Vayikra. Korbanos and Fiscal Probity; Aveilus and Shalach Manos; Aveilus and Davening for the Amud.

This is the Kollel Horaah of America's Parsha Sheet. Each of the three sections is insightful and informative, and I found it particularly interesting this week.  

Gaining a Closer Relationship with Hashem R' Moshe Orgel The תורה in this weeks פרשה writes a one פסוק introduction prior to detailing the specifics of the korbanos, “אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן וכו” The גמ׳ derives many הלכות from this פסוק. One of them is derived from the word כי יקריב מכם קרבן אדם. Rashi explains that we learn that someone bringing a קרבן must do so from his own animals and money and not from stealing someone else’s, just like אדם הראשון did not possess any stolen objects – as he had no one to steal from; so too one's קרבן may not be from stolen property. There are many other מצות which have the same exclusion – not to come from stolen property, for example; the תורה says that a לולב must be לכם from your property, not of someone else’s. קרבנות is the only place where the תורה alludes to this using the word אדם . What is unique about the פרשה of קרבנות that requires a different more complicated לימוד as opposed to the תורה simply writing לכם or something of that sort?  The word קרבן denotes קורבה, closeness. The purpose of bringing a קרבן is to gain a closer relationship with Hashem and strive higher in רוחניות. The תורה is teaching us that in regard to this מצוה it is not merely enough to do the mitzvah with your own money, but rather you should be like אדם הראשון. He did not have one penny that was not his, nor could he covet someone else’s property as there was no one else in the world but him. Theft by him was an impossibility, not simply a choice. When someone steals, he is not only doing the actual sin, he is in addition demonstrating his lack of אמונה ובטחון. If he truly knows that Hashem will provide with all he needs and that it is predestined each year what he will attain that year, he wouldn’t be stealing as there would be no point he is only getting a certain amount of money anyway. A person needs to recognize that just as is was impossible for אדם הראשון to steal, so too it is impossible for one to achieve anything through theft. With this idea in mind it is easy to understand what is unique about קרבנות that requires the law of stealing to come from the word אדם. The word אדם is not just teaching us a single focused law, rather an idea of how someone should conduct themselves. While attempting to come closer to Hashem through קרבנות or through תפילה one must make sure that the rest of one’s actions and thoughts are also up to par. Working on אמונה ובטחון to a level where one recognizes that all is from Hashem and one’s actions can’t change that is an integral aspect of the עבודה of the קרבנות. May we all be זוכה to become closer to Hashem, both through תפילה as well as אמונה ובטחון.

