Tzitzis-Less Briskers - Shelach 5772

There is a Shitta that nowadays that we don’t have Techailes we should not wear Tzitzis at all. That Techailes is M’akeiv Es Halavan. This is the opinion of Rebbi in the Mishna and the Baal Hamor Paskens this way. However, we L’halacha Pasken like the Chachamim and we all wear Lavan we all wear the white Tzitzis despite the fact that we do not have Techailes or at least most of Klal Yisrael for most of its history has not had Techailes. There is a Chumra and there are Machmirim who will not wear Tzitzis out in the street on Shabbos and it is based on the Shitta of the Baal Hamaor. They argue and say according to the Baal Hamoer that Tzitzis must have Techailes and therefore, the white strings would be carrying on Shabbos. It says in Shulchan Aruch that if you have Tzitzis that are Posul, the strings are Posul it is considered carrying when you wear them out in the street and those strings don’t belong there.

They argue the same thing here. If you hold that Techailes is M’akeiv Es Halavan, on Shabbos wearing the Lavan itself would be carrying. Ad Kan Chumra Zu.

I have a Kasha on this for a long time. It is true that when Tzitzis are Posul one is carrying. Nevertheless, even if in Shamayim they Pasken like Rebbi and one needs Techailes, nevertheless wearing 8 strings that are white should not be carrying. This is because carrying is based on what people consider a Tachshit (something that people think belongs on a Beged). Even if it were an erroneous Psak and they hold like the Chachamim nevertheless it cannot be carrying it is no different than any design a person has on a Beged which is the way he intended it to be. Therefore, this Chumra which is well known in Brisk circles in Eretz Yisrael seems to be technically inaccurate.

Portable Homeland - Shelach 5772

Something is very much missing from this week's Parsha.  The discussion of the Parsha is a discussion of whether Klal Yisroel should go forward and do battle to enter Eretz Yisrael. There is a discussion of the fruits of the land, of the cities of the land, as it says in 13:19 (הַבְּמַחֲנִים, אִם בְּמִבְצָרִים).

Why does a Yid move to Eretz Yisroel? A Yid moves to Eretz Yisroel because of Kedushas Eretz Yisroel, because of Eretz Yisroel being such a unique place on the globe. That seems to be missing from the entire Parsha, the entire discussion. Nobody talks about Kedushas Eretz Yisroel as being the necessity for Klal Yisroel to enter Eretz Yisroel. That which is missing is the biggest Kasha of all.

The Arvei Nachal in this week’s Parsha answers the question but he prefaces it by discussing a Kasha on last week’s Parsha. Last week we learned about Klal Yisrael moving from place to place in the Midbar as it says in 9:20 (עַל-פִּי יְרוָר יַחֲנוּ, וְעַל-פִּי יְרוָר יִסָּעוּ). They took apart the Mishkan and moved and put together the Mishkan again in a new location. The Kasha which is already mentioned in the Gemara is that the Melacha, the 39 Melachos are learned from the Mishkan and the Melacha of Soseir which is taking something apart, destroying the building which is one of the Melachos on Shabbos, is only considered a Melacha if in the language of the Gemara a person is Soseir Al Minas Livnas Mimikomo, someone destroys a building in order to rebuild in its location. The Kasha is that in the Midbar where they took apart the Mishkan they did not take it apart to rebuild it in the same location. Since we learn all Melachos from the building of the Mishkan how could it be that there is a Melacha of destroying. Soseir Al Minas Livnas Mimikomo, destroying in order to rebuild in the same spot, if in fact that never happened in the case of the Mishkan.

Chazal answer that which it says in last week’s Parsha in 9:20 (עַל-פִּי יְרוָר יַחֲנוּ, וְעַל-פִּי יְרוָר יִסָּעוּ). That they actually did take things apart and put them together again in the same place. They were travelling in a desert. Wherever Klal Yisrael encamped was a place of Kedusha, was a place of holiness. The Gemara says that even in Chutz L’aretz (even when one is outside of Eretz Yisrael) in a place that is designated as a place for Davening or Learning, a Bais Hakneses or a Bais Hamedrash, he is considered as if he is in Eretz Yisrael.

