245. Vayikra

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

‫מוצאי שבת‬

245

Issue

'‫פקד יפקד ה‬

‫בס"ד‬

‫פרשת ויקרא‬

‫ג' ניסן תש"פ‬ 28 Mar 2020

‫קבלת שבת‬

JLM

MAN

LON

JLM

BMTH

GLSCW

GHD

MAN

LON

JLM

BMTH

GLSCW

GHD

MAN

LON

8.10

7.50

7.41

7.33

7.24

7.45

7.32

7.31

7.19

6.19

6.17

6.30

6.19

6.21

6.10

A Time to Be Humble aseres hadibros. Is this doublestandards?

Rabbi Daniel Fine Community Rabbi, Stanmore and Canons Park US; Hasmonean Beis Programme

Various answers have been given, including distinguishing between Moshe being a representative of the entire nation versus Moshe meriting things based on his own high spiritual level. But for us in our current times, perhaps we can comment that there are times to be humble, and times to realise we have indeed been humbled.

In sports games, there are stand-out players. In plays, there are stand-out actors or actresses.

And in our parsha, there is arguably a stand-out letter. In classic Jewish philosophical vein that ‘humble things make the most impact,’ the standout letter is the small Alef. And the Ba’al Haturim comments that the reason is that Moshe’s humility pushed him to ask that the Alef be made small, to denote a chance calling from Hashem (vayikar). The obvious question is that there are other instances that Moshe is clearly centrestage and Hashem calls him directly – it is Moshe who goes up the mountain to receive the

The world is sophisticated and impressive, and humanity has been on the front foot of charting its course over the last few years. But the world grinds to a halt with a virus – reminding us, above all, that humanity has its limits.

To be proud of our achievements and advances is nothing bad, but being able to admit that it is Hashem’s world is essential. And part of that means that there is nothing wrong with life being uncertain or being dependent on

‫ספר דברים‬

‫ספר במדבר‬

‫לע"נ ר' יקותיאל זלמן נאה ז''ל‬ ‫בן ר' חנניה יו''ט ליפא הי''ד‬ ‫נלב''ע ט''ז אדר תשע''ז‬

‫לע"נ מרת טויבא רחל נאה ע''ה‬ ‫בת ר' שמואל שמעלקא הי''ד‬ ‫נלב''ע כ''ה מנחם אב תשע''ז‬

Hashem’s bigger picture. “Man plans and G-d laughs” as they say. We can only do our best because ultimately in the play that is life, we are sometimes actors, but at these times we are spectators.

To try and hoard, panic-buy and elicit human control seems to be mistaken.

It takes a big and humble person to be able to let go – to do what we can but to acknowledge that Hashem is the only One who can ever be in control.M

‫ספר ויקרא‬

‫ספר שמות‬

Please daven for

‫לע"נ‬

‫הב' אברהם יוסף אריה‬ ‫בן רוחמה אילה נ"י‬

‫לרפואה שלימה בתוך חולי ישראל‬ ‫לע''נ ר' מרדכי בן ר' שלום ז''ל‬ ‫נלב''ע ט''ו סיון תשס''ב‬

‫לע''נ ר' בנימין בן ר' מאיר דוד ז''ל‬ ‫נלב''ע ב׳ אדר תשע''ז‬

‫ספר בראשית‬

stafftreats.com

jle.org.uk

‫אריאל יהודה ז״ל‬ ‫בן ר׳ פינחס צבי נ״י‬ ‫קליין‬

‫נלב''ע י״ז תמוז תשע''ח‬

MEDIA PARTNERS N OW R E AC H

ING

OPLE 24,000 PUENTRIES I N 24 C O

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, Rio de Janeiro, Rotterdam, Ruislip, Santiago, Sao Paulo, Stanmore, Southend, Tallinn, Tarzana, Toronto, Uman, Vienna, Zurich

2

Oneg Shabbos Issue 245

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

A Novel Interpretation of the Term

“Rei’ach Nichoach LaShem”

T

he HaKsav V’HaKabbalah makes a beautiful observation that there is a recurrent theme throughout Sefer Vayikra: When the Torah speaks of the burnt offering, it refers to it quite often as olah, ishei, rei’ach nichoach lashem — an olah-offering, a fire-offering, a pleasing fragrance to Hashem. Most of us understand that the term rei’ach nichoach (a pleasing fragrance) refers to the sacrifice. For some reason, the Ribono shel Olam gets some type of pleasure from the aroma of Korbonos.

HaKsav V’Hakabbalah brings from a sefer called ‘Ma’aseh HaShem’ that this is incorrect. He interprets that the term rei’ach nichoach laShem is not referring to the korban. It is referring to the person who brings the korban. To what can the matter be compared? On Erev Shabbos, most of us walk into our homes and we smell something delicious. Maybe it will be the chicken soup coming to a boil, maybe it will be freshly baked challah, maybe it will be the chicken that is roasting in the oven. Whatever it is going to be, when one walks into the door of a traditional Jewish home on Erev Shabbos — even if one is on a different floor, even if he is 50 feet away from the kitchen — aaah! It smells so good!

