Shabbat-B'Shabbato – Parshat (Zachor) No 1616: 9 Adar II 5776 (19 March 2016)

AS SHABBAT APPROACHES "I Belong to my Lover and my Lover Belongs to Me" - by Esti Rosenberg, Head of the Midrasha for Women, Migdal Oz

The decree of the lots by was the first historical event after the destruction of the Temple which put in the balance the question of the relationship between the Holy One, Blessed be He, and His nation. The Talmud does not hesitate to raise the question of a separation between the Holy One, Blessed be He, and the nation, as a viable possibility. "If a slave is sold by his master or a woman is divorced by her husband, what connection remains between them?" [Sanhedrin 105a].

In the Midrash "Panim Acheirot" on the Megillah, a link is also made between the destruction of the House of G-d and the decree of the lots: "Why were the people of Yisrael of that generation found to be liable for a punishment of death?" And the answer is: "It is because they did not sanctify My name in the days of Nevuchadnezer."

The spiritual atmosphere of the Midrash brings out in a sharp way the fears that the community of Yisrael had for their safety and about the depths of the link between the nation and the Holy One, Blessed be He, in the wake of the destruction. Did the relationship remain as strong as it used to be? The sages see a connection between Esther and Chapter 22 of Tehillim: "My G-d, My G-d, why did You abandon me, I cried out my words a great distance from my salvation." [22:2]. The feelings of Esther in this passage reflect the thoughts of Yisrael – a sense of great distance from the Holy One, Blessed be He, and a loss of the feeling of security.

This can be seen in the Midrash which describes Esther's unannounced visit to the King. Instead of viewing the fact that the King pointed his scepter to greet her as to be naturally expected – the Midrash describes a spine- tingling moment when Achashverosh is very angry at Esther for daring to come to see him: "His eyes were burning as if on fire... And the Queen saw the anger of the King and was very frightened, and she lost her courage... And our G-d saw and had mercy on His nation, and He turned to see the sorrow of the orphaned woman who trusted him. And He gave her favor in the eyes of the King, and the King stretched out his scepter to her." The gesture of the scepter and the salvation of Yisrael were not at all a foregone conclusion, other alternatives were possible where the scepter was not raised to save Esther...

Because of the suffering of the orphan and mainly because of her courage and her dedication, the Holy One, Blessed be He, had pity on His nation and redeemed them. This redemption, the first one that took place after the destruction of the Temple, symbolized much more for the nation of Yisrael than merely the salvation from Haman's decree. The redemption served as a comprehensive proof that the link between the community of Yisrael and their G-d remained and was very strong even after the destruction of the Temple, for all generations to come. The reason for the great joy of Purim is the revelation that "G-d will not abandon His nation, and He will not leave His heritage" [Tehillim 94:14]. Even after the destruction, the Holy One, Blessed be He, continues with His relationship of love and forgiveness for His people. The love of the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not depend on the existence of the Temple but will continue to accompany us in exile even when the face of G-d is hidden from us.

The community of Yisrael responds to the love of the Creator and accepts the mitzvot willingly and with love. And this renewed acceptance of the and the mitzvot does not depend on a specific historical context but is much

1 deeper, linked to a strong obligation. "The people accepted it again in the days of Achashverosh" [Shabbat 88a]. Even during times of evil decrees and great hardship, the community of Yisrael will continue to accept the yoke of heaven, without setting any conditions, and with deep love.

Let it be - "in those days and also at this time."

POINT OF VIEW Stop the Witch Hunt against Prominent People - by Rabbi Yisrael Rozen, Dean of the Zomet Institute

"When a Nassi sins" [Vayikra 4:22]. "This is related to a concept of joy – Happy is the generation whose Nassi (leader) takes the trouble to atone for his unintentional sins, all the more so will he regret his sins what were done on purpose." [Rashi].

Witch-Hunting of Prominent Figures

One affair follows another, all in the subject area of "harassment," and the media (both broadcast and internet) are having a field day. Not only have they been provided with a juicy source of ratings, which they eagerly pass on to our eye and ears – the media have taken upon themselves the multiple roles of judgement, meting out punishment, and sometimes even burial. This phenomenon typically takes place when a known figure is slated for promotion or an important new job in his or her career, or is being considered as a candidate by a placement committee with the job of suggesting alternatives for filling a high position. And that is the perfect opportunity to draw out past sins and to attempt a "knockout." This phenomenon includes not only accusations of "harassment," but also other subjects – such as violation of building codes, hiring illegal foreign workers, falsifying financial declarations, and so on. Those who like sensational revelations or who pursue "shaming" and faults of others spend their time locating and exposing sins and disgraceful conduct, and they carry out slanderous investigations of prominent figures and candidates for leadership. I strongly feel that we have gone too far, and that this witch-hunting has become a national sport which must be curtailed.

I must admit that writing about this subject is not easy, out of the fear that I will be accused of supporting sinners and having too forgiving an attitude towards public figures. It is quite probable that "women's rights organizations" will come out against me in droves. Actually, this is the opposite of the truth: My main claim in this column is that equality must be preserved in this realm too. Just as the media does not involve itself and does not report or discuss rumors of sins by unknown people in the markets or other simple folk, it should act in the same way towards prominent figures, both those who occupy high offices and those who are merely candidates for such jobs.

