Shabbat Parshat
Vayakhel-P'kudei - Hachodesh - M'vorchim HALACHIC TIMES This Shabbat, we bench
Rosh Chodesh Nisan, the first of the months of the year, month wise.
It will be on Thursday, March 30th. HAMOLAD YIH-YEH B'YOM
R'VI'I, SHALOSH ESREI DAKOT ACHAREI SHALOSH BA'TZA'HARAYIM The actual (astronomical) Molad is Wednesday, March 29th, 12:15pm Only month always
"benched" with 2 Sifrei Torah (HaChodesh or Para) Appropriate for
Nisan, n'est-ce pas? The Chafetz Chayim points out the following in his Sefer HaMitzvot HaKatzar. There are things we do in our day-to-day lives that are the fulfillment of mitzvot, and we don't always realize that. Example. You take a taxi ride. Upon reaching your destination, you pay the fare. Simple. You have hired someone to perform a service for you and you have paid the person for that service at the accepted time to pay (end of the ride). Mitzva. You have fulfilled the mitzva of paying a laborer on time. B'YOMO TITEIN S'CHARO. And you probably didn't even think of it. Which is the Chafetz Chayim's point. Do think of it. Be aware that there is a mitzva to perform, have KAVANA to do the mitzva, and do it. You're going to do it anyway. But the quality of the performance is increased when you consciously do the mitzva. And, by the way, by paying on time, you have avoided the prohibition of delaying a laborer's wages. And that too is a mitzva. We have positive mitzvot to do and prohibitions not to do. Enhance the quality of your mitzvot - positive and prohibitions - by being aware and having KAVANA. There are many more
examples of this, but let's talk Pesach Prep. You tackle your food
cabinet. This we'll eat up, this we'll get rid of, this can stay,
this will be part of the sale of chametz. Wipe or wash down the
shelves, repaper them (perhaps). Mitzvot involved: Ridding your
house of Chametz. Avoiding eating of Chametz on Pesach. Avoiding
eating foods containing chametz on Pesach. Avoiding possession of
Chametz on Pesach. Avoiding possession of chametz on Pesach. (Not a
typo - a double mitzva. Albeit prohibitions. Rigorous steps taken to
avoid prohibitions are fulfillments of mitzvot. Pesach shop- ping.
Every product that you pick up and examine for reliable hashgacha is
a fulfillment of the mitzvot. So have KAVANA. And have a good
attitude, because it isn't mere cleaning, it isn't just shopping.
Your Pesach mitzvot come into play well before Matza, Hagada, 4
Cups, Hallel... at the Seder table. Do them all well, and may we be
ZOCHEH to the GEULA SH'LEIMA. Observation Notice that when G-d speaks to Moshe, He instructs him concerning the Mishkan (236 p'sukim!) and then warns him that Shabbat is supreme. When Moshe gathers the people to instruct them, he puts the Shabbat warning up front. Interesting, no? Some commentaries say that with the change in “primary” emphasis on the Mikdash in the aftermath of the Golden Calf incident, there came a change in the messages of Shabbat and Mikdash which helps explain which is presented first, and when. SDT In the opening three-pasuk portion about Shabbat, there are 40 words - 39 plus the word HaShabbat. This can be taken as a symbolic reference to the 39 categories of prohibited Melacha, which define the nature of HASHABBAT. The Baal HaTurim says that the word LA'ASOT in the phrase, "These are the things that G-d commanded TO DO them", is spelled with a LAMED (30) and an anagram for TEISHA (9) - another remez to the Melachot of Shabbat. He adds that a VAV is "missing" from LA'ASOT, representing the six weekdays when Melachot are permitted. MITZVA WATCH Sefer haChinuch says that the prohibition here is directed to Sanhedrin, not the individual. [It is mitzva 114 according to the Chinuch, and Rambam’s LAV (prohibition) 322.] We have already been told that we may not kindle fire. The courts, says the Chinuch, may not carry out the capital punishment of burning (S'reifa) on Shabbat. Nor, by Biblical extension, may any capital punishment be carried out on Shabbat, nor may any punishment by the courts be carried be meted out on Shabbat. This allows Shabbat to be a day of respite and rest even for the convicted felon on “death row”. We can also look at the Shabbat reminder in a different way. You may not kindle fire in YOUR DWELLINGS, wherever they may be, but you may - nay, you must - kindle fire (and do certain other Melachot) in THE DWELLING, the Mikdash. (That is, when specifically commanded to do so by G-d.) This can explain the specific placement of the “repeat” of the prohibition of kindling fire. Tif'eret Y'honatan suggests a novel reason for singling out FIRE. Since we are prohibited from doing Melacha on Shabbat because G-d rested from Creation on the first Shabbat, and since fire was not "in the picture" until the first Motza'ei Shabbat, perhaps kindling of fire is not an equal member of the family of prohibited Melachot. Comes the pasuk here to set the record straight. Fire is not only one of the 39 categories, it is the flagship of the LAMED-TET MELACHOT. [P> 35:4 (26)] Aside from the first three p'sukim, the rest of the sedra deals with the building of the Mishkan. Parshat T'ruma gave us the command and instructions, Vayaqhel tells us of the carrying out of the instructions. One senses an impatient excitement concerning the job at hand. Moshe speaks to the people and tells them that which G-d has commanded. (Note the similar
