On Halakhah #4: Values-Balues Halakhah, Part Two David Zvi Kalman - [email protected]

‫ אורח חיים חלק ד סימן סב‬,‫ אגרות משה‬.1 ‫ ולכן בפה‬,‫והוא בין לקולא בין לחומרא‬...‫אבל הא לענין זה אין כל המקומות שוין דתלוי זה בהאופקים‬ ‫ אבל כפי‬,‫אמעריקא בעירנו נוא יארק וכן נוא דזוירזי וכל מקומות הקיץ בהרים שבאלו מקומות הייתי בעצמי‬ ‫ אשר כחמשים מינוט אחר שקיעה כבר כל השמים מלאים‬,‫ששמעתי כמעט רוב ערי אמעריקא הוא כן‬ ...‫כוכבים והוא חשך כבאמצע הלילה ולא פחות מבמקומותינו ביוראפ אחר ע"ב מינוט ויותר‬ ‫ ואף בלא צורך אין חיוב‬,‫לפ"ז יש להתיר במוצאי שבת לאחר חמשים מינוט לאלו שממהרין לאיזה צורך‬ ...‫ אבל לכתחלה מן הראוי לאחר יותר מן הדין אף שכבר מותר‬,‫למחות‬ ‫וכ"ש לבני תורה ויראי השי"ת יש להם לחכות ע"ב מינוט כמו שהורגלו במקומות דיוראפ אף שכאן אין‬ .‫צורך לזה מדינא‬ 1. Igros Moshe (R’ Moshe Feinstein, New York, d. 1986), O.H. 4:62 But accordingly, not all places are equal [with regards to the time of shkia and tzeit hakokhavim], since this depends on their respective horizons...and this creates both leniencies and stringencies (i.e. Shabbat might end earlier or later, depending on where one is located). As a result, here in America, in our city New York as well as in New Jersey and in all summer mountain locations (where I myself have been to these places, though I have heard that in basically all American cities it is thus) where approximately 50 minutes after shkia the whole sky is already full of stars and it is as dark as the middle of the night; is this not less than the 72 (or more) minutes in dwellings in Europe...? As a result, those pressed for time may be lenient on Motzei Shabbat [and start doing melakhah] after 50 minutes. Even those who are not rushing have no obligation to wait [until 72 minutes], but ab initio it is fitting that they delay [ending Shabbat] a bit more than is strictly necessary, even though it is already permitted [to do melakhah]. And all the more so, it is fitting for Bnei Torah and God-fearers to wait 72 minutes, as was -1-

common in Europe, even though strictly speaking there is no need to do so. 2. Myzmanim.com, “Sources for 3 Stars and Talis Times,” http://www.myzmanim.com/ messagebox.aspx?messageid=sources Let's now analyze one definition from the list below: In New York and New Jersey, Motzoei Shabbos is never later than 50 minutes past Shkio. (Igros Moshe) [...] Q: Okay, that's great for New York, but what does that have to do with everywhere else? A: The time for ‫ מוצאי שבת‬in any other location, can be found by determining the time at which the degree of darkness in the given location matches the degree of darkness that is present 50 minutes past ‫ שקיעה‬on a summer day in New York. For example, let us consider ‫ירושלים‬. Using standard astronomical calculations, it can be shown that on a summer day, the degree of darkness that is present 43 minutes past ‫ שקיעה‬in ‫ ירושלים‬is equivalent to the degree of darkness that is present 50 minutes past ‫ שקיעה‬in New York. We can therefore conclude that during the summer, ‫ מוצאי שבת‬in ‫ ירושלים‬is approximately 43 minutes past ‫שקיעה‬. Interestingly enough, that's exactly what emerges according to ‫( ספר בין השמשות‬see table below).

‫ שו"ת אגרות משה יורה דעה חלק א סימן מז‬.3 ‫ובדבר החלב של הקאמפאניעס במדינתנו אשר יש פקוח הממשלה ואם יערבו חלב בהמה טמאה יענשו וגם‬ ‫יסגירו את העסק שלהם שלכן ודאי מירתתי מלערב יש טעם גדול להתיר אף בלא שיטת הפר"ח משום‬ .‫וזהו גדר אנן סהדי שמצינו בהרבה מקומות‬...‫דהעיקר דידיעה ברורה הוא כראיה ממש‬ 3. Igros Moshe, Y.D. 1:47 Concerning the milk of companies in our country, over which there is government inspection whereby, if the milk of a non-kosher animal is mixed in [with the kosher milk] they will punish [the company] and also shut down their business, so that they will therefore certainly be afraid to mix in [non-kosher milk] — there are good grounds to be permissive [in allowing such milk], even without resorting to the position of the Pri Ḥadash [Ḥezekiah da Silva, d. 1698], since clear awareness is fundamentally identical with actual “seeing” (re’iyah)...this is a definition -2-

we see in several places.

