Convention Program Highlights

Transcription

1 Orthodo Union National Convention in Jerusalem Ramada Hotel Jerusalem WED SUN, November Convention Program Highlights The following are Convention highlights that are open to the public Please register for them at the OU desk in the hotel lobby UPDATED Wed. 7:00pm Opening Program (Maariv at 8:00pm) Stephen J. Savitsky, Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger, Hon. Nir Barkat 8:30pm Journalists Roundtable: Identifying the Hot Button Issues Ethan Bronner, Gil Hoffman, Steve Leibowitz, Ruthie Blum Thu. Fri. 2:30pm Join us at the proposed site of the US Embassy Representing hundreds of thousands of deeply caring, committed American Jews, we will urge President Elect Barak Obama to speedily implement the duly approved will of Congress to relocate the US Embassy to Jerusalem. Remarks by Danny Ayalon Location: Derech Hebron & Yanovsky Street (near Hollandia) 7:30pm Keynote Address by Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks Our Mission Statement for the 21st Century 9:15pm Film Premiere: Hungry to be Heard produced by OU Young Leadership Cabinet 9:15am Economic Meltdown: Implications for America and Israel Pinchas Landau 10:30am Israel/Diaspora Relations Amotz Asa El, Rebecca Caspi, Daniel Gordis Highlights of the Shabbat Program (Rooms for Israeli guests are SOLD OUT) Shabbat Keynote Address by HaRav Yisrael Meir Lau Shabbat Shiurim: Rabbi Hershel Schachter, Rabbi Menachem Genack, Rabbi Simcha Hochberg, Rabbi Steven and Yael Weil, Mrs. Shira Smiles Convention Summation by Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks Motza ei Shabbat: 6:30pm 8:00pm Debate and Adoption of Resolutions Concert starring Shlomo Katz For more information, contact the Seymour J. Abrams OU Israel Center at (02) or visit ë 0Y

2 dkal In Israel (not yet elsewhere) hne lh oze Correct for TT 836 Rabbeinu Tam (J'm) 5:52pm 4:01 Yerushalayim 5:16pm 4:20 S'derot 5:19pm 4:17 Gush Etzion 5:16pm 4:17 Raanana 5:17pm 4:17 Beit Shemesh 5:17pm 4:18 Rehovot 5:17pm 4:17 Netanya 5:16pm 4:17 Be'er Sheva 5:18pm 4:17 Modi'in 5:16pm 4:01 Petach Tikva 5:17pm 4:01 Maale Adumim 5:15pm 4:16 Ginot Shomron 5:16pm 4:15 Gush Shiloh 5:15pm 4:17 K4 & Hevron 5:17pm 4:16 Giv'at Ze'ev 5:16pm 4:18 Yad Binyamin 5:17pm 4:19 Ashkelon 5:19pm 4:03 Tzfat 5:13pm dy iig zyt zay 836 Nov , '08 h"qyz oeyg c"k This Shabbat is the 54th day (of 354), 8th Shabbat (of 50) of 5769 d k ßa lße d afhßl d G d W c g d z ` Epi l r W C gßy W...oFv i dßi The small but special prayer In this week's sedra, the Torah tells us (B'reishit 24:63) And Yitzchak went out to meditate (to converse) in the field toward evening. Connecting this pasuk with T'hilim 102:1 A Prayer of the poor, when he faints, and pours out his conversation before G d, the Gemara in the name of R' Yosi b'r' Chanina, concludes that Yitzchak Avinu "established" the prayer of Mincha. The net pasuk is Hear my prayer, HaShem, and let my cry reach you. SICHA in the contet of T'hilim 102 is a term for heartfelt prayer and this connotation is applied to the pasuk with Yitzchak as well. e"dl Earlier, the Gemara quotes R' Chelbo who said in the name of R' Huna a person should always be careful (particular, meticulous) with T'filat Mincha, because it wasn't until Mincha time that Eliyahu HaNavi was answered (in his confrontation with the 450 false prophets of Baal), as it says in Melachim Alef (18:36) And it was at the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice (Mincha time), that Eliyahu the prophet came near, and said: HaShem... cont. on page Zero, which is below... Shabbat 3:00pm (Mincha 4:00) Rabbi Yaakov Moshe Poupko Motza'ei Shabbat 8:30pm Rabbi Ephraim Sprecher ë 1Y Tel: (02) US toll free: res@traveldealisrael.com

3 Orthodo Union OU Kashrut NCSY Jewish Action NJCD / Yachad / Our Way Kharkov Synagogue Support Services IPA OURadio.org Young Leadership Project Areivim OU West Coast Stephen Savitsky, President, Orthodo Union Harvey Blitz, Chairman of the Board, Orthodo Union Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, Eec. Vice President, OU Eliezer Edelman, Eec. Dir. Operations and Management Headquarters: 11 Broadway, New York, NY website: Produced, printed*, collated, and folded in house Phil Chernofsky (02) tt@ouisrael.org Advertising: Ita Rochel ttads@ouisrael.org (02) TT Distribution ttdist@ouisrael.org OU Israel and Torah Tidbits do not endorse the political or halachic positions of its editor, columnists, or advertisers, nor guarantee the quality of advertised services or products. Nor do we endorse the kashrut of hotels, restaurants, caterers or food products that are advertised in TT (ecept, of course, those under OU Israel hashgacha). We recommend that readers check with the advertisers themselves to clarify kashrut and shmita details of their services and products. ë 2Y Ranges are 10 days, WED FRI 21 Cheshvan 1 Kislev (Nov ) Earliest Talit & T'filin Sunrise 5:18 5:25am 6:12 6:20am Sof Z'man K' Sh'ma 8:47 8:53am (Magen Avraham: 8:01 8:05am) Sof Z'man T'fila 9:40 9:44am (Magen Avraham: 9:09 9:13am) Chatzot (halachic noon) Mincha Gedola (earliest Mincha) Plag Mincha 11:24½ 11:27¼am 11:55 11:58am 3:32¼ 3:31pm Sunset 4:42 4:40pm (based on sea level: 4:37 4:34pm) Word of the Month We bench Rosh Chodesh Kislev this Shabbat. Cheshvan is one of two variable months in our fied calendar; cont. p.4 OU ISRAEL Seymour J. Abrams Orthodo Union Jerusalem World Center OU Israel Center programs Makom BaLev Lev Yehudi Pearl & Harold M. Jacobs ZULA Center Machon Maayan NESTO The Jack Gindi Oraita Program Mashiv HaRuach Beit Kharkov OU Israel Communities OU Kashrut Israel Yitzchak Fund, President, OU Israel Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Senior Vice President Prof. Meni Koslowsky, Vice President Rabbi Dovid Cohen, Vaad member Stuart Hershkowitz, Vaad member Moshe Kempinski, Vaad member Sandy Kestenbaum, Vaad member Zvi Sand, Vaad member Harvey Wolinetz, Vaad member Rabbi Avi Berman, Director General, OU Israel Menachem Persoff, Director of Programs, Israel Center Phil Chernofsky, Educational Director and TT editor 22 Keren HaYesod POB Jerusalem phone: (02) fa: (02) office@ouisrael.org website: Torah Tidbits and many of the projects of OU Israel are assisted by grants from The Jewish Agency for Israel Founders and initial benefactors of the Israel Center: George z"l and Ilse Falk

