Podcasts about Korach

Chelek 28, Korach 1

Volume 28 korach 1

https://www.torahrecordings.com/likutei-sichos/028/009_001

Explains the Meaning of Moshe Rising and Going to Datan and Aviram

התוכן [המשך] ובזה שרש"י מציין "כמו שמצינו במעשה קרח", ששם היתה המיתה "בידי שמים", מביא ראי' למ"ש עה"פ לפנ"ז "והזר הקרב יומת" "בידי שמים", אף דבכ"מ שנאמר "יומת" (ולא "ימות") הכוונה בידי אדם. (ואף שכבר בפ' משפטים עה"פ "וגם בעליו יומת" פרש"י "בידי שמים", אבל שם אכן שואל "יכול בידי אדם" ומביא ראי' שזה "בידי שמים"). וההוראה מכל הנ"ל: כמו ב"מעשה קרח" לא "יצא (אפי') הקצף" (ולא רק העונש מיתה) עד שלא הקריבו הקטורת בפועל, ועד אז – אפי' לאחר שקרח הקהיל כל שבט לוי והציתם נגד "משה אמת ותורתו אמת" וכו' – הי' להם עוד נשיאת חן בעיני ה', ומשה חזר אחריהם שיחזרו בתשובה וכו', ועד"ז גם יהודי שחסר אצלו בענין של "שמירה מסביב למשכן", בהענין ד"הרחק מן העבירה" וכיו"ב, הנה כ"ז שאין הענין בפועל, ה"ה נושא חן גם "בעיני האלקים" – מדת הדין, ו"הקב"ה עוזרו" וכו' ובודאי ש"בל ידח ממנו נדח".משיחת מוצש"ק פ' במדבר, מבה"ח וער"ח סיון ה'תשל"ט ל"הנחה פרטית" או התרגום ללה"ק של השיחה: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=27-05-2025 Synopsis [Continued.] By citing “the incident of Korach,” where the punishment was by the hand of Heaven, Rashi gives proof to his explanation in the earlier verse, “any layperson who approaches will be put to death” that “put to death” means “by the hand of heaven,” unlike most instances of the word יומת (as opposed to ימות) which mean death by the court. (Although Rashi already explained in Mishpatim on the verse, “its owner, too, shall be put to death (יומת)” that it means by the hand of heaven, nevertheless, there he asks explicitly, “Perhaps it means by the hand of man?” and brings a proof that it means by the hand of Heaven.) The lesson from all this is that just as in the incident of Korach, even the “wrath” (let alone the punishment of death) was not unleashed until they actually offered the ketores, and moreover, even after Korach gathered the tribe of Levi and incited them against Moshe, they still found favor in Hashem's eyes, and Moshe sought to bring them to do teshuvah etc., similarly, if a Jew is lacking in his service of “guarding around the Mishkan” (distancing himself from sin) and the like, as long as he doesn't actually sin, he finds favor in “the eyes of G-d” (the attribute of judgment), and “The Holy One, blessed be He, assists him,” and it is certain that “he who is banished will not remain banished.”Excerpt from sichah of Motzaei Shabbos parashas Bamidbar, Erev Rosh Chodesh Sivan 5739 For a transcript in English of the Sicha: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=27-05-2025

התוכן עה"פ [בשני דפ' במדבר] והלויים יחנו סביב למשכן העדות ולא יהי' קצף על עדת בנ"י וגו'", מפרש"י: "אם תעשו כמצותי לא יהי' קצף, ואם לאו, שיכנסו זרים בעבודתם זו, יהי' קצף, כמו שמצינו במעשה קרח כי יצא הקצף וגו'". וצ"ל: 1) מה קשה בפשש"מ? 2) הרי "מכלל לאו אתה שומע לאו", ומדוע צריך לפרט "ואם לאו, שיכנסו זרים בעבודתם זו"? 3) למה צריך הראי' מ"מעשה קרח"? והביאור: בפסוק שלפנ"ז כתוב "והזר הקרב יומת", וקשה: מהו ענין ה"קצף" שמוסיף בפסוק זה? והיו יכולים לפרש, דמ"ש "יומת" קאי על זר שנכנס בפועל, אבל אם זר לא נכנס בפועל, ורק לא התקיים מ"ש בפסוק זה, שהלויים לא שמרו מסביב למשכן (שנתנו האפשריות שזר יכנס), אז (לא יהי' "יומת", רק) "יהי' קצף". וזהו מה שרש"י שולל ומפרט "ואם לאו, שיכנסו זרים בעבודתם זו", רק אז יהי' "קצף", נוסף על ענין ה"מיתה" שבפסוק שלפנ"ז. ומוכיח זאת מ"מעשה קרח" שנאמר שם "יצא הקצף": 1) שלא הי' ענין הקצף עד הקטרת הקטורת ע"י הזרים בפועל (אף שהפסקת השמירה על המשכן ע"י הלויים היתה לפנ"ז כשהתאספו אצל קרח). 2) שנוסף על ענין ה"מיתה" אצל ה-250 איש, הי' גם "קצף" כללי וכו'. [המשך יבוא]ד חלקים משיחת מוצש"ק פ' במדבר, מבה"ח וער"ח סיון ה'תשל"ט ל"הנחה פרטית" או התרגום ללה"ק של השיחה: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=26-05-2025 Synopsis On the verse [in sheini of parashas Bamidbar] “And the Levi'im must encamp around the Mishkan of Testimony, so that there will be no wrath against the community of the Jewish people,” Rashi explains: “If you do as I have commanded, there will be no wrath; but if not, and laypersons venture into this service of theirs, there will be wrath, as we find in the incident of Korach, ‘for wrath has gone forth….'” A number of questions arise: (1) What is difficult here in the plain meaning of the verse? (2) We know that “From a negative statement you can infer a positive statement” – so why is it necessary to spell out that “but if not, and laypersons venture into their service of theirs…”? (3) Why does Rashi need to bring a proof from the “incident of Korach”? The explanation is as follows: A previous verse states, “any layperson who approaches will be put to death”; therefore, the question is why this verse adds this idea of “wrath”? A possible explanation would be that the earlier verse, which mentions the death penalty, applies when a layperson actually enters, whereas this verse teaches that if the Levi'im failed to guard the Mishkan as required (creating the possibility for layperson to enter), but no layperson actually entered, then (there would be no death penalty but) there would be “wrath.” But Rashi negates this explanation by saying, “but if not, and laypersons venture into this service of theirs” – only then will there be “wrath” (in addition to the death penalty mentioned in the earlier verse). Rashi proves this from the incident of Korach, where it says, “for wrath has gone forth,” indicating that (1) there was no wrath until the non-Kohanim actually offered the ketores (even though the Levi'im had already ceased guarding the Mishkan earlier, when they joined with Korach); and (2) in addition to the punishment of death upon the 250 men, there was also a general “wrath” etc. [To be continued.]4 excerpts from sichah of Motzaei Shabbos parashas Bamidbar, Erev Rosh Chodesh Sivan 5739 For a transcript in English of the Sicha: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=26-05-2025

