MISC section - contents: [1] From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE Q: At Sheva B'rachot, the person who was supposed to recite Sos Tasis started to recite Samei’ach T'samach (the following b'racha). People tried to get him to switch, which confused him. I told him to continue, and the next m'varech (blesser) went back to So Tasis. Afterward, someone pertinently remarked that since he did not yet mention Hashem’s Name, “no harm had been done” and he should have reverted to the correct b'racha. What is the correct thing to do in that situation? A: Let us start with your assumption that switching the order of Sheva B'rachot does not present a problem. This is indeed the predominant opinion of poskim (see Ba’er Heitev, Even Ha’ezer 62:1, based on Rambam; Otzar Haposkim ad loc. 3:2). (The matter is less clear regarding one who switches Yotzer Ha’adam and Asher Yatzar (ibid. and Hanisu’in K’hilchatam 10:(149))). However, a good question was raised: when the m'varech was just a few words into the b'racha, was it too early to have given up on the preferred order? We were, surprisingly, unable to find direct references to this common scenario. We must base our inclination on parallel precedent, although, admittedly, one could suggest distinctions between the cases. Sos Tasis and Samei’ach T'samach do not begin with the classic “Baruch ata Hashem Elokeinu…” because each is a b'racha hasemucha l’chaverta. In other words, a b'racha can use the b'racha template of the previous, adjacent b'racha and suffice with “Baruch ata Hashem” at its end (see Pesachim 104b with commentaries). The question then is: what is the status of a b'racha which one started without saying “Baruch” or uttering Hashem’s Name. Is it “harmless,” allowing one to switch to a preferred b'racha, or is it the midst of a b'racha, which should be finished, if possible? One who, in his Shabbat Shemoneh Esrei, starts saying the weekday b'rachot (beginning with Ata Chonen) should finish the b'racha he started (B'rachot 21b; Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 268:2). One can continue because the weekday b'rachot are not antithetical to Shabbat. Why, though, should we continue the weekday b'racha, since, in the final analysis, Chazal instructed us not to recite them? Recall that all but the first b'racha of Shemoneh Esrei begin with “harmless words” (and Ata Chonen does not mention Hashem’s Name until the end). Apparently, once one begins a b'racha in a string of b'rachot hasemuchot l’chavertan, it is best not to stop even if Hashem’s Name has not been uttered. The same should ostensibly apply in our case, meaning that your instruction to continue the b'racha was correct. However, one can minimize or deflect the proof. Several poskim say that if one began Ata Chonen in chazarat hashatz, he would not continue because of the "burden to the congregation". Also, perhaps it is a disgrace for Ata Chonen to be stopped. In contrast, in our case, Samei’ach Tesamach will shortly “get its turn”. However, one can bring you further support from another precedent. The Mishna B'rura (59:7, based on the Derech Hachayim) says that if one made a critical error in Yotzer Or and began Ahava Rabba before realizing, he should finish Ahava Rabba before returning to Yotzer Or. This precedent has some advantages over the previous one. Firstly, he could revert to Yotzer Or and end up with Ahava Rabba, which is usually preferable, in that the latter would then follow a proper b'racha. Also, there it refers to b'rachot whose order is not critical, and the linkage between the previous and present berachot is arguably weaker (see Rasha, Berachot11a), and still he finishes the “open-starting” b'racha he started. In conclusion, it appears that one who started saying a b'racha of Sheva B'rachot that should have come later should preferably finish up the b'racha before returning to the one he missed. It does not matter if he said Hashem’s Name in a normally beginning b'racha or he recited a word or two of a b'racha hasemucha l’chaverta. However, even if we are correct, it does not seem that stopping before Hashem’s Name would be a grievous mistake. 