Author: Rabbi Milder

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim Chapter 4 second half of halacha 2 and Halacha 3

The Chofetz Chaim concluded halacha 2 saying that one can also not speak lashon hara about one who is lacks in even branches of a mitzvah, meaning he keeps part of a mitzvah, for example if a person is frugal with his money and does not honor the Shabbos to the best of his ability like if he can wear nicer clothes for Shabbos or more delicacies at his Shabbos table and just doesn’t do so because he’s too cheap to buy them. You can’t tell anyone this even if you have firsthand knowledge. Also if one is lacks in rabbinic mitzvahs, whether they are fences to stop one from sinning like muktza or decrees like lighting the menora on Chanukah or even if they are seemingly minor rabbinic enactments like how to tie one’s shoe or how to cut your nails, which are both discussed in the Shulchan Aruch, it still constitutes lashon hara to tell others about his wrong doing. However if he doesn’t care about the rabbis and has an attitude that there is no need to keep rabbinic mitzvos then this is a different situation which Rava refers to these type of people as sinners in Shabbos 40a and one who is not only not holy but also an evil person, in Yevamos 20a, in that case there is a mitzvah to speak out against him.

Halacha 3 reiterated that there are a lot of details that must be taken into account when seeing someone do something that he is not supposed to be doing halachically. If he is the average Jew like most of us are who usually is careful about sinning but sometimes transgresses then there is a mitzvah to judge him favorably that he did it unintentionally or didn’t know it is forbidden, or just thought it was a restriction, or nice thing to do which only the righteous are careful in and therefore it is forbidden to tell anyone the sin you saw or heard someone else transgress, even if two people saw it. You can’t even hate him because there is a mitzvah to judge him favorably. There are different halachos in terms of speaking lashon hara and having that person allowed to be a witness. But one has to judge him favorably even if it is a sin people know is a problem, or even assume it was intentional though many people are lacks in the matter, even if the person transgresses it many times. However if he is assumed to be doing a certain sin all the time then the Halacha might change and will be discussed later in halacha 7.

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim Chapter 4 first half of Halacha 2

One is forbidden to tell anyone else about sins that other people do or the fact they don’t perform mitzvos, whether referring to sins or mitzvos that everyone knows about or those which people don’t take seriously and don’t understand the severity of the law. He gives two examples of mitzvos not taking seriously, Torah learning and lying. The reason why one cannot tell other that another is lax in these matters even if those listening might not take them seriously is because they will now look at the person being talked about in a different light for now on. The Chofetz Chaim makes a very important differentiation. A person who transgresses a mitzvah out of spite, purposefully not having fear of Hashem is considered “not part of your nation” meaning even if he is biologically Jewish or converted to be Jewish but if he is purposefully rebelling then it is permissible to speak lashon hara about him, but most times than not people just make up excuses of why they do things wrong and a person who just sins or doesn’t do a mitzvah because of some excuse, no matter how lame it is you cannot tell anyone what he did, that would constitute lashon hara in most cases.

There is one Gemara in Bava Basra 111b where it seems that Rebbe Yannai spoke lashon hara about Rebbe Yehuda HaNasi to Rebbe Samlai in front of Rebbe Yehuda HaNasi’s face which might be worse because of embarrassment. Rebbe Yehuda asked Rebbe Yannai a question and Rebbe Yanna told Rebbe Samlai let’s go he really doesn’t want to learn he’s just giving me a hard time. But the Chavas Yair says that a rebbe is allowed to speak harshly to a student in order to motivate him to learn deeper and more diligently which was Rebbe Yannai’s intent in this case therefore it was permissible what he did. Obviously Rebbe Yannai was able to deduce that Rebbe Yehuda Hanasi was able to handle and learn from such rebuke.

Posted on

Vayishlach – Loving Your Enemy

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.



