Today we concluded with reading a little bit more of the introduction to Sefer Chofetz Chaim which we try to do around a fast. He mentioned that one of the reasons Lashon Hara is so prevalent is because the sources for these laws are spread out all throughout Shas and poskim and that is why he felt he must put everything together into one sefer with such detail and elaboration. This will allow those misinformed or not knowledgeable in the matter to have it at there fingertips and those that do know the Halacha can easily review in order to combat the yetzer hara, evil inclinations pull and excuses to speak lashon hara. With that being said we saw today in even greater detail the same thing we have been seeing the past couple weeks that speaking lashon hara even if true, when the guy is right there in front of you is still forbidden. When Rebbe Yossi in Erechin seems to say it’s permissible, Tosfos says is only a statement that doesn’t necessarily sound like lashon hara, meaning it can be understood two ways, positive or negative. According to the Sefer Yereim and Rabbeinu Yonah Rebbe Yossi was talking in situations where spreading the lashon hara will be beneficial for the victims or others to stay away or be careful for example spreading news of a thief, or an extortionist, or one who verbally or physically hurts others. Or if a person is known to purposefully transgress a sin that everyone knows is a problem and he was warned and doesn’t care about it then one can speak about that issue with others, for example if he or she eats non -kosher food like pig or shell fish. If you are willing to spread the news with the suspect in the crowd (barring the issue that he might go after you next) that is an indication you are talking about it for the sake of the truth and the honor of Hashem or to protect others and help the victim. Otherwise, if one is only willing to talk about the issue behind his or her back that is indicative that the person making the statement or spreading the news is doing it for personal reasons making him or herself look good in front of others while putting down other people, which is absolutely forbidden. Bottom line if it is not constructive don’t say it whether in front of the person or behind his or her back.
Torah Riddles Test #60
- Question: What is the difference between a Kohen contaminating himself with the dead and anyone breaking Shabbos in terms of the concept of “adding on to the count”?
Background:
- The Minchas Chinuch (mitzvah 264) says in the name of Tosfos in Brachos 20a that even though a kohen can be spiritually contaminated by the dead body of his close relative but if there are other dead bodies in that house he cannot get out his relative because burial of a relative only pushes off the prohibition of contact with the dead by a kohen. However Rashi holds that the prohibition being in contact with the dead is totally permitted in terms of taking care of a close relative so even if there are other dead bodies in the room it is permitted.
- Tosfos said it is forbidden just like cutting off a branch of figs where only one fig is needed to heal a sick person and three are on the branch so you get a prohibition of breaking Shabbos for the other two figs even though they were all on the same branch. Why is Shabbos any different than contact with the dead by a Kohen according to Rashi?
- By Shabbos one is liable for each object one does a forbidden act with.
Answer: By Shabbos even though it is one action of cutting off the branch but because it was for 3 different object then the prohibition is attributed to each object as if you did the prohibition 3 times. But once you are tamei, spiritually unclean, that is that, and there is nothing more to add therefore it would make no difference if he came into contact with one or more dead person, so once it is permitted for one it is permitted for all. Parenthetically if a kohen is already in a state of tamei and then later on before being purified he comes in contact again then he does get another sin it is just that at one time since nothing is added when becoming tamei then once it is permitted for his relative then everything else becomes permitted and it is not considered adding unneeded amounts.
Torah Riddles Test #59
- Question: Why isn’t it an issue of being forced into a situation of making an unneeded blessing (bracha she’eino tzricha) in terms of washing in the morning or by tefillin but there is an issue of making an unneeded blessing by tzitzis?
Background:
- The Mishna Berura (4:13:30) says if one was up all night, for example on Shavuos, or even if he got up before alos hashachar (dawn) and washed his hands(see Mishna Berura 33), then there is a question whether he has to wash his hands in the morning and make a blessing, based on the question in halacha of why we wash, is it because of touching impure places while sleeping, sleeping itself, or just the nighttime which brings a bad spirit onto one’s hands. In any event the suggested practice is to go to the bathroom and then everyone agrees that he would be obligated to make a blessing after washing for washing his hands and going to the bathroom.
- The Beur Halacha (25:5 “vitov”) explains the reason why this is fine is because since one is forced to do this because of the doubt it is does not fall into the category of an unneeded blessing. Similarly by tefillin there is a question whether a blessing is needed by the tefillin shel rosh or whether it counts with the blessing over the tefillin shel yad. The Shulchan Aruch and the Vilna Gaon both agree like the view of Rashi that one only makes one blessing for both but the Rema says two blessings should be said like the view of the Rosh. Rebbe Akiva Aiger suggests that one should have in mind to not use the first blessing on the arm tefillin for the head tefillin in order so that he is forced to make the second blessing just in case the halacha is like Rashi that the blessing on the hand tefillin can also count for the head and this is not considered making an unneeded blessing because one is forced to do this to get out of the doubt of who we poskin like.
