Shabbat Parshat SH'MOT HALACHIC TIMES Further explanations
and notes on Z'manim are available on the website www.ou.org/torah/tt
- click on Halachic times SHOVAVIM Avraham Avinu did not want to expel Yishmael and Hagar; Sara Imeinu was more perceptive and pragmatic and insisted - G-d backed her up. Yitzchak Avinu loved Eisav and wanted him to receive the main bracha; Rivka Imeinu was more perceptive and pragmatic and engineered matters (divinely inspired) so that Yaakov would receive the brachot. Yaakov Avinu loved Rachel and wanted to marry only her. Rachel Imeinu was more perceptive and pragmatic and sacrificed her happiness so that her sister Leah would become the mother of the majority of Shivtei Kah. Imagine what would have happened if the Imahot had not prevailed. Now we come to Sh'mot. The children of Israel are subjected to slavery and oppressive decrees. Two midwives (maybe Yocheved and Miriam and maybe just two unknown heroines among many) risk their lives to save Jewish baby boys so that the nation can survive. Amram, leader of the community, decrees that husbands and wives should separate and not bring children into their world of misery and hopelessness. Miriam prophesies that Amram's decree is harsher than that of Par'o. As a result, Amram and Yocheved reunite and Moshe Rabeinu is born. Baby Moshe's life is in
danger: his mother Yocheved, his sister Miriam, and the daughter of
Par'o save his life. The men in Egypt
despaired; the women adorned themselves and lifted the morale of
their husbands. Because of righteous women, our ancestors were
redeemed from Egypt. Way to go! SDT The opening words
of the sedra/book of Shmot - V'EILEH SH'MOT - form the initial
letters of (V'chayav Adam Lilmod Sh'nayim Mikra V'echad Targum) - And a person is obligated to review the Torah text twice and once in translation. Baal HaTurim extends this acronym to the next two words. His whole statement is: "One who learns the sedra 2+1, singing it pleasantly, shall merit long life." SDT The final letters of the opening words (sofei teivot) rearrange to spell the word T'HILIM. When the People of Israel are in trouble (a play-on-words on Egypt - MITZRAYIM - MEITZARIM), they shall use T'hilim to help them focus their prayers to G-d, thereby meriting redemption. SDT Our first exile was associated with the number 70, the number associated with the members of Yaakov's family who went down to Egypt. The exile following the destruction of the first Beit HaMikdash lasted 70 years. The termination of the final exile will be associated with our dominance over, or recognition and respect by the "70 nations" of the world. "And Yosef and all his
brothers and all that generation died." This pasuk (1:6) has a
g'matriya (numeric value) of 981. There is one other pasuk in the
Torah with that same g'matriya - D'varim 4:4 - "And you who cling to HaShem, your G-d, are all alive today." This pasuk is one of the sources of the concept that G-d fearing people live on after their physical death. The pasuk from the beginning of Sh'mot had a certain finality sound to it. The second pasuk (its G'matriya Twin) testifies that the "Shivtei Kah" live on. [P> 1:8 (15)] A new king "who does not know Yosef" considers the Jewish people a threat and takes measures to enslave and demoralize them. (Ironically, he is the first one to refer to us as a nation - "Am Bnei Yisrael" - sometimes it is our enemies who tell us who and what we really are.) Par'o called us the Jewish Nation even before we felt that and knew that ourselves. He instructs the midwives to kill the baby boys at birth to prevent the development of his "potential enemies" (and to kill off the potential redeemer of the People). They refuse to do his bidding and save the lives of the boys. SDT VA'T'CHAYENA ET HAY'LADIM ...and they gave life to the boys". The Midrash says that not only did the midwives defy Par'o by not killing the boys, they also were responsible for saving those that might have died during childbirth. It is natural that some babies do not survive birth. The midwives were concerned that if they happened to deliver a stillborn, that it might appear as if they had carried out Par'o's orders. Their prayers were answered, and miraculously none of the babies died. Thus they are credited, not just with assisting in the births, but also with giving life to the babies. There is a parallel idea concerning the night of the Exodus. It is said that even the normal deaths that might be expected in a large population did not occur on the night of the Exodus, lest it detract from the miraculous nature of the Night. Thus, we have then similar miracles at either end of the Mitzrayim experience. SDT AND THEY EMBITTERED
THEIR LIVES... The trup (Torah notes) on these words seem unduly
happy for such sad words. The GR"A points out the "happy" result of
the unusually harsh oppression, namely, that G-d reacted to Egypt's
excess by cutting down our time in bondage to 210 years from the
original prophecy of 400, by counting from the birth of Yitzchak,
rather than from Yaakov's descent into Egypt. Understand that this
is not just an exchange of 210 years of extra harsh conditions for
400 years of regular slavery. Commentaries say that if we did not