4 Page Zero of Torah Tidbits 836 Lead Tidbit cont. from page 1 (above) Ed. note: We are aware that page Zero follows page 2 this week. Its usual position is at the top of the PDF version of Torah Tidbits. Occasionally, we leave what was on the back cover of the hard copy of TT in its place, and then page Zero ends up being page 3 or 4. That's the way it goes. In various works of Rabbinic Literature throughout the generations because of the episode of Eliyahu HaNavi on Mt. Carmel, Mincha became associated with the quality of Emunah, faith in G d. The result of the confrontation with the prophets of Baal resulted in the people of Israel resoundedly proclaiming, HASHEM HU HA'ELOKIM, HASHEM HU HA'ELOKIM. This is considered such an important state ment of Emunah in G d that we conclude NE'ILA on Yom Kippur with a sevenfold emotional declaration that "HaShem is truly The G d!" Ironically, the Amida of both Shacharit and Maariv is preceded by the recitation of the Sh'ma our twice daily (at least) reconfirmation of our belief and acceptance of the Yoke of Heaven. Mincha is not "fortified", shall we say, with the Sh'ma, but it has the dramatic episode with Eliyahu HaNavi as its background. Because of its small size, and more so because of when we daven Mincha, our Sages have considered there to be a special reward for meticulous attention to Mincha. Shacharit is part of our morning routine, before we get involved in the day's activities. Maariv is part of our evening routine, usually after the day's activities have been concluded. Mincha, however, usually requires us to make the time in our "busy schedule" for it. Evidence of our commitment to Mincha are the many Mincha minyanim (services) that one finds around town at various times in the early afternoon in stores, banks, bus stations, office buildings. In Yerushalayim and other cities, there are Minyan Factories that host countess daveners in many, many min yanim from the earliest time for Mincha (half hour after halachic noon) until sunset (and even a bit beyond). According to T'fila K'hilchata, most (Ashkenazi) poskim hold that women are required to daven both Shacharit and Mincha etent and application of this statement should be checked out with your Rav. Obviously, each of our davenings should be done with seriousness and care. It's not just Mincha. But the others have an easier time of it, so to speak, because of their timings and content. Mincha is a simpler prayer than the other two. It seems to fit with the personality of Yitzchak Avinu. And the image of conversing with G d in the field as the day comes to an end, has a more spiritual "flavor" than the ë 3Y

5 corresponding verses and circumstances for Shacharit and Maariv. If you don't daven Mincha, think about taking it on. If you do, give Yitzchak Avinu a thought and let him help us daven better. WORD of the MONTH cont. from p.2 A weekly TT feature to help clarify practical and conceptual aspects of the Jewish Calendar, thereby enhancing our appreciation of G d's gift to us of HaChodesh HaZeh Lachem... it works like this: Cheshvan varies between its regular status of 29 days and its occasional "full" status of 30 days. Regular and occasional are a bit misleading, since Cheshvan's regular 29 days occurs in only 55% of years; its full status occurs 45% of the time. With 29 days (as in this year), Kislev has only one day of Rosh Chodesh. Because of Cheshvan's situation, Rosh Chodesh Kislev has many possibilities: SUN, SUN MON, TUE, TUE WED, THU, THU FRI, FRI. Notice that the one day of Rosh Chodesh Kislev (when Cheshvan has only 29 days) can be SUN, TUE, THU, FRI (that's equivalent to LO B'Da"Z). When there is a 30th day of Cheshvan, it becomes the first day of Rosh Chodesh Kislev and pushes the first of Kislev (to become the second day of Rosh Chodesh) a day later so from Sunday, there is Sunday and Monday; Tuesday becomes Tuesday and Wednesday; Thursday becomes Thursday and Friday. But it doesn't happen that Cheshvan has a 30th day when the first of kislev is a Friday (as it is this year). So there is never a case (in our fied calendar) of Friday Shabbat. The result of this is that neither day of Rosh Chodesh Kislev is ever a Shabbat. The 30th of Cheshvan can be SUN, TUE, THU, FRI. The first of Kislev can be any of the si weekdays, but never Shabbat. Rosh Chodesh Kislev is Friday :d afhßl l ` ßU i l M l rß e Epi l r ` A d i W W mfi ßA d ißd i e lßq M y c g W` The molad is FRI 3h 26m 15p (3:06am Israel Standard Time). wfa A W l W i g ` mi w l g U rœd Wi n g e zfw c W W e mi ßU r,i W W mfi ßA d ißd i c lfo d In Rambam's notation btz:h 'e The actual (astronomical) molad for Kislev is THU 6:55pm which is 8 hours earlier than the announced molad [That's quite a bit of a discrepancy between the actual and the announced (which is based on average), but last month there was a 13 hour difference. And net month, the gap will close further. And the month after that, the actual molad will be later than the announced one.] ë 4Y

6 Chayei Sara STATS 5th of the Torah's 54 sedras; 5th of 12 in B'reishit Written on 171 lines in a Sefer Torah, rank 37th 4 Parshiyot; 3 open, 1 closed 105 p'sukim ranks 32nd (11th in B'reishit) same as D'varim (which is longer) 1402 words ranks 37th (11th in B'reishit) 5314 letters ranks 36th (11th in B'reishit) Shorter than average p'sukim in a sedra with slightly below average number of p'sukim means a smallish sedra MITZVOT none of the 613 mitzvot are in Chayei Sara, however, as mentioned often, there are Midot and values and other lessons to be learned. Aliya by Aliya Sedra Summary [P> X:Y (Z)] and [S> X:Y (Z)] indicate start of a parsha p tucha or s tuma respectively. X:Y is Perek:Pasuk of the beginning of the parsha; (Z) is the number of p'sukim in the parsha. Kohen First Aliya 16 p'sukim 23:1 16 [P> 23:1 (20)] The parsha begins by telling us that Sara died in Kiryat Arba, which is Hevron. But first it tells us that she lived a full, long life of 127 years. ë 5Y SDT: With the last theme of Vayeira being the AKEIDA, the jutaposition of Sara's death supports our Tradition that Sara died as a result of the Akeida. The Midrash says that the Satan informed Sara about what Avraham was intending to do with Yitzchak, when they went towards Har HaMoriah. The shock was too great for an old woman, and she died. Some commentaries give an interesting twist to this. They say that Sara died, not from fear that Avraham would offer Yitzchak as a Korban, but rather that he might not! She remembered Avraham's reaction when she told him to banish Yishmael (and Hagar). She was afraid that Avraham's love and kindness towards Yitzchak would prevent him from carrying out G d's command, and that Avraham would thus fail this ultimate test of faith. When she saw (or heard) that Avraham was returning with Yitzchak still alive, she thought her fears were realized and she died. Avraham comes (some say from the Akeida, that is from Har HaMoriah; some say from Be'er Sheva; either way, it was apparently to Hevron that he came) to eulogize Sara and to cry for her. SDT: V LIVKOTAH, and to cry for her, is written with a small KAF. Some take this as a reminder that the crying was "small" since Sara had lived such a long life (Baal HaTurim). There is more crying when a person dies young. Some say that the KAF points to the 20 in the way that the Torah tells us how old she was when she died: 100 years and 20 years and 7 years. Others say that the small KAF allows us to reread the word with regular sized letters only to obtain a different understanding, on

