Podcasts about rabbi yossi

Everyone agrees that if the date of an IOU is the date of a Shabbat or Yom Kippur, the given assumption is that the document was post-dated, with some occasions that - despite this apparent exceptions that are the subject of a dispute between Rabbi Yehudah and Rabbi Yossi. Also, other cases of bills being dated to some future date, after the funds for that bill becoming available -- presumably for financial flexibility.

Send us a textToras Hagalus

Rabbi Yossi Birman de Jabad Palermo  Palabras de Sabiduría Kinus HaShluchim Chabad Lubavitch Dec 1, 2024 New Jersey, US --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/leandrotaub/support

Stay updated via WhatsApp: https://chat.whatsapp.com/LcLgVe52sIw4yyUW3RG1wZFind out about our programmes, journals, and books: www.TheHabura.comWe are an online and global Bet Midrash with international students, striving to know God by embracing the world through the lens of Torah. Web: www.TheHabura.com Instagram: @TheHabura Facebook: The Habura A project of the Senior Rabbi's Office (www.seniorrabbi.com), S&P Sephardi Community of the UK, Montefiore Endowment, and Dangoor Education.#torah #talmud #yeshiva #betmidrash #sephardi #sepharadi #sephardic #sefardi #sefardic #rambam Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A contradiction was brought from a braita against the Mishna regarding returning reciprocal gifts for a wedding (shushbinim). There were three resolutions. The third established the case of the Mishna of one when the groom died and left a yabam, a brother to perform levirate marriage. When the gifts are given to the yabam, he must share them with his brothers. To raise a difficulty against this answer they compare the case to one where the groom dies after betrothal and before the marriage. Just as in that case, the money from the betrothal does not have to be returned as the woman can claim that it is not her fault that they are not getting married, likewise with the shushbinim, the family that first received gifts can claim that there is no need for them to send gifts if the groom is no longer alive since they did not rejoice with him at the wedding. However, Rav Yosef explains that the cases aren't comparable as the case with the yabam was one where the other family did join the brother's wedding before he died and rejoiced with him, but did not yet bring the gifts. The Gemara attempts to establish that the opinion mentioned previously, that a woman does not have to return the money of the betrothal if the husband died as she can claim it was not her fault they never got married, is a subject of a tannaitic debate. However, this suggestion is rejected and the tannaitic debate is explained to be regarding a case where the woman, not the man, died and the debate is whether or not betrothal money was meant to be given and kept even if the marriage never happened. If one holds that it was not intended to be kept even if the marriage never happened, the woman's heirs would need to return the money if that was the custom in the place where they lived. That issue was not only a debate between Rabbi Natan and Rabbi Yehuda haNasi in the source quoted previously, but also can help explain a debate in a different braita between Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yossi. In the time of the amoraim, there were different opinions about whether the betrothal money would be returned or whether other gifts given from the groom to the bride were to be returned. The five unique laws that govern the shushbinot gifts. The court can enforce its collection. It is returned only when the one who gave first gets married. There is no interest if the reciprocal gift is larger than the first. It is not canceled in the shmita year like other loans. And a firstborn would not collect a double portion if the father was owed shushbinot gifts for his sons. If one doesn't attend the wedding, one is still obligated to bring reciprocal gifts. However, if he was not invited to the wedding, while he still needs to pay, he can hold a grievance against the person. However, since he did not eat at the wedding, he can deduct the amount he would have eaten from his gift. How is the amount of the deduction calculated? A braita sets up various cases in which one is not obligated to return the shushbinot. In the context of that braita, they mention a public wedding (pumbi) and therefore another braita that mentions this word pumbi in a different context is brought. That braita quotes various drashot comparing one who is wealthy in different types of property to one who is wealthy in different types of Torah knowledge. What is the ideal? Rav and Rava deliberation about whether it is better to master Mishna or better to matter Talmud. They each derive their opinion from Proverbs 15:15. Other drashot are brought on that verse which relate to middot or other things that will make a person happy or will cause them to lead an unhappy life. Some of these sources view having a happy life as a good thing whereas others do not view it in a positive light.

A contradiction was brought from a braita against the Mishna regarding returning reciprocal gifts for a wedding (shushbinim). There were three resolutions. The third established the case of the Mishna of one when the groom died and left a yabam, a brother to perform levirate marriage. When the gifts are given to the yabam, he must share them with his brothers. To raise a difficulty against this answer they compare the case to one where the groom dies after betrothal and before the marriage. Just as in that case, the money from the betrothal does not have to be returned as the woman can claim that it is not her fault that they are not getting married, likewise with the shushbinim, the family that first received gifts can claim that there is no need for them to send gifts if the groom is no longer alive since they did not rejoice with him at the wedding. However, Rav Yosef explains that the cases aren't comparable as the case with the yabam was one where the other family did join the brother's wedding before he died and rejoiced with him, but did not yet bring the gifts. The Gemara attempts to establish that the opinion mentioned previously, that a woman does not have to return the money of the betrothal if the husband died as she can claim it was not her fault they never got married, is a subject of a tannaitic debate. However, this suggestion is rejected and the tannaitic debate is explained to be regarding a case where the woman, not the man, died and the debate is whether or not betrothal money was meant to be given and kept even if the marriage never happened. If one holds that it was not intended to be kept even if the marriage never happened, the woman's heirs would need to return the money if that was the custom in the place where they lived. That issue was not only a debate between Rabbi Natan and Rabbi Yehuda haNasi in the source quoted previously, but also can help explain a debate in a different braita between Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yossi. In the time of the amoraim, there were different opinions about whether the betrothal money would be returned or whether other gifts given from the groom to the bride were to be returned. The five unique laws that govern the shushbinot gifts. The court can enforce its collection. It is returned only when the one who gave first gets married. There is no interest if the reciprocal gift is larger than the first. It is not canceled in the shmita year like other loans. And a firstborn would not collect a double portion if the father was owed shushbinot gifts for his sons. If one doesn't attend the wedding, one is still obligated to bring reciprocal gifts. However, if he was not invited to the wedding, while he still needs to pay, he can hold a grievance against the person. However, since he did not eat at the wedding, he can deduct the amount he would have eaten from his gift. How is the amount of the deduction calculated? A braita sets up various cases in which one is not obligated to return the shushbinot. In the context of that braita, they mention a public wedding (pumbi) and therefore another braita that mentions this word pumbi in a different context is brought. That braita quotes various drashot comparing one who is wealthy in different types of property to one who is wealthy in different types of Torah knowledge. What is the ideal? Rav and Rava deliberation about whether it is better to master Mishna or better to matter Talmud. They each derive their opinion from Proverbs 15:15. Other drashot are brought on that verse which relate to middot or other things that will make a person happy or will cause them to lead an unhappy life. Some of these sources view having a happy life as a good thing whereas others do not view it in a positive light.

