וישב תשפ״ו

00:02 Speaker 1 Good to vlog. Welcome to tonight's Shiur. Molt Shuves Parshas Vayeshev. This was Shabbos Mevarchim, uh, Teves. And today's Shiur is dedicated kindly by Rabbi Pinchas Rabin and family in honor of the newborn grandson, Mordechai Osher ben Moshe Cheskel Rabin. So parents should be magdal him the Torah chuppah mas and tovim, and the grand-the grandparents should have lots of nachas l'olam shalom Teves. I'm going to share with you the statistics before we go into the actual Shiur, but I think people would be happy to see the s-the statistics of the Shiur. This is from the, as you can see, for the last year. So, um, having a hundred and twelve percent growth. Uh, this is on Spotify alone. And we have here one, one point four thousand listening hours and new audience four hundred and eighty-seven percent. I don't understand all these statistics, but Boruch Hashem. Uh, and I, I want to say that the people who are listening on Molt Shabbos are the nucleus, uh, for this Shiur, and so thank you for joining us. And, uh, right. Let's go to our, our, um, Shiur. So the first thing I want to share with you is, since I had a request to include a Seder Shema Yisrael, so I want to, I want to accommodate that request. I also want to accommodate another request to make a siyum on Rambam as we finish each safer. So the story which I wanna share with you is the following. Uh, last week was Parshas Vayishlach. I don't

01:58 Speaker 1 mean just this morning, I mean a week before. And we have a shliach in Oslo by the name of Rabbi Sheyel Wilhelm. So he was-- His father took him to New York to, to the Rebbe, and Sheyel was all of six years old. And it was common for the Rebbe to ask children about... younger children to ask him about tzitzit. So his father prepped him with what to answer about tzitzit. But as it was, when they came, they were told by Rabbi Groan or whoever, there's gonna be a while till they come in, till they have their, their slot for Yechidas. So father took the son downstairs, and they learned, uh, the beginning of Parshas Vayishlach, which was this time of the year. Learned with him, the child, the Chumash and a bit of Rashi. And then they go into Yechidas, and then the Rebbe asks the young boy, "What's the week sedra?" So he knew to say, "It's Parshas Vayishlach." "And do you know what it says in the sedra?" Rebbe asks him. "And so what does Vayishlach mean?" Then Yaakov sends malachim. "So what does malachim mean?" So he says, "It means malachim mamash," Rashi says. And the Rebbe says to him, "Vozokstu. But what's your, what's your take when you see that Yaakov sent malachim? How do you understand?" And, uh, Sheyel, as a six-year-old boy, didn't have what to answer, but the point which he, he found this very pertinent. The Rebbe is saying to a young child, "I know you've,

03:39 Speaker 1 you've learned Rashi, but now kind of digest this and think in your own mind how to... whether you absorb this and how to absorb this," et cetera. Now, this brings me to the siyum of Sefer Kinyan in Rambam and a very, should we say, a very, uh, modern, contemporary kind of a-approach, where although we're talking about, he's talking about slaves, and although mitzvot hadin, you are allowed to really make them work back, back-breaking labor, and yet midas chassidis is that a person should be compassionate, and he should not be overbearing, to-too overbearing on his slaves. Should feed them for, um, generously from whatever he has. And then he has that, he has a quote from Iyov. First, he has, um, a pasuk, "Keini shich leyad gavirtal," the pasuk from Tehillim. But then he has that Iyov talks about im-- "Did I despise the, the justice for my servants?" «הֲלוֹא בְבֶטֶן עֻשֵּׂנִי עֻשָׂהוּ» He was made in the same womb as I was made. «וַיְחֻנֵּנֻנִי בְרֵחֶם אֶחָד» In other words, the equality of human beings, that they are human and we are human, and therefore, although there is a hierarchy, there is a, there, there is a business arrangement of them being slaves, and yet to respect them as human beings. So that's, uh... So I just see that a little bit similar. You have a, a Rebbe speaking to a child, and it's a message for all of us. As a child, yes, you're, you're, you're so much older and so much more educated, and

05:36 Speaker 1 the child is less so, and yet to respect that child's, uh, that child's view and ask vozokstu. So that's the one I want to share these two in your honor. Okay. So now let's go on to our list of questions. So here is the first question. A Lubavitcher Hasid, he has a spare pair of tefillin at home, and he gets up early and puts on tefillin at home to say Shema. And then he takes them off, probably has a bit of, uh, barbais and something to eat, something to have energy for davening. And then he goes subsequently to shul, and he puts on another pair, different pair of, uh, tefillin in shul. So does he need to make a new bracha on the tefillin which he puts on in shul? So what you have on the screen here is from the from the Meluiyim of the Seder, which I was zechar to publish. And there's a whole chapter here in Meluiyim about brachos in-- when you change from one thing to the other. So we have here from the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, someone went from one sukkah to another. And the Alter Rebbe says he has to make a new bracha on the sec-- when he goes into the second sukkah. Even though he doesn't ne-need to, need to bro-- change-- make a new bracha on the food, but the fact he's gone to a different sukkah, he has to make a new bracha. So it seems to be because it's a different article,

