דברים תשפ״ד

00:08 Speaker 1 Good evening. Welcome to tonight's Shear, Thursday of Parshas Devarim, coming up to Shabbos Hazoin. And that's got to do with the-- We're, we're focusing on the Beis Hamikdash this time of the year. And so the Rebbe encouraged us to learn about the Beis Hamikdash during this time. And so I want to start off with something about the, about the Beis Hamikdash Hashlishi. So here you have on the screen, you have a plan, a floor plan of the Beis Hamikdash Hashlishi, where we have towards the, uh, west, we've got the building. On the center, we've got the, uh, small-- the inner azarah, the inner courtyard. And then what we're gonna be focused on today is on the sides of the main building, we've got these large buildings, which are fifty amas wide and a hundred amas long, and they are made of three floors. Um, so I want to explore that, the Pasuk about the Yechezkel. But let's just see here. Um, this is a couple of times sent-- showed-- shared drawings of my son, Yaakov. And what actually inspired him to get into, uh, 3D art, um, is because he was making, um, design and, and 3D models on computer of the Kalim of the Beis Hamikdash, and this is his, uh, source of Parnasa nowadays, alongside his Shlichas in Wyoming. So, okay. So I just wanna share that picture with you, and then we'll go on. Right. So we've got the Pasuk in Yechezkel. This is in Yechezkel chapter mem beis, chapter forty-two, and

02:07 Speaker 1 it talks about the, this, this structure, which I said is like on the side of the main building. It's, uh, sort of fifty by a hundred. And he mentions about the Atik, El Pnei Atik, which is understood as being columns, Bashlishim. And then he talks about the passage of ten Amas. But then comes along Pasuk Hey. "Vehalashochos Yoinos Ketsuros." The upper floors of these chambers are narrow. "Ki Yuchlu Atikim Meheino," because they have-- space has been eaten away from them. "May HaTechtoinos U'Matihonos Binyan," because of the structure of the lower and middle floors. "Kim sheloshos heino." They are three floors high. "Ve'eino hen amudim ka'amudei chatzeyres." They don't have regular columns, like amudim of the courtyards. "Al ken netzol matachtoinos umachtainos mealetz." Therefore, something is taken away fr-- because of the lower and middle floors. So what exactly is going on? Why is the top floor, Ketsuros, is narrow because of the, because of the beams, the columns on the m-middle and lower floor. On the contrary, if the top, the top floor doesn't need any build-- doesn't need to have any columns, so then the top floor should be the most spacious because it doesn't need to have any columns to hold up another floor. And Rashi says, "Ki sheloshos hen luihevanti bohem klal," I don't understand what's going on here, says Rashi. And the Radak similarly says, "But aimani parashas oyev sechel yod parasha." I'm, I'm baffled. He says it's going to be explained by Eliyahu HaNavi. So I'm going to try to,

04:11 Speaker 1 since we're looking for Eliyahu HaNavi and waiting for him to tell us the Geulah, I'm just going to guess ahead, a-- s-suggest what this, what th-these columns are and why the top floor is narrower. That the columns, instead of being as columns of chatzeyres, which were typically vertical, here, these columns, possibly made of wood, would be, uh, at an angle leading towards the middle. And that's actually a, um, I believe, a very strong way of very sturdy kind of structure, because a fur-- a straight wall may be somehow fall over. But when the weight of the wall comes towards the middle, when the weight of the columns is towards the middle, it's not gonna fall over to the outside. And so long as the beams in the middle remain firm, it's going to actually-- the, the weight will keep it in place. And because of this, because of these kind of, uh, uh, diagonal columns, the, the Atikim are diagonal. Therefore, that makes the lower space is wider, but the upper floor is narrower. That's my suggestion. Um, we're going to go on to a Halakhah question, which is the main focus of our Shear. But I must, I must share you one, one more thing, which, uh, I noticed in Rabbeinu Bechaye in this week's Parsha. And he says-- He talks about the Lishkas Hagozis, and he says that's got to do with the Lotan of cutting, because that is the chamber where the ps-- the, uh, supreme Sanhedrin were seated. And the word,

06:07 Speaker 1 by the way, the word decision in English is loshon to cut, like incision. And the loshon in Hebrew, or psak, means to, to, to kind of divide it. That's exactly where it goes. You cut it over here, lahafzik. So that's why it's called lishkas hagozis, the loshon of cutting, because it was a place where decisions were made. Okay, let's go on. So we have here a fine mother, Jewish mother, asked me. She's sitting in her living room, and there are Sforim on the shelves. New, new baby. She's sitting there, and, uh, sometimes the baby doesn't, um, cooperate with being covered. And so she's asking, is she allowed to be partially, uh, exposed in the front of the s- in the presence of the Sforim? So I looked around a bit, and what you have on the screen is from the Sforim of the late Rav Falk of Gateshead. So he's got a Sefer in English called Oy Zevachad L'Vusha, and then he's got in Hebrew, uh, that has also been translated from the English into Hebrew, apparently. He's also got a more lamdashas kind of work called L'Vusha Shel Torah in two volumes, and he explains this. There is the term erva, and we have to be careful not to expose erva, uh, in the presence of something sacred. So the erva would be basically the, uh, the lower parts of the body. That's the erva. Any other parts of the body are not strictly erva, but they are normally covered. So it's not s'nius

07:59 Speaker 1 to be exposed, but it's not erva per se. And so he's differentiating here that in the presence of a man, even if it were her husband, so the, these, uh, this is, uh, how do you say? Um, seeing areas which are normally covered, seeing them exposed would be stimulating a certain, uh, ta'avah, et cetera, and therefore it's not appropriate. But for the woman herself, that's not a problem. That's not a, that's not a, not an exposure which is a problem for herself. So she is allowed to, uh, even s- There's a famous Mishnah, "In chalah kotzer isha chalahso arumo m'p'nisheh poneha tuchas b'karkah." Her erva is covered, she's sitting, she's allowed to say a beracha, uh, et cetera. So that's for, in the presence of a man, a man wouldn't be able to say a beracha in the presence of her being exposed. But that's because of his machshavot of being, uh, in a, stimulated in an inappropriate way. But the Sforim is not a problem. So she's allowed to be in the presence of Sforim, and it's only erva mamash which would be an issue. And I think we've discussed it in the past, the Alter Rebbe in the Siddur does talk about, um, being careful not to change, uh, a nappy for a child right in the presence of Sforim. So if you do have to do that in the, in the, in the room where the Sforim are, to do it in a way that, uh, you'd kind of be in the

