Shabbat-B'Shabbato Parshat Teruma 2 Adar 5775 (21 February 2015)

AS SHABBAT APPROACHES Transparency - by Rabbi Oury Cherki, Machon Meir, Rabbi of Beit Yehuda Congregation, Jerusalem Even though building a House for G-d is a Torah mitzva (Rambam, Hilchot Beit Habechirah) and the Torah will never change (Rambam, Thirteen Principles), there are some differences about the way the Temple was built at different times, in accordance with the words of G-d as handed down by the prophets. Therefore, the plan of the Tabernacle in the desert was not the same as that in Shilo, and they were not the same as the designs of the First and Second Temples, or the Third Temple of the future which appears in the prophecy of Yechezkel. The reason for this is that the Temple is a reflection of the heavenly world in our world, "like the image that you were shown on the mountain" [Shemot 25:40] something akin to the ideal world of Plato. The spiritual world changes form to correspond to changing times, and therefore the appearance of the Temple on the earth changes too. One of the details that is different between the Tabernacle as described in the Torah portion of Teruma and the Temple of Shlomo as described in the Haftarah of Teruma is that in the Tabernacle there are no windows, while the Temple built by King Shlomo does have some. Thus, the Divine inspiration in the desert was meant for Yisrael exclusively, without any contact with the other nations of the world, because at that point Yisrael was just coming into existence and had the experience of an intimate wedding ceremony with the Creator "The love of our betrothal, when you followed Me into the desert." [Yirmiyahu 2:2]. When Shlomo arrived, the time had come for the active universal influence of Bnei Yisrael, when the entire world came to hear the wisdom of Shlomo. This was therefore the proper time to make windows in the Temple, indicating a point of contact between Yisrael and the other nations. The passage describes "transparent blocked windows" [Melachim I 6:4]. Targum Yonatan writes that the windows were "open on the inside and blocked on the outside." This is an indication the holy was able to absorb from the profane that is, the Jews absorbed from the non-Jews. This is also what Rav Kook implies in Orot Hatechiyah (Chapter 15). However, see the RADAK: "The sages felt that the opposite was true: the windows were open to the outside and blocked on the inside. This is to say that the people of Yisrael had no need for the light of the world." According to this, the windows indicated that holiness was sent out from the holy site to the outside, without being influenced by the outside (this corresponds to the earlier commentary of Rav Kook, Ein Ayah Bikurim 27). We can say that there is no dispute in principle between the two approaches. Rather, the first one describes the actual situation. The nation of Yisrael is not afraid of external influences when the Shechina has appeared within it. The second commentary describes the essential difference between Yisrael and the other nations, something which grants Yisrael a feeling of security.

The Metzudot explains that the windows were made of glass, at one and the same time both transparent and blocked. This commentary seems to combine the two above approaches described above. However, in order to combine the external and internal influences it is necessary to create new technology, such as glass, which is invented at a later stage, as part of the world's development. Rabbi Cherki is the head of Brit Olam Noahide World Center, Jerusalem

POINT OF VIEW What are they Doing to Abba Kahaneman in Ponevezh? - by Rabbi Yisrael Rozen, Dean of the Zomet Institute There are three crowns: The crown of royalty is the Table, about which it is written that it has a golden crown around it. The crown of the priesthood is the Altar, about which it is written that it has a golden crown around it. And the crown of Torah is the Ark, about which it is written, a golden crown... Why is it not common for the children of Torah scholars to be scholars too? ... It is so that people will not say that Torah is their inheritance." [Nedarim 81a]. An Evil Spirit in the Sanctuary There is an evil spirit blowing on the hill of the Yeshiva of Ponevezh in Bnei Berak, the model for all the "Lita'i Yeshivot." This yeshiva has become a brand name in the "world of the Torah," and it has received much praise as a result of its many graduates who hold prominent positions in the realms of the rabbinate, as judges in the religious court, education, and various Chareidi activities. The "Lita'i"-analytical method of study has become the main technique in the "world of the yeshivot," and it also serves as a model in Chassidic and Sephardi yeshivot. It is also the most prominent technique in the analytical study of Talmud in the many types of Zionist yeshivot. In the "competition" among the most prominent Lita'i and Jerusalem yeshivot, Mir and Chevron, the press has given Ponevezh a title of nobility: "Oxford of the Yeshivot." The crown, the glory, and the fame are all reserved in this yeshiva for the merits of its founder, the illustrious Rabbi Yosef Shlomo Kahaneman, who fled alone from the Holocaust (only his son Avraham accompanied him, while the others in his family perished), with a burning desire to replant the crown of the Torah of Lita in Eretz Yisrael, after it had been so cruelly destroyed. As a rabbi and a multifaceted activist, he founded the campus of the Ponevezh Yeshiva on a hill in Bnei Berak, and he also established a memorial for the holy martyrs of Lita. Rabbi Kahaneman served as Rosh Yeshiva and gave many lectures, while at the same time he was also the financial head and in charge of broadening its Torah vision. One of his most famous projects was the famous "Yarchei Kala" expanded summer study for the general public, at a level and in the atmosphere of a yeshiva. The students of the yeshiva and their own