Editor's remark: 1. Chazal learn from the words Adam ki yakriv that just as Adam Harishon brought korbanos that were 100% his, with no admixture of theft, our korbanos must be equally pure. Rabbi Orgel sees this as a far broader lesson - if you want to bring a korban, YOU have to be like Adam. If you possess any stolen property, your korban is undesireable. I would put it this way: By Korban Pesach, if you own Chametz at the time of the hakrava, the korban is improper (you're over a lahv, but the Korban is kasher - Rambam Pesach 1:5.) Just as it is assur to bring a Korban Pesach when you own Chametz, so too it is assur to bring any Korban if you possess property that was acquired dishonestly.  It's not a lahv, and it doesn't passel the korban, but it's meguneh, and if you're looking for Ritzui, that's not where to look.  It might be interesting to think about whether this applies to Shemoneh Esrei. אורח חיים Rabbi Shmuel Goldstein Question: Can an Avel give and be given Mishloach Manos? Answer: The Gemara says that an Avel during Shivah, (the first seven days, counting from the funeral), may not say Shalom Aleichem to others [a]. One may not say Shalom Aleichem to an Avel throughout Shloshim, (the first thirty days counting from the funeral), and for the twelve months if the Avel is in Aveilus for a parent [b]. There are different opinions with regard to greeting someone with saying Shalom Aleichem on Shabbos [c]. It is permitted to give a Bracha to an Avel, and therefore one can say “good Shabbos” [d]. Saying “good morning” is also technically permitted. Some refrain from doing so, especially during Shivah [e]. The Ramah says that many people say Shalom after thirty days, during the twelve months of Avielus for a parent, but he says that he doesn’t know what they rely on, unless our greeting isn’t like the one in the time of Chazal [f]. Most Acharonim do not give credence to this leniency [g]. However it seems the Ramah may have been referring to statements like “good morning” [h]. The Maharil says that giving someone a present is the same as saying Shalom Aleichem, and therefore one may not give Mishloach Manos to an Avel. This would apply to giving an Avel throughout Shloshim, and for the twelve months if the Avel is in Aveilus for a parent [i]. Although an Avel during Shivah may not give presents, since Mishloach Manos is an obligation, they may and must give [j]. Some Acharonim say an Avel should only give Mishloach Manos to one or two people [k]. Either way an Avel should not give extra happy things in the Mishloach Manos [l]. Those who are lenient, and give an Avel, are relying on those who opine that Purim is like Shabbos regarding Aveilus combined with relying on those who opine that Shalom Aleichem is permitted on Shabbos [m]. If an Avel is after the third day of Aveilus, and they were given Mishloach Manos, they may accept it [n]. It is permitted to give Mishloach Manos to a Rebbe or someone whom the gift is almost like part of a salary [o]. Editor's remark: This halacha of Mishloach Manos and Aveilus is not widely known, nor is the proscription from greeting an aveil with Shalom Aleichem during the entire year. As Rabbi Goldstein quoted from the Maharil, these two laws are the same - giving Shalach Manos is like greeting with Shalom Aleichem. It's also worth remembering that this applies during Kiddush Levana. יורה דעה R' Mechi Plittman

Question: When should an Avel serve as the Shatz? Are there any times when he should not act as שליח ציבור? Answer: The רמ''א writes that the minhag has become that an avel does not daven for the amud on שבת ויו”ט [a]. The ש''ך explains that the same applies to the ימים נוראים [b]. The נודה ביהודה understands that to mean only ראש השנה ויום כפור and not ימי סליחות ועשרת ימי תשובה [c], during which the אבל can indeed lead the ציבור. The reason for this minhag is that it is inapropiate for one in mourning to lead the congregation when the congregation is in a state of שמחה [d]. It is important to note that his is a minhag and not an איסור [e]. This applies, both, to a son during the twelve months after losing a parent, and to any mourner for the duration of שלושים of a close relative [f]. Many אחרונים ask [g]; the רמ''א himself writes his sefer דרכי משה, that an אבל refrains from serving as שליח ציבור on ראש חודש as well. Furthermore, the source for רמ''א is the מהרי"ל who implies that this halacha applies to any day that we say הלל. That would include חנוכה ופורים [h]. So why then, does the רמ''א only mention שבת ויו''ט in the שלחן ערוך. The ערוך השלחן answers that the רמ''א only listed the days on which an אבל does not daven for the amud the entire day i.e. שבת ויו"ט. On ראש חודש or חנוכה ופורים just refrain from davening in the morning, but he may daven for the עמוד for מנחה ומעריב [i]. This is the opinion of the משנה ברורה [j] as well. There are some who understand this minhag to allow the אבל to daven שחרית as well and just not daven הלל ומוסף [k]. On חול המועד there is a dispute if an אבל should daven for the amud at all. Some maintain that he should refrain from serving as ש''ץ for it is similar to a יו”ט [l]. However, many אחרונים are of the opinion that on any day we say הלל an אבל should not daven for the amud even מנחה ומעריב. This was the opinion of Rav Moshe [m]. All other days that we don’t say תחנון for example, ל"ג בעומר ט"ו שבט ט"ו באב an אבל may daven for the amud [n]. There is an opinion that rules that any day that you don’t say קל ארך אפים and למנצח an אבל should not daven for the amud. That would include ערב פסח, ט' באב, ערב יו"כ, שושן פורים, פורים קטן [o]. However, it’s clear from the source of the רמ''א that only days which הלל is said is there a minhag for an אבל not to be the ש''ץ. This minhag comes from a different source which doesn’t agree with the רמ''א.  If the chazon for the shul during the ימים נוראים is an אבל he may daven for the עמוד if no one can replace him and his abilities [p]. On Shabbos and יו''ט if no one inspires the shul like him then he may be the Shatz [q], but just because he sounds good is not a heter. The same applies to the reading of the מגילה if no one can pronounce the words and read כהלכה like him then he may read the מגילה [r]. Otherwise he should refrain. Editor's remark: The halacha that an aveil may daven for the amud on yomtov if the tzibbur needs him became relevant to a friend this past year. He had retained to daven on the Yamim Nor'aim, and he became an aveil the day before Rosh Hashannah. He was the only Shliach Tzibbur available for that certain shul. I told him to leave the Shiva house during shiva, and fly back to Chicago to daven for the Amud on Rosh Hashanna.

