Shabbat Parshat SHO-F'TIM This Shabbat is the 327th day (of 354); the 47th Shabbat (of 50) of 5766 ANI L'DODI V'DODI LI... (Shir HaShirim 6:3) HALACHIC TIMES Candle Lighting and Havdala times - Regular and (earliest) Further explanations and notes on Z'manim are available on the website www.ou.org/torah/tt - click on Halachic times WORD OF THE MONTH The molad was THU morning. Three days later is Sunday morning. That means that the first opportunity for Kiddush L'vana this month (according to Minhag Yerushalayim) is Sunday night. For 7-day after the molad opinion followers, first op for KL is THU night, August 31. Minhag to hear Shofar each weekday morning from Friday Rosh Chodesh (not Thursday), except for Erev Rosh Ha- Shana. From 1 Elul through Hoshana Raba, we say Psalm 27 - L'DAVID, HA- SHEM ORI V'YISH'I - at the end of Shacharit and... Maariv (for Nusach Ashkenaz), Mincha (for Nusach S'fard). S'faradim begin saying S'lichot from 2 Elul; Ashkenazim begin on the Motza'ei Shabbat before Rosh HaShana (when RH is Thursday of Shabbat; when RH is Monday or Tuesday, Slichot begins the previous Motza'ei Shabbat). The Irreversible, Ironclad Deal In Va'etchanan, when Moshe is retelling the episode of Matan Torah, this "conversation" between Moshe and the people is found in much greater detail. Essentially, it is the same deal that the People are offering to Moshe (and to G-d). You, Moshe, speak to us, not G-d. And we will do what you tell us He tells you to tell us. And in Va'etchanan, the Torah tells us that G-d approved of the offer. He accepted the deal, so to speak. In R'ei, we find the first potential problem with the "deal" - namely, NAVI SHEKER, false prophet. One can assume that direct communication from G-d will be incontrovertible. With Moshe Rabeinu, also no problem. But prophets that announced themselves to the Jewish People in later generations, there is room to question their authenticity. So the Torah must set down the rules of recognizing and dealing with false prophets. Not an easy situation, but a necessary byproduct of the deal with G-d to let a prophet speak on His behalf. Next comes this week's sedra of Sho- f'tim. It addresses three different authority figures in Jewish Life: Judges (Sanhedrin), Kings, and Prophets. Concerning prophets, the Torah expands on the rules introduced in R'ei and includes the command to listen to a true prophet, further tips (so to speak) on recognizing a prophet who does not speak in G-d's name, and the prohibition of over-testing a prophet. Sanhedrin and halachic authorities are spokesmen of sorts for G-d, different from prophets, but very significant in what they are empowered to teach us. Kings are powerful authority figures of a different sort. And we have also been warned about the Enticer to idolatry, and - in this week's sedra, about practicing the Black Arts. It is a complex deal, but one we must take seriously. SHO·F'TIM STATS Mitzvot Aliya-by-Aliya Sedra Summary [P> X:Y (Z)] and [S> X:Y (Z)] indicate start of a parsha p’tucha or s’tuma respectively. X:Y is Perek:Pasuk of the beginning of the parsha; (Z) is the number of p'sukim in the parsha. Kohen - First Aliya - 18 p'sukim - 16:18-17:13 What if a judge was going to vote in favor of the briber, even without the bribe. Justice is still being served. Is the bribe any less a serious offense? The answer is NO. A bribe is a bribe. One leads to another, and justice will be perverted. SDT: TZEDEK TZEDEK TIRDOF - Justice you shall surely pursue. The doubling of the word TZEDEK can be seen as a reminder that not only shall justice be pursued, but the means employed in the pursuit of justice shall also be just. We do not subscribe to the concept that the end justifies the means. Perpetrating a mockery of justice and claiming that it is justice, is the greatest offense of all. TZEDEK (B')TZEDEK, justice with justice... [S> 16:21 (2)] Planting trees in the courtyard of the Mikdash (or near the Mizbei'ach) is forbidden [492,L13 16:21] - it is an idolatrous practice. (This prohibition still applies today.) Erecting monuments (as is done in idol worship) to G-d (even with "proper" motives) is forbidden [493,L11 16:22] Perversion of justice is juxtaposed to idolatry to emphasize how serious is the former sin. Pirkei Avot states that "the sword comes to the world because of perversion of justice... exile comes because of idolatry." Both sins cause us to lose our hold on Eretz Yisrael. And conversely, remaining faithful to G-d and dealing with each other with honesty and justice will secure us our hold on our Land. The Gemara states that "appointing inappropriate judges is tantamount to planting a tree near the Altar". Planting a tree in an attempt to beautify the Temple, is a completely misguided act. The beauty of the Beit HaMikdash flows from itself and its spiritual essence. To think that external decoration can contribute to the beauty is to lack understanding of what the Beit HaMikdash is. So too, to appoint a judge because of personal appearance, wealth, stature, etc. (and not because of scholarship and worthiness to judge) is equally "missing the point". [S> 17:1 (1)] Sacrificing blemished animals is forbidden [494,L95 17:1]. (Elsewhere the Torah enumerated types of blemishes, but the mitzva is counted here in Shoftim; the Gemara deals with the details.) [S> 17:2 (6)] The Torah next stresses that idolatry is a most serious sin. If we find among us a fellow Jew who worships anyone (or thing) other than G-d, we must most scrupulously investigate the case against him (or her). If the person is convicted by the court, the punishment is death by stoning, thereby uprooting evil from our midst. It is the eye-witness testimony of a minimum of two that shall be necessary to convict. No one can be sentenced to