Shabbat Parshat B'haalot'cha (Naso) This Shabbat is the 250th day (of 354); the 36th Shabbat (of 50) of 5766 ...LO V'CHAYIL V'LO V'CHOACH KI IM B'RUCHI... (Zecharia 4:6) HALACHIC TIMES Candle Lighting and Havdala times - Regular and (earliest) WORD OF THE MONTH Prime time for Kidush L'vana was last Motza'ei Shabbat. For those who have not yet said KL, we've got another Motza"Sh for you. Last op for KL this month is the eve of 15 Sivan, all night. Don't wait, though. If possible, say KL any night until then (except for Leil Shabbat) And another thing... We have previously spoken of Shavuot as the CULMINATION of Pesach. And so it is, for Torah and Eretz Yisrael. Yet Shavuot is more like a graduation, COMMENCEMENT, if you will. It is really both. What began on Pesach, culminated on Shavuot. We started the process of (physical) freedom on Pesach and reached the spiritual heights on Shavuot with the Sinai experience. So too coming to Eretz Yisrael and the building of the Beit HaMikdash were culminations. Yet now the challenge of living a Torah life BEGINS in earnest. LEAD TIDBIT Then the thoughts go to the people. It is hard, especially for Olim - of any length of time - not to think in terms of us and them, when thinking of family and friends who have not made that major switch of countries and lifestyles. Then you think of the little prayer, ACHEINU KOL BEIT YISRAEL, which speaks of Jews wherever they are. You feel at one with Klal Yisrael and at the same time, you also are acutely aware of the differences. And for this Shabbat in particular... they are reading about the material gifts of the tribal leaders to the Mishkan. We are reading about the deeper, more intimate involvement of Aharon HaKohen with Mikdash service. Does that say anything to you? B'haalotcha Stats Mitzvot: Note to TTreaders who live in Chutz LaAretz: For the next several weeks, you can find your Parshat HaShavua in the previous issue of TT. See page 21, bottom box. Aliya-by-Aliya Sedra Summary Kohen - First Aliya - 14 p'sukim - 8:1-14 SDT Rashi explains the connection between this portion and that of the gifts of the N'SI'IM at the end of Parshat Naso. Aharon, as leader of the tribe of Levi, was embarrassed that he had not offered gifts for the dedication of the Mishkan as did the other leaders. G-d is telling him that his gift - daily service in the Mishkan - is far greater than the other gifts. Theirs are material and transitory; his is spiritual and permanent. The MITZVA to tend and light the Menora is recorded and counted elsewhere in the Torah. This fact makes the DRASHOT explaining the connection to Parshat HaN'si'im stand out all the more, since the P'SHAT is sort of redundant (not quite). Ramban sees in this portion an allusion to a future generation when descendants of Aharon (the Hasmoneans) (re)dedicated the Mikdash by lighting the Menora. If we look at the two topics that flank Bamidbar 7, we find the two Temple practices that survive until this day (as opposed to the short-lived nature of the gifts described in chapter 7) - Birkat Kohanim, still practiced daily as commanded by the Torah, and the Menora, commemorated by the yearly observance of Chanuka. This perhaps is part of G-d's message to Aharon. All-in-all, this opening parsha is a strong “REMEZ to Chanuka from the Torah”. The Menora is described again with specific reference to the wicks (flames) of the lamps facing the "face (central stalk) of the Menora". [P> 8:5 (18)] Next G-d commands Moshe to separate the Leviyim from among the People and to purify them. Ritual waters, shaving their hair (Rashi explains that as an atonement for the firstborns whom the Leviyim replaced, they were considered to have a ritual impurity akin to that of M’TZORA, hence the shaving of all bodily hair as part of their purification process), cleansing their clothes, and various sacrifices and ceremonies accomplish this command of "separation of the Leviyim". Levi - Second Aliya - 12 p'sukim - 4:38-49 The Torah explains that the sacred functions were originally to be performed by firstborns who were sanctified as a result of their being spared in Egypt. (The special position of the firstborn actually predates the Egypt experience.) As a result of the sin of the Golden Calf, the Leviyim, who unilaterally reacted in defense of G-d's honor, were taken by Him in lieu of the firstborns of all the Tribes. Moshe, Aharon and the People of Israel did to/with the Leviyim as Moshe was instructed. After purification, the Leviyim were to come to the Mishkan to "report for duty". [S> 8:23 (4)] From age 25 until 50, the Levi was eligible for Mishkan service. (From 25-30 the Levi studied and trained for Temple service, at 30 he began serving. Age 50 was the retirement age for the "carrying chores", but the singing and guarding functions of the Levi continued beyond that age). Shlishi - Third Aliya - 14 p'sukim - 9:1-14 This Pesach and Pesach Sheni episode occurred before the counting of the People recorded in the opening portion of Bamidbar. It was not placed at the beginning of the book because it is embarrassing to the People of Israel that they (we) only brought this one Korban Pesach in the entire Wilderness period. Then the Torah tells us that there were people who were ritually unclean and thus unable to participate in the Korban Pesach. They approached Moshe and complained that it was unfair that they were unable to join in this mitzva with the rest of the People. Moshe called upon G-d to answer their "complaint". It is important to understand that the laws of Pesach Sheni are a part of the original Torah miSinai. However, they were not revealed to the People until this point. And it was done at this point to honor those who "complained". BTW, contrast this kind of complaining with the other kind that unfortunately occurs too many times in the Book of B'midbar. [P> 9:9 (6)] A person who is "tamei" or far away from the Mikdash and is unable to bring K.P. shall bring a K.P. on the afternoon of the 14th of Iyar [380, A57 9:11] and eat it that night [381, A58 9:11] with matza and maror. Nothing of it may be left over for the morning [382,L119 9:12] and no bone of it may be broken [383,L122 9:12]; all rules of K.P. apply to this Pesach Sheni (actually there are differences concerning peripheral details, but the korbanot themselves are the same). Intentionally not bringing K.P. is punishable by "karet" (excision). Note: This is potentially confusing; read carefully: A person who missed P1 inadvertently, because of illness, forgetfulness, accident, and a variety of other reasons (other than intentional), is not liable for KARET (of course), and is required to bring P2. If he misses P2 also, inadvertently - no KARET, but if intentionally, he is subject to KARET. If a person missed P1 intentionally, he is subject to KARET, but if he brings P2, the KARET is removed, so to speak. However, if he misses P2 (having intentionally missed P1), then he is liable to KARET, even if he has a good excuse for missing P2. Another note: Although the Torah mentions two specific "excuses" for not bringing K.P., anyone who did not bring K.P. for any reason - including someone who intentionally did not bring it - is eligible and obligated to bring Pesach Sheni. This Divine “second chance” is available EVEN to the intentional violator. MitzvaWatch • RAMBAM says (seems to say) that a boy or girl who reaches the age of mitzvot after Pesach but before Pesach Sheni, should preferably not participate in the first Pesach (as a child) but rather should bring Pesach Sheni (as a halachic adult). If, however, they were included in (and did eat) Pesach Rishon, then they do not bring P2. • A non-Jew who converts between the Pesachs, would not have been part of the first Pesach. He must bring Pesach Sheni as a (new) Jew. This might be surprising, if one thinks of P2 as a make-up for P1. Rambam’s point is that P2 is its own set of mitzvot. • A woman is obligated on Korban Pesach (the first one, that is, on the 14th of Nissan), just as a man is obligated. Even though it is time- related, it is part of the package deal of Pesach mitzvot, which includes the prohibitions of Chametz, and we are dealing with THE set of mitzvot at the hub of Jewish life - "everything" is related to Y'tzi'at Mitzrayim - women are obligated. Pesach Sheni is different. It is more the "classic" time-related positive mitzva, and women are exempt. However, a woman who wants to bring P2 (if the conditions for P2 are present, meaning that she could not bring the first one), may do so. But not on Shabbat. That is, on her own or with a group of women only. But if she is part of a CHAVURA that includes a man, then she can participate in P2 on Shabbat (in which case it is eaten on Motza”Sh). This is so because an optional korban cannot push aside Shabbat; only a required one can (the man's P2 is a requirement; the women's is not). R'vi'i - Fourth Aliya - 19 p'sukim - 9:15-10:10 SDT The pasuk (9:18) says: "AL PI HASHEM (by the word of G-d) the People of Israel shall travel, and by G-d's word they shall camp." The SHLA"H HAKADOSH writes that this is the source for the concept that a person should use the phrases Im Yirtzeh HaShem, Baruch HaShem, B'ezrat HaShem, and the like whenever he speaks of doing something. Our travels and every activity should also be AL PI HASHEM. [P> 10:1 (10)] G-d commanded Moshe to fashion two silver trumpets to be used to assemble the People (or their leaders) and to signal their movement. The T'KI'A sound on both trumpets was a call for everyone to gather to Moshe. The T'KI'A on one trumpet was a call to the leaders of the people. The T'RU'A sound indicated that traveling was to commence - one T'RU'A for each camp (of three tribes each). Kohanim are charged with the mitzva of sounding the trumpets when appropriate. The above-mentioned purposes of the trumpets applied to the generation of the wilderness only, but the mitzva for future generations concerning the trumpets is as follows: When the People enter the Land of Israel, the trumpets are to be used during times of troubles and on festive occasions during Temple service [384, A59 10:9,10]. MitzvaWatch When does the mitzva apply? The blowing of the CHATZOTZROT in the Beit HaMikdash, to accompany certain korbanot, obviously applies when the Beit HaMikdash is standing. What about the blowing during times of crises? Some authorities hold that the mitzva does not apply in our time - only at the time of the Mikdash. Some say that this aspect of the mitzva would apply in our time except that we do not know how to make the CHATZOTZROT, and therefore we can- not fulfill this mitzva on a "technicality". Others disagree and hold that the mitzva of blowing in times of trouble DOES apply and we use CHATZOTZROT made today to the best of our knowledge and ability. Rabbi J. David Bleich in his Contemporary Halachic Problems mentions a fascinating opinion on this topic. Rather than Eretz Yisrael per se or the Mikdash being a prerequisite for this mitzva (the blowing in times of national crisis aspect of the mitzva), it is Jewish sovereignty in Eretz Yisrael that activates the mitzva. Therefore, according to this opinion, we are dealing with a mitzva - maybe the only one - that reactivated for us in 1948. Chamishi - Fifth Aliya - 24 p'sukim - 10:11-34 [S> 10:29 (6)] Moshe informs his father-in-law Yitro (here called CHOVAV) of Israel's traveling plans and asks him to come along. Yitro declines the invitation and returns to his home. The People travel from Sinai for 3 days, led by the Aron which was searching for a resting place, so-to-speak. G-d's Cloud accompanied and protected them. At this point in the Torah, we are 13 months out of Egypt and neither the people nor Moshe Rabeinu have done what later caused them to be barred from entry into Eretz Yisrael. After Moshe talks to Yitro, it was supposed to be a three-day trip (condensed into one day) to bring us WITH Moshe, into the Land of Israel. But then we started messing things up. Shishi - Sixth Aliya - 31 p'sukim - 10:35-11:29 [P> 11:1 (15)] Next follows another "black period" in the early history of the Nation - the Complaints. The People complained and were punished by fire. Moshe pleaded for the people and G-d stopped the punishing fire. They complained about the Manna and demanded meat. With great chutzpa, they remembered the fish and other "fine foods" they ate in Egypt. And they disparaged the wonderful, miraculous sustenance from G-d. This angered (so to speak) G-d greatly. Even Moshe Rabeinu complained about G-d's anger with the People and expressed his difficulty in handling the People alone. Moshe also questioned where he would possibly be able to get enough meat to satisfy the People's demands. [P> 11:16 (7)] G-d told Moshe to gather 70 elders