Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Ki Seitzei

The following is a brief summary of a thought said over by R' Frand on the parsha this evening. I have attempted to reproduce this vort 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 begins with the mitzva of Eishes Yifas Toar, a non-Jewish woman who a soldier may bring back from battle with him and marry after she has gone through a thirty day waiting period.

In commenting on why this mitzva exists, Rashi explains that the Torah allows this mitzva to combat the Yetzer Hara. However, Rabbi Frand brought down a more interesting view of the mitzva as explained by the Shela HaKadosh.

The Shelah quoted a pasuk from Nach which says that Mayim Genuvim Yimtiku - stolen waters will be sweetened. The concept of sweet water is difficult to comprehend since water does not have a taste. Indeed, a person may be very thirsty for water and it will quench his thirst, but the water still will not have flavor. However, the water which does not belong to the person which he steals, will taste sweet to him because it is forbidden.

R' Frand digressed to illustrate this point by making reference to the "no carb diet." He said that normally, a person will have no strong desire to eat a plain baked potato. French Fries or potatoes with sauce or dressing may be appealing, but a person does not have a strong desire to eat a plain potato. However, to a person on a "no carb" diet, a plain baked potato may be very attractive. Of course, once the person goes off the diet, the potato goes back to being plain and uninviting.

R' Frand then returned to explain that according to the Shelah, the Torah allows a variation on the item so that it will no longer be as desirable to the person.

R' Frand brought a proof to this concept from a gemara in Chullin which recounts a conversation between R' Nachman and his wife, Yalta. Yalta said to her husband, every time that the Torah has made something forbidden, there is a corresponding rule which allows a similar item. For example, on numerous occasions, the Torah forbids the consumption of blood. However, the Torah allows the consumption of liver which is essentially blood filled. Another example she mentioned was chelev - forbidden fats of a kosher beheimah. Although chelev of a cow is forbidden, the Torah allows chelev of a chaya such as a deer. Still another example mentioned is the concept of meat and milk. While the two cannot be consumed together, a person may consume a cow's udder.

R' Frand then returned to the Shelah's concept of Eishes Yifas Toar. If a person knows that in some form he is permitted to do something, he will not have a longing for the forbidden aspect. By permitting the Eishes Yifas Toar to the soldier, he will not be consumed by desire for a battlefield bride. In so doing, the Torah did not combat the Yetzer Hara, it gave the person a way to circumvent it entirely.

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

Tuesday's Thoughts on the Daf - Berachos 27

Today's daf continues the discussion of the proper times to say various prayers including Shacharis, Mincha, Maariv and Mussaf. Towards the bottom of 27b, the gemara gets into a discussion about whether Maariv is obligatory or optional. As part of this discussion, the gemara digresses to talk about how R' Gamliel was removed from his position as Nasi due to his tormenting of R' Yehoshua.

The gemara begins by telling a story about a student (who we later learn on 28a is R' Shimon Ben Yochai) who asked R' Gamliel whether Maariv was obligatory. When R' Gamliel said that it was obligatory, the student said - but R' Yehoshua said that it is optional! This caused R' Gamliel much consternation and he demanded that R' Yehoshua address whether he took a position contrary to R' Gamliel. After he admitted that he did take this position, R' Gamliel required that he stand in the Beis Medrash while R' Gamliel continued to teach. This caused those assembled much consternation and they reviewed all the times that R' Gamliel had unfairly treated R' Yehoshua before finally concluding that R' Gamliel must be removed from his position as Nasi.

The gemara then discusses the method used to choose a new Nasi and the eventual selection of R' Elazar Ben Azarya. After they asked him to be the Nasi he told them that he must discuss it first with the members of his household (meaning his wife). The gemara reveals that when he broached the subject with his wife, she had numerous concerns including R' Elazar Ben Azarya's age. One of the concerns his wife raised was that due to his tender years, he did not have gray in his beard and he would not be a respected lecturer. The gemara states that the same evening he grew 18 rows of gray in his beard. The next reference is to the famous line from the haggada about R' Elazar Ben Azarya saying that he was like 70 years old, because in fact he was not advanced in age.

