בא תשפ״ד

00:09 Speaker 1 A gute vokh. Welcome to the shiur tonight. Apologies for the earlier hour. This is for the fabregin. There's a fabregin which is the, uh, yurt site of the previous Rebbe, and the beginning of the Nesi'ah Savah Rebbe. That's later on this evening, so that's why the shiur's earlier, to be able to, as they say, tanzen of the veder fastness. So we'll start off with a, an int-very interesting topic which came up. I mentioned in passing at the end of last week's shiur, and we'll spend some more time this week- Diane, you're- -looking into it. Diane, you're breaking up. So the story was... Yes. Your, your voice is breaking up. Um, I'll try to speak more, uh, assertively. Okay. Okay, then. So the story was that someone parks his car, his father's car, on the street on Friday close to Shabbos. Sh-Friday night, they realize on a red, red route, and if it says there's gonna be tow away. That's the question. Now, it's not Bliash Moshe's. It's well into Shabbos. Are you allowed to ask a goy to come and remo-re-relocate the car? So we've got here a very... more lenient or does panic say no, put the brakes on because it might go overboard. And this seems to be a contradiction in Shechinah Racha and Shechinah. These are all things which are written in, in, in Gemara, in Etzetra. We can't hear. He knows. I've told him. He says he's gone off. He's gonna join in again. Okay. Good work. I'm sorry for that

06:30 Speaker 1 disruption. We'll start again. So the story was that there's someone who borrowed his father's car, and he parked it on a, a tow-away zone on Friday. Then it was permitted. When on Shabbos morning it's not permitted, it'll be towed away. Can we call a goy to take the car away? So here we have two apparently contradicting sources. In the second source on the screen, which is Shin Lamed Daled, about a fire house of Shalom that breaks out on Shabbos. So there it says, "You're not to ask a goy. You're not to instruct a goy to put out the fire." And the concern is because a person is panicky in a case of loss and he's going to try to salvage what he can. Therefore, the worry is that he'll come to extinguish the fire himself. And therefore, there we put the brakes on. No extinguishing the fire. You can't call a non-Goy. You can say maximum. You can say, "Call a Mechaber," so you can speak in, in indirect terms that anyone who does put out the fire will, will not lose out of it. But you won't-- you're not allowed to give them direct instructions. On the other hand, we have the case of someone who is on Shabbos, and he realizes he has with him his wallet. That's in Siman Reish Samech Bet. And so what should he do? He's got with him his money. So it says he should give it to a Goy. And the reason being that because ain od

08:11 Speaker 1 mamon asher lamamon, a person is not going to just, um, you know, lee- leave his money to behalf care. And we don't let him. We don't find a permitted way to-- for a Goy to take his money to safety. So once again, we have a case of panic. And here we say that for-- because of the, the Behalot, because of the, the, uh, pressure, therefore, go easy on him. So this is our, this is our dilemma. Is, is a case of panic reason to be lenient, or is it a reason-- case a reason to be, to be strict? And there seems to be a contradiction here. In the-- In Mishnah, in Siman Shin Lamed Bet, there's a long entry in Beer Halacha. It's long as in the-- at the age of twenty-three. Dan Rasco, we can't hear you. He says, um, trying to sort out this, this, uh, question. And he says the following. You-- Pardon? You're cutting out all the time. I apologize. I can't do anything about cutting up. That's what I have. Uh, perhaps next time I'll do it from, from the office, where it would be a more, uh, stable line. So upon him-- So this is, this is where we have this question. And so you could say, "Okay, there's a case of a fire. There, the, the danger's coming by itself." In our case, you're ta-- In the case of the, of the money in the pocket, that you expect him to throw his money away. That's too much

