תולדות תשפ״ד

05:19 Welcome to tonight's Shiur, Motzaei Shabbos, Parshas Toldos. And so we'll go straight into something very interesting biur, not a question, halacha, which I came across this week. We have on Shemini Atzeres and on, uh, Shemini Atzeres and Mus-- at Musaf, when we switch over to start saying, "Mashiv haruch ham evir l'geshem," we have a poem in Musaf, in the repetition of Musaf, and it's attributed to Rabbe Zecharia Halevi, and the-- there's a whole, uh, there's six stanzas here. And they correspond to, the first one is referring to Avraham Avinu, ovnim shechachach nechochach hamayim. The second one is Yitzchak was born by the basar of yuchach no ma'at mayim. The third one is Yaakov, who crosses the, the, uh, water, the Yarden with his, um, staff. This fourth one is Moshe Rabbeinu, drawn from, in, in a basket from the water. And we have the fifth one is Aaron, who toivels in, in the, uh, as a Kohen Gadol, toivels seven times on, on, on... I suppose five times on, on Yom Kippur. And then we've got the, the, uh, 12 Shevatim who were, um, th-they were delivered across, uh, the Ya- the Yam Suf in tunnels of water. The question which, uh, is, which is asked is, we see that there's the chorus. Typic- origin-原- pr- it looks like the original idea was that the hazan would say the main stanza, and the, the c-congregation would respond with the, call it a chorus if you want, and would say, here they would say,

07:07 "Baburi altim namoyim." Here they would say, "B'tzitkri choin chashras mojim." So we have, it alternates. One time the, the response is, "Altim namoyim," and the other one is, "Choin chashras mojim." So what's the, what's the logic there? What's going on there? So there's this Sefer which, uh, written about, um, about 170 years ago, or, uh, no, no. So this, this Sefer was printed Achraf Ayin Daled. So it's, uh, uh, printed more than 200 years ago, and he has the following fascinating explanation. He says, "When we talk about a, a concern about the provision of water, there could be two types of concern. There could be that we are pl-pleading in case Hashem had originally allocated that there would be a bracha of water, abundance of water, and there may be some reason that we, we, that, that we, um, have merited, if that's the right word, that it should be discontinued. That there shouldn't be a provision of water. So we're asking that Hashem should not withhold the provision of water which had been allocated already. It could be the other way around. There could be that there had been a decree that there shouldn't be a provision of water, and then the, the, the plea is that if there had been such a decree, that the decree should be overturned. And there should be, nevertheless, there should be a provision of water." So again, is the-- There could be a plea that if there had been a, a bracha for water, that, that bracha

08:45 should not be withdrawn. There could be the other way around, that there's a bracha, uh, that, that had not been allocated, and we're asking to overturn that, that there should be a bracha nevertheless. And so now let's look at these six stages, characters, et cetera, tzadikim. So we have those who had an experience. They were, with challenges with water, and they prevailed in tefillah, and they were-- and, and the, uh, the challenge was overcome, and water was provided. Then we have those who had no challenge with water, but they were tzadikim. So Avraham Avinu, we don't see any, um, uh, experience in his life wh-where there was a shortage of water. I know there was a famine, he went down, but we don't see that he had a shortage of water per se. And therefore, we say, "Okay, in the zechus of Avraham, baburi altim namoyim, there's been allocated water. In the zechus of Avraham, there's, that, that allocation should not be withdrawn." Yitzchak, by contrast, had a, a parshah with the, with the, with the wells, which we learn, talk about this week in the Sidra. And so there were, there, there was a, a business that he was seeking water, and he succeeded in getting water. So therefore, b'tzitkri choin chashras mojim, in the merit of Yitzchak. So therefore, there should be a provision of water, even if there are challenges. We go to Yaakov. Yaakov does not have a, a problem with a shortage of water. And so in his zechus, we

10:16 say, "Baburi altim namoyim," that the, the water should be, the bracha should remain, that it shouldn't, it shouldn't be withheld. Then we have Moshe Rabbeinu. So he does have a challenge with water. There's a time where the people, the Yiddin are sh- are, um, short of water, uh, and they are, and they are thirsty, and then there's a whole story with the rock. And so, b'tzitkri choin chashras mojim, in his merit, we should, you should give us water nevertheless, even though there was a challenge. Weiter, we go to Ya- Avra- Ya, um, to, um, Aaron HaKohen. Again, we don't see him having to deal with a shortage of water. And therefore, baburi altim namoyim. And then we have the Shevatim. When they come to a place where there was, uh, the water was, was, um, was bitter. And then, b'tzitkri choin chashras mojim, so that they were, there was, they were challenged water-wise. Therefore, we ask them, they, they, we ask in their merit that they, if there is a challenge, and there's, it may decree there shouldn't be water, b'tzitkri choin chashras mojim, Hashem should provide, um, water in abundance. I mentioned that before that Avraham, there was a, a, a famine in his time, but we don't see that he had a particular dealing with overcoming... Well, he, he doesn't, uh, he doesn't solve the water problem, whereas Yitzchak does, Moshe Rabbeinu does, and so do the Shevatim, well, with Moshe, with the, um, with the, uh, story with the bitter water. Okay.

11:49 Let's, let's move on. And in the Sefer, there also discusses the difference why you say sometimes baburi, sometimes b'tzitkri, but I don't want to go into that. Um, I just, this is Pashat HaGishmakeka, um, explanation. Okay. Now, I often daven at the Omid Not because, not only because I love davening at Yamot, but I like that things should be on time. And so, uh, so I go to Yamot, and then it's a weekday Shacharit. And I, um, looking around, we start saying Kaddish D'Rabbonon. There's a letter of the Friedrich Rebbe printed in Sefer, in Sefer Mamorim Taf Shin Tes. Later in the Igress about the importance of saying the Kaddish D'Rabbonon before davening. Okay. So I start saying Kaddish, and then as I've just said the first sentence, then someone in the back starts saying Kaddish. So he's a chiyuv, but he, uh, I didn't know that he's a chiyuv or whatever, starts saying Kaddish. So now, do I have to finish the Kaddish which I've started, or can I just stop short, let him continue? This is my dilemma. So I just came across the Gemara, uh, Halakha Protes in, uh, Gemara Brochos Daf Yod Daled on Beis. And... Well, but let's start a similar Gemara, similar loshon is in Gemara Taanis Daf Chof Ches. So in Taanis Daf Chof Ches, it talks about Hallel on Rosh Chodesh. So it tells, tells us a story. Rav comes to Bavel. He lived first in Eretz Yisrael. He comes to Bavel, and he sees that they're