who would help ease the burden of leadership. G-d would instill in them the Divine Insight so that Moshe would not have to lead them alone. To the People, G-d promised meat (quail) which would descend in such great quantities for a sustained period of time (a month) until the People would become "sick of them". Moshe expressed doubt as to how so many people could be thus fed. [P> 11:23 (13)] G-d reproaches Moshe for the doubt. Moshe speaks to the People and gathers the Elders who were given the gift of prophecy by G-d. [The g'matriya of ELDAD U'MEIDAD is 103, same as N'VI'IM, prophets.] (Commentaries tell us that they prophesied Moshe's death and Yehoshua's accession to leadership.) Yehoshua, protective of his mentor Moshe, pleads with Moshe to punish them. Moshe assures Yehoshua that it is G-d's will that they should prophesy. About 18 times in the Tanach, it says "And G-d got angry with..." Yisrael / Bnei Yisrael / His people. When the People complained about the Manna, etc., the Torah says VAYICHAR AF HASHEM M'OD, G-d got VERY angry. Why? Kedushat Levi explains that usually when G-d got angry at the People, Moshe would rise to their defense and persuade G-d, so to speak, not to punish them. This time, the Torah says that "and in Moshe's eyes it was bad". Moshe Rabeinu was more upset with the people than usual. This "angered" G-d all the more, and Moshe did not defuse G-d’s anger as in the other instances. Sh'vi'i - Seventh Aliya - 23 p'sukim - 11:30-12:16 [P> 12:1 (3)] Miriam speaks critically against Moshe to Aharon by belittling Moshe's unique stature among prophets and people. [S> 12:4 (10)] G-d rebukes them and clearly states how unique Moshe is among all prophets, past and future. Miriam is stricken with Tzora'at. Moshe offers a short but eloquent prayer on behalf of his sister. [P> 12:14 (3)] The People delay their travels for the week of Miriam's isolation. [81 years earlier, Miriam had stood by the Nile protectively watching over her baby brother Moshe in the basket. Her "reward-in-kind" is this 7-day delay. The Mishna points out that good deeds are thusly rewarded.] On the other hand, the Torah in D'varim 24:9 tells us to remember what G-d did to Miriam on our way from Egypt. This becomes a warning against speaking LASHON HARA. The People move to the Paran desert. These last 3 p’sukim are Maftir. Haftara - 21 p'sukim - Zecharya 2:14-4:7 The haftara contains Zecharya's vision of the Golden Menora flanked by olive branches. This serves as an appropriate counterpoint to the description of the Menora in the Mishkan at the beginning of the sedra. The Haftara also tells about a Kohen Gadol (Yehoshua in the haftara; Aharon in the sedra). This vision of the Menora was borrowed by the State of Israel to be the national emblem (not exactly, but close). Wouldn't it be wonderful if our leaders would heed the words of Zecharia in explaining that vision: "Not by might nor by power, but by My spirit..." Only when we act properly, which also means differently from other nations, will we merit the Geula. THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW - Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Dean His lawyer made a motion to adjourn for half an hour. The other side did not object in principle, except the lawyer for the defendant said that he had an extremely important appointment that afternoon and every moment counted. I told the parties and their lawyers that the halacha took into account the lunch break for the Beth Din during the course of a trial. They were, of course, quite surprised and I told then I would send them an essay on the topic. The following is essentially the essay that I sent. The entire Torah court system was originally composed of judges who were scholars and who gave time from their studies in order to sit in judgment. Given their natural reluctance to relinquish study time, it became necessary to establish certain minimum amounts of time during which a duly constituted regular appointed community Beth Din is required to hold sessions. In T. Shabbat (10a), the Talmud records a discussion concerning the minimum amount of time that the judges are required to sit in Beth Din. It appears that immediately after the morning prayers, the judges entered into the Beth Din to adjudicate cases and they did this without taking any time for eating. The question arose, until when must they sit in judgment? The answer give by the Talmud is that they must sit until the time of the midday meal. The Talmud points out that the scholars ate their first meal in the sixth hour of the day. In Jewish Law the hours are calculated by taking the amount of daylight hours and dividing by twelve. Thus assuming a day equally divided between night and day, we would have twelve equal daylight hours from 6:00am to 6:00pm, and the scholars would eat between 11:00am and noon. There is a difference of opinion among post-Talmudic authorities whether the mandatory meeting of the Beth Din is until 11:00am, until noon, or some time between. Alfasi (1013-1103) says that they must sit until the sixth hour and Asheri (1250-1327) following him, uses the exact language. The words “until the sixth hour” would seem to indicate until the beginning of the sixth hour which is about 11:00am. Rambam (1135-1204) however, states that the judges must sit until the end of the sixth hour, which would be until noon. He writes as follows: “During what hours do the judges hold session? The Small Sanhedrin and the Beth Din of three judges, from the time when the morning prayers are over until the end of the sixth hour of the day. The Great Sanhedrin meets from the time of the morning tamid [daily burnt offering] until the evening tamid is slaughtered, Sabbaths and festivals they spend in the house of study located in the Temple Mount.” Tur (1270-1340) holds that the law is in accordance with Rambam. R. Yosef Karo (1488-1575) in his Kesef Mishneh commentary on Rambam and in his Beth Yosef commentary on Tur, questions the holding of Rambam and Tur. He concludes that the halacha should be that the judges must sit until the beginning of the sixth hour rather than the end of the sixth hour. These comments serve as the basis for R. Karo’s statement in his code (Shulhan Aruch Hoshen haMishpat §5) that the Beth Din sits from dawn until the end of the fifth hour, that is, until 11:00am. Bach (1570-1641) in his commentary on Tur and