Although I have learned this gemara many times before, the story triggered a memory of a story from Yaffa Eliach's Chassidic Tales of the Holocaust. In the book, there is a story about a baker who told a story about when his sister was captured by the gestapo. The man went to beg for her to be released and the German soldier said - only if you grow hair on the palm of your hand. The man opened his hand and it was covered with thick black hair. The German soldier called him all sorts of names but released the girl to him and the two ran from the gestapo. The baker explained to the person telling the story that when the baker was younger his hand was injured in an industrial accident and they grafted skin from another part of his body. The baker concludes, they say that hair should not grow as a result of the surgery, but my hand did not go to medical school...

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

Monday's Musings on Sports - Dez Bryant, Seinfeld and the Rain

Over the last twenty four hours, the sports news world has been set on fire by various NFL stories. Although there are many drew my attention, the story which most piqued my interest involved Dallas' troubled but talented WR, Dez Bryant.

Last month, a story broke that Bryant had been arrested for hitting his biological mother. Its hard to comprehend how this happened and why a grown man would strike his mother. Eventually, the story died down and it has been reported that Ma' Bryant indicated that she would not be cooperating with authorities or pressing charges against her son.

Anxious to avoid more negative publicity, the Dallas Cowboys started a "double secret" probation process to protect their investment. The terms of the probation included: (1) A midnight curfew. If he's going to miss curfew, team officials must know in advance; (2) No drinking alcohol; (3) He can only attend nightclubs if they are approved by the team and he has a security team with him; (4)He must attend counseling sessions twice a week; (5) A rotating three-man security team will leave one man with Bryant at all times and (6)Members of the security team will drive Bryant to practices, games and team functions. [Terms of the probation are courtesy of Yahoo NFL Blog Shutdown Corner which has markedly improved since the departure of Mr. Chase].

Mike Greenberg commented on the lengths that the Cowboys went to and compared it to a line that he attributed to Jerry Seinfeld which never made it into the TV show but is true just the same. Seinfeld observed that there is no reason that the authorities should have to enforce the helmet laws. If a person is not smart enough to wear a helmet and protect against head injuries, then he deserves what happens to him. Greenberg drew a parallel to Bryant and his status in the NFL. Since Dez is in his second year in the league, he is in the middle of a NFL mandated rookie contract which severely restricts his earning power. But if he has a couple of good years, his next contract could easily exceed $100 million. All Bryant has to do is not get into trouble and stay healthy and perform to his potential and its all there for him. Yet he needs a six point probation period to protect him from himself.

The story reminded me of a story that I heard on a Chofetz Chaim Heritage Foundation CD for Tisha B'Av which was told by R' Ephraim Shapiro. He mentioned that his parents were walking in Jerusalem when a sudden rainstorm hit. They were walking in narrow streets and looking for shelter when an old lady beckoned them from an entryway. They thought she needed help, but instead she invited them in from the rain. When they entered her sparsely furnished 2nd floor apartment, they saw that rain was coming in through a hole in the roof. The water was coming down on to the woman's shabbos table and she had wrapped her challos in plastic so they would not get wet. They could not help from asking her - don't you want to get the landlord to fix this hole? She responded - its gishmei beracha - blessed rain.

The story stayed with me over the last month and seems to echo at various points when I hear or see things. This woman had virtually nothing and her meager possessions were getting rained upon. However to her, the water just Hashem's blessing and nothing to be upset about.

If this woman could be happy with her lot and could maximize her enjoyment of life, why can't a professional athlete stay out of trouble to maximize his earning potential during his brief playing career?

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

Sunday Night Suds - Blue Moon Caramel Apple Spiced Ale

This week's Sunday Night Suds returns with a look at Blue Moon's newest limited release, the Caramel Apple Spiced Ale.

Earlier this year, the Blue Moon division of Coors began to add smaller batches of limited seasonal releases to their mix box. The Brewmasters Sampler Winter Box contained three standard Blue Moon, three of the rather bland Pale Moon, three of the usual winter selection - Winter Moon Abbey Ale and three of a special limited edition - Spiced Amber Ale. The Brewmasters Summer Box continued this theme by again providing three standard Blue Moon, three Pale Moon (which I really should have given away), three of the wonderful Honey Moon Summer Ale and three of the limited edition Blue Moon Agave Blonde Ale.

Much like the other mix boxes, the fall edition of the Brewmasters Sampler includes three standard Blue Moon, three Pale Moon, three of the usual fall offering - Harvest Moon Pumpkin Ale and three of the new limited edition - the Caramel Apple Spice Ale.

