Daily Halacha Podcast - Daily Halacha By Rabbi Eli J. Mansour

The work Va'yomer Meir addresses the situation of a Jew who was involved in a court case, and the courthouse officials forbade him from wearing a Kippa. The question arose as to whether this man was permitted to review Torah topics in his mind during his time in the courthouse, despite being bareheaded. This issue hinges on the question of "Hirhur Ke'dibbur" – whether or not we consider thinking akin to speaking. The Rambam maintains that silent thoughts are indeed halachically equivalent to spoken words, in which case one may not think Torah thoughts while not wearing a Kippa. However, Hacham Ovadia Yosef writes that Halacha does not follow this ruling of the Rambam, and even if one is entirely unclothed, he is allowed to think about Torah matters as long as he does not verbally express these thoughts. Certainly, then, it is entirely permissible to think Torah matters when one is fully clothed but not wearing a Kippa. Summary: Although one may not speak any words of Torah while not wearing a Kippa, it is permissible to silently think about Torah matters without a Kippa.

The Zechor Le'Abraham (Rav Abraham Alkalai, 1750-1811) observes that some people ensure to keep their heads covered while walking about in the Mikveh, and not only when they actually immerse. He writes that this is an unfounded stringency that has no basis or reason. He explains that the Shechina does not reside in the bathhouse, and so there is no need to cover one's head, an act which is intended to make us aware of G-d's presence above us. The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) similarly writes that there is no reason to cover one's head while in a Mikveh. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) clarifies that this refers to the interior part of the Mikveh. In the outer room, where people get changed, it is proper to keep one's Kippa on his head. One should keep his Kippa on until he leaves to the interior room to shower and immerse, and should put it back on his head immediately upon returning to the outer room to get dressed. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939) recommends placing one's hand over his head while walking about in the Mikveh, though the consensus does not follow this view. The Yalkut Yosef writes that the beach has the status of a bathhouse in this regard, and thus one may keep his head uncovered at the beach not only when he is in the water, but also when walking about or relaxing near the water. Of course, he should put his Kippa back on upon returning to the lounge. And it goes without saying that if a person wishes to eat while at the beach, he must wear a Kippa for the recitation of the Berachot and while he eats. (Incidentally, if a person wishes to eat bread at the beach, he may dip his hands in the ocean water in lieu of Netilat Yadayim, and recite the Beracha "Al Tebilat Yadayim.") This applies to a pool, as well. One may keep his head uncovered even while sitting at the poolside, except when eating. The Yalkut Yosef cites Rav Chaim Kanievksy as ruling stringently in this regard, and requiring one to wear a Kippa at the beach or pool when he is not in the water, but Halacha follows the lenient position. Summary: One is not required to wear a Kippa at the Mikveh, at the beach, or at the pool, even when he is not in the water. In the Mikveh, one should cover his head only in the outer room, where he changes. One who wishes to eat at the beach or at the poolside must wear a Kippa for reciting the Berachot and eating.

As we've seen, one should avoid putting on two articles of clothing simultaneously, as this can result in forgetting one's Torah knowledge. The reason is that a special "Or Ha'makif" ("supernal light") surrounds our clothing once we put them on to protect them from the forces of impurity, and when a garment is inside another garment, this light cannot reach it to provide protection. The question was asked concerning men who leave their ties tied around the neck of their shirts. Seemingly, a man should not put on a shirt with the tie already on it, because he is then putting on two garments at the same time. Rav Yisrael Bitan writes that there is room to allow this practice, because it is questionable whether a tie, which does not cover a significant portion of the body, qualifies as a "garment" in this respect. He notes the ruling of the Yalkut Yosef that one recites the Beracha of "She'hehiyanu" upon the purchase of a new tie, which would indicate that a tie indeed is considered a "Beged" ("garment"), but he questions this conclusion, as a tie could be viewed as an accessory to the shirt, rather than an independent garment. Furthermore, Rav Bitan adds, even if a tie indeed formally qualifies as a "Beged," it is possible that a garment that does not really cover any part of the body does not require the protection of the "Or Ha'makif." Hence, there is room to permit men to put on a shirt with the tie already tied around the collar. A similar question arises for women who cover their hair with a snood and a decorative kerchief on top. Many women keep the snood and kerchief together and then put them both on at the same time. Is this allowed? Rav Bitan writes that there is room to argue that since women are exempt from the obligation of Torah study, and the entire concern of putting on two garments simultaneously relates to the retention of one's Torah knowledge, this Halacha does not apply to women at all. According to this theory, women do not need to avoid putting on two articles of clothing at the same time. Rav Bitan concludes that one should not rely on this theory, and women should, in general, avoid putting on two garments simultaneously, but this possibility may be introduced as one of several factors to permit putting on the snood with the kerchief. Another consideration is that if they are kept tied together, then they may be considered a single garment. And even if not, if this has become the normal method of putting the hair-coverings on, then this might suffice to view them as just one garment. Moreover, since the kerchief covers only part of the snood, the "Or Ha'makif" can reach the snood, such that there is no concern. While each of these possibilities on its own could be questioned, they may be combined to permit women to put on the snood and kerchief together. Incidentally, if a man wears a long-sleeve undershirt beneath his shirt, then he must ensure not to pull both sleeves over his Tefillin in the morning simultaneously. Although he may certainly cover his arm with both layers, he should pull each sleeve separately, and not pull them both over his arm together.

The Bet Yosef cites the ruling of the Terumat Ha'deshen (Rav Yisrael Isserlin, 1390-1460) that covering one's head with his hand does not suffice to permit praying and reciting Berachot, since the hand is part of the same body as the hand. The clear implication of this ruling, as the Bet Yosef notes, is that another person's hand is considered a legitimate head-covering to permit praying and reciting Berachot, as that hand is not part of the same body. The Bet Yosef rules accordingly in the Shulhan Aruch. There is a minority opinion – that of the Maharshal (Rav Shlomo Luria, Poland, 1510-1573) – that one's own hand can serve as a head-covering for this purpose, but the consensus does not follow this view. Although one's bare hand does not suffice as a head-covering, he may pull his sleeve over his hand, or cover his hand with some material, and then place his hand on his head, and this would qualify as a valid hair-covering. Therefore, if the wind blows someone's Kippa off his head and he needs to go retrieve it, he should pull his sleeve over his hand and then place his hand on his head so that he does not walk four Amot (cubits) with his head bare. A number of Poskim (including the Mishna Berura and Kaf Ha'haim) bring the view of the Elya Rabba (Rav Elya Spira of Prague, 1660-1712) that although covering one's head with his own hand does not suffice for prayer, it does suffice with respect to the requirement to avoid walking four Amot bareheaded. According to this opinion, one who needs to retrieve his Kippa may cover his head with his hand even without pulling down the sleeve. However, the Shulhan Aruch does not mention this distinction, and so it is best to act stringently and try in such a case to have one's sleeve or some other material in between his hand and his head. Summary: Placing one's hand on his bare head does not suffice as a hair-covering in lieu of a Kippa, unless there is something in between the hand and the head. Therefore, if someone does not have a Kippa and needs to pray or recite a Beracha, or he needs to go retrieve his Kippa which blew off his head, he should pull his sleeve over his hand and place his hand on his head. Somebody else's hand – even if the hand is bare – suffices as a head-covering.

One's Kippa should preferably be large enough to cover the entire head or the majority of the head. If, however, one prefers a smaller Kippa, this is acceptable, as long as it can be seen from all sides. One should not wear a Kippa so small that cannot be readily discerned from all sides. This is the ruling of Hacham Ovadia Yosef. Hacham Ovadia Hedaya (1889-1969), in one of his published responsa (Yaskil Abdi, vol. 6, p. 292a), writes that he would often reprimand people for wearing very small Kippot. Even one who normally wears a smaller Kippa, that does not cover the majority of his head, should try to wear a hat or a larger Kippa – that covers the majority of the head – while praying or reciting Birkat Ha'mazon.

As we have seen, even if wearing a Kippa cannot be defined as an outright Halachic obligation (except while praying, reciting Berachot, and eating), it is proper to ensure not to walk four Amot (cubits) with one's head uncovered. It is considered a special act of piety to avoid walking even shorter distances without a Kippa. The Maharshal (Rav Shlomo Luria, Poland, 1510-1573), surprisingly, writes that this entire concept applies only outdoors. Indoors, he writes, there is no need to wear a Kippa – even as a measure of piety – because there is a roof over one's head, and this suffices to remind him of G-d. Most later Poskim, however, including the Mishna Berura, disagreed, and maintained that one should wear a Kippa both outdoors and indoors. Is it recommended to wear a Kippa even while sleeping? From the Rambam's comments it appears, at least at first glance, that he assumed people did not wear a head-covering while sleeping. The Rambam ruled that the Birkot Ha'shahar – the series of morning blessings which we recite praising Hashem for certain phenomena we experience each morning – are recited only as we experience each phenomenon. For example, when one hears the crowing of the rooster, he recites "Ha'noten La'sechvi Bina…"; when one opens his eyes, he recites "Poke'ah Ivrim"; when one stands up from his bed, he recites, "Zokef Kefufim"; and so on. Toward the end of this sequential list of blessings, the Rambam mentions that upon putting on one's head-covering, he recites "Oter Yisrael Be'tifara." The Rambam seems to presume that people's heads were uncovered at night, and only in the morning they put on a covering. However, Rav Yisrael Bitan noted that the Rambam may have assumed that people slept with a small covering – like a Kippa – and then recited this Beracha when putting on their turban or larger hat. In any event, the Mishna Berura and others bring the teaching of the Shela (Rav Yeshaya Ha'levi Horowitz, d. 1630) that it is proper to sleep with a head-covering, though it seems clear that this was intended as a special measure of piety, and is not required. As a practical matter, it is very difficult to keep a Kippa on one's head during the night, and oftentimes it becomes difficult to find it in the morning. Certainly, if a man would end up waking up his wife early in the morning as he searches for Kippa, then he should not sleep with a Kippa. Some people avoid this problem by sleeping with a special hat that stays fastened on the head throughout the night. While this is commendable, it is certainly not required. Summary: One should wear a Kippa both indoors and outdoors. Some sources mention that one should sleep with a Kippa as a measure of special piety, though this is not required, especially given the practical difficulty entailed, though there are those who sleep with a cap that remains fastened on the head throughout the night.

The Gemara in Masechet Kiddushin (31a) tells that Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua made a point of always keeping his head covered, and he explained that since the Shechina hovered over his head at all times, it is appropriate to cover one's head as a sign of respect. This same Rav Huna is cited elsewhere (Shabbat 118b) as saying that he was worthy of reward for ensuring never to walk four Amot (cubits) with his hair uncovered. In a different context (Shabbat 156b), the Gemara teaches that wearing a hair-covering helps engender Yir'at Shamayim (fear of Heaven) and thus prevent us from sin. It tells that a woman was warned by astrologers that her infant son would be a thief as an adult. She understood this to mean that the boy was born with a natural inclination toward theft. In an effort to avoid this outcome, she saw to it that the child's head would always remain covered, so he would be cognizant of Hashem's presence at all times and thus stay away from sin. In addition, she fervently prayed to G-d that he would be righteous. Once, the Gemara says, when this boy was still a child, he was sitting beneath somebody's palm tree learning Torah, and his head covering blew off. He looked up and saw a cluster of luscious dates. Enticed, he ate the dates, which were somebody's private property – showing how a head covering helps protect a person from the Yeser Ha'ra (evil inclination). (Thanks to his mother's efforts, though, this boy grew to become Rav Nahman Bar Yishak, one of the great Sages of the Talmud.) Similarly, the Zohar (Balak 187a) teaches that one must avoid walking more than four Amot with his head uncovered, because the Shechina hovers over his head. The Zohar adds that this concept is alluded to in the verse in Kohelet (9:8), "Ve'shemen Al Roshecha al Yehsar" – "Oil shall not be lacking upon your head." The Shechina (divine presence) is compared to fire, and Misvot are the "oil," the fuel that sustains its presence in our lives. Covering our heads brings us Yir'at Shamayim so that we remain loyal to G-d's commands. The Zohar reiterates this point later (Pinhas 245b), citing the verse, "Melo Kol Ha'aretz Kebodo" (Yeshayahu 6:3) – G-d's glory fills the entire earth. We acknowledge and give honor to His presence by wearing a head covering. The Rambam, too, in his Guide for the Perplexed (3:52), emphasizes that the great Sages always ensured to cover their heads out of respect for the divine presence. However, as we know, there are many otherwise observant Jews (especially in our community) who do not wear a Kippa all the time. They make a point of wearing a Kippa when they enter the synagogue, but not throughout the day when they go about their ordinary affairs. Is this acceptable, or are these individuals failing to fulfill a Halachic obligation? This question depends on whether we regard head-covering as a strict Halachic requirement, or as a Middat Hasidut – a recommended measure of piety. The Maharam of Rothenberg (Germany, c. 1215-1293), cited by the Orhot Haim and Kolbo, maintained that Halacha does not forbid going about bareheaded, and the Sages who ensured to have their heads covered did so as a Middat Hasidut. This is also the clear implication of the Rambam, in the passage cited earlier, where he mentions that great Rabbis made a point of covering their heads – indicating that this is a recommended measure of piety, and not a binding Halachic obligation. The Maharshal (Rav Shlomo Luria, Poland, 1510-1573) drew proof to this view from a passage in the Midrash which emphasizes how Hashem deals with us far more kindly than mortal kings deal with their subjects. Normally, the Midrash comments, when a king's messenger reads to the masses a written royal decree, everyone is expected to stand, remove their hats, and listen with fear and trepidation. But when we read the Shema in fulfillment of G-d's decree, we are not required to stand and remove our head coverings. The Midrash here clearly implies that there would be nothing wrong with baring our heads – even for the recitation of Shema. The Shebut Yaakov (Rav Yaakov Reischer, 1661-1733) refutes this proof, noting that the Midrash later observes that Hashem does not demand that we hunt wild animals to bring them as sacrifices, but rather commands that we offer as sacrifices domesticated animals, which do not need to be hunted. Clearly, this does not mean that it would be acceptable to offer wild animals as sacrifices. By the same token, we cannot necessarily deduce from the Midrash that it is acceptable to recite Shema with our heads uncovered. Maran (Rav Yosef Caro, author of the Shulhan Aruch), in Bet Yosef (91), brings the aforementioned opinion of the Maharam of Rothenberg, that covering one's head is not strictly required, indicating that he concurred with this view. Elsewhere in Bet Yosef (46), however, Maran appears to imply otherwise. In discussing the blessing recited each morning, "Oter Yisrael Be'tif'ara" ("He who crowns Israel with splendor"), Maran explains that we are "crowned" in the sense that we, unlike other nations, are required to cover our heads. Maran adds that even those who maintain that this is not strictly required, agree that it is recommended as an act of piety. Here Maran clearly sides with the opinion that head-covering constitutes an outright Halachic obligation. Regardless, the Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) noted that in the Shulhan Aruch, Maran takes the position that covering one's head is recommended but not strictly required. In Siman 2, the Shulhan Aruch writes that "it is forbidden" to walk about "Be'koma Zekufa" – completely upright, appearing proud and overly confident. In the same sentence, the Shulhan Aruch writes that "one should not walk four Amot with his head bare." When it comes to "Koma Zekufa," the Shulhan Aruch uses the word "Assur" ("It is forbidden"), whereas regarding walking bareheaded, he writes simply that this should not be done. It would thus appear that although it is proper to wear a head-covering, this is not strictly required. However, the Taz (Rav David Ha'levi Segal, 1586-1667) writes that even assuming that head-covering was practiced in ancient times only as a Middat Hasidut, in modern times this has become a strict Halachic obligation. The Taz explains that since the Christians are accustomed to walk about bareheaded, doing so violates the prohibition of "Hukot Ha'akum" – following gentile practices. Hence, in the view of the Taz, one is required to wear a Kippa nowadays in order to avoid transgressing the Biblical prohibition of "Hukot Ha'akum." Hacham Ovadia Yosef disputes this claim. Based on the comments of the Mahari Kolon (Rav Yosef Kolon, d. 1480), Hacham Ovadia writes that one transgresses the prohibition of "Hukot Ha'akum" only if he does something with the specific intention of imitating gentile practices and resembling a non-Jew. If a person decides to leave his head uncovered in the interest of comfort, this does not violate the prohibition. Nevertheless, in a famous responsum in Yehaveh Da'at, Hacham Ovadia writes that nowadays, one is required to wear a Kippa, for a different reason – because this has become the "badge" or symbol of an observant Jewish man. By wearing a Kippa, one identifies himself as a member of the population of G-d-fearing Jews. Conversely, one who chooses not to wear a Kippa presents himself as being non-observant, thereby inviting suspicion, and for this reason, wearing a Kippa has today become an obligation. It seems, however, that this applies only in Israel, where the decision of whether or not to cover one's head is the clear marker of one's self-identification as religious or secular. Here in the United States, however, at least in some communities, this is not the case, and it is known that not all observant Jews ensure to keep their heads covered at all times. Therefore, while it is certainly preferred and advisable to wear a Kippa – and where a person fears antisemitism, he can wear a cap instead of, or over, his Kippa – one who wishes to leave his head uncovered has a basis on which to rely. (Indeed, in the school where I work, I advise the members of the basketball team to leave their Kippot off during games, because the Kippa would interfere with their playing; since the Kippa is not required as a strict obligation, it may certainly be removed for this purpose.) Nevertheless, wearing a Kippa when eating, praying, reciting Berachot and learning Torah is strictly required. Of course, one must wear a Kippa in the synagogue. In the presence of a Rabbi, it is proper to wear a Kippa in the interest of Derech Eretz (common courtesy). When a person wishes to fulfill the requirement of a Beracha by listening to its recitation by somebody else, he must wear a Kippa even though he remains silent, because he is considered as actually reciting the Beracha by listening to his fellow.

