Toronto Torah
Toronto Torah
Vol.4 Num. 13
I have a dream?
Our parshah, like last week's parshah, begins with two dreams. Last week we read about Yosef's dreams, and this week we read about Pharaoh's. There are many differences between them, but a striking one is frequently overlooked: Pharaoh sought to prevent his dreams from coming true, and the best brains in Egypt worked on the question of how to stop them from being completely realized. Yosef's dreams were of a different type; as understood by Ramban (Bereishit 42:9), Yosef applied a great deal of thought and effort to make them come true. This was the goal behind the strange strategy he employed when his brothers descended to Egypt. This difference between the dreams raises an interesting question about dreams in general: To what extent should one go, in order to realize his dreams? Indeed, Abarbanel (41:54) opposes Ramban exactly on these grounds. His comment on Ramban's suggestion is short and sharp it is not Yosef's duty, claims Abarbanel, to fulfill his dreams. Rather, this responsibility falls on G-d. As on this Shabbat we conclude Chanukah, let's turn our look to "in those days, at this time", and see if we can gain some insight. Rav Avraham Yitzchak Kook wrote a responsum (Mishpat Kohen 164), dealing with a gripping question: How could Yehudah HaMaccabee wage war against the great empire of Antiochus? Why do we praise a suicidal act of declaring war against a superior enemy? Rav Kook answers that the Hellenists tried to convert the Jewish people, and so it was seen as a time of religious persecution (she'at hashmad) which obligates one to sacrifice his life for any of the mitzvot. Others answer that the Chashmonaim were great tzaddikim, and such righteous people are allowed to risk their life for the sake of kiddush Hashem (Kesef Mishneh, Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 5:4). These answers are all correct, of course. However, reading Sefer Maccabim, or the Scroll of Antiochus, presents a different picture. Matityahu didn't sit and deliberately consider how and if a revolt could be justified in Jewish law; when he saw a Hellenist Jew sacrificing a prohibited animal to an idol, his rage led him to kill both the Jew and the king's officer standing there. After that he fled to the desert, and from there the revolt began. Matityahu's decision can be rationalized, but it didn't come from reason. It came from the hidden place in the soul where a small jug of pure oil is kept. Throughout our lives, we must respond flexibly to the circumstances around us; as our sages have pointed
Translation or Treason?
According to a tenth century halachic text, Baal Halachot Gedolot, the eighth of Tevet (this coming Friday) will mark the anniversary of the translation of Torah into Greek. The translation is alleged to have happened in the third century BCE, more than a century before the events of Chanukah. We know little about how this translation came about; we have several different traditions regarding who did the translation, how, and why. We don't know whether the original translation was the Greek Septuagint, although this work is often granted that pedigree. We do know that traditional Jewish texts label the translation a tragedy, but we don't know why. An early Jewish source, Masechet Sofrim (1:7-8), compared the translation of Torah into Greek with the worst event in our nation's religious history. As the text tells it, "Once five elders wrote the Torah in Greek for King Ptolemy, and that day was as harsh for Israel as the day the Calf was created, because the Torah could not be properly translated. Another time, King Ptolemy gathered 72 elders and put them in 72 houses without revealing why he had gathered them. He went to each one and told them, 'Write the Torah of Moshe, your master, for me.' G -d placed counsel into each one's heart, and each of them wrote an independent Torah. They changed thirteen things: 'Elokim created in the beginning'" According to the first part of this account, Greek itself is inadequate to translate the Torah, and the disaster of translation was that it necessarily betrayed the original. Of course, omnis traductor traditor - every translator is a
Visit us at www.torontotorah.com
R Ezra Goldschmiedt
