Oneg purim ki sisa

OnegShabbos בס"ד

North West London's Weekly Torah and Opinion Sheets

To receive this via email or for sponsorship opportunities please email [email protected]

Now in London, Hale, Edgware, Borehamwood, Elstree, South Tottenham, Gibraltar, Bet Shemesh, Yerushalayim, Baltimore, New York, Miami, Vienna, Toronto, Johannesburg, Los Angeles

משנכנס יין יצא סוד

Alongside the famous saying of חז''ל – that is another – משנכנס אדר מרבים בשמחה This means that when wine .משנכנס יין יצא סוד goes in, secrets come out. Indeed it is a known fact that those who have imbibed alcohol are often easier to elicit guarded information out of. are סוד and יין point out that the two words of חז''לparallel in גימטריא too, suggesting that there is a deep-rooted relationship between them.

The word סוד is etymologically synonymous with the word יסוד, which means foundation. Just as the foundations of a house are hidden from view, so is a secret. יסוד also has connotations for the building blocks of our way of life. The ישרים begins with מסילת the words 'ויתאמת שיתברר הוא התמימה העבודה ושורש החסידות יסוד is 'עבודת הthat achieving perfection in – 'אצל האדם מה חובתו בעולמוbased on one’s recognition of his duty in this world. But what is this connection between wine and Purim that gives us two phrases so strikingly similar?

The answer is staring us in the face. Even if you open the קיצור you will find the solution. The מגלה begins with a feast (called from the root to drink) which placed its emphasis on vast – משתהamounts of wine drunk from holy vessels, apparently signifying the end of the Jewish people’s hopes. In his intoxicated state the

king has his wife called before him and she refuses. This results in her removal and the appointment of אסתר. The ישועה itself comes about through the invitation of the queen to the king and המן to a feast. At the end the Jews are told to celebrate through feasting.

The truth is that מגלת אסתר is the story of הקב''ה revealing His presence in what – at first glance – seems nothing more than a wonderfully entertaining episode of court intrigue and political shenanigans. Only when looking at the whole series of events together do we see how 'המלך' – the real One that is – guides and protects His people from the darkest times towards ישועה. This indeed, is an exercise in understanding how theעולם בורא guides us and, in turn expects us to work towards achieving the perfection inעבודת ה' that the מסלת ישרים told us about.

This, perhaps more than anything else, should make us think twice before raising our לחיים glasses. Are we of a calibre pure enough to drink wine and radiate an inner core of goodness, that people say, ‘there goes a אלקים Or will we be seen to be ?’צלם rolling around in a state of disgrace (if so, it may be wiser to fulfil the words of the רמ''א – drink a little and go to sleep. You thereby fulfil the ענין of עד דלא ידע). It all depends on how finely tuned we are, only if fulfilling the criteria of working towards a spiritual end

.ובלבד שיכוון את לבו לשמים –

No wonder that the appellation of the Purim story is מגלת אסתר – look at the roots. You will see as the גר''א did, with such clarity, that a direct translation of these two words is… ‘the revealing of the hidden’. How apt.

7th Mar ‘15 ט"ז אדר תשע”ה

פרשת כי תשא - פורים

פ' כי תשא הפטרה: מלכים א' י''ח א'-ל''ט

הדלקת נרות London 5.33 pm

מוצש’’ק London: 6.41 pm

תענית אסתר Out : 6.26 pm

לע"נ חנה בת אלעזר ע"ה לע"נ חזן שלמה בן אברהם משה ז"ל

PU

RIMThe Secret is Out

Rabbi Amram LandauHasmonean High School

“At the end-point there is nothing but being, no time but the present.” Rabbi Akiva Tatz “At the end-point there is nothing but being, no time but the present.” Rabbi Akiva Tatz

S P O N S O R E D

YOUR WEEKLY LOCAL NEWSPAPER020 8442 7777 | [email protected]

S P O N S O R E D

2

“We have no understanding of the energy that God planted within our souls. Therefore, God has to test us to bring forth those treasures that are buried deep within ourselves and make us unique.” Rebbeztin Esther Jungreis

What does this mitzvah entail?

Giving two “gifts” to two poor people1.

What is the definition of “poor” as far as this mitzvah is concerned?

The consensus view is that anybody who does not have a regular source of

income that enables them to meet their general day-to-day expenses is eligible2.

How much do I have to give?

There are various opinions, but two are most widely cited. The Ritva writes

that a “shaveh prutah” (a few pence) for each recipient suffices, and several

contemporary poskim rule accordingly3. However, some poskim are more

stringent and require giving the amount needed to buy a basic meal4. This

equates to around £2.50 for each gift5. Adults should try to fulfil the stringent

opinion, while children can rely on the more lenient view6.

The Rambam states that it is better to spend more on matanos l'evyonim

than on mishloach manos or the Purim seudah7.

Do the gifts need to be of money?

No, food is fine too8. There is a debate as to whether the mitzvah is fulfilled

with other items, such as clothes, so these should preferably not be relied on9.

Do women need to give matanos l’evyonim?

Yes10. Although the Aruch Hashulchan11 rules that a husband and wife can

fulfil the mitzvah together, the consensus view is that they each require their

own set of "matanos". It is fine for a husband to give on his wife’s behalf or

vice versa12.

What about children?

Many poskim rule that they should give matanos l'evyonim13. According

to R. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, children should be trained to do so from age six/

seven while R. Nissim Karelitz rules that children age nine and above should

fulfil this mitzvah14. However, other poskim exempt children from matanos

l’evyonim, and R. Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky (the Steipler) was known to be

lenient on this15.

1 Orach Chaim 694:12 Aruch Hashulchan 694:3, R. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv cited in Balayla Hahu p.12, Halichos Shlomo 19:20, Zeh Hashulcahn 2:694:3, R. Chaim Kaneivsky and R. Nissim Karelitz cited in Matanos L’evyonim Kehilchasan (Kupat Ha’ir)3 Ritva Megillah 7a, Mishnah Berurah 694:2, Kaf Hachaim 694:7, Shu’t Tzitz Eliezer 7:27:7, R. Chaim Kanievsky cited in Yismach Yisrael (Dardak) 25:1 4 Zera Yaakov cited in Shaarei Teshuva 694:1, Maharsha to Megillah 7a, Shu’t Teshuvos Vehanhagos 3:231, Piskei Teshuvot 694:65 heard from local rabbanim6 Yismach Yisrael 25:17 Mishneh Torah Hilchos Megillah 2:158 Mishneh Torah Hilchos Megillah 2:16, Pri Megadim 694:1 Mishnah Berurah 694:29 Ohr Sameach Hilchos Megillah 2:16, Nitei Gavriel 66:1, Shu’t Shevet Hakehasi 3:215:5 10 Rema 695:411 Aruch Hashulchan 694:212 Yismach Yisrael 26:613 Siddur Ya’avetz Shaar Hadagim 13:20, R. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv cited in Balayla Hahu p.13 14 Matanos L’evyonim Kehilchasan (Kupat Ha’ir)15 Aishel Avraham 695:14, Orchos Rabbeinu 3:4, R. Chaim Kanievsky cited in Matanos L’evyonim Kehilchasan (Kupat Ha’ir)7

When should I give matanos l’evyonim?

On the day of Purim itself16. However, if you're giving to an organisation (or

gabai tzedakah ) that will distribute your donation on your behalf, this can be

done before Purim too17.

If I give matanos l'evyonim on Purim day (as opposed to depositing

them beforehand), when should I do so?

Some poskim rule that you can even give matanos l'evyonim before

davening (although you should ideally say birkas hatorah first)18. But according

to most opinions, it's better to do so after davening. Whether or not you should

try to hear megillah first is subject to debate19.

R. Chaim Kanievsky rules that you're free to decide whether to give matanos

l'evyonim or mishloach manos first and that matanos l’evyonim can be given in

the afternoon if you prefer20.

Is it preferable for the recipients to come from my own city/

community?

Yes, but you should give tzedaka on Purim to people from other communities

too21.

Is it sufficient to give only one donation to a family that consists of

two or more people?

While this is acceptable according to some poskim22, many rule that

matanos l'evyonim should be given to two separate families23.

If the organisation I use to fulfill the mitzvah distributes my entire

donation to one recipient as opposed to two or more, is this

problematic?

According to both R. Chaim Kanievsky and R. Nissim Karelitz, this is fine24.

Can I use maaser money?

The minimum amount for each matana cannot come from maaser25. If you

give more than this minimum to each person then it is questionable whether

maser can be used towards the additional amount26. But gifts to additional

recipients, beyond the two required, can come from maaser27.

Halachos reviewed by R. Dovid Tugendhaft

16 Magen Avraham 685:13, Mishnah Berurah 695:2217 Yismach Yisrael 27:6, R. Nissim Karelitz cited in Kuntres Vaad Harabanim18 Siddur Ya’avetz19 R. Moshe Feinstein cited in Moadei Yeshurun p.59 rules that this is unnecessary, while the Kaf Chaim 694:18 and Orchos Chaim (Spinka) 695:13 state that this is preferable. 20 Matanos L’evyonim Kehilchasan (Kupat Ha’ir), Yismach Yisrael 20:9 21 R. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and R. Nissim Karelitz cited in Matanos L’evyonim Kehilchasan (Kupat Ha’ir)22 Shu’t Binyan Olam 36, Kaf Hachaim 694:10, Mikraei Kodesh 40, Shu’t Tzitz Eliezer 14:6523 Aruch Hashulchan 694:2, R. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv cited in Yismach Yisraelh 26:7, Shu’t Hisorerus Teshuva 3:48924 Yismach Yisrael p.176, R. Nissim Karelitz cited in Kuntres Vaad Harabanim25 Mishnah Berurah 694:3, Mekor Chaim 694:1, Mekadesh Yisrael (Harfenes) 223, Shu’t Maharshag 4:29:426 Yismach Yisraelh 25:227 Tzedakah Umishpat 6:n37, Emes L’Yaakov p.260

PU

RIM

H

ALA

CH

AMatanos L’evyonim FAQ'sR' Joseph FaithMagid Shiur Nishmas Yisroel

Oneg Shabbos is looking for Sponsorshipin order to continue

Please email [email protected] for further details.

3

The Weekly Halachic Conversation

Rabbi Avi WiesenfeldRosh Kollel, Yerushalayim and Rav at Kav Halacha Beis Horaah

HALACHA KOLLEL looking for

Dedication / Sponsor!! Special Opportunity. Call 0203-734-8365

“One question is always relevant: How can I use this to move forward?” Rebbetzin Tziporah Heller.

PU

RIM

H

ALA

CH

A

Purim

BANGING FOR HOMON – WHAT’S IT ALL ABOUT?

Children and adults alike eagerly anticipate the moment when Homon’s name is mentioned in the megillah. People go wild, banging on the tables, stomping the floor, shooting pop-guns and the like. But where does this minhag actually originate from?

As we remember from Parshas Zochor, we have a Torah obligation to erase the memory of amalek.1 In fact, some Rishonim write that it was the custom was to write homons name, or draw images of him on stones, and bang the stones together to erase the name or pictures of homon.2 Since homon descends from amalek, we fulfil the mitzvah of erasing amaleks name. In addition, the gematria of “macho emche” and “zeh homon” is the same.3

The minhag which is prevalent amongst most of Klal Yisroel is to bang upon hearing the name of homon. This custom should not be abolished as it was established for good reason.4

Some say that since children do not know how to say “Shem Reshoim Yirkav” – “The name of the wicked should rot”, they bang when the name of homon is mentioned instead.5

The Chasam Sofer brings a reason for banging in that it shows that we do not want to hear his name. It shows our displeasure.

