Podcasts about masechet megilla

It is customary to read Megillat Rut on Shabuot, and several different reasons have been given for this custom. The Mordechi (Rav Mordechai Ben Hillel, Germany, 1250-1298), in Masechet Megilla (chapter 1), as cited by the Rama (Rav Moshe Isserles of Cracow, 1525-1572) in Darkeh Moshe (494), explains that the story of Rut took place during the harvest season, around the time of Shabuot, and it is therefore appropriate to read this story on this holiday. Others explain that at the time of Matan Torah, the Jewish People underwent a process of "conversion," for, like converts, they had been obligated only in the Seven Noachide Laws, and then committed themselves to the Torah's 613 commands. (Interestingly, the Hebrew word "Gerut" has the numerical value of 620, corresponding to the 613 Biblical commands plus the seven Misvot instituted by the Sages.) Therefore, on the day we celebrate Matan Torah, we read the story of Rut, which tells of Rut's conversion and acceptance of the Misvot. Thirdly, we read Megilat Rut as a reminder that accepting the Torah includes not only our obligations toward G-d, but also our obligations to other people. The story of Rut is all about Hesed: Rut accompanied her mother-in-law, Naomi, and left her homeland to be at her side; Boaz cared for Rut when she arrived in Bet-Lehem, and then married her; Rut performed kindness for her deceased husband by allowing his soul to be perpetuated through the process of Yibum. We read this story to remind ourselves that kindness and sensitivity to other people is part and parcel of our acceptance of the Torah. Additionally, Megillat Rut is a story of remarkable "Mesirut Nefesh" – self-sacrifice. Rut was the daughter of the king of Moav, yet she was prepared to leave her life of royalty and all the amenities and luxuries it offers in order to become a Jew. This story reminds us that we need to sacrifice in order to succeed in Torah and Misvot. We cannot expect to excel in our devotion to Torah while enjoying all the comforts and luxuries that life offers. "Mesirut Nefesh" is an indispensable prerequisite for a successful Torah life. Finally, the story of Megillat Rut concludes with Rut's marriage to Boaz and the birth of their son, who ultimately became the grandfather of King David, who was born and passed away on Shabuot. It is thus appropriate to read this story on Shabuot, when we remember and reflect upon David Ha'melech.

The Torah in Parashat Vayera tells the story of the destruction of Sedom, a wicked city which G-d condemned to annihilation. Before destroying the city, G-d sent two angels to rescue Lot – Abraham's nephew – who had taken residence in Sedom. Rashi (19:29) makes a perplexing comment explaining why Lot deserved to be rescued. Lot was saved, Rashi writes, in the merit of a favor which he did for his uncle, Abraham. When Abraham was forced to briefly move to Egypt because of the harsh famine that struck Eretz Yisrael, he and his wife, Sara, posed as siblings. Abraham feared that Egyptian men might desire Sara and thus kill him so she would be available for marriage. In order to protect his life, he and Sara had no choice but to pretend that they were brother and sister. Lot, who had accompanied Abraham and Sara, went along with the plan, and did not reveal to anyone in Egypt that Sara was actually Abraham's wife, and not his sister. In this merit, Lot was deserving of being rescued from Sedom before the city's annihilation. The obvious question arises, why was this considered such a significant source of merit? What was so special about Lot keeping this secret about Abraham and Sara's relationship? The answer to this question perhaps can be found in a teaching of the Gemara, in Masechet Megilla (13b). The Gemara writes that in the merit of Rachel's Seniut (“modesty”), she was worthy of having a descendant, Shaul, who would become king over Israel. And in the merit of Shaul's Seniut, the Gemara then states, he was deserving of having a great descendant of his own – Queen Ester, who likewise had this quality of Seniut. The Gemara explains that the term “Seniut” in this context refers not to a style of dress, but rather to the ability to remain private, to keep quiet when necessary. Rachel did not divulge to Yaakob before what was to have been their wedding night that she had taught Leah the special signals that she and Yaakob had arranged before the wedding. Shaul complied with the prophet Shmuel's instruction not to tell anybody that he had been chosen to be king. And Ester obeyed Mordechai's instruction not to mention that she was Jewish. It emerges from the Gemara that Shaul and Ester rose to royalty in the merit of this quality of privacy, of reticence, of remaining quiet, keeping things to oneself rather than freely talking and spreading information, either about oneself or about others. Rashi makes his comment about Lot's merit for remaining silent just before the story of Lot's incestuous relationships with his daughters, which produced a son, Moab. Centuries later, Rut, a descendant of Moab, was born. Rut, of course, was the great-grandmother of David Ha'melech, and she was thus the matriarch of the Davidic dynasty, which will culminate with Mashiah. Rashi is perhaps alluding to us that Lot earned this great privilege, of fathering the eternal dynasty of Jewish kings, in the merit of his “Seniut” – his quality of remaining quiet when necessary. Lot lived in a society where one person's business instantly became everyone's business. He invited the angels – who appeared as ordinary travelers – into his home, and soon the entire city assembled outside his home and demanded that they be handed over. The society of Sedom marked the antithesis of “Seniut,” of privacy. Despite living among such people, Lot retained this quality, and for this reason, he was worthy of fathering the Davidic dynasty. This area has become very challenging in our times. Today it has become accepted to broadcast everything, to send pictures of ourselves and the activities we're involved in to hundreds of people using our devices. People are on social media platforms trying desperately to draw attention to themselves – the precise opposite of Seniut. Who knows if what's delaying the arrival of Mashiah, the restoration of the Jewish dynasty, is this lack of Seniut, of discretion, or privacy, the way we broadcast ourselves as much as possible. We began by asking why Lot deserved so much credit for remaining silent in Egypt, keeping to himself the information about Abraham and Sara being married. But if we take an honest look at our own habits, at how quickly we rush to spread private information around, we have our answer. It indeed takes a great deal of discipline to keep quiet, and not divulge “juicy” information that we have. We need to examine ourselves in this area, and recommit ourselves to the timeless value of Seniut, of remaining silent when silence is warranted, and keeping our private information, and other people's private information, private, out of public view.

It is customary before reciting the Beracha over wine to proclaim, "Sabri Maranan," to which the people listening to the Beracha then respond, "Le'hayim." What is the meaning of this practice?The word "Sabri" means "pay attention," and thus when the person reciting Kiddush announces, "Sabri Maranan," he is simply calling the people around him to attention (literally, "Pay attention, my masters"). Therefore, a person who recites the Beracha alone does not first announce "Sabri Maranan."Why must the person reciting the Beracha call the others to attention, and why do they respond "Le'hayim"?The commentators explain that since wine can be both beneficial and destructive, and can bring both blessing and curse, before we recite the Beracha over wine we formally express our wish that the wine should serve a beneficial purpose. Rav Shlomo Luria (Poland, 16th century) noted that wine is associated with death, as indicated in the Gemara (Sanhedrin) which states that wine was given to a person before execution in order to alleviate his fear. Wine was also customarily given to mourners to help ease their grief. And so when we drink wine on happy occasions, we announce that the wine is being used for a joyous purpose, and not, Heaven forbid, the opposite. Similarly, the tree from which Adam and Hava ate, according to one view, was a vine, and Hava actually prepared wine which she and Adam then drunk. And we know that after the flood Noah drank wine and became inebriated, which resulted in a curse upon one of his sons. We therefore express our wish before drinking wine that it should bring blessing, and not curse. The Shiyureh Keneset Ha'gedola (Rav Haim Banbenishti, Turkey, 1603-1673) notes the story told in Masechet Megilla of Rabba who became inebriated during his Purim celebration and killed Rabbi Zera (though Rabbi Zera was then miraculously brought back to life). This, too, demonstrates the potentially harmful consequences of drinking wine, and we thus proclaim "Le'hayim" to express our wish that only positive outcomes should result from our drinking.We might also suggest an additional explanation. In Parashat Ki-Tabo, the Torah lists the 98 Kelalot (curses) that would befall the Jewish people in exile, and our nation has indeed suffered these calamities over the course of our four exiles. But in Tehillim, David teaches us that we must "raise a cup of wine" for both happy occasions and the opposite: "Sara Ve'yagon Emsa U'be'Shem Hashem Ekra… Kos Yesu'ot Esa U'be'Shem Hashem Ekra." Both when we're enduring calamity, and when we celebrate salvation, we call out to Hashem in faith, knowing that everything He does is for the best. And so when we drink wine, the one reciting the Beracha first lifts the cup and asks, "Sabri Maranan" – as if to say, "What do you say about the misfortunes and troubles that we are experiencing?" And then everyone responds, "Le'hayim." The numerical value of "Le'hayim" is 98, alluding to the 98 curses of Parashat Ki-Tabo. The response of "Le'hayim" thus expresses the belief that even these misfortunes are "for life," as they help bring us toward the perfection which we seek. The exchange of "Sabri Maranan" and "Le'hayim" is thus an exchange about Emuna (faith), as we declare that we "raise our cup" to Hashem in both joy and sorrow, both in good times and bad, resolute in our belief that everything Hashem does is the very best thing for us.

