Podcasts about am yisrael

The Henry and Lisa Manoucheri Parsha Shiur Parshiyos Acharei Mos & K'doshim (2025-  תשפ״ה) The Jewish Goal of Intimacy Plus Intimacy & Parenting the RIGHT Way vs the Wrong Way  

The Psychology Behind the Parsha

The Henry and Lisa Manoucheri Parsha Shiur Parshiyos Tazria-M'Tzora (2025-  תשפ״ה) Held to the Highest Standard  & The Ethos of a Real Community & The Anonymous "THEY..." 

Today's daf is dedicated to the memory of the fallen soldiers of the IDF and security forces who fell in defense of Am Yisrael and Eretz Israel, and to the memory of those whose lives were tragically lost in terrorist attacks. May their memories be blessed. We are especially thinking of our Hadran learners who have lost children, grandchildren, siblings and close friends in the past year and a half. We continue to pray for the safety of our soldiers, for the safe and speedy return of our hostages, and for a refuah shleima for all the injured soldiers.  Today's daf is sponsored by Naomi Cohen in loving memory of her mother, Elisheva bat Yehuda, Elisabeth Maybaum, on her 6th yahrzeit. "Having fled the Nazi regime as a child, it gave her such joy and hope to see her children and grandchildren living Jewish lives, learning Torah, settling in Eretz Israel and defending it. Tehi zichra baruch." Does one get multiple punishments for an act on yom tov that involves multiple melachot (as is the case for sacrifices for one who violates Shabbat)?  If so, why isn't planting also listed in the Mishna? The Mishna listed a case where one plowed and received eight sets of lashes because of unique circumstances. Seven other suggestions are made to cases that could have been brought in the Mishna that would have added an additional set of lashes. Cases are brought regarding cross breeding with animals that are considered both hekdesh and chulin. How many lashes does one receive? If one cannot receive that many, the court assesses how many they can handle (must be a number divisible by 3).  What if they change the assessment? Does it depend on whether they already starting giving the person lashes or not? On what else does it depend?  How does an assessment work when there are multiple sets of lashes? How does the actual giving of lashes take place? What type of whip do they use? Where does the person receive the whipping?  

Today's daf is dedicated to the memory of the fallen soldiers of the IDF and security forces who fell in defense of Am Yisrael and Eretz Israel, and to the memory of those whose lives were tragically lost in terrorist attacks. May their memories be blessed. We are especially thinking of our Hadran learners who have lost children, grandchildren, siblings and close friends in the past year and a half. We continue to pray for the safety of our soldiers, for the safe and speedy return of our hostages, and for a refuah shleima for all the injured soldiers.  Today's daf is sponsored by Naomi Cohen in loving memory of her mother, Elisheva bat Yehuda, Elisabeth Maybaum, on her 6th yahrzeit. "Having fled the Nazi regime as a child, it gave her such joy and hope to see her children and grandchildren living Jewish lives, learning Torah, settling in Eretz Israel and defending it. Tehi zichra baruch." Does one get multiple punishments for an act on yom tov that involves multiple melachot (as is the case for sacrifices for one who violates Shabbat)?  If so, why isn't planting also listed in the Mishna? The Mishna listed a case where one plowed and received eight sets of lashes because of unique circumstances. Seven other suggestions are made to cases that could have been brought in the Mishna that would have added an additional set of lashes. Cases are brought regarding cross breeding with animals that are considered both hekdesh and chulin. How many lashes does one receive? If one cannot receive that many, the court assesses how many they can handle (must be a number divisible by 3).  What if they change the assessment? Does it depend on whether they already starting giving the person lashes or not? On what else does it depend?  How does an assessment work when there are multiple sets of lashes? How does the actual giving of lashes take place? What type of whip do they use? Where does the person receive the whipping?  

B"H On Israel's Remembrance Day, we remember heroes like Noach Bograd, who fled persecution in Russia to build a life in Israel—and his son Yechezkel, who gave his life defending it in the Yom Kippur War. Their legacy lives on in every Jew who sacrifices for Am Yisrael—whether on the battlefield or in daily acts of courage and faith. This is mesiras nefesh—the self-sacrifice that taps into the deepest parts of our soul and binds us to our people. As the Lubavitcher Rebbe taught: every Jew is a soldier in Hashem's army, spreading the light of Torah and mitzvot and building true, lasting peace. To watch Torah Thoughts in video format, click HERE Subscribe to the Torah Thoughts BLOG for exclusive written content! Please like, share and subscribe wherever you find this!

The Torah in Parashat Shemini introduces the subject of "Ma'achalot Asurot" – the forbidden foods, outlining the general principles that govern which foods are permissible for consumption and which are not. In its conclusion of this topic, the Torah connects these laws to the concept of Kedusha, the sanctity of Beneh Yisrael: "Ve'hitkadishtem Vi'hyitem Kedoshim Ki Kadosh Ani" – "You shall sanctify yourselves and be sacred, for I am sacred…" (11:44). This association between "Ma'achalot Asurot" and the concept of Kedusha is underscored by the Rambam, who includes these laws in the "Kedusha" section of his halachic code. To explain this connection, Rav Eliyahu Bakshi-Doron (1941-2020), former Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel, draws our attention to an important passage in the Midrash Tanhuma (Shemini, 6), which offers an analogy to a doctor who visited two ailing patients. He noticed that the first patient was gravely ill with little chance of surviving, whereas the second was likely to recover. The doctor told the first patient's family member to feed him whichever foods he wanted, whereas the family of the second patient were given very strict instructions regarding the patient's diet. Since the first patient in any event was not likely to live, the doctor explained, he could be allowed to enjoy whichever foods he wished. The second, however, had the potential to live, and so he needed to care for his health so that he could recover. The Midrash explains that the same is true of Am Yisrael and the other nations of the world. While there is no physical difference between us, and our bodies are no different than the bodies of other peoples, we are destined to "live," as the verse says in the Book of Debarim (4:4), "Ve'atem Ha'debekim B'Hashem Elokechem Haim Kulechem" – "And you, who are attached to Hashem your G-d, are living." Rav Bakshi-Doron explains that we are destined to receive a portion in the next world, in the eternal afterlife, where our souls will exist together with Hashem, and this is the "life" to which we are uniquely destined. We are "sacred" in the sense that we are given the potential to build a special connection with the Almighty. Therefore, we are given a special "diet" that we must follow. We of course do not understand the spiritual effects of kosher food and non-kosher food, but Hashem Himself – the greatest "doctor" – informed us of which foods we must abstain from in order to preserve our spiritual health so we can build a unique connection with Him and become the holy people that we are meant to become. Rav Bakshi-Doron adds that this explains why the laws of "Ma'achalot Asurot" appear here in Parashat Shemini, which also tells of the events that took place when the Mishkan was inaugurated. The purpose of the Mishkan, as Hashem famously told Moshe back in Parashat Teruma (Shemot 25:8), is "Ve'shachanti Be'tocham" – that Hashem would reside among His people. Through the Mishkan, Hashem came to live intimately with us, to dwell within each and every member of our nation. The Mishkan, then, signifies the special relationship that we are to build with our Creator, the unique spiritual potential that we have been given. This is the connection between the Mishkan – the most powerful symbol of our unique spiritual potential – and "Ma'achalot Asurot," the laws we must observe in order to bring that potential into fruition. Hashem chose us to become a special nation – and to that end, He equipped us with special potential and abilities. This does not mean we are naturally better than others – rather, it means that we are given the responsibility and the challenge to rise to greater heights, and we are guaranteed the ability to meet this challenge if we truly strive to. Once we recognize our unique spiritual mission, and the unique potential we have to complete this mission, we will feel more confident and more driven to pursue spiritual greatness, to maximize our potential, and become the great people that we are expected to become.

In this episode of the Tribesmen Podcast, I sit down with Yakir Wachstock, the founder of Boots for Israel, an organization that's outfitting Israel's reservist soldiers with one of the most basic but critical tools—high-quality combat boots. Yakir shares his unbelievable story of how a 2:30 AM phone call from an IDF Major led him on a mission that's now delivered over 80,000 pairs of boots to IDF reservists across Israel. He opens up about the grind, the miracles, and the powerful connections this journey has created between Jews in America and soldiers on the front lines. This isn't just about boots. It's about brotherhood. It's about action. And it's about YOU realizing the difference you can make when you step up.     What You'll Learn: How an occupational therapist from New York stepped up to supply IDF reservists with life-saving boots. The 2:30 AM phone call that launched a mission now helping thousands of soldiers on the front lines. Why proper combat boots are critical for reservists serving 200+ days in extreme conditions. How Yakir turned a simple act into a movement that's delivered over 80,000 pairs of boots—one soldier at a time. The powerful stories and miracles that show how one small action can make an enormous difference. Why the fight isn't over, even in times of ceasefire—and why the need for unity, support, and action is greater than ever. How Boots for Israel is connecting Jews across the world and strengthening Am Yisrael in a time of crisis. What's next for Boots for Israel and how YOU can step up, get involved, and make an impact today.     Key Takeaways for the Tribe: ✅ Take Action When You're Called Yakir didn't wait to be an expert. He heard a need and stepped up. So can you. ✅ One Pair of Boots = One Life Changed This isn't about numbers. It's about one soldier, one pair of boots, one act of care—80,000 times over. ✅ Am Yisrael Chai Means More Than Words Support isn't just money. It's showing up, writing a note, packing boots, and being part of something bigger than yourself. ✅ You're Never Too Small to Make a Difference Yakir was “just” an occupational therapist. Now he's leading a mission that's changed tens of thousands of lives. ✅ Our Soldiers Need Us—Now More Than Ever Even in ceasefire, the battle isn't over. Soldiers are still in harm's way. And they're counting on us.     Chazak ve'ematz! Yigal P.S. If this episode moved you, take one small step today. Visit bootsforisrael.com, donate a pair of boots, or bring Yakir to your community. Our soldiers are counting on us.  

This daf is sponsored by Miriam Adler in loving memory of her mother whose first yahrzeit is today. "When I started this round of daf yomi in January 2020, my Mom who was 98 years old at the time, told me that she’d like to celebrate the siyum with me! She made it to Bava Metzia. We hope to carry on her optimism and love of family and Am Yisrael." Today's daf is sponsored by Sara Berelowitz. "May the learning of the daf be in memory of my dear mother-in-law, Sarah Berelowitz, Sarah Teyuva bat David Shlomo, on her sixth yahrzeit. We miss you Granny. Yehi zichra baruch."  If one kidnapped a person and sold them to the father/brother of the kidnapped, is the kidnapped liable the death penalty? One who kidnaps one's own son, there is a debate between Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka and the rabbis. On what basis do the rabbis exempt? The Torah mentions the prohibition to steal in the Ten Commandments and in Vayikra Chapter 19. From the context of each section, it is evident which one refers to kidnapping and and which refers to stealing objects. Since there are two actions involved in kidnapping in order to be convicted (kidnapping and selling), could two witnesses testify that one kidnapped and a different two testify that one sold? Would that be considered two separate testimonies that each stands alone or is each only half a testimony? If it is half a testimony, there is a debate between Chizkiya and Rabbi Yochanan about whether partial testimony is acceptable or not. How does the case of kidnapping compare to a rebellious son, where there are also two stages - as first witnesses testify that he ate and drank, he is flogged and then if he repeats the offense in the presence of witnesses he is killed? What is the procedure for convicting one as a rebellious elder, zaken mamre?

This daf is sponsored by Miriam Adler in loving memory of her mother whose first yahrzeit is today. "When I started this round of daf yomi in January 2020, my Mom who was 98 years old at the time, told me that she’d like to celebrate the siyum with me! She made it to Bava Metzia. We hope to carry on her optimism and love of family and Am Yisrael." Today's daf is sponsored by Sara Berelowitz. "May the learning of the daf be in memory of my dear mother-in-law, Sarah Berelowitz, Sarah Teyuva bat David Shlomo, on her sixth yahrzeit. We miss you Granny. Yehi zichra baruch."  If one kidnapped a person and sold them to the father/brother of the kidnapped, is the kidnapped liable the death penalty? One who kidnaps one's own son, there is a debate between Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka and the rabbis. On what basis do the rabbis exempt? The Torah mentions the prohibition to steal in the Ten Commandments and in Vayikra Chapter 19. From the context of each section, it is evident which one refers to kidnapping and and which refers to stealing objects. Since there are two actions involved in kidnapping in order to be convicted (kidnapping and selling), could two witnesses testify that one kidnapped and a different two testify that one sold? Would that be considered two separate testimonies that each stands alone or is each only half a testimony? If it is half a testimony, there is a debate between Chizkiya and Rabbi Yochanan about whether partial testimony is acceptable or not. How does the case of kidnapping compare to a rebellious son, where there are also two stages - as first witnesses testify that he ate and drank, he is flogged and then if he repeats the offense in the presence of witnesses he is killed? What is the procedure for convicting one as a rebellious elder, zaken mamre?

At the beginning of this week's parasha , Titzaveh , Bneh Yisrael were commanded to bring שמן זית זך —pure olive oil—to light the menorah . Only the very first droplets from each olive were permitted for this purpose. Chazal tell us that although only 12 hours' worth of oil was placed in the lamps, the flames miraculously burned for a full 24 hours—demonstrating Hashem's presence among the Jewish people. The menorah represented the light of Torah. The Gemara states that whoever wishes to attain wisdom in Torah should face slightly southward while reciting the Amida , because the menorah , which symbolizes Torah wisdom, stood in the southern part of the Beit HaMikdash . The power of Torah is far beyond our comprehension. The Midrash tells us that Shlomo HaMelech constructed ten menorot for the Beit HaMikdash , each with seven lamps, totaling 70 flames—corresponding to the 70 facets of Torah. Chazal further teach that as long as those flames were burning, the 70 nations of the world remained subservient to Am Yisrael . But from the day those flames were extinguished, those nations gained power over us. All of our strength comes from Torah. The Sefer Sas Be'Imratecha records a powerful story about Rabbi Moshe Chevroni, the former Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Chevron . At one point, he wasn't feeling well and went to the doctor for an evaluation. After running tests, the doctor informed him that he had been diagnosed with a serious illness and had only three months left to live. His family and talmidim were devastated. But instead of falling into despair, the Rosh Yeshivah made a firm decision—he would dedicate these final months to learning Torah without interruption , stopping only for the most basic necessities. And so he did. He immersed himself in Torah study, and Baruch Hashem , instead of living for just three more months, he lived for another 20 years. The Steipler Gaon , upon hearing this, remarked in amazement, "Hashem gave him a blow, but instead of breaking from it, he elevated himself—and the merit of his Torah added 20 years to his life." What was even more astonishing was that throughout those two decades, he never required treatments that would prevent him from learning. He continued delivering his regular shiurim and prayed with the yeshiva minyan every single day. The Chozeh of Lublin once had a long line of people waiting to see him for berachot and advice. Suddenly, in the middle of his appointments, he asked everyone to step out of the room for a few moments. Once the room was empty, he locked the door. One of his chasidim , eager to learn from the Rebbe , hid inside the room to see what he was going to do. To his astonishment, he saw the Rebbe take out a Mishnayot and begin learning a perek . Unable to contain his curiosity, the chasid revealed himself and asked, "Rebbe, why did you send everyone out just to learn a perek of Mishnayot?" The Chozeh replied, "The last few people who came to me shared their suffering and begged for salvation. I felt that in order to give them a proper beracha, I needed the strength of Torah within me—so I paused to learn first." All of our great rabbanim who had the power to give berachot drew that strength from their Torah learning and purity of character. We must treasure the Torah we have and use our time wisely to learn it in depth. It provides us with the spiritual energy we need to succeed in this world. Shabbat Shalom.