Homons name is mentioned 54 times in the megillah. This is hinted to with the words macho emcha, “I will surely erase [amalek].” The gematria of the word “emche” is 54.

We should bear in mind that the focus of the megillah should not be on what kind of noise he will make for the next homon, scanning the megillah for the next time his name appears; rather, remember that the listening of the megillah in its entirety is the foremost part of the mitzvah, representing a story that teaches us its lessons for all generations.

HOW MANY BRACHOS CAN ONE MAKE ON PURIM?

Many people walk around during Purim, delivering shelach monos, visiting rebbes, shpieling (collecting money), etc. and are often offered a l’chaim, or something to eat in each home they visit. Is a new beracha rishona required upon entering every house, or is one beracha sufficient at the start of ‘making the rounds’? What about people that carry with them a bottle of wine and continuously drink throughout the day, wherever they go, do they need a new berachah at any given point?

Changing one’s location whilst eating may require one to make a new beracha when continuing to eat in the second location. Even if one returns to his original place immediately and continues to eat of the same food he started, since he changed location, a new

1 שמות יז:יד.2 אבודרהם, תפלת פורים, א"ר ס"ק טז. בן איש חי פ' תצוה ס"כ.

3 מטה משה.4 מהרי"ל, הל' פורים הובא ברמ"א סי' תרצ סעי' יז, לבוש יז, מ"ב שם ס"ק ס.

5 אוצר כל מנהגי ישורון עמ' 122, מועדים לשמחה ח"ג עמ' 301.

berachah is required. This is because when one changes location, it is as if he has stopped eating and then begun a new eating.6

In a normal situation, when one leaves a house or building and goes onto the street, a new beracha is required, even when continuing to eat or drink the exact same item that was started in the house.

Nevertheless, in certain cases, changing location whilst eating will not require a new beracha. This is when one did not decide on a fixed place to eat, rather he eats while on the move in different places. Since he doesn’t have a set place, changing location will never be considered an interruption of his eating and thus, a new beracha is not required.7

People going from house to house on Purim (collecting money or delivering shelach monos), who have a drink in each house need to recite a beracha (Rishona) in each house.8

However, if they simply grab a drink/bite to eat as they leave each place, without actually sitting formally to eat/drink it, a new beracha need not to be recited in each place.

One who starts to eat or drink on the street (although it is not really a practice that should be done), with no specific place of eating, may continue to eat or drink without having to recite another beracha.

We always want to serve Hashem, and when the opportunity permits, this love becomes revealed. Purim is a time to reconnect with Hashem. We must show Him that we truly love His Torah and mitzvos, and we desire to keep them with love. Even if our love for Hashem has lain dormant for a long time, Purim is the time to reveal our true inner selves.

There is a rule from the Ramban; the extent something is destroyed reveals just how much kedusha – holiness was there originally. The biggest example of this is the Beis Hamikdash. Purim is yet another example of this. It’s a fun packed day, with very little time to really appreciate the holiness and potential of the day. The sefarim tell us that just as Chazal say “Anyone that stretches out his hand – one must give him”, in other words, without an investigation of whether or not he actually needs the money or not, on Purim, we just give. The same is true with Hashem; if we stretch out our ‘hand’ and ask Hashem for whatever it is we may need, we are not judged and scrutinized to determine whether or not we deserve it. If we ask we just get. There is so much potential available on Purim – let’s use it!

6 מקור לדין זה הוא גמ' פסחים קא: "שינוי מקום צריך לברך". והרמב"ם בהל' ברכות פ"ד ה"ה כתב ש"המשנה מקומו פסק אכילתו". וכ"פ השו"ע סי' קעח ס"א.

7 שו"ע קעח ס"ד "הולכי דרכים אוכלים דרך הלוכם", ועי' מ"ב שם ס"ק מב, גר"ז ס"ד וחי"א כלל נט יא.8 כנלע"ד. ואח"כ ראיתי כעין זה בשו"ת שבט הקהתי ח"ד סי' נה. וכן הסכים עמי הגר"ע איוערבאך שליט"א.

S P O N S O R E DS P O N S O R E D



4

“Don’t be afraid of discovering that the ‘real you’ may be different than the ‘current you.’” Rabbi Noah Weinberg, zt ”l

Note – this summary is by no means exhaustive; there are many הלכות which are not mentioned here. We have merely tried to make note of and bring attention to the ones which are less well known and/or sometimes ignored.

קריאת המגילהWhen? One must hear the megilla twice, both at night and during the

day1. Ideally the day reading should not be before netz hachama. If this is not possible e.g. one must go to the office and cannot arrive too late one may read it from alos hashachar2.

Who? Everyone is obligated to hear the megilla – men and women3. Children who are above the age of chinuch are also obligated. It is customary to bring even younger children to shul4; this is fine as long as they know how to sit quietly for the entire duration of the megilla. If a parent knows that his child cannot keep quiet for so long one should not bring him – it is unfair to all those who wish to hear every word of the megilla without disturbance.

One should not eat or drink before hearing the megilla5. This applies both to men and women6, both at night and in the morning. However someone who feels weak after the fast (especially women) may eat7. Even in such circumstances one should not eat too much bread or mezonos (more than 55 gram) but may eat as much as one needs of other foods e.g. fruit, fish, meat. In light of this, someone who genuinely feels that he cannot daven properly or concentrate on hearing the megilla without having a coffee before שחרית may do so8.

One must hear every word of the megilla in order to fulfill one’s obligation9. It is therefore worthwhile to go to a shul where one knows that the ba’al koreh has a loud and clear voice. The gaboim of each shul should also do their best to ensure this.

The ברכות – Many women have the megilla read to them at home. If the ba’al koreh has already heard the megilla himself one of the women present should make the brochos on the megilla10. She should substitute

.[’12לשמוע מקרא מגילה‘ or] .’11לשמוע מגילה‘ with ’על מקרא מגילה‘

on Purim morning one should have שהחיינוof ברכה During the - שהחיינוin mind that it applies also to the other 13מצוות היום i.e. משלוח מנות, מתנות פורים סעודת צדקה However one should not refrain from giving .לאביונים14, even before hearing this ברכה.

Many people own their own megilla. This is indeed preferable so that if they miss a word they can read it themselves from their own kosher megilla. However it is also fine to follow in a printed chumash and to read any missed words from there15. There are a few פסוקים which it is customary for everyone to read out loud. Those who are following in a printed chumash should preferably have in mind when saying these פסוקים

1 שו"ע רי"ס תרפ"ז2 שו"ע ומ"ב שם

3 שאף הן היו באותו הנס, וגם שעיקר הנס היה ע"י אשה, גמ' וב"י4 שו"ע סו"ס תרפ"ט ומ"ב שם

5 רמ"א סו"ס תרצ"ב6 הכל במ"ב שם

7 ולגבי מי שאינו צם לכאו' עדיף שיאכול ביום תענית אסתר בצהרים כדי שלא יצטרך לאכול בחצי שעה סמוך ללילה8 תשובות והנהגות ח"ג רכ"א וכן הובא בשם הגריש"א שליט"א בספר אשרי האיש

9 מ"ב תר"צ ה'10 כ"פ הגרשז"א זצ"ל בהליכות שלמה. ויש שכתבו שכל אשה מברכת לעצמה

11 מ"ב תרצ"ב י"א ובהליכות שלמה הובא שכן הורה הגרשז"א לשואלים ודלא כח"א הובא במ"ב תרפ"ט ח' שכ' לשמוע מקרא מגילה

12 הגרח"ק והגרנ"ק שליט"א ע"פ הח"א ומ"ב שם13 מ"ב תרצ"ב א'

14 והעירו הפוס' למה השמיט המ"ב מתנל"א ויש שכתבו שחשש אולי ימנעו מליתן לעני לפני ששמעו ברכת שהחיינו. ולכן גם אם יכוון על מצוות מתנל"א בודאי לא ימנע מליתן לעני אף לפני כן.

15 מ"ב תר"צ י"ט

that he does not want to fulfill his obligation with his own reading but rather with the reading of the ba’al koreh16.

Touching the megilla - One who has a kosher megilla should preferably17 wash his hands before touching the parchment. The truth is that one’s hands should anyway be clean before one davens, so the main application of this halocho is if one wishes to touch the megilla at home or if one scratches one’s hair (or the like) between finishing שמונה עשרה and the megilla leining.

Standing or sitting? One should stand18 during the ברכות before and after19 the megilla. During the actual reading of the megilla one may sit except for the ba’al koreh who should stand. One reading for ladies may sit down20.

After the megilla - One should not speak even after the megilla reading has finished until the ba’al koreh has said theברכה of 21הרב את ריבנו.

Although the ba’al koreh does not say theברכה of הרב את ריבנו until he has rolled his megilla back to the beginning, others however do not need to do so22. If one chooses to do so and the ba’al koreh begins to recite the .ברכה while one is still rolling one should stop and listen to the ברכה

משלוח מנותWhen? One should try to give at least one משלוח מנות as soon as one

can after returning from shul on Purim morning. This is because of the rule of 23זריזין מקדימין למצוות.

One must make sure to give at least one משלוח מנות during the day – not on Purim night and also not wait to the following night (מוצאי פורים). Once one has given it, he may give more מנות even after nightfall משלוח even though Purim has essentially finished24.

Who to give to? The best person to give to is someone who is upset with you25 – whether you feel he is justified or not. Others say one should give to a close friend26.

How big? The משלוח מנות should be respectable27, something which is valued by the giver and the receiver e.g. one cannot fulfill one’s obligation by giving one apple and one orange to a rich man. This does not mean however that it should be over the top, indeed the main criteria is how much thought has gone in to making it nice, presentable and respectable, not how much has been spent on it28.

Each משלוח מנות must contain two food (or drink29) items. Contrary to what many think, the two items may be of the same 30ברכה.

16 הגרשז"א בהליכות שלמה17 שעה"צ תרצ"א ד' וע"ע מ"ב קמ"ז ד' והחת"ס הביא שרבו הגרנ"א הקפיד בזה

18 שעה"צ רי"ס תר"צ19 הגריש"א שליט"א בספר אשרי האיש

20 שם21 מ"ב תרצ"ב ט'

22 ע' מ"ב תר"צ נ"ז שהטעם שהקורא גולל את המגילה לפני שמברך הוא משום דגנאי הוא שהמגילה יהא מונחת כך, וזה שייך רק במברך שפשט את המגילה כאגרת ולא בשאר אנשים ופשוט

23 פשוט וכ"כ המקור חיים וכ"ה בהליכות שלמה שהגרשז"א זצ"ל היה מזרז את ב"ב מיד כשחזר מביהכנ"ס24 מ"ב תרצ"ה כ"ב. וראיתי לבאר ע"פ מש"כ המ"ב בסי' תרצ"ו סקל"ב ששמחת פורים הוא שני ימים ולילה אחד

ומקורו בתה"ד סי' ק"י וביאר שם שאם מתחיל השמחה ביום אפשר להמשיכה אף בלילה.25 פלא יועץ וכ"כ בספר שערי ימי הפורים ששמע מהגה"צ רבי משה שוואב זצ"ל שכן הוא מנהג המדקדקים

במעשיהם26 כן מבואר בב"ח סי' תרצ"ה שהמצוה לשלוח לרעהו הטוב וכתב דלכן תקנו חיוב לשלוח רק לאדם אחד כי יתכן

שאין לאדם אוהבים ורעים רבים וכמו שאמרו קנה לך חבר שלפעמים צריך לקנות חבר בדמים. וראיתי )שלמי תודה עמ' רע"ו( שכשנסתלק הגאון מחרקוב אמר ידידו הגרי"ז מבריסק כי מעתה יקשה עליו יותר לקיים מצות משלוח מנות

כדינה כיון שנסתלק רעהו הטוב.27 פמ"ג מ"ז ג' ול' הברכ"י שיהו מנות יקרות ערך וערבות

28 הגרשז"א זצ"ל בהליכות שלמה29 מ"ב תרצ"ה כ'

30 לא מצאתי שום מקור שצריכים להיות ברכות שונות

Summary Of Hilchos PurimRabbi Avrumi Heckscher



5

PAR

SH

A

“A person who takes a walk of 100 feet and a person who walks 2,000 miles have one major thing in common. They both need to take a first step before they take a second step.” Rabbi Zelig Pliskin

Who? Women are also obligated in this 31מצוה. If a husband and wife

send joint מנות i.e. from Mr. and Mrs.…, one should ensure that משלוח

it consists of (at least) four food items – two for him and two for her32.

