BSD

Shkolim 6a (3)

Shvat 27, 5784. February 6, 2024

An enlightening observation made by the Rebbe that is somewhat related to our גמרא.

ירושלמי שקלים ב’:ג’:ה

רִבִּי פִּינְחָס בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי לֵוִי. לְפִי שֶׁמָּכְרוּ בְכוֹרָהּ שֶׁל רָחֵל בְּעֶשְׂרִים כֶּסֶף וְנָפַל לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מֵהֶן טִבַּע לְפִיכַךְ יְהֵא כָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מֵהֶן נוֹתֵן שִׁקְלוֹ טִבַּע.

1- Reb Pinchas said in the name of Reb Levi the reason behind the מצווה of מחצית השקל is a כפרה for the 10 שבטים that sold Yosef.

What price did they sell him for? It says in פרשת וישב that Yosef was sold for 20 silver coins דינרים.

וַיַּֽעַבְרוּ֩ אֲנָשִׁ֨ים מִדְיָנִ֜ים סֹֽחֲרִ֗ים וַֽיִּמְשְׁכוּ֙ וַיַּֽעֲל֤וּ אֶת־יוֹסֵף֙ מִן־הַבּ֔וֹר וַיִּמְכְּר֧וּ אֶת־יוֹסֵ֛ף לַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִ֖ים בְּעֶשְׂרִ֣ים כָּ֑סֶף וַיָּבִ֥יאוּ אֶת־יוֹסֵ֖ף מִצְרָֽיְמָה׃

No

A שקל\סלע equals 4 דינרים. So 20 silver coins equals 5 שקלים\סלעים.

Dividing the 20 silver coins  or 5 שקלים\סלעים by the 10 שבטים that participated in the sale of יוסף, equals a half a שקל\סלע per each שבט!

[We still need to understand why all 12 שבטים of כלל ישראל are obligated to give מחצית השקל]

2- Now the ancient question is how do we get to 10 participants when discussing מכירת יוסף?

Firstly, בנימין was not there. Secondly, although ראובן was there when they originally planned to kill him he was not present when they actually sold him. [He was shocked when he returned to the pit and יוסף was not there]

So we’re down to 9.

We will discuss some answers next week IY”H.

3- Now, hundreds of years later, (228?), at the חנוכת המשכן the 12 נשיאים donated numerous gifts to the משכן. Amongst them was a שעיר עזים אחד לחטאת.

This חטאת seems out of place in this נדבה for the משכן. It is explained  that the idea behind it was a כפרה for the מכירת יוסף.

So here too the same question pops up.

Why did שבט יוסף need this חטאת? He was the victim…?

Why did ראובן and בנימין need כפרה as above?

4- The Rebbe (LS 8, page 46, footnote 33) suggests that in regards to יוסף perhaps the reason is that he indirectly ‘caused’ the hatred to him by telling the brothers his dreams.

But בנימין?

in the words of the Rebbe:

“על שלא חפשו אותו כל השנים”!

These few words perhaps encapsulate the Rebbe’s outlook on the obligation of every Jew to his brothers.

Binyomin’s did not search for his brother יוסף.

Binyomin, was was not present at the time of the מכירה. True enough. But  by not searching for his brother he is faulted as much as the ones who actually sold יוסף and needs to bring a חטאת.

5- Our גמרא also states that one must give at least a third of a  השקל per year.

רִבִּי חִלְקִיָּה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אָחָא. מִיכָּן שֶׁאָדָם צָרִיךְ לְשַׁלֵּשׁ שִׁקְלוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה פְעָמִים בַַּשָּׁנָה.

This is not the מצווה of מחצית השקל but the minimum צדקה one must give every year.

A similar גמרא is in בבא בתרא.

9a.

אָמַר רַב אַסִּי ^זלְעוֹלָם אַל יִמְנַע אָדָם עַצְמוֹ [מִלָּתֵת] שְׁלִישִׁית הַשֶּׁקֶל בְּשָׁנָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (נחמיה י,

לג) וְהֶעֱמַדְנוּ עָלֵינוּ מִצְוֹת לָתֵת עָלֵינוּ שְׁלִישִׁית הַשֶּׁקֶל בַּשָּׁנָה לַעֲבוֹדַת בֵּית אֱלֹהֵינוּ

We mentioned that this is actually a הלכה in שלחן ערוך. YD 249, 2, Shach 4.

See the ש”ך where he mentions the מנהג of the גבאי צדקה  walking around the שול on Mondays and Thursdays collecting coins so that even by giving him small coins one will reach a ⅓ of a שקל per year!

He concludes: .ומנהג נכון הוא

6 – We finished the story of last week about the question asked to the  מהרי”ט concerning an אפוטרופוס that donated a large sum of money for a רפואה for the young orphan.

The issue was if this was permissible since an executor of a trust can spend funds of the trust only on items that have a ‘limit’. Such a buying for the יתום  a לולב.

צדקה however, in not allowed because ,אין להם קצבה’, it has no limit.

Now what does קצבה or limit mean?

The מהרי”ט quotes our משנה to understand the definition of קצבה- limit.

מחצית השקל says Reb Shimon has a limit – only an exact מחצית השקל. A חטאת on the other hand has no limit since the cost of an animal can run up to a very large sum. Based on this interpretation of קצבה, donating for a מי שברך has no limit.

However, the מהרי”ט’s bottom line is that a non  קצבה item means  it is a constant occurrence – like צדקה for the poor. It’s endless.

מצוות that do not occur on a constant basis are considered קצבה. They are limited since it may not occur again and thus will not deplete the trust.

Therefore the אפוטרופוס did nothing wrong since it he donated  צדקה for an ailment that is not recurring.

His ruling: an אפוטרופוס should indeed donate by estimating how much the orphan would have pledged based upon the value of the trust.

 

 

 

 

BS”D

Shkolim 6a (2)

Shvat 20, 5784. January 31, 2024

1- משנה.

Collecting small amounts of money for the purposes of having enough coins when the time arrives to give the מחצית השקל.

This collection can play out in a few scenarios.

Scenario #1- One begins placing small amounts by saying “these coins are for the מחצית השקל”.

Scenario #2 – He says “my מחצית השקל will be from these coins”.

[One could of course say nothing and probably avoid all issues]

The difference is when it’s time to actually take from this bowl a מחצית השקל and one realizes that there is more than one מחצית השקל.

What do we do with the extras? Is it הקדש or not.

When saying “these coins are for the מחצית השקל”(Scenario #1) it implies, (if it turns out that the person erred in giving too much, that somewhat) perhaps all the coins become הקדש. Meaning the השקל מחצית and all the rest are הקדש.   It is a טעות הקדש.

The opinion of בית שמאי is that any הקדש made in error is considered הקדש. According to בית שמאי the entire collection is הקדש. According to בית הלל the extra coins are חולין.

