בראשית תשפ״ו

00:05 Speaker 1 Tchmoch. Welcome to tonight's Shiur, Motzei Shabbos Bereishis. A little bit later than usual. This is, uh, hopefully will... Once the days become shorter, the nights become longer, we'll be able to start the Shiur at eight thirty. But tonight, we're starting at nine o'clock. And, uh, I've said nine forty-five for end, end time. We'll see how, how we'll do. Okay. So let's go to our first question. So in middle of sukkos, someone from overseas says, "Oops." In the middle of sukkos, he realized that he had, his sukkah had been covered. The schach had been put up by a, a eineh Yehudi, and he didn't do anything. He didn't intervene at all. And so what's the story there? So we learned actually in this year, in the, uh, evening shiur, we went through these halachas, and we have in Siman Tof, Reish, Lamed, Heh, sukkas ganvach verakvach. And ganvach stands for Goyim, Nosim, Behemes, et cetera. Um, r- then rak, so it's roim, chayotzim. So it says it very clear. The sukkah does not need to have been made for Shehemitzvah. It has to be han- have, have been made for Shem sel, for shade. And so therefore, even if it's made by, by a Nochrim, by, uh... As long as it was made for shade, it's okay. It's valid. So when the, your caretaker put up your sukkah, and it was obviously a Shem sel, so the sukkah is a kosher sukkah. And yet, there is a, a hishtadlus. People try to make sure that a

01:59 Speaker 1 Yid is involved. So on this screen you have from the Sefer Bikurei Yaakov. This is from Rabbi Yaakov Ettlinger. He is more known perhaps for his Pirush Aruch LaNer. He lived in Germany about a hundred and fifty, a hundred and eighty years ago. So he wrote a Pirush on the Halachas of Sukkah, Lulav and Sukkah, which is, um... So he, he discusses this. Now, in the So he wants to say, "Davka ha'asuiyak varg sheira." It's, uh, if it's already been built, it's kosher. But l'chatchilah, you shouldn't be, uh, co- using to, to cover the sukkah a Nochri or Isur, uh, a cotton less than y- thirteen years old. So no question that it's kosher. The question is whether it's, uh, l'chatchilah. So yeah, this is, it's, uh, it's, it... He's, he, he's mechadesh that it's not, not totally l'chatchilah. But no question of the kashrus of the sukkah because it was put up for Shem sel. The Shem... It was, it constructed... Uh, we're not talking about the walls, as he says. We're talking about the schach. It was placed there for the purpose of shelter, which is the mitzvah of sukkah. That's fine. Okay, let's go on to the next question, and that is about a... Someone sent, asked me about a snack bar made with mashed dates. That's very interesting. So I, I looked up... I have a Sefer called Shari Habrachah, and I looked under snack bars. He tells me to look under mamrach tamaryim, which means date spread, where he says

03:42 Speaker 1 the bracha rishonah is shehakol and the bracha achronah is... See a footnote, which means it's complicated. So, um, but let's, so let's go through this carefully. This, uh, the, the question about s- um, mashed dates is actually written in Gemara Brachos, and they have a, a word for it. It's called trimo, spelt Tes-Reish-Yud-Mem-Alef. Trimo is mashed dates. Now, the way the Tur brings this, he says, "She'nismachu ksas," that they're somewhat ma-ma- mashed. Whereas the way the, the, the Beit Yosef challenges that, and he says from the Rambam, "It's not even a ksas," even though they're totally mashed. And therefore, he m-- When he brings the Halacha in Shechinach Oroch, he leaves out the word ksas. So let's read these words. This is with Siman Reish Beis. "T'morim shemiyachon bayad." He s- um, squeezed the mosh, sma- mashed them by hand. "Ve'oso mehem iso. Vehoitzim mehem garineihem." The, uh, the wording's interesting. Obviously, he first took out the, the date pits, and then he made them into a mush. And nevertheless, "Lo nispanah birchatam." The bracha doesn't change. And therefore, the bracha remains borei pri ha'etz, and the after bracha is borchu mein shalosh. So the bracha on mashed dates is ha'etz and, um, borchu mein shalosh. There are more comments on this, and he says something called latvern. Uh, I think there's something now also a sim- with a similar word. But, um, uh, but he said he has a pavila. Pavila is some kind of jam. According to this, a jam should also be