What is the language in a document that makes it clear that the document itself only served to strengthen the commitment of the person on their deathbed, and was not meant as a document necessary for affected the transaction? What wording must be used to designate one's property to others in his lifetime when he is healthy? Rabbi Yehuda holds that one must write "From today and after my death." Rabbi Yossi does not require adding "From today." Once this is written, the property is considered to belong to the recipient, while the proceeds belong to the giver. Can either of them sell their rights to their share? Why does the language of "From today and after my death" work here, but it is not effective in a divorce document? Raba bar Avuha accepted Rabbi Yossi's opinion because the date on the document makes it clear that it is in effect from the date it was written, even without adding the words "from today." If an act of acquiring was performed from the giver to witnesses on behalf of the recipient, this would preclude the need for writing "from today," even according to Rabbi Yehuda. However, there is a debate about whether this applies across the board or is it dependent on the language used in the document. If the recipient sells their rights and then predeceases the giver, does the buyer acquire the property upon the giver's death or does it revert to the giver's heirs? Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish disagree on this based on a debate about whether one who acquires proceeds to an item (in this case the giver retains rights to the proceeds) is considered the main owner of the item. They debate this issue in another case as well. Why is there a need to mention their debate here if it could be inferred from the other case? To answer this question, the Gemara explains why one could have differentiated between the cases. Rabbi Yochanan raises a difficulty from a braita on Reish Lakish's position, but it is resolved. 

What is the language in a document that makes it clear that the document itself only served to strengthen the commitment of the person on their deathbed, and was not meant as a document necessary for affected the transaction? What wording must be used to designate one's property to others in his lifetime when he is healthy? Rabbi Yehuda holds that one must write "From today and after my death." Rabbi Yossi does not require adding "From today." Once this is written, the property is considered to belong to the recipient, while the proceeds belong to the giver. Can either of them sell their rights to their share? Why does the language of "From today and after my death" work here, but it is not effective in a divorce document? Raba bar Avuha accepted Rabbi Yossi's opinion because the date on the document makes it clear that it is in effect from the date it was written, even without adding the words "from today." If an act of acquiring was performed from the giver to witnesses on behalf of the recipient, this would preclude the need for writing "from today," even according to Rabbi Yehuda. However, there is a debate about whether this applies across the board or is it dependent on the language used in the document. If the recipient sells their rights and then predeceases the giver, does the buyer acquire the property upon the giver's death or does it revert to the giver's heirs? Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish disagree on this based on a debate about whether one who acquires proceeds to an item (in this case the giver retains rights to the proceeds) is considered the main owner of the item. They debate this issue in another case as well. Why is there a need to mention their debate here if it could be inferred from the other case? To answer this question, the Gemara explains why one could have differentiated between the cases. Rabbi Yochanan raises a difficulty from a braita on Reish Lakish's position, but it is resolved. 

If one wrote all of his possessions to his wife it assumed that the man intended only to appoint her as a steward and wrote it in that manner so that the recipients of the will would respect the executor. Would this be the case only if he wrote it on his deathbed or would it apply even if it was written when the husband was healthy? The answer to this question is brought from a braita relating to a case where the husband wrote to give his wife all of his property and on account of a debt of the husband, the property was collected from the wife, does she forfeit the right to collect her ketuba. Although there is a debate about this, it is clear that if he wrote to give her all of his property, she inherits it all and is not appointed to be a steward. First, the Gemara assumes that it is a case where the husband is not on his deathbed, as on his deathbed, she would be appointed to be a steward. However, this answer is rejected as the rule on one's deathbed has some exceptions, like a woman who was only betrothed or divorced. If the case was in one of those situations, then it could have been even if he was on his deathbed, thus leaving the original question unanswered. Rav Nachman ruled in the ketuba case above that the woman forfeits her right to collect the ketuba when she accepts all of the husband's property. A difficulty is raised from a braita, from a different case where Rav Nachman ruled that we assess one's intention and allow one's possessions to be returned, which we do not do by the woman regarding her ketuba. It was resolved by differentiating between the cases. A Mishna in Peah is quoted, as later Rava will ask if the ruling also applies only if it was done on a man's deathbed or even if he was healthy. If a husband writes all of his possessions to his son and gives his wife any size portion of land, she loses her right to her ketuba. Three amoraim suggest different explanations for this puzzling ruling - each suggesting that the woman indicated (although not explicitly) her acceptance of this arrangement. The Gemara quotes the continuation of the Mishna to raise a difficulty on the three opinions as Rabbi Yossi holds that even if the husband did not write a document to her granting her the land, but the woman accepts it she gives up her rights. This implies that the first tanna requires both a written document and the woman's explicit consent. There is no resolution to the difficulty against the three amoraim. Rav Nachman ruled that the woman forfeits her right to collect the ketuba in the case described above. He explained that the woman is willing to give up these rights as the husband made her his partner is dividing the property to the sons and this affords her honor on account of which she is willing to forfeit her right to her ketuba. Rava asked if this ruling applies also to a man who divided his property in this manner when he was healthy, or only on his deathbed. The Gemara explains the two sides of the question but leaves the question unresolved.