‫ אורח חיים סימן מ‬- ‫ שו"ת יביע אומר חלק ו‬.4 ,‫ אע"פ שדעתו לחזור לחו"ל‬,‫)ו( מסקנא דדינא שבחור העולה לא"י והוא עצמאי שאינו סומך על דעת הוריו‬ .‫ שיש לקוות שימצא אשה ויקבע דירתו בארץ ישראל‬,‫יש לו לעשות יום טוב אחד בלבד‬ ‫ ומ"מ נכון להודיעו שגם‬,‫ יעשה שני ימים טובים‬,‫ לחזור לחו"ל‬,‫אבל כשאומר שדעתו סומכת על אביו ואמו‬ ‫ אם תזדמן לו בת זוג מתאימה עם מוהר ומתן באופן שיוכל להסתדר‬,‫אם הוא סומך בדרך כלל על דעת הוריו‬ ‫ שמצות אלו פו"ר וישיבת א"י חשובות‬,‫ שורת הדין שאינו צריך לשמוע להם‬,‫ אפילו אם יתנגדו הוריו‬,‫בא"י‬ ‫ יש להורות לו שיעשה יו"ט‬,‫ ואז אם ישתכנע ויאמר שהוא מוכן לכך‬,‫ וכתורה יעשה‬,‫יותר ממצות כאו"א‬ .‫אחד בלבד‬ ‫ ולעולם דעתו סומכת עליהם ככל אשר יאמרו כי‬,‫אבל אם יענה שבכל זאת לא יתננו לבו לעזוב את הוריו‬ .‫ אז יש להורות לו לעשות שני ימים טובים כמנהג חו"ל‬,‫הוא זה‬ 4. Yabi`a Omer (Ovadia Yosef, Israel, b. 1920), O.Ḥ 6:40 In conclusion: A young man who comes to Israel, and who is independent of the will of his parents is allowed to observe only a single day of yom tov, even though he intends to return to the Diaspora, since we can hope that he will find a woman and make Israel his permanent residence. If, however, he says that he is dependent on his parents, i.e. to return to the Diaspora, he should keep two days of yom tov. In any event, it is worth informing him that even if he generally follows his parents’ wishes, if he happens to find a fitting spouse who comes with a large dowry and means sufficient that he might make due in Israel — even if his parents would object to this — technically he does not need to listen to them, since the mitzvot of reproducing and of living in Israel are more important than the mitzvah of honouring one’s parents, and he should act according to the Torah. If (after telling him all this) he becomes convinced and says that he is ready for this, instruct him to observe only a single day of yom tov. However, if he response that even so he couldn’t bring himself to abandon his parents, and that he listens to them in all things, instruct him to keep two days of yom tov according to the Diaspora custom.

