Podcasts about Shimon

1 section- debate and basis for the prohibition/lack thereof of chametz eating/benefiting prior to, during, and following Pesach (R' Yehuda, R' Shimon, R' Yose HaGlili)

1 section- debate and basis for the prohibition/lack thereof of chametz eating/benefiting prior to, during, and following Pesach (R' Yehuda, R' Shimon, R' Yose HaGlili)

Diagrams of Holacha (R. Shimon) - Document for Daf 14 by Simon Wolf

The name, and the connection to what he said.Source Sheet: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zyCyvARUdGUPpcBkbaLGlldhYbxnWwO5/view?usp=share_link

Study Guide Zevachim 11 The Gemara seeks to find a source for the opinion of the rabbis that the blood of the guilt offering whose blood is brought into the Sanctuary is not disqualified. Why is the guilt offering not treated like the sin offering? After the first attempt by a logical kal v’chomer argument is rejected, they learn it from a drasha from the verse relating to that law. According to the rabbis’ opinion in our Mishna that a sin offering slaughtered with intent for another offering is disqualified, but a guilt offering is not, one can understand the comparison in a braita of two different types of meal offering – one to a sin offering (will be disqualified is offered for the wrong sacrifice) and one to a guilt offering (will not be disqualified. In the braita, this is derived from a verse, Vayikra 6:10. How does Rabbi Eliezer understand this verse, which differentiates between sin and guilt offerings? To answer the question, they quote a Mishna with a different differentiation. This leads to a further question as both sources quote Rabbi Shimon – how can he derive two different things from the same verse? This question is resolved as well. Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion in our Mishna was derived from a verse that compared the guilt offering to a sin offering. The rabbis use that verse to derive that a guilt offering also requires smicha, leaning on the animal. Rabbi Yochanan and Rabba explain that Rabbi Eliezer agrees with Yosef ben Honi’s position in the Mishna that an offering brought for a Pesach (on the 14th of Nissan) is disqualified as well. Rabba points out that he disagrees, though, about an offering brought with the intent of a sin offering and does not hold that it is disqualified. To prove this, a lengthy braita is quoted, featuring a debate between Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Eliezer, as well as the logical arguments of Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Eliezer's attempts to disprove them. In the course of the discussion, it becomes clear that Rabbi Eliezer does not hold that an offering slaughtered with intent for a sin offering is disqualified. Shimon ben Azaria holds that an offering brought with the intention of a higher level of sanctity is not disqualified, but one brought with the intention of a lower level is. The source for this is from Vayikra 22:15. Does he disagree on two counts and he holds that it also atones for the owner, or not? This question is left unanswered. Rabbi Yehoshua and Ben Beteira disagree in the Mishna about a Pesach sacrifice that was slaughtered for the intent of a different sacrifice on the morning of the fourteenth will be disqualified as well. Rabbi Elazar, in the name of Rabbi Oshaya, explains that their disagreement is broader as they also disagree about whether a Pesach sacrificed slaughtered for its own sake will be accepted if it was slaughtered in the morning, meaning, is the morning also a valid time for bringing the Pesach sacrifice.

Study Guide Zevachim 11 The Gemara seeks to find a source for the opinion of the rabbis that the blood of the guilt offering whose blood is brought into the Sanctuary is not disqualified. Why is the guilt offering not treated like the sin offering? After the first attempt by a logical kal v’chomer argument is rejected, they learn it from a drasha from the verse relating to that law. According to the rabbis’ opinion in our Mishna that a sin offering slaughtered with intent for another offering is disqualified, but a guilt offering is not, one can understand the comparison in a braita of two different types of meal offering – one to a sin offering (will be disqualified is offered for the wrong sacrifice) and one to a guilt offering (will not be disqualified. In the braita, this is derived from a verse, Vayikra 6:10. How does Rabbi Eliezer understand this verse, which differentiates between sin and guilt offerings? To answer the question, they quote a Mishna with a different differentiation. This leads to a further question as both sources quote Rabbi Shimon – how can he derive two different things from the same verse? This question is resolved as well. Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion in our Mishna was derived from a verse that compared the guilt offering to a sin offering. The rabbis use that verse to derive that a guilt offering also requires smicha, leaning on the animal. Rabbi Yochanan and Rabba explain that Rabbi Eliezer agrees with Yosef ben Honi’s position in the Mishna that an offering brought for a Pesach (on the 14th of Nissan) is disqualified as well. Rabba points out that he disagrees, though, about an offering brought with the intent of a sin offering and does not hold that it is disqualified. To prove this, a lengthy braita is quoted, featuring a debate between Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Eliezer, as well as the logical arguments of Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Eliezer's attempts to disprove them. In the course of the discussion, it becomes clear that Rabbi Eliezer does not hold that an offering slaughtered with intent for a sin offering is disqualified. Shimon ben Azaria holds that an offering brought with the intention of a higher level of sanctity is not disqualified, but one brought with the intention of a lower level is. The source for this is from Vayikra 22:15. Does he disagree on two counts and he holds that it also atones for the owner, or not? This question is left unanswered. Rabbi Yehoshua and Ben Beteira disagree in the Mishna about a Pesach sacrifice that was slaughtered for the intent of a different sacrifice on the morning of the fourteenth will be disqualified as well. Rabbi Elazar, in the name of Rabbi Oshaya, explains that their disagreement is broader as they also disagree about whether a Pesach sacrificed slaughtered for its own sake will be accepted if it was slaughtered in the morning, meaning, is the morning also a valid time for bringing the Pesach sacrifice.