R.. Joshua Falk (1555-1614) in his Prisha commentary on Tur write that Rambam and Tur certainly are aware of the Talmudic admonition that a scholar must commence his midday meal no late than before noon. Accordingly, they explain, Rambam and Tur do not literally mean until the end of the sixth hour (i.e. noon), rather they are referring to a time approximately a few minutes before noon. Schach (1622- 1663) in turn cites Falk with approval. Aruch haShulhan (1829-1908) attempts to reconcile all the proceeding views as follows: All agree that the Beth Din must be in session until 11:00am. In addition, if the judges desire, they may remain in session from 11:00am until just before noon. However, the judges must adjourn to eat at least a few minutes before noon, according to all authorities. Tur, after stating that the Beth Din is required to sit until noon, adds that after this time the Beth Din is no longer required to sit in session. This language is also used by Rama (1520-1572) in his emendations to R. Karo’s code. Bach comments that the judges should not think that they are prohibited for sitting in judgment in the afternoon because they would be neglecting the study of Torah. Therefore, judges should be told that their function is so important that they may resume sitting in judgment in the afternoon after they have eaten. Aruch haShulhan, after analyzing the various authorities, concludes that the preceding rules were followed during Talmudic times. At the present time, however, Beth Din always reconvenes after the midday meal. In discussing the topic, that Talmud and the codes also mention that provision should be made for recessing the afternoon Beth Din session to recite the Afternoon Prayers. All that which was said is according to the halacha if there is no agreement among the parties. They may stipulate that the trial or any part thereof, may commence and/or take place at night. A community may adopt rules regarding times for trials and so may an organization. These rules should be made known to the litigants who seek the aid of this particular Beth Din. The Beth Din of the Israel Center does not have the power to compel litigants to come before it. We only judge cases where both sides have entered into a stipulation to have their dispute adjudicated by us. To date we have not had any disputes by the litigant regarding our rules, which we deem to be fair to both sides. Oh yes, in the case of which I spoke at the outset, we sent down to the caterers in the lower floor who brought up sandwiches, and also the lawyer who had to leave called ahead and told them he would be late, and they were happy since they were not ready for their meeting. The important thing that all the people in the room learned is that the halacha does make provision for a recess for lunch. And oh, yes, again, the case was settled to everyone’s satisfaction after all the parties had a chance to make their points. The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in volume I chapter 5 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 TANACH On the other hand, he did not want to leave the holiness of Eretz Yisrael, and did so only out of honor for his mother who had commanded him to go (Peh Kadosh). "The land of the Children of the East to which Avraham had sent the sons of his concubines, before his death, away from his son Yitschak, was known for witchcraft, soothsaying and magic. It was there that Balak sent to fetch Bilaam to work his magic to prevent Israel from entering Eretz Yisrael. Yaakov was not concerned so much about their idolatry as he had already been inoculated against it by the teachings of Avraham and Yitschak. Rather, he feared succumbing to those practices in Haran to which human nature is so susceptible, of foretelling the future. So he went unwillingly and with hesitant steps" (Ha'amek Davar)." "At first, Yaakov went slowly as befitting one leaving Bet HaKnesset, since Eretz Yisrael stands in relation to all other countries as Bet HaKnesset does to the secularism of the street. The Rama, holds however, that if one intends to return, it is a mitzva to go in haste so as to come back as quickly as possible. Accordingly, having been told by Hashem that He would bring him back to the Land, Yaakov could now make his way to Haran swiftly and happily" (Chatam Sofer, Chiddushimal HaTorah). As he drew near to Charan, Yaakov saw a well covered by a large stone in a field and three flocks of sheep at rest there. "Rabbi Shimon from Akko taught that the well refers to Har Sinai from where his sons would draw the Ten Commandments. Rabbi Chanina taught that the well is Zion from where they would draw His Holy Presence" (Bereishit Rabba 70:8). "The well refers to Hashem who is the source of Living Waters" (as in Yirmiyahu 2:13). When Israel is in Eretz Yisrael, then the well functions in an inhabited place, but in galut it is found in open fields. The sin that caused our galut and prolongs it, is causeless hatred. Therefore in order both to return the Well to Eretz Yisrael and to remove the blockage of stone so that the Living Waters can flow, we require unity, just as the joint efforts of all the shepherds were required in Yaakov's revelation" (Malbim). Even simpler reading of the text provides significant lessons. Eliezer's type of well, while he was on a similar mission, was commonly either in the town or at its entrance for water for the population; whereas this one was primarily for the flocks. We should remember that through- out the Middle East water is scarce and has caused strife and wars from the dawn of history down to our own times. So, the purpose of the stone was legitimate and understandable. "The stone was to prevent wastage, pollution or anyone or object falling in" (Radak). Halakhically, not only are we liable for the damages that we or our property cause to the persons or assets of others, but we are required to prevent even ownerless property from causing such damage. "He who sees his neighbor drowning and is able to save him and did not do so; or heard others plotting to do him harm and did not inform him, negates the Biblical prohibition of: "You shall not spill blood in your house, and you shall not stand on your brother's blood" (Choshen Mishpat, 426). "What is the whole purpose of telling us how Yaakov was able to remove the stone alone whereas it normally required the efforts of all the