Podcasts about Rabbi Akiva

Daf Yomi Avodah Zarah 52Episode 2044Join the community: https://chat.whatsapp.com/LMbsU3a5f4Y3b61DxFRsqfSefaria: https://www.sefaria.org/Avodah_Zarah.52a?lang=heEmail: sruli@babbleontalmud.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/babble_on_talmudFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/p/Babble-on-Talmud-100080258961218/#dafyomi #talmudOn daf 52 of masechta Avodah Zarah we dive into the machlokes between Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Ishmael about at what point avodah zarah becomes prohibited. Then we talk about fixing up avodah zarah. Enjoy...00:00 Intro01:50 At which point avodah zarah becomes prohibited30:12 Fixing up an avodah zarah clunker59:34 Conclusion

00:25 The essence of Rabbi Akiva's wisdom is that the Torah speaks in parables3:40 The sin that led to the death of Bar Kochba is the sin of taking the Torah literally 11:15 Balaam and the parables about the Messiah; the prophets themselves didn't know the meaning of their parables about the Messiah18:00 Balaam blessed Israel with kingship, which turned into a curse21:00 Inverting the meaning of the Torah and Balaam's endeavor24:00 The inversion of the Torah is its external, superficial meaning; Balaam as the anti-Moshe28:45 The function of a king is to craft a unified message; the connection between kings and parables33:45 The problem with kings, who occlude the kingship of Hashem43:00 How can there be a righteous king?44:15 The function of halacha and how it applies to establishing kings who stand as parables for Hashem55:00 The contradiction in Shemoneh Esreh whether Hashem alone will rule us or David will56:00 Solomon's failure revolved around thinking we know the reasons of mitzvahs fully59:30 The more progress we make in recognizing the limits of our reason, the more we can safely explore the reasons for the mitzvahs 1:05:30 The Guide is Gan Eden; the Tree of Life is the middle question in the middle chapter of the middle section of the Guide: "Why did he give these mitzvahs and these prohibitions?"1:11:30 Rabbi Akiva knew the reason of the Red Heifer, which is that paradoxes are appropriate1:13:00 Balaam as the anti-Moshe and his influence, together with Moshe, on all the prophets that come after Moshe1:15:00 Rabbi Meir, student of Rabbi Akiva, and his approach to parables

התוכן [המשך] והראי' שהגאולה ותחיית המתים אכן תהי' בפועל באופן דאתהפכא ("עוד ישבו זקנים וזקנות ברחובות ירושלים"), אף שאין הכרח בדבר, היא "עכשיו שנתקיימה נבואתו של אורי'" ש"ציון שדה תחרש": אף שבחורבן בית שני לא נשאר כלום מהבית כ"א העצים והאבנים (דלא כבחורבן בית ראשון) –"ציון שדה נחרש", אבל רק על ידי זה, שלא נשאר אפי' היסוד של אבנים אלא זה נחרש, נעשה זה מקום ראוי לזריעה ולצמיחה. ומזה הוכיח שהגאולה הולכת בכיוון של אתהפכא. ואע"פ שזה מובן מהנבואה של "עוד ישבו זקנים וגו'" כשלעצמה, אבל מצינו שמצד סיבות (כמו הענין ש"הי' בידיהם למחות ולא מיחו", כמו שהי' בתקופת חורבן בית ראשון) יכולה לא להתקיים גם נבואה לטובה, משא"כ כשקיום הנבואה מתחיל בפועל. וכיון שישעי', שאמר "ואעידה לי עדים נאמנים את אורי' הכהן ואת זכרי' בן יברכיהו", עשה מב' הנבואות – נבואה אחת (כמו ב' עדים שמעידים על ענין א'), ו"ציון שדה תחרש" התקיים בפועל, מוכח שגם יתקיים המשך הנבואה – "עוד ישבו זקנים וגו'" – גאולה באופן של אתהפכא. וזה בא ע"י שגאולה הפרטית דכאו"א בעבודתו היא באופן של "אתהפכא".ב' חלקים משיחת יו"ד שבט ה'תשכ"ה ל"הנחה פרטית" או התרגום ללה"ק של השיחה: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=07-08-2025 Synopsis (Continued.) The proof that the Redemption and Techias Hameisim will indeed take place in a manner of transformation (“There will yet be elderly men and elderly women sitting in the streets of Yerushalayim”), even though it doesn't necessarily have to happen that way, lies in the fact that “the prophecy of Uriyah has been fulfilled,” that “Tzion was plowed like a field”: In the destruction of the second Beis Hamikdash, nothing remained of the structure except wood and stones (unlike the destruction of the first Beis Hamikdash), but it was only because it was razed to the foundation and plowed that the place became fit for sowing and growth. Fron this Rabbi Akiva proved that the Redemption will take place in a manner of transformation. Although the prophecy itself also alludes to transformation (“There will yet be elderly men and elderly women…”), however, we find that due to certain causes (such as the fact that “it was in their power to protest and they did not protest” at the time of the destruction of the first Beis Hamikdash) it is possible for even a positive prophecy to potentially not be fulfilled. But this doesn't apply when the fulfillment of the prophecy has already begun physically. Therefore, since Yeshayahu, who said “And I will take to Me faithful witnesses: Uriyah the Kohen and Zecharyah the son of Yevarechyahu” combined the two prophecies into one (like two witnesses whose testimony become one), when Rabbi Akiva saw that “Tzion was plowed like a field” in actuality, he knew that the continuation of the prophecy, “There will yet be elderly men and elderly women...” would be fulfilled – Redemption in a manner of transformation. This comes about as a result of every individual's redemption in their personal divine service being in a manner of transformation.2 excerpts from sichah of Yud Shevat 5725 For a transcript in English of the Sicha: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=07-08-2025 לזכות ר' זאב הכהן וזוגתו מרת פריידא הינדא שיחיו טייטלבוים ליובל החתונה שלהם ביום חמשה עשר באבלברכה והצלחה בכל הענינים ‏בגו"ר

