Parashat Shavua

Hemdat Yamim Parashat Balak

Hemdat Yamim Parshat Balak 12 Tammuz 5762 =========================== This edition of Hemdat Yamim is dedicated to the memory of R' Meir ben Yechezkel Shraga Brachfeld o.b.m. ======================================= Eretz Hemdah is the premier institution for training young rabbi's to take the Israeli Rabbinate's rigorous Yadin Yadin examinations. Eretz Hemdah, with its distinctive blend of Religious Zionist philosophy and scholarship coupled with community service, ensures its graduates emerge with the finest training, the noblest motivations and the strongest connection to Jewish communities worldwide. ================================================== An Unusual Eye Examination As Balak, king of Moav, summoned Bilam to curse Bnei Yisrael, he reported: "For a nation left Egypt. Indeed it has covered the eye (ein) of the land, and it is sitting opposite me" (Bamidbar 22:5). What kind of eye does a land have, and what does it have to do with Bnei Yisrael's having left Egypt 40 years earlier? Also, what did Balak have to fear if Bnei Yisrael had refrained from battle with his nation and had fought only the Emori and Og of Bashan? Rav Goldvicht z.t.l. explained how Balak was less concerned about imminent attack than was he shaken by the questions on his world outlook, raised by Bnei Yisrael's experiences. Let us progress along the order of the pasuk. Bnei Yisrael left Egypt with the greatest of all historic miracles, a series of events which shook the Moavites, among other nations (Shemot 15:15). These eye-opening miracles actually threatened to eclipse the eyes which Balak and others were used to, the eyes of the land, or the physical world. It finally dawned on the world that true success could be ensured only through Divine Will, which was certainly a troubling thought for the likes of Balak. Over time, the shock wore off significantly. However, two events heightened Balak's anxiety. Bnei Yisrael had just captured the city of Cheshbon from Sichon the Emorite. If we go back just one parasha, we will find that Cheshbon was once the unconquerable city of Moav and that even the powerful Sichon was able to conquer it from them only by means of Bilam's curses (Bamidbar 21:26-29 and Rashi, ad loc.). But now, Hashem had handed over this revered city to Bnei Yisrael. Finally, concludes our pasuk, Bnei Yisrael were encamped opposite Moav, not in the midst of a desert. No longer could he ignore the ideas that Bnei Yisrael engendered. Balak decided to test if Divine Providence was unstoppable or if it could somehow be overcome. Thus, he turned to Bilam, whose curses had proven themselves at Cheshbon, with the following plea, as Rav Goldvicht explained. "Bnei Yisrael have, at least temporarily, covered the eye of the land (in other words, the non-spiritual running of the world). Prove it is not so or you, Bilam, will be uncovered as an inconsequential fraud. Had Cheshbon remained in Moavite hands, Bnei Yisrael would not have been allowed to conquer it. Perhaps, Sichon's conquest from Moav had not been due to Bilam's mouth, but was part of a greater, Divine plan. If you can successfully curse Bnei Yisrael, you will uncover the eye of the land." As we know, and as even Bilam knew, Bilam could not produce the goods. As Bilam admitted: "Am I capable of saying anything? That which Hashem puts in my mouth, that is what I will say" (ibid. 22:35). ======================================== P'ninat Mishpat - Some Bibliographical Notes on Choshen Mishpat- part II Last week, we introduced Choshen Mishpat as the fourth section of Arba'ah Haturim (the Tur) by R. Yaakov b. R. Asher. The first two sections (and, partially, Even Haezer, as well), were written for the knowledgeable layman, as well as the practicing rabbi. In contrast, it is clear from both the introduction and the order of Choshen Mishpat that it was written, first and foremost, for the use of dayanim (Rabbinical Court judges). Whereas Orach Chayim is chronological, covering a person's day, week, and year, Choshen Mishpat begins with the laws of running a court and the acceptance of testimony, which are of priority only for dayanim. What turned this important work into a household name (hopefully) is the work of the even more famous, R. Yosef Karo. R. Karo wrote Beit Yosef, the most important commentary on the Tur. Beit Yosef expands on the sources, adds later and more varied opinions, and discusses the logic and implications of the topics raised by the Tur. Furthermore, R. Karo's most famous work, the Shulchan Aruch, follows the exact same order of sections and chapters (simanim) as did the Tur and is based on the discussions found in Beit Yosef. Thus, when we refer to a topic in Choshen Mishpat (or the other sections), it normally appears both in the Tur and in the Shulchan Aruch in the same place. (The Tur, unlike the Shulchan Aruch, wasn't broken up by its author into paragraphs (se'ifim)). We should note also that R. Moshe Isserles' notes on the Tur and Beit Yosef, Darkei Moshe, served as the basis for his glosses on the Shulchan Aruch. ================================================= Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) Aliyah Against the Wishes of Parents - Part III (condensed from Amud Hay'mini, siman 22) [We have seen that the mitzva of kibud av (honoring parents) does not require one to leave Eretz Yisrael, but that the parents' condition could create a situation that makes it impractical or inappropriate to stay. We will now discuss whether one may/should leave parents to make aliyah]. The gemara (Megillah 16b) comments that study of Torah is a great mitzva, as we see that Yaakov Avinu was not punished