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 While describing how we should behave while besieging an enemy during the time of war the verses state, "Do not destroy - LO TASHCHIT - the trees... because you can eat from them." The verse continues "KI HADAM ETZ HASADEH LAVO MIPANECHA BAMATZOR". This part of the verse is a bit difficult to understand and any translation is already a type of commentary. Rashi explains it as a rhetorical question - "Really? is the tree of the field a man who is besieged by you, to suffer famine and thirst just like the inhabitants of the city? Why then should you cut it down?" Meaning you shouldn't cut down the tree because it isn't your enemy and didn't harm you in any way. Ibn Ezra explains in a different way. He explains as follows: "because you may eat them and you shouldn't cut it down because the tree is man's life". As the Sifri explains "the life of man is only from the tree." Nechama Leibowitz sees in these two divergent grammatical interpretations of the verses, actual differences in meaning and implication. According to Rashi's explanation the law is inspired by compassion for whatever Hashem created, whereas according to Ibn Ezra it is motivated by considerations of human welfare. The Rabbis have actually seen the tree in the text just as an example, a prototype. They see the prohibition of BAL TASHCHIT as implying that it is forbidden to willfully destroy anything that could be of benefit to mankind. We are commanded to make use of Hashem's creations, but we are not allowed to willfully destroy these gifts of nature. 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!'" [The Parshat Sho-f'tim Homepage]
|
