Parsha Halacha
When you purchase a Jewish slave [Eved Ivri], he shall work for six years and in the seventh year he is to be freed.
Working for the same employer for three years and signing an employment contract:[1]
Some Poskim[2] rule that an employee, including a worker, teacher, [Sofer[3]], or servant, is not[4] to hire himself out to work for the same employer in his home[5] on a permanent[6] basis for more[7] than three years.[8] [Other Poskim[9], however, rule one may hire himself out to work for the same employer for over three years, although may not hire himself out to work for the same employer for six years.[10] Other Poskim[11] however argue on all the above and rule that there is never a prohibition involved in hiring oneself out to work for an employer for more than three years, in any situation. Practically, we rule like the first opinion, unless it is a time of great need, as explained next.[12] Thus, a person should not sign an employment contract for a more than three year term. Rather, he should have an option of renewing the contract or quitting within the three years.[13] However, there is no issue with continuing to work for the same employer for more than three years if one is not bound to a contract which requires him to do so.[14]]
If no other employment opportunities available: Nevertheless, if one does not have another source of sustenance to provide him food, [and has nothing to sell[15]] then he may hire himself to work for the same employer even past three years [and may certainly continue working even past three years].[16]
The law by a woman:[17] (However, a woman who is no longer a Na’arah is not allowed to hire herself to work for the same employer for more than three years even if she does not have another source of income, according to the above opinion.[18]) [Thus, the law by a female employee is more severe than by a male employee, as a male employee may hire themselves out for more than three years if they have no other resources to provide themselves food, while a female employee may not do so even in such a case.]
| Summary [includes Q&A]: Some Poskim rule one may not hire himself out to work for the same employer for more than three consecutive years, unless he has no way to support himself otherwise and will be left hungry. [Thus, a person should not sign an employment contract for a more than three year term. Rather, he should have an option of renewing the contract or quitting within the three years. However, there is no issue with continuing to work for the same employer for more than three years if one is not bound to a contract which requires him to do so. Furthermore, even one who signs an employment contract for more than three years has upon whom to rely if he receives annual vacation days, and is not working in the home of the employer.] Q&A Does the above prohibition [according to stringent opinion] apply towards any job, or only towards a job in which one works in another’s home and lives there on a permanent basis during his years of work? From the wording of the Poskim[19] it is implied that the prohibition only applies when the worker lives at the house of his employee and is supported by him in terms of room and board. In such a case, they stringent opinion holds it is forbidden to work in such a way for more than three years due to it being similar to a slave. However, if one lives in his own home and eats his own food, then seemingly there is no issue according to any opinion, against working for the same employer for many consecutive years. Nonetheless, some Poskim[20] rule that the above prohibition applies even by an employee who does not live in the home of the employer, such as the Rav of a community, as nevertheless his room and board is supported and paid for by his employer, which is the people of the city. It is for this reason that the contract of Rabbanim is either for three years or five years but not for six years.[21]
What is defined as permanent work? Some Poskim[22] rule that if the person contains annual vacation days within his employment contract, as is common today, then it is not considered permanent work and one may hence sign on an employment contract of more than three years.
Is the prohibition only against initially accepting at the outset of the employment to work for more than three years for an employer, or for even simply continuing to work for the same employer for more than three years?[23] The entire issue is only against initially hiring oneself for more than three years. Thus, if the employment agreement is renewed every year, or if there is no employment agreement and the person may decide to leave his job whenever he wishes, then seemingly there is no issue for him working for more than three years for the same employer.[24]
|
If one digs a pit, and leaves it uncovered, he must pay for damages if an animal falls in and dies.
Liability for damages caused by one’s items that were negligently left in a public area:
Not to place a potentially damaging object in a public area: It is an act of piety for a person to hide his sharp objects [nails/glass], and any other damaging item, in an area that will not cause any potential harm/damage, such as to throw them in the river or to burn them.[25] [This applies even if the potentially damaging object is in one owns property, and not in the public area, as it is still a potential harm for family, guests and visitors.[26]] It is forbidden to place a potentially damaging object in the public area[27], unless it is publicly accepted, or one has permission from the municipality to do so.[28]
Bodily injury:[29] If one placed a sharp object, such as a nail or glass, in a public area, and another person became injured from the object, then if the owner did not have permission to place the item there, he is liable to pay for the bodily damage of the victim.
Monetary damage:[30] If one placed a sharp object, such as a nail or glass, in a public area, and another person’s item became damaged from the object, then the owner is exempt from liability, even if he did not have the right to place it there, and was negligent in placing it there, or even did so deliberately.[31] [Nevertheless, in areas that have set laws regarding these matters, it is possible to make the owner liable for monetary damages, despite the Biblical exemption.[32] One is to speak to a Beis Din for further information.]
| Summary: Initially, one is to avoid placing a damaging object in an area that can cause damage, even in one’s own property. If one was not careful to do so, and it caused damage to another person, one is liable for all bodily damage that it may cause, although is exempt from any monetary damage it causes.
Q&A If one’s clothing tore on a nail that was sticking out of someone’s Sukkah, are they liable to pay for the clothing? No. This applies even if the Sukkah was placed in public property without permission.
|
If a borrowed item became damaged the borrower must pay unless the owner was with him.
