Shabbat Parshat
Vayikra HALACHIC TIMES With the molad being on Wednesday afternoon, the first opportunity for K.L. for the 3-day-after-the-molad custom, will be Motza"Sh, April 1st. 7-day people will have to wait until Wednesday the 5th. Kiddush L'vana is an important mitzva every month, but perhaps even more so for Nissan, the chief of the months, given for that position by the One whose Presence we greet with the Kiddush L'vana bracha. Another name for Nissan is Chodesh HaAVIV, the spring month. AVIV has an additional significance by reading it as AV YUD-BET, the father of the 12 (months of the year). During Nissan, when
seeing (preferably 2 or more) fruit trees in blossom, we say BIRKAT
HA-ILANOT. And for us, based on the pasuk in Vayikra (partially quoted in the above box), the grain of salt has great significance. Salt, a pinch will do - even less, is required on all Korbanot that went on the Mizbei’ach. There are a variety of reasons and ideas offered for the requirement of salting a Korban and the prohibition of offering a Korban that has not been salted. Just as people salt their food because it enhances the flavor and enjoyment of the food, so too must we offer food on G-d’s Altar. Not, point out the commentaries, that G-d eats our Korbanot; perish that thought. But we are influenced psychologically by what we do, and meat without salt is literally, as well as connotatively insipid and unsavory. The Midrash tells us that when the waters were separated into Upper and Lower realms, on day two of Creation, the lower waters objected be being distanced from the Divine. It was promised, so to speak, that the people of Israel would salt their korbanot, their offerings before G-d. (Salt is considered a component of water.) Some of the rules of
salting Korbanot are the same as for koshering meat; the link is
important to us. Notice the unique wording in this first pasuk of Vayikra; the method by which G-d communicated with Moshe was different from the prophets and all others. First among the korbanot that the Torah presents is the OLAH (of a bull), the offering that is completely (almost, but not quite - the skins of most OLOT were a gift to the kohanim and were not placed on the Mizbei'ach) consumed on the Mizbei'ach. A common procedure in the bringing of many korbanot is leaning upon the animal before it is slaughtered (S'micha). Many details of korbanot have psychological effects upon the one who brings the korban. The physical contact with the animal gives the korban-bringer a sober realization of the tenuousness of life (his own, not just the animal's). After slaughter, the blood of Sh'chita is collected in a sacred vessel and is then brought to the Mizbei'ach to be poured on it. This procedure is essential for (all) korbanot. The OLAH is skinned (the skin is a gift to the kohanim, as mentioned earlier) and cut into pieces which are placed on the fire of the Mizbei'ach and there completely consumed (meaning, no one eats the meat of an Olah). [S> 1:10 (4)] Male sheep and goats can also be brought as OLAH. The procedures are similar, but not identical. SDT Sacrifices from the cow family are considered to be atonements for the Sin of the Golden Calf. That with which the People sinned can now be used for sacred purposes as a redemption, atonement and Tikun - repair. We often find that the bull is the first presented, discussed, offered, etc. This lends credence to its roll as atonement for the Golden Calf. It is the father trying to clean up his son's mess (as the Para Aduma is spoken of as the mother called upon to clean up after her son, the Eigel (calf). SDT The OLAH is considered by the Talmud to be an atonement for improper thoughts. The CHATAT - sin offering - is brought for (some) improper deeds. The Olah is presented first because usually, improper thoughts precede (and lead to) improper deeds. SDT The opening command concerning Korbanot is, "A person (singular) who offers from among you a sacrifice... they (plural) shall offer their sacrifice." Toldot Yitzchak suggests that since an individual doing a mitzva can have a positive effect on all of Klal Yisrael and the whole world, then his individual sacrifice is really ours, hence the switch to plural. Furthermore, there are aspects of Korbanot that relate to the community, even if the korban at issue is a private one. The wood for the fire, the salt of each korban, the kohanim performing the Avoda - these are all communal aspects that make an individual's korban, our korban. SDT The Ba'al HaTanya explains the wording, "A person who brings from you a korban to HaShem, from the animal..." as the requirement of a korban- bringer to sacrifice the animal within himself upon the Mizbei'ach. The act of a Korban must be personalized and internalized for it to have the effect of bringing us closer (this is the root meaning of KORBAN-KAROV) to G-d. Baal HaTurim says that G-d put Moshe's name before His own in the opening pasuk of Vayikra, to tell us all of the close personal relationship that He had with him. Daat Z'keinim says that
the fact that animal sacrifices are from domesticated mammals (B'HEIMOT)
rather than from wild animals (CHAYOT), shows us G-d's concern for
His people - that He spared us the extra bother of hunting and
trapping that would be necessary if CHAYOT were among the korbanot.
