Sunday, April 03, 2005

My Daughter's Midrash Report

בס"ד

מלפנו מבהמות ארץ ומעוף השמים יחכמנו

(איוב לה:יא)



Table of Contents


מלפנו מבהמות ארץ ומעוף השמים יחכמנו 5

חתול 6

נמלה 7

מעשים טובים 10

מדות 13

חכמה 15

יונה 16

צפרדע 18

הוי עז... 21

חכמה בגוים תאמין... 22

Bibliography 24

Outline


  1. Introduction (עירובין ק:)

    1. We must learn חכמה from animals

    2. Why animals have חכמה

      1. It is really their טבע

      2. To teach us חכמה

      3. To teach us how to act

  2. חתול

    1. Her מעלה is צניעות

      1. How this is manifest in her

      2. רחל  שאול

      3. אסתר

      4. Lack of צניעות causes a fall from גדלות

  3. נמלה

    1. לך אל נמלה עצל... (משלי ו:ו)

    2. Why שלמה taught the עצל from the ant

    3. 3 major מעלות needed in עבודת ד'

      1. מעשים טובים

        1. Collects so much even though she only lives for 6 months

        2. How much she collects

        3. Her שר is waiting for משיח

        4. She has no עצלות

        5. We have to collect מצוות ומעשים טובים for עולם הבא

      2. מדות

        1. She does not steal (מדרש רבה שופטים ה:ב)

        2. לחמה...מאכלהit is hers, not stolen

        3. She does all this even though she has no leader (חולין נז:)

        4. פרנסה is from ד'

        5. We must obey our שופטים

      3. חכמה

        1. She has 3 houses, yet only stores her food in the middle one

        2. דרך האמצעי (נתיבות עולם נתיב הזריזות)

        3. She does not steal – waste of time

  4. יונה

    1. No עריות

    2. Only one mate for life (נצח ישראל כב:13)

      1. Never drops her mate – like ד' and כלל ישראל

    3. Her wings are a משל to מצוות (ברכות נג:)

      1. She never fully stops flying

        1. עבודת ד'

        2. מצוות protect from צרות

    4. יונה coos

      1. ד' and בני ישראל mourn the חורבן בהמ"ק (ברכות ג.)

    5. בני ישראל in גלות vs. גאולה (תהלים סח:יד)

  5. צפרדע

    1. חנניה מישאל ועזריה take קו"ח from frogs at the כבשן האש (פסחים נג:)

    2. מחלוקת whether they had to be מוסר נפש

    3. נסים that ד' did for them

    4. They learned from the נסים that ד' did for the frogs (וארא ח:ט, חכמת המצפון וארא ח:ט)

    5. Didn’t leave without רשות because would be a breach of דרך ארץ (שיחות מוסר תשל"ב:יח)

    6. מסירות נפש of frogs

  6. הוי עז כנמר... (פרקי אבות ה:כ)

    1. עובדי ד' do not lose their strength

    2. כבוד שבת (לקט שיחות מוסר קצ"ד)

  7. Geese

    1. 5 basic truths

מלפנו מבהמות ארץ ומעוף השמים יחכמנו


אמר רב חייא מאי דכתיב מלפנו מבהמות ארץ ומעוף השמים יחכמנו1... אמר רבי יוחנן אלמלי לא ניתנה תורה לישראל למדנו צניעות מחתול וגזל מנמלה ועריות מיונה ודרך ארץ מתרנגול2


Had we not received the תורה we would have been able to learn different מדות from other sources. This גמרא gives four examples of animals whose traits and actions we could have learned just by observing them.

ד' put מדות into animals so that we would be able to learn from them.3 All מדות that we find in animals we can find in ourselves, as well. ד' put these מדות into them so that we should learn to utilize them properly.4 The מהר''ל explains that animals do not actually act with דעת, these מדות are part of their nature. Animals act a certain way, but not because they understand what they are doing; their nature is to act this way. The ant does not have זריזות or the מדה of keeping away from גזל because she has חכמה or יראת שמים; rather, this is her nature.

What exactly is the purpose of this engrained טבע?

The purpose is to teach us דרך ארץ – how we should act.5 ד' teaches us דרך ארץ through the animals and birds. This is one of the reasons why they were created.6 The ant does not distance herself from גזל because it is אסור, and the same is true with the יונה. Rather, they do so in order for us to learn to act like them.

חתול

אלמלי לא ניתנה תורה לישראל למדנו צניעות מחתול7


Had the תורה not been given to כלל ישראל we would have been able to learn צניעות from the cat – just by observing it. The cat does not attend to its private needs in public, and she covers her wastes.8 We find an example of such צניעות with שאול. דוד told שאול, “According to the תורה I was allowed to kill you. You are chasing me in order to kill me, and the תורה says – "בא להרגך השכם להרגו". But you were צנוע, and that saved you.”

What צניעות did שאול have?

The פסוק says: 9ויבא אל גדרות הצאן על הדרך ושם מערה”. חז''ל explain to us that it was a fence inside another fence and a cave inside another cave. שאול was going to attend to his private needs, so he went into this cave to hide himself – to be hidden from other people. Just as he acted בצניעות, when דוד came to kill him, he was hidden from him – so דוד was unable to kill him.

The גמרא says:" בשכר צניעות שהיתה ברחל זכתה ויצא ממנה שאול ובשכר צניעות שהיה בשאול זכה ויצאה ממנו אסתר"10. On the day that רחל was supposed to marry יעקב, she knew that her father was going to give לאה to יעקב in her place. She had רחמנות on her, and she gave her over the סימנים. יעקב did not discover לאה until the next morning. רחלwas so צנועה, and therefore she was זוכה to שאול.

שאול, in turn, was זוכה to אסתר – who is also known for her צניעות. When אסתר was taken to the palace, מרדכי asked her not to reveal who she was and which nation she was from. She did not reveal her lineage – that she was descended from שאול, from מלכות. The פסוק says about her: "אין אסתר מגדת מולדתה ואת עמה"11

The שירה of the cat is: 12אם תגביה כנשר אם בין כוכבים תשים קנך משם אורידך...” This is talking about someone who is in a position of power and greatness. Such a person might think that through a lack of צניעות he can attain even more power and glory, but this is not so. If there is a lack of צניעות, ד' will cause him to fall – even from an extremely high position. We find an example of this with אסתר – she had such an innate צניעות, yet she rose to such a high position.

