ויצא תשפ״ד

00:05 Speaker 1 Welcome to this year, this evening, Motzei Shabbos, Parashat Vayeitzei. And, uh, I wanna share with you some interesting things. First thing is not necessarily Mamash Halakha, but it was brought to my attention the following. In the back of the Tehillim, there is a kuntres on-- about Amirat Tehillim. It's-- This was published in the year Tav Shin Yud Gimel, nineteen fifty-three approximately, and that was when the Tehillim with the Reshimas of the Tzemach Tzedek was published. You may recognize this volume. Uh, so this was published in the year Tav Shin Yud Gimel. And in connection with this, this is his notes of the Rebbe Tzemach Tzedek on the Tehillim. And in honor of this also was compiled a le- like a, a collection of letters of the Friediker Rebbe encouraging the Inyun of Tehillim BeRabim, et cetera. At the back of-- In, in that Kuntres, there's a whole story of the Tzemach Tzedek where he was... So let's read this. What's on one little piece. At the meal on Tzim-- on Simchas Torah, when they were singing the Alter Rebbe's Nigun before benching, so the Tzemach Tzedek said he saw his grandfather, the Alter Rebbe, and he said to me, "HaKos Shel Brocho, the cup of blessing, ton hagbor tefach min ha-shulchan, should be raised a tefach, a hand breadth from the table. The Kos Shel Brocho Shel Dovid, SheHu Sefer HaTehillim, and the cup of blessing of Dovid, which is the Book of Tehillim, magbia tefach. It raises us all a tefach, umevatel kol hatet

02:10 Speaker 1 kitrugim. And this annuls all the, the, um, the, the decrees which are negative things, all the, um, accusations, et cetera. Tikbah asher yomru bechasher yikol yom behashqamo. Lo yiru chamashor avis es kol hatehillim." And you should institute. The Tzemach Tzedek had been very anxious about something which he saw on the horizon. And in this vision, the Alter Rebbe tells him on-- This was already from Rosh Hashanah. He was very, very, uh, anxious. And on Simchas Torah, the Al-- Tzemach Tzedek now says that my grandfather came to me and he said, "You should establish, you should take, say Tehillim every day early, no later than from four o'clock, mi yashor rav is. Should say the whole Tehillim for hamishim shloshah yom, for fifty-three days. VeYimacha hakitrug." And this will erase the, the kitrug, this decree against Klal Yisroel. So if you want to read the full story, it's there. It's also been-- This kuntres has been translated into English. It's called On Saying Tehillim. Meanwhile, the Rebbe, our Rebbe, as he was his style already over several years, once he became responsible for the publication of the Friediker Rebbe's material, he would very often n-- add notes. You-- Mostly references, but also other comments. So here we have a comment of the Rebbe. On this which it says that the sh-- that the cup sh-- is raised a tefach from the table. You make, uh, Kos Shel Brocho is raised a, a tefach from the table. So he gives us a reference to Shulchan Aruch Siman

04:03 Speaker 1 kuf peh gimel siv dalet. Uminhogenu. However, our minhag, as written in the Haggadah, which the Rebbe had published, he doesn't say the year, I think it was Tav Shin Zayin, approximately several years earlier, some six years earlier. So in the Haggadah, the Rebi-- the Rebbe had already written that the minhag is to do, uh, to make, uh, to raise the cup of wine of Kiddush three Tefachim, gimel Tefachim. So we have here a little bit of a contradiction. Here it says in Shulchan Aruch to raise the cup a tefach. And Minhag Chabad is to raise it three Tefachim. Ve'ulai hu l'chatchilah l'hidur. Perhaps that is as an extra measure to raise it three Tefachim, but min hadin is enough one tefach. And al pi zeh mishiyas sevas bepshates. With this, we can reconcile in a simple way. Ma shekos ovor zo helek beis shetsachri as gavoha zeres. In the Zohar, in one place, it says to be a zeres, it should be raised. Im sh'bekavan m'kameis or I'm skipping the brackets, we'll come to that in a minute. Bekavan m'kameis gam bezo gufer. It says she'yatsalku tefach. Yatsalku tefach. Elsewhere in the Zohar, it says the same as the Gemara, the idea of tefach. So before we go further, let's go down to the bottom of the screen. And we have here from the Zohar, which the Rebbe referred to, the first Zohar, Kos dibrocho itz lichmo vimetach livi mino. It should be, um, held in the right hand, I guess. Venisom bikvosh. Itz lichmo

05:39 Speaker 1 vemzakif min pesoro. It should be raised from the table. Shiuro deikri zeres. It should be raised a zeres from the table. L'vorch al Kodsha Briku. And that's venisom bikvosh. All right. The pshat in the Zohar is another discussion, but meanwhile, he says it should be raised a zeres. Now, coming back now to the brackets. Shepilush shegam kan gimol tefach. That the meaning of zeres, the translation of zeres here, too, is three tefachim. Okay, Mishne Kosov veSefer Ohr HaChaim. Ohr HaChaim is Rabbi Ovadia Al- um, Azoulay. And was the grandfather of the Chida, if I'm not mistaken. And he also trans- says that zeres means literally, uh, three tefachim. And lo kamishne Kosov veItur Sofrim. Unlike what is written in another sefer called Itur Sofrim, who wants to say that the zeres in the Zohar should be translated as a tefach. Amashi meyashiv, so back to the n- next line. Amashi meyashiv veOhr HaChaim odech. The Ohr HaChaim, as I say, is a commentary on the Zohar. It says, "How would you work out three tefachim?" So tefach, he says, "Well, the tefach itself, the, the table itself is a tefach thick." As you have by the shulchan, you have bisgues de tefach. Then you raise the cu- the cup a tefach, and the cup itself is a tefach. So from the top of the tefach to the bottom of the thickness of the table, you've got three tefachim. That's the solution of the Ohr HaChaim to re- to reconcile the zeres measurement to the halakha

