בשלח תשפ״ד

00:08 Speaker 1 Welcome to this Shiur for Motzei Shabbos, Parashat Beshalach. So today's Shiur is dedicated by family, uh, Mr. And Mrs. Siegelman. It's the Yahrtzeit of Mrs. Siegelman's mother, Mrs. Rivka Elisheva bas Reb Yitzchak. Um, we'll go straight to our first Shailah. So fairly simple Shailah. If someone has a certain illness, and because of this, they have been advised not to eat certain foods, and they, uh, nevertheless prefer to indulge, do they have to make a beracha? Or do you say because it's-- they're harming themselves, they shouldn't be making a beracha? So this we have, we have on the screen. It's from a Sefer called Sha-Sharia Haberacha, contemporary Sefer. It says if a person eats something which is harmful, that's not called eating. Therefore, if a person would drink olive oil or drink vinegar, then he would not make a beracha because that drink is harmful for them. However, he said, "Dvorim sheyes hanoa bachilos sameach tam u'ne'im." There is a enjoyment in eating them, and, uh, they have a good taste. So then, chayavim b'beracha, they are-- they do warrant a beracha. Afilu ein hamacholim berim, even if they're not healthy foods. So in the footnote number Yud, he gives a clear example of a person who suffers of sukkar, of, uh, diabetes. And if he's eating sweet stuff, or a person who's got heart problems as they're eating fatty foods, which are not healthy for them. But they say-- he says they're not direct, directly, uh, dangerous. So then one should make a beracha. And

02:29 Speaker 1 you have here sometimes the Lashon, aph apishe, um, aph says here you have-- sometimes you have the, there's the immediate, and there's the longer, longer term. So the person's enjoying it now, although in the longer term, they talk it will be harmful for them, but they would make a beracha for it. Okay. No advice here, but just... Now, the following is-- the following question is a little bit more involved, and that is that one of our regular listeners was recently in Eretz Israel for a Bar Mitzvah of, I guess, a relative or a friend, whatever. And they spent Shabbos at a hotel in Jerusalem. And on Shabbos morning, they, they served hot fi- fish in a hot sauce, and there's chicken in a hot sauce. And in conversation with the Arab waiter, so he says that they warmed it up that morning in the, uh, hotel kitchen. There's a mashgiach there, et cetera. This listener is a Rav in a community. He wasn't the only rabbi there. Some people were saying that the Sephardim have a different opinion about this, and it's more lenient. So he asked me for some clarity on this. Uh, so I'm going to spend a couple of minutes on this. Okay. So first of all, we, we all-- we know there's a principle of ein bishul achar bishul, that food which has been cooked once, reheating cooked food is not called bishul. There's no violation there. But that is only for solids. For liquids, so the ru- the rule is

04:19 Speaker 1 yesh bishul achar bishul, which means that reheating it is a violation. So that's number one. So reheating, reheating liquids, well, according to mos- most poskim, that remains the halacha, that where there's difference between cooking, it's changing the substance, the constitution of the food. And therefore, once it's been changed, it's not gonna change again. Therefore, ein bishul achar bishul. With liquids, the primary benefit is not so much the change of structure as much as the heat. And therefore, if the heat has gone away and you brought it back to heat again, so then that's called bishul. So boiling is called bishul. Some poskim hold that ein bishul achar bishul by liquids also. But then what is the... When we say Sephardim, Ashkenazim, what does the Shulchan Aruch, Rav Yosef Caro, what does he hold about this? So let's read here for Siman shin yud Ches, Seif Daled. Tav shil sh'nisbashal kol tzorcho. A food which is fully cooked. Yesh bo mi shehom bishul im nitzanen. But if it's co-cooled off completely, doesn't go... So say the word completely, I added. But okay. So food which was fully cooked, but it's become cold and you reheated it. So then I'm assuming that this is talking about the liquid food. Okay. But at any rate, this is pretty clear that the Mechaber holds that yesh bishul achar bishul, but only for lac. Therefore, to take a gravy and to put it into the oven would be definitely asur, even according to this Sefardim or Pascan like the Shulchan

06:13 Speaker 1 Aruch. I did a little bit of homework. I have at home a kitzer Shulchan Aruch with the, uh, commentary of Rabbi Mordechai Yau, zecharo livracha. And there he puts in the variations where Minchas Assaf is different to Ashkenaz. So that's one-- this-- that's one source. There's also, you can look in Yaakov Yosef and Babadi Yosef, et cetera. So anyway, that's seems to be fairly straightforward that the Shulchan Aruch, the Rabbeinu Yitzchak Cara and therefore Minchas Assaf is that you're not allowed to reheat liquids which were-- have cooled off totally. Where does-- where there is a bit of a gray area is when it's a solid, but when you re- when you reheat it, there's going to be liquid coming out, and that liquid is gonna turn-- become hot. So here you can see on the screen that also in Siman shin yud ches, "s'ivta zain, mutar liten in panada beoneged ha'esh bemakom sheyad so ledes". You are allowed to place a... In panada would be what we would call kugel in modern Hebrew, which Sefardi, it is fashtida. You're allowed to place the kugel near the fire, even where it's gonna be yad so ledes, very, very hot. Even though the shuman, even though the fat therein, shenikrash, which had congealed, chozeh venimocheh, is going to dis-dissolve. So this is where we have the concept what's called, um, chozeh venimcheh, a solid which is p-warmed up and it's turning back into a liquid, and then it's gonna be, be warmed up. Well, actually, the Mechaber