10:34 Speaker 1 to ask a person to throw his money away. Therefore, in that case, we say, "Ask a Goy." Again, to say that the first case, the fellow who has his money, uh, with him, you expect him to throw it. That, that you call in a Goy. In the case where it's happening by itself, then leave it to happen and, and, and don't intervene. That's how some Rosh Yeshivah want to say. If that's the case in our story with the car, the tow truck is coming by itself. You're not expecting to throw the car d- into the river. You tell him, "Don't-- Do nothing. What happens, happens." If so, you're not allowed to call a non-Goy. That's how you could learn Shoft. However, there is another so-- There's a third, third source, and that is where actually the Beer Halacha in Ha-- in Birshat Brewer talks about. We have a case, an anim-- a person has an animal, and the animal has got a Achozat Dam. I'm going to say it's got very high blood pressure. I don't know if that's the correct translation. But meanwhile, the animal is very-- i-is in a da- in danger. And the way to sa-save it is to do a, a bloodletting. And if you don't do the bloodletting, which is a Melacha, it's gonna die. So there it says you're allowed to call a non-Goy to, to, uh, to, um, to make it-- to, to, to extract blood. Now here, it's the same thing as the case of the fire.

12:01 Speaker 1 If you do nothing, you can sit by, by and see the animal die. And instead it says that you are allowed to call a non-Goy. So just like you're allowed to call the goy to do for the animal, why you shouldn't be allowed to call that goy to take the car? It shouldn't be towed away. So then why, why by the fire is it different? So the Mishbet Ha'aloch says the following: Sometimes the solution is a s-- In the case of the fire, you say... In the case of the goy, you're calling the goy to put out the fire. It could be that the goy won't manage on his own, and therefore you'll start getting-- helping him. So therefore, there we say you have to stay back. You have to step back. In the case of, in the case of the, um, the animal is ill, so then it's-- y-you have him problem solved. In the case of the, the money in the street, you-- well, you give it to the goy, problem solved. It's not a question it will snowball to something else. So this is the way, um, he wants to un-- um, resolve this problem. To say that when-- that really, that really we'd say, um, that whenever there's a risk of-- avoidable risk of loss of money, then you should be allowed to call in a goy. It's only in the case of a fire that if you call in a goy, the next thing is that you'll be starting doing

13:54 Speaker 1 it yourself. If that's the case... So the same thing with a, with a car. Of course, you won't lose the car, but it's gonna cost you two hundred pounds or something or more. It's gonna be taken to a car pound, et cetera, and a loss of time, et cetera. It is a significant damage. Therefore, you can be mekel. Then by-- Then I have a-- about an animal which is, uh, which is, um, which has got this blood problem. It's be-- You know, hakaz ve'ha. Then we have another thing. It says in Siman Reish S'if Majalev that if, uh, during Bein Hashemoshes, you're allowed to call in a goy to save yours if there's a financial loss. Why Bein Hashemoshes is a Sofek Geder Sofek Klai lo? Okay. In the case of a Sofek Geder Sofek Klai loss, because it's a Sofek, you can call in a goy. If you said that you could take a major loss, you could call in a goy on Sha-on Shabbos proper. Why are you telling me Bein Hashemoshes? It's always muter because it's a major loss involved. L'ma'aseh, it's only Bein Hashemoshes, it's not during Shabbos. So how do you reconcile that? Yeah. So I'm really-- I've been going around in circles for the last week. Um, but the only thing I can come up with is the following. There's something which is called an outright l-- There's a loss, and there sometimes is that you've lo-- it's a lost opportunity. For example, someone comes to town-- So there's

15:33 Speaker 1 a, a ship comes to town, and it's got stuff which is, uh, uh, job lots which are very, very cheap. If you don't take it now, you're going to miss a m-miss a significant opportunity. That is not a loss, uh, out of pocket, but it's a loss of-- a lost opportunity. And strictly speaking, in Halakha, that's not called a Hefsit. That's called M'niya Sorev. But possibly that's what it's allowing you in Bein Hashemoshes. That even if it is not Mamash, a loss out of pocket, even if it's a Hefsit Meruba that, um, you're, you're missing a significant opportunity, that is also permitted Bein Hashemoshes. That's the only thing I could think of. But I, I, I mean, I'm really struggling, um, how do you reconcile these, these thing-- these sources, whether you are allowed to call in a goy be Hefsit Meruba or not. Okay, let's move on. The next question which I have, um, is a case of the Shabbos hot plate. Um, and actually, I was writing-- I was asked to write a, a article for a, um... There's a what's called the, the Compass magazine. It's a magazine for Shluchim, and they asked to put to-together an article about challenges of making a Shabbos event in a hotel. So one of the things came up is in the hotel, the, the Shabbos kettle or the Shabbos hot plate was disconnected. And one of the goyish waiters... Now, for sure you're not allowed to ask a goy to switch it on. You're not