09:35 Speaker 1 way, intervene, that the erva of the child should not be exposed to the Sforim. Okay, let's move on to the next question. So now, whilst I was researching this, uh, about, um, uh, in the presence of Sforim, so I came across something which we discussed not long ago, and I'd said it differently. And that was whether you're allowed to put on tefillin with a man who's not wearing anything above the waist. And I'd said that I, the Alter Rebbe doesn't seem to have an issue of it, with it. It's only for Shemoneh Esreh, where you're omed lefne haMelech. I certainly did emphasize it's, it's not menshlech, it's not, not respectful. But strictly speaking, it would, would, would, uh, would be allowed. And I did mention the time that people who go on meftzoim in places where they'll meet, uh, people who are bare-chested, they sometimes will take with them a shirt of some sort to offer for the, uh, for their candidates for putting on tefillin. Okay. Having said that, so I was a bit surprised to see that there are sources to say clearly that it's not okay. And so this is the Magen Avraham in Siman Lamed Ches. He writes here, "Mishyech y'lim," one whose chest is bare, "should not wear tefillin." He quotes Knesses HaGedolah and Sefer Hasidim. Then he refers us to Siman Tsadik Aleph at the end of Ayin Dalet, where I think there it says it's not such a problem. Let's look at the Sefer Hasidim. So the Sefer

11:11 Speaker 1 Hasidim was written by Reb Yehuda HaChasid, living in the time of the Tosafists, so that's about seven hundred years ago. So he writes the following. That's chap-- That's, uh, entry seven seventy-four. So he says the following: "A person has tefillin on his arm, he shouldn't carry anything. If he has something to carry, he shouldn't carry it under his arm, because that would be dividing between his, the tefillin and his heart." Ah, you say he's wearing clothes. That's not a prob-- That's not a divide, because that's normal. But to carry, let's say, if you're having twil- tefillin to hold a, a, a large board under your arm, that would be inappropriate. Under your left arm. Yeah. That's the first thing. Second thing he says, um, "Don't cover your arm with a g- with your sleeve and put the t- tefillin on the sleeve," because that's the, the sleeve would be a chatzitz. Okay. Third thing which is relevant to our discussion is that if, he says, if a person is wearing michnasayim, is wearing briefs- But he is, uh, y- unaddressed from the michnasayim, from his waist upwards, so he should not wear tefillin because liboy orim, because his chest is bare, and that's not appropriate. Okay, so we have here Sefer Chassidim who says it's inappropriate to put on tefillin bare-chested. Well, all right. That was the obvious, but it's stated. It's got a source there. Very good. Let's move on. But as I said, the Alter Rebbe does not bring it, so strictly speaking,

12:50 Speaker 1 if push comes to shove, the answer would be it's okay, but it certainly is not a recommended practice. Very good. Okay, um, now about this... I know we've discussed this about putting on... Uh, sorry, about standing or sitting by Kriyat HaTorah. There's someone who's been corresponding with me about this, and that's why I've, um, I've revisited it. And the background is that in the first volume of Nesivim B'veis HaShlichus, I had written about this, and, um, I had... Part of the analysis had come across that it's okay to sit, and he's, he's, he's got an issue with that. Okay. So first of all, we have the Shulchan Aruch in Siman Kuf Bet Vav. Sure, the, uh, Rabbi Yosef Karo writes, "Ein tzorch la'amod b'mekor HaTorah," not an obligation to stand when there's a reading of the Torah. Then we have the Rama who says, "Yesh machmirim v'omdim," those who are particular do stand. V'chehen Osem HaRam, Rav Meir of Rothenburg, uh, was particular. Okay, so he's recommending. Now, before going further, in our conversation, myself and this, this, uh, correspondent of mine, so he refers me to a letter of the Rebbe which I was not aware of. A letter printed in Chelek, um, is it Chelek Chaf Daled? To someone, a Rabbi Shitrit, who lived in Yerushalayim at the time, and he'd asked the Rebbe several questions, and the Rebbe writes the following: "B'negeia la'amidah b'eis Kriyat HaTorah," in reference to whether to stand at Kriyat HaTorah. "Ein hago'as k'vet k'dushat Admor Mishmos Eidin,"

14:36 Speaker 1 the Rebbe Rashab, "Mishmos Eidin b'Siddur Toldos Hashem." Look up the notes of the Rebbe Rashab, which are printed in the Siddur Toldos Hashem, uh, um, which the note of the publisher says it's not referred to Toldos Hashem, it actually refers to the Siddur Torah Oh. Uh, fine. So, so, so here we have this letter of the Rebbe. You want to know about standing for Kriyat HaTorah, look up the Hago'ah of the Rebbe Rashab, which I'm going to look at with you. And he took the message, "Oh," he says, "that you should stand." And I'm going to discuss this with you, and let's see whether that is actually what the Rebbe Rashab come and said, uh, says. It's, uh, it's, uh, it's a lo- a long paragraph. We'll go through it patiently. Um, right. So there we go. "Ein B'derach HaChaim," top of the page. "Ein B'derach HaChaim" Siman Ein Vav, Seif Alef. Im tzrichim la'amod b'she'ah Kriyat HaTorah. The Darchei Chaim is written by Rav Yaakov Lissa, and it was around the time of the Alter Rebbe. Um, and he write... He says, "You want to look up there what he says, whether you need to stand at Kriyat HaTorah." So to help you, just beneath the, that larger quote, we have here where it says the Alef. This is from the Darchei Chaim. So let's read this. When, he says, "When you have... When the Oleh says Borchu, and the Kol answer Baruch Hashem Havochlo Olam Vaed. Yesh lohem la'amod." The congregation should stand

