yeshiva universitydownload.yutorah.org/2010/1053/748535.pdf · ideas for sukkot by rabbi menachem...

Yeshiva UniversityRabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological SeminaryCenter for the Jewish Future500 West 185 StreetNew York, NY 10033

September 2010 • Tishrei 5771 אין התורה נקנית אלא בחבורה (ברכות סג:) Volume 45 • Number 1

CHAVRUSA A PUBLICATION OF THE RABBINIC ALUMNI OF THE RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY • AN AFFILIATE OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITY

Conference for Assistant RabbisPage 5

Torah Perspectives on Monetary Aspects of the Deep Water Oil SpillPage 19

In This Issue Divrei Torah from: Rabbi Zevulun CharlopRabbi Josh FlugRabbi Menachem PennerRabbi Zvi Romm

זמן שמחתינו

2C h av ru s a • T i s h r e i 5771

Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary

Richard M. JoelP r e s i d e n T, Y e s h i va u n i v e r s i T Y

Rabbi Dr. Norman LammC h a n C e l lo r , Y e s h i va u n i v e r s i T Y

ro s h h aY e s h i va , r i e T s

Rabbi Julius BermanC h a i r m a n o f T h e B oa r d o f T ru sT e e s , r i e T s

Rabbi Yona Reissm a x a n d m a r i o n G r i l l d e a n , r i e T s

Rabbi Kenneth Branderdav i d m i T z n e r d e a n , C e n T e r fo r T h e J e w i s h f u T u r e

Rabbi Zevulun Charlopd e a n e m e r i T u s , r i e T s

sPeCial adv isor To The PresidenT on Yeshiva affa irs

Rabbi Robert Hirtv i C e P r e s i d e n T e m e r i T u s , r i e T s

Rabbi Dr. Solomon F. RybakP r e s i d e n T, r a B B i n i C a lu m n i

Rabbi Chaim Bronsteina d m i n i sT r aTo r , r i e T s

CHAVRUSAa P u B l i C aT i o n o f r i e T s r a B B i n i C a lu m n i

Rabbi Ronald L. Schwarzbergd i r e C To r , T h e m o r r i s a n d G e rT ru d e B i e n e n f e l d

d e Pa rT m e n T o f J e w i s h C a r e e r d e v e lo P m e n T a n d P l aC e m e n T

Rabbi Elly Krimskye d i To r , C H AV RU S A

Rabbi Levi Mostofskya s s o C i aT e e d i To r , C H AV RU S A

Ms. Keren Simona s s i sTa n T e d i To r , C H AV RU S A

Rabbi Robert ShurG r a P h i C s a n d l aYo u T, C H AV RU S A

CHAVRUSA is published three times a year by the Rabbinic Alumni of the rabbi isaac elchanan Theological seminary, through the office

of the morris and Gertrude Bienenfeld department of Jewish Career development and Placement.

Yeshiva university’s Center for the Jewish future serves as the community service arm of the rabbi isaac elchanan Theological seminary (rieTs). it continues the work of the max stern division of Communal services

which, for over 60 years, has served as one of the premier service organizations for the Jewish community.

5 0 0 we s t 18 5 t h s t . s u i te 413n ew Yo rk , n Y 10 0 3 3

21 2 - 9 6 0 - 5 4 0 0 x 6 3 6 0r a b b i n i c a l u m n i @ y u . e d u

c h av r u s a m a g a z i n e @ y u . e d uw w w. y u . e d u / c j f

editorial contributions and submissions to CHAVRUSA are welcome. This publication accepts no responsibility for unsolicited manuscripts or photographs. all submissions are subject to editing and are used at the editor’s discretion. opinions expressed in this publication do not

necesarily reflect official seminary and/or university policy.

in This issue

News from RIETSrieTs introduces new leadership initiative, and conference for assistant rabbis

Page 12 Musmakhim in the Limelighta look at rabbis who teach Torah to women

Page 19 Practical HalachahTorah Perspectives on the Monetary Aspects of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill By rabbi Joshua flug

Page 5 Chomer L’DrushIdeas for SukkotBy rabbi menachem Penner

Page 10 Back to the Beit Midrash“I and He”: Perspectives on the Mitzvah of LulavBy rabbi zvi romm

Page 8 Divrei ChizukThe Four SpeciesBy rabbi zevulun Charlop

Page 22 Lifecycles

CHAVRUSA• will consider articles and letters for publication. Books authored by musmakhim that are reviewed by musmakhim will be • considered for publication as well. obituaries about and authored by musmakhim will be considered for publication. • CHAVRUSA• aims to maintain the hebrew pronunciation style of the author of the article. Transliterations follow the author’s preference i.e. academic, ashkenazic, modern hebrew or the like. while we will remain consistent within articles, each author will be afforded to transliterate within his comfort level. CHAVRUSA• reserves the right to edit articles received for publication, and will make every effort to show a draft form to the author prior to publication. Contributions may be sent to [email protected]• in addition to • CHAVRUSA magazine, articles and divrei Torah may also be submitted for publication in the weekly rabbinic alumni e-newsletter. Please e-mail them to [email protected]

editorial Policies

3C h aV ru S a • T i S h r e i 5771

The Yeshiva has introduced the Huberfeld Family Semikha Leadership Initiative, a thre-year fellowship at RIETS designed to mold future leaders of the American rabbinate. “It is our privilege to be afforded this special opportunity to provide enhanced leadership training to students in consonance with time-treasured Torah prin-ciples of areivus, our communal responsibility towards Klal Yisroel,” said Rabbi Yona Reiss ’91R, the Max and Marion Grill Dean of RIETS.

As part of the fellowship, students will receive crucial leadership and entrepreneurial training that will enable them not only to play a vital role in their future respective commu-nities, but to create and guide the institutions that stand at the helm of those communities.

The talented young men that com-prise the first cadre of Huberfeld Fellows are Rabbi Yaacov Feit ’05R, Rabbi Yechiel Shaffer ’10R and RIETS student Dovid Bashevkin.

“The goal of this program is not to produce leaders who will fill positions in existing institutions,” explained Rabbi Marc Penner ’91R, director of profes-sional education for RIETS. “It is to train leaders who will envision and create the institutions of tomorrow.” The fellowship program will combine an individualized curriculum of directed post-semikha Torah learning at RIETS with a full complement of professional training, tailored to each of the fellow’s career aspirations. Each fellow will also be assigned multiple mentors

in the rabbinic, organizational and busi-ness worlds and benefit from personalized professional coaching. “This offers me the unique opportunity to learn from successful Jewish leaders in the field and the chance to continue my studies within the walls of Yeshiva University,” said Rabbi Shaffer, who obtained his semikha from RIETS as well as his master’s degree in education from YU’s Azrieli Graduate School of Jewish Education and Administration in June. He also served as a leader on the CJF-AJWS student trip to El Salvador. “I can continue my development both academically and in the field under the best guidance.” Rabbi Feit, a member of the Yadin Yadin Kollel at RIETS, looks forward to furthering his training in Jewish jurisprudence through the fellowship. “Our community doesn’t fully understand or trust the beth din sys-

tem,” said Rabbi Feit, who will participate in a joint program between RIETS and the Beth Din of America. “One of my goals through the fellowship is to create several initiatives that will educate the community at large. This will include seminars, articles and publications that clarify the roles and procedures of beth din.”

Bashevkin, who is currently complet-ing both his rabbinic ordination at RIETS and a master’s degree from YU’s Bernard Revel Graduate School, believes the fel-lowship will help him develop as a leader and an educator. “I’d like to eventually get involved in communal leadership, educa-tion and growth,” said Bashevkin, who has been involved with several Jewish organiza-tions and schools in the past. “My hope is to become as valuable an asset as I can for the Jewish community.” n

In the News

RIETS Introduces huberfeld Family Semikha leadership Initiative

(l-r) Rabbi Yaacov Feit, Rabbi Yechiel Shaffer, Dovid Bashevkin

In the News


Assistant Rabbis Gather for Professional Development Seminars Presented by CJF Twenty-two assistant rabbis from across North America recently gathered for two one-day seminars presented by Yeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future (CJF). The semi-nars featured presentations on topics ranging from “Relationship to the Senior Rabbi” and “Assistant Rabbi vs. Senior Rabbi” to “Pro-gramming and Best Practices” and “It’s Not Too Early: Building your Financial Future.”

The seminars were hosted by Congrega-tion Edmund J. Safra in New York’s Upper East Side. The synagogue’s spiritual leader, Rabbi Elie Abadie, also serves as director of the Jacob E. Safra Institute of Sephardic Studies at Yeshiva University.

“Assistant rabbis are a growing sector of the Orthodox clergy whose respective roles are often undefined,” explained Rabbi Levi Mostofsky, director of rabbinic programming at the CJF and one of the events’ coordina-tors. “They are budding professionals who do

not get attention and recognition at broader rabbinic gatherings. These seminars provide them the opportunity to come together as a

community of peers to discuss their particular challenges and opportunities.” n

Participants at the Assistant Rabbi Conference

Table set aside for RIETS Rabbinic Alumni in the Jacob and Dreizel Glueck Center for Jewish StudyDedicated in memory of harav Dovid lifschitz zt”lFeel free to come by anytime to learn in the vibrant and exciting atmosphere of the newest makom Torah on the YU uptown Wilf Campus. The table for rabbinic alumni is located on the second floor of the new beit midrash, and is accesible by both stairs and an elevator.


By the Yom Tov of Sukkot, the kehillah — and sometimes the Rav — may be tired of long derashot. No matter how

wonderful and meaningful one’s Yomim No-raim divrei Torah have been, Sukkot becomes a time for something a bit different: short, yet thought-provoking ideas. I share with you a collection of insights relating to Sukkot and simchah that I have used or will be using in Holliswood and encourage you to share simi-lar ideas with me at [email protected]. Please also feel free to e-mail me for full copies of the sources referenced in this article. Sukkot is the paradigmatic festival of simchah and we are commanded three times in the Torah within the context of this chag to be happy. In fact, we are told (or exhorted) “vehayita ach sameach.” A number of reasons can be suggested for the special joy of Sukkot. The simchah may be related to the material joy of the completed harvest. While there is an element of joy intrinsic to the other chagim, the fact that work remains to be done in the field gets in the way of true simchah on Pesach or Shavuot .1 At the same time, the simchah of Sukkot may be tied to the spiritual joy of the time spent with Hashem in Tishrei and to the sense of relief for having been forgiven on Yom Kippur. Either way, Sukkot is a good time to look at happiness and to think about what makes us happy.1. Most people feel a real sense of joy while eating the yom tov meals in their sukkah. This is, on the surface, somewhat strange. We leave our comfortable homes to sit on rickety chairs in a hut and we find ourselves delighted. Why ARE we so happy in the suk-kah? Is it possible that what we do on Sukkot is to take the things that are most valuable to us — our family, our friends, our tradition

— remove them from the distractions of our homes, and celebrate them? Meals in the sukkah are made all the more spe-cial by the attention we give to our children’s decorations. And how nice it is that there are no couches for family members to retire upon before the meal is finished! This message can be a very powerful one to share with our ba’alei bayit. What do we truly need to be happy? Perhaps the answer is found in our sukkot.2. An interesting contemporary look at the concept of happiness can be found in a recent edition of Commentary magazine.2 The author reviews two recent books about happiness — one from a personal and one from a political perspective — and concludes that the books have confused the concepts of “happiness” and “fulfillment.” In a few powerful sentences, the writer explains that happiness not a “right” but a gift for which we must be most thankful.3. Simchah is, of course, not just a concept; we are commanded to be happy on the chagim and this commandment is one of the most difficult mitzvot to fulfill. To eat, to drink, even to sing — that may be easy. To actually remain happy for seven, eight or nine days in a row is extraordinarily difficult. The Vilna Gaon claimed that there is no more difficult mitzvah than “vesamachta bechagecha.”3

Rav Soloveitchik often differentiated be-tween mitzvot whose kiyum was one of action and those whose kiyum was balev. The former can be most challenging to fulfill, especially for an extended period of time. 4. And Sukkot, if understood on a deeper level, makes this challenge even harder. The sukkah reminds us of our vulnerability.4 Despite all of our human efforts, represented by the building of the sukkah, we remain open to the elements

and the vagaries of “nature.” Rav Soloveitchik spoke of the dread that modern man faces despite his advances in science and technol-ogy. The fear is not new. Shlomo Hamelech, despite all of the guards that surrounded him and despite the relative peace in his time, was haunted by a “pachad ba’leilot” — a fear of the unknown and uncontrollable that looms around the corner. Modern Man, in particular, is haunted by this feeling of insecurity despite all that he has accomplished.5 (The Rav once suggested that this “pachad ba’leilot” was the fear of degenerative disease and senility — a malady that no-one, despite their power, riches and brilliance can avoid. The Rav, himself, would be subject for more than a decade to this “pachad ba’leilot”. ) A simple approach would be to say “All will be OK— Hashem will protect us.” And, of course, He does and He will. But the sukkah, where it does rain sometimes and we do not always feel completely protected, begs us to consider a more sophisticated approach. In-stead, suggests Rabbi Nathan Lopes Cardozo, the sukkah is a challenge to celebrate what we have despite our genuine fears and uncertain-ties. He writes that “to be happy when all is well is of no significance. But to fully aware of the dangers which surround us, while simul-taneously continuing our lives with ‘song and harp’ is what makes humans great and proud.”6 5. From its inception, Sukkot represents dreams as of yet unfulfilled and the ability to rejoice in the process of geulah while it continues to unfold. Rabbi Ben Tzion Firer asks why two holidays, Pesach and Sukkot are necessary to remember Yetziat Mitzrayim7. He answers that while Pesach commemorates the day of Yetziat Mitzrayim — “So that you may remember the day of your exodus from Egypt …,”8 Sukkot marks the days that followed — “ So that your generations shall know that in sukkot did I make the Children of Israel dwell when I brought them out from the land Egypt.”9 The latter focuses not on the day of the Exodus, but on the many difficult days that followed as they stood between the Exodus from Egypt and the entrance into Eretz Yisrael. This theme of Sukkot is most important and relevant. It reminds us that we should not despair of a complete geulah if the redemption does not materialize immediately. It reminds us to celebrate each stage of the geulah, even as we await the final stage of the redemption.

