217. Oneg Shabbos Shoftim by Oneg Shabbos

Issue

217

‫בס"ד‬

‫הריני בא ללמוד תורה לשמה לעשות נחת רוח לאבינו שבשמים‬ ‫מוצאי שבת ר"ת‬

‫מוצאי שבת‬

‫פרשת שופטים‬

‫ז' אלול תשע"ט‬ 7 Sep 2019

‫קבלת שבת‬

JLM

MAN

LON

JLM

BMTH

GLSCW

GHD

MAN

LON

JLM

BMTH

GLSCW

GHD

MAN

LON

8.11

8.58

8.48

7.33

8.31

8.55

8.41

8.40

8.26

6.21

7.27

7.44

7.32

7.21

would be - if only we knew what the future entailed.

‫תמים‬ ‫תהיה‬

LIVING IN THE PRESENT Worry and anxiety is one of the biggest challenges which we humans face today and, more than likely, have always faced. We spend an inordinate amount of time agonising about what lies in wait for us around the corner and all too often we find ourselves fantasising and wishing that if only we could get a sneak-peak into what life has in store for us, it would be immeasurably more bearable and easier to navigate. Wouldn’t it be reassuring if we were to find out that our children would always be safe and be provided with all that they need? Wouldn’t investing money feel like a breeze if we knew which investments would be worthwhile? Imagine if we had a device, much like a GPS, which could tell us about forthcoming dangers and advise accordingly; in fact, even if something tragic and painful was going to happen, surely knowing about it in advance would allow us to be better prepared to deal with it. How much less difficult and how worriless life

All of these thoughts and concepts may seem like science-fiction or mere musings of an ultra-imaginative mind, but in this week’s Parsha the Torah records a number of ancient practices and rituals which people would indeed use to see into the future and to assist them with their every-day decisions1. However, the Torah prohibits us from engaging in such practices and minces no words by calling those who do: ‘an abomination to Hashem’. Cryptically, though, after listing the various examples of these forbidden practices, the Torah concludes with the following command: ‘And you shall be wholehearted (‫ )תמים‬with Hashem your G-d’.2 HaRav Chaim Mordechai Katz zt”l, Rosh Yeshiva of Telz, Cleveland makes note of an interesting machlokes rishonim regarding the meaning of this imperative3: Ramban (and Sforno) understand the Torah to be saying that it is only Hashem who truly knows and decides what will happen in the future and therefore it is ‘only through Him that one should be seeking the future, either via a Navi or via the Urim V’Tumim’ i.e. it is not the practice itself of prying into the future that the Torah warns 1 Although the Rambam in Hilchos Avodah Zora, 11:16, ridicules these practices as being ‘foolish and ignorant’ and goes so far as to say that ‘wise and sound-minded people know that all these matters which the Torah disallowed are not matters of wisdom but formless nonsense followed by senseless people’, the Vilna Gaon (amongst others), famously, strongly disagreed and held that these rituals did actually work. 2 D’varim 18:13 3 See Sefer Be’er Mechokek, Parshas Shoftim compiled by his son, HaRav Yakov Zev Katz Shlit”a

For questions on Divrei Torah, please email the editor Rabbi Yonasan Roodyn at editor@oneg.org.uk

N OW R E AC H

RTA The RTA is a two year post- Semicha programme to introduce newly qualified rabbis to the challenges of our modern world

against but the way in which it is done. Rashi, however, takes this one step further: ‘Walk with Him with wholeheartedness. Trust in Him (i.e. trust what he has in store for you), and do not delve into the future. But rather, whatever comes upon you, accept with wholeheartedness and then you will be with Him and of His portion’. According to Rashi, even if one is fortunate enough to have a Navi at his disposal who can tell him what will be in the future and advise accordingly, one should not turn to the Navi but rather trust in Hashem. Even though we don’t live in a time of Nevi’im, the message is just as relevant today as it was back then: the present is where we’re meant to be. Being ‘wholehearted’ with Hashem means to live in the here-and-now and worrying about the future isn’t just a lack of trust but a moment of ‘being with Hashem’ lost. In other words, Rashi is saying: ‘Tamim Tihiyeh’ i.e. ‘one who lives solely in the present’, ‘Im Hashem Elokecha’, ‘is one who truly experiences Hashem’s presence’. The less we focus on the future, the more we are able to experience the ‘now’ and the more we experience the ‘now’ the more we allow Hashem into our lives. A short pasuk but a profound message indeed. M

To suggest an idea or a response to the ideas exchange please email ideas@oneg.org.uk

ING

45 0 0 P E O P L E

I N 24 C O U

To receive this via email please email subscriptions@oneg.org.uk

Rabbi Akiva Rosenblatt

N T R I ES

Yerushalayim, Amsterdam, Antwerp, Baltimore, Beit- Shemesh, Birmingham, Borehamwood, Budapest, Cancun, Detroit, Edgware, Elstree, Gateshead, Gibraltar, Glasgow, Hale, Henderson, Hong Kong, Ilford, Johannesburg, Lakewood, Larnaca, Las Vegas, Leeds, London, Los Angeles, Manchester, Melbourne, Memphis, Miami, Milan, New York, Oslo, Paris, Petach Tikva, Philadelphia, Pressburg, Radlett, Ruislip, Santiago, Sao Paulo, Stanmore, Southend, Tallinn, Tarzana, Toronto, Uman, Vienna, Zurich

This page is sponsored by OGR Stock Denton | ogrstockdenton.com

Oneg Shabbos Issue 217

Rabbi Yaakov Hibbert Whitefield Community Kollel, PBM, The 6th Form Night Chabura

officers remain behind. One officer says that he wants to share his story:

The following is a real excerpt [my rough translation] from a London newspaper on 20th July 1916 during the middle of World War One. The actual piece was taken from an Old Hungarian newspaper called the ‘Pesti Hirlap’ which had printed a letter that a nonJewish Hungarian soldier had written from the trenches to his wife: “If you would be so kind to find our Jewish neighbour, so that he can unravel the mystery of the words ‘Shema Yisroel’. For during the time that the bombs are falling and destroying everything around us here in the trench, while men are falling like the wheat being harvested, the Jewish soldiers cry ‘Shema Yisroel’ and they are miraculously saved from sure death, while their non Jewish companions are killed. As soon as you have resolved the mystery of these words from our Jewish neighbour please let me know, so that when death looms over my head I can save my skin”

These amazing words are in fact a ‫ רש"י‬on this week’s ‫סדרה‬. In the pre-war speech that the ‫ כהן‬makes to the Jewish soldiers we read, “And he shall say to them, “‫ – שמע ישראל‬Hear, O Israel, today you are coming near to the battle against your enemies; let your heart not be faint; do not be afraid…. For Hashem, your G-d, is the One Who goes with you, to fight for you with your enemies, to save you.”

The phrase "‫ "שמע ישראל‬seems superfluous, for it is obvious that the ‫ כהן‬is addressing Israel? Explains the Gemara: It is written as an allusion to the Shema, which begins with these words, “to teach us that even if there is no merit in you but the recitation of Shema alone, you are worthy that He should save you”. The arameG continues to tell us that before the epic battle between ‫ דוד המלך‬and Goliath, Goliath would approach the camp of the Jewish people “every morning and evening”. He taunted the Jewish people at these times because this was when the Jewish people recite the Shema. The Shema protects us from our enemies and he wanted to deny us this merit. R’ Shlomo Carlebach tells over that during the Yom Kippur War he gave a concert to lift the spirits of the Israeli soldiers. After the concert finishes and the soldiers dissipate, some

“I was brought up on an extremely non-religious kibbutz. It wasn’t that we didn’t believe in G-d, G-d just didn’t exist. We were taught that religious people are living a lie and Israel wasn’t any more holy than Tokyo or Moscow. When the war started, I ended up fighting next to a religious soldier. Before every encounter with the enemy; before everything he did, he cried, “Shema Yisroel”. This absolutely grated on my nerves, why did I need to be subjected to hearing his religious beliefs? I told him how I felt about it to which he simply replied, “You fight your way, I fight my way”. [The officer begins to tremble and cry as he continued]. Thursday morning the shelling started and suddenly I realise that my comrade hadn’t screamed his usual cry of “Shema Yisroel”. I looked around and I saw him severely injured, on the brink of death. I bent down to him and asked him if there was anything I could do for him. With his last words he says “Please, say “Shema Yisroel” in place of me”. And that moment it suddenly dawned on me not just that I had to believe in G-d, but that I had seen the Hand of G-d”

The statement of ‫ שמע ישראל‬could quite possibly be termed the mission statement of the Jewish People. It’s one of the first sentences Jewish children learn and many Yidden have died with ‫ שמע‬on their lips. There are many deep ideas that revolve around this mission statement. But a more basic approach to this special statement is beautifully expressed by the ‫שם‬ ‫משמואל‬. The most basic premise of the Shema is that through it we accept upon ourselves the yoke of heaven – i.e. Hashem is the boss. This most basic thought, that there is a Creator, is what lies at the heart of every Jew. This idea is really the mechanics of what makes “a Pintele Yid” - the Yiddish term which basically refers to the “Jewish Spark” that lies within the heart of every Yid. The spark that made some of the most unaffiliated Jews utter the words “Shema Yisroel” as they were tortured throughout our history. “Shema Yisroel” – Hashem is the boss, represents the first building block in our Yiddishkeit; from here we began the building that is Judaism. When we fail, we always have this first building block to restart from. When we have nothing else left either physically or spiritually we always can call on this basic element – “Shema Yisroel”. As we approach the ‫ ימים נוראים‬this is a tremendous comfort for us says the ‫שם משמואל‬. We need to remind ourselves that no matter how many times we try to restart our engines of '‫ ;עבודת ה‬no matter how many times we have kick started our year with new resolutions, the message that a Yid carries with the cry of Shema Yisroel is that strength of always having that first building block with which to start again from. So important is the statement of “Shema Yisroel” that it alone saves Jewish soldiers. The cry of Shema is one that reaffirms his basic knowledge that there is a Master of the world. The reaffirmation of this seminal building block is such a tremendous merit for a person. As long as the Jew can say Shema Yisroel there is hope for renewal. M