16:09 Speaker 1 for Borchu and the response of Baruch Hashem Havochlo Olam Vaed. "Uvebirchas Hashem Bocho Bano. O ве Kriyas HaTorah ein kol kach chiyuv." For the actua- for the berachos and for the actual reading, it's not such a chiyuv. "Eliyahu Rabbi Siman Kuf Bet Vav d'lo keMogen Avrom sham." Mogen Avrom, it, it took the view that the Birchas HaTorah, all are, are, um, are, are chiyuv to stand like for Borchu, and the Eliyahu Rabbi disagrees with him on that. To explain what's going on here, there's a concept called dovor shebikedusha, something which is only done, which is only allowed to be done in the presence of a Minyan. And so the Borchu is for sure a dovor shebikedusha. Are the Birchas HaTorah? Possibly. Well, you can say, you can, you can say on your, on your own. Okay. The Kriyas HaTorah, so he says that's, that's not the, the biggest chiyuv, yeah? But the, but the, here's the debate. Next. "Am nom ha'medakdikim machmirin al atsam ve'omdim." People are more particular do stand for Kriyas HaTorah. "Vechein nochrim." And then he adds, "The machmir also need not stand only for the reading, but not bein gavra ela gavra." Between aliyos, it's okay to sit. Right. And just in case you wanted to see, the Eliyahu Rabbi that's underneath here, that he disagrees with Mogen Avrom who says that, quoting the earlier Poskim, that for Birchas HaTorah, you have to stand. Says, "No, d'lesso, eleh b'Borchu, vanie boruch." That the emphasis is on the Borchu rather than the

17:58 Speaker 1 Birchas HaTorah. So now, coming back, having read those, those sources. When we read the, the first line of the Rebbe Rashab's note, "Ein B'derach HaChaim, im tzrichim la'amod b'Kriyas HaTorah." So, "Ein kol kach chiyuv, medakdikim machmirin al atsam." It's a hidur mitzvah, it's not a chiyuv. That's very clear at this stage. Next stage. «וּבִשְׁמוֹעַנו שְׁעוֹרִים שְׁעַר הַכְּבוֹנִים,» the writings of Rabbi Chaim Vital in the name of the Arizal, talking about Sefer Torah. He writes the Arizal would kiss the Sefer Torah, accompany it from where it was, where he met the Sefer Torah, until the table. «שְׁכוֹיִן שׁוֹם.» Now, the box means here the, what we call the bimah. «אַחֲכַךְ,» after he had... The Arizal had accompanied the Sefer Torah to the, to the bimah. «כּוֹזֶל וְכוֹמֵהוֹ רִישִׁין,» go back to his place. «מְיוֹשֵׁב מְיוּשְׁבוֹ עַד סִיאוּם קְרִיאַת הַפָּרָשָׁה.» The Arizal will remain seated throughout Kriyat HaTorah. «וְלוֹא כָּכָה שׁוֹן הַנּוֹהֲגִין לָהּ,» contrary to those who are accustomed to stand. Very interesting, yeah. So the Arizal took the view that it's okay to sit Kriyat HaTorah. And not only for Kriyat HaTorah, but also for the berakhot, uh, berakhot. He sat, he sat all the way through. That's very clear, yeah. Okay. That, that was the Sha'ar Hakavonot. Similar thing is the Pri Etz Hayim. Okay. «וְכֵן כָּה שַׁבְּסִידָה הָאֲרִזָּל אָב רַב שַׁבְּסִי רַשְׁקָא בָּזָּא.» Shabbtai Rashko is a Talmud of the Baal Shem Tov, and he compiled a siddur with the, according to the teaching of the Arizal, and that was of the four editions

19:43 Speaker 1 of the Siddur Arizal. It was Rav Shabbtai's siddur, which was the favorite of the Rebbe. The Rebbe, the Temim Tzedek would have it at the Seder night. He would have it on the, on the, um, the, the, on the bimah for Krias, Krias Shema, and our Rebbe also did the same. So all right. So that's the Shabbtai Rashko. Fine. There he quotes that the Arizal would sit for Kriyat HaTorah. «אַךְ שׁוֹם הוֹישִׁיב וְזֶה לָשׁוֹן. זֶהוּ כְּשֶׁיֵּשׁ עַל מֶמְרָא,» that's only if there is a bimah. So it's, that, that's the beset, the basic necess. So therefore, they have issues with the answer. But then the Sefer Torah and the whole, whatever is going on there is in a separate premises. «אַבָּל שְׁכוֹיִן עַל הַשּׁוּל חֲבָלֵי עַל מֶמְרָא,» but says Shabbtai Rashko that if there's no, um, raised platform, walls around it, then you should be standing, and only «בִּגַבְרָא לְגַבְרָא» can you sit. This is like... I know we discussed it last time, that what bothered me was if it's out of the respect for the Sefer Torah. So why can you sit «בִּגַבְרָא לְגַבְרָא?» So the answer which I understood was that you stand because there's someone who's having his Aliyah, not because of the Sefer Torah, but because of the «עֹלֵל הַתּוֹרָה.» And so that it's, therefore, you are in the same issues as the, as the, as the man who has the Aliyah. Now, then this becomes intrig- interesting. The Rebbe then, Rebbe Rashab, refers to the Esh Alav Rahm. That which the

21:15 Speaker 1 Esh Alav Rahm writes in Siman Kuf, Mem, Tes. That's referring to not Bishas Krias, Bishas Hakriah. Now, before reading the actual words, uh, of the Esh Alav Rahm, who is the Esh Alav Rahm? So just to make it, uh, interesting, there's three Esh Alav Rahms. There is the Pri Megadim's commentary on the Magen Avraham called Esh Alav Rahm. Then there's the B'chatchero, Rabbi Rahm David Weirman, who was a young man in the time of the Alter Rebbe. It's printed at the back of the Shulchan Aruch, also called Esh Alav Rahm. And then there are sporadic comments in the Shulchan Aruch from, forgotten who it is, by... called Esh Alav Rahm. So who is the Esh Alav Rahm who the Rebbe Rashab is referring to? It's not the Pri Megadim because it's irrelevant. What he writes is irrelevant. So what you have on the, the text here I copied out from, there's a volume called Sha'arei Yeshurah Torah Sholom. So about ten years ago, eleven years ago, Rabbi Berel Levin, zal zeyn gezunt, put together all the Halakha writings of the Rebbe Rashab into a volume, and he called it Torah Sholom. So he edited, and he put notes there. And so in reference to this, uh, Torah-- Esh Alav Rahm, he refers, he quotes from Rebbe, uh, the B'chatchero's comment. And the B'chatchero there is dealing with whether to take the Sefer Torah in before Asher Bendzin or after Asher Bendzin. And he writes, «שֶׁצִּרִיךְ לְמִיאוּס לְכַמָה אַנֹשִׁים לָעַמֶד כָּל כָּךְ בְּקוֹמֵת שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם בִּמָּה