It is customary to read Megillat Rut on Shabuot, and several different reasons have been given for this custom. The Mordechi (Rav Mordechai Ben Hillel, Germany, 1250-1298), in Masechet Megilla (chapter 1), as cited by the Rama (Rav Moshe Isserles of Cracow, 1525-1572) in Darkeh Moshe (494), explains that the story of Rut took place during the harvest season, around the time of Shabuot, and it is therefore appropriate to read this story on this holiday. Others explain that at the time of Matan Torah, the Jewish People underwent a process of "conversion," for, like converts, they had been obligated only in the Seven Noachide Laws, and then committed themselves to the Torah's 613 commands. (Interestingly, the Hebrew word "Gerut" has the numerical value of 620, corresponding to the 613 Biblical commands plus the seven Misvot instituted by the Sages.) Therefore, on the day we celebrate Matan Torah, we read the story of Rut, which tells of Rut's conversion and acceptance of the Misvot.Thirdly, we read Megilat Rut as a reminder that accepting the Torah includes not only our obligations toward G-d, but also our obligations to other people. The story of Rut is all about Hesed: Rut accompanied her mother-in-law, Naomi, and left her homeland to be at her side; Boaz cared for Rut when she arrived in Bet-Lehem, and then married her; Rut performed kindness for her deceased husband by allowing his soul to be perpetuated through the process of Yibum. We read this story to remind ourselves that kindness and sensitivity to other people is part and parcel of our acceptance of the Torah.Additionally, Megillat Rut is a story of remarkable "Mesirut Nefesh" – self-sacrifice. Rut was the daughter of the king of Moav, yet she was prepared to leave her life of royalty and all the amenities and luxuries it offers in order to become a Jew. This story reminds us that we need to sacrifice in order to succeed in Torah and Misvot. We cannot expect to excel in our devotion to Torah while enjoying all the comforts and luxuries that life offers. "Mesirut Nefesh" is an indispensable prerequisite for a successful Torah life.Finally, the story of Megillat Rut concludes with Rut's marriage to Boaz and the birth of their son, who ultimately became the grandfather of King David, who was born and passed away on Shabuot. It is thus appropriate to read this story on Shabuot, when we remember and reflect upon David Ha'melech.

We read in Parashat Vayeshev of the hatred that Yosef's brothers felt toward him. The background to their hatred is the special love shown to Yosef by their father, Yaakob, who made him a special garment ("Ketonet Pasim" – 37:3), as well as Yosef's bringing negative reports about them to their father (37:2). The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (10b) comments that a parent must ensure not to show favoritism to one child over the others, noting that "because of the extra two Sela'im-worth of fine wool that Yaakob gave to Yosef more than his other sons, his brothers envied him, and this resulted in our forefathers descending to Egypt." Yakaob's favoritism toward Yosef fueled the brothers' hatred which ultimately led them to sell him as a slave to Egypt, such that the special garment given to Yosef can be said to have indirectly caused the Egyptian exile. A number of commentators raised the question of why the Gemara emphasizes that the garment weighed "two Sela'im." Why is this detail relevant to the message being taught, that one must ensure to avoid showing favoritism to one of his children? Some Rabbis offered a deeper explanation of the Gemara's comment, suggesting that the Gemara alludes here to a hidden message latent within the garment which Yaakob gave to Yosef. Elsewhere in the Talmud, in Masechet Megilla (18a), the Gemara teaches, "Mila Be'sela, Mashtuka Bi'trein" – "A word is worth a Sela, silence is worth two [Sela'im]." Very often, remaining silent is far more effective, and powerful, than speaking. Yaakob gave Yosef a garment made from two Sela'im of wool as an allusion to the importance of silence, which is described as having the value of two Sela'im. As mentioned, Yosef regularly brought his father negative reports about what he perceived as his brothers' misconduct. Of course, his intentions were sincere and pure; we may reasonably assume that Yosef was well versed in the laws of Lashon Ha'ra, and knew the conditions that must be met to allow speaking negatively about other people, including the condition of pristinely sincere motives. There is no doubt that Yosef was not looking to cause trouble or to earn his place as Yaakob's favorite son, but rather brought this information to Yaakob's attention so he could address his sons' behavior. Nevertheless, under the circumstances, with brewing tensions, Yosef should have remained silent. Not everything that can be said should be said. This is why Yosef's garment is referred to as "two Sela'im-worth of fine wool." Yaakob gave Yosef two Sela'im to impress upon him the great value of silence, which is worth "two Sela'im," twice as much as a spoken word. It goes without saying that we should not be speaking negatively to or about people out of anger, spite or revenge. This is clearly forbidden. But the Gemara here indicates to us that even when our intentions are noble and sincere, criticism is not always wise. Very often, silence is far more prudent, far more effective, and far preferable. Even when we see value in saying something, we need to consider the possibility that refraining from saying it will yield a more desirable outcome. Let us never underestimate the precious value of silence, and let us always ensure to think very carefully before expressing any sort of criticism or negativity.

It is customary to read Megillat Rut on Shabuot, and several different reasons have been given for this custom. The Mordechi (Rav Mordechai Ben Hillel, Germany, 1250-1298), in Masechet Megilla (chapter 1), as cited by the Rama (Rav Moshe Isserles of Cracow, 1525-1572) in Darkeh Moshe (494), explains that the story of Rut took place during the harvest season, around the time of Shabuot, and it is therefore appropriate to read this story on this holiday. Others explain that at the time of Matan Torah, the Jewish People underwent a process of "conversion," for, like converts, they had been obligated only in the Seven Noachide Laws, and then committed themselves to the Torah's 613 commands. (Interestingly, the Hebrew word "Gerut" has the numerical value of 620, corresponding to the 613 Biblical commands plus the seven Misvot instituted by the Sages.) Therefore, on the day we celebrate Matan Torah, we read the story of Rut, which tells of Rut's conversion and acceptance of the Misvot.Thirdly, we read Megilat Rut as a reminder that accepting the Torah includes not only our obligations toward G-d, but also our obligations to other people. The story of Rut is all about Hesed: Rut accompanied her mother-in-law, Naomi, and left her homeland to be at her side; Boaz cared for Rut when she arrived in Bet-Lehem, and then married her; Rut performed kindness for her deceased husband by allowing his soul to be perpetuated through the process of Yibum. We read this story to remind ourselves that kindness and sensitivity to other people is part and parcel of our acceptance of the Torah.Additionally, Megillat Rut is a story of remarkable "Mesirut Nefesh" – self-sacrifice. Rut was the daughter of the king of Moav, yet she was prepared to leave her life of royalty and all the amenities and luxuries it offers in order to become a Jew. This story reminds us that we need to sacrifice in order to succeed in Torah and Misvot. We cannot expect to excel in our devotion to Torah while enjoying all the comforts and luxuries that life offers. "Mesirut Nefesh" is an indispensable prerequisite for a successful Torah life.Finally, the story of Megillat Rut concludes with Rut's marriage to Boaz and the birth of their son, who ultimately became the grandfather of King David, who was born and passed away on Shabuot. It is thus appropriate to read this story on Shabuot, when we remember and reflect upon David Ha'melech.

