Podcasts about talmud yerushalmi

It is forbidden to extend the greeting of "Shalom" to a mourner within twelve months of the passing of his or her father or mother, Heaven forbid. A person who has recently suffered such a loss is not in a position to experience "Shalom," and this greeting is thus inappropriate during this period. A mourner is allowed to extend such a greeting to others; the prohibition applies only to others greeting a mourner with the word "Shalom." It is permissible to extend other kinds of greetings to a mourner, such as "good morning," "good health," and the like. The Sages enacted this prohibition only with regard to the specific greeting of "Shalom." With regard to the common greeting of "Shabbat Shalom" on Shabbat, the Shulhan Aruch, in the laws of mourning, records a custom (based on the Talmud Yerushalmi) to allow extending the greeting of "Shabbat Shalom" to mourners on Shabbat, and this is, indeed, the accepted practice. It is also permissible to extend to a mourner the greeting of "Shalom Alechem" that is customarily exchanged after Birkat Ha'lebana. The reason for this greeting is that since we recite several verses about the downfall of our enemies ("Tipol Alehem Emata Va'fahad…"), we greet one another with "Shalom Alechem" to make it clear that we did not have one another in mind when we expressed our hopes for our enemies' demise. Thus, this greeting is intended not as a friendly gesture, but rather to avoid possible misunderstandings and ill-will, and it is therefore permissible to extend this greeting to a mourner. Furthermore, this greeting is formulated in the plural form – "Alechem" – and thus refers to the entire congregation, and not only to the particular individual that one addresses, and for this reason, too, one may extend this greeting to a mourner. It is forbidden to give a mourner a gift throughout the twelve-month period after a parent's passing. There is no greater "friendly greeting" than a gift, and one therefore may not give a gift to a mourner within twelve months after the passing of his or her parent. This discussion applies only to one observing Abelut (mourning) over a father or mother, Heaven forbid. In the case of one who lost another family member, Heaven forbid, these restrictions apply only during the first thirty days, but not afterward. Summary: It is forbidden to greet a mourner with the greeting of "Shalom," or give a mourner a gift, within twelve months of the passing of his or her parent. It is permissible, however, to extend other greetings, and to greet a mourner with the greeting of "Shabbat Shalom" on Shabbat, and with the "Shalom Alechem" greeting customarily extended after Birkat Ha'lebana. In the case of the passing of another family member (as opposed to a parent), these Halachot apply only during the first thirty days.

**This week's essay is dedicated in memory of Rosa bat Shafia** Parashat Ki-Tisa begins by completing the Torah's discussion of the construction of the Mishkan. In the previous Parashiyot, we read of the building and its furnishings, as well as the special garments worn by the Kohanim and the procedure required for their consecration. The Torah now completes its discussion by presenting a number of additional laws, such as the mandatory annual half-shekel tax ("Mahasit Ha'shekel"), the washing basin at the entrance of the Mishkan (Kiyor), the Ketoret (incense), the anointing oil (Shemen Ha'mish'ha), and the designation of Besalel as the chief artisan who would oversee the project. Having concluded its discussion of the Mishkan, the Torah then speaks of Shabbat, and the strict prohibition against its desecration. Rashi (31:13) explains that the command of Shabbat appears here to indicate that the construction of the Mishkan did not override the Shabbat prohibitions. Hashem was telling the people that as important as it was to build the Mishkan, the place where the Shechina (divine presence) would reside, this project did not supersede the laws of Shabbat, and so the work was to be discontinued on Shabbat. The Klausenberger Rebbe (Rav Yekutiel Yehuda Halberstam, 1905-1994) finds specific significance in the juxtaposition between the command of Shabbat and the immediately preceding verses. Just before the command of Shabbat in our Parasha, Hashem instructs that Besalel should lead the project to construct the Mishkan, and He lists all the various items which Besalel and his team were responsible for making. Near the end this list we find "Bigdeh Ha'kodesh Le'Aharon Ahicha, Ve'et Bigdeh Banav Le'chahen" – the priestly garments (31:10). The juxtaposition between these verses, the Rebbe explained, alludes to the importance of Bigdeh Shabbat – the special garments to be worn on Shabbat. Just as the Kohanim were required to wear special garments when they served in the holiest place – the Mishkan – so must we all wear special garments on the holiest day, Shabbat. Our special Shabbat clothes are our "Bigdeh Kehuna," our "priestly garments," that we are obligated to wear in order to properly respect the sacred day of Shabbat. The Klausenberger Rebbe notes in this context the famous tradition (Talmud Yerushalmi, Ta'anit 1:1) that if the Jewish People would properly observe one Shabbat, we would then be worthy of Mashiah's arrival. The reason, the Rebbe explains, is based on a passage in the Midrash (Bereshit Rabba 65:16) in which Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel extols the extraordinary lengths that Esav went to for the sake of honoring his father, Yishak Abinu. While Esav was, in general, sinful, he excelled in the area of Kibbud Ab (honoring his father). Rabban Shimon mentions that Esav would prepare food for his father, and would then change into his fine garments before serving him, so he would look respectable. He ensured to wear special clothing when serving his father in order to show honor and respect. By the same token, the Klausenberger Rebbe writes, on Shabbat, Hashem comes into our homes, and we are spending the day with Him. It is only fitting, then, that we wear special, fine clothing in His honor. The merit through which Esav's descendants have been able to succeed and prosper, and keep us in exile, is his outstanding devotion to Kibbud Ab, his showing great honor to his father. The way we end this exile, then, is by showing this same level of honor to Hashem – and we do this through our Bigdeh Shabbat, by dressing in honor of Shabbat the way Esav dressed in honor of his father. "Dressing down" has become the norm in our society. People are no longer encouraged to dress formally for work, or for other events. While this policy may have merit in the context of the workplace, we must ensure not to embrace it with regard to Shabbat. On Shabbat, we become like Kohanim, as we are in the Shechina's presence, like the Kohanim in the Bet Ha'mikdash. Thus, like the Kohanim, we are obliged to wear our "Bigdeh Kehuna," our special garments through which we show our honor and reverence for the Almighty.

The Gemara states that the list Haman's ten sons should be read in one breath. The common practice is to also read the word "Aseret" (ten), which sums up the list, in the same breath as the names. The reason for this custom is to emphasize that all ten sons died simultaneously, even though they were hung one after the other. The custom is to also read the words that proceed their names, "V'et Hamesh M'ot Ish"-(and five hundred men) in the same breath, as well. The reason is that these men comprised Haman's sons' army; each son was captain over fifty men. The Shulhan Aruch (siman 690) records this Halacha with the words, "V'sarich Lomar…"- (And it MUST be read…). The Poskim debate whether Maran's language indicates that this Halacha is critical to fulfilling the obligation. That is, if one did not read the names in this manner, B'diavad-after the fact, does he have to go back and read again? In any event, Maran, in his Bet Yosef, cites the opinion of Tosafot that this Halacha is L'Hathila, but if one did not do so, he has fulfilled the Misva after the fact. From this, it can be derived that Maran's intention in the Shulhan Aruch is also only L'Hathila. This is clearly the Rema's opinion, as well. ------ Maran, in Siman 690, records another Halacha that if the reader made mistakes in pronunciation, it is not necessary to be meticulous to correct him. The Megillah does not have the status of a "Sefer"-a holy book, but of an "Iggeret"-a letter. Maran does not distinguish between levels of severity of mistakes. Thus, it seems that even if the mistake changes the meaning of the word, it Is not necessary to correct the reader. However, Maran continues and presents a "Yesh Omrim"-an additional opinion, that this leniency only applies to mistakes that do not change the meaning of the word. This is based on the incident, recorded in the Talmud Yerushalmi, in which the sages did not correct the reader who made a minor mistake in pronouncing the word "Yehudim" (Jews). This implies that the leniency only applies to mistakes that do not change the meaning. Interestingly, Hacham Ovadia rules in accordance with the "Yesh," additional opinion, that any mistake that changes the meaning of the word is critical, and the reader must go back. -------- The Bet Yosef (Siman 690) cites the incredible opinion of Rabbenu Avraham ibn Ezra (1089-1167, Spain). He holds that the Megillah was originally written without "Sof Pasuk"-periods, i.e. end of sentence punctuation. Since it was given as an "Iggeret"- a letter, it was not formally broken up into verses. Only later, Ezra HaSofer added sentence punctuation to the Megillah. Therefore, the Ibn Ezra holds that the Megillah should be read in one long flow, without stopping at the end of the Pesukim-verses. Many authorities question this opinion. Rav Shlomo Alkabes (1500-1576, Tsfat), in his Manot Levi commentary on the Megillah, argues that if the punctuation added by Ezra was not to be applied when reading the Megillah, for what purpose did he add it? On the contrary, the fact that Ezra added periods indicates that they are important and must be followed. This is how Hacham Ovadia rules. The accepted practice is to allow the reader to take a breath in between each Pasuk. SUMMARY If the reader did not read the list of Haman's sons in one breath, he does not have to go back and read it again. Reading mistakes that do not change the meaning of the word are not critical, but mistakes that do change the meaning are critical, and the reader must go back and read correctly. The reader should conform to the end of verse punctuation, and he can take a breath in between each verse.

