BSD

Shkolim 8a

16 Adar II  5784. 03/26/24

1- To start with: דברים שאמרתי לכם טעות הן בידי

Correction to what we said and posted last week.

מן התורה all בהמות born within one year are considered one lot. Meaning that when corralling the animals and then herding them thru the gate to be מקדיש each tenth, one can include only בהמות that were born with in this particular year.

Mixing animals from one year with others born in a different year is not allowed as we learnt at the beginning of מסכת ראש השנה.

When exactly is this ‘one year’ מן התורה? Three opinions which we discussed this week. See below. All of the above is at the דאורייתא level. A one year cycle.

2- Unlike תורמות ומעשרות that prior to destination of the  תרו”מ , the produce is non edible as it is טבל, animals prior to passing thru the מעשר בהמה process, are not אבל . One can shecht and eat them as long as he eventually gives  מעשר בהמה – 1 from 10.

Ramabam Bechoros Chapter 7, 7.

אין הטלאים הנולדים כמו הטבל שאסור לאכול ממנו עד שיעשר כמו שביארנו במקומו אלא מותר למכור ולשחוט כל מה שירצה עד שיעשר ויהיה המעשר קדש ויאכל כהלכתו כמו שביארנו:

When he decides  to be מקיים the מצוה of מעשר בהמה, he passes them thru the gate, designates every 10th as מעשר and brings it up as a קרבן to ירושלים.

3- However, the חכמים noticed a pattern with the cattle ranchers.

They would hesitate to perform the מעשר בהמה process until the herds were very large. The ranchers reasoned that it’s in their best interest to do it in large batches so that all מעשר of every 10 are grouped together. It made it easier to bring them all up to ירושלים and avoid the בל תאחר.

So the  חכמים established within the year 3 cycles or cut-off dates. When these dates arrived it was prohibited to eat any animal in one’s herd that has not gone through the מעשר process.

Now they could have chosen any 3 dates in the calendar year. The reason they chose dates before the שלש רגלים was that the above תקנה would cause the ranchers to give the מעשר just prior to these dates.

(since after these dates these dates arrived eating the animals would be prohibited unless מעשר was given).

So by designating the date before the שלש רגלים it ensured a stock of plenty of animals available for the עולי רגל.

 

4 – The משנה then states various opinions as to the exact 3 days of the beginning of a new cycle established by the חכמים.

Reb Akiva –

• 15 days before Pesach,
• 15 days before שבועות and
• 15 days before ראש השנה.

Ben Azzai –

• 29th of Adar,
• 1st of Sivan and
• 20th of Av.

Reb Elozor and Reb Shimon –

• 1st of Nissan,
• 1st of Sivan and
• 29th of Elul

5 –  The 3 opinions of the דאורייתא year above in paragraph #1.

Reb Meir – from ראש חודש אלול  to ראש חודש אלול.

Reb Elozor and Reb Shimon – from one ראש השנה to the next.

בן עזאי – From ראש השנה until ראש חודש אלול. And another separate ‘year’ for the entire חודש אלול!

Ben Azzai says he is unsure who is right and his opinion is a compromise.

6- From the expression of בן עזאי about his compromise, our גמרא derives that בן עזאי was a תלמיד חבר of Reb Akiva.

A colleague and a student.

[Speaking of חבר- a friend- we mentioned in passing the שו”ת יהודה יעלה of R’ Yehdua Aszod that discusses משלוח מנות איש לרעהו.  Does giving to a teacher who is not an exactly a ‘friend’ of his student constitute רעהו?

חלק א, או”ח רד]

We discussed this a bit and mentioned the famous book by Malachi Hakohen from Livorno, Italy. (Tuscany region).

Livorno, Tuscany, Italy

יד מלאכי

His ספר was quickly accepted by many as the authority on how and whom to follow when we find in ש”ס or פוסקים two or more opinions without a definitive ruling.

For example – In ש”ס –  different opinions with not clear הלכה למעשה. What’s the bottom line?

If the Shulchan Aruch says יש אומרים and ויש אומרים. Whose opinion do we follow?

The יד מלאכי has much to say as to the definition of תלמיד חבר.

