Pages

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Shmuel Hanavi's Hairstyle

The name of the father of the navi Yoel written in Tanach is “פתואל.” The Midrash (ילקוט שמעוני יואל רמז תקל"ג) writes that this was actually the navi Shmuel. Why was he given this name? One of the reasons is that it’s similar to the word “בתולה – a young girl,” and Shmuel would comb his hair like a young girl.
Now, why would Shmuel comb his hair like a girl?
Shmuel was a nazir. Being that even a Yisrael is not allowed to enter any part of the Mishkan with long and unruly hair, Shmuel was required to comb it and make it look nice so he should be allowed to enter the Mishkan in Shiloh which he frequented.
אור שמח על הרמב"ם הל' ביאת המקדש פ"א הי"ז
See here

Monday, August 29, 2011

Throwing Away Papa's Money

The Gemara (סנהדרין כב, ב. נדרים נא, א) tells us of a certain "Ben Eleasa" who would spend large sums of money in an effort to learn the unique hairstyle that the Kohen Gadol had in the Beis Hamikdash. The Gemara comments that this effort was "not for naught."
Why would the Gemara feel it necessary to inform the reader that it wasn't for naught - what would prompt one to think that it was?
The Maharsh"a explains: Let us examine this man's name - "Ben Eleasa." Why was he given this name; if he was indeed a wealthy and important man, why did he not merit to be addressed with his own given name? The answer is that this man did not accumulate his own wealth, rather he inherited it from his father. As such, his entire legacy was attributed to the owner of his money - his father.
Now, people in such a position usually squander their money as they do not appreciate its value. Therefore, the Gemara tells us that this man did not do that; "not for naught" did he expend large sums of money, for his motives were noble, as he was trying to learn about the ways of the Kohen Gadol.
מהרש"א חדא"ג נדרים נא, א ד"ה מאי בן אלעשה

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Mechitzah - a Modern Invention?

Walking into any Orthodox Shul today, you will encounter a mechitzah, a partition running between the men and ladies section of the Shul. Others have a separate balcony for the ladies. One may wonder why is the mechitzah never mentioned in Shulchan Aruch or other earlier seforim? Why was this only recently discussed, and with such passion, by the great Rabbis of a more modern Europe?
The answer is simple: up until modern times, the style of the Shul was completely different. Women that wished to come and daven would sit in a completely separate room and would only hear the sounds of the davening by way of small windows.
שו"ת ציץ אליעזר ח"ז סי' ח
See here