The Steipler Is Learning While Doing Chesed

A family member of the Steipler always found it difficult to get to speak to the Steipler for he was always learning. Once, as the Steipler was peeling an item of food for his wife, the family member thought he found an opportune time. He went over to the Steipler whereas the Steipler replied, he has no time for he’s in the middle of a sugya (Divrei Siach – Parasha Korach).

Rav Avrohom zt”l held as well that one has an obligation to learn while doing chesed.

Rav Avrohom Zt”l – A Case Where A Baal Habayit Says The Fruit Is Not In The House And Then Finds It – Is A new Bracha Necessary?

There was a case that took pace on the 15th of Shevat, where a son asked his mother if there were any dates in the house (for they take precedence in regards to the “Shivat Haminim”). The mother replied that there were none so the child made a bracha on other fruits. When he was ready to make the “bracha achrona” the mother remembered that she did have dates. Does the son now have to make to new “borei pri ha’eitz” on the dates?

Rav Avrohom Zt”l said that it seems the son would not have to make a new bracha based on the “Head of Household” principle, and even though in this case the Baal Habayit didn’t think there were any dates, it is assumed that when a person makes a bracha, they rely on everything the ball habayit will tell them, even though at the time of the bracha the baal habayit said there were no dates.

Rav Avrohom Zt”l then brings a proof to this Halacha from “Afikomen” on Pesach.

However, Rav Avraham zt”l asks on the case of dates, how we can say that the first bracha on the fruit will cover the dates, for this would go against the law of “kadima” in brachos for the dates are more “chasuv” than regular fruits and the Rashba holds in such a scenario this can’t be done.

However, unlike the Rashba, we hold the “Head of Household” principle is effective in this case as brought down by the Biur Halacha (Siman 211 Sief 5.)

Sefer BarAlmugim Siman 52:Section 2 – Pages 280-281

Man Versus Animal

The gemartia of “Adam” is 45 spelling “mah,” “what?” in Hebrew. The Maharal says “be’hema,” animal in Hebrew stands for “ba mah,” “what is in it?” (an animal is empty, lacking free choice). Man is a manifestation of “what,” of asking, knowledge and identifying. Man must always ask, what is required of me to serve G-d properly.

A Taking

“Va’yikach Korach – Korach took.” What does the kicha mean?

The word “take” refers directly to Torah as it corresponds to the verse (Mishlei 4:2), “Ki lekach (a taking) tov natati lachem, torati al taazovu -For I give you a good doctrine; forsake ye not my teaching.” The end of the verse, “forsake ye not my teachings,” is evidence that the beginning of the verse is discussing Torah.

Korach used Tzizit, a part of the Torah to challenge Moshe, but was mistaken in how he applied it.

Even Shtar

One must ask why in Kiddushin (5a) the Gemara asks, “ומנין שאף בשטר – how do I know that a woman can be acquired “even” with a shtar?” By kesef and bi’ah the word אף is never used (rather the Gemara just asks, מנין, indicating a simple question of where are they derived from, but not indicating any notion that they would be difficult to effectuate a kinyan to acquire a woman). Perhaps shtar is the greatest chiddush as there is no tangible benefit to the woman.