Chomer l’Drush and Ideas for SukkotRabbi Menachem PennerDirector, Professional Rabbinic Education, RIETSRabbi, Young Israel of Holliswood

Chomer l’Drush

continued on page 6

Chomer L’Drush and Ideas for Sukkotcontinued from page 5


Chomer l’Drush

We are reminded of this message by our special “guests” in the sukkah. Rav Firer notes that all of the ushpizin longed for a redemption they could not yet taste. Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov are promised Eretz Yisrael but are not given the land in their lifetimes. Yosef is exiled and must await redemptions for himself and for his family. Moshe and Aharon are unable to cross into Eretz Yisrael. And Dovid Hamelech yearns for the Beit HaMikdash, but is not zocheh to build it himself. They send a single message to those who will one day sit in sukkot: “Be patient. It may not happen just yet. It may not even happen in your lifetime. But geulot come slowly. Most important, they do eventually come.” During the long journey it may seem difficult — yes, “the shade will be greater than the sunlight” — but the end will eventually come. Perhaps, for this reason, Eliyahu HaNavi is not invited on Sukkot. Eliyahu is the mevaser

ha’geulah. His role restarts when he is ready to announce an imminent geulah. But that’s not Sukkot. Sukkot is not about the moments of geulah themselves, but the long journeys that lead from one stage of the geulah to the next.10 6. Part of the joy of Sukkot is in the multitude of mitzvot we are able to perform. It is a crucial time to show our children that mitzvot, even when they are somewhat “inconvenient,” are a source of joy. The attitude that we bring to yeshiva ba’sukkah can have lasting effects on our family. If we complain about the cold, the pine needles, the bees, the mosquitoes and ev-erything else that distracts us, we send a mes-sage that mitzvot are a burden. However, if we show a genuine love for one of the few mitzvot that we can perform with our entire bodies, we send a powerful message to the next genera-tion.11 Rav Moshe Feinstein lamented that a generation was lost to Shabbat observance despite the great sacrifices of their parents to keep Shabbat when they came to the shores of America. Though parents sacrificed so much to keep the Shabbat, a generation grew up seeing Shabbat as a burden rather than a joy. Shabbat meant not just loss of income, but, usually, loss of a job. Children, unable to see the joy and value of the Shabbat, yearned for the day when they could throw that burden away. Unfortunately, many did.12 We often take it for granted that our children understand the meaning that Judaism brings to our lives. Very often, however, they hear only the sarcasm, the sighs and the complaints. It is important to use Sukkot, zman simchateinu, as a time to clearly express how fortunate we are to have the mitzvot ha’Torah.7. Another angle to consider is the joy we give to Hashem on Sukkot.13 Rabbi Dr. Abraham Twerski tells a famous story about the Chafetz Chaim that illustrates this idea:14

On the return from a convention in which many Torah sages participated, the train made stops in several towns, whose Jewish communities came out to greet the gedolim. The Chafetz Chaim, however, in his profound humility, never went on the train platform to meet the people. HaGaon Rav Meir Shapiro of Lublin, although he was a young man, boldly approached the elderly sage. “Why aren’t you going out to meet the people?” he asked. The Chafetz Chaim answered, “Why should I go out? What is it that they want to see?

I don’t have horns on my head. It is because they have this idea about me that I am a tzaddik, and if I go out to them, I am making a statement about myself that I am someone special.” Rav Meir Shapiro asked, “And what is wrong with making such a statement?” The Chafetz Chaim said, “What do you mean ‘what is wrong?’ It is ga’avah.” Rav Meir Shapiro said, “And if it is ga’avah, so what?” The Chafetz Chaim said, “Ga’avah is a terrible aveirah.” Rav Meir Shapiro said, “And what happens if one does an aveirah?” The Chafetz Chaim said, “Why, for an aveirah one will be punished in Gehenom.” Rav Meir Shapiro said, “Throngs of Jews will have pleasure from seeing you. Aren’t you willing to accept some punishment in order to give Jews pleasure?” The Chafetz Chaim was electrified. From then on, every time the train pulled into a station he was the first one on the platform to meet the people.

Rabbi Dr. Twerski continues, “This story tells us that we must be willing to accept some discomfort to give others pleasure. “ This was said in the cotext of a dispute between a brother and sister regarding their mother. But what a powerful lesson for us about sitting in the sukkah and giving “pleasure” to the Rib-bono shel Olam. 8. Another interesting connection to sim-chah can be found in the takanot of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai relating to lulav and chadash. The Gemara15 tells us that Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai established two takan-not zecher le’Mikdash — one, that the lulav be taken all seven days, even outside of the Mikdash, and another that new wheat remain assur on the entire 16th day of Nisan (the “Yom HaNeif ”), despite the fact that the Mikdash was destroyed and no Korban ha’Omer was being prepared for offering. What, asks Rav Elyashiv, is the connection between these two takkanot? He answers that the takkanot have the opposite effect. To legislate seven days of lulav observance as a remembrance to the Temple days was to send a message that a long period of galut was forthcoming. One doesn’t cre-ate a remembrance for something unless a significant period of time will elapse before it is renewed. The affect of this first takana was devastating for the people. They understood, through the eyes of their gadol ha’dor that the

Chomer l’Drush

geulah might be far into the future. Therefore, a second takana was necessary — one that reminded them that geulah could come at any moment.16 9. A further thought on the joy of being forgiven: Rav Chaim Yaakov Goldvicht, the past rosh yeshiva of Yeshivat Kerem BeYavneh, suggested a fascinating insight to the famous Yalkut Shimoni (651) that speaks of the Jewish people emerging victoriously from beit din with their lulavim and etrogim held high as a symbol of victory.17 Why are the daled minim chosen as the symbols of our victory? Rav Goldvicht explained that victory can only be assured by attaching oneself to the Klal. When the angels question as to why Klal Yisrael cannot sing shirah on the Yomim Noraim,18 they are looking at our chances in the Heavenly court as a tzibbur. Why, they ask, should Klal Yisrael, confident of victory, not sing shirah during the judgment? The answer given by the Gemara is that each Jew is also judged as an individual. “Is it possible that the King sits on his Throne of Judgment and the books of life and death (for each individual) are open and Israel should sing shirah?” There is no greater symbol of the unity of Klal Yisrael than the daled minim, repre-senting so many different types of Jews bound together. Rav Goldvicht explains in a beautiful essay that part of doing teshuva

is connecting oneself to the Klal (similar to the famous words of Rav Soloveitchik in Al HaTeshuva). For this reason, the Midrash chose the daled minim as the ultimate symbol of victory. It is when we are bound together like the four species that we can be confident of our victory.10. According to the Vilna Gaon, Sukkot specifically celebrates the joy of a renewed rela-tionship with G-d. In his commentary to Shir HaShirim,19 the GR”A suggests that the 15th of Tishrei was chosen as the date for Chag Ha’Sukkot because it was on that very day that the Ananei HaKavod, removed from the Jew-ish people after the chet ha’eigel, were restored. The Jews were forgiven on Yom Kippur and several days later began to build the Mishkan. Only after the building of the Mishkan begins is the atonement complete and only then did the clouds reappear. This occurred on the 15th of Tishrei, five days after Yom Kippur. The sukkah thus represents the special protection that we receive from Hashem even after we have sinned — if we are able to do teshuva. The chag thus follows beautifully on the heels of the Yomim Noraim. It is my hope that some of these thoughts can enhance your Sukkot and the yom tov of your kehillot. n

Footnotes Chizkuni, Da’at Zekeinim and others to Devarim 1. 16:15. See Meshech Chochma to this pasuk who suggests that the mi’ut of “ach sameach” comes to limit those who rejoice only because of the materials aspects of the simchah. Ultimately, their simchah will be clouded by jealousy and will not be complete. “The Dawn of the Happiness Busybody”, 2. Com-mentary, April 2010, pp. 51-54. Quoted in 3. Sefer Divrei Shalom, p. 36. It is interesting that the Sukkah, which started as a 4. symbol of our material success in Eretz Yisrael (see Rashbam to Vayikra 23:43), has become a symbol of our wanderings in exile. For further elaboration of the theme of sukkah as historical galut, see Rabbi Isaac C. Avigdor, Two for Ten, pp. 131 and Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, Faith in the Future, pp. 150-153. An interesting look at the value of Galut can be found in Rav Soloveitchik’s Abraham’s Journey (Masoret HaRav), in the chapter on Avraham’s wanderings, especially pp. 75-80, and Rabbi Yisroel Reisman’s Pathways of the Prophets, in a fascinat-ing chapter entitled “Prava Galus,” pp. 25-40. See shiur of Rav Soloveitchik, Saturday night, Dec. 5. 16, 1978, Sedra “Vayaytze” which can be found at www.613.org 6. Thoughts to Ponder, vol. 1, pp. 135-137. 7. Eleh Heim Mo’adai, vol. 1, pp. 149-152. Devarim 16:3.8. Vayikra 23:439. My own thought. Rav Firer himself suggests else-10. where that Eliyahu is left off the “guest list” because Sukkot is a time of rachamim and inclusion of all types of Jews. Eliyahu represents kana’ut and is thus not welcome on Sukkot. See Rav Moshe Meir Weiss, 11. Passionate Judaism, pp 165-167. Derash Moshe, vol. 1, to Parshat Pinchas, p. 133.12. See Alshich to Vayikra 23:37 who explains that it 13. is not we, but Hashem who has complete simchah on Sukkot. 14. Dear Rabbi, Dear Doctor, pp. 20-21. Bavli, Sukkah 41a.15. Quoted in 16. He’arot al Masechet Sukkah by Rav Yonah Emmanuel, p. 191. I have seen this idea quoted in the name of the Sfat Emet, but have not been able to locate a source in his writings. Yikra d’Chaim17. (Memorial Volume in memory of Rav Goldvicht, zt”l), pp. 71-75. See there at length as he incorporates many ma’amarei Chazal into this idea. Bavli, Rosh Hashana, 32b.18. Kol Eliyahu, Parshat Emor, 84.19.


Pri Etz Hadar, zeh Hakadosh Baruch Hu … hod v’hadar lavashta (Tehillim 104)Kapos Temarim zeh Hakadosh Baruch Hu

… tzadik katamar yifrach (Tehillim 32)Anaf Eitz Avos zeh Hakadosh Baruch Hu … v’hu omed bein hahadasim (Zechariah 1)Arvei nachal zeh Hakadosh Baruch Hu … solu l’rochev b’arvos b’Kah shmo (Tehillim 68)(Midrash Vayikra Rabba 30:9)

Probably the most popular and well known midrash relating to the daled minim, the four species that we take on Sukkos is the one that defines and distinguishes the wholeness of the Jewish people in its distinct and possibly at times disparate parts: even as the esrog has taste and fragrance, taam vareyach, so too are there Jews who combine Torah, identified with taste and maasim tovim, good works, identified with fragrance. The lulav refers to those Jews who have taste, Torah, but want for maasim tovim, fragrance. Others are likened to hadasim, to myrtles. They have maasim tovim but are not necessarily learned in Torah. Finally, we have the willows, the aravos, which have neither taste nor fragrance.

