MISC section - contents: [1] From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE Q: I know that one may not talk during Kri'at HaTorah, neither during the actual layning nor in between aliyot (bein gavra l'gavra = bglg). What I have not found in S'farim is when this halacha ends. After the seventh aliya? Maftir? Hagba? Haftara? Putting back the Sefer Torah? A: We will focus on the limitations on speech only regarding the special factors that relate to Kri'at HaTorah. Many topics and modes of discussion are forbidden at any time of the T'filla and in fact, in a shul at any time. The Gemara (Sota 39a) says: "Once the Sefer Torah is opened, it is forbidden to speak even in matters of halacha." Two sources from the Nevi'im are cited: one focuses on being quiet and one mentions the need to listen. Bglg is not explicitly discussed, and according to several authorities (apparently the Rambam, T'filla 12:9; Bach, Orach Chayim 146, cited by Magen Avraham 146:3 and others; B'er Sheva, Sota ad loc.) it is permitted to talk then. In fact, in regard to another matter of disgrace to the Torah, walking out in the middle, the Gemara (B'rachot 8a) says that it is permissible to go out bglg. It is Rabbeinu Yona (B'rachot 4a of the Rif's pages) who says that once the Torah is opened, it is forbidden to talk until the end, including bglg. The Beit Yosef (OC 146:2) explains that the prohibition must be based on our concern that the person will continue talking after the reading resumes. Poskim discuss how broadly to extend this concern. Most permit learning quietly by oneself bglg, where it may be easier to stop and he at least does not disturb others (see Ateret Paz I,3, EH 13). If there is an organized break, such as when someone says divrei Torah to the whole congregation at that time, the problem likely does not exist (Yechaveh Da'at V, 17). Distinctions are also raised regarding the length of the bglg break (Magen Avraham ibid.: Aruch Hashulchan OC 146:3). Interestingly, the Shulchan Aruch (OC 146:2), while accepting Rabbeinu Yona's stringency, adopts Rambam's timeline for the matter. The Gemara and Rabbeinu Yona speak about from the time the Torah is opened; the Shulchan Aruch and Rambam posit that this is only from the time the reading actually begins. (The Ateret Paz tries to explain why it is easier to stop talking before the initial reading than bglg.) One could have explained Rabbeinu Yona's opinion to mean that it is disrespectful to speak during the entire unit of Kri'at HaTorah, including its breaks, but the Shulchan Aruch explains his ruling on more pragmatic grounds. This point is important for the following reason. Other than the length of the break for Kaddish (during which one is anyway forbidden to speak) and Hagba, there seems to be no difference regarding the chance of continuing talking from the beginning straight through the haftara (the Shulchan Aruch ibid. :3 forbids talking during the Haftara). On the other hand, regarding the matter of a unit, there is a big difference. The original takana of layning on Shabbat did not include the Haftara or Maftir. Along with the institution of the Haftara, it was instituted that he who gets the Aliya to read from the Navi should read also from the Torah, so as not to equate an Aliya for reading Navi alone to that of reading the Torah (Megilla 23a). We even separate between the two sections of Torah reading with Kaddish. Therefore, it makes sense that after the seven aliyot, it is no longer considered bglg. In fact, Rabbeinu Yona himself says that the prohibition is in place until he "finishes the parasha," which implies after the seventh aliya. (We did not find Acharonim who discuss the matter.) As hinted, there is logic to say that the Shulchan Aruch might argue. However, since he is trying to comply with Rabbeinu Yona, it makes sense to not extend the stringency to the less stringent section of Kri'at HaTorah. Considering that we did not find someone who forbids the matter (albeit, we did not find one who permitted it either), we do not feel that one can forbid appropriate speaking before the readings of Maftir and the Haftara. [2] Candle by Day We often confuse "desired" with "desirable" From "A Candle by Day" by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein [3] Wisdom and Wit by Shmuel Himelstein R' Aharon Roke'ach, son of R' Yissachar- Dov Roke'ach, the Belzer Rebbe, noted: "My father was a very wise man. As we are told that Hashem gives wisdom to the wise, it implies that the person was already wise before Hashem gave him wisdom. That being the case, I asked my father, "where does the person's original wisdom come from?" 