07:25 Speaker 1 of tefach. And the Rebbe says, "That's dechak. It's an awkward shot. Kamuvhan, which is obvious." Then the Rebbe goes, uh, on- he says, "Furthermore, you look in Gemara Pesachim Daf Kuf Tes, there's a whole discussion about the shear revi'is. And there it says, "Vekois de ra- ra- razah," the, the typical cu- the default cup. A razah, it talks about the size of a revi'is. It says it's gavoha le'erech gimol etzboas. It's about three etzboas high and diameter of two etzboas. And that's how he works out the Gemara exactly the shear of a revi'is in dimensions. In, in, not, not rather than in, in, in, you know, measuring in, in, uh, liters, et cetera. Ule'tefach. So meanwhile, in that Gemara, you see that the height of a, of the Kos Shel Brocha is, is three qua- is three etzboas. Tefach is four etzboas. Therefore, that's another question on the, the, the, the likelihood of the pshat of the Ohr HaChaim. So meanwhile, the Rebbe is saying we have taka one place of the Zohar, um, it says zeres. Elsewhere in the Zohar, it says tefach. And so, so the answer is that there's the, there's lechatchilah lehidur, there's an extra. And then there is the basic halakha is a tefach. What came to the, the, the... What, what, what, what was brought to my attention is a correspondence between Rav Zevin and the Rebbe. And this is published, as you can see, in Igrot Kodesh, s- uh, pa- uh, volume chaf gimel. So the Rebbe writes

09:03 Speaker 1 to him, "Beinyan zeres." I'll, I'll, I'm gonna bring the Rav Zevin's letter in a moment. You should, you should, "Kedai letsayon lehasidim okeyotzabei v'chol hamarbe b'simanim l'Torah reiz b'shuvach." So this note of the Rebbe, which we just read from the back of the Tehillim, um, about 10 years later, 12 years later, the Siddur Im Dach was published, uh, was reprinted. And in the Chof Tzadikhis at the back, there are some 15, 20 pages of Halach Oras V'Tziunim, largely put together by Reb Leibel Gron, alav ha-shalom. And this note of the Rebbe is also quoted there. And Rav Zevin, m- um, he, he's referring to that note in the Siddur, which is the same note as which we have over here in the Tehillim. It's exactly the same words. And he has, he struggles with it. And he, we'll see in a moment, he's challenging the Rebbe's, um, uh, explanation. And therefore, he's wondering, he's, he's, he's... Rav Zevin is the editor of the Encyclopedia Talmudis. At that time, the- he was working on Volume 12 of the Encyclopedia Talmudis. And there, there's a section on an entry on zeres, and what is the definition of zeres. And so generally, a zeres, as we know, is a half an amah. But there are other... And how do we untranslate the zeres here in the Zohar? And he struggled with the Rebbe's pshat, and the Rebe- he's asking the Rebbe, "Since I'm not happy with your pshat about zeres, should I refer to it or should I

10:45 Speaker 1 ig- should I kind of not refer to it altogether?" And the Rebbe says, "It's okay. Refer to it. Don't worry. Refer to it, to this reference in the Siddur. And the more r- r- cross-references in Torah, the, the better." So now let's read what Rav Zevin writes to the Rebbe. "Ve'inya zets, I see in the Siddur Im Dach what you had written about the minyan in the Rebbe's house to raise the cup of Kiddush Kos Shel Brocha three tefachim. And I also saw this some time back in the Hagadah Shel Pesach, which the Rebbe had published. And I guessed at the time that this was based upon the Zohar in which says zeres. And now I've been delving into, um, uh, editing the entry of zeres in encyclopedia, and I made a note in my, in the notes, uh, you know, the, the references. And I, I had guessed that you had re- been referring to that Zohar, the three of zeres, but two places else in the Zohar it says tefach, and that's in the Gemara and the Poskim. Vaday hakavona b'mokach shekosu zeres gam kenal tefach." Therefore, Rabbi Zevin is convinced that in the one place where the Zohar says to raise the zeres, you should translate the word zeres tefach. To support this though, he brings a, a, a Targum Yerushalmi to explain. There are basically three Aramaic translations which we have of the Chumash. We have Targum Onkelos, which is more literal. We have Targum Yerushalmi, which is more of a,

12:29 Speaker 1 a, an explanation r- rather than just a literal translation. And then there's another tran- another Targum called Targum Yerushalmi. In, in some Chumashim, in Mikraot Gedolot, you'll have it there. At any rate, the Z- the choshen, the breastplate of the Kohen Gadol, is measuring at a zeres. It says zeres or kovei zeres rochpoi. So the Targum Yerushalmi translates it pesach. Am shocheh, we know, is a tefach. So the breastplate, according to the Targum Yerushalmi, the breastplate of the Kohen Gadol is, is a tefach al tefach square rather than a three tefachim square. The Kohen cars out... By the way, it makes it cheaper that way. Imagine the, all the stones now have to, can be much smaller. Um, you know, the, uh, the, the stones of the choshen, it's a small, small, smaller thing, so it c- it can be smaller stones. But then it's a more of a struggle to be able to read the messages on the choshen. Okay. Um, veheinu tefach. So he's giving us a reference to, uh, the Targum Yerushalmi, that we have here a precedent, that the word zeres is translated as, as tefach. And he gives a reference to also the Sefer Yitur Sofrim, and he says, "No, the Rebbe had written Yitur Sofrim, and it's actually Yitur Sfarim." Okay? Um, now, now he also, as we saw before, that the Yitur Sofrim or Yitur Saf- Sfarim, I didn't check it out this time, uh, he says that tefach... That, sorry, zeres means a tefach. So Rav Zevin,

