סוכות תשפ״ב

00:00 Good evening. Uh, good night. And, uh, sorry for the short notice. Okay. We'll start off with, uh, the first question on the sheet, which is about the mezuzahs in seven seventy. I'll tell you how this came about. We were sitting and learning in Maimon yesterday, yesterday morning, and we were talking about the... It says in Poskim that when you sit in a sukkah, you have to have kavanah. You have to have, uh, you, you have to think about the fact that Yidin-- the Yidin took out the Yidin in the desert, and they, uh, were protected with the Ananei HaKavod. Now, the kavanah is part of the mitzvah, so Rabbi Wilhelm, who was teaching in the Maimon, said that-- Because really, how are you fulfilling the mitzvah of sukkah? You're sitting in it, but you're, you're passive. What, what are you doing? So he wanted to suggest that the kavanah is, is the way you're doing the Makkah and the mitzvah, by having that kavanah. Okay, fine. So the conversation went on. He suggested also that the mitzvah of mezuzah. You have a mezuzah. How do you fulfill the mitzvah of mezuzah? So he suggested that the-- by the fact that you touch the mezuzah, because once you put up mezuzah, it's passive. It's just there. So he was suggesting by the fact that you touch the mezuzah, it's as if you're doing the mezuzah, so to speak. Because we know that if, for example, you put on tzitzit or tallit early on, uh, on a,

01:37 in a, in, in, before day, day break. Or let's say you put on your, your tzitzit, um, when you couldn't make a bracha. So then the halacha is that when you can make a bracha, you're mamash mesh. You touch the tzitzit, and then you can make a bracha. For that matter, the tefillin. If you didn't make a bracha when you put on the tefillin for whatever reason, so then you are mamash mesh. You touch the tefillin, and it's counted as if you've put on the tefillin now, so to speak. So he was suggesting that the touching of the mezuzah, he said he, he'd read it somewhere, which I, I haven't found the source yet for this. But the touching of the mezuzah, which is mentioned in Shulchan Aruch. It doesn't talk about t- kissing the mezuzah. The Ramah talks about touching the mezuzah. So he was suggesting that the touching of the mezuzah is a form of a praula, of, uh, a deed, that you're doing the mitzvah. All right. So t- taking that a little bit further, here's, um, something very interesting. That the idea of putting a mezuzah inside a, a, uh, bamboo or something is mentioned in Poskim. Might even be mentioned in the Zohar, I'm not sure. The idea of having it inside a, a kind of a, a pipe. But in seven seventeen, particularly in the Rebbe's room, you'll see that the mezuzahs are in plastic or paper covers. And what I'm suggesting is that if it would be a

03:07 rigid mezuzah case, then when you touch it, you're not touching the mezuzah. And there is something about touching the mezuzah. There should be like a feeling, a sen- a sen- in a sense that you're touching the mezuzah. So dafka, by having a soft cover to the mezuzah, of course, there's the other side of it. That, that when there's a soft cover, the mezuzah is not so protected from being squ- squashed, et cetera. But on the other hand, there seems to be something about feeling the mezuzah when you touch it. And if that's the idea of like mamash mesh, but tzitzit mesh, mamash mesh tefillin, that might explain also why there is dafka a mile in, in having a, a, uh, a, a soft cover for the mezuzah rather than a rigid, uh, soft, um, hard cover. Let's move on. Okay. So the second question is, someone asked me earlier this week or last week. Now we've got two weeks of shiur-- of, of shailas here. For some reason, last Thursday night, we didn't do a shiur. So, um, so, um, the question was, does one need to use Lechem Mishneh for each meal on Yom Tov? And the question is a practical one. You make a fabregen at the end of Yom Tov, whether it is, um, Simchat Torah or the end of, uh, Simchat Torah, end of, uh, Simchat Torah. Does-- Is there a requirement of Lechem Mishneh at that point? That's, that is the question. Okay. So now let's take a look at

04:51 our, our list of, uh, you know, our pr- our, uh, display. So first of all, is there a need for Lechem Mishneh on Yom Tov? So because the Lechem Mishneh is the zecher for the fact that they didn't have man. So here, this is from the Riff in the end of, of Pesachim. So he writes, "On the other, you're meant to be, on Shabbos, you should be breaking bread on two loaves." And because it says, "Lechem Mishneh." Now, the Riff adds that he's quoting from Seder of Amram Gaon, that also , also on Yom Tov, you need to break bread on two loaves. Because the idea of Shabbos is because there was no man which came down on, on, on, on, on Shabbos. They, they kind of had a double pair, double, uh, measure on Erev Shabbos. Actually, on Yom Tov also, the man did not come down. It would come out of Yom Tov, a double measure. Just like you'd have a double measure on Erev Shabbos, so too, there would be a double measure on Erev Yom Tov, and that's the basis of having- That's the last two lines. „Halakhah be-iner le-mivtzer be-Yom Tov altar tin rifoso shelimo." So should have two whole loaves for Lechem Mishneh, just like for Pesach-- for Shabbos. Then he goes on to Pesach, which is another Parsha. Three matzahs, two matzahs, et cetera. So that's the, that's the Shulchan Aruch. That's, that's the riff. Then we have here on the top of your, your screen, you see