[We discussed a case of someone bidding $500 for an עליה thinking that the last bid was $450 (and he upped it by $50) when in reality he misheard and the last bid was only $250! Does he pay $300 or $500?]

However, if he said before placing the first coin into the bowl:

“my מחצית השקל will be from these coins”, (Scenario #2) even בית שמאי would agree that only one half a Shekel becomes הקדש and the rest remain חולין. The reason is that he only meant to take one מחצית השקל when the time comes.

2- We discussed why this does not trigger the famous ברירה question.

ברירה means a ‘retroactive designation’. Like drinking from a bottle of wine of טבל, prior to taking out the percentages for תרומה  and מעשר.

 

If ברירה  works, then he can drink the wine as long as he leaves the minimum for תרומה ומעשר at the bottom of the bottle.

By leaving the required amount in the bottle we then apply יש ברירה and  retroactively designate and say: What is left is/was the תרומה ומעשר that took effect before he started to drink.

May sound funny – but that is the idea behind יש ברירה.

להלכה we do not accept this with items that are דאורייתא. So drinking before הפרשת תרומה ומעשר is not allowed להלכה.

So back to this collection of coins. How can he keep on adding to this pile of coins and at the end just choose a מחצית השקל and the rest remains חולין?

We are basically saying that the מחצית השקל that he took out is the one that originally was הקדש. That sounds a lot like ברירה.

3- Related to ברירה we touched briefly on the author of the שו”ת עונג יום טוב, Reb יום טוב ליפא הלפרין.  The writer was a  מתנגד that (according to some historians) was ousted from his position as the Rov of Mezritch when he decided to place the חסידים of this city in חרם!  See here.

4- We spoke about a case when בית דין is unsure on how to write a גט and להלכה need to write two גיטין to ensure that at least one is כשר. The בית דין writes two גיטין and the husband then gives his wife the two גיטין one after the other. EH 129, 18-19.

Here too we may have the issue of ברירה because when the husband gives the first גט he is unsure if that is a  valid  גט or just a scrap of paper..

The נודע ביהודה writes that in his בית דין he would write two גיטין but would not tell the husband. Only after the husband gave the first he would tell him that the בית דין realized that the גט has an problem and they need to write another one. All of this is to avoid the ברירה issue.

5- The above mentioned עונג יום טוב has a novel idea on the above גיטין dilemma and brings support from our גמרא. See here #166.

His point is that ברירה is an issue only when at the time that the action happened it was necessary to know what occurred. Like the case of drinking from the flask before giving תרומה ומעשר.

One needs to know before drinking any wine what in the bottle is תרומה ומעשר and what is not. That is the definition of הפרשה.  To separate the תרומה and the balance becoming  edible חולין.

Using ברירה allows us to retroactively designate what is what.

Since, as above, we do not accept ברירה at the דאורייתא level, drinking in such a manner is prohibited.

However, says the עונג יום טוב, when there is no need to know at the time what is what, then all would agree that there there is no need for ברירה.

Therefore, in the case of the 2 גיטין, there is no issue with ברירה, since the husband does not care and/or need to know which גט will do the job.

His proof is from our גמרא. We allow for the collection of coins to take place and say that only the single coin that will be chosen for the מחצית השקל is הקדש. The rest is חולין.

What about ברירה? It is obvious that ברירה is not a concern here. Why?

Because all coins look alike and one does not care which coin will eventually be ‘the chosen one’.

6 – We began to talk about another interesting topic also related to our גמרא.

The משנה states that unlike מחצית השקל that is limited in the sense that one can only give an exact מחצית השקל, when collecting money for a חטאת, any mount left is הקדש. The cost of a חטאת has no limit.

The term used is:

אמר רבי שמעון מה בין שקלים לחטאת אלא של שקלים יש להן קצבה ולחטאת אין לה קצבה ר‘ יהודה אומר אף לשקלים אין להן קצבה

This concept (קצבה) is also used in regards to the amount that an אפוטרופוס can spend from the trust of an orphan.

An executor of a trust can  spend money of the trust only on items that have a ‘limit’. Such a buying for the יתום  a לולב.

צדקה however in not allowed because ,אין להם קצבה’. There is no limit.

The case we began to discuss was an אפוטרופוס that donated large amounts of צדקה for a יתום that became ill.

This case is discussed at length by Reb Yossef Trani also known as the מהרי”ט so of the famous מבי”ט. See here.

To be continued.

ומסיימין בטוב.

 

BSD

Shkolim 5b(2) – 6a

Shvat 13, 5784 –  01/23/2024

1- משנה. Case of a שליח that accepted to deliver someone’s מחצית השקל to the גזבר and upon arriving decides to give it as his own.

The issues are:

גניבה- he used someone’s שקל for his own use.

תשלומין- he needs to repay the שקל to the sender.

מעילה- if he delivered it after ראש חודש ניסן, when it belongs to הקדש, he was מועל.

2- The גמרא explains that מעילה is only when he tells the גזבר ‘this is from me’. If he gives it סתם, then nothing happened since it is considered that the משלח gave it.

The גמרא compares this to someone who steals an עולה and proceeds to bring it to the בית המקדש as his own קרבן . When he arrives with this stolen  עולה to the כהן at the מזבח he does not advise him that his intention is for his own sake. The הלכה is that the קרבן is considered as a קרבן for the original owner.

3- We mentioned that this הלכה  was used by the חתם סופר (YD 345) on a totally different topic.

Here is the story in short:

Today the ‘מנהג’ is that multiple חיובים can say the קדיש all at the same time.

However, up until a few hundred years ago, in Europe, only one קדיש reciter would be allowed. If there were multiple חיובים, there is a ‘list’ as to who gets priority. See Ramo YD 376, 4 and מגן אברהם OC 132, 2.

(see below from Zev Sero).

Now, a wealthy couple’s wife passed away  and had no son to say Kadish for her.  The husband therefore hired a מלמד to say קדיש in her memory.

As there were other חיובים in this Shul, they refused to allow this מלמד to say קדיש  since he is not a relative of the deceased woman. He is just ‘a ge’dungener קדיש’ so he is not on the above list of priorities.

The גביר, having connections with the ‘machers’ of the city, threatened that if they will not allow his hired קדיש זאגער he will get the אקרו”ט, to disallow all the other חיובים to say קדיש!

Who is this אקרו”ט? We discussed the power that the leaders of the קהילה had in days of old. אקרו”ט means  אלופים, קצינים, רבנים וטובים

אלופים, קצינים, רבנים וטובים

See here. Some קהילות still use this term. See here.

So the חתם סופר was asked if a hired קדיש has any rights to get a slot when there are other חיובים.

