Until now we discussed speaking out to avoid a potentially bad situation from happening. Meaning, if a person was not hired yet, or there was not yet an engagement, certainly now wedding. But what if the suspicious guy started working, became partners, or even a contract was just signed as an official agreement to start or the like then can you still speak out or is it too late? Before there is any agreement or they started it’s not considered causing a loss to potential worker, nothing happened yet but now that there is a contract signed or he started working, whichever the case might be it’s very hard to just break the contract or fire him because that would look very bad for him and change a lot in his life. And the 5th condition to be able to speak is that you can’t do worse to the person than what he deserves in court. Therefore, if you know you can tell the guy’s boss and he will not trust you immediately or is not rash to make decisions and would fire the guy on the spot, but rather he would just keep a close eye on him to ensure nothing goes wrong then you can tell him and it’s even the correct thing to do. But if he will immediately take action then you can’t say a word because what you say would not hold up in court since you are only one witness. If you are two witnesses who actually saw him steal, for example, and all 5 conditions are met, then you can tell the employer and he can fire the guy if he likes because that is what would have happened in court as well. But if you both heard it second hand or even one saw him steal and the other knew it second hand then the testimony would not hold up in court so you can’t tell the employer if he will take action and not just keep a close eye on his employee.
Vaera – Haunting Pharaoh
This week’s Torah portion of Vaera, we begin to go through most of the ten plagues. The first plague was one of blood. Upon warning Pharaoh about the first plague, the Medrish Rabba in this parsha (9:8) relates that Hashem told Moshe, “‘Go to Pharaoh in the morning, he will be coming out of the water.’ Pharaoh only went down to the water in the mornings because this wicked person declared and lauded himself as a deity who didn’t need to use the facilities; therefore he only went in the morning, when the need was too overwhelming. And the staff that turned into a snake [Hashem told Moshe] you should take with you in order to instill fear of you inside him.” The Maharz”u quoting a different version of the medrish found in the Yalkut Shimone says that Hashem told Moshe that because he declared himself a god, he should inform him that he is only human; so Moshe grabbed him. Pharaoh said, let me go so I can do what I need to do. Moshe said back, is there a god that needs to use the facilities? That is why Hashem told Moshe to get up early in the morning.
Why did Hashem tell Moshe to take his staff in order to instill fear into Pharaoh? The Maharz”u says to look at the previous medrish, which said that what it means that Aharon’s staff swallowed their staffs, Rebbe Eliezer says, is that a miracle within a miracle happened. The staff turned back into the original staff [after it had turned into a snake] and then swallowed all the other ones. When Pharaoh saw this, he was bewildered and said ‘What if he tells the staff to swallow Pharaoh and his throne, it will now swallow him…’ We see from here that the staff was brought that morning in order to haunt Pharaoh and remind him of the threat that he could be swallowed up by the staff.
The Eshed Hanachalim has an interesting twist on why the staff was brought to instill fear into Pharaoh. “Maybe he will have a change of heart for the better. Because Hashem doesn’t want to take revenge like human beings. Rather He is warning him and instilling fear into him perhaps he will repent.” The Eshel Hanachalim goes on to prove that that is what Hashem was trying to do. (Click here for Hebrew text.)
But why did Pharaoh have to be haunted by this staff in order for him to possibly repent? Wasn’t it obvious that he was wrong? He was caught in an act of being mortal by his arch nemesis; there was nothing he could deny, intellectually! Besides the fact that emotionally, even in the back of his mind, he had the memory of the staff fresh in his mind! So why the need to bring it just to haunt him and make a greater impression upon him to change?
We see from here how hard it is for a person to change his character and way of life. Even though Pharaoh couldn’t deny to Moshe that he was only human, as well as the fact that the threat of being swallowed up by the staff was fresh on his mind, still, in all, it wasn’t enough for him to admit his flaws and repent. The Eshed Hanachalim also says that even after he was haunted by the staff, then perhaps, maybe he would repent. Instilling fresh fear while being caught in the act of not acting godly still wasn’t able to ensure his repentance; and in fact he didn’t. Things got much worse for his entire country with the ten plagues and the eventual annihilation of his entire army when they drowned in the Red Sea.
