tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-202910922024-03-12T21:49:06.966-04:00Nefesh HaChaimChaim Markowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00394877450412567027noreply@blogger.comBlogger265125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-16880645020833037652014-02-27T11:08:00.002-05:002014-02-27T11:10:14.141-05:00Ki Siis: Lo Sishchat Al Chametz<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This is </span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;">in honor of the one person that actually reads this blog and gives me his comments.</span> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">On Parshas Ki Sisa </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">I spoke about the<span style="font-family: inherit;"> issur of
"lo sishchat al chametz dam zivchi", you are not allowed to shechet
the Korbon Pesach while owning chametz. There are 2 pesukim for this, one in Ki
Sisa and one in Mishpatim.<o:p></o:p></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The achronim have the
following chakirah. Is this a halacha in korbon Pesach or a halacha in hilchos
chametz. In other words do we say that one of the requirements of korbon Pesach
is that you can't own chametz while shechting the korbon. Or do we say that
part of the mitzvah of getting rid of your chametz includes getting rid of it
during the time the korbon can be shechted.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The Ramban in Mishpatim seems
to hold like the first tzad. The Chinuch (Mitzvah 89) sounds like the second
tzad.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Rashi in Pesachim 63a also
sounds like the second tzad.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A few nafka mina:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">1) Who is oveir on the
issur-the shochet and zoreik or even a person in the chaburah who owns the
chometz evn if he is not shechting. Tosafos (Pesachim 63) and thee Ramban both
say only the shochet is chayav. This is like the first tzad that it is a din in
bringing the korbon. The Rambam and others say the person in <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the chaburah who has are chametz is chayav.
This is like the 2nd tzad that it is a din in getting rid of your chametz.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">2) Is the korbon still valid.
Tosafos writes it is still valis cause no specific pasuk to say it is pasul. Lifi
the tzad of chametz-why do I need a reason. It is pashut the korbon is kosher
since it's not a chisaron <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>in the korbon.
Only if you hold the first tzad do you need a reason, otherwise you would say
the korbon is pasul.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">3) The Minchas Chinuch has a
shaylah if this issur would apply after Pesach. L'mashel if you leave over the
eimurim to burn after Pesach, can you own chametz b'hetter. L'chorah his question
only makes sense if it is a din in the korbon. If it is a din in removing your
chametz, after Pesach there is no issur so why would I have to remove my chametz.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">4)The Tzlach writes that we don't
say aseh of korbon Pesach is docheh the lav of lo sishchat because the aseh and
lav are intrinsically linked. Rabbi Akiva Eiger in Mishnayos Chagiga (1:1)
argues and compares it to mitzvah of re'iyas habayis with korbon. (Ayin sham).
I saw that some point out this machlokes can depend on our chakirah. If the lav
is a din in the korbon, then the Tzlach is correct and the aseh and lav are intrinsically
linked. But if lav is din in chametz then they are separate-lav is hilchos
chametz and aseh is hilchos korbon.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
Chaim Markowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00394877450412567027noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-67017819823615342002014-02-26T16:52:00.001-05:002014-02-26T16:52:02.353-05:00Vayakhel:Meleches MachshevesI have been lazy and it's been a while since I posted. Here is this past week's shiur.<br />
<br />
<br />
I spoke about Meleches Machsheves. Rav Menachem Zemba has a chakira in Totzaos Chaim (siman 8) whether we say that the meleches mchsheves makes the action into a melacha or do we say the action was always a melacha but the meleches machsheves creates the chiyuv. Inhis teshuvas Zera Avraham he presents both sides as 2 dinim in meleches machsheves as opposed to a chakira. My understanding of what he is saying in Zera Avraham is that depending on the case, one of the two dinim would apply. <br />
The example he gives is that "zomer v'tzarich l'eitzim-pruning for the wood" is chayav on Shabbos but patur from Shmittah. Tosafos says it is because Shabbos has meleches machsheves. The pshat is that kotzeir b'etzem does not apply to pruning. So for Shemittah we don't view your act as kotzeir. However, since on Shabbos your machshava is to do that act, it becomes a melacha for Shabbos. In this the meleches machsheves creates shem melacha. An example of the other din would be shitas Rabbi Yehuda by melacha sh'ein tzricha l'gufa where you are chayav. You are chayav because according to Rabbi Yehuda, you have enough of a meleches machsheves to create a chiyuv. <br />
<br />
I saw that Rav Moshe in his Dibros Moshe in Bava Basra has a similar explanation. The gemara in Baba Kama 61 says if you are zoreh and the wind helps you, you ar patur if you damage someone but chayav for Shabbos. One reason given in the gemara is because of meleches machsheves. Rav Moshe explains that by nezikin we care about your act. So all you did was throw something in the air. The damage was caused by the wind carrying it. However, by Shabbos we care about what you wanted to happen. Your machshava plays a role in deciding if we attribute this action to you. Since you wanted the wind to carry the stalk, you accomplished your goal and we say you did the melacha.<br />
<br />
In the Totzoas Chaim he points out that there is a machlokes rishonim how to learn the gemara. The Rosh understands the gemara that since this is how zoreh is done, (and how it was done in the Mishkan-see the Chasam Sofer in Shulchan Aruch Siman 252), therefore you are chayav. The mashmaos is that davka by zoreh we say meleches machsheves makes it a melacha. But other melachos we don't say it. According to the Rosh, meleches machsheves does not give the act a shem melacha but just creates a chiyuv. <br />
<br />
Rav Asher Weiss and Totzoas Chaim point out that this is also a machlokes between the Rashba and Ran whether you are chayav for writing on Shabbos for "chok tochos". Chok kTochos is where l'moshol I have a page full of ink and I erase the ink and m'meila I have wriitng, for gittin it is not kesiva. The Rashba holds you are patur onn Shaboos because it is not kesiva and the Ran says meleches machsheves makes it into kesiva. The Ran holds like the tzad that meleches machsheves gives it a shem melacha.<br />
<br />
One other nafka mina in the Totzoas Chaim is regarding chatzi shiur on Shabbos. Rashi says chatzi shiur is assur on Shabbos. The Rashbam holds chatzi shiur is patur because it is not meleches machsheves. According to Rashi you can argue that meleches mchsheves does not makes the action into a melacha but rather it just creates the chiyuv. Therefore, even without meleches machsheves I have a shem melacha and can say chatzi shiur is assur.Chaim Markowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00394877450412567027noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-2050061623330084342014-01-14T17:21:00.001-05:002014-01-14T17:21:09.503-05:00Parshas Beshalach:Techum Shabbos
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This week I spoke about Techum Shabbos.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">There are three shittos regarding whether Techum Shabbos is
m’doreisa or m’d’rabanan. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">1)</span><span style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font: 7pt/normal "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><span dir="LTR"></span><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Rambam in Sefer
Hamitzvos learns that even the techum of 2000 amos is Min Ha Torah. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">2)</span><span style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font: 7pt/normal "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><span dir="LTR"></span><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Rambam in Mishna<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Torah (Shabbos Perek 27) is chozer and says
that only the techum of 12 mil is Min HaTorah. The techum of 2000 amos is only
m’d’rabanan. The m’kor for this seems to be a Yerushalmi. This is the opinion of
the Rif (end of Eiruvin Perek 1 )<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">3)</span><span style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font: 7pt/normal "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><span dir="LTR"></span><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Ramban both in Sefer
Hamitzvos as well as in Eiruvin (Perek 1 17b)writes that only Rabbi Akiva holds
Techum of 2000 amos is Min HaTorah and only<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>the Yerushalmi holds 12 mil is Min Ha Torah. The chachamim in the Bavli
holds it is m’d’rabanan. </span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">There is a gemara in Eiruvin (17b) which indicates one gets malkos for techum shabbos. The Ramban says this is going according to Rabbi Akiva who holds techum Shabbos is Min HaTorah</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Divrei Yechezkel (siman 7) has an interesting chakirah.
How does one view the geder of Techum Shabbos. Is it a din that I am not
allowed to leave my mokom (however your mokom is defined) and once I leave it I
have violated the techum . Or do we say the issur is in walking 12 mil and the
12 mil is a shiur in the issur halicha. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This second tzad needs a little hesber because it is
definitely not assur to walk 12 mil within the techum. Furthermore, if a walk a
little bit outside my techum even if it is not 12 mil I am also chayav. That
being said it seems the Ramban in Eiruvin 43a seems to hold like this tzad. The
Avi Ezri (Shabbos Perek 27)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>explains the
Ramban with this mehalech.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">One nafka mina in this chakirah is chatzi shiur.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Why is there
no issur chayzi shiur for walking less than 12 mil. The Divrei Yechezkel says
this shows the 1<sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">st</span></sup> tzad makes sense. Since techum Shabbos is a din
in leaving your mokom, it is not shayach to say chatzi shiur. I saw Rav Sheinberg in his Mishmeres HaChaim discusses this chakirah with regard to ma'avir 4 amos. He says there is no chatzi shiur by 4 amos because by<span style="color: #1f497d;"> <span style="color: black;">hotza’ah
that each amah is not a davar chashuv in of itself – it’s only the sum which
creates the chashivus.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><span style="color: black;"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: #1f497d;">L'chorah you can say the same vort by techum Shabbos even according to teh Ramban.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: #1f497d;"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: #1f497d;">There are other ways to answer teh question. Maybe we don't say chatzi shiur by issurei melacha. Ayin in Mishmeres Chaim. You would then need to figure out if techum Shabbos is an issur melacha or a diff issur of Shabbos (like Shevisas Beheima). Rav Shach and the Divrei Yechezkel both discuss this as well.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">the<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Chaim Markowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00394877450412567027noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-79118397665839828402013-12-18T09:59:00.002-05:002013-12-18T09:59:16.489-05:00Parshas Vayichi:Ayin Hara
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This week I spoke about ayin hara. The Gemara in Berachos
(20a) learns that part of the beracha that Yosef received was that his
descendants would not be influenced by an ayin hara. We find several places in
Shas and Poskim where the idea of ayin hara is mentioned including a couple
that are halacha l’ma’aseh. For example, the gemara in Bava Basra 2B says one
is considered a mazik if one stands next to a friend’s field and look at it.