He first quotes the opinion of רבי יוחנן of Troyes, who was one of the ראשונים, that on hired קדיש does indeed have a right to ‘get on line’.

[We mentioned in passing that the city of Troyes is where Rashi was born and studied until moving to Germany for 10 or so years. Eventually Rashi returned to Troyes where he is buried. ]

A discussion on Treves/Troyes

Sculpture for Rashi, in Troyes

After analyzing the issues at length he comes to the conclusion that the rights of every member in a קהילה is a form of a partnership. When a member passes away he loses these rights.

However, his relatives have an obligation of their own to ‘help’ the נשמה of their deceased relative. But a hired קדיש has no moral obligation to say the קדיש and therefore is not included in the roster of the קדיש-sayers.

He concludes by saying that regardless, they should find a way to satisfy this גביר by allowing his hired קדיש-sayer to share a slot.

And then the Chasam Sofer adds another interesting point based on our גמרא.

Forcing yourself, against the wishes of another קדיש-sayer, to recite your own קדיש (or grabbing the עמוד) is not advisable.

‘As I heard in my youth in the name of the שב יעקב, that if one ‘grabs away’ a קדיש that belongs to another, the ‘chaper’  gains nothing for himself and does not diminish the זכות of the person who he grabbed it from!

Why? The קדיש that he says goes to the benefit of the person whom he shoved aside!

Adds the חתם סופר – our גמרא is proof for this. As mentioned above:

‘someone who steals an עולה and proceeds to bring it to the בית המקדש as his own קרבן . When he arrives with this stolen  עולה to the כהן at the מזבח he does not advise him that his intention is for his own sake. The הלכה is that the קרבן is considered as a קרבן for the original owner’.

Zev Sero:

Yekkes and Ashkenazim (i.e. Oberlanders), as well as some others,  still keep the original minhag that only one person can say kaddish.  At KAJ an אבל is lucky to get a turn once a week.

 

 

BSD

Shkolim 5b

Shvat 6, 5784. January 16, 2024

Short notes for this week:

1- We discussed the topic of what happens on Rosh Chodesh Nisan, when the first batch is used by the גזברים to purchase animals used on that day.

We spoke about it last week and now, to clarify, we gave an example if worldwide, there are 10 million eligible מחצית השקל donors.

However, by Rosh Chodesh Nisan only 8 million have arrived. One million has been donated but has not arrived to Yerusholayim, The other million has yet to be donated – it eventually will be donated and arrive by the end of Adar of next year.

The גזברין need to have in mind, when taking some of the 8 million in the pot, also the other 2 million that have not arrived. They are donating for them as well.

כשהוא תורם מתכוין לתרום על הגבוי שיש בלשכה. ועל הגבוי שעדיין לא הגיע ללשכה. ועל העתיד לגבות כדי שיהיו אלו השקלים שהוציאן להסתפק מהן כפרה על ישראל וכאילו הגיעו כל שקליהן ללשכה ונתרמה מהן תרומה זו:

 2- The Maharil uses this concept, of the גזברין donating for people that have  donated yet, on a totally different topic.

The ראשונים write a הלכה which seems difficult to understand.

When giving מעשר כספים, a tenth of what one earned, one needs first to earn the profit. Meaning, whenever one makes a חשבון of the amount he was blessed with, he needs to donate 10% to צדקה

[We glanced over this מצוה and the discussion of whether it is מדאורייתא, מדרבנן or a מנהג]

Now say the year begins and no profit has yet been earned. A poor person knocks on the door and asks for a donation. You have not earned yet and therefore have no מעשר money to give him.

The ראשונים (also in the שלחן ערוך-  YD 257, 5) suggests you do the following:

Give him money as a ‘loan’. Technically he needs to repay you.

When BEH, your earnings arrive at a later date, you take these earnings, designate 10% of them as מעשר  and then  ‘pay’ yourself back the loan.

Once the loan is ‘paid back’ the עני owes you nothing since you have been repaid!

3- In theory it makes sense. But, the מהרי”ל was asked, at the time of the loan, you have not earned your profit yet and not obligated to give מעשר, – so how can you give it then as מעשר? It’s a דבר שלא בא לעולם!

One cannot say: the apples in this bushel are תרומה for the apples that will grow in a few months time!

The מהרי”ל first answers that as opposed to תרומה that is מן התורה,

מעשר כספים is מדרבנן

Additionally, he uses the concept of the גזברין above to explain this הלכה.

The גזברין have the power to consider the future arrival of the שקלים as if they have arrived.

שו”ת מהרי”ל סימן נד

 

 

BSD

Shkolim 5a

Teves 28, 5784. January 9, 2024

1- New משנה.

For the ease of travel of the שליח that is bringing up the מחצית השקל to ירושלים, the collectors may exchange all the collected silver מחצית השקל, into coins of gold.

2- Exchanging it into a diamond is not allowed since the market price for gems may fluctuate down and cause a loss to הקדש.

The term used in our גמרא is מרגליות. We mentioned the different opinions if that is a diamond or a pearl.

3 – We discussed the general view of the משנה and גמרא on inflation. The value of money (coins of gold or silver) is always constant. It is only the commodities that fluctuate in price.

In other words, the value of a Shekel is always a Shekel. That is a constant.

When there is inflation, it is the price of wheat, for example, that is more expensive.

4 – As a preface to the next part of the משנה, we spoke about the chronological order of the מחצית השקל from the initial giving to the actual usage of the coins for purchasing קרבנות.

We used as an example, the מחצית השקל originating in a small shtetl in Israel which is a 5 day trek to ירושלים.

Rosh Chodesh Adar – Proclamation for all to give.

15th of Adar – Local collector sets up a Pushka and begins collecting and placing them into a שופר shaped box. Wide on the bottom and narrow at the top to keep sticky fingers out…. See here.

 

The local collecter keeps track of all locals that donated and pawns the assets of the nay givers.

 25th of Adar – he opens the שופר, counts the coins and if needed, exchanges them for gold coins. He chooses a local carrier שליח to make his way up to ירושלים to deliver it to the גזברים. They in turn place all the incoming שקלים in a large שופר.

Rosh Chodesh Nisan, the first batch is used by the גזברים to purchase animals to be used on that day. (We will learn later on about this process).

5 – If the שליח loses the coins or if he is robbed the question is ‘whose coins’ were lost or stolen? The donor’s or הקדש?

Generally, it would depend on when the loss or robbery occurred. Prior to Rosh Chodesh Nisan, then we view them, since they were never delivered to the גזבר, as still belonging to the donors. The שליח, since he is (generally) a שומר חינם, does not need to pay but needs to swear to the ‘owners’ (the donors) that he was not negligent.

However, it becomes interesting if the שליח never made it to ירושלים by Rosh Chodesh Nisan. Say, he arrives on the 5th of Nissan and delivers the שקלים from this shtetl.