06:27 here from the Shulchan Aruch, Halachot Yom Tov. Now, I've, I've brought this from the Shulchan Aruch because the Alter Rebbe somehow does not have this... You know, he has this siman, but this emphasis is not there in the Alter Rebbe. "Ve-ḥayav le-tzoyah al shetei kikrot ulekoveya al kol sod al hayayin." That every meal of, of Yom Tov should have two loaves. Or meanwhile, he said, "The meals of Yom Sh-- uh, Yom Tov should have two loaves." So he's bringing down what the Berurah has paskened, that Yom is not mefuresh in Gemara, but this is how we learn, that Yom Tov also you have to have Lechem Mishneh. Question is, do you need to have, first of all, by Shalosh Seudos. People ask this question. Does-- Is there a requirement of Lechem Mishneh by Shalosh Seudos? So now, this is now from the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch. This is Res 20 Alef, where he says that by Shalosh Seudos, you should also make mo- motzi on two loaves. "Al shetei kikrot shleimos," just like for the first two meals. And if you'd have several meals over Shabbos, more than three, also you should have Lechem Mishneh at each meal on Shabbos. First opinion. "Ve'yesh oimrim," there are those who disagree, and they say no. Now, Seudah Shlishit, you can manage with one challah. You don't have to have two. Why is that? Because on Friday came down the man, which had two measures for each person. And for each measure, each oimer, they were able to

07:56 produce two loaves. So that means the Friday delivery produced four loaves. One of them was eaten on Friday. Then they had Friday night, and then they had one on Shabbos morning. So now, you were started off with four, and now you're left with one. Therefore, for Seudah Shlishit, you don't need to have two loaves. You only have to have one. So this is, again, the first opinion says Shalosh Seudos, you should have, uh, two loaves. Because the idea of Lechem Mishneh should be celebrated in-- at every meal. The second opinion says, no, the Shalosh Seudos, you don't need to have, uh, uh, two challahs. "Vehenis pashit ha-minhag min halakha u'minaggdinus eiym." Indeed, the minhag has been to take the lenient view that by Shalosh Seudos to rely on having one loaf. Uh, "Vel yesh la-ḥakam lelikach shnaim kesivora ha-rishon shehu ikar." He says, really, the main halakha is like the first ap-approach. You should have Lechem Mishneh by Shalosh Seudos also. Unless you don't have, okay, then you shouldn't have less than one. Okay, fine. Well, so, so Shalosh Seudos on Shabbos, it's recommended to have, to have, uh, Lechem Mishneh. And what we're saying here is similarly... Now, so now let's come back now on Yom Tov. There's no ḥiyuv of a Seudah Shlishit on Yom Tov. But the question then is, it's, it's totally voluntary. Is there an, a, a, uh, inyun of having Lechem Mishneh? So now, looking, this is now from the Shmirat Shabbos KeHilchasa. So he writes, "Mitzvah le-tzoyah bekol

09:32 seudah shel Shabbos ve-shel Yom Tov al shnei lechem shleimim." Just the same logic that there is to have two loaves for every meal on Shabbos, the same logic applies to Yom Tov. Then he says, later in the notes, whatever, he says it's, it's of course, bedash Ha-sadh hak, you can manage with one, but really, it-- one should read two. When I actually, at the beginning of the week or last week, when the person asked me this question, I hadn't done my homework. This is the, the shiur, drives me to do a bit more homework. But meanwhile, I told him I-- we all remember very vividly by the Rebbe, but it was the Seudah at the end of Yom Tov, and, uh, it was Rosh Hashanah or, uh, yeah. And the Rebbe would hold these two big challahs, two round challahs, and he would hold them. They were facing back to back, and he would make HaMotzi. He'd be-- cut the... I remember him holding the two challahs like this, back to back, and with a knife, like a swinging motion over the two challahs. And then he made HaMotzi on, on one of the-- He broke off, uh, a piece of challah from one of the challahs. So he was botzeah. Uh, that was obviously the, uh, the third Seudah for Yom Tov. And still, it was made on, on Lechem Mishneh. So it's, uh, recommended. So this is back to the question. You're making a fabrengen for the end of Yom Tov. Should you

10:54 encourage Lechem Mishneh? You should, yeah. It's not a big deal because unless you're really very worried about COVID, you can have t- one person touch it. He takes the other one's challah, puts it together, and you can, you can manage to have Lechem Mishneh. Okay, so that's the question two we've dealt with. Let's go on to the question three. This was, um, I think it was Shabbos Shuvah. W-was recently, one of the neighbors knocked on. It was after Shabbos. It was an hour after Shabbos. And he said, for some reason, at Havdalah, they had made the berakhah. Um, the person making Havdalah, said the HaMavdil, had forgotten to say borei pri ha-gafen. And then he said, "Ha-borei pri ha-gafen" after HaMavdil. So does he have to repeat Havdalah or Yoyatzet? So here's actually quite an interesting, uh, an interesting Chidush here. That the Alter Rebbe... Now, we have the Alter Rebbe at the top of your page is in Hilchot Pesach, where we have the saiday. He talks about the said of Yakn Haz. By Chidush, when you say first the borei pri ha-gafen, and then you say the berakhah, Mekadesh Yisrael v'hazmanim. Then the berakhah on, on the flame, borei ma'or esh. And then you make the berakhah, Ha-mavdil bein kodesh l'kodesh. And then Shehecheyanu. So we know the Yakn Haz. Then the Alter Rebbe adds in brackets. Now, what is a, a, um- The style of the Alter Rebbe with the brackets. There is a story that the Alter Rebbe wrote things in

