"I always ask students if their dog and a stranger (person) were drowning, who would they save.One third say the dog, one third say the
stranger, and one third can't decide. When I ask someone who answered "the stranger", "Was the person who said 'the dog' wrong", I am invariably told that everyone has to do what they feel is best." Dennis Prager (quoted in Reader's Digest)

"See, I (G-d) have given you today blessings and curse (blessings for following the Torah, curses for not)..." (Divorim 11:26) The Sforno says that in Judaism we have many areas that are, objectively, good or bad--not subject to cultural, social, or personal values.

Intermarriage, abortion, euthanasia, and same sex marriages, to name a few issues, have certainly gone through cultural changes, but for us G-d's Torah is eternally true!!

Have a great Shabbos !!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Rabbi Mitterhoff,

In the Tur Haaroch,it is mentioned that we should take notice to the fact that if we are to choose between good & bad, what is the Torah stipulating here the ideal of 'seeing'?[Re'eh?]His answer: unlike someone playing a lottery, where the winning number is concealed, Hashem says to us-Re'eh-! See with your eyes the good path-the winning number- all you have to do is TAKE it- choose life !

Thanks. That Tur is something that I could use in a future dvar Torah

See the Sifri on our pasuq. It concludes by pointing out that Hashem went beyond the "call of duty" (as it were). He didn't simply lay out the alternatives, Hashem then tells you "Choose life!" -- which alternative to choose!

Before that is an interesting machloqes between R' Eliezer ben R' Yossi haGelili (given in two versions, with two different proof texts) and his brother, R' Yossi ben R' Yossi haGelili. R' Eliezer seems to imply that our pasuq is saying the choice is between good vs bad consequences; in other words, that our choice CAUSES the reward or punishment. On the other hand, R' Yosi speaks more directly about Hashem meting it out indiviually. (With thanks to R' Meir Levin for pointing this out.)

I have a question on the Parasha Re'eh:

My wife and I had an argument about whether the places to worship and bring one's offerings were situated inside or out-side the walls/gates of the 'settlements'.

We both agree that the place to bring the offerings for the Passover/Pesach, Week of Feasts/Shavuot and Feast of Booths/Succot were to be 'a place that G-d will choose' - but we disagree about the other offerings.

Could someone please enlighten us?

Dov

Dear Dov,
In the time of the Bais Hamikdash, all sacrifices were brought in the Bais Hamikdash.The "holier" sacrifices were slaughtered in the north side of the "courtyard of the Bais Hamikdash" and eaten within the kloyim (curtains)(it was called curtains because in the Mishkan, the temporary place in the desert, there were curtains--but in the Bais Hamikdash there were actually walls).The "less holy" sacrifices were slaughtered anywhere in the courtyard and eaten anywhere in Yerushalayim. For an elaboration of which sacrifices were considered holy etc. and where other parts of their service were done, see "Aizehu mekomon" ("What is the location..")in the kobonos before Boruch Sheamar in davening.If you want me to elaborate more on this please let me know.
Thanks.
Chaim Flom

Thank you Rabbi Flom ,

Yes, if it is not considered inpertinent of me, I would like an elaboration.

Parasha Re'eh takes place before there even was a Bais Hamikdash in Yerushalayim, right? That would mean, or so I think, that any 'holier' offerings would have to be brought to the Mishkan - where was that situated during the time it took for the People to conquer The Land?

It is not clear from the text, at least to me, what offerings were not mandatory to bring to the Mishkan?