Rashi explains the hezek is you are putting an ayin hara on your friend. We
also pasken in Shulchan Orach that 2 brothers should not receive consecutive
aliyos because of ayin hara.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The 2
questions that need to be answered is a) how does ayin hara actually work b)
how can you be mazik someone through an ayin hara if the person doesn’t deserve
to be punished.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">There are two mehalchim in explaining ayin hara.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">1)</span><span style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font: 7pt/normal "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><span dir="LTR"></span><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Chazon Ish (Likutim
Baba Basra 14a) seems to understand that ayin hara is a koach people have that
allows them to harm someone. My understanding of the Chazon Ish is that just
like a can be mazik a person by stealing his money or physically damaging his
car, so too I can be mazik a person through my thoughts. How is it possible to
harm someone even though tey don’t deserve it? The Chazon Ish writes that you
can’t. If HKB”H determined that this person is deserving of punishment then one
way it can be brought about is through an ayin hara. For example, let’s say it
was decreed that a person should lose his car. It can either be stolen, smashed
up or lost through an ayin hara. Ayin hara is just a mechanism through which
Hashem will punish the person.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">A similar mehalach is found in the Michtav
M’Eliyahu (Chelek 4 page 5&6) and elaborated on by the Sifsei Chiam (Emunah
V’Hashgacha chelek 1). Rav Dessler writes that every person has a connection on
a ruchniyu slevel. When Reuvain is jealous of Shimon, this causes a chisaron in
Shimon’s “shefa hachaim” and makes him more susceptible to be harmed. The Sifsei
Chaim explains this to mean that a person has a koach haratzon through his
machshava to harm someone. Just like HKB”H created the world through his
ratzon, we also have the ability to impact someone through our koach haratzon
and machshava.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This is similar to the Chazon Ish. However,
there is one main difference in the way the Sifsei Chaim explains it. The
Sifsei Chaim asks how can you hurt someone who doesn’t deserve it? He gives 2
answers. His first answer is that just like Reuvein has a koach haratzon and
bechirah, so too does Shimon. The question is whose koach haratzon is stronger.
Is Reuvein’s koach haratzon to hurt Shimon is stronger than Shimon’s koach
haratzon to not be hurt? If Reuvein’s koach is stronger than Shimon can be
harmed. The Sifsei Chaim explains this does not mean that Reuvein is the
shaliach of Hashem to damage Shimon. In this sense he is different than the
Chazon Ish (according to my understanding of the Chazon Ish).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">His second answer is that <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rav Dessler also writes that when a person
causes someone else to be jealous, he has harmed that person spiritually.
Therefore, this person now has a kitrug on him and deserves an onesh min
hashamayim. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since this person is now
b’sha’as sakana (throughhis own doing) he enables the koach haratzon of Reuvein
to affect him. <i><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">2)</span><span style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font: 7pt/normal "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><span dir="LTR"></span><span style="font-family: Calibri;">I heard a second mehalach
from Rav Hershel Schachter in a shiur on ayin hara. The Torah tells us that if
you mistreat a widow or an orphan and they cry out to Hashem, that you will be
punished. How does this work? When the widow cries out to Hashem, she is asking
that her tormentor be punished. Normally, Hashem lets things slide and doesn’t
punish people right away. None of us our deserving of anything-we all do
aveiros and we all deserve to be punished. The fact that we aren’t punished
right away is part of Hashem’s chesed. However, when someone asks Hashem to
punish us, then He looks at what we have done more closely and decides if we
really deserve what we have. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Similarly, when someone is jealous of
someone’s money or wealth there is an implicit tefilla to Hashem that it’s not
fair that this person deserves what he has. The jealous person is asking Hashem
to take away what we have because it isn’t fair. Consequently, Hashem will look
more closely at whether we deserve what we have and He might take away certain
things.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The poskim point out that an ayin hara will
not affect someone who is not makpid.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>How are we to understand this based on the two mehalchim?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">According to the Chazon Ish/Rav Dessler
perhaps we can say that if you are not makpid about an ayin hara, this means
that you don’t walk around making people jealous of you. As Rav Dessler says,
if you are a “nosein” people won’t be jealous of you. M’meilah if everyonre
likes you and is not jealous they won’t put in ayin hara on you. According to
Rav Schachter’s mehalech, he mentions that the way to combat ayin hara is
through tefilla and by recognizing “ein od milvado”. Perhaps that is also the
pshat in not being makpid about an ayin hara. When you realize everything is
from Hashem and “ein od milvado”, you by nature also won’t be makpid about an
ayin hara.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Chaim Markowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00394877450412567027noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-14506082887854703802013-11-11T16:25:00.000-05:002013-11-11T16:25:01.390-05:00Parshas VaYeitzei:Neder on Davar Sh'lo Bah L'Olam
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This week’s shiur discussed the question whether you can
make a neder on a davar sh’lo bo l’olam-something which is not here. The Rambam
in Hilchos Erachin (6:30-32) says that a neder on a davar sh’lo bo l’olam works
and his rayah is from Ya’akov. Ya’akov promised Hashem that he would bring
ma’aser from whatever Hashem would give him and later on at the end of the
Parsha we find that Hashem calls that a neder. In Hilchos Mechirah (22:17) the
Rambam also brings this halacha but he writes it a little differently. In
Hilchos Erachin he writes “if a person says ‘I will give any fish that I catch
to Hekdesh’ then it works”. In Hilchos Mechirah he writes “if a person says ‘I
will give any animals born to Hekdesh’ or ‘Any animals born will be hekdesh’
then it works”. In Hilchos Mechirah he brings both a case of “I will give” and
a case of “it will be”. In Hilchos Erachin he only brings the case of ‘I will
give”. The Raavad in Hilchos Mechirah argues on the Rambam that only a case of
“I will give” works but the other case of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>“it will be” does not work. The question is what are they arguing about
and why does the Rambam only bring one case in Erachin and both cases in
Mechirah?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">There are a number of mehalchim in the achronim to explain
this Rambam. Rav Moshe in the Dibros Moshe Nedarim (Siman 6 anaf 5,6) presents
one explanation. He writes that there is a machlokes rishonim whether you can
make a neder on a mitzvah. Can one make a neder to say ‘I will learn this
perek’. A neder is usually an issur on a cheftzah so how can it apply to an
action? The Ran holds you can’t and when the gemara says that you can make a
neder to say ‘I will learn this perek’, it really means you are making a
shevuah. Other Rishonim like the Ramban and Ritva hold the neder works. Rav
Moshe explains that they learn this from tzeddaka. The gemara in Rosh Hashana
says one can make a neder on tzeddakah, so if a neder on tzeddakah works so too
a neder on a mitzvah will work. The Ran will tell you that neder on tzeddaka
doesn’t work b’toras neder but rather we say<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>the rule of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“amiraso l’gavoah
k’mesiraso l’hedyot” applies even to tzeddaka and not just hekdesh.
Therefore,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>when you say you give it to
tzeddaka it is like the ani made a kinyan on it. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Rav Moshe explains that this is the machlokes between the
Rambam and Raavad. The Rambam holds a neder on tzeddaka works like a neder and
therefore even on a davar sh’lo bo l’olam a neder can work. You can obligate
yourself through a neder to bring something or make something<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>tzedaka in the future. Even a loshon of “it
will be tzeddaka” should work. The Raavad however will tell you that using the
loshon of “I will give” is a loshon of neder. But saying “it will be” is not a
loshon of neder but more lie a loshon of nedava and that only works through the
din of “amiraso l’gavoah k’mesiraso l’hedyot” and that can not work on a davar
sh’lo bo l’olam. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
Chaim Markowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00394877450412567027noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-41543691514193299012013-10-30T17:51:00.000-04:002013-10-31T11:22:07.488-04:00Chayei Sorah: Paying a ShadchanThis week I spoke about the question of paying a shadchan. Specifically, how much do you pay a shadchan when the chassan is from one city which pays higher rates and the kallah is from a city which pays lower rates. The main point to understand is that a shadchan has a din of a hired worker (a poeil) and paying a shadchan is a shailah in Choshen Mishpat.
<br />
<br />
The Panim Meiros discusses this question and he understands that m'tzad the chassan, the shadchan is working for him in the city of the kallah and m'tzad the kallah, the shadchan is working for her in the city of the chassan. Based on a Yerushalmi in the beginning of Bava Metzia Perek 7, he says you pay based on where the poeil did the work. Therefore, the kalllah would pay based on the rates in the chassan's city and the chassan would pay based on rates in the kallah's city.
<br />
<br />
However, there is an exception. If the shadchan and chassan live in the town with cheaper rates, the chassan could argue that he hired the shadchan based on their city rates and therefore he pays the cheaper rate.
<br />
<br />
There is a machlokes haposkim in a case where the chassan from a higher rate city goes to hire the shadchan from a lower rate city to find a shidduch in the higher rate city. According to the Yerushalmi the socheir can argue I went to the lower rate town to higher cheaper work. I don't care that you are working in the higher rate town-to pay higher rates I would have hired a guy from my town.
<br />
<br />
The Panim Meiros says by a shadchan you don't say that since you davka wanted that shadchan-his work is qualitatively better. Unlike a poeil-a worker is a worker. The Minchas Elazer argues and says you can pay cheaper rates. Even in the yerushalmi you can argue some workers are better. We don't say that and pay cheaper rates.
