Author: Rabbi Milder

Posted on

Torah Riddle Test #125

Question: The Mishna Achrona (Oholos 1:8) asks why in the Michilta it is taught on the verse “when you open a pit or dig a pit” if on the opening you are liable all the more so for digging it, so why need the verse, rather the verse must be teaching us that we don’t exact capital punishment or lashes from logic, it needs a verse. And Tosfos in the first chapter of Bava Kama says that it is obvious that opening is included in digging and still you need a verse. In Gemara Makkos it asks if testimony works with two witnesses then why does the Torah also mention 3? But what’s the question, we hold ein onshin min hadin, you can’t punish based on logic, and we would not enact a death penalty if 3 witnesses testified, for example someone killed someone else but because it is impossible to have 3 without two then obviously they should be able to make someone guilty of a capital crime, so why isn’t this any different then digging and opening a pit where each one needs a verse though once we know one then obviously we know the other?

Background

A. Digging a pit entails opening something which was not there before whereas opening a pit entails opening a hole that was already opened before but currently is covered.

B. 3 witnesses are all separate who just happened to come together to testify about the same thing.

 Answer: Since opening and digging really are two different actions then it makes more sense to say a kal vachomer so therefore a verse is needed to punish but two out of three witnesses are the same as two witnesses therefore it makes more sense to say they are the same thing as that is why the Gemara asked why a verse is needed.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #124

1.    Question: Rav Elchanan Wasserman (Kovetz Ha’aros 77, 78) asked why you are punished for each child when shechting a cow with its calves but you are only punished once for wearing a piece of wool clothing with shaatnez that has multiple linen threads intertwined in it?

Background:

A. Even though there is an argument between the Rabbanan and Sumchus (See Chullin 82a) whether the shochet gets one set of lashes or multiple sets for each calf just as Sumchus would say if you eat two forbidden fats in one setting you are liable for two sets of lashes but the Rabbanan still hold according to the Rambam in his commentary on Mishnayos Nazir (Chapter Shlosha Minim) that though you might only get one set of lashes but you still are liable in heaven for each calf. Why is this if what triggers the sin is really just one action of slaughtering the mother?

B. Same should apply to wearing shaatnez clothes, even though it is one action of wearing but if there are multiple threads of interwoven wool and linen you should at least be liable in heaven for each thread?

  Answer: By the slaughtering there is really two different issues here shechting the mother and her first child and then her second child the sin was just done in one action once the mother was slaughtered so it’s doing two prohibitions at once. But by shaatnez the prohibition is wearing clothing that has shaatnez in it so really there is only one prohibition and multiple reason of why he is liable. But he is only punished once for the one prohibition.  


Posted on

Korach – The Response to Anarchy

For Food for Thought in Spanish: Haga clic aquí para leer en español. Please share this with your Jewish Spanish speaking family, friends, and associates.

Korach’s rebellion with his followers takes place in this week’s Torah portion of Korach. The beginning of the portion states: “Korach the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi took [himself to one side] along with Dasan and Aviram, the sons of Eliab, and On the son of Pelet, descendants of Reuvain. They confronted Moshe together with two hundred and fifty men from the children of Israel, chieftains of the congregation, representatives of the assembly, men of repute. They assembled against Moshe and Aharon, and said to them, “You take too much upon yourselves, for the entire congregation are all holy, and the Lord is in their midst. So why do you raise yourselves above the Lord’s assembly?” Moses heard and fell on his face. He spoke to Korach and to all his company, saying, “In the morning, the Lord will make known who is His, and who is holy, and He will draw [them] near to Him, and the one He chooses, He will draw near to Him” (Bamidbar 16:1-5).

The Medrish Rabba explains in more detail the conversation Korach and his followers had with Moshe and Aharon. They said to Moshe and Aharon that the entire nation are all holy and all of them heard on Har Sinai the mitzvah of, ‘I am the Lord your G-D’ so why should you reign over the congregation of Hashem?! We could understand if everyone didn’t hear the receiving of the Torah on Har Sinai, except for you, but now that everyone heard so why are you elevated over everyone else (Bamidbar Rabba 18:6)?