IntroductionWhile exploring drunkenness in the Talmud Yerushalmi in episode #163 of The Jewish Drinking Show, it was fascinating to read that saying the Shema might be problematic. As such, the 168th episode of The Jewish Drinking Show explores an historical overview of halakhic writings on the topic of saying Shema while drunk.Source SheetThe source sheet for this episode is available here.Time Stamps0:00 Welcome0:11 Introduction to the Topic0:56 Talmudic Text2:51 Medieval Rabbinic Authorities (Rishonim)8:59 16th Century Rabbis20:58 17th-18th Century Rabbis21:12 19th-20th Century Rabbis32:30 Q&A38:15 Thank you37:46 L'ḥayyim“Drinks and Discussion”-style EpisodesThis episode is the 14th "Drinks and Discussion"-style episode of The Jewish Drinking Show on various topics led by Rabbi Drew:Drunken Shema - Episode #168 (This episode)Drunken Birkat HaMazon - Episode #167Drunkenness in the Babylonian Talmud, Part 2 - Episode #166Drunkenness in the Babylonian Talmud, Part 1 - Episode #165Drunkenness in the Talmud Yerushalmi - Episode #164Drunkenness in Early Rabbinic Literature - Episode #163Dukhening Under the Influence - Episode #161Drinking Between Glasses of Wine at the Passover Seder - Episode #154The Purim Katan Episode – Episode #151Drinking During Mourning – Episode #150Drinking In/Out of Sukkot – Episode #142A Significant Rabbinic Discussion on Wine & Drinking: Eruvin 64-65 – Episode #47Drinking During the Ten Days of Repentance: An Introduction – Episode #44Drinking During the Nine Days – Episode #40Support the showThank you for listening!If you have any questions, suggestions, or more, feel free to reach out at Drew@JewishDrinking.coml'chaim!

IntroductionWhile exploring drunkenness in the Talmud Yerushalmi in episode #163 of The Jewish Drinking Show, it was fascinating to read that blessing the birkat hamazon might be problematic. As such, the 167th episode of The Jewish Drinking Show explores an historical overview of halakhic writings on the topic of blessing birkat hamazon while drunk.Source SheetThe source sheet for this episode is available here.Time Stamps0:00 Welcome0:17 Talmudic Text2:20 Medieval Rabbinic Authorities (Rishonim)6:35 16th Century Rabbis13:47 17th-18th Century Rabbis28:46 Late 19th Century Rabbis37:07 Wrapping-up37:46 L'ḥayyim“Drinks and Discussion”-style EpisodesThis episode is the 13th "Drinks and Discussion"-style episode of The Jewish Drinking Show on various topics led by Rabbi Drew:Drunken Birkat HaMazon - Episode #167 (This episode)Drunkenness in the Babylonian Talmud, Part 2 - Episode #166 (This episode)Drunkenness in the Babylonian Talmud, Part 1 - Episode #165Drunkenness in the Talmud Yerushalmi - Episode #164Drunkenness in Early Rabbinic Literature - Episode #163Dukhening Under the Influence - Episode #161Drinking Between Glasses of Wine at the Passover Seder - Episode #154The Purim Katan Episode – Episode #151Drinking During Mourning – Episode #150Drinking In/Out of Sukkot – Episode #142A Significant Rabbinic Discussion on Wine & Drinking: Eruvin 64-65 – Episode #47Drinking During the Ten Days of Repentance: An Introduction – Episode #44Drinking During the Nine Days – Episode #40Support the showThank you for listening!If you have any questions, suggestions, or more, feel free to reach out at Drew@JewishDrinking.coml'chaim!

Based on an understanding of scholasticism as a cross-cultural phenomenon, undertaken by rabbinic, Graeco-Roman, and Christian scholars in late antiquity, this book examines the development of Palestinian rabbinic compilations from social-historical and literary-historical perspectives. Rabbinic Scholarship in the Context of Late Antique Scholasticism: The Development of the Talmud Yerushalmi (Bloomsbury, 2024) focuses on the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi in the context of late antique scholarly practice aimed at preserving past knowledge for future generations. This book provides insight into how rabbinic scholarship in the Land of Israel participated in the wider intellectual practices of Roman-Byzantine times. Beginning with the social, educational, and legal contexts that generated rabbinic knowledge. Catherine Hezser goes on to investigate the oral and written transmission of rabbinic traditions to eventually examine the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi with a comparative and redaction-historical approach. Integrating Palestinian rabbinic education and scholarship into the context of late antique Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Christian scholarly practices, Catherine Hezser demonstrates how rabbinic compilatory techniques resembled but also differed from.those of Hellenistic, Roman, and Christian scholars. The book highlights how rabbinic compilations are idiosyncratic and create a distinct rabbinic identity. Overall, Hezser argues that rabbinic scholarship was an integral part of late antique intellectual life in the Near Middle East and should be recognized as an Eastern equivalent to Western, paideia-based forms of scholarship in the Roman-Byzantine period and beyond. Catherine Hezser is Professor of Jewish Studies at SOAS University of London, UK. Michael Motia teaches in Religious Studies and Classics at UMass Boston. 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

Based on an understanding of scholasticism as a cross-cultural phenomenon, undertaken by rabbinic, Graeco-Roman, and Christian scholars in late antiquity, this book examines the development of Palestinian rabbinic compilations from social-historical and literary-historical perspectives. Rabbinic Scholarship in the Context of Late Antique Scholasticism: The Development of the Talmud Yerushalmi (Bloomsbury, 2024) focuses on the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi in the context of late antique scholarly practice aimed at preserving past knowledge for future generations. This book provides insight into how rabbinic scholarship in the Land of Israel participated in the wider intellectual practices of Roman-Byzantine times. Beginning with the social, educational, and legal contexts that generated rabbinic knowledge. Catherine Hezser goes on to investigate the oral and written transmission of rabbinic traditions to eventually examine the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi with a comparative and redaction-historical approach. Integrating Palestinian rabbinic education and scholarship into the context of late antique Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Christian scholarly practices, Catherine Hezser demonstrates how rabbinic compilatory techniques resembled but also differed from.those of Hellenistic, Roman, and Christian scholars. The book highlights how rabbinic compilations are idiosyncratic and create a distinct rabbinic identity. Overall, Hezser argues that rabbinic scholarship was an integral part of late antique intellectual life in the Near Middle East and should be recognized as an Eastern equivalent to Western, paideia-based forms of scholarship in the Roman-Byzantine period and beyond. Catherine Hezser is Professor of Jewish Studies at SOAS University of London, UK. Michael Motia teaches in Religious Studies and Classics at UMass Boston. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Based on an understanding of scholasticism as a cross-cultural phenomenon, undertaken by rabbinic, Graeco-Roman, and Christian scholars in late antiquity, this book examines the development of Palestinian rabbinic compilations from social-historical and literary-historical perspectives. Rabbinic Scholarship in the Context of Late Antique Scholasticism: The Development of the Talmud Yerushalmi (Bloomsbury, 2024) focuses on the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi in the context of late antique scholarly practice aimed at preserving past knowledge for future generations. This book provides insight into how rabbinic scholarship in the Land of Israel participated in the wider intellectual practices of Roman-Byzantine times. Beginning with the social, educational, and legal contexts that generated rabbinic knowledge. Catherine Hezser goes on to investigate the oral and written transmission of rabbinic traditions to eventually examine the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi with a comparative and redaction-historical approach. Integrating Palestinian rabbinic education and scholarship into the context of late antique Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Christian scholarly practices, Catherine Hezser demonstrates how rabbinic compilatory techniques resembled but also differed from.those of Hellenistic, Roman, and Christian scholars. The book highlights how rabbinic compilations are idiosyncratic and create a distinct rabbinic identity. Overall, Hezser argues that rabbinic scholarship was an integral part of late antique intellectual life in the Near Middle East and should be recognized as an Eastern equivalent to Western, paideia-based forms of scholarship in the Roman-Byzantine period and beyond. Catherine Hezser is Professor of Jewish Studies at SOAS University of London, UK. Michael Motia teaches in Religious Studies and Classics at UMass Boston. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

Based on an understanding of scholasticism as a cross-cultural phenomenon, undertaken by rabbinic, Graeco-Roman, and Christian scholars in late antiquity, this book examines the development of Palestinian rabbinic compilations from social-historical and literary-historical perspectives. Rabbinic Scholarship in the Context of Late Antique Scholasticism: The Development of the Talmud Yerushalmi (Bloomsbury, 2024) focuses on the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi in the context of late antique scholarly practice aimed at preserving past knowledge for future generations. This book provides insight into how rabbinic scholarship in the Land of Israel participated in the wider intellectual practices of Roman-Byzantine times. Beginning with the social, educational, and legal contexts that generated rabbinic knowledge. Catherine Hezser goes on to investigate the oral and written transmission of rabbinic traditions to eventually examine the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi with a comparative and redaction-historical approach. Integrating Palestinian rabbinic education and scholarship into the context of late antique Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Christian scholarly practices, Catherine Hezser demonstrates how rabbinic compilatory techniques resembled but also differed from.those of Hellenistic, Roman, and Christian scholars. The book highlights how rabbinic compilations are idiosyncratic and create a distinct rabbinic identity. Overall, Hezser argues that rabbinic scholarship was an integral part of late antique intellectual life in the Near Middle East and should be recognized as an Eastern equivalent to Western, paideia-based forms of scholarship in the Roman-Byzantine period and beyond. Catherine Hezser is Professor of Jewish Studies at SOAS University of London, UK. Michael Motia teaches in Religious Studies and Classics at UMass Boston. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Based on an understanding of scholasticism as a cross-cultural phenomenon, undertaken by rabbinic, Graeco-Roman, and Christian scholars in late antiquity, this book examines the development of Palestinian rabbinic compilations from social-historical and literary-historical perspectives. Rabbinic Scholarship in the Context of Late Antique Scholasticism: The Development of the Talmud Yerushalmi (Bloomsbury, 2024) focuses on the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi in the context of late antique scholarly practice aimed at preserving past knowledge for future generations. This book provides insight into how rabbinic scholarship in the Land of Israel participated in the wider intellectual practices of Roman-Byzantine times. Beginning with the social, educational, and legal contexts that generated rabbinic knowledge. Catherine Hezser goes on to investigate the oral and written transmission of rabbinic traditions to eventually examine the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi with a comparative and redaction-historical approach. Integrating Palestinian rabbinic education and scholarship into the context of late antique Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Christian scholarly practices, Catherine Hezser demonstrates how rabbinic compilatory techniques resembled but also differed from.those of Hellenistic, Roman, and Christian scholars. The book highlights how rabbinic compilations are idiosyncratic and create a distinct rabbinic identity. Overall, Hezser argues that rabbinic scholarship was an integral part of late antique intellectual life in the Near Middle East and should be recognized as an Eastern equivalent to Western, paideia-based forms of scholarship in the Roman-Byzantine period and beyond. Catherine Hezser is Professor of Jewish Studies at SOAS University of London, UK. Michael Motia teaches in Religious Studies and Classics at UMass Boston. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Based on an understanding of scholasticism as a cross-cultural phenomenon, undertaken by rabbinic, Graeco-Roman, and Christian scholars in late antiquity, this book examines the development of Palestinian rabbinic compilations from social-historical and literary-historical perspectives. Rabbinic Scholarship in the Context of Late Antique Scholasticism: The Development of the Talmud Yerushalmi (Bloomsbury, 2024) focuses on the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi in the context of late antique scholarly practice aimed at preserving past knowledge for future generations. This book provides insight into how rabbinic scholarship in the Land of Israel participated in the wider intellectual practices of Roman-Byzantine times. Beginning with the social, educational, and legal contexts that generated rabbinic knowledge. Catherine Hezser goes on to investigate the oral and written transmission of rabbinic traditions to eventually examine the compilation of the Talmud Yerushalmi with a comparative and redaction-historical approach. Integrating Palestinian rabbinic education and scholarship into the context of late antique Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Christian scholarly practices, Catherine Hezser demonstrates how rabbinic compilatory techniques resembled but also differed from.those of Hellenistic, Roman, and Christian scholars. The book highlights how rabbinic compilations are idiosyncratic and create a distinct rabbinic identity. Overall, Hezser argues that rabbinic scholarship was an integral part of late antique intellectual life in the Near Middle East and should be recognized as an Eastern equivalent to Western, paideia-based forms of scholarship in the Roman-Byzantine period and beyond. Catherine Hezser is Professor of Jewish Studies at SOAS University of London, UK. Michael Motia teaches in Religious Studies and Classics at UMass Boston. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/religion

