Author: Rabbi Milder

Posted on

Behar/Bechukosai – The End Does Not Justify the Means


The Chofetz Chaim in his Sefer Shmiras Halashon goes parsha by parsha enumerating the many episodes of unfortunate lashon hara and the prohibitions that are listed in the Torah on this subject. In the first portion of this week’s double portion of Behar and Bechukosai, the conclusion of the Book of Vayikra, the Torah states, “And you shall not wrong, one man his fellow Jew, and you shall fear your G-D, for I am the Lord, your G-D” (Vayikra 25:17). The Chofetz Chaim explains that “here the Torah warns us about onaas devarim, wronging verbally, meaning a person should not provoke his fellow Jew with words, and it says in the gemara, Bava Metzia 58b, that wronging verbally is worse than wronging monetarily, for one is done with his body and the other is done with his money, one can be returned and the other cannot be returned. It says there, Bava Metzia 59a, that all the gates in Heaven are closed except for the gate of the wronged, in order to pay back the wrongdoer. Onaas devarim is also considered a subcategory of lashon hara as we find in Yoma 44a” (Shmiras Halashon, volume 2, chapter 17). (Click here for Hebrew text.)

Rashicomments on this pasuk, ולא תונו איש את עמיתו YOU SHALL NOT THEREFORE BE EXTORTIONATE TO ONE ANOTHER — Here Scripture warns against vexing by words (wounding a person’s feelings) — that one should not annoy his fellowman, nor give him an advice which is unfitted for him but is in accordance with the plan and the advantage of the adviser. But lest you should say, “Who knows whether I had any intention to do him evil?” Scripture therefore states: “but you shalt fear your G-D”! — He Who knows men’s thoughts, He knows it! In all cases where it is a matter of conscience (more lit., a matter handed over to the heart), when no one knows the truth except the one who has the thought in his heart, Scripture always states: “but be afraid of your G-D”! (Sifra, Behar, Chapter 4 1-2; Bava Metzia 58b; cf. also Rashi on Leviticus 19:14.)

The Sifra, or Toras Kohanim that Rashi is quoting, lists a number of examples of this prohibition:

  1. If a person is a baal-teshuva, penitent, don’t tell him, ‘Do you remember what you used to do…’
  2. If he is a son of a convert, don’t say, ‘I remember how your family used to act…’
  3. If a person is sick, suffering, or buried his children, don’t tell him what Iyov’s friends told him, ‘Isn’t your fear your foolishness, your hope and innocent ways, please remember who is cleanly lost and where did the straight people be annihilated.’
  4. If you see donkey drivers asking for grain or for wine don’t tell them to go to a certain person who never sold grain or wine in his life.
  5. Rebbe Yehuda says that one should not check into an item and ask for a price without any intent on buying it.

Rabbeinu Bachye shares a reason for the gemara in Bava Metzia 59a which says, ”Rav Ḥisda says: All the gates of Heaven are apt to be locked, except for the gates of prayer for victims of verbal mistreatment, as it is stated: ‘And behold, the Lord stood upon a wall built with a plumb line, and a plumb line in His hand’ (Amos 7:7).” The Reason is because the one who is verbally wronged is very much pained, and his mind is weakened, and his heart is humbled over his suffering, and he prays from out of his worrisome heart with intent and is heard. If the [speaker] would say ‘Who knows if I had bad intention’ therefore the pasuk concludes, “and you shall fear your G-D.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
People sin for various reason but don’t deny afterward that no one knows what happened; so what’s the big deal? First of all, why would a person think that remorse for a sin is dependent on who saw it? Secondly, would a person who sins normally deny his folly towards Hashem once he realizes his mistake if he is a G-D fearing Jew? So why is this case any different? Does this person who speaks verbal abuse have to be a denier of Hashem to the point that the Torah has to say, “and you shall fear your G-D?” This expression is not found in too many places. It doesn’t say anywhere that when a person does a sin in private, he should fear Hashem! What is the emphasis here?!

