Podcasts about Rashi

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

Parshas Beshalach: Crossing Inner Seas At the edge of the Yam Suf, the Jewish people face their final test. Egypt is behind them, the sea before them, and fear grips their hearts. Though redemption is already unfolding, freedom suddenly feels more terrifying than slavery. This episode explores the moment when physical escape gives way to inner transformation. Drawing on Rashi and the Lubavitcher Rebbe, we uncover why true freedom only begins when retreat is no longer an option—and how the crossing of the sea becomes the crossing of the self. It is a Parsha about courage, responsibility, and stepping forward even when certainty is gone. Dedicated in loving memory of Keshvar Bas Shmuel, Edward Ben Efraim, Shlomo Ben Edward, and Yirachmiel Daniel Ben Gedalia. For the Refuah Shlema of Shaul Ben Edward, Benyamin Ben Tova, Rafael Ben Mazal, and Orna Bas Lili.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

REM-SS85-08 The Torah tells that as Beneh Yisrael stood at the shores of the sea, and they saw the Egyptian army pursuing them, they cried out to G-d – "Va'yis'aku Beneh Yisrael El Hashem" (14:10). Rashi comments: "Tafesu Umanut Abotam" – "They took hold of their forefathers' craft." Meaning, Beneh Yisrael here followed the example set for them by the patriarchs, who likewise prayed to G-d. Rashi then proceeds to cite verses from the Book of Bereshit showing that the three patriarchs – Abraham, Yishak and Yaakob – prayed. When reading Rashi's brief remark, we must wonder what point he wishes to make, which difficulty in the text he is trying to resolve. Why must we be informed that Beneh Yisrael's prayers at the shores of the sea followed the patriarchs' example? How does this enhance our understanding of the text? Probing a bit deeper, Rashi's comments become even more perplexing. As mentioned, Rashi cites verses that speak of the patriarchs praying. Surprisingly, however, Rashi specifically does not cite the more obvious sources of the patriarchs' prayers. Instead of pointing to Abraham's prayer on behalf of the city of Sedom, Rashi instead brings the verse that tells of Abraham returning the next day to the spot where he had prayed for Sedom (Bereshit 19:27). Instead of noting Yishak's prayer for a child, Rashi instead cites the Torah's vague description of Yishak "conversing" in the field (Bereshit 24:63), which the Sages interpret as a reference to prayer. And instead of mentioning Yaakob's plea for help when Esav was approaching with an army, Rashi brings the verse that tells of Yaakob's evening "encounter" ("Va'yifga" – 28:11), which is understood to mean that he prayed. Why did Rashi not cite the clearest references to the patriarchs' prayers? More generally, why did Rashi need to bring textual proof to the fact that our righteous Abot (patriarchs) prayed? Do we not already know this? The Lubavitcher Rebbe (Rav Menachem Mendel Schneerson, 1902-1994) answered all these questions by establishing that Beneh Yisrael's cries were not actual cries for help. We must remember that these events transpired after G-d had brought the powerful Egyptian Empire to its knees with ten miraculous plagues, after Moshe had informed the people that G-d was bringing them to their homeland, and after they had taken the Egyptians' possessions with them to bring to the Holy Land. They knew that G-d would help them and save them from the pursuing Egyptian army. They did not have a doubt. (Although the Torah relates that the people turned to Moshe in panic, asking why he had taken them out of Egypt to perish, Rashi explains that this was a different group than the group who responded by praying.) They had complete faith in G-d. This was the point that Rashi wished to clarify – that the people prayed even though they were confident that they would be saved. These prayers were not a prayer for help, for rather "Umanut Abotam" – the "craft" taught to them by their forebears. A person with a profession goes to work every day. He doesn't show up only when he runs out of money; he knows that he needs to tend to his profession consistently. The same is true of our connection to Hashem. We cannot build this connection only by turning to him when we face some kind of problem. We need to practice the "craft," or "profession," of prayer each and every day, even when we have no particular, pressing issue that concerns us. This is what Rashi is teaching us. Beneh Yisrael turned to Hashem in prayer not because they were frightened, but rather because prayer was an "Umanut" – a "profession," something that they knew they must consistently do. And they learned this "profession" from the patriarchs. Abraham prayed even after Sedom was destroyed, when he could no longer save the city. Yishak prayed in the field regularly. And Yaakob prayed before going to sleep. These weren't prayers for help, but rather part of the Abot's ongoing, persistent efforts to build their relationship with Hashem. This is the "profession" that they taught us, and that we must follow. The Lubavitcher Rebbe applied this idea to the Misva of Torah study. This obligation is not limited to practical knowledge. It goes without saying that in order to practice Judaism properly, we must learn and familiarize ourselves with Halacha, and practical Halacha must certainly take priority in our Torah curricula. However, this is not the sole objective of Torah study. We are required to learn as much as we can even about subjects that are not practically applicable. Torah learning is not only about knowledge, but also about our connection to Hashem who gave us the Torah. When we pray and learn Torah not only in moments of need, but with constancy and devotion, we cultivate a living, daily bond with Hashem – and this is the lifelong, sacred "profession" which we've inherited from our righteous forebears.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

