fl_4f4fdd4faaad8

8/2/2019 fl_4f4fdd4faaad8

1/6

Tetzaveh 5772

This week's arcle discusses the halachos of Parashas

Zachor, which is read this week in advance of Purim. Is the

reading of Zachor a Torah mitzvah, or a rabbinic enactment?

Does the mitzvah require a kosher Sefer Torah, and a

reading among a quorum of men? Are women obligated in

the mitzvah? These quesons, and more, are discussed this

week.

This week's Q & A addresses the queson of inving others

to a bris (and responding to an invitaon).

Dear Reader!

In this week's article we

discuss the halachos of

remembering Amalek,

which is achieved by

means of reading Parashas

Zachor.

What, however, is the

defining nature of Amalek,

whose evil we are

commanded to obliterate

from the world? Beyond

the deeds themselves,

what is the conception of

evil that we recall?

It appears that the

underlying nature of

Amalek is latent in the

Torah's emphasis of theircoming "on the way."

Each time that Amalek

appeared, the nation of

Israel was on its way to

achieving a particular

national destiny.

The first encounter with

Amalek was on the way toSinai to receive the Torah,

and from there to the

Remembering Amalek:

Halachos of Parashas Zachor

This week, in addition to the reading of the weeklyparashah, wereadParashas Zachor. In so doing, we fulfill the Torah obligation

of remembering at least once a year what Amalek did to us

on our way from Egypt, as the pasuk teaches: "Remember that

which Amalek did to you on the way, as you went forth from

Egypt" (Devarim 25:17).

In this week's article we will focus on the halachic details of this

obligation. Does the reading ofParashas Zachorinvolve a Torah

or rabbinic obligation? Must the reading be from a Sefer Torah,

and with a congregation of ten? Are women obligated to hearthe annual reading?

We will deal with these questions, and others, by investigating

themitzvah from its primary sources.

A Torah Mitzvah

As noted above, there is a Biblical commandment to recall (in our

minds and verbally) what Amalek did to the Jewish People upon

leaving Egypt. Does this mean that there is a Torah obligationto read the Torah reading ofParashas Zachor?

According to Tosafos, the answer is yes. Discussing a teaching

in the Gemara (Berachos 13a) which appears to imply

100
http://dinonline.org/


2/6

Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah atwww.dinonline.org2

Land of Israel to implement

it. Amalek's ambush of the

nation sought to prevent the

people from achieving the

purpose to which they wereheading.

The next assault of Amalek

against Israel came as the

nation was on its way back to

the Land, following the seventy

years of exile in Babylon. With

the seventy years almost up,

Amalek once again soughtto intercept the nation on its

way to reestablishing itself in

the holy Land and rebuilding

the holy Temple.

Amalek's evil prevents the

destiny from being reached.

In the words of the Gemara,

as long as the evil of Amalek

remains in the world, the

Divine throne, and even the

Divine Name, cannot be

complete. The revelation of

Hashem in the world, which

is the ultimate destiny for

which the world was created,

cannot be reached whileAmalek exists.

How do we overcome the evil

of Amalek?

In both instances of Amalek's

assault against Israel, the

key to victoryor at least a

crucial factor thereinis the

that there is some Torah-mandated Torah reading, Tosafos

explains: "One can answer that this refers to sections that

must be read by Torah injunction, such asParashas Zachor."

Thus, according to Tosafos it appears that remembering

Amalek requires reading from the Sefer Torah. Citing Tosafos,

the Beis Yosef(Orach Chaim 685) mentions this opinion,

and it is likewise cited in the Shulchan Aruch (686:7; seealso 146:2).

TheRosh (Berachos 7:20), moreover, implies that not only

is reading the Sefer Torah a Biblical command, but even

reading it with a minyan (a congregation of ten men) is a

Torah mandated stipulation (see also Shaar Hatzion 685:5).

This requires analysis: Since the Torah makes no mention of

an obligation to read the chapter with a quorum, how can

this detail be included in the Torah injunction?

TheKeren Orah (Berachos 5a) explains that themitzvah of

remembering is associated with the mitzvah of waging war

against and wiping out the people of Amalek. Just as the

obligation to obliterate Amalek falls on the entire congregation,

so the mitzvah to recall Amalek falls on the congregation,

and therefore it must be fulfilled amid a congregation of at

least ten men.

