Parashat Shavua

Hemdat Yamim Parashat Chukat 5763

Hemdat Yamim Chukat 5 Tammuz 5763 ********************************************** 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 training young rabbis to take the Israeli Rabbinate's rigorous Yadin Yadin examinations. Eretz Hemdah, with its distinctive blend of Religious Zionist philosophy and scholarship combined with community service, ensures that its graduates emerge with the finest training, the noblest motivations resulting in an exceptionally strong connection to Jewish communities worldwide. ************************************************************************************************************************** The Song of the Moshlim Harav Yosef Carmel Toward the end of the parasha, we find a difficult, poetic portion, which talks about the destruction that occurred in Moavite territory (Bamidbar 21:27-30). The "song" begins with the words, "About this the moshlim said." We need to understand who these moshlim were and what they were singing about. What connection did it have to Bnei Yisrael (it seems to just talk about the nations of Sichon the Emorite and Moav)? Is it connected to another song mentioned soon before, the Song of the Well (ibid. 17-20) and, if so, how? The gemara (Bava Batra 78b) learns homileticly (drash), that the word moshlim refers to those who have dominion (one meaning of the word) over their evil inclinations. While this does not appear to be the simple explanation (pshat), we will see that there is a connection between the drash and pshat. Rashi, Rashbam, and Ramban explain that the moshlim were prophets, such as Bilam, who spoke in parable form. They referred to the period of the wars of Sichon against the Moavites and Ammonites, when our forefathers were enslaved in Egypt. These wars had significant impact on Bnei Yisrael, who were forbidden to attack or take land from these nations of "cousins" (the sons of Lot). The Torah reports that Bnei Yisrael took hold of the cities east of the Jordan, which they captured from Sichon, king of the Emorites. The p'sukim go on to explain that much of this area was "purified" by Sichon when he, not we, took the lands from Moav and Ammon (Gittin 38a). Yeshaya 15, 16 contain a prophecy, known as "Masa Moav," which describes Moav's conquest at the hands of a ruthless attacker. The deep state of mourning over their losses, which overcame the Moavites, is described at length. Yeshaya sums it up with the words, "These are the words that Hashem spoke to Moav from then" (ibid. 16:13). Continuing on to Yirmiya, one sees a further, more elaborate description of the same set of events. They conclude with words that mirror the Torah's words in our parasha. So the same song of the moshlim seems to appear three times in Tanach, with the most succinct version being, appropriately, in the Torah. It tells of a ruthless attack, which took the lives of women and children and did not spare the landscape of the Land of Moav, which became a wasteland. When Bnei Yisrael entered the region, they, as sons of the merciful Avraham, did not employ such ruthlessness. In the context of these events, Bnei Yisrael sang not of destruction but of the well which came with them. This well of water, on all the different levels implied, turned a land of desolation into one fit for inhabitation. The message that they brought was of development and causing the desert to blossom, both on the ecological and the spiritual plane. So both the literal and homiletic approaches are correct and complement each other. The songs are a tribute to those who control their evil inclinations with values and ethics even in the face of a struggle to survive against the 70 wolves and when taking hold of their Land. This, too, is one of the important messages of the period after the exodus from Egypt to future generations. *************************************************************************************************************************** P'ninat Mishpat Status of a Man with the Name of a Kohen (based on sections of Piskei Din Rabbani'im XVIII, pp. 187-194) Case: A man with the family name, Kagan, is married to a woman who needs a conversion because of questions about her Judaism. The regional court ruled that he must separate himself from his wife even after her conversion because of the prohibition on a kohen to marry a convert. [Ed. note- in the Russian language there is no letter for "h," which is replaced by the "hard g" sound. Thus, "Kagan" is the Russian pronunciation of "Cohen."] The man claimed to have been unaware of the concept of kehuna or his having a special status until his appearance in beit din. Ruling: In general, there is a major dispute whether kohanim, whose status is based upon assumption and not a clarified lineage, can