The Weekly Shtikle Blog

An online forum for sharing thoughts and ideas relating to the Parshas HaShavua

View Profile

Friday, May 22

The Weekly Shtikle - Bemidbar

It has been 11 years since we've had a year with this configuration which places Rosh Chodesh Sivan on Sunday, thus pushing aside the regular haftarah for Bemidbar in favour of the special haftaras machar chodesh. There is an intriguing connection between the haftarah and Shavuos, as detailed by R' Elie Wolf.

 

The haftarah is from Shmuel I perek 20. Towards the end, Sha'ul gets rather annoyed at his son Yonasan for siding with his friend, David. In the midst of his outburst, he exclaims, (pasuk 30) "Son of a rebellious woman! Do I not know that you choose ben Yishay to your own shame and the shame of your mother's nakedness!?" What is the reason for such an outburst and what does Yonasan's mother have to do with anything?

 

Rashi on this pasuk tells the story of how Sha'ul met his wife. After most of the tribe of Binyamin were wiped out following the gruesome episode of pilegesh b'Giv'ah at the end of Shoftim, the tribe was in danger of extinction. They were told to go out to the vineyards and watch as the daughters of Shiloh come out and dance and they were to pick wives from them. Sha'ul was embarrassed and did not partake in this exercise until finally, his eventual wife uncharacteristically ran after him and, well, the rest is history.

 

The gemara (Yevamos 76b) tells the story of how the validity of David's lineage was questioned due to the fact that he descended from Rus the Moabite, a passage with obvious implications to Shavuos when we read Megillas Rus. Avner maintains that the prohibition of a Moabite (or Amonite) to marry into B'nei Yisrael (Devarim 23:4) applies only to males (Moavi v'lo Moavis) and therefore Rus was allowed to marry Bo'az and David's lineage is clean. The rationale he suggests is that the reason given for the prohibition is that they did not come out and greet B'nei Yisrael with food and bread. This can only be a claim on the men for it is not the way of the woman to go out and greet. Do'eg retorts that they should have brought out the men to greet the men and the women to greet the women, to which Avner seemingly has no response. The gemara later concludes that the rebuttal to Do'eg's claim is that even still, the pasuk says, (Tehillim 45:14) "kol kevudah bas melech penimah," the honour of the princess is to dwell within. Even to greet the women, it would not have been right to make the women come out. Aruch LaNer suggests that the reason why Avner neglected to offer this rebuttal is because he did not want to insult Sha'ul haMelech for the manner in which his wife seized him was clearly a breach of this maxim. Therefore, he chose to remain silent.

 

Chid"a and Chasam Sofer suggest that this is the explanation of Sha'ul's rebuke of Yonasan. If Yonasan is choosing to side with David, he is affirming the legitimacy of David's kingship which is based on the adage "kol kevudah bas melech penimah." By doing so, he is effectively shaming his own mother for the way she seized Sha'ul.

 

Have a good Shabbos and Chodesh Tov.

Eliezer Bulka

WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

 

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Clarification of a Sheva Na rule

Al Pi Cheshbon: No Population Increase

Al Pi Cheshbon: Tens and Ones by Ari Brodsky

Al Pi Cheshbon: Rounded Numbers

Al Pi Cheshbon: Discrepency in Levi's Population

Al Pi Cheshbon: Explaining the Uncounted Levi'im

Al Pi Cheshbon: Pidyon HaBen Probability

Dikdukian: Be or Ba?

Dikdukian: Discussions on Bemidbar by Eliyahu Levin


Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, 
www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

 

Friday, May 15

The Weekly Shtikle - Behar / Bechukosai


This coming Sunday, 23 Iyar, is the 10th yahrtzeit of my great aunt, Lady Amélie Jakobovits, a"h. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Mayla bas Eliyahu.

 

This coming Tuesday, the 25th of Iyar, is the 19th yahrtzeit of my mother, a"h. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Tzirel Nechamah bas Tovia Yehudah.

 

In the section dealing with our obligation to reach out and come to the aid of our neighbour, there is a glaring discrepancy, pointed out by Meshech Chachmah, in two adjacent pesukim. The first deals with the ger toshav, a non-Jew who has sworn off avodah zarah but is not subject to all of our mitzvos. We are commanded to support him in his time of need. The pasuk (25:35  ) ends off, "vachai imach." The next pasuk, dealing with the prohibition of charging interest, ends of, "vechei achicha imach." The message seems almost the same but the word vachai turns into vechei.

