בהעלותך תשפ״ב

00:06 Speaker 1 Good evening. Shalom aleichem, and welcome to today's, uh, shiur, Parshas Balot Secha. And, uh, so we'll go straight into our first-- Well, it's, uh, dedicated in honor of the yahrzeit of, of Tzaddik, Rav Nachman Tzaddik, of Lubavitch, Shalom, his yahrzeit is today. Um, okay, let's go to our first question. Okay. So someone contacted me earlier in the week, last week. They're very much into dikduk, and was wondering about the wording in Shemoneh Esreh, "Ve'es kol minei shel osher u'tovah" or "Ve'eys kol minei shel osher u'tovah." In most siddurim, it is spelt, "Ve'es kol minei," and in Chabad siddur, it's "Ve'eys kol minei." And so he's asking how precise is it. So what I'm showing you here is the first print of the Alter Rebbe. So that's the gray background. The, the other print is the second print, which we have. So this, the lower one is printed in Samech Gimel, Taf Kaf Samech Gimel, in the Alter Rebbe's lifetime. The other one is Taf Kaf Ayin Vav, three after years after his passing. There were several editions in between. However, we never-- Uh, we don't have copies of those. They're not, not, not known to exist. So what we're seeing here is that there were-- was a change here from Ve'es kol minei, as you can see clearly in the gray background, to Ve'eys. Now, we've gone through this several times. The Alter Rebbe, uh, as we know, very much, uh, focused on the dikduk background of the siddur, and he, um, looked into the

02:04 Speaker 1 contemporary medakdekim, masters of dikduk of his time, and one of them is, uh, clearly Reb Zalman Henau, who lived about, uh, a generation or two before the Alter Rebbe. So in Reb Zalman Henau's siddur-- So he wrote a, a volume called Sojer Ha-Tevot, which is all to-- a-a-about the words of davening. But then he also published a siddur called Ve'eys Tefillah. He published in two editions, one in a place called The Hague, in Haag, in Holland. The other one pla-- published in Yesnitz. Uh, one was Taf-- I don't remember exactly, Taf Kaf Lamed Zayin, but whatever. One was Taf Peh Heh, one was Taf Kaf Lamed Zayin. So one was before the Alter Rebbe was born, one was in, uh-- when the Alter Rebbe was a young man. And he, um, addresses the wording of Ve'es kol minei shel osher and why he changed from a segol to a tsere. So let's just read his wording. "Ha-alef bet tsere, that the word Ve'es should be read Ve'eys, with a tsere, ki mishpat halosh. Kasher tovoina achrim milas Ve'es kol, shtei milos lehutos." When you've got after the word-- the, the combination of Ve'es kol, then there are other words which you kind of link to one another. "Achrim od mila achas yesh loshachas el ha-maimer." In other words, there's a string of words which are connected. "Az aitiyah milas Ve'eys betsere." The way I understand in simple English is that when you've got a long train, you need to put commas, you need to put

03:50 Speaker 1 pauses in, in that train. So if it was a short thing, it would be Ve'es kol minei. But Ve'eys kol minei shel osher u'tovah, it's a long train. If you think of a pasuk in Bereishit, "Ve'eys kol minei hem hayom harim es--" So you have-- When you have a train, you can't just, um-- You need, you need to have pauses along the way, and that's the difference between the es and the eys. The es is, uh-- You've got this makkaf, this connector without a pause, and Ve'eys, with the more emphasis, means with a pause. So Reb Zalman Henau, he's-- he insists that there needs to be the Ve'eys to create a kind of pause. And the Alter Rebbe evidently did take this on, and take-- accept this, not in the first print, but as we know, when the first print was published, the Alter Rebbe was upset about several changes. Um, the parallel which I have to this is the, um, where is it? Al kol masha barasa. It's slightly different, but it's similar. Al, al-- Was it al kol masha barasa or al kol masha barasa? And here, there's a difference, um, in the schos. This appears that al kol masha barasa is in two places. It is in, um, the beracha borei nefoshos. It's also in the, at, the, the davening of Rosh Hashanah, she, um, al kol masha barasa, that's the end of a sentence. So there again, you have that change, whether it's kol or kol. And Reb Chaim-- Reb Zalman

05:35 Speaker 1 Henau, for the similar, uh, explanation, feels that there ought to be the kol, a slight pause there. Now, without going too much into the-- But meanwhile, I-- This conversation I had with someone, as I said, he's very much into the background of davening. He sent, he sent me a whole, um, a whole study of which he had made on the use of kol or kol in borei nefoshos. But meanwhile, I just want to share with you one fascinating thing. That in the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, in Siman Res Zion, it brings two pirushim of how you understand the phrase of, Often, the Rebbe would quote this in the Sichos. that which they're lacking. There are things which are necessities. Those are the things which are the extras. To give extra oomph, extra-- what do you have in extra? Things like Nash, high energy stuff. These are, things which have created to give boosts. That's one way of learning Pshat. But then this was, which was new to me, is a Pirush of the Ari z"l, and this is, this is what I want to share with you, a fascinating Pshat. This is from, you can see it's from Sefer HaLikutim, from the Ari z"l, in Parshas Eikev, I think. He says the following: alludes to the Neshamas which, Chesroinon means the ones who are lacking. That they didn't manage to accomplish in their sojourn through this world, they didn't ac-accomplish what they needed to do. Therefore, they have to come back down again. And we--

