Parashat Shavua

Hemdat Yamim Parashat Vayikra

Hemdat Yamim Parshat Vayikra 5 Nisan 5764 *********************************************** This edition of Hemdat Yamim is dedicated to the memory of R' Meir ben Yechezkel Shraga Brachfeld o.b.m., Yitzchak Eliezer Ben Avraham Mordechai Jacobson 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. *************************************************************************************************************************** Wanting Good Will One of a baby's earliest sentences is invariably, "I want." We hope that as he matures, his interests will be less self-centered. But a person continues to have strong desires throughout his life. The idea is to channel those desires in positive directions. Let's see what our parasha teaches on the matter. Vayikra starts by describing the korban olah (burnt offering). While one who requires one can be pressured to bring the korban, it ultimately must come "willingly." This is derived (Bava Batra 48a) from the word "lirtzono" (Vayikra 1:3) which one translation renders as "voluntarily," based on the gemara's phrase, "rotzeh ani" (I want). However, this is linguistically difficult, because throughout Chumash (as opposed to Chazal and parts of Nach), "ratzon" means to be accepted favorably ("chafetz" means to want). (If scanning a concordance does not convince you, see Ha'amek Davar, ad loc.). So how did Chazal know that "lirtzono" indicates agreeing to the korban, when the simple meaning is that the korban is accepted favorably? The answer may simply be that Chazal understood that there is no way that Hashem will accept a korban favorably if there is no human desire or interest in the korban serving its purpose. So if it is lirtzono, the person could not have been totally coerced to bring it. Different levels of interest are needed to fulfill different mitzvot. All agree that if one is forced to repay a loan (which is a mitzva) he fulfills the mitzva (on the basic level) and need not pay again. If one is forced to eat matzah on Pesach, he fulfills his mitzva only according to the opinion that "mitzvot einan tzrichot kavana" (Rosh Hashana 28a). But to have a korban brought without any element of spiritual involvement whatsoever cannot bring any spiritual gain that can be described as lirtzono (see Shmuel I, 15:22). If this is true, then we can see how the different meanings of "ratzon" relate to each other. When Hashem accepts a korban favorably, it is by virtue of the fact that the korban has served as a medium of bringing a feeling of closeness and desire for further interaction between Him and the person who brings the korban. Hashem "feels" the person's desire to draw close and reciprocates in the appropriate, Divine manner. When someone desires something (the common use of "rotzeh") he wants the thing to be connected to him. Of course, we can use the phrase on the most mundane level, describing the least significant connections, like that between a baby and a piece of candy. But man has the ability, the opportunity, and the responsibility to use his ratzon to seek out Hashem and create a mature, passionate, and lasting relationship with Him. What is certain is that to the extent that he is sincere, his overtures will be reciprocated "b'ratzon." Creating this connection is not be done all at once or independently, but is developed through the right, enthusiastic approach toward performing mitzvot. Maybe this is the intention of Avot 2:4, "Aseh r'tzoncha kirtzono k'dei sheyeaseh r'tztoncha kirtzono." When you do what Hashem desires (mitzvot) like your own desires, you will develop the favorable outlook towards Him that He is prepared to have towards you. ******************************************************************************************************************* P'ninat Mishpat – Obligation to Pay for Another Person's Rental (based on Piskei Din - Rabbinical Court of Yerushalayim - vol. III, pp. 177-8) Case: A contractor obligated himself to pay $250 a month to the owners of the home he was to renovate to rent an alternative home during the time of renovations if the work would be completed on time. The work did take longer than promised, but the contractor said that he need not pay because the homeowner did not rent an apartment and, thus, there was no need to pay for expenses that never materialized. Ruling: The gemara (Bava Batra 140a) assumes that one who, at the time of marriage, obligates himself to support his new wife's existing children is obligated to do so even after they have married. We see from here that when one obligates himself to pay for a certain need of someone else, he is required to continue paying that money even when the need is being addressed by a third party (in the gemara's case, the stepdaughter's husband). On the other hand, the S'ma (60:15) says that when one obligates himself to support someone else, if the recipient was in need at the time of the obligation, then we assume that the obligation ends when the need stops. How can the S'ma reconcile his position with the aforementioned gemara? The Chacham Tzvi (notes, ad loc.) makes the following distinction. The gemara is referring to a case where the stepfather obligated himself for a set time. In such a case, we assume that if he didn't stipulate any other parameters, the obligation is governed by the time element alone. However, when the obligation is open-ended, we assume that the intention was that the obligation should last only as long as the need exists. Another consequence of the distinction between an obligation for a set time and an open-ended one is whether the lien that emanates from the obligation takes hold in its entirety right away or whether it develops as time and the obligation go on. Only when the obligation is for a set time does it take hold from the outset for the entire time period. The mishna (Ketubot 101b) says that when one obligates himself to support his stepdaughter, the obligation takes effect all at once, and continues even after she marries and has who to support her. But the Hafla'ah says that this is the case only when there were other provisions for the stepdaughter at the time of her mother's re-marriage. Then we say that if the stepfather nevertheless obligated himself, that the obligation continues on even when she marries. If she had no funds to support herself when the obligation was made, we assume that the obligation falls off when provisions become available. Whichever distinction we adopt, the contractor, in our case, is not obligated to pay rent money when no rent is actually being paid. In this case, the obligation was open-ended and was made at a time when there was an expected need. Therefore, only if the homeowners can substantiate that they incurred rental expense are they entitled to the money. ************************************************************************************************************************* Moreshet Shaul (from the works of Hagaon Harav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l) Drasha for Shabbat Hagadol-5711- part I (based on Drashot Liy'mei Hapesach, pp. 52-54) In two prominent places (Devarim 6:6; ibid.11:19) where the Torah gives the general mitzva to educate one's children, it says to do so "b'shivt'cha b'veitecha, u'v'lecht'cha baderech" (when you sit in your house and when you go on your way). In other words, not only is concern for a child's education applicable when everyone is together in the home, but even when one is on the road and unable to teach his child, he should appoint an agent, a melamed (teacher), to do so on his behalf. But there is another opportunity to teach one's child where the expectation is that the father should do so himself within the framework of the home. This is the instruction to the father, "And it shall be when your child will ask you...