07:11 Speaker 1 and this is particularly interesting. In seven seventy, as you may know, there's the, there's a yard at the side of seven seventy, between seven seventy and the Rebbe's library, and there is a bridge between the two buildings, and that's where the sukkah is built every year, in this yard. And so you have the yard going from the front all the way to the back of that yard, and in between you have this walk, this bridge, which is, I don't know, eight feet, ten wee- feet wide. At any rate, you basically you got the-- both sukkahs are... They're not, they're not, they're not the same sukkah. And this is a very practical question. If someone made a beracha leshev basukkah in the front part of the sukkah, and then he decides that the fabring at the far end looks more attractive, and so does he have to make another time leshev basukkah when he goes... It's within the mamash, the same four walls, broadly speaking, but it's another sukkah. So that's a, that's a discussion, and I'm sure that Rabbonim in Crown Heights have addressed this. I've looked into it once, but, uh, I'm not gonna deal with it now. So you have this idea that going from one sukkah to the other requires a new bracha. So there is a Sefer called Beit Meyer, who was around the time of the Alter Rebbe, perhaps a little earlier, and he disagrees with this and he says, "It's the same mitzvah. What's the difference? This sukkah, that

08:39 Speaker 1 sukkah, it's all the same mitzvah." But the Alter Rebbe clearly takes the view that the fact that you are moving from one sukkah to a different sukkah, then you have to make a new, uh, bracha leshev basukkah. It's a new article of a mitzvah. And on that basis, switching sukkah to sukkah warrants a new bracha. So similarly, switching tefillin to tefillin warrants a new bracha. Now, having said so, there are those who... The one who challenged my, my friend has got some background. As I said, first of all, the Beit Meyer, and this is from the Sefer Piskei Teshuvas, who quotes that, um, that if when you take off one pair of tefillin, you en- have in mind to put on another pair of tefillin. For example, you turned up to shul and you realize you don't have your tefillin, so you borrow someone's tefillin. But what you have made arrangements that someone's gonna bring your tefillin, and likely the owner of these tefillin is gonna come, sooner or later, you're gonna take them off and put on your own tefillin. Gives us such an example. So he says that if it wasn't a hesed chadas or if you didn't leave the premises, then you wouldn't make another bracha. So I'm not sure, uh, I'm not totally sure about this, if it's mamash without havsek at all. But, um, what I did say to the fellow is that you're going from... You are going from your home to shul. That is already a havsek called

10:15 Speaker 1 shini mokim. It's a havsek. In addition, if you go to mikveh in between, and if you use the, uh, the facilities in between, all of these would be, be, uh, cr-create a, a, a, uh, a havsek between the first mitzvah and the second one, and therefore that would justify making a new bracha. I just want to finish off this point and say that I believe the majority of our, our nash are accustomed to not make a bracha on the tss-- on the tallis cotton in the morning and wait with the bracha until you put on your tallis for davening, and then you have in mind the tallis, also the tallis cotton. Now, as discussed in the Hayom Yom, it's a little bit ambiguous. And I know of a couple of eminent talmeda chachamim who insist on that, that's not... That, that you should put on, uh, when you-- You should make a bracha on your tallis cotton in the morning when you get dressed, and then a-again, on the tallis later on. So I don't have a solid, uh, you know, case one way or the other. But what I'm seeing here, according to this Sevarah, which we're reading now, that there is a Sevarah that the bracha on the earlier tefillin should cover for the later tefillin. So there's also, according to that, that, at least according to the other poskim, there is room to say that the bracha on the tzitzit would cover for the tallis. And don't bother about the fact that

11:42 Speaker 1 it's a different nusach, whether this is al mitzvas tzitzit and this is al asat efes tzitzit, because those details are not in mark. Okay, let's move on to our next thing, and that is that someone... I was on duty on the Beit Seira last week, and someone calls up. They have a-- some kind of skin issue on their, his, he has on his leg, and he needs to wash it with a shower. Now, he's not gonna use hot water We're talking about Shabbos. Not gonna use hot water, but it-- using a shower, if you don't have a curtain in the way, it's going to cr-create a puddle on the floor. So that's why if you want to use a shower, you usually want to use some kind of curtain or partition to contain the water inside the shower tray or the bath. He's asking that his shower curtain is made of polyester. Is that an issue of soaking the curtain with the, with the shower? Now, uh, it's pre-- it probably is not a problem because the polyester curtains for showers are probably made with a layer of, uh, of some kind of waterproofing that they shouldn't absorb. Not, not much use of having an absorbent shower curtain. It doesn't, doesn't sound very clever, unless you want to develop mold. Um, but, uh, taking a look here, just generally, if it were, let's say, is a terlene cloth, a terlene tablecloth, is, is wetting that considered washing, like washing? So there is a certain view

13:21 Speaker 1 that the real schita and kibosh only applies to wool or, uh, cotton or linen, natural fibers. But it doesn't apply to, to nylon or plastic, et cetera. But that's where I was not so convinced, and that's why you can see here also the Piske Shulchan talks about this. I think it's in Siman shin Beis, that when you have a... When you've made a weave with synthetic, uh, fibers. So then that should, should be seen as the same as had it been woven with natural fibers. In other words, when it says in Halakha that, that, um, something like leather is not-- it is, it is not a problem of kibosh of we-we-- of, of washing or laundering. That means that it means a sheet of, of leather. And the same thing if it were a sheet of plastic. A sheet of plastic, it's gotten dirty, you are allowed to pour water on it. Although you shouldn't rub it between your hands. That's what it says in the Mishnah in reference to leather. But, uh, but, uh, that's, that's when it's just a plain sheet of... Which is non-absorbent. But when we have something, he shows here, Acrylan, Terylene, et cetera. He refers here to the Shulchan Orach Chaim. That's from Rabbi Tzvi Abarshalom, and also to others, Shabi Tal Levi and Chutz Chani, where they say that, yes, nylon is waterproof. But if you take nylon and make it into threads, then it would be absorbent to some degree. And therefore, the re-limitations of soaking, s-equaling,

