יתרו תשפ״ד

00:09 Good night of Shabbos. For many of you, by the time you hear this will be Motzaei Shabbos. . So I'm recording this from, uh, in, in New York. It came, uh, couple of days ago and, uh, to celebrate the engagement of my daughter, Mushka to her husband, Shmuel Yosef Greenbaum of Melbourne. Um, may Birshas HaElokim should be, um, be in another yard with the Asham Yavarach. Lots of naches, and thank you to so many people who did send in, um, wishes, response. You'd all be blessed with the abundant blessings of Hashem, uh, in all you need. Children, Parnassah, health in all and abundance. So let's go now to our questions which we have, um, during, during the past week, and a bit shorter than usual. Had a busy week traveling, etcetera. So first question which I have on the list is after Tachnun at Chacharis. So one morning this week, in a particular shul, so the chazan, instead of saying just half HaKaddish, he went and said, said the whole Kaddish. In other words, he said after van, um, um, after Tachnun, he said, "Tiskabel," after, uh, the Amir Val Livim Omei, he said that, um, Tiskabel Tzlusa all the way instead of back for Isha Shalom. So should he now... Normally, we only at that point we only say half Kaddish. Should he now go back and say, um, after Aval HaTzion, should he say the full Kaddish, or should he say, um, without Tiskabel? So let's explain a little bit more. Just to

02:24 fill you in. The term Tiskabel Tzlusa means may their pray-prayers be accepted upon high. And that is particularly focusing on the Shemoneh Esreh. So that is said after Shacharis, after Mincha, after Maariv, and on whenever Mussaf is said. That is said after Mussaf at any other stages in the Avni. So e-either it's like a, a shorter pause, and then it's the half Kaddish. If it's after Tehillim or similar, like after Shir Shel Yom, it'll be or after Aleinu, it's Kaddish Shalom without Tiskabel, otherwise known as Kaddish Yasom. And if it's after Mishnayos, learning Torah, so then it'll be Kaddish DeRabbanan. So now, here's a question that normally the understanding is that the Kaddish after Uval HaTzion, Tiskabel Tzlusa, is connected to the Kaddish, uh, is connected to the Shemoneh Esreh. And for some reason, it's not said right after Shemoneh Esreh, it's said after Uval HaTzion. This time, he said Tiskabel earlier. So he's already said Tiskabel Tzlusa and already said the prayer for the tefillah to be accepted. So therefore, it seems to be logical. There is no need to say it a second time because he already said the Tiskabel Tzlusa. But before rushing to answer this, I think we have to go back, uh, one, one step back. If indeed it's so logical that Tiskabel Tzlusa refers to the Shemoneh Esreh. So then we need to address why was it then... Why are we putting it at, at a stage later on a regular basis? Why are we normally doing it after

04:18 Uval HaTzion? Why aren't we saying that Kaddish, um, as early as possible right after Shemoneh Esreh or right after Tachnun? So this is, this is the... It has to be addressed before being able to answer with confidence the question at hand, whether Tiskabel should be said again or not. So, so again, what's the question? Why is Tiskabel Tzlusa not said sh-closer to, after the Shemoneh Esreh after Chazarat Hashatz? Why is it said later? So actually, this is a typical question for the Levush. So whereas other poskim deal with basically the Halakha, the Levush is very much into background, explaining how this meaning e-evolved, etcetera. So here we have on the screen, you have a quote from the Levush in Siman Nun Heh. Siman Nun Heh is addressing the first Kaddish, which is mandated after Yeshbach. And so he really goes into the discussion about the Kaddishim. They're also a Siman Nun Heh. That's where you talk about the minimum of a minyan, etcetera. So let's read the words of the Levush. Why is Tiskabel not said immediately? The Kedusha which we say in Uval HaTzion. Et cetera. And that's where the Gemara in Sota talks here. So we're saying Kedusha in Uval HaTzion. And that kedusha bas a tefillah greira. It's kind of, uh, appended to the tefillah, a fishe me enya, me enyan tefillah ve-shabach. Because it has within it a kind of prayer, kind of praise. Therefore, it's reflecting the tha- same themes at the Shemoneh Esrei itself. V'lachen mamtinin miloima tiskabel ad