Is it חבר in that they are  equal but one learnt one or two ideas from his equal?

Or perhaps that originally they were equal but now one surpassed the other, and that the other is now a his תלמיד!

7 – We went back to discuss the famous saying of בן עזאי:

כל חכמי ישראל דומין עלי כקליפת השום, חוץ מן הקרח הזה

“The knowledge all the חכמי ישראל , in comparison to mine, is like the skin of a garlic! Except for this קרח”.

Not R Akiva

Most opinions identify the קרח ‘Baldy’ as Reb Akiva. See last week’s Shiur.

We mentioned the opinion of רבינו ניסים that בן עזאי meant (not Reb Akiva, but)  אליעזר בן עזריה רבי who was appointed נשיא at a very young age before he had a beard.  Thus he is the ‘bald’ fellow here!

8- Some explanations of the בן עזאי saying:  “The knowledge all the חכמי ישראל , in comparison to mine, is like the skin of a garlic! Except for this קרח”.

כל חכמי ישראל דומין עלי כקליפת השום, חוץ מן הקרח הזה

A  – The של”ה מסכת שבועות, נר מצוה.

If we understand it right:

בן עזאי is saying that all the חכמי ישראל are indeed smarter than him. He is just sharper than them.

By nature, people that are sharp occasionally come up with ideas that are not grounded in reality. Their suggestions need direction to keep it in line.

He, בן עזאי is the sharp garlic, but they are the skin that keeps and protects this sharpness.

So בן עזאי is actually complimenting the חכמי ישראל by admitting their superior intelligence and thanking them for keeping him on track.

חוץ מן הקרח הזה– Reb Akiva however is greater than all, as he has both qualities. Sharpness and structure.

B – Reb Tzadok HaKohen. דברי אמת פרשת קרח.

The גמרא says that Reb Akiva used to derive ‘piles and piles’ of הלכות based on the תגין that adorn the letters of a ספר תורה. These תגין are likened to hair on the head (the letters).

We look at these תגין and see a mumble jumble of incomprehensible lines. Reb Akiva, by explaining each תג he is ‘untangling’ these hairs. He is giving them a ‘haircut’.

So by calling Reb Akiva a ‘baldy’, he is not degrading Reb Akiva (as Tosfos points out- Last week’s shiur). He is giving him the highest accolades, as only Reb Akiva knew the meaning hidden in the תגין.

——

ומסיימין בצחוק….

6,000,013 years old……

 

BSD

Shkolim 7b (2)

9 Adar II  5784. 03/19/24

Brief notes.

1 – We began a new משנה that takes us to the next step of the שקלים process.

As the שקלים came into the בית המקדש, they were all placed in an ‘office’- לשכה.

3 times a year, a portion of the שקלים were removed from this לשכה and placed into 3 large jugs or vats. קופות.

The 3 dates are:

• 15 days before פסח,
• 15 days before שבועות and
• 15 days before ראש השנה.

2 – The משנה then diverges to מעשר בהמה and suggests that these 3 dates (for the placing the שקלים into the קופות) correspond to the three cut-off dates for מעשר בהמה.

To clarify:

מן התורה all בהמות born within one year are considered one lot. Meaning that when herding them thru the gate to be מקדיש each tenth, one can include only בהמות that were born within this particular year.

Mixing animals from one year with others born in a different year is not allowed as we learnt at the beginning of מסכת ראש השנה.

3 – When exactly is this ‘one year’ מן התורה?

Three opinions:

Reb Meir – from ראש חודש אלול  to ראש חודש אלול.

Reb Elozor and Reb Shimon – from one ראש השנה to the next.

Ben Azzai – From ראש השנה until ראש חודש אלול. And another separate ‘year’ for the entire חודש אלול!

We will delve into the explanation of the 3 opinions at the next Shiur IY”H.

All of the above is at the דאורייתא level. A one full year cycle.

4 – {This paragraph was corrected on 03/28/2024]

However, the חכמים noticed a pattern with the cattle ranchers.

They would hesitate to perform the מעשר בהמה process until the herds were very large. The ranchers reasoned that it’s in their best interest to do it in large batches so that all מעשר of every 10 are grouped together. It made it easier to bring them all up to ירושלים and avoid the בל תאחר.