It is permissible to handle one's clothes and dress himself immediately upon waking in the morning, even before washing his hands, though one who is stringent in this regard, and ensures to wash Netilat Yadayim before touching his clothing, is deserving of special blessing. However, this applies only to one who went to sleep before Hasot (Halachic midnight). If one went to sleep after Hasot, then there is no reason whatsoever to avoid touching his clothes before Netilat Yadayim, not even as a measure of piety. The Kabbalists teach that the impurity which descends upon the hands while one sleeps arrives at the point of Hasot, and so if one went to sleep after that time, there is no concern at all.

The Gemara (Shabbat 129a) teaches that one should ensure to purchase shoes for his feet even if this necessitates selling the "ceiling beams of his house." This might mean that the protection provided by shoes for the feet is more important than the protection provided by the roof of one's home. Elsewhere (Pesahim 113b), the Gemara warns that one who goes about barefoot is "excommunicated by G-d." Different reasons have been given for why one should not walk about without shoes. Rashi explains that walking around barefoot is undignified, and Torah Jews are obligated to conduct themselves in a dignified manner as befitting the children of the Almighty. Others explain, very simply, that walking around barefoot is dangerous, as one's feet might be bitten or stung, or might step on a sharp object. Some have noted that the Hebrew word for shoe – Na'al – may be read as an acrostic for the words "Nahash" (snake), "Akrab" (scorpion), "Lahash" ("hissing"). Similarly, some sources warn that one who walks about barefoot is more susceptible to catching a cold or some other virus. Rav Abraham Azulai (d. 1643) offered a Kabbalistic reason for this Halacha, explaining that after Adam and Hava's sin in Gan Eden, G-d placed a cursed upon the ground ("Arura Ha'adama Ba'aburecha" – Bereshit 3:17). It became the domain of the snake, which represents the Yeser Ha'ra (evil inclination) and forces of impurity, and slithers on the ground and eats the dirt. One who walks barefoot, touching the ground without any obstruction, exposes himself to the ground's impurity. Indeed, some commentators explain that the Egyptian sorcerers, who succeeded in mimicking some of the wonders that Moshe Rabbenu performed – such as changing their staffs to snakes, and transforming the water into blood – received their magical powers from the forces of impurity within the ground. For this reason, they were unable to match Moshe after he brought the third plague – the plague of Kinim (lice) – because the earth underneath Egypt was overrun by vermin (Shemot 8:13), and thus they could not access the forces of impurity. According to the Kabbalists, then, one must wear shoes in order not to connect himself to the Tum'a (impure) in the ground. In fact, some suggest that the word "Na'al" is an acrostic representing the phrase "Nahash Afar Lahmo" – "the snake's bread is dirt," alluding to the function of shoes to shield a person from the impurity of the ground, the domain of the snake. In theory, these different reasons yield interesting exceptions to this Halacha. For example, in warm climates, or during the summertime, walking about barefoot will not likely result in illness. And, in societies where walking barefoot has become accepted, it is not considered undignified. The Kabbalists teach that the ground of Eretz Yisrael does not contain the Tum'a that is present in the ground throughout the rest of the world. In practice, however, since we must concern ourselves with all these reasons, one should avoid walking about barefoot everywhere – even in warm regions, in societies where this is accepted, and in Eretz Yisrael. Inside one's home, however, none of these reasons apply: there is no concern of getting sick or being bitten or stung; there is no requirement to appear especially dignified within the privacy of one's home; and the floors are tiled such that one does not step directly on the ground. Thus, it is entirely permissible to walk about barefoot in one's home. This is the ruling of Hacham Ovadia Yosef. One should avoid walking about outside without shoes even if he wears socks. Although the socks protect the feet from the Tum'a of the ground, they do not offer protection from small creatures or sharp objects, and, in most societies, this would be considered undignified. Some sources mention the practice of going outside barefoot as a form of self-affliction for the purpose of achieving atonement for one's sins. People would intentionally endure the discomfort of walking barefoot and hurting themselves, or getting sick, so they could earn expiation for their wrongdoing. (This resembles the account of how the Arizal would roll in the snow during the winter in order to earn atonement.) Hacham Ovadia Yosef, however, opposed all practices of self-affliction, including voluntary fasts. He noted the Gemara's teaching that the Nazir must bring a sin-offering to atone for his self-denial, abstaining from wine. All the more so, we are discouraged from afflicting ourselves unnecessarily by fasting and causing ourselves pain. Hashem expects us to enjoy – in moderation – the comforts and joys of our world, not to deprive ourselves of them. Moreover, voluntary fasts and other extreme measures of piety can often bring more spiritual harm than benefit, as they frequently result in arrogance. Many people who observe such practices ensure to put themselves on display, or to tell their peers about what they do, in order to earn their admiration and esteem – a kind of exhibitionism which is the diametric opposite of piety. Primarily, though, Hacham Ovadia opposed these practices because they lead a person to overlook the most important and most beneficial means of atonement – Torah study. King Shlomo teaches in Mishleh (16:6), "Be'hesed Ve'emet Yechupar Avon" – "Iniquity shall be atoned through kindness and truth," and "Emet" ("truth") refers to Torah learning. In fact, in the blessing of the Amida in which we ask Hashem to help us repent, we begin, "Hashibenu Abinu Le'Toratecha" – "Bring us back, our Father, to Your Torah." The most important and most effective way to rectify one's wrongdoing and earn atonement is through Torah study. The sanctity of Torah has the ability to purge and cleanse the soul of all impurities. I am often approached by people seeking advice for how to attain forgiveness for various sins, and my response is always to attend more Torah classes and devote more time to Torah learning. This isn't my idea – it was written explicitly by Rabbenu Yona (Spain, 1200-1263) in his famous Iggeret Teshuba – a brief guide for those seeking to repent. He says that on the day that a person decides to perform Teshuba, he should immediately commit to increase his Torah learning: if he is accustomed to learning one page, then he should learn two; if he is accustomed to learning for one hour, then he should learn for two hours. Even regarding the six weeks of Shobabim, when there is a time-honored custom to fast on Mondays and Thursdays, the Sadikim teach that spending several hours a day learning achieves more than fasting. This is especially so in today's day and age, when we are not accustomed to abstaining from food, and fasting thus causes frailty which diminishes our productivity and our ability to learn Torah and observe Misvot. It must be emphasized that Torah learning has the ability to atone for even the most grievous sins. The Gemara in Masechet Menahot (110) teaches that one who learns Torah does not need to offer sacrifices for atonement. Even the sin of Lashon Ha'ra – a sin as severe as murder, idol-worship and immorality combined – can be atoned through genuine repentance and Torah learning. Rav Chaim of Volozhin (1749-1821) related that people would ask his mentor, the Gaon of Vilna (1720-1797), how they could atone for the severe sin of Hosa'at Zera ("wasting seed"), and he would respond, "If they devote themselves to Torah study, then they have nothing to worry about." The Gaon of Vilna did not advise these individuals to observe fasts or practice forms of self-affliction or self-deprivation; instead, he urged them to devote time to Torah learning, as this is the universal remedy for all spiritual maladies. (It goes without saying that rectifying this sin also requires common-sense measures such as avoiding places and devices that trigger the Yeser Ha'ra.) We should add that reading the Zohar, too, is beneficial for achieving forgiveness. Even if one does not understand what he reads, the words themselves have inherent sanctity that spiritually cleanse a person. In fact, the Arizal had the custom of reading a section of Tikkuneh Zohar each day from Rosh Hodesh Elul through Yom Kippur, when he would complete the entire work. Clearly, then, one should avoid all measures of self-deprivation, and should instead care for his physical wellbeing so he has the strength and mental energy to devote himself to Torah learning as much as he can.

When putting on shoes, as we have seen, one should put the right shoe on before the left shoe in order to show importance to the right side, though he should tie the laces of the left shoe before the laces of the right shoe, because the left side has greater importance with respect to tying. When removing one's shoes, one should show respect to the right side by reversing the sequence – removing the left shoe first, so that the right shoe remains on the foot for longer. Intuitively, we might assume that the entire process should be reversed, such that one first unties the right shoe, unties and removes the left shoe, and then removes the right shoe. This is, indeed, the opinion of several Poskim, and the position adopted by Hacham David Yosef in Halacha Berura. By contrast, the Az Nidberu (Rav Binyamin Zilber, 1916-2008) maintained that one unties and removes the left shoe, and then unties and removes the right shoe. He reached this conclusion on the basis of the Gemara's formulation (Shabbat 61a) – "Holetz Shel Semol" ("removes the left [first]"). The verb H.L.TZ. used here in reference to removing shoes appears also in the context of Halisa – the procedure required when a married man dies without children, and his brother chooses not to marry the widow (which would fulfill the Misva of Yibum). The Torah requires the widow to remove her brother-in-law's shoe from his foot, using the word "Ve'halsa" (Debarim 25:9). This is understood as referring to both untying the shoelaces and removing the shoe, seemingly proving that the root H.L.TZ. includes both steps of the process, and not merely the shoe's removal. By extension, then, when the Gemara requires, "Holetz Shel Semol," it means that one should first untie and remove the left shoe before untying the right shoe. As mentioned, however, other Poskim ruled that one should first untie the right shoe before removing the left shoe. Therefore, one has the option of which procedure to follow. It is told that the Sadik of Nasaud ( Rav Avraham Yehoshua Freund, 1850–1932) once needed to remove only his right shoe, to have it repaired. He made a point of first removing the left shoe, in order to observe the Halacha requiring removing the left shoe before the right shoe. This shows that at least in his opinion, even if one needs to remove only the right shoe, he should remove the left shoe first. Rav Abraham Yishak Ha'kohen Kook (1865-1935) drew an intriguing distinction between the ordinary removal of shoes, and removing shoes for a Misva purpose – such as before Yom Kippur and Tisha B'Ab, a Kohen preparing for Birkat Kohanim, or when changing into one's Shabbat shoes on Friday afternoon. Normally, one shows greater respect to the right side by leaving it on for longer. However, when the shoe's removal fulfills a Misva, then to the contrary, one shows greater respect to the right shoe by using it for the Misva first. Rav Kook thus maintained that whenever one removes his shoes for the purpose of a Misva, he should remove the right shoe first. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Jerusalem, 1910-1995) fundamentally agreed with Rav Kook, though he disputed the application of this reasoning to the removal of shoes before Yom Kippur and Tisha B'Ab. On these occasions, the purpose of removing the shoe is to deprive oneself the comfort of wearing shoes. Therefore, Rav Shlomo Zalman contended, one shows greater respect to the right shoe by leaving it on and enjoying the comfort it provides for longer than the left shoe. In the other situations of a Misva, Rav Shlomo Zalman concurred with Rav Kook's position. However, Rav Yisrael Bitan noted that the earlier sources make no mention of such a distinction. Moreover, the Lebush (Rav Mordechai Yoffe, c. 1530-1612) explained the requirement to remove the left shoe first by stating that it is disrespectful for the right foot to remain bare for a few moments while the left foot is still in a shoe. According to this explanation, it would certainly seem that the purpose of the shoe's removal is not relevant as far as this Halacha is concerned, and thus in all situations, one should remove the left shoe before the right shoe. Summary: When one removes his shoes, he should remove the left shoe before the right shoe. According to some Poskim, one should first untie the right shoe before untying and removing the left shoe, whereas others maintain that one should untie and remove the left shoe, and then untie and remove the right shoe.

We have seen that although one should put his right shoe on before his left shoe – because precedence is always given to the right side – nevertheless, one should tie his left shoe before his right shoe. This is because the Torah commanded tying Tefillin to one's left arm, indicating that with regard to tying, the left side has greater importance than the right. Seemingly, then, this Halacha should not apply to women, who do not wear Tefillin. For them, we might assume, the left has no special importance with regard to tying. Accordingly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Jerusalem, 1910-1995) maintained that women should tie their right shoe before the left shoe, reverting to the general principle that the right should be given precedence. Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank (1873-1960) was of the opinion that women have the option of tying their shoes in whichever sequence they choose. Others, however, disagree, arguing that once the Torah lent importance to the left side with the Misva of Tefillin, the left takes precedence in this respect for all people, even women. Hacham David Yosef, in Halacha Berura, accepted this view, drawing proof from a different Halacha that applies to women despite its being based on the Misva of Tefillin. When using the restroom, a person should not clean himself with the right hand, as this is the hand used to wrap Tefillin around the left arm (and the middle finger of the left hand should not be used, as the Tefillin is wrapped around that finger). Rav Yaakov Emden (Germany, 1697-1776) maintained that this applies even to women, since a woman could wrap Tefillin around her husband's arm, and thus the significance of Tefillin is relevant also to women. By the same token, then, women should tie their left shoe before the right shoe. Hacham Yishak Yosef, in Yalkut Yosef, brings both opinions without reaching a definitive conclusion, but Hacham David, as mentioned, accepts the view that women should follow the same sequence as men. Children should be taught to put their shoes on in the proper sequence as part of their training in Halacha observance. Summary: Men should put on their right shoe before the left shoe, but should tie their left shoe before the right. The Poskim debate the question of whether women, too, should tie the left shoe first, and a woman has on whom to rely whichever sequence she chooses, though it would seem more correct for women to follow the same sequence as men and tie the left shoe first.

We have seen that although the right side is always given precedence over the left, the left shoe is tied before the right shoe, because the Tefillin is tied to the left arm, showing that with regard to tying, the left is given precedence. Seemingly, this would mean that a lefthanded individual – who wears Tefillin on his right arm – should tie his right shoe first. In truth, however, the Halacha in this regard depends not on whether a person is lefthanded, but rather if he is "left-legged" – meaning, if his left leg is stronger than his right leg. If it is, then he should tie his right shoe first, regardless of whether he is righthanded or lefthanded. A "right-legged" person, however, ties his left shoe first, even if he is lefthanded. If a person is placing shoes on somebody else's feet – such as an employee in a shoe store, or an aid tending to an elderly individual – the procedure depends on the person whose shoes are being put on, and not the person who is putting on the shoes for him. Thus, if, for example, the customer at a shoe store is "right-legged," then the person putting on his shoes should tie the left shoe first, even though he – the store employee – is "left-legged." If, for whatever reason, one currently has only his left shoe available, he may put it on, and does not need to wait until his right shoe is brought so he can put it on first.