נמלה

לך אל נמלה עצל ראה דרכיה וחכם אשר אין לה קצין שטר ומושל תכין בקיץ לחמה אגרה בקציר מאכלה13


זה שאמר הכתוב 'לך אל נמלה עצל ראה דרכיה וחכם אשר אין לה קצין שטר ומושל תכין בקיץ לחמה אגרה בקציר מאכלה' מה ראה שלמה ללמד לעצל מן הנמלה רבנן אמרי הנמלה הזו שלשה בתים יש לה ואינה כונסת בעליון מפני הדלף ולא בתחתון מפני הטינה אלא באמצעי ואינה חייה אלא ששה חדשים... וכל מאכלה אינה אלא חטה ומחצה והיא הולכת ומכנסת בקיץ כל מה שמוצאה חטין ושעורין ועדשים אמר ר' תנחומא וכל חייה אינה אלא חטה ומחצה והיא כונסת את אלו ולמה היא עושה כן שאמרה שמא יגזר עלי הקדש ברוך הוא חיים ויהיה לי מוכן לאכל אמר ר' שמעון בן יוחאי מעשה היה ומצאו בבור שלה שלש מאות כר מה שמכנסת מן הקיץ לחרף לפיכך אמר שלמה 'לך אל נמלה עצל ראה דרכיה וחכם' אף אתם התקינו לכם מצות מן העולם הזה לעולם הבא ומהו 'ראה דרכיה וחכם' רבנן אמרי ראה דרך ארץ שיש בה שבורחת מן הגזל אמר ר' שמעון בן חלפתא מעשה בנמלה אחת שהפילה חטה אחת והיו כלן באות ומריחות בה ולא היתה אחת מהן נוטלת אותה באה אותה שהיתה שלה ונטלה אותה ראה חכמה שיש בה וכל השבח הזה שיש בה שלא למדה מבריה ולא שופט ולא שוטר יש לה שנאמר ' אשר אין לה קצין שטר ומושל' אתם שמניתי לכם שופטים ושוטרים על אחת כמה וכמה שתשמעו להן הוי 'שפטים ושטרים תתן לך בכל שעריך'14


שלמה המלך tells the עצל – go observe the ant and learn from her חכמה.15 She has no officer to teach her how to act, no policeman to supervise her deeds, and no ruler to punish her for any wrongdoings. Still, she prepares her food during the summer, and at the time of harvesting she gathers it into her house.

Why did שלמה המלך teach דרך ארץ from the ant?

The ant digs three holes in the ground in which she can theoretically store her food. She does not store her grain in the upper hole – for fear of a leak from the rain, and she does not store her grain in the lowest hole – for fear that the water absorbed by the earth will ruin it. She stores her food in the middle hole so that it will remain dry.

The ant only consumes about one and a half grains of wheat her whole life,16 yet she collects so much, so early. This teaches us the trait of זריזות.

Why did ד' create this nature in her – of working so hard for nothing?

We must learn from her to act with זריזות. רשב"י explains that זריזות means gathering or doing more than necessary.

The מעשה where they found 300 כר of grain in an anthill shows us just how hard the ant works – for a life which she is not even assured of. How much more so must we work to prepare for עוה''ב, which we will surely have!

Why does the פסוק say "דרכיה" – which is רבים?

To teach us to look for another מדה in the ant – her דרך ארץ that she does not steal from any other ant. The גמרא in עירובין ק: says, "למדנו גזל מנמלה" and רש"י explains: "שאין אחת גוזלת מחברתה". This is proven in the מעשה with the נמלה who dropped a grain of wheat and no other ant took it – because that would be גזל.17

These מדות that the ant has are not crucial for her survival. When ד' puts such מדות into animals, He does so for us to learn from them. Some animals teach us to emulate their מדה, while others teach us to distance ourselves from their מדה.18

How did שלמה המלך know that ד' wanted us to learn to act like the נמלה? It seems to be that the ant works so hard for something that has no שייכות to her. Shouldn’t the lesson we learn be not to be so busy with הבלים in עוה"ז such as money?

חז"ל answer this question with the fact that the ant has three houses, yet stores her food in the middle one. This is an act of שכל and דעת,19 which proves that ד' wants us to follow her ways. All מדות that are in animals which ד' wants us to distance ourselves from are done with foolishness, so that everyone who observes them understands that they are bad. ד' is not teaching us to spend our lives running after money, rather, we must collect מעשים טובים to live off of in עוה"ב.20

The מהרש"א explains the פסוק differently. "לך אל נמלה עצל" – learn from the lazy ant. Even a lazy ant has זריזות and does not rely upon her friends in order not to do גזל. This is a lesson to the עצל who relies upon his friends heavily, and even if they do not want to provide for him, he takes by force what he wants.

Theגר"א21 explains that a person needs three things in order to serve ד' properly: מעשים טובים, מדות, חכמה. The ant has all three. Let us look at how these מעלות are manifest in her and what we can learn from them.

מעשים טובים

"לך אל נמלה עצל"– one who is lazy and does not feel motivated to do מעשים טובים should learn from the נמלה. She collects so much, although she consumes so little.

There is a מעשה that happened with שלמה המלך: One time he thought to himself - There is no king in the world as wealthy as I am. ד' sent a small ant to him, and she told him, “Come and eat with me. Bring all your soldiers and I will prepare a feast for you.” שלמה המלך laughed and called her a fool, “You cannot possibly feed all of us!”

The ant answered him, “I will feed all of you for seven days and seven nights. You just have to lend me one of your servants to help me prepare the food כהלכה.” He sent one of his servants. The servant dug and found vast storehouses of wheat, barley, wood, and straw, and he prepared a feast for the king.

שלמה המלך came with all of his soldiers and servants, and they feasted for seven days and nights. When שלמה המלך was ready to leave the ant turned to him and said, “Know that you had גאוה on that day when you said ‘מי מלך כמוני בכל הארצות’, and therefore ד' sent me to you show you that there are some very great kings in the world. Know that all of these treasures that I gave to you belong to one king who captured them in war from the king of this city.”22

From this מעשה we see just how much food the ant collects and stores. Why does she do this? The מדרש answers: "שאמרה שמא יגזור הקדוש ברוך הוא עלי חיים ויהיה לי מוכן לאכול".

If not for the חטא of אדם הראשון even the animals would have lived forever.23 When the חטא will be fixed מיתה will stop – even for them. Therefore, they all wait for life without מות after it.

Animals, however, do not have שכל like we do to be able to wait for something like this. So what does this mean?

Every object on this earth has a שר above it in שמים; the שר controls its actions. The reasoning behind the ant’s actions is her שר. Everything she does – by collecting and storing so much food – is because her שר is anxiously awaiting and looking forward to life without מות, which will come in the time of משיח. All of her זריזות is for life after this world, therefore she rushes to collect as much as possible.

We, too, must collect as many מצוות as we possibly can in this world. The זריזות that we have to be especially careful with is זריזות אחר התחלת המעשה. חז"ל teach us that: "אין המצוה נקראת אלא על שם גומרה".24 In order for us to get full שכר for our מצוות, we must be the ones to finish them.25

It is man’s nature to be lazy. Man has בחירה and can spend his time as he wishes. His נפש, however, feels a lacking, and therefore he works to acquire what he feels he needs. The ant, on the other hand, has no בחירה. Her nature is to work continuously, and that is how she lives her life. Even in her “free time” she is busy collecting and preparing food for herself. This is not food that she needs, she will never eat it, yet she has this innate זריזות.