08:00 Speaker 1 doesn't even emphasize about the warming up. Now, uh, it's, it's interesting how this, uh, uh, evolves. The Levush, who was a couple of generations later, he says, "It can't be sheyad so ledes. It'd be she-eino yad so ledes." Because to reheat the, the kugel and the liquid is going to become hot, that would be ca-called bishul. But others disagree, and they say, "No, it's okay, because it started off as a, as a solid. So the fact that it became, um, became a liquid, it became hot, that's okay." Then the way... If, if you say it's talking about eino yad so ledes, there was a discussion altogether. The answer is that there's another issue. There's the issue of moledet. And some think, let's say, you retake something which is a solid and you cause it to dissolve, and then you're gonna have a liquid, so you created a new thing. So what is exactly the discussion in Sifta Zayin? Is it a question of bishul or is it a question of moledet? So the Levush will say the discussion is about moledet. And he says, "Okay, if it's in pl-places, eino yad so ledes, but okay, that's, that's where, where, where whether you can, can make it warm up, that it shouldn't dissolve, but not, not to reheat it." But the way that it is presented in the Shulchan Aruch is even if it does become hot, so then that is okay. So this is where we have a difference between Sefardi and Ashkenazi. A Sefardim

09:31 Speaker 1 will allow warming up a kugel in a place where it can come, uh, fully very hot, even though it's going to a, a, a, a, a juice, a, a gravy will form from it. I wanna also emphasize that the, the way the, uh, Shulchan Aruch had, had been-- had spelt it, keneged ha'esh. He described that you're putting the stuff, the food keneged ha'esh. It doesn't say you put it in the oven. And also in the previous sip, keneged hamedura, placing it near the oven, near the fireplace. To put food in the oven is a definite isur derabanan of... There's rules for chazara, and the rules for chazara are for re-- are, are based upon nirah k'mevadcha. To put s- to put food into an oven is only if it was hot and only if you had it in your hand, et cetera. There's a whole lo- list of the requirements to allow you to replace food in the oven. So to take stuff out of the fridge and to put into an oven, there's no question that that's not okay. Because, um, e-e-even if you're gonna go according to nirah k'mevadcha, the heter of the, uh, the Sefardim, but that to put it in an oven is a de-- is a derech bishul. That's not okay. Okay. And to heat up a gravy is also not okay. What they're saying is you can heat up a, a, a kugel and, and a gravy might form from it, but not to, to, to take a liquid

11:08 Speaker 1 and reheat it. Now, having said all of that, before going further, what does the Alter Rebbe hold about this reheating the kugel? The Alter Rebbe is quite... He takes the, the position of the Levush that I don't care that it started off as a, as a solid. The fact that it's going to evolve into a liquid, and it's gonna be heated, so you're reheating a liquid. So it comes under, yesh bishul achar bishul. So here we have from the Seder. The Shulchan Aruch is, is more lenient. The Seder, the Alter Rebbe writes, even though we say ein bishul achar bishul with a yud-vav-yud, with a solid. But if it's going to chozeh venimche, it's going to dis-disintegrate, actually dissolve, and some liquid is gonna come out of it, venimche mimenu k'tzats, yesh bemo shum bishul achar bishul, then we do have a problem of rehe-- recooking. Belach luchis hamochai, with the fluid which is going to dissolve- Um, in yad soledet be. Now, my understanding is this is only if the liquid is gonna ooze away. The fact there's a kugel which is gonna be moist and is going to have a liquid inside the kugel is going to become hot, that is not the problem. The problem is only when it actually becomes a distinct liquid away from the food, and that's gonna become hot, then that's where we have the problem of bishul achar bishul, v'davar, uh, which chayav nimcha. All right, and therefore the Alter Rebbe has the issue of warming up

12:41 Speaker 1 meat if... Now read again, im yischamem hamoyo hal-hanimchem meihem. That-- I want to em-emphasize this. It's the fluid which is going to melt and is going to ooze away from them. If that liquid is going to become yad soledet be, then I'm concerned, he says, of isur skilah v'kores chas ve'shalom. Okay. So coming back. So this is where the Alter Rebbe is very clear that he's, he, he is machmir on that. But this is where the Sefardim have the position of the Shulchan Aruch that it is permitted to do. Now, what happens if someone violated the rules of chazara? Again, let's say you took out from the fridge, you took out some dry meat. You took schnitzel, it's dry, and you put it on, on, on a source of heat, on the blech, et cetera. If you did... If you violated chazara in a way where everyone agrees that it's not allowed. This is simin- shin-- sorry, siman reish and nun gimmel, seif chaf daled for the moment. If one violated the rules of chazara in a way that is l'dvar hakol, all poskim would say that this is forbidden, where the b'shogeg is it. Then if you violated it, isur d'Rabanan. There's a penalty. You may not have benefit from it until motzei Shabbos, uh, b'kedei sheyas. Then he has a bit of a pilpul about, uh, mitzva m'd'oraysa. But if there was a violation of chazara, never mind bishul. If it was a violation of chazara, then you cannot have, uh, a... You

14:30 Speaker 1 cannot enjoy the food until after Shabbos. It's not so clear, and I'll tell you why. Because he says in the brackets, Alter Rebbe were added the wo- three words, le-lashom, l'dvar hakol. Now, I've said to take food from the fridge and put it onto the, uh, onto, uh, onto the stove, that's definitely us, yes. But let's say you had food which was on, on this, on the blech when Shabbos came in, and then it was taken off. To put it back there, that according to some poskim is allowed. It's only chazara from erev Shabbos to Shabbos. But chazara on Shabbos, all these conditions of having to hold it in your hand and all that, some poskim say it's not necessary. So then if you did violate that, then there would not be the isur till motzei Shabbos. Again, so let's say a case that someone had taken off, um, schnitzel, something similar, something that's dry food. Taken it off and put it on without having fulfilled all the rules of chazara. Somebody eved, there would be reason to, to permit that they should be allowed to use it for their seudat Shabbos. Now, what we're doing, here we have if there i-is, is there room to be make light. Um, but, uh, as I say, if it was in the fridge from before Shabbos and taken and, and, and put onto the, uh, heat, so then that's a violation of chazara, and for sure it's us. Then he goes into seif chaf he, and he

