Volume 25 Number 46
                      Produced: Fri Dec 20  0:12:41 1996

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Aliya by Aliya Summary
         [Saul Mashbaum]
Barrenness of Soro Imainu
         [David Oratz]
Benei God and Benei Reuvein
         [Shlomo Noach and Ruchel Mandel]
Chazal's vindication of Tzadikim
         [Daniel Eidensohn]
         [Thierry Dana-Picard]
Menashe's inclusion with Reuven/Gad  (25:41)
         [Myron Chaitovsky]
Sarah's age
         [Art Kamlet]
Sarah's Age
         [Rick Turkel]
Sedrah Explanation (2)
         [Josh Hoexter, Shoshana L. Boublil]
         [Ovadiah Dubin]
         [Carl Sherer]


From: <mshalom@...> (Saul Mashbaum)
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 10:10:32 EST
Subject: Aliya by Aliya Summary

The Israel Center, the OU/NCSY "presence" in Yerushalayim, publishes a
weekly parshat hashavu publication called Torah Tidbits which is
available through email. The publication is edited by Phil Chernofsky
and includes an aliya-by-aliya summary of the parsha, plus divrei Torah,
halachic summaries, insights on the Jewish calendar, and much more. It's
an excellent publication which I recommend highly.

To subscribe, write <philch@...> or philch@netmedia.net.il and

subscribe tt <your name>

in the message.

The publication also has a website: www.cyberscribe.com/tt

[This reference was also pointed to by:
	Carl Sherer - <sherer@...>
	Hillel E. Markowitz <hem@...>
	Geoffrey Shisler <geoffrey@...>

Saul Mashbaum


From: David Oratz <dovid@...>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 15:39:51 +0200
Subject: Barrenness of Soro Imainu

In volume 25 #22 the Silvers write:  
"Help !! Can anyone solve this ...  

Beraishis 11:30         Soro Imainu was barren (ein lo volod)  
Gemorah Yevamos 64b     on the above possuk - she had no womb  
Beraishis 18:11         Soro Imainu had stopped menstruating (see Rashi)  

If she did not have a womb, how could she have stopped  
menstruating ?"  

 First of all, there is no conceptual problem in saying that Rashi
explains according to his principle of sticking to the Pshat even when a
Midrash contradicts the pshat. Accordingly, Rashi, and all those who
explain "Chadal [lihiyos leSara Orach Kanashim]" as "[Sara] stopped
[menstruating]", don't have to say that she had no womb.
 The real question is how Chazal, who do say she had no womb, explain
"Chadal". However, the same structure ("Chadal L...") is used in
Bemidbar (9:13) to mean "holding back" (targum translates
"Veyismena). If so, "Chadal lihiyos leSara Orach kanashim" can be
translated "Menstruation was withheld [Nimna] from Sara".

There is no question that Chadal=stopped is closer to pshat than
Chadal=withheld. Pshat is not the issue here, however, rather how to
understand the posuk according to the Midrash.

Dovid Oratz


From: Shlomo Noach and Ruchel Mandel <snm@...>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 23:52:19 -0500
Subject: Benei God and Benei Reuvein

Jonathon Katz (vol 25 #41) three questions on the parsha of Benei God and
Benei reuvein. 

1) Where does the half of Sheivet Menashe come in?

The Ramban says that when Sheivet Menashe saw that Reuvein and God got on
Eiver Hayarden they also wanted.

2) It Seems from the Pasuk that says If Benei God and Reuvein don't go over
that they will get in Eretz Yisrael that there is something wrong with
getting eretz yisrael.

The Mishne in Kedushin Daf Samech Aleph brings a Machlokas Reb Meir and Reb
Chanina about this Pasuk. Reb Meir learns from here that Every time you
make a Tenai you have to make it a Tenai Koful. (Meaning you have to speak
out both sides if you a hundred dollars then you are divorced If you don't
give me a hundred dollars then you aren't divorced.) If you don't make a
Tenai Koful then the Tenai doesn't work and she will be divorced even if
she doesn't give him the hundred dollars. Reb Chanina says that the reason
the Torah says that if they don't cross the Yardein that they will get in
Eretz Yisrael you would think that they don't get anything.

3) Why did Moishe give in

I'm not exactly sure what the question is but the Gr"a says the Benei God
and Benei Reuvain were trying to be Mekadeish Eiver Hayrdein with kedushas
Eretz Yisrael.

I hope this has veen helpful.