The Megilla tells us that Ester, the heroine of the Purim story, had another name – Hadasa. What might be the significance of this second name? We should perhaps assume that if the Megilla found it necessary to inform us of Ester's other name, this detail must be important. What does the name "Hadasa" represent, and what does it tell us about Ester's role in the Purim story? The historical backdrop to the Purim story is the destruction of the Bet Ha'mikdash and the Jewish People's banishment to exile. It was during this period, after the Jews had spent over half a century in Babylonia – which was taken over by Persia – that the story told in the Megilla unfolded. We can easily imagine what was going through the Jews' minds at this time. They must have assumed that their special relationship with G-d was over. After all, G-d had sent the Babylonian marauders to set His Bet Ha'mikdash ablaze, and to bring the nation into exile. Decades passed, and they remained far from their homeland. They naturally thought that they were no longer Hashem's special nation, and there was thus no longer any reason to learn Torah, to perform Misvot, or to live a religious lifestyle. Indeed, the Gemara teaches that at Ahashverosh's feast, he came dressed in the special garments of the Kohen Gadol, and used the utensils of the Bet Ha'mikdash. He was celebrating the fact that the Jews' exile was permanent, that they would never be returning to the Land of Israel and would never rebuild the Bet Ha'mikdash. The Jews participated in this feast, showing that they shared this belief. Of course, this was a grave mistake. King Shlomo, the wisest of all men, writes in the Book of Kohelet (4:12), "Ve'ha'hut Ha'meshulash Lo Bi'mhera Yinatek" – "The triple thread will not easily be snapped." A single thread can easily be torn, but if three threads are woven together, this becomes a rope, which is far more difficult to cut. The Jewish Nation is a "triple thread," having been built by three patriarchs – Abraham, Yishak and Yaakob. Had our nation been created by just a single founder, or even two founders, this would not have established a strong enough foundation to withstand the many challenges and upheavals that would occur over the course of Jewish history. But our nation was built by three "threads," three outstanding figures, laying for us a foundation that can never be broken. For this reason, the verse in the Book of Debarim (32:9) says, "Yaakob Hebel Nahalato" – Yaakob is the "rope" of G-d's "lot," the Jewish Nation. Yaakob was the third patriarch, and thus he turned the "threads" of his two predecessors into a "Hebel," a rope, that can never be broken. The Jewish Nation is eternal, and its special relationship with Hashem is eternal. A child might anger his parents, and this relationship might at times be strained, even, perhaps, under drastic circumstances, to the point where the parent must send the child out of the home for a period of time, but he will always be their child, and their love for him will always remain. Similarly, even when Hashem punishes Am Yisrael, and even when He drives us into exile, His love for His treasured nation is everlasting. This was Ester's message to the Jewish People when they faced the threat of annihilation. They had despaired, figuring that G-d had abandoned them, but she reminded them that their bond with Hashem is everlasting and unconditional. She therefore decreed a three-day fast – to remind them of the "Hut Ha'meshulash," the "triple thread" that forms the foundation of Am Yisrael, which cannot ever be broken. Ester was therefore called "Hadasa," an allusion to the "Hadas," the myrtle branch, one of the four species we take on Sukkot. The Torah calls the Hadas "Anaf Etz Abot" (Vayikra 23:40) – a branch with a thick covering of leaves – and Rashi explains this to mean "Kelu'im Ke'hebel" – "braided like a rope." The leaves of the Hadas branch grow in groups of three, with every three leaves emerging from the same spot on the stem. The Hadas' thick covering of leaves is thus likened to a rope, three threads woven together, and it symbolizes the concept of "Yaakob Hebel Nahalato," G-d's eternal bond with the Jewish Nation. In fact, the word "Hut" (thread) in Gematria equals 23, such that three threads are represented by the number 69 (23 X 3) – which is the Gematria of "Hadas." Ester was called "Hadasa" because this was precisely the message she conveyed to the Jews in exile – that Hashem's love for them was everlasting, that this bond could never be broken. We all recognize the numerous spiritual problems that plague the Jewish People in our day and age. It is clear to all of us that there is so much to improve, so many difficult problems to address. But we must never feel discouraged or fall into despair. At no point may we ever think, as the Jews in Persia thought, that Hashem no longer loves us or cares about us, that our special relationship with Him has ended. We must remember that our special bond can never be broken, that Hashem loves us under all circumstances, even when we aren't acting as we should. Sometimes this love is more evident, and sometimes less, but we must believe that it is always present. This awareness should give us the encouragement and resolve we need to work toward growth and improvement, to strive to elevate ourselves as well as our fellow Jews, and thereby strengthen the eternal bond between us and our Creator.

Ditza Ohr, a mother whose son, Avinatan, was taken hostage during the tragic events at the Nova music festival on October 7, 2023. Avinatan's girlfriend, Noa Argamani, was also abducted, with distressing footage of her kidnapping spreading worldwide.Despite the immense personal anguish, Ditza has become a voice of resilience and faith, advocating for solutions that balance the urgency of bringing hostages home with the safety of the broader community. Her unwavering belief in divine providence (emunah) and deep commitment to the well-being of the Jewish people (Am Yisrael) guide her in navigating this heartbreaking reality. This video highlights her strength, her message, and the ongoing efforts to secure the safe return of all those still in captivity.► SAVE A FARMHelp defend our people's land.→ Help Here: https://bit.ly/3QBc9LGLchaim.

This week's learning is sponsored by Nira Feldman in loving memory of her mother Faye Darack z"l. "A devoted Hadran learner, she approached each day with a renewed curiosity to learn and grow, she continues to inspire us each day."  Today's daf is sponsored by Phyllis & Yossie Hecht in loving memory of Phyllis’s father’s, HaRav Yerachmiel Binyanim ben Zalman Tzvi Witkin on his 16th yahrzeit, “Jerry Witkin, the יושר לב, חבר לכל רואך וכל כך שמח בחלקו. We can only imagine the pride Dad must feel peeking down on his impactful legacy of 6 children, 28 grandchildren and continuous growth of great-grandchildren living lives of Am Yisrael b'Eretz Yisrael im Torat Yisrael! Dad, you are so missed and we have been so blessed. Yehi Zichro Baruch.” Today’s daf is sponsored by Rabbi Art Gould in loving memory of Carol’s mother, Irma Robinson, Hudda Bat Moshe on her 8th yahrzeit. “Irma built a rich life in the Chicago area. She loved to have the family over for special events. Sadly, four years after she was widowed, Irma developed Alzheimer’s. Carol and her sister Debbie were blessed that though her illness progressed, she never forgot who they were.” She and Carol are together in a different world, and this dedication will always remain the same.  Today's daf is sponsored by Naomi Cohen. "Mazal Tov to Jack, Rivka, Itzik and Yoni on the birth of a daughter and sister, Elisheva bat Yaakov v'Rivka, Ella - with love from Mum and Dad/Savta and Sabba." Assumptions are made about a rebellious child regarding the course his future will take and therefore he is killed to prevent him from sinning further. Similar assumptions are also made regarding a robber - the assumption is that a robber will come to kill if the owner of the house stands up against the robber, and therefore it is permitted to kill a robber. The Gemara discusses the circumstances in which one can assume the robber is coming to kill. Additionally, if at the time of the robbery the robber is viewed as a pursuer, there is a "death penalty" on the robber. Therefore, the robber is exempt from damages caused to property because of the law that if one incurs two punishments simultaneously, one is exempt from the more lenient one. Rav takes this even further to say a robber who can be killed is exempt from returning the stolen items.  Rava disagrees and only exempts the robber if the item is broken or gone. Our Mishna is brought to support Rava's interpretation. Another source is brought to raise a difficulty against Rava's position. The difficulty is resolved. Other drashot are brought on the verses regarding robbery, including laws that one can even kill a robber on Shabbat, in any way they want, and anyone can kill the robber, not only the one being robbed. Two different drashot highlight why the verse specifically brought the example of a robber in a machteret, i.e. breaking in, even though the law would also apply to one who climbs up to the roof or enters the courtyard (easily). One explains that it is the typical manner of robbers, while the other learns from here that one who breaks in is already considered forewarned and no warning is necessary before killing the robber. Rav Huna rules that a minor pursuer can be killed as well, as there is no need for a warning. Rav Chisda raised a difficulty from a Mishna in Ohalot 7:6 that if the mother's life is endangered during childbirth, if the head has emerged, one cannot kill the baby to save the mother, even if the baby is acting like a pursuer. The resolution is that the baby is not intending to kill the mother, as it is an act of God. In the earlier part of that Mishna it is explained that before the head has emerged, one can abort the fetus if it is causing risk to the mother, as the life of the mother takes precedence to an unborn fetus. A braita is brought to support Rav Huna's position and another is brought to contradict. However, both are rejected as inconclusive.

This week's learning is sponsored by Nira Feldman in loving memory of her mother Faye Darack z"l. "A devoted Hadran learner, she approached each day with a renewed curiosity to learn and grow, she continues to inspire us each day."  Today's daf is sponsored by Phyllis & Yossie Hecht in loving memory of Phyllis’s father’s, HaRav Yerachmiel Binyanim ben Zalman Tzvi Witkin on his 16th yahrzeit, “Jerry Witkin, the יושר לב, חבר לכל רואך וכל כך שמח בחלקו. We can only imagine the pride Dad must feel peeking down on his impactful legacy of 6 children, 28 grandchildren and continuous growth of great-grandchildren living lives of Am Yisrael b'Eretz Yisrael im Torat Yisrael! Dad, you are so missed and we have been so blessed. Yehi Zichro Baruch.” Today’s daf is sponsored by Rabbi Art Gould in loving memory of Carol’s mother, Irma Robinson, Hudda Bat Moshe on her 8th yahrzeit. “Irma built a rich life in the Chicago area. She loved to have the family over for special events. Sadly, four years after she was widowed, Irma developed Alzheimer’s. Carol and her sister Debbie were blessed that though her illness progressed, she never forgot who they were.” She and Carol are together in a different world, and this dedication will always remain the same.  Today's daf is sponsored by Naomi Cohen. "Mazal Tov to Jack, Rivka, Itzik and Yoni on the birth of a daughter and sister, Elisheva bat Yaakov v'Rivka, Ella - with love from Mum and Dad/Savta and Sabba." Assumptions are made about a rebellious child regarding the course his future will take and therefore he is killed to prevent him from sinning further. Similar assumptions are also made regarding a robber - the assumption is that a robber will come to kill if the owner of the house stands up against the robber, and therefore it is permitted to kill a robber. The Gemara discusses the circumstances in which one can assume the robber is coming to kill. Additionally, if at the time of the robbery the robber is viewed as a pursuer, there is a "death penalty" on the robber. Therefore, the robber is exempt from damages caused to property because of the law that if one incurs two punishments simultaneously, one is exempt from the more lenient one. Rav takes this even further to say a robber who can be killed is exempt from returning the stolen items.  Rava disagrees and only exempts the robber if the item is broken or gone. Our Mishna is brought to support Rava's interpretation. Another source is brought to raise a difficulty against Rava's position. The difficulty is resolved. Other drashot are brought on the verses regarding robbery, including laws that one can even kill a robber on Shabbat, in any way they want, and anyone can kill the robber, not only the one being robbed. Two different drashot highlight why the verse specifically brought the example of a robber in a machteret, i.e. breaking in, even though the law would also apply to one who climbs up to the roof or enters the courtyard (easily). One explains that it is the typical manner of robbers, while the other learns from here that one who breaks in is already considered forewarned and no warning is necessary before killing the robber. Rav Huna rules that a minor pursuer can be killed as well, as there is no need for a warning. Rav Chisda raised a difficulty from a Mishna in Ohalot 7:6 that if the mother's life is endangered during childbirth, if the head has emerged, one cannot kill the baby to save the mother, even if the baby is acting like a pursuer. The resolution is that the baby is not intending to kill the mother, as it is an act of God. In the earlier part of that Mishna it is explained that before the head has emerged, one can abort the fetus if it is causing risk to the mother, as the life of the mother takes precedence to an unborn fetus. A braita is brought to support Rav Huna's position and another is brought to contradict. However, both are rejected as inconclusive.

Parashat Yitro recounts one of the most pivotal events, if not the most pivotal event, in Jewish history—the giving of the Torah at Har Sinai. The Midrash famously teaches that before giving the Torah to Beneh Yisrael, Hashem first offered it to the other nations. He approached the descendants of Esav, who inquired about its contents. When Hashem told them that the Torah includes the command, "Lo Tirsah"—"You shall not murder," they declined, as violence was ingrained in their way of life. Next, Hashem turned to Yishmael's descendants. Upon hearing that the Torah forbids theft—"Lo Tignob"—they, too, rejected it, unable to commit to such a moral standard, refraining from theft. Hashem then went to Amon and Moav. When they asked what the Torah commanded, Hashem told them, "Lo Tinaf"—"You shall not commit adultery." They, too, refused, unwilling to accept such a limitation, as they were accustomed to engaging freely in illicit relationships. Hashem then offered the Torah to Beneh Yisrael, who unlike the other nations, accepted the Torah unconditionally, without asking any questions. The Midrash's account requires explanation. The prohibitions of murder, theft, and adultery are not unique to the Torah. They are already included in the Sheva Misvot Beneh Noach – the seven "Noachide Laws," universal commandments given to all of humanity. Whether or not Esav, Yishmael, Amon, and Moav accepted the Torah, they were still bound by these prohibitions. If so, why does it matter that they rejected the Torah? The answer lies in the profound difference between observing these basic moral prohibitions and fully embracing the Torah's rigorous ethical and spiritual expectations. The command of "Lo Tirsah" does not only prohibit taking a life. It also forbids embarrassing someone in public, which is akin to murder. It means we must not "kill" our time by engaging in wasteful, vain activities. It even extends to preserving objects of value and not destroying them unnecessarily, because destruction is, in a sense, a form of "killing." Similarly, "Lo Tignob" is not just about theft of money or possessions. Wasting another person's time is a form of theft. Depriving someone of sleep by making noise at night is also stealing. Even redistributing wealth unjustly—such as in the story of Robin Hood, or in the style of communism—constitutes a violation of this prohibition in Torah law. Finally, "Lo Tinaf" likewise extends beyond the specific prohibition against forbidden intimate relationships. The Torah demands a higher level of modesty (Seniut), governing the way we dress, the way we speak, and even what we choose to see or expose ourselves to. This is what distinguished Beneh Yisrael from the other nations. Even if the other nations were willing to abide by basic moral codes, they would never commit to the all-encompassing ethical and spiritual framework that the Torah demands. Beneh Yisrael, however, accepted these lofty expectations without hesitation, embracing not just the specific prohibitions, but the especially high standards of sanctity and self-discipline that Torah life requires. As the Jewish people, we are held to a higher standard. Accepting the Torah means committing ourselves to a life of holiness and moral refinement. This is both a privilege and a responsibility. As Hashem's beloved nation, we must always remember that our actions reflect the divine mission entrusted to us. Whether in business, in speech, in dress, or in our treatment of others, we must uphold the elevated standards of Am Yisrael – and feel honored and privileged to conduct ourselves in a special manner befitting Hashem's beloved people.