One should inform the recipient who sent the משלוח מנות; therefore if both

husband and wife wish to fulfill their obligation with this one משלוח מנות

one should tell the recipient that it is from both of them.

There is difference of opinion in the Poskim if one should deliver the

.oneself or rather with a messenger33 (even a child34) משלוח מנות

Someone who borrowed money may not give the lender מנות משלוח

as a token of appreciation – he may well be in violation of the prohibition

of רבית – giving interest. Whether the loan has already been repaid or not,

and whether he says clearly that it is because of the loan or not, it should

be avoided. If one normally gives this particular person, even without the

loan and now wants to give משלוח מנות as usual, a Rov should be consulted.

סעודת פורים some avoid eating meat on Purim night so that it should – מוצאי שבת

not be confused with the Purim 35סעודה. If someone normally eats meat

for מלוה דמלכא then he may do so this week even though it is פורים night.

When? The סעודה should be eaten only after one has davenned 36מנחה

otherwise he may accidentally forget to daven.

Note – davenning on Purim must be with the same דרך ארץ as the rest

of the year, after all even on Purim one is talking with the מלך מלכי המלכים.

This is true even if one is davenning while dressed in a costume37.

One should learn for a few minutes before the 38סעודת פורים.

What to eat? - One should wash for bread at the 39סעודה. Women are

also obligated to partake of the 40סעודה – therefore they should also wash.

The Poskim say one should also eat meat at the סעודה, and some say that

real meat should be used not chicken41.

Drinking ידע דלא ידע The obligation to drink wine - עד דלא does עד

not apply to women42. Some say they should nevertheless drink just a

little wine43.

31 רמ"א סו"ס תרצ"ה32 הגרשז"א זצ"ל בהליכות שלמה

33 המ"ב תרצ"ה י"ח הביא שהבנין ציון הסתפק בזה ויש שהקפידו בזה ]חת"ס ועוד[ ויש שלא הקפידו ]חזו"א ועוד[ ויש שכתבו להיפך דמצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו ]א"א בוטשאטש[. והגרשז"א זצ"ל הורה שא"צ להקפיד בזה אבל הוא עצמו

העדיף לתת ע"י שליח 34 כ"כ החת"ס בחידושיו לגיטין כב: ע"ש

35 מג"א הובא בשעה"צ תרצ"ה י"ב36 רמ"א תרצ"ה ס"ב ומ"ב שם ח

37 שבה"ל ח"י סי' י"ח38 רמ"א תרצ"ה ס"ב ובספר אביר הרועים )תולדות האבני נזר סי' ז( מסופר בשם האדמו"ר מקאצק זצ"ל שאבי

האבנ"ז זכה לבן שהיה מגדולי הדור בזכות שבשנה אחת בפורים בשעה מסויימת כל בני ישראל אף הצדיקים והגדולים שבהם היו עסוקים במצוות היום ואף אחד לא למד תורה חוץ מאביו של האבני נזר ונעשה מזה רעש גדול בשמים

ובזכותו ניצל כל העולם והכריזו בשמים שבשכר מצוה גדולה זו יזכה לבן המאיר עיני ישראל39 נח' בזה הפוס' דדעת המהרש"ל וט"ז שהוא חיוב גמור כמו כל יו"ט כיון שיש חיוב שמחה ודעת המג"א דלא מצינו

שחייבוהו לאכול פת דוקא ועכ"פ לכל הדיעות נכון לאכול פת וכן הוא המנהג. ונפק"מ בזה אם שכח על הניסים ע' מ"ב שם ט"ו

40 כף החיים תרצ"ה נ"ד41 ז"ל לקא יושר )ח"א עמ' קנ"ז( 'אין שמחה אלא בבשר ויין וצריך כל אחד לעשות תבשיל אחד או ב' מן הבשר ובשר

עוף אינו נקרא בשר'42 שבה"ל ח"י סי' ח"י ועו"פ

43 בארחות רבינו ח"ג פורים אות צ"ז שכן הורה לנכדותיו שישתו קצת יין לכבוד יום הפורים

One who does not intend to become completely drunk should

nevertheless drink some wine (more than he usually does)44 – it’s not “all

or nothing”. If one drinks but is not drunk he may nevertheless pretend

to be drunk45.

Wine or whiskey? The Poskim debate whether one should drink wine

in particular or any alcoholic beverage e.g. whiskey46. One who likes them

both should drink wine; one who dislikes wine may rely on the opinion

that permits other alcoholic drinks. According to all opinions grape juice

is not sufficient47.

Someone who knows or suspects that if he drinks too much he will not

bentch properly or daven מעריב properly (and similarly if he suspects he

might say something which may hurt someone’s feelings…48) should not

drink too much49. One’s obligation to bentch, daven and not hurt a fellow

man apply equally on Purim and are not relaxed in any way.

Bentching - One should remember to say הניסים .when bentching על

Even if one finished the סעודה after nightfall it should be said50. If one

forgot to say it, bentching should not be repeated51.

If one wishes to daven ma’ariv before having ended the סעודה one

should bentch before davenning to avoid the question of whether to say על

.after having davenned52 הניסים

House to house - It is common for people to move from house to

house in the middle of the סעודה. Similarly many people go from house to

house while delivering משלוח מנות and have a bite to eat or a drink in each

house. The same applies to shpielers going from door to door53. One must

be aware that the laws of שינוי מקום are complex – when does one need to

make a new ברכה in each house and when may one rely on the ברכה made

in the previous house. It is beyond the scope of this summary to list all the

details, but one should not just guess when to make a ברכה and when not.

In conclusion – there are six expressions in the ברכה of הרב את ריבנו. The

ישראל says that this is to hint to the six confrontations אבודרהם have כלל

had with עמלק over the years i.e. in the days of (1) יהושע (2) אהוד (3) גדעון

refers to the הקל המושיע The last expression .(4) שאול (5) דוד (6) מרדכי ואסתר

final battle during which we will rid ourselves of this arch enemy once and

for all בימות המשיח – במהרה בימינו אמן!

PREPARED BY A. HECKSCHER comments - [email protected]

44 ע' רמ"א תרצ"ה ישתה יותר מלימודו וע"ע עמק ברכה בשם הגר"י סלנטר שעד דלא ידע אינו שיעור בקיום המצוה ומקיים המצוה גם בשתיה מועטת יותר מכדי לימודו וכ"ה בשפ"א מגילה ז:

45 נמוקי יוסף מגילה ז: וכעי"ז במהרש"א ב"מ כג:46 ע' גליוני הש"ס מקראי קודש ועוד וכ"פ הגרשז"א זצ"ל בשלמי מועד דבעינן יין דוקא ומאידך מביאים בשם האג"מ

דיוצא בכל מידי דמשכר וכ"כ ארחות רבינו ח"ג47 הגרשז"א זצ"ל בשלמי מועד

48 ע' הליכות שלמה שאין שום היתר להלבנת פנים ואונאת דברים והוסיף דבהאי עובדא דשחטיה רבה לר' זירא יתכן שהכוונה שאירע שהלבין פניו וביישו שדבר זה הוא אבק רציחה

49 ח"א ביה"ל קצשו"ע ועו"פ50 שו"ע ורמ"א תרצ"ה ס"ג

51 מ"ב תרצ"ה ט"ו52 מ"ב שם ט"ז

53 לפעמים יש להם דין הולכי דרכים ולפעמים לא ע' כוס של אליהו, ובשו"ת שבט הקהתי ח"ד סי' נ"ה ואכמ"ל

PU

RIM

H

ALA

CH

A

In deep appreciation to the individual who takes time out of his busy schedule

to compile this amazing Dvar Torah compendium.HKB'H Yishalem Sechorom.

To donate to the Oneg ShabbosBACS Payments to BARCLAYS BANK PLC

Account Number: 70598097 | Sort Code: 209561Thank you


6

Attention Whisky Drinkers - it is safe to read the article below

Rabbi Akiva Osher PadwaDirector of Certification, KLBD

“In spirituality, the searching is the finding and the pursuit is the achievement.” Dr. Abraham J. Twerski

THE CONCLUSION

Whisky Production Then and Now - The Kashrus Issues in Scotch Whisky PART VII

In this seventh part of the series, we will explore the Halachic perspective on whisky matured in wine casks and the ramifications of the new processes in the industry.

Many years ago, the Poskim grappled with the question whether whisky can be considered a kosher beverage. They were not really concerned about the ingredients used. This is because the Scotch Whisky Act ensured that there were no concerns about the actual ingredients used, as the only ingredients permitted – grain, malted barley, yeast and water - are all essentially kosher. The only concern they had was regarding the traditional use of wine casks and particularly sherry casks for the maturation of whisky. Did the use of such casks render the whisky non-kosher or not? After much thought and research, most Poskim of the previous generation, including my grandfather the London Rov Ha’gaon Reb Chanoch Dov Padwa ZT”L

- the Baal Cheshev Haifod and the Manchester Dayan Ha’gaon Rav Weiss ZT”L - the Baal Minchas Yitzchok, came to the conclusion that whisky was kosher and can safely by consumed even by a G-d fearing Jew, even though there was no kosher certified whisky available at the time.

The reason for this was their consideration of the motive behind the reuse of wine casks for maturation of whisky. Besides the fact that old wine casks were available and cheap, the distillers preferred to use second-hand barrels, because they were concerned that were they to use new casks, the fresh ‘virgin’ wood may spoil their whisky by adding a coarse ‘woody’ taste to the whisky. Therefore they preferred reused barrels, because the liquor that was previously stored in them would have tempered the wood, and it would no longer release such a woody flavour into their whisky! But at no time did they want to positively influence the whisky being matured with flavour of whatever liquor was previously stored in the cask. On the contrary, they were using these second-hand casks to maintain and protect the original taste of the whisky and to prevent any chance that the wood cask would adversely affect the whisky stored therein.