terminology the Torah uses when Moshe tells about Shabbat and about
the Mikdash.) Then each part of the Mishkan and its furnishings is mentioned in detail. After the people heard what Moshe had to say, they left the meeting (apparently enthused and anxious to get busy). One can speculate, based on the sequence we are presented with in the Torah, that there was a fair amount of guilt from the Golden Calf that was motivating the People. The phrase SHABBAT SHABBATON appears 6 times in the Torah. Twice it refers to Yom Kippur, once to the Shmita year. One other time it might be talking about Shabbat, but possibly about Yom Kippur. The first two times the phrase appears are in Ki Tisa and Vayakhel. Both times are in the context of building the Mikdash. One of the commentaries suggests that when one does “regular” work during his week, then Shabbat is Shabbat. But when we spend our six work-days in “holy-work”, such as building the Mikdash (but not just that), then our Shabbat is further elevated, and is described as Shabbat Shabbaton. Many people are moved to give generously in response to Moshe's appeal. Men and women all give (there are different interpretations as to what the wording in the pasuk indicates). In addition to donations, men, and more so women, donated their talents in weaving, dyeing, woodwork, metal- work, etc. Repeated reference is made to the hearts of the people being in what they were doing. This was a genuine positive response to G-d's and Moshe's call to build the Mishkan. The leaders of the
Tribes supplied the precious stones for the shoulder-pieces of the
Eifod and for the Choshen of the Kohen Gadol, and spices and oil for
the Incense and the Anointing oil. [S> 36:8 (6)] When G-d commanded Moshe about the Mishkan, He first commanded the making of the Aron, Shulchan, and Menora. Then, the roofing layers - the Mishkan, the Ohel, and the Orot. Only then were the wall boards and foundation sockets brought into the picture. In the carrying out of the commands, a more "practical" plan was followed. The structure and then the furnishings. But how can Moshe and Bezalel deviate from the commands of G-d? You can't just do whatever you want in this kind of thing. Commentaries say that Moshe and Bezalel requested and received per- mission from G-d to take the more human, practical approach. In this portion, the three layers of ceiling are presented. Note that the first layer was a beautiful, multicolored weave and the fasteners were gold. [P> 36:14 (6)] Over that came the more practical, less attractive, less complicated, weather-resistant Ohel of goat hair. This layer was not seen from inside the Mishkan, and might not have been seen from the outside either, according to the opinion that the Tachash and Red-dyed sheep skin covering (which was also attractive) was not just on top, but down the sides of the Mishkan as well. [S> 36:20 (19)] Next the Torah describes the construction of the wall-planks of the Mishkan from acacia wood. There were 48 planks - 20 each on the north and south walls, and 8 on the west wall. Each plank was covered with gold. (According to Rav Aryeh Kaplan z”l, the gold covering was extremely thin - he calculated it at 1/100 of an inch thick.) Each plank was inserted into two foundation sockets of silver. The Torah describes in detail the rods, bolts, rings that held the wall planks together. The Parochet to hang between the Kodesh and the Kodesh Kodoshim, the Masach for the front of the Mishkan, and the Masach for the front of the courtyard were similar in style and material to the first ceiling layer. With the structure completed, next came the Aron and the Shulchan. [P> 37:1 (9)] The Aron is described in the same detail as when it was first commanded back in Parshat T’ruma. This is so for all parts of the Mishkan, not just the Aron. The Aron consisted of an open-top box of wood, plated with gold inside and out. (Some describe it as three nested boxes - the outer and inner of thin gold and the middle one of wood, which gave support to the Aron and the lid - Kaporet and K’ruvim). Even the thickness of the wood was covered with gold, so that none of the wood was visible. [P> 37:10 (7)] This
parsha contains the details of the Shulchan. In T’ruma, the command
to build the Shulchan and its utensils was followed by the command
to put the Lechem HaPanim onto the shelves of the Shulchan. Here in
Vayaqhel, the mention of Lechem HaPanim is still to come. Did you know... even though the Torah commands that the Menora be made of gold, it may be made of other precious metals, if gold is not available. Furthermore, the requirement of MIKSHA ACHAT, one solid piece, only applies to the Menora when it is made of gold. And furthermore, a non-gold Menora, which is just as “kosher” for the Beit HaMikdash as a gold one, does not need the decorative orbs, cups, and flowers. Without these restrictions, it is much easier to make a Menora for use in the next Beit HaMikdash, until we get the gold and full details of the Menora’s form. In fact, there is a silver Menora in the Temple Institute in the Old City, that is waiting to function in the Third Beit HaMikdash until we will be able to make a proper gold one. May we see it put to use in our time. [P> 37:25 (5)] Next, the Golden Altar (a.k.a. Incense Altar, a.k.a. Inner Altar) is described. After this Mizbei'ach was made, the Anointing Oil and Incense were compounded. Just an observation...
