Parashat Shavua

Hemdat Yamim Parashat Ki_tavo 5763

Hemdat Yamim Parshat Ki Tavo 16 Elul 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. Public Relations as a Matter of Choice or Not? Harav Yosef Carmel The first part of Sefer Devarim contains the commandment to give ma'asrot (tithes) (Devarim 14:22). This week's parasha goes a step further. Before Pesach on the fourth and seventh year of the shemitta cycle, Jews would go to the Beit Hamikdash to announce that they kept all of the laws of ma'asrot properly (ibid. 26:12-14). This process is known as viduy ma'aser. The explicit assertion of proper fulfillment of a mitzva seems unusual. Is it not presumptuous and haughty to praise oneself in such a way? Rishonim already dealt with the problem, and we will bring some of their approaches. In our times, we have expressions to the effect of, "Talk is cheap." But this is not the Jewish outlook on the ideal or perhaps even the norm. The Sefer Hachinuch explains viduy ma'aser based on the opposite assumption. The crowning glory of mankind, above other creations, is his ability to speak. There are, therefore, people who are particularly fearful of degrading their speech, even when they are less concerned about their actions in the same area. Because of the crucial nature of the mitzva of ma'asrot, the Torah wanted to strengthen the likelihood that they would be given honestly by requiring a clear assertion in the Beit Hamikdash to that effect. The Abarbanel's approach seems more in line with our times' unfortunate realities. He says that the viduy ma'aser encourages one who is dismayed by the prospect of parting with a part of his produce. The person is compensated by the fact that his donations will be duly noted and publicized in no less important and public a place than the Beit Hamikdash. This approach corroborates a p'sak of the Rashba (Shut I, 681), brought by the Rama (YD 249:13). A member of the community contributed money for the expansion of the local shul and demanded that his gift be mentioned on the building's wall. The Rashba was asked if the community could deny the demand. He cited precedent from the Talmud and even from Tanach, which regularly mentioned those who did good deeds by name, as evidence that it is proper to reward those who do mitzvot by publicizing those mitzvot. However, even after seeing the Rashba, one may still claim that it seems unfortunate that the ulterior motive of public acknowledgment should be necessary on such an ongoing basis. Further study of the p'sukim may uncover why it is particularly appropriate in this context. The Torah describes the recipients of the ma'asrot with the words, "They will eat in your gates and be satiated" (26:12). Who says that by giving a tenth of one's produce to the poor, they will reach the point of satiation? Apparently, the Torah is describing a higher level of giving than the mandatory tenth on the third and sixth years. It is indeed appropriate to allow people to publicize their gift in order to encourage them to give on such a high level. We should note that the Jewish people have gone beyond the call of duty throughout the generations to use their wealth for good causes. Ya'akov Avinu promised a tenth from everything he would receive to Hashem, even when the Torah required it only from a few types of produce. To this day, many pious Jews fulfill the custom of ma'aser kesafim without resorting to various legitimate leniencies. Eretz Hemdah Update Our parasha contains a section of curses for those who violate a variety of different, negative commandments. But the final curse is reserved for one who refrains from doing the right thing, which is to "establish the words of the Torah to do them" (Devarim 27: 26). Many explanations are given for the exact meaning of this phrase. The Ramban brings an explanation that it refers to those who have the ability to strengthen the words of Torah within the public through acts of leadership and do not do what is expected of them. We certainly wish well, not Heaven forbid curses, for all of our brothers and sisters, leaders and non-leaders alike, and hope that all are successful in doing that which is right for them, according to their capabilities and circumstances. But we do see from here the great value the Torah places on Torah leadership. It is, thus, with great joy and pride that we wish the most complete beracha and success possible to our recent graduates who have just taken up posts spreading Torah and its values in a variety of different locations and settings. What unites them all is that they have spent many years (the last seven, at Eretz Hemdah) filling themselves with Torah knowledge, skills and values. We are confident that these precious attainments will enable them to have a positive impact in their present and future endeavors. The following are the names and positions of our recent graduates: Harav Gadi Eldad - Ram in Beit Midrash for Rabbanim of the Italian Jewish Community Harav Amotz Cohen - Rosh Kollel in Kfar Darom Harav Eliyahu Shachor - Ram in the Yeshiva Gevoha in Elon Moreh Harav Rami Sar Shalom - Rosh Kollel in Pisgat Zeev We also want to take this opportunity to wish beracha v'hatzlacha to our incoming class. ***************************************************************************************** Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) Kilayim - VII- The Prohibition of Grafting (Kilei Harkava) (from Eretz Hemdah II, 2: 1,2) In addition to the explicit Torah prohibition of sowing a field with the seeds of different species, Chazal derived the prohibition of grafting the branch of one tree onto another tree of a different species, in such a manner that the branch becomes attached to the host tree. This case is the connection between the prohibition of mixed sowing and that of mixed breeding of animals, which the Torah brings in tandem. By this, we mean that one combines two types of plants in a way that a new species. Sometimes, the prohibition is violated without forcing a branch into a tree, but, for example, by placing a vine into the roots of a watermelon. This is forbidden even if it is done in order that it will receive