7 a REMEZ (hint) level. And Avraham came to eulogize Sara ULVITAH, and for her daughter. This correlates with the opinions that Avraham and Sara had a daughter, but she died when Sara did. (Some even say that her name was BAKOL.) Avraham net makes the arragements for providing a suitable place to bury Sara. (There is a Tradition that Avraham was aware of the burial place of Adam and Chava, and that is the piece of land he was interested in.) He turns to the people of CHEIT, one of whom is known as EFRON. They all echange niceties and the people offer Avraham any land he wants. He insists on paying full price and that is what he does for the field and cave of Machpela. Pirkei Avot made famous that Avraham was tested 10 times. But the mishna does not enumerate the ten tests. There are different opinions as to which of Avraham's eperiences are considered tests of his faith. Most lists of the 10 end with the Akeida, as implied from the p'sukim themselves. Rabeinu Yona finds a test after the Akeida Avraham's eperience in providing a burial place for Sara. The question on this is obvious What was so difficult about that, that it should qualify as a test of faith especially after the Akeida? Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that after the Akeida, Avraham still had a couple of difficult things to go through. Wasn't the Akeida and everything that preceded it enough? No, not finished yet. This can test a person, sometimes, more than terrible trials and tribulations. ë 6Y Surviving the Holocaust did not guarantee a person that he would have an easy life from then on. Some were blessed with trouble free lives after their terrible ordeals, but most had many more difficulties to face in the years to come. We do not know how G d works. Why must we suffer trials and tribulations in this world? It has something to do with making us better people. With challenging us. With testing us. With preparing our souls for the World of Truth. And probably a lot more. There is another approach to answer the same question. Eulogizing his wife, acquiring a burial place, finding a "shiduch" for Yitzchak even remarrying Hagar (Ketura) are all "regular", mundane eperiences. Can one who spoke repeatedly to G d, ascended Har HaMori'ah, had a special relationship with G d can such a person return to being a "normal" human being? This too is a test, and Avraham passed with flying colors. These commentaries point to the pasuk at the end of the Akeida portion, "And Avraham return to the lads..." as an indication that he was able to "come back down to earth". SDT: If a father insists that his son marry or not marry a particular woman, the son is not duty bound to listen to his father. Meshech Chochma says that we learn this from the fact that Avraham gave instructions and administered an oath to Eliezer about a wife for Yitzchak, but did not command Yitzchak himself on the matter.

8 Levi Second Aliya 13 p'sukim 23:17 24:9 The field, cave, trees, etc. become the lawful possessions of Avraham, after which he buries Sara. [S> 24:1 (67)] Avraham is now at an advanced age and has been blessed greatly by G d. And G d blessed Avraham BAKOL, with everything. The word BAKOL screams out for eplanation. And, sure enough, there are many suggestions as to what this etra blessing of BAKOL is. (Every time we say Birkat HaMazon, we ask G d to bless us as He blessed our forefathers BAKOL... Mikol and Kol are terms associated with Yitzchak and Yaakov.) The numeric value of BAKOL 52, the same as BEN, son. This alludes to the ultimate blessing that Avraham received his son Yitzchak. Avraham resisted because he had seen in the stars that he was not going to have children. G d "eplained" to Avraham that it is possible to rise above one's "mazal", and in fact, that is the special quality of the nation that will come from him. l`yil lfn oi`. Ibn Ezra says in the name of our Sages z"l, true, but only as long as they keep the Torah.) R. Shimon bar Yochai says that Avraham had a precious stone with curative powers that would heal all who gazed upon it. These last two opinions identify BAKOL as Avraham's prominent position in the world. This fits with his role as "father of many nations". Some suggest that Eisav's not sinning (until Avraham died) and Yishmael's repentance, both during Avraham's lifetime are the etra blessings. There are still other eplanations. R. Meir says that Avraham was blessed by NOT having a daughter. In Avraham's time and in his unique circumstances, who would she have married? What would have happened to her? In this case it was a bracha not to have had a daughter. On the other hand... R. Yehuda says that Avraham's etra blessing was that he DID have a daughter. There is even an opinion that his daughter's name was BAKOL. Rabbi Eliezer HaModai says that Avraham was blessed with the art/skill/power of astrology and that he was consulted by noblemen from far and wide. (Even when G d told Avraham that he would have a child, ë 7Y From the variety of eplanations of BAKOL, it is quite clear that Avraham's unique status as the one who restored belief in One G d to the world did not go unrewarded. We can see in this list of blessings, all the different kinds of blessings that can be ours, the spiritual heirs of Avraham Avinu. The one major task remaining, which will forge the net vital link in what promises to be a great people and a great Chain of Tradition, is finding a suitable "shidduch" for Yitzchak. Everything now will depend upon Yitzchak. However great Avraham was,