15:05 Speaker 1 um, laundry on Shabbos would apply to synthetic fibers too. Besides the fact that sometimes, very often, the synthe-synthetic fibers, the, the, that, that material may be sewn. Uh, the hem, uh, seam, and those, the stitching may, may be well done with cotton. So then you've got the ki-problem of kibosh from that alone. So coming back, I, I su-- I recommended to, uh, to him that, uh, he has just a plain plastic, uh, curtain, which he was happy to go, go ahead. You have just a plain, smooth plastic curtain, and then there's no shailah at all. Right. We're going on to the next question, and that is: Is there an issue of boi-pouring boiling water from a pareve kettle into a meaty cholent? So the meaty cholent has got a, a vapor. When you open it up, it's hot, so it's got a, a, a meaty vapor, and now you're pouring your, the kettle into it. Is there an issue here of the meaty vapor affecting the, the pareve status of that kettle? So what you have on the screen is from Reb Shlomo Zalman, a Minchas Shilo, uh, Oyah Bach, a Minchas Shlomo. He says the following, "You should be careful." Here's a question. Pouring water from a kettle to a, a fleishig dish. Fleishig, um, cook, uh, food which is, has been, has been cooked. So he says, "You should be careful that the vapor which is coming up from the pot," from the cholent, let's say, should, to, to, which is coming to,

16:50 Speaker 1 reaching the, the kettle, should not be yad soledet bo. Should be sa-- It should be in a way that if you put your hand there, you wouldn't have to withdraw your hand quickly. If it's not yad soledet bo, if the lower pot, the steam coming up is not gonna be so hot, even if the kettle is still... So let's say it's a Shabbos kettle sitting on the, on the fire, and you open the spout. But since it's, you got here, indeed, there may be some vapor, but he's not so worried about it. So typic-typically, if you would hold the... If you wanted to, let's say, top up hot water to a drying out cholent, and you wanted to put it directly under the tap of the urn. If you'd have, uh, hold the cholent that little bit lower, uh, not directly beneath the tap, but a little bit lower in a way that if any vapor comes up, it's not gonna be yad soledet bo, then that won't affect the pareve status of your kettle, your sp-the spout of your kettle. Um, and what about the fact that there's a water connection? That the hot water is connecting from the upper to the lower. Does-- Is there an upstream taste being transferred? So you got water pouring from the kettle into the cholent. Is there a s-a svara that there's going to be some fleishig taste going upstream from the cholent into the, into the kettle? So he says the Chochmas Adam addresses this. If

18:22 Speaker 1 the lower one was hot and the upper one was cold, then yes, then the heat may travel up. If both of them are hot, then you're not going to have that dynamic, so it's not a worry. So that's useful to know that, uh, pouring from a kettle, part of a kettle into a, an active fleishig hot food. If you are-- should hold the kettle far, far, far enough that there shouldn't be hot steam coming up from the fleishig food, which would reach the kettle whilst it's still hot. Let's move on to our next question. G-is gluten free... Someone asks, "Is a gluten-free dough, uh, subject to challah?" Now, we have to be careful because I did check online about gluten-free flours, and generally g-gluten free... Now, th-this is that wheat and, and other grains have in them a natural sickiness. And there are people who suffer from celiac or other, uh, conditions which they, they struggle with digesting the, the gluten stuff, and hence they go to gluten-free foods. So when you see a gluten-free food, it may well be made out of nuts. I mean, sorry, gluten-free f-flour. It's many of-- many times it's made from other species on a-- rather than from wheat. But if you can look carefully, it says here, um, "premium wheat-based." And so don't ask me the details, but apparently there's a chemical way of removing. There's a way of chemically removing the gluten out of the flour, and this is our question. So again, if it were gluten-free,

20:11 Speaker 1 f-not from the five sp-species of grain as wheat, barley, oats, spelt, and rye, then there'd be no question of Hafrashat Challah. But this is indeed made from, it's made from wheat, apparently, and yet it's not-- it doesn't have any gluten in it. So is it subject to Hafrashat Challah? So this is an interesting point that this is actually from Hilchot Pesach, and it says here that you would not fulfill the mitzvah of matzah on Pesach with, uh, matzah made only of the bran because that would not qualify as bread for challah. And it's, it's kind of there's the same rules for challah and for matzah, for the mitzvah of matzah. And apparently, at least according to some, it seems to be I looked around. Some Poskim say that it's only subject to Mitzvot Challah if it could ferment and become chametz, but the gluten-free flour apparently will not ferment, and therefore it's, it's not, not valid for matzah, and accordingly, also not valid for challah. So again, some Poskim will say it's from wheat, so therefore it's subject to challah. Other Poskim will say-- would say that it, it because it is conditioned, it's not gonna become chametz ever, therefore it's-- um, it doesn't have to have taken challah. So the bottom line would be for such a product to be Mafrish Challah, but without saying a Bracha when doing so because it's a supplement. Okay, I'm going to go on to this lip stain, and, uh, forgive me for not putting any pictures of,

