MISC section - contents: [1] From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE As we begin the important “season” of Torah reading, we share the following question with those ending an enjoyable but not so important season of the “great American pastime” (i.e. baseball - for EB and other non-American TTreaders), examining it from a halachic perspective. This also allows the responding rabbi to use information gathered during many hours of his youth. Q: As a sports fan, I was wondering whether Shawn Green, or any other Jewish baseball player, can play a game without violating Shabbat? TT editor's facetious and flip answer: Yes, by playing on any of the six other days of the week. Now for the Vebbe Rebbe's real answer. A: Mr. Green did not send this question, and we are not answering it as a practical question, which would touch, among other things, on the general question of going to work on Shabbat without direct violations of Shabbat. Rather, your question affords the sports fan the opportunity to apply some of the intricacies of the laws of Shabbat to an area of interest. All professional stadiums are fully enclosed. Thus, carrying, hitting, and throwing are permitted. In general, there may be restrictions on carrying even in enclosed areas without an eiruv. However, that is only when carrying between areas owned by different people or groups. An entire stadium is owned by one person or group, so this is not a problem. What if one hits a homerun, which, in certain parks, may “leave the park” to an unenclosed area or one owned by other people or the public? A disciplined hitter will not intend to hit the ball out of the stadium, just out of the playing field. Therefore, even if Shawn hit one extra far, it would be a davar sh’eino mitkavein (an unplanned, uncertain violation of Shabbat), about which he need not be concerned in advance. Often, hitters “dig in” with their cleats at the batter’s box, making a small ditch to help them push off when swinging. This is a Torah-level violation of choresh (plowing), done directly and purposely to improve the ground for one’s purposes (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 327:1). Sliding on the base paths dirties a player’s uniform. The gemara (Shabbat 147a) says that one who shakes out his clothes to remove dew (according to Tosafot) or dirt (according to Rashi) violates a Torah prohibition. The gemara continues that this is only regarding new, black clothes, which he is careful to keep clean. The Rama (Orach Chayim 302:1) says that one may not do so to any article of clothing which one is conscious not to walk around in with this level of dirt. While the matter is more complex than we can address here, the Biur Halacha (ad loc.) rules stringently on the matter when one does not just shake out but performs an action of cleaning on the place of the dirt. Therefore, it is at least preferable to do no more than lightly shaking off the top layer of dirt, leaving that which is partially embedded in the fabric. When playing the outfield, is there a problem of cutting or uprooting the grass? In general, one is allowed to walk on grass because even if he were to cut some blades, it is a davar sh’eino mitkaven (Shulchan Aruch, ibid. 336:3). However, the Mishna Berura (ad loc.:25) points out that if one runs on tall grass, it is ap’sik reisha (a certainty that one will inadvertently perform the prohibition), which is forbidden. Although stadiums have short grass, it is possible that with cleats, the matter is a p’sik reisha, and this respondent lacks the technical expertise to rule on the matter. The Shulchan Aruch (ibid. 308:45) rules that balls are muktzeh because they lack a serious use that would make them utensils. The Rama argues because balls are set aside for the purpose of playing, which he considers sufficient. Therefore, balls are not muktzeh for Ashkenazim; Sefardim are divided on the matter (YalkutYosef, Shabbat 308:26). (See Mishna Berura’s (ad loc.:158) objection to playing on the ground, which does not seem to apply to baseball.) In summary, by taking proper precautions, one can solve most if not all of the technical halachic issues of playing baseball on Shabbat, while certain halachic and fundamental issues would remain (including some we have not mentioned). So, “play ball”… preferably, another day. Ask the Rabbi Q&A is part of Hemdat Yamim, the weekly parsha sheet published by Eretz Hemdah. You can read this section or the entire Hemdat Yamim at www.ou.org or www.eretzhemdah.org. And/or you can receive Hemdat Yamim by email weekly, by sending an email to info@eretzhemdah.org with the message: Subscribe/English (for the English version) or Subscribe/Hebrew (for the hebrew version). Please leave the subject blank. Ask the Vebbe Rebbe is partially funded by the Jewish Agency for Israel [2] Candle by Day [3] CHIZUK and IDUD (for Olim & not-yet-Olim respectively) Alongside Creation, there is the Exodus from Egypt. While individuals date their origins to Creation, we as a people mark Pesach and the Exodus as our "national birthday", re-ordering our calendar as such, and linking our national character to the advent of spring. God's active intervention in history conveys to humanity the all-important message that not only is He in eternal control of the fate of the universe, but Jewish destiny can and will defy the laws of nature and be ever resurgent. In a real sense, the Exodus "trumps" Creation, and so we are commanded to remember the Exodus every day and every night, something not required regarding Creation. There is, however, a third moment in history that is even greater than these two! "Behold, days are coming, says God, when people will no longer take an oath by 'the God who liberated Israel from Egypt,' but rather by 'the God who gathered the dispersed of Israel from the lands... where they were scattered" (Yirmiyahu 23:7-8). Says the Gemara (B'rakhot 12): "When Israel is free from the domination of foreign powers, even the Exodus will pale in comparison." Yes, there is indeed a "Road Map" for the Jewish people. It starts at Creation and winds through the Exodus. WHEN it will come to its conclusion may still be uncertain; but WHERE it will end is crystal-clear: nowhere else but in Eretz Israel. TORAH THOUGHTS as contributed by Aloh Naaleh members for publication in the Orthodox