Author: Rabbi Milder

Posted on

Vaera – Zrizus: Beyond Mind Over Matter

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.

The Torah tells us in this week’s Torah portion of Vaera: “Moshe and Aharon did as Hashem commanded them, so they did. Moshe was 80 years old and Aharon was 83 years old when they spoke to Pharaoh” (Shemos 6, 7:7). The Torah isn’t just a historical book teaching us facts about the Jewish leaders’ timelines and ages. There must be a reason why the Torah gave the ages of Moshe and Aharon at this junction. In fact, the Ibn Ezra observes that the pasuk mentions their ages, and we don’t find anywhere else in Scripture where it mentions that prophets gave prophesy at such an old age.

The Sforno learns from this pasuk that, with all their elderliness, Moshe and Aharon still woke up early and acted with speed and alacrity (b’zrizus) to do the will of their Creator. For normally one who has reached the age of 80 had, even in those days, already surpassed “old age” and reached “the age of strength,” as Moshe testified in his prayer when he said: “The days of our years are 70 years, or even by reason of strength, 80 years” (Tehillim 90:10). (Click here for Hebrew text.)
The Sforno is telling us that the lesson we learn from this pasuk is that even at an old age one can act b’zrizus; with enthusiasm, alacrity and zeal, and in a manner which is quick and with much ease, in order to serve Hashem and fulfill His will.

This is something totally expected of Moshe and Aharon, such great tzadikim, righteous to the highest caliber, in touch with Hashem directly. Why would we think anything less of them, that the Torah has to point out their ages as if to applaud them for acting in a manner which was above and beyond what they were expected to do?

We see from here that even for such holy and righteous people like Moshe and Aharon, they also felt the effects of age, and it must not have been easy for them to act with such energy, like they had in their youth, to go with such speed to fulfill Hashem’s will. Yet they overcame the natural lethargies of age, and acted b’zrizus to do Hashem’s bidding, which deserved special mentioning.
But we have to put into context what exactly this means. Although it says at the end of Moshe Rabbeinu’s life: “Moshe was 120 years old when he died; his eyes had not dimmed, and his vigor had not vanished” (Devarim 34:7), and Moshe also carried down the Tablets and erected the Mishkan single handedly, we must say that Moshe was only rejuvenated by Hashem with “the fountain of youth” when he was up on Har Sinai upon receiving the Torah. Until then he was aging normally as anyone else would. In fact, the chapter in Tehillim that the Sforno quoted was written by Moshe Rabbeinu: “A prayer by Moshe, the man of Hashem…” (Tehillim 90:1) and the Ibn Ezra mentions there that Moshe might have written this Psalm when he was 80, before he had prophesy, when his “hands were becoming heavy.” So he really was naturally slowing down at that point; yet when he was charged by Hashem to free the Jewish people he acted in a manner not befitting his age, with such enthusiasm and speed that it was worth lauding him and Aharon in the Torah, which is not known to write anything extra, not even a letter.

This is something which should not be taken so lightly, the Mishna in Pirkay Avos, which the Sforno in fact alludes to, says: “At seventy fullness of years; at eighty the age of ‘strength’” (Avos 5:21). Rashi there says that at 70 you are considered completely old, when most of your hair whitens, and it is a big thing to live to the age of 80, and if one lives longer than 80 it is with “the power” of Hashem which keeps him alive, not because of his own strength, for from now on one doesn’t have as much strength to eat and drink.

We see from all this that aging is a natural tendency within all of us and that it is normal for us to slow down based on the laws of nature. But, even barring a miracle, one has the ability to move above and beyond nature, if he puts his or her mind to it and is excited to act with speed and alacrity, b’zrizus, especially when performing Hashem’s will.

The Orchos Tzadikim in the chapter on Zrizus opens by saying: “Zeal for the Torah and the commandments is a great quality, and so is zeal that aims to make a better world. And it is a quality of the righteous in the service of the Creator, may He be Blessed. Our Sages, of blessed memory, said : “The zealous are early to perform their religious duties” (Pesahim 4a).” Everyone, no matter what age or circumstance has the potential to be righteous and is able to tap in and use this incredible attribute for good.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #92

2.       Question: Why does the Chesed Avraham hold you can use an electric machine to make tzitzis but not to shecht an animal?

Background:

A. The Har Tzvi brings those that are strict who say that both tzitzis making and shechting must be done by hand and not machine because the Torah says by shechting “and you shall slaughter” which sounds like “you,” it needs human power to kosherly slaughter an animal. By tzitzis the Torah instructs “you shall make for you” which also implies human power is needed to make tzitzis.

