ראה תשפ״ד

00:06 Good evening, and welcome to tonight's Shiur. Today is Thursday of Parshat Re'eh. And, uh, I wanna start off, I was-- whilst I was waiting for eight thirty, I look in today's Rambam, and it's talking about the various, uh, Mumin, deformities of blemishes which would disqualify a Kohen. On the fir-- In his-- In Perek Ches of ‑‑ it says, "If a person's nose is, uh, recessed, even if he cannot paint both eyes in once, he is called the Baal Mum." Now, this reminds me of what I heard from Rav Mendel Futerfas about that there was someone by the name of Reb Peretz Fein. And Reb Peretz had the unique privilege to have seen the Alter Rebbe as a young child, and he lived to see the Friediker Rebbe in the crib, in the, in the cot. So it's, it's about eighty. He was in his eighties when he passed away, and he saw six Rebbes. So when he was a young child, this Reb Peretz, he stayed in a, uh, home. In a way-- Apparently, his-- He came from Germany and was hosted by a family somewhere in Russia, um, White Russia, and they were a wealthy family. And whenever the Alter Rebbe would pass through that town, he would stay in their house, in this, in this house. And they had a room designated just for the Rebbe. So they had a room in the house just for the Rebbe. In this room, they also, however, kept the utensils for Pesach. So there were high

02:09 shelves in this room, and there were large copper... You know, Rav Mendel told me. There were large copper pots on the shelves, on this high up shelf. And so Reb Peretz was, uh, eight years old, nine years or whatever. So he was curious to see the Alter Rebbe's Hanhoges, Alter Rebbe's conduct inside the room. So he somehow managed to climb up and hide behind those pots on the shelf, and he was able to observe the Alter Rebbe. And he said a few things. Number one, the Alter Rebbe was not necessarily tall, but broad-shouldered. He had like, uh, a bulge on the back of his head like a level bread, like a loaf of bread. Um, now, in that context, Rav Men- Rav Mendel also said how the Alter Rebbe had a recess by his-- the top of his nose. And there's this Halakha which we just said about Kochot Sh'ein Hak'achas, to be able to take a, a brush and to brush both eyes with color in, in one, uh, uninterrupted move. So that's mentioned in Chazal. The Alter Rebbe had this, um, thing. There's a story with the Alter Rebbe that when he was a Talmud by the Maggid, he had some kind of illness, uh, and it was some kind of a worm on the brain. And the doctor said that the only way they could remove it was to, to amputate, remove the nose. They asked the, the, the Maggid, and the Maggid said he-- "That's not acceptable." So then they came

03:58 up with an alternative that they will be able to remove the bone inside the nose, and that way they will be able to get to the brain to be able to remove this, uh, this worm, and that was successful. So the Alter Rebbe was, uh... Is it the Loshon Kochot Sh'ein Hak'achas. And when the picture, the portrait of the Alter Rebbe became available, th-this was one of the ways of co- of confirming that it was genuine because somehow you could recognize this feature on the picture. What we have is obviously a picture of a picture. Apparently, in the or-original, it was, it was ve- it was noticeable. The other things which he said were that the Alter Rebbe would daven exactly... It took him two hours. It took him half an hour from the beginning of davening until Birkat Kohanim. Birkat Kohanim and, and Shemoneh Esreh was an hour, and from there to the end of davening was another half an hour. This was his... Evidently, he saw this a few days, uh, and so he was able to observe the Alter Rebbe. And then after this, they would bring into the Alter Rebbe a bowl of some kind of kasha, and the Rebbe, Alter, would have five or six spoons of this kasha, and that was his food for the day, and then he went on with his day's learning. This, uh... So Rav Mendel was very close to Reb Meir Simcha Chen in Nevel. Reb Meir Simcha was a grandson of this Reb

05:32 Peretz. So Rav Mendel kind of say like he's like three steps removed. He got from Reb Meir Simcha, Reb Meir Simcha from Reb Peretz, and Reb Peretz from the Alter Rebbe. All right, it just sort of reminded me of this maise just by-- from today's Rambam. Right. Let's go into the list of points which we have for today. And this is Behemshich to our discussion about when we had about around Tisha B'Av, where it says, "It's not our custom to sleep on the floor." And, uh, I raise the point that possibly not just on Tisha B'Av, there's a general objection to sleeping on the floor, and there's a Gemara in Brachos which talks, that says, "But I'll call Mishkav Tishkav, but Al HaSishkav Al HaKar, Al HaKar Ka." Brachos Daf Samech Beis, Omed Beis. So there were a few recent, Rabbi, um... Last Friday, Rabbi, uh, Rav Motkie Burn from Liverpool, uh, sent me that the, the Rambam, of which we were learning on the Peh Gimel Perakim L'Yoim. Last Friday, it says that the Kohanim would sleep Al HaArets. So this, as you can see in Perek Ches, Halacha Zayin. It talks about the Kohanim not sleeping in their uniforms, which were allocated from the, uh, Mikdash, from the Beis Hamikdash, uh, uh, how do you say, wardrobe. And when it came to go to sleep, V'Lo Shim Bigdei Atzmo, they would put on their own clothes. V'Yesheinim Al HaArets, and they would sleep on the floor. And the Rambam adds, K'Derech Kol Shemri

07:12 Chatzeires HaMelochim, as would be the practice of, uh, sentries on royal courts. SheLo Yishnu Al HaMitot. They wouldn't sleep on beds. Okay? So Rabbi Akiva pointed out that here you see that the Kohanim would sleep on the floor. So now, the source of this, um, Halacha, this fact, is in the Mishnah, in Tamid, and in Middos. The same Mishnah appears in M- the Mishnah's Tamid, Perek Alef, um, and in, in Middos, also Perek Alef. And it talks about the Beis HaMoed, which was a large chamber on the north side of the Azara, of the courtyard. And it says it had Mukaf Reuvdin Shel Even. It was large slabs of stone. It was like amphitheater style perhaps. V'Ziknim Bais Avi Yesheinim Sho. The elders of the, the family who were on duty that day, they would sleep on these pla- on these raised, um, slabs. U'Maftachis HaAzara B'Yod. When they were, uh, keeping the keys to the courtyard. U'Firchi KeHuna, the young Kohanim, Ish Kistoi B'Arets. Each one ki- now, the way it's in the Rambam's version, it's Ish Kesusoi B'Arets. Each one had his garment on the ground, which would mean he slept in his own clothes on the floor. Tosfos in Abedah Zarah reads this, the word not Kesusoi, but Kistoi. And we have the word Kar and Keses. And the Tosfos in Abedah Zarah, uh, Daf Samech He, is discussing this, the, the two words which seem to be, people mix them up, of Kar and Keses, both meaning some kind of cushion.