16:01 Speaker 1 says, "This is if it was done by a Yid. But if a goy put it back, then you are out of hand." Oh. So now this is if a, if a goy put it back. Then he goes on further. And, and I just wanna g-g-get this clear. We're dealing with, we're dealing with two issues here. One is a d'Rabanan and one is a De'oraisa. The d'Rabanan is chazara. And here we've seen that with chazara, then if a goy did chazara, then you could have benefit from it. But then the next paragraph he says, "That's only if it was w-a little bit warm. It was edible. But if it was soyna legamri, it wasn't really edible, and it was put back in a way of chazara, which is a violation l'dvar hakol, then you cannot have benefit from it." So the chazara aspect in our story, where the, the, um, the waiters in the hotel, which whatever, the staff took stuff out of the fridge and put it into the oven, that's a violation of chazara. And assuming, uh, you can argue, I don't know, can you eat the fish cold? Possibly. I, the, I'm sure the gre-gravy you can't eat cold. Um, so if, if there was a violation of chazara in a way that you couldn't benefit from it otherwise, then for sure you're not allowed to have benefit from it. Now, let's leave the chazara side, uh, for, for, um, uh, aspect for a moment, and let's look at the other s-aspect of

17:40 Speaker 1 the bishul mamash. As I said, even the Mechaber says that taking cold liquid and reheating it is a violation of bishul. So chazara to one side, there has been an act of bishul. And this is very, very interesting. This is, again, this is Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, reish and gimel, seif chaf, chaf he. And he says... And you know this, Alter Rebbe's got lots of brackets, and in this seif there's brackets. Now, you have to... You know, you know, the, we just s-as, as I just saw in the Sicha which I hazard today, there's a famous thing that the Alter Rebbe added in brackets- Things which he wanted to reflect on at a later stage. Here, you-- and, and the way I, um, um, uh, I feel that you learn out of Rebbe Shneur you have to read it with the brackets and without the brackets to be able to understand what's going on here. Here, he's got two sets of brackets, which are alternative ways of learning the Halakhah, as you'll see. Let's read this carefully. "Va'afilu im siba es hanokhri le'hachzir." Even if you told the goy to put it into the ov- onto the oven. "Im hechzir lamakom sheyesh matirin afill lechatkhilo." But if it was placed in a place where there are those who permit this. Now then we have the other bracket. "Im hechzir afill haYisroel atzmo." Even if the Yid himself put it back in a place where there's matirin. "K'goy shesomach eitz altano." Not on the oven, which

19:09 Speaker 1 is derekh Bishul nirah k'mevashel, but he put it eitz altano, which is not a normal way of cooking. So he didn't o-- It wasn't over the Rabbanon. It's... Yeah, because it's eitzel. But it's a pl- he put it eitzel. Ein hagar avot kart. "Ve keneged hamadura ot tav shilshil nisheh bashul kol tzarokoi. Ve'yesh be'moreh u'nitsatan l'gamri." He took it. Remember, it's like our case. He took a food which is completely cooked, and it's co- It's got gravy. It's t-completely, uh, cold, and it was reheated, becomes yahtzi le'etzbei. Then look at this, these words. "Af al pi sheyesh bo chiyuv chatas leYisroel." For the Yid to have put this gravy to reheat it, we pasken it's chiyuv chatos. "Because yesh bishul achar bishul bedavarach mikol makom ki sheyesh matirin afill lechatkhilo. But because there are those who say that ein bishul achar bishul even bedavarach shenitztan l'gamri. Yesh lismoch al divreihem be'deved." You can rely on their words be'deved. Now then you can read it in two ways. Either the first bracket that the heter is when the goy put it in the oven. "Shelo lese maase hanokhri afill etzvo Yisroel." Then you can read the other bracket. Even if a Yid himself did it. At kol ponim, in our case, you can say, yeah, takya the goy put it in the oven, and it's yesh bishul achar bishul bedavarach. But there is the opinion that ein bishul achar bishul bedavarach. So in that respect, you can rely be'deved, and you can have benefit from it.

20:52 Speaker 1 So here we have a fascinating, uh, almost an anomaly, that there's a Rabbanon and there's a DeRabbis. The, the Rabbanon was violated here because they did chazarat, put it in the oven. Lost case. As far as the DeRabbis is concerned, since it's, uh, there's a si- shita which holds that it is no avereh and it's mutar lechatkhilah. Therefore, for the DeRabbis side, you could say you're allowed to have benefit from it. The Rabbanon side, you cannot have benefit. So the poial would remain it's orso, be-be-be mechdesh yasu. But it's fascinating that the aspect of the DeRabbis, because there are those who are matir lechatkhilah, as you can see, as we say, it's me-mamash our case of yesh bishul achar-- ein bishul achar bishul bedavarach. Therefore, be'deved, um, that would not have been a problem. L'maaseh, it is a problem, as, as far as I can understand. I don't know what the Rabbanim who give the hechsher in the hotel, um, how they allow this reheating. There's a mashgiach there, I hope. How they allow this, the reheating of the foods in the oven, I don't know. Um, one more point, and then I'll look at the, the chats, uh, the points which you have raised. The... I have another issue, and that is about Sefardim and Ashkenazim. If-- Is it okay if a Sefardi warmed up food, which according to the Minaggim Sefardim is okay. Is an Ashkenazi allowed to have benefit from it? It's not such a straightforward thing. But even if there is