The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat brings the ruling of Rabbi Yohanan that when one puts on shoes, he should put his left shoe on before his right shoe. He notes that Tefillin are worn (by righthanded people) on the left arm, indicating that the left side, at least in some respects, is given precedence over the right side. Rabbi Yosef, as the Gemara cites, disagrees, quoting a Berayta establishing that the right shoe should be placed first. The Gemara concludes that the proper thing to do is to accommodate both opinions, by placing the right shoe before the left shoe, and then tying the left shoe before the right shoe. At first glance, this "compromise" seems difficult to explain. If one places the right shoe first, but then ties the left shoe first, he does not accommodate either position. Why, then, is this the preferred sequence? The Bet Yosef brings those who explain that when Rabbi Yohanan points to the precedent of Tefillin, his intention was to show that when it comes to tying, the left side is given precedence. Tefillin is tied to the left arm, thus indicating to us that tying on the left should come before tying on the right. Therefore, even Rabbi Yohanan agrees that the right shoe should be placed before the left shoe, and his point was simply that the left shoelaces should be tied before the right shoelaces. This is the ruling of the Shulhan Aruch. It should be noted that the Tefillin are not actually "tied" around the arm; they are wrapped around the arm. It thus follows that this Halacha applies not only to tying shoelaces, but to all kinds of fastening – such as if one's shoes are closed with a zipper or Velcro. Moreover, when one wears a long-sleeve shirt, he should first button the left sleeve before buttoning the right sleeve, as this, too, is a kind of fastening. Although one should insert his right arm into his shirt when getting dressed before the left arm (as we've discussed in previous installments), the left sleeve should be buttoned before the right sleeve – or, if one wears cufflinks, the left cufflink should be closed before the right cufflink. Interestingly, the Lebush (Rav Mordechai Yaffe, c. 1530-1612) offered a different explanation for why the left shoe should be tied before the right shoe. He notes the story of Abraham Abinu rescuing the city of Sedom after it had been captured by the four kings, and when he returned from battle, the king of Sedom offered Abraham all the property which he had retrieved. Abraham refused to take any possessions of the evil city of Sedom, and he proclaimed that he would not even accept a "thread or a shoelace" ("Im Mi'hut Ve'ad Seroch Na'al" – Bereshit 14:23). The Gemara (Sota 17a) teaches that in reward for Abraham's refusing to take even a "shoelace," the Misva of Tefillin was given to his descendants. Thus, the Lebush writes, a special connection exists between shoelaces and the Misva of Tefillin, and it is for this reason that we tie our shoelaces in a manner that is based upon the Tefillin, granting precedence to the left side. According to this explanation, this procedure is required only when tying shoelaces, and not when tying or fastening anything else, such as shirtsleeves. Regardless, the commonly accepted explanation is that which the Bet Yosef cited, and therefore the left is always given precedence when tying or fastening garments, such as when buttoning shirtsleeves. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Jerusalem, 1910-1995) addressed the question regarding shoes which have laces on both sides; meaning, on each foot, there are two sets of laces that must be tied, one on the right side of the shoe and one on the left side. When tying each shoe, which side should be tied first? This would depend on the question of whether Halacha requires only tying the left shoe before right shoe, or giving the left side precedence in every act of tying. According to the first perspective, the requirement is merely to tie the left shoe first, in which case for each shoe, we revert to the standard rule granting precedence to the right side, and tie the right laces of each shoe first. According to the second perspective, then even when tying each shoe, the left side is given precedence. Rav Shlomo Zalman was more inclined to accept this second possibility, that the left side should be tied before the right side. The Rama writes that if one wears shoes without laces, then he simply places the right shoe before the left shoe. Rav Haim Cohen of Aleppo (d. 1655) wrote that when wearing shoes without laces, the proper procedure is to put the right foot in the shoe but not completely, and then put the left shoe on completely and, thereafter, finishing to put on the right shoe. However, the Poskim did not bring this practice, and the accepted procedure is to simply put the right shoe on before the left shoe. (It is known that the Hafetz Haim made a point of wearing of shoes without laces, as he did not wish to waste the time it would take each time he put on or took off his shoes to tie and untie the laces.) Summary: The proper procedure when putting on shoes is to place the right shoe first, without tying it, and then place the left shoe, tie it, and, at the end, tie the right shoe. When it comes to any sort of tying or fastening, the left side is given precedence, and thus one should tie his left shirtsleeve before his right shirtsleeve, or close the left cufflink before the right cufflink. If one wears shoes without laces, then he simply puts the right shoe on before the left shoe.

The Gemara (Shabbat 61a) teaches that if one is applying oil on his entire body, he should begin with the head, which is the "king," so-to-speak, of the body. The Rama, in Darcheh Moshe, cites Rav Abraham of Prague (d. 1542) as asserting that this applies also to bathing; when one washes his body, he should wash his head first. The Rama then proceeds to cite a passage from the Rambam which seems to imply that one may wash the rest of his body first, before the head, and that there is no need to wash the right side of one's body before the left side. However, the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Israel, 1870-1939) cites those who explain that since in earlier generations people did not bathe very often, no procedure was instituted for bathing. It is only when it comes to daily activities that we are urged to give precedence to the right side to symbolize the prevailing of Hesed (which is associated with the right) over judgment (which is associated with the left). Bathing, however, was infrequent in ancient times, and so the Sages did not institute any procedure. Nowadays, we bathe regularly, and so we should follow the proper protocol – washing the head first, and then the right side of the body followed by the left side. The simple manner of bathing, then, is to first wash the hair on the head, and then the entire right side of the body – the arm, torso and legs – followed by the entire left side. The Arizal, however, taught that after washing the head, one should wash the right arm, then the left arm, the torso, the legs, the private area, and then the feet. When one washes his hands – either for Netilat Yadayim or for cleanliness – he should wash his right hand before his left hand. Likewise, when drying oneself after bathing, he should first dry the head and face, followed by the arms and then the feet. When one gets dressed after bathing, he should first put on his Kipa before his garments, as the head should be covered before the other parts of the body. When undressing, one should remove his Kipa last, after removing all his clothing. And when one removes his clothes, he should remove the left side before the right side to show importance to the right side, just like one puts his garments on his right side before the left side (as discussed in a previous installment).

There is a basic rule that the right should always be given precedence over the left. The right side is associated with the divine attribute of Hesed (kindness), whereas the left is associated with judgment, and so we always strive to give precedence to the right side so that kindness shall prevail over judgment. When bathing, then, one should wash the right side before his left side. (The Kabbalists first wash their head, followed by the right side of their torso and then the left, and they conclude with the feet.) When one dresses himself in the morning, he should insert his right arm in his shirt before his left. Likewise, when putting on a sports jacket or overcoat, the right arm should be inserted first. One should preferably hold both sides of the garment with his right hand, and then transfer one side to the left so he can put his right arm through the garment first, followed by the left arm. This applies even to lefthanded individuals. When putting on a Tallit, too, one should first hold the Tallit with his right hand, and then transfer one side to his left, at which point he recites the Beracha and puts it on. When putting on a scarf, one should wrap the right side over the left side, and not vice-versa, expressing the prevailing of Hesed over judgment. Hassidic communities insist on this arrangement even for the buttons of shirts. In contemporary society, the shirts have the buttons on the right side, with the buttonholes on the left, such that the left side covers the right side. Hassidic communities therefore have shirts custom-made with the buttons and button-holes reversed, so that the right side will cover the left side. It is told that the Steipler Gaon (Rav Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky, 1899-1985) would have his buttons transferred to the left side of his garments for this reason. In any event, most communities are lenient in this regard, and wear their shirts and jackets with the left side covering the right. Interestingly, even Hassidic communities that insist on wearing shirts with the buttons on the left side wear normal pants, with the button on the right side. Some explain that there is value in leaving one area for the Kelipot (forces of impurity) to control so they will be content and not seek to inflict harm. When putting on shoes, one first puts the right shoe on before the left. Likewise, when applying hand lotion, one should first treat the right hand before the left hand.

The Gemara (Horiyot 13b) warns that sleeping with one's garment under his head can cause him to forget his Torah knowledge. In airports, for example, when flights are delayed, people sometimes place their jacket beneath their head so they can rest. One should avoid doing so, as this could cause him to forget his Torah knowledge. However, this applies only if one places his head directly on the garment. If there is something in between, then there is no concern. Hence, one may lay his head on a piece of luggage even though it contains clothing. According to one opinion, the Gemara refers specifically to a person who lays his head on his own article of clothing. If one lays his head on somebody else's garment, then there is no danger. This is the view of Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868), and of the Salmat Haim (Rav Yosef Haim Sonenfeld, 1849-1932), who explains on this basis the Mishna's description (Tamid 1:1) of the Kohanim sleeping on their garments in the Bet Ha'mikdash. This was allowed, the Salmat Haim suggests, because the priestly garments were not the Kohanim's personal property, but were rather owned collectively by the entire nation. Hacham Ovadia refutes this proof, noting that perhaps the Kohanim were allowed to sleep on their garments because of the sanctity of the Bet Ha'mikdash. The Kelipot (forces of impurity) had no power in the Bet Ha'mikdash, and so there was no danger involved when sleeping there with one's clothing under his head. Hacham Ovadia concluded that as we have no definitive proof to the lenient position, it is preferable to act stringently in this regard due to the serious risk that's at stake, and refrain from sleeping directly on any garment, even one which belongs to somebody else. One who wishes to lie on a garment should ensure to place something in between his head and the garment.

In earlier installments, we noted the Arizal's teaching that one should not put on two articles of clothing simultaneously – such as putting on a hat with the Kippa inside it – as this could cause a person to forget his Torah knowledge. The reason, as we discussed, is that the inner garment will be concealed and thus unable to receive the "Or Ha'makif" ("supernal light") that surrounds our clothing to protect them from harmful spiritual forces. It would seem, at first glance, that this is relevant only to putting two garments on at the same time, because it is then when we want the "Or Ha'makif" to surround the garments. When removing garments, however, there appears to be no reason not to remove two garments simultaneously – such as removing a sweatshirt together with the shirt underneath it. This is, indeed, the position taken by Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Jerusalem, 1910-1995). He writes that when it comes to behaviors which could lead a person to forget his Torah knowledge, we have no reason to be stringent beyond the restrictions mentioned in the earlier sources. Since the sources speak only of the dangers of putting two garments on at the same time, we do not need to be concerned about removing two garments at the same time. By contrast, the Yosef Ometz ruled stringently, that one should avoid also removing two garments at the same time. Hacham Ovadia Yosef concluded that although Rav Shlomo Zalman's lenient ruling seems correct, nevertheless, it is preferable to act stringently and avoid removing two garments at the same time, because one might then also put them on together. If, for example, a person removes his shirt together with his sweater, and the shirt remains inside the sweater, he might later put them both on simultaneously, and so he should preferably remove his garments one at a time.

June 16 first through 5:25 As explained in an earlier installment, the Arizal warned that putting on two articles of clothing simultaneously could have an adverse effect on a person, causing him to forget his Torah knowledge. This gives rise to the question of whether one may put on his shoes when they are inside rubbers. Often, in the winter, people take off their shoes when entering the home together with the rubbers, keeping the shoes inside the rubbers. Then, when they go back out into the snow, they simply put the shoes with the rubbers on their feet. Seemingly, this should be discouraged, as one must refrain from putting on two articles of clothing at the same time. Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank (Jerusalem, 1873-1960) cites a source claiming that the Arizal's teaching does not apply to garments made from rubber, in which case there is no concern in this regard. However, the Sitz Eliezer (Rav Eliezer Waldenberg, 1915-2006) questioned this theory, noting that there seems to be no reason to differentiate between rubber and other materials. The Arizal taught that when placing two articles of clothing at the same time, the inner garment does not receive the "Or Ha'makif" (supernal light) that surrounds garments to protect them from the harmful spiritual forces. This concern certainly appears to be relevant to rubbers no less than to garments made from other materials. Nevertheless, Hacham Ovadia ruled leniently in this regard, and allowed putting on shoes that are already inside rubbers. This is based on a comment of the Aruch Ha'shulhan (Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein of Nevarduk, 1829-1908) that the Arizal's teaching does not apply to shoes. The Aruch Ha'shulhan does not explain why shoes would differ from other garments in this regard, but Hacham Ovadia suggested that since the shoes touch the ground, which has impurity, they cannot be protected from impurity, and so they do not receive the "Or Ha'makif." Socks, however, are not treated as shoes. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) ruled that although one who touches shoes must then wash his hands, one does not require hand washing after touching his socks. Some Poskim disagree, but Halacha follows this view of the Ben Ish Hai. This lenient ruling yields a stringent conclusion with regard to the question of putting on two socks at the same time. Since socks are treated by Halacha differently than shoes, the Aruch Ha'shulhan's leniency does not apply. Therefore, one who wishes to wear two pairs of socks for extra warmth must put on one after the other, and may not wrap one sock in the other and then put them both on together.

A number of sources teach that if a person puts on two garments at the same time, he is likely to forget the Torah he has learned. This is mentioned in the Sha'ar Ha'kavanot, based on the teachings of the Arizal. It is brought also by the Mishna Berura. An example is placing one's Kippa in his hat, and then placing the hat on his head, such that he puts on both head coverings simultaneously. Another example is somebody who is going skiing and puts on two pairs of socks – he must put one sock on the foot at a time, rather than placing one sock inside the other and putting them together on his foot. This can also be relevant to a person wearing a shirt and a sweater; he must put on the shirt and then the sweater, rather than putting the shirt inside the sweater and then putting them on together. This applies also to those who wear two jackets; each must be put on separately. The reason for this Halacha is that according to Kabbalah, a garment is surrounded by an "Or Ha'makif" – a "supernal light." In fact, when we recite each morning the blessing "Malbish Arumim," thanking Hashem for the blessing of clothing, we refer to the special "light" that surrounds the clothes that we wear. This "light" has the effect of bringing a person Kedusha (sanctity) and warding off the Kelipot – the harmful impure forces that threaten him. If a person puts on two garments simultaneously, the inner garment does not receive the "Or Ha'makif." It must first be worn alone so it can receive this "light" before the outer layer covers it.

It is incumbent upon observant Jews to always appear well-kempt and dignified. Nowadays, this applies to all observant Jews. As representatives of the Torah, we all bear the obligation to look respectable in order to reflect positively on the Torah. An observant Jew must not walk about with stained clothing, scuffed shoes, or a foul odor. People who encounter a religious Jew who appears this way lose respect for the Torah, and reach the conclusion that the Torah does not encourage self-dignity. In fact, the Sages teach (Shabbat 114a) that if a Torah scholar has "Rabab" – dirt – on his garment, then he is deserving of death, because he misrepresents the Torah. I had the privilege of knowing Rav Chaim Kreiswirth (1918-2001), the Chief Rabbi of Antwerp who frequently visited Israel. He was a towering spiritual giant, who mastered the entire Talmud. I saw him once take out a pocket mirror and comb before getting out of a car, to groom himself. He explained that the windows were open during the trip, and his hair and beard became disheveled. He therefore made sure to groom himself so he looked presentable before getting out of the car. Another example that I personally witnessed was the time when I went with a group of students to the home of Rav Chaim Brim (1922-2002) in Jerusalem, for a Torah class, after which we wanted to take a group picture with him. He did not allow the picture to be taken until he first straightened up the room and made sure he looked presentable. He wanted to ensure that people who looked at this picture would not see him unkempt or his home untidy. Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in Yehaveh Da'at, addressed the question of whether or not it is acceptable for a man to use a mirror. The Gemara teaches that a man should not use a mirror, as this is something that women do, and is considered vanity for men. Nevertheless, Hacham Ovadia ruled that nowadays it is specifically a Misva for men to use a mirror to ensure that they look presentable and thereby make a Kiddush Hashem (glorification of G-d's Name). Rav Yissachar Frand (contemporary) shared that when he traveled with his Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Yaakov Ruderman (1900-1987), to fundraise, and they would pass through the train station, Rav Ruderman would have his shoes shined in order that he would look presentable when meeting with the donors. Just as an observant Jew must dress in a dignified manner, he must conduct himself in a dignified manner. This includes eating neatly and patiently. Needless to say, this applies to both men and women. Women must dress not only modestly, but also respectably so they appear dignified. Earlier, we noted the Gemara's teaching that a Torah scholar with a "Rabab" – stain – on his clothing is deserving of death. An alternate reading of this teaching has been suggested, based on the Gematria of the word "Rebab" (204), which is the same Gematria as the word "Sadik." The Gemara thus perhaps refers to a scholar who "wears" piety on his clothing, who shows himself to be more righteous than he really is. Just as it is wrong to appear unkempt and undignified, so it is wrong to appear greater and holier than one actually is. One who projects a false impression of piety is also deserving of death, as he deceives people in an effort to earn their respect and admiration. Finally, a Torah scholar should wear neither very expensive clothing, nor very cheap clothing. He must appear respectable, but should not appear as though he wastes large amounts of money on costly attire.

The Gemara (Shabbat 114a) teaches that one of the qualities of a Talmid Hacham (Torah scholar) is that if he notices that one of his garments is inside-out, he immediately turns it around so the stitches will not be visible. It seems that long ago, the interior of garments looked very much like the exterior, except that the stitching was visible on the inside, and so it would be common to mistakenly wear a garment inside-out. A Torah scholar is obligated to ensure to wear his garments the right way, and not inside-out. The Tur writes that with respect to this Halacha, all observant Jews must consider themselves "Torah scholars." All those who observe the Torah effectively function as the "ambassadors" of Torah, since people who see us and watch how we conduct ourselves naturally interpret our behavior as reflective of the Torah's values. Therefore, all observant Jews must dress respectably, and this includes ensuring that clothing is not worn inside-out. However, if the concern was only about appearance, then this Halacha would not apply to undergarments, which are not seen. We would assume that one may wear an undershirt, for example, inside-out, since it is not visible. In truth, though, several sources teach that this Halacha is based also on Kabbalistic concepts, and it therefore applies to all garments. Even if, for example, nobody would notice if one's socks are worn inside-out, or if his Sisit are worn inside-out, nevertheless, they must not be worn this way. Beyond the need to appear presentable, clothes must be worn the right way because of Kabbalistic reasons, and so this applies to all garments. If, however, a garment is made from the outset to be reversible, and worn both ways, then one may wear it either way.