07:25 Speaker 1 So we have the concept of Gilgul Neshamas, and as we know, the concept of Gilgul can be also in a plant, it can be in an animal or other species. So, and they sometimes go through that they are lacking completeness. Then, then the Hamishter puts them into a something or other, and then they have now the opportunity of being revived, to begin fresh Chayes. And by using this food and making a Bracha with it and using the energy for, for good. So then that's refers to the Gilgul HaNeshamah. That he, because he lacked, uh, Shleimus the first time. We, by eating this food, are able to, to elevate that food and thereby give Chayes to that Nefesh who had, uh, come here in a Gilgul. So I just found that a fascinating Pshat. Obviously, Alpica Bola, but it is, you know, the famous story, I think with the Baal Shem Tov. Someone who came to the Baal Shem Tov, and the Baal Shem Tov, the whole story about a Socher, about a, a grain who was a Gilgul and is waiting and waiting till they should get a, get a Tikkun. Finally, he comes into, made into a grain of barley. Then he comes in, into a, a whiskey. And then he-- A Yid bought him from the shelf, from the, in the shop. And then the Yid is, uh, has a Go-Gosher customer, and they pour out a drink, and they should both, uh, have a drink of, of whiskey to, on the deal.

09:07 Speaker 1 And then the Yid picks up the glass. The Neshama's ha-happy he's in the Yid's glass, in the Gosher's glass. And the Yid was embarrassed to make a Bracha. And he drank the, the whiskey without a Bracha. And the Baal Shem Tov said that, "That Neshama was your Zayde." And the person faints. And then the Baal Shem Tov gives a whole Derech of Tikkun, how to, um... Beca-- He, he remembered now this story. He had had this. He was the Socher, he was the businessman, and he had, uh, not made the Shehakol and not made a Bracha out of, uh, he was inhibited. And, uh, he had failed his Zayde's Neshamah, uh, in being able to give it a Tikkun. Okay, so let's move on. Here's a question someone asked me to try to clarify. We've got-- Sometimes we say we shouldn't indulge in horoscope, in, in, uh, the, these extrasensory things we should be avoiding. And yet we've got so many things which you've got in Minag Yisroel. There is a certain thing about what time of the month do we make a fast preferably, which now we're, we're not so particular about because of the pressure, not delaying weddings. Um, but we have about g-moving into a house not on a Monday or a Wednesday. We have about, um, when to make Kiddush. Lots of things which we do. Um, and then there's a business we come to about spending money on Motzei Shabbos. So there's, there are various things which we don't, which

10:45 Speaker 1 we do avoid. And so let's, let's try to get, get sort out what is okay, okay, what is not okay. And I'm telling you ahead, there's not everything's gonna be totally clear. Just warning you. So, all right. So here we have a Gemara in Chulin. See, Rab Shimben Elazar says, You shouldn't be using these as a Nachash, as a form of divining, but you are allowed to regard them as a Siman. What this means practically... What this means is that if, let's say, a person moved house, and he looks back, and he says, "Since I moved to this house, I, these things have been going successfully. This has been successful. That has been successful." He identifies, and he says, "This, this house has brought me good mazel." What's the, what's the Nafkamina? It comes a stage where he may be thinking perhaps to move house, and he says, "No, I don't want to move from this house because this house has brought me good mazel." Or it could be the other way around. It could be the negative That since he moved into this house, he's had that calamity, this and that, and he feels that this hasn't been a mazaldike move. And therefore, he's ready to-- maybe that makes it helps to make the decision to move on. So that's the siman. So that's okay. And Rebbe Lazer says, "That's provided that this has been recognized over three times." Where do we see a precedent? The Yaakov Avinu. He says, "Yosef has disappeared. Shimon

12:39 Speaker 1 is no longer here. He'll take Binyamin, and he'll disappear then. I'm, I'm destined to, uh, to misfortune." So he makes some kind of siman. I mean, these are two, three separate-- two or three separate events. But he sees this as a certain thread, uh, a certain trend, and so that's ca-that's called siman. And that seems to be legitimate. So let's take a look now in the Shulchan Aruch. We have here, um, it's from Siman kuf ain tes in Yoreh Deah. Interesting. Yoreh Deah, the mid-- the second volume, has the laws of Aveida Zara. After Yah nesech, then you got about thirty simanim about Aveida Zara. Then it's about ribbis. After the end of ribbis, then you got a few things about, um, malbush isho and, um, peyos, and also about witchcraft,abei. "Ein shoyelin bechozim bekochavim." We should not be consulting astrologists. "Or lei begirolos," or sorting things through lots, et cetera. Um, as it says, "Tom tim yashim haimar tech." Or certainly, we shouldn't be consulting "chosmim u'monachim shim u'machashim." We shouldn't be consulting people who are telling you, um, information through, um, witchcraft, et cetera. Having said that, that you shouldn't be consulting, then it says, "Neg, neg, negsif. No agu she'ein matschilin besheini u'vervi." It's customary to avoid starting a new project on a Monday or a Thurs- on a Wednesday. And, "Ve'ein nosim noshim ela bimelu halvan." And weddings are made only when the moon is waxing rather than it's waning. Just to repeat what I said before, nowadays, we don't worry

14:35 Speaker 1 about this. The reason being because otherwise it would cause weddings to be delayed longer and longer, and it's a greater virtue to have the wedding sooner than to be conscientious about this inyan of mazal. And this is in Chabad, and this is also in other circles, too. Um, therefore, he says that, Ramah says, "Therefore, this customary for the zman of the, the, be'yeshivas vesat and veshkodesh." Because although, "Ein nichush, yesh simin." So we're seeing here that there is room for siman. The way I understand this, just to summarize, is nachash is you say a cat crossed my path, therefore, I'm not going to do this project. There's no logical, um, connection, uh, not even by any stretch. It's putting one thing with another without any, uh, connection at all. Let's say, however, it's on a Shabbos afternoon, and I've got a choice to go to visit this child or that child. And I decide I'm gonna come to the corner, and if there's someone, if there's the traffic light is this way, I'll go to this one. If the traffic light is the other way, I'm gonna go to the other one. There, there, there is-- that, that one seems to be legitimate because, uh, there's, there is a certain logic. There seems to be a, um, a more readiness to go in that direction. So you follow that, and that seems to be legitimate. Also, when there is a mokhir in Torah, when this, um, as we said, um, the Monday and the Wednesday.