Let me clarify this for my readers. Everybody knows very well that "exposures," slander, reports of "complaints," and involvement in rumors are a form of punishment, usually too difficult to bear. Who gave the media the authority to judge a person and also punish him or her? I have faith in the justice system, and as long as a person has not been convicted of a crime with disgrace there is no reason – and in fact it must be forbidden – to pile on more and more punishment. And this is doubly so for punishment that results from rumors, giving fodder for the hungry media and providing evidence for a field trial.

Prominent Figures who Carry a Pack of Vermin

In addition, I will make some declarations that are not "politically correct" in today's world. In Jewish tradition a person is not prohibited from holding a public office, in executive and not an educational role, even

2 if they have repugnant and faulty acts in their past, no matter how serious they were. A long list of ministers and leaders of the State of Israel, from Moshe Dayan to Bibi Netanyahu, with many others that I will not list here, were not perfect in the past in matters of sexual conduct, to put it mildly. As far as I am concerned, even somebody who is not an outstanding model of virtue or ethical behavior can be capable of serving the public with great skill, and there is no reason that his or her talents should be lost to the public. The search for "moral purity" by placement committees and the media obsession to provide them with the most blemished possible information do not stem from pure motives and are not based on objective criteria of values or a belief in the high value of ethics (something which is as far removed from the media as the west is far from the east). The main motive for all of this activity today is that the media has been transformed from "watchdogs" to "wolves on a hunt."

Our sages have taught us, "A leader should not be appointed for a community unless he has a pack of vermin hanging from his back. Then, if he becomes light-headed, he can be told: Look behind you." [Yoma 22b]. There are many explanations for this surprising declaration. However, one thing is certain: We are not frightened away by leaders who are not morally perfect. I want to emphasize again – this refers to executives and not rabbis or educators (or figures prominent in cultural matters?). Because of their roles, they must indeed be outstanding figures, models worth emulating.

The Power of Repentance

There is one more very significant point that I want to make with respect to the current practice of burrowing into the past of prominent figures and rejecting them for public office. The Jewish outlook gives great emphasis to the elements of regret, contrition, and repentance. In fact, one of the most respected acts in education is confession – starting with a king and leading even to such a person as Yinon Magal. (I know, I can just see the raised eyebrows at the juxtaposition. No! I did not say that these two are comparable!) And while we are at it, it seems to me that when Bibi Netanyahu was not too ashamed to admit a fault he was forgiven.

The power of repentance and atonement is found deep within this week's Torah portion, in the quote at the beginning of this article. "When a nassi sins." The sensitive ears of the sages saw this as a positive event: "Happy is the generation whose Nassi takes the trouble to atone..." Of course, the applause is not for the sin but for repentance and atonement. Commentators have noticed that "three terms are used for sinners – 'Ki' (it happens), 'im' (if), and 'asher' (when). For an individual the word 'ki' is used: 'When it happens that a soul commits a sin' [Vayikra 4:2]. For a number of people, the word is 'im' – 'If the entire community of Yisrael sins' [4:13]. For the leader, 'asher' is used – 'When a nassi sins' [4:22]. 'Ki' stands for a higher probability than 'im,' and 'asher' is a higher probability than 'ki.' A leader who rules with pride in his heart will surely commit a sin, and therefore it is written 'asher' with respect to a Nassi." [Kli Yakar].

SWEETNESS FOR THE SOUL Psychologist and Social Worker - by Rabbi Itiel Gilady, Lecturer in the School for the Soul and Editor of the Writings of Rabbi Yitzchak Ginzburg

In therapy rooms, the subject for discussion is chosen by the patient, one soul touching another. Whatever is happening outside – remains there. The other approach is the following: Just give us a few details – gender, age, where did you grow up and where do you live now, what do you do for a living, what is your financial situation? – and we can categorize you and find solutions for your problems. Am I a psychologist or a social worker?

3 One of the basic principles of the Jewish understanding of the soul is that a full and true picture can only be obtained by taking into account both the (psychological) essence and the (social) surroundings of a person.

Two Simultaneous Tracks

In-depth discussions and a piercing look can reveal and identify essential character lines which are unique to the specific patient. But without knowing his living conditions in the present and in the past it is not possible to understand what he must cope with, what he needs, and what can be demanded of him. Without knowledge of the external factors it is not possible to estimate properly the source and the correct weights to be given to spiritual phenomena. Is the description that he gives precise and realistic, such that it must be treated, or does it deviate from reality so that the patient must be treated in terms of imagination and exaggeration? Are his actions "normal" and to be expected as a reaction to the conditions of his life, or do they show that there is a deep distortion of reality, since no objective cause can be found to explain his behavior?

On the other hand, complete knowledge of the conditions of a person's life, even if helped along by support to improve the situation, will not help the patient grow and develop in a true sense unless it is accompanied by an understanding of his character and his unique needs. The external situation forms a background upon which the internal essence appears, and without a deep understanding of the soul it is not possible to propose a channel for suitable solutions and progress which are truly appropriate for the specific patient.