-3-

‫ אבן העזר חלק א סימן ז‬,‫ אגרות משה‬.5 ‫בדבר ליקח שערס מקאמפאניעס שעושין מלאכה ומסחר בשבת הא חזינן שנתפשט להיתר והטעם פשוט‬ ‫שאין להחשיב את הקונים שערסשהוא רק משהו מהמסחר שאין להם שום דעה בהמסחר אף לענין חלקם‬ ‫ וגם אין הקונהשערס רוצה להיות בעלים בהמסחר ו‬,‫לבעלים של"ד לשותפות במקצת שיש לו דעה כבעלים‬ ‫ויו‬,‫אינו רוצה לקנות כלום בהמסחר אלא הוא רק כקונה ריוח והפסד שיהיה בהמסחר לפי סך כך וכך שקנה‬ .‫ רק מצד קניני דיני המדינה‬,‫תר נראה שאין בהם גדר קנין בדינא שהוא לקנין דבר שלא בא לעולם‬ ‫ הוא רק פטומי מילי בעלמא כי‬/‫נשיא‬/ ‫ומה שלפי תנאי המכירה יש לבעל השערסדעה לבחירת פרעזידענט‬ ‫למעשה משאירין לעצמן יותר מהרוב שלא שייך שיאמרו דעה וגם הקונים איןרוצים לומר דעה בזה כי אין כ‬ .‫וונתם לקנות זה ולכן לע"ד אין לחוש למה שעושים הבעלים דהקאמפאניעס שאינו נוגע להם‬ ‫ואף אם יש גםיהודים בהבעלים אין להחשיב מסייע לעוברי עברה שהמסחר יעשו גם כשלא יקנה שערס מה‬ ‫ם כי לא חסר מי שיקנה שערס והקונה קונה רקלטובת עצמו ולכן אין בזה שום איסור וכמו שנוהגין הרבה בנ‬ .‫"א ואף יראי חטא לקנות‬ ...‫אבל ודאי לקנות מדה מרובה כ"כ עד שיתחשבו בדעתו יש לאסור‬ 5. Igros Moshe (R’ Moshe Feinstein, New York, d. 1986), Even Ha’Ezer 1:7 On the question of buying shares from companies that do melakhah and business on Shabbat: we see it fitting to be permissive. The reason is simple: the shareholder is not relevant, since he is simply a part of the business, since the shares have no say in the business — with the exception of the owners’ portion. There is not enough for there to be a “partnership” in the little that he has. As well, the shareholder does not wish to be the business owner, nor does he wish to purchase anything from the business. Rather, it is as though he is purchasing whatever profits or losses there are from the business according to the given amount that he purchased. Moreoever, it appears that, strictly speaking, this is not a “purchase” [qinyan], since he is purchasing something nonexistent. It is only a “purchase” according to the local laws. As for the fact that, according to the conditions of purchase, the shareholder can vote for the president — this [vote] has no [halakhic] legal significance, since in reality they [the corporation] leave for themselves the majority [of shares], so any opinion [the shareholders] express is irrelevant. The shareholders, too, do not [even] want to express an opinion about this, since their intention is not to buy this [company]. As a result, my humble opinion is that one need not worry about what the owners do, since this does not concern [the shareholders].

-4-

And even if there are Jews among the owners, they need not be considered accessories to sin, since they will conduct business regardless of whether [the Jewish owner] purchases shares from the company, since there is no absence of buyers [and thus all shares will be held] and since the buyer buys only for his own personal benefit [and not to partner with the Jewish owner]. As a result, there is no prohibition, just as it is the practice of many people and even those who fear sin to purchase [shares]. However, there is reason to forbid the purchase of a quantity sufficiently large that [the owners] will consider his opinion.

‫כו‬:‫ ויקרא יט‬.6 .‫ וְ ל ֹא ְתעוֹנֵ נוּ‬,‫ ַה ָדּם; ל ֹא ְתנַ ֲחשׁוּ‬-‫ ﬠַ ל‬,‫ל ֹא תֹאכְ לוּ‬ 6. Leviticus 19:26 Ye shall not eat with the blood; neither shall ye practise divination nor soothsaying. :‫ תלמוד בבלי ברכות י‬.7 '‫וא"ר יוסי בר' חנינא משום ראב"י אל יעמוד אדם במקום גבוה ויתפלל אלא במקום נמוך ויתפלל שנא‬ ‫)תהילים קל( ממעמקים קראתיך ה' תניא נמי הכי לא יעמוד אדם לא על גבי כסא ולא ע"ג שרפרף ולא‬ '‫במקום גבוה ויתפלל אלא במקום נמוך ויתפלל לפי שאין גבהות לפני המקום שנאמר ממעמקים קראתיך ה‬ ‫וכתיב )תהילים קב( תפלה לעני כי יעטוף וא"ר יוסי בר' חנינא משום ראב"י המתפלל צריך שיכוין את רגליו‬ ‫שנא' )יחזקאל א( ורגליהם רגל ישרה >א"ר יצחק א"ר יוחנן< וא"ר יוסי בר' חנינא משום ראב"י מאי דכתיב‬ ‫)ויקרא יט( לא תאכלו על הדם לא תאכלו קודם שתתפללו על דמכם >א"ד< א"ר יצחק א"ר יוחנן א"ר יוסי‬ ‫בר' חנינא משום ראב"י כל האוכל ושותה ואח"כ מתפלל עליו הכתוב אומר )מלכים א יד( ואותי השלכת‬ ‫אחרי גויך אל תקרי גויך אלא גאיך אמר הקב"ה לאחר שנתגאה זה קבל עליו מלכות שמים‬ 7. Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot 10b R. Jose son of Hanina further said in the name of R. Eliezer b. Jacob: A man should not stand on a high place when he prays, but he should pray in a lowly place, as it says; Out of the depths have I called Thee, O Lord. It has been taught to the same effect: A man should not stand on a chair or on a footstool or on a high place to pray, but he should pray in a lowly place, since there is no elevation before God, and so it says, 'Out of the depths have I called Thee, O Lord', -5-

