MISC section - contents: [1] Vebbe Rebbe [1] From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE The Orthodox Union - via its website - fields questions of all types in areas of kashrut, Jewish law and values. 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: A friend of mine goes to a local hospital that has Jewish patients who are not able to make Kiddush and does it on their behalf. When Shabbat begins late and people eat before Shabbat, he makes Kiddush before accepting Shabbat and returns home. May he make Kiddush for others before he himself accepts Shabbat? A: At first glance, your friend is making Kiddush at a time when he is not obligated to do so, on behalf of those who have (presumably) accepted (or are accepting) Shabbat and are thus obligated in Kiddush. In general, one who has already discharged his obligation of a certain mitzva can perform the mitzva with its b'racha to fulfill the obligation of one who has not yet done so (based on the concept of arvut) (Rosh Hashana 29a). However, the mishna limits this. The one who performs the mitzva must be as obligated in it as the one for whom he is doing it. We must consider: is your friend considered obligated in Kiddush because generally it applies to him, like one who already fulfilled his obligation? Or should we say that one for whom the time is such that the mitzva does not apply is not considered obligated at all? Regarding cases similar to this, Acharonim cite a Yerushalmi (see Tosafot, Yevamot 14a) that says that inhabitants of unwalled cities cannot read the Megila on behalf of those from walled cities (whose obligation is a day later). We see that one who is obligated in theory but not at this time is not considered obligated. R. Akiva Eiger (to Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 277) in regard to our case, raises the following distinction. Here, the one who has not accepted Shabbat can accept it and become obligated immediately. Therefore, the obligation is considered relevant even before he did so. However, R. Akiva Eiger left the matter as an unsolved doubt. In the past generation, several poskim have tried to resolve the doubt. Tosafot (B'rachot 48b) says that one who did not eat is considered obligated in regard to performing Birkat Hamazon on behalf of one who ate because he could eat. Rav Sh.Z. Orbach (Minchat Shlomo I, 3), makes the following distinction between that case and ours. At the time of Birkat Hamazon, the mitzva applies to the one who has not eaten only if the circumstances were that he had eaten. In contrast, before Shabbat is simply not a time that Kiddush is relevant for one who has not accepted Shabbat even if he could do so. On the other hand, we should consider whether it is clear that Kiddush is inappropriate before Shabbat. The Rambam apparently does not accept the concept of Tosefet Shabbat (the ability/obligation) to usher in Shabbat early. Yet he (Shabbat 29:11) says that it is possible to recite Kiddush toward the end of Friday afternoon. This lends credence to the concept that Kiddush (as well as its parallel, Havdala) applies and can be done close to the time of the transition between Shabbat and week- day. Thus the obligation of Kiddush may already apply on a certain level soon before Shabbat even for one who has not accepted Shabbat. While it is difficult to rely on this thesis, it can be thrown in to the mix when contemplating grounds for leniency in various related cases (see Minchat Shlomo, ibid.). Some of our generation's important poskim have differed as to whether it is proper to rely on R. Akiva Eiger's more lenient position and allow one who has not accepted Shabbat to make Kiddush for others. In a case such as ours where one is doing a mitzva by doing so and it is not easy to replace him with someone else who can make Kiddush in a better way, we feel that it is proper to be lenient on the matter (see Tzitz Eliezer XII, 25; Yabia Omer VIII, OC 46). While it is best if someone who is hearing the Kiddush should be eating upon it at that time, it is possible that even this is not an absolute necessity (Tzitz Eliezer XII, 24). (The details of that issue are beyond our present scope.) 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 We must guard against the unconscious tendency to assume something we had done to be wrong because we had not planned to do it. G-d often protects us from our plans. From "A Candle by Day" by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein A Candle by Day - The Antidote - The World of Chazal by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein Now available at 054-209-9200 [3] CHIZUK and IDUD for Olim & not-yet-Olim respectively Perhaps the most audacious complaint made by Korach's cohorts is made by Datan and Aviram who say, ìIs it not enough that you have brought us up from a land flowing with milk and honey (Mitzrayim!) to cause us to die in the Wilderness...