Moshe Rose Up and Went

Moshe Rose Up and Went

Have any questions, insights, or feedback? Send me a text!Length: 58 minutesSynopsis: Tonight (4/30/25), in our Wednesday night Tehilim shiur, we finished the perek! This was due, in part, to the fact that I didn't have my usual chavrusa this week AND didn't have time to prepare shiur. Nevertheless, we reviewed what we did last time and refined the theory I came up with, running it through the whole perek and bringing it down to the level of the practical. We found support in Saadia Gaon and got some nice Tehilim methodology from Hoil Moshe. I'm happy with how our analysis turned out, and I'm eager to start whatever we take up next!-----מקורות:תהלים פרק מדמצודת דוד - תהלים מד:כא-כברד"ק שםדברים ח:ז-כהואיל משהפירוש רס"ג-----The total cost of producing my five podcasts in 2024 came to $1,455—an expense I would have otherwise had to cover myself. I'm deeply grateful to the generous sponsors who helped shoulder that cost and supported my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.-----If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider contributing to my Patreon at www.patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss. Alternatively, if you would like to make a direct contribution to the "Rabbi Schneeweiss Torah Content Fund," my Venmo is @Matt-Schneeweiss, and my Zelle and PayPal are mattschneeweiss at gmail. Even a small contribution goes a long way to covering the costs of my podcasts, and will provide me with the financial freedom to produce even more Torah content for you.If you would like to sponsor a day's or a week's worth of content, or if you are interested in enlisting my services as a teacher or tutor, you can reach me at rabbischneeweiss at gmail. Thank you to my listeners for listening, thank you to my readers for reading, and thank you to my supporters for supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.-----Substack: rabbischneeweiss.substack.com/Patreon: patreon.com/rabbischneeweissYouTube Channel: youtube.com/rabbischneeweissInstagram: instagram.com/rabbischneeweiss/"The Stoic Jew" Podcast: thestoicjew.buzzsprout.com"Machshavah Lab" Podcast: machshavahlab.buzzsprout.com"The Mishlei Podcast": mishlei.buzzsprout.com"Rambam Bekius" Podcast: rambambekius.buzzsprout.com"The Tefilah Podcast": tefilah.buzzsprout.comOld Blog: kolhaseridim.blogspot.com/WhatsApp Content Hub (where I post all my content and announce my public classes): https://chat.whatsapp.com/GEB1EPIAarsELfHWuI2k0HAmazon Wishlist: amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/Y72CSP86S24W?ref_=wl_sharel

Rashi (Vayikra 10:5) references Sanhedrin 52a which cites a machlokes whether Nadav and Avihu's entire body was burnt or only their insides. The reverse machlokes applies to the adas Korach. This episode analyzes these two types of deaths.

Welcome to People Make Roofing, a call to action led by Roofing Talent America and RoofersCoffeeShop®. We're tackling the industry's biggest challenges, from outdated misconceptions to the widening skills gap. Our mission? To show the next generation the true potential of roofing—including the diverse opportunities, endless growth possibilities and a chance to make a lasting impact. Join us as we share unfiltered stories from industry professionals across North America, inspiring and guiding the future of roofing. Learn more at RoofersCoffeeShop.com! https://www.rooferscoffeeshop.com/   Are you a contractor looking for resources? Become an R-Club Member today! https://www.rooferscoffeeshop.com/rcs-club-sign-up   Sign up for the Week in Roofing! https://www.rooferscoffeeshop.com/sign-up   Follow Us!   https://www.facebook.com/rooferscoffeeshop/   https://www.linkedin.com/company/rooferscoffeeshop-com   https://x.com/RoofCoffeeShop   https://www.instagram.com/rooferscoffeeshop/   https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAQTC5U3FL9M-_wcRiEEyvw   https://www.pinterest.com/rcscom/   https://www.tiktok.com/@rooferscoffeeshop   https://www.rooferscoffeeshop.com/rss   #RoofingTalentAmerica #RoofersCoffeeShop #MetalCoffeeShop #AskARoofer #CoatingsCoffeeShop #RoofingProfessionals #RoofingContractors #RoofingIndustry 