06:32 achas sei de-kedusha. Therefore, tiskabel will be left until after kedusha. Kedeshe hei chozir gam al sei der ach kedusha. So that this prayer, tiskabel tzlorin, should also include the sei de-kedusha. So this-- in other words, this , not so clear what he's answering, explaining, but there's certainly a, a, a, a kavana. There was an intention why this Kaddish, tisk-- why, why this inclusion of Kadd-- of tiskabel b'tzlorin was put not immediate, but at a later stage after Ahavat Olam. To include that also the tiskabel b'tzlorin. Now, when I saw this question, my first go-to sefer is a sefer all about mistakes in davening, etc. She'kiyois mee ovin, very much a contemporary safer. And predictably, he had on this question, he had several opinions. At least two. One saying he should say tiskabel, and one saying he shouldn't say tiskabel. The one who particularly says you shouldn't say it again seems to be the, the, uh, safer, um, Sefer Beit Shloime. The Beit Shloime, his name was Rav Shloime Darimer. He was a Rav in, uh, I believe in Hungary, whatever, um, or in Galitzia. Rav Shloime Darimer, alav ha-shalom, who had the s- the, the store in Crown Heights, was a direct descendant. And actually, he funded the reprinting of his zeide's sefarim. So he says not to repeat tiskabel b'tzlorin. Once you've said it, you don't have to say it again. What we have on the left of your screen is from a safer called Shaalei Tzion. Shaalei Tzion, I've mentioned him, sh- sure

08:30 enough before. I had actually the good fortune to meet him when I started into rabbonim. On, uh... So I went for close to a month, shmash in Eretz Israel. And I went to various rabbonim to get from them ideas, guidance. One of them was Reb Ariel Lazarov. Reb Ariel Lazarov was then probably well into his eighties, quite frail, but he agreed to meet me. So he wrote this, this sefarim called Shaalei Tzion. Just to fill you in why he gave him, ga-he, he gave his sefarim this, this name. He was a Rav in Yerushalayim during the time of the British mandate. And he would answer shailas for the prisoners who, um, the Yiddish boys who were imprisoned by, by the British mandate for their revolutionary, uh, actity-activities. So you know the name Rab Ari Levin very much associated with that, that period. And but Reb, Reb Ariel Lazarov, he was passing the shailas for the, for the, for the Jewish boys who were imprisoned. And so his l- term, Shaalei Tzion shlom ha'uirayich, we have in the kinis on which we say on Tisha B'Av, Shaalei Tzion, um, Tzion halot tisha leiv shlom ha'uirayich. Tzion should be asked for the, the peace of its, uh, p-prisoners. That's in the name of his Sefer Shaalei Tzion. And so he, he, he writes, and this, this is, uh, unrelated to his career in answering shailas in prison. He, ba-- He answers this question. This is a fairly, uh, common question, apparently. And he writes, "Lafi ani is

10:24 da'iti oy nira laima shegam-" That even they should say, you say, oh, it's a tiskabel again, because the first time was a mistake. Therefore, there's no savorah that we should... Because you made a mistake earlier, therefore you shouldn't do the right thing now. And he brings a pos-- a lot of the Gemara in Brachos. If someone has eaten garlic and he has bad, um, smell, um, um, he has a foul smell in his mouth, so he should eat another piece of garlic. So on this idea. So you did a mistake. You, you didn't say tisk-- You, you said tiskabel, and you shouldn't have said it. This doesn't justify making another, uh, error of saying, of not saying it when you should say it. Then he, he, he then he refers to the Beit Shloime, to Rav Shloime Darimer's safer, who says the opposite. And he says it, it depends on the circumstances. There, he may have been talking about a different type of error. Let's say it would be Motzei Shabbos. If instead of saying the Kaddish Shalom after, um, after, um, um, uh, after Kaddish had been said earlier. I don't remember exactly. But he says it could be he was addressing a slightly different instance. But in this instance, he feels that we should, uh, he should say tiskabel a second time. And the fact he made a mistake before, okay, but you made a mistake before, but now do it right. Which to me makes a lot of sense, and, um, especially

12:02 when you have a later authority who's seen the words of the earlier one- So then that makes it so much more, uh, reliable. Idea of, of, um, hilchos hakabbalas ha'ah. You follow the, the later authority. When you see in the earlier authority considered his words and still formulated opinion to the contrary, okay. Which is a person who's a reliable authority, so you rely on the, on the later one. Point number two was a question which was on the list for the previous, uh, year, and for some reason I, uh, overlooked it. And a couple of people asked me about the omission. I said, "I'll, I'll deal with it this week, BeEzrat Hashem." So a fairly common question. But this woman made a grocery sh- um, order online and received some... Whatever, and received some dairy products, whether it was chocolate, whatever it may be. And it happens to be that it wasn't cholov Yisrael. Now, we know that there are many fine Jews who do not subscribe to a idea of cholov Yisrael, that they, they will use, um, dairy products without some Mashgiach going out to the fields, to the, to the dairy farms. And they are relying on Pri Chadash, and then of later, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, relying on the fact that there's a government, uh, regulation, whatever consideration, uh, other considerations. As a result, the, the, they are, uh, okay with having chocolates or whatever other products which are not cholov Yisrael. I want to throw in something. I had a couple

