פינחס תשפ״ג

00:06 Good afternoon, good evening. Today is Sunday of Parshat Pinchas, and this, today's shiur is being pre-recorded. I'm currently in Manchester, le, cover the siyum hashas of Young Lubavitch, and wish the minyan a tremendous hatslacha in their peulos, especially for their, their leader, their Rav, Reb Shmuel Lent, solz ain gezunt. Let's go straight into our questions. So we have the first shailah, which is someone asked me, could they perhaps clarify the story with the form of vehamarachem? So let's scroll down, and we're going to look at different prints of the siddur. So on the right of the screen, you have an old Ashkenaz siddur from a little bit before the Alter Rebbe. And there you can see vehamarachem. It's got the vav of vehamra-- vehamra-- The word hamarachem is preceded with a vav. On the left of the screen, we have here from the first print of the Alter Rebbe siddur, which we have from taf kuf samech gimel. And there it has, "Hatoiv ki lei cholo rachamecha, hamarachem." See, it does not have the vav. What you have now on this further screen now, in the, still in that first print of the Alter Rebbe siddur, also you can see Friday night as hamarachem. It has Shabbos morning, Shacharis of Shabbos. Again, it has hamarachem. Mussaf of Shabbos, it has hamarachem. Only at Mincha on Shabbos does it have vehamarachem. Even on Mussaf of Rosh Chodesh, it has hamarachem. So the only one which has vehamarachem is in Mincha of Shabbos. But in the later

02:03 prints of the siddur, we will see that whenever it is a Shabbos or a Yom Tov or a Motza'e, it's going to be vehamarachem, and on a weekday, it's hamarachem. And so just to, well, perhaps one more point of clarification. The nusach of vehamarachem, that's authentic Nusach Ashkenaz and the Nusach Sfarad, going back, uh, original Nusach Sfarad was hamarachem. And it's interesting how the Alter Rebbe siddur seems to be sometimes following Nusach Ashkenaz, sometimes Nusach Sfarad. And so this was puzzling, Rab-- Uh, Rav David Lavut, the Alter Rebbe, who was the pioneer in researching the Alter Rebbe siddur. Uh, actually great-great-gran-grandfather of the Rebbe. He was Rav of Nikolaev. And he wrote the, well, the first edition was called Shaare, Shaare Tfilah, and his later edition was called Shaarei Kohel. So he addresses this. And so that's in the Shaarei Kohel, as you can see on the screen. Um, the exact reference is in Peerek Tes. A fascinating, uh, way of, uh, of explaining this. But first, let's get the facts. On the weekdays, he says it says, "Hamarachem," and the Shabbos it says, "Vehamarachem." And he says that this question was put to Reb Hil Paritcher, who, as we know, was, well, a Chassid of the Mitveleh Rebbe and, and, and of the, and of the Tzemach Tzedek. He was-- The story is told that he had been present when the Alter Rebbe was in the room, but he never managed to meet the Alter Rebbe face to face because he had fainted. I

03:48 don't want to go into the whole story, but a yeiman, uh, went to prepare himself a kasha in Irpin. Darfur zich alein maier, uh, maierich zain. When he heard this, the Open Ruach HaKodesh, uh, about the kasha which he had prepared, he fainted. And then by the time he recovered, the Alter Rebbe had left town. At any rate, so Reb Hil Paritcher was discu-- uh, wa-was asked this question, and he said, "On the weekday, for sure, it should be said, 'Hamarachem.' And on Shabbos and Yom Tov, for sure, we say, 'Vehamarachem.'" And here, Reb Hilal was saying that, you know, Kohel, Rosh Chodesh, and Kohel amed, ze sof. So now to try to get a bit, uh, a clearer understanding of this. So he says, "Let's look at Nusach Ashkenaz." And he took-- takes a look at, uh, Nusach, the Shalas siddur printed, printed in Amsterdam. And he says that you have there, um, you have a number of praises to Hashem, each one preceded with what's called a vav hamovess, with a vav. They add the additional vav. The vav which is adding. So you, uh, you have , ve'al nishmasenu, ve'al nisechu, ve'al nefs echu, ve'al toras echu, ve'al, vav oyekh, ve'tzorai, ve'hamarachem, ve'al kulam, ve'israim. Now, in Nusach Ashkenaz, they don't have the ve'isnassey. So let's just scroll, scroll down back again to the, uh, to the, uh, T'filus Tedorim. Ve'al kulam, yitbarach vi'israim, mamshimcha malkeinu. That's Nusach Ashkenaz. In Nusach, um, of the Alter Rebbe, ve'al kulam, yitbarach vi'israim, mamvi'isnassey. Okay,