get out when we did, we would not have made it to Nationhood. [P> 2:1 (22)] Amram reunites with Yocheved and a baby boy is born. When he is no longer able to be hidden (some say that Moshe was three months premature; that the Egyptians knew when Yocheved was due; there- fore she was able to hide him only for those three months), Yocheved prepares a water-proof basket and sets him on the river under the watchful eye of his sister. Bat-Par'o finds Moshe and sends Miriam to bring a wet nurse for the crying infant who apparently will not nurse from an Egyptian breast. Miriam brings Yocheved, Moshe's mother, who takes Moshe until he is weaned. From that point on, Moshe is raised in the royal palace by Bat Par'o (Bitya). She names him Moshe. SDT Egyptian astrologers read in the stars that Israel's redeemer was soon to be born. They recommended the systematic drowning of all baby boys (including non-Jews, since they were not sure from what nation this redeemer would come). When Moshe was floated on the Nile, the astrologers reported to Par'o that Israel's redeemer was indeed "cast into the river". As a result of this not quite accurate reading of the stars, Par'o withdrew the decree to drown the boys. SDT On the phrase: VAYEILECH ISH... And a man (from the house of Levi) went... the Baal HaTurim points out the only other occurrence of that phrase, in the book of Ruth: VAYEILECH ISH MI'BEIT LECHEM YEHUDA... In both cases, a redeemer of Israel results. In our case, Moshe Rabeinu. In Megilat Ruth, the progenitor of David HaMelech, his line, to Mashiach ben David. "And she called his name Moses, for from the water he was drawn." Does not quite make it
in English. This is one of the demonstrations that the Torah was
written in Hebrew. Similarly, ADAM was made from the ADAMA. Try that
in English. Copper snake? No, N'CHASH NECHOSHET. [P> 2:23 (3)]
Meanwhile, after much time passes, the king of Egypt dies (or maybe
got so sick that it was like he died) and the oppression in Egypt is
greatly intensified. The People react by calling out to G-d. He too,
“reacts”... Moshe did not have that same "z'chut", although it was mainly Moshe who brought Yosef's remains from Egypt to the threshold of Eretz Yisrael. Gives you pause for thought. No criticism is intended. SDT When Moshe realized that Datan and Aviram informed on him to Par’o, the Torah tells us that Moshe was afraid. Rashi says that we can understand that literally, and also on a deeper level. With Jews like Datan and Aviram, Moshe feared that the people of Israel might not merit redemption. (Note that Rashi
includes the p’shat (plain) meaning as well as the additional
meaning. Both apply in this case. It isn't always so that the plain
meaning is retained when there is a drash that is the preferred way
of understanding the text.) Moshe asks "why me?". G-d assures Moshe that He will be with him and that as proof of the Divine nature of his mission, Moshe will be bringing the people back to "this spot" (Sinai) to "serve G-d" (and receive the Torah). Furthermore, Moshe is to "reintroduce" G-d to the People. Moshe asks G-d what he should tell the People when he comes to them at G-d's command. G-d's answer spans nine p'sukim (3:14-22). G-d identifies Himself as EH-YEH ASHER EH-YEH (Alef-Hei-Yud-Hei is one of the 7 names of G-d that may not be erased. Probably the least known of the list of seven.) This name of G-d's has the meaning: I will be with you (Bnei Yisrael) in your time of trouble (in Egypt) as I will be with you in future situations of enslavement and oppression. SDT Baal HaTurim points out that the letters of this unusual name of G-d total 21. The initial letters of the first three names of G-d in the Thirteen Divine Attributes are YUD, YUD, ALEF = 21 (HaShem, HaShem, Keil...). The initials of the Patriarchs are ALEF, YUD, YUD = 21. The initials of the Five Books of the Torah are BET, VAV, VAV, VAV, and ALEF = 21. At Moshe's suggestion, so to speak, G-d agreed to be identified to the people as EH-YEH, with the more comforting connotation of "I will be with you", without the implication that there will be other periods of oppression in the future. (based on Rashi). G-d gives Moshe
detailed instructions as to what to say to the people. He tells
Moshe how the people will react and how Par'o will react. He tells
him about the plagues and about the "friendly" reaction of the
Egyptian people. Moshe asks "on what basis will they believe me?" G-d gives Moshe three signs to perform for Par'o and the People. The three signs are the staff becoming a snake and then turning back to a staff. His hand inserted into his cloak and emerging stricken with TZORAAT and then being restored. Taking water from the river and spilling it on the ground and it turns to blood. SDT Rashi says that the first two signs were also reprimands to Moshe for speaking against the people and doubting in advance their potential to believe what he would tell them. This is Lashon HaRa, and both the snake and the Tzoraat are associated with Lashon HaRa. The third sign seems to have been specifically selected by G-d (so to speak) to be a bridge and introduction to the MAKOT (plagues), the first of which was an extension, shall we say, of the third sign. Moshe still questions G-d as to "why me"; G-d gets angry at Moshe for doubting His choice of leader. G-d informs Moshe that Aharon will assist in these matters. Moshe is instructed to have his special staff with him when he presents himself to the People and Par'o. SDT The Staff, HaMateh. Baal HaTurim says that there is/was a scribal custom to put Torah crowns on the TET in the word THE STAFF. This, to say that Moshe was the ninth (TET=9) righteous individual who had the miraculous staff in hand. (Pirkei Avot tells us that the Staff was one of the items created in the instant between the Six Days of Creation and the first Shabbat B'reishit.) The previous eight are: Adam, Chanoch, No'ach, Shem, Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov, Yosef. The Midrash says that Moshe had several names - Yered, Chever, Y'kutiel, Avigdor, Avi-Socho, Avi-Zanu'ach, Tovia, Heiman, Sh'maya. The Midrash further tells us that of all his names, he is only called Moshe - even by G-d - to give honor to the acts of kindness of the one who found him and saved him from the water - Bat Par'o, the future Batya (Bitya). Rashi says that Moshe's experience at the Burning Bush and his communication with G-d there lasted for SEVEN DAYS! All during that time, G-d was trying (so to speak) to convince Moshe to undertake his mission. Try this on your kids
and/or Shabbat guests. Ask them how to say MATEH (staff) in Aramaic.