How difficult is it to repent? How hard is it to examine your behavior, your choices, your values, your decisions to determine which are in need of improvement? How hard is it to reconsider your choices, to regret your mistakes, and to chart a new path forward, a path of righteousness, a path of purity, a path of holiness? Repentance demands a degree of self-sacrifice. To repent means to abandon from your previous self and to forge a new person, one free of that sinful way. In effect, to repent is to to eliminate the previous self in order to make way for the new you.  Surprisingly, on Moshe's last day of his life, he describes repentance as something which is very easy. It is not distance, it is not beyond you, is not in the heavens or across the seas; it is in your mouth and your heart to perform it. In this interesting, elegant, and very topical podcast, we reveal new frameworks of repentance that will help us move past any negative associations we may have with repentance, and make the upcoming season of repentance more powerful, more productive, and more efficacious.– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –This Parsha Podcast is dedicated in honor of our parents Drs. David and Susanne Gelb from the Gelb, Goldman and Shacknofsky families. Wishing them and all of Klal Yisrael a Shana Tova Umetuka, a good and sweet New Year. May this learning also  be in merit of Avner ben Avraham HaCohen, Shayndel bat David, Meshulam ben David, Avraham ben Menachem Mendel HaKohen, Ashraf Rachel bat Yosef Halevi, and Nissan ben Shimon. May their Neshamas have an Aliyah. – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –DONATE: Please consider supporting the podcasts by making a donation to help fund our Jewish outreach and educational efforts at https://www.torchweb.org/support.php. Thank you!– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –Email me with questions, comments, and feedback: rabbiwolbe@gmail.com– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –SUBSCRIBE to my Newsletterrabbiwolbe.com/newsletter– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –SUBSCRIBE to Rabbi Yaakov Wolbe's PodcastsThe Parsha PodcastThe Jewish History PodcastThe Mitzvah Podcast This Jewish LifeThe Ethics PodcastTORAH 101 ★ Support this podcast ★

Audio, spa_t_norav_2025-09-17_lesson_zohar-la-am-hakdama-yetizat-rashbi-memeara_n1_p3. Lesson_part :: Daily_lesson 1 :: Lessons_series. Zóhar para todos . Introducción del Libro de El Zóhar

Audio, spa_t_norav_2025-09-17_lesson_zohar-la-am-hakdama-yetizat-rashbi-memeara_n1_p3. Lesson_part :: Daily_lesson 1 :: Lessons_series. Zóhar para todos . Introducción del Libro de El Zóhar

Video, spa_t_norav_2025-09-17_lesson_zohar-la-am-hakdama-yetizat-rashbi-memeara_n1_p3. Lesson_part :: Daily_lesson 1 :: Lessons_series. Zóhar para todos . Introducción del Libro de El Zóhar

Video, spa_t_norav_2025-09-17_lesson_zohar-la-am-hakdama-yetizat-rashbi-memeara_n1_p3. Lesson_part :: Daily_lesson 1 :: Lessons_series. Zóhar para todos . Introducción del Libro de El Zóhar

Masechet Zevachim is sponsored by Esther Kremer in loving memory of her father, Manny Gross on his third yahrzeit. "He exemplified a path of holiness and purity, living with kedushah in his everyday life." Today’s daf is sponsored by Judi Felber in loving memory of her mother, Yocheved bat Zvi and Sara, on her 4th yahrzeit. If one takes an animal that was designated for a specific sacrificial purpose and slaughters it with the intention that it be used for a different type of offering (shelo lishma), the sacrifice is not invalidated. It must still be offered according to its original designation. However, it does not fulfill the obligation of the person who brought the sacrifice. There are exceptions to this rule - cases in which slaughtering with the wrong intent completely disqualifies the offering. The Mishna records four differing opinions regarding these exceptions: Tana Kamma holds that a sin offering (chatat) and a Passover offering (korban Pesach) - when brought at the proper time (the afternoon of the 14th of Nissan, or possibly even the morning) - are disqualified if slaughtered with incorrect intent. Rabbi Eliezer adds the guilt offering (asham) to the list, arguing that it is similar in nature to the sin offering. Yosi ben Honi expands the rule further, stating that any sacrifice slaughtered with the mistaken intent that it be offered as a sin offering or a Passover offering on the 14th of Nissan is disqualified. Shimon, brother of Azaria, maintains that if a sacrifice is slaughtered with the intent that it be offered as a higher-level offering than originally designated, it remains valid. However, if the intent is to downgrade it to a lower-level offering, the sacrifice is disqualified. The Mishna provides examples of what constitutes higher and lower offerings. The Gemara raises a question: Why does the Mishna use the word "ela" ("but") instead of "ve" ("and") in the phrase “but [a sacrifice slaughtered with the wrong intent] does not fulfill the owner’s obligation”? The answer given is that although the sacrifice does not fulfill the owner's obligation, its original sanctity and designation remain intact. Therefore, the remaining sacrificial rites must be performed in accordance with its original purpose. This explanation aligns with a statement made by Rava, and two reasons are offered to support this ruling—one derived from a biblical verse, and the other based on logical reasoning. A further question arises: If a sacrifice is slaughtered without any specific intent, is that considered “no intent” or does it count as “intent”? Rava infers from the Mishna that such a case is treated as if it were done with intent. However, he notes a contradiction with the laws of lishma regarding a get (divorce document), which must be written specifically for the woman being divorced. Why, then, is the law different in each case? After addressing this question, the Gemara investigates the sources that underpin Rava’s apparent contradiction: first, that a sacrifice brought without specific intent is still valid; and second, that a get lacking explicit intent is invalid.  

