פנורמה של הלכה 23

02:18 How's the sound? You're muted, so I can't hear. Okay. Start. Good evening, and, uh, tonight's shiur is, um, sponsored, dedicated in the honor of the yahrtzeit of the late Mrs. Wendy Teller. Yiddish name's Chaya Dina bas Shole. And her yahrtzeit is... It's, it's the second yahrtzeit, I believe. Yes? Hilchos? Second yahrtzeit? I'm not sure. Okay. All right. Let's move on. Um, right. So let's go straight to the questions. Dan, you're very quiet. Yeah. Go straight to the questions. First of all, about on Yom Tov, we all went into peeling lots of fruits and vegetables, so the question about peeling on Yom Tov. Can you use a peeler for peeling fruit and vegetables on Yom-- on, on Shabbos and on Yom Tov? So now, the Shmiras Shabbos Kahalacha brings the view of the Aderet Nezer. The Aderet Nezer was the Sochatchover. He also wrote a sefer called Eglei Tal, which is on the lamed heh tes melachos. And he was a contemporary, perhaps, of the Semak Tzedek, a little bit later. He, he strongly takes the view that if it's an edible peel, then it's not a question of borer altogether. The whole issue here is you are allowed to se-take... You're allowed to... Boreh is a melacha, but if it's a derech achilah, the-- if it's a manner of eating, then it's okay. So the, uh... He sees an edible peel, that you remove an edible peel, so that's not called borer altogether. It doesn't come into the g-category of borer. And on that basis,

08:43 even though a peeler could be seen as a special implement, specialized for separating one from the other, but he says still that it's not borer altogether. It's all, it's all food. You're separating food from food, and therefore it's not considered borer. And so he allows you to use a, an apple peeler or, or a potato peeler to peel apples. He says you are allowed to use those on Yom Tov. On Shabbos, sorry. So now then, what you have in front of you, however, is from a sefer called Shabbos Kahalacha from Rabbi Yekusiel Farkash. He's now published his fourth volume on Hilchos Shabbos. So I'm gonna run through what he says here. So this is in, uh, it's his second volume. Yeah. So he writes the following: "Dvarim shenitan leichlol miblishi yikarfum." Things which can be eaten without being peeled, like apples and like cucumbers, if most people eat them with the peels, but once the peel is removed, people are not gonna eat apple peels on their own, not gonna eat, eat cucumber peels on their own. So there are many poskim who allow us to peel them on Shabbos without the limitations of borer. And you would be allowed to use a peeler also, and you'd be allowed to peel them even not for immediate use, even for delayed use. However, he says, if the pe-- the person who's peeling them is a istenis, is very fussy, a fussy eater who won't eat without the peeling, even though other people will eat the same

10:23 with the peel, so he should be machmir not to... He should be not to use a peeler, et cetera, et cetera. So he takes the f-- brings the first view that using a peeler for apples, if you are used to eating apples with the peel, he says you are allowed to peel them with a peeler on Shabbos. He then says, "Le'eder hisa," and that's the second paragraph. On the other side, there are gedolei haposkim who are more machmir on this, and therefore he recommends that, "Harotze lotze et y'dai kol hadeot." If you want to be covered from a-- all opinions, then you should-- you shouldn't be using a peeler, I guess, subject to the dinim of... Because it, it is a question of borer. He says, then at the bottom of the page, he says, "If you are in a rush to cov-cover a lot of ground, a lot-- do a lot of peeling, lots of apples, um, in a rush and whether to... or you're in a rush and time." Let's go onto the next page. So you should, uh, so he says, "If you do want to use a peeler, so use, peel off also a fair bit of the fruit also, not just the peel." Uh, it should be a bit, quite a bit of the fruit, noticeable part of the fruit. In other words, more than just the bare peel. This is all said, he says, by a, by a fruit or a vegetable where most people do eat them with

