BS”D

Suka 10 a-b 

Elul 19, 5780. September 9, 2020

A few short notes. 

1- The Mishnah discusses a proper Sukkah that has two types of issues:

1 –

a) A protective cover on  סכך to block the sun.

b)  A sheet that is under the סכך to protect the people sitting in the Suka from the leaves flowing down from the סכך. 

2- A cover over a canopy bed. That is not סכך. And it does not ‘protect’. 

We discussed the difference between סכך – protection from sun etc. and אהל – cover. 

Bamboo

סכך needs to be something grown from the ground and be in its simplest/original form, meaning not a כלי. So wood is fine for סכך, but not if the wood was made into a כלי- pot. It must not be מקבל טומאה. 

Bamboo Pots

The issue with a אהל – cover, on the other hand, is that one sitting under a canopy bed is sitting under a ‘cover’ that is not the סכך. Similar to סוכה על גבי סוכה. 

2- The Gemore discusses different types of נוי סוכה.

See here.

 

Here is one with bottles.

 

3- We discussed the story mentioned in the Gemore: 

The Gemare relates that Rav Chisda and Rabba bar Rav Huna happened to come to the house of the ריש גלותא. 

(One of the famous ones: Bustenai)

Rav Naḥman, who was the official Rov in charge of the ריש גלותא’s household, lodged them in a sukkah whose decorations were removed from the roofing four טפחים. They were silent and did not say anything to him, even though in their opinion the sukka was unfit. 

Rav Naḥman said to them: Did the Sages retract their halakhic ruling? Does your silence indicate that you concede to my ruling? 

They said to him: No, we did not change our minds. The reason we slept there is that we are on the path to perform a mitzva and, therefore, we are exempt from the mitzva of sukka.  העוסק במצווה פטור מן המצווה.

Therefore, it is permitted for us to sleep in this sukka. In terms of the halakha, our ruling is unchanged.

Topics discussed: 

A- How did Reb Nachman lead them into a Sukkah knowing that his guests considered such a Sukkah as פסול? 

Is one who eats חלב עכו”ם allowed to offer it to his guest that he knows does not eat it? That question applies to any חומרא  that one does not adhere to. Can he serve it to his unsuspecting guests? Can you serve Empire chicken to guests if you know your guests do not eat it?

We discussed the Ritv”a who poses these questions.  See below. 

B- What Mitzvah were they performing? Greeting their Rebbe on Yom Tov. 

But that is מדרבנן! So how did this absolve them from fulfilling sitting/sleepin in the Sukka which is מן התורה. 

To be continued. 

———————-

Here is the Ritv”a

 פירוש ואע”ג דאכתי לא ידע ר”נ דהדרו משמעתייהו או דהוו שלוחי מצוה אגנינהו לפום דעתיה.

 ולא חש דהוי חתיכא דאיסורא לדידיה ויתבי בסוכה פסולה ומברכי התם שלא כראוי והוה כנותן מכשול לפני פקח.

יש אומר דמהא שמעינן שהמאכיל לחברו מה שהוא מותר לו לפי דעתו ומאכילו אין בזה משום לפני עור לא תתן מכשול, ואע”פ שיודע בחברו שהוא אסור לו לפי דעתו וחברו בעל הוראה שהמאכיל היה ג”כ ראוי להוראה וסומך על דעתו להאכיל לעצמו ולאחרים לפי דעתו. 

ונ”ל דהכא דוקא מפני שהאיסור ניכר לחברו ואי לא ס”ל לא ליכול הא בשאינו ניכר לחבירו לא.

ואמרינן התם חס ליה לזרעיה דאבא בר אבא דליסופו ליה מידי דלא ס”ל בפרק כל הבשר וכן הור’ לי מורי הרב נר”ו.

מיהו הכא דאיפסיקא הלכתא דלא כותיה, בין לנפשיה בין לאחרים אסור וכדמוכח ממאי דכתיבנא בפ”ק דע”ז ובפ”ק דיבמות.

 

 

BS”D

Sukkah 9a-b

Elul 5, 5780. August 25, 2020

1 The issue of a stolen Sukkah. 

We discussed the possible scenarios:

A- Moving into someone’s Suka. Issue- that’s not defined as stealing since ‘land’ cannot be stolen. קרקע אינה נגזלת. 

B- Stealing the סכך. Issue- That’s גזילה Min HaTorah, but the חכמים enacted that one does not need to return the actual סכך but only to pay for the monetary value of the theft. This was to enable תשובה for someone who stole a beam and built it into his house. Requiring him to destroy his home would hinder his תשובה.  (Suka 31a, Gittin 55a)

ועל המריש הגזול שבנאו: תנו רבנן גזל מריש ובנאו בבירה ב”ש אומרים מקעקע כל הבירה כולה ומחזיר מריש לבעליו

וב”ה אומרים אין לו אלא דמי מריש בלבד משום תקנת השבין

C- Stealing a Sukkah that is on a wagon. He would be required to return it since it does not ruin his house. Such a scenario would indeed be considered a סוכה גזולה. 

3

D- Someone builds a Sukkah on property that is not his. The owner comes along and ousts him. He then uses this Sukkah. This would also be considered a  סוכה גזולה.

2- A סוכה גזולה is not Kosher as our Gemara derives it from the פסוק.

חג הסוכות תעשה לך

Now comes the question of the ראשונים as to why is there a need for a פסוק  since it would be invalid regardless, due to the rule of מצוה הבאה בעבירה. 

This question is one of the famous ‘Gemara Trivia Questions’ for which a multitude of answers are offered. 

3- We mentioned the Minchas Chinuch (325) answer:

ונ”ל דהנה שני מינים יש במצות עשה א’ שהוא חיוב אקרקפתא דכל איש מישראל כמו תפילין ואתרוג ואכילת מצה.
. ומצוה כזו אם מקיים אותה עושה רצון הבורא ית’ ויתעלה כי כן צוה לו המלך ב”ה ואם מבטל המצוה ואינו מניח תפילין או שלא נטל לולב ביטל המצוה ועשה נגד רצונו ית’ וענוש יענש.

