Yom Kippur - Haazinu -
Sukkot - Simchat Torah - B'reishit HALACHIC TIMES Before lighting Yom Kippur candles, it is customary to light memorial candles for parents (and others) who are no longer in this world, and one additional 24-hour candle "for the living" and to provide NER SHESHAVAT, the candle to be used for havdala or to light the havdala candle from. See Pull-Out of TT 687 for details. Yom Kippur candles are lit like Shabbat candles are: light, cover eyes, make b'rachot, etc. The brachot for Yom Tov candles should preferably be said immediately before lighting the candles (not after lighting, as is standard for Shabbat candles). Covering the eyes is not necessary for Yom Tov candles, if the brachot are said first. A woman may choose to light Yom Tov candles the same way she lights Shabbat candles. Havdala for Yom Kippur:
No intro p'sukim. Wine bracha. No b'samim. Candle lit from flame
that "rested" over Yom Kippur. Havdala bracha. Some sources write that Kiddush L'vana for Tishrei is to be said SPECIFICALLY on Motza'ei Yom Kippur. Others say to specifically say KL before Yom Kippur. Minhag Yerushalayim is to say KL at the first opportunity after 3 full days following the announced molad - even during Tishrei, Sivan, and Av when other customs wait until after YK, Shavuot, and 9Av respectively. The most (?) common practice is to say KL upon emerging from shul following Maariv of Motza'ei Yom Kippur, prefer- ably still wearing kittel & tallit and in the joyous mood that YK engenders. Most hold that it can be said before havdala and breaking one's fast. Last opportunity for KL
this month is Sunday night, Oct. 16th, all night. In extenuating
circumstances, one can say KL on Leil Sukkot until 4:49am, Oct. 18. Cheshvan and Kislev are the only two variable months in our Fixed Calendar. When they are K'seder, the year has 354 days, or 384 in the case of a Shana M'uberet (13-month, two Adar year). When the year is CHASEIR, "missing" a day, it is Kislev that only has 29 days and the year has 353 or 383 days. A SHALEIM year has an extra day, namely 30 Cheshvan, and the year has 355 or 385 days. 5766 has 354 days. 5765 had 383, being a M'UBERET and a CHASEIR. RH 5765 was on THU (and FRI). PEI-GIMEL-KAF and MEM-GIMEL-KAF years occur, on average, 11½% of the time. In those types of years, Yom Kippur falls on Thursday, as it does this year. Recent Thursday Yom Kippurs occurred in 5762 (2001), 5755 (1994), 5742 (1981). Most years that begin on Tuesday, do so because the molad of Tishrei is on Tuesday before noon or on Monday after noon. 5766 is a rare case of the molad of Tishrei being on Monday morning (and after 9h 32m 13p) and being a year that follows a M'UBERET, thereby being subject to D'CHIYA 4 (the fourth and rarest rule for postponement of RH beyond the day of the molad), which fixes RH on TUE (and WED). Whereas RH on TUE & WED and YK on THU is not so uncommon, what is rare about 5766 is that it became a RH on TUE year by D'chiya 4. That happens only a bit more than ½% of the time. The last time that happened (a D'chiya 4, not a THU YK) was 5688. Someone born on that RH would be 78 years old on RH this year, until 120. The time before that was 5519 (1758) when the Vilna Gaon was in his late 30s, George Washington in his late 20s, and Motzart was 2½ years old. The other issue was the fact that the last 17 p'sukim were not read during 5765. The first weekly sedra of a year is either Vayeilech (as it is this year, 5766) or Haazinu. The last weekly sedra of a year is either Nitzavim by itself (as it was in 5765) or Nitzavim and Vayeilech combined. A year beginning on MON or TUE will begin with Vayeilech on Shabbat Shuva. A year beginning on THU or SHABBAT will begin with Haazinu on Shabbat Shuva. In the same vein, a year preceding a MON or TUE RH, will end with Nitzavim alone. A year that preceeds a THU or SHABBAT RH will end with Nitzavim- Vayeilech. Since 5765 began on THU, its first weekly sedra was Haazinu. Since 5766 begins on TUE, 5765's last weekly sedra was Nitzavim. Therefore, Vayeilech was not read in 5765, except for the first 13 p'sukim on Shabbat afternoon and on Monday morning, Erev Rosh HaShana. The remaining 17 p'sukim of Vayeilech's total of 30 (shortest in the Torah) were not read during 5765. Significance? No. Good
trivia though. And more importantly, all of the above gives us more
knowledge of our calendar, which is part of the spirit of the mitzva
of HACHODESH HAZEH LACHEM... Usually, the Lead Tidbit presents a picture with a close-up or zoom lens, or occasionally with a "regular" lens. This time, as the title announces, we have the opportunity to use a wide angle lens. Within a relatively short period of time - we can measure it as the range of this "monster" issue #688 - we complete the 40 day period designated for intensive introspection, T'shuva, and turning over many new leaves. The period intensified as Elul approached Rosh HaShana, and then yielded to Tishrei and the Aseret Y'mei T'shuva. The culmination, of course is Yom Kippur, a serious, somber, but amazingly joyous day, as only can happen when one feels a close relationship with G-d, that includes YIR'A (fear and reverence) and hopefully a large amount of AHAVA - love of G-d, love of Torah and Mitzvot, and love of others, as well. The mood of Yom Kippur
is not allowed to cool, as we are immediately caught up in
preparations for the particularly busy holiday of Sukkot. With Sukka
to build and decorate, Abra'a Minim to buy and bind, festive meals
to prepare for family and guests, perhaps some new clothes for Yom
Tov -- we are able to translate our new resolve and commitment to
Torah Life from words, thought, and feelings, into action. The fact
that the mitzva of Sukka is to Live in it, a mitzva performed with
our entire beings, is most significant. Then we celebrate Torah,
which is the bottom line of it all. And then, on Shabbat B'reishit,
we start to get back to normal, but a better and improved normal,
that brings us to new heights. The entire Yom Kippur service, with all of its details, constitutes one mitzva. Aharon is to take a bull as a sin- offering and a ram as a burnt-offering. He is to wear his special garments (the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur alternates between his full set of eight garments and a special set of four pure white garments which he wore when he entered the Holy of Holies and does other YK-specific Avoda). The Kohen Gadol washes
his hands and feet ten times throughout the day and immerses in a
mikveh five times. "From the People", Aharon takes two goats for
sin-offerings and a ram as an Olah. The bull is an atonement for
Aharon and the kohanim. SDT There are two very
different styles of sin - rejecting what G-d says and distancing
oneself from the Divine, and violating His commands in an attempt to
get closer to Him. Most sin is of the former type; that of Nadav and
Avihu was of the latter kind. Corresponding to these two opposite
motivations for sin, we have two special offerings on Yom Kippur -
one that was offered inside the Beit HaMikdash, its blood actually
being brought into the Kodshei Kodashim, and the other being sent
completely away from the Beit HaMikdash. Ponder this: Both goats
were identical. This next portion continues to describe the complex service of Yom Kippur. Among the many tasks of the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur, is VIDUI on behalf of all the people of Israel. His confession of sin
must be accompanied by that of each Jew, if complete atonement is to
be achieved. Rambam says that there is "communal forgiveness" for
"minor" offenses, but major sins require that the individual do his
own T'shuva. Even when there is "communal forgiveness", an
individual still has to be part of the community in order to benefit
from it. He who distances himself from the community does not
receive the benefits of communal prayer, repentance, and atonement.