05:39 Speaker 1 pri ha'etz. But others disagree with that, and they say it's shehakol. Hmm. I hear that they said share screen isn't working. We're gonna try again. Um. Just give me a second. There it is. Some of us have it, I think, Diane. I have. Um, well, try again. I can see the screen. Okay. Uh, let me check it again. Patient. Okay. Um. Better now? You've gone back to the beginning. Yeah. No, that, that, that's okay. Well, I ha-- Some of us had it before. Yeah. I'm asking the ones who didn't have it, whether they have it. Okay. This is what we can do. All right. Um, so the Ramah continues about pavitle, and he says that the Sadim Truma Sandeshen says he should say Shehakol on pavitle. So... So there we go. So then this Mishnah Bira now has an interesting question that now that we have this, let's say this pavitle. Okay, so there's a, uh, there's a s-sevara that it's Haetz, and then Prosevara is the Shehakol. See, if the same pavitle would be made from something from Shiva Saminim, let's say from, whether from grapes or from, uh, pomegranates. If you had such a paste, and according to the first opinion, it's Bore Pri Haetz. According to the second opinion, it's Shehakol. Now, what is the after bracha? It's all very well for the bracha of Sheina because Safek, bracha of Bore, Bore and Shehakol covers. But when it comes to the after bracha, Bore Nefashos doesn't cover instead of Shalach... Um, and

08:24 Speaker 1 Shalosh. So he says, he, Taka, he's a bit stuck with that. He doesn't really have a Etzel. Okay. So now let's go a little bit further on this discussion. This is how it's brought in the Alter Rebe's Shechinach. Temarim Shemi Yachan Beyad Behoitze Garinei Mas Mehem Iso Vechehen Kolei Etze Mishar Peires. It means the, that, that even though that's not the normal thing to do, the bracha remains Haetz. So just to summarize, the why is that, this, this halacha, that mashed dates, uh, are going to be still Haetz. And the answer is when you look at mashed dates, it's, it looks, it, it, it's recognizable as what it is, and therefore it's going to be Bore Pri Haetz. So a practical extension of that, let's say mashed, um, avocado. Avocado is common. People make into a paste. What bracha is that? So everyone looks at it, knows it's avocado. So according to what we've, we're learning here, that would be Bore... The bracha would be Bore Pri Haetz. By the way, that's a trick thing that I often ask in the class. Uh, girls can have the impression that avocado is Hardomo because it's treated, it's similar to a vegetable, but avocado is obviously a Bore Pri Haetz. Right. Um, so now let's come back then to our, to our bar. So if... The, it looks, it looks like in the dark, the color of dates. It's just, uh... Okay. Then it remains Haetz. What he said over here is made into a paste, into

10:17 Speaker 1 a spreadable paste. Now, I think what, that is already must... It, it cannot be that that paste is just plain mashed dates because it would not be as smooth as it would be, uh, much thicker. You wouldn't be able to spread it the way you would be able to use these spreads. See, obviously they're adding, they've added something to it, and that's possibly why he's, uh, uh, taking the position that the bracha is Shehakol. But when it's a, I, I, I believe when it is Taka, like a, int- some kind of bar, and you look at it, it's got the same color. And when you t-try to bend it or whatever, you can feel that it is similar to, uh, the consistency of dates, uh, of... Or would you be able to recognize? So then the Chareda is the Halacha, which it says, Shechinach, that the bracha remains Haetz. Let's move on. So someone asked me the following question. Should one rise for Baruch Hashem Hamuvoilach LeOlam VaEd at the beginning of each Aliyah? And further detail, he asked me, "What about this lifting yourself up slightly?" Uh, I was l-thinking of the word in Hebrew, L'Hisorimim K'Tzas. So at first I thought it was a simple, straightforward answer. I gave him a reference to the Kitzur Shechinach. And over Shabbos, I had further thoughts about this. So here you have his Kitzur Shechinach. You can see the reference, Siman Chof Gimel, that when the person has the Aliyah says, Baruch Hu, and we respa-respond

11:56 Speaker 1 Baruch Hashem Hamuvoilach LeOlam VaEd, Tzrichin Kol Hatzibur Laman. One is approa-uh, supposed to stand And he says the beracha, and during Kriat HaTorah, they're not required to stand. Only midat Chassidim b'mitzvot will stand for the rest. Between the Gabriel to Gabriel, between the Aliyahs, there's no reason to be maachol. Okay, I'm not going to go all of that. I'm just reading here that he's saying that for Boruch Hashem Hamavarch LeOlam VaEd, we should be standing. Now, I'd like to share meta-information, should we say, that the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch has got three main sources. One is the Altereves Shulchan Aruch, another one is the Chayei Odom, and another is the Siddur HaChaim. These are his main sources. Now, here you have on the screen the Siddur HaChaim, Siman Ayin Peh Reikai Vav, which is almost, the Kitzur is almost word for word from the Siddur HaChaim. Fine. Now, we have in the, we have a, a, a, uh, about four pages of Hagorot HaSiddur of the Rebbe Rashab. And they are printed in the back of the Siddur Imdach. They're printed in the back of the Siddur Torah Air. And in the recent volume of Torah Shalom, Sha'alas UShuvah Torah Shalom, they've been included there. In my, in my Siddur, the first edition, it was also included in the back. But in the new edition, each item from that list of Hagorot was put on the right page, on the relevant page. Coming back. So he starts off, "Ayin v'derech ha-chaim siman ayin vav," whether one

