MISC section - contents: Q: I had friends over; I didn’t notice that one of them brought a music CD, which she left in my CD player. A week later she inquired about its whereabouts. We found it outside its case, among an assortment of family CDs. I might have taken her CD out, thinking it was one of the kids’; perhaps my kids (under bar mitzva) did so. My friend later told me that it was scratched and ruined. She did not ask me to pay her, but should I offer? A: As we always preface such monetary questions, we cannot tell you for sure that you are exempt without formally hearing your friend’s version of the story. We will give our thoughts according to your perspective. This is sufficient since your friend has not demanded payment, and you want to know if you should volunteer it. There are two issues to consider. One is whether you are obligated to pay for failing to watch the CD properly. The other is whether you are obligated as one who might have damaged it. In general, a person is not obligated to watch something and pay for damages stemming from negligence unless she consented on some level to accept that responsibility (see Bava Kama 47b). Since you were unaware that your friend’s CD was in your possession, that certainly did not happen. This case, though, is more complicated because this may be a case where the laws of HASHAVAT AVEIDA (returning a lost object) apply. It is unclear from your description whether your friend realized quickly that the CD was by you (and thus it was not lost) or whether she wasn’t sure where it was, and it was an AVEIDA.Let us assume the latter. The Torah obligates one who finds an AVEIDA in the laws of a watchman even if he did not intend to become responsible (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 267:16). The question of whether he is like a paid or a volunteer watchman (ibid.) is irrelevant here because either way it is negligent not to put a CD in its case, and all watchmen are obligated to pay for negligence. One usually becomes obligated in the laws of HASHAVAT AVEIDA, including the obligation of a watchman, at the time he lifts up the object (see Bava Metzia 26b; Pitchei Choshen, Metzia 4:(2)). What happens, though, if one picks up an object without realizing that it is an AVEIDA? There are related discussions on whether one who physically had control of an AVEIDA without fully understanding the scope of his obligation becomes a full-fledged watchman. The Ketzot HaChoshen (291:4) was unsure whether one who found something he thought was cheap is obligated in its full value when it turned out to be more expensive. The implication is that if he had not even realized that the object was a lost one, he would not have been obligated. Similarly, the Machane Efrayim (Chatzer 5) proves from the Rambam that one who unknowingly has an AVEIDA on his property is not yet considered one who found an AVEIDA. Therefore, in your case, you did not have a watchman’s obligation. However, even without a watchman’s responsibility, you may be obligated for scratching the CD. In general, one who physically damages an object, even with little personal blame, must pay the damages (Bava Kama 26a). However, we do not know for sure that you scratched the CD. Something could have fallen on it when it was exposed. Your friend could have scratched it, if not before someone in your house moved it, then perhaps after she took it home. Your kids could have done it, and minors and their parents are exempt from paying for the minors’ damages (Shulchan Aruch, ibid. 424:8). Therefore, a Beit Din could apparently not obligate you to pay because there is a doubt if you damaged the CD. Poskim discuss whether children who damage should pay when they grow up (see Pitchei Choshen, Nezikin 10:(115)), and parents often pay for their children’s damages. However, a CD’s scratching is common; even proper care does not always prevent it. Therefore, you do not even seem to have a strong moral obligation. On the other hand, it is likely of value to offer your friend at least partial payment and see what she says. 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 Sifrei, however, offers a diametrically opposed understanding. It calls our attention to the contiguity of two passages in the book of Devarim. The end of verse 11:17 reads: "And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land that God gives you." This is immediately followed by: "Put these words of Mine upon your heart and upon your soul." Expounds the Sifrei: "Even when I shall exile you from the Land of Israel to the Diaspora, prepare yourself for the return to Israel through observance of the mitzvot so that when you return they shall not be new to you. This may be likened to a mortal king who became angry with his wife and sent her back to her father's house. Before her departure, he warned her. 'Do not remove your jewelry, so that when I send for you they shall not be unfamiliar to you.' This is the meaning of the words of Yirmiyahu 31:21 - 'Set up markers for yourself.'" This passage in the Sifrei led the Ramban, the arch-Zionist of the Middle Ages, to formulate his revolutionary theory concerning the observance of mitzvot, as he writes in his commentary to Devarim 4:5 (and several other places): "To hint at the basic truth that the true observance of all mitzvot can only be fulfilled in Eretz Israel." Those who live outside Israel fulfill mitzvot only
as practice for their long-awaited journey home. R' Yaakov David used to say: "There are three
rabbis in Bobroisk: a rabbi with a shtreimel, a rabbi without a shtreimel,
and a shtreimel without a rabbi." 2) Why does Moshe say LAHEM, in plural, referring to the disputing parties but then say BA, in singular, when referring to the two parties actually coming before him for judgment? (see 18:16) 3) Why does the Torah mention the Jews arriving in
the desert of Sinai prior to the description of their leaving from Refidim?