17:11 Speaker 1 allowed to ask a goy to light a fire that you should have food. Make it clear. To ask a goy to light a fire that you shouldn't catch a cold is muter. To ask a goy to light a fire that you should have hot food, that is-- that doesn't, that doesn't-- there's no heter for that. He, uh, the hot-- the food is still hot, comes along a goy, and he switches it on. Obviously, he's switching it on for the Jewish customers, for the Jewish clients. Are you allowed to now the goy has switched on the fire, are you allowed to enjoy your cholent five hours later? Had he not switched on the fire, the cholent would have been cold. So now you're allowed to have benefit from the... Without being asked. So are you-- It would have-- He protected it from getting... You're not, you're not, you're not enjoying the melacha. He's just, he's just protecting it from getting cold. So actually, Reb Shimon Shimon Oirbach, he, um, he, he mulls over this question and He's, he's not so-- He doesn't give a clear answer. I would just venture to say that Shlomo Zalman lived in Yerushalayim, and if your hot plate goes out, you have a simple eitzer. You can go to your neighbor and put your cholent by the neighbor. That, that option... If you don't, if you don't have that option, I can't see how you can ignore and say, "I'm not having benefit." Of course, you're having benefit because otherwise you'd

18:48 Speaker 1 have a cold cholent, and now you're having a benefit from the Goez mochal. So the pastors, I think that's not okay. Um, as I say, Shlomo Zalman has a discussion, but, um, the in-in-inclination seems to be it is not okay. Let's go on to the next question on our list. I'm going to-- Because the, you know, connections is not so stable, I'm going to perhaps go through the questions a bit quicker, swifter, rather than, you know. Hopefully, we'll-- BeEzrat HaShelom, we'll, we'll get through it, the, the list. Okay. Can a eleven-year-old girl separate challah with a bracha? So actually, this is a Mishnah. Mishnah in the beginning of Trumot. There's . There's five, um, five categories who are-- should not be taking terumah, and if they did, the terumah is not valid, not valid. And the rules for taking-- for the same, the rules for taking terumah. So therefore, if a kotan or a katan takes terumah, it's not valid. However, it does say in Shekel Kodesh that if the child is what's called mufla samech lev, it is called mufla samech leish is close to his, uh... If he would make a neder, his neder would be, um, possibly va binding. And the same thing with a girl from the age of eleven who is, um-- If she makes a vow, it's possible that the vow vi-- the vow is binding depending on our assessment how serious-minded they are. If the, if the child is mufla samech leish, then the challah is, is binding,

21:07 Speaker 1 does take effect. So I'm actually puzzled with this. I haven't gotten a clear picture. Does an under bar mitzvah, an under bar mitzvah is not, is not high bar mitzvah. So what is the criterion here? Is it whether you have the mitzvah or whether is it got to do with vows? Um, and look, so but the ever, if the child over the age, a girl over eleven had taken challah, the challah would be, uh, possibly. It'd have to be-- Certainly, chumra, you'd have to say it is challah. But on the other hand, um, certainly not to give the child over under, under ba-bar or bat mitzvah to do the, um, Hafrashat Challah. Question number four we have is a boy who's turning bar mitzvah. So Shliah, forgotten who it is. Pa-past week, he asked me that my son is, is turning bar mitzvah shortly. When he was three years old, he was involved in a life-threatening accident. Baruch Hashem, he's well. Should he now, when he turns bar mitzvah, should he say Birkat Agameil? Now, you remember that last week we had a discussion about delayed Birkat Agameil. I mentioned that Aruch HaShulchan mentions about the shir of, of... That if it's a long time and you've already forgotten, it's, it's too late to say Birkat Agameil. There's others, others that disagree with this, but that's the, um, Birkat... That's the, uh, Aruch HaShulchan. Um, also, if you remember from last week, just how Shlomah, the Aruch HaShulchan said maximum five days. Where did you

