Parashat Shavua

Hemdat Yamim Parashat Shemot

Hemdat Yamim Parshat Shemot 23 Tevet 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. ====================================== When a Word is a Word / Harav Yosef Carmel One of the accounts where we see Moshe Rabbeinu's fine personal qualities shine through is when he saved the daughters of Yitro from the shepherds and gave their flock to drink. Moshe's reward came promptly. "Vayoel Moshe to live with the man, and he gave his daughter, Tzipora, to Moshe" (Shemot 2:21). Moshe who was pursued for decades (see Ramban, Shemot 2:23), did not hesitate to take on the masses and, in return, received warm hospitality in a strange land. The term "vayoel Moshe" is explained in different ways. Rashi's first explanation is that Moshe agreed to live with Yitro. The difficulty with this explanation is that it should be self-evident that Moshe would agree to such a generous offer. The Midrash brings another couple explanations: 1. To dwell (based on Shoftim 19:6). 2. To begin, in this case, to watch the flock. These explanations also have the problem that they appear to be minor points that wouldn't seem fit to merit the Torah's attention. Therefore, we will concentrate on Rashi's other explanation, that vayoel comes from the root "alah," which means an oath. Moshe swore that he would not leave Midyan without Yitro's permission. One of the advantages of this explanation, which is found in Nedarim 65a, is the number of places in Tanach where the term has to do with oaths (see Shmuel I 14:24; Melachim II 5:23; Yechezkel 17:12). Another advantage is that it refers to a more significant event than do the other explanations. But, perhaps, of greatest significance is that it sets the stage for another glorious ethical characteristic of this future leader of our nation. Moshe showed reliability in fulfilling his promise to Yitro to the fullest extent. The midrash (Devarim Rabba 11:2) stresses this idea in a most beautiful way. The famous p'sukim in Tehillim deal with the questions, "Who will go up on the mountain of Hashem, and who will stand in the place of His holiness?" (Tehillim 24:2). The answer is that Moshe is the one to have that distinction, and why? It is because he was "one who has clean hands and a pure heart" (ibid.:3) (namely, he didn't steal and his heart was pure with fear of Hashem) The pasuk continues that "he didn't raise up his soul for falsehood and did not swear in a deceiving manner." The midrash says that this refers to Moshe's oath to Yitro. What is the result of the attributes of such a leader? "He shall carry a blessing from Hashem" (ibid.:4), which the midrash understands as causing a blessing to others. Moshe's beginning as a man of chesed, who stood up for the weak, and his continuation as a pillar of trustworthiness, brought blessing upon him and the nation he led. ====================================== P'ninat Mishpat - Distancing Damage to Neighbors - part I - Introduction When one thinks about the laws of damages, he usually thinks about payment for clear-cut damages that were either done by accident or by an act of wickedness or vengeance. However, the question often arises when a good man wants to do something which is ostensibly innocuous and unrelated to his friend, yet his friend tries to prevent the action with the claim that he will be damaged by it. Welcome to the world of hilchot shecheinim (the laws of neighbors) and harchakat n'zikin (distancing damages). There are extensive discussions on these issues in the gemara, with the most focused discussions being in the 2nd perek of Bava Batra. Difficulty in applying the halachot is two-fold. Firstly, the living conditions that exist among neighbors nowadays are very different from those of the times of Chazal. Therefore, significant effort is needed to convert concepts found in the gemara to parallel but different, modern cases. Secondly, some of the halachot may be changed by widespread public agreement to certain practices that were once forbidden or, to the contrary, by widespread opposition to certain practices which were accepted and acceptable in former times. The beauty of the halachic process is that we can apply our living Torah to new cases in new ways without compromising the integrity of its eternal truths and rules. We will concentrate more on the basic, classic principles in our treatment of the topic than on the ever-changing applications (although we will touch on some of those as well). ============================================= Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) Organ Donations- part III (from Chavot Binyamin, siman 109) [We have seen that according to the Radvaz, one does not have to enter a serious danger to his own life in order to save another. We said that although the main obligation is to toil to save a life, and not directly to give of one's body, it is proper, beyond the letter of the law, to give donations from the body of things which are replaceable. We continue from that point.] It is proper to donate replaceable parts of the body (blood, bone marrow, etc.) only in a case that the foreseeable danger from the action