16:18 Speaker 1 There's a hesba-- the Meshech on the spot explains that the, the, uh, astrology. In, in Chazal, they say the astrology of Monday and Wednesday is not, not, doesn't bode so well. All right, so you have a mokhir in Torah. Um, about the motzei Shabbos, about not spending money on the motzei Shabbos. So the Rebbe Rashab would tell his rebbetzin, since mentioned the Reshim Asar Yomen, "If you an-anticipate you'll need money, um, ask me on Friday. Don't ask me on motzei Shabbos." So they were choyshish, but try to avoid spelling it out. So even where there are things which we would, um, be conscious of and to avoid, we'd avoid spelling out that we're doing so because of the concern of, of, uh, it being, um, a not good omen itself. Then we have here the other, another, uh, um, thing which it says. Although it says you shouldn't consult girolos, but to ask a child, "Tell me a posuk which you learned." So we know the story with Mordechai. He saw this as a, as a, as a, as a, a f- kind of mini Nevuah, and that's, that's, that's legitimate. So since it's coming from Torah, there seems to be a legitimacy to it. Yeah, those who are, uh, a little bit, it says here, abetech, veteach, it's not something necessary which is so recommended, but there are, there are grounds to this, um, which obviously brings to mind the whole idea of many people using Igress Kodesh in certain ways in whichever page

17:53 Speaker 1 they open to, et cetera. There is a yasod for it. Does it mean that that's a recommended mahalach for Chabad? It's certainly something which is, which wasn't in Chabad, um, thirty years ago. So is that, uh, recommended or not? That's, uh, is another question. If someone wants to read up on that, in, uh, Rabbi Gorari's series of Chidrei Minhogim, he's got a whole, uh, chapter on this, and you can read it there. All right. Let's move on to something, uh, another question. Here, the question is the following. That someone met an old friend of his on Shabbos Erev Shavuos, and he's schmoozing with him, and he tells him about what he's doing, publishing seforim. And this fellow is a b... Is a Baal Teshuva from a wealthy family. Unfortunately, his parents are no longer alive, and, uh, there's him and his sister who-- they have a, uh, charit-charitable trust of the family. He wasn't actually soliciting any money, but he was just telling his friend. And a, a few days after Shavuos, he, uh, opens the, uh, uh, an, an, an envelope in the mail, and there, there's a check for a thousand dollars from, uh, from the trust of this family, which is very exciting. But the, uh, he sa-- He looks at the, the date of the signature, the date of the postmark, and the date is, is, is the second day of Yom Tov. So now he's wondering, "Am I allowed to bank this check, which was written probably by a Jew

19:34 Speaker 1 on Yom Tov?" This is the question. So now, this brings us to the question, what's called Maaseh Shabbos. Something which was generated by a forbidden activity on Shabbos, are you allowed to, uh, benefit from it? So the, the primary source is in the dinim of cooking on Shabbos. It's Shehin Yitches. And where we have, where someone cooked on Shabbos. So it says that for the person who cooked, so that food is forbidden forever. Lo Yasur Le-olam. If he did so willfully, knowing it's Shabbos, and nevertheless, he violated Shabbos, the, the, the, um, the one, the one who did the act is forbidden to benefit from it Le-olam. And for others, it's Mutar Motzei Shabbos. Now, I know we know there's the term of Shogeig, which is a more lenient halakha, but I don't think it's correct to refer to a person who doesn't keep Shabbos as Shogeig. Shogeig means if you tell him that, like, today is Shabbos, if you tell him that this is also a Shabbos, they would desist. That's not what we're talking about. Here, we're talking about a person who says, "I'm not religious." So he's not a Shogeig by, as such. You might give some other names. Tin, Tinok Shenishbeh, if you want, but it's not, it doesn't have the definition of a Shogeig. Therefore, it would be Lo Yasur Le-olam. Um, now, here's another interesting point. If a person cooks on Shabbos, not only is the food Asur Le-olam, but also the pot in which he cooked is also

21:24 Speaker 1 Asur Le-olam. Now, that's a very interesting point because you could then, according to what I just said, if a person was not Shomer Shabbos and used to use a kettle on Shabbos, now they become Shomer Shabbos, Baal Teshuva, Baruch Hashem, it would work out they would have to ca-kasher the kettle. It's very interesting because how do you kasher a kettle? A kettle, well, it's, it's the water. Are you, well, are you going to get the water? The water doesn't have a taste. So what, what does it mean? What are you gonna kasher here? Fine. Anyway, let's, let's keep to our point. The Alter Rebbe in Siman Shehin Yurchez says that although that the one who violated Shabbos is not allowed to have benefit, af-- for others it's Mutar, af im bishel bishvil. The intended beneficiary is allowed to have benefit from the melacha after Shabbos. So, coming back to our case. A check was written by A for the benefit of B. So then, according to what's written over here, for whom it was cooked, is allowed to have benefit after Shabbos. Not so poshit, because a similar halakha appears in Siman Taf Kuf Gimel in Hilchos Yom Tov. And here, the Alter Rebbe paskens differently. He says that these foods which were cooked in violation of Yom Tov, whatever the de-detail is there, also Lo Yolech Chol Anshei Beiso Le-olam. The penalty that is not allowed to have benefit from the food is not only for himself, but also for his family. So here,

