The Institute for Dayanim And under the auspices of Beis Horaah in memory of Baruch and Bracha Gross

Pinchas 5774 218

This week's article discusses the question succession and inheritance in positions of authority, and in particular inthe Dear Reader! rabbinate. Does a son automatically fill his father's place as ? The opening of this week's What is the historical picture in this matter, and how are things parashah continues narrating done today? Which halachic sources are relevant for deciding the tale of the amazing the issue? These questions, among others, are discussed in this deed performed by Pinchas: week's article. "Pinchas, son of Elazar, son This week's Q & A addresses the question of winding a watch on of Aharon the Kohen, has Shabbos. turned back My wrath from the people of Israel, in that he was zealous with My zealotry Rabbinic Succession among them, so that I did not consume the people of Parashas Pinchas includes the request of Moshe to Hashem to Israel in My zealotry." appoint a successor as leader of the nation. Clearly, the operative word After being informed that he would not enter the Land of Israel, of the passage is 'zealotry.' Moshe speaks to Hashem: "Let Hashem, who is G-d of spirits of Pinchas was a 'zealot,' and he was rewarded for all flesh, appoint a man upon the congregation, who will go out his zealotry. What is the and come in before them, and who will lead them out and bring meaning of this zealotry, and them in, so that the congregation of Hashem will not be like sheep how can it apply to us? without a shepherd (Bamidbar 27:16-17). It is important to distinguish Moshe's request for the appointment of a new leader raises the the concept of zealotry from issue of how community leaders are appointed. In particular, the the idea of vengeance or question we wish to address is whether community leadership, revenge. The word kinah, such as the rabbinate, passes on by inheritance. which is the disposition with which Pinchas acted, is Although the concept of inheriting a position might seem strange related to the word kinyan, to the modern mind, Poskim over the generations have written meaning the acquisition of extensively concerning the question of rabbinic inheritance: Does, property. Acting as a zealot or ought, a son succeed his father as community rabbi? implies performing an action that means to return missing In fact, there are areas where the concept of rabbinic inheritance ØØ remains today. In the Hassidic world, it is the norm for a son to or lost property. inherit his father's position as Rebbe of a community. And in By contrast, the concept of the Lithuanian community, the status of Rosh is often vengeance does not relate to a passed on from father to son – though this is not always the person's property, but seeks to case. repay evil with evil, redeeming, is it were (as in the case of Should appointments be made based on merit alone, or is the go'el ha-dam), a person's there room for appointment by inheritance? Should we be wounded pride by striking the suspicious of family appointments, as we are today of public source of the injury. appointments in general? How has the halachic approach to The evil that befell the nation this issue changed over time? These questions, among others, on account of Midyan was are addressed below. related to assets, kinyan. Hashem brought the nation of Inheriting the Rabbinate Israel into being: "This nation I have created for Myself, My Opinions are divided concerning succession of rabbinic positions. glory them shall tell" (Yeshayah The Rema (Yoreh Deah 245:22) states his opinion on the 43:21). Moreover, Hashem matter: 'bought' us when He brought "Somebody who serves as the rabbi of a city, even if he took us forth from Egypt: "For to Me the position for himself, cannot be ousted from his standing are the Children of Israel slaves; – even if somebody greater than he comes to town. Even his they are My slaves, which I brought forth from the land of son and his son's son, forever, take precedence over others, Egypt" ( 25:55). provided they continue the ways of their ancestors in fear of G-d, and provided they are somewhat wise." From being slaves of Hashem and under His dominion, the The Rema qualifies the ruling: "However, where the custom is sin of the daughters of Moab to appoint a rabbi for a specified period, or to choose whomever caused the nation of Israel the community wishes, the congregation has the right to do so." to "cling to Ba'al Pe'or." As it were, the people rebelled The source for the idea of succession in the rabbinate is a against the dominion of their ruling of the Rambam concerning public positions in general. Divine Master, and entered the Discussing the laws of kings, Rambam rules as follows: "Not dominion of another power. only the kingship, but rather every position of authority and all The courageous deed of Pinchas appointees of Israel are passed on to a son and to a son's son, returned the 'property rights' of forever – provided the son continues the ways of the father in Hashem. He was jealous (the fear of G-d and in wisdom. If the son is G-d-fearing but not word zealous and the word wise, he succeeds his father in his position and we teach him jealous are almost synonyms) wisdom" (Laws of Kings 1:7). The Rambam rules similarly in on behalf of Hashem, returning the laws of the Beis Hamikdash (Kelei Hamikdash 4:20). the nation of Israel to its true 'owner.' By so doing, he saved Issues of Inheritance the nation from the terrible As noted at the outset, we are familiar with the model of ØØ inheriting leadership from the Hassidic Rebbe. The position of Rebbe is traditionally passed on from father to (eldest) son, consequences that might have much as the Rambam describes, unless there are strong and otherwise overcome them. concrete reasons for rejecting a son as Rebbe. Hashem's 'ownership' of His nation receives its deepest This often results in a broad variety of Hassidic leaders over the expression in the Temple generations: A father might be especially sharp, while his son service. By virtue of his less sharp but especially pious. The leader is not chosen for his heroic act, Pinchas was given attributes, but rather for his lineage. Abiding by the ruling is not the "covenant of everlasting always easy or convenient. priesthood"—the opportunity Shut Ginas Veradim (Yoreh Deah, Kelal 3, no. 7-8) elaborates to participate in this great on the