 |
|
|
Surf A Little Torah PARASHAT YITRO by Rav David Silverberg
The widespread custom among the Jewish people is to stand during the reading of the Ten Commandments this Shabbat. Some authorities, most notably the Rambam (Teshuvot HaRambam 46), opposed this practice in light of a passage in Masekhet Berakhot (12a). There we learn that a reading of the Ten Commandments was conducted daily in the Bet Hamikdash, a practice that the Sages disallowed in other locales. They feared that an institutionalized, regular reading of these ten laws would lead ignorant listeners to the heretical conclusion that only these mitzvot originate from God. The rest of the Torah, they may think, was made up by the rabbis, Heaven forbid. Therefore, Chazal thwarted an attempt to universalize the daily, public reading of the Ten Commandments. The Rambam extends this principle to forbid any practice that sets the Ten Commandments apart from the rest of the Chumash, including standing specifically for this section of the Torah reading. Several suggestions have been offered to reject this argument and uphold the common practice of standing during the Ten Commandments. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggerot Moshe O.C. vol. 4, 22) explains that in truth, little danger exists even with a daily public reading of the Commandments. In fact, he cites sources to the effect that originally the Commandments were read in all synagogues, not just in the Bet Hamikdash. Reading these verses each day would not, suggests Rav Moshe, lead one to heresy so easily. One can readily understand the unique quality of these ten laws, forming the basis and backbone of the rest of the Torah, that warrant their specific emphasis. Only when heretical movements capitalized on this practice to undermine the authority of the rest of the mitzvot did the Sages urge communities outside the Mikdash to stop the daily reading. In the Bet Hamikdash, however, plenty of kohanim and scholars were available to teach and guide, thereby preventing disastrous misunderstandings. All the more so, reasons Rav Moshe, we have little reason for concern when we rise for the reading of the Ten Commandments. It doesn't take much to realize that we rise in deference to this majestic moment in our history where every member of Benei Yisrael beheld the vision of God, as it were. We may safely assume, then, that no one will get the wrong message and afford exaggerated significance to the Ten Commandments. Rav Moshe adds that one should not remain seated during the reading of the Ten Commandments if everyone around him stands, as one should not oppose the congregation's custom. Additionally, even if one personally maintains that standing should be prohibited as it may lead to heretical notions, clearly when the entire congregation stands he accomplishes nothing in this regard by sitting. Nevertheless, I have been told that Yemenite Jews, who strictly adhere to the Rambam's rulings, will remain seated even when participating in a minyan where everyone stands for the Ten Commandments. Although they would generally conform to local custom when praying in a community following different practices from their own, on this issue they refuse to conform given the Rambam's vehement stance. It should be noted that many authorities recommend that one feeling uncomfortable standing who prays in a synagogue with members who do, should stand for the entire Torah reading or at least for the "aliya" containing the Commandments. This way, he neither presents himself in direct opposition to the congregation's custom nor appears as affording special significance to the Ten Commandments. ***** As we know, the fourth of the Ten Commandments begins with the instruction, "Remember the Shabbat day… " Chazal derive a number of specific halakhot from this verse, perhaps most prominently the Biblical imperative of reciting kiddush. The Mekhilta, however, understands this verse as requiring an awareness of Shabbat throughout the week. The Ramban elaborates on this obligation, explaining that one must constantly remember the concept of Shabbat, as this will in turn lead one to a constant awareness of God's having created the world. A more specific application of this general obligation appears in the Mekhilta of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai, which derives from this verse a mitzva to count each day by its position in the week in reference to Shabbat. Namely, on Sunday one must realize that it is the first day after Shabbat, on Monday the second, and so on. The Ibn Ezra adopts this approach in his reading of the verse, and explains that every day one must take note of the day of the week, adding that "all this is in order that one observes the seventh