09:20 And Tosfos insists that Keses is the cushion, and Kar is the mattress. And some people go, they may say some mix them up. And meanwhile, Tosfos does refer to this Mishnah of Ish Kistoi B'Arets. So Tosfos is obviously reading that the word Kistoi does not mean, uh, his gar- not Kesusoi, but Kistoi as in his cushion. And so he would have his cushion on the floor. Now, well, so we have here two ways of reading this Mishnah. And curiously, the Rambam, well, the Rambam has read the word Kesusoi, and then he's skipped that word of Kesusoi altogether. He could have said, Yesheinim Al HaArets BeBig- Well, he said, Bigdei Atzmo. So this is how the Rambam's only pshat. V'Lo Shim Bigdei Atzmo. And that's Shar, Ish Kesusoi B'Arets. They slept on the ground wearing their clothes. Whereas if it's the word, it's read Kistoi, that means they would put down some kind of, um, mattress of sorts, some kind of cushion between themselves and the ground. What we do see is the Rambam sees this as possibly as part of the covet of the Beis Hamikdash. The fact that the sentries sleep on the ground rather than of Sh- Sh- Lo Yishnu Al HaMitot. There's another Ram-- I guess in Rambam, V'Lo SheYishnu Al HaMitot. So really sleeping in a comfortable bed would be not respectful. You're saying, "You're come to, come to sleep here. You're coming to be on, on guard." Okay, so you're taking turns. But, uh, to sleep on a comfortable bed

10:58 wouldn't be appropriate. So what we're seeing is that, yes, the Rambam says, Yesheinim Al HaArets. But there are those who would say that it's, uh, that he's-- they slept with some kind of cushion, some kind of mattress. Um, and you can see here, the Tiferes Yisroel, he, in that Mishnah, he says, "When they went to sleep," Pes Usus Atzmun Al HaRitzpa. "They put their own garment on the floor rather than using the Bigdei KeHuna to use as a mattress." That would not be corre-- acceptable for two reasons. Whether it's be correct to use something s- which is holy for mundane, for an indulgence. Also because they were in- included shatnez. The Gemara talks about this. In that Gemara in Abedah Zarah, that they in- they, the Bigdei KeHuna included shatnez, and therefore they wouldn't be allowed to sleep on them because they're not allowed to sleep on shatnez. All right, so that's the, the Rambam vis-a-vis the way it is in the Mishnah. So there's two ways of reading this. And now, about the not sleeping on the floor, not sitting on the floor. So here you have the-- There's a well-known thing about not- Even when the Tisha B'Av or, uh, in, in not to sit mamash on the floor. So the source for this, you can see here, the Shari Teshuvah quotes from the Birkei Yosef, from the Chiddushim, and he says that one should have an interruption. This is in Taf-Kuf-Nun-Beis. In, uh... They- they should be have a hefsek between your-

12:33 yourself and the ground. Al pi haKabbalah. One shouldn't sit on the ground even with clothes. Only should be something that besides your own clothes, there should be something else interrupting between yourself and the ground. Now, he quotes this from a Sefer Merav Shmuel Sha'ar Aryeh be-Chiddusho. This is what the Chiddushim writes. The Chiddushim lived in times of the Alter Rebbe perhaps. I'm in the middle of a shiur now. I'll be free at nine thirty. What's curious is I could not find this Sefer Sha'ar Aryeh, and so I'm intrigued what is the Kabbalah reason for having a, an interruption. Then he goes from the... brings from the Maharil, who seems to be not so worried about this. And then he says that possibly the ma-- when the Reb Sh- Reb Shmuel says not to sit... This is in the Kaf HaChaim. When the Reb Sh- this Reb Shmuel Sha'ar Aryeh says you shouldn't sit on the ground, means mamash when there's no... when it's mamash on the soil. But if it's got a stone floor, um, that's not a problem. And so then we're going back to when the Rambam says that they slept on the ground and the, the, uh... And then we said the Gemara says not to sleep on the ground. So the Gemara is talking about al ha- al hakarka, on soil, whereas the, perhaps the Beis Hamikdash had a stone floor, and therefore that, that concern doesn't apply. So it's not so clear. Um, okay. Just, just someone raised this point

14:18 and okay. So the, the Rambam Taka says al ha'aretz, but that is in looking at the Mishnah, it's not so clear-cut. Let's move on. Beracha rino for chocolate wafers. And so, you know, some people have these problems. How much, how many wafers will make up for beracha rino? Most of us don't have a problem. You have a sofek, you eat another wafer. Problem solved. But if you are very careful how many wafers you tend to have, so you're asking, what is the shiur? Now, the shiur for kazais is, uh, it's not a shiur in weight, it's a shiur in, in, in, in, uh, in volume. They used to say that a matchbox is about the shiur of a kazais. That's in the days when matchboxes were made of wood rather than car- um, carton, and they were about at least three millimeters, uh, thicker. Okay. So s- uh, three, four wafers will be for sure, uh, more than that kind of kazais. The question is, though, what about the fact that a significant part of the mass of the wafer is actually not wafer, but it's chocolate? Now, I emphasize the difference between weight and, and mass because the wafer is a very lightweight type of bread, but that's not a problem. The, the pores inside the wafer are also mestadref to the shiur. That's the Mishneh in Uksin and in Shulchan Aruch in Siman Taf Peh Vav. That is sponge cake. You don't have to squeeze the air out of it. You can be

