Parashat Shavua

Hemdat Yamim Parashat Vayeira

Hemdat Yamim Parshat Vayeira 20 Cheshvan 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. ========================================= A Slow but Sure Cycle / Harav Yosef Carmel The last parshiyot have dealt with the life of Avraham Avinu, father of our nation. The story of his life capsulizes, to a great extent, the story of the nation as a whole. When Avraham was 70 years old, Hashem promised him that his offspring would be liberated from slavery and exile after 400 years, and would leave with great riches (Bereishit 15:13-14). (The count of 400 began with the birth of Yitzchak and lasted until the liberation from Egypt- Rashi, see also Ramban and rishonim on Shemot 12:40). That seems like a very long period of time. However, if we check further in the development of the nation, we will find even longer periods. From the Exodus until the building of the Beit Hamikdash was 480 years (Melachim I 6:1). This number has a special significance. We find that 40 years was the length of time which Tanach refers to as the length of a generation. The pasuk in Tehillim says, "For 40 years I was angry with a generation [which sinned in the desert]" (95:10- see also Bamidbar 32:13). In other places, it was the length of a significant block of time, as in, "And the land was quiet for 40 years" (Shoftim 3:1; see also ibid. 5:31; Shmuel I, 4:18; compare Bereishit 25:20 and 26:34). 480 is 12 x 40. There is no need to prove the spiritual significance of the number twelve in Judaism. Thus, the number 480 seems to be fitting for a long historical period for Am Yisrael. Indeed, if we continue tracing Jewish history, we encounter the recurrence of this time period. 480 years after the construction of the first Beit Hamikdash, the second Beit Hamikdash was erected. (The first stood for 410 years (Erchin 12b) and there were seventy years in between the two (Yermiya 29:10)). 480 years after the construction of the second Beit Hamikdash, Bar Kochba's rebellion began, which ultimately hastened the destruction of the remaining Jewish settlement in Eretz Yisrael. After another 480 years, the period of the amoraim and savoraim ended, giving way to the Geonic Period (beginning with Rav Yitzchak Gaon (4360)- Seder Hadorot). Approximately 480 years later, the Rif and Rabbeinu Meir Maor Hagolah ushered in the period of the rishonim, followed after a similar period of time by Rav Yosef Karo and Rav Moshe Isserles, the beginning of the period of the acharonim. By this count, the new period starts in our generation. Let us hope that it will prove to progress from atchalta d'geula (the beginnings of salvation) to the geula shleima. P'ninat Mishpat - Intra-familial Obligations - Part III We saw last time that Chazal wanted a father to feel comfortable providing a significant dowry for his daughter without fear that his wealth would be lost to his family upon his daughter's death. The institution which rectifies the situation is known as ketubat banin dichrin. The basic law of ketuba works as follows. The dowry of a bride reverts to her full control if the marriage ends by divorce or the husband's death, along with the rest of the ketuba. If the wife dies first, her husband, not her sons, inherits the dowry. According to ketubat banin dichrin, when the husband subsequently dies, his sons from different marriages do not inherit equally. Rather, the sons of each of his wives receive the ketuba/dowry of their mother. Only afterwards, do the sons divide the remainder of their father's estate equally. Thus the father/grandfather, who provides the dowry, knows that his riches will either go back to his daughter or eventually end up by his own grandchildren after his son-in-law dies. While the rationale for this institution is agreed upon, there is much discussion as to its halachic mechanism. For example, the gemara (Ketubot 52b) questions why it should apply in a case where the father did not, in fact, provide a dowry (it applies in regard to the other elements of the wife's ketuba). The gemara also inquires whether payment of the ketubat banin dichrin follows the rules of payment of a ketuba or those of receiving an inheritance. There is further discussion about a case where a woman sold, during her lifetime, the rights to her ketuba, whether or not the institution of ketubat banin dichrin still applies (ibid. 53a). ========================================= Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) Reasons to be Thankful for the Medina (excerpts from Harabanut V'hamedina pg. 284) [In the piece from which these excerpts are taken, Rav Yisraeli responds to a student who found difficulty saying Hallel for the establishment of a State which, in his eyes, caused tens of thousands of olim to abandon a religious lifestyle. Within his response, Rav Yisraeli takes issue on this characterization (as we hope to share with you some day). We will now see the reason for Hallel, even if one accepts the student's assumptions.] The halacha is that when a father dies and leaves an inheritance, a son not only makes the mourner's blessing, but also Shehechianu for receiving significant financial resources (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 223:2). We see that even when one event causes both sadness and happiness, and even when the sadness overpowers the happiness, we must still bless for the good. The good received is not swallowed up and, as if standing