Fieldwork

Getting to know each of these factors – the essence of the soul and the life status – requires different skills which the therapist will have to acquire. This would mean a sharp eye and sensitivity, together with a "detective's" sense for gathering information and a knowledge of different possible life styles. There is also a difference from the spiritual point of view. To get to know the essence of another person requires connectivity – personal contact which includes affection and identification. Getting to know the status of a person requires dedication - a concerted effort to leave my own known surroundings and enter into the realm of the patient. This is needed both in practice, by an effort to gather data and encounter the external surroundings, and in terms of the soul, getting to understand how his living conditions helped to shape him. In order for me to understand him and to relate to him in the proper way, I must be able to put myself into his position, or at the very least I must be familiar with this position.

Recognition and Estrangement

In terms of Kabbalah and Chassidut, knowledge of another person is related to the power of "daat" – knowledge – in the soul, which consists of one part that forms a link and a closer approach (the element of kindness in knowledge) and a second part which involves separation (the element of strength in knowledge). One side recognizes the other person and the other side is estranged. We encounter the essence of the person through the side which makes a connection, empathizes, and shows love – the side of kindness. The external situation is categorized by characteristics of separation which establish the place for every person in his own world, based on law and power. (An effort is necessary for me to leave my own place and to reach other and different places.)

The correct spiritual movement is to encompass the left-power within the right-kindness – to move on from estrangement to acquaintance, from a reserved approach to intimacy and love. It is important to note that the estranged beginning is not only a necessary evil. Rather it is also an important element on its own, and therefore it must be "nurtured" by getting 4 to know the situation through various parameters. There is a human tendency to relate to another person as an extension of my own personality, to identify with him, to fashion his experiences as copies of my own, and thus to give him advice that is best suited for me. The way to overcome this is to get to know his personality, which differs from mine first of all in terms of external conditions. Only on a basis of differentiation, which emphasizes the external distance and differences, will it be possible to penetrate in a respectful way and to form a true spiritual encounter that includes love and identification. This will not be through forcing my situation onto the other but as a result of a true effort to encounter his personality.

(Based on the third condition of the "Rules for Education and Guidance" by the Rebbe Rayatz – the sixth Chabad Rebbe.)

A PARSHA INSIGHT How Can we Eradicate ? - by Rabbi Asaf Harnoy, Post-Graduate Beit Midrash for Torah and Leadership, Jerusalem

Eradicating Amalek on the Bus

A few years ago, I rode a bus from Tzefat to Jerusalem. At the beginning of the trip I took a small Gemarra out of my pocket, the tractate of Nedarim, hoping to study a bit before I was caught up in sleep. A few minutes later, a Chassid got on the bus and sat down next to me. He saw that I had a copy of Nedarim, and he said to me that whoever studied the commentary of the RAN on this tractate would thereby observe the mitzva of eradicating Amalek.

Of course I took the bait immediately and asked him why this was so. He replied, "Amalek twists the mind, and the RAN on Nedarim straightens it out again."

Having Mercy on Agag while being Cruel to all the Infants

In the Haftarah of this week's Torah portion we are taught about the great mistake of King Shaul who did not kill Agag, the King of Amalek, and all the sheep in the war.

The simple way to understand this is that Shaul and his people refrained from killing Agag and the sheep out of a feeling of mercy: "And Shaul and the nation had pity on Agag and on the best of the sheep" [Shmuel I 15:9]. However, this is not easy to accept – is it reasonable that Shaul and the nation ruthlessly killed the entire nation of Amalek, including women and young babies, but had pity and saved the king and the sheep?

Mercy as a Test of the Service of G-d

We can perhaps understand why the nation had pity on Agag in view of the reason that Shaul gave for the fact that the nation took pity on the sheep of the Amalek people: "And the nation took from the booty of sheep and cattle... to sacrifice to G-d at " [15:21].

The reason for leaving the sheep was not to give a personal profit to any of the people. Rather, the people had a real desire to set aside the choice animals in order to sacrifice them to G-d. The people thought that to keep the sheep and sacrifice it would be the best way to worship G-d. In a similar way, we can suggest that Agag was spared as a way to worship G-d.

It is well known that the act of killing the leader of the enemy in a war can have a powerful effect on the morale of the soldiers and their feeling of victory. Perhaps Shaul let Agag live in order to observe the command to kill him in public, with an appropriate ceremony, on the day that Shmuel the Prophet would join them all for a festive meal of thanksgiving celebrating

5 the great victory. Shaul preferred to wait and kill Agag in public, in front of all the people, instead of as a minor incident when Agag would have the "honor" of falling in battle.

Just as with the sheep, this was not a matter of personal profit but rather a true intention of worshipping G-d. However, this is precisely the error which led to the downfall of Shaul's dynasty. The Kingdom of Yisrael will not be established through worshipping G-d through human ideas instead of listening to His direct command.

Eradicating Amalek in our Generation

The war against Amalek does not consist of sharpening our weapons but rather is a struggle of viewpoints in essence and in principle. The "Amalekite" approach does not recognize G-d, and it therefore denies the existence of Divine commands which we are obligated to observe.