Al-mighty wants so much — it is Rabbi Yissocher Frand what the korban Rosh Yeshiva, Ner Yisrael Baltimore is going to bring out in the person. ‘Korban’ comes from the word karev — which means coming closer. When a person brings a korban, that says he wants to be better. Either it is a sin offering and he wants to bring atonement for what he has done, or it is a burnt offering (olah) or a peace offering (shelamim).

In any event, his bringing the korban is an anticipatory act. He thereby anticipates what is going to happen by virtue of him having brought the sacrifice. The rei’ach nichoach laShem is that now the Ribono shel Olam sees — smells, if you will — from this activity of bringing a korban that this person is going to be better in the future.

The korban is the “smell” that indicates what is going to be.

His offering is indicative of what he is going to do and who he is going to be in the future. That which is going to happen in the future is always referred to as smell. One “smells it” before one is actually there. HaKadosh Baruch Hu loves the smell of the person who wants to become better and who wants to become closer to Him. That is why a korban is “rei’ach nichoach laShem” — the person, not the animal. M

Smell, to use an idiom from the business world, can be called “a leading economic indicator.” This means that one does not have to taste the chicken soup, one does not even have to see the chicken soup to know that “tonight I am going to have a delicious meal.” I know I am going to have fresh challah and kugel and chicken soup and it is all going to be geshmak! I know that already, without having tasted a morsel, because I smell it.

The nature of smell is that it is anticipatory. Our sense of smell allows us to anticipate what it going to be.

HaKsav v’HaKabalah writes that when a person brings a korban, he wants to do Teshuva. It is not the korban that the

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

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

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

28 Mar 2020

‫ג' ניסן תש"פ‬

‫פרשת ויקרא‬

3

Rabbi Avrumi Marmorstein

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

What is our Sacrifice? )’‫ב‬:’‫אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן לה׳ (ויקרא א‬

At the beginning of the parsha (1:2), with the introduction to korbanos, the pasuk says, “‫”אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן לה׳‬. “When a man will bring a korban to Hashem.”

Later (4:2), the pasuk introduces the korban chatas, the sin offering, with the words “‫”נפש כי תחטא‬-literally, “when a soul will sin.”

We can see from these pesukim that man is essentially made of two parts. One is the adam, derived from the word adama- earth. This represents man’s earthly desires and his materialistic side. The second aspect of man is his nefesh - soul, which represents spirituality and closeness to Hashem. When one dies, the adam returns to the earth and the neshama goes to be close with Hashem. At the time of techiyas hameisim, the neshama will return to elevate and purify the adam.

Rav Leib Chasman zt’’l asks: if the adam pushes us to sin and the nefesh pulls us close to Hashem, then why regarding korbanos does the pasuk say “adam,” and regarding sin say “nefesh?” The root word of korban is karov - close, which is represented by nefesh, not adam! What exactly does adam represent?

The Nefesh HaChaim stresses the connection of adam to korbanos. Look how one single act of Adam Harishon changed the whole world and the course of mankind! One must realise the potency of your actions! Even if we don’t see the results of our decisions and actions, recognise that you too are adam!

Decide to go about correcting the state of mind which led to that choice of action; bring a korban.

Rav Chasman answers that the Torah is trying to teach us that both halves are always present. When we go to sin, we have to drag along the nefesh and degrade it through the horrible experience. However, the opposite is also true. When we bring a korban, the adam is uplifted and sanctified.

The Alshich, quoting the Ramban, gives a powerful answer to these questions. He remarks that the essence of bringing a korban is not the actual offering of the animal, but rather how

the sacrificing serves as a cleansing of the soul of the person who brings the korban. When someone witnesses the various processes of the bringing of a korban, including slaughtering the animal, removing and cleaning the various parts, catching and sprinkling its blood, and, lastly, burning the animal on the mizbeach, he should think to himself that the animal is replacing him, as he really should have to undergo such experiences to somehow counteract all of his negative actions.

Such an idea is reinforced by the pesukim’s addition of the seemingly superfluous word of “‫( ”מכם‬see Vayikra 1:2), as it becomes clear that the korban should actually be “‫מכם‬,” from you, yourself, but Hashem, in His infinite kindness, allows Klal Yisrael to sacrifice animals in their stead. Thus, through the bringing of a korban and the accompanied introspection, he will become a holier person and prevent such acts from occurring in the future.

This is similar to an idea of Rabbi Mordechai Kamenetzky.

He writes that adam, a single man, and mikem, the greater community, are as one. When an individual does an action, whether good or bad, he affects everyone. One man can be responsible for the whole nation.

Both views on this pasuk present a similar message. When we do an action, we must have in mind that we affect much more than just ourselves.

The Slonimer Rebbe shlit”a explains that this is what is meant by the word “‫”מכם‬, from you. Don’t simply bring an animal! The sacrifice must be ‫מכם‬, from you! Sacrifice yourself! If the korbon is ‫מכם‬, then and only then is it a “korban laHashem”; a true means of drawing close to Hashem.