Insights into purim & Siyuom Masechet Megilla 1 by Rabbi Benjamin Lavian

Insights into purim & Siyuom Masechet Megilla 2 by Rabbi Benjamin Lavian

Study Guide Megillah 2 This month's learning is sponsored by Jordana and Kalman Schoor on behalf of their daughter Daria Esther who is completing Masechet Megilla in honor of her Bat Mitzva this month. "Daria attended the Hadran siyum and there is no doubt that her attendance inspired her to learn each chapter with a different family member and begin her journey into the world of Gemara learning." Mazal tov!  Today’s daf is sponsored by Jessica Shklar on behalf of her sister, Ruth Leah Kahan’s birthday “Happy Birthday to a Hadran stalwart, Ruth Leah Kahan, from her sister Jessica, who loves sharing daf yomi with you from across the ocean.” Today's daf is sponsored by Sharon Russ and family, in loving memory of her father, David ben Avraham and Naomi, on his fourth yahrzeit. "May his memory be a blessing and his Neshama have an Aliya.” On what days is it possible to read the Megillah? On what does it depend? Why is the law different for those who live in villages and why are they allowed to read it earlier than the dates specified in the Megillah? Where in the Megillah can one find an allusion to this? Is there an opinion that one is not allowed to read the Megillah before the 14th? From where do we know that walled cities read on the 15th and is it walled cities from the time of Yehoshua or from the time of Achashvarosh and the Purim story? 

Study Guide Megillah 2 This month's learning is sponsored by Jordana and Kalman Schoor on behalf of their daughter Daria Esther who is completing Masechet Megilla in honor of her Bat Mitzva this month. "Daria attended the Hadran siyum and there is no doubt that her attendance inspired her to learn each chapter with a different family member and begin her journey into the world of Gemara learning." Mazal tov!  Today’s daf is sponsored by Jessica Shklar on behalf of her sister, Ruth Leah Kahan’s birthday “Happy Birthday to a Hadran stalwart, Ruth Leah Kahan, from her sister Jessica, who loves sharing daf yomi with you from across the ocean.” Today's daf is sponsored by Sharon Russ and family, in loving memory of her father, David ben Avraham and Naomi, on his fourth yahrzeit. "May his memory be a blessing and his Neshama have an Aliya.” On what days is it possible to read the Megillah? On what does it depend? Why is the law different for those who live in villages and why are they allowed to read it earlier than the dates specified in the Megillah? Where in the Megillah can one find an allusion to this? Is there an opinion that one is not allowed to read the Megillah before the 14th? From where do we know that walled cities read on the 15th and is it walled cities from the time of Yehoshua or from the time of Achashvarosh and the Purim story? 

Certain Torah violations are punishable by execution – either Sekila (stoning), Serefa (burning), Sayif (death by sword), or Henek (strangulation). The Sefer Ha'hinuch lists each form of execution as a separate Misvat Aseh, an affirmative command requiring Bet Din to administer the given form of punishment. According to the Sefer Ha'hinuch's listing, Henek is the 47 th Biblical command. The Sefer Ha'hinuch explains that capital punishment is necessary as a deterrent against grievous sins. If there was no fear of punishment, then people would kill one another and commit other grave violations, and so the Torah commands Bet Din to put to death those who have been convicted of severe misdeeds. Six sins are punishable by Henek: an adulterous relationship with a married woman, kidnapping, inflicting a wound in one's father or mother, Zaken Mamreh (a scholar who opposes the majority view of the Sanhedrin), prophesying in the name of a foreign deity, prophesying falsely in G-d's Name. Surprisingly, the Sefer Ha'hinuch writes that murder is also punishable by Henek, despite the fact that the Gemara explicitly states that murder is punishable by Sayif (death by the sword). This question was noted by the Minhat Hinuch, who leaves it unanswered. Indeed, it is very difficult to explain the basis of the Sefer Ha'hinuch's comment. In any event, the Sefer Ha'hinuch writes that Henek is the swiftest form of execution, and it is administered to murderers because they generally kill their victim swiftly, in order to avoid being caught. Other violations, which are committed more slowly, are punishable by other forms of execution, which cause death to occur more gradually. Another difficulty in the Sefer Ha'hinuch's discussion of Henek is his comment that capital punishment is administered only in Eretz Yisrael. The Minhat Hinuch noted that the Gemara in Masechet Makkot states that capital punishment is administered anywhere, even outside the Land of Israel, as long as the Bet Ha'mikdash stands and the Sanhedrin meets in the Lishkat Ha'gazit (its special chamber in the area of the Bet Ha'mikdash). It is thus very difficult to understand why the Sefer Ha'hinuch wrote that capital punishment is limited to Eretz Yisrael. No Beracha is recited over the fulfillment of this Misva, and the commentaries explain that this is because G-d does not wish for violators to be executed. As the verse in Yehezkel (33:11) says, “I do not desire the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked repents from his path and lives.” The Gemara teaches in Masechet Hagiga that when a sinner suffers as punishment for his wrongdoing, G-d Himself is pained, as it were, because of His love for all people, even sinners. Therefore, since punishing sinners brings distress to the Almighty, so-to-speak, no Beracha is recited when administering punishment, even though it fulfills a Torah command. Similarly, Tosafot comment in Masechet Megilla (31) that no Beracha is recited over the reading of the Tocheha – the sections of the Torah warning of the calamities which Hashem threatens to bring upon the nation for betraying Him. When the Tocheha is read in the synagogue, the Aliya begins several verses before the Tocheha, and ends only after the Tocheha, so that the person receiving the Aliya does not recite a Beracha over these curses. G-d is pained, so-to-speak, by having to issue these warnings, and so it would be inappropriate to recite a Beracha over this section. The Sefer Ha'hinuch writes that if Bet Din had the authority and ability to execute an offender and failed to do so, then they are in violation of this command. He emphasizes that the one who fails to fulfill this command is deserving of punishment, because without a functioning system of justice, people will not be deterred from perpetrating evil, resulting in anarchy. It should be noted that whereas the Sefer Ha'hinuch lists capital punishment as four separate Biblical commands, the Ramban maintained that all four forms of capital punishment are included in a single command. The Ramban cites the command mentioned several times in the Torah, “U'bi'arta Ha'ra Mi'kirbecha” – “You shall eliminate the evil from your midst,” and explains that in his view, this command requires Bet Din to execute those guilty of capital offenses. Of course, this command does not apply nowadays. However, the Gemara in Masechet Sanhedrin teaches that when Bet Din does not have the authority to execute offenders, G-d arranges that those deserving of capital punishment will die in a manner resembling the type of execution that they deserve.