- However the Mishna Berura (8:16:42) says that if one slept in his tzitzis the entire night there is a question whether he can make a blessing on the tzitzis in the morning since there is a doubt whether there is a mitzvah of tzitzis at night or just that pajamas are exempt from tzitzis but day garments are still obligated even at night therefore the Mishna Berura says safek brachos lihakel (when in doubt by a blessing one should be lenient and not say it) however he can have in mind for the tzitzis when making a blessing on his tallis. He then says that this is as long as he doesn’t take it off but if he takes off the tzitzis with having no intention of putting it back on immediately then he would need a new blessing according to everyone but one shouldn’t do this on purpose to create a situation of an unneeded blessing.
Answer: . By washing one is just doing something which he would have to do at some point anyways so he isn’t doing anything extra to force himself to make an unneeded blessing and by tefillin too, the Beur Halacha says that having in mind to not use the blessing on the arm is like talking in the middles of doing the mitzvah which warrants a new blessing so there isn’t a superfluous step which forces a need of a new blessing. But by tzitzis, the garment is already on, and there is no need to take it off, it is totally extra and repetitive so going through the motions of taking it off just to put it on again is more like a loop hole which just creates an unneeded blessing.
Pinchas – Blessing of Diversity
There are many reasons why Hashem created us, and the entirety of existence,
with a myriad of differences. No one and nothing is the same, although
sometimes the differences are simply nuances. Hashem did this with a purpose in
mind for everyone and everything, in order that challenges can be faced and
overcome for the sake of doing His will and, optimally, serving Hashem to the
fullest. If everyone and everything were the same then there would not be any
challenges in life and there would be no room to grow physically, emotionally,
and intellectually. People have a natural, innate tendency to react to change
or things that are different than them, be it different looks or ideas. However
the question remains: what is the appropriate response when faced with someone
or something which is different, extraordinary, or just a change from the norm?
The Medrish Tanchuma discusses this issue in this week’s Torah portion
of Pinchas when Moshe asks Hashem who will replace him as leader once he passes
away. Moshe speaks in a harsh manner requesting, “Let the Lord, the G-d
of spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation…” (Bamidbar
27:16). The Biur Ma’amarim on the Medrish Tanchuma suggests that the
intent of the following medrish is to explain why Moshe described Hashem as
“the God of spirits of all flesh.” The medrish begins by quoting halachos that
can also be found in Brachos 58b. The medrish says, “Our rabbis have taught us
that if one sees people who are different what bracha should be made? This is
what our rabbis have taught us: One who sees a black person, or an albino, or
one of really tall height, or one whose hands or body are filled with leprous
like symptoms, or one who is lame, one should say, ‘Blessed is the One who
makes the creatures different.’ One who saw a person who is missing a limb or
is blind or one filled with boils should say the blessing of ‘Blessed is the
True Judge.’ When is this last blessing said? Only when they were first fully
healthy people then they changed. But if they were that way from their mother’s
womb then one should say ‘Blessed is the One who makes the creatures
different.’ And if one sees exceptionally beautiful people or trees one should
say ‘Blessed is the One who has such in His universe.’ But if one sees a whole
group of 600,000 or more people he should say the blessing, ‘Blessed is the
Knower of secrets.’ Just as no one’s face are the same so to no one’s thought
process are similar to each other, rather every single individual has their own
mind. So to it says, ‘To make a weight for the spirit, and He meted out the
water with a measure’ (Iyov 28:25), every single person has his or her own
unique mind. Know that this is true for Moshe beseeches Hashem around the time
of his demise, and said to him, ‘Master Of The World it is well known before
You the minds of every individual, and none of Your children are similar to
each other. When I disappear from the world, may You please, if You want to
appoint a new ruler over them, appoint someone who will be able to be patient
and understanding with every single individual according to each one’s mind.’
How do we know this? From the fact that Moshe called upon Hashem saying ‘Let
the Lord, the G-d of spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the
congregation…’” (Medrish Tanchuma, parshas Pinchas, paragraph 9 [or 10 in some
editions]. Click here and here for Hebrew text.)