In the beginning of Parashat Beshalah, we are told that as Beneh Yisrael left Egypt, Moshe made a point of bringing with him Yosef's remains. Many years earlier, before Yosef died, he made his brothers promise that they would bring his remains with them out of Egypt, so he could be buried in the Land of Israel. This promise was fulfilled through Moshe Rabbenu, who retrieved Yosef's remains at the time of Yetziat Mitzrayim (the Exodus from Egypt). The Gemara in Masechet Sotah (13a) applies to Moshe Rabbenu the pasuk in the Book of Mishleh (10:8), חכם לב יקח מצוות – "The wise-hearted takes mitzvot ." Whereas the rest of the nation was busy collecting the riches of the Egyptians to bring with them out of Egypt, Moshe was preoccupied with the mitzvah of tending to Yosef's remains. Many commentators ask the question of why the Gemara speaks in such praise of Moshe for retrieving Yosef's remains. After all, Hashem had explicitly commanded the people before Yetziat Mitzrayim to take the Egyptians' belongings with them. Collecting the spoils of Egypt was also a mitzvah . Why, then, was Moshe deserving of special praise for tending to the mitzvah of retrieving Moshe's remains – if all Beneh Yisrael were also involved in a mitzvah ? To answer this question, let us take an honest – and uncomfortable – look at something that many of us are occasionally guilty of. And that is – failing to sufficiently concern ourselves with other people. Why is it that sometimes, when we hear of somebody going through a hard time, we just forget about it, and go back to our own affairs? Worse, why do we sometimes find ourselves feeling a bit of satisfaction hearing about other people's struggles, especially if this is somebody who always seemed to have the "perfect" life (as if such a thing exists)? Why is it sometimes so hard to feel genuine empathy, and share in the pain or grief of others? The answer is not that we're bad people, or even that we're selfish people. We all of course understand the value of empathy and concern for our fellow, of hesed , of lending a helping hand, of extending beyond ourselves to help people. But doing so is a challenge for the simple reason that we are, legitimately, busy and stressed with our own needs and our own concerns. We all have pressures, we all have stress, we all have things that we're worried about, that we're upset about, that are weighing heavily on our minds. And so it's hard for us to allocate some of our headspace for the needs of the people around us. This might explain the Gemara's comment about Moshe Rabbenu. The rest of the nation was busy collecting the riches of Egypt, as they were supposed to, but Moshe went beyond that. He had the wisdom – חכם לב – to at the same time look out for what other people needed. Even amid the tumult and hustle-and-bustle of Yetziat Mitzrayim , his mind was thinking not only of himself, but also of others, and about Am Yisrael generally. A pasuk in Tehillim (114:3) – which is included in the text of Hallel – describes, הים ראה וינוס – "The sea saw and fled." Before the sea split for Beneh Yisrael to cross, it "saw" something. The Midrash comments that the sea "saw" Yosef's bones. It was in the merit of Moshe's care and concern, his ability to look beyond his own needs and concerns, and to take in consideration the greater good and the needs of the Jewish People, that this great miracle occurred. When we wake up in the morning and begin our day, we are usually thinking about the things we need to get done that day, or the things that we are worried about. This is perfectly legitimate – but imagine what our lives would be like if we also asked ourselves every morning, "What does Am Yisrael need from me today? In what way can I make the world better today? What can I do for other people today? Where might I be needed today?" Perhaps there's a friend or relative who could use a friendly phone call or visit. Perhaps there's an organization or project that can use some volunteer work, an extra pair of hands. Perhaps it's a single parent who can use a favor, or an invitation. Just imagine what our lives – and our community and our nation – would look like if we started our day asking ourselves these questions. Let us learn from the "wisdom" of Moshe Rabbenu – and find the time, despite our busy schedule, to look out for other people!

VAERA: Does God Hear Your Lonely Crying? | STUMP THE RABBI (226) https://youtu.be/pmYWQOPNMag No matter who the person is, they have had some tough times in their lives. Some have such difficulties that they feel alone in the world. While everyone knows that HaShem heard Am Yisrael's cries in Egypt, parashat VAERA will teach us whether that also pertains to your lonely cries. If He Hears them, then why doesn't seem like He's responding. These are critical questions that must be answered for each person to have the proper ideological perspective needed during those difficult times when people have to ask you to smile. This and many questions from the live online audience will be addressed BeEzrat HaShem. Learn, Share, Enjoy and Be Holy.

VAERA: Does God Hear Your Lonely Crying? | STUMP THE RABBI (226) https://youtu.be/pmYWQOPNMag No matter who the person is, they have had some tough times in their lives. Some have such difficulties that they feel alone in the world. While everyone knows that HaShem heard Am Yisrael's cries in Egypt, parashat VAERA will teach us whether that also pertains to your lonely cries. If He Hears them, then why doesn't seem like He's responding. These are critical questions that must be answered for each person to have the proper ideological perspective needed during those difficult times when people have to ask you to smile. This and many questions from the live online audience will be addressed BeEzrat HaShem. Learn, Share, Enjoy and Be Holy.

B"H Emotions are running high as we approach the hostage deal. The morning blessing, ‘Who frees the imprisoned,' has a profound meaning today. Let's pray with extra Kavana today for the hostages being reunited with their families. But for the families of those who are not coming home, the pain remains unimaginable. This moment is bittersweet, a blend of relief and heartache, hope and grief. We hold space for every life impacted and pray for a future where no more lives are torn apart, no more hostages taken, and healing and salvation can begin for all. May we see the day when peace and redemption become the reality for all of Am Yisrael and the world. #hostage #hostagedeal #amyisrael #israel #pray #daven #redemption #peace #hope #blessing #pain #hashem #jewish To watch Torah Thoughts in video format, click HERE Subscribe to the Torah Thoughts BLOG for exclusive written content! Please like, share and subscribe wherever you find this!

00:00 - Good Morning0:18 - Emails3:26 - Wives.MDYDaf.com3:59 - MDYsponsor.com7:00 - Guests7:18 - Introduction7:40 - Questions of the Day 9:10 - Amud Beis19:38 - Amud Aleph48:44 - Amud Beis1:00:04 - Have a Wonderful Day!Quiz - http://Kahoot.MDYdaf.com----Mesechta Sponsors:Refuah Shelaima for Yosef Chaim Shmuel ben Alte Nechama, From His Grateful Family-For הצלחה ברוחניות ובגשמיות-Larry Cohn: In memory of Yechiel Moshe Ben Chaim v'Yetta, who started learning Daf Yomi at age 70 and continued for 32 years until he was nifter​-For the unity of the Jewish people​-Glenn Esterson: With love & gratitude from Wilmington NC. Thank you for enriching my life with Torah----Monthly Sponsors:לע״נ זכריה בן משה לע״נ חיה בת יוסף-Yosef Ben Chaya Sara for parnassa B'revach-As a zechus for our children & tremendous parnassa-Leilui Nishmat Yaffa Bat Simcha. Refuah Shlema Yisrael Yaakov ben Malka-Zchut Parnasa Birevach for Baruch Tzvi Nissim ben Shoshana Leah-Kidnovations LLC: In honor of Uncle Elchanan & Fishel. A zechus for Akiva Simcha Ben Fayga, a shidduch for רבקה יהודית בת יפה חיה & a THANK YOU to Rebbitzen Stefansky----Shiur Sponsors:Stephen Rubinstein: In honor of the Yartzeit of Esther bas Pesach L'Mishpachas Rubinstein-Esther Radin: Lz"n R' Yisrael בן Avraham Radin His love was for Am Yisrael, Eretz Yisrael & Learning-Kidnovations LLC: In honor of Menashe Minkin of Kayalah Diamonds & Jewelry for finally switching over to R' Eli's shiur. I told you it's geshmak!

Happy Chanukah to all our DMC listeners! Chanukah is all about miracles, and the Jewish people have witnessed miracles of biblical proportions this year. These open miracles have reminded us that Hashem is in control and will never break his promise to the Jewish people or Israel. And while these miracles have often strengthened our belief and emunah, other historic, spiritual miracles are happening to Am Yisrael as well, both in Israel and the Diaspora. Celebrated Israeli journalist and Torah educator Sivan Rahav Meir joins us on the podcast to share what she thinks is the greatest miracle of all from the war. In this episode, we discuss: How Sivan got into Israeli TV and journalism Her experience as a religious women in Israeli journalism How Sivan's work has changed since October 7th The miracles Sivan has witnessed in her coverage of the war The real miracle of the war How we can see more miracles in our lives Sivan's website: https://sivanrahavmeir.com/home-en/ To Be a Jew booklet: https://sivanrahavmeir.com/to-be-a-jew/  We love hearing from our listeners. You can find Deep Meaningful Conversations on Facebook and Instagram, join our WhatsApp group https://chat.whatsapp.com/IjG33sXCYgFGJSdncnN4nX, and you can always email us at dmcthepodcast@gmail.com. Sponsors:  DMC YEARLY SPONSOR: Town Appliance https://www.townappliance.com/ 1-866-309-8119 https://www.townappliance.com/pages/contact-us --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dmcthepodcast/support

The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (21b) tells the story of the Hanukah miracle, and then adds that "Le'shana Aheret" – the next year – the Rabbis established Hanukah as an annual celebration. The clear implication is that the Rabbis did not institute the holiday of Hanukah immediately after the miraculous triumph over the Greeks and the miracle of the oil of the Menorah. The decision to establish this holiday was made only the next year. Why? Rav Moshe Yechiel Epstein of Ozorov (1889-1971), in his Be'er Moshe, explains that the Rabbis waited to see if the spiritual powers that existed during the time of the miracles returned the following year. Hashem has performed and continues to perform many miracles for Am Yisrael, but special holidays are instituted to commemorate only a small number of these miracles. A holiday is instituted only if the Rabbis sensed that each year, on the date when the miracle occurred, the spiritual forces that facilitated the miracle return, empowering us to achieve what our ancestors achieved at the time of the original story. During the Hanukah story, the Be'er Moshe writes, the Jews were blessed with a special element of divine compassion and grace. The vast majority of the nation had assimilated, succumbing to the immense pressure placed on them by the Greeks to abandon their faith and embrace Greek culture. Only a very small group of Jews retained their commitment to Torah. Hashem showered the people with exceptional mercy and grace, providing them with miraculous assistance that they did not deserve. Despite having assimilated almost completely, Hashem enabled them to defeat the Greeks and then sustained the lamps of the Menorah in miraculous fashion. The following year, the Rabbis sensed that this unique grace and compassion returned, that Hashem brought us this special gift, the opportunity to receive undeserved kindness and assistance, once again. At that point, the Rabbis instituted the annual celebration of Hanukah. Indeed, the Arizal (Rav Yishak Luria, 1534-1572) taught that the thirteen words that comprise the first Beracha recited over the Hanukah candle lighting (according to Sephardic custom) correspond to Hashem's thirteen Middot Rahamim – attributes of mercy. Each word of the Beracha is associated with a different Midda. On each of the first seven days of Hanukah, we receive an especially large measure of one of the thirteen attributes, and on the eighth and final day of Hanukah, we are showered with an abundance of all the remaining attributes, from the eighth through the thirteenth. (This is why the eighth day of Hanukah is an especially significant and sacred day in Kabbalistic tradition.) The days of Hanukah are not just a time to commemorate and express gratitude for the miracles that Hashem performed for our ancestors. This is, of course, the basic purpose of Hanukah, but in addition, this is a time of great compassion, when Hashem bestows upon us undeserved grace and kindness. This is a precious time to beseech G-d for all that we need, for the assistance that we require. Just as Hashem graced our ancestors with undeserved kindness, granting them a miraculous victory, so is He prepared to shower us with this same element of kindness. Let us take advantage of this special opportunity by turning to Hashem in sincere, heartfelt prayer, and humbly beseeching Him for undeserved kindness and compassion, that we be blessed with all that we need, even if we are unworthy of it.