The seventh of the Ten Commandments is the command of “Lo Tin'af” – adultery, which forbids having relations with a married woman (Shemot 20:13). The Sefer Ha'hinuch presents several different reasons for this prohibition. First, he explains, G-d wants every type of creature to reproduce together with a member of its species, rather than breeding with a creature of a different kind. This extends to the family unit, as well, requiring people to reproduce only with their spouse. Secondly, the Sefer Ha'hinuch writes, G-d wanted to ensure that everybody knows with certainty who his or her father is, and for this reason, it is forbidden to cohabit with a woman who is married to a different man. The Sefer Ha'hinuch gives several reasons why it is important to know who one's father is, including the simple fact that this is necessary in order to fulfill the command of Kibbud Ab – respecting one's father. Moreover, if one does not know who his father is, he might end up marrying his sister, or another relative whom he is forbidden to marry. Additionally, the Sefer Ha'hinuch writes, adultery constitutes a form of theft, in that the adulterer in a sense “steals” his fellow's wife. And, adultery often leads to murder, as the husband might likely learn about the adulterous relationship and seek to take revenge against the adulterer. Needless to say, this prohibition applies at all times, and in all locations. It is included among the Seven Noachide Laws, which are binding even upon gentiles. As a general rule, when a man has relations with a married woman, both are liable to Henek (strangulation) if witnesses were present and the perpetrators were warned. If, however, the woman was not fully married, but was rather a “Na'ara Ha'me'orasa” – a girl who was betrothed, then they are both liable to a more severe form of capital punishment – Sekila (stoning). If the “Na'ara Ha'me'orasa” was the daughter of a Kohen, then she is liable to Serefa (burning). Different explanations have been given for why the punishment is more severe in the case of a betrothed girl. Intuitively, we would have assumed that relations with a fully married woman is a more grievous violation than relations with a girl who is only betrothed and had not yet begun marital life. Nevertheless, the punishment in the case of a betrothed girl is more severe. One explanation is that when one has a relationship with a married woman, he is concerned that the husband might find out, and this fear diminishes somewhat from the enjoyment of the sinful experience. In the case of a betrothed girl, however, the adulterer commits the act without any fear, as she is not even married yet, and thus his forbidden enjoyment is complete. This makes the sin more grievous, and hence the couple is liable to more severe punishment. There is considerable discussion among the scholars concerning the case of a man who does not die, but rather ascends to the heavens and enters Gan Eden alive – something which happened on rare occasions in earlier generations. Eliyahu Ha'nabi, for example, did not die, but rather ascended to the heavens without dying, and became an angel. Another example of Hanoch, Noah's great-grandfather, who was taken from this world to Gan Eden alive. Likewise, the great Talmudic sage Rabbi Yehoshua Ben Levi was brought to Gan Eden alive. The question arises as to whether the wife of such a man may remarry. Normally, of course, a married woman becomes permissible for other men once her husband dies. In this case, however, the husband never died, but on the other hand, the husband is no longer in this world. Rav Elhanan Wasserman (1874-1941) writes that this question depends on the conceptual question of whether the reality of the husband's absence from this world suffices to render the woman permissible for other men to marry, or whether it is specially the husband's death that allows the woman to be allowed to marry another man. Is a married woman forbidden for other men because she has a husband, or is she forbidden until the husband either gives her a Get or dies? Some scholars suggest drawing proof to the latter position from the Gemara's discussion in Masechet Kiddushin (13). The Gemara there raises the question as to the source of the law permitting a wife to remarry after her husband's death. Initially, the Gemara proposes explaining that since it is the husband who makes the woman forbidden for other men, by betrothing her, it stands to reason that once he is no longer alive, she is allowed to marry another man. However, the Gemara then dismisses this rationale, noting that even after the husband's death, the wife may not marry his relatives, which shows that even once the husband dies, the effects of his betrothal remain. It does not necessarily follow, then, that the husband's death automatically dissolves the effects of his betrothal with respect to the wife's status vis-à-vis other men. The Gemara concludes by noting an association drawn by the Torah between a husband's death and the giving of a Get. Just as giving a Get has the effect of rendering the women permissible for other men, likewise, the husband's death results in the woman becoming permissible for other men. This conclusion appears to indicate that a wife becomes permissible only with the husband's death. The death itself functions just like a Get, allowing the wife to marry another man, and it is thus the death, and not merely the husband's absence, which renders her permissible. Seemingly, then, the wife of a man who was taken to Gan Eden alive would not be allowed to remarry. On the other hand, the Rama (Rav Moshe Isserles, Cracow, 1530-1572), in his Darkeh Moshe (E.H. 17), notes that the Torah formulates the prohibition of adultery as a prohibition against relations with “Eshet Re'ehu” – “one's fellow's wife.” This phrase implies that only “Eshet Re'ehu” – the wife of a fellow human being – is forbidden, but not the wife of angel, such that the wife of somebody who ascended to the heavens alive should be permitted to marry another man. A similar question arises in situations of men who died and were then brought back to life. For example, the Gemara in Masechet Megilla tells the famous story of Rabbi Zera, who was killed by his colleague one Purim, and was then revived. Some Rabbis addressed the question of whether Rabbi Zera needed to marry his wife anew, since his death may have dissolved the marriage, thus necessitating a new Kiddushin (betrothal). Likewise, tradition teaches that at the time of Matan Torah, Beneh Yisrael's souls departed as a result of the sound of G-d's voice, and they were then revived, giving rise to the question of whether they needed to get married again after their lives were restored.

The Torah commands in the Book of Shemot (12:18), “Ba'ereb Tochelu Masot” – “In the evening, you shall eat Masot,” introducing the obligation to eat Masa on the night of the 15 th of Nissan (the first night of Pesach). One fulfills this Misva only with Masa baked from one of the five principal grains. The reason behind this Misva, of course, is to recall how our ancestors were rushed out of Egypt after having been held there as slaves for over two centuries. The miraculous redemption unfolded so quickly that they did not have time to prepare adequate provisions, and so they baked unleavened Masa, and we commemorate the speed of the redemption by eating Masa. This obligation applies even after the destruction of the Bet Ha'mikdash. Although the Pesach sacrifice is not offered in the absence of the Bet Ha'mikdash, the Torah obligation to eat Masa nevertheless remains binding. The obligation to eat Masa applies even to women, despite the fact that it falls under the category of “Misvot Aseh She'ha'zman Gerama” – affirmative commands which apply only at certain times (as one is obligated to eat Masa only on the night of the 15 th of Nissan). The Gemara establishes that women are included in the obligation of Masa based on the verse in the Book of Debarim (16:3) which mentions both the prohibition against eating Hametz and the Misva to eat Masa. That these two commands are mentioned in the same verse indicates that everyone bound by the prohibition of Hametz is included in the obligation of Masa. Therefore, since women are included in all Misvot Lo Ta'aseh (prohibitions), they are included also in the obligation of Masa. Tosafot (in Masechet Megilla) raise the question of why the Gemara needed to resort to this inference to establish women's obligation to eat Masa. The Gemara elsewhere states that women are required to hear the Megilla reading because “Af Hen Hayu Be'oto Ha'nes” – “they, too, were included in the miracle.” Haman's decree of annihilation threatened both men and women, and thus both the men and the women were saved by the Purim miracle. As such, both men and women must commemorate the miracle through the reading of the Megilla. By the same token, it would seem, as both the men and the women were miraculously delivered from Egyptian bondage, they should both be obligated to eat Masa to commemorate this miracle. Seemingly, then, even without a comparison between the prohibition of Hametz and the obligation of Masa, we would have known that women are included in the obligation of Masa. Why, then, did the Gemara need to infer this Halacha from the verse? Tosafot answer that the rule of “Af Hen Hayu Be'oto Ha'nes” establishes a requirement only Mi'de'rabbanan – by force of Rabbinic enactment. When it comes to eating Masa, women are required to eat Masa on Pesach on the level of Torah obligation, as the Gemara derives from the verse. One cannot fulfill the Misva of Masa by eating Masa which is forbidden for consumption, such as Masa produced from Tebel – grain which has yet to be tithed, and is thus forbidden. Since Halacha forbids eating this food, one cannot use it to fulfill a Misva. The Minhat Hinuch writes that an exception is the case of a patient suffering from a life-threatening illness who urgently requires food, and the only food available is Masa made from forbidden grain. This conclusion is based on the Shulhan Aruch's discussion (Orah Haim 196) regarding the recitation of a Beracha over forbidden food. The Shulhan Aruch writes that one who eats forbidden food may not recite a Beracha, because if he would, “En Zeh Mebarech Ela Mena'etz” – “he is not blessing [G-d], but rather blaspheming [G-d].” One cannot be credited with a Misva, pronouncing a blessing to G-d, if He does so in the context of a sin. However, the Shulhan Aruch rules that if one eats forbidden food in a case of Piku'ah Nefesh (concern for human life), where eating this food is necessary to prevent a threat to life, then the patient does, in fact, recite a Beracha. By the same token, the Minhat Hinuch writes, a patient in such a situation on the night of the 15 th of Nissan would fulfill the obligation of Masa with Masa made from forbidden grain. Since Halacha allows him to eat this Masa, he fulfills his Misva with this Masa, as well.