14:00 of shailas this past week. A woman from Italy, up from San Michealis, and she's, uh, asking me about cheese. She sends me a whole, uh, a shop, a range full of ch- of all different cheeses. She, she says, "For people who don't eat cholov Yisrael, are they allowed to have cheese?" So I responded to her, um, this is all derech aga, by the way. I responded to her that there's a separate Issur Gevinas Akum. Besides the Issur of Cholov Akum, which may or may not be relevant, applicable because of government supervision, et cetera, there's a separate thing of Gevinas Akum. And the reason for this is that Akum forbade this, it's Mishnit, you know, in, in a Talmud Zora, that because cheese is made with rennet, causing of the solidifying of the, of the, uh, milk is with rennet, and it was common to use animal rennet, which mean taking the stomach of a cow and drying it out, and then that's dipped into the milk. And apparently that has a chemical effect to, to, to separate the curds and whey, et cetera. And so it's this, this is a very interesting topic that why is it that if it's c-kosher from a kosher shechted animal, then the cheese is kosher, and if it's from a n-non-shechted animal, the ch-cheese is not okay. So when it comes to if it's from a kosher a-animal and kosher animal was shechted, then we'll say that since it doesn't have a taste of m-meat, so it's not a

15:39 problem milk and meat together. And nevertheless, when if it's from a non-shechted animal, so then what's called Neveilah in Lashon HaKodesh. So then we cannot ignore that this change of structure was brought about... The catalyst for this change of structure was this rennet, and it was from non- non-kosher rennet. Therefore, the cheese is asur. So that's a side issue about Gevinas Akum. But here we're talking about not cheese, we're talking about, let's say, chocolate or yogurt, perhaps. So, so Reuven, he, he has this non-cholov Yisrael stuff, cholov stam, cholov Nokri. And he has a neighbor who this is what they, they are quite happy to use it. So is it okay for Reuven to give away to Shimon something which Reuven himself would not use, but Shimon does use it? Is this a problem of, of, um, lifni iver? Is it a problem of giving something to someone else, something which you yourself wouldn't, uh, wouldn't rely on? So let's say in a similar question, when it comes to year of Shmita, produce of Shmita. So in Eretz Yisrael, there's many Rabbonim, many poskim who have allowed what's called Hefer Mekhirah. So the sale, the sale of the, the land to Goim, and as a result, this doesn't have a problem of Kedushat Shivis. The more Haredi Rabbonim have not accepted this. So now if I'm, I, I'm in... I live in Haifa and I have a grocery shop, a macolit. Am I allowed to sell stuff which is Hefer Mekhirah? That's a similar question.

17:21 It's a standard which I myself would not rely upon. Am I allowed to sell and provide this kind of product for others? And the general guidance on this, and you can hi-see on the, on the list of Vayimaen HaKomis, the general guidance of this is it's not a problem of lifni iver. You're not misleading anyone because they have-- they're relying on their poskim. So to mislead someone they don't know, and you're, you're, you're misleading them. Here, they're saying, "You know, I... For me, this is, I, I... It's kosher. It's reliable. I can-- I'm, I'm allowed to rely on this because that's my... My, my rab says it's okay." In that case, the provider would not be guilty of misleading because the, the, the, um, beneficiary is relying on their own authorities. Not everyone agrees This view that to provide stuff which you, you yourself won't rely upon because you're not satisfied with the cash flows, but you want to, um, give benefit to someone else, that, that would be okay. Let me just throw in something, another parallel. Let's say if you are in an area where there's an Aroof, which you yourself don't rely on the Aroof, would you be allowed to give someone a bag to take home for their benefit? So then, uh, and they use the Aroof. So that wouldn't be a problem of Lifne Iveir. Where it would be more interesting, if you're asking them to do carrying, carrying something for you, and then it becomes an interesting dilemma. If