Without going into the in-depth details of the Halachic discussions, their conclusions were based on the fact that the purpose of storing the whisky in old casks is not to obtain any influence from the residual wine absorbed into the walls of the cask. As such, there are many elements of Sofek we could rely upon:

a. Maybe this particular whisky was never matured in an ex-wine cask at all and they used 2nd hand casks that had been used previously to store some other permitted beverages such as beer or rum or indeed American whiskey.

b. Considering the amount of casks used to produce a single batch of whisky, if some of the casks were ex-wine casks

and some others were used previously for other beverages, possibly the wine influenced whisky with will be nullified in the non-wine influenced whisky.

c. Even if it had been matured entirely in ex-wine casks, possibly they were such casks that are permitted to use, either because they had been allowed to dry out for twelve months, or perhaps these were already 2nd or 3rd fill and by the time they were used again the wine influences had become ‘diluted’ to the extent that they are no longer of concern.

This being the case, when the changes I described previously came about, and the industry moved away from using predominantly ex-wine casks to using ex-American whiskey casks, the Halachic considerations were simplified too. If say, 40, 50 years ago we could rely on the element of Sofek and ‘assume’ that there was no cause for concern regarding the use of forbidden casks, at least not to the extent that the Kashrus of the whisky will be compromised. Nowadays that the majority of all casks - to a very high percentage point - are not ex-wine casks, surely it is much simpler to be lenient.

To get a perspective on this change, I have been quoted figures of somewhere around 90% of all ‘new’ casks entering the Scotch whisky industry today are ex-whisky and not ex-wine casks. Almost all grain whisky is matured in ex-whisky casks and most malt whisky too is laid down to mature in ex-American whiskey casks. Also take into consideration that much of the wine casks that are used today are 2nd fill or 3rd fill casks and so may be subject to additional leniencies.

This is not to say that most whisky today did not come into contact with any ex-wine casks. It is very possible for a large percentage of whiskies to have at least an element of wine cask matured whisky included in their makeup recipe, however if there was room for leniency all those years ago there would be even more room to be lenient now that the percentage of wine casks in use has been reduced so dramatically.

However all this relates only to regular whiskies that may or may not include wine cask matured whisky. What about whisky that is matured exclusively in wine casks, and if the makers state clearly that their whisky is sherried, i.e. matured in Sherry wood? With these whiskies it is more difficult to be lenient as in such a case many of the elements of Sofek do not exist. We know that they used ex-wine casks, and while some may indeed be 2nd fill or 3rd fill, however a large percentage of their wine casks are newly commissioned and tempered with Sherry. And even more worrying, they claim proudly that the sherry can be detected in the taste of their whisky!

The same applies to the aforementioned special finishes and so called ‘double matured’ whiskies. For these whiskies they always use freshly commissioned and primed casks – so called 1st fill casks. Furthermore, whereas in the old days the master blenders went out



7

PAR

SH

A

“We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” Avraham Einstein

of their way to ensure that no traces of sherry flavour would be detected in their whisky. Nowadays they purposely ‘marry’ fully matured and blended whisky in new and fresh sherry casks in order to add the additional flavour dimensions. Also, unlike in the old days when they used whatever casks were available at a given time, nowadays these casks are purposely primed with the sherry, so they have complete control over the type and variety of sherry used; a fact that is often advertised on the bottle label. For example, the product description for Bowmore Darkest whisky states: “Finished in the finest Oloroso Sherry casks”.

The concerns with this are obvious. Firstly we can no longer claim that they do not desire a wine taste and that they ensure that there is no chance of detecting a taste of the wine previously stored in the casks. On the contrary, the only reason and the very purpose for the second maturation of an otherwise fully matured and blended whisky is exclusively to add a sherry influence. It is difficult to consider the wine flavour Botel, for several reasons. Firstly, if the additional maturation is done – as the manufacturers’ claim – in order to enhance the flavour, and indeed, expert tasters confirm that the sherry can be detected, it is difficult for us to come along and say that actually it is nullified. On the contrary, the sherry influence is often its main selling point!

Some have argued that surely the amount of wine absorbed in the walls of the cask will be nullified against the volume of whisky in the actual cask. Especially if we accept that wine will be nullified up to one part in six - rather than 1/60 as is the accepted norm with other foods and beverages requiring Bittul.

How much wine is absorbed into the wooden walls of a cask? Some Poskim mention Kedai Klifa. I have actually cut through wooden staves and found marks of the liquid ingression through to about two thirds of the thickness of the wood! Therefore, because we do not know exactly how much wine is absorbed, we may have to consider the entire volume of the walls to be absorbed with wine. Hence we would require the contents of the cask to be at least six times the volume of the walls, in order to nullify any influence absorbed in them. Surprising though it may seem, many experts claim that after calculating the volume of the walls of the vessel by multiplying the height, circumference and the thickness of the wood

– generally one inch or more – as well as the volume of the tops and bottoms of the cask, the volume of the interior of the casks is only just over 4 times the volume of the exterior. This means that not only do we not have enough to nullify 1/60, but there is not even enough to nullify in 1/6!

Finally, there is another concern. The Shulchan Aruch (יו"ד קל"ד י"ג says that all beverages that it is customary for the Goyim to (ס' produce with the addition of wine or wine vinegar are forbidden. There is no mention whether or not they add an amount that can be nullified or not. The source for this Halacha is a ruling by the Rashba who states explicitly that even if the resulting beverage were to be tasted by a K’faila – an expert – who testifies that there is no recognisable wine taste in the finished beverage, nonetheless it is still forbidden, because the addition of the wine was intentional and an integral part of the recipe and it was not just added by chance.

Many question this ruling and ask how come we do not find in any other case that we should differentiate between if the Issur was added

intentionally as an integral part of the recipe or if it was added by chance. My grandfather Hagaon Reb Chanoch Dov Padwa ZT”L noted on the margin of his Shulchan Aruch a quote from the T’zemach T’zedek, who explains that the Rashba was referring explicitly only to beverages that contain wine, as wine is not forbidden in the same way as most non-kosher foods. Wine is not forbidden because of a Chashash Issur, rather it is because of a Gezeira (its association with Idol Worship etc.). Therefore, if wine is added into a beverage by chance or by accident, we can consider whether there is enough kosher liquid for it to be nullified. However in a case where the wine is added intentionally and indeed it is an integral part of the recipe, regardless how small the amount is, and regardless whether it can be detected by tasting or not, it remains forbidden as in its original context.

By the same token it could be argued, in the old days, when the whisky industry was using the abundance of readily available 2nd hand casks, of which a high percentage were ex-sherry casks, we can deliberate whether or not the sherry influence can be detected and whether it can be nullified. Nowadays however, that they specially commission and temper the casks with wine and then purposely fill the ready matured and blended whisky into such pre-primed sherry casks for a second maturation period, it could well be likened to the case of the Rashba, whereby the wine is added intentionally and is an integral part of the recipe, and in such a case the Rashba rules that the beverage is forbidden.

We see therefore that on the one hand the situation today is far better than in times of old, for the majority of largely anonymous whiskies - as well as a large percentage of specific whiskies, blended whiskies and even many single malt whiskies - and it is now even easier to be lenient than it was in times gone by. On the other hand however, there are many whiskies - especially amongst the more exclusive and up-market brands - that are much more problematic than in the past.

One saving point is that these specially commissioned wine casks are much more expensive to produce than to purchase regular second-hand ex-American whiskey casks, with the former often costing as much as ten times as much as the latter. This being the case it is deemed extremely unlikely that any manufacturer will use expensive 1st fill, (i.e. specially commissioned and primed) Sherry Casks without informing their customers and mentioning it somehow on their labels.

For the benefit of the many members of the Jewish community, who wish to keep their standard of Kashrus to a mehadrin level and avoid any chashash of stam yeinom in their whisky, I am proud to state that B’ezras HaShem we at the London Beth Din have been successful in granting kosher certification to a wide range of quality single malt whiskies that will suit the palate of practically every whisky consumer. These include Auchentoshan Springwood, Auchentoshan Classic, Auchentoshan American Oak and Auchentoshan Virgin Oak , McClellands Lowlands, McCllelands Highlands, Glen Garioch Virgin Oak, Glen Garioch Small Batches, Bowmore Dorus Mor, Bowmore Small Batchs and many more.

Look for the KLBD logo on the label - L’Chaim!

HA

LAC

HA

KA

SH

RU

T




8

“In Jewish history there are no coincidences.” Elie Wiesel

Rabbi Shlomo MillerAv Beis Din and Rosh Kollel, Kollel Avreichim Toronto & Av Beis Din of the Va'ad Harabonim of Lakewood

Scotch Aged in Wine Casks Written by Rabbi Tsvi Heber, COR

The Rabbanim of the Kashruth Council of Canada (COR) recently permitted the consumption of Scotch Whiskey aged in sherry/wine casks based on the psak of the Rosh HaKollel, HaRav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a, Rosh HaKollel and Av Bais Din, Toronto. The Rosh HaKollel’s heter is questioned by those who have difficulty comprehending how a product that has become absorbed with the taste of non-kosher wine emanating from a wine barrel can be considered kosher. It is therefore my goal to summarize the Rosh HaKollel’s heter of to the best of my ability.

Shulchan Aruch Yore Deah [137:4] writes: "Vessels that are prohibited because they were used to store non-kosher wine, are permitted to be used with water, beer or any other liquid (collectively “other liquids”) except for wine, provided that one first rinses the vessels from any trace of wine."

Ta"z [137:7] adds, “it seems obvious to me that the other liquids would be permitted even if the liquids stayed in the vessels for 24 hours (me'es le'es), because the Tur permits using these non-kosher wine vessels because the taste of the wine impairs the taste of the other liquids. Although we normally forbid using non-kosher vessels le’chatchila, here it is permitted because the non-kosher wine is absorbed into the vessels while cold.

Sha"ch [137:15] explains the heter slightly different than the Ta”z by explaining that other liquids “overpower (mevatel) the taste of the wine (from the vessel)”.

It is clear, therefore, that other liquids including Scotch that is aged in non-kosher wine vessels are permitted; either because the wine absorbed in the vessels impair the taste of other liquids (Ta”z); or because the taste of other liquid overpowers the taste of wine from the vessels (Sha”ch).

The source is the Gemara in Avoda Zara 33b: Ravina permitted Rav Chiya to put beer into vessels that had stored non-kosher wine that had not been kashered. Rav Chiya accidentally put in wine instead of beer. Yet Ravina did not retract his heter and forbid even beer as perhaps others will also accidentally put in wine, because there is no need to worry that others will make the same mistake.

Rashi explains: we do not forbid beer because of wine, for beer overpowers the taste of the forbidden wine. The Tur quotes the Ra”n and the Rashb”a: ...for beer also burns out the wine [traces] because of the bitterness of its hops. And the Rashb”a writes: "Any vessel that a Gentile used to hold his wine in, a Jew may put in them water, beer or any other liquid, and one need not worry about the [forbidden] wine [traces] because those traces are minor, and will not add taste”.

It is thus clear from the Gemara, Rishonim, Shulchan Aruch and Nosé Kaylim that the taste of wine from vessels does not prohibit other liquids including Scotch.

On the other hand, the Minchas Yitzchak [2:28] writes: “one should not derive from Shulchan Aruch Yore Deah [137: 4] to be lenient in our situation, since the reason for permitting is either because there is bitul or because the wine traces ruin the taste. But in storing liquor in Sherry Casks, since the entire purpose is so that it will absorb the wine taste from the Sherry Casks, it is exactly like mixing kosher and non-kosher wine (which is forbidden).”