Similarly, bird-korbanot come only from two domesticated types of
dove. These three categories of OLAH - large animal (B'HEIMA GASA), small animals (B'HEIMA DAKA), birds (OFOT) - are counted as one positive command [115,A63 1:3]. SDT Note that the bird offering is called OLAH LA'SHEM, a Burnt Offering to G-d. Although no one eats from an animal OLAH, the skin is a given to a kohen as one of his gifts. The dove is completely consumed on the Mizbei'ach. It is the only korban that is COMPLETELY to HaShem, so to speak. [S> 2:1 (3)] The Torah next describes the MINCHA (not to be confused with our afternoon davening), a meal offering. It consists of flour and oil with a bit of frankincense (L'vona) and differing amounts of water. (Water as an ingredient is not mentioned in the Written Word, but is part of our Oral Tradition.) There are several types of M'nachot that will be described in the coming p'sukim. First, some general procedures that apply to all types of Mincha are described. [S> 2:4 (1)] Next the
Torah describes the first specific type of Mincha - the MAAFEI TANUR,
oven-baked. The Mincha Al Machavat was made famous, so to speak, by the Shabbat Z'mira, Baruch Keil Elyon. In the refrain, we ask G-d to be as pleased with our Shabbat observance as He is (so to speak) with the Mincha Al Machavat. SDT Until this point in
Vayikra, the Torah has described four different types of voluntary
offerings, each one less expensive than the one before it. The bull
is most costly, sheep and goat cost less, but more than a dove. And
a flour and oil offering is the least expensive. The person who
brings the korban is referred to as ADAM, a human, the first time,
and then with the pronoun he, him, his (she, her, hers). Only with
the flour & oil offering is the bringer referred to as NEFESH, a
soul. This, says Rashi, refers to the poor person, who is the one
who would most likely bring the Mincha. It might not cost a lot, but
the poor person puts his soul into his modest offering, making it no
less significant than an expensive PAR (bull). MitzvaWatch This is so for all mitzvot, not just the ones that defy our logic. To be most effective, so to speak, the thought expressed in the previous paragraph must be applied liberally to all mitzvot. Even a mitzva (maybe, especially a mitzva) that “makes perfect sense to us” should be treated first and foremost as a Divine Command which we must follow because it is there. No korban may be
offered without salt [118,L99 2:13]; every korban must be salted
[119,A62 2:13]. [S> 2:14 (3)] Another type of MINCHA is next described. This one is made from the first grain, and it involves roasting in a perforated vessel. SDT Our table is like
the Mizbei'ach. A famous saying with many different manifestations.
We salt our HaMotzi bread because we are expected to add an element
of spirituality to an otherwise very mundane act of eating. Salt is
a preservative and salt does not spoil. As such, it represents an
element of the eternal in this temporal world. This explanation is
borrowed from that which is written about the mitzva of salting
korbanot, but it applies well to our everyday minhag regarding salt. The element of completeness that is special to the Sh'lamim in that part of the korban is burned on the Mizbei'ach, part is given to the kohen as one of his gifts, and part is returned to the korban's owner for him and his family to eat. "Everyone" benefits from a Sh'lamim. In that respect, it is the complete korban. Sh'lamimcan be brought from male and female animals, of cow, goat, or sheep. The Torah outlines the procedures for SH'LAMIM, which are basically similar, but with some differences from animal to animal. [P> 3:6 (6)] Sometimes, goats and sheep are lumped together as TZON, animals of the flock. They are referred to as B'HEIMA DAKA, the smaller livestock, as opposed to CATTLE. In the case of Korbanot, there are differences between the two and therefore, they are treated separately. The details of the Sh'lamim of sheep is presented first. Male or female. S'micha. What goes on the Mizbei'ach, etc. [P> 3:12 (6)] Then
Sh'lamim from goats is presented. On close inspection of the p'sukim
(without checking in Mishna or Gemara), the only difference between
the sheep and the goat is the ALYA, the fat of the tail area. In a
sheep, it is offered on the Mizbei'ach and for the goat, it is not
mentioned. [P> 4:13 (9)] Similarly (but with differences), if the Sanhedrin errs in a decision which causes wide-spread sinning (again, of certain sins), then the leaders of the people are to bring a bull as a sacrifice [120,A68 4:13] (and not each person who acted upon the pronouncement of the Sanhedrin). [P> 4:22 (5)] A leader of the people brings a male goat as his CHATAT. In all cases, the CHATAT is brought for SHOGEG (inadvertent) violations with some level of negligence on the sinner's part that resulted in the sin. A CHATAT is NOT brought for intentional violations. Nor is a CHATAT brought for all sins - only for those whose intentional violation is a capital offense. For example... A person is basically Shomer Shabbat, but never knew that you cannot water grass on Shabbat. Nice hot summer Shabbat afternoon, the person "has mercy" on his yellowing lawn and turns on his sprinklers. When he learns of his mistake, he is required to bring a Korban Chatat (in the time of the Beit HaMikdash). SDT When a leader of
the people shall sin... ASHER NASI YECHETA. The initials of this
phase spell ANI (I, me!) What is likely to lead a leader astray? His
focusing on himself and his losing sight of his responsibilities to
the community he leads. Clarification... If a person sees brown leaves on a house plant and pinches them off to enhance the growth of the plant on Shabbat, he has violated a Rabbinic prohibition. (This Rabbinic prohibition is based on the fact that the act is essentially the same as, and for the same purpose as, pruning leaves on a bush growing in the ground. Pruning is a Torah prohibition. The ban on doing the same with house plants is one of many protective measures of the Sages to protect the Torah from violation.) When the person learns of his error, no Korban is required - just T’shuva - because the act was not a Torah violation. But doing the same with one's rose bushes in the back yard IS a Torah violation and would require a CHATAT, in addition to T’shuva. Also, if a person mistakingly cooked meat in butter, thinking it was parve margarine, this would be a SHOGEG violation of a Torah law, but no CHATAT, because cooking meat in milk is not a capital offense. [P> 4:32 (4)] In the previous parsha, the "animal of choice" for a Chatat was presented first. It is a female goat. This parsha continues with the other acceptable animal for an individual's Chatat, a ewe (female sheep). [P> 5:1 (10)] Another category of sacrifice is the KORBAN OLEH V'YORED [123,A72 5:1], a sliding-scale guilt offering. An example of a sin requiring this korban is suppression of testimony or lying under oath about it. Testifying is an obligation [122,A178 5:1]. The form that the