Though we don’t have korbanos unfortunately today, we do have this concept of ‘sacrifice’, of giving from one’s self. If we cannot offer an olah, a shelamim or a chatas, we can at least learn from their lessons what ‘sacrifices’ need to be made in life to prepare the way for our ultimate victory, and of the ultimate redemption. M

4

Oneg Shabbos Issue 245

History

Halacha Within

History Rav Yitzchak Elchonon Spektor – The Kovno Rov Rabbi Aubrey Hersh Director of Education, JLE

1817-1896 – Yahrzeit on 21st Adar A number of elements serv[e to elevate a Talmid Chochom or Rav into a Gadol, including: tzidkus, knowledge, perception, empathy and achrayus. And indeed all these were very much a description of Rav Yitzchak Elchonon - the Gadol Hador of Czarist Russia. Described by Rav Isser Zalman Meltzer as suitably worthy of the title “Rabban Shel Kol Bnei Hagolah” and by Rav Elchonon Wasserman as the last gadol in Europe who was able to command the respect of all elements of Russian Jewry, it is understandable why in an era where photography was in its infancy, one photo nevertheless made its way into people’s homes: that of the Kovno Rov.

Remarkably, the Chazon Ish would say about Rav Yitzchok Elchonon that he was originally of very average intellect and stood therefore as proof of how one can become a tremendous talmid chochom purely through ameilus (effort).

His pikchus in understanding people as well as his sensitivity to individuals can be seen through a well-known story which was related by Rav Shach zt”l. In a particular community there was tension between the Rav of the town and some of the local Talmidei Chachamim. As often happens in such cases, the ‘opposition’ began to cast a highly critical eye on all of the Rav’s halachic rulings. At one point, the Rabbi ruled wrongly and his detractors sent a telegram to Rav Yitzchak Elchonon Spektor asking for his psak, without revealing the reason behind their enquiry. He responded almost immediately, but issued a mistaken psak! Shortly afterwards, Rav Yitzchak Elchonon sent a second telegram, in which he reversed his previous position and admitted that his first ruling was wrong. Rav Shach explained that Rav Yitzchak Elchonon recognized that the seemingly innocent query was really a trap to prove the Rav’s incompetence – why else would they address a shayla to him without involving their own Rabbi? So he devised a strategy to silence them. By pretending to err with respect to the question sent to him, he showed the Rav’s opponents that the question was one about which even a Gadol could make a mistake. Thus they would not be able to use the first telegram as it ruled incorrectly, neither could they use the second, as it admitted to the making a previous mistake in psak. Rav Shach added that Rav Yitzchak Elchonon was prepared to forgo his own honour, to preserve the kavod haTorah of another Rav. Further indication of Rav Yitzchak Elchonon’s character can be seen from the events which followed immediately from the Czar’s assassination in 1881. The Jews were falsely implicated and pogroms broke out in over 150 Jewish communities. After meeting with government representatives in St. Petersburg, he realised

‫ג' ניסן תש"פ‬

‫פרשת ויקרא‬

that no help would be forthcoming within the Russian Empire.

Yet getting the Jews abroad to protest against the Czarist regime could backfire and lead to an even greater sequence of repression.

He therefore wrote a coded letter to Lord Rothschild in London in which he presented the problem of ‘an Agunah in Russia’ who needed help and instructed Rothschild to galvanise non-Jewish support only, which was successfully done amongst both politicians and in the newspapers.

The letters that he would write on behalf of communities were not simply appeals but heartfelt entreaties for help. Phrases such as ‫ המתחנן לפניכם‬...‫ בלבבי אין רוח‬,‫לגופי אין כח‬, would feature commonly in his letters, and even the Hamelitz newspaper - the mouthpiece of the Maskilim - quoted him with respect.

Bluma Solomonson, who was one of his few grandchildren to survive the Holocaust, recalled that when she was six or seven, she would spend time with her grandparents during the summer, in a resort near Kovno. She noticed there, that even the animals had a rapport with him. The cat for instance, sat on a chair behind her grandfather and ate directly from his hand.

In the realm of Halacha he was unafraid to give psak regarding Klal issues. Following a famine in 1868 he permitted the consumption of Kitniyos for that Pesach. Being concerned however, that some might endanger themselves and be stringent, he publicised the fact that he and the ‘chashuvei ha’ir’ would all eat Kitniyos that year. However his most critical role in halacha was alleviating the plight of Agunos, where his advice was sought from across the world. The problem greatly intensified in the 19th century as Jews were drafted into various armies, many of them subsequently being reported as ‘missing in action’. Mass transportation across the oceans (particularly to the USA) also contributed to the problem, due to mishaps at sea.