05:24 so let's get back. So we have there twelve, a sequence of twelve vav in, in all. And he points out another interesting, uh, aspect here, that we have in the, the last part of the Brocha of Modim. Ve'chol hachayim. Well, it's, there's ve'chol hachayim. Och-- And then we have these words, "Hakeil shor sei nivéz, osei nivzéla." And in Ash-- In Ashkenaz, we have also, "Hakeil hatov." Now, you can see here, in the ear-earlier print of the Alter Rebbe's siddur, those words, "Hakeil shor sei nivéz, osei nivzéla, hakeil hatov," are encircled with a With, with brackets, with parentheses. In the </i>Sichashkunas</i>, they are there. The, the words are there without parentheses. Now, just to analyze this, these words, he asks the question. Usually, we have the idea of somuch, that the somuch lechasimo meein hachasimo. That the, the, uh, the part of the berachah which is near the end, the penultimate part, should reflect the same theme as the ending of the berachah. So since the berachah finishes, hatov shimcha l'chol olam oido, this idea of thanksgiving. So the words v'chol hacham yodu chaselo, is somuch lechasimo meein hachasimo. It's the same idea. But then the words in between, um, achei yeshuas eno ve'ezras eno. Those words seem to be, uh, Hashem is saving us, but that, that's, uh, that seems to be unrelated. And that's where he explains that when it has in the Alter Rebe's Siddur, those words in brackets, it's not that you shouldn't say them, but just you should understand that they

07:14 are as if were, they were in brackets because the somuch lechasimo is the v'chol hacham yodu chaselo. And then these words were added for a reason which we're gonna come to in a moment. But so, they are like a parenthetical ad-- um, insert in that last piece. Fine. So let's come back. So, so w-in all, you have twelve vavin, including achei yeshuas eno ve'ezras eno. So you have your twelve vav. Then in the Alter Rebe's Siddur, there's a couple of changes. Um, well, he doesn't have the vav of vehamarache. He does have an extra-- So he-- There's missing the vav of vehamarache, but he does have additional word of veyasnase. So the balan-- it bal-- works out the same. They both have twelve vavin. So that's, that's one point, which is comparing where although they're different, in this idea of having twelve vavs, they are the same. Then he says, "What's the significance of this?" Well, he says there's two points here. We have to be careful, otherwise it's gonna be misunderstood. There's, there is the inyan of having twelve expressions of thanks. Separately, there's the inyan of twelve vavin. What is... Why should you have twelve vavin? Sorry, so twelve, twelve, um, hodos. Twelve expressions of thanks. That is in order, on Shabbos and Yom Tov. On Shabbos and Yom Tov, we also call the sh-- the davening, we call it Shemoneh Esreh. We call it the, the eighteen, and there are only six berachahs. So, uh, all right, you have the middle ones,

09:03 the seven, it does count, doesn't count, but you don't have the full complement of, of eighteen berachahs. So by having twelve expressions of thanks in the berachah of Moydim, that's kind of symbolically making up for the missing twelve hodos in the middle of the berach-- in the mi-- of the, of the middle berachahs. Right. So that's one, one of the, uh, point which he's saying, that you need to have these twelve praises. And then he ma-makes another point. That it's, it's fairly consistent in Kabbalah Sarizal that whenever there's an inyan of eighteen, a number of eighteen in the, in the davening, we add an extra one. As you all know, the berachah, Ve lamal shinim, was added. So in our Shemoneh Esreh, there are actually not eighteen, but there are nineteen berachahs because the berachah Ve lamal shinim, when the... So the original Shemoneh Esreh was instituted by the Anshei Kneset HaGedolah. But then at a later stage, when they were suffering, and I think from the time of the Rabbi Gamaliel, suffering from the heretics who were harassing the, uh, the, uh, Frum community. So they instituted another berachah, Ve lamal shinim. So just like there's a nine-nineteenth berachah in the Shemoneh Esreh, so similarly in the morning berachahs, there's a nineteenth berachah. So there are eighteen. However you work out that number, but there's nine-- there's eighteen morning berachahs, and there's a nineteenth. Hanosain layoef koyach. That for the weary, Hashem gives strength. Now, that possible-- That berachah was added at a later

10:44 stage to make up the number of nineteen o-rather than just eighteen. Similarly, we say every morning, we say Yehi Hakoid, and there are eighteen pesukim there, or eighteen, uh, Hashem, uh, names of Hashem, whatever. And then there's a nineteenth one, which was added in Mesilat Yisroel, and that's the Rabos mechshavas b'lev ish vasas Hashem hisakom. So that pasuk, pasuk Rabos mechshavas b'lev ish, is actually, um, if I'm not mistaken, the pasuk from Mishlei, and it was thrown in similar to the first pasuk before, perhaps pasuk after, but it was added so that there should be instead of eighteen, should be nineteen. Similarly, in Ein Keloheinu, you have the inyan of not eighteen, but you have the inyan of twelve, because you have Boruch Elokeinu, At Hu Elokeinu, and then in the opening phrase, phrase, pesukim, you have Kavel Hashem, then Kavel Hashem, Ein Kadesh K'Hashem. Uh, four times the word Hashem. So you've got four times Baruch et Hashem. Then you've got Ein Keloheinu mi Keloheinu ve'ein ode lo Keloheinu, which is Rosh Yateves Amen. So you've got the, uh, and so you got Amen there, like four times. And in all, the four times, uh, is three, is three phrases, or three times four is twelve. So somehow you got here a remez to the number of, of twelve, corresponding to the middle berachahs- Of the Shemoneh Esreh. And then we have the, in the Nusach Ari Zal, we have the extra one, which is Atah Chayim or Atah Chayim, whichever print you're using.