22:28 Speaker 1 a heter, I think that a hotel which has got Ashkenazi guests and Sefardi guests, I don't think it would be correct policy to be warming up food in a way which is, uh, uh, acceptable for Ash- for Sefardim and, and not acceptable for Ashkenazim. They're doing it for their customers. So it's as if the Ashkenazish, uh, guests are, are telling them that they have to do this, which would be lechayeida, um, out of order. Right. Um, so I see someone's asking about maybe, um, n-nitsanim. I know that, but what's the... Oh, okay. Let's, let's move on, yeah. Someone knows what the heter of the hotels is. I'm, I'm, I'm happy to listen. It could be next week, whatever. Okay. Right. Now, Baruch Hashem, baby was born, and there's a minhag of the woman going to, to, uh, shul after giving, after giving birth. The first sortie, the first outing out of the house to go to a shul and to hear Kedusha. Now, someone asked me, "Is this a minhag Chabad or is it a Veltishe minhag?" As far as I know, I said it's, I think, I believe it's a, it's a Veltishe minhag, and I'm gonna, we'll go through this a little bit more. Uh, what I-- They also asked the question if they had the, the Bris in the house and there was a Minyan for Mincha at the Bris and the lady, she heard Kedush- she heard Kedusha and she answered Kedusha. Does that count? So my response was, I know

24:10 Speaker 1 that this was by Reb Yossel, uh, Kitrick's Bris, where he was one of the three, uh, who had this zechus, that the Rebbe was Sandek in the year taf shin Yud Aleph. And I'm not sure whether the Bris was a weekday or, uh, don't know. But at any rate, there was this question that Mrs. Kitrick, his mother, had, uh, answered Kedusha at the Mincha, and they asked the Rebbe if that's good enough for having gone to shul, and the Rebbe said it is good enough. Okay. So what you have here on your, uh, screen is... The first quote is from a Sefer called Shaarei Efraim, which is the classic Sefer on Krias HaTorah. And in Sha-- It's, it's in Shiurim. His chapters are called Shiurim. So in Shaar Beis, the second gate, so to speak. So he has about who's called a Chiyuv. And this is a shout-out for all those Gabboim, uh, who take such responsibility. And it's, uh, you know, who do you give aliyah, who do you give priority? It's a sensitive thing. People's-- You know, Hakham could have done, they could have done the Kriyas HaTorah like Megillah. One man reads the whole lot and finish. No, Hakham saw the, they saw the wisdom in having seven aliyas, and that means kibudim, and it means-- And sometimes kibudim can mean some people get upset that they didn't get a kibud. And it's a sensitive area. So shakoi to all those gabboim on duty and, uh, with the challenges, etc. So in

25:49 Speaker 1 the second chapter of Shaar Efrayim, he talks about the list of chiyuvim. So he writes here, the husband of a woman who gave birth to a boy or a girl. So on the Shabbos, when the woman comes to shul. So then is a chiyuv. That husband is a chiyuv to have an aliyah, even though she gave birth, uh, to a boy. And the Shabbos before the Brit, he had an Aliyah. But nevertheless, he has also when the Shabbos she comes to shul. And what's the story here? The story is that in the times of the Beis Hamikdash, we learn in the beginning of Parashat Tazria, that a woman who gave birth to a boy after forty days, she's got seven days of tumah and eight or thirty-three days of taharah. And then she's got-- she brings a Korban Chinuch Yoledet. And then if it's a girl, it's fourteen days of tumah and, and then sixty-six days. Was it? Yeah. And then she goes to Mikveh, etc., and brings a Korban. So in times by gone, women were, uh, perhaps wiser, and they would have bed rest for a long time after giving birth. Perhaps their workload was different to today, perhaps more, more physical, more demanding. At any rate, they would have bed rest for the best part of a month. At the end of the month, be'erech, that's when she would go to shul. Perhaps it was less than forty days. But at any rate, it was, it was a good few weeks. When

27:24 Speaker 1 she would go to shul, it was like, like reminiscent of the minhag of going to the Beis Hamikdash to bring your Korban. So her coming to shul is like her bringing a Korban. And so, all right, so that's where the husband has the Aliyah as if-- because it's, it's the-- when he and his wife are kind of bringing a Korban. That's, that's the background to this minhag. Then on the lower part of the page, we have here from a book, a Sefer called Shorashim Minhag Ashkenaz. And this quotes, he writes a minhag. This is, um, from, what's it about? Uh, about a hundred years ago, a bit more. That's when the writer of this, uh, report says that he writes the, this is the Yekish minhag, minhag yofeh ve'rab mashmaos. It's a nice and beautiful and very significant minhag. That the first time a woman goes out of the home, uh, so the first time she will go to the Beis Hashem, to the Beis Ha-- to the, to the shul. And when the mother, the fortunate, happy mother, she, she re-regains her strength, and she's able to make the journey to the shul, like approximately a month after, after birth. So then they had a special name for this in the Yekish, uh, um, word in the vernacular, oys, oysvachen geyn. Which is somehow something about, he says it in a moment, what he says. Um, oysvachen because vachen means the birth, uh, giving birth is called vachen, oysvachenerin. So oysvachen, that means she's