However, the Yalkut Shimone in Yona (550), quoting a Pirkei diRebbe Eliezer (chapter 43), relates that Pharaoh was the only Egyptian who survived the drowning at the Red Sea because he was rewarded foe exclaiming before he would have drowned, “Who is like You among the heavenly powers, Hashem” (Shemos 15:11)! At that point, broken and humiliated, he in fact repented and ran off to Nineveh. Hashem granted him the chance to live for hundreds of years longer, and he was the king of Nineveh in the book of Yonah the prophet. When Yonah finally came to Nineveh and told the people in the great metropolis to repent from their evil ways, the king, who was Pharaoh, told everyone to not take Yonah’s word lightly because his G-D means business and is being very serious. Millions of people went through a penitent process that lasted only 40 days, but we clearly see that Pharaoh finally got the point and acknowledged who is Boss. (Click here for Hebrew text)
Ultimately it can only take oneself to choose to change his or her own life. No one can force them to do it. There can be pressure, a lot of pressure, but it’s still only up to one’s own self to change.
Torah Riddles #216
1. Question: Why do friends of the Chosson put on tefillin now a days (from time of the Rema) throughout sheva brachos even though it’s possible they might get drunk and are then forbidden to don tefillin?
Background:
A. In the Mishna Berura (38:7) the Mechaber writes that a chosson and his friends who are joyous with him and all those connected to the chupa are exempt from tefillin because it’s possible that it will lead to drunkenness and lightheaded atmosphere.
B. The Chofetz Chaim in Mishna Berura (23) says that the Teshuvas Rema (132) poskins that now a days where even the chosson is required to say krias Shema and shemone esray (see siman 70), then automatically the chosson and anyone associated with the chupa are obligated in putting on tefillin. The Olas Tamid and Birkay Yosef poskin like this Rema.
C. Concept in halacha that if you are involved with one mitzvah you are exempt from the other. D. The Shulcham Aruch says 70:3 that if one marries a virgin, he is exempt from saying krias shema the first 3 days of marriage because he is too busy being involved with the mitzva of marriage. But that was originally, but now a days where people normally do not have proper intent in the davening any ways then even a chosson says the shema.
Answer: The level of fulfilling a mitzvah is lower now a days so just as the chosson cannot fulfill his mitzvah to the biggest capacity so too his friends don’t have the heter to drink since they are expected to fulfill their mitzvah to the highest capacity.
Sefer Chofetz Chaim hilchos rechilus chapter 9 halacha 3,4
If you hear someone say I am going to beat so and so up, or curse him out or embarrass him, then you have to ascertain whether he’s being serious or just making baseless threats. If he has a track record of following through with his threats, then you should inform the would-be victim to take proper precautions to protect himself. Or even if you see that this time, he means business then you can tell. But this is only if you have tried to rebuke the angry person beforehand or appease him so that he will calm down and decide not to hurt the person he is angry with. If it works, then you have fulfilled the mitzvah of rebuke bringing peace among people. However, if the rebuke does not work or you see it will not work then you’ll have to tell the would-be victim.
However, if you see that by telling the would-be victim won’t just take precautions, but he will go and attack his would be threat then you can’t tell him because you are just ensuing a fight not resolving it.
The reason why you should try to rebuke first in this case is because the person is just angry and he just needs to calm down, of course if you think he’ll calm down but hurt the other guy anyways then you have to warn the other guy but that’s only if the angry person is known to follow through with threats even after he calms down. The reason why we said earlier by hiring the person who is a thief or the like that there is no reason to rebuke, is because for a long-term relationship as a job hiring, we can’t trust that even if he says he changed if it would stay that way. But in this case rebuke or appeasing is warranted to calm down the anger so that he won’t go through with the threat he is saying he will do, it’s clear and present danger which can be avoided by talking to him if it works.