die (or be otherwise punished) by the testimony of only a solitary witness. The witnesses them- selves are often to be involved in the carrying out of the sentence. [P> 17:8 (6)] The Torah next establishes the mechanism for the perpetuation of Judaism throughout the generations (by emphasizing, among other things, that if disputes arise or a halachic point needs clarification, that we are to consult the judges IN OUR TIME) and the dynamic applicability of Halacha for all times (by giving the Sages the mechanism to enact laws for the protection of the Torah and its proper observance). We are required to do all that the Sanhedrin (the Supreme Halachic Authority) teaches and commands [495,A174 17:10]. We must not veer from their rulings "neither to the right nor to the left" [496,L312 17:11]. MitzvaWatch: Rambam's Book of Mitzvot contains 14 "rules" by which Rambam counts the Torah's 613 mitzvot. Rule #1 states that rabbinic mitzvot such as Chanuka and Purim shall not be counted among the Taryag. This might seem obvious, but Rambam feels compelled to state this rule in opposition to mitzva- counters who DID include some "rabbinic mitzvot" among Taryag. Why would someone consider the post-biblical mitzvot of Chanuka and Purim as Torah law? Similarly, why is it that the bracha for mitzvot, which states "...Who has sanctified with his mitzvot and commanded us..." is also recited for 6 rabbinic commandments? (Shabbat & Yom Tov candles, Chanuka candles, Megilat Esther and the other Megilot, Netilat Yadayim, Hallel, and the three types of Eiruv.) The answer to both questions is based on the p'sukim in the beginning of this week's sedra which speak about the authority of the Sanhedrin - mitzvot 495 & 496 above. In essence, the Torah commands us to observe rabbinic law. Therefore, it can be argued that rabbinic law IS Torah Law. It follows that one might consider counting Chanuka and Purim among the 613, and it makes sense to use the mitzva-bracha formula for Rabbinic mitzvot. Rambam does not argue against this. He insists, however, that we cannot possibly count Rabbinic mitzvot separately among the 613. This could lead to the untenable situation of having to re-adjust the mitzva count each time a Sanhedrin would make a new rabbinic mitzva. One who does not light Chanuka candles, for example, is at the same time in non-fulfillment of a rabbinic command and double violation of the Torah’s mitzvot of TAASEH and LO TASUR. Does this mean that violations of rabbinic law are equivalent to (or even more severe) than violations of Torah law? The general understanding is that the Torah "put its authority" behind rabbinic law, but rabbinic law remains "one notch", so to speak, below Torah law. Without this distinction, Rabbinic Law might have been forbidden because of BAL TOSIF (adding to the Torah). Included in Sanhedrin-edicts which we are obligated to follow, are their presentation of Oral Law, their derivation of Torah Law by the 13 "Talmudic" principles of analysis, both of which would be considered "D'O'rayta" (Torah law), and the various decrees and measures that the Sanhedrin enacts as protection for Torah Laws, or because of similarity to Torah Law, or for whatever other reason they have for their rulings. We who stood at Sinai, accepted a "package deal" of Judaism - D'Oraita and D'Rabbanan. A Torah scholar with authority to render Halachic decisions who defies the Sanhedrin and encourages others to disregard their ruling, can (under certain circumstances) be put to death. Such an individual is known as ZAKEN MAMREI and is ultimately judged by the Great Sanhedrin. This shall serve as a deterrent to the People not to behave similarly. The average Jew is not similarly subject to possible execution, but still is warned of the seriousness of flouting Rabbinic authority. [It is likely that there never actually was an individual who was executed as a Zaken Mamrei, yet the idea adds tremendous weight to the seriousness of Rabbinic Law.] We might say that G-d’s Plan and his Torah included Rabbinic Law in the total picture of what He wants of us. Levi - Second Aliya - 7 p'sukim - 17:14-20 A king must write a Sefer Torah for himself [503,A17 17:18] (in addition to the one he is commanded to write as a Jew - mitzva #613). This Torah is to be copied from THE Sefer Torah of the Beit HaMikdash. A king of Israel has awesome powers over his subjects. He therefore requires the "humbling force" and moral restraints of the Torah constantly before him. The Torah is his guide for proper rule. A king who is guided by Torah law and values is a great asset to the People of Israel. A king who isn't, is our worst liability. Shlishi - Third Aliya - 5 p'sukim - 18:1-5 [S> 18:3 (3)] (Among other gifts to the kohen,) the kohen is to receive specific parts of every animal slaughtered for food - the forelimb, tongue and surrounding cheeks, stomach and surrounding fat [506,A143 18:3], T'ruma from produce [507,A126 18:4], and the first-shearing of the sheep [508,A144 18:4]. These gifts are due the kohen because of his sacred service. Note: Whereas T'ruma and other gifts which are sacred, cannot be given at the present time because of issues of ritual impurity, both "gifts" [506] and Reishit HaGeiz [508] apply today and can be given. If this is practical issue for you, consult a Rav for details. R'VI'I - Fourth Aliya - 8 p'sukim - 18:6-13 [S> 18:9 (14)] Another warning follows, to be on guard against learning from and adopting any of the abominable practices of the nations that we will encounter in Eretz Yisrael. The implication here is that we must not "learn to do" the terrible things, but we may learn about them in order to understand their ways and to better instruct our fellow Jews in this area. (Tur Shulchan Aruch, based on the Gemara) Shun