independently, requires thanks to Hashem. Thus, even according to your assumptions, one should thank Hashem for the gift of Jewish independence in its homeland of Eretz Yisrael, despite your disappointment. Furthermore, one needs to distinguish between thanking Hashem for what He has granted us and our satisfaction with the way we make use of that present. Indeed, any good, which a person receives, also places a trial before him. Will he use the Divine gift to further his service of Hashem or not? Mesillat Yesharim says that it is a greater trial to be rich than to be poor (compare Chagiga 9 to Devarim 32:15). Despite this, one makes a blessing on receiving riches even though he may fail in the test it creates. The inevitable conclusion is that when receiving something which in its essence is a blessing, one must thank Hashem for His Divine assistance. If he doesn't make good use of the present, he may blame only himself and pray that in the future he will improve his use. In truth, this concept is clear from the Chumash as well. The cheit ha'egel (sin of the golden calf), the most severe sin in our history, was brought about, in no small part, by Bnei Yisrael's excess of gold (see Rashi Shemot 32:34, Devarim 1:1). One would think, then, that we should not thank Hashem for receiving riches as we left Egypt. Indeed, it is hard to understand why Hashem provided those riches, which contributed to our downfall. But in fact, Hashem did keep his promise of riches and, in the Haggada, we do thank Hashem for them. Furthermore, even the Exodus itself was instrumental in setting the stage for the sin. Before being exposed to Hashem's miracles and receiving freedom, Bnei Yisrael were not held so responsible for the idol worship they were involved in. So why do we get so excited about the story of what happened in Egypt, considering the tragedy that it brought about? The spies who discouraged Bnei Yisrael from entering Eretz Yisrael also were concerned about the spiritual dangers of entering a land with such physical bounty. History showed how well founded this fear was (see Devarim 8: 11-18). Yet we thank Hashem every time we eat for the "corruptive" bounty of the "good land which Hashem gave to you." Therefore, it is clear that even if we were to erroneously assume that the State of Israel caused more religious deterioration than development, we would still be obligated to thank Hashem for the great present of its establishment, which our generation merited in His grace. =========================================== Ask the Rabbi Question: Is it permitted and advisable to add individual requests to one's tefilla? Answer: There is tension between the importance of making tefilla responsive to the individual's needs and circumstances (see Berachot 29b) and the importance of preserving the framework, which was composed by Anshei K'nesset Hagedola. The gemara (Avoda Zara 8a) and poskim (Orach Chayim 119) arrived at the following balanced approach. During the first three and last three berachot of Shmoneh Esrei, where one praises and thanks Hashem, we make no requests (Shulchan Aruch, OC 112:1). During the middle berachot of set requests, one can add requests to any beracha on condition that they are related to the beracha and that the need is in the present (not, "that I shouldn't get sick") (ibid. 119:1). Some say that requests that apply to an individual should be said in the singular, as using the plural, which is the format of the set tefilla, makes it look like he is adding on to the set tefilla (ibid.). The last of the middle berachot, Shomeia Tefilla, is the most general and lends itself more easily to personal requests. Therefore, any request can be added at that point, even if relates to potential, future needs, and it can be made in the plural (ibid.). However, even here, some poskim place limitations. 1) They shouldn't be too long (ibid.: 2) Some object to turning a set text of a request into a permanent part of the Shmoneh Esrei text, particularly if formally published in a siddur (Aruch Hashulchan 119:2). Others are not troubled by the possible insult to Anshei K'nesset Hagedola, if the text comes from a recognized source such as the Zohar (Kaf Hachayim 119:5). Certainly, if an acute need persists for a long time, one should not feel pressured to stop praying for it on a regular basis. The proper place to insert the addition is within the middle of the beracha (Shulchan Aruch 119:1). It is preferable to do so before the last phrase preceding the beracha's ending (see Aruch Hashulchan 119:1) like the addition for fast days. The simplest place to insert requests is after the set tefilla is complete (before "Elokai netzor ..."), before or after "Yehiyu l'ratzon ..." (Shulchan Aruch, ibid.). None of the above reservations apply there. There are a variety of opinions as to whether it is best to make use of this safer system or whether it is best, when permitted, to insert the request at the earlier, more central part of tefilla. Some complain that halacha is so structured that it leaves no room for individualism. We are not required to make any additions and can think about our specific needs when we get up to the appropriate parts of the tefilla. However, those who can benefit from the ability to express what is on their mind can feel free to take advantage of the halachic opportunity. ======================================== 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