Printed fromChabadoftheGardens.com
ב"ה

On Jewish Books in the Technological Age: Part I

Tuesday, 28 March, 2017 - 4:00 pm

 library.jpg 

 
On Jewish Books in the Technological Age
בענין בית מלא ספרים 

 

with Rabbi Mordechai Z. Hecht
Nissan 5777
www.Chabadchessed.org/books

 

In the following Responsa, the question of mourning and rending one’s garments on the loss of Holy texts as if they were humans, is addressed. The Responsa gives you a bird’s eye view of what this occurrence was like for the Jews at the time that the question was raised. The question is heart wrenching and the answer is awkwardly heartwarming, as the Jewish people show deep and endless respect for the ‘book’.

 

Shailah – Question:
“With regard to the great fire that we experienced here which consumed hundreds of Seforim and Torah scrolls as well as many pairs of Tefillin to no end, if one saw this fire does one need to ‘tear Kri’a- - rend one’s garment as a sign of great loss and mourning?
 
Tshuvah - Answer:
“In the spare of the moment and upon first thought, without reviewing this matter in seforim and researching the matter properly I would think one should do so – tear Kri’a. However we know it is written in the Talmud in the chapter Eilu Miglachin that “one does not ’tear’ unless it is done ‘B’Zroa – unless the Torah was burned by the direct action of one’s hand, as the Talmud relates an actual story of such a nature. However a large section of Talmud and Torah itches me to refer to another place in Talmud in Tractate Shabbos Chapter Ha’Oreg and in Moed Katan Chapter Eilu Migalchin which states: ”one who stands by and see’s one passes-away one must tear Kri’a. What is this compared to?! one who sees a Torah Scroll being burned, as Rash”i so eloquently comments: “there is no empty one amongst the Jewish people that is not filled with Torah and Mitzvos”.
 
So when by Heavens decree a Torah is burned it is compared to the death of person. However when is this, as Rash”i comments, when it is being burned and one can not save it. For who would see a man dieing and not attempt to save them, and if attempted and could not, surely the loss is awesome. As in our dire scenario here, how many people saw the fire and attempted to help extinguish the flames but were unable to, even though some tried to and had to retreat, if there were those who were able to save and perhaps did “something impure” and did not –“what is my soul worth” – in light of those who failed to save the books, the Torahs and the Tefillin. And so based on this it would seem to me one would have to tear Kri’a.
 
However, after I did return to my books and research the matter,  I saw that the Talmud is referring to a case like the story of Yehoyakim, when the Torah was burned on purpose G-d forbid, but when a wind came or the books were burned inadvertently then no one tears Kri’a. As it it is brought in the Sem’ak Siman 97 - who quotes the Gemora there as law.
Similarly in the commentaries on Ein Yaakov , there are 2 commentaries that refer to this matter. One, in the name of the Ran , when do we say one must mourn or tear kri’a that is when it is destroyed by hand. And two, when burned to anger G-d. The destruction and the effacement toward G-d is a mourn- worthy, otherwise not necessarily.
 
Furthemroe, when we say that when one is present when one’s soul leaves this world that person should tear Kria’a as we see in the teachings of the Ramban in the book of Toras Ha’Adam in the topic of tearing Kri’a 16 b, that is only a parable or analogous way of speaking that a person dieing before you is like a torah being burned -in the sense that it causes fear and trepidation upon a person - but not that it is exactly the same thing. This idea is also brought in the Tur of the Bes Yosef in Yoreh De’Ah 341. See also the Toras hadam page 90. As well as in the Bes Yosef Yoreh de’Ah sec. 340 and the Sha”ch there sub section 35. Which discusses the opinion of Rash”i and the other majority of opinions in this matter who argue with Rashi, as well as differences between actual mourning practices and tearing practices and the difference that exist in law between them, and in which matter we are lenient and in which we are strict, which is Biblical and which is a Rabbinic enactment.
 
Regardless of all the above mentioned, there really is no obligation to tear kira’a if it was not done directly by the hands of man. And so is the ruling which I have also received from the great master the Chcahm Tzvi of Hamburg.
(Shut Shvus Yaakov . Yoreh De’ah Q.84)
 
Synopsis:
From this Responsa we can rightfully deduce multiple ideas including but not limited to:
 
1. The Talmud addresses the value of books and equates a Torah scroll burned (on purpose by man) similar to the death of a person in that we would mourn the books (If they were destroyed by a direct act of man).
 
2. Books destroyed or consumed by an act of G-d would not be a tragedy which earns it’s own mourning or symbolic actions of mourning – but rather from the question alone and the consideration to address it and the Rabbis first initial gut response, shows us the deep importance of the matter and speaks to our hearts “how can one not mourn the loss of such Jewish valuables”?! 
 
3. The hand of man is the critical factor here. If man chooses to destroy holy texts –seforim, Torahs or Tefillin or manuscripts and books, then one can directly equate it with the death of a human. Can you imagine
 
4. Note: In general we must recall that the whole purpose of Mourning is to “take to heart the loss” and in bringing this Responsa to the attention of the masses I say: save the Seforim.
 
Consider this:
Before you go out and throw away book or clean you house from (of) books, ask yourself: How much energy went into producing this book? Consider the author, the research and the paper maker and the ink producer - as well as the tool constructer, the press, printer and binder and the manufacturer and then finally the distributor. Think of the series of owners, the blood and sweat to purchase, own and use these books – and then ask yourself can this book live on, does it have a value of re-use or perhaps a historical value of posterity, or perhaps it’s day has come and indeed it must be buried – as we do all things precious – such as man itself!
 
Comments on: On Jewish Books in the Technological Age: Part I
There are no comments.