13:44 Speaker 1 ought to be standing for Kriat HaTorah. Right. Then he quotes from Shmirat HaShiurim, from the, um, Rav Chaim Vital, from the Arizal. The Arizal would kiss the Sefer Torah. He would accompany it until the table, where, namely the bimah, where the readings takes place. Then he went back to his place, and he would stay seated until the end of Pri Hapesach Parshah, "Lo yechosen ha-noyachin la'amod." So now, it looks like the Arizal did not stay standing for Boruch Hashem Hamavarch LeOlam VaEd. And, uh, the Kafar Chaim says that, that diyuk too. Now, there is, the Alter Rebbe mentions this in Shulchan Aruch. Does one need to stand for Kadesh? And they bring, for, the Poskim bring a raya from this king of Eglon Melech Moav. When he had a, a message from Hashem, he's, from the, through the navi, he stands up. So if you have... If he stood up, we should also be standing up for Kadesh. Despite that, the Arizal clearly, I think the Alter Rebbe mentions this in Shulchan Aruch, was not partic-particular to stand up for Kadesh. If he was already standing, he remained standing. But he would not st-a-arise to, for Kadesh. So what's the, what's the, what's the, uh... Why, why would, should you have to stand for Boruch Hashem Hamavarch LeOlam VaEd? Because it's the status of davar shebikedusha, something which is normally said only with a minyan. So that's a davar shebikedusha. Needs to... So then, out of davar shebikedusha, you should be standing. But there's, there's

15:19 Speaker 1 no logical difference between standing for Boruch Hashem Hamavarch LeOlam VaEd and standing for Kadesh. And if you can stay seated for Kadesh, you can stay seated for, for, for this Boruch also. So, so that, that's now, so it's not so straightforward. The Kitzur Shulchan Aruch says, yes, uh, you should stand. And, um, but it looks like the, according to the Arizal, it's not so, not so necessarily the case. And this is from the, now you have on the screen, from the Piskei Teshuvas. Siman Kuf Mem Vav in the name of Kriat HaTorah. And he quotes the Mishna Berura, who says, "But when saying Boruch Hashem Hamavarch LeOlam VaEd, you have to stand." Then he says there are very, some very fine Jews who do not stand for Kriat HaTorah, not even for Boruch. And he, he gives a quote from Rav Chaim Vital. And as I said, and, and there are others also who take that view. And therefore, that is, to summarize, although the Kitzur says he should stand for Boruch Hashem Hamavarch LeOlam VaEd, if you're sitting anyways, there is room to be makeil. And so now we've got two opinions, yeah? And then we've got this, and this I didn't manage to research adequately. We say, for example, where by ziman. So es-especially when there's a ziman with Hashem's name, they're to rise somewhat from your chair. So what, what exactly is that? And the same thing, what we've seen, people who are sitted, seated for, during Kadesh, but for Am Echad

16:57 Speaker 1 Meirav, they'll rise, lehizdureim me'aat. So that seems to be some kind of shor. The Al Pi Din, you don't have to stand, as the Arizal remains seated. For Kadesh HaTofseem Yushvim remain seated. But nevertheless, since there is opinion that you should be standing, so out of respect, there is this lehizdureim me'aat. Uh, again, I haven't looked at this now. Years ago, I remember seeing a teshuvah of Rav Ovadia Yosef, the GaBei Moedim Anachnu Loch. Uh, whether one needs to rise for Moedim. As far as I remember, he says you do have to stand. Again, you do, you may look around and see people are not so particular. I'm wondering whether that is related to the same discussion of the Arizal not being particular, uh, to rise for davar shebikedusha unless tofseem me'umad. Let's move on. So simple question. Someone asks, "Could you use the aravos of the lulav to use them for Hachanos?" I suspect the question is that there was an early minyan, and they've all finished using their lulavim. And now you can take those aravos, really, and then you can put them together, make a backpack of their Hachanos. That's for Arovos, the lulav you only have two. For Hoshana Rabbah, you have to take five. Anyway, so at the time I'd said it's okay, but afterwards, I looked up in Shulchan Aruch. So let's read this carefully. This is in Taf Resh Nun. Uh, re-- Um, sorry. Taf Resh Samech Daled. Towards the end of Hilchot Sukka, talks about Hoshana Rabbah,

