Accidentally Knocked Laptop Off of Shtender - Must He Pay?

00:00 Speaker 1 Welcome to the Halacha Podcast, L'maan Yishmeu, with Harav Yosef Yeshaya Brown, Mahara d'Asra and a member of the Crown Heights Beis Din. This podcast is brought to you by the Ask the Rav platform in partnership with L'maan Yilmedu, the premier institute for practical Halacha learning.

00:21 Speaker 2 Welcome to L'maan Yishmu, Ask the Rav podcast number twelve. I got an interesting shaila this week where a woman took upon herself a commitment that she's only gonna hear kiddush from her husband. Problem is this week she won't be able to hear kiddush from her husband, and she wanted to know if she needs to have a hattaras nedarim, she needs to annul her vow, her commitment. Can it, can it be done on Shabbos? This question came in right before Shabbos. And how is it done? So just to, to go through the details of this question, the halacha is that when it comes to a minhag tov, a positive thing which has some root in, in Torah and Yiddishkeit, then if a person commits to do this on a regular basis, or even if they haven't made any formal commitment, they just started doing bistam without any commitment. They've already done it three times. So once they do it three times, it's considered a commitment, and they're bound to do it. And if they want to stop doing it, there's a concept of hattaras nedarim, of annulment of vows. When it comes specifically to a vow associated with tzedakah, with hegdish, with a mitzvah, and on that-- in that category falls and also minhag tov, a positive, good custom, even gamar ba'libo, even if a person just in their mind mentally makes a decision that this is what they're going to be doing, that becomes-- takes on the force of a neder at least midrabon, at

01:52 Speaker 2 least rabbinically. Now, it's important to point out that gamar ba'libo means making a decision. Often people think of different things. Yeah, it's a good idea to do XYZ, but if it wasn't gamar ba'libo, it wasn't-- Gamar means complete. It also has that meaning. If it's complete formal decision, I decided I'm going to give now a donation to this and this institution a hundred dollars. That's what we call nidrei tzedakah. Sometimes, yeah, it might be a good idea to give, but people are derech adam le'hislach, and the people keep on changing their mind. Yeah, a hundred shekel, fifty shekel. So you don't have to keep on obsessing that the fact that I originally thought a hundred means I can't go down. But once you made a decision-- So here she made that decision, and that was her question. So now let, let's, let's go into the details of this question. Is there anything positive halachically with hearing kiddush specifically from your husband? There's no such thing. There's no advantage for a woman to hear kiddush from her husband specifically. It really doesn't fall on the minhag tov. A lot of women think it's respectful for the husband. It's, it's a very nice thing, but it actually has some negative aspects to it, too. It means waiting for a husband to come home. It means fasting on Shabbos. There's nothing really in halacha that says it's advantageous davka to hear from a husband. There's something called berev am. There's two different opinions about that. Is, is, is

03:07 Speaker 2 there an advantage in each individual making their own kiddush or one person making for everyone? Which I'm not gonna go into that right now. But that didn't-- it didn't stem from that aspect that davka to have one kiddush versus two kiddush. That wasn't the idea over here. The idea here is specifically to hear from a husband. It wasn't about kiddush over wine versus grape juice. It could be she can make herself on wine also. That wasn't the neder. The neder was, the commitment was hearing from my husband. I'll wait for my husband. Many women do that. Sometimes it puts the husband in an inconvenient position 'cause now he has to rush, and sometimes maybe they to begin with, they shouldn't-- they sh-- the wife shouldn't have to wait for them to begin with, but these are all sha'al v'tales aspects, which is not, not the subject of our discussion. So had she only thought to do so in her mind, this is what she decided, then, okay, so she decided. She changed her mind. You can-- There's a lot of decisions people make throughout the day, and you can change your mind about it. The problem is if a person actually verbalizes their commitment, so even if it's not a minhag tov, a neder, a person can make a neder, a vow, an actual promise, a commitment, specify that this is a vow. They can make a promise about anything, even the stupidest thing, and it's binding. They can decide that they're going to stop