Question:
I borrowed a fan from a friend and it suddenly died while I was using it. I tried to fix it unsuccessfully although did manage to get it to partially turn and blow air? My friend is now asking me that I pay her for a new fan, as she does not want a broken fan returned to her. What is the Din?
Answer:
You are exempt from paying her for a new fan. However, for the sake of peace you may choose to reimburse her partially or fully, if you so choose.
The reason: As the fan died during its intended borrowed use, and no change of use was done with it, and therefore it is exempt under the clause of Meisa Machmas Melacha which exempts even a Shoel.
Sources: See Michaber C.M. 340:1; Tur 340; Rava Bava Metzia 96b; Bava Metzia 93a; Shavuos 49a; Maharash Halevi C.M. 55; Birkeiy Yosef 586:10; Halachos Ketanos 1:79; Shulchan Gavoa 586:8; Kaf Hachaim 586:25; Vedarashta Vechakarta C.M. 3:25; Asher Chanan 1:273
Do not mention other deities on your lips.
Not to mention the name of idols and foreign deities:
Giving it a derogatory name:[33] One is required to help eradicate idolatry and give idols and foreign deities a derogatory name.
Swearing using its name:[34] One who swears in the name of an idol or foreign deity [transgresses a negative Biblical command and] is liable for lashes.
Mentioning the name of an idol:[35] It is forbidden to mention the name of an idol or foreign deity.[36] This applies whether there is a need to mention his name, such as to tell his friend to wait for him by a certain idol, and whether there is no need to do so, and one wants to mention his name in casual conversation.[37] It is permitted to mention the names of idols written in the Torah, such as Kara, Baal, Koreis, Nevo, Haorchim Lagad Shulchan, [Baal Tzafon[38]].[39] [This however only applies to names of idols and deities that were innovated for the sake of the idolatry, and hence the meaning of the name itself connotes a foreign G-d [such as Zeus, which connotes Deity in Greek]. However, common names of people/items which have been used for idols, may be mentioned, as the name does not have any G-dly connotation, and was not innovated for this purpose.[40] Thus, we find that the Gemara mentions the names of festivals of idolatry, as well as the name of Oso Ish and his students.[41]]
Mentioning their festivals:[42] It is permitted to mention the names of their festivals that are called the same names as people, although one may not refer to it in a manner of eminence as do their worshipers. [It is forbidden to mention the name of a festival that is called the name of their idol or deity.]
Poking fun at the idol or deity:[43] It is permitted to make light of idols and foreign deities [and it is permitted to mention their name for this purpose[44]].
| Summary: It is forbidden to mention the name of an idol even for location purposes, if the name is unique to idols, connotes a deity, and is not used for the names of people. It is permitted to mention names of idols that were originally used as names of people/items, and hence do not innately connote a deity. The same applies for the names of their Holidays, it may be mentioned, although without reverence, if their names are also common names of people. It is permitted to mention the name of any idol for the sake of poking fun at it.
Q&A May one write the names of idolatry and false deities?[45] It is permitted to write the names for learning purposes.
May one say the names of idols that are now extinct, such as the false deities of Greek mythology, such as Zeus/Cronus/Hera/Hades? Seemingly, it is permitted to mention names of idols that have become extinct and are no longer worshipped.[46] [Nonetheless, one must make sure that in truth this idol is no longer revered or served. There exist today modern forms of paganism, which, although not popular, still worship some of the above Greek deities, such as Zeus.]
May one say the name Jesus or Yeshu? From the letter of the law it is permitted to recite the name Jesus or Yeshu.[47] It is likewise permitted to write these names, as we find Gedolei Yisrael who wrote these names in their Sefarim.[48] Nevertheless, despite the letter of the law, the custom of all Jewry dating back many generations is to avoid saying these names and rather the term “Oso Ish” or “Yoshka” or “Yoshke Pandre” is used in its stead. One is not Heaven forefend to break this custom.[49]
May one say the word Christ?[50] One is not to use this term as it connotes a Messiah and savior, and according to some even a deity, and so is the custom of all Jewry to not say this term.[51]
May one say the name Chris-mass? No, and so is the custom. One is rather to use a epithet [i.e. nickname] such as Kratzmacht; Nittel, and the like. Seemingly however the term X-mass is not to be used, as the X is short for Ch***, and is used also by Christians as a formal name of the holiday.[52]
May one say the name Mary?[53] From the letter of the law it is permitted to do so[54], although G-d fearing Jews avoid saying this name [when in reference to the mother of Yoshka].
May one say the name Muhammad or other followers of Islam? Yes, as the religion of Islam is a true monotheistic religion which carries no aspect of idolatry.