It says in Devarim 11:21 (לְמַעַן יִרְבּוּ יְמֵיכֶם, וִימֵי בְנֵיכֶם) that a person has Arichas Yomim if he is in Eretz Yisrael. R’ Yochanan commented as it says in Maseches Berachos 8a  (אמרו ליה לר' יוחנן איכא סבי בבבל תמה ואמר למען ירבו ימיכם וימי בניכם על האדמה כתיב אבל בחוצה לארץ לא כיון דאמרי ליה מקדמי ומחשכי לבי כנישתא אמר היינו דאהני להו כדאמר ר' יהושע בן לוי לבניה קדימו וחשיכו ועיילו לבי כנישתא כי היכי דתורכו חיי) that there are people who get old in Bavel because of the Beracha of (למען ירבו ימיכם וימי בניכם) because of the blessing of having long days. Because these people are in the Shuls in Chutz L’aretz and when somebody spends time in a Bais Hakneses or a Bais Hamedrash in Chutz L’aretz it is like he is in Eretz Yisroel. Wherever Klal Yisrael encamped in the Midbar they were at a place of Learning. Klal Yisroel learned all day, they were all in Kollel. Moshe Rabbeinu taught them what he had learned at Sinai. Wherever they went was (עַל-פִּי יְרוָר יַחֲנוּ) was a place where there was a little piece of Eretz Yisroel, they took it with them and therefore it was Soseir Al Minas Livnas Mimikomo. They destroyed in order to rebuild in another location but the other location was the same Kedushas Eretz Yisrael location.

Returning now to the Meraglim. In the Parsha of the Meraglim we do not find that they had to go into Eretz Yisrael because of Kedushas Eretz Yisrael. Says the Arvei Nachal, because wherever they were camped in the Midbar wherever they settled they were in a place that had Kedushas Eretz Yisrael. Because the Shuls and the Batei Kenisios and Batei Medrashos and every single location had Kedushas Eretz Yisrael. Therefore, the Miraglim said we are not missing Kedushas Eretz Yisrael. Let us stay here in the Midbar. The discussion centered around practical things, the fruits of the land, the fortified cities, and Kedushas Eretz Yisrael was never an issue.

Obviously this is a tremendous Mussar to those of us who are here in Chutz L’aretz, who are not moving to Eretz Yisroel. We can still have Kedushas Eretz Yisrael when we enter a Bais Hakneses or Bais Hamedrash something we do faithfully. We have to appreciate the Chashivus of it. We all find that it is easier to learn in a Shul or Bais Hamedrash than to learn in one’s home or to learn in one’s place of business. It is not for naught that Chazal say the Bais Hakneses or Bais Hamedrash has Kedushas Eretz Yisroel. It is not just imagination it is real. When you pull yourself away you are tired, you are exhausted, you don’t feel like going to learn, when you get to the Bais Hamedrash the Kedusha there can awaken a person, the Kedusha there invigorates the person to give him energy to be able to absorb the Kedusha in his learning and his Davening in Shul.

Agav, I will mention, that the same Kasha with which I began in Parshas Shelach is one which disturbs me in Parshas Vayechi. Yaakov Avinu asks to be buried in Eretz Yisrael. Rashi in 47:29 (אל נא תקברני במצרים: סופה להיות עפרה כנים (ומרחשין תחת גופי) ושאין מתי חוצה לארץ חיים אלא בצער גלגול מחילות, ושלא יעשוני מצרים עבודה זרה) gives us 3 reasons because of the 1) Kinim (lice), 2) the Egyptians should not make his body into an Avodah Zora, and 3) so that he not suffer the pain of Micholos of travelling to Eretz Yisrael at the time of Techias Hameisim. Rashi there too seems to be missing the Ikkur reason, the main reason. Why does a Jew wish to be buried in Eretz Yisroel today? Because of Kedushas Eretz Yisrael the holiness of the land as it says in Devarim 32:43 (וְכִפֶּר אַדְמָתוֹ עַמּוֹ). We say that the land of Eretz Yisrael is a Kapparah. It is strange that Rashi doesn’t mention this as one of the reason for Yaakov to be buried in Eretz Yisrael. That is Tzorech Iyun it is a Kasha with which I will leave you.