22:02 Speaker 1 uh, the-- this product. But I did look it up, part of my job. And so apparently it's, it's the following. There's a kind of lip, uh, well, stain means a paint of some sort, which is put on the lips, and then y-it's left to dry for a few minutes. Uh, and the actual stain doesn't look, uh, very appealing, but then this looks more black than anything else. But then, uh, then it's peeled off. It becomes like two layers. The upper layer becomes like a film, which you're able to peel off, and then the lower layer remains stuck to the lip, and that looks the color which the person desires or thinks they're going to be more attractive that way. Um, so here's an interesting question. Is it eligible? Sorry. Is it permitted to leave-- to, to peel this upper layer off on Shabbos? So actually, I did not see it as a problem. So to put on the stain on Shabbos, definitely not. You're not allowed to use, um, colored, colored makeup. For that matter, even to use clear lip gloss. It's also Shabbos says not to use. It's enhancing the color. But here it's, the color's been placed there already. It's just that it's under wraps. It's got the, uh, this upper layer. Removing that layer is not a problem. I don't see why it should be a problem. And, uh, it's there only for temporary. Therefore, I don't see it as a problem to peel it off. Not that I'm recommending it to

23:37 Speaker 1 be used, and, um, I'm not getting any commission from any cosmetics company, but, uh, strictly speaking, in Halakha, I see it's okay. Okay. Now, we're going on to question number six. And if you may remember that we had a discussion about the Kodesh, Kodesh, Kodesh. Why is there a vertical line after the first word, Kodesh? And I'd looked around, eventually found this in the Siddur of Rabbi Shlomo Sofer. And so one of our listeners listens to the recording. He says, "Perhaps you can help us also with the word Echad. In Shma Yisrael, Hashem, Elokeinu, Hashem, Echad. Look in the Siddur. Before the word Echad, there's a vertical line." So he's asking perhaps that Sofer will also help us with this one too. And he was actually right. So here you have... And if you-- um, just to remind you, the word, is it pasek or pasek? Well, this is referring to this line. It's not a trop. It doesn't have a tune, but it's one of the symbols which help the, the, the reading of the, uh, text, similar to what the hyphen, which is called in, uh, Ashkenazic is called the makaf. So, uh, that's-- it has no trop, but it, it does help us manage the, uh-- understand where to put the pause, not to put the pause, and so on. So here, this vertical line, this pasek, doesn't have a trop, but it is there for a reason. So he's asking, why is there this reason? Now that as a-- to remind

25:09 Speaker 1 you who Rabbi Shlomo Sofer is. He's a Talmud of the Baal HaToshot of Rabbi Menachem Yafo, lives about four hundred years ago. Was highly, highly recommended by the Va'ad Arba Arotzes for his mastery in Dikduk, and they wanted every community to have a copy of his siddur which he published. The manuscript which we have, uh, published over here was kept a manuscript for about, let's say about four hundred years. It was owned by the London Beis Din, and it was published about thirty years ago. Fascinating. It goes through kind of all of these little, we call the Yiddish pitchforks. All these little, um, questions in how you spell things, et cetera. And, uh, so here he addresses why is there that line. So he says the following. We have in, in Shema Yisroel, in the posek Shema Yisroel, we have Hashem Elokeinu Hashem. We have Got Hashem addressed three times. And there is each one of those has got a different re-referring to a different aspect. As he refers to the Zohar and the Raknati in Parashat VaEschanan where the posek is, who is Rabbi Nachman Raknati was a famous, um, Mekubal. And then he refers to Selah Yaakov, who wrote a commentary on the Siddur. And there's a si-- there's a... in the, in... when he talks about the Shema, that, that Hashem Elokeinu Hashem, each of those are referring to a different level. I'm sure in Hasidus, there's also a lot of this similar kind of discussion. Now, if it hadn't been that,

26:44 Speaker 1 that line, you would have said, Hashem Elokeinu. Hashem Echad. The, the third one, that's the real one. And that obviously was, is, uh, very wrong. And because Echad refers to all. Although we talk about different dagas, different levels in godliness, but ultimately it's all Hashem Echad. It's all one. And therefore, there is that line to say, Echad is referring to all of the above rather than just to the last word. So that's what the, uh, line is there for. If someone can help me, I don't know what this word over here. Pirudevekitzut Hasveshalem. That you have very often this term, if someone says something which is misleading in fundamental, in the autumn of faith, they have the lotion, it's kitzut b'netiois, as if he is kind of picking at the plants. I'm not sure why that euphemism is used for saying the wrong thing about godliness. If someone knows, I'm... I'll be grateful where, what the lotion comes from. I did not do too much homework about that. Just, um, giving that challenge out to any of you out there. So we're going on to the next. We, we're talking about, about di-dikduk and diyukim, et cetera. So here's the following, which last week, the Parashat VaYishlach. So we have a, a, a posek which is got a gap in the middle. You know they've got the gaps in the Torah. Either they are with the Samech and the Chumash, which means that the gap is an enclosed gap, that they're writing on words on

28:19 Speaker 1 either side of the gap. And then you've got Psukah, which means that the gap is open till the end of the line. So you've got Psukahs and Stumas. And we have this posek. This is after Rachel had, had, um, had passed away. And then it says that Reuven slept with Bilhah, his father's concubine, and Israel, his father, heard. ”VaYhi Yomei Yaakov Shnem Also,” the sons of Yaakov were twelve. And there's a gap in the middle of a posek. So now... And there's the, there's a reason for the... in Chazal, the reason for this is to say that you should, uh, first of all, that to say that, uh, to... that the fact that it says, ”VaYhi Yomei Yaakov Shnem Also,” that Ya-Reuven was not ostracized for this. You see that he was con... he's still considered one of the twelve sons of Yaakov. And that leads us to say that what we... is described is not to be taken literally. Rather, it means that after his mother passed away and, um, Yaakov had put his, um, bed in Bilhah's tent, and Bilhah was his mother's maid. Sorry, he was, was, was Rachel's maid, and Reuven took exception to this, and he felt that now that Rachel's out of... has passed away, it should... he... the me-- bed of Yaakov should be with his mother, with Leah. And so it was an interference, but not to be taken literally. So that's, that's the, uh, that's the, the background to this. So... But we have here a