Even if you hear secondhand knowledge of a physical, monetary, or psychological threat one should tell the possible victim, of course with the non-confidence that we had spoken about earlier, just to ensure that he will protect himself.
Unlike by Gedalia ben Achikam who did not take Yochanan ben Kerech seriously that Yishmael ben Natanya would kill him. That was a problem on a couple of fronts. First off in regard to a life-threatening issue one should take any threat seriously even if it is a farfetched concern. Secondly, Yochanan ben Kerech recognized that Yishmael was being serious, and if there is recognizable evidence you can’t have the excuse that he might be exaggerating, therefore Gedalia should have heeded to the warning and that is why he died and there is now a fast called Tzom Gedalia.
Shemos – Moshe’s “Match Made In Heaven” Story
Many couples have a special story how they met and it’s one of those touching stories with “Hashem’s guidance at the right time” written all throughout it. Moshe Rabbeinu has one of those stories as told over in the Medrish Tanchuma (10,11) of this week’s Torah portion of Shemos.
When Moshe ran away to Midian and found a well, he was taking the route of his forefathers. The Etz Yosef actually says it would have made more sense for Moshe to go to the local inn;, why did he wind up by a well? It must be he was looking to get married. The medrish continues, by saying that there were three people who found their match by a well:, Yitzchak, Yaakov, and Moshe…
The next paragraph relates how Yisro’s daughters wound up becoming shepherds, as. Yisro was a priest for idolatry. If that was‘s the case,why could Hashem orchestrate that such a tzadik, a righteous man, like Moshe, wind up amongst idolatry, if on the contrary Hashem is zealous against idolatry? However, since Yisro was a priest and idols were usually degraded by their worshipers and attendants, Yisro realized the fallacy behind idolatry and decided to repent before Moshe had even showed up. He called his whole city together and said,‘until now I was working for you, now I am elderly, go choose some other priest.’ He then got up and removed all the idols and theparaphernalia used for upkeep and worship from out of the temple and gave it all to them. In response they excommunicated him; no one could have anything to do with him or work for him;, meaning they couldn’t even be his flock’s shepherd. Yisro asked the shepherds to take care of his flock, but they refused and banished him and his daughters like a woman divorced from her husband;, meaning they weren’t thrown out of town but were ignored by all. That is how the daughters became shepherds. Then one day the shepherds were harassing the daughters of Yisro, and it happened to be the day Moshe showed up looking for a shidduch, and he saved them. They then went back home and told their story to their father of how an Egyptian saved them, and water miraculously came up the well towards him and they were able to feed their entire flock. Yisro said back to them, “do you know who this is? It is a grandson of ‘those that stand by the well’ that the well recognizes it’s master.” (The Etz Yosef points out that Yisro knew the story of Yaakov and Rivka, how the well was blessed because of them, and its water would simply rise up when they needed water. They didn’t need to put in any effort to draw water, rather the water would rise up to meet them). So Yisro told them to invite him to eat, and perhaps he would marry one of them. Moshe wound up marrying Tziporah and the rest is history. (Click here for Hebrew text.)
Within this beautiful story the medrish asks why the daughters told their father that an Egyptian saved them;, did Moshe look like an Egyptian? The Etz Yosef points out that Egyptians (descendants of Cham) and Ivrim (descendants of Shem) looked very different, besides the fact that Moshe looked angelic, so how can they mistakenly think he was an Egyptian?! Rather the medrish answers that if not for the Egyptian that Moshe killed, he would never have wound up in Midian. This could be compared to a person who was bitten by a poisonous snake;, he runs to a river to put his bitten leg into water. As he goes into the water, he sees a small child drowning and saves him. The child says, ‘If not for you I would be dead!’ He says back, ‘I didn’t save you the snake did, who bit me, and I ran away from him and saved you.’ So to the daughters of Yisro told Moshe, ‘Thank you for saving us from those shepherds. Moshe told them, ‘The Egyptian I killed saved you.’ Therefore, they told their father it was an Egyptian, meaning who caused all this to happen to us it was the Egyptian who was killed.