(Oversimplified, to be sure, but there is a point here.) For this day will atone for you, to purify yourself from all your sins - before G-d will you be purified. One commentary took the
phrase LIFNEI HASHEM and defined it as it is defined in a different
context (specifically with the Arba'a Minim of Sukkot, and other
verses). The result is the following statement. If we use this day
of Yom Kippur properly, and repent well the sins we have, then we
will be purified, AND this will lead to being purified before G-d,
meaning in the Beit HaMikdash that will be rebuilt when we "earn"
it, so to speak, by proper T'shuva. There is a well-known
correlation between the number of Aliyot and the sanctity of the day
we read the Torah. Minimum number of people called to a Torah
reading is three. This is the number for weekdays (Monday and
Thursday), public fast days, even Purim and Chanuka. True they are
special days, but they are not elevated in sanctity by restrictions
of Melacha. Rosh Chodesh and Chol HaMoed are a rung up the Kedusha
ladder, as demonstrated by calling four people to the Torah on those
days. Yom Tov is higher in Kedusha and we call five people (plus a
Maftir). Yom Kippur is higher still, and its regular number of
Aliyot is six (plus Maftir). Shabbat has the highest Kedusha and
seven are called to the Torah (in addition to the Maftir). There are two origins attributed to Baruch Sheim. One says that it was Yaakov Avinu's whispered response of thanks to G-d when his sons proclaimed their complete faith and loyalty to G-d with the words: Hear Yisrael, G-d, our G-d, G-d is One. The other source says that Moshe Rabbeinu "borrowed" it from the angels and taught us to say it. Because the sentence is not originally ours, we modestly whisper it throughout the year. On Yom Kippur, however, when the nature of the day and its prohibitions elevate us spiritually, we resemble angels and only then do we "dare" (so to speak) say Baruch Sheim aloud. This second origin for Baruch Sheim... seems to fit well with the Yom Kippur practice. There is, perhaps, another reason why we say Baruch Sheim aloud on Yom Kippur. In the Beit HaMikdash, the sentence Baruch Sheim... was used as the response to a bracha, rather than AMEN. On YK, with its focus on the service in the Beit HaMikdash, we say the sentence aloud. In the repetition of Musaf, we find the description of the response of the people in the Azara (courtyard) to the Explicit Divine Name - they fell to the ground, prostrated themselves and said Baruch Sheim K'vod Mal'chuto L'Olam Va'ed. One should say Baruch
Sheim with deepfelt Kavana, especially at Ne'ila. It is a very
powerful six-word statement. The first is the beautiful and detailed description of the Yom Kippur service in the Beit HaMikdash by the Kohein Gadol. Elaborating upon that which was read in the Torah a bit earlier, the Chazan movingly describes the "order of the day", including the multitudes who packed into the courtyard of the Beit HaMikdash to witness the events of the day. The blessing of the Kohen Gadol for a good year for all, the description of his counterance upon emerging from the Holy of Holies, the celebration that followed - all portray the most glorious period of Jewish History. Immediately thereafter, the text plunges us into a drastically different scene. We read of the Ten Martyrs who died sanctifying G-d's Name. The details are heart-breaking, especially when seen on the backdrop of the previous portion. Why are these two opposite pictures of Jewish History presented side by side? On Yom Kippur, says the Rambam, one should picture himself as precariously balanced, so that one mitzva will tip the scale to the good - for himself, his community, all the world. And one sin can, G-d forbid, tip the scale the other way. The repetition of the
Musaf Amida gives us two glimpses into history, but also shows us
the possible scenarios of the future. Do we remain faithful to G-d,
do we do more mitzvot, do we do the mitzvot better, do we improve
the inter- personal relations among Jews. Do we do T'shuva. If so,
we will soon reap the benefits of a complete spiritual and physical
Jewish Life in Eretz Yisrael. If we take the other path, tragedy and
horror await us. The Choice is ours. "When I (singluar) call
G-d's Name, you (plural, min. 2) praise G-d for His Greatness." From
this pasuk we learn that when three people eat together, one calls
to the other two to "bless G-d" - ZIMUN (benching m'zuman). There is no generation gap in real Jewish life; the older generation teaches the new one, the new generation gains by asking questions of their elders and learning from them. G-d structured the world in parallel to the developing nation of Israel, and granted us special protection and guidance - "like an eagle protects its young..." SDT The lessons of
Torah are compared to dew, rain showers, and down- pours. All water,
but different intensities and speeds. So too Torah, for different
people. The analogy between Torah and water has many levels. Moshe tells us that G-d's reaction to our disloyalty is HESTEIR PANIM - the hiding of "G-d's Face", so to speak. He also tell us that there have been several times when G-d had wanted to destroy the People of Israel but did not, so as not to give the nations of the world cause to doubt the power of the "G-d of Israel". It is striking how
similar are the words of reproach and how different the
presentation. Moshe, in front of Yehoshua, tells the people to heed the warning of this SHIRA and to keep the Torah, which in turn, will keep them. An important point that has been oft- repeated in the book of D'varim is this: We did not receive the Land of Israel with "no strings attached". We must always be worthy of holding on to E. Yisrael. Sometimes that reminder is subtle; sometimes it is heavy-handed. Here it's: Take the Torah seriously, because it is the basis upon which we will have a long tenure in the land. [P>32:48 (5)] G-d then
tells Moshe to ascend Har Aravim-Nevo, see the Land from there, and
die there, as Aharon had done earlier (the Torah reiterates the
reason that both Moshe and Aharon couldn't enter Eretz Yisrael -
namely, the incident when Moshe hit the rock rather than speak to
it, missing an opportunity to sanctify G-d's name), rather than
enter the Land which the People of Israel will enter. Additionally, Rabbi
Jacobs (in his "A Haftara Companion) points to a few parallels in
the texts of Haazinu and its haftara, e.g. the use of the term TZUR
(Rock) for G-d. Next the Torah teaches us the mitzvot of Kiddush HaShem and its opposite. [Perhaps we can understand why Chazal "backed us up" these 8 p'sukim, rather than leaving us just with the portion of the cycle of the Chagim. First of all, on Chag there are many animals used both for Korbanot and for the dinner table. The two mitzvot included in this opening portion of the Torah reading serve as a reminder that we have rules and regulations that go along with our commandments and permission to use the animals for our own purposes. The "reminder" of Kiddush HaShem and Chilul HaShem, serves us well to focus our SIMCHA in the proper direction and not allow ourselves to get carried away by improper joyful behavior. The final pasuk before the presentation of the Chagim reminds us that all the Holidays are commemorative of the Exodus from Egypt. Now, we are ready to continue with the reading about the Holidays themselves. The Torah begins with