If somebody forgot to count one night of the Omer, and did not count the entire next day, then henceforth he counts each night without reciting Beracha. Since some Rishonim (Medieval Halachic authorities) maintained that all the days of Sefirat Ha’omer comprise a single Misva, such that one who misses even a single day can no longer fulfill the Misva, the Beracha is not recited on the subsequent nights once a day has been missed.The question arises as to whether a person in this position may recite the Beracha if he is counting on behalf of others. Even though he normally does not recite a Beracha over his own counting, perhaps he may recite the Beracha if others will be listening to his Beracha and his Omer counting for the purpose of fulfilling their obligation.The Peri Hadash (Rav Hizkiya Da Silva, 1659-1698) ruled that since the person in this situation is not obligated to recite the Beracha over Sefirat Ha’omer, he is not eligible to recite this Beracjha on behalf of others. The Talmud Yerushalmi, as the Peri Hadash cites, states that a "Ben Ir" – resident of an unwalled city, who is obligated to read the Megilla on the 14th of Adar – is ineligible to read the Megilla on behalf of a "Ben Kerach" – resident of a walled city, who is obligated to read the Megilla on the 15th of Adar. Since the "Ben Ir" is not obligated to read the Megilla that day, he is unable to fulfill the obligation of a "Ben Kerach" by reading for him (and vice versa). Similarly, the Peri Hadash writes, a person who is not obligated to count the Omer with a Beracha, because he had missed a day of counting, is not eligible to recite the Beracha and count on behalf of those who are obligated.Maharam Ibn Habib (Jerusalem, 1654-1696) disagrees, asserting that Halacha does not follow this ruling of the Yerushalmi. The principle of "Kol Yisrael Arebim Zeh La’zeh" ("all Israel are responsible for one another"), Maharam Ibn Habib writes, establishes that even one who has already fulfilled his obligation can fulfill the obligation on a fellow Jew’s behalf, because we are all responsible for each other’s Misva observance. In fact, Rashi, in the beginning of Masechet Megilla, writes that villagers, who are occasionally allowed to read the Megilla before Purim (sometimes as early as the 11th of Adar), can fulfill their obligation by hearing the reading by a "Ben Ir," who is not obligated until the 14th. By the same token, Maharam Ibn Habib rules, one who had missed a day of counting the Omer may nevertheless recite the Beracha and count on behalf of somebody else.Hacham Ovadia Yosef brings those who refute this argument, distinguishing between a person who was obligated but discharged his obligation, and one who is altogether excluded from an obligation. While it is true that one who has already fulfilled a Misva can still fulfill the obligation for another, in the case of one who had missed a day of counting, he is no longer included in the obligation, and so he cannot recite the Beracha and count for somebody else.Hacham Ovadia writes that although the Rabbis of Salonica allowed one who had missed a day of counting to serve as the Hazzan and count on behalf of the congregation, many other Poskim, including the Kenesset Ha’gedola (Rav Haim Banbenishti, Turkey, 1603-1673), and Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868), followed the Peri Hadash’s stringent ruling. Therefore, we apply the rule of "Safek Berachot Le’hakel" – that one does not recite a Beracha when it is questionable whether it is warranted – and thus one who had missed a day of counting may not count on behalf of others.Hacham Ovadia (Yabia Omer, vol. 8, O.C. 46:2) notes the ruling of the Shebet Ha’levi (Rav Shemuel Wosner, 1913-2015) that if the Rabbi is the one who normally recites the Beracha and counts the Omer for the congregation, he may be allowed to do so even if he had missed a day. Having somebody recite and count for the congregation in the Rabbi’s place would cause the Rabbi great embarrassment, and, in Rav Wosner’s view, the concern for "Kebod Ha’beriyot" – the Rabbi’s dignity – allows for the Rabbi to recite the Beracha in this case. Since in any event the Beracha is omitted only out of doubt – because according to one view, a person who missed a day of counting cannot fulfill the Misva of Sefirat Ha’omer on subsequent nights – the Rabbi may be allowed to recite the Beracha to avoid humiliation. Hacham Ovadia, however, does not accept this ruling, and maintains that even in the case of a Rabbi, or a regular Hazzan, who would suffer embarrassment, if he had missed a day of counting, he may not recite the Beracha and count on behalf of others.Interestingly, Hacham Ovadia in a different context does allow the consideration of "Kebod Ha’beriyot" to override the prohibition of reciting a Beracha Le’batala (Beracha recited in vain). Elsewhere in the eighth of volume of Yabia Omer, Hacham Ovadia discusses the case of a woman who, long before meeting her husband, had an illicit relationship which resulted in a pregnancy and subsequent miscarriage. She never disclosed this information to her husband, and so after she gave birth to a firstborn son, preparations were made for a Pidyon Ha’ben ("redemption" of the firstborn). Hacham Ovadia ruled that due to the concern for "Kebod Ha’beriyot," the wife did not need to reveal this to her husband, even though he would be unnecessarily performing a Pidyon Ha’ben and thus reciting a Beracha Le’batala. The likely distinction between the two cases is that in the situation of the Pidyon Ha’ben, the woman was allowed to keep the information to herself, and not required to embarrass herself in order to prevent her husband from reciting a Beracha Le’batala. In the case of Sefirat Ha’omer, by contrast, Hacham Ovadia was not prepared to allow the Rabbi himself to knowingly recite a Beracha Le’batala in order to avoid embarrassment.Therefore, one who had missed a day of counting may not recite the Beracha and count for others, even if he is a Rabbi or regular Hazzan who would suffer embarrassment by having somebody else count for the congregation.Summary: One who missed an entire day of counting the Omer continues counting henceforth, but without reciting the Beracha. The person in this case may not recite the Beracha and count for others, even if he is a Rabbi or regular Hazzan who would suffer embarrassment by having somebody else count for the congregation.