The Etz Yosef quoting a Yifeh Toar says the reason why Moshe didn’t credit himself is because the whole thing happened through Hashem. The obvious question is that Moshe didn’t credit Hashem either, and he could’ve said Hashem sent me to save you, or this was all orchestrated by Hashem. Why did Moshe give the credit to the Egyptian he killed?
It is evident that Moshe made it clear that Hashem saved them, but he was teaching a lesson that the best way to realize Hashem’s interaction and “Hand” in the process is by going into detail about each step of how they got saved. Contemplating and expressing every detail and not just plainly crediting Hashem will make people better appreciate Hashem’s ever involvement in our lives.
Good Shabbos,
Rabbi Dovid Shmuel Milder
Torah Riddles Question #215
1. Question: Why does Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe Orach Chaim 2:77) poskin that if a Jew purposefully carries keys in the public domain in order to open the shul then the congregants may not enter the shul until it is relocked and opened by a non-Jew, since the congregants walking in are benefiting from the door being opened, however he says in (1:126:3-4) that one is only forbidden to benefit from the prohibition of Shabbos for his own benefit if transgressed but one may benefit if it is for the sake of a mitzvah, like here where they are going to daven in shul? (See Dirshu Mishna Berura 318 footnote 28 and page 39 footnote 9.)
Background:
A. The Mishna Berura 318:1 says there is a rabbinic fine that one may not ever get any benefit from a Torah prohibition that he himself purposefully transgressed and others must wait until after Shabbos to benefit from it.
B. The Be’ur halacha (2nd one in the siman) quotes a Chaye Adam that though this fine only applies to prohibitions which caused the actual object to change like by cooking or planting, or lighting a fire but, for example carrying in the public domain doesn’t change the object carried at all, but still you should be strict and not benefit from the object carried, at least until after Shabbos.
Answer: Because there is an easy solution of ow to fix the problem by getting a non-Jew to reopen it then it’s considered benefit for yourself to walk through the do that was opened by the Jew and not for the sake of a mitzva.
Sefer Chofetz Chaim Hilchos Rechilus chapter 9 halacha 2 conclusion of footnote 9
It’s obvious that if you don’t personally know, for example the maid, that she is a thief, or any other example of the like, rather people just told you, even though we said you can tell the would be hirer so that he can protect himself, however you can’t just say plainly “so and so is a thief” looking as if you know yourself this fact. You can’t even say “I have heard that son and so is a thief” because many people, not being experts in the laws of accepting rechilus will take it as fact. Rather you should be as non-confident as possible and say, “I heard about so and so this and this, and maybe the matter is true, therefore t would be appropriate for you to be cautious and protect yourself from her.” This non-confidence is the way to act in all circumstances of the like to protect others besides a person looking to hire a teacher or looking for a shidduch and the he or she is rumored to have fundamental flaws in his or her Torah perspectives, philosophies or beliefs (not observance), which could be serious red flags, then you can just say with more confidence “I heard…”
The reason why rebuking the perpetrator beforehand is not on the list of conditions as it was by lashon hara is because it’s not applicable here. One is looking to hire someone else. It doesn’t make sense to first rebuke the would-be candidate before definitely deciding to go to the hirer to warn him the candidate s a thief because even if he promises he will change who says that is true, the hirer still has a right to protect himself and know what he is getting into. Whereas by the laws of lashon hara, one should first go over to the thief and rebuke him because that was in order to get the thief to give back what he stole without needing to tell the victim what happened.
