Newsletter Aw[ Yl [Wrp Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Two Objectives of the Institution of Marriage
Rabbi Dr. Binyamin Lau is the Rosh Beit Midrash of Beit Morasha in Jerusalem and is the author of numerous articles and books. THE TWO OBJECTIVES OF THE INSTITUTION OF MAR R IAGE1 “For She is Your Companion, and the Wife of Your Covenant.” (Malakhi 2:14) Rabbi Dr. Binyamin Lau Introduction: Marriage According to Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In the beginning of his article on marriage,2 Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik notes that there are two basic theories about the institution of marriage. The first expresses commitment to the welfare of the group outside the matrimonial union, the partners to the marriage placing themselves at the service of society. The second expresses commitment within the matrimonial union, a commit- ment rooted in the experience of the joining of two individuals thirsting for love and fellowship. One practical difference between the two theories relates to the place assigned to procreation. According to the first theory, having children is the central element upon which the entire structure of marriage rests. Remove that obligation from marriage, and the institution loses all its meaning. According to the second theory, the significance of marriage is not diminished by the absence of offspring. The very union of the wedded partners is itself the desired creation. In his typical manner,3 here too Rabbi Soloveitchik tries to uncover both of these motifs in Scripture. The command to “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen.1:28) expresses the essence and goal of the man created in the first chapter of the book of Genesis. Man’s obligation to procreate, which appears in chapter 1, is presented as part of man being God’s partner in the continuous process of creation. -
Halachic Aspects of Vaccination
Nature&Science By Edward Reichman Halachic Aspects of Vaccination Perhaps it is because we live in When potential relief from the horrors smallpox and beseeching the rabbis of twenty-first century America, a coun- of the disease came on the horizon, his generation to allow inoculation. try largely immune from true epi- there must have been unabashed ex- However, the treatment was con- demics, that we take vaccination for citement. The cure, or, more accu- sidered controversial at the time, as granted and some parents even con- rately, the mechanism of disease never in the history of mankind had sider not vaccinating their children. A prevention, however, was unique in the one taken a healthy individual and in- Jew living in the eighteenth century history of medicine: it required expos- jected him with the very cause of an would have longed for respite from the ing healthy individuals to disease, illness, even if the objective was to relentless onslaught of diseases, and hopefully a mild form, in order to pre- prevent a more severe disease. This could only have dreamed of having a vent the development of a more seri- unique treatment posed a dilemma for way to prevent them. The thought of ous disease. The procedure involved the Torah-observant Jew. The Torah refusing vaccinations would never the removal of fluid from the pox of an gives license to the physician to heal have entered his mind. Unfortunately, afflicted patient, and the subsequent the sick, but does it give him license to nowadays, as a result of misleading in- injection of that virulent fluid into the bestow illness upon the healthy, albeit formation, some parents are confused body of a healthy individual. -
Laws of Medical Treatment on Shabbat
Laws of Medical Treatment on Shabbat Dov Karoll The permissibility of treatment of the ill on Shabbat varies from mandated and required even when numerous melachot would need to be violated, to permitted, provided it does not violate any melachot, to prohibited for the simple fact that it is medical treatment. What factors lead to such a great disparity? The primary, crucial distinction at work here is between medi- cal treatment that involves saving a life (piku’ach nefesh), which is permitted and even required, even if it means violating the normal rules of Shabbat, and providing medical treatment in other cases, regarding which the rules are more complex. When is medical treatment required even if it involves violating melachot? The Rambam is very clear on this issue:1 It is forbidden to delay in violating Shabbat for a person who is dangerously ill (choleh she-yesh bo sakkana), as it says [in the Gemara, based on a verse]: “[Regarding the laws of the Torah] ‘man shall fulfill them and live,’2 rather than fulfill them to die.”3 We learn from here that the laws of the Torah are not to 1 Hilchot Shabbat 2:3. This passage is also cited in Shemirat Shabbat Ke-Hilchatah at the beginning of his discussion of the laws of piku’ach nefesh on Shabbat (32:1). Translation mine. 2 Vayikra 18:5. 3 The verse is cited, and the law is derived, in the Gemara Yoma 85b, where this explanation of Rav Yehuda in the name of Shmuel is one of many sources provid- ed for the notion of saving lives overriding Shabbat observance (starting on 85a). -
Parshas Matos Masei the Rest of the Story
CANDLELIGHTING: 8:44 VOLUME 1 ISSUE 14 כ"ח תמוז תשע"ג SHABBOS ENDS: AFTER 9:47 72 MIN 10:14 JULY 6, 2013 PARSHAS MATOS MASEI THE REST OF THE STORY: By R‟ Aaron Kutnowski Yehuda son of Tema said: Be bold like a leopard … to do the will of What’s behind the passuk? our Father in Heaven. (Pirkei Avos, 5: 23) By R‟ Yosef Dovid Rothbart After their great victory over Midian, the Bnei Yisroel brought back The Torah relates how Moshe assembled 1,000 men from each of the many spoils of war. Instructed by Hashem, Moshe allotted the spoils Shevatim and sent them out into battle against Midian. The Torah to the Bnei Yisroel including Elazar HaKohen and Shevet Levi. repeats this three times (Possukim 4-5) to teach us that although only Usually Kohanim and Leviim do not receive a portion from the 1,000 warriors fought the battle, 3,000 men from every Shevet were spoils of war. What, then, made the war against Midian different so selected to partake in this battle. Two thousand were needed to fight that Elazar HaKohen and Shevet Levi received portions? the war and guard the supplies, and 1,000 were to daven for the The Medrash Tanchuma states that after Pinchos zealously speared soldiers who were out in the battlefield. Zimri, the Bnei Yisroel were very upset. They protested, saying: Moshe chose so few soldiers to demonstrate to the Jewish people the “Have you seen the son of [Yisro] whose mother‟s father fattened terrible consequences of sin. -