day by not performing work thereupon." According to the Ibn Ezra, this obligation helps prevent a miscalculation of the days, which would cause unintentional violation of Shabbat. The Ritva, in his writings on Masekhet Rosh Hashanah, goes a bit further, claiming that this halakha prompted our tradition not to assign names to the days of the week. We name our days strictly by their number in relation to Shabbat, in fulfillment of this obligation. Accordingly, the Ben Ish Chai writes that we fulfill this mitzva through our introduction to the "shir shel yom" (daily Psalm) each morning. Before reciting the given day's Psalm, we remind ourselves of the day of the week, "on which the Levi'im would recite the following in the Bet Hamikdash." By verbally stating the number day in the week, we effectively fulfill this requirement. Interestingly, however, the Ben Ish Chai presents a different reason for this requirement than that offered by the Ritva. Whereas the Ritva provided a practical basis for this mitzva, the Ben Ish Chai suggests a more philosophical one: "The idea is to teach that the weekdays are reliant upon, and connected to, Shabbat, for from there their light [i.e. spiritual quality] flows." It is reported that Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l would precede his recitation of the "shir shel yom" with the words, "Zakhor et yom ha-Shabbat" ("Remember Shabbat day"). In this way he reminded himself that he now fulfills this obligation established by the fourth of the Ten Commandments. ***** Towards the beginning of Parashat Yitro we read of Yitro's arrival at the Israelite camp together with his daughter, Moshe's wife, and her two sons, Gershom and Eliezer. A puzzling Midrash regarding Moshe's first son, Gershom, requires some explanation. The Midrash relates that when Moshe requested Yitro's daughter's hand in marriage, Yitro agreed on condition that Moshe raise his firstborn to idolatry. Moshe consented, a decision for which he was punished, says the Midrash, by having a grandson from Gershom who would serve as a pagan clergyman (see Shoftim 18:30). The conduct of both Yitro and Moshe in this startling incident demand some rationale. The Midrash elsewhere speaks of Yitro's circuitous and difficult path to monotheism, having worshipped every alleged deity in the world before arriving at the truth. Why would he so strongly wish the same torment upon his grandson? Regarding Moshe, too, we can only wonder. Yes, the Midrash considers his consent to Yitro's stipulation inappropriate. But even the miscalculations of Moshe Rabbeinu certainly had some reasonable basis! The Chiddushei Ha-Rim answers that Yitro's turbulent religious past added a powerful dimension to his faith in monotheism. His pagan background provided him with a stark contrast that made his current beliefs ever stronger. He wished his grandson to experience the same journey to truth that he himself had traveled. Yitro therefore insists that Moshe's firstborn be educated as a pagan, so as to enrich his ultimate belief in one God. Moshe accepts Yitro's reasoning and agrees to the stipulation. As the Midrash tells us, Moshe erred in this regard. The lesson that emerges is perhaps a twofold one. First, one cannot impose his , individual approach to religiosity upon others. Each person grows in a different way, and what works for one will not necessarily work for the other. The fact that Yitro found his way to monotheism by first studying and rejecting other religions does not mean that his grandson will do the same, Secondly, we learn that one may not take any risks when it comes to his children's education. Although Gershom may have stood to gain by a variegated religious studies curriculum, which included intensive study of pagan practices, he had far more to lose, should he eventually prefer idolatry to monotheism. Indeed, the effects of this education surfaced in his own son. Children must first solidify and firmly ground their belief in the one, true God before gaining exposure to opposing doctrines. ***** Parashat Yitro tells of Yitro's establishment of a judicial network for Benei Yisrael. He advises Moshe to delegate magisterial responsibilities rather than dealing personally with each and every case that arises. As we know, Moshe accepts Yitro's criticism and implements his plan. From here we can perhaps learn an important lesson about accepting advice and criticism from others. According to one view in Chazal (adopted by Rashi), Yitro offered this suggestion to Moshe after Matan Torah. That is, after Moshe had sat and studied the Torah straight from the Almighty atop Mount Sinai, he patiently and willingly listens to the constructive criticism of his father-in-law (itself somewhat