Yitro
Yitro, 22 Shvat 5773
The Living Dead
Harav Yosef Carmel
Our haftara opens with the proclamation that the very powerful and profound vision that Yeshaya saw took place
in the year that King Uziyahu died (Yeshaya 6:1). We have discussed in the past the opinion in Chazal that this does
not refer to Uziyahu’s biological death, but to the time that he became a leper and was forced to “retire.” At that time,
his son Yotam became the de facto king.
Yotam was well described by his name, which hints at completeness in righteousness. The first two letters of his
name hint at Hashem’s name and the final two letters spell tam, meaning complete or righteous. In fact, Yotam is the
only king, including the righteous ones, of whom there is no hint of sin or criticism. There is no mention of problematic
behavior – not in Melachim, nor in Divrei Hayamim, nor in the words of the prophets who operated in his time
(Hoshea, Amos, Yeshaya, and Micha).
There is extreme praise for Yotam in the writings of Chazal. The gemara in Sukka (45b), for example, says that if
the merit of Yotam were added on to those of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and his son they could save the world from
the time of its creation until the end of time. Rashi (ad loc.) said the following: “Yotam ben Uziyahu was a righteous
man, who was more humble than other kings. He merited to show honor to his father, and for this reason, the pasuk
“a son shall honor his father” (Malachi 1:6) is attributed to him, for all the days that his father suffered from leprosy and
Yotam would judge the people, as it says ‘Yotam the son of the king was over the palace judging’ (Melachim II, 15:5),
he did not wear the crown during his [father’s] life, and all the rulings he rendered he did in his father’s name.” Rabbi
Tzaddok Hacohen said that he was the completion of King Shlomo, as there was nothing lacking in him.
A couple weeks ago we discussed the phenomenon of passages in the Prophets that do not seem to work out
from a historical perspective. This phenomenon occurs in regard to Yotam, as well. The navi, speaking about the
parallel king of the Northern Tribes of Israel, says that Hoshea ben Elah became king during the twentieth year of the
reign of Yotam (Melachim II, 15:30). This is difficult because Yotam was king for only sixteen years and was
succeeded by Achaz, who was a wicked king. One of the answers of the author of Seder Olam (a historical work from
a scholar of the Talmudic period) is that the navi preferred to date to the beginning of Yotam’s reign, after he died,
rather than to Achaz, while he lived.
We now see the completion of the circle. Yotam’s father was a sinner who was considered dead when he was
alive, and Yotam, his righteous son, was considered alive when he was dead. Life and death can refer to moral
statuses rather than biological ones.
Let us pray for a “resurrection of the dead,” in the form of a return of the whole nation to proper values, and a
realization that spiritual elevation and performing good deeds are more important than material gain.
Hemdat Yamim
is endowed by
Les & Ethel Sutker
of Chicago, Illinois
in loving memory of
Max and Mary Sutker
and
Louis and Lillian Klein, z”l
This edition of
Hemdat Yamim
is dedicated
to the memory of
R' Meir
ben Yechezkel Shraga
Brachfeld o.b.m
Yitro
Hamapil for Those Who Take a Long Time to Fall Asleep
by Rav Daniel Mann
Question: I recently discontinued the practice of saying Hamapil because I don’t fall asleep quickly, and I find that I
sometimes end up talking. Besides Rav Moshe Shternbach’s opinion not to recite Hamapil, am I justified?
Answer: Reciting the beracha of Hamapil is mandated by the gemara (Berachot 60b) and codified as halacha
(Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 239:1). We say it in conjunction with Kriat Shema prior to going to bed, which is also
an obligation, and other p’sukim and texts that relate to our desire for divine protection while sleeping. There are
different opinions as to the order of recitation, but the prevalent one is to say Kriat Shema, then Hamapil, and then the
other p’sukim (see Mishna Berura 239:2). Hamapil’s main content is to thank Hashem for the benefits of sleep and
request a pleasant sleep without fright or improper thoughts.
Your reference to Rav Shternbach is apparently a mistake. He just conjectures (in Teshuvot V’hanhagot II:131)
why many individuals and some prominent groups do not say Hamapil (we will mention one of his ideas). In the final
analysis, he says that the problems that may arise are overshadowed by the need to follow the gemara.
Let us see the extent of the problem to speak between Hamapil and falling asleep, which will help determine
whether you made the right choice. The gemara says that one makes the beracha as he prepares to lie down in bed
to sleep. The Rama (OC 239:1) says that one should not eat, drink, or talk between Kriat Shema and actually
sleeping. Most assume that this applies as much or more to interruptions between Hamapil and sleeping.