29:07 Speaker 1 kind of graduated from being a, a kimperter of just giving birth. And so this is where, where-- So we can see this background. It's a Yekish minhag, but it was a generally, I don't know whether it's by Sephardim, by Ashkenazim, seems to be a bro-widespread minhag. The first excursion, the woman goes out, goes out of the house, will be taka to a shul. And here's a... Now, someone to say that her saying Kidush or Borchu, that's the equivalent of Birchas Hagomel for her. Um, right. So then someone actually asked me tonight, he asked me on Friday, but I only opened my, uh, um, my WhatsApp, whatever, tonight, about Birchas Hagomel. Now, the Alter Rebbe actually writes this in the Sefer HaBerachos, about a woman benching Hagomel, standing in the Esnes Noshim and saying it. Um, we, we discussed this a few times. It's not a minhag, uh, in most of European communities, it's not done. In Eretz Yisrael, it seems to be a more minhag Yerushalayim, perhaps in Bnei Brak. So it's more-- it's not so... Well, listen, we've, we've never seen it. And if I may, if you remember what I said last time, Reb Berel Alernik, alav hashalom, um, when his wife gave birth, he told the Rebbe that she stood, his wife stood in the Cheder Sheini, and she said Birchas Hagomel. So the Rebbe in, in jest said to him, "Did the Bocherim say Shehecheyanu?" Okay, let's move on. Let's move on about drinking water which is left overnight. Now, I

30:35 Speaker 1 want to address this because I'm-- I get this so often, people asking, they left w-w-water overnight, and therefore, they have to throw it out, and da, da, da. It's a whole, whole business. So let's, let's deal with it, yeah? So here we have in, in Yod Heh Dalet, Siman Kuf Tes Zayin. And there is something called Gilui, which means exposed, left exposed. Um. Mashkim she'nisgalu, she, um, uh, that if liquids were left exposed, hakhamim forbade us to drink them. Dechashino, out of concern. She'mo shoso nochosh mehem, lest a snake had drunk from them. And vehitil bohem eres, that the no- nochosh, the snake had drank and left a deposit of venom. Viachshav she'ein nochshim metzuyim beineinu mutar. So now that we don't have snakes abounding in our civilized areas, therefore the la- liquid left exposed is permitted. Now, the Alter Rebbe doesn't talk here about overnight or not, but he says that it, it, it's not a problem. We don't have snakes. Of course, leaving s- liquids open, it might be dust might fall in perhaps, uh, if you have... It, it could be, but it's not, it doesn't really, it's not a isur as such. So it, it is mutar to have liquid which was left overnight. The only exception to this is about wine for Kiddush. And this you can see now we have a quote from the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, and that's Siman ain reish beis, which is Birchas Kiddush, where he says, "Vechein..." Sorry about that. It'll come back again.

32:23 Speaker 1 If someone can remove that scribble which they did on the screen. Um, "Vechein ein m'kadesh al hayayin she'nisgal." Not to make Kiddush on wine which was left exposed. "Af al pi she'achshav ein izharin b'giyul." Although that nowadays exposure of liquids is not a concern of ours. "Af al pi she'ein nochshim metzuyim beineinu" because we don't have, um... It's not common for snakes to be in our, where we live. "Af al pi kein, hakrivehu lo le'fecho secho?" Would you give it to your, to your duke, to your count, to, uh, uh, to a, a gosh of a person you wouldn't g- give it. The word, um, the word pecho is, uh, it mean... It's, it's the Hebrew word for a, for a, for a count or a poet, et cetera. You have, uh, uh, in the Megillah, you have, "Ach ashtar panim veha'pachois." It's the same word. You wouldn't offer such a drink to a gosh of a person, therefore you shouldn't use it for Kiddush either. Then in the next paragraph, the Alter Rebbe writes, "If it was only left exposed for a short while, then that's not an issue." Especially he says, "In our countries where wine is not so available." Therefore, uh, because then for a short while, even the pachois vehasagonim, even the, the, uh, aristocracy would not be fussy about that bedieved unless, uh, it lost its, the taste was affected. Okay. So that's that, uh, about liquids left exposed. It's not such an issue. So, so people are l'chatchila careful,

34:02 Speaker 1 but it's not an issue bedieved. Sure. Right. Let's move on. Now, what's our next question? About benching with the Mizrach. This is very interesting. Now, looking at the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, you get the impression that benching with a mezuman means that one person says the beracha and the others listen. So we have here in Sin kuf peh gimel, Sif Yud. So he talks about the first ins- the first halacha, he says that if, um, if each one is benching on his own, that's not a ziman. He says since the Birchas Hamozon, they're all saying together word for word, then it's considered like a mirah achas as, as, as one saying. And the ending, the leader is saying aloud, and they are answering Amen. "K'mo cheshe'echun mevorach l'kulam mamesh." And therefore, really, ziman should be listening to the leader and being yotz to the beracha from him. But this is also okay. "Vyesh chochchim omer," and now those who say no. That, "She'ein zamin," the only way ziman is, there has to be one would say the beracha for everyone, and the others listen. "Vkol habocher should listen at least for the first beracha ad seim Birchas Hazon. Vechein ikar." So ziman would mean that one person is saying the beracha and aloud until hazon osachail, and everyone else is listening and not say, and they start on their own from noida. That's vechein ikar. No. Vechein... You know what the ikar is? The ikar is what we see what has been done. Baruch Hashem,