Yaakov prepared for combat with Esav at the beginning of this week’s Torah portion of Vayishlach. Fearing the worst, he split up his camp, prayed to Hashem for salvation, and sent a peace envoys ‘with giftsto try to divert the incoming attack of Esav and his 400 mightiest warriors. The Torah portion begins: “Yaakov sent angels ahead of him to his brother Esav, to the land of Seir, the field of Edom. And he commanded them, saying: “So shall you say to my master to Esav, ‘Thus said your servant Yaakov, “I have sojourned with Lavan, and I have tarried until now. And I have acquired oxen and donkeys, flocks, manservants, and maidservants, and I have sent to tell [this] to my master, to find favor in your eyes’ ” (Breishis 32:4-6).


The Ralbag learns a very fascinating lesson from this initial confrontation. He says: “It is befitting for one who has someone who hates him and he wants to remove the hatred from him, that he should come close to him with all his might and tell him some personal news. In this way he is bringing their hearts closer by not hiding anything. The point being that a person only informs his loved ones of personal news and hides it from his haters. With this, if so, by making a foundation in his heart that he is a loved one, and breaking his heart, you will remove the hatred from him. For this reason Yaakov sent messengers to Esav to inform him about what had happened to him in order to calm his heart that he is a loved one.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
There was an obvious rift between Esav and Yaakov. Esav wanted to kill Yaakov at some point for “stealing” the birthright and blessings. He even sent his son to do the duty many years before, but his son only took all of Yaakov’s possessions which left him penniless and utterly embarrassed because he had no gifts in hand when he met his bride to be, Rochel, at the well. Granted that now he is trying to appease him, but how is it humanly possible to treat your enemy as your loved one by giving him personal information which most people wouldn’t divulge to a random stranger off the street, no less a sworn enemy?

It would seem that Yaakov, though apprehensive and ready to prepare for battle if need be, sincerely felt brotherly love, and sent a delegation to talk with Esav in a manner that only two loving friends or family would engage in.  Real sincerity must have been there, if it was to be successful in removing the hatred from Esav’s heart. It was not an allusion or trick, because people can see right through that. Indeed, it also seems from this Ralbag that, on the contrary, a person who hates another cannot simply tell his enemy personal information. There is something innately blocking him from doing that, and therefore by telling that information it demonstrates sincerity, which can melt the heart of your enemy.

The fact that the Ralbag brings this as a lesson shows us that this can be done by anyone, not just a Yaakov Avinu. As hard as it is to go over to someone with whom you are not on good terms and start engaging in small talk and treating him or her like your friend, if one can muster up the will and power to do so, then inevitably it will remove hatred from his or her heart, because you are sincerely showing love towards that person.

Posted on

Vayetzei – Handling Depression

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.

In the beginning of this week’s Torah portion of Vayetzei, Yaakov, sometime after leaving his parents, is promised by Hashem in the famous dream of the Angels going up and down the ladder, that he will have many offspring. Furthermore: “And behold, I am with you, and I will guard you wherever you go, and I will restore you to this land, for I will not forsake you until I have done what I have spoken concerning you” (Breishis 28:15).

After this episode, the Torah remarks: “Now Yaakov lifted his feet and went to the land of the people of the East” (Breishis 29:1). The Radak explains what it means by “Yaakov lifted his feet.” “Since G-D promised him and showed him this great vision he was happy and he easily lifted his feet and walked joyously, with a good heart. For originally, he was walking with weakened feet, like a person running away from his father’s house depressed. But he did not run away in a rush like one who runs away from the sword because he was not afraid of the sword of his brother as long as his father was alive.”(Click here for Hebrew text.)   It sounds like on some level Yaakov was depressed; Hashem lifted his spirits, and Yaakov was elated with joy after being promised blessing, security, and salvation by Hashem.

How could Yaakov Avinu be depressed after he took away the blessings from his brother and was told by his parents to leave his home? Aren’t we supposed to serve Hashem with joy and accept with a full heart anything that Hashem brings our way, no matter how dire the circumstances may be? If that’s the case, how could Yaakov, one of our forefathers, a role model for his descendants, feel a sense of depression?