and it also says, A prayer of the afflicted, when he fainteth. R. Jose son of R. Hanina also said in the name of R. Eliezer b. Jacob: When one prays, he should place his feet in proper position, as it says, And their feet were straight feet. R. Jose son of R. Hanina also said in the name of R. Eliezer b. Jacob: What is the meaning of the verse, “Ye shall not eat with the blood?” (Lev. 19:26) Do not eat before ye have prayed for your blood. R. Isaac said in the name of R. Johanan, who had it from R. Jose son of R. Hanina in the name of R. Eliezer b. Jacob: If one eats and drinks and then says his prayers, of him the Scripture says, And hast cast Me behind thy back. Read not gaweka [thy back], but geeka [thy pride]. Says the Holy One, blessed be He: After this one has exalted himself, he comes and accepts the kingdom of heaven! 8. Babylonian Talmud, Ketubot 72a-b Mishna: The following are to be divorced without receiving their ketubah: a wife who violates dat moshe or dat yehudit. What is [regarded as a violation of] dat moshe? Feeding [her husband] untithed food, having intercourse with him during the period of her menstruation, not setting apart the dough offering, or making vows and not fulfilling them. What is [considered to be a violation of] dat yehudit? Going out with her head uncovered, spinning in the marketplace, or conversing with every man . . . Gemara: . . . “WHAT IS [CONSIDERED TO BE A VIOLATION OF] DAT YEHUDIT? GOING OUT WITH HER HEAD UNCOVERED.” [Is not going out with an] uncovered head a Biblical prohibition—as it is written, “And he shall uncover her head” (Num. 5:18), and the school of R. Yishmael taught that this is a warning to the daughters of Israel that they should not go out with uncovered head? [R. Yehudah answered in the name of Shmuel]: Biblically, her work-basket is a satisfactory head covering; however, according to dat yehudit even a basket [on her head is insufficient and] is prohibited as well. R. Assi stated in the name of R. Yohanan: When a woman goes with a basket [on her head], she is not considered to be [going with] an uncovered head. R. Zera took issue with this: Where are we talking about? If you were to say, in the marketplace—this is already considered to be dat yehudit [and forbidden]; but if you were to suggest instead, in a courtyard—if so, you have not left a single daughter of our patriarch Abraham who could live with her husband! Abaye, or alternatively R. Kahana, answered: [R. Yohanan’s ruling is meant to apply to a woman who -6-

goes] from one courtyard to another by way of an alley.

‫סּוּרי ִבּ ָיאה ֵפּ ֶרק כא‬ ֵ ‫ ִהלְ כּוֹת ִא‬,‫ רמב”ם‬.9 .‫ ַא ַחת ְפּנוּיָ ה וְ ַא ַחת ֵא ֶשׁת ִאישׁ‬,‫ ל ֹא יְ ַהלְּ כוּ ְבּנוֹת יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל ְפּרוּﬠֵ י רֹאשׁ ַבּשּׁוּק‬.‫יז‬ 9. Maimonides (Egypt, d. 1204), Issurei Biah 21:17 The daughters of Israel should not walk around in the markets bareheaded, whether they are single or married. What question should we ask of our texts? Naïve approach: What does this source mean? Naïve, “Flat”: What is this source’s bottom line? Where does that fit in the pantheon of bottom lines? Naïve, Analytic: What is this source’s argument? Brisker: Where does this source fit into the pantheon of legal positions? Rationalizing: How can this source enlighten my perception of the world? Historical-Disinterested: What does this source tell me about Rabbi X and his time period? Pneumatic: Why would this time period have produced this text? Historical-Interested: What was Rabbi X thinking? Reader-oriented: What was Rabbi X trying to convey to his audience? Subversive (“hermeneutics of suspicion?”): What is behind the source? Politics? Religious values? Culture/social values? Legalism? Emotion? Money? A specific mental state? “Therapeutic:” What error might have led Rabbi X to this judgment (and how might I avoid his pitfall)? Incredulous: What was Rabbi X thinking? And for heaven’s sake, why? “Conversational:” (1) What is bothering this source, (2) how can I get it to bother me, and (3) now that it bothers me, can I provide a better answer?

-7-