35:50 Speaker 1 we have a previous generation, we've seen what's being done, and we can see the minhag is we don't do this. And so therefore, that is going to be at the ikar. But the Alter-- But we have to deal with what the Alter Rebbe says, vechein ikar, that it should be said until Birchas Hazon aloud and... Now, what you have on the next, the next quote is from, um, from Toras Menachem, from the Sichos. I think it was so- shof shalamid beis approximately, where the Rebbe changed his practice. Whereas until then, the Rebbe would say the first brocha, brocha aloud until hazon osachail. But then he said, then he, he, this time he stopped doing so. He said it quiet. And after benching, the Rebbe explained himself why did he say the beracha quiet. Because he, he got the impression that some people were being, trying to be yotzer from listening. And he was concerned... Doesn't say all the details. Remember, it was somewhere else discussed more at length. The Rebbe says possibly because of the noise, bit of sh- You can't hear everything, and so you're listening to be yotzer, but you're not yotzer because you can't hear. And therefore, he didn't want people to be yotzer- And as a result, he stopped saying the first berakhah aloud. Now, why-- what's this-- what's the background to this? The background to this is that we say, "Beshuras mimvaron barabona barabosi nivoreich shochal hamishilo." There's going to be a berakhah. So where's, where's the nivoreich? So therefore,

37:35 Speaker 1 the nivoreich is that one person is gonna say the berakhah for everyone to be yotzer. What's interesting is there are those whose-- there are other sources where it seems to be that if it's, um, a zimon of ten people, so because Hashem's name is mentioned, nivoreich elokeinu, then the-- you'll be yotzer with that alone. So therefore, someone I, I, gave this shiur in Hebrew on Wednesday. So someone says, "You can't prove from the Rebbe Sicha, from the Rebbe's hagah, because the Rebbe was with, with ten people. With ten people, the, it, it's not so imperative to say the first berakhah to be motzi everyone. But when there's only three, where's your nivoreich?" Okay, so that's, that's, that's a bit-- that's the question. So here we have our good friend, the Piskei Teshuvos, and he brings-- after having brought this, um, he brings from the Mishnah Berurah that Ma sh'enoim ha'beha noshim, that each one benches on his own, shelo kidinim ho'osim it's not kidim. Having said that the Mish-- having quoted the Mishnah Berurah, which is not different to the Alter Rebbe L'ha'eir. And he says, "We see many fine and eminent Jews, learned Jews, who after having said Boruch hanasheloi, they each one says their own benching." And he brings here that some say that nowadays people can't focus so well, and if they're gonna have to say word for word with him, that's gonna struggle because some p- people don't bench, you know, bench slower, some are faster, they won't necessarily keep up

39:12 Speaker 1 the same speed. And therefore, they rely back on the Shulchan Aruch. Um, then he adds another thing. Yesh shitas arizal vehamakubalim and that i-- that the four berakhahs are all connected, and you should say them on your own. I didn't really find much evidence that makubalim are different to the Shulchan Aruch here. But what I can tell you is that I just recently went through the Alter Rebbe's maimar about zimon in the Siddur Imdah. So there are two maimorim about zimon. Hemsh-- One is a beer on the other. And he brings in a whole idea of, of a... based upon a lesson of the Zohar, which the Zohar looked up, doesn't necessarily talk about zimon. But it talks about in the Zohar that you've got a river, and you want to irrigate from the river. So you can have one canal, like a diversion from the river. But if you want to have to, to irrigate many, m- many canals, then you'd... M- Many small diversions from the river don't work. Don't ask me the, the physics of it. Instead, what you need to do is you make a pool. You make a pool near the river, and the water from the river flows into this pool. And from this pool, it's going to dist- be distributed by canals to all different places. The pool, as you know in Hebrew, is called the bereikhah. So the Al-- the Rebbe explains there, when you bench on your own, so it's like you've got just one diversion

40:47 Speaker 1 from the river. You're having the berakhah. But when you make a zimon, it's as if you have created this pool, this bereikhah, and then that's, uh, and then the berakhah k- is, is, is distributed from there. That's the Alter Rebbe's ha'gas. So the way I understand from the maimar is that the... if you ask the question, "Nivoreich shochal hamishloach," and where's the berakhah? So they m-- So they say you have to say the first berakhah aloud. Well, according to this mahalah, that the, the, the... Of course, it's, um, more Al Pi Kabbalah and Drush. But the, the zimon has this collective of a zimon. Three people together, the acharon is three people together. That itself is a klimaz ikberakh. It's like this creating this pool. And therefore, you've achieved the nivoreich by the zimon alone, even without having said one berakhah aloud. That's just adding to what you s- could see here, that minag, it's a widespread minag. Contrary to what we've seen, the Pashtas HaShulchan Aruch, it's a widespread minag, as we've seen. Uh, one person says, "Nivoreich shochal hamishloach," and they all answer. And then each one says their own benching. And the truth of what the arguments which he says here, that people don't focus so well and that the people are different speeds, that's absolutely true. And so all right, that's, that explains the minag, uh, minag haolam. Okay, what do I have here? Question number eight is, don't have on the slides. Someone's working as a mashgiach on a, on

