OnegShabbosפרשת מקץ

20 Dec ‘14 כ”ח כסלו תשע”ה

North West London's Weekly Torah Sheet

To receive this via email or for sponsorship opportunities please email mc@markittech.com

פ' מקץהפטרה: זכרי' ב' י"ד-ד' ז'

הדלקת נרות London 3:36 pm Manchester 3:35 pm

מוצש’’קLondon: 4:52 pm Manchester: 4:54 pm

Please could you ensure that there are ample sheets left in shuls for Shabbos before taking one home.If you wish to receive this sheet via email please email mc@markittech.com

Now in London, Manchester, Gibraltar, Bet Shemesh, Yerushalayim, Baltimore, New York, Miami

A Light For GenerationsOver the last number of years I have led trips to areas in Europe where

Yiddishkeit once flourished. In 2010 as I prepared for our trip to Italy, I realized that our day in Rome would be the most poignant and dramatic of our journey. Rome is unique. Most cities wish to present an image of being contemporary and modern. Not so Rome. As one walks through the historic parts of the city, it becomes obvious that Rome’s pride is with ancient temples, arenas, arches, and buildings which are mostly dilapidated and crumbling.

The structure I felt would be the perfect culmination of our trip was the imposing 51-foot-high Arch of Titus. Built in the year 81 (by Titus’s brother) to commemorate Titus’s conquest of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash, the arch remains almost intact. It is the oldest surviving example of a Roman arch.

High on its inner wall is a sculpted depiction of broken and defeated Jews being led from Jerusalem, carrying a Menorah from the Beis HaMikdash. It is depressing to look at, for it depicts one of the saddest moments in Jewish history, the exile of thousands of captive Jews from Jerusalem to Rome.

Throughout my preparation, I wondered why Hashem allowed this monument of disgrace to Jews to exist for all these years. So much of ancient Rome is in ruins — why did this arch not crumble as well? Could there be a message here?

Indeed as we gathered alongside the Arch on the last day of the trip I told the following story that I heard from my dear friend Rav Menachem Gross, a former Rosh Mesivta in the Novominsker Yeshivah in Brooklyn. About 30 years ago, an American journalist was asked to write a report on Hadrian’s Wall, the 73-mile-long wall originally built by the Roman emperor, Hadrian, as a military fortification in the northern part of the Roman Empire. Part of the wall stands near Newcastle and the River Tyne in northern England.

The journalist soon realized that the great wall was not as revered as it once was, and that tourists chip off bits of its rocks and stones as souvenirs. In a conversation with one of the local residents the journalist mentioned that he was Jewish. “If you are Jewish, then why don’t you visit the thriving Jewish neighborhood not far from here?” he was asked.

“I didn’t know there was one,” he replied.

He was directed to the Jewish community in Gateshead, it was a mere two miles from where he had been standing. When he arrived there, he was taken to the home of the Rosh Yeshivah, Rabbi (Arye Zev) Leib Gurwicz , the son-in-law of Rabbi Eliyahu Lopian. After speaking with him for a little while, Rav Leib asked the journalist to accompany him to

the beis medrash of the yeshivah. (Rav Mattisyahu Salomon told me he remembers the day of the journalist’s visit to the beis medrash.)

As he entered with the Rosh Yeshivah, the journalist was awestruck by what he heard and saw. There were close to 200 fellows in the beis medrash. Some were concentrating on various texts, some were arguing, some were deliberating. Hands were waving, fingers were pointing, nearly a hundred animated conversations and debates were going on simultaneously.

“Just what is going on here?” asked the bewildered journalist.

“I wanted you to see this,” said the perceptive Rosh Yeshivah, “so that you would understand something. You came to write about a wall that was built by Hadrian [Hebrew: Adriyanus]. It was under his rule that Rabbi Akiva was convicted of teaching Torah publicly and eventually martyred. Yet, today few people know of Hadrian. His descendants do not exist, few of his writings exist, and the Roman Empire itself does not exist. However, these boys in this study hall, and in study halls throughout the world, are still debating the writings and the thoughts of Rabbi Akiva! These young men here and young men like them around the world are all the spiritual descendants of Rabbi Akiva! Hadrian thought that by having Rabbi Akiva killed, he would halt the transmission of Torah. In reality, it is just the opposite. Torah and Rabbi Akiva live in the minds and hearts of Jews everywhere.”

I told our group that in 1953, the Ponevezher Rav, along with his friend Dr. Moshe Rothschild, founder of the Ma’yanei Yehoshua Hospital Bnei Brak hospital, came to this spot in Rome. Looking up at the daunting arch, the Rav proclaimed out loud, “Titus, Titus, You thought you would destroy the Beis HaMikdash and defeat Am Yisrael. You thought you would take the holy implements to Rome and leave us, Bnei Yisrael, with nothing. What remains of you, Titus? Not a single remnant. But we are still here! We were victorious. We can be found everywhere, sitting and learning Torah in every corner. Titus, Titus — we defeated you!”

After relating these incidents, I pointed to the carving within the arch and suggested that perhaps the etching symbolizes for us the difficult journey that we are making through the Diaspora. It began then and is moving to its inevitable, glorious end with the coming of Moshiach. However the journey can only continue if we maintain the standards of Torah study and mitzvah observance symbolized by the Menorah. Shlomo Hamelech wrote, Ki ner mitzvah v’Torah ohr, [Every] mitzvah is a lamp and [the study of] Torah is a light (Mishlei 6:23).

On Chanukah when we celebrate with lights we must know what true Jewish light is, Mitzvos and the study of Torah. Perhaps this is why the Arch of Titus is still there: to remind Jews in exile that only by continuing to carry that which the Menorah stands for will we make it to the end of the journey.

The Maggid Rabbi Paysach Krohn

16 Page

Chanuka Edition

2

My grandfather used to repeat the above explanation of how they found the oil, almost every Chanukah and I always found it a bit strange.

However, at publication, I came across a small book called “Drashas Toras Chessed” (so named for it contains the first sermon of Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Lublin, z”l, writer of the Toras Chessed Responsa, printed in 5695). At the the end of that book I discovered that my grandfather had thought of the same explanation as that of the Shach on the Chumash, who also explained that the Chashmonaim found Yaakov’s oil jug. He adds that the same jug was also used in anointing the Temple vessels.

The Toras Chessed explains that Kohen Gadol whose seal was found on it was the same Kohen Gadol who had officiated at the anointing of the Temple vessels.

Another thought I had about finding the jug sealed with the Kohen Gadol’s seal is this: (This is from my pamphlet on Chanukah ‘Shemen l’meor’, and I suggested the idea to my grandfather, who liked it.)

The Gemara in Shabbos 21b explains: What is Chanukah? (i.e. for which miracle was it instituted? - Rashi) The Rabbis taught... When the Hellenists entered the sanctuary, they defiled all the oil that was found there. When the government of the House of Hasmoneans prevailed and conquered them, oil was sought and only one flask was found with the seal of the High Priest intact. This flask contained sufficient oil for only one day, but a miracle occurred, and it fed the menorah for eight successive days. (It was hidden, and sealed with the imprint of the Kohen Gadol’s ring, and they were able to tell it had been untouched - Rashi)

A. Why do we need to know who sealed it – is it significant that it was the Kohen Gadol’s seal?

B. What was the Kohen Gadol’s seal doing there anyway? Is the law that the Kohen Gadol needed to seal all oil jugs? If there is such a law, why is it discussed nowhere in the Gemara or Rambam?

C. The Gemara reads that “there was only oil for one day”, however in the Sheiltot of Rav Achaai Gaon it reads “there wasn’t even enough for one day” (Sheilta 26) and although the Haamek Shaila (number 27) proposes to amend the text to read like that of our Gemara, he himself notes that the Sefer HaEshkol (Chanukah, beginning) quotes this Sheiltot as reading “there wasn’t even enough for one day”, adding that “even the first day was a miracle”.

[He intends to answer the question of the Bais Yosef (Orach Chaim 670) as to why there are eight days of Chanukah when the miracle was only for seven days. The answer is that the first day was a miracle too. This answer is mentioned in “Yomin D’Chanukah” (Jerusalem, 5734) chapter 27:8, written by the Rebbe of Erloy and the Birkei Yosef (chapter 670) in the name of Rabennu Yerucham (Nesiv 9) and in the commentary of the She’elas Shalom on the Sheiltot.]

At any rate this seems to be an established text, and so the question is why did they fill the menorah in the first place with so little oil, knowing that it could not last even one night?

We find a curious division in levels of Chanukah lighting; the mitzvah itself, mehadrin, and mehadrin min hamehadrin - the superlative way of lighting. We do not find different levels of fulfillment for other mitzvos, only here. Why? (In Chapter 15 of “Yomin D’Chanukah”, the author demonstrates from various sources that the true fulfillment of lighting the Chanukah lights is the best one. This too needs explanation)

The Rambam in discussing the laws of the oil used in the Temple says (Isurei Mizbeach 7:8) “Nine levels of oil quality are counted: an olive that sprouted at the top of the tree and was single-picked, crushed and put into the basket, creates the finest oil. Second to that is when that olive is pressed in a press... although all are suitable for menachos, the first is the best, then come the second and fourth - which are equal.... and for the menorah only the first, fourth and seventh are suitable, as it says ‘crushed for lighting’ - i.e. only crushed olives are permitted for the menorah, although all may be used for menachos. If all are suitable for menachos why are they ordered? For one ought to know the best possible quality available, so that one can bring merit to oneself by subduing his Yetzer Hara and opening his hand to spend generously on bringing his korban in the finest way possible.”

Although there are many levels of oil quality, they are rated by level so that one can bring the best and purest, thereby showing his love of mitzvos and his desire to perform them in the best possible way.

The Kohen Gadol would offer a minchah each day, called the chavitei Kohen Gadol. The Rambam (Maasei Hakorbanos 12:4 and Tmidim Umusafim 3:15) writes “It is a mitzvah to offer the chavitei Kohen Gadol each day, half in the morning together with the morning tamid and half in the afternoon with the afternoon tamid.” The Rambam adds that the gemarah in Menachos 51a prescribes bringing with them three lugin of oil (Maasei HaKorbanos 13:2).

The Rambam (Tmidim and Mussafim 3:11) explains that every lamp in the menorah held half a lug of oil, as it states ‘...from evening to morning...’ - i.e. put in enough oil to last until the morning. So the seven lamps of the menorah needed three and a half lugin - half a lug more than the Kohen Gadol’s chavitin.

Perhaps one can suggest that the jug of oil that was discovered was the oil the Kohen Gadol prepared for his own minchah, and that’s why it held his seal, to indicate that it was reserved for him. It was his own personal seal, just as the seal Yehudah sent to Tamar was his personal seal, and as the Gemara in Shabbos discusses carrying one’s personal seal. (Shabbos 63a, Orach Chaim 201:79)

However, when they found the jug, they knew it was designated for menachos, for which all oils are suitable. But as the Kohen Gadol was known to be extra careful to use only the best oil for his minchah, and not to compromise with a lesser quality oil, the jug was deemed suitable for use in the menorah too. The stringency of the Kohen Gadol contributed to the miracle of the oil, for his preparing the finest oil allowed it to be used for the menorah.

So the miracle was that not only that they found the oil, but also that it was sealed with the personal seal of the Kohen Gadol - enabling it to be used for the menorah. Since it was designated for the minchah it held only three lugin, half a lug less than the amount needed for the menorah, [hence the Sheiltot that there was not even enough for one day]. And yet, miracles upon miracles, despite the small quantity, it lasted for eight days, so they could prepare new oil.