Vayechi – Life Cycles
In the concluding Torah portion for the Book of Breishis, parshas Vayechi, Yaakov passes away and the Torah relates that the brothers mourned for seven days (Breishis 50:10). The last Medrish Tanchuma in the book of Breishis concludes that from this pasuk we learn the laws of shiva, the day mourning period following the death of a close relative. …The medrish then asks why the mourning period is for exactly seven days?, and answers that it is contrary to the seven days of partying for a wedding, sheva brachos. The Etz Yosef, quoting the Yifeh Toar, asks what does one have to do with the other, that the text of medrish (which the Etz Yosef says we don’t have) says “just as he comes he will go?” The Yefeh Toar explains that this hints to the fact that there is no point to life in this world, and its joys, because in the end a person will die;, just as he comes he will go. Therefore, just as the days of partying we have for a wedding, which is for the sake of having children (if Hashem grants the couple to have children), is for 7 days, so too the days of mourning are the same amount. (Click here for Hebrew text.)
We must put in context what it means that there is ‘no point to life and happiness in this world. For if that is really true, then why have days of feasting by a wedding, and what about what the Mesilas Yesharim says in the first chapter, “…but the path to the object of our desires is this world, as our sages of blessed memory have said, ‘This world is like a corridor to the World to Come (Avos 4:21).’ The means which lead a man to this goal are the mitzvos, in relation to which we are commanded by G-D, may His name be blessed. The place of the performance of the mitzvos is this world alone.” If that is the case than doesn’t this world have a very important role in our lives and the Torah even says in the curses of parshas Ki Savo “because you did not serve Hashem, your G-D amid joy…” (Devarim 28:47). So we see how important life is in this world, as well as living it up happily and serving Hashem with joy. s So how can the Yefeh Toar be saying there is no point to life and happiness in this world?
However,, the answer is, that vis a vis the World to Come, this world is nothing, as the Medrish Tanchuma concludes, “The Holy One Blessed Be He said that in this world you are pained over the righteous, mourning for 7 days. In the future to come I will switch their mourning to glee and comfort them and cheer them up from their depression (Yirmiyahu 31:12). And I will comfort Tzion and its destruction, as it says, ‘For Hashem will comfort Tzion, He will comfort all her ruins; He will make her wilderness like Eden and her wasteland like a garden of Hashem; joy and gladness will be found there, thanksgiving and the sound of music’ (Yeshayahu 51:3).
The Medrish Rabba concludes Sefer Breishis the same way as the Tanchuma, and the Yefeh Toar there explains that “this pasuk is only a hint to the concept of seven days of shiva but it’s not a Torah level obligation. Mourning for seven days is only Rabbinic. Since that’s the case the medrish was wondering why the rabbis enacted mourning to be for that long, isn’t there a punishment for mourning over the dead too much (See Devarim 14:1)? That is why the medrish answers that 7 days is opposite the sheva brachos, 7 days of feasting by a wedding. (Sheva brachos is learned from Shimshon in Pirkei diRebbe Eliezer, parenthetically.) Since it’s better to go to a mourners house then to go to a party house, and the hearts of the wise are at a mourners house and the hearts of fools are in a party house, therefore the days [of celebrating and mourning] are equal… there is another reason [why they are equated] because the days of feasting by a wedding has a connection to the days of burial, for since a person is destined to die, therefore he feels compelled to try to have children, and ensure offspring… Therefore, the days of mourning were set up as 7 days just as the days of partying after a wedding.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
If it is so bad to mourn too much over the dead, then why is it permissible to set up these seven days of mourning just to equate it to the seven days of partying at after a wedding? Isn’t it still going overboard;, why risk the punishment?
However, it would seem that the lesson learned from equating them two is such an important lesson that it’s worth it for the Rabbis to enact seven days of mourning. In fact, the reason for the punishment of overly mourning is the same as for Shiva, to realize that this world is temporary and we should not put too much focus on it, as mentioned in the Sforno Devarim 14:1, “there is no reason to mourn excessively for the person who has passed as he, at least, has not experienced any loss, on the contrary, he has been promoted to the region of eternal life, something of which our sages in Avos 4:6-7 have said that a single hour of the serenity experienced in that life is worth all the combined delights ever experienced during one’s transient life on earth.”