However it would seem based on this Rabbeinu Bachye that this person actually might think he has an excuse to say to himself ‘Who knows if I had bad intention’ because look at the results that he produced by totally insulting and humiliating his fellow Jew. The victim was able to reach such great heights in prayer that he has the ability to be answered whereas others are not so readily answered. The perpetrator caused the victim to reach such great heights of intent in prayer that he might be delusional to think that in fact he did a mitzvah by helping another to come so close to Hashem, to the point that he might tell himself, “who knows if I had bad intentions”. That is why the pasuk concludes, “and you shall fear your G-d,” so one should not come to think that the end justifies the means.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #191

2. Question: Why technically if you don’t answer amen but you just had in mind and the person saying the blessing had you in mind then it’s as if you said the blessing by any blessing besides if one bentches gomel upon hearing someone being saved, where the person actually saved must answer amen to fulfill his obligation of bentching gomel?

Background:

A.      The Mishna Berura (8:5:15) says that if 2 or 3 people are putting on their tallis all at the same time they should make the blessing all at the same time and if they want one can say it for everyone and the rest answer amen and even though one should anyways always answer amen to a blessing, but in this case when they want to fulfill the obligation themselves then answering amen shows they want to be apart of it, but technically even if they didn’t answer amen they fulfilled their obligation for the blessing [by just listening and having in mind.]

B.      When bentching gomel for himself a person should say Blessed is Hashem…Who has bestowed every goodness upon me. The Mishna Berura (219:4) says that if someone else said Blessed is Hashem… Who has bestowed every goodness upon you, and you answer amen then it works for yourself.

 Answer: Rebbe Akiva Aiger quoted in the Be’ur Halacha (219:4 “vi’ana amen”) says that since the listener cannot say “bestowed goodness upon you” then he cannot fulfill his obligation with the language of that blessing so listening is like answering would not apply and therefore he must answer amen which means he is acknowledging the subject of the blessing and not specifically how it was said.

Posted on

Torah Riddles #190

1. Question: According to the Tur why do children who say they came back from a funeral have to explain in detail that they were just at a funeral of so and so and there were eulogies by these people etc. in order for the wife of the deceased to be allowed to be remarried but if he just said as testimony that so and so died he is believed without further interrogation or need to speak innocently, for her to be remarried? What the difference between the two cases?

Background:

A. We believe testimony of almost anyone, even a maidservant or slave or a child for a woman to get remarried because of the issue if aguna and she will make sure her husband is dead before actually getting married last all the fines in chapter 10 of Yevamos will be upon her.

 B. Children are prone to make up stories and playing games like performing a funeral for an ant.

C. When a child reaches the age of 7 or 8 he has enough knowledge to do some level of business and is not considered like an insane person.

Answer: The Taz (Even HaEzer 17:13:9) says that since a child of 7 or 8 is mature enough to do business then he can be relied upon for aguna like any other non-real witness because we aren’t worried he’s insane but when talking about a funeral we are concerned they are making up stories so they have to give more details in order to prove they are telling the truth.

Posted on

Emor – Just One Shabbos


The Torah, in this week’s portion of Emor, requires a newborn animal set aside to be an offering to be 8 days old before it is allowed to be sacrificed, as it says: “When an ox or a sheep or a goat is born, it shall remain under its mother for seven days, and from the eighth day onwards, it shall be accepted as a sacrifice for a fire offering to the Lord” (Vayikra 22:27).


The Medrish Rabba brings a parable as to why one must wait 7 days before bringing a newborn animal as a sacrifice which, it says, is also the reason why the bris milah is on the 8th day. “‘It shall remain under its mother for seven days.’ Rebbe Yehoshua of Sechnin said in the name of Rebbe Levi, a parable to a king who entered one of his provinces and decreed and said, ‘Which ever citizen here who would like to see my face must first see the face of the matron.’ So to, Hashem said, ‘You shall not bring before me an offering until Shabbos has passed, for there isn’t 7 days without Shabbos, and there isn’t a bris milah without a Shabbos, therefore the pasuk continues,‘and from the eighth day onwards’” (Vayikra Rabba 27:10).