the practices of passing one's children through fire (a vivid example of a reprehensible pagan practice, counted elsewhere], divination and certain types of meditations meant to "read the future" [510,L3 18:10], astrological predictions [counted elsewhere; some other aspects of astrology are not halachically objectionable, but one must be careful), reliance on omens [counted else- where], conjuring & witchcraft [511, L34 18:10], incantations [512,L35 18:10], mediums [513,L36 18:11], oracles [514,L37 18:11], and necromancy (seances, contacting the dead) [515,L38 18:11]. All the above- mentioned practices - and there are different opinions as to exactly what each Torah-term refers to - pull a Jew away from his straight- forward, "pure" relationship with G-d. We must strive for that direct, honest relationship. Apropos the point of the Lead Tidbit, the practice of these Black Arts can be seen as an alternative to prophecy, yet they are "unkosher" and must be shunned. How much more so when they are attempts to bypass or defy the divine intention. Chamishi - Fifth Aliya - 22 p'sukim - 18:14-19:13 This was part of the "deal" made with G-d at Sinai, when we asked that we not hear G-d's "voice" directly. G-d agreed with our request on the condition that we would listen to true prophets who would communicate to us what G-d asks of us. Anyone who does not listen to the Word of G-d through the prophet will be "answer-able to Him". But a prophet dares not speak in G-d's name under false pretenses [517,L27 18:20], or speak in the name of an idolatry [518,L26 18:20]. How are we to know what is and what isn't G-d's word? A prophet must have a 100% "track record" - anything less is an indication of a false prophet. (Prophecies of bad things to befall the People can be reversed through sincere repentance and there- fore do not cast doubt upon the prophet.) We must not be afraid to defy a false prophet and bring him to justice (and execution) [519,L29 18:22]. Of course, we are not supposed to be afraid to do any mitzva in the Torah. In the case of a false prophet, we are often dealing with a charismatic individual who might have a very large following. Defying him might be a very unpopular thing to do. The Torah is bolstering our resolve to rid ourselves of false prophets by commanding us not to be afraid. Perhaps we can draw from this mitzva a lesson to apply to all mitzvot. Do not be afraid to keep the Shabbat, be kosher, daven Mincha, avoid Lashon HaRa, etc. etc. etc. even when doing so will meet with scoffing of others. Adhere to halacha and don't be afraid or embarrassed to do so. [S> 19:1 (10)] When matters are settled in Eretz Yisrael, we are required to designate another three cities of refuge [520,A182 19:3]. Roads to the cities are to be prepared and identified so that the killer can easily find refuge. The cities will protect the inadvertent killer from the blood-avenging relative of the the victim. If (when) we will merit expansion of our Land, another three cities will be selected. This is to avoid unnecessary bloodshed. [P> 19:11 (3)] An intentional murderer also flees to a city of refuge, but is removed therefrom to stand trial. We must not ignore these situations - and those concerning assault [521,L279 19:13], so that we will thereby eliminate the shedding of innocent blood and merit a good life. Rashi raises an interesting argument against capital punishment, which he rejects. On the words, Do not have pity on him (the killer), Rashi says, don’t say that the victim is dead any- way, why should we take another life and there will be two people dead. The implication is clear that despite that argument, capital punishment stands. (One can be opposed to capital punishment in today’s society without it being considered clashing with Torah.) Shishi - Sixth Aliya - 17 p'sukim - 19:14-20:9 This prohibition extends to other forms of encroachment, e.g. unfair competition that steals someone's business. [S> 19:15 (7)] It is forbidden to render judgments (in most cases) based on the testimony of a single witness [523,L288 19:15]; a minimum of two witnesses are required. (Some- times, what only one person says will point the judges in a certain direction, but not as formal testimony.) This topic is known as EIDIM ZOM’MIM - plotting witnesses. It is a subset of false witnesses that differs from “regular” false witnesses in several interesting and sometimes enigmatic ways. [S> 20:1 (9)] When we go out to battle our enemies and see their horses and vehicles, armaments, etc. and we might tend to panic... we are forbidden to be afraid, because G-d is on our side [525,L58 20:1,3]. A kohein is anointed as chaplain (sort of) and delivers the pre-battle speech to the potential army [526,A191 20:3] He and the Sho-t’rim speak to the people and send home those that have recently built a house, become engaged to marry, and/or planted a vineyard. (In all three cases, the point is that each pursuit is as yet “unfinished”. Such a person faces serious distraction from the goals of battle.) They also dismiss from service someone who fears that he has insufficient merit to survive battle. (This is one of several ways of looking at this topic.) Sh'vi'i - Seventh Aliya - 20 p'sukim - 20:10-21:19 [S> 20:19 (2)] When laying siege to a city, care must be taken not to destroy fruit trees [529,L57 20:19]. Only shade trees may be cut down so that siege equipment can be built. This prohibition of BAL TASHCHIT is expanded by Chazal to include many types of wanton wastefulness. [P> 21:1 (9)] If a corpse is found in a field, and it is not known who has committed the murder, measurements are made to determine the nearest town. The elders of that town perform a ceremony which includes killing a calf [530,A181 21:1] to emphasize the