16:01 meshar as it is. If it's something like a air kichel, which has got large pockets of air, that's a different story. But if it's a regular, even as it says, pas sufganis, so then mishta'eres k'mo ets shiur. Okay? Fine. But the question is, can you combine also the chocolate layers, uh, which are between this... Let's say there's five layers of wafer and four layers of cream in between. Do they combine to the shiur kazais? Before we get to that, we have another question, which I've perhaps discussed in the past, and that is any cake has got, in addition to flour, it's got in it sugar, and it may have some other ingredients. Do those ingredients, if you have only mamash kazais of the cake, now twenty-five percent or thirty percent of that kazais is not even flour. Does that make any difference? So here we have from the Alter Rebbe's Sefer Bereishis, where he says that we have this Gemara in Berachos, which says that the dogon, the grain, is always considered the ikar. Even if the majority of that mass is honey or other ingredients, and it's only a minority is grain, flour, it doesn't matter. And even if you say it's really more sweet than a, than a, than a, um, n- food for-- to give you nourishment, et cetera, to ful- fill you, still the, uh, the, the, uh, m- grain remains the dominant feature. To express-- To quote the Lashon HaGemara, "Sal kadai tachamino duf she'ikar, kamash balon kimche ikar." You

17:52 might have thought that the honey is the main component because that's, you know, well, that's possibly majority, and they might... While you're having it as a treat, kamash balon duf, kimche ikar. Now, the grain element remains the dominant feature. And then, th- therefore, he says, "Mevorach haloteire min hametzaynes." Not only that, but also the Brocha Achas Amain Shalosh. You'll say Al Hamichya for this food. So Chazais of this food seems to be Mezonos and Al Hamichya. Then the next paragraph, he says that not everyone is so confident about the Brocha Achrainah. There are those who say you cannot say a Brocha Achrainah with this combination unless the ratio is a Chazais to Kedei Achilas Pras, which is about one to six, one to five, however you want to pr- uh, um, spell it out. With that, if it's that ratio, then the Mezonos, the flour ingredient dominates the mixture, and it is Mezonos, and it is Al Hamichya. If the flour element is, let's say, one to seven or one to eight, et cetera, it's still Mezonos. But for Al Hamichya, you cannot say Al Hamichya, uh, according to the second opinion. And you're therefore, you're now in a dilemma what Brocha, uh, after Brocha do you say. So according to this, something like chocolate brownies even, which have got, um, let's say half of it is flour, even if it's a third is flour, it's Hamotz-- it's, it's Mezonos and Al Hamichya without a problem. Right. Now, that is so far when the sugar,

19:39 et cetera, is mixed into the dough. But what happens if it is something like cheesecake or strudel, where the other element is very recognizable. It's not mixed in. It's like there's a pocket which has got, I don't know, mashed, uh, uh, apples or whatever it may be to make it into a strudel, so there's the pastry on the outside, and then you've got the filling. Does that make up your sheer or not? And the same thing would be in the case of the wafers because they're not... Well, they're baked as wafers, and then they somehow put, uh, the cream, and then they cut them to size, et cetera. Or for that matter, if you had a chocolate, uh, coated wafer, so the chocolate on the outside, it's not an, an indigenous part of, of the, of the dough. So do those other elements make up the sheer? And here, Rab Shlomo Zalman in Minchas Shlomo, he, um, he questions that. Now, he does refer to the Mishnah Berurah. And on the Mishnah Berurah, you can see on the, on the left of the, of the screen, where the Mishnah Berurah in Siman Res Ches, Sof Katan Lamed Gimel. He's taking the view that you'd have to... In order to make Al Hamichya, you'd have to have enough of that pastry that you had actually a Chazais of grain. And here, Rab Shlomo Zalman says, that's why his, his discussion has been according to Mishnah Berurah, but according to-- he's been pointed out to that according

21:13 to the Ateret Zekenim in several places, he says, "So long as there's a Chazais ratio within Kedei Achilas Pras, even if you eat only a Chazais of the mixture, you'd say Al Hamichya." So that is true. Um, but that-- I, I still feel that that doesn't answer his i-initial question because the Ateret Zekenim is Mechadesh, all right, fine, that the grain in a mixture, it dominates the mixture, and it all becomes Mezonos. It's upgraded. So the sugar becomes Mezonos, and therefore it's Al Hamichya. But what about the filling? Yes, it's true you don't make a separate Brocha on the filling, uh, of the strudel. But because it's so noticeable as a separate element, does it become Mezonos to the point that you can make an Al Hamichya on a piece of strudel, including the fill? I don't think that's, that's, that's, uh, clear from the Ateret Zekenim, and so that still remains, uh, an unclear point. Now, one last point before you finish off with this is that in, in the... There, there is a Beshtital problem here that in Perec Gimel, this is where you're seeing the Ateret Zekenim says, "If there's a Chazais, um, if the ratio, i-if there's a ratio of one-sixth of this food is a grain, then it's Al, Al Hamichya," contrary to Mishnah Berurah says that you have to have a Chazais of that, of grain within that mixture, which means you have to eat several, several Chazaisim or two Chazais, let's say, in order to have a Chazais