Born in London in 1926 and orphaned a t a youn g age , Rabbi Moshe Shternbuch spent his formative years Torah in Translation learning in England and Israel. For many years, he served as a leader in the Jewish community in Johannesburg, South Africa, where he delivered Teshuvot vHanhagot 1:69 acclaimed Torah lectures on business Translated by R Ezra Goldschmiedt ethics. His renown grew while there, and he returned to Israel to join the Beit Din of the Eidah haChareidit, which he Question: Is it a mitzvah to wear a belt currently heads. (gartel) during prayer? A descendant of the Vilna Gaon, Rabbi In Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 91:2 it is Shternbuch compiled what is considered stated explicitly that one must have a belt for an authoritative book on his ancestor's prayer, even one who has a belt in his customs and rulings, "Hilchot haGra trousers, because of "Prepare [to meet your G uMinhagav" and has founded a yeshiva-d, Israel]" [Amos 4:12, a verse cited in synagogue dedicated to following in his Shabbat 9b as the basis for preparing to ancestor's traditions. Rabbi Shternbuch pray]. It is surprising then, that most of the has written many other works; he is [Ashkenazic] Jewish community is not most renowned for his Moadim accustomed to wear a belt for prayer. uZ'manim, which discusse s the Similarly, the Sefardic community is not holidays, and his responsa, Teshuvot accustomed to wear a belt designated for veHanhagot, which address a wide prayers. Indeed, in Beit Yosef (91), in the range of modern-day issues. Rabbi name of Rebbeinu Yerucham, it is explicit Shternbuch's responsa are particularly that this applies only if one goes about all noteworthy as a repository of oral day with a belt. If one does not go about all traditions from earlier authorities. day [with a belt], it is unnecessary. However, the Mishnah Berurah (91:4) writes that there This biography includes elements from a is a measure of piety in this [situation] as biography written by Rabbi Netanel well to wear one. Clarification is needed, for Javasky in a previous issue of Toronto we don't practice this. Torah.
Wearing a Gartel
It seems that since the foundation of the obligation is on account of "Prepare to meet your G-d," meaning that this is an honour to the king - see Rambam, Laws of Prayer 5:2 it applies specifically regarding clothing that a belt adorns. Examples would be the chaltal and long garments like it, that we are accustomed to wear with a belt for beauty. We would similarly beautify them in prayer. However, [concerning] garments for which beautification with a belt is not applicable, which we never wear with a belt, it would seem that there is no relevance in beautifying them with a belt. We never wear them with a belt, and so a belt would not demonstrate preparation or honour for prayer. There would be no obligation for this. According to this logic, there is not even a measure of piety in wearing a belt for those whose garments are never worn with a belt. It is relevant only where the garment is specifically adorned with this, as it was in their [earlier] time... Everything is in accordance with one's local custom: If one is accustomed to wear a garment like this, then it is included within the parameters of preparing one's garments [for prayer]. However, I have noticed a new issue in this matter: Specifically those who wear a belt in the morning for prayers sometimes fail to
egoldschmiedt@torontotorah.com
fulfill "Prepare [to meet your G-d, Israel]" when wearing arm tefillin. They are wearing a belt, but since their left arm, together with the tefillin, cannot enter into the sleeve of their jacket, the sleeves are left to rest halfway on the shoulders. This is not an honourable way in which one enters before the King. They are required by the law of "Prepare" to wear their outer garment, a jacket, in its normal manner, their arms inside the sleeves, with the buttons closed. Adding a belt is a measure of special piety, but wearing the garment itself in a casual manner, inappropriate for entering before a king, nullifies the mitzvah of "Prepare". Indeed, an overwhelming majority of those who customarily pray with a belt in the morning are clothed in this manner. Therefore, there is no fulfillment of the mitzvah of "Prepare", even if they then wear a belt. It is surprising that they haven't alerted people to this, which they could repair easily and so fulfill this mitzvah properly.
Visit us at www.torontotorah.com
According to Rashi, Yehoshua is on trial for the guilt of his children, who intermarried; his dirty clothing proclaims theiir sin. The "satan" prosecutes; G-d supports Yehoshua. The clothing is replaced because Yehoshua's children ultimately separate from their non-Jewish wives. (Ezra 10)
According to Ibn Ezra and Radak, Yehoshua represents the Jews who are trying to build the Beit haMikdash, and the dirty clothes represent their poverty. The "satan" represents the earthly forces attempting to prevent the construction, and G-d enables the builders to succeed. The new, clean clothing represents the end of that generation's poverty. Per Abarbanel, Yehoshua represents his descendants, the Chashmonaim, who are guilty of taking the throne inappropriately; kohanim are not supposed to rule as kings. Their clothing is dirty because they wear royal
Visit us at www.torontotorah.com