23:04 Speaker 1 we are having a de-- a, a evidently, a contradiction. When there is a penalty on a person who is mechallel, does it include the family for whom it was cooked or only the person who did the actual cooking? In the Alter Rebbe's-- Well, in the Magen Avraham, in Shehin Yurchez, he brings two sides. In Hilchos Yom Tov, in the Kuntress Achron, the Alter Rebbe discusses this, and there he takes the view that it includes the family too. In which case, the same thing should apply here, that the check is written for so and so, so it was-- the ben-- intended beneficiary should also be included. Um, I know I'm uncomfortable about the contradiction here. One mitigation, or perhaps to explain perhaps why the, um, here is psak one way, one's the other. Possibly, in Hilchos Shabbos, because people are more conscientious about the severity of violating Shabbos, there's no need to extend the penalty to Anshei Beiso, to the beneficiaries. In Hilchos Yom Tov, where people are not so aware, not so, perhaps, um, careful about the isurim of Yom Tov, therefore, there's need for that penalty when there was a violation to include Anshei Beiso. Okay. That doesn't help us at all because here we're talking about someone who wrote a check on Yom Tov for someone else, and therefore then, according to the Hilchos-- psak in Hilchos Yom Tov, it is asur for the beneficiary. The only thing is that the check, no one's eating the check. The check is basically a key

24:46 Speaker 1 to access funds from the bank account. So I don't, I'm not interested in eating the, having the check. It's, it's different. But, so this I found in a sefer called the Bibina Bodaz. Talks about a check written for someone. You could say you're not eating, you're not neheneh, you're not enjoying the actual check. What do you say? Well, you're getting the equivalent. You're getting what's released through it. So I wasn't so confident with this hetter. What one, one, one hetter, I think, is that, he's-- the check is not written for him. The check is written for his charitable endeavors. Therefore, it's not bishvilo. It's bishvil, it's the, the, the thousand dollars is for the community who will benefit from wherever-- whatever charita-charitable activities this young fellow is doing. So therefore, it's not, it's, it's not bishvilo, and therefore, bishvil kol haolam, it certainly is mutar. Let me just see what some people have written on the chat, and before we go on to the next question. What about the spiritual benefit for the person who w-- That's a good point. The person, uh, on the one hand, um, would have be-benefit of the tzedakah which he's giving. That's true. Um, of course, there is... You could go back and ask for a new check, but that's, that's a bit of an awkward situation. We can all understand that. Um, Reb Mendel is cha-challenging that it wasn't written le'anshei beis. That's true. But it was-- I-I think le'anshei beis means the intended beneficiary. So if it

26:23 Speaker 1 was for his personal use, he is the one for whom it was done, and l'chayei that would be included. Okay, let's move on. Okay. So someone asked me the question during this past week, "What happens if I hear a bracha which is not according to my nusach?" So, for example, um, the Sephardim don't say, uh, a, a woman would not say a bracha on, on lulav. Because it's mitzvot asei shehazman grama. The Rambam holds that the woman shouldn't be making a bracha. So what happens if a Sephardi hears a ma-- hears a woman, Ashkenazi or Sephardi, saying a bracha al neteilas lulav? So does he answer amen? Does a Chabadnik-- We don't say a bracha al mitzvot, um, tefillin on the Shalosh. If I'm in shul and I hear someone putting on tefillin, he puts on, says it's Ashkenazi, and he says, uh, shehakol on Shalosh. Do I say a bracha-- Do I say amen? Sorry. Um, I often, for my-- because of my schedule or lack of schedule, will daven maariv in a non-Chabad minyan. And they say, after Hashkiveinu, they say, "Baruch Hashem l'olam." Al kol ma asah. Do I answer amen to that bracha? So this is the question, yeah. When I see someone's putting, "Baruch atam kadeshi b'rabim," all right, yes, same, same question. So here we have in Shulchan Aruch, siman reish, tes lamed. One who says a bracha she'eino tzrichah, one who says a bracha which is not unwarranted, so then that's considered sa-uttering Hashem's name, lashav, in vain.

28:21 Speaker 1 V'harehu kenishah lashav. It's as if he had made an oath in vain. V'al su lanos amen acharon amen. You're not to answer amen. That's the Shulchan Aruch. So if you-- someone says a bracha d'vatala, a bracha she'eino tzrichah even, so then you shouldn't be answering amen. Says now the Mishnah Berurah in Biur Halacha. Let's read this carefully. However, he says, "Im echad noig ke'eizeh de'ah." If that other person is following a legitimate opinion. "V'eizeh de'ah lo yudchu legamrei min ha'poskim." That other opinion is not totally rejected from poskim. And he gives the example of bearing the four species. Baruch ata Hashem, eloheinu melech ha-olam. Which is an interesting example. Um, ach shamin hadin ein mechuyav laneis aleiha amen. So you don't subscribe to tzi-to that view. Therefore, you're not obl-obliged to answer amen. S'feik amen l'kula. You're not obliged to answer amen. Komokom ein issur im eino oleiha. There's no issur if you do answer. And as he quotes the Pri Megadim, "Ein bo chashash d'lo sisah." To say a bracha in vain is included in lo sisah, as if you're making a false oath, as said in the Shulchan Aruch. But to answer amen when it's unwarranted would not fall into that category of lo sisah. So what that person did, that's his business. But for me to answer amen, I don't have to feel guilty, uh, answering amen, even if I don't actually say-- hold of saying that bracha, because that bracha is a legitimate bracha according to, um, you know, recognized poskim.