is distant. This is under the area of 50% and, in all likelihood, within the limits of danger that people accept upon themselves in order to earn their livelihood. We find a similar idea in Rav Kook's, "Mishpat Kohen" (143), in regard to Chazal's teaching on the pasuk "do not fear a man." Chazal explain that a judge should not fear even when there is danger. Rav Kook explains that this could not be talking about serious danger, but rather it must be talking about a distant doubt, the type of faint concern that people are in the practice of entering into even on monetary matters. That is similar to the gemara (Bava Metzia 112a) which learns from the pasuk "v'eilav hu noseh et nafsho." The gemara says: "Why did he [the worker] go up the ramp or hang from a tree and give up his life for [possible] death? Was it not for his wages?" However if there is an equal chance of death and survival and certainly if the "danger leans toward certainty" that the one who intends to save will himself be killed, he is not required to give his life, and it isn't even a act of righteousness to do so. If one does so, the Radvaz calls him a crazy, righteous man. However, it is noteworthy that he did not say it is a forbidden act. The explanation is that there are times when there is merit in considering such an action. See Rav Kook (ibid., pg. 310) who discusses the matter, and see also Igrot Moshe YD II, pg. 293). We can learn from the gemara's examples that the obligation to save is only in regard to involvement of effort on the part of the one who is saving, including physical exertion and slight danger. However, we see from the Radvaz that there is no obligation to donate from one's body a limb or the type of tissue or organ, like a kidney, which will not regenerate within the donor, even though the danger is not great. There is, though, an "attribute of righteousness" even in this case to save his friend from death and "praiseworthy is he who can withstand this." The Shach (YD 157:3) writes that when one is forced to violate a negative commandment and can be saved only by losing a limb of the body, it requires research to determine if the sacrifice is like money (where one has to give all he has to save himself from the sin) or like giving one's life (where he does not have an obligation of self-sacrifice). The Shach does not cite the Radvaz who, in the parallel case of the commandment not to leave a friend in danger, assumes that there is no obligation, just an "attribute of righteousness." There is room for distinction, as we have explained, that saving a friend falls under the category of "returning a lost object," which does not include damage to one's body. We can say that the Shach's doubt was not on negative commandments between man and man. ===================================== Ask the Rabbi Question: Should a woman who is close to her birth due date find a place for Shabbat to prevent the need to travel to the hospital? Answer: An expectant mother certainly does not have to find a place close to the hospital for Shabbat (Shmirat Shabbat K'hilchata 36:7). On one hand, it is proper to make preparations before Shabbat to minimize the need of doing foreseeable forbidden activity on Shabbat to save lives (Mishna Berura 330:1). On the other hand, there is a rule in pikuach nefesh (steps to save lives) on Shabbat that one need not take unusually difficult steps to obviate the need for permitted chillul Shabbat. (This rule is beautifully explained in an article by Rav Sh. Z. Orbach in "Torah Sheb'al Peh, vol.14). What constitutes unusually difficult steps is subjective and difficult to spell out. However, when discussing only a possible need for chillul Shabbat and when dealing with a mother who is soon to give birth (with Hashem's help), there is every reason to consider things with leniency. Therefore, a woman should pack before Shabbat a bag of things she will take with her (things that should not be taken on Shabbat should be separated from before), as this is a very simple step. But there is no need to find a place for Shabbat nearby, all the more so if it will detract from the spirit of Shabbat. The most important thing to consider at this stage is the health of the expectant mother, including her level of rest and her psychological state. In the case of an important psychological need, Rav M. Feinstein even allowed a husband to travel to the hospital with his wife (see the circumstances in Igrot Moshe OC I, 132; Shmirat Shabbat K'hilchata 36:8). Some women may wait until the last minute before traveling on Shabbat even when far away from the hospital, which is not a good idea. Others may go at the first signs of what might turn out to be false labor and end up in a situation where they are stuck in the middle of nowhere for the rest of Shabbat (see more in Shmirat Shabbat K'hilchata 36:10). Such women should consider these factors in their choice of a hospital and their Shabbat plans. But again, the concern is how the various scenarios will affect her health. [There are several issues for a couple to consider, depending on the circumstances.] 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