B. Why doesn’t the Chesed Avraham understand the verse by tzitzis in the same manner as he understands the verse by shechita?

C. By twirling and knotting the strings you are transforming them into tzitzis. Whereas by a live kosher animal all you are doing is killing it in a specific way the Torah tells you to do it.

A2. In terms of tzitzis the action is just the means of transforming strings into an object called tzitzis so you don’t necessarily need a person to do that as long as the transformation took place it is now a kosher pair of tzitzis. Whereas by shechita there is no transformation into a new entity taking place so the action of slaughtering isn’t just a means it is an act in of itself therefore it will require special halachos like a person’s own power doing the action as the Torah indicates and therefore a machine doing it, no matter how precise will not halachically be able to do the job.                Result vs. Process


Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #91

1.       Question: If in terms of making a vow mushroom are included within things that grow from the ground then why don’t you make a “borei pri ha’adama”, the blessing you make over vegetables that grow from the ground?

Background:

A. The blessing you make on mushrooms is a “shehakol”.

B. Mushroom get nourishment from the air.

C. The understanding of a vow is based on how people talk.

 Answer: The Ra”n explaining the Gemara in Nedarim daf 55b explains that because one sees mushroom scatter about throughout the ground then when one says he vows to not get any benefit from anything that grows on the ground then mushrooms are included but since the main way a mushroom grows is through nourishment from the air then the blessing when eating it is Shehakol since anything which does not grow from the ground gets that blessing.

Posted on

Shemos – Daughter of G-D: Respecting Status


An astonishing thing is often overlooked in this week’s Torah portion of Shemos, when Pharaoh’s daughter did something akin to Avraham Avinu.  While totally steeped in the idolatry and black magic for which the Egyptian culture was known, she, completely independently, found G-D and denounced idolatry. This is why “she just happened” to be by the Nile River, in the right place at the right time, as Baby Moses was floating down the river in a basket. Indeed, this is why she is known as Basya, Daughter of G-D. The Torah relates: “Pharaohs daughter went down to bathe by the River and her maidens walked along the River. She saw the basket among the reeds and she sent her maidservant and she took it” (Shemos 2:5).
The Gemara in Sotah 12b elaborates about what exactly took place at the time: “The verse states: ‘And the daughter of Pharaoh came down to bathe [lirḥotz] in the river’ (Exodus 2:5). Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: This teaches that she came down to the river to cleanse herself from the impurity of her father’s idols, as she was immersing herself as part of the conversion process. And similarly it states: ‘When the Lord shall have washed [raḥatz] away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of destruction’ (Isaiah 4:4). This washing clearly refers to the purging of spiritual sins, rather than bathing for the sake of cleanliness. The verse continues: ‘And her maidens walked along [holekhot] by the riverside’ (Exodus 2:5). Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This walking is nothing other than the terminology of going toward death, and similarly it states: ‘Behold, I am going [holekh] to die’ (Genesis 25:32). The verse continues: “And she saw the ark among the willows” (Exodus 2:5). Once her maidens saw that the daughter of Pharaoh was intending to save Moses, they said to her: Our mistress, the custom of the world is that when a king of flesh and blood decrees a decree, even if all the world does not fulfill it, at least his children and members of his household fulfill it, and yet you are violating the decree of your father. After the maidens tried to convince her not to save Moses, the angel Gabriel came and beat them to the ground and they died. The verse concludes: “And she sent amatah to take it” (Exodus 2:5). Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya disagree as to the definition of the word “amatah.” One says that it means her arm, and one says that it means her maidservant. The Gemara explains: The one who says that it means her arm explained it in this manner, as it is written “amatah,” which denotes her forearm. And the one who says that it means her maidservant explained it in this manner because it does not explicitly write the more common term: Her hand [yadah]. Therefore, he understands that this is the alternative term for a maidservant, ama. The Gemara asks: And according to the one who says that it means her maidservant, didn’t you say earlier: Gabriel came and beat them to the ground and the maidservants died, so how could Pharaoh’s daughter send her? The Gemara answers: It must be that Gabriel left her one maidservant, as it is not proper that a princess should stand alone.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
The life of Moshe Rabbeinu, which means the future of the Jewish People and in fact the whole world, hung in the balance. Would he be saved or not? Pharaoh’s daughter saw the child floating down the river and wanted to save him. Her companions tried to stop her, but the angel Gavriel struck them dead. The Tanna who said that she stuck out her hand and brought in the basket obviously was learning that there was an open miracle performed, by her arm stretching many amos, or cubits, long in order to save Moshe. However, according to the other opinion, Moshe being saved was relatively within the boundaries of nature beside the angel Gabriel’s intervention. That being the case, why then was one maidservant left alive simply because it is improper for a princess to be left alone?  Wasn’t there a chance that the last maidservant might dissuade her from saving the baby? Granted, at this moment, she was making a statement, separating herself from her father’s idolatrous way of life, essentially at risk of leaving the palace all together; but it still must have been a very highly sensitive emotional time, especially with her entire entourage mysteriously dropping dead on the banks besides her. Why take the risk and leave one alive? Because that’s proper manners? If she can potentially be the one to convince her to turn back then any hope of saving Klal Yisrael might be all over!