11:55 the peels. The kind of fruit or vegetable which most people will not eat them without being peeled. So, for example, an, a carrot. Although you can eat a carrot with the peel, but most of us won't eat a carrot unpeeled, therefore you wouldn't be allowed to use a peeler for that. So to, to summarize this, he says: One who wants to peel a cu-cucumber or apple, not subject to the ru-- the limitations of boreh, like for the peeler or for a delayed use. ‹ foreign language › don't do that. It should be ‹ foreign language ›. If you want to rely on the ‹ foreign language ›, you can... Y-y-it's only such a fruit which most people will eat it without peeling. Okay, so that's basically the answer. Now, th-there is room to be ‹ foreign language ›, to be more lenient with the use of a peeler for peeling apples on Shabbos. But, um, but he, he recommends to be, to take a stricter view not to do so. Let's move on then. Point two in our question then, um, what about on Pesach? Even so, on Pe-- we just read before about the ‹ foreign language ›. A person who's a very fussy eater wouldn't eat without peeling. So then for him, subjectively, it becomes an issue of boreh. So the same thing would apply for Pesach. For, since on Pesach we are more fussy about peels, so then we should, we shouldn't be using a peeler on Shabbos on Pesach. Having said

13:32 that, what about Yom Tov, not Shabbos? So then on Sha-- on Yom Tov, on the contrary, it's recommended to use a peeler because the, the rules of boreh for Yom Tov are different to Shabbos. The rules of Yom Tov on, on, of boreh on Yom Tov is to use the simplest route. The one which is less, the least effort. And therefore, to, i-i-if you, if it's quicker, it's less effort to use a peeler than to use a knife, then use a peeler by all means on Yom Tov. Okay. Okay, let's go on to the next question. Every year we got, we, you know, comes the last day of Pesach. The whole Pesach we'll be very, very careful about gibroks. Comes the last day of Pesach, so this is, uh, amongst all Hasidim who are ‹ foreign language › gibroks, but the last day of Pesach we're ‹ foreign language ›. We thought only Chabad. You look in, uh, others forums, this is the general view. On the last day of Pesach, uh, one is ‹ foreign language ›. And the reason for this is, say, in a sense that it's a day where there should be an ‹ foreign language › and not to be ‹ foreign language ›. I do more, I'm more stricter than you. Okay. Question is: Do you have to worry about the keilim, about not being able to use the, the same keilim next year because they were used for gibroks? Let me stop a second before we go, going

14:54 to this question. What happens if chametz got mixed into sugar a week before Pesach and it got cooked together? So we know that ‹ foreign language › works before Pesach. And therefore, you'll be, you'd be allowed to have that sugar on Pesach because it's ‹ foreign language › before Pesach. Now, what happened if the same happened on Pesach? If one drop of, of, of, of chametz fell into a whole pot of sugar, let's say, on Pesach, so then there's no ‹ foreign language ›. There's no ‹ foreign language ›. And so the whole pot of sugar becomes ‹ foreign language ›. Becomes, becomes ‹ foreign language ›, sorry. But what happens next year? This, this, this, uh, this bit of chametz which is ‹ foreign language ›. On Pesach itself, it, there's no ‹ foreign language ›. ‹ Foreign language › doesn't work on Pesach. But this, this same mixture, if it would happen a week after Pesach, would be ‹ foreign language ›. So then possibly, as you'd say, for next year, well, why should it be ‹ foreign language ›? It's been ‹ foreign language › before this Pesach. Or do you say no? Because the mixture happened on Pesach, and on Pesach the, the whole mixture became ‹ foreign language ›. Therefore, the whole thing should be, the, the keilim should be ‹ foreign language ›. There's, there's two ways of looking at it. Okay, so, so this is... I've got here from the, um, the Sefer Piskei Teshuvos. Some, some say,

16:27 take the view that by next year you don't have to worry about it. Some say that you do have to worry about it. That it, that the problem kind of reawakens next year. And the meaning would be, if it had been ‹ foreign language ›, if there had been a, a crumb of chametz mixed into a, a compote, let's say, and, and the keilim had become ‹ foreign language ›, you wouldn't use it next Pesach without kashering. That's true. But when it comes to gibroks, we're talking about a different thing. We're not talking about chametz, ‹ foreign language ›. We're talking about a, a ‹ foreign language › being extremely, how do you say, conscientious. Way beyond. And on that basis, although if it were ‹ foreign language › chametz mixed in with a, with a, with a, uh, compote on Pesach, I'd say you should kasher that pot before next year. But here with gibroks, one can take the view, because it's such a remote... I don't know what the right word is. A remote, far or out ‹ foreign language ›. Therefore, one doesn't need to kasher. So there are different vie-views of this. Some say that because between this Pesach and next Pesach, there's 12 months, therefore you don't have to worry about it because there's an opinion of the ‹ foreign language › based upon the ‹ foreign language › that once... The, the whole issue is the taste in the, which is absorbed in the keilim. So, so there's that