senselessness of bloodshed. The area where the ceremony is performed may never be planted nor worked [531, L309 21:4]. The elders proclaim that they are not responsible for the loss of life. The whole procedure has a sobering effect on all involved, and hopefully there is sincere mending of ways and atonement granted by G-d because all the People now take "life" more seriously. [3-pasuk Maftir.] Haftara - 24 p'sukim - Yeshayahu 51:12-52:12 THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW - Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Dean There is a dispute among the authorities regarding the following fact situation: Levi purchases the land from Reuven and before Shimon can exercise his right of first refusal, Levi gives the land by gift to Yehuda. According to some authorities the law of the right of first refusal does not apply to Yehuda, and Shimon cannot exercise his right of first refusal, while according to other authorities the law of the right of first refusal does apply. Even according to the first authority, Beth Din should closely scrutinize to see if the gift from Levi to Yehuda is really a gift since these facts are rather unusual. The law of the right of first refusal does not apply if Reuven sells several parcels of land to Levi, which parcels are not contiguous to each other. Shimon cannot exercise his right of first refusal regarding the parcel that is contiguous to his parcel. Shimon may not exercise his right of first refusal even if he offers to purchase all of the parcels that Reuven sold to Levi. The law of the right of first refusal does not apply if Reuven sells the land to the person from whom he purchased the land. For example, Reuven purchased the land from Naftali. He now resells the land to Naftali or to Naftali's heirs if Naftali is dead. Shimon has no right of first refusal. A person does "what is right and just" when he resells the land to the original owner. However, if Reuven purchased the land from Naftali and then sells the land to Levi, and now Levi sells the land to Naftali, Shimon may exercise the right of first refusal. The law of the right of first refusal does not apply if Reuven sells the land to his son. The law of the right of first refusal does not apply if Reuven sells the land in an emergency situation. Levi will not purchase if he knows that Shimon may force him to sell to Shimon and thus Reuven will not find a ready buyer and he cannot wait until Shimon goes to the bank to obtain funds to purchase. It also does not apply if Reuven must raise immediate cash to pay the tax collectors of the king who will arrest him unless the tax is paid within minutes. Or Reuven must raise immediate cash to bury a close relative. If Levi is wiling to purchase within these few minutes, then Shimon cannot exercise his right of first refusal. The law is the same if Reuven borrows money from Levi in these emergency situations and now wants to sell the land to Jacob to repay Levi. Shimon cannot exercise his right of first refusal against Jacob. However, if Reuven needs money for his business, the nature of the requirement is not enough of an emergency to make Shimon lose his right of first refusal. Merchants very often need cash in a hurry and to have the right of first refusal not apply to those situations will essentially emasculate the law. There is authority that the emergency exception can be extended to any situation when it would require hardship on Levi a member of the community to require him to transfer title to Shimon, the contiguous neighbor. For example, Levi purchases Reuven's house and he cannot find any other place to live. For Shimon the gain is to expand his land to include the land sold by Reuven to Levi. This opinion holds that it is up to the Beth Din to weigh the conflicting interests between Levi and Shimon. Many authorities do not agree and hold that to include this exception would result in emasculation of the law of the right of first refusal. The law of the right of first refusal does not apply in land for land exchanges situations. For example, Reuven exchanges his parcel of land, parcel #1, for a parcel of land parcel #2 owned by Levi. Shimon may not exercise the right of first refusal and acquire parcel #1 from Levi. There is no way that Shimon can give to Reuven a piece of land that is the same as Reuven receives from Levi. Also, Levi would not give up his land except for the land he receives from Reuven. However, if Reuven exchanges his land for an animal or other personal property belonging to Levi, Shimon can have the animal or personal property appraised and pay to Levi the appraised value to acquire the land from Levi. Levi cannot demand that Shimon obtain from Reuven the animal or personal property that Levi gave to Reuven for the land. In this last described situation, Beth Din will be within its rights to suspect fraud, or at least an attempt to circumvent the right of first refusal on the part of Reuven and Levi, since it is unusual for a person to give up land for a animal or personal property. The right of first refusal does not apply against a partner. If Reuven and Naftali are partners in the ownership of the land or joint tenants in the ownership of the land or even partners in another business, Reuven can sell his interest to Naftali. Shimon the contiguous neighbor to the land does not have right of first refusal. In the next lesson, IYH more exceptions to the right of first refusal. Part 2) The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in volume V chapter 1751 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 The incident of Dina's abduction is seen by the commentators to have been in punishment for sins committed by Yaakov and Leah. This is based on the wording of the opening verse: "Now