22:51 Speaker 1 get the five days? So if you look in Beit Yosef, in Siman Reish Yod Tes, you'll see in two different Rishonim. Some say that it's up to three days, some say it's up to five days. Never mind. Here we're talking about a, a different question altogether. The child was involved in a, a life-threatening accident many years ago. Now he's turned to Birkat Agameil-- Tu-tu-turned bar mitzvah. Now, the answer is the following, that a child does not say Birkat Agameil for the simple reason that the lotion of this, the Maraam mintz was quoted in the, um... Maraam mintz is quoted in the Bar Heitiv, in Siman Reish Yod Tes, and he says the following: a child cannot say, "Lechayavim." He's not chayavim. When we say Birkat Agameil, when we say Agameil Lechayavim Tovas, the child is not chayavim. He's not, he's not guilty, and therefore, you can't accept-- He, he, he cannot say the bracha. Perhaps the father should say. If a child, uh, had, had a, uh, a life-threatening situation, perhaps the father should say because it says sometimes... It says, "Why a bon of Shalod Hamayisim?" That person loses a child because of their sins. So perhaps the father should say the bracha Agameil Lechayavim Tovas. So Maraam mintz says it's not always the parents. Sometimes it could be-- And he mentioned the concept of Gilgul. It could be that this Neshamah has an account to settle from a previous Gilgul, and therefore, it's not for sure that it's not the father's chayavim because

24:32 Speaker 1 it could be the child's own destiny had, ha-had this in, in it. Therefore, it remains unclear. So the father can't say Birkat Agameil, and the child also doesn't say Birkat Agameil when they are a child. And when they grow older also, we don't know because he, he... Who says it was-- he was the chay-- He wasn't the chayavim then, um, because perhaps it was his father's. So it, it remains un-unclear. And bottom line is that the child will not say Birkat Agameil when, uh, when he turns bar mitzvah. We're going to question number five, here's a case of a Jewish man married a non-Jewish woman, and subsequently they had a child. And after that, she went for gir, a good-- a proper gir. And the boy also, because he was born to a non-Jewish mother, the boy also had gir. And brought up as a frum family, very bit of beautiful, nice fr-frum family. And now the boy is now engaged and getting married shortly. Question here is: What do you write the name of this boy in the ketubah? Do you write the biological father, or do you say the Halakha, it's not his father? You know, Halakha, a gersh in this guy has no, has no father, and therefore you should write, uh, Ben Avraham. Of course, the father is not keen. The biological father is not s-- keen to write Avraham-- Ben Avraham Avinu on this thing. Um, often this-- people have totally forgotten and are aware that, that they are, uh,

26:22 Speaker 1 this is the, their, their background. So speaking, one should be-- one shouldn't be writing, um, the, the biological father's name. Maximum, what you could do, like you will do in a case of adopton-- adoption, you'd write, Ben so-and-so hamagad lui. So-and-so was the one who brought him up. In that way, you mention the biological father without, uh, without going too much details. Anyone who's a little bit more learned will see that this was a case of there was some history there. And okay, fine. That's, that's one way of getting there. But, but V'dieved. This-- I have, um, on the, on the say-- on the computer, I have the Sefer Mishpat Ha Ketubot or Mishpat Ha Ketubot, an eight-volume set about, uh, writing Ketubots. And, um, he, he, he talks about this situation, and he says, "What is the problem with this, um, document? This is how this boy is known. He's known as the son of this person." Yeah. And by the way, for Aliyah La Torah also, there's a little bit of leeway on that, um, in Hasid stock, et cetera. So he's-- The, it's nothing-- It's not in-- it's not incur-- inaccurate. It does not de-- reveal the gyrus history. Who said that a Ketubah, which doesn't divulge that there's a gyrus in the background, that makes the Ketubah invalid. It is not the correct thing to do. This Ketubah, if there is a gyrus, it should be on a, in, in-- on the Ketubah. That's the correct procedure, but that does not