The Yefeh Toar observes that the reason why Shabbos is compared to a matron is because Shabbos is referred to as the Shabbos Queen. The lesson learned from this comparison is that Shabbos is a testimony to the fact that G-D created the world, something from nothing, and that Hashem watches over and is involved in His lower species. This belief must come before everything. Therefore, those that bring an offering to burn before The Great Hashem without belief in the nuance of the world and Hashem’s constant involvement has an untruthful belief. For this reason, one Shabbos should pass before the mitzvah of bringing an offering and the mitzvah of bris milah. (Click here for Hebrew text.)


What kind of a person is this medrish referring to? If it is someone who does not have any belief at all then why is he bringing a sacrifice or giving his son a bris? Even if he is just doing what his family does because that is the Jewish thing to do, then what does one Shabbos do for him? He has no clue how or why to keep Shabbos properly, so one Shabbos passing won’t make him a believer? Yet, if this is referring to someone who is already a believer in Hashem and he is bringing a peace offering, burnt offering, or even a sin offering for accidentally sinning, then he is already a believer and he even has observed many Shabbosim until now; so what does this add? It can’t be for the sake of the animal or baby’s belief who were just born because they don’t have the intellectual capacity to think in these terms?!

It must be referring to a believer who until now, if you would ask him, of course he would say that Hashem created the world from nothing and has, is, and always will be consistently involved in its existence and in minor and minute details that exist in what He created. However, the experience of observing a Shabbos reinforces this belief before such a momentous event as a father connecting his son to the Jewish covenant with Hashem or a person bringing an offering on the altar of Hashem to more closely connect or reconnect with Him for whatever reason he or she is bringing the offering. This could be one of the reasons why we have a shalom zachor the first Shabbos after a baby boy is born, to acknowledge and reinforce this belief in Hashem, (see Sefer Taamei HaMinhagim: Inyanei Milah).

 Without the experience or observance of the first Shabbos when the baby boy or animal is born then whatever belief, as strong as it was, won’t be the same and in fact it’s as if the previous belief is nothing.  

There are infinite levels of belief in Hashem and all the facets of His involvement in this world. These beliefs must be constantly reinforced but there are specific auspicious times like when bringing an offering or bris milah where one is creating a special connection with Hashem so at these times Hashem requires one to experience a Shabbos in order to create a deeper impression of belief in preparation to connect with Hashem.

Good Shabbos,
Rabbi Dovid Shmuel Milder

Vayikra 22:27).

The Medrish Rabba brings a parable as to why one must wait 7 days before bringing a newborn animal as a sacrifice which, it says, is also the reason why the bris milah is on the 8th day. “‘It shall remain under its mother for seven days.’ Rebbe Yehoshua of Sechnin said in the name of Rebbe Levi, a parable to a king who entered one of his provinces and decreed and said, ‘Which ever citizen here who would like to see my face must first see the face of the matron.’ So to, Hashem said, ‘You shall not bring before me an offering until Shabbos has passed, for there isn’t 7 days without Shabbos, and there isn’t a bris milah without a Shabbos, therefore the pasuk continues,‘and from the eighth day onwards’” (Vayikra Rabba 27:10).

The Yefeh Toar observes that the reason why Shabbos is compared to a matron is because Shabbos is referred to as the Shabbos Queen. The lesson learned from this comparison is that Shabbos is a testimony to the fact that G-D created the world, something from nothing, and that Hashem watches over and is involved in His lower species. This belief must come before everything. Therefore, those that bring an offering to burn before The Great Hashem without belief in the nuance of the world and Hashem’s constant involvement has an untruthful belief. For this reason, one Shabbos should pass before the mitzvah of bringing an offering and the mitzvah of bris milah. (Click here for Hebrew text.)
What kind of a person is this medrish referring to? If it is someone who does not have any belief at all then why is he bringing a sacrifice or giving his son a bris? Even if he is just doing what his family does, because that is the Jewish thing to do, then what does one Shabbos do for him? He has no clue how or why to keep Shabbos properly, so one Shabbos passing won’t make him a believer? Yet, if this is referring to someone who is already a believer in Hashem and he is bringing a peace offering, burnt offering, or even a sin offering for accidentally sinning, then he is already a believer and he even has observed many Shabbosim until now; so what does this add? It can’t be for the sake of the animal or baby’s belief who were just born because they don’t have the intellectual capacity to think in these terms?!