04:19 Speaker 2 eating X or, yes, eat X, whatever it is. And here in this case, she actually verbalized her commitment. Since she verbalized it, and she didn't only verbalize, which people often do, "I already decided." Saying, "I already decided," isn't a neder. Saying, "I am committing to do so and so," she actually committed, she said that she's making this commitment. And now the right thing would be to say bli neder. But if a person does not say bli neder, always a person should-- any decision they make, they should always say bli neder. So it shouldn't run into the shaila. She didn't say bli neder. She made a promise. She made a commitment. We run into a shaila of a neder, and the question was, can she do hattaras nedarim? Certainly, she can do hattaras nedarim. Let's-- L'tzorech. You gotta even do it on Shabbos 'cause this is l'tzorech Shabbos, for the purpose of Shabbos, and the way to do it is to get three people together, three men that are-- one of them knows the halachas of nedarim and knows what you're allowed to be ma'atar neder, what you're not allowed to be ma'atar neder, because you're supposed to specify the neder to the rabbi. Pir-- The mitzvah of pirut ha-neder, specifying the neder. Part of that is to know, 'cause some nedarim, some vows cannot be annulled. So one of them, the neder is specified to. The other two don't even have to know what the neder is. And there's a process of charata where they

05:37 Speaker 2 express remorse why they took on this neder or why they didn't say bli neder, and a pesach, and opening a channel where you could do hattara, and the neder is annulled. There is the hattaras nedarim that we do on Erev Rosh Hashanah. Hattaras nedarim Erev Rosh Hashanah is what we do a general hattaras nedarim, and you can't just rely to that-- on that if you know the specific neder and you didn't specify it. So that's in response to this question. Let's move on to the next question. So Shavuos, this came up a lot when it came to Shavuos. A lot of people wanna be mekain, but the Rebbe asked to get everyone to come to shul to hear Aseres Hadibros, specifically children, even younger children, even babies, if it's okay as far as their health is concerned, at least from one month up, to get them to hear Aseres Hadibros because of at the time of Aseres Hadibros, when Aseres Hadibros is being read in shul during Krias HaTorah, that is the giving of the Torah happening. It's Hashem giving the Torah from anew. And specifically, it's important that children should be there because the children are the guarantors for Kabbalas HaTorah. Hashem said he needs a guarantor, and the guarantor were the children. So important to point out when the Rebbe spoke about this, he, he mentioned specifically the idea that it should be in shul, which is a Makom Kodesh. It's a Mikdash Me'at, and it's a place where people daven, and therefore

07:03 Speaker 2 it will have the milev Krias HaTorah and davening Torah and tefillah together. It's a place which includes Torah and tefillah. It's, it's-- The Rebbe specifically spoke about being there for Krias HaTorah. Sometimes the Rebbe said they should at least, if at least if they can't come, they should come for the words VeYidaber Elakim, a few psukim before from Vayechi Yish Aslishi. Krias HaTorah in general, specifically Aseres Hadibros. At one occasion, the Rebbe said they should be in shul, hear Krias HaTorah and davening, but at least we should try to get them to come for Aseres Hadibros wherever that's possible. Now, in some places, they try to arrange for people to come, but they won't necessarily come to shul, and therefore different ideas have been developed of having different forms of Krias HaTorah, which will attract the audience, and particularly the children to come, even if it's not in the context of a partic-- normal shul. So while that's not exactly what the Rebbe spoke about, the idea of the Rebbe was to do Krias HaTorah in shul, and they should come to the existing Krias HaTorah, but I still wanna explore the various different things that are being done. So one of the, the, um, ideas that were floated around, and I understand that people were cons-- did this or considered doing this on Shavuos is to arrange in a park to do Krias HaTorah in a park, and that's a place where there's a lot of kids there. A lot of kids will come

08:24 Speaker 2 there. A lot of kids are there. We can promise them ice creams and nash and whatever it is, and do Krias HaTorah in the park. The problem, of course, is that being metalta, a Sefer Torah, moving a Sefer Torah is a very, very severe thing. Particularly moving a Sefer Torah into a public area, into the rechov, into the street is a mamash, uh, uh, a really terrible thing. There's serious issues with that. The Zohar talks about even not moving from one shul to another shul. Poskim talk about even within the shul from one room to another. And there's a lot of halachas about moving a Sefer Torah when it's allowed, when it's not allowed. So someone suggested that perhaps there's a way we could arrange Krias HaTorah in the park. Again, I'm not convinced this is what the Rebbe wanted, but we're just exploring the halacha itself. Based on the fact that ten people will go along with the Sefer Torah when it's taken out of shul, and there's some heter based on a Kaf HaChaim. So I was told there's a Kaf HaChaim, that based on this Kaf HaChaim, it's okay to take a Sefer Torah if ten people take the Sefer Torah or walk along with the Sefer Torah. Now, the short answer is it's absolutely not correct, and it's a very s-serious issue. It should be shum ofen. It should not be done, and it should have not been done. Having ten people go along with the Sefer Torah does not, um,