Shabbat, followed by Pesach, the Omer, Shavuot, Rosh HaShana, Yom
Kippur, and Sukkot. This 52-pasuk portion is read for 5 people, the
number of Aliyot assigned to Yom Tov. It is significant to
note that because the number of bulls in the Musaf of the days of
Sukkot change - 13 on the first day, then 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, and 7 on
the seventh day - the Torah identifies each day of Sukkot as its
own. In other words, there is mention of "And on the second day",
"and on the third day", etc. This is not the case with Pesach. The
Musaf of each day was the same as the first, and the Torah does not
announce, "and on the second day of Pesach..." It could have, but it
doesn't. Consequently, we view each day of Sukkot as a separate Chag
(sort of) and each day gets full Hallel. Days 2 thru 7 of Pesach are
not considered distinct from the first day and as a result Hallel is
required only on the first day. What subsequently began as a custom
to recite Hallel throughout Pesach has now become a requirement, but
the essential difference of that Hallel is preserved by our practice
of skipping the first 11 p'sukim in each of two of the chapters
among the six that make up Hallel. (In Chutz LaAretz, the Chol HaMoed reading is a bit different, reflecting the concept of S'FEIKA D'YOMA, doubt as to the actual date of a given day.) No haftara on Chol
HaMoed (except on Shabbat). Our Sages did not want to burden the
people who had to work during Chol HaMoed with extra shul-time. On Simchat Torah morning, after Hakafot, we read the sedra of V'Zot HaBracha. This is the only "Parshat HaShavua" that is not read on Shabbat (except in Eretz Yisrael when Simchat Torah falls on Shabbat). Five people are called to the Torah, as on all Yamim Tovim. The sedra is not completed with these 5 Aliyot. These five portions are reread over and over again, many times with several Torahs being read simultaneously at different locations in shul. This allows everyone to receive an Aliya on Simchat Torah. Following this, the Chatan Torah is called for the last Aliya in the Torah. A chupa is often made over the Bima by four tall guys with a talit, as the Torah is completed. There is a custom that the last Aliya before Chatan Torah is given to one of the oldest men in shul, and with him, all young boys (who cannot take their own Aliya) are invited to share this KOL HA'NE'ARIM Aliya. After V'zot HaBracha (and the Book of D'varim, and the whole Torah) is completed, the Torah is lifted, closed, and "dressed" and a second Torah is read from. This time, the honor of the Aliya goes to the Chatan B'reishit, for whom will be read the beginning of the Torah. We never finish with the Torah; we begin it as soon as we get to the end. This is the “real” reason for our great joy. We celebrate, not the conclusion of the Torah, but the wonderful feeling of beginning again and of being the people to whom the Torah was given and for whom the Torah is our way of life. Again a Chupa is made for this Aliya (customs might vary from shul to shul). The whole first chapter of B'reishit is read, plus the first four p'sukim of the 2nd chapter, which describes the first Shabbat. Maftir is read from a third Sefer Torah. It comes from Parshat Pinchas and presents the Musaf of Shmini Atzeret. Finally, the Haftara of
Simchat Torah picks up where the Torah left off - with the beginning
of the Book of Yehoshua. Aside from it being the natural choice for
Haftara of V'zot HaBracha because it is its continuation, it also
contains G-d's encouragement to Yehoshua to cling to the Torah and
immerse himself in it day and night. This portion is particularly
suited for Simchat Torah. Tur says that had the mitzva of Sukka been commanded at Pesach-time (because of its connection to the Exodus), it would not be noticeable that we are performing a mitzva; it would seem that we are merely seeking comfort in the warming springtime. On the other hand, when we leave our homes as others are returning to theirs in anticipation of cooler and wetter weather, the mitzva aspect of Sukka is manifest. Rambam seems to take an opposite view, namely that the timing of Sukkot is a kind gesture by G-d - we dwell in the Sukka when it is neither too hot nor to cold to do so in an enjoyable manner. (A lot depends upon where you live - Eretz Yisrael is highly recommended.) Ramban says that Sukkot is set at the other side of the year from Pesach to emphasize that we must appreciate G-d's having taken us out of Egypt and protecting us in the Wilderness - ALL YEAR ROUND. Pesach and Sukkot are each a 7-day commemoration of the Exodus, each begins on the 15th day of the first month of the year (both Nissan and Tishrei are first months). According to the Vilna Gaon, after the Sin of the Golden Calf, the Heavenly Clouds left the people. Only after the command to build the Mishkan, and after the materials were collected and the construction was about to begin, did the Clouds return. The GR"A says that this happened on 15 Tishrei, hence that date for Sukkot, the Sukka reminding us of the Clouds. Menorat HaMaor says that Sukka is a humbling experience perfect for the Jew who has just brought in the harvest and is about to tuck himself comfortably into his home for the winter. He would usually burst with pride at what he accomplished. Sukka brings the Jew out of his complacency and remind him - in the frail Sukka- of G-d's dominion over nature. Chidushei HaRim says
that the reason given by the Torah for Sukka - In order that your
generations shall KNOW... KNOWLEDGE can be achieved best (or only)
in a sin-free atmosphere, only right after the Yamim Nora'im. A
person does not sin unless he is overcome by foolishness. Thus, we
are capable of fulfilling the mitzva of Sukka best during the days
following Yom Kippur. From Musaf of Shmini Atzeret (a.k.a. Simchat Torah in Israel, but that might confuse readers in Chutz LaAretz - and even some from here) until Musaf of the first day of Pesach, we say that G-d is (among other things), the MASHIV HARU'ACH UMORID HAGASHEM (MHUH). An Amida during the rainy season (Shmini Atzeret to Pesach) without any reference to G-d’s role in making the weather is considered fatally flawed, and must be said over. Specifically, if one omits MHUH from the second bracha of the Amida, AND does not say MORID HATAL either, the Amida must be repeated. In Israel (and in many communities in the Diaspora), where MORID HATAL is said when MHUH is not said, it is considered that G-d’s role as Weather Maker is acknowledged throughout the year.Therefore, if one forgets MHUH, he can assume that he said MORID HATAL and his Amida is not invalid. Let’s do some fine-tuning. The rule for repeating or not repeating, as above, has another application. If one continues the Amida beyond the second bracha, and then realizes he hadn’t said MHUH, nor MORID HATAL, the person stops cold and starts the Amida over. Not saying MHUH but saying MORID HATAL (by mistake), the person just continues the Amida to its conclusion and “ignores” the omission. If you remember within the second bracha that you did not say MHUH, then there are two opinions. One opinion is that as soon as one realizes the omission (remember, within the second bracha), he goes back to ATA GIBOR and says from there. Some say that it is only necessary to go back to MHUH, the ATA GIBOR part was said and untainted by the omission. The other opinion is that one says MHUH wherever the omission was realized, without going back to the beginning of the bracha. But one should say MHUH between phrases, not within one. For example, one can say SOMEICH NOFLIM, MHUH, V’ROFEI CHOLIM, but should not say SOMEICH MHUH NOFLIM. See the phrase-by-phrase layout of the bracha (box). Furthermore, the last