In the next paragraph of the Medrish Rabba (18:7), in the second answer of how Moshe responds the Medrish says that Moshe said to them, Hashem created boundaries in His world. Are you able to combine day and night? That is what the pasuk says in the beginning, ‘And it was evening, and it was morning’ (Breishis 1:5), ‘and G-D separated between the light and between the darkness’ (1:4 there). This was done for the practicality of the world. So just as He differentiated between light and darkness for the practicality of the world, so too He separated the Jewish people from the rest of the nations, as it says, ‘And I separated you from the rest of the nations to be for me’ ( 20:26). And so too He separated Aharon, as it says, ‘And he separated Aharon to make him holy in the Holy of Holies’ (Divrei HaYamim alef 23:13). If you are able to combine the  separation between light and the darkness, you are able to nullify this also, therefore Moshe said to them, ‘Morning, and Hashem knows what is His and the Holy and he offered on it, it is already fixed, and that which he chooses he shall bring close to Him.’

The Rada”l on the medrish clarifies that if light and darkness combined together the world would  be able to benefit from it’s useful purpose. So too the Jews separated from the rest of the nations of the world and Kohanim separated from Yisrael, through their separation, that is their use in order to stay holy and to be free to serve Hashem. (Click here for Hebrew text.)

Korach and his followers’ claim is that everyone should be equal, we all are holy and together like one man with one heart who received the Torah then why should Moshe and Aharon be elevated to a higher status than everyone else? This statement is an anarchist, utopian like statement. What is Moshe’s response? Moshe breaks it down for them as clearly as possible, stage by stage to make clear that there is a logical need for a hierarchy, and it is unhealthy for the world to be one big melting pot.

Moshe first gave the example of the light and darkness, imagine if light and darkness would be combined, not light shed onto a pitch black room, but combined like if you would combine yellow and blue which makes green then you would never get the benefits of yellow and blue if they were always mixed, so too if light and darkness were combined then you wouldn’t be able to see as well or sleep as well, the combination would not be useful at all, at least at its optimal potential. The same is true about the Jews and the rest of the nations. By Hashem setting us apart and giving us a status of a light upon all other nations, princes to the King Of All Kings, he set us apart to keep us holy and focused on our mission to serve Hashem at great heights. If He would not have separated us from everyone else and we would just be intermingled with the rest of the world then there would be no push or sense of responsibility to be focused on being holy and to serve Hashem to the optimum since we’d all be doing the same thing and there would be no impetus to not do what everyone else is doing  and finds interesting. This means that the very essence of being set apart and put on a higher pedestal is what gives the proper motivation for one to succeed in what he is asked to do, the hierarchy and sense of being unique and special gives one a sense of responsibility to produce proper results. In this case of course every Human being was created in the image of Hashem, and has high degrees of intellect with potential to reach great heights in serving Hashem but Hashem still put the Jewish people on a pedestal in order so that they feel that sense of responsibility to be unique and separate, holy, so that they can be an example and benefit to the world in serving Hashem to their optimum.

So too within the Jewish people Hashem created a hierarchy of Kohanim over Yisraelim. The kohanim have to be even more scrupulous in their holiness and they are given the special job of the only ones able to perform the service in the Mishkan and Beis Hamikdash, they have benefits such as  the priestly gifts, but their sanctified status comes with a lot of responsibility and if every Jew would have equal status, anyone can perform the sacrificial service, for example, then no one would adhere to the level of holiness required. This is similar to  people who wish to have no government or law and order because it is not right that some people have higher status and control over others. Yet without the positions of leadership there would not be an impetus or responsibility to get things done properly and the whole world would fall into chaos.

Even at the risk of abusive control, haughtiness and all other negativity that comes with leadership we see from here that it is more worth while to have a sense of hierarchy and not anarchy in the world in order to infuse a sense of responsibility and purpose  for the benefit of the world.

All Korach and his followers wanted was anarchy, a utopia where everyone is equal, but Moshe’s response was that it would be useless and harmful to the world because if everyone is equal. If there is no leadership then there is no responsibility and the world would then fall apart.