How a Story of Liberation Was Used to Exclude What if the Exodus wasn't just a story of freedom… but also a story of exclusion? Key Takeaways Redemption stories are rarely neutral—they are often weapons. The charge of being "left behind" usually says more about the accuser than the accused. A story about leaving becomes an excuse for not moving at all. Timestamps [00:00] Moses' Uncompromising Message to Pharaoh [00:24] The Irony of the 'Left Behind' Story [01:48] Introduction to Madlik and This Week's Topic [02:42] Exploring the Tradition of Those Left Behind [04:00] The Ambiguous Word in Exodus 13:18 [05:24] Rashi's Interpretation and the Fifth Child [11:08] Ezekiel's Rewriting of the Exodus Narrative [13:25] The Polemic Against Those Who Stayed Behind [25:05] The Tradition of Jewish Names, Language, and Dress [29:56] Conclusion and Final Thoughts Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/ Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/704560 Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

In this installment, Rod Thomas explores the Jewish concepts of the Messiah, focusing on the three-messiah framework: Mashiyach Nagid, Mashiyach ben Yosef, and Mashiyach ben David. The discussion delves into Daniel's prophecy, Jewish tradition, and the identity of Yeshua (Jesus) as understood in Messianic faith. The episode also examines why mainstream Judaism rejects Yeshua as Messiah and how these messianic expectations shape both Jewish and Messianic perspectives. Key Topics Covered 1. Introduction and Context Greetings and setting: Recorded on the 3rd Day of the 11th biblical month, 6025 (Friday, January 16, 2026). Reflection on persecution, faith, and the hope found in Yeshua's teachings (Matthew 5:10-12; Ephesians 6:18; Matthew 5:44; Luke 6:28). 2. Why Judaism Rejects Yeshua as Messiah Historical grievances and theological differences. The role of Rabbinic expectations and interpretations in shaping Jewish messianic beliefs (Hebrews 2:3; Romans 3:2; Romans 11:25-26; Zechariah 12:10). 3. The Three Messiahs in Jewish Thought Mashiyach Nagid (Messiah the Prince) Mashiyach ben Yosef (Messiah, son of Joseph) Mashiyach ben David (Messiah, son of David) The episode focuses on Mashiyach Nagid, with future installments to cover the other two. 4. What is Mashiyach Nagid? Linguistic breakdown: "Mashiyach" means "Anointed One"; "Nagid" means "Prince" or "Leader." Scriptural foundation: Daniel 9:25-26 and its interpretations. The prophecy's implications for Jewish and Christian eschatology (1 Corinthians 13:12; Matthew 24:15-16). 5. The Meaning and Role of "Nagid" "Nagid" as prince, ruler, leader, commander, or official. Biblical examples: Saul, David, Solomon, Hezekiah, Abner, Azariah, and others (1 Samuel 9:16; 10:1; 13:14; 25:30; 2 Samuel 5:2; 6:21; 7:8; 1 Kings 1:35; 2 Kings 18:1; 2 Chronicles 31:13). 