A break could be particularly problematic after Hamapil for two reasons. First, if one made a break after Kriat
Shema, he can repeat Kriat Shema upon returning to bed, whereas one cannot recite Hamapil, which is a beracha, at
will (Mishna Berura 239:4). Furthermore, there is a fundamental question as to Hamapil’s function. The Chayei Adam
(35:4) says that the beracha is a general thanks to Hashem for providing sleep, and it is appropriate to recite it at
night, when people generally go to sleep. He says that the beracha was appropriate even if one did not end up falling
asleep, because other people did sleep. This is similar to the idea of reciting Birkot Hashachar for things from which
people benefit in the morning, even for one who did not benefit that day (Shulchan Aruch, OC 46:8). On the other
hand, many cite the Seder Hayom, who says that Hamapil should be said very close to the time one falls asleep, as
the beracha relates to one’s personal sleep. The Biur Halacha (239:1) strengthens this opinion by pointing out that
Hamapil was composed in the first person, implying it refers to the sleep of the one reciting the beracha (see Shaarei
Teshuva 46:12). Rav Shternbach (ibid.) understood that those who do not recite it reason that it must be said close to
falling asleep and it is hard to determine when that will be.
The Biur Halacha is uncomfortable deciding between these two approaches and recommends not reciting
Hamapil if one is not confident he will fall asleep. The Biur Halacha does not uproot the obligation out of concern that
one will unexpectedly not fall sleep.
We will take a similar approach for you. If you have specific reason to believe you will be unable to refrain from
speaking before falling asleep, then it may be safer to not make the beracha (even though we prefer the opinion that
your intention at the time of the beracha is the critical factor- see Yechaveh Da’at IV:21). If you recite Hamapil and a
long time passes before you fall asleep, it is unclear how great the need has to be to be allowed to speak or eat (see
Ishei Yisrael 35:9 and Piskei Teshuvot 239:3). We believe that one can be lenient on the matter (see Tzitz Eliezer
VII:27). However, if you want to avoid the situation of doubt of whether you can eat or talk for an extended period of
time, you can wait until you are getting closer to falling asleep to recite Hamapil. If you fall asleep before reciting it,
you are not to be blamed.
“Living the Halachic Process”
We proudly announce the publication of our second book in English.
“Living the Halachic Process volume II” a selection of answers to questions from our Ask the Rabbi
project. A companion CD containing source sheets for the questions is also available.
In honor of the book’s debut, we offer it at the special rate of $25
Special offer: buy both volumes for the price of $40.
Contact us at [email protected]
Have a question?..... E-mail us at
[email protected]
Yitro
Modesty Distancing Dangers
(condensed from Ein Ayah, Berachot 9:243)
Gemara: Rabbi Tanchum bar Chanilai said: Whoever is modest in the bathroom will be saved from three things:
snakes, scorpions, and demons. Some say that his dreams will also be orderly and pleasant for him.
Ein Ayah: A person must protect his special status as a human being even when he is forced to perform things that
are connected to his animalistic nature. All sorts of damages and dangers befall a person when his nature lowers him
to animalistic behavior. In contrast, a person who is of the highest caliber and never compromises his dignity will be
saved from all loss because of the elevation of value that he receives as a result of his behavior.
There are three categories of damages in the world. The first category is damages that come from a clear
“damager,” which is capable of doing damage even if the victim did nothing to make himself susceptible to it. This type
is represented by the snake. When one works on the level of the divine image within him (i.e., modesty), even when
he is involved in animalistic activities (i.e., in the bathroom), his aura of holiness will cause his enemies to want to
reconcile with him and not attempt to hurt him while he possesses such charm.
The second category of a damager is one which causes damage without making a conscious decision to do so.
This is represented by the scorpion, which moves its tail and stings without necessarily planning to do so. This
category of damage to people occurs when one forgets to concentrate on his intellectual side, which is a danger when
one allows his animalistic side to become overly strong. If a person remains focused on his intellectual side, he will
not be so susceptible to this type of danger.
The third category of danger is one that a person is himself responsible for having created. The example that
represents this category is the mazikin (demons). If not for the “preparation” provided by a person’s imagination, there
would be no damage. Indeed, without one’s imagination, there are no mazikin, which are a product of one’s
imagination. The way “demons” cause damage is by affecting one’s spirit to the point that this has a trickle-down
effect on the body as well. The damage of this type can only occur when one’s intellect is weakened, for, otherwise,
one’s imagination is not able to cause damage.
Dreams come up in a confused, upsetting manner only when one’s control over his intellectual side is weak.