The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 191) writes that the Sages instituted an abridged version of Birkat Ha'mazon to be recited by workers who are being paid wages for a full day of work. Since their time belongs to the employer, the Rabbis allowed the workers to recite a shorter version of Birkat Ha'mazon. The workers recite the entire first Beracha, and then a brief combination of the second and third Berachot. The fourth Beracha, which to begin with does not constitute a Torah obligation, is omitted, and certainly the "Ha'rahaman" section is omitted, resulting in a significantly shorter text of Birkat Ha'mazon. This was done to minimize the amount of worktime taken away from the employer. This Halacha does not apply nowadays, because, as the Poskim explain, employers today – thankfully – are not so strict that they refuse to allow their employees the several minutes needed to recite the complete Birkat Ha'mazon. The Aruch Ha'shulhan (Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein of Nevarduk, 1829-1908) goes so far as to say that even if the employer explicitly stipulates that he hires the worker on condition that he does not recite the full text of Birkat Ha'mazon during work hours, this condition is not binding. Since the accepted practice today is to treat the full text of Birkat Ha'mazon as an outright obligation, the employer is not halachically permitted to make such a stipulation. Therefore, even if an employer makes this demand, the employee recites the full text of Birkat Ha'mazon. (Birkat Ha'mazon is similar in this regard to the evening Arbit prayer, which, strictly speaking, is optional, but has been accepted by the Jewish Nation as an obligatory prayer, and it must therefore be approached as an outright obligation. The same applies to the full text of the Birkat Ha'mazon, which has been accepted as obligatory and may thus not be substituted by the abridged version.) Although this Halacha is not actually practiced nowadays, it nevertheless yields – albeit indirectly – a vitally important practical lesson. The Talmud Yerushalmi raises the question of why the Rabbis instituted a special abridged version of Birkat Ha'mazon, instead of simply allowing workers to recite Birkat Ha'mazon while working. Rather than have the workers skip portions of Birkat Ha'mazon, the Rabbis could have enacted that after reciting the first Beracha, workers should resume working and recite the rest of Birkat Ha'mazon as they perform their work. The Yerushalmi answers that it is improper to engage in any activities while reciting a Beracha, and so the Rabbis did not want to allow employees to work while reciting Birkat Ha'mazon. The Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan, 1833-1909) finds it very significant that the Rabbis preferred having employees skip portions of Birkat Ha'mazon altogether rather than have them recite those portions while working. If these are the only two options, they felt it is better to arrange an abridged version of Birkat Ha'mazon. This shows us, the Mishna Berura writes, the extent to which the Rabbis deemed it improper to engage in any sort of activity while reciting a Beracha. This means, for example, that one should not begin reciting "Asher Yasar" after using the restroom while washing or drying his hands; he should begin the Beracha only after finishing drying his hands. Another common example is clearing the table while still reciting Birkat Ha'mazon. This is improper, as while reciting a Beracha one should not be doing anything else. This is crucial not only to ensure that one concentrates on what he is saying, but also as a sign of respect for the Beracha, showing that he considers it important. A doctor treating a patient should give the patient his full attention; engaging in other matters while tending to the patient would be very disrespectful to the patient and would show a gross disregard for his duties as a physician. Likewise, engaging in other activities while reciting a Beracha is disrespectful. Therefore, whenever we recite a Beracha, we must give the Beracha our full attention, and not be doing anything else. Summary: In ancient times, workers were allowed to recite an abridged version of Birkat Ha'mazon, because employers did not allow them the time to recite the full text. Although this Halacha does not apply nowadays, nevertheless, the fact that the Rabbis preferred instituting an abridged text rather than allow employees to recite Birkat Ha'mazon while working shows us the importance of refraining from all activities while reciting a Beracha.

IntroductionEver wondered how our Talmudic rabbis discussed or otherwise considered drunkenness? The 164th episode of The Jewish Drinking Show considers drunkenness in the Talmud Yerushalmi.Source SheetThe source sheet for this episode is available here. “Drinks and Discussion”-style EpisodesThis episode is the tenth "Drinks and Discussion"-style episode of The Jewish Drinking Show on various topics led by Rabbi Drew:Drunkenness in the Talmud Yerushalmi - Episode #164 (This episode)Drunkenness in Early Rabbinic Literature - Episode #163Dukhening Under the Influence - Episode #161Drinking Between Glasses of Wine at the Passover Seder - Episode #154The Purim Katan Episode – Episode #151Drinking During Mourning – Episode #150Drinking In/Out of Sukkot – Episode #142A Significant Rabbinic Discussion on Wine & Drinking: Eruvin 64-65 – Episode #47Drinking During the Ten Days of Repentance: An Introduction – Episode #44Drinking During the Nine Days – Episode #40Support the showThank you for listening!If you have any questions, suggestions, or more, feel free to reach out at Drew@JewishDrinking.coml'chaim!

The Rebbe also comments on the notes of Rabbi Solomon. https://www.torahrecordings.com/rebbe/igroskodesh/011/010/3683

It is customary to blow one hundred and one Shofar sounds on each of the two days of Rosh Hashanah. We blow thirty Shofar sounds before the Musaf service, and then, according to our community's custom, thirty sounds are blown during the silent Amida prayer of Musaf. Another thirty sounds are blown during the Hazan's repetition of the Amida, and then, during the Kaddish Titkabal following Musaf, we sound another ten Shofar blasts, bringing the total to one hundred. It is then customary to sound a long "Teru'a Gedola," for a total of one hundred and one. Why do we blow so many Shofar sounds, beyond that which the Torah strictly requires? The Gemara raises this question in Masechet Rosh Hashanah (16), and it answers that the additional Shofar sounds serve to "confound the Satan." Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Ben Yishak, France, 1040-1105) explains that when the Satan sees the Jewish people's great love for Misvot, to the point where we blow additional Shofar sounds on Rosh Hashanah, he is silenced. His ability to prosecute against us as we stand judgment before God is severely hampered by our display of love and zeal toward the Misvot. Tosefot (commentaries by the French and German schools of Medieval Talmudists) explain differently, noting that the Satan is also the "Mal'ach Ha'mavet" (angel of death). Based on a comment in the Talmud Yerushalmi, Tosefot write that the angel of death will one day be eliminated, as indicated in the verse (Yeshayahu 25:8), "Bila Ha'mavet La'nesah" ("He shall eliminate death for eternity"). We are also told (Yeshayahu 27:13) that on that day, a great Shofar will be sounded. Thus, when we sound the Shofar after having already fulfilled the Misva of Shofar blowing on Rosh Hashanah, the Satan begins worrying that perhaps this is the Shofar blast that heralds the time of the final redemption, when he will be eliminated. This fear that Satan experiences hinders his ability to prosecute against us in the Heavenly Tribunal. The Abudarham (Rabbi David Abudarham, 14th century, Spain) cites a Midrash that offers a different explanation of the one hundred Shofar sounds, namely, that it brings to mind the event of Akedat Yishak (the binding of Yishak upon the altar). The Midrash relates that when Sara heard that her son was bound upon the altar prepared to be slaughtered as a sacrifice, she wailed one hundred times. By sounding one hundred Shofar blasts, we bring to mind Sara's anguish at the time of the Akeda, hoping that in this merit God will atone for our sins and grant us a favorable sentence. Others explain that the one hundred sounds are reminiscent of the one hundred wailings cried by the mother of the Canaanite general Sisera. The general's mother wept bitterly one hundred times as she waited in vain for her son to return from his battle against Beneh Yisrael, during which he had been killed. We commemorate her weeping by sounding the Shofar one hundred times on Rosh Hashanah. (At first glance, it seems difficult to understand why Sisera's mother's weeping should assume significance on Rosh Hashanah, though this is a subject for a separate discussion.) We find in Halachic literature some discussion concerning the propriety of the one hundred and first sound that we blow, the "Teru'a Gedola" sounded after the one hundred sounds. The Re'avya (Rabbi Eliezer Ben Yoel Halevi, Germany, 1140-1225), in Siman 541, mentions this custom and expresses his strong disapproval (listen to audio recording for precise citation). He notes that generally speaking, making sounds with an instrument is forbidden on Shabbat and Yom Tob, and sounding the Shofar on Rosh Hashanah is permitted only for the purpose of fulfilling the Halachic obligation. Therefore, once the required Shofar sounds have been blown, it is forbidden to blow the Shofar on Rosh Hashanah any further. A number of works cite the Rosh Yosef as going so far as to claim that blowing a one hundred and first sound constitutes "Hilul Yom Tob" – a desecration of the holiday. It is clear, however, that these authorities who disapprove of this practice were unaware of the writings of the Geonim, which explicitly record the observance of this custom in the two main Yeshivot of Babylonia, and explain that this, too, serves to confound the Satan. A number of Geonim (specifically Rav Amram Gaon and Rav Hai Gaon) addressed the question of whether the custom was for the one hundred and first sound to be blown publicly or only privately by certain individuals, but, in any event, such a custom most certainly existed. In light of this account, it seems very difficult to reject this custom and consider it a "desecration" of Yom Tob. Accordingly, Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in his work Hazon Ovadia (Laws of Shofar), codifies this practice, and writes that the one hundred and first sound of the Shofar is blown in order to confound the Satan. One must ensure, however, not to sound the Shofar after having blown or heard the customary one hundred and one sounds. Of course, if one did not hear all the sounds he may and should certainly blow the sounds he missed, and it is of course permissible to blow the Shofar on behalf of somebody who did not hear the Shofar blowing. One may not, however, blow the Shofar needlessly once he has blown or heard the one hundred and one sounds. Summary: The accepted custom is to blow one hundred Shofar sounds on Rosh Hashanah, plus an additional "Teru'a Gedola" after these hundred sounds. One may not blow the Shofar unnecessarily once he has heard or blown the one hundred and one sounds.