As discussed in an earlier installment, men – like women – are required to dress in an appropriate manner. This includes a requirement to limit exposure to the minimum extent necessary when changing or performing one's bodily functions, and ensuring to lock the door when using the restroom. The Poskim make a point of emphasizing the requirement for parents to educate their children in this regard. Even at a young age, children should not be permitted to walk about unclothed. And, after a child is toilet-trained, the child should be taught to keep the door closed while using the restroom. While it of course might be dangerous to instruct a small child to lock the door – as an adult should when using the restroom – children should be taught to keep the door closed and maintain privacy while changing their clothes and while using the restroom.

People mistakenly believe that the concept of modest dress is relevant only to women, whereas men can dress in any way they like. This is incorrect. There are certain restrictions on dress that apply to men. The basic principle is that one must realize that he is constantly in the presence of G-d. Even when a person is in the privacy of his home, and even alone in his bedroom, he must be cognizant of the fact that Hashem fills the earth and accompanies him at all times. King Shaul was praised for his high standards of modesty, as he went into a dark cave to perform his bodily functions, and even inside the cave, he exposed himself only as needed, out of an awareness of G-d's presence. Accordingly, the Shulhan Aruch rules that a person must put something on before getting out of the bed in the morning. Long ago, people would sleep under their blankets unclothed, and the Shulhan Aruch writes that before a person steps out of bed, he should put his garment on under his blankets so he will not be exposed upon leaving his bed. This applies even if the room is dark, as Hashem can see even in the dark. The Poskim debate the question of whether the Shulhan Aruch intended this instruction as an actual Halachic requirement, or only as an admirable practice, a measure of piety that is recommended for the sake of demonstrating one's awareness of G-d's omnipresence. Rav Moshe Feinstein (1895-1986) maintained that there is no strict halachic obligation for a man to avoid being exposed in private, and the Shulhan Aruch's ruling was written only as a recommended practice, a proper mode of behavior for a G-d-fearing individual. By contrast, the Mishneh Halachot (Rav Menashe Klein, 1923-2011) maintained that this law constitutes an outright Halachic obligation, as the straightforward reading of the Shulhan Aruch and other sources suggests. Likewise, the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) writes that according to some Rishonim, these laws are required on the level of Torah law, and so they should be strictly observed. Nowadays, of course, people generally wear pajamas or undergarments when sleeping, so the Shulhan Aruch's instructions would apply in our time to changing one's clothes under the blanket, so that his private parts are not exposed. Many people would naturally find this difficult. Hacham David Yosef, in Halacha Berura, accepts Rav Moshe Feinstein's lenient position, that these guidelines were not presented as actual Halachic requirements, and so he rules that they may be suspended if they would cause considerable discomfort. Thus, if somebody finds it very difficult to get dressed under the blanket, this is not necessary. Hacham David writes that this was the position taken by his father, Hacham Ovadia Yosef. In fact, Rav Moshe himself ruled leniently if dressing under the blanket would take too much time, or if one cannot dress neatly in this fashion. Nevertheless, Rav Haim Kanievsky (1928-2022) taught that one who ensures not to expose his private parts while getting changed is worthy of special blessing. Rav Moshe adds that when walking about, a man must dress in a manner in which he would not feel ashamed appearing before ordinary people. When it comes to Tefila, one must dress in a way he would when greeting a prominent figure. At all other times, Rav Moshe writes, it suffices to dress in a manner that is not embarrassing. One's private parts, however, must of course always remain covered. Rav Haim Kanievsky took a more stringent position, writing that one must ensure not to expose his arms above the elbows, or his legs above his knees. Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Jerusalem, 1924-1998) wrote that since people in modern society do not walk about barefoot, one should refrain from doing so even in his home. In fact, the Mishna Berura writes that since the feet are normally covered, it is proper to put one's socks on before getting out of bed in order not to expose his feet. The Piskeh Teshubot concluded that one may walk about barefoot in his home under hot weather conditions, when covering the feet is uncomfortable. However, even the Mishna Berura conceded that in Mediterranean countries, where many people walk about barefoot, it is permissible to do so. It thus stands to reason that the guiding principle is the accepted practice in any given locale. In communities where it is not deemed acceptable to walk about with exposed feet, or in short sleeves or shorts, one should abide by the community's standards. In places where these modes of dress are acceptable, then they are allowed. Indeed, Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled that one is allowed even to pray wearing very short sleeves or short pants if this mode of dress is accepted in his community (though he added that a person dressed this way should not serve as Hazan). Likewise, despite the Mishna Berura's aforementioned ruling that one should put on his socks before getting out of bed, numerous later Poskim – including the Hazon Ish, the Steipler Gaon, and Hacham Ovadia Yosef – ruled leniently in this regard. This is likely due to the fact that it has become more acceptable to walk about with sandals without socks, and thus exposing one's feet is no longer considered undignified. By the same token, a man may take off his shirt when swimming in a pool or at the beach, as this is the accepted mode of dress in these areas. However, some Poskim ruled that if one is not swimming at the beach, but is playing ball or walking, he should wear a shirt. A man who goes to the Mikveh should not walk about the Mikveh unclothed, and should instead cover himself with a towel or robe on his way to and from the water. Some Poskim allow one to be unclothed in a restroom that has a bath or shower, as such a room has the status of a Bet Ha'merhatz (bathhouse), where it is permissible to be unclothed. Others, however, rule that this is not allowed unless one is planning to bathe. Summary: Men, like women, must adhere to appropriate standards of modest dress. The basic rule is that one must dress in a manner that is deemed respectable and dignified in the place where he is. In some communities, it is inappropriate to walk about in shorts, whereas in others this is allowed. At the beach or swimming pool, a man may remove his shirt. Nowadays it is generally deemed acceptable in most communities to wear sandals without socks, so this is permitted. When one needs to expose himself – such as when dressing, when bathing, when using the restroom, or in a Mikveh – one should expose himself only to the extent necessary, remaining cognizant of G-d's presence.

There are certain sections from the Torah that some communities have the custom of reciting each day. These include the verses in Parashat Ki-Tisa that speak of the Kiyor (the faucet in the Bet Ha'mikdash from which the Kohanim would wash); the verses in Parashat Sav that speak of the Terumat Ha'deshen (the daily removal of ashes from the top of the altar); and the verses in Parashat Tesaveh and Parashat Ki-Tisa that speak of the Ketoret (incense offering). Sephardic custom, however, following the teachings of the Arizal, is not to recite these sections from the Torah as part of the daily prayer service. Although we recite the verses of the Tamid (the daily sacrifice in the Bet Ha'mikdash), and the section from the Gemara that discusses the Ketoret, we do not recite this section. (In some communities, the Kohanim read the section of the Kiyor each day.) Many have the custom to recite the text called "Perek Shira" each day. This text speaks about the praises that the various animals sing to Hashem. Some women, in particular, recite a portion of Perek Shira each day, completing it over the course of the week, whereas others recite the entire text every day. The Sages teach that "Kol Ha'osek Be'Perek Shira" – "whoever involves himself in Perek Shira" – is guaranteed a share in the world to come, and will succeed in remembering the Torah that he studies. Notably, the Sages speak not of someone who "recites" Perek Shira, but rather of someone who "involves himself" in this text. To reap the benefits offered by Perek Shira, it does not suffice to simply mouth the words. One must understand what he is saying and reflect on the fact that even the animals give praise to Hashem – showing us that we, who recognize Hashem's greatness and kindness far more than the animals, certainly have the obligation to constantly give praise to G-d.

Some have the custom to recite each day the section known as "Parashat Ha'man" – the verses from Parashat Beshalah (Shemot chapter 16) which tell of the Manna, the miraculous food with which G-d sustained Beneh Yisrael in the wilderness. Reading this section reinforces our faith in Hashem as the source of our material sustenance, and is thus very significant. The Talmud Yerushalmi writes that one who recites this section each day is guaranteed that he will never lack food. Many people mistakenly think that reading this section is a Segula ("charm") that brings wealth, but it is clear from the Yerushalmi that this is not the case. The Yerushalmi guarantees that those who read it every day will never experience deprivation or shortage, not that they will become wealthy. Rav Haim Vital (1543-1620) would recite Parashat Ha'man each day until his mentor, the Arizal, told him to discontinue this practice. It is unclear whether the Arizal opposed the daily recitation altogether, or opposed only its recitation at the beginning of the prayer service. The Sefer Hasidim (Rabbenu Yehuda Ha'hasid, Germany, d. 1217) writes that one must not pray for his material needs before first beseeching G-d for assistance in his pursuit of spiritual greatness. Perhaps, then, the Arizal objected only to reciting Parashat Ha'man during the introduction to the daily prayer service, but accepted the value of reciting it each day after Shaharit. Regardless, Hacham David Yosef, in Halacha Berura, writes that Sephardic custom is not to recite Parashat Ha'man as part of the daily prayer service. Of course, there is nothing wrong with reciting it afterward. Many have the practice of reciting this section on the Tuesday before the Shabbat of Parashat Beshalah.

The Gemara (Berachot 12) tells that some Sages considered instituting the daily recitation of the Aseret Ha'diberot (Ten Commandments), but this was not done because of the heretics. Rashi explains that there those who spread the heretical belief that only the Ten Commandments are binding, while the rest of the Torah does not need to be observed. Reciting the Aseret Ha'diberot each day would be misunderstood as reinforcing this belief, implying that only these are the obligatory laws. Therefore, the Sages decided against incorporating the Ten Commandments into the daily prayer service. Surprisingly, the Tur writes that one may recite the Aseret Ha'diberot each day if he so wishes. The Bet Yosef explains that although the Gemara concluded that this should not be done, the Gemara refers only to the congregational prayer service. If the Ten Commandments are read each day publicly as part of the congregational Tefila, this might embolden the heretics, but if someone wishes to recite this text each day privately, he may. In fact, the Bet Yosef adds, it is commendable to recite the Ten Commandments each day, to strengthen one's faith in the Revelation at Sinai. The Shulhan Aruch rules accordingly, and the Rama clarifies that this applies only to a private recitation by an individual. By contrast, the Maharshal (Rav Shlomo Luria, Poland, 1510-1573) wrote that it is permissible even to include the Ten Commandments as part of the congregational prayer, and that this was his community's practice. He explained that the Gemara discouraged reading the Aseret Ha'diberot together with Shema, but this section may be recited by the congregation at other points during the prayer service. The Maharshal said that his congregation recited it each day before Baruch She'amar. Rav Haim Vital (1543-1620) writes that he had the custom of reciting the Aseret Ha'diberot each morning before Shaharit, until his mentor, the Arizal, instructed him to discontinue this practice. The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) comments that the Arizal apparently felt that even private individuals should not recite the Aseret Ha'diberot each day. Elsewhere, the Hida speculates that the Arizal may have discouraged reciting this section before Shaharit, but did not oppose its recitation after the prayer service. Regardless, our practice is not to recite the Ten Commandments at all, even privately, perhaps because of the Arizal's instruction to his disciple. (However, some Siddurim list the Ten Commandments on the margins alongside the first paragraph of Shema, as these commands are alluded to in this paragraph.) Incidentally, the Rambam, in a famous responsum, strongly opposes the practice followed in some congregations to stand when the Ten Commandments are read from the Torah (on Shabbat Parashat Yitro, Shabbat Parashat Va'et'hanan, and Shabuot). Just as the Gemara forbade the incorporation of the Aseret Ha'diberot into the prayer service, fearing that this would embolden the heretics, the Rambam felt that giving special respect to this section by standing similarly could have this effect. Indeed, our custom is to remain seated for the reading of the Aseret Ha'diberot. If the Rabbi is called for the Aliya that includes the Ten Commandments, and thus the congregation stands out of respect for the Rabbi, they should sit after the Rabbi recites the blessings, before the reading begins. A number of Poskim similarly opposed the practice to display images of the Ten Commandments on the wall in the synagogue, giving them special prominence, as this, too, could embolden the heretics who claimed that only these commands are binding. This objection appears in several works, including Zecher Yehosef (Rav Yosef Zecharia Stern, 1831-1903), and Teshurat Shai ( Rav Shlomo Yehuda Tabak, 1832–1907). This is the ruling of Rav Betzalel Stern (1911-1989), in Be'sel Ha'hochma. Others justified the practice, suggesting that an image of the Ten Commandments serves as a reminder of the fact that the entire Torah was presented at Sinai. However, Rav Yisrael Bitan challenged this explanation, noting that this image could easily be misunderstood as indicating that only these ten laws were delivered at Mount Sinai. Regardless, Rav Moshe Sternbuch (contemporary), in Teshubot Ve'hanhagot, writes that common custom allows featuring such images in the synagogues. He explains that since the commandments are not written out fully, and only one or two words of each commandments appears, there is no concern of a misunderstanding. It should be noted that many synagogues feature the Ten Commandments on tablets which are rounded on top, which is incorrect. The tablets were rectangular, and not rounded.

When I was a young boy, the schools placed a great emphasis on Keri'a – teaching children to read properly. They insisted that youngsters must be taught all the nuances of the Hebrew language, so they know how to accurately pronounce each letter of every word. This continued the tradition that was followed by our ancestors in Syria. Indeed, a number of sources emphasize the importance of praying slowly and carefully, ensuring not to skip or mispronounce even a single word. The Sefer Misvot Katan (Rav Yosef of Corbeil, France, 13 th century) writes that one must treat each word like a precious jewel, seeing to it that not a single word is missed. And the Shelah (Rav Yeshaya Horowitz, d. 1630) writes that if one mispronounces even a single letter of the prayer text, he can end up "destroying the world." For example, when reciting in Birkat Kohanim the words "Ya'er Hashem" – "G-d shall shine," mispronouncing the word "Ya'er" could result in a words that means, "G-d shall curse," and thus the Kohen ends up cursing, Heaven forbid, instead of blessing. Another example is the word "Anenu," which means "answer us." If it is pronounced with a Dagesh (dot) in the Nun, this word means "torment us." Mispronouncing words can also result in outright blasphemy. In the verse "Nafshenu Hiketa L'Hashem" – "Our soul awaits G-d" (Tehillim 33:20), the word "Hiketa" begins with the letter Het. If one mispronounces this Het as a Heh, then the meaning of the word is "strike," as though we proclaim that we are beating the Almighty, Heaven forbid. And in the verse "L'Hashem Ha'aretz U'mlo'ah, Tebel Ve'yoshebeh Bah" – "The earth and its fulness belong to G-d; the world and those who reside in it" (Tehillim 24:1), one must recite the word "Tebel" ("world") with the emphasis on the second syllable. Otherwise, this word means "produce that has not been tithed," implying that this is all that G-d owns, Heaven forbid. Likewise, we recite each morning the blessing "Malbish Arumim" – that G-d "clothes the naked," but if we omit the Dagesh in the Mem of "Arumim," the word means "the clever ones." This blessing would thus imply that Hashem provides clothing only for those who are clever. Another common mistake is omitting the "Mapik Heh" at the end of certain words. When the Heh at the end of a word has a Dagesh, it must be pronounced in a special way, and failing to do so corrupts the word's meaning. King Shlomo warns in the Book of Mishleh (18:21), "Mavet Ve'haim Be'yad Lashon" – "Death and life are in the hand of the tongue." This is certainly true in the realm of interpersonal relations, as gossip and slander can sometimes be a matter of life or death, but additionally, as we have seen, mispronounced words in prayer can reverse the prayer's meaning, resulting, Heaven forbid, in dire consequences.