22:56 of grain. Okay. In Perec Ches, in Beis Hosanen, the Ateret Zekenim seems to be saying similar to what the Mishnah Berurah says, that there is a reason to say that you'd have to have a Chazais of the actual grain and not, uh, a, um, a Chazais of the food which has one-sixth of it is grain. The-- It's, uh, at first I used to think that it used to be, that is a contradiction, but, um, later I came to the recognition that there he's talking about a different type of mixture. So again, here in Perec Gimel, the Ateret Zekenim is talking about a combination of flour and honey. In Perec Ches, he's talking about a mixture of kemach dogon and kemach kitnios, flour of grain and flour from beans, let's say. So you've got two flours, uh, and they are now me-- um, blended into one mixture. Here, although I've quite quoted the Gemara, you might have thought that the dvash, the dvushha ikke, kamach velon, kimchi ikke, that they're demanding... That's true. When there is a, should we say, a struggle between honey and flour, so the Gemara says flour dominates. Right. That doesn't necessarily mean that there's a flour and another type of flour, that the flour which is chametz she'einah dogon dominates the other flour. It's a different type of struggle. This is a struggle of two different, totally different flavors, different... You know, this is a sweetener, and this is, this is a, a carb. So those things, we're gonna say the

24:38 carb is the main thing. But when you've got carb and carb, you've got this flour and that flour, it's not evident that the... We don't have a da'ah from the Gemara that the chametz she'einah dogon are more sacred, that they should dominate the other. And as a result, the, the, there, by when there's a combination of two types of flour, the Ateret Zekenim says you should be machmir to have a Chazais of, uh, uh, of, of, um, dogon. Otherwise, the Chaza-- the... If you don't have a Chazais of dogon, the kemach of the kitnios, of the pulses, may not make up the sheer. So I don't see it as a contradiction. Um, so all right. So meanwhile, to summarize what happens with the, um, with the chocolate wafers. So you should, should be, have a point of having enough wafers that, let's say three or four pieces of wafers, for sure you've had casais of the, of the pastry alone. There is, uh, in one seif I saw that the chocolate which is mixed in, which, which is in between, they sometimes put in also mashed flour to kind of mix with that chocolate. But that's something which has to be fact-checked before becoming, um, you know, a reliable Halakha. It's not good enough to say, "I heard that someone says," you know. That doesn't... Not, not, not convinced with that. Okay, let's move on to the next thing. Okay, we've had something similar a couple of years ago. But here, a girl called me

26:07 up this week. She has a hoodie. This is a very Jewish, um, kind of type of garment. . So she has this hoodie sweater, and it's got on it written, uh, logo of some sort. I think she said, "Fear God," or something like that. It's written G-O-D. And she's asking, "Is it okay to wear this garment, this hoodie?" So we have got here two questions. Number one, is G-O-D written on something, is that sacred? And number two, if it is sacred, does it mean therefore you can't use the garment? These are two separate questions. So let's deal with, with first the, the holiness of Hashem's name written in other languages. So here we have in the Alter Rebbe's Shekhinar, and he talks about Shemos Hamyuchadim, names which are clearly attributed when-- um, and indicating you're talking about Hashem, and they are the seven names. In other words, you have names you refer to Hashem as the merciful. Well, Rachum can also be a person, as a parent can also be merciful. So that's not Myuchadim. But the names of Yud Kei Vav Kei, Heh Shin Daled Yud, Zvai, et cetera, these are names of Shemos Myuchadim. And so we're not allowed to mention them even Velo Shinachah, which means even in a, in a other language. So he goes into detail. A name which Hashem is known, people refer to, uh, to God in that way. So you says the word God, Got in, in Ashkenaz in German, Boga in Polish and Russian. In other

27:58 places, I think the Kitzur Shekhinar mentions also Dios, uh, Dioso in, uh, in, in Dieu, Dieu in French, or Dio, Dios in the Spanish. So to say that, um, not in the context of a prayer would be saying Hashem's name in vain. Now, here's the interesting point. He says, "Although this name does not have Kedushah in the way it's written, and you're allowed to erase it. But it is still disgraceful if you mention it in an impure place." And that's the context here in Yichus Krishma, talking about saying holy things in an impure place. And he says, also, if it comes to making an oath and so it would be, uh, cursing someone, so it would have valid-validity there. But it says not to mention it in vain. And I do try to, uh, impress upon Talmidos. Sometimes I hear them saying, "Oh, my God." Really? You're not davening now, so don't use the word God. You find, find an O word. Okay. Um, but here it does say that there's no Kedushah in this written word. He says, "You're allowed to erase it." However, we all know that in any Haredi, uh, newspaper, when it comes to Hashem's name, G dash D, it's written G dash D, not G-O-D. And this in the Shuach Menachem, which is a compilation of Rebbe's letters in Halakha. So it has here, Nohagnuchan. It's one of three or four quotes there that we are-- we've established here a practice of writing G dash D with missing out a

29:50 letter. And it refers to the Shekhinar, which is, you know, which we just read. It's fascinating that you've got here the Alter Rebbe says, "Ein be Kedushah in the written form, and you're allowed to erase it." And then you see the Rebbe says, "No, we d- we don't write G-O-D because..." Because of what? It's gonna get to disgrace. So in a siddur, when they translate a siddur, it does have G-O-D because that's a siddur. You've got Hashem's name in the Hebrew, you've got Hashem's name written in the English. But if it's a piece of literature which will probably end up in the, uh, waste bin, so then we, out of, out of, uh, respect for Hashem's name, we write G dash D. That shouldn't come, c-c- go to disgrace. And in the notes in the Shuach Menachem, there's a reference here to, uh, Ste Hemed. That encyclopedia where he says from... It brings from a Sefer Pesach Advir, "Leka d'kemach hu armach." So the, uh, Hetter in the inside of the Alter Rebbe's Shekhinar, that you're allowed to erase it from the Shah. And there are several poskim who, um, oppose this, di-disagree with the Shach and Ramo. So it's very interesting that something which the Alter Rebbe had paskened in Shulchan Aruch that it is okay, and yet, um, we, we don't follow that heter, and we do write G-d, um, out of respect to Hashem's name. Um, and it's not an easy-- It's, it's not without a price because when you're writing something,