27:51 Speaker 1 invalidate the Ketubah. So he-- that's how he writes. It shouldn't be, it shouldn't have been done that way, but it, it does not invalidate the Ketubah. Right. Let's move on to the next thing which I have on the list, and that is when you say Shema and you're wearing glasses, is it necessary to remove your glasses? So no, I don't think it's a-- in a way, it's a very s-s-serious shailah, but it is addressed in-- there's a Sefer called Or Zitu from Rabbi Yom Tov. He addresses this question, and he says that you do not need to remove them. Um, the main idea when you close your eyes is to help you focus more on the Shema. And therefore, he doesn't see that it makes a, a difference whether you take your glasses off or not. So it-- he says it's not necessary. Okay. We're going on to the next question, and that is question number, number seven. There is a rule that if you, uh, after the changeover to Tal Umatar, et cetera. So if you're not sure, like many of us may daven with the-- what we call autopilot. Say they-- pr-probably said the right thing. But after thirty days, you probably didn't, didn't do the right thing. Probably you follow what your, your habit is. After thirty days, your habit will have changed to the, to the switchover. So here it becomes a little... It becomes a little bit confusing because there's Tal Umatar and there's the same, um, the Mashiv Ha

29:48 Speaker 1 Ruach U'Meir HaGeshem. Mashiv Ha Ruach U'Meir HaGeshem in thirty days is more than ninety times because you've got Musaf on Shabbos and also, uh... Yeah. And then you also have the two day-- the, the Musaf of, of, uh, of Still. So, so it's a little bit more than ninety times. In the same Tal Umatar, on the contrary, it's less-- in n-- in thirty days, it's less than ninety times-- days or ninety times. So I've just been l-looking through, uh, um, some kind of, uh, Halakha list. And there he says that by, by Tal Umatar, he says it should be ninety times. Now, obviously, it's saying that, that, that, um, that thirty days is not enough because you have to have ninety times. Now, this is written by the Darchei Chaim, uh, and it's-- he's-- this is how it's quoted in the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch. To say that for the first ten Tal Umatar you have to have ninety times, and thirty days is not good enough. Actually, this is, this is not a straightforward thing, and there are poskim, and that's the impression also for the Alter Rebbe. The Alter Rebbe does not s- talk about this in the Seint Ale Motter. Let's get this clear. In Siman Kuf Yod Daled, the discussion is about Mashim Ruach Merageshim. In Siman Kuf Yod Zayin, the discussion is about the Seint Ale Motter. The thirty-day discussion in the Alter Rebbe is only in Siman Kuf Yod Daled. He doesn't talk about it at all in Siman Kuf

31:41 Speaker 1 Yod Zayin. So he doesn't address the Seint Ale Motter. But the impression we get from the Alter Rebbe and other poskim is that thirty days, even if you miss a day here and there, is going to change your hazakah. You're going to get used to the new, the new, um, uh, I mean, the new way of saying things in thirty days, even if you don't have your ninety times. So the person one, one should be following that. Bearing in mind that you're talking here about Sofek Ba-Ba-Brocho L'batola. You g-- In other words, although you can say you should bow down to El Snadova, tell you enough and you don't have to have ninety times. As I said, there are poskim... It loo-looks like thirty days would be good enough. We'll move on. Going to a question. A shliach asked me this coming, um... He's, he's doing an event, uh, on Motza Shabbos. Is he allowed to have Goyim doing... preparing the tables, cutting vegetables? No melacha, but just hachana. May they do so on Shabbos? So the preparing on Shabbos for after Shabbos is the Issur D'Rabonon. So L'tzoirech Mitzvah, Shvus D'shvus L'tzoirech Mitzvah is permitted. So to ask a Goy to do Issur D'Rabonon w- um, for a mitzvah need is permitted. However, the Alter Rebbe is quite clear in Kuntres Acharon that this is only Bedieved, it's not a Lechatichilah. You cannot rely on this Lechatichilah. So therefore, what I said to him is, if you can manage to do the preparation before

