8066 —הצעות לאופן עריכת ספר ולבירור קו התאריך הבינלאומי

Shalom u'Vrachah!

Comments regarding the general structure of the sefer: The way topics are presented assumes that the reader is already deeply involved in this issue, merely needing analysis to clarify conclusions or resolve contradictions. Clearly, only a select few possess such knowledge. Even they will not retain all necessary details for understanding after a short time. It would be highly beneficial to include an introduction at the beginning of the sefer, explaining the question (which, for most Torah scholars, its very existence will be a surprising novelty) and outlining the main points of differing approaches to its resolution. This would greatly broaden the circle of those who understand these matters.

It is worthwhile to explain in the introduction or preface—or at least note—that discussion of the main question itself is found (and begins) in the last quarter of the sefer. If possible, it would be good to change this so as to make grasping and understanding the scope of matters easier.

I also commend you for including in full the words of the authors being discussed, so readers do not need to search through other books themselves. Surely, Professor(s) will proofread again, as there are omissions and additions, etc.

Regarding what you wrote about crossing the date line at sunset on Friday and Shabbat multiple times, thus supposedly nullifying Shabbat: This is impossible—what difference does it make if there are seven days without Shabbat or seven hundred? Why is this impossible—especially according to Ramban (Shemot 20:8), who says every day has a mitzvah of 'Remembering Shabbat' (even though this remembrance is not a complete sign since one is still obligated in tefillin)? Certainly, one should not prohibit such travel or compare it to delaying circumcision so as not to desecrate Shabbat later with preparations (see Raza"h and Rashba cited in Ran on Shabbat 134b), or prohibiting joining a caravan if it may lead to Shabbat desecration later. See also Rashi Sukkah 25b s.v. 'Shechal': One engaged in a mitzvah is exempt... In all these cases, there is an obligation that is merely overridden or permitted by circumstance; our case differs.

There is some resemblance to Menachot 41a ('How can you exempt yourself...'), see Tosafot there and Hagahot Maimoniyot at end of Hilchot Tzitzit. Also see Shu"t tzt"z Yoreh Deah section 192; Tzafnat Paneach new edition p.87 s.v. 'And yet it is not similar,' since in those cases, at least the mitzvah exists in reality—but here there would be no Shabbat on Friday or Sunday. I also saw your reference to Mishnah Berurah.

Regarding your suggestion that all Jews could cross the date line at that time and thus completely nullify Shabbat—note what Mechilta Parshat Ki Tisa deduces: 'The nations surrounded Eretz Yisrael and Israel desecrated...' And what Tzafnat Paneach quotes from Rav Ragatchover (I do not have his book now), who explains that only when Shabbat is entirely nullified does Scripture require a special verse (which explains why Mechilta describes such an extreme scenario). There remains uncertainty regarding whether Jews put on tefillin on Yom Kippur during the year when Beit HaMikdash was completed since they ate and drank then (Moed Katan 9a). See tzt"z on Moed Katan (chapter 3 mishnah 4) that 'the sign' refers to prohibition of work; perhaps even then no work was done except by priests offering sacrifices—and maybe cooks etc., but not all Jews—work related to food preparation? But this requires further study.

However, such a scenario where all Jews cross the date line together is impossible based on Sefer HaMitzvot of Rambam positive commandment 153: G‑d forbid such a thing should happen since He promised otherwise. Tzafnat Paneach Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh end chapter 5 shows a source for this from Bava Batra 115b and Horayot 6b. The intent needs clarification: Even if Ephraim's and Menashe's descendants are scattered across distant lands, their land inheritance remains forever—so their tribe does not disappear.

Your attempt to reconcile Chazon Ish's explanation regarding Raza"h's opinion about the date line leads into great difficulties without resolving them—as you write elsewhere in your book... Regarding 'dragging' logic—even though there is a distant example from someone consecrating an organ upon which life depends—a closer analogy exists in Eruvin: Once inside city limits, all within four cubits... However, regarding when a day begins, all agree it depends on sunset and sunrise—each point stands independently. It is astonishingly illogical to say that thousands of miles are determined by one point when counting days.

The greatest wonder with Raza"h's view seems to be this: Since he holds that the date line lies between Jerusalem and settlements at Earth's eastern edge—and our Sages interpret 'for us/for them' (Rosh Hashanah 20b) as referring to these two points (meaning Jews lived at Earth's eastern edge then)—how come there isn't even one Talmudic ruling addressing questions related to the date line? We must conclude that even though he interprets 'for us' as Babylonia, nevertheless no Jews lived there then.

Regarding what you quoted from several books about sanctifying Yom Tov above while places below differ—see also Shulchan Aruch HaRav Orach Chaim section 61 paragraph 18; Sefer Torat Chaim end Parshat Beshalach p.948ff.

Summary

This letter highlights how clarity in presentation benefits both advanced scholars and broader audiences. The Rebbe emphasizes structuring complex halachic discussions with accessible introductions while analyzing intricate issues like crossing the international date line through careful reference to classic sources.