more moisture, not with the intention or result of creating a new type of fruit. In a few ways, the prohibition of grafting is stricter than that of mixed sowing (kilei zeraim). Firstly, grafting is forbidden by the Torah even outside Eretz Yisrael. The logic is that grafting is derived from cross-breeding, which is not a land-based mitzva and thus applied even in chut la'aretz. Additionally, grafting applies even to trees, while kilei zeraim applies only to seeds. The reason is similar to what we have just explained. The pasuk on kilei zeraimi mentions sowing, not planting, which applies to trees. However, as kilei harkava is not derived from the words of kilei zeraim but from the concept of cross-breeding, any two species are included, whether they are sowed or planted. On the other hand, it may be incorrect to look at grafting as a prohibition that is totally unrelated to mixed sowing. For example, the Chatam Sofer cites an opinion that only the grafting of two species of fruit which together will create a fruit is prohibited. There is also a question how to apply the introduction to the pasuk, which is the source of the related prohibitions of mixed species, in regard to grafting. The pasuk says, "Et chukotai tishmoro" (You shall keep my statutes). The Amora, Shmuel (Kiddushin 39a) understands these words in reference to the rules [of nature] that are included in the creation, in other words, that they shouldn't be interfered with by forbidden human intervention. This concept may provide the impetus to extend the prohibition of mixed species to grafting despite the fact that it is omitted from the pasuk in the explicit form. However, the gemara in Sanhedrin (60a) brings this approach to the pasuk in the context of R. Eliezer's opinion that kilayim is forbidden for gentiles (Bnei Noach) as well. This can imply that according to Rabbanan, who hold that only Jews are obligated in kilayim, chok means a mitzva without a known reason, not a concept from the beginning of time. This appears to be Rashi's opinion. However, according to Tosafot, all agree that the chok of kilayim is an ancient one, and the machloket is as follows. According to R. Eliezer, the chok was long ago decreed upon all mankind. According to Rabbanan, the rules were not commanded to mankind until Bnei Yisrael accepted the Torah, but the rules were incorporated into the world through nature. Ask the Rabbi Question: After washing silverware on Friday night, I need to arrange each type in its proper place. How do I do that without violating the prohibition of borer (selecting)? Answer: It is conceivable that there is no problem, as we will explain, but there are also relatively simple ways to separate the silverware into categories without a problem of borer. Rav Ovadia Yosef shlita (in Yabia Omer V, OC 31) justifies the practice of those who pull out forks, knives, and spoons in groups from a pile of silverware so that each will be in its distinct place to expedite setting the table on Shabbat morning. In classic form, he does so by bringing several possible reasons why the procedure may be permitted, even though each reason is not sufficiently convincing in its own right. We will start with the strongest of the reasons in his eyes. The Aruch Hashulchan (OC 319: 8,9) wonders how it is possible to pick out one type of silverware from a bunch of assorted ones. His first suggestion is that because of their large size, each utensil is distinct in the eyes of he who selects. Thus, the process of removing what he wants is not considered borer, but simply taking. Many Acharonim question this proposition (Shemirat Shabbat K'hilchata 3:(78); Piskei Teshuvot 319:6), which may also depend on how tightly packed the silverware is. In fact, the Terumat Hadeshen (#57) already raised the idea but was reluctant to rely upon it without further indications for leniency. Another important point is raised by the Pri Megadim (cited by Biur Halacha 319:3). The Rambam (Shabbat 8:12) rules that if one has two useful types of items before him he may take out the one he wants to use in the short term. The time factor can be understood in two ways. Perhaps the fact that one will be used before the other turns the former into ochel (desired object) and the latter into relative pesolet (unwanted). The rule is that we may take ochel from pesolet, but not vice versa. If that is the issue, then if one will use both groups of items at the same time in the future, there is no problem, because there is no distinction between ochel and pesolet. The Biur Halacha (ibid.) is convinced that this is not the explanation of the time factor. Rather, there is a special dispensation when one takes an object to use in the short term, as this is considered "in the manner of consumption" and is permitted. In contrast, selection for later use is more like classic borer. Additional, weaker grounds for leniency include the possibility that the Torah prohibition of borer applies only to things which grow from the ground or that preparations for the next meal are considered short term even if the meal is significantly later. The following suggestions are systems to conform to the majority opinion among poskim, which does not accept the aforementioned leniency (Shemirat Shabbat K'hilchata 3:78-79; Hilchot Shabbat (Eider) X,G,4). One is to keep the silverware in a pile and set the table soon before the meal begins, as we saw in the Rambam. It is not sufficient to do the separation soon before setting the table, if that is done long before the meal (Mishna Berura 321:45). Another possibility is to not select utensils from the pile, but to use the opportunity that the utensils are in the hand to create separate piles for each category. After taking them one by one indiscriminately in order to wash or dry, one then puts each one in a separate pile by category. With a little organization, this system need not waste too much time. Others suggest artificially undoing the mixture by throwing them across the surface (like pick-up sticks) and then selecting as desired (Rav Moshe Feinstein, response #11 to Rav Eider). 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