שלמה המלך tells the עצל: Even if you have money, work and prepare for old age, sickness, צער גידול בנים… Watch over what you collect and do not waste it on trivialities. Do not leave your work to other people to do. Do not sit around until you become desperate and resort to stealing or cheating other people!

We have בחירה, we control our actions. We can choose to act in a good or bad way.

What do we gain by having זריזות?

With זריזות we can acquire עוה"ז and עוה"ב. We will also fulfill more מצוות, thereby earning a life of טוב וברכה.

What can we gain by having עצלות?

Nothing. One could ח"ו lose their עוה"ז and עוה"ב and live a life of רע וקללה.26

The ant lives for six months, and spends most of her life collecting for after her death. We, too, must collect מצוות and מעשים טובים for עוה"ב.27

There is another aspect of עצלות that שלמה המלך is addressing, and that is someone who is an עצל בתורה.28 The man is in his home, and hisרבי is in the city. The townspeople urge him to go learn from the רבי, but he replies that he is scared of meeting a lion on the way. The רבי comes to his neighborhood, and he is once again urged to go learn from him. Once again he refuses for fear of running into a lion on the street. The רבי moves in next door, but the עצל refuses to go because maybe the door will be locked. The people tell him it is not, but the עצל wants to sleep… שלמה המלך says about this person: "מחורף עצל לא יחרוש ושאל בקציר ואין".29 רשב"י explains that this is describing someone who did not learn תורה when he was young and had the strength, memory, and time to do so. Once he is older, he tries to learn, but he is unable to do so for he has no strength, time, or memory.

משה רבינו added that with תורה there is another level of עצלות: not translating what one learns into practicality. One cannot just learn for the sake of learning, he must learn על מנת לעשות – only then will his learning have קיום. This is represented by the ant’s three houses. Some people learn without doing; this is like the upper house. Some people act without knowledge; this is like the lower house. These two have no קיום. Why?

A person is comprised of a mind and a body. Our deeds correspond to the body, and how we do them corresponds to our minds. We need to utilize both. The ant stores her food in the middle house so that it should not be ruined by the rain. We, too, must learn תורה with practical application. We should not waste our minds on genres of knowledge that have no practical aspect. We should not just learn, nor should we learn ספרים that only teach us how to act. We must learn and act with שכל – which creates a partnership between the mind and the body. This has קיום.30

מדות

Another מעלה the ant has which is crucial in עבודת ד' are her מדות. The פסוק says, “ראה דרכיה”, and the גר"א explains that this is talking about her מדות. The ant is constantly busy trying to collect more food, yet she will not touch anything that does not belong to her. 31 The מדרש 32 brings a מעשה of an ant who dropped a grain and all the other ants came to smell it, thinking it was theirs. None of them took it until the one to whom it belonged came back, smelled it, and carried it off.

Another ראי' that the ant does not steal can be found in the פסוק -"תכין בקיץ לחמה אגרה בקציר מאכלה". These are possessive nouns; the food is hers, not stolen. She acts this way even though she has no ruler: "אשר אין לה קצין שטר ומושל"33. A מושל is in charge of watching to make sure there is no stealing in his city. She has no מושל, yet she still does not steal – this is her nature.34

How do we know that the ants have no leader(s)?


לך אל נמלה עצל ראה דרכיה וחכם אשר אין לה קצין שוער ומושל תכין בקיץ לחמה אמר איזיל אחזי אי וראי הוא דלית להו מלכא אזל בתקופת תמוז פרסי' לגלימא אקינא דשומשמני נפק אתא חד מינייהו אתנח ביה סימנא על אמר להו נפל טולא נפקו ואתו דלייה לגלימא נפל שמשא נפלו עליה וקטליה אמר ש''מ לית להו מלכא דאי אית להו הרמנא דמלכא לא ליבעי א''ל רב אחא בריה דרבא לרב אשי ודלמא מלכא הוה בהדייהו אי נמי הרמנא דמלכא הוו נקיטי א''נ בין מלכא למלכא הוה דכתיב בימים ההם אין מלך בישראל איש הישר בעיניו יעשה35 אלא סמוך אהימנותיה דשלמה36

The תנא did not want to rely on what שלמה said, so he went to check this out by himself. He spread a shirt over the ant hill, because ants love shade. One ant came out and saw the shade, and the תנא made a סימן on the ant in order to be able to recognize him and see what the other ants will do to him. The ant went inside to tell the others, and they all came out. The תנא removed the shirt, and the sun shone on them. The ants all turned to the first ant and killed him. The תנא explains a few possible options:

  1. They have no king. If they had one, they would have been required to get permission from him before killing the ant.

  2. Maybe they do have a king, and the king was there with them.

  3. They do have a king, but they did not need his permission to do this because there was a law that anyone who lies can be killed on the spot.

  4. Maybe they were between kings – so everyone did what they wanted.

The תנא concludes that there is no way to know for sure, therefore he must rely on what שלמה המלך said – the ants have no leaders.37

The ant believes that everything is from ד' – including פרנסה, therefore she does not steal. It is as if she does not want to get הנאה from that which ד' gave to her friend.38 The ant runs away from stealing, therefore ד' gives her strength to collect more and more. This is the opposite of what we think, which is that if someone steals he will get more פרנסה. If we would run away from גזל, ד' would give us more opportunities for פרנסה. The reason that ד' allows the ant to collect so much is because she does not steal.39

When ד' created אדם, ד' created him with leaders to keep him on the right path. The proof of this is that ד' showed אדם the leaders in every generation. ד' also created us with the desire to listen to our leaders so that we would appoint them to rule over us. Ants do not have this nature, yet they act as if they do. We were created with it, and therefore we must act accordingly.

חכמה

The third מעלה of the ant is her חכמה. She has three houses, yet she does not store her grain in the top or bottom ones for fear of rain on top and mud on bottom. She stores in the middle one – she takes the דרך האמצעי. We must learn from her to also act בדרך האמצעי in everything we do, as well as with our מדות.40

The אלשיך adds another aspect of חכמה that we learn from the fact that she does not steal. If she did, she would have to spend a lot of time returning what she stole or working to pay it back. Therefore, she does not steal – which shows חכמה on her part.41

יונה

The גמרא says, "למדנו...ועריות מיונה".42 The יונה only has one mate during his entire life – she never drops him for another יונה. Even after one of the זיווג dies, the other one will never find a new mate. Their זיווג is total and everlasting. The same is with ד' and כלל ישראל – once we were מכיר הקב"ה, we can never drop Him.43 Our relationship with הקב"ה is total and everlasting.44


דאמתלא כנסת ישראל כיונה שנאמר כנפי יונה נחפה בכסף.45 מה יונה אינה נצולת אלא בכנפיה אף ישראל אינן ניצולין אלא במצות...מה יונה זו כנפיה מגינות עליה אף ישראל מצות מגינות עליהם46