29:47 Speaker 1 gap in middle of the posek. And so, uh, the question is: How is it read? Now, let's look carefully. If you want to look at the screen, there's two sets of trop. The, the tunes are. The fir-- the first one is reads, "VaYelech Reuven VaYichbav Es Bilhah Pilgeshov Yaishmah Yisroel VaYhi Yomei Yaakov Shnem Also." The second one is, "VaYelech Reuven VaYichbav Es Bilhah Pilgeshov Yaishmah Yisroel VaYhi Yomei Yaakov Shnem Also." So the first one is reading it all in one long posek, and the second one is actually dividing into two pesukim. So this has been addressed by various midakdim. And the question was put to me was the following. The Rav Yaakov Endon takes the view that y-when you are reading it Vayochid, you should actually read it with a lower trop, which, which divides it into two pesukim. So the fellow who asked me the question wanted to take it one step further. When it comes to doing Shnayim Mikra v'Echad Targum, should you do the first part and the Targum, and then the second part and the Targum? Now, I must say n-no one No, no, no. With all my research, no one comes up with that extreme an idea. But he's coming from Rabbi Yaakov Emden. And just to remind you, which I've talked about in the past, so you've got Rabbi Yaakov Emden publishes his siddur the year when the Alter Rebbe is born. So he's a generation or more that before the Alter Rebbe. And he has-- there's a contemporary

31:29 Speaker 1 of his called Reb Shlomo Zalman Henau, Hanau, Hennau. A master midaktik, but took the liberty of making huge chidushim also. And so whilst he, he's, he's brilliant, but his chidushim were not always so popular. And Rabbi Yaakov Emden is the most outspoken critic of Reb Zalman Henau. He published a volume called Luach Erez, and it's all step by step refutations or ar-arguing Reb Zalman Henau. Okay. Now, the main discussion, the main debate between Reb Zalman Henau and, and, uh, and, uh, the, the Rabbi Yaakov Emden is really focusing on the Aseres Hadibros, where the Aseres Hadibros are, let's say, the first, the second one, let's say Shabbos has got four pesukim. Yet, there is what's called the Tam Ha’elyon, and there's a way that we read it in Shul, and we read them all in one, those four pesukim in one as if one long pasuk. Lesivta, Lesinov, Lesig- Lesignov, et cetera, are, are four loys, loys in one pasuk. And yet we re- don't read them that way. We read loy, loy, you know, we read them as four pesukim. And that's because in the Torah, there are gaps between the di- the dibros. So you've got ten dibros, and they are spread over twelve pesukim, and some of the dibros have got... are made up of multiple pesukim, and some of the dibros are four in one pasuk. So Reb Zalman Henau writes a whole four-page discussion about this, and he says the following. He says that what you have here is like

33:26 Speaker 1 the concept of kri and ktiv. There is the way words are written, and then we have a mesorah, the way those words are meant to be pronounced. Like you have, for example, the word nar. So if you're familiar, this nar is spelled nun, ayin, reish. That's the way. And that should be read nar. But the mesorah, the To- the, the, the kri is, it's read naro. And there are numerous, I don't want to go into all the de- de-details, but there's a way which it's written and the way it is meant to be pronounced, the way it's meant to be read. So that's the kri and the ktiv. So now the Aseres Hadibros. So let... Then, then, okay, so the Aseres Hadibros, we've got all of these gaps, and they are in the, in the script, they are the gaps. One way where it's numerous, uh, with breaking up Lesignov into four, that pasuk into four sections. And the other ones, you've got the gaps kind of putting four pesukim into one section. That is the ktiv. But then the kri is with the way we have a mesorah, where the pasuk begins, where the pasuk ends, et cetera. So with Aseres Hadibros, we have what's called in the Chumashim, Tam Ha’elyon and Tam Hatachton. You could re-understand that, the more dramatic one and the more business as usual one. There's a-- However you want to s- uh, to, uh, explain where those titles come from. High pitch, low pitch. The Tam Ha’elyon is used

35:04 Speaker 1 when we're laying in, in, in Shul. The Tam Hatachton is the one which we, which is when, let's say, you're learning Chumash, you're being Ma'ariv, et cetera, you use a Tam Hatachton. So this is, this is the way Reb Zalman Henau explains the Aseres Hadibros, the reading of Aseres Hadibros. Actually, he, his conclusion, and this is where he's, where he's not popular, he actually slams this whole Tam Ha’elyon, and he says, "No, it should be just Tam Hatachton. We have a rule. We're not allowed to divide pesukim other than the way Moshe Rabbeinu divided them." And therefore, he, he kind of dismisses the whole Tam Ha’elyon. That's got to do with the ktiv, but then we should be doing just the kri. Um, and of course, that is not the minhag. Some say, um, to do the Tam Ha’elyon just on shvuas, and some say, "No, whenever we read the Aseres Hadibros, uh, in, in, in Keriat HaTorah, we're going to use Tam Ha’elyon. That's indeed our minhag." So this is-- So Reb-- And so Reb, uh, Yaakov Emden goes to town, slams against, uh, Reb Zalman Henau, and about it. Now, coming back to our, our, our pasuk, though. So now according to the, the, the ktiv. So we have the pasuk, Vayelech and Vayehi are two separate pesukim because there's a gap in between. According to the kri, they are all one pasuk. So what we're seeing here is the tibur. We read it the kri and not the ktiv. Rabbi Yaakov Emden,