If they don't know, give them a hint: Pesach Seder. The answer is
found in CHAD GADYA - CHUTRA. On the way, Tzipora circumcises her son. Commentaries explain that Moshe had neither circumcised his son Eliezer because of the danger in traveling when recently circumcised, nor did he postpone his return to Egypt, which would have been in defiance of G-d's command. It seems that he was in error in not having circumcised him, hence his life was in jeopardy until Tzipora performed the circumcision. Another question on this episode concerns the acceptability of a female circumcising. Commentaries solve that problem in different ways. [P> 4:27 (29)] G-d tells Aharon to greet Moshe. Moshe tells Aharon all that has happened. They gather the elders and Aharon tells them what will occur. The People believe what they hear and bow to G-d. SDT Rashi says that the
donkey that Moshe used to bring his family to Mitzrayim was the same
one that Avraham took to the Akeida and the one that the Mashiach
will ride upon. Why not a regular donkey? To tell us that these
monumental events were not haphazard, but rather specially prepared
parts of G-d's master plan for the world. SDT Notice that the elders are not mentioned. Rashi tells us that one-by-one, the elders "disappeared" (in fear of Par'o) as the entourage was going to Par'o, until only Moshe and Aharon were left. Because of this, it was to be this way at Sinai also. The elders were left at the foot of the mountain and Aharon and Moshe ascended. (Then Aharon stopped and Moshe proceeded to the top alone.) Par'o refuses,
questioning who this G-d of Israel is. He then increases the burden
on the People (who obviously have too much free time because they
ask for a 3-day release) by requiring them to also collect the straw
for the raw materials of the bricks they have to make.. The leaders
of the People bear the brunt of the new edicts and complain to Par'o.
Par'o blames Moshe; the People react with anger and disappointment.
Moshe tells G-d that his efforts were counter- productive. G-d says
that NOW you (Moshe) will see what G-d will do to Par'o... S'fardim read the first
chapter of Yirmiyahu as the haftara of Sh'mot. That chapter is the
first haftara of the Three Weeks, Bein HaMeitzarim. Interesting
parallel to the first haftara of enslavement in Mitzrayim. There are
other sedra-haftara connections too. Public domain Reuven’s domain Reuven as a good citizen digs a pit in an area on the side of the public street so that it will be filled with rainwater, so that passersby will have water to drink or to water their animals. Once he advises Beth Din of what he has done or if gives a cover to Beth Din to place it on the pit he is no longer liable, once Beth Din has enough time to cover the pit. Reuven in his own domain digs a well for the public and donates the well to the public. As soon as the public officials are made aware of and accept the donation, Reuven is no longer liable to those who fall into the pit. Levi’s domain In halacha, there is a distinction between two depths and heights regarding Reuven’s liability for damage or injury caused by his pit. If the pit is ten or more tefachim deep, the liability that it entails is different than a pit that is less than ten tefachim deep. [Ed. note: 10T ranges from the calculation of R' Chayim Na'eh - 8cm per tefach to that of the Chazon Ish - 9.6cm per tefach. 10 tefachim then is 80-96cm or 31.5-37.8 inches.] Similarly, if a mound built up by Reuven in a public street is ten or more tefachim above the ground level the liability it entails is different from a mound that is less than ten tefachim high. In order for Reuven to be liable to Shimon for the death of Shimon’s ox that fell into the pit, it must be at least ten tefachim deep. If the pit was less than ten tefachim deep and Shimon’s ox fell in and was killed, Reuven is not liable. However, if Shimon’s ox was injured, as distinguished from being killed, Reuven is liable even if the pit was less than ten tefachim deep, no matter how shallow. The ten tefachim measure also applies above the ground. For example, if Reuven places an object such as a carton or a pile of sand in the public domain, the height for Reuven to be liable to Shimon’s animal that is killed by falling or tripping over it will be ten tefachim above the ground. If less than ten tefachim in height, Reuven will not be liable for the death of Shimon’s animal but will be liable if Shimon’s animal is injured. There is an opinion that if the mound or object is less than three tefachim in height there is no liability at all if Shimon's animal falls over it. There are some authorities who give precise depths to be applies for different types of creatures. If the pit is at least the depth determined for the particular animal, then there is liability. It seems to me to that the better view is not to have these differing measurements for different creatures, but to hold Reuven liable for any depth that causes injury to any animal. In determining depth, one tefach of water in a pit is deemed to be equivalent to two tefachim of pit depth. Thus if the pit is nine tefachim deep, but one tefach is of water, it is deemed to be ten tefachim deep. The depth exacerbates the lack of air that asphyxiates the ox. Thus if here is no doubt that the ox died from concussion rather than asphyxiation, Reuven is free of liability since the pit was only nine tefachim deep and the ox did not die of asphyxiation. It is not clear if this two tefachim equivalent for water extends to other depths as well; for example, if the pit is eight tefachim deep and two are water or seven tefachim and three are water. IYH in the next lesson we shall discuss the extent of liability. The subject matter of