2 students founded yeshivot and Batei Midrash all over the land, copying the style and methods of the original yeshiva. And the "Lita'i vision" took root and bore fruit. And then... and then the flames of dispute broke out, and they have been charring the Yeshiva of Ponevezh for more than a decade. A great controversy broke out among the "heirs" the son, Rabbi Avraham Kahaneman, and the son-in-law, Rabbi Shmuel Markowitz and it rose to a tumult within the yeshiva. During this past decade, innumerous discussions were held between the antagonists and many who joined them - in rabbinical courts, in arbitration, and in the courts - and there were also violent disturbances within the yeshiva. Lately the press has been flooded with reports of violence, destruction, and police involvement between the two sides, which operate as separate yeshivot in the same campus, as required by arbitration rulings and court decisions. It is clear that this dispute is not about "methods" or "outlook" and not about any spiritual issues. The flames of controversy revolve around questions of ownership and control, mainly property rights, to which has been added jealousy, passion, and honor. The phrase "desecration of the holy name" falls short of being able to describe the public, educational, and Torah significance of these events. The real tragedy is that the flames have burst out from the heart of the "Temple" of the Mussar movement with its emphasis on morality, which serves as the basic framework for the world outlook of the "Lita'i" yeshiva movement. My heart goes out to the Ponevezh Yeshiva, and how anybody who passes by will cry out, "Eichah how has it become an anti-ethical and anti-behavior conflagration, and how has its Torah been transformed into a mockery?" They are the subjects of the verse, "The wisdom of a poor man is despised" [Kohellet 9:16]. (And the Midrash adds, "Is the wisdom of Rabbi Akiva to be despised? Rather, it refers to those who act in a way that is the opposite of his teachings." [Kohellet Rabba].) The antagonists have taken for themselves unit names that come straight from the dark side of the Cossacks: "Enemies" and "Terrorists." It is written, "Demons will dance there" [Yeshayhu 13:21]. And a heavenly echo reverberates from the ruins: Expend your energies in the IDF! The Torah is not a Legacy I would not get involved in this depressing situation if not for the lesson that I want to share (and I assume that in this I speak for many): Woe is to a yeshiva which is seen by its founders and its managers as an "inheritance" for their sons and their sons-in-law. Even if from a legal point of view this is a "family enterprise" and a legal entity in every way the Torah is not a legal legacy, certainly not on the level of "those who transfer the traditions" and those who pass on the chain of the traditions of the Torah. Royalty does indeed pass from one generation to the next as an inheritance (see my book, "Shoftim B'Govah Ha'Einayim," on the affair of Avimelech). Chassidic rabbis in all of their branches indeed act as royalty, and by definition - they do bequeath their status and honor, and the leadership, to their children. If there are a number of children and the community is large enough it will separate into several parts, but if not a dispute is likely to occur. This is not true with respect to the teaching of Torah, where the rule is that Torah is not an inheritance, as quoted in the beginning of this article. And it is written, "Moshe's sons did not take over his position, rather Yehoshua took his place" [Bamidbar Rabba 12].

In its current state, the Yeshiva of Ponevezh must close its doors. Two kings cannot rule in the same territory. In particular, I cannot believe that the young students and the married scholars are capable of delving into their Torah studies while the tumult continues around them, and while their leaders are in danger of losing their positions. From the legal point of view with respect to property rights the only possible solution (which also corresponds to the halacha) is called "gud o agud" (you take it or I will). One side must buy out the part of the other side, which will then be free to move and establish its own glorious "Oxford" someplace else.

