Will the Third Beis Hamikdash Have Wi-Fi and Elevators?

00:00 Speaker 1 Welcome to the Halacha Podcast, Laman Yishmu, with Harav Yosef Yeshaya Brown, Maharad Asra and a member of the Crown Heights based din. This podcast is brought to you by the Ask the Rav platform in partnership with Laman Yelmedu, the premier Institute for Practical Halacha Learning.

00:20 Speaker 2 Welcome to our next installment of Laman Yelmedu in partnership with Ask the Rav. We have some-- quite a few interesting questions in this podcast, and let's get through to them one after another. So one question that I received mamash, mamash recently, I received a similar question a couple years ago, but now this question came up again, and we're learning now all about the halachas of the Beis Hamikdash. And the question I was asked was, will the third Beis Hamikdash have modern inventions, central air conditioning, heating, Wi-Fi, electric lights, sound systems, elevators, all of that kind of stuff? So the short answer is, I don't know. It's very possible. We will wait and see, and we'll find out if that's what's gonna happen. Chazal tell us mamash-- about quite a few questions that are asked in the Gemara about what will happen when Moshiach comes. Liksheyavo, when he will come, Moshe v'Aharon yimo, Moshe and Aaron will be with us, and they'll teach us exactly what to do. But we will explore what the potential possible questions. I wanna start with one of the issues and move on from there to the general issue about inventions in general. The issue about underground heating specifically, I will mention that has to do with two-- there are two questions. One is, are you allowed to make a change to the structure of the Beis Hamikdash? And another part of the question is about heating in a shul. There were shuls in the past that had a custom not

01:49 Speaker 2 to allow heating in a shul. Some poskim, however, prefer to have underground heating in the shul, and that has a lot of bearing on the Beis Hamikdash. So let's go... The Beis Hamikdash did have heating, but that was not in the non-holy section. Let's go to the details. So we have a general halacha that we know the Har Habais is supposed to be hollow, and we need to-- be-because of tumah, so there shouldn't be any issues of tumah. Har Habais was hollow. There's a discussion that we need to understand about the mechilas, the tunnels underneath the Beis Hamikdash, what level of kedusha they had underneath the, underneath the floor, if it has kedusha, if it doesn't have kedusha, which is ano-- a very, very fascinating sugya about the level of kedusha it has. The other issue that we need to talk about is the rule of hakel b'ksav. Hakel b'-- the pasuk says about the Beis Hamikdash, hakel b'ksav miyad Hashem alai hiskel. Everything was given in writing. There was a megilas Beis Hamikdash, a particular scroll that was given from generation to generation, how the Beis Hamikdash is supposed to be. And as part of the rule of hakel b'ksav, the Gemara says in a few places you can't make any changes to the Beis Hamikdash because of hakel b'ksav. Now, this rule applies to the first Beis Hamikdash, to the second, and it clearly applies to the third. The Rambam talks about this clearly as an introduction to Masefet Beis Hamikdash, and he

03:06 Speaker 2 brings the principle of hakel b'ksav, how it relates to the Beis Hamikdash. So Iftach Hamsofer writes that Moshe Rabbeinu was told in advance about all three Batei Mikdash, and it was given over b'nevuah how they should be, because otherwise anything that you do will be considered a change. So if there's a rule of hakel b'ksav, the question is where the rule applies. There's a discussion if it applies on the entire Har Habais. Does it apply on the ground? Does it apply underground? Strengthening the building of the Beis Hamikdash, is that an issue of hakel b'ksav? Yoshiyahu, the king took the aron and he hid it underneath the tunnels. There's a discussion if that's also a violation of the rule of hakel b'ksav. One possible heter we can have is that there's a sevarah of the Maharsha. The Maharsha says they made mechitzas in the Beis Hamikdash during Simchas Beis HaShoeiva. The Gemara actually talks about how they were allowed to make those changes. And the Gemara says they found a pasuk to teach us the idea that you can't have the mingling and visibility of men and women together at the same time. And the Maharsha explains this was done in order to protect people from doing the wrong thing. It's not for the purpose of the avoda in the Beis Hamikdash, and therefore it's not an issue. And that perhaps would imply if it's not done for the Beis Hamikdash purpose, so it's for external stuff. It's not for the avoda. The Maharsha writes