The Talmud Yerushalmi in Masechet Yoma says the reason the Bet HaMikdash was destroyed was because the people at the time were chasing money and had baseless hatred. The question was asked, what is the connection between these two? Rabbi Matisiyahu Solomon explained, the people were chasing after their friend's money. It was their jealousy which led to their hatred. If someone covets what his friend has, he eventually starts to think, "Why does he have it? He doesn't deserve it. I should be getting that." And then he comes to resent his friend for having what he wants. That is baseless hatred. How do we stop it? Isn't jealousy a natural feeling? I read a mashal which was written to explain the words of the Ibn Ezra on this subject. Imagine, there was a farmer who spent all of his days planting cucumbers, onions and various other vegetables. He had no formal education and he lived in a hut. One day, he hears loud music coming from a distance. He goes to see what's happening and there he watches as a special procession is in progress, celebrating the engagement of the princess. She's on a big chariot with her groom to be, waving to the crowd, and everyone is cheering. Would this farmer feel jealous that he was not chosen to marry the princess? Of course not. It's so far out of the realm of possibility that the thought wouldn't even enter his mind. That is how we are supposed to view what other people have. Whatever a person was given was first determined by our purposeful Creator. He gives people their spouses, their homes, their children, because He determined that is what they need to fulfill their purpose in the world. What someone else has was never in the realm of possibility for anyone else to get. A person might feel he was more qualified for a job than someone else who got it, and he is burning with jealousy that he wasn't picked. He must realize, he was never a candidate for that job to begin with. It doesn't matter how qualified he is, for his purpose in this world, that job was bad for him and that's why Hashem didn't let him have it. We have it within our ability not only to not be jealous of others, we could even be happy with what others have, even though we might have wanted it for ourselves. The moment something is decided, whether it's our friend signing a lease on an apartment we wanted or getting a job we wanted, we have an opportunity to accept the will of Hashem and say "thank you for putting everyone where You know they need to be." If someone doesn't fix this inclination towards jealousy, he is only hurting himself. People spend painful hours thinking about what they could have had or what they should have had and ask why everyone else gets what they want. We have what's meant for us and if it would be any other way, we'd be missing out on our opportunity to fulfill our purpose here. Even when it comes to our spiritual lives, we're not supposed to feel bad when we see others more successful than us. A person who is struggling to understand Torah might get down on himself when he sees his friend understand everything right away. Another person might feel bad when he sees his friend able to react so calmly when his patience is tried, while when he is in the same situation he's ready to explode. Everyone has a different purpose, everyone is given different strengths and different weaknesses for their jobs. It could be for a person with a temper to hold back his anger just a little bit is more precious to Hashem than the man who reacts calmly who has no inclination towards anger. And for a person who has a hard time grasping Torah, to sit and try is more precious to Hashem than the genius understanding it instantly. What matters the most is our efforts, not the results. To summarize, everyone is given the exact character traits and circumstances that they need to be in to be considered successful with their mission in this world. If we can accept the will of Hashem for ourselves and for others, we'll reach great levels in emunah, we'll release so much stress and tension and we'll be able to have true Ahavat Chinam.

A life lived with tranquility and confidence. Success in business. Protection in times of danger. And, greatest of all, a way to strengthen our connection to Hashem. Yes, the blessings of bitachon are immeasurable. But how do we truly incorporate such trust in Hashem into our hearts? The Talmud Yerushalmi, the Zohar, the Maharal and many other sources offer us a time-tested and effective means for embedding bitachon firmly within us. The Maharal even states that this technique is a segulah for success in business and protection in times of war. What is this ultra-powerful technique? Pesukim of bitachon. Reciting specific verses, these sources tell us, is an extremely powerful way of incorporating bitachon – and all its blessings - into every aspect of our lives. In this Inside ArtScroll interview, Rabbi David Sutton, author of A Daily Dose of Pesukim of Bitachon, describes how when we internalize these pesukim, we will transform our very essence. In his book and in this interview, Rabbi Sutton gives us a greater understanding of the many lessons we can learn from these pesukim. Through stories and insights, he shows us how to use the pesukim to strengthen our bitachon. Watch and be uplifted. [Buy the new book HERE.]

The Mishna Berura (work by Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933), in a very important passage, cites a comment made by Rabbi Abba Bar Mamal in the Talmud Yerushalmi. Rabbi Abba remarked that if he had the support of his colleagues, he would have permitted work during Hol Ha'mo'ed. Even though Halacha imposes certain restrictions on working during the days of Hol Ha'mo'ed, Rabbi Abba nevertheless felt that the Rabbis should have allowed it. He explained that Halacha imposes these restrictions only so that people could spend this time eating, drinking and studying Torah. Instead, Rabbi Abba observed, people spend Hol Ha'mo'ed eating, drinking and engaging in vanity. Rabbi Abba saw that the free time made available by the restrictions on work was being spent on all kinds of unconstructive activities, rather than being used for Torah learning. He therefore felt that it would be preferable to lift the restrictions on work, so that people would at least be productive rather than waste precious time. Along the same lines, the Mishna Berura cites a comment of the Kolbo (Rav Aharon of Lunel, 1280-1330) that it is a far more grievous sin to engage in frivolity during Hol Ha'mo'ed than to work during Hol Ha'mo'ed. Therefore, one must utilize his time during Yom Tob and Hol Ha'mo'ed to involve himself in Torah study to a greater extent than he normally does. Those who study Daf Yomi (the daily page of Talmud), for example, must certainly continue their daily study throughout the holiday. In fact, during the holiday they have the special opportunity to spend more time learning, to study the page of Gemara in greater depth than they ordinarily do. This is a precious opportunity that must not be squandered. The Shulhan Aruch, amidst his discussion of the restrictions on writing during Hol Ha'mo'ed, rules that if a person hears or develops a "Hiddush," a new Torah insight, during Hol Ha'mo'ed, he may write it down, since he might otherwise forget the idea (Orah Haim 546:9). The Mishna Berura, in a fascinating and revealing comment (listen to audio recording for precise citation), claims that this is permissible even if one is confident that he will not otherwise forget the new insight. He writes that at every moment one bears an obligation to study Torah to the best of his ability, which includes arriving at new insights into the Torah. If a person develops a "Hiddush" during Hol Ha'mo'ed and waits to write it down until after the holiday, then he is wasting those moments after the holiday that should be used for developing new "Hiddushim." This would be a misuse of the time which he should be utilizing for arriving at new insights. Writing is permitted on Hol Ha'mo'ed to avoid a loss ("Dabar Ha'abed"), the Mishna Berura notes, and there is no greater loss than losing time from Torah study. Therefore, regardless of whether or not one fears he will forget the idea he learned, he should write it down immediately, on Hol Ha'mo'ed, so that the time after the holiday could be used for developing additional new insights. The Mishna Berura adds that the Bah (Rav Yoel Sirkis, Poland, 1561-1640) wrote his famous commentary to the Tur during Hol Ha'mo'ed. Therefore, those who attend Torah classes during Hol Ha'mo'ed and wish to take notes may certainly do so. Summary: The holidays were given for the purpose of celebrating as well as Torah study, and one must therefore ensure to use the free time on Yom Tob and Hol Ha'mo'ed for Torah learning. Although there are restrictions on writing during Hol Ha'mo'ed, it is permissible to write down on Hol Ha'mo'ed new Torah insights that one hears or develops.