What lessons can be drawn from the post-October 7 era? Amid growing isolation and antisemitism, where do opportunities for hope and resilience lie for the Jewish people? In a compelling discussion, AJC CEO Ted Deutch and Bernard-Henri Lévy—renowned French philosopher, public intellectual, and author of Israel Alone—explore these critical questions. Guest-hosted by AJC Paris Director Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache, this conversation offers insight into the challenges Jewish communities face and the possibilities for a brighter future. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  What's Next for the Abraham Accords Under President Trump? Honoring Israel's Lone Soldiers This Thanksgiving: Celebrating Service and Sacrifice Away from Home The ICC Issues Arrest Warrants: What You Need to Know Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Bernard-Henri Lévy and Ted Deutch: Manya Brachear Pashman: What lessons can be drawn from the post-October 7 era? Amid growing isolation and antisemitism, where do opportunities for hope and resilience lie for the Jewish people? I'm throwing it off to AJC Paris Director Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache to explore these critical questions. Anne-Sophie? Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Thank you, Manya. Welcome everyone to today's special episode of People of the Pod. I'm sitting here in our office near the Eiffel Tower for a special and unique conversation between Ted Deutch AJC CEO and Bernard-Henri Lévy, one of the most, if not the most prominent French philosopher and public intellectuals. Bonjour. Bernard-Henri Lévy:  Bonjour. Hello. Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Today, we will speak about loneliness, the loneliness of the Jewish people in Israel, the explosion of antisemitism in Europe and the United States, the attacks on Israel from multiple fronts since October 7. We will also speak about the loneliness of Western democracies, more broadly, the consequences of the US elections and the future for Ukraine and the European continent.  Bernard-Henri Lévy:, you've recently come back from a tour in the United States where you presented your latest book titled Israel Alone. Ted, you've just arrived in Europe to sound again the alarm on the situation of Jewish communities on this continent after the shocking assault on Israeli soccer fans in Amsterdam. Israel alone, the diaspora alone, actually the Jewish people, or Am Yisrael alone. As if Israel and Jews all over the world have merged this year over a common sense of loneliness.  So I ask the question to both of you, are we alone? Bernard, let's start with you. Bernard-Henri Lévy:  I am back from a campus tour in the United States of America. I went in USC, in UCLA, in Columbia, in Ohio, University in Michigan. I was in many places, and in these places, in the campuses, it's not even a question. The loneliness is terrible. You have Jewish students, brave, resilient, who have to face every day humiliation, provocations, attacks, sometimes physical attacks. And who feel that, for the first time, the country in the world, America, which was supposed to be immune to antisemitism. You know, we knew about antisemitism in Europe. We knew about antisemitism in the rest of the world.  But in America, they discovered that when they are attacked, of course there is support. But not always from their teachers, not always from the boards of the universities, and not always from the public opinion. And what they are discovering today in America is that, they are protected, of course, but not as it was before unconditionally. Jews in America and in Europe are supposed to be protected unconditionally.  This is minimum. Minimum in France, since French Revolution, in America, since the Mayflower. For the first time, there are conditions. If you are a right wing guy, you say, I protect you if you vote for me. If you don't vote, you will be guilty of my loss, and you will be, and the state will disappear in a few years. So you will be no longer protected. You are protected under the condition that you endorse me. On the left. You have people on the left wing side, people who say you are protected under condition that you don't support Israel, under condition that you take your distance with Zionism, under condition that you pay tribute to the new dark side who say that Netanyahu is a genocide criminal and so on. So what I feel, and not only my feeling, is the feeling of most of the students and sometimes teachers whom I met in this new situation of conditional security and support, and this is what loneliness means in America.  Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Thank you, Bernard. How about you, Ted? Ted Deutch:  Well, it's interesting. First of all, thank you Anne-Sophie, and Bernard, it's an honor to be in conversation with you. It's interesting to hear you talk about America. Your observations track very closely. The comments that I've heard since being in Europe from students in the UK, and from students here who, speaking about America, tell me that their conclusion is that whatever the challenges they face here and the challenges are real, that they feel fortunate to be in university in Europe rather than in the United States.  But the point that you make that's so important everywhere, is this sense that it's not only the Jewish community that expects to have unconditional security. For the Jewish community now, it feels as if expecting that security, the freedom to be able on college campuses, the freedom to be able to pursue their studies and grow intellectually and have different experiences.  That when that security is compromised, by those who wish to exclude Jews because they support Israel, for those who wish to tag every Jewish student as a genocidal baby killer, that when those positions are taken, it's the loneliness stems from the fact that they're not hearing from the broader community, how unacceptable that behavior is. That it's become too easy for others to, even if they're not joining in, to simply shrug their shoulders and look the other way, when what's happening to Jewish students is not just about Jewish students, but is fundamentally about democracy and values and the way of life in the U.S. and in Europe. Bernard-Henri Lévy:  Of course, except that the new thing in America, which is not bad, is that every minority has the right to be protected. Every community, every minority has the right to have a safe space and so on. There is one minority who does not have the same rights. The only minority who is not safe in America, whose safety is not granted, is the Jewish one. And this is a scandal. You know, we could live in a sort of general jungle. Okay, Jews would be like the others, but it is not the case. Since the political correctness and so on, every minority is safe except the Jewish one. Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  So if we are alone, if American Jewish students feel alone, as European Jewish students, we are probably not the only one to feel that way, right? I turn over to you, Mr. Levy, and go to another subject.  Since day one of the Russian invasion, and even before that, you have been a forceful advocate for a steadfast European and American support for Ukraine.  Is Ukraine alone today? And will it be even more during America's second Trump administration? Bernard-Henri Lévy:  I've been an advocate of Ukraine, absolutely and I really believe that the freedom for liberty, the battle for liberty, the battle for freedom today, is waged on two front lines. For the moment, it might be more, but Israel and Ukraine. I wish to make that very clear, it is the same battle. They are the same stakes, the same values, and the same enemy.  I'm not sure that every Ukrainian, every Jew, knows that they have the same enemy. The axis between Iran, Putin, China, more and more, Turkey, and the same axis of authorisation countries. So it is the same battle.  The Ukrainians have not been exactly alone. They have been supported in the last two years and half, but in a strange way, not enough. The chancellery, the West, spoke about an incremental support. Incremental support meant exactly what is not enough, what is necessary for them not to lose, but not to win. This is what I saw on the ground.  I made three documentaries in Ukraine on the field, and I could elaborate on that a lot, precisely, concretely in every spot, every trench they have exactly what is needed for the line not to be broken, but not to win. Now we enter in a new in a new moment, a new moment of uncertainty in America and in Europe, with the rise of populism. Which means the rise of parties who say: Who cares about Ukraine, who don't understand that the support of Ukraine, as the support of Israel, is a question of national interest, a question of national security for us, too. The Ukrainian ladies and gentlemen, who fight in Ukraine, they fight for the liberty. They fight for ours, French, yours, American. And we might enter in a new moment. It's not sure, because history has more imagination than the man, than mankind. So we can have surprises. But for the moment, I am really anxious on this front line too, yes. Ted Deutch:  There are additional connections too, between what's happening in Ukraine and what's happening in Israel, and clearly the fact that Iranian killer drones are being used by Russia to kill Europeans should be an alarming enough fact that jars all of us into action. But the point that you make, that I think is so important Bernard, is that Israel has in many ways, faced the same response, except with a much tighter window than Ukraine did.  Israel was allowed to respond to the attacks of October 7, that for those few days after the World understood the horrific nature of the slaughter, the rape, and the babies burning, the terrible, terrible mayhem, and recognize that Israel had a right to respond, but as with Ukraine, only to a point Bernard-Henri Lévy:  Even to a point, I'm not sure. Ted Deutch:  But then that point ended. It was limited. They could take that response. But now we've moved to the point where, just like those students on campus and in so many places around the world, where only the Jews are excluded, that's a natural line from the geopolitical issues, where only Israel is the country that can't respond in self defense. Only Israel is the country that doesn't have the right to exist. Only a Jewish state is the one state that should be dismantled. That's another reason, how these are, another way they are all tied together. Bernard-Henri Lévy:  Don't forget that just a few days after Israel started to retaliate. We heard from everywhere in the West, and United Nations, calls for cease fire, call for negotiation, call for de-escalation. Hezbollah shell Israel for one year. We never heard one responsible of the UN called Hezbollah for not escalating. The day Israel started to reply and retaliate after one year of being bombed, immediately take care to escalation. Please keep down. Please keep cool, etc, etc.  So situation of Israel is a unique case, and again, if you have a little memory, I remember the battle for Mosul. I made a film about that. I remember the battle against the Taliban in 2001 nobody asked the West to make compromise with ISIS and with al-Qaeda, which are the cousins of Hamas. Nobody asked the West not to enter here or there. No one outside the ground said, Okay, you can enter in Mazar-I-Sharif in Afghanistan, but you cannot enter in Kandahar.  Or you can enter in the western part of Mosul. But be careful. Nobody had even this idea this happened only for Israel. And remember Joe by then asking the Prime Minister of Israel about Rafa? Don't, don't, don't. At the end of the day, he's not always right and he's often wrong, but the Prime Minister was right to enter into Rafa for obvious reasons, which we all know now. Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Ted, let me come back to you more specifically on the US. At AJC, we support democracy. This is in our DNA. Since the organization was founded 1906 we've been strong supporters of the Transatlantic Partnership since day one. We believe in the alliance of democracies in the defense of our common values. And you know here, there's a lot of anxiety about Donald Trump's re-election. So what is your take on the U.S. elections' consequences for Europe, for transatlantic relations? Ted Deutch: I've been coming to Europe for years, as I did as an elected official. Now in this capacity there is that our friends in Europe are always rightly focused on US policy and engaging the level of commitment the US makes to Europe. The election of Donald Trump, this isn't a new moment. There is history. And for four years in the last administration, the focus that the President had on questioning the ties to Europe and questioning NATO and questioning the commitment that has been so central to the transatlantic relationship rightfully put much of Europe on edge. Now, as the President will come back into power, there is this question of Ukraine and the different opinions that the President is hearing. In one side, in one ear, he's hearing from traditional conservative voices in the United States who are telling him that the US has a crucial role to play, that support for Ukraine is not just as we've been discussing, not just in the best interest of Ukraine, but that it relates directly back to the United States, to Europe. It actually will, they tell him, rightly so, I submit, that US involvement and continued support for Ukraine will help to prevent further war across the continent. In the other ear, however, he's hearing from the America first crowd that thinks that America should recognize that the ocean protects us, and we should withdraw from the world. And the best place to start is Ukraine, and that means turning our back on the brave Ukrainians who have fought so nobly against Russia. That's what he's hearing. It's imperative that, starting this weekend, when he is here at Notre Dame, that he hears and sees and is reminded of not just the importance of the transatlantic relationship, but why it's important, and why that relationship is impacted so directly by what's happening in Ukraine, and the need to continue to focus on Ukraine and to support NATO. And to recognize that with all of the challenges, when there is an opportunity for American leadership to bring together traditional allies, that should be the easiest form of leadership for the President to take. It's still an open question, however, as to whether that's the approach that you will take.  Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Thank you, Ted.  Let me sum it up, our conversation for a minute. We said that the Jewish people feels alone, but we said that we are not the only ones. Didn't you feel that on that lonely road of this year, we've also never felt as strong as who we are, both our Jewishness. A French intellectual I know, Bernard Levy would say our Jewish being, être juif, and Jewish unity. Are they the best answers to overcome our loneliness? Let's start with our philosopher. Bernard-Henri Lévy:  I don't believe only in Jewish unity. I believe in Jewish strength. And in one of my previous books, the genius of religion, I spoke about about that Jewish strength, not military strength in Israel, but spiritual strength, and I think that this strength is not behaving so bad. I told you about the campuses. I told you the dark side.  But there is also the bright side, the fact that the students stand firm. They stand by themselves, by their position. They are proud Jews in the campuses. In Israel, come on. Israel is facing the most difficult war and the most terrible war of its history. We know all the previous wars, and alas, I have the age to have known personally and directly, a lot of them since 1960s about this war with terrorists embedded in the civilians, with the most powerful terrorist army in the world on the north, with seven fronts open with Houthis sending missiles and so on. Israel never saw that.  So the people of Israel, the young girls and young boys, the fathers, even the old men of Israel, who enlist, who are on the front, who fight bravely. They do a job that their grandfathers never had to do. So, resilience. Also in Israel. The most sophisticated, the most difficult, the most difficult to win war, they are winning it. And in Europe, I see, as I never saw, a movement of resistance and refusal to bow in front of the antisemite, which I never saw to this extent in my long life. You have groups today in France, for example, who really react every day, who post videos every day.  Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Some are in this room.  Bernard-Henri Lévy:  Some are in this room. Pirrout is in this room, for example, every day about the so called unbound France. Mélenchon, who is a real antisemite as you know, they publish the truth. They don't let any infamy pass without reacting, and this again, is new, not completely new, but I never saw that to this extent.  Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Thank you, Rene. How about you Ted, what do you think?  Ted Deutch:  more important than ever that as Jews, as Jewish community, As Zionists, that we don't allow our opponents to define what's happening, that the response is never to to feel defensive, that the response. Is to be bold, boldly Jewish, boldly Zionist, unapologetically Zionist. To to do exactly what those students are doing across the United States, that I've seen, the students here who have that I that I've met with that in Europe, a student in in London a few days ago, said to me, she said, when someone yells at me, when they when they scream at me and accuse me of genocide, she said it only makes me want to get a bigger Magen David. The person that that stood up at a meeting in New York a few months ago who told me that, before announced in front of a big crowd that that for years, she's been involved in all of these different organizations in her community to to help feed the hungry and to help kids to read, and all these worthy causes. She said, since October 7, she said, I am all Jewish all the time, and I want everyone to know it the and Israel is perhaps the best example of this. It's impossible to imagine the kind of resilience that we see from Israelis. The taxi driver that I had in Israel. He said, This is so difficult for all of us. We've all known people. We've lost people. It's affected all of us, but we're just never going to give up, because our history doesn't allow it. We have prevailed as a people for 1000s of years and have gotten stronger every single time. Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Thank you, Ted. I can keep thinking about this overwhelming challenge that we face as the Jewish people today, which seems to confine us to solitude. Anyway, Jews and Israel are attacked with alternative truths, false narratives. We've witnessed how international justice, our common, universal values, have been turned upside down in the Jewish tradition, we say that we have a mission to repair the world, Tikkun Olam. But how can we make sure to recreate the common world in the first place? Bernard-Henri Lévy:  It's on process number one, continue to try to repair the world, I remind you, and you know that, and Simone Rodan knows it also, in many occurrences, in many situations of the last 30 years when real genocides happened. Real genocide, not imaginary. Real one. In Rwanda, in Srebrenica, in Darfur, when I met with in Chad, with Simone, and so on. The first whistleblowers, the first to tell the world that something terrible was happening, were not exactly Jews, but were ladies and men who had in their hearts the memory of the Shoah. And the flame of Yad Vashem. That's a fact, and therefore they reacted and what could be repaired. They contributed to repair it. Number one.  Second observation, about what Ted said, there is in Europe now, since many years, a tendency to step out, to give up to and to go to Israel. Not only by love of Zionism, but thinking that this is not a safe place any longer for them. I tell you, this tendency starts to be reversed now you have more and more Jews in Europe who say, no, no, no, no. We built this country. We are among the authors of the French social contract.  For example, we will not leave it to those illiterate morons who try to push us away. And this is a new thing. This reaction, this no of the Jews in Europe is something relatively new. And third little remark. 10 years ago in the States, I met a lot of young people who were embarrassed with Israel, who said we are liberal and there is Israel, and the two don't match really well. 10-15, years ago, I met a lot. Less and less today. You have more and more students in America who understand that Israel should be supported, not in spite of their liberal values. But because of their liberal values. And come on, this for a liberal, is a treasure, and it is unprecedented, and there is no example. Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  How about you, Ted? How do you think we can overcome the challenge of those parallel realities we feel we live in? Ted Deutch:  Those students, and I think broadly the Jewish community, after October 7, came to realize that as Hamas terrorists rolled into southern Israel, they made no distinctions about the politics of the Israelis. That great irony, of course, is that the peaceniks, or the brunt of these attacks, living along the southern edge of Israel by Gaza, they didn't make determinations on who to kill based on how they practiced, what their politics were, how they felt about Bibi.  And I think what the Jewish world, certainly it's true for young people that I talk to, came to realize is that connection between Israel and the Jewish people is not theoretical, that that ultimately, what's gone on for the past year is is an attack against Israel, Israel as the stand in for the Jewish people, and that defending Israel is really defending all of us. And I think they've come to understand that.  But going forward, I think what you described, Bernard, is new, this is what it means now to be an Or Lagoyim. This is what it means to be a light unto the nations. That in the face of all of these attacks, that Israeli democracy continues to thrive. That the conversation by those, ironically, the conversation that has attempted to demonize Israel by demonizing Bibi, has highlighted the fact that these protests have continued during the time of war. As you point out that this is this is unlike anything you would see, that what's permitted, the way democracy is thrives and is and is vibrant in Israel, is different than every place else, that this is a message that the world will see, that that the that in the face of these ongoing challenges, that the Jewish community stands not just against against these attacks against the Jews, but stands against what's happening In the streets of so many places in America. Where people march with Hezbollah flags, where they're openly supporting Hamas. It's going to take some time, but ultimately, because of the strong, because of the resilience, because of the strong, proud way that Jews are responding to this moment and to those protests, eventually, the world will realize that standing in support of Hamas terrorism is not just something that is dangerous to the Jews, but puts at risk the entire world. Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Thank you. I'm a Sephardic Jew, so I cannot just end this conversation speaking about loneliness. How about hope? Can we find some? Bernard-Henri Lévy:  I compare the situation of the Jews today to the situation in the time of my dad, for example, there are some change, for example, the Christians and the Catholic Church. 50 years ago, a huge cultural revolution in the world. It is the change of position of the Catholic Church on anti semitism. It was the Vatican Two Council and the Nostra aetate. It seems tiny, but it is huge revolution, and it consisted in a single word, one word, the Catholic Council of Vatican Two said Jews are no longer the fathers of the Christians, as it was said before, in the best of the case, they are the brothers of the Christians.  This is a huge revelation. Of course, Catholics are not always faithful to this commitment. And popes, and especially the pope of today do not remember well the message of his ancestor, but on the whole, we have among the Christians, among the Catholics in Europe and in. Real friends in America among the new evangelical I don't know if they are friends, but they are strong allies. Abraham agreements was again another big revolution which has been underestimated, and the fact that the Abraham agreements, alliance with Morocco, Emirates, Bahrain stands, in spite of the war on seven fronts. Is a proof. It is solid. It is an ironclad alliance, and it holds.  And this is a new event, and we have in the not only in the top of the state, but in the public opinions of the Muslim world. We have a lot of people who who start to be who are more and more numerous, to believe that enough is enough. Too much war, too much misunderstandings, too much hatred, and who are really eager to make the real peace, which is the peace of hearts and the peace of souls with their other brothers, who are the Jews. So yes, there are some reasons to be optimistic.  Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Thank you very much, Bernard. Ted? Ted Deutch:  I don't think that we can ever give up hope. And optimism is necessary, and I think justified. The things Bernard talks about, I mean, at AJC, our focus on on building democracy, our focus on interreligious work, the work we've done with the Catholic Church around Nostra aetate, now 60 years old and and continuing to build the relationship our Muslim Jewish Advisory Council always looking for opportunities to to find those voices that are tired of all of the war. And in our office, in Abu Dhabi, we've, we've continued to go to the Gulf, to the Abraham Accord states, and beyond, even through this entire war, because there is the hope of of getting to a place where, where Israel is in a more normalized position in the region, which will then change the perception and push back against the lies that those who wish to to see a world without Israel continue to espouse.  All of that is hopeful, and we work toward it. But for me, the most hopeful thing to come from this moment is, AJC works around the world and because the Jewish community now understands how connected we all are as a result of the threats that we face, the opportunity to strengthen diaspora Jewry, to help people realize that the connections between the Jewish community in Paris and the Jewish community in Mexico City and the Jewish community in Buenos Aires in Chicago, in Miami and New York, that they're interrelated and that we don't have the luxury of viewing our challenges as unique in our countries.  By standing together, we're in a much, much stronger position, and we have to continue to build that. That's why AJC's Global Forum is always the most important part of the year for us, bringing together the Jewish community from around the world. That's why the antisemitism summit that we'll be doing here with the CRIF is going to be so critical to building those relationships. We have an opportunity coming out of this incredibly dark time to take the strength and the resolve that we feel and to and to channel it in ways that that will lead the Jewish community to places that a year ago seemed absolutely impossible to imagine. Those 101 hostages need to return home. We stand together calling for them to return home. We stand together in our support of Israel as it wages the seven-front war, and ultimately, we stand together as Jewish people. That's what gives me hope every day. Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache:  Thank you so much. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you missed last week's episode, be sure to tune in for the conversation between my colleague Benji Rogers, AJC's director for Middle East and North Africa initiatives, and Rob Greenway, director of the Allison center for national security at the Heritage Foundation, and former senior director for Middle Eastern and North African Affairs on the National Security Council, they discuss the opportunities and challenges President-elect Trump will face in the Middle East.