ויש מצות שאין חיוב לעשותם, כגון ציצית דהתורה לא חייבה אותו ללבוש בגד של ד’ כנפות, ואם רוצה הולך בלא בגד של ד’ כנפות ואינו נגד רצון הבורא ב”ה. אך אם מביא עצמו לידי חיוב שבכיון לובש ד’ כנפות לקיים מצות ציצית זה דרך הטוב וישר הכלל אם מקיים מצוה זו עושה רצון הבורא ב”ה אבל אם אינו מקיים מצוה אינו עובר על רצונו רק דאינו מקיים המצוה.

Mitzvos can be classified into two types:

A – Obligatory Mitzvos. Such as eating Matzah or hearing Shofar. 

B – Non obligatory ones. Meaning that there is no requirement to perform the act of the Mitzvah. 

Such as wearing a four cornered garment with Tzitzit. The Mitzvah only kicks in if one wears a four cornered בגד he must then tie Tzitzit on all four corners. Another example is מעקה. 

Sitting in a Sukkah, has both types above. How? 

On the first night of Yom Tov one must sit and eat in the Sukkah. Type A above. 

Other than the first night of Yom Tov, one is not obligated to sit in a Sukkah. It is only if one wants to eat he then must do so while inside a Sukkah. Type B above. 

So, posits the Minchas Chinuch, on the first night, if one were to use a stolen Sukkah, since it is an obligatory Mitzvah, meaning that he is commanded to do so, being that he is using a stolen Sukkha, contrary to the will of Hashem, it’s as if he is not sitting in a Sukkah. 

Conversely, during the rest of the Yom Tov, since there is no commandment to sit in a Sukkah, one who is sitting in a stolen Sukkah only because he wants to eat, so while we say that he didn’t perform a Mitzvah (since it’s stolen) we cannot say that he ate outside a Sukkah! 

אבל במצות שאינם חיובית כגון ציצית וסוכה בשאר ימי החג אם הם באים בעבירה אמת דלא קיים רצון הבורא ב”ה כי אין זה רצונו ית’ אבל מכל מקום לא ביטל המצוה רק דלא קיים וה”ל כמי שאינו לובש בגד כלל או לא אכל כלל

In other words: When the Torah wants one to do something and he does it with a stolen object it is contrary to the idea of the Mitzvah and he basically did nothing. 

On the other hand, if there is no commandment to do it, then doing it with a stolen object is considered ‘doing it’ but incorrectly. 

So it follows,  on the days when sitting in a Sukkah is not obligatory, the Mitzvah is the שלילה of not eating outside the Sukkah. So even if he eats in a stolen Sukkah, being his action is not directly contrary to the will of Hashem, he does not do the Mitzvah but neither is he eating outside the Sukkah!

כי באמת הוא לובש ציצית ואוכל בסוכה אך שאינו לרצון לפניו ית’ ה”ל כאילו לא קיים המצוה אבל לא נוכל לדון אותו כאלו ביטל המצוה כיון דמ”מ עושה המצוה –  עיין ותבין

So, concludes the Minchas Chinuch, if not for the פסוק, using a stolen Sukkah on Yom Tov, other than the first night, we would think that he (didn’t perform a the Mitzvah, he) nevertheless  didn’t eat outside a Sukkah. 

We also mentioned the example of the לקח טוב based on the מנחת חינוך. 

see Klal 12, page 58

4- We went on to the Mishna of 9b, concerning a Sukkah that is under a tree. 

There is much to discuss here and we will bl”n continue. 

We concentrated on Rashi’s opinion on the following scenario:

One builds a Suka that is 10’ x 10’. By covering 51% of such a Sukkah with סכך it is Kosher. צלתא מרובה מחמתה. 

He then covers only 40% of the Sukkah with leaves. 

He then adds 20% of ivy that is still attached to the ground. סכך פסול. 

He mixes the two leaf types and they are not discernible/distinguishable.

So now, using this combination, the Sukkah is covered 60%.  צלתא מרובה מחמתה. 

According to Rashi, such a Sukkah is Kosher. 

In other words the non Kosher סכך, being that its ratio to the Kosher סכך is 20% vs 40%, we apply the rule of ביטול ברוב.

One is even allowed to do this לכתחילה (because there is no Issur here)!

בהגה”ה

 ולפיכך מותר לערב ולבטל סכך פסול בכשר לכתחילה, משא”כ בשאר איסורין שאין מבטלין איסור לכתחילה, לפי שאין שם איסור כלל על המיעוט הפסול המעורב בכשר.

See here Alter Rebbe’s SO. OC 626, 9. 

BS”D

Suka 8b (2)- 9a

Menachem Av 28, 5780. August 18, 2020

1- We continued to learn about a Sukkah that was made by individuals that are not obligated to sit in a Sukkah.  

גנב”ך. 

גוים

נשים

בהמות 

כותים

The third one is בהמות? Was it built by humans for the purpose of בהמות?

We mentioned that the ערוך לנר comments that all these four seem to have in common in that they were built by non obligated individuals.  So perhaps it was built by animals. Such as by monkeys.

2- We moved on to 9a. To recap from last week: 

The Machlokes between Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel if the construction of a Sukakh needs to be לשמה.  According to Beis Shammai a focused attempt needs to be present when building a Sukkah. If this מחשבה is not present, the Sukkah is invalid for use. 

Conversely, Beis Hillel’s opinion is that no intent is needed. So if one buy a house from a non-Jew and he finds a gazebo that has walls and is covered with branches -סכך – it is good for Suka use. The הלכה is like Beis Hillel. The Yerushalmi writes that even according to Beis Hillel ones need some ‘input’, a חידוש to Kosherize such a Suka. Such as rearranging a bit of the Schach. 