Masechet Zevachim is sponsored by Esther Kremer in loving memory of her father, Manny Gross on his third yahrzeit. "He exemplified a path of holiness and purity, living with kedushah in his everyday life." Today’s daf is sponsored by Judi Felber in loving memory of her mother, Yocheved bat Zvi and Sara, on her 4th yahrzeit. If one takes an animal that was designated for a specific sacrificial purpose and slaughters it with the intention that it be used for a different type of offering (shelo lishma), the sacrifice is not invalidated. It must still be offered according to its original designation. However, it does not fulfill the obligation of the person who brought the sacrifice. There are exceptions to this rule - cases in which slaughtering with the wrong intent completely disqualifies the offering. The Mishna records four differing opinions regarding these exceptions: Tana Kamma holds that a sin offering (chatat) and a Passover offering (korban Pesach) - when brought at the proper time (the afternoon of the 14th of Nissan, or possibly even the morning) - are disqualified if slaughtered with incorrect intent. Rabbi Eliezer adds the guilt offering (asham) to the list, arguing that it is similar in nature to the sin offering. Yosi ben Honi expands the rule further, stating that any sacrifice slaughtered with the mistaken intent that it be offered as a sin offering or a Passover offering on the 14th of Nissan is disqualified. Shimon, brother of Azaria, maintains that if a sacrifice is slaughtered with the intent that it be offered as a higher-level offering than originally designated, it remains valid. However, if the intent is to downgrade it to a lower-level offering, the sacrifice is disqualified. The Mishna provides examples of what constitutes higher and lower offerings. The Gemara raises a question: Why does the Mishna use the word "ela" ("but") instead of "ve" ("and") in the phrase “but [a sacrifice slaughtered with the wrong intent] does not fulfill the owner’s obligation”? The answer given is that although the sacrifice does not fulfill the owner's obligation, its original sanctity and designation remain intact. Therefore, the remaining sacrificial rites must be performed in accordance with its original purpose. This explanation aligns with a statement made by Rava, and two reasons are offered to support this ruling—one derived from a biblical verse, and the other based on logical reasoning. A further question arises: If a sacrifice is slaughtered without any specific intent, is that considered “no intent” or does it count as “intent”? Rava infers from the Mishna that such a case is treated as if it were done with intent. However, he notes a contradiction with the laws of lishma regarding a get (divorce document), which must be written specifically for the woman being divorced. Why, then, is the law different in each case? After addressing this question, the Gemara investigates the sources that underpin Rava’s apparent contradiction: first, that a sacrifice brought without specific intent is still valid; and second, that a get lacking explicit intent is invalid.  

Kollel Iyun Halacha. Shuirim are held Sun-Thurs at 11 Gudz Road Lakewood NJ. For more info email: kih185miller@gmail.com

Is It True?

Sponsored by Mark and Tammy Friedman and family in memory of the 1st yartzeit of their father Marshall Friedman, Mutyah Yechezkel ben Shimon.

Kollel Iyun Halacha. Shuirim are held Sun-Thurs at 11 Gudz Road Lakewood NJ. For more info email: kih185miller@gmail.com

#391> To purchase Imrei Shai: https://alehzayis.com/product/%d7%90%d7%9e%d7%a8%d7%99-%d7%a9%d7%99/> To join the SeforimChatter WhatsApp community: https://chat.whatsapp.com/DZ3C2CjUeD9AGJvXeEODtK> To join the SeforimChatter WhatsApp status: https://wa.me/message/TI343XQHHMHPN1>  To support the podcast or to sponsor an episode follow this link: https://seforimchatter.com/support-seforimchatter/or email seforimchatter@gmail.com (Zelle/QP this email address)Support the show

Kollel Iyun Halacha. Shuirim are held Sun-Thurs at 11 Gudz Road Lakewood NJ. For more info email: kih185miller@gmail.com

Tonight we learned the identities of the two children who were murdered Wednesday morning at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis. CNN's Shimon Prokupecz speaks to a fellow student, 11-year-old Chloe Francoual, who shares her experience as the shooting unfolded. Shimon got permission from Chloe's father to speak with her. Plus, stunning developments at the CDC. President Trump's pick to run the agency has now been fired, and four top officials, some of the most senior and experienced public servants at the agency, quit in protest. Also, sources say HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy is expected to name his deputy as the acting CDC director. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