The Torah in Parashat Vayishlah tells the famous story of the mysterious man who attacked Yaakob Abinu as he was making his way back to Eretz Yisrael from Haran. Yaakob and his assailant wrestled throughout the night, with Yaakob ultimately emerging victorious, though with an injury to his thigh which made him limp. The Rabbis teach us that this assailant was actually not a man, but an angel. Specifically, it was Satan, who came to attempt to block Yaakob Abinu, to prevent him from continuing his journey and the process of building Am Yisrael. The question arises, though, why did Satan attack only Yaakob? Why did he not try to obstruct the path of Abraham or Yishak? These three patriarchs built the foundations of Am Yisrael – and yet, for some reason, Satan waited until the emergence of the third patriarch, Yaakob, to launch his assault and try to prevent the rise of Hashem's special nation. Why? Rav Elhanan Wasserman (1874-1941) answered this question by taking a closer look at the unique characteristics embodied by Abraham, Yishak and Yaakob. Abraham, of course, embodied the attribute of Hesed, kindness, extending himself generously and selflessly for the sake of others. Even after undergoing the painful procedure of Berit Mila at an advanced age, he sat outside hoping to find weary travelers in need of hospitality whom he could invite and help. Yishak is associated with the quality of "Aboda," serving G-d through sacrifice and prayer. This quality is best exemplified by his having been placed on an altar as a sacrifice to Hashem. He embodied the devoted service of Hashem, which nowadays, in the absence of the Bet Ha'mikdash, is done primarily through prayer. Finally, Yaakob represents the value of intensive Torah study. He is described as a "dweller of tents" (Bereshit 25:27), referring to the halls of Torah learning. And even when he was forced to leave because of Esav's threat to kill him, he first went to the yeshiva of Eber, where he spent fourteen years diligently learning, without even taking time to sleep (Rashi, Bereshit 28:11). Rav Elhanan explained that whereas all three qualities are vitally important components of Jewish life, it is the third of these qualities that guarantees our survival as a nation. A Jew must, of course, act with kindness, but this attribute is not unique to our nation. Other nations also recognize the great value of Hesed, and many non-Jews are wonderfully kind and generous. In fact, we are privileged to live in a country that guarantees the rights of all its citizens, and even has welfare systems in place to help the underprivileged. Clearly, Hesed is not a strictly Jewish value. The same is true of "Aboda." Followers of all religions pray, and perform rituals in the service of their deity. And there are, unfortunately, many Jews who pray to Hashem, but without accepting the core beliefs of Judaism, or living a Torah lifestyle. The value that sets us apart from everyone else, and which thus ensures our continuity and survival as a distinct nation, is Torah. Immersing ourselves in our sacred texts, absorbing our ancient wisdom, is what enables us to resist the lures and pressures that abound, to withstand the powerful cultural influences that are all around us, and to preserve our faith. This is why the Satan felt threatened specifically by Yaakob, and not by Abraham or Yishak. He was not worried about the Jewish People's extraordinary devotion to Hesed, or about our filled-to-capacity houses of worship. Neither of these guarantee our eternity, because other nations are also kind and also have houses of prayer. Satan sprang into action only when he saw Yaakob Abinu, the bastion of Torah learning, because it is the devotion to intensive Torah study that ensures Am Yisrael's survival throughout the generations. As mentioned, although the Satan was unable to eliminate Yaakob, he did succeed in crippling Yaakob, by dealing a blow to his thigh. The Zohar comments that the thigh symbolizes the supporters of Torah. Just as the legs hold up the body, the generous donors who fund Torah education are the ones who maintain the Jewish People. When the Satan realized that it was unable to destroy Yaakob, it dealt a debilitating blow to the thigh, to the support of Torah. Indeed, there has never been a shortage of Jews interested in learning Torah, but there is often difficulty in funding Torah learning. Parents are reluctant to incur the significant costs of providing their children with a Torah education, and yeshivot and kollelim struggle to raise enough money for their institutions to operate. We must remember that Torah learning is the best "insurance policy" we have for Jewish survival. In a time when we face unprecedented spiritual challenges, when we are, sadly, witnessing assimilation on a mass scale, the best way to ensure our continuity is intensive, rigorous Torah learning. Hesed and prayer are critically important, but not sufficient. In order for us to withstand the relentless attacks of today's "Satan," the challenges it has put in our way, we must make time for our own Torah learning and also allocate the resources needed to support our Torah institutions.

This week's learning is sponsored by Debbie and Yossi Gevir for the refuah shleima of Eitan Asher ben Dvora v'Haim Zelig. "Eitan was wounded while protecting Am Yisrael in Lebanon two and a half weeks ago. May he and his buddies continue to  heal steadily along with all of Tzahal's wounded soldiers." Rav Amram explained the reasoning behind Rabbi Yochanan's ruling that the last line of a document should contain a review of the main part of the document. Since there is often a bit of space between the end of the document and the signatures, there is concern that the last line could have been added after the witnesses signed. Therefore, nothing new is added, as it would not be upheld, and instead, the last line should include a review of the document's content. Rav Amram supports his explanation from a braita that permitted one line of space but forbade leaving two lines of space between the end of a document and the signatures. He explains that one line is permitted because the last line contains only a review, but two would be a problem as something additional can be added. A question was then raised about leaving a line and a half. Initially, they attempted to answer the question from the braita, but inferences could be made in either direction. They quoted another braita from which it was clearly stated that anything less than two lines would be valid. The braita continues with another ruling about witnesses' signatures. If four or five witnesses signed on a document and some were disqualified witnesses or relatives, those signatures are ignored and the document is validated by the other signatures. This supports Chizkiya's ruling that if more than two lines were left blank before the signatures but were subsequently filled in with disqualified witnesses' signatures, the document is still valid. He draws a parallel to the laws of s'chach in a sukka, where a space of three handsbreadths disqualifies the sukka, but if the space is filled with disqualified s'chach, it is only problematic if it is four handsbreadths wide.

This week's learning is sponsored by Debbie and Yossi Gevir for the refuah shleima of Eitan Asher ben Dvora v'Haim Zelig. "Eitan was wounded while protecting Am Yisrael in Lebanon two and a half weeks ago. May he and his buddies continue to  heal steadily along with all of Tzahal's wounded soldiers." Rav Amram explained the reasoning behind Rabbi Yochanan's ruling that the last line of a document should contain a review of the main part of the document. Since there is often a bit of space between the end of the document and the signatures, there is concern that the last line could have been added after the witnesses signed. Therefore, nothing new is added, as it would not be upheld, and instead, the last line should include a review of the document's content. Rav Amram supports his explanation from a braita that permitted one line of space but forbade leaving two lines of space between the end of a document and the signatures. He explains that one line is permitted because the last line contains only a review, but two would be a problem as something additional can be added. A question was then raised about leaving a line and a half. Initially, they attempted to answer the question from the braita, but inferences could be made in either direction. They quoted another braita from which it was clearly stated that anything less than two lines would be valid. The braita continues with another ruling about witnesses' signatures. If four or five witnesses signed on a document and some were disqualified witnesses or relatives, those signatures are ignored and the document is validated by the other signatures. This supports Chizkiya's ruling that if more than two lines were left blank before the signatures but were subsequently filled in with disqualified witnesses' signatures, the document is still valid. He draws a parallel to the laws of s'chach in a sukka, where a space of three handsbreadths disqualifies the sukka, but if the space is filled with disqualified s'chach, it is only problematic if it is four handsbreadths wide.

Parashat Toldot tells the story of the blessings that Yishak Abinu decided to give to Esav, but ended up conferring upon Yaakob, who, at his mother's behest, disguised as Esav and came before Yishak to receive the blessing. The Torah relates that when Esav came, and Yishak then told him that his brother had deceived him and received the blessings in his place, Esav cried bitterly ("Va'yiz'ak Ze'aka Gedola U'mara Ad Me'od" – 27:34). The Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni 115) comments that Esav actually shed only three tears. One fell from his right eye, another from his left eye, and a third remained stuck inside his eye. This third tear, the Midrash concludes, is what has caused the Jewish Nation to shed rivers of tears throughout the ages. Rav Solomon Breuer (Germany, 1850-1926), son-in-law of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888), offered a meaningful explanation of the Midrash's description. The two tears that fell from Esav's eyes correspond to the two "wrongs" that Yaakob committed against him. The first was Yaakob's purchasing the birthright from Esav in exchange for food when Esav came into the home weary and famished. And the second, of course, was Yaakob's seizing the blessings which Yishak had intended to grant to Esav. These two tears, Rav Breuer explained, were what we would call today "crocodile tears." Esav was not really upset over losing the birthright and Yishak's blessings. The birthright entailed performing the special service in the Bet Ha'mikdash, which Esav surely had no desire at all to participate in. And as for the blessings, the Midrash elsewhere (Bereshit Rabba 66:3) comments that in these blessings there are allusions to all the different areas of Torah – the Tanach, Mishna, Gemara, etc. These blessings of success, prosperity and dominance were not given "for free"; they were promised only on condition, in exchange for serious commitment to Torah learning and observance. This is certainly not something that Esav had any interest in. Esav's only real tear, Rav Breuer explained, was the tear that remained in his eye, and could not be seen. Meaning, what really troubled Esav, what really pained him, was not the birthright or the blessings, but rather the knowledge that Yaakob was the worthier brother, that he truly earned the right to bear the legacy of Abraham and Yishak, to be a patriarch of Hashem's special nation. And it is this hidden pain that has caused Am Yisrael so much pain and so many tears throughout the ages. The enemies of the Jewish Nation outwardly shed different kinds of fake "tears," they give different reasons for why their hostility toward us is justified, why they feel they have the right to cause us harm and to seek our destruction. But the real reason is the hidden "tear," the resentment over Am Yisrael's status as G-d's special nation. When Yaakob first came before Yishak disguised as Esav, Yishak heard what sounded like Yaakob's voice, but when he felt Yaakob's arms, they felt hairy, like Esav, because Ribka had wrapped goatskins around his arms. Yishak then proclaimed, "Ha'kol Kol Ya'akob, Ve'ha'yadayim Yedeh Esav" – "The voice is the voice of Yaakob, but the hands are the hands of Esav" (27:22). The Midrash uncovers for us the deeper message of Yishak's pronouncement, explaining that he was saying, "When the voice of Yaakov is heard in the synagogues, the hands are not the hands of Esav; otherwise, the hands are the hands of Esav." The way we protect ourselves against the threat of Esav, from the hostility and animosity of the enemy nations, is through heartfelt prayer. And so in our times, when there are so many who are trying to inflict harm upon Am Yisrael, both in Israel and around the world, let us commit ourselves to increasing the "voice of Yaakob," to pray and beseech G-d for His protection and assistance. We must raise our voices and pour our hearts before Hashem, and ask that He shield us from those who seek our destruction, and grant our nation the peace and serenity that we long for.