In the first presentation of the Mishkan, the Golden Altar is found
in Parshat T’tzaveh. The Mizbei’ach for the korbanot, which was
outside the Mishkan, which is the next topic here in Vayaqhel, was
presented in T’ruma. [S> 38:1 (7)] The External Altar, Copper Altar, Earth Altar (because it was filled with earth when the camp rested and the Mishkan was erected) is described. Almost all korbanot were brought on this Mizbei'ach. It was much larger than the Golden Altar. [S> 38:8 (1)] The final vessel described is the Washing Basin and its Stand. It was made of copper. Tradition tells us that the copper came from the mirrors of the Israelite women. At first, Moshe did not want to accept them because of the vanity associated with mirrors. G-d, however, told Moshe how very precious this gift was in His eyes, because they reminded Him (so to speak) of the role Jewish women played in the redemption of the people from Egypt. [S> 38:9 (12)] Finally, the courtyard is described. [S> 38:21 (3)] The sedra of P'kudei begins with an accounting of the materials collected for use in the construction of the Mishkan, its furnishings, and the garments of the Kohanim. SDT We are taught from the fact that Moshe Rabeinu gave a voluntary accounting of the materials, that a person in the position of collecting monies for the community must conduct himself in such a way that he will always be above suspicion. Even if the individual is completely trustworthy, he should take measures to avoid the possibility of appearing improper. The work of assembling and dismantling the Mishkan throughout the years of wandering in the Wilderness was the domain of the tribe of Levi, under the supervision and leadership of Itamar b. Aharon HaKohen. The chief artisans of the Mishkan, the Torah reminds us, were Bezalel from Yehuda and Aholiav from Dan. [S> 38:24 (9)] The
Torah next details the amounts of gold, silver, and copper which
were collected for the Mishkan and its vessels. The Torah also lists
the uses of the different metals. Then the Torah mentions the
different dyed wools (sky-blue, purple, red - the shades of color
are debated - e.g. sky-blue - at what time of day?) that were used
in the making of the sacred garments of the Kohen Gadol, and for the
cloths that covered (and protected) the sacred items of the Mishkan
during the traveling from place to place in the Midbar. [S> 39:6 (2)] Two onyx stones (Avnei Shoham) were attached to the shoulder straps of the Eifod. The names of the 12 tribes (actually, it was the 12 sons of Yaakov) were engraved on the stones, six on each stone. [P> 39:8 (14)] This
parsha contains the detailed description of the CHOSHEN. In addition
to the fabric of these two garments, there were gold settings for
the stones, gold rings and chains for attaching Choshen & Eifod. The hem of the ME'IL was fringed with alternating bells of gold and pompoms of colored wools. According to Rambam, there were 72 bells in all, 36 in the front and 36 in the back. Ramban says that the bells were embedding within the RIMONIM. Most other commentaries say that the bells alternated with RIMONIM. [S> 39:27 (3)] The KUTONET, a long-sleeved, floor-length garment was woven of white linen. All Kohanim wore a KUTONET. Each had it custom-fitted, since it is forbidden to do AVODA in the Mikdash if the garment was either two long or too short, or frayed or soiled. A turban of linen was worn by the Kohen Gadol in one style, to accommodate the TZITZ. Regular Kohanim wore their turban in a different style. The belt or sash, AVNEIT, was woven from the three colors of wool and from linen. It was unusually long (32 AMOT, approx. 15 meters, about 50 feet) and therefore needed to be wound around the kohein's waist many times. (Some say that the AVNEIT was worn above the waist.) The winding produced a prominent bulge around his waist which he felt whenever his hands were at his sides. This served as a constant reminder to the Kohein of the seriousness of the service in the Beit HaMikdash. The AVNEIT was Shaatnez, as was the Choshen and Eifod. There are different opinions as to whether the regular kohen wore an AVNEIT of pure linen or of the same mixed weave of the Kohein Gadol's AVNEIT. [S> 39:30 (2)] Next comes the TZITZ, a.k.a. NEZER HAKODESH, made of pure gold and fastened around the KG's head with ribbons of T'cheilet wool. The TZITZ was embossed with the words KODESH TO HASHEM. There are many different opinions as to how the words were formed from the gold of the Tzitz, and in what order and orientation relative to each other. The TZITZ was like a royal crown for the Kohein Gadol, yet it was also meant to humble him greatly. [S> 39:32 (1)] Thus, all the work of the parts of the Mishkan and garments of the Kohanim came to an end. (All that remained was to put everything together and in its right place.) SDT Talmud Yerushalmi notes that the phrase, "as G-d had commanded Moshe" appears 18 times in P'kudei. Correspondingly, we have 18 brachot in our weekday Amida (the connection between Service in the Mikdash and Davening is obvious). [P> 39:33 (11)] All the