May one say the names of Saint Paul/Peter/Patrick/Francis? From the letter of the law, one may say their names without mentioning their status of sainthood.[55] Thus, while one may say Paul/Patrick in reference to the apostles, one may not say a preface to his name which connotes reverence, such as Saint Paul.[56] One is also not to write such a preface of reverence, and possibly should not even write its initial, such as S. Peter, because people may come to read it in full.[57] [It however may be written for learning purposes, as stated earlier in the Q&A.] Furthermore, it is proper to mention their names in a derogatory form when possible, such as Peter should be called Peter Chamur.[58] [According to Chazal, Paul and Peter were Tzaddikim who were planted into the christian world in order to divert their religion away from resemblance to Judaism, and they remained faithful to the Jewish people throughout their lives.[59] Nevertheless, they are still to be called by a derogatory name.[60]]
May one say the name of a city that is named after an idol or Saint? From the letter of the law, it is permitted to do so if the city is named after a saint. It is likewise permitted to say the name if the city is named after an idol whose name does not connote a deity and is used as a name of people or items, as stated above.[61] Nevertheless, G-d fearing Jews are accustomed not to say the name of such cities but rather give it a nickname. For example, the city of Bela Tzurkav in Russia they would call Shevartza Tzurkav.[62] If the city name is of a false deity whose name connotes a deity in the language originated, and is not used as a name of people or items, then [from the letter of the law] it may not be used to call the name of the city. [An example of such a city is perhaps Mumbai, which is the name of a pagan G-ddess which connotes the term “Mother of creation.” One should call it Bombay or other name of the like.ll it Bombay or otehr Mumbaiy, which is a pagan godesseity in the langugae er gave it a derogatory term.g therd d ] Saying the word Saint of the city name: If the name is preceded by the term Saint, such as S. Diego, S. Paul, S. Monica, and the like, then it is not to be said or written even in initials, as stated in the previous Halacha.[63] [The city of S. Monica is commonly called Simcha Monica by Chassidim. Nevertheless, when writing the name of a city in Gittin, one is to write the name as required by Halacha, even if it involves writing the preface of S.[64]]
|
The reason for reading Parshas Shekalim:[65] The Torah requires that the sacrifices of the Temple be bought using the money of the new Shekalim fund, each year beginning from the month of Nissan. Thus, the collection of the annual Shekalim donation [which was mandatory] was announced in the month proceeding the month of Nissan, which is within the month of Adar that falls in proximity to Nissan. We thus read the portion of the half Shekel donation in proximity to the month of Adar as a reminder [and verbal fulfillment[66]] of this requirement.[67]
When:[68] The date for the reading of Parshas Shekalim is dependent on the day of the week that Rosh Chodesh Adar is situated that year. When [the second day of[69]] Rosh Chodesh Adar falls on a weekday, even if it falls on Erev Shabbos, the Parsha is read on the Shabbos before Rosh Chodesh, which is known as Shabbos Mevarchim Chodesh Adar.[70] If however [the second day of[71]] Rosh Chodesh Adar falls on Shabbos, the Parsha is read on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh.[72] In a leap year that there are two Adars, the Parsha is read [either] prior to Rosh Chodesh Adar Sheiyni [or on Rosh Chodesh Adar Sheiyni, in a case that Rosh Chodesh Adar Sheiyni falls on Shabbos].[73]
The portion to be read:[74] The portion read is from the beginning of Parshas Ki Sisa until the words “Lechaper Al Nafshoseichem” in verse 16.[75] The Haftorah for Shekalim is then read from “Veyichros Yehoyada”.[76]
How many Torah scrolls are removed and what is the order of reading:[77] When Shabbos Shekalim does not coincide with Rosh Chodesh, two scrolls are removed from the ark. From the first scroll the weekly Torah portion is read until Shevii. The second scroll is then placed on the Bima which is followed by half Kaddish.[78] Hagba is then done to the first scroll. [The Mi Shebeirach for the ill is recited after Hagba.] One may not open the second scroll until the first scroll is rolled up [and placed in its Meil[79]].[80] For Maftir the portion of Shekalim is read from the second scroll. One then performs Hagba to the second scroll and reads the Haftorah for Shekalim. [On Shabbos Mevarchim the Chazan for Musaf takes the scroll of Maftir to hold.[81] When the scrolls are being returned to the Aron, the scroll of Maftir is taken first.[82]]
How many Torah scrolls are removed and what is the order of reading on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Shekalim:[83] When Rosh Chodesh Adar [Sheiyni-in a leap year] falls on Shabbos, three Sifreiy Torah are removed. The weekly Sedra [Parsha of the week] is read regularly from the first scroll [until the 6th Aliyah. By the 6th Aliyah the remainder of the Parsha is read from Shishi until the end of the Parsha.[84] One then places the second scroll on the Bima for the seventh Aliyah and does Hagba to the first Sefer Torah.[85] One may not open the second scroll until the first scroll is rolled up and placed in its Meil.[86]] The portion of Rosh Chodesh is then read from the second scroll. [One then places the third scroll on the Bima together with the second scroll and says half Kaddish.[87] Hagba is then done to the second scroll. The Mi Shebeirach for the ill is recited after Hagba.] This is followed by the reading of the portion of Shekalim from the third scroll. [88] This reading is then followed by the first and last verse of the Haftorah of Shabbos Rosh Chodesh. [When adding the verses of Hashamayim Kisiy on Rosh Chodesh the custom is to add the first verse of the Haftorah and verses 23-24 and then again verse 23.[89]] If Rosh Chodesh is two days, and falls on Shabbos Sunday, then one also recites the first and last verse of Machar Chodesh. One first says the first and last verse of Hashamayim Kisiy and then of Machar Chodesh.[90] [See Q&A regarding if Shekalim was read instead of Rosh Chodesh!]
| Q&A What is the law if a congregation read Parshas Shekalim a week early? They are to read it again the next Shabbos.[91]
What is the law if one began reading the wrong Haftorah?[92] If one mistakenly read the wrong Haftorah, such as the Haftorah of Rosh Chodesh or of the Parsha, then he is to read the correct Haftorah. If one only remembered after the blessings, then he is to read the Haftorah without its blessings. Q&A on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Shekalim Does one place the first Sefer Torah back on the Bimah when half Kaddish is said after the reading?[93] No.[94]
What is the law if one mistakenly began reading Parshas Shekalim from the second Torah scroll [by Shevii], instead of Parshas Rosh Chodesh?[95] If they already began reading Parshas Shekalim from the second Torah scroll they are to complete the reading and read the portion of Rosh Chodesh from the third Torah scroll [Maftir]. The Haftorah of Rosh Chodesh is then read from “Hashamayim Kisi”.