î However, its audacity is matched by its familiarity. We're reminded of Lot's choosing the land of Sodom over the land of Canaan and, by extension, the immorality of Sodom over the wholesomeness and kedusha of Avraham's household. In Megilat Ruth, Elimelech turns his back on famine-struck Eretz Yisrael to move his family to the unethical prosperity of Moav. And, throughout our history, how often have Jews lauded their Galut ìJerusalemsî and forgotten the Land of Israel? The Midrash Shocher Tov suggests that the real targets of the audacious complaint were the ìmitzvot hat'luyot ba'aretzî All the mitzvot of Pe'ah, Leket and Shichecha, of Trumot and Maasrot and of Sh'mita can be viewed as unbearable and unnecessary burdens on one's life. In that case, life outside of Eretz Yisrael, with its fewer demands, can seem preferable. However, at the end of our Parsha, we find the appropriate rejoinder to the complaint. Wherever we speak of Trumot and Maasrot, we use the verb ìharamaî to bring up or elevate. Through the mitzvot connected to our agricultural produce, we elevate our material lives along with our spiritual lives. This opportunity only exists in Eretz Yisrael. Finding ourselves within a sh'mita year, many will agree that, despite some of the initial inconveniences, sh'mita affords us an opportunity to look at the fruits of our Land through a different lens. We recognize the special qualities, physical and spiritual, of the agricultural products of Eretz Yisrael and realize that each Jew's greatest potential for spiritual growth in all aspects of life can be realized only in Israel. Nowhere else. Nekuda. Chaya Passow, Jerusalem 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 Once, the Rebbe of Gostynin saw a number of Jews playing cards on Chanuka, as was often the practice on Chanuka in those days. Turning to the players, he remarked: ìWhen I was a young boy, I observed a number of people playing cards. After watching them for a while, I learned that if a person has a bad hand of cards, he tries to get rid of it as fast as possible, while if a person has a good hand, he holds onto it as much as possible and conceals it from all the other players. ìFrom this,î he went on, ìI learned two important rules in serving Hashem. First, if a person has any evil traits, he must strive to get rid of them as fast as possible. Second, if he has any good qualities, he should keep them to himself and not show them to anyone else.î ### R' David of Lelov said, ìSometimes the yetzer hara makes a person so enthusiastic to perform a mitzva, that the person tramples everyone who stands in his way of performing that mitzva.î 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] Parsha Points to Ponder - KORACH 1) Why does Moshe specify every person that Korach and Aharon should each take the PAN WHICH IS HIS (MACH- TATO)? (16:17) 2) Why does the Torah relate that the Jews ran TO THEIR VOICES when they feared that the land would swallow them as well (16:34)? Shouldn't it say FROM THEIR VOICES since they were reacting to the cries of the people being swallowed up? 3) Why does the Torah say the seemingly superfluous words AS MOSHE SPOKE when Aharon followed Moshe's instructions and offered incense to try to stop the plague? THESE ARE THE ANSWERS Ponder the questions first, then read here 1) The Meshech Chochma teaches that G-D wanted to make sure that Aharon did not use the pans which were used in the Mishkan since if they did, people would claim that their offering was accepted because the pans were holy. Thus, G-D commanded that everyone should use their own personal pans for the test. 2) The Kli Yakar answers that the Jews ran to hear what the people were saying as they were being swallowed since they assumed the people were crying out to G-D in repentance. This would clarify the precise reason why they were being swallowed and enabled the surviving Jews to insure that they were not guilty of the same sin LEST THE GROUND SWALLOW THEM as well. 3) The Ohr HaChayim explains that offering incense in the wrong place and time is a violation of Torah law. However, a prophet is allowed to command people to violate a Torah law on a temporary basis when a situation demands such action, like Eliyahu on Mount Carmel. Thus, the Torah emphasizes that Aharon did this in violation of the Torah because it was Moshe who commanded him to do so. 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@ouisrael.org SEIFEL is a mug or a cup, but what's a SIFLON? It's a demitasse. What's a MACHMEI'A? Even if you don't know, try to guess... It's a butter dish. How about a , MISKERET? Correct! (or not) Sugar bowl. How about this one? How do you say platter in Hebrew? PIMKA. Soup tureen? MERAKIT OR MAGEIS No Holds Barred Last week we saw the fascinating Midrash that Ya'akov told Rachel that since he already had children and she did not, then he was less obliged to pray for her. She countered that he should emulate his grandfather Avraham, who prayed for his wife, Sarah, even though he himself had children. Ya'akov asked Rachel whether she was willing to go to the lengths that Sarah did of bringing her maidservant to her husband. We mentioned