LET YOUR WELLSPRINGS BURST FORTH A Place for the Evil Ones - by Rabbi Moshe Shilat, Director of "The Torah of Chabad for Yeshiva Students" In this week's Torah portion Yisrael is commanded about the contributions for the Tabernacle and its construction. Between the command about the Tabernacle and the construction itself the sin of the Golden Calf is described. That is, the Torah portions of Teruma and Tetzaveh involve the commands about the contributions and the labor needed for the Tabernacle, but before the building is done (in the portions of Vayakhel and Pekudai) the portion of Ki Tissa interrupts the ideal flow with the sin of the calf and the resulting shattering of the Tablets. What is the reason for this sequence? The sages suggest three different solutions to this puzzle (in the Midrash and in the Zohar). The three solutions have separate messages for each of the main sections that make up the community of Yisrael Tzibur, which is an acronym for tzadikim, beinonim, and resha'im (righteous, average, and evil people). The first approach is that the sequence of events corresponded to the sequence in the Torah, with the command for the Tabernacle appearing before the sin, which took place before the construction. A second approach is that the command and the actual construction took place after the sin. There is also a third possibility, which is not so well-known, that the Tabernacle was built before the sin of the Golden Calf. The Rebbe of Chabad explains that in correspondence with the principle that "these and those are the words of the living G-d," we can show that each of the three proposed solutions is relevant to our current lives. It Belongs to All The nation of Yisrael was born anew when the Torah was given. The filth that the serpent imbued into Chavah disappeared from the world. Everybody was at a level of righteous people who have no evil inclination, just like in the Garden of Eden before the sin of the Tree of Knowledge. After the sin of the calf, "the filth returned." The nation fell into the depths of evil, and they were led by the evil inclination. After they repented, they reached the status of average people. The filth continued to exist in the world, the good and evil inclinations were intertwined. We succeed in coping with the inclination, as is defined for the "beinioni" in the Tanya, as a person who stands between being pulled to good or to evil. The Tabernacle belongs to everybody equally to the righteous, the average, and the evil ones. Contributing to the Tabernacle is an expression of being connected with it, and the three sequences described above correspond to three qualities of the contribution. The idea that the command and the construction came before the sin of the Golden Calf corresponds to the righteous people, without any filth their actions, under the influence of the good inclination alone.

3 The opposite approach, that the sin came first, emphasizes the average people, who repented. After the sin and the repentance, the command and the construction of the Tabernacle took place. And the approach that accepts the sequence in the Torah, with the sin taking place between the command and the construction, is from the approach of the evil people. The command was given to the people when they were righteous, and it continued to accompany them during and after the sin. A new command was not received, since nothing changed when the people sinned. The need for and relationship with the Tabernacle remained in effect while the people continued on their evil path. The Secret of the Pieces of the Tablets The three qualitative levels discussed above are preserved within the Ark of the Covenant. The pieces of the first Tablets are kept permanently in the Holy of Holies. This seems to keep a memory of the great crisis of the nation of Yisrael. Why should we do this? It is because the existence of the first Tablets brings us back to the time when we were righteous, the fact that the Tablets have been shattered is related to the time when we were evil, and the existence of the second set of Tablets is related to our having repented. There is room for all three types of people inside the Ark and inside the Holy of Holies! Gold, Silver, and Copper Here is an interesting hint that appears, based on the verse near the beginning of the Torah portion: "This is the contribution that you shall take from them: Gold, silver, and copper." [Shemot 25:3]. The words can be viewed as acronyms: Gold is "This is one who gives in strength." Silver is "When there is a danger of fear." And copper is "The gift of a sick person who commanded to give." In line with the comments in the first part of this article, we can note that gold corresponds to a righteous person the healthiest of them all, healthy in his spirit and in the performance of the Torah and the mitzvot. Silver, when a danger is apparent, is the status of the average person and the repentant, who are constantly in fear of returning to evil ways, and they must constantly make an effort to stay away from the danger. And even one who is sick (copper) must give a donation, and he is still part of the community. The sick person (the evil one) is farthest from Torah and the mitzvot, but he too participates in the building of the Tabernacle and this helps him to become cured and to approach G-d. We are all the children of the Holy One, Blessed be He, we all belong and we all have our proper place. Constantly.

