Shabbat Parashat Shemot | 5770
Shemot | 23 Tevet 5770 | 1/9/2010
Our parasha opens with an introduction to the Jewish presence in Egypt that confirms that Yosef’s dreams, so central to the end of Bereishit, had indeed been fulfilled. All the brothers came down to Egypt, bowed down to him, and lived under his leadership. Last week, we made the claim that the special connection between full brothers, Yosef and Binyamin, were not only personal but historic.
I believe that it is a p’sik reishei (an unintentional but certain result) that a can opener will touch the food while opening the can. Therefore, it would seem to be required to tovel (immerse) the opener before use when it has been obtained from a non-Jew. Yet, I have not heard of people doing this. What is the correct practice?
What is an example of one who speaks negatively about a talmid chacham (Torah scholar) after his death? It is as is found in a mishna: He [Akavya ben Mehalalel] said: The special sota waters are not administered to a convert or a freed slave. The Rabbis said that they are administered. They brought a proof from the story whereby a freed maid servant from Karakamit had sota waters administered to her by Shmaya and Avtalyon. Akavya answered: doogma they gave her to drink. They placed a ban on him, and he died with the ban upon him.
Of those who invested their money in the failed real estate company, Heftzibah, which collapsed a few years ago, some will receive their home and others will be reimbursed because they had a bank guarantee. The biggest losses will be the lot of those who invested without guarantees. Some people took this unwise move after consulting with financial advisors. Can financial advisors be sued for giving such bad advice? After all, the idea to invest such large sums of money without legal remedy for possible loss is an irresponsible act, as any beginner economist could tell you, even if it saves a little bit of money.
This week in the Daf Yomi the Gemara (137b) states that a present given on condition that it be returned is considered a present. The Gemara explains that the ramification of this principle is if someone gives an etrog to someone else on Succot. In order to fulfill the mitzvah of taking an etrog (and lulav, hadas and arava as well) on the first day of Succot, one must own the etrog one takes. Therefore, if one borrows an etrog, he does not fulfill the mitzvah (Succah 30a).
This week’s Hemdat Yamim is dedicated in loving memory of
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).