31:30 and people have this, uh, problem, if they publish a book and they want to reach a broader readership, who are not familiar with Charedi, um, practices, they find what's this G-d? Do we-- Who's-- Do we-- Uh, who... I remember one fellow, he came, um, he had come to something, some kind of Shabbaton or something. Who's this Ha-Hashem? They're talking about Hashem the whole time. He didn't know who Hashem is. Um, and so some people ask, "Who's, who's G-d?" And so it is confusing, and yet there's an insistence we write in, in, in publications G-d, um, because of out of, uh, sensitivity to Kedushas Hashem. So now-- So G-O-D, we're going to take the stricter view that it is also to disgrace it. Yeah. So coming back to this lady, young lady with a hoodie. To walk with that hoodie into, let's say, to the bathroom, that would be a problem. I-- We've discussed this in the past. If someone has a piece of jewelry which has got Yud Hei Vav Hei or Shin Dalet Yud, can you go into the bathroom wearing that piece of jewelry, and you have to hide it each time. So that's certainly a, a, an issue, and therefore it's not practical and not, not, not advisable. Then there's an one step further. Does the presence, an inscription of Hashem's name on an article somehow make that article sacred? So this is, you can see on the screen, from Sefer Ginzei HaKodesh, very much a contemporary Sefer. And he says you're

33:06 not allowed to inscribe Hashem's name on utensils, on cloths. If you did write one of the seven names of Hashem which mustn't be erased on a Keili, then you would not be allowed to use that Keili, and you'd have to somehow cut off that piece and put it in Genizah or put the whole piece in Genizah. So now he is talking about in Hebrew. It not-- It doesn't say in-- if that's true in, in, uh, another language too. So that goes back to what we saw before. Is there a Kedushah in Hashem's name written in English, G-O-D? Does it have a Kedushah, and therefore does it make the, um, the sweater, the hoodie also sacred? There is room to, to, uh, debate. As I said, you see the Shach is mehikel. But for the-- especially for the first reason that when you're wearing something, you, and you have to, uh, as a human being, you need to go into places where you can't take Hashem's name in an exp- in an exposed way. So really, I'd, I'd advise not to wear this, uh, garment. Okay. So then again, ear-earlier this week, someone in, uh, the New York area contacted me that one of his regular, uh, congregants has decided that she needs to have animal therapy. And so she has a dog, and she's been coming Shabbos morning to be coming to shul with her dog. At first, the dog stayed in the, uh, foyer, but it looks like the need for therapy was so

34:49 great that the dog needed to come with her into the shul. And other congregants possibly have dogs at home, but they felt that dogs don't belong in shul. And so now he's asking me how to navigate this. So not so straightforward. And the, the Rebbe was asked about taking a dog, a, um, for a blind person that, uh, take a guide dog with them into shul. So he refers to, in this letter, to the Toras Shlomo. That's written by a contemporary, Rav Nachum Kasher, brilliant man, encyclopedia on, on Halachah Torah. So he had written that you're not allowed to bring a, a dog into the shul, and he did not-- the Rebbe says, "But he did not bring a proof to his words." And the Rebbe gives a couple of references to this, and then he gives a reference. I think this is not that common that the Rebbe should refer to Igrus Moshe. Don't know how often you'll see in the Rebbe's letters a reference to Igrus Moshe. But meanwhile, he refers to the Igrus Moshe, to Rav Moshe Feinstein, who says that bringing a dog into shul is not worse than bringing a donkey into shul, and he brings a proof that, uh, a source that it's okay. So here the Rebbe had challenged Rav Kasher that he did not bring a proof to his objection to bringing dogs into the shul. And then Rav Kasher apparently got wind of this, probably it was referred to him, and he wr-wrote to the Rebbe

36:22 and bringing various proofs, and the Rebbe responds to those various proofs. And one of the things he brings, I didn't bring the whole letter, there is a mention about the fire which was on the Mizbeach. And at some stage it was Revutz Al K'ari. It was crouched like a lion. And then it says there's another stage in history of the Beis Hamikdash, it was crouched like a dog. So the Rebbe brings, um, sure, but, uh, having said all that, that's talking about a blind person who needs to have a guide dog, and I think most of us would be sympathetic to that kind of need. Here we're talking about a, uh- Personal, um, you know. Well, actually, it does need therapy. It could be. But, um, the other, the-- We certainly have to also take into consideration. I'm told to, to object on Halakhic grounds, not necessarily, but you can say that there are other people who are, feel uncomfortable, and you'd have to be sensitive to the other people and therefore leave your dog in the foyer, et cetera. Um, someone is asking, could the sleeve not just be rolled up so that, that the G-O-D should be covered? That would possibly be an eitzer. I should say it's-- It would be possibly an eitzer because you're talking about bizayon. And, and let's say, uh, if it's covered, it may not be considered kisve m'tach kis. But the fact that it's covered is enough to take away the element of bizayon. That might be.

38:00 But again, it's, it's practical. It's not a practical thing. You wear a garment, and every time to remember to have to roll it up, and I don't know how, what experience you have, uh, Rabbi Singer, with wearing hoodies, but I don't know how easy it is to roll up the sleeve. They have usually elasticated, um, you know, at the bottom of the sleeve just near the wrist. So probably not so simple to roll them back. Okay. Right. And also there's, uh, if-- Another element is when people will see in this and will learn that lesson, this is okay, it isn't okay. It's, it's something actually which, which should be discouraged. Right. Okay. Now we get to something more exciting than hoodies and dogs. Okay. Here's a bochur asking a question. Who owns the food in the yeshiva's kitchen? So, you know, there is a breakfast time, but I'm very hungry an hour before. Or supper time, doesn't matter. The chollent is meant to be served Shabbos afternoon by Shabbos meal. And it's, you know, a moment I need the kohens for davening. I need to have some chollent to be able to daven. And it's, it's my chollent in any case, but I'm gonna get it e-earlier or later. So this is his question, kind of. Does-- It-- The f-food is designated for the boys in any case. So why is it-- why should it be a problem if they take it, um, at the wrong time? So I saw, as far as I remember,