12:22 So you have there again, the idea of making, have a representation of the 13th or the 19th, whichever way it is. So coming back. So we have here, let's just to come back to our, our, our point. We have here in the, uh, Mobroch HaMoidim, we've got 12 phrases, and then we've got the Union of Twelve Wavin. Now then, let's finish off. So now, he says, "On Shabbos Yom Tov, these words, 'Cheli Shoseinu Es Rosseinu Selo,' which correspond to the Birchas Haminim. So they are kind of ex- they are already necessary. That whole phrase is necessary for... because we don't have the Birchas Haminim, and a-or you don't have all the other brochas. He doesn't explain. That's, that's, uh, remains is, is unclear. But on Shabbos Yom Tov, since that phrase of Cheli Shoseinu Es Rosseinu Selo, that... So again, this phrase, which is in the ultra rabbinic today is in brackets. And we've said it really doesn't really belong there. It's like an extra piece. It's not Somach Lachasima Menachasima. But that piece was added for this same reason to that the, in the Moidim, there should be a representation not only of the 12 middle brochas, but also there should be a representation of the V'lamal Shinim. So that's how this comes in, this extra one. So this is corresponding to the 13th mi- of the middle brochas, although it's not in the se- it's not the 13th in the, in, in sequence. So they, it, it makes up. On Shabbos, this is

14:01 necessary to be, to, for the very purpose it's been created for, to represent, a, the Bracha Vlamal Shinim. And because of this, the vav of Yeshoseinu is not available for making up the number of twelve vavin, because that whole phrase is as if it were e-exploited already or, or been used up already for the representation of Vlamal Shinim. Therefore, we're lacking one vav. And because of this, on Shabbos Yom Tov, we have the vav of, the vav added to the word Veham Rachel. So there should be the, should be the complement of twelve vavin, uh, on Shabbos Yom Tov. So the, the, uh, the, it's not the vav of Veham Rachel corresponds to the Bracha Vlamal Shinim. It's the vav of Yesh-Yeshuoseinu Esroseinu corresponds to the Bracha Vlamal Shinim. But because that's been used up already, therefore, we, we need to, we need the vav, a-additional vav of Veham Rachel to make up, make up your number of, um, of twelve vavin in, in the Bracha Moid. This is his theory, and it's, it is a little bit tenuous. And what, what L'Maise, what we've seen from the Rebbe was that although Rabbi Hillel Parache made this, uh, he said, "Mutav Derach Halamei Besofek," actually, we saw from the Rebbe that whenever Tachnan wasn't said, so then he would say, "Veham Rachel." That we could hear Bechezar Hashazar, the days where, for whatever reason, there was, well, Shecha-that, that, that, that Tachnan wasn't said, so it was Veham Rachel. People have asked me, what about

15:52 by Ma'ariv? If you're not saying Tachnan by Ma'ariv, yeah, sure, can say. I don't have a clear, uh... Let's continue. So the question was put to me that in the Kfar Chabad siddur, so there are lots of instructions at the bottom of the pages. So when it comes to Moidim Derabonon, which is the Moidim which, when the Chazan says Moidim, so then the tzibur, the c-congregation also say m-another Moidim, a d-different text. And one of the reasons why we have, it's a ni-nice idea I heard, I don't remember from where, that when it comes to saying thank you, don't rely on someone else to do it for you. You say it yourself. And therefore, when the Chazan says Moidim, and we want to s-a-agree and, um, and, and join in with the Moidim, so we say our own Moidim. So all right, says Moidim. But then he, he writes in the, the, in the Cha-in Chabad, is Kfar Chabad a print. So Tov Shen Samach Gimel writes that the Moidim Derabonon, the whole, it said the whole, the whole map Moidim is said standing and, um, in, in a bowed form. "V'yitzkiv v'keilah achei dois." And then you should stand erect by the words, "Keilah achei dois." So the person who asked me says it doesn't seem to be Correct, which I'm inclined to agree with the questioner. I think that it is, it isn't accurate. So let's read the Shulchan Aruch and Siman Kuf Chof Zayin, the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, where he says

18:28 that when the chazan comes to Moydim, so then the congregation also bow. Why is it important for everyone to bow? Because otherwise, you may be, uh... It says even if you're davening shmoneh esreh, you should be bowing. If you're in the middle of a berachah, it shouldn't be looking like that you, uh, that you disagree with the sentiment of the people who are bowing. But then we know that when it comes to Moydim of our own, so we bend ourselves down by Moydim Anachnu Loch. When it comes to the word Hashehatu Hashem Eleichenu, we stand erect, like by the other three times when we bow, Baruch ata Hashem. So we bow, kneel, um, kneel and bow by Moi-- Baruch ata, and by Hashem, we stand erect. And that's the lashon of the Gemara, Vezoikif, vezoikif beshem. You should stand erect for Hashem's name, and as you see in a moment, that's from the pasuk of Hashem zoikif kefufim. Hashem gives, uh, the, those who are stooped, gives them the ability to stand erect. So how does it work for Moydim? So Yesh Misheomer are those who say that Moydim, you should be bowing twice. This is Moydim Derabonon. Because at the beginning, you say, "Moydim Anachnu Loch," and the end is, "Al sh'anu Moydim Loch." So you should bow at the beginning, and you should bow at the end. But then it goes on to say that the Minig Medines Eilo is, in other words, the Minig Ashkenaz is, that we say, the Hamptayim Moydim