19:00 it's not good enough for you, why are you asking someone else to do it for yourself? But if it's good... If they are the beneficiaries, that's the primary, um, uh, then that would be more lenient. That's not a problem of issue of, of, uh, Lifne Iveir. If you want to look it up, you have the sources. One of them is in Encyclopedia Talmudis, Volume thirty-seven, the entry of Lifne Iveir, and that's on page here. Okay. We'll go on to the next point. Very, very common question, um, about light sensors. I just want to go one, back, back to the question about the Chalav Yisrael. And that is, someone asked me this past week, um, about a particular product. Oh, it was about baby milk. And they are, uh, expecting to give, the baby, the woman is expecting to give birth. It's, uh, it's a little bit more complex than the regular birth, and expect to have, uh, a cesarean and a prolonged stay in the hospital, and the hospital will insist on giving, um, the, uh, their, their milk and which is not Chalav Yisrael. So it turns out that this, this milk, which the hospital will provide, is made from milk powder. So I told him that really, you try what you can, right? Try to get Chalav Yisrael stuff. But if push comes to shove, there is the Hardt Zvi, who was a pace of Franc, was a Rabbi in Yerushalayim, uh, going back fifty years ago or more, sixty years ago. But

20:35 he was asked about lactose, which is used in many, many, uh, tablets, medications. And he takes the view that just like there's a heter as far as butter is concerned, that butter cannot be made from anything that, uh, other than cow's milk. Therefore, the Loshon of Shechinah is ein nimchas v'adam mechilim. There is a tolerance for those who are, uh, uh, use, uh, no, um, butter which isn't Chalav Yisrael. So his understanding is that milk powder can also only be made from cow's milk, not from non-conscious species. Consequently, he allows the use of medicines which have milk powder in them or lactose because the cow, because it couldn't be made from anything other than a cow. Okay. Cow's milk, I mean. Yeah. Okay. Now we come to the next question, a very, very common question in mainland Europe, where so many people are... m-majority of the population, I guess, in towns and cities are living in apartment buildings. It's becoming more and more common. The two issues, one is about electronic or electro, uh, locks, which is one issue, but the other one is about the lighting in the hallways, that there are sensors, and when you walk through, so the lighting goes on. And you wanna get to your house, you wanna get in. Do you have to stay put in your house, in your apartment, or are you allowed to walk through the corridors even though the lighting is going to be activated? Now, there is a term of sicration. So if you,

22:13 you wanna say, "I don't have intention. I'm walking through. I don't, I don't need the pencil." But sicration, it's inevitable. But if you have no benefit from it, so we have a term, sicration de lo nichale. It's an inevitable consequence, but you have no interest in that happening. And the, the Oruch, who lived, uh, about eleven hundred years ago, he takes the view that sicration de lo nichale is permitted. Others disagree, and it's not allowed. But then if it were an Isu min Hatorah, it would be more chamor. If it's an Isu d'Rabonam, would we rely on, on the het of sicration de lo nichale. So we'll, we'll look at this in a moment in, inside. But what is the lighting? Is it, is it, uh, lighting incandescent bulbs, which that is Eish Mamash, the glowing hot, uh, metal wire inside the, the tungsten inside the bulb. That's more a Sha'ale of Min Hatorah. If it's fluorescent, if it's... Certainly, if it's LED, which is becoming more, more common. If they are into saving money on lighting, probably they're using LED bulbs or lighting which are not, not... There's no H there. Therefore, you're talking about sicration de lo nichale, Beis D'Rabon. What are mid lo nichale? So what is really crucial here is, is there minimal lighting in the hallway? And so really, you could manage without the lighting which is, uh, switched on because there's a bit of a security light. It's quite dim, but you, you're not gonna fall over. You can,

23:52 you can see where you're going. But then for comfort, the light, the, the bigger lights go on. Then you could say, "I can manage without those, uh, the extra light." Then you can say, "Sicration de lo nichale. I'm not interested in those extra lights. I can manage without." Then there's room to be mekil that you would be allowed to walk through. Uh, whereas if they l- there's n-no lighting in the corridor at all, only it is pitch black, unless the activ- the sensor is activated, then you cannot say, "I have no interest." Of course. Or you, you can't walk in the, in pitch black. It's very, um, s- It, it can be dangerous even. You might s- commit, maybe bump into something. There's a missed step. So you d- of course you need the light. Then it would be harder. And so if that is the case, okay, so the... What, what you have in front of you is actually from an article, uh, uh, written. There's a volume called Shaalas Teshuvas Rabonei Europa. So we have an organization called Mekas Rabonei Europa, and we used to have a monthly newsletter, which would have a, a Halakha article. So... And then later, these articles were put together and put into a volume called Shaalas Teshuvas Rabonei Europa. And here, one of the Rabbonim addresses this, th-this is the, his conclusion, and in the, the following article, Rabirim... The first one is from a Rabbim called, someone called Rabbi Haltovski, uh, who lived in Antwerp. And