04:30 Speaker 2 that the s-- according to some opinions, the sodeh was a fence around the Beis Hamikdash, and it was there so people shouldn't carry on Shabbos. So that's not a problem of making changes because it's to protect from doing the wrong thing. It's nothing to do with the avoda in the Beis Hamikdash. The problem is there's some clear Gemaras. The Maharsha himself brings a Gemara about doing kis- They wanted to add earth for kissing Adam. There's a Gemara that talks about putting salt on the ramp so people shouldn't slip. And the Gemara talks about that you can't do it because of a concern of hakel b'ksav. So those things could perhaps are called for the avoda. So the-- we have to identify what's called sodeh avoda and what's not sodeh avoda. It's not clear. There's an argument you could say that hakel b'ksav does not apply only if something which has to dafke be a certain way. So whenever things have to dafke be a certain way, you can't make any changes. But other, other outside beauty stuff maybe is not an issue. Another sevarah I will mention, there's a Ritva that seems to imply that hakel b'ksav only applies once the structure has been made. In the beginning, when you start the structure, you could make changes. And that, if we take that approach, so make the Beis Hamikdash to begin with, with the underground heating. As you build it, don't add anything later and change the structure, and that should work. But then that's

05:48 Speaker 2 not very clear. That's a one sevarah of a Ritva. If we talk about heating specifically, there's a fa-fascinating story with Rabbi Meir Shapiro. He was a Rav in Petrikov, and in his town there was a shul called the Kalte Shul. It was very cold, and there was always a concern people during the winter are gonna go daven elsewhere. And it became a discussion maybe they should get-- finally we can get heating in the shul. But first, Gabi went to talk to the Rav, and the Rav said he has to think about it. And he wasn't sure if he should. He's certain that making a change in the structure of the shul. And he went to the Charkover Rebbe, the small Charkover, and he was thinking maybe discussing with the Charkover Rebbe. And as he comes to the Charkover Rebbe, and he comes to the Tish, the Charkover Rebbe invited him to sit next to him. He says, what's your plans for the winter? It's going to be cold. People are going to leave the shul. What's your plans? He couldn't believe it. The Charkover Rebbe was immediately catching on exactly what's in his mind. He started stuttering and saying, well, actually, that's what I came to the Rebbe to discuss. So the Rebbe said, I want to hear what you said. So he says, I'm thinking that you should not put ovens and heating elements in the shul. And his reason is because in the Beis HaMidrash it says about the Kohen Gadol, that the

06:54 Speaker 2 Kohen Gadol couldn't be part of the Sanhedrin deciding the Ibr HaShanah because the Kohen Gadol had a very cold Yom Kippur going to the Mikvah five times. And he might, if he will sit on the Bezdin that determines the length of the year and whether to add another extra month or make a leap year or not, that will determine the weather on Yom Kippur, which will affect his clouds, his judgment. He might consider making the year in such a way that Yom Kippur should be warmer so he shouldn't have to go to a cold Mikvah. So the Beis HaShapiro said, one second, that they could get ovens and heat up the place. So clearly there's a problem with having ovens. The Charkover Rebbe told him, I'm very happy with your Psak. You pasked incorrectly. They shouldn't introduce heating in the shul. When the Charkover Rebbe went out, he told the Charkover Rebbe, when the Sared HaMeish Shapiro left the Charkover Rebbe, he told his children about the Ruch HaKodesh of their father that he immediately thought of the question that he was thinking. But then he said, I'm not a Chasid Sheita. I don't fall for Ruch HaKodesh. No, the Rebbe thought it's coming winter. He thought a Rav is coming. He's probably going to ask a question about the shul. He thought of that. But the Rebbe has such a good guess and is a good Rebbe. I would like to go to such a Rebbe that always guesses it the right way. That's