In part 3 of this captivating three-part series, Dr. Jeffrey Rubenstein returns to our podcast to unravel the intricate tapestry of Talmudic narratives surrounding Elisha ben Abuyah, also known as "Aḥer" (the Other), the apostate. Exploring the accounts in the Mishna, Tosefta, Talmud Yerushalmi, and Talmud Bavli, Dr. Rubenstein provides a meticulous analysis of the traditions about Aḥer, examining the striking similarities, nuanced differences, varied approaches, and profound lessons embedded within the various cultural settings of these Aggadic stories. The episodes ponder the contemporary relevance of Aḥer, questioning what insights can be drawn from his enigmatic journey into "Pardes" to his brazen violation of halakha, and more. Join us as we dive into the intricate perspectives of the Sages on the heretic teacher of Rabbi Meir, contemplating the extent to which Torah lessons can be gleaned from a scholar who once stood within the religious fold. An intellectual odyssey awaits as we navigate the complexities of Aḥer's tale and unravel its timeless implications. Join us for episode 3 of 3 in the Aḥer series. (FYI this 3-part series was recorded over a span of a year, so some personal anecdotes should be understood in that context) --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/judaismdemystified/support

In part 2 of this captivating three-part series, Dr. Jeffrey Rubenstein returns to our podcast to unravel the intricate tapestry of Talmudic narratives surrounding Elisha ben Abuyah, also known as "Aḥer" (the Other), the apostate. Exploring the accounts in the Mishna, Tosefta, Talmud Yerushalmi, and Talmud Bavli, Dr. Rubenstein provides a meticulous analysis of the traditions about Aḥer, examining the striking similarities, nuanced differences, varied approaches, and profound lessons embedded within the various cultural settings of these Aggadic stories. The episodes ponder the contemporary relevance of Aḥer, questioning what insights can be drawn from his enigmatic journey into "Pardes" to his brazen violation of halakha, and more. Join us as we dive into the intricate perspectives of the Sages on the heretic teacher of Rabbi Meir, contemplating the extent to which Torah lessons can be gleaned from a scholar who once stood within the religious fold. An intellectual odyssey awaits as we navigate the complexities of Aḥer's tale and unravel its timeless implications. Join us for episode 2 of 3 in the Aḥer series. (FYI this 3-part series was recorded over a span of a year, so some personal anecdotes should be understood in that context) *This episode is dedicated to the neshama of Meir ben Moshe a'h — Abdolrahim Ilian, the late father of our dear friend, Rod Ilian. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/judaismdemystified/support

In this captivating three-part series, Dr. Jeffrey Rubenstein returns to our podcast to unravel the intricate tapestry of Talmudic narratives surrounding Elisha ben Abuyah, also known as "Aḥer" (the Other), the apostate. Exploring the accounts in the Mishna, Tosefta, Talmud Yerushalmi, and Talmud Bavli, Dr. Rubenstein provides a meticulous analysis of the traditions about Aḥer, examining the striking similarities, nuanced differences, varied approaches, and profound lessons embedded within the various cultural settings of these Aggadic stories. The episodes ponder the contemporary relevance of Aḥer, questioning what insights can be drawn from his enigmatic journey into "Pardes" to his brazen violation of halakha, and more. Join us as we dive into the intricate perspectives of the Sages on the heretic teacher of Rabbi Meir, contemplating the extent to which Torah lessons can be gleaned from a scholar who once stood within the religious fold.An intellectual odyssey awaits as we navigate the complexities of Aḥer's tale and unravel its timeless implications. Join us for episode 1 of 3 in the Aḥer series. (FYI this 3-part series was recorded over a span of a year, so some personal anecdotes should be understood in that context. Also, it's ideal to watch this episode in particular on our YouTube channel because of all the slideshow visuals he provided. Go to YouTube and type in Judaism.Demystified in the search bar - please like, subscribe, and share while you're at it.) *This episode is dedicated to the neshama of Meir ben Moshe a'h — Abdolrahim Ilian, the late father of our dear friend, Rod Ilian. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/judaismdemystified/support

The Torah in Parashat Ki-Teseh (Debarim 23:2) commands that a man who is a “Pesu'a Daka” or “Kerut Shofcha” may not marry a Jewish girl. These terms refer to forms of damage caused to the reproductive organs that make a man infertile. A “Pesu'a Daka” is a man whose testicles were crushed, and a “Kerut Shofcha” is somebody whose member was cut. The Sefer Ha'hinuch explains that the Torah forbade such a man from marrying a Jewish girl in order to disincentivize what was a common phenomenon in the ancient world. Men would volunteer to have their reproductive organs permanently damaged so that they could be appointed by the king to guard and care for the royal harem. We know this from Megilat Ester, which tells of King Ahashverosh's “Sarisim” (eunuchs), the most famous of whom was Hegai, who was in charge of the young women brought to the palace for the king to choose a new queen. Men would have this done to them in exchange for the money and prestige that came with a job in the king's palace. The Sefer Ha'hinuch writes that as we are a sacred nation, it is improper for a man to harm himself in this fashion. For this reason, the Sefer Ha'hinuch adds, this prohibition applies only if the damage to the reproductive organs were inflicted by the person himself or by somebody else. If this happened on its own, “Bi'ydeh Shamayim” (“at the hands of G-d”), then the man is permitted to marry. Since the purpose of the prohibition is to deter men from having this done to them, it applies only to situations which were caused by people, and not to those which occurred on their own. This prohibition applies in all times and places, and, quite obviously, is relevant only to men. If a man with one of these conditions marries a Jewish girl and consummates the marriage, he has transgressed this prohibition and is liable to Malkut. The man is permitted to marry a female convert, or a gentile maidservant who was released and converted. According to the Talmud Yerushalmi, a man with one of these conditions violates this command by having relations with a Jewish girl, even outside the framework of marriage.

The Talmud Yerushalmi teaches, "Anyone who sleeps on the Rosh Hashanah – his fortune will sleep." On the basis of this passage, it has become customary not to sleep during the day on Rosh Hashanah, as this could lead one's good fortune to "sleep," Heaven forbid, during the coming year.It would appear at first glance that in order to avoid this undesirable consequence of sleeping on Rosh Hashanah, we need to wake up right at the crack of dawn, which is usually sometime after 5am. After all, we need to avoid sleeping during the day, and the day starts at dawn, and it should thus be necessary to wake up already at dawn. Indeed, this is the view taken by several authorities, including the Ben Ish Hai (Parashat Nisavim, 11) and Kaf Ha'haim Sofer (584:37).Hacham Ovadia Yosef, however, disagreed, and maintained that especially if somebody is up late on the night of Rosh Hashanah studying Torah or reciting Tehillim, he does not have to awaken at dawn. This was also the view taken by Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Jerusalem, 1910-1995), who explained that going to sleep during the day is different from remaining asleep after the day begins. When one goes to sleep during the day of Rosh Hashanah, he shows his disregard for Rosh Hashanah and that he is not concerned about the judgment on this day. But if he was sleeping during the night and remained asleep past dawn, as he normally does, this does not reflect any disregard or lack of concern. Therefore, it is not necessary to wake up at the crack of dawn on Rosh Hashanah.The question arises, however, as to whether one may go back to sleep if he happened to wake up at dawn. Those who have been waking up early for Selihot during the weeks before Rosh Hashanah might wake up at or shortly after dawn on Rosh Hashanah morning, as they had been accustomed to doing, and then wish to go back to sleep. Seemingly, this should be forbidden, as suggested by a parallel case relevant to the laws of Sukkot. When rain falls on Sukkot, one is permitted to sleep indoors and does not have to sleep in the Sukka. If the rain stops during the night, he nevertheless does not have to go back outside into the Sukka, but if he wakes up after dawn and sees that the rain has stopped, and he wishes to go back to sleep, then he must sleep in the Sukka. Seemingly, we should apply this rule to Rosh Hashanah, as well, and if one wakes up at or after dawn, he should not be allowed to go back to sleep.In truth, however, Hacham Ovadia maintains that even on Sukkot, one does not have to sleep in the Sukka after dawn if the rain has stopped. In his work Hazon Ovadia – Sukkot (p. 207), he writes that the Halacha requiring one to go out into the Sukka in such a case applied only in times when people would normally arise at dawn. Nowadays, however, when people normally sleep past dawn, one who wakes up after dawn on Sukkot and wishes to go back to sleep may sleep inside, even though the rain has stopped. Similarly, one may go back to sleep on Rosh Hashanah morning after dawn, if it is still earlier than the time when people normally wake up.Needless to say, there is a general rule of "Zerizin Makdimin La'misvot," which means that we should always try to perform Misvot as early as possible. Thus, it would certainly be praiseworthy for one who can to wake up already at dawn on Rosh Hashanah. Strictly speaking, however, this is not necessary, and as long as one wakes up at a normal time in the morning, he does not have to fear that his good fortune will "sleep" during the coming year.Summary: Although it is customary not to sleep during the day on Rosh Hashanah, one does not have to wake up already at dawn, and may sleep until the time when people normally wake up.

