Parashat Shavua

Hemdat Yamim Parashat Bshalach - 15 Beshvat 5763

Hemdat Yamim Parshat Beshalach/Tu B'Shvat 15 Shevat 5763 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 rabbis to take the Israeli Rabbinate's rigorous Yadin Yadin examinations. Eretz Hemdah, with its distinctive blend of Religious Zionist philosophy and scholarship combined with community service, ensures that its graduates emerge with the finest training, the noblest motivations resulting in an exceptionally strong connection to Jewish communities worldwide. **************************************************************** The Privilege to Act / Harav Yosef Carmel One of the more popular songs heard at festive occasions these days is a new tune to the eternal words from our parasha: "Stand up and see the salvation of Hashem" (Shemot 14:3). Moshe Rabbeinu invited the nation to witness Hashem's salvation at Yam Suf, which transpired in the form of, "Hashem will fight for you, and you shall be silent" (ibid.:14). Was this passive salvation on Bnei Yisrael's part optimal or, on the contrary, was it a sign of Hashem's disapproval of their actions? After all, when encountered with the threat of Paroh's army, Bnei Yisrael had complained to Moshe that they would have been better off remaining slaves in Egypt. Were they deserving of the most uplifting salvation possible? The midrash (Eicha Rabba) relates the background of the victories of four important kings of Israel. David asked of Hashem to help him smite his enemies, and Hashem agreed. King Assa, who reigned a few generations later, told Hashem that he did not have the strength to kill his enemies, but only to chase them and have Hashem do the actual work. Indeed, this is what happened, as the pasuk confirms, "Assa chased ...for they were broken before Hashem" (Divrei Hayamim II, 14:12). Yehoshafat said to Hashem that he didn't even have the strength to chase but would sing songs of praise to Hashem, and Hashem agreed that this would suffice (see ibid., 20:22). Finally, Chizkiyahu said that he did not have strength, not to kill, or chase, or even sing Hashem's praises. Rather, Hashem agreed to save him as he lay on his bed at night, as Hashem brought a plague on the encampment of the Assyrians. This midrash illustrates the famous principle of yeridat hadorot (the deterioration of subsequent generations). David's approach was the most lauded. He had faith in Hashem, but he was willing to actively and fully take part in Hashem's wars. On the other extreme was Chizkiyahu, who didn't even have the ability to sing the praises of Hashem. (R. Yehoshua b. Levi's statement is well known, that Chizkiayahu's failure to sing praises, even after his miraculous salvation, cost him the opportunity to be the Mashiach (see Shir Hashirim Rabba, 4). We see that active, physical involvement by the saved in their salvation is the preferred course of action. If so, we can conclude that this opportunity was taken away from Bnei Yisrael when they said, "it is better for us to work for Egypt." Not only did Hashem tell them that He alone would fight for them, but He also warned them, "and you shall remain silent." Only after the mesirut nefesh that brought them to enter the stormy sea did they merit to sing, "Az Yashir." The only thing greater than witnessing the biggest miracles in the history of the world is to take part in them. But one needs the strength and courage, physically and spiritually, to do so. ********************************************************* P'ninat Mishpat - Distancing Damages- part IV We saw last time that even in cases where one does not have to pay for indirect damages done (g'rama), one has to remove certain potential damaging factors. R. Yossi says that the "damager" has to distance the dangers only in cases of giri dilei, cases where the damage is more direct than other cases of g'rama. The Ritzva (cited in Haghot Maimoniot, Sh'cheinim 10:5) points out that R. Yossi, if perceived as being insensitive to the needs of protection of neighbors, is being misunderstood. Consider R. Yossi's objection to Rabbanan's requirement that one who plants a tree in his own field must distance it 25 amot from the water storage pit in his neighbor's field. R. Yossi is not less concerned with the needs of the pit owner, says the Ritzva but factors in the basic rights of the tree owner. Why is the need for an undamaged pit more important than the right to plant trees in one's field? Why can't the pit be moved to somewhere it will not be damaged by the tree's roots? To balance the interests, R. Yossi ruled that if one side can be identified clearly as "the damager," then he has to distance himself. However, in cases of less direct damage, we allow autonomy to the two sides. According to the Ritzva's approach, one can act in a way that might cause indirect damage only in a place or a situation where he is protecting important needs which would be affected if we demand that he distance potential damages. This approach seems to have strong basis in the terminology of R. Yossi, who didn't just say that one may cause indirect damage. Rather, he says, "this one can dig within his own [field], and this one can plant within his own [field]." It is because of the rights in his own field that he can continue to live normally and ignore the negative impact on his friend. *************************************************************** Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) The Saplings Came from Gan Eden (manuscript of an address