I got my first sample of the Caramel Apple Spiced Ale well before the harvest season. A quiet tzaddik who was visiting Camp M for the last shabbos brought me a bottle from the Autumn Sampler Box that he bought for himself. I was excited to see the Caramel Apple Spiced Ale as Mrs KB will tell you that I am a sucker for anything apple such as Apple Pie, Cinnamon Apple (Dunkin) Donuts, Apple Cider and even Smirnoff Twisted Green Apple. When R' Andrew S. brought the bottle to our Friday Night Oneg, I could not wait to open it and quickly poured it into four plastic cups so that we could all sample some.

The first taste of the brew was cinnamon and nutmeg. The spice was apparent when I brought the cup to my face and stayed with me throughout the first sips. I never really got a strong flavor of apple as the beer really was a nice soft ale with some hops, but mostly spice. Since I only consumed about four ounces of the brew and it was in a plastic cup, I can't say that I got enough of the beer to actually appreciate all the complex flavors, but I would want to sample more of it if there was a way that I did not have to purchase a box containing the awful Pale Moon.

Blue Moon Caramel Apple Spiced Ale is certified kosher by the Orthodox Union. For the experts take on the Caramel Apple Spiced Ale, please click here http://beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/306/83191 .

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).

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

Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Shoftim

The following is a brief summary of a thought said over by R' Frand on the parsha this evening. I have attempted to reproduce this vort 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 mitzva of Eglah Arufah. Simply stated, Eglah Arufah is triggered by the finding of a dead body between two cities. The elders then measure the distance between the body and the cities and the city which is closest must take a calf which has never worked and kill it by breaking its neck in a valley where the land had never been toiled. While doing so, the elders of the city state that they had not intentionally neglected this person and had not purposely failed to safely escort him out of their city.

R' Frand mentioned the mitzva of Eglah Arufah as a jumping off point to discuss a gemara in Yoma 23a which told a story about two kohanim who were running to do a kibud in the Beis Hamikdash. The kohain who was falling behind in the race took a knife and stabbed the other kohain in the heart. Immediately thereafter, R' Tzadok stood up and cried out - the Torah states that if a body is found outside a city the elders of the city must go out and perform Eglah Arufah [the link to this parsha in the vort]. Who is responsible for the Eglah Arufah here, the elders of the city or the Beis Hamikdash? The people who were assembled all began to cry until the father of the stabbed kohain stood up and said - he should be a kappara for the Jews. But the father then added thereafter - he is not dead yet, so the knife is not tamei. The gemara concludes the story by stating that this teaches that they considered the taharah of the vessels of the Beis Hamikdash more seriously than murder.

R' Frand offered an initial interpretation of this gemara as teaching that the father did a great thing, because he was more concerned about the purity of the vessels of the Beis Hamikdash than the impending death of his child.

R' Frand next told a story to illustrate a point. He quoted R' Ruderman ztl who said that the Alter of Slobodka had a child of his pass away on Sukkos. [R' Frand was unsure whether it was on yom tov or chol hamoed]. Since aveilos is not observed on yom tov, the Alter was seen singing and dancing on Simchas Torah as if nothing had ever happened. However, as soon as yom tov ended and he had made havdalah, the Alter fainted from the loss of his son. R' Ruderman explained that this demonstrated how much control the Alter had over his emotions that he could keep the pain and grief in check during a time that it was asur to grieve, but as soon as that period ended, he showed true loss.

R' Frand then returned to discuss the gemara. On Yoma 23b, the gemara asks - was the people's attitude toward murder less stringent and their valuation of taharah of keilim remained the same? Or was the attitude towards murder the same and the valuation of taharah of keilim became more stringent?

R' Frand then asked - why does the gemara even ask this question? Why do we care how things had changed?

R' Frand answered the question by quoting R' Chaim Shmulevitz who says that the gemara is teaching that a person must think when he takes an outwardly noble act, am I doing this for the right reason? Am I taking this action because I want to do the right thing, or am I being controlled by ulterior motives?

R' Frand closed with a note on the first pasuk of the parsha which states that there should be Judges and Officers on all your gates. He offered a take on this pasuk that a person should be like one of these officials and make sure that every act that he takes within his own gates is for the right reason.

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

Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Re'eh

Since there are no Rabbi Frand shiurim until Elul, I have been substituting vorts from other Rabbanim each week, rather than leaving the blog without a vort for shabbos. This week, I am again attempting to repeat a vort heard from R' Eli Mansour as recorded on http://www.learntorah.com . Same rules as usual apply - I have attempted to reproduce the vort 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 the maggid shiur.