If one wrote all of his possessions to his wife it assumed that the man intended only to appoint her as a steward and wrote it in that manner so that the recipients of the will would respect the executor. Would this be the case only if he wrote it on his deathbed or would it apply even if it was written when the husband was healthy? The answer to this question is brought from a braita relating to a case where the husband wrote to give his wife all of his property and on account of a debt of the husband, the property was collected from the wife, does she forfeit the right to collect her ketuba. Although there is a debate about this, it is clear that if he wrote to give her all of his property, she inherits it all and is not appointed to be a steward. First, the Gemara assumes that it is a case where the husband is not on his deathbed, as on his deathbed, she would be appointed to be a steward. However, this answer is rejected as the rule on one's deathbed has some exceptions, like a woman who was only betrothed or divorced. If the case was in one of those situations, then it could have been even if he was on his deathbed, thus leaving the original question unanswered. Rav Nachman ruled in the ketuba case above that the woman forfeits her right to collect the ketuba when she accepts all of the husband's property. A difficulty is raised from a braita, from a different case where Rav Nachman ruled that we assess one's intention and allow one's possessions to be returned, which we do not do by the woman regarding her ketuba. It was resolved by differentiating between the cases. A Mishna in Peah is quoted, as later Rava will ask if the ruling also applies only if it was done on a man's deathbed or even if he was healthy. If a husband writes all of his possessions to his son and gives his wife any size portion of land, she loses her right to her ketuba. Three amoraim suggest different explanations for this puzzling ruling - each suggesting that the woman indicated (although not explicitly) her acceptance of this arrangement. The Gemara quotes the continuation of the Mishna to raise a difficulty on the three opinions as Rabbi Yossi holds that even if the husband did not write a document to her granting her the land, but the woman accepts it she gives up her rights. This implies that the first tanna requires both a written document and the woman's explicit consent. There is no resolution to the difficulty against the three amoraim. Rav Nachman ruled that the woman forfeits her right to collect the ketuba in the case described above. He explained that the woman is willing to give up these rights as the husband made her his partner is dividing the property to the sons and this affords her honor on account of which she is willing to forfeit her right to her ketuba. Rava asked if this ruling applies also to a man who divided his property in this manner when he was healthy, or only on his deathbed. The Gemara explains the two sides of the question but leaves the question unresolved.

The Mishna on RH 32a quotes a machlokes whether the final of the ten pesukim should be from Navi or Torah. In analyzing this machlokes, we discovered Rabbi Yossi's novel take on the role of these pesukim.

Send us a textBlack, Jewish and Proud: How Rabbi Yossi Kulek Promotes Inclusion To inquire about dedicating an episode - please email podcast@lubavitch.comDid you enjoy listening to this episode? Leave us a five-star review on the podcast platform and/or email us at Podcast@Lubavitch.com - we truly value your feedback!“I told my mother, ‘I'm ashamed. I'm ashamed to be Black. I look in the mirror and I ask G-d, “Why me? Why do I have to look this way? Why do I have to be Black?'” - Rabbi Yossi Kulek“I instilled in my children that if there's anyone that's ever had an issue with them, it's because they have a problem. You're not the problem.” - Rebbetzin Dalia KulekProduced by: Gary Waleik & Shneur Brook for Lubavitch International/Lubavitch.com - A Project of Machne IsraelAvailable on all major podcast platforms - and online at Lubavitch.com/podcastSupport the show

In this episode, Rabbi Yossi Katz delves into the fascinating life and works of Rav Nosson Nota Zuber, a Talmudic scholar who served as the rabbi of Roselle, NJ. Through a general exploration of Rav Zuber's responsa contained in Zichron Menachem, Rabbi Katz reveals the remarkable rulings and insights made by this less-well-known, yet exceedingly erudite 20th century rabbinic figure.  Rabbi Katz has compiled historical data about Rabbi Zuber and created the following wikipedia page: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Zuber 

This week's learning is sponsored by Joy Benatar in loving memory of Miriam Quint David on her 8th yahrzeit. "Proud mother and grandmother; passionate Jewish educator; pastry, ice cream and needlework enthusiast." Today's daf is sponsored by Batsheva Pava in loving memory of her father's family who arrived at Auschwitz only a few days before Shavuot. "His mother, Batsheva, and son, Moshe Meshel and daughter, Adle, were taken to the crematoria only hours after arrival. My grandmother was a big baalat tzedaka. My father used to say that if he did not hide his pants at night she would give them away to a poor person. Hashem yinkom damam." Today's daf is dedicated to Noa Argamani, Almog Meir Jan, Andrey Kozlov and Shlomi Ziv who were rescued from captivity, and in memory of Arnon Zemira who was killed in the rescue mission. We are thrilled at the return of the hostages, but, at the same time, we mourn the loss of Arnon and pray for the safe return of the remaining 120 hostages. The responsibility for putting up a mezuza is on the renter, and the renter cannot remove the mezuza when leaving, unless the house belongs to a gentile. Items that come into the courtyard of the landlord, such as dung of animals who come into the courtyard, belong to the landlord, even if someone is renting the house, as the standard house rental does not include the courtyard. This explanation of the Mishna can be used to support Rabbi Yossi son of Rabbi Chanina's statement that an item that enters one's courtyard is acquired by the owner, even without their knowledge. Three tannaitic sources are quoted to raise a difficulty with Rabbi Yossi's opinion.  If one rents for a year and the year becomes a leap year, is the rental of the extra month included in the original price or does the renter need to pay extra? According to the Mishna, this depends on whether the agreement was for months or a year. If the agreement mentions both months and years, the Mishna rules that the money of the leap year month is divided. Rav disagrees with this opinion and Shmuel and Rav Nachman offer opinions as well. 

This week's learning is sponsored by Joy Benatar in loving memory of Miriam Quint David on her 8th yahrzeit. "Proud mother and grandmother; passionate Jewish educator; pastry, ice cream and needlework enthusiast." Today's daf is sponsored by Batsheva Pava in loving memory of her father's family who arrived at Auschwitz only a few days before Shavuot. "His mother, Batsheva, and son, Moshe Meshel and daughter, Adle, were taken to the crematoria only hours after arrival. My grandmother was a big baalat tzedaka. My father used to say that if he did not hide his pants at night she would give them away to a poor person. Hashem yinkom damam." Today's daf is dedicated to Noa Argamani, Almog Meir Jan, Andrey Kozlov and Shlomi Ziv who were rescued from captivity, and in memory of Arnon Zemira who was killed in the rescue mission. We are thrilled at the return of the hostages, but, at the same time, we mourn the loss of Arnon and pray for the safe return of the remaining 120 hostages. The responsibility for putting up a mezuza is on the renter, and the renter cannot remove the mezuza when leaving, unless the house belongs to a gentile. Items that come into the courtyard of the landlord, such as dung of animals who come into the courtyard, belong to the landlord, even if someone is renting the house, as the standard house rental does not include the courtyard. This explanation of the Mishna can be used to support Rabbi Yossi son of Rabbi Chanina's statement that an item that enters one's courtyard is acquired by the owner, even without their knowledge. Three tannaitic sources are quoted to raise a difficulty with Rabbi Yossi's opinion.  If one rents for a year and the year becomes a leap year, is the rental of the extra month included in the original price or does the renter need to pay extra? According to the Mishna, this depends on whether the agreement was for months or a year. If the agreement mentions both months and years, the Mishna rules that the money of the leap year month is divided. Rav disagrees with this opinion and Shmuel and Rav Nachman offer opinions as well. 