This explains why there are levels of performance of this mitzvah. Our sages wished to enshrine the entire scope of the miracle, including the stringencies that the Kohen Gadol fulfilled in preparing his oil. Therefore they set different levels of observance, similar to the levels of oils suitable for menachos, so that the mitzvah would have an element of doing the minimum, doing above the minimum, and doing even more still.

My friend Rabbi Tzvi Michel Goldstein showed me that the son of the Chida, Rav Rephael Yeshaya Azulai, z”l, in the sefer “Shabbos Shel Mi” also explains that the oil was that which the Kohen Gadol had prepared for his minchah, and I was glad to have thought of the same idea. However, he goes on to explain that at first they chose to light only one lamp each night, the eastern lamp. [This needs explanation: is there any mitzvah to light a single lamp of the menorah? And why would they light in a way that needed a miracle, when the rule is not to rely on miracles? - see Yomin D’Chanukah, chapter 13]

To explain the different opinions as to whether there was enough oil for one day [Rashi] or not even enough for one day [Sheiltot], perhaps we can suggest the following:

The Shoel U’Meshiv (Vol. 4, Part 2, 104) answers the question posed by Tosfos as to how the oil remained pure if the sages had decreed that non-Jews cause impurity by moving an object, for even if it were sealed it would still become impure when rolled, by quoting the Gemara in Chullin (71a) that something swallowed within something else does not become impure. Therefore the oil absorbed into the walls of the jug remained pure. And as the Gemara explains that generally liquids do not mix, with the exception of oil and wine, which mix exceptionally well, therefore the oil circulated, with the impure oil entering the walls of the jug and becoming pure (by being considered

‘swallowed’) and the now pure oil coming back out. Eventually, it was all purified by this process. Therefore although non-Jews may have rolled the jug, the oil within it was still pure and suitable for use.

If so, perhaps we can reconcile the two texts: the Gemara reads that there was enough oil for one day, as that was the quantity when the jug was originally filled. However, part of the oil was subsequently absorbed into the jug, leaving less than enough for one day. Both texts are indeed correct! And this is why it was important to mention the fact that there was not even enough for one day, as the reason for this - that the oil had been absorbed and purified – was the reason why it was permissible to use the oil at all!

Birchas Shalomadapted from the Hebrew sefer of The Tchaba Rov Ztk’’l

לעילוי נשמת הגאון הצדיק רבי שלום משולם ויינברגר זצוקלל״ה

גאב"ד טשאבא

3

ChanukaWe learn in the Gemara Shabbos 21:

What is Chanukah? The rabbis taught: “On the twenty-fifth day of Kislev, Chanukah commences and lasts eight days, on which lamenting (in commemoration of the dead) and fasting are prohibited. When the Hellenists entered the sanctuary, they defiled all the oil that was found there. When the government of the House of Hasmoneans prevailed and conquered them, oil was sought (to light the menorah in the sanctuary) and only one flask was found with the seal of the high priest intact. The flask contained sufficient oil for one day only, but a miracle occurred, and it fed the menorah for eight successive days.”

Tosafos asks a question: Since even a sealed container becomes impure if moved by a gentile, why was the seal meaningful?

I would like to suggest an answer using the commentary to a midrash quoted in Bereishis Rabba 69: 8 on a verse in parshas Vayetze (28:18):

And Yaakov arose early in the morning, and he took the stone that he had placed at his head, and he set it up as a monument, and he poured oil on top of it.

How did Yaakov have oil in this deserted place? The midrash tells us:

Enough oil descended from heaven to fill the vessel.

The Pnei Yehoshua asked a question on this sugya. This whole miracle was really unnecessary because when most of the population was ritually impure, it was permitted to use impure items. He wrote that the essence of the miracle was to demonstrate Hashem’s love for the Jewish people, in the same way as did the constant miracle that neither the omer offering nor the shtei halechem were ever disqualified. The crux of the Chanukah miracle was that the Jews were saved from the harsh decrees of their enemies, who tried to force them to sin. However, as a further testimony, in addition to the miraculous salvation, the miracle of the menorah showed that the Shechinah (the Divine Presence) resides within the Jewish people.

The Ramban writes in his commentary on the Torah at the beginning of parshas Behaalosechah that it says in a hidden megillah that Hashem promised Aharon HaKohen that He will perform a miracle on Chanukah. This tradition was passed down to Aharon’s descendents, the kohanim, so that they knew that they would witness a great miracle when lighting the menorah in the Beis Hamikdash.

After the Chashmonaim fought against the Greeks’ decrees to uproot Torah and mitzvos with such fervour and dedication, Hashem wanted to show them that their efforts were valued. In their great merit, they were worthy of receiving oil from Heaven from the same flask that Yaakov Avinu had come across in exactly that place. It was sealed with the seal of the Kohen Gadol – as it says in gemara Menochos 110:

“This is permanent for Israel” (Divrei Hayomim 2:3). Rav Giddal said in the name of Rav, this refers to the altar built (in Heaven) where Michael, the great Prince, stands and offers up an offering.

In other words, just as korbanos are continuously offered in the Beis Hamikdash in Heaven and surely the menorah is also being lit there too, as in the earthly Beis Hamikdash, so the ‘seal’ refers to that of the Kohen Gadol in Heaven. This resolves Tosfos’ question – if the flask came from Heaven, it could not have been made impure by being touched by gentiles.

This explanation also connects with the famous question of the Beis Yosef – why did the rabbanim institute eight days of Chanukah when there was enough oil in the flask for one day? One of the answers given is that finding the flask of oil was itself a miracle. According to what we have said, it was an even greater miracle, as it resembled the miracle that Yaakov Avinu experienced. Possibly, they found the same flask which had already been prepared for them and which appeared now that they needed the miracle in order to demonstrate Hashem’s love for them.

SHABBOS 21:R. Kahana said: R. Nathan b. Manyomi in the name of R. Tanchum lectured:

“A Chanukah lamp becomes disqualified if it is put higher than twenty amos (from the ground), just like a Sukkah and like the side beam of an alley.”

R. Kahana said: R. Nathan b. Manyomi in the name of R. Tanchum lectured: It says (about the pit that Joseph was thrown into by his brothers) “The pit was empty and there was no water in it.” What do we learn from the addition of the phrase ‘there was no water in it?’ That there was no water in it, but there were snakes and scorpions in it.

Why did Rabbi Tanchum compare a Chanukah lamp to the pit into which Joseph was thrown?

I would like to suggest that this is a suggestion for how Jewish children should be taught Torah and fear of Hashem. Chanukah is an auspicious time for chinuch, which is implicit in the name “Chanukah”.

We see in the gemara Shabbos 22 that there is a disagreement as to whether putting the menorah in its place constitutes the mitzvah, or whether lighting the menorah constitutes the mitzvah. The Kedushas Levi explained: “Lighting the menorah constitutes a mitzvah” – this means that a person is enthusiastic about serving Hashem and loving the Creator and His Torah, and “putting the menorah in its place constitutes a mitzvah” – means that this lighting up remains, that he puts his love into a vessel and preserves it. This enlightenment and enthusiasm must be instilled into the hearts of our youth while they are still young, so that when they grow up it will remain there, and the flame of Torah and serving Hashem will stay with them throughout their lives. But, if the parent or teacher does not do this when the children are young, they will not be as effective in doing this when the children are older. Even if later on they try to lead them to warmth and enthusiasm for Torah, it might not work, because it is hard to change a person’s habits.

Chazal said in Taanis 7.

Why were the words of Torah compared to water? Just as water goes from a high place to a low place, so too the words of Torah are like this.

Torah only lasts in a low place. We see this when the Torah was given on Mount Sinai which was lower than all the mountains around it. Here too, while the child is young and acknowledges this, his father must teach him Torah, to light the flame of holiness within him, so that his enthusiasm will grow. Later

“putting it in its place constitutes a mitzvah,” he will stay on the path that he was taught throughout his life.

This was Rabbi Tanchum’s lecture: The “Chanukah lamp” hints at the light of mitzvos and Torah which must be ignited while a child is young. “Which was placed above twenty amos” meaning, if a person says ‘first I’ll teach my child secular studies or a profession so that he can earn a living, and he’ll learn Torah afterwards, when he’s twenty years old’ (hinted to by placing it higher than twenty amos) – this is an invalid method. “Like a succah” – just like a person who sits in a succah has to constantly remember that he is sitting in the succah in order to keep Hashem’s commandment, (as it says “ In order that your generations will know…”) and he has to be aware of this, this is the case here too.

Rabbi Tanchum lectured further: A father might think that it is not so important for his son to be a Torah scholar and that he can be a God-fearing Jew even without studying Torah from a young age. However, this possibility is refuted by the next question, “why does it say the pit was empty and there was no water in it?” Water refers to Torah. If there is no Torah then, “there were snakes and scorpions in it”. If his son is an empty pit, and does not study Torah regularly while he is young, but instead occupies himself with secular studies, then he will surely have snakes and scorpions, i.e. heresy and sacrilege, inside him,. If a person waits till his son is twenty to teach him Torah, he may become so used to a permissive lifestyle that it is already part of him. Therefore a father must instil a passion and desire for Torah while his son is still young, and then the warmth of real Torah will stay with him throughout his life.

Birchas Shmuelכ״ק רבינו שרגא שמואל שניצלער זצוקלל״ה

in English

לעילוי נשמת הגאון הצדיק רבי שלום משולם ויינברגר זצוקלל״ה

גאב"ד טשאבא

4

The Torah Shiurim of Rabbi FrandRabbi Yissochor FrandMaagid Shiur, Yeshivas Ner Yisroel, Baltimore

How Yosef Got His JobWhen Yosef interpreted Pharaoh’s dream (and gave a solution for the

situation foretold therein), the Torah writes: “And the matter was good in Pharaoh’s eyes and in the eyes of all of his servants. And Pharaoh said to his servants ‘Is there another man to be found (like Yosef) who has the spirit of G-d within him?’” [Bereshis 41:38-39] Pharaoh then went ahead and appointed Yosef as overseer of the massive campaign to collect the food in order to prepare for the years of famine.

In one day, Yosef went from being a common petty prisoner in the dungeon to becoming the second most powerful man in Egypt, arguably the second most powerful man in the world. This is a very unlikely scenario. How does Pharaoh take a person who was in jail yesterday and elevate him in a moment to be the second in command in the Empire? Did he not have other trusted advisors -- a Secretary of Agriculture or a Secretary of Commerce who could have implemented Yosef’s suggestions? How does a common criminal suddenly become the “Mishneh L’Melech” (“vice-President”)?

I saw an answer given in the name of Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz. As an analogy, let us ask -- why did George W. Bush pick Dick Cheney to become his vice president? The process was that Dick Cheney was the person in charge of finding the right candidate to run on the ticket with Bush for the position of vice president. Lo and behold, Bush picked Cheney himself to be that person. Admittedly, Dick Cheney is a very smart person and he shared Bush’s agenda, but Dick Cheney brought to the job something that no other candidate would have brought to the job. It was the most admirable quality a presidential candidate may look for in picking a running mate -- someone who himself does not want to become president!

