b Parashat Shavua - sucot

  Main | Parashat Shavua French | Hebrew  
Dov Goldstein
Hitnachalut 11 Karnei Shomron
tel. 972-9-792 0838                     fax 972-9-792 0837
celphone: 972-52-424 305         tora@tora.co.il

logo 

Main >   Parashat Shavua
 Eretz_Hemdah




Hemdat Yamim Parashat Chukat

Hemdat Yamim Parshat Chukat 5 Tammuz 5762 ============================ This edition of Hemdat Yamim is dedicated to the memory of R' Meir ben Yechezkel Shraga Brachfeld o.b.m. ===================================== Eretz Hemdah is the premier institution for preparing young rabbis for the Israeli Rabbinate's rigorous Yadin Yadin examinations. Eretz Hemdah, with its distinctive blend of Religious Zionist philosophy and scholarship coupled with community service, ensures its graduates emerge with the finest training, the noblest motivations and the strongest connection to Jewish communities worldwide. ================================================== The Secret Road to the Top Harav Moshe Ehrenreich The Midrash (Bamidbar Rabba 19:4) tells us, in regard to para adumah (the red heifer), that Hashem told Moshe that He would explain its reasoning to Moshe, but it would remain a chok (a law whose reason is not understood) for others. The Midrash continues that there were things which were revealed to Rabbi Akiva but not even to Moshe. How could it be that Rabbi Akiva, with all his greatness, was privy to more secrets than Moshe Rabbeinu? The Midrash continues to tell of an exchange between R. Yochanan b. Zakai and a gentile. The gentile claimed that the practice of para adumah was a form of witchcraft. R. Yochanan responded that gentiles do similar things to remove evil spirits, and similarly we perform the para adumah process to remove impure spirits. Assuming this had been a deflective response, R. Yochanan's students asked him later for the real answer. He responded: "It is not the deceased who causes the impurity nor the sacred water which purifies. Rather, Hashem said: 'I legislated a chok; I decreed a decree. You are not permitted to violate it.'" Why is it unreasonable to say that, for some reason, the process removes impure spirits? Also, did R. Yochanan's stressing not to violate the decree imply a lack of trust in his students' resolve to follow halacha? The Midrash concludes with the idea that the para should come and atone for her child, the egel (the golden calf). The Sefat Emet points out that the para, which deals with sin, after the fact, precedes the egel in creation. He explains based on a shocking gemara in Avoda Zara 4b. The gemara says that Bnei Yisrael were beyond the level where they should have been vulnerable to the sin of the egel, but Hashem enabled them to sin such a sin in order to provide a claim for repenters. Since a ba'al teshuva can reach a higher level than one who hasn't sinned, there is a certain aspect of sin which, potentially, can be part of a l'chatchila (preferable) chain of events. Thus, the para, which represents teshuva and kapara (atonement), precedes the egel, in that it can, paradoxically, cause the egel to have a value. The gentile, who asked R. Yochanan, assumed that the para adumah magically removes impurity. R. Yochanan divulged to his students that the purification process, tied to repentance and atonement, can create an elevated, spiritual state, which those who were always pure do not experience. He, therefore, had to stress to his talmidim that Hashem strictly forbade entering this process, which is a chok for those who already need the purification. He reminded them that "you are not permitted to violate it" and "one who says that he will sin and repent is not given the opportunity to repent." Full tzadikim, epitomized by Moshe Rabbeinu, who directly reach their spiritual summit, cannot fully grasp the para's purification on the level of R. Akiva, the ba'al teshuva prototype. Yet, the Midrash tells us that things which are hidden in this world, will be revealed in the world to come, and one will not need to be lowered by impurity or sin to reach the greatest heights. ================================================ P'ninat Mishpat- Some Bibliographical Notes on Choshen Mishpat The world calls it "civil law." Israeli academia calls it "Mishpat Ivri." The Torah world calls it "Choshen Mishpat." What is the origin of this name? Some 700 years ago, there were three major works of p'sak halacha. Two followed the order of Shas and were, therefore, harder to use: the Halachot of the Rif and the Piskei HaRosh. The major topical code was the Rambam's Mishneh Torah, which was becoming accepted in many communities as the sole authority on practical halacha. Rav Yaakov (known as the Tur), the son of the Rosh, wrote a masterfully organized halachic work which quoted (by name) the major opinions of his predecessors, with a stress on the Rambam and his father, the Rosh. R. Yaakov named his work "Arba'ah Haturim" (The Four Columns). Bibliographically, the most important section was the fourth, Choshen Hamishpat (usually called "Choshen Mishpat"). In the Kohen Gadol's choshen hamishpat (breastplate) there were four columns of precious stones, which served as the basis for the name of the Tur's work. The urim v'tumim were placed in this choshen hamishpat, "which were needed for all who asked for their eyes to be lit up" (from introduction to Choshen Hamishpat), which was also his intention for the halachic work. [More on the structure of the different sections and the centrality of the work next week.] =========================================== Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) Aliyah Against the Wishes of Parents - Part II (condensed from Amud Hay'mini, siman 22) [We saw last week that, in general, parents cannot tell their children to forgo mitzvot, which should include living in Eretz Yisrael. On the other hand, we saw that Rav Asi was allowed to leave to greet his mother even though he was a kohen