We have to put things into perspective; Yaakov always did the right thing. He sat in the tent learning Torah most of his younger years, and the Torah testifies that he was a sincere person. Yaakov did as he was told from beginning to end. He listened to his mother when she told him to get the blessings. He now listened to his father (and mother) to go find a wife by his uncle Lavan. Yaakov wasn’t afraid of any danger, as the Radak said that he had nothing to worry about until his father died. It must be that he was simply upset to be the focal point of all that family stress, which in fact Esav was causing.

His depression must not have even affected him in a great manner, for Chazal testify that after he left his parents’ house he learned diligently in Yeshiva Shem ViEver for 14 years, unhindered by anything, to the point that when calculating the amount of years Yosef was away from Yaakov, which was a punishment for Yaakov not honoring his parents, those 14 years were not included in the calculation. Therefore it must be that during his time in yeshiva he put all his strength and effort into his learning of Torah. Furthermore, if his depression would have actually affect the way he served Hashem, then he would not have been deserving of Hashem coming to him and assuring him that He would be with him wherever he goes and that his future looked very bright, since he would not have deserved all that attention from Hashem. If this then is the case, what does the Radak mean that Yaakov was depressed?

We must say Yaakov still is only human, and on some miniscule level, which manifested itself in the way he walked, he looked depressed, even if for the most part he served Hashem to the utmost, putting in all the proper emotions and abilities into his service of Hashem. However, once he received chizuk [words of encouragement from Hashem] he was a new man, with a spring in his step, which gave him a whole new level of joy and elation.

It would seem that it is human nature for people to feel depressed at times, and it is a great kindness for others to lend a hand of security and encouragement to uplift that person. However, there are still expectations and responsibilities to learn; how to handle or control one’s depression so that it will not get in one’s way of walking on Hashem’s path and doing His will.

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #79

  1. Question: According to Rav Yaakov Emdan why can challah only be nullified if it accidentally fell into another batch of dough but not if it fell into the dough it was taken from?

Background:

A. The Torah requires one to take a piece of dough and give it to the kohen (nowadays we burn it) if an amount of dough of at least 1660-2250 grams of flour was made.

B. This dough is holy like teruma and can only be nullified 1 in hundred times the amount of dough it falls into and gets mixed up according to the Rema (Yoreh Deah 323:1).

Answer: Pischay Teshuva (2) says that according to him if the dough falls back into where it was taken all the dough becomes untithed again therefore it is not nullified but if fallen into some other dough it doesn’t affect that dough in anyway so it can be nullified.

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim Chapter 4, halacha 1, footnotes 3, 4

Footnote 3: In Brachos 19a it says that if a Tzadik does a sin we assume he immediately did teshuva unless in a case of where he did not return the item he owes the person he took it from. This would seem to preclude that even if a person seems to have changed his ways for the good he is not considered a baal teshuva if he has not returned what he owes. If why does it seem that we are saying here that once we see a person has changed for the good then you can never speak slanderously against him because we can assume he repented, if he didn’t return what he owes he didn’t repent?

The answer is that the Gemara in Brachos and also in Bava Metzi’a 62a which also says, if he relented why does he still have the money, is talking about case where he is able to pay back and he doesn’t then we can technically speak out negatively against him as long as we meet all the prerequisite which will be taught in chapter 10. But here we are talking about a person who didn’t out right steal but rather he was a sleezy, dishonest businessman wheeling and dealing, forcing people to buy or sell things against their will. He became disliked and known by all to be very tough guy to deal with. One day he realized his mistake and changed for the good, becoming an honest businessman man known to all. In this case and in similar cases where it is virtually impossible to return everything he dishonestly took from so many people or he doesn’t have the means to return everything then once he has proven to have completely changed and is now an honest fellow one cannot bring up what he used to do and slander him.

Footnote 4: If one saw someone do a sin he must go over to the guy in private and politely, and gently rebuke him. Only after he repeated his sin in a manner that shows he doesn’t care about the rebuke and about mending his ways than one can publicly embarrass him into repenting.

Posted on

Toldos -Two for the Price of One

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.

King of…the Jungle?