[about the significance of the Pesach seder]" (Shemot 13:14). The seder has always remained a most fundamental possession of the Jewish home, per se. In the haftara of Shabbat Hagadol, we read: "Behold, I am sending to you the prophet Eliya before the coming of the great and awesome day of Hashem. He will return the heart of the fathers toward the sons and the heart of the sons towards the fathers" (Malachi 3:23). The prelude to the so eagerly awaited redemption puts such stress on the uniting of the hearts and minds of fathers and sons. This implies that a major part of the cause of the extended exile is a schism between father and son, which is overcome with their coming together. Teshuva is needed for redemption to come and Eliyahu is needed to bring teshuva (Yalkut Shimoni, Malachi 3) and unifying the generation is one of his major tasks. [Ed. note- Rav Yisraeli seems to explain the return as both an improvement of the relationship between generations and the return of both to Hashem.] So what is the problem between the generations? "'And it shall be when your children will say to you, What is this work for you?' (Shemot 12:26). This is a bad tiding that Bnei Yisrael were told that the Torah would be forgotten. Others says that this is a good tiding that they were told that they would merit to see children and grandchildren" (Yalkut Shimoni, Shemot 12). These two opinions seem startlingly different from each other. It is also difficult to take the pasuk of the wicked son as a sign that the Torah would be forgotten. After all, he did not forget the Torah; he rejected it. The Haggada brings the following pasuk as the response to the wicked son's cynicism: "Because of this Hashem did for me when I left Egypt" (Shemot 13:8). The only legitimate response of the father is to show his own personal, emotional involvement and act as if he left Egypt. If he acts as a truly free man, in body and in spirit, then his example to his son is a proper one. But if he celebrates Pesach as some sort of hollow ceremony, then the son's question is a legitimate one. "What is the work for you? Even for you, father, the holiday seems as a burden and a nuisance." How then can we expect the son to get all excited about it himself? This lack of passing on the proper spirit of mitzvot in general and Pesach specifically is a root cause of the schism between generations, which Eliyahu will have to heal. ********************************************************************************************************************* Ask the Rabbi Question: I am my parent's firstborn son, and my father recently told me that my planned pidyon haben (redeeming of the firstborn by a kohen) was delayed because of my illness and was never done. (My parents were not fully observant.) Is there something I should do now? Answer: It sounds like you require a pidyon haben, as the mitzva does not expire. However, first we have to try to determine if you definitely require it, and then we can discuss how to do it in this situation. First it pays to check if your father was right in planning the pidyon haben. The main exemptions are as follows: either of your parents is the child of a male kohen or levi; if your mother had a miscarriage prior to your birth; if you were born in a Caesarian delivery. Also ascertain from your father if, after all these years, he is sure that there was no pidyon haben. It is possible that the rabbi/kohen who was to have done the pidyon did so in a quick, halachic procedure that your father may have forgotten, while he remembers the fact that the party was cancelled. If there is uncertainty, get back to us, as we cannot give one blanket rule in advance. Assuming that you need a pidyon haben, we have to deal with an interesting, relevant dispute among halachic authorities. A father is required to redeem his son. However, if he fails to do so, the son becomes obligated to redeem himself once he is bar mitzva (Kidushin 29a). The question, though, is whether only the son is obligated at that point or whether the father's obligation remains. If the grown son does the pidyon haben the matter is certainly taken care of, but the difference among the opinions is in a situation where the father is now interested in doing the mitzva which was delayed for whatever reason. The Rashba (Shut II, 321) says that as the mitzva of pidyon haben creates a monetary obligation on the father's property from the outset, there is nothing to removes the obligation, and the father remains obligated. The gemara (ibid.) says that if one has enough money to redeem only himself or his son, he should redeem himself, because the mitzva that relates directly to himself has precedence. The Rivash (Shut 131) infers from there that the son's obligation to redeem himself is the primary obligation, and the father's practical responsibility to redeem his baby is due only to the fact that a small child is incapable of performing the pidyon haben himself. When the child grows up, he alone is obligated. Many later authorities have debated the matter, and it is difficult to say that one approach is more accepted or acceptable than the other (see Pidyon Haben K'hilchato 1:(16)). We would suggest as follows. As you know your father better than we, try to determine if he would want to be involved in the pidyon haben or not. If you think that he wouldn't mind, there is no problem doing it yourself. Ifhe wants to do it, there is a way to devise a system whereby the right person will end up doing the mitzva. You can physically give the money to the kohen and make the appropriate blessings and statements but do it on condition that if your father should rightfully be doing it, then you are doing it is as his agent. The process is only slightly complicated, and since few kohanim have done a pidyon haben in a case where a person is doing it for himself you will anyway need a very learned kohen and/or a rabbi to make the appropriate adjustments in the text of the blessings and statements. We would be happy to explain whatever needs to be explained to such a kohen. In any case, it is both important (a full Torah law) and not as complicated as it might sound to do the pidyon haben. While it is customary to have a minyan present (Otzar Pidyon Haben 18:2), it can be done privately to avoid embarrassing your father. 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