this lesson is more fully discussed in volume X chapter 410 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 CHOLENT But this necessity became in time something close to an actual minhag, or obligatory custom. The Rema writes: It is a mitzva to seal CHAMIN [literally hot food, but more specifically, the Hebrew word for cholent] for Shabbat, in order that he should eat CHAMIN [here in the literal meaning of hot food] on Shabbat, for this is the honor and enjoyment of Shabbat. And anyone who doesn't believe in the words of the Sages, and forbids eating hot food on Shabbat, there is a suspicion that he may be a denier. (SA OC 257:8.) The Mishna Berura cites an early source for this view, a little poem found in the Baal HaMaor commentary on the Rif: Some say that it is a decree of the Sages to have Shabbat delight with CHAMIN, and anyone who doesn't eat CHAMIN is suspected perhaps he is a MIN [denier]... and to prepare to cook CHAMIN and to make the Shabbat a delight and fatten, this is the true believer and he will merit to see the end of days (16b on the Rif pages). The simple
understanding of why a person who doesn't store away CHAMIN would be
suspected of denial is that the Karaites, who professed a literal
reading of scripture, did not allow fire in their houses at all on
Shabbat and thus could not seal CHAMIN in the oven. But this is only
a partial explanation. After all, there must be many things which
the Karaites forbid which we could distinguish ourselves by
permitting. From the words of both the Rema and the Baal HaMaor it
seems that an equally important factor is the importance of oneg
Shabbat, Shabbat delight. But a person who is so strict with these rulings as to deny himself one of the most basic delights of Shabbat, namely a warm meal on Shabbat day, is suspected of misunderstanding the entire point of Shabbat. It is true that Shabbat is a ZECHER LEMAASEH BERESHIT, a commemoration of the Creation, and our rest from creative labor on Shabbat mirrors and testifies to God's rest on the seventh day of creation. But Shabbat is equally a forward-looking holiday, ME'EIN OLAM HABA, a taste of the World to Come. A person who recognizes only the first of these foundations has an understanding which is not only incomplete, because it is missing the second foundation, but it actually erroneous, because it misunderstands even that foundation which it adopts. When God made the world with a limit, by refraining from Creation at a certain time, he made it finite and thus perfectable, ensuring that human effort is capable of bringing about an ideal future existence, which will reach its full fruition in the time of Moshiach. So the testimony to God's rest at the beginning of history is in fact inseparable from the anticipation of God's redemption at its end. The intimate relationship between these two aspects of Shabbat is thus embodied in the most mundane and yet sublime emblem of our Shabbat experience: our cholent. Rabbi Asher Meir has
two wonderful books in print - Meaning in Mitzvot (ask for it at
your local s'farim store) and The Jewish Ethicist, available at some
bookstores and through the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem, (02)
632-0222. Both works are highly recommended 1."If we take BA to mean 'came', then we have to explain that before Avraham left from Beer Sheva for the Akeida, he sent Sara from there to Hevron to prevent her suddenly receiving the tragic news. How- ever, the real original meaning of BA is to take oneself out of the public space into privacy; as in BA HASHEMESH in contrast to YATZA HASHEMESH. So Avraham shut himself in to mourn; [similarly we withdraw during the period of our SHIVA], making no parade of grief. This may also be indicated by the small KAF in V'LIVKOTAH from which Chazal learn that one should not mourn excessively" (Rabbi S. R. Hirsch). 2. At the same time, the death of loved ones often causes people to revolt against what they view as a miscarriage of, or even as the absence of, Divine Justice. In order to express our knowledge and acceptance of the power and intervention of His Divine Justice and Wisdom, there is Kaddish; our prayer for the dead which makes no mention of death or the dead. We can easily understand Avraham's mourning for Sara and the concern of Bnei Chet for his sorrow. After all, Chazal taught: "One whose wife's death precedes his own, it is as though the Bet HaMikdash were destroyed in his time" (Sanhedrin 22). Less obvious is his feeling the essential need for a special place for her burial and the importance of the Ma'arat HaMachpeila in that need. "Why should Avraham acutely feel that need? Why bother with burial at all; surely the body could simply be left to rot? And if it is necessary, what difference does it make to the dead or to the living, where that place is? A philosopher of the nations (one of the ancient Greeks] said that if the dead are aware, then their burial would only cause them much sorrow; and if they feel nothing why bother? Burial is beneficial to Mankind both as far as the body and the NEFESH are concerned. Since the body of a person without the soul is far more useless that that of an animal, which does not possess a soul, (as) the human body decomposes far quicker, the smell is more noxious and therefore the [environmental] damage to other people, incurred by leaving it lying around unburied, is far greater. Death marks the decomposition and transformation of the body back into the physical components that it was formed from; however, it also marks the return of the soul to its spiritual source. 