components of the Mishkan, its vessels, and the sacred garments were
brought to Moshe following the completion of the work by the many
men and women who voluntarily contributed their talents to the
Mishkan. Moshe inspected all of the work and found it to be
consistent with what G-d had commanded to be done. The Torah once again enumerates all of the components of the Mishkan. And repeats over and over again that the People did everything that G-d had commanded Moshe. Here's a thought... The
emphasis upon the people doing as commanded stands in harsh contrast
to the Golden Calf, which was not at all what G-d had commanded. We
can see a rebuke every time the point is made that, "this time we
listened, but what happened a couple of months ago..." (To be sure,
it is complimentary, that we did as commanded, but we can also see
an implied rebuke.) Then the Shulchan and Menora were put in their places, followed by the Golden Mizbei'ach. The MASACH was then hung from the posts at the entrance to the Mishkan. The Copper Mizbeiach was then place in front of the Mishkan, opposite its entrance. The KIYOR and its base were then placed between the Mishkan and the Mizbei'ach, slightly to the side. The courtyard curtains were then hung from their posts. Following all this, Moshe was to anoint all the components of the Mishkan and sanctify them. Then the Mizbei'ach and its vessels were anointed, and the Laver as well. Then the Kohanim were brought forward. After proper ablutions, they were clothed in their sacred garments and anointed. Note that Aharon's sons were also anointed. Regular kohanim are not; they were exceptions. It gave them a status of Kohen Gadol. Aharon's sons needed to be anointed, because they weren't kohanim by birth, as opposed to all other kohanim throughout all generations. (Pinchas is the only exception, and he was given the status of kohein by G-d.) [S> 40:17 (3)] And it came to pass that on the first day of Nissan, in the second year out of Egypt (almost), the Mishkan was completed. In this portion, the Torah spells out the step-by- step procedures of finally carrying out the commands of Parshiyot T'ruma, T'tzaveh, beginning of Ki Tisa, all of Vayakhel. ADANIM (foundations – logical, no?), wall boards, braces for the walls, pillars for the curtains. Coverings. [S> 40:20 (2)] Then the LUCHOT go into the ARON, the carrying poles are inserted into their rings, the lid (KAPORET) is placed on the ARON and the complete ARON is placed into the Mishkan. When in position, the PAROCHET is hung between what now becomes the Holy of Holies (with the ARON) and the rest of the Mishkan. [S> 40:22 (2)] Then the SHULCHAN is set in place (north wall of the Mishkan) and the LECHEM HAPANIM is placed on the shelves of the SHULCHAN. [S> 40:24 (2)] The MENORA goes in place next, opposite the SHULCHAN (on the south wall). Then the oil cups are placed on the tops of the seven branches of the Menora. [S> 40:26 (2)] The
Golden Mizbei’ach is then set in the middle of the KODESH and
KETORET is offered on it. [S> 40:30 (3)] The LAVER (KIYOR) was set between the Mishkan and Mizbei’- ach, and it was filled with water. Kohanim were required to wash hands and feet before approaching the Mizbei’ach or the Mishkan. [S> 40:33 (1)] Finally came the poles and curtains of the courtyard and the curtain at its entrance. And the whole task was completed. [P> 40:34 (5)] In the final 5 p'sukim of Sh'mot, the Torah tells us that Moshe was not able to approach the Mishkan because it was "covered by a Cloud". Only when the cloud lifted was Moshe able to approach. The Cloud was also that which signaled the people to travel or to remain encamped. The Cloud was there by day and the Pillar of Fire by night. Thus ends the Book of
Sh'mot, with the stage set, so to speak, for the Book of Vayikra,
Torat Kohanim. The Maftir contains
several mitzvot — the Jewish Calendar [4], to slaughter the K.P.