Such an outlook might permeate its way into our minds, and lead us to invent our own ideas about how to serve G-d, at times forgetting what G-d commanded us to do. Like Shaul, we might also develop a strong desire to perform exalted acts as part of our worship of G-d. But we must always check if they correspond to what G-d really commanded us to do.

Shmuel's reaction, "Does G-d want sacrifices or does He prefer His voice to be heard?" [15:22], continues to reverberate in our generation loud and clear. It insists that we must focus on fulfilling the will and the commands of the Holy One, Blessed be He, as the central message of our war on Amalek. Specifically in our generation, which places such a great emphasis on personal experience and making a connection through serving G-d, we must take care to observe the commands precisely as they were given to us.

It is possible to develop many attractive ideas for worshipping G-d, but what is really important and primary is to listen to what G-d wants from us and not to act the way that we would like to. We will eradicate Amalek if we align our mind to correspond to the precise will of G-d and we do not allow the approach of Amalek to distort out thoughts.

THE MAP AT THE SHABBAT TABLE Salt - based on the book "The Shabbat Map (Tablecloth)" by Amos Safrai

"Put salt on every Mincha Sacrifice. Do not hold back the salt of the covenant of your G-d from your Mincha Sacrifices. Offer salt with all of your sacrifices." [Vayikra 2:13].

The common definition of salt is a chemical compound made from sodium and chlorine. This is one of many types of "salt" that are found in nature. When we use the word "salt" we first and foremost are referring to what we find on the table, in our saltshaker. Salt is a vital ingredient in human food, as it is in the foods of many animals and plants. Salt is a preservative and it is used in processing food, and it is useful in many industrial and agricultural processes.

Salt appears in the Tanach more than thirty times. Salt symbolizes an eternal covenant because it never spoils. In ancient times, salt was used as money given to a worker. This is the source of the word "salary" – a name for the monthly stipend that the Roman government gave to the legionnaires – a block of salt.

Salt is manufactured by two large companies in Israel. The first one and the one that is best known is in the area of the Dead Sea. This is one of the largest companies in Israel, which manufactures many products: potash, bromine, magnesium, and cooking salt. Ancient sources called our table salt "Sedom salt." This is very strong salt, which can be dangerous if it gets

6 into a person's eyes (Eiruvin 7b). This salt is put on the sacrifices in the Temple (Tosefta Menachot 9:15).

The second company, "Salt of the Land," is in Atlit. The company was founded in 5682 (1922). In its early years it was an important source of income for people who lived in the area. In addition, the salt trucks were used to hide shipments of weapons. This was a salty road on the path to establishing our country. As the company expanded, it opened other plants in Eilat and in Kalia.

Rabbi Cherki is the head of Brit Olam – Noahide World Center, Jerusalem

MY KLEZMER BLOG

Turvy World Turvy - Topsy

Turvy World Turvy - Topsy - by Moshe (Mussa) Berlin

Kol Nidrei and the Soccer Game

A Jew living in London was a stalwart fan of the Chelsi soccer team. He avidly followed his beloved team's games, and he never missed a television broadcast of a game. Unfortunately, a very important game against the team's arch-enemy Manchester United was scheduled for Yom Kippur, just at the time of "Kol Nidrei."

The man hesitated about what he could do, and in the end he asked his rabbi for advice. He described his great dilemma to the rabbi, and he asked the rabbi what he could do. The rabbi replied, "What's the problem? Record it, and then you can watch the recording later."

The man thanked the rabbi profusely and went on his way. A few months later they happened to meet, and the rabbi asked, "Well, how was the recording?"

"It was great," the man replied. "I made a recording like you said, and to this day, whenever I have some spare time I put on the recording of Kol Nidrei - and I enjoy it very much."

An Encounter on the Subway

Monday evening, the day before the holiday of Shavuot, Reb Shlomo Carlebach was sitting in a Manhattan subway, and he saw a young man who was brimming over in happiness. He asked, "Why are you so happy?"

"Well, I'll tell you. I am Jewish, and I am getting married on Saturday, to a non-Jewish girl, in a church."

Reb Shlomo said to him, "That's very nice, for a Jew to marry a non-Jew, to bring more peace to the world. I think you could use a special blessing from my rabbi – he will want to bless you that your union will last forever."

At the time, Reb Shlomo had a very close relationship with the Rebbe of Lubavitch, whose door was always open to him. And so, 3:30 that morning, there was a knock on the Rebbe's door. He opened it, and he found Reb Shlomo standing there. Reb Shlomo said to the Rebbe, "I brought you a present for Shavuot - a Jew who needs some mending."

The young man entered the room, and he stayed and talked to the Rebbe until 7:00 am. Nobody knows what they said to each other, but the young man left the room with puffy eyes. The Rebbe said to Reb Shlomo, "Take him and help him put on Tefillin, and everything will be fine."

The young man did not see Reb Shlomo anymore after that, but he also stopped seeing the Gentile girl. After his talk with the Rebbe the young man could not bring himself to get married in a church.