9 unless there is "solid" continuity, all will be lost. To this end, Avraham calls upon Eliezer to swear that he will faithfully carry out his task, that he will return to Avraham's family and hometown, and find a wife for Yitzchak there. And that Yitzchak is not to leave Eretz Yisrael (having been consecrated on the Mizbei'ach during the Akeida). Shlishi Third Aliya 17 p'sukim 24:10 26 Eliezer (who is eclusively referred to as "The Servant" or "The Man", as opposed to by name his name never appears in Parshat Chayei Sara, where we would have considered him a major personality) takes ten camels laden with a splendid assortment of goods and travels to Avraham's hometown. Upon arrival, he ties the camels up near the well (and spring), towards evening, at the time that the local girls come to draw water. He asks G d to be kind to his master Avraham. Eliezer asks for a sign the girl who will offer him drink and also for his camels, she will be the one sent by G d. Almost before he finished speaking, Rivka bat Betu'el of Avraham's family arrives on the scene with her water container on her shoulder. Eliezer runs to her and asks for a bit of water. She immediately gives him his fill and then draws water for his camels. Anious to find out whether she was "the one", Eliezer waits until the camels have their ë 8Y drink and then presents Rivka with gifts of jewelry. (On the one hand, he has seen her kind nature and tireless act of chesed; on the other hand, he has not even asked her who she is.) When Rivka tells Eliezer that she is indeed from Avraham's family and invites him to stay at her home, he prostrates himself before G d in grateful acknowledgment. The Gemara in Taanit states that Eliezer servant of Avraham did not ask (something of G d) properly, but he was nonetheless answered in a fine manner. His "sign" could have resulted in an unsuitable shidduch for Yitzchak, but G d sent Rivka to him instead. Some sources fault Eliezer for relying on an omen or sign especially (or specifically) because he did not ask who she was before giving her "gifts". R'vi'i Fourth Aliya 26 p'sukim 24:27 52 Eliezer also says a blessing to G d for not abandoning Avraham or withholding Divine Kindness from him. Rivka runs home to tell her family what has happened. Lavan (filled with ulterior motives, our commentaries tell us) runs to greet Eliezer. The gold jewelry adorning Rivka catches Lavan's eye, and he "graciously" offers Eliezer hospitality. Eliezer is served food but refuses to eat until his "business" is completed. Eliezer proceeds to tell the story of

10 his mission. He tells of Avraham and Yitzchak and of being sent to find a wife for Yitzchak. When he asks for Rivka's hand on behalf of his master, Lavan and Betu'el (commentaries point to Lavan's pushing himself before his father as an indication of a negative personality trait) accept all as G d's will. Eliezer again prostrates himself before G d in grateful acknowledgment of the success of his mission. Chamishi Fifth Aliya 15 p'sukim 24:53 67 Eliezer gives more gifts to Rivka and her mother and brother, then they all celebrate with food and drink, and Eliezer and his party stay overnight. In the morning, Elizer asks his leave. Rivka's family asks that she remain for a year, or at least ten months (as was the custom in olden times) but Eliezer insists on leaving immediately. Rivka is consulted and she agrees to leave right away. They send her off with a "maid" (later identified as Devora) and bless her. (This blessing has been repeated countless times to Jewish brides throughout the generations. Ironic, is it not, that we use Lavan's words for such a special occasion.) Finally the entourage leaves for Canaan. Meanwhile, Yitzchak (having gone to bring Hagar back to Avraham) is in the Negev area and goes "into the field to commune, before evening". (This, we are taught, was the model for Mincha see Lead Tidbit.) As the Rivka Eliezer caravan approaches from a distance, Rivka sees Yitzchak, jumps down from her camel, and asks Eliezer who that man is. She covers her face with a veil when she is told that the man is her intended husband. Eliezer tells Yitzchak everything that has occurred. Yitzchak takes Rivka as his wife and she becomes a comfort to him for the loss of his mother. For us, she later becomes Rivka Imeinu. Rabbi Sholom Gold speculates as to how a girl growing up in the house of Betuel and Lavan can so quickly step into Sara Imeinu's shoes. His answer (beautifully developed in a shiur) is that it was D'vorah, Rivka's nursemaid, who was her teacher and influence in the ways of Sara. D'vorah was left behind when Avraham and Sara "made Aliya", for just this purpose. Shishi Sith Aliya 11 p'sukim 25:1 11 [P> 25:1 (11)] Avraham, having successfully provided for the continuity of what will become the Jewish Nation, now lives out the remainder of his life as a "private citizen", so to speak. He takes for himself a wife named KETURA (which we are taught was HAGAR) and fathers si more children. He gives them gifts, but Yitzchak remains Avraham's eclusive spiritual heir. (We can really say that in ë 9Y

11 some ways, other peoples of the world followed Avraham's lead in living monotheistic lives, but the Torah's definition of Avraham's lineage is Yitzchak.) On the question of the different treatment of Yishmael (banishment) and the children from Ketura (gifts), it can be eplained that there was a crucial difference between Yishmael and Ketura's children. Yishmael challenged Yitzchak's inheritance. He claimed (and in some ways continues to claim) Avraham's legacy. When G d told Avraham to listen to Sara, He told him to banish them, BECAUSE in Yitzchak will be called your offspring, your descentants. This point had to be made, and a farewell party and lavish provisions for the journey would not have made the point. No such problem with Ketura's children. They made no such claim. They did not dispute Yitzchak's role. They received gifts. Avraham dies at the "ripe old age" of 175 (actually, this is 5 years short of the complete 180 that Yitzchak achieved various reasons are given for the "lost" 5 years). His was a graceful, good, and fulfilling life (despite the tough times he had). He is buried in the Cave of Machpela, where he had buried Sara. Both Yitzchak and Yishmael take care of the burial. The Torah implies that Yishmael had repented his ways and had become righteous. What greater "nachas" for a father! G d blesses Yitzchak after Avraham's death. From the fact that Avraham took Ketura only after Yitzchak was married, the Baal HaTurim says that this is the proper thing to do Marry off your children, before you yourself remarry. Sh'VII Seventh Aliya 7 p'sukim 25:12 18 [P> 25:12 (7)] The descendants of Yishmael are now enumerated. Yishmael is identified fully as the son of Avraham and Hagar the Egyptian maiden of Sara who bore Yishmael "to Avraham". (This is quite parallel to the description of Yitzchak's connection to Avraham as stated in the beginning of net week's sedra. This might further indicate Yishmael's T'shuva in his later years.) It is noteworthy that Yishmael fathered twelve sons, not like Yitzchak, but like Yaakov. Note that both Nachor and Yishmael had their 12 descendants before we did (so to speak). This indicates a tougher life for the Jewish people (something that has been borne out over and over again in the course of Jewish History, right up to current events). Yishmael dies at the age of 100 and 30 and 7 years. The wording in the Torah (seems to) purposely parallels that which was used to describe Sara's lifespan, a further indication (perhaps) of the change for the better in Yishmael. Rashi says that the age of Yishmael is included to help us compute the ë 10Y