20:06 V'Shechia Achaz in one s-stooped, uh, sequence of being stooped from beginning to end. And even though Hashem's name does come up, don't worry about Hashem Zoikif Kefufim, because that's only when it's in the end of a berachah, the beginning of a berachah, as discussed e-elsewhere. But in Moydim Derabonon, Hashem's name is not right in the beginning, and therefore, it's okay to remain stooped for the whole Moydim Derabonon. So what seems to be quite clear is that you'd stay stooped for the whole of Moydim Derabonon rather than what's being suggested by that note, that when it comes to the end... Let's go back to the previous screen, if we have it over here. Um, we have the text. So, no, we don't, we don't have on the, on the screen. So, so, i-i... What I'm saying is that it, it doesn't look like there's anything, uh, call for raising yourself erect by the end Baruch Kel Ohalai Doies. And, uh, if you say because it says Baruch Kel, okay, but, uh, it's still not Hashem's, not Yud Kei Vav Kei. Anyway, it doesn't say such a thing. It seems to be midgila vad soif, and therefore, it seems to be that you should be staying stooped all the way till the end of Baruch Kel Ohalai Doies. Let's move on. So I got this question about someone who, Chamal Tzlach, had, uh, lost any mobility on his left arm. And so the question was, does the per... I've forgotten exactly the degree, what the, what the

21:53 form of disability is, but it's no, no, no movement at all. Does-- Should he be putting tefillin on that arm? And so what we have in front of us is from the Sefer Nishmas Avrohom. It's a contemporary Sefer, which I find very useful. It's a series of four, three fosforim going any medical-related issue with Halakha. So he goes in the order of Shulchan Aruch, and he addresses them, uh, i-in each one, in each place. And so he talks about someone who's lo-- is, is paralyzed in the left hand, left arm, would still put tefillin on the left arm. Now, you know that the left arm, in one place in the Torah, it says, "Well, Yad Cha," and it's written Yud Daled Chof He. And the Gemara says, "Here's the remez, Yad Che He," that the ha-- the, the tefillin are placed on the weaker hand. So the fact that his, there's, there's a, the fact that he's paralyzed, so it's a weaker hand. So he quotes, there's a Sefer called Chesed Le'Avraham Toimim who, w-he, he differentiates what degree of disability would be on that left ha-ha, left arm, uh, if it is, does, uh, any chance of recovering or not. But later, there were base-- the Beis Shlomo, if I'm not mistaken, that was Rav Shlomo Dreamer, who was a, a very eminent posek in, maybe in Hungary, in Galicia, uh, dis-disagrees with him. And he says it makes no difference, and the tefillin should be put on that left arm regardless. So that

23:36 seems to be, be... I did not look up the sources, but with the lack of proof one way or the other, um, seems, it makes a lot of sense that you just continue. But he would put on tefillin on his left arm, des-regard-- de-despite the lack of any, uh, motor control there. Let's move on. So now, so someone's asking about the Shemoneh Esreh, and that is where we say, "Hashivah Shofteinu Kevaresheinu Ve'alteinu Kevatehilah." We start off, Hashem should restore the, the judges as, uh, back then. Then it finishes off, "Baruch ata Hashem, Melech ohev shofet omishpat." That Hashem cherishes sho-shofet and, and judgment. How does the beginning of the berachah, which is asking for the restoration of the shofetim, of the judges, how does that connect with the end of the berachah, which is Hashem cherishes mishpat? It's, it's broadly, yes, it's similar, but it doesn't seem to be the same request. That was his question. But I want to just share with you that some of the berachahs, the berachahs were instituted, as mentioned before, by the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah. Now, they were the beginning of the second Beit HaMikdash. Right. Now, amongst their, the, the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah, they would-- When they had the berachah of Retzei. Now, we, in our berakhah of Retzei, we t-we finish off Borakh atah Hashem hamavzir shekhinato letziya. That Hashem should-- Hashem will restore his shekhinat letziya. What was the nusach when the Beit HaMikdash was standing? Did they say, Hamavzir shekhinato letziya or Hashem ival avodot

25:37 letzvi bezechor? Then the nusach would have been different. And this is a Rashi in, uh, Gemara, um, the Rashi in Gemara, uh, what is it again? Rashi in Berakhot daf yud ches. So Rashi says that in the times of Beit HaMikdash, they would say either they would end off Barukh hamakabel avodot am yisrael berotz. We ask for Hashem should accept our prayers and our offerings willingly, and they finish it off. And so where we say, Hamavzir shekhinato letziya, they would say, Hamakabel, the Hashem accepts, receives willingly the avoda vin. That's one, uh, uh, suggestion Rashi has. Or another suggestion that she'otsekhal avadkha beyirah na'avod. That we should serve you exclusively with awe. So either way, the, the... Nowadays, there are when there's, I think, when there's birkas keranim, so in some nusachois, they use the, tha-those words. Instead of, uh, Hamavzir shekhinato letziya, they use those which she'otsekhal avadkha beyirah na'avod. Be that as it may, the point which I'm trying to bring out is that because of the change of conditions, so that nusach, which is, which was applicable in the times of Anshei Knesset HaGedolah, that had to be changed after the Horban. And therefore, we have a change to Hamavzir shekhinato letziya. So what I'm suggesting is coming back to Hashivah shofteinu. In the times when you do have a Sanhedrin, so then it wouldn't have been appropriate to say, Hashivah shofteinu kevereit shoyna, because you do have a Sanhedrin in place. So what would be the berakhah? The word berakh would