13:25 saying Hallel on Rosh Chodesh. Never heard of such a thing. So he had considered to stop them, but then he saw that they are skipping parts. So he said, "Ah, I see that there's, there, there's some, you know, the minhag is saying b'din. There's ob- evidently, there's been someone who had considered whether to, how to introduce to it. And Daf can not saying the full Hallel to differentiate between that and the days when we say Hallel as a duty, as a chiyuv. And so, all right. So he sees that it's, you know, it's, it's a responsible decision here, not just out of ignorance. And then it finishes off, Tano. We learned in a braisa, Yochid lo yaschil. So although there is a custom of saying Rosh, um, Halel on Rosh Chodesh, but a Yochid should not. Veim hiskil goime. If he did start, then he should finish off. So I'm not going to go into the whole Halakha of, uh, Halel on Rosh Chodesh. And w- there's a whole thing with the Alter Rebbe about, um, being goeze from the chazan, et cetera, et cetera. Written in about the, in the siddur. There's a lot of discussion about that. But I'm just, I'm just picking up on this thing, this idea. Don't... You, you shouldn't begin. But if you began, you finish the unit which you've started. So that's the Gemara in Taanis Daf Chof Ches. Now, we have here in Brochos Daf Yod Daled. So we have the following story. Rav Shmuel Bar Yehuda

14:52 says that in Marova, that in Eretz Yisrael, at Ma'ariv. Now, there's a whole question. Do you have to say the third parasha of Shema in the evening? Because after all, the third parasha has got to do with tzitzit, and sit- By night, there's not, there's no chiyuv to wear tzitzit. Uh, because it says, "Orei isem osrei." So there was a discussion, as I s- an idea whether one needs to say the third parasha. So he says, in, in Eretz Yisrael, in the evening, they would say the following. , They just sk- said the first part and the last three words, with the word Emes afterwards. Says Abaya, "How, ma, am I... What's so wonderful about this?" But Rav Kahana had said in the name of Rav, in the evening, Lo yaschil. You don't, don't need to start the third parasha. Veim hiskil goime. But if you started the third parasha, you have to say the whole parasha. Ah, you could say that the , is, is only a, how you say, a preamble. It's not a beginning of the actual content. S- So, but Rav Shmuel Bar Yitzchak says, "Dabeil Bnei Yisrael is take not a haskal, but Gaomar Talheim is a haskal." It's considered that you started. So therefore, it says, all right, so in this point, whether Gaomar Talheim is a preamble, is a haskal, there's a machloket that they d- don't agree. Until... Unless you say, "Ve'osa lamitztzitz." Then you really started saying the content of the parasha. So Abaya concludes, "Anaan

16:29 maschuli maskilinon." We start saying Gaomar Talheim, because even in Marova, they also would start. But then, once we start, then Rav had said, if you start, then you have to finish. So, . As we have the idea, Rav Kahana in the name of Rav had said, as we said before, "Lo yaschil, veim hischil goime." So we're seeing an identical loshon that whether it's here, it's about the Shema, and here it's a- about Hallel. But lo yaschil, you don't ne- don't need to start. But if you start, you finish. So I'm, I'm seeing a svo- a similar svara here that although I didn't have to say Kaddish, but possibly, I, I might be totally wrong. I mean, and I looked around and couldn't find anyone who comments on this. Um, but in hiskil goime, we had a similar thing just this past week that one, it was on Rosh Chodesh, and there's a fellow, he's a chiyuv. And he, on Rosh Chodesh, he's not davening at Yamit. At the end of a Hallel, so he started saying Kaddish. And then says, "Oh, no, no, it's, it's a Kaddish for the chazan. It's not your Kaddish." So th- these are not the same. One was st- starting, uh, Kaddish, um, legitimately, um, but then someone else comes in. , there, perhaps you could say it wasn't his business to say Kaddish at all, so he stopped. L'chayil he stopped. But, um, so I just find it interesting, um, to, to see the svaras here. Right. Let's move

18:01 on. So now, I was... Now in the, uh, in, in, uh, I was at Kiness Shulchan in New York, and, uh, a couple of people- - Bashgoha Protes. I don't know whether they had any connection with one another. Asking about Kehilat Chapaim, which we say on Mondays and Thursdays, has that got to do with Kriyat Shomar? So this is-- You can see a picture from the Tehillat Hashem siddur, I think, or Torah siddur. Then on Sheini Vachamishi, on Mondays and Thursdays, after Tachna, after Kaddish, before Kri- Kris-- before opening the Aron Kodesh, Vayhi B'sayer, we have this passage of Kehilat Chapaim. Now, has that got to do with Kriyat Shomar? In other words, if you, for whatever reason, are not davening with a minyan, do you still say that passage because it is Monday and Thursday? Or has it got to do with it's a preamble to Kriyat Shomar, Vayhi B'sayer. Uh, another variation of the same question, if let's say you are, uh, one of the slower, uh, daveners in the minyan, and so you are middle of saying Tachnam, and they've opened the Aron Kodesh, and now... So do you interrupt in middle of your sequence of, uh, of Tachnam? Of course, Vayhi B'sayer and Veberich Shmei is, is time sensitive, so you're gonna say it then. What about Kehilat Chapaim? Is it also time sensitive to be said, said then? Or can you just leave it when you get there, when you're finished? Uh, eventually, you'll say it, um, where it belongs