18:28 Speaker 1 and it says the Shulchan Aruch says you're not yoetz with the Aravah of the lulav, even if you lifted it twice. If you had took the same lulav, you lifted it twice, once for lulav and the second time you lifted it for the mitzvah of Aravah or the minhag Aravah, you're not yoetz. On this, the Mishnah Berurah says that's only if you lifted the second time. Um, well, the second opinion says you are yoetz. They said even the first opinion, that's only whilst it's still in the bunch together with the lulav and the other... and the hadasim. But if you had undone the bunch, you have tooken-- taken the Aravah away from them, pshat sheyoetz bo. So then he's, he's quite confident. Mishnah Berurah says for sure that you could be yoetz with the Aravot shel lulav. Once they've been separated, you can use them for Hoshana. Okay, let's move on. So someone asked me, one of our regulars, regular listeners asked, "Is there some kind of connection between the... We've got s-six days of Hoshana and then the seventh day is Hoshana Rabbah. Is there a connection between the poems which are on each day to that particular day?" So that's interesting, interesting question. Now, to go back a bit, the Arav-- the Hoshana, sorry, broadly seems to be attributed to Rebbe Elazar of Calari. And indeed, I think in the first long poem of the, of the... of what is said on Hoshana Rabbah, it goes through the whole Alef Beis, and at

20:01 Speaker 1 the end there's another five, uh, uh, sentences which are starting with the letters of the name Elazar. So he's the author, the composer of all of this. L-looking at earlier sources, it looks like it wasn't such a big deal one way or another. So long as you have an Alef Beis series, it doesn't... it wasn't such an import-- such a big issue. You chose one or the other. And then we have also in Nusach Ashkenaz, they've... there's, uh, another two Alef Beis in which we don't have in our Nusach. Erich Shavi and, uh, I've forgotten the other one. Um, and then there's this another one for to say on Shabbos. And so the Seder Ashkenaz is different. What seems to be, though, is that for Hoshana Rabbah, everyone has the same, the same, the same Seder. Comes along the Alter Rebbe and he says the s- the, the sequence of the six Hakafos of... or seven Hakafos of Hoshana Rabbah, that sequence should be adhered to also in the days leading up the whole of Sukkot. So that's... That you can see here. Now, this is from a Sefer, a contemporary Sefer written before Shavuot. That the Akud-- The Baal HaTanya has got a much more rigid Seder for Hoshana, very different to all the Minhagim which we mentioned before. Just emulating the Seder of Hoshana Rabbah, L'maan Amito, Shehecheyanu, et cetera. Now, this, he does... There is a reference here to an earlier source, Seder Troyes. Troyes, that's Troyes. That's in France. That Rashi

21:43 Speaker 1 is associated with that city. So there he says, let's read this inside. The nine days of Chag are arranged like this. Seder Hoshana is for the seven days. The Yomim Kadmonim. In earlier days, it was common... They would rather... They, they... It was to say the seven days as of the Yom Tov, as they are set out for Hoshana Rabbah even today, one per day. And Hoshana Rabbah, they go over the same ones all over. But nowadays, there is... Uh, the... For the first day, there's a-another one, L'maan and Nerot, Mesayim Kodesh, et cetera. So this is... He, he... This is Seder Troyes going back hundreds of years ago, saying that originally it was like the Alter Rebbe, uh, advises us to keep to, um, the rigid Seder. Fine. Um, so that's, that's as far as Bechalal Seder goes. But what's, what's the significance of the various piyutim and their connection to the various days? So should have... I'm gonna just open up a siddur. So the first day we have the Ma-- Hashaynu L'maan Amito, Hashaynu L'maan Briato, Hashaynu L'maan, uh, um, Godlo V'zivhaarto. So the first one, the Alef Beis, is largely focusing on the glory of the Shekhinah. And so that's the first day of Yom Tov. The second day of Yom Tov, the focus is on the Beis HaMikdash, Shehecheyanu, V'Zman Karinu. So we've got the... Those, the, the, the... One of the Acharon say because they're the first days of Sukkot, therefore on Yom Tov, they're given the more Chashuve

23:22 Speaker 1 ones. The next, the third one is Omani Chaimar, and that's very much talking about the ma'alah of Yidden. Um, and you may have, may have heard this Chassidishe nigun. Oam id dis elin, oam id dis elin, de ma'alas von de Yidden. Von, uh, dershter ma'alah iz oym ani chaimar. Noch a ma'alah iz bor akacham. Och, och, och, goy lo besura. Doch, doch, doch, lom sol es zayn. I'm sure some of you have heard this nigun, but that's, that's, that's clear-clearly the, the theme of the third day is the inyan, the ma'alah of, ma'alah of Bnei Yisrael. Then, then we have the next one. The next three seem to be talking about, um, gashmius, but on, on different levels. So some of the Acharon want to say that we don't want to talk about rain even in the Hoshana until the last day possible, because rain during Yom Tov is not a bracha, and therefore that's li-left to the last day. In this itself, the different Minhagim, as our Minhag is that we have Domam Me'eretz, Sofer Misolom, Hadorim Daled, um, Rov Mei Rozin. It's talking about the weather and about there should be a good weather. And so that as... relates to the inyan of rain, and that's therefore left to the last day. In what we have for the fourth day, Ha'oden Ha'mashiach, it's also talking about bracha from heaven, but it's not as, not as explicit. But that's... So again, we've gone through focus on the Aibishter, focus on the Beis HaMikdash, focus