39:37 there is somewhere in Igros Moshe, it talks about the very question, but I couldn't find it. I looked and couldn't find. But Rabbi Vosner was asked this question. And so here you have in Shulchan Aruch Har Levy, um, where he says the following. We asked about bochurim taking from the yeshiva kitchen without rashus. Eh, and even if the kitchen is locked. And, um, the argument is that the bochurim are shutafim. They are partners in the funds of the yeshiva. Or perhaps no, perhaps the Rosh Yeshiva is called the owner. And he says, "Ve'einei poshu't noid," that this is, this is gezeil gamur. It's absolute gezeil, he says. And the Rosh Yeshiva is called the owner. And it is, the yeshiva has got the, has got the duty and the, the prerogative to apply sdorim. And if you, um, depart from those, those, that, that seder, you're de-latachto and you are, you're out of order kind of thing. Okay. So here's very, very interesting. It's a very interesting question. The bochur is coming with the approach that the yeshiva has raised funds as income for to feed the boys. So what-- So this, this food is my food, and therefore I should be, uh, it should be legitimate for me to have it at another time because it's my food. I can have it earlier or later. And, um, does the Rosh Yeshiva actually own the food? I don't, don't know whether even Rav Vosner is saying that, but he's a trustee. He's got-- There's money

41:27 which has been raised one way or the other, and he's a trustee. For what? For yeshiva. And yeshiva is a place of chinuch. And if the needs of chinuch dictate that there are going to be mealtimes, and chollent is served on Shabbos afternoon and not at ten fifteen on Shabbos AM or whatever, so then he has a duty to, to use the, the, uh, funds at his disposal in a responsible way and not in an irresponsible way. And therefore, I can see the, the wisdom in that, that if the yeshiva s-sees the need, I think every yeshiva does need to, uh, implement some degree of seder. So then, uh, they have the right to do that. And so it's not as if the bochurim own the food in the yeshiva's kitchen. It's given, it's, it's provided to the bochurim within a framework of a chinuch, and therefore they have to conform to that chinuch, um, seder, in order to be eligible to get the physical benefits from the yeshiva's funds. I'm just going to, just to support my thought here, you have here on the bottom of the screen from Kuntres Eitz Chaim, which is from the Rebbe Rashab, which is several years after Yeshivat Temimim was founded, and he's talking about how the seder includes so many hours for chassidis and so many hours for niglah, et cetera. And he writes the following: "You can see that we have undertaken to provide 18 to provide for all your needs, and we absolutely happy about

43:21 that to do this so that you should be able to be... your minds and hearts should be available to engage in Torah . But whoever doesn't conform to the notice given here about Chasidim four hours a day, uh-uh, daily, you should know is , is benefiting from the yeshiva, um, illegally." See, he doesn't say the word gezel. He does say that we've established the yeshiva for a purpose, and if you are in the yeshiva and are ta-taking from... with-with-with beyond the, um... outside the not-not conforming to the purpose of the yeshiva, so then it's, it's-it's not legal. And it's ille-illegitimate. It's illegitimate benefit. So I think that's, that's would have been the answer to this bocher's question. No, it's not legal. Uh, and bochurim do not own the food in the kitchen. It's there to provide them, um, in the right time within the framework of, of a yeshiva. I see Rabbi Lou writes the following: "Is there something in addition related to the fact that there are others? Who is, who is allowed to decide how much is left, um, after the early morning challah? " See, that's another point that there may be that these early birds may actually be depriving the latecomers. Um, yeah, that's, that's true. Actually, this bocher asked me another question. He-- In his yeshiva, it looks like there's always leftover food. So is he allowed to give boys... take from that food to give a boy who's not in the yeshiva, or do you need to have permission?

45:06 And he asked another interesting question. If you have a shop who throws out food because it's out of date, but he doesn't want people to take that food because, because then they're not gonna buy in his shop. So can he say, "Oh, I'm making it hefker, but you mustn't... no one must take it." Which I don't... didn't, didn't make sense to me. Once he's thrown it out, if the cats and dogs can, can access it, so you can't really stop humans having it. But so long as it's still in his, uh, possession, still thrown it out, he's still... Let's say, for whatever reason, let's say the, the management of the yeshiva does not want to have other people coming to the yeshiva and having meals there because it feels gonna be disruptive to the yeshiva. So again, I think they've got that prerogative to, to lay down that rule and, uh, the bochurim do not have the permission to, to violate that. Right. Okay. Behi Rotzon that these words should be, uh, should reach the right destination. Okay, uh, let's move on. The next question was about someone who's declared bankruptcy. Is, is that recognized in Halakha? So what you have on the screen is from the Piskei Choshen, talks about bankruptcy, where if a person does declare bankruptcy, he will be... somehow they'll come to some kind of arrangement, take whatever assets he has, and it'll be distributed to the various, uh, creditors. And after that, he's now not obliged to pay those debts,

46:47 the outstanding debts. Is that recognized in our Pitole? So he says, "What exactly is this? Is this a, a Peshora, Mechila?" He goes, another question. This is... He says, "Do we use the concept of Dinam DeMalchusa Dina? Because this bankruptcy is recognized in civil law, does that make it recognized in Halakha?" Again, since in civil law I don't owe you any money, therefore, I don't owe you, owe you any money in Halakha. So here's an interesting point. When we say the concept Dinam DeMalchusa Dina, that's understood when it comes to taxes, et cetera, that's the... us v. the government, if that's the right word. So we have a mo-- We have to respect the law of the land, and if the government say that you have to pay this penalty or this, uh, for parking, whatever it may be, okay, Dinam DeMalchusa Dina. But when the government have said, "Well, when you have an internal dispute or, um, arbit-- whatever, the arrangement with someone of, uh..." And to say, "Well, the law of the land is that between you and you, you do owe money, you don't owe money," it's not nothing to do with the government. It's the way the government-appointed legal system will arbitrate between Reuven and Shimon. Who says that the concept of Dinam DeMalchusa Dina applies when there is a, a dispute, a monetary dispute between one unit and his, and, and his, his neighbor? I mean, let me give a different example. If my next-door neighbor who's, uh, who's Jewish