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim chapter 6, halacha two, footnote 2: Part 1

Today we began a very important lesson in learning . Many times we see things through the lenses of the final product, obviously something is forbidden and it makes logical sense but how did the rabbis figure that out and what are the exact details of how it came about? By getting into the details of the origin of the halacha with the back and forth of whether it is a problem or not then we can better appreciate the severity of the halacha and make it ingrained inside us.

 In our specific case the Chofetz Chaim, in footnote 2 of his Be’er Mayim Chaim goes into much detail discussing and questioning how we know that just listening to lashon hara, even if you don’t accept it is still a Torah level prohibition. The Chofetz Chaim began with a gemara in Kesubos 5a quoting and explaining a verse in Devarim 23:14 that you should stick your fingers in your ears when you hear bad speech. The Chofetz Chaim says that is not necessarily a proof that the Torah holds you can’t even listen to lashon hara, maybe that is just an, asmachta, a hint in the Torah and the Rabbis said you can’t listen and must stick your fingers in your ear, proof is that there is another Gemara in Pesachim 25b which says that if you are stuck amongst a group of people who are speaking lashon hara and cannot leave but dislike what they are saying that is good enough. But if the Torah says you should stick your fingers in your ears it should have said that? It must be it’s only advice if the rabbis hinted to in the Torah. But you shouldn’t come to the conclusion that the Torah permits you to just listen to lashon hara, for there could be a difference between needing to stick your fingers in your ears and searching out juicy slander to listen to. The fact that many places like the Rambam and Rabbeinu Yona use a term that you cannot accept lashon hara does not mean that it is permitted to listen because all they mean is to be inclusive of times when you really are permitted to listen to lashon hara for the sake of avoiding physical or monetary damage to yourself or helping others from getting hurt, which though you can listen and be cautious to what you hear but the Torah says you cannot accept what you here as absolute truth until you look into the matter yourself.

Next week we’ll continue with this footnote to see if there really is a Torah level source that you are not allowed to even lean an ear to just listen to lashon hara.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #123

Question: What’s the difference between putting on Tefillin which the Yeshuos Yaakov holds there is a Torah level mitzvah to wear the entire day but taking the lulav an esrog is only a one moment mitzvah on a Torah level, not the entire day?

Background:

A. The mitzvah by the lulav and esrog is to take them into your hands.

B. The mitzvah of tefillin is to have them on you.

 Answer: An action only takes a moment to do so by tefillin it’s only a moment but having them on can be continuous so the mitzvah by tefillin is the entire day.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #122

1.       Question: According to the opinion brought down in the Minchas Chinuch (mitzvah 423) that if you fix tzitzis at night on a day time garment which one corner broke, it is invalid and must be restrung in the day because the night isn’t a time of performing the mitzvah of wearing tzitzis but why then can you bake matzah before Pesach or build a Sukkah before Sukkos?

Background:

A. The issue for not working is the concept of “ta’aseh vilo min ha’asui” which means that there has to be an obligation to do the mitzvah ready to be when you set it up, not set it up beforehand then the obligation comes in. For example you can’t take a rounded garment, which doesn’t have an obligation of tzitzis and put tzitzis on four sides and then cut out four corners so that it would now be obligated in tzitzis after the tzitzis was tied on.

B. What obligates a garment in tzitzis is a four-corner garment but the obligation is only during the day according to most opinions.

C. There is a difference between a passive exemption and an active exemption.

                   Answer: By tzitzis the exemption of night time is actively exempting one from a potentially preexisting obligation, therefore the concept of taaseh vilo min ha’asuy kicks in because there is an obligation that can be fixed so it has to be fixed when the time is appropriate but by shofar and sukkah there isn’t an obligation before the Yom Tov so passively time just happened to not cause the obligation to kick in but since it is not actively stopping it then preparations can be made to prepare for the mitzvah to take place when the time comes for the obligation to kick in.

Posted on

The Negiah: The Power of a Bias

For Food for Thought in Spanish: Haga clic aquí para leer en español. Please share this with your Jewish Spanish speaking family, friends, and associates.