We read in Parashat Lech-Lecha of Hagar, an Egyptian woman who become the maidservant of Sara Imenu. The Midrash teaches that Sara was actually a princess, Pharaoh's daughter, and Pharaoh gave her as a maidservant to Sara upon seeing Avraham and Sara's greatness, and realizing what a privilege it would be for his daughter to work in their home. Later, after Avraham and Sara lived together for many years without children, Sara had Avraham marry Hagar. Hagar immediately conceived, resulting in tensions between her and Sara. Sara mistreated Hagar, and Hagar fled. She ended up meeting an angel, who urged her to return to Avraham and Sara's home, despite the hardships she would face there. Hagar complied. Hagar's return to Sara conveys a powerful lesson to each and every one of us. She understood the immense value and benefit of joining Avraham and Sara, even when this entailed a degree of hardship. It was difficult for Hagar to live in the home, given the tensions that arose between her and Sara, but she nevertheless accepted the angel's advice, coming to realize that it is worth enduring this unpleasantness for the sake of the great privilege of living with Avraham and Sara. The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (31a) tells the famous story of a non-Jew who came before Shammai and said that he would convert to Judaism if Shammai could teach him the entire Torah in just a few moments, within the amount of time he could stand on one foot. Shammai sent the man away, figuring that he could not possibly be serious about embracing Judaism if he demanded to learn the entire Torah in just a few seconds. The gentile then came to Hillel, and said the same thing – that he would convert if Hillel could teach him the entire Torah while he stood on one foot. Hillel warmly embraced him, and said, "That which you dislike – do not do to your fellow." He explained that this concept encapsulates the entire Torah. This story is often understood as contrasting the approaches of Hillel and Shammai, showing how Shammai followed a stricter policy, whereas Hillel was more patient and tolerant. However, I would like to suggest an additional angle to this story. Perhaps, the gentile's experience with Shammai is told not as a point of contrast with his experience with Hillel, but rather as the background to his experience to Hillel. Meaning, Hillel quite possibly accepted this prospective convert as sincere and well-meaning precisely because he continued in his quest even after being rejected by Shammai. The fact that the man did not relent, and persisted in his attempt to join the Jewish Nation, even after a rejection, demonstrated how highly he regarded the privilege of being a Jew. His perseverance testified to his sincerity, showing that he was prepared to go through a lengthy process for the priceless opportunity to join Am Yisrael. He in fact was not just looking for an easy route; like Hagar, he was prepared to do whatever it took to become part of the Jewish People. We declare each morning during the Shaharit service, "Ashrenu Ma Tob Helkenu, U'ma Na'im Goralenu, U'ma Yafa Me'od Yerushatenu" – "We are fortunate, how good is our portion, and how pleasant is our lot, and how exceedingly beautiful is our inheritance!" At the beginning of every day, we are to remind ourselves of how privileged we are to belong to Hashem's special nation, to be able to devote our lives to His service. We remind ourselves that no matter what we will have to do deal with over the course of the day, we've won the lottery of life, we have received a precious gift. Yes, throughout any given day, a Jew is going to confront challenges. He might struggle with a challenge to his faith, a challenge posed by his sinful inclinations, the hardships that arise when seeking to meticulously observe the Misvot, or the hostility so often shown to us by other peoples. Belonging to Am Yisrael is not always going to be easy. But we can and must look to Hagar for inspiration, to be reminded that we are truly fortunate, that any difficulties that we endure are a small price to pay for the great privilege that we have been given to serve the Almighty.

Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in honor of their friend and co-learner Debbie Weber Schreiber on the birth of a granddaughter. "May the new addition be a source of pride to the entire family and to Am Yisrael, and be a harbinger of simcha and shalom for us all.  תזכו לגדלה לתורה ולחופה ולמעשים טובים" A braita ruled that the firstborn gets a double portion of the enhancement of their father's property that happened on its own, without the orphans' intervention. However, the Gemara points out that this is Rabbi Yehuda haNasi's opinion as the rabbis disagree and hold that the firstborn does not get a double portion of any enhancement. Rabbi Yehuda haNasi brings an example of this - a promissory note that was paid back after the father's death. If the father's estate owed a debt, the firstborn would need to pay a double portion, but if he agreed to pass up on receiving a double portion of the inheritance, he would not have to pay double for the loan. The Gemara brings the verse in the Torah where the rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda haNasi derive their positions. Rav Papa limits the debate to a situation where the enhanced item is different from the original item, i.e. date flowers that became dates. There are four opinions about whether it is clear with whom the halakha accords or whether it is unclear and what we do with a case where a judge rules against the accepted opinion. Rav Nachman and Rami bar Hama each quote a Midrash Halakha (Sifrei) that accords with a different opinion on this issue. Rav Yehuda quoted Shmuel's ruling that a firstborn does not get a double portion on a loan. The Gemara tries to assess whether this ruling follows the opinion of the rabbis or Rabbi Yehuda haNasi, and concludes that it follows the rabbis' position. A ruling was sent from Israel to Babylonia that if a loan was paid back from a non-Jew, the firstborn would collect a double portion from the principal but not from the interest. This is understood to be the rabbis' opinion. Why would they distinguish between the principal and the interest? The principal is considered as if it is already collected, but the interest is not. The conclusion of this ruling seems to contradict Shmuel's ruling. Ameimar rules like the Israeli ruling and Rav Acha points out that he followed Rav Nachman's position as they were both from the same city, Nehardea. Raba and Rav Nachman each distinguish, in an opposite manner, between a loan that is paid back in land and one that is paid back in cash.

Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in honor of their friend and co-learner Debbie Weber Schreiber on the birth of a granddaughter. "May the new addition be a source of pride to the entire family and to Am Yisrael, and be a harbinger of simcha and shalom for us all.  תזכו לגדלה לתורה ולחופה ולמעשים טובים" A braita ruled that the firstborn gets a double portion of the enhancement of their father's property that happened on its own, without the orphans' intervention. However, the Gemara points out that this is Rabbi Yehuda haNasi's opinion as the rabbis disagree and hold that the firstborn does not get a double portion of any enhancement. Rabbi Yehuda haNasi brings an example of this - a promissory note that was paid back after the father's death. If the father's estate owed a debt, the firstborn would need to pay a double portion, but if he agreed to pass up on receiving a double portion of the inheritance, he would not have to pay double for the loan. The Gemara brings the verse in the Torah where the rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda haNasi derive their positions. Rav Papa limits the debate to a situation where the enhanced item is different from the original item, i.e. date flowers that became dates. There are four opinions about whether it is clear with whom the halakha accords or whether it is unclear and what we do with a case where a judge rules against the accepted opinion. Rav Nachman and Rami bar Hama each quote a Midrash Halakha (Sifrei) that accords with a different opinion on this issue. Rav Yehuda quoted Shmuel's ruling that a firstborn does not get a double portion on a loan. The Gemara tries to assess whether this ruling follows the opinion of the rabbis or Rabbi Yehuda haNasi, and concludes that it follows the rabbis' position. A ruling was sent from Israel to Babylonia that if a loan was paid back from a non-Jew, the firstborn would collect a double portion from the principal but not from the interest. This is understood to be the rabbis' opinion. Why would they distinguish between the principal and the interest? The principal is considered as if it is already collected, but the interest is not. The conclusion of this ruling seems to contradict Shmuel's ruling. Ameimar rules like the Israeli ruling and Rav Acha points out that he followed Rav Nachman's position as they were both from the same city, Nehardea. Raba and Rav Nachman each distinguish, in an opposite manner, between a loan that is paid back in land and one that is paid back in cash.

Today’s daf is sponsored by Tina & Shalom Lamm in honor of their new grandson. "With hakarat hatov to Hashem for the blessing of a new grandson, Ayal Nachum, born on Yom Kippur and entered into the brit of Avraham Avinu on Shabbat Chol HaMoed Sukkot. Mazal tov to our children, the proud parents, Sara and Shmuel Lamm of Modiin." Today's daf is sponsored by Debbie and Yossi Gevir in honor of their two  sons, Elazar and Eliav, and their son-in-law Boaz who are now serving in the army. "They are serving Am Yisrael from the Lebanon border and beyond. May Hashem continue to protect all of Am Yisrael and medinat yisrael. והעמידנו לשלום ופרוס עלינו סוכת שלומך, כן יהי רצון!"            Rav Papa raises a second and third difficulty with the opinion that the land was divided among those entering the land. Firstly, why did the daughters of Tzlofchad complain - their father was not worthy of receiving any portion since he was no longer alive when they entered the land? Secondly, why in the book of Yehoshua 17:14, did the sons of Yosef complain that they did not have enough land for the people of their tribe as they were a large tribe? If the land was divided among those who entered, the tribe of Yosef should have received more land, according to the number of people! Abaye answers both of these questions. From both the stories of the daughters of Tzlofchad and the sons of Yosef, Abaye concludes that everyone else received a portion upon coming into the land, as if some did not, they would have complained. However, the Gemara concludes that it is possible others complained but since their complaints were ineffective, there was no need to record them. The sons of Yosef's complaint was also ineffective but was brought for a different reason - to teach that people should try to avoid the evil eye, ayin hara. They explain the exchange between the sons and Yosef and Yehoshua relating to that issue. Did the people who complained and those who joined Korach receive a portion of the land but it was given to Yehoshua and Caleb just like the spies' portion or did they not receive a portion at all? This is a source of debate and one of the opinions is derived from the verse Bamidbar 27:3, from the words of the Tzlofchad's daughters. Rav Papa raises a difficulty with the opinion that Yehoshua and Caleb inherited all their portions, as they would have inherited most of the Jews' property, since so many complained in the desert! Abaye responds that the complainers were those who complained with Korach. Rav Papa's fifth question is again against the opinion that the land was divided among those entering the land, based on a verse from Yehoshua 17:5 - that Menashe received ten portions, six for each family and four for the daughters of Tzlofchad. This makes the most sense with the opinion that the land was divided among those leaving Egypt. However, Abaye explains the four also to fit with the opinion that the land was divided among those entering the land.  

Today’s daf is sponsored by Tina & Shalom Lamm in honor of their new grandson. "With hakarat hatov to Hashem for the blessing of a new grandson, Ayal Nachum, born on Yom Kippur and entered into the brit of Avraham Avinu on Shabbat Chol HaMoed Sukkot. Mazal tov to our children, the proud parents, Sara and Shmuel Lamm of Modiin." Today's daf is sponsored by Debbie and Yossi Gevir in honor of their two  sons, Elazar and Eliav, and their son-in-law Boaz who are now serving in the army. "They are serving Am Yisrael from the Lebanon border and beyond. May Hashem continue to protect all of Am Yisrael and medinat yisrael. והעמידנו לשלום ופרוס עלינו סוכת שלומך, כן יהי רצון!"            Rav Papa raises a second and third difficulty with the opinion that the land was divided among those entering the land. Firstly, why did the daughters of Tzlofchad complain - their father was not worthy of receiving any portion since he was no longer alive when they entered the land? Secondly, why in the book of Yehoshua 17:14, did the sons of Yosef complain that they did not have enough land for the people of their tribe as they were a large tribe? If the land was divided among those who entered, the tribe of Yosef should have received more land, according to the number of people! Abaye answers both of these questions. From both the stories of the daughters of Tzlofchad and the sons of Yosef, Abaye concludes that everyone else received a portion upon coming into the land, as if some did not, they would have complained. However, the Gemara concludes that it is possible others complained but since their complaints were ineffective, there was no need to record them. The sons of Yosef's complaint was also ineffective but was brought for a different reason - to teach that people should try to avoid the evil eye, ayin hara. They explain the exchange between the sons and Yosef and Yehoshua relating to that issue. Did the people who complained and those who joined Korach receive a portion of the land but it was given to Yehoshua and Caleb just like the spies' portion or did they not receive a portion at all? This is a source of debate and one of the opinions is derived from the verse Bamidbar 27:3, from the words of the Tzlofchad's daughters. Rav Papa raises a difficulty with the opinion that Yehoshua and Caleb inherited all their portions, as they would have inherited most of the Jews' property, since so many complained in the desert! Abaye responds that the complainers were those who complained with Korach. Rav Papa's fifth question is again against the opinion that the land was divided among those entering the land, based on a verse from Yehoshua 17:5 - that Menashe received ten portions, six for each family and four for the daughters of Tzlofchad. This makes the most sense with the opinion that the land was divided among those leaving Egypt. However, Abaye explains the four also to fit with the opinion that the land was divided among those entering the land.  

We are continuing our series on Am Yisrael by investigating how we are meant to represent God in the world. It has been a difficult week for Am Yisrael. We sustained several attacks from Hezbola in Israeli territory. Our learning together should be for the Refuah of those who were injured in the attacks, Leilui Nishmat those we lost, and for continued Siyata Deshmaya for our soldiers fighting a two-front war.