התוכן איתא בסיום מס' מכות: "כבר הי' ר"ג וראב"ע ור"י ור"ע מהלכין בדרך .. כיון שהגיעו להר הבית ראו שועל שיצא מבית קדשי הקדשים התחילו הן בוכין ור"ע מצחק .. אמרו לו מקום שכתוב בו והזר הקרב יומת ועכשו שועלים הלכו בו ולא נבכה, אמר להן לכך אני מצחק דכתיב ואעידה לי עדים נאמנים את אורי' הכהן ואת זכרי' בן יברכיהו, וכי מה ענין אורי' אצל זכרי' .. אלא תלה הכתוב נבואתו של זכרי' בנבואתו של אורי', באורי' כתיב לכן בגללכם ציון שדה תחרש בזכרי' כתיב עוד ישבו זקנים וזקנות ברחובות ירושלים, עד שלא נתקיימה נבואתו של אורי' הייתי מתיירא שלא תתקיים נבואתו של זכרי', עכשיו שנתקיימה נבואתו של אורי' בידוע שנבואתו של זכרי' מתקיימת בלשון הזה. אמרו לו עקיבא ניחמתנו עקיבא ניחמתנו". ראי' זו שהביא ר"ע אינה על עצם ענין הגאולה ותחיית המתים, שה"ז מפורש בתושב"כ, אלא על אופנה: שהרי תחיית המתים כשלעצמו הי' יכול להיות באופן (רק) כמו שהי' בג"ע לפני החטא – ביטול ענין המיתה, ו(במילא) יקומו מלכתחילה בריאים וחזקים. אבל מנבואת זכרי' "עוד ישבו זקנים וזקנות ברחובות ירושלים" מוכח שאז יהי' חידוש נעלה יותר שאינו מוכרח – הענין דאתהפכא, שיקומו באופן של "זקנים וזקנות" והם יהיו חזקים עד ש"ישבו .. ברחובות ירושלים" (לא כדרך זקנים)! [המשך יבוא]ב' חלקים משיחת יו"ד שבט ה'תשכ"ה ל"הנחה פרטית" או התרגום ללה"ק של השיחה: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=06-08-2025 Synopsis The conclusion of Masechta Makkos states: “It once was that Rabban Gamliel, Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, Rabbi Yehoshua, and Rabbi Akiva were walking along the road…When they arrived at the Temple Mount, they saw a fox that emerged from the site of the Holy of Holies. They began weeping, and Rabbi Akiva was laughing…They said to him: This is the place of which it is written: “And the layman who approaches shall die,” and now foxes walk in it; and shall we not weep? He said to them: That is why I am laughing, as it is written: “And I will take to Me faithful witnesses to attest: Uriah the Kohen, and Zechariah ben Yevarchiyahu.” Now, what is the connection between Uriah and Zechariah…Rather, the verse hinged the fulfillment of the prophecy of Zechariah on the fulfillment of the prophecy of Uriah. In the prophecy of Uriah it is written: “Therefore, for your sake Tzion will be plowed as a field.” In Zechariah it is written: “There will yet be elderly men and elderly women sitting in the streets of Yerushalayim.” Until the prophecy of Uriah was fulfilled, I was afraid that the prophecy of Zechariah would not be fulfilled. Now that the prophecy of Uriah was fulfilled, it is evident that the prophecy of Zechariah remains valid. They said to him: Akiva, you have comforted us; Akiva, you have comforted us.” Rabbi Akiva here is not bringing proof for the Redemption and Techias Hameisim themselves, because they are stated explicitly in the Written Torah. Rather, he is bringing proof as to the manner in which they will occur: Conceptually, Techias Hameisim could occur in a manner similar to the state of Gan Eden before the sin, meaning, the abolition of death, as a result of which the dead would be resurrected in a state of optimum strength and health. But since Zechariah's prophecy states that “There will yet be elderly men and elderly women sitting in the streets of Yerushalayim,” that proves that there will be an even greater novelty – the fact that they will arise as “elderly men and elderly women,” and yet they will become strong enough to be “sitting in the streets of Yerushalayim” like young people. (To be continued).2 excerpts from sichah of Yud Shevat 5725 For a transcript in English of the Sicha: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=06-08-2025 לע"נ מרת צבי' אדל בת ר' צבי ע"ה ליום היארצייט שלה י"ב מנחם-אב. ת.נ.צ.ב.ה.

Rabbi Jacobson will discuss the following topics: Chassidus applied to Tisha B'Av How does this day capture the paradox of a Jew? Why are we still grieving? What is the healthy way of mourning over loss while not being defined by it? Should the main focus of this day be the sadness and grief over the destruction of the Holy Temple, or should it be the joy and happiness that the third Temple will be revealed and be greater than the first two? Why was Moshiach born in the darkest moments of this saddest day of the year? Why did the other sages not laugh like Rabbi Akiva; were they not aware of the future prophecy? Is there a custom to do a “prank” on Tisha B'av as in the story with Reb Yisroel Ruzhiner? Are we supposed to continue the mourning on the 10th of Av? How important is unity in repairing the wounds of Tisha B'Av? And how does that apply today to winning the battles with our enemies? Can we apply Tisha B'av to healing from all forms of illness? What is a balanced Torah approach to healing and medicine? Should we listen to doctors who only medicate and do not address the soul? What is the significance of Shabbat Nachamu? Why the double Nachamu Nachamu Ami? Why is the 15th of Av such a great holiday comparable to Yom Kippur? What can we learn from the joyous events that occurred on this day to give us hope that we will endure and thrive despite the latest demonstrations of antisemitism? Did the Rebbe say that the breaking of the axe also symbolizes that we have finished our work of refining the world?  Why was public dancing permitted on this day? How is it consistent with strict standards of modesty followed today?Nachamu/15th of Av How should we respond to questions about the recently publicized photo of the Rebbe and the Rebbetzin? Follow-up 

Can You Communicate Without Defensiveness? The Incredible Lesson of Shimon Hamsoni and Rabbe AkivaThis class was presented on Tuesday, 11 Av, 5785, August 5, 2025, Parshas Vaeschanan, at The Barn in Montebello, NY. There is a story in the Talmud, in which Shimon the Imsonite retracts his entire theory that the term "Es" indicates the inclusion of another person or item, due to a single verse in this week’s portion, “You shall fear -- Es -- the Lord your G-d.” How can we be in awe of anybody but G-d? Yet his student, Rabbi Akiva, rescues his teacher’s refuted theory. The obvious question is what did Rabbi Akiva discover which Shimon did not? Shimon could not entertain the notion of including anything in the commandment to fear G-d. For him, such a proposition would be blasphemy. Why did Rabbi Akiva, then, not have a problem of adding Torah scholars to the mitzvah of fearing G-d? How is it that for what Shimon was blasphemy was for Rabbi Akiva perfectly acceptable, and even a mitzvah?! You were selected to win the Nobel Prize for your contribution to physics. You received your tickets to Norway to attend the lavish ceremony. You were featured on the cover of Time magazine, and have been interviewed by hundreds of journals and networks. Minutes after you received the call that the Nobel Committee had chosen you from 40 possible candidates, you went from being an anonymous physicist spending the last 45 years in a laboratory to becoming a world-class scientist whose name will be immortalized in the annals of scientific innovation and discovery. You become a household name. The world is buzzing with your praise. And then… the unthinkable happens. Hours before you go to the airport to fly to Norway, you discover a subtle mistake in one of your 20,000 equations. It is a mistake that no eye has perceived and perhaps will not be perceived for many years. But it is a mistake. Your calculation is erroneous. You have refuted your discovery. You now have a choice to make. Will you allow the “small truth” to destroy your eternal glory? What would you do? It is such a story that the Talmud is addressing. If only we can internalize this type of integrity our lives can be transformed.View Source Sheets: https://portal.theyeshiva.net/api/source-sheets/9744