THE LIGHT STARTS IN THE EAST Zeal and Moderation in Serving G-d by Chezi Cohen, Yeshivat Maaleh Gilboa and Midreshet Ein Hanatziv Rabbi Ovadia Hedaya (1889-1969) was born in Allepo (Aram Tzova) in a family of rabbis from the area of Chaleb. He was treated like a member of the family in the homes of the Sephardi Chief Rabbi (Rishon Letzion), Rabbi Yaacov Shaul Elyashar (the author of "Yissa Beracha"), and Rabbi Ben-Tzion Avraham Kuenka, who edited the periodical Hame'asef. Rabbi Hedaya was one of the founders of Yeshivat Porat Yosef, a halachic expert, a judge, and a master of Kabbalah and head of the Kabbalistic yeshiva Beit El. He was a member of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and he was a judge in the Great Rabbinical Court. As one of the greatest halachic experts, he wrote a book of responsa ("Yasskil Avdi") in eight volumes, he was

very involved in topical issues, and he had a very positive attitude with respect to the State of Israel. The following story is told. * * * * * * Rabbi Ovadiah Hedaya had a custom of studying with his students through the night on the eves of Shavuot and Hoshana Rabba. About an hour before sunrise he would immerse himself in a ritual mikveh, as was appropriate. One time on Shavuot he asked Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, who was then a young man, to accompany him. Since one is not allowed to immerse himself together with his mentor, the two performed the ritual separately. Rabbi Hedaya, who was about eighty years old, quickly climbed the stairs leading to the mikveh, and when Rabbi Eliyahu finished immersing himself, his mentor was already waiting for him, after he finished his own immersion. On another occasion later on, Rabbi Hedaya was invited to take part in a celebration, but he refused, saying that he did not have the strength to climb steps. This surprised Rabbi Eliyahu, who asked his teacher: "Didn't you climb the steps of the mikveh very quickly?" Rabbi Hedaya replied that the real reason he declined the invitation was that he wanted to avoid going into a place where there was a severe lack of modesty. And he added, "When it is necessary I am young, and when it is necessary I am old." * * * * * * The incident described above can be viewed as an elegant way of avoiding an unpleasant situation. Rabbi Hedaya does not want to take part in an immodest gathering, and therefore he makes up an excuse (in order to reply in a peaceful way) and makes a claim that is not true. The sages have taught us that even the Holy One, Blessed be He, bent the truth in order to keep the peace. Yosef's brothers described something that was not true in order to keep the peace (Yevamot 65b), and under certain circumstances one is allowed to do this. However, it would seem that the above story is has a greater depth than this simple analysis would show. It is an accepted assumption that there are positive and negative traits. We would be naturally inclined to view such traits as zeal ("zerizut") and wisdom as positive traits. On the other hand, such traits as being slow and delaying, laziness, and foolishness are typically considered as negative characteristics. The above story undermines these assumptions. Rabbi Hedaya teaches us that the proper attitude depends on the context. There are times when zeal and quick action are necessary, but there are situations where they can be harmful. And the opposite is also true a delaying action, which is usually seen in a negative light, can be a positive trait in the proper context. An example would be fear, which is usually seen as a negative trait that prevents a person from taking action in a free and precise way, can be a very necessary reaction when it is needed to prevent a person from acting in a dangerous way, and it can in fact protect him from harm. Thus, a complete human being embodies spiritual traits that are the opposite of each other initiative and zeal on one hand, and delay and a lack of action on the other hand. The control of body and spirit which is the result of contrasting spiritual activity is not a simple thing at all. Spiritual fortitude depends

4 on the ability to choose the proper spiritual movement for every situation. Rabbi Hedaya behaves in a way that is characterized by spiritual purity and seclusion. This can be seen in the way he takes care to immerse himself in a mikveh and by the fact that he refuses to take part in an immodest event. The first realm is based on positive action, and it can be seen in the zealous way he goes into the mikveh. The second realm is expressed in the way he makes an effort to avoid negative actions, and what is required for this moderation and a delay. For the first action he is young, and for the second one he is old. Tikun the ritual performed on the night of Shavuot includes reading sections from the Torah and a review of the 613 mitzvot, and it is an expression of a renewed acceptance of the Torah. Rabbi Hedaya teaches us that receiving the Torah depends on how a person acts in the world. When he goes to immerse himself in the mikveh the rabbi teaches us the trait of zeal and enthusiasm, which is needed in order to observe the Torah. However, this lesson is incomplete because it only involves one trait. The lesson will be completed only later, in the Beit Midrash, when a small and apparently insignificant event takes place, where the rabbi teaches his disciple that there are times when it is necessary to delay and to act in moderation. As is well known, Rabbi Nachman of Breslev emphasized the importance of remaining young in spirit. Rabbi Ovadia Hedaya teaches us that real wisdom means to maintain a hold on two opposite traits to choose to be young sometimes and to be old at other times. e-mail: hhcohen4@gmail.com (I will be happy to hear any stories you have about the wise men of the east.)