36:41 Speaker 1 he wants to say, "Yes, in public, you should be sticking to the, to the kri because we don't want people to hear that Reuven did this and this without hearing the end of the pasuk, because the end of the pasuk is kind of exonerating, uh, um, Reuven to say that he didn't... don't take it literally. So therefore, we shouldn't be breaking it apart." But when you're learning, when, when you're by yochid, so you can see here, um- and it should be that dividing the pasuk. Now, what you have on the screen is from the, the Shaila Moira Chumash, and he brings this, and I've seen it in other Chumashim also, they, they bring this. Okay. So to, to, to summarize. The Rab-- the Rab Zalman Henna says, "Just read it as one pasuk because that's the Keri. Don't worry about the gap, which is in the Sefer Torah, that's the Ksiv. Just stick to the Keri." Rab Yaakov Emden has said here, "In public, do the Keri, but in private, stick to the Ksiv." Now, curiously, he says this is the same as Aseres HaDibros. And I'm sorry, it's actually just the opposite because in Aseres HaDibros, we are in public, we are reading it... reading the Ksiv. We, we are, we are respecting the gaps. you know. We, we, we... A-and it's, and it's when we're reading on our own, that's when we'll go according to the Keri. But he says it's the same, but fine. Um, now, the Alter Rebbe brings this whole

38:21 Speaker 1 discussion in Siman Tov Tzadik Dalet, the Dinim of Shavuos. And he says how Aseres HaDibros have got two tunes. And what's the reason? Well, the first one, the... is, uh, according to the Ksiv, and the second one is the Keri. And he says, "Really, really we should be sticking to the Keri." However, he says, "But come Shavuos, since it's Shavuos, we are reading in public, we're kind of... It's the day of the giving of Aseres HaDibros. Therefore, we read the Aseres, Aseres HaDibros in ten separate statements as they were said by Har Sinai." So again, in Shavuos, because it's a re... a kind to replay as, um, Matan Torah. In Matan Torah there were ten Dibros, and therefore, we're going to go according to the Ksiv, which have them in ten separate statements. There are those who do so also in VaYisro and also in VaEschanan, who also do the Taam HaEliyon. The Alter Rebbe used the word Taam HaEliyon, Taam HaTachton, I'm not even sure. Just... I don't, I don't remember. It doesn't matter. But then the, the b-bottom line is, he says, that if you're learning on your own, you should be sticking to the Keri, which, in other words, the, the way the Psukim are divided, not the way the gaps are set out. So therefore, I'm challenging when the, uh, the Sefer, the Shaila Moira, quoting the Rab Yaakov Emden, was saying that the, uh, Yochid should divide his pasuk into two. When the Alter Rebbe has said, not so. He

40:20 Speaker 1 has said that Yochid should go according to the Keri, and therefore read it as one pasuk. Not to have a gap in the middle, and certainly not to stop for, uh, for, for, for the Shnai Mikra. Now... And th-this is also for the Kaf HaChaim, for quoting the Sefer Bes Dovid, that when you're doing Shnai Mikra, you should reach... read the whole pasuk as it is and not to be breaking it up. He's talking about Aseres HaDibros, not to be breaking up into separate psukim when you're doing Shnai Mikra. One last thing now. The Sefer Luach Erez of Rab Yaakov Emden was pub-- was reprinted in Tafshin Samech Alef, and it was published by someone called Rab Dovid Yitzchaki. At the b-end of the volume, he has several essays on Dikduk, and he addresses, and he, he... this, the two tunes for the story with, with Reuven. And he, he identifies them as a Machlokes Marvoi Umadinchoi, uh, the difference between the West and the East. And the Taam HaEliyon is from the, um, ma- from the West, and the Taam HaTachton is from the East. And so you have here, the West has it all in, um, in one pasuk, and the East has it, uh, broken up into two psukim. Just to help you get your geography r-right, you've got the... in, uh, Bavel and Eretz Israel. So E-Eretz Israel is West in relation to Bavel. So you've got here two schools, West and East, or Bavel and Eretz Israel, and he takes

42:12 Speaker 1 the... he says the following. That generally, we follow the m- the West, and therefore, we should only be having the Taam HaEliyon, and he does away with the whole breaking apart into two psukim. That's how he paskens. So we have here, although Rab Yaakov Emden does tell us to break it up into two psukim and to, to respect the Taam HaTachton, so to speak. But we're seeing here that the actual, the publisher, who really, uh, seems to be, um, he idolizes Rab Yaakov Emden, uh, in, in the main Sefer. But here, nevertheless, he disagrees with it. So, um, all right. For some people, this is fascinating. For some people, absolutely boring, I know. But yes, and we're gonna go on. Um, so let's get some action here. So someone went into a, a shop. American co- call it a store. And somehow he knocked over a bottle of wine. And it's got a, uh, tiled floor, as you can see, so beautifully illustrated. So the bottle smashed. So now here's the question: Is the customer liable to pay or not? So my first reaction was, everyone-- every child knows, "Adam muad le'olam." Um, um, a person is always, uh, cautioned to be careful. And you have, "Ben ore ben yoshnin," even if you're asleep, if you lay down s- and there was something fragile near you, and then in your sleep, you rolled over and you, uh, smashed the thing. So you are liable to pay even though you were asleep when you rolled over