12:28 brackets. He wanted to revi-review them at a later stage. That may-- That is also true, but it seems to be also when the Alter Rebbe came up with his own Chiddush. So he would often put those Chiddushim in a bracket. So, "Ve'im shino haseder shehikrim ham'uchar ve'ach echar hamukdam." If he switched the seder of the yak nuhas, it's yotzer yotzer. V'lo yakzevidah. You don't have to do a Kiddush again. Unless, "Hikdim hakiddush l'birchas hayayin." If you made first Mekadesh Yisrael V'atzmanim, and then hagafen, then he says you have to make Kiddush all over again because this is a machloket, Beis Shammai, Beis Hillel. Beis Shammai say you have to first say the Boruch, Mekadesh Hashabos, and then hagafen because it's the Kiddush which kind of invited the, the reason why you have the wine is because of the Kiddush. So first do the Kiddush. And, and Beis Hillel say, "No, you have to first make the boruch on the wine, and then you make the Boruch Hamakadesh Hashabos." Now, if you follow Beis Shammai against Beis Hillel, you're not yotzer. Since the Alter Rebbe, if a person made, made Kiddush, and he first said Hamakadesh Hashabos, Mekadesh Yisrael V'atzmanim, and then said, B'ri pri hagafen, he has to do Kiddush again. That's very... So then this is-- That, that, that was like raising an alarm bell in my mind that this boy who came round to the, to, to the door on Motzaei Shabbos two weeks ago, actually is not yotzer. The same thing, that

13:57 you're meant to make first hagafen and then the Boruch hamavdil. And that's what my mind is, is there a difference between havdalah and Kiddush? Now, Alter Rebbe's Kiddush is about, about, uh, is about Kiddush, not about havdalah. Beis Shammai talk about Kiddush. They don't talk about havdalah. So I was, I was mulling about this, and I felt that I told him not to make havdalah again. Afterwards, I looked into it a bit further. One of the prominent Goinim in Poland, going back about a hundred years ago, his name was Reb Meir Arik. And a Ch-ch-chassid, I don't know of which Rebbe, says stark in Alter Rebbe. And Reb Meir Arik, in his notes in the Sefer Minchas Pitim, he asks a question. How can the Alter Rebbe say that you first make Mekadesh Hashabos and then, um, B'ri pri hagafen, you're not yotzer? Take a look in the, in Shulchan Aruch, Halichas Kiddush, which you have the bottom of your page. Says, "Kiddush al hakos." If you make Kiddush on a cup of wine, normal Kiddush, and then by mistake, you slipped up and you start talking about unrelated topics. Hifsik bedibur. You start talking about, uh, who won, Chelsea or Arsenal. You know, you start talking about Jimmy Greaves, alav hashalom, mechulel. So now, uh, say hifsik bedibur. Kos r'vorach b'ri pri hagafen. You have to make it hagafen again, and you don't make Kiddush again. Ah, so he's made Kiddush, hagafen, and then he made the, the Boruch, the, the Mekadesh Hashabos. But

15:35 then he said hagafen afterwards. He's doing like Beis Shammai. So how is it yotzer? So the Reb Meir Arik asks this question. How can the Alter Rebbe say if you switch the order, you're not yotzer? Here, you see that you are yotzer. That's the Reb Meir Arik's question. And the simple answer is, which later I think the Tzl'ah l'dovid, uh, I don't remember exactly who. Others respond to that question. Um, the f- the, the following. When the, when the Alter Rebbe says you're not yotzer means if a fellow wants to be an oib hacham. I don't know how you say oib hacham in English. A fellow wants to be a smart alec, and he says, "I'm gonna do Kiddush and then, then hagafen." So any other tricks which you'll do, you're yotzer mid'oraita. But you want to be-- So this trick, you're doing consciously. The wrong order, you're doing like Beis Shammai, you're not yotzer. The Alter Rebbe, where he talks about the fellow, forgot. It wasn't he's trying to do a-- Beis Shammai, he doesn't even know about Beis Shammai. He, he, he slipped up. He spoke about the Jimmy Greaves, alav hashalom. He's not talking about, thinking about Beis Shammai. Good. So then he is yotzer. He got... And so coming back to our story, the fellow who made havdalah and slipped up, he's not thinking about Beis Shammai. He made a mistake. He's just a little bit confused, and he made a mistake. He's not trying to f-f-follow Beis Shammai. There, the