Dov

Addition for Rabbi Flom

Thank you for pointing me in the direction of the Siddur - I have seen it, but didn't think to look there

Dov

Dear Dov,
While the Jews were in the desert, wherever they were camped was where the Mishkan was.The holier sacrifices were eaten in the Mishkan (that was the term "cutains" that was used), and less holy sacrifices were eaten within within the 3 machanos, camps. (While the Jews traveled, there were 3 concentric camps,1) the Mishkan itself,2) where the tribe of Levi was, and 3) where all the Jews lived.In Parshas Naso the Torah talks about different levels of Tumah(spiritual impurity) and which camps they could stay in.--i.e. a leper had to stay outside all of the camps etc.)
An interesting, almost paradoxical fact, was that even though the Korban Pesach is one of only 2 positive commandments that if violated, gets Kares ( a severe form of Heavenly death)--the other being bris milah, yet it is called less holy. I would imagine the reason is that since all people had to partake of the Korban Pesach, it couldn't just be eaten in the Bais Hamikdash, and therefore IN THIS ASPECT is called less holy.
As far as the Korbonos in the siddur,unfortunately most people (myself included) don't always say them, and when we do, we "daven it" (that is a sarcastic term for saying words by rote without thinking about its meaning).
I hope that I have been helpful.If I have the knowledge and time, it is my pleasure to answer your questions.
Chaim Flom

Dear Rabbi Flom,

Thank you for the elaboration!

Let me see if I got this right...

You are saying in way of answering my question as to where the Mishkan was situated while the People was busy conquering The Land - that it travelled with them as they went, just as it had before they entered The Land? Or did the main bulk of the people stay on the other side of Jordan, while those being soldiers went about conquering?

Yes, I was wondering at that - the Korban Pesach being one of the lesser offerings And I was going to ask about that, but you beat me to it - thanks!

I have a question about what it said in the Siddur:

In connection to the text about the Korbanot, the following supplications are added on weekdays: "May it be Your will [to accept this recitation] as though I [actually] brought a burnt offering" - and in connection to the guilt and sin offerings: May it be Your will our G-d, and G-d of our Fathers, should I be obligated to bring a sin/guilt, let this recitation be pleasing to You as though I [acutally] brought a sin-offering."

My question is: Can one substitute the performance of a Mitzvah one has no possibility of full-filling due to circumstances beyond ones control, such as f.i not having the monetary resources or being physically disabled, with a supplication such as the one above?

Dear Dov,
In my previous response, I didn't discuss the specifics of what the Jews did after they crossed the Jordan to coquer territory.
For the first 14 years west of the Jordan, the Mishkan was set-up in Gilgal. Basically, since the ark was with the army when they fought, the Mishkan didn't have the full status of the Mishkan or Jerusalem. Then the Mishkan went to Shilo for 369 years. This did have the status of the regular Mishkan or Jerusalem. Then that was destroyed and the ark was taken by the Philistines, and then the Mishkan moved to Nov for 13 years, and then to Givon for 44 years. Nov & Givon also did not have the status of the regular mishkan or Jerusalem.(The Gemarra in Zevachim 119a learns it from a drasha.) In Gilgal, Nov & Givon, certain private sacrifices did not have to be brought in the Mishkan but on a "bama ketana" a small, or private altar. In was consequently eaten in the owner's house or city. Certain public or obligatory sacrifices were brought only in the mishkan in all 4 cities, and were eaten either in the Mishkan or the whole city depending upon the level of holiness. However, certain sacrifices in the 3 irregular Mishkan cities were not brought at all.
As far as saying the korbonos: The Gemara in Megilla 31a says that G-d told Avraham that when there will be no korbonos, reading the psukim of the korbonos will be like offering those sacrifices. In a similar vein, the Gemarra in Menachos 110a says that if one learns about the sin offering it is as though he brought it. Normally, when a person can't do a mitzva we say "onus Rachmana patrei" (G-d exempts one who was unable to do it because it was out of his control). After the Holocaust, we found prayers that people wrote asking Hashem to view their eating whatever in lieu of Matzo.Off-hand I don't know if this concept is brought in the Gemarra etc. about (saying a prayer and) reading psukim in lieu of doing any other mitzva besides Korbanos.
Take care.
Chaim Flom

Thank you very much, Rabbi Flom, for your patience and willingness to answer my questions it is very much appreciated.

quote:

After the Holocaust, we found prayers that people wrote asking Hashem to view their eating whatever in lieu of Matzo.