 

So the חכמים  established within the year 3 cycles or cut-off dates. When these dates arrived it was prohibited to eat any animal in one’s herd that has not gone through the מעשר process.

Now they could have chosen any 3 dates in the calendar year. The reason they chose dates before the שלש רגלים was that the above תקנה would cause the ranchers to give the מעשר just prior to these dates.

(since after these dates these dates arrived eating the animals would be prohibited unless מעשר was given).

So by designating the date before the שלש רגלים it ensured a stock of plenty of animals available for the עולי רגל.

Our משנה then states various opinions as to the exact 3 days of the beginning of a new cycle established by the חכמים.

Reb Akiva –

• 15 days before פסח, until
• 15 days before שבועות, until
• and 15 days before ראש השנה, until 15 days before פסח.

Reb Elozor and Reb Shimon –

• 1st of Nissan,
• 1st of Sivan and
• 29th of Elul.

Ben Azzai – 29th of Adar, 1st of Sivan and 20th of Av.

The reasoning behind these 3 opinions will also be discussed at the next Shiur IYH.

5 – As a preface to the גמרא further on, explaining the opinion of Ben Azai,  we discussed his life in short including him being a son-in-law of Reb Akiva.

At the very least he was engaged to Reb Akiva’s daughter – קידושין without נישואין – but then divorced her.

בן עזאי  explained why did didn’t remain married:

ומה אעשה, שנפשי חשקה בתורה, אפשר לעולם שיתקיים על ידי אחרים

 

6 – Ben Azzai used to say “the knowledge all the חכמי ישראל , in comparison to mine, is like the skin of a garlic!

Except for this קרח”.

כל חכמי ישראל דומין עלי כקליפת השום, חוץ מן הקרח הזה

 If קרח is a person, then who is this mysterious Reb קרח? Or perhaps קרח means something else?

 It’s a long and interesting story.

Rashi in a few places explains that קרח here means bald and Ben Azzai meant Reb Akiva – who was bald. Meaning that the only person equal to my knowledge is this baldy!

Ouch.

That’s not very respectful especially in light that בן עזאי was a student of Reb Akiva…. And his future or former father-in-law….

[We can assume (as per Tosfos below) that it was said half in jest, as it fits in the context of Ben Azzai’s talking about his brain prowess].

Rashi continues. We know that Reb Akiva had a son Reb Yehoshua. רבי יהושע בן רבי עקיבא.

We also find in many places in Sha”s a תנא with the name Reb Yehoshua son of Korcho. רבי יהושע בן קרחה.

So concludes Rashi, since the קרח in Ben Azzai’s saying refers to Reb Akiva then  רבי יהושע בן רבי עקיבא is רבי יהושע בן קרחה. They are the same person.

רבינו תם in Tosfos (בכורות נח, א. ב”ב קיג, א ) does not accept it. Assume, says Tosfos, that one time Ben Azai was joking when he nicknamed Reb Akiva ‘the baldy’, but for the entire Sha”s to call his son רבי יהושע בן קרחה the ‘son of the bald Rabbi’?
Tosfos presents additional chronological proof that רבי יהושע בן קרחה is not Reb Akiva’s son.

רבינו תם concludes that surely רבי יהושע בן רבי עקיבא and  רבי יהושע בן קרחה are two separate people.
קרחה the father of רבי יהושע is the name of a person called קרחה similar to the original קֹרַח.

מסכת בכורות
דף נח ע”א

7 – We concluded with the amazing words of Reb Chaim Vital in

שער הגלגולים – הקדמה לו.

“My master [The AriZa”l] told me that he saw with his eyes, both,

רבי יהושע בן  קרחה and יהושע the son of רבי עקיבא and they are not the same person, as Rashi writes.

גם אמר לי מורי ז”ל, כי הוא ראה בעיניו את ר’ יהושע בן קרחה, ואת ר’ יהושע בנו של ר’ עקיבא, ואינם איש אחד, הפך מה שכתב רש”י ז”ל בפ”ק דשבועות בסוגיא דבהרת ששניהם אחד:

 

 

 

 

 

 

BSD

Shkolim 7b

2 Adar II  5784. 03/12/2024

One major topic this week with many sub-topics.