19:28 in the siddur. So this is the question. Is it, is this a, a prayer to be said on Mondays and Thursdays, or is it a preamble to Kriyat Shomar? I told them off the cuff that it's a preamble to Kriyat Shomar. In the siddur, in the notes which I'd written in the siddur, I'd discussed this, and you can see on the left that the, uh... This is written in the Sefer Yishai Yisroel, quotes from Reb Shlomo Zalman Oirbach, that it's, "Mispal veYochi does not say Kehilat Chapaim," and that it is a preamble to Kriyat Shomar. Just to, um, support that, on the right side of the screen, you have a q- a quote from the Mateh Moshe. To fill you in, the Mateh Moshe is a Talmud of the Maharshal. Um, he-- And his Sefer is all reasons for, explanations, backgrounds for any Yoni of davening, et cetera. So he writes, on Mondays and Thursdays, "Oim nim Kehilat Chapaim." What's the significance of saying this plea at this point? So he says, "Because we're going to now read in the Torah, Ve'onru avar nu lahel, and we are aware that we have violated the Torah, uh, in, on some occasion. And Hakadosh Baruch Hu is marech apoi. He's, he's, uh, patient with us, with his great mercy and kindness. Therefore, as we're about to read Kri- the Torah, we say Kehilat Chapaim before we start saying Kriyat Shomar, reading the Torah." Fascinating. So it's, it's, it's a kind of because we're going to read the

21:00 Torah, and it might be a reflection on, o-o-of guilt on upon us, therefore, we ask for a special tefillah that we should be in, uh, we shouldn't be, uh, punished, so to speak, for, for that vi- those violations. Um, but it's clearly he's saying it's got to do with Kriyat Shomar. What I remember also, and the siddur referred to this, is that the Abudarham says that this also apply, applies on a fast day. If you'll have a, uh... Sorry, Betavis, let's say, if that would be on a, on a Tuesday. So it also, it'd be, it'd say Kehilat Chapaim because it's an introduction to Kriyat Shomar. It's not limited to Mondays and Thursdays. It's, it's got to do with it. It's a preamble to Kriyat Shomar. Um, now, Rav Naftali is writing here, there was once in the upstairs zal, someone began saying Kaddish at the wrong time. People tried to shush him, and the Rebbe says, "Lo zim endikim, let him finish off, uh, the Kaddish." Yes. Uh, thank you for reminding me about that. That, I believe, was on Rosh Chodesh. Now, what we do normally on Rosh Chodesh, we don't finish off HaVurat Siyum aloud so that, uh, otherwise you'd have to say Kaddish. And then when instead we, um, bring back the Sefer Torah without a Kaddish, switch off, te-take off Rashi's and put a Ravadim, and then we start to say Kaddish and start off, uh, Musaf. Now, this fellow had said the Kaddish where, earlier than necessary, than appropriate.

22:38 And yes, thank you. So that's, uh, supporting this idea that even though, um, he shouldn't have been saying Kaddish then, and it was a whole, whole, um, confusion, but the Rebbe said to finish off. Although I don't know how far he had gone. But okay, that, uh, we have certainly a pshtikle may seraf to support this, that once you've started, you finish the Kaddish. Thank you. Let's move on to the next point. Fascinating. As I'm in, in the, the United States, it's about twelve o'clock or one o'clock, whatever, in, uh, New York, and I get a phone call from someone who is... He says, "I'm traveling..." This is on Monday. It's Erev Rosh Chodesh. "I'm traveling to Hong Kong via Japan." And so he's traveling across the Pacific. And he's g-let's-- He says about to get onto the plane. Let's say his plane, his, his departure is two o'clock. Now, since he's traveling along with the sun, he's gonna have a very long afternoon, and it's gonna remain light for most of the journey. And when by the time he lands in Japan, it's going to be nightfall. Now, because it's crossing the date line, he will be going from on... It will be instead of Monday afternoon, by the time he lands in Japan, it will be Tuesday afternoon, actually Tuesday evening. So he will have missed out on Rosh Chodesh. He says, "What do I do about Halil, about Musaf, et cetera?" So as I say, it was very much on the spur

24:17 of the moment. And I was-- I told him, "I think that you ch- since you're going to a new day, you should daven again, um, Sha-Shacharit, et cetera, and Musaf." But I said to him that the mumche on this is actually Rabbi Leshes in Melbourne, who's done a lot of research as the Rav of the, um, Siyumei Yeshiva, whatever, the young Yeshiva, a minyan. And I... Right afterwards, I sent an email to Rabbi Leshes and asked him, how do they pasken? Now, I hadn't considered when I told him to daven Shacharit again, you know what? It's gonna, he, he, it's gonna, it's not gonna get earlier. It's gonna-- He's traveling at two o'clock. Let's say it's gonna... He, he's not gonna get earlier in time. It'll be two o'clock, three o'clock, et cetera. He's not gonna go back to Shacharit time. So there was no reason for him to have to go back to Shacharit. But he would, once he crosses the date line, he would be able to, uh, daven Musaf, et cetera. So that's, that's the... All right, so now this is the, what happened on, on Monday, and then I'm gonna share with you Rabbi Lesches' answer. Yeah. So here you go. He writes the consensus in Australia, and that's in the Rabbonim, I guess, that there's, there's the, there's the day, there's the time of the day, and there is the date. So when you cross the date line, it's still the same day, and therefore you don't have to do

25:49 Shacharit again or Mincha again. It's still the same day. But it's a different date. So it will change from Monday to Tuesday, it'll change from Erev Rosh Chodesh to Rosh Chodesh, et cetera. Therefore, in our instance, he writes that he's traveled on Erev Rosh Chodesh, and he's-- and, um, davening Erev Rosh Chodesh. So now, uh, he would, he would-- Once he crosses the date line, it would become Rosh Chodesh for him. And on that basis, he would daven, uh, Mincha. He, he'd say, "Yaale ve-yavo at Mincha." He'd say Halel, he could daven Musaf once he's crossed the date line. He says that's the majority of the Rabbonim in Melbourne who would say that you go by your current location. So once you've passed the date line, there's a whole discussion where is the date line. But once you are satisfied that you've crossed the Halacha date line, so at that point it becomes from Monday to Tuesday, and it becomes Erev Rosh Chodesh becomes Rosh Chodesh, and you'll daven Musaf and Halel, et cetera. However, Rabbi Chaim Zvi Groner, son of the-- Reb Itche Groner, uh, says no, and he says you're bound by your, uh, original location regardless of the fact that you've traveled across the da- across the date line. And so actually Rabbi Chaim Zvi was in New York, and he posted this, uh, gui-guidance, uh, on, on the, I guess, from the Austra-Australian shulchan, um, ch-chat line, whatever you call it. And he says that those who are leaving on Monday