phrase before the ending of the bracha - V’NE-EMAN... must precede
the ending, without MHUH interceding. So if one has already said the
V’NE-EMAN phrase and then realizes he forgot MHUH, he says MHUH,
then repeats V’NE-EMAN... and then concludes with BARUCH... If we could prove things with G'matriyas and anagrams, then maybe R. Eliezer would “win” the dispute, but as is, the dispute as to when the world was created remains. “In the beginning, G-d created the Heavens and the Earth. And the Earth...” Did that happen on day 1 of Creation? Or is something before Day 1 being described? Here is one possible answer. The first two p'sukim of B’reishit describe the totally, exclusively Divine aspect of Creation of Something from Nothing — YEISH MEI'AYIN. Before “B'reishit”, perhaps nothing existed — except G-d. With the Divine Command of B'reishit, everything that now exists came into existence for the first time. All matter, all energy, thoughts, concepts, time — everything. According to this point of view, SHAMAYIM and ARETZ mean everything in the universe. The first form that all of Creation had was TOHU VAVOHU, chaos. That's the second pasuk. And, this stage of Creation occurred BEFORE Day One. Not on the first day - before the first day. And not a day before, not an instant before nor and eon before. It is pointless speculation to attempt to give a time-frame for the first two p'sukim, because TIME has meaning only in the context of the ordered world that began to take shape on Day 1. No wonder we are not supposed to concern ourselves with what had happened before the world was created! “And G-d said: Let
there be light...” Without going into detail, here is a breakdown of the first Aliya for your consideration. 2 p’sukim, as mentioned above, for the first phase of creation. Notwithstanding the argument above that broke these two p’sukim off of the description of the first day (so to speak), they are part of the first PARSHA, together with the creation of Light, etc. 3 p’sukim for Day 1, creation of light, separation of light and darkness, and their being identified as day and night. One KI TOV. The day is called YOM ECHAD rather than RISHON, because RISHON has meaning only if there is a SHENI, which there wasn’t yet. [P>1:6 (3)] Second Day of Creation. The creation of the Heavens and the separation of the Upper and Lower waters. [P>1:9 (5)] Third day of Creation which consists of two “sections”. First, two p’sukim for the “gathering of the lower waters” into different areas and the formation of dry land. And the “naming” of Land and Seas. KI TOV. And then the Divine command to the Land to spring forth with vegetation. 3 p’sukim with another KITOV introduce us to the Plant Kingdom. [P>1:14 (6)] Creation on the 4th day. The Sun, Moon and stars (and other “heavenly bodies”) are placed in their appointed positions and orbits. KI TOV. [P>1:20 (4)] Continuing... Next comes the Fifth Day, with its account of Animal Kingdom, part one. Swarming insects, fish, birds. KI TOV. And P’RU URVU. [P>1:24 (8)] Next the largest parsha yet, with the formation of Animal Kingdom, part two. Land animals (most mammals). “Creepy things” probably includes most reptiles as well. KI TOV. Then comes the formation of human beings, first as a single being both male and female (one explanation of the wording in the parsha) and then separated into two different beings, male and female (but with some “crossing” of characteristics). P’RU URVU. TOV ME’OD. THE sixth day. YOM HASHISHI. [P>2:1 (3)] This
relatively long first Aliya concludes with the 3-pasuk parsha
introducing us to Shabbat B’reishit, the day that G-d blessed and
sanctified because He “rested” from Creation. We say this parsha in
the Friday night Amida, right after the Friday night Amida, and at
the Friday night table as the first part of Kiddush. This should
tell us how important it is that we learn well (as best as we can)
the Torah's account of Creation. "It is not good that man shall be alone" is explained in different ways, including that only G-d is singular. Man needs to know that as great as he can become, as much as he can accomplish, he is not a god. All creatures were brought before Adam as "candidates" for partner- to-Adam. None was found suitable, but Adam named them all (as people have done throughout the ages). In the first account of
Creation, Man was the final act of Creation, but not so much the
purpose and focus of creation. In this second account, Man is
presented as the focus of creation. We must see things both ways in
order to maintain a healthy perspective on this world, our role in
it, and our responsibilities towards it and all elements of nature. [S>3:16 (1)] This one-pasuk parsha consists of G-d's "punishment" (can we call it "redefining") of Chava (woman- kind. [S>3:17 (5)] And this parsha consists of Adam's "punishment" and G-d's act of Chesed, in clothing the naked. This act is one of the many pointed to in our challenge to emulate G-d's qualities. Note that the "story"
parts of Shlishi and most of R'vi'i are part of one large parsha,
but G-d's statements to Adam and Chava, and His kindness to them are
slightly isolated in the form of two parshiyot S'tumot, thus calling
specific attention to them and the lessons we learn from them. [S>4:1 (26)] "Births"
of Kayin and Hevel and Kayin's killing of Hevel following the
attempt of each to make an offering before G-d. Kayin's punishment
and fate. His lineage. The Torah mentions more descendants of Kayin and their roles as the "firsts" in various fields of human activity. Yaval (son of Lemech and Ada) was the “first” tent-dwelling animal raiser. His brother Yuval was a musician. Tuval- Kayin (son of Tzila) worked with iron and copper. His sister was Na’ama. Rashi (quoting B'reishit Rabba) says that she was the wife of No'ach. What is significant about that is that Kayin's line was not completely severed by the Flood. Although we refer to all of man- kind as Bnei No'ach, who descended from Adam through Sheit, on the mother's side there is Na'ama and before her, Kayin. This portion also contains Lemech's lament for having killed Kayin. Aliya breakdowns differ
from Chumash to Chumash [S>5:1 (5)] This is the
Book of the Chronicles of Mankind... Adam and Chava were created.
