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.

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.

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.

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. 

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.

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.

Biha’aloscha – The Negative Effect Physical Desires for Food Have on Faith

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.

There are two episodes in the Torah which seem to mirror each other but had vastly different outcomes. In this week’s Torah portion Biha’aloscha the Jews complained that they were not given meat to eat which they desired, as the Torah states, “But the multitude among them began to have strong cravings. Then even the Children of Israel once again began to cry, and they said, ‘Who will feed us meat? We remember the fish that we ate in Egypt free of charge, the cucumbers, the watermelons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic. But now, our bodies are dried out, for there is nothing at all; we have nothing but manna to look at’” (Bamidbar 11:4-6).  Hashem responded, “And to the people, you shall say, ‘Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat, because you have cried in the ears of the Lord saying, ‘Who will feed us meat, for we had it better in Egypt.’ [Therefore,] the Lord will give you meat, and you shall eat. You shall eat it not one day, not two days, not five days, not ten days, and not twenty days. But even for a full month until it comes out your nose and nauseates you. Because you have despised the Lord Who is among you, and you cried before Him, saying, ‘Why did we ever leave Egypt’” (11:18-20)? In the end, “The people rose up all that day and all night and the next day and gathered the quails. [Even] the one who gathered the least collected ten heaps. They spread them around the camp in piles. The meat was still between their teeth; it was not yet finished, and the anger of the Lord flared against the people, and the Lord struck the people with a very mighty blow” (11:32, 33). The Jewish people were in the desert for a couple of years at that point, and were on the way to Israel to possess their Promise Land, before they sent the spies. They had been eating nourishing manna all this time, yet the Ralbag in this week’s Torah portion says that they didn’t lust for something they required, they were simply running after their desires, since the manna was technically enough for them. But there was a group of lowlifes that left with the Jews out of Egypt who had convinced many of the Jews to cry and say that they very much desired that Hashem give them meat to eat, and even though they had a surplus of cattle, as it says, “And also, a great mixed multitude went up with them, and flocks and cattle, very much livestock” (Shemos 12:38), yet they wanted to find some excuse to have Hashem give them meat.

In a similar vein, right after the Jewish people witnessed all the miracles of the Exodus from Egypt and the splitting of the sea, when their belief and trust in Hashem reached such a peak that Hashem testified, “so said the Lord: I remember to you the loving kindness of your youth, the love of your nuptials, your following Me in the desert, in a land not sown” (Yirmiyahu 2:2), an expression of endearment for the Jewish people following blindly Hashem out of Egypt into a barren desert. Yet the Torah relates, “The entire community of the children of Israel complained against Moses and against Aaron in the desert. The children of Israel said to them, If only we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by pots of meat, when we ate bread to our fill! For you have brought us out into this desert, to starve this entire congregation to death…And Moses said, When the Lord gives you in the evening meat to eat and bread in the morning [with which] to become sated, when the Lord hears your complaints, which you are making [the people] complain against Him, but [of] what [significance] are we? Not against us are your complaints, but against the Lord… And Moses said to Aaron, Say to the entire community of the children of Israel, Draw near before the Lord, for He has heard your complaints.…It came to pass in the evening that the quails went up and covered the camp, and in the morning there was a layer of dew around the camp. The layer of dew went up, and behold, on the surface of the desert, a fine, bare [substance] as fine as frost on the ground” (Shemos 16:2-3, 8-9, 13-14). They just left Egypt with such wonderous miracles as eating from fruit trees miraculously grown and producing succulent fruit as they were walking through dryland in the splitting of the Red Sea, as well as drinking fresh water from the walls of salty seawater on either side of them, plus much sheep and cattle which left with them out of Egypt. Yet when they got to the desert of Cin their physical desire of hunger caused them to complain to Hashem. Yet at that point Hashem listened to them but did not punish them; on the contrary, he began giving them manna and quail.

