Halacha For Today

Parshas Ki Savo, which contains words of rebuke and hair-raising threats of terrible suffering which will befall the Jewish people.

However, consolation may be found by recognizing that we are currently living in the century which corresponds to Parshas Nitzavim-Vayeilech, which is commonly referred to as the portion of repentance. Not surprisingly, the years since World War II have seen an extraordinary wave of uneducated Jews returning to their roots on an unprecedented scale, precisely as predicated by the Torah.

כי קרוב אליך הדבר מאד בפיך ובלבבך לעשתו (30:14)

            The Ponovezher Rav once traveled to South Africa to strengthen and encourage the Jews there in their religious observance. Prior to his journey, he asked his teacher, the illustrious Chofetz Chaim, what message he should relate to the Jews there in the name of the leader of the generation.

The Chofetz Chaim replied that he should tell them that it is actually quite easy to do the mitzvah of teshuvah – repentance. The minimum requirements to fulfill this obligation are few and are within the reach of every Jew: ceasing to sin, confessing one’s past actions and expressing regret over them, and accepting upon oneself not to transgress again. Unfortunately, the evil inclination attempts to convince a person that proper repentance is so difficult and involves so many complex components that he will never succeed in correctly doing so, thereby causing him to give up the effort without even trying.

In this vein, Rav Nosson Wachtfogel notes that in our verse, Moshe describes one of the commandments as not being hidden or distant from a person. It isn’t in the heavens or across the sea as one might have thought, but rather it is very close – in one’s mouth and heart. What is this commandment which a person might mistakenly conclude is so far beyond him that its observance requires him to travel thousands or millions of miles, yet in reality the keys to its performance lie inside of him? Not surprisingly, the Ramban writes that the mitzvah to which Moshe is referring is the mitzvah of teshuvah.

            The Gemora in Kiddushin (49b) discusses a case in which a wicked man betroths a woman on the condition that he is completely righteous. Surprisingly, the Gemora rules that she may be legally engaged, explaining that perhaps he had thoughts of repentance in the moment prior to his proposal. We may derive from here that a person can literally transform himself from one extreme to the other in a mere moment of sincere reflection and regret, a lesson which should inspire and motivate us during the approaching Yamim Noraim.

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1)      Moshe reminded the people (29:15-16) of the abominable idols which they saw in Egypt and other lands through which they passed. Why was it necessary to warn them against worshipping these idols if they themselves had witnessed how deplorable they were? (Nesivos Rabboseinu)

2)      Moshe told the people (30:12) that the Torah is not in Heaven. The Gemora in Bava Metzia (59b) understands this to mean that after the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai, it is up to the Sages to decide matters of Jewish law, which are no longer within the jurisdiction of Hashem. In numerous places, the Gemora records episodes in which a bas kol – Heavenly voice – descends to inform the Sages with which opinion in a dispute Hashem sides. Why is it referred to as a bas kol – literally, the daughter of a sound – and not as a ben kol – the son of a sound – or simply as the sound itself? (Tosefos Sanhedrin 11a, Tosefos Yom Tov Yevamos 16:6)

3)      The Rambam writes (Hilchos Chagigah 3:1) that the purpose of gathering the people together to hear the public reading of the book of Devorim (31:11) is to strengthen their religious commitment and fear of Hashem. With such important objectives, why is this mitzvah performed only once every seven years and not annually? (Even Yisroel)

4)      How could Hashem tell Moshe (31:16) that he would lie with his forefathers when Moshe was buried on Mount Nevo and the Avos were buried in Me’aras HaMachpeilah in Chevron? (Targum Yonason ben Uziel, Rashi Bereishis 47:30, Ayeles HaShachar, Shaarei Aharon)

5)      Parshas Vayeilech contains the mitzvah to write a Sefer Torah (31:19). The Gemora rules (Gittin 45b) that a Torah which was written by a heretic is invalid and must be burned. If a heretic appoints a non-heretic as his agent to write a Torah on his behalf, may it be used? (Har Tzvi)

Answers to Points to Ponder:

1) The Brisker Rav answers that exposure to something sinful and forbidden such as idols, even if a person intellectually recognizes that it is vile and repugnant, still leaves an emotional impression. Although one’s initial reaction is to be repulsed, his senses are also dulled in the process and the next time that he sees them his response won’t have the same intensity and he may even be convinced that they’re not so problematic after all. After sufficient exposure, he may even come to see positive qualities in them, and for this reason Moshe had to warn the people against worshipping the idols, which they had originally viewed as detestable but to which they may have become desensitized over time. In light of this phenomenon, the Brisker Rav used to warn against traveling to places where Shabbos was violated in order to protest, as witnessing its desecration can negatively affect one’s own Shabbos observance.

2) Tosefos writes that the voice which is heard is not the original voice which emanated from the heavens, but rather an echo which results from it. As a result, it is appropriate to refer to it as a bas kol, meaning an offspring which result from the initial voice. Alternatively, the Tosefos Yom Tov suggests that when the Jewish people were on a high enough spiritual level, Hashem communicated with us through prophecy which was specifically and directly addressed to an individual prophet. After this period ended, Hashem communicated with us through a lower form, in which a voice emanating from the heavens made His will known to whomever was present to hear it. Because this is a lesser level of prophecy, it is referred to as a derivative of the original voice. This also explains why it is called a bas kol and not a ben kol, as the feminine term connotes the fact that the level of prophecy has weakened.

3) Dayan Yisroel Yaakov Fisher explains that it is appropriate to perform this mitzvah when the words of Torah which are read will be properly listened to and accepted. After the Shemittah year the Jewish people have spent an entire year letting their fields lie fallow and using their time to pursue spiritual pursuits. They have also witnessed the Torah’s blessing (Vayikra 25:21) that the land will miraculously produce enough to sustain them for three years, and with mundane concerns far from their minds, this unique opportunity which arises only once every seven years is the ideal time to perform this mitzvah.

4) Rashi maintains that the phrase “lying down with one’s fathers” doesn’t refer to burial but to death. The Targum Yonason ben Uziel explains that Moshe would lie with his forefathers in the sense that his body would be buried in the ground just as they were, and also because his soul would move on to be with them in the World to Come. The Shaarei Aharon suggests that this verse may be a source for the opinion of the Yalkut Reuveni that Moshe and Tzipporah were in fact buried in Me’aras HaMachpeilah.

5) The Olas Shmuel cites the Talmudic concept that שלוחו של אדם כמותו – an agent sent by a person to do a task is legally considered to be performing the task in the stead of the one who appointed him. Therefore, even though the Torah is physically written by a non-heretic, it is legally viewed as if it was written by the apostate who designated him, and the Torah is invalid. Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank notes that many opinions maintain that a heretic is unable to appoint an agent to act on his behalf, in which case the Torah would be considered as if it was written by the non-heretic and would certainly be valid. Even according to the opinion that an apostate can designate an agent, Rav Frank argues that the legal concept of appointing an agent doesn’t restrict the agent to the limitations of the person who assigned him. His actions are still viewed as being performed by the agent, and in this case the Torah would be kosher.

© 2010 by Oizer Alport. To subscribe, send comments, or sponsor an issue, email oalport@optonline.net