The first encounter with Avimelech, King of the Plishtim, was when Avraham told Sarah to say that she was his sister, because he feared that if the Plishtim knew she was his wife they would kill him. Instead they simply took Sarah and gave her to the king. G-D told Avimelech in a dream to not touch her, ‘lest I kill you.’ Avimelech in essence exclaimed: “What did I do wrong!”  “O Lord, will You kill even a righteous nation? Did he not say to me, ‘She is my sister’? And she, even she said, ‘He is my brother.’ With the innocence of my heart and with the purity of my hands have I done this” (Breishis 20:4, 5). Eventually Avimelech made a treaty with Avraham acknowledging that “G-D is with you in all that you do” (Breishis 21:22).

Again in this week’s Torah portion of Toldos, Yitzchak was forced to go down to Gerar, the capital city of the Plishtim, due to a severe famine. He told his wife, Rivka, to tell them that she was his sister, out of the same fear of her being taken away and Yitzchak being killed. They did indeed leave them alone, but Avimelech caught them one day being too friendly with each other and again said: “What did I do wrong!”  The Torah says: “So Avimelech called Yitzchak, and he said, “Behold, she is your wife; so how could you have said, ‘She is my sister’?” And Isaac said to him, “Because I said, ‘Lest I die because of her.’ And Avimelech said, “What have you done to us? The most prominent of the people might easily have lain with your wife, and you would have brought guilt upon us. And Avimelech commanded all the people, saying, “Whoever touches this man or his wife shall be put to death” (Breishis 26:9-11).

After this episode the Torah relates: “And Yitzchak sowed in that land, and he found in that year a hundred fold, and the Lord blessed him. And the man became great, and he grew constantly greater until he had grown very great. And he had possessions of sheep and possessions of cattle and much production, and the Philistines envied him” (Breishis 26:12-14). Yitzchok then dug up the well his father had dug, which the Plishtim had closed, saying: “They may become a source of danger to us because of marauding troops that may invade us,” as Rashi on pasuk 15 mentions. Avimelech then told Yitzchak to leave them. Yitzchak) settled in the Valley of Gerar not too far away, and the Plishtim shepherds argued with Yitzchok’s shepherds, and again closed up wells which Yitzchok had dug. Yitzchok then dug one more well, which they didn’t touch, but Yitzchok decided to move to Be’er Sheva. All this time Hashem had granted Yitzchok much financial success even though there was a famine in the land. The Targum Yonasan on pasuk 26 points out that even the Plishtim in the vicinity reaped the benefits of Hashem’s blessing to Yitzchok.

At that point Avimelech ran after Yitzchok. Yitzchok asked him what he wanted; you hate me and drove me away from you. Avimelech responded that he wanted to reaffirm the treaty he made with Avraham, Yitzchok’s father: “We have seen that the Lord was with you; so we said: Let there now be an oath between us, between ourselves and you, and let us form a covenant with you. If you do [not] harm us, as we have not touched you, and as we have done with you only good, and we sent you away in peace, [so do] you now, blessed of the Lord.”

The Daas Zekeinim on this pasuk asserts that Avimelech “is compared to a lion which got a bone stuck in his throat and says anyone who comes and takes out the bone shall receive much riches. A bird came, which was a crane with a long neck, and said I will get it out. The bird stuck its head inside the lion’s mouth and took out the bone. After he took it out he asked for his reward. The lion said to him, ‘Isn’t it enough that I sent you away in peace and didn’t eat you when you stuck your head down my throat, you now have the audacity to ask for your reward?’ So to Avimelech said to Yitzchok, ‘We did a great kindness to you by sending you away in peace because our way of life is to hurt anyone that comes our way.’” (Click here and here for Hebrew text.)

Kafui tov! What an ingrate!! The crane just saved the lion’s life and not only does he not give him the promised reward, he says you are lucky I didn’t kill you? So too Avimelech says you are lucky I didn’t harm you when I sent you away. Yet now it seems like he wants him back because of the blessing on his land, so he has claims against Yitzchok for leaving his vicinity. What kind of chutzpah is that?
What’s even worse is that Avimelech sounds like he is being authentic. He really feels insulted that Yitzchok left, even though he didn’t harm him as they did to most people. What did we do wrong?!