What was the difference between these two episodes? Both times it would seem that the Jewish people were at such great height of belief and trust in Hashem that they should have trusted in Hashem to feed them at first, and later what Hashem had been feeding them; yet they complained that they wanted to go back to Egypt, as the Ralbag in the Torah portion of Bishalach says, since meat was found there in plenty. Both times Hashem listened to their complaints and gave them what they wanted. But the second time they were punished, and many died; what changed?
The Ralbag in his Toaliyos learns a very important lesson from here in this week’s portion, “this is to inform us that it is not befitting of a person to run after his physical desires, for we see what happened to those who ran after their desires and many of them died. However, the Almighty Hashem wanted to fulfill their request to show the nation that the hand of Hashem is not shorthanded so that they will strengthen their faith in the Almighty Hashem. He showed them the He brought for them such an abundance of meat to last a month, for even the least amount a person gathered was ten laden donkeys full. Now, behold The Almighty Hashem did not punish when they asked for meat and bread in the Desert of Cin because then they did not have manna and it was appropriate for them to ask for bread and sustenance. However, now, when they had manna the problem was, they were running after their physical desires or their intent was to test The Almighty Hashem if he can give them meat in such abundance.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
We first learn from here that one’s physical desires, at the very least for food, can cause someone, even at such lofty levels of belief and trust in Hashem, to question their faith.
We also see how two episodes, which at first glance look exactly the same, can have drastically different results. For in the first case in Bishalach, all they wanted was a much-needed well-balanced diet, which Hashem patiently provided when they asked for it, though they did so in the form of a complaint. But in this week’s portion of Biha’aloscha their complaints stemmed from running after a desire that they wanted but did not need. Therefore, even though Hashem did fulfill their request, just to teach them a lesson in strengthening their faith, it came with deadly consequences.

It is very important to get to the root of an issue and to see the subtle differences before concluding that two things might look the same.

Sefer Chofetz Chaim chapter 5, halachos 7, 8

Today we concluded the fifth chapter of Sefer Chofetz Chaim.

Halacha 7 discusses how not only you cannot speak lashon hara about your fellow Jew but also about his objects. For example two business competitors cannot speak negative about their competitor’s products. This stems from jealousy and is a Torah level prohibition of lashon hara.

Halacha 8 teaches us that not only speaking loshon hara by yourself even if it is true is prohibited, but all the more so, two or more people speaking lasho hara about someone else is forbidden because the second person is giving credence to the first and the people listening will more likely believe what is said which cause a bigger disgrace to the one being talked about.

The Chofetz Chaim elaborates on this point in his Be’er Mayim Chaim (11) below and makes a very important point of what exactly is lashon hara. He says, not only is it lashon hara if two people are speaking at the same time but if one person speaks after the other, even though the first one already did the damage it is still lashon hara for the second one because lashon hara is speaking negatively about your fellow Jew, as we see by Miriam to Aharon who spoke lashon hara about Moshe, though it was only in private, she loved Moshe, only meant well, and Moshe wasn’t insulted one iota, still in all she got tzaraas because she spoke negatively about her fellow Jew. The insult, and damage that is caused is only a biproduct of lashon hara that just makes it worse.

Torah Riddles Test #119

Question: What is the difference between a sefer Torah on Shabbos found to be invalid but fixable where the Beis Yosef in the name of Rashba (See Taz Orach Chaim 32:18) says one can still use it still since it is fixable it’s as if it’s already fixed but if one hears Kaddish or Kedusha while davening Shemone Esray and waits silently until it is over then it is not as if one said it according to many Rishonim as brought in the Ra”n in Sukkah 38b even though we should apply the same logic that if one has a problem and can potentially fix it it’s as if he did it even before fixing it?

Background:

A.      The Bach says that “Kol Ha raui libila ein bilah mi’akeves” applies by the sefer Torah even if you aren’t allowed to fix it on Shabbos because there is nothing stopping the Torah from being fixed just a scribe cannot violate Shabbos.

B.      Why not say the same by a person davening Shemone esray that the person can really say the kedusha or kaddish but his shemone esray is just stopping him from saying it so by being silent it is as if he said the kedusha or kaddish?

 A2. Only by sefer Torah where nothing is stopping the sefer Torah just the person can’t fix it on Shabbos do we say that it is as if it is fixed but the same person who can’t talk because something is stopping him from doing so can physically talk if he wanted to, so it is not as if he said it.

Torah Riddles Test #118

1.       Question: According to the Ra”n and Rema (Orach Chaim 38:8) who says if one is involved in a mitzvah he is exempt from another mitzvah even if you can fulfill both of them then why should one stop and say kedusha if he is in the middle of reciting the Shema?

Background:

A.      The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 66:1) poskins that one can pause in reciting the Shema to say shalom to a person passing by who he reveres, for example his father or rebbe.

Answer: If one has an obligation to say shalom to a person he fears all the more so he should recite kedusha if the minyan is up to there in order to give honor to Hashem. The Mishna Berura there (19) says that if one pauses to say hello to a person all the more so for the sake of honoring Hashem. Therefore it has nothing to do with the concept of being involved in one mitzvah exempts one from another mitzvah.