Welcome to Daily Bitachon. We are now in the zone of nechama —the time of comfort . As we know, this week's Shabbat is called Shabbat Nachamu , based on the Haftarah , which opens with the words נחמו נחמו עמי / Be comforted, be comforted My nation, יאמר אלקיכם —so your God will say. The Pri Tzadik in this week's parashah is bothered: it shouldn't say יאמר /He will say—but rather אמר /God said. He explains that it's for future generations; whenever we read this Haftarah , God Himself is talking to us and giving us words of comfort. This is not just the first Haftarah , but for the next seven weeks. There are seven weeks of comfort. His words are, מתחדש הנחמה מפי השם ממש —the words of comfort literally come out of God's mouth and are renewed every year— ונכנס ללב —and enter the heart. That's how we get ready for the High Holiday season. It's worthwhile to refresh our memory—what does the word nechama , which we loosely translate as comfort , really mean? We go back to the first time the word nechama shows up in the Torah , where it says וינחם השם כי עשה את האדם בארץ . Simply speaking, Hashem comforted Himself that He made man on earth. ויתעצב אל לבו —and He was u pset. So now, if He's upset, why is He comforting Himself? Rashi says וינחם means נהפכה מחשבתו של מקום —God's thought changed. He changed from the trait of mercy to the trait of justice . Rashi continues and says: וכן כל לשון ניחום שבמקרא — wherever it says the word nichum in the Torah , it means to have a change of mind, as it says: ובן אדם ויתנחם/ Is God like a human being that changes His mind? על עבדיו יתנחם —on His servants He will change His mind. וינחם השם על הרעה —God changes His mind from the bad, and so on . כולם , says Rashi , all of them, לשון מחשבה אחרת —it means a different way of looking at things. So nachamu means not comfort , but: start looking at things differently. Have a different angle on things. Yes, we suffered. Yes, it's difficult. But there's a new perspective to be given. This reminds us of the famous story at the end of Masechet Makkot , where the group of Tannaim were going to Yerushalayim . They reached Mount Scopus, and they tore their clothing. When they reached the Temple Mount, they saw a fox running out from the Kodesh HaKodashim —the Holy of Holies. The rabbis started to cry, and Rabbi Akiva started to laugh. They said to him, "Why are you laughing?" He said, "Why are you crying?" And they replied, " This is a place where it says a non- kohen that enters should die, and now foxes are running there—and we shouldn't cry?" He said, " That's why I'm laughing. Because there are two pesukim . One says there will be negativity, and the good will only come when that negativity is fulfilled. And now that I see the negativity being fulfilled, I know that the positive prophecies will come true." And they said to him, Akiva nichamtanu, Akiva nichamtanu — Rabbi Akiva , you comforted us. Which means: Rabbi Akiva , you gave us a new angle, a new way of looking at things. And that's what our job is for these next weeks. We have three weeks of negative Haftarot , and seven weeks of positive Haftarot . That means Hashem wants us to focus on the flip side— not on the negative. In one of the upcoming Haftarot , Yeshayahu 49:14 , it says: ותאמר ציון עזבני השם — Tzion says: God has forsaken me. ואדני שכחני —and God forgot me. And God says: " You know what? You're doing the same thing Adam HaRishon did. I made a wife to help him, and he complained. Yaakov Avinu —I'm making his son into the king, the viceroy—and he's complaining. And Tzion , you're doing the same thing. I'm busy now getting rid of the other nations of the world. I already got rid of Bavel , I got rid of Madai , I got rid of Yavan —and now I want to get rid of the final wicked kingdom. And you're complaining and you're saying עזבני ?" So we have to look at things in a different light. And that's what we'll be doing, b'ezrat Hashem , this week until this Shabbat—which is Tu B'Av —and then b'ezrat Hashem , after that, we will start a new series to be announced next week.

00:00 The project of the Guide is the rectification of the challenges associated with prophecy2:30 The need for the Torah to be unlocked12:00 King Solomon was a Messianic figure who commenced the unlocking of the Torah, which was then completed by Rabbi Akiva20:45 The innovation in the Torah which is itself rooted in the Torah: Rambam's rereading of the Torah's mission to uproot idolatry and his application of its teaching to God's incorporeality 36:30 The Oral Torah can undermine the surface-level meaning of the Written Torah40:45 How Moshe both did and didn't wage war against the erroneous belief in the corporeality of God44:00 It takes much knowledge to know that knowledge is limited48:45 How Rabbi Akiva's new teaching about parables improved on King Solomon's teaching about parables51:00 The endless sea and the infinitude of wisdom: The meaning of the parable of water is that we can't know the true meaning of the parable of water54:30 The purpose of parables is not to explain something but rather to make an abstract truth attractive to the body1:01:15 Rabbi Akiva's teaching about the water that has no end; how he faced endless waves and how Rabbi Meir faced endless waves1:12:30 Two kinds of parables1:15:30 What will be treated of in the next lecture

Shapell's 9 Days Yom Iyun 5785 - Rabbi Schneider- Rabbi Akiva and the Fox: Destruction and Rebuilding by Shapell's Rabbeim

This morning we discuss Rabbi Jonathan Sacks' presentation of two very different and consequential responses to the catastrophe of the destruction of the second Bet HaMikdash - from Paul of Tarsus and from Rabbi Akiva. This leads us to Rabbi Yaakov Weinberg's analysis of how the month of Av, and Tisha B'Av specifically, propels us to the month of Ellul. Michael Whitman is the senior rabbi of ADATH Congregation in Hampstead, Quebec, and an adjunct professor at McGill University Faculty of Law. ADATH is a modern orthodox synagogue community in suburban Montreal, providing Judaism for the next generation. We take great pleasure in welcoming everyone with a warm smile, while sharing inspiration through prayer, study, and friendship. Rabbi Whitman shares his thoughts and inspirations through online lectures and shiurim, which are available on: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5FLcsC6xz5TmkirT1qObkA Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/adathmichael/ Podcast - Mining the Riches of the Parsha: Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/mining-the-riches-of-the-parsha/id1479615142?fbclid=IwAR1c6YygRR6pvAKFvEmMGCcs0Y6hpmK8tXzPinbum8drqw2zLIo7c9SR-jc Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3hWYhCG5GR8zygw4ZNsSmO Please contact Rabbi Whitman (rabbi@adath.ca) with any questions or feedback, or to receive a daily email, "Study with Rabbi Whitman Today," with current and past insights for that day, video, and audio, all in one short email sent directly to your inbox.

The Chasam Sofer's explanation in the connection between them.Source Sheet: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Bpkz5rTw2GQZ1YI3oHQsx5y9l8P6cQ6e/view?usp=share_link

0:00 How does Rambam intend to extract us from exile?2:30 Rabbi Akiva as the great teacher whose Torah completes the Messianic teaching6:30 The need for the Torah to be clarified and for its meaning to be unlocked10:00 In what sense Rabbi Akiva is called a "prophet"18:30 The diminished significance of the Messiah as an individual man of great wisdom and prophetic power24:00 Allusions in the Guide to the role of Rabbi Akiva and his new teaching30:00 What is the "new teaching" predicted by the prophets and who will teach it? 31:00 The teaching of Rabbi Akiva about what makes a human perfect: Do not say, "Water, water"34:45 Moshe went beyond human capabilities; the rest of humanity requires a way to approach God without transcending human limits46:30 The meaning of the word "water"; equivocal terms and parables54:20 Why there is a need for a "new teaching" and what is wrong with the "old teaching"58:00 The failure of the "Nobles of the Children of Israel" in their vision of God points to the flaw with the old teaching and the problem inherent in every prophet lesser than Moshe1:05:00 The Guide is meant to rectify the problem inherent to non-Mosaic prophecy

First, a note on Rabbi Akiva's question on the previous daf. Then, a discussion about the cheese of non-Jews that leads into reflection on the verse, "for your love is better than wine" - is God talking? Are the Jewish people talking? Plus, how decrees were made quietly, lest people not be able to live up to the requirements of the decree, and tactfully. Also, a new mishnah! The list of non-Jews' foods from which Jews are prohibited to eat, but they can get benefit from the things on this list (milk, bread, oil, and more).

In today's page of Talmud, Avodah Zarah 34, we hear a story in which Rabbi Akiva visits a faraway city and is asked three seemingly unrelated yet straightforward questions by the folks who lived there. We're told that he did not know the answers. What's going on here? Listen and find out. 

Do glazed earthenware vessels absorb, and if so, to what extent? Can they be kashered? Meriemar appears to issue contradictory rulings regarding this topic, particularly vessels that contained wine of idol worshippers versus the kashering of vessels for Pesach. How is this contradiction resolved? Rabbi Akiva was asked three questions, one of which pertained to clay jugs previously owned by non-Jews. Unable to provide answers on the spot, he went to the beit midrash, where he ultimately discovered the correct rulings. The jugs can be used after twelve months of not having been used for wine.  Grape seeds, grape peels, and fish stew (morayis) mentioned in the Mishna are discussed in detail, along with the halachic issues they raise. Different sages mention items that can be used after twelve months without undergoing any kashering process.  Why are cheeses from Onaiki forbidden? Reish Lakish proposes an explanation, but his answer is challenged based on a seemingly contradictory statement he made in a different context. The resolution of this difficulty involves a clarification of his original statement.  Feces from an ox that gored and was sentenced to be stoned are not forbidden, even though the ox itself is. However, feces from an animal that was used for idol worship are forbidden. The distinction between these two cases is clarified through logical reasoning and supported by verses from the Torah. Rava adds that our Mishna can also serve as a textual basis for these rulings.