6. Mashiyach Nagid in Prophecy and Tradition The "transitional" leader concept: Anointed but not yet king. Comparison with "Melech" (King) and the Davidic Covenant (2 Samuel 7:8-16; Psalm 2:8-12; 2 Chronicles 13:5). 7. Messianic Traits and the Melchizedekian Order Psalm 110 as a foundational text for the dual role of king and priest. The Melchizedekian priesthood and its fulfillment in Yeshua (1 Peter 2:9; Daniel 2:44; Matthew 21:44; 1 Corinthians 15:24; Revelation 11:15). 8. Jewish Perspectives on Mashiyach Nagid Views of Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and Rambam (Maimonides) on the identity and role of Mashiyach Nagid. The Essenes and Qumran writings: Priestly and royal messiahs, "Prince of the Congregation" (Damascus Document, Rule of the Congregation, 11QMelchizedek). Apocryphal and Talmudic references: Suffering and kingly messiahs (1 Enoch, Jubilees, Talmud). 9. Christian and Messianic Interpretations Yeshua as the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy and the persona of Mashiyach Nagid. The dual or double-fulfillment view of prophecy. Jewish objections to identifying Yeshua as all three messianic figures. 10. Application and Call to Discipleship The call for believers to imitate Yeshua's character traits: suffering, triumph, priesthood, kingship, exaltation, royal lineage, and spiritual warfare (Isaiah 53; Colossians 2:15; Psalm 110; Matthew 1:1; Zechariah 14:3; 1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 20:6; 2 Corinthians 10:4-6; Ephesians 6:12-14). Invitation to covenant relationship and Torah-honoring lifestyle (2 Corinthians 6:2; Isaiah 55:6-9). References & Further Reading https://www.sefaria.org/topics/mashiach?sort=Relevance&tab=notable-sources https://jewishlink.news/the-origin-of-the-word-nagid-leader/ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318725539_A_Contemporary_Defense_of_the_Authenticity_of_Daniel https://www.gotquestions.org/prophecy-double-dual-fulfillment.html https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/101747/jewish/Mashiach-ben-Yossef.htm https://library.biblicalarchaeology.org/sidebar/the-messiah-text-4q521-and-a-line-by-line-analysis/ https://jamestabor.com/a-cosmic-messiah-who-makes-live-the-dead-in-among-the-dead-sea-scrolls-4q521/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Messiah https://scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1010-99192014000300016 https://www.sefaria.org/rashi_on_daniel.9.25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud https://www.themessianictorahobserver.org/2025/06/20/messianic-reflections-in-the-life-of-yosef-ben-yisrael-thoughts-reflections-on-torah-reading-34/ Contact & Community For questions or further discussion, email: perceptionwp@gmail.com Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe on https://www.themessianictorahobserver.org/ Closing Blessing May you be most blessed, fellow saints in training. Walk in faith, truth, and the hope of Messiah's return.  