09:42 Speaker 2 allow for this to happen. This Kaf HaChaim that people are talking about, let's go to the root of the inyan. Kaf HaChaim brings it from a sefer called Piskei D'Kanti. It's brought in other poskim too. Now, they clearly are talking about that when you take it from one shul to another, and they follow the position that you're allowed to take it m'beit kneshia l'beit kneshia, which is a big machloket if you're allowed to do that. And I'm not convinced that we should be seeking out a heter w-- in something which many poskim say you're not allowed to do. That's not what we're supposed to be doing. But let's go along with this at least. Here we're talking about those that say you gotta take it from one shul to another. So there's still an inyan that whenever you take a Sefer Torah, ten people should go along. Clearly, the way it's written in the Birkei Yosef, and the, the Chida also wrote a se-- The Chida wrote Birkei Yosef. He also wrote a sefer called Ohr David Emes. Tov, it's a good idea while we're taking the Sefer Torah anyhow because we're allowed to take it from one shul to another. It's a good idea ten people should go along. It's not a heter wherever you're not allowed to carry that ten people go along. It's very, very likely that they're actually talking about something totally different. The Sefer Torah is in a shul, we're moving the Sefer Torah. People sometimes need to bring a

10:45 Speaker 2 Sefer Torah to a new chabadas, to a new shul. Now it's gonna stay in this shul. Still, whenever you take a Sefer Torah, you should be respectful to the Sefer Torah. We're not talking about the heter of moving. We're talking about now the Sefer Torah is being in transit, we should have ten people going along. It's not about allowing the issur of moving the Sefer Torah because there are ten people there. There's a similar case. The Zohar Emes has a tshuva. There was a shul which couldn't open the Aron Kodesh on Shabbos that was stuck, so they would-- he agreed with the opinion you're allowed to take it from another shul, but he also asked to have ten people coming along with it. Clearly, according to halacha, you're not allowed to bring a Sefer Torah into the street. That is according to all opinions. So having ten people coming along, there's no such heter of ten people coming along. We-- There are some other sources. Every one of those sources will clearly demonstrate, have no connection. The Ashrei Yesh HaPiske talks about a sukkah in a home, and they would have a place set up in the sukkah for the Sefer Torah, which is a special set heter when there's already a place prepared for the Sefer Torah, an Aron Kodesh, whatever it is. He clearly, um, talks about he to-- is very inclined that you're not allowed to do it. Some poskim bring this tshuva, but they don't bring the whole entire context. If

11:57 Speaker 2 you look inside the tshuva, you see clearly he had a hard time with it. The Tzit L'Yesa talks about in the Kos Lamadua where they move the Sefer Torah to the various different minyanim. He also brings this tshuva But if you look very clearly, he also writes that the whole entire community went along with the Sefer Torah, not ten people. So it's a different-- heter altogether. The Be'er HeTeShamaim talks about the same case, which was a common thing. Looks like people would carry the Sefer Torah from the house to the sukkah, sukkah to the house. And he clearly says, even if you prepare the Sefer Torah there a day or two in advance, you're not allowed to do it. The, the, the Ashrei HaZah Piskah that I quoted brings the early Sefer Torah, Eidus B'Yosef. And if you look at that Sefer Torah, it was a place that almost the world wouldn't have been Kriyas Yam Suf the entire city. And he still was very, very machmer. It was a shul, a small city, very few people there. Shul was burnt. They did-- continued davening in this destroyed shul, but they couldn't leave the Sefer Torah there. So they had a ohrin, a protected, nice place where they kept the Sefer Torah. After davening, they would bring it back. He says, "Don't bring it just for Kriyas Yam Suf. You only-- You have to bring them before davening in this set place, and during Kriyas Yam Suf, then take it out." So clearly, he-- there's