7 September 2019

‫ז' אלול תשע"ט‬

‫פרשת שפטים‬

This page is sponsored by M&N Insurance | mninsure.com

onarchy features as a central theme in this week’s Sedra. On the brink of their entrance into Eretz Yisrael, Hashem instructs the Jewish People that at some point in the future they should appoint for themselves a king to rule them. As the pesukim in Perek 17 read: (14) When you come to the land Hashem, your G-d, is giving you, and you possess it and live therein, and you say, “I will set a king over myself, like all the nations around me,” (15) You shall set a king over you, one whom the Lord, your God, chooses; from among your brothers, you shall set a king over yourself; you shall not appoint a foreigner over yourself, one who is not your brother. What seems to be a very simple command is in fact a mochlokes. The Meforshim hotly debate the role of monarchy within Judaism, with opinions ranging from classifying it as an unequivocal Biblical mandate to others who deem it to be one of the Jewish People’s most devastating decisions. At face value such debate appears to be futile. Surely the Torah clearly commands the appointment of a monarch, as set out in the pesukim above, so how could there be such mochlokes. The Sifri even assures that success in conquering and settling Eretz Yisrael was directly dependant on the fulfilment of appointing a king.Yet, a closer reading of the pesukim immediately throws into question the nature of this mitzvah, as the Torah does not use the usual terminology when introducing a commandment. The Torah simply says ‫"שום‬ "‫תשים עליך מלך‬, that when you come to the Land and ask for a monarch, indeed “you should appoint a king over yourself.” By using this phraseology the Torah appears to be giving an advisable directive rather than a straight up command. Moreover, when the Jewish People do end up asking for a king, as the Torah foreshadows, in the times of Shmuel Ha’Navi, their request is met with a telling off, with Shmuel sharply rebuking the people for making such a proposition. The Gemorah in Sanhedrin discusses whether Shmuel’s warning was totally factual or if he was exaggerating in order to ensure his vital message hit home The Netziv, makes clear that the appointment of a monarch is unquestionably a Torah command, as clarified by Chazal already. Nonetheless, this mitzvah is different from other mitzvos which apply equally and uniformly in all times and circumstances. Netziv explains that when it comes to society building and political leadership there are numerous options. What is ideal for one society living at a particular time is not the right thing for another society. Whereas one society desperately needs the leadership of a monarch, in whom all power and jurisdiction is concentrated, for another society this model of governance would be a disaster. Therefore, even though the Torah views monarchy to be the best system of national governance, it does not command it unequivocally. The Torah builds-in an understanding and dispensation for those Jewish societies for whom a king will not work, allowing them to create another form of political leadership without transgressing a Torah command. The Malbim presents another approach to explain how the appointment of a monarch is a Torah commandment but not one that needed to be fulfilled straight away. Hashem had plans for the appointment of a king as per His command in the Torah; nonetheless the Jewish People’s demand for one at the time of Shmuel Ha’Navi was inappropriate, and not just because of the manner in which they requested it. Malbim explains that Hashem meant for a king to rule over His people in ordinary times, when the Jews lived a natural and mundane existence. The times of Shmuel, however, were not such times. At that point

they were still living in a supernatural Rabbi Eliav Sagal world, where Hashem fought their wars and provided for all their needs in an abnormal manner. Therefore the Jewish People were jumping the gun by asking for a monarch fitting for a far more mundane existence. R. Shimshon Raphael Hirsch offers another approach to the question, and one which has a powerful message about the role of a Jewish monarchy and Jewish leadership. Like the other Meforshim discussed, R. Hirsch is also clear that the appointment of a monarch is a definite Torah command. There was no problem in requesting a king, however the type of king they requested was the issue. Fundamentally mistaken in their understanding of what a Jewish king is all about, they made an error by requesting a political king. They wanted a “king like the other nations” who would serve to concentrate, centralise and efficiently exercise the power and wealth of the entire nation. Such a king would then successfully lead them into battle and make Israel a powerhouse on the international stage, but a Torah monarch is not supposed to be that. Ideally, a king is a spiritual leader, not a political one. Their role is to unite the spiritual capacities of the people, and ensuring that the individual’s contribution to society resulted in a national achievement that is greater than its sum of parts. Therefore, the role of leading the Jewish People into battle to conquer and settle the Land of Israel was Hashem’s remit. Only after this was fully achieved and the stage had been set to live as a people in full service of Hashem, was a human king called for in order to lead this noble endeavour. That is why the Torah does not make a precise commandment about appointing a king since it very much depended upon when the circumstances would call for it. This is also why the people were wrong to ask for a king in the times of Shmuel when the era for a Torah styled monarch had not been reached. The ideal king in Judaism is Dovid HaMelech. He uniquely managed to combine the political and spiritual needs of a Jewish monarchy. Hence Dovid HaMelech’s name became synonymous with Jewish monarchy and until this day we daven that BenDovid should come and redeem us and be our true king once again. Even with Tisha b’Av behind us we continue to long for those times when a Jewish king will lead us once more, not in battle or in politics, but in a spiritual journey to achieve our ultimate existence. M

RECOMMENDED SPEAKER

MR CHARLIE HARARY www.torahanytime.com

Oneg Shabbos Issue 217

This page is sponsored ‫לע''נ ביילא בת ר׳ משה ע''ה‬

'IF I WERE A RICH MAN' “Place upon yourself a king…He shall not greatly increase silver and gold for himself.” — Devarim 17:16-20 The Torah commands us to appoint a king to rule over the Jewish people. However, there are various warnings given to the king. He should not acquire too many horses, he should not take too many wives, and he should not amass too much gold and silver. The Daas Zakainim explains that each of these excesses is singled out to protect the king from a particular danger. The danger of amassing too much wealth is that it leads to arrogance.

We are obligated to treat a king with great respect. This Daas Zakainim is difficult to understand because, as the Rambam explains, we are obligated to treat a king with great honour; it is vital for his effectiveness as a ruler. As a result, any individual, even the greatest talmid chacham or Navi, who walks into the chambers of a king must bow down full face to the ground. No person is allowed to sit down in his presence. Additionally, the king himself must guard his kavod. He isn’t allowed to stand up for any man in public. He isn’t allowed to use titles of honour for anyone else. If he commands a person to leave the room and that man refuses, the king has the right to have him killed. At the same time, a king is expected to remain humble. The Torah isn’t afraid that the great honour accorded to him will bring him to arrogance. He is capable of maintaining his sense of balance by understanding that honour isn’t due to him, but rather his position. He is still a mortal human. As a servant of Hashem, he plays his role as everyone else does.

