Shabbat Parashat Nitzavim Vayeilech 5773
Nitzavim Vayeilech | 25 Elul 5773 | 31/08/2013
In the section of the Torah reading that deals with teshuva (repentance), the Torah says: “… when Hashem will return to rejoice (yasus) over you for good like he rejoiced over your forefathers” (Devarim 30:9). Hundreds of years later, the prophet Yeshaya (in the haftara of Nitzavim) uses this root: “I will certainly rejoice (sos asis) in Hashem, my heart will be gleeful in my G-d, for He has dressed me in clothes of salvation, a coat of benevolence he has placed over me, like a bridegroom who is adorned with grandeur and like a bride who puts on her jewelry” (Yeshaya 61:10). The joy of a bride and groom has indeed turned into the symbol of the liberation of Israel.
If I make a beracha on one food and then later decide to eat other foods of the same beracha, do I need to make a new beracha, or does the initial one cover them?
[We continue the story of the demand made of Chanina to stop setting the calendar outside of Eretz Yisrael.] [The emissaries of the rabbis of Eretz Yisrael] said [to Chanina]: They said to us: “Go and tell him in our name [to cease].” If he listens, good; and if not, he shall be excommunicated. And tell our brothers in the Diaspora. If they listen to us, good; if not, let them go up to a mountain. Achiya can build an altar; Chanaya can play a musical instrument, and all can apostatize and say: “We have no part in the G-d of Israel.” Immediately, the whole nation broke out in crying and said: “Heaven forbid; we do have a part in the G-d of Israel.”
You asked about the case where Shimon has a written ruling of beit din stating that Reuven owes him money and now Reuven claims that he paid after beit din’s ruling and Shimon denies receiving it. You should know that this is the subject of a machloket between the Ra’avya, who says that the defendant is believed that he paid, and the Maharam, who says that he is not believed. The Maharam brought a proof. [Our text of the Maharik says that the proof is from the 10th perek of Bava Batra, but the Beit Yosef (Choshen Mishpat 19) cites Teshuvot Maimoniot, Mishpatim 66 as the location of the Maharam and, there he brings the following proof from the 1st perek of Bava Metzia (17a). The gemara says that if beit din instructed the defendant to pay, he is believed to say that he did so, and therefore if the plaintiff requests somewhat after the ruling to commit it to writing, we do not do so out of concern that the award was already paid. The Maharam reasons that the subsequent transcribing of the ruling is problematic only if it will prevent the defendant from claiming that he paid. So, it is apparent from the gemara’s concern that the defendant is not believed when there is a written ruling, only when the ruling is oral.]
Rabanit Itah bat Chana
Mr. Eliyahu ben Sara Carmel
amongst the sick
of Klal Yisrael
This edition of
Yechezkel Shraga Brachfeld
is endowed by
Les & Ethel Sutker
Louis and Lillian Klein, z”l
A weekly divrei Torah leaflet: A Glimpse at the Parasha, Ask the Rabbi, From the writings of Harav Avraham Yitzchak Hakohen Kook, zt”l, Pninat Mishpat (Jewish Monetary Law).