He wrote over 100 teshuvos (many containing the word the words ‫ והתרתי‬- “and I have permitted it”) and expended incredible effort to help these anguished women. When one of his children fell gravely ill, he pleaded with ‫הקב״ה‬that she be healed in the zechus of his tremendous exertion on behalf of so many Agunos. One of his fundamental rulings (which became a precedent for the leading poskim of the 20th century, especially in the tragic circumstances post both World Wars), was known as the ‘double majority (roiv) principle’. As an example, in 1883 he was asked about a ship that had sunk a day’s travel from the port of Hamburg. He ruled that the

5

overwhelming majority of victims of deep-sea shipwrecks perish (roiv). In addition, most passengers had not managed to get on the lifeboat (a second roiv). It can therefore be assumed that the husbands of the Agunos were amongst those who remained behind and sank with the ship. He also writes of the fact that no word had been heard from any of the husbands, and none of them were known to be estranged from their wives prior to the tragedy.

He was also consulted regarding cases of Chalitza. In one instance, a Jewish soldier told a fellow (non-Jewish) combatant, of a Jew who was killed in battle. This was subsequently confirmed by an independent army report that was sent to the widow (based on the testimony of a different individual). Rav Yitzchok Elchonon ruled that the army declaration could be accepted, based on the Mishna in Gittin that documents issued from a non-Jewish court are valid (with the exception of divorce documents) and that nowadays official records are treated as if issued by a court.

Another teshuva regarding the status of a married woman, concerned a husband who wanted to divorce his wife who was hospital-bound. Since he now lived far from his home-city, he appointed an agent to deliver the get. Shortly thereafter, the husband appeared in the city in person. He asked the agent whether he had carried out the task, and upon hearing that he had not, the husband declared that he wanted to patch things up with his wife.

He therefore went to the hospital and spoke to her, after which they agreed to live again as man and wife. She remained in hospital and he went to his wife’s home. Concerned when he did not visit her again, she went looking for him. Coming home, she discovered to her great consternation the box where she kept her money had been opened. Her 30 roubles were missing and so was her husband.

He had run away to America. More than three months went by and she did not hear from him again. The husband was known as a rogue and the question was whether the agent could now hand over the get.

Rav Yitzchok Elchonon responds by saying that although at first glance it seems that the get was invalidated by their reconciliation, his subsequent actions show his intent to steal her money and run away and his disinterest in any genuine reunion. Since he was never alone with his wife – as she was in the hospital – we need not be concerned that this is an outdated get and therefore the agent may deliver the get, allowing her to marry. M

CREDIT: The Good Quote

28 Mar 2020

6

Oneg Shabbos Issue 245

Korbanos: Gift vs.

Obligation Vayikra begins by laying down the laws of korbanos, the Temple offerings or “sacrifices” as colloquially [but quite inaccurately] translated. The second pasuk details a few general disqualifications that limit which animals may be used for a korban in all types of korbanos. “Of the cattle” invalidates animals upon whom bestiality has been performed, “of the sheep” eliminates those animals designated for animal worship or those animals who had killed a person, and so on. The exclusions listed are specific to korbanos and are derived directly from the grammatical form employed [i.e. the word “of”, such as in “of the sheep”, implies that some of a given set of animals are acceptable, but not all.]

The very first disqualification that is learned from these pesukim, however, presents two difficulties. The very first pasuk says, “a man who will offer up a korban”, which is explained to teach us that, “just as the first man [i.e. Adam] did not offer stolen animals [as korbanos], for everything belonged to him, so too when you bring a korban, you may not bring a stolen [animal as a] korban.”

This is doubly perplexing. First of all, the prohibition of using stolen goods for the purpose of a mitzvah applies to all mitzvos and could have been taught in the context of any mitzvah. Why, then, would this universal disqualification be the first one listed for korbanos? Shouldn’t something uniquely relevant to korbanos have been listed first? Secondly, at first glance it seems to be a stretch, contrived even, to assume that “adam - a man” refers specifically to Adam Harishon and his ownership of all animals in the world. What does this seemingly far-fetched allusion mean?

In order to understand the unique impropriety of stolen korbanos, we must define the world of korbanos vis-a-vis all other mitzvos.

Imagine I hire a workman to fix something in my house and then discover that he used stolen goods to do so. Although I will be very upset and feel that he had committed a terrible wrong, his wrongdoing does not contradict the essence of our transaction. I paid him to fix something, and he did so. But now let us picture someone giving a close friend an expensive stolen item as a gift, or a chosson giving a kallah a stolen diamond ring.

In these cases, the misdeed strikes at the heart of the very gift.

The very essence of a gift is giving of oneself to another, i.e. taking the time and effort that I’ve invested in earning money and giving it to another in the form of a gift. The giving of oneself is totally absent when presenting a stolen gift, and thus such a gift has no redeeming value whatsoever.

The world of avodas Hashem has two major components: obligations and voluntary opportunities. Mitzvos are, first and

Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky Rosh Yeshiva of The Yeshiva of Greater Washington & TorahWeb.org

foremost, commandments. A person who does a mitzvah, even if there are shortcomings in its performance, still has done his duty. But then there are korbanos, which are “offerings.”

Although some korbanos are obligatory, the quintessential korban is a voluntary offering, the equivalent of a “gift.” This is evidenced by the fact that Rashi explains that the very first part of Vayikra is speaking specifically about a voluntary korban.