27:31 night, which is Rosh Chodesh, and they will arrive on Wednesday. So he says that they should-- they will keep American time. They'll still say Shacharit and Yaale ve-yovo even if they've crossed the date line in flight. This is based upon the Rebbe's Psak. Your, your, your day follows your point of origin until you ar-arrive at your destination and disembark. Now, as, as the Rabbi Lesches says, the Rebbe's, uh, an- Rebbe's answer in relation to his mother's travels. Now, the background to this, um, actually I heard this years ago and subsequent I, and I wrote it up, and then subsequently after Rabbi Leibel Groner passed away, they found in his archives his version of how he's, you know, he was there at the time. So the story is the following. That Rabbi Itche Dov Groner went to Australia to live there as a Shliach in around nineteen sixty-three. His wife had just given birth, and as a result, she wasn't ready to travel a long journey, and several months later, she gets on a train from New York to Los Angeles. And at-- in Los Angeles, she gets onto a boat with her six Kinderlach, and at some stage, she looks at the schedule of the boat arrival in Sydney, and it's going to be arriving on Sunday, which in American da- uh, days would be still Shabbos. So this, this-- so she had this dilemma. What's she gonna do? She'll be-- if according to what her accounting that she'll be arriving on Shabbos, she'll have

29:19 a problem of getting off the boat. So she sent a telegram to her husband, who contacted his brother. Her husband was in Melbourne, and he contacted his brother, Reb Leibel, who was in New York, and he asked the Rebbe. The Rebbe told him to ask this Ro for, uh, um, his take on it, another one, and the Rebbe wasn't satisfied. And third one, I believe, was Rabbi Menachem Kasher, who had written extensively about the Halacha date line, and he, uh, gave the following advice, which the Rebbe was happy with. And what this was relayed to Mrs. Groner on the boat, the following guidance that once they have... once the captain announces they've crossed the date line, they should try to get off the boat at a port, obviously, um, and disembark, if possible, to spend a night in, in that location. If not, at least to have a, a meal, to sit down and to be kavuah. Once they've, once they've settled, so to speak, on the other side of the date line, then they can align themselves with the timing as in Australia rather than the timing of America, and they would be able to therefore be landing on Sunday rather than Shabbos. So what, what, what's being understood from this is, uh, if you haven't disembarked, you're still bound by your, um, point of departure time, um, even though you've crossed the date line. That's, that's, that's the, uh, that's where he's coming from. Now, then I'm gonna share with you... This I

30:56 also heard from Rabbi Groner, alav ha-shalom. And eventually, Chaim Swish, um, found this in e- in his files, in father's files, and he shared this with me. Again, this is printed up in the, in the Sefer Meshech Achicha, volume Gimmel. So this is a Isaru Safa D'Imma. Rabbi Groner was in... Rabbi Itche Groner was in New York, and the Rebbe gives him such a... gives him a job. Rabbi Yisroel Groner himself was a g- uh, an eminent Talmid Chacham, but I believe the Rebbe was referring to him to get a, a more s- you know, a solid psak. Get a f- verify, get a, a decision of a Rav. One who enters a plane on a Friday. And the plane continues without a stop landing on ground. It's just continued, continues to fly. And you're still on the plane, it's still flying, and it's already now past sunset where you've left. Ma Dina, what's the Halakha? So let's say if we would take a plane in winter, or let's say a ten o'clock flight. So this would arrive in, in, uh, New York. In New York time, let's say one o'clock. But in English time, it would be six o'clock. So in the winter, that would be well into Shabbos. And so Rebbe's asking, what is... what's the Halakha? Are you allowed to travel in a way that before you land, it's already Shabbos in the place where you departed from? So this seems to be a similar approach that although in your, in real

32:54 time where you are now, it's not Shabbos yet, but you are still possibly bound by the Shabbos of where you left. At the time, Rabbi Groner did discuss this. This is Tosef Shin Mem approximately. He discusses this with Rabbi Zalman Shimon Dvorakin, uh, who said that l'chatchila you shouldn't travel in such a way. Um, if you did, when you arrive at your destination, you're gonna have to be Mekabel Shabbos immediately, even though it's well before plag haMincha. That was Rabbi Zalman Shimon's psak. But meanwhile, what we're seeing here is an idea that you still maintain the status of your point of departure until you land. What I would just suggest, though, is that this is... You have the idea in, in, uh, Gemara Pesachim , et cetera. There is such a concept that the, that the stringencies of the, your point of departure will de- apply until you become a local in a, in a different location. I'm not sure whether that is a chumra or it is a, a hard and fast Halakha. Uh, would that be also used Lekula? And therefore, I'm asking here, this is seems to be Rav Chaim Swie's, um, svora. That you're bound by... You're still a, uh, an American time, and therefore it's Rosh Chodesh, in his case, until you, until you land in, in Australia. Um, because you're going, going for the m- I'm, I'm wondering whether that is just a l- a l'chumra or also... Or, and perhaps, and therefore. But if it's just l'chumra, then

34:42 perhaps you should, you should say halal and you should say mussaf because the ichar is you should go accor- to where you are. But as far as Shabbos is concerned, you should be machmir not to, uh, not to take such a trip because of the chumra of perhaps you should be bound by the . I'm not sure, but I'm j- I haven't seen anything in writing about this from Rabbi Groner. But, um, I'm just wondering. And as you see that you've got this, what Rabbi Elesh is saying, the majority of the Rabbonim there take the view that you go according to the current location once you've crossed the date line. Um, so you'd, you'd look at the real time. Um, whereas we have that other opinion. Okay. So if you are taking trips to Australia, crossing the date line, um, ask your, um, uh, ask a Shaila before you do, um, more than half an hour before takeoff. Okay, let's move on. Now, here are some, um... Now, we've discussed this not long ago, and, uh, we're at the Kinus on a Friday night. So a... someone, a Shliach in Manhattan who does, uh, is doing a lot of activity of getting young people together and, uh, and now there's a big Isurus of getting tzitzit for, for the soldiers in Eretz Israel. And so he has a hundred to hundred and fifty people coming together in, um, putting in tzitzit. So one thing about to putting tzitzit in the evening, that's not a problem.