14:01 Speaker 1 he says, "I've got these two sources to translate zeres as tefach." But now, in the siddur, I see the Ha'Az Kodshi, how you've learned that zeres means kipputay three tefach. Om nom. But, um, kos haKehin, um, she'zeh al pi haZohar sh kos zeres. Yes, I see now that I... Well, it's suspected that you had said three tefachim is based upon the Zohar, but you didn't quote the Targum Yerushalmi. Now, since... Now, in other words, said the Targum Yerushalmi says it's a tefach. So perhaps that would explain the Zohar instead of making a contradiction of the Zohar. Vehayot sh'erech anal oyleid baz. Therefore, since I haven't printed this yet, I'm asking should I give a reference to the siddur? Uh, and, but then, if I do give a reference to the siddur, I will then have to add sorech birur, I'm not satisfied. Or perhaps I should, oyleid lohavi klal. Perhaps I shouldn't because I'm not satisfied. Better not to refer to it and not to write sorech birur. That was Rav Zevin's commu- co- communication with the Rebbe. So the Rebbe writes to him. This, so you can see his answer. "Refer to it. Don't worry." And, and, kol hamarbeh bilshimoniim latoyrah harbeh zimushah. So this is, this is the conversation. A fascinating conversation. I just want to add to you that, um, some time back, I'd written about this, about this whole, um, topic. And, um, someone referred this to me this past week to my article that I'd written, um, a couple of

15:33 Speaker 1 years ago, which will be, it's included in the siddur, HaBorê Lenaha Tov. So now, in the new edition, you'll have there the following. When it comes to kinyanim, they say one of the kinyanim is hag- is hagbah, to lift, to lift an article. You lift an article, that's a way of acquiring it. How much is the Shir Hagbah? There's a machloket Rashi, Tosafist. Um, I think Rashi says it has to be a kinyan of three tefach- uh, ha- lifted three tefachim. And Tosafist says that it's not enough to lift it a tefach. If I got the names switched over, all right. But there's a machloket Rashi, Tosafist about this. So what is a kinyan? Is a kinyan a, a show of ownership or is a kinyan to exclude others? And there's a, in Ketubachot in Vayikra in chelek, uh, yud beis, there's a discussion about Adam Harishon, about him not bringing korbonot and hagazel. So there's a savora there to say that kinyanim are only needed to exclude someone else. The Rebbe brings a source there. Adam Harishon, he mustn't bring a korban hagazel because Adam Harishon, Adam ki yakrid. He didn't bring hagaz- sh'hakol loy o sheloy. So suggesting that the concept of kinyan is only when there's a challenge. When there's a challenge, you have to do a kinyan. But if there's no challenge, that's all, everything's yours. So this is a question, what is a kinyan? Is a kinyan a positive statement or is it a negative statement? Is a p- kinyan

17:09 Speaker 1 to negate others or is it to, to, to demonstrate it's yours? So Rashi, who says that kinyan hagbah is, is gimot tefachim. So I think Tosafist comments that Rashi is because of, of knud. Up till three tefach, it's still attached to where it was. So you have to disconnect it. So the kinyan of hagbah is to disconnect it from where it was, and now it becomes yours. Tosafist says it's enough a tefach. It's a demonstration. You want to show, and for that it's enough to... A tefach is enough to demonstrate. It's, it's significant enough to be a demonstration of ownership. So here we have two ways. Now, so I, I, when I saw this, it struck me as very, very interesting that we have here a machloket about kinyan, whether hagbah three tefachim or tefach. And then we have two opinions about k- picking up the Kotzel Bracha, three tefachim or a tefach. Possibly the following. There's a difference between Friday night and Shabbos day. Friday night, we make kiddush standing. Shabbos day, we make kiddush, whatever, make kiddush sitting. He lift, he lift himself a little bit. Lov dafke exactly, but it, this, that's negotiable Friday night, the Shabbos is negating Yomei HaCheyl. And therefore, Friday night is Kimut Tachlim because it's like, uh-a-uh-uh-it's to, to disconnect from the weekday. Therefore, you're, you're standing, and therefore, your, your cup is three tachlim away from the table. Shabbos day is to say Shabbos is a Hashivah day, but it is not an Inyan of Shlilah,

18:40 Speaker 1 it's Inyan of Chiyuv. That's Shomer and Zacher. And therefore, Shabbos day you can make... If you're sitting, no one sits by the table to hold the cup three tachlim from the table. When you're sitting, you just lift it a tefach. So Shabbos day is the Inyan of... So that, that's another way of reconciling the two. Although the Rebbe doesn't say this at all. The Rebbe just makes a difference of the Lechatchilah and Lehidur. Uh, and the basic din is a tefach. But just, uh, another possibility of saying that that's where the meaning is of, of three tachlim. That it... But davka by night when the, the, the lifting of the kos is like a more, an, a, uh, stepping away from Yomei HaCheyl. Okay. Um, not negia l'halacha, but just a Gishmakah conversation. Okay, let's move on. So someone asked me about tiki torches. So some years ago, I, I'd put together a list of, uh, of guidelines for public Menorahs. And amongst them, this is published, uh, for different, few places. And one of the things I'd said that gas lamps are not okay. Um, so gas lamps, uh, are not okay. The reason is because the way the gas lamp is, like electricity, we know that electric, um, electric, uh, like a, um, fluorescent is not fire. It's like, it's a gas which, which, which glows. Um, uh, neon is already, uh, long out of, out of fashion, yeah? Or LED. These are not... There's no fire there. Therefore, they're, they're not okay

20:20 Speaker 1 for Hanukkah, Ner, Ner Hanukkah. A gas lamp, if you don't know the details, so you get the impression it's like the gas fire in your kitchen, so it's a real fire. But the mitzvas is not like that. The gas, the gas lamps is a very beautiful white light, and that is that you have inside, there's like a cloth, uh, cloth, uh, bag. This cloth is impregnated with a glowing material, a certain powder. And there's a little burner over here. This little burner heats up the atmosphere inside the bag, and that causes the particles to glow. If c- if that's the case, you don't s- It's not a, a light of a fire. It's a light of a glowing material, and therefore it's not valid for Ner Hanukkah. So then they ask the question, what about tiki torches? So I had to do a bit of homework. What are tiki torches? So tiki torches, the way I see them here, are basically, uh, bottles and a thick... Uh, bottles filled with oil and a thick, um, wick. I, well, my impression was it was like even a, a square centimeter, uh, you know, wide, uh, width. And you can raise it out of the, uh, container, and it lights. It gives light, it gives warmth. So those I see no problem to use for Ner Hanukkah. There are-- Just to be careful, there's als-also I see on, uh, when looking around, there's, uh, solar tiki torches. So this is the, this is the real one. And