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) R. Yehoshua of Kutno (Yeshu'ot Malko) asks: It is well known that relatively few Jews returned to Zion at the end of the 70-year Babylonian exile; most chose to remain in exile. How, then, did Ezra and Nechemya build the Second Temple? According to Sefer HaChinuch, a majority of world Jewry must live in the Land in order to do so! R. Yehoshua answers his question based on a Gemara in Chagiga (15a): [God] created righteous and wicked people, and He created Gan Eden and Gehenom. Everyone has two portions: one in Gan Eden and one in Gehenom. If a righteous person merits it, he receives his and his friend's portion in Gan Eden. If a wicked person so deserves, he receives his and his friend's portion in Gehenom. The same applies here. At the time of Ezra, all Jews had the ability and opportunity to make Aliya. The majority, however, willingly chose not to, mainly because they became too complacent in exile. Therefore, the few Jews who withstood the temptations of the Diaspora and ascended to Eretz Yisrael received not only their own "portion" in the Holy Land, but also their friends' portions. Although quantitatively only a minority of Jews lived in the Land, qualitatively it was as if the majority dwelt there. Thus, they were able to rebuild the Holy Temple. There are many similarities between the return to Zion at the time of Ezra and today's return to Zion. Both were initiated by the Gentiles (Cyrus and the Balfour Declaration); both were carried out - to a large extent - by irreligious Jews; and in both cases many religious Jews refused to take part. What we learn from Chazal and R. Yehoshua Kutner is that when God gives us the opportunity to return to our Homeland, we must seize it. For if we don't, we run the risk of ruining the redemption for all of Klal Yisrael or forfeiting our personal share in God's special Land. Adapted from an article in the author's recent book, Eretz Yisrael in the Parasha 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 Due to these questions, the very first time R’ Chaim gave a shi’ur, some of the greatest Torah scholars of the time came to hear the shi’ur, including R’ Eizel Charif. R’ Chaim gave an extraordinary shi’ur, which simply dazzled all those present. At one point, though, R’ Chaim realized that the logical construction which he had built up was evidently in opposition to what the Rambam writes in his Sefer HaMitzvos. No one else had noticed this contradiction. R’ Chaim immediately stopped the shi’ur and, after thinking through the matter for a few minutes, decided that the quotation from the Sefer HaMitzvos was a valid one, and that his shi’ur was therefore not valid. He therefore sat down. As this shi’ur was supposed to be a test for the new Rebbe, one might have imagined that it would eliminate any chance of R’ Chaim receiving the position, but the contrary happened: the great Torah scholars were so impressed with R’ Chaim’s passion for the truth, that they voted unanimously to retain him as a Rebbe. 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). Excerpted with the permission of the copyright holder [5] Portion for the Portion by Rakel Berenbaum - FEEDback to berenbau@actcom.net.il Here is what the Portion of the Portion columnist wrote about last week's recipe: I would like to apologize to all those who found last week's recipe gross, disgusting and bordering on unJewish. I take my guidance from the Torah which discusses death, murder, capital punishment and other unpleasant topics in an open and clear way so people can know how to behave. The recipes are meant to awaken a discussion and get people interested in the verses from the Torah. If people find some weird, disgusting or not appropriate for their family they do not have to serve them. My family, who tend to be my biggest critics, actually liked this recipe and even had a hard time finding which of all the verses in the sedra I prepared it for, since there were many other places in the sedra that discussed death such as - manslaughter (21:12-13), murder (14), killing slaves (20-21), miscarriage (23), ox goring a man to death (28). The verse I chose to write about what happens to be a timely topic and it is important for us to know what the Torah law is in these delicate areas. I hope to write next week about the tunic which is worn as an atonement for killing. Hopefully that will act as atonement if I offended anyone by what I wrote last week. MADE OF PURE GOLD Rashi explains that it wasn't allowed to be made out of pieces that were attached together, rather it had to all be shaped from one piece of gold. The crafting of the Menora was a difficult task. For all the other objects of the Mishkan, Hashem gave exact dimensions how to construct them - how many cubits width, length and height. Not so for the Menora. The Torah describes what the Menora should include base, stem, decorative cups, spheres and flowers, six branches - three on each side. It also says that it should be made out of a KIKAR ZAHAV - talent (68.4kg) of pure gold (25:39), but it doesn't say how tall it should be, what width the base should have, how long the branches should be, etc. Rashi says that Moshe had a difficult time making the Menora. It is complicated to make such an intricate piece out of one piece of gold. He had such a hard time that Hashem showed him a model of the Menora made out of fire. According to Midrash Tanchuma, Hashem finally told him to throw the bar of gold into the furnace where