This week’s Torah portion is Shelach, which discusses the incident of the spies. This dvar Torah is based on a shmuz given by Rav Moshe Chait zt”l, who was Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim Yerushalayim. It shows the power and extent a bias corrupts without defining what the bias of the spies was. For an explanation of the exact bias of the spies please click here and here and here for the Rosh HaYeshiva of the entire Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim network, Rav Henoch Liebwitz zt”l’s shmuz found in Majesty of Man.

A major theme in the Torah portion of Shelach is the count of the meraglim, the spies. The Mussar Giants say this is an example of great people succumbing to mistakes which appear be obvious to other people, but to the individuals involved in the matter there was some kind of negiah, bias, that distorted their deductions.

The Yalkut Shimone says that the spies were righteous. In the opening pasuk of the portion it says: “Send for you men,” “Shelach licha anashim;” and whenever the Torah says “anashim,” “men,” it is refering to righteous people.
The selection of these people were approved by both Moshe and Hashem. Nevertheless, on this pasuk Rashi says that Hashem told Moshe ‘they are being sent on your command, not Mine.’

Really, Moshe couldn’t understand the request of the Jewish people, because Hashem promised them a land flowing with milk and honey. So there was already a doubt as to whether their request was authentic or not; Hashem had assured them, so they shouldn’t have any doubt in the land.

In fact, at the end of his life, Moshe warned the people to not do like their fathers did and mess up when they were about to go into the Promise Land. Moshe reminded them, “And all of you approached me and said, ‘Let us send men ahead of us so that they will search out the land for us and bring us back word by which route we shall go up, and to which cities we shall come’” (Devarim 1:22). Rashi there says that when the Jews came to ask for the spies the younger folks were pushing the elders and the elders pushing ahead of the judges. This was a lack of courtesy which Moshe now admitted he didn’t pick up on at the time but should have noticed and rejected their request. In the next pasuk, “And the matter pleased me; so I took twelve men from you, one man for each tribe,” Moshe even admitted that he thought they had a good idea. It is hard to admit you are wrong. But “Derech Eretz Kadmah liTorah,” good manners precede the Torah; it is the beginning and ending of the Torah. A slight lack of courtesy could destroy even a sincere and devoted motivation to do something. A lack of good manners is not being so meticulous in Jewish law, halacha, in general, and specifically in character development, mussar.

As a result, while Moshe hand-picked the spies and Hashem approved, he still had his suspicions and blessed Yehoshua, as well as prayed for him, that he would be saved from the influence of these bad people.

Once in the land, “They went up in the south, and he came to Hebron” (Bamidbar 13:22), Calev only went to Chevron to pray by the tomb of our forefathers. Calev at that point was aware that there was something wrong and prayed to not be corrupted. When the spies returned to the camp Calev had to stop the people from stoning Moshe and Aharon. He had to first act like he was against Moshe and Aharon to get the Jews to listen to him and then convinced them otherwise, that they were making a bad decision in following the rest of the spies. However, with all his bravery and conscientiousness, he still had to pray to Hashem to not fall to the influence of the spies. He might have thought that when he is in the company of all the great Jewish leaders he might be great himself, but if he is acting on his own, it is hard to feel that one can overcome the danger by himself. Therefore he turned to Hashem to ask for assistance. Based on this it would seem that both Yehoshua and Calev acted by themselves, not together, as it says that for their own deeds they merited to inherit a part in The Land.

To understand the extent of the spies’ bias and how far they went in going against Moshe, we see that they came back on Tisha B’Av and they went from tent to tent crying that ‘we will never see each other again’ and ‘destruction is imminent if we enter the land.’ Then all of the Jewish people, men, women, and children started to cry. Because of this bias they could not enter the land and there was then a real reason to cry, for all generations, until the Final Redemption, may it come speedily in our days.

The lesson we see from here is that even if one knows he is doing the right thing, but everyone else is doing the wrong thing, he still might be able to fall into the evil inclination’s trap. So one cannot rely on oneself but rather should pray for Divine Help as we see that Calev left the spies, though he might have put himself in a dangerous and compromising position, in order to pray to Hashem by the tomb of our forefathers. He couldn’t pray where he was but had to go to his forefathers, as he knew Hashem would accept their prayers to save him. Yehoshua, also, had Moshe pray on his behalf so he felt a little more comfortable since Moshe prayed for him.

