Tzipiyah.com

Every year, after Yom Haatzmaut, I have a bunch of thoughts bottled up which end up being put down on paper. This year is no exception, so I thought I would dedicate my Monthly update to these thoughts. Only one thing – Beware, I’m sure it’ll be quite long. Maybe the first draft for a book lol. But I plan on communicating some incredibly important ideas – Ideas you can comment on, discuss, or simply just read and think about. I think it’ll be a worthwhile read. (more…)

Last week, I asked a powerful question which received a lot of great answers in the comment section. Today, I want to give my own answer (inspired by what I have learned from my Rabbis).

If you would like to re-read the question, please click here. Here is a short summary:

We know that the Torah, as derived in the Gemara, says that any person who goes over a negative commandment should receive the punishement of Makkot. One of the exceptions to this rule is that of the Lav Hanitak LeAsseh. We know that the Ramban says that teshuva is a positive commandment from the Torah. If this is the case, and Teshuva is the repentance from one’s sins, then all negative commandments are Lav Hanitak LeAsseh, the Asseh being doing Teshuvah. If this is the case, then we can never, even conceptually, receive the punishment of Makkot! This makes no sense since it is mandated in the Torah!

My answer goes to the core of the definition of Teshuva. Through this question, I think we can understand the deeper meaning of what Teshuva really is, especially through the perspective of Rav Avraham HaKohen Kook. I joked around with one of my friends explaining that this question proves that learning Rav Kook is essential in understanding the meaning of Torah :-).

(more…)

A few post Yom Kippur thoughts:

Here is a question I heard from Rav Mordechai Elon, in the name of the Hi”da, about the nature of Teshuva. Fasten your seat belts because it is quite a difficult question. Hopefully, some of you will have some good answers. I plan on posting my own answer during Chol Hamoed Sukkot. The answer I have bring an incredible understanding to our holidays and to the concept of Teshuva. Still, enjoy this post - the question is as sweet as the answer, and I can’t wait to read your answers as well.

There is a concept in Halacha called “Lav Hanitek Leasseh”. This concept, a very technical legal concept, is defined as follows: If there is a Lav, a negative commandment, which is then connected to an asseh, a positive commandment, then it is a Lav Hanitek LeAsseh. For example, if you steal (going against a negative commandment), you then need to give back what you have stolen (a positive commandment related to this negative commandment). Therefore, the commandment not to steal is a Lav Hanitek LeAsseh.

On the other hand, if you have a negative commandment which is NOT related to a positive commandment , it is NOT called a Lav Hanitek LeAsseh. Any negative commandment which is not followed by a positive commandment related to it DOES NOT fall in this category.

This differentiation has a practical difference (Nafka Minah) in Jewish Law - We get Malkout (flagellation) for going against any negative commandment except for a Lav Hanitek LeAsseh . (There are other exception to this rule but they are not relevant to this question: A Lav She-ein Bo Maaseh and a Lav Sheyesh Bo Mitat Beit Din.) Again: if it is a regular negative commadment, you get Malkout for going against it. If it is a Lav Hanitek LeAsseh, you don’t.

Now comes the most incredible part of the question. There is a Mahloket between the Rambam and the Ramban. The Rambam holds that Teshuvah is not a mitzvah from the torah. If you sin, you sin, and then you need to do teshuva but its not a Mitzvah from the torah to do Teshuvah. We won’t deal with his opinion right now.

On the other hand, the Ramban says that Teshuvah is a Mitzvah Min Hatorah, a positive commandment from the torah.

Now, lets formulate this Ramban in the way it is usually understood: If someone sins, then he has the positive obligation of doing teshuva. How does this apply to a negative commandment? If someone goes against a negative commandment, then he has the obligation to do teshuva. This applies to ANY negative commandment!

Rav Elon quotes the Hidah which asks an absolutely incredible question. The Hi”dah asks: If the opinion of the Ramban is right, then all the negative commandments in the torah are Lav Hanitek LeAsseh! Think about it: If someone goes against any negative commandment, then he has the obligation to do teshuva. This is the very definition of a Lav Hanitek LeAsseh! But we have a problem! If this is the case, then, the punishment of Malkout (flagellation) can NEVER apply, since it only applies on negative commandments which are NOT Lav Hanitek LeAsseh! However, Malkout is a form of punishment from the Torah! How can it be possible that it would never apply? How can it be possible that we can’t even think, conceptually, of a time when this punishment can apply? This is impossible!

We all know the Ramban did not make stupid mistakes so the Hidah asks: What did the Ramban mean when he said Teshuva was a Mitzvat Asseh? We cannot just understand it through its simple literal meaning because, as we have seen, it would make absolutely no sense and would not be coherent with the rest of Torah!

I would love to read all of your answers as I prepare for the best way to formulate my own!

I think its very interesting that I’m writing this for the day on which Ashkenazim start to say slichot (even though I’m only posting it a few days late), when I started saying slichot a month ago since I am Sfardi!
So then, I took the slichot which were said yesterday night to find something nice to say and I saw that the slichot start with a sentence which I find has a lot of chutzpah: “We are coming on Erev Shabbat to say Slichot Early” We are coming early? A week before is early? Maybe I should say skoyach: better late then never? What is this?
I then decided to explore the difference between the askenazi minhag and the sfardi minhag.

The reason for the sfardi minhag is clear: No, its not because we eat kitniyot on pessah that we need to compensate. Its known that these 40 days are days of forgiveness and so we do slichot on these 40 days.

The Askenazi minhag is summarized in the Mishna Brura. Orignally, they wanted to do slichot during assara yemei tshouva. This makes sense, they blow the shofar from rosh chodesh ellul and then say slichot on level 2. Then level 3 is kippur and soon I will make a post letting you know that level 4 is sukkot.
Then, they realized that on 4 of the 10 days, you don’t say slichot: Rosh hashana is 2 days, then there’s Shabbat and on yom kippur. So, they added 4 days before rosh hashana.
Then, in order to add even more days, They arbitrarily chose a day in which slichot will be said each year, on Yom Rishon.

Now, we understand everything except for one thing: Why Saturday? Which is yom rishon.

We could say its arbitrary but it doesn’t seem right! Things in Judaism are not usually arbitrary.

(more…)

Burning CDs
One of the most relevant instances of intellectual property in today’s world is with respect to technology which allows the copying of music CDs. Most legal systems all around the world have adapted themselves to ensure the rights of the rights of the artists would be protected. However, how would Talmudic Law relate to such an instance?

According to the approach based on Dinei Demalchuta Dina, Talmudic Law will be the same as the law of the jurisdiction in which the copying has taken place, which is different in many countries today.

According to the approaches based on both undue competition and the laws of enjoyment, burning CDs would seem to be illegal. However, in a case in which a person burned a CD that he knows he would have never bought, there would be no loss of enjoyment or undue competition. Therefore, in such a case, one might argue that these approaches would not make the copy of CDs illegal. On the other hand, since such a standard is extremely subjective, one might argue that in order to ensure one would not lie to himself and rationalize his actions (more…)