In this episode, Rabbi Yossi Kamman joins us to explore a fascinating responsum (Likutei Sichos, Vol. 16, p. 518) of the Lubavitcher Rebbe (R. Menachem Mendel Schneerson) against scheduling elective surgeries within a few days of Shabbos. Rabbi Kamman presents us with an insightful profile of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, his approach to halachah, and what made him unique and so widely renowned. A synopsis of this topic, can be found in Rabbi Kamman's publication, a A Chassidisher Derher. This episode is sponsored by Lev Podelko in honor of the upcoming 30th wedding anniversary of his parents Marina and Dr. Alexander Podelko.

Thu., May 16, 2024  A Torah Thought from Rabbi Yossi Madvig on this week's parsha called “Emor.”  News of the day: Five IDF Soldiers killed in friendly fire incident in northern Gaza. See israeldailynews.org for more information.  Israel Daily News website: https://israeldailynews.org Israel Daily News Roundtable: https://www.patreon.com/shannafuld Support our Wartime News Coverage: https://www.gofundme.com/f/independent-journalist-covering-israels-war Links to all things IDN:⁠ https://linktr.ee/israeldailynews⁠ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/israeldailynews/support

Send us a Text Message.Eretz Yisrael and YOU!

Rabbi Yossi Morozov grew up in Brooklyn and was on shlichus with his family for twelve years in Ulyanovsk, a city one thousand kilometers east of Moscow. After being forced to leave Russia, Yossi moved with his family to the Pomona area in New York and became a life insurance agent. In this conversation we discuss his choices to go on shlichus and then into business and the challenges these choices posed to his own Lubavitch identity.

The Jewish people are now in an interesting time between the holiday of Passover and Shavuot. But who's counting? We are. Take a listen to this message before Shabbat from our spiritual leader and guide, Rabbi Yossi Madvig of Oswego, New York. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/israeldailynews/support

The spiritual leader of the Israel Daily News Podcast, Rabbi Yossi Madvig comes to you with a Shabbat and end-of-Passover message. Hint: It's about miracles. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/israeldailynews/support

Chag Purim Sameach from Rabbi Yossi Madvig and the Israel Daily News team! We know that as war wages on in Gaza, it can be difficult to celebrate what is meant to be such a joyous holiday. Find solace in the words of IDN spiritual leader, Rabbi Yossi Madvig of Oswego, New York. For Thursday's news, head over to IsraelDailyNews.org --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/israeldailynews/support

Tu B'Shvat is a Jewish holiday that celebrates the renewal of trees in a yearly cycle. Elliott notes, the timing of the holiday on the Jewish calendar is weird, falling out in the middle of winter. If we really wanted to get into the spirit of the day, we'd send everyone out into the middle of nature, "into the wild," to experience the trees. Rabbi Yossi points out that the winter is also a cool time to think about trees, because it is when the sap starts to run. The trees are starting to come alive, on the inside, where the sap is starting to build. Really, this is symbolic of the inner growth that takes place inside of us as human beings. Yossi adds that maple syrup is an ancient food but you have to get rid of the excess foam, which is a great metaphor for what people have to do - to keep the sweet parts of ourselves and get rid of the excess. As Yossi says, "whatever your winter looks like" you have to learn to go through the dark nights and come out on the other side.Elliott also notes that educationally, Tu B'shvat should teach us to "throw out the playbook." Jewish schools could plan a trip, throw away the books for a day, and take students out into nature to experience renewal and the miracle of creation. The holiday of the trees shows us that religious education can be found as much in nature as in textbooks. Yossi says there should be "Outward Bound" program for Tu B'shvat. This holiday represents the environmental ethic of the ancient rabbis and their view of the ecosystem, exemplified in the discussion of rain in the second paragraph of the Shema prayer. God gives human stewardship over the earth and it is up to us to make sure we treat that as a sacred trust. In an age of climate change, this is a powerful message.Shout out to the late great Neil Peart of Rush and his wonderful song "The Trees!"This‌ ‌episode discusses:‌ ‌ The importance of Tu B'Shvat How to use this time of year to cultivate renewal in oneselfThe history of Tu B'ShvatEmail us at hello@livingjewishly.org, we would love to hear from you!Be sure to follow us on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/living.jewishly/ and on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/livingjewishly/ If you like the show, please leave a review, it helps us to reach more people just like you.Links:‌ ‌ To get in contact or learn more about Living Jewishly:  Visit‌ ‌our ‌website: https://livingjewishly.org  Follow us on Instagram: @living.jewishly  Watch us on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO2YEegjapKpQeXG6zh6tzw   or send us an email at hello@livingjewishly.org.    Shalom!

Holy High: How Milwaukee Became Home to a Revolutionary Jewish Prep School - Rabbi Yossi & Ilana BassmanTo inquire about dedicating an episode - please email podcast@lubavitch.com"There was one instance where a bunch of kids over there brought this bag of chips, they gave it to me. And I was like, "You know, what could be wrong with chips?" And ate it. And then, afterwards, they were just mocking me. "Oh, that was pork rinds. The Jew ate pork rinds." - Gedaliah Liberman, Bader Hillel High '19 "If we're stepping up and taking ownership of the future of the Yiddishkeit, of the Jewish people, that begins and ends in authentic Jewish education. - Rabbi Yossi Bassman"I do remember, vividly, looking at my husband and telling him, "No, I seriously, I cannot plan a program. I wouldn't even be able to make a lesson plan. I can't even do that." And he looked me straight in the eye and he said, "Yes, you could." - Rebbetzin Ilana BassmanProduced by: Gary Waleik & Shneur Brook for Lubavitch International/Lubavitch.com - A Project of Machne IsraelAvailable on all major podcast platforms - and online at Lubavitch.com/podcastDid you enjoy listening to this episode? Leave us a five-star review on the podcast platform and/or email us at Podcast@Lubavitch.com - we truly value your feedback!

The Gemara in Shabbos 25b cites a four way machlokes about who is rich? Rabbi Meir gives the classic answer (from Avos 4:1) that it's one who is happy with his portion. Rabbi Tarfon says it's one who has 100 vineyards, 100 fields, and 100 servants to work them. Rabbi Akiva says it's one who has a wife who is “pleasant in her actions.” Rabbi Yossi says it's one who has a bathroom near his table. This episode analyzes these positions.