shepherds? This question is especially pertinent when we remember that he was able to perform this physical feat even though he was tired and exhausted from his long journey. His great strength tells us how G-d gives strength and power to those who fear and love Him" (Ramban). Judaism's idea of the righteous and the saviors being physically strong and prosperous is in sharp contrast to that of all other religions. "Our sages (Yerushalmi Nedarim 9:1) taught that it is sufficient to limit ourselves to those things that the Torah forbids. So a person should not excessively refrain from material things as do the priests and monks of the idolaters, in order to achieve piety" (Mishne Torah, Hilkhot Deot 3:1). In mainstream Judaism, suffering or poverty or physical weakness is not a way to worship G-d, but rather wealth, health and prosperity, if earned and used correctly are the means of uniting Heaven and Earth in sanctity. That requires free adult people in full flowering of their physical, mental and material strength. However, Yaakov also had a tremendous sense of morality and justice, a prerequisite for Jewish leadership. "He said to the shepherds, if you are hired workers then you are shirking your responsibilities to the owners and if you are self-employed you should be more diligent" (Bereishit Rabba 70:7). "He saw Rachel the solitary woman amongst all the shepherds, so as an act of justice and mercy he removed the rock and watered her sheep" (Shadal). Rivka waters a stranger's camels, Moshe protects the daughters of Yitro at a well, and Ruth, Mother of Kingship, does chesed. All are the marks of the Abrahamic faith, to do righteousness and Justice. We see the character of the Arameans - no one trusted the other and nobody meant anybody else to have the slightest advantage. So they placed a heavy cover on the well so that only by their combined effort and supervision could it be removed" (S. R. Hirsch). "One who says, what's mine is mine, and yours is yours; some say this is the trait of S'dom" (Avot 5:10). This is installment #131 in Dr. Tamari’s series on “Tanach and its messages for our times” MISC section - contents: [1] From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE Q: I had an Israeli supermarket send me a delivery. After they left, I realized that they gave me two cases of expensive beer I had not bought. I have asked them several times to pick them up, but they haven’t yet. The cases are in the way and two bottles have been broken. When I last nudged them, the woman said that it hard for them to arrange, and if I don’t want to bring them back, I should keep them. As it is hard to shlep the cases by bus (with children), what should I do? I wouldn’t mind drinking the beer, but their value to me is far less than their price. A: Your simple case raises many, difficult Choshen Mishpat questions that we cannot do justice to in this forum. We will touch on a few major points and give our suggestion of how to proceed. When you discovered the beer, you became obligated in hashavat aveida (returning lost objects). (We assume it ideally would have been returned to another customer, although, depending on a few halachic doubts and questions of the sequence of events, it is possible that the store still owned the products.) As such, you became responsible to protect them from harm (Shulchan Aruch, CM 267:16) and return them. If the adults in your home broke the bottles or they were otherwise broken because of your lack of care (there is a machloket between the Shulchan Aruch and Rama, ibid. regarding the required level of care), you became obligated to pay for them. The main question is whether a finder is obligated to actually return a lost object or whether it is sufficient to enable the owner to retrieve it. The gemara (Bava Metzia 30a), in illustrating the differences between the mitzva of hashavat aveida and those of helping one load or unload his animal, describes hashavat aveidaas being done when the owner is absent. This seems to imply that if the owner is around to take the object, the finder is not responsible to take it home for him. Yet, the Derisha (CM 265) derives from Rishonim that the mitzva extends until it is returned to the owner’s possession. (See also Bava Metzia 31a and Shut Ben Yehuda I, 118, which strengthen the Derisha’s claim.) Thus, it seems that you did not complete hashavat aveida with the phone calls. The Derisha does point out that if the owner improperly wants to use the finder’s mitzva to have him do all the work, the finder can refuse, just as one can refuse to load another’s donkey alone as the owner watches. However, in this case, we can understand why a busy supermarket finds it difficult to send someone specially to pick up two cases of beer. There are a couple of possibilities to exempt you from storing the cases until they are retrieved or returning them on your next visit to the store. We are assuming that the person who paid for the beer has or will be reimbursed. Thus, he drops out of the picture, and you deal with the store. It is unclear whether he can and did halachically return ownership to the store (see R. Akiva Eiger’s notes on CM 120:1 and Divrei Chayim II, YD 112). Therefore, one can make the claim that you are not formally obligated in hashavat aveida. The store’s interest in the beer may not be sufficient if they do not own it (see Pitchei Choshen, Aveida 1:(55)). More directly, the woman on the phone said that you could keep the beer. There is a broad, important question to what extent a worker can relinquish his employer’s rights. In practice, it depends on the worker’s level of authority and the logic of making the concession. Your case involves a relatively modest amount of money, and they have reason to be considerate of a customer who was caused reasonable trouble because of their mistake. However, you may want to be wary of a half-hearted concession that might have been caused by what sounded like reluctance to perform hashavat aveida to its fullest. We suggest getting the store’s agreement to a compromise. For example, find someone to buy it at a good price and give the store the money or drink it for around half the price. 