What is the law if the Baal Korei did not read until the end of Shevi’i by the 6th Aliyah on a day that three Sifrei Torah are removed? A seventh Aliyah is to be called up for Shevi, and then an eighth Aliyah for the reading of the second scroll and then a ninth Aliyah for the reading of the third scroll.[96]
What is one to do if on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Shekalim there are only two scrolls available? If there are only two Torah scrolls available, then one is to read the Parsha of Rosh Chodesh from the second scroll, and read the Parsha of Shekalim from the first scroll.[97] This however only applies if the first scroll is rolled to the Parsha of Shekalim prior to its Hagba. If, however, the first scroll was not rolled to the Parsha of Shekalim prior to its Hagba, then it is better to read the Shekalim portion from the second scroll.[98] [Seemingly, if the Parsha of Shekalim is adjacent to the weekly Parsha, then one is to read from the first scroll even it was not rolled to Shekalim prior to Hagba.[99]]
|
[1] Admur Hilchos Sheila Usechirus Vechasima 21; See Betzel Hachochmah 2:87; Pischeiy Choshen [Bloy] 7:1; Mishpitei HaChoshen 333:3; Darkei Choshen Teshuvah 9; Even Pinah C.M. 2:183
[2] Yeish Mi Sheomer in Admur ibid; Rama C.M. 333:3 “For this reason it is forbidden for a worker, including a teacher or scribe, to hire himself to permanently be in the home of the same employer for three years”; Darkei Moshe C.M. 331; Shach C.M. 333:17; Hagahos Mordechai Perek Haumnim Remez 459-460; Maharam Merothenberg Teshuvah 85; See Shabbos 127b “There was a certain man from the upper Galile who hired himself to an employee for three years”
Is this a biblical, or rabbinical prohibition? Some Poskim rule that this is merely a rabbinical prohibition. [Lechem Rav 81; Ketzos Hachosehn 333:7] However, the simple implication of the Poskim is that it is Biblical. [See Darkei Choshen ibid]
[3] Rama ibid; Hagahos Hamordechai
[4] So is wording in Admur ibid; However in Rama ibid the wording is “Therefore it is forbidden..”
[5] Admur and Rama ibid; See Q&A!
[6] See Q&A for the meaning of the statement.
[7] Admur ibid; Shach 333:17 based on Ber Sheva p. 112 and Agudas Eizov p. 107 and Hagahos Mordechai ibid; Taz ibid; However, see Rama ibid “three years”; See also Poskim in next footnote
[8] The reason: As up until three years of work one is considered an employee, as it says in Yeshaya [16:14] “Beshalosh Shanim Kishnei Sachir Venikleh” while by an Eved Ivri the verse [Devarim 15:18] states “Ki Mishneh Secha Sachir Avdecha Sheish Shanim”, and thus if one works for more than three years he leaves the status of an employee and enters the status of a slave and the Torah stated that “Ki Li Bnei Yisrael Avadim”, that they are Hashem’s slaves and not slaves of slaves. [Admur ibid; Shach ibid; Maharam ibid; Mordechai ibid]
Other opinions: Some Poskim learn one may not work for an employer for up to three years, because three years of work is called a Sachir, and one may not be a Sachir. [Smeh 333:15; Shach ibid negates this Nussach and so rules Beir Sheva p. 112; Agudas Eizov p. 107; Admur ibid also rules unlike Smeh] The practical ramification is whether may one work on the last day of the three years.
[9] Chasam Sofer O.C. 206; Opinion in Aruch Hashulchan 333:14
[10] The reason: As the verse considers an Eved Ivri to be a slave of six years, and hence any less than six years is not an Eved Ivri. [ibid]
[11] Tosafus Bava Metzi 10a, brought in Mordechai ibid, Beir Sheva ibid, Shach ibid, Aruch Hashulchan ibid
[12] See Chasam Sofer O.C. 206 and C.M. 22; Chavos Yair 140;
[13] Chasam Sofer ibid regarding a Rav
[14] See Q&A!
