Author: Rabbi Milder

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #128

1.    Question: If a bar mitzvah boy who turned 13 Friday night did not develop 2 hairs until Shabbos morning is still obligated to say the night time kiddush during the day then why is an onen, someone who is waiting to bury his dead relative, in this case over Shabbos, exempt from saying havdala after the burial on Sunday according to the Rosh?

Background:

 A: The Minchas Chinuch (mitzvah 31) says that if the bar mitzvah boy could not say Kiddush for himself on the Shabbos night he is obligated according to the Torah to say kiddush on Shabbos day because the kiddush during the day would not make up for what was skipped rather there is just a Torah level mitzvah to say the night time kiddush at some point during the whole entire Shabbos. (The daytime kiddush we say is rabbinic.)

B. The Rosh brought in the Tur Yoreh Deah 341 says that since an onen was not obligated to do havdala on motzei Shabbos at the beginning of his obligation to say havdala then he is exempt from saying havdala the next day after the burial, for since he was not obligated by the main time of obligation he is not obligated anymore (though havdala technically could be said until Tuesday normally.)

C. The obligation of kiddush comes because of the concept of Shabbos but the obligation of havdala comes because of the separation between Shabbos and weekday.

Answer: The obligation of kiddush is because of the day and the whole day is Shabbos so the bar mitzvah boy is still obligated once he produces his two hairs. But the obligation of havdala is the separation between Shabbos and weekday which is really a moment in time, once it passes and the onen was exempt at the time then he is not obligated any more or get a renewed obligation once he buries his relative. [/exapnd]

Posted on

Pinchas – Human Perfection

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.

 Hashem decreed Moshe Rabbeinu’s death by the hitting of the rock in the Torah portion of Chukas. Now, Moshe is faced with the reality for the first time that he will pass on before entering the Promise Land in this week’s Torah portion of Pinchas, “Hashem said to Moshe, “Go up to this mount Abarim and look at the land that I have given to the children of Israel. And when you have seen it, you too will be gathered to your people, just as Aaron your brother was gathered…” (Bamidbar 27:12, 13). Responding,  “Moses spoke to Hashem, saying: “Let the Lord, the God of spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation…” (Bamidbar 27:15, 16).

The Ralbag learns from Moshe’s response that those who have lived a complete, well-rounded life are not afraid of death, for they don’t greatly choose the life in this physical world, as there is something much better after they acquire all their intellect, which can only be appreciated in its entirety after one loses his physicality. For this reason we don’t find that Moshe was scared of dying;at this point and in any other place in time rather, Moshe requested from Hashem to appoint a person over the congregation who would put all his efforts into leading them, because his intentions were to do what was good for as long as possible. (Click here for Hebrew text.)

There is an innate drive in every living being to stay alive and to cower from death. It is in everyone’s natural instincts to do whatever they can to stay alive, to the point that a person will automatically recoil when faced with a burning fire. 

Anyone who feels the opposite is deemed to be unhealthy and possibly dangerous to themselves or others. Yet we find here that those who have reached human perfection, who have fulfilled their potential in life, do not fear death. Indeed, on the contrary, those individuals would rather die than live in this finite world. How does this seem appropriate for such an upstanding citizen of society and leader as Moshe Rabbeinu?

Furthermore it seems that Moshe did request from Hashem (in the Torah portion of Vaeschanan) to change the deadly decree on him, and get permission to enter the Promised Land with the Jewish people. So what does the Ralbag mean?
It would seem that in fact Moshe felt he was not finished yet with his mission in life. He believed that he could gain better insights to take with him to the Land of Eternity, if only he could enter the Holy Land. Which is why he davened 515 prayers to enter The Land. But he was not terrified of death itself, because he understood that his physical body in fact hindered the ultimate spiritual and intellectual experience of basking in the Presence of Hashem and appreciating the Torah he learnt in this world on a more pure and Divine level.

Only one who has nearly completed his mission in life and feels no need for his body anymore can wholly appreciate this, if not then on whatever level one is  on there is this natural pull and drive to stay physically alive.


Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim chapter 6, halacha 2, footnote 2 continued and footnotes 3, 4

Footnote 2 continued: The Chofetz Chaim proved from a gemara in Shevuos daf 31a combined with the Rambam (hilchos Sanhedrin 21:7) that even listening to lashon hara is forbidden since it might lead to accepting it as truth. So it’s logical to say that if the Torah definitely forbade accepting lashon hara then it also forbade what would lead to it which is just listening. The Gemara in Shavuos and the Rambam were talking about judges listening to statements by one party before the court case officially starts. If that’s a problem because they might accept the first aide as fact even if he will eventually hear the other side of the story, all the more so in any other situation of just listening where many times the person talked about doesn’t defend himself therefore it’s for sure forbidden because it is easier to accept what you hear. The Pirkei Di’Rebbe Eliezer warns that just sitting among those who speak lashon hara, no mention of accepting what you hear, you are considered wicked and one who hangs around slanderers, that means just by listening. Finally, the Sefer Chareidim says straight out in the negative mitzvah that have to do with one’s ears that just listening to lashon hara is prohibited by the Torah. You can’t get any clearer than that but the Chofetz Chaim says he must know this because of all that was quoted earlier.

Footnote 3: When a person is allowed to listen to lashon hara for a constructive purpose like to avoid future feuds then you have to have two things in mind:

 1. If the person is speaking out of hatred you can’t listen to him because he won’t be careful the prerequisites of permissibly speaking lashon hara for a constructive purpose listed later on.

2. You can listen in only if he had already started to speak with others so that you aren’t the one placing a stumbling block in front of the blind.

Footnote 4: When it says that if you are in a position to help someone correct his ways then you can listen to lashon hara in order to investigate if it is really true or not that is only if there is an inkling of possible truth to the matter but if you feel there is no way the guy you are listening to is telling the truth you have no obligation to be cautious about what you heard to rebuke the would be wrong doer.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #127

2. Question: Why does the Pri Megadim hold you should first make a blessing on the Tallis then say shehecheyanu but by a new fruit you first say shehecheyanu and then the blessing on the fruit?

Background:

A. The reason why the Tallis is considered important in your eyes to warrant a shehecheyanu is because of the mitzvah.

B. The fruit itself is what causes the need to say a blessing of Ha’etz and the blessing of shehecheyanu.

C. Saying the blessing of Haetz is for the benefit you get and shehecheyanu for the joy you get.

 Answer: Since the mitzvah causes the Tallis to need a shehecheyanu then it’s not fitting to say the blessing on the Tallis then the shehecheyanu but by the fruit since the reason for each blessing is different one for enjoyment and the other for joy and they are both caused by the fruit itself independently then it would be a separation /hefsek between the blessing and eating if shehecheyanu was said in the middle. (Also could say before and not after eating because really the joy starts from when the fruit is seen on the tree, so technically can say shehecheyanu then but we wait until we eat it when the joy intensifies.)

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #126

1. Question: Why can a kohen wear his priestly garments which has shaatnez in them even when not doing the holy service but the Raavad holds you can’t wear tzitzis which has shaatnez in them at night since there is no obligation at night?

Background:

A. These are examples of a positive mitzvah pushing off a negative mitzvah, in this case the mitzvah of tzitzis or priestly garments pushing off the prohibition of shaatnez/forbidden mixtures.

B. Really when it comes to the priestly garments the Torah didn’t just push off the prohibition of shaatnez but completely permitted it because that’s the only way to perform the service in the Beis hamikdash.

C. You don’t have to wear shaatnez by tzitzis but if you have a linen garment and the techeiles/blue string (when worn) was supposed to be wool then the positive mitzvah of tzitzis pushes off the negative mitzvah of shaatnez.

D. Why does the priestly garments permit the prohibition of shaatnez but the tzitzis only push off the prohibition if shaatnez.

Answer: The Kovetz Ha’aros (40 in new edition) answered that the Raavad holds that since there is no other way to wear the priestly garments while doing the Holy service then the prohibition became permitted even after the service was done and before it took place but by tzitzis you can always wear a linen garment with linen tzitzis so you wouldn’t need to mix wool and linen together. The Torah just permitted you to do so if you wish for the sake of the mitzvah so the mitzvah only pushes off the prohibition so when there is no mitzva, like at night then the prohibition won’t allow you to wear the garment.

Posted on

Chukas/Balak – Clarifying Comes to Clarity

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.
One might think it is obvious that the best teacher one can possibly have is Hashem Himself. However, Hashem thinks otherwise in this week’s haftorah for Chukas and Balak, which takes place in the Book of Micha.

