Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Monday, April 22, 2013
Emor Answers
Emor 5721
Alef.
1. וכל ענין ההגדלה בו, כדי שיכניס האדם בלבו—כשיראהו מורא וענוה it is human nature that when a person sees a place that is lit up, that he will be struck by a sense of reverence and humility.
במעשה הטוב תוכשר הנפש something that is goodly will affect the soul.
הכל נגזר מצד המקבלים all is formulated/decreed with the viewers/recipients in mind.
2. HaChinuch—the light from the Menora affects the soul in a spiritual, psychological sense.
MaLBIM—the light that the Menora will give off due to the olive oil that the people contribute, symbolically represents their willingness to be “ignited” via Moshe who brings down the Tora and God’s Light to the world.
3.
ספר המצוות לרמב"ם מצות עשה כה
והמצוה הכ"ה היא שנצטוו הכהנים להדליק הנרות תמיד לפני ה' והוא אמרו יתעלה (ר"פ תצוה) "באהל מועד מחוץ לפרוכת אשר על העדות יערוך אותו אהרןובניו." וזו היא מצות הטבת הנרות [תמידין פ"ג הי"ב ועכ"מ]. וכבר התבארו משפטי מצוה זו כלם בשמיני ממנחות (פו א) ופרק ראשון מיומא (יד א, טו א, כא ב)ומקומות ממסכת תמיד (ספ"ג ורפ"ו):
פרשת תצוה
שמות פרק כז
(כ) וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זָךְ כָּתִית לַמָּאוֹר לְהַעֲלֹת נֵר תָּמִיד:
(כא) בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד מִחוּץ לַפָּרֹכֶת אֲשֶׁר עַל הָעֵדֻת יַעֲרֹךְ אֹתוֹ אַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו מֵעֶרֶב עַד בֹּקֶר לִפְנֵי יְקֹוָק חֻקַּת עוֹלָם לְדֹרֹתָם מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל: ס
פרשת אמור
ויקרא פרק כד
(ב) צַו אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זָךְ כָּתִית לַמָּאוֹר לְהַעֲלֹת נֵר תָּמִיד:
(ג) מִחוּץ לְפָרֹכֶת הָעֵדֻת בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד יַעֲרֹךְ אֹתוֹ אַהֲרֹן מֵעֶרֶב עַד בֹּקֶר לִפְנֵי יְקֹוָק תָּמִיד חֻקַּת עוֹלָם לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם:
(ד) עַל הַמְּנֹרָה הַטְּהֹרָה יַעֲרֹךְ אֶת הַנֵּרוֹת לִפְנֵי יְקֹוָק תָּמִיד: פ
Although RaShI states that the discussion of the Menora in Tetzave was to mention what was to take place in the future regarding the Menora that was to be fabricated ast this point, but the lighting did not actually begin until the Commandment is given in Emor, RaMBaM apparently counts the Mitzva when it is first discussed rather than when it is first enacted, and therefore Sefer HaChinuch follows suit.
Beit.
1.א. The process begins with the acquisition and bringing of the oil to the Kohanim by the people, rather than with the Kohanim’s placing of the oil into the Menora. If it would not have said “אליך” I would not know the destination to which the people were bringing the oil.
ב . Even though it is the people’s obligation to acquire the oil, they are not the ones who will be placing it in the Menora and lighting the flames. Consequently, the people will be acquiring the oil with the intention to bring it to you so that you can serve as their Shlichim to carry out this Mitzva, whose raw materials originate with them.
2. Although the oil and wicks will be set up at the beginning of the evening in the Menora, the fact that they will hopefully burn from evening to morning is as if they are being handled/taken care of directly during this entire period.
In the three RaShI’s that are cited, in each case there is a lacuna in the biblical verse because it is not clear from where to where each of these actions will take place, i.e.,
a. Beraishit 24:18 When Rivka lowers her pitcher, where was it to start that she had to lower it?
b. Ibid. 38:12 When Yehuda went up to be involved in the sheep shearing, where exactly did he go up to?
c. Shemot 3:3 When Moshe says that he will turn aside to see the phenomenon of the bush on fire that was not being consumed, from where and to where was he turning aside?