דאתמיל כנסת ישראל ליונה שנאמר כנפי יונה נחפה בכסף47 וגו' מה יונה כנפיה מגינות עליה אף ישראל מצות מגינות עליהן48


The wings of a יונה are a protection for her when she is fleeing from other birds and man. So, too, are the מצוות a protection for בני ישראל.49

When all other birds are tired, they rest on a rock or a tree until their strength is restored. The יונה, however, is different. When the יונה gets tired, she rests one wing and flies with the other. She alternates between resting one and the other until she gets her strength back.50 We can learn two major lessons from this:

This shows us a way of עבודת ד' which we must learn. Some people grow and rise until they reach שמי מרום, but then they fall all the way back down. They live like that – constantly rising and falling. The יונה is different – even when she has no strength to rise, she is very careful not to fall. She is constantly flying with at least one wing. We must do the same - even when we must be busy with גשמיות we must be careful not to totally let go of ד'; we must be constantly connected to הקב"ה.51

The יונה never has complete rest, because she is always flying with at least one wing. It is the same way with כלל ישראל – we are never free from צרות. However, our מצוות protect us from these צרות.52

ר' יוסי was once traveling and he stopped and walked into a חורבה. He was in a rush, so he did not daven inside. אליהו הנביא came to reprimand him for this and he said:


בני מה קול שמעת בחורבה זו ואמרתי לו שמעתי בת קול שמנהמת כיונה ואומרת אוי לבנים שבעונותיהם החרבתי את ביתי ושרפתי את היכלי והגליתי את בני לבין העובדי כוכבים. אמר לי בני חייך וחיי ראשך לא שעה זו בלבד אומרת כך אלא בכל יום ויום ג"פ אומרת כך. ולא זו בלבד אלא בשעה שישראל נכנסין לבתי כנסיות ולבתי מדרשות ועונין יהא שמיה הגדול מבורך הקב"ה מנענע ראשו ואומר אשרי המלך שמקלסין אותו בביתו כך. ומה לו לאב שהגלה את בניו לבין העובדי כוכבים. ואוי להם לבנים שגלו מעל שלחן אביהם53


Just like the יונה coos, so do בני ישראל groan about the חורבן, and so does ד' mourn the חורבן. ד' does not literally droop His head, but this shows that ד' has pain over the fact that בני ישראל caused such a חורבן with their חטאים.54 ד' says," אשרי המלך שמקלסין אותו בביתו כך". ד' yearns for the days when the בית המקדש was still standing – when כ"י would praise ד' in the בית המקדש like this.55 When the בית המקדש was in existence, בני ישראל were זוכין משלחן אביהם, and they called ד' – מלך.56 Now, we are in גלות, and we call ד' – אב, because ד' is כביכול not a king when His כסא is not complete.57

"אם תשכבון בין שפתים כנפי יונה נחפה בכסף ואברותיה בירקרק חרוץ"58


When כלל ישראל are in גלות we look and feel so disgusting – like someone who lives among pots – from the צרות in גלות. When the גאולה comes we will look and feel nice again – like "כנפי יונה נחפה בכסף".

צפרדע

עוד זו דרש תודוס איש רומי מה ארו חנניה מישאל ועזריה שמסרו עצמן על קדושת השם לתוך כבשן האש נשאו קל וחומר בעצמם מצפרדעים ומה צפרדעים שאינן מצווין על קדושת השם כתיב בהו ועלו ובאו בביתך ובחדר משכבך ועל מטתך ובתנוריך ובמשארותיך59 אימתי נשארת מצויה אצל התנור בשעה שהוא חם אנו שמצווין על קדושת השם על אחת כמה וכמה60


Why were חנניה מישאל ועזריה - מוסר נפש into the כבשן by נבוכדנצר? Why didn’t they darshen: וחי בהם ולא שימות בהן?

This all happened in public, so they had to give up their lives for this – even for a מצוה קלה; it was יהרג ואל יעבור.61 The problem is that the הלכה states that if a non-Jew wants a Jew to bow down in order to give him pleasure, it is forbidden for the Jew to bow; it becomes a יעבור ואל יהרג, and someone who does bow down is מבחייב בנפשו.62 This was not a problem here, because this was not עבודה זרה, it was a statue of נבוכדנצר – which he made for his honor. חנניה מישאל ועזריה saw, though, that נבוכדנצר made this statue to increase his honor and glory, but to decrease that of ד', and therefore they were חייב in this case to be מוסר נפש for כבוד ד'.

Why didn’t they just run away when they had a chance? The frogs were commanded to give up their lives: "ועלו ובאו בבתיך...ובתנוריך", but חנניה מישאל ועזריה were not! They did not want נבוכדנצר to claim that all the nations had bowed to the statue – including בני ישראל, therefore they בדוקא stood and did not bow.

The פסוקים inשמות seem out of order: first they say "בתנוריך" and then "במשארותיך". It should have been the other way around – first they went into the משארות and then into the תנורים. This is a רמז that those in the תנורים remained alive. משארותיך is from the word שארית.

ויעש ד' כדבר משה וימתו הצפרדעים מן הבתים מן החצרות ומן השדות63

The פסוק here does not specify that the frogs in the תנורים died. They were willing to be מוסר נפש for ד', therefore He did not kill them. This is a נס גדול וגילוי. נסים that ד' performs through שליחים are not only for the generation in which they happened; all the following generations must learn from the נסים that happened in previous generations. This is why such נסים are written in the תורה. Someone who is a real מאמין can look into the תורה, read and learn about these נסים, and feel as if he himself witnessed them.

The צפרדעים were מוסר נפש for ד', and therefore they were not burnt.64 They had no בחירה whether or not to do רצון ד', but this was going against their nature, which is to flee from danger. חנניה מישאל ועזריה took a קל וחומר from them, and they went willingly into the כבשן האש.65 The frogs had no צווי and they were saved, so חנניה מישאל ועזריה were sure they would be saved because they had a צווי.66

There are so many people who are willing to give up their lives for small, stupid causes; this is not real מסירות נפש. מסירות נפש for ד' is so great and is a נס! Our purpose in this world is to change our nature to match רצון ד'. The greatness in their מסירות נפש was that it was for ד' only! This is a level that we have to strive for – to make our רצון match רצון ד'.67

ד' sent מלאך גבריאל to save them. This was even more פרסומי ניסא because גבריאל is the מלאך of fire, yet he saved them from the fire. This is the reason that he went behind them in the תנור. If he would have gone in front, he would have stopped the power of the fire, and they would have walked behind him in the cold. Therefore he went in back of them to show that he was strengthening the power of the fire, yet they were not harmed because their צדקות cooled down the fire.