The Biur Ma’amarim adds that the reason the
medrish mentions these halachos is because mentioned amongst them is the
blessing upon seeing a whole group of 600,000 Jews all at once, where one
should say the blessing of “Blessed is the Knower of secrets,” which means that
Hashem recognizes the secrets hidden in the hearts of every individual even
though they all have different mindsets. This explains why Hashem is called the
G-d of spirits, which is similar to what we say in our Shemone esray 3
times a day, enacted by the Anshei Knesses HaGedolah: ‘You graciously endow man
with wisdom… Endow us graciously from Yourself with wisdom, incite, and
discernment…’ So too Moshe said ‘You know the spirit of each individual,
appoint upon them a man similarly who can be patient and understanding of every
single individual.’
In reacting to diversity or change one can be a separatist or an antagonist,
speaking or acting in a racist manner, and maybe even reacting violently to
those who are different than them. But Halacha calls on every individual Jew to
take the opportunity when seeing something different or changed from its
original status to bless Hashem for creating so many unique things in the world
and always doing what is best for humanity. The Mishna Berura in chapter 225 in
fact says one only says this blessing once in a while when he or she has not
seen the like before or in a very long time. Also, to those who see the
crippled or lame, blind or very sick, they can only say that blessing if they
knew that person. Meaning, if there is an emotional charge inside oneself, and
excitement of seeing the uncommon or extraordinarily beautiful, or the
emotional pain and suffering upon seeing someone you know going through
terrible times, it warrants blessing Hashem. This positively channels one’s
emotions and thoughts towards a whole new appreciation of how Hashem is in
constant contact with and intimately involved in this world.
This is the way every Jew is supposed to react in such a situation. Every Jew
is also supposed to ask Hashem in his or her prayers every day to graciously
give us or really share with us the Divine ability to have knowledge,
intuition, and deep logical thinking in our own individual way.
What then was the unique quality Moshe was asking for in the next leader? If
you think about it, it is very profound! It can be very easy, and there are
many leaders who are able to handle and lead groups as a whole. Many times
though people hear or give complaints that their individual needs aren’t taken
care of. It is easier to just run an organization or institution, or even a
people with a general understanding or belief of what is best for the populace
or what is best for the organization. But Moshe Rabbeinu beseeches Hashem for
someone who would be sensitive and would be able to connect with and help every
individual on their own level, certainly no matter how they looked or what
condition they are in but even to understand where they are coming from, their
essence, and to work with every single individual.
That’s a quality of a true leader!
Sefer Chofetz Chaim Chapter 3 Halacha 1 footnote 1 (part 1)
The Gemara in Eruchin 15b makes a very ambiguous statement. Rabba says any statement that is said to the guy’s face is not lashon hara and Rabba proves this from Rebbe Yossi who said “I never said anything and then had to look behind my back.”
The Chofetz Chaim said that many people took this Gemara out of context to mean that if you are willing to say something to the guy’s face whether good or bad it is permissible. He proves this assumption wrong based on many Rishonim including the Rambam, Tosfos, Smag and the Rabbeinu Yona.
First off, besides lashon hara if one is willing to embarrass a guy to his face like being up a story of a baal teshuva in his early years or even discuss what someone’s relatives use to do before they changed there way for the good, that is also the prohibition of onaas devarim, making a person feel bad.
Even if you saw a person do a sin between man and Hashem like breaking Shabbos you can’t just hate him and publicize his sin to the world even if he is right there in front of you. Rather you should take him aside and gently rebuke him.
Even if he was rebuked properly and he did it again where there is now room in Halacha to hate him it is still not an easy matter to spread what he did to others even if he is around as we saw in the case in Pesachim 113b of Tuvia sinning and Zigud who saw this going to Rav Pappa’s court to testify what happened and Rav Pappa gave Ziggud lashes for coming in as a single witness which is lashon hara. Testimony needs at least a pair. The Chofetz Chaim does mention that one is allowed to speak lashon hara of a group of unruly people to warn others to stay away from them but that is not what the Gemara in Eruchin is talking about.
Therefore as of now we have not come up with the exact case in Eruchin but we will find out next week when we finish the footnote, b’ezras Hashem.
Torah Riddles Test #58
1. Question: Why would tefillin that a child wrote be invalid because since he can’t put on tefillin yet the Torah says he can’t write them either but if a child shechts an animal it is kosher on a Torah level?
Background:
A. The Achiezer (3:82:12) pointed out that Tefillin is a new obligation everyday but the prohibition of eating a carcass which obligates one to shecht properly is one obligation per animal that can last for a long time, even after the child grows up.
B. By tefillin the sofer makes the tefillin kosher by following all the halachas of making tefillin. But by kosher meat the shechting isn’t what makes it kosher, it is the Torah permitting the animal and the shochet is just doing the action of shechting.