And the midrash wonders, how does HaKadosh Baruch Hu relate to these human wil-lows, without taste or fragrance?

U-ma haKadosh Baruch Hu oseh lahem? L’ovdan, ee efshar. Ela, amar Hakadosh Baruch Hu, yuksheru kulam agudah achas v’hein m’chaprin elu al elu. Ve’im asisem kach, osa sha’ah ani mis’aleh.What does the Holy One Blessed Be He do with or to them? He can’t destroy them! Instead, He ‘ties them all together into one congregation and they atone for each other.’ And if you do this, at that

very moment, I am uplifted! (Vayikra Rabbah 30:9)

But the question remains, how and why do we need the aravos altogether? They have no Torah, they have no maasim tovim. What do they add or contribute? On the contrary, they may diminish from the wholesomeness and sanctity of the others, separate or united.

The answer, it seems to me, is provided two midrashim earlier, in anticipation almost, which astonishingly denominates each of the four species and each on its own as the Holy One Blessed Be He, even the lowly and undistin-guished aravos.

What in the world does the midrash mean when it proclaims of each of the minim, including the aravos, individually, Zeh Hakadosh Baruch Hu, this is the Holy One Blessed Be He.

For me, this midrash is a startling articula-tion of one of the loftiest and essential teachings of Torah, of Yiddishkeit, that all Jews - and in a real sense all humanity - in different ways, what-ever their station and whoever they be, share at bottom the breath of Hashem, the tzelem Elokim, the image of God, that He infused into Adam Harishon at the very inception of Creation. And, it is this truth which was self evident to the Founding Founders of these United States and speaks to the overriding splendor of the Ameri-can democracy and sets it altogether apart from the French Revolution that followed.

The American Revolution was defined and took its strength from the Declaration of Inde-pendence which proclaims in that elegant and vaulting cadence that “We are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights.” With

their invoking of the Borei Olam Hakadosh Ba-ruch Hu, the Creator, these giants who “brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal,” projected the ultimate truth about all of us, that the Tzelem Elokim — the irrepressible and undying spirit of Hakadosh Baruch Hu — reposes securely, inextricably and eternally in us and our descendants.

MurbiyosNear the end of the 1973 Yom Kippur

War, when literally and miraculously victory was snatched from the jaws of defeat but which unfortunately brought in its wake massive casu-alties, my father, Rabbi Yechiel Michel Charlop zt’l shared with me on the Hoshanah Rabbah of that year, as the war was winding down and our enemies were on the run, that he now understood more fully the mishnah in Sukkah (Sukkah 45a).

How was the mitzvah of aravah accomplished? There was a place below Yerushalayim called motza. The agents of the beis din would descend there and collect murbiyos of aravah and would erect them at the sides of the altar, with their tops bent over the altar...

The Gemara (Sukkah 45a) describes these murbiyos, as very tall willows, which surround-ed the mizbeyach on Hoshanah Rabbah and around which seven hakafos were made.

My father asked, why did they particularly choose aravos? They should have surrounded the mizbeyach with the beautiful esrogim or the imposing lulavim, or the sweet smelling and comely hadasim instead.

It was in the context of the heavy and heartbreaking casualty reports that he sensed a new understanding of murbiyos — the aravos of Hoshanah Rabbah. While it is true that the talmidim of the Yeshivot Hesder who served in Tzahal sustained, early on, possibly the greatest losses certainly in relative proportion to their numbers. This was owing to the fact that they chose to stay at their posts, to man the border on Yom Kippur, so that their less observant comrades could go home for the Holy Day.

Nonetheless, it was clear that the vast majority of those who died al Kiddush Hashem, protecting and defending Eretz Yisrael against the sneak, brutal and sweeping onslaught of the enemy, were the less lettered and less devout


Divrei Chizuk

Zeh Hakadosh Baruch Hu

Rabbi Zevulun Charlop

Divrei Chizuk


Israeli soldiers. My father noted that they may have been perceived in some quarters as the ara-vos of our people — no taste and no fragrance. However, the truth of the matter was that in all likelihood without their sacrifices, we could not have emerged victorious in those dark days. Without them, heaven forefend, there may not have been a state of Israel today.

On Hoshannah Rabbah, a day likened to Yom Kippur, it was the aravos which adorned the mizbeyach, because their human representations were closest to the mizbeyach. They proved to be the korbanos, the sacrifices, which saved the day. In the conglomerate of the Jewish people they were surely not an unimportant component. Therefore, no less of them do we declare zeh HaKadosh Baruch Hu.

Having said all this, however, as bnei Torah and maaminim b’nei maaminim, we must know that no less than the heroic soldier on the battle-field, in different and possibly in profounder ways, Talmud Torah and yiras Shamayim cannot be trumped. This truth should never be lost on us.

One of the premier commentaries, the Atzei Yosef found in editions of the midrash, un-derstood the inclusion of the aravos among the daled minim from a different vantage point. With their failings and all — without taam and reyach — it was the aravos who surprisingly wanted to be at one with the esrogim, the lulavim and the hadassim. That in itself is a mighty saving grace.

AvaryanimThe authors of the Yom Kippur machzor deemed it appropriate to open the Kol Nidrei service with a special plea to the beis din shel maalah, the tribunal above and the beis din shel matah, the tribunal here on earth, to allow the avaryanim, loosely translated as sinners, to pray with the congregation. Indeed it can and should be construed as a call of welcome to them.

I often wondered why the word avaryan for sinner was chosen and not the more common posh’im and chot’im, words or forms of these words which abound in the machzor? It seemed to me that avaryan was deliberately selected over its more familiar synonyms because it also resonates the word ivri, which is a highlight of Maftir Yonah, which we read as prelude to Neilah. Most of us are familiar with the story of Jonah

the prophet who was fleeing from the Almighty who put upon him an urgent, awesome, charge to preach teshuvah to the forsaken metropolis of Nineveh, which otherwise stood imminently to be destroyed. Jonah apparently for some reason not altogether clear to us, took flight on a ship which in time was met by a furious storm which threatened to break his ship apart, burying crew and passengers in the deep oblivion of the sea.

When his fellow voyagers asked Jonah, the stranger among them, who they prop-erly suspected is the cause of their impending misfortune, “who are you and where do you come from?” Unafraid he says Ivri Anochi, I am a Hebrew, even as he is running away from G-d.

Avaryanim was the word chosen for sinners because of its cognitive similarity to ivri. We don’t force the aravah to be bound up with the other more committed kinds. In fact, the aravah, as distanced as he is from the many hallowed perspectives of our faith, nonetheless wants to be part and parcel of the Jewish people and to show himself before the Almighty at least once a year. His Jewish tzelem Elokim is still alive and pulsating and is witnessed to the fact that he is not, heaven forefend, sundered from his roots, from klal Yisrael. And in this sense, it can be said of this aravah zeh Hakadosh Baruch Hu. He is a posheya or a chotei perhaps, but he proclaims ivri anochi, and therefore he is called an avaryan.

Vat’chasreihu me’at m’Elokim, v’chavod v’hadar te’atreihu.But there is another concept, certainly no less majestic than tzelem Elokim, and probably another understanding of tzelem Elokim, that tzelem Elokim not only applies to the moral and ethical imperatives which ought to distinguish him from other inhabitants of the universe, but gives nearly literal meaning to David’s soaring conception of who man is when he proclaims,

ki er’eh shamecha, ma’aseh etzb’osecha, yareyach v’chochavim asher konantah. mah enosh ki sizk-erenu uven adam ki sifkidenu va’tchasreihu me’at me’Elokim v’chavod v’hadar te-atreihu.When I behold Your heavens, the work of Your fin-gers, the moon and the stars which You established. What is man that You are mindful of him and the son of man that You think of him? You have made him slightly lower than Elokim and have crowned him with glory and honor. (Tehillim 8:4-6)

I don’t believe that ever before in human history has this psalm been more understood and felt as in the last 25 years, and increasingly in the last five to ten years. The psalm introduces the notion of va’tchasreihu me’at me’Elokim, of man being slightly less than Elokim, with ki er’eh shamecha, ma’aseh etzb’osecha, yareyach v’chochavim asher konantah…

Buckminster Fuller, the noted architect and iconoclast who died several years ago observed, “Until I was 28, we knew only about our own galaxy. In 1923, Hubble discovered another galaxy. Since then we have discovered 2 billion beyond that.” And I might add that in the years since, even millions and possibly billions more. Amazing! But that is exactly what Chazal told us nearly two millennia ago in Brachos (32b) and specifically in the explanatory note that appears in the Artscroll edition of the Talmud (note 23), which invokes Chazal’s understanding centuries ago of the vastness of the universe.

The Gemara, undoubtedly taken from some ancient Mesorah that was handed down from generation to generation, pictures for us a hierarchy of galaxies with the names ligyon, rahaton, karton and gostera, telling us the precise number of stars attached to each of these galax-ies. Artscroll computes or attempts to compute their total number: “Ligyon, rahaton, karton and gostera are titles for different officers [taken apparently from Roman military parlance] (Rashi), proceeding in a hierarchy from the higher to the lower levels (Ben Yehoyada). Each “officer,” representing a system of stars or other heavenly bodies, controls numerous lower-level “officers” and their “divisions” beneath them, and so on. The lowest level “officers,” the gosteras, numbering in the hundreds of millions (12x30x30x30x30x30), each has attached to it several billion stars (365 thousand myriad). This amounts to quadrillions of stars.”

A talmid of mine through a strange hap-penstance was in the same car with Garrett Reisman, the only Jew to have lived on a space station for 90 days. He returned to earth a little over two years ago. And our talmid, upon learn-ing that he was Jewish, asked if he had placed a mezuzah on the space station, not really expect-ing a positive answer. He was surprised when

continued on page 11

And [through the performance of the mitzvah of lulav] may I know how Your Name is called upon me, such that [my

enemies] will fear to approach me …This phrase, culled from the Yehi Ratzon

prayer recited by some prior to performing the mitzvah of lulav, calls for explanation. What does it mean to have G-d’s name “called upon” the one who performs the mitzvah of lulav? How does this mitzvah affect that result?

The answer may lie in a striking Midrash in Vayikra Rabba (30:9):

“A goodly fruit (i.e. the esrog )” — this refers to the Holy One, Blessed be He, about whom it says “You donned glory and beauty.” “A palm branch” — this refers to the Holy One, Blessed be He, about whom it says “The Righteous One will flower forth like a palm tree.” “A branch of myrtles” — this refers to the Holy One, Blessed be He, about whom it says “He stood among the myrtles.” “And willows of the river” — this refers to the Holy One, Blessed be He, about whom it says “Praise the One who rides in the Heavens (aravos) using His Name.”

Each of the four species taken on Sukkos is deemed to be symbolic of G-d Himself in some fashion. Thus, the one performing the mitzvah of lulav is taking objects which represent — metaphorically, of course — the Almighty Himself.

Yet just a few paragraphs later in the same Vayikra Rabba, we find another passage (30:12) which addresses the symbolism of lulav from a very different perspective:

“A goodly fruit” — this refers to Israel; just as the esrog has both taste and scent, thus Israel

contains those who posses both Torah and good deeds. “A palm branch” — this refers to Israel; just as the lulav has taste but no scent, thus Israel contains those who posses Torah but no good deeds. “A branch of myrtles” — this refers to Israel; just as the myrtle has a scent but no taste, thus Israel contains those who posses good deeds but no Torah. “And willows of the river” — this refers to Israel; just as the willow has neither scent nor taste, thus Israel contains those who posses neither Torah nor good deeds.

Here, the four species are portrayed not as representing G-d, but as representing the Jewish People. Other midrashim see the four species as symbolic of various aspects of Klal Yisrael, the Avos and Imahos (30:10) or the Sanhedrin (30:11).

Which is the “true” symbolism of lulav and esrog? Perhaps we can suggest that all the symbolic representations are correct. In fact, part of the symbolism of the four species is to show that a unique bond exists between G-d

and His Chosen People. It is not accidental that the four species are used to portray both G-d and the Jews. Part of the message of the Four Species is precisely that Yisrael v’Kudsha Brich Hu chad hu — that the Jewish People and G-d are truly united.

This notion, that lulav conveys the identification of G-d with the Jewish People, helps explain certain aspects of the hoshanos recited with the taking of lulav and esrog.