18:00 view that after 12 months, the taste in the keilim has become totally, uh, you know, irrelevant. So totally bottled. Uh, there's nothing to talk about. So some say that because between one Pesach and the next, there's 12 months, but that's not always ‹ foreign language › to the day. So there's, there's room to be ‹ foreign language ›, there's room to be ‹ foreign language ›. And bottom line is, what is our minag? So here we have from the Sefer Ohr Tzimah of Chabad- They, they, many in Chabad, by the base-- in the, the Rebbe's house, they would use for Pesach, they... for the last day of Pesach, they'd use the same dishes which they used the middle days of Pesach, the early days of Pesach. Wouldn't kasher for the next year. And even though sometimes there aren't full twelve months from Pesach to next Pesach, weren't worried about it. So that remains the bottom line, basically, in Chabad, that we don't worry about kashering the kalim from gibrocs before using them next year. So we are a bit relaxed on that. Okay. Let's go to one more, um, post-Pesach question. And that is, one family, they made before Pesach-- or during Pesach, they made some kind of sweet, mixing mashed banana and crushed nuts. But it's-- after a while, that same mixture becomes a bit mushy, and they had some leftovers for after Pesach. So they took some oats after Pesach, and they mixed it into that sweet, and then they're asking the question,

19:34 "What is the berachah on this sweet?" Which is a mixture, as I said, of banana, mashed banana, crushed nuts, and now it's got some oats. Is the berachah Mezonos or is it Shehakol, et cetera? So, we do know that there's this principle that in a mixture, Mezonos becomes the dominant feature. But that's only when it's put in for taste. But if it's just given, put in there for structure, to give it some kind of more, if the word is viscosity, so then it doesn't become Mezonos. This is what you have here from the Alter Rebbe's Sefer HaBerachos. When do we say that dogod becomes the ichor? When it's put in for taste. But if it's only put in to color or , just to make it hold together, then you can ignore the, uh, we ignore the grain content, and we make the berachah as if it wasn't there. That's the reason why, let's say, um, uh, fish cakes, which are made with, with matzo meal, they re-- they don't become Mezonos because the, the matzo meal is put there just to give it body, to hold it together. It's not to give it... not for the purpose of, of nourishment. And in, in Dayan Kraus from Manchester, in his book, he's got two seforim on berachos. The first one he called Mekorei Habrachah, and the second one he called Tosfos Berachah. And in that sefer, in those-- in the first sefer, he takes the view that the berachah on licorice is Mezonos because licorice

21:17 is, uh, has got flour in it, these licorice, um, chewy sticks. In the second volume, in the Tosfos Berachah, he retracts from that, and he, uh, has a-- quotes a letter from Kalden and Bowser, the manufacturers, where they confirm that the reason why they're putting the flour into the licorice is not for taste, but it is for, uh, for body. Since we're talking about, um, berachos on food, I'd like to share with you. I know I spoke about this at the Kinus HaTorah on, uh, P-Pesach here in London, but I'd like to just share it with you here in a, in a, in a... at least briefly. It's something which had bothered me for many, many years. And that is, when you have a, you have a cookie. You have a-- which is made of, of flour, and it's got in it sugar. Ch-classic example is chocolate brownies. Check in the, the kitchen, what's the recipe. There's a massive amount of sugar vis-à-vis the, the flour. So now, if you just, you're on a diet, you only eat one kazais of chocolate brownie. Now, what berachah cron is it? Is it Al Hamichya or Borei Nefoshis? Because half of this thing isn't, isn't flour at all, so you only had a half a kazais of, of, of, of grain. Or do you say no, the grain becomes the dominant feature, and just like the presence of grain makes the whole thing Mezonos, so perhaps the presence of grain makes the whole thing into an Al