22:53 Speaker 1 בְּבִנְיָן.» For people to stay, we have to remain standing all the way through Asher Bendzin. If there's no proper bimah with walls around it, so the people have to remain standing. Therefore, it's advantage to take the Sefer Torah before Asher Bendzin, which is indeed Mishnah Min HaGashkanos. Uh, I, I, um, I beg to differ with Rav Levin, and I wrote him an email also, because that's... Then he says, "Nearer Lee," the Rebbe Rashab says, "Nearer Lee sh'zes areb sh'lo b'shas hakriah." Which not nearer Lee, it's clear that Rebbe, that he's talking about sh'lo b'shas hakriah. And what you're seeing from him is that he seems to take the view that sh'lo, even sh'lo b'shas hakriah, um, if there's no bimah, you have to stand. Well, how, how does that fit with Rabb Shabbtai Rashko said you're allowed to sit בִּגַבְרָא לְגַבְרָא. So for sure, you're allowed to... If the Sefer Torah is present, you're allowed to sit, um, by Asher Bendzin. So I don't understand. You know, I don't... This, it doesn't seem to be relevant. But here we have at the bottom of the screen the Esh Alav Rahm, which is on the margin of the Shulchan Aruch. He quotes the Esh, the Elyah Rabba, "The Sefer Torah is on the bimah. You don't have to stand because the Sefer Torah is a different issues." Well, we've seen that already, yeah. Then he says, "The Taz adds, even if the Sefer Torah, even if it's not a bimah with walls around, if the shulchan

24:17 Speaker 1 is ten techim high and four techim square, and that is in Hilchas Shabbos makes it into a separate issues, then it's also the Sefer Torah separate issues." So now the... comes along the, the Esh Alav Rahm has brought a new idea. That just like you, if the Sefer Torah is in a raised platform bimah, you're allowed to sit. So the same thing is if the Sefer Torah is on a bimah, which is ten techim high, which most of our bimahs qualify for that. I say most because not all. Uh, some bimahs are made with a pedestal, et cetera, or with legs and not proper walls, and they don't qualify for shulchan. This is what the Rebbe Rashab is referring to. "Ma shekosu ve'Esh Alav Rahm. Siman Kuf, Beb Tes, Tes, Kot, and Alef." That when the Sefer Torah i- is on a... When the bimah is ten techim high, you are allowed to sit. Nearer Lee sh'zes sh'lo b'shas hakriah, not during Kriah.

25:15 Speaker 1 The, they say the same thing as the Shabsi Rashkiva. During, during Kriya, you have to stand up because of the Aliya, because the person's saying the Torah. Should it be Gavra l'Gavra, then you're allowed to sit. That is clear, in my mind, very clear what the Rebbe Rashab is saying. So let's, before flipping to the next slide. So we've got here, we started off, the, uh, um, Der Chechaim. Is it here to stand? It's a, it's a recommended Chumra. Medakdekim. The Arizal would sit. Then we have, well, even, uh, even, uh, if you take the Arizal, but it's not so cl- so clear, because if there's no raised Bima, then it is recommended to stand. Good. Now we go into the next slide. A Sefer Shulchan HaKriah. Now that's, uh, a Yekke ShaSefer on Krias HaTorah. Because that, he writes, "Im hu chalosh," the person is weak, uh, and he can't concentrate well. If he's standing, he's not gonna concentrate. "Yesh lo lehishev." Let him sit. Ach, no, what? He shouldn't sit straight ahead of the Bal Kriya because all right. Ah. So now, although we've said sources that there is a Chumra to stand, but "im hu chalosh," if you're, and you want... Chalosh doesn't mean you have to be walking around with a walking stick. It means chalosh, that you are in whatever, whatever reason, for you, for you to stand for throughout Krias HaTorah, you're going to be, um, unable to concentrate. That's, that, that's, that's it, that's the chalosh in this

26:47 Speaker 1 context. Well, if he's zeh yesh shelo. And this, I believe, this is what the Rebbe Rashab was driving at. He's talking about the following. In the Beit Midrash, and there's a Bima, and it's not with a raised platform. It's ten tefachim high and four tefachim square, and we've said that during Krias HaTorah, you should be standing. There's a Yid who's sitting and davening in the corner. He's, "ein hu nizel lishma Krias HaTorah." He's not now focusing on Krias HaTorah. Why? Because he heard before, he's gonna hear later, it's not my business. Meanwhile, "ez yitzdon davent umespalel beshas Krias HaTorah, v'hu chalosh." And here's the question. The Yid davened bar veida, and there's a Krias HaTorah going on. Does he have to stand? So now, what we saw here is, if there's no El Melech, then you have to stand, yeah? And then Zoktel, if during Krias HaTorah, we've seen here that chalosh is allowed to sit. So they're saying how much more so. If you're n- you're not focusing on Krias HaTorah, you're, you're davening. If you're not much and you're chalosh, yeah? So you're allowed to sit. What's the difference whether, yeah, whether the Chalishus will impede his focus on the Krias HaTorah, or in this case, it's gonna impede his focusing on his davening. Mutta lehishev. I believe that's what the Rebbe Rashab is driving at with this whole thing. He quoted the Arizal, he quoted the Sri Arizal. I think that his focus is the Yid was sits to the, is sitting