There have been very caustic comments made about the office of vice president and exactly what its value is. As George Bush (the first), who held the office of vice president for 8 years before he become president, once explained it in defining the office: “You die, I fly.” To go to funerals for a living is not

something that most people aspire to. Why then does anyone become vice president? Usually, they become vice president because they want to become president. Anytime a president goes into a second term, this right away causes problems. The vice president does not want to become tarnished by the record of his boss, so during the second term, he needs to start “distancing himself” from the person who gave him his job! This was Al Gore’s problem. He did not want to be tainted with Clinton’s problem. It is always problematic to take a person who wants to be president as vice president, but most vice presidents do want that top job. Dick Cheney brought that quality to the office -- he did not want to be president.

L’Havdil, Pharaoh saw in Yosef the quality which made him say “This is the man who I want as my vice-president, second in command!” When Pharaoh told Yosef “I’ve heard that you have this uncanny ability to interpret dreams” Yosef answered “I don’t do it by myself, the L-rd will answer the welfare of Pharaoh.” [Bereshis 41:16] In other words, he told Pharaoh, “my only power is that sometimes G-d gifts me with the ability to interpret dreams.”

Now let us put ourselves in Yosef’s shoes. He has just been taken out of prison. He has the opportunity to make a good impression, be released permanently from prison, and even become part of the government. The King gave him a compliment. Any other person would have reacted in a way which would acknowledge the King’s description of him as having great talent. “Well, that’s what they say sir. I do have this talent. I have done this before...” We would expect self-promotion. But what does Yosef say? “I can do nothing by myself...”

Pharaoh sees in Yosef a selfless, self-effacing individual who has no self-aggrandizing agenda of his own. Seeing this, Pharaoh said, this fellow might have been a prisoner yesterday, but tomorrow he is going to be my viceroy. A person who is so honest, self-effacing, and non-egotistical -- this is the person I trust to be my second in command.

The Torah Readings Of ChanukahIn the Torah Reading on Chanukah is from Parshas Nasso - the respective

chapters of the offerings of the Nessiyim [Princes] during the 12 days leading up to the dedication of the Mishkan. Our tradition is that they started building the Mishkan on the 11th of Tishrei (immediately after Yom Kippur, the day Moshe descended for the third time from Mt. Sinai, having achieved atonement for the sin of the Golden Calf) and the Mishkan was completed on the 25th of Kislev. The actual inauguration of the Mishkan was put off until the first day of Nisan, which is when the Nessiyim started bringing their offerings. But since the Mishkan was actually completed on the 25th of Kislev, we read the section of the Nessiyim on Chanukah, to link the rededication during the Chanukah period with the original dedication of the Mishkan in the time of Moshe.

The Medrash points out an anomaly in Halacha that exists here but nowhere else. We never allow a private person’s offering (Korban Yachid) to be brought on Shabbos. Only public offerings (Korbanos Tzibbur) are “doche Shabbos” [may be brought on Shabbos]. Nevertheless, the offerings of the Nessiyim, which were private offerings, were brought for 12 consecutive days, which obviously spanned a Shabbos. Specifically, the offerings were started on Sunday and the offering of the Nossi [Prince] of the Shevet [Tribe] of Ephraim was brought on the seventh day, on Shabbos. This was a ‘Horaas Sha-ah’ -- a special one-time dispensation that a private offering could be brought on Shabbos.

The Chofetz Chaim offers a suggestion to explain this anomaly. The Medrash indicates that when the Nessiyim brought their offerings, every Shevet had in mind what they would be bringing. The first day, Nachshon ben Aminadav of the Shevet of Yehudah brought his offering. The second day was the turn of Nesanel ben Tzuar of the Shevet of Yissachar.

The second person to offer was faced with a dilemma. What should I bring? The first person brought a beautiful offering, but what should I bring? Should I bring the same offering? No! That is not going to be good enough anymore.

He was tempted to bring something even more impressive, which would have put pressure on the third Nossi to bring something even more expensive and so on down the line.

It is very easy to fall into the trap of one-ups-man-ship. It is like kiddushim in shul. The first week’s sponsor has one potato kugel. The second person to make a Kiddush the following Shabbos has to add kishke to the menu. By the third week they are adding “herring from New York”. It quickly becomes a contest of outdoing one’s predecessor.

What did Nesanel ben Tzuar decide? He resisted the temptation. He recognized that the purpose of the Mishkan was to bring unity to the Jewish people, not strife and competition. He recognized if they began the inauguration of the Mishkan with competition, there would not be ‘achdus’ [unity] amongst the Jewish people, there would be dissension. Therefore, he took heroic action and brought exactly the same type of Korban as did Nachshon ben Aminadav, thereby sending a message -- my friends, this is not the time for competition or ones-up-man-ship. His example was followed by the third, fourth, and fifth Nessiyim and so on down the line.

This explains why the Torah, which is so frugal with its words, spends 60 plus pasukim in repetition of that which we already knew. The Torah could have told us in a pasuk or two that they all brought the same offering. Why go through the repetition, over and over again? The Almighty is teaching: “It is so precious and dear to Me that you each brought the same offering and did not play ones-up-man-ship that I will give each Nossi the exact same amount of

‘print’ in the Torah.”

The Chofetz Chaim suggests it could be for this reason -- the Almighty’s pleasure at the unity of His children by this non-competitive gesture -- that He made an exception and ruled that ‘This private offering can even negate the laws of Sabbath.’

לע''נ

ר' יוסף דב בן ר' משה הכהן אלביצקי ז"ל

S P O N S O R E D

5

On Call Dr Yossi Adler

Treatment of Seriously Ill Patients on Shabbos

I feel privileged to have been asked to contribute occasional articles to this exciting new publication.

I am certainly not qualified to pasken halochos. The normal disclaimer to articles of this type is that one must always ask a halachic authority. The problem of course in relation to the subject of this discussion is that when one is faced with a medical emergency one often has to act first and ask later and therefore everyone should have some familiarity with these halochos so as to know how to respond when ח''ו one is faced with situations where one is concerned there may be some risk to life. Indeed the מחבר in his introduction to these halochos [אורח חיים ס- שכח סע-ב] says והשואל הרי זה שופך someone who asks questions in these situations can be considered דמיםas having shed blood. The Mishnah Berura brings the Yerushalmi which says הנשאל הרי זה מגונה ie if someone is asked questions in this situation he is considered as culpable because a Talmid Chochom has the responsibility that everyone under his jurisdiction should aware of these halochos and should act rapidly to save life without asking questions. I hope this article will be helpful in providing an outline in the basic principles surrounding ones approach to seriously ill patients on Shabbos

It is important to be aware that there are various categories of illness with regard to Hilchos Shabbos.

an illness which may be life threatening -- חולה שיש בו סכנה .1

where there is a danger to a limb or organ but not to life -- סכנת עבר .2as a whole

הגוף [3 .3 כל an illness which affects the whole body but is not -- חולה life threatening

a minor ailment -- מיחוש .4

The purpose of this article is to introduce some of the principles involved in the first category.

In the same סעיף the mechaber states; מי שיש לו חלי של סכנה מצוה לחלל It is a mitzvah to be mechalel Shabbos to עליו את השבת והזריז הרי זה משבחsave life and someone who acts with urgency in this regard is praiseworthy. The Rambam writes פ'ב מה'שבת ה'ב that the rule regarding a חולי שיש בו .is that Shabbos is considered like a weekday for all his needs סכנה ן

The overriding principle therefore when faced with a possible life threatening illness on Shabbos is that saving life overrides all halochos of Shabbos. If in doubt one must do whatever needs to be done without any delay. In these situations the fact that it is Shabbos has to be totally disregarded. One must act like one would on a weekday calling Hatzolo or 999 as appropriate and doing everything with the utmost speed.

If it is so clear cut that danger to life overrides all halochos of Shabbos this article ought to be very short indeed and there would not be much to add to what has been said so far.

However there is a fundamental machlokes between the Mechaber and the Remo in סי'שכח סע'יב . The Mechaber states, seemingly in accordance with what has been quoted above that when one is mechalel Shabbos for a choleh sheyesh bo sakono one should not do it through non jews , minors or women but the adult Jewish man should do it himself. The Remo however states that some say that if it is possible to do it using a shinui [an unusual manner such that it is not an issur deoraisa ] and that doing so will not cause any delay then one should do so. Similarly if it can be done through the agency of a non Jew without any delay whatsoever then one should do so and the Remo states that this is the prevalent custom. [The Remo adds that if there is any concern that the non Jew will slacken then he should not be used] .

It seems therefore that according to the Remo it is not so straightforward that Shabbos should be treated like a weekday in all respects when facing

a life threatening illness. It seems that where one is certain that there will be no material delay one should try to minimise the chillul Shabbos by performing melocho with a shinui or getting a non Jew to do it.

The Mishno Beruro brings the Taz who states that the statement of the Remo that this is the prevalent custom is not a ותיקין and is notמנהג to be relied upon . The Taz says there are 2 reasons not to use a non jew [interestingly the Mishna Beruro only quotes the second one]. Firstly even if using a non Jew will not cause a delay on this occasion we are concerned that bystanders will think that one may not be mechalel Shabbos one self and will delay on future occasions [the Taz adds that to counteract this if one does ask a non jew to do Melocho on Shabbos one must announce to bystanders that were he not immediately available he would do it himself]. Secondly even though the non Jew may do the melocho efficiently the Jew will do it with more alacrity.

The Mishna Beruro here seems to pasken like the Taz, but this is an apparent contradiction to what he writes in סי'רעח ס'ק ב that if a חשב'ס needs a light to be turned off or on, one should do it through a non jew if this will not cause delay. Indeed the אדם הרב and חיי ערוך pasken like the שלחן Remo that one should use a non Jew where possible, in contrast to the statements of the Mechaber and Rambam and the Taz as quoted by the Mishna Beruro. Interestingly Rav Wosner in Shevet Halevi [[עד ס' ח' חלק states rather cryptically that the halocho is like the Taz but the minhag is like the Remo.

The key to understanding the psak seems to be the statement of the Mishna Bruro in סי'שכח ס'ק לה where he seems to pasken like the Remo with regards to a shinui and states that where it is possible to do something in a permitted way one should not disregard this and do an issur. He continues that even if the shinui will cause some delay but אין החלי בהול – the patient’s condition is not immediately critical then one should use a shinui.

We have to recognise that there are two distinct categories of חולה שיש בו One group are those where the life threatening danger is immediate . סכנהand any delay may be critical [for example somebody with acute chest pain or breathlessness] In these cases we follow the dictum of the Rambam that Shabbos with regards to a חיב'ס is treated exactly like a weekday. However there is another more common group where the patient has an illness which may well be life threatening but where there is no immediate time pressure [for example somebody with a severe infection or a lady in early labour]. In these cases the danger to life is not immediate at this moment but one must act because otherwise it may develop rapidly. In these cases a few moments will not make any difference [the patient will probably any way end up waiting for a doctor or in A & E for some time ]

In discussing this issue with various Rabbonim it seem that the prevalent custom is that in the latter situation where the emergency is not immediate Ashkenazim at least conduct themselves like the Remo by trying to minimize the חלול שבת by using a shinui or the agency of a non jew where possible and no material delay will be caused. This is why when discussing putting on a fire for a חשב'ס the Mishna Beruro does require use of a non jew where possible. Indeed the Taz himself states that the main thing is not to use a non jew if one sees the danger with certainty --suggesting perhaps that in less emergent situations even he would advocate use of a non jew. However in cases of immediate life threatening emergency we fall back on the psak of the Taz to do everything oneself without risking any delay. This is also the conclusion expressed in the excellent compendium of halochos of refuah on Shabbos [רב ישראל פנחס בדנר] ספר רפואת ישראל

In a future article we will discuss אי'ה some practical aspects when these cases may occur and how to apply these principles, as well as delineating some of the other principles involved. In the meantime it is important to remember that the overriding axiom is that if in any doubt in regards to a חשב'ס it is necessary to act first and ask later.