1 section- first explanation of debate (Abayey v'Rava) regarding smelling incense against will, based on debate about "davar she'eino mitkaven" (R' Yehuda v'R' Shimon)

1 section- first explanation of debate (Abayey v'Rava) regarding smelling incense against will, based on debate about "davar she'eino mitkaven" (R' Yehuda v'R' Shimon)

It's Elul, and we're focusing on Defining Success as Bnei Torah in the workplace. What does real success look like? Is it possible to set goals that are both ambitious and compassionate?This week, we sit down with Rav Shimon Isaacson, Rosh Yeshiva of Mevaseret. Before entering the world of Torah and chinuch, Rav Isaacson worked in Big Law in New York City. Many assume he left that life to escape its spiritual emptiness — but the truth is much more surprising.SummaryIn this episode, I sat down with Rav Shimon Isaacson, Rosh Yeshiva of Mevaseret, to trace his remarkable journey from Big Law associate to respected mechanech and community leader in Israel. Rav Isaacson shares how his wife's passion for Aliyah shaped their family's path, how he balanced intense Torah learning with a demanding legal career, and how an unusual arrangement of “lawyer in the summer, learner in the year” gave him the springboard into full-time chinuch.The conversation dives into big life questions: What makes for a successful decision-making process? How can a Ben Torah thrive in the workforce? What does passion in Avodas Hashem look like? Rav Isaacson also reflects on 30 years of Aliyah, the role of rebbeim as life guides, the value of combining Torah greatness with real-world experience, and how yeshiva can prepare talmidim for decades of growth ahead.

Kollel Iyun Halacha. Shuirim are held Sun-Thurs at 11 Gudz Road Lakewood NJ. For more info email: kih185miller@gmail.com

1)       Why in Parshas Eikev does Onkelos translate ורגלך לא בצקה as מסנך לא יחיפו?[1]2)      Does Pas Akum include bread baked in geothermal heat?[2]3)      A doorframe has a diagonal lintel, the right doorpost being taller than the left one. When measuring the ‘top third', do we measure the doorpost or the doorway?[3] 4)      Changes in the Pizmon שלוש עשרה מדות in Selichos of Erev Rosh haShono:[4]5)      May a weekday Krias haTorah be held for less than 6 men who haven't heard yet?[5]6)      May a man trim his eyebrows? [6]7)      The fence of our yard is not 10 tefochim tall. I wish to rectify this with a poles-&-wire structure. Do the poles have to be 10 tefochim higher than the top of the low fence?[7] 8)      Reuvain lent Shimon $500 and Shimon gave Reuvain his laptop as collateral. The laptop got damaged whilst in Reuvain's care. Does Shimon have to pay the full $500?[8]9)      Does a yogurt-machine become truly dairy, since the product is never really hot?[9]10)  Feedback on Chazoras haShatz:[10][1]   ה'נתינה לגר'מפרש שראה להשוות ל'שמלה' דלעיל מיני'.[2]  בס' חלקתבנימין (סי' קיב ד"ה כותח של עו"כ) מוכיח שאע"פ שבישול עכו"םבחמה אינו אסור, אבל פת אסורה אף בכה"ג.[3]  בס' שכל טוב(סי' רפט ס"ק עו) מסתפק בזה. וע"ע ס' שערי מזוזה פ"ט סל"ד –לקבוע בלא ברכה.[4] ברובספרי הסליחות הרי פיוט זה מופיע ב'נוסח מתוקן', בכדי שלא ייראה כמתפלל אל המדות.וכן הוא בסליחות למנהג חב"ד משנת תשט"ו. במהדורת תשכ"ג נספח 'ליקוטטעמים ומקורות', מכ"ק אדמו"ר זי"ע. שם מציע תיקונים רבים לפיוט זהבבחינת החזרת עטרה ליושנה – אבל בפנים הספר נשאר הפיוט כמקדם. בתחלת שנותהלמ"ד מופץ דף עם נוסח הפיוט להחזיר עטרה ליושנה. נוסח זה תואם עם ההצעותב'ליקוט טעמים ומקורות', אבל עם שינויים רבים, רובם בין ל"ז לל"נ.במהדורות באות שולב נוסח "עטרה ליושנה" בספרי הסליחות של חב"ד. מהסיבת המעבר אז? אולי קשור עם הופעת סדר הסליחות מהדורת גולדשמיט (מוה"קתשכ"ה). אבל יש כמה שינויים בין נוסח חב"ד ונוסח גולדשמיט.  [5] בשו"ת צמח צדק (או"חח"ב סי' ) דן לענין הצום בעת המגפה ר"ל, ומתיר לקרוא בתורה בג' שהםמתענים. ולכאורה היינו רק בשעת הדחק. עוד פוסקים המקילים – ראה אשי ישראלפל"ח הע' סז.[6] ס' ידי כהן – לא ילבש פי"ב ס"ד. [7] הצעתי למתוח חוט מאוזן תוך ג' טפחים, ובכך להגבי'הקיר לשיעור י' טפחים.[8] בשו"ע חו"מ סימן עב ס"ב, למחברהוי ש"ש, לרמ"א אולי ש"ח. בפשיעה ודאי חייב ובאונס בודאי פטור -ראה פתחי חושן דיני הלואה פ"ח. [9] שיעור יד סולדת בו – לא פחות מ-45 צלזיוס (שמירתשבת כהלכתה רפ"א). ויש לחשוש גם לדין בית שאור. האם נאמר בזה דין כבושכמבושל?  ראיתי בפסקים ותשובות סי' קה:ג שלא נאמר 'כבוד' במיונז וגבינה, כיאינו מתנועע. וא"כ ה"ה היגורט שנעמד.[10]מאמר משנת תשמ"ח.

