Thursday, April 26, 2018

Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshios Acharei Mos-Kedoshim

The following is a brief summary of some of thoughts said over by R' Frand on the parshios this evening. I have attempted to reproduce these vorts to the best of my ability. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Frand.

R' Frand began discussing Parshas Acharei Mos by noting that the beginning of the parsha is read on Yom Kippur. Some machzorim have an introductory quote from the Zohar which states that anyone who cries over the death of Nadav & Avihu will be saved from (r'l) the death of a child. 

[I heard a shiur once from R' Mansour about this where he noted that the Sefardim have a pizmon which is read before the Kriah on Yom Kippur which is meant to evoke such feelings].

R' Frand noted that there are many sad events which take place in Chaumash, so why is the only event where there is a segualh if one mourns over it? R' Frand answered by quoting the Rav of Ponovich (sp?) who explains that Nadav & Avihu were exceptional people, to the point that Moshe remarks that he thought that either he or Aharon would need to die, but Nadav & Avihu were holier then them.

Based on this, one should wonder, what would have happened to the Jewish people had Nadav & Avihu not died and instead were able to instill their kedushah in the Jewish people? For that matter, the Rav continued, think about all the great tzaddikim and anshei ma'aseh who died in the Holocaust. Although it has recently been written that the Jews are approaching the makeup point for the death of the six million, think about how much more Torah and kedushah we would have if these people had not died in the Holocaust. Or what about the talmidim of R' Akiva - 24,000 tanaim who perished and did not have the opportunity to teach Torah. This is the tragedy one should mourn, that the people, be they Nadav & Avihu, or the Karbanos in the Holocaust or the students of R' Akiva did not have the chance to make an impression on the Jewish people.

R' Frand's second vort related to the Avodah on Yom Kippur. He quoted the Gemara in Yoma which talks about how the Kohain Gadol was kept awake all night by the young Kohanim, while outside the "Yakirei Yerushalim" - the precious one- would walk around noisly in order to keep him awake. 

R' Frand asked - why are these people called the precious ones? If anything, the young Kohanim who actually sat with and occupied the Kohain Gadol should be given the accolades!

He answered by quoting the Tolner Rebbi, who explains that the young Kohanim had a personal satisfaction in their acts as they could "tell their grandchildren" one day about what they did that night...But the people on the outside did not have that satisfaction. They did what they did, without seeing the Kohain Gadol or even knowing whether he could hear them. 

R' Frand's final vort related to the actions of Nadav & Avihu. The Medrash Tanchuma quotes Bar Kappara who explains the four reasons they were punished: (1) they came close without permission; (2) they brought a sacrifice without permission; (3) the fire itself was from a foreign source and (4) they did not consult one with the other before bringing their sacrifices.

The final answer is curious, as there is a Medrash that they each independently decided to bring the sacrifice. But if that was the case, why would their consultation have accomplished anything?

R' Frand answered by quoting R' Dovid Soloveitchik who explains that if one had asked the other, he would have gotten a response of --why are you doing this, there is no permission to do so! He connected it to the rule as to blemishes that a Kohain can view all blemishes to determine if they are tamei, except for his own. He read into the statement of law that a person can see blemishes in others, but not his own.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Thursday, April 19, 2018

Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshios Tazria-Metzorah

The following is a brief summary of some of thoughts said over by R' Frand on the parshios this evening. I have attempted to reproduce these vorts to the best of my ability. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Frand.

Rabbi Frand said two vorts tonight on the concept of metzorah which for our purposes we will define loosely as leprosy. The first vort related to the metzorah which appears on the house. R' Frand highlighted some interesting choices in verbiage in the first few pesukim which discuss this concept in Vayikra 14:33-35. 

The Torah states that the metzorah will come after the Jews arrive in the land of Canaan "that I gave you as a possession". But why did the Torah need to mention that Hashem gave the land as a possession? Who else could have given it to them? The Torah also writes that the person "whom the house belongs to" must go to the Kohain and advise that there is something that looks like leprosy on the house. Again, who else would we expect to come to the Kohain? Lastly, the owner of the house is directed to remove all of his possessions from the house prior to the Kohain's inspection and potential declaration that the house is tamei and all within it are tamei as well.

R' Frand quoted the Klei Yakar who in turn quoted the gemara in Erchin which teaches that the leprosy on a house comes from a person being stingy with their possessions. R' Frand gave examples of a person who when the neighbor asks to borrow the lawnmower says that he uses a service. Or when he wants to borrow the car, the response is "its in the shop" when neither is true.

This is not to say that a person can never say no  and R' Frand used the phrase "prudent stewardship" to teach that there are times when you should say no...like when the neighbor's kid who just got a license wants to borrow your car.

But the punishment of tzaraas on the house for being stingy is a way that Hashem shows that you are just watching His things and they are not yours. This is the reason that the pasuk begins with saying this will happen after the Jews come to Canaan which Hashem gave to them as a possession. If the owner of the house is stingy and does not lend the property, he will see the leprosy on his house and after reporting it, he will be directed to remove everything from the house, including the very things that he was too stingy to lend (and claimed that he did not have).

R' Frand also discussed the more "traditional" tzaraas in which a person sees the leprosy on his person and must bring two birds as his offering for forgiveness. One of the birds is sent away and the other is slaughtered. R' Frand noted that this is the only time that a personal offering is not slaughtered and instead is sent away. 

Again, R' Frand referred to the gemara in Erchin which asked, why are birds used for this? Since the birds twitter incessantly, it is a reminder that the punishment comes from speaking lashon hara.