(see 19:1-2) 2) The Meshech Chachma answers that this teaches us that when Moshe judged a case, he had the presence of mind to completely ignore who the two parties were to make sure this did not impact his judgment. From Moshe's perspective, it was the case that came before him and not the people. Thus, Moshe used the singular, BA, to describe what came before hi,m referring to the case, itself, which was the only thing he noticed in front of him. 3) The Ohr HaChayim says that G-D wrote it this
way to demonstrate the anticipation that all of creation had for the moment
that the Jewish people would arrive at Sinai and receive the Torah. This was
the moment when all of creation reached its fulfillment and purpose and the
Torah jumped out of order to demonstrate the anticipation and excitement for
this great event. What is so special about Yitro that he deserved to have a whole parsha named after him? How did Yitro become the guest of honor at a meal with Aharon, and all the elders of Israel (18:12)? Our sages teach that Yitro, a priest of Midyan, had tried all types of idol worship. When he heard what Hashem had done for Bnei Yisrael he decided to leave it all and join Bnei Yisrael. In this parsha he brings Tzipora and her children to Moshe in the desert. Some midrashim say that from these verses we see that Yitro himself converted. The conversion process includes brit mila, immersing in a mikva, and a korban in a time when we are able to bring sacrifices. (Bnei Yisrael did all these things to be ready to get the Torah as well.) Here Yitro brought OLAH V'ZVACHIM, "burnt offerings and other sacrifices". The meal that everyone ate with Yitro was in celebration of his conversion. The sages say that Yitro was worthy of all these people eating with him because he had offered food in the past. When his daughters told him how Moshe rescued them from the shepards and had watered their sheep for them, Yitro said "Why did you abandon the stranger? Call him, and let him have something to eat" (Sh'mot 2:19-20) VAYOCHAL LECHEM. There he had given bread and here everyone eats bread with him. There we see Yitro's quality of thankfulness. Moshe had done a kindness for his daughters and he wanted to thank him. We see this same quality of thankfulness in our parsha. The Meshech Chochma says that Yitro's korban here was a Korban of thankfulness, KORBAN TODAH,. Yitro saw all Bnei Yisrael alive and Moshe told him everything Hashem did to Par'o, about the splitting of the sea and the war with Amalek (Rashi). Yitro, who the Midrash says had been one of Par'o's advisors and knew exactly Par'o's strength and what he wanted to do to the Jews, realized the immense miracles that had been performed. He (and not bnei Yisrael) blessed Hashem for these miracles: BARUCH HASHEM ASHER KITZIL ETCHEM MIYAD MITZRAYIM (18:10). We learn from here that a person should say a blessing at the place where a miracle happened (Sanhedrin 94a). But sometimes the person who receives a miracle can't realize the extent of the miracle. KI EIN BAAL HANES MAKIR B'NEISO [When there is a Beit HaMikdash, the Korban Toda is brought with 40 breads LACHMEI TODA, consisting of 30 matzot (10 chalot baked in the oven, 10 r'kikin smeared with oil after baking, 10 murbechot, deep fried in oil) and 10 chametz loaves.] The thanksgiving sacrifice had a lot of food in it
and had to be eaten quickly so the person could invite others to share it
with him. They could sit together, eat and relate Hashem's miracles. This
Shabbat instead of concentrating on all the bad things around us let's try
to follow in Yitro's footsteps and relate all the miracles. The Hebrew name Yitro conveys the notion of addition. Our rabbis teach us that in honor of Yitro's far-reaching and fatherly advice in the matter of Moshe's judgment of the people, the Torah incorporated the episode as part of the unfolding drama of the Exodus. Moreover, in recognition of his wise counsel Yitro also gained the addition of the Hebrew letter 'vav' to his former name of Yeter (see Shmot 4:18). Like the wicked Amalek (who preyed on Israel's weaknesses), so did Yitro, "hear what G-d did for Moshe and his people Israel." However, each heard his "own version". What Yitro heard caused him to embrace Judaism and to be recognized repeatedly in our parsha as the father-in-law of Moshe. The Ohr HaChayim understands that Yitro's greatness lay not only in his recognition of G-d's role in punishing Egypt. From Israel's victorious battle with Amalek, Yitro also learned of and internalized Hashem's direct intervention on behalf of Bnei Yisra'el (see ibid, 17:8-16). This, no doubt, was Yitro's long-lasting legacy for all of us. Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff [The Parshat Yitro Homepage]
|