A FAMILY NAMED "YISRAELI" Giants and Dwarfs - by Rabbi Yikhat Rozen, Director of the Or Etzion Institute Publishing Torah Books of Quality Naama's Story If there's one thing that I really like about the week before Purim, it's "Giants and Dwarfs." Just in case there is somebody out there who is not familiar with this, let me explain. A lottery is run in the class. Every student gets the name of another girl in the class who will be her "Giant." The dwarf must then prepare surprise gifts, candies, letters, and other cute things. She gives these items to the Giant in secret, so that she will not know who gave them to her. In the end everybody brings a Purim gift (Mishloach Manot) to her own Giant, and then all the secrets are revealed. I really enjoy bringing things for my friends, and all the secrecy adds to the fun. Everybody keeps wide awake and tries to figure out who their Dwarf is, and it takes ingenuity to get something in your Giant's bag or put it on her desk, or in her coat pocket, without being discovered. And of course it is just as much fun to receive the gifts, to enjoy some candy, and to feel that there is somebody who cares about me and who is making an effort for me... * * * * * *

And, as expected, the day after Rosh Chodesh, at the beginning of Adar, the teacher announced the game of Giants and Dwarfs. We held a lottery. I hoped that I would get the name of one of my good friends, so that I would really enjoy making an effort for her. I pulled out the lottery ticket, opened it very carefully, and the result was... Gila. Oh, boy! Why did I get Gila? She was one of the most irritating girls in the class! Why should I make an effort for her? Why should I take any time to give good things to Gila? And then the teacher spoke, almost as if she had read my thoughts: "Listen to me, girls. The lottery is final! Everybody got a name, and it is her duty to do good things for that girl in the best way possible. This is your opportunity to strengthen your ties even if you got the name of a girl who is not a close friend... And even if you do not make a new friend, everybody wants to receive nice gifts. Invest your time well, and I hope everybody has lots of fun! All the people of Yisrael are friends to each other!" In my heart I knew that the teacher was right, and I accepted what had happened. * * * * * * Every year Abba reminds us that the main thing is not expensive candies but rather the care that we take in getting items to give away. He therefore gives us an amount of money to spend for our Giant, and it is up to us to spread the money out and use it wisely during the game. One time I will get a small candy, another time I will get a pretty eraser, or I will write a decorated letter. In this way, my Giant will receive a number of different gifts all through the week, and in the end she will have a lot of fun. As a start, I bought Gila a nice snack, and I added a very pretty and decorated letter. I managed to get them both into her bag when she left the room for a few minutes. All day long I waited. But nobody gave me anything. And then, while I was walking home, I suddenly discovered that there was something in the inside pocket of my coat. I checked and saw that it was a small bag, with a biscuit and a small letter. The letter was a simple message of "Happy Purim!" decorated with a lot of color. And what about the biscuit? Was that it? I hate biscuits! I really hoped that next time my Dwarf would find something better to give me! For the next few days I tried to put in a lot of thought in my Giant, Gila. I wrote her many decorated blessings, nice letters, songs and jokes that I found on the internet, and of course I also added some candies that I picked out just for her. On the other hand, I was a bit upset that I didn't feel the same attitude from my own Dwarf. She kept on giving me small items, she brought me candies with strange names that I didn't dare to taste. And her blessings were always decorated without taste, with lots of color. * * * * * * Guess who my Dwarf was! It was none other than Gila!