25:24 then Rabirim Yacoin, who's an, a very, uh, eminent Talmid Chacham, Rab-been, uh, Rab-been various communities. He also weighs in, uh, with the same conclusion, practically, that you are allowed to rely on i-if, if, if the, if there is minimal lighting in the hallway, then you can rely on the prin-principle of secration de la nicole to be able to wa-walk through. If it is, the arrangements are that there are no lighting, there is no lighting at all in the hallway, so then the recommendation is that the Jewish householder who owns an apartment should, before Shabbos, put in the corridor. He should put in his own lighting, uh, lantern or battery-operated, possibly, have it hanging in the hallway, and then he, then he can say, "I don't need to have the extra lightings going on because I already have lighting there in any case." Of course, that's gonna be easier if it's only one floor. If it's gonna be several floors, it's gonna be more of a challenge to do it. But that is really, um, the only way we could allow walking past and the sensors activating the sta-- the lighting because you could manage without. So really, this is what, what you have on the s-- on the sheet here, on, on the screen. Um, he says that... This in like the fourth paragraph. He says, "If the corridor is absolutely pitch black, and without light you wouldn't be able to go there, then you'd, then you would say it's Nicole. You do have benefit

27:02 from the sensor lighting, and then you wouldn't be allowed to, um, walk through on Shabbos." Uh, so it said this is this ar-arrangement you can make, that there should be a ba-- a, a battery-operated or whatever, a, a, some kind of minimal light from before Shabbos for the evening, and that would a-allow you then to walk through despite the fact that you're activating. Now, of course, all of this is not a comfortable arrangement. Well, what I'm, I'm getting the impression from the people living in various cities in Europe, is partially it is very, very difficult to find a, a dwelling, um, without conceding on this. And so it just can sometimes be a question, do I just stay in a tiny, uh, apartment, suffer, and be in for years till I find something suitable, or do we go along with it? The other one with the, with the, uh, door entry, that's not as simple. On the other hand, there is a s-- that, that there's a solution. You can find some way of having a signal to the someone who's inside. She should come and open the door for you, et cetera, et cetera. Um, yeah, that's, that's the whole... That's another partial with how do you release the door? Does it mean you have to press the button to release? Can you release it mechanically? But that's another discussion. But meanwhile, we're talking about the, the light sensors being the issue. Okay. I want to continue the... There's some, I had some further

28:30 feedback about the whole story about the, uh, hotel in Yerushalayim, where the Arab waiter said that they warmed up the fish and the, um, chicken with gravy on Shabbos. Right. So now I got here two issues. One is if it's done by a Yid or... And then about... So someone wrote to me that there is a header to... I think that's what we had last week. That if the Jew puts it on the hot plate before it goes on, and then later it'll go on. So what we have here on the screen, the couple of sources, um, one is from the Pidor. Now, the Chidor is around the time of the Alta Rebbe. And there is a rule about Amirul Al-Nachri. Amirul Al-Nachri is, it says Rabbona. What if the issue at hand is debated? So I think I've used that example in the past. I won't open a can on Shabbos because of the worry of Binyan, of Yesh Binyan B'chalim. Now, the word of Yesh Binyan B'chalim, Ein Binyan B'chalim is Machlokes, uh, in, uh, Bis Shama Bis Hillal, and it remains in Machlokes throughout the generations. Yesh Binyan B'chalim or Ein Binyan B'chalim. So w-we are Machmir, as if the Yesh Binyan B'chalim, which means that there is, if you make a Keili, you're, you're in violation of Binyan. But there remains an opinion which says, Ein Binyan B'chalim, it's not a problem of Binyan. So for Amirul Al-Nachri, we will, we, we can rely on the more lenient opinion. So when

30:12 you have a Machlokes L'Halacha in a question, you say, "Min Hatorah." So as far as asking a goy to do so, you can rely on the lenient opinion. It says it, it is permitted. So I would ask a goy to open a can, I wouldn't hesitate because of the combinations, the Amirul Al-Nachri and the Yashim Em Ein Binyan B'chalim. So the Chidor uses the same idea here with reheating a, a liquid. If you remember last week, we had a discussion. Yash Bishalaha Bishu B'davar Alach, Ein Bishalaha Bishu B'davar Alach. Is reheating a liquid subject to Ishru Bishul or not? And the, we pass in that reheating a liquid is called Bishu, and we consider it a Semina Torah. It doesn't take away from the fact that there is an opinion that Ein Bishalaha Bishu B'davar Alach, that reheating liquid is Mutam Min Hatorah. So as far as asking a goy, one can rely on the lenient opinion that ain bishul achar bishul ve'davar ach, and therefore it would be permitted to ask a goy to reheat liquid. That is what the Chidah writes in his Sefer. Now, he's got a Sefer called Birkei Yosef, and then he has a further Sefer called Machzik Beracha, and then it's a vo-a volume called Shiurei Beracha, and these are all commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch in a orderly way, and throughout the whole Sh-Shulchan Aruch, basically. And so this is in the Shiurei Beracha in Siman Shin Yod Ches. And as the Chidah was really very much, um,