korban takes depends upon the financial means of the sinner -
goat/sheep or doves. SDT The main animal for
a communal CHATAT (as in the Musaf of Rosh Chodesh and Chagim) or an
individual CHATAT, is the goat. This brings to mind the use of the
goat by Yosef's brothers to deceive their father by dipping Yosef's
coat into goat's blood. The CHATAT for all times contains a reminder
of the terrible behavior of brother to brother. (The goat was also
used by Yaakov to deceive his father, when he posed as Eisav to
receive the bracha.) [S> 5:14 (3)] The ASHAM for sacrilege is a ram. In addition, the violator, who has used the sacred for his own benefit, must make restitution and add one-fifth of the value as a penalty [127,A118 5:16]. Actually, one fourth is added, that amount that becomes one fifth of the total amount. E.g. 100 worth of use + 25 penalty = 125 total payment, the addition of 25 being one fifth of the 125. This is how the penalty called CHOMESH is calculated.) [S> 5:17 (3)] A variation of the ASHAM is brought when one is not sure if he violated the particular prohibition or not. The Conditional Asham is a ram [128,A70 5:17]. [S> 5:20 (7)] The thief is commanded to return that which he stole [130,A194 5:23]. The bringing of the ASHAM for all the specific types of violations is a positive mitzva [129,A71 5:21 - there are other p'sukim that input into this mitzva, since there different types and reasons for bringing an ASHAM]. Thus the Torah ends its introduction to the different types of korbanot. The final 3 p'sukim are
reread for the Maftir. G-d does and will favor
and redeem us, even when we don't deserve it. (Nonetheless, it is
far better to act in such a way as to be worthy of G-d's love of us
and His many acts of kindness on our behalf, for His own sake.) A few more examples: Similarly, if while they are fighting, Reuven calls Shimon a mamzer, this is not grounds for Shimon to be compensated for humiliation. Likewise if Reuven calls Shimon a thief and Shimon responds that Reuven is a mamzer, this is a somewhat automatic verbal response and neither has liability for humiliation. n) Reuven and Shimon have begun a wrestling match. Reuven throws Shimon to the ground and in doing so blinds Shimon’s eye and Reuven is not hurt. Reuven is free of liability. Shimon contributed to his own injuries by engaging in the wrestling match and he assumes the risk of injury. o) Reuven and Shimon are in a non-friendly fight, both having started the fight simultaneously. If Reuven injures Shimon, Reuven is liable. Although Reuven did not intend to hurt Shimon, Reuven is liable because his actions border on “inadvertence close to intentional”. p) While fighting, both Reuven and Shimon are hurt. If Shimon’s injuries are greater than Reuven’s, Reuven must pay the difference between their injuries to Shimon for up to all five categories of damages. If Reuven started hitting Shimon first and then Shimon defended himself, Reuven is liable for all of the injuries he caused and Shimon has no liability for Reuven’s injuries. The same applies if Reuven commenced to hit Shimon and Shimon then hit Reuven intentionally. If Reuven’s wife intervened and tried to stop Shimon from hitting Reuven and Shimon hit Reuven’s wife, Shimon is still free of liability. q) Reuven splits wood in a public street and a piece of wood flies onto Shimon’s property and injures Shimon. Or Reuven is chopping wood on his own property and a piece flies off into the street and injures Shimon; or Reuven is chopping wood on his own property and a piece flies off and injures Shimon on Shimon’s property. In each of these instances, Reuven is liable for up to four categories of damages. Excluding humiliation, since the act was “inadvertent bordering on intentional”. r) Reuven splits wood in a secluded place and Shimon happens to pass by. Shimon is injured by a flying piece of wood. Reuven is not liable for the categories of pain, healing, humiliation and loss of income, since the act was not “inadvertent bordering on intentional”. Reuven is liable for injury since the injury was not entirely accidental. s) Shimon enters Reuven’s carpentry shop, whether with or without permission, and a piece of wood flies off the plank that Reuven is working on and injures Shimon. Reuven is liable for up to four categories of damages and not for humiliation. He is liable since it is anticipated that customers will enter Reuven’s shop; he is liable whether or not he knew that Shimon had entered his shop. There is an opinion that Reuven is not liable unless he knew that Shimon had entered his shop. t) Reuven is seated and a stone is resting in his lap; he is not aware of it or he was aware and has forgotten about it. Reuven stands up and the stone falls and injures Shimon. Reuven is liable for the category of injury since the occurrence is not entirely accidental. He is not liable for the other four categories since it is not at all intentional. u) Reuven intends to throw a stone four yards and it travels eight yards and injures Shimon. Reuven is liable for injury and is not liable of the other four categories of damage. With these examples we have concluded the liability of Reuven for untended assaults insofar as it covers the category of injury, one of the five categories of damages in case Reuven causes injuries to Shimon from an assault. We shall now discuss the other four categories of damages caused by an untended assault. 2. Pain. Reuven is not liable to compensate Shimon for pain unless his actions wee deliberate or “inadvertent and close to intentional”. 3. Healing. Reuven is not liable to compensate Shimon for healing unless his actions were deliberate or “inadvertent and close to intentional”. 