MISC section - contents: [1] From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE Q: I left my meal (including bread) to daven Ma’ariv. It turned out that there was a long sicha before Ma’ariv. By the time I was able to return to eat an hour and a half had passed. Could I still bentch (recite Birkat Hamazon) at that time? A: The mishna (B'rachot 51b) says that one must bentch before the food is digested. The Gemara (ibid. 53b) brings two opinions as to the signs of this cut off point. R. Yochanan says that it is until one becomes hungry. Reish Lakish says that it is as long as he is still thirsty from the eating or for 72 minutes, depending on how much he ate. We rule like R. Yochanan and assume that it refers to beginning to be hungry as the food is digesting (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 184:5). However, most poskim assume that R. Yochanan accepts a 72 minute minimum time limit, just that if one has not yet begun to become hungry, he can still bentch after that point (see Bi'ur Halacha, ad loc.). However, the problem is that this feeling is hard to quantify or determine with certainty (Magen Avraham 184:9). Therefore, one should be careful to bentch no later than 72 minutes after finishing eating. You did not succeed in doing so this time and probably entered the realm of safek (doubt). Ostensibly, your desired preference was the halachic preference as well. That is to continue your meal and bentch afterward; just be sure that the continuation of your meal includes at least a k’zayit of bread (Mishna Berura 184:20). Thereby, Birkat Hamazon is in any case appropriate, and there is a reasonable hope that it is in time to cover the original eating also. This, though, raises a new question. After taking a break possibly long enough for digestion to begin, making it too late for a b'racha acharona, does one require a new b'racha rishona? The Magen Avraham (ibid.) assumes that one requires a new beracha because the previous eating is a matter of the past. However, the Even Ha’Ozer (Orach Chayim 179) argues that there is no source to indicate that digestion breaks the continuity regarding a b'racha rishona. To the contrary, the Rambam (B'rachot 4:7) says that a beracha one makes when he begins eating can cover other foods “even if he breaks all day long” as long as he has not decided to stop eating. Although there are attempts to deflect the proof (see Tzitz Eliezer XII 1) and some poskim agree with the Magen Avraham, the Even Ha’Ozer’s opinion is the more accepted one (see Mishna Berura 184:17; Yechaveh Da’at VI, 11). Furthermore, in a case like yours where there is doubt whether digestion occurred, even the Magen Avraham (ibid.) suggests eating more without a new b'racha to get out of the doubt regarding Birkat Hamazon. Apparently, it is better to enter a situation where one might need to say HaMotzi and refrain from it because of doubt than to miss out on Birkat Hamazon which he might still be able to make (see Levushei S’rad, ad loc.). The only reservation we must address applies if you made a significant change of location (the parameters of which are beyond our present scope) between your first and second sittings. We rule like the Rama (Orach Chayim 178:2) that one does not need a new b'racha after moving locations in the midst of a meal that includes bread. As we discussed, we also rule like the Even Ha’Ozer that even a long break does not require a new b'racha as long as one intends to continue eating. However, the Tzitz Eliezer (ibid) tries to prove that when one both changes locations and waits a long time, then we would accept the Magen Avraham’s opinion that one requires a new b'racha. However, in our humble opinion, the case he presented is not convincing (beyond our scope). We accept that which is apparently the majority opinion that even with the combination of the passing of time and moving of location you can eat more bread without a new b'racha. Doing so would have been the best way to salvage bentching in the case of doubt that arose. Ask the Rabbi Q&A is part of Hemdat Yamim, the weekly parsha sheet published by Eretz Hemdah. You can read this section or the entire Hemdat Yamim at www.ou.org or www.eretzhemdah.org. And/or you can receive Hemdat Yamim by email weekly, by sending an email to info@eretzhemdah.org with the message: Subscribe/English (for the English version) or Subscribe/Hebrew (for the hebrew version). Please leave the subject blank. Ask the Vebbe Rebbe is partially funded by the Jewish Agency for Israel [2] Candle by Day [3] CHIZUK and IDUD (for Olim & not-yet-Olim respectively) Reish Lakish, whose