31:49 although he was an int- tremendous, um, uh, you know, Talmud Chacham in his own right, but he's a very much a melaked. And you can see here at the end of the line, he's, he's writing Maharash, Shaar, Aryeh, and Mahari"l, et cetera, et cetera. Okay. Mahari"l, sorry, Mahari"l Vali. He brings from some poskim who... Some pos-- Sefardic poskim who rely on the, the fact that bishul achar bishul ve'davar ach is, is debated, therefore they allow asking a goy to do so. Right. Um, that's about asking a goy. From the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, which we saw last week, the Siman, uh, Siman Reish Shin Gimel Sif Kuf He, it's clear that the Alter Rebbe doesn't allow it. He doesn't say that. Be'di eved, if it was done, then you would, um, be permitted to use it. And you can ask the question, why-- what's, what's the guidelines? Why sometimes do we say, "Oh, since it's a Minorit Ha'Ochr, you can rely on the, on the min- on the minority opinion." Okay. That's, uh, the question is how this opinion, which we don't follow, how, how, um, how far is it from, from being accepted Halacha? So I guess the weight. How much weight does it have? The more weight it has that it is accepted, the more it would be allowed to ask a goy to do so, and if it's less accepted, so then perhaps one wouldn't be allowed to ask a goy. So be'di eved would be okay, as I've just said, uh,

33:26 lechatchilah to ask a goy. According to the Alter Rebbe, I get the impression the answer is no. Right. So now we're coming back to the other question. What about, what about, um, putting a gravy or similar on a hot plate which is going to switch on on Shabbos? And so that's what someone had written, and that is okay. So I was given two references, one to, um... Someone sent me a shiur of some rabbi here in, I think, in... Here in the, in-- Well, here can be United States or England, but it doesn't matter. He, he, he gave a reference to Shmiras Shabbos KeHilchoso and to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. So I did not have the references to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef's exactly, but I've got his, the Sefer of Yalkut Yosef, which is from his son, from Rosh, Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Yitzchak Yosef, and he writes the following. "Yesh omeimrim that you are allowed to place on Friday, you can put a cold food with a soup on a hot plate, which is switched off, and on Shabbos, this hot plate will switch on with a time switch, and the soup will be heated. Others disagree, even if you had put the soup there before Shabbos. Ha'ikar Hadina is that you can rely on the first opinion. Amach mitav v'aloch bracha." So you can see here clearly, he's saying if the soup was placed on the hot plate before Shabbos, that also is debated, and there he takes the lenient opinion, and possibly also incorporating the

35:12 Svara of ein bishul achar bishul even bedavar ach. But he's only allowing it from before Shabbos. He's not allowing on Shabbos. That's with the same time switch, yeah? But he only allows it if you do it before Shabbos. Now, let's take a look in the Shmiras Shabbos KeHilchoso, his other source. He says, "You've got here a kadeira, which has got hot foo- um, cooked food. You're allowed to put it on a, uh, on electric stove, which is not working now, and it's on a time switch, and, uh, uh, and then it'll, it'll go... It'll be switched on during Shabbos." Now, if you put that pot on before Shabbos, now let's say it's eight o'clock it's gonna switch on. How about at seven o'clock you take the pot off just for a minute, and you put it back? Now, he says that's not allowed because once you took it off, the status quo is going, gonna remain cold. When you're putting it back is you are effectively cooking it, um, indirectly. So this is Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach's edition. You can see in the... This is from the newest edition of the Shmiras Shabbos KeHilchoso. In the older edition, this is a, a note at the back that Rav Shlomo Zalman says, "Don't take off the pot off the, the, the cold stove and put it... Cold hot plate and put it back before the reconnection." So that's clear that he does not allow putting it on when the, uh, on Shabbos to put it on,

