It’s a safe bet that Ya’akov Avinu could not wait to get out of Lavan’s house. So why after Lavan agreed to let him go, and further, even paid tribute to Ya’akov, saying, “Nichashti, va’yevarcheini Hashem biglalecha,” (30:27) acknowledging that Hashem blessed his home because of Ya’akov, did Ya’akov insist that he will stay on and work until he had his own flocks and only then leave? Why not cut and run – why wait that extra six years accumulating sheep?
If you’re the Rogatchover, the answer (link) is that Ya’akov wanted to fulfill his neder of giving ma’aser, i.e. ma’aser beheima. Since sheep that has been acquired is exempt from ma’aser beheima, Ya’akov had to accumulate his own flocks. This is also why he kept his sheep separate from Lavan’s, so as to avoid a ta’aroves of those which were chayav in ma’aser with those which were not.
I wanted to share a less technical answer but an equally beautiful one that is offered by the Ostrovtzer in his Me’ir Einei Chachamim (vol 3). I mentioned last week the teaching of the Ch. HaR”IM that even if a Jew is far from where he should be, so long as he recognizes and is moved by the appearance of a tzadik, there is yet hope for his return. The Ostrovtzer’s answer reflects the same idea. He explains that Ya’akov thought that his mission in the galus of Lavan’s home was finished with the birth of Yosef and it was time to return and confront Eisav. However, when he came to take his departure and he heard Lavan acknowledge the fact that bracha came to his home only through Ya’akov, he realized that there was yet some goodness left in Lavan’s heart. So long as Lavan recognized that everything good came though the tzidkus of Ya’akov, not his own corrupt persona, there was something to stay behind for.
Only after those years tending the flocks passed and Ya’akov overheard Lavan’s sons saying, “M’asher l’avinu asah es kol hakavod hazeh,” (31:1) that Lavan was the source of his own wealth and prosperity which Ya’akov drained and made his own, did Ya’akov decide that it was then truly time to depart.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Rogotchover, as you know, was impelled to say his pshat because of the odd Rambam that says that there's no chisaron of Davar shelo ba le'olam by nedarim to be makdish, with a raya from Yaakov's kol asher titein. So everyone asks, who needs a raya? The difference between neder and makdish dslb'l is obvious even to children. So the Rgtchvr says it means to obligate him to generate income from which to give maaser. I have to say, though, that the Rambam is still shver. I don't see the Rgtchvr's pshat in the words.
ReplyDelete>>>The difference between neder and makdish dslb'l is obvious even to children.
ReplyDeleteCall me stupid, but it's not obvious at all. A neder is an issur cheftza -- why is it so pashut that you can create an issur cheftza on something which doesn't exist but you can't be makneh something which doesn't exist? (On this Rambam, see Kli Chemdah end of ois #2, first column on p. 73).
The Rog. is built on the fact that the ma'aser pledge seems to be Ya'akov's response to discovering that he's at the makom mikdash. What's the connection? Because ma'aser beheima can be offered only by a yisrael at the makom mikdash, not at a bamah.
> Since sheep that has been acquired is exempt from ma’aser beheima, Ya’akov had to accumulate his own flocks. This is also why he kept his sheep separate from Lavan’s, so as to avoid a ta’aroves of those which were chayav in ma’aser with those which were not.
ReplyDeleteBut it would only take one year to generate a herd so that maaser could be taken. Also the separation of the flocks was primarily because Yaakov's flocks were also his salary since they decided that any of Lavan's sheep mixed in with Yaakov's would be considered stolen.
>>>But it would only take one year to generate a herd so that maaser could be taken.
ReplyDeleteI had the same question and unfortunately don't have an answer.
If I were the Rogotchover, I could call people names. I don't want to be a "halber illui."
ReplyDeleteA neder to do a mitzvah is not an issur cheftzah, and that's all the Rambam is talking about here. Do you think that the maaser was chal as soon as Yaakov made the neder? Or that as soon as he acquired the sheep or property that the maaser was chal without dibur? Of course not. So there's no issur cheftza here. It's just nidrei mitzvah, it's a promise to do or not do something, and there's no chalos.
There is a dinei mamonos shibud created -- it's not like a neder to learn Torah.
ReplyDeleteReally? A shibud is created? And even lu yetzyor that you're right, creating a shibud is not called makneh davar shelo ba le'olam. You're creating the shibud on the gavra right now, not the cheftzah that's lo ba le'olam.
ReplyDeleteI was just talking to Rabbi Keller of Telz Yeshiva, and I was telling him about your saying that it creates a shibud, and how wrong you are, and he said, "I think that Reb Chaim in the stencils shtells tzu nidrei hekdesh to amiraso le'gavo'ah." I told him that I hope he's misremembering, but just in case he's not, here's a contingent apology.
ReplyDeleteSome old posts on the topic:
ReplyDelete1) http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2006/07/nidrei-reshus-vs-nidrei-gavoha-case-of.html
2) http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2006/07/nidrei-tzedaka-shibud-mamon-or-not.html
(this one is not written too well -- I should revisit it one day.)
Shu"T Ran writes there are 2 dinim in tzedaka 1) neder - chal only on a b'ein that exists and on which amiraso l'gavoha applies; 2) shevua - b'ficha zu tzedaka.
ReplyDeleteThe sugya in nedarim 8 of nidrei mitzvah may technically be talking about shevua (that was the topic of one of those old posts).
If you use a lashon like "harei alay" (i.e. neder language) to pledge tzedaka which you don't have in hand, The Yismach Moshe on this week's parsha (d"h derech shlishi) is mistapek whether your kabalah is chal at all. The Y.M. has a long pilpul to work out the sugyos, but bottom line is Ya'akov was undertaking a kabalas *neder* without having anything in hand and that creates the problem.
(P.S. Thank you for getting me to look into this a little more)
I actually gave a chaburah on this topic recently. See Rambam hilchos arachin perek 6 halachos 31-33. Whether nidrei hekdesh work as chiyuvei gavra or are chal on the cheftza (similar to nidrei issur/reshus) seems to be a machlokes rishonim. See Ramban al ha-torah reis Matos and hasagos le-sefer hamitzvos, aseh 94. Veacm"l
ReplyDeleteThat Ramban was discussed in the previous posts I referred to. I am guessing you saw Reshimos Shiurim in B.K. on this?
ReplyDeleteWell, if you hold it's chal on the cheftzah, I suppose you can understand why the Rambam needed to prove that it's chall on a DSLBL. On the other hand, it's stam hard to know how you can prove anything from Yaakov. Just because he made the neder you don't see that anything was chall. But, again, if you can bring rayos from Lavan about ein me'arvin and how long a besula has and so on, you can also bring a raya from the fact that Yakov called it maaser, as if it were chall already. But it still needs a yishuv.
ReplyDeleteI want to know why a guy who's in yeshiva, giving chaburos, has time to look at websites, even chashuveh ones like this.
b -- were you referring to me when you asked about a guy in yeshiva giving chaburos?
ReplyDeleteYes, I was. I assumed a chabura giver would be in yeshiva. Was I wrong?
ReplyDeleteb-
ReplyDeleteYes. Full time employed professional who runs/organizes a rotating chaburah among other baalei batim. Kinda like the baal ha-blog here. BH.
Yasher kochacha. For whatever a birkas heyot is worth,
ReplyDeleteמחייה חיים תחייך חיי אריכי לעבדו בלב שלם וללמוד וללמד תורה ברבים
b-
ReplyDeletethanks. Will always accept a beracha, especially a nice one like that. See the Seforno at the end of last week's parsha (when Lavan blesses his children and grandchildren before they take leave).