'And the dust shall return unto the earth from where it was taken and the soul unto the Lord who granted it.' Yet the severance between the two is not immediate as the soul cannot return on high until the body has become completely reduced to its components. '12 months a dead man's body continues to exist and the soul rises and descends from heaven. At the end of that time the body may be negated and the soul ascends without descending again' (Shabbat 122). So, through burial, the body is granted time until it disintegrates into the materials from which it was formed and the soul is finally released. Furthermore, the entity that is a human being, body and soul, bears the TZELEM of G-d, so it is a place for the SH'CHINA to reside, it has divinely granted wisdom, it is the pinnacle of the whole creation and has a connection with Him. It is not fitting therefore, that after death it should be treated with dishonor, disrespect and abuse, to be cast aside like redundant garbage. So burial is needed in order to give the dead that honor and respect due to a person's divine origins. The honor rendered by proper burial is directly commensurate with the moral, social and religious status of the person. So we find that Shaul, who was not the founder of Jewish Kingship, was simply buried together with his forefathers, since now in death he was their equal. However, David, whose dynasty was to continue forever, was not buried in Bet Lechem, his hometown, but rather in Zion, Ir David, that was the burial ground of all the House of David, the King. For these reasons Avraham saw it fitting that there should be a significant place for Sara's burial" (Don Yitschak Abarbanel). The spiritual significance of burial may be further seen from the verse "His body shall not hang on the gallows overnight [the prolonged exposure of the unburied body of a human being is an insult to G-d in whose Image it was created], rather you shall surely bury him" (D'varim 21:3). "From this we learn that it is a positive mitzva to bury the dead. By commanding us to do so, Hashem shows His concern for the welfare of His Creatures "(Sefer Hachinuch, 537). "Achuza refers only to landed property, property that grips, holds and outlives the owner. So Avraham, the wanderer and stranger, does not ask for permission just to bury his wife. He asks for land for a sepulchre since he wants her to rest in her permanent resting place, that is the first and only need that he has: to acquire a piece of land in the Promised Land. This will be the bond that attaches him to that land" (Rabbi S. R. Hirsch). That achuza where: "Avraham and Sara were buried; there they buried Yitschak and Rivka and there I buried Leah", (B'reishit 49:31); these were Yaakov's words to his sons and there they buried him. Indeed Ma'arat HaMachpeila is such an achuza, where all the generations of Israel can know who their ancestors were, can draw strength and inspiration from them and can see themselves as the eternal owners of that Land. This is the 112th
installment in Dr. Tamari’s series on “Tanach and its messages for
our times” Q: Do hard liquors require a hashgacha (rabbinical supervision) and why? A: There was a fascinating exchange of letters on the topic between Rav Moshe Feinstein and Rav Pinchas Teitz some 50 years ago (Igrot Moshe, YD I, 62-64). Rav Teitz gave a hashgacha on blended whiskey, which he felt was forbidden to drink without one. Rav Feinstein countered that whiskey did not require a hashgacha. His presentation reveals that he felt that it was important to substantiate the leniency because rabbis and religious laymen drank such whiskey regularly. Rav Feinstein wrote that he personally avoided drinking it because of halachic preferability, except when it looked like he was showing off if he refused to drink like others. He praised Rav Teitz’s hashgacha for the opportunity it gave to those who wanted to be extra-careful. (This story is typical of Rav Moshe.) Over the last 50 years, kashrut standards in America (and elsewhere) have risen. (Detractors call it the tendency toward stringency.) We do not know what Rav Feinstein would recommend today, and one should ask his personal/community rabbi whether and/or when to be strict. We note that the standard-bearer of the Orthodox community regarding kashrut, the OU, requires verification that liquors do not contain non-kosher ingredients (See “Hard Truths About Hard Liquor” on the “OUKosher” website). Differences exist between different types of liquor, and one can find lists of products that have been checked out even if they lack a kashrut symbol. We feel it is appropriate, in this forum, to only discuss certain of the issues that poskim have argued, rather than state our own opinion. Wine and grape juice that are not specially prepared are rabbinically not kosher. Pure whiskey and other grain- based alcoholic beverages are fundamentally permitted. However, American and other laws permit producers to include “blenders” from other ingredients up to the rate of 2%. This is above the standard rate (1/60th) at which a non-kosher ingredient is batel (null). Blenders are commonly used, and they can include products of animal origin such as glycerin and often non-kosher wine. Furthermore, scotch is often aged in casks used previously for sherry (a non-kosher wine). As it is impossible to determine how much taste is imparted, we assume the worst-case scenario (Shulchan Aruch, YD 98:5). Thus, there is room for concern. However, Rav Feinstein bases his leniency on the Shulchan Aruch’s (Yoreh Deah 134:5) ruling that non-kosher wine is batel in water at the rate of one to six. There is significant dispute as to whether this (not unanimous) leniency is particular to water (upon which that amount of wine impacts the taste negatively - Shach, ad loc.:21) or applies to all liquids (Taz, ad loc.:5). Rav Moshe accepts the lenient opinion; Rav Teitz and the OU accept the stringent one. There is also discussion whether the rules of bitul apply when one purposely puts a non-kosher additive into a product. There are two issues: 1) One should not purposely set up situations in which a non-kosher item becomes batel and if he does, bitul does not work (Shulchan Aruch, YD 99:5). 