There are times we feel a little too confident about ourselves, at those times we must turn to Hashem to pray to Him that He removes any bias that we can give in to when making decisions, for example, yeshiva guys sometimes feel too confident that they are always in yeshiva and don’t have to worry about any outside influences but the truth is they still have to pray for Hashem’s help to not stumble. So to, everyone else in the world, with their own circumstances should always turn to Hashem for Divine Assistance in making proper judgement calls.

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim Chapter 6 halacha 1 with footnote & halacha 2 without footnote

We started the sixth chapter which deals with the recipient of lashon hara. Though both are forbidden on a Torah level yet there is a difference between accepting lashon hara and listening to lashon hara. 

Halacha 1 deals with accepting lashon hara which is defined as decisively deciding in one’s heart that what you heard is true which is a problem because now the one being talked about is disgraceful in your eyes even if you don’t show any response to what you heard. If you show a response to what you heard is two times worse than just accepting in your heart, either way the mechilta learns that one who accepts lashon hara as truth is worse than the one saying it and deserves to be thrown to the dogs. The Chofetz Chaim does caution in his footnote (1) that though it is forbidden to accept lashon hara as truth but one shouldn’t decide the speaker is a liar. Rather he should take the middle ground and be indecisive and if he has to, for his own or others benefits he can do research into the matter and decide on his own whether it really is true or not. 

Halacha 2 says that one is forbidden to have an ear out to listen to lashon hara even if he doesn’t accept what is being said. However one is aloud to keep his ears open if what he’s listening to will help him or someone else in some way. For example if one tells him about a potential shidduch or partnership he can listen and do research to see if it is really true what the person said. This is permitted because it can avoid much hardship and strife in the future. Also if you think you are influential enough then you can listen to someone talk about someone else who did something wrong if you think you can go over to the wrongdoer and help him change his ways. Otherwise listening just to hear juicy info about others is strictly forbidden by the Torah. 

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #121

2.       Question: If a person who isn’t sure whether he said birkas hamazon should say it again because this blessing comes from the Torah and when in doubt you have to be strict and say it again, yet the Shaarie Teshuva (Orach Chaim 184:4:1) says he cannot say birkas hamazon for others because we are only strict about fulfilling a Torah level doubt on a Rabbinic level so the person in doubt has a lower level obligation then the one who has a definite obligation to say birkas hamazon and can’t say it for the definite. However the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 197) says that one who ate a kazayis (olive bulk) of bread who has a rabbinic level obligation to say birkas hamazon can say birkas hamazon for a person who ate bread to satiation who has a Torah level obligation to say birkas hamazon, what’s the difference?

Background:

A.      The parameters for obligating oneself to say birkas hamazon is the same regardless whether it’s because he is satiated or he ate a kazayis, the eating obligates the blessing.

B.      The parameters that obligate a person to say bikas hamazon in doubt or definitely are different. Explain why and how that makes for a difference.

 Answer: The obligation of one who definitely needs to say birkas hamazon stems from the fact he ate whether it was a kazayis or to satiation it is all the same thing but the obligation to say birkas hamazon in doubt stems from the fact that the rabbis said you should still say birkas hamazon even if you are in doubt so it is a separate type of obligation therefore one cannot say it for the other since they have different obligations.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #120

1.       Questions: What would be the difference between a Jew and non-Jew together tying tzitzis and them together shechting an animal?

Background:

A.      The case by shechting is where they are both holding onto the knife when slaughtering where the Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 2:11 says it is no good.

B.      You need an action of a kosher shechita done by a Jew but it does not transform the animal in any way but by tzitzis the four cornered garment is transformed into a tzitzis garment and the action required to be done by a Jew is just the means to transform it into a kosher tzitzis garment.

C.      Why then would it be alright if a non-Jew made the tzitzis with the Jew even if it would not work by shechting the animal?

 Answer: Since what is required by shechting is a kosher action then the whole action must be done only by a Jew according to the Shulchan Aruch. But by tzitzis you just need a garment of tzitzis made by a Jew and it was made by a Jew a non-Jew was just involved as well.