The Mishnah (Sukka 45a) records the opinion of R’ Yehuda that instead of saying “Ana Hashem hoshiana na” (“Please, O G-d, save now”) when circling the altar in the Beis HaMikdash, the kohanim instead said “Ani vaHo hoshiana na.” While noting that the gematria of “ani vaHo” equals that of “ana Hashem,” Tosfos question what the significance of “ani vaHo” might be. They suggest that it means “I and He” — that, as it were, G-d Himself is in captivity when the Jews go into exile. The prayer asks G-d not only to save us, but, so to speak, to save Himself. The phrase “ani vaHo” thus identifies G-d with the Jewish People as a central component of the hoshanos.

This theme is carried further in numerous stanzas of the poem authored by R’ Eliezer HaKalir which concludes the hoshanos:

As you saved a nation and its G-d, both in need of G-d’s salvation — so may You save us now!As you saved the plant [Israel] who sang “He saved [us],” the same word is vocalized as “He was saved” for the One who delivered it — so may You save us now!As you saved with the expression “I will redeem you,” which can also be read as “I will be re-deemed with you” — so may You save us now!

The theme in all these stanzas, as well as others, is that G-d goes into exile together with the Jewish People, and that He is redeemed from exile together with us. Once again, the hoshanos stress the identification of G-d with the Jewish People.

When we consider that the hoshanos are recited while circling the bima with the Sefer Torah, a third element is added to this equation: The notion that G-d and the Jewish People are both identified with the Torah — Yisrael, Kudsha Brich Hu, v’Oraisa chad hu.

Based on all this, we can understand the


“I and he”: Perspectives on the Mitzvah of lulav

Rabbi Zvi RommInstructor of Talmud, Isaac Breuer CollegeRabbi, Bialystoker Synagogue, NYC

Back to the Beit Midrash

Part of the symbolism of the Four Species is to

show that a unique bond exists between

G-d and His Chosen People

Back to the Beit Midrash

Reisman told him, “I did in fact affix a mezuzah on one of the posts of the space station.”

At the same time, only in the last few years, the GPS has become part of us, it goes wherever we go. It can direct billions of people to billions of destinations instantaneously. It can tell a billion people at the same time all around the globe with absolute precision, how they can get to their destinations. And if any of them or all of them, for that matter, make a wrong turn, it will immediately change directions in a second for those billion people in a second. Wherever you are, whether in China or Timbuktu or the Bronx, the itinerary will be changed; it knows exactly where you are.

In the last two years we have seen the Hadron Collider, which hopes for the first time to move at speeds faster than the speed of light. Theoretically it would take us back in time. We have reached a pass in history when we can think of going back in time. It is axiomatic in Judaism that the closer one gets to the past, the closer you come to ma’amad har Sinai, the closer you come to Hashem. Chadesh ya’meinu k’kedem. It’s uncanny that the word Hadron, which is an acronym of scientific terms and parts that comprise this collider, is hadron, which means returning or going back.

Only a short while back, in the August 11, 2010, New York Times Blog Opinionator exclu-sive online commentary from the Times, Garry Gutting, a noted philosopher of our day, wrote a biting critique entitled, “On Dawkins’ Atheism: A Response,” and attempted to demonstrate that the scientific assertions that Dawkins made and the so called proofs that he conjured, were actually vulnerable and indeed could not stand the test of rigorous philosophical analysis. Without going into the itinerary of his thinking, Dawkins rejects Hashem’s omniscience, and,

not least of all, His ability to manage billions of people all at once.

Today the GPS can do it, so can the Almighty. We have reached an age where before things could only be ascribed to Elokim. Today, we are me’at me’Elokim.

Science, it has been recently reported, stands on the threshold of penetrating man’s mind and the dreams of man as well to know what he is thinking – day or night, awake or asleep.

The recent advance of science can also complicate or clarify biblical exegesis. The To-rah tells us in Parshat Devarim (1:28) and then repeats word for word in Parshat Eikev (9:1) that in the upcoming battle against the seven nations who then held sway in Canaan-Eretz Yisrael, they would come against a formidable opponent whose cities are fortified to the heavens, arim g’dolos uvetzuros bashamayim. Rebbe Ami (Chullin 90b) wondered: How can there be cities in the heavens? The whole idea is preposterous! Therefore we derive from these pesukim that dibra Torah b’lashon havai - b’lashon guzma - that the Torah from time to time uses exaggeration to make a point.. The Sifrei, interestingly enough makes a similar comment about hyperbole, but uses the verse in Eikev, not that of Devarim, as its proof.

The Vilna Gaon notices this anomaly and wonders why the authors of the Sifrei would use Eikev as the proof verse, when trhe pasuk first appeared earlier in Devarim? As a general principle, Chazal cite the first time the proof verse appears. Why in this instance does the Sifrei pass over the verse in parshas Devarim and goes to Eikev? The Gaon therefore emends this midrash and leaves it with a different text, girsa, altogether, whereby the Sifrei mentions first the pasuk in Devarim and then adds “that it can also

be found in Eikev.”However, the Torah Temimah (Devarim

1:28) demurred from the Gaon’s revision and said that Chazal, purposely cites the verse in Eikev deliberately skipping over its first mention because in Devarim the words were uttered by the meraglim, the notorious spies who searched the land of Canaan and brought back an altogether depressing and evil report about that land and are explicitly called liars by our Sages. How can you derive a teaching, says the Torah Temimah, from liars? So therefore, they skipped over that verse, went to Eikev, for there it was Moshe Rabbeinu who proclaimed Arim U’vezuros BaShamayim.

On the surface the Torah Temimah’s an-swer seems to be a brilliant reposte to the Gaon’s concerns.

However, in light of recent discover-ies, how can we say that the pasuk in Eikev originally emanated not from Moshe obvi-ously speaking in Hashem’s name? Hashem is simultaneously haya, hoveh v’yihiyeh at once and knows that there would be arim batzuros bashamayim. Unless the pasuk refers specifically to cities on earth whose towers rise literally into the endless expanse of heaven, precisely because they are endless, the Gaon’s fixing of the text would not be improper. Moreover the Torah doesn’t explicitly say that G-d said it or that Moshe spoke in His name. So it may not be a question at all. However this may go counter to the famous assertion of Chazal that HaKadosh Baruch Hu Diber Me’Toch Grono Shel Moshe – That the Almighty spoke through the larynx of Moshe – so our problem with the Gaon’s understanding remains.

Having said all this, it is still only me’at m’Elokim. But me’at is hardly less than before and He remains approachable yet unbridgeable. n


Divrei ChizukZeh Hakadosh Baruch Hucontinued from page 9

phrase with which we began — describing the lulav as exemplifying how “Your Name is called upon me” — in greater depth. Indeed, the one who performs the mitzvah of lulav is declaring that the Jewish People, and by extension, himself, identifies with the Almighty. In this

sense G-d’s name is called upon the person through fulfilling the mitzvah of lulav.

Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur posit a relationship with G-d whereby we approach Him, so to speak, from the opposite side of the table. We are being judged and need to defend

ourselves. On Sukkos a realignment of that relationship takes place. G-d invites us, so to speak, to join Him on “His side” of the table. We are able to identify with Him, as He identi-fies with us. May we merit to be deserving of that lofty identification. n

Teaching Torah to Women“Not only is the teaching of Torah she-baal peh to girls permissible but it is nowadays an absolute imperative. This policy of discrimination between the sexes as to subject matter and method of instruction which is still advocated by certain groups within our Orthodox community has contributed greatly to the deterioration and downfall of traditional Judaism. Boys and girls alike should be introduced into the inner halls of Torah she-be-al peh.”

Letter dated May 27, 1953 from Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik to Rabbi Leonard Rosenfeld, chairman of the education committee of the Hebrew Institute of Long Island and director of the Department of Yeshivot at the New York Board of Jewish Educationpp. 83 - “Community, Covenant and Commitment: Selected Letters and Communications” by Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Rabbi Nathaniel Helfgot, ed. pp. 83. The Toras Horav Foundation, 2005

Musmakhim in the Limelight

Musmakhim in the limelight


CHAVRUSA: How did you get your start teaching Torah to women? RFS: I was the first faculty member to teach Talmud at Stern College for Women. Dr. Belkin zt”l asked me to teach at YU and asked me if I would prefer teaching uptown at the men’s campus or in midtown at Stern College. I asked the Rav his opinion and he suggested that I teach at Stern. He also counseled me to teach text, not to instruct baal peh. The cur-riculum was up to me, so I requested to teach Gemara. The Rav was happy with my decision and encouraged me.

At one point, Dr. Belkin wanted to move the Stern library uptown as a cost-cutting measure. They would arrange men’s days and women’s days. He faced opposition from roshei yeshiva and some of the faculty, who feared that the school would end up co-ed. He called a meeting of the faculty at Stern, which I attended. He told us the following story: As a youngster, Dr. Belkin studied in Radin. One day the Chofetz Chayim told the boys in the yeshiva to be “gozer a taanis” (to decree a fast

day) the next day because the following day he was going to Warsaw to plead with the Gerer Rebbe to withdraw his support for the nascent Bais Yaakov of Cracow. The Chofetz Chayim went and met the Gerer Rebbe, who told him, “Maybe you’re correct in Radin. But in Warsaw I need it. Should the Jewish women go to Christian schools, and learn from priests? My young Chassidim will marry those girls?” Dr. Belkin continued that, “The Chofetz Chaim returned to Radin and told us that the Gerer Rebbe convinced him to found a Bais Yaakov in Radin as well.”

RCB: My desire to teach Torah stems from my 12 years as a student at the Yeshiva of Flatbush. My main motivation for attend-ing Yeshiva College, which was then not the accepted choice it might be today, was to maxi-mize my opportunities to learn. Of course, the eventual opportunity to enter the Rav’s shiur was a major goal and motivation.

After semikhah in 1965, I moved to Israel. I was accepted into the ITRI kollel, which was made up of the best guys in Yerushalayim

because Rabbi Elefant, the rosh yeshiva, realized that due to the difficult economic situation, for an extra $50 a month, he could attract the best students to his kollel. It was an eye-opening experience for me. I had thought that if you could make your way through a daf Gemara that you’d never seen before you were a qualified talmid chacham. But I encountered

The Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 60) teaches us that during the lifetimes of both Sarah and Rivkah and in their merit, candles burned all week illuminating their home, blessing was found in their bread and a cloud was tied above their tent. Perhaps this cloud was a precursor to the ananei hakavod, the clouds of glory that accompanied our ancestors through the wilderness, which according to Rebbe Eliezer (Sukkah 11b) the sukkot represent.

As the role of women and their education has evolved in society, our Torah community needs to ensure that the paradigm of Torat Imecha (Mishlei 1:8) continues to contribute to the eternality of our people. As was so eloquently expressed by the Rav zt’l:I used to have long talks with my mother. In fact, it was a monologue rather than a dialogue. She talked and I “happened” to overhear. What did she talk about? I must use a halakhic term in order to answer this question: she talked me-inyana de-yoma. I used to watch her arranging the house in honor of a holiday. I used to see her recite prayers; I used to watch her recite the sidra every Friday night and I still remember the nostalgic tune. I learned from her very much. Most of all I learned that Judaism expresses itself not only in formal compliance with the law but alsoinalivingexperience.Shetaughtmethatthereisaflavor,ascent,a warmth to mitzvoth. I learned from her the most important things in life — to feel the presence of the Almighty and the gentle pressure of His hand resting upon my frail shoulders. Without her teachings, which quite often were transmitted to me in silence, I would have grown up a soulless being, dry and insensitive.(Tradition Vol 17 No. 2 – Spring 1978 – “a Tribute to the rebbitzen of Talne”, pp. 77)

The Rav continued to illustrate his point that while his father taught him the laws of Shabbat, it was his mother who taught him how to live and love Shabbat.

in the modern world, transmitting “Torat imecha” is not sufficient. as the Rav explained in the letter above, teaching women Torah shebaal peh is an ‘absolute imperative.’

Although many halachic traditions frown upon teaching women Torah sheba’al peh, the Rav, following in the giant footsteps of the Gerer Rebbe and the Chofetz Chayim, ruled differently. Rabbi Meir Twersky ’85R in a public eulogy for his grandfather the Rav, brought support for the Rav’s decision:The chachmei hamasorah are not merely human tape recorders for transmitting masorah. Their understanding and interpretation are an integral part of the masorah. Hence, there’s no distinction, and there can be no distinction, between Torah shebaal peh and magidei Torah shebaal peh, and the chachmei hamasorah who transmit Torah shebaal peh…The Rav zt”l boldly applied the masorah he received in pre-WWII Eastern Europe in the post-war America and Eretz Yisrael ... In his applications and implementations, his views were not necessarily those of the majority. But the principles of masorah were the same. He brilliantly and heroically guided Klal Yisrael under modern conditions in the same glorious tradition as the Chazon Ish’s “vnireh” [regarding his psak] on “moridin v’lo ma’alin,” the Chofetz Chaim’s “vnireh” in likutei halachos with reference to Talmud Torah lanashim, and in fact all chachmei hamasorah. [transcript of the shiur]

ChAvRUSA gathered three rabbinic alumni who have devoted themselves to teaching women Torah. Rabbi Fabian Schonfeld (RFS) ’52R, Rabbi Chaim Brovender (RCB) ’65R and Rabbi Shlomo Hochberg (rSh) ’73r all have enjoyed distinguished careers in avodat hakodesh. We asked all three to discuss their successes and experiences teaching Torah to women.