Dina, daughter of Leah whom she had borne to Yaakov, went out to look over the daughters of the land" (Ber. 34:1). "Why was Dina not referred to as the daughter of Yaakov as is common in the Torah? Because she went out bedecked in jewelry and all her finery in violation of the codes of modesty; Leah too had lacked modesty when she went out to meet Yaakov" (Midrash Tanchuma; Abarbanel). "It is difficult for us to fathom even to the slightest, the depth of the workings of divine justice. Even though all of Leah's intentions were holy and were meant solely to establish the Tribes of Israel, Issachar and Zevulun, nevertheless, there was a very slight degree of immodesty in her going out to Yaakov and that led to the incident of her daughter Dina" (Harav Shach)."A person goes into a store and sees various items but decides that the price is inflated or the quality inferior or they simply do not like the goods. Yet, the salesman is able to tempt the customer by stressing their uniqueness, or by persisting that the price has been specially reduced just for that person until it is almost at his cost, or by other stratagems. The customer, even with- out desire to buy, nevertheless, all too often succumbs to temptation. We can learn a most basic and important lesson of the danger that temptation places before all of us from the actions of Leah, Dina, the Imahot and Avot. Avraham, who despised material wealth, nevertheless took an oath that he would not benefit from the gifts of the king of S'dom. He was convinced of the power of temptation to move one even though one has every intention of not doing a certain action, so he felt that he needed the strength of an oath to help him withstand it. Leah, even though G-d rewarded her going towards Yaakov, by granting her two tribes, nevertheless, bequeathed her slight immodesty to Dina" (Daat Torah, Rabbi Livowitz, Yeshivat Mir). "When Yaakov said to Lavan (30:33), "Let my integrity testify for me in the future", G-d said: "Does any mortal know what the future has in store for him? In the future your daughter will be humiliated." Yaakov hid Dina in a chest so that Eisav should not have the opportunity to see her and marry her. Thus he showed a lack of faith in G-d that perhaps she would cause Eisav to repent. ["You feared that she would marry a circumcised man, verily, she will fall to an uncircumcised one" (Midrash Rabba)]. Furthermore, Yaakov was arrogant in referring to himself as lord of the lower world [Gur Aryeh on 33:20]. For all these statements, Yaakov was punished by the abduction of Dina" (Rabbenu Bachya). "His error lay in not going directly to Bet El and redeeming his vow there. Instead he built the altar in Shechem. So Hashgacha caused the incident of Dina so that he was forced to leave Shechem and go to Bet El" (Malbim). G-d's evaluation of human ethical and moral behavior and His subsequent punishment, in no way justify the acts of the instruments He chooses to carry out that punishment. For instance, Bayit Rishon and Bayit Sheni were both destroyed because of Israel's sins, nevertheless, both the destroyers, Bavel and Rome, were punished for exceeding their mandate. This is an essential truth to remember in the world of today where often perpetrator and victim are considered to be equally to blame. Killers of innocent bystanders and non- combatants are seen not as murders and terrorists but as liberating soldiers. Victims of business fraud are faulted for being naive or for their misplaced trust. It in this light that the reaction of the brothers to the news must be seen: "And they were distressed and they were fired deeply with indignation" (34:7). "They saw it as a disgrace to them but this distress was mild compared to their indignation concerning the breach of the high moral standards of Israel" (Abarbanel). His was an act unacceptable even to Bnei Noah who had guarded themselves against sexual immorality after the Flood. Their distress and indignation were a message that was followed centuries later by their descendants. This was when the Tribes of Israel went to war against their brothers of Binyamin over their unwillingness to punish the men of Givah (Shoftim, 19-20). "The first time that the Avrahamic People are referred to as Israel is in the incident of Shechem, and this even before Yaakov's name was changed to Israel. They already considered themselves part of the Holy Nation called upon to fight for G-d. What a magnificent concept of duty and morality is thus connected with this great name, that the struggle for G-d inherent in that name should be in defense of the sacred ideal of moral purity; the first mission of Israel is to safeguard that ideal" (Rabbi Munk)., MISC section - contents: [1] From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE In honor of the publication this week of the sixth volume of our Hebrew responsa work, B’mareh Habazak, we proudly bring you a question and answer from that forum (siman 45). It is not only translated from Hebrew but also adapted to the different format we employ in Hemdat Yamim. (Copies of the sefer are available in our office, along with other of our publications.) Q: Is it permitted, while serving on Shabbat, to transfer vegetables or kenaidelach from the soup to the bowls with the use of a special spoon that has holes in it? A: The baraita (cited in Shabbat 74a) mentions cryptically that selecting (borer) some food from other types of food is sometimes forbidden and some- times permitted. The following three distinctions that are brought to explain the various possibilities are accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 319:1-2) as halacha. 