Answer:
A2a. A child isn’t able to put on tefillin today so he can’t be a scribe for that mitzvah which is renewed every day but a child who shechted has ramification for the future since the meat can be eaten after he is bar mitzvah therefore the slaughtering is a good slaughtering since the same mitzvah can be used for when he is bar mitzvah.
A2b. By tefillin since the whole mitzvah is dependent on the person than if the scribe is a child then the mitzvah was not created since he is obligated in mitvos yet but since the Torah is what makes the animal kosher and the slaughtering is just an act to allow the Torah to make the meat kosher then it makes no difference if a child did it as long as it was done kosherly.
Torah Riddles Test #57
- Question: Why if 2 or 3 people are putting on their Tallis at the same time they can each make their own blessing but if they would bring a havdala candle into the Beis Medrish or shul then one should say a blessing over the candle for everyone for havdala because b’rov am hadras melech, the more people doing something together is a greater honor to the King?
Background:
A. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim, siman 8) says that if 2 or 3 people are putting on their Tallis at the same time all of them should make their own blessing and if they want one of them can make the blessing for them and the rest just answer amen.
B. The Gemara in Brachos 53a brings a case of people sitting in the Beis Medrish and a candle is brought before them. Beis Shammai poskins that each one should make their own blessing in order not to disturb the learning in the Beis Medrish and Beis Hillel poskins that one person should make a blessing for everyone because of b’rov am hadras Melech. We poskin like Beis Hillel as the Shulchan Aruch himself says in 298:14.
C. The concept of b’rov am hadras Melech applies when people do things all together like when one person blows shofar or reads Megillah and everyone else is listening.
Answer: This concept applies when people are doing the same thing all together like in the case of the candle saying a blessing on one havdala candle but not when each person is doing their own thing even if it is the same kind of thing all at once like by a group of people, each one putting on their own Tallis all at once.
Torah Riddles Test #56
1. Question: Why does the borrower have to pay $200 and not $100 or $300 in the following case?
Background:
A. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 30:3) brings a case of Reuvain who claims Shimon owes him $1500. He has five witnesses, one says he borrowed $100 another said $200, another said $300, another says $400 and the last one said he borrowed $500. If they all claim the loan took place on the same day but with different amounts Shimon only owes $200 because if you are trying to extract money from someone you have to bring proof. (Hamotzi mechavero alav hara’aya.)
B. The Sm”a (17) says the number $200 is based on the fact that there are two witnesses who said he owes no more than $200 even though there are 3 witnesses that say he owes at least $300.
C. There is a rule in Shas that two witnesses and even 100 witnesses are all the same, meaning more witnesses on one side does not create a majority to beat out witnesses on the other side if there are at least 2.
D. There is a logic in Shas that within $200 is $100. (Bichlal masayim manah.)
Answer: They certainly don’t pay no more than 200 because the 3 witnesses who say he should pay more are no better than the ones who say they owe the most 200 and they also admit he at least owes $200. Shimon won’t only owe $100 because the one who says he borrowed $100 could add up and combine with the other to $200, though not more than that because the $200 witness only said he owes no more than $200.
Torah Riddles Test #55
- Question: Why are those listening to the bracha seem to be more lenient in terms of if they spoke before eating then one who actually said the blessing?
Background:
A. The Rema (Orach Chaim 167:6) says that when one speaks unneeded words before they take a bite they have to make a new blessing, is only if they spoke before the one who said the blessing for them took a bite, but if they spoke after he took a bite it is not considered a separation between the blessing and them eating even though they didn’t eat yet, but they all fulfilled their obligation with the blesser eating his piece. Not everyone needs to eat from the bread he said the blessing they just do that to show a love for the mitzvah.
B. The Magen Avrohom and Taz both ask how it is possible that the listeners are better than the blesser, for by the blesser we say that if he talks before he takes a bite he has to say a new blessing because he made a separation between the blessing and eating. But by the listeners even if they make a separation between the blessing and eating they don’t need to make another blessing?
C. The commentaries’ question is based on the assumption that the concept of “listening is like answering” means that it is as if the listener said the blessing.
D. The Rema seems to hold that the explanation of “listening is like answering” is that really only the blesser is blessing but the blessing counts for those listening as well by just listening.
Answer:Once the blesser eats the blessing is put into play for everyone and really nothing more has to be done for everyone to eat so the ones listening can’t ruin it but as long as the blesser didn’t eat yet then the blessing doesn’t work so if he says something in between the blessing doesn’t connect to the food for anyone. (Whereas if you would say that it is as if each person makes the blessing then the blessing actually wouldn’t go into play and work until everyone ate without interruption.)