13:01 Speaker 2 no-- there's-- These are-- Sefer Torah are being quoted. They don't give a heter for ten people accompanying it. The only source that we know is the Esh LaAvraham. Esh LaAvraham, Talmud of the MaHaDitcher, brings that he heard from the Yo-- the Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat, the Yosef Dvir Emet, a tzad heter. Tzad heter means it's not a heter. Excuse me. It's a tzad-- I apologize. A tzad heter, a, an inclination towards a heter together with other arguments. And he says he heard about this heter about ten people going along. And now look at the case that he's talking about. He had a house attached to the shul. It was under one roof. He still wasn't comfortable with moving the Sefer Torah in such a case also, even though really kosel echad le'shnehem, there's one wall which surrounds all under one roof. And he wanted also ten people to go along. And more than that, not just ten people going along, he wanted them to make a mechitza. So this idea of ten people, the ten people form a mechitza. It's not just ten people going along. There are other poskim that talk about this idea of ten people going along. Again, they're talking about carrying from shul to a shul, a specific heter for Simchas Torah where everybody needs an aliyah, and therefore they, they hold that you're allowed to do it on Simchas Torah. And they add the idea of ten people going along. We don't find anyone that is saying that the ten

14:19 Speaker 2 people itself is a heter. In those cases where it's already mutar, they added-- they made the heter better by having ten people going along, or they added it as a chumrah. And in the ten people, either some of them write that the ten people need to make a mechitza, or they say you need to have the entire community. The one source that I found that gives us heter if the community goes along and he doesn't add anything else, just that itself is the Chovas Ma'ariv HaKohen. But it's not clear in the question what the case they're talking about. And even in his case, he also spoke about the entire community has to go along. If you think about it, the heter of the entire community is a different heter. It's the-- The idea is the Torah going to you or you're going to the Torah. If there's some people in the community that didn't go along, then we have the problem of HaTorah Holeches Achram. The Torah is going to the people, and that's a problem. So the heter here was everybody was going along with the Sefer Torah. Now, of course, that wouldn't be practical in a place where you're making Kriyas Yam Suf in the park specifically because people are not gonna come otherwise. So obviously, they're not gonna come along with the Sefer Torah. Clearly, the, the-- when the poskim talk about the issur of Totlif Sefer Torah, they mention Mishnah Brurah brings the Aley Rabbi that says a minyan who are

15:29 Speaker 2 going and taking a Sefer Torah... There, there is a case, I don't wanna mention the details, where they took the Sefer Torah from the shul of Maria Avua when there was a earthquake on Tzfat, and ten people were mechadeesh themself and took the Sefer Torah, and it says a terrible thing happened. So sometimes we see a heter, but it's not-- You have to look into the context how the heter is brought. In this case specifically, we're talking about leaving the Sefer Torah in the street, and the street is worse off than anything else. Carrying to the street, leaving in the street. So to take a heter of a different case and apply it to a case where clearly is worse than anything else and nobody speaks about this, it, it makes no sense. It really should not be done. It's a terrible thing to do. Moving on to another question. A lot of people ask questions on Shavuot about forgetting Erev Teshuvah. Unfortunately, this is very, very common. People forget to make an Erev Teshuvah. And the question arises, what do you do if you forget? And the problem, of course, is when it comes Rosh Hashanah, other Yom Tov there's a heter. If you remember a Yom Tov, you can make a tenai, and you can make a stipulation on the first day of Yom Tov. It doesn't apply in Rosh Hashanah. It doesn't apply in many cases. You can use this heter of a tenai. But we're talking about bechalal. What-- How do

16:40 Speaker 2 people-- What could people do that they shouldn't forget? So there's a lot of good eitzas out there to help people not forget. And, uh, they can have an alarm. They can have in the area of cooking, in the kitchen, right by the, the, the oven and stove, they can have some type of reminder and make Erev Teshuvah. They're really-- They're really simple solutions. But someone suggested perhaps an idea. A rav mentioned to me an idea that he has, that they'll have a system where it's a phonk-- a phone system which will call in the name of the rabbonim different people in the city to remind them to make an Erev Teshuvah. And then the system will allow that you appoint a rav as your shliach in case you forget to make an Erev Teshuvah. So you'll press a certain button, whatever it is, and the system says, "If you're pressing this button, it means you're appointing the rav as your shliach." So I mean, there's a lot of details why this could be-- how this could work and how this can't work, and of course, depends if you're within the chum and not in the chum. You have to know if the rabbonim are in town and not in town and who's gonna be within the chum and out of the chum. But this was a suggestion that was, that was floated around. Um, the rav that mentioned this to me and wrote about it came with a bunch of different questions. What happens if