last week that this Midrash illustrates the great lengths that couples are willing to go to in order to have children. It is incredible and often inspiring to see how far couples are willing to go and how much they are willing to invest, in terms of time, money and effort, to have children. Yet this can sometimes be misused, as since the couple is literally willing to try almost anything, sometimes they can be lead to undergo inappropriate and unnecessary treatments. Fertility treatment is a big business and there are people who take advantage of the couple's strong desire to have children and suggest all sorts of things that may or may not help the couple. Since each couple wants to be successful and have children they are often willing to pay substantial amounts of money for remedies and treatments, especially if these promise instant and guaranteed success without extensive medical treatment, or they suggest alternative medical treatments which may claim to have proven success. The problem is that some of these treatments are successful and have been shown to give a couple an improved chance of pregnancy, and thus many couples are caught not wanting to reject something that may help them but not wanting to pursue unnecessary treatments. Since almost everything is sometimes successful some sporadic success stories can mislead couples. So what can one do? This is an area where the Puah Institute has proven to be invaluable. Puah Institute continues to investigate many different types of treatments, both conventional and otherwise and to keep abreast of the latest studies and treatment options. In addition the Rabbis at Puah have excellent working relationships with a variety of different experts in many fields related to fertility treatment and can therefore easily check out new treatments and new methods that the couple may come across. The Rabbis at Puah guide the couple through the maze of different treatments to find the best experts and the most appropriate treatment, tailor made for each and every couple. When couples consult with the Puah Institute and receive a clear picture of their options this gives them great confidence to pursue the treatments and to be successful. The Puah Institute for Fertility and Gynecology in Accordance with Halacha is based in Jerusalem and helps couples from all over the world who are experiencing fertility problems. Puah offers free counseling in five languages, halachic supervision and educational programs. Puah has offices in New York, Los Angeles and Paris. To contact the Puah Institute please call 02-6515050 in Israel or 718-3360603. Visit our website at www.puah.org.il Mishna 18. He (R' Akiva) used to say, Beloved is man, (CHAVIV) for he was created in the image of God; but it was by a special love (CHIBA Y'TEIRA) that it was make known to him that he was created in the image of God; the mishna then quotes the pasuk in Tanach that indicates G-d's telling us about His love. Furthermore for the the people of Israel and for G-d's gift of the Torah to us. Love - and a greater measure for the telling. So too it should be for human relations. It is wonderful for parents to love their children. But they should make sure they tell them of their love. And vice versa. And for grandparents and grandchildren, siblings, spouses, friends. CHIBA and CHIBA Y'TEIRA. [9] Portion from the Portion by Rakel Berenbaum FEEDback to berenbau@actcom.net.il MACHLOKET LO L'SHEM SHAMAYIM Anyone who has ever listened to the Rabbi's speech in shul about this week's portion will remember that it has to do with the problem of MACHLOKET - disputes. We all know this. We all know that the Torah is trying to teach us that we shouldn't fight amongst ourselves. So maybe there is no point in learning this portion anymore? Maybe this lesson doesn't need to be taught anymore because we have already internalized it and no longer fight? Unfortunately, that is not the case. There are no shortage of topics that we find Jews fighting about: politics, religion, education... So maybe we needn't learn this portion any more because the situation is hopeless? Maybe we just will never learn? Maybe we will always be fighting amongst each other? If the Torah writes about something, it is because G-d wants us to learn from it. He believes that we can change; He is giving us the guidance to learn how. It is up to us to change our ways, but He believes that we can. It is legitimate to have a different opinion. It might even be all right to raise that opinion if done in the proper way. But the way to solve a dispute is to have open lines of communication. To talk to each other and to listen to each other. Moshe, after hearing all the complaints against him, and his initial reaction of falling on his face, tries to talk to the groups of people disputing against him. First he starts with Korach and his group. (16:5) VAYDABER EL KO- RACH - Moshe speaks to Korach - SHIM'U NA B'EI LEVI, listen to me the children of Levi. Moshe is trying to open up a dialogue. He also calls to DATAN and