Union's 'Torah Insights', a weekly Torah publication on Parshat HaShavu’a [4] Wisdom and Wit “You are utterly wrong, my son,” said the Chasam Sofer. “If you look at the matter historically, the commandment to respect one’s parents was given at Sinai, in the desert, where everyone’s needs were met by Hashem. Yet, even though no son was dependent on his father, they were still commanded to respect their parents.” R’ Chaim Shmulevitz had his own special insight into the respect one is required to give one’s parents. According to him, a person who respects his parents in spite of what they do, does not fulfill the commandment of honoring one’s parents. Every person must find at least one thing in each parent which marks that parent as a unique individual - one singularly above anyone else in the child’s eyes. Shmuel Himelstein has written a wonderful series for ArtScroll: Words of Wisdom, Words of Wit; A Touch of Wisdom, A Touch of Wit; and "Wisdom and Wit" — available at your local Jewish bookstore (or should be). [5] Portion for the Portion by Rakel Berenbaum - FEEDback to berenbau@actcom.net.il The most logical answer to this question is brought in B'reishit Raba. Adam and Chava must have eaten from a fig tree because afterwards they covered themselves with fig leaves (3:7). Another reason for this choice is based on a play on words " they ate from a fig (TE'ENA) which brought (TO'ENA) hardship onto the world". B'reshit Rabba also brings wheat as a possibility, based on the saying common in their day, "that someone who has never eaten wheat is not clever". Since they ate from the "Tree of Knowledge" they must have eaten from something that would give them knowledge, i.e wheat. But then one could ask, "they ate from a tree and wheat is not a tree?" The MIDRASH answers that particular wheat was extraordinary and was as tall as the cedars of Lebanon. Ginsburg in his book Agadat HaYehudim states that maybe this idea is a play on words as well - wheat (CHITA) which caused a sin (a CHET). The Midrash also suggest that the fruit was grapes or wine and the siddur of Rav Amram Gaon refers to the fruit as a nut. The Midrash also mentions the Etrog as the fruit eaten by Adam and Chava. The verse says (3:6) "the woman saw that the tree was good to eat and desirable to the eyes". It doesn't say that she saw that the fruit was good to eat, but rather that the tree was good to eat. The Etrog was the only tree that listened to Hashem's command (1:11-12) to put forth "fruit trees that put forth fruit" and not "trees producing fruit". Meaning the etrog tree actually tasted like the fruit it produced. Therefore, when it says that the woman saw that the tree (itself) was good to eat - it must mean she ate from an etrog. The etrog was referred to in the past as "the apple of the garden of Eden", which might be the source for the Christian notion that the fruit was an apple. Etrog Jam Etrog Chicken [6] Micro Ulpan [7] Parsha Points to Ponder - B'REISHIT THESE ARE THE ANSWERS 1) Rav Weinberg explained that when G-d “calls” something by a name, it is the assigning of a function for that object. The essence of the object is the original name and its function is designated by what it is “called”. In this circumstance, G-d was giving the sky the function of SHAMAYIM. Shamayim refers to the spiritual realm. The vast and infinite sky is what brings us an awareness of the fact that there is a spiritual reality beyond the physical which we see before our eyes. Parsha Points to Ponder is prepared by Rabbi Dov Lipman, who teaches at Reishit Yerushalayim, Tiferet, and Machon Maayan in Beit Shemesh and RBS and is the author of "DISCOVER: Answers for Teenagers (and adults) to Questions about the Jewish Faith", soon to be re-published by Feldheim ppp@israelcenter.co.il Mazal Tov to Rabbi Dov Lipman (Parsha Points to Ponder) on the republishing of his book [8] Torah from Nature [9] Torah KidBits B'REISHIT - IN THE BEGINNING... All beginnings are a new chance to start over and do things right. When you think about it, beginnings are a gift. Just imagine if you could never start anew and you always had to continue in the same path, doing the same old things in the same old way, even if they weren't turning out well. Pretty awful, isn't it? The Torah teaches us that beginnings are very important. They are the foundation for all that follows. If you start out badly on the first day of school, or have a fight with a new friend, you can, of course, always try to correct things, but it's always more difficult than starting out on the right foot. When G-d completed the world, He proclaimed: "And G-d saw all that He had done and behold, it is very good." When Hashem does something, His beginnings are always perfect. And they never spoil. That's why the Torah says Creation IS very good, not that it was very good. When we begin something new, it may turn out out well or, it may not. But when Hashem creates something, it is good for all time. Even though people may cause problems, every new year is a chance for us to try and begin again. This year, you have a brand new chance to begin at the beginning - at B'reishit - once again. You can listen to the entire Torah - from beginning to end, week by week. Isn't that a wonderful gift? [10] Divrei Menachem When we endow something with our approval, we tend to say that it is good. That term finds its roots in Hashem's rating of some of His completed creations. Thus on the first day, "G-d saw that the light was good." And later, on the third day, the earth, the seas and the vegetation all merited such a heavenly accolade. The rabbis note that there is no mention of Hashem calling anything good on the second day in which there is a separation of waters above and below the firmament. Maybe because separation implies conflict. Or perhaps, to cite Rabbeinu Bachya, because the firmament and its complement of angels detract from the core purpose of putting Man into the lower world to bring Hashem's plan to fruition. Which leaves us asking why, in contrast to the remaining days in which G-d saw that His creations were good, Man's formation on the sixth day does not merit such an annotation. Is it because, incomplete, we ever strive to perfect ourselves and the world that we are in? Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff [The Parshat B'reishit Homepage]
|