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) Asks Rav Zalman Sorotzkin in Oznayim LaTorah: What are they complaining about? They are not doing anything wrong in not bringing the offering; they are exempt. And no one is faulting them for being impure. To the contrary, the Gemara says that the people who came to complain were Mishael and Eltzafan, who had been instructed to drag the bodies of Nadav and Avihu out of the Mishkan after they were killed for having brought the "strange fire." They had been involved in the important mitzva of honoring the dead, and one who is engaged in one mitzva is exempt from another. Rav Sorotzkin answers that while they had a good reason for not bringing the Pesach offering, they were nevertheless upset because they were losing out on the opportunity to fulfill the mitzva as part of the Jewish people. Being exempt from a mitzva means that one is not liable for failing to observe it; but it does not provide the spiritual boost that comes from doing what God has commanded. Rav Sorotzkin laments that we no longer have this attitude. Rather, we see mitzvot as burdensome and are relieved to be exempt from them. Nowhere is this truer than in regard to the mitzva of settling the land of Israel. There are many legitimate reasons for not fulfilling this mitzva. But why aren't we asking lama nigara? Why aren't we bothered by the fact that we are losing out on the experience of raising our families in Eretz Yisrael? Only if we feel and express the pain of not being in Eretz Yisrael will we be motivated to seek ways to overcome the obstacles to Aliya. And only if our children hear us sigh, lama nigara, will they understand that Eretz Yisrael is an important goal even if, temporarily, it seems to be unachievable. Joel Rebibo, Beit El 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, this rich man was sitting with the rabbi and discussing various matters. The conversation turned to the different religious functionaries and what they earned. "Rebbe," the man asked R' Chaim Leib, "how do you do financially?" "Well, if there were fifteen such as you," R' Chaim Leib answered, "I would have no financial problems at all." "You've misunderstood me," R' Chaim Leib told him. "I really meant what I said. If there were fifteen such as you in Smargon, I would have no financial problems at all. The problem is that there are two hundred such as you." 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). [5] Parsha Points to Ponder - B'HAALOT'CHA THESE ARE THE ANSWERS 1) Rav Moshe Feinstein answers that the Torah is revealing to us how Aharon approached the performance of mitzvot. Despite the fact that the commands to him actually came from Moshe, Aharon focused on the fact that they were actually the words of G-D. This prevented him from having any thoughts that perhaps Moshe did not transmit the mitzva properly or in its entirety. Since it emanated from G-D its transmission was undoubtedly perfect. 2) The Chidushei HaRim explains that G-D wanted to make sure that while one group of Jews was being designated for a special role, the rest of the nation should not feel slighted or jealous. Therefore, in this specific verse He mentions BNEI YISRAEL five times to demonstrate his love for the entire nation. 3) The Ramban teaches that the negativity prior to these two verses refers to the fact that the Jewish people fled from Mount Sinai indicating their desire to have no further mitzvot. Had we stayed longer, perhaps we would have received even more mitzvot. The Kli Yakar explains that the word NUN means fish. A fish never turns away from water, its life source. The backwards NUN captures the negativity by indicating that we were like a fish that turned away from its life source when we turned away from Mount Sinai where we were receiving the Torah, our life source. Parsha Points to Ponder is prepared by Rabbi Dov Lipman Mashgiach Ruchani, Yeshivat Yesodei HaTorah in Bet Shemesh, author of "DISCOVER: Answers for Teenagers (and adults) to Questions about the Jewish Faith", soon to be republished by Feldheim - ppp@israelcenter.co.il [6] Portion for the Portion by Rakel Berenbaum The paragraph starts off, "On the day that the Tabernacle was erected, the cloud covered the Tabernacle, the Tent of Testimony. It seems that a special cloud is referred to here and not just any ordinary one. The Midrash says that this was the cloud that had covered Sinai when Hashem gave the Torah. The fact that this cloud appeared over the Tabernacle was a "Testimony" to the people that G-d rested in their midst. Although it might have looked like the Israelites were wandering in the desert, the nation knew that Hashem, by the sign of the cloud, was leading them. And yet this was no easy journey. Sometimes they encamped in one place for a very long time. Some times they only stayed in a place for a very short time. They might just arrive in a location and weren't given time to rest before they had to pack all their belongings and move again. There was no hint how long they would remain in each place so they had to do all the preparations of setting up camp even if in the end they only remained for a short time. These verses show us the uncertainty of the travel in the desert. They couldn't know in advance when they would travel. They couldn't plan for the future. Despite this hardship the verses repeat "AL PI HASHEM YACHANU VAL PI HASHEM YISA'U" - THEY CAMPED AT G-D'S WORD AND MOVED ON AT G-D'S WORD. They had faith in Hashem and followed His lead. Rav Hirsh explains that from the description of the travel in the desert, we learn how we, in every generation, should follow Hashem. We must accept what Hashem brings our way even if it doesn't make sense to us and even if it is difficult for us. What is interesting in these verses is that it seems that the long distances traveled in the desert weren't what was difficult for the people, but rather the staying put in one place for extended periods of time were the big test on the peoples trust in Hashem. They felt they weren't moving any closer to their goal of reaching the Promised Land. We must follow in our forefathers' footsteps during this long exile in the "desert of the nations" (Yechezkeil 20:35) and have patience and trust that no matter how long the journey Hashem leads us on, we will follow His cloud. TIRAMISU 2 cups Ricotta cheese (part skim milk) [7] Torah from Nature About a half a year ago, there was a scientific survey conducted in a previously unexplored mountainous jungle region in Indonesia. Just a look at the summary of discoveries passes the Wow test. A new