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 permission [4] CHIZUK and IDUD for Olim & not-yet-Olim respectively In reading about the trials and tribulations of Judaism's "first family", it seems clear that their lives were no laughing matter. Famine, kidnapping, war, infertility, the near-sacrifice of their child - it all adds up to a continual struggle for survival. Avraham and Sarah - and Yitzchak, too, for that matter - seem to live from one crisis to another. And yet, inexplicably, they laughed! When hearing that they will have a child in their old age, both Avraham and Sarah laugh! In fact, the very name of that child -Yitzchak - means "laughter!" Chazal struggle with the nature and meaning of this rather unexpected show of emotion. Some want to say that Avraham's laughter is a kind of incredulous wonder at the realization of G-d's power to perform amazing miracles - as in, "Wow, can you believe what an unbelievable gift I'm about to receive?!" - while the response of Sarah (who, according to the Gemara, did not even have a womb!) is more of a self-deprecating, even challenging laugh, as in, "Hah! Imagine that! At my age, a child?" It is particularly appropriate that the sentiment, "He WILL laugh" belongs to Yitzchak, the only one of the Avot who never left the Land of Israel. The implication is clear: Life in Israel can be extremely challenging, and often is accompanied by large doses of self- sacrifice. At times, the ultimate sacrifice - greater even than that of Yitzchak, whose life, after all, was spared - will be called for. Yet, at the end of the day, those "who reap in sorrow shall harvest in joy". It is only in Israel that a Jew can find his fullest expression, experience the Mitzvot in their purest form and come closest to Hashem; and it is only in Israel that the destiny of the Jewish People will be realized. History will show that those who connect their lives to Israel will have the last laugh. Rabbi Stewart Weiss, Raanana 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 [5] Parsha Points to Ponder for VAYEIRA 1) Why does G-D say I WILL SAVE THE ENTIRE PLACE on account of fifty righteous (18:26) people while Avraham asked WILL YOU NOT SAVE THE PLACE ON ACCOUNT OF FIFTY RIGHTEOUS PEOPLE (18:24) without mentioning THE ENTIRE PLACE? 2) Why does the Torah waste the words to tell us that Lot's sons did not believe that G-D was going to destroy S'dom (19:14)? What relevance does this have to our lives? 3) The Torah states AND IT WAS AT THAT TIME that Avimelech decided to make a pact with Avraham (21:22) indicating that something about that time prompted this pact. Considering the fact that the previous story related to Avraham sending Hagar and Yishmael away from his home, what led Avimelech to do this specifically AT THAT TIME? Parsha Points to Ponder is prepared by Rabbi Dov Lipman, who teaches at Reishit Yerushalayim and Machon Maayan in Beit Shemesh and is the author of "DISCOVER: Answers for Teenagers (and adults) to Questions about the Jewish Faith" (Feldheim) and "TIMEOUT: Sports Stories as a Game Plan for Spiritual Success" a recent release by Devora Publishing ppp@ouisrael.org Answers - Ponder the questions first and then look here 1) The Netziv explains that Avraham was not sure if G-D would save the entire city on account of the righteous people so he left it open-ended allowing for it to mean the entire city or just the place where the righteous were located. G-D responded that He would save the entire city and not just the immediate location around the righteous people. 2) Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky answers that the Torah is teaching us here that belief in G-D and His involvement in the world or rejection of this reality does not depend on the mind and the intellect but rather on controlling one's desires. The Torah does so by relating that Lot, who was not completely steeped in the pleasures of S'dom was able to accept this reality, while his sons-in-law, who were consumed by the pleasure of S'dom would not let themselves accept G-D and His involvement in the world. 3) The Meshech Chochma teaches that people always saw Avraham as the beacon of chesed and no one ever feared him. However, once Avimelech saw that Avraham had a harsh and cruel side, the only traits which could lead him to dismiss a son in Avimelech's mind, then he feared Avraham and possible retribution for what he did to Avraham and Sarah. Thus, AT THAT TIME, he decided to approach Avraham about a pact. [6] Portion from the Portion by Rakel Berenbaum FEEDback to berenbau@actcom.net.il no column this week [7] from Machon Puah Who is his Mother? part 2 In our continuing review of the case of Sean and Carolyn Savage and the child that she carried to term, we are discussing issues regarding halachic maternity. In the theoretical case that such a baby would be born to a Jewish couple, who would be considered his halachic mother? Last week we discussed the reasoning of those who believe that the genetic mother is also the halachic mother, regardless of who actually carries and delivers the baby. In the case of the Savage family, she was