A Rabbi Akiva story -- wherein he didn't know the answer to 3 questions, though others in the beit midrash were able to shed light for him. (One of these questions being a straight-up "avodah zarah" Jew/non-Jew interaction question, and the possibility of rehabilitating jugs owned by a non-Jew, which explains the passage's presence on this daf). Also, more on the fish stew -- and the story of how guards were placed to guard the fish stew to make sure nobody added wine to it (risking libation wine, etc.). Note that "cheap wine" was understood to not be problematic to begin with. Plus, the cases of cheese and the woman who is betrothed with the excrement of an ox that awaits stoning.

Do glazed earthenware vessels absorb, and if so, to what extent? Can they be kashered? Meriemar appears to issue contradictory rulings regarding this topic, particularly vessels that contained wine of idol worshippers versus the kashering of vessels for Pesach. How is this contradiction resolved? Rabbi Akiva was asked three questions, one of which pertained to clay jugs previously owned by non-Jews. Unable to provide answers on the spot, he went to the beit midrash, where he ultimately discovered the correct rulings. The jugs can be used after twelve months of not having been used for wine.  Grape seeds, grape peels, and fish stew (morayis) mentioned in the Mishna are discussed in detail, along with the halachic issues they raise. Different sages mention items that can be used after twelve months without undergoing any kashering process.  Why are cheeses from Onaiki forbidden? Reish Lakish proposes an explanation, but his answer is challenged based on a seemingly contradictory statement he made in a different context. The resolution of this difficulty involves a clarification of his original statement.  Feces from an ox that gored and was sentenced to be stoned are not forbidden, even though the ox itself is. However, feces from an animal that was used for idol worship are forbidden. The distinction between these two cases is clarified through logical reasoning and supported by verses from the Torah. Rava adds that our Mishna can also serve as a textual basis for these rulings.

Daf Yomi Avodah Zarah 34Episode 2026We finish up the discussion of flasks and move on to the next section of the mishnah, on the topic of "pits and peels". After that we discuss some kind of fish dish, and then seguay into our discussions of cheese, which will continue into tomorrow. So a little bit of a smorgasbord, but a good smorgasbord. Enjoy

0:00 Why are the Redemption and the Messiah not treated of in the Guide, considering that they comprise the 12th principle of faith?5:30 Chasam Sofer's dispute with Rambam regarding the 12th principle9:00 The redemption is a principle of faith since it involves the success of the Torah's overall project11:30 The entire Guide is the means for the Torah's project to succeed: Through this book, they will escape from exile18:30 The Messiah is the notion that kingship of Israel can and will be perfected25:00 The Torah, as opposed to the prophets, doesn't talk about the figure of the Messiah34:50 A contradiction within Mishneh Torah about whether the Messiah will be wiser than Solomon and achieve a level of prophecy close to Moses, or will be simply an effective king49:40 Rabbi Akiva's role in the Redemption; Rabbi Akiva as the Solomonic and Mosaic figure56:30 Rabbi Akiva as the figure bracketing the whole Mishneh Torah, who entered the Pardes in peace and exited in peace1:00:00 Halacha as the prerequisite for knowledge of Hashem1:02:00 The nature of Rabbi Akiva's perfection and the connection to his assumption that Bar Kochba was the Messiah1:05:30 The study of Mishneh Torah is required to be capable of recognizing that parables are not meant literally1:09:30 Who is the real king? Rabbi Akiva or Bar Kochba?

Can an idol worshipper perform a brit mila on a Jew? If no Jew is available, is it preferable for a Samaritan (Cuti) or an idol worshipper to perform it? What are the sources for the various opinions, and which authorities support each view? Is brit mila required to be performed lishma—specifically for the sake of the mitzva? Two different verses are cited to explain why an idol worshipper may not perform a brit mila on a Jew. What is the practical difference between the two interpretations? The Gemara offers three possible distinctions, though the first two are ultimately rejected. The remaining practical implication concerns whether a woman is permitted to perform a brit mila. Can an idol worshipper perform a medical procedure or prescribe medicine for a Jew? Under what circumstances is it permitted? Is there a difference between an idol worshipper and a heretic, and if so, why? Why did Rabbi Yishmael not permit Ben Dama to be healed by a heretic? If the Torah says “and you shall live by them,” why wasn’t healing allowed in this case? Rabbi Yishmael prohibits transgressing idol worship and other commandments publicly, even under threat to life. This approach differs from Rabbi Akiva’s opinion in Sanhedrin, which holds that one must give up one's life rather than transgress the three cardinal sins: idolatry, murder, and forbidden sexual relations.

Can an idol worshipper perform a brit mila on a Jew? If no Jew is available, is it preferable for a Samaritan (Cuti) or an idol worshipper to perform it? What are the sources for the various opinions, and which authorities support each view? Is brit mila required to be performed lishma—specifically for the sake of the mitzva? Two different verses are cited to explain why an idol worshipper may not perform a brit mila on a Jew. What is the practical difference between the two interpretations? The Gemara offers three possible distinctions, though the first two are ultimately rejected. The remaining practical implication concerns whether a woman is permitted to perform a brit mila. Can an idol worshipper perform a medical procedure or prescribe medicine for a Jew? Under what circumstances is it permitted? Is there a difference between an idol worshipper and a heretic, and if so, why? Why did Rabbi Yishmael not permit Ben Dama to be healed by a heretic? If the Torah says “and you shall live by them,” why wasn’t healing allowed in this case? Rabbi Yishmael prohibits transgressing idol worship and other commandments publicly, even under threat to life. This approach differs from Rabbi Akiva’s opinion in Sanhedrin, which holds that one must give up one's life rather than transgress the three cardinal sins: idolatry, murder, and forbidden sexual relations.

Elisha Ben Avuyah was one of the greatest Sages with the potential to being a historic legend of Jewish history on par with Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues. But he went awry. He became a heretic and a sinner and abandoned Torah. Why did he go awry? That question is hotly debated among the Sages. […]

Beginning with a new mishnah that opens on the bottom of daf 19: One may not make jewelry for an object of idolatry -- but you can be hired to do such things, as an artist. Also, note that Jews may not sell that which is attached to the ground to non-Jews. The Gemara will investigate the source of this prohibition - lo techanem - don't do them any mercy - which demands a great deal of investigation, and several possible meanings. But the meaning of the text and the term itself don't quite line up nicely enough - which gives the Gemara more fodder to interpret. Also, a story in the context of this injunction: about Turnus Rufus and Rabbi Akiva, during the Hadrianic Persecutions. The story includes praising the beauty of a woman who worshipped idols, so isn't that an example of a violation of the prohibition - except that we also appreciate the beauty God brings into the world. But men aren't supposed to be gazing on women and contacting on them, regardless of whether they are beautiful.