Ariel Property Advisors hosted its summer Coffee and Cap Rates event on July 30th, sharing the latest trends in New York City's investment sales market.Over 250 NYC real estate professionals gathered for this live networking breakfast at TD Bank's conference center at One Vanderbilt. The theme of the event was “Investing Through Change.”Shimon Shkury, President and Founder of Ariel Property Advisors, opened the event with a comprehensive overview of New York City's investment sales market and highlighted key insights from the firm's recently published mid-year research reports.For more details on the event and to access our research reports, visit arielpa.nyc.

This week we sit down with MMA Prospect Shimon Smortritsky. What's it like competing on the Regional and International Scene and Contender Series. Coach Bryan is available for Clinics worldwide. Email: levelupgrappling@gmail.com

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

In this episode, I opened a retirement account live on camera, and by the end of this it you'll know more than 99% of your friends about investing. Ready to retire a millionaire? Let's dig in.(Please don't ignore this if you're young. I promise you'll thank us when you're nicely aged.)Shimon Willig's contact info: Shimon.Willig@mwminvest.com✬ SPONSORS OF EPISODE 97 ✬► TWILLORY – Premium men's wear that works hard and looks even better. Use promo code CHAI20 at Twillory.com/KosherMoney for 20% off your first order.► BITBEAN – Got big ideas but clunky systems holding you back? BitBean is the go-to team for custom software that actually works for your business. Whether you're in healthcare, finance, or retail, they've built powerful platforms that scale smart.

Kollel Iyun Halacha. Shuirim are held Sun-Thurs at 185 Miller Road Lakewood NJ. For more info email: kih185miller@gmail.com

Kollel Iyun Halacha. Shuirim are held Sun-Thurs at 185 Miller Road Lakewood NJ. For more info email: kih185miller@gmail.com

Kollel Iyun Halacha. Shuirim are held Sun-Thurs at 185 Miller Road Lakewood NJ. For more info email: kih185miller@gmail.com

Dedicated to Meir Shimon Ben Gavriel Amer who was tragically killed in Gaza before completing his Service as Staff Sergeant for Netsach Yehuda amongst many other holy soldiers from the IDF... May all be comforted and healed

Kollel Iyun Halacha. Shuirim are held Sun-Thurs at 185 Miller Road Lakewood NJ. For more info email: kih185miller@gmail.com

The Torah begins the story of Korah's brazen uprising against Moshe Rabbenu by introducing him as "Korah, son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi." Rashi notes that the Torah traces Korah's genealogy back to Levi, but it stopped there, without going one generation further, mentioning "the son of Yaakob." This was done, Rashi explains, in fulfillment of Yaakob Abinu's request before his passing. In Yaakob's parting words to his sons, when he addressed Shimon and Levi, he proclaimed, "Bi'khalam Al Tehad Kebodi" – that his honor should not be associated with their "congregation" (Bereshit 49:6). This refers to the "congregation" assembled by Korah for the purpose of challenging the authority of Moshe Rabbenu. Yaakob did not want his name mentioned in the context of this sinful uprising, and so the Torah identified Korah only as "son of Yitzhar, son of Kehat, son of Levi," without adding, "son of Yaakob." Several later scholars addressed the obvious problem with Rashi's comments – his assumption that the Torah should have traced Korah's lineage all the way back to Yaakob. Rashi says that the Torah would have mentioned also "son of Yaakob" if not for Yaakob's request that his name be omitted – but why would Yaakob's name have needed to be mentioned? For that matter, why did the Torah bother tracing Korah's lineage even back to Levi? The Torah already presented the genealogy of the tribe of Levi, back in the Book of Shemot (6), and Korah's family background is included there. Why did the Torah go through the trouble of telling us that Korah was the "son of Yitzhar, the son of Kehat, the son of Levi," and why would it have added also "son of Yaakob" if Yaakob hadn't asked not to be mentioned? A fascinating answer is given by the Maharal of Prague (Rav Yehuda Loew, 1512-1609), in his Gur Aryeh. He explains that the Torah wanted to emphasize the extent of Korah's evil in launching this uprising against Moshe, by noting his distinguished lineage. Korah himself was a prominent member of the nation, among those who carried the ark during travel, but also descended from outstanding Sadikim – Yitzhar, Kehat, Levi, and the patriarchs. Of course, Korah's revolt would have been a grievous sin no matter who he was, but his prominent family background made it particularly severe. This is why the Torah made a point of mentioning his distinguished, righteous predecessors – and would have gone as far as mentioning also Yaakob Abinu, except that Yaakob asked that his name be omitted from this context. The Maharal's explanation brings to mind an insight of the Maggid of Dubna (1741-1804) regarding a verse in Parashat Behukotai (26:42). This verse appears in the section known as the "Tocheha," where G-d warns of the dreadful calamities that He would bring upon Beneh Yisrael as punishment for their misdeeds. G-d in this verse proclaims that He would remember the covenant He made with the patriarchs. It seems that He is now offering consolation, emphasizing that despite His anger, and although He would be punishing the people, He would nevertheless have compassion due to His covenant with the Abot. However, the next verse then continues the description of the exile that the Jewish People would suffer on account of their sins – indicating that the comforting conclusion of the Tocheha has not yet begun. The Maggid of Dubna thus explains that in this verse, G-d warns the people that their wrongdoing is exceptionally severe because of whom they descend from – the sacred patriarchs, with whom Hashem made a special covenant. As heirs of this covenant, and members of this special nation, their misdeeds are considered graver. The Maggid draws an analogy to two people who committed the same minor misdemeanor – a prince, and a poor peasant. The peasant is sentenced to several weeks of prison, whereas the prince is handed a ten-year jail sentence. The reason is that the prince's offense is far more grievous due to his family background, because he is the king's son, a member of the royal family. We, Am Yisrael, must live with this awareness, that we are royalty, that we are "princes," the children of Abraham, Yishak and Yaakob. As members of the "royal family," who have received and studied the Torah, which instructs us how to live a "regal" lifestyle, more is expected of us than of other people. We are bidden to maintain the high standards demanded of Hashem's special nation who represent Him to the rest of the world, and always strive to be worthy of this unique privilege.

