וילך תשפ״ג

00:00 Good evening and Welcome to the Shiur this evening for Parashat, uh, Vayelech, Shabbat Shuva. So let's go straight into our first question. So someone asked me recently, is the term Shnat Hakhel, is it a Kiddush of the Rebbe? Because Hakhel is where-- which is read in yesterday's Parashat HaChumash, where they-- the year after Shmittah, so on Sukkot, the whole of Klal Yisrael will, will converge to the, on, to the Beit HaMikdash and the melech reads from the Torah. So there's a Hakhel event which happens on Sukkot. The term, the whole year as a Hakhel is, where does that come from? So actually, this is a letter in, uh, from Torat HaShlemim Ches, published in the Sefer HaZohar Dalet, where the Rebbe addresses this, and the Rebbe dates the letter, Shnat Hakhel, um, the date also, but he also calls it, he calls it Shnat Hakhel. And so the Rebbe addresses this, and he says, "Keiyn yei shlomo. The chol ha-shana, the whole year is called so because of the mitzvot Hakhel on Sukkot." Similar to the idea of Shnat HaYovel. The whole year is called-- why is it called Yovel? Yovel, Yovel is the blowing of the trumpet of the, of the-- which is done on Rosh... on, on Yom Kippur. It's true that you can argue that on Yovel there are other, um, aspects which apply the rest of the year, um, like, you know, not doing agriculture, et cetera. But the na- the name Yovel has got to do with the blowing of

01:49 the, of the, uh, of the shofar on Rosh... on, on Yom Kippur, which is a one-off. And so the, the, like you could have Shnat HaYovel, Shnat Hakhel. Then the Rebbe says further, because the Hakhel is not just a one-off event. It's got the tetzurah, the Yom Shlaha Rezah, it's got the effect on the subsequent days. As it says in the Torah, this purpose of, of this, this, uh, coming together is, "Lehirat Hashem kol hayomim," to imbue a sense of awe of Hashem for ti- for days to come. And therefore, it makes sense. It's got an impact on the whole year, and therefore, there's tetzurah of Shnat Hakhel. And we also read in the Parasha, which again, yesterday's Parashat HaChumash, it says, "Moed Shnat HaShmitah." And Rashi says, the first year, um, because it's kind of following after Shmitah, Rashi says it's ko... it's Shnat HaShmitah. But why does the Torah use that, that term? Says the Rebbe, to emphasize that it's, well, she, she, "Neh lahargish zehu in yushach lechol hashanah." It's got to do with the whole year. So the Rebbe's using this to support his having named the whole year Shnat Hakhel. And then he refers to Chazal elsewhere who talk about the whole year being moed zoish vitz. Okay. Let's go on to the next point. And this is something, I was at the Ohel Shabbos Tzlachas, and a gentleman sat down next to me and we were, we were talking. He's, uh, a fair bit older than me, and he

03:19 has-- suffers hearing loss. And, uh, so he uses a hearing aid. And he tells me, which was news to me, that the current hearing aids are made, instead of a battery, they are, they are, um, with an, a USB charger. And the-- So those who would wear hearing aids, uh, with batteries, that's not a problem to switch on the, the-- To switch on the battery on-- switch on the, the, um, hearing aid on Shabbos is a problem. But if it's already on before, so it's just goes on the whole of Shabbos, that's okay. Um, but here, the problem is with this full charge of this, uh, hearing aid is only for eighteen hours. Which means, which I understand for, uh, normally people don't stay awake for more than eighteen hou-hours in one stretch. And therefore, it's, you know, it depends, but you, you charge it. But for a, for a year, that's a problem, that the, uh, that it doesn't last him a Shabbos. So he ca-- he was asking me, would there be an acceptable solution to plug the, uh, hearing aid into a charger, and the charger is, is, uh, on a time switch. So let's say it's ten at, uh, eleven o'clock at night. He'll put it in the charger, which is timed to start working at twelve o'clock at night. So the moment the charger is dead, he'll put it in, and later it'll s- kick in and it'll, it'll charge. And then in the morning, it'll be recharged, and then

04:57 he'll be able to take it out. So this, this, uh, this was his, his question, which I was, uh, a little bit skeptical whether that would be okay. And I'll tell you where I came from, and then we'll see. Yet, I think he actually was onto a good solution. So let's take a look here. We have a halacha. This is in sim-sim-simulation on Gimel, where we have the story where in the olden days, you'd have every Shabbos, the goy would come to stoke the fire because people couldn't, uh, you know, pe-people didn't have central heating. And so, uh, not to get ill, you'd have to call in a goy to, to light the fire. You know, you gave him a bit of kugel, and that's how we got the, um, the Shabbos goy. It became part of our culture. Fine. So the goy is gonna heat, uh, put in, um, wood or whatever in the, in the fireplace. What about putting a kettle on the mantelpiece or somewhere near the, the, uh, fireplace? And then you'd put it on at, let's say, um- 10 o'clock. At 11 o'clock, the goy is gonna put in the m- m- make, make the fire. So when you put on the kettle, it's on a cold shelf, but later it's gonna go on. So there, Alter Rebbe addresses this, and he says that's not allowed. He wouldn't be allowed to put the... He says, you have that, the idea. It says, "Echod meivi, uh, echad maniah ges gedera ve'echad