16:58 Alter Rebbe wasn't talking about this. When the Alter Rebbe says, "Im shino haseder," means he consciously made a change, then we say, "Your paskening wrong. You have to do it again." In the case of, uh, a person who slipped up, made a mistake, then you don't have to repeat the Kiddush. You don't have to repeat havdalah. Let me now look at, um, one of the notes. Where, where do-- Where you need-- Where you do need two chalos but forgot. Can you use a frozen chalah for the second one? And the answer is yes. It doesn't take long for th-to defrost, and you're not mechuyav to eat both. Um, so yes, you can, you can use a frozen chalah. There is an interesting question whether you can use an eruv pesach sh'chalah b'yom tov shabbos. The art to use a matzah wrapped in a plastic bag together with a challah. I mean, I wouldn't dream of doing that, but, um, the question has been addressed. All right, let's move on. Another question which came through this week. Someone asks, uh... Oops, sorry. I, I tried to cover the number of the, uh, the door and the artwork moved over. Doesn't matter. There's a house, and they've got this overhang, as you can see. And as you look towards the bottom, uh, next to the stairs, there are some plant pots. And the question was, would they be allowed to consider under the overhang to be considered, um, a reshus hayachid to be able to take a

18:27 key hidden under the plant pot and use it to open the door? As you can see, the, the front wall of this property is quite low, so it doesn't make it... It's not 10 tefachim high. So then, well, there was-- Sefora was, the question was, could we take that overhang and consider that as a, a wall? Now, we have-- The term which we have for this is P'tikah Yored V'Choitzen. Now, the edge of the, of the ceiling kind of creates a, a vertical-- You've got a horizontal ceiling, and the edge of that horizontal, uh, ceiling will be considered to be creating a vertical barrier. So the idea was that as if you're going to have a vertical barrier coming down along the length of this, um, this overhang and also over here, um, the, the width, and that would create-- That, that plant pot would be inside the Reshus HaYachid, and you'd be allowed to carry from one to the other. So now, here we have... This is from the Alter Rebe's Shulchan Aruch in the Dinim of Eruv, et cetera. Um, shin samech alef. And he talks here about a, a, a breach in a, in a corner of a property. And then he says, "What about a house which there's a, a breach at the corner?" There's the wall that has come down at the corner. And there's a, there's a dia- there's a diagonal opening to this house. So he says, "You won't, you won't use," Oz Ein O'imrim. "You don't use

20:07 the principle of P'tikah Yored V'Choitzen." And he adds another explanation, which was, was news to me, actually. That the r- the logic of P'tikah Yored V'Choitzen is Mishum Sh'doyma L'Pesach. When you've got three sides, we've got three sides, and the fourth side, there's the end of a ceiling. And so we're going to look at it as if it was a doorway, and there's a door. M'karyan Zohar. So this is a kind of principle in Halakhah. It's not Derech to make a, a, a Pesach to a property in a corner. Meanwhile, what he's saying is that P'tikah can only be in the middle of the wall, but not at a corner. Um, aval Pesach she'ein m'karyan Zohar. If it would be just a single, um, bre- break, you could use the principle of P'tikah. The edge of the ceiling would be creating a barrier. The second opinion says, Yesh O'imrim, Afili Hi B'meluah. And even if it's two of them, um, you could do your P'tikah Yored V'Choitzen. And you-- If you've got two walls together as an L, which are there, and then you've got another two walls which are missing, and there's a ceiling over there, you would be able to... In the second opinion, you could do P'tikah Yored V'Choitzen, but not when you've got two parallel walls, like a, you know, like a carport idea. So then we've got these two opinions, and the conclusion is that actually, that you could do P'tikah Yored V'Choitzen, as in, in our instance. However, he

21:44 finishes off, that's the last line. V'afal Piken Tov Lochosh L'svar Ha Rishonah. It's better to take heed of the first opinion, that you can't do, uh, P'tikah Yored V'Choitzen. So coming back to our, our overhang or awning, whatever you want to call it, can you, can you use the principle of P'tikah Yored V'Choitzen? If it's diagonal, if it's slanting, for sure you cannot, as discussed earlier or later in the same siman. If it's flat, so the Ikkar Hadin, you can do, but it's recommended not to rely on that. Now, let's finish off then. What I did say to the questioner is, if you hide your key under something which isn't Muktzeh, a plant pot may very well be Muktzeh. If you pl- hide your key, you are able to move it within Dalet Amot, in the front garden, and then bring it to the door, push the door, push... Now, it's an important point here. Many people have doors which open onto a place where there's no Eruv. Like in a block of flats, let's say, or a door, like, say, on the side of a, of a, uh, shop, which is open, mamash, onto the street. You, you, you... Just outside the door, you're in the street. You cannot put the key in and push the door in because then you will have-- be taking the key from the street and put it into the Reshus HaYachid. So if you have such a door, which is mamash onto the street, so the, the s-

23:08 the way to do it is you put the key in, and you push the door just an inch, two inches, just beyond the door jamb. You withdraw the key and put it back on yourself or where you're hiding it, and then you go in. But you don't push the door in, all the way in, with the key in it because effectively you've been taking the key from Reshus Harabim or into the Reshus HaYachid. Let's move on. Okay. So here, I was asked the following question. It's going back a little bit, before Rosh Hashanah. And the fellow is a Chassidishe Yingerman, and he is the Baltageyer. And so he's pastor. Baltageyer should be, uh, it says he should be the, the m- the, the, the most Tzadik, uh, person, seen as a Tzadik in that, in that environment. Um, all right. So he's a Chassidishe Yingerman. It turns out that, uh, he davens slower. And so the, the Gabai, who will bang on the, on the Bima or whatever to announce, because we blow shofar in the quiet Shemoneh Esreh. The Gabai will bang on the table, and he has to blow, but he's not up to there. So can he blow Shofar in the quiet Shemoneh Esreh when he's not up to there? So this is interesting, which I didn't-- I wasn't aware. As you know, there's this difference between Ashkenazim and, and Sefard. It's more, uh, Minhag Sefard to, to, to blow in the quiet Shemoneh Esreh. So, um, in this Mateh Efraim, that's