<br />
Chaim Markowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00394877450412567027noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-26196816923219345822013-10-14T11:12:00.003-04:002013-10-14T11:12:55.114-04:00Parshas Lech Lecha: Hatafas Dam Bris<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Rambam (Hilchos Mila 1:7) paskens that both a ger who had a mila as a non-Jew and a child born with a mila rquires hatafas dam bris. The m'kor for this halacha seems to be a gemara in Shabbos DAf 135 which says that the koton born with a mila rquires hatafas dam bris because of a safeik orlah kevushah-we are afraid the orlah is hidden and teh child is really an oreil.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"> There are a number of questions asked on this Rambam.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">1) The Minchas Chinuch (Mitzvah 283) says that the Rambam paskens in Hil Teruma that a chikd born with a mila can eat terumah. The question is why. If we are afraid that he is really an oreil, so we should be machmir m'safeik and not let him eat terumah.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">2) The Rambam in Hil Mila Perek 3:6 writes that both the ger and koton do not make a beracha on the hatafas dam bris. I can understand that we don't make a beracha on the koton since the whole reason for the hatafas dam bris is due to a safeik orlah and m'safeik we don't make a beracha. However, the reason for the ger can't be because of safeik orlah kevusha-the ger had a real bris. The only reason he needs hatafas dam bris is because the milah was done when he was a non Jew. Why wouldn't he require a beracha? </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">3) The Kehillas Yaakov in Shabbos asks that the gemara in Yevomos 71a learns that a father who has a katan sh'nolad mohel can't eat the korbon pesach (until the hatafas dam bris is done). Why is this different than teruma where we say the katan can eat terumah.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">4) The Minchas Chinuch also asks, if we are choshesh for orlah kavusha, how does hatafas dam bris solve this problem. All you are doing is drawing some blood-you are not cutting anything away. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">There are a few mehalchim to answer these questions. Below is the mehalach of the Mishkanos Yaakov (Y.D. Siman 63)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">He writes that b'emes there is a machlokes hasugyas between the genara in Yevomos 71 and Shabbos 135. The gemara in Yevomos brings the shitta of Rabbi Akiva that we learn from a posuk that both a ger who had a mila as a non Jew and a father who has a katan sh'nolad mohel can't eat the korbon pesach. If the reason why the koton needs hatafas dam bris is because of safeik orlah kevushah, why do we need a limud for this? It is pashut-the child is a safeik oreil and m'meilah you can't eat the korbon Pesach. Therefore, you have to say that according to Rabbi Akiva, the reason for hatafas dam bris isn't because of safeik orlah kevusha but rather it is a din in the mitzvas mila-part of the mitzva is a requirement to do hatafas dam bris. In fact the zohar says there are 3 parts to mila, the mila, p'riah and hatafas dam.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The gemara in Shabbos argues on Rabbi Akiva and holds the reason for a katan is because of orlah kevusha. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Furthermore, According to the gemara in Yevamos, the reason both a ger and a koton need hatafas dam bris is the same reason-both are missing the mitzvah of hatafah of dam bris. The ger had a ma'aseh mila but there was no hatafas dam l'shem bris. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">We can now say that the Rambam paskens like the sugyah in Yevomos and hatafas dam bris is itself a mitzvah . (unlike the Rif and Rosh who hold the reason is orlah kevusha). We can answer the questions above.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">1) The issur of eating teruma is only for an oreil. Even though the koton is lackning the mitzvah of hatafas dam bris, he is still not considered an oreil. (ayin R' Chaim al hashas that says the same idea). Since he is not an oreil he can eat terumah. [L'chorah you have to say that the Mishkanos Yaakov understands that the shem oreil goe saway when the orlah is removed or is not present. Since this koton does not have an orlah he is not considered an oreil even though he is missing a chelek of the ma'aseh mitzva of mila (i.e. the hatafas dam).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">2) The reason we don't make a beracha has nothing to do with safeik berachos but it is because although the hatafa is a chelek of the mila, the chachamim were not misakein a beracha on the hatafa by itself. Furthermore, the Mishkanos Yaakov points out, in Mila 3:6 the Rambam mentions an androgonus doesn't make a beracha on hatafas since it is a safeik beracha. We see that koton and ger must be a different reason.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">3) The Kehillas Yaakov says that the issur of bringing the korbon pesach does not depend on the shem oreil, but rather on whether the mitzva of mila was completed. The proof is that you can't bring a korbon pesach if your slave doesn't have a mila-even though you are not an oreil. Therefore, since this koton still requires hatafas dam bris the mitzvah of mila has not been completed and you can't bring the korbon pesach.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">4) Since the hatafah isn't there to remove a safeik, there is no need to do any cutting of teh skin, and letting out blood is enough.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Other achronim (Imrei Moshe, Mishnas Ya'avetz) point out that the Yerushalmi seems to work well with the sevara of the Mishkanos Yaakov and thsi coulds also be the m,'kor for the Rambam.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Both the Kehillas Yaakov and Mishnas Ya'avetz don't like the fact that the Mishkanos Yaakov made this into a machlokes hasugyos between the gemara in Shabbos and Yevamos. They both have a mehalech which puts the sugyos together, but ain kan mokom l'harich. ayin sham.</span>Chaim Markowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00394877450412567027noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-15956560895684619952013-10-14T10:19:00.001-04:002013-10-14T10:21:12.092-04:00Welcome Back<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><div>
Welcome Back!</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
I have been toying with the idea of restarting my blog and I have finally decided to do it.</div>
<div>
As in the past, this blog will mostly be a write up of my weekly parsha chabura that I give over in shul every Shabbos. In the chabura I discuss a halachic or lomidshe topic that is based on that week’s parshah.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Comments are always welcome but I don’t guarantee that I will always respond.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
I hope to put up the first post shortly.</div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"> </span></div>
</span></span> <br />Chaim Markowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00394877450412567027noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-91667366546036177762011-07-26T17:28:00.000-04:002011-07-26T17:28:05.377-04:00Parshas Mattos:Kashering Keilim by MidyanThe Ramban asks why did B'nei Yisroel only get the mitzvah of kashering the keilim by Milchemes Midyan and not previously after Milchemes Sichon V'Og.<br />
<br />
The Ramban answers that during war all issurim are muttar. We learn this from the possuk in Va'eschanan "U'batim mileim kol tuv". The gemara in Chullin 17a writes that even chazir is muttar during battle. Therefore, by Milchemes Sichon V'Og the b'nei Yisroel were allowed to use the pots they took. However, the Ramban explains that this heter only applies by kibush Eretz Yisroel. Milchemes Midyan was not kibush EY (ayin <a href="http://www.divreichaim.blogspot.com/">http://www.divreichaim.blogspot.com/</a> for the Rogotchover's mehalech in being magdir this war). Therefore, issurim were assur and mimeilah they needed to be told to kasher the pots. <br />
<br />
L'ma'aseh the Ramban is l'shitaso in Parshas Va'Eschanan. There the Ramban explains that the heter b'sha'as milchama applies to everyone and even after the war the spoils of war are muttar even if they are assur (orlah, chazir). However, the Rambam disagrees. The Rambam paskens (Melachim 8:1) that this heter only applies to the army and b'sha'as hadechak when they are hungry. (In fact the Chasam Sofer in Chullin equates the heter of issurim to the heter of yifas toar-i.e. dibrah torah kneged yetzer hara). The Minchas Chinuch in Shoftim discusses this machlokes Rambam and Ramban.<br />
<br />
According to the Rambam how do you answer the Ramban's kasha-why didn't the get a mitzvah of kashering keilim by Sichon V'Og.<br />
<br />
There are several ways to answer this kasha.<br />
<br />
1) Daas Zikeinim writes that Sichon V'Og took place in the fields so there were no keilim. Midyan took place in the cities where they took keilim from the houses.<br />
<br />
2) Several Achronim (Lev Aryeh in Chullin 17a and Tzlach in Chullin) write the Rambam is l'shitaso. In Pesachim there is a machlokes if ta'am k'ikar is min hatorah or midirabanan. Rabbi Akiva holds it is min haTorah and the rayah is that we had to kasher keilim of Midyan. The Chachamim hold klei midyan are no rayah since that whole sugyah is a chiddush cause keilim were nosein taam lifgam. The Rambam paskens ta'am kikar is d'rabanan so he holds klei midyan were a chiddush. Once you say it's a chiddush then you can't ask why davka by Midyan they got the mitzvah-the whole thing is a chiddush. <br />
The Achronim want to take it a step farther and say that the Ramban holds ta'am kikar is d'oreisa, and mimeila he has to hold by milchama that all issurim are muttar in order to answer his kasha. However, I saw the Chasam Sofer holds the Ramban says ta'am kikar is dirabanan.<br />
<br />
3) The Chavtzeles Hasharon doesn't like this pshat because the Pri Megadim says that even though the Rambam holds ta'am kikar is dirabanan, nevertheless kashering keilim is d'oreisa. So again why didn't they have the mitzvah by Sichon v'Og.<br />
<br />
