Surf A Little Torah
Yeshivat Har Etzion

PARASHAT BEREISHIT

By Rav David Silverberg

            Among the more famous halakhic quandaries regarding the observance of Yom Tov is the issue of whether Jews traveling to Israel from abroad must observe Yom Tov sheni – the second day of Yom Tov observed outside Eretz Yisrael.  The practice of Yom Tov sheni serves to commemorate the custom among Babylonian communities in ancient times before the fixed calendar system was developed, when new months were determined based upon the sighting of the new moon.  The High Court in Jerusalem would declare Rosh Chodesh on either the thirtieth or thirty-first day since the previous Rosh Chodesh, and then dispatch messengers throughout Eretz Yisrael and Babylonia to convey this information to the Jewish communities.  Distant communities in Babylonia would generally not receive word until after Yom Tov, and were thus uncertain as to whether the previous month extended for twenty-nine or thirty days.  They were thus compelled to observe two days of Yom Tov to cover both possibilities, and, in commemoration, Diaspora communities ever since have followed this practice.

            The question thus arises, must a Diaspora Jew observe the second day of Yom Tov if he spends the festival in Eretz Yisrael?

            The Mishna and Gemara towards the beginning of the fourth chapter of Pesachim discuss the situation of a person who visits a community with different practices than those observed in his hometown.  Assuming the traveler plans on returning home, he is bound by the stringencies of both his hometown and his current location.  Accordingly, we might expect that visitors in Israel from abroad must observe Yom Tov sheni, since the temporary nature of their trip renders them bound by the stringent practices of their original location.

            However, the Chakham Tzvi (167; cited in Sha’arei Teshuva end of O.C. 496) famously distinguished between this case, of the traveler to Israel, and standard situations where one is bound by his hometown customs.  According to the Chakham Tzvi, the general principle applies only if the stringent practice in question could be observed even if one establishes permanent residence elsewhere, where the stringency is not followed.  In most cases, a person who relocates in a different community may continue practicing a stringent measure observed in his original location, as a personal custom.  In the case of Yom Tov sheni, however, one who emigrates from the Diaspora to Eretz Yisrael obviously cannot continue observing the second day of Yom Tov in his new location.  The Chakham Tzvi thus contends that since Yom Tov sheni simply has no place at all in Eretz Yisrael, a visitor from abroad need not observe the second day of Yom Tov.

            Rav Shemuel Salant (cited by Rav Yechiel Michel Tuketchinsky, Ir Ha-kodesh Ve-ha-mikdash, 3:19:11) added another argument for this position.  As stated, the entire institution of Yom Tov sheni stems from the situation in ancient times when distant communities were in doubt as to when to observe Yom Tov.  Clearly, if a Babylonian Jew in ancient times had visited Eretz Yisrael and would thus know with certainty which day was Yom Tov, he would observe just one day, like all Jews in Eretz Yisrael.  Accordingly, nowadays, too, when we commemorate the customs of our ancestors centuries ago, visitors from abroad should observe just one day of Yom Tov.  Others, however, have refuted this argument very easily, noting that the contemporary observance of Yom Tov sheni by definition ignores the precise conditions of antiquity.  After all, with the advent of the fixed calendar system, even Diaspora Jews know the date with certainty, and nevertheless continue to observe two days of Yom Tov, despite the fact that a Jew in ancient Babylonia who somehow heard the court’s announcement would observe just one day.  This appears to prove that the observance of Yom Tov sheni nowadays stands independent of the original conditions that gave rise to this practice, and it thus has the same status as other location-dependent stringencies, which one must observe if he temporarily visits a different location.

            Although a range of opinions exist on the matter, the majority view appears to favor the observance of Yom Tov sheni by visitors from abroad.  Although the Shulchan Arukh does not issue any ruling on the subject, the work’s author – Rav Yosef Karo – explicitly sides with the stringent view in a different work – his collection of responsa, Avkat Rochel.  Furthermore, the Chakham Tzvi’s own son, Rav Yaakov Emden, challenges his father’s arguments and disagrees with his ruling (She’eilat Ya’abetz, 1:168).  The Sha’arei Teshuva cites many Acharonim who likewise dispute the Chakham Tzvi’s ruling, and the Mishna Berura (496:13) accordingly adopts the stringent position.  This is also the view of many recent authorities, including Rav Moshe Feinstein, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Rav Yitzchak Weiss.  Needless to say, those in this situation should consult a competent halakhic authority for guidance.

(Sources taken from Piskei Teshuvot, 496:3)

******

            The final section of Parashat Bereishit (5:1-6:8) presents a genealogical record of Adam’s descendants through the birth of Noach’s three sons, culminating with a description of the depravity of mankind in Noach’s time.  This section begins with the introductory clause, “Zeh sefer toledot Adam” – “This is the book [or, ‘record’] of the history of man” (5:1).  Innocuous as this phrase may seem, at least one view in Chazal, as recorded in Torat Kohanim (Kedoshim, 4:12) and the Talmud Yerushalmi (Nedarim 9:4), sees this verse as encapsulating the “kelal gadol ba-Torah” – the greatest principle in the Torah.  Responding to Rabbi Akiva’s famous assertion that “Love your fellow as yourself” (Vayikra 19:18) constitutes a “great principle in the Torah,” Ben Azai counters by citing this verse – “This is the book of the history of man” – as an even greater “principle.”  What “great principle” is embedded with this very plain and simple phrase, “This is the book of the history of man”?

