Parashat Shavua

Hemdat Yamim Parashat Emor

Hemdat Yamim Parshat Emor 15 Iyar 5762 ============================================== This edition of Hemdat Yamim is dedicated to the memory of R' Meir ben Yechezkel Shraga Brachfeld o.b.m. ============================================== We remember the tragic murder of two young boys from Tekoa, Koby Mandel and Yosef Ishran, exactly a year ago. ============================================== Breaking Family Ties / Harav Yosef Carmel We find, in our parasha, the pasuk: "Should a kohen's daughter desecrate herself (teicheil) through illicit relations, she thereby desecrates her father..." (Vayikra 21:9). The word "teicheil" can be connected to two verbs: "L'hatchil" (to begin) or "l'challel"(to desecrate), as we translated. Although the Ibn Ezra (ad loc.) cites those who understand our pasuk according to the former explanation, he prefers the latter one of desecrating or profaning. According to this approach, the pasuk is purposely repetitive, stating that the daughter profanes herself and profanes her father. We need to understand the meaning of desecration, in respect to both father and daughter. The pasuk seems to imply that there is some practical, halachic ramification... but is there? A kohen's daughter does not seem to have any special kedushat kehuna (priestly sanctity). She may go to a cemetery, marry anyone a Jewish girl can marry, and loses the right to eat teruma as soon as she marries. The father also does not appear to be halachically affected by his daughter's promiscuity. He can continue his priestly activities, in regard to service, eating from holy foods, and entering holy places. In only one way is the daughter of a kohen halachically different from her "regular" Jewish counterparts. Her firstborn son is exempt from pidyon haben (redemption of the firstborn). Thus, a kohen grandfather passes on, through his daughter, the status of priestly lineage, which affects the exemption, despite the child's clear status as a Yisrael. However, if the kohen's daughter has a boy, fathered, Heaven forbid, by a non-Jew or resulting from an even greater sin, then the boy requires a pidyon haben (Bechorot 47a, Shulchan Aruch, YD 305:18; see Bemareh Habazak II, pg. 98). We can now explain the concept of halachic desecration, referred to by the pasuk, in the following manner. Should the daughter of a kohen be involved in a severely illicit relationship, she, in addition to being punished for the sin, will lose the halachic link to her father's kehuna. Instead of her father being able to transfer the exemption from pidyon haben, she causes a break in the family, priestly lineage, which the Torah mandated, preventing herself and her father from continuing the imprint of kehuna for another generation. ======================================================= P'ninat Mishpat - The Dating of a Ketuba -Part I A ketuba is a serious document, which should be written carefully to assure its validity and preciseness. However, we are not nearly as careful about the spelling of names and places as we are by a get, where mistakes could raise questions about the status of the entire divorce. By a ketuba, its viability in beit din is the main issue. A detail of particular concern, specifically by a ketuba, is its date. This stems from the technical fact that many weddings take place close to the time of nightfall (the new Jewish day). We will discuss problems this week and solutions next week. A pre-dated monetary document (including a ketuba) is invalid even if both sides to the agreement agree to the pre-dating. This is because the document's recipient (the wife) can claim property which was sold by the one whom the document obligates (the husband) as payment based on the concept of shibud (lien). This applies only to property which was still in the husband's possession at the time of the obligation, not those he sold previously. Usually, the husband becomes obligated at the time of the chupah. If the ketuba is pre-dated, even by a day (because the chupah was delayed until after nightfall), the ketuba will contain erroneous evidence of a stronger lien than is true, and it will be an invalid document. If the ketuba is dated for the night (and the chupah, miraculously, is earlier than expected) there is an issue that until the ketuba takes effect (based on its date), the couple is, in effect, married without a ketuba, which, we have seen, is a problem. =================================================== Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) "Longevity of the Second Sanctification" (Eretz Hemdah I, 3:7) There is a machloket among the Tanaim whether the kedusha shniya, the sanctification of Eretz Yisrael at the time of Ezra, ended with or survived the destruction of the second Beit Hamikdash (Arachin 32b). R. Yossi, who