[5], to eat it [6], not to eat it rare or cooked [7], not to leave
over any of K.P. to the morning [8], to destroy Chametz from one's
possession [9], to eat matza on Seder night [10], not to possess
Chametz on Pesach [11], not to eat any foods that contain Chametz
[12]. We also find the source of SHMURA MATZA and the source of the
permitted M'LACHOT on Yom Tov. There is a requirement for intent in the five categories of payments. 1. Injury: If Reuven injures Shimon he must compensate him for injury. It is not necessary for Reuven to have intent to strike Shimon to be liable for the category of injury when he injures Shimon. This is because Reuven is always deemed forewarned regarding his actions. In Hebrew this is called, “Adam mu'ad l’olam” (a person is always deemed forewarned.) Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, one of the leading Rabbinic personalities of our times, told me that he heard from the great Torah giant, Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveichik, that halacha paraphrases Descarte’s “cogito ergo sum” (I think therefore I am) as to say “I am responsible therefore I exist. ”This is true whether Reuven acts deliberately or inadvertently, whether he is awake, asleep or drunk. Reuven is liable even if the injury results from an accident that has some elements of inadvertence. He is not liable if the accident results from something that can be called “entirely accidental” or from an act of God. He is also not liable if Shimon contributes to his becoming injured, whereby he has assumed the risk of becoming injured. Some examples: a) Reuven is only liable for injuries that he causes while asleep if when he went to sleep Shimon and he lay down at the same time or if Shimon was already sleeping there. Reuven in his sleep turns over and injures Shimon or tears his clothing. Reuven is deemed forewarned even when he is asleep and he is liable to Shimon. b) If first Reuven goes to sleep and thereafter Shimon lies down next to him and then Reuven, in his sleep turns over and injures Shimon or tears his clothing, Reuven is not liable since Shimon has contributed to the injury and/or damage. The same holds true if after Reuven is asleep Shimon places an object, his own or someone else’s, next to Reuven and Reuven in his sleep, turns over and breaks it; Reuven is not liable since Shimon has contributed to the damage. If turning onto the vessels injures Reuven, Shimon is liable to him. c) Reuven goes to sleep on the edge of a roof and is then blown off the roof by a normal type of wind. Reuven falls on Shimon and injures him. Reuven is liable for up to four of the categories of damage, but not for humiliation. He is liable since it is inadvertence bordering on the intentional. He should not have slept there if a normal type of wind could blow him down. He is not liable for humiliation since he did not intend to injure anyone. d) Reuven goes to sleep on the edge of a roof and is blown off the roof by an unusual wind. (He would not have been blown off by a usual wind.) Reuven falls on Shimon and injures him. Reuven is liable only for injury, since the damage is caused inadvertently. He is not liable for the other four categories for the same reason. If the wind was particularly unusual, such as a hurricane wind, then Reuven would not be liable of it blew him off the roof since this is deemed entirely accidental. e) Reuven injures his wife during marital intercourse. Although he injured her inadvertently, he is liable for up to four of the categories of damage, excepting humiliation. f) Shimon says to Reuven, “blind my eye, or cut off my hand with the understanding that you will not be liable,” and Reuven does so; Reuven is liable for up to all five categories of payment. It is presumed that one would not usually consent to carrying out such treatment. g) Reuven has in his possession a coat or jar belonging to Shimon and Shimon says to Reuven, “Tear my coat or break my jar with the understanding that you will not be liable”, and Reuven does so, he is liable. h) Reuven does not have in his possession a coat or jar belonging to Shimon and Shimon says to Reuven, “Tear my coat or break my jar.” If Reuven does so, he is not liable even if Shimon did not say, “you will not be liable.” This is an example of Shimon contributing to the damages. i) Reuven and Levi injure Shimon at the same time. They are both liable and the payments are apportioned by Beth Din. (The law is the same no matter how many people participate in the beating of Shimon.) If Reuven acted with intent to injure and Levi had no such intent, Reuven pays for up to all five categories of damage and Levi pays for up to four categories and is free of paying for humiliation. j) Shimon enters onto Reuven’s property without permission. Reuven, while casting Shimon off his property, injures him. If Reuven could have removed Shimon from his property without injuring him, Reuven is liable. (While Reuven has the right to evict Shimon he does not have the right to injure him, unless it cannot be done in any other way.) If he could not have removed Shimon without injuring him when Shimon resisted, Reuven is not liable. Reuven is also not liable if Shimon works for Reuven such as a house boy and Reuven suspects Shimon of stealing and orders him off the property, even if Shimon has not been paid yet. (This speaks of a case in which Reuven has some proof that Shimon is dishonest.) If Shimon resists leaving and Reuven injures Shimon while evicting him, he is not liable for the injury; Shimon has contributed to his becoming injured. k) Shimon enters onto Reuven’s property without permission and Reuven is not aware that Shimon is there. Reuven does an act that results in Shimon being injured. Reuven is not liable, for this is a true accident. However, if Reuven is injured because Shimon is there, although Reuven is not aware of Shimon’s presence, Shimon is liable to Reuven because Shimon contributed to his injuries. If Reuven knew or became aware of Shimon’s presence and Reuven was injured, such as tripping over Shimon, Shimon is not liable. l) Levi sees Reuven beating Shimon and cannot save Shimon except by hitting Reuven. If Levi does so he is not liable to Reuven. Next, IYH we shall discuss other examples, and discuss the liability in these cases for the other four categories of damages. The subject matter of
this lesson is more fully discussed in volume X chapter 421 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 "Yitschak entreated:
prayed abundantly and urged according to R' Yochanan in the Midrash
or as a pitchfork that overturns the decree according to R' Yitschak
(Yevamot 64a) or as one bores or penetrates a wall (Pesikta Zutresa).