The גזברים, five days prior, on Rosh Chodesh Nisan, have  already spent some of the שקלים for their intended purpose – the purchasing of קרבנות.

So the big question is: Did their spending also include the שקלים (that didn’t arrive yet) that are in transit? Or even better – Did their spending also include the שקלים that are not in transit but will eventually (throughout the year) arrive in ירושלים?

There are different opinions on this but the הלכה is that all שקלים that will eventually arrive are included in the first תרומה by the גזברים on Rosh Chodesh Nisan.

א”ר יוסטי ב”ר סימון אתיא כמ”ד תורמין על הגבוי ועל העתיד לגבות

 As the Rambam (Shkolim 2, 9) writes ‘It’s as if all the שקלים arrived’.

כשהוא תורם מתכוין לתרום על הגבוי שיש בלשכה. ועל הגבוי שעדיין לא הגיע ללשכה. ועל העתיד לגבות כדי שיהיו אלו השקלים שהוציאן להסתפק מהן כפרה על ישראל וכאילו הגיעו כל שקליהן ללשכה ונתרמה מהן תרומה זו:

 It therefore follows, that if the שליח lost the שקלים or was robbed after Rosh Chodesh Nisan, since the גזברים had in mind all the שקלים (both – the ones in transit and even the ones that still need to be pledged and shipped to ירושלים) the שקלים in the pocket of the שליח belong to הקדש.

This will now change the direction of the שבועה of the שליח to the גזברין.

6 – We concluded with the story of חנניה, מישאל ועזריה, the decree to bow down to a צלם and being thrown into an oven and survived.

They took the cue to be מוסר נפש from the צפרדעים.

What was the story with the צפרדעים?

The frogs were in fact commanded to jump in the king’s palace, his bedrooms, beds, slave quarters, Egyptian homes, ovens and silos.

It says so in the posuk:

וְשָׁרַ֣ץ הַיְאֹר֘ צְפַרְדְּעִים֒ וְעָלוּ֙ וּבָ֣אוּ בְּבֵיתֶ֔ךָ וּבַֽחֲדַ֥ר מִשְׁכָּֽבְךָ֖ וְעַל-מִטָּתֶ֑ךָ וּבְבֵ֤ית עֲבָדֶ֨יךָ֙ וּבְעַמֶּ֔ךָ וּבְתַנּוּרֶ֖יךָ וּבְמִשְׁאֲרוֹתֶֽיךָ:

Yes,  they were commanded as a group of frogs, but not each individual frog.

The individual frogs which jumped in the oven did not say “let the other frog jump in the oven”. They jumped in the oven and did not leave it for someone else to be  מוסר נפש

So חנניה, מישאל ועזריה did not learn מסירת נפש from the frogs – for that they did not need the frogs.

They (unlike Daniel who escaped prior to the decree) learned from the frogs that although no one frog in particular was ordered to jump into the oven and perish, someone needed to do so.

They made a kal-vchomer:  the frogs which do not have מצוה of  ‘ קידוש ה, so readily jumped in the oven, how much more should we!

Interestingly,  for this the frogs were actually spared, as the posuk says : וַיַּ֥עַשׂ יְהֹוָ֖ה כִּדְבַ֣ר משֶׁ֑ה וַיָּמֻ֨תוּ֙ הַֽצְפַרְדְּעִ֔ים מִן־הַבָּתִּ֥ים מִן־הַֽחֲצֵרֹ֖ת וּמִן־הַשָּׂדֹֽת: – the ones in houses and fields died, but not the ones who went in the ovens!

SeeTosfos in Pesochim 53b.

.מה ראו חנניה מישאל ועזריה. פ”ה מה ראו שלא דרשו וחי בהם ולא שימות בהן וקשה דהא בפרהסיא הוה ומסקינן בסנהדרין (דף עד.) דלכולי עלמא בפרהסיא חייב למסור עצמו אפילו אמצוה קלה.

ומפר”ת דצלם זה שעשה נבוכדנצר לאו ע”ז הוה אלא אינדרטא שעשה לכבוד עצמו ולכך קאמר מה ראו וכן משמע מדכתיב לאלהך לית אנחנא פלחין ולצלם דדהבא לא נסגוד משמע דאלהא דידיה וצלמא תרי מילי נינהו ואתי נמי שפיר הא דאמרינן באלו נערות (כתובות לג:) אלמלי נגדו לחנניה מישאל ועזריה פלחו לצלמא ואי ע”ז הוה ח”ו שהיו משתחוים לו ומיהו לשון פלחו לא אתי שפיר.

ור”י מפרש מה ראו שלא ברחו שהרי קודם המעשה היו יכולים לברוח כמו שעשה דניאל כדאמר בחלק (סנהדרין צג.) ג’ היו באותה עצה:

We mentioned the Jewish quip as to why the צפרדעים were not rewarded for posterity like the dogs who were didn’t bark during יציאת מצרים.

BS”D

Shkolim 4b (2)

Teves 21, 5784. January 2, 2024

Short notes on topics discussed this week.

1 – מעשר בהמה when the animal is owned by partners.

2 – The concept of an estate of a deceased, as a self standing entity prior to the distribution of the assets.

3 – Assets of an estate that are divided. Does each recipient really receive ‘his part of the estate’ (יש ברירה) or does each recipient ‘buy’ a part of the estate (אין ברירה).

4 – משה רבינו.

A- He was a נביא.

וְלֹא קָם נָבִיא עוֹד בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל כְּמֹשֶׁה אֲשֶׁר יְדָעוֹ יְהוָה פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים.

 

From the יג עיקרים- 

 אֲנִי מַאֲמִין בֶּאֱמוּנָה שְׁלֵמָה. שֶׁנְּבוּאַת מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ עָלָיו הַשָּׁלוֹם הָיְתָה אֲמִתִּית. וְשֶׁהוּא הָיָה אָב לַנְּבִיאִים. לַקּוֹדְמִים לְפָנָיו וְלַבָּאִים אַחֲרָיו:

B- Was he a כהן גדול?

There is a discussion about this in זבחים קא, א. Bottom line is that for the days of the מילואים he definitely was considered a כהן גדול and his children were not כהנים.

As to the 40 years in the מדבר there is a מחלוקת. According to the opinion that he was a כהן גדול he was allowed to do the עבודה whenever he wanted.

C- Was he considered a מלך?

The answer, as per the גמרא above, is yes, but his children didn’t inherit the מלוכה. It stopped with him and there was no king for hundreds of years after משה until  the coronation of שאול המלך.

5 – We mentioned an original idea of the מהר”ל דיסקין (mentioned in previous shiurim)

The גמרא says that משה actually asked for מלכות when he approached the סנה but his request was denied.

As per the גמרא this request and refusal does not say explicitly in the חומש.