accidently impregnated with another couple's embryos during an IVF cycle. According to this reasoning, the genetic mother would be the actual mother of the child that Carolyn Savage recently delivered. However, there are dissenting halachic opinions that posit that the birth mother is the halachic mother; they bring a number of proofs for this position. One source is the Mishna regarding the case of a young Orla tree that is grafted to an older non Orla tree (we have previously discussed this mishna in our review of fertility preservation and ovarian grafting). Even though the young tree was less than three years old (pre-grafting), the fruit grown post-grafting is not considered to be orla, since it is considered to be part of the host tree. Specifically, the fruit has grown and been nourished solely by the host tree. Similarly, once the woman receives the egg and becomes its sole source of nourishment and growth, the egg loses its independent identity and becomes part of her. Therefore, she should be considered the halachic mother. Another fascinating source is the case of Rachel and Yosef. The Gemara (in B'rachot 60b) discusses whether one can pray that the gender of their unborn child be changed. The Gemara notes a precedent in the case of Dina, Leah's daughter. Dina's name means "to be judged". The Gemara explains that Leah understood that Yaakov would have only 12 sons. She herself had already had 6 of them and each maidservant had 2 sons. She also knew through Ru'ach HaKodesh that her unborn child would be a boy. Were Leah to give birth to another son, Rachel would be left with the opportunity to have only one son, less than either of the maidservents. Leah "judged herself" and determined that she would pray for the baby's gender to be changed in order to spare her sister from embarrassment. So she prayed and the fetus was switched from male to female; Dina was born. The Maharasha, adds that what actually happened was that both Rachel and Leah were pregnant at the same time. Leah with a boy and Rachel with a girl. Leah's prayers resulted in the exchange of the unborn children. Leah gave birth to Rachel's genetic child and Rachel gave birth to Leah's. It is clear from the Torah that Yosef was Rachel's son, even though he was the genetic child of Leah. According to this opinion, it is clear that the determining factor in motherhood is giving birth. 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 1-800-071111 in Israel or in the US 718-336-0603. website: www.puahonline.org [8] Glimpses into the world of OU kashrut supervision L'CHAYIM! Kashrut issues with brandy The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms defines "brandy" as, "an alcoholic distillate from the fermented juice, mash, or wine of fruit or from the residue thereof"... The plain word "brandy" or the words "grape brandy" refer specifically to distillates made from wine. "Fruit brandy" on the other hand, may refer to brandies "from the fermented juice or mash of whole, sound, ripe fruit, or from standard grape, citrus, or other fruit wine..." In all cases, the normative, plain sense of the word "brandy" unless otherwise designated, is distilled liquor from grape or grape wine. Clearly... brandy is subject to the laws of Stam Yeinam - as any grape juice based products which are touched or moved by non-Jews prior to becoming mevushal (cooked) fall into this category. Stam Yayin is assur m'dirabanan - rabinically forbidden - and one may not drink it. Poskim discuss whether the Mishna's ruling (Avoda Zara, 29b) that it is forbidden to benefit from it also applies today. Rama (see Shulchan Aruch 123:1, 114:10 and 155:3) states that one can get benefit from Stam Yayin b'makom hefsed (in a situation of potential financial loss). The Shulchan Aruch (123:1) holds that Stam Yayin is forbidden even if there is significant loss involved. The production of kosher grape juice and wine is quite involved. In order to assure that the product does not become stam yayin, religious Jews (sometimes the mashgichim themselves) take over some or all of the aspects of production. As stated above, once the juice is mevushal, non-Jews can handle the product without it becoming stam yayin. One innovative method employed is called "hot bricking", where the juice is immediately pasteurized after crushing. This greatly simplifies the hashgacha. Of course with wine, there can be several more complications, as pasteurization is commonly delayed until later stages or - in the case of non-mevushal wines is never done at all. Here, great care is taken to make certain that the non-Jewish workers do not jeopardize the kosher status of the wine. Brandy and cognac have several further steps. As the definitions quoted above state, "brandy" is a distillate. This means that the end product is made much the way scotch or bourbon is made - the primary material is distilled. Distillation