He answers that the Chazon Ish (OC) writes that Moshe got all the mitzvos at Har Sinai but was not told to tell B'nei Yisroel certain mitzvos until later. Could be this is one of those mitzvos and HKBH decided not to tell B'nei Yisroel until Midyan for some reason only known to HKBH.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-68505904529557740112011-07-04T13:20:00.001-04:002011-07-04T13:21:10.996-04:00Bris drashaHere is the speech I said today at my son's bris. We named him Michoel Dovid after my mother's father (Michoel) and my father in law's father (Dovid)<br />
There is an interesting aspect of the bris milah that does not get a lot of attentiion. It is brought down that after the bris the minhag is to bury the orlah in the ground. The Ksav Sofer says that the mekor for this minhag is based on a medrash in this weeks Parsha. The Medrash says that when Bilam saw the orlos in the Midbar he said who can stand against klal yisroel who have the bris mila that they bury in the dirt.<br />
<br />
Bilam, then went ahead and gave klal yisroel the beracha "Mi mana yaakov K'afar" who can count the dust of Yaakov and the seed of Yisroel.<br />
<br />
The Ksav Sofer concludes that frm here is the minhag to bury the orlah in the dirt.<br />
<br />
The Avudraham brings a different mekor. He says that the reason we bury he orlah is based on the havtacha that HKB”H made with Yaakov on the way to Lavans house. HKB”H promised Yaakov that his children will be like the dirt of the ground.In truth these 2 mekoros are actualy in sync with each other. There is another medrash in parshas Bamidbar, ( and I would like to thank my father in law for pointing out to me this medrash). The Medrash says that Hahsem promised Avraham that his children will be k’kochvei hashamayim. He promised Yitzchak they will be k’chol hayam. And to YTaakov he promised that they will be k’afar haertz. The medrash then concludes that the havtacha to yaakov was fullfilled b’zman of Bilaam when he blessed B’nei Yisroel "Mi mana yaakov K'afar"<br />
<br />
So we see that the m’kor of the Ksav Sofer which is learnt from the possuk "Mi mana yaakov K'afar" is the kiyum of the havtachah of `k’afar haertz. which is the mekor according to the Avudraham. It<br />
would seem then the key to understanding this minhag of burying the orlah in the ground is to understand the beracha of k’afar haertz.<br />
<br />
The medrash says that there are 3 characteristics that dirt has that are found in Klal Yisroel. First<br />
of all just like dirt is always stepped on and trampled on so too Klal Yisroel is always stepped on. Second of all just like dirt can never be totally destroyed-as much as you grind up dirt all you are left with is more dirt, so too Klal Yisroel can never be destroyed. And finally jsut like when you water dirt it has the capability to grow and produce so too Klal Yisroel has the capacity to grow and grow.<br />
<br />
It is interesting that the first characterisitc is the total opposite and even contradictory to the last 2. How is it possible for something that is constantly being steeped on to a) never be destroyed and b) contine to flourish? The meforshim point out that Yaakov was the prototype of the Jew in golus and the havtacha of k’afar haertz. given to Yaakov was a beracha meant precisely for golus. Even in golus when we are in a matzav of being beaten and stepped on we will still grow.<br />
<br />
This is what the medrash is telling us- we are like dirt always being stepped on but we are also<br />
like dirt that even in such a matzav not only do we survive but we also grow.<br />
The question still remains how does this happen? I think the answer comes from the second half<br />
of the possuk. Hashem tells Yaakov "ufaratzta yama vakedma tzofona vnegba" The gemara in Shabbos says that from here we learn one can be zocheh to a "nachalah bli mitzarim" We see from the gemara that the havtacha of k’afar haertz is a havtacha of "nachalah bli mitzarim". It’s a havtacha that klal yisroel has the ability to transcend the limitations of the natural world and go l’ma’leh min hateva. This is precisely why even in golus, in a matzav of k’afar haertz. we are able to survuve and even grow-because we were also blessed with the beracha of "nachlos bli mitzarim"-the ability to go against the natural teva.<br />
<br />
I think with this yesod we can now explain why the mila is covered in dirt. We know that a bris<br />
<br />
mila takes place on the eighth day. One of the reasons given is that 8 represents l’ma’aleh min<br />
<br />
hateva and a bris milah is l’ma’aleh min hatva. I mentioned at the shalom zachor that we see<br />
<br />
from the parsha of mei meriva that when the water from the well came b’zechus Miriam, Moshe<br />
<br />
had to hit the rock. However, at mei merivah when the water was coming b’zechus Moshe, all he<br />
<br />
had to do was speak to the rock. The Chasam Sofer writes that the ma’aleh that Moshe had over<br />
<br />
Miriam was his bris milah. The zechus of bris milah allowed Moshe to accomplish more. We see<br />
<br />
from here that a bris milah allows one to go l’ma’aleh min hateva.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, as we mentioned klal yisroel itself is a nation l’ma’aleh min hateva and the bris<br />
<br />
mila is a baby’s entrance into klal yisroel. Not only is it the first mitzvah that will be performed<br />
<br />
with this child but also, Rav Elchanan writes that Avraham was the first member of klal yisroel<br />
<br />
and he became a memeber through his bris mila. It would seem then that it is only fitting that the<br />
<br />
orlah of the mila which represents that aspect of a Yid that allows him to go l’ma’aleh min<br />
<br />
hateva and represents that teh child is a member of a nation that is l’ma’aleh min hateva should<br />
<br />
be buried in the dirt which is representative of the havtacha to klal yisroel that because they are<br />
<br />
l’ma’aleh min hateva not only will they neevr be destroyed in golus but they will also grow in<br />
<br />
golus.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-15184445770935158792011-07-03T01:01:00.000-04:002011-07-03T01:01:19.878-04:00Shalom ZachorThis past Shabbos I had a shalom zachor for my new son who was born last Monday. Below are the 2 divrei torah I said over.<br />
<br />
1) The Chasam Sofer (Chukas) brings a medrash that when the"mem" of the mateh aharon v'moshe was nifgam then the "mem" of the bris mila was nifgam.<br />
<br />
The Chasam Sofer explains that HKBH told Moshe to talk to the rock ancd instead Moshe hit it. Moshe's kavanah was that he felt bad for Miriam. Originally the rock produced water b'zechus Miriam. However, in order to produce the water Moshe had to hit the rock. Now that the rock was producing water b'zechus Moshe all Moshe had to do was talk to it. This would indicate that Moshe was on a higher madreigah than Miriam. In order to protect the kovod of Miriam, Moshe hit the rock.<br />
<br />
The Chasam Sofer explains that Moshe's cheshbon was wrong. The Medrash says that if you have a man and woman with equal level of tziddkus and on the same madreigah the man could accomplish more because of his bris mila. The reason Moshe only needed to speak to the rock while for Miriam, Moshe needed to hit the rock was because of Moshe's bris mila and not because Moshe was on a higher madreigah. <br />
<br />
The Chasam Sofer then says that maybe Moshe understood this, but he felt if he used the ma'aleh of bris mila it would look bad for Klal Yisroel who didn't have a bris in the midbar. Therefore he chose to hit the rock.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
2) Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky in Emes L'Yaakov writes that the chok of para aduma is m'galeh on the whole torah that we only keep mitzvos because of gezeiras hashem.<br />
We find that one of the mitzvos given at Marah was Para Aduma. Rav Yaakov explains para aduma at that time had no purpose-it wasn't a practical mitzvah. Yet it was given to teach klal yisroel the ikar of learning is l'shma even if it is only theortetical.<br />
<br />
We know that a baby is taught kol hatorah in the mother. Why? In reality all the Torah it learns is impractical and not l'ma'aseh. There is no Shabbos or Kashrus inside the mother.<br />
But maybe that is gufa the idea-to teach the baby the ikkar is torah lishma just like we learn from para aduma.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-90626024288360974292011-06-22T14:47:00.000-04:002011-06-22T14:47:44.713-04:00Mamzerim and MoshiachI just went through an interesting sugyah from teh 4th perek in Kiddushin. The gemara says that when Moshiach comes Eliyahu will be mitaheir the mamzeirim. The Ramban learns that even a mamzer vadai will be muttar. The Ran asks that how can it be that the issur of marrying a mamzer will be battul. Rather the gemara means that any mamzer who is mixed in with klal yisroel and we don't know that he is a mamzer will now be muttar. Eliyahu will not reveal the fact that he is a mamzer.<br />
<br />
The Ran says that this has a nafka mina b'zman hazeh. Even if someone knows that a person is a mamzer, he can't reveal it. Just like Eliyahu knows who is a mazer and won't reveal it, so too we can't reveal who is a mamzer. The Rema in Even HaEzer (Siman 2) brings the Ran l'halacha.<br />
<br />
There is a machlokes between the Chelkas Michokeik and Beis Shmuel (Even HaEzer Siman 2) whether this halacha applies to 2 eidim. The Chelkas Michokeik says the Ran is only referring to a situation where one eid knows someone is a mazeir, or where there is a rumor about a person then we don't investigate. But if 2 eidim know they have to tell beis din. The Beis Shmuel holds even 2 eidim can't say anything.<br />
<br />
The Chazon Ish (Even HaEzer Siman 1) seems to pasken like the Chelkas Michokeik.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-46992340711922248212011-03-20T01:11:00.000-04:002011-03-20T01:11:28.711-04:00The Lesson of the SHekalim in Defeating HamanThe gemara in Megillah (13b) says:<br />
"אמר ריש לקיש גלוי וידוע לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם שעתיד המן לשקול שקלים על ישראל לפיכך הקדים שקליהן לשקליו והיינו דתנן באחד באדר משמיעין על השקלים ועל הכלאים"<br />
“Reish Lakish says that it was revealed before the one who created the world that Haman would pay shekalim to kill the Bnei Yisroel. Therefore, our shekalim preceded his shekalim as we learn in the Mishna “On the first of Adar they make the appeal for shekalim”.<br />
The gemara is referring to the fact that המן offered אחשׁורושׁ 10,000 shekalim to kill the בני ישראל. In anticipation of this, הקב"ה instituted that every year a half shekel would be collected for use in the Beis HaMikadash. The question is what is the connection between the yearly donation of a half-shekel to the shekalim that המן paid אחשׁורושׁ. Furthermore, the story of Purim took place in golus when there was no Beis HaMikdash and consequently there were no shekalim being collected. How then did these shekalim have the ability to overturn the gezeirah of המן.<br />