21:55 Speaker 1 then there are those which are made, which are powered with solar power, and then it looks like it's, uh, fiddling, like as if there's a flame inside, but that's just electric, uh, replay on solar power. And obviously, that's not a flame, and that wouldn't be okay. But these ones which are the... Which you see here, which is a nor- a wick with oil and a flame, that's kosher for Ner Hanukkah. Let's move on. Oh, so this, in case you have, um... All right. So w-what we have here from the Piske Choshen on Taf Rashay in Gimel. So where he writes this, that you wouldn't be yoetzah, uh, with a, uh... You, you wouldn't be yoetzah with a gas if there's no wick. If it's just gas. And, um, certainly you wouldn't be able to use, um, electrical ones. So it would, it would needs to have a, a wick and a, and a flame. Uh, yes. Now, then it... What I found though interesting is what he writes further. The Shaar HaTzarchak, when there's no way you can use a naked flame, there are... The consensus of Ge'onei HaDor that you could use a battery-operated, a battery-powered, uh, uh, lantern. Not neon, not fluorescent, not LED, but if it has a tungsten. So a tungsten is called a, uh, a wi- It's like a wick. Why davka with a battery? There is a halacha that when you light the Menorah, there has to be enough fuel for it to last for the half hour. When

23:32 Speaker 1 it's connected to the power, to the, you know, the, to the mains, there's no container. You don't have a container of half an hour of power. Whereas if it's powered by a battery, so you do have it. What's the difference whether it's, uh, energy in, in the form of, uh, oil or the energy in the form of a battery? You have half an hour energy there. And therefore, if you cannot, for whatever reason, this is, can be relevant for people in the hospital, et cetera, uh, then they would allow you to make a beracha on a battery-operated, uh, Menorah, provided that the, the bulbs are tungsten rather than, uh, fluorescent, et cetera. Very interesting. All right. Let's move on. So now, very common question about if you've... Can you be yoetz Menorah not in your own house? And for years, I had been under the impression that you would not be yoetz, uh, away from your house. And the way it's written in Shulchan Aruch is that if you are in the same town, you have to go home. You cannot be yoetz, uh, lighting somewhere else. And this has becomes a b- It can be a bigger, a bigger issue. Like if you, let's say if you, your, uh... You have the children who live, let's say, t-twenty minutes away, half an hour away from the parents, and they want to come for Menorah, but it, they want to be there when the Zadie lights the Menorah. Perhaps that's also help for the Hanukkah

24:54 Speaker 1 gyot, I'm not sure. But meanwhile, they want to be there and, um... But then the, what's gonna happen with their own Menorah? And the, uh, uh, and then they, then Tati can't eat su- Then what, M-Bobby invites them for supper, but they can't eat supper because they haven't lit Menorah, et cetera. It becomes, uh, it becomes an issue. So therefore, I was very pleased to see that there are those who say that despite that we've said, uh, you have to go back to your own, your own thing, yes, there are those who write that actually bias, although it says neir ish ubeiso, it's not, not really dependent on your physical bricks. And let's say if a person's camping during Hanukkah, would they be able to yotzi light menorah, uh, on the campsite with, uh, obviously with a lantern, which is going to be windproof, et cetera. So there are those who say yes. He's, he's saying this. And taking this a little bit further, so I'm just gonna take out the Nitei Gavriel and, um, it's, this is Nitei Gavriel on Hanukkah. So chapter Yud Aleph. So he says, "If you go for-- with your family to eat supper by your relatives, l’chatchilah you should go home and light at home, or you should light in your house before you go out." But then he writes, "If it's difficult for you to get home because of the effort with the children, yesh lismoch, you can rely on the lenient opinions to light in the place

26:29 Speaker 1 where you're eating." And the point which he says in the notes there, he says the following: "The idea why it's important to light in your home rather than elsewhere is also because you don't want people to pa- passes by to suspect that you didn't light menorah." That's all very true for those who light the menorah outside the house or by the front door, et cetera. But, but those who light the menorah inside, so then people are passing by don't know any difference, and therefore the no chashad from the outside, and the family, the family are with him. So if the family would be home and he's, he's, and he's by, by, in the different house, so then he's depri- the family don't see the menorah. But if he's with the whole family, so then there, there is room to be makeil to light the menorah even away from home. Two points which come to, uh, which, which now become, uh, easier for me to understand. There is in the Rashamis about the Rebbe Rashab would, after his father passed away, he would light the menorah by his mother. And for years it bothered me, and he's missing out in lighting in his home. But now that I'm seeing that there, that, that that's the idea of beiso is not mamash so crucial, and probably the Rebbetzin probably would have been very, um, upset to have to light her own menorah. So he, he mamash lived next door. I'm sure he was there every day. So,

27:57 Speaker 1 so he, he lit menorah by his mother, which is, uh, you know, kibud eim, uh, et cetera. The other point which came into-- it was also for years I've been struggling with the lighting of the menorah for travelers. You go into, uh, you go out in Etz Hayim by in, in the airport and also in Kennedy, you have the Chabad at the airport, and they have their table, and you-- before you go into the plane, you light the menorah, and you go into the plane. Now, the, the practicality is that most people, in many, many instances, it's not shayach to light at home and catch, catch the plane. Because still you got, it's a couple of hours, et cetera. Whatever. So I never really, um, felt comfortable about this. Now that I'm seeing, it's just a gfer like you can light when... Now, last year in the Derech Eretz magazine, they had a story of a particular, I think it was a judge, and he, he's, and he, and, um, in, had a, this-- he meets the Rebbe, and there's a conversation about the fact that he had lit the menorah in JFK a few months earlier. And it looked like the Rebbe was happy with it. And so now that we're seeing this view that it's, it's the beiso is, is... It, it is a little bit, there's a little bit of latitude there. So I understand a person's not able to light at home. So then if he lights at the, uh, at