Why Didn't Yehoshua & Calev Obey Moshe? - Shelach 5771

When Moshe Rabbeinu commanded them to enter Eretz Yisrael he gave them one Mitzvah 13:20 (וּמָה הָאָרֶץ הַשְּׁמֵנָה הִוא אִם-רָזָה, הֲיֵשׁ-בָּהּ עֵץ אִם-אַיִן, וְהִתְחַזַּקְתֶּם, וּלְקַחְתֶּם מִפְּרִי הָאָרֶץ; וְהַיָּמִים--יְמֵי, בִּכּוּרֵי עֲנָבִים) V’hischazaktem Ul’kachtem Mipri Ha’aretz. To take from the fruits of the land.

As you know the Meraglim took the fruits and Caleiv and Yehoshua refused to participate. I don’t understand, they were given a Tzava (commandment) to bring back fruits, they didn’t have to do it together with the Meraglim, they should have brought their own fruits back.

Are We There Yet? - Shelach 5771

Regarding Parshas Behaloscha. In Perek 9 we find the Torah gives instructions for what to do when you are in the Midbar and the Anan is raised. The Torah says when the Anan moves you move and follow the Anan. The Posuk 9:22 (אוֹ-יֹמַיִם אוֹ-חֹדֶשׁ אוֹ-יָמִים, בְּהַאֲרִיךְ הֶעָנָן עַל-הַמִּשְׁכָּן לִשְׁכֹּן עָלָיו, יַחֲנוּ בְנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְלֹא יִסָּעוּ; וּבְהֵעָלֹתוֹ, יִסָּעוּ) says sometimes the Anan led Klal Yisrael in the Midbar and stopped for just a day, so they camped for a day and they left the next day. Sometimes two days, a month, a year. However long the Anan stopped Klal Yisrael is given instructions you follow that Anan. When it travels you travel when it stops you stop. (עַל-פִּי יְרוָר יַחֲנוּ, וְעַל-פִּי יְ רוָר יִסָּעוּ) Al Pi Hashem Yachanu Al Pi Hashem Yisa’u.

I don’t understand, we are told that if not for the Cheit of the Meraglim then Klal Yisrael would have entered Eretz Yisrael immediately, which Rashi explains to be 3 days. It was only after the Cheit of the Meraglim that Klal Yisrael stayed in the Midbar and had so many Masa’os. So what is going on here in the Posuk 9:15 (וּבְיוֹם, הָקִים אֶת-הַמִּשְׁכָּן, כִּסָּה הֶעָנָן אֶת-הַמִּשְׁכָּן, לְאֹהֶל הָעֵדֻת; וּבָעֶרֶב יִהְיֶה עַל-הַמִּשְׁכָּן, כְּמַרְאֵה-אֵשׁ--עַד-בֹּקֶר) B’yom Hakim Es Hamishkan which is the fact that this was the day that the Mishkan was completed and then Kisui He’anan. Then the Posuk goes on to give you instructions. Why were they given instructions 9:15 (וּבְיוֹם, הָקִים אֶת-הַמִּשְׁכָּן, כִּסָּה הֶעָנָן אֶת-הַמִּשְׁכָּן, לְאֹהֶל הָעֵדֻת; וּבָעֶרֶב יִהְיֶה עַל-הַמִּשְׁכָּן, כְּמַרְאֵה-אֵשׁ--עַד-בֹּקֶר) on B’yom Hakim Es Hamishkan, it was before the Cheit Hamiraglim and therefore there should not have been a possibility of 2 days, a month, or a year, that the Anan would stop in any one place for a year. Tzorech Iyun Gadol.