Recalling Amalek by Any Means

According to other opinions, it appears that the Torah

obligation of recalling Amalek does not require a Torah

reading, and can be fulfilled by any verbal expression. The

Torah reading fulfills a rabbinic mitzvah, upholding the

directive of the Sages to fulfill the mitzvah in this specific

way. (It is possible that after the Rabbis directed us to fulfill

the mitzvo in a specific way, one can no longer fulfill the

Torah command in a different manner.)

A similar understanding emerges from the explanation given

by the Rambam to the obligation to "remember the day of

the Sabbath, to sanctify it." The Rambam writes (Shabbos

29:5; Sefer Ha-Mitzvos 155; Chinuch 31) that there is

no specific statement that must be used to fulfill the Torah

obligation. Each person can fulfill thatmitzvah with his own

words. The instruction to fulfill themitzvah specifically with

the Kiddush liturgy, is of rabbinic origin.

The Rambam does not elaborate on how the mitzvah ofrecalling Amalek must be fulfilled (see Sefer Ha-Mitzvos
http://dinonline.org/http://dinonline.org/http://dinonline.org/


3/6

Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah atwww.dinonline.org 3

Torah.

Dwelling on the place name

Refidim, which is where

Amalek launched their attack

against Israel, Chazal teach

that Amalek came on account

of the people's weakness

from Torah. The path to

Sinai was cleared by victory

over the evil assailer. On

Purim, Chazal teach that the

miraculous salvation involved

a new acceptance of theTorah.

With the Torah, we move

forwards, ever nearing the

destiny for which we are

created. Without the Torah,

we are stopped in our tracks

by the evil of Amalek.

The third coming of

Amalek against our

nationperhapswas the

unprecedented onslaught of

Nazi Germany against the

Jewish people. By the grace

of G-d, the nation was saved.

Yet if we are to continue on

to reach the final destiny, a

destiny so close, it can only

be with the Torah.

In the merit of the Torah we

live by, may Hashem protect

us from our enemies, and

bring us speedily to the final

redemption we so await.

189; Hilchos Melachim 5:5; Chinuch 603), suggesting

that there is likewise no specific wording that must be used

to fulfill the Torah obligation. There is a rabbinic obligation

to readParashas Zachor

The Ramban (Ki Teitzei) expresses doubt over this matter,

and concludes that "the correct way in my opinion" is that

there is no obligation (of Torah origin) to use the specificwording of the Torah chapter:

"The correct way, in my opinion, is that the instruction is

not to forget that which Amalek did to us, until we obliterate

his name from beneath the Heavens. This we must tell

our children and our generations, informing them of the

wickedness that was done to us, and that therefore we are

commanded to obliterate his name."

The Shulchan Aruch (685:7) quotes the opinion (writingthat "some say") that the Torah reading ofParashas Zachoris

a Torah obligation: "Some say that the readings ofParashas

Zachor and Parashas Parah are Torah obligations, and

therefore those who dwell in places where there is nominyan

must ensure they go to a town where there is a minyan on

these Shabbasos" (see also Shulchan Aruch 146:2).

Fulfilling the Mitzvah with Other Readings

The wording of the Rambam suggests a close connectionbetween the mitzvah of remembering Amalek, and this

mitzvah of wiping out the evil nation: "We are instructed to

remember that which Amalek did to us [] and to awaken the

spirits with our words to fight him, and to inspire the nation

to hate him, so that we will not forget the mitzvah and we

will not weaken."

The mitzvah, according to the Rambam, is to remember the

evil that Amalek did to us, and therefore to awaken ourselves

to hate Amalek and to destroy it. The Rambam likewise writes

that themitzvah is to remember Amalek until we obliterate it

from beneath the heavens.

This connection will possibly help us in understanding the

dispute between the Magen Avraham and the Mishnah

Berurah concerning fulfilling the mitzvah with other Torah

readings.

The Magen Avraham (685:1) writes that one fulfills his

requirement with the reading of Purim morning, which istaken from Parshas Beshalach and recounts the war in the


4/6


desert against Amalek.

Yet, both theMishnah Berurah (686:16) and

theAruch Hashulchan take issue with this ruling,

explaining that part of themitzvah to remember

is also to wage war and take revenge against

Amalek, an obligation exclusively delineated in

Parshas Zachor(of Devarim). The connectionbetween remembering and destroying, as

implied by the Rambam, is the foundation for

this opinion.