Adam was 130 years old when Sheit was born. He lived another 800
years after Sheit was born, during which time he fathered many sons
and daughters. He lived 930 years and then he died. Maimonides lists five Torah commandments as the source of the laws of torts. There are thus five types of torts described in these commandments. (1) Commandment #236: Reuven causes the damage or injury; (2) Commandment #237; Reuven’s ox causes damage or injury by goring: (3) Commandment #238: Reuven causes injury by digging a pit into which Shimon and/or his property falls; (4) Commandment #240: Reuven’s ox causes damage “with its tooth” or “with its foot”; (5) Commandment #241: Reuven causes damage by kindling a fire. In types (2) and (4), it is Reuven’s ox that causes the injury and/or damage. The domain in which the damages are causes is often crucial to ascertain if Reuven is liable to Shimon for the injuries and/or damage. The Talmud was redacted when people were primarily engaged in agriculture. Therefore one’s animal became the basis for many of the laws of torts caused by one’s property. Reuven’s actions are classified into three categories: (1) the direct cause of the injuries or damages; (2) the indirect cause of the injuries or damages; and (3) the remote cause of the injuries or damages. The domain in which the tort was committed may determine liability. The halacha speaks of riding a horse in public streets. This formulation was used in most Western countries until just a few years ago and is still used in many places in third world countries. With certain exceptions, halacha presumes that a person is always responsible and liable for his tortuous actions, whether awake or asleep, when they are committed. There may be an exception to the statement that the tortfeasor, Reuven is always responsible for his actions and liable for all injuries and damages caused by him, including accidents. There are two major views as to this exception, one more liberal in construing liability against Reuven and the second holding him strictly liable in most circumstances with only a limited scope of exception. These views follow with a few examples. At times the distinction between the views is blurred and some of the codifiers present overlapping views. Some commentators hold that all intents and purposes the views are essentially the same. View (I). The first view of exception to liability for causing injury or damages asserts that if the tort was committed entirely accidentally, without any negligence on Reuven’s part in causing the occurrence, then he is not liable. Beth Din will assess each case to determine if there was such an accident. The assessment is carried out as follows: Was Reuven’s conduct similar to that of a person from whom an object was stolen? If Reuven’s conduct did not lead to the theft then he will not be liable if the accident was entirely out of his control. This view does admit that if Reuven’s manner when the accidental occurrence took place was similar to the conduct of a person who loses another’s object, then he is liable since he was somewhat negligent. According to this view Reuven is free of liability only if he did not intend the act that caused the injury or damage. If the act was done intentionally then he is liable even if the damage occurred by accident. Of the classical examples, several deal with Reuven tripping while carrying a jug. Depending on the facts, tripping can be sometimes termed an accident and sometimes almost an accident. Example (1) Reuven lay down to sleep next to Shimon’s vase that was on the floor and, while sleeping, stretched out his hand and broke the vase; Reuven is liable. If he lay down to sleep next to Shimon who was sleeping and in his sleep Reuven struck Shimon and injured him; Reuven is liable. However, if Reuven fell asleep first and then Shimon lay down next to Reuven, placed his jug there and Reuven while asleep, injured Shimon and broke Shimon’s jug, Reuven is not liable. This is because Shimon’s conduct can be considered negligent while Reuven’s unintended action while sleeping does not subject Reuven to liability. Example (2) If Shimon sets his jug down in a public street and Reuven, while walking trips over the jug and breaks it. Reuven is not liable for breaking the jug. Example (3) Reuven trips while carrying a jug and when he is falling with the jug, it falls on Shimon and injures him. Reuven is not liable. Although tripping is somewhat negligent, Shimon might have been more careful to avoid the result. Example (4) Reuven trips while carrying a jug and when he is falling with the jug it falls on Shimon’s object and damages the object. Reuven is liable. The reason for this is that tripping is a somewhat negligent act. The consequential liability from this differs from the preceding example because in the preceding case Shimon might have been more careful to avoid the result. Example (5) Reuven
falls from a high place such as a roof and lands on Shimon and
injures him. Reuven is liable. This holds true only if Reuven falls
while an ordinary wind is blowing. However, if Reuven was blown off
the roof by an extraordinary strong wind then Reuven is not liable. The subject matter of
this lesson is more fully discussed in volume X chapter 378 of A
Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint. Copies of all volumes
can be purchased via email: orders@gefenpublishing.com and via
website: www.israelbooks.com and at local Judaica bookstores.
Questions to quint@inter.net.il The commentators explain the likeness as follows: We fulfill the mitzva of sukka as servants who come to do the bidding of our Master, the Holy One blessed be He. If it is raining, we should feel rebuked as though are service is some- how lacking. We should be concerned that we are not performing the mitzva properly and therefore Hashem is not interested in obliging us. While the mishna only claims a "likeness", the Maharil (a late Rishon) enunciated it as a halakhic rule: one who is compelled to leave the sukka because of untoward weather "shouldn't resent the sukka as he leaves, rather he should leave in a state of subjection like a servant who poured a cup for his master and he poured it in his face," and this ruling is brought down by the Rema on the Shulchan Arukh (OC 639:7). According to the Maharil, the feeling of subjection of the rejected servant is to be contrasted with resentment. This is not obvious from the mishna; it is just as possible to understand that the natural feeling would be relief at being exempt from the obligation as if the master gave us a day off. However, we do find one other place in the Talmud which condemns resentment at the exemption from sukka. The gemara at the
beginning of Avoda Zara describes how Israel will be favored at the
final judgment because of our performance of the mitzvot. The gemara objects that they are correct in leaving the sukka, for (as we have just learned) extreme discomfort exempts us from this mitzva! The gemara replies that even when we are exempt, we do not resent the exemption (Avoda Zara 3a-b). From this we can see that the ideal way to view the performance of the mitzvot is as a unique privilege granted us by God. If we are unable to carry them out we should feel a sense of disappointment and loss. But among lesser attitudes there are two levels: Many people acknowledge their obligation in the commandments, but view them as a difficult burden. "Es is shver tzu zein a yid", "It's hard to be a Jew". This is an unfortunate attitude (it is said that Rav Moshe Feinstein was very critical of this common expression), but at the very least it captures the idea that we are servants of Hashem. But some people view
the commandments as a right, not a privilege. Like the rebellious
nations described in Avoda Zara, they believe they have a right to a
favorable judgment and a divine reward. They are willing to exert
themselves a bit to obtain this reward, but ultimately they consider
it an entitlement. If for some reason they aren't provided an
opportunity to earn their reward they respond with resentment and
contempt. This is a far worse attitude, for ultimately it makes man
into a kind of master, as if the Creator "owes us". With their
ruling on rain in the sukka, the Maharil and the Rema remind us that
this is the attitude that we must above all avoid. Lot did not do this. Instead he took his flocks and herds and made his way to the cities of the plain of the Jordan, that was then as well watered and as fertile as the trees planted in Gan Eiden and like Egypt the granary of the world. The verse in B'reishit (13: 11) "and Lot traveled East", is usually translated as East from Ai and Bet El where he and Avraham were encamped to Sodom and Gomorrah that lay on the Eastern banks of the Jordan. Chazal teach that he journeyed away from Kedem that is from the Eternal One, by separating himself from Avraham, the beloved of Hashem, saying, "I want neither Avraham nor his G-d". This is not semantics but clearly spelt out by the text. "And Lot lifted up his eyes and saw", this is lust for sexual immorality, even as it is written regarding Potiphar's wife "And she lifted up her eyes upon Yosef", or "And Shechem saw Dinah and took her" (Nazir 23a)]. What did Lot see? He saw Sodom and its people about who the Torah writes that they were evil and sinful before G-d, exceedingly; yet he used the right of first choice given to him by Avraham, to choose Sodom. "They were evil to each other, [bein adam l'chavero] and sinful sexually [bein adam la Makom]" (Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin 10:3). The people of the generation of the Tower of Bavel were evil against Hashem but loved one another and were kind to each other; therefore they were only punished with dispersion, whereas the people of the cities of the plain had to be totally destroyed. "Rabbi Yehuda says that when the verse mentions 'before G-d', this refers to idolatry and 'exceedingly' refers to their bloodshed and murders. The Rabbis taught, they were evil in monetary dealings, as it is written referring to a lender who is reluctant to lend because of the impending annulment of debts in the impending Shmita year, " And you look with evil on your poor brethren" (D'varim 15:9); furthermore they were sinful sexually, as it is written [Yosef's words of rejection to Potiphars wife], "lest I sin before G-d" (B'reishit 39:9). However, Rabbi Yehuda refers