The מהר”ל דיסקין suggest that the words at the first encounter of משה at the סנה hints to this conversation.

וּמֹשֶׁה הָיָה רֹעֶה אֶת צֹאן יִתְרוֹ חֹתְנוֹ כֹּהֵן מִדְיָן וַיִּנְהַג אֶת הַצֹּאן אַחַר הַמִּדְבָּר וַיָּבֹא אֶל הַר הָאֱלֹהִים חֹרֵבָה.

וַיֵּרָא מַלְאַךְ יְהֹוָה אֵלָיו בְּלַבַּת אֵשׁ מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה הַסְּנֶה בֹּעֵר בָּאֵשׁ וְהַסְּנֶה אֵינֶנּוּ אֻכָּל.

וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אָסֻרָה נָּא וְאֶרְאֶה אֶת הַמַּרְאֶה הַגָּדֹל הַזֶּה מַדּוּעַ לֹא יִבְעַר הַסְּנֶה.

וַיַּרְא יְהוָה כִּי סָר לִרְאוֹת וַיִּקְרָא אֵלָיו אֱלֹהִים מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּנִי.

וַיֹּאמֶר אַל תִּקְרַב הֲלֹם שַׁל נְעָלֶיךָ מֵעַל רַגְלֶיךָ כִּי הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה עוֹמֵד עָלָיו אַדְמַת קֹדֶשׁ הוּא.

Now this last פסוק is telling משה to take his shoes off because the area is holy.

But it starts with ‘don’t come close’ and only then ‘remove your shoes’.

What is the ‘don’t come close’? Why not ‘just remove your shoes’?

It seems to say that ‘move back a bit and remove your shoes because where you are now is holy ground’

Suggests the מהר”ל דיסקין:the following:

משה רבינו was 80 years old at the time.

The גמרא says in חולין כד ב that the sign of a healthy and young person is one that can take off his shoes and tie them while standing on one foot.

It adds that only  רבי חנינא , despite being 80, was able to perform this acrobatic feat while on one foot. He attributed it to his mother pampering him with olive oil.

Thus, משה, being told that he should remove his shoes wanted to sit down where he was standing to remove them. However, the area of the סנה, he was told, is אַדְמַת קֹדֶשׁ הוּא. It has the same קדושה of the עזרה of the בית המקדש where sitting is prohibited for all, except מלכי בית דוד.

So משה’s was asking to be granted  מלכות for himself and his descendants to achieve the status like מלכי בית דוד which would grant him the right to sit down on this אַדְמַת קֹדֶשׁ הוּא.

He is told וַיֹּאמֶר אַל תִּקְרַב הֲלֹם meaning that I hear your request and it is not granted. Your מלכות is limited just to you, not you your descendants, (like דוד המלך). Therefore אַל תִּקְרַב הֲלֹם, ‘move back, sit down and then remove your shoes’.

6- We discussed two footnotes to the above.

A- Doesn’t is say that משה רבינו did not lose any of his strength until the day he passed away? וּמֹשֶׁה בֶּן מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה בְּמֹתוֹ לֹא כָהֲתָה עֵינוֹ וְלֹא נָס לֵחֹה.

Perhaps it means that whatever strength he had at the age of 80 didn’t diminish until his last day.

B- The גמרא says ‘the ability to remove and tie his shoes.

The question: Does not tying come first?

The Rambam (OH 5, 7) indeed writes tying and removing’!

We mentioned the answer of Reb Levi’k on this last question.

 

 

 

 

BS”D

Shkolim 4b

Teves 14, 5784. December 26, 2023

1 – The גמרא concludes with a source for the opinion of ריש לקיש that no donation for the בית המקדש in whatever form may ever be accepted from a גוי.

וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם זְרֻבָּבֶל וְיֵשׁוּעַ וּשְׁאָר רָאשֵׁי הָאָבוֹת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא לָכֶם וָלָנוּ לִבְנוֹת בַּיִת לֵאלֹהֵינוּ כִּי אֲנַחְנוּ יַחַד נִבְנֶה לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּנוּ הַמֶּלֶךְ כּוֹרֶשׁ מֶלֶךְ פָּרָס.

2 – We discussed the topic of accepting צדקה from a גוי.
Here are the places in Shulchan Aruch where it seems quite clear that it is prohibited.

רנט ד
and:
רנד א ב

There are of course solid sources that allow it under certain circumstances.

We mentioned the famous חסיד of the צמח צדק, Reb Eliyaho Yosef Rivlin, who authored a ספר that is considered the basis for all discussions on this topic.

See story in סיפורי חסידים, זוין ע’ 456ץ

Starts here in his אוהלי יוסף  ספר.

3 – We continued with the קלבון.

Basically, there are two reason for adding this extra small amount.
According to Reb Meir it is מדאורייתא, since משה רבינו was shown a מטבע של אש one needs to be certain that his מחצית השקל is a full half of a שקל.

When a שקל is minted there is a chance that the weight of the metal is not a full שקלs worth of silver. Ditto for a half a שקל. Thus, one needs to add a קלבון, another small coin that is a 1/12 of a מחצית השקל.

On the other hand, the opinion of the חכמים is that the reason for the קלבון is a fee for the transaction. It is paid to either the שולחני or the גזבר of הקדש for exchanging a full שקל for two halves.

4 – We returned back to the topic of the כותים and the expression of the גמרא in Chulin 6a that they were declared as “non-Jews”. See Shiur Shkolim 3b (3) – Chanukah – 12/12/23.

The Chasam Sofer takes issue with this idea of proclaiming someone as a גוי!

Now, as per the שולחן ערוך, this proclamation was only לחומרא, meaning that after the proclamation if a כותי touches wine we considered this wine as if a גוי touched it. That’s לחומרא.

However, לקולא, we still consider them יהודים. So say, for example, if a woman, after the proclamation accepted קידושין from a כותי, she would require a גט.

However, according to the Rambam, the כותים are considered גויים ממש, even לקולא. The obvious question is where do the חכמים get this power to change the religious status of a person.

See here the Tosfos Yom Tov (7, 4) who also asks this question.

[Parenthetically we asked why he doesn’t mention the גמרא about the עשרת השבטים where a similar edict was issued, Yevamos 17a].

5 – The Chasam Sofer answers that the source for this authority come from our גמרא on 3a.
The גמרא there brings as a source for הפקר בית דין הפקר a פסוק.
וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָבוֹא לִשְׁלֹשֶׁת הַיָּמִים כַּעֲצַת הַשָּׂרִים וְהַזְּקֵנִים יָחֳרַם כָּל רְכוּשׁוֹ.
That means that בית דין can impound private assets.
The end of the פסוק is even more powerful:
וְהוּא יִבָּדֵל מִקְּהַל הַגּוֹלָה.
‘And he will be ousted from כלל ישראל’.
This means, as per the Chasam Sofer, that בית דין can actually pronounce an individual or community as non Jewish!