Imagine if The G-D of Legions, King of All Kings, The Holy One Blessed Be He, lihavdil, was in His war room with the angel Gabriel and they were strategizing a mission of how to best save Moshe Rabbeinu from drowning in the Nile and saving the entire Jewish People. This would have ramifications for the entire world’s existence, for if the Jewish People  would not have been redeemed from Egypt to get to  Har Sinai in order to accept Hashem’s Torah, then Hashem would have destroyed the world. So there was a lot on the line. Hashem decided to conduct things within the natural realm of the world and he warned Gabriel that he could take out all of Basya’s friends besides one, because it would be a lack of proper respect for a princess to be left alone. So now that she had her one maidservant, the maidservant could go and fetch the basket, using normal means of saving Klal Yisrael, and no massive miracle had to take place. But why risk the chance of saving one maidservant just because it is improper to leave her alone? The world was hanging in the balance; why is derech eretz, proper manners, taken into account at such a delicate time as this? Gabriel should not have taken any risks, wiped them all out, and ,if need be, since there was no other means of saving Moshe, then there is no choice but to rely on a miracle! But now that he had to take proper manners into account and must save one of them, it then put everything back into the rule and order of nature, and there is a slight risk that the whole mission might fall apart. Was it really worth even taking a slight risk like that during such an important mission?

The answer is YES! We see to what extent one has to treat another person with the proper respect he or she deserves, no matter what the dire situation anyone is in. Derech Eretz Kodmah LiTorah, proper manners supersedes the Torah! In this case it means that respecting others status comes before rational logic of getting things done properly without taking any risks even at such an ominous time in history!

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim Chapter 4, halacha 5, note 25-28 and halacha 6

Note 25: Though the Chofetz Chaim said that when the court reprimands a person that committed a severe sin once they should do it in private and in a fashion that won’t embarrass the guy however he elaborated here that if the guy won’t easily listen or if the sin was public and everyone knows about it and might do the same then the Jewish court has a right to take things into their own hands and use him as an example to dissuade others from committing the same thing or give him lashes to be sure he will stop doing the sin himself.

Note 26: Though the court can’t accept one witness’s testimony for it is considered lashon hara if not said with another witness and they don’t have to rebuke the would be sinner, however if they somehow verified that the he did actually sin then they certainly should rebuke him.

Note 27, 28: In the end of the halacha we said that the person who saw someone do a severe sin can tell the sinner’s rabbi or rebbe as long as he believes him like two witnesses and the rabbi is a secretive and modest person who wouldn’t tell anyone else about it. Then the Rabbi can “hate” the sinner for what he did even if you don’t think he will do it again, until he has proven that he has repented then we assume that this type of rabbi when finding out that his student or congregant has repented or he helps him repent will love the repented sinner again and treat like everyone else as he was before the sin. He certainly won’t tell anyone else, which no one should believe him anyways even if he is a trusted rabbi since I’m this is all second hand coming from him and he only trust the guy who saw the sin first hand “like” two witnesses just to be extra cautious and to try to help the sinner mend his ways.

In halacha 6 the Chofetz Chaim says that even if the rabbi is a big talker but if you know if you don’t say anything to him and he is the only person the sinner will listen to them you are allowed to tell the rabbi in order so that the sinner will stop doing the sin if you have indications that he is ready and willing to do the sin again. This is permissible because you are doing this for the sake of Heaven to stop sin in the world. You certainly can’t tell anyone else because you have not actually seen him sin again even if you saw the sin with someone else, to be two witnesses and you know he would do it again, but as long as you have not seen him do it again or really for multiple times he is still included in the verse of “your nation” which one cannot speak lashon hara to anyone about.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #90

2.       Question: Why is one allowed to enter a bathroom or bathhouse without a halachic question fully answered but cannot start Shemone esray if he did not finalize an answer to the halachic question he was thinking about?

Background:

 A. In both cases one cannot think about the question, in the bathroom or bathhouse because it is forbidden to think Torah in dirty places and by shemone esray because it will ruin his concentration.