4. Loss of income. Here too, Reuven is not liable to compensate Shimon for loss of income unless his actions were deliberate or “inadvertent close to intentional”. 5. Humiliation. Reuven, to be liable for humiliation, must have intended to injure or humiliate a specific person. However, if Reuven intended to humiliate Levi and instead humiliated Shimon he is liable to Shimon for humiliation. Similarly if Reuven intended to humiliate a minor and instead humiliated Shimon, an adult, he must pay Shimon the compensation due to a minor who has been humiliated. For example: (a) Since there must be intent to humiliate or injure Shimon to be liable for humiliation, if Reuven humiliates Shimon while Reuven is asleep, (for example, Reuven spits in his sleep and it lands on Shimon’s face) he is not liable for the category of humiliation. (b) If Reuven does not intend to injure or humiliate Shimon but humiliates him while trying to retrieve Reuven’s possession from Shimon’s premises, he is not liable for humiliation. (c) The officer of the Beth Din, acting under the instructions of Beth Din, beats Reuven the defendant who refuses to appear in Beth Din. Reuven strikes the officer. The officer’s wife comes to his defense and she rescues him by humiliating Reuven. She is not liable. (d) The officer of the Beth Din, in pursuance of his official duties, humiliates Reuven, the defendant, who refuses to abide by the decision of the Beth Din. The officer is not liable. Requesting Divine
Intervention against another The subject matter of
this lesson is more fully discussed in volume X chapters 421 & 422
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 Bearing in mind the importance of water, a scarce commodity in Eretz Yisrael, it is difficult to understand why they destroyed these wells instead of taking them for their own use. "They feared that thereby he would acquire rights in the Land (Chizkuni); [alternatively] they feared that Yitschak would be even greater than Avraham was and would simply take the wells instead of merely using them. They said neither he nor we will have them" [Radak]. The wells were not the only subject of contention, rather the text tells of Yitschak's increased wealth and how despite the famine in the Land, he had harvested an abundant crop; all as a result of G-d's blessing. The resultant envy and malice brought in their wake the expulsion by Avimelech of Yitschak and his camp from their midst, from Gerar and its surroundings. This jealousy of the Philistines is a reflection of the eternal hate and malice towards the alien in all societies. In contrast, our Torah warns us against such attitudes in its repeated injunctions: "You shall love the stranger; you shall not oppress the stranger". The price of galut that we ourselves have suffered as strangers throughout the ages and in many different societies has been this causeless malice and jealousy, and that notwithstanding our great contributions to all of them. "Brit Yitschak, the bond of the second Patriach, with Hashem teaches how He protects us from the avarice and unjustified oppression that is inherent in geirut. In the final stage of galut we will win the respect and recognition of the nations of the world and they themselves will plant us again in our old heritage" (S. R. Hirsch). Harav I. Y. HaKohen Kook taught that the recognition of the nations to our right to return home was made by the granting of the Balfour declaration and ratified by the League of Nations; subsequently repeated in the decision of the U.N. Thus, the oath whereby Israel undertook not to revolt against the yoke of the nations has been voided, thereby removing the halakhic objection to organized mass Aliya and statehood. With Yitschak began geirut, the first stage of the 400 years shown to Avraham and yet he is Ish HaAretz more than any of the other Patriarchs. This is not only because he alone never left Eretz Yisrael, but in addition, because the Divine Covenant with him demonstrates the separate and intrinsic Kedusha that the Land possess. When Yitzhak went to the land of the Philistines because of the famine, there are echoes of Avraham's going to Egypt under similar conditions, however G-d commanded him to remain in the Land. "Rabbi Hoshia said, just as the Olah sacrifice becomes defective if it goes out of the curtains of the Mishkan, so will Yitshakif he goes to Chutz AaAretz [owing to the tum’a that exists everywhere out of Eretz Yisrael] (Sanhedrin, 11a). "Actually, there are two distinct types of kedusha; one kedusha of Torah and mitzvoth and the other the independent intrinsic kedusha of Eretz Yisrael. The latter continues to exist even after Israel has been expelled from the Land as punishment for their loss, through their non-observance of the kedusha of Torah and mitzvot"(Chatam Sofer). The real and ultimate purpose of the mitzvot, and therefore their real kedusha, is their observance in Eretz Yisrael, as is repeatedly expressed in the Torah. That this applies not only to mitzvot hateluyot ba'aretz may be seen in the following commentary by Rashi: "Why does the Torah mention longevity in the Land as a the reward for observance of mezuza, since it is not a mitzva hateluya ba'aretz? We are to keep them in Chutz LaAretz so that when we return they will not be strange or foreign to us" (D’varim 11:20-21). Furthermore, the very promise of the Land to Avraham's descendants (B’reishit 12:13) is not associated with any Torah mitzva as it preceded the covenant of Brit Mila whereby Hashem became their G-d (B’reishit 17:7), thereby demonstrating the Land's independent kedusha. This kedusha is realized by acts of settlement and all that is connected with them. "A person who dwells in Eretz Yisrael but does not earn a livelihood there or lives from gifts from Chutz LaAretz, does not fulfill Mitzvat Yishuv HaAretz" (Avnei Nezer, Yoreh Deah, 454). [Ed. note: an opinion; not everyone agrees.] "Dwell [this is the language of command] in the Land [make shepherds dwellings (Radak)]; sojourn in this land [thus he would demonstrate love for the Land (Netziv);he acquired it with a better kinyan than did Avraham, since he ploughed, sowed, reaped etc. in it (Or HaChayim) and I shall be with you [even though there is a famine, so you will not lack pastures (Soforno] and bless you [with wealth, without leaving the Land (Soforno)]" (B’reishit 26:2). "It is forbidden to dwell in Chutz LaAretz unless there is a famine [or perhaps other material causes that make dwelling in Eretz Yisrael impossible], and even though then it is permitted, to do so is not an act of righteousness, Midat Chassidut, as we learn from Machlon and Chilyon who went to live in Moav during a famine (Ruth, 1:1-5). Even though one who dies in the tum’a of Chutz LaAretz has atonement for sins if buried in Admat HaKodesh, nevertheless such kedusha is not the same as that received when one is alive there. One should always live in Eretz Yisrael, even in a city that has a majority of gentiles [usually considered to be a place of less kedusha] rather than in a city in Chutz LaAretz even if there is a majority of Jews living there" (Rambam, Hilkhot Melachim, 5: 9-12). All who dwell in Chutz LaAretz, it is as though they worship idols" (Ketubot 110b). This is installment