is, essentially, the process by which liquid mixtures are separated by heat. Water boils at 100C; alcohol at 78.3C Other fractions have other boiling points... For example, if we heat a liquid containing alcohol to 78.3C, the alcohol will vaporize and rise as steam. That steam is then captured and condensed. Done enough times, one can achieve a liquid which is 95% pure alcohol - referred to as "neutral spirits" or "everclear"... There are, as you can imagine, several variations on this theme, including systems that use vacuums and other modifications, all of which effect how the machinery is koshered. One might ask a simple question - isn't the distilled product only alcohol - and therefore divorced from the original liquid? Responsa Rivash 255 rules that distilled stam yayin (brandy) remains forbidden because the zei'ah (steam) that rises out of the liquid retains the halachic status of the original liquid. The Mishkenos Yaakov (Y.D. 34) has a novel approach to be lenient about zei'ah in many cases, but seems to agree that we must be machmir regarding stam yayin. The Shulchan Aruch and later Poskim all rule strictly. Because brandy has a distinct flavor from the original wine, the bracha is shehakol rather than hagafen (see Noda B'Yehuda, Y.D. 26). Nevertheless, there is no question that the original wine is intrinsic to the unique flavor of each brandy. This is, in the end, perhaps the most fundamental reason to be stringent - the brandy may be distinct from the wine, but the flavor and character of the wine are still very much present. Rather than seeking to divorce the flavors of the wine from the brandy, brandy distillation is done at the lowest possible temperatures ensuring that the vapors contain as high a proportion as possible of the congeners, the hundreds of organic chemical compounds in the wine that define its flavor profile. In the end, brandy is approximately 40% alcohol - obviously, much of the substance of the original wine remains - albeit in a concentrated form. This effective concentration of the wine again affects the Halacha. In their "straight" normal drinking strength forms, stam yayin wine and grape juice have a special halachic status. Unlike other issurim, they are batel b'shisha rather than shishim - one only needs six times the volume of the original to nullify their taste rather than the normative sixty times. When concentrated, it is necessary to nullify the full reconstituted volume of the wine! Clearly, as we have pulled the essence of the wine from the liquid, this is many times the volume of the remaining brandy and so, practically, we require the normative sixty times for koshering. Like its other distilled cousins, bourbon, scotch and whiskey, brandy is aged in casks to mature its flavor. Here we get into the much discussed issue of wine casks and distilled spirits. When making cognac, for example, the pre-aged "raw" product first mellows in new oak casks. It is then further aged in mellowed or previously used casks from wine production. Clearly, those casks have to be kosher. Interestingly, the fact that brandy is not batel b'shisha (discussed above), leads to a stringency vis-a-vis scotch and whiskey. While many follow the Iggeros Moshe's leniencies regarding spirits aged in sherry and other wine casks - one of which is that any wine would be batel b'shisha in the second liquor - in the case of brandy casks, it would be necessary to nullify significantly more than sixty times the original volume. ### [9] Hidden in the Sand This is one of the Gimatriya-Match finds that cause a WOW. [10] Person in the parsha by Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb for Parshat for Parshat Vayeira Avraham the Teacher I love to teach teachers. I've had a number of opportunities in my career to lead workshops designed to enhance the skills of classroom teachers. Some of the most powerful learning experiences that I've had have occurred during such workshops. One of the techniques that I use is to ask the participants, all teachers themselves, to close their eyes and visualize their own favorite teacher. After they have "locked in" that image, I ask them to recall the most important lesson they learned from that teacher. Invariably, a teacher of long ago surfaces in the mind's eye of the workshop members, and the lesson that they remember is often surprising to them. When we discuss what this experiment in imagery provokes, most of the participants express the gratitude they have now for lessons they learned long ago. For, you see, a lesson that lasts for many years is a valuable lesson indeed, and one to cherish and for which to be thankful. In this week's and last week's Torah portion, we read about a most remarkable man, Avraham. This man had many accomplishments. He rescued his captive nephew, brought to the world the concept of monotheism, introduced the practice of hospitality, and