To receive Points to Ponder weekly via email, please contactkollelhoraah@gmail.com or text KHAWEEKLY to 22828

מראה מקומות לדין אורח חיים

a) גמרא מו"ק טו. וכא:

b) גמרא מו"ק טו. וכא:

c) ע' רא"ש מו"ק פרק ג' סי' כ"ח ול"ח

מירושלמי ברכות ב:ז, רמב"ם אבל י:א. ש"ע שפה:ג.

d) שלמת חיים תכ"ה [קל"ג], גשה"ח כא:ז:ד-ז, להורות נתן חלק ב' סי' ל"ז

e) ע' לקט יושר עמ' ק"י, מ"ב תקנ"ד ס"ק מ"א, באר משה חלק ד' סי' ק"ו, להורות נתן חלק ב' סי' ל"ז

f) רמ"א שפה:א

g) ש"ך יו"ד שפ"ה ס"ק ג' ומג"א או"ח תקנ"ד ס"ק כ"א

h) ע' בה"ט יו"ד שפ"ה ס"ק ב', מ"ב תקנ"ד ס"ק מ"א, לקט יושר עמ' ק"י, באר משה חלק ד' סי' ק"ו, להורות נתן חלק ב' סי' ל"ז

i) הובא ברמ"א יו"ד שפה:ג ובאו"ח תרצו:ו

j) ש"ע או"ח תרצו:ו עם מ"ב ס"ק י"ז

k) נחלת שבעה סי' י"ז וקובץ הלכות פרק ט"ו הע' מ"ד

l) מ"ב תרצ"ו ס"ק י"ח

m)  ע' מג"א או"ח תרצ"ו

n) כתב סופר או"ח סי' קמ"א

o) דברי למכיאל חלק ה' סי' רל"ז 

מראה מקומות לדין יורה דעה

a רמ"א יו"ד שע"ו

b) ש"ך שם סקי"ד בשם המהרי"ל

c) נו"ב או"ח סי' ל"ב

d) שו"ת מהרי"ל סי' כ"ב

e) רמ"א שם

f) מ"ב או"ח תקפ"א סק"ז

g) ערוך השלחן שע"ו סקי"ד

h) כל בו על אבילות עמ' רפ"ז

i) ערוך השלחן שם ועיין מהר"ם שיק או"ח קפ"ג שכן נוהג החת"ס

j) מ"ב תקפ"א סק"ז ותרע"א סקמ"ד ותרפ"ג סק"א

k) גליון מהרש"א סי' שע"ו ובא"ר או"ח סס"י תקפ"ב ופרמ"ג תרע"א מ"ז סק"ח וגשר החיים כ"ג:ה

l) מ"ב תרע"א סקמ"ד בשם הפמ"ג וגשר החיים כ"ג:ד סברו לא התפלל ושו"ת מהר"ם מינץ מ"ג וערוך השלחן שם סברו יכול התפלל

m) רבבות אפרים ח"א תמ"ג בשם ר' משה

n) מ"ב תרע"א סקמ"ד וגשר החיים כ"ג:ו

o) מ"ב קל"ב במאמר קדישים ונועם מגדים להפמ"ג מנהגים א'

p) ש"ך שע"ו סקי"ד בשם מהרי"ו

q) כן משמע מדרכי משה במה שכתב "אף" ימים נוראים ומ"ב תקפ"א ז' ותרצ"ו י"ב ולא כב"ח יו"דשפ"ו

r) מ"ב תרצ"ו סקי"ב

To receive Points to Ponder weekly via email, please contact kollelhoraah@gmail.com or text KHAWEEKLY to 22828

