You are never alone #Vayetzei#devartorah#parashathashavua

Aubrey bought a fleece-lined coat for her aging father, but he died before he could wear it. So she tucked a note of encouragement with a $20 bill into the pocket and donated the jacket to charity.

Ninety miles away, unable to endure his family’s dysfunction any longer, nineteen-year-old Kelly left his house without grabbing a coat. He knew of only one place to turn—the home of his grandmother who loved him dearly. Hours later he stepped off a bus and into his grandma’s arms. Shielding him from the winter wind, she said, “We’ve got to get you a coat!” At the mission store, Kelly tried on a coat he liked. Slipping his hands into the pockets he found an envelope—with a $20 bill and Aubrey’s note.

In this week’s Torah portion, Vayetzei, Jacob flees for his life at his mother’s urging because his brother Esau swore to kill him because he stole his blessing from their father. When he stopped for the night, God revealed Himself to Jacob in a dream. God told him: “Your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth; you shall spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south. All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you and your descendants. Remember, I am with you: I will protect you wherever you go and will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.” (Genesis 28:14-15)

“Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, “Surely God is present in this place, and I did not know it!” (Verse 16) Jacob built an altar and named the spot “Bet El-God’s house” (verse 22). Kelly takes Aubrey’s note and that $20 wherever he goes. Each serves as a reminder that we are never alone no matter what challenges we face. Wherever we run, God is there.

Why pencils have erasers and other laws of documents TB Bab Batra 162

 Today’s daf Tb Baba Batra 162 is an extremely short daf. Starting on the previous daf, we learn three halakhot about an ordinary document, a get pashut- גֵּט פָּשׁוּט.

Back in grade school we learned pencils have erasers because all human beings make mistakes. Concerning erasures Rabbi Yoḥanan taught: “A document that includes a suspended correction (above the line and we usually use an upside down V to direct our eyes to the correction-gg)of text inserted between lines of the document, which is verified at the end of the document, is valid; but a document with a reference to words written over an erasure is not valid, even if it is verified at the end of the document. At the end of a document, before the formula: Everything is confirmed and established, is written, any corrections made in the document are verified by adding to the text: On line so-and-so, such and such a word has been added, or some similar formulation. This may be done only for inserted corrections, not for erasures.

“The Gemara clarifies this statement: And they said that an erasure on a document renders the document not valid only if it is in a place on the document where the declaration: Everything is confirmed and established, should have been written, and only if the erasure is the measure of space in which the declaration: Everything is confirmed and established, can be written. The only concern with erasures is that the crucial formula: Everything is confirmed and established, might have been erased, as this would allow for unlimited forgery. If the erasure is such that this formula could not possibly have been erased, the document is valid.” (TB Baba Batra dappim 160b-161a, Sefaria.org translation)

The first halakha: “Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: There are two halakhot with regard to documents: For any erasures in a document, the scribe must write at the end of the document: And this is their verification. That is, he must list the erasures, stating that on line so-and-so there is an erasure and a correction stating such and such, for each erasure

The second halakha: “And the second halakha is that the scribe must review some of the details of the document in the final line of the document. What is the reason for this second requirement?  Rav Amram says: It is because one may not learn any new details from the final line of a document. There is a concern that the holder of the document may have written in an extra line of text to his advantage, between the text and the witnesses’ signatures. Therefore, any new information contained in the last line is disregarded. Since the final line is disregarded, it is necessary that the final line of a document contain only a review of what is already written in it.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rashbam explains since the witnesses cannot write their signature so close to the end of the document, the scribes leave a space between the document and their signatures. In that space a person could forge and add something on that one line. Consequently the sages ordained that the last line reviews what is in the document without adding anything new. If somebody tries to forge and add something to the document afterwards, the party involved doesn’t lose anything for we don’t learn anything from the last line of any document. Also the new last line of the document won’t contain the very important last phrase of any document “שָׁרִיר וְקַיָּים- Everything is confirmed and established.”

The third halakha: There may be no more than a space and a half between the end of the document and the witnesses’ signatures for the document to be kosher.

