S E P H a R D I C
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
S E P H A R D I C Family, Business, & Jewish Life Through the Prism of Halacha VOLUME 5779 • ISSUE XXV • PARASHAT TZAV • A PUBLICATION OF THE SEPHARDIC HALACHA CENTER possibility of mitzva fulfillment exists. SCROLL R’ Tzvi Pesach Frank in Mikra’ay Kodesh (Megilla 11) cites a different responsum of the Halachot and CALL: Ketanot (2:45) where he says the hearing im- paired may listen to the Megilla with ear trum- May One Hear the Megilla by pets. Asks R’ Tzvi Pesach: Doesn’t this contradict Electronic Means? the ruling of the Halachot Ketanot about the Adapted from a shiur by Rav Eliezer Gewirtzman cave? Some answer that the difference lies in Adapted from a Parasha & Halacha Shiur by Rav Yosef Greenwald on Parashat Tzav the distance that the sound must travel. ANSWERING THE CALL But R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (1:9) estab- A Matter of Taste lishes that the sound that emerges from tele- One Purim some years ago, I was about The Halacha is that forbidden food that is to begin the Megilla reading when a man phones, microphones, and hearing aids is a new absorbed in a mixture forbids the entire mix- approached and placed a cell phone on the one that cannot be attributed to the speaker. ture (within a set of rules and limitations). This bima. He explained that his father lived in a The Tzitz Eliezer agrees in many places, but the rule is known as “Ta’am K’Ikar” – a taste is like place with no Megilla reading; could he listen Igrot Moshe (O.C. 2:108) and Chazon Ish do not, to ours by phone? the entity itself. Maran (Y.D. 98) follows many although R’ Moshe permits only reluctantly in Rishonim who hold that this rule is MiD’Orai- case of need. (Their argument in favor would The Halachot Ketanot (2:276) discusses the ta. Rashi (Hullin 97b) says it is generally D’Ra- appear to pertain to digital technology as well.) case of a man reading the Megilla inside a banan except for Kodashim. MiD’Oraita, it is Some posit that a hearing aid wearer who can cave while another man some distance from Battel B’Rov (nullified in a majority). hear minimally without assistance, and uses the the cave listens to the echo. He rules that the Rashi and the Ra’avad argue that if Ta’am K’Ikar devices only for amplification, can fulfill mitzv- echo is not the voice of the reader, and the were to be MiD’Oraita, then, if less than a Ka- ot with a hearing aid. If he can position himself listener does not fulfill the mitzva. In a paren- Zayit of non-kosher meat dissolves into a soup near enough to the ba’al koray that he could thetical note, the publisher observes that the and is not Battel B’Shishim (there is no sixty in hear at least something unassisted, he should same logic would apply to hearing the Megilla the soup to nullify it) one is Hayav for eating do so to avoid the Halachic controversy. by phone. This inference is echoed by the Ma- a KaZayit of the soup on its own right, as the harsham in Da’at Torah (O.C. 689). One who is reading only for a hearing aid-de- soup now becomes a non-kosher entity. How- pendent person should do so without a bracha. Minchat Elazar (2:72) is inclined to say that ever, most Rishonim maintain that non-kosher mitzvot other than shofar—where the Mishna One who must hear the Megilla by phone taste is not nullified because of its importance. (Rosh Hashana 3:7) specifically excludes hear- should also not make a bracha. R’ Moshe holds (continued on page 2) ing an echo because one must hear the shofar that a telephone is inferior to a microphone or directly—can be fulfilled telephonically. Neta hearing aid due to the distance the signal must Sha’ashuim (4), a disciple of the Minchat Ela- traverse. Elevate your Inbox. zar, rejects the view of the Halachot Ketanot, One may not taste food at night until after Me- Scan here to receive the weekly because he maintains that a phone transmits gilla, unlike other mitzvot that only prohibit a email version of the Halacha Journal the speaker’s actual voice. He further says that full meal prior to their fulfillment. Maran rules spotlight his teacher, the Minchat Elazar, only prohibited that if one cannot hold out fasting that long, it hearing shofar by phone because phone audio is better that he read as early as plag haMin- (continued quality in his time was very poor. cha—1.25 Halachic hours before sunset—than on back) It would seem that with digital communica- eat