Every effort must be made to arrive in the synagogue on time in the morning so one can recite the complete service – from the morning blessings, through the Akeda and Korbanot, followed by Pesukeh De'zimra, Shema and its blessings, the Amida, and so on. The Kabbalists in particular emphasized the importance of reciting the entire service without skipping any section. According to Kabbalistic thought, the prayer service is a process whereby one ascends from one level to the next, so that by the time he recites the Amida, he is on the highest level where he can speak directly to Hashem. Just as one cannot reach the third floor of a building without first reaching the second floor, likewise, one cannot reach the higher levels before passing through the lower levels, and so each stage of the prayer process is indispensable for the prayers to be effective. Indeed, in the work Maggid Mesharim (Parashat Beshalah), we read that the angel who taught Torah to Maran, author of the Shulhan Aruch, sternly admonished him to ensure to arrive on time in the synagogue so he can complete the entire prayer service. Skipping portions of the service, the angel warned, violates the "Heavenly protocol." Nevertheless, it occasionally happens that, for whatever reason, a person arrives late in the synagogue, and if he recites the entire service, he will be unable to pray the Amida together with the congregation. What should the individual do in this situation? Should he forego the recitation of the Korbanot for the sake of Tefila Be'sibur – praying the Amida together with the congregation – or must he follow the sequence of the prayer service even at the expense of Tefila Be'sibur? The Shulhan Aruch writes that if a person arrives late, then he should skip the introductory sections, and begin with Baruch She'amar so that he can catch up to the congregation and pray with them. If one has time for reciting some of the introductory portions of the prayer service, the Shulhan Aruch adds, then he should recite the morning blessings, as well as the paragraph of "Lefichach" through the verse of "Shema Yisrael" and "Baruch Shem." He should also recite the verses of the Tamid, and the section of the Ketoret, until but not including the paragraph that begins "Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel." Additionally, he should recite the Ana Be'cho'ah prayer. He should recite the first part of Hodu – until the words "U'bi'nvi'ai Al Tare'u" – and then skip until "Kel Nekamot Hashem," continuing through "Ya'anenu Be'yom Kor'enu." He should then skip until "Hashem Melech" and Baruch She'amar. If one does not have time to recite any part of the Korbanot section, then he should skip it entirely in order to pray the Amida with the congregation, as the value of Tefila Be'sibur – praying with the congregation – overrides the value of reciting the Korbanot. This is the ruling of the Shulhan Aruch, based on the opinion of the Rashba (Rav Shlomo Ben Aderet, Spain, 1235-1310). Likewise, the Hacham Sevi (Rav Sevi Ashkenazi, 1656-1718), after noting the comments of the Zohar and the Arizal about the importance of reciting the entire prayer service, and of not skipping any portions of it, writes that Tefila Be'sibur is the highest priority, and thus one should skip the earlier sections of the service when necessary to pray the Amida with the congregation. This was the position taken also by the Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806). By contrast, the Poskim who follow the teachings of the Kabbalah ruled that one may never skip any portion of the prayer service, even for the sake of Tefila Be'sibur. These include the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) and the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939). This is the view accepted by Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Jerusalem, 1924-1998). He writes that notwithstanding the Shulhan Aruch's ruling, we cannot ignore the Kabbalists' teaching about the importance of the sequence of the prayer service. Furthermore, Hacham Bension adds, if we allow skipping the earlier sections of the prayer service, many people will do so habitually. It is preferable to forbid skipping, so people will see that by arriving late they forfeit the benefits of Tefila Be'sibur, and this will motivate them to make a greater effort to arrive on time. A mourner, Heaven forbid, should not skip the Korbanot section or any other portions of the daily prayer service. Although a mourner is not permitted to learn Torah, he may recite the passages from the Torah and other sources that have been incorporated into the prayer service.

We conclude the daily Korbanot section with "Rabbi Yishmael Omer" – a Berayta (passage by a Tanna) authored by the great sage Rabbi Yishmael, listing the thirteen methods with which the Sages extracted Halachot from the text of the Torah. If one wishes to extract oil from the ground, it is not enough to know where the oil is located – he needs the right machinery to extract the oil from beneath the ground. Likewise, to deduce Halachot from the Biblical text, one needs to have the "tools," the rules by which the Halacha can be determined based on a careful analysis of the text. The first of these "tools" is Kal Va'homer, whereby a conclusion is reached through logical deduction, by noting that the Halacha applies in a less intuitive context. An analogy would be a person concluding that he can lift a certain heavy object after seeing that someone weaker than him was able to lift it. An example of a Kal Va'homer in the Torah is G-d's announcement of Miriam's punishment for speaking Lashon Ha'ra. He said that if Miriam's father had angrily scorned her, she would be ashamed for an entire week, so certainly, now that Hashem has scorned her by having her stricken with Sara'at, she should remain outside the camp for a week (Bamidbar 12:14). The second of Rabbi Yishmael's thirteen methods is Gezera Shava – extending a Halacha that applies in one context to a different context on the basis of a common word shared by these two areas of Halacha. Likely the most famous Gezera Shava is the connection drawn by the Sages between Pesach and Sukkot. The Torah establishes an obligation to eat Masa on the night of Pesach, the 15 th of Nissan, and the Sages deduced that on the first night of Sukkot one is similarly required to eat bread in the Sukka. As the Torah requires observing Pesach on "Hamisha Asar" – the "15 th " of Nissan, and it requires observing Sukkot on "Hamisha Asar" – the 15 th of Tishreh, we may infer that the obligation that applies on the night of Pesach applies also on Sukkot. Hence, one must eat bread in the Sukka on the first night of Sukkot just as one must eat Masa on the first night of Pesach. (Throughout the rest of Sukkot, although one who wishes to eat bread must do so in the Sukka, he does not have an obligation to eat bread in the Sukka; this obligation applies only on the first night.) The Tur writes that we recite this Berayta at the end of the Korbanot section between it is the introduction to Torat Kohanim – the Halachic Midrash on the Book of Vayikra, which focuses on the sacrifices, and is thus relevant to the topic of sacrifices. Furthermore, this Berayta appears in the Gemara (Yoma 33a), and thus by incorporating it as part of our daily prayer service, we ensure to learn some Gemara each day (just as reciting Ezehu Mekoman each day ensures the daily study of Mishna).

As part of the Korbanot section of the morning prayer service, we read the Mishnayot of the fifth chapter of Masechet Zebahim – the chapter of Ezehu Mekoman. This chapter goes through all the various sacrifices that were offered in the Bet Ha'mikdash, and concisely tells us the procedure required for each sacrifice. One reason we read this chapter is so that through our reading, we will be considered as though we actually brought the sacrifices and receive atonement. But additionally, we read this chapter as a fixed daily regimen of Torah learning. By incorporating this reading into our daily prayer, we ensure to learn Mishnayot each day. However, if this is the reason for reciting these Mishnayot, then we must understand what we read. Reading Mishna, or Gemara, without understanding the meaning of the text has no value. When it comes to prayer, although we are of course encouraged and urged to try to pray with Kavana (concentration), our Rabbis taught that there is value to our prayers even without understanding the words. If a person prays with sincere feelings and emotions, then his prayers are accepted regardless of he actually understands the words. But this does not apply to Torah learning. If a person reads a Torah text without understanding what he read, he is not credited with the Misva of Torah study. (The exception is the reading of the Zohar, which has value even if one does not understand what he reads.) Therefore, in order for our daily reading of Ezehu Mekoman to have value and to be considered as Torah study, we must learn the text so we understand what we are saying. This point is made by Hacham Ovadia Yosef. Some add that we recite specifically this chapter each morning because of its unique characteristic – all the information is presented unanimously, without any disagreements. Throughout the Mishnayot we find Mahlokot – disagreements among the Tanna'im regarding the Halachot under discussion. In the chapter of Ezehu Mekoman, however, there are no disagreements. Every Halacha is unanimous, and not subject to debate. This makes this chapter special and worthy of our daily study. Furthermore, I heard many years ago from Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025) that this chapter consists of 345 words – the Gematria of the name "Moshe." This alludes to the fact that all the information presented in this chapter regarding the offering of the sacrifice was taught to Moshe at Mount Sinai.

As discussed in a previous installment, the Ana Be'cho'ah prayer, which consists of 42 words, alludes to the special 42-letter Name of G-d. We conclude this prayer with the exclamation, "Baruch Shem Kebod Malchuto Le'olam Va'ed" – "Blessed is the Name of the Majesty of His Kingship, forever and ever." After reciting the prayer expressing the divine Name, we make this proclamation giving praise to the Name of the Almighty. This proclamation is significant in that the first letters of its six words – Bet, Shem, Kaf, Mem, Lamed and Vav – are the only letters in the Hebrew alphabet that are used as prefixes to G-d's Name. These six letters can be appended to the Name to form the words "B'Hashem" (as in "Ach B'Hashem Al Timrodu" – Bamidbar 14:9), "She'Hashem" (as in "Ashreh Ha'am She'Hashem Elokav" – Tehillim 144:15), "K'Hashem" (as in "K'Hashem Elokenu Be'chol Kore'nu Elav" – Debarim 4:7), "Me'Hashem" (as in "Me'Hashem Yasa Ha'dabar" – Bereishit 24:50), "L'Hashem" (as in "L'Hashem Ha'yeshu'a" – Tehillim 3:9), and "V'Hashem" (as in "V'Hashem Holech Lifnehem" – Shemot 13:21). These letters thus have a special connection to Hashem's Name, and so we proclaim "Baruch Shem…" after making a reference to the divine Name. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in his work Torah Li'shmah, writes that although this proclamation is made silently when it is recited during the Shema reading, in other contexts it may be recited aloud. Accordingly, we do not need to recite "Baruch Shem" silently when we say Ana Be'cho'ah during the Korbanot section each morning. However, Hacham Ovadia Yosef noted that elsewhere in his writings (Od Yosef Hai), the Ben Ish Hai contradicts this ruling, and writes that "Baruch Shem" must be recited silently even in Ana Be'cho'ah. The accepted practice is to recite it silently in Ana Be'cho'ah just as we do during the reading of Shema.

The Kabbalists taught that when one recites the "Ana Be'cho'ah" prayer, he should arrange the words of the prayer in pairs. Meaning, he should say the first two words, briefly pause, say the next two words, pause, and so on. This is the instruction given by Rav Haim Vital (1543-1620), in Sha'ar Ha'kavanot, based on the teachings of the Arizal. This is brought later by the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) and the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939). However, Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025) ruled that one should not follow this custom, as the reading becomes unintelligible in this manner. By reciting the text of this prayer in pairs of words, one ends up saying, "Ana Be'cho'ah" – "Please, with the strength"; "Gedulat Yeminecha" – "the greatness of Your right"; "Tatir Serura" – "release those who are trapped"; "Kabel Rinat" – "accept the prayer of"; "Amecha Sagebenu" – "Your nation, protect us"; "Taharenu Nora" – "purify us, O Awesome One," and so on. The words are clearly not intended to be broken up in alternating pairs of two, as they have no meaning when recited this way. Rav Mazuz therefore ruled that one should recite the text of the prayer this way: "Ana Be'cho'ah Gedulat Yeminecha" ("Please with the power of the greatness of Your right"), "Tatir Serura" ("release those who are trapped"); "Kabel Rinat Amecha" ("Accept the prayer of Your nation"); "Sagebenu Taharenu Nora" ("protect us, purify us, O Awesome One"). (Incidentally, Rav Mazuz issued a similar ruling regarding the recitation of the famous verse, "Hashem Hoshi'a Ha'Melech Ya'anenu Be'yom Kor'enu." The Kabbalists instructed pausing after the word "Ha'melech," such that one should say: "Hashem Hoshi'a Ha'Melech, Ya'anenu Be'yom Kor'enu." Rav Mazuz noted that this reading sounds as though we ask Hashem to save the King ("Hoshi'a Ha'melech"). The proper way to read this verse, Rav Mazuz ruled, is with the pause after the word "Hoshi'a," such that we say, "Hashem save us; the King shall answer us on the day we call out.") Some Siddurim use a very complex system in punctuating this prayer, adding commas and periods, in an attempt to accommodate both opinions. In any event, Rav Yisrael Bitan writes that as the Arizal, the Ben Ish Hai and the Kaf Ha'haim all say that this prayer should be divided into pairs of words, it is difficult to dismiss this practice. Therefore, this is the preferred way to read Ana Be'cho'ah.

After we recite in the morning the section of the Ketoret and the passage of "Abayeh Hava Mesader," we recite a very special prayer – Ana Be'cho'ah. This prayer was composed by one of the great Tanna'im – Rabbi Nehunya Ben Ha'kaneh, whom the Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) describes as one of the earliest Kabbalists, preceding even Rabbi Shimon Bar Yohai. The Ana Be'cho'ah prayer is so significant that the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) and many others write that if a person arrives late to Shaharit, and needs to skip the introductory portions of the prayer service, he should not skip Ana Be'cho'ah. This prayer consists of seven lines, each of which with six letters, for a total of 42 letters, and these 42 letters spell the special 42-letter Name of Hashem. This Name is the "elevator," the Name associated with rising to the upper worlds. It is critically important to recite Ana Be'cho'ah as part of our introduction to Shaharit because it elevates us to the heavens so we can present our Tefilot to G-d. By the time we recite the Amida, we want to be standing before the Heavenly Throne, so we can speak directly to the Almighty. The recitation of Ana Be'cho'ah elevates us to the higher spheres so we can speak to Hashem while standing in front of His Throne. It is proper to recite this Tefila slowly and to take note of the first letters of the words. This Name is alluded to also in the first paragraph of Shema, which consists of 42 words (from "Ve'ahabta" through "U'bi'sh'arecha"), corresponding to the 42 letters of this Name. For this reason, some Siddurim feature the letters of this divine Name alongside the words of this paragraph of Shema. Another allusion to this Name is found in Kaddish – specifically, in the phrase "Ve'yishtabah Ve'yitpa'ar Ve'yitromam Ve'yitnaseh Ve'yit'hadar Ve'yit'aleh Ve'yit'halal," which consists of seven words that each contains six letters, for a total of 42. Some have the custom to recite Ana Be'cho'ah each night before going to sleep. The soul departs and rises to the heavens when one sleeps, and so it is appropriate to recite this prayer which, as mentioned, is associated with elevation and ascent. Likewise, it is customary to recite Ana Be'cho'ah at funerals, Heaven forbid, as the coffin is being taken for burial, and the soul is ready to rise to the heavens. In some communities, Ana Be'cho'ah is recited before Lecha Dodi on Friday night, as we elevate ourselves to the higher plane of Shabbat. Likewise, many recite this prayer after counting the Omer, as the Omer counting is intended to elevate us in preparation for Matan Torah on Shabuot. The custom to read Ana Be'cho'ah following the recitation of "Abayeh Hava Mesader" was taught by the Arizal, as brought in Sha'ar Ha'kavanot. This is cited by the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939). The Seder Ha'yom (Rav Moshe Ben Machir, Safed, 16 th century), by contrast, writes that it is better to recite Ana Be'cho'ah later, just before Baruch She'amar. He explains that the world was created with the power of this 42-letter Name, and so it is appropriate to allude to this Name just before reciting "Baruch She'amar Ve'haya Ha'olam," when we give praise to Hashem who created the world. However, we follow the Arizal's teaching, that Ana Be'cho'ah should be recited after the section of "Abayeh Hava Mesader." One possible explanation for the Arizal's custom is that the section of "Abayeh Hava Mesader," which lists the various Abodot (services) performed daily in the Bet Ha'mikdash, omits Birkat Kohaim (the priestly blessing), which was recited each day in the Bet Ha'mikdash. In the Bet Ha'mikdash, the Kohanim reciting Birkat Kohanim would use the Shem Ha'meforash – the divine Name that is normally forbidden to utter, and according to some, this was the 42-letter Name. Perhaps, then, we add Ana Be'cho'ah – which is associated with this Name – after the section of "Abayeh Hava Mesader" to allude to the daily recitation of Birkat Kohanim in the Bet Ha'mikdash. The Ana Be'cho'ah prayer concludes with the pronouncement of "Baruch Shem Kebod Malchuto Le'olam Va'ed," giving praise to the exalted Name of G-d, which this prayer expresses.

After the recitation of the Ketoret, we recite "Abayeh Hava Mesader," a section from the Gemara (Yoma 33a) citing Abayeh's concise list of all the Abodot (services) performed daily in the Bet Ha'mikdash, following the sequence in which they were performed. This list was compiled "Aliba De'Abba Shaul" – according to the view of Abba Shaul, as there is some debate concerning the sequence of the Abodot. We read this section so that we will be considered as though we followed this procedure and performed all these Abodot. However, this is effective only if one understands what he reads. Let us, then, briefly go through this list so we understand what we are saying: Ma'aracha Gedola – placing the firewood on the large altar in the Temple courtyard. Ma'aracha Sheniya Shel Ketoret – placing the firewood on the smaller altar, the incense altar inside the Bet Ha'mikdash. Siddur Sheneh Gizreh Esim – placing two long logs of wood on the large altar in the courtyard. Dishun Mizbe'ah Ha'penimi – cleaning the ashes from the incense altar. Hatabat Hamesh Nerot – preparing five of the lamps of the Menorah for kindling. Dam Ha'tamid – sprinkling the blood of the morning Tamid sacrifice. Hatabat Sheteh Nerot – preparing the remaining two lamps of the Menorah for kindling. Ketoret – bringing the morning incense offering. Ebarim – offering the Tamid sacrifice on the altar. Minha – the flour offering that accompanied the Tamid sacrifice. Havitin – the flour offering brought each day by the Kohen Gadol. Nesachin – the wine libations that accompanied the daily Tamid. Musafin – offering the special Musaf sacrifice on Shabbat, Rosh Hodesh and holidays. Bazichin – placing on the altar each Shabbat the frankincense that was on the Shulhan (table) with the Lehem Ha'panim (show-bread). Tamid Shel Ben Ha'arbayim – the afternoon Tamid sacrifice. Abayeh concludes his statement by mentioning the law that no sacrifice may be offered after the afternoon Tamid ("Aleha Hashlem Kol Ha'korbanot Kulam"). As mentioned, this section begins with the words "Abayeh Hava Mesader" ("Abayeh would arrange…"). The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) writes that there were those who added the word "Hu" ("he") in between the words "Abayeh" and "Hava." The reason is that if one recites the words "Abayeh Hava" quickly, he may inadvertently utter the Name of "Havaya," which may not be pronounced the way it is written. By breaking up these words with the word "Hu," one ensures not to mistakenly violate this prohibition, which, according to Tosafot (Shebuot 35a), is so severe that one forfeits his share in the next world if he transgresses and utters the Name. Hacham Ovadia Yosef writes that strictly speaking, this is not necessary, because one transgresses this prohibition only if he utters the Name intentionally. Even if one indeed ends up saying the Name of "Havaya" by reciting the words "Abayeh Hava," he has not committed any wrongdoing, because he had no intention at all of uttering the Name. Nevertheless, it is commendable to briefly pause between the words "Abayeh" and "Hava."