24:46 the lower quote, he says, "B'chol Medinos Eilu," generally, the Ashkenazim Minhag is not to blow in the quiet Shemoneh Esreh. Then he says, "Yechide Sgula," third line here. Oh, second line. "Noyagin Shehashlich Tsibbur K'sheMagiya L'Simcha, Simchas Biras Malchuyos, T'hiyeh Atash Lehashatarat." So that's, that was news to me. He's, he's suggesting that it's actually the Chazan who blows the Shofar in the quiet Shemoneh Esreh, which is not the experience I've had.Uh, you know, being, being around, it was in some cemetery also. It wasn't the chazan who blew in the quiet Shemoneh Esreh. So if it would be the chazan blowing in the quiet Shemoneh Esreh, then we wouldn't have this question because he's, he's, he's got-- he's, he's running the show. But the meaning of which in Chabad is that you have a baal tefillah and you have a chazan and, and a gabbi. And so, uh, the gabbi will bang on the table. So now the Alter Rebbe in Shulchan Aruch talks about the blowing in the, each shofar during Shemoneh Esreh. And it says about the chazan whether he can blow the Shemoneh Esreh. He says really he shouldn't be blowing because it's confusing. Here is to-- because, uh, he might be able to-- not be able to retrace where he's holding in davening. Then third line over here on the top of the page. If the chazan feels confident that he will be able to resume the davening without being too confused or he's davening from a siddur. Yeah. So, um, you

26:20 have it very easy. We all have siddurim, Baruch Hashem. Those days, there's, uh, chazan knew it by heart. If the chazan is confident he'll be able to resume the davening after blowing shofar in the Shemoneh Esreh, he's allowed to. And he explains. blowing shofar is not a hefsek at all. The way I understand it is, it's not speaking. It's not as if you're talking about any other topic. Blowing shofar is not speaking. It's a different type of activity. I don't know, like, I don't know, if you wipe your forehead, that's not called a hefsek. It may not be appropriate, you're in the middle of nehamalek to do gestures, but it's not a, it's not a interruption. Therefore, I was, I was inclined to say on this basis that the singular man is able to blow shofar, even though he's not up to the gap, the, you know, between one beracha and the next. He should be allowed to blow shofar in the quiet Shemoneh Esreh. Although I'm not totally confident with it, but, uh, that, that seems to be the, the halacha. Let's move on to the next question. Ah. So here, as I notice something very interesting. At the end of Selichos on a Taanis Tzibur, we have this . And the same thing, we have it at the end of Selichos Yom Kippur by night. But on the, the Selichos up to Rosh Hashanah, we don't have the . And I was just curious, why is it there and not there? And so

28:08 now, this, this Rosh Hashanah, I, I, I bought myself a, uh, a new machzor, which has got various Pirushim. And it gave me-- It sent me to this-- On the , it had a note to this following, um, Tshuva, uh, written by the Ben Ish Chai. It's Tshuva Toil U'Shma. He's got two sefarim of Tshuva, at least two. One is called Ra'avyot. And then the other one is called Toil U'Shma. He's actually signs his name curiously as Yechezkel Kahali. And apparently, Yechezkel Kahali somehow is the same Gmar as Yosef Chaim. Be that as it may, um, this is the Sefer Toil U'Shma. And he deals with the fact that tefillah, generally, we don't daven in Aramaic. And the reason is, it says in the Gemara, that one shouldn't daven. A sh- person shouldn't plead his-- for his needs in Aramaic because the malachim, the angels, will not-- They will not, they will, they will not process. They will not elevate your tefillah because they don't recognize Aramaic. There's, uh, deeper explanations in this, that the Aramaic is like an Achirai for Lashon HaKodesh. He discusses this at length. I'll just take one little piece. And so how, how-- here you say it's okay to daven in Aramaic, and here you say you shouldn't daven in Aramaic. Well, the answer is, Lecha Shma is not a problem. A yochid shouldn't daven in Aramaic. A tzibbur can daven because why is that? You have the expression, . That HaKadosh Baruch Hu will not despise the, the kabbalah,

29:47 the Rabbi, tefillas Harabim. The, the tefillas Harabim is powerful, and they doesn't need to have the malachim to, to elevate it. The HaKadosh Baruch Hu will accept it even though it's in Aramaic. So that's why we have, like, Musaf Kaddish, for example, is in Aramaic. And, um, this is also discussed here in this Tshuva. And now, in a bunch of-- I want to read this last, these last few lines. It says, Ben Ish Chai, "Now you'll understand that in Selichos has been established a few, um, pakoshos in Aramaic. The Selichos were established to be davened in a tzibbur. And to emphasize in the t- that the tzibbur have got the koach, a great, a great power of , that they don't need to have the malachim. Therefore, they davka put in into the Selichos. They put a piece in Aramaic to show, to bolster the, uh, the understanding of, of, uh, of a tzibbur, the koach ha-tzibbur, that even Aramaic, it could also be proce- it can al- also be elevated. So it's as if there is kind of a sample. There's a, a, a certain little piece of the Selichos, the davka put in Aramaic to show that the tzibbur can manage in Ara-- the tefillahs can be accepted in Aramaic. So what I've noticed is that you've got in the Selichot, as it says, Yom Kippur or the Yaatones Tzur, you've got Rachmana Dionne. In the Selichot before Rosh Hashanah, we also have a couple of sections. In Aramaic, you have-- I've got