1) The selection is done by hand, not by a utensil whose purpose is selection. At first glance, our question fails the first test, as a utensil is being used, not hands. One could try to apply the following important rule which Rav M. Feinstein used (Igrot Moshe, Orach Chayim I, 124). One is allowed to remove food that he wants to eat from its surroundings with a spoon or fork if the selection could have been done as efficiently by hand and the utensil was used for a side reason (e.g., to keep his hands clean). One could claim that in our case one would use his hand if not for technical factors such as hygiene and not wanting to dirty or burn his hands. On the other hand, the spoon in question here is a special one which is made to have the effect of a strainer. It is likely that in such a case Rav Feinstein would not have been lenient. However, we can permit using the spoon in this context for a combination of factors. The Maharitatz (Shut 203) says that it is not considered borer when one removes a solid from the medium of a liquid. He used this rule to explain his ruling that one may remove a fly that fell into a drink. It is true that many argue (including the Taz, Orach Chayim 319:13) and the more accepted halachic practice is to take out some liquid along with the fly (Biur Halacha to 319:4). The Yalkut Yosef (319:28) rules that the halacha is like the Maharitatz, just that it is preferable to remove some liquid with the fly. Furthermore, the Shevitat Shabbat (Borer, 11) says that when the solid pieces inside the liquid are large, even those who argue on the Maharitatz should agree that removing the pieces is not borer. In the standard case you refer to, there is another significant reason to be lenient. The person who takes out the vegetables presumably does not care if a modest amount of liquid is transferred along with the vegetables. His intention is just to efficiently move a large amount of vegetables from one place to another. Thus, even if liquid falls out along the way, it is not considered borer. Based on this concept, the Yalkut Yosef (ibid.:28) allows using a spoon with holes to remove pieces of meat from chulent even though some gravy slips out in the process. He bases himself partially on a similar ruling in Shemirat Shabbat K’hilchata (3:54). There, Rav Neuwirth says that one can use a ladle with holes to quickly remove wet spaghetti from a pot to a plate in such a way that he does not have a significant amount of water fall out in the process. 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) This week's parsha deals with a fourth category which is often overlooked due to our long exile. These mitzvot can be called Bein Adam LaChevra or Bein Adam LaMedina (between man and society or between man and state). These are laws that cannot be fulfilled by the individual. Rather they are the collective obligations of society. Only a society can establish a government, courts, law enforcement agencies, an army and rules of combat. Without an independent state, these mitzvot are relegated to theoretical study without practical implementation. If a Jew does not live in an independent Jewish state, he cannot fulfill these mizvot. Our generation is blessed. In our time, in our country, these mitzvot are no longer merely theoretical. Being self- governing, we are challenged to bring this dormant area of Torah to life. Establishing a police force, an army, courts and government are mitzvot when they are done in Israel. I once heard an interesting interpretation of the verse in Tehilim 147:19: "He declares His word to Ya'akov, His statutes and His judgments to Yisra'el." When we are Ya'akov, a name that represents Galut, many parts of the Torah are merely words. But when we become Israel, those parts of the Torah become living statutes and judgments. 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 "Why did you turn us down, Rebbe," they asked. "Is being the rabbi of Mohilew beneath you?" "Heaven forbid," answered R' Yoshe Ber. "Mohilew is a marvelous town, an important town, and what greater honor can a Rav have than to occupy the position once held by the Malbim? But let me give you a parable. If a person needs to marry a widow, he should look for a woman who was widowed recently. Such a woman feels that she cannot survive without a husband. After all, who will support her? Who will make kiddush and havdala for her? We can rest assured that such a woman will appreciate being remarried. On the other hand, if a woman has been a widow for a number of years, she already knows that she can survive without a husband. Thus she will not be as appreciative of her second husband. "So too, if a community has just lost its rabbi, it believes that it cannot do without one. Who will make halachic decisions? Who will give the sermons? Such a community will appreciate having a new rabbi. However, Mohilew, which has been without a rabbi for years, has no doubt reached the conclusion that a Jewish community can survive quite satisfactorily without a rabbi." 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 - SHO F'TIM THESE ARE THE ANSWERS 1) The Alshich explains that the word WITH teaches that one must be perfect in the service of G-D even when there is no one else around and it is literally just the person WITH G-D. Our perfection in serving G-D must be motivated by our understanding of G-D and our connection to Him and not by what other people will see and think of us. 2) The Sfat Emet answers that FROM YOUR BROTHERS teaches that the Jewish people only merit prophecy when in a status of brotherhood and unity. Thus, the Torah is saying that a prophet arises from our acting as brothers. 