 Answer: The Shach says in Yoreh Deah 246:28 that the more one tries not to concentrate or to remove the question from him mind while davening then the more distracted he will be from davening. Meaning trying to distract oneself from the question so that you can Daven with more concentration will cause you to have less concentration on your davening and more concentration on distracting yourself so it is counterproductive. But when walking into a dirty place you just have to distract yourself and everything is fine. See Dirshu Mishna Berura 85:2:8:4.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #89

1.       Question: What is the difference between a bathroom and a chicken pen or barn?

Background:

A. The Mishna Berura 84:3 says if you make a difference in the body of the bathroom to make it not a bathroom then it is permissible to place a mezuzah on the door and to make blessings inside it, as well as to learn and Daven inside it. But without a change in the body of the room, then its name is not uprooted, meaning it is still a bathroom even if not in use any more and cleaned out.

B. But a barn, the Be’ur Halacha (79:7 “Aval”) says, only needs a cleaning of all waste to be able to learn or pray inside it. The Levushei Mordechai says this is also true for a chicken pen.

C. The Torah requires “your camp to be holy” to do Holy matters like making blessings, learning and praying. The question is what’s the difference?

  Answer: Since the chicken pen or barn is not set aside specifically for excrement rather it is to guard the chickens and animals, it is just that they also take care of their needs in that place then all you need is to clean it out but as long as the room is considered a bathroom even if it’s not in use it is still not “holy” and a disgrace to do Holy matters in that area. See Dirshu Mishna Berura 83:1 footnote 4.   [/exapnd]

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim Chapter 4 Halacha 5 part 1 with note 23, 24

If you know the person you saw do an outlandish sin that everyone knows is wrong would not listen to your rebuke because he is foolish and a scoffer, and it’s very possible he will do the sin again then it is permissible to tell the court if you can bring another witness that saw it to testify with him so that the court will privately take the proper initiative to stop him from sinning again. If you are only one witness you can’t tell the court because the Torah says courts only accept to witnesses, one witness constitutes lashon hara since the court can’t believe you. However an individual can go to the sinner’s relatives and tell him what he did assuming they will believe as if he is two witnesses and do something about it. All this is possible because sin disrupts the wellbeing nature of the world and must be minimized as much as possible however one can only tell if he is doing purely for the sake of Heaven, to be zealous for the sake of sanctifying Hashem’s Holy Name in the world but if he has ulterior motives like he has some grudge against the sinner then it will be held against him. Even though he should divulge the information anyway in order to stop the guy from sinning more but Hashem will hold the speaker accountable for his ulterior motives. However one has to be extremely careful before telling a relative, to be sure he will accept what you are saying and try to help because there are many times when relatives don’t believe negative reports about their relatives which can lead to major arguments and fighting that is not worth it for the sake of peace. We see from here that keeping the peace is more important for the world than trying to stop others from sin. One other option is to tell the sinner’s Rav or Rebbe again assuming they will believe you like two witnesses and will keep it private. They are allowed to hate the guy and gently reprimand until he changes his ways.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #88

Question: Why is the Pischey Teshuva (Yoreh Deah 289:1) unsure if you have to say a blessing if you take off your mezuzah to check it having in mind to put it back on but if you take off your Tallis or tefillin within mind to put it back on you don’t have to say another blessing?

Background:

 A. You could answer that it’s possible one might not think he’s putting the mezuzah back on if when checking it, it’s found unkosher. But besides that there is another reason to be in doubt, based on where the mitzvah is done which even if he took it down for some other reason like repairing the door and would put it right back onto the doorpost, still there would be a doubt whether you still need to make another blessing.

 A2. Tefillin and Tallis are put onto one’s body so the need of the blessing is based on what the person has in mind so if he plans on putting it back on no other blessing is needed but the mezuzah is put onto the door of the house so it is as if there is nothing to have the mezuzah in mind when being put back on so it’s possible to say that you always need a blessing when putting the mezuzah on the door post in whatever circumstance. Or you can say that the mezuzah belongs to the person and the person is in charge of the mitzvah so if he has in mind to put it back up he does not need to make a new blessing and that is the doubt.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #87

1.      Question: Why does the Shaagos Aryeh hold that saying Shema in the morning and night are two separate mitzvos but honoring your father and mother is one mitzvah but two parts to it?

Background:

A. The Maharatz Chiyos (Sanhedrin 56b) proves that honoring your parents is one mitzvah with two parts because there are only Ten Commandments not 11.

B. What is “michayev,” meaning what creates the obligation of each mitzvah?      

A1. By honoring one’s parents the obligation is because you are their child so the source of obligation is that you by yourself have to honor your mother and father. This is why it is one mitzvah with two parts to it. But what obligates one to say Shema is the time of day and night so it is two separate mitzvos.