Is it really possible for someone to think that it is perfectly alright to hurt people, just part of their normal way of life, to the point that it is an act of kindness not to hurt them? Furthermore, why was Avimelech compared to a lion, specifically?
It would seem that this misguided philosophy in life stems from a negative character trait of a brute or bully. There are people who are tough and controlling; that is their demeanor. They think they are always correct and that they do nothing wrong. If that is their attitude they cannot admit they are wrong, and they even believe they are righteous, always having an excuse for their actions. No wonder they can convince themselves that there is nothing wrong with hurting people.

——————————————————————————————————–

On the flip side here is an example of true sincerity from the very same episode.

Appreciating What You Do

We all know that every single sentence, word, and even a letter in the Torah have a lesson, or halacha that Hashem is teaching us. In this week’s Torah portion of Toldos we find one of the smallest pesukim in the Torah it is only 3 words: “וַיֵּ֥שֶׁב יִצְחָ֖ק בִּגְרָֽר,” “And Yitzchok lived in Gerar” (Breishis 26:6).

We have to put the pesukim in context in order to appreciate the lesson that is being related from this seemingly simple pasuk. The Torah at the beginning of the perek relates: “And there was a famine in the land, aside from the first famine that had been in the days of Abraham, and Isaac went to Avimelech the king of the Philistines, to Gerar. And the Lord appeared to him, and said, “Do not go down to Egypt; dwell in the land that I will tell you. Sojourn in this land, and I will be with you, and I will bless you, for to you and to your seed will I give all these lands, and I will establish the oath that I swore to Abraham, your father. And I will multiply your seed like the stars of the heavens, and I will give your seed all these lands, and all the nations of the earth will bless themselves by your seed, Because Abraham hearkened to My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My instructions” (Breishis 26:1-5).

After Hashem tells Yitzchak not to go down to Egypt though there is a famine, rather just stay in Gerar, because Hashem will take care of him, but not only that, everything and everyone around him will be blessed, the Torah then says in pasuk 6: “And Yitzchok lived in Gerar.” The Ibn Ezra says we learn from here that Yitzchok “did as Hashem commanded of him.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)

What kind of lesson is this, why would we not think Yitzchak would do as Hashem commanded? Yitzchak grew up in Avraham’s household, the Ibn Ezra explains the previous pasuk to be telling us that the reason why Hashem is promising Yitzchak all this blessing is because his father, Avraham, followed him with blind faith to the land of Israel, was willing to sacrifice his only son on Hashem’s command, observed all the mitzvos of the Written Torah and it’s Oral explanation, as well as performed a bris on himself, his children and all his servants. So Yitzchak was raised in a house which was deeply G-D fearing and surrounded by belief and trust in Hashem. Yitzchak himself was a very holy person who dedicated himself to Hashem by completely acquiescing to being offered on the alter. On top of all that, he didn’t just figure out that Hashem wanted him to stay in Israel, Hashem came to him in prophesy and actually told him. So of course he would listen, why does the Torah have to write three extra words to praise him for that, even if it is a time of famine, Hashem still assured him that He will take care of him and even bring blessing to all those around Yitzchak?

We can learn a very powerful lesson from these 3 words. We have to give ourselves credit where credit is due. We can’t underestimate how incredible it is to follow the command of the King of all Kings, Master of the Universe, Blessed Be He. Doing Hashem will, observing His commandments is a big deal and what even seems to be a menial job as what Yitzchak did deserves 3 extra words to be written in the Torah. That is the emphasis the Ibn Ezra is pointing out that the Torah is teaching us.

And by not underestimating and by giving ourselves credit for doing Hashem’s will day in and day out it should better our service of Hashem!