17:49 Speaker 2 you already appointed this rav as a shliach? Now can you make your own Erev Teshuvah? Well, how will that work? But there's another problem altogether which he hasn't mentioned. When the Alter Rebbe talks about this din of making an Erev Teshuvah, he says that everybody has to make their own Erev Teshuvah, or they could ask someone else to make an Erev Teshuvah if they're using your objects. Mishelo betoch beiso. Using your objects, and they're doing it in your house. So- Clearly it's from the Alter Rebbe, it's not-- An eiruv tachlin works when you make an eiruv or you ask someone else to use your chafetz. And the fact that another person makes an eiruv and picks it up for you, that's not gonna work. He's clearly talking about a case where the baal habayis separates food for the eiruv tachlin, and someone else makes the eiruv. This comes out very clear from the Ma'at Ephraim as well. Interesting, the Alter Rebbe says, "Besur beisoi," it should be in your house. The question is whether it actually means that it actually has to be done in your house. What's the ma'ala in your house? But certainly, mis'haloi, it has to be yours. Now, the Mishnah Berurah seems not to hold like that. For the Mishnah Berurah, it seems clear that it helps even if it's not yours. Now let me explain this a bit better. There is a concept that the rabbi in town, the gadol ha'ir, can make an eiruv tachlin for everyone. But that

19:03 Speaker 2 doesn't work unless someone is-- forgot to make an eiruv tachlin and it wasn't-- his forgetting wasn't negligent. And that becomes the question, when is it considered negligence? You forgot. Why did you forget? Obviously, it's not so important for you. It's the first time you forgot? It's the second time you forgot? It's the third time you forgot? W-you were busy and therefore you forgot, or you just forgot because you forgot? 'Cause forgetting is not always considered accidental. So when we say that lechatchilah, you're not allowed to rely on the rabbi, on the gadol ha'ir. If you, however, appoint someone specifically to be your shliach, then it works. So the Mishnah Berurah met-- takes the position even further. Mishnah Berurah takes the position that this that it doesn't help you relying on someone else is when you found-- You didn't go and talk to the rabbi before. You didn't know in advance. But if, if you knew in advance that the rabbi is making and you didn't come and discuss it on, on Yom Tov, say, "Oh, you made to me? Okay, fine." In this case, the Mishnah Berurah says, if the, if the rabbi told you, "I'm going to make," and you say, "Sure, no problem," it would work. The Alter Rebbe clearly doesn't hold with it. The Alter Rebbe says he has to become your shliach. It's not enough that he agrees. You have to make him your shliach, and he has to use mis'haloi. He has to use your items. There's a lot of

20:16 Speaker 2 questions about what the Mishnah Berurah says. I don't want to go into alum this right now. It's very hard to accept Mishnah Berurah's haskafa. And clearly it seems like there's a special thing of making a shlichus, and it has to be yours. Why does it have to be yours? Well, it really depends on the reasons for eiruv tachlin. One of the reasons of eiruv tachlin is that you have to ha-- make sure you have food left o-- You might forget not having any food left over Shabbos after your beautiful milchig and fleishig Shavuot meals. So when you make an eiruv tachlin, that re-- helps you remember to have something left for Shabbos. So when you're asking someone else to make for you, it might not work unless he's actually using your food, at least so we can argue. We can also argue according to the other reason of eiruv tachlin, that you should remember that you're not allowed to cook from Yom Tov to the week. If you know that you can't cook from Yom Tov to Shabbos, only through eiruv tachlin, it will help you remember the halacha that you're not allowed to cook from Yom Tov to the week. What's the idea? That when you already started and took one item and set aside for Shabbos with the eiruv tachlin, then all the other cooking means you're not-- You're finishing off-- You already started cooking, you're just finishing it off. So if it's not your food, you can't say that you're finishing off

21:24 Speaker 2 the cooking because it wasn't your food to begin with. And these are different arguments about why the Alter Rebbe says so, but clearly the Alter Rebbe says so and therefore that, that creates a problem. I want to mention one more thing about eiruv tachlin, and it's a question that happens every Yom Tov, and we have it on Shavuot as well. People often ask, "What about guests?" They stay eating by someone else. Does the eiruv tachlin of the other person work for them? Does it not work for them? So-- And nowadays, there's another part to the question that's often asked, which earlier poskim don't address, but the con-- contemporary poskim address. You're eating by someone, but you're sleeping in your own house. So many people question, if you're sleeping in your own house, will the eiruv tachlin work for you? Honestly, I don't begin to understand what difference does sleeping make about this. If we accept the position, if you're staying in someone's house for many days, then you become a member of their family, and their eiruv tachlin works for you, then what difference does it make where you're sleeping? That's really irrelevant to the discussion. People often talk about, are they required to make eiruv tachlin? Are they gonna be doing anything if they're eating everything by someone else and not doing any cooking? And the answer is, well, you're benching lech. And indeed, actually, according to the-- There's a machloket if benching lech requires an eiruv tachlin. According to the Alter Rebbe, benching