27:32 be to somehow that they should be, they should, th-they should continue, or they should, uh, be, uh, that their ability to, to be leading in the teaching of Torah and the implementation of Halakha, that they should be able to continue with that. That would have been instead of Hashivah, it would have to be a different, different, uh, loshon. The loshon of Hash-Hashivah is from the Navi Yeshaya. We're talking about Horban. But when there is a Beit HaMikdash and there is a Sanhedrin, so then the opening would have been not restoration, but asking for preservation and continuity. And then you've got, Uh, melekh ohev zekhar mishpat. So then the berakhah would have been, Hashem should ma-maintain that, that position of the shoftim and melekh ohev zekhar mishpat because Hashem cherishes mishpat. That's my suggestion that that would have been, and that's why they, they remain that way. That was the, that was the original form of the, that berakhah. Let's move on. So here we have a, a gentleman who is, uh, I believe he's about teshuva, uh, English family, and it's his father's birthday, and the family are making a birthday party for the granddad. And they, they, they want to have... And he, this pr-fellow is asking, he himself plays violin, and he's asking whether it would be, uh, uh, uh, p- permitted for him to play violin at this event. Where-- So I asked him, "Is there going to be wine at the event?" So he says, "Probably there will be." So let's

29:13 take a look at this, uh, halakha. And that is, is he, he had obviously learned this halakha, and, uh, I'd, I wa- I wasn't ready to gi-give him a heter so easily. And so this is in Siman kuf samekh, where you have a list of things which we do zecher l'Horban, or we don't do zecher l'Horban. So you have here, let's read that inside. Hekhen gazru, there was this decree, shelo lenagei miklei shir vehakhol mini zemar, not to play music, various instruments. Vehakhol mashmiyei kol shosheer. I'm not sure what these various expressions are alluding to. Not to play shosheer, and like a not zemar, a mashmiyei kol, different musical instruments. Le sameach bahem, not to play music, basically. Then he says, V'osa le shom om mipnei haHorban. Okay. Number one. So there's a, there's an objection to the p-playing of music. Va'afil u'shir be'peh al hayayin asur. Even if it's just vocal with wine, it's also not okay. She'ne'emar bashir lo shishtu yayin. So we have a pasuk that they, they should not accompany the song with wine. So then you're gonna ask, I mean, do we see, we have siman because we have, uh, v'achvar nagu kol Yisroel loim adir ve'shir l'hishbokhes ve'shir shel ha'daos. Ve'zichrin chasdei ha'mor, haKadosh Baruch Hu, al hayayin. It has become a, a, a broadly accepted by Yidden to ha-- to sing w-words of praise to Hashem along with wine. And that's, so that's where we have many celebrations, Baruch Hashem, and there'll be wine and, but the songs

31:02 will be songs of celebration to, uh, uh, of, of thanks to Hashem rather than perhaps, uh, unrelated. And, and to avoid it as Hashem. And then the Ramah continues, . So that's-- So we have by chasunas, we will have... Because it's, you know, uh, the fact that a choson kallah getting married is a mitzvah. So to celebrate that, we will have music or singing with wine. That's okay. So the question really is: Is the birthday of the Zayda, is that considered a seudat mitzvah? So what we ha-- what you have below on the screen is from the Hiskashus, where he says not only by a choson kallah, but also other simchas mitzvah would also be permitted to have shir as song-- singing together with wine. Like he says a few examples, all are included. Or for that matter, related to today's event, seudat mitzvah for a siyum Acharei Musar Sefer Torah, lav malki even adds. So then it's okay to have music and if it has music, it seems to be that, that music and even if there's wine there. So really the question, uh, has to be a-addressed, is this party? If it's a party which is somehow seudat mitzvah, then it would be okay to play music. And the fact that they have wine together, that's fine. If it's-- if it doesn't constitute a seudat mitzvah, a mitzvah, uh, celebration, then there is a reservation not to be for having music along with the wine. So that's, that's what I told him, and,

33:00 uh, okay. What happens, happens. Okay. One of our regular listeners asked me for some clarification. Now, we-- he did this address this some time back, but just, um, just addressing it a-again. And that is about, uh, he's, he's somewhere in the Far East, and one of the young ladies there gave birth recently, and it wasn't an easy, uh, experience. It was gone through a lot of an-anxiety. And sh-- One wants to thank Hashem. Is it appropriate for a woman to say Birkat HaGomel? So we have in the... This is from the Alter Rebbe's Siddur. It say the Birkat HaNe'enin, peh yud gimel, if I'm not mistaken, that whilst a child does not say Birkat HaGomel, if they've gone through a, a experience which we normally, uh, say HaGomel, a child doesn't say Birkat 'cause they can't say, "Lechayavim." They're n-they're not guilty. But women should say this berachah, and therefore, a woman who's given birth would, when she recovers from her illness, so then she would say the berachah in the women's shul, and ten men from inside will hear, and they will, uh, they will hear her saying because it is imperative for Birkat HaGomel. It says, um, "Vimru b'chal om u'v'meishiv shekeini halelu." It has to be b'chal om to be able to say the berachah. It has to be in the presence of ten men. So there is this minig of, by the Alter Rebbe's paskening. So, you know, the Alter Rebbe says that women should say Birkat HaGomel after giving birth.