UPDATE:

From a column by  by Rabbi Daniel Mann. Rabbi Mann is a Dayan for Eretz Hemdah and a staff member of Yeshiva University's Gruss Kollel in Israel. He is a senior member of the Eretz Hemdah responder staff, editor of Hemdat Yamim and the author of Living the Halachic Process, volumes 1 and 2 and A Glimpse of Greatness.

Question: Is it permitted for an avel (mourner) to serve as a chazan for Yamim Noraim (Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur)? Whose decision is it – the shul’s or the avel’s?

Answer: The classical source on the topic is the Maharil (15th century, Ashkenaz), based on the Maharam. In contrast to the rabbi who asked him the question, the Maharil (Shut 128) states that the minhag is that an avel does not serve as a chazan on Shabbat and Yom Tov or on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 376:4) cites this minhag in regards to Shabbat and Yom Tov and adds on “… even though there is no prohibition in the matter.” The Shach (ad loc. 14) and Pitchei Teshuva (ad loc. 8) posit that the rule is the same for the Yamim Noraim.  

The Meir Netivim (80) posits that there is no problem with an avel being a chazan on special days. What the sources are saying is that as opposed to a regular weekday, when an avel makes a point of being the chazan, the minhag is that they do not make an effort on Shabbat, etc. However, if it works out for the avel to do so, there is no reason to stop him. 

However, the great majority of Acharonim understand that we do not allow an avel to be the chazan on these days. The Rama only means that it is not a classic prohibition but a bad idea which we do not choose to allow (see Noda B’Yehuda I, OC 32). The Maharil implies that the problem is that all of these days are happy days (in varying degrees and aspects). It is possible to explain either that it is not appropriate for an avel to expose himself to the happy tefilla as a chazan (Shut Maharam Shick, OC 183) or that the avel is insufficiently capable of giving the tzibbur’s tefilla the level of festivity it deserves (see Zera Emet III, 164). 

There is another approach to the reason for the avel not to be chazan on special days. The Pri Megadim (Eshel Avraham 581:4) invokes the idea (see Taz, OC 660:2) that during aveilut, there is an element of din (strict judgment) that hangs over the avel. Therefore, it is unwise for the community to be represented by one who is more likely than usual to attract negative judgment. According to this approach, even if the avel decides that he wants to be chazan, it is appropriate for the tzibbur to refuse. The Pri Megadim raises another ramification of this approach. Although the onset of Rosh Hashana after completion of shiva removes the halachic status of avel from a mourner for a relative other than a parent, the spiritual situation of the effect of din continues until thirty days have passed. Therefore, even such a person should not be a chazan at that point. 

The Maharil (ibid.) says that if there is no viable alternative to the avel as chazan, then he is allowed to serve. The biggest difference in practice between different communities is in determining what is and is not an alternative. According to some (see opinions Divrei Sofrim, YD 376:92), it is enough that the chazan serves on a yearly basis so that it not look as if he is being chazan because he is in aveilut. The Afarkasta D’ania (I:156) explains that we don’t want it to look like the deceased is wicked, as others do not need protection on special days. He also suggests that having been chazan once before is enough (once may create chazaka rights – Shaarei Teshuva 581:7). The Mateh Ephrayim (581:24) says that it is permitted as long as the avel is clearly more qualified (on cantorial or religious grounds) to the alternative. If the avel receives payment that is financially significant for him, this is reason for leniency (ibid.). 

In a past discussion, about an avel as chazan on Rosh Chodesh, we explored the topic of whose decision it should be to allow the avel to serve as chazan; the findings were not conclusive. This is true here as well, and much depends on the reasons given above. It is best if a decision is made based on consultation between the rabbi and the chazan, and it is best if all involved explore the matter with flexibility and sensitivity. Certainly, a congregant should not make a fuss over the matter (see Meir Netivim ibid.).