6

Weekly Nach Journey through NachThe material has been adapted from ‘Journey Through Nach’ published by Adir Press and distributed by Feldheim. To pre-order the Journey through Nach two-book box-set or for more info, email danielpfine@gmail.com

Perek 11:

Yavin, the King of Chatzor, heard what happened to the five kings,

and combined the armies of many other nations to fight against Bnei

Yisrael. Hashem had hardened their hearts in order to punish them and

remove them from the land (Radak 11:20). Yehoshua launched a pre-

emptive strike and massacred these enemies. Hashem commanded

Yehoshua to cripple the legs of the enemies’ horses once the enemies

were defeated and captured. Hashem prevented Bnei Yisrael from

using these horses, lest they come to rely on their physical might

instead of relying on Hashem (Ralbag 11:6). The city of Chatzor was

burned (the Ralbag explains that this was because the leader there

was the instigator of the attack on Klal Yisrael) and the Bnei Yisrael

were allowed to keep the spoils. Yehoshua eradicated nearly all the

anakim (giants) and inhabitants of Canaan from Eretz Yisrael.

The perek then provides a brief summary of Yehoshua’s conquests,

though at that time (i.e. after the anakim were killed) only the borders

had been conquered. Note that the conquering took seven years and

possessing the land took a further seven (see Radak 14:10). The

Radak (11:18) comments that Yehoshua had an assurance that as

long as he was alive, the people would remain loyal to Hashem, and

that he would not die before the land was conquered. Thus, he was in

no rush to conquer the land, although he was faulted for this. However,

given that Bnei Yisrael had captured the main border territories, Bnei

Yisrael were already secure (Radak 11:23).

Perek 12:

This perek offers a summary of the lands which Bnei Yisrael had

captured with Moshe (Moshe’s name is mentioned after the lands that

he conquered because this success was in the merit of Klal Yisrael)

and then with Yehoshua. Though Bnei Yisrael had killed the thirty

one kings listed there, they had not yet taken possession of all their

land (Malbim). Each king in the list ruled over several cities –but only

their capital cities are mentioned (Radak).

Perek 13:

Hashem instructed Yehoshua to divide up the land. He told

Yehoshua how much land there was left to conquer, and outlined

the borders of Eretz Yisrael that would be divided for the 9½ tribes

to live there. Yehoshua was too old to finish conquering the entire

land (Ralbag 13:1) necessitating each tribe conquering his portion

individually (Rashi 13:6). We are told the territories and boundaries

of Reuven, Gad, and Menashe on the eastern side of the Yarden. No

inheritance was given to Levi as “Hashem is their inheritance”; they

learned and taught Torah to the people and were supported by the

various gifts accorded to them by the Torah.

Perek 14:

This perek outlines the way Eretz Yisrael was to be divided.

Calev, flanked by the people of Yehuda, successfully requested from

Yehoshua that he should be able to conquer Chevron from the anakim

and keep it. This was based on Moshe’s promise that as a reward for

Calev giving a fair report of Eretz Yisrael, Calev would receive a part

of Eretz Yisrael. The Radak writes that Calev only received the fields

surrounding the city; the city itself was reserved for the Kohanim. See

the Radak (11:21) that there is a seeming contradiction in the pesukim

as to who conquered Chevron, and whether it was fully conquered

until Sefer Shoftim. The Radak favors the approach that it was fully

conquered now.

Dvar Torah: Perek 13

The Radak asks a pertinent question; Hashem promised “As I

was with Moshe, I will be with you”(1:5), yet Yehoshua lived till 110

which is ten years less than Moshe? It appears that this promise

was broken. Chazal criticise Yehoshua for delaying the battles

because Hashem promised him he would live to distribute the land

and Yehoshua wanted to delay the conquests in order to live longer.

This is learnt out from 11:18 “Yehoshua conducted war with these

kings for many days.” This is in stark contrast to Moshe who was

eager and hasty in initiating war with Midyan, despite knowing he

would die after it. (Rashi 31:3 Parshas Matos)

The Maharzu adds that Yehoshua lengthened the battles since

he knew that the Bnei Yisrael would serve Hashem in his lifetime,

but not afterwards. Nevertheless he was punished for making his

own judgement and not following Hashem’s. As the Radak observes

“man makes many plans, but the plan of Hashem prevails” (Mishlei

19:21).

לע''נ

רות שאשא בת יעקב מאיר ע"ה

S P O N S O R E D

7

with

We welcome all members and friends to a

מוצ“ש חנוכה (פ‘ מקץ)20TH DECEMBER | 9.00PM

LIGHT REFRESHMENTS EZRAS NOSHIM WILL BE OPEN

Menachem Kraus

Joseph FaithMagid Shiur Nishmas Yisroel

In chutz la’aretz, the common practice is to

light Chanukah candles either at nightfall or

shortly before. However, due to work and other

commitments, lighting at this time often proves

difficult. This short guide aims to answer some

of the issues most commonly encountered when

lighting later than the optimal time. For final rulings,

please consult your rav.

Must I leave work early to light Chanukah candles on

time?

If feasible, you should try to light as early after the

optimal candle-lighting time as possible1. However, in

chutz la’aretz, where we light indoors, many poskim allow

you to stay late at work and light when you return home2,

as long as you began working more than half an hour

before candle-lighting time.

If I will be returning home late from work, is it preferable

for my wife to light at the correct time instead?

According to most poskim, in chutz la’aretz, you should

wait until you arrive home to light, rather than having your

wife light instead3. Similarly, if your wife is not at home at

the optimal candle-lighting time, you should wait for her to

return before lighting, unless you are sure that she will not

mind missing it4.

If I return home late at night and the rest of my family

are asleep, should I still light candles with a bracha?

According to the Magen Avraham, you cannot make a

bracha in this scenario. Many later poskim concur with

his ruling5. However, others (including R. Moshe Feinstein,

R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and R. Shmuel Wosner) rule

1 Rema 672:22 Nitei Gavriel 4:2, Shu’t Mekadesh Yisrael (Harfenes) 22, Musaf Dirshu on Mishnah Berurah 672:10 note 353 Or Yisrael (Dardak) 9:9, based on the rulings of R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, R. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and R. Shmuel Wosner. However, according to R. Chaim Kanievsky, ibid., even in chutz la’aretz candle-lighting must take place at its proper time, and if the husband will arrive home late , his wife should light instead.4 R. Moshe Feinstein, cited in Moadei Yeshurun 1:note 17, Emes L'yaakov 672: note 586, R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, cited in Halichos Bas Yisrael 21:note 9, Halichos Shlomo 16:2, Avnei Yashfei 5:95:5, Mekadesh Yisrael 151, Or Yisrael 9:95 Magen Avraham 672:6, Chayei Adam 154:19, Mishnah Berurah 672:11, Or Yisrael 9:11, Nitei Gavriel 3:16, Shalmei Moed p.218, Piskei Teshuvos 672:4

that one should make a bracha, despite nobody else being awake6. If it is before halachic midnight (around 12 a.m. at this time of year), then there is a stronger basis for lighting candles with a bracha, even according to the first opinion7.

Am I allowed to eat before lighting candles?

Yes, but you can’t have more than an egg’s volume (kebeitza) of bread or a meal’s worth (shiur kevias seudah) of mezonos8 once there is less than half an hour to go until candle-lighting time. According to some opinions, you are not allowed to eat more than an egg’s volume of mezonos from this time9. There are no restrictions on eating other foods.

Do these restrictions apply to women who will fulfil

their obligation through their husbands/fathers?

According to some poskim, a woman who will not personally be lighting is permitted to eat freely in the half-hour before candle-lighting time10, while according to others there is no difference between men and women in this regard11. Once candle-lighting time has arrived, most opinions only allow eating in accordance with the restrictions described above, although there may be room for greater leniency where necessary12.

Is there any way that I can eat a full meal or begin

work before lighting candles?

According to some opinions, you may eat and/or begin work if you appoint someone to remind you to light candles later on13. Many rule that setting an alarm (e.g. on one’s phone) is sufficient14.

All halachos have been reviewed by Rav Dovid Tugendhaft

6 Chemed Moshe 672:3, Igros Moshe 4:105:7, Kovetz Mibeis Levi Kislev 5757 p.2, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, cited in Beyomin DeChanukah 242 and Shalmei Moed p. 218. Cf. Shaar Hatziyun 672:177 Shu’t Maharshal 85, cited in Taz 672:1, Nitei Gavriel 3:15, Mekadesh Yisrael 1568 Mishnah Berurah 232:34 & 672:10, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, cited in kuntres Halichos Vehanhagos p.7, R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited in Kovetz Mevakshei Torah Chanukah p.16, Nitei Gavriel 5:4, Mekadesh Yisrael 21, Or Yisrael 13:49 Eishel Avraham 431:4, Piskei Teshuvos 672:710 R. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, cited in Kuntres Liknos Chochmah p. 3, Kovetz Mibeis Levi Kislev 5757 p.2211 Halichos Shlomo 16:3, Nitei Gavriel 5:5, Or Yisrael 13:7, Piskei Teshuvos 672:712 Betzel HaChochmah 4:58, Piskei Teshuvos 672:7, Nitei Gavriel ibid.13 Nitei Gavriel 4:4 & 5:6, Or Yisrael 13:5 regarding eating. Cf. Birkei Yosef 275:3, Shu’t Salmas Chaim (Hechadash) 275, Mishnah Berurah 235:18 14 Piskei Teshuvos 235:8, R. Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg in Kovetz Am Hatorah 3:1 p.7

8

Of all areas of hashkafa commonly discussed, the topic of Hishtadlus - to what extent should one rely on ones own devices to achieve desired ends and at what point do we leave it to HKBH- is not only of the most relevant in practical terms to our daily life, but one that commonly elicits varying responses to questions on the matter. The Torah’s narrative of Yosef’s request of the Sar Hamashkim to remember him to Paroh and its consequences, are seen as a guide to our approach to Hishtadlus by many sources in Chaza”l ranging from the Medrash Rabba through Rabeinu Bachye and up until

the Chazon Ish in his Sefer Emuna and Bitachon.

“And the butler did not remember Yosef, and he forgot him......it was at the end of two years and Paroh dreamt......”. Parshas Mikeitz is ostensibly the story of the amazing series of events that set the stage for Yosef’s incredible rise to power and which eventually led to Yaakov’s descent to Egypt. What then, is the relevance of the butler forgetting Yosef and his request, and the delay of two years before Yosef is remembered to Paroh.

The Medrash tells us that Hashem set Yosef a fixed time of two years to serve in prison. Due to Yosef’s reliance on the butler and repetition of his request to be remembered to Paroh, he would similarly be forgotten for two years.

At first glance, and in fact a number of commentators on the parsha explain it thus, Yosef’s sentence of two years in prison was “middah keneged middah” quid pro quo for twice asking to be remembered. Yosef ought not have relied on man to procure his freedom but should have placed his trust solely in Hashem.The Mahara”l refers us to the Gemara that states that man forgets after twelve months. Yosef, having asked the butler to remember him, placed his hope in man throughout the first year. Consequently, it was decreed that he would correspondingly undergo a year where Hashem was his sole source of salvation. The Mahara”l adds that the gematria of “vayishkechehu” is 355 which has the same numerical value as “shana”- a year. The ungrateful butler consciously forgot him for a year, subsequently he was automatically forgotten for a year until the butler was reminded through Paroh’s dream.