Hataras Nedarim On Challah - Shelach 5771

In Yore Dai’a 323 we find a Halacha in Hafrashas Challah which is of great use to Rabbanim.  Very often someone calls a Rav with the following Shaila. The woman calls and says that I separated Challah and I am making my Challahs and now I don’t see the dough that I separated for Hafrashas Challah. The Challah dough must have been mixed back into the dough and it is in one of my Challahs and I can’t identify which is the dough that was separated and made holy and I can’t eat. I can’t distinguish that from the rest of the Challah, what should I do? 

In Siman 323 we find that the Din of Hataras Nedarim which allows a person to be Mattir Neder, to let a person who made a vow and cause it to become abrogated and dissolved that applies also to Kedusha.

Setting Kedusha with words and establishing Kedusha through words, those words can also become nullified by Hataras Nedarim, and that is what we do. It has happened that a woman calls with a Shaila to the Yeshiva and I have taken two other people from the Yeshiva to her home and done Hataras Nedarim. 

Today I would like to deal with a few of the Geshmake Kashas that are dealt with in this Shaila of being Mattir Neder for Hafrashas Challah.  

The Chasam Sofer in Yore Dai’a at the end of Siman 320 asks a great Kasha. How can I go and be Mattir Neder. A woman that separated Challah and now because the Challah became mixed into the rest of the dough which would make all the Challahs prohibited, they would all have to be thrown out. So I am going and being Mattir Neder. When I am Mattir Neder I am causing retroactively that the Challah was never Challah because all Hataras Nedarim works in a retroactive way.  If so, it turns out that the Beracha that she made when separating the Challah, Asher Kidishanu B’mitzvosav V’tzivanu L’hafrish Challah or as some say L’hafrish Challah Min Ha’isa, that Beracha that was made initially now becomes a Beracha Levatala, because it turns out that she didn’t separate Challah when she retroactively nullifies the separation of the Challah and then the Beracha is a Beracha Levatala. You can’t nullify a Beracha. The Chasam Sofer therefore asks how can you be Mattir Neder on separating Challah, aren’t you causing a Beracha Levatalah which is a worse Aveira then throwing out all the Challahs.

The Chasam Sofer says a Lomdishe Teretz that it is not a Beracha Levatalah because the language of the Beracha is Asher Kidishanu B’mitzvosav V’tzivanu L’hafrish Challah, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu commanded us with his Mitzvos and commanded us to separate Challah.

That Beracha the Chasam Sofer Teitches is a Mitzvah to separate Challah according to the rules of the Torah. In other words, when I make a dough I have a Mitzvah to separate some dough and cause that to become Challah which is subject to the Mitzvas Hatorah. Since the Mitzvas Hatorah themselves include an ability to be Mattir Neder, so my Beracha is not a Beracha Levatalah. Because what did I do, I said this is Challah subject to all the rules of Dinei Challah. That is what happened. Even when I nullified the Hafrashas Challah it is not a Beracha Levatala because it turns out that what I did with the Beracha is Mikuyam. When I made the Beracha I said I am making this Challah subject to Hilchos Yore Dai’a. And it is subject to Hilchos Yore Dai’a which allows Hataras Nedarim. So it turns out says the Chasam Sofer, that it is not a Beracha Levatala.

I should add for those who learn Maseches Nedarim that there is a Rav Shimon Shkop who says that Hataras Nedarim works L’mafrei’a only Mikan Ul’haba L’mafrei’a. He has a Lomdishe twist that says that Hafrashas Challah is only retroactive for things that are important for now and the future. However, it is not retroactive for things that are retroactive, that took place in the past. He has this type of hair splitting Chiluk in Hataras Nedarim L’mafrei’a. According to Rav Shimon the Chasam Sofer’s question would be answered and it is not a Beracha Levatala. At the time it truly was Challah. It is only later that it becomes Os Challah L’mafrei’a.