Then one’s materialistic and imaginative side takes control over him, and his imagination can be petrifying and
confusing. However, a person who is stable, so that even when he is sleeping his intellectual side still provides
balance for him, will maintain order and balance in his dreams as well. They will remain close to the logical and far
away from the wild imagination that can upset a person so badly.
Responsa B'mareh Habazak, Volumes I, II, III, IV, V, VI and now VII:
Answers to questions from Diaspora rabbis. The questions give expression to the unique situation that
Jewish communities around the world are presently undergoing. The answers deal with a developing
modern world in the way of “deracheha, darchei noam”. The books deal with the four sections of the
Shulchan Aruch, while aiming to also take into consideration the “fifth section”
which makes the Torah a “Torah of life.”
Special Price: $15 for one book or
$90 for 7 volumes of Responsa Bemareh Habazak (does not including shipping)
Yitro
Returning Tuition When a Student Was Expelled – part II
(from Hemdat Mishpat, rulings of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
Case: A student was expelled in the middle of the year from a yeshiva for not living up to the minimum expectations
of its staff. The yeshiva demands full tuition because of a clause in the contract stating that if the student leaves the
yeshiva after a certain date, he must pay in full. The sides disagree as to whether this condition applies to a student
who was expelled.
Ruling: [Last time we saw that the contract’s context implies that the parents do not need to pay in full, but that
since they already paid, it is difficult to extract a refund based on this implication alone.]
Tuition is compensation for one providing education, and if the service was not provided, it would seem that tuition
is not due from parents who are not responsible for their son’s behavior. We must look at sources relating to services
that were discontinued due to an oness (extenuating circumstance). The gemara (Bava Metzia 78b-79a) discusses
such cases including one who was hired to irrigate, which became unnecessary due to rain. If the two sides were
equally aware or unaware of the chance of such a scenario, the worker does not get paid.
The gemara also discusses one who rented a ship for cargo and the ship sank. The halacha is that the renter
does not have to pay the rental fee, but if he did, he does not get a refund. There are two approaches to the logic of
this distinction. Tosafot says that early payment is a sign of relinquishing one’s rights in a case like this. The Rosh
(Bava Metzia 6:3) says that in many such cases, it is not clear which side is correct, and so we revert to the broad rule
of having the person with possession win.
In a parallel case, where someone rented a house and died during the lease period, the Rashba (I:1028) says
that the inheritors must continue paying because a renter acquires rights and obligations of the house. The Maharam
MiRutneberg disagrees. The Rama (CM 334:1) cites both opinions and rules that they do not pay, but if the rent was
paid, they do not get a refund. The Gra (334:5) applies the Rama’s distinction only to renting a house, due to the
opinion that the house is acquired, but regarding a worker whose work was discontinued, the money is returned even
if it was paid. The S’ma (334:3) says that the Rama’s distinction applies even to a worker.
In this case, according to the minority opinion of beit din, since it is unclear whether the yeshiva deserves money
for the period they did not teach the student, they do not have to return the tuition. According to the majority opinion,
though, the yeshiva has to return the additional tuition for two reasons: 1. There is a strong assumption that parents
would not agree to pay under such circumstances. 2. The yeshiva was not compelled to expel the student but decided
(legitimately) that it was not in their best interests. They cannot make that decision and refuse to refund the money.
Only if the student’s behavior left no choice would it make sense to allow them to keep the full tuition.
Mishpetei Shaul
Unpublished rulings by our mentor, Maran Hagaon HaRav Shaul Yisraeli zt”l
in his capacity as dayan at the Israeli Supreme Rabbinical Court.
The book includes halachic discourse with some of our generation’s greatest poskim.
The special price in honor of the new publication is $20.
Do you want to sign your contract according to Halacha?
The Rabbinical Court, “ Eretz Hemdah - Gazit ”
Tel: (077) 215-8-215
[email protected]
Fax: (02) 537-9626
Eretz Hemdah - Gazit serves the public in the matter of dispute resolution
according to the Halacha in a manner that is accepted by the law of the land.
While drawing up a contract, one can include a provision which assigns
the court jurisdiction to serve as an agreed upon arbitrator.
Eretz Hemdah is the premier institution for training young rabbis to take the Israeli Rabbinate's
rigorous Yadin Yadin examinations. Eretz Hemdah, with its distinctive blend of Religious Zionist
philosophy and scholarship combined with community service, ensures that its graduates eme rge with
the finest training, the noblest motivations resulting in an exceptionally strong connection to
Jewish communities worldwide.