Does Hearing a Beracha for Tefillin from Someone Else Count—And What If the Speaker or Listener Makes a Mistake? One of the foundational principles in Halacha is Shome'a Ke'Oneh —"the listener is as if he himself recited." This principle allows a person to fulfill a Beracha obligation by hearing someone else say the Beracha and answering "Amen," provided certain conditions are met. This rule applies not only to communal rituals like Kiddush, Havdala, or Megillah, but also to personal Misvot such as Tefillin . For example, if someone says the Beracha over Tefillin aloud with the intent to fulfill the obligation for another, the listener may rely on that Beracha and is exempt from saying his own— if all the proper conditions are met . The Halachic Conditions for Shome'a Ke'Oneh to Work According to Shulhan Aruch (O.H. 213:2), four conditions must be present for Shome'a Ke'Oneh to apply: The person saying the Beracha must have intent to fulfill the obligation for the listener. The listener must also have intent to be yotze through the speaker's Beracha. The listener must hear the entire Beracha clearly —from "Baruch Ata" through the conclusion. The listener should answer "Amen" immediately upon hearing the end of the Beracha. If all of these are fulfilled, the listener is considered to have personally recited the Beracha and can then proceed to perform the Misva—in this case, placing Tefillin— without saying his own Beracha . Applying This to Tefillin In many Sephardic yeshivot and minyanim, it is common for a father to recite the Beracha aloud while helping his son put on Tefillin for the first time. Or a Hazan may say the Beracha for several men in the room. So long as the speaker and listener have the mutual kavana (intent), and the listener hears the Beracha clearly and answers "Amen," this is fully valid. The Ben Ish Hai and Kaf Ha'Haim both encourage the use of this mechanism, especially for beginners or people who may struggle with pronunciation or correct Beracha wording. What If the Speaker Interrupts? Now we come to a practical concern. What happens if the person who said the Beracha speaks between the Beracha and putting on the Tefillin ? For example, if Reuven says "Baruch Ata… Lehani'ah Tefillin," and then says something unrelated before placing the Tefillin (e.g., "Where's my bag?" or "Let me adjust my jacket"), he has made a Hefsek (interruption), and according to Maran (O.H. 25:9), he is required to recite a new Beracha . But what about Shimon , who was listening and answered "Amen" with the intent to be yotze? This is debated among the Poskim: According to some, the listener's Beracha is still valid , because at the moment he heard it, the Beracha was said properly and with kavana. This is the ruling of Hacham Ovadia Yosef ( Yabia Omer and Halichot Olam ), who holds that the speaker's later mistake does not invalidate the listener's fulfillment . Others argue more strictly, saying the speaker's interruption disqualifies the entire process—including for the listener. However, this view is not followed in practice by the majority of Sephardic authorities. What If the Listener Interrupts? If the listener himself speaks after answering "Amen" and before placing his own Tefillin , the ruling is more severe. In this case, the listener has created a Hefsek between the Beracha and the act , and must now recite a new Beracha , specifically "Al Misvat Tefillin" before placing the Shel Rosh. This is a straightforward ruling in Shulhan Aruch and the Ben Ish Hai . The interruption breaks the connection between the Beracha and the Misva, even though the listener did not speak during the actual Beracha. However, if the speech was related to the Misva —such as "Pass me the Shel Rosh" or "Can you adjust the knot?"—this is not ideal but is not considered a full Hefsek , and a new Beracha is not required . What If There Was No Kavana? Shome'a Ke'Oneh only works when both parties have intent : If the speaker was not aware that someone was listening—or had no intent to fulfill their obligation—then the listener is not yotze . Similarly, if the listener was distracted, unsure, or did not intend to be yotze, the Beracha does not apply to him. The Hida and Kaf Ha'Haim emphasize this in many places, warning against relying on a public Beracha unless you're sure both parties are aware and participating with clear intent. In cases of doubt (e.g., someone is unsure if the speaker had him in mind), the principle of Safek Berachot Le'hakel applies: Do not repeat the Beracha unless you are certain that it is required. Summary: A person may fulfill the Beracha for Tefillin by listening to someone else , if both have intent and the listener answers "Amen." If the speaker interrupts after the Beracha, most Sephardic Poskim say the listener is still covered . If the listener interrupts before putting on the Tefillin, he must recite a new Beracha . Speech related to the Misva is discouraged but not a disqualifying Hefsek. Without mutual intent , the Beracha does not count . When in doubt, follow Safek Berachot Le'hakel —do not repeat the Beracha unless clearly necessary.