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

The Torah in Parashat Bo (12:40) states that Beneh Yisrael spent a total of 430 years in Egypt. Already Rashi notes the seeming contradiction between this verse and G-d's prophecy to Abraham Abinu that his descendants would endure a 400-year period of exile and oppression (Bereshit 15:13). Why did G-d predict a period of 400 years, if Beneh Yisrael were going to spend 430 years in exile? Rashi explains that the number depends on the starting point. The period from the birth of Yishak until the Exodus was 400 years, but Abraham received this prophecy thirty years prior to Yishak's birth, for a total of 430 years. The Shela Ha'kadosh (Rav Yeshaya Horowitz, d. 1630) offered a different answer, boldly asserting that G-d added thirty years to the period of exile. G-d informed Abraham that his descendants would live as foreigners for 400 years – but as a result of Mechirat Yosef, the sale of Yosef as a slave by his brothers, thirty years were added. The Shela explains that Yosef was brought out of the dungeon in Egypt and appointed the country's vizier at the age of thirty (Bereshit 41:46). In a sense, then, his first thirty years were stolen from him because of his brothers' cruelty. Therefore, it was decreed that Beneh Yisrael would endure an additional thirty years of oppression. The Shela's theory sheds light on the Gemara's comments in Masechet Sanhedrin (92) regarding the mistake made by the tribe of Efrayim. The Gemara says about the people of Efrayim, "Manu Le'ketz Ve'ta'u" – they miscalculated the end of the Egyptian exile. When they erroneously thought that the time for redemption had arrived, they left Egypt. But when they reached the Philistine region of Gat, they were attacked by the Philistines, and many were killed, while some managed to escape back to Egypt. The Gemara says that the remains of those people from Efrayim were the "dry bones" that were miraculously brought back to life in Yehezkel's famous prophecy. On the basis of the Shela's analysis, we can understand more clearly why the tribe of Efrayim made this mistake. If, indeed, an extra thirty years were added on account of the sin of Mechirat Yosef, then it stands to reason that the tribe of Efrayim – who descended from Yosef – assumed that they did not need to wait the additional thirty years. Since this period was a punishment for the crime committed against Yosef, they figured, it did not affect them, the descendants of Yosef. They therefore left Egypt thirty years early, at the end of the period of exile that was initially decreed. The question then becomes, why were the people of Efrayim wrong? Why were they killed for leaving Egypt early? The answer emerges from a passage in the Zohar regarding another consequence of Mechirat Yosef. Each year, on Tisha B'Ab, we recite a special Kinna (dirge) about the "Asara Harugeh Malchut" – the ten great Rabbis who were brutally murdered by the Romans. The Zohar teaches that these great Rabbis were Gilgulim (reincarnations) of the brothers, and they were killed to atone for the sin of Mechirat Yosef. Now in truth, only nine of the twelve brothers participated in Mechirat Yosef: Yosef, of course, was the victim; Binyamin, the youngest, was home and not involved; and Reuben was not present when the other brothers decided to sell Yosef, and in fact tried to rescue him. Why, then, were ten Rabbis killed to atone for the sin committed by only nine brothers? The answer is that Yosef himself bore a degree of guilt. While his brothers of course acted wrongly by selling him as a slave, he was partially responsible for their hostility. He reported to Yaakob about their alleged wrongdoing, and provoked them, arousing their hatred. Therefore, he, too, was accountable. This, then, was the tribe of Efrayim's mistake. The additional thirty years were decreed also for them, the descendants of Yosef, because he was partially responsible for what happened. Their decision to leave Egypt was thus a mistake, as they, too, were required to spend an additional thirty years in Egypt.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