29:27 Speaker 1 the, uh, in the airport, perhaps he stays there and has something, stays there for a few minutes, whatever. Of course, you're gonna have to now work out how does that fit with the din that the shamas, the gabba, whoever who lights the menorah in shul, has to go home and light menorah again with a bracha, with all three brachas, et cetera. Why is he not yotzi with the lighting in the shul? All right, we have to work on that. But, uh, at least what we're seeing, there is a, an opinion, a view of Poskim, that there's a little bit of flexibility on, on it have to be dafka his bias. Let's move on. Okay. So now Shliah, Shliah somewhere in France. So he is, uh, I'll just give the background. He is a-- In the Chabad Center, they have a separate minyan for Sephardim. It's, uh, so it's a Sephardic minyan, and he's the Rav. His fa- his father is the Shliah and has another minyan for the Beis Chabad, but this is a Sephardi minyan within Chabad premises. And sometimes then there's a few, uh, young men who their families have been friend- involved. Unfortunately, there's these three boys, young men, who are married out. One of them is a Kohen, and the other two are Yisrael. And so he's been giving them, occasionally giving them an, an aliyah. And the people of the shul are, are protesting or saying, "How can you give an aliyah to someone who's married out?" That is, that

31:00 Speaker 1 is the question. So- We've discussed this be- in, a, a few times. Um, what I can say is that the, the Poskim do take a strong view not to give an Aliyah because... And Poskim, as I mean, uh, I mean in-

31:20 Speaker 2 Mm

31:20 Speaker 1 ... late, in recent generations. We're not talking about Poskim as in, you know, Rishonim or even early Acharonim. There is-- We're talking about later Poskim, and they see this as a kind of sanction. The person's married out. How can you give an Aliyah? So re- I just saw now Reb Boruch Oberlander in, he, he, when he, he just published a volume called Omarova, Omar Boruch Oberlander. Um, so he published a volume. There he has a teshuvah about this, and he says he once sp- met with Rav Ozer. And the question is, if the not giving an Aliyah is going to actually alienate them, so then what have you achieved? And I'd also like to refer to in his Omarova, he refers to an article which he's published. We have a volume called Shaal Sesuvah Rabboni Europa. There's an excellent study of the whole attitude to Mechallei Shabbes, et cetera, as, as far as are they part of Klal Yisroel, not part of Klal Yisroel, um, in, in various applications for Aliyah la Torah, et cetera, et cetera. Very, very good, um, piece. He's actually quotes there from Reb Yoachim Schlesinger, um, this is Kan Rosh Yeshivas, uh, who, uh, says that he was once in Switzerland with Rav Velvel of Brisk, and they were short for a minyan and for Krias HaTorah. And there was someone in the ho- in a nearby hotel. He wasn't Shomer Torah Mizvos. And Rav, Rav Velvel said, "Bring him in." Uh, he, he relied on having him as, as

32:58 Speaker 1 a center. Now, if you're looking for Chanoy in the Br- in the, you know, Brisk of Velvel, Rav Velvel is, uh, pretty Chanoy. He brings also from Reb Mechel Kalemeier, who in his time in Hungary, whatever, was known as one of the most, uh, outspoken Chanoyim. And yet he, he also allowed, I mean, M'tzaref Mechallei Shabbos to a minyan in the small shtetl, in the villages. So there is, there's background to this. Um, so on the other hand, you have to be sensitive. To give them an Aliyah, I mean, every week, et cetera, um, it may be offensive. It depends which Sibrut it is. If it's a, if, if it's a Chabad house, so, well, we, well, that's, you know, that's what we're there for, uh, to, uh, to be Mekarev it. And, uh, other shuls, you have to leave... If it's a, you know, a Leders or Yurt side or something. If it's a special occasion, there's certainly, uh, room to, to be Mekel. Uh, but we, we, you know, to be sensitive to the, the people in the shul that they shouldn't see this as they are, um, you know, somehow not being respected. Um, as a Kohen, this is another point. A Kohen, he... If a Kohen was married to a Gerusha, he's forfeited the privileges of a Kohuna. If he's living with a Goyte, so she has also, um, got a Din of Zoyna, et cetera, and therefore apostles the Kohuna. So as long as he's married to a, to a,

34:24 Speaker 1 a Shiksa, so then he wouldn't be allowed to Duchan, et cetera. Doesn't mean you have to make a fight about it, but, uh, you wouldn't be, uh, able to give, to give him a Hata to, to, to Duchan. Okay, let's move on to something, um, well, in a way less painful. Flying trampoline. So this, uh, happened this past week somewhere in the British Isles, and a fellow has a trampoline in his front garden, I presume. And a very powerful wind lifted his trampoline over an eight-foot hedge, and it landed on a car. Or, uh, somehow I think it, it lopped off a, a wing mirror. And before the police came, it was just seven o'clock in the morning kind of thing, he asked his Rav, um, "Am I liable in Halakha?" And so I got this, you know, a message in the morning. So looking just from Halakha, I'm not talking about what's the civil law. I don't know. So here we have, we've got the four t- forms of, of, uh, Shoel, Boel, Maveh, Chei, Shen, Regil, et cetera. So here we have in Shechu Nos, in Chesh Mišpat. You've got Beor. Beor means literally a pit, a ditch, which pe- uh, which you m- made in the public domain, and something fell in there. The Torah talks about Kiach, um, um, that if you dig, and then you'll, then you'll be liable for the damage for the ox or a, a donkey. So that's the Boel literally. Then we've got Tul Des Haboer,