Rabbi Chaim Brovender



people in Yerushalayim who felt that even if you knew all of Shas and Shulchan Aruch, you still were not a talmid chacham! At that point I realized that learning Torah was going to be a long haul. After the Six Day War many univer-sity students, backpackers and whatnot started making their way through Yerushalayim and R. Elefant asked me to start an evening learn-ing program for these people. This program eventually led to the founding of Yeshivat Darchei Noam (Shappels). In Yerushalalyim there were no co-ed programs so the women

whom I had taught in the ITRI women’s pro-gram approached me wanting to learn as well. Eventually I started Yeshivat Hamivtar for the men and Bruriah for the women. I spent about 35 years in those institutions.

RSH: Since the early years of my rabbinic career, I have met numerous women who had a tremendous thirst for Jewish knowledge; women of all ages — some Yeshiva-educated, many with no formal Jewish education whatsoever. They shared a tremendous drive for deveikus/closeness to Hashem, and they recognized that their lack of knowledge was a barrier which they had to overcome.

I continue to enjoy numerous gratifying op-portunities teaching and learning with women in the two communities that I served — Low-ell, MA, a small out-of-town community and now in Jamaica Estates, NY. But the opportu-nity to teach at Stern where young women are focused upon forming their religious person-alities, and their attitudes and life-direction is exhilarating.

I have found the women at Stern to be “searchers” — both students with a strong background Torah-learning through Yeshiva High school and Israel programs, as well as those who, with lesser formal background,

make the inspiring choice to make Torah learning part of their college experience as an entirely or partially new discipline.

CHAVRUSA: How is women’s Torah study different from that of men? RSH: Women seem to seek not only formal knowledge and meaning of the texts and the halachic detail and structure, but also embrace learning as a spiritual activity to deepen their relationship to Hashem, their ahavas Hashem, as well as their interpersonal relationships.

It often seems, too, that women more than men relate to their Torah-learning and kiyyum hamitzvot (performance of mitzvoth) and middot (character), not only as vehicles for their individual spiritual development, but also as tools which will ultimately enable them to build better families and communities.

RFS: Biologically, I don’t think there’s any difference whatsoever. There is nothing that a woman can’t understand as well as a man. My issue with teaching women Gemara is only that women generally are not afforded the time necessary to master it. But in principal, there is no difference.

The problem I faced was that treating Ge-mara like any other subject was not fair to the

Rabbi Shlomo hochberg




As revolutions go, the opening of programs for women to study Talmud has been a quiet one.

It involves the opening of a sefer, a book of Mishnah or Gemara, and the only sound beyond the turning of pages comes from the voices of the teachers and the students.

What has happened because of this revolu-tion? As their understanding of the connection between the Written Torah and the Oral To-rah deepens, students’ observance of halakhah, Jewish law, becomes more precise and more fulfilling. In a life of mitzvot, the more you know, the more you enjoy. The foundations of Jewish family life have not been shaken; if anything, they have been strengthened.

Learning Gemara does not work for every-one. Just as for men, so for women—some people have an intelligence geared to studying Talmud, while some are intellectually inclined to other disciplines. In Europe there were groups who studied Ein Yaakov in the evening after a day of work, while others formed a Chevrah Tehillim; some studied Mishnayot, while those who could studied Gemara. At Stern College, after the course of advanced study in Talmud was initiated, several talented women asked for an advanced course in Tanakh; both programs are now flourishing.

I never understood what commotion there could be about serious learning by women. I am named for a great-grandmother, Reb-betzin Rivkah Rabinovich, sister to the twins

Rav Eliyahu Akiva Rabinovich-Te’omim (the ADeReT) and Rav Binyamin Zvi Yehuda Rabinovich-Te’omim (Rav Kook married the Aderet’s daughter, and when she passed away, he married her first cousin); she was known within a learned family as the person to ask if you wanted to locate a source in the Talmud. The Aderet had no problem in quoting her incisive solution in Yagdil Torah to a question of fasting BaHaB when it fell on Pesach Sheini in 1883. I am one of the great-granddaughters who would be happy to attain a fraction of her knowledge.

The family belonged to a world centered on Torah learning. They surely knew Rabbi Eliezer’s statement in Sotah 20A about teach-ing women Torah, yet chose to follow an interpretation that permitted it. Dr. Hillel Seidman gave an account in Yiddish of the conversation around the table in the home of the Telzer Rosh Yeshiva, with the women participating fully; Torah was the essence of all their lives. When I drove my uncle Rav Elchonon Teitz, who had learned in Telz, to visit my father, he said when we reached the highway, “u’v’lekhtekha vaderekh,” and taught me the rest of the way.

My grandmother, Rebbetzin Frieda Preil, moved to a neighborhood in Brooklyn so that her granddaughters could attend yeshiva high school; this was before 1963 when my father founded Bruriah High School in Elizabeth,

NJ. She studied Tze’enah u’Re’ena, and told us how fortunate we were to be able to read commentaries on our own. I had studied gemara in fifth and sixth grade at the JEC in Elizabeth, and heard my father say on his radio program, Daf Hashavua, that he was happy that women were listening and learning. When a woman who had contributed to Torah edu-cation passed away, he dedicated the program that Saturday night in her memory and spoke about her accomplishments. When I asked the representative of the yeshiva high school that I attended why Gemara was not in the curricu-lum, my classmates were taken aback: “Girls don’t learn Gemara!” When I asked my father how to counter this, he said, “Don’t answer the critics. If the greatest avlah of this generation will be that girls learned Gemara, this will be a wonderful generation in Jewish history.” The significant change in our time is that what had been available in learned homes is now open to every interested student.

In a family that relishes stories about the little ones, what joy all these ancestors would take in my granddaughter Tehilla, who saw an open Gemara on the table, climbed up on the chair and announced, “I’m being Ima.” The future is bright.

A Quiet RevolutionBy Dr. Rivkah Teitz Blau

girls, or fair to the Gemara. You just can’t teach Gemara like any other subject. The only way to master Talmud is through ameilus, via diligent study. I was only on faculty for three hours a week. Furthermore, aside from my students who were alumnae of the Yeshiva of Flatbush, the women had not studied Talmud previous-ly. I quickly realized that most of the women had no background. I was teaching young ladies who were intelligent, but just did not have the tools. So I began by teaching them

the elementary concepts. You really need to teach a whole year of introduction to Talmud, such as “Eshnav l’Talmud” and the history of the Talmud by Chief Rabbi Hertz, which can be found in the beginning of Brachos in the Soncino edition of the Talmud. It’s absolutely magnificent. If you can master that introduc-tion, then you can go on to the real thing.

The difference is that when men enroll in RIETS, they desire to be a shtickel ben Torah and already have 10 years of learning behind

them. If you teach Talmud as literature, you can’t achieve that. You need yegiyah. The Rav would declare that Torah without yegiyah is nothing.

I taught Ein Omdin and I told the women to go out and buy a Gemara Brachos. One of my students went to her local Jewish book store and asked to buy a Gemara Brachos. He wouldn’t sell it to her; her father had to go in and buy it for her. It was a different time.

I was the chairman of the Board of Educa-



tion at the Yeshiva of Central Queens and I proposed that the girls learn a little gemara in eighth grade. My proposal was met with much resistance. I shared my experience with the Rav and he said, “Why don’t they object to Rashi and Ramban on Chumash? That’s not Torah shebaal peh?”

RCB: There does not seem to me a dif-ference between men learning and women learning. At Yeshiva of Flatbush I observed that we did not learn differently. Men and women come to the table with different backgrounds. Women who went to the same school as men may be better at language than the men. This was my experience. In ivrit b’ivrit schools, often the girls are better students.

I opened a yeshiva for men. We developed a way of teaching men. It was obvious to me that you should teach women exactly the same way. In the 60s, we were competing with ashrams. At YU I learned that studying Torah was a spiritual experience available to all Jews. In order to turn that into something real, you had to learn the Gemara. Gemara has its dif-ficult patches. Women didn’t have a clear path besides their year of seminary. They didn’t have the program at Stern College that we have to-day. In those days, the Judaic studies programs in universities had their strange dimensions. Women did not have an obvious path to con-tinue, as the men did. I was interested in open-ing the books with them. I didn’t realize the social stigma associated with women studying Talmud. Even open-minded people couldn’t believe that women were learning Gemara. It always elicited a quizzical response.

In the Chareidi world, there are many women who are very knowledgeable in Torah. No one knows where they got it. Often it is from the home. In terms of learning Torah, you

can’t avoid Gemara. In terms of the experience of Talmud Torah, you have to hook into the thousands of years of Talmudic study. To deny women that opportunity would be wrong.

CHAVRUSA: How did your RIETS education prepare you both in terms of knowledge and outlook for your life’s task? RCB: I remember the YU Bais Medrash at night, when I was a student. You and your chavrusa could easily get a seat; you could get a whole quadrant. Rabbi Yosef Blau ’61R and Rabbi Chaim Soloveitchik ’62R had their own quadrant of the bais medrash; another quadrant went to me and my chavrusa. Night seder looks very different now.

The Rav made a big impression on me. On the one hand, I was afraid of him. On the other hand, his human achievements were something I could learn from. The Rav loved to learn. Often he would learn the sugya in shiur with us, as if it was his first time. It wasn’t as if he had a script to pass along to us students. Often, he would reconsider and re-learn the material. This was especially true in Yevamos, which he told us he had not learned since he was a child. The Rav showed passion as well. You know he was troubled by things. We saw the communal concern and his burdens on his face.

RSH: I have been blessed to learn with outstanding rabbeim at RIETS including the Rav zt’l and his talmidim, who taught me on the one hand that Torah must always emanate from a firm structure of deep commitment and allegiance to mesorah, and also to ap-preciate that different prisms and perspectives could enable one to enhance our avodas Hashem (service of Hashem) within our me-sorah. They also demonstrated first-hand what it means for a rebbe, rabbi, or teacher to fulfill their mission as a mentor — to care deeply on a personal level about all of one’s students of all ages and levels — and to see in each person their unique spiritual and religious personality, and to be responsive to each as an individual.

RFB: The notion of teaching women Torah can be found within the writings of Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch. There is a volume called Parnas l’Davar, which contains a letter that Rav Hirsch wrote to the author asking for

his grandson to attend his school in Frankfurt. He pointed out that while the boys learned Gemara and Rashi, the young women learned dinim, halachah, health, and how to run a Jewish household. He was concerned with tachlis. I believe Rav Hirsch would have taught Gemara to women today.

CHAVRUSA: What do you see as the future of women’s Torah study?RSH: Today women have opportunities to learn all areas of Torah at a high level, with Stern College’s undergraduate and graduate programs providing the premier venue.

I am certain that in the years to come, the Orthodox community, as well as the broader Jewish community, will increasingly benefit from these learned, committed women as they take advantage of an expanding variety of opportunities — as Torah teachers and guides, and as role models at all levels. n

Rabbi Chaim Brovender earned a BA in mathematics from Yeshiva College and was ordained at RIETS in 1965. He made aliyah the same year. He was awarded a PhD from the Hebrew University in Semetic languages in 1974. While studying for his doctorate, Rabbi Broven-der began teaching Judaism to students who had come to Israel for the Hebrew University’s overseas program. Those relationships led to his becoming the found-ing Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Hamivtar in 1976 and Michlelet Bruria afterwards. Currently, he serves as the president of ATID (www.atid.org ) — The Academy for Torah Initiatives and Directions in Jewish Education, and rosh yeshiva of www.WebYeshiva.org , a fully interac-tive online yeshiva.