Dedication opportunities are available for episodes and series at  https://ohr.edu/donate/qa   Questions? Comments? podcasts@ohr.edu   00:00 How can one be okay with prayers not being answered? How might one "improve the returns", so to speak?   07:01 Is there a source for souls choosing their parents before birth?   11:47 How can we pray if Hashem won't change His mind? And is it possible for Adam & Eve to be a parable?   24:22 Do we introduce all halachos at once to someone interested in Judaism, or do we withhold some and introduce slowly?   30:42 Is it preferable for the only Levi to quicken his Amidah to wash the cohanim's hands, or to forego washing in favor of a better Amidah?   32:25 How can the Zohar claim that there is no teshuva for zera levatala, whereas the Talmud Yerushalmi says that is true only for bitul Torah?   35:23 Is there a source for Lev Tahor's dress code, and how should we react to it?   38:23 If someone is given an interim set of tefillin by the tefillin repair shop, and he has already paid for his fixed tefillin, what type of shomer is he?   40:46 Do the laws to respect the wishes of the dead apply even to those executed by the court?   42:48 What does Judaism say about alien life or the multiverse?   46:07 Does Korach have a share in the World to Come?   47:59 If one regrets his own purchase, does gam zu letovah apply?   52:15 Why do some wait to repeat Vayechulu with another, if they finished the Shabbat Amidah late, while some don't?   54:08 How should one treat non-Jewish family members by intermarriage?   1:00:25 A person younger than 20 suffers-- is this attributed to future sins, the sins of the parents, or a gilgul?   1:04:28 Where does tikkun klali come from, and are there similar formulas?   1:06:45 What mitzvos can one forego for the sake of kiruv, or to what degree can one sacrifice his own spiritual growth for kiruv?   1:16:05 How many praying people can one walk in front of in order to do a mitzvah?   1:18:41 What is the cause of the rise in divorce rate, and how can one avoid divorce?   1:24:50 How did the Sanhedrin communicate their takanos and gezeiros?   1:27:06 What exactly is the sin of complaining in Chukas? And why should a copper snake be a cure?   1:34:26 Are the rules of saying amen from Berachos still applicable today?   1:35:23 Should a baal teshuva start with new growth or with old regret? What about day-to-day?   1:40:24 Was Tosfos' expectation that we know all of Shas before learning Tosfos?   1:45:17 Are there many references to Bar Kochba in Chazal?   Yeshivat Ohr Somayach located in the heart of Jerusalem, is an educational institution for young Jewish English-speaking men. We have a range of classes and programs designed for the intellectually curious and academically inclined - for those with no background in Jewish learning to those who are proficient in Gemara and other original source material. To find the perfect program for you, please visit our website https://ohr.edu/study_in_israel​ whatsapp us at https://bit.ly/OSREGISTER or call our placement specialist at 1-254-981-0133 today!   Subscribe to the Rabbi Breitowitz Q&A Podcast at https://plnk.to/rbq&a   Submit questions for the Q&A with Rabbi Breitowitz https://forms.gle/VCZSK3wQJJ4fSd3Q7   Subscribe to our YouTube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/c/OhrSomayach/videos       You can listen to this and many other Ohr Somayach programs by downloading our app, on Apple and Google Play, ohr.edu and all major podcast platforms. Visit us @ https://ohr.edu  PRODUCED BY: CEDAR MEDIA STUDIOS  

The Gemara in Masechet Berachot (48) addresses the case of nine people who ate a meal with bread, and a tenth, who ate with them, ate only vegetables, without bread. In such a case, the Gemara writes, the group of ten may conduct a Zimun with "Elokenu," meaning, with the full text of "Nebarech L'Elokenu She'achalnu Mi'shelo." Since nine out of the ten ate bread, they may recite the special Zimun for a Minyan, even though the tenth ate food other than bread. This Halacha is codified by the Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 196:3), who adds that in such a case, the tenth person must recite a Beracha Aharona; he cannot fulfill his obligation of Beracha Aharona by listening to the recitation of Birkat Ha'mazon.Tosefot (commentaries by Medieval French and German scholars) comment that according to some authorities, this Halacha does not apply in a case of two people who ate bread and a third ate other food. In such a situation, the third person, who did not eat bread, cannot combine with the other two to allow reciting a Zimun. Even though a tenth person who ate food other than bread suffices to allow a group to recite "L'Elokenu," a third person who did not eat bread does not allow the group to recite a Zimun. This is the view of several other authorities, as well, including Rav Hai Gaon (10th century, Babylonia), the Rambam (Rabbi Moshe Maimonides, Spain-Egypt, 1135-1204) in Hilchot Berachot (5:8), the Rashba (Rabbi Shelomo Ben Aderet of Barcelona, Spain, 1235-1310) and the Ra'a (Rabbi Aharon Halevi, Spain, 1235-1303). According to this view, if two people ate bread together with a third person who ate or drank something other than bread, they do not recite a Zimun before Birkat Ha'mazon.The Talmud Yerushalmi, however, states otherwise, and rules that in the case of three people, too, they may recite a Zimun even if one of the three ate or drank something other than bread. Several Rishonim (Medieval scholars) follow this ruling of the Yerushalmi.The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 196:3; listen to audio recording for precise citation) cites three opinions on this issue. He first cites the aforementioned view of Tosefot, the Rambam and others that three men cannot conduct a Zimun unless all three ate bread. The second view he cites maintains that they may make a Zimun even if one of the three did not eat bread, but ate "Mezonot" food. The Shulhan Aruch then cites the ruling of the Yerushalmi, that even if the third person ate a Ke'zayit of vegetables or a Rebi'it of wine, the three men may make a Zimun.As for the final Halacha, the Shulhan Aruch writes that people who eat together should avoid this situation given the different opinions that exist. Meaning, if two people eat bread together, and they are joined by a third person, that third person should either eat bread, so they can recite a Zimun according to all views, or not eat or drink anything, so that they do not require a Zimun according to all views. Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001), in his work Birkat Hashem (vol. 3, p. 468; listen to audio recording for precise citation), rules that the three may recite a Zimun even if the third eats only "Mezonot" food.The Shulhan Aruch adds that if the third person nevertheless eats other foods, such as vegetables, or only drinks, they may recite a Zimun. Although they should preferably avoid this situation, as discussed, if the third eats foods other than bread they recite a Zimun, in accordance with the view of the Yerushalmi.As mentioned, this discussion refers only to the situation of one of three people who eats foods other than bread. When ten people eat together and one of the nine ate or drank something other than bread, they may recite a Zimun with "L'Elokenu."Summary: If nine people ate bread, and there was a tenth person with them who ate a Ke'zayit of another food, they may recite a Zimun with "L'Elokenu." If three people eat together, and one of the three does not want to eat bread, they should see to it that he either eats bread or a "Mezonot" food, or does not eat or drink anything, to avoid the question of whether a Zimun would be recited. If he did eat or drink something other than bread, then they recite a Zimun.

Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1869), in his work Mo'ed Le'chol Hai, records a custom that the congregation recites the Shema prayer on Shabuot morning loudly and in unison. One reason for this custom is to ensure that everyone stays awake and alert for the recitation. After remaining awake studying Torah throughout the night, people are naturally drowsy on Shabuot morning, and they thus run the risk of sleeping during the Shema recitation, thereby neglecting the Torah obligation to read the Shema. It is therefore proper for the congregation to make a point of reading the text of Shema out loud together to help keep all the congregants awake for the Shema recitation.There is, however, an additional reason for this custom, as Rav Haim Palachi notes. The Ten Commandments, which we read in the synagogue on Shabuot morning, are all alluded to in the text of Shema. The first commandment – "I am Hashem your God" – clearly corresponds to the first verse of Shema: "Hear, O Israel, Hashem our God – Hashem is one." The prohibition against idolatry, which comprises the second commandment, is mentioned explicitly in the second paragraph of Shema ("Pen Yifte Lebabchem Ve'sartem Va'abadetem Elohim Aherim"). The command to "love Hashem your God with all your heart," which we read in Shema, parallels the prohibition against uttering God's Name in vain, as one who loves the Almighty does not insult Him by freely uttering His Name. The words "Le'ma'an Tizkeru" ("in order that you remember") which we recite in Shema bring to mind the fourth commandment, the Misva of Shabbat – "Zachor Et Yom Ha'Shabbat Le'kadesho" ("Remember the day of Shabbat, to make it sacred"). We read in Shema of the promise of long life ("Lema'an Yirbu Yemechem"), which is the reward promised for observing the commandment of honoring parents ("Kabed Et Abicha…Le'ma'an Ya'arichun Yamecha"). The prohibition against murder is alluded to in the warning "Va'abadetem Mehera" ("you will be quickly destroyed"), which refers to death in retribution for murder (as the Talmud Yerushalmi states, "Mann De'ketil Yitkatal" – "One who kills shall be killed"). The verse toward the end of Shema which warns against straying after one's eyes ("Ve'lo Taturu") alludes to the sin of adultery. Theft is indicated by the description in Shema of Beneh Yisrael's harvest – "Ve'asafta Deganecha" ("You shall gather your grain") – implicitly warning against taking other people's produce. In the final verse of Shema, we testify to God's having taken us from Egypt, and it thus corresponds to the prohibition against bearing false witness. Finally, the command to affix a Mezuza to the doorpost of one's home, which appears twice in Shema, alludes to the tenth commandment, "Lo Tahmod" ("You shall not covet"), which forbids coveting one's fellow's home.Thus, for this reason, too, it is appropriate for the congregation to recite the Shema out loud on Shabuot morning, as it bears unique significance on Shabuot, when we celebrate the event of Matan Torah and read the Ten Commandments. And while it is certainly proper to have these allusions in mind whenever one reads Shema, it is especially worthwhile to concentrate on them when reading the Shema on Shabuot.Summary: It is proper for the congregation to recite the full text of the Shema aloud and in unison during Shaharit on Shabuot morning.