When both parties are untrustworthy and cannot take an oath, Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Meir disagree about the proper procedure. A debate emerges about who holds which opinion, as one maintains the money should be split while the other argues that the oath returns to its original place, though it remains unclear which rabbi said which. Additionally, there is disagreement about the meaning of the position stating "the oath returns to its place." Rabbi Ami explains that one position is held by the rabbis in Israel while the other belongs to the rabbis in Babylonia. Rav Pappa clarifies that the Babylonian rabbis are Rav and Shmuel, while the Israeli position is represented by Rabbi Abba. Shimon ben Tarfon offers several statements concerning the importance of associating with the right people and avoiding the wrong ones. The Gemara examines the case of a storekeeper who was asked to pay someone's workers. The workers claim they never received payment while the storekeeper insists he paid them. The question arises whether Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi agreed with the Mishna's opinion that each party can take an oath to get paid by the employer. Another issue concerns contradictory witness testimony. If two groups of witnesses contradict each other in court, can they be believed to testify in a different case? Or since we know one group certainly lied, should we reject both groups' testimony in future cases? Rav Huna and Rav Chisda each take different positions on this matter.

When both parties are untrustworthy and cannot take an oath, Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Meir disagree about the proper procedure. A debate emerges about who holds which opinion, as one maintains the money should be split while the other argues that the oath returns to its original place, though it remains unclear which rabbi said which. Additionally, there is disagreement about the meaning of the position stating "the oath returns to its place." Rabbi Ami explains that one position is held by the rabbis in Israel while the other belongs to the rabbis in Babylonia. Rav Pappa clarifies that the Babylonian rabbis are Rav and Shmuel, while the Israeli position is represented by Rabbi Abba. Shimon ben Tarfon offers several statements concerning the importance of associating with the right people and avoiding the wrong ones. The Gemara examines the case of a storekeeper who was asked to pay someone's workers. The workers claim they never received payment while the storekeeper insists he paid them. The question arises whether Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi agreed with the Mishna's opinion that each party can take an oath to get paid by the employer. Another issue concerns contradictory witness testimony. If two groups of witnesses contradict each other in court, can they be believed to testify in a different case? Or since we know one group certainly lied, should we reject both groups' testimony in future cases? Rav Huna and Rav Chisda each take different positions on this matter.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

#365> To purchase "Tefillah B'Tzibbur B'Halacha": https://alehzayis.com/product/%d7%90%d7%94%d7%9c-%d7%a9%d7%9c%d7%95%d7%9d/> To join the SeforimChatter WhatsApp community: https://chat.whatsapp.com/DZ3C2CjUeD9AGJvXeEODtK> To join the SeforimChatter WhatsApp status: https://wa.me/message/TI343XQHHMHPN1>  To support the podcast or to sponsor an episode follow this link: https://seforimchatter.com/support-seforimchatter/or email seforimchatter@gmail.com (Zelle/QP this email address)Support the show

The late Z'ev Ben Shimon HaLevi (Warren Kenton 1933-2020) wrote The Kabbalistic Tree of Life (KS Books, 2025), a metaphysical scheme based on ancient, medieval and modern views of its principles, which describes the structure and dynamic of cosmic laws that operate throughout the four Worlds of Jacob's Ladder and humanity. HaLevi also wrote The Anointed (KS Books, 2025), a fictional Kabbalistic novel about the destiny of one man and the fate of the world. Tune in as we speak with Jonathon Clark, former student of HaLevi and now himself a teacher of Kabbalah, about the life and works of Z'Ev Ben Shimon HaLevi. Jonathon Clark was a student of Z'ev ben Shimon Halevi from 1992 until his death in 2020. His website is www.jonathonclark.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The late Z'ev Ben Shimon Halevi (Warren Kenton 1933-2020) wrote The Kabbalistic Tree of Life (KS Books, 2025), a metaphysical scheme based on ancient, medieval and modern views of its principles, which describes the structure and dynamic of cosmic laws that operate throughout the four Worlds of Jacob's Ladder and humanity. Halevi also wrote The Anointed (KS Books, 2025), a fictional Kabbalistic novel about the destiny of one man and the fate of the world. Tune in as we speak with Jonathon Clark, former student of Halevi and now himself a teacher of Kabbalah, about the life and works of Z'Ev Ben Shimon Halevi. Please visit the Kabbalah Society's website. There you can find more info about Warren's books, study materials, and videos on Warren himself.  Jonathon Clark was a student of Z'ev ben Shimon Halevi from 1992 until his death in 2020. His website is www.jonathonclark.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