Rabbi Shlomo Hochberg has been serving as mashgiach

Rabbi Fabian Schonfeld

Rabbi Dovid AsherYeshiva University-Torah Mitzion Chicago

Community Kollel, Chicago, IL

Ms. Libat AvivYeshivat Akiva, Detroit, MI

Rabbi Chaim AxelrodYeshiva University High School for Boys

New York, NY

Rabbi Shalom AxelrodYoung Israel of Woodmere, New York

Eitan BendavidCommunity of Capetown, South Africa

Rabbi Ezra BerenholzBoys Town Jerusalem Foundation

Dovi BergmanYeshiva University-Torah Mitzion Chicago

Community Kollel, Chicago, IL

Raffi BilekJewish Family Services, Passaic, NJ

Rabbi Akiva BlockKehillat Kesher, Tenafly, NJ

SAR High School, Riverdale, NY

Rabbi Yoni ChambreHAFTR High School, Cedarhurst, NY

Boruch DanzgerHAFTR High School, Cedarhurst, NY

Rabbi Yisrael DruinJewish Academy, East Northport, NY

Rabbi Ira EbbinOhav Shalom Congregation, Merrick, NY

Rabbi Steven EisenbergHAFTR , Cedarhurst, NY

Rabbi Mark FishmanCongregation Beth Tikvah, Dollard Des Ormeaux,

Quebec, Canada

Zev GoldbergYoung Israel of Century City, Los Angeles, CA

Rabbi Elimelech GottleibYeshiva of Manhattan Beach, Brooklyn, NY

Rabbi Avi GreeneEpstein Hebrew Academy, St. Louis, MO

Rabbi Yonah GrossCongregation Beth Hamedrosh, Wynnewood, PA

Rabbi Peretz HochbaumCamp Kaylie/OHEL

Rabbi Naphtali HoffTorah Day School of Atlanta, GA

Rabbi Yaakov JaffeMaimonides School, Brookline, MA

Rabbi Wes KalmarAnshei Sfard Kehillat Torah, Glendale, WI

Rabbi Aaron KaplanShaarei Tefilah, Dallas, TX

Rabbi Bryan KinzbrunnerOscar and Ella Wilf Campus for Senior Living

Somerset, NJ

Binyamin KrohnBrith Sholom Beth Israel, Charleston, SC

Rabbi Ian LichterGreat Neck Synagogue, Great Neck, NY

Rabbi Aryeh LightstoneBeth Sholom Congregation, Lawrence, NY

Rabbi Andrew MarkowitzShomrei Torah, Fairlawn, NJ

Rabbi Binyomin MarwickCongregation Shomrei Emunah, Baltimore, MD

Rabbi Philip MoskowitzBoca Raton Synagogue, Boca Raton, FL

Rabbi Yoni MozesonYeshivot Bnei Akiva, New York, NY

Rabbi Duvie NachbarYoung Israel of Pelham Parkway, Bronx, NY

Rabbi Michael NadataCongregation Schara Tzedeck, Vancouver, BC

Rabbi Asher NemesYeshivat Akiva, Detroit, MI

Rabbi Jeffrey NeyYeshivat Akiva, Detroit, MI

Rabbi Asher OserOhel Leah Synagogue, Hong Kong , China

Rabbi Adir PosyBeth Jacob Congregation, Beverly Hills, CA

Orthodox Union West Coast Region Beverly Hills, CA

Rabbi Daniel PriceYeshiva of North Jersey, River Edge, NJ

Rabbi Shaanan SchererColumbus Torah Academy, Columbus, OH

Rabbi David SerkinCarmel Elementary School, Hong Kong , China

Rabbi Charles SheerWestchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY

Rabbi Jonathan ShulmanJLIC Educator, University of Pennsylvania

Philadelphia, PA

Rabbi Tzvi SinenskyHAFTR HS, Cedarhurst, NY

Rabbi Elon SonikerCongregation Anshei Shalom, West Hempstead, NY

HANC, West Hempstead, NY

Rabbi Ari SpieglerBeachwood Kehilla, Beachwood, OH

Michael SteinRiverdale Jewish Center, Bronx, NY

David TellerYU-Torah miTzion Beit Midrash of Toronto

Rabbi Ira WallachIda Crown Jewish Academy, Chicago, IL

Rabbi Mayer WaxmanNational Association of Chevra Kadisha

Richmond Hill, NY

Rabbi Mordechai WeckerBe’er Hagolah Institutes, Brooklyn, NY

Rabbi Elchanan WeinbachStern Hebrew High School, Bala Cynwyd, PA

Rabbi Jay WeinsteinYoung Israel of East Brunswick, NJ

Rabbi Akiva WilligCongregation Ohab Zedek, New York, NY

Rabbi Daniel YolkutCongregation Poale Zedeck, Pittsburgh, PA

Dovid ZirkindYU-Torah miTzion Beit Midrash of Toronto

Ms. Deva ZwellingIda Crown Jewish Academy, Chicago, IL

RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY - RIETSThe Gertrude and Morris Bienenfeld Department of Jewish Career Development and Placement,

the placement committee of RIETS, the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA) and the Orthodox Union (OU)congratulates the following leaders on their newly obtained positions in avodat hakodesh.

The placement committee serves Yeshiva University and RIETS alumni, the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA) and the Orthodox Union (OU).

ruchani and Judaic studies faculty at Yeshiva University’s Stern College for Women since 1995. He has served as the rabbi of the Young Israel of Jamaica Estates, a congregation of approximately 300 families, since 1990. Prior to assuming his present rabbinic position, Rabbi Hochberg served in Lowell, MA, for 16 years as rabbi of Montefiore Synagogue and principal/dean of Merri-mack Valley Hebrew Academy. Rabbi Hochberg received his BA from Yeshiva University in 1970, followed by a year of learning at Yeshivat Kakotel. He completed his semicha studies in 1974 at RIETS, and earned an MS

in education from YU’s Ferkauf Graduate School in 1973. He studied counseling at Teacher’s College Gradu-ate School of Columbia University, and at the Special Education Administration doctoral program at Boston University. Rabbi Hochberg is the immediate past president of the Rabbinical Council of America, has been a member of the RCA since 1976, serving on its execu-tive committee, as treasurer and first vice-president, has chaired and co-chaired RCA conventions. Rabbi Hoch-berg is a past president of both the Vaad Harabonim of Queens and the Vaad Harabonim of Massachusetts; on

the education committees of local Yeshivot and is among the founders of YESS!

Rabbi Fabian Schonfeld has been the rabbi of the Young Israel of Kew Gardens Hills since 1951. He received se-micha from RIETS, Yeshiva University. Rabbi Schonfeld is the president of Poale Agudah as well as the past presi-dent of the Rabbinical Council of America, Rabbinic Alumni of Yeshiva University, and past chairman of the Council of Young Israel Rabbis. Rabbi Schonfeld was one of the founders of the Vaad Harabonim of Queens.




As rabbis and educators, we are often challenged to find contemporary ap-plications to laws and scenarios found

in the Torah and the Talmud. The laws relating to torts are replete with applications to agricul-tural settings. Congregants or students have a particularly difficult time relating these laws to modern times. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill provides us with an opportunity to teach some of these laws in a meaningful way. In this article, we will highlight some of the relevant issues. Please keep in mind that the “facts” of the case are constantly changing and signifi-cantly affect any halachic discussion.1

IntroductionThe Deepwater Horizon was an oil rig owned and operated by Transocean. Transocean was contracted by BP to pump oil out of a well pri-marily owned by BP. Halliburton was contract-ed by BP to cement the well and Halliburton claims that it completed its job 20 hours prior to the blowout that caused the oil spill.

Millions of gallons of oil have leaked out of the well in what has become the largest oil spill in U.S. history. Damages caused by the oil spill will amount to billions of dollars. Aside from actual damages, the U.S. government and local governments will bill BP for any costs that are incurred through its role in the cleanup and containment.

There are two basic questions that must be addressed: First, who should pay for the damages? Should the blame be assigned to BP, Transocean or Halliburton? Second, what types of damages are included in the total costs? We will now explore some relevant sugyot and how they apply to the oil spill.

The Liability of a ContractorBP was not actively involved in the oil drill-ing. It hired Transocean and Halliburton as contractors to complete certain tasks. Who is responsible when a contractor causes damage to someone else’s property? The Mishna, Baba Kama 98b, states that if a builder was hired to take down a wall and he caused damage, he must pay for the damage. R. Yehonatan (cited in Shita Mekubetzet ad loc.,) is of the opinion that if someone else’s property is damaged, the builder is responsible and the homeowner is exempt because a contractor takes on all responsibility for damage. However, if the builder is not working as a contractor, rather as an employee, the owner is responsible for damage to someone else’s property. R. Elchanan Wasserman, Kovetz Shiurim no. 142, adds that although R. Shlomo Luria, Yam Shel Shlomo, Baba Kama 9:21, exempts the con-tractor for damages that were not in his control (onnes), this exemption does not exempt one from damage caused to others. Onnes is only an exemption from paying for the broken materials belonging to the homeowner.2

Applying the above discussion to our case, the two contractors, Transocean and Hallibur-ton, can be held liable for the initial explosion if investigations reveal that either one of the companies caused the initial explosion. How-ever, it is arguable that if investigations reveal that the explosion was caused by a fault in the well itself, BP is liable for the initial explosion.

The Categories of NezikinThe Torah presents us with different categories of damage. One of these categories is dam-age caused by a bor (pit). The Gemara, Baba

Kama 6a, notes that one can only categorize something as a bor if it causes damage pas-sively. Another category is damage caused by fire (eish). The Gemara defines eish as damage caused by one’s property that was transported through an auxiliary force (e.g. wind). If some-one left a package on the edge of a roof and it was blown off of the roof and caused damage on the way down, it is considered eish. If it caused damage after it landed (e.g. someone tripped on the package), it is considered a hybrid of bor and eish.

The oil is transported by the ocean to the shores. Damages that are caused as the oil is transported, such as damage to the fish,3 would be categorized as eish. Damages that are caused by the presence of oil on the shores, such as the devaluation of beachfront property, would be categorized as bor.

There are a number of laws relating to bor that impact our discussion. First, Rambam, Hilchot Nizkei Mamom 12:3, writes that one is liable for a bor, even if the pit developed by itself without any human interaction. If it is one’s property, one must take responsibility for it. R. Ya’akov ben Asher, Tur, Choshen Mish-pat no. 410, adds that even if someone else dug the pit, the digger is only liable until the owner finds out. Once the owner finds out, the owner is liable. Rama, Choshen Mishpat 410:4, codi-fies Tur’s ruling but adds that the owner can sue the digger for the costs of covering the pit. Second, Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 410:28, write that if a pit was created as a result of an accident, the owner is not liable until he is given proper time to cover the pit. If it was the result of negligence, he is immediately responsible.4

If one were to categorize certain damages caused by the oil spill as bor, the responsibility is primarily placed on BP. BP can sue Trans-ocean or Halliburton for its part in causing the damage, but its case with the two other parties does not absolve it from responsibility to those who suffered financial loss. Yet, BP can claim that it should be exempt from all bor-related damages that occurred prior to their oppor-tunity to cap the well. One must then explore whether the spill was the result of negligence, in which case, BP would be immediately responsible. One must also figure out what is considered a reasonable amount of time for

Practical halachah

Torah Perspectives on the Monetary Aspects of the Deepwater horizon Oil SpillRabbi Joshua FlugDirector of Torah ResearchYeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future


BP to have capped the well.Are damages that are categorized as eish

subject to different rules? It is clear that if someone places someone else’s package on the edge of a roof and it blows off and causes damage, the person who placed the pack-age is responsible for the damage.5 What if the owner of the package knew about the placement of the package and had a chance to remove it? Shita Mekubetzet, Baba Kama 5b, s.v. Kashia, quotes the opinion of Tosafot Shantz that one can be responsible for eish if one’s property causes damage that is catego-rized as eish, even if someone else it to blame. However, this seems to only apply when the person who actually caused the damage is not available or able to pay for the damages. As such, Transocean or Halliburton would be held primarily responsible for the eish damages. If they are unable to pay, BP would be responsible. Nevertheless, it is arguable

that the eish responsibility may be limited to the initial flow of oil. The oil that followed the initial flow, would be the responsibility of BP as damage caused by its bor. 6

There are two types of costs related to the oil spill: costs related to the cleanup and costs related to reimbursement for damages. Regard-ing cleanup costs, the Mishna, Baba Metzia 117b, states that if a wall falls onto someone else’s property, the owner of the wall is respon-sible to remove the stones. Tosafot, Baba Metzia 118a, s.v. Amar Lei, imply that the responsibility to remove the stones is a function of the stones causing damage to the property. As such, one would apply the previous discussions relating to damage to the cleanup responsibility. R. Avra-ham Y. Karelitz, Chazon Ish, Baba Batra 14:16, based on the comments of Tosafot HaRosh, Baba Metzia 118a, s.v. V’Amar Lei, contends that it is not a function of the laws of damage. Rather, when one’s own property is actively

causing damage to someone else’s property, one must remove the cause of damage, even if one is technically exempt from damages that were previously caused by that property. As such, the cleanup costs are the responsibility of BP who owns the well.