12 chronology of Yaakov. Last 3 p'sukim are reread for Maftir. Haftara 31 p'sukim Melachim Alef 1:1 31 The sedra tells of the aging Avraham and his task of providing for the continuity of his beliefs through his son Yitzchak (even though there were other potential heirs). The Haftara parallels this theme by telling us of the aging King David with many potential heirs, providing that it would be his son Shlomo who would be the net link in the Davidic line. This, fulfillment of a promise made to Shlomo's mother, Batsheva similar to the promise made to Sara that her son would inherit. The starting points are Avraham Avinu and David Hamelech. But no matter how strong their personalities were, the chain ends with them unless the net generation is as strong as a Yitzchak Avinu and a Shlomo Hamelech. THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Dean Lesson #450 (conclusion) Women as Participants in the Judicial Process With this lesson we hereby conclude (for now) the topic of women in the Beit Din system. (The role of a person in the Beit Din system is in the person of a litigant, whether the plaintiff or defendant, or in the person of a witness, or in the person of a judge.) We are, in this lesson, discussing the role of a woman as a witness. (The role of the woman as a litigant has been discussed in prior lessons; the role of the woman as a judge in the Beit Din system is left for future lessons, IYH) In a case that was decided about 40 years ago, Rav Menashe Klein (a prominent decisor of halacha, living in Brooklyn, NewYork), he wrote a responsum in which the question was discussed. (Responsa of Rav Menashe Klein, Mishna Halacha 5:269). He differed with the reasons that some of those who would deny women the right to testify, even in the limited cases where the Rama permits them to testify. Some stated that women could not testify since they were not trustworthy witnesses. R. Klein rejects this by showing that in many areas of ritual law, they were as trustworthy as men (for eample, taharat hamishpacha, kashrut, Shabbat). His reasoning is the opposite of the reasoning of the Maimonides school which is based on the same Torah source that also prohibited Moshe and his brother Aharon from acting as witnesses in the same matter, that is a decisive prohibition. As was stated in the prior lessons, there are many personal matters in which a woman may testify; for eample, that her husband had ë 11Y

13 died or that the husband of another woman had died. And in either case the woman may remarry. A nurse may testify which twin was born first so if he is the firstborn he will inherit a double portion of the estate. In most ritual matters a woman is believed. That the meal she serves is kosher; that the plates used are dairy or meat etc. There are still questions regarding the eligibility of women testifying in Beit Din regarding monetary matters. There is of course the holding of the Rama and the entire Ashkenazic school that in matters in which only a woman is apt to be present, where there is no time to prepare eligible witnesses, the woman may testify. Thus, in the case of an accident she would be able to testify. (Or what took place in a mikve where a woman was injured when she slipped; was it her fault or the fault of the mikve operator. Or if there was a fight between two women in the women's section of the synagogue, who started the fight?) The foregoing lessons show that some communities have qualified the prohibition against women testifying before Beit Din in certain ways. In some communities women may testify under the status of their declarations in the Beit Din not being direct testimony but informed observations; they tell the Beit Din what they saw rather than what they witnessed. (There is little difference, in essence, between a person testifying and stating what that person saw. The judges of the Beit Din are the ones who should try to make a distinction between the two.) Nowadays, both testimony and stating what a person saw are generally permitted. Another possible approach is by stipulation. There is a general principle that all legal stipulations between the parties regarding monetary ë 12Y matters are given effect by the Beit Din. This principle appears in the Talmud on at least five occasions and in Maimonides in several places as well as the Shulhan Aruch itself. (See T. Bava Metzi'a 51a and 94a; T. Kiddushin 19b; T. Ketuvot 56a; T. Baba Batra 126b; Maimonides, Laws of Sales 19:8; Laws of Marriage 12:9/9.) (See also Rama 16:2; R. Karo 2:5; 206:1 and 225:5.) Thus the judges advise the litigants and their attorneys before the start of the trial that they should stipulate (agree) that women may be called as witnesses by the parties (and by the judges if they are so advised) and their declarations should be treated as testimony the same as that of a man. In chapter 37 of Choshen Mishpat, R. Karo states that there is another eception. Ineligible witnesses may testify in matters affecting the community at large, since this is the accepted practice. The Rama adds that all these things depend upon the practice of the community. Moreover the entire chapter 22 of Choshen Mishpat deals with individual litigants accepting ineligible witnesses as eligible witnesses. It may be possible that the litigants who come before the Beit Din accept by kinyan women as witnesses in the case before them. Consider a responsum of a leading respondent R. Shimon ben Zemach Duran who lived in Majorca and Algiers from He was asked to pass upon a decree that was made by a small community. Most of the citizens of the community were related to each other and thus it would be difficult to find eligible witnesses since related witnesses may not testify in a lawsuit whether they are related to a litigant, to the judges or to

14 one another. They agreed and legislated that henceforth the ineligibility of relatives would not be raised as an issue in Beit Din. In a lengthy responsum in which he cites many of the sources cited in these lessons, he concludes that the decree is valid and binding. And although an individual who has accepted an ineligible witness to testify may change his mind before the Beit Din renders its decision, R. Solomon b. Adret [Rashba] stated that the interests of the community override this right. The majority may compel the minority to accept this procedure. Also R. Meir Rotenburg was asked to decide a similar question and decided the same way. He concluded his responsum by stating that the practice of the community has the force of Torah law. It is to be remembered that the word halacha means to move forward. In a day and age when women head governments; teach our children; and perform almost all of the tasks performed by men, there is very little rationale for women not being able to participate in the judicial process on the same footing as men. (As was stated at the outset the role of the woman as a judge in the Beit Din system is left for future lessons.) The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in A Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint. Copies of all volumes can be purchased at local Judaica bookstores. Questions to quint@inter.net.il Spiritual and Ethical Issues in the Bamidbar Stories by Dr. Meir Tamari And your camp shall be holy ; The Nazir [5] Although the Nazir is seen as a holy person sanctified to G d, this type of sanctification highlights the difficulties seen by the commentators of achieving a balance between the heightened spirituality and the negative possibilities inherent in such an undertaking. The discussions center round the anomaly of the Nazir, being holy to G d yet having to bring a sin offering at the completion of the period of his vow. There seems to be an undertone running through all the various concepts of what the sin of the Nazir is. This is the fact of a powerful yetzer hara that can only be overcome by him through the denial of the legitimate enjoyments and satisfaction of normal bodily desires. The anomaly of the Nazir's sin offering is heightened by the comment of S'forno: "In all the cases of purification, the person required a holy person, the Kohen, to accompany him to the Ohel Moed, whereas regarding the Nazir, the Torah writes 'and he shall bring himself'', since we cannot find somebody holier than the Nazir himself." "And the Kohen shall offer one dove as an olah, elevated offering, and the other dove as a sin offering, and effect atonement for him for having sinned" (Bamidbar 6:11). What can be the sin of men and women whom the Torah itself calls 'holy to G d'? Rabbi Elazar taught that if the Torah called somebody 'holy who merely ë 13Y