6 – We concluded by going back to the topic of why רבי didn’t create a מסכת חנוכה.

We mentioned the עדות ביהוסף and his original idea that מגילת תענית is actually מסכת חנוכה and there was no need for רבי to rewrite it.

He offers another reason based on the story of the destruction of the community in Alexandria which we encountered in Suka 51b.
The Yerushalmi adds to the story as to what caused King Tarchinus (In Sukkah it is Alexander the Great) to annihilate this thriving community.

Ancient Synagogue of Alexandria

In short: King Tarchinus’s son was born on Tisha B’Ov and passed away on Chanukah.  Someone informed the king that upon his son’s birth Jews were in mourning and upon his death they celebrated!

This caused the king to annihilate the community of Alexandria.
Thus, Chanukah was practiced under the radar.

Alexander kneeling before Shimon Hatzadik – Yuma, 69a

Accordingly רבי didn’t want to publicize חנוכה by creating a separate מסכת!

Here is the Yerushalmi :
תַּנֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי: בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה מְקוֹמוֹת הוּזְהָרוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁלֹּא לָשׁוּב אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם, {שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר:}ג כִּי אֲשֶׁר רְאִיתֶם אֶת מִצְרַיִם הַיּוֹם לֹא תוֹסִיפוּ לִרְאוֹתָם עוֹד עַד עוֹלָם, וַי״י אָמַר לָכֶם לֹא תוֹסִיפוּן לָשׁוּב בַּדֶּרֶךְ הַזֶּה עוֹד, וֶהֱשִׁיבְךָ י״י מִצְרַיִם בָּאֳנִיּוֹת. וּבִשְׁלָשְׁתָּן חָזְרוּ וּבִשְׁלָשְׁתָּן נָפְלוּ: אַחַת בִּמֵי סַנְחֵרִיב מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר, {שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר:}ד הוֹי הַיֹּרְדִים מִצְרַיִם לְעֶזְרָה, מַה כְתִיב בַּתְרֵיהּ: וּמִצְרַיִם אָדָם וְלֹא אֵל וְסוּסֵיהֶם בָּשָׂר וגו׳. וְאַחַת בִּימֵי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן קָרֵחַ, וְהָיְתָה הַחֶרֶב אֲשֶׁר אַתֶּם יְרֵיאִים מִמֶּנָּה שָׁם תַּשִּׂיג אֶתְכֶם וגו׳. וְאַחַת בִּימֵי טְרוֹגְייָנוּס הָרָשָׁע*.
(ו) נוֹלַד לוֹ בֶן בְתִשְׁעָה בְאַב וְהָיוּ מִתְעַנִּין. מֵת בִּתּוֹ בַחֲנוכָּה וְהִדְלִיקוּ נֵירוֹת. שָׁלְחָה אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאָמְרָה לוֹ: עַד שֶׁאַתְּ מְכַבֵּשׁ אֶת הַבַּרְבָּרִיִּים, בוֹא וּכְבִישׁ אֶת הַיְּהוּדִים שֶׁמָּרְדוּ בָךְ. חָשֵׁב מֵיתֵי לַעֲשָׂרָה יוֹמִין וַאֲתָא לַחֲמִשָּׁה. אֲתַא וָאַשְׁכַּחוֹן עֲסִיקִין {בְּאוֹרַייְתָא בִּפְסוּקָא}ה יִשָּׂא י״י עָלֶיךָ גּוֹי מֵרָחֹק מִקְצֵה הָאָרֶץ וגו׳. אֲמַר לוֹן: מַה הֲוִיתוֹן עֲסִיקִין. אָמְרוֹן לֵיהּ: הָכֵין וָכֵן. אֲמַר לוֹן: הַהוּא גַבְרָא הוּא דַחֲשַׁב מֵיתֵי לַעֲשָׂרָה יוֹמִין וַאֲתָא לַחֲמִשָּׁה. וְהִקִּיפָן לִיגְיוֹנוֹת וְהָרְגָן. אֲמַר לִנְשֵׁיהֶן: נִשְׁמָעוֹת אַתֶּם לְלִיגְיוֹנוֹתַיי וְאֵין אֲנִי הוֹרֵג אֶתְכֶם. אָמְרוֹן לֵיהּ: מַה דְעַבְדַּת בָּאֲרַעִייָא עֲבִיד בְּעִילִייָא. וְעִירֵב דָּמָן בְּדָמָן וְהָלַךְ הַדָּם בַּיָּם עַד קִיפְּרוֹס. בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה נִגְדְּעָה קֶרֶן יִשְׂרָאֵל וְעוֹד אֵינָהּ עֲתִידָה לַחְזוֹר לִמְקוֹמָהּ עַד שֶׁיָּבוֹא בֶּן דָּוִד.

*Perhaps Trajan, Taanis 18b, and Jastrow

 

BS”D

Shkolim 4a

Teves 7, 5784. December 19, 2023

1- We continued with the topic of the Kusim if  כותים גירי אמת או גירי אריות

Pointed out that our גמרא (as opposed to the many places in בבלי) has the names of the תנאים, that argued if the Kusim are real גרים or not, as רבי שמעון בן גמליאל and his son רבי יהודה.

2 – We began the topic of accepting donations from גויים for the בית המקדש. This will lead us into the הלכות of accepting צדקה from גויים.

3 – The opposing opinions of רבי יוחנן and ריש לקיש if גויים can participate in the building and upkeep of the בית המקדש.

ריש לקיש is very stringent and not allowing any participation at all.

רבי יוחנן allows accepting after the building is complete and then only items that are not distinctive דבר המסויים. That means any donation that cannot be identified once it’s accepted.

As an example to a distinctive item the גמרא suggests the  כליא עורב

“היכי דמי דבר המסויים? אמר רב יוסף: כגון אמה כליא עורב”  , ערכין, ו ע”א.

4 – The גמרא quotes the משנה in ערכין if a גוי can pledge an ערך or נדבה.

An ערך is a type of pledge that one offers the ‘value’ of a person, as specified in פרשת בחוקתי . The proceeds go to בדק הבית.

For example – 50 Shekel for a male from the age of 20 to 60 and 30 Shekel for a female.

On the other hand a נדבה is any amount pledged by a donor.

5 –  Now we know that a boy becomes Bar Mitzvah at 13 and a girl at 12.

This means that they are not obligated to perform מצוות until that age.

The exception to this rule are the laws of נדרים, as the גמרא elaborates (45b נדה) that a boy (if he knows what he is doing) can make a valid נדר starting at the age of 12 and a girl from the age of 11.