Damages Caused by GeramaSome of the damage caused by the oil spill is not direct damage. A restaurant on the coast of Louisiana that has a slower summer because there are fewer tourists is not directly damaged by the oil spill. A lifeguard who was laid off be-cause his portion of the beach is closed is also not directly damaged. Regarding torts, there is no legal responsibility for damages caused indirectly (gerama).7 There is only a moral responsibility.8 Does this exempt BP from all indirect damages?

There is a concept of harchakat nezikin which requires one to avoid certain activities that might cause damage to neighbors by

Practical halachah

Practical halachah

21C h aV ru S a • T i s h r e i 5771

keeping a safe distance. These laws are found in Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat no. 155. There is a dispute among the Rishonim regarding damages that were caused through gerama when a person did not follow the proper procedures in distancing his poten-tially harmful activity. Rabbeinu Asher, Baba Batra 2:27, rules that there is no liability. Sefer HaItur, Dinei Macha’ah (page 53a) rules that there is liability. Shulchan Aruch 155:33, quotes both opinions on the matter. Shach, Choshen Mishpat 155:2, notes that if there is a significant statistical likelihood that the activity will cause damage, there is liability for gerama even if one followed the proper precautions. Investigations into the oil spill will eventually reveal whether the proper precautions were taken and what the perceived likelihood of a spill was at the time of the explosion.

The Cost of Government InterventionThe government has been and will continue to be involved in the cleanup effort. In general, actions taken by the government are more costly than actions taken by a private company. Additionally, the government tends to spend money on services that may not be absolutely necessary. Is BP justified in claiming that it should only pay for the costs that one would pay a private company and not the govern-ment premium?

The Gemara, Baba Kama 116a, discusses a case where someone went to save the property of someone else and the rescuer incurred expenses from the rescue. The Gemara con-cludes that if he was successful in the rescue mission, he can charge full price. If he was unsuccessful, he only gets paid for his time and his costs. Rama, Choshen Mishpat 264:4, ex-plains that this only applies when there was an arrangement between the rescuer and the vic-tim. If there was no arrangement, the rescuer only gets paid for a successful rescue mission. R. Ya’akov of Lisa, Netivot HaMishpat 264:3, explains that there are two separate reasons to pay the rescuer. The first is a contractual ob-ligation. When the rescuer is asked to rescue, there is an assumed payment structure, even if the mission is not successful. The second is based on benefit. When one provides financial

benefit to another, even if there was no ar-rangement, the beneficiary must pay. If there was no arrangement and no benefit, there is no payment required. Based on the comments of Netivot HaMishpat, if there is no arrange-ment and the benefit is less than the price that the rescuer charges, one is only responsible for the benefit. BP only benefits to the extent that the government is saving it from cleanup costs that it would have had to incur on its own. Additional costs above and beyond that would not be included.

Nevertheless, one can claim that the government has a responsibility to its people to ensure their safety and there is no other option for them to allow the parties to handle the effort on their own. The government expenditures are a necessary means of ensur-ing the safety of its people. When someone is put in a situation where he must react by spending money to alleviate the situation, it is considered garmi (a direct action with indirect results) and the party causing the situation must pay for the expenses.9nNotes

This article is based on what was known in July, 1. 2010.There is a dispute between Tosafot, Baba Kama s.v. 2. U’Shmuel and Ramban, Baba Metzia 82b, regard-ing liability for complete accidents (onnes gamur). Tosafot is of the opinion that one is exempt and Rambam is of the opinion that one is liable. Ram-ban seems to agree that in the case of a contractor or employee, one is exempt from accidental damages caused to the owner’s property because the contrac-tor/employee is treated as a shomer sachar (paid watchman) and not as a mazik (damager). This would explain why there is distinction between dam-age caused by a contractor to the owner’s property and damage caused to a third party. The contractor does not enjoy a shomer sachar relationship with the third party and therefore, he is considered a mazik, who is liable even in cases of accident. According to Tosafot, it is arguable that if the accident was beyond the control of the contractor, the contractor is exempt even from damages caused to a third party.The Gemara, Baba Batra 21b, notes that a fisher-3. man has certain monetary rights to the fish that normally enter one’s net.The Mishna, Baba Kama 52a, states that if two 4. partners own a pit and one of the partners discov-ers that the pit is not covered properly and does not cover it, he is solely responsible. We follow the

opinion of R . Yochanan that the other partner only shares in the liability once enough time has elapsed for him to find out about it and hire workers to cover the pit. Rashi, ad loc., s.v. V’Rishon, writes that the time factor is only significant regarding the partner who didn’t discover the open pit. The partner who discovered the pit is fully liable from the moment of discovery. Tosafot, ad loc., s.v. B’Kdei, write that even the partner who discovers the open pit is given time to cover the pit before he is fully liable. Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 410:26, follows the opin-ion of Rashi. Rama follows the opinion of Tosafot. R . Yosef Z. Hutner, Ulam HaMishpat 410:26, posits that Shulchan Aruch’s ruling that in general, one is given time to cover a pit is only applicable ac-cording to Tosafot. According to Rashi, when there is a single owner, the owner of the pit takes immediate responsibility for the pit, even if he does not have time to cover it.See Tosafot, Baba Kama 22a, s.v. Isho Mishum 5. Mamono and Minchat Shlomo ad loc.The Gemara, Sanhedrin 77b, states that if someone 6. bound an individual close to a dam and opened up the dam and killed the individual, he is culpable if it was result of the first force (ko’ach rishon). If it was the result of the second force (ko’ach sheni), he is exempt (i.e. it is considered gerama). Chazon Ish, Baba Kama 1:5-6, notes that if the cause of damage was generated through ko’ach sheni, there is no liability. As such, it is arguable that the oil that flowed out of the well after the initial explosion is an eish form of damage that was generated by ko’ach sheni. R . Ya’akov Y. Bloi, Pitchei Choshen, Nezikin U’Sh’cheinim (chapter 7 note 1) contends that regarding bor one is responsible even if the bor was generated through ko’ach sheni because it is no different than a bor that developed by itself. It should be noted that there is an important dispute between Rashi, Sanhedrin 77b, s.v. B’Ko’ach, and R . Meir Abulafia, Yad Ramah, Sanhedrin 77b, s.v. Amar Rav Papa, regarding the parameters of ko’ach rishon and ko’ach sheni. Rashi is of the opinion that only the initial waters are included in ko’ach rishon. Ramah is of the opinion that everything that is released as a result of the initial flow is included in ko’ach rishon. Baba Kama 60a.7. See Baba Kama 55b, and Ketzot HaChoshen 32:1, 8. regarding the different types of moral responsibilities for damage caused by gerama.Compare to Rama, Choshen Mishpat 14:5, who 9. rules that if Reuven is told by his co-litigant, Shimon, to show up for an appointment at the beit din and Shimon fails to attend, Shimon must reimburse Reuven for his costs based on garmi.


PublicationsRabbi Dr. Alan Brill ’90R: Judaism and Other Religions (Palgrave Macmillan, February 2010).

Rabbi Herbert J.Cohen, PhD, ’70R: Walking in Two Worlds: Visioning Torah Concepts through Secular Studies, as an educational project of the Community Kollel of Dallas.

Rabbi Eliyahu W. Ferrell ’94R: Biur HaShulchan — Hilchos Basar B’Chalav, to provide current students of Yoreh Deah and musmakhim reviewing Yoreh Deah with the data they need to go from s’if to s’if with clarity and understanding.

Rabbi Dr. Basil Herring ’73R on republishing his long out-of-print book, Jewish Ethics and Halakhah for Our Time, Sources and Commentary, featuring the original two volumes now in one volume.

Rabbi Dr. Samuel A. Weiss ’46R: “An analysis of the Two Versions of the Ten Commandments” in MIDSTREAM, a Quarterly Jewish Review, Spring 2010, pp 38-41.

Rabbi Tzvee Zahavy, PhD, ’72R and Jacob Neusner: How the Halakhah Unfolds: Volume Five: Hullin in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Bavli, Part One: Mishnah, Tosefta, and Bavli and How the Halakhah Unfolds: Volume Five: Hullin in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Bavli, Part Two: Mishnah, Tosefta, and Bavli (University Press of America, Inc).

Mazal TovRabbi Moshe ’70R and Cheryl Abramowitz on their grandson Shlomo becoming a Bar Mitzvah.

Rabbi Shimon ’76R and Sharon (Marks) Altshul on the marriage of their daughter, Eliana, to Adam Pomerantz.

Rabbi Eli ’10R and Rebecca Belizon on receiving the Midor l’Dor Award from Yeshivat Kerem B’Yavneh at the Yeshiva’s 40th Annual Dinner.

Rabbi Julius ’59R and Dorothy Berman on receiving a special tribute at the YU high Schools Annual Dinner of Tribute.

Rabbi Jon ’74R and Miriam Bloomberg on the marriage of their daughter Adina to Rabbi Aviv Melese of Kiryat Ekron.

RIETS Student Joe Blumenthal on his marriage to leah Weixelbaum of West Orange, NJ.

Rabbi Dr. Herbert (Chaim Zev) ’51R and Leona Bomzer on being honored with the Keter Shem Tov Award by the Brooklyn Region of Emunah.

Rabbi Avraham ’09R and Daniela Bronstein on the birth of a son, Elisha Chanan. And to grandparents, RIETS administrator Rabbi Chaim ’72R and Brenda Bronstein.

RIETS student Noah and Sarah Cheses on the birth of a daughter, Adina Malka.

RIETS Rosh Yeshiva Rabbi Yitzchok ’65R and Sara Cohen and Rabbi Lawrence ’78R and Florence Ziffer on the birth of a granddaughter, Rochel, to Ari and Devorah Ziffer of lakewood, NJ.

Rabbi Dr. Hillel ’75R and Rock Davis on the marriage of their daughter, leora, to Ezra Blumenthal of Cedarhurst, NY.

Rabbi Eliot ’75R and Ann Feldman on the birth of a granddaughter, Ahuva Ora, born to Simcha and Shoshana (Michaelson) Feldman.

Rabbi Joel ’89R and Bluma Finkelstein on their son, Asher, becoming a Bar Mitzvah.

Rabbi Moshe and Rebbetzin Esti Frank on being honored by Congregation Ezrath Israel in Ellenville, NY.

Rabbi Zvi ’81R and Tobi Friedman of Ramat Beit Shemesh on the birth of a grandson, Akiva Chaim, born to their children Daniella and Raphael Tatelbaum of Kiryat haYovel, Yerushalayim. And on the birth of a grandson, Moshe Aharon, born to their children Yehudit and Dovey Polansky of Ramat Beit Shemesh.

Rabbi Hersh Moses ’58R and Sarah (Lebowitz) Galinsky on their grandson, Yishai Naphtali, son of lior and Nechama Shtul, becoming a Bar Mitzvah in Ely, Israel.

Rabbi Daniel ’07R and Tzippy Gelernter on birth of a son.

Rabbi Yaakov ’03 and Jennifer Gibber on the birth of a son, Avraham Yeshaya.

Rabbi Efrem Goldberg ’01R on being chosen by The Jewish Journal as one of the 33 Top Jewish People who have made an impact in South Florida through their extraordinary commitment to the Jewish community and Israel.

Rabbi Shmuel ’76R and Barbara Goldin on the birth of a grandson, Chaim Yonah, to Yossi and Shifra Goldin. And on being the guests of honor at their 26th Anniversary Dinner at Congregation Ahavath Torah of Englewood, NJ.

Rabbi Aaron Goldscheider ’94R and the Mt. Kisco hebrew Congregation in New York on the completion of their eruv.

Rabbi Macy Gordon ’56R (and former president of YU Rabbinic Alumni) on the marriage of his granddaughter Nava Devora, daughter of Etana and Dr. Alan Friedman, of Petah Tiqva, to Tzori Wieder, of Modiin.

Rabbi Shlomo Grafstein on the birth of a grandson.

Rabbi Seth ’04R and Leba Grauer on receiving the Alumnus of the Year Award at the Etzion Foundation Annual Dinner.

Rabbi Morton Green ’58R on receiving an honorary doctorate from Yeshiva University at the Toronto Convocation and Dinner.

Rabbi Wallace Greene ’69R on being honored with the Community Service Award by Yeshiva Ohr Simcha of Englewood, NJ and on receiving the 2010 Prize for the Jewish Educator in the Diaspora by lifshitz College of Education together with the World Council for Torah Education in Jerusalem.

Rabbi Gary ’08R and Leba Guttenberg on the birth of a daughter, Esther Elka. leba’s grandparents are Rabbi Yitzchak ’56R and Fay Sladowsky.

Rabbi Michael Hecht ’64R on receiving a special tribute at the YU high Schools Annual Dinner of Tribute.