Today's daf is sponsored by Geelit and Eric Sommer in honor of Shai Seliger, his wife Hadar, to his parents, our dear friends and fellow daf learners Oren and Rachel Seliger upon Shai’s safe return from a year of fighting in Gaza. "Am Yisrael is grateful to you and all the other men and women fighting to protect us and to their spouses and families for all their sacrifices." Today's daf is sponsored by Sara Sacks "in honor of Rabbanit Michelle Farber who has made daf yomi accessible to me and a pleasure to learn." Our learning will also be in memory of those killed in Ba"ch Golani yesterday and for the refuah shleima of all the injured soldiers.  Where in the Torah is a source for the law that a son or daughter inherits from their mother? The law is derived from a verse about a daughter and then learned for the son by a kal v'chomer argument from the inheritance from a father. The rabbis and Rabbi Zecharia ben haKatzav disagree about whether the laws of inheriting from the mother are the same as the father, and the son precedes the daughter, or whether they divide her property equally. The argument for the latter (Rabbi Zecharia ben haKatzav's opinion) employs the dayo principle, laws derived by kal v'chomer cannot be stronger than the original law. Since the law is stated by the daughter and learned by kal v'chomer to the brother, the brother can't have more strength than the daughter to inherit in place of her. The dayo principle is derived from God's punishment of Miriam when she spoke lashon hara about Moshe. How can the rabbis not employ dayo here if dayo is derived from the Torah? Some rabbis held like Rabbi Zecharia and even some who held that Rav held that way. But Rav Nachman was adamantly against this position as he believed that neither Rav nor Shmuel held that way. Rabbi Yehuda Nesia had an encounter with Rabbi Yanai where he asked the source for the law that a son precedes the daughter in their mother's inheritance. When Rabbi Yanai responded with a heikesh, comparison, between one who inherits from a mother and one who inherits from the father from the word 'matot', Rabbi Yehuda questioned why doesn't a firstborn doesn't get a double portion from his mother's inheritance just as he does from his father? Rabbi Yanai was so offended by the question that he did not respond. Abaye, Rav Nachman and Rava each bring verses to explain why it was obvious to Rabbi Yanai that a firstborn would not get a double portion from his mother, but only Rava's is accepted. Where in the Torah is a source for the law that a husband inherits from his wife? Two different drashot are brought (in braitot) and Rava and Abaye each explain the first one in a different manner.    

Today's daf is sponsored by Geelit and Eric Sommer in honor of Shai Seliger, his wife Hadar, to his parents, our dear friends and fellow daf learners Oren and Rachel Seliger upon Shai’s safe return from a year of fighting in Gaza. "Am Yisrael is grateful to you and all the other men and women fighting to protect us and to their spouses and families for all their sacrifices." Today's daf is sponsored by Sara Sacks "in honor of Rabbanit Michelle Farber who has made daf yomi accessible to me and a pleasure to learn." Our learning will also be in memory of those killed in Ba"ch Golani yesterday and for the refuah shleima of all the injured soldiers.  Where in the Torah is a source for the law that a son or daughter inherits from their mother? The law is derived from a verse about a daughter and then learned for the son by a kal v'chomer argument from the inheritance from a father. The rabbis and Rabbi Zecharia ben haKatzav disagree about whether the laws of inheriting from the mother are the same as the father, and the son precedes the daughter, or whether they divide her property equally. The argument for the latter (Rabbi Zecharia ben haKatzav's opinion) employs the dayo principle, laws derived by kal v'chomer cannot be stronger than the original law. Since the law is stated by the daughter and learned by kal v'chomer to the brother, the brother can't have more strength than the daughter to inherit in place of her. The dayo principle is derived from God's punishment of Miriam when she spoke lashon hara about Moshe. How can the rabbis not employ dayo here if dayo is derived from the Torah? Some rabbis held like Rabbi Zecharia and even some who held that Rav held that way. But Rav Nachman was adamantly against this position as he believed that neither Rav nor Shmuel held that way. Rabbi Yehuda Nesia had an encounter with Rabbi Yanai where he asked the source for the law that a son precedes the daughter in their mother's inheritance. When Rabbi Yanai responded with a heikesh, comparison, between one who inherits from a mother and one who inherits from the father from the word 'matot', Rabbi Yehuda questioned why doesn't a firstborn doesn't get a double portion from his mother's inheritance just as he does from his father? Rabbi Yanai was so offended by the question that he did not respond. Abaye, Rav Nachman and Rava each bring verses to explain why it was obvious to Rabbi Yanai that a firstborn would not get a double portion from his mother, but only Rava's is accepted. Where in the Torah is a source for the law that a husband inherits from his wife? Two different drashot are brought (in braitot) and Rava and Abaye each explain the first one in a different manner.    

Rav Moshe Tzvi Neriya describes an important mission of Am Yisrael embedded in a Pasuk in Kohelet.

In this heartfelt conversation, we speak with Dana and Yedidya, reflecting on the events of October 7th and the enduring impact a year later. Dana Cohen's husband Aviad Hy"d was killed on October 7, and Yedidya Harush, leader of Shlomit, has been fighting in the IDF.They share their experiences of loss, resilience, and the unbreakable spirit of the community in Shlomit. Through their words, we witness the strength of a family that has endured unimaginable pain and their commitment to rebuilding and moving forward for the sake of Am Yisrael. Join us as we honor the memory of Aviad Hashem Yikom Damo and all those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the people of Israel.

Picture Today is October 7. It’s hard to believe it has been a year since that tragic day. Sadly, we are still grappling with its aftermath. We continue to pray for the release of all the hostages, the safety of the soldiers on the front lines, the safe return of all those displaced from their homes, the full recovery of injured soldiers, and comfort for those mourning the loss of close family or friends. We also pray for the safety of those living under constant rocket attacks, and the list goes on… May this year bring peace and better days for Am Yisrael. If a seller sells a field and does not specify anything further, do we allow for a margin of error? First, the Gemara tries to answer this question from our Mishna, but it is inconclusive. Then they derive from a braita that there is a margin of error, just like one who adds the words "more or less." The Mishna explains that if the amount given to the buyer is greater than the margin of error (1/4 of a kav per se'ah, 1/24), the seller can insist that the buyer pay for all the land greater than the amount agreed upon. The buyer cannot insist on giving back the land to the seller as a small piece of land is useless to the seller. This gives power to the seller over the buyer. However, according to a braita, the buyer can insist that the seller sell the land if it is more than the margin of error, giving the buyer power over the seller. To resolve this contradiction, the case of the braita is understood to be one in which the price fluctuated from the time of the sale and the time they realized there was a mistake in the size of the land given to the buyer. While the buyer cannot insist on buying it (as per the Mishna), if the seller chooses to sell it to the buyer, the buyer is forced to pay but can insist on paying the lower price, either the one at the time of the sale or the current price (as per the braita). If the amount of land given to the buyer is nine kav more than agreed upon, the buyer can insist on returning the land to the seller, as nine kav of property is the minimum size of a field. Rav Huna and Rav Nachman disagree about whether this is an absolute amount (Rav Huna) and even if the field is larger than thirty se'ah, the buyer returns the amount to the seller (as there is no presumption of mechila for the amount of nine kav, even in a large field) or is it a relative amount (Rav Nachman) - nine kav for a field of 30 se'ah, as at that amount there is no presumption of mechila, but if it were in a larger field, there would be mechila by the seller on the error (as per 1/4 kav per se'ah). Rava raises difficulties with Rav Nachman's position, but they are resolved. Rav Ashi asks: If a field was sold with a surplus of more than seven and a half, but less than nine kav, and when the surplus was measured, the field became potentially used as a garden, can the buyer return the surplus land to the seller? What about the reverse case? These questions remain unanswered. If the seller owns the adjacent field to the one being sold, the buyer can return the land, even if the surplus is less than nine kav. What if there is a pit, water channel, road, or row of palm trees separating the surplus land from the seller's field?  

Picture Today is October 7. It’s hard to believe it has been a year since that tragic day. Sadly, we are still grappling with its aftermath. We continue to pray for the release of all the hostages, the safety of the soldiers on the front lines, the safe return of all those displaced from their homes, the full recovery of injured soldiers, and comfort for those mourning the loss of close family or friends. We also pray for the safety of those living under constant rocket attacks, and the list goes on… May this year bring peace and better days for Am Yisrael. If a seller sells a field and does not specify anything further, do we allow for a margin of error? First, the Gemara tries to answer this question from our Mishna, but it is inconclusive. Then they derive from a braita that there is a margin of error, just like one who adds the words "more or less." The Mishna explains that if the amount given to the buyer is greater than the margin of error (1/4 of a kav per se'ah, 1/24), the seller can insist that the buyer pay for all the land greater than the amount agreed upon. The buyer cannot insist on giving back the land to the seller as a small piece of land is useless to the seller. This gives power to the seller over the buyer. However, according to a braita, the buyer can insist that the seller sell the land if it is more than the margin of error, giving the buyer power over the seller. To resolve this contradiction, the case of the braita is understood to be one in which the price fluctuated from the time of the sale and the time they realized there was a mistake in the size of the land given to the buyer. While the buyer cannot insist on buying it (as per the Mishna), if the seller chooses to sell it to the buyer, the buyer is forced to pay but can insist on paying the lower price, either the one at the time of the sale or the current price (as per the braita). If the amount of land given to the buyer is nine kav more than agreed upon, the buyer can insist on returning the land to the seller, as nine kav of property is the minimum size of a field. Rav Huna and Rav Nachman disagree about whether this is an absolute amount (Rav Huna) and even if the field is larger than thirty se'ah, the buyer returns the amount to the seller (as there is no presumption of mechila for the amount of nine kav, even in a large field) or is it a relative amount (Rav Nachman) - nine kav for a field of 30 se'ah, as at that amount there is no presumption of mechila, but if it were in a larger field, there would be mechila by the seller on the error (as per 1/4 kav per se'ah). Rava raises difficulties with Rav Nachman's position, but they are resolved. Rav Ashi asks: If a field was sold with a surplus of more than seven and a half, but less than nine kav, and when the surplus was measured, the field became potentially used as a garden, can the buyer return the surplus land to the seller? What about the reverse case? These questions remain unanswered. If the seller owns the adjacent field to the one being sold, the buyer can return the land, even if the surplus is less than nine kav. What if there is a pit, water channel, road, or row of palm trees separating the surplus land from the seller's field?  

Kabbalistic tradition teaches that everything which happens here in our world has its origins in the upper worlds. By the time an event unfolds here on earth, something had already occurred in the heavens that set this process into motion. It occurred to me that this teaching may be applied to an event which we witness here in New York City each year – not coincidentally, in September, shortly before Rosh Hashanah, or around the time of Rosh Hashanah. I refer to the United Nations' General Assembly. Leaders of countries around the world come here and take the stage to rail against the world's only Jewish state. They stand up to fabricate lies and portray Israel as the cause of the world's problems. The "heavenly" backdrop of this annual disgrace can be understood based on a teaching of Rav Shlomo Kluger (1785-1869) regarding the judgment that takes place on Rosh Hashanah. He writes that on Rosh Hashanah, not only is each individual judged for the coming year, but the entire Jewish Nation, too, is brought to trial as a single entity. Rav Kluger explains that when Hashem disrupted the building of Migdal Babel, dividing mankind into seventy nations, he assigned an angel to each nation. Every nation that was formed came under the supervision of an angel in the heavens. There is, however, one exception. As we read this Shabbat in Parashat Haazinu (32:9), "Ki Helek Hashem Amo, Yaakob Hebel Nahalato" – "His nation is G-d's portion; Yaakob is the territory apportioned to Him." Am Yisrael is under Hashem's direct protection and supervision. There is no angel assigned to the Jewish People, because G-d cares for us directly, as His "personal" portion. However, this special status needs to be earned. Following the sin of the golden calf, even after G-d accepted Moshe's plea not to annihilate Beneh Yisrael, He was not prepared to continue keeping them under His direct care. He told Moshe, "I am hereby sending an angel before you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the land I have prepared" (Shemot 23:20). The people had forfeited the privilege of G-d's direct care through their wrongdoing. Even then, though, Moshe successfully interceded on the people's behalf, and Hashem agreed to care for the nation directly. Rav Kluger writes that each year, on Rosh Hashanah, the angels in heaven call for a new "election," for reassessing Am Yisrael's special stature. They question and challenge the Jewish Nation's right to Hashem's special care and protection. Like the speakers in the UN, they stand up and cast aspersions against us. They claim that we are not worthy of our unique relationship with Hashem. And the critical moment when we successfully refute this challenge is during the recitation of "Alenu Le'shabe'ah" during Musaf on Rosh Hashanah. In this prayer, we express our boundless gratitude for not having been made like the other nations, "for they bow to vanity and nothingness, and pray to a god that does not deliver, whereas we kneel and bow before the King of the kings of kings…" We loudly, proudly, and confidently avow that we do not follow the other nations' customs and practices, that we do not embrace their beliefs, that we are fully and unwaveringly committed to Hashem, and resist the lures of the "vanity and nothingness" to which other peoples devote their time and attention. It is by resolutely proclaiming our loyalty to Hashem, and our refusal to go along with the beliefs, values, customs and lifestyles of the people around us, that we earn a renewal of our contract, so-to-speak, the continuation of our special relationship with Hashem. If we steadfastly commit to refrain from the "vanity and nothingness," from the practices of other peoples, then we earn our nation's special stature, our unique relationship with the King of the universe.

In the merit of our soldiers now down south and up north and for the safe return of our hostages, we will be learning about Am Yisrael and the biblical origins of Jewish Identity. In addition, I hope our learning about this topic will help strengthen us and our bonds as a nation.