22:40 Speaker 2 lech requires an eiruv tachlin with a bracha. But other people talk about, "Right, but are you gonna make your own coffee?" These are all discussions whether you require an eiruv tachlin. The question now is not whether you require, the question is whether you become exempt with someone else's eiruv tachlin. So if you're staying by your parents, by your in-laws, you could be exempt by their eiruv tachlin. Now, the fact that you're sleeping somewhere, this has nothing to do with sleeping. This has to do with-- It all has to do with ea-eating. When you're eating from their foods, then their food is yours. Their eiruv tachlin becomes yours. Everything becomes yours. This is clearly built in and proven from the Rash, who discusses this topic, and he talks about a wife that has another house where she stays. Clearly, the issue is not about where you're sleeping. Now, the poskim talk about-- The Alter Rebbe and the Yam shel Shlomo talk about bnei beis, that the family members are all exempt with one eiruv. It's not-- They don't talk about other people that are coming, let's say married children or other guests that are coming over. But the minhag is that other people that come over and staying, by Yehuda Asher Lavram already brings this minhag, and he says the minhag is that married children that come over all rely on the eiruv tachlin of the baal habayis. So once we, we accept that position, I don't see any reason to make a distinction whether they're

23:56 Speaker 2 sleeping there or not sleeping there. The Asher Lavram goes even further, and he says that even if they're eating in a different room or even if eating at a different table, that-- which is, which is an interesting chidush. So the problem really that we have now, the real problem which people don't talk about so much, is not where they're sleeping. That's irrelevant. It's even when they're eating, are they really eating there? There's different days we could talk about. There's Yom Tov, when the eiruv, the eiruv tachlin's made so that we have to cook on Yom Tov for Shabbos. There's Shabbos, which the eiruv tachlin was for, for the covenant of Shabbos according to one reason. And there's Erev Yom Tov, when you make the eiruv tachlin. So when we say guests are included, does that mean guests that are there for Erev Yom Tov, guests that are there for Yom Tov, or guests that are there for Shabbos? There's many ways to look at it. There's proofs one way or another. There's strong argument to say that it has to do with Yom Tov, when you're cooking for Shabbos, but there's also strong arguments to say that it has to do with Erev Yom Tov, when the eiruv tachlin is kal. And because of that, that creates a problem, because sometimes they're not there for all of that time, for Erev Yom Tov and for Yom Tov and for Shabbos, which in this case it's always better because of the shailah. So just ha-have the

25:08 Speaker 2 person make the eiruv tachlin for you, like the din of making a shliach to make an eiruv tachlin. Thiscertainly not called a pesheik-- pesheia, where you can't rely on the gadol ha'ir, because this is a safek in halakha, he has to make an eiruv tachshith. But clearly, if you have him pick it up for you or you do that, that should work. At least make it become yours even before the eiruv tachshith and everything should, should, should work fine. Um, I'll just mention, uh, a different question altogether. Moving on from eiruv tachshith, now is the chasuna season, and I've been brought a lot of different designs of ketubah, often to ask if this ketubah is a legitimate ketubah or not. So recently, someone sent me a design of a ketubah. The problem was the design was such that it was very hard to read the ketubah text because the design and the ketubah text were interfering one with another, which is a separate discussion. And because a ketubah is a star, a document that has to follow the halakhot of starot, so it has to be ca-- it has to be in such a way that you can't forge it. So that has to be examined case by case. But my real problem over here was, even though that's not a halakha problem, but a hashkafa problem based on the design. So people often put different pesukim in the design. We should talk about whether pesukim should be used for this or not. The