In the middle of the Haftorah, Hashem sends Micha to the Jewish people to “verbally fight” against them for rebelling against Him, right around when the First Beis HaMikdash was destroyed. “Hear ye, O mountains, the controversy of Hashem; and you mighty ones, the foundations of the earth; for Hashem has a controversy with His people, and with Israel He shall contend. O My people, what have I done, and how have I wearied you? Testify against Me. For I brought you up out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam” (Micha 6:2-4).

Hashem goes on to say in the next pasuk, which is the link to this week’s Torah portion, “My people, remember now what Balak king of Moab planned, and what Bilaam the son of Beor answered him. From Shittim to Gilgal, may you recognize the righteous deeds of the Lord.” The Haftorah concludes with the fact that Hashem does not want their sacrifices and offerings but rather, “He has told you, O man, what is good, and what Hashem demands of you; but to do justice, to love loving-kindness, and to walk discreetly with your G-D” (Micha 6:8).
When Hashem first claims ‘what have I done wrong to you,’ and He reminds them of how He took them out of Egypt with great leaders, the Ibn Ezra says an amazing thing! Hashem is telling the Jews of the time, “That only a tremendous favor did I do for you when I elevated you and took you out by means of a person who can speak with you and tell you all you need to know, and to inform you of My ways. This was Moshe who came to Pharaoh and Aharon who prophesied for the Jews before Moshe came and Miriam who prophesied for the women. Also, the Torah was given through the hand of Moshe, and Aharon who was his spokesman. Both taught the mitzvos to the men and Miriam to the women. For the word of Hashem was with him face to face just as a person speaks to his friend mouth to mouth, and not in a dream or vision, or with riddles. This is a great favor and is amazing, for the words were clear like a father to his son and a rabbi to his student.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
Hashem challenges the Jewish people: ‘how can you rebel against me? I did so many favors for you and acted so kindly towards you, for example, I brought you out of Egypt and taught you the Torah through emissaries, not directly.’ Why was sending emissaries a kindness and a favor? Imagine watching videos of the most perfect orator, who spoke clearly and eloquently, better than you can imagine. Isn’t that exactly a depiction of what Hashem could have done, through dreams, visions or prophetic riddles, if Hashem were to have Himself given the instructions to leave Egypt, to each person, and taught each of them the Torah? How much better could it have gotten?

However we all know that the video sometimes is scratchy; there can be a blip in the system; the audio is bad; the bandwidth is weak. So as perfect of a speaker as He might be, there is a possibility of a glitch in our system, and of some disparity in understanding that might come about. So too if the Jewish people would not have had Moshe, who was on such a high level of prophesy, unlike anyone else, learning and getting direction from Hashem “face-to-face,” where he could question and clarify matters with Hashem, “mouth to mouth” and then teach it to Aharon and Miriam in order to help spread it to the masses so they could also question and clarify, then the Jewish people would have had to rely on their individual interpretations of dreams or visions or prophesy on lower, possibly unclear, levels, depending on where everyone was holding. In receiving direction and the Torah from Hashem directly they would not be able to respond back,  since they weren’t on the same level as Moshe was, to properly respond to Hashem. Therefore, it was a tremendous favor of Hashem to send Moshe, Aharon, and Miriam as His emissaries on His behalf to take them out of Egypt and teach them the Torah.

We see from here how important it is to have a father or rabbi in your life that you can talk to ask questions and clarify matters so they will be clear. Just watching videos, even if the speakers seem to be very clear, or reading books, even if you think they are clearly understandable, will not put you in the proper framework to serve Hashem properly compared to having someone who you can turn to and not be afraid to ask questions, as well as help you make applications to other matters, and to be sure you are doing the right thing. If Hashem could say it was better for them to have Moshe, Aharon, and Miriam as their guide and teacher, though it doesn’t make a difference how great they were, they still aren’t G-D, then it shows the opportunity to have a relationship with a rabbi to a student or a father to a son must be priceless. All the more so in our day and age even if our mentors and teachers aren’t as clear as professional speakers, but the professional speakers and expert writers aren’t G-D either.

 Bottom line the opportunity to be able to clarify matters, the give and take on a personal level to ensure clarity and to be able to apply one’s self is the best way to ensure you are doing the right thing and serving Hashem properly.
Take advantage!

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.