Yitschak prayed for both of them since both he and Rivka were
barren, as we learn from the similarity of language with Manoach and
his wife, parents of Samson [Maharam of Rotenburg)." When there was
no doubt that Rivka was barren, Yitschak took her to Har HaMoriah,
to the site of his Akeida, to pray. He stood in one corner and
prayed while she stood opposite him and prayed. He prayed: May the
sons promised to me all be born from this saintly woman while she
prayed: May all my sons be from this tzaddik" (Bereishit Rabba,
63)). "He began to doubt that the Abrahamic Covenant would be
through somebody from Lavan's family so he prayed particularly
referring to Rivka, his wife" (Rabbi S. R. Hirsch). The text tells
us that his prayers, rather than hers, were answered, since one who
prays on behalf of another is listened to more carefully: "a
prisoner cannot free himself from jail". "Understanding 'Nochach'
used by the text as meaning 'for the sake of', teaches of Yitschak's
great love for Rivka. He did not take her maid-servant as did his
father take Hagar nor did take other wives as did his son, even
though he had to wait 20 years after the marriage until Rivkah's
barrenness ended" (Radak). "From Yevamot (64a) we understand 'nochach'
not as opposite but rather on the same plane, equal to his wife" (Kuzari).
"Although Yitschak had already been promised children, he begged
Hashem that they should be from this worthy woman opposite him" (Sforno); When Rivkah felt the struggle in her womb she enquired of other woman whether such pain and struggle was their normal experience in childbirth and when they told her that it was not, she went to enquire from the prophet of G-d, Shem (Ibn Ezra). Perhaps she felt that in that case there was a danger to her life from the strange birth pain, or perhaps that she would give birth to a stillborn child so that her yearning for sons was misplaced and exaggerated. -d assured her that none of these applied but that she would bear two nations and two spiritually different groups, who would eternally war with each other to try and impose their philosophies on the world. Abrabanel writes that she was concerned that her child would be partially evil and partially saintly, such division being worse than complete evil. "We learn (Sotah 13a) that Eisav tried to prevent Yaakov's burial at Maarat HaMachpela, claiming that as the first-born it belonged to him. Chushim ben Dan who was deaf, saw the commotion and killed him, thus fulfilling Rivka's prophecy that they would die at the same time. Chushim had to stab him in the back since his face was identical to Yaakov's. Being so similar in appearance and born as twins to the same two tzaddikim, they were like two vines of identical stock, planted in identical types of soil with similar climatic condition, yet the one, Yaakov, yielded quality wine but the other, Eisav was vinegar" (Shem Mi Shmuel). This is the 121st
installment in Dr. Tamari’s series on “Tanach and its messages for
our times” Q: I grew up in a standard Orthodox house in which we scrubbed and cleaned for a month before Pesach, but, on the night of bedikat chametz, we did a ceremonious bedika, which was unlikely to uncover chametz. After learning the relevant gemarot, I understand that the bedika on the night of the 14th of Nisan should be a serious search for chametz. What should we really be doing? A: In terms of classical sources, your observation is correct. The gemara does not discuss the cleaning we do; it does spell out the serious job one should do on the night of the 14th. However, already in the time of the Rishonim, the phenomenon you discuss existed. The Terumat Hadeshen (15th century, Ashkenaz - I, 13) reports that many people would sweep (clean?) the house a few days before Pesach, put a few pieces of bread in a few rooms, and stop the bedika when they found them. He rejected the practice based on the Mordechai (Pesachim 535) who said that sweeping the house beforehand is not sufficient. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 433:11) concurred. A few centuries later, the Sha’arei Teshuva (ad loc.) cited and justified the practice you refer to. Does the practice conflict with the Terumat Hadeshen’s ruling or has the situation changed so that the Terumat Hadeshen would agree? The main reason the Mordechai mentions for requiring bedika even on a cleaned house is to avoid distinguishing between one bedika and another. In other words, Chazal instituted a time for doing bedika, on the eve of the 14th, and one should not say that he previously obviated the need. The Terumat Hadeshen already points out that if this were the only issue, it would have been sufficient to fulfill the mitzva of bedika on a single room. However, he continues, sweeping the house does not do a complete job, as it does not get into the holes and cracks, and it is, therefore, not a valid replacement for bedika. The Sha’arei Teshuva addresses this, saying that since those who do a cursory job on the 14th clean very carefully beforehand, this is sufficient. The Magen Avraham (433:20) raises another issue. Chazal required that the bedika be done by candlelight at night or in an area with direct sunlight during the day. Few are careful to check all areas they clean in this manner. Furthermore, the Taz (433:1), Bach (433) and others say that even if one did a halachic bedika on the 13th at night, he must repeat it on the 14th, the time Chazal instituted. The Chok Ya’akov (ad loc.: 23) and Pri Chadash (ad loc.: 11) say that one can fulfill the obligation of bedika on a night prior to the 14th. The Ba’er Heitiv (ad loc.: 1) premises this opinion on the condition that he is careful that chametz be kept away from the checked areas. However, we can still justify the prevalent practice even according to those who say that the bedika can be done only on the 14th, as follows. Only those areas into which chametz