 

3- We discussed the novel question from the Avnei Nezer. The Gemara seems to imply that Beis Hillel needs a special Posuk to teach us that לשמה is not required for the building of a Sukkah. Without this Posuk even Beis Hillel would agree that לשמה is required? 

But why asks the אבני נזר. Oc 13, 33. The building of a Sukkah must occur before Yom Tov. Prior to any obligation of the Mitzvah.

He compares this to one writing a Get for a woman before he marries her.  Such a Get is invalid because it’s not לשמה. Why? ‘Something that is done prior to it being possible to be utilized is not considered לשמה’. 

 

To be discussed further bl”n.

5- The Gemara brings up the topic of the prohibition of using the  Sukkah during Yom Tov for personal use. 

We mentioned the machlokes if this איסור applies to the סכך or the walls as well. רמב״ם והרא״ש.

6- We spoke about this קדושה that disappears as soon as Yom Tov is over. 

7- Discussed why sitting in a Sukkah during a rain, when one is not obligated to do so (הדיוט), is not considered to be ‘using’ the Sukkah for ‘personal’ use.
Additionally why isn’t it בל תוסיף??

8- Story of Reb Yonasan ben Uzziel. Suka 29a.

The great and famous sage Hillel had eighty most distinguished disciples; thirty of them were said to be worthy to enjoy the Divine Presence as Moses did; another thirty were said to be great enough to have stopped the sun in its path as Yehoshua did; the remaining twenty were “in the middle.” The greatest of all of Hillel’s disciples was Jonathan ben Uzziel; the smallest among them was Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, who was familiar with all the hidden secrets of the holy Torah.

Thus our Sages described the greatness of Hillel and his disciples. And from the greatness of Hillel’s smallest disciple Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, we can imagine the greatness of Hillel’s greatest disciple Rabbi Jonathan ben Uzziel!

The Sages related that when Rabbi Jonathan ben Uzziel was busy studying the holy Torah, a bird flying over him at that moment would be burned!

 

So the famous question is, what happened when Hillel himself, the Rebbe of Reb Yonatan, was busy studying? 

Some say that everything around him would be burned!

We mentioned the vort of the Kotzker Rebbe:

His answer: Nothing! 

Greatness is peaceful and tranquil!

 

BS”D

Suka 8b

Menachen Av 21, 5780. August 10, 2020

 

1- Having concluded the mathematical page of Suka we mentioned the suggestion repeated in the name of the GR”A or others regarding the number of Pi. π. 

See here. And here. Interesting stuff. 

הגאון מוילנא מסביר שרמז ליחס בין הקבוע פאי ובין המספר 3 המובא בפסוק – יחס השווה בקירוב למספר 1.0472 (1.0472=3:3.14), נרמז בקרי וכתיב של המילה וקוה שנכתבת וקוה ונקראת וקו, אם נבדוק את היחס בין הגימטריה של המילה קוה (111) למילה קו (106) נקבל שוב את המספר 1.0472 בקירוב, הדבר הנרמז כאן הוא שעל אף שלמעשה היה ראוי לכתוב את המספר המלא של הקבוע פאי, לצורך נוחות הקריאה נכתב רק העיגול של המספר.

2- We jumped ahead a bit to 9a to get an understanding of the parameters that create a Kosher Sukkah. 

Firstly, there is the Machlokes between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel if the construction of a Sukkah needs to be לשמה.  According to Beis Shamai a  focused attempt needs to be present when building a Sukkah. If this מחשבה is not present, the Sukkah is invalid for use. 

Conversely, Beis Hillel’s opinion is that no intent is needed. So if one buy a house from a non-Jew and he finds a gazebo that has walls and is covered with branches -סכך – it is good for Suka use. The הלכה is like Beis Hillel. 

3- The Yerushalmi quoted by Tosfos. Despite Beis Hillel stating that the building of the Sukkah does not require לשמה, nevertheless ones need some ‘input’ a חידוש to Kosherize such a Sukkah. Such as rearranging a bit of the Schach. Such is indeed the Halachah. See here. 

See מגן אברהם and ט”ז there that discuss other topics we touched upon; if this Chiddush need to be in the walls in addition to the סכך and more.

Potters Hut

4- We reverted back to 8b where the Gemara discusses a hut that leads into another hut. The topic is regarding a person that lives in a Kosher Sukkah all year if he can use this structure on Sukkos.
Why not? It’s not ‘noticeable’ that his sitting there is for the Yom Tov of Sukos. מינכרא מילתא.

5- These two huts, the inner one and the outside one are labeled in our Gemara as פנימיות וחיצוניות. It’s a good trivia question for בחורים as to where in Sha”s do we find these expressions from Chassidus mentioned in Sha”s. 

[In a previous Shiur we asked as to where the words עשר ספירות are mentioned in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch]. 

6- Being that the Shiur took place on the 21st of Av, we mentioned an interesting observation of Reb Levik on Tanya chapter 37.   See here #22.

Though it is indeed a great descent, a veritable exile for the soul;

כי גם שיהיה צדיק גמור, עובד ה׳ ביראה ואהבה רבה בתענוגים

for even if it become, in this world, a perfect tzaddik, serving G‑d with fear and abundant love of delights,

לא יגיע למעלות דביקותו בה׳ בדחילו ורחימו בטרם ירידתו לעולם הזה החומרי, לא מינה ולא מקצתה 

it will not attain to the quality of its attachment to G‑d with fear and love that the soul experienced prior to its descent into this corporeal world, nor even [to] a fraction of [its earlier fear and love].

ואין ערך ודמיון ביניהם כלל, כנודע לכל משכיל, שהגוף אינו יכול לסבול כו׳

In fact, there is no comparison or similarity whatever between them — between the love and fear of G‑d experienced by a soul on earth, and that of the soul above; [for] as is obvious to every intelligent man, the body could not bear etc. a love and fear of such intensity as the soul experienced above, in the spiritual realms.