42:17 Speaker 1 the k- kosher kitchen on a cruise liner. Um, I made up the story. Uh, but okay. Because if he's a mashgiach, he should ask the Rav who gave-- tells him, you know, whether he should be making an eiruv or not. But the question here is, does-- do you need to have an eiruv to be able to carry on the, on the, on the, uh, on the ship? Since i- in my mind, it's no different to a, to a hotel. And we've got to discuss this more than once. There are those who say that in the hotel, although you have rented a room, but you don't have a contract on that room. They could move you, give you a different room. Of course, once you've moved, once you've c- come in, they're not gonna move you because they don't want to lose, lose a customer. But there's no contract. You don't own that room, even in contract. So therefore, therefore, it's... You're li-- You're a guest. A guest in a house doesn't have to make an eiruv. And the s-- the same thing, I believe, would be on the ship, too. Another point is that I'm not su-- I've, I've, uh, I've never been on one of these cruises. But you have... A, a cruise can have five thousand people on, on the ship. And they have a-- Within this, we have these advertisers, kosher Rica, whatever, these kosher cr- cruises. So within the five thousand passengers, there's a, a group of Jews, and they have

43:39 Speaker 1 a, uh, special dedicated kitchen. Kosher kitchen, very nice. If they all eat together, so if they all eat together in the, the kosher dining room, that itself becomes the eiruv. When you have several people, but they're all eating as a, as a group in the same, in the same kitchen, in the same dining room, that itself is an eiruv. So if that's the case, if they're all eating... If all the Jews on the ship who are, are, are eating together, so then you don't need to have a eiruv. But then if you, if you, if, if that's not the case and some are doing their own thing, then you would need to have an eiruv, like l'chumrah. And as I said, it could be at a hotel. You could be makeil. You wanna be machmir, okay. Then you... If you wanted to do that, then you have to start doing, doing schirus and somehow getting, um, or doing some kind of agreement with one of the staff, one of the management of the, of the ship. Okay, let's move on. On Friday, on Friday morning, I got a call from a shliach somewhere in Europe that there's going to be a bris on Shabbos, and he's asking what does he do about Kiddish. So I said to him what I'd seen in Sefardim, that you could have the Hagafen, which is said at the k- at the, at the, at the bris, um, before the brocha sheha-kiddushyi did mi beten and the naming of the

45:07 Speaker 1 child. That Hagafen could also be double up as, as the, as the, uh, as Kiddish. So then half an hour later, I g- there are two shlichim in that town. The other shliach sends me, well, he g- a copy of this piece of Alter Rebbe Shuchan Aruch, Siman Reish Ayin Gimel, where it says that, uh, by, by a, a sh- the Kiddish bes ha-kneses o amilo. And he talks about if there's no child to whom to give the, the, the wine, then the adult should drink a revis and be yotzer Kiddish b'ruchim sud by drinking a revis. Which seems to tell you that the normal, uh, the default procedure would give it to a child. To which I responded that that is talking about a bris at a venue where there are-- where they don't have a buffet with, with mezyonos there. There's just the wine. If there's no, no, no, no mezyonos, so then, okay. So then whoever has the Ki- Kiddish, if he doesn't, if he's not gonna have mezyonos, and no one else is gonna have mezyonos, so then, uh, y- y- you give it to a child. But if there is mezyonos, so what's the problem? Everyone can have now Kiddish b'ruchim sud. Now, ho-- after that, after that, I came home, and I looked up in Piskei Teshuvos. And I see although some say as I had said, but others disagree with that. And you can see this on the screen. This is Piskei Teshuvos Siman Reish Ayin Gimel. Um,

46:37 Speaker 1 Osios Alef. He writes, "Yesh hakosvim that the Kiddish, um, that the Kiddish at the bris doesn't really fit the bill for the-- to be the Kiddish b'ruchim sud," et cetera. And there- therefore, you should do Kiddish separately. So I got back to them, and I said, "All right, so then do what is written over here, that, that Shuchan Aruch give it to a child." Oh. Now, so again, I just see Rabbi Levi Sudek is just joining us, um, about a bris on Shabbos. What do you do about, about, uh, the Kos Shel Bracha? So the way it's written in Shuchan Aruch is to give it to a child. If you remember, just a couple of weeks ago, we spoke about Kiddish b'ruchim sud, that it should be leolter. That the Kiddish should be... There shouldn't be a significant interval between the Kiddish and the, and the meal. Now, what's happening over here by a bris, so you're standing there, you're holding the cup of wine, you make the brocha, and then the second brocha. And then there's the, the, the, um, the naming of the child. Then there's a Mi Sheberach. Then there's Aleinu Leshabeach. And then there's everyone has to c- come over and, uh, uh, give a hug and a kiss and give mazel tov. And only then you're gonna go and have a mezyonos. It's, it's a few minutes delay. Not only is it a few minutes in time, which is the lesser problem because it's less than ten minutes, which still

48:06 Speaker 1 be called leolter. But in mind, it's a total... It's a different... You're distracted. Now you're focusing on the bris and mazel tov. And then, oh, yeah, we're gonna have now some mezyonos. So I can see the v-- the argument is saying, "Don't, you know... Keep them separate. And at the bris, give the wine to a child. Then after the bris, then some of them make Kiddish, and everyone will en- enjoy the, the, um, mezyonos and have Kiddish b'ruchim sud." Okay, we have one extra thing which is not on your list. Um, I've told you a few times probably that I've been working on, on a manuscript which was written about a hundred and twenty and thirty years ago. And one thing which I just came... We were working on this past week was a question about Selichos. And that is we have the... In the Selichos, we have this piece, "Mi She'onnu Avraham Avinu Behar Ha'Moria Hu Yaaneinu," et cetera. "Mi She'onnu Yitzchak," et cetera. And then this is... He says it's obviously drawn from the Mishnah, where Mishnah in town is paying base. And it says that they would have, uh, when they would have the fast for rain, so then they would add brachas to the Shemoneh Esreh. They add six brachas to the Shemoneh Esreh, and it started off after Goel Yisroel before Raffeinu. That's where they added the six brachas. And, and in Goel Yisroel, they added, "Mi She'onnu es Avraham Avinu Behar Ha'Moria Hu Yaaneh Eschem," whoever the one, the