22:53 Hamichya also. This is the question. So here we have in, in Alter Rebbe's siddur, in the Berachos HaNehenin, he says the first of view is that if you have a mixture of grain with honey, so then, then the grain becomes the ichor, and it becomes Mezonos and Al Ha-- and, I mean, Ein Sholes, but Al Hamichya. So long as there's actual grain and not just the taste, it becomes Al Hamichya. Now, second paragraph. There are those who say that on this mixture, it would not become, um, warrant Al, Al Hamichya. It'd only be if the ratio is that there's one kazais in the amount you would eat in, in, uh, in a, in a . Let's say that's six, um, three eggs. If it's one, uh, one to six. I-in other words, one to five, actually, yeah? Some say that when does the grain dominate to make the whole mixture Al Hamichya? Only if it's a one, one to five ratio. But if it's more, if the grain is more diluted, let's say one to six, one to seven, then it's, it's still Mezonos, but it's not Al Hamichya. Good. So meanwhile, according to this, the berachah on the chocolate brownies, which is, even if it's twice sugar to, to, to grain, it's still not one to s- not one to f- one to six. It's one to... It's less than one to five. It's more than one to five. Therefore, according to this, the berachah on, uh, uh, for, uh, you'd say Al Hamichya

24:47 for the chocolate brownies. Now, let's go on to the next quote, which is in Berachos. And that was in Perek Gimel, and now we're in Perek Ches. So here he writes, "If you've got a mixture of flour, of grain, and let's say flour of kitniyas," yeah? "Of, of beans." Could be it's hamotzi because the, the grain is the main thing. But when it comes for the after berachah, would only be warrant birkas hamozon if there's a ratio of kazayis mchdei achilas pras. There's a mistake there. Uh, it should be a samech. That seems to be the same as what he said back in Peh Gimel. Well, v'yesh oimrim she-eino mevarech birkas hamozon at sheyochol kol hapas. The second opinion says no, you can't make, you can't make a birkas hamozon, the full birkas hamozon on this mixture unless you eat a whole pras. So you've eaten the volume of three... of, of, of, of three eggs. So inevitably you've eaten a kazayis of grain. So could this, this ap-ap-approach, it looks like that on the chocolate brownie you wouldn't make a beracha al hamichya on one kazayis unless you had ate two or three kazayis and then by... you will inevitably have eaten a kazayis of grain. So here we've got lechayeh contradiction between the two places. Does... This is, uh, yeah, I think it's very clear. The contradiction seems to be very clear. So this contradiction bor-bothered me for many years, and last year I looked at it more carefully and I think I've

26:24 come to a, a, a clear, uh, uh, um, explanation. In this case, in the first, uh, scenario, he's talking about grain mixed with honey. In the second scenario, he's talking about flour of grain mixed with flour of beans. There's a difference here. Two different types of mixtures. Flour with honey, sugar, whatever it may be, or flour with flour. Why does that make any difference? So now let's scroll down. Here we have, um, a... This is where it's in Shulchan Aruch. I think it's Kuf Zam Shin. And here we have the Magen Avraham who talks about if it... He's differentiating whether it's mixed with flour or with other things. And here, the, the next quote is from the Alter Rebbe in the Luach Beritasana. And I just explained the, the logic here. Flour in other things. In flour in, in a, in a chocolate brownie, let's say, flour with sugar. The flour is recognizable. Uh, that its presence is there. Therefore, even though it's one to five, it's still noticeable and it dominates. But when it's flour with flour, it's flour of grain and flour, cha, tapioca flour, whatever it may be. Flour with flour, because it's a power... They're similar. They have similar properties, similar tastes, similar structure, therefore it becomes negligible. It's more easy to ignore flour in flour than to ignore flour in sugar. So again, in Pelek Gimel, he says, "When it's one to five of flour in sugar, in honey, then it's al hamichya." In Pelek Ches, he says, "If the

28:19 same would be flour with flour, it would not be, um, warrant al hamichya or birkas hamozon if it was without sugar because it's flour with flour." Then I wouldn't say an al hamichya unless you ate s-so much of the mixture that you, that you for sure ate a kazayis of, of, of flour in the mixture. But that's, that's the, uh... That seems to be very clear, the, uh, the answer. So back to the chocolate brownies. It remains that you would make an al hamichya on a kazayis of the brownies, and it doesn't need to be a kazayis or, um, it doesn't... Y-y-one kazayis of the mixture is enough to make an al hamichya. Let's move on. I got this question from a shliach somewhere in the former Soviet Union, and the situation is that, as, uh, we all know, that there's, uh, every time there's a, the person who's not so frum who's, who's, who passes away, there's always a struggle. Is it going to be a cremation or is it going to be a burial? And, um, it's, uh, uh, a, it's a big achievement that you can a-- and you manage to save a Jewish body from being cremated and, and instead it's buried halacha. The problem is that in many of these places, they don't have a dedicated Jewish, uh, burial ground. They don't have a de-dedicated Jewish cemetery. They don't even have a dedicated plot, area within the, the goyishe cemetery. So it can be that you're burying a, a, a