astounding), a recent convert to the faith. Moshe could have easily replied, "Don't worry about me; if I managed without food or water for forty days and forty nights, I can handle sole responsibility over the national justice system." Instead, Moshe put to use the mishna in Masekhet Avot, "Who is wise? He who learns from all people." Moshe thought for a moment and decided that Yitro had a good point; everyone would benefit from a distribution of duties, and no harm would result from delegating his responsibilities. Appropriate in context, the Kotzker Rebbe comments on Yitro's statement to Moshe, "Now, listen to my voice, I will advise you," that the best advice Yitro could give was "listen to my voice." This is the best piece of counsel: open your mind and listen to what others have to say! That said, we should note an important qualification to this important message, which Rav Moshe of Kobrin extracts from this very same parasha. The Yitro section concludes with Moshe, somewhat unexpectedly, sending his father-in-law back home. Although Chazal interpret Yitro's sudden return as intended to convert his family, Rav Moshe of Kobrin relates it to the previous incident, that of his advice to Moshe. Moshe's appreciative acceptance of Yitro's idea notwithstanding, he feared that Yitro's initiative in reforming Benei Yisrael's state of affairs would extend too far. What if Yitro would seek to change other institutions, those firmly grounded in halakha and not subject to human initiative or innovation? Rather than risk unwanted intervention, Moshe sent Yitro home. Although one may certainly question this approach in light of Bamidbar 10, where Moshe begs Yitro to accompany the nation to Eretz Yisrael, the message imparted is an important one: open-mindedness has its limits. The need to listen to others does not mean a willingness to reject tradition in light of new ideas and religious concepts. At times we must stubbornly refuse the advice of those who seek to undermine Torah law. Thus, although we have what to learn from all people, we mustn't learn from everything we hear. ***** As we briefly discussed yesterday, Yitro's visit to the Israelite camp eventually ends with his return to Midyan; he does not establish permanent residence among Benei Yisrael. Interestingly, Chazal attribute his return to his having been spared the torment of the Egyptian bondage: "The Almighty said, My children were subjugated with mud and bricks while Yitro sat peacefully at home. He has now come to behold the joy of the Torah together with My children!?" (Midrash Tanchuma). How are we to understand this Midrash? Can we blame Yitro for not having volunteered as an Israelite slave in Egypt? Should God deny him the privilege of experiencing Matan Torah just because he converted only after the Exodus? Apparently, Benei Yisrael's development into God's special nation required a two-step process, consisting of the Egyptian exile and Matan Torah. As Rav Soloveitchik eloquently explains in his famous essay, "Kol Dodi Dofeik," the experience of Am Yisrael exists on two levels: fate and destiny. The exuberance of Matan Torah and the distinguished destiny of living a Torah life do not tell the whole story of what Benei Yisrael must become. This special nation must also endure the fate of a special nation, standing in opposition to the entire world and often suffering the prejudices and oppression resulting from their being different. Although a foreigner may join God's nation after Matan Torah as a convert, the initial formation of this nation necessarily entailed the participants' inclusion in both these elements. Before standing at the foot of Mount Sinai, they must first understand the repercussions of maintaining their distinct identity. The Egyptian experience demonstrated that Benei Yisrael retain their uniqueness at the expense of hostility; their distinction arouses suspicion, which itself triggers contempt and hatred. Yitro was thus barred from the glory of Sinai whereas he missed the anguish of Egypt. Only one who could fully identify with the plight of Benei Yisrael could enjoy the majesty and splendor of Benei Yisrael. [It should be noted that this passage in the Midrash Tanchuma seems to adopt the position that Yitro came to the Israelite camp before Matan Torah, as the simple reading of the verses suggests. Yesterday, you will recall, we worked in accordance with the alternate view among Chazal, that Yitro visited only after Ma'amad Har Sinai.] ***** The fourth of the Ten Commandments, "Remember the Shabbat day," forms the Biblical basis of the mitzva of kiddush on Shabbat eve. One interesting issue related to the halakhot of kiddush involves the type of cup required. First and foremost, one must ensure that