evil to sexual immorality and sin to money, as it is written regarding delayed payment of oaths, "and you will sin" (D'varim 23: 22)" (Sanhedrin 109a). "One who says, 'What's mine is mine and what's yours is yours, this is a mediocre nature; others say this is the characteristic of Sodom (Avot 5:10). At first glance, this does not seem such a particularly terrible attitude that it should be the nature of Sodom. Such a person is not stealing or damaging others property, all they want is to have what is legally theirs while expecting others to do the same. However, in Judaism that is not sufficient, it is only a mediocre nature or alternatively a midat Sodom. The moral problem lies in their refusal to use their wealth to help others or to shoulder the social costs of assisting the poor, the weak, the old and strangers. Since Judaism is action orientated, its way of militating against the egoism of Sodom is not left to preaching and moralizing but rather made halakhically mandatory. Furthermore, like in other areas of life it is not left to the individual's choice to be practiced according to his or hers kindness and good nature. Rather, the Bet Din has the obligation to prevent a person from this midat Sodom. "The Gemara has a number of ways of enforcing anti-Sodom behavior. For instance, according to the halakhic dictum of one has a benefit and the other does not have a loss, anyone may fish in the Kinneret even though it belongs to the tribe of Naftali,since the removal of a fish does not constitute a loss to them and is a favor to the others. Similarly, Reuven can use Shimon's empty courtyard or dwelling that he is not in the habit of renting out, provided it is not thereby damaged in any way. There are some opinions that the owner can force him to leave, without being able to claim payment. However, even they agree that to do so is a midat S'dom and Chazal expelled such a person from the camp. One who is able to wave his legal rights in cases of 'one has a benefit while he has no loss', is righteous like the Chafetz Chaim but unlike the people of Sodom" (Daat Torah, Harav Levovitch, Masgiach Yeshivat Mir). Egoism is the antithesis of the Abrahamic nation: "One who refuses to do his fellow a favor with his wealth, it is doubtful that he is of the descendants of Avraham". Yet Lot settled in Sodom. This is the 100th
installment in Dr. Tamari’s series on “Tanach and its messages for
our times” Q: When, how, and why do we have to put something between the floor and us when performing the special "korim" (bowing) on Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur? A: The gemara (Megila 22b) tells that when Rav arrived in Bavel, he refrained from "falling on his face" during Tachanun as the locals did. One of the gemara's explanations is that there was stone on the floor next to Rav, and, therefore, he was forbidden to fall on his face. (In those days, they bowed down on the floor during Tachanun (see Rivash #412)). The prohibition is found in Vayikra (26:1): "…you shall not place an EVEN MASKIT in your land to prostrate on it." This practice, which was used by idol worshippers, is forbidden (outside the Beit HaMikdash) even when one does so in service of Hashem. Commentaries differ widely on the exact meaning and etymology of EVEN MASKIT, but it applies to any stone floor (Rambam, Avoda Zara 6:6-7). The gemara continues that only Rav had a problem, because he used to prostrate his body fully during Tachanun. The Mishna Berura (131:40) summarizes the Rama (OC 131:8) and earlier authorities' opinions as follows. The Torah prohibition is only when one is totally prostrated (pishut yadayim v'raglayim = PYR) on a stone floor. The Rabbis instituted prohibitions in situations that are once removed from the Torah prohibition. Thus,one may not do PYR even on a non-stone floor. One may not do KIDA (having one's knees and head on the floor in a crouched position) on a stone floor. Each of these rabbinic prohibitions can be remedied by adding another element of leniency. One is to lean on the side when bowing down. (Many explain that this is the origin of our practice of leaning on our arm during Tachanun (see Beit Yosef, beginning of Orach Chayim 131)). Another is to place something in between the body and the floor. The Rivash (ibid.) cites R. Sherira, who says that the reason we forbid PYR on any floor is the fear that there is stone underneath. Magen Avraham (131:22) leans toward the following claim: Covering a stone floor with cut grass, as was customary for bowing on Yom Kippur, solves even the Torah-level prohibition. Yet, stone covered by earth is a problem according to R. Sherira, because the connected earth merges with the stone. Thus, it is not a halachic separation, and PYR is forbidden. In contrast, loose grass is a separate layer, and PYR is permitted. (According to many, any material that is fastened to the floor, e.g. carpet, is not a separation - see Machatzit Hashekel 131:22). However, not all agree that a covering allows one to bow in a way that would otherwise be a Torah prohibition (Sha'ar Hatziyun 131: 44). Note that this concern, which troubled poskim such as the Mishna Berura, no longer applies in our communities. This is because (in places we know of) we do KIDA, not PYR, even on Yom Kippur. Therefore, a separation suffices and no separation is needed for a non-stone floor (see Magen Avraham 131:22). What counts as stone?
Bricks are not considered like stone (Mishna Berura 131:41).
However, Shevet HaLevi (I,23) says that marble is like stone.
Although one can claim that cement is closer to brick than to stone,
Piskei Teshuvot (131:27) cites Rav Elyashiv as saying that it is
like stone because of the small rocks it contains.There seems to be
ample room for leniency if one does KIDA on a carpet or linoleum
that is on top of concrete. However, most people use towels or
papers anyway. (Who wants to risk violating a prohibition during Yom
Kippur davening?) May we spend Yom Kippur
in the Beit Hamikdash, where one may bow even on stone. A later gemara tries to
reconcile one Amora's ruling with another's action. According to one
account, Rav said that an Etrog that mice nibbled on is pasul. Yet,
R. Chanina (believe it or not) bit from an etrog and then used it
for 4M, which should be a problem of an etrog that is missing a
piece (CHASEIR). The gemara explains that R. Chanina did so on the
second day of Sukkot. Regarding the mice, there are two contrary
suggestions. One is that Rav said it was pasul because it is
particularly unseemly and unfit even on the second day. The other is
that the nibbled etrog is sufficiently HADAR and is fit on the
second day. From this gemara we see that CHASEIR does not make 4M
unfit beyond the first day of Sukkot. The Rosh (Sukka 3:3) incorporates both gemarot and says that the only differences between the first day of Sukkot and the rest are borrowed 4M and CHASEIR. Lack of HADAR always renders 4M pasul. He explains that the rabbis extended the p'sul of more central flaws of the species' status even to the days when the mitzva of 4M is only rabbinic. (Why HADAR, which the Torah mentions only in reference to Etrog, is more central than CHASEIR for all species is a good question. However, it is a fact, according to this approach.) The Rama (649:5), who reflects Ashkenazic practice, accepts the Rosh's opinion and disqualifies dry or blighted 4M.The Rama says that in the famous case where the PITAM (the Etrog's "flower") falls off, it is an example of CHASEIR. However, the Mishna Berura (ad loc. :35) cites an opinion that a removed PITAM is a matter of HADAR and is a p'sul throughout Sukkot. He suggests being stringent except where another Etrog is not available.Then one can rely on the combination of the opinions of Rambam, who permits even a non-HADAR, and Rama, who says it a fallen PITAM is only a problem of CHASEIR. Another interesting machloket is the status of the second day of Sukkot, outside Israel. On one hand, the mitzva of 4M is only rabbinic that day. On the other hand, in most ways we treat the second day as if it might be the first day (most classically, by treating it like Yom Tov). Once again, Rambam is lenient regarding the p'sulim that do not apply on the rest of Sukkot and the Rosh gives it all of the first day's requirements. The Shulchan Aruch and Rama treat it as a doubt (ibid.) and say that if that is all one has, he should take those 4M without a beracha. Ed. note: Something not covered in this Vebbe Rebbe piece is the distinction between HADAR and M'HUDAR. HADAR, as mentioned in the VR Q&A is part of the definition of an Etrog, and extends to the other three MINIM as well. If an Etrog or Lulav or Hadas or Arava is not a HADAR, it is invalid for the mitzva. M'HUDAR describes the extra beauty of the Etrog, etc. A M'HUDR is desire- able for the mitzva, but its lack does not disqualify the species in question. Very often, a Rav should be consulted to determine whether an Etrog (or the other MINIM) is kosher or not. An additional question, beyond whether it is acceptable for the mitzva is whether it is a M'HUDAR, or does it lack features that make it M'HUDAR. 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 At first glance, it would appear that both mitzvot derive from the general mitzva of Torah study. This would explain why women are exempt from writing a Torah scroll, as they are, according to most authorities, exempt from Torah study (for its own sake). Why then are they included in the mitzva of Hak-hel which also appears to derive from the mitzva of Torah study? Furthermore, Hak-hel is a time-bound positive mitzva, from which women are generally exempt. On the other hand, the mitzvot of Torah study and, by extension, writing a Torah scroll are not time-bound and yet women are exempt (Kiddushin 34a). Perhaps there is a
connection between a woman's obligation in Hak-hel and the fact that
Hak-hel applies only in Eretz Israel. Sefer haChinukh says that
failure to participate in Hak-hel carries a very serious punishment
since it is a "powerful pillar" of Judaism. Women are unquestionably
integral members of the Jewish nation. The Torah is the foundation
of all national life in Eretz Israel. It is, therefore, incumbent
upon all members of the nation to participate in Hak-hel, which
underscores the responsibility and privilege given to Am Israel to
practice the Torah in its most natural environment, in Eretz Israel.