species of honey eater, the first new bird species discovered on New Guinea since 1939. The breeding grounds of a "lost" bird of paradise... A new large mammal for Indonesia, the golden-mantled tree kangaroo... More than 20 new species of frogs, including a tiny microhylid frog less than 14mm long. A series of previously undescribed plant species, including five new species of palms. A remarkable white-flowered rhododendron with flower about 15cm across. Four new butterfly species. [8] Israel and Chutz LaAretz are not reading the same Parshat HaShavua It happens in two ways: [9] Divrei Menachem The consecration consisted partly of Bnei Yisrael "lean[ing] their hands upon the Leviyim" and of the Leviyim offering sacrifices. We understand the immediate necessity of sacrifices as a means of atonement, but the aspect of the people's leaning on the Leviyim seems strange. Surely, if at all, Moshe, the leader, should have leaned his hands on the new priests in the same way that he (later) leaned his hands on his successor Joshua, as a means of investing authority (Bemidbar 27:23). SHEYIBANEH BEIT HAMIKDASH... RED ALERT: - Shavu'ot was NOT Chag Habikurim "How were the Bikurim taken up (to Jerusalem)? All the people, inhabitants of the villages which constituted the Ma'amad, assembled in the city of the Ma'amad" (Bikurim 3:2). The Tosefta notes; "People did not go up on an individual basis, they went up by district", the farmer brought his Bikurim together with thousands of his friends and neighbors, members of the local Ma'amad and it was highly organized. A Ma'amad was the name given to the "collective" of Israelite farmers hailing from a particular geographic area of Eretz Yisrael. The country was divided into 24 Ma'amad districts and each one of the 24 Ma'amad groups was associated with one of the 24 Mishmarot (divisions) of the Kehuna, the priesthood. Both the Ma'amad group and the associated priestly Mishmar represented the same district. And since the farmers of each particular Ma'amad were all from one small geographic area of Eretz Yisrael and their harvest ripened more or less at the same time, they could bring their Bikurim up to Jerusalem together. There- fore, every couple of weeks, another Ma'amad, consisting of thousands of farmers from a different part of Eretz Yisrael (accompanied by the local Kohanim of the Mishmeret whose turn it was it serve in the Mikdash), ascended to Jerusalem to bring their Bikurim. (When a Mishmar of Kohanim was called to officiate in the Beit Hamikdash when its associated Ma'amad did not bring Bikurim, some of the members of its affiliated Ma'amad group nevertheless, still went up to Jerusalem. They entered the Azara to witness the daily sacrificial rite and served as representatives of K'lal Yisrael.) In the spirit of "in the multitude of the people is the Glory of the King", the Mikdash authorities coordinated the exact arrival time of the Ma'amadot and organized for them an impressive entrance into Yerushalayim. As they marched into the city carrying their Bikurim, they were warmly welcomed by the local population of Yerushalmim. Another widespread area of confusion seems to concern the nature of Bikurim. I have before me a beautiful coloring book published by an Orthodox organization which shows a happy family (Even the donkeys are smiling!), wending their way up Yerushalayim (visible on the horizon). The family members are holding straw baskets filled with Bikurim including oranges, apples, and bananas. Leaving aside the historical inaccuracy, the Mishna (Bikurim 1:3) specifically says that "Bikurim may be brought only from the Shivat HaMinim", the seven species for which Eretz Yisrael is praised in the Torah. "A land of wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, oil-olives and dates (from which honey is made)." (Devarim 8:8) The Sifri notes that "honey" quoted in the Pasuk cited above, is not bee's honey, but rather it is the sweet juicy extract of the date. By paraphrasing Rashi, we can easily under- stand the underlying principle of this ancient tradition. The Torah says Mei'rieshit, "from the first ripened fruits", implying not all-first ripened fruit were subject to the obligation of Bikurim. When the Torah discusses Bikurim, it employs the term 'Eretz' (land). The Torah uses the same word, Eretz, when it lists the Sheva Minim; 'Eretz' - a land of wheat, barley, etc. Since both quoted verses contain the word Eretz, by a Gezeira Shava (parallel terminology), we may conclude that only the Sheva Minim were subject to the law of Bikurim. "When they came to Shilo, Bamot were forbidden" (Zevachim 14:6). When Am Yisrael crossed the Jordan into Eretz Yisrael, they erected the Mishkan in Gilgal, to the east of Yericho. During the wars of conquest and while they were apportioning the land, the Mishkan remained in Gilgal. Unlike the wilderness days, during this interim period, private people were permitted to build Bamot ("private altars") for sacrifice. The Sages derived the source for this seeming leniency from Moses' statement, "…for you have not yet come to the resting place or to the inheritance that the Lord your G-d gives you" (Devarim 12:9). This was in sharp contrast to the years of desert wonderings when Am Yisrael could offer Korbanot only on the Mizbei'ach of the central sanctuary. However, after they finished conquering and apportioning the land, they removed the Mishkan from Gilgal "and the whole congregation of the Children of Israel assembled themselves at Shilo, and set up the 'Tent of Meeting' there; and the land was subdued before them" (Yehoshua 18:1). Once they erected the Mishkan in Shilo, Bamot were once again forbidden just as they had been during Am Yisrael's trek through the desert. (Interestingly, during the period of Heter Bamot when the "high places" were permitted, women were permitted to receive and sprinkle the blood of the Korbanot offered on the Bama. Unlike the offerings on the Mizbei'ach of the Beit HaMikdash or in Shilo, the Korbanot offered on a private Bama did not require a Kohein (Sifra, Acharei Mot, Ch. 9:99(7).) Shilo was considered the "resting place" referred to in Moshe's statement because in Shilo, they "rested" from war and the Aron was placed within. The Mishkan "rested" in Shilo for 369 very stormy years. After Shilo was destroyed, the Mishkan was removed to Nov and then to Giv'on and during that interim