5 After we discovered who we were and laughed about the fact that we were working for each other, Gila surprised me with what she said. "I really tried to make an effort to give you good things. I know that you are very special, and every time I stood in the store for an hour until I could find some sweet that looked special. I worked for a long time on every note that I sent you, so that they would all be very pretty and colorful. I hope you liked what I got you." Only then did I realize that she picked the "strange" candies after a lot of thought. And she had really spent a long time on each note even if they had not come out according to my taste. And then I realized that I had felt all along that I was putting in so much time on the game, while nobody was doing the same for me. But it could also be that Gila felt the same way from her point of view. Could I tell if Gila had liked what I had given her? In the end, I wonder if it matters anyway. It was fun to give, and it was fun to get something back. We don't know all the other girls in depth. We tried to make the other girl feel good, and we did what we thought would do the job. We got a bit closer to each other. I discovered that Gila is a nice girl after all. In the end, that's what is really important! I am very happy that I got Gila's name for this game! NOW AVAILABLE: The stories of the Yisraeli family published as a book. You can also purchase the book "Mashmiya Yeshua" for children. To order a copy, in Hebrew, contact: 054-6340121. (Note: The stories of the "Yisraeli" family are based on true events or on stories that could have been true.) Reactions and suggestions for stories: yikhat@gmail.com

RESPONSA FOR OUR TIMES Mowing Grass in the Shemitta Year - by Rabbi Re'eim Hacohen, Rosh Yeshiva and Chief Rabbi, Otniel Question: Two weeks ago I wrote about taking care of a herbarium, and I allowed cutting grass that appears on top of the ground if the plants are not uprooted. I received several comments referring to a Baraita (Moed Katan 3a) which implies that mowing grass is prohibited on Shemitta. What are the conditions for mowing grass to be allowed? Answer: In the Talmud, Rabba and Rav Yosef disagree whether one who removes weeds on Shabbat ("menakesh") is guilty of the prohibition of plowing or that of planting (Moed Katan 2b). The Rambam rules that the prohibition is plowing. And we explained in our last article that the dispute between Rabba and Rav Yosef is concerned with pulling out the weeds by the roots, which is an act that is similar to plowing. Weeding and Trimming In addition to the prohibition of menakesh there is also a prohibition of trimming ("kisuach"): "'Do not plant in your field and do not prune your vineyard' [Vayikra 25:4]. This is only a prohibition of planting and pruning, what about weeding, raking ("idur"), and trimming? It is written in the verse, 'Not

your field... Not your vineyard...' do not do any labor in your field, do not do any labor in your vineyard." We must determine exactly what kisuach is, and why both kisuach and idur are mentioned. We find two definitions of the term kisuach. Rashi as printed in Moed Katan (3a) explains that kisuach is trimming the grass above the ground and nikush is pulling the plants out with their roots. This is also quoted by Meiri (ibid) and in the commentary of the Raavad on Torat Kohanim. On the other hand, there is a commentary by one of the early rabbis on the tractate of Mashkin (published by Rabbi Mordechai Yehuda Leib Zachs, 4699, attributed to an earlier version of Rashi): "Kisuach does not mean to uproot the grass but rather to remove the dry and withered plants and leave the damp ones." The editor saw this as the same as what appears in the printed version of Rashi, but in my humble opinion this is not right, since weeds are not dry and withered. I feel that this commentary is describing a type of labor that is similar to pruning. This indeed appears in one of two explanations given by Rabeinu Hillel in Torat Kohanim: "Kisuach is pruning. 'Lo tizmor' is translated as do not prune. In other texts, kisuach means trimming the grass in the field and not pulling it up by the roots." We thus see that according to the printed version of Rashi and many of the early commentators menakesh is forbidden because of plowing. But it is not at all clear how labor that is performed entirely on the surface of the ground is considered plowing! Here is a passage from a Mishnah: "One who does any amount of plowing and one who is menakesh, mekarsem (prune dry branches), or mezared (weed out excess moist branches), even a small amount is guilty. One who gathers wood: if the purpose is for fixing, he is guilty even a small amount; if he needs the wood for heating, the minimum amount is what is needed to boil a small egg. One who trims grass (melaket): if the purpose is for fixing, he is guilty even a for small amount; if the purpose is for animal feed, the minimum amount is what is needed to fill the mouth of a kid." Similarly, for Shemitta, we find that there is a prohibition of removing thorns (Shevi'it, Chapter 4). In the Talmud Yerushalmi two explanations are given: one is that the thorns are removed by plowing, and the other is that the specific act of removing thorns is forbidden. However, it would seem that trimming can be considered as starting to plow when it is done in order to improve the land, in preparation of additional planting. But if the purpose of removing the thorns is merely to clean up the area, in my humble opinion the action is not prohibited at all. This seems to be the straightforward meaning of what appears in the Talmud that weeding is permitted when the person has no intention of improving the land, for example, if the land belongs to somebody else (Shabbat 103a). Rashi explains that this is so because the person does not care about the land. Rabbi Akiva Eiger points out, however, that Rashi himself wrote in another place (Shabbat 75) that one is allowed to perform labor without intending to do so only if he does not want its results at all, so why in our case is it sufficient for Rashi that the person is merely not interested in the results of the labor? In my humble opinion the

