Answers to this Week’s Riddles

(For the riddles, please see page 30)

1. The Satmar Rebbe Rav Yoel Teitelbaum in Divrei Yoel notes that toward the beginning of Choshen Mishpat, the Shulchan Aruch rules (12:2) that there is a mitzvah for judges to encourage the litigants in a financial dispute to compromise and settle, rather than insisting on the strict application of the letter of the law. Although this is the correct approach to civil disputes, it would be inappropriate to begin Shulchan Aruch by promoting such an attitude toward halachah. (Parsha Potpourri)
2. The Torah stipulates (Shemos 21:25-26) that if a master knocks out the eye or tooth of his non-Jewish slave, he must immediately free him. The Gemara (Berachos 5b) records that Rav Yochanan had ten sons, all of whom died during his lifetime. When the last one passed away, Rav Yochanan kept one of his teeth and took it with him when he went to comfort mourners, as a way of tangibly showing them how much pain he had endured. The Chida (Yosef Ometz 2:30) discusses a case involving an elderly Jew who kept all his teeth so that they could be buried together with him, but over time, one of the teeth got misplaced. Although the Chida notes that many people strive to be stringent in this regard, he brings a proof from Rav Yochanan’s conduct that teeth do not legally require burial. The Ichud B’Chidud (5777) quotes a ruling of Rav Yechiel Michel Tukechinsky that if teeth fall out or are removed posthumously, they must be buried, for it is forbidden to receive benefit from any part of a dead body. (Parsha Potpourri)
3. The Gemara in Pesachim (113a) lists five things that Rav instructed his son Chiya, one of them is: לא תעקר ככא – “Don’t remove a tooth,” i.e. even if you have a major toothache, don’t extract the tooth. There are stories with various geonim and tzadikim that were very careful not to remove their teeth even in times of great need. The sefer Beis Yisrael (Vol. 8, pg. 190) relates that mori ve’rebbi M’Unsdorf suffered with his teeth all his life, especially when he was older, however, he refused to have them extracted based on the aforementioned Gemara in Pesachim. This was also the conduct of the Kesav Sofer, and he would refuse to have any teeth extracted. However, in the last year of his life, the Admor of Unsdorf could no longer cope with the pain and he agreed to have them extracted, and the pain eased. After that he remarked, “I didn’t realize how pleasant life is in this world without toothache” (איך האב נישט געוויסט וואם פאר עולם הזה דאס איז). It is also related about the Steipler (Orchos Rabbeinu Vol. 1, pg. 202) that he refused to have any teeth extracted, even when they caused pain, and his reasoning was based on the above Gemara. However, towards the end of his life he suffered very much from a particular tooth and agreed to have it removed, and it was removed on erev Yom Kippur, however, this was the only tooth he had removed. The rest of his teeth, fell out or crumbled on their own. On the other hand, the Leket Yosher (Vol. 2, Yoreh Deah, Inyan 4) relates that his rebbe the Terumas HaDeshen once asked a non-Jew to extract a particular tooth, and the Leket Yosher asked him, “what about the Gemara in Pesachim?” and the Terumas HaDeshen replied, “either way it would have fallen out in the next day or two.”

However, what is behind the Gemara in Pesachim, what is so terrible about removing a painful tooth?

i) Rabbeinu Chananel on the Gemara in Pesachim

explains that one shouldn’t extract a tooth as it can cause the eyes to get weakened. The Rema in his sefer Issur V’Heter (Klal 59, siman 18) explains a bit further, and explains that there are teeth that are connected to the eyes like the Gemara in Avodah Zorah (28b) writes: שורינא דעינא בלבא תליא, therefore, it is dangerous to extract a tooth. The Ya’avatz (Mor U’Ketziah 328) writes that it’s not for nothing that Chazal warned not to extract teeth, and sometimes extracting a tooth can be more damaging than the gain. Therefore, one shouldn’t extract a tooth, unless he knows from expert doctors that he is not going to be harmed, and that there is no other way to fix the toothache besides for having the tooth extracted. It is related about Rebbi Shaul Brach Mikashoi zt”l that once he suffered terribly with toothache, and he once said that before having a tooth extracted one should write a will, as many gedolei Yisrael have died when having a tooth extracted (see the sefer Shaul Bechir Hashem pg. 266, who lists the tzadikim that died).

ii) The Beis Yisrael brings from the Admor of Unsdorf

that the explanation is based on the Gemara in Bava Kama (65a) which says:מה לי קטל ה כולה מה לי קטלה פלגא – “What difference if one completely kills something, or if one partially kills something”. The Admor of Unsdorf explained that extracting a tooth is killing the tooth, and what difference does it make if one kills himself completely, or just partially.

iii) Bad for parnosah.