06:25 noisnin se'ur shetachtel." If Reuven put a, a pot in place, and then Shimon put the fire in place, and then cooked the kettle, boiled the kettle. So the Gemara says, "Sh'anishin patur." The one who put the fi- the, the kettle on the stove before the fire was there is patur, but it's also mid'Rabbanan. So it's, it's also mid'Rabbanan. So to put something in a position where subsequently there's going to be another intervention and going to m- cause a melacha, so that would not be allowed, at least mid'Rabbanan. So therefore, to put the, the, the charger, the, uh, the, uh, the, um, hearing aid into the charger where it's going to switch on, um, at a, a later hour, it's, uh, it's also mid'Rabbanan. On the other hand, if it's also mid'Rabbanan, well, perhaps for such a tzorech, tzorech gadol, I think for a d- for a person, a person who's not able to hear, they are detached from society. It says in the Gemara that if you cause someone, uh, d- uh, uh, damage, if you damage their eyesight, see, there's a certain amount you have to pay. If you, if you damage their hearing, you have to pay their, their full worth, as if like a full value of, of, you know, the slave market, whatever it may be. You have to pay the full value. "Chei shel nosnin temheiku lehu." When a person becomes deaf, Chamalal Z"L, they lose contact with the world around them, and that's really very, um, very debilitating. And

08:03 so it- it's certainly a tzorech gadol. So perhaps to do it, uh, it's a Rabbanan klal chayad, may... There may be, uh, room for that. I was a little bit still... My, my question, which I am, am gonna share with you now, what bothered me about this is, our time clock situation, in my mind, is worse than the story over here with the pot, uh, on, on the fire, the fireplace. Because when I put the pot on the fireplace, it's not automatic that there's going to be a fire lit by the goy. The goy will decide, "I'm coming. I won't come. He won't come." You know, it's, it's, it's... He, he may decide he doesn't want, want to bother. It's not inevitable, so it's, it hasn't happened yet. By contrast, if there is already a process in place that there's a time sc- clock ticking away, unless there's a power cut, but under normal circumstances, it's going to happen. So I feel that's actually worse, and that's, therefore, should not be allowed because it's as if you're plugging it in. What's the difference whether it's gonna go on now or gonna end going on in a minute? It's an inevitability. So that was my hesitation, despite my tremendous, uh, sympathy for the situation of this, uh, uh, person who's been, uh, uh, unable to hear, uh, out of communication the last hours of Shabbos. But I, I did my, uh, I did homework, and here you have, all of the, in the Sefer Shmiras Shabbos

09:33 KeHilchosa, page Yud Gimel. Now, if you look on the, uh, notes which I sent around, there's two numbers, one w- in brackets and one without brackets. That's because there's early edition and later edition. So the square brackets is the newer edition. But anyway, he talks about stuff, about when something is, uh, in or o- on, on a time switch. Let's say when it's off, are you... Let's say there's a heater plugged in to a, to a time switch, and you decide, "I don't want the heater on in an hour either." So you are, he says, you're allowed to pull out the plug from the time switch whilst it's all off. Uh, it should remain off. Of course, the plug is muktzah, so we're talking about mu- moving it klal chayad. But then he says, which this is really, I was, uh, very surprised, but I'm happy to share it with you. "Uvesha'as tzorech gadol mutar af leechanis es hateik el hasheikeh." If there's a great need, you'd be allowed to even plug in a plug into the socket. "Mum klal chayad k'dei she'or yidalek im chibuur zeraim ha'hashmal." So that once, when the t- current will be switched on, then this light will go on. So he's allowing you, with tzorech, tzorech gadol, to plug in something which will go on at a later moment. So mamash this situation, where you're plugging in the, uh, the hearing aid. You're plugging in the hearing aid into the charger, and you know it's gonna switch on, so

11:04 the tzorech gadol here allows it. Now, in the footnotes, which I didn't put on the screen, uh, he quotes here Rav Shlomo Zalman, who says that this is called grama. It's kind of indirect causation, and that's allowed in the case of tzorech gadol, which so I found that very, uh, very helpful. My reservations about this, in the Shmiras Shabbos KeHilchosa, he gives a reference to, um, to a sefer called Chatzos Vai, from, uh, uh, Pesach Frank, who's Rav of Yerushalayim in his time. And he actually raises this question. At an automated, in an automated system, he says perhaps that's called a issur shel Torah. It's not like putting the kedera, um, when someone else will light it. It may be... No, it's, it's inevitability, and therefore, he's, he's concerned it's a Torah. So on the one hand, m- uh, I see that, you know, my con- concerns were, are, are valid. I feel validated. Well, the, the psak halacha which Rav Shlomo Zalman says i- is considered grama, and therefore, he sees it as a, as it's permitted in tzorech gadol. Of course- Doing it kelacha yad, which means handling in an unusual way. This, all, all of this discussion was also very, um, helpful for me. I've been asked several times about, many times, about women who have got excess milk, and they need to relieve milk on Shabbos. So there's one thing about the milk being put to waste. Otherwise, it's a melacha of, of, you know, like, like frying... I tell, tell

12:39 the ladies, "If you do that, if it's, if it's b'krich nefesh, you're allowed to do it. But otherwise, think about it. It's just like frying an egg. It's, uh, it's a melacha d'oraita to pump milk to use it." So there is this, uh, English phrase, um, pump and dump. Then, but there's another issue about using a pump. Can they use electric pump? And then some, some Rabbonim have come up with an idea of having electric pump attached to a time switch and put the pump in place before the time switch kicks, kicks in, before the power kicks in. In this way, you haven't done anything. It's happened by itself. So I had my reservations about that. As per the Seforim of Chatzvei, that it's, it's, it's inevitability. But now I'm, I'm gratified to see that Rav Shlomo Zalman sees that as a, as a gurama. And therefore, yes, it would be, certainly be a lot of mileage in doing that system of having the, uh, the, uh, apparatus attached to the body before the power goes on. So then when you're putting that, you're not pumping anything. Then later, the, uh, pump, the elec- you know, the time switches, switches, the time switch switches it on, and then, sure, it'll happen by itself, and that would be as, uh, an, an advantage, uh, when, you know, of course, in case of necessity. Okay, let's move on to our next question. Right. Wearing open-backed slippers or Crocs on Yom Kippur. So it, somehow in my mind,