Balak – Ingratitude on a Whole New Level
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.
When speaking in terms of an ingrate what usually comes to mind is a person who had a favor done for them, which they haven’t acknowledged at all. No ‘thank you’ and maybe even a criticism of how it was done. In the worst case scenario, not even realizing a favor was done, and acting nastily to the person. But Bilaam in the Torah Portion of Balak takes it to a whole new level.
Bilaam, the prophet anointed by Hashem for the non-Jewish world, was hired to curse the Jewish people. Hashem told him not to go and do it. When Bilaam decided otherwise, Hashem said that He would hijack Bilaam’s power of speech, only allowing him to say what He would force him to say. “The Lord placed word into Balaam’s mouth, and He said, ‘Return to Balak and say as follows. When he returned, Balak was standing next to his burnt offering, he and all the Moabite dignitaries. He took up his parable and said, ‘Balak the king of Moab has brought me from Aram, from the mountains of the east [saying], ‘Come, curse Jacob for me and come invoke wrath against Israel.’ How can I curse whom God has not cursed, and how can I invoke wrath if the Lord has not been angered?” (Bamidbar 23:5-8).
The Baal HaTurim clearly indicates that though Hashem controlled Bilaam’s speech, Hashem didn’t take control of Bilaam’s thoughts and intentions. When Bilaam “took up his parable” in pasuk 7, the Baal HaTurim says that Bilaam raised his voice so that all the 70 nations of the world could hear, so that they would be jealous of the Jews, just as Chaza”l say that if one blesses his friend in a loud voice it is considered a curse to him. The Baal HaTurim goes on to explain two reasons why Bilaam mentioned Aram. The first is that Bilaam came from Aram. Some say he was a great grandchild of Lavan, and there is even another Medrish which says Bilaam was actually Lavan. Either way, Bilaam was saying ‘How can we come upon them from Aram to curse them if from Aram their forefathers came, Avraham Avinu, came laden with blessing as it says, “You shall go from your land…and I will bless you…” So to by Yaakov Avinu it says he went back to Aram laden with all the blessings as it says, “Behold I am with you and I will protect you…”
The second reason given by the Baal HaTurim why Bilaam mentions Aram (which seems to go hand in hand with the first reason and doesn’t seem to be brought to argue on it), is that “from Aram” means that if not for them we would not exist. Bilaam is telling Balak that we are from Aram and around the same time as the Binding of Yitzchok, Milkah conceived through Nachor as it says “Behold Milkah also gave birth…” ‘And you are also and ingrate (kafui tov) for if not for Avraham you would never have been born for in his merit Lot was saved from Sodom. I am also an ingrate for if Yaakov would not have come to Lavan he would not have had sons, and we are coming to Aram to curse them?!’ (Click here for Hebrew text.)
Even though Hashem took control of Bilaam’s speech and did not let him curse the Jewish people, Bilaam still had free choice over his thoughts and he had evil intentions of causing jealousy among the non-Jewish nations by making sure he was heard throughout the world when he said the blessings that came out of his mouth. In this way he was hoping the nations would cast an evil eye (ayin hara) on the Jews or perhaps it would even provoke them, as a whole, to take action against the Jews. He had all this in mind, even though he felt a sense of gratitude towards the Jewish people. He acknowledged that if not for them he would no longer be alive. Indeed, neither would Moav, who was a direct descendant of Lot and his daughter who were saved by the destruction of Sodom. Yet, despite possessing this sense of gratitude, he was still planning to curse the Jewish People, and when that didn’t work he still tried to spread an ayin hara on them.
How could this be? How could Bilaam have been so ungrateful? His actions were that of gratitude, by blessing the Jewish people, albeit he was forced; but he knew what he was doing. He told Balak he would be blessing them. He even acknowledged all the good that the Jews did for him and Balak. Yet, since his original intentions were to curse them because that was what he was hired to do and he would be getting a lot of fame and honor for doing so, and even when he saw he wouldn’t be successful, he still tried to undermine Hashem with his evil intentions of trying to make everyone jealous. He was therefore being ungrateful and even admitted knowing what he was doing, and did it anyways!
This is a whole new dimension of ingratitude. Bilaam wasn’t oblivious to the good the Jews did to him and was therefore willing to take actions against them. He knew that if not for them, both he and Balak would not be alive! He even verbally acknowledged that, and admitted that they should have a feeling of gratitude towards the Jewish people. Yet he still tried undermining them to the very end. Wow, this is the complexity of the human mind and emotions!