Have any questions, insights, or feedback? Send me a text!Length: 57 minutesSynopsis: Tonight (4/23/25), in our Wednesday night Tehilim shiur, we began a new chapter of Tehilim. Yeah, yeah, I know that we had STARTED Tehilim 42 last time and didn't even get to the analysis, but that was over a month ago, and most of the shiur attendees wanted to start something new. Plus, I started learning this perek over Yom Tov and I was REALLY excited to dive deeper into it! As usual, we spent most of the time working on the translation. We then identified the pivot point(s), which was relatively easy. Finally, in the last five minutes of the shiur, I revealed my subversive theory about the perek - or should I say, my theory that the perek IS subversive! We'll have to wait until next time to see whether my theory is supported by a closer reading of the text and the meforshim.-----מקורות:תהלים פרק מדArtscrollRobert Alter-----The total cost of producing my five podcasts in 2024 came to $1,455—an expense I would have otherwise had to cover myself. I'm deeply grateful to the generous sponsors who helped shoulder that cost and supported my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.-----If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider contributing to my Patreon at www.patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss. Alternatively, if you would like to make a direct contribution to the "Rabbi Schneeweiss Torah Content Fund," my Venmo is @Matt-Schneeweiss, and my Zelle and PayPal are mattschneeweiss at gmail. Even a small contribution goes a long way to covering the costs of my podcasts, and will provide me with the financial freedom to produce even more Torah content for you.If you would like to sponsor a day's or a week's worth of content, or if you are interested in enlisting my services as a teacher or tutor, you can reach me at rabbischneeweiss at gmail. Thank you to my listeners for listening, thank you to my readers for reading, and thank you to my supporters for supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.-----Substack: rabbischneeweiss.substack.com/Patreon: patreon.com/rabbischneeweissYouTube Channel: youtube.com/rabbischneeweissInstagram: instagram.com/rabbischneeweiss/"The Stoic Jew" Podcast: thestoicjew.buzzsprout.com"Machshavah Lab" Podcast: machshavahlab.buzzsprout.com"The Mishlei Podcast": mishlei.buzzsprout.com"Rambam Bekius" Podcast: rambambekius.buzzsprout.com"The Tefilah Podcast": tefilah.buzzsprout.comOld Blog: kolhaseridim.blogspot.com/WhatsApp Content Hub (where I post all my content and announce my public classes): https://chat.whatsapp.com/GEB1EPIAarsELfHWuI2k0HAmazon Wishlist: amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/Y72CSP86S24W?ref_=wl_sharel

This week we will begin with discussions about King David's sin with Batsheva and the consequences of his actions, followed by reflections on repentance and divine justice. The later pages focus on the downfall of the wicked kings of Israel and the rebellion of Korach, culminating in a broader conversation about false prophets, rebellious cities, and how the Torah guides dealing with internal threats to the spiritual and moral fabric of the nation.Kol Hakavod for finishing Masechet Sanhedrin!For more info or to visit the main shiur page please visit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://webyeshiva.org/course/daf-yomi-one-week-at-a-time-sanhedrin/

The wife of Korach

Today's daf is sponsored by Abby Sosland in loving memory of Rabbi Henry Sosland. "He taught us that daily learning could be the ultimate source of comfort and sipuk nefesh." Today’s daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in honor of our friend and co-learner, Bracha Rutner, whose completion of Masechet Sanhedrin marks her siyum on all of Shas. "You dedicated the last seven and one-half years to this monumental achievement, and we are so proud that you are one of our group, and that we are able to share in your simcha! לכי מחיל אל חיל." Korach's wife convinced him to rebel against Moshe, despite Korach initially arguing against her persuasion. What were her specific complaints against Moshe and Aharon? Based on inferences from Bamidbar 16:14 and Tehillim 106:16, Rabbi Yochanan explains that they accused Moshe of engaging in relations with their wives. Moshe approached Datan and Aviram, seeking reconciliation. From this action, Reish Lakish teaches that one should actively work to resolve disputes. Different verses are brought to prove that anyone who challenges their teacher is considered as challenging God directly. There is a debate regarding Korach's fate: Was he swallowed by the earth or burned with the others who offered incense? This remains unresolved due to different interpretations of the verses. However, the Torah clearly states that Korach's sons survived. Regarding the generation that wandered in the desert, sages debate whether they will have a share in the World-to-Come. Various verses are cited to support both positions. Similarly, the fate of the ten tribes is disputed. Will they eventually return to the land or were they permanently exiled? This discussion centers on different interpretations of Devarim 29:27. Scholars also debate whether these tribes will receive a portion in the World-to-Come, with various verses brought as evidence. In both these controversies, Rabbi Akiva takes the stricter position that they will neither return nor have a share in the World-to-Come. Rabba bar bar Hanna quotes Rabbi Yochanan questioning Rabbi Akiva's stance, noting that Rabbi Akiva typically adopts more lenient positions. What is the source for Rabbi Akiva's general tendency toward leniency? From what point in development can one merit entry to the World-to-Come: from conception, birth, the ability to speak, or the ability to say "amen"?

The sin of Korach (who didn't have a portion in the World to Come)... including a focus (and blame) on the wife of Korach and the wife of On (who names Korach and his followers as holy people, and then entices them). Plus, a discussion of the power of the Leviim and Kohanim, and the famous dispute over techelet on a garment. These interpretations are midrashim that build out the biblical text. Also, a new mishnah about the exile of the 10 Tribes, Rabbi Akiva uncharacteristically maintains that they will never return, and various others disagree with him as to their capacity for return.