29:55 Jewish, um, body right next to a, it could be even a, ch- crosses and whatever, what have you. I must tell you, I was once in Alma-Ata, where the Rebbe's father is buried, and walking from the, uh, the entrance of the cemetery till where Reb Levik is buried, this is about a five-minute walk. It was really, I felt terrible because there's all these goyishe graves with busts and statues and, and, and, uh, symbols, et cetera. And then after a five minutes walk, there you find Reb Levik's burial plot, and you felt that it's like a galus in a galus in a galus in such a... That's the, that's where he's buried. So here the question is, they don't have... In many of these places, they don't have the fac- they don't have the option of burying them in a Jewish cemetery. Is there-- What can be done to mitigate the issue of burying them somewhere else, where burying them in a goyishe cemetery? So what's the issue here? So here we have the, uh, halacha of ein koveirim rosh eitz el tzadik. Afil rosh hamur eitz rosh kal. There is an issue of not burying a rosh next to a tzadik. And for the-- certainly, like a, a Yehudi, with any Yehudi, one wouldn't want to bury them next to one another. One's presence could disturb the other. There is a shtickel solution, and that is to put up a, a fence. And that's sometimes allowed, uh, that's sometimes done, and that would mitigate the,

31:39 this issue. And I just saw now in the Minchas Elazar talks about this issue, and he says that's why, um, they build a ohel for a tzadik. This is basically to isolate that the tzadik shouldn't be disturbed by, uh, this resting place. So the tzadik shouldn't be disturbed by the other people's, um, bodies who are buried n-nearby. So the, um... One interesting factor which I noticed when I was in Russia and in, in Ukraine, that there it's very popular that they have family plots, and they have metal railings around them. Uh, nothing to do with Yiddish guy, just wherever it is. You saw-- I saw many times cemeteries as you're driving through the countryside. You saw many times they had these family plots with, surrounded with metal railings. And actually, around the Blaviks' place also, there's a metal railing all the way around. And so that would mitigate. Though it's not a, a proper Beis HaChaim dedicated, th-the, this would be the, the, uh, one way of, of... Of course, you can't put up the railings necessarily before the burial, but as soon as possible to put up railings, and that way it wouldn't have this business of rosh next to tzadik. Let's move on to the next question. So question seven is that we have a room which was a bathroom, but now we've removed all the, the porcelain, the, this, the, uh, bath and the, and the toilet sea, e-et cetera, and now it's used as a storeroom. D-does, does a, this room

33:20 require a mezuzah? This is the question we're gonna deal with now. So let's-- Here we have in front of us the Mishnah Brurah in Siman Pey Dalet. Let's say it's talking really in the rules, the halachas of Shema, where you wouldn't say Shema in a bathhouse. And here he says, in passing, he throws in this. Um, If there was a change in the structure of the bathroom. They, uh, removed the stove which they would have in the bathroom then. And they made it into a, a regular room. So the Mishnah Brurah is very clear that if you did a structural change to remove the features of a bathroom and now it's become a regular room, then you would put up a mezuzah with a bracha, et cetera. Let's move on. Just excuse me just a minute. I'll be back in a minute. Sorry about that. Okay. Let's move on to the next question, point eight. And that is, we have-- When we take out the Sefat Emet on Yom Tov, so we say, "Hashem, Hashem, ken, rachum vechanun," after which we have this Ribono shel olam where we mention our name and our mother's name. Now, on Yom Tov, we have the, uh, three shofarots of Shabbos. So then becomes the question when, uh, the siddur says clearly, when Yom Tov is on Shabbos, we don't say, "Hashem, Hashem." It remains unclear what happens about the Ribono shel olam. Is that prayer said when Yom Tov is on Shabbos, or do you-- since you're not