36:11 Most, most Poskim say that it's no problem to put in tzitzit at night. Um, what about women? So we've gone through this, that the Alter Rebbe says the Halakha is that it is kosher. It's a l'chatchila. The Sefer is l'chatchila to do a svora achronit that women shouldn't be putting in tzitzit. Okay. So there was a svora, which he also discussed with other Rabbonim. If you have a man to, to do the first, first, uh, knots in the Ka- Anchulya, then the con- the continuation can be done, um, by women without any, um, worry. What about children? So then what we're seeing here is a... The way the Alter Rebbe presents this, according to this Ish Shita that women wouldn't be, uh, qualified to make tzitzit, therefore cotton also wouldn't be qualified, even if a Gadol is standing over them. But, uh, which, which tells us according to the Psak Halakha- Which is the Ichad Hadin, that they would be qualified. And I, about Kavana, suspect that there's a Godlo Medogabo, then that would be, uh, acceptable. So, all right. The, the... Then he asked, what about Goyim? Now, yeah, why would Goyim want to put in tzitzit? So, uh, the, the reality is that in the crowd which is coming, some of them may be from non-kosher conversions, et cetera. They're not, so they're not Yiddin Halacha, but they're still part of, uh... They're coming to social groups, et cetera, and it's not always so easy to, uh, to, uh, to not allow them

37:39 to be there. So would he be allowed to leave them to put in tzitzit? And here the answer is no. What we're seeing here is, and it says clearly, a Goy will put in tzitzit. It's possibly because putting in tzitzit is like a mitzvah, yeah. It says, "Ve also lahem tzitzit." So not just the wearing of the tzitzit, but, "Ve also lahem tzitzit." V'ni Yisroel, yeah. V'ni Yisroel ve also lahem tzitzit. The Eden put in tzitzit. Therefore, if a Goy makes tzitzit, that would not be okay. That's so. How is he gonna d- deal with di- diplomacy? That's, I'll leave to him. He's a very wise person, and he'll manage that. Okay. Now, someone asked me a totally unrelated question to any of our discussion till now. He wanted... Well, slightly related. He feels that he wants to support, uh, Israel at this time, and he has some money which he wants to put in, uh, buy Israeli bonds. And he's asking, is there a shailah of ribbis? So, uh, I guess the bonds is you buy, you, you buy a bond, and, uh, in time it would mature and, uh, increase in value. So is that a question of, of ribbis? So what... He, he, he dug up a letter. I told him to inquire. He go- dug up a letter from Reb Menachem Mendel Uziel, who was the Sefardic Rav Roshei. Uh, this is going back in Taf Shin Yud Beis in 1952. And what I, I found this letter. I did a

39:08 search on it, and I found it in, uh, published in the Hamoya Journal. So he's t- talking about the, the, uh, Shtores Milve, the, the bond is a kind of a, a loan which is being sold in America, lo- loans for the Israeli government. He says, actually, it's not a, it's not a loan as such. It's, it's colloquially known as, as a loan, but actually it's actually a partnership. You're going a, um... You're, you're entering into a partnership, investing together with them, and, um, that's what the, the bond is. Um, it goes into details about this. And therefore, you are buying a share in a business which is generating an income. Therefore, you are entitled to get a return on that. It's a partnership. It's not a loan. However, he says, nevertheless, it was instituted through the Ministry of Religion that, that all of the bonds will be under, under the terms of Heter Iska, as is in all the Jewish banks in Eretz Israel, that they are, um, uh, d- done with the guidance of Heter Iska, which is a way which is that the investments are seen as investments and not as loans. And therefore, the, the, the, theref- the bonds are subject to Heter Iska. So it's o- that's okay. Right. Let's move. Let's see. Someone's asking. So a batch of tzitzit is where there would be a issue with Goyim having made them kosher, called the Poshut. That's a very interesting question. Um, can you rely on Roy? So let's say

40:49 if you have, uh, uh, uh, lots of mezuzahs, and one of them is Poshut and you don't know which one it is, can you rely on Roy? There's a whole question because Roy is only for bitter of Isurim. But does Roy help to make a, a mitzvah? Can you... Does, does it make a mezuzah kosher? That's, that's a question which is discussed in Poskim, and they're not so keen about it. Okay, let's move on. Um, so someone, one of our listeners is asking a few things about davening, and the first one is about L'shem Yichud. In other siddurim, as particularly in Nusach Sfarad, as in Nachsidische Nusach, you have a L'shem Yichud before every mitzvah. So it's a L'shem Yichud before tzitzit and before tefillin, before kri... Uh, be- before lulav and before Sefirat HaOmer. And in our siddur, those, they're not there. But we do have a L'shem Yichud which they don't have, and that is before Boruch Shamar. And so what is the ex- explanation for all of this? I think it would be interesting to ask, just like you did in Besina, in the shtiebel, ask him, what does it actually mean, this L'shem Yichud Chavru L'chorish Chintei? A bit pshat, obviously. What, what are you exactly trying to say? It's literally a Poshut, yeah. But meanwhile, here, what you have here on this screen is from the Likutei Sichos, Chelek Lamed Tes. And this is a sicha about the policy of the Alter Rebbe in, uh, the siddur bechalal. It's basically,

42:24 if I'm not mistaken, it's talking about the Rosh Hashanah, the preparation for Tkias. But meanwhile, it's an overall understanding of what's the Alter Rebbe's policy in the siddur. So let's read this carefully. So it says, "In Sifrei Kabbalah, it's written that before every mitzvah, before performing a mitzvah, you should say you're doing this, the Shem Yichud Chavru L'chorish Chintei, to, uh, create a yichud of various levels of godliness. And in very siddur, this is published to be said before every mitzvah." And we find amazing, uh, in, in, in Alter Rebbe's siddur, there is no L'shem Yichud before every mitzvah. But on the other hand, it's been inst- in- in- installed to be said every day before Boruch Shamar. So, there, there is written elsewhere, the « Mevuer bazeh », this is in the name of the Rebbe Rashab, that we say, « Lashem Yichud, » once a day. And we have in mind also with that, with the yotzer, all the mitzvahs of the day. But the question is, if Lashem Yichud, if we're saying Lashem Yichud is a hanhaga, which is shayas to most of us, so why isn't it put there? And if Lashem Yichud is a little bit too kabbalatic from us, or we don't understand what we're saying, so why is it there before Borcheanu? And so here, the Rebbe comes along with a very in... He's going, what he'd said earlier in this, in this sikha, a very interesting, uh, approach. Almost like you'd say the gaver and the cheftze.