2) Ingredients with a pungent taste are not nullified even at 1/60th (Rama, YD 98:5). Rav Moshe rejects these claims in our case. The problem of purposely nullifying applies only when Jews do so for Jews. Here, even if Jews own a company, their actions relate to the majority of customers, who normally are non-Jewish. While pungent taste may be a factor if one puts wine in blander foods, Rav Moshe posits that it is not in hard liquor, which is at least as pungent as the wine. Rav Moshe says that the rationale for stringency is stronger according to those who forbid benefiting from non-kosher wine even in our days (see Shulchan Aruch, YD 123:1). Again, we have only
scratched the surface and leave the ruling to other forums. The Chatam Sofer comments that we, the Jewish people are indeed compared to stars because it is our task and privilege to illuminate what can sometimes be a very dark universe. Generally we see stars from a distance, hundreds, thousands or millions of light years away. That distance prevents us from viewing them as they really are - huge orbs of pulsating energy and light with a tremendous influence on other celestial bodies and the very space around them. In Egypt (the Diaspora) we too are a pale reflection of our potential power. Viewed from the right perspective and setting however, we are a blazing source of energy and light. Israel is the setting in which a Jewish soul can come to full expression of its potential power. Leaving Mitzrayim (Egypt) is not easy. The Lubavitcher Rebbe wrote that we all have our "meitzarim", narrow places that can keep us confined. Sometimes those narrow places can even take the form of a lovely home on five acres. But leave Mitzrayim we must, if we are to arrive at our true destiny. Aloh Naaleh! As sons
and daughters of Israel, let us shine forth as a beacon of faith,
illuminating the world with the message of "Shma Yisrael" from the
holiest place in the universe, the Land of Israel. The man couldn't believe what he had heard. When at last R' Shmelke emerged, he went over to him and said: "Excuse me for being so forward, Rebbe, but I heard you say to yourself: 'Good morning, Rav of Nikolsburg! Good morning, Rebbe. Please take a seat, distinguished rabbi.' Could you tell me what that was all about?" "Let me explain
myself," said R' Shmelke. "I saw a huge crowd of people coming to
pay their respects, and I became afraid that I might become
conceited. I therefore took some time off and paid my respects to
myself. That sounded absolutely ludicrous. From now on, whenever
anyone pays his respects to me, I will let it affect me as the
respect I paid myself." 2) The Chofetz Chayim teaches that this displays the true greatness of these women. They feared that if they stepped aside, new midwives could arise who would heed Pharaoh's decree leading to the deaths of Jewish babies. While they could have simply avoided dealing with the situation and absolved themselves, they recognized that risking their lives could be the only hope for these babies. 3) The Kedushas Yom Tov
points to the Midrash which teaches that the Jewish people can only
be saved from exile if they have faith. Thus, Moshe concluded that
since the Jewish people did not believe, regardless of the reason,
Par'o wouldn't listen. Salvation could not possibly come without the
impetus of the Jews? faith. Some commentators don't deal with this question. Either they feel that the burning bush was just a means to get Moshe's attention, or they feel that if there was some specific significance to the sign, it would be beyond our grasp (Avraham son of the Rambam). Nechama Leibowitz brings many other midrashim and commentators who have tried to find the symbolism in the vision. For example, Shmot Rabba and Chizkuni say that the vision came to answer Moshe's fear that maybe Israel would be totally lost in the Egyptian exile. The bush that burns and isn't devoured symbolizes that Egypt will never be able to completely destroy the children of Israel. This message is true for all the exiles. We can ask another question on this vision. Is the fact that Hashem chose a thorn bush and not a tree or other kind of shrub coming to teach us something as well? The lowly prickly thorn bush is hardly the likeliest object to be chosen for a Divine revelation. There must be some lesson to be learned from this choice. Some midrashim say the thorn bush teaches us about the bondage in Egypt. When a person inserts his hand into a thorn bush it doesn't hurt because the thorns are bent downwards, but when he tries to pull his hand out, the thorns catch it and he cannot pull it. The same with Egypt. At the beginning they welcomed Yosef's family but then they enslaved them and would not let them leave. There are other midrashim that show how we learn about Hashem's attributes by His choice of the thorn bush. R' Eliezer b. Arakh states in the Mechilta that Hashem prefers the lowly unassuming medium to a grandiose one. (We see this same idea when Hashem gave the Torah on the smallest mountain - Sinai). We should follow in Hashem's ways and shed some of our obsession with grandeur and outward appearances and be humble instead. In another Midrash, R' Yehoshua b. Karcha speaks of Hashem's presence in every place (even a thorn bush) and His nearness to man wherever he may be (Egypt). This is a message of comfort to us all. Hashem is always with us. Not only that - but in Shmot Rabba they explain Hashem's speaking from within the thorn bush as symbolizing Hashem's suffering when we suffer. Hashem is pictured as a father chastising His children for their good. Even when He chastises us he suffers along with us, as it says in T'hilim (91:15), "I will be with them in trouble". It is comforting to know that even in hard times Hashem is there with us. According to R' Arye