08:05 Speaker 2 that story. Going back to the question about changes in the Beis HaMikdash, if we talk about other changes, like having a sound system or things like that, we could take into account the shit of the Yereim. The Yereim says that Hakel Beksav is only attached. Anything which is not connected, not Mechuber, Tolosh is no issue of Hakel Beksav making changes. There is a similar discussion about the Bima Shal Eitz. In the year of Hakel, they would make a platform. And some Acharinim write that this platform, since it's a movable platform, it's not a problem of Hakel Beksav making a change in the Beis HaMikdash. Okay, but that platform was only there on a temporary basis. If we put a system in the Beis HaMikdash, which is there on a permanent basis, even if it's not connected, that might be an issue. There are other arguments about the reason of the Bima Shal Eitz for Hakel. There's also a Svara that anything which is not part of the structure, it's a side thing. It's not there for part of the structure. It's external. It's on the outside. But the general theme of making changes in the Beis HaMikdash using modern technology, obviously modern technology is there for Kedusha and for the Beis HaMikdash. The world didn't deserve to have gold. And the reason we have gold is for the Mishkan. All this modern technology is there to serve Hashem and certainly for the Beis HaMikdash. We have in the Mishnah that Ben Kattan made 12 different

09:25 Speaker 2 ways to get water out of the Kiyor. There was originally only two. He made a whole wheel for there shouldn't be a problem of the water staying overnight in the Kiyor. Mumbaz HaMelech made the handles of the dishes on Yom Kippur all gold. There was a Tav LeShal Zev. Hilni HaMalka made a bunch of things that were made over the years. They took the flute that they sang in the Beis HaMikdash. They covered it with gold so it should be nicer. And Acharinim write that he's supposed to improve and always make better the Beis HaMikdash. So the concept of modern technology itself per se wouldn't be an issue. So the short answer, as we said before, is we don't know.

09:57 Speaker 1 A brief ad and we'll be right back to the podcast. Already have Smicha? Now it's time to fulfill the Rebbe's hora to receive Yadin Yadin certification. Join the Dayanist program with the renowned Magid Shear Rebbe Tuvia Kasimov and gain the knowledge and training to rule on real-life questions. Spots are limited, so don't wait. Sign up today at lamanilmedu.com.

10:22 Speaker 2 Let me go to a different topic altogether. I received the following question. In Hayom Yom it is written about Menichaba when we wash our bread. We wash three times for bread on one hand and three times on the other hand. And the third time when we wash, we leave a bit of extra water in the final wash. And we use that water to rub our hands together. And the question was, is that only for bread or is it any other washing? The answer is any time you wash on your sail until you die and also when you wash before davening. Why am I saying washing for bread? We have the clearly halakhah you're supposed to rub your hands. Rubbing your hands for washing for davening is found in Alterebe Shokanar. There's a machlokas whether you should make a bracha every time you wash your hands for davening. We don't because of a safek. But conceptually it's the idea of washing which according to one opinion you actually make a bracha. And Alterebe clearly writes to rub your hands to make the posuk of erchatz b'nikoyim kappayim. Now when you read Alterebe Shokanar, it could imply that the reason you're rubbing your hands is because one opinion says to wash your hand all the way till the arm. And one says just to the end of the fingers. So you want to be yotzed other opinion, add a bit of water, rub your hands. That's how you could learn pshat in Alterebe Shokanar. In the siddur,

11:38 Speaker 2 however, you could learn pshat differently. The implication of the siddur is purely just for extra tarah you keep continuing rubbing your hands. But klal, the idea of rubbing your hands is in order to do an extra purity erchatz b'nikoyim. Not the word focus, not the word kappayim. There should be the whole hand. But nikoyim, it creates more cleanliness when you rub the hands together. What about washing in the morning? Now in Shokanar, the siddur doesn't mention to rub your hands when you wash in the morning. But it is clearly mentioned in Kizva Rizal. We have Reb Chaim Vital wrote a sefer called Shalach Avonas. Over there he doesn't mention it, but he wrote another sefer called Oy Las Tamid, which is after the Shalach Avonas. And over there it's clearly mentioned. It's mentioned in Pri Etz Chaim, which is also Manuscripts of Talmid Arizo, although it's not directly from Chaim Vital, it's mentioned in so many Siddur Arizo, in Mishas Hasidim, in Shalom Sharabi, you name it. So I-I'm saw one of the modern-day Acharonim write that nobody says to rub your hands when you wash in the morning when you wake up. But clearly he didn't know that it says this in all these various different kisvei Arizo. So the first time you're washing by your bed, you obviously have to rub your hands then. But the second time when you're washing and making a bracha, you should really rub your hands then for the washing. When you're washing, however, if for stam, for