נבוכדנצר was amazed by a few נסים here:

  1. They were walking around unharmed in a blazing fire!

  2. He had thrown in three men, yet there were four walking around inside the fire!

  3. He recognized that the fourth “man” was a מלאך של אש – from מלחמת סנחריב – and how could a מלאך של אש be saving them from fire?! If it was a מלאך of snow or hail it would not be as miraculous… But a מלאך של אש – that was a פלא!68

The שיחות מוסר69 brings down another reason why חנניה מישאל ועזריה did not run away from the כבשן instead of being מוסר נפש; they did not want to leave without נבוכדנצר’s permission. They were thrown in by his command, and they refused to leave without it. The same thing happened with נח. He did not want to leave the תיבה without ד'’s permission – because he had entered with it.

We see from here how binding דרך ארץ truly is. נח had major יסורים in the תיבה. The פסוק says, "וישאר אך נח"70 – he was bleeding from the hard work of watching the animals. רש"י over there explains that for those twelve months נח and his sons did not sleep! Still, when the water dried and they had the ability to leave, נח did not want to leave without ד'’s רשות.

What happened with חנניה מישאל ועזריה is even more wondrous than that! By נח, ד' sent him into the תיבה in order to save him from the מבול. With חנניה מישאל ועזריה, נבוכדנצר wanted to kill them. They did not leave because it would have been a פגם in דרך ארץ for them to do so without his permission. They learned this from the צפרדעים.

Every minute that they remained alive was a נס! This proves that ד' agreed with what they did – therefore He lengthened their נס until נבוכדנצר commanded to take them out of the כבשן.

The frog’s purpose in the world is to be מוסר נפש for רצון ד'. She says in her שירה: "מין אחד יש...ונוטלני ואוכלני כי לכך נוצרתי מתחלת הבריאה"71. We must strive to also reach this level of being willing to bend our רצון for ד'’s.

הוי עז...

הוי עז כנמר וקל כנשר ורץ כצבי וגבור כארי לעשות רצון אביך שבשמים72


רבינו יונה explains when it is that we must use these מדות in עבודת ד'. One must have עזות to reprimand people who are sinning. רבינו יונה then discusses the whole משנה at once in terms of being עוסק בתורה ובמצוות. He brings the פסוק: "וקוי ד' יחליפו כח"73. One who has עזות to learn and do מצוות and who hopes in ד' – when he becomes tired, ד' increases his strength so he can use it for מלאכת ד'.

He continues with "וקל כנשר" – those who serve ד' without laziness 74 – "יעלו אבר כנשרים". "רץ כצבי" – other people, when they run and go they become tired. Those people who run to serve ד' with all of their strength, "ילכו ולא ייעפו ירוצו ולא ייגעו".

"וגבור כארי" - we must direct all of our כחות into עבודת ד';75 this includes our actions, intentions, and thoughts.76 "לעשות רצון אביך שבשמים" – our רצון should be to do ד'’s רצון.

רש"י explains this משנה in a different way. He says that one must utilize all of these מדות to bring honor to שבת קודש. Why specifically this מצוה?

ד'wants us to recognize and know Him. If we do this we will have pleasure all the time. That is why ד' gave us שבת and a רוח ממרום - "נשמה יתירה ורוחב לב למנוחה ושמחה"77. שבת is brings down light and pleasure on the other six days of the week. We must cling to ד' and have pleasure from Him throughout our lives. We have so many disturbances in our lives which hold us back from focusing on ד'. ר' יהודה בן תימא warns us to stand strong against the נסיונות of this world with עזות like a leopard, מהירות like a deer. We have to rise above like an eagle to have pleasure from the שכינה. We have to overcome these נסיונות with strength like a lion in order to get the רוממות הנפש that one has the potential to achieve on שבת. This will enable us to come to the level of דביקות בד' throughout our lives.78

חכמה בגוים תאמין...


This fall when you see geese heading back south for the winter, flying along in a “V” formation, you might be interested in knowing what has been discovered about why they fly that way. It has been learned that as each bird flaps its wings, it creates uplift for the bird immediately following. By flying in a “V” formation, the whole flock adds at least 71% greater flying range than if every bird flew on its own.

Basic Truth #1:

People who share a common direction and sense of common purpose can get there quicker.

Whenever a goose falls out of formation, it suddenly feels the drag and resistance of trying to do it alone and quickly gets back into formation to take advantage of the lifting power of the bird immediately in front.

Basic Truth #2:

It’s harder to do something alone than together.

When the lead goose gets tired, it rotates back in the wing formation and another goose flies point.

Basic Truth #3:

Shared leadership and interdependence gives each of us a chance to lead as well as an opportunity to rest.

The geese honk from behind to encourage those up front to keep up their speed.

Basic Truth #4:

We need to make sure our honking is encouraging and not discouraging.

Finally, when a goose gets sick or is wounded by gunshot and falls out, two geese fall out of formation and follow it down to provide help and protection. They stay with it until it is either able to fly or until it dies, and they launch out on their own or with another formation to catch up with their own group.

Basic Truth #5:

We need to stand by each other in good and tough times.79



















Bibliography


עין יעקב

עירובין ק: - רש"י, עץ יוסף, עיון יעקב, באר הגולה ד: יא: 1017

חולין נז: - רש"י, מהרש"א

ברכות נג: - מהרש"א

סנהדרין צה.מהרש"א

שבת מט.רש"י, תוספות

ברכות ג.עץ יוסף

פסחים נג: - רש"י, רי"ף, עץ יוסף


מדרשים


מדרש רבה שופטים ה:ב – תפארת ציון, מהרז"ו, המבואר

בראשית רבה לט:ח – דברי שמואל, דברי שאול

ילקוט שמעוני וארא ז: כו-כט: סה,סו

פרקי אבות: ה: כ – רש"י, רבינו יונה, לקט שיחות מוסר


מהר"ל

נתיבות עולם: נתיב הצניעות פרק א

נתיבות עולם: נתיב הזריזות פרק א

נצח ישראל ה:76

נצח ישראל כב: 13


תנ"ך

משלי ו:ו – גר"א, ילוט מעם לועז, אלשי"ך, מלבי"ם

תהלים סח: יד – מצודת דוד

וארא ח:ט – חכמת המצפון וארא: ח: ט


מוסר

מסילת ישרים פ"ז

שיחות מוסר תשלב: יח

המביט על פרק שירה










1 איוב לה:יא

2ערובין ק:

3 ערובין ק: רש''י

4 משלי ו:ו מוסר חכמה

5 ערובין ק: רש''י

6 ערובין ק: עץ יוסף

7 ערובין ק:

8 ערובין ק: רש''י

9 שמואל א כד:ג

10 מגילה יג:

11 מגילת אסתר ב:כ

12 עובדיה א:ד

13 משלי ו:ו-ח

14 מדרש רבה שופטים ה:ב

15אבן עזרא משלי ו:ו

16 תפארת ציון שופטים ה:ב

17 המבואר-מדרש רבה שופטים ה:ב ; חולין נז: מהרש"א

18 For example, the אנפה – heron – is always angry and spends her days in grief and sorrow. She teaches man to distance himself from כעס. The sloth – called עצל in the מפרשים - is known for its עצלות – which makes it east to trap. From him man learns to distance himself from עצלות.