                              Boruch  Chaim Mandel


From: Daniel Eidensohn <yadmoshe@...>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 12:19:41 -0800
Subject: Chazal's vindication of Tzadikim

>From: Nahum Spirn <spirn@...>
>        In MJ #41 David Herskovic asks why do Chazal vindicate Reuven,
>saying that he did not in actuality sleep with Bilhah, but vilify Yosef,
>saying (with no apparent compelling reason from the text) he had
>intentions of sleeping with Mrs. Potiphar?
>        In Rav Zvi Hirsch Chajes's Introduction to the Talmud, he asks
>this question on the Chazal regarding Yosef - not just Reuven, but *all*
>tzaddikim in Tanach are generally vindicated by Chazal (to bring out the
>idea of mitzvah goreres mitzvah, one mitzvah leads to another). Why is
>Yosef the exception?
>        He answers: It is no big deal to control your passion when you
>are not turned on.  Yosef is called "hatzaddik" precisely because he
>controlled himself *despite* having the desire to be with Potiphar's
>wife.  Chazal are pointing to Yosef's greatness, not the opposite.

It is important to note that this issue is part of a larger question -
how to understand aggada.

The Maharetz Chajes seems to assert that Chazal had a general rule or
bias to vindicate Tzadikim but didn't necessarily know what actually
happened. It is also possible to understand the Ramchal to have a
similar approach (in his introduction to aggada - found in beginning of
Ein Yaakov and translated by Rabbi Aaron Feldman in "The Juggler and the

In a strong attack on the Mahretz Chajes - the major modern Kabbalist
Rabbi Shlomo Eliyashiv asserts that Chazal are describing things they
knew directly through Ruach HaKodesh and are not guessing or merely
applying general principles.[Found in "Leshem" Chelek II Drasha 4 page
161]. Therefore they are always describing what actually happened. They
don't make up interpretations just to make Tzadikim look good.

This distinction seems reflected in the Michtav M'Eliyahu IV page 353
versus the view of Rabbi S.R. Hirsch. See also the criticism of the
Shaloh HaKodesh directed against the Ohr Zaruah found in the
introduction to Ein Yaakov.


From: Thierry Dana-Picard <dana@...>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 11:16:35 +0200 (IST)
Subject: Girgashi

I have been disconnected for a long time, so I do not know whether the
following source has already been mentioned by somebody else.

After Yehoshua sent his famous three letters to the Erets Canaan's
inhabitants, the Girgashi left Erets Israel and got an equivalent land,
namely Africa. The Midrach Rabba, end of Parashat Noa'h, says that
Africa is actually Tunisia.

It is worth to have a look to Sanhedrin, beginning of Perek 'Helek
(about Daf 82), where African people and some special people from Judea
and Samaria have an argument with Israel at Alexander's court. Have a
look also on Rashi's commentary on the spot: he explains who are really
all these people.

Sorry for not giving the exact page number, I have no Gemara here. 

Noa'h Dana-Picard


From: <MCHAIT.BROOKLAW@...> (Myron Chaitovsky)
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 09:52 EST
Subject: Re: Menashe's inclusion with Reuven/Gad  (25:41)

Jonathan Katz (25:41) wants to know why Menashe is suddenly included in
the land grant given to the tribes of Reuven and Gad in Transjordan
(Bamidbar/Numbers 32).

A number of commentators state the idea that Moshe feared that if he
were to allow two tribes to live on their own, they would eventually
feel that they had no stake in the Land of Israel proper.Thus, he
integrated among them another group which, because its members lived on
BOTH sides of the Jordan, would maintain its family and communal ties
with the 'mainland', and keep the other two tribes 'in line'.

But this begs the question: Why split up Menashe? Why not another tribe?

To this, MeAm Lo'ez answers that at the juncture of Miketz and Vayigash,
which we read at this very time of year, it is Menashe, the Midrash
says, who was Yosef's agent. His 'investigation/ interrogation' of the
brothers leads to great anguish. While a necessary pre-requisite to the
denouement of the story, Menashe is yet 'punished' by living among his
fellow tribes as a 'split' tribe.


From: Art Kamlet <kamlet@...>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 01:21:38 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re:  Sarah's age

<CHIHAL@...> (Yeshaya Halevi) writes,
>I'm puzzled.  Yeetzhak got his name (root: laugh) because laughter
>greeted the thought that an old couple such as Avraham and Sara would give
>birth to a son.  But when Yeeshamel was born, Avraham was 86 and Sara was 76;
>rather an advanced age.  (Even Avraham thought this was old, as evidenced by
>the fact that later he was to say that his being 100 and Sarah's being 90 was

I'm not sure what the question is, but as long as you brought it up,
after Sarah dies, Abraham once more marries (to Keturah, who
commentators say might have been Hagar) and has more children.