it miraculously formed by itself into the Menora. The Menora was an important object that was placed in the southern part of the Kodesh. Because of the extra knowledge that was needed to construct the Menora, the Rabbis say KOL HAROTZEH L'HACHKIM YADRIM, anyone who wants to become smart should go to the South. The Shulchan Aruch also recommends that someone who wants to pray for wisdom should face east and lean a bit to the south. • The Abarbanel says that the Menora symbolized the reward of wisdom and attaining greater spiritual heights. It was made of pure gold, hinting that wisdom must not be tainted by alien ideas. This is interesting considering that Abarbanel was himself well-versed in Torah tradition as well as the classical literature of his day, including contemporary Christian scholarship and Arab philosophy. Nevertheless it was he who stressed the limitations of the secular sciences. He said the cups, spheres and flowers symbolize the various sciences which branch out from each other. These were all formed from one piece of gold showing that all the various sciences have one common source - the Torah. California Gold Bars [6] Parsha Points to Ponder - T'RUMA 2) Why does G-D command Moshe to make the Aron in plural VA’ASU (25:10) as opposed to the singular VA’ASITA which He uses regarding the other vessels of the Mishkan? 3) Three vessels in the Mishkan had crowns - the Aron, the Golden Altar, and the Shulchan. Regarding all three, G-D commanded AND YOU SHALL MAKE A GOLD CROWN AROUND. Why did G-D repeat this command for the Shulchan saying AND YOU SHALL MAKE A GOLD CROWN ON ITS MOLDING AROUND? (See 25:25) THESE ARE THE ANSWERS 1) The Or HaChaim answers that the Shoham and setting stones differed from the other items donated to the Mishkan. Since they were on the garments of the Kohein Gadol, they could be used for non-holy purposes when the Kohein was not on duty (See Yoma 68b). Everything else donated to the Mishkan was halachically holy and not usable for a secular purpose. Therefore, the items which were less holy were relegated to the end of the list. 2) The Chafetz Chayim teaches that the plural emphasized that every Jew should contribute towards the construction of the Aron since the Aron represented Torah. No Jew should ever feel like he is somehow inferior when it comes to Torah study and a relationship with the Torah. Just like every Jew was commanded to contribute to the Aron, every Jew should contribute his portion in Torah and strive for excellence in this pursuit. 3) Rav Moshe Feinstein points to the teaching of our Sages, quoted by Rashi, that the crown of the shulchan symbolized the crown of kings because of the wealth which the food of the shulchan represented. Rav Moshe explains that majesty and wealth usually lead to terrible abuse and negative behavior. Kings are usually full of great haughtiness and selfishness which leads to great evil into this world. However, the crown with all of its wealth also has the potential to bring kindness to others. The Torah, therefore, emphasizes that the crown of the Shulchan in the Mishkan is one that teaches the positive promise of the crown of kings. The Hebrew for ITS MOLDING is MISGARTO. This can also be translated as ITS ENCLOSURE. The Torah is, thus, revealing that the crown of majesty with its wealth and honor, involves holiness only when it also serves as an enclosure - with safeguards protecting against its natural tendency towards evil. 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",just re-published by Feldheim, ppp@israelcenter.co.il [7] Torah KidBits The Hebrew word LISHKON means to live or to dwell. A SHACHEIN is a neighbor, someone who lives near you. A MISHKAN is a dwelling place set aside for a special purpose. THE MISHKAN was the very special place Hashem chose to "dwell" among Bnei Yisrael. Hashem doesn't need a place to live. He is called HAMAKOM - The Place - because He is everywhere, all at once, all the time. Nonetheless, He chose one place where His Holy Presence would reside in the midst of Am Yisrael during the forty years they were in the Midbar. Later on, in Eretz Yisrael, the Beit Hamikdash replaced the Mishkan. Parshat T'ruma describes the building of the Mishkan. It was made of huge beams and tapestries and skins. It could be set up and taken down as the Jews moved through the desert. Wherever it was, it was somehow always directly connected to a Heavenly, spiritual Mishkan. It took time, many materials and much work to build the Mishkan. The people had left Egypt laden with treasures. Copper, silver, and gold; precious stones, animal skins, linen, purple and scarlet wool; spices, oil, wood and animals - all payment for the many years of slavery in Egypt. They gave of their treasures generously, supplying all the raw materials and doing all the work. They wove, sewed, crafted