33:54 Speaker 1 Shabbos or after Shabbos, you shouldn't be allowing and asking for them to do the preparation on Shabbos. If the circumstances are that you cannot manage without this preparation, then that would be permitted on the basis of Shvus D'shvus L'tzoirech Mitzvah. Okay. Um, number nine. So this came up the following. Some time back, I wrote an article about a Midralim... to Goy to do something for you on Shabbos. Or for that matter, on Yom Tov. So actually, following on from the last discussion, I'd written there that if you... It's the second night of Yom Tov, and you'd prepared a candle, and your candle went out before the end of the second n- before the end of the first day of Yom Tov. You want to... The Busha woman wants the bench lit. She doesn't have a naked flame. So I'd written that you are allowed to ask a Goy to strike a match because striking a fire, ign-igniting a fire on Yom Tov, I wrote is Mid'Rabonon. And therefore, to ask a Goy to strike a match, that's Shvus D'shvus L'tzoirech Mitzvah, so that would be permitted. So on Chabad.org, where this article was published, there's a feature for comments. So someone wrote there a comment that y- what you wrote that Yom Tov, striking a match on Yom Tov is Mid'Rabonon, is untrue because Mishnah Berurah says it's Mid'Rabonon. So I confessed that I did not know that Mishnah Berurah. I do have the volume on my shelf. So I c- looked it up, and

35:43 Speaker 1 actually, the Mishnah Berurah in S- um, in Siman, beginning of Torf Kov Beis, he brings the Taz. The Taz there, Taker, he, he has some diyuk. He wants to... So in the Losh HaRambam, he wants to come to a conclusion that there's no hetter, uh, even Mid'Rabonon to, um, to m- to, to, uh, to strike a match on, on, uh, on Yom Tov. Having said that, I, I wrote that I'm-- I did a bit of research. I found that in the pa-- in passing, the Chazon Ish does s- he says that it's that striking a match is on Yom Tov is a, is a Shvus, is a Rabbonon. I looked up Encyclopedia Talmudis, uh, under the entry of Moled, and there he says, you know, some sense it is that it's Issur D'Rabonon. And I'm, I was just thinking that to make it Osur, it has to be a melacha. Is, is making a fire a melacha? Is making a fire on Shabbos a melacha? So there's a Machloket in Gemara where the Havura LeLab Yotzet or Havura LeChalech Yotzet. When the Torah says, "Do not make a fire on Shabbos," does that mean it becomes one of the Lamdet Melachot? Or it's a separate, and it's, it's a separate, uh, thing like you'll not have to carry out of the trim, et cetera. It could be Havurah LeLaav Yotzes. You get Malkus, don't have to bring a Korban. If, if Havurah LeLaav Yotzes, that's only for Shabbos, nothing to do with Yom Tov. Elama,

37:26 Speaker 1 you're following the Sefor Ha'Orah, the Havurah, the Ha-the Havurah is, is one of the Lamed Tet Melachos. And somehow you're saying that it's, it's Osem Min HaTorah, uh, on Yom Tov. And the, the TaZ's argument is that the, the things that you're allowed to do on Yom Tov are things which you have immediate benefit. But lighting a fire is gonna cook your food and let you be able to f-it's not, not a direct benefit. That seems to be how the TaZ is concerned. I'm not so confident with that. You can strike a fire on Yom Tov to be able to read with the light, and you have a, a benefit right away. So at any rate, there is such an opinion, but, uh, uh, there is an opinion therefore that striking a match in Yom Tov is Osem Min HaTorah. It's a very, very much a minority opinion. And to finish off on this, when it comes to Amirah LeNochi, the, the rule is that whenever there's a Machloket in Halakhah, and we are Mahmir, when it comes to Amirah LeNochi, we can be Mekil. So, for example, I sometimes used to get, used to get asked about pe- relying on the aid of Northwest London. So as a policy, I say, "I'm not gonna answer you because that's go-it's a territorial issue. I don't want to have the Lubavitcher Rebbe over there have to say that, you know, Lubavitch, eh, said it's okay or not okay. So leave me out." But then they ask,

