Shabbat Parashat Beha'alotcha| 5765
Beha'alotcha | | 02/01/2004
One of the notable highlights of our parasha is the set of backward letters nun, which encapsulate two p’sukim. One opinion (Shabbat 116a) says that it indicates that the p’sukim were brought from their natural position in the Torah to separate between two unfortunate episodes (puranut). The second puranut was clearly the miton’nim, Bnei Yisrael’s complaints that follow the encapsulated p’sukim.
Case: A couple brought a divorce settlement to be confirmed by beit din, and the husband gave a get. Some time later, the ex-husband brought appendices to the settlement to beit din, which stated that if the husband will have custody of their child, the ex-wife would have to pay him for child support. Are these appendices binding to create changes in the original divorce settlement?
It appears to me that even according to the Beit Shmuel, that the genetic father is the halachic father in the case of a child conceived from artificial insemination, the matter is different in the case where the father died before the implantation, as we shall explain.
Question: Why is the mitzva of zechirat yetziat Mitzrayim (=zym) (to mention (twice) daily the exodus from Egypt) not counted in the 613 mitzvot? Also, even if it is a time-based mitzva, why aren’t women obligated to fulfill it, as women are obligated in mitzvot that commemorate miracles they were involved in (af hein hayu b’oto hanes (=ahhbh))?
This edition of
A weekly divrei Torah leaflet: A Glimpse at the Parasha, Ask the Rabbi, From the writings of Harav Avraham Yitzchak Hakohen Kook, zt”l, Pninat Mishpat (Jewish Monetary Law).