Reb Levik explains the change of languages the Alter Rebbe uses to describe the difference between the אהבה ויראה of a living Tzadik and the דחילו ורחימו  of this same Tzadik prior to him being born. 

The Alter Rebbe begins with לשון הקודש – אהבה ויראה, and concludes with דחילו ורחימו  which is Aramaic. 

In short – Aramaic is translating the Hebrew. So in a sense the לשון קודש is the פנימיות.  The Aramaic is חיצוניות. 

So the Alter Rebbe is saying that even the best a living Tzadik can attain, the highest level of love and fear בפנימיות is less than the love and fear that he had prior to being born. Less even that the חיצוניות level of his love and fear before descending to this world. 

 

 BS”D 

Suka 7b- 8a. 

14 of Menachem Av, 5780 – August 4th 2020

Some short notes on the past 3 Shiurim. 

We covered the famous ‘page of math’ that frightens many from learning Meseches Suka. 

ב”ה נכנסנו בשלום ויצאנו בשלום…..

1- The topic is a round Suka and the calculation of its minimum square area. 

Reb Yochanon said that it is the circumference of ‘24 people’. 

Assumption that he meant 24 Amos. Meaning 8 Amos in diameter. Based on the principle (rounded off) of Pi. π

2- We discussed the minimum of a  round Sukkah wall, what percent of the circle needs to be enclosed. Meaning how much of the circle does it need to be an actual wall versus the opening. An adobe structure.

Whereas in a Sukkah with straight walls we have two opinions – 2 full walls and a Tefach, or three full walls and a Tefach- with a round circular Suka what percent of this wall needs to be enclosed. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Sefas Emes writes that he is unsure. Perhaps it needs to be at least half enclosed plus a tefach. On the other hand it may be that since it is a ‘single wall’, it needs to be 100% enclosed, minus an opening for entrance. 

3- We discussed the Mogen Avrohom’s opinion (OC, 634, 1) that since a round Suka must be large enough to fit a Kosher sized square Suka, (7×7 Tefachim) thus a corner in any Suka that doesn’t have a 7×7 space is problematic and one should not eat there! 

We continued with the opinion of the Bikurei Yakov from the Aruch La’Ner that takes this a step further and says that in the above picture of a round Suka that has a 7×7 square in the middle one cannot sit in the area outside the square. But the Mishnah Brura disagrees. 

4- Speaking of Pi and its approximation of 3 by the Gemara in many places, we mentioned the Chinuch 258 that the Chachomim were obviously aware that the number 3 is just a rounded figure to the nearest whole number. Therefore, in  the world of business, one needs to be exact. 

כל אמתא ברבועא אמתא ותרי חמשי באלכסונא, וכן כל שיש בהקפו שלושה טפחים יש בו רחב טפח, וכן כמה מרובע יתר על העגול, רביע, וכיוצא בכללים אלו, שלא אמרו זכרונם לברכה על הכוון הגמור כי אם בקרוב, ולכן אל תסמך בזה בחלוקת הדברים בין בני אדם.

Here it is in it’s entirety:

ספר החינוך רנ”ח

ועוד הרבה עניינים המתבארים בספרי חכמת החשבון וגימטריאות שיחלקו בין זוית נצבה לזוית נרוחת וזוית חדה, ואלו שלוש צורותיהן (זוית נצבה, זוית נרוחת, וזוית חדה) ובין משולש שוה הצלעות והמשולש אשר שתי הצלעות בלבד שוות, והוא נקרא משולש שוה השוקיים ובין משולש שאין צלע מכל צלעותיו שוות הנקרא המתחלף הצלעות, ובין מרובע ריבוע שוה למרובע אורך, ומרובע מעויין מרובע דומה למעויין, וכמה צדדין באלו לא יכיל קלף גדול לרוב הצורות שעשו בזה בעלי חכמת התשברת והשיעורין הנקראין אלהנדסה בעניינים אלה.

ומכל צד צריכין אנו להזהר הרבה במדידת הקרקעות.

 

ותזכור עם זה כי הכללים שכללו חכמים זכרונם לברכה בעניני החשבון, כגון מה שאמרו עירובין נז, א)

כל אמתא ברבועא אמתא ותרי חמשי באלכסונא, וכן כל שיש בהקפו שלושה טפחים יש בו רחב טפח, וכן כמה מרובע יתר על העגול, רביע, וכיוצא בכללים אלו, שלא אמרו זכרונם לברכה על הכוון הגמור כי אם בקרוב, ולכן אל תסמך בזה בחלוקת הדברים בין בני אדם.

 

ואל תתמה איך יכתבו דבר בלתי מכוון והם אנשי אמת, אשר אלקים נצב בעדתם, כי הם לא נצרכו אל החשבונות כי אם בחשבון תחומי שבת או בזריעת הכלאים ונטיעתם וכיוצא באלו הדברים, ובזה מה שלא כוונו בו מביא אותנו לידי חומרא ואינו מזיק לשום אדם בממונו, ואף על פי כן העידו ברוב מקומות אלו, שאין החשבון מדוקדק שם, שאמרו בכל מקום ומקום כפי הראוי בו, היינו דלא דק ולחומרא לא דק, וכיוצא בזה שהודיעונו בכל מקום, שלא נתלה בהם מיעוט השגחה וידיעה בדבר מכל הדברים.

ויתר פרטי המצוה בבתרא ובמקומות אחרים ח”מ סימן רל

 

5- We mentioned the Mamor of the Tzemach Tzedek (previous shiur??) that the reason Pi is an infinite number is to symbolize the infiniteness of G-D.  

6- Before Tisha b’Av we spoke about the perplexing topic of the concerning the second Beis Hamikdosh. 

As the Rambam writes, the builders used the plans of the first Mikdash but added some items as per the prophecy of Yechzkel. 