28:19 Speaker 1 in the, in, in the s- end of the Beit Midrash, and he's davening ve'archas, and there's a Krias HaTorah going on this, in the room. Is he allowed to continue sitting? And he says yes, if he's a chalosh. Okay. Um, I... Okay, and this is what came up, and last time we discussed this. What about the Hayom Yom? Does the Hayom Yom, it said to stand up for Asher Sa Dibros, does that mean you sit for the rest? So the answer now, I believe, is not like Head Rut and then. No. It doesn't mean you have to s- sit for the rest. It means that, that a lot of people are sitting for the rest because they are chalosh. Most people, many people, uh, even if they've had coffee and cake before davening, they don't necessarily, necessarily have the stamina to be able to focus, to stand and focus. It's all very well, some people have got standers, so they can lean on their standers. It's more comfortable to remain standing. But if you don't have a stander, you're standing there by a, by a table and you don't have proper support. So yeah, so it can be, it can be, uh, draining a bit. Zoktel. Sorry. The Hayom Yom, it says, "People who are sitting for," let's say because they are chalosh, but at least for Asher Sa Dibros and for, uh, for Shira, as for Hazak, stand up for that. So I, um, these, uh, the HaMashmas for the Cr- the Hayom Yom,

29:45 Speaker 1 I retract from that. Don't, no proof from there that's a minim to sit. But it is, it's a, it's, it's a common, uh, a c- common occurrence, a common, um, phenomenon that's, you know, it's okay. All right. I hope that's a bit clearer. Let's move on. So I know we're going, this has also been going on for a couple of weeks about someone who, um, said a Bir- Bracha Achronah, and he had forgotten that he'd eaten something earlier. And so I, I, I brought from the Ben Ish Chai in Rav Pe'alim that it brings here from a Sefer Shaar Asher that a person had had fruit and a wa- and a drink of water, and he made a Bracha Achronah on the water, and he's not yoitzeh for the fruit which he had forgotten about. And he bases himself on the Rashbo. On the Rashbo who says, "If you made a Bracha..." Now, he's talking the Rashbo Bracha Rishonah. "Keshe barech la'garua, ein ha'poites hachashuv der greira elo der kavana." If you made a Ka- Bracha on the less important, then it won't automatically cover a more important food, unless you had so, uh, a kavana, um, directly, specifically. And he says the Rashbo is muskam lekula yalm. And the Shaar HaOshur quoted by Ben Ish Chai, Rav Pa'alim, is saying just like by Brocho Rishono, if you didn't have in mind, you're not motzi that which you didn't have in mind. Same thing with Brocha Achrono, you're not motzi that which you didn't have

31:23 Speaker 1 in mind. So someone asked me a practical thing. I've been sitting by a Fabregen for two hours, and there were pickles, and there was, there was tuna, and there was, uh, bamba, whatever. And, and, and now at the end of the Fabregen, I say, "Brocha Beren Voshes." Do I have to now play back in my mind, "Oh, did I... What did I have? Which, which thing did..." You know, I have to think back all the way, all the different foods which I had and make a Brocha Achrono. I'd have to remember all the nasch which I had in the last hour and a half. That's why I got out, uh, Grace of Chiddash, yeah. Kol Pani, but that seemed what he s- he... That was the apparent conclusion, and I'm going to show you that's not really the case, yeah? And, um, so again, the Ben Ish Chai is basing upon the Rashba who says a brocha on the more-- on the less important doesn't cover the four more important. He says it, "Davo Humuskim LeCholei'am." Okay. So now here you have on the screen, you have from the, um, Shulchan Aruch, whether I think it's Yimin Reish Yud Alef. You have two foods, Yimin Reish Vav, I'm not sure now. Uh, he says, "Ovochi Heidaita Gam Ken Olov B'birchoso." If you had two foods, you made a brocha on one, is it motzi to the other? Only if you had it in mind, and he quotes the, the Shem HaRashba. Okay. So now let's

32:44 Speaker 1 go to the... And, and when I read this last week, I was... It bothered me because Epus, uh, in, in my head was that it's not, not, not unanimous. Although he says it's Musku Kule'am. So let's read in the Alter Rebe's Sefer Birchot Nene in Perek Tes. Talking about brochos on various foods. Brocha Rishona, yeah. He says, "If the two br- foods are equal Hashivas, then you made a brocha on one, it covers for the other." The brocha, the table of food are on the table. "But if one of them had priority over the other, and both of them are in front of you, Ein Birchat She'eini Mukdam Patrer Izta Mukdam L'brocha. The one which is less important, you made... You had two foods on the table. One is more, more choshen, one's less choshen. And you should have made the brocha on the more choshen. And you made the brocha on the brocha less choshen. So it doesn't cover one for the other. Unless you had specifically in mind. So let's give you an example. If you have kiwi and grapes. Grapes are Shivas Haminim, more choshen. Kiwi, less choshen. But you decided, 'cause as they, "Havel Dai Nefesh Habamis Haded Min Ha'ut," that you want to have kiwi, piece of kiwi now. So you made a brocha on the kiwi. Is the... Are the grapes covered? And you... So he says that the brocha on the less important doesn't cover the more important unless you had sp-specifically in mind. Okay. V'yesh choyl kin

34:09 Speaker 1 al kol zeh. Now, those who disagree with this whole approach, and they say there's no different, more important, less important, the same brocha. Ah, you should have had the dik dima, you should have made a brocha on the grapes before the kiwi. That's what Chazal... That's true. Nevertheless, the more important is gonna be covered with the brocha of the less important, even though you didn't have them specifically in mind. So I, I, I have this, um, from time to time. I have some pasta, and then I want to have a biscuit. I think I've discussed this a few times. I made a brocha on the pasta. Can I... But now, okay, then pa-pasta is less choshen because it's not shayeches to, to become lechem. The, the biscuit is, is shayeches to become a motzi. So if I made a brocha on the pasta about motzi, how can I have the biscuit? So here we have a machloket. The first op-opinion says I have to make a new brocha on the pasta... on the, on the biscuit. Second opinion says, no, you're motzi. And he says, "Lot is this of brochos to avoid, avoid the situation." What I'm seeing here, though, is that this rule that less choshen does not motzi the more choshen, it's gone. You should say Musku Kule'am. There's a second opinion which says that there is motzi the less choshen. The less choshen is motzi the more choshen. If that's the case by Brocha Achrono, so the same for Brocha Rishono. Sorry.