The Medrash however continues by quoting a possuk from Tehillim. “Ashrei hagever asher sam Hashem mivtacho”, happpy is the man that places his faith in Hashem-”zeh Yosef” this person who places his faith in Hashem is Yosef. Continues the Medrash, “velo pana el rehovim” and did not turn to the haughty-since Yosef requested the butler to remember him to Paroh, two years were added to his time in prison.

This Medrash seems to contradict itself. On the one hand, Yosef is described as the paradigm baal bitachon. On the other hand Yosef appears to be criticised by the Medrash for his request of the butler.

Further, the criticism of Yosef and consequent punishment of an extra two years captivity, begs an explanation. Chaza”l in many places instruct us not to rely on nissim. How was Yosef at fault for undertaking some form of Hishtadlus.

The Beis Halevi and the Ksav veHakabola amongst others explain that the criticism here is uniquely relevant to Yosef. Hishtadlus is something that is incumbent on all. The degree of Hishtadlus that one must undertake however, corresponds directly to the level of bitachon one has. Once a person has undertaken the amount of Hishtadlus that satisfies him at his individual level of bitachon any extra Hishtadlus is unnecessary. For Yosef Hatzadik the quintessential baal bitachon, the smallest act of Hishtadlus, which as the Ksav veHakabola points out

was not even said as a request but a statement of fact “vehizkartani” and you will remember me, was more than Yosef required at his level and was prohibited. The Medrash is thus declaring, specifically Yosef who was such a great baal bitachon should not have turned to the butler to save him.

Rabenu Bachye suggests a different explanation of the Medrash and the Malbim in Tehillim follows in a similar vein. Of course one must undertake Hishtadlus as the rule is we do not rely on miracles. However, even where one appreciates that everything only comes about through Hashem’s will and that Hishtadlus alone cannot succeed, one may not assume that salvation will come necessarily through our chosen act of Hishtadlus. Harbeh shluchim laMokom, salvation can come in many ways, and it is not for us to dictate to Hashem how we should be saved. Yosef, by repeating his request, implied that his rescue would be through the butler. At Yosef’s level this was considered a fault.The Malbim adds that there is a boteiach b’Hashem one who trusts in Hashem, but believes that man must create the avenues for salvation, and a sam Hashem mivtacho, a higher madreiga where he trusts Hashem Himself is the avenue for salvation in any way He seems fit.

The Chazon Ish has a novel approach as to the criticism of Yosef. Hishtadlus is obligatory as we do not rely on miracles. An act that realistically has no likelihood of producing the desired result is not an act of Hishtsdlus but an act of despair. This is the antithesis of bitachon. The likelihood of an Egyptian butler convincing Paroh to free a Hebrew slave was so minimal that asking the butler was an act of despair despite Yosef having complete faith in Hashem.

Michtav M’Eliyahu takes a different approach based on a principle of the Chovos Halevovos, one who believes in teva is subject to teva. Rav Dessler explains that a person might be a true baal bitachon but believes that Hashem only saves through natural means. Such a person will never be saved through Hanhogo Nissis, miraculously. Rav Dessler brings the example of a sick person who has bitachon that he will find the best doctor to cure him using conventional methods. Such a person will not merit a miraculous recovery but one through medical intervention. He has subjected himself to the world of nature. Yosef Hatzadik, by resorting to teva, the butler’s remembering, to save him, was subjected midah keneged midah to shikcha, the butler forgetting, which is an aspect of teva.

The Medrash on the words vayehi mikeits mentions the possuk in Iyov ketz sam lachoshech. Rav Dessler interprets this to mean that Yosef himself ended the darkness. Until now Yosef placed himself in darkness subject to the dictates of teva. Having spent two years in a dark pit, Yosef came to the realisation that the tikkun required was to extricate himself from a world of choshech and shikchah and appreciated that the tikun was subjecting himself to a salvation free of teva. Immediately, Paroh dreamt. This dream and all that would follow was the miraculous response to Yosef raising himself to the level of Hanhogo Nissis.

Chazal on the possuk vechoshech al pnei tehom tell us that it is hinting at golus Yovon which is described as darkness. The Maharal explains that this particular golus took place in Eretz Yisrael. Yovon stood in opposition to the Beis Hamikdosh which Chazal refer to as the oro shel olam the illuminator of the world. There were ten regular nissim taking place in the Beis Hamikdash demonstrating a realm not subject to the darkness of nature. This stood in direct contrast to the Greeks deification of teva. Similarly, the Yevonim wished to abolish Rosh Chodesh, Shabbos and Mila. These three mitzvos demonstrate how time and spirituality of man transcend nature. Just as Yosef put an end to his darkness, the Chashmonaim with their supernatural mesirus nefesh for the Beis Hamikdosh merited the illumination of the Beis Hamikdosh with Hashem demonstrating His grace through the miracle of the Menorah.

Home Grownfrom the Golders Green KolelThis week: Rabbi Meir Goldberg, Rosh Chabura in Golders Green Kolel

לע''נ

חיה שפרה בת יהודה ע"הכז סיון תשעד לפ"ק

S P O N S O R E D

9

S P O N S O R E D

Mitzvos Start at HomeThere is an apparent contradiction between the format of the מצוה of נר חנוכה and its required outcome. The aim of the מצוה is פרסומי ניסא - the public announcement of the miracle - yet the מצוה is directed to the home. It is true that the light has to shine into the street, but the placement has to be in the home. Why? If the aim is to create public awareness then surely the מצוה would dictate that a person should build a large מנורה in the middle of town and make a big noise with complimentary doughnuts?

Indeed, the מצוה of נר חנוכה is so unique that the פני יהושע concludes with a ‘צריך are מצות Other ?תורה in the מצות different from all other מצוה Why is this 1.’עיוןdesigned for each person to perform while here we have a מצוה for a house! The basic form of the מצוה is נר איש וביתו - only one person need light in the home - so it is clearly not a mitzvah incumbent upon a person! Where else do we find a mitzvah on a house?

Perhaps one could also ask that the concept of ‘publicity’ is not a common Torah theme. We are innately tznius orientated and most of our ruchniyus is acquired behind closed doors, in the contemplation of a quiet shemoneh-esreh or immersed in a blatt gemoro. We are not a street people. At חנוכה, however, we are projecting into the street. Why?

English History defines its own ‘Dark Ages’, but Reish Lokish defines ours. In the very beginning of Torah - פסוק ב׳ - we learn that the creation of the world includes תהום פני על darkness over the depths’. Reish Lokish in the‘ - חושך Medrash2 equates that darkness with the era of Yovon and he describes one of Yovon’s more esoteric decrees against the vassal Jewish state -

‘They darkened the eyes of the Jewish People and decreed that they should inscribe on a קרן של שור (ox-horn) that they have no portion in the G-d of Israel’.

This perpexing targeting of an ox-horn is significant. The global use of the word ‘קרן’ has seemingly contradictory connotations. It is often translated as a

‘horn’ - clearly an external protuberance. It is also used in reference to the main, inner value of an object. For example, the mishna refers to certain mitzvos for which the main reward - keren - is stored and awaits us in Olom Habo. What then is the essence of the concept of ‘keren’?3 The ‘keren’ represents how, exactly and perfectly, one should go about presenting externally…by growing it from the inside out. A horn consists of bone in a keratin sheath and, most importantly, that bone is permanently fused to the skull from birth. The ‘external’ horn is a manifestation of the very core of the animal - it’s skull. A ‘horn’ is always ‘live’ and growing as opposed to a reindeer’s antlers which die, fall-off and re-grow.

The war of the ‘keren’ sums up the war of the Yovoni culture with our תורה Yovon exalted beauty and all things physical. They delighted in the .הקדושהhuman form and were heavy-thinkers in the corporal world. Not too bad, yet. But then they ideologically detached the external world from the world of the spirit. They believed that art has no bearing on the soul. The soul has no bearing on the body. The Torah of the Jews may contain much beauty of idea and form, but this has no bearing on the refinement and nobility of human spirit and certainly does not oblige a contract with G-d. So they said. And so they decreed - ‘you have no portion’ in the concept of ‘keren’.

But we resisted their onslaught and continue to do so. We passionately subscribed to, and fought for, our Torah HaKedosho - adhering to the ‘keren’ principle by which we see external as the manifestation of the internal. We don’t care so much about what car a person drives - only about the chesed that they do with it. When a person looks beautiful, and displays beautiful internal qualities as well, then the entirety is sublimely perfect.4

The ox is a curious beast. It is honoured with the epithet:5 ‘King of the Beheimos’ and its image is affixed to the כסא הכבוד, which is ironic considering that it is largely docile and underwhelming. Built for power but lackadaisical in its cud-chewing. A seemingly reluctant monarch. But despite the fact that it may be outwardly understated, its qualities are within. This is the animal whose keren became the target for the Yovoni decree.

1 פרק במה מדליקין2 מדרש רבה בראשית פרק ב׳ ד׳

3 בס׳ פחד יצחק חלק חנוכה הובא שאין מילה א׳ של לשון הקודש משמשמת בב׳ משמעות נפרדות4 פירוש הגר״א למשלי. חן ויופי שאינן משותפות עם תיקון הנפש הם בכלל שקר החן והבל היפי אכן אשה יראת ה׳

אז הוא היינו היופי עצמה גם תתהלל5 חגיגה י״ג ע״ב

When the Satmar Rov זצ״ל reached the shores of America after his wartime incarceration, he was being driven in New York by chassidim who were eager to point out to the Rebbe the sights of the ’New World’ of enterprise and rejuvenated Jewish life. They drove passed a kosher butcher’s shop. The shop-frontage was an array of neon illumination, advertising by flashing ‘on and off’ -

בשר כשר - בשר כשר - בשר כשר -

The insightful Rebbe זצ״ל wryly observed,

”א מאל כשר - א מאל נישט - א מאל כשר - א מאל נישט“

“Sometimes kosher sometimes not; sometimes kosher sometimes not!”

It is not enough to outwardly flash ‘kosher - kosher’. ‘Kosher’ has to come from within and then it will not intermittently disappear. This is the dictate of ‘keren’.

Reish Lokish equates the Yovonim to חושך since their decree ‘darkened our eyes’.

“Darkness’ in Torah is actually quite illuminating. Everybody understands darkness to be an absence of light. This is reflected in the way that we talk:

“Please can you turn off the light?”

A strange reaction would greet the fellow who instead requests,

“Please can you turn on the dark?”

This is because we do not naturally accept that darkness is a creation in its own right, but merely an absence of light. Light can be shut on and off while darkness is merely a corollary.

However, darkness is as much a creation as light is. The Novi6 says,

…״…יוצר אור ובורא חושך

“He forms the light and creates the darkness…”

And indeed this must be so because HaShem fully created the world, and whilst it may appear that there are a few gaps such as darkness or holes, appearances deceive. Everything in the בריאה is directly created. Indeed, it requires a deeper and awareness to perceive the role of HaShem in the ‘vacuums’ of creation אמונהand that is why the darkness can be really quite illuminating!