It must be referring to a believer who until now, if you would ask him, of course he would say that Hashem created the world from nothing and has, is, and always will be consistently involved in it’s existence and in minor and minute details that exist in what He created. However, the experience of observing a Shabbos reinforces this belief before such a momentous event as a father connecting his son to the Jewish covenant with Hashem or a person bringing an offering  on the alter of Hashem to more closely connect or reconnect with Him for whatever reason he or she  is bringing the offering. This could be one of the reasons why we have a shalom zachor the first Shabbos after a baby boy is born, to acknowledge and reinforce this belief in Hashem, (see Sefer Taamei HaMinhagim: Inyanei Milah).

 Without the experience or observance of the first Shabbos when the baby boy or animal is born then whatever belief, as strong as it was, won’t be the same and in fact it’s as if the previous belief is nothing.  

There are infinite levels of belief in Hashem and all the facets of His involvement in this world. These beliefs must be constantly reinforced but there are specific auspicious times like when bringing an offering or bris milah where one is creating a special connection with Hashem so at these times Hashem requires one to experience a Shabbos in order to create a deeper impression of belief in preparation to connect with Hashem.

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim chapter 8 halachos 5,6

The prohibition of lashon hara only applies to someone who is considered “part of your nation” which excludes an apikores. An apikores is someone who denies the entire Torah came from Hashem or even doesn’t believe that one mitzvah or one drasha, like a kal vachomer or gezeila shava comes from Hashem. Now the avos diRebbe Nosson (16:5) says “A person can’t say I only love rabbis but simpletons (am haaratzim) I don’t love. You have to love every Jew besides an apikores and people who convince others to sin, as King David said, ‘Those that Hashem hates I hate’ (Tehillim 139:21).” An apikores is hated by Hashem because he willfully acknowledges Hashem’s Torah and denies it so it is permissible to speak out against him and degrade him to his face and behind his back since the verse says these prohibitions only apply to those who are acting within “your nation” but a non-observant Jew who doesn’t know any better, he’s a simpleton, who doesn’t know or understand the severity of Torah life should be loved by every Jew just like Hashem loves them and one cannot speak lashon hara about them.

One must have heard himself, blasphemous talk coming out of the mouth of the would be apikores to be allowed to speak out against him or if it is known everywhere, at least throughout the city, that a certain person or group is an apikores then it’s permissible to speak out against them, for example Jews for Jesus or, an extreme example, Hitler and Nazis who everyone agrees they were bad. But if you heard secondhand information that someone might be an apikores then you are allowed to take precautions and even tell others to stay easy from him for them until it’s confirmed but you can’t just speak out in public against them until verified.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #189

 2. Question: Why does the Ohr Letzion poskin that anyone can give a haircut to their 3 year old at anytime of the omer but the bottom Tosfos in Bava Metzia 10b says that not even women can cut off the peus of boys?

Background:

A. The negative mitzvah of cutting off peus on a Jewish Male doesn’t only apply to a man but even a woman can’t do the action even to a boy who is not obligated in mitzvos but the women still transgressed the prohibition of cutting off the sidelocks. (See Tosfos there.)

B. The laws of mourning don’t apply to children whether it is for a relative who died or during the 3 weeks leading into Tisha b’av etc.

C. Not cutting hair during the omer is a custom in order to remember the loss of Rebbe Akiva’s students.

 Answer: Mourning doesn’t apply to a child at all so anyone can cut his hair even if they are mourning since not cutting hair only reflect mourning which doesn’t apply to the child but the prohibition of cutting off peus is an issue on the cutter not just the one being done to so even if the child isn’t obligated in the mitzvah as of yet but the hair cutter or the one allowing the hair cut to be done is.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #188

1. Question: Why can you remarry a woman you divorced after Nisuin but not a woman you divorced after Kiddushin (Erusin) anytime during the omer? Background:

A. Weddings are forbidden during parts of the omer when we are mourning over the loss of Rebbe Akiva’s students because it creates a tremendous amount of joy.

 B. There are two parts to a halachic marriage, Kiddushin which is the acquisition by giving the ring and the like and nisuin which is the consummation. Now a days we do them all at the same time but they use to be done separately like an engagement and a wedding.