3) The Chatam Sofer teaches that this phrase is actually an acceptance of guilt by the Sages of the city. They first state that OUR HANDS HAVE NOT SPILLED THIS BLOOD, indicating that no one from their city performed this murder. However, for such a crime to take place near this town, it indicates the city's lowly spiritual level. Thus, they proclaim AND OUR EYES DID NOT SEE - we did not notice the weakened spiritual state of our people, and, this incident has brought this failure of ours to our attention. Parsha Points to Ponder is prepared by Rabbi Dov Lipman, who teaches at Reishit Yerushalayim, Tiferet, and Machon Maayan in Beit Shemesh and RBS and is the author of "DISCOVER: Answers for Teenagers (and adults) to Questions about the Jewish Faith", soon to be re-published by Feldheim ppp@israelcenter.co.il [6] Portion for the Portion by Rakel Berenbaum - FEEDback to berenbau@actcom.net.il Rice broccoli (trees) forest [7] Torah from Nature [8] Micro Ulpan [9] G'matriya Matches [10] Elul In Megilat Esther we find the mitzva of giving gifts (of food) from ISH L'RE'EIHU U'MATANOT LA'EVYONIM. This highlights the interpersonal aspect of the T'shuva process, which commands special focus and effort. In Divrei HaYamim we have our declaration: And now, our G-d, we acknowledge and thank you and praise Your glorious Name - modim ANACHNU LACH UMHAL'LIM L'SHEIM tif'artecha - this points to the significance of prayer during this special month. In Yirmiyahu's prophecy of G-d's accepting our T'shuva and returning us from the exile, G-d promises to return ISH L'NACHALATO V'ISH L'ARTZO - each person to his Heritage and his Land. We have a thrice-repeated phrase that describes two korbanot, each of which addresses a different aspect of sin. ECHAD L'CHATAT V'ECHAD L'OLAH, one as a Sin Offering and one as a Burnt Offering. The former sacrifice is part of the process of seeking atonement from G-d for acts that were inadvertent violations of certain sins. The latter is for the wrong kind of thoughts, and sometimes for the non-fulfillment of positive mitzvot. [11] Divrei Menachem The opening words are poignant: They remind us that G-d is the ultimate comforter, for, "It is I. I am He who comforts you" (51:12). These words, however, stand in stark contrast to the manner in which G-d describes Himself a few verses later as, "Hashem your G-d (Elohim)… Hashem, Master of the Legions, is His name." In reality, we see juxtaposed the two classic sides of G-d: The strict Master who represents the side of Justice (Din) and the concerned Father who conveys the attribute of loving-kindness (Chesed). The prophet parallels these aspects, castigating a raucous people for deserting their G-d while alternately stirring them to joyous fulfillment with his cry of: "Wake up! Don your strength, O Zion!" For this is our life, our destiny, our hope and our expectation. Yes, even as we mourn the victims of war, we continue to yearn for peace. Surely, though, our conception of this lofty goal has to be reconciled with the prophet's exhortation in our Haftara, whereby he proclaims: "How beautiful are the footsteps of the herald making heard, 'Shalom!'… 'Salvation!'… [and] who says to Zion, 'Your G-d has reigned!'" Towards Better Torah reading and Davening SHEYIBANEH BEIT HAMIKDASH... The Shulchan and the Lechem HaPanim Beit Garmu prepared the Lechem HaPanim in a special room called the Lishkat Osei Lechem HaPanim, "Chamber of the Showbread Makers", located in the Beit HaMokeid, on the northern side of the Azara. The employment of a kohanic family in the Mikdash to bake the Lechem HaPanim was actually an innovation instituted during Bayit Sheini. In Bayit Rishon, the Levitical family Bnei Hakehati "were over the Lechem Hama'arechet" (i.e. Lechem HaPanim) to prepare it every Shabbat" (I Divrei Hayamim 9:32). The salary of the bakers and the cost of the flour were taken from the Machatzit Hashekel, the half-shekel Temple tax, that was paid annually to the Mikdash treasury, by every adult male Israelite (Shekalim 4:1). Aside from what is written in the Torah (Vayikra 24:6-9), our primary source relating to the placement of the Lechem HaPanim, is the Mishna in Menachot and its attendant Gemarot and commentaries. When a festival occurred on Friday, the Kohanim of Beit Garmubaked the Lechem HaPanim on Thursday. It is likely that the Lechem HaPanim remained in the Lishkat Osei Lechem HaPanim under lock and key until the appointed time on Shabbat when the Kohanim brought them into the Bayit. Two groups of four Kohanim entered the Bayit every Shabbat to place fresh Lechem HaPanim on the Shulchan and to remove the loaves of the previous week. Two of the Kohanim of the first group carried the twelve new loaves with their golden moulds into the Ulam and placed them on the marble table that was located north of the Great Gate. The Mishna relates, "In the Ulam - the entrance hall - there were two tables; one of marble and one of gold. On the table of marble they laid the new Lechem HaPanim when it was brought in and they laid the old Lechem HaPanim on the table of gold when they brought it out of the Heichal" (Menachot 11:7). The Mishna explains why the old Lechem HaPanim, after having been removed from the Shulchan, was placed on a gold table in the Ulam, while the new Lechem HaPanim only "rated" a marble table. "What is holy must be raised (in honor) and not lowered." The old Lechem HaPanim had reposed on a gold table; for it to be placed on a marble table would be a "comedown." Balancing six loaves and their moulds required great agility and strength because they were certainly heavy and unwieldy. (In light of the well-known Biblical passage, "In the multitude of the people is the glory of the King, (Mishlei 14:28)", frequently quoted as a reason to increase the number of Kohanim participating in other Avodot, it is surprising that only two Kohanim were designated to carry all those loaves and their gold moulds. It would have been considerably less exhausting for the Kohanim involved, and it