AVIRAM (:12) VAYISH- LACH MOSHE LIKRO L'DATAN VAVIRAM... Moshe calls for them to come to speak with him. Moshe tries to open up a dialogue between himself and those opposing him. Once people are able to talk there is a chance that no matter how far apart their beliefs are they may be able to resolve them. But they say LO NA'ALEH. They refuse to come up to talk to Moshe. They are not interested in a dialogue. The Midrash says that they did not want to be convinced of the truth in Moshe's position. They preferred to be ìrightî and continue the fight. But Moshe wants to try everything in his power to stop the fight. Verse 25 says, VAYAKAM MOSHE VAYELECH EL DATAN VAVIRAM. The Midrash tells us that when Moshe, the leader of the nation saw that Datan and Aviram wouldn't come to him, he went to them, even though this was below his stature. His honor was not as important as trying to open up the lines of communication to stop a fight between Jews. But he was not successful. They just didn't want to talk to him and listen to him. For continuing this unjustified dispute they were punished by VATIFTACH HADAMA ET PIHA VATIVLA OTAMî (16:32) The land opened her MOUTH and swallowed them up. They were punished tit-for-tat - they were not willing to use their mouths, to communicate, in order to stop this dispute - so the land opened her mouth - to swallow them. If the other side wants to keep up the battle no matter what one does to appease them, they will continue to fight, as it says in T'hilim - ANI SHALOM V'CHI ADABEIR, HEIMA LAMILCHAMAî (Ps. 120:7) I am a man of peace: But when I speak, they are for war. But we must still try our utmost. As Moshe did, to stop a fight. This cake recipe from my friend Sharon Levine from Miami looks like the earth that swallowed up Korach. If you want you can stick a few ginger bread men in the cracks. Chocolate Mousse Split Earth Cake 10 oz. chocolate 4 oz. margarine 6 eggs separated 1 cup sugar 1 Tbsp. rum or chocolate liqueur (optional) Preheat oven to 375F (190C). Grease an 8" spring form pan. Line with baking paper. Melt the chocolate and margarine till smooth. Beat egg yolks with cup sugar till thick (wide ribbons form). Add chocolate on low speed. Then add rum. Mix with spatula. Beat egg whites till frothy. Add cup sugar a bit at a time till stiff but not dry. Stir of white mixture into chocolate. Fold in remaining whites. Transfer to pan. Bake 15 minutes. Reduce temperature to 350F (175C) and bake more 15 minutes. Reduce to 275F (135C) and bake 30 minutes more. Turn off oven, leave cake in oven for another 30 minutes, with door ajar. Take out and place on rack till cooled. Use sharp knife to remove from pan (cake will be a bit wet - like mousse). Cover with plate and invert - remove paper lining. The Agony of the Agunah and the Convert by Rabbi Ephraim Sprecher, Dean of Students, Diaspora Yeshiva An aguna (literally, a "chained woman") is one whose husband deserts her or disappears without divorcing her, thus preventing her from remarrying. The leading rabbis in every generation have tried to find solutions, even far-fetched ones, for the distress of agunot. The illustrious Rabbi Akiva Eiger (late 18th century) helped to release an aguna with the explanation that "the time is right to release a Jewish woman from the bonds of being an aguna, and Jewish women should not be hefker (ownerless, victims of absence of a solution is liable to drive desperate women to sin, and therefore: "We are going to be lenient with an aguna... and in emergency we should rely on the words of one person. And there is no greater emergency than a situation where if a woman remains an aguna all her life, a mishap will definitely result." These great rabbis were no less God-fearing than the dayanim of certain rabbinical courts in our time. They were also familiar with the warning of the sages against hastiness in judgment: "A dayan must always see himself as though the gates of Hell are open beneath him" (Sanhedrin 7a). However, in their awareness of their great responsibility, they were not afraid to seek solutions for complex questions about agunot. Moreover, according to the kabbala, releasing an aguna brings the redemption closer. In modern times we also have the widespread syndrome of "Jewish women being hefker and Jewish women denied a Get". Solving their problem according to Halacha is one of the major Rabbinic challenges of today. More- over, Israeli law has authorized the rabbinical courts to send a husband who denies a Get to his wife to a long period of imprisonment. However, there are dayanim who are opposed in principle to such enforcement, and even milder types of enforcement, for fear of a Get kafui - a divorce granted under duress, which is not considered valid. Consequently, there are many recalcitrant husbands who exploit this situation for prolonged abuse against their captive wives. This is a complicated issue. One the one hand, a Get imposed on the husband against his will is invalid according to halacha. On the other hand, there is a concept of "he