15 refrained from wine, how much more so would somebody who denies himself the enjoyment of other things, be called 'holy'? The Nazir is called a sinner only because he defiled himself by contact with a dead body" (Ta'anit 11a). "We find that the Torah uses the phrase, 'if a person should die near him with quick suddenness and contaminate him" regarding the Nazir but not regarding a Kohen who also must keep himself from Tum'at Meit. This is because the Nazir who denies himself things that the Torah does not, eposes himself to the dangers of suddenly and unepectedly transgressing his restrictions in a manner that the Kohen who is only limited by the restrictions of the Torah" (Reb Baruch of Mastuchin). Perhaps the story of Shimshon, eemplifies this approach? Although possessed of great physical strength, nevertheless, he was overcome by unepectedly transgressing. "Shmuel taught that whoever indulges in fasting is dubbed a sinner. This is as the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer HaKapar regarding the verse 'and make atonement for him, that he sinned by the soul', by which soul then did he sin? We must conclude that it refers to his denying himself the enjoyment of wine. If one who merely denied himself the enjoyment of wine is called a sinner, how much more so does this apply to a person who denies himself the other pleasures of life" (Ta'anit 11a). "The early Chassidim, when they wanted to make an Olah offering or a Thanks offering, both of which are free will offerings, they would simply do so. However, they did not volunteer to become a Nazir who also brings such offerings, since they did not want to be called sinners" (Nedarim 10a). "Therefore our Sages commanded one only to deny oneself those thing that the Torah denied him. One should not inflict on oneself oaths or vows of abstinence from those things that the Torah permits. Is it not sufficient for us to refrain from those things that the Torah forbade, that we have to refrain from other things? As it is written (Mishlei 7:16), 'be not righteous overmuch' "(Hilkhot Dei'ot 3: 1). Rambam follows the teaching of Rabbi Eliezer HaKapar in seeing the Torah's defining the Nazir as a sinner a warning against fasting, mortification of the flesh and similar endorsements of a life of denial; the opposite of his famous middle of the road philosophy. "The Torah writes about the Nazir who sits in his Nezirut that he is one who remains static in a certain religious and spiritual level. This is contrary to the correct way in which a man should always be "mehalech", walking or striding forward, as G d said to Avraham, arise, "hithalech", walk before and be perfect'. Some additional self imposed temporary and limited restrictions and abstention can serve as a stimulus to greater spiritual efforts and religiosity, but the sin of the Nazir is that he remains only in his original spirituality" (Chatan Sofer). Using the plain sense of the verse regarding the need to bring a sin offering, Ramban comments: "This man sins against himself when, at the end of the period of his abstinence he forsakes his vows. He had separated himself to be ë 14Y

16 holy to G d and is compared to the prophet. He was obligated to remain at the same high spiritual level and now that he decides to defile himself he is considered a sinner". "In general the Chatat offering precedes the Olah since purity from sin is always the preliminary stage of sanctifying ones actions. However, in some cases, as in the case of Nazir, there is a reversal of this order of sur mi ra, desist from evil, and then asei tov, do good. Where there was an actual sin committed the stress is on the chatat which has to be brought first before there can any elevation of the spiritual symbolized by the olah. But where no actual sin has sin has been committed so that the chatat is only the epression of an undertaking of future firmness in avoiding the sin, then the m the stress is on the olah, the spiritual elevating influence that precedes the chatat. This is the case both with the Nazir and with the Yoledet" (S R. Hirsch). MISC section contents: [1] Vebbe Rebbe [2] Candle by Day [3] From Aloh Naaleh [4] Wisdom and Wit [5] Parsha Points to Ponder [6] Portion from the Portion [7] micro Ulpan [8] Torah from Nature [9] Guest Article [10] Divrei Menachem [1] From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE The Orthodo Union via its website fields questions of all types in areas of kashrut, Jewish law and values. Some of them are answered by Eretz Hemdah, the Institute for Advanced Jewish Studies, Jerusalem, headed by Rav Yosef Carmel and Rav Moshe Ehrenreich, founded by HaRav Shaul Yisraeli zt"l, to prepare rabbanim and dayanim to serve the National Religious community in Israel and abroad. Ask the Rabbi is a joint venture of the OU, Yerushalayim Network, Eretz Hemdah... and the Israel Center. The following is a Q&A from Eretz Hemdah... ë 15Y I know that if two people want to do a ZIMUN and a third does not Q want to yet, the two can force the third to answer. What about if there are five or si people? Can two of them pick one to force to join them? The Gemara (B'rachot 45b) says that if three eat together, one stops A to answer for two who want to bentch, but two do not stop for one. Rashi eplains that one should show proper manners to answer, implying that there is no halachic imperative that he must take a break in his eating to do so. However, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 200:1) rules like the Rishonim who say that it is halachically required for the third to answer, and even if he refuses to answer, the two (only) fulfill the requirement of zimun. In order to answer your question, regarding two who want to use a third when there are more than three participants in the meal, we need to under stand the reasoning behind the halacha above. Poskim eplain that it is based on the concept of rov (majority) (Birkei Yosef, OC 200:5; Mishna Berura 200:2). The minority that is

17 not yet ready to bentch has to follow the majority of the group that is interested. According to important poskim, this idea of ROV can be etended to other groups. The Eliyah Rabba (OC 200:6), for eample, says that si who want to do a zimun with Hashem's Name also create a majority to force four to answer. If the matter depends on ROV, it does not appear that a minority of a group can force a majority or even two sub groups of the same number of people cannot force one another to do a zimun. The Birkei Yosef (200:5) assumes simply that which the Eliyah Rabba implies: five cannot make five answer. One could claim that the important thing is to have a majority of the necessary quorum who are ready to bentch and then they can use whomever they want. Thus two could force any one they wanted, while five, which is only half way to the zimun of ten, could not. However, the language of the poskim implies that it is a matter of deciding when the most appropriate time is for the group to do the zimun. There is no reason to assume that two can select one from the main group and turn him into their minority. The eact definition of what constitutes a ROV in this regard is important for the following common case. One person wants to bentch, and a second is not yet finished but is interested in helping his friend and agrees to be the second. Can those two force the third? The Birkei Yosef (ibid.) (discussing five and five with one of the "non bentchers" volunteering) leans toward the view that he cannot. The person who volunteers is still not an interested party who creates a ROV who are bentching. On the other hand, Rav Kook (Orach Mishpat, OC 40) leans toward the approach that even when only one of the two is bentching now, the two can force the third. His ë 16Y impression is based on the following Gemara (B'rachot 45b). Rav Papa was eating with his son and a third person. Only his son was ready to bentch, and Rav Papa accommodated him. The Gemara says that Rav Papa had gone beyond the letter of the law in agreeing. Rav Kook understands that once Rav Papa agreed, the third's willingness was irrelevant. (One can deflect the proof and say that, given Rav Papa's stature, it was clear that the third person would not object.) It seems that a majority of poskim accept the Birkei Yosef's approach that only two who are actually bentching can force a third. In practice, most people do accommodate their friends anyway, which is good. (Vaya'an Avraham (OC 16) suggests the possibility that if the second agrees because he is halachically required to respect the person who wants to bentch, it would be considered a ROV; he himself rejects the suggestion). It is worthwhile to recall that, for Ashkenazim, when someone answers zimun before bentching, he must wait until the end of the first b'racha before resuming eating (Rama, OC 200:2) Ask the Rabbi Q&A is part of Hemdat Yamim, the weekly parsha sheet published by Eretz Hemdah. You can read this section or the entire Hemdat Yamim at or And/or you can receive Hemdat Yamim by weekly, by sending an to info@eretzhemdah.org with the message: Subscribe/English (for the English version) or Subscribe/Hebrew (for the hebrew version). Please leave the subject blank. Ask the Vebbe Rebbe is partially funded by the Jewish Agency for Israel