subject and quotes an interesting (and somewhat service. bewildering) anecdote of how the rabbinate in Tzefat was An act of zealotry or jealousy passed on by inheritance. When the local rabbi (Rabbi Avraham does not always imply the violent act that Pinchas had Shalem) passed away, his son had still not reached the age of to perform. Today, in a mitzvos. The townspeople decided to appoint the renowned generation where the flaw in Rabbi Moshe Alshich as their rabbi. Hashem's 'property rights' Their plans were thwarted by Rabbi Shlomo Alkabetz, who is sadly evident, and many of ordered them to wait for the young heir of the rabbinate to our Jewish brethren are distant come of age. Rabbi Alshich was turned down and when the son from the service of Hashem, it appears that our 'jealousy' turned thirteen he took over his father's position! must take a specifically peaceful This ruling is based on a ruling found in Rambam (ibid.) form. concerning a king: If the royal heir is a minor, we wait until Our duty is to demonstrate the he comes of age, at which time we coronate the child as king. pleasant ways of , and The same, according to Rema, applies to a community rabbi. to show those around us how Presumably to avoid such circumstances, we find a decision being under the yoke of Torah of the Slutsk synod from the year 1761 stating that a rabbi is a wonderful merit. Thus, we cannot be appointed over a community while under the age of take our share in returning twenty (see S. Dubnow, Pinkas ha-Medinah (Berlin, 1925), Hashem's 'lost property' to its 226, 961 (4)). original owner. As we enter the time of the The Crown of Torah Three Weeks, let us add a prayer that we should hear no However, not all opinions concur with the extension of Rambam's more evil tidings, and that we ruling concerning inheritance of positions of authority to the should speedily reach the time rabbinate. when "the lost ones will return from Ashur, and those cast out The bases a ruling on the same halachah in will return from Egypt, and they connection with a cantor, who retains the right to bring in shall bow to Hashem in the his son as an assistant and to groom him to take over his Holy Mountain, at ." position (Orach Chaim 53:25). A Chazan is considered, for ØØ this purposes, a public position that is inherited guards the fig will eat it" ( Rabba, Pinchas from father to son. 21:17). Commenting on this halachah, the Magen Avraham The Chasam Sofer assumes that the sons of Moshe (53:33) writes (citing Shut Maharashdam, Yoreh were worthy of the position. If they were unworthy, Deah no. 81) that the concept of inheritance Moshe would surely not have entertained their does not apply to a rabbinic or teaching (Torah) appointment. Rather, although they were worthy position. The Rama of Fano, also quoted by the in their wisdom and their dispositions, Yehoshua Magen Avraham), wrote in this spirit that "there was found worthier, on account of his waiting is no hereditary priority concerning the Crown of upon Moshe with all his strength. We derive from Torah." here that the crown of Torah leadership is not passed on by inheritance. The Chasam Sofer's Opinion In the following responsum (Orach Chaim 13), The opinion of Chasam Sofer, who worked Shut Chasam Sofer writes that he "upheld the tirelessly to restore the past glory of the rabbinate, ruling of the Rema" even concerning matters of is particularly interesting. the rabbinate. A further comment of Chasam Sofer (Choshen Mishpat 21) likewise implies In one responsum (Orach Chaim 12) he that his final decision was to rule in accordance rules according to the above opinion of Shut with the Rema. He explains that this is because Maharashdam that rabbinic positions are not a rabbinic position today involves a measure of inherited. As concrete proof of this, he quotes the authority and community service, and is not limited following Midrash on our Parshah: to teaching Torah and to issuing halachic rulings. "Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying, "May Hashem, For the latter, there is no succession principle and G-d of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the position is given to whoever is most fit. Thus, the congregation." What did Moshe see to request he rules (13) that the position of Chief Rabbi is this matter after the laws of inheritance? Because passed on solely on the basis of merit since the he saw the daughters of Tzelofchad inheriting position required a halachic authority. their father, Moshe thought to himself that it was time for him to claim his own needs: "If daughters It is noteworthy that Mishnah Berurah (53:83) inherit, so too should my sons inherit my position." cites both opinions concerning inheritance of the Hashem told him: "He who guards the fig will eat rabbinate, without issuing a definitive ruling on it" (Mishlei 27). Your sons were idle and did not the matter. study Torah, but Yehoshua served you much and Principles of Inheritance of Positions honored you greatly. He came to hear you at dawn and at dusk. He arranged the benches (for Does the idea of inheritance concerning positions students). He spread out the mats and he waited of authority or the rabbinate (according to the upon you with all his strength. It is worthy for Rema) share the same principles as ordinary him to serve Israel, for he will not lose his reward. inheritance? If there are no sons, does the next [Therefore it is written] "Take Yehoshua bin Nun closest relative inherit the position in their place? for you," to fulfill that which is written, "He who Shut Maharik implies the answer to be in the 4 Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org negative. Discussing the question of intangible find the following comment: inheritance (the inheritance of tovas hanaah), "In order that his rule should extend for many Maharik (Shoresh 161) asks a question on those days, he and his sons among Israel" – "he and authorities who maintain that an intangible right his sons," to teach us that if he dies, his son takes is not inherited: Surely we find that positions of his place. How do we know that this is true even authority are inherited by sons? for all positions of authority? Therefore the verse Maharik replies that the two concepts are distinct, states, "he and his sons among Israel"—his sons and we cannot infer from inheritance of positions take over his position for any [position] within to that of possessions. Although