36:00 Speaker 1 which means subsidiary categories. Avnoi, Sakino, Masoi. Your rock, your knife, your burden, and you left them in the public domain, and they cause damage. So it's an obstacle rather than a pit. So that's an- another variation of that. Then it talks about if you left them Be Rosh Gagoi. If you left the, your knife on the to- on a rooftop, and they fell Beruach Mitzuya, and they fell with a irregular wind, and they l- l- cause damage, so then you are liable. But then Sif Beis says, "If Noflu Beruch Sheino Mitzuya." If they fell dr- due, th- due to an unusual wind, unexpected wind, and they cause damage, or Afilo Achan Afilo caused Manche, or it, it caused damage once it landed, but you didn't have a chance to take away the, the, uh, danger. So then you're Patur. Later, for, uh, for later, you're Bechaiv. But meanwhile, what we're seeing here is a damage because of an article of yours flew with a, with-- due to an unusual wind, then- Is your patter. So Al Pi Halacha is patter. I, in civil law, they may say you're liable. Civil law doesn't recognize Hashem, and therefore there's no- they don't say, "Oh, Hashem sent..." They say e- either you're liable, the owner is liable, et cetera. If you own it, you must be liable. In, in Torah, we... The Habracha could have, c- can cause someone a, a, a loss, Rachmanu Litzlan. And it, uh, and it is, the Habracha is kind of sending it.

37:40 Speaker 1 I, uh, uh, it came through someone else. That person is not, not, not liable. It doesn't... In other words, there's not the chuy of... There's not imperative that there must be someone who's liable. In, in the civil law, there's, they have to find someone who's liable. In, in, in, in Torah law, it's not imperative that there's someone who's liable. Also, the liability then remains with the victim, okay? Um, that's one, one point. I want to just throw another interesting thing. I was sitting at the Kinus and sitting next to Rab- a, a, a Rav from Montreal, and we were talking about Sukkah. And talking about a, in Sukkah, we have a din that if the Sukkah cannot withstand a Ruach Metzuya, then it's not a valid Sukkah. So then the question is, what is the definition of Ruach Metzuya? So I told him that actually there's a Rambam in Pirush Hamishnah, in Bava Metzia, and it talks about Shmirah, guarding an animal from running out and causing damage. Says, "A Ruach Metzuya achas le shnaim ulsheloshah yamim, ulsheloshah albo yamim." It's a kind of wind. Every few days, you'll have such a wind. Which means, in that context, if it's something which is, you know, occasionally it's... You know, you, you are, you are in tornado zone, but that's not achas le sheloshah yamim. That would not be called a Ruach Metzuya, even though in this region these things happen. Um, I don't know whether you could extend that to over here because it's, uh,

39:14 Speaker 1 if it's a windy time of the year, I think you'd say that he is liable. I think here would say it's not, not expected. He doesn't expect this to happen, and therefore he would be patter. Okay, let's move on. Right. So here's a tricky question. A Jewish man, he's a jeweler, and a Jewish man comes to him. He says, "I'd like to buy a ring." And they're schmoozing a bit, and it turns out he's marrying a non-Jewish woman. So he's asking, "Am I allowed to sell a ring to someone who will use it for, um, um, for marrying a non-Jewish woman? Am I accomplice to the Avereh?" I have a bigger question I think perhaps we discussed a bit before. If I am a travel agent, am I allowed to sell a ticket to a Jew who will, for, which is for travel on Shabbos? At any rate, it's, it's a little bit similar, but I think that's a worse problem. And here we have a source in Darchei Mirvava on the Shah in Siman Kuf Nun Alef Yoreh Deah, where he says, "Is there a Mechuyav to prevent a, a person who's..." There's a mitzvah of Lo Sitosor. You mustn't support a Yid doing an Avereh. But he says, "If a Yid is doing Avereh Bemazid, so then according to the Shah, you're not Mechuyav to, uh, to stop him." Very, very interesting. Now, what's, what do we have here? Now, here, this is, this quote here is from the Alter Rebbe in Hirhuris

41:05 Speaker 1 Ribis. And it talks here about, it talks here about lending money to a Mumar, and then you'll pay him Ribis. So he says, "A Mumar Sheyotzem Min HaKlal, Lo Yinareh SheMutal Alav VoRibis." You're allowed to lend a Mumar money, and he'll pay you Ribis. Why is that? If his body is Hefker, you're allowed to Mutal Abdo. How much more so his property, his, his money is Hefker, and therefore you're allowed to get his money. That is to lend the Mumar Ribis. But to borrow from him Ribis, in Seif Ain Zayin, is Osur. To borrow from him and you'll pay him Ribis, that is, everyone would agree that that is forbidden. Right, in the previous one, there's yes, only not allowed to... But meanwhile, but to borrow from a, a Mumar and pay back in Ribis is forbidden. And he says, "Beshum HaVelifnei Ever." And it says, "Lo Sasich." There's a Isur of Ribis not only for the lender who's charging Ribis, but also for the borrower who's paying Ribis is also, um, um, doing an Avereh. And a very interesting Lashon. Although he is not called our brother, but we are brothers to him, and therefore he is not allowed to, he, he, he's not allowed to take Ribis from us. But what I'm just pointing out here is, Alter Rebbe throws in here, Beshum HaVelifnei Ever. He's a Mumar, Yotzem Min HaKlal, and he says there's a Velifnei Ever. So contrary to what the Shah seems to be saying, that there's no Isur of

42:45 Speaker 1 assisting a, a Mumar, a person who's dropped Torah totally. There's no Isur of helping them to do an Avereh. The Alter Rebbe say, seems to be saying here that there is a Isur of Velifnei Ever besides the Lo Sasich. Uh, what I would though still say that I told him that actually, you know what? This fellow is marrying this... He's living with this shiksa. Whether he marries her or not makes no difference. The averia of living with a shiksa makes no difference. Doesn't give a ring, doesn't give a ring, and th-they are in that relationship in any case, whether you, whether you... And besides that, you can get rings any-anywhere else. But the point is that the giving of the ring is actually not, is not, uh, how do you say? Is not enabling the averia. The averia is being done even without the ring. So that's why I felt he's not, he's not really accomplice for an averia. Um, can you sell food to... Someone put in the chat. Someone you s- Can you sell food to someone who will eat it on Yom Kippur? He might eat it every Yom Kippur. Can you rent a house out to someone who will watch TV on Shabbos and has got a plug, and he's, uh... I must share with you that someone, um, once challenged... This is one of Rabbi Tzvi Hirschenson, Oliver Sholms, um, one of his favorite quotes. Someone asked the late Rav Padwa, Rabbi Henoch, asked him, "How come you give a