Have a 2024 new year blessing from Rabbi Yossi Madvig of Oswego, New York. Sign up for this week's Newsletter to include a 2023 rundown of accomplishments and milestones along with a 2024 message from IDNP host Shanna Fuld: Israeldaily.news Israel Daily News Roundtable: https://www.patreon.com/shannafuld Support our Wartime News Coverage: https://www.gofundme.com/f/independent-journalist-covering-israels-war Support the show here:⁠ https://linktr.ee/israeldailynews⁠ Music: Tzuf Family Band at the Baam Nature Reserve https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2712386232335422 --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/israeldailynews/support

Send us a Text Message.Why was yaakov punished for putting Dina in a box

Rav Nachmun issues a halahkic ruling about orphans and the repayment of loans. The daf explores when do kodshim kalim becone subject to meilah and thereby except from damages.

Rabbi Flamm is a Maggid Shiur at Yeshivas Chofetz Chaim in Baltimore

Lessons in early childhood education. The change that happened with the story of the Rebbe Rashab.

Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran Zoom family "We extend a heartfelt Mazal Tov to our fellow learner, Eric Sommer, on the marriage of his daughter, Ariel to Nitay. In the merit of their wedding, the words of the passuk should be realized quickly: מהרה ה' א-לוקינו ישמע בערי יהודה ובחוצות ירושלים קול ששון וקול שמחה." Today’s daf is sponsored by Rabbi Lisa Malik in memory of the 7-month anniversary of the death of 12-year old Aryeh Kluger z”l and the second yahrzeit of 27-year old Jonathan Loeb on Rosh Chodesh MarCheshvan and in memory of all of the children and adults who were mercilessly murdered on Simchat Torah. May their memories be for a blessing. Today’s daf is sponsored by Rachel Savin in honor of my son Itai who is coming to Israel on aliya today. We are so proud of you.  A father is believed to testify about his daughter whether she is betrothed or betrothed and divorced but only if she is still a minor. A father is not believed to testify about his daughter to forbid her to marry a kohen (that she was taken into captivity and redeemed) What is the difference between the cases? A husband is believed to testify that his wife is exempt from yibum (he has sons or no brothers) but is not believed to obligate her in yibum (he has no sons/has brothers). Do these two rulings, that were said in the Mishna, not accord with Rabbi Natan’s approach who said in braita that a man is believed to obligate his wife in yibum. Rava and Abaye each bring explanations of how the case in braita is different from the case in the Mishna in order to prove that Rabbi Natan would also agree with the ruling in our. If one betrothed his daughter and did not say which daughter, it would not include an adult daughter. If he had two wives and two sets of daughters and he said that he betrothed the older (or the younger), there is a dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yossi about whether all the daughters except the younger (older) are potentially betrothed or did he only mean the oldest (youngest) daughter?    

Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran Zoom family "We extend a heartfelt Mazal Tov to our fellow learner, Eric Sommer, on the marriage of his daughter, Ariel to Nitay. In the merit of their wedding, the words of the passuk should be realized quickly: מהרה ה' א-לוקינו ישמע בערי יהודה ובחוצות ירושלים קול ששון וקול שמחה." Today’s daf is sponsored by Rabbi Lisa Malik in memory of the 7-month anniversary of the death of 12-year old Aryeh Kluger z”l and the second yahrzeit of 27-year old Jonathan Loeb on Rosh Chodesh MarCheshvan and in memory of all of the children and adults who were mercilessly murdered on Simchat Torah. May their memories be for a blessing. Today’s daf is sponsored by Rachel Savin in honor of my son Itai who is coming to Israel on aliya today. We are so proud of you.  A father is believed to testify about his daughter whether she is betrothed or betrothed and divorced but only if she is still a minor. A father is not believed to testify about his daughter to forbid her to marry a kohen (that she was taken into captivity and redeemed) What is the difference between the cases? A husband is believed to testify that his wife is exempt from yibum (he has sons or no brothers) but is not believed to obligate her in yibum (he has no sons/has brothers). Do these two rulings, that were said in the Mishna, not accord with Rabbi Natan’s approach who said in braita that a man is believed to obligate his wife in yibum. Rava and Abaye each bring explanations of how the case in braita is different from the case in the Mishna in order to prove that Rabbi Natan would also agree with the ruling in our. If one betrothed his daughter and did not say which daughter, it would not include an adult daughter. If he had two wives and two sets of daughters and he said that he betrothed the older (or the younger), there is a dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yossi about whether all the daughters except the younger (older) are potentially betrothed or did he only mean the oldest (youngest) daughter?    

Rabbi Yossi Nemes is a Shliach for more than thirty years in Metairie, a suburb of New Orleans. In our conversation, we discuss what it was like for him to learn in 770 back in the 80s, and what kinds of discussions about Lubavitch identity were taking place already back then.

On this episode of The Holy Sparks PodcastI interview Rabbi Yosef Marcus of Chabad North PeninsulaRabbi Yosef Marcus is the co-founder of Chabad NP and co-director of the Lent Chabad Center. He is the author of several books of Torah literature, including commentaries on Psalms, the Scroll of Esther, The Passover Haggadah, Ethics of the Fathers, and is currently at work on a new commentary on Aishet Chayil (Woman of Valor). His articles have appeared on Askmoses.com and Chabad.org.He lives in San Mateo, CA, with his wife, Esty Marcus, director of the acclaimed Chai Preschool, and their six children. He can be reached at rabbi@chabadnp.comIn this episode, we explore what it is like to be a Chabad Rabbi, growing up Jewish In Long Beach, California, The Rebbe Menachem Medel Schneerson, Moshiach, and misconceptions sabout Chabad Rabbis and communities.If you've ever wanted to sit down with a Chabad Rabbi and get to know them, this interview is for you !His Uncles are famous musicians, Avraham Fried and Rabbi Manis Friedman, his brothers are founders of the band 8th Day.Please Subscribe to our channel, it's FREE!For More info go to www.holysparks.tvto become a patron or support our channel go to www.patreon.com/saulkayethank you again to JLTV for helping sponsor our show.Go to www.jltv.tv for stories that inspire.