19 The פסוק says תכין = what can be seen by the eye. She cuts every grain into very small pieces so it shouldn’t grow if rain falls on it. This is a הנהגה of חכמה יתירה. אלשיך משלי ו:ו

20 תפארת ציון שופטים ה:ב

21 משלי ו:ו,ז

22 ילקוט מעם לועזמשלי ו:ו-ח

23 ב"ר יט:סט

24 ב"ר פה:ג

25 מסילת ישרים פרק ז ביאור חלקי הזריזות

26 אלשיך משלי ו:ו

27 פירוש מהרז"ו מדרש רבה שופטים ה:ב

28 נתיבות עולם: נתיב הזריזות פרק א

29 משלי כ:ד

30 נתיבות עולם: נתיב הזריזות פרק א

31 גר"א משלי ו:ו, עירובין ק: רש"י

32 שופטים ה:ב

33 משלי ו:ו

34 אלשיך משלי ו:ו

35 שופטים יז

36 חולין נז:

37 רש"י

38 עירובין ק: עיון יעקב

39 נתיבות עולם: נתיב הזריזות פרק א

40 משלי ו:ו גר"א, נתיבות עולם: נתיב הזריזות פרק א

41 אלשיך משלי ו:ו

42 עירובין ק:

43 נצח ישראל פרק כב:13

44 ברכות נג: מהרש"א

45 תהלים סח:יד

46 ברכות ג:

47 תהלים סח:יד

48 שבת מט.

49 שבת מט. רש"י

50 בראשית רבה לט:ח

51בראשית רבה לט:ח-דברי שמואל

52בארשית רבה לט:ח-דברי שאול

53 ברכות ג.

54 ברכות ג.-עץ יוסף

55 ברכות ג.- ש"י

56 ברכות ג.- מהרש"א

57 ברכות ג. – עץ יוסף

58 תהלים סח:יד

59 וארא ז:כו-כט

60 פסחים נג:

61 פסחים נג: תוספות

62 ב"ח

63 וארא ח:ט

64

65 חכמת המצפון וארא ח:ט

66 פסחים נג: רי"ף

67 חכמת המצפון וארא ח:ט

68 פסחים נג: רי"ף

69 מאמר יח תשל"ב

70 נח ז:כג

71 המביט על פרק שירה- I couldn’t find a real מקור for this anywhere.

72 פרקי אבות ה:כ

73 ישעי' מ:לא

74 רש"י

75 רש"י

76 רבינו יונה

77 רש"י ביצה טז.

78 לקט שיחות מוסר קצ"ד

79 The Wisdom of the Geese – Angeles Arien

Saturday, April 02, 2005

Toras Purim 5765 from my brother in law, R' Chaim Brown

Chazal (Shabbos 31a) identify each of the six sedarim of Mishna with a phrase in the pasuk in Yeshaya (33:6) "V'haya emunas itecha chosen yeshu'os chochma v'da'as...". Seder Taharos, which marks the completion of Shas, is identified and connected with the middah of da'as .

The last Mishna in Shas tells us that Hashem will ultimately reward each and every tzaddik with 310 worlds.

"Mishenichnas Adar marbin b'simcha". The Divrei Elimelech notes that the word "B'SiMChaH" has the same letters as the word "MaCHShaVaH", thinking, or using one's da'as . The shoresh of machshavah is ChoSheV = gematriya 310.

The climax of the Megillah is the unraveling of Haman's plans. Esther begs that Achashveirosh rescind "ra'as Haman haAgagi v'es MACHSHAVTO" and to recall "es hasefarim MACHSHEVES Haman ben HaMedasa HaAgagi". Purim is not just about repealing the edicts of Haman, but is about overturning the machshavah and da'as of Haman.

Da'as does not simply mean knowledge - it means connectedness on the deepest level, as reflected in the pasuk "V'Adam yada es Chava ishto".

The Rambam (Geirushn 2:8) tells us that even if a Jew refuses to consent to do a mitzvah unless Bais Din coerces him to agree, that agreement is considered to be done with full da'as. Although a Jew may verbally protest, may physically protest, may claim he does not care about mitzvos, on the deepest level there always remains some connection, some da'as, that attaches to ruchniyus.

There is a fundamental difference between the simcha of Purim and the simcha of all other yamim tovim. R' Soloveitchik explained that the geder of simcha of the three regalim is being in Hashem's presence, as the pasuk says "u'semachtem lifnei Hashem...". This is the purpose of aliya l'regel. According to Tosfos (M"K 14b), when there is no mikdash for korbanos haregel, there is no obligation min haTorah of simcha.

The simcha of Purim is of a different nature, as Hashem's name is never mentioned in the Megillah and the entire yom tov takes place without mikdash and in galus. The simcha of Purim is not a temporary trip to Mikdash and then a return home, but, like the deeper level of da'as that always exists even if we ourselves deny it, it is the simcha of knowing we are always with Hashem, machshava=simcha=choshev=310, that sans Mikdash, sans nes galuy, in the deepest galus, we still have a connection directly to Hashem.

Even if one drinks to a state of "ad d'lo yada", no one really mistakes the evil of Haman for the goodness of Mordechai. The Ishbitzer asks, once we put aside our da'as, where does our knowledge to make that disctinction come from? Perhaps the answer is (and he suggests a similar idea) that once we put aside our own thoughts, our own ideas, and all the false da'as we fill most of our lives with, we reach a deeper level of connectedness, which is the true da'as that the Rambam tells us is at our core.

The Ishbitzer writes that this is why Purim is the holiday of masks. We put on a costume, but in the end, everyone recognizes who we really are under that mask. In life, we disguise ourselves under many masks of da'as, but the true identity of each Jew, the true da'as that connects to Hashem, always remains recognizable.

Chazal (Meg 16a) tell us that when Haman came to dress Mordechai and parade him through Shushan, Mordechai Mordechai was learning the details of the korban ha'omer (Yalkut). The Radomsker in Tiferes Shlomo notes that the word OMER = gematriya 310. New wheat was not permitted to be offered in the Bais HaMikdash until after the offering of the shtei halechem on Shavuos. But the Torah tells us that not just the wheat of Mikdash, the "lifnei Hashem" wheat deserves a korban, but the wheat of each farmer that was grown for his daily bread also deserves a korban in celebration.

Purim Erev Shabbos means that we go from Purim into a Shabbos of "Meleches machsheves asra Torah" - Shabbos means we divest ourselves of the weekday machshavah and find that deeper da'as connecting to Hashem.