June 4 second from 14:33 till the end As we've seen in previous installments, the recitation of the Ketoret is especially valuable, and offers a person great blessings and benefits. However, this is true only if the person recites the text slowly and with Kavana (concentration), understanding the words he utters. As such, it behooves us to try to understand this difficult text to whatever extent we can. The portion from the Talmud which we recite begins by listing the eleven ingredients of the Ketoret, and their relative amounts in the mixture. We read that the Ketoret consisted of a total of 368 portions ("Maneh"), and that 365 of these were offered over the course of the 365 days of the solar calendar – half a portion each morning, and half a portion each afternoon. The remaining three portions were used for the Kohen Gadol's special Ketoret offering inside the Kodesh Ha'kodashim (inner sanctum of the Bet Ha'mikdash) on Yom Kippur. The Gemara teaches us that these three portions were returned on Ereb Yom Kippur to the "Machteshet" – the mortar – to be ground extra-fine. Whereas the Torah requires that the ordinary, daily Ketoret be prepared "Daka" – finely-ground – the Ketoret brought in the Kodesh Ha'kodashim on Yom Kippur needed to be "Daka Min Ha'daka" – especially fine, and so these three portions were ground a second time on Ereb Yom Kippur, in preparation for the Yom Kippur service. The first four of the eleven spices listed by the Gemara are Sori, Siporen, Helbena and Lebona, which (as mentioned in our previous installment) are the four spices named by the Torah (Shemot 30:34). As the Gemara teaches, Sori is "Seraf Ha'notef Me'aseh Ha'ketaf" – "sap that drips from the balsam tree." This is the "Nataf" mentioned by the Torah, referring to its "dripping" ("Notef") from the tree. The Siporen – onycha – is called "Shehelet" in the Torah. The third and fourth spices are Helbena – galbanum – and Lebona – frankincense – which are listed by these names also in the Torah. The next five spices are Mor – myrrh; Kesia – cassia; Shibolet Nerd – spikenard; Karkom – saffron; and Kost – costus. There's a great deal of discission as to the correct text for this ninth spice. In many editions, this word appears as "Ha'kosht." The definitive article "Ha" ("the") seems difficult to justify, because this article is used only in reference to the first four spices ("Ha'sori Ve'ha'siporen Ve'halbena Ve'ha'lebona"). As we explained in a previous installment, the prefix "Ha" appears in reference to these four because these four are explicitly named by the Torah itself. All the others, however – including Kosht – are not named by the Torah, and so the prefix "Ha" seems inappropriate in this context. This point was made by Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025), who added that the word "Kosht" itself is incorrect. The correct pronunciation, he wrote, is "Kost" – meaning, with the letter Sin as opposed to the letter Shin. Rav Mazuz explained that "Kosht" resembles the Aramaic word "Keshot," which means "true" (as we say in the Berich Shemeh prayer: "De'Hu Elaka Keshot Ve'Orayteh Keshot…") and is not the name of a spice. Therefore, although in many Siddurim the word is written "Ha'kosht," it should be pronounced "Kost."

There is a custom that some observe to read the section of the Ketoret from a piece of parchment upon which the text of the Ketoret is written in ink and in the same format as in a Sefer Torah. I was exposed to this custom for the first time when praying with Hacham Ovadia Yosef. When the time came for the recitation of the Ketoret, his assistant brought him a parchment from which the Hacham read the Ketoret. This custom is mentioned by Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868), both in Kaf Ha'haim and in Ru'ah Haim. It appears also earlier, in Seder Ha'yom (Rav Moshe Ben Machir, Safed, 16 th century). These works emphasize the great value and benefit of observing this custom, how it brings wealth and prosperity – just as the Kohen who offered the Ketoret in the Bet Ha'mikdash was blessed with wealth. However, this custom is subject to a great deal of controversy. The majority view among the Rishonim – a position held by both the Rambam and the Rosh – forbids writing a portion of the Torah on parchment. This is based on the Gemara's discussion in Masechet Gittin (60a), where we read that Rabba explicitly forbade writing a portion of the Torah on parchment for a child to study from. By contrast, the Rif (Rav Yishak Alfasi, Morocco, 1013-1103) ruled that it is permissible to write a portion of the Torah on parchment. Maran (author of the Shulhan Aruch), in Bet Yosef, reconciles the Rif's lenient ruling with the Gemara's discussion in Masechet Gittin by noting that other Amoraim disagreed with Rabba's ruling. They allowed writing a small portion of Torah on parchment as this became necessary to ensure the continuity of Torah, that it will not be forgotten. However, despite Maran's defense of the Rif's position in Bet Yosef, in the Shulhan Aruch he follows the stringent opinion of the Rambam and the Rosh. And, generally speaking, when we find conflicting rulings in the Bet Yosef and Shulhan Aruch, it is assumed that the ruling in the Shulhan Aruch – Maran's later work – is the more authoritative position, and should be followed. It would thus seem that one may not write the section of the Ketoret on parchment, or hire a Sofer to do so. By contrast, numerous Ashkenazic Poskim ruled leniently. The Bayit Hadash (Rav Yoel Sirkis, Poland, 1561-1640) writes that the custom is to allow writing sections of the Torah on parchment, and this is the view also of the Shach (Rav Shabtai Ha'kohen, 1621-1662), the Taz (Rav David Segal, 1586-1667), and other Ashkenazic authorities. In modern times, this view was accepted by the Hazon Ish (Rav Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz, 1878-1953). The famous "Lederman Shul" in Bnei-Brak, where Rav Chaim Kanievsky (1928-2022) would pray, features on the wall a large piece of parchment with the Ketoret section, following the lenient ruling of the Hazon Ish. Accordingly, Hacham Ovadia ruled that if a Sepharadi wishes to observe this custom, he must purchase the parchment specifically from an Ashkenazic Sofer, as preparing such a parchment is allowed by Ashkenazic Poskim, but forbidden for Sepharadim because of the Shulhan Aruch's stringent ruling. A number of Sephardic Poskim disagreed with Hacham Ovadia on this point. Most notably, Rav Moshe Levi (1961-2000), in his Tefila Le'Moshe, writes that the Shulhan Aruch forbids writing a small portion of the Torah on parchment only because this is disrespectful to the Torah. However, writing the entire section of the Ketoret, which includes the Gemara's discussion elucidating the Biblical text, is not in any way disrespectful, and is thus permissible even according to the Shulhan Aruch. Others note the practice among Kabbalists to pray from texts written on parchment that included passages from the Torah – thus demonstrating that the Shulhan Aruch's stringent ruling was not accepted. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, the custom to recite the Ketoret from a text written on parchment appears already in Seder Ha'yom – a work by a contemporary of Maran. Some have pointed to this source as further evidence that the Shulhan Aruch's stringent ruling was not necessarily accepted. Regardless, in light of Hacham Ovadia's ruling, it is proper for a Sepharadi who wishes to observe this custom to purchase the parchment from an Ashkenazic Sofer. If, however, a Sephardic Sofer prepared such a parchment, it may be used.

The Bet Yosef (commentary to the Tur by Maran Rav Yosef Karo, author of the Shulhan Aruch) cites Rav Yishak Abuhab (Spain, 1433-1493) as stating that when one recites the list of the eleven spices of Ketoret, he must do so carefully, from a written text, in order to ensure not to mistakenly omit any of the spices. As we say in the section from the Gemara recited in the Ketoret section, "Im Hisar Ahat Mi'kol Samaneha Hayab Mita" – leaving out even one of the eleven ingredients of the Ketoret constitutes a capital offense, punishable by death. Since we read the Ketoret section in lieu of the offering of the Ketoret in the Bet Ha'mikdash, one who mistakenly skips one of the ingredients would be in violation of this capital offense. The Bet Yosef speculates that this might be the reason why Ashkenazic communities do not recite the Ketoret section on weekday mornings – due to the concern that one might recite this section quickly, given the pressures of the workweek, and mistakenly omit one of the spices. Indeed, the Rama (Rav Moshe Isserles, Poland, 1530-1572) explains on this basis the Ashkenazic custom not to recite the Ketoret on weekdays. The Bet Yosef comments that if the Ashkenazim received a tradition to omit the Ketoret on weekdays, then he certainly will not argue with their tradition, but if this is done only due to the fear of skipping one of the spices, then this practice is not acceptable. He explains that when the Gemara speaks of the death penalty as the punishment for leaving out one of the spices of the Ketoret, this refers to the Kohen Gadol offering a deficient incense on Yom Kippur. The only time it was ever permissible to enter the Kodesh Ha'kodashim – the inner sanctum of the Bet Ha'mikdash – was when the Kohen Gadol went there to perform the special Yom Kippur service, and this required the offering of Ketoret. If the Ketoret was deficient and thus invalid, then the Kohen Gadol would be in violation of a capital offense when he entered the Kodesh Ha'kodashim on Yom Kippur. It goes without saying that this has no relevance at all to somebody who mistakenly omits one of the spices when reciting the section of the Ketoret and listing its ingredients. A different view is held by the Rambam, who maintained that a Kohen incurs the death penalty for offering a deficient Ketoret even on ordinary weekdays, and not only on Yom Kippur. However, even according to the Rambam, the punishment is incurred not for bringing a deficient Ketoret, but rather for entering the Bet Ha'mikdash for naught, since the offering brought was not valid. Clearly, this does not apply to one who mistakenly skips one of the spices while reciting the Ketoret. Moreover, even if one insists that offering a deficient Ketoret itself constitutes a capital offense, there is no basis for extending this to a person who omits one of the spices during the recitation of this section. Therefore, while of course one should always try to ensure to recite all the words of the entire prayer service properly, there is no reason to be especially "scared" when listing the ingredients of the Ketoret.

We read each morning the section of the Ketoret, which includes verses from the Torah that discuss the Ketoret incense offering brought in the Bet Ha'mikdash, as well as a passage from the Talmud that goes into the detail of how the Ketoret was prepared. It is customary when reciting the Gemara's list of the eleven spices from which the Ketoret was made to count them with one's fingers. According to the teachings of Kabbalah, one should count on only one hand, the right hand. One counts the first five with the five fingers of the right hand, and then the next five with those same five fingers, and then the eleventh with one finger on that hand. The right hand is used because it is associated with the divine attribute of Hesed, and we want the Ketoret offering to arouse this quality. Additionally, the Kohen in the Bet Ha'mikdash would offer the Ketoret specifically with his right hand. The Hesed La'alafim (Rav Eliezer Papo, 1785-1828) maintained that one should count the spices with both hands, but we follow the position of the Kabbalists, to count only with the right hand. This is the ruling of the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) and the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939). The first four of the eleven spices are Sori, Siporen, Helbena and Lebona, and we then say, "Mishkal Shibim Shibim Maneh" – that seventy measurements of each of these four spices – a total of 280 portions – were included in the Ketoret. We then proceed to list the next four spices: Mor, Kesi'a, Shibolet Nerd, and Karkom, and add "Mishkal Shisha Asar Shisha Asar Maneh" – sixteen portions of each of these four ingredients (a total of 64) were included. The next spice is "Kost," of which "Shenem Asar" – twelve portions – were included in the Ketoret. The list concludes with the final two spices – three portions of Kilufa and nine portions of Kinamon. This brings the total amount of portions to 368 (280+64+12+3+9). All the other items listed in the Ketoret section were not ingredients of the Ketoret, but were used in the process of preparing of the Ketoret. Interestingly, although the section from the Gemara lists eleven spices that comprised the Ketoret, the Torah lists only four – Nataf, Shehelet, Helbena, Lebona Zaka (Shemot 30:34). The Sages arrived at a total of 11 because the Torah introduces its list with the word "Samim" (spices), which implies the inclusion of an additional two spices. And, after listing the first three spices – Nataf, Shehelet and Helbena – the Torah repeats the word "Samim," indicating another five in addition to the five that were already mentioned. The Torah then mentions the final spice, Lebona Zaka, bringing the total to 11. Hacham Baruch Ben-Haim would count the eleven spices with his fingers not only when reading the Gemara's list, but also when reading these verses. He counted the first instance of the word "Samim" as two, then Nataf, Shehelet and Helbena, followed by five for the second instance of "Samim," and then the eleventh when reading the word "Lebona Zaka." Hacham Baruch noted that the Gemara, when listing the eleven spices, adds the preface "Ha" when mentioning the first four spices: "Ha'sori, Ve'ha'siporen, Ha'helbena, Ve'halebona." The preface "Ha" is the definitive article "the," and thus the Gemara is identifying these four spices as ingredients that we are already familiar with, as though saying, "The Sori that was already mentioned, the Siporen that was already mentioned," and so on. Hacham Baruch explained that these are the four spices mentioned explicitly in the Torah, and so the Gemara refers to them with the definitive article "Ha."

We introduce the section of the Ketoret with the proclamation, "Ata Hu Hashem Elokenu…," stating that "You are Hashem our G-d" to whom our ancestors would offer incense in the Bet Ha'mikdash. Our custom is to recite this introduction each time we recite the Ketoret – toward the beginning of Shaharit, before Alenu at the end of Shaharit, and at the beginning of Minha. The question arises as to why this introduction is necessary. Before we recite the verses discussing the daily Tamid sacrifice, we do not make a similar pronouncement, that Hashem commanded us to offer the Tamid sacrifice that our ancestors would bring in the Bet Ha'mikdash. Why do we introduce the Ketoret with this declaration? One explanation is given by the Noda Bi'Yehuda (Rav Yehezkel Landau of Prague, 1713-1793). He notes that before the recitation of the Ketoret toward the end of Shaharit, we recite "En K'Elokenu," a hymn poetically declaring that there is no being comparable to Hashem. This hymn concludes, "Ata Hu Elokenu, Ata Hu Abinu, Ata Hu Malkenu, Ata Hu Moshi'enu" – "You are our G-d, You are our Father, You are our King, Your are our Savior." As a natural continuation of this phrase, we add, "Ata Hu Hashem Elokenu She'hiktiru…" The Noda Bi'Yehuda explains that we introduce the Ketoret with "En K'Elokenu" because of the Gemara's teaching (Yoma 26a) that the Kohen who offered the Ketoret was rewarded with wealth. We, too, aspire to earn wealth through the recitation of the Ketoret, and so we begin by proclaiming "En K'Elokenu" – acknowledging that everything we have, all our material blessings, have been given to us by Hashem, that there is no one and nothing in the world like Hashem, as He and only He provides us with everything we have. (Another explanation for the recitation of "En K'Elokenu" is based on the comment of the Talmud Yerushalmi (Yoma 1:5) that nobody was allowed in the Bet Ha'mikdash at the time when the Kohen offered the incense. Even the angels were barred from the Temple during those moments, so the Kohen could be alone with the Almighty. We therefore introduce the recitation of the Ketoret by emphasizing that "En K'Elokenu" – there is no one like Hashem, and thus only He was present at the time the Ketoret was offered.) The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) offers a different explanation for the "Ata Hu Hashem Elokenu" introduction to the Ketoret. He contrasts this introduction with the prayer that introduces the recitation of the section of the Tamid (the verses about the daily animal sacrifice in the Temple) – a prayer asking Hashem to consider our recitation of the Tamid as though we actually brought the sacrifice on the altar in the Bet Ha'mikdash. Before reciting the Ketoret, we do not say such a prayer, and we instead emphasize that the Ketoret was offered only by our ancestors during the times of the Temple. The reason, the Ben Ish Hai writes, is that it was a grievous infraction if the Ketoret was missing even one of its eleven ingredients when it was offered on the altar. If our recitation of the Ketoret would be regarded as the actual offering, then if a person read this section quickly and mistakenly omitted one of the ingredients, he would be guilty of offering an invalid Ketoret. Hence, instead of asking Hashem to accept our reading as though we actually offered the Ketoret, we do just the opposite – emphasizing that this is what our ancestors did and what we are unable to do. This way, if we miss a word, our recitation would still have value as reading about the Ketoret offering, but we would not be guilty of bringing a deficient offering.