 C. A get (divorce bill) is required in both cases and a Kiddushin and nisuin must be redone both times too.

 Answer: There is no halachic joy when remarrying your wife from Nisuin because you are just getting back together, nothing new. But to consummate a Kiddushin that was broken off is a new step to the marriage so it has a lot more joy. (See Dirshu Mishna Berura 493 footnote 2) 

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim chapter 8 halachos 2-4

Who can you not speak lashon hara about:

Halacha 2: You can’t speak lashon hara about men or women even your wife because it says, “Don’t be a tale bearer amongst your nation” your wife and all other wives are still part of “your nation”. There is another proof that you cannot say lashon hara about your wife unless there is a productive reason because there is a prohibition of motzi shem ra, if the newly wed husband claims his wife isn’t a virgin so only deserves 100 and not 200 for the kesuba then if he is right that ok but if he is wrong because he can’t prove it then the Torah finds him for saying lashon hara about his wife. The Chofetz Chaim goes on to say that it was unfortunately prevalent in his day that many people spoke lashon hara about their wives or in laws in front of their brothers and father’s house which he said is absolutely forbidden unless there is some constructive purpose.

Halacha 3: sometimes it is forbidden to talk lashon hara about children. For example if the are orphans and speaking out against them might cause physical or emotional harm, for example there foster parents will kick them out of the house or orphans have more sensitive feelings but if they need to be taught a lesson then you can tell on them so that they will be reprimanded but only if you know they won’t be too severely punished. The Chofetz Chaim does say that even though the example he gives is of an orphan child that is the most prevalent of issues with lashon hara about children but if any physical, monetary, or emotional harm would happen to any child then lashon hara shouldn’t be spoken. What he means is that, for example, if a child was caught coloring on the wall most people will just laugh it off, he’s a child, he doesn’t know better he just has to be taught not to do it, he’ll grow up one day. That is why many times there is not an issue of lashon hara with children. If an adult would do such a thing that would be a crime called graffiti. Of course as was said if harm is done by saying the lashon hara of course it should not be said and now a days we have to be cognizant of the fact that emotional stability is very fragile. My Rosh Yeshiva zt”l, Rav Henoch Leibowitz use to say that back in the early 1900s Americans were like cobwebs now a days we are like tissue paper. Halacha 4: If a person is an on ha’aretz, a simpleton, not learned, he is still Jewish and one cannot speak lashon hara about him but certainly if he is a rabbi or sage it is even worse because one must show more respect to the sage, respect to the learned is respect to the Torah but even worse if lashon hara was spoken about the rabbi then people who ask him questions or go to his shiurim might stop and that will cause them to make up their own observance of Torah and ultimately a new religion because they feel they can’t trust there Rabbi who is learned.

Posted on

Acharei Mos Kedoshim-Evolution of Atheism


We find a cause for the development of The Haskala, The Enlightenment, along with the Atheist movement, in the second portion of this week’s double parshios of Acharei Mos and Kedoshim. The Torah states, “You shall observe My statutes: You shall not crossbreed your livestock with different species. You shall not sow your field with a mixture of seeds, and a garment which has a mixture of shaatnez shall not come upon you” (Vayikra 19:19).