7 This is but one of many stories that happened to Reb Shlomo Carlebach, day after day.

To see a film clip of the Tel Aviv Purim parades in 1932-34, press here.

For reactions: [email protected]

HALACHA FROM THE SOURCE How Much Wine must we Drink on Purim? - by Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Rimon, Director of the Center for Teaching and Halacha and Director of the Beit Midrash in the Lev Academic Center

In the Megillah, the mitzva of having a meal on Purim is called a "mishteh" – a banquet. (The root of the word is "shatoh," to drink.) The many banquets that appear in the Megillah clearly show that their main characteristic was not the food that was served but rather drinking wine. Like the festive meals in the Megillah, the mitzva of the "se'uda" (festive meal) of Purim is not just for fancy food but also includes an obligation to drink wine.

"A Person must become Intoxicated"

It is written, "Rava said: A person must become intoxicated on Purim until he does not know the difference between 'Haman is cursed' and 'Mordechai is blessed.'" [Megillah 7b].

The simple reading of this passage is that one should become so intoxicated that he loses his sense of understanding. However, right after this the Talmud gives a story that indicates how dangerous it can be to become drunk. Rabba and Rav Zeira had a Purim banquet together, and they drank wine. In their drunken stupor, Rabba stood up and killed Rav Zeira. Afterwards Rabba understood what he had done, and he revived Rav Zeira. The next year Rabba once again wanted to join Rav Zeira for a Purim banquet, but he refused, since he could not be sure that the same miracle would be repeated, and that Rabba would be able to revive him from death.

At first glance, there seems to be a clear contradiction between the mitzva to get drunk and the story that follows it. The decree insists that we must become intoxicated on Purim, while the simple implication of the story is that this can be very dangerous. The story evidently implies that one should not become drunk on Purim because of the danger. The early commentators give three different interpretations of this passage and the implications of the ruling and the story.

Interpretations of the Early Commentators

The first approach to this passage in the Talmud is attributed to Rabeinu Efraim (quoted by Baal Hamaor, page 3a in the RIF). In his opinion the purpose of the story is to declare that the words of Rava are rejected, and that one should not drink so much wine that he loses his senses.

On the other hand, the RIF (ibid) and the ROSH (Megillah 1:8) quote the instructions given by Rava (to get drunk) without the story that follows it, and this implies that one should indeed become so intoxicated that he loses all of his senses.

It is possible to explain that according to the RIF and the ROSH the story does not contradict Rava's ruling. The fact that a year later Rav Zeira refused to join Rabba for the Purim meal and didn't make a condition that no wine would be drunk at the meal shows that the two rabbis intended to get drunk on the second year too, and for this reason Rav Zeria refused the invitation. (See Pri Chadash 695:2.) We can therefore conclude that there is indeed an obligation to become drunk on Purim.

8 Many early commentators took a third approach and suggested intermediary ways of looking at the matter, which on one hand require drinking wine but on the other hand put limits on Rava's ruling, "to get drunk..." For example, the Rambam writes (Hilchot Megillah 2:15) that a person should drink so much that he goes to sleep (since a person who is asleep is unconscious). Orchot Chaim writes (Megillah and Purim, 38) that a person should drink a little bit more than what is usual for him, which will cause him to fall asleep.

According to these explanations, the purpose of the story is to teach us not to exaggerate too much in our drinking, and that is why Rav Zeira refused Rabba's second invitation.

In summary, we can say that many of the early commentators clearly felt that Rava's instructions should not be taken literally, and that a person should not become so drunk on Purim that he loses his senses completely. This is either because Rava's ruling was not accepted as the halacha or because it was never meant to be taken in a literal sense.

We can also go further: It is possible that such commentators as the RIF and the ROSH who quote Rava's instructions without any limitation feel that it is not necessary to become so drunk that one loses all his senses. It is possible that they interpret the word that Rava uses, "libesumei," not as becoming completely intoxicated ("lehishtaker") but as drinking a much smaller amount of wine. This might also be the meaning of the rulings of both the RIF and the ROSH (as is written by Shi'arei Knesset Hagedola (695, notes by Beit Yosef 1). Here is what is written in Yesod Veshoresh Ha'avoda (12:7) in the name of the ARI:

"The wise men of the Talmud were very precise in their holy and clear choice of words. They wrote lebesumei and not lehishtaker on Purim... And the ARI in writing about the intentions of drinking, based on hidden secrets, clearly wrote in his holy language: A person should not become intoxicated but only under the influence of the wine."

The reason for this limitation by the commentators is that the joy of Purim should not lead to wild partying and foolishness, but rather it should be such that it leads the person to greater love of G-d and to recognize all the miracles which He performed for us (Meiri, Megillah, ibid).

In Practice

The Shulchan Aruch (695:2) quotes the ruling of Rava without any limitation (but interpreting it to mean that one should be influenced by the wine but not completely intoxicated). The RAMA (695:2) rules according to the Rambam and the Orchot Chaim:

"Remark: Others say that it is not necessary to go so far but rather to drink more than is usual and to fall asleep. And while he sleeps he does not know the difference between 'Haman is cursed' and 'Mordechai is blessed.' And one can do either more or less as long as his heart has clear intentions for heaven."