The גמרא says the reason to the above is that a girl matures in intelligence quicker than a  boy  –   בינה יתירה ניתנה באישה יותר מבאיש.

6 – In 1922 the Rebbe (IK 1, 5) asked the Rogatchover as to why the Rambam offers a totally different reason as to why a girl can begin to make a נדר earlier in life than a boy.

“Women (usually) have shorter lives than men!”

ושני הנקבה לעונת נדרים פחות משני הזכר להיות חייהן קצרים מחיי האיש ברוב:

We do not have the response of the Rogatchover to the Rebbe.

7 – In modern times the opposite is true. The life expectancy of women is longer than of males.

We mentioned that from our סדרה, פרשת ויגש, we see quite clearly that in Biblical times a group of men all outlived their wives who were also their brother’s twin sisters!

As Rashi writes that according to one opinion all the שבטים had a twin sister.

And yet, when they came to travel down to מצרים, none of the the sisters were alive!

וכל בנותיו – ר׳ יהודה אומר: אחיות תאמות נולדו עם כל שבט ושבט, ונשאום

ולדברי האומר (בראשית רבה פ״ד:כ״א): תאומות נולדו עם השבטים, צריכין אנו לומר שמתו לפני ירידתן למצרים, שהרי לא נמנו כאן.

 

 

 

BS”D

Shkolim 3b (3) – 4a

Kislev 29, 5784. December 12, 2023

1- Wrapped up the previous topic with one small observation.

As mentioned some opinions say that based on the ר’ עקיבא איגר and the בשמים ראש, a Kohen (or Levi) should perhaps not be the חזן for מוסף! This is because he is not obligated to Daven מוסף as he had no obligation to give מחצית השקל according to בן בוכרי.

We just learned a few months ago at the end of Sukkah (53a) the story of the great sages and their immense joy during שמחת בית השואבה.

תניא אמר ר’ יהושע בן חנניה כשהיינו שמחים שמחת בית השואבה לא ראינו שינה בעינינו כיצד שעה ראשונה תמיד של שחר משם לתפלה משם לקרבן מוסף משם לתפלת המוספין משם לבית המדרש משם לאכילה ושתיה משם לתפלת המנחה משם לתמיד של בין הערבים מכאן ואילך לשמחת בית השואבה

Reb יהושע בן חנניה was a Levi and apparently did Daven Musaf…..

2- The next Mishna discusses many topics.

כותים גירי אמת או גירי אריות

We spent time discussing the age old מחלוקת about the status of the כותים.

Jews or not Jews?

From the time of the early תנאים (or earlier) until the 2-3 generation of אמוראים there were 2 schools of thought concerning their conversion.

3 – The final straw in this saga came about when the חכמים found a דמות יונה – a figurine of a dove in their Beis Hamikdosh on הר גריזים.

We mentioned the Tosfos in Chulin 6a that the כותים found this עבודה זרה under the tree where יעקב and his children buried it amongst the loot they ransacked from שכם.

וַיִּתְּנוּ אֶל יַעֲקֹב אֵת כָּל אֱלֹהֵי הַנֵּכָר אֲשֶׁר בְּיָדָם וְאֶת הַנְּזָמִים אֲשֶׁר בְּאָזְנֵיהֶם וַיִּטְמֹן אֹתָם יַעֲקֹב תַּחַת הָאֵלָה אֲשֶׁר עִם שְׁכֶם. בראשית לה, ד.

 

Upon this discovery the חכמים ‘pronounced them as גויים‘.

4 – We briefly discussed this loaded proclamation of ‘declaring some as not Jewish’.

How is that possible? Is in only לחומרא or לקולא as well? For example, if, after this historic declaration, a כותי is מקדש someone, does she need a Get? A dead כותי is מטמא?

We IY”H will discuss this more but in the meantime here is a חתם סופר. OC 39, 4.

5- We concluded with the age old question as to why there is no מסכת חנוכה.

The common explanation (attributed to the חתם סופר) that רבינו הקדוש the compiler of the משניות was not ‘happy’ with the חשמונאים who, after their victory, declared themselves kings and ruled for over 100 years.

Since שבט ייהודה , was designated to be the only royal שבט family.  רבי, who was from שבט יהודה, had an issue with the ‘kings’ of the חשמונאים.

Some question this reason. It seems a bit selfish and personal and not a cause to the point of not establishing a מסכת חנוכה.

[We mentioned the long story from the end of הוריות where רבי’s father reminds his son that the descendants of the royal family and the נשיאים following them, must be vigilant in maintaining their leadership status].

6 – Other reasons are offered (IY”H will discuss next week) and we concluded with a rather interesting one.

This is from a Sefardic Rov,  Reb Yosef Chaim Ibn Samun in his book  עדות ביהוסף. See here. #15.

One of his suggestions:

Briefly, prior to רבי writing the Mishnayos, other than the תנ”ך, no part of the תורה שבעל פה was allowed to be written.

There was one exception. A scroll that was sort of a calendar with a listing of all the days of Yomim Tovim and days of sorrow and fasting. This scroll was called מגילת תענית.  See here.

Now in this מגילת תענית, the story and the resulting הלכות of Chanukah are right there for all to see.

Thus, there was no need for רבי to write them again!

On the contrary, being that this ancient מגילה was written many generations prior to רבי by the early the תנאים, he showed them respect by not repeating what they had already written.

רבי himself mentions in the מגילת תענית in מסכת תענית chapter 2,8, that one needs to follow all what is written there.

כֹּל הַכָּתוּב בִּמְגִלַּת תַּעֲנִית דְּלֹא לְמִסְפַּד, לְפָנָיו אָסוּר, לְאַחֲרָיו מֻתָּר.

From AlHatorah.org

בעשרין וחמשה ביה חנכת תמניא יומין, די לא למספד בהון.1

[סכוליון:] שכשנכנסו יונים להיכל טמאו כל השמנים שבהיכל, וכשגברה יד בית חשמונאי ונצחום, בדקו ולא מצאו אלא פך אחד שהיה מונח בחותמו של כהן גדול שלא נטמא, ולא היה בו להדליק אלא יום אחד. ונעשה בו נס והדליקו ממנו שמונה ימים. לשנה אחרת קבעום שמונה ימים טובים.