Today's daf is sponsored by Abby Sosland in loving memory of Rabbi Henry Sosland. "He taught us that daily learning could be the ultimate source of comfort and sipuk nefesh." Today’s daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in honor of our friend and co-learner, Bracha Rutner, whose completion of Masechet Sanhedrin marks her siyum on all of Shas. "You dedicated the last seven and one-half years to this monumental achievement, and we are so proud that you are one of our group, and that we are able to share in your simcha! לכי מחיל אל חיל." Korach's wife convinced him to rebel against Moshe, despite Korach initially arguing against her persuasion. What were her specific complaints against Moshe and Aharon? Based on inferences from Bamidbar 16:14 and Tehillim 106:16, Rabbi Yochanan explains that they accused Moshe of engaging in relations with their wives. Moshe approached Datan and Aviram, seeking reconciliation. From this action, Reish Lakish teaches that one should actively work to resolve disputes. Different verses are brought to prove that anyone who challenges their teacher is considered as challenging God directly. There is a debate regarding Korach's fate: Was he swallowed by the earth or burned with the others who offered incense? This remains unresolved due to different interpretations of the verses. However, the Torah clearly states that Korach's sons survived. Regarding the generation that wandered in the desert, sages debate whether they will have a share in the World-to-Come. Various verses are cited to support both positions. Similarly, the fate of the ten tribes is disputed. Will they eventually return to the land or were they permanently exiled? This discussion centers on different interpretations of Devarim 29:27. Scholars also debate whether these tribes will receive a portion in the World-to-Come, with various verses brought as evidence. In both these controversies, Rabbi Akiva takes the stricter position that they will neither return nor have a share in the World-to-Come. Rabba bar bar Hanna quotes Rabbi Yochanan questioning Rabbi Akiva's stance, noting that Rabbi Akiva typically adopts more lenient positions. What is the source for Rabbi Akiva's general tendency toward leniency? From what point in development can one merit entry to the World-to-Come: from conception, birth, the ability to speak, or the ability to say "amen"?

Korach

The unique punishments of Korach's followers, what was Korach's punishment?

Sanhedrin 110 : Marc Chipkin : 2025-04-06 The influence of a wife. Which death did Korach receive? The 10 tribes- will they return in future?

The connection of all three groups. 

A story is brought of Nahum ish Gamzu and how he is saved from death by the Romans on account of magical dirt that came from the dirt that Avraham used against the four kings, which magically turned into swords. What was the generation of those who built the Tower of Bavel try to accomplish? What were the acts of Sodom? God gave them everything they could want, which made them self-sufficient, leading to arrogance, which led to their isolationist policy.    They mainly engaged in two categories of trangressions - not treating guests properly and perverting justice.  There is a debate about Korach and his followers - whether they are deserving of the World-to-Come. The Gemara extrapolates the names of the people in Korach's group and explains how On ben Pelet didn't rejoin Korach's group on account of his wife's actions.

This episode discusses a beautiful thought by the Klausenberger Rebbe how to understand the significance of Korach.

A story is brought of Nahum ish Gamzu and how he is saved from death by the Romans on account of magical dirt that came from the dirt that Avraham used against the four kings, which magically turned into swords. What was the generation of those who built the Tower of Bavel try to accomplish? What were the acts of Sodom? God gave them everything they could want, which made them self-sufficient, leading to arrogance, which led to their isolationist policy.    They mainly engaged in two categories of trangressions - not treating guests properly and perverting justice.  There is a debate about Korach and his followers - whether they are deserving of the World-to-Come. The Gemara extrapolates the names of the people in Korach's group and explains how On ben Pelet didn't rejoin Korach's group on account of his wife's actions.

Have any questions, insights, or feedback? Send me a text!Length: 57 minutesSynopsis: Tonight (3/19/25), in our Wednesday night tefilah shiur, we began learning the perek before the one we did last time. We had seen opinions that 43 is part of 42, and the proof definitely seems to be in the pudding, so we're going to proceed on that assumption. The translation was a bit quicker than usual, since so many phrases were familiar. We only got a little bit into our analysis, noticing the difficulties of the perek and voicing some intuitions about its themes. Next time we'll engage in some REAL analysis! (בג"ה)-----מקורות:תהלים פרק מבArtscrollRobert Alterרמב"ם - משנה תורה: ספר המדע, הלכות יסודי התורה ב:א-ברמב"ם - משנה תורה: ספר המדע, הלכות תשובה י:ב-ג-----The Torah content for this week has been sponsored by my friend, Rabbi Dr. Elie Feder. His latest book, Happiness in the Face of Adversity: Powerful Torah Ideas from a Mom's Parting Words, shares the wisdom of Shani Feder a"h, a true Eishes Chayil. This is the kind of Torah I wish more people knew—ideas that directly impact our experience of life. Available now on Amazon.-----If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider contributing to my Patreon at www.patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss. Alternatively, if you would like to make a direct contribution to the "Rabbi Schneeweiss Torah Content Fund," my Venmo is @Matt-Schneeweiss, and my Zelle and PayPal are mattschneeweiss at gmail. Even a small contribution goes a long way to covering the costs of my podcasts, and will provide me with the financial freedom to produce even more Torah content for you.If you would like to sponsor a day's or a week's worth of content, or if you are interested in enlisting my services as a teacher or tutor, you can reach me at rabbischneeweiss at gmail. Thank you to my listeners for listening, thank you to my readers for reading, and thank you to my supporters for supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.-----Substack: rabbischneeweiss.substack.com/Patreon: patreon.com/rabbischneeweissYouTube Channel: youtube.com/rabbischneeweissInstagram: instagram.com/rabbischneeweiss/"The Stoic Jew" Podcast: thestoicjew.buzzsprout.com"Machshavah Lab" Podcast: machshavahlab.buzzsprout.com"The Mishlei Podcast": mishlei.buzzsprout.com"Rambam Bekius" Podcast: rambambekius.buzzsprout.com"The Tefilah Podcast": tefilah.buzzsprout.comOld Blog: kolhaseridim.blogspot.com/WhatsApp Content Hub (where I post all my content and announce my public classes): https://chat.whatsapp.com/GEB1EPIAarsELfHWuI2k0HAmazon Wishlist: amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/Y72CSP86S24W?ref_=wl_sharel