The discussion from the last daf continues as to who the Mishna is according to - Rabbi Meir or Rabbi Yossi regarding whether or not messengers can set up other messengers to write and give the get. If a man divorces his wife conditioning it upon his death - does that work? Tana kama holds that it depends on the wording - if he said this is your get from now if I die, it works - upon his death, the get applies retroactively from the date he gave it. If not, it doesn't work. Rabbi Yossi holds that it works in any case because the get is dated from today and therefore the date proves that he meant the get to be effective upon his death retroactive to the date in the get. Rav Huna's statement about this Mishna is questioned and the Gemara struggles to explain according to who he was relating and to which case.

The discussion from the last daf continues as to who the Mishna is according to - Rabbi Meir or Rabbi Yossi regarding whether or not messengers can set up other messengers to write and give the get. If a man divorces his wife conditioning it upon his death - does that work? Tana kama holds that it depends on the wording - if he said this is your get from now if I die, it works - upon his death, the get applies retroactively from the date he gave it. If not, it doesn't work. Rabbi Yossi holds that it works in any case because the get is dated from today and therefore the date proves that he meant the get to be effective upon his death retroactive to the date in the get. Rav Huna's statement about this Mishna is questioned and the Gemara struggles to explain according to who he was relating and to which case.

This week on Frum FWD we had on the famous Rabbi Yossi Wallis the founder of Arachim. He tells us in person about his amazing story and his journey along the way. We were fortunate enough to have him in person. I hope you guys enjoy this episode and share it with friends and family! As CEO of Arachim, the ultra-successful global kiruv organization, Rabbi Yossi Wallis has touched and transformed the lives of tens of thousands of Jews, and has developed personal, warm relationships with many of our greatest Torah leaders. Before he became a renowned kiruv master, Yossi ("Joe") Wallis lived a life of breathtaking exploits and hair-raising escapes. It began on the tough New York streets, where Joe led the Bronx's first all-Jewish gang, black leather jackets and all. It was a life that included dangerous encounters with the Mafia underworld, a stint in the Israeli air force, and an unexpected discovery of his Torah heritage while waiting in a restaurant for his pork sandwich. To purchase his books: https://www.artscroll.com/Books/9781422617113.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwqZSlBhBwEiwAfoZUIKGwKfuHxgtxVI7-PPS9cjdRjKDugNhs0x4b33ODLCLqz_duDCt9iRoC5WsQAvD_BwE https://www.artscroll.com/Books/9781422623305.html To contact and reach Arachim: http://arachimusa.org

In honor of Gimmel Tammuz, we've dedicated our fifth episode featuring renowned educator and mentor Rabbi Yossi Paltiel to the Rebbe's tremendous love for baalei teshuva and the vital mission of helping them find their footing as new members of the Chabad community. Rabbi Paltiel challenges both baalei teshuva and the Anash community to make integration happen, identifies several ways baalei teshuva can tap into the lessons learned by previous generations, and gives us some homework.Make sure to listen through to the end, where we sign Rabbi Paltiel up for doing a future episode on chinuch and shalom bayis!For questions, comments, and sponsorship opportunities, please contact us at https://www.btcenter.org.- Emmett and RivkaProduction and editing by Gary WaleikAll rights reserved to The BT Center

Don't tell parents lashon hara about their kids, There are many types of rechilut the Torah forbids. Rabbi Yossi never said anything he had to retract, Choose your words wisely and consider their impact!

The Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Israel, 1870-1939), in Siman 494 (Se'if Katan 32; listen to audio recording for precise citation), discusses the custom among Sepharadim to read on Shabuot the Azaharot, which is a poem written by Rabbi Shelomo Ibn Gabirol that lists all 613 Biblical commands. The custom in our synagogue is to read the first three and last three paragraphs of the Azharot in the synagogue, as a reminder to the congregants that they should recite the complete poem at home. (We do not read the entire poem so as not to unduly extend the prayer service.) This is done before the recitation of Ashreh at Musaf. The Azharot are read on both days of Shabuot.The Kaf Ha'haim adds that it is worthwhile to study on Shabuot the verses from the Book of Vayikra (in Parashat Emor) that discuss the Korban Sheteh Ha'lehem, the special offering that was brought on Shabuot. It is appropriate to study on each holiday topics relevant to that holiday, and thus on Shabuot, there is value in studying the subject of the Korban Sheteh Ha'lehem.Furthermore, the Kaf Ha'haim writes, it is proper to study on Shabuot the Book of Tehillim, which was composed by King David, who passed away on Shabuot. It is customary to recite Tehillim in King David's memory on Shabuot, and this occasion is an especially auspicious time for one's recitation of Tehillim to be lovingly accepted by God. The Kaf Ha'haim notes that when one recites the introductory Yehi Rason prayer before reciting Tehillim on Shabuot, he should omit the passages that pray for forgiveness for our sins, as we do not offer prayers for forgiveness on Yom Tob. He also notes that when reciting the passage in this prayer in which we pray for long life ("Ve'nizke Ve'nihye…"), one should not recite the text praying for seventy or eighty years of life. Since many people live beyond eighty years, we should not be praying for only this length of life. Therefore, it is proper to pray generally for long life, without specifying a particular duration.The Kaf Ha'haim also writes that one should try over the course of his Torah learning on Shabuot to conceive of at least one Hiddush (new Torah insight). Since Shabuot begins the new year of Torah study, thinking of a Hiddush during Shabuot is a favorable omen for success in Torah throughout the coming year. If one is unable to arrive at a Hiddush of his own, he should at least study new material or a new insight which is a "Hiddush" for him.The Kaf Ha'haim writes that Rabbi Moshe Cordovero (1522-1570) would study Kabbalah on Shabuot, which would bring him success in his learning.In this context the Kaf Ha'haim emphasizes that one should exert himself in Torah study on both days of Shabuot, and not only on the first day. He notes that according to one view among the Tanna'im (the view of Rabbi Yossi), the Torah was given on the 7th of Sivan (the second day of Shabuot), and not on the 6th, and it is therefore important to immerse oneself in Torah learning even on the second day of the holiday.There is a well-known custom to partake of dairy products on Shabuot. Among the many different reasons given for this custom is an explanation suggested by the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), who noted that the numerical value of "Halab" ("milk") is forty. We eat on Shabuot foods made from milk to commemorate the forty days that Moshe spent atop Mount Sinai receiving the Torah. Additionally, the names of the three letters that form the word "Halab" are "Het," "Lamed" and "Bet." The "inner letters" of these three names (meaning, the letters after the first letter) are "Yod" and "Tav" (from "Het"), "Mem" and "Dalet" (from "Lamed"), and again "Yod" and "Tav" (from "Bet'). These letters spell the word "Temidit," which means "constant" or "consistent." We eat dairy products on Shabuot to remind ourselves of the concept of "Temidit," that our devotion to Torah must be constant and consistent. We cannot study only on some days but not others, when we happen to feel like it. This devotion must continue day in, and day out. The Torah says, "Zot Torat Ha'ola" (literally, "This is the law concerning the burnt offering"), alluding to an association between Torah and the daily Ola offering brought in the Bet Ha'mikdash. Torah, too, must be "daily," a constant part of our lives, each and every day.Summary: It is customary among Sepharadim to read Rabbi Shelomo Ibn Gabirol's Azharot both days of Shabuot. It is proper to study on Shabuot the section of the Torah dealing with the special Shabuot sacrifice, and to recite Tehillim in memory of King David. One should try over the course of Shabuot to come up with a novel Torah insight, or to at least to learn something new in Torah that he had not known previously.