#194.** Sponsored by Legacy Judaica**** The auction will be Sunday April 23rd at 1PM. Bid here: bit.ly/3GLi645 or attend in-person at Estreia, 978 River Ave, Lakewood, NJ 08701**With R' Moshe Maimon discussing the Legacy Judaica auction 11 catalogue and the many items contained therein. We discussed a number of the items, while discussing  the historical significance of the items and various tidbits of information. We also made mention of newer editions of some of the items and the like.To see the catalogue and bid on items (make to register first): bit.ly/3GLi645To see and bid on the Meir Tehillos: bit.ly/3UGN0QXTo see and bid on the Nachlas Avos: bit.ly/41fehMLTo see and bid on the Venice 1523 Talmud Yerushalmi: bit.ly/3L9ZUDXTo see and bid on the 1st edition Chafetz Chaim: bit.ly/3L6Mf09To see and bid on the Kiryas Sefer of the Meiri: bit.ly/41yAVztTo see and bid on the Cherem on mixed dancing: bit.ly/3KITt9iTo see and bid on the Dvar Shmuel: bit.ly/43J9DbBTo see and bid on the Luchos Eidus of Rav Yehonoson Eybeschutz: bit.ly/3A7wi3KTo see and bid on the Magen V'Tzinah: bit.ly/43EnIXHTo see and bid on the Yosef Tikva regarding machine matzos: bit.ly/41hbRwWTo see and bid on the forged Yerushalmi Kodshim: bit.ly/43CHpitTo see and bid on the Sidrei Taharos: bit.ly/3A3oBeSTo see and bid on the 1st edition Zera Shimshon: bit.ly/3GSB2hrTo see and bid on the letter of Rav Shlomo Zalman:  bit.ly/3MMpOPeTo see and bid on the Baal Shem Tov letter from the Kherson Geniza: bit.ly/3oob3ryTo see and bid on the Aderes letter regarding the Maharil Diskin Seforim: bit.ly/3KN5KK0To see and bid on the Jerusalem Municipality tax letter to the Brisker Rav: bit.ly/3MPs1ta

Length: 1 hour 35 minutesSynopsis: As I mention in the introductory disclaimer for the shiur I gave this morning (3/31/23) in our Machshavah Lab series for women, I wasn't sure how this shiur would turn out. At best, it could yield some earthshattering insight into the four cups and how we relate to them; at worst, it would just be an overview/review of basic ideas and sources about the four cups. It ended up being closer to the latter, though we definitely picked up some insights along the way ... just not earthshattering chiddushim. The focus of the shiur was on the four explanations of the four cups provided in the Talmud Yerushalmi. We did our best to understand all four, and I think we got at least three, if not three-and-a-half. If you're looking for an overview of this mitzvah and/or some fun questions to think about, then you'll find value in this shiur.-----מקורות:משנה – פסחים י:א, דף צט עמוד ב (גירסת הרמב"ם)בבלי פסחים דף קיז עמוד ברי"ף, רשב"ם, ומאירי שםירושלמי פסחים י:א:זפני משה שםמאירי פסחים דף צט עמוד בתורה תמימה שמות ו:ו הערה הבראשית מ:י-יגבראשית רבה פח:התרגום יונתן - בראשית מ:יבבראשית טו:יבבראשית רבה שםKulp, Origins of the Seder – Currents in Biblical Research 4.1 (2005) pp.112-113,117-118ירמיהו כה:טו-כו; נא:ז-ידתהלים יא; עהרש"י - איכה ד:כארמב"ם - משנה תורה: ספר זמנים, הלכות חמץ ומצה ז:ו-ז,ט-ייד פשוטה ז:טResources Mentioned:Five Types of Dvar TorahAlHaTorah's Haggadah GedolahAlHaTorah's Seder Topics"Hashem Decreed the Egyptian Slavery?! God Forbid!" (Sforno on Shemos 1:1-14) -----The Torah content from now until Pesach has been sponsored by my friend and colleague, Rabbi Dr. Elie Feder, author of Gematria Refigured: A New Look At How The Torah Conveys Ideas Through Numbers. Stay up-to-date by joining the Gematria Refigured+ WhatsApp group, and subscribe to the Gematria Refigured+ Podcast.-----If you have questions, comments, or feedback, I would love to hear from you! Please feel free to contact me at rabbischneeweiss at gmail.-----Substack: rabbischneeweiss.substack.com/Patreon: patreon.com/rabbischneeweissYouTube Channel: youtube.com/rabbischneeweissBlog: kolhaseridim.blogspot.com/"The Stoic Jew" Podcast: thestoicjew.buzzsprout.com"The Mishlei Podcast": mishlei.buzzsprout.com"Rambam Bekius" Podcast: rambambekius.buzzsprout.com"Machshavah Lab" Podcast: machshavahlab.buzzsprout.com"The Tefilah Podcast": tefilah.buzzsprout.comWhatsApp Group: https://chat.whatsapp.com/GEB1EPIAarsELfHWuI2k0HAmazon Wishlist: amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/Y72CSP86S24W?ref_=wl_sharel

What are we trying to do? Put Hashem in a box? Sostrange as we quote the angels every day - Kadoshkadosh kadosh hashem sevaot - Malehkol haaretz kevodoh Nevuchadnetzar, king of Babylon, who destroyed the first Bet Hamikdash, took all the 5,400 gold, silver and precious stone utensils and 180 treasure houses. whose heart inspires him to generosity Heb. יִדְּבֶנּוּלִבּוֹ, an expression of נְדָבָה, which is an expression of goodwill, present in French, [a] gift. you shall take My offering Our Rabbis said: [The word ךְתְּרוּמָה, mentioned three times, denotes that] three offerings are mentioned here. One is the offering of a beka [half-shekel] per head, from which they made the sockets, Anotheris the offering of a beka per head for the [community] coffers, from which to purchase the communal sacrifices, And another is the offering for the Mishkan, each one's [Israelite's] donation (Talmud Yerushalmi, Shekalim 1:1;

00:00 - Good Morning 00:08 - Emails/Guests 02:06 - Sponsor.8MinDaf.com 05:28 - Amud Aleph 39:00 - Amud Beis 48:19 - Have a Wonderful Day -- Today's shiur is sponsored Maaser & לע"נ חיה בּת יוסף By Anon Ymous & Shprintzy and Alan Gross, לע"נ The yahrzeits of our Father's, שלמה זלמן בן יצחק אייזיק ז"ל, Sol Birnbaum ע"ה, נפטר ח' שבט ​ בנימין אייזיק בן צבי הירש הכהן ז"ל, Ben Gross ע"ה, נפטר ט"ז שבט & the MDY Family: Leilu Nishmas Boruch Helfgott z'l ben ybl'c Mordche Shloima​ & לע״נ זכריה בן משה & Yossi Klein: Shalom Burch Yehuda ben Yosef Ycheil Mechel please put on your status join4yiddy.com & Yitz Moshel: In honor of R' Eli, the Baldman Brothers, Yosef Billyack, Gershon, Avi Gargir, Tomer and all the others who make the Shiur happen & Simcha Weichbrod: Leulei nishmas my dear mother blimah bas moshe on her 6th yhartzeit & Leilouy Nishmat Yardena bat Lilian & Nachum Hurvitz: Mazel Tov to all the MDY mishpocha members who have taken on the new Talmud Yerushalmi cycle and are being mesayem Maseches Brachos today! #keepondaffing ​--- Turning of the daf לכ׳ ישיבת נועם התורה י-ם,והרב דוד אמון שליטא who always encourages us to finish ש״ס & להצלחה for the magid shiur, the members of the HBA Group and their families. אמן

Learning Talmud YerushalmiSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/ten-minute-halacha/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

#170.** To support the podcast: https://seforimchatter.com/support-seforimchatter/ or email seforimchatter@gmail.com** With Dr. Yakov Mayer discussing the first printing of the Talmud Yerushalmi We discussed the history of print and the 16th century, Aldus Manutius, Daniel Bomberg, the Leiden manuscript of Yerushalmi, how the edition was edited, other manuscript(s) that were used for the first edition, Yaakov ben Chaim Ibn Adoniyahu, Rav David Pizzeghitaone, who edited the Yerushalmi, and moreTo read an article by Dr. Mayer on the topic: https://www.ancientjewreview.com/read/2022/8/31/editio-princeps-the-1523-venice-edition-of-the-palestinian-talmud-and-the-beginning-of-hebrew-printingTo purchase the book: https://www.magnespress.co.il/book/Editio_Princeps-8320To purchase "Nechemiah": http://www.ybook.co.il/book/7679/%D7%A0%D7%97%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%94

The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 328:2) writes (listen to audio recording for precise citation) that when somebody becomes seriously ill on Shabbat such that there is potential danger to his life, there is a Misva to desecrate Shabbat for the sake of assisting him. One who acts quickly to desecrate Shabbat for the sake of patient's life, the Shulhan Aruch adds, is praiseworthy, whereas one who first goes to consult with a Rabbi is considered a murderer. As the Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) explains (listen to audio recording for precise citation), going to consult with a Rabbi delays the treatment, thus increasing the risk of the patient's death. Therefore, taking time to consult with a Rabbi in the case of a potentially life-threatening condition, instead of immediately doing everything necessary to treat the patient, is considered a grave sin, akin to murder. The Mishna Berura notes in this context the Biblical command "Lo Ta'amod Al Dam Re'echa" (Vayikra 19:16), which forbids standing idly by a fellow Jew in a life-threatening situation. When there is a potential risk to life, one must immediately do everything necessary to protect the person's life, without any hesitation, even if this entails violating Shabbat. The Mishna Berura also notes in this context the comment of the Talmud Yerushalmi that if a person takes the time to consult with a Rabbi before desecrating Shabbat to help a dangerously-ill patient, the Rabbi is also at fault. It is a Rabbi's responsibility to teach his students ahead of time of the obligation to desecrate Shabbat without delay in the case of a dangerously-ill patient, and thus even the Rabbi deserves criticism if he is approached for consultation when such a situation arises.Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in Me'or Yisrael (vol. 1; listen to audio recording for precise citation), adds that Rabbis must ensure to be well-versed in the Halachot relevant to seriously-ill patients on Shabbat, because when such questions arise, they must be answered immediately. A Rabbi must not begin searching in books to find answers to questions that are brought to him regarding the treatment of life-threatening conditions on Shabbat, and must rather be fluent in these Halachot in advance, lest he cause an unnecessary delay in the patient's treatment. Additionally, Hacham Ovadia writes, if a Rabbi asked such a question on Shabbat does not know the answer, and a young scholar who is with him has the answer, the other scholar should immediately give the answer. Ordinarily, it is forbidden for a student to answer a question in his Rabbi's presence, as this is disrespectful. But in the case of a potentially life-threatening situation on Shabbat that is brought to a Rabbi's attention, any delay could decrease the chances of the patient's survival, and this serious concern overrides the need to show respect to one's Rabbi. Therefore, in such a case the student may immediately give the answer.This discussion underscores the importance of studying Halachot relevant to treating serious medical conditions on Shabbat, even as we hope and pray that these Halachot will always remain theoretical and never become practically relevant.Summary: It is vitally important for Rabbis to teach their students the laws relevant to treating serious medical conditions on Shabbat, because when such situations arise, any time taken to pose or answer a question could decrease the patient's chances of surviving. When somebody suffers a potentially life-threatening condition on Shabbat, one should immediately do everything necessary to care for the patient, even if this entails Shabbat desecration, and one should not take the time to consult with a Rabbi.