25:12 Speaker 1 of Bnei Yisrael, then about the for Bnei Yisroel. The fifth one is going from the weather or rain, goes to parnassah on the, on the physical side, on the, on the earth, earth side. Uh, Behemah, ba-ba-ba-- um, and it talks here about, um, very much about the, the, the, the crops and the et cetera. So it's talking again about parnassah, but not talking about the, the, the weather side, but more the, the, uh, success in the, in the, in the, uh, agriculture, et cetera. So that's why I managed to find, as I say there, in the, uh... for the six days. That's the seventh day is, uh, is all about Esh, which is why I shine it up. Okay. That's as much as I can tell you. Uh, as you can see on the screen, there is a Sefer Orot Mefarshim Hoshana Rabbah, which I used a little bit. There is an ArtScroll book published probably forty years ago on Hoshana Rabbah. Uh, I did not look it up. Probably they do have some kind of overview and further information about this. Okay, let's move on. Pass to number six. What is more correct? Barchehnu Va'amarcham HaShuleshes o Va'amarcham HaShuleshes Ba'Torah. So this is when we... the Chazan says, um, echoes the Inyan of Birchas Keranim. So what is the... where the comma should be placed. And there, there were editions of the Tehillas Hashem which had the comma after the word Ba-- on the word HaShuleshes. Barchehnu Va'amarcham HaShuleshes Ba'Torah HaKesuvah. But what you

26:57 Speaker 1 have on the screen is an, a-an answer of the Rebbe, and this is published in the Kuntesseches Cheilek Kaf Daled. It says, "B'nusach B'brocham Shuleshes Ba'Torah. HaBeis Shel Ba'Torah Merchiach." The fact that there is the, the Beis, uh, the way it's pre-spelled, is that the... it means that the tripleness, if that's a word in English, is, is in Torah. HaShuleshes Ba'Torah. It gives the reference to the Sefer Kesseh Shem Tov, and that's not from Baal Shem Tov, but from Rabbi Sholom ingaguin. And, um, right. I'll, I'll come back to that in a moment. And then we have another reference, and this is in a Mich Tov Kloli. The Zochim L'brocha HaShuleshes Ba'Torah. The merit that the berachah which is tripled in the Torah. Yevarechecha Yah is a letter just before Shavuot. What's the Lashon HaShuleshes Ba'Torah? Because some Meforshim say that in the Beis Hamikdash, when they, they did not answer Amen for a berachah in the Beis Hamikdash. They said whatever they answered, but not, not Amen. Therefore, Birchas Keranim was all with berachah achas. That's Lashon HaMishnah in Megillah, I believe. Berachah achas ubigvulin sholesh berachos. That bir-- the berachah, Birchas Keranim in the Beis Hamikdash was said just in one sequence, whereas in bigvulin and elsewhere, it's said in, in, in th-three, uh, sections. In the Torah, how is the To- how is the... how are the Yevarechecha, Yoiso? They are written in three pesukim. So this is the emphasis, HaShuleshes Ba'Torah. However it's said orally, it could be one way or

28:44 Speaker 1 the other. But the way it's in the Torah, it's HaShuleshes Ba'Torah. In the Torah, it's in triple form. In my siddur, I have this quote from Moshe Zakkuta. Uh, Mischanen L'fano Yitbarich SheYekayem Banu HaBerachah HaShuleshes Ba'Torah. Pirush Hasauder Leneg that... What, what does it mean, HaShuleshes Ba'Torah? Again, you see the HaShuleshes Ba'Torah. That it is corresponding to the three avos. Yevarechecha is Chesed, corresponding to Avraham Avinu. And Yoir in Gevurah corresponds to Yitzchak. And Yisso is Tiferes corresponds to Yaakov. And le-- right, left, and, and center. Okay. Then this last thing is from the, from the Kesseh Shem Tov. Now, this Kesseh Shem Tov, as I said, Rabbi Sholom Sh-Shloime Gaguin, he was a Sephardi, lived in London, and he published several sefarim, um, recording the Minhag Sefardim shel Amsterdam ve-London. And the Rebbe co-- refers to him quite often in Minhogim, et cetera. And he says, uh, all right, so you got this. Is it one berachah or three berachahs? VeIm Toima MiShum Shojim B'brochenu Ba'brocha. You see, Ba'brocha, it was in single form. Mashmo berachah achas. That i-implies it's a single berachah. Ze Einu, don't worry about that. Ki Kvar Omar Somech Veniri. He just said HaShuleshes Ba'Torah. You've said already HaShuleshes Ba'Torah. LeYodi SheHeim Shulesho Lo Yachas. So it seems to be quite clear that the guidance is that the comma should be after the word Ba'Torah. HaShuleshes Ba'Torah, it is in triple form in the Torah. Um, someone mentioned to me that in, in the, the writings of Rav Henkin, he