The Torah in the Book of Debarim, in the final verses of Parashat Ki-Teseh, establishes the command of "Maho Timhe Et Zecher Amalek" – to eradicate the memory of the wicked nation of Amalek.Interestingly, this obligation assumed practical Halachic significance following World War II, when Germany agreed to pay reparations to Jews. The Gaon of Vilna (1720-1797) taught that the Germans descend from Amalek. In fact, when the German Emperor Wilhelm II visited Jerusalem in 1898, Rav Yosef Chaim Sonenfeld (1848-1932) felt that the Jews should not go to see him, even though generally there is value in seeing kings, because of the Gaon of Vilna’s tradition, that the Germans descend from Amalek. Accordingly, after the Holocaust, the question arose whether the command to eradicate Amalek includes a prohibition against benefiting from Amalek’s property, such that it would be forbidden to accept money from Germany.Rabbenu Bahyah (1255-1340), in his Torah commentary (Parashat Beshalah), writes explicitly that it is forbidden to derive any benefit from the property of Amalek. He explains on this basis why the Megila emphasizes that after the Jews waged war against their enemies in Persia, "U’ba’biza Lo Shalehu Et Yadam" – they did not take any spoils. Since this war was waged against Haman and his followers, who belonged to Amalek, they were not permitted to benefit from the possessions. Likewise, Rabbenu Bahya writes, King Shaul was punished because, after waging war against Amalek, he took Amalek’s cattle as spoils of war, and this property was forbidden for use. As many have noted, however, other sources appear, at first glance, to contradict this conclusion. For one thing, the Rambam (Rav Moshe Maimonides, Spain-Egypt, 1135-1204), in presenting the Halachot relevant to the command to eradicate Amalek, makes no mention of such a prohibition. What’s more, we read in the Book of Shemuel I that David, before he became king, waged war against an Amalekite tribe and seized their animals for use by him and his men. And, we read in Megilat Ester that after Haman’s execution, Ester gave "Bet Haman" ("Haman’s home") to Mordechai. The Gemara in Masechet Megilla (10) shows from this verse that Providence arranges that the wicked become wealthy so that their fortunes will later be given to the righteous. It is clear that the Gemara understood that Mordechai received Haman’s assets. Haman, of course, is a descendant of Amalek, and yet Mordechai received his fortune – seemingly proving that it is permissible to benefit from the property of Amalek.The Meshech Hochma (Rav Meir Simcha of Dvinsk, Lithuania, 1843-1926) suggests answering this question by distinguishing between individuals, and the Jewish Nation as a whole. The prohibition discussed by Rabbenu Bahya forbids the Jewish Nation to collectively benefit from the possessions of Amalek. Therefore, when King Shaul waged war against Amalek, and when the Jews waged war against their enemies in Persia, it was forbidden to seize the spoils. However, David waged war against an Amalekite tribe before he was king, as an individual, and Mordechai similarly was given Haman’s wealth as an individual, and therefore, this was allowed.A different answer is given by the Oneg Yom Tob (Rav Yom Tob Lipman Halperin, 1816-1879), in the introduction to his work. He writes that the obligation to eradicate the memory of Amalek includes a prohibition against taking its possessions, because if one has Amalek’s possessions, the memory of Amalek is retained. Therefore, when King Shaul was commanded to wage a war of annihilation against Amalek, he was not to have taken any of Amalek’s possessions. However, once the nation of Amalek in any event has yet to be eradicated, its possessions may be received and used. Therefore, in the times of David and Mordechai, it was permissible to take the possessions of Amalek, because Amalek in any event was not eradicated. Strictly speaking, the Jews were permitted to seize the possessions of their enemies in Persia, however, as Mordechai was a descendant of King Shaul, he had the Jews leave the spoils in order to rectify the mistake made by his ancestor, who took Amalek’s cattle. The Poskim note that according to both these approaches, it would be permissible for Jews affected by the Holocaust to receive reparations from Germany. These reparations were received as individuals, not by the Jewish Nation as a whole, and so according to the Meshech Hochma, this is allowed. And, according to the Oneg Yom Tob, this would certainly be permissible, because if we indeed assume that Germany descends from Amalek, then Amalek is not eradicated in any event, and so its possessions are permissible.Another basis for accepting reparations was proposed by Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik of Boston (1903-1993). Citing his grandfather, Rav Chaim Soloveitchik of Brisk (1853-1918), Rav Soloveitchik advanced the theory that the obligation to eradicate the nation of Amalek applies not only to the nation of Amalek itself, but also to any nation who follows Amalek’s example of hostility to the Jewish People. He proved this theory from the Rambam, who, in Hilchot Melachim, discusses the command to eradicate the seven Canaanite nations, and concludes, "U’kbar Avad Zichram" – we no longer can identify the descendants of these nations. In the next passage, however, where the Rambam discusses the obligation to eradicate the nation of Amalek, he does not end with this conclusion. This might suggest that in contrast to the Misva to eradicate the seven Canaanite peoples, which applies only with regard to those actual nations, the Misva to eradicate Amalek is not limited to Amalek. Rather, it was said regarding all nations that follow Amalek’s example of hostility, even today. Rav Soloveitchik also cited the comment in the Talmud Yerushalmi (Yebamot 2:6) that although the Megilla identifies Haman as "Haman the son of Hamedata," Haman was not actually the son of Hamdata. Rather, this verse means that Haman was a murderous villain just like his father was. It turns out, then, that Haman may not have even been a biological descendant, and yet the war against Haman is considered a war against Amalek – showing that the status of "Amalek" is not limited to actual descendants of this nation.As such, Rav Soloveitchik asserted, even if the Germans are not the biological descendants of Amalek, they would be included in the Misva to eradicate the memory of Amalek. However, Rav Soloveitchik stated, there still is a difference between biological Amalekites and others who are considered like Amalek by virtue of their hostility to the Jewish Nation. When it comes to the obligation to wage war against the nation of Amalek, this obligation applies to all nations who resemble Amalek. But with regard to the law of "Maho Timhe," to eradicate the nation of Amalek, which includes, as we have seen, a prohibition against benefiting from Amalek’s property, this prohibition is limited to biological Amalekites. According to this distinction, too, it would be permissible to receive reparations from Germany.Nevertheless, there were those who opposed accepting reparations not on halachic grounds, but rather in order not to allow the Germans the opportunity to ease their conscience. Many felt that accepting reparations enabled the Germans to feel absolved of their guilt for the unspeakable crimes they committed against the Jews, as though they could make amends by paying money. A precedent to this argument is the verse in the Book of Shemot in which G-d commands Moshe before the Exodus from Egypt, "Please speak in the ears of the nation" that they should ask the Egyptians for their riches before leaving the country. The Gemara in Masechet Berachot comments that Moshe had to "beg" the people to bring the Egyptians’ wealth with them ("Please speak…"), because G-d had made a promise to Abraham Abinu that his descendants would emerge from their period of bondage with great wealth. Apparently, if not for G-d’s promise to Abraham, the people would not have wanted to bring the Egyptians’ riches with them. Some have explained that the people did not want the Egyptians to feel they could clear their conscience for their inhumane treatment of Beneh Yisrael by giving them money. Beneh Yisrael’s instinct was to refuse the Egyptians’ money so that the Egyptians would not feel that they had atoned for their persecution. By the same token, many felt it would be inappropriate to accept reparations from the Germans because it would convey the mistaken message that Germany thereby earns expiation for what it did to European Jewry.In conclusion, it is worth noting a very meaningful insight by Rav Avigdor Nebenzahl (contemporary) regarding the Torah’s outlook on Amalek. Rav Nebenzahl observed that although the Torah requires eradicating the nation of Amalek, nevertheless, the Rambam rules that an Amalekite may convert and join the Jewish People. Proof to this view may be brought from the Gemara’s remark in Masechet Gittin (57) that Haman – an Amalekite – had descendants who taught Torah Bnei-Brak. This would certainly indicate that members of the nation of Amalek can convert and become full-fledged Jews, which is how Haman ended up having descendants who taught Torah. And, it seems from the Rambam that a convert from Amalek may even marry a Jewish woman. This is in contrast to the nations of Amon and Moab, whom the Torah forbids allowing to marry a Jew after conversion. The Torah explains that these nations are forever barred from the Jewish People because they did not offer provisions of food and water to Beneh Yisrael after the Exodus. Amon and Moab descend from Lot, Abraham Abinu’s nephew, who was rescued from the destruction of the city of Sedom solely in the merit of Abraham Abinu. These nations thus owed an enormous debt of gratitude to Beneh Yisrael, yet they refused to offer assistance – or even sell provisions – when Beneh Yisrael were traveling in the desert after leaving Egypt. The Torah therefore forbids allowing them to join our nation.Interestingly, Rab Nebenzahl noted, Amalek, who waged an ideological battle against Am Yisrael, may convert and join our nation, but Amon and Moab, who showed ingratitude, cannot. Rav Nebenzahl explained that if somebody has the wrong beliefs and ideas, he can be taught and educated. However, if somebody is plagued by negative character traits, it is exceedingly difficult for such a person to change. Indeed, Rav Yisrael Salanter (1810-1883) taught that changing even one character trait is more difficult than studying the entire Talmud. Therefore, Rav Nebenzahl explained, a person from Amalek, a nation that opposed us ideologically, can join our nation, because he can be taught the correct beliefs and given proper knowledge. A person from Amon and Moab, however, can never join our nation, because these nations are afflicted with negative character traits – specifically, ingratitude – an this is exceptionally difficult to change. Hence, such a person can have a profoundly negative effect upon our nation if he would be allowed to join us.An earlier source of this general concept is a discussion of the Ran (Rabbenu Nissim of Gerona, Spain, 1320-1380), in one of his Derashot (11), regarding Abraham Abinu’s insistence that his son, Yishak, not marry a woman from Canaan. Abraham sent his servant to his homeland, Aram Naharayim, to find a girl for Yishak, rather than find a suitable match from the local population in the land of Canaan. The reason, the Ran explained, is because although the people in Aram Naharayim worshipped idols, their characters were not as flawed as those of the people in Canaan. Abraham understood that incorrect beliefs can be overcome through proper education, but negative character traits often remain permanently embedded within a person’s nature. As he was forming the foundation of Am Yisrael, Abraham knew that somebody from Canaan cannot play any role in this process, because such a person could inject negative Middot (character traits) into the fabric of the nation, thus having disastrous long-term consequences. He therefore insisted on finding a mate for Yishak from Aram Naharayim.Summary: When the Germans offered the Jews reparations after World War II, there was considerable controversy surrounding the question of whether this money should be accepted. From a strict Halachic perspective, it seems that accepting the money is allowed. Nevertheless, some felt that this would be inappropriate, as it would give the impression that Germany could simply buy expiation for the unspeakable crimes perpetrated against European Jewry.