2 more lavin: the prohibitions of strengthening arguments (like congregation of Korach) and verbally abusing someone else

Generations of Vengeance - Six Degrees of HateWebsite: http://www.battle4freedom.com/Network: https://www.mojo50.comStreaming: https://www.rumble.com/Battle4Freedomhttps://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2032%3A35&version=CJBDeuteronomy 32:35Vengeance and payback are mine for the time when their foot slips; for the day of their calamity is coming soon, their doom is rushing upon them.Genesis 36:1 This is the genealogy of `Esav (that is, Edom). 2 `Esav chose Kena`ani women as his wives: `Adah the daughter of Eilon the Hitti; Oholivamah the daughter of `Anah the daughter of Tziv`on the Hivi; 3 and Basmat Yishma`el's daughter, sister of N'vayot. 4 `Adah bore to `Esav Elifaz, Basmat bore Re`u'el, 5 and Oholivamah bore Ye`ush, Ya`lam and Korach. These were the sons of `Esav born to him in the land of Kena`an.Genesis 36:6 `Esav took his wives, his sons and daughters, the others in his household, his cattle and other animals and everything else he owned, which he had acquired in the land of Kena`an, and went off to a country distant from his brother Ya`akov. 7 For their possessions had become too great for them to live together, and the countryside through which they were traveling couldn't support so much livestock. 8 So `Esav lived in the hill-country of Se`ir. (`Esav is Edom.)Genesis 36:9 This is the genealogy of `Esav the father of Edom in the hill-country of Se`ir. 10 The names of `Esav's sons were Elifaz, son of `Adah the wife of `Esav, and Re`u'el the son of Basmat the wife of `Esav.Genesis 36:11 The sons of Elifaz were Teman, Omar, Tzefo, Ga`tam and K'naz. 12 Timnah was the concubine of Elifaz `Esav's son, and she bore to Elifaz `Amalek. These were the descendants of `Adah `Esav's wife. 13 The sons of Re`u'el were Nachat, Zerach, Shammah and Mizah. These were the sons of Basmat `Esav's wife. 14 These were the sons of Oholivamah, the daughter of `Anah the daughter of Tziv`on, `Esav's wife: she bore to `Esav Ye`ush, Ya`lam and Korach.Genesis 36:15 The chieftains of the sons of `Esav were the sons of Elifaz the firstborn of `Esav and the chieftains of Teman, Omar, Tzefo, K'naz, 16 Korach, Ga`tam and `Amalek. These were the chieftains descended from Elifaz in Edom and from `Adah.Genesis 36:17 The sons of Re`u'el `Esav's son were the chieftains of Nachat, Zerach, Shammah and Mizah. These were the chieftains descended from Re`u'el in the land of Edom and from Basmat `Esav's wife. 18 The sons of Oholivamah `Esav's wife were the chieftains of Ye`ush, Ya`lam and Korach. These were the chieftains descended from Oholivamah the daughter of `Anah, `Esav's wife. 19 These were the descendants of `Esav (that is, Edom), and these were their chieftains.Genesis 36:20 These were the descendants of Se`ir the Hori, the local inhabitants: Lotan, Shoval, Tziv`on, `Anah, 21 Dishon, Etzer and Dishan. They were the chieftains descended from the Hori, the people of Se`ir in the land of Edom. 22 The sons of Lotan were Hori and Hemam; Lotan's sister was Timnah. 23 The sons of Shoval were `Alvan, Manachat, `Eival, Sh'fo and Onam. 24 The sons of Tziv`on were Ayah and `Anah. This is the `Anah who found the hot springs in the desert while pasturing his father Tziv`on's donkeys. 25 The children of `Anah were Dishon and Oholivamah the daughter of `Anah. 26 The sons of Dishon were Hemdan, Eshban, Yitran and K'ran. 27 The sons of Etzer were Bilhan, Za`avan and `Akan. 28 The sons of Dishan were `Utz and Aran. 29 These were the chieftains descended from the Hori: the chieftains of Lotan, Shoval, Tziv`on, `Anah, 30 Dishon, Etzer and Dishan. They were the chieftains descended from the Hori by their clans in Se`ir.Genesis 36:31 Following are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king had reigned over the people of Isra'el. 32 Bela the son of B`or reigned in Edom; the name of his city was Dinhavah. 33 When Bela died, Yovav the son of Zerach from Botzrah reigned in his place. 34 When Yovav died, Husham from the land of the Temani reigned in his place. 35 When Husham died, Hadad the son of B'dad, who killed Midyan in the field of Mo'av, reigned in his place; the name of his city was `Avit. 36 When Hadad died, Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his place. 37 When Samlah died, Sha'ul of Rechovot-by-the-River reigned in his place. 38 When Sha'ul died, Ba`al-Chanan the son of `Akhbor reigned in his place. 39 When Ba`al-Chanan died, Hadar reigned in his place; the name of his city was Pa'u; and his wife's name was M'heitav'el the daughter of Matred the daughter of Mei-Zahav.Genesis 36:40 These are the names of the chieftains descended from `Esav, according to their clans, places and names: the chieftains of Timna, `Alvah, Y'tet, 41 Oholivamah, Elah, Pinon, 42 Kenaz, Teman, Mivtzar, 43 Magdi'el and `Iram. These were the chieftains of Edom according to their settlements in the land they owned. This is `Esav the father of Edom.The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.- Mark Twain -Crediting:https://unsplash.com/@jakobowens - Waves

Halachah From The Parshah Series: Parshas Korach - The sanctity of Kohanim contemporarily 06/24/2020