The Torah in Parashat Kedoshim (Vayikra 19:23) commands that when Beneh Yisrael enter the land and plant trees, they must refrain from eating a tree's fruits during the first three years after it is planted. During these three years, the fruits are called "Orla" and are forbidden for consumption and for any sort of benefit. The Or Ha'haim Ha'kadosh (Rav Haim Ben-Attar, 1696-1743) offers a remarkable interpretation of this verse, explaining that beyond introducing the prohibition of Orla, the Torah here also teaches us about the importance of producing children who are committed to Torah. The Torah tells us that when we go to Eretz Yisrael, our priority must be to "plant trees" – referring to producing students and scholars of Torah. The Or Ha'haim brings a number of sources where producing scholars is compared to planting a tree. For example, the Gemara (Shabbat 118b) cites Rabbi Yossi's remark that he "planted five saplings," referring to his five sons, who grew to become Torah scholars. Similarly, Yeshayahu (65:22) compares his fellow sages to trees ("Ki'ymeh Ha'etz Yemeh Ami"). The Or Ha'haim proceeds to explain that those who study Torah are called "trees" because they sustain the souls of the Jewish Nation. To demonstrate this point, the Or Ha'haim references the famous story told of Rabbi Akiba, who once came across a man who was unclothed, his skin charred, carrying large amounts of wood. The man explained to Rabbi Akiba that he had died and been sentenced to Gehinam because of the evils he perpetrated during his lifetime. His punishment, he said, was to collect wood each day, which is then used to burn his soul. The only way he could be extricated from Gehinam and end his suffering, the man told Rabbi Akiba, is if he had a son reciting Barechu or Kaddish in the synagogue. This man had died when his wife was pregnant, and he did not know whether or not she had a son. Rabbi Akiba immediately proceeded to inquire about this fellow, and determined that indeed, he had a son, but this son had not even received a Berit Mila, let alone a religious education. Immediately, Rabbi Akiba gave the young man a Berit Mila, and sat and taught him Torah. When the young man was ready, Rabbi Akiba brought him to the synagogue to recite Barechu. That night, the father appeared to Rabbi Akiba in a dream to inform him that he had been released from Gehinam. The Or Ha'haim brings this story to show how producing youngsters who study and practice Torah resemble the planting of trees which produce nourishing fruit. Building a generation of men and women devoted to Torah is the way we sustain our nation, even the souls of the deceased. May Hashem grant us His assistance in our efforts to "plant" beautiful "trees," to produce the next generation of devoted students of Torah, that will provide our nation with the spiritual sustenance that it needs to continue its sacred mission.

Study Guide Nazir 62 The Gemara brings several possibilities to extrapolate the words "a man who expresses" in the verse about valuations. Each possibility is partially rejected until Rav Ada bar Ahava brings a drasha that is not rejected. The Gemara brings several possibilities to extrapolate the words "a man who expresses" in the verse about the nazir. Each possibility is partially rejected until the braita is brought to show that we can derive from there the law that one can nullify one's vows. The Mishna teaches that there is a stringency by slaves regarding nezirut that is not true for women - one can nullify his wife's vows, but if he breaks the nezirut of his slave (i.e. forcing him to drink wine), when he is freed, the prohibitions will come into effect again. The Gemara brings a braita with the following question: Why is it even permitted for a master to force his slave to drink wine when he is a nazir but if the slave takes an oath or vow, one cannot force him to go against it? After two failed attempts to answer the question, Abaye understands the braita differently - that one can force a slave to not keep his nazirite vow, but vows and oaths one does not need to force one's slave not to keep, as a vow or oath of a Canaanite slave is not valid at all. If a slave has been freed, his nezirut is reinstated, but what if he ran away? Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yossi disagree. What is their point of disagreement?

Study Guide Nazir 62 The Gemara brings several possibilities to extrapolate the words "a man who expresses" in the verse about valuations. Each possibility is partially rejected until Rav Ada bar Ahava brings a drasha that is not rejected. The Gemara brings several possibilities to extrapolate the words "a man who expresses" in the verse about the nazir. Each possibility is partially rejected until the braita is brought to show that we can derive from there the law that one can nullify one's vows. The Mishna teaches that there is a stringency by slaves regarding nezirut that is not true for women - one can nullify his wife's vows, but if he breaks the nezirut of his slave (i.e. forcing him to drink wine), when he is freed, the prohibitions will come into effect again. The Gemara brings a braita with the following question: Why is it even permitted for a master to force his slave to drink wine when he is a nazir but if the slave takes an oath or vow, one cannot force him to go against it? After two failed attempts to answer the question, Abaye understands the braita differently - that one can force a slave to not keep his nazirite vow, but vows and oaths one does not need to force one's slave not to keep, as a vow or oath of a Canaanite slave is not valid at all. If a slave has been freed, his nezirut is reinstated, but what if he ran away? Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yossi disagree. What is their point of disagreement?