Hak-hel includes the personal requirement of Torah learning for men
(Chagiga 3a), but goes beyond to include the national attachment to
Torah and Eretz Israel, which applies also to women. Immediately after Shacharit on Yom Kippur, the shamash pounded on the table and announced, "By order of the rabbis, everyone is required to return home and eat now." No one moved. Each looked down, not daring to look his friend in the face. Who could eat on Yom Kippur? R' Yisrael tried to reason with the people, explaining to them that the commandment "to protect one's life" (D'varim 4:16) was more important than any other. Still no one moved. Finally, R' Yisrael
motioned to the shamash, who brought out wine and poured a cup for
the rabbi. In a broken voice R' Yisrael recited the required
blessing and drank the wine in full public view. Everyone answered
"Amen" tearfully, and one by one they slipped away to their own
homes to eat. It is written in Vayikra (23:32) "On Yom Kippur, VE'INITEM ET NAFSHOTEICHEM. This is usually translated as, "You shall afflict your souls." However, the word also has another meaning, as we find in reference to the mitzva of bringing the first fruits (Devarim 26:5) "And you shall answer and sing (V'ANITA) before G-d, when you bring the first fruits to the Temple." Therefore, in the context of Yom Kippur, the phrase VE'INITEM ET NAFSHOTEI- CHEM doesn't have to be translated only as "You shall afflict your souls". On the one hand, one can't hide the fact that Yom Kippur is spent looking deeply into one's soul, exposing weakness and shortcomings. That certainly causes one to be afraid of being found guilty on the Day of Judgment. But Yom Kippur is also the Day of Atonement, when all sincere Ba'alei T'shuva are guaranteed forgiveness by G-d. It is this most comforting element of Yom Kippur that allows us to rejoice during the festival of forgiveness. The verb V'INITEM, in addition to meaning that "you shall afflict your souls," can also be translated, "you shall allow your souls to sing". You shall free your soul of all of its usual bodily needs and desires and dedicate a 25-hour period to your soul and to G-d. Within the comforting embrace of the G-d of love and forgiveness on Yom Kippur, our bodily needs become of almost no account, as our souls take over our bodies, singing to G-d. Yom Kippur is a grand and unique opportunity for every Jew to receive a new beginning in life, a second chance. That's why the Talmud in Ta'anittells us that G-d gave us the second tablets on Yom Kippur, symbolizing that G-d always gives us a second chance to become better human beings. Judaism is an optimistic and forgiving religion that allows for change and the ability of a person to begin a new relationship with others and with G-d. The prayers of Yom Kippur reflect this perspective. More than ten times, we repeat that this day serves to atone for all our sins, to purify us and restore our holy character, because on Yom Kippur, by attaining repentance and forgiveness, our bond to the Creator is restored and renewed. The crucial message of the day is not just that the opportunity for a clean slate exists, it is how we realize that opportunity. We do this by concentrating on our soul. All year long there is tension and conflict between body and soul, between the physical, material needs and one's spiritual soul. In virtually all the battles between the forces of the spiritual and the physical, the physical desires win. We indulge our physical cravings, doing that which feels good, and that which brings us pleasure. On Yom Kippur, the day belongs to the soul, as our physical activities are diminished if not altogether eliminated. The soul, freed of its physical bonds, can now soar upwards, ascending to higher levels of kedusha, where it can express its deepest feelings and emotions. On Yom Kippur, we become like angels, who neither sleep, eat, nor have marital relations. So that we can, for one day out of the year, devote ourselves exclusively to singing the praises of G-d, dressed in white and confident that our true nature, the G-dly soul, is being fulfilled. Such an elevation of the spirit is true inner joy. The sounding of the
shofar at the end of Yom Kippur is directly linked to the shofar
blast that once was sounded each half century on the jubilee year.
Just as that dramatic shofar blast signaled freedom through a
release from debts and an end to physical slavery, so our own shofar
blast symbolizes the ability of a Jew to rise above material and
physical desires, freeing the soul to bond with G-d. Therefore, let
us all accept the challenge to rejoice on Yom Kippur. G'mar Chatima
Tova 2) Moshe compares the Torah to rain (Matar) in 32:2. What is the symbolism of this comparison? 3) Why does the Torah
revert back to Yehoshua's old name, HOSHEA, in this week's Parsha?