The question is as follows: The prophecy, detailing how the next Beis Hamikdosh should be built, was said during the 70 years of exile. So it must have meant the second one. So why didn’t they follow it? Was it because it was cryptic? Not decipherable? So it was not meant for the second and implied that there  would be a third? 

 If so, it means that while building it, they were fully aware that eventually it will be destroyed….again?? 

We spoke about the solution of the Tosfes Yom Tov. 

התוספות יום טוב מסביר שנבואת יחזקאל נאמרה על בית המקדש השלישי, ולא על בית המקדש השני. משום כך שבי הגולה בנו את בית המקדש השני על בסיס תבנית בית המקדש הראשון, ורק בדברים מסוימים הסתייעו בנבואת יחזקאל.

בהמשך דבריו מסביר התוספות יום טוב מדוע בית המקדש השני לא נבנה על פי נבואת יחזקאל, אלא על פי התבנית של בית המקדש הראשון, ורק כמה דברים נעשו על פי נבואת יחזקאל:

לכך אני אומר שלפי שלא הייתה תשובתם הוגנת, לא יוכלו למלאותו בכל חלקי הבניין כמות שהוא, לפי שאותו בניין מיועד לגאולת עולם, שתהא הכבוד חונה לעולם, כעניין שנאמר שם: “ושכנתי בתוכם לעולם” (יחזקאל מג,ט). ומכל מקום, הואיל והיה ראוי להם – ראו כי טוב לבנות מעין אותו הבניין במקצת מן הדברים…

See also here what is found on line. 

Sukkah 7a. Tamuz 22, 5780. July 14, 2020

A- We continued the topic of the ‘one טפח’ that needs to be added to the two or three walls to create a kosher סוכה. 

There are 4 explanations as to where and how this טפח needs to be placed.

1- Rav- at the edge of the wall. At a 90° angle.

乚⇠ טפח 

2- Rav Kahana and Rav Asi – at the edge of the wall but at an angle tuned into the סוכה. 

 

                                                                                                              טפח 

 

3- Reb Yehoshua ben Levi – 

⇠

                                                                                                                טפח

 

4- Rava- The wall to the right needs to be a צורת הפתח. 

 טפח 

 

צורת הפתח

B- We discussed the expression the Gemara uses as to Rav’s (#1) reaction when he heard the opinion of  Rav Kahana and Rav Asi (#2). 

“He was silent’. 

We discussed the meaning of this several years ago

From Shiur Beitza 6a 

“We read the text of a note the Rebbe wrote and printed in a few Ma’amorim. The Rebbe Rashab and the Freidiker Rebbe explain that occasionally one comprehends something with clarity and conviction. It is as if he ‘sees the concept’.

And yet, despite being convinced of its truth, he cannot explain it.

His ability to rationalize his understanding to others is not yet developed. ‘Chochma that has not descended to Bina’.

As an example they quote our Gemara where Rav simply did not answer the question posed on his opinion.”

See there for the continuation.

שתיק רב

 

Suka 6b

Tamuz 15, 5780. July 7, 2020

Some points from the Shiur, in brief: 

1- The Beraisa with the opinions of the חכמים and Reb Shimon about the minimum amount of walls a Sukkah requires:

 חכמים – two full walls and one טפח.

רבי שמעון – three full walls and one טפח. 

2- Our Gemare presents 5 explanations as to the logic of this argument. 

3- We discussed at length the concept of 

יש אם למקרא  and  יש אם למסורה

There are many words written in the תורה  that are pronounced slightly different than the way they are actually spelled.  That is the מסורה (written) versus the  מקרא (reading). 

With most of these occurrences, the meaning does not change whether one follows the written text or the way it’s pronounced. 

To use an example from this week’s Parsha – Pinchos.

Now Pinchos can be written as פנחס or with an added Yud- פינחס. 

 

In the Torah we find it written both ways. Regardless, it all sounds and means the same. The name of the person called פנחס. 

Occasionally, the way it is written has a different, and opposite, meaning to the way it is pronounced. Sukkah is one of them. 

The Posuk concerning the building of a Sukkah has the word Sukkah three times. But twice it is written as סכה and once סוכות. 

בַּסֻּכֹּת תֵּשְׁבוּ שִׁבְעַת יָמִים כָּל הָאֶזְרָח בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשְׁבוּ בַּסֻּכֹּת.

לְמַעַן יֵדְעוּ דֹרֹתֵיכֶם כִּי בַסֻּכּוֹת הוֹשַׁבְתִּי אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּהוֹצִיאִי אוֹתָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם.

If we follow the written word, סכת, סכת, סכות, we arrive at a total of 4 mentions of the Sukkah. 

However, if we are to follow the way it’s pronounced סוכות ,סוכות ,סוכות we have a total of six! 

As the Gemare explains, using the two methods, מסורה או מקרא, one comes to different conclusion of the minimum amount of walls required when one builds a Kosher Sukkah. 

4- We quoted the RI”F who explains the feminine expression אם למקרא  as opposed to the masculine expression used by בנין אב.
Also discussed the thought of the שערים מצוינים בהלכה. Written by the grandfather of Rabbi Braun, of the Crown Heights Beis Din.

הרב שלמה זלמן ברוין אצל הרבי

5- We briefly discussed the issue of the Mitzvah of writing a Sefer Torah today. 

The Gemore says that already in its time סופרים were unsure as to all the חסרים ויתרות.

A Sefer Torah that is missing a single letter is not Kosher.

Sha’agas Arye concludes that today, we simply cannot be מקיים this Mitzva because we are unsure how to write every word! 

Minchas Chinuch (613) disagrees. True he says, a Sefer Torah that is missing a single letter is not Kosher. But that is only with words that create a practical difference based upon the way it is spelled. Writing פנחס או פינחס makes no Halachik difference. Whichever  way one writes it, it is Kosher בדיעבד.  