14:09 I'd seen it, it's permitted, but I, I looked at it again. Now, this is from Siman Shin Alef, which is the siman about carrying on Shabbos. Wearing, carrying. And we have here that at first it says that you would be allowed to wear, they call these w- these shoes pantinish. Similar to the Yiddish, I think, which, uh, slippers were called pantoffel. And he says, "It's easy for them to slip off the foot. But since it's, the upper is covering the majority of the foot, then we're not worried about it slipping off." V'yesh makomos. There are places where they are machmir not to... The Shulchan Aruch says, "We have mechatchila." Af, which is mutar mid'oraita. There are places that do have a minhag to be machmir not to wear open-back slippers or Crocs. And, uh, uh, some of you may remember the Dr. Scholl's. Um, so to wear those on Shabbos in the street, yesh makomos which are machmir. So generally, we're machmir. Now, then, now here comes the question, what about for Yom Kippur? Is there room to be meikel or... Now, the r- the, the, the argument is, in a sense, actually, Yom Kippur, it may be worse. Because on a regular day, you're not gonna take off your slippers and walk barefoot. But on Yom Kippur, it's, you know, nowadays, none of us walk barefoot on Yom Kippur either. But those days, people would wear, would walk around barefoot on Yom Kippur. And therefore, a, a, um, it's a, a back, a backless

15:45 slipper will be more of a temptation. Be that as it may, so, um, now on the left of your screen, you've got here a quote from the Pirchei Shoshanim, um, in Siman Shin Alef. He says, "On Yom Kippur, one may rely on the lenient opinion that you are allowed to wear open-backed slippers." However, V'hamachmir yachmir al atzmo. If you want to be machmir for yourself, there is room to be machmir, but, uh... Okay. I'm just looking here at the, uh, chat questions. Going back to the, the hearing aid. Another possible, another possible problem, if there is a charging light that changes from red to green when fully charged, he cannot pull out hear- earpiece. Okay, um, good point. I think, though, that, uh, because it's kelacha yad, and especially now it's LEDs, there's no, there's no fire there. So, yeah. Um, and, and wait a minute. If it's, if it switches off, if it switches off before he pulls it out, then probably that green light will also stop, um, uh, shining because it's pulled, the, the charger is off. So that might solve it. Um, now, next one is, if a person has two hearing aids, you can leave one charged overnight, and the time switch will switch, it will turn it off at... Yes, that's true. Um, just my knowledge about hearing aids, they're quite expensive. Amazing pieces of equipment. Imagine a whole, a whole, a whole PA system in your ear. Uh, they are, as far as I remember, very expensive. All

17:30 right. Uh, uh, you have a spare one? Yeah, sure. Right. That could be, that could, that could work. Let's move on. Okay, now, uh, here, this is my, uh, my Shabbos Shuvah Drasha in advance. So last few weeks, I noticed an amazing, uh, pa- uh, uh, view of the Chagiz Arya. Chagiz Arya is a contemporary of the Baal Shem Tov. It was, uh, of his last years, I believe, was in Metz, in, uh, in the Alsace region of France. But anyway. So he came, he, he has from Siman Kuf Chei- Kuf Daled through Kuf Ches. The last five Simanim, the Chagiz Arya address- Mitzvahs which are, are addressed carrying on Yom Teru. For mitzvahs which are not really a chiyuv. So he addresses carrying a shofar or a lulav through the street for noshim who are not chayav, for a child who's not chayav, to if you've already heard the first 30 kolos, which if you've already yoetz min haTorah, to go and, um, carry a shofar to blow during the Shemoneh Esreh, which is only Midrabbanan. To carry, now, if you bench lulav already, to carry the lulav to, to shul because you want to sway it at Halal. All of these things, the Shagas Aryeh takes the view that they are not a seir yom tov and you're not allowed to carry for any of them. Now, we don't pasken like this, but it, it's really-- it bothered me, um, you know, why, why aren't, why aren't we worried about this? I just

19:10 want to say that the Shagas Aryeh, uh, clearly, he mentions the Rav Yo, who says, and this is from Berakhot of the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch and Siman Taf, Kaf, Beit, Es, that women are exempt from hearing shofar. However, k'dei la'asot nachat ruach l'noshim, they are-- we, we are permitted to blow the shofar for them, which is, it's not really a yeshuas galur, and zeh od hedar chat. Then he says, "Umutar lehoitzi ha'shofar l'shus haravim l'kadel it kol ha'eih." So you are allowed to carry the shofar through the street to blow shofar for a woman. That's what the Alter Rebbe paskens, V'shem HaRav Yo, one of the later Ishrinim. But the Shagas Aryeh, he, he, uh, challenges, he disagrees with the, with Rav Yo on this, and he says you're not allowed to. So here, also, I want to analyze the, the question, the, the problem here. The question is, is when a child or a woman who's not chayav to do the mitzvah, when they do the mitzvah, is it a mitzvah? When we do something which is a chiyuv d'Rabbanan, is it a mitzvah? And it's amazing what he says about the second set of techeiles, which is a chiyuv in Shulchan Aruch. And he says, d'Rabbanan is not a chiyuv. It's not a real chiyuv. She wouldn't be allowed to carry the shofar for that. So here's now, here's a very interesting question. Is a mitzvah d'Rabbanan or isur d'Rabbanan? Is it, is it gavra or is it cheftza? Is it a

20:45 personal discipline or is it a-- is it objectively actually changing the status of the article? So here's a, a, a test case. Now, the Kovner Rov, Reb Yitzchok Elchonon Spector, I think it's in Ein Yitzchok, he was asked the following question. You know, there are certain relationships which are forbidden Min HaTorah. Incestuous, other. But then there are relationships which are also Mid'Rabbanan. A slightly re-distant relative. So they're called shniyus. So let's say, the-- this is a real case. There was a couple who were married, happily married, and it turns out that they were forbidden to be married Mid'Rabbanan. No one told them. No one realized at the time. And they got married. Now, they are in blissful ignorance. Here's the question. If a person violates an isur d'Rabbanan b'shogeg, are they doing an aveira? Or is isur d'Rabbanan means you as a person have a discipline, but it's not that the a-- the, the act itself is a forbidden act. The Rambam in Hilchos Macholos Assuros talks about a vendor who sold non-kosher food unwittingly. He didn't realize. Afterwards, he realizes. So if it's a isur d'oraysa, if it's a-- if the food which he sold is also Min HaTorah, he has a duty to reimburse the customer. Who's eaten it already. It's whole and treif, he has to reimburse. If it's isur d'Rabbanan, he doesn't have to reimburse. So this, Rambam is understood that isur d'Rabbanan and is just isur gavra, not isur cheftza. This is what I was quoting here, Sefer Chelek Chof