3. Verse 2 is describing what the obligation of the Jewish people would be, i.e., to bring olive oil for the purpose of lighting the Menora. Their bringing of the oil was not “before HaShem”; only the lighting of the Menora in the Mishkan/Mikdash was “before HaShem”. Consequently the phrase is only used when describing the actions of the Kohanim as opposed to the action of the people bringing the raw materials.
Gimel.
1. “ויצא” will be accompanied by the point of origin from which the individual went out, as opposed to the place which was his destination, the latter being introduced by the verb “ויבא”.
2. Each one of the interpretations is filling in the lacuna of from where this individual was coming.
3. MaLBIM accounts for the apparent superfluity in the verse in the following manner:
מלבי"ם שמואל א פרק יז פסוק ד
...ויצא איש הבנים, שהוא ירד ממחנות פלשתים אשר בהר אל העמק שבין המחנות...
In other words, he didn’t just emerge from where he lived, but specifically positioned himself so that he could challenge the Jewish encampment.
4. Sifra: The individual emerged from being judged by Jewish law and losing his claim.
Tanchuma—R. Levi: The individual lost his self-respect and place in the world.
R. Berechya: He “turned his back on”--derided a basic Halacha regarding the Mishkan, the weekly fabrication and replacement of the Lechem HaPanim.
5. Sifra: The individual lost his claim to take up residence in the Machane proper.
RaMBaN: The individual left the privacy of his own tent to start a public controversy.
Daled.
According to Abrabanel, “ויצא” suggests the intention to start a controversy, i.e., to leave the anonymity of the group in order to draw attention to oneself by disputing with others over some issue.
Heh.
The two questions that Wiesel addresses are:
a. Why does the story of the blasphemer come at this particular point?
b. Why had we not been told previously about the sin of blasphemy and its punishment (particularly since we were told about the sin of cursing one’s parents,1 which is minor compared to blasphemy.)
Vav.
1. Ibn Ezra suggests that “ויקב” could either mean:
a. He articulated
b. He cursed.
2. The commentator expresses a preference for the first interpretation due to the context of the verse in which it appears:
ויקרא פרק כד
(יא) וַיִּקֹּב בֶּן הָאִשָּׁה הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִית אֶת הַשֵּׁם וַיְקַלֵּל וַיָּבִיאוּ אֹתוֹ אֶל מֹשֶׁה וְשֵׁם אִמּוֹ שְׁלֹמִית בַּת דִּבְרִי לְמַטֵּה דָן:
If ויקב alone connoted cursing, why does the verse also state the word “ויקלל”?
(ט) כִּי אִישׁ אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יְקַלֵּל אֶת אָבִיו וְאֶת אִמּוֹ מוֹת יוּמָת אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ קִלֵּל דָּמָיו בּוֹ:
Monday, April 15, 2013
Achrei Mot Kedoshim Answers
Kedoshim 5722
Alef. VaYikra 19:32-6
The stranger that sojourneth with you shall be unto you as the home-born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
In the Alon HaDeracha a number of hypotheses are presented re how these verses relate to one another. The approach that is most appealing to me is that of Ibn Ezra, who sees the three groups of individuals mentioned, i.e., the elderly, the stranger and the consumer, as individuals who are particularly vulnerable to being taken advantage of. The elderly do not have the physical strength to protect themselves; the stranger does not have the political power to fight back if he is treated poorly; the consumer will not be in a position to tell whether the weights and measures that are being used are honest or not.
Beit.
Since the Ketav VeHaKabbala associates “Hadar” with reversing direction, not carrying out what might be one’s natural tendency, therefore, showing “Hidur” to the elderly means to draw back from treating them disrespectfully, e.g., sitting in their place, speaking during their turn to speak, contradicting what they have said.
Gimel.
1. The commentators seem to be trying to understand why the Tora has to prohibit something that should be obvious.
2. Bei’ur: Since one is in control of the land, one might be tempted to treat minority populations insensitively.
HaEmek Davar: Since if both of you would be strangers in a different land, you would have a mutual bond that would lead you to protect one another, it should be no different when he is the stranger in the land that belongs to you.
Daled.
VaYikra 19:35
Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in weight, or in measure.