1-  Repeating the Torah of another and giving the originator credit.

a –  If the originator has passed away – שפתותיו דובבות בקבר .

b –  כל האומר דבר בשם אומרו מביא גאולה לעולם.

c  –  The איסור גזילה if one plagiarizes. מגן אברהם קנו, ב

2- In relation to ‘c’ above, we mentioned the dialogue between the Tzanzer Rebbe, דברי חיים, Reb Chiam Halbesrstam and his contemporary the מהר”ם שי”ק. YD 156.

Mahara”m – Moshe Shick

The issue was if one copies ideas from a source, then prints it in his own  book without giving the originator credit. Is that גזילה?

(others have noted that surprisingly, neither mention the מגן אברהם).

3- We mentioned that, as the Rebbe points out, the Alter Rebbe omits ruling of the מגן אברהם. LS 36 Ki Siso 2.

 

4 – In regards to plagiarism, we mentioned the somewhat humorous Din Torah that occurred about 3 hundred years ago between siblings that inherited from their wealthy father a nice fortune. In addition to the allotted sum for every son, the father inserted in his will the stipulation that if any of his sons ‘will say a דרשה in public’ he will earn an additional sum from the estate.

One son took up the challenge and actually delivered a דרשה in public and requested the promised (additional) חלק from the his brothers.

The brothers refused to pay for various reasons.

Firstly they said ‘you call that a דרשה? You would have done better not speaking at all!’

Secondly, what he did say was plagiarized! It was not his חידושים but either he read it somewhere or heard it from someone and that’s not what our father meant!

They approached the famous פוסק of the time, Reb Yakov Reisher.

Hebrew. 

His response is in שו”ת שבות יעקב ב, יו”ד קמו.

5 – We spoke a bit about this illustrious רב who penned many books,  amongst them the עיון יעקב which the basic פירוש on the עין יעקב. Additionally, he wrote the חק יעקב on אורח חיים which is printed inside the שולחן ערוך.

We mentioned him here.

In the past we spoke about a particular ruling of his and the Alter Rebbe who wrote a lengthy rebuttal on his פסק. This was regarding a person whose father didn’t sell his חמץ and passed away in middle of פסח. The issue is that despite the fact that the son automatically received a ירושה of the חמץ in middle of פסח it is אסור בהנאה and therefore perhaps he never ‘inherited’ it to begin with.

 

‘

 

Reb Yakov responded that as to the first complaint that the son said ‘nothing’, well, that’s subjective. The brothers didn’t think it had value but others may differ and who’s to judge?

‘Occasionally a דרשן presents a דרשה that has merit and yet the listeners were not excited because the דרשן is not a polished orator, he lacks the talent to explain things well or his vocabulary is limited. Or the reverse’.

[We paused on the last words ‘Or the reverse’. Did Reb Yaakov mean that the opposite is also true…..Sometimes a דרשן presents a דרשה that excites the listeners because the דרשן is a polished and talented orator with a rich vocabulary…. But says nothing of value….?]

Additionally, the father never stipulated that this דרשה by any of his sons needs to be knocked out of the park.

As to the second complaint that the son just repeated what he heard or read, if that can be proven beyond doubt, says Reb Yaakov it is a valid טענה.

For surely the father’s intent was for his sons ‘to be diligent in their learning’ and come up with something original.

He didn’t mean for them to just ‘clothe themselves with a טלית not of their own… as is the custom with some תלמידים that lack in their diligence and yet  pride themselves and taunt others… ’.

In short, that is not what the father had in mind.

He goes on that even if the father would be ok with such a דרשה there is the issue of plagiarism which is not allowed על פי הלכה and the צוואה does not apply is such a עבירה! .

He concludes that one of the famous local לומדים should give this son a perplexing  מדרש, place him in a quiet room for a while and see if he can decipher it on his own. If what he comes up with is worthy to deliver in a public  דרשה he would then truly earn his fee as per his father’s will.

5 – We continued from last week the Rebbes’s letter (אגרות קודש רה)  to Reb Berel Rivkin on topic ‘a’ above.  שפתותיו דובבות בקבר

The Rebbe writes that we find 4 people that requested that students of theirs should always repeat his תורה and state that they heard it from their רבי.