stood up to God Himself in defense of the cause of justice. Yet, of all these accomplishments, we are told that his most outstanding quality, the one for which he found favor in the eyes of God, was his capacity to teach others, and to teach others the lessons that would last them a lifetime. "For I have regarded him and chosen him so that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may do righteousness and justice." (B'reishit 18:19, following Rashi's interpretation) Of all the reasons to regard and choose Avraham, the Almighty selects his ability to leave a lasting lesson as the greatest of Avraham's many virtues. The text stresses "acharav", a lasting lesson. The lessons we learn for a lifetime are the true essence of education. The Hebrew word "chinuch" is found in last week's Torah portion for the first time. Rashi, the greatest of the rabbinical commentaries, defines the term as setting in motion a process which will last a long time. And that is what education is all about from a Jewish point of view. It is the initiation of a lifelong process. Plato, in his masterwork, The Republic, which is arguably the earliest treatise on the subject of education, writes, "The direction in which education starts a man, will determine his future life." How well these words capture the concept of education that is expressed in Jewish sources! Unlike Plato, however, who thought that only the elite could be teachers, Judaism teaches that every person is a teacher. Every one of us can leave a lasting impact upon another, and most of us, for better or worse, do. I encourage you, dear reader, to reflect upon some of the important lessons you have learned in your life. I wager that you will find that these lessons go back a long way, and that they were taught to you not only by formal classroom teachers, but by men and women from all walks of life. Personally, I remember lessons of appreciating authenticity taught to me by my father, of blessed memory. And I remember lessons about the importance of time management from a supervisor in the school system where I once served as a psychologist. I remember learning to enjoy reading from my seventh grade teacher, and I learned to take myself seriously from my Talmud teacher in my early college years. There is nothing more rewarding to a teacher, rabbi, or parent than encountering a student or child now grown, to be told how they remember something said long ago, perhaps in passing. Discovering that we have influenced another in a positive manner is one of the most pleasing of life's experiences. A man who was one of the most perceptive of American educators, John Dewey, once said, "Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself." Dewey was on to some- thing, but he too was preceded in this insight by the Jewish sages who taught that Torah study is the essence of life, and that, as Rambam put it, "For the wise, a life without learning is no life at all." Avraham and Sarah were the first Jews not just because they happened to be born earlier than the rest of us. They were the first Jews because teaching others was their life's mission. They modeled lives of kind- ness, empathy, justice and humility. The faithful Jew follows in their footsteps. Rabbi Joseph Hertz, the late Chief Rabbi of the British Empire whose commentary on the Bible I commend to each of you, looks upon the verse quoted above as follows: [11] MicroUlpan From an article in the JPost this past Friday. An object is a CHEIFETZ, but a gadget is a CHAFITZ [12] Divrei Menachem The parsha begins by telling us that in the heat of the day (as Avraham was recovering from his Brit Mila), Hashem appeared (Vayeira) to Avraham. It was as if Hashem was paying him a sick call or, perhaps, paying tribute to our forefather for his exceedingly high level of self-sacrifice. Then Avraham lifted his eyes and saw (Vayar) and, "behold three men were standing over him. And he saw [again] and ran toward them... and said, 'My Lord [Hashem]... please do not pass away from your servant'" (after Tanchuma Yashan). These various phases of observation teach us something about relationships between Man and Man and Man and G-d. For the passive use of the term that describes G-d's appearance to Avraham suggests that Hashem was, as it were, already hovering over Avraham. But it takes a Tzadik to recognize this. Perhaps only when this Presence manifested itself was Avraham then able to perceive the "visitors". And, our rabbis tell us, it was not just Avraham's natural desire to help others that stimulated him to rush towards his unexpected guests. For he "saw" that the overriding Divine imperative demanded that the best way to serve Hashem at that moment was, indeed, to do what he always did best: to host the guests and inspire them to follow his holy teachings. Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff [The Parshat Vayeira Homepage]
|