For a 10% discount on Rabbi David Ashear's new book LIVING EMUNAH VOL 8 click the link below https://www.artscroll.com/ Books/9781422644645.html People sometimes see others giving millions to tzedakah and wonder why they don't have the same zechut to give such large amounts. Others see children with exceptional middot and ask themselves, "Why do they have such great children, while ours are so difficult?" Some struggle to grasp even the basics of Torah learning, while others seem to understand the most complex sugyot effortlessly. It's natural to wonder why Hashem didn't give everyone equal opportunity, especially when the purpose of this world is to serve Him. In Parashat Chukat, we read how the Jewish people complained when they had no water. The pasuk says: " וירב העם עם משה ויאמרו לאמר ולו גוענו בגוע אחינו לפני ה '" They quarreled with Moshe and said they wished they had died like the rest of the people in the desert. They asked why he brought them out of Egypt just to die in a wasteland. This happened almost 40 years after they left Egypt—this was the new generation that was supposed to enter Eretz Yisrael—and yet they were speaking just like their parents had. Moshe could have thought that everything he had done over the past 40 years was for nothing. He had worked so hard to prepare this nation to be Am Hashem and build the Beit HaMikdash, and now it seemed like nothing had changed. But as Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch explains, a person is not judged by results—because results are in Hashem's hands. A person's greatness is measured by effort and pure intentions. We don't know Hashem's calculations. We don't know why things turn out one way for one person and another way for someone else. But we do know we are sent here with a mission—to act the way Hashem wants us to act, regardless of the outcome. Some people appear to succeed in life with very little effort, while others see little success despite their hardest work. A person who has a brilliant mind and understands the Gemara instantly, yet doesn't review or put in much effort, receives little reward for that understanding—it was a gift from Hashem. On the other hand, someone who works tirelessly to understand even a little, even if he never reaches the same level, will be rewarded far more for his toil. Parents who are blessed with children who naturally have strong middot and a love for Torah, yet do little to raise them that way, will not receive nearly the same reward as parents who devote hours upon hours to raising children with learning disabilities or challenging personalities—even if those children struggle. Hashem rewards effort , not results. A person struggling to make ends meet might earn more reward for a small donation than a wealthy person who gives large amounts easily. It's all relative. What matters is how hard it was to give, not how much was given. A rebbe who teaches day after day and sees no apparent nachat from his students is not a failure. Results are not in his hands. Effort is. Hashem pays us for our hishtadlut —our effort—not our outcome. Imagine if Rabbi Akiva had given up after losing his 24,000 students. The world would have missed some of the greatest sages who ever lived. But he didn't give up. He started again. He knew that his mission came from Hashem, and that the results were not the measure of his success. The Gemara tells us that after 120 years, a person will be asked: " עסקת בפריה ורביה ?" —Were you involved in trying to build a family? It doesn't say, "Did you succeed?" because that part is not up to us. We are also asked, " קבעת עתים לתורה ?" —Did you set times to learn? Not, "Did you master Torah?" Everyone truly does have equal opportunity—because everyone is judged by their effort, not their results. And effort is something that each of us can choose to give, every single day.

On sin and the purpose of sin! God allows sin to happen so that future sinners can repent. Consider the story of King David with Batsheva, with the implication that David wouldn't have done the sin were it not for his later repentance. Comparably, the sin of the Golden Calf. When an individual sin, we encourage reflection, repentance, and atonement. A group sin is a little more complicated, but the same principle stands. Plus, the differences between humans and angels, including, or especially, progeny. Plus, the harsh punishments for sin (for example, Rabbi Akiva). Also, a return to halakhah, with the question of why 3 days of not selling to non-Jews before their holidays (why not more or less)?

A powerful lesson from Rabbi Akiva on how to channel the grief of exile to achieve redemption.

What happens to a loan on collateral if the collateral is lost? A discussion that leads into an application of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Eliezer to Shmuel's position - which seems counter-historical in terms of how the Gemara is put together. Also, does the shemitah year cancel the debt that is loaned on collateral? Perhaps that depends on whether it's symbolic or covering the loan.

Rabbi Meir is one of the most significant personalities in Jewish history. He was one of the five surviving students of Rabbi Akiva, and the one whose notes were used as the basis for the Mishnah. In this seminal teaching, he guides us on how to harmonize Torah study and making a livelihood and informs […]

We discuss the calling of the Disciples, and the shepherding motif in scripture.  Warning: In a wondrous display of ineptitude I have misspoken and attributed a story of Rabbi Eliezer to Rabbi Akiva.  A Rookie mistake and I apologize.  Here are some links  to the story of the Rabbis and the miracles associated with the debate over the oven of akhani.  https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/144163?lang=bi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Oven_of_Akhnai, https://sites.hofstra.edu/daniel-greenwood/the-oven-of-akhnai/, https://www.chabad.org/torah-texts/5455793/The-Talmud/Bava-Metzia/Chapter-4/59b

Facing adversity often feels like a daunting challenge, but what if these struggles are actually stepping stones to profound spiritual growth? On this episode of the Thinking Talmudist podcast, we examine the teachings of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai and Rabbi Akiva, who illuminate the spiritual gifts attainable through perseverance. Rabbi Akiva's inspiring journey, beginning his Torah study at age 40 and overcoming immense hurdles, reminds us that resilience can lead to understanding and influence that transcend time. By embracing these "afflictions of love," we prepare ourselves for greater achievements and deeper connections with our spiritual heritage.Words hold immense power, shaping reality and relationships in ways we often overlook. We explore how maintaining integrity in our speech, even in the face of social discomfort, is vital for personal and communal growth. Through stories of resilience, like the collective spirit post-September 11th, we highlight how shared struggles can unite and transform communities, urging us to cultivate unity and kindness. Like the process of creating olive oil, where pressure brings forth purity, adversity can reveal our best qualities and foster an indomitable spirit within individuals and communities alike.Parenting holds the delicate power to shape a child's future through affirmation and encouragement. Drawing on Talmudic wisdom and the example of the High Priest, Aharon HaKohen, we discuss the necessity of bending the truth at times for the sake of peace and harmony. Positive reinforcement from parents can set the stage for a child's confidence and success, and we stress how expressing belief in their potential can nurture their greatness. Whether it's encouraging a child or fostering harmony among people, these affirmations are the foundation of nurturing confident, capable individuals who carry forward the legacy of resilience and integrity._____________The Thinking Talmudist Podcast shares select teachings of Talmud in a fresh, insightful and meaningful way. Many claim that they cannot learn Talmud because it is in ancient Aramaic or the concepts are too difficult. Well, no more excuses. In this podcast you will experience the refreshing and eye-opening teachings while gaining an amazing appreciation for the divine wisdom of the Torah and the depths of the Talmud.This Podcast Series is Generously Underwritten by David & Susan MarbinRecorded at TORCH Meyerland in the Levin Family Studios to a live audience on May 16, 2025, in Houston, Texas.Released as Podcast on June 6, 2025_____________DONATE to TORCH: Please consider supporting the podcasts by making a donation to help fund our Jewish outreach and educational efforts at https://www.torchweb.org/support.php. Thank you!_____________SUBSCRIBE and LISTEN to other podcasts by Rabbi Aryeh Wolbe: NEW!! Prayer Podcast: https://prayerpodcast.transistor.fm/episodesJewish Inspiration Podcast: https://inspiration.transistor.fm/episodesParsha Review Podcast: https://parsha.transistor.fm/episodesLiving Jewishly Podcast: https://jewishly.transistor.fm/episodesThinking Talmudist Podcast: https://talmud.transistor.fm/episodesUnboxing Judaism Podcast: https://unboxing.transistor.fm/episodesRabbi Aryeh Wolbe Podcast Collection: https://collection.transistor.fm/episodesFor a full listing of podcasts available by TORCH at https://www.TORCHpodcasts.com_____________EMAIL your questions, comments, and feedback: awolbe@torchweb.org_____________Please visit www.torchweb.org to see a full listing of our outreach and educational resources available in the Greater Houston area!_____________#Talmud, #Berachos, #Talmudic, #Affliction, #SpiritualGrowth, #LandofIsrael, #WorldtoCome, #Resilience, #Perseverance ★ Support this podcast ★