for being away from his parents during the years he was learning in Eiver's yeshiva. This gemara, quoted by the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch, seems to contradict the halacha that one leaves kibud av to fulfill any mitzva (Kiddushin 32), not just talmud Torah. One possible solution is that since talmud Torah has no set time or amount, it should have been pushed off by kibud av had it not been such a great mitzva. In contrast, other mitzvot, which need to be done at certain times, push off kibud av. One can also distinguish between different stages of kibud av. If one were in the midst of actually helping his parents, one would not leave them to learn Torah. However, if one wanted to leave at a time when he was not needed, in a case that it would not be practical to come back when the need would arise later, he might be allowed to do so. One could argue that is was under those circumstances that Yaakov Avinu's Torah study overcame kibud av. It appears, then, that if a mitzva without a specific timetable other than talmud Torah arises so that it interferes with his availability to help his parents, he would be considered generally busy with a mitzva (osek b'mitzva) and would not be required to go for the other mitzva. (Even regarding Yaakov, it says only that he was not punished for the time away; it doesn't say that is what the right thing to do). In fact, the Aruch Hashulchan 240:36 states that in regard to fulfillment of mitzvot other than talmud Torah, one needs to get his parents' permission before leaving them to fulfill the mitzvot (apparently, if they don't have a set time). This seems to follow the reasoning of the Ritva (Sukka 25) that when involvement in a mitzva exempts involvement in another, one may not opt to fulfill the second one at the expense of the first. Therefore, the mitzva to live in Eretz Yisrael does not enable one who is in an ongoing state of kibud av [to be discussed next week] to stop the mitzva to move to Eretz Yisrael without permission. An exception is when the parents themselves have no legitimate excuse for not moving to Eretz Yisrael. In that case, the child can say: "Come to Israel, and then I will be able to fulfill both mitzvot." If they refuse, he can then move to Eretz Yisrael anyway. =============================================== Ask the Rabbi Question: I have moved to a community, where the people pronounce Hebrew differently from the minhag I was brought up on. How should I act privately and publicly? Answer: The great majority of poskim agree that it is preferable to maintain the form of pronunciation which one "inherited" from his father (see Rav Kook's Orach Mishpat 16-18; Har Tzvi OC I, 4; Igrot Moshe OC III, 5). This is based on the concept, "do not forsake the Torah of your mother" (Mishlei 1:8; see Chulin 93b). One should maintain his family minhag in this matter even if he prays regularly in a beit k'nesset where people use a different pronunciation from his, and even if one already switched, it is best to switch back. An exception to the rule is regarding specific pronunciations where all experts are in agreement, in which case it is proper to use the accurate pronunciation. This applies at least to the letters "ayin" and "chet" and the vowel "cholam," which are all properly pronounced by the Sephardic community. One should exercise caution before making such changes, as it is better to use one's previous pronunciation than to be inconsistent and inaccurate in the new, improved one. Regarding other changes, not always are the opinions of "so-called experts" unanimously agreed upon. Accenting of syllables, especially in Kri'at Shema, should be done according to the rules of dikduk, as found in accurate sidddurim and sifrei Tanach. It is widely brought in the name of the Chazon Ish that an Ashkenazi who pronounces Hebrew like a Sepharadi should pronounce at least Hashem's name like an Ashkenazi. However, it appears preferable to pronounce the entire tefilla in a uniform manner (Har Tzvi, ibid.), and there is not even unanimity on what the Chazon Ish's opinion was. The above applies to a person's private pronunciation, including his quiet davening in a group setting. However, if he is serving as a chazan or ba'al kri'a, it is proper, if he can, to read according to the local minhag (Igrot Moshe, OC IV, 23). This ruling takes on even greater weight if one's failure to conform to the local minhag is apt to confuse the tzibur or, Heaven forbid, cause arguments. The need to preserve communal peace pushes aside the aforementioned concept of "the Torah of your mother" (Orach Mishpat 18). This response is for one to know for himself. In regard to displeasure with someone else's lack of compliance with this or other related rulings, one should realize that one fulfills the mitzvot post facto with any discernable pronunciation (Orach Mishpat, ibid.), as "one who reads and is not exact in his pronunciation fulfills the mitzva" (Berachot 15b). Certainly, one should not actively create machloket in the name of preventing possible machloket, unless his position (rabbi, or possibly, gabbai) justifies his sensitive intervention. This response is based on Bemareh Habazak III, 1 ***************************************************************** Harav Shaul Israeli zt"l Founder and President Deans: Harav Yosef Carmel Harav Moshe Ehrenreich ERETZ HEMDAH 5 Ha-Mem Gimmel St. P.O.B 36236 Jerusalem 91360 Tel/Fax: 972-2-5371485 Email: eretzhem@netvision.net.il web-site: www.eretzhemdah.org American Friends of Eretz Hemdah Institutions c/o Olympian 8 South Michigan Ave. Suite 605 Chicago, IL 60603 USA Our Taxpayer ID#: 36-4265359

Main > Parashat Shavua
Eretz_Hemdah