06/06/2021

06/26/2022

This daf is sponsored anonymously. "May the passion of our daily learning be a zechut that we see more and more miracles in the coming days." The Gemara discusses a case involving a daughter of a kohen who commits adultery. Rabbi Yishmael interprets the phrase "she disgraces her father" to mean that her actions affect the respect normally given to her father as a kohen, since children's behavior reflects on their parents. People may even say to the father, "Cursed is the one who gave birth to and raised her." Regarding the death penalty by burning, the Mishna clarifies that it wasn't performed by surrounding the person with clusters of branches and lighting them on fire. Instead, the condemned person was executed by having molten lead poured down their throat. There was a debate about how to open the person's mouth: The Sages advocated strangling them until their mouth opened, while Rabbi Yehuda suggested using tongs, concerned that strangling might cause death by suffocation rather than the required death by burning. The source for this method of execution is debated. Rav Matna derives it from Korach's punishment, while Rabbi Elazar points to the death of Aharon's sons (Nadav and Avihu). Both bring textual evidence showing internal burning, though they disagree on each other's interpretations. When asked why the method isn't derived from the burning of bull offerings outside the Temple, the Gemara explains that execution by burning shares more similarities with the cases of Korach and Aharon's sons. Rav Nachman adds that the principle of "love your neighbor as yourself" requires choosing the quickest and least painful method of execution. The Gemara provides background on these biblical cases: Nadav and Avihu were punished for discussing their anticipated succession of Moshe and Aharon's leadership and wishing for Aharon and Moshe to die so they could lead. As for Korach, he gained followers by providing food, leading to flattery from the people. This caused respected Torah scholars to be diminished in Korach's eyes, ultimately leading to their downfall as they followed his rebellion. A relevant case is cited where Rav Chama bar Tovia executed a kohen's daughter by burning her with branches. Rav Yosef points out two errors: the correct method is pouring molten lead down the throat, and capital punishment cannot be carried out when the Temple is no longer in existence. Rabbi Elazar ben Tzadok attempted to justify external burning by citing a case he witnessed, but this was rejected for two reasons in different versions: either the court was composed of Sadducees who misunderstood the law, or Rabbi Elazar ben Tzadok's testimony was invalid because he was too young at the time. How can the two versions be reconciled? The Mishna discusses decapitation by sword: How was it performed? Since this method was used by gentiles, doesn't it violate the prohibition against following their practices? What is its scriptural source? From where do we learn those who receive this punishment? Similar questions are posed about death by strangulation: How was it performed and how do we learn that adulterers receive this punishment? 

This daf is sponsored anonymously. "May the passion of our daily learning be a zechut that we see more and more miracles in the coming days." The Gemara discusses a case involving a daughter of a kohen who commits adultery. Rabbi Yishmael interprets the phrase "she disgraces her father" to mean that her actions affect the respect normally given to her father as a kohen, since children's behavior reflects on their parents. People may even say to the father, "Cursed is the one who gave birth to and raised her." Regarding the death penalty by burning, the Mishna clarifies that it wasn't performed by surrounding the person with clusters of branches and lighting them on fire. Instead, the condemned person was executed by having molten lead poured down their throat. There was a debate about how to open the person's mouth: The Sages advocated strangling them until their mouth opened, while Rabbi Yehuda suggested using tongs, concerned that strangling might cause death by suffocation rather than the required death by burning. The source for this method of execution is debated. Rav Matna derives it from Korach's punishment, while Rabbi Elazar points to the death of Aharon's sons (Nadav and Avihu). Both bring textual evidence showing internal burning, though they disagree on each other's interpretations. When asked why the method isn't derived from the burning of bull offerings outside the Temple, the Gemara explains that execution by burning shares more similarities with the cases of Korach and Aharon's sons. Rav Nachman adds that the principle of "love your neighbor as yourself" requires choosing the quickest and least painful method of execution. The Gemara provides background on these biblical cases: Nadav and Avihu were punished for discussing their anticipated succession of Moshe and Aharon's leadership and wishing for Aharon and Moshe to die so they could lead. As for Korach, he gained followers by providing food, leading to flattery from the people. This caused respected Torah scholars to be diminished in Korach's eyes, ultimately leading to their downfall as they followed his rebellion. A relevant case is cited where Rav Chama bar Tovia executed a kohen's daughter by burning her with branches. Rav Yosef points out two errors: the correct method is pouring molten lead down the throat, and capital punishment cannot be carried out when the Temple is no longer in existence. Rabbi Elazar ben Tzadok attempted to justify external burning by citing a case he witnessed, but this was rejected for two reasons in different versions: either the court was composed of Sadducees who misunderstood the law, or Rabbi Elazar ben Tzadok's testimony was invalid because he was too young at the time. How can the two versions be reconciled? The Mishna discusses decapitation by sword: How was it performed? Since this method was used by gentiles, doesn't it violate the prohibition against following their practices? What is its scriptural source? From where do we learn those who receive this punishment? Similar questions are posed about death by strangulation: How was it performed and how do we learn that adulterers receive this punishment? 