 

Meshech Chachmah explains the difference between these two similar terms. One might summarize it as follows: Chei is to live whereas chai is life itself. We find the word chai used with respect to HaShem, as in "Chai HaShem," because He embodies everlasting lifeThe word chei is used with respect to more fleeting life, such as Yoseif's use of the term "chei Par'oah." 

 

When we support our neighbour, the ger toshav, it is far more than providing financial stability. Since he has not accepted the full burden of all mitzvos, his sole source of "everlasting life" is his connection to our community. If we do not come to his aid, he will surely stray and give up the life he had chosen. Therefore, reaching out to him is indeed providing him with everlasting life.

 

The second pasuk refers to achicha, your Jewish brother. He therefore already merits the "everlasting life" by virtue of his service of HaShem and acceptance of all mitzvos, a pact he surely cannot alleviate himself of under any circumstances. Therefore, our financial support, however mandatory, is simply providing superficial, physical life. And so, the word chei is used instead.

 

!חזק, חזק, ונתחזק

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
DIkdukian: Hearing Los

Dikdukian: How Lo Can You Go?

Dikdukian: Even Lo-er

Dikdukian: Qualification of the AHOY rule
Al Pi Cheshbon: An Ironic Observation

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

 

 

Friday, May 8

The Weekly Shtikle - Emor

Parshas Emor always comes out in the middle of sefiras ha'omer and it is also the parsha which contains the commandment for sefiras ha'omer (23:15). This unique mitzvah seems to give rise the most interesting halachic discussions ranging from the theoretical, such as counting the Omer in alternative number bases, to the more practical, such as the effect of crossing the International Date Line on the fulfillment of the mitzvah. There is an interesting discussion as to whether or not writing may qualify as a valid means of fulfilling the mitzvah of sefiras ha'omer. That is, if one was to write, "Hayom yom x la'omer," would that be sufficient to fulfill one's obligation and would this action disallow one from repeating the count with a berachah?

The discussion of this halachic quandary follows an interesting family tree. This issue is first dealt with in the responsa of R' Akiva Eiger, siman 29. The teshuvah is actually written by R' Akiva Eiger's uncle, R' Wolf Eiger. Unable to attend his nephew's wedding, he made a simultaneous banquet of his own to celebrate the occasion. He wrote to his nephew about this halachic issue, which was discussed at the banquet. He cites a number of related issues which he builds together to try to reach a conclusion. The gemara (Yevamos 31b, Gittin 71a) teaches that witnesses may only testify by means of their mouths and not by writing. The gemara (Shabbos 153b) states that mutes should not separate terumah because they cannot say the berachah. It is assumed that writing the berachah would not have been sufficient. Also, there is a discussion among the commentaries with regards to the validity of a vow that is written and not recited. R' Wolf Eiger concludes that writing is not a sufficient means of fulfilling the mitzvah of sefiras ha'omer. However, this sparks a debate between him and his nephew which stretches out to siman 32.

This issue is eventually discussed in the responsa of Kesav Sofer (Yoreh Dei'ah siman 106) by R' Avraham Shmuel Binyomin Sofer, R' Akiva Eiger's grandson who was, in fact, named after R' Wolf Eiger. He covers a host of related topics and eventually discusses the exchange recorded in his grandfather's sefer. The debate, although it encompasses various pertinent issues, never produces any concrete proof directly concerning the act of counting. However, Kesav Sofer quotes his father, Chasam Sofer, in his footnotes to R' Akiva Eiger (his father- in-law) where he provides a more concrete proof. The gemara (Yoma 22b) teaches that one who counts the number of B'nei Yisrael transgresses a prohibition as it is written (Hoshea 2:1) "And the number of B'nei Yisrael shall be like the sand of the sea that shall not be measured nor counted." The gemara cites two examples (Shmuel I 11:8, 15:4) where Shaul HaMelech went out of his way to avoid this prohibition by using pieces of clay or rams in order to perform a census. Chasam Sofer suggests that Shaul could simply have counted the men by writing down the numbers and not saying them. Since Shaul went to far greater lengths, we are compelled to say that writing the number of men would still have qualified as counting them and he would not have sufficiently dodged the prohibition. Thus, concludes Chasam Sofer, if one has explicit intention to fulfill the mitzvah, writing is a valid means of counting Sefiras HaOmer. However, Kesav Sofer suggests that perhaps the berachah should not be recited in this case.

It's hard to imagine what the practical implications might have been in those days. Why would someone write down the day of the omer if not for the fact that they were completely unable to talk. However, perhaps this issue has more practical implications in our modern age. Suppose someone sends his friend a text message asking what night of sefirah it is and he responds, "tonight is 6." Could there be a problem counting with a berachah after that?

 

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Ner Tamid

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com