43:56 Speaker 1 because, uh, y-you have to... You're, you're... You have to be careful. So that was my first reaction. But then I'm looking around a bit more, and I saw the following. This is in the Sefer Knei Bosam, actually, from Rav Meir Brunzof. I met him, uh, about thirty years ago in Jerusalem. So he was asked the following. Someone asked his friend, Reuven is going to sleep, and he says to Shimon, "Do me a favor, and this and this time, come and wake me." So Reuven, before he went to sleep, he took his glasses off, and he put them on the floor next to his bed. Shimon, at the, uh, given time, comes along and wakes up Reuven, and meanwhile, he treads on the glasses and smashes them. So now Reuven and Shimon come to the Rav. And does Shimon have to pay for breaking Reuven's glasses? And he says, no, he does not have to pay because, and this is where we're going to read the Din Shulchan Aruch, that if someone left... Here's in Shulchan Aruch. You can see in Teshuva Mishbetot yud beis. If someone left a jug in the street and someone, a-another person passes by and tripped over it and broke the jug, the tripper doesn't have to pay because... And here's, here's the, here's the, uh, the punchline. It's not normal for people to be eyeing the str- the floor as they walk through the street. Not only that, if Mr. Tripper hurt himself o-on the broken jug, actually, Mr. Jug

45:37 Speaker 1 has to pay Mr. Tripper, uh, compensation for the damage. So, so here we have although, as I said, although a persons always has to be careful, but if someone left something in a public place, and I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm using the word public, uh, um, you know... You can see here that the Knei Bosam is talking about even the case of the fellow who, uh, with the glasses, and obviously, that bed wasn't in the street. And still, he, uh, did apply the, uh, rule that, that it's... A person is not expected to be checking the floor as they walk through the street, and therefore they're patur. So now I'm not paskening, um, l'maase, because we have here... Uh, here it's not so clear. I mean, this-- I think this is, is, uh, pretty asking for trouble position for the bottles of wine because, uh, it's not mamash on the floor. But I think if you had a heavy coat and you turned around, it's very likely you'd knock over, over a bottle of wine. Uh, and so I think it's quite careless for want of a, a, uh, milder word for, uh, uh, for the shop to be putting their wine so close to the floor that it's so easy for them to be knocked over by a passerby. Um, but the shopkeeper might insist that actually it's high enough to be safe, so then there's gonna be a din Torah over the bottle of wine. Um, obviously, he might consider if he wants the

47:16 Speaker 1 guy to come back again to let him off. But, right. But there's, there is... There are grounds if it is so low that it's likely for them to be knocked over by someone who's didn't notice, then, um, that they're ground to say they don't have to pay. Right. Um, let's move on. That's the bottle of wine. Hmm. Okay. So we have here number nine on our list. Several men missed laining at Mincha on Shabbos. May they lain after Mincha. So what is the question? The question is like this. We have Krias HaTorah on Shabbos. Then we have on Mondays and Thursdays. That was a Takana of Ezra, that you shouldn't go three days without Krias HaTorah. What was the institution on... of reading the Torah on Shabbos afternoon at Mincha? There are people who are Yosef Kronos. They're not the shulgoers on a daily basis. So at least they should have the Krias HaTorah at Shabbos Mincha. I'm not sure why they weren't there at Shacharis. I don't remember. But this is the, th-this is the question that perhaps the laining at Mincha is not so, um, not such a strong Chiyuv, and therefore i-i-- they, uh, they, they wouldn't be able to do it other than in the context of Tefillah. So I did a quite a bit of research. I'm sorry I don't have anything on the screen. And my first reaction is the following. What about Krias HaTorah on Musaf... Sorry, on Mincha of Yom Kippur? Now, Rabbi Akiva Eger, who lived

49:08 Speaker 1 about two hundred years ago, says when he was in a coun-- in a city called Friedland, somewhere in Germany, I think, and it was common that people would make a, a, a, a... During the break between Musaf and Mincha. So people would make, take a, take a Sefer Torah to a side room, and they would do a Krias HaTorah there. I'm told that there's someone in Seven seventy who does this every year. He does... He sells Maftir Yona. He does one Minyan after the other. He makes a lot of money for his Chabad house by selling Maftir Yonas during the break in Seven seventy. Um, so someone's got a, a, a bargain Maftir Yona, so he takes the Sefer Torah to a side room and makes a Minyan there. So two hundred years ago, they were doing that. And Rabbi Akiva Eger talks about the Kaddish. So normally after Krias HaTorah, we have a Kaddish. At Mincha, we don't do a Kaddish because we have the, the Kaddish at the beginning of Shmoneh Esreh. But here you're doing just a Minyan for Krias HaTorah without, without, without Shmon-- without, um, M-Mincha. So he says you should say Kaddish. Where should you say Kaddish? That's another thing. Um, we should say the Kaddish after Haftarah. Actually, Rabbi Akiva Eiger has a problem with our Mincha, which is the widespread Mincha on Shacharis of Tisha B'Av. Why is Kaddish said after Krias HaTorah, before Haftarah? Because o-on a regular Tanis, y-you don't ha-interrupt between the k-k-the Shlishi

50:40 Speaker 1 and the Haftarah. Be-- Uh, it's only when on Shabbos, Yom Tov, where the... You've got your quota of Aliyas in the, in... Before the Kaddish. You finish your quota, say a Kaddish, and then you do the Maftir afterwards. But, uh, when, when the f-last Aliyah is part of the quota, then there shouldn't be a Kaddish said there. That's a, that's a separate, um, problem. But meanwhile, there you see that there is Krias HaTorah, an independent Krias HaTorah, uh, not related to Mincha. And so on that basis, the Piskei Yosher, he doesn't, he doesn't bring this proof, but he does say it's okay to do a Mincha. People missed the Krias HaTorah at Mincha. It's okay for them to do a separate Krias HaTorah after Mincha. It's not... The fact that it's not in the Rab-- in, within the framework of Tefillah, that doesn't matter. Now, listen to this. Uh, on... As I left the Beis HaMidrash on Friday, I got a message from a, someone who run, runs a yeshiva somewhere in Europe, and it's one day Hanukkah, and it's the day where the boys are able to go home for a few days for a break. And a lot of the boys will have to leave the yeshiva. They leave the premises early, so they won't be able to daven, uh, in, uh, with a Minyan. It's because they have to leave so early. But they're asking, davening, they can daven later. But can they do Krias HaTorah before davening, before they leave? So