In order to understand this gemara we need to uinderstand what the shekalim represented. The מדרש תנחומא (פרשׁת כי תשא סימן ג) says that that הקב"ה told משׁה רבינו that by reading פרשׁת שׁקלים every year it is as if משׁה רבינוhimself is here and raising us up. Rav Tzaddok(פרי צדיק פרשׁת שׁקלים) explains that פרשׁת שׁקלים begins with the phrase "כי תשא את ראשׁ" because the act of "נשיאת ראשׁ" implies that you are raising that person over someone else and making him the leader. When הקב"ה commanded משׁה to raise up בני ישראל he was telling משׁה that each individual Jew has the ability to be the best in one area. The מדרשׁ says that the תורה could only be given with 600,000 Jews. If one of them was missing there is something missing from כלל ישראל. Just like a sefer torah is posul if one letter is missing so too בני ישראל are not complete if there are less than 600,000 Jews, and an incomplete כלל ישראל can’t get the Torah. Rav Tzadok says that this מדרשׁ teaches us that each person from כלל ישראל has a part of his נשׁמה that is unique and that noone else has. This unique part of a person is brought out through לימוד התורה. This is the reason why we say "איזה הוא חכם הלומד מכל אדם". Since each person has his own חלק in תורה, everyone has something to teach others that only he can teach. Furthermore, this חלק of a person ultimately has its roots in the חכמה of הקב"ה and is considered to be a חלק אלוק ממעל. Rav Tzaddok adds that this concept does not just apply to learning Torah. The גמרא (תענית כא.) says that each person has his time in which הקב"ה wants/needs that unique chelek of good that a person possesses. When this time comes, that person is raised up above everyone.This concept, Rav Tzaddok writes is what the shekalim come to reinforce. When a person gives his half-shekel, he is showing that he is an individual who can make his own unique contribution to the תורה and to כלל ישראל. When the מדרשׁ says a person is raised up to the top over everyone else, it doesn’t mean he is better than everyone but rather it means that he is the best person to fulfill his unique role.<br />
In order to answer what this has to do with defeating המן we have to understand what המן represents. The מדרשׁ תנחומא (כי תצא ט) writes "עמלק, עם שׁבא ללק דמן שׁל ישראל ככלב" . עמלק is a nation that laps up the blood of בנ"י like a dog. Rav Tzaddok (פרשׁת זכור) explains that עמלק’s war against בנ"י comes on two levels. At first he seduces and convinces us to do aveiros However, even after we have sinned and fallen, עמלק comes along to make us fall even further. He convinces us that all is lost and there is no hope. He creates in us a <br />
<br />
sense of יאושׁ and once we are מייאשׁ, we give up hope of doing teshuva. After all, why should we do teshuva if there is no point to anything. This is why עמלק is compared to a dog that laps up the leftover blood. Whatever self worth we have left after doing an aveirah is destroyed by עמלק. He comes along and sucks all the life out of us.<br />
This idea can be applied to the story of פורים. The בני ישראל were in golus as a punishment for their aveiros. By taking part in the סעודת אחשׁורושׁ we were exhibiting the signs of יאושׁ. אחשׁורושׁ was celebrating our גלות and we joined him in the celebration. Is there any greater יאושׁ than celebrating one’s own downfall? Shortly after, המן comes along and takes advantage of our יאושׁ to try and totally destroy us. המן told אחשׁורושׁ that we were an עם מפוזר ומפורד. According to what we have been saying we explain that one sign of יאושׁ is not recognizing that we are all in this toether. Giving up hope on the גאולה is tantamount to saying that כלל ישראל as a nation, as an עם הנבחר is a relic of the past. By not recognizing that we are in fact one nation, we were showing signs of being an עם מפוזר ומפורד.<br />
הקב"ה foresaw that this would happen, so He decided to teach us many years before the Purim story that this attitude is not correct. This lesson was taught to us through the שׁקלים. As we explained from Rav Tzaddok, the shekalim reinforce the idea that each person is a חלק אלוק ממעל and has a unique purpose and goal in life. However, it is not just that we each have a tachlis, but that tachlis comes through connecting to הקב"ה and his תורה. The unique חלק that each of has in תורה, also serves to connect us to to each other through the Torah. Since my fellow Jew has something in תורה that I don’t have, I need him to teach me that part of תורה. At the same time that each of us can create our own individuality through the תורה, we also are connected as one nation through the תורה. The shekalim teach us that we are not an עם מפוזר ומפורד but rather an עם סגולה and a ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדשׁ. This lesson of the שׁקלים was reinforced everytime we donated our half-shekel year after year on ר" אדר.<br />
Perhaps with this idea we can understand another גמרא regarding the שׁקלים of המן.The gemara (מגילה טז.) says that when המן came to put מרדכי on the horse of ,אחשׁורושׁ he found the תלמידים studying the laws of קמיצה that applied to the קרבן עומר. המן commented that their studying the laws of קמיצה pushed away the 10,000 shekalim that he paid אחשׁורושׁ. What is the connection between the 10,000 shekalim paid to אחשׁורושׁ and the halachos of קמיצה? The significance of this is that not only were the תלמידים of מרדכי connecting to each other through לימוד התורה, but that day was the 16th day of ניסן, the day when the קרבן עומר would have been brought in the בית המקדשׁ. The בנ"י were learning halachos מענינא דיומא that only applied בזמן הבית. Through their learning they were showing that they were no longer in a state of יאושׁ. They had finally accepted and internalized the lesson of שׁקלים that had been taught to them year after year. בּנ"י finally recognized that they were and always will be connected to הקב"ה. When המן saw that the בנ"י had realized this, he realized his plan was going to fail.<br />
Finally, with this מהלך it is very understandable why there was a new קבלת התורה of תורה שׁבעל פה. The entire lesson of the שׁקלים is that we each have our own חלק and כח החידושׁ in the תורה. This חלק is brought out by the חדושׁים that we are מחדשׁ in תורה שׁבעל פה. [In fact we find this idea in the מגילה. The גמרא tells us that "ויעבר מרדכי" refers to the fact that מרדכי decreed a fast day on the first days of פסח. מרדכי used his כח החידושׁ to lead the בנ"י during this עת צרה]. Once בנ"י recognized and appreciated how everyone has their unique part in תורה, it naturally led to a reenergizing of לימוד התורה and a new קבלת התורה on the part of כלל ישראל.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-79543118461944902862011-03-13T23:14:00.000-04:002011-03-13T23:14:54.886-04:00Purim thoughtsEveryone nows that Achashveirosh did not know where Esther came from. What is interesting is that the gemara in Megillah says that Esther would leave Achashveirosh, go toveil and go to be with Mordechai.Now Esther was in the palace for 9 years before the end of the story. You would have to assume that Achahsveirosh had his best men working to find out where Esther came from. I would assume that would include keeping tabs on her and seeing who she was in contact with. Yet no one was able to catch her sneaking out to visist Mordechai. I find this very interesting.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-64808166365001437052011-03-13T23:10:00.000-04:002011-03-13T23:10:53.550-04:00Parshas Vayikra:Esther Karka OlamI'm finally getting around to updating my blog. I hope noone missed me too much. <br />
<br />
<br />
I spoke this week about the sugyah in Sanhedrin that discusses Esther's marriage to Achashveirosh. The gemara says that for any aveirah done b'pharhesia-in public one must give up their life. The gemara asks what about Esther-she married Achashveirosh which was an aveirah b'pharhesia. The gemara gives 2 answers 1) Abayei says Esther was "karka olam" 2) Rava says since Achshveirosh did it for his own hana'ah it was mutar.<br />
<br />
What is meant by "karka olam". The simple understanding is that since she went to Achashveirosh against her will we don't view it as if she did an aveirah. Rav Elchanan in Kovetz Ha'Oras (Siman 48) wants to explain that neither pikuach nefesh is docheh aveirah b'pharhesia and an aveira b'pharhesia isn't doche pikuach nefesh. Therefore, the best cause of action is "shev v'al ta'aseh"-do nothing. Since Esther was forced to live with Achashveirosh, she is considered in a state of shev v'al ta'aseh and it was muttar.<br />
<br />
The Rishonim ask what do you do about the fact that she was married to Mordechai and there is an issur of adultry which is one of the big 3 aveiros.<br />
<br />
1) Rabeinu Tam says sleeping with a non Jew is not an aveirah of giloy arayos.<br />
2) The Rivam says the heter of karka olam applies to giloy arayos as well.<br />
3) One can also say based on the Rashba in Megillah (15a) that Mordechai gave Esther a get.<br />
<br />
<br />
Another question that needs to be answered is that when Esther invited Achashveirosh to the party she went to him willingly. The heter of karka olam no longer applies. How then is it mutar? The Maharik (shoresh 167) and Noda Beyehuda (tanyana y.d. siman 161) answer that to save klal yisroel it was mutar. The Kovetz Heoros also suggests that she did it b'issur-it was an aveirah lishma. But elsewhere (siman 45) he quotes the Maharik as well.<br />
<br />
A nafka mina l'maaseh is the question whether a married woman can give herself over to a robber to save others.The Shevua Yaakov (chelek 2 siman 117) based on the Maharik says it is muttar and the rayah is Esther. The Noda BeYehuda disagrees. First of all he says we see the Rashba holds Mordechai divorced Esther-so there is no issur eishes ish. Even if you learn like Rahsi that she was married, the heter is only to save all of klal yisorel. to save a few Jews is assur.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-7411553732122381992011-01-02T22:49:00.000-05:002011-01-02T22:49:32.655-05:00Parshas VaEira:Hearing What You DavenThe Sifsei chachamim makes an interesting diyuk in the parsha. By 9 of the makkos when Moshe davens to remove the makkos the Torah uses the loshon of 'vayetar". However, by the frogs the loshon used is 'vayitzak ". The Sifsei Chachamim explains that the frogs were making so much noise that Moshe couldn't hear himself daven. Therefore, hehad to scream in order to hear himself. <br />
<br />