22:36 Tes. So there is a view that an isur d'Rabbanan is only an isur gavra, not isur cheftza. Um, the Alter Rebbe in Tanya, in Pey Khes, talks about a person doing aveira, eating non-kosher food. He says, "Even it's a isur d'Rabbanan," and he says, "Even it was b'shogeg." So here, the Alter Rebbe seems to take the other view, that isur d'Rabbanan is going to have an effect on the article itself. And the Rebbe refers to in this, uh, in Acharon Shulchan, Tof Shin Lamed Vav. This was a, uh, major discussion about this. So there's this whole discussion, is isur d'Rabbanan isur gavra or cheftza. So now, so here's the, here, here's the question. Um, if isur d'Rabbanan is only isur gavra or the-therefore, this, it's not a-- you could say the article's not a mitzvah. If you say isur d'Rabbanan becomes, affects the cheftza, so then I could take it further and say if, not only isur d'Rabbanan, mitzvah d'Rabbanan, but if a person is not chayav to do a mitzvah, but he does the mitzvah, so the mitzvah is a mitzvah. Not only he's done a good deed, but the article is. I'm gonna ask a test case, which I don't have an-- I don't, I didn't find an answer to this. There's a din that the sukkah has got a kedusha like a korban. In Tof Shin Lamed Ches, it tells, it says that sukkah has got a kedusha like a korban. You mustn't use the s'chach for anything else for the seven

24:03 days of Sukkot. Hagaz says, "LaShem." A system of Hagaz says, "LaShem. It's sacred like a korban." It says, however, that's only once the sukkah has been used. If you have a sukkah, a freestanding sukkah, and it wasn't used as a mitzvah, so then it doesn't have a kedusha. But if you designate it for a mitzvah and you use it for a mitzvah, so then it acquires a kedusha. Now, what happens if a woman had a sukkah built for her and she used the sukkah? Does that make an isur cheftza on the sukkah? Does it change the article? The question is, is she just nachas ruach for her, or does it actually, when you elect to do a mitzvah, that act is an act of a mitzvah? That's really the debate here. And I think the Shagas Aryeh is taking the view that it remains just al ha'adam. There's no, there's no cheftza here. And therefore, everything is not so yom tov. Tell her just, uh, j-it's not necessary. Back off. Um, whereas, whereas the other view may be that it, that it does, it does change. It is a mitzvah article. Here's a fascinating Sicha of the Rebbe. It's, um, Tof Shin Nun Beis. And he talks about... Now, here's the whole discussion. We have, we have the idea there's three intertwined, three, um, three... The Loshon of the Zohar, three items, so to speak, are, are bound with one another. So you've got, uh, Yidden, Torah, and Hashem. So through Torah, we are connected

25:33 to Hashem. But then we have the, the question, how then, how then can Yidden int- add to Torah? Add to Torah like you have, first of all, you have Din D'Rabbonon. You have Min HaTorah. How do Yidden add to Torah? Now, the Rebbe discusses this in Torah. And the-- one of the reasons, w- so although we've said that Yidden are connected to Hashem through Torah, but then we've got Yisroel who precede, precede Torah. Yisroel is Kadmon of their Eitz. So Yidden have got a connection with Hashem which is higher than Torah. And that's why Yidden can add to Torah because their connection with Atzmus, with Hashem. So here the Rebbe in this Sicha is saying that when Yidden are Mechadesh in Torah, it's, it's actually in a sense greater than the Torah per se because the Yidden, because of their Shorash in Atzmus, they are able to contribute to Torah. So here we have this idea of Yidden adding to Torah. I want to share with you also something which I, which struck me. I was at the Ohel, and I was reading for the minor Losh. And you can see which page it is, page 11. And you say, in your prayer, you're pleading to Hashem, um, "You should not turn me away empty-handed in the merit of the Tzadikim, Moron v'Rabbonon, who are buried here, uh, and, a-elsewhere." "In the merit of their Torah, their holy Torah which they learned." "And the Chidushim of the Torah which they were Mechadesh." "And their good

27:06 deeds." I found it fascinating. Why are their Chidushi Torah put on par and actually put before their Maaseh Matovim? The Tzadikim did wonderful things this world. They did tzedakah and they mo- ga-gave chizzuk to people, whatever it may be. And yet the Chidushim which they were Mechadesh in Torah is seen as, as, uh, as such a significant contribution that we're saying the zchus of the Chidushim which they were Mechadesh. Not just their diligence, but the Chidushim of this Chacham. Very, very interesting. Uh, and so what we've, we've just seen here is how the idea of Chid-Chidushi Torah is actually bringing Atzmus into, into, into Torah. Now, here in this other Sicha, which you have on Chelek Yutes, Chayei Losich, which I found, um, mind-blowing. The Chayei Losich in Chelek Yutes. So he talks about the idea of, of, of Kol Mar SheTuchlan Vos He'osim LeChadesh. And he quotes here, the Shleimus Hanefesh is to be able to be Mechadesh a Sechel Chadesh in Torah. Shleimus Hanefesh. You, you've got a mission in life, and your Shleimus of your mission in life is you're adding a Sechel Chadesh in Torah. And he says because the true Inyan of Sechel is not just that you understood someone else's thoughts, but you actually absorb the thoughts and it becomes so absorbed to that you've got the ability LeChadesh. And then you've got a Yechud Nefesh as discusses in Tanya. Therefore, that's the Shleimus Hanefesh that you become one with the Torah to the di- to the level you