and carved, engraved, weaved and embroidered - producing all the beautiful items Hashem commanded them to make. Today, we have no Mishkan and no Beit HaMikdash. The closest thing we have is the Bet Knesset. It's only a substitute, a reminder of the originals. If you look at a book of photographs of shuls around the world, you will see that the Jews have always tried to make their Batei Knesset as beautiful as possible. Every shul contains an Aron which reminds us of the original Aron Hakodesh. Each has a Ner Tamid to remind us of the original Menora. And most important, each has its minyan of Jews - descendants of the original Jews who left Egypt. A long time has passed since the Mishkan or Beit HaMikdash existed, but we still pray the same prayers (plus many newer ones) in Hebrew - the same language. And someday, hopefully in the near future, we will have a new Beit HaMikdash which will be even more beautiful than the original. And who knowse maybe you'll be able to help build it! [8] Torah from Nature Pictured above, to the right, under the mascot of this TT frequent feature is the shell of the sea snail known as Hexaplex trunculus or Murex trunculus. It is the top contender in our day for being the true source of T'cheilet. Its hypobranchial gland secretes a mucus... which upon exposure to air and light, produces a strong blue dye. The substance that becomes the T'cheilet dye, is colorless when it is extracted from the snail. It turns blue - as mentioned earlier - upon exposure to air and light. However, if it is shielded from light, the same substance produces a purple dye, which is thought to be the ARGAMAN, also mentioned in the sedra. So these two dyes have the same source, but different conditions of "production". Visit www.tekhelet.com for more details. And search the web for more. On a different note... [9] Taanit Esther Some say that on days when the Jewish People wage battles, they fast and pray for Divine help and guidance. Such a day was the 13th of Adar, the usual date of Taanit Esther (but not this year). Some say that the fast is actually mentioned in the Megila, which speaks of ...DIVREI HATZOMOT V’ZAK’ATAM - ...the matters of the fast and the wailing. And some suggest that the fast was instituted as an atonement and TIKUN (repair) for the Jews of Shushan attending the parties of Achashveirosh, at which he flaunted the plunder of the Beit HaMikdash and at which he belittled G-d. The Jews had no business enjoying those parties - for several reasons. Therefore, abstaining from food and drink serves as an atonement and TIKUN. And, ironically, so does the eating and drinking of Purim day. There are two ways to atone for sins of eating and drinking. One is to fast, and the other is to indulge in food and drink, even to an excess... that is L’SHEIM SHAMAYIM, for the sake of Heaven and for the fulfillment of a mitzva. Taanit Esther serves as a sobering reminder not to indulge food and wine for the wrong reasons on Purim. Taanit Esther embodies the serious side of Purim, which we tend to ignore or overlook on Purim day. [10] Dvar Torah The three metals used in the construction of the Mishkan were gold, silver, and copper (brass? bronze?) - ZAHAV, KESEF, NECHOSHET. Marayana shel Torah quotes the Chatam Sofer with a beautiful observation. ZAHAV: ZAYIN is Shabbat, HEI and BET are Thursday and Monday. NECHOSHET: NUN - Neirot, candles - that’s Chanuka (okay, so this one letter is a stretch), CHET - Chodesh, as in Rosh Chodesh, and Rosh HaShana which is also a Rosh Chodesh (hey, why not use the CHET for Chanuka? Because then we'd need something else for NUN), SHIN is Shavuot (could have been Shabbat too), and TAV is for Taanit, as in all the public fast days. [11] Divrei Menachem One of the central features of the Mishkan was the Ark that housed the Tablets of Law. Its very name "Aron" incorporates "Or" - 'light' - indicating that the Torah embodied by the 10 Commandments is the light of the world (Rabbi Bachya). Notably, the command to build the Aron is stated in the plural, in contradistinction to the singular language employed for the other appurtenances in the rest of the parsha. The inference is that the entire nation should be involved in the formation of the Aron and its purpose. The instructions for the Aron preceded those pertaining to the structure as a whole. In practice, however, the Mishkan was built before the Ark. Ramban explains that for Moshe it was important to speak of the Ark first, not as an architect, but as a teacher. For the Aron that housed the word of G-d is far more important than the building where it is stored. This surely sends a message to those individuals today who tend to confuse the aesthetics of the synagogue with what happens within it. Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff [The Parshat T'ruma Homepage]
|