31:18 the bottom of the page, Yemach Shemo ase, and Moron de Vismayo, these three pieces in Aramaic, and it's, according to the Ben Ish Chai, it's the same-- it's coming with the same message, that we-we're davening as a tzibur, and it's okay for us to do it in Aramaic-- to do part of it in Aramaic because the Abish will accept it ir-regardless. That's, that's what he's saying. Um, so here it's one piece of Aramaic. I still don't have an answer why this piece was put into these Selichot, and that piece was put in those Selichot. All right, that's, uh, you know, perhaps, um, by, by sharing it with the tzibur who are listening now or later, perhaps we'll get an answer on that also. All right, let's move on. Okay, last night, Motzei Yom Tov. Now, Boca comes over to me, and he says, "I forgot to say Hal Haviyovot in Hazzan." So I continue. I was in the middle of Moedim, and I put in Hal Haviyovot where we'd say Hal Hanissim. And then I finished, and then continued. I'll call these Boca since now say I finished Moedim, I finished Mincha. So he asks me, was he yoetz or not? So we know that the Ma'ariv, if you forget Hal Haviyovot and Ma'ariv in Rosh Chodesh, you don't have to repeat Mincha. But if you forget Hal Haviyovot and Ma'ariv in Chala, on Chala Moed, you do have to repeat Mincha. So now he's-- he remembered to say Hal Haviyovot, but he put it

32:50 in the wrong place. Is he yoetz or not? Now, I actually did not find this addressed in, uh, Malachim. I've got a-- I mentioned this before. I've got this two-volume set of She'os Miyovin about all different mistakes which you can make in davening, and apparently, there's, there's more mistakes than he's listed. So we've got a new mistake. So are you yoetz or not? And, um, I told him, "You're not yoetz. You have to do it again." So here we have in the Din of Rosh Chodesh, where it says, "If you didn't say Hal Haviyovot where you should, if you realize before Moedim, you put it right there." In other words, you said, "Baruch Hashem Hamazoch L'tsion." Oops. Oops, it's not half sick. Um, so then you say, "Ken avikeisen Hal Haviyovot," and then you say, "Moedim." You can-- In other words, you'll in-insert Hal Haviyovot after Hamazoch L'tsion before Moedim. That would be acceptable because you haven't gone to the start of the next one. But if you've already started Moedim, so then, Oyom Roi Bemochim, Bemizka Kenish Hischamaya. If he's already started Moedim, Chozel Yirtzeh. He has to go back to Yirtzeh and, and, and say, insert it in Yirtzeh. If he didn't, then he has to go back to the beginning. So here I have a clear Psak Halacha. If you didn't say Hal Haviyovot, um, in the right place, you have the option of going back to Yirtzeh, but you don't have the option of inserting it at any other spot later.

34:20 And therefore, he missed the opportunity of going back. Therefore, he'd-- to the r- to, to Yirtzeh, therefore, he has to go back to the beginning of Mincha. That's what I told him. Again, as, as I said, I didn't see this in any Seferim. I looked for it. I didn't find it. Okay. Question. Fella asked me, this is probably last week, his neighbor has got a-an apple tree, and the branches, part of it-- some of the branches are overhanging into my garden, he says. Who's-- What about the fruit? Who do they belong to? So here we have, this is a Chush Mishpit, Siman Kuf, Sama Ach zain, where you have a tree. If the tree is mamash on the border between two properties, so then the fruit are shared equally. Then there are more ads. Abelim Oyomid Besodeh Shel Echad. Man, if the tree is f-fully in the field of the one, Venoteh L'sodeh Acher or Se Acher, and it's overhanging to the other one's field, Chochal Ach Ha'iker V'hachoch Shelo. So really, the fruit of the overhanging tree belong to the owner of the tree. So that's the Halacha. The, the, the situation was a little bit more, uh, complicated because the neighbor had no way of coming into the questioner's garden. Plus, the neighbor had loo-- I told him, "Go and ask the neighbor." Uh, he said, "He looks like he's gonna away for a couple of weeks." So I said, "If that's the case, so then he has been mafkir, as far as