This leads to the question what is the geder of hearing yourself during davening. The halacha is that l'chatchila one must hear yourself daven but b'dieved you are still yotzei sayin it quietly. The chakirah is the following, by not hearing myself daven is it a chisaron in my dibbur and it is as if I am not saying anything or is it a halaca in tefilla that a ma'aleh of tefilla is that you need to hear yourself. (The chazon ish has this chakirah on the sugyah in Berachos). A nafka mina is if you are talking in a normal voice but you can't hear yourself because it is very noisy. According to teh first tzad-it could still be considered dibbur acc. to the 2nd tzad it is still a problem.<br />
<br />
By Megillah, a cheiresh who can't hear is possul. The Avnei Nezer discusses the question if someone can't hear himself cause he has earplugs can he be motzi someone? It could be toloi on the above chakirah. The Avnei Nezer says a cheiresh is really a bar chiyuv just he can't be motzi someone cause his speech is not dibbur since he can't hear himself. So too someone who can't hear himself-his speech is not dibbur. (Rabbi Akiva Eiger holds a cheiresh isn't a bar chiyuv).Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-52441853391035029022011-01-02T22:23:00.000-05:002011-01-02T22:23:26.278-05:00Catching up on Parsha CakesI haven't posted in while even though I promised I would be more consistent. My daughter complained that I haven't put up all of her parsha cakes, so here are the ones I haven't put up yet. All the people are actually edinble, they are made of fondue. However, noone in my family has been brave enough to taste it soI can't tell you how it tastes.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TSE_xOOtITI/AAAAAAAAAHA/OAGburlyTlI/s1600/parshas+vayeishev+yosef+in+the+pit.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" n4="true" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TSE_xOOtITI/AAAAAAAAAHA/OAGburlyTlI/s320/parshas+vayeishev+yosef+in+the+pit.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Parshas Vayeishev:Yosef in the pit</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TSE_zmLZJ_I/AAAAAAAAAHE/zHlpi4nsqcs/s1600/miketz+binyamins+cup.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" n4="true" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TSE_zmLZJ_I/AAAAAAAAAHE/zHlpi4nsqcs/s320/miketz+binyamins+cup.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Miketz: Yosef's cup in Binyamin's sack</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TSE_3fOPGnI/AAAAAAAAAHI/zEkcTEbH-A0/s1600/Vayichi+yaakov+giving+efraim+and+menashe+a+beracha.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" n4="true" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TSE_3fOPGnI/AAAAAAAAAHI/zEkcTEbH-A0/s320/Vayichi+yaakov+giving+efraim+and+menashe+a+beracha.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Vayichi:Yaakov's beracha to Ephraim and Menashe</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TSE_5ysrLQI/AAAAAAAAAHM/fdHfnsw00Sc/s1600/shemos+baby+moshe+in+the+Nile.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" n4="true" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TSE_5ysrLQI/AAAAAAAAAHM/fdHfnsw00Sc/s320/shemos+baby+moshe+in+the+Nile.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Shemos:Moshe in the Nile</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-36648665693614163252010-11-22T15:48:00.000-05:002010-11-22T15:48:43.957-05:00Parshas VaYishlach:Gid HanAsheh Muttar B'Hana'ahI spoke this week about an interesting kasha on the Rambam, The Rambam paskens that gid hanasheh is muttar b'hana'ah and one can give it or sell it to a non-Jew. The problem is that there is a sugyah in Pesachim 21b-22a that has a machlokes between Chizkiyah and Rav Avahu. Chizkiyah holds that whenever the Torah says Lo Tochal it means the food is assur to eat but it doesn't tell you whether the food is assur b'hana'ah. Rav Avahu holds that whenever the Torah says Lo Tochal it means the food is assur and is also assur b'hana'ah. The gemra asks on Rav Avahu that we find by gid hanasheh that it says "Lo Yochal", yet it is mutar b'hana'ah. The gemara answers that gid hanasheh is included in neveilah and just like neveilah is muttar b'hana'ah so too is gid hanasheh. The gemara answers that only works if you hold gid hanasheh has ta'am-taste. But if you hold "ein b'gidin b'nosein ta'am" and eating it is like eating a piece of wood, then you can't include gid hanahseh in neveilah. The gemara answers ain hachi nami, if you hold "ein b'gidin b'nosein ta'am" then gid hanasheh is assur b'hana'ah and this is shittas R' Shimon.<br />
<br />
The problem with the Rambam is that he paskens "ein b'gidin b'nosein ta'am" and also paskens that gid hanasheh is muttar b'hana'ah. According to the gemara, these two halachos can't co-exist. A number of Achronim attempt to answer the Rambam. One mehalech is found in the Kovetz Shiurim Pesachim Siman 90. The Rambam only counts cooking meat and milk and eating meat and milk as separate lavin. He doesn't count the issur hana'ah of meat and milk as a lav (even though it says "lo sevasheil gidi 3 times). The Rambam writes in Lo Saseh 187 the reason is becasue the issur achilah is really just a form of hana'ah. When the Torah says "Don't eat" what it is really saying is don't have hana'ah-whether by eating ir bu some other form. This is pshat in Rav Avahu who says that whenever the Torah says Lo Tochal it means the food is assur and is also assur b'hana'ah. The torah uses the loshon of eating cause this is the main form of hana'ah.<br />
<br />
Rav Elchanan says that this idea of the Rambam can only apply to a case where you get hana'ah by eating the food. However, by gid hanasheh the Rambam holds "ein b'gidin b'nosein ta'am" -there is no hana'ah by eating a gid hanasheh. Al karchach you have to say that the issur achilah of gid hanasheh is the ma'aseh achilah and has nothing to do with the hana'ah. Mimeila the whole drasha of Rav Avahu doesn't apply to gid hanasheh and it is actually muttar b'hana'ah.<br />
<br />
Rav Elchanan says this is pshat in the Ramban who answers the kasha on the Rambam by saying that when the gemara said it's R' Shimon it was only l'ravcha d'milsa. Meaning really the gemara could have given this teretz but it said we are going with shittas R' Shimon l'ravcha d'milsa.<br />
<br />
(ayin Rabbi Akiva Eiger in Pesachim who rejects this approach.)Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-38623139257512458502010-11-22T14:30:00.000-05:002010-11-22T14:30:00.641-05:00Parsha Cakes from Vayeitzei and VayishlachHere is my daughter's cake from the last 2 weeks.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TOrCnMlQXlI/AAAAAAAAAG0/y7xXnA9hZ0E/s1600/vayeitze+the+well+with+stone+on+top.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" ox="true" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TOrCnMlQXlI/AAAAAAAAAG0/y7xXnA9hZ0E/s320/vayeitze+the+well+with+stone+on+top.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">The well from Parshas VaYeitzei</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TOrC5PZ8UXI/AAAAAAAAAG4/C8cJm2bs0RA/s1600/parsha+vayishlach+kever+rochel+cake.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" ox="true" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TOrC5PZ8UXI/AAAAAAAAAG4/C8cJm2bs0RA/s320/parsha+vayishlach+kever+rochel+cake.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<br />
Kever Rochel from VaYishlacjUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-81768511262666929392010-11-09T09:55:00.000-05:002010-11-09T09:55:25.052-05:00Toldos Parsha CakeHere is this weeks creation.<br />
<br />
If you can't tell what it is, it is Yaakov (in blue) and Eisav (in red). The orange in the top left is supposed to be a sword.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TNlgqa8kcyI/AAAAAAAAAGw/4saoOVcc5xs/s1600/toldos+yaakov+and+eisav.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" px="true" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TNlgqa8kcyI/AAAAAAAAAGw/4saoOVcc5xs/s320/toldos+yaakov+and+eisav.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-12394530977296527092010-10-31T09:58:00.001-04:002010-10-31T09:58:14.408-04:00Parshas Vayeira and Chaya Sorah: Hachnosas Orchim and Mincha KetzaraI figured I would combine 2 weeks into one post since neither topic has a lot on it. <br />
<br />
<strong><u>Parshas Vayeira:Hachnosas Orchim</u></strong><br />
<br />
I spoke about the mitzva of hachnasas orchim. I basically went through the Chofetz Chaim in Ahavas Chesed and pointed out how the mitzva is done. Here are a few ha'aras.<br />
<br />
1) The Chofetz Chaim learns all the halachos from the actual pesukim that describe what Avraham did. He explains that the reason the Torah tells us in detail how Avraham took care of his guests is to show us what the mitzva entaiuls. For example, Avraham told his guests to sit down and rest before they ate. From here we learn you should let your guests catch their breath and relax when they come in before serving the meal.<br />
<br />
2) The Rambam paskens that escorting the guests on their way out is teh most important part of the mitzvah. The shiur he gives is different for a rebbi/talmid or a regular guest but it could be up to 2000 amos. The question is why we don't do it today. The Chofetz Chaim suggests that m'ikkar hadin the shiur is 4 amos. Everything else is just lifnim mishuras hadin. Therefore, it was only necessary to escort them to the edge of the city or 2000 amos when the roads were dangerous. In todays times where people are on the street so you just need to the escort them 4 amos.<br />
<br />
3) The question is asked if talmud torah is docheh the mitzva of hachnasas orchim since the gemara says taht hachnasas orchim is equal to hashkamas beis medrash. The Chofetz Chaim says that in this regard hachnasas orchim is equal to all other mitzvos. By all other mitzvos the halacha is if the mitzvas can be done by someone else then talmud torah comes first. .Similarly by hachnasas orchim if someone else can take care of the guest as well as you then you can go learn. An example that comes to mind would be if a chashuv guest comes, so if your wife or kids take care of the guest it might be a slap in the face to the guest. In such a case you would have to stay home and care for the guest. <br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Chaya Sorah: Mincha Ketzara</u></strong><br />
<br />
Since Yitzchak was misakein mincha I spoke about heichi kedusha. I always thougt (ignorantly as it turns out) that heichi kedusha stands for "half kedusha". However a quick google search taught me that "heichi" is yiddish for loud and since the chazzan says the first 3 berachos out loud it was called "heichi kedusha". the actual halachic term is "mincha ketzara"<br />