This pasuk discusses the prohibition of kilayim, forbidden mixtures. Rabbeinu Bachye shares a reason for these prohibitions: “According to the simple understanding the reason for the prohibition of forbidden mixtures is because all the things created in this world whether animal or vegetation has a power source or mazal (fortune) connected on high, and each thing was created in its own species, for this, The Mighty King made a foundation for them in the beginning of creation, so that each one would have their own unique species. So, someone who mixes, or grafts two species together changes and weakens the acts of creation which the Torah writes about them, ‘according to their species’ (Breishis 1:12, 21, 25), and he does the opposite of Hashem who wants to differentiate between each species. It is as if this person makes himself appear that he thinks what The Holy One Blessed Be He has created in this world isn’t enough and he wants to outsmart and add more species, new ones, within what the Eternal One has created. The prohibition of plowing an ox and donkey is for the same reason because it is the custom of farmers after plowing to bring the yoke [with the two animals] into one barn and it would lead into crossbreeding and giving birth to strange breeds resulting in the weakening of creation.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
Tangelos, a mix of a tangerine and grapefruit, might lead to a juicier fruit, and the mule, which is the crossbreed of a horse and a donkey, results in a stronger animal. Yet while a mule, might have advantages, they are not able to reproduce on their own, and tangelos are a juicier fruit, yet they are self-sterile, hence they really are weakening the essence of creation; and by dabbling in this field one might create more harm than good. However, scientists who experiment in these sorts of things are trying to improve the world and make things more productive and better; so knowing what they are doing they obviously think the positive advantages outweigh the negative. If so, then what’s really the problem?
Furthermore, later in the perek, in pasuk 27 the Torah writes, “You shall not round off the corner of your head, and you shall not destroy the edge of your beard.” Rabbeinu Bachye explains that the reason behind destroying a beard from its roots is prohibited is along the same lines as forbidden mixtures. “According to the simple reasoning the reason for the prohibition is in order not to quash the sign that The Holy One Blessed Be He imprinted in the male gender in order to differentiate him from a female. One who does this (i.e., destroys the beard at its roots) is doing the opposite of Hashem, like one who plants forbidden mixtures, and everything that was made in creation, is written by it ‘according to their species.’” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
What could be wrong with a man destroying his beard? What is wrong with social justice and equality, or gender equality?

We see from here that Hashem had a reason for creating differences in the world and unique species which cannot be combined or blurred. But the real issue is the attitude that one can outsmart Hashem. ‘I can think of an idea, scientifically and morally, that Hashem didn’t come up with, and it will be bigger and better than how things were originally designed. And who cares about the side effects or drawbacks; those are minor and relatively non-existent or important.’

What people don’t realize is that there is nothing new under the sun. Hashem created the ability and potential for all these new species to be created and advancements to occur. He gave us the free will to choose to use our knowledge for the betterment or the destruction of the world, and the moral fabric of society at large. The Gemara in Sanhedrin 56b even says that non-Jews also have the prohibition of forbidden mixtures in the Noahide laws. It is within our power and decision making to use the tools and brains that Hashem bestowed in us to realize the gifts Hashem provides and to use them appropriately.

However, as we have seen with the advent of the industrial revolution and the advancement of technology, it is very easy to think we can “play god” or invent things which were thought to be impossible. Getting caught up in human advancement and not realizing the source for the gift of these abilities which would lead one to believe there is a moral fabric of how to use all the ingredients around them in this world, is what leads one to conclude he is an atheist. He thinks he just outsmarted G-D so G-D must not exist.

For this reason, Hashem created the laws of forbidden mixtures and the prohibition of uprooting the hair follicles of a beard. There are Higher moral standards so don’t mix them up!

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #187

2. Question: Why does the Beis HaLevi hold that a person who missed a day of the omer can still say it with a blessing for someone else but someone who is obligated in megilla for Shushan Purim can’t read it for one who needs to hear megilla on regular purim?

 Background:

A. Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank quoting the Beis HaLevi says that even though you can’t say a blessing anymore by the omer because you skipped a day and there is a doubt whether the mitzvah of omer is one big mitzvah or 49 individual mitzvos so when in doubt you must be lenient and not say a blessing but there is still a concept of “arvus” that we are all connected to each other and help each other fulfill a mitzvah properly if we are both obligated in it therefore he can say a blessing for someone else in order that they can recite the omer with a blessing.

B. The Kaf HaChaim argues and says omer is like reading the megilla just as a person who lives in Yerushalayim and is obligated in shushan purim can’t read megilla for one who is obligated in regular purim even though they are both obligated in megilla, so to one who can’t say the blessing on the omer anymore for himself can’t say it for others.

 Answer: By the omer he is really an oness, it is just out of his control that he can’t fulfill the mitzvah if saying the blessing for the omer because of the doubt but he really is obligated possibly but the Yerushalmi has no obligation whatsoever (unless he decides to obligate himself) in the reading for regular Purim. (See Dirshu Mishna Berura 489 footnote 74.)