Facing adversity often feels like a daunting challenge, but what if these struggles are actually stepping stones to profound spiritual growth? On this episode of the Thinking Talmudist podcast, we examine the teachings of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai and Rabbi Akiva, who illuminate the spiritual gifts attainable through perseverance. Rabbi Akiva's inspiring journey, beginning his Torah study at age 40 and overcoming immense hurdles, reminds us that resilience can lead to understanding and influence that transcend time. By embracing these "afflictions of love," we prepare ourselves for greater achievements and deeper connections with our spiritual heritage.Words hold immense power, shaping reality and relationships in ways we often overlook. We explore how maintaining integrity in our speech, even in the face of social discomfort, is vital for personal and communal growth. Through stories of resilience, like the collective spirit post-September 11th, we highlight how shared struggles can unite and transform communities, urging us to cultivate unity and kindness. Like the process of creating olive oil, where pressure brings forth purity, adversity can reveal our best qualities and foster an indomitable spirit within individuals and communities alike.Parenting holds the delicate power to shape a child's future through affirmation and encouragement. Drawing on Talmudic wisdom and the example of the High Priest, Aharon HaKohen, we discuss the necessity of bending the truth at times for the sake of peace and harmony. Positive reinforcement from parents can set the stage for a child's confidence and success, and we stress how expressing belief in their potential can nurture their greatness. Whether it's encouraging a child or fostering harmony among people, these affirmations are the foundation of nurturing confident, capable individuals who carry forward the legacy of resilience and integrity._____________The Thinking Talmudist Podcast shares select teachings of Talmud in a fresh, insightful and meaningful way. Many claim that they cannot learn Talmud because it is in ancient Aramaic or the concepts are too difficult. Well, no more excuses. In this podcast you will experience the refreshing and eye-opening teachings while gaining an amazing appreciation for the divine wisdom of the Torah and the depths of the Talmud.This Podcast Series is Generously Underwritten by David & Susan MarbinRecorded at TORCH Meyerland in the Levin Family Studios to a live audience on May 16, 2025, in Houston, Texas.Released as Podcast on June 6, 2025_____________DONATE to TORCH: Please consider supporting the podcasts by making a donation to help fund our Jewish outreach and educational efforts at https://www.torchweb.org/support.php. Thank you!_____________SUBSCRIBE and LISTEN to other podcasts by Rabbi Aryeh Wolbe: NEW!! Prayer Podcast: https://prayerpodcast.transistor.fm/episodesJewish Inspiration Podcast: https://inspiration.transistor.fm/episodesParsha Review Podcast: https://parsha.transistor.fm/episodesLiving Jewishly Podcast: https://jewishly.transistor.fm/episodesThinking Talmudist Podcast: https://talmud.transistor.fm/episodesUnboxing Judaism Podcast: https://unboxing.transistor.fm/episodesRabbi Aryeh Wolbe Podcast Collection: https://collection.transistor.fm/episodesFor a full listing of podcasts available by TORCH at https://www.TORCHpodcasts.com_____________EMAIL your questions, comments, and feedback: awolbe@torchweb.org_____________Please visit www.torchweb.org to see a full listing of our outreach and educational resources available in the Greater Houston area!_____________#Talmud, #Berachos, #Talmudic, #Affliction, #SpiritualGrowth, #LandofIsrael, #WorldtoCome, #Resilience, #Perseverance ★ Support this podcast ★

Today's daf is sponsored by Tali Oberman in honor of her grandmother, Miriam Sklar, who has reached the incredible milestone of 90. A braita has a more expanded version of the debate between  Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva about whether or not the oath of expression for which one is obligated to bring a sliding-scale offering includes oaths regarding events that already happened (about the past). Each uses a different exegetical principle in reaching his conclusion, based on the method adopted by their teachers, Rabbi Nechunia Ish haKane, klal and prat (Rabbi Yishmael), and Nachum Ish Gamzu, ribui and miyut (Rabbi Akiva). An oath of expression is only brought if the person is shogeg, unwitting, when they forgot their oath, but not if they did it on purpose or if it was totally beyond their control. The Gemara brings an example of an oath that would be beyond one's control. A braita extrapolates from the verse that an oath of expression is only brought by one who forgot the oath but not the object. Is it possible to find a case of remembering that oath, but forgetting the object? Rava asks Rav Nachman what would be the case if one forgot both the oath and the object. This question is left unanswered as one can make an argument both to obligate and to exempt. Rava asks Rav Nachman what would be a case of shogeg for an oath of expression about the past? Rav Nachman answers that one who remembers the oath, but does not know that one is obligated to bring a sacrifice. This seems initially to match only Munbaz's approach in Shabbat 68b that one can be obligated to bring a sacrifice if one knew it was Shabbat and that the action was forbidden, but did not know that one is obligated to bring a sacrifice. But, then the Gemara explains that even the rabbis would agree by oaths as it is a unique halakha, as usually one is only obligated in oath for a prohibition punishable by karet. Shmuel rules that one is only obligated for an oath of expression that is expressed in words, not one that is in one's heart. Two sources are brought to raise a difficulty on Shmuel's position, but are resolved.

Today's daf is sponsored by Tali Oberman in honor of her grandmother, Miriam Sklar, who has reached the incredible milestone of 90. A braita has a more expanded version of the debate between  Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva about whether or not the oath of expression for which one is obligated to bring a sliding-scale offering includes oaths regarding events that already happened (about the past). Each uses a different exegetical principle in reaching his conclusion, based on the method adopted by their teachers, Rabbi Nechunia Ish haKane, klal and prat (Rabbi Yishmael), and Nachum Ish Gamzu, ribui and miyut (Rabbi Akiva). An oath of expression is only brought if the person is shogeg, unwitting, when they forgot their oath, but not if they did it on purpose or if it was totally beyond their control. The Gemara brings an example of an oath that would be beyond one's control. A braita extrapolates from the verse that an oath of expression is only brought by one who forgot the oath but not the object. Is it possible to find a case of remembering that oath, but forgetting the object? Rava asks Rav Nachman what would be the case if one forgot both the oath and the object. This question is left unanswered as one can make an argument both to obligate and to exempt. Rava asks Rav Nachman what would be a case of shogeg for an oath of expression about the past? Rav Nachman answers that one who remembers the oath, but does not know that one is obligated to bring a sacrifice. This seems initially to match only Munbaz's approach in Shabbat 68b that one can be obligated to bring a sacrifice if one knew it was Shabbat and that the action was forbidden, but did not know that one is obligated to bring a sacrifice. But, then the Gemara explains that even the rabbis would agree by oaths as it is a unique halakha, as usually one is only obligated in oath for a prohibition punishable by karet. Shmuel rules that one is only obligated for an oath of expression that is expressed in words, not one that is in one's heart. Two sources are brought to raise a difficulty on Shmuel's position, but are resolved.

A new mishnah! Taking a false oath about the past, or an oath about the future, which is not upheld, which turns it into a false oath, about tangible or intangible matters, means a sliding scale offering. Likewise, if it pertains to other people. Plus, the stringencies of oaths (shevuot) vs. vows (nedarim), with regard to each other. Also, if a person swears about another party - falsely - either that person needs to bring the sacrifice or not - a large debate. Oaths also seem to pertain to matters that are either good or bad - and a textual inference is necessary to present them as not necessarily being harmful or beneficial. Rabbi Akiva vs. Rabbi Yishmael, and Rav vs. Shmuel -- which is not the same dispute, though we might have thought they were. Plus, the formulation with regard to oaths to make them oaths.

Today's daf is sponsored by Rabbi Art Gould in gratitude for the love and support of the Hadran Family during his latest medical misadventures. Rabbi Akiva and the rabbis had a back-and-forth discussion in the Mishna each supporting their own position. The rabbis claimed that there is no other place in the Torah where one who eats any amount is liable. The Gemara raises several instances where one is liable for eating any amount but then explains why these are expectations to the rule. Rabbi Akiva answered that there is no other place where one speaks and is liable to bring a sacrifice. The Gemara suggests a few cases where that would be the case and also then explains why they are not the same as what Rabbi Akiva was referring to. Rava limits their debate to cases where one did not specify that "I will not each any amount" or where one said, "I will not taste." Rav Pappa limited the case to oaths, not to konamot. A difficulty is raised on Rav Pappa's assertion from a braita where it is clear there is a requisite amount for konamot. There are two resolutions. One is to explain the case of konamot in the braita where one used the language of eating. Ravina offers an alternative answer and differentiates between the obligation of lashes (no requisite amount) and the obligation to bring a meila sacrifice (requisite amount at a value of a pruta). However, not all agree that there is a prohibition of meila by konamot. If so, how can the braita be explained according to Ravina? Rava raises two dilemmas about the requisite amounts required for oaths in particular situations where the item discussed is not edible or not generally eaten on its own. They are both left unanswered. Rav Ashi raises a dilemma about a nazir who takes an oath to forbid grape pits. Is the oath invalid as it is already forbidden, or since the nazir can't eat an olive-bulk of grape pits, perhaps the oath is forbidding any amount? The Gemara quotes the upcoming Mishna regarding one who took an oath not to eat and then ate non-kosher meat. Based on the amoraim's interpretation of the Mishna, they conclude that the oath would not be valid, as an unspecified oath would be forbidden only at an olive-bulk, and that is already forbidden to the nazir by Torah law. 