[15] Admur ibid Kuntrus Achron 4 based on Rambam Avadim 1:1; Shach ibid
[16] Admur ibid; Shach 333:16; Aruch Hashulchan 333:14
The reason: As in times of the Yovel, a person who had no form of sustenance could even sell himself as a slave, as the verse [Vayikra 25:39] states “When your brother becomes destitute and is sold to you”, and thus certainly he may work for more than three years. [Admur ibid; Shach ibid]
[17] Admur ibid in parentheses
[18] The reason: (As even in times of the Yovel, a woman who reached puberty [growth of breasts] could not sell herself as a slave [even if destitute] [see Bava Metzia 12b; Tosafus ibid; Rambam Avadim 2], therefore she may also not hire herself to work for more than three years according to the above opinion.) [Admur ibid in parentheses]
[19] Admur ibid; Rama ibid “To be in the house of the employer permanently”; Hagahos Maimanis ibid “to be in his home and rely on his table” Lechem Rav 81, brought in Kneses Hagedola 334:20; Toras Chesed [Perachya] 261; Gilyonos Baruch Ta’am on Ketzos Hachoshen ibid; Betzel Hachochmah 2:87; Pischeiy Choshen ibid
[20] Chasam Sofer O.C. 206 and C.M. 22, 172, brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah 333:6; Implication of Chavos Yair 140 regarding Chazan in Shul; See also Aruch Hashulchan 333:15 and
[21] Chasam Sofer ibid; Aruch Hashulchan ibid
[22] Betzel Hachochma 2:87; Pischeiy Choshen ibid
[23] Setimas Kol Haposkim; Pischeiy Choshen ibid footnote 1
[24] Although the concept of a Hebrew slave is his actual work for his master for a certain amount of years, and not necessarily the contract between them which requires them to do so, and hence there is room to learn that one should not work for the same employer for more than three years even if no contract was ever signed, nonetheless, the implication from the wording of the Poskim, as well as from Setimas Kol Haposkim, it is implied that the prohibition is only against hiring oneself for a more than three year term and against initially entering into a more than three year employment contract, and not against simply working for the same employer more than three years. [So is implied from the wording of Admur ibid, Rama ibid, Mordechai ibid “Lehaskir Atzmo” and not “La’avod” and so is implied from the fact that in all of the Shaalos and Teshuvos discussing this law, the questions discusses only signing on a more than three year contract, and no question is ever recorded regarding staying with the same employer for more than three years. Indeed, the Chasam Sofer writes that in the contract for a rabbi it suffices to write a stipulation in the contract that he has a right to sever the employment ties whenever he wishes, and that suffices to allow him to become the permanent rabbi of the city for many years to come, hence proving the issue is not with how long you work for, but rather for how long you obligate yourself to work for the same employer.
[25] Michaber C.M. 415:3; Bava Kama 30a
[26] Pashut from Gemara ibid and from next Halacha which prohibits placing a hazardous object in the public area; Aruch Hashulchan 415:2
[27] Michaber C.M. 417:1; Bava Kama 50b
[28] Rama ibid; Beis Yosef 417 in name of Rashba
[29] Michaber C.M. 415:1 “One who hides his nails and glass in his property and it flew into the public area and damaged another person, he is liable”; Mishneh Baba Kama 30a; The above liability is only for bodily damage and not monetary damage, as brought in sources in next footnote
[30] A “Bur” is exempt from monetary damages of vessels: Michaber C.M. 410:21; 412:4; Tur 410; Rambam Nizkei Mamon 13:2; Mishneh Baba Kama 52a; Gemara ibid 53b and 28b; A nail or other object that damages has the same status as Bur: Michaber C.M. 411:1; 412:4-5; Rambam ibid
[31] The reason: As the Av Nezikin called Bor, as well as all its subcategories, is exempt from liability of monetary damage of vessels, and is only liable for damages of animals and man. [Michaber 410:21; Tur 410; Mishneh Bava Kama 52a; Gemara ibid 53b] This is learned from the verse which states the word “Shur” and comes to exclude vessels. [Baba Kama 53b]
[32] See the following regarding the ability of a community/country to enact stricter laws than the Torah and its Halachic binding: Rama C.M. 356:7 and Shach 356:10 regarding Dina Demalchusa Dina; Chevel Nachalaso 9:58; Baba Basra 8b; Meri ibid; Shut Harosh7:1; Rashba 2:268
[33] Michaber 146/15; Avoda Zara 47b
[34] Michaber 147/1; Mishneh Sanhedrin 60b
[35] Michaber 147/1; Sanhedrin 63b
[36] This is learned from the verse “Vesheim Elokim Acheirim Lo Sazkiru, Lo Yishama Al Picha”
[37] Michaber ibid; See Taz 147/1 for the novelty of this ruling;
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that when there is an absolute necessity one may mention the name. [Chavos Yair Teshuvah 1 Hasaga 11-12]
[38] Shach 147/2; Perisha
[39] Michaber 147/4; Sanhedrin 63b
The reason: As these idols have become extinct and nullified. Alternatively, since the Torah mentions it, then certainly we may mention it. [Yireim 245 [75]; See Tofas Riem for different Girsas and if these are two reasons or one; Levush 147/4; See also Chavos Yair Teshuvah 1 Hasaga 11-12 who questions the first reason; See Likkutei Sichos 23/166 that the Torah’s mentioning of the name destroys it and makes the idol worthless]
[40] Yireim 245 [75] “If they were given a name that connotes a deity”, brought in Hagahos Maimanis Avodas Kochavim 5/3; Chavos Yair Teshuvah 1 Hasaga 11-12; Biur Hagr”a 147/3; Teshuvos Rav Azriel Hildsheimer 180
The reason: As only those names that were innovated for the sake of idolatry was the Torah particular against one mentioning. [Poskim ibid] See Chavos Yair ibid that according to Yireim ibid even names that were innovated for a deity may be used if they do not connote a meaning of a deity in the language. However Chavos Yair questions this and asserts that perhaps only names that were already used for other purposes have this allowance.