Study Guide Nazir 15  Today’s daf is dedicated to our amazing mom and grandma - Patty Belkin! Love, Jason, Erica, Raquel, Eli, Ariel, and Gili. Today's daf is dedicated for the rescue and healing of the victims of the earthquake. May we find more living and help more of those displaced. Our thoughts and prayer are with them and their families. The Gemara proves the words of Rabbi Yossi bar Rabbi Hanina that if the days of a nazir have passed before but one has not yet done the shaving and sacrifices, one would not get lashes for any of the prohibitions – only for becoming impure to the dead. But then a braita is brought to contradict him as it appears there that one would receive lashes for all the prohibitions of a nazir. The Mishna cites a case where one said I will become a nazir when I have a child and I will be a nazir for a hundred days. There are different interpretations of the law of the Mishna. It all depends on whether the child was born before the seventieth day or after. If before, then one doesn't need to count extra days but if after, one does. Rav says that if the child is born on the seventieth day, this day can also be considered the first day of the nazir for the child - according to the law that part of the day can be considered a whole day, and therefore also for the nazir term of a hundred days, it will be counted as two days and one can perform the shaving and sacrifices on the hundredth day and not day one hundred and one. The Gemara brings two difficulties about his words from our Mishna - the first one is resolved but the second one is not. And they conclude that Rav does not agree with our Mishna. The Gemara tries to find a tanna that Rav's opinion corresponds to. First, they suggest Abba Shaul regarding matters of mourning, but that is not successful. Then they try Rabbi  Yossi regarding a zav or zava and the Passover sacrifice. There are two ways to understand his opinion and according to one way, the words of a Rav will correspond to his opinion.   

Study Guide Nazir 15  Today’s daf is dedicated to our amazing mom and grandma - Patty Belkin! Love, Jason, Erica, Raquel, Eli, Ariel, and Gili. Today's daf is dedicated for the rescue and healing of the victims of the earthquake. May we find more living and help more of those displaced. Our thoughts and prayer are with them and their families. The Gemara proves the words of Rabbi Yossi bar Rabbi Hanina that if the days of a nazir have passed before but one has not yet done the shaving and sacrifices, one would not get lashes for any of the prohibitions – only for becoming impure to the dead. But then a braita is brought to contradict him as it appears there that one would receive lashes for all the prohibitions of a nazir. The Mishna cites a case where one said I will become a nazir when I have a child and I will be a nazir for a hundred days. There are different interpretations of the law of the Mishna. It all depends on whether the child was born before the seventieth day or after. If before, then one doesn't need to count extra days but if after, one does. Rav says that if the child is born on the seventieth day, this day can also be considered the first day of the nazir for the child - according to the law that part of the day can be considered a whole day, and therefore also for the nazir term of a hundred days, it will be counted as two days and one can perform the shaving and sacrifices on the hundredth day and not day one hundred and one. The Gemara brings two difficulties about his words from our Mishna - the first one is resolved but the second one is not. And they conclude that Rav does not agree with our Mishna. The Gemara tries to find a tanna that Rav's opinion corresponds to. First, they suggest Abba Shaul regarding matters of mourning, but that is not successful. Then they try Rabbi  Yossi regarding a zav or zava and the Passover sacrifice. There are two ways to understand his opinion and according to one way, the words of a Rav will correspond to his opinion.   

Tu B'Shvat is a Jewish holiday that celebrates the renewal of trees in a yearly cycle. Elliott notes, the timing of the holiday on the Jewish calendar is weird, falling out in the middle of winter. If we really wanted to get into the spirit of the day, we'd send everyone out into the middle of mature, "into the wild," to experience the trees. Rabbi Yossi points out that the winter is also a cool time to think about trees, because it is when the sap starts to run. The trees are starting to come alive, on the inside, where the sap is starting to build. Really, this is symbolic of the inner growth that takes place inside of us as human beings. Yossi adds that maple syrup is an ancient food but you have to get rid of the excess foam, which is a great metaphor for what people have to do - to keep the sweet parts of ourselves and get rid of the excess. As Yossi says, "whatever your winter looks like" you have to learn to go through the dark nights and come out on the other side.Elliott also notes that educationally, Tu B'shvat should teach us to "throw out the playbook." Jewish schools could plan a trip, throw away the books for a day, and take students out into nature to experience renewal and the miracle of creation. The holiday of the trees shows us that religious education can be found as much in nature as in textbooks. Yossi says there should be "Outward Bound" program for Tu B'shvat. This holiday represents the environmental ethic of the ancient rabbis and their view of the ecosystem, exemplified in the discussion of rain in the second paragraph of the Shema prayer. God gives human stewardship over the earth and it is up to us to make sure we treat that a sacred trust. In an age of climate change, this is a powerful message.Shout out to the late great Neil Peart of Rush and his wonderful song "The Trees!"Email us at hello@livingjewishly.org, we would love to hear from you!Be sure to follow us on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/living.jewishly/ and on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/livingjewishly/If you like the show, please leave a review, it helps us to reach more people just like you.

Rabbi Yossi Bensoussan is the mashgiach ruchani at Yeshiva High School of Cleveland. A Certified Alcohol and Substance Abuse Counselor with a laid-back attitude and trademark sense of humor, Rabbi Yossi speaks and counsels worldwide on issues involving teenagers, addiction, and education.    He runs a private counseling practice and is the co-founder of the 2nd Chance Initiative, which creates solutions for parents and schools dealing with struggling youths. He is the co-host of Meaningful Minute's ever-popular The Two-Cents Podcast.   **SPONSORS** INFINITY LAND SERVICES Title without the horror stories! Reach out to: https://ilstitle.com or call 718.338.4200 ____________________________________ It's time to reach out to Touro University to find out how you can further your education! Head to Touro.edu ____________________________________ Purchase your tickets now for the Hasc Concert! Hasc36.com ____________________________________   Subscribe to Meaningful Minute on WhatsApp: https://wa.me/15166687800?text=Please%20subscribe%20me%20to%20Meaningful%20Min Ute ____________________________________ Subscribe to our Podcast Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/2WALuE2 Spotify: https://spoti.fi/39bNGnO Google Podcasts: https://bit.ly/MPPGooglePodcasts Or wherever Podcasts are available!   Follow us on Instagram: https://instagram.com/meaningfulpeoplepodcast Like us on Facebook: https://bit.ly/MPPonFB Follow us on Twitter:https://twitter.com/MeaningfuPplPod   Editor: Sruly Saftlas Podcast created by: Meaningful Minute   For more info and upcoming news, check out: https://Meaningfulminute.org   #jew #jewish #podcast #frum #rabbi #frumpodcast #meaningfulpeople #torah #mitzvah #hashem #jewishmusic #jewishpodcast #israel #kumzitz #nachigordon #jewishpod

Rabbi Yossi Bensoussan on Let's Get Real with Coach Menachem, Sunday September 11 Class # 116, Why we desperately need to change Ourselves and Our Chinuch Approach to Today's children --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/menachem-bernfeld/support