(32:44) MALBIM explains that Yona was certain that the people of Nineveh, capital of Assyria, would listen to his prophecy, repent, and then destroy Eretz Yisrael. He ran away from G-d's mission MILIFNEI HASHEM, in order not to be an accomplice to this destruction. Yona cared too much for G-d's nation, Israel, to follow G-d's command.He was willing to sacrifice himself for his people. DAAT MIKRA gives a different answer. Yona ran away because he did not understand G-d's mercy. For Yona b. AMITAI ( the son of truth) justice could not go together with forgiveness, mercy is truth (just). In verse (4:2) he tells G-d the reason he ran away - "I knew that You are a gracious G-d, and merciful, slow to anger and great in love and repents of the evil." Yona mentions the Divine attributes mentioned in Sh'mot (34:6) but leaves out the word ,nt (truth) from the list. Yona disagrees with G-d's idea of justice. He thinks that those who have sinned should be punished and shouldn't be given an opportunity to do T'SHUVA. The lesson from the book of YONA is that the world could not survive without G-d's mercy. Even Yona himself is a recipient of G-d's chesed. Yona, a prophet, should have known better then to run away from Hashem. He himself should have been punished immediately and yet G-d gave him many second chances. He sent him many messengers- the wind, the storm, the sailors, the captain, the GORALOT (lots), the male & female fish in order to get Yonah to repent. Why are all four chapters of the book of Yona read on Yom Kippur at Mincha time? Many commentators such as the Beit Yosef say that the book's theme is T'SHUVA and is read to wake us up to do T'SHUVA before Neila, just before the Gates of Repentance close. But there can be another reason. This book, which shows how Hashem has mercy even on those who don't deserve it, is read as a prayer to Hashem asking him to have mercy on us, and forgive us, even if we don't deserve it. It is a mitzva to eat
on Erev Yom Kippur. In one of your meals you can serve a big fish
(to remember Yona being swallowed by a big fish). If you want to be
really extravagant you can also serve fish roe (eggs) from salmon or
herring since the midrash says that Yona was spit out of a male fish
DAG into a female fish DAGA. Her belly was full with eggs which made
Yona even more uncomfortable. This is what forced Yona to finally
pray to G-d. This Yom Kippur may we all have the proper atmosphere
to pray and may our prayers be answered. When an individual is defiled by a dead person, two stages of spiritual purification take place. The first is a sprinkling procedure conducted by a Kohen. The second demands of the individual to completely immerse his body in the Mikve. The first stage is passive. It is as if the impure individual needs shock treatment to stir him back to life. The second procedure is active and it begs Rabbi Akiva's question: "Before whom are you cleansed?" Rabbi Akiva stresses the active component of the ritual cleansing, even though it is technically the second stage. The dipping is the key element in restoring the individual to his previous state, notes Rabbi Yaakov Ariel. For here the person is pro- active; here he is completely surrounded by pure water, a symbol of G-d's living Torah. In the days leading up
to Yom Kippur, we are called upon, more than ever, to immerse
ourselves in the wellsprings of G-d's Torah. Having done so, we are
ready to let Hashem sprinkle His blessings upon us. May we be
worthy, speedily and in our days. Minchat Shai (a very well-respected authority on pronunciation and DIK- DUK) says the HEI/PATACH and the LAMED/SH'VA NACH form the first syllable of the word - HAL. the rest of the word is the regular pronunciation of G-d's name, ADO-NOI. HAL-ADO... Another authority says
that the HEI should be pronounced in its own syllable, and then the
LAMED/SH'VA NA is attached to G-d's name. The problem is that a
LAMED/SH'VA cannot be followed by a CHATAF-PATACH which is what is
under the ALEF of the pronunciation of G-d's name. Maybe it would
change to LA, in which case the ALEF falls silent. HA-LADO... "Inner
Sin-Offerings" - Par Kohein Mashiach "At the time when the Holy Ark was hidden away, they also hid the Shemen HaMishcha, the jar of manna, etc." (Horayot 12a). Radak (R. David Kimchi 1160-1235 CE on II Divrei Hayamim 35:3) quotes a no longer extant Midrash. "Our rabbis of blessed memory said, 'that (Yoshiyahu, the last righteous king of Judah [639 BCE - 608BCE], realizing that the destruction of Bayit Rishon was imminent), gave instructions to hide the Aron (and the oil, the vessel with the manna, etc.)… There was a stone in the western side of the Kodesh HaKodashim and the Ark rested on it…. When Solomon built the First Temple, (Ru'ach HaKodesh revealed to him) that one day it would be destroyed. Therefore, in anticipation, he excavated a place to hide the Aron in winding, hidden tunnels deep below the surface of the earth. The stone upon which the ark rested, covered the opening of that tunnel. Yoshiyahu ordered that the Aron be hidden in the place that Sh'lomo had prepared. '(And he said to the Levites that taught all Israel, that were holy unto the Lord) 'Put the Holy Ark in the (House that Solomon King of Israel did build)…' And they hid the Aron, the staff of Aaron, the jar containing the manna and the Shemen HaMishcha." When the Beit HaMikdash is rebuilt speedily in our time, Eliyahu HaNavi will restore them to us. The Mishna refers to this Korban (and Par He'elam Davar Shel Tzibur, the "bullock offered for a matter that was hidden from the congregation") as the "bullocks which are to be burnt". These Korbanot fall into the category of Chata'ot Penimi'ot - "inner sin-offerings" - because unlike other Chata'ot, the Kohanim made the blood application inside the Bayit. The Mishna reads, "The bullock(s)… were slaughtered north of the Mizbei'ach and their blood was received in a Kli Shareit (a Mikdash service vessel) in the north and their blood was required to be sprinkled on the Parochet (between the Heichal and the Kodesh HaKodashim and on the Mizbach HaZahav, the golden (incense) altar" inside the Bayit (Z'vachim 5:2). Rambam elucidates, "…the blood was tossed seven times on the Veil… and (blood) was dabbed on the four "horns" of the Mizbach HaZahav… he starts in the northeast, (proceeds to) the northwest, southwest (and finishes in the) southeast. The anointed Kohein…receives the blood and sprinkles the blood in (the Heichal) but if (he appointed) a common priest (as a surrogate, the Korban) is valid" (Hil. Ma'asei Hakorbanot 5:13-15). The Mishna cautions, "(The lack of) one of these sprinklings impaired (the atonement). The residue of the blood (left in the Kli Shareit) was spilled over the western base of the outer (sacrificial) altar…" A common Kohein removed the Eimurim (inner sacrificial portions) from the animal - salted them and burnt them on the Mizbei'ach. Then they removed the body of the Par from Jerusalem but did not flay the animal. They took the Par to the area where the ashes of the Mizbei'ach were disposed, dismembered it and burnt the pieces. A Zar (non-Kohein) could burn the Par and it may be burnt even at night. Since Shemen HaMishcha was no longer accessible in the days of Bayit Sheini, they could not anoint the new Kohanim Gedolim. Instead, they were inaugurated by simply being invested with the eight garments of the KG. The newly appointed KG donned the "many garments" and removed them every day for a week. Rashi comments, "…Iknow that (the KG) anointed with the Shemen HaMishcha (is eligible to perform the Yom Kippur Avoda). (However) he who (wears) the "larger number of garments", from whence do we derive that he also is eligible)? Scripture states 'And who shall be con- secrated' (Vayikra 16:32) etc. These are the High Priests who arose from (the time) of Yoshiyahu and afterwards, because in his days, they concealed the cruse of anointing oil." After this 7-day investiture, they accepted the legitimacy of the new Kohein Gadol without question and he could perform all the Avodot required by his office. The prerogatives of the KG who was inaugurated by the 'wearing of the many garments' for seven days differed from those of the anointed KG only in that the Kohanim Gedolim of Bayit Sheini, not being anointed, were barred from bringing the Par Kohein Mashiach. While we have no record that this particular Korban was ever offered, it could not be brought - even in theory - in Bayit Sheini. <to be continued> Catriel's book in
progress: The Temple of Jerusalem, A Pilgrim’s Perspective; A Guided
Tour through the Temple and the Divine Service |