his kiddush cup meets the minimum requirement of volume - a "revi'it." (Considerable controversy exists as to the precise quantity of a "revi'it," specifically surrounding the famous dispute between Rav Chaim Na'eh and the Chazon Ish.) It should be noted, however, that a distinction may exist in this regard between kiddush Friday night and on Shabbat day. Halakha allows one to conduct kiddush on Shabbat morning with liquor. Now requiring kiddush over an entire "revi'it" of brandy obviously puts the individual in a somewhat precarious situation as far as Shabbat lunch is concerned. Fortunately, the Maharsham allows one to recite kiddush over a small amount of liquor in a standard liquor glass. It is reported that several Chassidic giants, including the legendary rebbes of Tzans and Kotzk, had such a practice. Interestingly, however, Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank argues that this leniency may depend upon an important dispute amongst the authorities in a different context. Generally speaking, one requires a "berakha acharona" after drinking only when he had drunk a full "revi'it," whereas only such a quantity renders one's drinking meaningful enough to warrant a berakha. What happens, however, when one drinks a single shot of liquor? On the one hand, he has drunk considerably less than a "revi'it" (even by the minimalist assessment of this measurement). On the other hand, his drinking can hardly be considered less than meaningful!! This question is subject to a dispute between the Magen Avraham and the Taz (O.C. 190). Rav Frank suggests that this argument will directly affect the halakha regarding kiddush over liquor Shabbat morning. The lenient position mentioned above, which allowed reciting a kiddush over a shot glass of liquor, would presumably hold like the Taz, that one recites a "berakha acharona" over such a drink. The Taz evideviews the significance of the drink, rather than its amount, as the determining factor. As such, he would allow such a drink for kiddush Shabbat morning. According to the Magen Avraham, however, who exempts one from a "berakha acharona" after drinking a shot glass, what concerns us is quantity. As such, one should not, according to this view, recite kiddush Shabbat morning with anything less than a "revi'it," even should he use liquor. For practical guidance, please consult a competent halakhic authority. ***** Yesterday we discussed the minimum volume required for one's kiddush cup. Today we will explore a different issue regarding one's kiddush cup - the type of cup needed. Specifically, may one use a disposable, paper cup for kiddush? Three general opinions exist regarding this question. Rav Yitzchak Weiss as well as the Steipler Gaon forbade the use of disposable cups for kiddush. They argued that such a cup, by virtue of its intent for only one-time use, lacks the formal status of a proper cup required for kiddush. Rav Weiss proves this from the fact that such cups do not require "tevila" (immersion in a "mikveh") when purchased from a gentile, a requirement applicable to more significant utensils. The opposite view is championed by Rav Eliezer Waldenberg. He maintains that disposable cups are deemed such only as a result of their low price. Whereas functionally speaking such cups serve no less of a purpose than fancy wine glasses, they are of no lesser inherent value. As such, one may use such a cup for kiddush. Rav Moshe Feinstein and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach take a middle stand on this issue, discouraging the use of disposable cups but validating a recitation of kiddush with such cups in the absence of proper glasses. Rav Shlomo Zalman argues that given that paper cups are often used even at major functions by important guests, they cannot be relegated to inferior status. Nevertheless, the requirement of "hiddur mitzvah" (beautifying mitzvot, as discussed last week) mandates that one make the effort to use a nice, respectable glass for kiddush. As always, please seek competent halakhic guidance for practical instruction.
This shiur is provided courtesy of the Virtual Beit Midrash, the premier source of online courses on Torah and Judaism - 14 different courses on all levels, for all backgrounds. Make Jewish learning partof your week on a regular basis - enroll in the (c) YeshivHar EtzioAll rights reserved to Yeshivat Har Etzion Yeshivat Har Et
This shiur is provided courtesy of the Virtual Beit Midrash, the premier source of online courses on Torah and Judaism 14 different courses on all levels, for all backgrounds. MakeJewish learning partof your week on a regular basis - enroll in the (c) YeshivHar EtzioAll rights reserved to Yeshivat Har Etzion Yeshivat Har Et | ||||||||||||||||||||