June 2 second from 2:36 There are many people – including yeshiva students and Talmideh Hachamim – who skip the section of Korbanot, which discusses the sacrifices offered in the Bet Ha'mikdash, and begin with Pesukeh De'zimra, from Hodu or from Baruch She'amar. The Hikreh Leb ( Rav Raphael Yosef Hazan, 1741–1820) considered the possibility that those who devote their days to Torah study are perhaps justified in omitting the Korbanot section. Since they spend their time immersed in Torah learning, they might be excused for saving time by skipping this part of the Shaharit prayer. However, the Hikreh Leb dismisses this possibility, writing that as this is part of the daily prayer schedule, there is no excuse for omitting it. We cannot emphasize enough the importance and value of reading the Korbanot section, whereby we access the atonement and blessings that the sacrifices in the Bet Ha'mikdash bring. This is true of all the Korbanot, but it is especially true of the Ketoret – the section dealing with the incense offering that was brought each day in the Bet Ha'mikdash. The Zohar (Midrash Ha'ne'elam, Parashat Vayera) relates that Eliyahu Ha'nabi once appeared to Rabbi Pinhas, and taught him that the public recitation of the section of the Ketoret has the power to protect against plagues. Rabbi Aha, the Zohar writes, once visited the town of Tarsha, and the residents informed him that a plague had been ravaging the town for seven days, and was increasing in severity. He instructed them to choose the forty most righteous men of the town, and divide them into four groups of ten. Each was to go to a different corner of the town and recite the section of the Ketoret. Afterward, Rabbi Aha urged them to visit those who were on the brink of death, and to read the verses that tell of Aharon ending a plague by offering incense (Bamidbar 17). Sure enough, these patients survived. Elsewhere (Parashat Vayakhel), the Zohar emphasizes the protective powers of the recitation of the Ketoret. It cites Rabbi Shimon Bar Yohai's exclamation that if people recognized just how precious this text is, they would take each word and wear it as a crown on their heads. If one recites the Ketoret with proper concentration, Rabbi Shimon taught, he is spared from punishments both in this world and the next world. The Zohar further teaches that the Ketoret should be recited before the Amida prayer, because it helps clear the pathway to the heavens from the harmful spiritual forces that seek to sabotage one's prayers, ensuring that they reach the heavens. Some explain that the special offerings of the Nesi'im (tribal leaders) which they brought in honor of the consecration of the Mishkan were especially cherished by G-d because they included Ketoret. Moreover, Rabbenu Bahya (Spain, 1255-1340) writes that the moments after the offering of the Ketoret were the most auspicious time for blessings and prayers. This is why the Kohen Gadol would recite a special prayer for the people after offering the Ketoret on Yom Kippur, and why Moshe and Aharon blessed the nation on the day of the Mishkan's inauguration, following the offering of Ketoret. I witnessed the power of the Ketoret recitation firsthand. When my congregation's synagogue was being constructed, we encountered one problem after another. For reasons we do not know, Hashem decided to test us by making the process exceedingly difficult. Nothing was working. We consulted with the great Kabbalist Rav Mordechai Attieh, and he came with ten great scholars. They stood around the construction site and recited the Ketoret. Sure enough, after that point, we were able to move forward and complete the project. The power of the Korbanot section and the rewards offered by its recitation should incentivize all of us to do everything we can to ensure that we read this section each day.

The Maharil ( Rav Yaakov ben Moshe Levi Moelin, Germany, d. 1427), in discussing the laws of the daily recitation of Birkat Ha'Torah (the blessing over Torah study), writes that women are required to recite this blessing, despite the fact that they are not bound by the Misva of Talmud Torah (Torah study). He explains that although women are not obligated to learn Torah, they are required to read portions of the Torah, such as the Korbanot (the section of the morning prayer service that discusses the various sacrifices that were offered in the Bet Ha'mikdash). Therefore, they must recite Birkat Ha'Torah. It is clear that according to the Maharil, women are required to recite Korbanot each day just like men. However, a number of later Poskim – the Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) and Rav Yaakov Emden (Germany, 1697-1776) – ruled that women are not required to recite the daily Korbanot section. Rav Haim Palachi (1788-1868), in Lev Haim, concludes that women should recite the Korbanot, though they are not required to recite the section of the daily Tamid. Regardless, the accepted practice is that women do not recite the Korbanot, but a woman who has the time and the desire to recite this section each morning should certainly be encouraged to do so.

It is customary to sit during the recitation of the Korbanot – despite the fact that the Kohanim were required to stand while performing the service in the Bet Ha'mikdash. Some Poskim required one to stand during the recitation of the section of the Korbanot, since it is recited in lieu of the offering of the sacrifices, and the service in the Bet Ha'mikdash would be invalid if it was performed seated. Common practice, however, does not follow this opinion. It is documented that the great Rabbis of Jerusalem several generations ago would sit during this recitation. Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868), in his work Lev Haim, inferred from earlier sources that although it is accepted to sit during the recitation of Korbanot, it is commendable to stand. However, if everyone in the synagogue is seated, and the person would clearly stand out if he made a point of standing up, then he should not stand, as this would constitute Yuhara (a display of arrogance). If the person is widely recognized as an especially righteous individual, and it would be expected for him to follow Halachic stringencies, then he may stand. Likewise, if a person's standing would not necessarily be perceived as the observance of a stringency, then this would not constitute Yuhara and he may stand if he wishes. It goes without saying that if one prays privately, or after the congregation completed the public prayer service, and he wishes to follow this stringency, he certainly may.

As we have seen, it is customary each morning to recite the Mishnayot of the fifth chapter of Masechet Zevahim – Ezehu Mekoman – which goes through all the various sacrifices, explaining the procedure for offering them and their basic laws. By reading and learning about the Korbanot (sacrifices), we earn credit as though we actually brought them in the Bet Ha'mikdash Intuitively, we might assume that this chapter should not be recited on Shabbat and Yom Tob. The only Korbanot which may be offered on Shabbat and Yom Tob are those which are specifically required on those days – namely, the daily Tamid sacrifice, and the Musaf offerings required on particular occasions. Seemingly, then, we should not recite Ezehu Mekoman, which speaks of sacrifices such as voluntary offerings and offerings required for atonement, as these were not allowed to be brought in the Bet Ha'mikdash on Shabbat. In truth, however, these Mishnayot are recited on Shabbat. Although they cannot be recited in lieu of the actual offering of the sacrifices, they are nevertheless recited as Torah study. Shabbat is a time to devote additional time for Torah learning, so there is certainly good reason to include the recitation of Ezehu Mekoman on Shabbat, despite the fact that the sacrifices it discusses are not offered on Shabbat. Ashkenazim have the practice to recite on Shabbat after the Ketoret section the verses from the Torah discussing the Shabbat Musaf sacrifice. Similarly, on Rosh Hodesh, they recite the verses that discuss the Musaf sacrifice brought on Rosh Hodesh. However, the Arizal taught that the verses about the Musaf sacrifice should not be recited, and indeed, our custom is to omit this recitation from the Korbanot section.

Is it permissible to recite the Korbanot section – which discusses the various sacrifices – very early in the morning, before sunrise? On Shabuot morning, for example, when it is customary to pray early such that the Amida is recited right at sunrise, the Korbanot section is recited earlier, before sunrise. And sometimes, especially in the winter, it happens that a person needs to leave before sunrise for a meeting, or to catch a flight. May the Korbanot be recited before sunrise, when it is still dark? One potential issue is the Kabbalistic practice to refrain from reading or studying Tanach at night. According to the teachings of Kabbalah, verses from the Tanach should not be read at night, and the night is the time for the study only of Torah She'be'al Peh (the oral tradition), such as Gemara, Halacha, and so on. Secondly, since we read the section of Korbanot in lieu of the offering of these sacrifices in the Bet Ha'mikdash, and sacrifices could be offered only during the daytime hours, perhaps one must wait until sunrise before reciting the Tamid. The Halacha is that one must recite the Korbanot no earlier than Alot Ha'shahar – daybreak, the moment when the sun's rays first appear on the eastern sky – which occurs 72 Halachic minutes before sunrise (the moment when the sun itself appears on the eastern sky). Since it was after Alot Ha'shahar that the service began in the Bet Ha'mikdash, the Korbanot may be recited at this time – even before sunrise – but no earlier. This is the ruling of the Shulhan Aruch, and in Bet Yosef, he brings as the source of this Halacha a comment by the Rosh (Rabbenu Asher Ben Yehiel, Germany-Spain, 1250-1327) that the section of the Tamid should be recited no earlier than Alot Ha'shahar. The Bet Yosef deduced that all the Korbanot, too, must be recited only after Alot Ha'shahar, as the sacrifices could not be offered any earlier than that point. However, the Peri Megadim (Rav Yosef Teomim, 1727-1792) writes that if one is unable to recite the Korbanot section after Alot Ha'shahar, he may do so even earlier. This is based on a ruling of the Tebuot Shor (Rav Alexander Sender Shor, Poland, 1673-1737), who added that in such a case, the person should not recite the customary prayer asking G-d to consider the recitation as the actual offering of the sacrifice. Since sacrifices may not be brought during the night, one cannot ask that his recitation be deemed the equivalent of the actual offering of the Korbanot when he recites this section at night. The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) writes that although it is preferable to recite the Korbanot section after daybreak, it is acceptable when necessary to recite them earlier, even though the Korbanot cannot be brought during the night. He notes that we are credited with having offered the sacrifices by reciting and studying these portions of the Torah even though we are not in the Bet Ha'mikdash, and it is obviously forbidden to bring sacrifices anywhere besides the Bet Ha'mikdash. By the same token, it is acceptable to recite these sections even at times when sacrifices cannot be brought. The Leb Haim (Rav Haim Palachi, Turkey, 1788-1868) writes that one who cannot recite the Korbanot after Alot Ha'shahar may do earlier, but this would be considered simply as reading from the Torah, and not as the actual offering of the sacrifices. By contrast, the Mishna Berura rules that the Korbanot section may not be recited before Alot Ha'shahar. Those who cannot recite the Korbanot at the proper time may rely on the opinion that Alot Ha'shahar occurs 90 minutes before sunrise, rather than 72 minutes, giving them an additional 18 minutes. Summary: The Korbanot section of the morning prayer service must be recited no earlier than Alot Ha'shahar (daybreak), which occurs 72 Halachic minutes before sunrise. When necessary, one may follow the position that Alot Ha'shahar occurs 90 minutes before sunrise, and recite Korbanot at that time. If one cannot recite Korbanot even at that point, then according to some Poskim, he may recite it earlier.

May 30 first through 6:30 As we saw in an earlier installment, common practice among Sepharadim is not to recite each day the sections of the Torah discussing the various sacrifices (with the exception of the section that discusses the daily Tamid offering). However, the Poskim mention that during the time of a plague, it is recommended to read these sections of the Torah, as this recitation has the power to bring protection. This is especially true with regard to the reading of the Ketoret – the section dealing with the incense offering brought in the Bet Ha'mikdash. The Sages teach that when Moshe Rabbenu went to the heavens to receive the Torah, the angels in the heavens strongly opposed the plan to give the Torah to human beings, but Moshe prevailed in convincing them that the Torah belongs here in our world. G-d then ordered the angels to give Moshe gifts. Even the Satan was compelled to give Moshe a gift – and its gift to Moshe was the revelation of a secret. The Satan told Moshe that the only thing which it fears, which prevents it from inflicting the harm it wishes to inflict, is the Ketoret. Moshe used this secret during the aftermath of Korah's revolt, when Hashem unleashed a devastating plague that killed thousands among Beneh Yisrael. To stop the plague, Moshe instructed Aharon to bring an incense offering, and this ended the plague. Today, we cannot bring the Ketoret, but we can nevertheless read the section from the Torah and the section from the Gemara that discusses this offering, through which we earn protection as though we actually offered the Ketoret. Therefore, during times of widespread illness, such as during a pandemic, it is worthwhile to read the section of the Ketoret. Likewise, if somebody falls ill, it is advisable to read the Ketoret on the patient's behalf. It's worth noting in this context the opening verse of Parashat Behukotai, which promises rewards if we follow the Misvot. In stating the conditions for earning these rewards, the Torah says both "you observe My commands" ("Ve'et Misvotai Tishmeru") and "you perform them" ("Va'asitem Otam"). At first glance, these phrases seem redundant. Rav Levi Yishak of Berditchev (1740-1809), in Kedushat Levi, explains that the word "Tishmeru" in this context means not "observe," but rather "anticipate." Thus, for example, the Torah relates that after Yaakob Abinu heard Yosef's dreams about his becoming leader over his brothers, "Ve'abiv Shamar Et Ha'dabar" (Bereshit 37:11) – he eagerly awaited ("Shamar") the fulfillment of these dreams. Likewise, we speak of "Shemirat Shabbat," which means not only Shabbat observance, but also eagerly anticipating Shabbat throughout the week. Thus, Rav Levi Yishak writes, the phrase "Ve'et Misvotai Tishmeru" refers to longing to perform the Misvot, even when this is not possible. The Torah promises us rewards if we perform the Misvot we are able to perform, and if we genuinely long to perform the Misvot which we cannot perform. Thus, in the absence of the Bet Ha'mikdash, as we are unable to offer sacrifices, we must still long to bring them as the Torah wants us to. By doing so, we receive credit as though we observed them.

The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 1:5) writes that it is commendable to recite each morning the sections in the Torah – in the beginning of Sefer Vayikra – that speak of each of the Korbanot. People who follow this custom recite the sections discussing the Ola, the Minha, the Shelamim, the Hatat and the Asham. This custom is based on the notion developed by the Midrash that by reciting the verses that speak of a certain Korban, we are considered as having offered that Korban, and this is how we can attain atonement even without a Bet Ha'mikdash. Nevertheless, our custom is not to recite these sections in the Torah. It has been explained that we do not follow this practice because we instead recite the Mishnayot of Ezehu Mekoman – the fifth chapter of Masechet Zevahim – which briefly goes through the procedure for each kind of sacrifice. As discussed in previous installments, we do recite the section in the Torah discussing the Tamid – the daily sacrifice which was offered each morning and afternoon in the Bet Ha'mikdash. We do not, however, recite the sections in the Torah dealing with the other sacrifices. The Shulhan Aruch writes that after reciting the section from Torah of each of the sacrifices, one should recite a prayer asking G-d to regard his recitation as the actual offering of that sacrifice. Those who recite these sections add the prayer after the voluntary sacrifices – the Ola, Minha and Shelamim – but not after the Hatat (sin-offering), which cannot be brought voluntarily. The Hatat is offered only in very specific circumstances where atonement through the offering of this sacrifice is required, and it cannot be offered voluntarily. The Shulhan Aruch explains that those who follow this custom read the section of Hatat in case they have committed an act requiring this sacrifice, but they should not add the prayer asking that it be considered as the actual offering of the sacrifice, since they do not know for certain that they are required to bring this sacrifice. As for the Asham (guilt-offering), the Shulhan Aruch brings two opinions. Some maintain that since the Asham – like the Hatat – is brought only in very specific circumstances, the prayer should be omitted, except after the recitation of the Asham Talui – the Asham brought in situations where one is unsure whether he committed an offense requiring a Hatat. This sacrifice may be brought even if there is a remote possibility that it is required, and so it is valid to ask Hashem to accept the recitation of this section as though the sacrifice was actually offered. Others maintain that this prayer may be recited even after the section discussing other Asham sacrifices. The Shulhan Aruch writes that the first opinion seems more correct. The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) writes that if one wishes to observe this practice, he should recite these sections of the Torah after the Amida prayer. He explains that the recitation of the Amida functions as the offering of the daily Tamid sacrifice, and no sacrifice may be offered before the offering of the morning Tamid. Therefore, one must not recite these sections – which are recited in lieu of the offering of the sacrifices – before he recites the Amida. This opinion appears to contradict the justification mentioned above for our custom to not recite the sections in the Torah – that we instead recite the Mishnayot of Ezehu Mekoman. According to the Hida, it would seem, we are not permitted to recite Ezehu Mekoman before the Amida as a substitute for the actual offering of the sacrifices. It stands to reason that since, as mentioned, we recite the section of the Tamid before Ezehu Mekoman, the reading of the Tamid is considered as our offering of the Tamid sacrifice, well before the recitation of the Amida. We are thus justified in then reciting Ezehu Mekoman, which counts as the offering of the other sacrifices. Although we do not follow this custom brought by the Shulhan Aruch, nevertheless, this discussion is important as it underscores for us the significance of the Korbanot section. As we have seen, the Poskim took this recitation very seriously, viewing it as being actually considered as though the sacrifices have been offered. By reciting the Korbanot each morning, we truly have the opportunity to access the power of the sacrifices even though we do not yet have the Bet Ha'mikdash.

