Prologue: The Torah is quite clear. If you worship idols, you willbe excommunicated (Shemos 22:19). Yet just how clear is the Possuk? If it referred to idol worship why not explain Zoveiach l'elohim Acheirim? And why the special mention in Parshas Mishpatim if the Issur of Avodah Zara had already been mentioned in an earlier Parsha? And what is the difference between Zoveiach and Makriv anyway?
Rav Chaim Kramer (Rayonos Hachaim, Iowa, 1939) noted that there is a fundamental difference between a Zevach offering and that of a Korban. The Zevach is always shared. The one bringing the Korban is able to share it with his peers and with the Kohein who brings it on his behalf. This is not necessarily true of other Korbanot.
Similarly, the idea of Elokim does not always have to refer to God per se. Rather, as the Rambam notes in Moreh Nevuchim (Chap. 2) the title refers to any governing body necessary to a man whether that refer to God, a king or even a court. Whoever watches the man and takes care of him can take on the status of Elokim.
However, unfortunately, care that is too good often causes the receiver to forget the element of true godliness in each and every aspect of human functioning. The receiver forgets how he needs God in his life and how God helps him daily. Thus, in the Parsha of societal law, we are reminded that society must be set up to run the world in a structured format. Still, that structure must promote godliness, not thwart it. Zoveiach L'Elokim, when the community gathers and only compliments its
structure, Yacharam, it will be destroyed because people should come together to celebrate and recognize God's involvement in the world. Not to deny it.
*********
Dental Dangers
*********
(Special Thanks to Rabbi Avi Pollak for clarification of many of the issues surrounding this week's Chaburah)
The Talmud (Shabbos 106a) debates the issue as to whether destruction (Kilkul) is allowed on Shabbos or not. The debate ensues concerning the issue of Chavala (bodily injury involving the letting of blood). Rabbi Shimon maintains that only in the case of Mila do we allow Chavala on Shabbos. Other types of Chavala are prohibited and the prohibition is biblical in nature.
What is the nature of the biblical prohibition of Chavala? Rashi (Shabbos 107a, Kesubos 5b etc.) understands that the removal of blood from the body is a Toldah of the Av Melacha of Shochet. This prohibition is one of Netilas Neshoma (ceasing life, based on the Possuk that equates blood with life.) Alternatively he understands the Melacha as one of Toldah of Tzoveia (dyeing) because the skin of the body becomes colored (or discolored) as a result of the staining with broken capillaries. Tosafos
(107a) agrees with Rashi's first explanation. The Rambam prefers to see the Issur as a Tolda of Mifarek (See Hil. Shabbos 8:7 and 11:1) simply because he does not equate the letting of blood with cessation of life so long as life is not being stopped in the creature being injured (that would include humans).
When it comes to injury for healing purposes what is the Halacha? The Talmud (Shabbos 133b) allows special dispensation for a Mohel who MUST remove blood from the child having a Mila on Shabbos. If not for the requirement, the child could develop an infection and possibly die. Thus, the Talmud commands the Mohel to do the Mila and remove blood to correct the potential infection. However, without the Pikuach Nefesh, Chavala would be Assur on Shabbos.
When discussing this in Tur, the Beis Yosef (328) quotes the Orchos Chaim who says that if one is experiencing dental pain on Shabbos, he may ask a non-Jew to remove the tooth . The Beis Yosef explains that the reason for this Halacha is that the dental pain is as if the one in pain has the status of Choleh Sh'Ein Bo Sakanna. Those types of pains may be answered by a Nochri but a Jew may not actively violate Shabbos for. This opinion is quoted by the Rema (Siman 328:3).
The problem begins with the Mogen Avraham (328:3) who writes that there is a biblical prohibition against removing teeth on Shabbos. This prohibition is based upon the fact that in the process, blood will be removed. The Mogen Avraham sees this as Choivel l'Refuah which is biblically prohibited. The Mishna Berurah (328:30) cites a Mamar Mordechai who sees the prohibition as Rabbinic because the removed blood has no use (Melacha She'Einah Tzreecha L'Gufo) but disagrees with it noting that the Issur
appears biblical to him as well. The Mogen Avraham and Mishna Berurah seem to maintain that only in a situation where the tooth illness might lead to an infection that will afflict the entire body, may a person seek a non-Jew to remove his tooth on Shabbos. Otherwise, this would not be allowed. The Biur Halacha cites the Shulchan Aruch Harav who does not
require that much pain. The blood that is removed in the process is a Psik Reisha D'Lo Ichpas Leh according to this position and would be Mutar to remove if done by a non-Jew since the prohibition is only Rabbinic.
L'Halacha, the Shmiras Shabbos K'Hilchasa (Chap. 34:7) notes that if one has a tooth ache that hurts him so much that his whole body aches, he may take a pain medication. In cases of great need, he allows the removal of a tooth, however, this should be done by a non-Jew (like the Mogen Avraham and Mishna Berurah). However, the Jewsih dentist should not remove teeth on Shabbos. Similarly, rav Ovadiah Yosef notes that according to those who permit the brushing of teeth on Shabbos, if there was to be release of blood in the process, then brushing teeth would be Assur as well (See Shut YaBiah Omer IV:30).
Shabbat Shalom
adathisraelshul.org - test slogan