Ten men combine to form a Minyan only if they are together in the same room. The Rishonim debate the question of whether a person can count toward a Minyan if he is standing in the doorway. If nine men are inside the room, and the tenth is in the doorway, do they form a Minyan, or must the tenth man come out of the doorway inside the room? The Bet Yosef brings the view of Rashi, that the area underneath the lintel is considered part of the room, such that a person standing there counts toward the Minyan formed inside the room. By contrast, Rabbenu Yeruham (1290-1350) maintained that the area of the doorway is considered outside the room. The Bet Yosef shows that the Rambam follows Rabbenu Yeruham's view, noting the Rambam's ruling that if someone brought the meat of the Pesach sacrifice to the doorway of the home on the night of Pesach, he transgresses the Torah prohibition against bringing the meat of the sacrifice outside the home. The Rambam clearly considered the area of the doorway outside the home, and this would, presumably, apply also to the formation of a Minyan. The Shulhan Aruch accepts this view, and writes that the area of the doorway is not considered part of the room, and thus a person who stands there cannot be counted toward the Minyan. By contrast, the Magen Abraham (Rav Avraham Gombiner, Poland, 1635-1682) cites the work Tanya Rabbati as ruling leniently, that a person in the doorway may, in fact, be counted. This is the view also of the Mishna Berura, citing the Eben Ha'ozer. In light of these different opinions, several Poskim, including the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939), maintained that we must be stringent in both directions. This means that a person standing in the doorway of a room cannot combine with nine men in the room to form a Minyan, and also cannot combine with nine men assembled outside in the hallway, as it is uncertain whether he is considered inside the room or in the hallway. Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025), in Ish Masliah, writes that although it is proper to be stringent in both directions, the Halacha follows the Shulhan Aruch's ruling, and so, strictly speaking, a person standing in the doorway may combine with nine men in the hallway to form a Minyan. Within the Shulhan Aruch's view, there is a difference of opinion regarding the status of a person standing in the area of the doorway closer to the room, such that he would be inside if the door closed. The Mishna Berura writes that according to some understandings of the Shulhan Aruch, even a person standing in this spot is considered outside, and cannot be counted toward a Minyan. This was the position also of the Kaf Ha'haim. Rav Mazuz, however, disagreed, and maintained that the person may be counted in such a case. The Mishna Berura, too, concluded that one may be lenient in this situation, even according to the Shulhan Aruch, given that many Poskim do not accept Rabbenu Yeruham's stringent view to begin with. Rav David Yosef, in Halacha Berura, likewise rules leniently, and this is the Halacha. The Poskim debate the status of a doorway that has no door. Some argue that the only reason why the doorway would not be considered part of the room is that part of the doorway is left outside when the door is closed; therefore, if there is no door, the area of the doorway is viewed as part of the room. Others contend that to the contrary, the possibility of viewing the doorway as part of the room is based on the fact that part of the doorway is inside when the door closes. In practice, then, if there is no door, we must be stringent, and a person standing in the doorway cannot combine with people inside the room or outside the room, regardless of where in the doorway he stands. Summary: If a person is standing in the doorway of a room, then he cannot combine with nine men inside the room to form a Minyan. Strictly speaking, he can join with nine men in the hallway outside the room to form a Minyan, though he should preferably move outside the doorway into the hallway. If he stands in the inner portion of the doorway, such that he would be inside the room if the door would close, then he can combine with nine men standing inside the room, unless there is no door, in which case he cannot combine with either those inside the room or those outside in the hall.