When is a Sefer Torah invalid if written incorrectly, concludes the מנחת חינוך, only when the error would create a practical difference. As an example he uses סכת  and סכות. 

Whenever there is a מחלוקת  of יש אם למקרא or יש אם למסורה there was never an argument as to the way it was written or pronounced. They argued as to which one we should follow. 

If one would spell it differently it would indeed make the ספר תורה not Kosher. 

And in such places throughout our entire history there never was a doubt on how exactly we should write it. 

Therefore, even today there is a valid Mitzvah to write a ספר תורה. 

See here where the Rebbe brings both the שאגת אריה and the מנחת חינוך. Footnote 19. 

Short notes in Hebrew:

אם למסורה. 

שו”ת הרי”ף. איני יודע. אולי- כי מבנין אב למידין לענין אחר. משא”כ אם למסורה רק לנידן דידן. 

שערים המצויינים בהלכה – אם עקרת הבית – נשארת במקומה. 

אלישב. בנין אב- רק מדמין ויכול להיות שאין דמיון. כמו אב שלאו דווקא הוא האב. משא”כ האמא היא מאה אחוז. 

שאגת אריה שהיום א”א לקיים מ”ע של כתיבת ס”ת. כי אין אנו בקיאין.

מנ”ח- ח”ו לומר כן, מדלא כתבו  הראשונים. חסר ויתר שאינו נוגע להלכה לא פסול. רק במקומות כמו: יש אם למקרא. 

על כללות החיוב של כתיבת ס”ת היום, דעת הרא”ש וכו’, לקו”ש כג, 17.

 

Suka 6a (2)

1– We continued the Sugya of Shiurim. 

From the seven word in the Pasuk  כִּי ה’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ, מְבִיאֲךָ אֶל-אֶרֶץ טוֹבָה: אֶרֶץ, נַחֲלֵי מָיִם–עֲיָנֹת וּתְהֹמֹת, יֹצְאִים בַּבִּקְעָה וּבָהָר. אֶרֶץ חִטָּה וּשְׂעֹרָה, וְגֶפֶן וּתְאֵנָה וְרִמּוֹן; אֶרֶץ-זֵית שֶׁמֶן, וּדְבָשׁ. We derive 7 שיעורים .

Last week we covered חִטָּה וּשְׂעֹרָה. 

2– גֶפֶן. From this we know that the שיעור for wine, grapes, grape skins, pits and grape leaves tht is prohibited to a נזיר is a רביעית. 

We discussed the perplexing question as to why our Gemara does not say that all prohibited liquids are the שיעור of a רביעית. 

So far we found two people that discuss this issue. The גולת עליות, written by הרב דובער ב”ר שמעון ליפשיץ מווייעטקע בספרו גולת עליות על מס’ מקואות  ווארשא, תרמ”ו

He was a grandson the Reb מרדכי, the Alter Rebbe’s brother. 

This interesting ספר is a fundamental explanation on Mishnayos מקוואות. We mentioned him a few times when studying מקוואות. He quotes numerous times the Alter Rebbe and צמח צדק. See here footnote 33. 

The other one is the אבן האזל.  

3– רמון . We will discuss this bl”n next week as it pertains to מקוואות. 

4– חציצה

As the Gemara phrases it, there are 3 types of חציצות. 

1- One that:

a- covers the majority of the body, and 

b- one cares to remove it. רובו ומקפיד. 

Such as a painter that has most of his body covered with paint but he does not appear in public until he removes the paint. 

Such a חציצה is prohibited מן התורה. 

2- Only one of the above. (Not both): 

a- covers the majority of the body and b- one does not care to remove it.

Such as a mechanic that is almost totally covered in grease but he does not clean himself since it will get dirty again tomorrow…. רובו ואינו מקפיד . 

Or

a- covers only part of his body and b- he does care to remove it.

Such as a bit of nail polish on a finger. Small part of the body is covered but no one walks around without removing it. מיעוטו ומקפיד. 

Such a חציצה is prohibited only מדרבנן. 

3- Only part of his body is covered and one is not particular to remove it. 

Like a pen mark on a man’s hand.  מיעוטו ואינו מקפיד. 

Such a חציצה is מותר מדרבנן. 

Nevertheless the מנהג is not to use the מקוה even in such a case. 

6- We discussed the question asked to Reb Chaim and his answer. 

In case 2a above: 

a- covers the majority of the body and b- one does not care to remove it.

We say that it is כשר מן התורה but not a good טבילה מדרבנן 

Once the חכמים prohibited to have any חציצה , meaning that even a bit of nail polish is prohibited, that would automatically cause the person to be מקפיד! 

Therefore it would be like case 1 above: רובו ומקפיד. And in invalid טבילה מן התורה. 

 

Suka 6a. 

Tamuz 1, 5780. June 23, 2020

1 –

We began the Sugya of Shiurim. 

From the seven word in the Pasuk  כִּי ה’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ, מְבִיאֲךָ אֶל-אֶרֶץ טוֹבָה: אֶרֶץ, נַחֲלֵי מָיִם–עֲיָנֹת וּתְהֹמֹת, יֹצְאִים בַּבִּקְעָה וּבָהָר. אֶרֶץ חִטָּה וּשְׂעֹרָה, וְגֶפֶן וּתְאֵנָה וְרִמּוֹן; אֶרֶץ-זֵית שֶׁמֶן, וּדְבָשׁ. We derive 7 שיעורים .

The Gemore states that they are all  הלכה למשה מסיני. 

2 –  Rambam on the difference between:

A-  הלכה למשה מסיני. These הלכות are purely tradition, meaning that had we not have this הלכה למשה מסיני we would not have derived it from the תורה. Example: Shiurim שיעורין

B- הפירושים המקובלים מפי משה. These הלכות, once we have received this קבלה we can find a רמז in the תורה. Example: Esrog, eye for an eye. 

3 – From the word חטה we derived the concept of כדי אכילת פרס. A time span of anywhere from 3 -11 minutes. 