Why is money more dangerous than honour and power? The question then becomes obvious. If the king is capable of maintaining his humility despite the extraordinary honour accorded to him, why is the Torah so fearful that he will become arrogant if he amasses wealth? It’s as if the Torah is saying, “Honour he can handle, but wealth? Impossible!”

Rabbi Ben Tzion Shafier Founder, Shmuz.com

Why would it be so difficult for him not to be conceited if he acquired wealth? The answer to this question is based on a deeper understanding of the human personality.

The antidote to honour Honour is a difficult life test. When a person is given status and accord, it is natural for him to feel different, apart and above the rest of the human race. Power, too, is a grave test. When a person feels that he can control the destiny of other people, he runs the risk of feeling self-important, significant, and mighty. However, these are situations that a person can deal with. The antidote to honour is to remember where I came from and where I am going. I must understand that today I am being given great honour, but it will pass quickly. Very quickly. Today they sing my praises; tomorrow they will forget my name. That is the way of the world. Power is also something that a person can learn to deal with. As I stand here now, I control the destiny of others. But do I? Do I really have power? I can’t even control whether I will be alive tomorrow or not. When I lay my head on the pillow this evening, it is not in my control to will myself alive tomorrow. When my time is up, it’ll be over, and there is nothing that I can do to change that. The big, powerful, mighty me can’t even control whether I exist or not. In that sense, honour and power are potentially dangerous, but a person can be humble despite them.

The danger of Wealth Great wealth is different. Wealth brings a person to a much more dangerous sense of himself — a sense of independence. “I am rich! I don’t need anyone! I don’t need my wife. I don’t need my children. I don’t even need Hashem! I can buy and sell the whole world!” This seems to be the answer to the Daas Zakainim. Because this sense of independence is almost a natural outgrowth of wealth, the Torah warns a king of Israel not amass too much of it. He may be a great man, and he might be able to keep his sense of balance despite many temptations, but wealth will almost certainly lead to arrogance, and it is something that even a man as great as a king in Israel will not be able to resist.

7 September 2019

‫ז' אלול תשע"ט‬

‫פרשת שפטים‬

In our world This concept has great relevance to us. Whether we are wealthy as compared to others or not, the reality is that we enjoy great bracha living in the 21st century. Today, we all enjoy material possessions, luxuries, and opportunities that were unheard of in previous generations. One of the great dangers of living in these times is the sense of independence. “I am young, strong, and healthy. I can forge my own way. I don’t need anyone; I can make it on my own. I am independent.” While on one level, this sense is central to being an effective human being, it is also fraught with danger. A person must remain clear-headed in his understanding of Who is really in charge here. I am not the Master of the universe, nor even the master of my destiny. I am dependent. I depend on my Creator for my daily bread, my health, my success, and my existence. With this understanding, a man can enjoy great bracha and still remain humble. When a person is humble, the rest of his character traits naturally fall into place. But when a person is arrogant, the rest of his middos are out of balance as well. An arrogant person becomes angry easily. A humble man doesn’t. An arrogant individual doesn’t feel the pain of others, but a humble man does. The pivot point of all good middos is humility. Just as humility is the centre of a person’s character development, so too is it the cornerstone of his avodas Hashem. The Chovos Ha’Levovos explains that just as a master needs a servant, a servant needs a master. One cannot exist without the other. Any sense of arrogance is a denial of my dependence upon Hashem. It revokes my status of a servant of my Master. This sense of dependence upon my Creator brings a person balance and internal happiness because he is in synch with his himself. He doesn’t need to self-inflate and create illusions about his worth. Ultimately, it leads a person to success in this world and the World to Come. M For more on this topic please listen to Shmuz #58: Arrogance: Misdirected Greatness of Man, and #59: Humility: An Issue of Perspective Rabbi Shafier is the founder of the Shmuz.com – The Shmuz is an engaging, motivating shiur that deals with real life issues.

s a e IEd xchange Oneg Shabbos is looking for someone to create an Oneg Shabbos website

If you have a communal project idea but don’t know where to start, post it on the ideas exchange and ‫ בע''ה‬someone with experience & expertise will see this box and be in touch. Contact ideas@oneg.org.uk

Oneg Shabbos Issue 217

This page is sponsored anonymously

tock.com © shutters

'EXPECTATIONS'

number of years ago we were sitting at the Shabbos table with a newly married talmid of mine and his wife. He was a ba’al teshuva and she was a giyoress, both of whom had grown tremendously in the Yiddishkeit. At some point she began telling us about her background, which included the following incident. When she was nine years old, her parents sent her from New Hampshire across the county to Arizona, where the highest level gymnastics training school was located. This was the school that produced gymnasts for the United States Olympic team, and her parents wanted her to become an Olympian. The school had a dormitory, and nine year old Alice would be visited by her parents every six months or so. Gymnastics training became her life. At age thirteen, she was in a competition and fell off of the uneven parallel bars sustaining a broken collar bone, which would obviously put her out of training for quite a while. “My parents flew in to visit me in the hospital” she told us. “When they walked into the hospital room, the first thing my father said to me – even before saying hello and asking me how I felt – was ‘Alice, you’ve disappointed us’”. She said this pretty matter-of-factly. Now, having worked with ba’alei teshuva – and FFB’s for that matter – for so many years, there’s very little that shocks me. However, I must admit that this one stopped me in my tracks, and the piece of chicken perched on my fork resumed its place on my plate. “What kind of relationship do you have with him now?” I asked, genuinely curious about how this played out. “Uh, strained” she answered. I remember thinking at the time that this is the sort of thing one would only find by others. After all, she was a giyoress, so her father’s value system, him not being one of our tribe and all, although abominable, was at least not beyond the pale of what could be expected. Just open masechta Avoda Zara and you’ll see that nothing is to be assumed out of bounds by them. But

by us – nothing like that could possibly happen. So I thought.