6 answer to this question is that for labor whose only purpose is preparation, the reason that "it doesn't matter to him" is sufficient, since work that has no purpose is not prohibited. This was also written by the Radbaz (responsa 5:248) that the labor of soaking wheat and rice as a preparation for planting is only forbidden if this is his explicit purpose Zevachim 94b).. All of the above is according to the viewpoint of the printed Rashi and those who follow him that trimming refers only to action above the ground. However, those who feel that the forbidden trimming is pruning will only prohibit the action because of plowing if the grass is uprooted, thereby softening the ground, as was quoted from Rabba in Moed Katan. Conclusion We can conclude that according to most of the early commentators mowing grass is a rabbinical prohibition, and that this is also the conclusion of the later rabbis. And some early commentators (the first explanation of Rabeinu Hillel, and the commentary on the tractate of Mashkin) feel that trimming grass without uprooting the plant is not prohibited at all. In my humble opinion, mowing a lawn is permitted under any circumstances in the following cases: (1) To preserve a tree, so that it will not suffer harm (following the opinions of Rav Kook and the Chazon Ish). (2) Mowing on land that is not meant for agricultural use. (3) When the mowing is needed to protect from possible snakes. In our area the fear of snakes is a matter of life and death, and it is dangerous to leave a garden with wild grass and thorns. It is therefore necessary to mow the lawn as much as is needed.

THE TABLE OF THE KINGS The Carrot ("Gezer") and the Stick - by Bar-on Dasberg In each article in this series we deal with some aspect of a single chapter of the book of Melachim. (Melachim I Chapter 9) "Pharaoh, the King of Egypt, rose up, and he conquered Gezer and burned it in flames. And he killed the Canaanite who dwelt in the city, and he gave it as a wedding gift to his daughter, the wife of Shlomo." [Melachim I 9:16]. Why does Pharaoh take the trouble to send his army into action in order to capture a city far away from his land, situated near Shlomo's capital city? More than this, why would Pharaoh do this if he then gives up his military achievement by giving the spoils to Shlomo? Gezer was a Canaanite enclave which Efraim did not conquer (Yehoshu 16:10). Evidently it maintained its status until the time of Shlomo. It appears in Egyptian records (such as the El-Amarana letters) as a regional city which has control over the plains of Yehuda and over the main trade route between Egypt and Mesopotamia. Pharaoh saw how his friend Shlomo had control of the trade routes of the Middle East (we will discuss this more in the next article). He understood that the Canaanite city Gezer, which was on the main

road, blocked his way from the trade in the area. He preferred to have Gezer under Shlomo's control. Shlomo, who did not "dirty his hands" with war, achieved territorial control through economic and political interests. This was a brilliant tactic. It is a pity to see how today such strategies are used mainly against us, instead of our being able to control the politics of the Middle East.

RIDDLE OF THE WEEK by Yoav Shelosberg, Director of "Quiz and Experience" Teruma Where does the following equation appear? (X 2) + X + 2X = 42 Answers for last week, Mishpatim: The riddle was - When it is taken a "block" is formed. When it is removed it leads to freedom. - Taking a bribe causes even wise people to become blind. "Do not take a bribe, because a bribe will make a smart person to become blind and will distort the words of a righteous person" [Shemot 23:8]. - If a master knocks out an eye or a tooth of a slave, he or she is set free: "And if a man strikes the eye of his slave or the eye of his maidservant and destroys it, he should set them free in return for the eye." [21:26]. This weekly publication is distributed in Canada by MIZRACHI ORGANIZATION OF CANADA and by THE ZOMET INSTITUTE OF ALON SHVUT. It is an extract from SHABBAT BSHABBATO, a weekly bulletin distributed in hundreds of synagogues in Israel and has been translated by Moshe Goldberg. If you are interested in sponsoring or advertising in an issue of Shabbat BShabbato contact the Mizrachi office in Toronto at 416-630-9266, mizrachi@rogers.com; or in Montreal 514-483-3660, mizrachimontreal@gmail.com.