would have considerably lessened the risk of the Lechem HaPanim falling on the floor, if the task would have been delegated to more Kohanim in accordance with the philosophy of the quoted dictum. IMHO.) "They who brought the loaves in, stood on the north side with their faces towards the south (and their backs against the northern wall of the Heichal); those who removed the old Lechem HaPanim from the Shulchan stood on the south with their faces to the north. Those who removed the old loaves... [and other Kohanim] replaced them with the new loaves and there was always one Tefach where one overlaid the other, as it is written, 'Before Me continually'" (Sh'mot 25:30, Menachot 11:7). However, there is another opinion that "even if the old (Lechem HaPanim) was removed in the morning and the new set down only in the evening," it was tolerable. What was important, according to R. Yosi's rejected opinion, was that the Shulchan should not be bereft of Lechem HaPanim overnight (Menachot 99b). The other two Kohanim in this group carried flat-bottomed ladles holding the new frankincense. This frankincense was placed on top of the two piles of loaves. (This is according to the description in Antiquities bk. 3, ch. 6:6 cited above. However, the Rambam accepts the ruling of Abba Sha'ul, Menachot 11:5, which states that the flat-bottomed ladles containing the frankincense were placed between the piles of Lechem HaPanim loaves. Note Hilchot Temidin U'musafin 5:2) The four Kohanim charged with removing the Lechem HaPanim were members of the Mishmeret beginning one of its two annual weeks of service in the Mikdash: the Kohanim in the second group were members of the Mishmeret that was concluding its week of service. Upon exiting the Heichal, the Kohanim placed the old loaves on the gold table located south of the entrance of the Ulam. Then they were removed from the Heichal and distributed among the Kohanim of both Mishmarot. The two ladles of frankincense that accompanied the Lechem HaPanim were also replaced weekly; the old frankincense once removed was burnt on the Mizbei'ach. The Kohanim could not eat their allotted Lechem HaPanim until the frankincense (later salted like all other Korbanot) had been cast into and consumed by the sacrificial fire ablaze on the southwest corner of the Mizbei'ach. The Gemara tells us that one of the miracles of the Beit Hamikdash was that the Lechem HaPanim, even after being exposed to the open air for an entire week - from Shabbat to Shabbat - remained as fresh and as piping hot as the moment when the Kohanim took them out of the oven (Menachot 29a). -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 Parsha Pix TTRIDDLES... Last issue’s (R'EI) TTriddles: This week's TTriddles: NachKwestion of the Week 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 Israel Center Chesed Fund: As Rosh HaShana approaches, help us help families in need to celebrate the High Holidays. Your contributions are greatly appreciated by those in need who are unable to support themselves and their families due to illness. Please send contributions to: ‘Chesed Fund’, c/o Menachem Persoff, Israel Center, P.O. Box 37015 Jerusalem 91370 Make checks out to: “Chesed Fund” NESTO Native English-Speaking Teen Olim Jr. NESTO is for 7th, 8th, and 9th graders, Travel Desk: 566-7787 ext. 261 BOOKED: The Palmach Museum, Tel Aviv with Nachman Kupietzky, Monday, August 28th - Check-in 12:05pm • Leave Center 12:15pm PROMPTLY • Return 5:00pm (approx.), See the newest state-of-the-art museum vividly portraying the pre-state defense army of Israel, 85NIS (100NIS non-members) • must pay in advance • Limit: 25 people, Call Travel Desk (ext. 261) to reserve Exciting new series... Wednesday, August 30th, 1:15pm check-in • Tiyul ends approx. 4:00pm - Herzl Center Experiential Museum with Nachman Kupietzky and featuring the actor who portrays Herzl, Yitzchak Berkman, 50/60NIS • Limited space Flowing with G-d, Destruction to Construction The Back Page of TT729 Schedule for Erev Shabbat to Erev Shabbat, 1-8 ELUL (Aug. 25 - Sep. 1) Friday Friday Eve Shabbat day Motza'ei Shabbat SUN-Thu in the Ganchrow Beis Medrash (first floor) Sunday Monday - N'SHEI LIBRARY 10:00am-12:30pm Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Upcoming at the Israel Center Motza"Sh, Sept. 2, 9:15pm: The Christianization of American Jewry - Due to intermarriage, there are now more gentiles of Jewish descent in the US than there are halachic Jews, Latest demographics & future prospects by Dan Altura, Ph.D Monday, Sept. 4, 10:00am-3:00pm - YESHA SALE; Food items, household items, handicrafts, gifts...Support the Yesha farmer and artist She's back for a limited time only - Monday, September 4, 7:30pmWednesday, September 6, 9:00am - Monday, September 11, 7:30pmWednesday, September 13, 9:00am - Dr. Avivah Gottlieb-Zornberg Motza'ei Shabbat, Sept. 16th - SLICHOT; 9:00pm Shiur ~ 10:00pm SLICHOT, 11:30 Shiur ~ 12:35 SLICHOT - Watch for details of Shiur-givers and Baalei T'fila September Israel Center Video Club offerings - no charge Tuesday, September 19, 7:00pm: EVERYTHING IS ILLUMINATED Financial Freedom Seminars at the Israel Center Featuring award winning Financial Educator Mark van Gelderen Keep this time & day open for another Mini Health Luncheon, Monday, September 11th, 12:30pm - A special day (9/11) with a special speaker “Healing in Mashiach Times” - Herbology start a home career in 3 weeks, African Herbal Treatments, herbal healing, retailing herbs, herb treatments, herbal D-tox, disease prevention, weight loss, anti-aging, infant health,Healing Naturally - Herbs of the Torah, RSVP: Dr. Meyers 054 3193771, beginning Thursdays Sep. 7at the Israel Center10 sessions, 7-10pm, 180nis per session OU ISRAEL CENTER [The Parshat Sho-f'tim Homepage]
|