30:06 Speaker 1 So according to this, it's okay for me to answer amen on the bracha of Al mitzvas tefillin, even though I don't say it myself, uh, in this situation, unless I was mafsik, et cetera. So that's the position of the, of the Mishnah Berurah. Um, Rabbi, uh, Rav Yosef, he says differently, and he says that a Wu-an Ashkenazi woman will say a bracha, which for them is not a bracha levatalah. But since the Sephardi is listening follows the Shulchan Aruch, he should not answer amen for something which in his opinion is a bracha levatalah. And it's a sfeik amen yesomei l'chumra, as quoted in Rambam. So that's very interesting. Whilst the Mishnah Berurah had quoted the Pri Megadim that it-- no, not, no, no, don't worry about lo sisah by answering amen if it's unwarranted The, uh, Ravadi Yosef, he is quoting, uh, Amen Yesoimo. They should avoid it. So I think the general minhag is more like the Mishneh Berurah, that it's, it's gefaellach to answer Amen. I would only add that after, um, Boruch Hashem Le'olam, it's not only a question of Amen Levato. It's a question of hefs, of hefsek, because the Alter Rebbe tells us not to, he recommends to not say V'shamru. Uh, so it's not just because of Kas Nevarchah V'atola. It's because there should not be an interruption between Gal Yisroel and Shemoneh Esreh, geulah and tefillah. So the reason, so the, the, the, there's, the reason why we have a Kaddish at night between Birchat Krishe and Shemoneh

31:51 Speaker 1 Esreh seems to be because of the, um, impression or the idea that, that Arvis is Roshos, et cetera. The emphasis on Smichas Geulah L'tefillah Balailo is less. That's why in Ashkenaz Minhag, they would announce Yalavi Yovri on Rosh Chodesh, um, after Hashkivenu or after Boruch Hashem Le'olam, I'm not sure. But they would allow to announce, um, Yalavi Yovri then. Because they take the view that, uh, it's, that by Ma'ariv, the emphasis on Smichas Geulah L'tefillah, L'tefillah is not so strong. Um, the Alter Rebbe, um, he, he takes it stricter. He says you should avoid being mafsik between Geulah L'tefillah even by Ma'ariv. Therefore, not to say the announcement of, of Yalavi Yovri, and therefore not to say V'shamru, not to say Boruch Hashem Le'olam. And therefore, I think the Amen of Boruch Hashem Le'olam falls into that category of Hashash Hefsek. Uh, and therefore, room to be more mafsik, not to say it. Um, all right. So suggesting a way of, of avoiding the shaila. Yes, sure. Let's move on. Okay. So here, a shaila which came up, and, uh, it's interesting because it's, we just had this in Rambam. Um, last week, we were learning in three, three prakim a day, Ichas Tefillah. The last two, three prakim of Ichas Tefillah in Rambam is Ichas, uh, Birchas Kohenim. There, the Rambam says that if a Kohen had converted to another faith, and now he wants to come back, Boruch Hashem, what he's not allowed to do, he's not allowed, he doesn't have the privileges

33:47 Speaker 1 of a Kohuna. Um, there is the Mishnah towards the end of Maseches Vochim about Beis Chonyoi. There was this temple in Egypt, which was, uh, led by Chonyoi, who had gotten into a fight with his brother, Aris Tabulus, and he fled to Egypt and made a temple there. And there's a discussion in the Gemara, was it, was it for Avodah Zarah or was it, was it for Avodah Zarah Hashem? It was just, he wasn't allowed to do it. He did it, but was it Avodah Zarah or not? This could be just Kochim Bachutz, but not Avodah Zarah. Meanwhile, there's a discussion whether the Kohenim who, who served in Beis Chonyoi, are they allowed to serve in the Beis Hamidrosh. On, based upon that sugiah, it looks like the Rambam takes the view that if a Kohen had defected and served Avodah Zarah, he will lose his privilege. Even if he comes back, he doesn't come back to be a, a functioning Kohen. The Alter Rebbe says the opposite, and in the Rambam, on the spot, you have Hagos Maimonios, and there he quotes, Hagos Maimonios quotes from Rabbeinu Gershom or Ragelo, who disagrees with the Rambam and says that Teshuvah works for this also. So this you have now, a quote on the screen from the Alter Rebbe Shechinor, Siman Kuf Kof Ches, which is about Birchas Kohenim, and he says, uh, Sifnun Alef, "A Kohen Sheheimi who had, had converted to another faith, even to Islam, which is not Avodah Zarah, so he is