44:06 Speaker 1 hechsher on the Normandy Hotel when they've got TVs in the rooms?" So he said, "Yeah, I give them hechsher of them essen. Shane will take his gaze. I, because I give them a hechsher for all those sitzach in the Zimmern." I give a hechsher on the food. Um, I'm not up to taking a hechsher on everything going on in the rooms. Um, the... Someone asked here, "Is there a difference that the trampoline was not well screwed down in the garden?" The, the history is that that land trampoline had b- tramp-trampoline had been there for about six years. So, uh, whether it was screwed or not, I don't know, but it was, it was pretty safe, and the movement was obviously, um, uh, Bruach, Shenah, Metzuah. Okay. Now, coming back to the saga of the fellow with a cup of coffee in his car, um, and we talked about, we talked about Shinui Makom, that switching from one location to the other warrants a new beracha. And as a result, someone asked me, and we discussed it a couple of weeks ago, that he gets into his car in the morning, a cup of coffee in his car, and as he's driving, he'll stop at a petrol station, and he'll go out the car to put in petrol. He may go into the building to pay. When he comes back to his car, does he have to make a new beracha on his cup of coffee? And I'd said a few arguments to say that he

45:38 Speaker 1 doesn't need to make a new beracha. And one of them was a din of chol kidrochim, that, that, uh, halacha, the chol kidrochim don't have an issue of shinui makom because the whole concept of shinui makom is that you started off in a makom kavuah, and then you went somewhere else. But if you are the chatchilah, start off as a, uh, without a kvas, then there's no problem of, of shinui makom. That was the point which I'd said. So I, I got, um, I got a couple of strong emails challenging me on that. Perhaps the whole din of chol kidrochim not having to make a new beracha is only to do with bread, which is, you know, chol brocha chrona b'mekoisoi. Um, the brocha b'mekoisoi, but not by other foods and, um, some other tiners. So just...ashgacha protis. I've just been learning this sugia in Gemara Pesachim, taf kof gimel, I think it is. And then on Wednesday morning, I was in Golders Green in the shul, and they're learning this sugia also. They're learning kafa and ches in, in, uh, this, this whole topic. I just, you know, was, um, how do you say, encouraged to look at it th- more carefully. Okay. So now what we have here, first of all, on the screen, let's go al ha-seder. The first quote we have is from the Chayei Odom in Klal 10. He says, "If you are at a field, in a field," let's say, "and then there's argola, there's a wagon which pulls

47:12 Speaker 1 up, and you get onto the wagon. If you didn't have this in mind, then once you're in the wagon, you're gonna have to make a new beracha because of shinui makom. You made a beracha in the field. Now you got into the wagon, you'd have to make a new beracha." The Mishnah Berurah in Shaar Atzrayin siman kafa and ches. He quotes the Chayei Adam, "Mistapek ulei af me'oretz la'argola is also considered a change of place, and ve'ein nireh lehaḥmir kol kach bazeh." Um, I'm not so convinced you have to be so maḥmir that it's gonna consider change of place. So Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky is quoted as saying that the wagon which the Mishnah Berurah was talking about is an open wagon, and therefore it's not a shinui makom. But if you go into a... So according to him, if you go-- If you're standing by a bus stop and you started eating some crisps, and then the bus arrives and you go into the bus, so then you're gonna have to make a new beracha when you go into the bus because there's a shinui makom. So long as you are in the open ai- open air, so it's chol kidrochim. You don't have to make a new beracha. But when you go into the bus, then it's... You've gone into a bayis, and that's shinui makom, and you have to make a new beracha. Now, having s-said that, that's what he says, but what I'm seeing here is a few others. We have here

48:43 Speaker 1 a quote from Or Letzion, Rabbi Tzvi Abarschaum. Interesting style of his, his teshuvot. They're like, um, chapters and, and bullet points. So he writes the following. "If you started eating on the street, and then you want to continue in the car, or if you started eating in the car, and you're now going out of the car, you're allowed to continue eating. You don't have to make a new beracha." So he's not seeing the car as a shinui makom. And I, I-- It's, it's... You can argue both ways. You're in the car and you s-- If the windows are open all around you, so the s- the, uh, scenery is, is the scenery of chol kidrochim. On the other hand, there is an element of privacy in the car. So there's two ways of looking at this. And obv-obviously, Chaim Kanievsky was seeing the going to the bus, it, it's a structure. Therefore, it's got walls. It's, it's, it's, it's a bayis. And the others are saying it's still ex- totally exposed or very much exposed. Therefore, it's still called chol kidrochim, and you don't have to make a new beracha. And then this other quote is from a sefer called Bezoas Habracha. Um, also contemporary. He says, "You started eating in the car, and you go out of the car, and then you continue eating. You don't have to n- make a new beracha." He's-- Because eating in the car has got a status of, um, whilst you're traveling. It's called... So eating and sitting

50:18 Speaker 1 in the car is al- also hachnadat nachim. Is, is referring, alluding to Rav Eliashiv, by the way. That's what I just quoted. Um, now, different would be if you... Let's say you sat down in the car, and the car is parked, and you sat down there to eat your lunch. And then you go out of the car. That's a different story because then you used the car as a, as a, uh, as a kind of cabin, as a private place. And then it would, it would, w- we'd go into the inion of hachnadat nachim. And then he goes fur- But then his interesting thing, he says, "One who ate it whilst it's in the car, whilst it was... And it started traveling..." So now, again, if you say that sitting in the car is kovea, is kavuah, so then what happens when you start the car and start driving? You know, if you just said that sitting in the car and you go out of the car is called a shinui makom, what about if you're sitting in the car and you drive off? So he says, "No, that's not called shinui makom." It's his, his kind of, uh, kind of tans of svei- bedehasons. He says, "Since you're still, you're still on the same floor, uh, the car underneath you, the floor of the car is underneath you, therefore it's not called shinui makom." So then to, to go from the street into the car, he doesn't see that as shinui makom. You're still