28:34 may are able to be Mechadesh in Torah. So here is very interesting because in this Sicha, he's not talking so much. He's saying not so much as the Chidush that you've added new information in Torah. It's that you yourselves have gone through an experience of being Mechadesh in Torah. Be that as it may, what we're seeing here is there is a way of looking at things that, um, a Din D'Rabbonon has actually added to Torah. And I remember the Rebbe explaining that, I think it's in Lama Da-- in that Sicha Tov of Lama Dvar, that when Torah says chaser is true. So Hashem is, Hashem is the Boreh HaOlam. He says things have got-- this chaser has got a, a Shorash from Klipa. From Shorash, Klipa is up there. But when you have something like the chicken and cheese sandwich roasted together, ba-ba-bake together. Yisroel Rabbonon. Chicken and cheese is a Yisroel Rabbonon. So yesterday it was Mutar. Today, Rabbonon made a meeting, and they passed that chicken and cheese is also to cook together. So now they've decided this thing till now was Mutar. It was with Klipos of Shorash-- it was Klipos Neoga. It was-- It could have been elevated. And now they change its source. Anyway, the-- certainly the view of, in, in Chassidus is that a Yisroel Rabbonon actually affects the Cheftzor. It changes the article, as mentioned before from Tanya. And be-- And therefore, I'm just taking the liberty of taking that one step further. That if a person does

30:07 not have a Chiyuv to sit in the Sukkah, and yet they elect to sit in the Sukkah, so then the sukk- sitting in the Sukkah is an, a mitzvah act. And which will all ex- also explain, for example, how on Rosh Chodesh is a Minchah. How can we make on a Minchah? Who's ? So the answer is not just because of Mekabel Mizchak Tas. The answer is because even though it was elective whether you had to do it, but when you're doing it, you are doing a mitzvah, you are connecting to Hashem, even though it's, you weren't Mechuyav to do so. Um, on that basis, I feel more comfortable about, um, the carrying the lulav, uh, for Ananim, et cetera. We're all benching lulav. You know, Chassidim are benching lulav in, in their Sukkah at home, and they're carrying their lulav just to show. So, so some Poskim want to say that, um- They take, uh, what do they do with the Rashag Asaria? So they say, "But nowadays, our Rosh Hashanahims are not Rosh Hashanahims, they're Eis. They're Rosh Hashanahim because we don't have 600,000 people, um, walking the streets." I'm very uncomfortable to use that term because that's good for little shtetlach, for, uh, many cities, even in England, have, uh, 50,000 people, et cetera. But if you have a, a big city, we've got six-- uh, millions of people to say Rosh Hashanahim, they're very schwache. Okay, let's move on. Just that was my, uh, that was... It's on my mind for

31:41 the last month. Right. Um, just one more thing which I want to share with you. Um, coming back, I saw this note in, in a recent publi-- um, edition of the Shagas Arya. A practical thing. Let's say on, on Yom Tov, you come to shul, and then you go to your shver or to your parents after shul, and you take your lulav and esrog, uh, along, along to them, and then, uh, uh, after the meal, you finally, uh, get up and you, you want to go home. Why are you carrying your lulav? So he's, he's raising a question. Are you allowed to take your lulav at the end of the day when you don't really need it for today, and you need it for tomorrow? An interesting question, but I'm, I'm not gonna discuss it now. Um, right. Um, let's go back to these questions. Right. Is this also an answer to why we make a броше leshavosuk in the... Mm, that's, that's a good question. Uh, no. Um, I would say there, there you're taking the view that it doesn't bother you, that the rain doesn't bother you, and that's why you're making leshavosuk in the rain. You're, you're happy to sit in the rain. Uh, I'd love to, but my food will get-- But my-- It must be a certain thrill to sit in the rain, uh, and to, you know, fifen up the velt. Um, right. But might be similar, but yeah. Now, uh, oh, for-- I didn't put a heading here.

33:13 So this is going on to the next question. So as you ask, same, same as a tallis. A tallis is a simple thing. You wear it, then you can leave it. Afterwards, you take... Oh, this is the Baal HaTanya's answer. You take it a little after you've eaten with your shver, and then you might use it to bench with somebody. All right? Uh, if you have such a mashava, so then that's certainly, uh, mitigating the question. Right. Um, now, here, I-- In Gemara asked me a question last week in New York. So there's a esrog vendor, and he has this row with pitims. And someone is handling the esrog, and he put it back into the box, and somehow it became depitimized. Um, so now he apologized, goes to the, uh, balabos or the, you know, the, the vendor, and he says, "I'm very sorry, but this is..." He says, "Yeah, I mean, I'm sure you're sorry, but this, that's $400, that esrog." So now he says, "Well..." You know, he starts to making arguments. Really, you got this esrog in Italy. It cost you a dollar. Um, the other thing he starts saying, "But this is part of the risks of running a business, that sometimes goods which are on sale are gonna get damaged." Um, I didn't like the second argument, and having been in Italy and realizing the overheads to-- Even if you pay $1, which I think you pay more, but the overheads to get that $1 esrog in Italy, you

34:44 have to pay airf-airfare and, and accommodation, et cetera. There's enormous overheads to bring that $1 esrog. That, that's really, um, uh, you know, not understanding what's going on there. But, but then, then really the question is: Does he, does, does this fellow have to, uh, does, does the customer have to, um, pay for the damage which he did? And does he have to pay wholesale price or retail price? So this question actually, um, is discussed in Poskim, in Siman Taf Reshinuf Vaav, in the, uh, the, the, the Bring. There's, there's a, there's a story in the Gemara about a person who had prepared... He was going to bring a Korban, and he prepared a bull, bull that's worth 400 zuz. For he, he made a commitment to bring a Korban Olah. He didn't say which type of animal. And he'd bought this bull for 400 zuz, and someone inflicted some damage on it, and so now he can't bring it as a Korban. So he has to replace it. So the Gemara says there, "A Korban Olah, sure. You can bring a lamb which, uh, for a Korban Olah. It'll cost you 50 zuz, not to reimburse him of 400 zuz." He can bring, bring a bull. He, he has to bring a Korban, a different Korban Olah. Okay. Who says it has to be 400 zuz? Give me a cheaper one. So Mara-- There's one of the, Mari Minz or Minz, whatever, wanted to use a similar idea. Yeah, you damaged the esrog. Okay,