[41] Poskim ibid; See Sanhedrin 43; 67; 105; 107; Avoda Zara 27; Yerushalmi Brachos 5/1
[42] Michaber 147/2; Mordechai in name of Ravayah; Hagahos Maimanis; Rabbeinu Yerucham
[43] Michaber 147/5; Rav Nachman in Sanhedrin 63b
[44] See Sefer Chassidim 427 that only to a Ger should one not mention the name of an idol even to make jest of it.
[45] Chavos Yair Teshuvah 1 Hasaga 11-12; Teshuvos Rav Ezriel Hildsheimer 180
[46] This is similar to the allowance to mention names of idols written in the Torah, of which the Yireim 75 writes that the reason is because they have become extinct/nullified. Vetzaruch Iyun as not all Poskim agree with this reason.
[47] The reason: As it is permitted to recite names of people who do not connote a deity and were later turned into a deity. [Yireim brought in Hagahos Maimanis Avodas Kochavim 5/3; Chavos Yair Teshuvah 1 Hasaga 11-12; Biur Hagr”a 147/3; Teshuvos Rav Ezriel Hildsheimer 180; See Mishneh Halachos 9/169]
[48] See Biur Hagr”a ibid; This name is mentioned in various places in the Gemara and Rambam; See Sanhedrin 43; 67; 105; 107; Avoda Zara 27; Yerushalmi Brachos 5/1; However see Teshuvos Rav Ezriel Hildsheimer 180 that no proof can be brought from here that these names may be recited as there is no prohibition to write the names, and rather the prohibition is simply to say them.
[49] Teshuvos Rav Ezriel Hildsheimer 180; See Mishneh Halachos 9/169
[50] Teshuvos Rav Ezriel Hildsheimer 180; See Mishneh Halachos 9/169
[51] Although we find Sefarim that write this term as well, nevertheless one cannot learn from them that it is permitted to say the names, as writing is more lenient than saying, as well as that it is permitted to write the names for learning purposes. [ibid]
[52] See here http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Xmass
[53] Chavos Yair Teshuvah 1 Hasaga 11-12
[54] The reason: In addition to all the reasons of allowance mentioned above regarding Yoshka, this woman is not worshiped or considered a G-d by even the Christians, and hence it has no relation to idolatry. [ibid]
[55] Beis Yosef 147/2 in name of Rabbeinu Yerucham “However their Kedoshim/saints may be called by their names if they are names of people, although to call them by their names in a manner of reverence is forbidden.”; See also Michaber 147/2; Kneses Hagedola 147/4, brought in Darkei Teshuvah 147/7; See Likkutei Sichos 26/429 [printed in Shulchan Menachem 4/34-35] “Mentioning their names, even with a preface does not border the prohibition of “Lo Sazkiru”, as their name is not a name of Avoda Zara.” Nonetheless, a preface should not be mentioned.
[56] Likkutei Sichos 26/429 [printed in Shulchan Menachem 4/34-35] that one may not say the term Saint, and therefore there is a question if one should even write the initial S., let alone the actual word, lest people come to say it.
[57] Likkutei Sichos ibid that Rebbe questioned whether the letter S. may be written before the name, even if it is the name of a city, such as S. Petersburg, and the Rebbe referred the asker [who was a Tanya printer in such a city] to a Rav. Practically, the name published in that Tanya does not contain the S. [See Shulchan menachem ibid footnote 1]
[58] Sefer Chassidim 191 “Even a Tzaddik who they make into a deity it is a Mitzvah to call a derogatory name, for example Shimon Kipah should be called Peter Chamur”
[59] See Sefer Chassidim ibid that Peter was a Tzaddik; See Rashi Avoda Zara 10a which was censored and brought in Dikdukei Sofrim Avoda Zara p. 12 footnote 9 “The Gemara states that all the writings and language of the nations is not from them. This means as follows: All of their books of heresy Yochanon Paulus [Paul] and Petrus which were Jews wrote. They purposely infected their culture in order to sway the Christian faith away from Judaism. They themselves were not heretics and did so for the benefit of the Jewish people, as written in the book Teliya Yeshu” Seemingly this refers to the book Toldos Yeshu, which brings the history of Yeshu from a Jewish perspective and writes how Peter infiltrated the ranks of Yeshu and turned away Christianity from being a threat to Judaism. Peter was appointed by the Sages to do so. For the full story in all details see: Sefer Toldos Yeshu [dating back to at least times of Rashi]; Beis hamidrash vol. 5/60 and vol. 6 [1860; Likkut of old Midrashim] Midrash brought in Otzer Hamidrashim p. 557 [1920, by Rav Y.D. Eizanshtein]
Fast day of 9th of Teves: See Hagahos Baruch Frankel and Toldos Yeshu “On the 9th of Teves Shimon Hakalfus who helped save the Jewish people died and the Sages established it as a day of fasting”; See also Michaber 580/2 “On the 9th of Teves we do not know what Tzara happened”; See Taz 580/1 and M”A 580/6 who say Ezra died and question Michaber. However see Tur, Bahag; Orchos Chaim, Birkeiy Yosef who write that the Sages did not write what happened and it is left a mystery, and the fact Ezra died is not the reason for the fast. Accordingly, the words of Toldos Yeshu and Baruch Frankel reveal the secret that on this day Shimon Hakalfus died. Shimon Hakalfus was none other than Shimon Kifa, whose Christian name was S. Peter. He was the first Bishop/Pope of Rome and all the other popes are considered his inheritors.