12:55 Speaker 2 cleanliness, because of ruach ra, every time you wash your hands or you touch this, you touch that, you come out of the bathroom, then obviously you don't have to rub your hands. The rubbing your hands is when a person washes something which is a proper chiyuv gamur midirabanan, a proper obligation to go wash your hands. In those washings is-- we should also rub our hands as well. Different question in Hilchot Shabbos, and I have a couple of questions here in Hilchot Shabbos, and I hope we can go through all of them. So I received the following question. Somebody wants to go and put challahs wrapped in aluminum foil on top of their cholent crockpot. So I have a cholent, a fully cooked cholent, and on top of the cholent I want to place challahs wrapped in aluminum foil. Now we-- there's an issue of bishul, of cooking. Well, the challah was baked already before. It's not wet. It's absolutely dry. There's no concern of reheating it. The reason this could be a problem is because we have an issue called hatmana. Hatmana means not to have something insulated. Now, these challahs are wrapped in silver foil, aluminum foil. So if I'm putting them on top of the cholent pot and it's wrapped, would that be a problem? So it really depends why we're putting the wrapping around the challahs. Are we doing it in order to preserve or add heat? Or are we doing it because we want to keep the blech clean? We wanna

14:21 Speaker 2 make sure that the challahs do not dry out. If it's being done in a way because... N-not to retain the heat, to keep the challahs from drying out, that's not called hatmana. If it's to retain the heat, then it-- that would be hatmana. The only solution would be that most of the challah should be uncovered, or there should be some gap between the silver foil and the challah. Let me explain why I'm saying this. We have it in the Shulchan Aruch that if you do hatmana, insulation is only if it's there to retain the heat. If it's lishmem min hachbarim, you're covering something so the mice shouldn't get to it, that's not called hatmana insulation. Now, this din is mentioned in Shulchan Aruch, but it's not very clear. We have two forms of hatmana. We have hatmana bedavra she'eino mosef o bedavra hamosef haval. Something which retains heat or something which adds heat. And the two levels of hatmana on Friday, we're not allowed to even do insulation if on Friday insulate something in something which will add heat. On the Shabbos, even if it's just there to retain heat. There are two halachas. There are so many distinctions between them. This halacha that if it's to protect the item, it's not for heat purposes, not to preserve the heat, not to add heat, not to retain heat. It's purely to protect the item from the mice. Does that apply even if it's the actual insulation is adding heat? The Beit Shabbat wants to argue

15:44 Speaker 2 that this is a special halacha in something which is not mosef, it's maymid, it's retaining the heat, then I don't care because y-after all, you're doing it not to retain heat, you're doing it to protect from the mice. But a hatmana where it's adding heat, when it's on top of the cholent pot, there's fire there under the pot. When you put your silver foil, the silver foil is getting heated from that fire, and that silver foil is considered something that adds heat, then maybe it would not be allowed to wrap the challahs. Most poskim do not make this distinction. In fact, the s-read-- the source brought is that this is like covering your pot. You're allowed to cover your pot. Now, clearly, when you cover your pot, normally your pot is on the fire. You're allowed to cover a pot. Covering is not considered insulation. It's a cover. So if covering is okay, that applies to even something which is adding heat, certainly will apply to the wrapping around the silver foil. It's-- There's a discussion about this, but it seems pretty clear. The Rashba, the Rashba talks about hatmana bedavra hamosef, insulating something which adds heat. And then he adds this condition that if it's there to protect from the mice, it's not a problem. This is a discussion a lot of people have with kugel, that you wrap the kugel in the silver foil and you drop it into the cholent. I'm not gonna go into that whole topic. But clearly, those who