35:25 Speaker 1 penalized and he has lost his, his privilege, um, of Kohuna." But then he adds, "Vehu Shelo Yasot Teshuvah. Av Olim Asot Teshuvah." If he did do Teshuvah, "Afilu Heimi Dos Avodah Zarah." Even if his defection was not to Islam, but to Christianity, "Vechozar Bohi," and he came back, "Chozer Lekdoshasai," he is restored to his, uh, Kedushah, and he does do Nesiyas Kapayim. So this is where you have a clear, um, Psak in Shechinor, which is not like the Rambam find. Meanwhile, whilst we're talking about this, certainly, um, a person who went through baptism, a Yid who went through baptism should be taken to Mikvah. Um, there is in the last, um, Seif in Ichaz Geilim, where it is Samach Resh Samach Ches, I think. So the Rambam brings this Inyan, and there's also from the Rebbe, uh, letters strong, uh, very strongly encouraging the person who, um, had gone through a formal conversion to, to, uh, Christianity should go through, uh, a, uh, a purification of that, and that's through going to Mikvah. And, um, my experience with this, I've had it a few times. Um, sometimes you had some girls who had been in school here. They had been in the former Soviet Union, and, um, the, the-- afterwards, their appear, their re-re, you know, their feeling was a tremendous, uh, relief or a bit, a massive stone off their chests, felt, um, a Poshet, a, a relief, a, a, a, in, in their relationship to Yiddishkeit. Right. Rabbi Cohen's, um, mentioning if a

37:13 Speaker 1 Kohen is guilty of bloodshed, even if it was Bashogeg, that would be a different story. Um, yes, that's true. And, um, there's a discussion contemporaries for him, if he's driving a car and, God forbid, caused, um, a fatality, um, whether he would be allowed to continue doing his-- being a K- um, a active Kohen in Duchen. All right. Um, Right. So here I have a very interesting... A fellow's going on a hike, and he doesn't have-- There's no water. No, no drinkable water. For Netilas Yadayim, it has to be drinkable water. I was once, um, years ago, I was in, uh, to throw with my children, and we went to Tiberias. And, um, we were by, outside this hotel, and there's this pond, this artificial pond in front of the hotel, boiling hot water. I've never seen anything anywhere else the same. Imagine a built-up pond, it's about, you know, four foot off the ground. It's pushing boiling water. Um, that was the only water available for some reason, because we were not paying hotel fees. Uh, we were just, you know, uh, taking a free ride, so we were, uh, we weren't allowed into the hotels. So we didn't have any water. The only water we had was from this, this boiling water. It's garbage boiling. Um, waited till it cooled down, but really, that water is not kosher for Netilas Yadayim because it's got sulfur. And sulfuric water is passul from Netilas Yadayim, so I'm just telling you in case you're stuck in.

38:58 Speaker 1 Um, yes, sul-sulfuric water is no good for Netilas Yadayim. But dirty water, which is not drinkable, is passul from Netilas Yadayim. It is, however, kosher as a mikvah. So now this fellow is on a hike, and the only water he has is a river, and the river is dirty water. Still, you know, he's hungry, wants to eat his sandwiches, so he wants to do, uh, dip his hands in the, in the, in the river. The, the problem is that a few weeks ago, he had heard, listened on this, uh, panorama of Hadach, last year, that there's problems sometimes with rivers, that there's a, a dam upstream, electricity dam. And as a result, all the water which comes downstream is Mayim She'uvim, has been disqualified because it's come through the dam. Now, the context at the time was for tevilah of a person's , perhaps, or tevilas keilim. It wasn't in the context of tevi-- of tevilah for Netilas Yadayim. So you-- So let's look at this carefully. Are the rules for Netilas Yadayim as, as strict as the rules for tevilah of a person or tevilas keilim? Bear in mind that tevilas keilim, according to some, is a din min haTorah. Whereas Netilas Yadayim is a Takanat Shlomo HaMelech. Netilas Yadayim is n-- is, is a parallel, so to speak, but it's certainly a pure derabanan. Therefore, there could be room to be more lenient. What is not fit for a mikvah for other things may be fit for a mikvah for Netilas Yadayim. So,

40:45 Speaker 1 um, let's just see what we can bring up over here. Um, so, um, that's-- I don't, I don't have it on the screen, but here is Netilas Yadayim. Is a bit of leeway on this. And Mayim She'uvim, water drawn in buckets, and in this case, through the electricity dam, is not kosher for a mikvah, but, um, would be acceptable for Netilas Yadayim for the following reason. There's something called Hamshacha, um, which means when the water of the, the passul of water travel over a stretch of... Here we have it. This is, um, so Sh- Mayim She'uvim are passul, but if this, the water which were She'uvim, which were in buckets, are flowing over a stretch of land, then they are become kosher. So therefore, coming back to this question, the, the water downstream after the electricity dam is indeed kosher for Netilas Yadayim because it's She'uvim Behhamshacha. That doesn't take away the principal question. Let's say instead of the question it being because of an, a dam upstream, the question is, uh, it's water from, you go in the mountains, you're on the Alps, or you go in Snowdon, whatever, and you've got these rivers coming down, and those rivers are only there in the summer when there's melting snow. The rule is that a mikvah, if it is water from a spring, even if it's running water, it's kosher. That's called Zeichalin. But water from rain or from melting snow, if it's flowing, it's passul for a mikvah. Now, there are opinions, again, who

42:59 Speaker 1 say that although Zeichalin is passul for tevilah, for a mikvah, there are those who say that it is kosher for Netilas Yadayim. That you would be allowed to dip your hands in, in, in, in zo-- in resembling zoichein. So you've got this mountain stream. So there are those who say that it would be kosher for tefillah shehdai. Okay. Now it says, now the Rebbe writes, "If you dipped your hand in such a pool of, of..." Uh, you know, in a river of zoichein, so you're yotzer midy avod. But if you have now an opportunity to wash again, you should wash again. And if you wa-- made a bracha on the first one, you should not make a bracha on the second one. Here, I've come back to the main question. When you are fulfilling a mitzvah, mitz-- and you're yotzer, misafek, because we say, "Safek drabbanan lechula." Fine. And you make a bracha on that which you are fulfilling a mitzvah misafek. Because we have a, a klal of safek brachos lehakil. So although on the one hand, safek netilas yadayim is kosher. You see, your hands are kosher. Uh, uh, uh, you're allowed to eat your bread. But are you allowed to make a bracha on safek netilas yadayim? This is the question. So here we have the Mishnah Brurah in siman, is it... Um, in-- this is in, um, I think, it's kuf samech alef. I have a note over here. Uh, in siman kuf samech, Birhalacha, he says the following. He quotes