This would indicate that the quintessential form of korban is indeed the voluntary gift, while the obligatory korbanos comprise a special subcategory. It therefore makes sense that the first disqualification listed for korbanos is a stolen korban, for this negates the essence of the korban. It is almost as if the pasuk is meant to read, “if man offers of himself a korban”, and if there is no “self” in the korban being offered, there is absolutely no korban to speak of. Offering a stolen animal is not an ancillary offense, or even the violation of a prerequisite; rather it is a distortion of what a korban is supposed to be! Adam was the only person in the world and thus its exclusive owner, and therefore his bringing a korban was, by definition, giving of himself, and that serves as the prototype of what a korban is supposed to be.

This gives us insight into why the Nevi’im, when castigating Klal Yisroel for their sins, kept focussing on their korbanos.

For when a person is negligent in some of his duties, he is not excused from the rest of his duties, and certainly is not to be faulted for fulfilling them! If one does not wear tefilin, he will not be excoriated for wearing tzitzis! But korbanos are “extra-credit.”

As such, if a person is negligent in his basic obligations, and yet offers korbanos, the korbanos are seen as a cynical attempt to curry favor with Hashem instead of doing what is right. If we steal, act unjustly, and do not care for the weak, we are still doing what is right when we blow shofar and eat matzah; the wrongness of our misdeeds and the correctness of our mitzvos are independent of each other. But when we dare offer “gifts” to Hashem while also engaging in wrongdoing, then the negative connotations of our misdeeds corrupt the korbanos themselves.

This is something to consider when we are engaged in activities that are lifnim mishuras hadin. As long as a person is focused on doing what is required min hadin, then his shortcomings do not directly affect his mitzvos. But if a person goes lifnim mishuras hadin in some areas while being grossly negligent in others, his lifnim mishuras hadin becomes a travesty and highlights his wrongdoings, chas v’shalom. M

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

28 Mar 2020

‫ג' ניסן תש"פ‬

‫פרשת ויקרא‬

7 This page has been sponsored anonymously

PART 1

The origins & significance of

Aramaic language the

The origins of Aramaic

Zwi Yosef Sacho Baal Koreh and Maggid Shiur of 5-minute Daf Yomi vort

In terms of its antiquity, the Gemara (Sanhedrin 38b) quotes Rav, the great Amora from Bavel, who traces the origins of Aramaic to the time of Adam Harishon who spoke in Aramaic. At the beginning of Sefer Bereishis, we find that one of the sons of Shem was called Aram (Bereishis. 10:23) yet the Torah does not describe his descendants. Instead, the Torah lists the descendants of Arpachshad, the other son of Shem, until we get to Nachor, the father of Avraham. Nachor had a son called Kemuel, the brother of Avraham, who had a child also called Aram (Bereishis 22:21). Besuel, another son of Nachor and his son Lavan are both described as Arameans (Bereishis 25:20 and 31:20). In fact, the Gemara (Berachos 13a) derives the name “Avram” as being the father of Aram.

We therefore see that the earliest history of Klal Yisroel is connected with the Arameans of the East. In fact, the Rambam is quoted as saying that Aramaic and Arabic are distortions of Hebrew (Kuzari 2:68:5 footnote 381).

Occurrences of Aramaic in the Torah and Neviim The Talmud Yerushalmi (Sotah 7:2) notes that Aramaic is found in all three sections of the Tanach. In the Torah, an Aramaic expression occurs only once, in the narrative of the covenant between Yaakov and Lavan, where it is stated that each of them named, in his own language, the stone monument built as testimony of their treaty. Yaakov called it “Galeid” and Lavan used the Aramaic equivalent, “Yegar sahaduta” (Bereishis 31:47). In the Neviim, Aramaic also occurs only once in Yirmiyahu (10:11), where the Navi describes the text that was sent to the Jewish Exiles in Bavel, telling them what to answer their captors who would try to persuade them to worship their idols. The first posuk in this letter was written in Aramaic to indicate that the response must be understood by the Babylonians, whose vernacular was Aramaic at the time.

With the 14th Daf Yomi cycle having commenced recently, it is appropriate to consider why both the Talmud Bavli and Talmud Yerushalmi and other works of that era, as well as many other parts of our davening, were composed in Aramaic rather than Hebrew.

Furthermore, the texts of the kesubah (marriage contract), the get (bill of divorce) as well as parts of the Pesach Haggadah were written in Aramaic. This is the first article in a two-part series which explores the origins of the Aramaic language from the time Creation through to canonisation of the Tanach.