Rabbeinu Bachaye explains:
רבינו בחיי ויקרא פרשת קדושים פרק יט פסוק לה
(לה) לא תעשו עול במשפט. כבר הזהיר למעלה: (לעיל פסוק טו) "לא תעשו עולבמשפט לא תשא פני דל", אבל המשפט אשר שם הוא דיני התורה הכתוביםבסדר משפטים, ושבכאן הוא משפטי המדינות וחוקיהם וסדוריהם בעניניהמשקלות והמדות, וכענין שכתוב: (שמות טו, כה) "שם שם לו חק ומשפט", שהואעל דרך הפשט משפטי המדבר וחקיו.
Since Mishpat is a term that is associated with judges rather than businessmen, the verse points towards the authorities overseeing commerce. And since a verse has already been devoted to fair judging within the context of trials, this verse by the process of elimination is talking about the supervision of weights and measures.
Heh.
1. The difficulty for both commentators is the juxtaposition of the word משפט with issues of weights and measures.
2. Ibn Ezra: a) Just as you should be fair to a stranger in judicial matters, so too you should be fair in matters of weights and measures in an objective frashion.
b) The Mishpat is not necessarily an objective standard, but rather whatever the going practice in the land in which you find yourself. Whatever the laws of the land are, they should be consistently applied with regard to all matters of fairness.
3.
ויקרא פרק יט
רש"י
(לה) לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ עָוֶל בַּמִּשְׁפָּט (הנעשית) בַּמִּדָּה בַּמִּשְׁקָלוּבַמְּשׂוּרָה:
פירוש א' של אבן עזרא
(לה) לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ עָוֶל בַּמִּשְׁפָּט בַּמִּדָּה בַּמִּשְׁקָל וּבַמְּשׂוּרָה (לא הגונות):
Vav.
1. Meshech Chachma understands the verse as warning against a storekeeper using his weights and measures to exact revenge from someone who has cheated him in the past.משפט then is the justice that the storekeeper thinks he is achieving. עול is the Tora’sevaluation of his methodology to even the score, i.e., that this is improper.
RaShI and Ibn Ezra had attributed the term משפט to the storekeepers general use of weights and measures, or their governmental supervision.
2.
ויקרא פרק יט
(לה) לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ עָוֶל (כאשר את מרמה את הרמאי) בַּמִּשְׁפָּט (כדי לקבל בחזרה משהקונה חייב לך ממקודם) בַּמִּדָּה בַּמִּשְׁקָל וּבַמְּשׂוּרָה:
3.
מלבי"ם על ויקרא יט:יח
...לכן פי' חז"ל שהנקימה הוא בשאומר איני משאילך. (וכ"ש הנוקם בפועל בקום ועשה), והנטירהבשמשאילו רק שמזכיר איבה הצפונה בלב,
והנה מה שתפס אצל נקמה א"ל השאילני מגלך. ואצל נטירה א"ל השאילני קרדומך. רצו בזה שאף למישנקם ממנו אסור ליטור לו שנאה וכ"ש לנקום,
ולכן ציירו שראובן י"ל מגל ושמעון י"ל קרדום. ושמעון בקש מראובן המגל, ולא השאילו. ולמחר בקשראובן הקרדום, ושמעון נקם ממנו דרך נקמה, ואח"כ בא שמעון שנית ובקש מראובן את המגל. אסור לולנטור. וכ"ש לנקום, ועי' ביומא (דף מג) מ"ש ע"ז:
(כגון זה: - ראובן לשמעון: השאילני מגלך. - שמעון: לאו. - שמעון לראובן: השאילני קרדומך. - ראובן: איני משאילך כדרך שלא השאילתני. למחרת מנסה שמעון שנית לבקש את ראובן, אולי יאות לו הפעם: - שמעון לראובן: השאילני קרדומך. - ראובן (שנית): לאו. - ראובן לשמעון: השאילני מגלך. - שמעון: הא לך ואיני כמותך...)
In both cases, because of some previous slight, someone is tempted to exact revenge, and the Tora instructs the individual not to do so. Two wrongs do not make a right.
Zayin.
1. Since both הין and איפה are volume measures, to mention הין separately is superfluous.
2. a) Whether you say “yes” or “no”, it should be due to righteous rather than some petty considerations.
b) You should say what you mean, as opposed to saying one thing and thinking another.
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Tazria Metzora Answers
Tazria-Metzora 5726
Alef.