36:39 uh, take it... So in other words, the picture of taking out the soup from the fridge and putting it on the hot plate an hour before it's go-gonna switched on, neither Rav, Rav Yalkut Yosef nor the Shmiras Shabbos KeHilchoso permit this. To ask a goy, yes. To ask a goy, here you have. You can say to a goy to place a tavshil, uh, a pot with food, uh, uh, it's cold on the hot plate, which will be switched on pre-presently, um, with a tahat. So then that's, that will, that will be okay. To ask a goy to put it on before the- The hot plate is switched on. Okay, that, that, that could be okay. It seems to be okay. Um, so then after this, after I put this on the screen already, so then I saw further communication. Someone is writing that you would be allowed to put it on Shabbos if the, this Moroccan fish, which has got a gravy, if it's what's called meztamik ve'aralay. It's not make-- it's not enhancing its taste, it's going to spoil the taste. That whole thing was going to be very... First of all, you're seeing here, it's very shvah, uh, to be, to allow it, and, um, also the practicalities. Is it true that the gravy is gonna have a, how you say, a deteriorating taste or the contrary, it's actually gonna become buggish mak? Um, so that all this doesn't, doesn't hold, and, uh, to put it on, on Shabbos, that would not be

38:03 okay. And one last thing that I know that Rav Padver, zikhrono livrakhah, so who was the Rav in, in London for many, many years, he refused the pic-- the caterer's request to have the kugels sitting on hot plates which are going to switch on by a time switch on Shabbos. He felt this, this whole idea that you have now it's cold, and then it's going to switch on on Shabbos, it's, uh, asking for trouble. People are going to abuse it, and you, you're gonna say you put it only on before Shabbos. The next thing is they're gonna put it on Shabbos, um, and it's, it's just asking for trouble. So the caterers would have loved to have the system, that they could have kugels switching, you know, cold kugels on cold hot plates from before Shabbos. On Shabbos morning, it switches on, so like this, the kugel will be hot, and it won't be dried out, and it will be a shmak, and they'll get a-another job next week, et cetera. The caterers would love to do that, and, uh, Rav Padver did not allow it because of it's, it is asking for trouble. Okay. So that's as much as, uh, for this parasha about the reheating of liquids on Shabbos. One last thing which I have on the list. So... Uh, no, I've got two more thing, two more things. One is about reheating... Uh, sorry, leaving liquid uncovered overnight. I'm sorry, for some reason, it's not on the screen, but you have a,

39:41 a source in the Ateret Zekenah. Um, so you have, you have here that... So you have a steer, a source in Zekenah and in Ateret Zekenah. So in, in Zekenah, Siman Yod Heh kuf tazain, that's where we have the dinim of foods which engage a Sakan, which is a danger. So there are many, many things which for some reason, Hakhamem were concerned, and they told us, for safety reasons, don't use this. And one of them, one of those is Mayim Geluyim, water or other liquids which should be left exposed. The main reason is because of the possibility of a snake crawling in and having a sip and leaving some venom. So then, and then the Zekenah itself says that nowadays, the, the... It's hardly, uh, hardly likely that snakes will find their way into our kitchens and to, and to our drinks. Therefore, liquids which were left exposed overnight is not a problem. You are allowed to have that. So people very often ask this question, that's why I'm addressing it. Is there a problem with a lift-- with a jug of orange juice which was, uh, were left open overnight? Uh, and the answer is, is it is okay. Um, and it was except, with the exception of wine. Case of wine, then there is in Ateret Zekenah, which you have here in the dinim of Kiddish. So he says you should not use wine which was left exposed because it's a kind of thing which you would not offer to a, to an

41:25 important person, and therefore you shouldn't, uh, use, um, use it for Kiddish. I use a famous expression. I think we discussed this in previous years. I wanna apologize about repeating myself. "Akrivehu nol afecha secha," would you offer this to your, to your account? And o-one last thing, and that is, as I was on the, uh, traveling this week on We-Wednesday, somehow I managed to damage one of my fingernails, and there was like, I guess, I didn't even, couldn't see, but it wa-- I could feel it like a split. And like, you know, when you pass along a, a smooth surface, you can feel like it's catching. And then I realized I have a problem for Netilat Yadayim. I'm a very little fan of Mezzah's bread. So if it's bread, I'm having for a meal, it's hamotzi. So all right, what do you do for washing Netilat Yadayim on the plane? Okay. So we're not normally so happy to use the bathroom, but that's, that's the only facility. I think that's more mehudar to use the water and do Netilat Yadayim than to, to cop out called Mezzah's bread. When you're having Mezzah's bread and having a full meal, uh, y-y-and you're, you're missing out on a mitzvah of, a proper brocha, uh, of, of benching, which is a mitzvah in the Torah. Anyway, so now I've got this split nail. Now, here becomes a question of chatzitza. Basically, the water has to cover every... When you wash Netilat Yadayim, like when you go to mikvah,