In the times of the Bet Ha’mikdash, the Kohanim did not receive a portion of the Land of Israel, and thus they were unable to produce food. They were supported by various gifts that the rest of the nation was required to give them. As the Torah instructs in Parashat Shoftim, these gifts include certain portions of any kosher animal that is slaughtered – specifically, the Zeroa (arm), Lehayayim (cheeks) and Keba (stomach). This requirement applies when any ordinary, non-sacrificial animal is slaughtered. The food is not hallowed, which means that it may be eaten by anybody if the Kohen decides to share it, and it may be eaten even in a state of Tuma (impurity).Various reasons have been suggested for why specifically these portions were chosen as gifts for the Kohen. Rashi explains that these portions commemorate the heroic act performed by Pinhas, one of the first Kohanim, who killed Zimri and Kozbi, a man and a woman who committed a public sinful act. Pinhas prayed for G-d’s help at that time, commemorated by the Lehayayim, which are in the mouth; he killed them with his arm, commemorated by the Zeroa; and he stabbed them in the stomach, commemorated by the Keba.The Keli Yakar (Rav Shlomo Efrayim Luntschitz, 1550-1619) explains differently, suggesting that these gifts are given in exchange for the Birkat Kohanim blessing which the Kohanim confer upon the nation. The Kohanim therefore receive the Lehayayim, representing the mouth, which they use to recite the blessing, and the Zeroa, which symbolizes the Kohanim’s raising their hands as they pronounce Birkat Kohanim. In this Beracha they bless the people with prosperity and satiation, represented by the Keba, the animal’s stomach.Rav Abraham Saba (1440-1508) adds that in general, Kohanim are given gifts of meat because they are to devote themselves to Torah study, which has the effect of weakening a person, and so they need meat to keep them healthy and strong.If these portions are not given to a Kohen, the rest of the animal is nevertheless permissible for consumption. These gifts differ in this respect from Teruma, a portion of produce which must be separated before the rest of the produce may be eaten. This is proven from a story told by the Gemara in Masechet Megilla of, Rabbi Preda, who was once asked why he earned such a long life, and he replied that he never ate meat from an animal before these portions were given to a Kohen. It is clear from this story that waiting for these portions to be given before eating the rest constitutes a Midat Hasidut – special measure of piety, that is not required according to Halacha.The Sefer Ha’hinuch (anonymous work from the 13th century) writes (506) that this obligation cannot be enforced, because no particular Kohen can claim rights to these portions. Since the animal’s owner is entitled to choose to which Kohen he wishes to give these portions, no Kohen can make a legal claim that he is owed these parts of the animal.The Shulhan Aruch (Yoreh De’a 61:1) rules explicitly that the requirement to give these portions to a Kohen applies even nowadays. Later (61:21), he brings two opinions as to whether this obligation applies only in the Land of Israel, or also in the Diaspora. The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (10b) tells that Rav Hisda, who was a Kohen and lived in Babylonia, received these gifts, which certainly implies that this obligation is binding even outside the Land of Israel. Rashi, however, commenting on this story, references the Gemara’s ruling elsewhere, in Masechet Berachot, that the accepted custom follows the opinion that Reshit Ha’gez – the obligation to give a Kohen the first shearing of a sheep’s wool – does not apply outside Eretz Yisrael. According to Rashi, this ruling applies also to the portions of a slaughtered animal, and he writes that for this reason, the accepted practice is not to give these portions to a Kohen.Others, however, including the Rif (Rav Yishak of Fez, Morocco, 1013-1103), the Rambam (Rav Moshe Maimonides, Spain-Egypt, 1135-1204) and the Ramban (Rav Moshe Nahmanides, Spain, 1194-1270), disagree. In their view, the law regarding Reshit Ha’gez has no bearing at all on the obligation to give these portions of an animal, and thus this obligation applies both in Eretz Yisrael and in the Diaspora. This is the ruling of the Hid"a (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), in his Mahazik Beracha (Y.D. 61:14). The Shulhan Aruch, however, after bringing both opinions, writes that the accepted custom follows the lenient position, that this obligation does not apply in the Diaspora. This appears to be the accepted practice even today. Interestingly, however, there are stories told of great Sadikim, such as the Hatam Sofer (Rav Moshe Sofer, Pressburg, 1762-1839), who made a point of fulfilling this Misva even in the Diaspora.This explains why this Misva is not fulfilled here in the Diaspora – because the Shulhan Aruch ruled that the accepted practice follows Rashi’s view. It does not explain why this is not commonly observed in Israel. Already hundreds of years ago, Maran (author of the Shulhan Aruch) published a letter by one of his contemporaries in his work Abkat Rochel bemoaning the neglect of this Misva. (This Rabbi felt that it should be observed even in the Diaspora.) The letter states that Rav Levi ibn Habib (Jerusalem, 1480-1545) instituted a solution to this problem, implementing a system whereby butchers paid a particular sum of money to a fund for each animal slaughtered, and this fund would be distributed to Kohanim. This system is mentioned also by the Mabit (Rav Moshe of Trani, 1505-1585) and by his son, the Maharit (Rav Yosef of Trani, 1568-1639). The author of this letter, however, felt that this system was not sufficient, as in his view, the actual portions of meat must be given to a Kohen.Rav Yechiel Michel Tuketchinsky (1871-1955) tells of a different practice that was followed – whereby a large "loan" was given to the Kohanim, and each time an animal was slaughtered, a certain sum was deducted from the amount owed by the Kohen.It should be noted that if the animal is co-owned by a non-Jew, then this requirement does not apply. Conceivably, then, this obligation can be circumvented by granting a non-Jew a share in all the animals in the butcher shop. If so, then perhaps we might say that since many butcher shops have an arrangement whereby animals which are found to be Terefot (mortally wounded), and thus forbidden for consumption, are given to a non-Jew, every animal slaughtered is, in a sense, co-owned by a non-Jew until its status is determined. This might perhaps provide a basis for slaughterhouses that do not ensure to give these portions, or their monetary equivalent, to a Kohen. However, this question requires further elucidation.Summary: The obligation of "Zeroa, Lehayayim Ve’keba" requires giving a Kohen certain portions of every kosher animal that is slaughtered. According to accepted custom, this requirement does not apply in the Diaspora.