30:27 Speaker 1 says differently. There probably are other opinions out there, but that's what we, we, we have and now w-we've been told. Okay, um, number, number... That's... Wait a minute. That's... That was number six. Number seven. Okay, so how did that get to seven? That's number eight. Okay. So number seven, if you remember, we had a whole discussion about the Rebbe's corrections to the, um, this peot, which is said in, uh- Slichas, and there were changes. The Rebbe had recommended a list of changes. And then a few years later, the Slichas were printed with the changes, but u-updated from masculine form to de- ne- to feminine form and so on. And I was curious what happened here. So in Tov Shin Tes Vav, the Rebbe had written, written a list of, of rec, um, corrections, and then they, they were implemented, but different to the way the Rebbe had written them. So I was, I was asking for people who are more than ten years older than me if they remember how things developed. So someone who is, qualifies, he says that he remembers at the time, Shmuel Zalmanov commented to the Rebbe that his list of corrections, but they're not grammatically correct. So the Rebbe says, the Rebbe's response to him was, he, he wasn't-- that wasn't his point of making the exact wording. He wanted to point out that the way they are presented in the popular form, in the popular Slichas, they, uh, they-it's incorrect if you want to address the Midas themselves. They've

32:20 Speaker 1 been modified. But the exact form, yeah, that can, that can be, um, sorted out, um, properly. And if you remember what I, what I mentioned then was that, uh, in Tov Shin Chof Tes, or earlier, Tov Shin Chof He, you got Da-Da-Daniel Goldschmidt print Slichas based upon his research for manuscripts, and there, um, largely the Rebbe's corrections were corroborated by the, uh, by Rabbi Goldschmidt, by, um, Goldschmidt edition. And then we see in Tov Shin Chof Tes, that's when the Rebbe's corrections are actually incorporated, um, into the, the Chabad Slichas, but changed from where they should have-- where the Rebbe had written them in masculine form, they were changed into, uh, feminine form. But the history of this point of, uh, Shmuel Zalmanov's conversation with the Rebbe about this. Okay. Now, so number then, what you have on the screen now is number, actually be number eight, and that is about teaching Alefbeis to, or teaching to read Hebrew. Teaching a Goy to read Hebrew. The question was from a Shliah who was offered to give a course, uh, Semitic languages department and to give a course in, in Hebrew in a university in, in his town of Shlichas. And, uh, he would be keen to take that up, that offer. It gives him a, a foothold in the, in the, uh, university. But he was a bit concerned that there may be Goyim who will want to join the course, and then is it okay for him to be teaching Goyim to read, uh,

33:58 Speaker 1 Hebrew, Hebrew language. So I'd, I'd quoted, if you remember, a Italian, um, um, uh, Possek from four hundred years ago, Rav Travis, who, who said it is okay. Someone sent me later a link to the Ask the Rav, um, from Rabbi Broin. He also was asked this question, and he brings Kedarkee Vachodish a list of many references, and he's taking a s- a, a strict position. And so now-- And then someone c-can came up with a-another interesting, uh, set of references. All right. So let's see. This is from a Sicha. On the screen, it's a Sicha from Tov Shin Lamed Zayin, and it's a Sicha from beginning of Succoth. It was published for the beginning of Succoth. I'm not sure it's from Yurdil to Shuri or it's from during Succoth. I don't remember. Now, the Rebbe says the following. He's talking about the Pasuk of "Halelu et Hashem kol Goyim, Hashavchu ko la'um." The Sicha is Behemshich to the Parsha of Et Tabi, and the Rebbe is talking about the Goyim, uh, praising Yidden. And the Goyim will praise the Yidden, and they're not embarrassed to say, "Kigovor Aleinu Chasdei." The Goyim are happy to praise Hashem because Hashem was kind to Yidden, showed kindness to the Yidden. Then the Rebbe adds, the Rebbe has a style of, uh, speaking, sometimes a parenthesis inside a talk. This Pasuk is a Pasuk in Tehillim, and Tehillim is part of Torah Shebichsav. Torah Shebichsav includes Nevi'im Achlavim. It's been already translated into various languages, and it is