he does not Israel. elaborate on this distinction, it seems that the rationale is that inheritance of a position is not The law of inheriting positions of authority is true inheritance. This stands to reason: A position thus not comparable with the regular concept of is not an asset, and set rules of inheritance cannot inheritance, but is confined to a son taking over apply. The source for succession is moreover not his father's position. the laws of inheritance, but rather the principles Exceptions to the Rule of Inheritance of succession for kings. Thus, we do not find that where no son survives Based on this understanding, we can understand the father succeeds his son, because the halachah a number of exceptions that Poskim make to the is limited to a son alone who "takes the place principle of rabbinic inheritance. The concept of his father." Furthermore, we find (as quoted of rabbinic inheritance is not a rigid inheritance. above from Shulchan Aruch) that when a rabbi Although passing on the beacon from father to (or somebody in a position of authority) becomes son is an ideal, its parameters remain far from old he may have the right to hand over the those of material ownership. position to his son – though there is no actual Although he strongly affirms the concept of inheritance while a person lives. inheriting a rabbinic position, the Avnei Nezer (312, in a passage written by his son) writes It is noteworthy that attempts to appoint a son in that a son only inherits his father's position the father's lifetime did not always run smoothly. when the son is supported by the majority of the For example, when Rabbi Shmuel Laniado tried to congregation (he quotes that this was also ruled appoint his son Rabbi Efraim over the community by Harav Yehoshua of Kutna and by others). A of Aleppo, a great controversy flared. Ultimately, similar position is adopted by Shut Maharam Shik Rabbi Shmuel passed away and only then was (Yoreh Deah 228), the renowned disciple of Rabbi Efraim was appointed to the position. Chasam Sofer. Instead of being a law with the regular parameters Likewise, we can understand the debate among of inheritance, the inheritance of the rabbinate is authorities concerning whether a son-in-law thus restricted to a son's taking over his father's inherits the position of his father-in-law. Some position. Indeed, this follows the precedent of a rule that in the absence of a son, a son-in-law prince who takes over from his father the king. inherits the position (see end of Shut Rema, This understanding is implied by Sifri, where we and see Beis Yitzchak, Yoreh De'ah 2:70, who Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org ØØ5 discusses whether a son-in-law takes precedence position of a modern rabbi, who is limited by over a grandson or not). Yet, Shut Avodas various boards and committees, cannot be called Hagershuni (no. 49) writes that the principle of a position of authority that is handed down by rabbinic inheritance does not apply to sons-in- inheritance (See Shut Shevet Halevi, Vol. 4, law at all. no. 128, who writes that this depends on the It is interesting to note a ruling issued by Maharit individual circumstances of each case). Algazi (Simchas Yom Tov, no. 6), whereby a A later enactment of AHU (Altona, Hamburg, grandson (the son of a daughter) takes precedence Wansbeck) from 1723 demonstrates the over a brother. The ruling implies that the regular concern for the negative influence of family order of inheritance applies even to a rabbinic appointments: "No president of the rabbinic or other public position. This, however, does not court should be appointed who has some family appear to be the mainstream opinion. relations in town or Mehutanim's with whom he is related by marriage." This concern filtered Historical and Modern Applications through to matters of succession. For instance, The concept of the local rabbi has changed over Shut Chavas Yair (no. 31) testifies that despite the generations. By contrast with ancient times, his later father's attempts – his father was rabbi today's are often hired under contract of the community – the community refused to – whether by a particular Synagogue, or by a appoint him as rabbi in his place. broader Jewish body. A contractual agreement is In modern times of tight control over public not inherited by a rabbi's sons (as noted above appointments, and given the general disdain for from the Rema). nepotism, it is generally in the best interest of In this spirit we find the following Takanah the rabbinate to decide appointments by merit (enactment) in the Pinkas HaTakanos of Lithuania, and not by family credentials. Moreover, in many from the year 1623: "The president of a communities especially amongst the benei Torah rabbinical court who has received an appointment in Eretz Yisroail the main function of the Rav is for a limited period, when not rehired and agreed to pasken sheilos, which even according to the upon, is released from the rabbinate [at the end Chasam Sofer is not passed on to a son. of this period], and there is absolutely no need to In fact, we even find objections in the Hassidic remind him before the end of his term. When not world, running back to the times of the Divrei rehired, he will automatically be released, without Chaim, to inheritance of the Rebbe position. In any further notification." a famous responsum (Yoreh Deah 53; Choshen Mishpat Vol. 2, no. 32) Rabbi Chaim of Sanz The enactment does not relate to matters of ruled that there is no succession for the position inheritance. Yet, it forcefully makes the point of a of Rebbe, since the key factor is ability and merit contractual agreement, ensuring that there should rather than lineage. Of course, others disagreed be no life appointments and, by implication, no and continue to do so, and in Sanz, as in virtually succession of sons. all Hassidic branches, leadership is passed from Rav Moshe Shternbuch (Teshuvos Vehanhagos, father to son. Vol. 1 no. 719) writes that the nature of the 6 Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org For a fuller discussion of this issue please see see Shaul Stampfer, "Inheritance of the Rabbinate Umka Dedina (posted on www.din.org.il and in Eastern Europe in the Modem Period – Causes, published by the Institute for Dayanim), Vol. 2, Factors and Development over Time," Jewish pp. 285-300. For interesting historical details, History 13:1 (1999).