18 [2] Candle by Day The very eistence of the word "mood" in our vocabulary shows how insensitive we are to our emotions. A feeling whose cause we cannot eplain we call a "mood". If its cause were suddenly sensed, it would be a mood no longer. We use the word "mood" as we use the word "virus", not a label for some known causative factor, but as a euphemism for "cause unknown". From "A Candle by Day" by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein A Candle by Day The Antidote The World of Chazal by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein Now available at [3] CHIZUK and IDUD for Olim & not yet Olim respectively "Yitzchak went out to (lasu'ach) meditate in the field towards evening..." (B'reishit 24:63) What was Yitzchak thinking about that he felt the need to go out into the field to meditate? Perhaps the answer can be found in another place where the "field" takes on special importance. When Yosef is sent by Yaacov to look for his brothers, the Torah says, "A person (Gavriel) found him (to'eh) wandering in the field (37:15) The Kli Yakar points out that the word "to'eh" can also mean "making a mistake". Gavriel told Yosef that he is mistaken if he doesn't believe that his brothers would hurt him, let alone try to kill him because of something as insignificant as his robe. Gavriel tells Yosef that Kayin killed Hevel for a lot less, because jealousy has no rhyme nor reason. Here too, Yitzchak may have been thinking about the tragedy of Kayin and Hevel as it related to his own brother, Yishmael, wondering how brothers could harm one another without cause. Perhaps that is why the gimatriya katan for "suach", meditate, is the same as the combination of words, Kayin/Hevel (17). In Eretz Yisrael there is a special need to be careful of the sin of jealousy. We are brothers and the land cannot broach the pain brothers cause to each other. The punishment for such jealousy is wandering and eile. Now that we are finally on our land, can we afford to be to'eh? Yaacov Peterseil, Jerusalem THOUGHTS as contributed by Aloh Naaleh members for publication in the Orthodo Union's 'Torah Insights', a weekly Torah publication on Parshat HaShavu'a [4] Wisdom & Wit When R' Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook was the Rav of Yafo, a woman who had a miserable marriage finally left her husband and went back to live with her parents. Both she and her husband were originally from Bialystok. She, of course, wanted a divorce, but her husband simply refused to even consider it. This situation continued for about two years. Finally, after much persuasion, the husband consented to give his wife a get. Rav Kook, of course, immediately summoned his Beit Din, and checked carefully regarding the couple's eact names. The eact Hebrew names of the couple are a basic requirement for a get, and any error renders the get invalid. Once he had checked the names thoroughly, Rav Kook had the sofer scribe write up the get document. Then, just as the husband ë 17Y

19 was about to hand the get to the wife, the final act in a divorce, Rav Kook announced that since there was a minyan of men present, they should first pray the Mincha service. This they did. Rav Kook took an inordinately long time to pray, and by the time he had finished, it was already twilight. To the consternation of all those present, he announced that as it was already after sunset, the get document had the wrong date on it, and the whole procedure would have to be repeated the net day, with a new get written up. Of course, many people were horrified, fearing that the husband might change his mind overnight, but once the Rav had ruled, there was nothing they could do. That night, Rav Kook had a visitor, who just happened to be from Bialystok. As they were speaking, the Rav mentioned the divorce case he had heard that day. It so happened that the man knew the couple. "You are referring to Esther Rivka," said the guest. "No, she told me clearly that her name is Rivel," said Rav Kook. "That is wrong," said the guest. "Her name is Esther Rivka, although she preferred to be called Rivel." Rav Kook was astounded, because had the get document have gone through with "Rivel" as the name, the get would not have been valid, and she would have remained a married woman. The net day, when the proceedings were resumed, Rav Kook questioned the woman carefully about her name, and found out that her name was indeed Esther Rivka. She, however, preferred the name Rivel, and simply thought that that should not make a difference. Finally, a second get document was written up, with the woman's correct name, and she received her get. ë 18Y The entire city was agog at how Rav Kook's delaying the get had prevented a calamity from occurring. Had the incorrect get have gone through, she might have "married" someone else, and then all the children of her new "marriage" would be mamzerim. Some people attributed Rav Kook's actions to special Divine inspiration, but he had an entirely different eplanation for his actions. "You see," he eplained to one of his friends, "I had a very different problem. One of the two witnesses who signed on the get is a man who sent me personal letters on stationery with the letterhead of the company for which he worked. That is theft, and such a person is considered a thief. A thief is not a valid witness to a get. Had the man signed as a witness, the get would not have been valid. I certainly didn't want to do anything in public that would embarrass the man, but I could not let the get go through. Thus I came up with my stratagem of praying Mincha and forcing the get to be written the following day. Of course, the following day I managed to have a different man sign as the witness to the get." Shmuel Himelstein has written a wonderful series for ArtScroll: Words of Wisdom, Words of Wit; A Touch of Wisdom, A Touch of Wit; and "Wisdom and Wit" available at your local Jewish bookstore (or should be). Ecerpted with the permission of the copyright holder [5] Parsha Points to Ponder CHAYEI SARA 1) Why does the Torah repeat the fact that Avraham acquired the field from Efron (see 23:17 18 and 23:30)? 2) Why does Rivka trace herself back to her grandmother, Milka, instead of simply