35:28 Speaker 1 Okay. I mean, that is the rule for Brocha A-- Brocha Rishono, so the same thing for Brocha Achrono because that's the whole buildup of the Ben Ish Chai. If that's the true, it, it... So therefore, what kind of remains is that even... That, that similarly for Brocha Achrono, that according to the those who disagree with the Rashba, if you said a Brocha Achrono on one item, and you did not have in mind the other items, even if they were more choshen, they are still included in your Brocha Achrono. Yeah. That, that seems to be evident from, at least from this, from th-this mahala. And consequently, to say as a rule, if you made a Brocha Achrono, you didn't have in mind the other foods because you had forgotten about it, therefore, you are not motzi. You have to make a new brocha. Sorry. At least it's a sofek, um, whether you have to or not. And sofek brochos lehokah, you should not be saying, uh, you should not be repeating a Brocha Achrono because you forgot about a food earlier on at that sitting. Right. Let's move on. Section Challah. And, and we did discuss this some time back, uh, about two years ago. And someone brought it up again. And so this is a question raised by the Maharsah Shekel. What you have on the screen is from this Dehemed. Um, he quotes the Maharsah Shekel, who's w-concerned about this. And there's, there's a difference. Let's say when you buy bulkas. Is that the

37:02 Speaker 1 right word in English? Those rolls, like long rolls, yeah. And the way they are baked side by side, and they expand a little bit, they touch one another. So then they are stuck a little bit, and then you j- you divide them. But then section chalos are much more, um, stuck to one another. They actually take six clumps of dough, put them in a baking tin, and they, they really look like one big loaf, but it's... You can divide it into separate sections. So this is, this is the discussion here. And Rav Meir Arik, very, very eminent posek in Poland pre-war. So he says we have a case of esrogim, two esrogim which are gr-grown together like Siamese twins. So if you separate them, each one's kosher. And so the same thing if you have the two loaves, you separate them, still kosher. And the Stei Hemed is not so confident about that. He says, "If it was accidental, I understand. But if it was done deliberately," then he's not so, not, not so happy about that. And that's also what you see here on the Piskei Teshuvos, that if they were stuck together deliberately, even lightly, and, um, they're not, not the chatchilah for lechem mishnah. There are those who are mehikel, yes, they have milismach. Now, what I did have, I don't remember how I got this information, but I did have, um, last time I wrote that Reb Berel Bongarten would say in the name of the Rebbe Rashub-- of the, say,

38:32 Speaker 1 of the Rebbe from before the Nasi'us, that these section chalos, l'eitz hatzorech. If you're stuck, you can... Sorry about the pun. Um, so then, uh, you would be allowed to use them for lechem mishnah. So if necessary, you can use them, but they're, they're not an ideal choice. Let's move on to the next question, and that is someone who called me this past week, which in Refuah Shleima, he, he has his arm in a cast, and it's all the way down till past his knuckles. And he's asking what does he do about netilas yadayim. Can he do netilas yadayim on his fingers? He, he says it's to use a glove is not really so practical because of, I guess, because of the cast. So he's asking, what can he do? Can he do netilas yadayim on the fingers which are sticking out from the cast? So here we have from the Ateret Paz, Siman kuf samech beit, netilas yadayim. Mi sheyesh lebi yod makar beyodo. One's got a wound on his hand. Uretiah oleha, and he's got a bandage over it, and you cannot remove the bandage because of the pain. So d lo, what is okay to wash the rest of the hand, shelo b'mokom hamakor. It's okay. You wash the rest of the hand, not where the wound is. Ve'ein zenatila l'chatzot. It's not a problem of washing half the hand because the other part you can't wash in any case. It's as if this is all that's available. Okay, so far so

40:08 Speaker 1 good. Now here it gets, gets tricky. We've got mayim rishonim and mayim shnim. And this, this question is also when people got a sticky plaster, these waterproof plasters on your, on somewhere on your hand, on your, on your fingers. It's gonna be the same question. Om nom tzorich lezorer. You-- When you're pouring netilas yadayim, you're gonna have to avoid that the water should not fall onto the bandage. Why so? Because the water which just falls onto the bandage, you wash your hands, it's mayim, and becomes mayim mayim, falls onto the bandage. Then, so you've got mayim mayim on the bandage. Then, then you... Then it trickles back. Uh, you wash it a second time, but meanwhile, the mayim mayim comes back, and, uh, and that's shel yachzel ruva tamah sayah yad. That the water which is on the bandage, if it trickles back, it's going to, um, it's going to be metameh the water on your hand, when you... Then you got it under your netilas yadayim. Umpenish kashe lezoreh yigu, uh, yigu hamayim al retiah v'lo yipol al retiah. It's difficult to be so pr-precise to wash the hands, and it avoids the bandage. L'chein, to avoid this problem, yishpok revias k'echad al kol hayad scheoz le nitmu hamayim. So this whole need for mayim rishonim and mayim shnim is only if you didn't use the revias. But if you use the revias, then the revias is immune to tumah. It's as if it's like a mini mikvah, and therefore it's okay. So after

41:37 Speaker 1 you read the Shulchan Aruch, we've got a, we've got a solution here that do netilas yadayim with more than a revias. Problem solved. However, this question of whether revias is immune to tumah is a machloket ha'tanurim in Mishnah Yadayim. And now that was in Shulchan Aruch. What you have a lower quote is from the Alter Rebbe Siddur, where he's got about three pages about netilas yadayim. And as is often the style in the Siddur, chumras al chumras. Harotzeh lekayam mitzvat netilas yadayim ledivre hakol tzorich lezo yishpok al kol yad shnei pa'amim l'olam af sheshofach revias v'yoetzet. Even if you use the revias, you still have to do it b-beis pa'amim. Not going to Lubavitch, I'm gonna go doing three times. That's another discussion. Why so? Because of ki reviotzi b'reish peh k'ligaydaim d'lo k'rebbeia. The Reb Meir says the revias is not mekachol tumah, but Reb Yozi says the revias is mekachol tumah. So therefore, even if you're using more than a revias, there's still... You need to... You still have a situation of mayim rishonim and mayim shnim. And therefore, the solution which was said here, the fellow has got a ba- a bandage. He should wash with more than a revias, and therefore, even if it trickles back, doesn't matter because it's a revias. It's not so straightforward. So what should I tell the fellow? So what should I say? I, I said he sh- I said, I said he should wash. He, he, he, he... If, if I don't have another etz.