It doesn’t seem to work on some politicians TB Baba Batra 158

The rabbis praised every aspect of living in the land of Israel to encourage aliya. On daf TB Baba Batra 158 we learn a story even the air of the land of Israel has an salutary effect on people. The topic under discussion is inheritance. If a house collapses upon an only son and his mother and we don’t know who died first, then we don’t know who are the inheritors. If the mother dies first, the son inherits his mother’s property and then passes it to his inheritors, for example his children. If the son dies first, the mother’s family inherits the property she brought into the marriage.

“MISHNA: If the house collapsed on a son and upon his mother, and it is unknown who died first, the following claims arise: The mother’s paternal family claims that the son died first, and therefore they inherit from the mother, and the son’s heirs claim that the mother died first and her son inherited from her, and therefore they inherit from the son. In this case, both these Sages and those Sages, Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, concede that they divide the property between them. Rabbi Akiva said: In this case I concede that the property retains its previous ownership status. Ben Azzai said to Rabbi Akiva: We are already troubled by those cases where Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel are in disagreement. But do you come to bring upon us a disagreement with regard to the case where they agree?

“GEMARA: The mishna states that according to Rabbi Akiva, the property retains its previous ownership status. The Gemara asks: In whose possession does the property remain? Rabbi Ila says: It remains in the possession of the mother’s heirs. Rabbi Zeira, when he was still in Babylonia, said: It remains in the possession of the son’s heirs. When Rabbi Zeira ascended to Eretz Yisrael, he adopted the opinion of Rabbi Ila, whereas Rabba, in Babylonia, adopted the opinion stated by Rabbi Zeira. Rabbi Zeira said: Conclude from this incident that the air of Eretz Yisrael makes one wise (אַוֵּירָא דְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל מַחְכִּים), as when I ascended to Eretz Yisrael I accepted the opinion of Rabbi Ila, who was also from Eretz Yisrael, whereas Rabba, who remained in Babylonia, accepted my former opinion.” (Sefaia.org translation)

The Rashbam ד"ה אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ אַוֵּירָא דְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל מַחְכִּים explains that Rabbi Zeira reached this conclusion about the special “power” of the air of Israel as follows: Rabbi Zeira said to himself, “Ever since I came up to the Land of Israel I have put my heart (i.e. made great effort and toil in my Torah study) to find fault with my earlier ruling, and to be certain that my conclusion is the pure truth of the matter.”

Too bad some of Israeli politicians don’t make a great effort to evaluate their stances and their consequences so that the air of Eretz Yisrael doesn’t make them wise.

What is a get mekushar and why don’t we see them nowadays? TB Baba Batra 160

Although in today’s parlance a get (גֶט) is a bill of divorce separating husband from wife, a get is just the generic term for any type of document. The 10^th chapter of our massekhet discusses two different types of gets.

“MISHNA: In an ordinary document (גֵּט פָּשׁוּט-get pashut), its witnesses are to sign inside it, i.e., on the written side of the paper. In a folded and tied document (גֵּט מְקוּשָּׁר -get mekushar), its witnesses are to sign on the back of it.” (TB Baba Batra 160, Sefaria.org translation) A get mekushar is a rabbinic enactment in order to legislate patience.

 The Gemara TB Baba Batra 160b explains why. “The Gemara asks: And what is the reason that the Sages instituted the tied document? The Gemara explains: There was a place where there were many priests, and they were very quick tempered, and they would seek to divorce their wives impetuously. The halakha is that a priest may not marry a divorcée, even his own ex-wife. These priests, who acted impetuously, often regretted having divorced their wives. And therefore, the Sages instituted an ordinance that the bill of divorce for these people should be of the tied format, which is a long, drawn-out process, hoping that meanwhile, their composure would be regained and they would reconsider their decision to divorce.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Nobody knows exactly what a get mekushar looks like. The Rishonim have different opinions exactly what it looks like. Tosefot ד"ה תַּקִּינוּ רַבָּנַן מְקוּשָּׁר provides three different reasons nobody uses a get mekushar today.

1.    Since nobody is an expert how to write and bind a get mekushar, it is better to use get pashut-the ordinary document format.

2.    The rabbis only enacted this type of document for that particular place of hotheaded kohanim.

3.    Rebbeinu Yitzkhak argues that one is not obligated to use a get mekushar at all. It was only instituted so that hotheaded kohanim wouldn’t lose their wives in the heat of a moment.