Rabbi Dovid Kaplan Ohr Somayach

Reb Shlomo Yehuda Rechnitz spoke last year at the Mir simchas bais hashoeva and told a story. I wasn’t there to hear this directly from him, but it was told over during the drasha in one of our shuls on a Shabbos. A man saw a group of struggling youth on Leil Shabbos in a frum neighborhood. One of the boys was smoking and doing something on his smartphone. “How can you do this to your father and mother?” the man asked him, recognizing him as the son of very prominent parents. “My parents get more nachas from me now than they ever did before” the boy responded. There was no animosity in his voice and no cynicism. The man was baffled. “How could you say something like that? What you’re doing is devastating to them.” “No it isn’t.” “Of course it is.” “Not true. When I was in yeshiva and I’d come home with a grade of ninety on a test, my parents would always say ‘so why didn’t you get a ninety five?’ If it was a ninety five they’d say ‘so why didn’t you get a hundred?’ They were never happy with me no matter how well I did. Now, if I tell them I put on tefillin, they say ‘wow Shmuly, we’re so proud of you. You’re so good.’ So like I said, they get more nachas now. Why should I take that away from them?” I don’t know what the reaction was in the Mir, but in our shul you could hear a pin drop. Although I didn’t see any, there were probably a few teardrops too. I wonder if this boy’s parents had been talking to Alice’s dad. A frum couple, Chaim and his wife Rina, consulted with me recently regarding a couple of life and career decisions. When they walked in they made the impression of being high caliber individuals, and it turned out that indeed they were. Both were smart, capable and talented. So I was a bit surprised when at the outset of our discussion Chaim disclosed that he suffers

7 September 2019

‫ז' אלול תשע"ט‬

from serious nervous tension. I’d seen him around and he never struck me as the type. It came out that this stemmed from pressure being put on him by his father to accomplish certain things which, although perhaps capable if he pushed himself, Chaim had no interest in doing. I asked him if this began before or after marriage. “Long before I got married” he said, “it’s been going on my whole life.” It seems Alice’s dad really gets around.

‫פרשת שפטים‬

why do we want him to be doing whatever it is that we’re pressuring him to do? Is it becomes that’s what’s good for him, or is it because that’s what good for us?

So what can parents reasonably expect and at what point are they crossing a line into a red zone of being unrealistic, overbearing, insensitive, delusionary, and any other adjective you’d like to throw in? I think the first rule is that parents should never expect more than what a child’s true potential is. Notice that I’ve included the word “true”, because that’s the key to the whole thing. In order to assess potential, patents need to take into account the need to play, relax, attention span, the example they themselves are setting, and a slew of other factors. If not taken into account, something along the lines of “If we just get Moishy to stop playing with his friends after school and have him go straight to the bais medrash” is not being true. While a little push is sometimes necessary, there is a difference between a push and a shove. One telltale sign of when the red line is crossed is if the child is smiling less than he should be. Now, I’m not one who says a kid always has to be happy as a lark – after all, there aren’t many kids who enjoy doing homework or folding laundry – but a child should usually be upbeat and somewhat smiley. Lack of either should trigger a review of parental pressure policy. Rule number two is that nothing any other child is doing has any bearing on the determination of what your child is capable of. Perhaps others could be used as a gauge to determine the approximate range of what could possibly be expected, but at the end of the day it boils down to what your particular child could do. Parents go nuts from seeing other young boys who love going to shul while their son doesn’t, or boys who seem to do nothing but study mishnayos and speak Aramaic while their son has very little interest in anything other than sports. One of the best ways to guarantee that he’ll have even less interest is to compare him and expect him to be like those other boys. Rule number three, and the one that perhaps hurts most when parents are honest with themselves, is the question of why do we want him to be doing whatever it is that we’re pressuring him to do? Is it becomes that’s what’s good for him, or is it because that’s what good for us? “His progress and excellence will impress others and give us a measure of kavod” is a thought that underlies more child rearing decisions than many parents would

like to admit. This “I want him to be impressive” malady is more common among fathers, but plenty of mothers are suffering from this as well. Do you want him to be in shul because that’s what he should really be doing, or is it so you could tell your friend “Our Zalmy is only nine but he sits through the whole davening?” Do you expect your kids to sit through long divrei Torah at the Shabbos table because that’ll help them grow as healthy and upbeat bnei Torah, or is it so that you could tell your extended family members about how ruchni you Shabbos table is? Like I said, self honesty can be painful. I have an idea. The next time you make the bracha of “shelo asani goy”, think about Alice’s dad. You’re so happy, so so happy that you aren’t like him…aren’t you? M

This page is sponsored by nextgenrealestate.co.uk

‫לע''נ אריאל יהודה ז''ל בן ר' פינחס צבי נ''י קליין‬

Oneg Shabbos Issue 217

Restoring the primacy of Choshen Mishpat Under the auspices of Harav Chaim Kohn ‫שליט"א‬