There is definitely a very important attitude to live life and enjoy it in this world;, it is the corridor to prepare yourself for the ultimate joy of basking in Hashem’s presence in the next world and part of the preparation is to be happy while serving Hashem. That is part of living life properly, but it must be with the perspective that it is just temporary, it’s not the beginning and end of life. There is much more to life than this world and the real joy is in the World to Come. This equation puts one’s mindset into the proper perspective, if focused on accurately, that as important this world is the main place to look forward to is the World to Come.
Torah Riddles #214
Question: Why when you forget to say Birkas haTorah ahava rabba can count as saying Birkas haTorah only if you learn immediately after davening but let say you slept the whole entire day and didn’t say Birkas haTorah but davened mincha/maariv early with a minyan before it was dark, then the Shema counts as learning after Ahavas olam?
Background:
A. The Mishna Berura 47:7:13 says the blessing of ‘Ahavas Olam’ takes care of birkas haTorah if you learn immediately after davening without any interruptions. This applies in the morning (for Ashkenazim we say ‘ahava rabba’) or in the evening, for example if someone took a few hour nap in tbe day according to the opinion you have to birkas HaTorah and even those that are lenient it does not hurt to have in mind birkas haTorah when saying ‘ahavas olam’ during maariv.
B. The Mishna Berura (17) says that the reason why you have to learn right after davening is because it’s not apparent you are saying ahava rabba for the mitzva of learning Torah since it’s being said during another mitzvah, of davening. Rav Elyashiv adds that even though Shema can be considered Torah learning but because it’s being said for another mitzvah of krias Shema, which is a mitzva to be recited in the morning and at night once it is dark and the stars are out, and the bracha at the end of ahava rabba does not talk about learning Torah rather the love of Hashem for the Jews then without learning right after davening it’s not apparent it was said for Birkas haTorah.
Answer: The Dirshu (note 22) quotes a Teshuvas Hisorirus that because you recited Shema of maariv too early and it would have to be repeated once it got dark then it is apparent that the paragraph of Ahavas olam was said for Birkas haTorah and the Shema was used for learning.
Sefer Chofetz Chaim hilchos rechilus chapter 9 footnote 9
This 5th condition that you cannot harm the would-be perpetrator any more than what he deserves is a very tricky condition which the Chofetz Chaim himself is very hesitant in what to do but bottom line one has to divulge information in a fashion which will be a balance for both parties. That the wouks be victim can take proper precautions and the would-be threat won’t be overly damaged than what he or she deserves. For example, If Reuvain wants to hire Shimon for a job and Levi knows Shimon stole something at one point. Levi has to tell Reuvain the information he knows even if Shimon regrets what he did and wouldn’t do it again, but Reuvain has a right to be concerned and investigate the matter. However, if Levi can determine that by telling Reuvain about Shimon the word will get out and Shimon will be run out of town in shame then Levi really shouldn’t tell Reuvain the information. In this case as opposed to lashon hara, one does not need to have seen the stealing happen first hand, or even know for sure that it happened, as long as there is rumors you are allowed to tell a would be victim to be cautious himself just as you yourself can just be cautious with this information as long as you know he will only take proper precautions to quietly investigate the matter and make proper decisions to just protect himself from any harm. Just as a side note, even though there is a specific mitzvah of “lo sa’amod al dam re’echa” don’t stand by when your fellow Jew is in danger that is only when you definitely know of the potential danger, and you can help. But if it is just a rumor then it’s a good thing, a general mitzvah, to be concerned about and take proper precautions. So Gedalia ben Achikam, the mayor of Beitar that refused to accept lashon hara and wasn’t even cautious and that is why Beitar was destroyed, and we have Tzom Gedalia, chas vishalom, a tzadik like him transgressed a blatant mitzvah, rather he was being too Stringent of not even being cautious about rumors that he heard that he might be killed by someone.