Kaplan, the Sneh was probably the black raspberry (rubus sanctus)
which has berries that turn red and then black. Variations on this theme include batter-dipping the hotdog rather than wrapping it in dough. Or spread a thin layer of mashed potato on the dough before wrapping it around the hotdog. As an added touch, serve Moshe BaTeiva covered with string beans or sprouts to simulate Moshe's basket being placed in the reeds near the shore of the Nile. Also, served with a sauce, that can represent the water of the river. If you use a tomato based sauce or ketchup, it can further represent the Nile, which will turn ketchup-color in next week's sedra. If you have a Yocheved at home, she should definitely be the one to prepare this dish. If you or a daughter is Miriam, you or she can watch through the oven window on Erev Shabbat when the Moshe BaTeiva are baking. And a Batya - if you have one - can serve them. Have fun. Be creative. The purpose of the
"Portion of the Portion" column, besides giving you a D'var Torah
and a recipe appropriate for the weekly sedra, is to demonstrate how
the mundane can be elevated to a higher spiritual level. Clearly, to endure and survive the enticing and unclean flesh pots of Egypt (the Hebrew name Mitzrayim itself indicates suffering), the Children of Israel were in need of a wellspring of inner strength and commitment, of which we can learn more from this opening sentence. The Meir Eynei Yesharim,
invoking the priestly breastplate that contained the names of the
tribes, reminds us that these names served as a reminder to G-d of
the virtues of Bnei Yisrael, thus protecting them. The tribes are
associated first with Yisrael, a name of grandeur, and then with
Yaakov (which evokes lowliness), implying that the overriding
quality of Jewish pride coupled with perseverance served as critical
virtues that contributed to this goal. "Meir, You got a Tzav
from your Mishmeret!" - A Story Meir, and the other Kohanim of his Mishmeret, arrived in Jerusalem more or less at the designated time and immediately reported to the restricted area, where, under the guidance of Mikdash experts, they would spend a week "refreshing their priestly proficiencies". As Kohanim kept arriving, the Mishmeret authorities efficiently(?) lined them up; made sure they signed in, divided them into groups, and sent them off to the infirmary for physical examinations. Since the Torah forbade Kohanim who had certain specific bodily defects to perform Avoda, Mikdash doctors under the supervision of Chief Physician, Dr. Ben Achiya (Shekalim 5:1), carefully examined them to ascertain their fitness to serve. Sometimes Dr. Ben Achiya reluctantly had to send disappointed Kohanim home. Having concluded his physical, Meir, together with the rest of "his brethren the kohanim", began the process of purification by first showering and then immersing in a Mikve. When the Kohanim immersed, they had to be completely clean, and entirely free from any substances that might prevent the water from reaching all parts of their bodies. Such interpositions invalided the immersion and the impurity would remain. The setting sun signaled their purification from most forms of ritual impurity. On the third and seventh day, Mikdash appointees would sprinkle them with Mei Nida, spring water mixed with the ashes of the Para Aduma. Then they would immerse again and thereby be purified of Tum'at Meit (corpse-impurity), the most virulent form of impurity. They would eat and sleep on the premises. Since it is forbidden to wear authentic Bigdei Kehuna (priestly garments) outside the Mikdash, they would be issued similar looking "work-clothes". The Milu'imnikim lined up to collect their Tzi'ud (equipment). As the line inched forward ever so slowly, Meir saw a window beckoning in the distance. Hours later (it seemed), Meir reached the window and a Levi handed him a bulky packet that consisted of two pairs of four "Kohanic practice work-clothes" wrapped in two grey wool blankets. Meir knew what to expect and he was not wrong. One set was much too big and the other set was much too small. Meir knew that giving them back simply was not an option. "Tistadru Beineichem" the Levi yelled out ("Manage among youselves." i.e., trade with each other so that everyone has clothes that fit). Miraculously by shrewd horse-trading, Meir did acquire two sets of work-clothes that more or less fit. Suitably appareled, everyone was shown his quarters, i.e. a marked off place on the floor. "Don't complain! Next week, when you'll be in the Mikdash, you'll be sleeping on the floor in the Beit HaMokeid! So get used to it!" Meir knew the routine. Besides, smart Kohanim brought air mattresses! Meir, a "Zariz old-timer" thoroughly familiar with the Avodot of the Mikdash, was quickly co-opted by the instructors as an assistant and began reviewing with some of the younger Kohanim what they had learned. In groups, barefoot, and under the watchful eyes of instructors, they began their week's intensive study. They practiced how correctly to slaughter animals according to Halacha. (Since the animals were slaughtered "only for practice" the meat was distributed to the poor by "Mikdash Relief".) They were reminded which blood applications applied to which Korbanot. "Remember, before you do anything in the Azara, you wash your hands and feet at the Kiyor!" "Don't forget! Only a Kohein can receive the blood from the neck of the slaughtered animal." "All Avodot are done with the RIGHT hand!" "When you sacrifice an Olah, after you receive the blood, you begin by tossing the blood at the northeast corner of the Mizbei'ach." "You there! The blood has to spatter on the north AND east side of the corner! Do it again." "The receptacle for the Nisuch HaYayin (wine libation) is in the southwest corner of the altar." One day when assistant instructor Meir was showing a group of Kohanim how to apply blood on the "horns" of the altar for a Chatat, the heavens opened up and everybody got soaking wet. "Don't stop!" he cried, "The Avoda is not called because of rain! Be thankful it's not snowing!" A more fortunate group of Kohanim, going through their paces in a roofed area remained dry. Kli Shareit (serving vessel) in hand, they were practicing "taking the Kemitza (the "handful of flour")" for the Mincha (meal offering). They practiced putting their right hand into the flour, closing the three middle fingers thereby enveloping some of it, and lifting it up. Meir, his all around expertise appreciated, was enjoying himself a lot! He couldn't wait to enter the Azara! D'rashot given by the greatest Sages were interspersed with the practical work. The Sages stressed repeatedly the importance of the Avoda and that the Kohanim, by performing the Avoda correctly in the Beit HaMikdash, were bringing Kapara to Am Yisrael! After all, was not the Avoda one of the three pillars upon which the world stood (Avot 1:2)? One evening, the Segan, (deputy Kohein Gadol) spoke to them about various aspects of the Avoda. He particularly emphasized the great importance of Kavana - special intent. A Kohein who offered a Korban without proper intent invalidated it. Moreover, there were quizzes daily. "On what does the Shocheit have to concentrate when he slaughters the sacrificial animal?" "What does the Kohein have to think about when he is offering the Korban?" "What happens when a Kohein slaughtered a sacrificial animal, thinking it was an Olah, when really it had been designated as a Chatat?" "How was the Menorah cleaned? How did they light it?" "Briefly describe the Ketoret and how was it offered?" "How was it decided which Kohein performed which Avoda?" On the last day of their week long refresher course, the instructors tested them on their practical skills, graded them, and then determined who could be group leaders. Of course, Meir qualified! After the exam (it was the seventh day), the Kohanim lined up and Mikdash appointees sprinkled them with Mei Nida for the second time. They immersed and when the sun set, their purification was complete. Tomorrow, Shabbat, they would enter the Azara. -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 The NKJTQ in the Vai-chi
issue of TT was: Pidyon Haben was the first received answer, but - as was pointed out by several subsequently received solutions - a man can have two firstborns (or more) if each of two wives give birth to their first child. These two wives can be concurrent or successive. The point is that Pidyon Haben status depends on the first issue of the womb of the mother. A man can have several B'CHORIM, each requiring a bracha for their Pidyon. (For inheritance purposes, a man has only one B'CHOR - his first child, if it is male.) How- ever, Pidyon HaBen is not far off the mark. A firstborn who was not redeemed as a baby, is required to redeem himself when he reaches the age of mitzvot. In that case, the bracha is different from AL PIDYON HABEN. There are two opinions as to what the self-redeemer says: AL PIDYON HAB'CHOR or LIFDOT HAB'CHOR. In either case, it is a bracha that can be said at most once in a lifetime. Another correct answer is AL T'VILAT GEIRIM, for the ritual immersion of a convert, said by the convert after he emerges from the Mikve. This too can be said at most, once in a lifetime. The possible wrinkle for this solution is whether a bracha is said for the immersion (and conversion) of a baby, who says the bracha, and if the text is the same. Depending upon the answers to these questions, this bracha might be able to be said more than once in a person's lifetime. The jury is still out on this one. The third possible bracha that can be said at most once in a lifetime is the one for giving up one's life to sanctify G-d's name. ...L'KADEISH SH'MO BARABIM. The wrinkle in this bracha is that if a person survives the situation at the last moment, the bracha can be said subsequently if there is another situation of Kidush HaShem. So it might be possible to say this bracha more than once in a lifetime. So, you might argue, if a GER makes his Mikve bracha on a non-kosher Mikve or a person redeems himself inadvertently from a non-kohein, they too will make their once in a lifetime brachot a second time. Different - their first brachot are null. One more possibility for the at most once-in-a- lifetime bracha - maybe. Does one who circumcises himself have a unique bracha? One further suggestion for last week's NKJTQ (max. once in a lifetime bracha) was for building the Beit HaMikdash. This would have been a good answer, except for the fact that there is no bracha for that mitzva - several reasons why not Winners of the NKJTQ:
Gitta Neufeld for T'vilat Ger, Jan Meisler for Self-Pidyon,and Gil
Reich for Kiddush HaShem (and living to see the Cubs win a WS) OU
ISRAEL CENTER [The
Parshat Sh'mot Homepage]
|