ומה ראו לעשות חנכה שמונה ימים, והלא חנוכה שעשה משה במדבר לא עשה אלא שבעת ימים, שנאמר ומפתח אהל מועד לא תצאו שבעת ימים וגומר, ואומר ויהי המקריב ביום הראשון את קרבנו וגומר, ובשביעי הקריב אפרים?! וכן מצינו בחנוכה שעשה שלמה, שלא עשאה אלא שבעת ימים, שנאמר כי חנכת המזבח עשו שבעת ימים, והחג שבעת ימים. מה ראו לעשות חנכה זו שמנה ימים? אלא: בימי מלכות יון נכנסו בני חשמונאי להיכל, ובנו את המזבח, וסדוהו בסיד. וכל שמונת הימים היו מתקנים בכלי שרת. חנכת בית חשמונאי לדורות. ולמה היא נוהגת לדורות? אלא שעשאוה בצאתם מצרה לרוחה, ואמרו בה הלל והודאה, והדליקו בה נרות בטהרה. לפי שנכנסו יונים בהיכל וטמאו כל הכלים, ולא היה במה להדליק. וכשגברה יד בית חשמונאי הביאו שבעה שפודי ברזל, וחיפום בבעץ, והתחילו להדליק.

ומה ראו לגמר בהם את ההלל? ללמדך שכל תשועה ותשועה שעשה הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל, הם מקדימין לפניו בהלל ובשבח. וכך הוא אומר בספר עזרא: ויענו כל העם בהלל ובהודות לה׳ כי טוב, כי לעולם חסדו על ישראל. וכל העם הריעו תרועה גדולה בהלל לה׳ על הוסד בית ה׳. ואומר: לה׳ הישועה על עמך ברכתך סלה. להקדוש ברוך הוא לעשות נסים ונפלאות, ולנו להללו ולברכו. שנאמר״ על עמך ברכתך סלה.

מצות נר חנכה נר אחד לכל בית. והמהדרין נר אחד לכל נפש. והמהדרין מן המהדרין מוסיפין נר לכל נפש ונפש לכל לילה. בית שמאי אומרים: יום ראשון מדליק שמנה מכאן ואילך פוחת והולך ובית הלל אומרים: יום ראשון מדליק אחד מכאן ואילך מוסיף והולך. שני זקנים היו בצידן. אחד עשה כדברי בית שמאי ואחד כדברי בית הלל. זה נותן טעם לדבריו וזה נותן טעם לדבריו. זה אומר כפרי החג, וזה אומר מעלין בקדש ואין מורידין.

מצות הדלקתה משתשקע החמה, ועד שתכלה רגל מן השוק. ומצוה להניחה על פתח ביתו מבחוץ. ואם היה דר בעליה, מניחה בחלון הסמוך לרשות הרבים. ואם מתירא מן הגויים, מניחה על פתח ביתו מבפנים, ובשעת הסכנה מניחה על שלחנו ודיו.

7- The Mishna describes the קלבון.

For starters, we discussed the ‘piece of eight’ coin.

To be continued.

A Freilichen Chanukah

 

BS”D

Shkolim 3b (2)

Kislev 22, 5784. December 5th, 2023

1- We continued the topic if כהנים and לויים are obligated in מחצית השקל.

The Mishnah quotes an ancient מחלוקת from the time of יבנה , as to the participation of כהנים in מחצית השקל, between Reb Yochanan Ben Zakai and Ben Buchri. See here.

According to Ben Buchri there was no obligation on them and on the contrary, it’s preferred that they don’t participate. Reb Reb Yochanan Ben Zakai says they are obligated just as all ישראלים.

2- The גמרא has two approaches to explain these two opinions but first suggests a גימטריה to prove that all 12 שבטים including שבט לוי are obligated in מחצית השקל.

שמות ל, יג

זֶה יִתְּנוּ כָּל הָעֹבֵר עַל הַפְּקֻדִים מַחֲצִית הַשֶּׁקֶל בְּשֶׁקֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ עֶשְׂרִים גֵּרָה הַשֶּׁקֶל מַחֲצִית הַשֶּׁקֶל תְּרוּמָה לַיהוָה.

The numerical value of זה is 12!

We mentioned a few other places the the גמרא use גימטריה as a basis for הלכה. The 30 days of נזיר and the ל”ט מלאכות of Shabbos – Shabbos 70a, see Rashi.  Mishna Nazir 5a 

3- The two approaches, one based on פסוקים the other based on logic:

A -It’s based on the interpretation of the words כָּל הָעֹבֵר עַל הַפְּקֻדִים. If it means, as per Reb Yochanan, all those that crossed the ים סוף then that would include כהנים and לויים as well.

If it means, per Ben Buchri, only ‘the ones that were counted’, then the כהנים and לויים who were not counted together (at the first counting of בני ישראל)  with the other שבטים are not included in the מצווה of  מחצית השקל.

B- Ben Buchri says there is an issue with כהנים giving מחצית השקל because it causes the מנחות bought using the money from the מחצית השקל to be in a sense a ‘personal’ מנחת כהן.

Now some of these מנחות are eaten by the כהנים and the problem with that is that the  פסוק says explicitly that a מנחה of a כהן is not to be eaten. וְכָל מִנְחַת כֹּהֵן כָּלִיל תִּהְיֶה לֹא תֵאָכֵל.

So being they are not obligated for this reason, it’s preferable for them not to participate, but if they do, they must ‘give it to the fund and proclaim that they are withdrawing any individual rights to the שקלים’.

4- The next Mishna continues as to who is obligated to give מחצית השקל.

We followed up on what was discussed last week:

• The Reb Akiva Eiger that since women are not obligated to give מחצית השקל they do not need to Daven מוסף.
• His quote from the בשמים ראש. The controversy about this book.
• The Tzemach Tzedek’s take on this and the Rebbe quoting him.

We added this week another interesting point prefaced by the story of a Lubavitcher Rov of great fame who was from the ישובים by the Tzemach Tzedek.

Reb Chaim Yehuda Leib Litvin of Sesnitza author of the שערי דעה. We mentioned the rumors as to why, despite being famous worldwide, ‘disappeared’ from the Lubavitcher map. See here about the new edition of the שערי דעה. 

מכתב בכתב ידו של אדמו”ר המהר”ש לחותנו, ר’ אברהם אבא, עם הוספה בכתב ידו של אדמו”ר הצמח צדק: “פ”ש ידידי חתנו המפולג המפורסם מהו’ חיים ליב שי'”^[1]

In any case, he was an ‘original’ thinker and wrote on many topics such as using the telegraph and telephone for Halachic purposes, such as a husband instructing a בית דין to give a גט via a telegraph or telephone.

 

Reb Chaim adds an interesting point to our topic as it relates to the Reb Akiva Eiger above. SD 17.

‘I want to say something original’ he begins. Based on the idea that all that didn’t participate in the מחצית השקל have no obligation to Daven מוסף, it follows that they should not be a חזן for מוסף.

If, as we mentioned in previous Shiurim, only those over 20 years of age are required to give  מחצית השקל then someone under the age of 20 should not be allowed to go to the עמוד for מוסף!

Mentioned that Reb Elchonon Spector uses this logic concerning כהנים Davning Mussaf according to Ben Buchri.

More next week.

א פרייליכן חנוכה