Darkness is introduced at the very beginning of Torah - פסוק ב׳ - to emphasise that it is a fully constituted member of בראשית and not just something מעשה missing.7

The Yovonim were so sold on the external physical ideal that the realities of the spiritual world eluded them completely. Instead of throwing our oil away they made it tomei! They had no quarrel with pretty illuminations but every quarrel with the idea of tahara. They would not tolerate the carrying of the message of the מנורה that תורה pervades every perceived darkness and nothing is devoid of divinity. They sought to ‘darken our eyes’ so that we would not see the light in the darkness. They preached empty darkness whilst we struggled to observe the fullness of darkness’s revelation. Therefore, on חנוכה we make this proclamation - there is pure light in the pervading darkness! We reclaim the darkness from those who would say that it is empty and G-dless, by lighting the symbol of purity to illuminate the season’s longest nights.

The structure of our מצוה of חנוכה ingeniously encompasses all these נר paradigms.

The aim of the מצוה is to project the divine light into the world’s darkness. It has to be a public affair by definition. But outward manifestations must stem from pnimius roots and thus the illuminations will succeed when they are incumbent upon our homes - the bastions of Torah and tahara.

What, therefore, is our avodah for חנוכה? It is obvious, now, that it all starts at home. It is important to note that whilst we survived and grew from Golus Yovon, much of the world today thinks and acts like Yovonim. And they are targeting our homes!

Whilst we are busy lighting the מנורה in our sacrosanct homes to declare kedusha to the world, fibre-optic cables are snaking up through our floorboards and hissing through the wi-fi. Many of these snakes are highly venomous. Herein lies our avodah for חנוכה.

6 ישעיה מ״ה ז׳7 יעויין עוד במהר״ל ריש נצח ישראל בענין ד׳ מלכיות

Rabbi AtlasMenahel , Menorah Primary School

לע''נ

ר' שלום שכנא בן ר' חיים יעקב ז"ל

10

The Davening DiscussionRabbi Elozor Barclay Rabbi Yitzchok Jaegerauthors of the Guideline Series

לע''נ

יפה שינדל בת ר' יחזקאל ע"ה

Chapter 2: Times of PrayersAlthough most people are aware that prayers are restricted to certain hours

of the day, many do not realize that the earliest and latest times for each prayer

are calculated exactly. Just as Shabbos commences and terminates at a precise

minute of the day, so too do each of the prayers - shacharis, mincha, ma’ariv,

and mussaf. It is vital to understand that a prayer recited at the wrong time

is at best second-rate, and at worst totally invalid. These times vary greatly

throughout the year, and from one country to another. A person who wishes

to perform the mitzvah of prayer correctly must regularly consult a local Jewish

calendar in order to check the relevant times. All times mentioned in this book

are halachic times; for example, halachic noon is not twelve o’clock, but halfway

between sunrise and sunset. A halachic (seasonal) hour is a twelfth of the time

between sunrise and sunset.

1. What is the best time for shacharis?

The best time to begin shemoneh esrei of shacharis is at the moment of

sunrise (known as zericha, or haneitz). This necessitates beginning shacharis

some time before sunrise, in order to reach shemoneh esrei at the right time.

Care must be taken not to begin shemoneh esrei even a few moments before

sunrise. In normal circumstances this is the earliest time for shacharis, and is

known as kevasikin.

2. May one daven earlier?

In difficult situations, one may daven shacharis before sunrise. E.g., if he

must set out early on a journey, or in order to arrive at work on time.

3. What is the earliest time for shacharis?

Halachic dawn. This is known as alos hashachar, and is approximately

seventy-two minutes before sunrise. Nevertheless, the brachos for tallis and

tefillin, and shema may not be recited until some time later. This time is known

as misheyakir, and since opinions differ as to its calculation, a rav should be

consulted. (See also question 399.)

4. Is it preferable to daven shacharis alone after sunrise or with a

minyan before sunrise?

It is preferable to daven alone after sunrise. If possible, he should attend the

minyan in order to hear kaddish, kedusha, krias hatorah, etc. See also questions

26, 45 and 51.

5. What is the latest time for shacharis?

Every effort must be made to finish shemoneh esrei before the end of one

third of the day, and it is reprehensible to deliberately allow this deadline to pass.

However, if one accidentally missed this time, he may still daven shacharis until

halachic noon, although the value of such a prayer is much lower. See also

questions 38 and 522.

6. Is it preferable to daven shacharis alone before a third of the day or

with a minyan after this time?

It is preferable to daven alone before a third of the day.

7. Is it preferable to daven shacharis before sunrise or after a third of

the day?

If a person is unable to daven shacharis at the correct time, it is better to

daven before sunrise than after a third of the day.

8. What if a person willfully delayed davening shacharis until one third

of the day?

Although it is questionable whether he may daven shacharis until noon,

he should nevertheless do so. However, due to the doubt, he should stipulate

beforehand that if he is exempt, his prayer is a voluntary one. If this occurs on

Shabbos or Yom Tov, he should daven without making the stipulation.

9. Should a man omit parts of shacharis in order to daven shemoneh esrei

before one third of the day?

In normal circumstances, such a situation should not arise. However, if this

did occur, he should omit most of shacharis in order to daven shemoneh esrei

before one third of the day. He should say at least the following before shemoneh

esrei:

Al netilas yadayim, asher yatzar, and elohai neshamah.

Birchos hatorah.

From yotzeir ohr until shemoneh esrei.

If by saying this he will not be able to finish shemoneh esrei before one third

of the day, he should daven shacharis as usual without omissions.

10. If a man follows this procedure, should he say all the omitted

sections after shemoneh esrei ?

He should say everything except baruch she’amar and yishtabach, since

these brachos may not be recited after shemoneh esrei.

11. Should a woman omit parts of shacharis in order to daven shemoneh

esrei before one third of the day?Yes. If necessary, she should recite

the b’racha al netilas yadayim, the last verse of shema, omit everything

else, and begin shemoneh esrei immediately.

12. What else should a woman say before shemoneh esrei if time allows?

If it is close to one third of the day, but there is time to daven a little before

shemoneh esrei besides the b’racha al netilas yadayim, she should say from

emes veyatziv until shemoneh esrei. If more time is available, she should also say

baruch she’amar, ashrei, and yishtabach.

13. Why does emes veyatziv have such high priority?

The b’racha emes veyatziv through ga’al yisroel discusses the Exodus from

Egypt. According to most opinions, women are obligated in the mitzvah of

remembering the Exodus daily, and should preferably fulfill it by reciting this

b’racha.

14. May a woman skip most of this section and begin from tehillos l’eil

elyon?

This is totally forbidden and tantamount to reciting a b’racha in vain. The

section beginning at emes veyatziv and ending at ga’al yisroel is one b’racha

and should be either said in its entirety or omitted completely. See also question

521

S P O N S O R E D

11

S P O N S O R E D

The Weekly Halachic Conversation

Rabbi Avi WiesenfeldRosh Kollel, Yerushalayim and Rav at Kav Halacha Beis Horaah

Shabbos Chanukah

Q. Is a menorah muktzeh?A. It depends if it is being used or not:

• A gold or silver menorah that is not being used on Shabbos

is muktzeh (מוקצה מחמת חסרון כיס) and may not be moved for

any purpose.1

• A menorah that was lit before the onset of Shabbos – even

once the candles are extinguished – remains muktzeh (מחמת

until the end of Shabbos, since it was muktzeh when (גופו

Shabbos began.2

Q. May one move the chair/stool/table upon which the menorah was placed after the candles have gone out (e.g., the next morning)?

A. Anything that holds up a muktzeh item also becomes muktzeh.

This is due to the halacha of bosis (literally: a base).3 Consequently, if

a menorah was resting on a table, chair, stool etc., one may not move

the item that the menorah was placed on just like one cannot move

the menorah, even after the candles have gone out. This is true even

if the menorah is no longer on the table (e.g. a non-Jew removed it).

Q. Does it help to also place something non-muktzeh on that table or chair?

A. If one also places a significant (but not necessarily of higher

monetary value) non-muktzeh item on the chair before Shabbos, the

chair or table now becomes a bosis to both the menorah (muktzeh)

and the non-muktzeh item. If the non muktzah item is of more

significance than the muktzah item, the table or chair will not become

a bosis and may be moved (after the candles are out).4

For example, if the menorah is being placed on a chair by the

door, or a table by the window, and the table or chair will need to be

moved in the morning, one should place a bottle of coke, a challah,

or a bentcher that is needed for the meal on the chair or table before

Shabbos. This allows him to move the table once the candles have

burned out.

Q. Can one simply place the non-muktzah item on

1 שו"ע סי' שח ס"א-ב ומ"ב שם.2 שו"ע סי' רעט ס"א ומ"ב שם ס"ק א.

3 מ"ב סי' שי ס"ק כד, גר"ז סי' שט ס"ד, חי"א כלל סז ס"ב.4 גמ' סוף פ' כירה, שו"ע סי' שי ס"ח, מג"א שם ס"ק ט וסי' רעז ס"ק ח, מ"ב ס"ק יח. וע"ע בחי"א שהלחם חשוב יותר

מהמנורה ונרותיה שהרי צריך לסעודת שבת. ובשבות יצחק פט"ז הביא מהגרי"ש אלישיב זצ"ל שאע"פ שיש לו עוד ככרות ]או שאר דבר מוקצה שמונח על השלחן[ שאי"צ להם לסעודת שבת, אעפ"כ כיון שדעתו לאכול ככר זה חשיב

טפי מהשלהבת.

the tray that holds the menorah allowing him to move the tray once the candles are out?

A. Yes, provided it is a tray used for all sorts of objects and is

currently being used for his menorah. If one has a tray that is

designated primarily to be the base for his menorah and nothing else

is normally stored on it, placing a non- muktzeh item on the tray will

not allow him to move the tray afterwards.5

Note: This is a common mistake made on a regular Shabbos too.

People often think that by placing something of importance on the

tray that houses the candlesticks will subsequently allow one to move

the tray after the candles have gone out. This is not the case.

MOTZOI SHABBOS

Q. When should one light the menorah on motzoi Shabbos?

A. One should daven maariv as early as possible, so as not to miss

the preferential time for lighting the menorah.6 One who normally

waits until the zman of Rabbeinu Tam (72 minutes) should not change

his usual minhag, but should light as soon as possible after that

zman.7

Q. Which comes first, havdalah or lighting menorah?

A. In general, when a question of priority comes up regarding

Mitzvos, the rule is to prioritize the mitzvah that is performed more

frequently during the year [קודם תדיר תדיר ושאינו There is a .[תדיר

machlokes in regards to lighting menorah on motzoi Shabbos as to

which should be done first; havdalah, which is more frequent, or

lighting the menorah.8 Since there are valid arguments to both sides,

the Mishnah Berurah states that either way is acceptable (unless one

has a minhag that dictates otherwise).9

The light of the Chanukah candles is like the light of Torah, the

light of honor, the light of joy. In the merit of this great light may sin,

depression, suffering, and all forms of darkness disappear.

5 פרמ"ג א"א סו"ס רעט. וכ"פ האג"מ מובא בס' טלטולי שבת עמ' 210 והגרש"ז זצ"ל שם.6 מעשה רב להגר"א. וע"ע בבה"ל סי' רצג ד"ה ג' כוכבים.

7 אג"מ או"ח ח"ד סי' סב, מועדים וזמנים ח"ב סי' קנה.8 השו"ע כ' שידליק ואח"כ יבדיל, וכן דעת הרמ"א והגר"א ועוד. וכן נהג החת"ס, וי"א שיבדיל ואח"כ ידליק, וכן דעת

הט"ז מהר"ל מפראג ופר"ח ועוד. וכן נהג החזו"א.9 בה"ל סי' תרפא "דעביד כמר עביד ודעביד כמר עביד". וגם הפרמ"ג כ' שאין לגעור על שום אדם בזה כי יש לו על

מי לסמוך.