The same ruling is made by Mishna Berura (5) and other recent rabbis. Pri Chadash writes that even though in principle one should become drunk, in practice this should be avoided:

"Now that the generations have been degraded it is best to accept the words of Rabeinu Efraim and to drink only a little bit more than usual for a holiday. This will fulfill the obligation since one has heavenly intent, so that he will not become involved in anything bad, heaven forbid, but will be blessed by G-d."

9 In practical terms, in today's reality, drinking alcohol and becoming drunk might lead to spiritual, social, and medical damage, and this has become a great source of trouble in our society. Research has shown that the damage from drinking alcohol can be worse than that from drug addiction! Therefore, it is best not to drink wine at all or at the most a very minimal amount. Everybody knows about himself what degree of drinking can lead to spiritual uplifting and advances in serving G-d and not to shameful behavior – what amount will help to release a person from internal limitations and enhance their sanctity without leading to shameful actions. If there is any doubt, it is best not to drink at all or to drink a very small amount and to adopt a policy of drinking the barest possible minimum of wine. Women should be especially careful, since the enzymes which decomposes wine (ADH, alcohol dehydrogenases) act relatively slowly in their bodies, and it therefore takes a longer time for them to get rid of the effects of alcohol than for men.

The Rebbe of Slonim writes in his book Netivot Shalom (Purim, page 57) that Purim can help us reach our internal foundations without the need to drink wine:

"We can say that the decree that 'a person must become drunk on Purim' does not mean to get drunk on wine, but rather that it is possible to become intoxicated from Purim itself – 'drunk but not from wine' [Yeshayahu 51:21] – based on the exalted revelations of Purim, something that occurs only 'one time every year.'"

NATURE AND THE TORAH PORTION The "Alya" - The Fat-Tail of the Sheep - by Dr. Moshe Raanan, Herzog College and the Jerusalem College for Women

"Let him put his hand on the head of the Chatat Sacrifice, and let him slaughter the Chatat in the same place as he slaughters the Olah Sacrifice" [Vayikra 4:33].

From the above verse, Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai derives a surprising moral lesson. "Rabbi Yochanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai, 'Why is the Amida prayer recited silently? It is in order not to shame the sinners, just like we see that the Chatat and the Olah are slaughtered in the same place.'" [Sottah 32b]. That is, the fact that both the Olah and the Chatat are slaughtered in the area to the north of the Altar prevents bystanders from knowing whether a sacrifice is an obligatory Chatat for atonement or an Olah, brought as a voluntary donation. However, the Talmud asks how this helps keep the identity of the sacrifice a secret, since in any case the place where the blood is sprinkled reveals the secret – the Chatat blood is sprinkled above the half-way line of the Altar while the blood of the Olah is sprinkle below this line. The answer in the Talmud is that only the Kohen is aware of the place where the blood is sprinkled, since this cannot be seen clearly from so far away. And the Talmud continues to analyze the matter. "Isn't there another difference? The Chatat is a female while the Olah is a male!" The reply is, "That is covered by the 'alya' – the fat- tail." The fat-tail which covers the behind parts of the sheep prevents an observer from knowing whether a sacrifice is a male, which must be an Olah, or a female Chatat. While a sinner is allowed to bring a goat, which does not have a fat-tail, if he does so he is responsible for any shame involved in revealing his secret to the onlookers.

The fat-tail of the sheep has given them a premium status among the small domesticated animals, as is indicated by the Talmud: "Sheep are before goats, since their sacrifice includes the additional fat-tail" [Zevachim 90a]. At first glance, this seems to contradict the following Mishna: "Rabbi Shimon says, sheep come before goats in every case. You might think that it is because they are preferred. However, it is written, 'And if one brings a sheep as a Chatat Sacrifice' [Vayikra 4:32] – this shows that they are

10 equivalent." [Kritut 6:9]. Rabbi Ovadia Bartanura explains: "'Sheep come before goats' – In every place the verse mentions sheep before goats, as is written, 'from the sheep and from the goats shall you take' [Shemot 12:5] and 'or a lamb from the sheep or from the goats' [Bamidbar 15:1]. Thus I might think that one who promises to bring an Olah and has both sheep and goats should prefer to bring the sheep. However, it is written, 'If he brings a sheep for his sacrifice' [Vayikra 4:32] and before that, 'Let him bring his sacrifice, a young goat' [4:23]. Here the goat is listed first, to teach us that the two are equal and he can bring whichever one he wants to bring."

A Premium Status

The apparent contradiction can be explained by assuming that Rabbi Shimon is referring to the relative halachic importance of sheep as compared to goats, and in this matter there is no preference given to sheep, while on the other hand the Torah showed great respect for a sacrifice of sheep. The fat-tail is included among the parts that are burned on the Altar, and therefore a sacrifice of a sheep is considered to be relatively more elegant. For people too (and not only on the Altar) the fat-tail is considered a choice morsel at a meal, as can be seen from the instructions that Shmuel gave to his cook. "And Shmuel said to the cook, give him the portion which I gave you... So the cook picked out the thigh and what was connected to it (according to one interpretation this was the fat-tail) and placed them before Shaul" [Shmuel I 9:23-24]. In addition, the "modesty" of the sheep which we discussed above can add another reason for the preferred status of the sheep among the small domesticated animals. According to Rabbi David Kochav, the fat-tail is a hint of the physical modesty that separates the sheep from the goats, and for that reason it usually appears first in the verses in the Torah.