In the prayer we recite before the Korbanot section each morning, we express our joy over the fact that we arise early each morning to go to the synagogue and study hall, and we remain there in the evenings: "Fortunate are we! How good is our portion, how pleasant is our lot, and how exceedingly beautiful is our heritage. Fortunate are we when we rise early and stay late in synagogues and houses of study." In some editions of the Siddur, the phrase "Ke'she'anahnu Mashkimim" is written without the prefix "Ke" at the beginning. According to this version, we are exclaiming that we are fortunate "She'anahnu Mashkimim" – "that we arise early," not "when we arise early." The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) writes that a person should not say, "She'anahnu Mashkimim," because this would be dishonest, as most people do not arise at dawn to go to the synagogue or study hall. We should instead recite "Ke'she'anahnu," expressing that we are fortunate when we succeed in arising early to serve Hashem. Hacham Ovadia Yosef, however, disagreed, noting that the word is written "She'anahnu Mashkimim" in numerous texts of the earlier generations. It is found in Tana De'beh Eliyahu, the Siddur of Rav Amram Gaon, the Tur, the Seder Ha'yom, and several other sources. Hacham Ovadia explains that even one who does not rise early can recite this text – "She'anahnu" – because this word is written in the plural form, and thus refers not specifically to the individual reciting the prayer, but to the Jewish People generally, and many Jews indeed make a point of rising very early. This is comparable to the Vidui Ma'aser declaration that would be made every third and six years of the seven-year Shemitta cycle avowing compliance with the various tithing requirements (Terumot and Ma'aserot). Rashi (to Kiddushin 26a) writes that even a person who does not own land in Eretz Yisrael can make this proclamation, even though it refers to Eretz Yisrael as the land "Asher Natata Lanu" – "that You have given us" (Debarim 26:15), because this means that the land was given to the entire Jewish Nation. Even though the person himself has no portion in the Land of Israel, he can nevertheless speak of it as the land which Hashem has given "us," because the land was given to the entire nation. By contrast, a person without land in Eretz Yisrael cannot make the Mikra Bikkurim proclamation which is declared upon bringing one's first fruits, because this declaration speaks of the land "Asher Natati Li Hashem" – "that You, O G-d, have given me" (Debarim 26:10), in the first-person form. The phrase "She'anahnu Mashkimim" is written in the plural form, and thus refers to all Am Yisrael, and not specifically to the person reciting the prayer. Hence, it is legitimate even for somebody who does not rise early to recite this text. Nevertheless, most of the Siddurim that have become accepted in our community use the text "Ke'she'anahnu Mashkimim."

Each morning, before the Korbanot section, we recite a prayer ("Ribon Ha'olamim") in which we acknowledge our lowliness, recognizing that we are unworthy of G-d's kindness, and that even the most powerful are weak in relation to G-d and even the wisest are ignorant in relation to G-d. In this prayer, we humbly confess, "Ki Chol Ma'asenu Tohu" – "for all our actions are worthless." The obvious question arises as to how we can make such a pronouncement. After all, while we must all acknowledge that we are far from perfect, is it true that "all our actions are worthless"? We spend time praying, learning Torah, and performing acts of kindness for others, we give charity, and we do numerous worthwhile things throughout the day, every day. We of course all have much room for improvement, and, unfortunately, we are all guilty of wasting time on vanity, but it certainly seems exaggerated to claim that nothing we do has any value. Due to this question, there were some Poskim who changed the text of the phrase – replacing the word "Kol" ("all") with the word "Rob" ("most"). With this emendation, the text acknowledges that most of our actions are valueless, as we pursue vanity, but not that we never involve ourselves in meaningful activities such as prayer, Misvot and Torah study. However, the word "Kol" appears in all the texts that we have from earlier generations – including the text of the Rambam, Rav Amram Gaon, the Tur, and the Abudarham. Therefore, it seems very difficult to emend the text and change "Kol" to "Rob." The explanation, as Rav Yisrael Bitan discusses, likely stems from a comment of the Midrash (Vayikra Rabba 28:1) interpreting the verse in Kohelet (1:3), "Ma Yitron La'adam Be'chol Amalo" – "What does a person gain from all his toil?" The Midrash notes that certainly, there is much gained from a person's toil in Torah study, but Kohelet speaks of "Amalo" – a person's own "toil," meaning, that which he does for himself, for his own enjoyment and satisfaction. The "toil" that a person engages in for G-d, so-to-speak – his efforts in Torah and Misvot – are certainly precious and immensely valuable. It is only "Amalo" – his self-serving pursuits – that offer him no benefit. Likewise, we may explain the phrase "Ki Chol Ma'asenu Tohu" to mean that "Ma'asenu" – everything we do for ourselves, and not for the service of Hashem – has no value or significance. Therefore, we should not change the text to "Rob," and should instead maintain the text found in earlier sources – "Ki Chol Ma'asenu Tohu."

There is a time-honored tradition to remain awake throughout the night of Shabuot and read the special "Tikkun Lel Shabuot" text that is printed in the Mahzorim. Hacham Ben Sion Abba Shaul (Israel, 1924-1998), in his work Or Le'siyon (vol. 3, 18:11), discusses the importance of this custom and presents numerous laws and guidelines relevant to the proper observance of this special occasion (listen to audio clip for precise citation). First, he mentions that even learned men who prefer studying Gemara must set aside their Talmudic studies in order to read the text of the Tikkun Lel Shabuot. If time remains after they complete the Tikkun, they may then study other material that they find more enjoyable. In Yeshivot, Hacham Ben Sion writes, students should follow the instructions of their Rosh Yeshiva in this regard. He also emphasizes that one should read the Tikkun even if he does not understand some sections of the service. Even if one plans to remain awake throughout the night, he should nevertheless recite the Keri'at Shema Al Ha'mita before Hassot (midnight as defined by Halacha). Already after Hassot, one may recite all the morning Berachot, with the exception of "Al Netilat Yadayim" and Birkot Ha'Torah. One should make a point to use the bathroom at some point before morning in order to be able to recite "Asher Yasar." At the point in the pre-dawn hours when it is uncertain whether Alot Ha'shahar (daybreak, the first appearance of light in the eastern sky) has occurred, one should discontinue his Torah learning. He should instead either immerse in a Mikveh or sing songs of praise until Alot Ha'shahar. After Alot Ha'shahar, one should wash his hands in preparation for prayer, but without reciting a Beracha. He then must recite Birkat HaTorah. Hacham Ben Sion cites in this context a passage in the work Sha'ar Ha'kavanot, which comments that whoever remains awake and diligently involves himself in Torah study throughout this night is guaranteed to survive the entire next year and to avoid all harm. Nevertheless, one should make a point of studying "Li'shmah" – with the proper motivation, out of sincere love for and commitment to Torah learning, and not to receive reward. Hacham Ben Sion also warns that sitting idly or engaging in meaningless chatter is no better than sleeping. It is therefore imperative to ensure to spend the entire night engrossed in Torah learning, and not in any other activities. In particular, one must avoid idle conversation inside the synagogue. Hacham Ben Sion also cites a comment from the Zohar that emphasizes the importance of studying with joy and fervor, in reward for which one is blessed with seventy blessings. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) similarly stressed the importance of studying on this night with great enthusiasm and what he termed "purity of heart." Furthermore, on the festival of Shabuot God decrees how many "Hiddushim" (new insights) each individual will be privileged to develop during the coming year, which is determined based on the level of one's intensive study on Shabuot. Hacham Ben Sion writes that when we speak of Shabuot as "the day of the giving of the Torah," we refer not merely to the historical event of Matan Torah, but rather of the process that is renewed each year on this day. God grants a person on Shabuot the ability to think of new Torah insights, and one must therefore pray on Shabuot for Torah knowledge and the wisdom to understand to the best of his soul's capability, and also try to think of "Hiddushim" during his study on Shabuot. During the day of Shabuot, too, one should try to minimize his sleeping in order to spend as much time as possible involved in Torah learning. Every moment spent learning on Shabuot earns a person reward, and one must not squander this opportunity. In fact, there were great Rabbis who would not sleep at all on Shabuot; after remaining awake throughout the night, they would simply continue learning through the day of Shabuot. The Hid"a (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) likewise advises against indulging in sleep on the day of Shabuot. He also emphasizes that one must ensure not to fall asleep during the prayer service. Finally, one should also devote himself to Torah study with extra vigor and diligence during the "Sheloshet Yemeh Hagbala" – the three days of preparation prior to Shabuot. Just as in the wilderness Beneh Yisrael were instructed to abstain from relations and prepare themselves for three days prior to Matan Torah, so must we increase our efforts to learn Torah and minimize our physical indulgence during these three days. Hacham Ben Sion writes that the level of inspiration one receives from the experience of Shabuot depends on the amount of effort he exerted during the three previous days to prepare for this great experience.

The Korban Ha'tamid was the sacrifice that was offered each day in the Bet Ha'mikdash – one sheep was brought every morning, and a second sheep was brought every afternoon. This sacrifice was required each day, without exception, on weekdays, Shabbat, and all holidays, including Yom Kippur. The unique importance of this sacrifice can be seen in the story told by the Gemara in Masechet Menahot (64b) of the civil war that was waged during the Second Commonwealth, and one side besieged Jerusalem. The besieging army would send sheep over the wall into the city each day for the offering of the Tamid, until they were advised that as long the Tamid sacrifice was offered, they would not succeed in taking the city. The next day, they sent a pig instead of a sheep. The Gemara relates that as the pig was being lifted over the wall, the entire Land of Israel shook. Once the Tamid sacrifice was discontinued, disaster befell the nation. Due to the special importance of the Tamid, the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) writes in his work Rav Pe'alim that if a person arrives late in the synagogue, and does not have enough time to recite the entire Korbanot section (the section about the sacrifices), he should at least recite the verses of the Tamid (as well as the section of the Ketoret). We introduce the recitation of the Tamid with a special "Yehi Rason" prayer asking Hashem to forgive our sins and rebuild the Bet Ha'mikdash so we can again offer the daily Tamid sacrifice. This prayer appears in the Seder Ha'yom (by Rabbi Moshe Ben Machir, 16 th century). Although we generally omit on Shabbat prayers that include requests for forgiveness, we recite this prayer before the Tamid even on Shabbat. After reciting the Tamid section, we recite the section of the Ketoret followed by the paragraph of "Abayeh Hava Mesader" – Abayeh's outline of the entire daily procedure in the Bet Ha'mikdash. We then recite a concluding prayer – "Ribon Ha'olamim" – acknowledging that we are unable to offer sacrifices in the Bet Ha'mikdash because of our sins, and asking that our recitation of the Korbanot section should be accepted as though we actually offered the sacrifices. The Yafeh La'leb (Rav Rahamim Nissim Yitzchak Palachi, Turkey, 1814-1907) notes a passage in the Midrash stating that we will not require the offering of Korbanot in the future. He thus raises the question of why we ask Hashem for the opportunity to again offer sacrifices, if the sacrifices will not be brought in the times of the final redemption. In truth, this question was discussed already by his father, the Leb Haim (Rav Haim Palachi, 1787-1868), who concludes that all the Torah's Misvot – including the sacrifices – will remain binding for all time. The Midrash's comment about the sacrifices in the future needs to be understood, but it is clear that sacrifices will be brought in the times of the third Bet Ha'mikdash.

A verse in the Book of Hoshea (14:3) states, "U'neshalema Farim Sefatenu" – "We will compensate for the cows with our lips." This means that in the absence of the Bet Ha'mikdash, when we are unable to offer sacrifices ("cows"), we can attain atonement with our lips – by reciting the sections of the Torah that discuss the sacrifices, as through this recitation we are considered to have actually brought these sacrifices. The verse mentions cows, even though other animals were also offered as sacrifices. The Ibn Ezra (Spain, 1089-1167) suggests that since the cow is the biggest animal offered as a Korban, the verse specifies this animal, expressing the idea that even the large offerings can be substituted nowadays with our mouths. Others suggest that the reference to cows alludes to the sin of the golden calf, the grievous sin which our ancestors committed that requires atonement. Finally, there are those who explain that this refers to the situation where the entire nation inadvertently commits a severe misdeed based on a mistaken ruling of the Sanhedrin, a situation which requires the offering a cow for atonement ("Par He'alem Dabar Shel Sibur"). The point being made is that we have the opportunity to attain atonement even for grave sins despite the absence of the Bet Ha'mikdash, through the recitation of the sections of the Torah dealing with the sacrifices. A story told in Masechet Shabbat (12b) seems, at first glance, to contradict this concept. The Gemara there discusses the enactment legislated by the Sages that one may not read by candlelight on Shabbat, as he might tilt the lamp to move the oil toward the flame to make it steadier, which would constitute an act of Shabbat desecration. Rabbi Yishmael Ben Elisha felt confident that he would certainly not make the mistake of tilting the lamp, and so he read by the light of a candle on Shabbat. He ended up mistakenly tilting the lamp. After Shabbat, he wrote in his ledger that when the Bet Ha'mikdash would be rebuilt, he would bring an animal as a Hatat (sin-offering) to atone for this inadvertent violation. It seems that Rabbi Yishmael was not able to atone for this misdeed by reciting the section of the Hatat; he needed to actually bring the sacrifice in order to attain atonement. One explanation might be that reading the section of Korbanot (sacrifices) is effective if one never has the opportunity to actually offer the required sacrifice. But if a person has the privilege of living to see the rebuilding of the Bet Ha'mikdash, then he must offer the sacrifice even though he had recited the section in the Torah. By contrast, the Sapihit Bi'dbash (Rav Hiya Pontremoli, Turkey, 1764–1831), citing the Ma'abar Yabok , asserted that a sin committed during the time of the Bet Ha'mikdash is more grievous, and thus necessitates the actual offering of a sacrifice. After the Temple's destruction, sins lack the same level of gravity, and so they can be atoned even with the recitation of the Korbanot. However, this view appears irreconcilable with the Gemara's account of Rabbi Yishmael, who was obligated to bring a sacrifice for an offense committed after the Temple's destruction. Moreover, the Arizal writes that a person must fulfill all 613 Misvot, and so souls will need to be reincarnated and return after the Bet Ha'mikdash is rebuilt so they can fulfill the Misvot that require a Bet Ha'mikdash. This teaching, too, implies that reciting the Korbanot is not considered equivalent to the actual offering of the sacrifices. A more compelling approach was advanced by the Petah Ha'debir (Rav Haim Binyamin Pontremoli, Turkey, d. 1873), who distinguished between the atonement achieved through the offering of a sacrifice, and the Misva to offer the sacrifice. Reciting the verses that speak of a required sacrifice suffices to atone like that sacrifice, but it does not suffice to satisfy the halachic requirement to bring that sacrifice after committing a misdeed. Therefore, even though Rabbi Yishmael could earn atonement through the recitation of Korbanot, he still bore the obligation to offer a sacrifice when the Bet Ha'mikdash would be rebuilt. Likewise, the Arizal taught that one will have to return after the restoration of the Mikdash to fulfill the Misvot of the sacrifices that could not be fulfilled without a Temple, even though atonement can be achieved even in the absence of the Bet Ha'mikdash, through the reading of Korbanot. One might wonder, then, why we do not read each day the entirety of Parashat Vayikra, which goes through all the different sacrifices which an individual can bring and those which one must bring on certain occasions. If reading about a sacrifice earns a person atonement as though he actually brought the sacrifice, then it would seemingly be recommended to read this entire Parasha each day. Some explain that one attains atonement for his misdeeds through Torah study, and so it is not necessary to read the sections of all the sacrifices every day. Rabbenu Yona (Spain, 1200-1263) writes that when a person makes the decision to perform Teshuba (repentance), he should increase his amount of Torah learning; if he had been accustomed to learning one page a day, then he should learn two pages a day, and so on. This is because Torah study has the ability to erase guilt for one's misdeeds. This is why the blessing in Shemona Esreh in which we beseech G-d to help us repent begins, "Hashibenu Abinu Le'Toratecha" – "Return us, our Father, to Your Torah." As Torah learning is a crucial element of repentance, we ask Hashem to draw us closer to Torah study so we can repent properly. This concept has been understood on the basis of the laws of "Kashering" utensils. The basic principle of "Kashering" is that a non-kosher flavor is expunged from a utensil through the same medium through which it was absorbed. Thus, utensils that were used to cook non-kosher food through direct exposure to fire must be directly exposed to fire to eliminate the forbidden taste so they may become permissible. The Yeser Ha'ra (evil inclination) leads us to sin through the "fire" of forbidden desires, and so we cleanse ourselves from wrongdoing through Torah learning, which is likened to fire. Therefore, some Rabbis explained that it is preferable to immerse oneself in Torah learning to achieve atonement, rather than spend time reading the sections of the Korbanot. Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868) explained that reading all the sections of the Korbanot is unnecessary because we recite the chapter of "Ezehu Mekoman," which goes through all the various kinds of sacrifices, and this is sufficient for us to be considered to have offered any sacrifice we are required to bring. Another approach was taken by the Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806). We are required to recite 100 Berachot each day, and we also recite each morning Baruch She'amar, which contains eleven expressions that begin with the word "Baruch" (not including the two instances of "Baruch" that begin and end the concluding blessing of Baruch She'amar). These 111 blessings, the Hida writes, correspond to the 111 verses of Parashat Vayikra, and by reciting them we are considered to have recited all of Parashat Vayikra. This discussion underscores for us the importance of reading the Korbanot section each morning. As we have seen, this recitation is not simply an admirable and worthwhile practice; it actually provides us with atonement as though we brought the sacrifices in the Bet Ha'mikdash. Therefore, one should make every effort to arrive on time in the synagogue so he can recite this section and reap the great benefits that it offers.