17:04 Speaker 2 mention this idea that you're doing it only that the kugel shouldn't fall apart are clearly arguing... There, there might be other issues with that which I don't want to go into right now. But all these Acharonim who talk about this topic clearly understand that hatmana, even bedavra hamosef, even if it's adding heat, it's not a problem if you're doing it for other external purposes. And even by the way, if you're doing it for both purposes, you could-- both for heat and to protect it, over here you're doing it in order to-- it shouldn't dry up, that also could very well be okay if it's something which was made specifically for that. So you could argue the silver foil is not made for that. It's not like a cover. Okay, we, we could talk about that. But either way, if most of it is not covered, it-- when we talk about bedavra hamosef adding heat, the main thing is not about the top. The main thing is that most of it is wrapped around. If most of it is not wrapped around, that's never a problem. So let me-- So in order that we shouldn't get confused, if you're doing it not for heat purposes, you're doing that it shouldn't dry up, you don't want the moisture to come out of the challah to stay fresh, then it's not called hatmana. If you're doing it for heat purposes, then it needs to be mostly uncovered or have a visible gap. Which brings me to another Hilchot

18:20 Speaker 2 Shabbos question. And that is the issue of magis, mixing. Magis is a form of bishul, mixing something on the fire. Now, taking out with a spoon is another form of magis, is another form of mixing. Covering the pot is another form of mixing. So we have different forms of hagasa. Hagasa is an element of bishul, of cooking on Shabbos. So when people wanna take out stuff from-- wanna ladle out from the cholent, that could be a form of hagasa, of magis. So we take the pot off the fire, and only then do we ladle things out. Strictly speaking, hagasa would only be if it's not fully cooked, 'cause the idea of hagasa, of magis, is that you're helping the cooking process, you're aiding the process. If it's fully cooked, it wouldn't be a problem. But the Kol Bo has an opinion, and we've machmir with the Kol Bo's opinion that magis applies even if it's fully cooked. So we're machmir with that also. But to ladle out, we're not gonna be machmir. Ladling out, it's off the fire and fully cooked, that we're not machmir that far. So now the question is, what means off the fire? If you're holding it above the fire, this could be relevant with Sternos. There's a water pan underneath. The water pan is not touching the fire. So now you're having a pan on top of the water pan, but is that really considered it's on top of the fire? So the Pri Chodosh writes, "Fire doesn't mean fire.

19:44 Speaker 2 It means any place where it could cook." Other poskim seem to imply that's not the case. It's hard to really define the answer to this question 'cause it's hard to understand to begin with what could be the problem with magis, what is the problem of mixing, especially when it's fully cooked, and especially when you're not even mixing it, you're just ladling out. So that's-- becomes a bit hard to understand. There, there's actually some Rabbeinu Yitzchok that is showing him that imply that maybe it wouldn't be a problem if it's not, not touching the fire. Practically speaking, people often wanna ladle out stuff in the cholent, uh, so they hold the cholent above the fire. Well, if you're holding it above the fire, it's right above the fire, that could actually-- it's pretty hot over there. It could cook over there. So how is that different than the case of the Sternos? Some people take it off completely and put it to the counter. They're still holding it in their hand because they wanna put back the cholent. But if you're holding it above the fire or close to the fire, still many people are extremely lenient with that, and there's some strong argument for, for leniency in that case. Which brings me to a third topic. We mentioned that one of the elements of magis is the idea of covering. So that's clearly Halakha, that covering a pot is a form of magis, it's a form of bishul, putting a cover on top of a