See here from  ספר המנהגים Page 45 footnote 2 & 3. Thanks to Mendel Nemenov for this reference. 

כדי אכילת פרס is the time it takes for one to eat a loaf of bread made from wheat from ארץ ישראל while sitting down and some condiment added on the bread. 

4 – Minchas Chinuch 313. People eat differently, some quicker than others. Similarly there are various food types. So they are swallowed quicker than others. 

So how does one figure out what is כדי אכילת פרס? Nowhere mentioned in Gemara the actual time. 

He comes up with a big Chidush: Each food item is measured individually. Meaning, say, apples for example. כדי אכילת פרס for apples is the time it takes to eat apples in an amount that is the size of 3 eggs.

If we take a sticky peanut butter sandwich, the time to eat an amount of the size of three eggs of such a sandwich, will be different than apples.

So on Yom Kippur, when someone must eat due to an illness ח”ו , we advise him to space out his eating to be longer than כדי אכילת פרס.  Thus says the Minchas Chinuch: each food item has it very own כדי אכילת פרס!

We spoke about drinking very hot coffee when one does not drink a full רביעית in one shot. Question about ברכה אחרונה.

Mishne Lemelech (Brachos 3) drinking hot coffee. Alter Rebbe.

5- Our Gemara quotes a Mishnah regrading a person walking into a house that has צרעת:

 If a person enters a house afflicted with צרעת , carrying his clothes upon his shoulders, and his sandals and rings in his hands, both he and they become unclean immediately. 

If, however, he was wearing his clothes and had his sandals on his feet and his rings on his fingers, he becomes unclean immediately, but they remain clean, unless he stayed as much time as is required for the eating of half a loaf of wheat bread and not of barley bread, while in a reclining posture and eating with some condiment.

 Question asked by the שבות יעקב.

A woman  made a Neder not to wear her Yom Tov clothes during the week. Are her Yom Tov shoes and jewelry included? Does the term ‘clothing’ include everything?  

We discussed that based on the above Mishna the logic can go both ways. 

5- The next word in the Pasuk is שעורה. A barley seed. The size of this seed is used to measure a bone of a deceased person that is מטמא. This small amount is insufficient to be מטמא באהל. For that we need the full skeleton, skull or 125 אברים. (Rashi). 

Speaking of the 248 אברים enumerated here  in this Mishna רמ”ח אברים……

We spoke about something very perplexing. 

The list of the 248 אברים,  limbs, only include parts of the body that have a bone in them!

מאתים וארבעים ושמונה אברים באדם: שלשים בפיסת הרגל, ששה בכל אצבע,

So these 248 limbs do not include the heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, spleen, stomach, bladder, intestines etc. 

So when we make a מי שברך לחולה and say: 

וישלח לו מהרה רפואה שלימה מן השמים ברמ”ח אבריו 

none of the above boneless vital organs are included!!! 

Are they perhaps included in the שס”ה גידים. What are גידים? Veins (Tanya 37)? Muscles? 

Found  this question on line….but no answer. 

מגד ירחים א’ 321. See also here. 

 

6- The 28 ‘times’ and the story with Malbim.

 

בס”ד

Shiur 26 Sivan, 5780. June 16th, 2020

Brief notes. 

1- See  פסוקים below. Seems to say that only כלב will inherit land in ארץ ישראל. It says that יהושע will only “arrive’ in ארץ ישראל. Not receive any land. 

Why not יהושע? 

He did not have boys. Just girls. Although the  הלכה is that if a father leaves has girls, upon his passing the girls inherit his estate, this הלכה was only revealed 39 years later in the זכות of בנות צלפחד. 

Chumash is written in present tense! At the time יהושע’s children, the girls, were not deemed to receive any land. 

[Question if he had girls then or later. Interesting point- If they were alive then it would mean that they remained unmarried for 39 years!]

2- מקושש עצים

Mishneh in Makos. Reb Akiva and Reb Tarfon say that had we been part of the סנהדרין no one would ever  be executed as we would ask questions that the witnesses cannot answer leading to an acquittal. 

“We would ask the witnesses if they are sure the victim was not a טריפה”. 

Tosfos adds that in regards to חילול שבת they would ask if they are sure that the accused מחלל שבת was not a טריפה. 

Now if a person is a טריפה and doomed to die shortly his issue is internal. Like a punctured brain or heart. No human can tell that. So, conclude Reb Akiva and Reb Tarfon, our questions would deny a סנהדרין to execute anyone.  

So how was the מקושש executed? Why wasn’t he acquitted based on the above line of questioning? How were they sure that the מקושש is not a טריפה when he was מחלל שבת? 

The answer is that אהרן had the ability to ‘see’ inside the person as per תוספות in Shabbos.  

That it why it says that the מקושש was brought to משה and אהרן. 

3- We discussed if this type of ‘seeing’ is considered נבואה and therefore disqualifying it to be used in הלכה and a בית דין. 

Or, it’s not the נבואה that is establishing the הלכה. It is just verifying the facts. Just like מן would only verify a dispute about the ownership of a slave or to establish who the father was of a particular child. 

4- We discussed the agony of the עגונה whose husband is lost in an ocean or a lake. How does one ascertain that he did indeed drown and not swim to safety and take off. 

Story with the Koshznitzer. 

Sending a Pidyon by horse to a Tzadik. Reb Shlomo Kluger. 