44:45 Speaker 1 the Primordium. "Once you have license," Chazal said, "You are allowed to use this water for netilas yadayim. If so, you can make a bracha." Ha-you got this body of water, shurvim, whatever, zoichein. Chazal said, "Yes, it's kosher for netilas yadayim because safek netilas, safek netilas yadayim is kosher." Okay, then you can make a bracha on that. That's what, the way the Primordium says. Now, this is very, very interesting because in the dinim of chatzas for the Seder night, we have a Mishnah Brurah who has a problem with this. There are two opinions whether chatzas is a half an, uh, the volume of an egg or a third of the volume of an egg. For matzah, we take the larger amount. Chatzas is the equivalent of half an egg in volume. For maror, it is a third of an egg. So the shir of chatzas for maror is smaller than the shir of chatzas for matzah. No news over there. But let's read the Mishnah Brurah. But in maror, you have gam zu yetz liṣmaḥ bedi'eved. If you had a third of an egg volume of maror, achal chatchilah, you have to make a bracha on the maror. So how can you make a bracha? It's a safek. Well, hang on a second. You just told me that if I wash netilas yadayim, which is the halacha, it is valid. Primordium tells me that I'm allowed to make a bracha on it. So now I've got this piece of maror. Can I be yotzer with this

46:24 Speaker 1 maror? The halacha is there, yes. So according to this, it should be the same rule, that I should be able to make a bracha al achilas maror on the smaller shir, since the, the, uh, decision is that it's valid. Rav Chaim Noah addresses this in, in, uh, in Shiurei Torah. He says it's poshet that when the Alter Rebbe and earlier poskim say that for maror, you can rely on the shir of a third of a beitzah. So then they mean, uh, you can be yo-- that you can make a bracha. Otherwise, they would have told you that, you know, it's all very well, but you're missing out on the bracha. Okay. So what we're seeing here is that, that with this, this body of water, um, it seems to be that we would follow the Primordium, and, and that's borne out by the Alter Rebbe's position also, the gav in maror, that you can make a bracha al achilas maror, even on a shlishi beis, because that's the psak, that you're allow-- you're yotzer with this. You can make a bracha. So by the same token, when you have this water, which it could be it's like, uh, from, um, water which is coming down from, uh, what do we say? From, uh, toras, uh, from, from zoichein. But since they are the, the... Since you are yotzer, then you can make a bracha on this. Now, there's another interesting, uh, uh, uh, helpful note, and that is the concept of sfeik sfeika. We just

47:59 Speaker 1 came through Sefiras Ha'Omer. If you missed one night's Sefiras Ha'Omer, you can't count the next night with a bracha. What happens if you're not sure whether you missed? So then you can continue counting with a bracha. So we have there, and this is a letter of the Rebbe, and we see sfeik sfeika, that you can make a bracha. And so it's a similar idea. You have here that it's, you-- since you are, um, able to ful-fulfill this mitzvah, so then you can make a bracha. Okay. That's as much as I can say for the moment. It looks like that, uh, even though there's a safek to say that the water is from melting snow, and therefore, there are those who say it's not kosher, but there are those who say it is kosher, and therefore, you would be allowed to make a bracha, um, al tavilah, al shbefas yadayim. The bracha for dipping your hands is not al netilas yadayim. It's not al tavilas yadayim, because you don't have to do tavilah. And so the Alter Rebbe has al shbefas yadayim, the washing of the hands in more generic terms. Okay, let's move on. All right, um, so number seven on our list is onions were fried in a milchig frying pan, and whilst still very hot, these onions were placed on a meaty and a fleishiger, uh, china dish. Is the dish now treif? So we're all familiar, where certainly anyone who's learnt Yad Aja, the concept of dover charif. If you cut an

49:34 Speaker 1 onion with a fleishiger knife, so then that onion becomes fleishig. And if you then mixed it or put it into a, a, a milchig soup, you'd have, um, you'd have to have shishim against, well, however you work it out, but you'd have to have a, uh, you'd have to have, uh, get a bit of a shishim. Whether it's about the volume of the onion or the volume of the knife. But meanwhile, we, we'd say that there's a presence of fleishigs in the, in the onion. There, the typical scenario is what's called duchdet hasakina. There's a friction, a pressure combined with the, with the... In other words, the fric-friction when you, when you chop the onion, plus the sharpness of So the two together are, are creating that the taste would... From the knife will be imparted to the, to the onion. It goes even more than that. But even if normally we say, if a dish hasn't been used for twenty-four hours, we'll say it doesn't cause... It's, it's called no Shen taam lifgam. In the case of Dvar Charif, the Dvar Charif takes that, that rancid taste and refreshes it, and this even if it's more than twenty-four hours since that knife was used for cutting, uh, fleishigs, it will still make the onion fresh. What about frying onions? Does the concept of Dvar Charif work over here? So here we've got this milchig frying pan. It hasn't been used for twenty-four hours for milk take. I fried onions in it. Does the Dvar