#122 in Dr. Tamari’s series on “Tanach and its messages for our
times” Some of them are answered by Eretz Hemdah, the Institute for Advanced Jewish Studies, Jerusalem, headed by Rav Yosef Carmel and Rav Moshe Ehrenreich, founded by HaRav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l, to prepare rabbanim and dayanim to serve the National Religious community in Israel and abroad. Ask the Rabbi is a joint venture of the OU, Yerushalayim Network, Eretz Hemdah... and the Israel Center. The following is a Q&A from Eretz Hemdah... Q: During a milchig meal, I saw a crumb on the table, which I assumed was from bread. I put it on my tongue, and then realized it was a crumb from the coating of chicken schnitzel. Of course, I immediately spit it out. Could I continue the milchig meal or was I now flesihig? A: We will analyze the Rishonim’s explanation for waiting six hours (or however long your minhag requires) between eating meat and milk and see what applies to your case. We will then see the Acharonim’s rulings in your case to confirm the analysis. The Gemara (Chulin 105a) requires one to wait the time in between meals after eating fleishig before eating milchig, but not vice versa. Rashi (ad loc.) explains that certain fattiness comes out from the meat one eats which stays in the mouth for quite some time. The Rambam (Ma’achalot Asurot 9:28) says that the issue is the possibility that some meat will remain between the teeth. Many (including the Tur, Yoreh Deah 89) discuss practical differences between the explanations. One is, if one chewed meat in order to take it out of his mouth and feed to a baby (do not pass judgment on the pre-Gerber era). The Rambam would require waiting because it is possible that meat will be between the teeth. Rashi would not require waiting because the taste lingers only when one swallows the meat (see Shach, Yoreh Deah 89:2). Another is, if one finds meat between the teeth after six hours. The Rambam apparently assumes that after so much time, the meat is no longer problematic. According to Rashi, it is assumed to be a problem. We accept the stringencies that follow from both explanations (Tur, ibid.; see Shulchan Aruch & Rama 89:1). If we assume, as above, that even chewing does not activate Rashi’s issue, then briefly having a fleishig crumb on one’s tongue certainly does not. Regarding the Rambam, it seems illogical to be concerned about meat between the teeth if there was no chewing to involve the teeth. Of the cases discussed by early authorities, this is most similar to one who found and removed a piece of meat from between the teeth after six hours. In both cases, meat is in the mouth without recent eating. The Shach says that even according to Rashi that it is still considered fleishig, one does not have to wait another six hours from that point. However, the Rama (ibid.) says that one should rinse his mouth before eating milchig. The Aruch HaShulchan (ad loc.:5) puts the Rama in perspective: it is illogical that a mouth had meat in it one moment and one could put milk in it the next without taking steps to remove residue. Most poskim assume that the specific manner of removing the residue is the same as when wants to eat fleishig soon after milchig. There, we pasken that you need to rinse the mouth with liquid (hadacha) and eat a solid food to absorb the remaining taste (kinu’ach) (Shulchan Aruch, ibid.:2). According to our analysis, then, you could continue your milchig meal after rinsing the mouth and eating a pareve food first. However, sometimes practice is stricter than analysis would indicate. To take an example “close to home”, the Pri Megadim (MZ 89:1) demonstrates that if one only chewed an otherwise pareve food that absorbed meat gravy, he has no innate reason to wait six hours. Yet, he says that due to the concept of LO P’LUG (not distinguishing between similar cases that fall into the same category), he should wait six hours. Indeed, poskim accept this stringency (Pitchei Teshuva ad loc.:1; Kaf Hachayim ad loc.:3). In our case, though, poskim do not equate tasting food with a tongue to chewing it, and one does not need to wait six hours (Pri Chadash, ad loc.:18;Aruch Hashulchan, ad loc.:14; Darchei Teshuva, ad loc.:10; Kaf HaChayim, ibid.:4). The two former sources say that kinu’ach and hadacha are required; washing hands is probably not required (see Rama, ibid.:3). (Your case included additional mitigating circumstances that make leniency easier; however, we did not need to use them.) 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 During the previous century, the Orthodox community fought many battles in order to preserve authentic Judaism. Battles were fought for Shabbat, kashrut, Torah study and Jewish education with tremendous sacrifice and devotion, and the success of these battles enables us today to take these matters for granted. They may now be observed with relative ease because of the willingness of Jews to sacrifice things that were important to them at the time - material and financial well- being, and social acceptance - in the service of God and to ensure the integrity of the Jewish nation. Sacrifice is
fundamental to our service of God, and each generation must identify
its unique challenges, and be willing to sacrifice to face those
challenges. It appears that one of the few difficult things left for
Jews living in comfort and freedom is enhancing and actualizing
their connection with Eretz Israel. There have always been