So it appears that according to the Minchas Yitzchak, since the purpose of storing the liquor in Sherry Casks is to enhance the taste of the liquor, it is impossible to claim that the wine barrel impairs the taste of the liquor, for reality contradicts the technical halachic basis for the heter. Perhaps the Gemara is referring to a case where it is clear that the wine does not impart a good taste.

However, the Rosh HaKollel shlit”a disagrees with this approach as he wrote in his haskama to the sefer 'Sherry Casks: A Halachic Perspective' as follows: “We do

not to change the status of an issue which is clearly permitted by the Gemara and Shulchan Aruch on the basis of a questionable presumption that wine (barrels) impart a good taste. In truth, even with regards to Stam Yainam that is batul bshisha in water and in beer, according to the Igros Moshe, Yore Deah [1:62] we have the same question that wine appears to impart a good taste into six parts water; but Rav Moshe answers the question in that teshuva. The same answer that he used can be used to answer this question”.

My understanding of the Rosh HaKollel’s approach is as follows: Scotch that is aged in wine casks is permitted because the Gemara explicitly permits it. The practice of some distilleries to age Scotch in wine casks with the intention of imparting a good taste does not call the heter into question because we would answer our question the same way that Rav Moshe answers his question. His words from the aforementioned teshuva are as follows: “How can we claim that wine impairs water's taste if many people deliberately add a little wine to their water to improve its taste? We must conclude that the water overpowers/dilutes the taste of wine to the point that the wine is no longer potent rather it has become merely a sharp flavor or piquancy (ke’yuha b’alma). Pri Megadim writes in his introduction to Hilchos Taaruvos... and so is the implication of Tosafos in Chulin 25, who writes 'because it's not a strong, clear taste'. That implies that although there is a taste improvement, it is too weak a taste to prohibit it. Therefore, why should we care that this weak taste - not considered strong enough to prohibit - improves the wine?”

Similarly, in our case, even if the absorbed wine improves the taste of the Scotch, nevertheless, it is no longer potent since its taste has been weakened to the extent that it is no longer wine rather it is referred to as ke’yuha b’alma. So we do not care that this weak [permitted] taste improves the Scotch.

The Rosh HaKollel Shlit”a added that although we deliberately use wine bottles to store the Scotch, it appears likely that this is not in order to impart the taste of the wine, which as mentioned is impotent, rather it is to impart the aroma of the wine, in addition to the natural tastes of the barrels. The bottom line is that it is clear from the Gemara and from the Shulchan Aruch that Scotch aged in wine casks is permitted and there is no longer any question.

There are several additional reasons why the taste of wine in the barrels do not prohibit the Scotch:

According to the Chochmas Adam [81:11] only the outer layer of the barrel absorbs the taste of wine. The liquids are therefore always sufficient to nullify the taste of wine in sixty times its volume. See Nodah Beyehuda as quoted by the Pishchei Teshuva Yoreh Deah [135:2].

Being that they add lots of water to the Scotch before bottling it, the wine becomes batel bshisha.

We may not need to have sixty times or even six times more for nullification to happen; rather a majority may be sufficient. The opinion of the Har Tzvi Yoreh Deah [111] is that stam yayin today that is not actually touched, rather simply manufactured by gentiles, is forbidden only because of the gzaira of chasunos, and according to the Sha”ch Yore Deah [112:23] anything that is forbidden because of this gzaira is batul in a majority.

These reasons are essentially superfluous since the Gemara and Shulchan Aruch clearly permit Scotch aged in wine casks. For further research on the aspect of bitul as it pertains to Scotch, please read “Sherry Casks: A Halachic Perspective”, which thoroughly analyzes the issue.

When Rabbi Miller left, he called me over and said, "You know that were Rav Moishe Feinstein zl where still here , he would never assur this". The entire discussion wouldn't start. Of course he would be allow it"

Rabbi Shlomo Miller is quoted in Igros Moshe a few times, and was very close with HaRav Moshe Feinstein zl.

This Purim, enjoy a premium single malt sherry cask

HA

LAC

HA

KA

SH

RU

T



9

The Torah Shiurim of Rabbi FrandRabbi Yissochor FrandMaagid Shiur, Yeshivas Ner Yisroel, Baltimore

“A righteous man falls down seven times and gets up.” King Solomon, Proverbs, 24:16.

Sneak Preview of Messianic TimesThis week's portion contains the incident of the sin of the Golden Calf. The Ramba"n says this was not real idolatry that was being worshipped -- the Jews just wanted an intermediary, thinking Moshe Rabbeinu was dead. Nonetheless, it was a terrible sin.

What the Torah tries to convey is that what happened was akin to a run-away freight train. Things got out of hand. Moshe was late in returning. The Satan saw an opportunity. He made, what Rash"i tells us was the appearance of "confusion in the world". The people clamored for an intermediary. Chur got up and tried to stop them. The people killed Chur. That is how things got out of hand. It was like a snowball coming down a mountain. Unstoppable.

Aharon, who feared for his life after seeing what happened to Chur, went along with the people, while trying to minimize and mitigate. But he also gets swept along in this unstoppable snowball.

All of a sudden Moshe came down from the mountain. He put up his hands and, in a sense, said, "Stop!" In an instant the whole thing stopped.

What happened? How is it that this unstoppable "snowball" could stop on a dime?

The Beis Av makes the following observation: This is the power of Truth. Since their sin was based on Falsehood, on an incorrect assumption, on an act of Satan with no validity to it, as soon as the Truth became apparent, it was as if someone turned on a light in a dark room. The darkness dissipates in a moment. Such is the power of Truth to push away Falseness.

Sheker (falsehood) can be stopped in its tracks with pure unadulterated Emes (truth).

This is a tremendous ethical lesson for us. For thousands of years we have been wanting, praying for the coming of Moshiach. We say that when Moshiach will come that "every creature will know that You have created him..."

We may ask ourselves, how will it turn-around in Moshiach's time? How will it be that all of a sudden all people will realize the centrality of the Jewish people in the Universe? How will it be that the religious leaders of other faiths will all of a sudden say "You are right -- there is only One G-d; the rest of it is all Sheker"? How is this entire scenario going to happen?

This Parsha in the Torah teaches us how it will happen. When Falsehood meets Truth, Falsehood melts. When the Truth of Moshiach becomes evident, the whole world will turn around.

Note: This story occured in 1992 when Rav Pam came to Baltimore to visit Rabbi Binyomin Steinberg (z'l) who was very ill. Rabbi Steinberg was a student of Rav Pam and was the Menahel (principal) of the Bais Yaakov High School of Baltimore for many years. Rabbi Steinberg was also an outstanding teacher of Jewish history and current events.

I was not privy to the following conversation. But, I am told that Rabbi Pam visited Baltimore not long ago and was at Rabbi Steinberg's house. Rabbi Steinberg had the opportunity to speak to his Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Pam, and asked him the question that is on everybody's mind: What is going on in the world?

The world that we are living in today -- shortly before Pessach 5752 (1992) -- is a different world than the world we were living in 6 months ago before Succos 5752 (1991)! Before Succos there was a Communist Government in Russia, the world was functioning as it has "always" functioned, there were two Germanys, everything was "normal." Less than six months later everything has changed. What does it mean? Why does it all happen?

In his characteristic fashion, Rav Pam shrugged his shoulders and said, "I don't know." But he did offer one insight. G-d is trying to show us -- See! This is how it is going to happen!

If anyone doubts how the Moshiach will turn things around, how overnight people will reject life-long beliefs and proclaim that G-d is True and the Jewish People are his Chosen Nation, and all other religions will thrown in the towel... If anyone will say to himself "It can't happen -- How can it change overnight?", this is what G-d has done for us in the last 6 months. The world has revolutionized almost overnight. This has been the "sneak preview".

This too is the lesson of our parsha. Sheker can be pushed away by Emes. Moshe Rabbeinu stopped the Golden Calf on a dime. This is how the Moshiach will do it -- may it be speedily in our own days.

Personalities & Sources:

Rav Yeruchem Levovitz -- (1874-1936) the Mir Mashgiach; Mir, Poland. Beis Av -- Rav Elyakim Schlesinger- Rosh Yeshiv, London England Rav Pam -- Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshiva Torah Vo'daath, Brookln, NY; Member of Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah of Agudas Israel.

PU

RIM

Parshas Zachor (Vayikra): The Greatest Accolade Given To Mordechai:

The last pasuk [verse] in the Megilla reads "For Mordechai, the Yehudi, was viceroy to King Ahashuerus; he was a great man among the Jews, and found favor with the multitude of his brothers (ratzui l'rov echav); he sought the good of his people and spoke with peace to all his posterity. (v'dover shalom l'chol zar'oh)" [Esther 10:3]

The Ibn Ezra makes two very interesting comments on this pasuk. He says regarding the phrase "he found favor with the multitude (literally the majority) of his brothers," that because of jealousy, a person cannot find favor with everyone. It is impossible to be perfectly popular.

Then the Ibn Ezra comments on the buildup of praises that we have in the pasuk. The concluding, and seemingly greatest praise is that "he spoke with peace to all his posterity." The Ibn Ezra comments that this means he was on good terms with all his children and grandchildren.

This seems anti-climactic. Is this the greatest thing we can find to say about Mordechai HaYehudi? The Ibn Ezra says this is indeed a great praise.

Think of all the children and grandchildren that Mordechai had. Did each one turn out exactly like Mordechai would have wanted? If Mordechai would have wanted all his children and grandchildren to become Torah scholars, do we expect that is the way it would have worked out? Or, if he wanted them all to be expert businesspersons, do we expect that is the way it would turn out? Maybe there would be a black sheep in the family that became a scholar!

And yet, he spoke in peace to all descendants. He was able to maintain a peaceful relationship with all his children and all his grandchildren. This, the Ibn Ezra tells us, is a great thing. Because of the natural fear that children have towards parents, it is not always true that there is a loving relationship between parents and children. Therefore if Mordechai could maintain such a relationship, this is indeed the highest accolade that the Torah can offer him.

I think this is a great ethical lesson for us. We try to raise children, and we have certain ideals and standards of how we would like our children to be. It does not always turn out like that. But we should always strive to maintain a relationship where we can, at least, speak peacefully with all our offspring.

PAR

SH

A K

I S

ISA




10

A Practical Guide to the Halochos of Communal Obligations, Mitzvas Tzedokoh and Ma’aser KesofimExcerpts from the sefer Easy Giving / פתח תפתח את ידך (which includes extensive notes and comprehensive halachic sources), authored by Eli Katz and Emanuel Meyer and available from seforim shops in NW London. H

ALA

CH

A

CH

AR

ITY

EasyG

iving – פתוח תפתח את ידך

tzedakah book cov katz meyer Mar14 COVER SPREADS v10.indd 1

11/04/2014 16:18

Previously, in Chapter 1, we identified the source and the obligation of every member of every community to support the essential communal infrastructure and also the strength of this obligation. We further clarified what types of communal organisations are considered essential and that the obligation to support them has precedence over the mitzvah of tzedokah and minhag of ma’aser kesofim. Finally we explained how the personal obligations are calculated, with some modern day examples.

Section A – Communal Obligations Chapter 2 – Calculating the Communal Obligation of the Individual

D. PROPOSAL FOR THE APPLICATION OF A PRO-RATA METHOD IN COMMUNITIES TODAY.

1. It is clear that to attempt to apply a takonoh today which requires members to declare their asset value or annual income to the community would not be practical or acceptable to the kehillo at all.