According to the Magen Avraham, it may be

that although the mitzvos of remembering

and obliterating are closely related, this does

not mean that in fulfilling the mitzvah of

remembering we must explicitly mention wiping

out Amalek. It suffices, according to theMagen

Avraham, to mention Amalek and its evil, which

will automatically lead us to hate the nation and

seek its destruction.

Using a Kosher Sefer Torah

On account of the obligation to read Parashas

Zachor from a Sefer Torah, the Peri Megadim

(M.Z. 143:1) rules that it is obvious that akosher Sefer Torah must be used for the reading.

However, Shut Shoel U-Meishiv(III, vol. 1, no.

390) writes that there is no need to use a

kosher Sefer Torah, and explains that the entire

obligation (for regular Torah readings) to read

from a kosher Sefer Torah is because "matters

that are written may not be recited by heart."

Therefore, the principle mitzvah of recalling

Amalek is fulfilled even without a kosher SeferTorah.

This ruling is also given by Shut Maharam Schick

(Yoreh De'ah, end of book).

Shut Minchas Elazar(Vol. 2, no. 1) elaborates

on an actual case in which two sections of a

Sefer Torah came apart before the reading of

Parashas Zachor. To ensure that the Sefer Torah

should not be disqualified, the congregantstied the section togethereven though it was

Shabbosby means of an anivah (a slip knot

or bow).

TheMinchas Elazarwrites that the congregants

erred in so doing, for Parashas Zachorcan

even be read from a chumash, and all the more

so from a disqualified Sefer Torah. There was

therefore no need to fix the Sefer Torah before

readingParashas Zachor. (As a result of theseopinions while one must make every effort

to attend shul services for Parshas Zochor if

one simply can't it is advisable to read Parshas

Zochor at home from a Chumash.)

A similar ruling is also given by Rav Shlomo

Zalman Auerbachzt"l(Shulchan Shlomo 685),

who explains that if a flaw is found in the Sefer

Torah after Parashas Zachor was already read,

there is no need to read the chapter again.

The Time of the Mitzvah

The Chasam Sofer ( Even Ha-Ezer1:119)

elaborates on the timing of reading Parashas

Zachor, explaining that the principle Torah

obligation is to recall Amalek and its wicked

deeds at least once yearly.

This halachah is derived from the laws ofaveilus(mourning), where we find that the twelve-

month mourning period (over parents) reflects

the time it takes for a matter to be forgotten

from one's heart. To ensure that we do not

forget the matter of Amalek, we must therefore

read the passage of Amalek once yearly.

Based on the Torah obligation, the Sages thus

enacted the annual reading of Parashas Zachor,

by which we fulfill themitzvah.

Even in a leap year of thirteen months, the

Chasam Soferexplains that the annual reading

suffices. The reason for this is that human nature

of forgetting after a year does not depend solely

on the elapsed time, but also on the passage

of the seasonal events of the year. Only after a

complete yearly cycle does the human weakness

of forgetting take effect.Nonetheless, theMaharam Schick (Mitzvos, no.

604) writes that the Chasam Sofer told


5/6

Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah atwww.dinonline.org 5

his own disciples in leap years to also have

intention to fulfill the mitzvah of remembering

Amalek with the Torah reading of Ki Teitzei.

This ensures that a twelve-month period will

not elapse without a reading of the chapter.

In contrast with this opinion, the Rambam implies

that there is no specific time for the fulfillmentof the mitzvah, as he writes: "To remember

that which Amalek did to us and to mention

it at all times." This is likewise implied by the

Rambam's wording in the Laws of Kings (5:5):

"It is incumbent on us to always remember his

evil deeds and his ambush."

We are thus obligated to mention the deeds of

Amalek from time to time, ensuring that it not

be forgotten from our hearts.

A similar understanding emerges from the

wording of the Chinuch, who writes that we

must recall Amalek "once a year, or two, or

three." The general principle is that we must

remember the matter of Amalek always, but

setting periodical reminders, so that we do not

forget the matter.

Are Women Obligated?

The Chinuch (loc. cit.) writes that the mitzvah

to remember Amalek is only applicable to men,

because they are the ones who are commanded

to fight Amalek. This ruling is derived from the

connection, as noted above, between themitzvah

of remembering Amalek, and the mitzvah of

wiping it out.

The Minchas Chinuch questions this on several

counts, noting that there is no apparent basis

for the connection between recalling Amalek

and destroying it. Another objection he raises

is that even women are obligated to fight a

milchemes mitzvah (a Torah-mandated war),

thereby including them in the obligation to

destroy Amalek. He therefore rules that women

are biblically commanded to remember Amalek.