extenuating circumstances exempting Jews from fulfillment of the
mitzva of Yishuv Eretz Israel. But with so few areas of Jewish
observance that require true sacrifice today, increased focus on
finding ways to fulfill this mitzva is an authentic way to sacrifice
something of ourselves in the service of God. 2) The Meshech Chachma answers that since the sprinkling of the Olah and Shelamim were not done by hand but, rather, through the use of a vessel, the other Kohanim would join in and partake of the sprinkling together with the original Kohein. Regarding the sin offering, however, since the Torah mandates that its sprinkling be done using the finger, it would be disgusting for another kohein to dip his finger into the same blood. Thus, the Torah emphasizes that this sprinkling should be done by the original Kohein alone. 3) Rav Moshe Feinstein
teaches that HAKOHEIN is used regarding a basic, already prepared
sacrifice. Since he is not really contributing to the sacrifice,
knowing simply that he is a Kohein is enough. BNEI AHARON HAKOHANIM
is used when the sacrifice requires additional preparation. The
Kohein must remind himself where he comes from and how he is held to
a high standard of proper behavior while performing this important
service. When the Torah describes placing a fire on the altar, the
term BNEI AHARON HAKOHEIN is used since they are carrying out a role
similar to Aharon HaKohein who brought heavenly fire down to the
Altar. They must try to rise themselves to the highest of levels as
they attempt to emulate Aharon, himself, when doing so. When discussing the meal offerings, the verse says that they should not be brought out of leavened dough (chametz). The verse continues to tell us that “this is because you may not burn anything fermented (se’or) or sweet (dvash) as a fire offering to Hashem". And all burnt offerings should have salt (2:11-13). What is wrong with fermentation and sweetness? Why aren't they allowed in the meal offerings? And why is salt required? Rabbi Pliskin brings an explanation from Rabbi Mordechai Gifter. Both yeast (se’or) and honey (d’vash) are external additives. Yeast is added to make a dough rise higher and honey is added to make things sweeter. Both of these add something that is not present in the essence of the original object. Salt is different. Salt is a flavor enhancer - it brings out the flavor of the food, but only the flavor that is already there. There is a subtle
lesson here for all of us. When serving Hashem, we should not be
like yeast that distorts what is there or like honey that is sweet
but is something borrowed from the outside. We should not try to
worship Hashem in the means of others. We should not try to be
someone else. Rather we should follow the model of salt. We should
take all the G-d-given skills and talents that we have and enhance
them - be the best person that we could be, but we must be ourselves
and not try to be someone else. To keep your starter
alive it must be "fed" every 2-4 weeks by adding more flour and
water and allowing it to stand in a warm place or 24 hours. Because a Sefer Torah is hand-written, what words appear on what lines and what is at the top of any particular column will not necessarily match up from scroll to scroll. Writing styles differ from Sofer to Sofer and even though there is a strict body of halacha that governs the way letters are written, there will be differences, depending upon the exact size of the quill point, the exact dimensions of the parchment, and other factors. There is a long-standing Tradition that six particular columns are regulated as to what is at the top of the column. The first of the six - the most obvious - is the first column of the Torah, which begins with the word B’REISHIT. One could not expect otherwise. The others are less obvious. The words B’KAH SH’MO form amnemonic device for the six column starters: BET-YUD-HEI SHIN-MEM-VAV. The words refer to G-d’s name YUD-KAY (as we say it, i.e. YUD followed by a HEI). The phrase is from T’hilim 68:5, which is quoted in the passage recited as the Torah is carried from the Aron to the Bima/Shulchan on Shabbat and Yom Tov morning. We have the BET already. The YUD is for YEHUDA in the blessings of Yaakov to his sons in Parshat Vaichi. HEI is for HABA-IM, which begins the unusually wide column containing AZ YASHIR, the Song of the Sea. SHIN is the problem letter, since there is an unsettled dispute as to what it refers too. Some say, SHAMOR L’CHA in Parshat Ki Tisa, immediately after the Torah reading for Fast Days. Others say it is from Parshat Acharei and the words SH’NEI HA-S’IRIM GORALOT. Standard practice is to plan to have both possibilities at the top of a column. MEM is for MA TOVU in Parshat Balak. And the VAV is for V’A’IDA (from Parshat Vayeilech) at the top of the first of two HAAZINU columns. Next. There is a long-standing Scribal practice (although not as long-standing as the B’KAH SH’MO practice) to arrange the writing of a Sefer Torah so that every column (except as above) starts with a VAV. This is not a binding practice, but is considered a HIDUR and is most commonly done. In checking copies of two different Torah scrolls, one was found to have 245 columns and the other had 247. Obviously, there are differences in the column arrangements, but not for the B’KAH SH’MO columns. And, rather than choose one side of the SHIN dispute or the other, Torahs are written with both SHIN words at the top of columns. B’KAH SH’MO refers to six columns, and the second SHIN to make seven and take away the VAV word, since we are about to make a statement about a VAV-SEFER. All columns except for six, in most Torah scrolls (especially those written in the last many decades), begin with a VAV. BTW, in some Chumashim, the six (or seven) words are marked with a little circle and somewhere in a margin, we are told that the word is one of B’KAH SH’MO. Another point. Among
old Sifrei Torah, one can see many differences. VAV s’farim and ones
without VAV heading all columns except for... 42 line columns, 48
line columns. Even 66 line columns. Different embellishments on
special letters. And certainly, different column arrangements.
However, newer Sifrei Torah (maybe for the last 25-30 years or so),
are being copied from the popular Dovidovich Tikun, resulting in
much, much more uniformity from Torah to Torah than ever before.