48:30 wants to build a, an extension and civil law is, is allowed, does that mean that Halakha I cannot have any claim against him if, let's say... Actually, I don't think the Halakhas are that strict at all. But let's say in Halakha, he wouldn't be allowed to. In civil law, he is allowed to. Would that, would that be, uh, recognized to say, "Oh, he's allowed to because of Din DeMalchusa"? So that's the question. Finally, he says, "What would happen if the lender, the creditor, recognizes that the borrower had managed to pull a fast one on the, on the legal system? He managed to declare bankruptcy, but really he still has assets, but he's managed to somehow keep those assets and be, and be, uh, declare bankruptcy." So he says, "It's not Mokhu to be Mochel. The fact that you managed to, um, work the system to, to acquit yourself from debts in a civil law, that doesn't mean you don't owe me the money." If, if you, if you're, if... In other words, if your bankruptcy isn't, uh, a genuine one. This is also not so clear, this whole story, because if it's in businesses, let's come back to the other side of it. When it comes to businesses, you could say that businesses work with idea of a limited company and limited liabilities. That's how businesses work. And therefore, when I b-- when I do business with, with another, uh, company, another person, if it's purely in, in, in business, say, well, business terms include,

50:18 uh, um, following the laws of bank-bankruptcy, and therefore I'm protected. If it's... But if it's a, a private arrangement rather than a business kind of arrangement, it seems to be harder to, to, um, recognize that a bankruptcy should be a reason for total acquittal. Okay, let's move on. Now, here's a question about blowing shofar for a, uh... So here's the story. If you go to, to... You're going to some- You go to someone, and you want to help them do a mitzvah, and they need to say a berachah. So we're all used to, um, on mivtzat fill-in, you put on fill and say, "Baruch, Baruch ata, ata," what comes to Hashem's name? Do you say, "Adonai, Adonai, and now say noi." And he says, "Now say noi." Um, so but really, the halacha is that you could say with the person Hashem's name in the berachah. You could say, "Baruch ata," Hashem's name. The way it is, you can say with them the berachah word for word. This is in the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch in Siman kuf pe dalet de'ichas Pesach talking about going to homes to help them make a Seder. And so you're not doing the Seder with them. You're gonna do it earlier or later. If they don't know how to bench after the meal, so you can recite with them the whole berachah samozain word for word. It's not called a berachah in vain because they are saying word for word after you. That would be like a teacher teaching

51:58 a child, training a child to say a berachah after eating. So there's a difference. With a child, you can teach them in school. You can teach them berachahs. Uh, and even though they're not eating now, that's okay because that's with a child. With an adult, you could not teach them berachahs, um, not live, so to speak. But when in live, in, in session, when they are-- have just eat or about to eat or they've just eaten with benching, et cetera, you're allowed to say the word, the berachah word for word with them. That's okay. And by the same token, when you're going mitzvot lulav, mitzvot shofar, mitzvot, mitzvot tefillin, you can say the berachah with the, with the, with your client word for word with Hashem's name and all. The question which I have here is, my dilemma is when it comes to mitzvahs which a woman doesn't have a chiyuv, as in shofar, as in lulav, as in sukkah. So would, would these same rules apply? That, that like you're allowed to teach a berachah, um, word for word whilst the person is doing the mitzvah, would that apply also when it's a voluntary mitzvah? I'm not sure whether it got to do with Aravos or Torah. Or perhaps you say the other way around. Since they're allowed to say a berachah, I'm allowed to teach them the berachah. According to Minchas Chinuch, a woman is allowed to say a berachah, so I'm allowed to teach them the berachah. So it's, uh, more theoretical.

53:23 On the-- In most cases, a woman would, who has a little bit of knowledge, will know how to say the beginning part of a berachah from benching lech, whatever, and then you just say, say, "Baruch ata," and continue, and then you'd say... They would say the "Tilcha rabiacha olam," and then you'd say with them word to word, "Asher kidshanu b'mitzvotav v'tzivanu l'smacha et ha'ozer." Finally, here's like an interesting thing where that-- about the cutting of the corner of a blanket. So in the Alter Rebbe's... Now, a blanket is used something which is like a kind of garment. And if it's got four corners, so lechora, it should, uh, have to have tzitzit. Yeah. So here we have the Alter Rebbe, I believe. He says cushions and, uh, uh, sheets, even though, um, you sometimes sleep with them during the daytime, that doesn't make it into a daytime garment because it's basically a nighttime garment. Well, that's according to Tosfos who says it goes according to the designation of the garment, a night garment or a day garment. And according to the Rambam who says if you wear a night garment, four-quartered night garment by day, you do need to put on tzitzit. So then you should be really putting on tzitzit on your sheets because you sleep with them in the morning as you, you know, if you don't get up necessarily at, at, at, at dawn. And despite that, the minhag is not to put in tzitzit, whether on sheets, not whether they are

54:58 sheets or blankets, whether they are wool or linen. And the reason is because some say that a blanket is not a garment. A, a, a garment you wear on your body. This is more flat, um, over your body, and therefore that's not considered a garment as such. Others disagree with this, and therefore, the Alter Rebbe concludes, if it is a woolen sheet or a woolen, woolen, um, mattress of sorts, you should make one corner round to avoid having to have tzitzit. So we have here a dilemma with a woolen go- With particularly a woolen garment, whether you need to, uh, whether you need to cut off a corner. That's in the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch. In the Alter Rebbe's Siddur, he writes the following: "Vechehen ha'michseh shekeilim kaldre," a blanket, "shemechasim bo yeshan beyom." Now, here's remarkable that the Alter Rebbe, instead of talking about a sheet, is talking about a cover. And he adds another thing, which is krishe yoshen beyom. So if the Shulchan Aruch, he said that sometimes you'll oversleep, yoshen bohem baboiker. He doesn't say that. He says, krishe yoshen beyom. If you actually go to sleep with it during the day, even though mainly you'd use it for night, you should cut off a corner to make it round. So in the Siddur HaBoaleinu L'Tovoh, so you have a whole chapter in the Miluim about this. And to explain that there is a-- this is, this is very precise, krishe yoshen beyom. So that which you oversleep from night into