A Mixed Blessing

The fact that the fat-tail is the choice cut of the sheep is the basis for the expression for a mixed blessing ("alya vekotz ba" – literally, a tail with a thorn in it) which appears in the Talmud. "Rava said, if one overlooks the way he is treated he will be forgiven for his sins, as is written, 'He pardons sin and overlooks transgression' [Micha 7:18]. Who is pardoned for his sins? One who overlooks slights against him... '...for the rest of his heritage' [ibid] – Rabbi Acha Bar Chanina said, alya vekotz ba – this refers to part of his heritage and not his entire heritage." [Rosh Hashana 17a].

The Maharsha explains this expression as follows: "This is an allegory, in that thorns continuously attach themselves to the fat-tail." The fat-tail is the choicest part of the sheep, but it has a disadvantage – the thorns that it picks up because it is dragged along the ground.

The Breed that has Disappeared

The fat-tailed sheep ("kevess ha'alya"), one of the main breeds of sheep, is named for its broad tail, which serves as a repository of fat when needed. All of the species of fat-tailed sheep comprise about 25% of the sheep population in the world. The earliest evidence of the existence of this species is seen in drawings on stone utensils and murals from Mesopotamia and Babylon about five thousand years ago. The tail serves the same purpose as the hump of a camel. The weight of the tail of a female sheep can be as much as 6 kg, and the weight of the tail of a ram can be up to 10 kg. In the past many sheep had tails so big that they could not move around comfortably, and the tails were therefore put on wagons that were tied to the animals. To this day there is a breed of this type in India. Evidence of this technique is found in the Talmud: "A donkey is not allowed to go outside with its saddle if it is not tied to it... and the male sheep are not allowed to go outside with their wagon under their tails" [Mishna, 11 Shabbat 54b]. It is assumed that the tail was created as a mutation that occurred in domesticated sheep with a long tail. Perhaps the disappearance of the animals with large tails is because less of them were grown, due to the inconvenience and the complexity of handling them.

For more information in Hebrew and for pictures, and to regularly receive articles about plants and animals linked to the Daf Yomi, write e-mail to: [email protected]

STRAIGHT TALK Raising the Moral Status of Purim - by Rabbi Yoni Lavie, Manager, "Chaverim Makshivim" Website

Purim is fast approaching, and the level of excitement is increasing by the minute. It is such a short holiday, but so full of content and illumination, all crowded into one day. Can we manage to gather together all of this abundance into one day?

On this Shabbat with its special reading of Zachor and in view of the coming festive Purim meal, I list below a number of questions for discussion, and some suggested activities and goals, in an effort to enrich the family table and to touch on experiences that the treasures of Purim can bring us.

"Opening up the Table" – Questions for Thought and Discussion

 In your opinion, what is there about Purim that makes it unique among all the other holidays?  How is Purim this year different from last year?  What would you like to take away from Purim this year?  What is the most original / weirdest / most sophisticated / most exciting costume that you saw this year?  For Shabbat Zachor: What is the strongest memory that you have from grammar school? Or from high school? Do you have a good memory? Do you know any techniques for improving memory? If you were offered an opportunity to have a perfect memory so that you would never forget anything – would you accept the gift? Is there any advantage to being able to forget sometimes?  Standing up for your principles: "Mordechai would not kneel and bow down" [Esther 3:2]. What is the boundary between standing up and refusing to compromise on a principle and taking into account the surroundings and circumstances? Here is a real life dilemma: You have been invited with all the other workers in your office to celebrate the boss's birthday in a prestigious restaurant. You arrive for the party and discover that it is not kosher. What do you do? Turn around and go back home? Sit with all the others and drink a soda, straight out of the bottle? If you discovered this the day before the party – would your answer be different?  Masks and costumes: Not only children like to put on costumes, adults do too. And not only on Purim but all year round. What kinds of "costumes" are there in the real world? Is there any difference between how people you are not familiar with know you and how people close to you know you? Why is this so? Are our clothes, our profession, and the neighborhood where we live part of a "costume" which we wear, or do they reflect the way we really are? Do you feel that those around you really know you? Do you really know yourself?  What is the reason for the custom to wear costumes on Purim? Is this a proper custom for Judaism, which so strongly emphasizes the traits of truth and honesty, and which teaches us to be ourselves and not act as if we are somebody else?  "What should be done for the man whom the King wants to honor?" – How good are you at appreciating and praising other people? How many compliments did you give in the last twenty-four hours? What is the 12 last compliment that you received? How did you feel when you received it? What is the "proper" way to respond to a compliment?  "The drinks were according to custom" – The most amazing thing about Purim is the custom to become so drunk "that you do not know the difference between 'Haman is cursed' and 'Mordechai is blessed.'" Your intellect is neutralized, and you are even confused about the most fundamental aspect of the story in the Megillah. What is the reason for such behavior, which is outlandish, strange, and "un-Jewish?" How much do you really drink on Purim? What effect does it have on you?

