Parashat Shavua

Hemdat Yamim Parashat Ki tavo

Hemdat Yamim Parshat Ki Tavo, 16 Elul 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 rabbis 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. =========================================================== Thanks for All of Us / Harav Moshe Ehrenreich Our parasha opens with the mitzva of bikurim (first fruit) and determines that the obligation to bring them to Hashem begins "when you come to the Land... and conquer and settle it" (Devarim 26:1). Rashi explains that this comes to teach us that the mitzva of bikurim did not begin until the land was conquered and divided among the tribes. We should devote some thought to the possible alternatives for the beginning of the mitzva, had the Torah not specified conquest and settlement. The Ibn Ezra and Seforno point out that this section follows the command to fight Amalek, which was to take place after Hashem relieved us of our surrounding enemies. This condition was met only around 400 years later at the time of King Saul. Therefore, the Torah had to stress that other mitzvot, several of which are found in our parasha, preceded this time. Rashi, however, seems to imply that the time was delayed, not hastened, and it is thus worthwhile to look for an earlier theoretical beginning point for the mitzva of bikurim. The actual settlement of Bnei Yisrael in Eretz Yisrael did not occur at one time at the "time of division," but occurred gradually as conditions allowed for it in a given region of the country. It would, therefore, make sense that the mitzva of bikurim would begin in a given area when that area was properly settled. After all, bikurim is a mitzva of thanksgiving by the individual for the gift of the land and its fruit which he received. Rashi (pasuk 3) stresses that through bikurim, one demonstrates that he is not ungrateful and that a person fulfills the mitzvah between Shavuot and Sukkot when the joy is the greatest (Pesachim 36b), as he gathers his produce. It stands to reason that those who were fortunate enough to settle earlier should have given their thanks promptly. That is why Rashi has to stress that this form of thanksgiving was delayed until the end of the historical period of dividing the land for the nation as a whole. What is the lesson to be learned from delaying the thanks? Why not be thankful as early as one can? The Torah is teaching us that even one's personal happiness cannot be complete when the whole of the nation (as our nation forms one entity) has not yet merited to settle the land. Similarly in our days, we must engrain in our consciousness the realization that only when the entrance, conquest, and inhabitation of the Land will be accomplished by the entire Jewish nation, will our happiness be complete. =========================================================== P'ninat Mishpat - Levels of Obligation- part 1 As the Yamim Noraim approach, we look for ways to improve our standing before the Divine Judge. We are told that he who goes beyond his obligations in dealing with his fellow man receives similarly beneficial treatment from Above (see Rosh Hashana 17a). In this light, we thought it was appropriate to discuss different levels of extra-judicial obligations and their terminology. One type of semi-obligation, which cannot be enforced by beit din, refers to assurances a person gave in a manner that there was no binding kinyan. Kinyanim must, as a rule, include some form of physical action in order for them to be binding. However, we pasken like Rav Yochanan that a clear oral commitment to buy or sell creates a situation where he who backs out, is considered mechusar amana, lacking in reliability (Bava Metzia 49a). If money was paid and a party wants to back out, with the excuse that Chazal required a physical act to buy movable objects, then a form of curse, known as a mi shepara, is administered. Another term for moral obligation is taromet (grievances). The gemara exerts much effort in trying to determine the exact case(s) where a worker has grievances but not full legal remedy for having been deceived (Bava Metzia 75b-76b). Bava Kamma 8b discusses a practical implication of taromet. Under normal circumstances, only parties to a court case can get directly involved in the litigation. However, if Reuven sells a field to Shimon, and then Reuven's creditor goes to court to extract the field, which had a lien for their loan, Reuven may get involved in the case, with the claim that the case affects him directly. How? Even in a case where Shimon cannot demand reimbursement from Reuven, Reuven still has a halachically recognized interest that Shimon should not have taromet on him. =========================================================== Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) The Boundaries of Eretz Yisrael- IV- The Reason for the Shrinking Borders (from Eretz Hemdah I;4:4) We have seen that the territory of Eretz Yisrael, listed in Parashat Masei in a halachic context, is smaller than that mentioned in Brit Bein Habetarim and elsewhere. Although the broad boundaries extend to the Euphrates River in the North, most opinions rule that King David's conquests in that area were not halachically valid, because he shouldn't have conquered lands outside Eretz Yisrael before all of Eretz Yisrael proper was conquered. The most significant omission from the Masei boundaries was on the