Occurrences of Aramaic in Kesuvim

The occurrence of Aramaic in Kesuvim is more widespread. After the destruction of Bayis Rishon, the Aramaic language, which was already the vernacular used in Asia Minor in the time of Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian domination, took hold more and more of the Jewish populations of Eretz Yisroel and Bavel. In fact, the Gemara (Pesachim 87b) tells us that after the destruction of Bayis Rishon, Hashem specifically chose to exile the Jews to Bavel because of the similarity of Hebrew and Aramaic, to ease the acculturation process. This becomes apparent by the increased use of Aramaic in the books of Kesuvim written post-Bayis Rishon. For example, the Book of Doniel begins in Hebrew, but when it introduces the Babylonian interpreters of Nevuchadnezzar’s dream and the related narrative, the book switches to Aramaic from Chapter 2 verse 4 through to Chapter 4 verse 28. In the Book of Ezra, many parts of the narrative dealing with the rebuilding of Bayis Sheni and the various letters written between the Jews and the Persian and Assyrian officials are reproduced in the original Aramaic (see Ezra 4:8-6:17 and 7:11-26). Similarly, we have words in Iyov (for example, 28:8, 29:4 and 36:2) written in Aramaic, though its date of authorship is unclear – see Bava Basra (15a-15b). The employment of both Hebrew and Aramaic languages in the books of Tanach well illustrates its use in the circles in which the various books were written.

Conclusion Aramaic traces its origins to the time of Adam Harishon and was in use long before its widespread use in the Talmud. It is an ancient language inextricably linked with the Jewish people from the time of Avraham Avinu and finds its way on numerous occasions into our holy Tanach. The next article will explore the use of Aramaic from the post-Tanach era onwards. M Source: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1707-aramaic-language-among-the-jews

To join the author’s daily 5-minute Daf Yomi WhatsApp group, please send a WhatsApp message to 07913763641

8

Oneg Shabbos Issue 245

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

Rabbi Meir Orlian Halachah Writer, BHI

TWO MORE Back in Parshas Yisro, we find the description of the establishment of the Jewish judicial system, with the appointment of officers of various levels along with Moshe to judge the people.

Mr. Weiss and Mr. Schwartz were involved in litigation in Rabbi Dayan’s Beis Din. The case was extremely complicated, both factually and halachically. Beis Din spent five sessions meeting with the parties. The Dayanim laboured hard over the case and reviewed the mounds of documents that were submitted in conjunction with it.

After examining all the facts, the Dayanim debated among themselves the various sides of the issue. One Dayan was certain in his opinion. Another leaned in that direction but was hesitant. The third was unsure and could not reach a decision.

Rabbi Dayan decided to summon the litigants for one additional session, in the hope that that it would help clarify one remaining point. At the conclusion of the session, he asked the litigants to step out, so that the Dayanim could deliberate among themselves.

The first Dayan reiterated his initial position. The second Dayan said: “After much consideration, I’m willing to agree with you.”

“Unfortunately, I am still not able to come to a decision,” said the third Dayan. “I see the validity of both sides.”

Rabbi Dayan called the litigants back in. “Two of us are of the same opinion,” he said. “However, the third Dayan is undecided, and cannot render a decisive opinion.”

“I don’t see the problem,” said Mr. Weiss. “If two of you are of the same opinion, the case is effectively decided!

Even if the third Dayan would disagree with the other two, the ruling is according to the majority.”

“Not so simple,” said Rabbi Dayan. “We need to expand the panel of Dayanim!”

“That’s interesting!” exclaimed Mr. Schwartz. He asked: Why do we need to expand the panel of Dayanim?

“The Mishnah (Sanhedrin 29a) states that if one Dayan absolves and one obligates, or even if two absolve or obligate, and the third is undecided – we add two Dayanim,” answered Rabbi Dayan. “Were the third Dayan

This page is sponsored by nextgenrealestate.co.uk

to dissent, his opinion would be nullified by the majority. However, when the third Dayan is undecided, he does not count; it is like only two Dayanim ruled. Furthermore, if he expressed a dissenting opinion, perhaps the others would come around to him” (C.M. 18:1; Sma 18:4).

“Why add two?” asked Mr. Weiss. “Wouldn’t one Dayan suffice to replace the undecided one?!”

“We want to avoid an even-numbered Beis Din,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “According to the Rambam, cited by Shulchan Aruch, the Dayan who is undecided remains part of the panel, and continues to participate in the deliberations. Through the continued discussion, we anticipate that he will take a position” (C.M. 18:1).

“Some provide an additional reason for adding two Dayanim. If the initial two were split, we do not want the additional Dayan’s opinion to be evident to the litigants.

Accordingly, even if the original panel was agreed to be four and was split evenly, we still need to add two” (Shevus Yaakov 1:133; Pischei Teshuvah 18:5).

“What happens if the undecided Dayan remains undecided?” asked Mr. Schwartz.

“If three or four of the five Dayanim agree, we follow that majority, even if one or two are undecided,” replied Rabbi Dayan, “since now at least three issued the majority ruling. If two absolve and two obligate and one is undecided, we add another two, until reaching a maximum of 71.

“If two absolve, one obligates, and two are undecided,” concluded Rabbi Dayan, “The Bach maintains that this is considered a majority of three, but many Acharonim rule that we need to add, since there isn’t a majority when considering also those who are undecided” (Bach 18:1; Sma 18:6; Shach 18:2).

Verdict: When one of the three Dayanim is undecided, we add two Dayanim, and the deliberations continue with a panel of five. M

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

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

‫ג' ניסן תש"פ‬

‫פרשת ויקרא‬

9

The purpose of the Jewish people is “that it will declare My praise” (43:21). Yet something else was taking place. “But you did not call to Me, Yaakov, for you grew weary of Me, Yisrael” (43:22).