Rabbi Meir Orlian Halachah Writer, BHI

THEFT: UNAWARE Unfortunately, Jeremy was not a scrupulous fellow. He was involved in various forms of theft, but always tried to evade responsibility. One day he saw the gabbai of his shul, Mr. Prince, leave an envelope with money in his desk. “I left an envelope with money in shul today,” Jeremy told his friend, Yossi. “Would you be able to stop off this evening and take it? It’s in the gabbai’s desk.” “No problem,” said Yossi. In the evening, he went to the shul and took the envelope from the gabbai’s desk. The following day, the gabbai summoned Yossi to his office. “Last night someone stole money from the shul,” he said. “The surveillance camera shows that you took it.” “Jeremy told me to take it,” replied Yossi. “If anyone is liable, he is!” Mr. Prince called Jeremy in. “I understand that you sent Yossi to steal money,” he said. “You are responsible.” “How can you hold me responsible?” argued Jeremy. “I didn’t do anything! Yossi didn’t have to listen to me. He’s responsible for his own actions.” “I had no idea that the money wasn’t yours,” replied Yossi. “You said that it was.” “You still can’t call me a thief,” insisted Jeremy. “I didn’t do anything.” “Where is the money now?” asked Mr. Prince. “I was mugged on the way to Jeremy,” said Yossi. “The money’s gone but I’m not guilty” “You never got the money?” Mr. Prince asked Jeremy. “No,” said Jeremy. “I refuse to accept blame as a thief!” “I’d like to discuss this with Rabbi Dayan,” said Mr. Prince, “and I would like you both to come with me.” Mr. Prince took the two of them over to Rabbi Dayan. “Jeremy told Yossi to take money from the shul,” said Mr. Prince. “Yossi assumed it was Jeremy’s, but it was not. Is Jeremy liable as a thief?” “The Gemara (Kiddushin 42b; B.M. 10b) teaches that there is no agency for sin (‘ein shaliach lidvar aveirah’),” replied Rabbi Dayan. “Although a person’s agent is like him, and the agent’s actions on his behalf are legally binding, this does not apply to agency for transgressions. Thus, when someone sends an ‘agent’ to steal or

damage, the sender is not legally liable; the thief himself is held accountable” (Rema, C.M. 182:1; 348:8). “Why is that?” asked Jeremy. “The basic rationale is that each person is responsible to fulfill Hashem’s commands,” explained Rabbi Dayan. “Therefore, the excuse that ‘So-and- so sent me to steal or damage’ does not exempt the thief, since Hashem — Whose commands are superior — instructed him not to steal” (Sma 182:2). “In this case, though,” pointed out Yossi, “I had no idea that the money was not Jeremy’s.” “Indeed, according to one opinion in the Gemara, if the agent did not have a choice whether or not to obey, the sender is liable, since the rationale does not apply,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “Tosafos applies this also to our case in which the agent was unaware that he was instructed to transgress, since he had no reason not to obey. Nimukei Yosef disagrees, though, and exempts the sender” (Shach 348:6). “Similarly, some maintain that if the agent is known to transgress, the sender is liable, since the rationale does not apply. The sender was aware that the agent would fulfill his instructions and not heed the mitzvah,” added Rabbi Dayan. “Others do not differentiate, since the agent remains obligated to heed the commandment and can choose whether to obey. Some also maintain that if the sender threatened the agent to force him to obey, the sender is liable for the theft” (Rema, C.M. 388:15; Shach 388:67; Pischei Choshen, Geneivah 4:24). “Thus there is a dispute whether Jeremy is liable,” concluded Rabbi Dayan. “Nonetheless, he has a moral obligation to repay the theft that he caused, and if the money had reached his hands he would certainly have been liable for it, like any other lost item” (Pischei Choshen, Geneivah 4:23[66]). M

Provided by Business Halacha Institute. The BHI is a non-profit organization based in New York that educates and guides people in up to date applications of monetary halacha. For more information or to browse the BHI archives, visit www.businesshalacha.com

7 September 2019

‫ז' אלול תשע"ט‬

‫פרשת שפטים‬

MIDDOS ‫דרגה יתירה‬ Rabbi Zalman Guttman Ramat Shlomo

)‫טז‬-‫כי השחד יעור פקחים ויסלף דברי צדיקים וגו' (יט‬

One major obstacle we must overcome in our daily ‫( חשבון הנפש‬accounting of the soul) is to decide whether any particular deed that we did that day was done as a result of a “bribe” or not. Did we justify our deed with a personal interest or gratification? For example, when one eats an extra piece of cake, knowing that he or she really shouldn’t, does he tell himself that it is a mitzvah since otherwise it will get thrown out - and that would cause ‫!?בל תשחית‬

Personal desires literally blind our perception so that we do not see what we do not wish to see; and this is what takes us far away from the truth. Sometimes in order to perform a mitzvah, a person justifies all his actions along the way even if they are hurtful or dishonest to others. One can transgress countless sins ‫ בין אדם לחבירו‬- between man and man, with the goal of the “mitzvah” he wishes to perform completely blinding him! R’ Yisroel Salanter zt’’l writes that when Chazal in Pirkei Avos teach us that any argument that is ‫ לשם שמים‬- For the sake of Heaven, will be preserved in the end (‫)סופו להתקיים‬, it refers to when both sides of the argument believe that they are 100% justified; that in their minds they believe everything they are fighting for is truly ‫ לשם שמים‬and neither side will back down nor attempt to make peace. Such a ‫ מחלוקת‬will surely be preserved and it will last forever! One must stop and look objectively at every situation. Step out of your own shoes and become a judge who is not blinded by bribery and self-gratification. Make sure that whatever you do is truly 100% ‫ !לשם שמים‬M