51:07 Speaker 1 Charif of the onions bring out the taste of that, um, of that frying pan, the milkig taste? And even if it's more than twenty-four hours, it's gonna become fresh again. In other words, does cooking Dvar Charif compare with cutting Dvar Charif? That's, that's the question. Now, actually, I think it's fairly straightforward. In the Rama, it's tucked away because in Siman Tsadik Vov, that's where he talks about chopping Dvar Charif. But here in Siman Kuf Tsad... Sorry. Let's say Kuf Tsadik Vov. In Siman Tsadik Hey, he says the following. He's talking about, about the concept of Nat Bar Nat. You know, the idea of you, you, um, cooked, uh, potatoes in a fleishige dish, and now so those potatoes are still pareve because it's fleish into the dish and dish-- and, and from the dish into the, into the potatoes. So then that's called Nat Bar Nat, and the, the potatoes are not fleishy. The Yerev, the Chatrile. Fine. Aval im hu ya dov achad. If the cooked item, it's not potatoes, it's Dvar Charif which is being cooked. Shebishul devarim charifim bekeili shel basar afilu eino ben yomin. So here we have you cooked Dvar Charif. So then it has, if in Bishuli be cholo oisa afilu beYered. So if you'd cooked, um, a Dvar Charif in a fleishige dish, which... In a fleishige pot, which is more than twenty-four hours since it was used, doesn't matter. The Dvar Charif is going to, uh, refresh the taste there, and it's gonna become a taam which

52:48 Speaker 1 is potent to, to asper the food of the other, the other side. Meat or me- milk or m-milk to meat or meat to milk. So therefore, um, we're not talking about a few onions in, in an omelet. We're talking here where onions were fried, perhaps a lot of onions j- on their own in a, in milkig frying pan. So that lechayev falls into the definition of cooking a Dvar Charif, which the Rama is talking about here. Now, you can see here there's a symbol that on, on the Zain, et cetera. The Piskei Teshuva does bring others who disagree with it, but the pashut is this is the Rama. That by cooking a Dvar Charif, it will, um, impart a taste to the onions, et cetera, and they will become... In our case, they have ca-came fleishig, uh, milchig. So if you now fried a lot of onions in a milchig frying pan, those onions are now as if they were cooked with milk. Now, whilst they were still very hot, you put them onto a meaty plate. So now the question is: What do you do with that plate? So the answer to this is that the plate will still remain kosher. The reason is that the... If you had taken those onions and warmed them up in a fleishige dish, in a fleishige, I think, then that would become fleishig. Because it's milky onions now cooked in a fleishige dish, and it's, it's, uh... Yeah. But i-if it's just the hot onions were placed

54:23 Speaker 1 into the milkig, into the fleishige dish, fine. So it's klishaini. I know you might start saying Dvar gush, that a solid food retains its, uh, uh, temperature. The Alter Rebbe doesn't bring it, LaAloche, and the Rama doesn't... Before the Alter Rebbe doesn't bring it, LaAloche. It's a Humra De Mashal. So Dvar gush itself is not, not a reason to ask for something which can't be kashered. This is the point that I wanna say. And here we have Siman Kuf Hey talking about, um, klishaini. Chaim, Chaim Klishaini, first opinion, does not cook. Some say although klishaini doesn't cook, it does, um, yesh ominim, it does impart taste into the c-con-container. Oisa kle klipa. So what's the, what's the story with klishaini? So there are Pshat here in Shulchan Aruch in Kuf Heh Seif Beis. Lechatchilah, klishaini is mavlia maflit. V'd'yeved mutar b'ele klipa vadocha b'al masach. So if it were a metal dish, I would say to kasher that dish, perhaps. The fleishige dish. If it's an earthenware, china, which can't be kashered, so the Pshat Halacha is going to then, then say klishaini is not b'eleha, and therefore that the fleishige dish remains kosher, you don't have to discard it. Okay. We have one last question on our list, and there's no, um, there's no slide for that, so you can close the slide. And that is, someone asked me a question about two weeks ago. It was a, a bochur who's running the kitchen in a yeshiva, and he has to buy, um, wine

56:04 Speaker 1 for the bochurim, and he's asking that we have various wines, do- yayin kal, three and a half percent, four percent. What... But it's bochurim, they're Chetminim. He wants to give them not... He doesn't want to shortchange them. What level would be mehudar? So I told him approximately seven, seven, uh, percent would be considered mehudar. I didn't have very strong, uh, yesodais for that, but I felt... And there is idea that, that the wine should be a yayin hamazeiach. Yayin meshubech should have something which would, um, um, um, lift your mood a little bit. The, uh, yayin kal is, is, um, it's almost like grape juice. It has negligible amount of alcohol. Um, so I was pleased that I found there's this excellent guide from the late Rav Blumenkranz. A guide for Chag Pesach. Very, very practical stuff. Um, so he takes the view that when the wine has already got five or six percent, it's already considered mehudar. So I f- I feel I wasn't too far off. Um, too much, you know, solid evidence I don't have, but I think that's good enough to say that if it's got a little bit of alcoholic content, it would already be called yayin hamazeiach and would be adequate to be makayim, uh, you know, to be called mehudar. Okay. So that's i- that's what we have for tonight, and I wish you all a guten Shabbos. Thanks for participating, and we should meet in good health. And, uh, Ula shlemo v'shaste kaina v'im her v'yameinu mamash.

57:47 Speaker 2 Amen. Thank you. Thank you for your time