Wee the People. Did you have to memorize the preamble to the Constitution in school? "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution...” I never had a problem memorizing things for school. It was getting up in front of people that was terrifying. Eighth grade was a veritable shark tank of hormones, cliques, and mean girls and guys. A public mistake likely meant a nickname you didn't want. Not much tranquility among “we the people” in junior high. We the people. The politicians did get a few things right back then. A sense of common identity, community, mutual respect, and all those things that define a people group were at the top of their agenda. Not a bad start for a government defining and agreeing on what “constitutes” a nation. But the signers of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution didn't want a king, even a good one. Israel in the wilderness was a miracle, a people group preserved in Egypt over hundreds of years without losing their identity. They had a king, a pharaoh, yet they kept their own language. They kept their tribal identity. These things became even more defined in the wilderness when they received their covenant in Hebrew, affirming their collective mission. Each tribe's blessings were clarified, territory defined in the encampment, leaders chosen and instructed. A central place of worship nestled in their center, reminding them that they should provide for the common defense of the Ark, maintain their boundaries in tranquility, and look to the welfare of their families so that their posterity would be able to enter and inhabit the Land of Promise. Their King was YHVH, Who betrothed them to Himself at Mount Sinai. Everyone signed on with “We will do, and we will hear.” Unlike the Tower of Bavel, where human beings united to build a name for themselves, Israel united to build the Name of the Holy One of Israel. There is ultimate power in unity, which is reflected in our proclamation of the greatest commandment: “Hear O Israel, the LORD your God, the LORD is One.” What happens, though, when our “we” becomes my “I”? Oh, my. The stutter-steps in the wilderness occurred when the I's developed an independent agenda or envied others. There were rebellions against the authority of Moses and Aaron, rebellions against the mitzvot, even passive-aggressive disobedience. In the wilderness, that means just not showing up when you know you should. Each problem emerged when “I” outweighed “we the people.” Even rebel groups were not truly a “we.” They had different agendas, so they were bound as “we” only in dissatisfaction, which would not be enough to hold them together had they been successful, such as Korach and the Reuvenites. Truth is, they were a collection of “I's”. The secret to a successful “we”, as in “We will do, and we will hear,” or “We the people,” is that we have to become wee people. Smaller than our egos tell us we should or ought to be. Or, in some cases, bigger than our fears will allow us to be. In that case, doing more is actually an act of humility. If we obey the fear, we will not be fruitful in the congregation. We have to make the fear smaller and our Divine spiritual calling greater. Great faith means wee fear. WE are not alone as we battle our egos or our fears: “Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us...” (He 12:1) The clouds surrounded the Israelites in the wilderness. Within the cloud were many witnesses to the exodus from Egypt, the miracles along the way,

Today's daf is sponsored by Blima Sztorchain in loving memory of her sister, Rivka Sara Rina bat Tina and Yitzhak Tzvi. The daughters of Tzlofchad inherited Tzlofchad's double portion from his father, even though one only inherits a double portion that was in the deceased's property at the time of death (muchzak). The reason is that the land of Israel was considered as if it had already been owned by those who left Egypt. Earlier, a braita had explained that the sons of the spies and those with Korach, whose fathers did not get land in Israel, received land through their grandparents. However, a different braita explains that they received land on their own merit. The Gemara brings two explanations for how to reconcile these seemingly contradictory braitot. Raba explains, as was explained above, that the land of Israel was considered already possessed by those leaving Egypt, which explains why Tzlofchad's daughters inherited his double portion. However, a braita is brought against Raba as it explains that Moshe knew that they should inherit but was unsure regarding the double portion. This issue is resolved by explaining that the law is still clear that the land was possessed by the generation that left Egypt and that is exactly what Moshe was unsure of, and was then clarified. In that braita, they compare the case of Tzlofchad's daughters and the one who was chopping trees on Shabbat, as in both cases Moshe does not know the law and turns to God. The law in each case could have been transmitted directly but was told through the lens of Tzlofchad's daughters/the wood chopper to teach that merits are brought by one who is meritorious and liability by one who is liable. Why does it say in the verse that Tzlofchad's daughters went before Moshe, Elazar the princes (nesi'im), and the entire congregation? Two opinions are brought and each reflects different approaches - do we give respect to a student before his rabbi or not? The halakha accords with both - how can this be explained? The virtues of the daughters of Tzlofchad are explained - their wisdom, their ability to interpret the verses in the Torah, and their righteousness. From where can we see these traits?

Today's daf is sponsored by Blima Sztorchain in loving memory of her sister, Rivka Sara Rina bat Tina and Yitzhak Tzvi. The daughters of Tzlofchad inherited Tzlofchad's double portion from his father, even though one only inherits a double portion that was in the deceased's property at the time of death (muchzak). The reason is that the land of Israel was considered as if it had already been owned by those who left Egypt. Earlier, a braita had explained that the sons of the spies and those with Korach, whose fathers did not get land in Israel, received land through their grandparents. However, a different braita explains that they received land on their own merit. The Gemara brings two explanations for how to reconcile these seemingly contradictory braitot. Raba explains, as was explained above, that the land of Israel was considered already possessed by those leaving Egypt, which explains why Tzlofchad's daughters inherited his double portion. However, a braita is brought against Raba as it explains that Moshe knew that they should inherit but was unsure regarding the double portion. This issue is resolved by explaining that the law is still clear that the land was possessed by the generation that left Egypt and that is exactly what Moshe was unsure of, and was then clarified. In that braita, they compare the case of Tzlofchad's daughters and the one who was chopping trees on Shabbat, as in both cases Moshe does not know the law and turns to God. The law in each case could have been transmitted directly but was told through the lens of Tzlofchad's daughters/the wood chopper to teach that merits are brought by one who is meritorious and liability by one who is liable. Why does it say in the verse that Tzlofchad's daughters went before Moshe, Elazar the princes (nesi'im), and the entire congregation? Two opinions are brought and each reflects different approaches - do we give respect to a student before his rabbi or not? The halakha accords with both - how can this be explained? The virtues of the daughters of Tzlofchad are explained - their wisdom, their ability to interpret the verses in the Torah, and their righteousness. From where can we see these traits?

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.  