Rabbi David ’10R and Ariella (Cohen) Hellman on the birth of a daughter.

Rabbi William ’55R and Sylvia Herskowitz on the birth of their first great grandchild, amiel David Jotkowitz born to Tova and Ithamar Jotkowitz. Grandparents are Amy and Nathan Katz.

Rabbi Joshua ’55R and Claire Hertzberg on the birth of a great grandson, Moshe Rosenthal.

Rabbi Mordechai ’05R and Shira Hochheimer on the birth of a son.

Rabbi Carmi ’71R and Sara Horowitz on the birth of a granddaughter, Gefen, born to Elisha and hodaya horowitz of Mizpeh Yeriho.

Rabbi Alan ’10R and Lisa Houben on the birth of a daughter, Talia Shira.

Rabbi Ari ’84R and Esther Jacobs of Alon Shvut on the marriage of their son, Yehuda, to Atara Piha of Neve Daniel.

Rabbi Yonatan ’07R and Elana Kohn on the birth of a son, Ephraim Mordechai.

Rabbi Stuart ’80R and Karen Lavenda on the birth of a granddaughter, Shayna leora, born to Tova and Avi Rosenbloom.

Rabbi Yaakov ’73R and Abby Lerner on the marriage of their daughter Yosefa to RIETS Student Jonathan Hefter.

Rabbi Menachem ’98R and Devora (Cohen) Linzer on the birth of a daughter, Miriam. Also to grandparents, Rabbi Dr. Norman ’58R and Diane Linzer.

Rabbi Elchanan (Charles) ’76R and Ruth Lipshitz on the birth of granddaughter, Tal Meitav, to Batya and Yonatan Kolitz. And on the birth of another granddaughter, Renana Sarah, to Eli and Kedma lipshitz.

Rabbi Elihu ’56R and Chaya Marcus on their granddaughter Raut Breitbard becoming a Bat Mitzvah. and on the birth of their first great granddaughter, Ruth, to Chana Chen and Elazar Rosilio.

Rabbi Meyer ’78R and Shulamith May upon the birth of a grandson, Yitzchak, born to Rabbi Yehuda and Nechama May. And on the birth of another grandson, Yosef, born to Rabbi Yitzchak and Tova May.

Rabbi Shmuel ’02R and Chani (Koenigsberg) Maybruch on the birth of a son, Yochanan Yehuda.

Rabbi David E. ’58R and Anita Miller on the birth of a great-grandson, Judah Yehudah Azriel, born to Michael and Yael (Koenigsberg) Schertz. And to grandparents heshie and Bonnie (Miller) Schertz of lawrence, NY.

Rabbi Eddie ’73R and Sandy Mittelman on the birth of a grandson, Akiva Eliezer, born to Avigail and Michael Gordon.

Rabbi Shelley ’03R and Dina Morris on the birth of a son, Asher Yisroel.

Rabbi Elazar ’81R and Ruhama Muskin on the marriage of their daughter, Gila, to David Block of West hempstead, NY. And to David’s grandparents Dr. Alvin I. and Miriam Schiff and Jack and Margie Block.

Rabbi Eli ’04R and Zemira Ozarowski on the birth of a son, Bentzion Baruch Asher. And to grandparents Rabbi Joe and Ashira Ozarowski.

lifecycles


RIETS Rosh Yeshiva Rabbi Yaakov ’79R and Peshi Neuburger on the birth of a granddaughter, Elisheva, born to RIETS student Aryeh and Chaya Weistreich. And to great-grandfather RIETS Dean Emeritus Rabbi Zevulun Charlop ’54R.

Rabbi Ian Pear ’05R on the groundbreaking ceremony for the new Shir hadash Center for Jewish life in Talbiya, Jerusalem.

Rabbi Daniel ’04R and Lea Price on the birth of a daughter, Avigayil Miriam.

Rabbi Uriel ’10R and Aviva (Stroh) Rabinovitz on the birth of a son, Yonatan Shalom.

Rabbi David ’66R and Barbara Radinsky on the marriage of their daughter, Chani, to Daniel Friedman this past January.

Rabbi Abraham “Avi” Robinson ’08R on receiving the loretta Smith Legal internship scholarship (first recipient). It is reserved for a second-year law student with high academic standards who is committed to public service.

Rabbi Ari ’01R and Deborah Rockoff on the birth of a daughter, leora leeba.

Rabbi Dr.Bernhard ’74R and Charlene Rosenberg on the birth of a granddaughter, Ahuva leba, born to Ilana and Joshua Merl of Brooklyn, NY.

Rabbi Benjamin ’60R and Liza Samson upon the birth of a granddaughter, Soroh Rivkah, born to Chanah and victor Braverman.

Rabbi Eliezer ’03R and Shira Schnall on the birth of a son, Yonatan Tzvi hirsch. And to grandparents Rabbi David ’72R and Tova Schnall, and great grandparents Rabbi Solomon ’49R and Bertha Shoulson.

Rabbi Elihu ’57R and Freida Schatz, of Yishuv hashmonaim, on the birth of their 47th grandchild, Tamar, to Pinchas and Tzippie Schatz of Yishuv Rimonim. And on the birth of their sixth great-grandchild, Akivah, to Ariel and Fraydel Gilor of Yishuv hashmonaim.

Rabbi Arthur Schneier ’56R who was honored at the Park East Synagogue Annual Dinner.

Rabbi Fabian Schonfeld ’52R and Rabbi Yitzchok Sladowsky ’56R on being honored by the New York City Council for their leadership of the Queens vaad on the occasion of its 50th anniversary.

Rabbi Ezra Y. ’01R and Dr. Rivka P. Schwartz on receiving the Rabbinic Alumnus Award from Yeshivat Kerem B’Yavneh at the Yeshiva’s 40th Annual Dinner.

RIETS student Simmy Shabtai on his marriage to Devora Greer of Boca Raton, Fl.

Rabbi Avi ’93R and Ditza Silverman of Ramat Beit Shemesh, on the marriage of their daughter, Yonina, to Netanel Rubenstein of Chispin. And on their son Elchanan Betzalel becoming a Bar Mitzvah.

Rabbi Sidney ’80R and Michele Chabin Slivko on the birth of a grandson, Asher Josef, to Ellie and Dave Beatus.

RIETS student Aryeh Sova on his marriage to Shoshanna Webberly of Boca Raton, Fl.

Rabbi Reuven ’97R and Rena Spolter on the birth of a daughter, Moriyah Rachel. And on their son, Simcha, becoming a Bar Mitzvah.

Rabbi Drs. Charles A. ’51R and Regina Spirn on their granddaughter Shoshana Chaya becoming a Bat Mitzvah in Israel.

RIETS student Gershon and Nili Turetsky on the birth of a son, Akiva Yosef.

RIETS student Noson and Tamar Devorah Waintman on the birth of a son, Michoel.

Rabbi Josh ’06R and Racheli Waxman on the December 2009 birth of a son, Eitan Shlomo. And to grandparents Rabbi Eddie ’73R and Sandy Mittelman and Rabbi Zishe ’72R and Lorri Waxman.

Rabbi Steve ’90R and Yael Weil on their son, Benji, becoming a Bar Mitzvah.

RIETS student Josh Weinberg on his marriage to Julia Schafer of lakewood, NJ.

Rabbi Elie Weissman ’05R on receiving the Young leader of the Year Award at the YU high Schools Annual Dinner of Tribute.

RIETS student Moshe and Sherry Winograd on the birth of a baby girl, Shifra Nechama.

Rabbi Jeffrey ’82R and Toby Woolf on their daughter, Moriah Rachel, becoming a Bat Mitzvah.

Rabbi Moshe (Jordan) Yasgur ’81R on his marriage to Yedida Schaffner Sachs.

Rabbi Joel ’86R and Donna Zeff on the marriage of their daughter Chana, to Uri, son of Rabbi Mayer and Michal lichtenstein. And to grandparents, Rosh Kollel and Director of the YU-RIETS Israel Kollel in Jerusalem Rav Dr. Aharon ’59R and Dr. Tovah Soloveitchik Lichtenstein.

CondolencesCarol Stone Applbaum on the loss of her husband, Rabbi Sidney Applbaum ’45R, father of Yaakov Nisan, Alisa Weinrib, Isaac (Yitz) and Kalman, and 10 grandchildren; his two stepsons, Elihu and Maurice Stone, and six step-grandchildren.

helen Geller on the loss of her husband, Rabbi Yehoshua [Eugene] M. Geller ’48R, father of Simcha Geller, Ora Rosenbloom, Rochel-leah Michael, Avraham Geller and Batya Ney; brother of Jerry and howard Geller.

RIETS board member Elliot Gibber on the loss of his father, Mr. Isadore Gibber, husband of Ruth Gibber and also father of Allan Gibber, harvey Gibber, Phyllis victor, and Esther Katz.

Rabbi David ’52R and Sheila Halpern on the loss of Sheila’s father, hyman lifschitz, also father of Rabbi Joseph (and Miriam) lifschitz and Esther (and Dr. Stanley) landsman.

Rabbi David Kaminetsky, Judah Kaminetsky, Nechama Steinhardt, Faygie Riess, and Symie liff on the loss of their mother, Mrs. Selma Kaminetsky, wife of the late Rabbi Dr. Joseph Kaminetsky and sister of Shani Nagler.

Etta Kramer on the loss of her husband, Rabbi Milton E. Kramer Esq. ’47R, father of Roberta (and Michael) Sigall, Allen (and Bettina) Kramer Esq., and the late David Kramer z”l (and his wife Karen).

Rabbi Yitzchak Korn ’84R on the loss of his wife, Rabbanit Taube Korn, daughter of Toddie and Trudy levine, sister of Dr. Benjamin levine, Charles levine, Sam levine and Beth Bernstein, mother of Bracha and Elazar hofshteter, Sari, Elisheva, Tiferet, Zvi and Avital.

Rabbi Yirmiyahu Lebowitz ’99R and his brother, Dr. Jonathan lebowitz, on the passing of their mother, Mrs. Ruth lebowtiz.

Rabbi Dr. Josh Mark ’91R on the loss of his father, Dr. Julian Mark, Associate Professor of Maxiofacial Surgery at AECOM.

Dr. David (and Arlynn) Mirvis of Memphis and Theodore “Ted” (and Ruth) Mirvis of Riverdale on the loss of their father, Rabbi Allan Mirvis ’41R.

RIETS Rosh Yeshiva Rabbi Yaakov Neuburger ’79R on the loss of his father, Mr. Max Neuburger, husband of Mrs. Ruth Neuburger and also father of Naftali Neuburger and Judy Sturm.

Rabbi Joseph Oratz on the loss of his father, Rabbi Irving M. Oratz, father also of Suzie lowinger and Dina Perlman; brother of Rabbi Ephraim Oratz and the late Rabbi Pesach Oratz ’50R.

Rabbi Jay L. ’73R and Huti Pomrenze on the loss of huti’s father, Berel Ramras, father also of Gittel hochster, Chia Samson, and Shmiel Ramras.

Rabbi Joseph Radinsky on the loss of his wife, Rebbetzin Juliette Radinsky, mother of Rabbi Elie Radinsky, Dena Radinsky, and the late Devorah Urkowitz z”l. And eleven grandchildren including RIETS student Tzvi Urkowitz and one-great grandchild. Sister-in-law of Rabbi David Radinsky ’66R and mother-in-law of Rabbi Mark Urkowitz ’78R.

Rabbi Yitzchak ’62R and Judy Rosenbaum on the loss of Judy’s mother, Shoshana (Rose) Grossman, who passed away before Pesach and was buried on har hamenuchot on Erev Pesach.

Rabbi Yechiel “Jerry” Shatzkes ’70R and his wife Dr. Pamela Greenman on the loss of Pamela’s mother, Mildred Greenman, also mother of Dr. Marion Greenman Myers.

Rabbi Abraham Shonfeld ’44R on the loss of his wife, Mrs. Chana Shonfeld.

Rabbi Aharon Simkin ’85R on the loss of his mother, Barbara Simkin, wife of Ray Simkin, also mother of Michael Simkin, and Roberta Aharon.

The Wagner family on the loss of Rebbetzin Bina Wagner, widow of the late Rabbi Feivel Wagner of Forest hills, mother of Bracha Shapiro, Rabbi Chaim Wagner, Sara Maybruch and Chani Wagner.

Rabbi Michael Wolff ’81R on the loss of his father, Ernest Wolff.

Rabbi Stuart ’78R and Chana Zweiter on the loss of Chana’s father, Rabbi Joseph Reifman.

lifecycles

yeshiva universitydownload.yutorah.org/2010/1053/748535.pdf · ideas for sukkot by rabbi menachem...

Documents