43:53 And he's saying that although the gaver, the individuals may not be, uh, on par to understand all the kavanahs of the Ariza"l, the Kabbalah kavanahs, but the cheftze, the siddur which they're using is, is, is, is in tune with all of these kavanahs. And therefore, when you're using this, you are using this nusach, this siddur, you're connecting with those kavanahs, even though you're not necessarily mindful of those kavanahs. That's more or less, uh, what the Rebbe is saying over there. And having said that, the Rebbe says-- takes it one step further. That the Alter Rebbe is of the opinion that one should say Lashem Yichud at least once a day, and that will have the influence of the Lashem Yichud for all the, for all the mitzvahs done during that day. It- It's not shover l'chol nefesh. It's not, um, it's not, it's not reachable, or it's not suitable for most of us to have the Lashem Yichud kavanah for every mitzvah during the day. But we should at least at... when it comes the moment of davening, and it's the beginning of the day, and just before then, yes, just before Borcheanu. After that, you're not allowed to interrupt. So before Borche-- just before going to Borcheanu. So at that point, we insert the Lashem Yichud. That should-- That's a moment of focus to a degree, and that should be the Lashem Yichud for the whole day. Well, that's the, uh, Rebbe's sikha on this. Okay. Let's move on. The next question he has

45:28 was about the psukim before and after Mayim Acharonim. What's the relevance of those psukim? Now, the pasuk before is a pasuk from, « Iyov zeh chelek Adam Rashamei Elokim venachlas Imrei Mechel ». Now, the, the, the concept here is, and some people don't say this, but in Art Nusach it's there. It's as if to give klippah a little bit, like you throw a bone to the dog and keep the dog happy. So there is this idea of washing Mayim Acharonim, and that water is a kind of a unique, giving a little gleaning to klippah and let them have this, this little bit and not, not, not, not interfere any-anymore. The words Chelek Adam Rasho. Rosh Teimes spell Aleph, Ches, Resh. The portion of Acher. And so this is a, a, a unique Positro Achro. Which we discussed before, this is the sikhas of the Feder Rebbe mentioned about not using a silver dish for the pouring of the Mayim Acharonim. You don't want to... On the contrary, it's, uh, it's a lower, it's a lowly thing. It's, it's giving to klippah, so you don't make it fancy. Um, so that's the pasuk before. The pasuk after, « Vayidabe Elai shulchan Hashem ». I did not see an explanation, but it's kind of fairly evident that... Uh, this is also an interesting question. Is Vayidabe Elai connected to Mayim Acharonim? And if, if for whatever reason you're not able to do Mayim Acharonim, you don't have any water. But you... I... It doesn't seem to be

47:09 a svara that has to be dafka connected to Mayim Acharonim. It's just, um, it's saying that this table is a shu- is a shulchan Hashem. Possibly, it is related that once we have kind of given, uh, the, the gleaning for Sitra Achra, and now the table is shulchan Hashem, it's a table before Hashem. Uh, and so in other words, to bring out the, the kedushah and the Vedas Hashem of, of this table. Okay. Now let's... But I want... Since, since we've come onto discussing this, I want to share you with you something very, very interesting. So we have here a pasuk in, in Yechezkel. Now you know that Yechezkel has a, uh, a vision, and he has a malach who gives him a guided tour of the future Beis Hamikdash, of the third Beis Hamikdash, She'ivonem b'mehera b'yameinu amen. And he's shown the Mizbeach. The wooden Mizbeach is, stands three amos high. It's two amos, um, tall, and it's got corners. Um, it's all made of wood. « Vayidabe Elai zeh ha shulchan asher lifnei Hashem ». So this is where this pasuk is from. The pasuk in before Mayim-- after Mayim Acharonim. You can see it's from Yechezkel mem alef chof beis. So the Gemara in several places, but here we have from Berachos Daf nun hei. So it says the following. Um, it says there are various activities which are, um, merit, Arichas Yamim, um, long life. So Hamareh Chal Shulchan, one who spends a long time at his table. What's the merit

48:47 in that? Possibly a poor person will come and there's food at the table. So Yoheved, you'll give them some food from your table. Dirch Si, but where do we see that there's a merit in, in your table and, uh, hosting, et cetera? Dirch Si, it says, « Hapos efosu kamizbeyach eitz sholeish ames gavoiah ». The Mizbeach stands three ames high. Okay. And then it says, « Vayidabe Elai zeh ha shulchan asher lifnei Hashem ». And the malach says to me, "This is the table to Asher lifnei Hashem." So, « Pasach bemizbeach nasal bimischuchah ». So the pasuk starts off talking about a Mizbeach. Then it switches to Zeh HaShulchan. So how do you reconcile that? Says Rabbi Yehoshua ben Elazar, when the Beis Hamikdash is standing, so the Mizbeach mechaper al Yisroel. That in the Mizbeach is a source of, of atonement. The Achshav, now that we don't have a Mizbeach, we don't have the Beis Hamikdash, Shulchan shel Adam mechaper alal. So the table is an atonement. Very nice. So we have here that the... I know there are some elsewhere it says about the, the malach at the table, but the poshtut pshat of the Gemara here is, Dil ma'oseh ani oveyoheved lei. That it's an opportunity of, of hos- of hosting a poor person, giving them food. Meanwhile, what we're seeing here is that the Mizbeach is, howsay, is substituted for by the shulchan. The table is, uh, s- is, is a substitute for the, for mizbeach. Now, I want to