38:55 Speaker 1 "Can I have a goy wheel, wheel, um, wheel someone and, uh..." I say, "For a goy, m-m-really you can argue whether it's a Kashya for Yid. But for a goy, every time you're Amirah LeNochi, you can rely on the lenient opinion, yeah." So if there's Machloket whether it's valid or not, but at least for Amirah LeNochi it's valid. Our last, um, our last thing to-for today is about, about the saying the Parashat Shema in Rabbeinu Tam's. In other words, when you're saying... When you're putting on Tefillin, not for-- and it's a matter of Davening. You-- And you've-- When you've said Shema in, in good time. The same question would be on, on Tisha B'Av afternoon. If you put on Tefillin, do put on Tefillin then, about do you-- why, why, why do you have to say the three Parashat? And, um, last week I went-- I quoted a Maram Shik who discusses that question. So my son-in-law in Chicago, he sent me a, a, uh, a reference to a Sicha of Rebbe Achrei Mot Pesach Taf Shin Mem Beis. So the Rebbe in that Sicha, and this is a Hemshacha from Yud Aleph Nisan, asks the question: We have Taryag Mitzvot, and when we have a Mitzvah, one of the Mitzvot is Sipur Yetziat Mitzrayim. That's one of the Taryag Mitzvot. There's also a Mitzvah of Zechiras Yetziat Mitzrayim. And if you noted, the first Rashi in today's Chumash, yeah today's Parasha, was to tell you there's a Mitzvah of Zechiras Yetziat Mitzrayim every day.

40:31 Speaker 1 And every day we say in the She钱 Zechiras, the first of the six, "Vamtietz Es Yem Tzeis From Eretz Mitzrayim Kol Yemei Chayei." There's a Mitzvah of Zechiras Yetziat Mitzrayim. So the question is, why is that not listed in Taryag Mitzvot? So again, Sipur Yetziat Mitzrayim is, and Zechiras Yetziat Mitzrayim on a daily basis is not mentioned in Taryag Mitzvot. And that was the question the Rebbe's addressing. He quotes a, a, a certain Rosh Yeshiva, he, uh, he doesn't give a name, who had said, and his Talmidim had written down his Toras, that they had said that there's a Machloket whether you have to say Yetziat Mitzrayim by night. And this seems to be linked to whether you're going to say Yetziat Mitzrayim B'Moshe Rabbeinu. Now, if you say that you have to say Yetziat Mitzrayim B'Moshe Rabbeinu, then you don't have to say Mitzrayim by, by night. If you say you have to say it by night, you don't have to say B'Moshe Rabbeinu. So if you're asking the Zechir to say Yetziat Mitzrayim B'Elelo, that opinion would hold that they don't have to say B'Moshe Rabbeinu Yetziat Mitzrayim when Moshe comes. If so, the Rambam has a policy that the Mitzvah is only temporary, not go- in the Taryag Mitzvot. If so, therefore, B'Yetziat Mitzrayim, well, it d-doesn't apply Losin Lo, right? And therefore, you don't have to... It's not listed in Taryag Mitzvot. The Rebbe is extremely unhappy with that, um, Chiddush, and to the point that he says it must

42:12 Speaker 1 be the Talmidim who wrote it down didn't fully understand what the Rosh Yeshiva was saying. And because it's, it's-- To say that, that, that, uh, there's, you know, this Chiddush that Moshe comes, you won't have to say, um, the Parashat VaYomer doesn't seem to be-- have, have any, any backing anywhere. B'Kitzeh, what the Rebbe says is the following. It's Medayk in the Rambam beginning of, of Hilchot Kriat Shema. And I mentioned-- I think I mentioned this last week. Why do we say VaYomer? Is it... That's not because of Parashat Tzitzit. Because Tzitzit's okay, but why didn't you have a-- But, you know, we can, we can... There's many Mitzvot. Why do you have to say Parashat Tzitzit every day? So the reason is because of Zechiras Yetziat Mitzrayim. But there's many Parashat about Yetziat Mitzrayim. So the Gemara in Berachot lists five special, five, five, uh, Mitzvot or five, uh, features which are special about this Parashat. And that's why this of all the Parashat we talk about Yetziat Mitzrayim, this was selected to say on a daily basis. You look in the Rambam, he says, "Mipnei SheYesh Bo Zechiras Kol HaMitzvot." You have-- Now, then let's read this carefully. Shema has got the fundamental Hashem Echad. Echad Hashem. Echad Hashem. That's Shema. Is fundamental. It talks about all the mitzvahs. Now, It's fundamental. That's what makes Vayomer so important, that it's Zachiras Kolo mitzvahs. So then it says the Rebbe, okay. And the Rambam says these three mi-- parashat, they are called Shema. They