21:00 Speaker 2 pot. That's clearly mentioned in Shulchan Aruch that you're not allowed to cover, and you're also not allowed to add to the cover. There's a cover and you wanna add another cover on top of it, that's also a problem. It seems like this is the Issur D'oraisa. There is a halacha that an oinen, when a relative passed away, a father, a mother, brother, sister, etc., then the person who before the burial is considered an oinen, and an oinen is not allowed to do mitzvahs, mitzvahs asei, positive mitzvahs, is not allowed to make brachos, is not allowed to daven, etc., etc. So that makes it very difficult for people that really want to daven. So there's a particular heter called nimsela katafum. In the olden days, there were people who their job was to carry the coffin on their shoulders and they would do the burial. Once you give it to their hands, it's not in the hands of the oinen anymore, and then he could go daven, do everything that he wants to do. So do we rely on the fact that today's day and age we have organized Chevrei Kadisha and does that become nimsela katafum? So there's a big machlekis about this because often the children didn't, the children or the family members didn't give away totally to the Chevrei Kadisha. They're still involved on some level. They're going to the levaya. If they're going to the levaya, they're involved. However, there is a minhag in many places, including in Chabad, that children do

26:24 Speaker 2 not go along to the levaya. They don't follow the mitzvah. They don't follow the oren. So if they don't follow the oren and they organize everything with Chevrei Kadisha and everything has been worked out, then really it shouldn't be, they should be able to keep mitzvahs. The issue would only be where other relatives, children don't go follow the levaya of a father or a mother. Other relatives do follow. Then there would be this issue they don't have to keep mitzvahs. There is a lot more to be said about this topic. There's a lot of lack of clarity about this topic. And I don't want to go into all those details. The Noidei Behuda was mach when people accompany the mitzvah, but even he made some qualifications which is often not quoted. It's a difference if he's in a mitzvah or he's in a sealed oren. Today's day and age, often it's a sealed oren and that might be totally different. There's some, the other thing is that today's day and age when people are going along, they're not doing anything. In a lot of Chevrei Kadishas, they don't let you touch relatives. They don't let them touch. They don't let them bury. They don't let them add earth. They don't let them do a thing. And the Noidei Behuda possibly was talking about when the person is involved on some level. There's good reasons, a lot of svaras to be lenient. I will, the question really becomes, however, what does it mean they worked out

27:44 Speaker 2 everything with Chevrei Kadisha? What if the person is still involved on some level? He could still call people. Now, you could always call people, but does that mean he's involved? Generally, it's in Chevrei Kadisha's responsibility. It's not you need to have those extra people there. Some people say that giving over means that the person had to do some involvement himself. In today's day and age, he doesn't do any involvement whatsoever. That's a massive chidush as well. There's some strong arguments that katafum is when you give it over to the katafum, giving over to Chevrei Kadisha is even more than giving over to the katafum of those people in the olden days that would do the burial. There is a halacha that even if somebody is in another city, according to most Rishonim, and he's not involved on any level, he still follows the laws of aninus. And this is a question a lot of Achronim ask. Why if Chevrei Kadisha is doing something, the person loses the rules of aninus, but if he's in another city and his brothers or sisters are taking care of it, he does have the rules of aninus. There's a lot of distinctions. The main distinction is that Chevrei Kadisha is a Mesudat Diga thing. They're running the whole entire show of it. There's no real concern that there should be a problem. There's no hipcha covered of the meys that Chevrei Kadisha runs the entire thing from the beginning to the end. That shouldn't be a problem. There's some

28:53 Speaker 2 people that want to argue, but it's against literally practically all the Rishonim that Alter Rebbe or others don't hold of this heter of nimsela katafum. I mean, clearly nimsela katafum is a clear thing that if an oinen, once it's given over to the people that are in charge, not only they're allowed to eat meat and wine, but also they start becoming chayavim mitzvahs. And the Rebbe himself said the reason why he davened Ma'ariv in the year Tov Shin Chaf Hei, he davened Ma'ariv after his mother passed away because it was already in the hands of the Chevrei Kadisha by the Rebbe. He didn't have to take care of anything. He asked the Chevrei Kadisha to take care of it. It's done. He doesn't have to go through all the details. When the Rebbe's brother passed away, the Rebbe followed a different position, which is another whole discussion, where the Rebbe said since he's not going to the funeral, he's going to start, skip the stage of aninus, not to be able to daven, not say Shema for such a long time. He was going to go straight into mourning as though it's already after the burial because there are many positions that say that people don't go to the levaya, they start avelus right away. Talking about avelus, I want to talk about a, just very, very briefly about a question relating to the halachos of the nine days. We know the halacha is that if a person makes a sim or a sudas mitzvah