Today's daf is dedicated in memory of Professor Paul Haberfield, father of Shulie Mishkin, who passed away on Thursday. Tanchumim from the whole Hadran family.   How were the portions distributed when the Jews entered the land of Israel? There are three different answers to this question, each based on a different interpretation of the verses in Bamidbar 26:53, 55. One approach (Rabbi Yoshia) is that an equal portion was given to all those who left Egypt above the age of twenty. A second approach (Rabbi Yonatan) is that an equal portion was given to all those going into the land, but those portions were then redivided by families, according to how many had left Egypt. The third approach (Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar) is that a portion was given to each person who went into the land and also to each person who left Egypt. There were various people who didn’t receive portions such as the spies and those who followed Korach. The spies' portion was given to Yehoshua and Caleb. The sons of the people from these groups inherited land through their grandparents, provided the grandparents had been at least twenty years old at the Exodus from Egypt. Rav Papa raises a difficulty against Rabbi Yonatan from the verse in Bamidbar 26:54, "To the more you shall give the more inheritance and to the fewer you should give the less inheritance." What is the need for this verse if it was divided equally between those coming into the land, since, of course, a large family will receive more portions?

Today's daf is dedicated in memory of Professor Paul Haberfield, father of Shulie Mishkin, who passed away on Thursday. Tanchumim from the whole Hadran family.   How were the portions distributed when the Jews entered the land of Israel? There are three different answers to this question, each based on a different interpretation of the verses in Bamidbar 26:53, 55. One approach (Rabbi Yoshia) is that an equal portion was given to all those who left Egypt above the age of twenty. A second approach (Rabbi Yonatan) is that an equal portion was given to all those going into the land, but those portions were then redivided by families, according to how many had left Egypt. The third approach (Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar) is that a portion was given to each person who went into the land and also to each person who left Egypt. There were various people who didn’t receive portions such as the spies and those who followed Korach. The spies' portion was given to Yehoshua and Caleb. The sons of the people from these groups inherited land through their grandparents, provided the grandparents had been at least twenty years old at the Exodus from Egypt. Rav Papa raises a difficulty against Rabbi Yonatan from the verse in Bamidbar 26:54, "To the more you shall give the more inheritance and to the fewer you should give the less inheritance." What is the need for this verse if it was divided equally between those coming into the land, since, of course, a large family will receive more portions?

Robb, Mike, and Beau close out this Friday edition of The Morning Shift by diving into the life of Beau Morgan in The Life of Squid! On this edition of The Life of Squid, Beau “Squidbilly” Morgan, Mike, and Robb let you hear the Oakland Athletics' final radio call where play-by-play announcer Ken Korach brought it all home with a poignant and emotional farewell for all the memories made by fans, players, and staffers alike, and react to what Korach had to say. Mike, Robb, and Beau also let you hear longtime MLB insider and reporter for ESPN Buster Olney sound off on the other MLB owners for allowing what has happened in Oakland to happen while he was on the Steakhouse earlier this week.

Hour 1 - Chemistry between Kirk Cousins & backup center Ryan Neuzil will be something to watch Sunday Robb, Mike, and Beau kick off the final hour of this Friday edition of The Morning Shift by making their weekend picks! Next, Tiffany, Mike, and Beau continue the final hour by spending some time with former Atlanta Falcons quarterback, and now analyst for the Atlanta Falcons Radio Network Dave Archer! Mike, Beau, Robb and Dave discuss Dave being the starting quarterback in the game where Earl Campbell had the final carry in his career, if a quarterback is thinking about and is aware of having backup offensive lineman in the game, if it's a big deal that Ryan Neuzil snaps the ball left handed, how the Falcons offensive line and offense overall neutralize guys like Carl Granderson and Bryan Bresee, the Falcons playing primarily a cover three defense, the pros and cons of playing a cover three defense, and how the Saints and Derek Carr whose been pretty good against cover three defenses may plan to attack the Falcons' cover three defense. Mike, Beau, Robb and Dave also discussed how the Falcons defensive line can get some sacks against Derek Carr, if a quarterback's accuracy can be coached or if it's one of those things a quarterback either has or doesn't have, and Dave also talked about his favorite memory at Oakland Coliseum. Finally, Robb, Mike, and Beau close out this Friday edition of The Morning Shift by diving into the life of Beau Morgan in The Life of Squid! On this edition of The Life of Squid, Beau “Squidbilly” Morgan, Mike, and Robb let you hear the Oakland Athletics' final radio call where play-by-play announcer Ken Korach brought it all home with a poignant and emotional farewell for all the memories made by fans, players, and staffers alike, and react to what Korach had to say. Mike, Robb, and Beau also let you hear longtime MLB insider and reporter for ESPN Buster Olney sound off on the other MLB owners for allowing what has happened in Oakland to happen while he was on the Steakhouse earlier this week.

Today's daf is sponsored by Jessica Jobanek and Harold Kingsberg in celebration of the second birthday of their beloved son Shmuel Meir (Sammy). "We love you and learn from you every day."  Rabba bar bar Chana tells stories about when an Arab showed him the people who died in the desert (dor hamidbar), Mount Sinai, and the earth where Korach and his followers were killed. Each place seemed to have magical powers associated with it. More stories are told about unique creatures that were seen by people when traveling on boats. After mentioning the tanin in a story, the Gemara digresses to discuss what kind of creature was the tanin. Some identify it as the leviathan. They also discuss the unusual power and the limitations of these and other gigantic or unique creatures.

Welcome to Covenant & Conversation essays, Rabbi Sacks' commentary on the weekly Torah portion, explores new ideas and sharing inspiration from the Torah readings of the week. You can find both the video and the full written article on Korach available to watch, read, print, and share, by visiting: https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation/korach/taking-it-personally/ A new FAMILY EDITION is now also available: https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation-family-edition/korach/taking-it-personally/ For more articles, videos, and other material from Rabbi Sacks, please visit www.RabbiSacks.org and follow @RabbiSacks. The Rabbi Sacks Legacy continues to share weekly inspiration from Rabbi Sacks. This piece was originally written and recorded by Rabbi Sacks in 2011. With thanks to the Schimmel Family for their generous sponsorship of Covenant & Conversation, dedicated in loving memory of Harry (Chaim) Schimmel.