51:42 Speaker 1 ha'ivra derech. If you're... The car is parked, and you go out of the car, then he sees that is a shinui makom. But if you're staying in the car and drive off, he says it's not a problem of shinui makom, which I, I can, I can see the logic in that. What I'm seeing here is that, um, we're, we're... It's going to remain a sofek beracha. Yeah. Whether, whether going to the car, um, whether, whether, whether traveling in a car is called a makom kavuah and going out of the car is a shinui makom, or it's all considered hachnadat nachim, it's gonna be, at least it's gonna be a sofek beracha because I can see contemporary poskim are arguing about this. And therefore we're gonna use the principle of sofek berachos lehakil. Um, another point which I was challenged was, uh, oh, which I'd said that, that when you go to pay so you can see the car, and therefore that's, um, when... So long as roeh et ha-makom it's not a problem of shinui makom. Um, so one of the correspondents said, well, there's... That if it're the other side of, if there's reshut harabim in between, that creates a hefsek. When... I don't think when you pay for a petrol in a, a petrol station, the space between your car and the, um, the, um, the house where the, where you pay, I don't think that's called reshut harabim. It's not as if there are many people try- passing by in front of

53:09 Speaker 1 you the whole time. I think one can again at least, you know, sofek berachos lehakil not to have to make a new beracha. Okay. After I sent out the list of questions on Friday, I, uh, received the following question: How do you deal with a jumble of seforim? Is there... Taking out a sefer from a jumble of seforim, is it a problem of baalul? And is... This is from some website. You can see the quote on top of the page. Now, this q- website is saying that when you have... That the issue of baalul with seforim is only when they are similar in appearance. But when they are different shapes and sizes, there's no problem of baalul. So he's asking, according to this, as he's... He sent me a picture he's got here on his table of Shevet HaLevi and HaYom Yom and some other seforim. If he, on Shabbos, wants to pull out the HaYom Yom, not to use it, but to put it on the shelf. Let me explain something. There's baalul taking bad from good, which is always assur. There's baalul which is from good to... Good from bad, which is allowed, samach l'suda. And there's baalul which is sorting out. Let's say Friday night you washed the cutlery, and you want to put the c- the spoons in this compartment and the, uh, the knives in that compartment. That's sorting. Is sorting a issue of baalul? So the Alter Rebbe does not address this, um, clearly, explicitly. But the general view

54:39 Speaker 1 is that sorting good from good is allowed for immediate use. Sorting good from good for delayed use is the same as taking good from bad for delayed use. And therefore, there's issue of sorting, like there is a issue, um, fulal achzaria. So again, coming back. We've got here a jumble of seforim. And now to take out a sefer to use, no question that's okay. But to take out that sefer to put it on the shelf, he doesn't need it now. It does come into a question of baalul. So now looking at the Shmirat Shabbat KeHilchasa, I'm not sure which edition you have. Unfortunately, my, um, my, uh, Otzar HaChochma, um, started causing trouble on Friday, so that's why I don't have quotes of it on the screen. But here I'm reading from Shmirat Shabbat KeHilchasa, chapter gimel, which is the chapter on baalul. And so he has like this. It's on... It's... You have a bookshelf, and you want to take out a sefer. You want to look at it later. You don't need it now. So actually I see here he is machmir. But in the newer edition, he says to pull off a sefer off the shelf. Let's say it's Friday night, and you want to take out a sefer off the shelf, a Chumash, which you want to use tomorrow. So in the newer edition, he says that's okay because that's not-- there's no jumble there. They're on the shelf, and each one's got a title. See, if you, let's say, you

56:08 Speaker 1 had a bunch of Chumashim or whatever, some of them are torn and some of them aren't, some are good, and you're sorting out, you're taking a good one from the... That could be a problem of Boire if you don't need it right away. But, um, if they are Masuda on the shelf that-- where the titles are visible, to take one off the shelf is not an act of Boire. That's what he writes in the newer edition. Um, but on the other hand, when you have a whole pile of Sefarim jumbled together, and to pu- to sort them out from there, they are jumbled, then to pull them out, not for immediate use, would it be a problem of Boire. And he tells us the, uh, practical story that a Friday night at the Kosel HaMaaravi, there are thousands of Yidden will come, and you have, uh... or hundreds, whatever, it doesn't matter, and you have Siddurim. You have Sefardic Siddurim, Ashkenazic Siddurim, Lubavitch Siddurim, you have Teimane Siddurim, Italian Siddurim, et cetera, et cetera. And you've got these Sadranim, the people who their, their job to pre- to make, to say their... And then for the next morning, you expect to find everything in a, you know, Al Makom Yoveh V'Sholom. Sorry to borrow that term. Makom, don't know what I'm talking about. Um, so, uh, and so he says, actually, they, they can't. They can't. They're not allowed to, Friday night, sort out all the, um, Ashkenazic Siddurim here because they bring them all,

57:22 Speaker 1 it's all a jumble. And to start sorting them out, that wouldn't be okay. And therefore, he has an appeal that all the Ashkenazim should put their Siddurim back on the Ashkenazi shelf and all the Sefardim on the Sefardi shelf. And in that way, Ish Al Makom V'Sholom. I wish you all a Gut Voch, and, uh, we should hear, uh, Besuras Tovis, Yeshuos Unehamos. Um, we should hear, see, hear good news from Acheinu Bnei Yisroel in Aza and in, um, Eretz Yisroel. And the occasion to have a Geulah Shlemah, Moshiach Tzidkeinu, Al Yom HaMelachabris. To come be Mevaser, Besuras HaGeulah. Um, Motzei Shabbos, he's already, uh, he's able to come and tell us, so we should hear the Besuras HaGeulah. Very nice. Is it very nice? Here, let's see. Quick, quick, quick.