and perhaps was even allowed to leave permanently to honor her. We remind our readers that Moreshet Shaul is not written to teach practical halacha.] The Maharit, who allows one to leave Eretz Yisrael permanently in order to honor a parent, is difficult to understand. After all, the gemara (Avoda Zara 13a) allows leaving Eretz Yisrael only in order to study Torah or get married. On the contrary, kibud av va'em is more easily pushed off by other mitzvot, because the parents themselves are obligated to care for mitzvot (Bava Metzia 32a). We should note that despite the story of Rav Asi, the Rambam does not mention a heter for a kohen to enter chutz la'aretz to honor his parents. It would appear that we should take a different approach to understanding the nature of permission to leave. We [Rav Yisraeli] brought in Eretz Hemdah (pg. 34) the opinion of the Rashbash and Me'il Tzedakah that one who can not make a proper living in Eretz Yisrael is not obligated to live there, because inhabiting a country includes being able to support oneself. The logical extension of this concept is that one who cannot live with a basic peace of mind is also exempt from the mitzva. Going back to kibud av, we can explain that it is not the mitzva of kibud av which overrides the mitzva of living in Eretz Yisrael. Rather, the heter applies to the situation where one is upset by the fact that his living in Eretz Yisrael prevents him from properly helping his parents in their state of need. In such a case, one may say that his frame of mind obviates the normal obligation to live in Eretz Yisrael, as it is not normal living. Therefore, in the story of Rav Asi, only when Rav Asi demonstrated that his mother's welfare was so much on his mind did Rav Yochanan agree to let him leave. The gemara and the Rambam did not mention kibud av as a reason to leave Eretz Yisrael, because that would imply that it is the mitzva per se which creates the halacha that one can leave. In fact, parents in need is just one scenario where one's mindset prevents fulfillment of the mitzva of yishuv Eretz Yisrael. Therefore, if people are living in Eretz Yisrael and are not distraught over their parents' condition (which is often unnecessary), they need not be deterred by the mitzva of kibud av. [We will next discuss people who live near their parents and want to make aliyah.] =============================================== Ask the Rabbi Question: What is the status of divrei Torah found in parasha sheets and newspapers regarding whether they require geniza (burial of sacred texts)? Answer: The topic is much too broad to give proper treatment in this forum. We suggest that, if you read "halachic Hebrew," look at the overview found in Techumin, vol. III pp. 308-321. We will give a little background and the bottom line. There are two problems in dealing with sacred texts: 1) There is a Torah prohibition to destroy Hashem's "non-erasable names" (learned from Devarim 12:2-3). It is a matter of some debate whether there is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition to destroy other sacred articles, including a Tanach or even other divrei Torah which do not have Hashem's names spelled out. Another machloket arises in regard to indirect erasure of a Name. The gemara (Shabbat 120b) allows one who had a Name written on his body to enter a bath and have the water dissolve the ink over time, as this is indirect (goreim). However, there is reason to believe that this leniency applies only when a variety of mitigating circumstances coincide (see Igrot Moshe, Orach Chayim I, 4-6). 2) There is a requirement to avoid disgracing sacred texts and even to take steps to save them from disgrace, which includes not writing things which are likely to be disgraced later (see Shabbat 115). The critical need to teach Torah has allowed significant leniency in writing down divrei Torah in a manner which was once forbidden. However, one should take care not to unnecessarily write p'sukim or Names in places where their prospects are poor (see Igrot Moshe, YD II, 134-135). Between the two problems, several important poskim rule that disgrace is a bigger problem than non-direct, respectful destruction of the text, at least when Hashem's name is not present. Therefore, under certain circumstances, some allowed the burning of divrei Torah in a case where they could not or would not be buried and would certainly be disgraced (see Shvut Ya'akov III,10; Meishiv Davar II,80; Melamed L'ho'il, YD 89). Much of the discussion dealt with the more lenient case of unusable galleys from the printing process, where the texts were never fit for use. In modern times, the alternative to discarding is not burning, but putting in recycling bins, which is free of the disgrace of placing the texts in a garbage (even inside a bag). Also, the destruction is indirect, at least from the perspective of the text's owner. There is room to discuss leniency when Names aren't involved (see Aseh L'cha Rav III,28; Techumin ibid.). Although there are discussions regarding material printed by machine with a low level or no level of intention for kedusha and a variety of other questions, the halachic consensus is that Torah texts of all sorts (including the paper you are presently reading) should normally be put aside for geniza. [We welcome feedback from any community where the supply of this leaflet significantly exceeds its demand, so that we don't unnecessarily contribute to geniza stockpiles.] ======================================== Harav Shaul Israeli zt"l Founder and President Deans: Harav Yosef Carmel Harav Moshe Ehrenreich ERETZ HEMDAH 5 Ha-Mem Gimmel St. P.O.B 36236 Jerusalem 91360 Tel/Fax: 972-2-5371485 Email: eretzhem@netvision.net.il web-site: www.eretzhemdah.org American Friends of Eretz Hemdah Institutions c/o Olympian 8 South Michigan Ave. Suite 605 Chicago, IL 60603 USA Our Taxpayer ID#: 36-4265359



web site created by Happy Web Design