something before reading. The Pri Chadash tion, like cellular phones or some landlines, disagrees, saying that the Megilla must not be these authorities would agree that what the read before tzait hakochavim (the emergence of the stars) under any circumstances. listener hears is not the speaker’s voice and no OR SIGN UP AT BHHJ.ORG (continued on back) Don’t miss our upcoming Business Halacha Journal topic on Ribbit. Don’t yet receive it? Visit www.TheSHC.org, call us at 732.9300.SHC (742) or email [email protected] Hacham Ovadia Yosef ztz”l in Hazon Ovadia cham by ensuring that he is comfortable. GENERAL (Hilchot Purim pg. 167) also follows the Zera Q: Does the household have to know that one Yaakov (Hacham Ovadia was quoted as saying is giving Matanot La’Evyonim on their behalf? that the amount should be “enough to buy HALACHA A: When the head of the household gives Mat- himself a Falafel”). Matanot La’Evyonim FAQ’s anot La’Evyonim on behalf of his wife and chil- The Ohr L’Tzion (ibid) points out that despite dren, the Poskim discuss whether they have By Rav Mordechai Lebhar, Posek for the SHC and Rosh Kollel LINK, Los Angeles the fact that one can technically fulfill the Mitz- to be aware that the money is given on their vah with a small amount, if however, the per- behalf or whether the fact that he is Mezake son receiving is an important person, such as (benefiting) them with the Mitzva, should be a Talmid Hacham, one should be careful to enough to consider as though they have ful- give a honorable sum that would not embar- filled their obligation themselves. rass them. If one does not have this amount There are instances where one is able to give of money to give, he should find another poor money on behalf of someone else despite the person that would accept this small sum. fact that they are not aware of the giver’s inten- It should be noted, that if one gives a sum to tions, as the Gemara in Ketubot (98) discusses the Rabbi or another messenger to give Mat- regarding the giving of the Mahatzit HaShekel anot La’Evyonim on his behalf and he gives an for someone that one has vowed not to derive amount from the collective amount collected, pleasure from. However, the Netivot HaMish- and this indeed is a proper sum, this concern Q: How much do I have to give for Matanot pat (cf Teshuvat Hemdat Shelomo 32) writes would be avoided. La’Evyonim? that this is only with regards to the Mitzva of Similarly, Rav Elyashiv ztz”l has been quoted Shekalim, where the Mitzva is that every Jew A: Ribbi Yaakov Haim Benaim, one of the great many times saying that one who wishes to should have a Shekel given on his account, how- sages of Morocco in the 18th century, in his work fulfill the Mitzvah in the most proper fashion ever, a Mitzva that is incumbent on a person to Zera Yaakov (§11) is the common source quot- should give an amount that is sufficient to do with his own body (Hovat HaGuf) such as ed regarding this question. Following a lengthy make a poor person happy, as this is the es- Pidyon HaBen, cannot be fulfilled through the discussion, he finds support in the commentary sence of the Mitzva. This amount is relative. If agency of someone else. of the Ran in Masechet Megila (Perek Megila this is difficult for a person, Rav Elyashiv sug- Nikret) that distinguishes between Mishloah Subsequently, with regards to the Mitzva of gests that it is preferable to give two important Manot and Matanot La’Evyonim, that while we Matanot La’Evyonim, where the Mitzva has to donations than many small donations. need to send two items for Mishloah Manot, be done by one’s self, one would have to have even one gift suffices for Matanot La’Evyonim Although this is not the common practice, one the knowledge that the Mitzva is being done since to a poor person that is enough to glad- who wishes to be stringent in this Mitzva is for them (see Shevut Yitzhak, Purim 8). Further- den him. Therefore, reasons Rabbi Benaim, that praiseworthy. As the Rambam writes (Mishne more, Rav Elyashiv ztz”l is quoted as saying that just as for Mishloah Manot we give items that Torah, Hil. Hanuka U’Megila 2:17): since Matanot La’Evyonim are given from the are fit for a meal, so too for Matanot La’Evyonim “One should rather spend more money on person’s money, one has to consent to the giv- we should give a gift that can be used toward gifts to the poor than on his Purim banquet ing, otherwise it is not considered as they have a meal.