says that kedusha shniya is permanent, learns from "...which your fathers possessed, and you shall possess" (Devarim 30:5), that the two historic possessions of the Land of halachic impact are the only ones which will occur. Therefore, the second one must be permanent. The Rambam (Beit Habechira 6:16) paskens that kedusha shniya is permanent. He explains that the first kedusha, which was initiated by conquest ceased when the Land left Jewish control, but the second kedusha, which was through chazaka (assuming control), continues even when the Land was taken away. The Rambam's commentators had difficulty understanding the Rambam's distinction, which assumes that chazaka is stronger than conquest. The Radvaz (Terumot 1:5) explains that the kedusha rishona was accomplished only physically, whereas the kedusha shniya was done with an oral sanctification by Sanhedrin. Tosafot Yom Tov (Eiduyot 8:10) says that that which was gained by our capture could be counteracted by capture. However, the kedusha shniya, which resulted from settlement with the permission of the sovereign Persian Empire, could not be undone by capture. The Roman conquest was actually theft of land and had no halachic impact. But shouldn't Yehoshua's permission from Hashem be at least as effective as the Persians'? Tosafot Yom Tov concedes, but says that the Babylonians had Divine permission to destroy the first Beit Hamikdash, as stated in the Prophets, whereas the Roman conquerors of the second did not. However, this reasoning is difficult, because the Roman conquest was no less Divinely destined than the Babylonian one, with the only difference being that prophecy had ceased. Certainly, the Babylonians did not capture Eretz Yisrael out of a desire to fulfill Hashem's will. This explanation also does not address the Rambam's distinction between kedusha begun by chazaka versus conquest. It would seem that the Rambam's distinction stems from the Yerushalmi [which we brought last week] that Hashem promised that the kedusha shniya would be more simply accomplished. The kedusha rishona could only be done by conquest and thus could be similarly undone. Kedusha shniya had the opportunity to use chazaka. Roman conquest primarily affected Jewish sovereignty and independence, not the ability to inhabit the Land, as a large Jewish population remained and, thus, chazaka continued. On second thought, we can explain the Rambam that the Jewish control attained in the time of Ezra occurred when the Land was quite desolate, enabling chazaka without conquest. At the time of Yehoshua, when conquest was the key, practically and halachically, conquest by non-Jews removed the kedusha. ========================================================= Ask the Rabbi Question: Is it permitted to get married on Yom Ha'atzmaut and Yom Yerushalayim? Answer: As you know, there is an ancient custom not to marry during the period of sefira, when we commemorate the death of the students of Rabbi Akiva. There are opinions that are lenient in a variety of cases of need and mitzva (see a survey of opinions in Yein Hatov II:11), but the minhag, in general, is kept strictly. Chief Rabbi Nissim (ibid.) felt that celebrating the miracles and Divine blessings associated with Yom Ha'atzmaut (5 Iyar) is reason enough to allow a full suspension of the minhagim of sefira, including marriage, on that day. Other distinguished contemporaries of Rav Nissim, while appreciating, as he did, the importance of those crucial, historic events, believed that allowing marriages on Yom Ha'atzmaut was too revolutionary a leniency to adopt in our generation. See the responsa of Rav Ovadia Hadaya (Yaskil Avdi VI, 10) and Chief Rabbi Unterman (Shevet Miyehuda 60), who the latter view. After confirming with religious councils in Israel that the practice is to not allow marriages on Yom Ha'atzmaut, we feel that this custom should be followed, but those who decide to have the wedding then, have whom to rely on. The situation on Yom Yerushalayim (28 Iyar) is different, as it falls after Lag Ba'omer. Since, according to the minhag of many, the restrictions of the sefira period are over (see Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 493 and Mishna Berura, ad loc.), there is significantly more room for leniency. Consequently, the Chief Rabbinate Council (under the presidency of Chief Rabbis Unterman and Nissim, z.t.l.) issued a directive to allow marriages on Yom Yerushalayim. In Bemareh Habazak III, pg. 100 we cited this ruling and stressed its particular relevance for those who have not yet fulfilled the mitzva of pru u'revu. ======================================================== Eretz Hemdah is the premier institution for preparing young rabbis for 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. 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