B

nei Yisrael were created to declare Hashem’s praise and be the bearers of His mission, yet they tire of this job. A person can go about all his mundane affairs with energy and zest, but when he turns up to daven or to learn, where is the energy? Later on the Haftara talks about how the builder fashions his idols: “He crafts it with all his strength, though he may be hungry and without strength, he drinks no water and grows faint” (44:12). The idol builder works with great commitment. When someone is involved in something important to him, he almost forgets everything else. He doesn’t check his cell phone eight times an hour; he is absorbed in his job. The Vilna Gaon once didn’t eat for three days because he was stuck on a Mishna in Maseches Challa. When one’s davening or learning is important to him, then he does it with dedication, concentration, and focus. We can suggest it is precisely because these things are so important that in those areas the yetzer hora strikes at a person. Therefore, this is where the crucial battle takes place: to tire, or not to tire over Hashem’s service: that is the question.

The Mayana Shel Torah relates a parable: A man went to the market to find some profitable activity. He saw someone selling nuts for four dollars a kilogram. The man had a great idea.

“This man sells these nuts at this price, but half of it is only the shell. The buyer is paying two dollars for the shells. I will go around to all the waste collections and gather all the nut shells and sell them for four dollars a kilogram – a clean livelihood with no expenses.” He gathered all the shells he could and stood in the market selling his wares. It didn’t take long until people gathered around him and said, “What a fool. Don’t you know? It’s because of what’s in the shell that we buy them.

Who in their right mind would buy just a shell?” The prophet laments in the name of Hashem, “I fashioned this people” – I created this nation with everything it should ever need, only for the purpose “that it will declare My praise.” This was the goal of the whole of Creation and everything in it, that there should be Yisrael who should serve this purpose. The physicality of this world is for them to be able to reach the spiritual side.

However, “you did not call to Me, Yaakov,” and therefore all that’s left is the materialism alone, the shell without the precious nut inside.

Rabbi Jonathan Shooter Kollel Midrash Shmuel The author publishes a weekly detailed essay on the Haftara which can be received by writing to jonathanshooter613@gmail.com. More details about his books can be found at www.jonathanshooter.com

The Dubno Maggid added the following: Two merchants once sent their wares to be delivered by a wagon driver. One was a jeweller, who had a small box of precious stones; the other was a merchant selling iron that he had packed up into a box. When unloading, the driver mistakenly sent the box of precious stones to the iron merchant and the box of iron to the jeweller. When the messenger brought in the box to the jeweller, he was puffing and panting because of the heavy load.

He demanded from the jeweller more money because of the extreme burden. The jeweller was surprised and exclaimed, “You say the load was too heavy; that proves that this isn’t my package. My load wouldn’t have worn you out so much.”

If one were on the level where he was doing all his actions for the sake of Heaven, he would not know any fatigue or tiring.

The yoke of Torah and mitzvos would be to him like a crown of gold adorned with precious stones, intrinsically heavy, yet he will be able to bear it. The burden is Hashem’s burden. If one learns or does mitzvos for other motives or by rote, it will be a heavy burden that is too much to bear and he will tire one out quickly. It will be because “you did not call to Me, Yaakov” - the calling is not for the sake of Heaven - then “you grew weary of Me, Yisrael” – the burden weighs one down. M

CREDIT: Meaningful Minute

28 Mar 2020

10

Oneg Shabbos Issue 245

Daf Yomi WEEKLY

‫שבת כ“ב‬

Gemara Gems

CHANUKAH LIGHTS OUTDOORS IN GLASS BOXES :‫ כב‬- ‫הדלקה עושה מצוה או הנחה עושה מצוה‬

Is it the lighting of the candles that is the mitzvah, or placement of the candles that is the mitzvah? - 22b

The custom in Yerushalayim has been that conscientious people light their menorahs outdoors, in a glass case which protects the candles from the wind. There is a small door which is opened during the lighting, and immediately thereafter, the door is closed for the duration of the period the candles remain lit. The conclusion of our Gemara is that the mitzvah is determined by the moment the candles are lit. Mahari”l Diskin was first asked about this custom, because, technically, at the moment the candles are lit, the small door to the glass box is open, so that the person’s hand can reach inside.

Consequently, the candles are exposed and vulnerable to the wind, which almost for certain will blow them out within the 30 minute minimum time during which they must remain lit, unless that door is closed. How, then, can the lighting be acceptable?

In response to this question, Mahari”l is quoted to have instructed that the opening to the box be at the bottom of the box, rather than to the side. In this manner, the candles are never subject to the wind even while they are being lit.

The question is also addressed by Rabbi Tzvi Pesach Frank, in his Mikra’ei Kodesh (Chanukah, #17). He rules that if the door of the box is immediately closed when the candles are finished being lit, we can rule that the momentary exposure was meaningless, and the lighting is valid.

The candles were never in imminent danger of being blown out. The only time we would disqualify the lighting is if the candles were either put directly in the path of a strong wind, or if the candles actually became extinguished. Another reason to be lenient is that we can say that the lighting was done in order to close the door. .