2. However, an alternative approach would be to use the amount of ma’aser kesofim which a person donates, as an indicator of their wealth. In most cases a wealthier person donates a larger amount to tzedokoh, than a less wealthy person. Therefore, each person’s pro rata share of the communal obligations can be calculated as a fixed percentage of their tzedokoh donations.

3. This method will improve in accuracy as individuals calculate and separate ma’aser kesofim to the maximum level that they can reasonably afford, within the ten and twenty percent guidelines described in future articles (Section C – Ma’aser Kesofim). It goes without saying that everyone is strongly encouraged to allocate the correct amount, as explained in that section.

4. According to this approach, we need to calculate how much money is donated to ma’aser kesofim by the entire community, relative to the amount of money the community requires for

each essential communal institution. For example, based on the authors’ estimates, all the monies donated by the North- West London Jewish community in 2013 comes to no less than £35,000,0001 per annum, and the total annual shortfall (total costs less parents’ fees and contributions) of North-West London schools is one-fifth of that sum – £7,000,000. Therefore each person, whether their annual ma’aser kesofim donations amount to £1 or to £100,000, should allocate one-fifth of that sum, or 20%, to their local schools.

5. Whether this donation of 20% can come out of ma’aser kesofim funds or must be paid out of your income has been discussed, previously in Chapter 1:E.For application of this method to other essential communal infrastructure see future article (Chapter 4:E).

1 We have estimated the total sum of all the tzedokoh given by all donors in North-West London (i.e. NW11 and NW4). We are grateful to the many local institutions, welfare funds, charity organisations, larger donors and Achisomoch who have given us aggregate figures only. From this information, we extrapolated and calculated that for 2013 the total figure was not less than approximately £35,000,000.

Some people feel that this calculated amount is somewhat too low and it may be as high as £50M+, in which case the NW London School allocation would reduce from 20% to 14%. However, we remain comfortable, based on the information we have analysed, with our calculated estimate of £35M.

Chapter 3 - The Personal and Communal Obligations to Support a School and a Mikvah

A. SCHOOLS.1. Parental Obligations:

a. It is an explicit mitzvoh in the Torah to teach your son Torah: and you shall teach your למדתם אותם את בניכם (דברים י“א י“ט) children.

b. The Shulchan Aruch rules, based on the famous takonoh of Rav Yehoshua ben Gamla, that a parent is personally obligated to hire rebbeim. This obligation according to some opinions is de’Oraisoh.

c. This obligation is fully enforceable by beis din, just like a regular debt, and beis din has the power to confiscate one’s property in lieu of this debt.

d. Although the takonoh of Rav Yehoshua Ben Gamla was only enacted for boys’ education, seeing that nowadays the accepted practice in all Jewish communities is to teach girls within a school setting, therefore girls’ schools have the same priority as boys’ schools. Consequently, you are fully obligated to pay for your daughter’s education.

e. Additionally, since schooling for children is compulsory by law, you are therefore obligated nowadays to pay for your daughter’s, and of course, son’s, education in a Jewish school.

2. Communal obligations:

a. The Shulchan Aruch states further that aside from the parental obligation there is also a communal obligation to raise the funds to hire the necessary rebbeim. This includes raising the funds for a suitable building.

b. Every member of the community would then have to pay for the education of the community’s children on a pro rata basis.

c. The primary financial obligation to support the school falls on the parents first, based on a fixed fee per child; the community is only responsible for the shortfall.

d. The Shulchan Aruch adds that a city which does not hire the necessary teachers, the inhabitants are to be excommunicated. If, despite this, the city remains without teachers, then the city should be destroyed, since the world is sustained only through the words [of Torah] from the mouths of school-children.

To Be Continued ..

Giving a voice to victims of abuseGiving a voice to victims of abuse

Endorsed by leading UK Rabbonim

HELPLINE 020 3670 1818

[email protected]

HELPLINE HOURSSunday 6.00-8.30pmMonday 3.00-5.30pm

Tuesday 11.00am-1.30pmThursday 11.00am-1.30pm

11

PAR

SH

AK

I S

ISA

“If you want to meet a princess, make yourself into a prince.” Rabbi Dov Heller, Aish LA

וירא העם כי בשש משה לרדת מן ההר (לב:א)

When the people saw that Moshe was so long

in coming down from the mountain (31:1)

Klal Yisroel saw that Moshe had not yet returned. After

miscalculating the forty days and forty nights, they assumed

that he would not return. At that precise moment, Satan

showed them a large levayah/funeral for Moshe taking place

in heaven, convincing them that Moshe was in fact dead and

would not be returning. Subsequently, the people turned to

Aharon HaKohein to begin their work on the eigel hazahav.

Ramban explains that Klal Yisroel’s intention in making

the eigel was never chas veshalom to replace HaShem, but

rather to replace Moshe. Their intentions were the purest.

Without Moshe, how could they communicate with HaShem?

However, they made the grave mistake of thinking that they

needed a middle man. Klal Yisroel has the ability to talk

directly to the Aibishter. The role of the Tzaadik is only to

help guide the yidden in the right direction, and to warn the

people when they begin to stray.

There is however a fundamental question that presents

itself. As a rule, a person is never given a nissayon that he

has no chance of overcoming. A nissayon by definition is

something that there is a chance to pass and a chance to fail.

Accordingly, the Torah Ohr (Baal HaTanya) wonders: why

was Satan allowed to test Klal Yisroel by actually showing

an image of a dead Moshe? After seeing such imagery, what

chance was left to believe otherwise? He answers that כל

ממנו גדול יצרו מחברו the greater the person, the greater) הגדול

the yetzer hara). As a result of Klal Yisroel’s lofty level,

their nissayon was that much greater. Clearly on their great

level, they had the tools to deal with it.

Along the same lines, we find the same concept in

Parshas Shlach. The meraglim were sent out on their mission.

Before embarking on their journey, Hoshaea’s name was

changed to Yehoshua to give him added protection against

the meraglim. But why was Calev not given a name change

as well? Obviously, Yehoshua needed the name change in

order to pass his test; however, Calev already had the proper

wherewithal to deal with it. Hashem never places a person in

a situation that cannot be handled successfully.

Perhaps we can offer another approach to answering this

question. In the encounter between Yaakov and Sar shel

Eisav, after giving his own name to the Malach, Yaakov asks

the Malach in return what his name is. The Malach responds

“why do you ask of me my name”. Rav Leib Chassman zt’l

explains that Yaakov understood that a name is the essence of

a person. He wanted to learn the Malach’s name to understand

what makes him tic; to recognize him, to identify the signs

of what is and what is not the Yetzer Hara. The Malach

responded that there is no point in asking the question

because my name depends on YOU. I can be the “reality” of

your greatest fear; I can play out your greatest desires. My

abilities are based on whatever you allow me to do. If you let

me into the door, I can act, otherwise, I am powerless. The

Gemara tells us a similar rule for dreams as well. Dreams are

based on a person’s daytime thoughts. If you don’t think of it,

you won’t dream of it.

Similarly, the Sichas HaRan writes a mashul of a ray of

light that comes streaming in through a window. In complete

darkness, it appears to be something tangible. Yet, if one tries

to grab onto it, they will come up with nothing but air. This is

the koach/strength of the Yeitzer hara. He can make something

look so brilliant and so radiant, yet in reality, there is nothing

there. But in truth, his game only works in darkness; open the

lights (of the Torah) and it all vanishes.

When Moshe did not show up, Klal Yisroel feared the

worst, assuming he was not returning. It was only after those

thoughts entered their minds that the Satan was suddenly

able to conjure up such images of a funeral procession. It was

because Klal Yisroel opened the gate and allowed him inside.

Satan was only allowed to test with this image because they

gave him the express permission to do so.

If we train ourselves to have taharas hamachshova/ purity

of thoughts; if we learn to focus on the good things in life and

the positive of what HaShem does for us, we can in fact be in

control of the Yetzer Hara!

Focus on the GoodRabbi Mordechai AppelShomrei Shabbos Chevra Mishnayos & דרכים בפרשה




12

PAR

SH

A

Honest Business

A businessman once came to a famous Rabbi and told him he has an opportunity to enter into a certain business where he can make a great deal of money. In order to succeed, however, he will have to pull a few unethical tricks.

The Rabbi referred to this week’s Sidra to the verse which tells us about the Ten Commandments. The Torah says: כתבים לחת

ומזה מזה עבריהם ני ,Tablets inscribed on both their sides…“ ,משthey were inscribed on one side and the other.” (Ex. 32,15) Why, asked the Rabbi, were we told this? He answered, to tell us that whichever way we read the Torah, it tells us the same laws – you must not steal.

There are people who try to distort the meanings of the laws of the Torah by twisting them one way or another to suit their own fancies. The Torah’s laws are given for us to live a moral and ethical life. Trying to twist the meaning so that we can avoid living the honest Torah’s intent, distorts its function and its purpose.

Rabbi Dr Menachem Raab

Bubby's BlogMy father's Auschwitz nightmare began on a chilly October morning in 1944. At the tender age of 19 he watched his parents selected for death on the infamous platform at Birkenau, their parting blessings drowned out by the barking of crazed Alsatian dogs straining on the leashes of their jackbooted minders. The SS were determined to weed out any old or weak specimens unable to assist in Hitler's war effort. So, a further ‘selection’ was carried out in the barrack into which my father was marched along with the surviving members of that morning's cattle-truck shipment from his home town of Bratislava.

The barrack was bisected along its length by a horizontal brick-clad flue that ran along the floor from the stove at one end to the rising chimney at the far end. The inmates were ordered to line up on either side of the brick platform, on which the infamous 'camp

doctor'Josef Mengele stood in judgement; who shall live and who shall die. Now my father was not the healthiest looking specimen, with a pale and skinny physique and glasses that seemed bigger than his face. Far fitter types were being rejected as they shuffled in parallel files under Mengele’s thumb, gesturing alternately on either side of the platform.

And then, just as my father passed under Mengele’s arm, he was pushed from behind with a powerful shove. It sent him stumbling into the line in front and he scrambled to regain his footing. In that split second, as Mengele turned to my father’s line, he looked quizzically at the melée and continued his selection.

When the process was completed, Mengele let out a loud scream. “Etwas ist loess”, (something is wrong!). "Voh ist der mit die brillen???” (Where is the guy in the glasses?). Not to be cheated of the life of a single Jew, he called the whole group back to repeat the selection. However, by this time, my father’s comrades had told him to dump the glasses and switch berets with them to avoid recognition by the so-called Angel of Death.

And so my father was to survive the second selection and, ultimately, the Holocaust.

A few years ago I stood in such a barrack as a visitor to Auschwitz-Birkenau.

I had come to witness the flypast of Israeli F-16s over the infamous railhead. And a week after returning home to England, I could not concentrate on my work. My wife suggested I clear my head by putting my thoughts and feelings down on paper. I did so, and the resulting story was published on the front page of the Jewish Press in New York.I got many emails in response to that article. One was from a man named Fishof, with a stunning message. “My father was the man who pushed your father in that line.”

I met David Fishof for the first time in his Succah in Jerusalem. That October month was a lot warmer in Israel than it was in Poland exactly 61 years before. And the sons of two Holocaust survivors were drinking a Lechayim as free Jewish men in the eternal capital city of their nation.

It is a story of Netzach Yisrael – the eternity of the Jewish people - who continue to grow and flourish whilst those who sought to destroy us have long perished.