52:15 Speaker 1 I'd just gone through this whole thing about is, uh, is dav- is Krias HaTorah has to be part of davening, or can it be a standalone? So having gone through this whole thing, Rav Yisroel, I was able to tell him it's okay for them to do Krias HaTorah then. Although some are not so happy about doing Krias HaTorah before davening, a Sefer called Kinyan Torah. But, uh, come to Lubavitcher Shul, the Shabbos before Rosh Chodesh, the Shabbos before Shmini Atzeret, and you'll see plenty of Minyanim happening before, before davening. So somehow in Lubavitch, we do see the Krias HaTorah as a not so, uh, strongly bound to, to the davening. It's a separate thing. And so, uh, I told them it's okay. Right. Now, our last thing is someone I met in Eretz Yisrael when I was there last year. And whilst I was there, it was just after the, the, um, the siddur had been published, and I ma-- I arranged an interview somehow to promote the, the sales. And Baruch Hashem, the, the siddur is sold out in Eretz Yisrael, and we have to work on a new editio- new, new print. But meanwhile, he says, "In your interview," he writes to me, "you mentioned that the Alter Rebbe introduced the T- the Ktoras, the mention of Ktoras in the prayer, this end, at the end of davening, at the end of Korbanos." So on your screen, you've got from two Siddurim, which was shortly before the Alter Rebbe's times, the Shalos Siddur,

53:47 Speaker 1 Tov Korpe and the, um, Yaakov Emden Siddur from Tov Korpe. And you can see here, "Ata Chiba Sonul Hakav Korbin Atomid Bemayadoi." And here again, "Ata Chiba Korbin Atomid Bemayadoi." And the, he wrote saying it should be, "Kiilu Hikram DuKorbin Atomid Bemayadoi." Right. Now, the Alter Rebbe had introduced here, you know, Hakto, Haktoris Bizmano, and it has Keilu Hikram DuKorbin Atomid, V'Hiktaru Haktoris. The reason for this change is because the original Ashkenaz did not have, Nusach Ashkenaz did not have saying Ktoras every morning. And therefore, the prayer says, "We brought Korbin Atomid." That's what it is, the Parshah of Atomid. They didn't do saying, um, Ktoras on a daily basis. But once the Alter Rebbe is importing from S-Nusach Sfarad, et cetera, they, that saying Ktoras every day is standard, therefore you have to upgra-upgrade this, uh, lotion. Instead of just mentioning Korbin Atomid, you also have to mention the Ktoras. There's three times in this Tefillah. This is from a, this is from Tov Korceradic Beis print. But three times in this Tefillah, the Alter Rebbe upgrades, and he says, "Tomid Atomid Bemoyadoi, L'hakto, Bizmano." Yeah. Um, now, before I forget. In Rav Ashkenazi's Sefer, Sharit Tefilloh Minig, he asks the question, "Why is Tomid Bemoyadoi and Ktoras is Bizmano?" I did not have a chance to read his answer. The history, that's typical for Rav Ashkenazi to pick up on these, and he has these fascinating explanations. Um, I would just say it's style, but he's got much deeper explanations than that. But

55:35 Speaker 1 coming back to the, um... So this is where the Alter Rebbe had introduced. What I find fascinating, or, or no, that's not the right word, is that this Tefillah of Ribono Shel Olam, which is kind of the wrap-up of Korbanos of the morning, is mentioned in the Tour, in Siman Mem, uh, Mem Ches. Now, the fellow who asked me the question, he says he's taking several Siddur Ashkenaz, and this, this Tefillah is not there. And he's actually right. I took out the, um, Redlheim Siddur, I took out Rav Schonfeld's Siddur, uh, and another, a-another German Siddur, Avodah Zisroel, and they kinda don't have this Tefillah altogether. Whereas, as you can see, this is, the Shalo is also Nusach Ashkenaz, the Rabbi Akiva Emily is also Nusach Ashkenaz, and they do have it. So this, I don't have an answer. If you have a Tefillah which is mentioned already in The Tour, and it's brought down in the Ramoh in Siman Mem Ches, he mentions this. Mishne Berurah doesn't say a word of, that some Kehillahs don't say this Tefillah. So I am intrigued why it was dropped in some, in some Nusach Ashkenaz, uh, Siddurim. But the, the... You can see here that amongst Nusach Ashkenaz seems to be somehow the Germanic from the, uh, w-Western Europe, uh, Nusachois seem to have dropped it for some reason, which I don't know. Whereas more Eastern Europe Nusachois do have it. And, uh, and the Alter Rebbe then upgraded it, that it should also include Kor- L'hakti

57:14 Speaker 1 HaKtoras Bizmano. That's what I have to share with you for this evening, and thank you for joining us. I wish you a Gut Voch. May you have Shuras Toivas. Al Yom, Al Yom HaNavi. Should you be Mevaser L'geulah. B'yadei Moshiach Tzidkeinu. B'meheira U'yomeinu Hamush. Gut Voch.

57:38 Speaker 2 Gut Voch.