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test # 78

  1. Question: Why do you have to say a blessing on each animal you shecht if they weren’t all in front of you when you started, but if you make a blessing on a food like a fruit you don’t need to make a blessing for another one that comes afterwards even if it wasn’t in front of you when you made the blessing?

Background:

  1. The Tur (Yoreh Deah 19) poskins that in the beginning when you said a blessing there were many animals to shecht and afterwards more animals were brought, one must say another blessing for each animal that was not there when the first blessing was made.
  2. The Tur (Orach Chaim 206) says that if one makes a blessing on fruit that was in front of him and afterwards more is brought out of that kind then a new blessing is not needed even if they were not in front of you when the blessing was made.
  3. One is more settled when eating then when shechting.
  4. There is a Ra”n in Nedarim 17a that says if a person vows to be a nazir on condition of eating  bread then his vow is contingent on eating a kazayis of bread, and if he eats many kazaysim with being warned after each kazayis then he has multiple nazarite vows he must fulfill but if he was not warned in between each kazayis then he only has to be a nazir once, for 30 days. This, the Ra”n concludes implies that if not for warnings in between, eating multiple kazaysim at a time is considered one long process of eating.

Answer: Either you can say that because one is set and sitting down to eat then it’s expected that more food comes out so anything that comes out is automatically in mind to be eaten as part of the first blessing. Whereas by shechita the mindset is more likely that once all the animals around him are done there is no more coming so a new blessing must be made for more that come in. Or you can say that any fruit that comes out during the meal is one big eating which never really stopped so only one blessing is needed, whereas each animal is a different shechita which needs a new blessing unless specifically having in mind for more than one at a time which you know about. (Mishmeres Chaim 2:91)

Posted on

Torah Riddles Test #77

  1. Question: What is the difference between shechita and chalitza? Why if shechita is done specifically in mind just to cut the animal and not to do a kosher slaughtering it is not kosher even if a kosher slaughtering was halachically done but if one does the process of chalitza with the opposite intent (I.e. to do yibum and marry her instead of get rid of her) then it still works as a chalitza?

Background:

  1. The Maharshal (Yam Shel Shlomo Chullin 2:12) holds that even though we poskin that if a knife falls and just happens to shecht an animal properly it is a kosher slaughtering  you don’t need specific intent to shect but if you specifically had in mind not to perform a kosher shechita, but rather just to stab it or strangle the animal that is not a shechita even if it was physically done properly.
  2.  The Oneg Yom Tov (57) asks on the Maharshal from a case in Yevamos daf 106 that Reish Lakish holds that the case of a mistaken chalitza being a kosher chalitza is when he says I will perform the process of chalitza in order marry her. Even though chalitza is the process to separate the brother from his yevama and avoid marrying or doing yibum to her.
  3. The Maharshal holds that by shechita, the shochet is the one who is permitting the animal to be eaten. But by chalitza G-d is the one permitting the woman to marry anyone it is just that chalitza is the process of acquisition done for her to acquire herself and be allowed to now marry anyone else.
  4. Normally by an acquisition the person doing the acquisition makes it his by himself but by chalitza G-D makes her free not the brother who is doing the action of kinyan (acquisition to release her from the bond of yibum).

Answer: By chalitza it makes no difference what the intent of the brother was when doing the chalitza the action was done which allows for the Torah to release her but by shechita, granted there is no acquisition done to make it kosher therefore no specific intent is needed as long as the act was done properly but because the shochet is the one in control to make it kosher then if he has specific intent for it not to be kosher then he ruined it.  (Mishmeres Chaim 1:81)

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim perek 4 halacha 1 part 2 of footnote 1 and footnote 2

Two very important lessons we learn today:

        1. People talk, even if they are rabbis and there are far and in between people who are modest and private who you can trust to tell them something and they won’t spread it.

        2. It is illogical to say that if a person did something wrong in his youth even if very severe he still has that problem now, after so many years even if you did not see him repent. If he seems to be acting in a kosher way there is no reason to suspect him of his previous deeds.

Bottom line: People grow up (most of the time)! Therefore there is no excuse to speak lashon hara about them.