رازهای حیرت انگیز مگیلا Astonishing secret from Rav Shimshon Astrolopia HY'D on Masechet Megilla by Rabbi Benjamin Lavian

Hagiga 3:7 - The stays of foods and vessels after the festival, if touched by an am ha’aress on the festivalSeder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 3:8 - The cleansing of the vessels of the Bet Hamikdash Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 3:6 - Continuation of the preceding Mishnah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 3:5 - Continuation of the preceding Mishnah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 3:4 - Areas in which the laws of terumah are more stringent than the laws of kodesh Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 3:3 - Continuation of the preceding Mishnah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 3:1 - The stringencies of kodesh compared to terumah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 3:2 - Continuation of the preceding Mishnah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 2:6 - In order to achieve a state of taharah through immersion in a mikveh, one must bear in mind the particular degree of sanctified food which he intends to involve himself with Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 2:7 - The more scrupulous one is in observing the requirements of taharah, must regard the belongings of the less scrupulous as if they had midras-contamination Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 2:4 - Another dispute between Bet Hillel and Bet Shamai, based on the preceding Mishnah- how to deal with “Yom Teboah” if it falls out on a Sunday Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 2:5 - Decrees to safeguard the taharah of the respective levels of sanctity from being contaminated from tumah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 2:1 - Torah subjects that should not be discussed in public Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 2:3 - Dispute between Bet Hillel and Bet Shamai according to their opinions in the preceding Mishnah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 2:2 - The dispute in regards to leaning on korban on Yom Tob Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 1:8 - Examples of Torah precepts, which are only vaguely alluded to in the Torah, and would not be known without the Oral Law Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 1:7 - Examples of twisted things that cannot be made straight Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 1:6 - What to do if one didn’t bring his korban on the first day of the festival Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 1:5 - How many of each korban should one bring Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 1:1 - Who is and who isn’t obligated in the misvah of re’iyah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 1:2 - what’s the minimum that one must pay for a korban hagigah/re’iyah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 1:3 - From which funds can one purchase his korbanot Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Hagiga 1:4 - From which animals can a person offer his korbanot Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored Leiluy Nishmat Mazal bat Adella and Yitzchak ben Esther This class is taught by Rabbi Mayer Barnathan MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 3:8 - Expression of grief on the Moed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 3:9 - Innui, Clapping and Kinna-Rosh Hodesh, Hanukka and Purim Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 3:7 - What others may or must not do on Hol Hamoed, Sending food to a mourners home. Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 3:6 - Are Shabuot, Rosh Hashsna and Kippur counted like the Regalim or like Shabbat? Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 3:5 - When the holiday breaks the Shiba and the Sheloshim Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 3:4 - Writing documents on the Moed, writing Sifre Torah, Tefillin or Mezuzot on the Moed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 3:2 - Who may launder and what may they launder on Hol Hamoed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 3:3 - Documents that are permitted to be written on the Moed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 2:5 - Permitted activities on the Moed, selling and working on the Moed in private Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 3:1 - These may take haircuts on the Moed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 2:3 - Preventing a loss on Hol Hamoed, without scheduling it as such Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 2:4 - Buying and selling on Hol Hamoed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 2:1 - Continuing work on the Moed that one unintentionally couldn't finish Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 2:2 - Wine as well Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:9 - Professional manner/great effort but needed for the holiday Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:10 - Repairs on Hol Hamoed; Professionally or Amateurish? Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:7 - Getting married on Hol Hamoed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:8 - Professional manner, Amateur manner Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:6- Not all Sorche' Harabim are allowed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:5 - Things that cause sadness on Hol Hamoed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:3 - Minimal effort Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:4 - Trapping on Hol Hamoed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:1 - Dabar Ha'abed on Hol Hamoed Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Moed Katan 1:2 - Tirha Yetera, Sorche' Rabim Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsored by Margie and Sammy Saka and Family in Honor of Rabbi Saul Kassin This class is taught by Rabbi Saul Kassin MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 4:8 - Maase Reuben Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 4:7 - SeboimSeder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 4:5 - HaMaftir Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 4:6 - Katan Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 4:4 - Three pesukim Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 4:3 - Ten for kedusha Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 4:2 - Rosh Hodesh Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 3:7 - Hanukka Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 3:6 - Torah reading Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 4:1 - HaKoreh Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 3:4 - Ben Hakeneset SheHarav Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 3:5 - four parashiyot Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 3:2 - En Mochrin Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 2:6 - Laws of night Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 3:3 - Arbaah Devarim Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 3:1 - Bene Ir Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 2:3 - Ben KrachSeder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 2:5 - BaYom Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 2:4 - Heresh Shoteh Katan Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 2:1 - Different languages Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:11 - Shilo Jerusalem Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 2:2 - Serugin inks Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:10 - Bamot Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:9 - Kohen HaMashiah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:8 - Languages scrolls Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:7 - Neder Nedavah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:5 - Sorech Ochel Nefesh Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:6 - Neder Nedavah Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:4 - Leap year Purim Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:3 - Big city Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:2 - Specifics of dates Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla 1:1 - Dates of Reading Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

Megilla - Introduction to Masechet Megilla Seder MoedIn Memory of Buddy Sutton A”HMasechet MegillaSponsorship Available This class is taught by Rabbi Joseph Dana MishnaStudy.com  

It is customary to read Megillat Rut on Shabuot, and several different reasons have been given for this custom. The Mordechi (Rav Mordechai Ben Hillel, Germany, 1250-1298), in Masechet Megilla (chapter 1), as cited by the Rama (Rav Moshe Isserles of Cracow, 1525-1572) in Darkeh Moshe (494), explains that the story of Rut took place during the harvest season, around the time of Shabuot, and it is therefore appropriate to read this story on this holiday. Others explain that at the time of Matan Torah, the Jewish People underwent a process of "conversion," for, like converts, they had been obligated only in the Seven Noachide Laws, and then committed themselves to the Torah’s 613 commands. (Interestingly, the Hebrew word "Gerut" has the numerical value of 620, corresponding to the 613 Biblical commands plus the seven Misvot instituted by the Sages.) Therefore, on the day we celebrate Matan Torah, we read the story of Rut, which tells of Rut’s conversion and acceptance of the Misvot.Thirdly, we read Megilat Rut as a reminder that accepting the Torah includes not only our obligations toward G-d, but also our obligations to other people. The story of Rut is all about Hesed: Rut accompanied her mother-in-law, Naomi, and left her homeland to be at her side; Boaz cared for Rut when she arrived in Bet-Lehem, and then married her; Rut performed kindness for her deceased husband by allowing his soul to be perpetuated through the process of Yibum. We read this story to remind ourselves that kindness and sensitivity to other people is part and parcel of our acceptance of the Torah.Additionally, Megillat Rut is a story of remarkable "Mesirut Nefesh" – self-sacrifice. Rut was the daughter of the king of Moav, yet she was prepared to leave her life of royalty and all the amenities and luxuries it offers in order to become a Jew. This story reminds us that we need to sacrifice in order to succeed in Torah and Misvot. We cannot expect to excel in our devotion to Torah while enjoying all the comforts and luxuries that life offers. "Mesirut Nefesh" is an indispensable prerequisite for a successful Torah life.Finally, the story of Megillat Rut concludes with Rut’s marriage to Boaz and the birth of their son, who ultimately became the grandfather of King David, who was born and passed away on Shabuot. It is thus appropriate to read this story on Shabuot, when we remember and reflect upon David Ha’melech.