be determined to be definite kohanim or only possible kohanim. The Mabit (Kiryat Sefer, Isurei Biah 20) says that from the perspective of Torah-level law, one who is muchzak (under the assumption of) kehuna is assumed to be so regarding all of the rights and responsibilities involved. This is based on the concept that we carry out corporal punishment based on things which are assumed by the public as common knowledge, for example, that two people are parent and child (Kiddushin 80a). Similarly, the Rama (Yoreh Deah 331:19) rules that one can give terumah to anyone about whom there is a presumption of kehuna. On the other hand, the Rama in Orach Chayim (547:2) says that the status is not definite, and the Magen Avraham (201:4) says that it is for that reason that we are not careful in our times to give preference to kohanim in a variety of situations. It is difficult to determine any clear consensus on the matter, which could have an effect on our case, as well. Does a family name mean anything? The gemara (Bava Batra 126b) relates that Rabba Bar Chanan assumed that a certain person was a bechor (first-born) because that is how his father referred to him in casual conversation. The Ketzotz Hachoshen (284:1) learns from there (although Rabba bar Chanan's opinion was not accepted in his context) that whenever one is known by others by a certain title with halachic significance, we assume that the title has basis. It is sufficient that for thirty days, the person was known publicly with that assumption (see Rambam, Malveh 24:4). The issue is that it is hard to know, based on a family name of a kohen, that he is actually a kohen, as sometimes one receives the family name based on the mother's family. [Ed. note- Throughout Jewish history, people have adopted family names other than their natural ones for a variety of reasons]. In conclusion, while a family name such as Kagan creates reason to suggest that a person is a kohen, each case must be investigated in and of its own right. The family name does not reach the level of certainty required to make a man divorce a woman who is not fit to marry a kohen. ************************************************************************************************************************** Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) Interview with Rav Yisraeli in "Hatzofeh" in Honor of Kfar Haroeh's 50th Anniversary (from Gaon Batorah U'vamidot pp. 285-288) Kfar Haroeh was one of the first religious agricultural settlements (moshavim). Rav Yisraeli was the founding rabbi and served there for some three decades. Below are his thoughts on some of the challenges of what was, at that time, a new type of rabbinical position. A rabbi in an agricultural settlement was not a foregone conclusion in the early years (1933) of Hapoel Hamizrachi (Religious Zionist Workers' Organization). When I was requested by the people of Kfar Haroeh to serve as their rabbi and I came to them, I found a group of people who were indeed united by the religious pioneer ideal. However, they were separated by their country of origin, customs, and the mode of prayer. People came to the settlement from all over Europe, and they began to work hard, physical work that they were not used to and which demanded most of their strength. Now go ahead and have them coalesce into a new, united community, one that accepts the authority of the Torah. I set for myself as a guiding principle the words of Rav Kook, "to renew the old and sanctify the new," but in a manner that fit the time and the place. Namely, "to preserve the old and to purify the new." It was clear that the job of a rabbi in such a place was to be the cement that connects between one member and another and between the entirety of the membership and the Torah of Yisrael. That way, not everyone would claim, "this is the way I want to pray," or "this is the way I received it from my fathers." After not a small amount of exertion, lectures, persuasive conversations, which lasted all hours of the day and night, I was successful in finally setting a text for prayer and in ensuring that the Torah's authority rule prominently. The difficulty was double. It was not only internal, in regard to different customs and the different origins of the members, but also in regard to the external surroundings. We were surrounded in those days by leftist kibbutzim and villages, whose people would scoff at everything that was holy to us. They didn't only scoff, but actually fought an ideological war against us. We had to develop, within our community, a very strong Jewish identity in order to stand up to them. On the other hand, we did not live in a ghetto, and we did not close ourselves in. We entered into joint action and realized the joint fate we shared with them in many