However, several authorities testify that the

ancient custom was that women did not go to

shul to hear the reading of Parashas Zachor,

as noted by Shut Toras Chesed (37). Kovetz

Kol HaTorah (Nisan 5763) likewise cites

Rav Moshe Feinstein that there is no custom

for women to go to hear the reading, and Rav

Chaim Kanievsky has stated in the name of

the Chazon Ish that there is no obligation for

women to hear the reading (cited in Taama Di-

Kra).

Concerning the observation of the Minchas

Chinuch that even women are obligated to fight

a Torah mandated war, the Radvaz(Melachim

7:4) explains that this does not mean that

women must fight as combatants, but rather that

they must participate in the general war effort in

a supportive role such as supplying the soldiers'provisions. Since women don't participate in

the actual physical destruction of Amalek, the

reasoning of the Chinuch will stand.

In a similar light, Rav Moshe Shternbuch

( Moadim U-Zmanim 2:168) writes that

women need not readParshas Zachorwith the

tzibur, and can rely on their own reading from a

chumash to fulfill themitzvah.

Yet, many authorities do obligate woman to

hearParashas Zachor, as theMinchas Chinuch

writes. TheBinyan Tzion (2:8) relates that Rav

Nosson Adler was very stringent in ensuring

that everyone in his household, both men and

women, would go toshuland hear the reading.

The Avnei Nezer(509) also questions the

ruling of the Chinuch, and theMinchas Yitzchak

(9:68) writes that "the majority of poskim" rulethat even women are obligated.

In Jerusalem (and in many other places), many

women attend the reading ofParashas Zachor,

perhaps on account of the Maharil Diskin, who

was among the leading scholars of Jerusalem

and who advocated that women hear the

reading. It is noteworthy that Rav Ovadia Yosef,

(Yechave Da'as 1, 84) also encourages women

to listen to Parshas Zochor in shul since manyauthorities require them to do so.


6/6


c Halachic Responsa dto Questions that have been asked on our website dinonline.org

Question:

If one is invited to bris, is it a halacha he have to go? Where is the source? Does the same

principle apply to any se'udas mitzvah?

Answer:

If invited to a bris, one should make an effort to go. If there is a good reason not to go, one need

not be too concerned about this.

The special matter of "heeding" the invitation applies only to a bris.

Sources:

The Rema writes (Yoreh Deah 265:12) that whoever does not participate in the festive meal that accompanies

a Bris is viewed as if he is excommunicated from Heaven. He adds that if offensive people are participating

in such a meal, one is not obligated to join them.

Because of this ruling, some are careful not to directly invite people to a bris (You are invited to the Bris),

but rather inform their friends and community of the bris (The Bris will take place on such-and-such a day, at

such-and-such an hour).

This is done so that if the guest is unable to participate in the ceremony, his declining the invitation will not beinterpreted as a refusal to take part in the festive meal, thereby sparing him the risk of excommunication from

Heaven (Pischei Teshuvah, 265:18).

However, there are opinions that dispute this ruling, and argue that there is no problem of inviting people to a

bris, because the statement of the Rema applies only to guests who are present at the bris at the meal itself

and refuse to take part. By so doing, they show disdain for the mitzvah, which cannot be said for somebody

who is absent from the entire affair.

Shut Shoel Ve-Nishal (Vol. 7, Yoreh Deah 209) writes that this (lenient) ruling emerges from the wording

of the Rema itself, who writes that somebody who does not participate in the bris is considered as thoughexcommunicated from Heaven. The next sentence, stating that where offensive people are present one need

not join the meal, implies that the reference is to somebody actually present at the meal.

Note also that the Kaf Ha-Chaim (Sofer, 90:67) writes that even when formally invited to a meal, one who

needs to daven with the tzibbur (congregation) should not pass up on his obligation, and he is not looked upon

as one who refuses to take part in the commandment.

There are also opinions that if there is already a quorum of ten adult Jewish males at the meal, the guest is not

obligated to take part, for the commandment will at any rate be fulfilled without him (see Otzar Ha-Bris, p.

163).

For some, the lack of a formal straightforward invitation can be misinterpreted, and liable to make him feel

unwanted. In such cases, it is certainly better to invite him in a clear and unmistakable manner.

fl_4f4fdd4faaad8

Documents