R' Frand next quoted the Zohar which states that the two birds signify speaking lashon hara and lashon hatov. But what is meant by that?

R' Frand answered in the name of the Sfas Emes who explains that the lashon hatov referred to is refraining from speaking positively about others. A person can find himself in a position where he could give positive reinforcement to another, but chooses not to because he does not want to get involved, or is too lazy. The bird that is slaughtered is symbolic of the lashon hara which must be cut off. The bird that is sent away is symbolic of the lashon hatov which should be set free to continue.

There was more to the vort and a great story as well. I hope to iyh write more on this and finish the summary before Shabbos.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!


Sunday, April 15, 2018

Sunday Night Suds - Saranac Summer Golden Ale


This week's Sunday Night Suds looks at Saranac Summer Golden Ale.

My first post pesach beer purchase was the Saranac 12 Beers of Summer mix box which includes the Summer Golden Ale as well as the ADK Pils, the Tropical Storm IPA (which I suspect is the same as the Tropical Snow Storm IPA included in the 12 Beers of Winter mix box --reviewed here http://kosherbeers.blogspot.com/2017/11/sunday-night-suds-saranac-tropical-snow.html) and the Gen IV IPA (reviewed here - http://kosherbeers.blogspot.com/2015/08/sunday-night-suds-saranac-gen-iv-ipa.html).

The Golden Ale was typical of an American Blonde Ale with little hop bite but some citrus which the website attributes to the Centennial and Cascade (my favorite) hops. There was decent carbonation which is the hallmark of the Matt Brewery beers and the lacing stayed on the glass for some time. The beer is 5.00 abv which is also typical for the style and I could see having one or more of these with light summer meals such as grilled chicken or meat salads.

Saranac Golden Ale is under the Kosher Supervision of the Va'ad of Detroit as is every other beer produced at the Matt Brewery plant in Utica, NY. Keep in mind, Saranac has begun to brew many different varieties off site, so check bottles for kosher certification from the Va'ad of Detroit.

To see what the experts on Beer Advocate think about the brew, please follow this link www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/99/334066. (As of today there were no reviews, but maybe by the time you follow the link there will be!)

As always, please remember to drink responsibly and to never waste good beer unless there is no designated driver.

If you've tried this beer or any others which have been reviewed on the kosher beers site, please feel free to post your comments (anonymous comments are acceptable).

Lastly, if you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Thursday, April 12, 2018

Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Shemini

The following is a brief summary of some of thoughts said over by R' Frand on the parsha this evening. I have attempted to reproduce these vorts to the best of my ability. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Frand.

This week's parsha contains the tragic story of the deaths of two of Aharon's sons - Nadav and Avihu. The Torah recites in Vayikra 10:4 that after their deaths, Moshe called Mishael and Eltzafan in order to remove the bodies from the Mishkan. 

R' Frand quoted the Da'as Zekeinim M'Ba'alei Tosfos which cites the Toras Kohanim which explains that we learn from here that Kohanim cannot be mitamei to the dead. The Da'as Zekeinim asks two questions on the Torah Kohanim: (1) we have a pasuk in Parshas Emor which explicitly teaches that the Kohanim cannot become tamei, so why is this cited as the source for the law, and (2) since Elazar and Itamar were regular Kohanim (as opposed to the Kohen Gadol) they were allowed to be mitamei to relatives!

The Da'as Zekeinim answers these questions by stating that we learn from the appointment of Mishael and Eltzafan that a Kohain on the day that he is first anointed and performs his first service has a halacha like the Kohain Gadol. Since this was the first day for Elazar and Itamar as well as their (deceased siblings) they were not permitted to be mitamei to dead relatives. Furthermore, this explains what the Toras Kohanim meant by saying the law is novel.

R' Frand next quoted R' Asher Dicker of Lakewood, NJ who had relayed to him some thoughts on this vort, including R' Elyashiv's take on the issue. He first stated that we learn from this that the beginning of a process (like in this case, the appointment of the Kohanim and the dedication of the Mishkan) needs to be perfect. So if the process for Elazar and Itamar would have included their becoming tamei on their first day (even for a legitimate reason) the beginning of their time as Kohanim would have been less than perfect. 

He also tied this into the Pnei Yehoshua's famous question about the miracle of Chanukah. The Pnei Yehoshua asks - if the entirety of the Jewish people were tamei, why could they not have lit the Menorah with tamei oil, since tumah is hutrah (permitted) when the congregation is entirely impure? R' Dicker answered based on  this vort --it was because it was the first day after they recaptured the Beis Hamikdash from the Greeks, so the oil for the lighting of the Menorah needed to be perfect.

He also opined that this may be the meaning for the Hebrew expression - Kul Haschalos Kashos - all beginnings are difficult. Its not that things are difficult in the beginning, but rather that in the beginning we try as hard as possible to make it a perfect start.

He also quoted R' Elyashiv who discussed how a Kohain on his first day of service brought a special flour offering - the Minchas Chinuch. While he only brought that offering on his first day, the Kohain Gadol brought one every day. Why? Because for him, every day needed to be like a perfect first day.

R' Frand closed the vort by quoting to Beha'alosecha in which it states (Bamidbar 8:3) in connection with the Menorah, "Vaya'as Ken Aharon" that Aharon did this act. Rashi explains that we learn from the pasuk that Aharon never deviated from the way it was to be done. Many meforsim ask about this Rashi --of course he did not deviate, he should never deviate! R' Frand answered that Rashi's intention was that Aharon never changed his attitude and treated each time as if it was the first day, and wanting it to be perfect.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!