is sometimes brought need to be searched (Pesachim 2a). One can then claim that areas which were cleaned and into which people were subsequently careful not to bring chametz become places that do not have chametz. Thus, a superficial perusal of the house to make sure that indeed no chametz got into this room or that may be considered checking the relevant parts of the entire house. (This is apparently the Aruch Hashulchan’s (433:13) under- standing; see also Piskei Teshuvot 433:8). According to some, this logic makes the minhag to put out pieces of bread to find necessary because otherwise there is nothing to check (see Sha’arei Teshuva 432:12). It would be wrong to imply that all poskim fully accept the practice you mention. The Mishna Berura seems to neither embrace it nor reject it. Rav Ovadya Yosef (Yechaveh Da’at I, 5) says that it is proper to do a serious bedika on the 14th. However, our orientation is to instruct people to follow a prevalent minhag when it is justifiable, as this one is. If one wants to be more stringent, that is his business. 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 From "A Candle by Day"
by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein The Gaon of Vilna explains that the very first act of creation within the physical world was the creation of time. It is within this framework of time that all other aspects of life exist. And here we must differentiate between two dimensions of time. The first is the down to earth system of time, the time of the natural world, which is symbolized by the sun. The second system is associated with the moon, a system which is dynamic, irregular, and allows for constant new beginnings. While, on one hand,
"Jewish time" is the non-static time of the moon - HACHODESH HAZEH
LACHEM, from the very beginning the Torah makes sure that we realize
that we also maintain a very close bond with the natural world, the
time system associated with the sun, which, in the words of Rashi,
constitutes an act of giving us a portion of this physical world,
LATET LAHEM NACHALAT GOYIM. Within the world of time we express our
connection with the physical world through the intercalation of
months, connecting the lunar system of time with the solar calendar. Rabbi Ari Waxman,
Sha'alvim In Parshiyot T'ruma and T'tzaveh Hashem gives the instructions on how to build the Mishkan (Tabernacle). In Vayakhel and P'kudei we hear about its being constructed. For example the description of how to build the ARON (Ark) is mentioned in verses 25:10-22 and its actual construction is described in 37:1-9. In a previous parsha we wrote about the poles of the Ark, this week we will write about the cover (KAPORET) on top of the ARON. This cover was made of gold and had one Cherub at each end. The Cherubs were creatures like birds (Rashbam) with wings. The Gemara in Chagiga (13b) says that the word K'RUV (cherub) means KAF - like RAVIA- a baby. Everyone has seen pictures of angels with baby faces and never realized that the source for this depiction is the Gemara. Rashi says that one was male and the other was female. Since the ARON housed the ASERET HADIBROT (Ten Commandments), it symbolized Torah study. The Cherubs on top, with childlike faces hints to the fact that everyone, males and females, should start learning Torah from a young age (Abarbanel). Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv in his book Chochma U'Mussar states that the Cherubs were placed on top of the ARON to teach us that we should always consider ourselves as young children in relationship to our Torah learning. No matter how much one knows there is always still so much to learn. It is always as if we have just begun learning. That is also why a Torah scholar is always called a TALMID CHACHAM,which can mean, the student of a wise man. The greater wisdom one has the more one realizes that they are lacking wisdom. Rav Simcha quotes Socrates who stated that most scholars feel that to be a wise man one must know the answer to every question. He on the other hand realized that the more he learned the more he was aware how little he knew. We should also treat our learning of Torah with the excitement and enthusiasm of very young children. Every new experience and skill or knowledge that children learn fills them with more energy. The Hebrew for Cherub (K'RUV)
has another meaning: cabbage. So this week's recipe is for a cabbage
(K'RUV) salad with golden apples since the cherubs were made out of
gold. According to Ibn Ezra, both terms indicate that the Torah draws our attention to the complete structure of the Mishkan, replete with all its vessels and utensils, in contrast to the narrower view, which tends to evoke only the Ark that housed the stone Tablets of Testimony. On a Midrashic plane, Rashi sees in the double phrase a future reference to the two Temples that were a Mashkon, collateral for the Jewish people, taken from us until such time that we will be deserving of the Third Bet Hamikdash (Bimheira B'yameinu). For R' Bachya, these
two terms symbolize the Mishkan in Heaven that mirrors the Mishkan
on Earth. No wonder, then, that in referring to the completion of
the Mishkan, the Torah says that Bnei Yisrael performed all the
labor, using the word Avoda, rather than the technical word Melacha
(from which are derived the forbidden categories of work on
Shabbat). To paraphrase Ramban, who sees the people's construction
of the Mishkan comparable to the Avoda of the Kohanim, the idea of
building a Sanctuary should be a labor of love. The Gemara (Pesachim 57a) preserves a popular "street ballad" about the Sadducean Herodian and post-Herodian High Priests. The ballad shows the contempt and enmity of the people for these individuals. Woe is me, for the