5- The Agunos of the Titanic-

• • The מגדל בבל of the modern age. Thought to be unsinkable. 
  • Kosher kitchen. Kosher dishware. See below menu and plate. 
  • Jews on board. 
  • 
  • Issidore- Ida Strauss. Founder of Macy’s  –  A&S. Sunk, Ida refused to leave her husband.  1912. 
• 
  • Nathan Strauss remained in ארץ ישראל. Story in Yerusholayim. Poor man accepting a donation from him and immediately passing it on to a cripple.  
  • Netanya is named after him. 
  • Survived. Didn’t leave to board the Titanic. – Why? Unknown but stories abound. One such story is that he went to his Dentist. Broke a leg. Never planned to leave then. 
•  
  • Benjamin Guggenheim – refused to board a lifeboat. Brother of Solomon. 
  • Rebbe Rashab- Advised a father to tell his son not to go to USA. Son was on the Titanic. “I didn’t know it would sink. Just occurred to me that he should not go”. 
  • Reb Yisroel of Tchortkov to Yosef Halperin. Told someone who wanted to go to the USA via the Titanic:  ‘Gib a gris der Amricaner gut!’ Changed his mind. Survived. 
• 
  • Aks- Leah. Fascinating story. Son Efraim Fishel was thrown overboard but survived. Was later found and  identified by him being circumcised. Settled in Norfolk VA. 
•  
  • Jacon Birnbaum. Antwerp. Survived. Boat symbol on his tombstone! 
  • Shimon Meisner. Drowned. His wife a young עגונה, asks a שאלה.  
• 
  • Rabbi Meskin of Burlington VT and later in the Bronx. Writes a Teshuva. 
  • Relates that people were desperate to board the lifeboats. Man tried to board by dressing as a woman!  
  • Rules that Mrs. Meisner can remarry. 

 

• Web site listing the location of all great Rabbonim and Rebbes OBM in the USA. 
• קברים בארה”ב

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

1- פרשת שלח: 

וְעַבְדִּ֣י כָלֵ֗ב עֵ֣קֶב הָֽיְתָ֞ה ר֤וּחַ אַחֶ֙רֶת֙ עִמּ֔וֹ וַיְמַלֵּ֖א אַחֲרָ֑י וַהֲבִֽיאֹתִ֗יו אֶל־הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ אֲשֶׁר־בָּ֣א שָׁ֔מָּה וְזַרְע֖וֹ יוֹרִשֶֽׁנָּה׃

But My servant Caleb, because he was imbued with a different spirit and remained loyal to Me—him will I bring into the land that he entered, and his offspring shall hold it as a possession.

אִם־אַתֶּם֙ תָּבֹ֣אוּ אֶל־הָאָ֔רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֤ר נָשָׂ֙אתִי֙ אֶת־יָדִ֔י לְשַׁכֵּ֥ן אֶתְכֶ֖ם בָּ֑הּ כִּ֚י אִם־כָּלֵ֣ב בֶּן־יְפֻנֶּ֔ה וִיהוֹשֻׁ֖עַ בִּן־נֽוּן׃

not one shall enter the land in which I swore to settle you—save Caleb son of Jephunneh and Joshua son of Nun.

פרשת דברים: 

אִם־יִרְאֶ֥ה אִישׁ֙ בָּאֲנָשִׁ֣ים הָאֵ֔לֶּה הַדּ֥וֹר הָרָ֖ע הַזֶּ֑ה אֵ֚ת הָאָ֣רֶץ הַטּוֹבָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר נִשְׁבַּ֔עְתִּי לָתֵ֖ת לַאֲבֹתֵיכֶֽם׃

Not one of these men, this evil generation, shall see the good land that I swore to give to your fathers—

זֽוּלָתִ֞י כָּלֵ֤ב בֶּן־יְפֻנֶּה֙ ה֣וּא יִרְאֶ֔נָּה וְלֽוֹ־אֶתֵּ֧ן אֶת־הָאָ֛רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֥ר דָּֽרַךְ־בָּ֖הּ וּלְבָנָ֑יו יַ֕עַן אֲשֶׁ֥ר מִלֵּ֖א אַחֲרֵ֥י יְהוָֽה׃

none except Caleb son of Jephunneh; he shall see it, and to him and his descendants will I give the land on which he set foot, because he remained loyal to the LORD.

סוטה לה, א. דין ראש קטיעא ימלל. 

דין של בנות צלפחד נתחדש רק בשנת הארבעים. 

 

מקושש. 

 

2- תוס’ שבת כב, ב. ד”ה וכי: ברייתא דמלאכת המשכן, שאהרן הי’ מסתכל בטפיח ורואה מה שבתוכה. 

 

בית יצחק יו”ד ח”א לט. מיישב איך אמר ר”ע במשנה מכות ז, אלו היינו בסנה’ לא נהרג אדם מעולם. ובתוס’ ד”ה מכחול, בחילול שבת הי’ שואלים אם הוא טריפה. אז איך הרגו למקושש? ותירץ עפ”י הברייתא הנ”ל. שאהרן העיד שאין לו דין טריפה. 

והדרש והעיון (רעח) מוסיף שלכך נאמר ויביאו אותו לפני משה ואהרן. ואעפ”י שלכל ישראל הי’ הכח הזה לראות מה שבפנים כי הענן שרה על מחנה ישראל?  אבל הרי הענן הי’ בזכותו של אהרן. 

 

3- ואין בזה לא בשמים כי זה רק בירור המציאות. לא נביאות. הדוה”ע שמות ע’ שטז. ושם ראי’ מהמן, יומא עה, א, שדנו אם זה בן ט לראשון או ח לאחרון, וכן לברר של מי העבד הגנוב. כי זה רק בירור. עי”ש בתוס’ יוה”כ. וכן בברכי יוסף או”ח לב. 

 

4- מים שאין להם סוף. ופה.  היתרים- כולם צורבא דרבנן היום כי יש טלפנים ותקשורת. עברו כמה שנים. 

 

קברים בארה”ב

 

בית יעקב. אה”ע מט.

הרב יצחק יעקב רבינוביץ’, תשובה בנדון עגונה אחת שנטבע בעלה בהאניה “טיטאניק”, בתוך: קול התורה גיליון נ”ב, מדור ההלכה, עמ’ קמ”ג – קמ”ח

 

Rabbi Yaakov Meskin

יעקב ב”ר מרדכי הכהן