Pushed into Survival

My father's Auschwitz nightmare began on a chilly October morning in 1944. At the tender age of 19 he watched his parents selected for death on the infamous platform at Birkenau, their parting blessings drowned out by the barking of crazed Alsatian dogs straining on the leashes of their jackbooted minders. The SS were determined to weed out any old or weak specimens unable to assist in Hitler's war effort. So, a further ‘selection’ was carried out in the barrack into which my father was marched along with the surviving members of that morning's cattle-truck shipment from his home town of Bratislava.

The barrack was bisected along its length by a horizontal brick-clad flue that ran along the floor from the stove at one end to the rising chimney at the far end. The inmates were ordered to line up on either side of the brick platform, on which the infamous 'camp doctor'Josef Mengele stood in judgement; who shall live and who shall die. Now my father was not the healthiest looking specimen, with a pale and skinny physique and glasses that seemed bigger than his face. Far fitter types were being rejected as they shuffled in parallel files under Mengele’s thumb, gesturing alternately on either side of the platform.

And then, just as my father passed under Mengele’s arm, he was pushed from behind with a powerful shove. It sent him stumbling into the line in front and he scrambled to regain his footing. In that split second, as Mengele turned to my father’s line, he looked quizzically at the melée and continued his selection.

When the process was completed, Mengele let out a loud scream. “Etwas ist loess”, (something is wrong!). "Voh ist der mit die brillen???” (Where is the guy in the glasses?). Not to be cheated of the life of a single Jew, he called the whole group back to repeat the selection. However, by this time, my father’s comrades had told him to dump the glasses and switch berets with them to avoid recognition by the so-called Angel of Death.

And so my father was to survive the second selection and, ultimately, the Holocaust.

A few years ago I stood in such a barrack as a visitor to Auschwitz-Birkenau.

PUSHED INTO SURVIVAL







PAR

SH

AK

I S

ISA



13

Taking the Blame Greetings from the holy city of Jerusalem!

This week's Torah portion describes the infamous Golden Calf. When Moses prays to God to forgive the Jewish people for this incident, he pleads, "Blot me out of Your Book" (Exodus 32:32). The implication of this statement is that Moses's erasure from the Torah would somehow atone for the Jewish people's sin. We know that Moses was the humblest man who ever lived, which makes this statement seem quite surprising. The Golden Calf was a major offense. How could Moses be so presumptuous to think that removing his name from the Torah could atone for the entire fiasco?

According to the Baal Shem Tov (9), whenever Moses saw the Jewish people behaving inappropriately, he blamed himself. He assumed that his own failings were the most probable cause of the people's misbehavior. This attitude can be understood on two levels. On a Kabbalistic level, if the leader of a generation makes even a slight mistake, it can cause a ripple effect. A leader's small error in thought, speech or action may result in the people's committing major crimes.

The Mekor Mayim Chaim (6) writes that this effect can be compared to a person holding a long piece of string, with the top end between his fingers and the bottom lying on the ground. If the person moves the top of the string even slightly, the bottom will move as well. The top of the string - the "head" - symbolizes the head of the

generation. Just as the head of the string causes the bottom to move, so too does the head of the generation impact those lower down.

On a practical level, we can understand Moses's behavior as covering for the Jewish people. He took responsibility for their mistake because of his intense commitment to leading them. It is as if Moses said, "Had I been a better leader, they would have been better people." He saw their mistake as a reflection on his failure to guide them properly.

In fact, this was not the case, as we see in God's subsequent statement, "The one who really sinned to me I will blot out of My Book" (Exodus 32:33). Moses was completely guiltless in this situation. Yet we see that Moses was nevertheless prepared to cover for the people by taking the blame himself.

Now we can understand Moses's plea to be taken out of the Torah. Moses was not being presumptuous by claiming that his erasure from the Torah would atone for the people's sin; rather, he was begging, "Punish me instead of them!" A willingness to cover for other people - deflecting the accusations against them and accepting the blame ourselves - is one of the greatest ways to demonstrate love.

May we learn to love each other to the degree where we can point the accusatory finger at ourselves instead of at others. In this way, may we be able to rectify our old mistake of baseless hatred, and replace it with baseless love, that we may merit our full and final redemption.

Headraiser

"When you raise the head of the Children of Yisrael" (30:12)

Why does the Torah choose the expression “raise the head” to mean that Moshe should take a census of the Jewish People?

G-d explained to Moshe that the Jewish People had placed their lives in jeopardy by worshipping the golden calf. The process of counting them by the coins they were to donate would "raise their heads," — elevate them spiritually from the depths to which they sunk, and earn them atonement from their sin.

Moshe supposed that such atonement would require a coin of a very large denomination indeed. Perhaps it would be a kikar of silver, the equivalent of three thousand silver coins. If not three thousand silver coins, it might be that G-d would demand a coin worth a hundred silver pieces for each. This would be based on the penalty of one hundred silver pieces as the penalty the Torah prescribes for a man who wrongly defames his wife’s virtue. Since the Jewish People defamed G-d’s name when they proclaimed "These are your gods, Yisrael," this might be the level of the atonement required.

Alternatively, if not a coin worth a hundred silver coins, Moshe surmised that the coin G-d would stipulate might be the equivalent of fifty silver pieces.

For that is the penalty that a seducer must pay, and the Jewish People had made idols in defiance of the commandment "You shall have no other gods!"

At the very least, Moshe conjectured, G-d would demand a coin to the value of thirty shekalim. The owner of a goring ox must pay thirty shekels. By worshipping a calf, the Jewish People had traded G-d’s glory for the image of a calf.

In the event, Moshe’s fears were unfounded. G-d said to him "You need not pay Me coins worth a hundred, or fifty, or even thirty silver pieces. All I ask is that you donate one small coin to the value of a half-shekel."

G-d then took a half-shekel coin from under His Throne of Glory, showing Moshe its size and shape.

"This is the type of coin they shall give," said G-d.

Those half-shekel coins from the census were melted down and used for the silver sockets, the "adanim", that were the foundation for the walls of the Mishkan. In other words, the Mishkan literally stood on the half-shekalim that the Jewish People donated. They were the new basis of G-d’s residing amongst them.

Article generously submitted by Rabbi Moshe Newman (Jerusalem) www.ohr.edu

Rabbi Abba Wagensberg

Rabbi Asher Sinclair Rabbi Yaakov Asher Sinclair

Headraiser"When you raise the head of the Children of Yisrael" (30:12)

Why does the Torah choose the expression “raise the head” to mean that Moshe should take a census of the Jewish People?

G-d explained to Moshe that the Jewish People had placed their lives in jeopardy by worshipping the golden calf. The process of counting them by the coins they were to donate would "raise their heads," — elevate them spiritually from the depths to which they sunk, and earn them atonement from their sin.

Moshe supposed that such atonement would require a coin of a very large denomination indeed. Perhaps it would be a kikar of silver, the equivalent of three thousand silver coins. If not three thousand silver coins, it might be that G-dwould demand a coin worth a hundred silver pieces for each. This would be based on the penalty of one hundred silver pieces as the penalty the Torah prescribes for a man who wrongly defames his wife’s virtue. Since the Jewish People defamed G-d’s name when they proclaimed "These are your gods, Yisrael," this might be the level of the atonement required.

Alternatively, if not a coin worth a hundred silver coins, Moshe surmised that the coin G-d would stipulate might be the equivalent of fifty silver pieces. For that is the penalty that a seducer must pay, and the Jewish People had made idols in defiance of the commandment "You shall have no other gods!"

At the very least, Moshe conjectured, G-d would demand a coin to the value of thirty shekalim. The owner of a goring ox must pay thirty shekels. By worshipping a calf, the Jewish People had traded G-d’s glory for the image of a calf.

In the event, Moshe’s fears were unfounded. G-d said to him "You need not pay Me coins worth a hundred, or fifty, or even thirty silver pieces. All I ask is that you donate one small coin to the value of a half-shekel."

G-d then took a half-shekel coin from under His Throne of Glory, showing Moshe its size and shape.

"This is the type of coin they shall give," said G-d.

Those half-shekel coins from the census were melted down and used for the silver sockets, the "adanim", that were the foundation for the walls of the Mishkan. In other words, the Mishkan literally stood on the half-shekalim that the Jewish People donated. They were the new basis of G-d’s residing amongst them.

Article generously submitted by Rabbi Moshe Newman (Jerusalem) www.ohr.edu

“If you are not a better person tomorrow than you are today, what need have you for a tomorrow?” – Rebbe Nachman of Breslov

PAR

SH

AK

I S

ISA

PAR

SH

AK

I S

ISA




14

PAR

SH

A

Miracles Don't Really Matter Judaism is not based upon the performance of miracles.

We've all said it ourselves or we have at least heard someone else say it: "If only God would appear and show me some miracle, then I would truly believe and serve Him." This is what we sincerely think would be our reaction to a wonder or sign from Heaven.

But would it? History, including the episode of the worshipping of the Golden Calf in this week's Torah portion, has proven otherwise.

We are familiar with the story of the Golden Calf. The Jewish People heard God Himself, without an intermediary, speak and gave them His Torah. God also informed them that Moshe is His trustworthy prophet and that anything Moshe says in His Name should be accepted as God's word. Moshe then ascended to the top of Mount Sinai to receive all the details of the Torah. Moshe told them he would return in 40 days. (See Exodus 24:12-18.) When, according to their mistaken calculation Moshe tarried, (see Rashi, 32:1) they formed an image of a Golden Calf and worshipped it.

(It is highly unlikely that their actions involved actual idol worship. We find later in Jewish history that the idolatrous King Yerovam re-introduced golden calves into Jewish worship. He even used the same phrase in reference to the calves, with which the Jews of the Desert were punished so severely: "These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt." (Compare Exodus 32:4 with 1-Kings 12:28.) Is it possible that Jews would tolerate the arrangement of golden calves, as idols, when they had to have been aware of the terrible punishments that resulted from the original golden calf?

Perhaps one can rationalize use of other idols, but to make the same image that was a cause of terrible destruction for Jews and ask them to worship it? Unless, we understand, that the original golden calf was not actual idol worship. Rather, it was a sin of using an image as an inspiration or focus for prayer and service. Yerovam told them that golden calves as symbols of focus may have been inappropriate at the time of the Desert, but they are not forbidden for all generations since they did not involve actual idol worship. Yerovam is, of course, mistaken. God views the use of any image, even to enhance service of Him, as an offshoot of idol worship and reckons with it accordingly.)

When reading the story of the Golden Calf, a common question is: How could the Jews commit such a terrible transgression just 40 days after receiving the Torah? Shouldn't the impact of hearing God speak have lasted much more than 40 days? How could this have happened?

For some people, the rebellion of the Jews so soon after the Revelation at Sinai serves as an indictment of the truth of the Torah. After all, if God really did appear to the Jews, could they have sinned so quickly? It must be that God did not truly appear to them as is recorded in the Torah. How do we answer this charge?

Think for a moment. Even if you suggest, for argument's sake, that God is not the author of the Bible, but that it is written by a human, you must agree that this author was very perceptive and had a deep sense of the psychology of people. This is true to such an extent, that in the whole history of mankind, no one else was able to write a book that penetrated the hearts of all. There is no book that has been translated into as many languages and has had as deep an effect on humanity as the Bible. So, if we are intelligent enough to realize that there is a problem of disconnect with the Jews sinning 40 days after Sinai, how could it be that the author of the Bible was not smart enough to realize this?