43:10 Speaker 1 He can't put on a glove. And, uh, all right, according to the Shulchan Aruch- Well, pouring with a, a generous amount of reverse solves the problem. According to the siddur, if a little bit comes back, it's not g- it's not gonna solve the problem, but I don't have a better answer. So, okay, so I can't be... So here it says, "The libracho." Oh, it's not gonna be a libracho, but that's the best we can do in the circumstances. Uh, so what happens when a person's got a sticky plaster? Uh, and sh- well, it can be avoid. Okay, is it practical to avoid the plaster? It's very difficult. Yeah. It might be, it might be more, more straightforward just to wear a, a, a glove, which-- That's also not so posht, because at the end of it, until Sidom, he says, "Wearing a glove isn't a solution." I don't have a simple solution, sorry. Okay, let's move on. And that is, I had a very interesting Kashrus practice. Last Sunday, this past Sunday, I was, uh, uh, I n- I, I gave a shiur to a group of, uh, training rabbonim about yichud. The week before, someone had asked me, which I'd shared with you last week, a woman who had hired a, um, a taxi driver, and the taxi driver came an hour and a half late, and by then it was nighttime, and she refused. She sent the taxi away. She doesn't want to travel with him at night. Is there a-- Because of

44:37 Speaker 1 yichud. Is there a problem of yichud in a car? Says the male driver, a woman passenger. Could be the other way around. Is there a problem of yichud in a car? So now, I'd said it's not a problem. And this you have on the bottom of the screen. You have here from Nite Gavriel on his volume about, uh, yichud, and he says that a man and woman may travel t- in, during the day in a car which has windows where there are passersby. Um, and even if, even if there are no, um, pedestrians, but there are cars passing by. And that's the concept of pesach pasuch l'shosh rabim, when y- you have an opening to the street. And it's not pesach pasuch in the sense that someone can barge in, but it is pesach pasuch that you are visible to the street. I mentioned that, and I mentioned, I think, that one solution for yichud, which, uh, well, people are stuck in situation. If you're on the ground floor, you sit in the, in your front room, and your do-- windows are, are open to the street, as in someone can see what's going on from the street. That's another alternative of pesach pasuch l'shosh rabim. So meanwhile, I'd-- That's why I'd, I'd, I'd been saying, saying to people, I said at the shiur that there's no problem of yichud in a car because it's pesach pasuch l'shosh rabim. So one of the listeners to the shiur on Sunday, he sent me various sources to

46:04 Speaker 1 the contrary. And now, so I sent him... Yeah, so let's, let's, let's take a look. This is also Nite Gavriel, yeah. He talks about a bocher meeting a, a prospective kallah. Be careful to avoid yichud. And, um, okay. Then he says, "Although they're allowed to meet," of course, "but to be in a state of yichud in a car, especially by night, vechadoymer. And I'm very, very surprised bochurim lo medayre, the mezalzel in bi'isur min haTorah, and they're causing hirhurim and girei hayetzer. It's a dobra poshut. But we call became-- ba'vays ha'seinar rabin mezalzel in ba'zeir. It's a mitzvah, the Rosh Hashiva's, to make a, uh, to publicize chomrei isur. And it's also isur for the girl, and the teachers should teach them that's not okay." Very, very interesting. See, his, the whole idea of a bocher taking a car and taking a, um, a, a, a girl out. For a shidduch, he's saying that that's not okay. Um, now here he's, in chapter mem gimel, he said there's no problem in yichud in a car. Now, you might say, okay, um, he mentioned by night. Okay. So first of all, makes a difference. By night. Where? Is it a secluded place? Is it a place where there's passing by? Clearly, it's not, if there's passersby, it's still, even by night, people can see what's going on. It's still pesach pasuch. But he's, he makes an issue about that. So then there may be issue of libo egospo. Some say, some poskim say that if there

47:36 Speaker 1 is a close relationship, then the fact that there's exposure to the street is not a deterrent. Okay. Now, I'm just sharing you with you my dilemma. Now, on the left of the screen, you've got from Sefer Ha'sikhas tof shin nun alef. Forgot which parasha it was, but it was around Cheshvan time. Very, very unusual. Tof shin nun alef. Bechalal, it's not the kind of thing the Rebbe would speak about. And here, the Rebbe says in a, as a passing comment in the fabrengen to be, uh, ca-cautious about women and girls taking a taxi or a ca- a car, a car where the driver is a male. There might be a concern of yichud, and it's discussed in Shfar. And consult with the Rav to have guidance on that. In the Shuli Hagilion, so the first one, the first asterisk, the Rebbe says, "Especially nowadays, especially in a big city like New York, a kiritza beze, you can find a woman, uh, um, or you can order-- A woman can find a female driver and problem solved." So the Rebbe seems to be actually concerned about yichud here, yeah. I'm going into even the details. In the second, um, reference, second Shuli Hagilion, he refers to a few sources, Otes Haposkim, Sholas Tzemach, Balochah, um, Devar Halacha, which is the, the pioneer sefer in our contemporaries kind of on, on hichas yichud, Chelek Yesh Yakov, Tzidke Eliezar. The only one I didn't look up was the Chelek Yesh Yakov, but the others seem to be inclined