35:53 saying Yigmal aleinu, therefore automatically you drop the prayer also. I must tell you that this is already going back three hundred and fifty years ago. You've got Ramot Sh'Zakuta in, uh, in, uh, the Ramaz, who already mentions that you don't... E-even though you don't say, "Hashem, Hashem," you still say the Ribono shel olam, uh, on, on a Shabbos. And there's been to and fro in different sefarim whether, whether, whether they are, they are dealt together or they are two separate things. So now what we have here. So we have here a sicha from Tov Shinan Vays. Um, he's talking here about emulating the Nesiim, emulating the Rebbe. And he says, "Emulating the Rebbe." Let's take a look over here, um, this third paragraph. And so therefore you got all emulate the Rebbe. So the Rebbe says, "Don't be so surprised. You have something similar every Yom Tov when you open up the Aron." If it's on a weekday, . So you see what he's saying, the rabbi's saying over here, that you have this, this tefillah which we say every Yom Tov. And if it's on a weekday, you've said that you'd give them a zachmin, which obviously implies if it's, was not a weekday, if it was Shabbos, then you wouldn't say you give them a zachmin. But you still, they say the tefillah. So this is a tough hun and base. This is the way they've presented the sikha. And so you s- from here we see that it looks like you would

37:41 say the, the tefillah on Yom Tov, which, um, which is on the Shabbos. I'm just gonna read here. This is from the Piskei Teshuva. He writes the following. I see, . This question was put to the Moshe Zakuto, and he says, you shouldn't say, et cetera, um. He writes the following. That you wouldn't push aside this tefillah of Ribono Shel Olam, even when Yom Tov is on the Shabbos. So th-there's, there are two views of this, but it looks like that one sh- that the, uh, remains that you should be saying that re- tefillah of Ribono Shel Olam when Yom Tov is on the Shabbos. Not saying Hashem, Hashem, but you would say, Ribono, the tefillah of Ribono Shel Olam. Let's go to the next, um, question. Okay. Now, so I got this question yesterday. Someone asked that they have a, um, a child was born and there's a, uh, parent, a grandparent. Is it appropriate to give the name after a parent of a grandparent? And then because, let's say if my, um, if I would-- I have a child named after my mother, so then I'd be calling this child with my mother's name. Would that be appropriate or would it be not appropriate? So first of all, the idea of giving, um, and, and the way it was put to me was, the question was, perhaps it's better not to give a parent-- name after a parent, so as not to have the michshel, not to have the problem of how you're

39:41 going to call that child w-with, not with the, you know, with, with the parent's name. So first of all, it is definitely a Jewish minhag to try to give a name after a deceased parent. By the Sephardim, even in their lifetime, by the Ashkenazim, only after they passed away. So here we have, uh, this is from a Sefer called Ziv HaShemes, all about names. And he says that originally they used to give names of people named after the current event. Like Noach, Yitzchak, et cetera, Moshe. After events which happened at, around their birth. But then the minhag has changed and the name is given, we give names after parents. And then in the qu-- footnote we have here, he refers to Midrash Rabba. Rav Yochi says, the, the earlier generations, that they, their yichus, their lineage was more known. So then they would use the, they would name, uh, according to current events. But we, our lineage is not so well known, and therefore we use the names as to kind of, I think it means to preserve the traceability of the, of our lineage. Rav Shimshon Gamliiel says, "They used to have Ruach HaKodesh, so they would use names from the current events. We don't use Ruach HaKodesh, so we use the Shem Aviseinu." I also noticed, I don't remember w-whether, which Sefer I saw this. We have the four sons of Aaron. The oldest one was called Nadav. What was, um, uh, the, what was the gra- the grandfather? That's, Aaron's wife was

41:24 Elisheva. Elisheva bas Amminadav. So I saw a Sefer which points out that Nadav, the son of Aaron, was named after Elisheva's father, Amminadav. So w-we saw already then you have this idea of naming after a grandfather. Um, and throughout the generations, we can see, um, you've got the moshel, you've got the, after Hillel Han- the Nassi. Hillel, you got, um, Gam- Shimon, um, Gamliiel, Shimon, Gam-Gam-- Y-They, they, they used the names of the father the whole time. And, you know, the same thing with Rabbi Yehuda HaNassi and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. You see the whole time they would give gra-- names of grandparents. Having said that, in other words, it's clear that it's a minhag Yisrael to use grandparents' names. Then the question is: Is it appropriate to refer to, to call a child with the same name as one other, to another way, as actually referring to them? So I had heard from Rabbi Tiefenbrun, Rabbi Tiefenbrun, Aaron Tiefenbrun, his shver, his father-in-law was, uh, Rav Shalom Ber Eichorn. Rav Shalom Ber Eichorn was a, uh, meshamesh. He s- helped the Friediker Rebbe, who was, as you may know, he was very, um, uh, you know, di-disabled and limited with what he could do. So he needed to have someone to help him move, et cetera. And so Rav Shalom Ber Eichorn would help him. And the Rebbe never called him by his name, Shalom Ber. He alwa- always called him Eichorn. Because the Rebbe's father's was Shalom Ber, the Rebbe Rashab, therefore, he always