illustrious path to Teshuva is documented in Bava Metzia, expounds the Pasuk in Mishlei "If to cynics he will act cynically, but to the humble he will grant favor" as follows: "He who comes to defile himself, is provided an opening, but if one comes to purify himself is provided with help" (Shabbat 104a). Negative tactics are made possible, whereas positive ones are promoted. Furthermore, Chazal calculate the power of good as five hundred times that of bad. If a person traveling a harmful course is allowed to proceed without impediment, certainly a steadfast decision to make Aliya will be divinely encouraged. TORAH THOUGHTS as contributed by Aloh Naaleh members for publication in the Orthodox Union's 'Torah Insights', a weekly Torah publication on Parshat HaShavu’a [4] A Touch of Wisdom, A Touch of Wit Once, when R' Chaim came back from the market, he saw a maid leaving the beis din, carrying a slaughtered chicken. "Show me the chicken in your hand," he said. R' Chaim examined the chicken and found no reason to question its kashrus. Everything was in order. He then took the chicken, entered beis din, and asked its members, "How did you rule on this chicken?" "Go home," R' Chaim told the maid, "and bring me the other chicken." Everyone was amazed. How did R' Chaim know that there was another chicken? He must have ru'ach hakodesh! "No," said R' Chaim. "One does not ask questions about something which is obviously kosher. I therefore realized that two chickens must have been slaughtered, and when the maid was sent to the beis din, she must have taken the wrong chicken." Shmuel Himelstein has written a wonderful series for ArtScroll: Words of Wisdom, Words of Wit; A Touch of Wisdom, A Touch of Wit; and "Wisdom and Wit" — available at your local Jewish bookstore (or should be). Excerpted with the permission of the copyright holder [5] Parsha Points to Ponder - BALAK 2) Why did G-D allow Bil'am to travel with his entourage if He was going to stop Bil'am from cursing the Jewish people? 3) Why did G-D perform the miracle of making the donkey talk - a miracle which does seems to have been unnecessary? THESE ARE THE ANSWERS 2) Rav Moshe Feinstein teaches that G-D allowed Bil'am to travel and attempt to curse the Jewish people to teach us the power of the evil inclination. Bil'am was a prophet and KNEW that G-D did not want him to curse the Jewish people. Nevertheless he went through every effort he could to try to curse the Jewish people. This demonstrates that we can never relax our guard and assume that we are beyond the temptations of our drives and desires. 3) The Kli Yakar answers that this was G-D's way of rebuking Bil'am and insuring that Bil'am did not become too conceited over the fact that he received prophecy. Bil'am learned that just like the donkey was able to see the angel because G-D needed that to happen to benefit the Jews, so, too, he only received prophecy because it was there was a benefit to the Jews. He, on his own, however, did not merit to receive prophecy. Parsha Points to Ponder is prepared by Rabbi Dov Lipman, who teaches at Reishit Yerushalayim, Tiferet, and Machon Maayan in Beit Shemesh and RBS and is the author of "DISCOVER: Answers for Teenagers (and adults) to Questions about the Jewish Faith", soon to be re-published by Feldheim ppp@israelcenter.co.il [6] Portion for the Portion by Rakel Berenbaum - FEEDback to berenbau@actcom.net.il We are told that Moav, after seeing all that Israel had done to the Amorites, were very afraid and they sent messengers to the elders of Midyan to consult with them about their fears. The verse (22:4) relates what they said: "Now the Israelite community will lick up everything around us, just as a bull licks up all the vegetation in the field." We can ask a number of questions relating to this section. Why was Moav so afraid of Israel, when in fact, Hashem warned Israel not to attack Moav (D'varim 2:9)? Why did they go to consult specifically with Midyan? What is the significance of this allegorical phrase about a "bull licking up the vegetation in the field?" Me'am Lo'ez says that just as the bull doesn't lick up what is right in front of it, but sticks out its tongue and licks up what's on the sides, Moav was not afraid that Israel would attack them, but were afraid that they would attack Midyan. If Midyan were destroyed, Moav would suffer because they traded with each other, so Moav went to warn Midyan to find a solution. The Tanchuma says the reason Moav went to consult with Midyan was because they saw Israel winning and they thought it was because of their leader Moshe. Since Moshe had lived in Midyan, they