Brought to you by

B

eing sensitive to people’s economic statuses, the Torah lists different types of korbanos. Someone unable to bring one of the more ‘expensive’ options, could bring a ‘Korban Mincha’ a simple meal offering made of flour, oil and frankincense.

It is interesting though, that out of the different sacrifices, it is this offering, the cheapest of all the offerings, that has the merit of partially being eaten by the Kohen Gadol and his sons. Why this one?

The Baal HaTurim explains that this is a command to the Kohen Gadol to not overlook this offering as being insignificant.

One can imagine how the donor, who may have felt bad about bringing the cheapest offering, would have felt as he watched his offering being eaten by the most important people in the Beis Hamikdosh! It was a beautiful way of bringing happiness and validating the poor person bringing the offering.

There is an immense pleasure in giving.

At times accepting something from someone graciously, and granting them the opportunity to give can be a great kindness.

Although it may feel counter intuitive, if a tzedaka collector is offering a small gift as he collects, there can be a kindness in accepting it and allowing him to give back.

Or asking/accepting help from someone who is looking for a meaningful opportunity, or from someone feeling low and unfulfilled, can also be thoughtful and considerate.

Giving confers dignity.

Allow others the opportunity to do so. www.jgift.org

28 Mar 2020

‫ג' ניסן תש"פ‬

‫פרשת ויקרא‬

11

Sages through Ages THE

Dr Benji Schreiber

Rav Kook

Griva, Latvia 1865– Jerusalem 1935 ‫ג’ אלול‬ Rav Kook, ‫הרב אברהם יצחק הכהן קוק‬ was born in Griva, Latvia in 1865. He was a wonder child with phenomenal talent, devotion and piety. His father, Rav Shlomo Zalman, learnt at Yeshivas Volozhin whereas his maternal grandfather was a Chassid. He entered the Volozhin Yeshiva in 1884, where he was recognised by the Rosh HaYeshiva, Rav Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin (the Netziv) as outstanding in Torah and piety. Whilst there, it is reported that he learnt 18 hours a day and covered 60 daf of gemoro a day in depth! He married the daughter of Rav Aderes (short for: Rav Eliyahu Dovid Rabinowitz-Thumim).

At the age of 23 he entered his first rabbinical position, with the benefit of the Chofetz Chaim’s influence. Between 1901 and 1904, he published three articles which anticipated the fully-developed philosophy which he later developed in Eretz Yisroel.

He had a passionate love for Eretz Yisroel from his youth and in 1904 he was invited by the community of Yaffo to be their Rov. The Beis Din of Yerushalayim, under Rav Shmuel Salant, said they will now be guided by Rav Kook, “‫על פיו יצאו ועל פיו‬ ‫”יבואו‬.

In London The outbreak of the First World War caught Rav Kook in St. Gallen, Switzerland.. He was invited to become Rov of the Machzike Adath Spitalfields Synagogue in Whitechapel, London and he worked tirelessly for the Jews of Europe and was influential in obtaining the Balfour Declaration of 1917. At that time, he wrote that Rembrandt’s works in the National Gallery indicate that

he could see the ‫אור הגנוז‬, the special light which HaShem created but hid for Tzaddikim to enjoy in future.

Chief Rabbi In 1919 he was invited to be the Ashkenazi Rabbi of Jerusalem. He set up the Rabbanut HaRashit and became the first Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Palestine in 1921. He founded a yeshiva, Mercaz HaRav, in Jerusalem in 1924 which remains very active.

Other Rabbonim Rav Kook corresponded with many Gedolim of his day. The Chazon Ish stood for the duration of a speech given by Rav Kook in Bnei Brak, explaining ‫די תורה שטייט‬ – The Torah is standing! The Chafetz Chaim left the first Knessia Gedola of Agudah in 1923 in response to disparaging remarks made about Rav Kook, saying: ‫ מען דורף קורע זיין‬.‫פגעו במרא דארעא דישראל‬ They’ve besmirched the leading halachic authority of Eretz Yisroel, we must do Keriah!

Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld was the other leading Rov in Jerusalem at the time. The two were always respectful to one another, but they had different approaches.

Rav Kook did not like HaTikva and wrote an alternative anthem called HaEmunah.

This drew many religious and nonreligious people to him, but also led to widespread misunderstanding of his ideas.

He wrote prolifically on both Halacha and Jewish thought. His Hebrew is very difficult and the ideas challenging.

Beliefs He saw the whole Jewish people, the return to the land and the establishment of the state as having profound significance.

Today, he remains the leading light for groups associated with Yeshivat Merkaz HaRav and affiliated institutions, while he is ignored, or worse, in some other religious groups. Many intense reactions to Rav Kook – from adulation to defamation – continue to this day. M

As Rav Zevin writes, he was the only one in his generation to be a master of both Aggada and Halacha.

He combined mastery of all Jewish sources with the heart of a poet, a passionate love of all Jewish people and Eretz Yisroel, while possessing an unusual openness to new ideas.

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 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 IN ASSOCIATION WITH BHNY