Author of Nishmas: See also Siddur Avodas Yisrael, in name of an old manuscript siddur from the year 1407 “I heard from Yehuda Bar Yaakov that Shimon Ben Kipa authored Nishmas until the words Mi Yidmeh Lach” However see Machzor Vitri p. 282 Mahadurah Makitzei Nirdamim “Some say Nishmas was authored by the abomination of Rome, called Shimon Peter Chamor, which authored this liturgy and others while in the cave. Vechas Veshalom to say such a thing, and one who says so will have to bring a fat offering when Moshiach comes” Vetzaruch Iyun, as elsewhere in Machzor Vitri it states that Shimon Kipa authored the Piyutim of Seder Avoda said on Yom Kippur.
[60] Sefer Chassidim ibid regarding Shimon Kipa who was a Tzaddik that he should be called Peter Chamur
[61] The reason: As it is permitted to say names of idols that are also names of people, as brought from Poskim ibid, and the same would apply if these names are also names of cities. This allowance certainly applies if the name is merely that of a worshiper of idolatry and not an actual idol. [See Likkutei Sichos 26/429 [printed in Shulchan Menachem 4/34-35]
[62] See Likkutei Sichos 26/429 [printed in Shulchan Menachem 4/34-35]
[63] See Likkutei Sichos ibid that Rebbe questioned whether the letter S. may be written before the name, even if it is the name of a city, such as S. Petersburg, and the Rebbe referred the asker [who was a Tanya printer in such a city] to a Rav. Practically, the name published in that Tanya does not contain the S. [See Shulchan menachem ibid footnote 1]
[64] See Likkutei Sichos 26/429 [printed in Shulchan Menachem 4/34-35]; See Shulchan Menachem ibid footnote 5 regarding the wording of the city name in a Get written in Bela Tzurkav, that they used this name even though the Jews avoided calling it by this name, and rather gave it a derogatory term.
[65] Taz 685:1
Other reasons: Some write the reason for reading Parshas Shekalim in proximity to the month of Adar is because Haman gave Shekalim on behalf of destroying the Jewish people and in order to counteract his Shekalim Hashem gave us a Mitzvah of giving Shekalim. [Kaf Hachaim 685:3; Megillah 13b]
[66] The Mishneh Berurah 685:2 states that the reading of the Shekalim fulfills the dictum of “to complete the sacrifices using our lips”. This verse teaches us that when we are unable to fulfill a Mitzvah in its physical sense, due to lack of a Temple, we are still able to fulfill the Mitzvah by reading the verses of the Mitzvah. Accordingly reading Parshas Shekalim even today is not just a matter of commemoration but an actual level of fulfillment of the Mitzvah.
[67] Was Parshas Shekalim read in the times of the Temple? From the Taz ibid it is implied that the portion of Shekalim was also read in the times of the Temple in order to remind the people to bring the donation, and today we continue this reading. However, from the Mishneh Berurah ibid it is implied that the reading began after the destruction so we can verbally fulfill the requirement, as stated above.
[68] 685:1 and 5
[69] Levush brought in Kaf Hachaim 685:26
[70] 685:5
[71] Levush brought in Kaf Hachaim 685:26
[72] 685:1
[73] Mentioned in Michaber of both previous Halachos which adds that he is referring to “the Adar which is close to Nissan”
[74] 685:1
[75] The Michaber writes until “Veasisa Kiyor Nechoshes” which is verse 18. However, the intent is to read until that section and not literally until those words. Upashut.
[76] So rules Michaber 685:1; Kol Bo 20 and so are the Sefaradic and Chabad customs. However, the Ashkenazim are accustomed to start the Haftorah from the words “Beshnas Sheva Liyeihu”. This follows the ruling of the Tur; Levush. [Kaf Hachaim 685:11]
Reason for reading this Haftorah: This Haftorah discusses the donation of the Shekalim.
[77] Mishneh Berurah 685:9 and 12
[78] See 282:12 for the reason why Kaddish is recited between the five Aliyos and Maftir.