<br />
Here are a few he'oros.<br />
1) There are actually 3 ways brought down how to do it. <br />
The Beis Yosef quotes a Shibulei HaLeket (in siman 232) that if time is short and it is almost past zman mincha you can have everyone daven shemonah esrei and the chazan should just say the 1st 3 berachos and kedusha and not the whole chazaras hashatz. This is how the mechabeir paskens in Siman 232.<br />
<br />
The Darkei Moshe in Siman 124 quotes a Maharil that the chazzan starts off saying the first 3 berachos out loud and the tzibbur says it with him word for word including kedusha. Then after kedusha, everyone continues quietly on their own. This is how the Rema paskens in Siman 232 and 124.<br />
<br />
The Mishna Berura in Siman 124 and Siman 232 based on the Beer Heitiv in 124 says that the Rema's way should only be done if you are really pressed for time. However, if you will not miss zman mincha o it is better to let the chazzan say the 1st 3 berachos out loud and say kedusha and then everyone should start saying their own shemoneh esrei quietly from the beginning.<br />
<br />
How do we do it? Well it depends where you went to Yeshiva. Most of the velt, ( at least as far as I know) follows the Mishna Berura. This is how it is done in MTJ and other places I have been in. However, in YU they follow the Rema. This is because Rav Soloveitchik held the Rema was correct for teh following reason. This is brought down in Nefesh Harav p.124. The Rav felt that chazaras hashatz has a din of tefillas hatzibbur which he explained to mean that the chazzan as representative for the tzibbur is saying over a communal shemonah esrei. He is not just repeating shemoneh esrei to be motzi those who can't read, but rather it is a shemone esrei that everyone is a part of. He compares it to bringing korbonos for the tzibbur. The kohein brings teh korbon but it is on behalf of the whole klal yisroel. Furthermore, the Rav felt that every person has to say kedusha in his own Shemone Esrei. (He doesn't say why this is true, he just states this as fact). However, we don't do that. So how do we accomplish this? Through chazaras hashatz which is tefillas hatzibbur it is as if when we say kedusha that we are saying it as part of our shemone esrei. Based on this, if we follow the Mishna Berura's approach, you will not have said kedusha in your shemone esrei. Therefore, you must do it like the Rema, and your kedusha is now part of your shemoneh esrei.<br />
<br />
2) It is clear that heichi kedusha is not ideal. So why do yeshivos do it (MTJ does it every day). Some say because of bittul torah. However, Rav Yaakov Kamentzky in Emes L'Yaakov on Shulchan Aruch (Siman 124) gives a novel reason. He says the whole point of chazaras hashatz is to be motzi those who odon't know how to read. However, in yeshiva, everyone knows how to read so there is no need for chazaras hashatz. .However, you still need to say kedusha. By doing heichi kedusha we accomplish the saying of kedusha without chazaras hashatz. By shachris we can't do it cause you need semichas geulah l'tefilla and if everyone waits for the chazzan to say the 1st 3 berachos and kedusha it will be a hefsek. (acc to the Rema's way this might not be a problem).<br />
<br />
3) There is an interesting teshuvas Radvaz brought down that quotes the minhag of the Rambam in Mitzrayim. Apparently, the Rambam set up that the chazzan should say shemoneh esrei out loud and everyone should say it with him through kedusha. Then the chazzan would continue the rest of shemoneh esrei out loud and those who knew how to read would say it to themselves. The reason for doing this was because when everyone first said shemoneh esrei quietly and then had chazzaras hashatz, people would start talking and not pay attention. (Some things never change). Those who didn't know how to read and needed chazaras hashatz to be yotzei were not listening and being yotzei. Therefore, the Rambam set it up teh way he did. The Radvaz was discussing whether they can go back to the original takana which is more ideal or would it be disrespectful to the Rambam. He answers that the Rambam clearly indicates that his takanah was a shas hadchak and now that people in Mitzrayim are frummer and don't talk they can go back to the original takana of chazal of having a silent shemone esrei and chazaras hashatz. ( As a side not it is interesting how history never changes-there are always tekufos where people are not so midakdeik in mitzvos and then people get more educated and are more midakdeik).<br />
<br />
4) I heard a psak mipi hashemuah from Rav Dovid Feinstein that it is better for an aveil not to daven a heichi kedusha since the whole point of an aveil davening for the amud is to say more berachos for the niftar's zechus ( by answering amein to the berachos). Davening heichi kedusha doesn't accomplish thatUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-8243633779673950112010-10-31T09:08:00.006-04:002010-10-31T10:01:17.807-04:00Parsha CakesLast year my sister would bake a cake every Friday based on that weeks parsha.<br />
Here are <a href="http://parshacakes.blogspot.com/">her cakes.</a><br />
She inspired my daughters to do it this year. I must admit that my daughters can be very creative. Here are some pictures of the last few weeks cakes. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TM1lvXOBORI/AAAAAAAAAGk/tMDUm3JjLfI/s1600/Lech+Lecha_Avraham+and+Sorah+going+to+mitzrayim.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" nx="true" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TM1lvXOBORI/AAAAAAAAAGk/tMDUm3JjLfI/s320/Lech+Lecha_Avraham+and+Sorah+going+to+mitzrayim.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">This is from Lech Lecha, Avraham and Sorah going down to Mitzrayim. I will take partial credit for this since on Friday Parshas Lech Lecha my wife called me up to tell me that the cake fell in and they were trying to figure out what to do. I told her they should make Avraham and Sorah going down to Mitzrayim since there was already an indentation in the cake. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TM1lyYbSM9I/AAAAAAAAAGo/TmUgWnVw-SE/s1600/VaYEira_Lot's+wife.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" nx="true" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TM1lyYbSM9I/AAAAAAAAAGo/TmUgWnVw-SE/s320/VaYEira_Lot's+wife.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">This is from Vayeira, Lot's wife turned to salt. Originally, my daughter drew a shape of a person with blue icing. When I came home from work, I decided that the person had to look like a woman (and she needed a skirt to be tzniyus). So they added the red icing for a skirt and long hair, (What would my kids do without me :-) )</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TM1l0gwHNxI/AAAAAAAAAGs/h9KE4P13X4c/s1600/Chaya+Sorah_+Wedding+of+Rivka+and+Yitzchak.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" nx="true" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Sv1vuVLEZik/TM1l0gwHNxI/AAAAAAAAAGs/h9KE4P13X4c/s320/Chaya+Sorah_+Wedding+of+Rivka+and+Yitzchak.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">This is Chaya Sorah, the wedding of Yitzchak and Rivka. My only contribution to this one is that I was in the store and helped my daughter find the doilies that she used.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-53186772219745565562010-10-18T11:35:00.001-04:002010-10-18T11:35:51.187-04:00Parshas Lech Lecha:Mila and Bein HaShemashosParshas Lech Lecha (and Vayeira) are always good weeks to talk about the inyanim of bris mila. This week I spoke about a few interesting shailos regarding Bris Mila and Bein HaShemashos.<br />
<br />
Just as a brief hakdama, there are two main opinions regarding when nightfall starts. The shitta of the Geonim (and the GR"A) is that we hold that tzeis is 3/4 of a mil after shkiah and Bein Hashemashos lasts for 3/4 of a mil and is the time between shkiah and tzeis. . Rabbeinu Tam however holds that tzeis is 4 mil after shkiah and Bein Hashemashos is the last 3/4 of a mil before his tzeis. The time before Bein Hashemashos (3 1/4 after shkiah) is considered day. <br />
<br />
To put this in terms we can understand, let us say a mil is 18 minutes. Also, lets assume sunset (what we call shkiah) is 6:30. According to the Geonim, Bein Hashemashos lasts for (3/4) * 18 or 13.5 minutes, which means tzeis is 6:43 and 30 seconds. According to Rabbeinu Tam, tzeis is 4 mil or 72 minutes after shkiah which would be 7:42. Bein Hashemashos doesn't begin until 3 1/4 mil or 58.5 minutes after shkiah. So Bein Hashemashos for Rabbeinu Tam is from 7:29 30 seconds until 7:42. The time between 6:30 and 7:29.30 is daytime according to Rabeeinu Tam.<br />
<br />
Now for the questions. Assume shkiah is 6:30.<br />
<br />
We pasken that if a baby is born Bein Hashemashos, the bris is the next day.<br />
<br />
1) Let's say a child is born Tuesday night 5 minutes after shkiah at 6:35. According to the Geonim, the baby is born Bein Hashemashos and the bris should be Wdnesday. According to Rabbeinu Tam, the baby was born on Tuesday and the bris should be Tuesday. Rav Moshe writes that this is a case of sefek sfeika. Safeik who we pasken like and even if we pasken like the Geonim, it is a safeik what day it is since it would beBein Hashemashos acc. to Geonim. Rav Moshe wants to say that a safeik in din and safeik in metzius creates a sefek sefeika. Therefore, Rav Moshe says the bris should be Tuesday. However, if the baby was born Motzei Shabbos at 6:35 then Rav Moshe says because of chumra of Shabbos we don't make the bris on Shabbos but do it Sunday. But if one wants to do the bris on Shabbos we don't stop them.<br />
<br />
This case happened to me. My son was born a few minutes after shkiah on Thursday, but the Rav I asked said the bris should be on Friday. <br />
<br />
Also, Rav Moshe's sefek sfeika would not apply when the baby is born at 7:00. In this case according to the Geonim it is night and Rabeeinu Tam it is day so there is no sefek sefeika.<br />
<br />
2) Let's say the baby was born Friday night at 7 pm. According to the Geonim the bris is Shabbos and acc. to Rabbeinu Tam the bris is Friday. The father follows the Geonim and wants to make the bris on Shabbos. However, the mohel follows Rabbeinu Tam. Can the mohel do the bris since it would involve chilul Shabbos. Rav Yechezkel Roth at first says the mohel can't do the bris. But then he says there is a shitta of the Re'ah that if a mohel does a bris sh'lo bizmano on Shabbos it is only mikalkeil. Only the father has a mitzvah on a mila shelo bizmano and since there is no mitzvah for the mohel it is mikalkeil. Therefore, the mohel could do the bris in our case. I don't understand it since mikalkeil is still chayav m'd'rabanan. <br />