1. a) The Tora refers to diverse phenomena by sharing the same term/name.
b) It is not a natural phenomenon.
c) Other people speak in ways that are much more egregious than anything that Miriam had done (and therefore they are opening themselves to considerably more punishment as well.)
d) The first symptom/instance of Tzora’at will affect the individual’s home/house.
e) The Tora is using the same terminology (for Tzora’at affecting not only the body, but also clothing, furniture and houses) to note the similarity in these phenomena, but not that they are literally the same.
f) It (when Tzora’at affects one’s body) is the final stage of Tzora’at, its greatest manifestation and its strongest manifestation. These are all matters that the Tora (as opposed to science or medicine) describes, in accordance with what we have mentioned.
2. The Midrash interprets Moshe’s temporarily experiencing Tzora’at as the second of the three signs that HaShem Empowers him to perform in order to convince the Jewish people that God has Sent him,1 as a punishment for Moshe’s casting aspersions upon the people’s readiness to believe him: Shemot 4:1 “And Moses answered and said: 'But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice; for they will say: The LORD hath not Appeared unto thee.'”2
3. RaMBaM did not believe that the identical sort of mold or fungus that affects inanimate objects like clothing, furniture or the walls of houses would also affect animate entities like the human body.
4. Tehilim 73:9
They have set their mouth against the heavens, and their tongue walketh through the earth.
Arachin 15b
Further said Resh Lakish: One who slanders makes his sin reach unto heaven, as it is said: They have set their mouth against the heavens, and their tongue walketh through the earth.
The simple meaning of the text is that people who speak badly, do not confine themselves to targets on earth, but attack Heaven as well. The Derasha in the Gemora that RaMBaM quotes is that there is a slippery slope phenomenon at play whereby slandering this-worldly targets leads to slandering other-worldly entities. If this were truly the case wouldn’t the order of the verse be reversed, i.e., first there would be mention of slandering things in this world, followed by slandering things in the Higher Worlds?
Beit.
VaYikra 14:34-42
When ye are come into the land of Canaan, which I Give to you for a possession, and I Put the plague of leprosy in a house of the land of your possession. Then he that owneth the house shall come and tell the priest, saying: 'There seemeth to me to be as it were a plague in the house.' And the priest shall command that they empty the house, before the priest go in to see the plague, that all that is in the house be not made unclean; and afterward the priest shall go in to see the house. And he shall look on the plague, and, behold, if the plague be in the walls of the house with hollow streaks, greenish or reddish, and the appearance thereof be lower than the wall; then the priest shall go out of the house to the door of the house, and shut up the house seven days. And the priest shall come again the seventh day, and shall look; and, behold, if the plague be spread in the walls of the house; then the priest shall command that they take out the stones in which the plague is, and cast them into an unclean place without the city. And he shall cause the house to be scraped within round about, and they shall pour out the mortar that they scrape off without the city into an unclean place. And they shall take other stones, and put them in the place of those stones; and he shall take other mortar, and shall plaster the house.
Yeshayahu 28:16
Therefore thus Saith the Lord GOD: Behold, I Lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a costly corner-stone of sure foundation; he that believeth shall not make haste.
There does not appear to be all that much relevance in these Halachot if Tzora’at is a miraculous phenomenon which no longer occurs during the period of Hester Panim. The Midrash’s allegorical interpretation allows for the verses to be interpreted in a manner that makes them pertinent, addressing the present state of exile and absence of the Temple as well as the Promise of a future redemption.
Gimel.
ו אֶת־הַצִּפֹּ֤ר הַֽחַיָּה֙ יִקַּ֣ח אֹתָ֔הּ וְאֶת־עֵ֥ץ הָאֶ֛רֶז וְאֶת־שְׁנִ֥י הַתּוֹלַ֖עַת וְאֶת־הָֽאֵזֹ֑ב וְטָבַ֨ל אוֹתָ֜ם וְאֵ֣ת ׀ הַצִּפֹּ֣ר הַֽחַיָּ֗ה בְּדַם֙ הַצִּפֹּ֣ר הַשְּׁחֻטָ֔ה עַ֖ל הַמַּ֥יִם הַֽחַיִּֽים׃
As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar-wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water.
1. According to R. Hoffmann, the simple meaning of the text is that a bird is “shechted” over running water.
2. ChaZaL interpreted the verse as stating that the living bird is immersed in a combination of the blood of the “shechted” bird and running water.