34:44 And the maiseh is that although the Alter Rebbe does write this in, in Sefer HaBerachot, I can tell you that Baruch Hashem, since this has been published, have been thousands and thousands and thousands of Chassidic women who have given birth, who did not say Birkat HaGomel. And just to recall what was said last time, that one, yeah, a fellow came into the Rebbe and told him that his wife had given birth, and she said Birkat HaGomel and for the Chadashani seven seventy, and the bachurim said Amen. And the Rebbe, in jest, said to the father, it says, "Did the bachurim say HaShakiranu?" In other words, it was for a, a new ex-experience that a woman would say Birkat HaGomel. So it wasn't really done. In Yerushalayim, it was done, but it wasn't done in, in other, uh, communities. And, um, there's a story about the family Chidrich. The Rebbe here was the sandek, and some people said that the, the, that the missus, the mother had said Birkat HaGomel. Well, Rav Yosef Chidrich says that wasn't the story. The question was whether she needs to go to shul. There's a minig the first time a woman goes out of the house. So she would go to shul because they had made the bris at home, and they had a m- a minyan for Mincha at the home. So, uh, she had somehow, in that way, acquitted herself of going to shul because the shul had come to her. So no, no, no solid basis on

36:14 that. And what we kind of-- what we have a solid basis is what we have seen, uh, you know, year after year, uh, et cetera, and it's not done. And in the notes from, uh, uh, to the Sefer HaBerachot, from... Those notes are written by Rabbi Avraham Alashvili. So, uh, he writes in, "Minyan kama kehillas shenoshim lo mivarchas klal Birkat HaGomel," as the p-opinion of the Magen Avrohom, Rishon says. So it's broadly accepted in many kehillas, and I'm saying that's, uh, uh, you know, that's definitely the minig of Ayn Ash, that women don't say Birkat HaGomel. Possibly for reasons of tznius, uh, feel uncomfortable to stand up in the presence of a, a, a group of men to, to start s-speaking. And, uh, that's, that's a tznius feeling, which should be encouraged rather than discouraged. L-Let me just, uh, share with you. I was Shabbos in- In, uh, Eretz Israel, in the community of Lod, they asked me to come to Fabrin. And Rav Alashvili, Rabbi Alashvili, uh, he is one of the prominent Tamid Chachamin of that community. He gave a very beautiful Shiur on Shabbos afternoon, which I joined in and very enjoyable. At the Fabrinian, I noticed when some-- there was someone who had emptied... They took an empty bottle of lemonade or something, and they were putting the lid on, and Rav Alashvili punished him, "Don't do that." And I told Rav Alashvili that actually just last week at the Shabbos Shiur, I had quoted him as saying that you wouldn't

37:52 be allowed to do that. See, the reason you're allowed to put on a screw cap back, the Altar Rebbe says it's not a problem of Boina because it's something which is taken on, uh, o-off. Uh, you know, you, you, you close it, and they open it, you close it, open it. But once that bottle is empty and you're putting on that lid, it's gonna stay there. So you combine, you know, you're making a combination of two components. It's, it's a permanent combination. Therefore, it'd be a problem of Boina. So I was just, I was gratified to see how strongly he felt about this, that you wouldn't... You should not put back a cap on a, on an empty bottle. Um, I, I mentioned last week's in the Shiur Shabbos, especially when it's like these recycle, um, like these, um, bottles of water which people would, would crumple and then put on the, uh, the cap. So then for sure you want the Dafka to remain sealed. It's a separate discussion whether it's okay to crumple the bottles, but I, I don't see. It doesn't break it, so probably it is okay. But, uh, not to put on. One should not be putting on a lid on a bottle which you're ready to dispose of. Let's move on. So now, as I was in Eretz Israel, also, as I said, I was, uh, so before we get to the, um... That's, this is for question number eight. Question number seven was, someone owes me a significant

39:16 amount of money, has been delaying payment for years. Eventually, this ended up in court, in civil court. We won't go into the details how that happened. And he was awarded full payment plus interest, which is enforceable through a bailiffs. Is this interest surcharge permitted, or would I, would, uh, uh, he have to return the interest to the defendant? So the answer is that i-it would be a problem of Ribbis. Uh, it, it becomes really sticky about even the, uh, getting the money in the first place because i-it's a charge of Ribbis. I think he would have to tell the, the, uh, defendant that he has every intention to give that money back, but he, he wouldn't be allowed to hold on to that money. E-even though the civil laws say he is entitled, but it, it is giving an award of Ribbis, which one wouldn't, wouldn't be allowed to. The-- He's asking, so what's the encouragement for the fellow to pay up in time? So I said, "Listen, you're sending bailiffs. No one wants to have a geschäft with bailiffs. That itself is incentive to, to settle it as soon as possible." As Hashem, we should hear the source say this. Now, meanwhile, let's come back to the, this new Sefer. Now, this new Sefer, it's a very exciting project, and that is it explores the Minhogim of the Rebbe in, from a Halakha perspective. So the Rebbe was very meticulous in, in, in, in, in Halakha, and people who had a great knowledge of