36:15 you have to replace the esrog if it became pasul. Okay. Uh, es-- You can get esrog for a fiver. Who says I have to replace your esrog for 400 zuz, for $400, you know, $400? So this is this whole discussion. Do you have to replace a kosher esrog or an esrog of the value which you damaged? That's, that's the debate. Now, um, here you've got the Primordium in some Taf Reshinuf Vaav. He said, "Reuven Leshim an esrog yafah sheva arbay." So he only has to reimburse him a basic esrog. "Eli raba beshema Ram Minz." But then the Primordium says, "The Chacham Tzi disagrees with this. And he says, "V'kol shekei mimocha esrogim, v'ha kol leolam omedim d'meshalem kefi ma sheshava bachag, ein yoyin sham." He quoted Chacham Tzvi that certainly there's a difference whether you damage the private person's esrog. Reuven ever hasn't got esrog. I'll give you a esrog. Who says I have to give you a $400 esrog? I'll give you a esrog to do the mitzvah. So here, th- this is quoted now in the Pischa Tshuv, also in Torah Shebehalav. All of this debate is only true for a private person who's... someone took his esrog and damaged it, broke and made it pasul. But if it's a esrog which, uh, taken from a mokhe esrogim and was re- ruined, bepsi or beshogeg, everyone agrees that you have to pay the value of this esrog, um, which, which you ruined. I just want to add you one, one, one, one irrelevant

37:52 detail, that a pitom, if the top of the pitom is, is removed, it's actually, according to most poskim, is still kosher. It's only if the down... lower part of the pitom is, is, is removed, then it's, then it's pasul. The part which goes into the fruit or the stick. But the flowery part, this mushroom type, the top pit, if that's missing, you can still make a bracha on it. The only thing is, if you bought a $400 esrog to be able to march in sh- into shul with your esrog, it's ruined. For that is ruined. It's kosher, you can make a bracha on it, but its, its value, th- that, that's lost. All right. Uh, kol ponim. So what we're seeing here is actually that, uh, that he caused that damage, he would have to reimburse. Okay. Let's go on to our next question. And that is why Ashkenaz... Why is the nusach for a nefilas apayim in our Selichos- Can we stop that for a second, what the psak was on the esrog. So just repeat. Okay. The bottom line is with the esrog, I said I, I wasn't clear. The bottom line is that he does have to pay the damage. Um- What damage? The, the price, the esrog would be... The, the loss in the value of that esrog. Yeah. If it was worth $400, that's the, the official price. Uh, it's just as well we live in England, we don't have such expensive esrogim. Americans have bigger house service. Fine. More

39:18 competition, Hashem, in the shuls. Uh, fine. So here we have in towards the end of Selichos, and we have the, uh, this piece, Vayomer David El God, and then Rachum V'Chanun Chatasi. Now, that is actually the Nefilas Apayim in Nusach Ashkenaz, and also most, I think, most Nusach Sefard also. Uh, as in Sefard Hasidim. So why in our Selichos do we have Nefilas Apayim in the Nusach Ashkenaz? So couple of points here. First of all, let's take a look. This one, Chof Lamed Alef. Al Pik HaKavod for Nefilas Apayim, which would say, the, the, the, "Mizbei elecha Hashem nafshi esso." However, si- he says, the She'ar HaKovet says, since if a person says that, that for Nefilas Apayim and V'libi rov im Eno, and his heart is elsewhere, Goidim lo lehi'aseh v'lo yitoy. It's a cause, Chas ve'Shalom, that he should be brought to, uh, to heaven, uh, prematurely. Lefi Chachamim nu'u le'omrim bem'din hashel. Because of the worry that saying it with a, uh, in, in lack of kavana could be causing a person, uh, a punishment. Therefore, by Ashkenazim, it was dropped saying, Elecha Hashem nafshi esso because of the danger associated. And instead, we say, in Ashkenazim, we say, Rachum v'Chanun al ba'apcho, as you can see. Yeah. So we have a different, a different nusach to avoid getting into the danger of saying the Katachna as we have it in Nusach Sefard, which is, can bring on a, on a punishment. That's point number one. Point number two is that, um,

41:05 we are Ashkenazim, um, most of us here. Uh, whether we, whether we're from Russia, from Poland, or from, uh, wherever, we're Ashkenazim in origin. And so we use Selichos, which are Ashkenaz Selichos. And so it's, it's Ashkenaz. Now, just one, one other point here, and that is, L'poel, we do not do Nefilas Apayim in Selichos. And we have this little note here, Ein Noflim Al Pnim. We don't do Nefilas Apayim. Other Minhogim do. And here we have this note in the Sefer HaMinhogim, B'Selichos, Ein Noflim Al Pnim. Why so? It gives a reference to the Arukh HaShulchan and to the Alter Rebbe, again, in Chof Lamed Alef, which you'll see in a moment. So really, at Selichos, they, they... one should be doing Nefilas Apayim, but we don't. Because we don't, perhaps that is also the reason why we don't-- we didn't need to change it to the Nusach of Nefilas Apayim because we're not doing Nefilas Apayim in any case. So just leave it for Nusach Ashkenaz and finished, as it was. Let's just leave the historic. Um, I actually looked last night, I was looking into this. I saw a couple of Sefardic Selichos, and they do say, uh, HaShe- Ele- Elecha Hashem nafshi esso, uh, as they would, as we do in, uh, in Nefilas Apayim. Because we're not doing Nefilas Apayim, therefore, we just leave it. It was, say, Nusach Ashkenaz and finished. Okay. Um, why don't we do Nefilas Apayim at Selichos? Now, this is, here in, again, in Siman