There will always be differences because of stretched and/or
squeezed letters, heavy and light hand of a Sofer, etc. The Aye-Aye has been
described as "a Walt Disney witch's black cat with a touch of E.T.
thrown in.” Undeserved reputation for evil... The following two quite different "pieces" are not part of Birkat Ilanot, but are appropriate to share at your Shabbat table when the topic of the Trees Bracha comes up. Gemara, Masechet Taanit
(5b-6a) TREES by Joyce Kilmer Moshe must have been on tenterhooks to know when and how he would receive the summons to appear before Hashem within the confines of the newly built Mishkan. For, according to Ramban, Moshe was filled with awe as he contemplated the notion that G-d dwelt within its walls. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Book of Vayikra opens with the unusual declaration that G-d called to Moshe. As Rashi describes it, Hashem beckons Moshe in a loud voice that only he can hear; it is a loving invitation, a psychological preparation for a personal rendezvous with the Almighty. To which, we are told, Moshe responds with the exclamation, "Hineni" - I am at your service. In our opening verse, the word Vayikra ("And he called") is written with a miniature letter Alef. The letter Alef stands for one, me alone; it also means to train. The implication is that if we can subdue the egocentric Me and, like Moshe, endeavor to walk humbly in the ways of G-d, we might too maximize our potential to hear the voice of the beckoning Father. Shabbat Shalom,
Menachem Persoff Type Two D’veikim happens when a word ends in a consonant sound and the next word begins with ALEF or AYIN (and less so, with a HEI). Final MEM is a good candidate for this type of D’veikim. UR-ITEM OTO, and you will see it (the P’TIL T’CHEILET). Said without a tiny pause between the words and the MEM blends with the following word to produce MOTO - either UR-ITEM MOTO or even UR-ITE MOTO. In either case, the word OTO, it, changes into MOTO, his death. This is worse than just sloppy pronunciation; sometimes the meaning of the words get changed. But even when they don’t, the potential stick-together words should be separated by a short pause. M. Mashal (later, Mr. Marshal) and all other French teachers, taught that in French, the blending of words is intentional. In fact, some silent consonants come back to life by blending with the beginning of the next word. Not in Hebrew. Here’s a double example from Sh’ma: V’LI-MAD-TEM pause OTAM pause ET B’NEICHEM... Without a pause or mini- hesitation, the words come out MOTAM and MET. Here’s another multiple: V’ACHAREI EINEICHEM pause ASHER pause ATEM ZONIM pause ACHAREIHEM (not MASHER, not RATEM, not MACHA- REIHEM). VAAVADTEM ELOHIM ACHEIRIM... (not MELOHIM, MACHEIRIM). With a HEI, it is trickier. ETCHEM HAYOM - here, without a pause, the MEM can get rid of the HEI sound and also blend with the beginning of the word. First AYOM rather than HAYOIM. And then MAYOM. Once again, davening slower, looking in a Siddur rather than davening by heart, and paying more attention to what you are saying, can solve the D’VEIKIM problem. Besides EIM LAMIKRA
HASHALEIM by R’ Nissan Sharoni, which remains the premier book as
far as this column is concerned, we would like you to meet another
book, which has had significant input for the topic of D’VEIKIM. TUV
TAAM by HaMachon “SIMANIM” is a beautiful work on Taamei HaMikra,
and has a section on KRI’AT SH’MA.Comes with a CD for the Torah
reading melody. Distributed by Feldheim in Israel and the US. Preparing the
Mikdash for Pesach - A Story As the 15th of Nisan neared, the tension increased. Dizzy because of lack of sleep, all the Roshei Mishmarot and their lieutenants were holed up in their offices on Har Habayit reviewing enormous computerized lists of Kohanim. Several months before, the Segan had initiated a massive Siyur Ketovot, the purpose of which was to ascertain that the Kohanim actually lived where their Mishmeret records said they did, and that they could be easily contacted by telephone or email. The numerous mistakes that the Siyur Ketovot revealed were corrected and entered into the Mishmeret computers. This was urgent because every Mishmeret had to "contribute" thousands of Kohanim to assist in the performance of Avodat HaMikdash during the Shelosh Regalim. The need was even greater on Pesach because so many extra Kohanim were needed to offer the tens of thousands of Korbanot brought by the Olei Regel. All these newly drafted Kohanim had to be sent to hastily expanded "pre-Pesach training camps" to hone their kohanic skills so all these Korbanot Pesach, Chagiga and Simcha could be sacrificed quickly and without mishap. Provisions had to be made for all these additional Kohanim. [The Korban Chagiga was a kind of Shelamim brought during the Shelosh Regalim. The size and number of Chagigot depended on how much meat was required by the Ba'alei Korban and their families. It also depended on how much they could afford. "According to the blessing of the Lord your G-d, which He has given you (D’varim 16:17). If the Ba'alei Korban required extra meat during the Regalim in addition to the meat of the Chagigot, they had the option of bringing Korbanot Simcha as well.] The famed agility and nimbleness of the Kohanim was really put to the test on Erev Pesach! [Normally when a sacrificial animal was slaughtered, the Kohein who received the blood in a Mizrak - a Mikdash vessel - carried it to the Mizbei'ach for the blood application. On Pesach,when so many Korbanot were slaughtered at one time, this was impractical. Instead, the Kohanim formed lines stretching from the areas of slaughter all over the Azara to the Mizbei'ach, and they would pass the blood-filled vessels from one to the other (Pesachim 4:5). Upon receiving the vessel, the Kohanim who stood closest to the Mizbei'ach would pour the blood on the Yesod, the projection of the base of the Mizbei'ach on the northern and western sides, and the northeast and southwest corners.] "Quarantined" in their training camps, thousands of Kohanim stood in long lines and practiced passing vessels filled with red-colored water from one to the other. As their skill improved, their speed became incredible. They passed the vessels so fast that you could hardly see them. Other Kohanim were put to jogging over the hillsides. They had to get into good shape quickly! It would not do for them to get out of breath while running up the ramp of the Mizbei'ach to throw the Emurim of the Korbanot into the sacrificial fire. Because of the previous year's fiasco due to overcrowding and disorganization, the Segan had