[79] Orchos Chaim ibid; Kol Bo ibid; Mateh Moshe ibid; Elya Raba 139:9; M”B ibid; Kaf Hachaim 147:42
[80] Michaber 147:8; Mordechai end of Halachos Ketanos in name of Maharam Merothenberg; Tashbeitz 187 in name of Mahram; Orchos Chaim Hilchos Kerias Sefer Torah 54; Kol Bo 20; Mateh Moshe 254; Elya Raba 147:9; M”B 147:25; Kaf Hachaim 147:42; Ketzos Hashulchan 84:2; Halacha Berurah [Yosef] Vol. 2 p. 295
[81] Shaar Efraim 10:41; Piskeiy Teshuvah 150:4
Bedieved: If the Chazan accidently took the first scroll, it is not to be switched for the second scroll due to worry of Pegam. [Shaareiy Efraim ibid]
[82] See Shaar Efraim ibid
[83] 685:1
[84] Mishneh Berurah 685:4
[85] Hagba is only done after the second scroll is placed on the Bima. [Rama 147:8] Some [Rav M. Harlig] say that the Torah is to be placed on the right side of the first Torah. Others say it is to be placed on the left side. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos 147 footnote 36; Hiskashrus 1078 footnote 5]
[86] Michaber 147:8; Kol Bo; Elya Raba 147:9; Kaf Hachaim 147:42
[87] Mishneh Berurah 685:5; See Levush and Kaf Hachaim 684:19 for the reason behind this; The Sefaradi custom is to say two Kaddeishim, one after the second scroll, and one after the third scroll [Kaf Hachaim ibid]
[88] Michaber ibid; Megillah 29b
The reason for reading Haftorah of Shekalim and not Rosh Chodesh: Although the Parsha of Rosh Chodesh is Tadir [more common] and hence should have precedence, nevertheless we read the Haftorah of Shekalim being it was the last portion read. [Levush; M”B 685:3] Alternatively, it is because this Haftorah also mentions Rosh Chodesh. [Mordechai Megillah ibid] Alternatively, it is because the Sages explicitly placed these Haftorahs to be read instead of Rosh Chodesh. [Shivlei Haleket 53, brought in Elya Raba 685:17; P”M 685 A”A 1]
[89] Custom of Rebbe Rayatz, as brought in glosses of Rebbe to the Seder Haftoras in Siddur Torah Or, printed in Sefer Haftoras Chabad, and mentioned in Likkutei Sichos 35:187 footnote 34
The reason: In order to begin and end the last verse of Hashamayim Kisiy with a verse of good tiding. [verse 24 talks of negative matters] [Likkiutei Sichos ibid]
[90] Likkutei Sichos 35:27; Igros Kodesh 5:108 [letter to Rav A.C. Naah printed in Shulchan Menachem p. 96-105]; See Igros Kodesh 2:308 of Rebbe Rayatz in a letter to Rav Yaakov Landau that he was in doubt as to whether the verses of Rosh Chodesh are to be mentioned in this instance; See Background ibid and other opinions brought next
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that even according to the ruling of the Michaber ibid and Chabad custom of the Rebbe Maharash, one is nopt to recite the verses of Rosh Chodesh after the Haftorah of Chanukah. The reason for this is because we only mention Rosh Chodesh in cases in which there are opinions that require it to be read that Shabbos. However, all the Poskim agree that the Haftorah of Chanuka is to be read instead of Rosh Chodesh and there is thus no reason to mention it. [Ketzos Hashulchan 88 footnote 16] The Rebbe ibid disputes his ruling
[91] Yifei Laleiv 3:1 brought in Kaf Hachaim 685:4
[92] Luach Kolel Chabad Noach; Hiskashrus 1078; See Dvar Moshe 25:3; Shaareiy Efraim 9:19; Kaf Hachaim 425:18; Ketzos Hashulchan 88:5; Ashel Avraham, in name of Devar Moshe brought in Otzer Hamifarshim 425; Kaf Hachaim 423:9
[93] Levush, brought in Kaf Hachaim 684:19
[94] This is only done when Kaddish is said after the 1st Sefer prior to the 2nd, and not when Kaddish is said after the 2nd.
[95] Nodah Biyehuda Mahadurah Tinyana 11; Chayeh Adam 154:41; Shaareiy Efraim 8:82; Mishneh Berurah 685:5; Kaf Hachaim 685:14
[96] As the custom is to permit to add more than seven Aliyos on Shabbos [Admur 282:1] Now, although there are Poskim that forbid doing so [Tashbatz 2:70, brought in Hagahos Harif and Kaf Hachaim 282:10] and so is our custom not to add any more Aliyos [Tzemach Tzedek 35:7; Ketzos Hashulchan 84:1] nevertheless, in a case of need one may do so [Tzemach Tzedek and Ketzos Hashulchan ibid]. This especially applies in such a case that one must read another three Aliyos being that they involve three different Sefer Torahs, and hence all remaining three Aliyos are considered an obligation. See also Kaf Hachaim 684:17 in name of Peri Chadash, Levush, Birkeiy Yosef 282:3. A further proof for this can be brought from Admur 282:20 [and Michaber 137:3; Ketzos Hashulchan 84:10] that even if one skipped one word or one letter one must go back and read it even if it means adding an Aliya, and hence certainly here one must add a seventh Aliya to Shevi and then read another two Aliyos.
Delaying Shevi until next Shabbos: One cannot delay Shevii until next Shabbos, and thus only have 8 Aliyos, as even a missed letter from the Parsha must be read that Shabbos, as brought in Admur 282:20 [and Michaber 137:3; Ketzos Hashulchan 84:10] and certainly if the entire Shevi was missed.
[97] Rama 669:1; Peri Chadash 684; Shulchan Gavoa 684:11; Kaf Hachaim 684:16
[98] Chemed Moshe 669; Kaf Hachaim 669:41; Biur Halacha 669:1 “Vechozrim”
[99] The reason: As Shekalim is read from Ki Sisa which is in proximity to the weekly Parsha, while Rosh Chodesh is read from Pinchas which is very distanced from Ki Sisa, and thus in this situation, seemingly even according to the Chemed Moshe ibid one should read Shekalim from the first scroll.