35:42 Speaker 1 permitted for Umot HaOlam to learn it. "Kamo ki yadu'a ma she kasav ve kam aposkim bo zeh." That some, many, a-a-and numerous Poskim say that Umot HaOlam are allowed to learn Tanakh. "SheTorah Shebe'al Pe also Umot HaOlam lelamdah." The Goyim are not allowed to learn Torah Shebe'al Pe, um, besides the Sheva Mitzvot Bnei Noach. But Chumash, ko-kol, kol haolam mutar l'umet ha-olam. They're allowed to. "VeNigeil Nevi'im Achlavim. Hachrai Ishe mutar lalamdah." That Chumash is-- He seems to differentiate between Chumash and Nevi'im Achlavim, but, but they are allowed to. Now, on the Ma-- on the foot note, they give a reference to Ste Chamed. So you look in the Ste Chamed, it's actually a long article. And actually, there seems to be quotes there which are much more rigid, much more. And they say, quote from Zohar and from other sources, not even to share even a single Os of Torah, a single letter of Torah with Umot HaOlam. And th-then there are a couple of Poskim who take this... One of them, Tzvia Yishchayes. I've forgotten who the other one was. Well-known Poskim. Oh, the, um, the Netsiv, Meishiv Davar. They say you are allowed to teach a Goy, uh, Torah Shebichsav, not Torah Shebe'al Pe. And the Sechem it's, it's about five pages, Sechem, um, back and forth, um, and much more against than for. And that may be what the Rebbe's-- he chose his words carefully. «mash hakotze vekam apotkim bezeh.» So but then the, the fact they write in «lekuli alma», um,

37:32 Speaker 1 well, you look in Sechem, it doesn't seem to be lekuli alma. You have the story about the fact that we, we're meant to write the Torah on the stone, so the guy should be able to learn it. All right. That is so much as far as Limud HaTorah, Limud HaTorah Shebechtav. Then what about language? To teach simply the, uh, letters and the b- and the language. So he quotes here a Sefer, «Shelelamdamilosh shendulvad,» and just pure Hashemules to translate. That's not a problem. And he brings a proof. Before Deir HaFlaga, which is this week's Sedra. Um, so next week's, yeah, the coming week's Sedra. So everyone was speaking Lashon HaKodesh. As it says, «Vayhi kalaret safa echad.» And then we have the story when Mo- when Yosef came to Pharaoh, and he wanted to teach him Lashon HaKodesh, but Pharaoh didn't succeed. And then he says you can reject that because of Shalom Malchus, whatever. So you have here even this, even teaching Lashon HaKodesh to Umez HaOlam to-- is, is, is also part of the debate there. But my, um, tendency is if the, if the Rebbe's seems to be accepting or following the approach that you're allowed to teach them Torah Shebechtav, so how much more so that it shouldn't be a problem just teaching, uh, Aleph Bet, et cetera, and, and Lashon HaKodesh. And the, uh, the... And if the question would be clearly a guy's asking me to teach him on his own, here's what-- that's not the question. Here's the

39:07 Speaker 1 question is, he wants to have a... give a course in the university, and the likelihood is they'll have Jewish students. They might be goyim, might not be, but that's not his kavana. So all, all in all, there is, there is certainly mokim lechachil. Although it's good to know that there is... it's not, it's not unanimous at all. Now, as I say, in Sechem, Yikah Taarikh Lez Gedola. Um, yeah. Let's move on to the next point. And that was, we had a discussion last sheer about taking schach from a cemetery, that the local council have been trimming the trees in the cemetery, and they're offering it to a vishliach. He can use it for schach. And the question was about is, um, mutav ha'noia... Is, is a meis nochri mutav ha'no or not? So I- at the time I said I hadn't managed to find anything. Well, Baruch Hashem, I, I did manage to find it clearly in Shechinach. In Siman Shin Mem Tes, near the Deah, a meis, a dead b- uh, body, bein goy, bein Yisroel, whether Jewish or not, is... And, and that his tachrichim are also mutav ha'no. Now, so this is from... This is a quote actually from the Rashbo. The Shechinach is a quote from the Rashbo. And then we have here in one of the meforshim, he says that meis Yisroel is also mutav ha'no min haTorah. But a meis oyer kechovim is also midrabbonim. And therefore, he says so sometimes there would have been a, a need for

40:42 Speaker 1 some kind of, uh, heter, one could be meikel because it's not also min haTorah. So that comes back to our discussion, just to remind you. First of all, who says it grew over a kever? It could be it was another part of the cemetery, which is not a problem in any case. Even if it was, then, uh, meis nochri is a sofer. So then it becomes a sofer derabbonon. On top of it, I brought in the Svara that schach may not be considered a benefit because a mitzvah lav lechoness nitnu. That was the discussion then. But just I'm adding now that the question whether a meis nochri is also mutav ha'no or not is meforsh Shechinach. But the meforshim say that it is a isur derabbonon. What else do we have? Right. Ah. So this w- this question made up my minyan just on Friday. So, uh, someone asked me that he met some bochrim who did-- were going on a Mivtzel Ululav, and they told me that even on the first days, when they went around and met people, they did not specify they're giving it bematonah u'al manah s'lach achasir. And he asked, "Is that okay or is it not okay?" So certainly not l'chatchilah. And I'm g- going... We're gonna discuss, discuss this, but you can see in the Hayom Yom that w- it says that when you go to the memazak or someone with your, uh, uh, the al minim, you should say befelish, matonah u'al manah s'lach achasir, befrat beYom