Kasha #2 on the issue of being Mattir Neder – The Taz also in Siman 323 has a long piece in which he asks a great Kasha. He says if it is true that you can be Mattir Neder on things to which you give Kedusha which presumably does not only include Challah and Terumah but Korbanos as well. Or making oneself a Nazir, if you can be Mattir Neder based on events that take place later, you would never have a Nazir who would become Tamei and have to bring a Korban. If he becomes Tamei let him be Mattir Neder based on the fact that if he would have known that he would become Tamei he would have never made a Neder. Or if you have a Nazir who is getting Malkus for drinking wine, he should never get Malkus, let him be Mattir Neder and say had I known that I would drink wine I never would have made myself a Nazir in the first place. Or how can you give an Onesh of Shechutai Chutz (which is a Korban that is Shechted outside the Bais Hamikdash). If it is Shechted outside the Bais Hamikdash that would be a legitimate reason to be Mattir Neder because had I known that it would be Shechted outside the Bais Hamikdash I would have never made it a Korban. So asks the Taz how can that be?

The Taz says it must be that you can’t be Mattir Nedder based on future events which is called B’nolad, and if so the same thing should apply to Hafrashas Challah, how can you be Mattir Neder based on the facts that take place later? This is a Gevaldige Kasha.

The Orach Hashulchan actually says Ein Hachi Nami, you can fix all those cases that we brought down if you want (Nazir, Shechutai Chutz...) and there is only an Onesh if you don’t. This is a difficult Teretz.

Rav Yaakov Emden in the Teshuvas Yaivetz Cheilek 2 Teshuva 98 offers a great Teretz to the Taz’s Kasha. He says the idea of Poschim B’nolad, allowing someone to be Mattir Neder based on a future event is only on a future event which is Shichiach (happens often). If it happens often then you can say had you contemplated it at the time would I have made the Neder. On a Davar Delo Shichiach a person can’t be Mattir Neder. Certainly it is not Shichiach for a Nazir to drink wine in a circumstance where he would get Malkus and he is warned not to drink the wine, and therefore it is Lo Shichiach and you can’t be Mattir Neder based on that.  To Shecht a Korban Bachutz is not Shichiach.

As far as women mixing Challah back into the dough, you may argue that it is not Shichiach, however, Rabbanim will tell you that it happens quite often.  Therefore that is Shichiach enough to be Mattir Neder. Mashe’ain’kein, the other difficulties of Shechitas Bachutz and the rest which are not Shichiach, and there it doesn’t help. 

I saw an extraordinary Chiddush of Rav Chaim Kanievsky in the Derech Emunah Cheilek Bais which is Hilchos Teruma Perek 4:186. There he brings an extraordinary Chiddush B’sheim the Chazon Ish as Halacha L’mayseh. That is in such a situation where a woman or any Shaliach separates Challah, she is actually separating Challah from the dough which is legally the dough of her husband. Her husband in effect makes her a Shaliach to separate the dough. Zogt the Chazon Ish and this is based on earlier sources that the person who has to be Mattir Neder is not the woman it is the man because it was his Shaliach that separated the Challah. Since this is a Chiddush, an issue of question, the Chazon Ish says that they should both be Mattir Neder or the woman should make her husband a Shaliach. The only person who can be a Shaliach for Hatoras Nedarim is a husband for a wife. So then the husband can be Mattir for both of them. This is an extraordinary Chiddush but this is the Psak that is brought there in the footnotes from the Chazon Ish.

Many of you have already come to me and I have been Mattir Neder for the wife alone. I would point out that the Piskei Teshuva in Yore Dai’a 331:6 B’sheim the Chasam Sofer says that it is enough for the woman alone to be Mattir Neder. Nevertheless, when we have the Psak of the Chazon Ish and the Sefer Milo’o Omer which is quoted there, that the husband should be Mattir Neder as well, in the future Bli Neder that will be my practice.