areas of life: security, concern for health, land improvement. There were daily meetings, and on a daily basis, the Kfar Haroeh member was forced to deal with ridicule and secularism. On top of this, you have to consider the element of newness to every single religious institution in the kfar (village). There was the struggle over the building of the shul and over the construction of the mikveh. We had to arrange a religious school. There were struggles to properly develop a Shabbat and holiday atmosphere, to convince the public to do away with mixed dancing, which was very accepted among pioneers. Those were days full of renewal and effort. *************************************************************************************************************************** Ask the Rabbi Question: My wife did not feel well on Motzaei Shabbat and went to sleep before I made Havdala. I decided to wait for her, which ended up being until the next morning. Should I have made a full Havdala on Sunday, including the berachot on besamim and ner (Havdala candle)? Answer: There are a few questions to deal with here, starting with the question of whether you were correct to wait until the morning to make Havdala. We will assume a situation that you wife is fully capable of making her own Havdala without technical or emotional problems. It is true that it is preferable for a woman to hear Havdala from a man, because of the opinions that she is not obligated in Havdala (see Shulchan Aruch and Rama, Orach Chayim 296:8). However, if she needs to, she may make her own Havdala (ibid.; we wrote more on the topic in last year's Hemdat Yamim for B'ha'alotcha). So, if there are no problems, it is best to wait for her, but we must see whether there are problems. All of the classical sources (from the gemara (Pesachim 106a) to the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 299:6)) talk about making Havdala on Motzaei Shabbat. The idea of making Havdala until Tuesday evening sounds as b'dieved (after the unfortunate fact). However, one can claim that the sources just describe the normal situation that one fulfills his mitzva within a reasonable amount of time and does not address a situation where there is reason to wait. There is an interesting machloket between the Rosh (Berachot 3:2) and Maharam (cited by the Rosh) about one who was exempt from Havdala on Motzaei Shabbat because he was awaiting a close relative's funeral. Is he obligated to make Havdala after the funeral on Sunday? The Taz (Yoreh Deah 396:2) explains that the Rosh, who exempts the mourner, understands that the base obligation of Havdala is only on Motzaei Shabbat, and that which one has until Tuesday is because of tashlumin (making up missed obligations). In this case, there was no obligation of Havdala on Motzaei Shabbat, and he is exempt. The Maharam understands that the base obligation extends beyond Motzaei Shabbat, and the mourner starts his obligation after the burial. According to the Rosh, it should be very problematic to delay Havdala until the morning, unless there is no choice in the matter (and, in this case, there is a choice). However, it appears that we accept the approach of the Maharam as halacha (based on Shulchan Aruch, YD 341:2; see Yabia Omer V, OC 10, who discusses the various indications). A further complication is that one cannot eat or drink (except for water) before Havdala (Shulchan Aruch, OC 299:1). This is even the case upon awakening on Sunday morning, assuming one has the ability to make Havdala (Shemirat Shabbat K'hilchata 59:10). For Sefardim, the situation is even more problematic, because three pillars of recent Sefardic psak (Ben Ish Chai, Kaf Hachayim (299;26), R. Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer VI, 48.13)) rule that if one did eat before Havdala, he is able to make Havdala only if it is still Motzaei Shabbat. If one makes Havdala after Motzaei Shabbat, he does not make the berachot on the ner and besamim (Shulchan Aruch ibid.:5), because only Motzaei Shabbat is the time that fire was created and one needs to compensate for the let-down of the end of Shabbat (Mishna Berura, ad loc.). At first glance, he who waits until the next day will lose these berachot. However, it is possible to make the berachot without the rest of Havdala (Rama, OC 298:1). We conclude that it is halachically preferable for one not to wait until Sunday morning to make Havdala even if refrains from eating and even if it means that his wife will have to make it herself. Since both options are neither perfect nor halachically wrong, there may be circumstances where one will want to wait until the morning (except for the ner and besamim), while not eating. 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

Main > Parashat Shavua
Eretz_Hemdah