43:04 referred to him as Eichorn. I-- Last night, someone also sent me a, a text that, uh, possibly from the Halberstam family, who were very, very close with the Rebbe's family. And they would come, the children would come into the Rebbe's house. But when there were children who had the names, the Rebbetsin. If they were, let's say it was a Yosef Yitzchak or a, or similar, uh, who had the name of the Rebbetsin's parents. So she would never refer to them by name. She wouldn't call him Yosef Yitzchak. She would call him Mezuzkeit. Sh- whatever, maybe she would use some other reference to avoid calling him by name. So here we've got, I mentioned many times the Sefer Piskei Teshuvas, and there's a, uh, follow on from that. His son-in-law has put out a Sefer called Psakim Teshuvas, and here it's on, on... He has a, this section of Kubit Avodah. So he says that to call after the pa- father has passed away, you are allowed to call others with this name. But there are Yechedas Gula, there are select individuals who were particular about that, that they would not refer to, uh, they would not call someone by the name of their deceased father. So in the note one0seven, he quotes here that the Chasam Sofer had a son whose name was Reb Shmuel. He never called him Reb Shmuel. He called him Reb Wolf because his father was, I guess he had, I think his name was Rav Shmuel Benyamin. But he called

44:46 him Reb Wolf because the father was Reb Shmuel, and he wanted to avoid calling his son directly with his father's name. quotes Rav Chazania also had this, uh, he wouldn't call people by his father's name, Shmaryahu, uh, even though his father's passed away. And he says also by the Viznitzer Rebbes, they also would, um, change the name a little bit. It shouldn't be mamash calling the father's name. I just comes to mind that the, in the Beis HaRav, it's mentioned the Roshymus. The Rebbe Rashab, even as, as he was a little boy, they called him Rashab, and they called the other brother Rashab. They called them by this, by the, the abbreviations. I'm just wondering whether that would may have been also out of sensitivity. So Meshulam's father was Reb Sholom Shabtai. So to call his grandson, to call him Sholom Ber, perhaps he wanted to avoid that, so he called him Rashab- Right ...and so on. That's, uh, all I'm suggesting. Okay. That's we've gone through our list for today and, uh, wish you all a Gutten Shabbos and an inspiring Chof, um, Ches- But the Halacha, one can call one's ainikel like their father's name? The Halacha is that you can, yes. The Halacha you can, and that you see that most people do, do so, and it's only Yechedas Gula who are, who are particular about this, to avoid this. But, uh, generally it's okay. But if you want, you can, can kind of change the name slightly. Instead of, let's say,

46:13 instead of saying sh- in my case, my father's name was Sholom, Sholom Ber. That's how he was known. But let's say I would call him Berel or something like that. You can find, you can find another slight change. Let me just read this, uh, note and share with you. Rav Yisroel Abuchatzera was named after, um, his grandfather, Yaakov Abuchatzera. Because his father didn't want to name him with the same name. Is that why he was called Baba Salil? Is that what you're trying to say? That's what I heard. Ah, okay. So then, you know, you're talking about Yechedas Gula. Most people are not fussy about this, and it's, like, the Halacha is not necessary. But there is room to be machmir, and that's, uh, for Yechedas Gula, so all right. You can put, once you can put it on your bacharis for being a yechi- one of the Yechedas Gula and be ve- careful about this also. Meanwhile, I wish you all a Gutten Shabbos and, uh, bezrat Hashem, we'll continue next week with, uh, what we're, whatever comes up during the week. Kol tuv. Thank you very, very much. Gutten Shabbos. And a Gutten Chumash. Yes, of course. A Gutten Shabbos. Yeah, Gutten Shabbos. Gutten Chumash. Gutten Shabbos. Shabbos.