            The Ra’avad, in his commentary to Torat Kohanim, as well as Raboteinu Ba’alei Ha-Tosefot here in Parashat Bereishit, find the answer in the continuation of the verse: “on the day on which God created man, He made him in the image of God.”  Without delving into the precise meaning of this concept, the Torah here reiterates the fact that God created man in His own image, so-to-speak, with some sort of resemblance to the Almighty.  It is this concept that Ben Azai sought to emphasize in his response to Rabbi Akiva, who championed the importance of the Biblical adage, “Love your fellow as yourself.”  Based on this verse alone, we might conclude that a person with little self-respect or dignity, who does not mind subjecting himself to degradation or physical abuse, may treat others with the same standard he accepts with regard to himself.  Just as he does not mind insult or injury, so may he inflict emotional or physical pain on others.  Ben Azai therefore affords primary importance to this verse in Parashat Bereishit, which establishes the notion that every human being is created in the divine image, and therefore deserves respect and kind treatment even by those who do not insist on such for themselves.

            In homiletic writings, many different approaches have been taken to uncover the profound message underlying the phrase, “Zeh sefer toledot Adam.”  Rav Dov Weinberger, in his Shemen Ha-tov, suggests that the “great principle” represented by this verse emerges by considering the context in which it appears.  The previous section tells of Kayin’s murder of his brother and its aftermath.  Despite being punished, Kayin ultimately recovers, settling east of Eden, begetting children and building cities.  The Torah’s elaboration on Kayin’s progeny perhaps serves to emphasize his having overcome the mistakes of his past and success in rebuilding his life and his future.  This section also tells of the birth of Shet to Adam and Chava, who see their new son as a “replacement” of Hevel, who was killed by his brother.

            In this vein, the Shemen Ha-tov suggests, we might understand the phrase “Zeh sefer toledot adam” and its profound importance in Ben Azai’s view.  The story of the history of man is the story of downfall and recovery, of failure and success, of tragedy and renewal.  The great challenge of life, as can be seen in the lives of the very first generations of people, is that of recovery, to overcome downfalls and begin anew, to respond to setbacks with a firm resolve to move forward.  This “story of the history of man” continues in the subsequent chapters, where we read of the deluge and the gradual renewal of human life on earth.

            According to Ben Azai, this message constitutes the kelal gadol ba-Torah – the fundamental principle of the Torah.  The Torah teaches us to focus our energies and efforts on improving our future, rather than endlessly bemoaning our mistakes of the past.  When we experience failure, frustration or sorrow, we look to the “book of the history of man” to remind us of the importance of recovery and renewal, of the need to put the mishaps of the past behind us and work towards a brighter and more successful future.

******

            As we discussed yesterday, the closing section of Parashat Bereishit (starting with 5:1) presents a genealogical record, tracing Adam’s descendants through Noach.  A similar record appears several chapters later, in Parashat Noach (chapter 10), where the Torah traces Noach’s descendants down to Avraham.  The obvious question arises, why did the Torah include these lists?  What message or lesson do these chapters convey that renders them worthy of inclusion in the Biblical narrative?

            The Rambam addresses this question towards the end of his Moreh Nevukhim (3:50), amidst his discussion of the purpose served by a number of narratives in the Torah.  After establishing that “every narrative in the Law serves a certain purpose in connection with religious teaching,” the Rambam proceeds to explain the purpose served by these genealogical records.  He argues that mankind’s rapid procreation and dispersion throughout the globe threatened to undermine people’s belief in the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo – that God created the world out of nothingness.  One consequence of this theory is the belief that all of existence originated from a single source – a belief that some might find difficult to sustain in light of the vast differences between different people in terms of appearance, culture and geographic location.  The Torah therefore traces mankind’s development until Avraham – at which point it tells the story of the patriarchs and their descendants in greater detail – to provide proof for the emergence of all humanity from a single individual, Adam.

            The Rambam’s explanation may provide us with yet another possible explanation for the baffling statement of Ben Azai (Torat Kohanim, Parashat Kedoshim; Yerushalmi, Nedarim 9:4) which we discussed yesterday.  Recall that in response to Rabbi Akiva’s famous remark that “Love your fellow as yourself” (Vayikra 19:18) constitutes a “great principle in the Torah,” Ben Azai points to a different verse as expressing the “great principle” – the introductory verse to the genealogical record in Parashat Bereishit.  According to Ben Azai, the verse, “Zeh sefer toledot Adam” (“This is the record of the history of man” – 5:1) triumphs over “Love your fellow as yourself” in introducing a fundamental precept of the Torah.  According to the Rambam, we might explain that the “great principle” in this verse is that of yeish mei-ayin – the creation of the world out of non-existence.  Ben Azai perhaps refers to the section introduced by this verse, the Torah’s presentation of Noach’s pedigree, a list which the Rambam’s sees as indispensable for upholding the belief in creation.  The Rambam emphasizes in several places the centrality of this belief within Jewish theology, and his strong rejection of Aristotle’s theory of the eternity of the universe.  In explaining the purpose of the genealogical records, he speaks of creatio ex nihilo as “one of the fundamental principles of the Law,” and indeed the fourth of his famous thirteen “principles of faith” is the world’s having been created.  Possibly, then, this is the “great principle” to which Ben Azai refers in extolling the theological importance of the verse, “Zeh sefer toledot Adam.”