eastern bank of the Jordan River (the Jordan is given as the eastern border). This was an Emorite area (included in the seven nations) and had already been conquered by Moshe, according to Hashem's instructions. The Ramban (Bamidbar 21:23) explains that Moshe never intended to capture this area and would have left it uninhabited had Bnei Gad and Reuven not requested the land. Bnei Yisrael were too few to spread out so much. Also, the land east of the Jordan was impure in comparison to that to the west and was not fit to house the Divine Presence or the Beit Hamikdash. As Moshe's decision preceded Parashat Masei's instructions to settle the land, Hashem's subsequent instructions showed His approval of Moshe's decision. The special qualities and intrinsic kedusha of Eretz Yisrael do not apply to the eastern bank (Tashbetz III, 200). After Masei, the obligation to conquer applied only to those boundaries mentioned there, thus explaining the halachic attitude towards David's activities in Suria. According to the Ramban, it is possible that the mitzvah to conquer Eretz Yisrael, which seems to apply outside the Masei borders (see Devarim 1:4), took force to those areas only after the primary sections of Eretz Yisrael were all conquered. But it is more likely that the main mitzva to conquer and inhabit applied only to the holier part of the land, delineated in Masei. There are several sources that indicate that the land Moshe took from Sichon and Og had a status of Eretz Yisrael. We will discuss the contrary indications next week. =========================================================== Ask the Rabbi Question: I use my oven for baking fleishig foods. If I haven't used the oven for 24 hours and bake a pareve cake, can I eat it with milk? Answer: Please be aware that there are diverse minhagim in different communities regarding the use of ovens for different types of foods. What we write here is not intended to delegitimize any ruling you have received from a competent, rabbinic authority. We start with the case that you use a fleishig baking pan. Does the fleishig taste, which entered the pan, exit it, enter the pareve food and turn it into fleishig. This double-removed taste, known as nat bar nat, is the subject of a major machloket between the Shulchan Aruch and the Rama (Yoreh Deah 95:2), with the Rama ruling for Ashkenazic Jewry that it is proper to treat the formerly pareve food as fleishig. However, if the pan has not been used for 24 hours, then the taste remaining in it is not halachically significant. It is true that Chazal did not allow us to use non-kosher utensils that have remained unused for 24 hours. However, since, in this case, even within 24 hours, the fleishig status of the food is far from clear, the cake you refer to is considered pareve. For this reason, the Gra (ad loc.:9) permitted the use of such a pan for the purpose you describe. On the other hand, many acharonim prescribe to the opinion of the Chuchmat Adam (48:2) (with which the Rama (ibid.) mildly implies that he agrees) that one should not set up such a situation l'chatchila (of his own choice). In other words, if one planned to eat the cake with fleishig or pareve and then a situation arose where he decided to eat it with milchig, he could do so. However, he should not bake with the intention to eat the cake with milk. Thus, the proper thing, from this perspective, is to use a pareve or disposable pan. The problem is that the oven might cause problems. The Rama (YD 108:1) rules that taste is transferred from one food to another when they were baked or roasted in an oven at different times only if there was condensation (zeiah) from both foods on the walls of the oven. A "fleishig oven" presumably had fleishig condensation at some time during its use. But it is unclear how liquid does a food and how insulated does an oven have to be in order that there be zeiah to bring the fleishig from the walls to the food (see Igrot Moshe YD I:40). Bread and relatively dry cake dough probably do not create zeiah in a normal oven and will remain pareve. (One must make sure that the pan doesn't touch a surface with fleishig residue on it.) However, a liquid batter may create zeiah. When this is so, the zeiah compromises the pareve status of both the cake and the pan. (If the oven was well cleaned and had not been used within 24 hours, the pan would not need to be kashered). There are at least two legitimate solutions to this problem. One is to cover the cake batter (where feasible) so that escaping moisture is insufficient to transfer taste (Rama, ibid.). The other is to do libun kal on the oven before baking the cake to remove the fleishig taste from the walls and burn any surface residue. A half-hour of heating at the oven's highest temperature is usually sufficient. (More time is needed if there is significant spillage which one did not remove prior to heating.) Even one who relies on the aforementioned Gra must ensure that there is no edible residue on the walls of the oven in a case where zeiah could bring residue into the food, even though tiny quantities will not ruin the food b'dieved (after the fact) (see Igrot Moshe I:40; Gilyon Maharsha 99:6). ******************************************************************************************************************************************************* 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