43:53 Speaker 1 are called Kriyas Shema. And in a sense, saying that they become a unit, a fundam-- a unit of fundamental points which we are m-- s-saying every day. Says the Rebbe, as a result, mitzvahs Zachiras Yetzias Mitzrayim doesn't need to be listed as a separate mitzvah because it's a component of the mitzvah of Shema. There's a mitzvah of saying Shema every day. The mitzvah of Shema every day also includes Zachiras Yetzias Mitzrayim. Similar, says the Rebbe, in the case of b-building a Mishkan. We know in Parashat Terumah it says, "Build a Shulchan and build a Menorah and build an altar," et cetera. Entire Jag mitzvahs is one mitzvah. We also live Mikdash. It's made of components. So the mitzvah is now in our context. Details. One of the details is Zachiras Yetzias Mitzrayim. Therefore, it doesn't need to be listed as a separate mitzvah. That's the way the Rebbe answers this quest-ion. But meanwhile, what we gain from this is you can see very strongly, very strongly that the Shema in the three parashats become a unit. And if the reason why you say Shema Rabbeinu Tam is because it says, "Kol hak'ro kirshama b'leit tefillin." Now listen carefully. It doesn't say, "b'leit tefillin." It's a unit. "b'leit tefillin." So all right, to rectify that omission. In other words, if Ram-- if Rabbeinu Tam is right, you put on tefillin in the morning, you read Shema without tefillin. To, to rectify that, you're gonna say Shema again. So Shema becomes a unit. So very,

45:42 Speaker 1 very interesting. In Alter Rebbe Shimon Lamed He said you don't have to say Shema in, uh, in Rabbeinu Tams, but in the Siddur, the way it's written in the Siddur... It's now fifty years since my bar mitzvah, and I don't know whether I mentioned this before in this, in this forum, but when I went into Yechidas, um, very briefly, I went to Yechidas where my father was shalom. And at the time, Rabbi Sudak, my, um, um, was not my shver at the time, um, pushed us to ask the Rebbe about Rabbeinu Tam's tefillin. And so I pestered my father to ask about Rabbeinu Tam's. And the Rebbe said the lotion, If he'll commit himself not to have foreign thoughts, then he says further, Forbidden thoughts was out of the question, but even, uh, um, uh, arbitrary thoughts. It is only a matter of ten minutes. On the eighth to them is, So the Rebbe didn't mention about Vayomer. He says, To look in the Siddur for those-- for when reading those parashas, there will be a solu-- a, a solution not to have foreign thoughts. Then the Rebbe asked my father, "Does he have his own tefillin?" And, uh, my father says, "No, since then." Or two, uh, and that is that two years, two... A, a year and a half later, or a year, um, this was Lamed Heh, this was Lamed Vov. Two years later, Purim, the Rebbe says, is a free for all. Everyone who has Rabbeinu Tam... You know, every bocher

47:36 Speaker 1 wants. He, he encouraged them to put Rabbeinu Tam's. And then I went to Yechida six months later, and I wrote an apology that I'm not keeping the condition which the Rebbe had put to me. And, um, so, you know, trying to be, be polite as an Englishman. And so the Rebbe gives me a broche, and then he comes to this, this line, and he says the following. In reference to that which, uh, you wr- have written about your Rabbeinu Tam's tefillin. When a foreign thought enters your mind, you should raise your voice somewhat, and that will, uh, that will as-assist in driving away the foreign thoughts. So the Rebbe shlita's whole hope in that we should focus on what we have to do, and that's which is intensify our tefillin and our Torah, and the Rebbe shlita's whole hope in undesirables, which are, which we are, uh, faced with, and Klal Yisrael should be, uh, driven away. And we should see a geulah sheleimah sheyas atkenah behamehira bimheirah bimamash. Lematzmat Shabbos sheyavo lechu b'vas Hatorah ubesheirt Hageulah. Take care from Yad Mamish. Good to go.

48:54 Speaker 2 Amen.