The machshavah of Haman is that there is no ultimate purpose and cause that binds each Jew to G-d; there whole universe is just an interplay of accidental forces, interchangeable masks and identities. This is the force of Amalek, "asher karcha baderech" - karcha=accident, happenstance, like the word KERI = 310. This hashkafa of KERI tells us that there is no deep connection to anything; that da'as and maCHShaVa (=310) have no roots. Achashveirosh orders Vashti to appear unclothed, stripped of her masks, to try to prove that underneath everything is really a great void of nothingness.

V'nahapoch hu! Each and every Jew tries on Purim to obliterate "maCHSHeVes Haman", the Haman-thoughts of the daily grind that threatens to dominate our lives, and to connect to the da'as of who we really are. KERI =310 is transformed into the great simcha of "LaYehudim hayisa Orah v'Simcha v'Sason v'YeKaR"=310.

The Rambam tells us that Purim will always be with us as a Yom Tov because "harei hi kayemes k'chamisha chumshei Torah u'k'halachos shel Torah sheb'al peh sh'ainan b'teilim l'olam". The immutable da'as reflected in the Yom Tov of Purim exists because Purim is a cheilik of Torah, which is everlasting.

By connecting to Torah and being toveil in what the Rambam calls the "mei hada'as", we nourish that deep connection to Hashem, the machshava=simcha=choshev=310 of Adar and Purim, so that ultimately we can be zocheh to the 310 worlds and "U'mal'ah ha'aretz de'ah es Hashem kamayim l'yam mechsim..."

Friday, April 01, 2005

An Old Piece on the Halachic Definition of Death

Relevant to the inyana d'yoma of the Schiavo case:

THE DETERMINATION OF
DEATH: HALACHIC CONSIDERATIONS
Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer


In light of the recent endorsement by the Rabbinical Council of America
of brain-stem death as a valid Halachic criterion of the death of a person,
it is timely for us to explore the biological and halachic background of
this issue.

The two main parts of the brain are the upper brain, which controls the
conscious activity of the individual; and the brain stem, which transmits
the upper brain's "directions" to the rest of the body and controls vital
body functions, including respiration and cardiac activity. Therefore, even
if a person's upper brain ceases to function (as would be indicated by a
flat E.E.G.), a person would still be capable of autonomous bodily
functions, which are controlled by the brain stem. Such a person is in an
irreversible coma - what is commonly known as a "vegetable".

When the brain stem ceases to function, most autonomous bodily functions
also cease - including respiration. If supplied with oxygen (via a
respirator) and nutrients, the heart, however, may continue to beat for
several days. This is because the heart, besides being regulated by the
brain stem, possesses an independent natural pacemaker which regulates its
activity.

All Halachic authorities agree that it is not necessary, indeed
prohibited, to put a corpse on a respirator in order to simulate breathing.
This is desecration of the dead, a serious violation of Torah law. On the
other hand, all authorities agree that a polio victim who is dependent on
an iron lung, but whose brain is fully functional, is very much alive. A
doctor who "pulled the plug" on such an individual is a shofech damim. The
question involved in the RCA resolution concerns an individual whose brain
stem is clinically dead, but whose heart is still beating because he is
being maintained on life support systems. Is such a person considered
Halachically dead or alive? The primary practical ramification of this
question is organ transplantation. Most organs cannot be successfully
transplanted if harvested from a donor who has undergone cardiac death,
i.e. whose heart has stopped beating. Therefore, if we accept brain stem
death as a legitimate Halachic criterion, we may allow harvestation of
organs from such a donor. If, however, we conclude that cardiac death alone
constitutes Halachic death, the possibility of harvesting organs for
transplantation al pi halacha is practically nil.

It is important to clarify that this discussion only relates to whether
the donor via a proxy, or his or her relatives, may authorize harvestation;
and to whether a physician who is shomer mitzvos may harvest organs from
such a donor. If, as is most often the case, the organ is harvested anyway
from a "willing" donor by a willing physician, there may be no issur to
receive the donated organ. Much ado has been made over the fact that
although in a teshuva written in 1970 (Igros Moshe Yoreh De'ah 2:146)
HaGaon HaRav Moshe Feinstein zt"l called heart transplants "double
murders", he nonetheless later advised certain critically ill individuals
to undergo this procedure, and receive a new heart. In fact this ruling
only reflects that a procedure that was originally extraordinarily
questionable, resulting invariably in the recipient body rejection of the
new heart - thus in fact hastening that person's death - thanks to advances
in the use of rejection-preventing drugs is now normally successful at
prolonging the recipient's life.

The Halachic definition of death is discussed in Mesechta Yuma 85a. The
Gemara there concerns persons trapped beneath a collapsed building on
Shabbos. Obviously if there is a possibility that these persons are alive,
one is required to be mechalel Shabbos in order to save them. The moment,
however, one ascertains that a person trapped under debris is definitely
dead, one must cease desecrating the Sabbath and wait until nightfall
before continuing the process of removing the body. How does one determine
if the person is dead? According to Rav Pappa's summation, if one began
checking the body for signs of life from the feet there is a disagreement
if one checks up to the heart or continues to check up to the nostrils. If,
however, one begins checking from the head down, all agree that if one
checked the nostrils and found no breath, one need not go on to check the
heart. The Gemara, and the classical poskim (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:19,
Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim 329:4) only mention the criterion of
respiration as a criterion of death. The proponents of the brain stem death
criterion argue that by virtue of its omission, the Gemara and the poskim
clearly are indicating that cardiac death is not a necessary criterion of
death. The Gemara's reliance on cessation of autonomous respiration as an
indicative of death clearly indicates that the death of the brain death
which controls that activity is a sufficient determinant of death.

The proponents of the brain stem death criterion also cite the Mishna in
Ohalos 1:6 as proof of their position. The Mishna there discusses the point
in time at which a corpse begins to emit tumas mes (the degree of impurity
associated with death). The body of a person who has been decapitated is
metameh immediately after the head has been severed from the body. The
Rambam there points out that this is true even if the body is still moving,
as these movements are similar to the tail of a lizard which writhes even
after being severed from its body - since this movement is not controlled
by the source of control in the brain, it is not regarded as indicative of
any residual life (this ruling is codified by the Rambam in Hilchos Tumas
Mes 1:15). The proponents of brain stem death as the definition of death
regard brain stem death as "physiological decapitation", i.e. the brain has
been severed de facto by virtue of its clinical death from the body. Any
remaining heartbeat must therefore be regarded as equivalent to the
movements of the headless torso of the decapitated body, and thus not
indicative of any residual life.