house of Boethus: woe is me because of their clubs! With rare exceptions, these "spiritual leaders", foisted upon the people by the Roman and Herodian authorities were well known for their strong-arm methods and violence. They were insidious in their slander and secret denunciations of their opponents to the occupation authorities. The historian Joseph Klausner correctly noted that, "There could be scarcely a more dreadful and hateful picture of the High Priests and their families." [The wicked Ishmael ben Pavi referred to above is not to be confused with a later righteous Kohein Gadol of the same name. Agrippas II in 59CE appointed this later Ishmael ben Pavi and he was popular among the people and very well thought of by the Sages. His mother made him white garments for the Avoda of Yom Kippur that cost the incredible sum of 100 Minae. After the conclusion of Yom Kippur, "he handed them over to the community" (Yoma 35b). He was one of the few Kohanim Gedolim who burnt a Parah Aduma (Para 3:5). "When Ishmael ben Pavi died, the splendor of the priesthood ceased" (Sota 9:15).] However, the Beit HaMikdash required a Kohein Gadol; the awesome Avoda of Yom Kippur was valid only when performed by a consecrated High Priest. The Kohein Gadol was the man who, arrayed in pure white linen garments as his ancestor Aaron before him, entered Kodesh HaKodashim and sought forgiveness for the sins of Am Yisrael. Whatever his moral state may have been, and no matter who appointed him, he could not be ignored. Nevertheless, the High Priest's leadership role in Yahadut was severely limited. It was Moshe Rabeinu, not his brother Aharon Hakohein who "received the Torah from Sinai and 'delivered' it to Yehoshu'a, and Yehoshu'a to the Z'keinim (elders), and the Z'keinim to the N'vi'im (prophets) and the N'vi'im to the Anshei Knesset Hagedola - the 'men of the great Assembly…" (Avot 1:2). In contrast to the corrupt quisling High Priests of that age, the Pharisaic sages - the successors of the Anshei Knesset Hagedola - were renowned for their high ethical standards and for their moral sincerity. "Moreover, the Pharisees are friendly to one another, and are for the exercise of concord, and regard for the public;but the behavior of the Sadducees (the party of the High Priests) one towards another is in some degree wild, and their conversations with those that are of their own party is as barbarous as if they were strangers to them" (Josephus, Wars bk. 2:8). Josephus further records how 6000 Pharisees put their lives on the line and refused to swear allegiance to Herod. Surprisingly, Herod refrained from harming them (Antiquities bk. 17:3). "These (the Sages) have so great a power over the multitude, that when they say anything against the king, or against the High Priest, they are presently believed" (Antiquities bk. 13:10). In fact, " …they (the Sadducees) are able to do almost nothing of themselves, for when they become magistrates… they bind themselves to the notions of the Pharisees, because otherwise the multitude would not otherwise bear them" (Antiquities bk. 18:2). Recall the Talmudic quote regarding the remark of the father of the Sadducean High Priest to his son, "Even though we are Sadducees, we are afraid of the Pharisees" (Yoma 19b). The High Priest was a mere functionary and had no authority to decide Halacha. The disputes between the Sages and their Sadducee opponents regarding the Beit HaMikdash and the Avoda stemmed from a basic difference in their under- standing of the Mikdash and its place in the life of Am Yisrael. The Pharisaic sages conceived of a Beit HaMikdash, which would serve as the spiritual center of all Israel. The Beit HaMikdash as envisioned by the Sages, was a place where all Am Yisrael would be able to feel a sense of participation in the Avoda and thereby develop cognitive bonds and pride in being part of "a holy nation and kingdom of priests" (Sh'mot 19:6). In the Mikdash of the Sages, ongoing expenses were met not by the wealthy classes alone but by the half-shekel Temple tax that was paid yearly by all adult male Israelites (Shekalim 4:1). The philosophical differences between the 2 points of view cannot be overestimated! Most of the Sages came
from a working class background. This partially explains their great
influence among the masses. Hundreds of Pharisaic sages and
thousands of their students supported themselves with the labor of
their own hands. The great sage Hillel was a day laborer (Yoma 35a)
and R. Joshua ben Chanina, who lived in the generation of the
Destruction, was a charcoal burner (Berachot 28a). Such men, who
stressed the value of honest labor, were able to understand the
needs of the people and relate to them. Even most of the
rank-and-file Kohanim followed the leadership of the Sages and many
of them, such as R. Tzadok, his son R. Eleazar, and R. Shimon son of
the deputy Kohein Gadol, R. Yochanan ben Zakkai (?), R. Tarfon and
R. Yosi Hakohein, entered the Yeshivot of the age and became great
sages in their own right. Speaking of VAVs... It
is well-known that most Sifrei Torah today are written so that there
is a VAV at the top of every column except for 5 columns. The
average Sefer Torah has about 245 columns (AMUDIM, they are called),
so almost 98% of the columns in a Torah scroll begin with the letter
VAV. This is a Scribal Tradition; it is not a requirement. The
Tradition for the five columns referred to above, and one more
column that begins with a VAV is strong. Other than these 6 columns,
there are no rules about how a column must begin. Because of the
standardization of from what new Torahs are copied, there is much
more uniformity from Torah to Torah. Join us on Sunday April
30 for an evening filled with lots of sound advice and answers to a
lot of misconceptions... including: Why is it that over 40% of the
high school graduates flunk their IDF physical? Guest speakers:
Bella Mankowitz, Dr. Michael Finerman, Danny Simckes, Dr. Zvi Symon,
Sid Skippy Marcus - Watch for further details in coming weeks [The
Parshat Vayakhel-P'kudei Homepage]
|