for Tu B'Shvat) "He [Avraham] planted an eshel in Be'er Sheva and called out there in the name of Hashem" (Bereishit 21:33). "Noach began (vayachel- a root which can refer to the mundane) as a man of the land, and he planted a vineyard" (ibid. 9:20). The Ba'al Haturim points out that the verb of planting arises also in Bereishit 2:8 in reference to the planting of a garden in Eden. He says that this recurrence teaches us that Noach and Avraham took their saplings from Gan Eden. It is fascinating to see the fate of these saplings, as one was used to call out in the name of Hashem and the other was used for the mundane (Rashi, from the root vayachel). The memories of Tu B'Shvat, holiday of the trees, stay with us from the days we were imprisoned within the ghettos of Europe. We would take the carob and the date and, when making the "Shehechianu," would sigh as we remembered our Eretz Hemdah, the land we desired, yet was so distant. It is clear, though, that Tu B'Shvat did not originate in the Diaspora. On the contrary, it received its content from the time we lived in the Land, when it certainly had a more festive character. From the time we were distanced from our Land, we also lost some of our desire for it. We found our home more in the batei midrash. But in ancient times, we knew that Zeraim, dealing with the laws of agriculture, is called emunah (belief), because he who plants believes that the order of the world will continue, and his seeds will grow. The healthy, natural person is interested by the small, blossoming flower and by the blade of grass, which is commanded by the angel to grow, as these phenomena are revelations of the Divine. When Yitzchak walked in the fields, he instituted the prayer of Mincha. The Ba'al Shem Tov was spiritually inspired in the forests, and the Ari took his students to the mountains to usher in the Shabbat. David Hamelech sang the soulful songs of Hashem as he contemplated creation (see Tehillim 104). The question arises, what happens to the feelings of G-d of those among the nations, who live off their lands without inspiration. The answer is the term vayachel of Noach, referring to the sapling from Gan Eden that he used to become intoxicated. That is the nature of wine, which can bring happiness or destruction. ("... wine was their drink, and at the work of Hashem they did not look" (Yeshaya 5:12)). Work can intoxicate to the point that a person finds his satisfaction in his own work and thinks that he performed the miracle of turning a seed into a plant. This is the intoxication, which is rampant today among the workers' movement, who see only their own, not Hashem's work. We must always remember that when one works, he must not treat it as mundane work. We must see in it the Divine actions and miracles. Then the work will both interest us and purify us. *************************************************************** Ask the Rabbi Question: Many schools have charity auctions at which the parents solicit gifts from merchants, which are then auctioned. Is it wrong to "compel" merchants to contribute by implying that refusal will hurt their business? Shouldn't the parents buy the items for the school? Answer: Let us first assume that the parents are, in effect, compelling one to give the donation. In theory, the gemara says that one who pressures others into giving tzedaka is greater than the one who actually gives it (Bava Batra 9a). However, that it is only assuming that the donator was obligated to be giving that tzedaka and was reluctant to do so. One who pressures someone who can truly not afford to give tzedaka into giving is liable to be Divinely punished (Shulchan Aruch, YD 248:7). In any case, a group of parents has no right to compel a storeowner to make a donation to the institution of their choice. Who says that he doesn't have other places to give his donations? Who says he hasn't given enough tzedaka already? If he is not Jewish, he doesn't have an obligation to give tzedaka at all. And who are they to make these decisions anyway, all the more so when they have personal interests in the matter? On the other hand, it's hard to believe that parents can really coerce a merchant to donate. They could put some type of psychological pressure on, but the matter would still remain his own decision. This being said, any type of significant, negative pressure would be inappropriate at best. Usually, in this type of scenario, the incentive to give is positive. In other words, the storeowner is interested in creating or maintaining good-will and respect with the community of potential customers. Just as customers can ask for courteous treatment, they can ask for generosity, with the decision remaining his own. Those who contribute are often publicly acknowledged, so that they gain something from their donation. The actual cost to the donor is less than the retail value, and it may be possible to get a tax break. If these are the conditions, there should not be halachic or ethical problems in soliciting the donations. Of course, the solicitor should conduct himself in a manner that preserves the honor of a Torah lifestyle. Regarding the parents, they have more of an obligation to assist the school that educates their children than others do. But given the high cost of Jewish education, it is unrealistic for many of them to contribute more than the tuition they already pay. Hemdat Yamim is published weekly in conjunction with Gemara Berura. 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