42:09 Speaker 1 Rishon. So, and I remember going about fifty something years ago, fifty-three years ago, going with, um, around, uh, with Mr. Glik, alav hashalom, going on Miv-- So it was just after the breakout of the S- of the, um, Kippur War. And we went to Alpha House, and the Yidden were there, uh, hundreds of Yidden g- uh, to give, to donate blood. And we went, went there on, uh, Mivtzel Ululav. And in the corridors, people were lying, standing and waiting. And Mr. Glik went out to each one, "I'm giving this to you as a gift, and y- y- you'll give it to... On condition you give it me back." This was during Chol Hamoed, obviously, and, you know, it was, it... And he didn't necessarily fully understand what he was talking about, but that's the halacha, yeah. Now, having said all that, now we take a look at Shechinach, and this is Taf Resh Nun Ches, Seif He. It says, "Nosne lo stam. Hava ke'ilu omar lo al manas s'tach zireh uli." So if you meet someone, and you gave him your Ululav to-- for the mitzvah, it's, it's, uh, it's understood you meant al manah s'lach achasir. "Im stam al ke- al daas kei nosne lo- That, that's probably your mindset because you want to . Um, so when you go... You gave someone your lulav, the person can't say, "Oh, uh, thank you very much, and I'll see you next year." Uh, no, he, he has to give it back. The understanding is it's

43:39 Speaker 1 . So what I'd like to say is this halakha is more a dinim mominus halakha. You gave someone your lulav, and you didn't specify it's . Of course, um, that's what you intended. It's not saying that the one who received the lulav automatically knows that it's . Yeah? You go to a frum Yid who knows that it has to be lulav. So he knows that he's taking it . You find a Yid who doesn't know very much, and you tell them, "I, um, I just have to tie my shoelaces. Can you hold my lulav, um, whilst I tie my shoelaces?" Now, you're holding it already. Now say the berakhah. Uh, a-and you didn't say, uh, . He doesn't... He didn't think about . He didn't think he's, he's has to own it. So you should say, you should say this . Now, one more point, though, which I found very interesting. Now, for years, I've been struggling with this. It says in the Hayom Yom that when you give someone else your lulav, you should say , especially on the first day, which... And that's a benefit for the giver and the receiver. But why would there be a need or any benefit of for the rest of Sukkos? When it says , it doesn't mean and also it means the rest of Sukkos. So what's the, what's, what's the here? What's the, what's the... Sorry. What's, what's the ? Why should you do it ? So now, here the Mishnah Berurah says, it says

45:31 Speaker 1 in you gave someone your lulav. You meant . It adds even if you have already been yoetz that day, and you only need it for the rest of S-sorry, of Sukkos, and the rest of Sukkos doesn't need to be yours. But we assess a person's mindset. Even for the rest of Sukkos that you, you prefer to use your own lulav rather than a borrowed one. And therefore, even if you have already done the mitzvah today, you still want the lulav back by and not that it should be a borrowed lulav. Where does this come from? It quotes it from the Maharam Mordechai. Maharam Mordechai lived in Carpantera, which is, uh, somewhere be-on... It's in France, but not far from Italy. Sometimes it was a part of Italy. Um, Rav Mordechai Carmi. And he says the proof to this is a story in the Gemara with Rabbi Gamaliel and Rabbi Akiva. And Rabbi Gamaliel gave his lulav to Rabbi Akiva. And there's discussion there. It was . Now, the Rabbi Gamaliel had already been yoetz the mitzvah, and still he insists that it should be a . Why so? So the answer is because even the rest of Sukkos, there's a preference to use your own lulav. And that may be the that, uh, it's a pref- It's a... There's a in using your own lulav for the rest of Sukkos also. One last thought on that, and I don't have a, a, a, uh, clarity one way or the other. The reason why we keep

47:22 Speaker 1 the... We take the lulav for the wh-whole of Sukkos because in Beis Hamikdash they took the lulav every day of Sukkos. So the Hayom says has to be lulav. In the time of the Beis Hamikdash, for the, for the seven days of Sukkos, was there a need for lulav for the rest of Sukkos, or was there not a need? And if we'd say that there was a need for lulav for the rest of Sukkos, then you could say like this, "Yeah, it has to be lulav because what we're doing for the rest of Sukkos is only , but the, the hiddur that it should be sh-lulav also for the rest of Sukkos." And that would explain this word of the, uh, Hayom Yom that why it's a uh, for the rest of Sukkos also. Um, yeah. That's what I wanted to share with you and, uh, wish you all, uh, a good Davaroch. And we should have Besuras tovos.

48:35 Speaker 2 Amen.

48:44 Speaker 1 Thank you very much. Thank you. Good Davaroch.