In light of that I will simply live with not being able to fullfill certain Mitzvot, until I can.And let G-d count as He see fit.

Dov

quote:

Originally posted by Dov:
In connection to the text about the Korbanot, the following supplications are added on weekdays: "May it be Your will [to accept this recitation] as though I [actually] brought a burnt offering" - and in connection to the guilt and sin offerings: May it be Your will our G-d, and G-d of our Fathers, should I be obligated to bring a sin/guilt, let this recitation be pleasing to You as though I [acutally] brought a sin-offering."

My question is: Can one substitute the performance of a Mitzvah one has no possibility of full-filling due to circumstances beyond ones control, such as f.i not having the monetary resources or being physically disabled, with a supplication such as the one above?

There are Mitzvos where we perform them but, because we are not sure that we are doing so properly, we ask Hashem to treat our actions as if they were in full performance of the Mitzvah.

But I don't think, other than the offerings in the Temple, one says a "May it be Your will etc." where one is unable to perform the Mitzvah altogether. For instance, if one is unable to put on Tefillin (because, for example, one is suffering from diahrea (sp?)) then one doesn't say anything in lieu; Hashem knows why the Mitzvah cannot be performed.

There are circumstances, however, where one cannot actually perform the Mitzvah but one does the next best thing and, although not credited with having performed the Mitzvah, Hashem will give a reward for the effort. I'm thinking of the case of a dumb person who is unable to recite the Shema. If he sight reads the words with the intention that this should be the best he can do for the recitation of the Shema, he will get a reward for so doing. I believe the Mishna Berura (a famous commentary on the Shulchan Aruch by the Chafetz Chayim) mentions this.

Thank you

D

I would like to comment on 2 very interesting points that Stephen Phillips wrote (and Yasher Koach [or to be grammatically correct Yiyasher Kochachah] for writing them):

(1)"There are Mitzvos where we perform them but, because we are not sure that we are doing so properly, we ask Hashem to treat our actions as if they were in full performance of the Mitzvah." I understand that the Ben Ish Chai & Rav Chaim Falagi actually had a nusach (text) for this, but I never actually saw it, nor did I ever see the whole idea in writing, but that is probably due to my own lackings.



(2)"There are circumstances, however, where one cannot actually perform the Mitzvah but one does the next best thing and, although not credited with having performed the Mitzvah, Hashem will give a reward for the effort. I'm thinking of the case of a dumb person who is unable to recite the Shema. If he sight reads the words with the intention that this should be the best he can do for the recitation of the Shema, he will get a reward for so doing. I believe the Mishna Berura (a famous commentary on the Shulchan Aruch by the Chafetz Chayim) mentions this." In the Shulchan Aruch O.C.62:3-4, the Halacha is as was stated, that if a person is unable to say Shema (because of illness etc.) he should think it. The Biur Halacha (written by the Chofetz Chaim) has 2 opinions why this is true.a)Since there are opinions that "hirhur kedibur" (thinking is like saying) therefore you have actually fulfilled the requirement to recite the Shema.(According to everyone the best way is to say Shema is that you can hear your own words, but you have fulfilled the mitzva as long as you have "recited" it.) He feels that this is not the accepted opinion for a variety of reasons, and says that he paskins (rules) that it is because b)since you have no alternative, at least do this. As far as I know this is the only place where this is the halacha. There are a few cases that seem similar, but really aren't. For example,the Gemarra says that when some people traveled all the time, they put a Mezuza on a pole ( not a door post). Similarly, the Gemarra says when a person doesn't have an Esrog he takes a lemon or another fruit. However, both cases it is done, not like the Chofetz Chaim says here, but rather, just so those Mitzvos won't be forgotten.
Thank you.
Chaim Flom