49:13 Speaker 1 that in a car it is permitted. Um, this is the Sholas Tzemach, Balochah, about traveling with a nahag nochri. Yesh macher shehechel. Um, el shesh chiluk, Lashon Mari. Oh, no, there's, there's another piece. Um, so he's, he, he says, um, oh, he says about traveling with a goyishe driver. So the Eizeh Midassa Be'Chochero says if there are passersby, it's okay. Um, uh, but however, could be the carriage in which the, the Be'Chochero was talking about was an open carriage, whereas here the car is locked. I know. So he's, he's, he's raising the question. Okay. So just one, one last thing on this, and that is the Hashkachah Pratis. I'm very-- I learn Mishnah on a daily, uh, basis, and I came across here a Mishnah in Yediys Peh Dalet. Says the following: If a man had given a get to his wife, and they spent a night in an inn. So Beshama say, no need for a new get. Yisroel say you do need to have a new get. When is that said-- In other words, the assumption is that they had, had relations, and therefore there's a need to, uh, write a new get. Says the Mishnah further: When do we assume that because they were secluded, that they had, had relations? Only if they had been married before. But if they had only been betrothed before, then there's no need for a get, second get. "Mipnei she'ein libo gaspor." Now, so when we use this term libo gaspor, it-- this, this Mishnah gives

51:00 Speaker 1 us a certain, uh, parameter. What do you mean by libo gaspor? They're-- they, they were in ready betrothed, and they're traveling together, and it's still a libo gaspor. So I would be careful to just vafensach. Oh, it's libo gaspor. Libo gaspor, yes, but nevertheless, it's not a concern of-- in relation to the concerns which Yichud are conc- are concerned about. So yesh mokim l'chachil. Um, but on the other hand, you see the Rebbe was, was, um, moir this. And what I've said in the past is that possibly Rebbe's, especially if there is going to be, uh, let's say a, a route where she take-- uses this driver again and again, that certainly wouldn't be appropriate. Um, what-- Let's come back to the, to the, um, to Gavriel, who says, if there is a case that a woman needs to take a, a male driver, then she should sit in the back, not next to the driver, and she should make a point of not talking with the driver during the journey. And that's something which is doable nowadays. People have earbuds, listen to your own music, something that you shouldn't have to have a conversation. Sitting in a-- quietly in a car is, uh, an uncomfortable situation. So there's an eitzah. Um, one last thing. I know I'm running a bit late. I wanted to get m-um, time for Maariv at nine thirty. I won't make it. But okay. So here we have someone came to me this morning and asked me, "Why is it

52:31 Speaker 1 that we touch the tefillin by Yotzer Or?" And this you can see in Hayeim-- in Sefer HaMinhogim. By Yotzer Or, we touch the shel yad, and by borei schecher, we touch the tefillin shel rosh. I said it's something to do in Kabbalah. And see here you have at the top, we have Mishnachah HaArizal. When you say the brachah Yotzer Or, you touch the tefillin shel yad, which has got to do with Olam HaBria. You've got the, um, you've got the-- I-- What I explained to the Ingeman this morning was, you've got the three levels of Atzilut, Yetzirah, and Briah. Each one has got an action associated. So with, uh, Birchat Hashachar, we have netilat yadayim. I mean, "Baruch al shechesian et yadayim." So that's the action relating to, uh, Olam HaAtzilut. Then Olam HaYetzirah, we have the t- the tallit, the tzitzit. And that's why by Boré Shomea at the beginning of Olam HaBria, that's when we hold the, the tzitzit, and we kiss the tzitzit. Now we're going to Olam HaBria. So then there's another mitzvah, physical mitzvah, and that is the tefillin, which is the emphasis. And that's why at this point we touch the tefillin. Now, here you see he says, um, he says, "L'mashiv tefillin shel yad." And there are those who say you only have to touch shel yad and not tefillin shel rosh. But in the Sefer HaMinhogim, he gives us a reference to Mishnah Sochodim and also to the Siddur Arizal. Now, the Siddur Arizal, um, which I

53:55 Speaker 1 looked up also, is almost verbatim from the Mishnah Sochodim. Rabbe-- Here, Rabbe-- This is Mishnah Sochodim was Rabbeinu Chay Riki, um, who was a couple of generations after the Arizal. So he writes, "Yotzer Or, you should touch the tefillin shel yad, and you should have in mind because Yetzirah, uh, is, is further away from the Maasim than from Briah. And therefore, we can have benefit in Olam, et cetera." And then he says, "U'va borei schecher, yomashe shel rosh." So here we have a difference. In some Kabbalah sources, it's only to touch the shel yad, and in some Kabbalah sources, also touch the shel rosh. He asked me, "What's, what's Choshe-- Borei Choshech seems to be a low madrega." I said, "On the contrary, actually, you have a level of Yoshvei Choshech Sisrei that actually Choshech can mean an even more exalted madrega, like Keser, and that's why you touch it in the shel rosh." Um, someone brought this to my attention a couple of years ago, and he said, "We saw qui-quite, uh, notes remarkably that the Rebbe would, before Shemoneh Esrei, would be adjust-adjusting his shel rosh." So he wanted to suggest that is according to the, like, Kabbalah that by She-- by Yotzer Or, which is Olam Ha, HaBria, is the emphasis shel yad. By Shemoneh Esrei, it's already by Olam HaAtzilut. There, the emphasis is on the shel rosh. That's an acute idea. One last thing. Someone asked me today, um, is there an issue of a-- I'm just sharing this. I

55:18 Speaker 1 think it's, uh, I, I was, uh, surprised he asked the question. Is it okay for a father to go swimming with his fem-- with his, his daughters? And he'll be wearing swimming trunks, Amer-American bathing suit, and they will be wearing female bathing, bathing suits. And so he asked, "Where's, where's it talk about this?" I said, "Davar poshut. That is totally inappropriate." But here is from, again, from Rav, Rav Falk's Sefer Oz V'Hadar Levusha. Talks about taking a, a girl who's less than three years old. Okay. But, um, but, uh, "Ein lakachta b'gil v'vu'ah yoser." It's not appropriate that a, a, a girl, uh, over the age of three should be in a place where it's a man's place where the men are, uh, not fully clothed and, um, it's in, you know, tzaravas, et cetera, and so vice versa. So it's davar poshut, but it's, it's been recorded already. So yeah. Um, uh, with, with that, I'm finished for tonight's shiur. Wish you all a Good Shabbos. And, uh, b'shuv Hashem et shivat Tzion hayinu kecholmin. We should wake up from this dream of Galus and see the Geulah Amitess VeAshlema b'Mashiach Tzidkeinu meyad mamash.

56:33 Speaker 2 Amen. Yasher koach.