3. In BaMidbar 28:10, the whole burnt offering for Shabbat is offered together with the Tamid whole burnt offering, indicating that “Al” can be interpreted as “together with”. So too in VaYikra 14:6, “Al HaMayim Chaim” could be “together with running water.”
4.
תרגום אונקלוס
(ו) ית צפרא חיתא יסב יתה וית אעא דארזא וית צבע זהורי וית איזובא ויטבול יתהון וית צפרא חיתא בדמא דצפרא דנכיסתא על מי מבוע:
תרגום יונתן
(ו) יַת צִפְּרָא חַיְיתָא יִסַב יָתָהּ וְיַת קֵיסָא דְאַרְזָא וְיַת צְבַע זְהוֹרֵי וְיַת אֵזוֹבָא וִיטַמֵשׁ יַתְהוֹן וְיַת צִפְרָא חַיְיתָא בְּאַדְמָא דְצִפּוֹרָא דִנְכִיסָא וּבְמֵי מַבּוּעַ:
כתר יונתן ויקרא פרשת מצורע פרק יד פסוק ו
(ו) את הציפור החיה יקח אותה ואת עץ של ארז ואת צבע השני ואת האזוב ויטבול אותם ואת הציפור החיה בדם של הציפור שׁנִשׁחטה ובמי מעין:
Targum Yonatan follows ChaZaL “ובמי מבוע”. Targum Onkelos is non-commital, transferring the word from the biblical text as is: “על מי מבוע”.
5. Since in v. 51, “ו” appears rather than “על”, the commentator assumes that they are synonymous.
6. Since “השחוטה” (zakef katan) and “על” (tipcha) are separated by the Ta’amim, it supports ChaZaL’s position as opposed to R. Hoffmann’s.
Daled.
ז וְהִזָּ֗ה עַ֧ל הַמִּטַּהֵ֛ר מִן־הַצָּרַ֖עַת שֶׁ֣בַע פְּעָמִ֑ים וְטִ֣הֲר֔וֹ וְשִׁלַּ֛ח אֶת־הַצִּפֹּ֥ר הַֽחַיָּ֖ה עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַשָּׂדֶֽה׃
ח וְכִבֶּס֩ הַמִּטַּהֵ֨ר אֶת־בְּגָדָ֜יו וְגִלַּ֣ח אֶת־כָּל־שְׂעָר֗וֹ וְרָחַ֤ץ בַּמַּ֨יִם֙ וְטָהֵ֔ר וְאַחַ֖ר יָב֣וֹא אֶל־הַֽמַּחֲנֶ֑ה וְיָשַׁ֛ב מִח֥וּץ לְאָֽהֳל֖וֹ שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִֽים׃
And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let go the living bird into the open field. And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and bathe himself in water, and he shall be clean; and after that he may come into the camp, but shall dwell outside his tent seven days.
1. Actions that will prevent ritual purity from being achieved by the Metzora:
a) Sprinkling the water/blood mixture upon the M.’s body
b) Shaving body hair
c) Washing body
Actions that will not prevent the achievement of ritual purity by the Metzora:
a) The sending away of the live bird
b) Washing clothing
2. Since in v. 7, the etnachta is on the word “Pe’amim”, effectively separating it from“VeTiharo” (Zakef Katan), it allows for the latter to be seen as the beginning of a list of elements that are not completed until one comes to the word “VeTiher” in v. 8. Consequently, the purification process is not complete until all of the rituals directly affecting the Metzora’s body are completed.
3. Rather than being connected to the verse that comes afterwards, the intent is that the process of purification is not completed until at least some of the elements in the verse that follows are also completed.
And the LORD Said furthermore unto him: 'Put now thy hand into thy bosom.' And he put his hand into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous, as white as snow. And He Said: 'Put thy hand back into thy bosom.--And he put his hand back into his bosom; and when he took it out of his bosom, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh.-- And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign.
Shemot 4: 29-31 “And Moshe and Aharon went and gathered together all the elders of the children of Israel. And Aharon spoke all the words which the LORD had Spoken unto Moshe, and did the signs in the sight of the people. And the people believed; and when they heard that the LORD had Remembered the children of Israel, and that He had seen their affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshipped.”
It was when they came a second time, that the people refused to put their trust in them:
Ibid. 6:9
And Moshe spoke so unto the children of Israel; but they hearkened not unto Moshe for impatience of spirit, and for cruel bondage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