56:44 day does not make that into a beged, a beged yom. But, uh, and even according to the Rambam, it's still, it's still a hemshech of the night. It doesn't need to have-- not a question of tzitzit. If you are accustomed to lying, to take-taking a rest during the day and taking a rest with a blanket, and you have this blanket and it's square, then that's what the Alter Rebbe is talking about. Now, for I, I believe the majority of the population, Jewish population, having a rest during the day with a blanket is rare, uh, apart from Shabbos. And Shabbos, bichlal tzitzit is easier because you c- you not have to go and put in tzitzit on Shabbos. That's possibly... I'm trying to explain where did it come from that we're not so particular about cutting off corners of garments, which is a hemshech to the previous point or an earlier point. The people who do cut off corners of, of blankets are more often than not bochrim yeshiva, and the blanket belongs to the yeshiva. Um, and of, of course, in the assumption that the blanket belongs to them, but all right. Um, so, so there, there, there is, there is, there is this kumra of, of cutting off. The Alter Rebbe also, remarkably, does not differentiate. In the Shulchan Aruch, he says if it's made of, of wool. In the Siddur, he doesn't say a difference whether the blanket is made of wool. You could say Istanbul blankets are made of wool. I don't

58:20 know what was the case two hundred years ago. That might be true. But he says if it's a garment which you are consciously using to go and have a, to have a sleep during the day. It could be also in the Alter Rebbe's times, people got up for tikkun chatzos, so therefore having a rest during the day was almost a necessity. Whereas in, uh, nowadays, less of us do tikkun chatzos, and therefore having a, a, a official siesta in the a- during the day is, is less common. That could be why it's not so popular, this thing of cutting off a corner. Now, let's go a little bit further on this, and that is two little stories, and this will end with. And so here's a note of the Rebbe, Rebbe, of the Friediker Rebbe. Zain adorition tofrish I involved. That's 1916 in Rostov. I'm amazed, and I cannot restrain myself. The pure yirah, pure fear, uh, how, how precious is it. My father, Schlita, Rebbe Rashab, is having a haircut with a, with a, uh, haircut or hair clippers. And sometimes when I give him a haircut with a machine, I noticed that this sheet, which is-- I gave him to, to, to wrap around not to get, uh, soiled with the, the, uh, hairs which fall. And before he puts on this sheet, he cuts off the corner of the sheet and made it round. And the, uh, the intention was obvious. It shouldn't be a garment with four corners, and thus be

59:57 chayav tzitzit. And now I understand also the-- my question. When he comes to the, comes to the hotel, he doesn't use the, the-- their covers, their, their blankets. And even if they're very, very clean and pure, he doesn't like to use their, their blankets. Because that's another way of concern about four corners, which is very, very interesting because it's not your garment. The hot- if it belongs to the hotel, it's not yours. So therefore, why should you have to put in tzitzit in any case? A borrowed garment doesn't need to have tzitzit. Right. Um, so that's something which I shared with also this, this program. I did it yesterday in Hebrew. And Rabbi Glassman of Riga sent me the following, just now published in, uh, a, a journal called Ginzayo. So in issue seventeen, just now published in Tammuz, has the following story. It's from the memoirs of Reb Itche Golden, who was, uh, a manager of the yeshiva in during the time of the Friediker Rebbe. And he says, "One time," the Friediker Rebbe said, "we were in Chutz La'aretz." In other words, we were abroad, and I took out from the suitcase. I took out some sheets to prepare the beds to be able to have a rest. And my father, the Rebbe Rashab, says, "We have to cut off a corner. We have to ask permission by the akeidas avos." I think that's one of his ho-holy expression. So I answer, says the Rebbe, I answer. He says, "Baruch Hashem, this I've

1:01:25 managed to achieve, that such quest- such issues I don't need to have-- I don't need to ask." In other words, he doesn't need to ask his wife permission to cut off the corners of the sheets. And the Rebbe says, "Sehr gut," uh, and didn't say any further. Whether he did cut off the corner or not, the Rebbe didn't tell over. But what we're seeing here is the Rebbe Rashab was, was particular, and it was talking about sheets even. Yeah. But obviously not talking about wool davka. All right. The Rebbe Rashab, we know he had his extreme, extremely durim. Just finish off with one more similar story. Rebbe Rashab, I know some people might take exception to it, but I'll still tell, still tell the story. That the Rebbe Rashab, when he was traveling on a train. So at one stage, he took on a new kabbalah. He's gonna take-- bring his own little, uh, little kettle. But at some stage, he did take hot water from the, the controller. The conductor would go around with hot water and glasses and give people, uh, they could buy a drink of hot water. So Rebbe Rashab threw the cup. At last, he threw it out of the window of the train. And someone asked him, because he said, "If like this, if I had bought the glass, so then it would mean I have to tovel it. I can't drink without toveling. So therefore, I threw it out of the window to confirm that I didn't buy

1:02:44 the glass. I only bought the drink, and I don't need the glass." Okay. Also not a heral ha-ravim. Um, you might get arrested for doing that kind of thing today. I wish you all a guten Shabbos and, uh, inspiring Shabbos Mevarchim Elul. And we should be zocheh to see geulah, hamitis, ve-hashlema, b'tasit Moshiach tzidkeinu, b'meheira u-yameinu mamash. Amen. Amen. Yes, Father. Yes, Koach.