לע''נ

ר' חיים אליעזר בן ר' יעקב ז"ל

12

Your Weekly Spark of Chassidus

Rabbi Tal Moshe ZweckerMipeninei Noam Elimelech

Final Salvation

And it came to pass at the end of two years to the day: Pharaoh was dreaming. (Bereishis 41:1)

The holy Torah is hinting at this bitter exile, where the nations of the world stand over us to destroy us and Hashem saves us from their hands. We can understand this based on the verse “He will keep us alive after two days; on the third day, He will raise us up and we will live before Him” (Hoshea 6:2). Hashem will keep us alive after two days — that is after the destruction of the two Temples. “And on the third day” — and upon the rebuilding of the third Temple, which will be built speedily in our days — “He will raise us up and we will live before Him.”

This is the meaning of “at the end of two years” — at the end of this bitter exile, “Pharaoh was dreaming.” Every king who enacts new decrees is called a Pharaoh. Hashem saves us from the harsh decrees so that they are nothing but a dream. Thus, “Pharaoh was dreaming”

— after the bitter exile, the decrees and oppression will be as a dream.

“And behold, from the Nile arose seven cows” — our forefathers have always strived to rectify the seven upper levels to elevate the Shechinah, which is called the “Be’er Sheva,” the wellspring of seven [referring to the seven attributes, or sefiros].7 And every righteous person should follow in the way of the forefathers; thus it says, “The Tzaddik falls seven times and gets up” (Mishlei 24:10).8 The Tzaddik should strive to rectify the seven levels and elevate himself so that he will become a “komah sheleimah” — a completed edifice.

[The words קם, “gets up,” and קומה share the same root. This refers to the idea that the seven lower sefiros form a diagram called a “komah,” which means a body or erect structure. If the seven levels (Chesed-Kindness, Gevurah-Judgment, Tiferes-Beauty, Netzach-Victory, Hod-Splendor, Yesod-Foundation, and Malchus-Kingship) are uplifted and erected to stand tall and proud like a building, or like the human being, who unlike the animals stands straight and tall, then we have rectified the animal instincts and made man what he should be: an edifice of righteousness.]

Yipol, falls, can also connote “dwelling,” as in the verse “He who dwells with you falls on you” (Yeshayahu 54:15). The seven cows that rose in the dream allude to the seven levels which the Tzaddik must rectify to elevate the Shechinah [Hashem’s presence that literally means “dwells”].

“And they grazed in their marshland” — the most important trait to rectify is that of achdus, unity, through which the Tzaddik can carry out the rectifications. [As we said above, באחו, “marshland,” has the same root as אחוה, “brotherly love” and “unity.”]

“And, behold, seven other cows came up behind them” — the Torah is warning the Tzaddik not to fall into despair, because the klippah (the husks and shells representing the opposite of holiness) also has seven levels of unholiness always waiting behind a person to push him and cause him to stumble, Heaven forbid. This is why they came up behind them — to swallow up the holiness. Thus, “the ugly cows devoured the beautiful ones” — sometimes the holiness within a person can be swallowed up and snatched away.

“It was not apparent that they [the fat cows] had been swallowed” — indicating that one doesn’t even sense that the holiness has been

swallowed up by the klippos, and therefore the Tzaddik must be very wary of this happening.

“And I saw in my dream, and, behold, seven ears grew on one stalk” — this alludes to man’s livelihood, business, and trade, that they should be on the right track, that they should be consistent. He must guard them well that he should not stumble in his business dealings.

Thus a person must strive in every endeavor to guard himself and be careful not to desist from doing everything in holiness.

Holy Dreams Once, in his youth, Reb Menachem Mendel of Rimanov was studying

in the beis midrash under Rav Daniel Yaffe in Berlin. He studied the works of Rav Alfas (the Rif) on the Talmud diligently, and his soul thirsted longingly for self-perfection. Once, he learned so much in one sitting that his tongue stuck to his palate. He began to pray deep in his heart and cried to Hashem to enlighten him and brighten his darkness. He prayed and prayed, until he fell into a deep sleep and dreamt. In his dreams he saw the Rif himself! The Rif showed him an image of Rebbe Elimelech of Lizhensk and told him to travel to the Rebbe, for there he would succeed in attaining his goal. (Ohel Elimelech 183)

Notes: 1. See the Introduction to this book on the four methods of study called “Pardes” and specifically on the path of Remez, hints and allusions.

2. This idea, that “ ‘days’ allude to holiness, which is called a day,” was presented in an earlier discourse of Noam Elimelech in parashas Miketz. Also compare this idea with the teaching found in Tiferes Shlomo on Mo’adim, the discourse for Pesach Sheini, based on the teaching of the Arizal, that the word day refers to “Bayom hahu yiheyeh Hashem echad u’shemo echad — On that day Hashem will be unified and His Name shall be one” (Zechariah 14:9). This refers to the time of redemption. Therefore the concept of yom, “day,” represents an added dimension of holiness and redemption.

3. Similarly the Ben Ish Chai writes in Od Yosef Chai (Vayishlach): “When we call the sefiros ‘light,’ this does not mean that they are similar to the light which we see with our eyes. Rather, since our intellectual grasp is limited in scope by our physical body, we cannot grasp the true nature of spiritual things. Therefore we call the sefiros by the term light, since light is among the more important and lofty of sensations. It is also the more spiritual of sensations.”

4. These seven levels may refer to the seven lower sefiros, Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferes, Netzach, Hod, Yesod, and Malchus.

5. In this vein, the Tiferes Shlomo (Sukkos, Lulav HaGazul), says: “You must guard yourself extremely well in the performance of mitzvos so that the outside forces don’t snatch them away. This is the meaning of ‘Guard my commandments.’ ” Similarly, it says in the Hashanos (Hoshana Rishumim): “Every mitzvah a person does in wickedness is stolen by the outside forces. This is the meaning of ‘mitzvah haba’ah b’aveirah — a mitzvah that comes through sin’ [literally, “within sin”]’ (Sukkah 30a). By way of introduction, it says in Sha’ar HaYichudim (Gate of Unifications) [of the Arizal] that when the wicked perform mitzvos, they give power to the other side, and when they repent, returning to Hashem, they release them from the shells of impurity and bring them into holiness. This is what the verse ‘Chil balah v’yaki’eihu — It was swallowed and then vomited out’ (Iyov 20:15) means, and that is why repentance is called ‘returning,’ because you are returning them to their proper place.”

6. Sefer HaYashar is a mussar sefer that some attribute to Rabbeinu Tam.

7. See Vayeitzei, “Using the Weapons of Our Enemies Against Them,” above, for a more detailed explanation of this concept.

8. See Chesed L’Avraham, by Rabbi Avraham HaMalach (Toldos and Vayishlach), which explains that “the Tzaddik can fall to seven lowly levels and rise in order to uplift the fallen sparks from there.” The Me’or Einayim says that even if a person should fall into the place of the klippos (shells and husks of impurity), from there the Tzaddik must also rise because “the righteous fall seven times and get up.” The reason that the Tzaddik falls into places of darkness can be explained with an analogy. It is like the king who sent an emissary far away to conquer a certain country in the name of the king. So, too, when a Tzaddik falls, he will surely awaken and repent, returning to his former level by cleaving to Hashem. Then all the wicked who were in that place with him will also be uplifted. By the same token, Me’or Einayim says (later in Toldos): “Whoever wants to pick up something that is placed below must bow down and lower himself to that place in order to grasp and pick up the object.” (However, we are forbidden to purposely sin or cause ourselves to stumble, even if we believe we are doing so for higher, loftier purposes.)

SUNDAY 21 DEC ‘14 ה' דחנוכה

2:00-4:00PM At Nishmas Yisroel, 4 Brent Green NW4

Bouncy Castle Balloons Face Painting many more surprises… Followed by Mincha/Maariv and candle lighting £5 per child

Chanukah Carnival

13

The Weekly Parsha PerspectiveReb Chaim Simcha Jakubowicz

The חנוכה/פרשה Perspective: Lighting the Night!

The גמרא in גיטין, דף נז עמוד ב explains how each of the seven sons of חנה were approached by the King who ordered them to bow before his idol, however each of the sons responded citing the תורה as proof in denouncing the King and his ways of idolatry, refusing to bow down before his idol.

One by one the King had them all executed, however when he got to the youngest child, only a small boy, the king tried to at the very least have the boy pick up his ring which he dropped purposefully on the floor, in the hopes that it would look like he was bowing down to the idol, while in fact he was merely picking up the Kings ring.

This little boy answers the King, the גמרא notes how he responds by criticising the king ״חבל עלך קיסר על כבוד the boy admonishes the King, about caring more ,עצמך...״about his honour than that of הק״בה, the גמרא highlights this for us, it was the boy who understood an element much deeper rooted in the psyche of the people of Greece, and their King.

Each one of the brothers answered the King a part of the תורה, the יונים had no issue with the Jews learning could תורה after all the Greeks loved intelligence, the ,תורהprovide that, however learning and practising were two different things altogether.

The sons of חנה all understood that the secret behind Antiochus and his empire was to uproot all other influences, historians make a point to show that while Persia was an extremely influential Empire preceding the Greek Empire, the Greeks set about to destroy and limit it’s lasting influence, they understood that you can destroy the Empire, but influences live on.

The youngest son pointed to the King that while all his brothers may have died, they had left their impressions on the world, even quoting תורה as a form of practise to the King, rather than mere teaching, they were the ones who would shine bright and illuminate the darkness, their influence would live on.

Antiochus understood this, therefore he attempted to have the youngest son at least pretend to bow done, many

read the text and misunderstand the King’s action to being one of mercy, he wasn’t showing true mercy, he was trying to save his legacy, the youngest son understood that, and thereby mocked the King, pointing to how the honour of ה׳ was greater and would outlast mortals of mere flesh and blood.

As the young boy was led to his death, his mother said to him, “My son, go tell אברהם אבינו, you bound one son to the מזבח, I bound seven, yours was only a test, mine were for real!”

The מדרש discuses the extent of the test of אברהם אבינו, with the עקידה, that despite that אברהם had a certain understanding that ה׳ would never let there be a human sacrifice, the test would see if אברהם was willing to appear as a hypocrite in the eyes of the world, as he had denounced human sacrifice which the nations carried out as servitude to their idols, now however here he was, a man who had fought all his life against such evils, committing the same action himself in the eyes of the nations.

That was the test that these צדיקים had to face, when a whole world shouted in another direction, they could remain steadfast and strong to their commitment despite the severe darkness and overwhelming noise the world made, hence חנה pointed out how her sacrifice was even greater as there were 7 of her sons who followed in that path.

In turn this was the reason behind why the מדרש points to the worry that יוסף הצדיק had and why when as a viceroy and ruler of מצרים in this weeks פרשה he had all the מצריים have circumcision, so that when the בני ישראל would arrive they wouldn’t be embarrassed of their customs and ways, not ridiculed by the nation who would seek to discourage them for going in the ways of their forefathers.

Unfortunately despite this being a noble cause, we are reminded how strong we need to be in these times when ridiculed on the world stage, and pride in our heritage remaining of vital importance, it could be easier to succumb to the darkness that envelops so much of our existence,or rise up to light the night!