40:52 Halakha. So I, I was asked to help but review this Sefer. And so now it's at the Srol. It's, it's like just, just being released this week, so I picked up a copy. And so I want to share with you one interesting piece which is discussed here, and that is about the way the knot of the Tefillin is made. Now, the, the, there's two main ways of making the knot of Tefillin. Is it like a double dalet, which is basically a square, and that, I believe, is in Ashkenaz. And then we've got the single dalet, and that's the way our Tefillin are. That we have the retzuas, the straps are, are folded and, uh, and knotted in a way that it creates the dalet. There are different ways of doing it, and what's been published in this new Sefer is a photograph of the Rebbe's, uh, Tefillin, the knot of the Rebbe's Tefillin. And so here you can see on the left of the screen a photograph of the Rebbe's Tefill- of the Rebbe, the knot of the Rebbe's Tefillin. Now, on the right side, so thank you, Rabbi Glassman of Riga, who sent this to me. Some years ago, there was a discussion about this, and Rabbi Mendel Aronov, alav ha-shalom, wrote about this. He was a Sofer, lived in Toronto, and he spoke about this, this change. Now, as you can see here, there's two forms. One is there's, see, there's a diagonal. On the lower picture, there's a diagonal strap, and that,

43:25 that diagonal kind of is covering the vertical one. And if it's that, that layout, then it's gonna be-- If you do want to adjust the, the, if the word is, the girth of the strap around your head or whoever you want to put it on, it's going to be more difficult to get a hold of the ritzuah, the vertical ritzuah, be-behind the diagonal. The upper one has the, instead of the vertical being behind the diagonal, it's the, it's the vertical is in front and the diagonal is behind. That makes the, uh, the adjustment of the straps, makes it that much easier. And I recall, uh, that the Mishna Brura and the, and the Avnei Nezer were actually both opposed to the, uh, the f- the, the upper form where it makes it easier to open, to, to, to kind of, to m-m-m-adjust. Possibly they're seeing that there's-- because it's important that the kesher of tefillin should be what's called the kesher shel chayama, should be a permanent knot. The fact that it's got it easy to open and close, that kind of compromises the kesher shel chayama aspect of it. So they both object to it. In, in one of the sefarim, I think it's in the , I, I'd written up about this. And this, what's come to light now is-- So at the time, Rebbe Meir Zirkind had told me that his father was, was guided by the Rebbe to make the kesher as you can see it here on the, on the

45:09 screen, that the vertical is in front, contrary to the reservations of, of, as I said, of Mishna Brura and Avnei Nezer. Fine. So th-this has now become a whole discussion, uh, so just sharing with the Olam, that, uh, how the Rebbe wasn't, was, was not concerned about that and had the vertical in front, making the, the adjustment of the ritzuahs easier. So two points I'd like to add. Number one, my father, alav hashalom, had the zechus to attend to Reb Leivick, the Rebbe's father, in his last few months. He was a young, he was a young man. He was, I think before twenty, but his, my Zayde was the main responsible for looking after Reb Leivick. And my father and his brothers took turns to help, and my father would mention how Reb Leivick had, because of his illness, so his, the girth or, uh, uh, for, for his tefillin shel rosh, the, the nitua became small and his, his, h-head had shrunk. And therefore, he had several times had asked for the tefillin straps to be taken in so that it should be able to fit on his, on his head properly. So that's on an emotional level. But, um, on a more halachic level, I once, I mentioned this yesterday in, in, in, in, in Lud, that I heard from Reb Hillel Paritzky, the Rav of Lanash in Paris, that he once went into the Rebbe, and he was, he, he was the leader of the Sinai schools, and he complained to the

46:54 Rebbe that he spends so much effort of having these, these schools, uh, and the boys who go in and after several years leave the school, they graduate, and it's like there's no, no trace of any input. And so he was quite frustrated with this. And the Rebbe said to him, "Eich davka tzu zorgen dos is shechted in Tanya, za mitzvot, za inyan nitzchi," et cetera. Do I have to tell you that it's written in Tanya that a mitzvah has got, uh, uh, a permanence? Now, coming back to our topic, that the, the Avnei Nezer was also objecting b'klal the idea of people adjusting because it's, it's compromising the permanence of the knot. And the Rebbe, as in a letter, sichas, whatever, the Rebbe disagrees with him, and he uses this concept. There's a lot in Gemara, Gemara mitzvos he'achshaveh, that the mitzvah gives it prominence. And so that would also explain why this, the fact that, in other words, when you do a mitzvah, that's, that's, that's something which is eternal. It's nev-never gonna be, never gonna go away. And that may therefore explain why the objection to the easy adjustment, why that, that doesn't diminish the permanence of the kesher, because a mitzvah is, you know, it has this permanence. So it doesn't matter the fact that it's got a, um, the ease of adjusting to size. Just a, a theory. Right. Let's move on. So someone asked me, we have this well-known idea of safek berachos lehokel. You're not sure whether you should