דוד המלך, רבי יוחנן, רבי יצחק ורב ששת.

Why these particular 4?

Additionally perplexing is that if repeating someone’s תורה causes שפתותיו דובבות בקבר then even if their name is not mentioned (or even plagiarized as one’s own תורה) G-D knows whose תורה it is, so why would that affect the שפתותיו דובבות בקבר? What does giving credit to the originator add to the שפתותיו דובבות בקבר?

The Rebbe writes that the son of the דברי נחמיה dwells on this latter question ‘and we can comment on his answer  ואכ”מ’.

6 – We digressed to talk about this famous חסיד and his life style who was a businessman and a respected פוסק.

הגאון הצדיק רבי נחמיה הלוי בירך גינזבורג מדוברובנה

• Story told by Rabbi Shvay of the דברי נחמיה playing chess as a ‘breather’ after leaning for many hours non-stop. Right before he had a ‘check mate’ move, he would switch positions with his opponent and still win the game!
• 
• The reluctance of his son to publish his תורה and the threat of the צמח צדק that he will not allow him to יחידות!
• The criticism he claimed he received from ‘hot headed’ Chassidim for not printing the responses of the צמח צדק to his father’s letters.
• His name is mentioned in every volume of the Vilna Sha”s.

7- The Rebbe’s explanation to question in 5 above:

True, even if one does not give credit (and says תורה not mentioning the name of the original person who said it) it still causes שפתותיו דובבות בקבר.

However, these 4 individuals have a separate reason for insisting that either their name be mentioned or they had a special reason in general that their תורה be repeated.

1- דוד המלך

We find that דוד המלך who was a ‘בעל תשובה’ wanted that people should know that his תשובה was accepted by ה’.

Now, in general, one should learn תורה only from a righteous person. Thus, the best way to fullfil דוד’s wish that his sin was totally forgiven is by people repeating his תורה!

[If we understood it correctly- דוד regardless whether his name is mentioned would have the זכות of שפתותיו דובבות בקבר.

But he wanted more than that. He wanted people today to say ‘this is the תהילים of  דוד המלך’.  This proclaims that he was righteous and we can and do repeat his תורה.

2- רבי יוחנן

The גמרא describes the tragic and sad life of רבי יוחנן. He had ten children that passed away during his lifetime.

Now the גמרא says that one who leaves this world leaving behind no sons, הקב”ה is’ full of anger at him’. However, if he leaves behind proper תלמידים this anger dissipates.

(see Rabbeinu Chananel in Brochos 5b that he had an 11th son)

So here again, רבי יוחנן wanted not only to have the זכות of שפתותיו דובבות בקבר with his תורה being repeated. He had an additional motive for his request to say his תורה in his name. ‘Say it in my name – proclaim to the world that I left behind תלמידים!’

שהתלמידים קרוים בנים

3 – רבי יצחק

As quoted in זהר, he too asked (in addition to repeating his words) to be mentioned as the author of his תורה.

For as the גמרא states, even if one leaves a son (and there is no ‘anger’ as above) if this son does not reach the level of his father, it casts the father in a negative light. נאמר על האב מיתה אם אין הבן כמותו

The זהר says that at that time רבי יצחק’s son has not reached his father’s lever and רבי יצחק asked others to teach his son after his passing.

So Reb Yitzchok too had a special reason to ask that when repeating his תורות that people should say-’this תורה is from רבי יצחק’.

4 – רבי ששת

The Ariza”l in שער הגלגולים writes about the נשמה of רב ששת some interesting ideas.

Briefly, רב ששת, who was blind was a גלגול of  רבי בבא בן בוטא, who was also blind.

[We mentioned the topic about רב ששת and רב יוסף emulating רב and  if they were born or became blind ר”ל]

The reason for this גלגול was that רבי בבא בן בוטא, despite being a great צדיק, needed to return to this world to complete some ‘unfinished תיקונים’.

To accomplish this his נשמה reincarnated in the body of רב ששת.

This is symbolized by their names. בבא – using the א”ת ב”ש method is ששת!