Dear Talmid,

Focus on Middos

When the Polish government tried to ban ‫ש ִחיטָ ה‬, ְ R’ Chaim Ozer ‫ ַזצַ״ל‬appointed his close ‫חָ בֵ ר‬, ‫ ר׳ זַלְ מַ ן‬Sorotzkin ‫ ַזצַ״ל‬, to head the Committee for the Defense of ‫ש ִחיטָ ה‬. ְ When his efforts to defeat the law failed, ‫ ר׳ זַלְ מַ ן‬immediately countered it by placing a complete ban on meat consumption. Three million Orthodox Polish Jews adhered to his word, and immediately stopped buying meat. When the non-Jews who handled most of the Polish cattle trade realized that their source of livelihood had almost dried up, they complained bitterly to the Polish government. Within three weeks the decree was canceled. ‫ ר׳ זַלְ מַ ן‬often traveled to St. Petersburg to intercede with the authorities. Thanks to his close connections with General Stasowitz, who was in charge of mobilization, he managed to procure “temporary deferments” for hundreds of ‫ ַרבָ נִים‬who were not recognized by the Polish government. Miraculously, the general simply forgot to send the temporary deferments to St. Petersburg for re-processing, and they remained in force for the duration of the war. After the war, R’ Sorotzkin set up a ‫ וַעַ ד הַ י ְִשיבֹות‬based on the Vilna model. The ‫’וַעַ ד‬s first task was to provide a financial base for the ‫י ְִשיבֹות‬. R’ Sorotzkin decided to travel to England, where he was greatly aided by Dayan Yechezkel Abramsky ‫ ַזצַ״ל‬, the ‫ ַאב בֵ ית ִדין‬of London at that time. During that year, he organized support that continues until today. Against all odds, he was successfully collected over £40,000 sterling (Ed note: In 1940, £1 sterling = $4.03. With the inflation rate, £40,000 in 1940 is equivalent to $2.7 million today!) My ‫ ּתַ לְ ִמיד‬, R’ Sorotzkin was a leader of many organizations, yet he would travel by bus and refuse to take a cab. He would say, “With the extra money, another child could be saved for ‫ּתֹורה‬ ָ and ‫מצְ ֹות‬.” ִ R’ Sorotzkin taught by example what is a true Jewish leader. Every cause was only about concern for ‫שמַ יִם‬ ָ ‫ כְ בֹוד‬or a fellow Jew; nothing was about him. His projects saw unusual ְ ‫יהי זִכְ רֹו ָב‬ ‫ ִסיַעְ ּתָ א דִ ְשמַ יָא‬, and his legacy lives on in the many institutions he founded. ‫רּוך‬ ִ

‫ביְדִידוּת‬ ְ , Your ‫רֶּבִי‬

From the Pirchei of Agudas Yisroel Newsletter based on an article in Yated

Do you have an interest in a business or properties in America with an American bank account? Capitalize on the protection! You or your business may be eligible to enjoy the long-term, tax-free return on investment and business protection. Please call Leo (Itzy) Eckstein +1 347 838 0869 for details.

Oneg Shabbos Issue 217

THE OBLIGATION TO BRING AN ASHAM TALUI ‫ספק אכל חלב ספק לא אכל‬

In the Torah, we find (Vayikra 5:17-18) that if someone violates a negative commandment, but there is an element of his being unaware, he must bring a korban asham. The Gemara explains that this refers to an asham talui, and it is brought only when a person commits a sin which would deserve kareis if done intentionally, and would require a chattas if done unintentionally. Here, when the person is not sure whether or not he committed this act, he brings an asham talui.

On 17b, Amoraim argue regarding the details of this halacha. R’ Assi holds that this offering is brought in any case of doubt, even if, for example, there was only one piece of fat in front of a person, and he did not know whether it was permitted fat or forbidden cheilev. Rav disagrees and says that an asham talui is only brought if the case was where there were two pieces of fat in front of the person, one of them permitted and one forbidden, and after eating one of them it was uncertain and not possible to determine which one he ate. There are three explanations given in the Gemara to explain the view of Rav. Rava says that it is a scriptural decree that asham talui be brought only in a case of two pieces. R’ Zeira says that only where there were two pieces is an asham talui appropriate, because this is a case where the doubt can possibly be settled and resolved, because it is theoretically possible for an expert to examine the remaining piece and determine if it is the forbidden or permitted fat. R’ Nachman explains that an asham talui is brought only when there were two pieces involved in the original mishap, because in this scenario we know that there was a forbidden object in front of him (‫ )איסורא איתחזק‬when the act of eating occurred. If there was only one object to begin with, even though it is possible that it was a piece of cheilev, the degree of uncertainty is lesser in a certain sense, and an asham talui is not warranted. The Gemara explains later (25a, 26b) that the purpose of an asham talui in a situation where it is doubtful whether the sin occurred or not is in order for the person who did the possible sin to be shielded and protected from any possible suffering in the meantime, until he finds out that he did the sin and is able to bring a chattas and fully atone for his act. The Chinuch (Mitzvah 123) and others explain that the Torah commands that a person bring a korban for the very fact that he acted without proper care and attention so that his actions resulted in a possible violation of a mitzvah. Sefer Kovetz Ha’aros notes that according to these Rishonim the asham talui is brought due to the certainty of a person’s allowing himself to possibly commit this sin. M

CO U

119 X

DAYS

‫נ“ב‬ ‫כריתות י"ז‬ ‫בכורות‬

Distinctive Insight

E TH

Daf Yomi WEEKLY

DOWN TO NT

Siyum Hashas

Stories from the Daf EATING SLOWLY Stories from the Daf

”...‫“ספק יש בו כשיעור‬

H2 On today’s daf we find that one who is unsure whether he ate an olive’s bulk of chelev brings an asham talui.

Someone brought a dish of ice cream to the Skverer Rebbe, zt”l, shortly after he came to America. The rebbe—who had never seen ice cream before—gazed at it in wonderment. The man who had brought it said, “Eat it quick, rebbe, before it melts.” “If so, I will never eat this food,” said the rebbe. “But why?” asked the chassid.