Now if G-d intervenes and causes Abraham and Sarah to have a child so
through Isaac the Jewish people will come, what's the deal with Abraham
having more children with Keturah, when he is even older?  Did G-d
specifically intervene here too?  If yes, why?

Art Kamlet   Columbus, Ohio    <kamlet@...>  

From: <rturkel@...> (Rick Turkel)
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 09:45:56 -0500
Subject: Sarah's Age

	Yeshaya Halevi (<Chihal@...>) asked about old age as it
relates to Avraham and Sarah at the time of Yishma'el's birth.

	An 86-year-old man fathering a child, while rather unusual, is
not that surprising since male fertility is known to continue into late
old age.  If I remember correctly, the late Charlie Chaplin fathered a
child when he was past 80 years of age.  As for Sara's age at the time,
it was quite irrelevant - Hagar, not Sarah, was Yishma'el's mother, and
while we don't have any record of her age relative to Sarah's I think we
can safely assume that Hagar was the younger of the two.

	Chag sameach.

Rick Turkel         (___  _____  _  _  _  _  __     _  ___   _   _  _  ___
<rturkel@...>)oh.us|   |  \  )  |/  \     |    |   |   \__)    |
<rturkel@...>        /      |  _| __)/   | ___)    | ___|_  |  _(  \    |
Rich or poor, it's good to have money.  Ko rano rani | u jamu pada.


From: Josh Hoexter <jhoexter@...>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 00:52:08 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Sedrah Explanation

> From: <srni@...> (Rabbi Adam & Shosh Hill)
> Does anyone know of a publication where each Aliyah is described
> separately.

Chabad-Lubavitch provides this *exact* service on-line. To see their brief
summary via gopher, go to
gopher.chabad.org:70/00/update/files/w9  - for the upcoming Sedra
gopher.chabad.org:70/11/weekly/brief.w9  - to access all summaries

To recieve a summary every week via e-mail, send mail to
<listserv@...> and in the subject or body write "Subscribe W-9".
They have a number of "electronic publications" available at
lubavitch.chabad.org/  - on gopher
http://www.chabad.org  - on the web.

ps to get gopher documents using a web browser type eg

 - Josh Hoexter

From: <toramada@...> (Shoshana L. Boublil)
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 96 13:01:36 PST
Subject: Sedrah Explanation

> Does anyone know of a publication where each Aliyah is described
> separately.

You may find it of interest that Rabbi Barde'a, Chief Rabbi of Ramat-Gan
(Sephardi) is now in the process of publishing such a book.

Shoshana, Ramat-Gan
come visit: www.hilonet.com/achdut/ - the Achdut Yisrael web site!
Name: Shoshana L. Boublil
E-mail: <toramada@...>


From: <ovad@...> (Ovadiah Dubin)
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 20:20:14 EST
Subject: Re: Trop

I am interested to learn if anyone has any info on the Troppe for Devorin
" uritzon shochni sneh"  It would seem that the tipcha should be on the
ritzon, not on the shochni. 
  In ref to Gen. 9:29 (m-j 44 Saul mash baum) The Minchas shai has 3
similar cases
Noach, Lemech, and Chanoch

   Ovadiah Dubin


From: Carl Sherer <sherer@...>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 20:43:16 +0000
Subject: Yissachar

Saul Mashbaum writes:

> In "Nefesh Harav", his book about Rabbi Yosef Dov Halevi Soloveichik
> zt"l (the Rov), Rabbi Hershel Shachter, shlita, one of the Rov's most
> outstanding talmidim, cites two variants of the standard practice of
> pronouncing Yissachar's name as if it contained only one sin:


> 2) Out of doubt, in his private minyan the Rov directed the baal Koreh
> to read the name Yissachar twice - once with one sin and once with two -
> each time it appears up to Parshat Pinchas; it was read once, with one
> sin, afterwards.
> See Nefesh Harav page 308.

One small clarification which does not appear in the book, but which 
I know to be true because I had the privilege of reading for the Rav 
zt"l on a number of occasions in the early 1970's.  When a passuk had 
the name Yissachar in it, the Rav's practice was not just to repeat 
the name once as Yissachar and once as Yissaschar, but to re-read the 
entire passuk, once with Yissachar and once with Yissaschar.

A similar practice is commonly followed with regard to the word 
"zayin, chof, resh" (zacher, zecher) in Dvarim 25:19 on Shabbos 
Zachor (and in many congregations, when Ki Setzei is read as well).

-- Carl Sherer

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

Carl and Adina Sherer


End of Volume 25 Issue 46