To sponsor a podcast and help Rabbi Katz continue his work, go to https://thechesedfund.com/rabbikatz/support-rabbi-katzz-podcast

Podcast Jajam Shlomo (Sally) Zaed R Shimon bar Yojay y r R meir baal hanes Conferencia

There is nothing a person can accomplish without Hashem's help—and with Hashem's help, anything is possible. Even the smallest tasks require siyata dishmaya . A man shared an experience at an airport with his family. They were waiting for their last piece of luggage to appear on the carousel. His daughter asked if she could be the one to retrieve it, and he agreed. As the suitcase came around, she prepared to grab it—but in that moment, a single strand of her hair got caught on another piece of their luggage. This slight delay caused her to miss the suitcase, and due to the crowd, they couldn't retrieve it until it came around again. The man took a powerful lesson from that experience. His daughter had been ready, nothing seemingly stood in her way—yet, clearly, it was Hashem's will for them to wait a few more minutes. Hashem orchestrated it through something as small as a hair. We often have no idea how much He is helping us, even in delays or setbacks. Rabbi David Ammon, Rosh Yeshiva of Noam HaTorah in Israel, recounted a remarkable story. While in Los Angeles on Yom Tov, he was walking to deliver a shiur when he realized a few blocks from his home that he had worn the wrong suit jacket. He turned back to change. Upon his return, a man approached him and asked how he had known to turn around at that moment. Confused, the rabbi asked what he meant. The man explained that moments after the rabbi had turned back, a massive piece of a tree—thirty feet tall—crashed down on the exact path he had been walking. Because of the noise of traffic, the rabbi hadn't even heard it. He was completely unaware that Hashem had just saved his life by prompting him to wear the wrong jacket. On another occasion, Rabbi Ammon shared a story from a yeshiva trip to Europe. While visiting holy sites, someone recommended a sacred shul where three great tzaddikim had once served as rabbis. Entry was by appointment only, which they didn't have, but since they were nearby, they decided to stop by. Miraculously, someone with a key happened to be there at that exact moment to open the doors. Minutes later, a small group arrived—the ones who actually had the appointment. They had come hoping to hold a kumzitz , singing praises to Hashem in the holy site. Seeing the 30 yeshiva boys, they invited them to join, and together they shared what became the most uplifting experience of their trip. Appointments to that shul are rare, often just one or two per day. Hashem had clearly orchestrated the perfect timing for both groups to be there. Another man shared a story involving his son's bar mitzvah. He desperately needed a pair of tefillin but couldn't afford them. He contacted an organization that helps low-income families acquire tefillin , and they added his son to the waiting list. Days later, the organization called with news: a man named Shimon wanted to donate a pair and was given the boy's information. When they spoke to Shimon, he explained how it all unfolded. He had met a man in Williamsburg with a rare talent: the ability to instantly convert any secular date to its corresponding Hebrew date, even decades into the past or future. Shimon gave his secular birthday, and the man replied: "28th of Av." Shimon disagreed, saying it was the 29th. The man insisted. Upon investigation, Shimon discovered that his father had mistakenly told him the wrong date. His birthday occurred during a Yom Kippur Katan tefillah, typically held on the 29th of Av—the day before Rosh Chodesh . But that year, Rosh Chodesh fell on Shabbat, so the tefillah had been pushed up to Thursday, the 28th. Following his family's tradition, Shimon had not begun wearing tefillin until his exact bar mitzvah date—meaning he had missed his first day due to the error. This realization devastated him. He prayed for guidance and atonement. Weeks later, while attending a class, he heard the rabbi mention that if someone accidentally misses a day of tefillin , one way to atone is by donating a pair to someone in need. Overjoyed by the clarity and opportunity, Shimon contacted the organization immediately—and was connected with the bar mitzvah boy in need. Hashem guided each detail of this story—from revealing the mistaken date, to teaching Shimon how to atone, to connecting him with someone whose need matched perfectly with his desire to give. These stories remind us that Hashem is present in every moment and every detail of our lives. From a missed suitcase to a falling tree, from a sacred visit to a humble act of giving—He orchestrates everything with purpose. The more we ask Hashem for help, the more we see His hand in our lives.

Raising a number of problematc aspects re: the text of the famous agadeta

#354> To purchase the new edition of Sefer Habris: https://alehzayis.com/product/%d7%a1%d7%a4%d7%a8-%d7%94%d7%91%d7%a8%d7%99%d7%aa/> To join the SeforimChatter WhatsApp community: https://chat.whatsapp.com/DZ3C2CjUeD9AGJvXeEODtK>  To support the podcast or to sponsor an episode follow this link: https://seforimchatter.com/support-seforimchatter/or email seforimchatter@gmail.com (Zelle/QP this email address)Support the show