“My entire life, I work to eat slowly; a food which one must rush to eat is definitely not for me.”1

But eating slowly has its problems too. One man would always eat very slowly, being careful to take small bites at intervals. One meal he managed to eat with exceptional slowness. After he finished, he wondered whether he had even eaten an olive’s bulk of bread in the time it takes to eat half a loaf. Of course, if one is certain that he has not eaten this much, he may not make an after blessing on the food. But since this man was unsure, he wondered whether he could make an afterblessing or not. He was unable to eat even an olive’s bulk by the end of the meal, and, while he committed to be more careful in the future, he was unsure what to do this one time. When this question reached the Chofetz Chaim, zt”l, he ruled that he should not make an after-blessing in this situation.

“One who ate less than a k’zayis of bread during the meal, or even if he had a k’zayis in more than the time it takes to eat a half loaf of bread, may not make an after-blessing. If one feels satiated from this minimal amount of bread, however, it is not clear whether one can say bircas hamazon. Even if he eats an olive’s bulk of bread within this time, he should not rely on this minimal amount to discharge his obligation to make blessings on other foods eaten during the meal. Better not to eat bread and to make blessingss on the other foods. The only exception to this rule is Shabbos. Since it is a mitzvah to eat a k’zayis of bread on Shabbos, all other foods in the meal are secondary to the bread and one need not make a blessing on them.”2 M ‫ כן שמעתי‬1 ‫ סק"א ושעה"צ‬,‫ וס' ר"י‬,‫ ס' קע"ז‬,‫ מ"ב‬2

Brought to you by

7 September 2019

‫ז' אלול תשע"ט‬

‫פרשת שפטים‬

Sages through Ages THE

Dr Benji Schreiber

Ohr HaChayim HaKadosh

Salé, Morocco 1696 – Jerusalem 1743 15th Tamuz av Chaim ben Attar, best known as the Ohr HaChayim HaKadosh after his commentary on Chumash, was born in 1696 in Morocco where he spent most his life. When he was eight years old he learnt Torah from his grandfather, Rav Chaim HaZaken, whose name he carried. It was a turbulent time in Morocco under the rule of Ismail Ibn Sharif, the ‘warrior king’, who fought for Moroccan independence from the Ottoman empire. Rav Chaim became a darshan in Morocco, giving two shiurim a day, and he was the tzedoko gabbai. When he was 35 years old he completed his first sefer, Chefetz HaShem, Hashem’s will. This was a commentary on several masechtos including Brachos and Shabbos. He obtained the haskamos of Rabbanim in Morocco and travelled to Amsterdam to have the sefer printed by Rav Shlomo Propus. In 1738 there was a heavy famine in Morocco and he started travelling to Israel. He travelled first to Algiers and then to Livorno, Italy, which was under the control of the Medici family. He had married Pachunia but did not have children, so he married a second wife, Esther, as well. Both came with him to Eretz Yisrael. Unfortunately both were childless and they are buried near him on Har HaZeitim. In Livorno he was sustained by community members. His drashos were attended by large numbers with standing room only. While there he published his sefarim Ohr HaChayim, his famous work on the Chumash, and Pri Tohar, written on the Yoreh Deah section of the Shulchan Aruch.

In Eretz Yisrael He planned aliya to Eretz Yisrael while in Livorno and obtained support from

community members to set up a Yeshiva in Jerusalem. He recruited talmidim from Algiers and travelled within Italy to find financial backing. They then travelled via Alexandria and came by ship to Acco in 1741. When they arrived they visited Eliyahu’s cave and Elisha’s kever. There was a plague in Jerusalem so they set up the yeshiva initially in Acco. In 1742 they came to Jerusalem and established Yeshivat Knesset Yisrael. Much of the learning was based on showing the consistency of the Mishne Torah of the Rambam with the Gemoro.

His place in Chassidus In the Chassidish world he is always referred to as the Ohr HaChayim HaKadosh. It is striking how venerated and central the learning of the Ohr HaChayim is in Chassidus. His most famous talmid was the Rav Chaim David Azulai, the Chidah (17241806), an astonishingly prolific talmid chacham who wrote 122 seforim. The Chidah wrote a biography about the Ohr HaChayim, Shem HaGedolim, in which he describes how the sefer Ohr HaChayim was learned and reprinted in Poland, and how the Baal Shem Tov (1700-1760) respected the Ohr HaChayim. According to one chassidic tradition, the Baal Shem Tov was eating Seuda Shlishis with his talmidim in Podolia (Ukraine) when he declared that “the Western Light has been extinguished”, as the Ohr HaChayim passed away in Yerushalayim on Motzaei Shabbos. They also had indirect contact as Reb Gershon of Kitev, the brother-inlaw of the Baal Shem Tov and the first of the Chassidim to make Aliya, met the Ohr HaChayim HaKadosh. Others say he only made Aliya in 1747, so he would have missed him by 4 years. Rav

Yisrael of Ruzhin said that learning the Ohr HaChayim in this generation can purify the soul like learning of the Zohar. He died aged only 47. His talmid the Chidah wrote an epitaph on his matzeivah, which was unusual in Yerushalayim at the time, apparently because technically this required a better quality stone which was therefore at risk of getting stolen! He was eulogised in Yerushalayim and Levorno. The Rov of Levorno wrote a special kinah over his death, which included hints to all of his Seforim. M

Oneg Shabbos would like to thank the Pirchei Agudas Yisroel of America for providing this page +1 (347) 838-0869

Please be careful to dispose of this sheet in the proper manner as required ‫על פי הלכה‬. Please do not read this publication during ‫קדיש‬, ‫ קריאת התורה‬or ‫חזרת הש''ץ‬. Please do not read the adverts on Shabbos or Yom Tov. Please would you ensure that there are ample sheets left in shuls for Shabbos before taking one home. ‫בברכת שלא ימוש התורה מפי זרעינו ומפי זרע זרעינו מעתה ועד עולם‬