period, Bamot were once again permitted. Neither Nov nor Giv'on, bereft as these shrines were of the Aron, were considered true "resting places". "After they came to Jerusalem, the Bamot were forbidden and never permitted again: [because] this [the Beit HaMikdash] was the inheritance…" (Zevachim 12:8). "The sanctity of the Beit HaMikdash was sanctified for its own time and forever after" as it is written. "For the Lord will not cast off His people, neither will He forsake His inheritance" (T'hilim 94:14). It is also written, "For the Lord has chosen Zion; He has desired it for his habitation. This is My resting place forever. Here I will dwell; for I have desired it" (ibid 132:13,14). Not surprisingly, when Am Yisrael went into exile, they did not build a temple by the rivers of Babylon, nor did they build Bamot when they returned to Eretz Yisrael. By then, Bamot were not even an issue. Catriel's book in progress: The Temple of Jerusalem, A Pilgrim’s Perspective; A Guided Tour through the Temple and the Divine Service Parsha Pix TTRIDDLES... Last issue’s (Naso) TTriddles: NachKwestion of the Week This week's TTriddles: Israel Center Miscellany Help young couples (evacuees and children of evacuees) from Gush Katif get ready for the arrival of their newborn babies - Tzedaka - Matan B’Seter - The money collected will be used to buy carriages, cribs, layettes...Make checks out to the Israel Center. Write on the envelope: Gush Katif - Baby Fund, For more info. call Sara 0505-444-397 Camp Dror is back! NESTO Native English-Speaking Teen Olim SENIOR NESTOEnd-of-the-YearShabbaton & Tiyul is coming soon! Save the date!, June 23-24, Shabbat KORACH in PORIYA (which is next to the kineret), The cost is only 160NIS for NESTO member, and 190NIS for non-mem (hurry up - limited place), For more details just call me (Gili) at 054-7456060, Or check up at our new web site: www.mynesto.com May you all have a great Shabbat and special wishes for a good (and meaningful) time to the JUNIORS who have their End-of-the-Year Shabbaton this Shabbat. Jr. NESTO is for 7th, 8th, and 9th graders, Tiyulim and Shabbatonim LUNCH? When a tiyul says “bring your own lunch”, you can order one instead from the Israel Center Cafe. When you make your reservation for the tiyul, request a box lunch, or call the CAFE (ext. 257) up to the day before the TIYUL. 18š will get you a sandwich (your choice), a refreshing drink (regular or diet) and a dessert. Your lunch will be ready for you when you board the bus. BOOKED? When a tiyul is listed as BOOKED - you can call to be wait-listed; if you call, you will be called back if there is a cancellation, if we add a bus, or when we fix a new date for the tiyul. CANCELLATION POLICIES: We reserve the right to charge a cancellation fee in case of last-minute cancellations. Also... Price of tiyul is based on a minimum number of participants. STUDENTS FROM ABROAD: Parents visiting you this year? If so, speak to us! (566-7787 ext. 261) to see if we have any tiyulim or Shabbatonim (call Ita Rochel ext. 204) that they might be interested in. KASHRUT POLICY: Food for Israel Center In-House programs is supervised by OU-in-Israel-Mehadrin. Israel Center sponsored trips and programs are Mehadrin. Hotels, restaurants, and tiyulim advertised by outside parties are not necessarily Mehadrin and are not endorsed by the OU or the Israel Center. Calls from abroad: Due to time differences, we recommend that people from abroad fax 972-2-5660156 for attention of Travel Desk or email tiyul@israelcenter.co.il. Please be sure to include email or fax number for reply, in addition to phone number. New & Improved Travel Desk! LAST CALL: Next Israel Center In House Shabbaton - Celebrate the 14th anniversary of Torah Tidbits with us, Shabbat Parshat Shlach, Fri-Sha June 16,17 - Special Guest Speaker:Rabbi Yosef Adler, Rav of Cong. Rinat Yisrael, Teaneck, New Jersey, Principal, Torah Academy of Bergen County, 250NIS mem (275NIS non-mem) Reserve early (good for you and us) • We'll be taking Shabbat early (Mincha 6:03pm) Call 566-7787 ext. 204 to reserve, arrange for seating, dietary requests, etc. LAST CALL: L.A. Mayer Museum for Islamic Art - All You Don't Know About Islam, History, Faith, Customs · Shiites, Sunnis, Druze, Bahai, Lecture by Nachman Kupietsky followed by Tour of the Museum (in English), Sunday, June 11th, Check-in at 9:50 · Ending at 12:30 (approx.), 36NIS (50NS non-mem), Details & reservation, Travel Desk (ext. 261) LAST CALL: FROM THE ISRAEL CENTER TO THE CENTER OF ISRAEL, Wednesday, June 14th - 3 exciting sites in close proximity from where you can see "all of Israel", Kibbutz Nachshon - Master artisan shows you how vitrage stained glass works of art are created in his workshop, which produces exquisite masterpieces which can be seen all over Israel and worldwide. Tour of the world-famous Belz Synagogue, THU June 22, 4:00pm, 18NIS members (26NIS non-mem.), Advance registration & payment required, Participants will be informed of the meeting place upon registration Kibbutz Ein Gedi The Back Page of TT718 Schedule for Erev Shabbat to Erev Shabbat, 13-20 Sivan (June 9-16) Friday evening Shabbat Day Motza'ei Shabbat SUN-Thu in the Ganchrow Beis Medrash (first floor) Sunday Monday - N'SHEI LIBRARY 10:00-12:30 Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Upcoming at the Israel Center Tuesday, June 20, 7:00pm - “Paper Clips”: “It began as a lesson about prejudice… What happened next was a miracle!” At a public school in rural Tennessee, as part of their study of the Holocaust, students wanted to see just what the number six million looks like. They decided to collect six million paper clips. This documentary is the story of how the experience transformed them and their community. The people of the small town supported the students and worked together with them to achieve the amazing result. The students met Holocaust survivors from around the world. They came to believe that each paper clip was more than a piece of bent metal, but a life, a story. The paper clips were sent to them by people who deeply cared about the project and, in many cases, by family members of those who perished in the Holocaust. This film has moved audiences wherever it has been shown. It should be required viewing at every school, everywhere. OU Israel Center Dor LeDor Intergenerational Project: OU ISRAEL CENTER [The Parshat Naso
Homepage]
|