35:55 he's no-- has no interest in those fruit, and, and if you're gonna leave them, they're just gonna go, go rotten." So I felt in that case, if it's been, uh, mafkir them, uh, and they're gonna go to ruin in any case, I felt you could use them, and when he comes back, you'll tell him, uh, and if he wants to be paid for them, you'll pay. Okay, let's move on. This is another question someone asked me this past week. Um, oh, before I go into this one, we had a question. Question nine on your sheet is, "May a tenant take schach from the trees growing on his rented premises?" So I'm renting a property, and I don't own the property. I don't own the trees. The s-s-- trees are growing, and they have schach. Am I allowed to cut the branches of those trees to cover and use them for my sukkah? And, uh, I felt that actually, although again, I didn't find this in any, any, uh, sources, I felt that you as a tenant actually should be looking after the property. And you should be maintaining the property. So if you're gonna cut branches in a way which you're gonna ruin the tree, then you're, then you're, uh, y-you're wrong in doing so, and that would be a question of gezelah also possibly. But if you are cutting the trees in a responsible way, and it's a form of maintaining, m-maintenance, proper maintenance of the property, so then on the contrary, you're doing

37:26 the responsible thing, and therefore you should be allowed to use the, uh, schach for... use the schach for your sukkah. Which brings me to another question which I got from some, uh, shliach in Eastern Europe. He asked me the question which I'm a little bit hesitant to, to share it, but I'll tell you in any case. And if I've got it wrong, so, you know. Um, can he pull off aravos off a tree in public property? So at first I said, "Ask, um, ask if he'd get permissions, no problem." But you know, the, the bureaucracy to go and find the official, and this one will send you to this one, to that one to find it. So I said to him, I understood he was short of aravos. I said to him, "You know what? If Reuven will pluck aravos and Shimon will use them, and Shimon will pluck aravos and Reuven will use them." Because there is a idea of, um, i-if you're gonna say there's an element of gezelah here, and therefore it's not good for the, for the mitzvah. All right, so then if it's a gezel and she'neath your shoes is going to someone else's property, then it takes away the mitzvah of hashavah, and you'd be yotzer with the, uh... So really I was feeling that it's not such a big issue in any case in the first place because I don't think the authorities would have a problem with you ripping up a couple of, uh, leaves off their,

38:49 their trees. But if there would be a hashash, so you'd be able to, uh, address this by switching over one to the other. Let's come to our next question, though. Also, a shliach in somewhere in Eastern Europe asked me, "What is the story if someone is a chiyuv, is in his year of aveilus or on tzara, and he's running late. The tzibbur are holding now Baruch Leolu. It's the last Kaddish, and he is in middle of saying Psukim DeZimra. So is a chiyuv, and, uh, to say Kaddish, is he allowed to interrupt the middle of Psukim DeZimra to say Kaddish? That is the question. So what we have in front of you is from the Piskei Shus where he quotes the Chida in the Sefer Kesher Gordel, who says that you are allowed to say, um... He is talking about the Kaddish from before Hodu. Then he says, "Yosom, within the 11 months of aveilus of a father or mother, and he came late, as now he's middle of Psukim DeZimra. So he is allowed to say the Kaddishim, uh, um, at the end of the davening if he knows that he won't have an opportunity later to say those Kaddishim. Even if there are others who are saying Kaddish, but he is allowed to address his chiyuv. He's allowed to interrupt. And the general idea of answering various things in, in Psukim DeZimra and Kirshn-- Birchas Kirshna is based upon the idea of b'pnei hayir and b'pnei hakavod, which we all know the Mishnah

40:32 in, uh, in Berakhos. You are allowed to interrupt to respond b'pnei hayir, b'pnei hakavod. And so here he has a chiyuv, and he's allowed to address that chiyuv, uh, by, in middle of Psukim DeZimra. I'm not talking about Birchas Kirshna, but Psukim DeZimra is more lenient, so he is allowed to. That's what the Poskim say. So now, obviously, it will come to mind there's a letter of the Rebbe about this, and that is in Chelek Zayin of Igres. It's also in Shur Cham Nacham, a well-known letter. The letter is addressed to the late Reb Itzhak Dobov. Alav Shalom, who was-- He lived in Manchester, and he was a mashgiach in Manchester Yeshivah. Reb Lev Segal, Reb Yosef was the Rosh Yeshivah, and Reb Dobov was a mashgiach, and on the quiet, he was mechabed many Yidden. Many, many Yidden became Hasidim and Chabad Hasidim through his influence. Meanwhile, as the mashgiach, he wrote to the... He asked the Rebbe. There's a letter of the Friediker Rebbe printed in, in Sefer Hamamorim Taf Shin Tes, where the Re- the Friediker Rebbe write, talks very strongly about the Kaddish D'Rabonon before Hodu. It looks like there was-- it was being neglected, and he pr-pr-promotes the importance of saying the Kaddish before Hodu. Okay. Now, Reb Itzhak Dobov davened b'arekhut. He davened slowly. The Bochurim's minyan was probably faster than him. So he had the following question. He would start davening earlier than the minyan, and when the minyan was-- Let's say he started ten minutes earlier. And