Group Activities

 Who is it? – Take some strips of paper, and on each one write the name of a figure from the Megillah. They are all mixed together in a bag, and each participant takes a strip. He or she must then use pantomime only to describe the character, while the others try to identify who it is.  And Now for the News – Prepare a modern-day news broadcast that is reporting about the events in the Megillah. For example: The removal of Vashti / Choosing Esther / The attempted assassination of the King. An announcer is chosen, along with a reporter at the scene, a news analyst, and a live interview with one of the participants in the event.  A Scene in Court – Bring an event from the Megillah into a court. Parts to be played include lawyers for the prosecution and the defense, a jury, and the judge. Pick a topic for a mock trial. For example: Did Mordechai do the right thing by standing up to Haman even though he was putting himself and all the Jews into danger?  "There will Always be Mistakes" – The mission: Write a scene of something that happened in the Megillah, or prepare a monologue by one of the main characters, putting in as many errors and hidden elements as you can. Present this to the other participants, and see what they can catch.  Find the good – Choose from among the following characters in the Megillah, and find what good things can be learned from them: Vashti, Bigtan and Teresh, Zeresh, Haman, Charvonah. When you put aside Mordechai and Esther and purposely concentrate on the others, with a bit of creativity and imagination, you can find many surprising and beautiful examples.  Alternating through the story – Two or three people are assigned the task of telling the story of the Megillah, where each one says only one word at a time. The first one says the first word, the second one says the next one, and the third one says the next word, and so on. They should do this as rapidly as possible, and they are allowed to ad lib.

For reactions, added material, and to join an e-mail list: milatova.org.il

EXHIBITION ABSTRACTS Remember and Remember, All in One "Gragger" - Yossi Ben-Gal, Heichal Shlomo Museum

The detention camps in Cyprus were constructed by the British Mandate government in Eretz Yisrael to hold more than 53,000 people, most of them Holocaust survivors, who had tried to enter the area of the Mandate. The survivors made their way across the ocean, attempting to break through the British blockade, but most of them were caught near the coast. The camps operated between August 1946 and January 1949. Only a few months after the State of Israel was born, in November 1948, were the detainees gradually allowed to enter the land.

13 In spite of the harsh conditions in the camps, the detainees tried as hard as they could to observe Jewish laws and customs. They lacked prayer books and other tools needed for the rituals. Often they had to restore written texts from memory and to prepare makeshift holy tools from simple raw materials that were available in the camps.

In the permanent exhibition of the Haichal Shlomo Museum, "In Any Case the Letters Fly in the Air," there is a "gragger" (Purim noisemaker) which was made by a Holocaust survivor in one of the Cyprus camps. The body of the noisemaker has a swastika, on which is engraved the phrase, "And they hung Haman" – as an analogy for the Nazi oppressor, Hitler. A bronze coin that was made in Germany at the beginning of the Third Reich (1933) is hanging underneath the swastika.

RIDDLE OF THE WEEK by Yoav Shelosberg, Director of "Quiz and Experience"

Vayikra The name of his book appears in this week's Torah portion – Mincha. His first name is also the word Mincha, pronounced in a different way.

Answers to last week's riddle. It was: The grandfather of the gifted hero who was righteous and upright had the name of an evil king, one of five. And the same word, with a different meaning, appears and is heard when we listen to the Megillah.

The answer is: Chur.

- Chur was the grandfather of Betzalel: "And Betzalel Ben Uri Ben Chur from the tribe of Yehuda made everything that G-d commanded Moshe" [Shemot 38:22]. - Chur is also the name of one of the five kings of Midyan: "And they killed the five Kings of Midyan, with the others who they killed: Evi, Rekem, Tzur, Chur, and Reva – the five Kings of Midyan." [Bamidbar 31:8]. - Chur is a precious cloth that appears in the Megillah: "Chur, karpas, and techeilet, were hung from strings of linen and purple wool..." [Esther 1:6].

(Our thanks to Yamima Sonnenfeld of Maaleh Chever for this riddle.)

* * * * * *

We will be happy to publish your riddles here, with proper credit to the author. Send your suggestions to the e-mail address given below.

Do you have a bar/bat mitzva coming up? Are you looking for a special quiz? To order: www.hidonim.com e-mail: [email protected]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * SHABBAT-ZOMET is an extract from SHABBAT-B'SHABBATO, a weekly bulletin distributed free of charge in hundreds of synagogues in Israel. It is published by the Zomet Institute of Alon Shevut, Israel, under the auspices of the National Religious Party. Translated by: Moshe Goldberg To subscribe: http://www.zomet.org.il/eng/?pg=subscribe&CategoryID=165 Visit the Zomet Institute web site: http://www.zomet.org.il Contact Zomet with comments about this bulletin or questions on the link between modern technology and halacha at: [email protected] Or: Phone: +972-2-9931442; FAX: +972-2-9931889 (Attention: Dan Marans) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

14