Rather, we must admit that such a phenomenon can happen. The revelation by God at Sinai can occur and people can ignore it a short time after that event.

What is the reason for this? How is it that we human beings are able to disregard a clear inspiration and wondrous appearance by God?

The answer is that we are resilient in both a positive sense and in a negative one. Experiences that affected and moved me today may last a couple of days but will always wear off. I may have heard a motivating speech on controlling anger and I may really think that from now on I will control my anger. But we all know that given a week, that speech's effects will be largely lost.

Have you ever been to a funeral of a young person? Don't we leave the funeral vowing to appreciate life more and aren't we sure that we are going to tell our loved ones how much we love them every day of the rest of our lives? Yet, usually our resolutions do not last more than a day or two. Of course, this tendency applies in a positive sense as well. We are able to bounce back from negative experiences soon after we encounter them. But our emotional elasticity haunts us whenever we are trying to maintain inspiration and growth. We might call this the 'What have we lived through lately' syndrome.

And this syndrome destroys the impact of even miraculous events. It is not true that, "If only God would appear and show me some miracle then I would truly believe and serve Him." Unfortunately, the spiritual stimulus does not usually last. We learn this most succinctly from Eliyahu HaNavi, Elijah the Prophet.

In 1-Kings ch. 18-19 (Haftorah of Ki Tisa), Eliyahu challenged the idolatrous ruler, King Ahab to a "competition" which would take place in front of the entire people. The worshippers and false prophets of the idol, Baal, would offer sacrifices and pray to Baal and Eliyahu would offer sacrifices and pray to God. Whichever one would answer with a fire consuming the sacrifice would be accepted as the true God.

This proposal was accepted and a fire came down to consume only Eliyahu's sacrifice and not the men of the Baal. All of the people saw this and proclaimed, "Hashem, He is the God! Hashem, He is the God!" (1-Kings 18:39). (This is the phrase with which we end the Yom Kippur prayer service.) Eliyahu then destroys the false prophets of the Baal. In addition, Eliyahu brings forth a miraculous rainstorm that ended a prolonged drought.

King Ahab reports back to his wife, the equally evil Queen Jezebel, thoroughly dejected. It seemed that Eliyahu has defeated them and their idolatrous practices. The Jewish People would give up the service of the Baal and only serve God. This threatened Ahab and Jezebel's entire hold on their kingdom! Then a most curious thing occurs. Seemingly incongruous, Jezebel sends a messenger to Eliyahu saying, "Tomorrow, I am going to kill you." Eliyahu receives the message, reacts by running into the desert and is ready to give up. He requests that God take his soul. He wants to die.

What is going on here? Did Eliyahu actually think that Jezebel would have an epiphany? Jezebel was the epitome of evil. Surely, Eliyahu could not have ever hoped to change her idolatrous ways. In addition, Eliyahu has been running away from her his entire life and never gave up his mission of removing idolatry from the Jewish People. Now, he is ready to give up? Didn't he just perform a wondrous miracle which transformed the entire Jewish nation?

And how do we explain Jezebel's actions? Doesn't she realize that the chips are stacked against her now that Eliyahu has successfully and miraculously defeated the worship of the Baal? And if indeed she does not care about public opinion but simply wants to murder Eliyahu for the nuisance that he is to her, why doesn't she kill him today? Why does she say that she will only kill him tomorrow?

It is clear that Jezebel was not sending Eliyahu a message that she wants to kill him. This is not what she meant. Rather, she was saying the following: "Eliyahu, you think you have defeated me? You performed a grand miracle for all to see. Today I can't touch you. But TOMORROW I'll kill you and nobody will say a word. For just one day your miracle will work. That's how effective your miracle is."

Eliyahu had thought that the Jews' reaction to his monumental miracle would be grandiose change. He assessed the Jewish national soul and felt that finally they would repent as a result of his very public miracle. But then Eliyahu hears Jezebel's message and realizes that her assessment is more accurate than his. This new miracle would not be viewed differently than the standard reaction to miracles. The power and inspiration of miracles does not permanently last and it won't now either. Yes, Jezebel is right. Eliyahu is then ready to give up for he feels that there is nothing more that he can do to help transform the Jewish people.

We think that if the world saw miracles it would be a different world. But it would not. It would be the exact same world. Miracles do not change people. We remain with our ability to rebel and sin a short while after the miracle's effect wears off.

Judaism is not based upon the performance of miracles. Maimonides writes (Mishna Torah, Yesodei Torah, Chapter 8) that Moshe did not perform miracles in order to prove the truth of his prophecy. He (as a messenger of God) took water out a stone because the Jews were thirsty. He brought manna from heaven because they were hungry, etc. We believe in the Torah's truth only because God appeared Himself at Mount Sinai and told us that it is true.

We are aware that inspirations fade. We all know that the emotions we felt on September 11, 2001 have faded. Yet we still desire to gain something permanent when we are inspired to change. We don't want to waste the inspiration. So what can we do?

Here's a key. When we are motivated to change, we must think of some small, slight area in which we can grow. If we take on something too overwhelming and drastic, then it is all the more likely to fail. We should take, for example, the area of prayer, and accept upon ourselves to recite an additional short section that we never said before. Or we can choose the area of Torah study and learn for an extra few moments per day. We can decide to perform an extra act of kindness daily, or just smile at one person every day. There are thousand of small things we can do to change subtly. Of course, the long-term goal is to increase amounts and levels of change but we must start slowly if we are to change at all.

So when the next inspiring event occurs in our lives, we now know what to do. Never expect the inspiration to last.

Make just a small change. Over a lifetime, these tens and tens of changes will produce the transformation we are all looking for.

Kol YaakovRabbi Boruch LeffParsha Insights based on and inspired by the teachings of Rav Yaakov Weinberg Zl

PAR

SH

AK

I S

ISA



15

PAR

SH

AThe Commuters ChavrusaReb Howard Jacksonon the Train from Yerushalayim to Tel Avivwww.divreitorah.co.uk

Teaching a LessonA few years ago, a teacher at a Jewish primary school in Efrat was reciting Shacharit (morning prayers) with the children in her class. She noticed that one of the children was being particularly disruptive and not treating the Sidur (prayer book) or the prayers with any respect. She marched towards the desk, picked up the child's Sidur and threw it on the floor! Her intentions were to show the class that this child's behaviour was totally unacceptable and she certainly succeeded in shocking the children and teaching them a lesson.

When some of the parents were told what the teacher had done, they complained to the headmaster that the teacher should

be dismissed for setting a terrible example of throwing a Sidur on the floor. The headmaster suspended the teacher, and she appealed to Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, the Chief Rabbi of Efrat. What do you think Rabbi Riskin ruled: that the school must dismiss the teacher or that she must be reinstated?

Rabbi Riskin quoted from our Sidra, Ki Tisa: "As he approached the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, Moshe displayed anger, and threw down the Tablets that were in his hand, shattering them at the foot of the mountain" (Shemot 32:19).

In his commentary to the last verse in the entire Torah (Devarim 34:12), Rashi explains that God agreed with Moshe's decision to smash the Tablets. He cites the phrase "Asher SHibarta" = "which you broke" (Shemot 34:1) , interpreting it as "Y'asher Kochacha SheSHibarta" = "well done for having broken them!" (Gemara Shabbat 87a). When the people worshipped the golden calf, they demonstrated that the Tablets were of no value to them. Therefore, it was acceptable to smash them.

Similarly, based on this and a number of other factors, Rabbi Riskin ruled that the primary school teacher must be reinstated.

HA

LAC

HA

Dose of Halacha - Rabbi Chaim CohenRabbi of Netzach Yisrael and teaches at King David High School

BEDTIME SHEMA

Question: Is it important to say Shema before going to bed or is it sufficient just

to say it duringmaariv? Is it better to skip saying hamapil if I know I am likely to

talk?

Answer: The Shulchan Aruch (OC 239:1) writes that one should say the first paragraph of Shema, various pesukim and the beracha of hamapil before going to bed (see Gemara Berachos 60b).

The Mishna Berura (239:1) writes that it is ideal to say all three paragraphs. Certainly, one who davened maariv before nacht must repeat all three paragraphs now.

While minhag ashkenaz is to recite the Shema before hamapil, sefardim say hamapil first (See Yalkut Yosef 239:1).

The Rema (OC 239:1) writes that one should not talk or eat afterwards. R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yechave Daas 4:21; Yalkut Yosef 239:1) allows one to say asher yatzar, shehakol on a drink, quieten a child or respond to one’s parents after hamapil (See Mishna Berura 239:4; Piskei Teshuvos 239:3; Tefilla Kehilchasa p352, n29).

R’ Eliezer Waldenberg (Tzitz Eliezer 7:27:3) writes that one doesn’t need to worry about not talking after the beracha. Nonetheless, the Ben Ish Chai (Pekudei 12) writes that if one feels that they won’t fall asleep straight away and is going to talk, one should say the beracha without Hashem’s name at the beginning and end.

The Mishna Berura (239:9) writes that it is good to reflect on one’s actions during the day before sleeping, committing not to repeat any mistakes that one may have done and to forgive others’ wrongdoings against them.

SHEMITTA PRODUCE OUTSIDE ISRAEL

Question: I inadvertently bought some yellow peppers that are from Israel.

What should I do with them?

Answer: There is a machlokes in the Gemara (Moed Katan 2b) as to whether the observance ofshemitta nowadays is mideoraisa or miderabanan. According to the Ramban (Sefer Hazechus, Gittin 36) and the Raavad (Shemitta Veyovel 1:11) shemitta nowadays is mideoraisa, while according to the Baal Hamaor (Sefer Haterumos 45) it is only a midas chassidus (pious act). Most rishonim(Rashi; Tosafos, Gittin 36a) though, understand shemitta nowadays to be miderabanan (See Gra YD 331:6).

Regardless, during the shemitta year, we are forbidden to do business with shemitta produce (Avoda Zara 62a), to destroy it (Pesachim 52b) and to remove it from Israel (See Igros Moshe OC 1:186).

As opposed to fruit, even though most of the vegetable growth may have been before shemitta, the determining stage for vegetables is the time it was picked. Thus, as the peppers you bought were picked in shemitta, all the rules of shemitta produce apply. For a full list, seehttp://www.kosher.org.uk/article/shemitta-dates

As one isn’t allowed to destroy shemitta produce, one can’t simply throw one’s leftover shemitta food away. Rather, one must place it in a designated place until it rots and becomes inedible before disposing of it.

Some poskim (Rabbeinu Tam, Tosafos, Sukka 39b) forbid one to eat produce that has been guarded and worked on (shamur vene’evad), while others allow one to benefit from such produce (See Igros Moshe OC 1:186).

Modern day poskim thus advise that either one eats such produce and disposes carefully of any leftovers, letting them rot first, or disposing of them all in such a way without partaking of them.

PAR

SH

AK

I S

ISA



16

to be continued...

Part

A Berel Wein/ Destiny Publication www.rabbiwein.com

Become a member and save 45% all the time!

The Illustrated Story of

MaimonidesThe Torah Sage, Healer, Philosopher & Hero

Please could you ensure that there are ample sheets left in shuls for Shabbos before taking one home.If you wish to receive this sheet via email please email [email protected]

PLEASE DISPOSE OF THIS SHEET APPROPRIATELY AS IT CONTAINS WORDS OF TORAH

Part 14



Oneg purim ki sisa

Documents

Transcript of Oneg purim ki sisa