Study Guide Shevuot 19 Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva disagree about how to extrapolate the verse in Vayikra 5:2. Chizkiya explains the difference of opinion between them, while Rabbi Yochanan and Rav Sheshet hold that they do not disagree, rather each exempts one who forgot the Temple or sacrificial items from bringing a sacrifice, but extrapolates it from different words in the verse. Rava asks Rav Nachman: if forgetting the Temple or sacrificial items does not obligate one to bring a sacrifice, what if one forgot both the Temple and that one was impure? Rav Nachman answers that since the person also forgot they were impure, of course there is an obligation to bring a sacrifice. But Rava retorts that perhaps since one who forgets the Temple is exempt, this person would be exempt as well. Rav Ashi suggests an answer to this deliberation, but Ravina rejects it. A case is brought of one who walked on two paths - one pure and one impure and went into the Temple. Two variations are brought and there is a debate about the halakha in each case. There are three different opinions regarding these three cases. What is the root of their debate? The issues raised here relate to what type of previous knowledge of impurity is necessary to obligate one for a sacrifice. Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish each offer different interpretations for the first opinion in the cases of the two paths. Their opinions here contradict their opinions in a different place. How are these contradictions reconciled?

The Gemara discusses a case where a man had relations with his wife and she became a nidda during the act. Abaye and Rava each quote different rabbis stating that in such a case, the man could incur an obligation of two sacrifices. Rava then explains the specific circumstances that would warrant this double punishment. The man is a Torah scholar who engages in relations with his wife when she is about to menstruate. When she informs him in the middle of the act that she has begun menstruating, he withdraws immediately. He is considered shogeg (unintentional transgressor) regarding entering the woman's body, as he incorrectly assumed he would be able to complete relations before she began menstruating. He is also considered shogeg regarding his immediate withdrawal from her body, as he, despite being a Torah scholar, was unaware of the halakha requiring him to wait until he is no longer erect before withdrawing. Rava explains that the obligation to bring a sacrifice for each of these acts can be found in tannaitic sources. The rule about withdrawing appears in our Mishna, while the rule about entering appears in a Mishna in Nidda 14a. Rav Ada bar Matna debates with Rava whether the Mishna in Nidda actually refers to the case under discussion. Rav Ada suggests that it instead refers to withdrawal. Rava and Abaye disagree about why a man who withdraws while not erect is exempt from bringing a sacrifice. Rava maintains that intercourse without an erection is not considered a true act of intercourse. Abaye, however, argues that the exemption exists because a situation where his wife begins menstruating during intercourse is considered beyond the person's control (ones). Where can one find in the Torah a source for both a negative commandment (prohibition) and a positive commandment regarding a man's obligation to withdraw when not erect and to not withdraw when erect in the situation described above? Additionally, what is the source for the rabbinic prohibition against engaging in relations when a woman expects to begin her menstrual period soon? Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva disagree in the Mishna, though the precise point of their disagreement is unclear. Chizkia clarifies the subject of their debate.

Rabbi Jacobson will discuss the following topics:What is the connection between this Omer period, Lag B'Omer and the weekly Torah portion? Revealing the hidden and deeper good even in negative experiences What is the central theme of this week's Torah chapter? Is Judaism rigid or flexible? Static or dynamic? What personal and global lessons does it offer us for our times? Why are some blessings so great that they have to be hidden within curses?   Is it appropriate to get an aliya when they read the tochacho? Why did the Mitteler Rebbe not learn from the Alter Rebbe's previous readings that the curses are actually blessings? Can we say that the only reason we are still in golus is due to the pleasure Hashem gets from our effort to overcome the darkness and the challenges it presents? What is the difference between Lag B'Omer and Yud Tes Kislev? Should Israel be relying on America for protection? What can we learn from Rashbi's criticizing the Roman government? Why does Lag B'omer, the Mattan Torah of the Inner Torah, precede Shavuos? Is the Zohar the source of Chassidus? Why did Rabbi Akiva's students stop dying? Why are we allowed to sing during the days of Sefirah? What is the difference between sefiros and partzufim? What is the personal application of Yesod?  Is this week a good time to receive blessings to conceive healthy children?Can you share a few stories about his relationship with the Rebbe? 

The Lag BaOmer Perspective: Fire From Within Lag BaOmer begins in darkness—the plague that claimed Rabbi Akiva's students and Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai's years in hiding—but ends in brilliance. We light bonfires not merely for celebration, but to honor the inner blaze that emerges when faith refuses to dim. Rabbi Akiva's humility sparked a fire that could break stone, and Rabbi Shimon's unwavering commitment transformed exile into revelation. This episode explores how true light is forged in silence and struggle, and how each of us can carry that flame into the world. In honor of Eretz Yisroel. May G-d protect our brave soldiers and return all the hostages in Gaza immediately. Dedicated in loving memory of Edward Ben Efraim, Shlomo Ben Edward, and Yirachmiel Daniel Ben Gedalia. For the Refuah Shlema of Pennina Bas Shoshanna Miriam and all who need healing. Listen now at ParshaPerspective.com

In the classic song of Bar Yochai there is a line which translates to "when Hashem thought to make Man, he envisioned you (Rebbi Shimon)"—what was it about Rebbi Shimon Bar Yochai which made him worthy of such a compliment?

Rabbi Jacobson will discuss the following topics:What lessons can we learn from 13 Iyar, the 73rd yahrzeit of Reb Yisroel Aryeh Leib a”h  What does his name and life teach us? What did the Rebbe say after he stood up from shiva for his brother in 1952? How do we deal with setbacks and difficulties? How do we personalize this day? Is there a connection between the 13 and 14th of Iyar? Why do we celebrate on the day Rashbi passed away? What is the connection between Rashbi and joy? What do we learn from Rashbi and Lag B'omer? What impact does the inner dimension of Torah have on our lives? What is the significance of counting the Omer? How do we apply to our lives the fact that the Omer counting begins after the barley offering? What different meanings are there in the word sefira? Why do we refine our emotions during these days? Why not focus on cognitive emotions? After counting the Omer why do we recite psalm 67 about the conductor of songs? Why do we not make a blessing after we missed one day of counting? Do we get a special reward for counting all 49 days? Why do we not schedule weddings and listen to music during the days of the Omer? Why does Chabad (and others) resume the customs of mourning after Lag B'Omer? How is it possible that Rabbi Akiva's students did not show respect to each other? Why did Rabbi Akiva not stop their behavior? What lessons can we learn from this in dealing with conflicts today?Why is there a custom to study the tractate of Sotah during these days? What is the meaning of “l'hazhir ha'gdolim al ha'ktanim”? What relevance does the service of the priests have to most of us who are not kohanim? Why can a Kohen with physical deformities not serve in the temple?