May we all have together a true ליכטיגן חנוכה!!!ADVERTISE HERE

Contact mc@markittech.com

ADVERTISE HEREOR SPONSOR לע''נ SOMEONE

Contact mc@markittech.com

Special Deal7 weeks for £300

14

Eretz HaTzviRabbi Zvi TeichmanCongregation Ohel Moshe, Baltimore, MD

Hail to the Women, It’s Not Just About Latkes!There is a fascinating custom that calls for women to refrain from work activity while the Menorah remains lit, or at least for the initial half hour. This is attributed to the fact that through the heroic acts of women, the Jewish people were saved. One particular story highlighted is that of the courageous Yehudis who seduced the enemy leader Helofornes into a drunken stupor, subsequently beheading him and displaying the severed head before his soldiers, instilling within them a sense of fear, defeat and eventual retreat. The valor of Chana and her seven children who gave their lives willingly rather then submit to the blasphemous wishes of Antiochus is also mentioned in this vein, as it was the catalyst for the heroism of the Chashmonaim who valiantly led the charge of מי לה‹ אלי, Whoever is for G-d, join me! and the ultimate victory over Greeks.

So for all this bravery and inspired devotion all they get is a half hour break?! There must be a deeper sentiment being expressed here.

There are many רמזים, hidden allusions, in this portion of Mikeitz to the Yom Tov of Chanuka, which always coincides with this holiday.

After successfully interpreting the dreams of Pharoah, Yosef encourages him to appoint a worthy candidate to oversee the land in preparation of the coming famine.

.and he shall prepare the land of Egypt ,וחמש את ארץ מצרים (בראשית מא,לד)

The word חמש used here is an acronym for three main decrees that were legislated against the Jews by the Greeks, חדש, מילה, and שבת, the abolition of the maintaining of a lunar calendar and the holidays based on it, the command of circumcision and the observance of Shabbos.

These three concepts are alluded to as well in the story line of our portion.

.and it was at the end of two years of days ,ויהי מקץ שנתיים ימים (שם מא, א)

Rabbeinu Avraham, the son of the Rambam, points out that the Hebrew word used here for ‘years’, שנה, is generally used to connote a lunar year. In fact the word ָשָנה, year, is numerically equivalent to the number of days in a lunar year, 355, ש, equaling 300, 50 ,נ, and 5 ,ה, and is defined by its ‘nights’, when the moon appears in twelve lunar cycles. In contrast a solar year is determined by the number of days when the ‘sun’ shines in the course of its full cycle. The term used to describe a solar year is thus ָיִמים, the plural of the Hebrew word for day, יֹום.

The maintaining of the Jewish calendar, the very command to ‘sanctify’ the months, requires a coordinating of these two cycles of the moon and the sun. With the reference here of שנתיים ימים, two ‘years’ of ‘days’, utilizing both terms for a lunar and solar year respectively, clearly we have an intimation of this basic concept of an alignment of a lunar calendar with its solar counterpart, the fundamental principle of החודש Sanctification of the ,קידוש Month and the Jewish calendar!

When the people become hungry at the onset of the famine, Pharaoh tells them to follow Yosef’s every directive.

!whatever he tells you do ,אשר יאמר לכם תעשו (שם מא,נה)

Rashi quoting the Midrash informs us that this is referring to Yosef calling upon them to undertake the performance of מילה, circumcision, in order to receive food!

After the brothers arrive for the second time, now with Binyomin, Yosef instructs his son Menashe, who is in charge of his household, to feed them.

.have meat slaughtered, and prepare it ,וטבח טבח והכן (שם מג,טז)

Not only do the last five letters in this request possess the same אותיות, letters as ,(ח והכן=) חנוכה but the Midrash also teaches us that the phrase “והכן”

used here to imply preparation is similar to the wording(שמות טז,ה) “והכינו” , when they prepare, used in context of the people preparing the Manna for Shabbos while in the desert, thus implying that Yosef kept Shabbos as well!

What is even more intriguing is that both hints to Chanuka express a similar notion, “preparation”, וחמש, and he shall prepare, and והכן, and prepare!

What indeed was Yosef’s strategy in making the Egyptian populace circumcise them? Was he encouraging them to be Jewish?!

The Midrash, as quoted in Rashi, says that the Egyptians actually attempted to stockpile food, but it spoiled. It was only afterwards when they turned in desperation to Yosef, that he first prescribed circumcision.

Why in the introduction to Pharaoh’s dreams does the Torah make make reference to both the lunar and solar year? How is that relevant to the ensuing famine and the stockpiling of food?

Yosef possessed extraordinary self-discipline as evident in his self-control in the episode of his resisting Potiphar’s wife’s attempted seduction of him.

.and Joseph, he was the ruler ,ויוסף הוא השליט (בראשית מב,ו)

The Midrash teaches that this refers to his absolute self-discipline in all facets of his life. One who is out of control could not possibly have become entitled “,(שם) .the’ provider, as Yosef is so admiringly referred to‘ המשביר“ (תו“ש)

Yosef observed the lack of order and restraint in the lives of the Egyptians, it was no wonder they were the most decadent of nations. This chaotic existence would not serve them well in the years of careful stockpiling of food that was necessary for the ensuing famine. Their failed attempts to adequately protect their stored grain were a reflection of their poor concept of time and its alignment with the seasons. This understanding was critical in order to effectively maintain the optimum conditions for the balance of moisture and dryness which is so necessary for proper long term storage of grain. Yosef sought to initiate a sense of self-discipline that would draw their focus to the enormous tasks at hand. Circumcision was just the beginning of a lesson plan in the gaining of control of their lives. Circumcision and its most basic notion of giving up a piece of oneself for a greater goal and purpose is the most basic idea of self-discipline.

The beauty and meaning in the performance of Torah and Mitzvos lies in the careful preparation and thought that precedes it, and therein is expressed our greatest strength, discipline. Life is not about the pursuit of unleashed passion, but rather about attentive devotion to a greater will, that of the will of G-d.

The juggling of “time” and its responsibilities requires great talent. The seasons of Yomim Tovim and its vast details, attending to each family member’s needs and bringing it about with warmth and good cheer is a Herculean task. Celebrating Shabbos each week happily, on top of all the everyday challenges of raising a family, require super human effort. The bearing of children and all the tribulations associated with it, both physical and emotional, and the task of ‘training’ them to a life of self-discipline that begins with the command of Milah is a burden only women are capable of undertaking.

We are not offering the women a half an hour of vacation while we light the candles, but rather giving adoring testament to the astounding talent they possess and dedicate to us daily. The Yom Tov of Chanuka is a time where we celebrate and portray before the world, opening our curtains and allowing the world to glimpse a window into our world and where our greatness lies, and it is found in the Jewish women who are indeed the source of our success!

May we in this season of הלל והודאה, ‘praise and appreciation’ give proper due to our mothers, wives and all the illustrious women who utilize their special qualities to enlighten and inspire our world!

לע''נ

ר' משה בן ר' פנחס ג'יי ז"ל

S P O N S O R E D

15

MiYemini MichoelRabbi Michoel JablinowitzRosh Yeshiva Ateret Yerushalayim

Shabbos Chanukah

The Gemara in Shabbos 23B teaches in the name

of Rav Hunah, HaRagil B’Ner Havyen Leih Banim

Talmidei Chachamim. The one who is regular or

consistent with the mitzvah of lighting candles, will

merit to have children who are Talmudic Scholars.

Rashi on the Gemara explains that the candles

referred to in the Gemara are both Shabbos candles

and Chanukah candles. What is the specific

connection between lighting candles and being

Talmidei Chachamim?

Rashi explains that the connection is based on the pasuk in Mishlei (Chapter 6, Pasuk 23 ) Ki Ner Mitzvah V’Torah Ohr. As a result of performing the mitzvah with ner, Shabbos or Chanukah candles, one merits to Torah Ohr. Hence, the one who is regular with mitzvah candles merits having children who are Talmidei Chachamim.

The Sfas Emes explains in the name of the Chidushei HaRim in a different manner, which seems to suggest that the mitzvah of candle mentioned by Rav Hunah refers specifically to Chanukah candles. He says that “regilus” is a negative thing. It can lead to a person performing mitzvoth out of habit and routine without any feeling or emotion. As the Mishnah in Brachos (Chapter 4, Mishnah 4) teaches, Rabbi Eliezer Omer, HaOseh Tefillaso Kevah, Ein Tefillaso Tachanunim. The one who makes his prayer fixed or like a burden, his prayer is not proper. Therefore, Rav Hunah teaches that one has to do mitzvoth on a regular basis with a fire, with an enthusiasm and a “bren”. The p’shat is, HaRagil B’Ner, the one who does his daily, regular mitzvoth with the enthusiasm of the fire of a candle, will have children who are Talmidei Chachamim.

The connection is still not clearly understood. What is the connection between enthusiasm and Torah Scholars?

The Sfas Emes answers that the word “HaRagil” is the same word as “regel” which means leg. The leg is the lowest limb in man, very close to the ground. It represents

the notion of the physical. Just as physical matter decays, so too one who acts out of rote has no life and freshness in his actions.

The opposite limb of the “regel” is the head. One who is constantly thinking and using his intellect has a newness and life to him. We know that a Zaken is an old person whose body is starting to decay. Yet Chazal teach that the word Zaken is an acronym for “Zeh Kanah Chachmah”. Through the wisdom acquired from learning, one doesn’t become old, but rather maintains a vigor and youthfulness. It is precisely for this reason that Rav Hunah teaches, HaRagil B’Ner, the one who performs his daily obligations with enthusiasm and vigor, will have children who are Talmidei Chachamim. The way to instill fire into his actions is through learning and acquiring knowledge. The learning is that which gives one’s actions meaning and freshness. And Midah K’Neged Midah, one who has this vigor in his mitzvoth as a result of his connection to learning, he himself will merit having children who are Talmidei Chachamim.

This is consistent with the idea brought in the Sefarim that the lights of Chanukah represent Torah She’bealpeh. The process of the transmission and interpretation of the Oral Law is what Chanukah celebrates. Hence, when Chazal teach the notion of doing mitzvoth with an intellectual understanding and enthusiasm, the paradigm employed are the Chanukah candles.

The Gemara in Shabbos 21B teaches that the time of lighting Chanukah candles continues until all leave the market place. The term used in the Gemara is “Ad SheTichleh Regel Min HaShuk”. This Gemara can be explained in the same manner. We light until we remove the Regel Min HaShuk, until we remove the physical notion of the Regel, which represents an uninspired “going through the motions”. The purpose of the Chanukah candles is to inspire us in learning and increase our enthusiasm in mitzvoth, and at the same eradicate the “Regel Min HaShuk”, the tediousness of habit and routine, from our performance of mitzvoth.

Looking for a yeshiva in Israel that understands you? Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim has over fifteen years of experience with many alumni throughout the UK. We’ve created a focused yet relaxed atmosphere where learning is engaging and enjoyable. Our warm staff includes Rebbeim from London.

For more information or to apply please contact our office on 972-2-587-9537 Building Lifelong Connections. Building Foundations for Life. www.ateret.org | office@ateret.org

16

A Berel Wein/ Destiny Publication www.rabbiwein.com

Become a member and save 45% all the time!

to be continued...

The Illustrated Story of

MAIMONIDESThe Torah Sage, Healer,

Philosopher & Hero

Part 5

ADVERTISE HERE Contact mc@markittech.com

ADVERTISE HEREOR SPONSOR לע''נ SOMEONE

Contact mc@markittech.com

Special Deal7 weeks for £300