26:21 Speaker 2 custom has been for many, many years, hundreds of years, people would put pesukim around the ketubah. Ketubah is not an item that you throw in the garbage, so there's room for leniency to write pesukim. I mean, there's a halakha bechalal, you're not supposed to write three words of a Torah without sirtul, without scraping underneath. But that's-- again, there's a lot of leniencies on that also. But the issue was the pasuk that I was given has a pasuk, "Anilo doidi ve'doidi li," which in my opinion is totally inappropriate to have such a pasuk on a ketubah. The pasuk talks about the love of Hashem and Yidden. Why are you using a pasuk that talks about Hashem's love to us and our love to Hashem when we talk about the romance between husband and wife? It's using shir hashirim for the wrong thing. Chazal talk about people who use shir hashirim to make love songs out of shir hashirim and how terrible that is. So here it's not a love song, but here it's a love statement. So interesting, someone went and asked on ChatGPT and AI, asked him, "Is it okay to write the pasuk, 'Anilo doidi'?" And it came up with a bunch of toirtos why it is okay. The reasons why it shouldn't have been okay, and why it really is okay. And they wrote that traditionally this was a pasuk that was always used, and they gave examples of old ketubot that used this pasuk. So when I was informed about this, I

27:28 Speaker 2 said, "I want to see the sources." I looked at every one of those sources. It's talking indeed ancient, fascinating ancient ketubot, but none of them actually had the pasuk, "Anilo doidi ve'doidi li." So this is just incorrect information. But the argument also was that it's a pasuk that talks about the love of two human beings. So we're using the same pasuk, but the argument is faulty. The pasuk talks about-- it uses a metaphor from a human love, husband and wife, and therefore derives from that love. It's a mashal, from there we talk about the love of Hashem and Yidden. But t-here we're talking about the reverse, taking a pasuk which talks about the love of Hashem and Yidden and actually using it for our love. That's the opposite way around. That really wouldn't make much sense. And finally, last but not least, interesting question. I'm not gonna give a psak about this question. This is a chesheh Mishpat question. There was a heavy debate amongst a number of rabbonim this week about this topic, where there was an individual that was in a shul. This is the Beit Midrash Ner Yisroel, where there's a bunch of people crowd into a sm-small Beit Midrash. They use standers in this Beit Midrash, and someone had a laptop or an iPad on the stander. And people do that. They write on their laptop Chiddushei Torah. They look up shtarim on the laptop. And someone was learning, and he just moved back slightly, stretched his hands, and he-- because

28:47 Speaker 2 he stretched his hands, the laptop on the other stander fell. And the question was if he was chayev or not. So there's arguments here and there. I'm just gonna mention some basic principles, and a bunch of rabbonim got involved in this argument. Again, this is a chesheh Mishpat case, and there's so many factors that could, can influence a psak. The, the key principle we have is that we learn from a pasuk, "Petza tachas petza lechayev ha'ones keratn," that when a person causes injury, "adam hamaza," when you cause injury, "adam murde oino," a person is responsible for all his actions, whether he's awake, whether he's sleeping, whether it's accidental. There's no heter of accident. Tosfos, however, says there's a heter called ones gomer, that if a person-- it's an absolute accident. What's an example of absolute accident? A person goes to sleep. There was nothing there. Then someone put his, his items, his glasses next to me while I was sleeping. So that's an absolute accident. We have in the Gemara where a person walks in the street, and there's a jug in the middle of the street. "Ein darkan shebonyad molzeh bein habedrachim." It's actually not normal to look in the streets. You don't have to look. But the posek can explain, because it's not normal to have jugs in the street. It is actually pretty normal to have laptops on top of standers, or at least in this particular Beit Midrash, it's a very, very common thing. So if, if that's common, you should

30:04 Speaker 2 look. Now, could be there's a difference. When it's dark, the Gemara says, and the, the Gemara actually brings an example where it's normal to put out jugs in front of a, a, a olive press. So the question here is now, is it normal for a person-- people make movements, they move back and forth all the time. One of the rabbonim were arguing, it's, you know, it's impossible to control yourself if you're moving back and forth. What do you mean? That's part of your job. You baalelei, you know, ameilei, you need to look. It's part of your job to check it out. And this is an interesting discussion. I'm not gonna give a psak, but that's just gi-- I'm, I'm mentioning the back and forth about this topic. Hatzlacha rabba.

30:37 Speaker 3 Join the global Halakha learning revolution of the Lemaan Yilmedu Institute and bring increased brachos into your home. For details about the various learning programs, visit our website, lemaanyilmedu.com. That's L-E-M-A-A-N-Y-I-L-M-E-D-U.com.