Now, when a נשמה returns in a גלגול in a different גוף, its primary objective is for the purpose of it’s original נשמה; not the current גוף.

That is why רב ששת would say (פסחים ע”ז? )  ”Be happy my soul – it is for you (only)  that I have learnt”. For his learning was only for the נשמה of רבי בבא. [See also Tanya chapter 37].

רב ששת therefore realized that his גוף is somewhat sad because when תחיית המתים comes around his נשמה will go back to the גוף of רבי בבא.

[That touches on a different topic since all גופים will be resurrected].

The Arizal stops right there – with  רב ששת’s גוף being sad.

The Rebbe concludes the story to come full circle.

רב ששת wants to bring joy to his גוף. The only thing left for his גוף is for it for eternity speak דברי תורה.

How can that be accomplished after his passing? By causing others to repeat his words of תורה.  Therefore רב ששת in particular asked his students ‘please repeat my words’.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BSD

Shkolim 7a (2)

25 Adar I, 5784. 03/05/2024

Many topics covered. Here are some short notes:

1- Our גמרא relates a story of Reb Yochanan when walking along notices that  Reb Eliezer, a student of his, going out of his way to hide himself so not meet Reb Yochanan.

Reb Yochanan expresses his sharp displeasure on the conduct of this Babylonian student who does not greet him with a שלום עליך רבי and additionally, hides himself from his רבי.

Some of his students try to calm down Reb Yochanan but that irks Reb Yochanan even more.

He continues: ‘This Reb Eliezer also goes around in the בית מדרש and says הלכות that he heard from me and does not give me credit’. Pure plagiarism.

2- We discussed the noticeable difference as this story is in our גמרא  – which is in ירושלמי versus how this same story is quotes in בבלי.

.יבמות צו , ב 

In בבלי, only the second part of Reb Yochanan’s complaint against Reb Eliezer, of not attributing הלכות to his teacher, is stated. The first part about the not greeting and hiding is omitted.

As per the רא”ש this difference is crucial as to what the הלכה is when a students encounters his רבי.

Does a student greet his teacher with a “Hello רבי” or not?

According to the ירושלמי – it is a definite no!

The בבלי, however, omits that part of the story, and with good reason says the רא”ש. For how can you say that greeting a רבי is not honorable and respectful when we find in multiple places in ש”ס the concepts of תוך כדי דיבור, which is a measurement of time in regards to many Halachik rules.

How long is תוך כדי דיבור? As long as it takes to say שלום עליך רבי!

3- Practically- what is the הלכה למעשה?

See here in Shulchan Aruch. YD 242, 16

The הלכה and the מנהג in indeed to great one’s teacher in a humble and respectable fashion.

The Ram”o quotes our ירושלמי which is of a different opinion; not to greet one’s teacher at all!

3 – The story continues. The גמרא explains why Reb Yochanan insisted that his תורה should be cited in his name.

‘When a person’s Torah is recited in his name (after he passes away) his lips speak these words in his grave’.

שפתותיו דובבות בקבר

Thus Reb Yochanan was adamant for his students to quote his Torah always citing him as the source. He wanted ‘his lips’ to move forever!

4- We briefly mentioned some of the explanation of this מאמר חז”ל

whether this is בגשמיות or in a spiritual realm?  מהרש”א ביבמות שם.

In  addition to the above

A – שפתותיו דובבות בקבר, there are two other topics when citing the source.

B  –  כל האומר דבר בשם אומרו מביא גאולה לעולם.

C  –  the איסור גזילה when one plagiarizes.

מגן אברהם קנו, ב.

See at length the Sicha of the Rebbe in LS 36 Ki Siso 2.

5 – So here is the obvious question. If the idea of repeating someone’s Torah after he passes away is to cause the reaction of שפתותיו דובבות בקבר, why is there a need to give him credit?

In other words, even if someone would repeat this Torah without the proper attribution to the originator, כלפי שמיא גליא that this originated with the originator. And thus it would still result in שפתותיו דובבות בקבר.

So why would Reb Yochanon insist that his students always give him credit when repeating what they heard from him?

6 – We began to discuss the letter of the Rebbe on this topic. Will continue next week BL”N and post it here.