42:35 Chof Lamed Alef. Ein Nefilas Apayim ba-layla. Midvara yudruru yoytzim. Now, the acce- the idea is that night, layla, is a time of Dinim, and Nefilas Apayim is moheil Dinim, so we don't bring the Dinim and Dinim together. Therefore, it says, if Mincha was drawn late into layla, one shouldn't, Ein Lipal Al Ponim. One shouldn't do Tachnun a- after night. And then he says, you only have to worry about b'vada layla. B'bein hashmashot, you don't have to worry. This is the background that people are saying that in Chabad, we, we would say Tachnun even after Shkia. Uh, during 10 o'clock. So this is the first opinion over here. Now, when they are getting 10 o'clock name, 10 o'clock Samiras, how you'll hook or will you? Despite the reservation of saying Tachnan at night, we do-- Ashkenazis do do, uh, Nefilas Apayim in Selichos because it's close to daybreak. Yes, Nu Yagin Lahadik Haslichus Ad Nechin Hayom. We also know from Robnam. There are those who are Hoyshes. They don't want to do Nefilas Apayim during night because of dinner and all that, and therefore they will draw out the Selichos till Nechin Hayom, till when it's really clearly day, and then they would do Nefilas Apayim. This is what the Rebbe is referring to when he says, "Look at Shuk Norach, the Alter Rebbe, and the Mogan of Rom," which is the background to this. The reason why we don't do Nefilas Apayim in Selichos is because Selichos, you know, originally, um, is said before daybreak,

44:18 and so we don't have Nefilas Apayim because we don't want to say Tachnan. We don't want to do Nefilas Apayim w-whilst it's still semi-day, semi-night, until Nechin Hayom. So actually, from this piece of Alter Rebbe, I, I disagree with the view that Chabad says Selichos after Shkiya. Because here, the Rebbe has told us we don't do Nefilas Apayim at Selichos, and that's because it's-- because of the Hashash of saying it before daybreak. And for the same reason why we don't say-- we don't have Nefilas Apayim in Selichos, for the same thing, we shouldn't-- for this very same reason, we shouldn't be saying, um, Nefilas Apayim after Shkiya. Um, some people will love me for this, some people will, will be angry with me for changing the, uh, accepted norm. But, you know. Let's move on. So, um, briefly. So we've gone through this before about a broch on a granola bar, and this is from a specialist, Sefer Kol Sha'ar HaBrocho. Um, granola ba- matzo pe, granola bar. And what he's saying is, if they are kind of, um... If they are a little bit cooked or if they're a little bit broken, and they're stuck together, so it's Birminiem Zoinis. Um, that's where I'm, I'm coming from, that I said it's Mezioines. So loose granola, as in, uh, um, just the cereal as it is loose, I would-- I have my problems with that, that it's which Brocha to make, and you got whole, whole nuts and whole raisins. It's Tutach. And the, and

45:54 the grains are whole. But if... Once it's become mushed and they, they're stuck together. So whether it's steamed, whether it's mushed with a, with a bit of, uh, syrup, I don't think there's a difference. I think once it's mushed and, and, and, and stuck together, it becomes a Ma'achal, it's Mezioines. If you remember, we discussed this when I was asked, "What about the issue of Bishul Akum?" You've got Jordan bars, et cetera. They're made... Sorry, not Bishul, Pas Akum. Is there a problem of Pas Akum? So I felt that no, it's not considered Pas. It's not a bread, therefore it doesn't g-g-fall into the category. It's, it's a mush, and it's Mezioines, as you would make a Mezioines on a, um, on, on a porridge. It doesn't fall into category of, of, of a Pas to be qualified as for Pas Akum. So meanwhile, um, the fellow who asked me this question now to re-- um, refreshed me this, this, this question. He asked me, "What is the story of, um, gluten-free, a gluten-free, um, ve-- um, cracker which has got tapioca flour, corn flour, whatever. It's got very, uh, various other flours, and it's got a very small minority of oat flour. Does that have a din of Pas Akum or not?" In other words, what's the guidelines? How much proporti-how much, uh, proportion of grain does it have to have to be subject to the din of, of, uh, Pas Akum? Is it the same as the Mezioines, uh, for the Brocha of

47:19 Mezioines, that even a minority would dominate? Um, I'm not so sure. Uh, um, I mean, um, I'm more inclined to say that because it's, uh, if it's mixed with flour, flour and flour, uh, tapioca flour with oat flour, I'm inclined to say that the flour, uh, the, the wheat flour is actually, uh, bottled into the majority of other flours and therefore does dom-not dominate the mixture. But, uh, I have to work that through more carefully, uh, so we'll leave that, uh, as just a speculation. Um, right. Now, if you remember, was it last week or two weeks ago, it came up about why is it that Chabad say, "Amech Avmi Shor Be-avo." We drop silent at that point. And by Gu Al Yisroel, where we have the same concern, that's the Hefsek of answering Amen. And there, the Minchah Chabad is to say, "Gu Al Yisroel," uh, uh, the Chazan says it aloud. And the, the, uh, Tzibur synchronize to say, "Gu Al Yisroel," together with the Chazan. In this way, they avoid having to answer Amen. The question is, why do you use the synchronizing solution for Gu Al Yisroel and for, for, for Al Avos Olam, uh, Amech Avmi Shor Be-avo, there you're using the solution of saying it, of, of dropping to, to quiet. So I'd said... I quoted Rebbe Pramishana as saying that in Himil, um, in, in, in Heaven, they want to hear you even saying Gu Al Yisroel. So that's, that's what I had said, that that's the reason