c Halachic d to Questions that have been asked on our website dinonline.org

Question: Can a person wind a mechanical watch on Shabbos? Does it make a difference if the watch is stopped or ticking? What about a self-winding watch?

Answer: It is not permitted to wind up a mechanical watch on Shabbos. This applies even when the watch is ticking, unless there is an urgent need, for which it is permitted to wind an already-ticking watch. It is permitted to wear an already-ticking, self-winding watch on Shabbos.

Sources: The Chayei Adam (44:19) rules that winding a stopped watch is prohibited because of tikun mana, an act of repair, and therefore a Torah prohibition. It is a chiddush to consider the watch to be 'broken' in its stopped state, and several poskim therefore dispute this logic (see Panim Me’iros 2:123; Ya’avatz 1:41; Kesav Sofer 55; Sho’el U-Meishiv 6:53). Yet, the general consensus is that there is at least a rabbinical prohibition involved in winding up the watch (see Da’as Torah 338:3; Minchas Shabbos 80:241), and as the Mishnah Berurah (338:15; see also 252:50) rules, it is therefore forbidden to wind up a watch on Shabbos. This is also the prevalent custom (see Kesav Sofer 55; Minchas Shlomo 9). Interestingly, according to the Chazon Ish (Orach Chaim 50:9) winding up a watch is considered “bringing it to life,” and prohibited on account of boneh (much like electricity). In the case of an already ticking watch, neither rationales apply (fixing a broken vessel and boneh), and the Da’as Torah 338:3 thus writes that the custom is to be lenient. However, the Mishnah Berurah (338:15) is stringent even concerning a ticking watch, and this is the accepted custom (see Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasah 28:19), unless there is an urgent need. There is no problem in wearing a self-winding watch while it is ticking. However, if the watch has stopped, one should not put it on and cause it to begin ticking. See Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasah 28:28, and sources cited in the footnote.

Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org 7