48:38 be saying a beracha, don't say a beracha. It's interesting because, you know, let's say about toveling keilim. So you say, if you're not sure, safek berachos lehokel. But when it says in here, actually, in the, in the dinim of tevilas keilim, it says it's better that you should tovel that keilim along with another keilim which needs to have tevila. So really, just to do br- mitzvahs without berachos is-- i-it isn't, uh, so straightforward. If one could do the mitzvah with a beracha, one should do so. Fine. But meanwhile, here we have on the margin of the Gemara in Daf Yod Beis in Berachos, we have a comment of Rabbi Chida Eger in Gilyon HaShas. And he says that this idea of safek berachos lehokel, says the Maharsha on commenting of the Ram- of the Rashbam, that only applies b'birchas hamitzvos. Because there, whether you do, you, you do the mitzvah, whether beracha is said or not, the mitzvah is being done. But when it comes to birchas hanehen, beracha on food, well, you're not allowed to eat without a beracha. And therefore, the Maharsha seems to be suggesting that when it comes to food, we'd say safek berachos lehachmir rather than safek berachos lehokel, because the beracha is the key to allow you to eat. So, so here's, this is the question. You are in a situation where it's a safek whether you have to make a beracha on the food or not. Are you allowed to eat? So the Maharsha and Rabbi Chida Eger

50:11 seem to be taking this, this, this approach, that you would say, "Safek bracha l'vatala," you'd say, "Say the bracha." However, it seems to be quite clear from the Alter Rebbe, and I checked with Rabbi Alashvili, uh, on Shabbos. He's the, he's the one who wrote the books. Uh, he's, uh, he's spe- one of his specialties is the research into Echaz Brachos, Echaz Ananin. So, um, he agreed with me that, uh, we see the Alter Rebbe writes in here in Perek Aleph. Let's read the halacha. "Bairach al hapas boirei minei mizonis." If on cake you made a bracha... Sorry, on, on, on a piece of bread, instead of the bracha, "Hamotzi lechem min ha'aretz," which is the greater privilege, you watered down the privilege, and you said, "Boirei minei mizonis." It's nourishing. You didn't say it's, it's bread. You didn't give it the ta'aruchem. So you've-- It's, it's, you've-- It's been short-changed. So the first opinion says you are yoetz. So although you didn't give the full praise which was, uh, uh, called for, it does, it's, the bracha is still valid. But "yesh cholkim," now those who disagree, and they say, "No, since you've short-changed what the, the level of praise which should have been said, you're not yoetz." "Os feik brachos lo chakel." Since it's a safek whether you should say now Hamotzi on that piece of bread or you should not say, so you don't say. And what does that mean? It means that you eat it. Yeah. So without papas husis. Using,

51:39 at any rate, using the cer-- terms, whereas the Marshah seems to be taking a position that the term "safek brachos lo chakel" doesn't apply for brachos on foods. We see it quite clearly that the Alter Rebbe disagrees with him on that, and he uses the term "safek brachos lo chakel" with brachos on the food. Right. Right. What do we have now? Um, what else? So I wanted to share feedback on two things. One was about sleeping, um... One was about sleeping with the feet to the door, and the other one, I'm gonna find it in a second on my computer. The other one... Sorry. The other one about the Rebbe being s- about the Rebbe being Sandek. So someone s-sent to me a, a message that they had done some, someone had done some research on the business of fa- sleeping with the face, feet facing the door. It's only if one is sleeping with, uh, on the floor. Which is interesting because I know the general minhag is people avoid it in, in, you know, on the bed. So I, I, I was discussing this with my host in, in, uh, Eretz Yisrael, and he told me that the Pnei Menachem, the late Gerrer Rebbe, the night when he passed away, he passed away quite suddenly, uh, and very unexpected. And he, that night, he was sleeping with his fe-feet towards the door. You know, normally, the same b- the bed was in the same position, but normally, he slept the other direction. That

53:19 n-night, he laid to sleep with his feet facing the door. Um, all right, so that's just some feedback on that. But about the story, if you remember, about with Rabbi Choniim Arosov. So I was f- this story was, uh, uh, makes more sense the way I was told now is the following. That, that when the Choniim's first son was born, the Rebbe Rashab was Sandek. The second son, he didn't give the Rebbe Rashab, he gave the son, the Freidiker Rebbe. The Rebbe Rashab was, uh, still alive, and he gave the son, the Freidiker Rebbe gave to be Sandek. And it was then that Rebbe Rashab commented, "Why did you, what, why did you do that?" And he said, uh, Choniim said, "You don't give a Sandek to the, to the same person twice." The Rebbe said this idea that if it's for the tovah of the, the, to honor the Sandek, you wouldn't do it twice. But if it's an honor for the chi-child, then you would give the, the, the Sandek twice. But, you know, what happened had happened. But later on, when the third son of Rebbe Choniim was born, so then, I believe by then, the Rebbe Rashab had passed away, but he gave the Sandek hos to the Freidiker Rebbe. What happened with the later sons, I don't know, but that's, that's the way the story was told. Thank you for listening, and I wish you a good week, an inspiring, a ba- a Basheiv Yom Tammuz. And we should hear,

54:47 "Yachofchu yom im elu." Uh, we should see, uh, uh, sim- the sason and the simcha. B'nin bes hamidrash. Shechta keina b'mehei yom menum. Bye.