20 saying that she was the daughter of Betuel? 3) Why was Yitzchak not blessed, either by G D or by Avraham, while Avraham was still alive (see 25:11)? POSSIBLE ANSWERS... Ponder the questions first, then read here 1) The Ohr HaChayim eplains that there were two steps to the acquisition. In step one, Avraham paid Efron the money (verse 16) which relinquished Efron's rights to the land. However, it still did not completely belong to Avraham until he made a "chazaka" on the land until he did something with the land. That took place with the burial (verse 19). The Torah recorded each step of the acquisition after each of those steps took place, thus eplaining the repetition. 2) Rav Yonatan Eibushitz answers that Milka was apparently older than Sarah since she was written first (11:29 (AVI MILKA V'AVI YISKA according to our Sages, Yiska was Sarah). The Torah teaches that right after the Akeida, Avraham heard that Milka gave birth to children. Therefore, Milka probably gave birth shortly before that. Sarah was 127 years old at the time of the Akeida so Milka was clearly older when she gave birth and her births were also miraculous. Rivka figured that referencing Milka would link her to these miraculous births in a positive way since miracle births of this kind would only happen if she was destined to have special offspring. 3) The Kli Yakar teaches that G D did not want to bless Yitzchak while Avraham was alive since G D had told Avraham that he would be the one to bestow blessings (see 12:2). Avraham was concerned about blessing Yitzchak since he did not want those blessings to come to fruition for Esav ë 19Y as well. Thus, Yitzchak first received blessing from G D after Avraham's death. Parsha Points to Ponder is prepared by Rabbi Dov Lipman, who teaches at Reishit Yerushalayim and Machon Maayan in Beit Shemesh and is the author of "DISCOVER: Answers for Teenagers (and adults) to Questions about the Jewish Faith" (Feldheim) and "TIMEOUT: Sports Stories as a Game Plan for Spiritual Success" just released by Devora Publishing. ppp@ouisrael.org [6] by Rakel Berenbaum FEEDback to berenbau@gmail.com 400 SHEKELS WORTH OF LAND Hevron is again in the news with Arab violence and the Jewish court system evicting Jews from homes they rightfully purchased from their Arab neighbors. They just don't leave us alone to live in Hevron in peace and quiet. In this week's portion we witness Avraham buying a tomb from the children of Cheit for his wife Sara precisely in Hebron. So many verses are used to cover this transaction (23:1 20). And this is not the only place where we are informed about Avraham's purchase. When Yaakov is on his death bed and asks his children not to bury him in Egypt but rather to carry his bones to be buried in Hevron he repeats all the details of the sale of this portion of land. Why the need for all this detail and repetition?

21 Ramban thinks that this section is one of the ten trials that Avraham had to go through. G d had promised him that the whole land of Israel would belong to him and here he is forced to pay money to buy a small portion of it. The Hitites obviously didn't respect the BRIT BEIN HABETARIM, the covenant where G d promised Avraham the land of Israel. They went out of their way to prevent Avraham and his descendants from acquiring such land. They made a law among their inhabitants not to give or sell him any land similar to the "White Paper" that was enacted by the British as a reaction to the Balfour declaration (OZNAIM LATORAH). So Avraham had to negotiate with them. He finally paid Efron the overpriced sum of 400 silver shekels for the field and cave of Makhpelah. For all of you math fans out there, don't miss the Vilna Gaon's commentary on verse (23:15). "400 shekels worth of land." Why this price? A BEIT S'AH a piece of land large enough to produce a S'AH measure of grain must be AMA (i.e sq. AMOT). If a person wanted a piece of land 600,000 sq. AMA then he would need 240 BEIT S'AH, which is 8 BEIT KUR. Our Rabbis have said that at the burial of a TZADIK, righteous person, there should be 600,000 people just like at MATAN TORAH, the receiving of the TORAH (Ketuvot 17). And each person needs a sq. AMA of space. Since Avraham wanted to show respect to Sara because she had been a righteous person, he bought a piece of land that would hold 600,000 people i.e. 8 BEIT KUR. And the HALACHA teaches us that a ë 20Y person who dedicates a field the size of a BEIT KUR to the Temple, if he wants to redeem it, he must pay 50 shekel (Arachin 25). If you do the calculation based on the value mentioned in ARACHIN the price of 8 BEIT KUR would be (8 50 = 400) 400 shekel and that's how much Avraham paid. If all that math is too complicated, the main message to remember from all this repetition about the purchase of the cave is that this is the "uncontested property of Abraham" (23:20). The lesson of these verses is no less important for us to remember today as Avraham's descendants as it was in the time of our forefathers. THIS WEEK'S RECIPE are cookies that represent the coins that passed hands between Avraham and Efron. 400 (grams) of Silver Cookies 400 gr. filo dough, "batseik Alim" sugar, cinnamon silver sugar pellets Cut dough into circles, sprinkle with cinnamon and sugar and silver sugar pellets decorations. Bake at 180C until lightly brown. [7] MicroUlpan Matches = GAFRURIM Matchbo = KUFSAT GAFRURIM Matchbook = OTFAN GAFRURIM Friction strip = PAS CHIKUCH (for striking safety matches) Matchstick = KEISAM (wood or cardboard)

22 [8] Torah from Nature 21st century (so far) mammals We've written about recently discovered mammals in Torah Tidbits from time to time. It continues to amaze people that such a relatively well studied class of animals will keep presenting the world with new members. Of course, a newly discovered animal is not really new. It's been around for quite a while, but we just never knew about them. In many cases, the animals were known to local peoples, but the world at large was oblivious to their eistence. Here is a partial listing of species of mammals discovered since the year At least five new species of marsupials (pouched animals) have been discovered since 2000, including the Arfak Pygmy Bandicoot, the Mountain Brush tailed Possum, and the Red bellied Gracile Opossum... The Pygmy Three toed Sloth was named in at least 25 new species of primate have been described, including 16 lemurs and nine monkeys... including the Goodman's Mouse Lemur of Madagascar, pictured below... the Black Pika, the Venezuelan Lowland Rabbit, the Annamite Striped Rabbit New rodents include the Cypriot mouse and the Laotian rock rat... At least 30 new species of bat... And the list goes on... ë 21Y [9] Guest article by Rabbi Ephraim Sprecher Dean of Students, Diaspora Yeshiva How can we escape our worries and fears today when we are confronted by the global financial meltdown and terrorism? The Rambam was asked a similar question in his Sefer, HANHAGAT HaB'RI'UT. In this medical book, the Rambam writes that there are numerous psychosomatic illnesses and there are also organic illnesses which are worsened by mental depression. Those worries and fears, besides being bad for the patient, also cause numerous other problems. Rambam provides the solution the Fear of G d. When someone fears G d, he serves Him in joy. As it says, "Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright of heart" (T'hilim 97:11). A person derives happiness from serving G d. Yet if someone's entire focus in this world is just physical pleasure and acquiring possessions, then when something goes wrong he will plunge into depression and grief. In "Guide of the Perpleed", Rambam devotes two chapters to IYOV (Job). In verses 3:22 23 of Iyov, Iyov's friends try to calm him down, but in vain. However, by the end of the book Iyov is calmed down. What change has he undergone? Have his troubles ceased? No! Not at all! His troubles are still with him, but his relationship to them has changed. At the beginning of the book, "Iyov sits among the ashes" (2:8). In other words, he is enveloped in earthly concerns. Yes, he is righteous, but materialism and physical possessions are very important to him. Therefore, when his world collapses, when his wealth is lost, and his children die, he becomes seriously ill. He becomes deeply depressed and broken in spirit.