Toward the beginning of Parashat Shoftim, the Torah famously commands, "Sedek Sedek Tirdof" – "Justice, justice shall you pursue" (16:20). The plain meaning of this verse is that the Torah commands judges to reach their decisions honestly and fairly, with the objective of pursuing justice for all litigants who come before them. The Midrash Tanhuma, however, adds a deeper layer of meaning, explaining that the Torah here commands leaders to advocate on behalf of the Jewish Nation. In the Midrash's words, "She'yiheyu…Melamdin Alehem Zechut Lifneh Ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu" – "That they should speak of their merits before the Almighty." According to this reading, "Sedek Sedek Tirdof" means that leaders should "pursue" the piety of Am Yisrael, searching for their merits, and then plead on their behalf before Hashem. Interestingly enough, the Midrash proceeds to state that the greatest example of this quality is Gidon, one of the judges, who led Beneh Yisrael to victory over the nation of Midyan, as we read in the Book of Shoftim (6). During Gidon's time, the Midrash comments, the people had few Misvot to their credit, through which they could earn G-d's salvation from the nation of Midyan which was oppressing them. Gidon, however, advocated on their behalf before G-d, and for this reason, an angel appeared to him and appointed him leader. The Midrash adds that, as we read in the Book of Shoftim (6:14), the angel assigned Gidon his mission by charging, "Lech Be'chohacha Zeh" – "Go forth with this strength." Gidon's "strength," the Midrash explains, was the power of his finding merit in Am Yisrael during that time. Despite the people's low spiritual stature, and their failure to observe the Misvot, Gidon nevertheless saw their inner goodness and advocated on their behalf before G-d. It was in this merit that he succeeded in leading Beneh Yisrael to victory over the nation of Midyan. This was the "Koah" – the strength – with which he was able to save the people. The question arises, however, as to where and how Gidon advocated on Beneh Yisrael's behalf. Nowhere in the text of the Book of Shoftim do we find Gidon speaking of the people's merits. To what, then, does the Midrash refer? The answer is found in Rashi's commentary to the Book of Shoftim (6:13), where he explains Gidon's response to the angel. The angel's first words to Gidon were "Hashem Imecha" – "G-d is with you!" Gidon then asked, "If, indeed, G-d is with us, then why has all this befallen us? And where are all His wonders which our forefathers told us about…" Based on the Midrash, Rashi writes that the angel appeared to Gidon on the first day of Pesach, and Gidon was referring to the story of Yesiat Misrayim (the Exodus from Egypt) which he heard his father relate the night before. Gidon noted that G-d brought Beneh Yisrael out of Egypt despite the fact that they were steeped in Egyptian paganism, and were not serving G-d properly. Hashem understood their plight and saw their inner, inherent goodness despite their wrongdoing, and redeemed them. Gidon thus argued that in his time, too, Hashem should save the nation despite their low spiritual level, because their core essence was still pure. He pointed to the generation of the Exodus as an example of how Beneh Yisrael are worthy of Hashem's miraculous assistance even when they act wrongly, because deep in the inner recesses of their hearts. they are devoted to Him. Gidon thus insisted that Hashem assist His beloved nation also then, as they suffered under the oppression of Midyan. The Hafetz Haim taught that the best way to earn a favorable judgment on Rosh Hashanah is to judge our fellow Jews favorably. If we want Hashem to tilt the scales in our favor, despite our many misdeeds and deficiencies, then we should tilt the scales in other people's favor, despite their mistakes, flaws and failings. If we view other people critically, looking to find fault, searching for reasons to complain about them and disrespect them, then, Heaven forbid, we will be viewed the same way as we stand trial on Rosh Hashanah. If we want to be judged favorably, then we must follow the example set by Gidon, who insisted on finding the good in Am Yisrael even in their state of spiritual lowliness. During this month of Elul, in preparation for Rosh Hashanah, let us accustom ourselves to seeing only what is good about all our fellow Jews, and about the Jewish Nation as a whole. Instead of criticizing and complaining about Am Yisrael, let us indulge in the singing of their praises, and focus our attention on the countless merits that Am Yisrael have. We will then, please G-d, be worthy of a favorable judgment for ourselves and for the entire Jewish Nation, Amen.

Study Guide Bava Batra 66 Today's daf is sponsored by Sarah & Inna Pasternak, in honor of their first wedding anniversary. "We fell in love studying the daf and look forward to remaining havrutas as we build a home full of Torah together."  Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in honor of their friend and co-learner Miriam Eckstein-Koas on the engagement of her son, Daniel. "May Daniel and Talia build a bayit neeman b'Yisrael firmly grounded in Torah and chesed, and may all of Am Yisrael see smachot!" The Gemara continues to figure out which opinion of Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis doesn't seem to correspond to the Tosefta Mikvaot that distinguishes between a pipe that was constructed and then attached to the ground and one that was hollowed out from the ground or while it is attached to the ground. After rejecting the first two possibilities (the braita that related to our Mishna and a Mishna regarding a beehive), they find a Mishna Keilim 15:2 regarding a baker's board attached to a wall in which it seems that both Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis disagree with the Tosefta Mikvaot. Since the Tosefta must fit with one of the two opinions, the Gemara then tries to assess which one. First, they attempt to reconcile it with Rabbi Eliezer, claiming that Rabbi Eliezer was more lenient in the baker's board case as it was only impure on a rabbinic level (a flat wood vessel). However, this is rejected on two accounts. One, mayim she'uvim disqualifies a mikveh by rabbinic law. Secondly, Rabbi Yosi son of Rabbi Chanina's explained that the Mishna in Keilim refers to a metal baker's block, which would make it impure by Torah law. In conclusion, the Gemara establishes that the rabbi's opinion corresponds to the Tosefta Mikvaot, as the issue of mayim she'uvim is only rabbinic. Therefore the rabbis are more lenient there than in the case of a baker's board. If rain falls on a movable item (vessel) that is detached from the ground and at the same time on food that is inside/on that item, if the owner wants the rain to fall on the item, the food also becomes susceptible to impurity. What if the moveable item was attached to the ground, would it be considered like the ground and the food inside it would not become susceptible to impurity, or would it be considered a vessel and the food inside it would become susceptible to impurity? The question is only asked according to the rabbis (and there is no answer), as according to Rabbi Eliezer, it would clearly be considered like the ground and the food would not become susceptible to impurity.

Study Guide Bava Batra 66 Today's daf is sponsored by Sarah & Inna Pasternak, in honor of their first wedding anniversary. "We fell in love studying the daf and look forward to remaining havrutas as we build a home full of Torah together."  Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in honor of their friend and co-learner Miriam Eckstein-Koas on the engagement of her son, Daniel. "May Daniel and Talia build a bayit neeman b'Yisrael firmly grounded in Torah and chesed, and may all of Am Yisrael see smachot!" The Gemara continues to figure out which opinion of Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis doesn't seem to correspond to the Tosefta Mikvaot that distinguishes between a pipe that was constructed and then attached to the ground and one that was hollowed out from the ground or while it is attached to the ground. After rejecting the first two possibilities (the braita that related to our Mishna and a Mishna regarding a beehive), they find a Mishna Keilim 15:2 regarding a baker's board attached to a wall in which it seems that both Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis disagree with the Tosefta Mikvaot. Since the Tosefta must fit with one of the two opinions, the Gemara then tries to assess which one. First, they attempt to reconcile it with Rabbi Eliezer, claiming that Rabbi Eliezer was more lenient in the baker's board case as it was only impure on a rabbinic level (a flat wood vessel). However, this is rejected on two accounts. One, mayim she'uvim disqualifies a mikveh by rabbinic law. Secondly, Rabbi Yosi son of Rabbi Chanina's explained that the Mishna in Keilim refers to a metal baker's block, which would make it impure by Torah law. In conclusion, the Gemara establishes that the rabbi's opinion corresponds to the Tosefta Mikvaot, as the issue of mayim she'uvim is only rabbinic. Therefore the rabbis are more lenient there than in the case of a baker's board. If rain falls on a movable item (vessel) that is detached from the ground and at the same time on food that is inside/on that item, if the owner wants the rain to fall on the item, the food also becomes susceptible to impurity. What if the moveable item was attached to the ground, would it be considered like the ground and the food inside it would not become susceptible to impurity, or would it be considered a vessel and the food inside it would become susceptible to impurity? The question is only asked according to the rabbis (and there is no answer), as according to Rabbi Eliezer, it would clearly be considered like the ground and the food would not become susceptible to impurity.

There is a time-honored practice – dating back many centuries – to read Shir Hashirim on Friday night. Some communities read it before Minha on Friday afternoon, others between Minha and Arbit, and some after Arbit. The text of Shir Hashirim is, essentially, a love story between a man and a woman. The Seror Ha'mor (Rav Abraham Saba, 1440-1508), in his introduction to Shir Hashirim, bemoans the fact that the Apikorsim (heretics) interpret Shir Hashirim literally, as describing an actual relationship between a man and a woman, Heaven forbid. This profanes Shir Hashirim, which our Sages describe as "Kodesh Kodashim" – the most sacred of all the texts in the Tanach. This book allegorizes the close relationship between Am Yisrael and the Almighty, describing the deep love He feels for us and we feel for Him. One verse in Shir Hashirim says, "Shehora Ani Ve'na'ava" – "I am black but beloved," referring to the fact that Beneh Yisrael are beloved to Hashem even when we're "black," darkened by sin. The simplest explanation for why we read Shir Hashirim at the beginning of Shabbat is because Shabbat is like the "wedding" between the Jewish People and G-d. This is why we sing, "Bo'i Kalla" ("Come, O bride") when Shabbat begins, and we dress up in our finest clothing and have an elaborate meal, just like at a wedding. Furthermore, in our Friday night prayer, we refer to Shabbat in the feminine form – "Ve'yanuhu Bah," whereas on Shabbat morning, we use the masculine form – "Ve'yanuhu Bo," and at Minha some have the custom to recite the plural form – "Ve'yanuhu Bam." Some explain these passages as allusions to the bride and groom, who come together on Shabbat afternoon, the time of the "Yihud," the culmination of the "wedding," the height of love and closeness between G-d and His special nation. Appropriately, then, as we celebrate this "wedding," we read Shir Hashirim which tells of the unique feelings of love between G-d and Am Yisrael. The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), in his work Kiseh Rahamim, brings another reason. He cites the Seder Ha'dorot as stating that although Beneh Yisrael spent 210 years in Egypt, they worked as slaves for only 117 years. The number 117, then, is associated with the end of exile and suffering, and the onset of redemption, as it was after 117 years of labor that Beneh Yisrael were freed. Our Sages teach us that if we all observe Shabbat properly, then we become worthy of redemption. So, on this day we read Shir Hashirim, which contains 117 verses, as though telling the Almighty that the merit of our observance of Shabbat should bring the end of our exile. Just as G-d redeemed our ancestors from Egypt after 117 years of slave labor, we, too, hope for our redemption in the merit of Shabbat observance, alluded to by the 117 verses in Shir Hashirim. (This is likely the reason why it is customary to read Shir Hashirim after the Seder on Pesach, because of the association between the 117 verses of this book and the Exodus from Egypt.) Another explanation is based on a teaching of the Roke'ah (Rav Elazar of Worms, Germany, 1176-1238). The Zohar comments that the wicked who suffer in Gehinam are granted a reprieve during the 24 hours of Shabbat. (Our lighting of a candle on Mosa'eh Shabbat signifies the rekindling of the fires of Gehinam.) But in addition, the Zohar writes, the fires of Gehinam cease to burn also when Am Yisrael recites each of the three daily prayers – Shaharit, Minha and Arbit. Specifically, the Zohar says that when Am Yisrael recites one of these prayers, the fires of Gehinam stop burning for an hour and a half – or 4.5 hours each day. Now the six workdays have a total of 144 hours (24 * 6), and among those, the fires of Gehinam are not burning for 27 hours (4.5 * 6). It turns out, then, that the fires of Gehinam burn for a total of 117 hours (144-27). The Roke'ah teaches that King Shlomo composed the 117 verses of Shir Hashirim as a prayer that the merit of this sacred text should save people from the punishment of Gehinam. We therefore recite Shir Hashirim at the end of the week so that the merit of our recitation will save us from the 117 weekly hours of suffering in Gehinam. Summary: It is customary to read Shir Hashirim on Friday night, either before Minha, after Minha, or after Arbit. The simplest reason is because Shir Hashirim talks of the special love between G-d and Am Yisrael, and Shabbat is the "wedding" between us and Hashem. There are also Kabbalistic reasons for this practice.

Today's daf is sponsored by Judy Schwartz in honor of her daughter Rina. "Rina got me started on my journey of Daf Yomi with Hadran. You are a magnificent person who does incredible chessed for Am Yisrael and serves as an example to all of us. With love and admiration for who you are." People in the Bar Marion household were pounding flax, and the flax waste flew in the wind to the neighbor and caused damage. Is this considered damages (giri didei) for which Rabbi Yosi would obligate? Can we learn from the laws of Sabbath (winnowing with the wind's assistance)? One needs to distance one's tree from another's property by four cubits to leave room for the neighbor to plow. If one's roots grow into a neighboring field, one can cut them to a certain depth, depending on why one is cutting them (what one needs the space for). Various cases are brought discussing these halakhot.  The Mishna says that when one is allowed to cut the roots of a neighbor's tree, the roots go to "him."  The Gemara tries to figure out whether the "him" refers to the owner of the tree or the owner of the neighboring field. Ravina and Ulla each understand that the first sixteen cubits of the roots are considered part of the tree, but beyond that, they are not. Based on that, Ulla rules that a tree within sixteen cubits of a neighboring field is considered to be stealing from the neighbor's field and one should therefore not bring bikurim from such a tree. The Gemara tries to bring tannaitic sources to prove how Ulla arrived at the number sixteen.

Balak | The Book of Bil'am, by Rav Yitzchak Etshalom Why do Chazal credit Moshe with writing "his book (Torah) and Parashat Bil'am". What is "Parashat Bil'am"? The story of Bil'am has always inspired consternation. Amongst the mysteries unique to this narrative is one of setting - it is the only story in the Torah since the end of Sefer Bereishit where Am Yisrael is not front and center - in fact, during this entire narrative, Am Yisrael isn't even in the background; they are the target and focus of discussion and attempted spiritual ambush - but we never see or hear them. This oddity likely led Chazal to ascribe "Parashat Bil'am" to Moshe Rabbenu - even though they already credited him with writing most/all of the Torah. There is, however, another way to understand that unusual statement. A Ritb"a suggests, there was a separate book, known as "the book of Bil'am", that Chazal were able to reference - and this is somewhat substantiated by an odd conversation between R. Hanina and a sectarian (BT Sanhedrin 100). where the latter refers to something he read "in Bil'am's log book". These mysterious statements gained more traction with a remarkable find in Tel Dir-'Alah (Biblical Sukkot, on the East Bank of the Jordan) in February 1967 - the mysterious "Book of Bil'am bar B'eor". Enjoy! Source sheet >>

Today's daf is sponsored by Vitti Rosenzweig Kones in loving memory of Sara Rosenzweig bat Vitti and David Greenbaum. Today’s daf is sponsored by the Hadran Zoom family in honor of so many great, joyful events in our Hadran family. "Mazal Tov to our friend and fellow learner, Ruth Leah Kahan, on the marriage of her son, Ariel Kahan to Miriam Holmes. May their house be a source of peace and love for Am Yisrael. A huge welcome home to our friends and fellow learners, Gitta Neufeld and Terri Krivosha, and wishes for an easy yishuv into your permanent home in Israel. Your move is an inspiration of hope to all of us!" Shmuel ruled that a wafer placed in a window is not considered permanent and therefore does not reduce the size of the window to prevent impurities from passing through. the Tosefta Ohalot Chapter 14 is brought to contradict as it lists several items that if placed in a window would block impurity even though they also are not permanent. The Gemara goes over each item listed and explains why they differ from the wafer. If two people share a house - one living upstairs and the other downstairs, what does each have to do to prevent damage to the other? Residents of a shared courtyard can prevent each other from turning their house into a store, but they cannot prevent each other from making loud noises from hammering for work or crushing of a millstone or from children.