50:23 share with you a fascinating insight. Look at the Rambam over here. In the Rambam, in Hilchos Beis Habechirah, perek beis. Talks about the mizbeach, and towards the end of the chapter, he writes that the exact dimensions of a mizbeach are not totally imperative, that the minimum size of a mizbeach would be the amor al amor, a square amor, veroom sholosh amos, and the height of three amos, which is the area of the makom hamarocha, where the fire would be on the Mizbeach in the midbar. So the Mizbeach in the altar in the midbar in the desert was five amos square. The corners which jotted out were an amor, uh, square, and then there's a pathway for the kohen to be able to walk around. So the actual fire area was just one amor square. It also says in Chumash, like it says over here, about the Mizbeach being three amos high. Although, Chazal learned that that's only the upper half of the Mizbeach. There was a lower half, and the Mizbeach stood at total ten amos high. But meanwhile, the way it's written literally in the passage is Mizbeach is three amos high. So what we're seeing is the minimum Mizbeach is an amor by an amor by three amos. Now, anyone who's familiar with, uh, anything about the mikvah knows that the smallest mikvah is an amor. Al amor al is three cubic amor. And so the smallest Mizbeach is the size of a s- the, the smallest mikvah. Which is not a surprise

51:58 because the Mizbeach, as, uh, the Rambam in the beginning says, that the earth, um, for the c- formation of Adam was taken from, uh, this place of this Mizbeach. Adam mimokin kaparos in Ivrit. So Mizbeach is to return for a person. And so it makes sense that the size of, the minimum size of Mizbeach is the size of the, um, dimensions of which accommodate a person. So one, the Mizbeach returns for the person. Now, here's a very interesting thing. The shulchan in the Miz- in the Beis Hamikdash, the way it's described in Parashat Trumah, measures one amor by two amos, and it's one and a half amos high. I'm not going to go to whole rikes, but of course, those who've got their mathematic heads screwed on now, one by two by one and a half equals three. So the overall dimensions of the Miz- of the shulchan are also, if you had wa-wanted to make a mikvah to fit in the, uh, the shulchan, you'd... If you make it one and a half amos deep, one by two amos, it would be a kosher mikvah. It would be containing three cubic amor, and the shulchan would fit in. So you got the shulchan, the m- that also is the same size of a mikvah. So what we're seeing, a fascinating thing is that the shulchan substitutes for the Mizbeach. We say that now we don't have a Beis Hamikdash, the shulchan substitutes for the Mizbeach. And the, the, the, uh, dimensions of the, of

53:22 the shulchan in the Beis Ha- in the Mishkan are, are, are the same as a shir mikvah, which is the same as a shir over the Mizbeach. And so it makes sense then that one, uh, substitutes for the other. Um, not neguel hadoch, but fascinating. Right. One last thing about this, Vayidaber Elai zer shulchan shel mi Hashem. So this is the safest. Yesod veshoyesha voido. I think it's a little bit before the Alter Rebbe's time. Not, not, not, not too much earlier. And he's quoting from the Ari Z"L. And here he actually says to say the psukim of Avorcha, et cetera, after Ma'amar Chayenu. We don't follow that. Maybe that's because of Cheschadas interruption. But meanwhile, he says, "You should say the passage of Vayidaber Elai, and then go straight into, um, into benching." And he says he-- the impression from the Kisri Ari Z"L is Vayidaber Elai zer shulchan is only said when it's said B'zimun. I did... I... My little, uh, little, uh, research, I did not see that, uh, Per- Mashmas. And the Pastus Alter Rebbe certainly doesn't say such a thing. And we say that passage also when we're b-benching alone. Um, one thing which I did pick up whilst I was, um, dabbling tonight was a story that someone, uh, Rabbi Chaim Vital says. He was, he was there in the presence of his Rebbe, of the Ari Z"L, and someone came along, and he said that he's been suffering pain in his shoulder. So the Ari Z"L said to

55:00 him, "It looks like that you have been interrupting between, um, between the Tirats Yada'im of Ma'amar Chayenu and, and your benching." He was learning Mishnas at the table. He would wash Ma'amar Chayenu and say a page Mishnas and then bench. And he says, "You have a lot on Takef from Tirats Yada'im brocha." The word Takef, which means immediate, is the same lashon, same letter as the word kaseh, which means the shoulder. So this is the background for this, these few lines over here. That because he was neglecting the ending of Takef, therefore, he was, he was, uh, suffering pain in his shoulder. And, um, by being careful about this would be take away this, his pain in the shoulder. Right. Let's move on. Okay. So then the next question he had was about the la-- After Hallel. So we have... Now let's go back to that previous slide. Uh, okay. So we have in... He has two questions about Hallel. One is about the word Al. What is the-- this word al is put in brackets. So, uh, why is it... If it's in, if it shouldn't be said, why is it there? Um, he mentions about the person's writing to me about, about the Veshamru that the Alter Rebbe put it in to be, uh, to placate the, uh, grandson of the Ba'al Shem Tov. Um, I just want to... On a, on a historical note. I've heard this story many times in various versions, in various Hasidische, uh, groups. This story is told,

56:33 whether it's this Eynikl, that Eynikl. Um, just got a little bit of yosher for you. The Alter Rebbe publishes his siddur in the year Taf kuf Samach Gimel. Well, that's the print which we have, and Veshamru is there. Um, the Hasidim with the Ba'al Shem Tov, with the Ba'al Shem Tov's grandsons is several years later. The Shlob in Hasidim, et cetera, there were two Hasidims, and they were much, uh, several years la-after the siddur was published. Therefore, to say that the Alter Rebbe inserted Veshamru to placate his mechutanim or his whatever it is, it's simply historically not true. Um, the, the conversation may have been, why did the Alter Rebbe say not to say Veshamru? And so the Alter Rebbe says, "Well, you can't... You can't, uh," because the Veshamru becomes a whole Yadid Lema'alah, becomes a whole, uh, celebration. And the Alter Rebbe says, "Nitafalu, you didn't come before, and you can't go to every fair and every, every, every, uh, celebration." So... And the Alter Rebbe didn't want to say, uh, didn't want to say the Veshamru because of a Hefsek, et cetera. So they, th-the-- to say that it was because of an interaction with someone and to placate them, that's, uh, that's why he put it in. That's not true. Um, all right. But meanwhile, come back to our main question. Things which are in the Alter Rebbe siddur, the late Reb Shur Manchin, uh, alav ha-shalom, once wrote to me he had this list of six or eight places where