30:08 Speaker 2 based on certain conditions, then the people that come to the sim that normally would come because they're family, because they're related, because they're friends, could be part of the sim. To come, stop to eat meat and drink wine is a problem. So the question this person is making about mitzvah bris, he has waiters, he has a singer, he has a photographer. Are they also part of that group? In my opinion, it's pretty clear they're also part of it. The halacha is you're supposed to give food for the shamash for the waiter. So it doesn't, it says relative or friend and then it says except for those who come and going to eat and drink. Now, come and eat and drink means because otherwise they wouldn't come. The waiter and the photographer, they normally come throughout the year. You make a simcha, you call them to be a photographer. And once they're coming, it's a menschal thing. They should be there. They're actually better than other people in a way, better than relatives and friends because they're coming, you need them there. The other people, maybe they'll come, maybe they won't come. I don't know. It's too hard for me. These people are coming for their parnassa, but they're part of the makeup of the meal. You need to have a waiter there. You need to have a photographer or at least you think you need to have one. So it's hard to say that they should not be included. And, and not only in the

31:16 Speaker 2 nine days, but even the week of Tisha B'Av, which is much more severe, and there in a bris, you only gotta have a minyan matsumsum, exactly a minyan plus immediate relatives. It seems to me that the photographer, the caterer, all the people that it's mentioned kedosh, hep kedosh kedosh, not to give them to eat. Everybody's eating meat, and they can't eat meat. Doesn't make any sense to me. I'm gonna start another topic, which is extremely, extremely controversial topic. We're not gonna talk about this at length, but I do wanna mention this issue. There's a big shaila nowadays. It has been-- there's an argument that our dishes do not absorb as they used to absorb in the past. And therefore, we-- when somebody cooks fleishigs in a pot, the concern is that the fleishig taste absorbed in the pot. And therefore, now if you cook milchigs, the milchigs will receive the fleishig taste. In our dishes, you don't feel a fleishig taste when you cook milchigs afterwards, or you don't feel the treif taste afterwards. And that could really create a, a whole new discussion that's been very little discussed about this topic. I wrote a whole article on-- about it, and I do wanna mention that everything on this podcast, you could-- um, a lot of things on the podcast, you could see later the links on the website, on the asteraav.com website. I wrote about this. It's number five three one two zero asteraav.com. You could look about it at length. That is some

32:34 Speaker 2 strong arguments to say-- it's to say that, uh, no, that we can't change the Halacha. That doesn't make any sense. The Halacha is based on fact. That if there are scientific experiments that prove that today, and there are some scientific experiments that today the taste is not absorbed in the metal. So I'm not gonna say because of that you shouldn't kasher, but that could be an extra argument that if a person did not kasher and they cooked something afterwards, there might be certain cases where we can argue that because anyhow there's no taste absorbed in their milchigs now, it could be mutar. This is a discussion for rabbonim to have. You have to look through all the different experiments. The question is not whether we rely on the science. The question is wheth-- it's not about Halacha changing. The question is, what type of experiment needs to be made to say that our dishes are done differently? It doesn't make sense to say the rule of lo plog, that once that was in the time of Chazal, because there's some strong evidence that every generation they went and they did practical assessments and scientific tests to see whether there's still a taste. We physically don't taste normally. If you wash the dishes properly, you cook something in a pot, you don't feel anything afterwards, that taste going into the next food. So again, this is not a psak. This is waiting for the Gedolei Yisrael to talk about this. But again, I'm just mentioning this

33:45 Speaker 2 as an interesting topic, and you can look up all the details more, the lamdus about it on the website. Yeshuras Tevel is kol tov.

33:53 Speaker 3 Join the global Halacha 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.