<br />
3) If a baby is born Friday before shkiah but after you were m'kabeil Shabbos the bris is Friday. Kabbalas Shabbos is meaningless in this case. We follow the day. A similar question is if a Friday bris was delayed and you were mikabeil Shabbos before shkiah and then you were able to do the bris. Do you do the bris? The Taz paskens in Siman 600 you do the bris. However, the Minchas Kohein in Ma'mar 2 Perek 1 disagrees and says you are machmir for chilul Shabbos.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-32513858325896672612010-10-13T10:03:00.001-04:002010-10-18T10:15:33.636-04:00Parshas Noach:Ben Noach and Holchin Acheir RovDoes a Ben Noach have the right to use a concept like rov? The Pri Migadim in Teivas Gomeh and Pesicha L'Taaravos Chakira 3 discusses the question of a piece of eiver min hachai that is mixed with other meats. Can a Ben Noach use bittul b'rov to eat the mixture? The Pri Megadim assumes that you can't use rov since the dinim of rov are learned from Sanhedrin and Kodshim/Korbonos. Since these halachos don't apply to a ben Noach, they have no mekor for rov. The Pri Megadim does have a safeik that maybe we still say mi ikka midi d'yisroel mutar u'ben noach assur and therefore the ta'aroves is muttar to a ben noach.<br />
<br />
The Noda B'Yehuda (Mahadura Tanyana Even Ezer Siman 42) also holds like this. However, he does say we follow rov l'chumrah. Therefore, we use the rov of rov bi'ilos achar haba'al to say we know who a ben Noach's father is and therefore he is assur to his father's wife.<br />
<br />
The Pri Yitzchak (Chelek 2 Siman 60) disagrees and says from the fact that dinei yerusha apply to a ben Noach and a son inherits his father, we see that we use rov and we say rov bi'ilos achar haba'al .<br />
<br />
The Chasam Sofer (Yora Deia Siman 71) also holds we say rov by a ben Noach. <br />
<br />
<br />
There are a few nafka minas.<br />
<br />
1) The gemara in Avodah Zara 6B says a ben Noach can bring a korban but he can't bring a treifa as a korban. The only reason we don't say that every animal brought is a safeik treifa is because we use a rov of rov b'heimos k'sheiros. If a ben Noach can't use rov, maybe we should say that a ben Noach can never bring his own korbon on his private bamah beacuse maybe it is a treifa.<br />
<br />
One approach to answering the kash ais to say that the only animal that a be nOach can not bring is an naimal that woul dbe posul for a Yisroel to bring. So since a stam animal is muttar for a Yisroel it is also muttar for a ben Noach. Only a definate treifa is a problem.<br />
<br />
2) The Minchas Chinuch (Mitzva 32) says that an asufi who lives among rov yisroel can assume he is a yisroel. But if a ben Noach doesn't have rov how can he keep Shabbos since goy sheshavas is chayav misa.<br />
<br />
3) The Rambam paskens if B'nei K'turah and B'nei Yishmael get mixed up you give the whole group a bris mila. The Sha'agas Aryeh asks, why don't we go after rov and rov are from Yishmael. His rayah that the Rambam holds we go after rov by a ben Noach is that the Rambam paskensthat if a ger from Amon comes to us we say Sancheirev mixed everyone up and since rov non Jews are not from Amon we can assume this ger is not from Amon and he can marry a Jew. <br />
<br />
The Noda B'Yehuda answers that there is no rov by a ben Noach. But in the case of the ger, since he already converted he is a Jew and he can use rov. <br />
<br />
The question on the Noda B'Yehuda is so why don't we say any ben Noach is chayav mila since maybe he is from B'nei Keturah and we can't use rov. Also, why did the Rambam only use a case of B'nei Keturah mixed with Yishmael.<br />
<br />
One answer I saw is that since other goyim don't have a mesorah to do mila we can assume they are not b'nei Keturah. It is only Yishmael who also has a mesora for mila that we have to worry maybe they are b'nei keturah.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20291092.post-62999115447790934012010-10-02T23:47:00.004-04:002010-10-02T23:58:14.285-04:00Sukkah and the RainI hope everyone had an enjoyable sukkos and is ready to get back to the regulat grind.<br />
<br />
The first night we had a massive downpour right after maa'riv which of course leads into the question of what is one supposd to do when it rains the first night. Basically, there are 2 shittos in the Rishonim. Some Rishonim hold that the first night one has a chiyuv to eat in the sukkah even if it rains. The petur of mitzaeir does not apply the first night. Other Rishonim hold that the petur of mitztaeir does apply the first night and one does not have to eat in the rain. What is the lomdus of the machlokes? There are actually a couple of ways to learn the machlokes. One way is to say that they argue in how to understand the chiyuv of eating in the sukkah the first night. Teh gemara says that we have a gezeirah shava of 15-15 from Pesach to teach us that eating in the sukkah the first night is not optional. Just like one has a chiyuv to eat matzxah the first night so too one has a chiyuv to eat in the sukkah the first night. The question is what is the chiyuv. Does the gezeirah shava just tell us that one has to eat bread the first night and since you can't eat outside the sukkah you have to eat it in the sukkah. However, there is no specific chiyuv to eat in the sukkah. The other way to understand the gezeirah shava is that the limud is telling us that there is a specific chiyuv to eat in the sukkah. It is not enough to eat bread but that bread must be eaten in the sukkah. One nafka mina would be how much bread does one have to eat. If the chiyuv is just to eat bread then one can argue you only need to eat a k'zayis. (You woud then also need to say that the achilas k'zayis on the first night becomes an achilas keva and m'meilah you would require a sukkah for the k'zayis.). According to the 2nd tzad, the chiyuv is to davka eat in the sukkah and since an achilas sukkah is a beitzah, you need to eat a beitzah of bread.<br />
<br />
A second nafka mina is our case. Does the petur of mitztaeir/rain/teishvu k'ein taduru apply the first night. If the chiyuv is just to eat bread and you only need a sukkah to allow you to eat the bread so there would still be a petur of mitztaeir/rain/teishvu k'ein taduru and you would be able to eat the k'zayis of bread in the house. According to the 2nd tzad, the chiyuv is to davka eat in the sukkah and one could argue that there is no petur of mitztaeir/rain/teishvu k'ein taduru and one would need to eat the bread in the sukkah even in the rain.<br />
<br />
I would just point out that one could argue the two sides differently-ayin Aruch Hashulchan. <br />
<br />
What does one do l'halacha? The truth is that even according to the tzad you have a chiyuv to eat in the sukkah in the rain, the chiyuv only applies to the first beitzah/k'zayis. So in reality one could make kiddush in the house, eat the meal and see if it stops raining. If it stops you can go outside eat in the sukkah and be yotzei both shittos. If it doesn't stop raining you could still go outside eat a k'beitzah in the rain and be yotzei the shitta that you need to eat in the rain. The problem is what to do with the beracha of shehechiyanu. The beracha of shehechiyanu goes on the yom tov and on the sukkah. If you made kiddush in the house the shehechiyanu only goes on yom tov. Therefore, the Mishna Berura and other poskim like the Mateh Efraim and Pri Megadim reccomend waiting an hour or two before making kiddush. <br />
<br />
I actually had decided to start eating around 9:30 and right when I was ready to make kiddush teh rain stopped. We had our whole meal in the sukkah.<br />
<br />
<strong><u>Waiting until Chatzos</u></strong><br />
<br />
There is a shittah brought down to wait until chatzos. It is quoted from the Maharil, although the Sharei Teshuva says that in the Teshuvas Maharil he writes noone did this and the Teshuvos are the ikkar. <br />
The Bekurei Yaakov and Chayei Adam also say to wait until chatzos. The Chayei Adam says you can make kiddush in the house after 2 hours but you should try to stay up until chatzos to eat a k'beitzah in the sukkah. . The Bekurei Yaakov (639:33) says the reason is based on the Magen Avraham that if you don't have wine for kiddush one should wait until chatzos to see if we can get wine. So here too we wait until chatzos to see if we can eat in the sukkah. My problem with the Bekurei Yaakov is that according to all shittos, if it would not be for the beracha of shehechiyanu, you can really make kiddush in the house as long as you eventually eat a k'zayis in the sukkah. So really the only reason you are waiting to make kiddush until chatzos is to get out of the problem of shehechiyanu. But that does not seem to be what the Bekurei Yaakov is saying. He seems to be saying we should be willing to wait until chatzos for it to stop raining to start the entire meal cause we wait up to chatzos to do the mitzvah-just like kiddush. This implies we need to wait up to chatzos for the atual mitzvah not just for shehechiyanu, but then why can't we start the meal earlier and just wait until chatzos to eat a k'beitzah <br />
I think a possible hesber is the following. The GR"A says that the reason you are patur when it rains is caause there is no shem sukkah. In other words, the petur of mitztaeir and petur of rain are not the same. By mitztaeir I have a perfectly good sukkah outside to use, however since to sit in it would not be k'ein taduru I am patur. By rain, the reason I can't sit in the sukkah is because I don't have a sukkah to use. The rain takes away the shem sukkah. According to this, on the first night I really am chayuv to sit in a sukkah. the only reason I can't is because I don't have a sukkah to sit in. I can't eat in the house because I am really chayuv in sukkah. So how long must I wait to get a sukkah? We learn from the Magen Avraham that just like I wait until chatzos to see if I can get wine for kiddush, hu hadin I wait until chatzos to ss if I can get a sukkah-if it stops raining I'll have a sukkah. I think this also explains another part of the Bekurei Yaakov. He throws in the idea that if you are mitztaeir to wait you can eat. But what does he gain by this/. How is this different than the petur of rain? The answer is that they are 2 very different peturim. Mitztaeir is a petur in yeshivas sukkah while rain says I don't have a sukkah to sit in.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0