This week's learning is sponsored by Audrey Mondrow in loving memory of Bessie “Nanny” Mauskopf, Basha Leah bat Tzivia Chaya and Meyer Yehuda. "A very special mother. By example she taught me how to be a mother and grandmother. We miss her dearly. May her Neshama have an Aliyah." The Mishna in Negaim is similar to the Mishna in Shevuot regarding the two shades of white that are considered leprous in the Torah and the two that the Rabbis added, and elaborates a little more. The Gemara explains that the Mishna there doesn't match Rabbi Akiva's opinion as the Mishna connects between avot, main categories and toladot, sub-categories and Rabbi Akiva connects between the order of the shades of white, which would mean one main category, baheret, then the next main category, se’et, and then each of their sub-categories – first the one for baheret, then the one for se’et. From where do we know that this is Rabbi Akiva's position? The first attempt to find the source is unsuccessful but it is proven from a second source.  From where do we derive that baheret also has sub-categories if the word in the verse mentioning sub-categories, sapachat, is said in connection with se'et?  From where is it derived that the verses that obligate one to bring a sliding scale sin offering if one is impure refer to one who entered the Temple or ate sacrificial items? 

Today's daf is sponsored by Gabrielle Altman in honor of her husband, Daniel Altman, on his fourth completion of the Daf Yomi cycle. "May he continue teaching the Daf and inspiring people to learn the Daf for decades to come, in good health." When Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi wrote in the Mishna "Shevuot there are two that are four," was it his own opinion also or was he just quoting Rabbi Akiva's opinion but he actually doesn't hold that way? At first, they tried to prove it was Rebbi's own opinion, but this option failed and they adopted the other explanation. Rebbi holds that "v'neelam" means he knew and then forgot - does that word necessarily translate in that manner? By a woman who is a sotah, that word is mentioned and it doesn't mean that.   The Mishna states "Taking things out on Shabbat there are two that are four" - this is different from the Mishna in Shabbat which lists two that are four inside and two that are four outside. What are the mishnayot in each place referring to and why are they referring to different things?  The Mishna states "Leprous marks two that are four" - does the Mishna not accord with Rabbi Akiva's position? 

A relationship can be based upon many different things but if you want it to endure there is one thing which reigns supreme.

Today's daf is sponsored by Dianne Kuchar in loving memory of her husband Dennis, Shimon Avraham, on his 3rd yahrzeit. "We all miss him." Today's daf is sponsored by Raquel Pilzer & Jennifer Lankin in loving memory of their beloved brother, Avigdor Chai Avraham on his 4th yahrzeit. "You are always on our minds and in our hearts." And also for the constant strength & safety of Raquel's husband Zevi in his current round of miluim." Today's daf is sponsored by Sara Berelowitz in honor of her newest grandchild, Levi, son of Chava and Meyer Sterman. The Gemara establishes the Mishna according to Rabbi Yishmael by explaining the case of oaths in the Mishna to refer to one who transgresses intentionally and is to receive lashes, not a sacrifice. This raises a difficulty with Rabbi Yochanan who holds like an unattributed Mishna but does not hold by this Mishna, as there is a case where no action is performed and Rabbi Yochanan holds there are no lashes in that case. To resolve the difficulty, they bring a different Mishna that Rabbi Yochanan holds by instead. Why would Rabbi Yochanan choose one and not the other? Why would Rebbi bring two different contradictory Mishnayot? After resolving all the issues, the Gemara raises a further issue. How can the Mishna be referring to lashes as leprosy and Shabbat as they are not punishable by lashes? There is a case of leprosy where one receives lashes and for Shabbat there are lashes if one is warned regarding lashes as Rabbi Yishmael holds that a negative commandment that is punishable by death can also be punishable by lashes. This explains why from the start the Mishna was explained according to Rabbi Yishmael. However, the Gemara questions this last point as the Mishna clearly doesn't accord with Rabbi Akiva for other reasons as he does not include one who forgets about the Temple and sacrificial items. This question can be resolved in the same way as we read the Mishna according to Rabbi Yishmael, with lashes instead of a sacrifice. After resolving the previous issues, more difficulties are raised with explaining the Mishna to be referring to lashes, as in the case of impurity, it is clear from the wording in the Mishna that the issue is one who sinned unwittingly and is obligated to bring a sacrifice. Therefore Rav Kahana (on the basis of Rav Yosef, but with a modification) explains that the Mishna accords with Rebbi who holds like Rabbi Yishmael in the case of impurity and Rabbi Akiva in the case of oaths. How can Rav Kahana be sure that Rebbi holds like Rabbi Yishmael in impurity and Rabbi Akiva in oaths. The Gemara provides sources for each one.  

This month's learning is sponsored by Bracha Rutner in loving memory of Anna Rutner. "She was a woman who was always curious about life. She came to the US in 1958 and learned English and made an incredible life for herself raising four children and seventeen grandchildren. She will always live on in our hearts and in the number of great-grandchildren named after her."  The Gemara begins with three structural questions regarding the Mishna. Why is Shevuot written right after Makkot? Why did the Mishna list all four cases that have two cases learned from the Torah and two from the rabbis, when in the context of Masechet Shabbat and Masechet Negaim (laws of leprosy), only the relevant case for the masechet is mentioned? Why did the Mishna begin with Shevuot, but when elaborating on the details, the case of impurity came first, and only after that does the Mishna move back to elaborate on laws of oaths? The Gemara explains in each of the four categories, what two cases appear in the Torah and what two are from rabbinic law. Does the Mishna follow Rabbi Yishmael or Rabbi Akiva? At first glance, it doesn't seem to follow either opinion as in oaths, Rabbi Yishmael holds one does not bring a sacrifice on oaths relating to past actions, and Rabbi Akiva holds that one does not bring a sacrifice if one forgot that the Temple was in that place or that the item was a sacrificial item. The first answer given is that each could fit with the Mishna if we adopt a different understanding of the Mishna. One could explain that the Mishna brings a list of two cases that are four, but not all obligate one in a sacrifice. This explanation is rejected since the Mishna also lists four cases for leprous marks and one is obligated to bring a sacrifice upon becoming purified from all four cases, and the assumption is that all four cases in the Mishna are similar in that way. The second answer given is that the Mishna follows Rabbi Yishmael and the Mishna refers to the obligation to receive lashes for an oath of expression that one did not keep intentionally, not a sacrifice for not keeping the oath because one forgot. This accords with Rava's position that one can derive from the verse about false oaths that one receives lashes for an oath of expression about something that happened in the past. To make this explanation fit with the Mishna, Rabbi Yishmael would need to hold that one receives lashes for a negative prohibition that to transgress it, one does not do an action, as the oath, "I will not eat," and one does not eat, does not involve an action on the part of the one who does not fulfill the oath. This raises a difficulty as Rabbi Yochanan holds like all unattributed Mishnayot, such as ours and he also holds that one does not receive lashes if no action is performed. To resolve this difficulty, the Gemara explains that Rabbi Yochanan holds by a different unattributed Mishna and they quote a Mishna in Makkot regarding notar, leftover meat from the Pesach sacrifice. However, this suggestion is rejected, as that Mishna can be understood following Rabbi Yehuda's explanation that it is a negative prohibition that has a positive way to fix it, lav hanitak l'asei, for which one is exempt from lashes.   

Today's Talmud page, Makkot 24, brings our tractate to a close. Rabbi Dovid Bashevkin joins us to sum up what we've learned, and explain Judaism's wonderful attitude to punishment and reward. Why did Rabbi Akiva laugh when he saw Jerusalem destroyed? Listen and find out.

For the text of the Hadran ceremony, click here. For more information about What is a Siyum, click here While there are 613 mitzvot in the Torah, King David and some of the prophets narrowed it down to a smaller list of the most basic mitzvot. Why were these specific ones chosen, most of them relating to justice and righteousness and involving relations between people? The masechet ends with the famous story of Rabbi Akiva laughing when seeing a fox running out of the kodesh kodashim or hearing the Romans on their way to attack, after the Temple was already destroyed, while his friends were crying. When questioned about his reaction, he explains, based on verses, that in order for the positive prophecy of Zecharia to be fulfilled, first the negative prophesy of Uriah needs to be fulfilled.