43:05 so the water has to cover the entire body. There shouldn't be any hefsek, any which... Chatzitza means like split, like the word mechitza, something which is a barrier, which is not allowing the water to come to, in contact with the, with the skin, et cetera. And so with the netilat yadayim, we have the same idea that there should not be a chatzitza. There shouldn't be anything interrupting between the water and your body. So now, when you have a cracked nail, so then the surface of the nail should have water arriving and reaching there. In the crack, also, it's now the surface. The, the, the... What was till now inside the nail, which water doesn't need to reach inside the body, now it's, you've got the, uh, the surface has got, uh, the crack, it got a, is a, is a surface inside, two surfaces by the side of the nail. But because the nail is, because of the, the pressure of the way the nail is, water is not gonna penetrate inside the crack. So really, you have a problem of chatzitza. Um, so let's read this in the Alter Rebe of the Shulchan Aruch, and then we'll read the reference in, in Shu- in Yoreh De'ah, in the dinim of, of, um, chatzitza for tevilah. So in Siman kuf samech alef, we have here, the Alter Rebe writes, "Tzorich..." Let's read this carefully. "Tzorich lizorer," one needs to be careful, "b'zipurin," with the nail, "shepisho miuto." If part of the nai- if the mi-minority

44:41 of the nail has been disconnected, "lokach oso," you have to di- c- cut it away, "shehich chotzes," because that little part of the nail is going to be a problem of chatzitza, as discussed, as will be discussed in Yoreh De'ah Siman kuf tzadik ches. Unfortunately, we do not have the Alter Rebe Shulchan Aruch on Yoreh De'ah kuf tzadik ches, but this is what we have in the Shulchan Aruch of Rabbi Yosef Karo. He writes, "Tzipurin ha-mudldeles," kuf tzadik ches chaf alef, "Tzipurin ha-mudldeles." If there's a, an, a nail which is a little bit dangling, "shepisho miuto," only the minority have sep- of the nail has separated from the main body of the nail, "chotzes." Then we have a problem of chatzitza. "Pesho rubo," if the majority of the nail has separated, "aino chotzes." That's not a chatzitza. And you look in the, uh, Taz, et cetera, and basically the idea is, if the majority of the nail is broken away from the main body, then the crack is a wider crack, and the water of the mikvah, or in our case, netilat yadayim, will be able to enter inside, and therefore it's not a problem of chatzitza. If it's a s- only a mi-minority of the nail is, is, is, uh, loose, so then the, uh, the, the, the loose bit of nail is going to be more pressed against the main body of the nail, and hence is going to be a chatzitza. Now, I wanna just throw in one more point. There is

46:20 also an idea of, "Kol ha'omed likotzeis k'katzo tzami." There is, when it comes to mikvah, we take the view that if it is slated for removal, then it's as if it were removed, and that represents itself a chatzitza. So let's say, uh, for, before mikvah, a woman normally cuts her nails, and if she doesn't cut her nails, so then there's an argument to say this, the, the nail edge which would have been exposed through cutting of the nails needs to be... Well, it's, it's as if it were, needs to, as if it were cut away already, the top of the nail. And therefore, that, that, that, the thickness of the nail needs to have contact with the water. But meanwhile, the nail hasn't been cut, so therefore water can't get there. So there's this opinion which says that even, uh, if the nail is in perfect condition, but because it's slated for removal, then already that's a chatzitza. It looks like the Shulchan Aruch here is not taking such an extreme position, um, although in, by mikvah, we are ca- careful about that. He's saying here it's already cracked, but it's the minority, uh, not the majority. But meanwhile, it's, it is an obstruction. The nail, the minority of the nail is an obstruction for the, uh, water to reach there, and as a result, it, it does create a problem of chatzitza. So if you, if someone caught me, uh, on camera biting my nails, that's because I, uh, had a problem of chatzitza,

47:50 and I didn't have nail clippers, so that was one way of solving the problem. Uh, if it would be a pro- on Shabbos, that would be, uh, another parshah, um, but then I wouldn't get caught on camera, hopefully. Meanwhile, I'll wish you a good Shabbos, and Motzei Shabbos, and gut Shabbos for those who are gonna hear Motzei Shabbos. And, uh, we should hear Besuras Tovos, uh, Besuras HaGeulah, uh, for those hearing Motzei Shabbos. We should hear the Besuras HaGeulah from Eliyahu Hanavi, who tell us that Mashiach is on his way. And we should see the Geulah Shleima, Mashiach Tzidkeinu, Malkeinu, Vedasheinu. Kol tuv.