Parshas Re'eh begins with Moshe telling the Jews "Re'eh" - See that today I am giving before you today a blessing and a curse. In so doing, Moshe mixes the singular and plural forms as the direction see is said in the singular and the you is stated in the plural form. Of course this prompts the question - why mix the singular and plural forms in the same sentence?

Rabbi Mansour answered by making reference to the sociological concept of peer pressure. When a person is with a group, it is difficult to buck the trend and separate from the masses. By using the term Re'eh in the singular form, the Torah is telling us that while we think that we are acting individually, the impact of the action is on the masses. A person may feel that he is acting on his own and is not being watched or observed, but his actions are always seen.

By way of example, a woman may go out dressed tziniusly, not for show but just because that is the way she is. Without realizing it, the woman can have a positive impact on another who looks at her and admires her sense of tzinius.

Rabbi Mansour told a story about how he was once on a plane and he was learning from his gemara. When the plane landed, a person came over and said, "Rabbi you have given me tremendous mussar. I saw you sitting there learning from your sefer the entire flight while I was doing other things." Rabbi Mansour then told the audience that he had been learning and looking into the sefer the entire time because he was afraid, but the observer was obviously unaware of this. Instead, the man was moved by the fact that he saw the Rabbi learning the entire time.

Rabbi Mansour's story reminded me of another airline story involving my aishes chayil. One Pesach we flew back from Chicago on Chol Hamo'ed. This is no easy task as the kids can't eat any of the airline food and we must pack enough matza and Pesach snacks to satisfy our kids for the four hour door to door trip. After we landed at Islip, a man came over and approached my wife and told her that his mother would have been proud to see how Sarah kept giving the kids Pesach food during the flight. Obviously, we did not pack the food to try to be mikarev others, but there was certainly a positive influence on others, even though it was purely unintentional.

Unfortunately, there can be a similar unintended negative influence if one does something wrong which is observed by others.

Rabbi Mansour then broadened the vort by making reference to the concept of yarhteit. On the anniversary of a person's death, their family does things to commemorate the individual's passing, be it learning Torah, getting an aliyah or in some circles, fasting. The reason why these customs are observed on the anniversary is because the soul of the departed is being judged again on the day of death. The question of course is - since the person is long dead and was judged for his earthly actions years before, what is the purpose of the new judgment?

Rabbi Mansour answered by making reference to the ripple effect. When a person throws a stone into a pond, the rock impacts on the water and sinks to the bottom, but the waves from where the stone hit the surface begin to branch out into all directions. Similarly, when a man does an act in this world he is immediately credited (or debited) for the act. However, the act itself can impact far beyond the moment that the person did the deed. A person's children might have learned the value of certain mitzvos from the way the deceased lived his life. Or the person might have been mikarev another and that person is now frum and continuing to do mitzvos which also count towards the credit of the deceased.

The opposite can be true if the person did negative things which are observed and mimicked well beyond his lifetime and he will continue to be judged to the negative year after year as a result of his negative teaching.

Rabbi Mansour also made reference to Miriam and Yocheved who acted as midwives and saved the Jewish children. The Torah writes in Shemos 1:20 that Hashem rewarded the midwives and the Jewish people increased and became very strong. Rabbi Mansour asked - how is this a reward for Yocheved and Miriam? They did not receive any tangible benefit from the increased population! Rabbi Mansour answered that the reward was that every mitzva that the children did was also partially credited to Yocheved and Miriam. These children who were supposed to be killed were saved through Yocheved and Miriam and as a result, each act that the children and their children and their children's children did will all be applied to Yocheved and Miriam's account.

Another proof (albeit relating to the negative impact) can be seen from Sefer Bereishis. After Kayin kills Hevel, Hashem says to Kayin at Bereishis 4:10 - "all the bloods of your brother are calling out to me." Why does the Torah use the plural form of bloods? To show that Kayin did not only kill Hevel, he also cut off all future generations which would have come from him. This is a negative act with a long ranging effect.

A final example can be seen in relation to donated seforim and siddurim. Why do people donate seforim in memory of others? While part of the reason may be so that the deceased is not forgotten, this is hardly the main reason. The person who has passed away does not care whether he is remembered. But the learning or davening which is done from these donated seforim will continue to be a reward for the deceased.

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