The Gemara in Niddah (65a) teaches:כיון שנתקו שיניו של אדם נתמעטו מזו נותיו – “If ones teeth are removed, his sustenance will be reduced.” The Shevet Mussar (in his sefer Meil Tzedakah, siman 666) brings something he saw in the sefer Toldos Adam. He writes that a person’s teeth are created according to the strength that is needed for that person, i.e. if a person is going to live a long life his teeth are created strong, and if he is going to live a short life his teeth are created weakly. If a person has weak teeth, and they get extracted at a young age it shows that he isn’t supposed to live long. Along the same lines, the Shevet Mussar brings, if one has his teeth removed, it shows he isn’t supposed to live long, therefore, Hashem provides him with less sustenance as he doesn’t need so much, as he isn’t going to live long. Perhaps this is why Rav warned his son Chiya not to ever extract his teeth, as doing such an act shortens one’s life, and reduces his sustenance.

iv) Some explain al pi sod [based on mystic teachings]

that it is clear from sifrei Kabbolah that a Jew has 32 teeth, which correspond to the 32 nesivos shel chochmah, wellsprings of wisdom, and if one removes a tooth, he loses one of the nesivos shel chochmah. (Otzar Pelois HaTorah)

1. The Medrash Talpiyos (Anaf Eivorim) discusses this question and concludes: Hashem knows which non-Jew’s in the future will convert and He creates them from the beginning with 32 teeth. The reason is, because if He didn’t, it would be embarrassing for the ger [convert] as he would stick out, and this may deter him from converting, and Hashem very much wants non-Jews to convert.
2. The Mechaber (Choshen Mishpot 97 and the Rambam Hilchos Malveh V’loveh 1:2) both write: אסור לנגוש את הלוה לפרוע כשיודע שאין לו – “It’s forbidden to oppress the borrower to pay back, if the lender knows he doesn’t have the money.” It is implicit that there is only a prohibition if the lender knows that the borrower doesn’t have the money available to pay back.

This leads to the question, why don’t we say sofek de’O’raisa lechumra [in questions of Torah law we rule stringently] and say that even when in doubt it should be forbidden?

i) The Torah never forbade when in doubt

as a person isn’t able to know everything that is going on by his friend, and if when in doubt it would be forbidden to ask, then most times lenders wouldn’t be able to ask for their money back. Therefore, the Torah only forbade asking for repayment when one knows for certain that his borrower is unable to pay back. (Minchas Chinuch, Mitzvah 67)

ii) This case is different

as if the borrower is able to pay back, then when the lender presses him and he repays, he fulfils a mitzvah of מצוה פריעת בעל חוב – the mitzvah of repaying a debt. Therefore, although normally we say sofek de’O’raisa lechumra, in this case it can bring about a mitzvah, therefore, we don’t apply the normal rule. (Maharam Shik al HaMitzvos, Mitzvah 67)

(This answer is a chiddush, as although the borrower may get a mitzvah, the lender is risking getting an aveirah, so we should still apply the rule of sofek de’O’raisa lechumra. Why should the lender risk doing an aveirah just because the borrower may get a mitzvah?)

iii) There is a halachah that a borrower isn’t allowed to lose the money that he borrows

therefore, we can assume that he still has it, therefore, in this case we don’t apply the rule of sofek de’O’raisa lechumra, as it is likely that he still has the money. (Kesef Kodshim, Choshen Mishpot; Minchas Soles, Mitzvah 67)

iv) The Chinuch (Mitzvah 67) explains

that the reason behind the prohibition of לא תהיה עליו כנושה, is because the Torah doesn’t want the lender to pressure the borrower with intent to cause him pain. If so, this is only possible if the lender knows he has no money, as then we can say his intent is to cause him pain. However, if the lender doesn’t know, we can’t say he intends to cause him pain, if, so, there is no prohibition. (Mishmeres Chaim, Vol. 2, Inyonim on Choshen Mishpot, siman 13; Shu”t Shevet HaLevi Vol. 10, siman 267).