The proponents of cardiac death as the determinant of death obviously
reject these two proofs. To begin with, they differ in the interpretation
of Rash i in Yuma. Rashi there explains that the situation in which we
found the person in question which requires us to check his breath is: im
domeh l'mes, she'eno meziz aivarav. The brain stem death school holds that
this phrase refers to a lack of external movement, i.e. brain and brain
stem controlled movement. The cardiac death school of thought holds that
this phrase refers also to lack of internal movement, i.e. lack of
heartbeat. They sustain this position further by citing the Teshuvos Chasam
Sofer Yoreh De'ah 338 who defines death as: kol she'achar she'mutal k'even
domem v'ain bo shum defika v'im achar kach batel haneshima, ain lanu ela
divrei Toraseinu hakedosha shehu mes. The Chasam Sofer clearly introduces
the element of defika - pulse - into the equation of death. He defines
death as the presence of three criteria: 1) lack of movement; 2) lack of
pulse; 3) lack of respiration. It would seem that the absence of any one of
these three indicators would prevent us from pronouncing such a person
definitely dead. HaGaon HaRav Shaul Yisraeli shlita, who wrote the Halachic
basis for the ps ak of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel (Ass ia, 11:2-3)
offers a different interpretation of this passage in the Chasam Sofer, that
the true criterion of death is the absence of spontaneous respiration;
therefore, even if there is no movement nor pulse, one must still ascertain
the absence of respiration before pronouncing death.We shall leave this
dispute unresolved, as there is no consensus on it among the poskim (see
the ruling of HaGaon HaRav Shmuel HaLevi Vosner shlita ibid., and Teshuvos
Tzitz Eliezer 9:46 and 10:25,4). One must bear in mind that in a case of
doubt as to the meaning of a ruling in hilchos shfichas damim it is far
better to err on the side of safety and refrain from possibly hastening a
death. The proponents of the cardiac death criterion also cite the Teshuvos
Maharsham 6:124 who states that even if respiration has ceased, so long as
some sign of life remains in any of the other organs of the body, we do not
regard a person as definitely dead.

As to the proof from Mesechta Ohalos, the cardiac death school maintains
that we have no right to extrapolate from the case of physical decapitation
to a case of physiological decapitation. In this vein, HaGaon HaRav Shlomo
Zalman Auerbach shlita (quoted in Dr. Abraham S. Abraham's Nishmas Avraham
339:2) writes that it is difficult for him to believe that it would be
possible to maintain respiration in a clinically brain stem dead person if
his brain was in fact completely dead. Medical technology is constantly
evolving. In 1971 the authors of an essay in HaDarom (no. 32) proposed that
Halachic death be determined on the basis of a flat E.E.G., i.e. upper
brain death - which even the medical sector now rejects as inaccurate. It
is possible that several years from now some function will be detected in
what is now regarded as a clinically dead brain stem, thus invalidating the
current definition of death even from a scientific perspective. Again, in
matters of life and death one must be certain beyond a shadow of a doubt
before acting.

The RCA resolution quote three sources as its basis. One is HaGaon HaRav
Yoshe Ber Soloveitchik shlita (yirapehu Hashem). Any possibly extant
teshuva from Reb Yoshe Ber is not in the public domain, and therefore not
available for analysis (parenthetically, it should be noted that the
publisher of the Midwest Jewish Week, Robert Gibber, related to me that
HaGaon HaRav Aharon Soloveitchik shlita told him that in fact this is not
his brother's position). A second is the ruling of the Chief Rabbinate of
Israel, written by Rav Yisraeli, mentioned above. This ruling relies
primarily on the third source, HaGaon HaRav Moshe Feinstein zt"l. In order
to clarify Reb Moshe's position it is important to examine his second
teshuva on the determination of death, written in 1976 (Igros Moshe Yoreh
De'ah 3:132). Reb Moshe discusses there cases of individuals who are
incapable of autonomous respiration, but are on life support systems. Reb
Moshe rules that persons who have reached this state as a result of a
debilitating disease may not be disconnected from their respirator. If,
however, the system went off on its own, one is not required under certain
conditions to reactivate it. Reb Moshe then draws a distinction between
this case and the case of a person who has been wounded in an automobile
accident or a similar incident. In these cases, says Reb Moshe, the
cessation of respiration is due to the contraction if certain nerves.
Therefore it is possible that after some time on a respirator the nerves
will again expand and work autonomously. Hence, even if no vital signs are
readily apparent, it is possible that these people are not yet dead (as Dr.
Abraham points out, in understanding Reb Moshe's psak it does not matter if
his perception of the clinical reality was correct, but rather only what
his perception was - only once that is clarified may we extrapolate to
other cases). Therefore, says Reb Moshe:

V'kaivan she'ata omer she'ata ika nisayon she'rofim gedolim yecholin
l'barer ... laida she'nifsak hakesher sheyesh liha'moach im kol haguf ...
v'gam she'kvar nirkav ha'moach ligamrai v'havai k'hutaz harosh b'koach,
she'im kain yesh lanu l'hachmir b'ailu ... v'af she'aino noshem klal blo
ha'michona shelo yachlitu shehu mes ad sheya'asu bedika zu, she'im yiru
sheyesh kesher liha'moach im haguf af she'aino noshem yitnu hamichona b'piv
af zman gadol, v'rak k'sheyiru al yidai habedika she'ain kesher liha'moach
im haguf yachlitu al yidai zeh she'aino noshem limes.

[Free Translation] "And since you say that now there is a test that great
doctors can thereby ascertain that the connection of the brain to the
entire body has been severed, and also that the brain has rotted
altogether, rendering the victim as if he was decapitated, we should
therefore be stringent in thes cases and even if one cannot breathe at all
without a respirator he should not be pronounced dead until this test is
performed, that if they shall discern a connection between the brain and
the body - even if the victim is not breathing at all - they should put him
on a respirator, even for extended periods of time, and only when they see
by this test that there is no connection between the brain and the body may
they pronounce this victim that is not breathing dead."

Some poskim derive from Reb Moshe's usage of the concept of physiological
decapitation that Reb Moshe here condoned the acceptance of brain stem
death as a suffice int criterion of death. Dr. Abraham (ibid.) points out
that this is definitely not the case. Reb Moshe clearly makes use of brain
death only as a chumra, an additional factor to be taken into account in
addition to and beyond the previously accepted criteria (which he defined
in the earlier teshuva explicitly as contingent on cardiac death).
Furthermore, Reb Moshe understood that the tests employed in determining
brain stem death actually indicate that the physical state of the brain has
decayed and rotted into "mush" (which in fact the tests do not measure -
the test approved by the Chief Rabbinate measures "auditory nerve-brain
stem evoked response"; see Assia ibid.). Even so, Reb Moshe did not rely on
this criterion l'kula. There is no evidence in the public domain that
indicates that Reb Moshe ever issued any psak overturning this teshuva.

In the final analysis, although there exist sevaros likan ulikan, such an
issue is of the gravest Halachic severity, touching as it does on the
subject of shfichus damim. Rulings in these areas must stem from writings
of the foremost gedolei hador which are available to talmidei chachamim di
b'chol asar v'asar to analyze and consider le'asukei shmatta aliba
d'hilchasa. The RCA is probably the most widely respected and and accepted
Rabbinical organization in the world. It is out of a sense of chibas
hakodesh that we raise these points for consideration in order to further
the clarification of this matter, u'mal'a ha'aretz de'ah es Hashem.