Ten men combine to form a Minyan only if they are together in the same room. The Rishonim debate the question of whether a person can count toward a Minyan if he is standing in the doorway. If nine men are inside the room, and the tenth is in the doorway, do they form a Minyan, or must the tenth man come out of the doorway inside the room? The Bet Yosef brings the view of Rashi, that the area underneath the lintel is considered part of the room, such that a person standing there counts toward the Minyan formed inside the room. By contrast, Rabbenu Yeruham (1290-1350) maintained that the area of the doorway is considered outside the room. The Bet Yosef shows that the Rambam follows Rabbenu Yeruham's view, noting the Rambam's ruling that if someone brought the meat of the Pesach sacrifice to the doorway of the home on the night of Pesach, he transgresses the Torah prohibition against bringing the meat of the sacrifice outside the home. The Rambam clearly considered the area of the doorway outside the home, and this would, presumably, apply also to the formation of a Minyan. The Shulhan Aruch accepts this view, and writes that the area of the doorway is not considered part of the room, and thus a person who stands there cannot be counted toward the Minyan. By contrast, the Magen Abraham (Rav Avraham Gombiner, Poland, 1635-1682) cites the work Tanya Rabbati as ruling leniently, that a person in the doorway may, in fact, be counted. This is the view also of the Mishna Berura, citing the Eben Ha'ozer. In light of these different opinions, several Poskim, including the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939), maintained that we must be stringent in both directions. This means that a person standing in the doorway of a room cannot combine with nine men in the room to form a Minyan, and also cannot combine with nine men assembled outside in the hallway, as it is uncertain whether he is considered inside the room or in the hallway. Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025), in Ish Masliah, writes that although it is proper to be stringent in both directions, the Halacha follows the Shulhan Aruch's ruling, and so, strictly speaking, a person standing in the doorway may combine with nine men in the hallway to form a Minyan. Within the Shulhan Aruch's view, there is a difference of opinion regarding the status of a person standing in the area of the doorway closer to the room, such that he would be inside if the door closed. The Mishna Berura writes that according to some understandings of the Shulhan Aruch, even a person standing in this spot is considered outside, and cannot be counted toward a Minyan. This was the position also of the Kaf Ha'haim. Rav Mazuz, however, disagreed, and maintained that the person may be counted in such a case. The Mishna Berura, too, concluded that one may be lenient in this situation, even according to the Shulhan Aruch, given that many Poskim do not accept Rabbenu Yeruham's stringent view to begin with. Rav David Yosef, in Halacha Berura, likewise rules leniently, and this is the Halacha. The Poskim debate the status of a doorway that has no door. Some argue that the only reason why the doorway would not be considered part of the room is that part of the doorway is left outside when the door is closed; therefore, if there is no door, the area of the doorway is viewed as part of the room. Others contend that to the contrary, the possibility of viewing the doorway as part of the room is based on the fact that part of the doorway is inside when the door closes. In practice, then, if there is no door, we must be stringent, and a person standing in the doorway cannot combine with people inside the room or outside the room, regardless of where in the doorway he stands. Summary: If a person is standing in the doorway of a room, then he cannot combine with nine men inside the room to form a Minyan. Strictly speaking, he can join with nine men in the hallway outside the room to form a Minyan, though he should preferably move outside the doorway into the hallway. If he stands in the inner portion of the doorway, such that he would be inside the room if the door would close, then he can combine with nine men standing inside the room, unless there is no door, in which case he cannot combine with either those inside the room or those outside in the hall.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.

Fire and ice fall from the sky, frogs flood the palace, and yet the most surprising instruction isn't a plague—it's a posture: speak to Pharaoh as Melech Mitzrayim. We dig into Vaera's high drama and ask the hard question: why would Moshe be told to honor a tyrant? Drawing on Rashi's breakdown of Moshe's three objections, a striking Zohar about illegitimate kings, and Rav Moshe Sternbuch's powerful thesis, we explore how public honor reframes Pharaoh's downfall as an unmistakable act of God rather than a political stumble.From there, we pivot to a pragmatic read with everyday stakes. What if that instruction also models a timeless persuasion principle—treat people with dignity and they will hear you? The Ramban's guidance on humility and gentle speech becomes a blueprint for conversations that land. Avraham's hospitality shows how influence is built not with pressure but with honor. And when we bring it home, Rambam's insights on marriage and mutual respect, plus a clear approach to parenting and professional negotiations, turn a biblical moment into a usable playbook: lead with respect, ask with clarity, and watch defenses drop.Expect a fast path from text to life: why honoring the other person doesn't excuse wrong, how to pair conviction with courtesy, and where this approach helps—at home, with kids, at work, and in heated debates. If you're ready to trade volume for influence and friction for traction, press play, subscribe for more source-driven takeaways, and tell us where you'll try this first.Support the showJoin The Motivation Congregation WhatsApp community for daily motivational Torah content!------------------Check out our other Torah Podcasts and content! SUBSCRIBE to The Motivation Congregation Podcast for daily motivational Mussar! Listen on Spotify or 24six! Find all Torah talks and listen to featured episodes on our website, themotivationcongregation.org Questions or Comments? Please email me @ michaelbrooke97@gmail.com

Rashi's commentary is an indispensable part of a person's daily studies. His explanation of Chumash, the first five books of the Torah, clarifies the "simple" meaning of the text so that a bright child of five could understand it. At the same time, it is the crucial foundation of some of the most profound legal analysis and mystical discourses that came after it.

These classes teach the day's section of the weekly Torah portion. The lesson is taught using the original Hebrew text with the indispensable commentary of Rashi—both translated and elucidated so that anyone can follow along.