48:50 why we don't fall silent at Gu Al Yisroel. So one of our listeners, um, in, in the States, sent me this, that he had read in Har Tzvi some time ago, that Rebbe Eli Chaim of Roytblat, who was a Mashpia in, in, uh, on the Tehillah, um, said that, that before Shema... So we, we, we all say Shema aloud. There's a din of the Sh- Wakokodinas Shema. It's not-- I don't think it's a very well-known din. The Chazan should be saying the first two words of Shema Yisroel aloud to kind of galvanize everyone together. That's the Lashon in the Gemara in Sotah. Wakokodinas Hashma. So the Chazan-- It's-- Alter Rebbe doesn't bring it in Shuk Norach. Machabber does. I don't know why the Alter Rebbe doesn't bring it. But there is an idea that the Chazan should lead everyone, "Shema Yisroel," and everyone should say it aloud together. Um, so that it's therefore you can afford to go quiet in Vehamishor Be-avo because you say Shema aloud, so you're going to, you're gonna have everyone on the same page. With Shemoneh Esreh, since it started quietly, so if you're going to go into Shemoneh Esreh quietly with the-- finish Gu Al Yisroel quietly, so then, well, the, you know, the transition, I guess, from, um, from Gu Al Yisroel to Shemoneh Esreh is not gonna be noticed before. I think that's what he's saying. Um, all right. Interesting. You do see-- You're, you're, you are saying Borach Atah Hashem before Gu Al Yisroel. You're saying

50:06 that aloud in any case. So people will know in any case. But fine, that was, uh, his farar. Fine. Very good. Let's move on to the last question whichhave. Uh, someone as-- after I sent out the, uh, the list of questions, someone asked me, um, what's the, the, the t-story about saying do we-- do, do the switch over in bentching also? So here you have a where the Rebbe says the following. The Rebbe had led the bentching. This is, uh, I'm not sure which day it was. Perhaps it was Rosh Hashanah. Um, and he says, "In reference to I once asked the, my f-father-in-law, the Friediker Rebbe, whether in Aseh L'mait Shiva do we say Hashalom, um, in bentching, in bentching as we do in . After, uh, after he heard my presentation..." Interesting. Then or after he heard my presentation, then he, the Rebbe said, "One should say as it is written in the Siddur." So it looks like-- we get the impression that the Rebbe had made a whole presentation about it. Arguments one way or the other, uh, which he doesn't-- the Rebbe doesn't share his whole thing. What I can tell you is why is there the whole switch over to Hashalom during Aseh L'mait Shiva? So the, the source is that there's a name of a Malach, Safri Kal. It is the Hashem scribe, and the, the, uh, mission of that Malach is to take... or perhaps not Safri, Russian counting, to take our tefillahs and to present them

51:44 to the Safri Kal. Safri Kal is, I think, a Gematria three hundred and eighty-one. At any rate, it's the same Gematria as the word Hashalom. So the usage of switching from Shalom to Hashalom is in order to invoke the Malach Safri Kal to elevate our tefillahs in an appropriate way. Um, possibly that's why it doesn't apply to bentching, because bentching is not a tefillah, it's thanking Hashem. On the other hand, I'm, I'm quite happy if a Malach takes my bentching up to Hashem also. I'm sure it does. But it's a different form. Po-possibly that's the, the background for why there's a difference between bentching and, uh, and, um... Yeah. Um, we have another coup- up to two minutes. I wanna share with you something came up three times this week, and therefore I, I, I looked into it. And that is, uh, so three people asked me separately, "If someone hasn't touched-- washed netilat yadayim and they touched food, are you allowed to use that food?" So we know that Alter Rebbe is quite, uh, strong about this, how careful you have to be not to touch food before netilat yadayim. The question is bediavid. So the Mishnah Berurah brings, I think, from, uh, Shvus Yankel, I think it is, that bediavid you are allowed to use the food. Mm, so-- But on the other hand, um, if it's, if it's in m- if it's not a big loss, one, one, one certainly, um, one should, one should be more machmir not to use it.

53:17 But if it's a carrot or just a little bit of something to be machmir, to be machmir. If it's a major loss, then you'd have to rely-- you could rely on the more lenient opinions. But just one, one, one, uh, last point about that. The Rebbe Rashab was in Rostov, um, it was during the, uh, nineteen eighteen, and it was, uh, a difficult time. There was shortage of food, and there were, there was-- someone asked the question, "There is a Jewish baker in the other side of town, and there's a goyische bakery just nearby. Should we buy the bread from the goyische baker, possibly even with lighting the fire, I don't, I don't remember, um, or should we buy from the Jewish baker who doesn't wash netilat yadayim?" And the Rebbe said, The Rebbe, the Rebbe Rashab was-- preferred to buy bread from the Jewish baker who doesn't wash netilat yadayim than to buy from the, um, Nisht Yiddishe baker, um, which l'chaya, there's no need for netilat yadayim. So he-- that was his ruling. Where'd did I get the story from? It's in the, um, book of Reshimas Po'im for Rabbi Chitrik. Rabbi Yisroel Chitrik, he brings this story. Um, right. Just one-- There's on the chat here. "Can you confirm that any vegetables grown hydroponically on water, not in soil, attract the brocha hakeil not adama?" No, I cannot confirm. It's-- That, that question is more than a hundred years old. What is the-- Does the brocha on the vegetable go according to

54:46 the specimen or the species? And the-- there's no clear, uh, co-consensus on that. And therefore, um, bediavid, yo yetz, whichever one you did, of course, Hashgacha. In any case, yo yetz. If you said ha'adama on hydroponic, uh, the grown tomatoes, yo yetz bediavid. L'chatchilah, um, put them into a salad, put other stuff there and, um, solve your problem that way. Okay. I wish you all a, uh, good night and a geimar simcha tova. Thank you for joining us and, uh, agas Shabbos and, uh, al gutza. Kol-