hoped they would have some clues about the source of his strength. Midyan told them that Moshe's strength was in his mouth (being a prophet, praying) so that is why they decided to hire Bil'am who also had special powers of speech. Homemade Lollipops [7] MicroUlpan LOLLIPOP. In Hebrew, the straightforward, prosaic SUKARIYA AL MAKEIL. Avoid the Israeli slang, since it has other (improper) connotations [8] Review: SHECHYANU during the Three Weeks [9] G'matriyot Bil'am poetically said: TAMOT NAFSHI MOT YESHARIM... he admires the deaths of the UPRIGHT. Who are the YESHARIM (560)? They are AVOT HA-OLAM (560), i.e. Avraham Yitzchak, Yaakov. VA'YAAN BILAM VAYOMER EL BALAK HALO DIBARTI EILECHA LEIMOR KOL ASHER YEDABER HASHEM OTO E'ESEH: Here's a g'matriya for which we offer no comment - just the numbers. Bil'am & Balak (142+132) = Mordechai (274) [10] Torah from Nature Ants use an internal pedometer to find their way home without getting sidetracked, a new study reports. Desert ants on foraging expeditions use celestial cues to orient themselves in the homeward direction, but with few land- marks in the barren land, scientists have wondered how the insects always take the most direct route and know exactly how far to march. The new study reveals that counting their steps is a crucial part of the scheme. Over the years, scientists have proposed several theories for how ants find their way home. One is that they do it like honeybees and remember visual cues, but experiments revealed ants can navigate in the dark and even blindfolded. Another disproved hypothesis was that because ants scurry at a steady pace, they could time how long it took them to get to and fro. Other studies have shown that once ants find a good source of food, they teach other ants how to find it. The ant "pedometer" technique was first proposed in 1904, but it remained untested until now. Scientists trained desert ants, Cataglyphis fortis, to walk along a straight path from their nest entrance to a feeder 30 feet away. If the nest or feeder was moved, the ants would break from their straight path after reaching the anticipated spot and search for their goal. Next, the researchers performed a little cosmetic surgery. They glued stilt-like extensions to the legs of some ants to lengthen stride. The researchers shortened other ants' stride length by cutting off the critters' feet and lower legs, reducing their legs to stumps. By manipulating the ants' stride lengths, the researchers could determine whether the insects were using an odometer-like mechanism to measure the distance, or counting off steps with an internal pedometer. After getting used to their new legs, the ants were able to adjust their pedometer and zero in on home more precisely, suggesting that stride length serves as an ant pedometer. MRMHKBAMHK [11] Pirkei Avot The sixth chapter is introduced with the statement: SHANU CHACHAMIM BILSHON HAMISHNA, our Sages taught in the style of the Misha, Blessed is He, Who chose them and their teachings. We acknowledge not only the greatness of the teachings of the Sages, but of the Sages them- selves. From whom you learn Torah is as important as what you learn. Our teachers are links in the Chain of Tradition, that began - as Pirkei Avot teaches us - with Moshe receiving the Torah from Sinai. The religious and moral character of our teachers is a factor in the transmission of Torah and Tradition throughout the generations. This is partially so because of the Oral Law. Even with printed Talmud and other holy books, the transmission of Torah is still essentially a process of oral teaching from parent to child, teacher to student. [12] Divrei Menachem Our parsha seems to confirm this latter aspect of our collective consciousness. For it describes two paradigms of gentile antipathy to the Jewish people. First, we encounter Balak ben Tzippor who openly condemns Bnei Yisrael and seeks a curse that will destroy them. So he calls upon his gifted neighbor, the evil soothsayer Bil'am. Bil'am represents the one who, seeing that his attempts to curse get him nowhere, covers up his guile by sweet-talking the Jewish people. His words are mostly full of praise deserved. But, cunningly, they also contain elements of disdain that sow the seeds of gentile unrest, such as the description of Israel as a nation that dwells in solitude (Bemidbar 23:9). Moreover, let us not be duped by the praises. For they emerge from the same man who claimed he could destroy a nation with his tongue but who threatened his she-donkey with a sword. Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff [The Parshat Balak Homepage]
|