49:49 Speaker 1 one who answered Avraham at the Mount Moriah, he should answer you and listen to your crying out. "Vayheima Ze, Baruch Hashem Goel Yisroel." The second one, which is the first of the added six, is, "Mi She'onnu Avoseinu Al Yam Suf," one who answered our forefathers, your forefathers at the, um, Red Sea. He should answer you and hear your cries out to this day. atem Yehova. Baruch Hashem. Zecha nischach, and so on. So he's asking a question. Why is it in the Mishnah it says, "Misha Ono Es Avraham Hu Ya Ne'eschem"? Why did the composer of the Selichos, who obviously is inspired by the lotion of the Mishnah, is taking it, he's borrowing it from the Mishnah. Why did he change it from LeAvraham, uh, and to Es-- from Es Avraham to LeAvraham? He goes into a whole dikduk discussion, um, little bit beyond my pay grade in, in dikduk, but he's asking I think a simple question, "Why is there a change here?" And at the end he says, "Whoever answers Yis Baruch HaMeis Hashem should have a baruch HaShem." So I'm, I'm keen to have a baruch from Hashem, and therefore I'm going to dare to answer this question. And with a premise that generally the style of brochos and tefillahs is if there is a similar precedent in Tanakh and as a pasuk, that would be used. So for example, the baruch on bread, "Hamotzi lechem min ha'aretz", because there's a pasuk, "Hamotzi lechem min ha'aretz". The baruch which we say, "Hanoson as

51:32 Speaker 1 ech vivino", there's a lotion of a pasuk in, in Iyov, "Oyminoson as ech vivino", and so on. Po kein chebri, and so on. Many of the supsie, the, the sheiness, many of the expressions in the brochos are borrowed from Sukkot. So now I'm looking at this setting up here. I'm, I'm comparing these two texts. What is significant between-- Uh, the significant difference is that in the Mishnah, there's a chazan who is davening aloud, and there's the congregation, and he is saying to the congregation, "Hu ya ne'eschem veYishma b'kohl tzarkaschem." He should answer you. He should hear your crying out on this day. In the Selichos, it's not someone speaking to an, an audience. It is a collective prayer. And therefore, we're speaking for ourselves as a group. Hu ya nenu rather than hu ya ne'eschem. Point number one. So there, I've, I've made two points here. Number one is that we try to, um, emulate, adopt the loshon ha'apasuk. The second one is it's a loshon, uh, that it, it's-- here we, we're speaking for ourselves. So now he asks, this writer, he asks, "Why don't we say in Selichos Misha Ono Es Avraham Avinu Hu Ya No Oison?" So my answer to that is the loshon of Ya No Oisonu, to my limited knowledge, is not a loshon of a pasuk. But Ya Anenu is. HaMelech Ya Anenu VeYom Korenu. That's the loshon of a pasuk. Therefore, Hu Ya Anenu is correct. Once the S is stop-- is dropped in the end of the

53:18 Speaker 1 phrase, of, of, of, of Hu Ya No Oisonu, instead it's Hu Ya Anenu, then it follows at the beginning of the phrase also should not be Misha Ono Es Avraham Avinu, but it should also go in this similar style without the S. And therefore, there's this change between it becoming Misha Ono LeAvraham instead of Es Avraham. I don't think there's much, um, more, m- significant difference. This is a stylistic difference, but I think that's enough to answer it. Once I have your attention about this, these seven, these seven, uh, brochos and additional prayers which are said on the Fast of Rain do appear in our siddur, but you may not be familiar with them, and they are in the... After the Selichos, in the Tehillas Hashem siddur, after Selichos for Sheva Asar B'Tammuz, there's a page of Selichos L'Tach Alui Yelodim Rachmanon L'Tsla. Selichos if there in the case where there be illness, uh, amongst children, there's a special selicha which would be added there. And in there it has actually Anenu Kim SheOnisu L'Avraham Avinu. And then the next one's Anenu Kim SheOnisu L'Avotenu Al Yam Suf. Third one's Anenu Kim SheOnisu L'Yeshua B'Gilgul. Anenu Kim SheOnisu L'Shmuel B'Mitzvah. And goes through the whole list. And, um, I just want to finish off that in this moment, Klal Yisroel are looking to the Hashem asking Anenu. We've seen, we're going through the parshas now, uh, of Kriyas Yam Suf. The Hashem, Anenu Kim SheOnisu L'Avosenu Al Yam Suf. So the Hashem, we ask Hashem

54:58 Speaker 1 collectively, Anenu. We should give a, uh, respon and give a Yeshua for Yidden, the hostages, and BeChlal Yisroel, BeChlal Yisroel Ne'eret Zakodesh. BeChlal Yisroel BeChol Makom SheHeim. Anenu Kim SheOnisu L'Avosenu Al Yam Suf. Bring us a Yeshua, a Yeshua Shlemu, the Mashiach Tzidkeinu. And to Motzei Shabbos, it is Eliyahu, which will be, uh, Mevaser DeGeulah. Hineh, Hineh, Geulah, uh, uh, Higiah Zman Geulaschem. And we should see a Geulah Shlemu with Mashiach Tzidkeinu b'mehera u'yamenu amech. A gut Shabbes. Shabbat shalom. Amen. Amen.

55:32 Speaker 2 Good Shabbos.

55:33 Speaker 1 Good Shabbos.

55:34 Speaker 3 Good Shabbos.

55:35 Speaker 2 Good Shabbos.