is beaten until he says: I agree", with such a Get being considered kosher and valid. The seeming contradiction is explained by the existence or lack thereof of a decree of Beit Din requiring the husband to divorce his wife. Without such a decree, even mild persuasion might threaten the non-coerced requirement of the Get. With such a decree, persuasion, coercion and even force is considered to bring the person to really want to comply with the decree and give a Get of one's own free will. Today's rabbanim are divided over the types of sanctions which, according to halacha, can be imposed on husbands who deny their wives a Get. The unresolved nature of these differences of opinions has caused many wives to live as captive women to unscrupulous husbands who hold them in chains for ransom to receive a Get. Many judges seem to ignore the directive of the Maharsha in the Talmud Bavli Yevamot who says, ìTo free an Agunah, our sages invoked many leniencies.î The Maharsha concludes that, ìG-d must grant courage to Rabbinical judges so that trapped and suffering wives will be blessed with peace and domestic tranquility.î Another major Rabbinic challenge at this time is how do we react and deal with the agony and suffering of righteous converts who suddenly find themselves in spiritual and halachic limbo. This is because of a Rabbinical Court's decision to retroactively cancel and revoke their conversions. Is such a halachic ruling valid? Let us consult the Torah and the Talmudic sources. The Torah commands us 36 times, according to the Rambam, more than any other Mitzva, to love the Ger (convert) and not to cause him anguish. The Talmud in Yevamot 47 lists 11 prohibitions against insensitive words and inconsiderate actions against converts. The Talmud there rules that we are not to be too strict or exacting towards a would-be Ger. The Rambam rules that as long as a would-be Ger undergoes Mila (circumcision), Tvila (immersion in a Mikve), and makes a verbal commitment to accept the yoke of the Mitzvot, we must accept him immediately and unconditionally as a righteous convert of the Jewish People. As the Midrash Yalkut Shimoni states, ìA righteous convert is more beloved to G-d than a born Jew.î The Talmud in B'rachot 64 states that Torah scholars must above all advance peace and harmony in the world. To preserve this peace amongst Torah scholars, the great Talmudic codifier, the Mordechai, at the end of tractate Gittin quotes Rabbenu Tam, Rashi's grandson, who ruled that no Rabbinical court has the authority to annul or revoke a halachic decision of another Beit Din. This Halachic ruling by Rabbenu Tam applies even when the Beit Din who wishes to annul is greater than the court they challenge. The Mordechai concurs and agrees with Rabbenu Tam. Therefore, there is no Halachic validity or precedent for retroactively revoking conversions. Annuling conversions has no basis in Halacha and is causing needless suffering and anguish to hundreds of righteous converts. The Mishna in Avot (1:11) states ìRabbis, be extremely careful with your words and actions... lest they lead to the desecration of G-d's Name.î We would be wise to heed their sage advice. Ed. note: Although we have a general disclaimer on page 2, we have decided to state clearly here that Rabbi Sprecher's views do not (necessarily) reflect those of Torah Tidbits, the Israel Center, OU Israel, or the OU. We will consider for publication views other than those expressed in this article. Rabbi Sprecher raises issues that demand our serious attention and much further discussion and study is called for. The aftermath of the rebellion of Korach and his followers appears to be no less interesting than the revolt itself. For in the days following we become aware that the people were still not clear about the role of the Kohen Gadol or of the other Kohanim and the Levites. They still questioned Aharon's title and still hankered for the firstborn sons of all the tribes to take an equal share in the priesthood. After the growth of the almonds on Aaron's staff settled the issue once and for all, Hashem reiterates the tasks of the Kohanim and their relationship to the Leviyim. It is intriguing to note that the family of Kehat, of whom Korach was a descendant, was to safeguard the holiest parts of the Mishkan, despite the rebellion in the family. However, by so doing they, para- doxically, are the ones to prevent more plagues among any of the rank and file who approached too closely. The Leviyim - "a gift for Hashem" - would now have the honor of singing psalms and of acting as watchmen, treasurers and officials (Rashi). And the Kohanim, in turn, were to protect the Leviyim from overstepping their boundaries. Notably, adds Rashi, the Levites were servants of Hashem and not of the Kohanim, and as such were to be respected. So now we have a useful hint of Judaism's take on the mutually deferential relationships that should exist in the work environment. Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff [The Parshat Korach Homepage]
|