58:02 there's a word in brackets. You know, we have a moshal, Al tosir v'lo sosir. We have V'chen shneich sovim v'chan, et cetera. So this is one of those places where we have a bracket in the Alter Rebbe siddur. You have also in Pirkei Avos, Reb Elazar Ben Chisma or Reb Elazar Chisma. Um, what's, what's, what's, what's the significance of these brackets? So let's read these words. Y'halelu Hashem elokeinu kol ma'aseha. All of your creations shall praise you. Or al kol ma'aseha. We-- They shall praise you for all what you have wrought. Both are legitimate messages. And okay, we can only choose one or the other, possibly. The brackets are there to be aware that there's another Pshat. It's okay, it's shivim panim la-Torah. So there's one way we're going to do a Gulei Ma'aseh, but it's okay to know that there's another Pshat, which is also perhaps relevant even for Shavuot HaNefesh to know that there's another Pshat. So, for example, v'chen shneich sovim. So v'chan. So although there may be in or, in, in, in the original Torah hakatanim, it's v'chan shneich sovim. Um, and okay. So there, there, there's an explanation that there it means in the original place, in Torah hakatanim, it, the v'chan shneich sovim fits better. And yet in poshtut Pshat, when you're davening, the v'chan doesn't fit because there's no v'chan. You know, you know it's not a commentary on the Chumash or anything. Therefore, it's, it's said as v'chen shneich sovim. That's, that's okay. Uh, and so on.

59:35 Um, I know that, for example, Unetanu ruach. So that's not for the Alter Rebbe. On top there, there's a Nusach Unetanu ruach from the Tzemach Tzedek. Okay. So possibly these are added there for a person who's a little bit more, uh, understanding to understand. Okay, there's a point, there's a way in which we're going to say Ma'aseh. But also, you should know that there's another way of, of reading it, et cetera. Um, I'm going to read here a couple of the, um, comments in the chat. So Naftali is saying, "I thought it was because of his friendship with Rabbi Yehoshua who defended, who defended the Alter Rebbe independent of them being mechutanim. Um, if, if not this, why should it be included at all?" So, um, all right. The Alter Rebbe does bring it because it was possibly... He doesn't even say you shouldn't say it. What he says is that he puts it there and most Hasidim do say it. He says, "If you don't say Baruch Hashem l'olam, you don't say Yesim Yam, you don't say, uh, Veshamru either." He kinds of leaves it a little bit, uh, a little bit open. Um, very, very interesting. I, I'm, I'm just saying this, uh, off-the-cuff kind of thing. Coming back to what we had earlier this evening about this Keila Chapa'yim. Because here, this is inconsistent. The list over here, which dates not to say Keila Chapa'yim, is inconsistent with the list which is before Lamnatzeach of days we don't say Tachana. And, uh,

1:01:03 Rav Tuvia Bleich says, and he's suggesting the Alter Rebbe is presenting there's this option. And then he says, "Well, Minchas Phar is another option." It's, it's possible that the Alter Rebbe would present, um... I know, Derashvi don't understand this, possibly. Possibly, the Alter Rebbe would, would allow you to know that there's two options. And okay, so you have the Har Chavas Ha-Ha'amochin. This is the way we're doing it. But you know that there are others, and they're, you know, they're, they're also, um, part of, uh, of Klal Yisroel, et cetera. Um, I once heard a very nice Pshat. It was when Yidden crossed the Ya- the Yam Suf. So they go through twelve tunnels, and there's the, the, uh, the, um... Midrash says that the, the tun- the walls of the tunnels were, were clear like glass. You could see. So why was it important that they should see the other, uh, the people in the other tunnels? So this is all about Chavurah. We're saying- There's 12 tunnels, and there's Yidden going each one a different tunnel. But you know, you're going in your tunnel, you'll get to the destination. They're going in a different tunnel, but they're also gonna get to the same destination. Um, that's why you have to know that there are other tunnels. Yeah, other Yidden in other tunnels. It's okay. It's legitimate. Um, the other point which he's asking, asking is about the V'avram Zoken and Zevodia Yashmereni. Now, I think we've gone through this before, that the name

1:02:28 Zevodia is the idea of, um, Hashem carrying your, your package, your burden. So the Zion is from the word Zoken, and the base is from the word Bo, and the Dal that somehow comes with Yomin, with the Mem and Dal, et cetera. And so we honor Chidesh, we mention in this Pasuk, and it's, uh, a school of Harichas Yomin. V'avram Zoken, Bo v'Yomin, and we, we add this Loshen. His question was, do we say first the Pasuk three times and then the, the, uh, this Tefillah afterwards, or do we say it all in one go? And what I have in my notes, uh, I saw this evening, is that there are Sfaradish Siddurim which say, say the Pasuk three times and then say this, uh, Zevodia Yashmereni once. Um, whereas in HaYom Yom, so we have this Loshen of, um, Koif-- uh, sorry, V'avram Zoken, Goime, Zevodia Yashmereni Goime, Gimel Poamin. So what does the HaYom Yom added to what's written in the Siddur, where it says, Kol Zeh Yom HaGimel Poamin? So th- there's a, uh, recent publication of Kol Zeh Yom HaGimel HaGvur. He wants to say this is the very point which he wants to confirm, unlike those who think, who say, say that you should first say the Pasuk three times and then say the Lachash, uh, three times. No, it says, Kol Zeh Yom HaGimel Poamin. Sorry, where, where it is. To say the, to say the S- Pasuk and the Zevodia Yashmereni, just say it three times. Um, in

1:03:56 other words, say the two pieces, um, one after the other, and then to say it again, the two pieces one after the other, only all three times. Okay, with that, we'll finish for tonight. I wish you all, we should have a Gut Tavok, and we should hear Besuras Tovos, and Harichas Yomim, and Geulah. We should see a Yeshua from the Yidden in, uh, captivity, uh, in, in, in Azza. And we should see all, uh, the soldiers come out and come home safely. And, uh, we should see a Geulah Shelemot, Mashiach Tzikeinim, Umeheri Umeinu Amesh. A Gut Tavok. Amen. Gut Tavok. Gut Tavok.