appointed "Mikdash trouble- shooter" Meir HaKohein, to put together a task force to inspect the adequacy of the new "purification centers" which had been set up to service the thousands of Olei Regel who were pouring into the city. Ritually impure Olei Regel had to arrive in Jerusalem at least eight days before Erev Pesach to be able to complete their purification process on time. While many of the Olei Regel had previously purified themselves at home to avoid spending extra time in Jerusalem, most did not. Hundreds of thousands of Olei Regel had to be purified with Mei Nida - spring water mixed with the ashes of the Para Aduma - on the third and seventh day of their arrival in Jerusalem to "cleanse" them of Tum'at Meit ("corpse impurity"). The pressure on the purification centers was tremendous. Day by day, Meir and his team inspected the centers and checked their efficiency. To "process" the vast crowds of impure Olei Regel quickly, strict organization was required and the Mikdash authorities had instituted a new system. When the Olei Regel arrived in Jerusalem, they were briefed on the laws of purity and assigned to a purification center near where they would be staying. Once they settled in, each Oleh Regel would personally visit his purification center and register. Teams of Leviyim were on hand to answer questions. Once the Oleh Regel registered, he endeavored to eschew anything potentially contaminating. By avoiding contamination for three days, he initiated his purification process. Three days after registering, the Oleh Regel would return to his purification center for the first of his two sprinklings. Leviyim verified that he was entered in their computer. Meir and his staff carefully recorded the time required to sprinkle Mei Nida on each Oleh Regel in each center and reported their findings to the Segandaily. Any recommendations were immediately implemented. The new purification centers were spacious halls strategically located throughout Jerusalem containing a number of "stations". Supervised by sharp-eyed Kohanim, volunteer "purifiers" manned each station. Arrows indicated the route that the Oleh Regel was to follow.Each purifier held in his hand three stems of hyssop and next to him was a large stone barrel of Mei Nida. As each Oleh Regel stepped forward, the purifier dipped the hyssop stems into the Mei Nida and sprinkled him with special intent to purify. Even a single drop sufficed for purification and the water "worked" if it touched his body anywhere except his tongue. The Oleh Regel returned on the seventh day and the purifier repeated the process. Later that day, the Oleh Regel immersed in a Mikveh and became completely pure at stars-out. On the morrow, before he would be admitted into the Mikdash compound, Leviyim stationed at the entrance would verify his ritual purity. Meanwhile, high above the Azara, workmen were whitewashing the Bayit (Midot 3:4). Once again, the Mikdash would appear as a "mountain of snow" beckoning the Olei Regel from afar. Pesach was fast approaching. Catriel's book in
progress: The Temple of Jerusalem, A Pilgrim’s Perspective; A Guided
Tour through the Temple and the Divine Service Amirat Seder Korban
Pesach SEDER KORBAN PESACH KP is brought from unblemished male lambs and goats within their first year, and are slaughtered anywhere in the AZARA, AFTER the Tamid is completed and the Menora is tended to. KP is not brought if any member of “the group” has chametz in his possession. KP is slaughtered (even by a non-kohen) and the blood of Shchita is received by a kohen in a sacred vessel. There were lines of kohanim from each “Shchita station” to the Mizbei’ach, each kohen with either a gold or silver vessel (within a row, all the vessels were the same; it was considered more attractive that way).The vessels did not have flat bottoms to prevent them from being put down, which might allow the blood to congeal before reaching the Mizbei’ach, thus invalidating the korban. In assembly-line fashion, the first kohen handed the vessel with the blood to the second kohen in line and received from him an empty vessel. The second kohen passed the blood to the next in line and received an empty vessel. And so on, until the kohen near the Mizbei’ach poured the blood on the base of the Mizbei’ach and handed the empty vessel back to the kohen next to him. Then the KP was hung from hooks or from poles supported by one’s shoulder and the shoulder of his fellow, and it was skinned (on Shabbat, the whole skin was not removed). Certain innards and fats were removed from the animal, placed in a sacred vessel, salted and placed on the fire of the Mizbei’ach. (The timing for HEKTEIR CHALAVIM, as it is called, was different when EP was Shabbat.) Other innards were removed and cleaned (with differences if EP is Shabbat), to be roasted alongside the KP. KP was brought in three shifts, none with fewer than 30 people. After the first shift entered the AZARA, the doors were locked. During the bringing of KP, Leviyim sang Hallel. If necessary, they repeated it, and again, until the shift was done. For each Hallel, kohanim blew the Silver Trumpets. When the shift was done,the people were let out of the Azara and the next shift was admitted. So too for the third shift. After all KP were brought, the floor of the Azara was flooded and washed - even on Shabbat. Roasting of KP does not “push aside” Shabbat. When EP is Friday, roasting must be done BEFORE Shabbat. When EP is Shabbat, roasting (and even bringing the KP from Har HaBayit to the place where it will be eaten) waits until AFTER Shabbat. The animal and those innards removed but not placed on the Mizbei’ach are placed on a wooden skewer from a pomegranate tree and put inside the oven, with the heat below. When EP is a weekday, a Korban Shlamim known as CHAGIGAT YUD-DALET is also brought (only when people are TAHOR) – from cow, goat, or sheep, male or female, any age – and is eaten as the main dish at the Seder so that the KP will be AL HASOVA, when satisfied (but not stuffed). This is the procedure for the KP and Chagiga (which are symbolized on our Seder plates by the Z’RO’A and EGG respectively). When we say Seder Korban Pesach, we should have in mind CHURBAN BEIT HAMIKDASH (the destruction of the Temple) AND be filled with prayerful anticipation for the next Beit HaMikdash (these are opposite sides of the same coin). Saying Amirat Seder Korban Pesach at the “proper” time on Erev Pesach, can count in “Heaven” (so to speak) as if we actually brought KP in the Beit HaMikdash, may it be built soon in our time, AMEN. OU ISRAEL
CENTER [The
Parshat Vayikra Homepage]
|