42:22 so then when the minyan came up to the, um, you know, Birvish Mu'al with the Kaddish, he was already after Boruch She amar. And he was, he was asking whether he would, should-- whether he's allowed to say the Kaddish D'Rabonon before Hodu when he is already ahead of the minyan in Psukim DeZimra. To which the Rebbe answers, "Hinni Ledaiti." I think it's from Taf Shin Yod Gimel. "In my opinion, I don't have the time to, to research this," but it's also, I think it's, it's simple, that's, "Ein zeh chiyuv she'ein zeh chiyuv prati shelo." The saying of the Kaddish D'Rabonon is not your personal duty. It's a mutala minyan. It's the minyan. Someone of the minyan should be making the saying the Kaddish, but it's not a personal chiyuv. Therefore, you shouldn't be interrupting your to say the Kaddish because it's not a personal cheir. Which from this itself, I see that not a contradiction at all, because there he's talking about volunteering to say Kaddish for a bone. It could be said by anyone. Here, our question is about a Kaddish which-- for a, a yosem is a cheir to say Kaddish. So then it is his cheir, and therefore it's two different, different stories. If it's a cheir, a personal cheir to say Kaddish, and he's in the middle of , he could. If it's just to cover a, a communal need, then it shouldn't be him. It should be done by someone else. Okay, um, again, someone asked me, it's a bit

43:57 late to talk about it now, but it's, it was before Sukkot. What's the story about a child under bar mitzvah? What do you do about Arba Minim? So of course, the ideal would be to buy them, uh, their own set. But if for whatever reason that's not a pr- not, uh, available. So let's take a look in the Halachot of the Shulchan Aruch. This is in, in, uh, Tafeich Nun Ches. It says, . Don't give the Esrog, lulav, the same thing, to a child before you have done the mitzvah. Because the Kotan will acquire, and he won't be able to release it back to you. So he gives it back to you, it's not given back to you. So you, if you give a child y- your Arba Minim on the, on the first day, it's . So it has to be yours, you know. So you can't get it... He can't give it back to you. You can't f-fulfill the mitzvah after the child has used it. Some say when the child is of a certain age, uh, it could be about seven or eight or something, where they have a little bit more of an understanding of, of buying and selling. Some say that is acceptable. Then he adds, . If you give the child the lulav and esrog, but you hold onto it also, you don't release it. You put it in the child's hand, but you also are holding it, then that's okay. Then the child hasn't been koina. Kinyan means

45:35 a show of ownership. And on the contrary, if you are holding onto it, you haven't released it, so you're not giving them the ownership. All right, so that's, that's what it says in the Mechaber, writes in the Shulchan Aruch. So now we have the Mishnah Berurah, Sefer Kaf Cheis. He says like this. All right, so by the fact that you hold onto it, then the child isn't koina. Therefore, you're, you're okay. Then he adds in the fifth line, the fact that you hold onto the Esrog and the Lulav, you have covered that you have retained ownership, but the child has not been yoetzar because he's not, he's not shaloi. He's not called lachem. And so the father also hasn't done the mitzvah of Chinuch to give the child the Esrog and Lulav, which is his own. So you- you've, you've saved your, your, your own interest or for, or for, for other adults. But meanwhile, you've deprived the child and depri-- of, of the mitzvah on the first day, and you've deprived yourself of mitzvah of Chinuch. Then he adds, the mitzvah is Chinuch . Others say no. Chinuch can be fulfilled even if the child doesn't own the Esrog. I know, know when he's an adult, he'll have to own the Esrog, but you can be-- and on the level of Chinuch, it can be with a borrowed Esrog. Now, because even with a borrowed Esrog, you're also training the child to do the mitzvah. I must say that I'm sure, uh, you know,

47:14 50 years ago, 100 years ago, where there's such a shortage of, of Arba Minim, I'm sure this is what they were doing. That they would, they would, they wouldn't release it to the child, and they would rely on these, these, on these opinions. So as I said, of course, the better, uh, option would be to, um, to have a separate set for the children, which is Baruch Hashem now broadly, widely available. But if that, if not, you hold on to it with the child, and, uh, and you don't release it, and you, you, you with it, in, in, in that way. You see the reshrayim all that way. All right. Finally, last week, we... Or last two weeks ago, we had a discussion about the Hayom Tamseinu, and I was worried about the sequence of the Aleph Bet. Tamseinu, Tvorchenu, Tagadlenu, Tedarsheinu. And then it says, Tishma Shavoseinu, then Tekabel Rachamim, and then, uh, Tismcheinu. It says, Shin, Kuf, Tav. I was concerned about the sequence there. So I've mentioned numerous times, Rama Azurkan, he wrote to me a very simple thing. The Hayom Tishma, Hayom Tekabel. First day, you ask the to hear our, our prayer, our cry, and then you say, "You heard, heard it, then you should accept it." You can't say, "Hayom Tekabel," and then, "Hayom Tishma." It doesn't make sense. You can't, you can't accept it before you've heard it, so to speak. So it's just on a, on a very simplistic level, that's why Tishma comes before Tekabel. I'm

48:43 still not totally happy because you can find other, uh, uh, num- words in the Aleph Bet that have the Shin after the Kuf. But on the, on the level of Pshat, I think it's quite a good answer. Okay, I'm going to stop with this. And, um, after Shabbos Bereshit, we're gonna go back to Motzaei Shabbos, with Hashem. Um, and we'll, we'll do it at eight thirteen. And if we, uh, later on, we'll bring it a little bit earlier. That's-- People ask it a bit earlier. But meanwhile, this is, this is, I think, manageable. I think Shabbos goes out, uh, about an hour earlier, so we should be able to manage it. And, uh, if you, if you, if you're listening to this here whilst you're helping to, to, as Rabbi Lou calls it, television and televasion, so, so be it. Okay. and we should be meeting good health. Kol tuv.