The Bet Yosef (Siman 308) cites the Shiboleh Haleket who rules that a ball used for games is Mukse on Shabbat. The fact that it is used for playing does not render it a vessel. Moreover, it is not even fit to cover a pot, since generally it is dirty. In the Shulhan Aruch, Maran states that it is prohibited to play ball on Shabbat. Most Poskim understand that Maran is ruling in accordance with the Shiboleh Haleket, that the ball is Mukse. That is how the Mishna Berura, the Aruch HaShulhan, Kaf Hahaim, Gaon Rabbi Zalman, the Levush and MaHaritatz understand the Shulhan Aruch. The Rambam in a Teshuva (Responsa 114) also ruled that a certain game played in his time, using ivory pieces, was Mukse, presumably because the function of entertainment does not render it a vessel. If so, Maran's opinion is not limited to a ball, but to all games. Therefore, Sepharadim should avoid playing any type of game on Shabbat, including backgammon, chess or ball. Games which use an hourglass to time the moves are even more problematic, because it is prohibited to measure on Shabbat. The Rema argues with Maran and rules that the custom of Ashkenazim is to be lenient regarding using a ball on Shabbat. It is important to know this ruling of the Ashkenazim, because Hacham Bension has a rule (Or Lesion Vol. 2) that anything permitted to an Ashkenazi adult is permitted to a Sepharadic child. Therefore, he allows Sepharadic children under Bar Misva age to play ball on Shabbat. Hacham Moshe Halevy (Israel, 1961-2001) rules that although women are also included in the prohibition, if they will not listen to rebuke, it is better that they transgress inadvertently. However, Hacham Bension suggests a different approach to understanding the Shulhan Aruch's prohibition of playing ball on Shabbat. It may not be related to Mukse and the Shiboleh Haleket's opinion at all, but to an incident recorded in the Talmud Yerushalmi. The Talmud relates that a certain city in Israel, Tur Shimon, was destroyed because its inhabitants were accustomed to playing ball on Shabbat, instead of learning Torah. If so, the prohibition would be limited only to ball and not other games. Based on this, he rules that those adults that are lenient to play games, besides ball, on Shabbat have what to rely on. This is difficult to accept because the Rambam explicitly prohibited certain games on Shabbat, and all the Poskim mentioned above understood Maran as referring to all games, based on the Shiboleh Haleket. Nevertheless, even the strict opinions permit handling a child's toy that will help calm a child and stop him from crying.SUMMARYSepharadic adults may not play ball or any games on Shabbat, but children under the age of Bar Misva may do so. It is permitted to handle a child's toy to stop him from crying.

The Torah in the beginning of Parashat Emor (Vayikra 21:1) commands the Kohanim, “Le'nefesh Lo Yitama Be'amav” – that no Kohen is allowed to become “defiled” through contact with a human corpse. The Sefer Ha'hinuch explains that as the Kohanim are chosen for the special role of ministering before G-d in the Bet Ha'mikdash, they are required to avoid Tum'at Met – the impurity caused by exposure to a dead body. This impurity is considered repulsive, and is the strictest form of Tum'a (impurity), and it is therefore not befitting a Kohen to be exposed to this form of impurity. The Sefer Ha'hinuch notes that although Kohanim are generally required to avoid Tum'at Met, an exception is made in the case of immediate family members. The Torah explicitly permits Kohanim to tend to the burial of immediate family members, even though they will then become Tameh. The Sefer Ha'hinuch explains this exception based on the general principle of “Deracheha Darcheh Noam” – that the Torah's “ways are ways of pleasantness.” The Torah acknowledges the human need to weep and grieve over a deceased family member, and so it did not apply the prohibition of “Tum'at Kohanim” to cases of immediate family members who passed away. The Sefer Ha'hinuch writes that the Torah permits Kohanim “Le'hasbi'a Nafsham Be'bechi” – “to satiate themselves with weeping” over a deceased family member, recognizing that this is a basic human need which must be met. A human corpse transmits Tum'a in three ways. The first is “Maga” – direct physical contact. If a person touches any part of a human corpse – even a fingernail or tooth – with any part of his body – such as his hand, foot or tongue – he becomes Tameh. The second method is “Masa” – carrying a corpse, even if one does not directly touch it, such as if one carries a coffin or stretcher with a dead body. A form of “Masa” is “Heset” – causing a dead body to move without touching it, such as moving a rod when the other end is near a corpse, such that it causes the corpse to move. Another example is “Tum'at Bet Ha'setarim” – if a person carries a source of Tum'a under his arm, even though this does not qualify as “Maga” (because he touches the source of Tum'a with a part of the body that is normally concealed), he becomes Tameh. The third way by which one contracts Tum'at Met is “Ohel” (literally, “tent”) – by being under the same roof as a corpse. All people, utensils, foods and beverages that are under the same roof as a corpse become Tameh. Even if a person puts just his hand, or even just one finger, into the building where a corpse is situated, he becomes Tameh. One becomes Tameh even through contact with a portion of a corpse; a Ke'zayit of flesh from a human corpse suffices to transmit Tum'at Met. A complete limb (that is among the 248 limbs of the human body) transmits Tum'a even in a size smaller than a Ke'zayit. A piece of flesh or limb can transmit Tum'a in any of the aforementioned three methods – “Maga,” “Masa” and “Ohel.” Bones, too, can transmit Tum'at Met. There is some discussion among the Poskim as to whether the remains of a Sadik transmits Tum'at Met. One of the sources of this discussion is a famous comment in Tosafot (Ketubot 103b) that Rav Haim Kohen – a prominent Tosafist who was a Kohen – said that if he had been in the area of the funeral of his mentor, Rabbenu Tam (France, 1100-1171), he would have attended the funeral and involved himself in the burial. This might mean that in the view of Rav Haim Kohen, the remains of a Sadik do not emit Tum'a. However, some explain this remark based on the Halacha mentioned in the Talmud Yerushalmi that when a Nasi (head of the Sanhedrin) passes away, he is to be considered like a “Met Misva” – a deceased person with nobody to bury it. For a person of such stature, there will never be enough people to give him the respect he deserves, and therefore, just as a Kohen may bury a “Met Misva,” he may likewise attend the burial of a Nasi. Rav Haim Kohen may thus have felt that Rabbenu Tam, the leading sage of his generation, had the status of a Nasi, such that even Kohanim were bidden to attend his funeral. This command applies in all places and times, and to male Kohanim. A Kohen who comes in contact with the remains of a person who is not one of his immediate family members is liable to Malkut.

The Halacha permits moving a Keli She'm'lachto L'isur, a utensil designated for a prohibited function, such as a pen, L'Sorech M'komo-if it is in the way and its place is needed. For example, one may remove a pen from his Shabbat table in order to make room for the dinner plates. The Poskim discuss whether it is permitted to move the pen even if the space is not needed for something else, but he would like the space to remain empty; he does not want to see a Mukse item on his Shabbat table and cause disrespect to the Shabbat. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Russia – New York, 1895-1986) ruled that such a motive is not "L'sorech M'komo," and it may not be removed. He argues that, on the contrary, leaving a Mukse item on the Shabbat table is Kavod Shabbat, because he is demonstrating that he keeps the Halachot of Mukse. This also seems to be the opinion of the Be'ur Halacha (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933), as well. He discusses removing a pot from the Shabbat table. In general, a pot used for cooking is a Keli She'm'lachto L'isur and may only be moved as long as it has food in it. Therefore, If the pot was brought to the table for serving and was emptied, technically it may not be removed from the table. The Biur Halacha permits removing the pot only because of a special dispensation called "Graf Shel Re'i," if the pot became putrid and was offensive. From this, it can be inferred that he does not allow removing the pot simply to have a clear table, and doing so does not constitute "L'sorech M'komo."On the other hand, Hacham Bension allows removing the pot from the table, because it is not Kavod Shabbat. He only mentions "Graf Shel Re'i" as a secondary factor. This indicate that keeping a surface clear is "L'sorech M'komo." The Sefer Ma'hazeh Eliyahu also brings this opinion. Those who wish, may rely on this lenient opinion.According to the strict opinion, which maintains that "L'sorech M'komo" is only when the space is needed for something else, the question is whether one may do "Ha'aramah" (circumvention). That is, may one remove the Keli She'm'lachto L'isur and then place an item that he did not really need in its place? The Aruch Hashulhan (Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein of Nevarduk, 1829-1908) cites the Talmud Yerushalmi that one may do "Ha'aramah," in order to avoid financial loss. For example, If the pen was left outside exposed to the elements, it may be moved to safety under the pretense that its space is needed for another item which he will put there. However, this would not enable him to remove the pen from the Shabbat table, where it is not in jeopardy.SUMMARYThere are two opinions whether one may remove a Keli She'm'lachto L'isur, such as a pen, from the Shabbat table if its space is not needed for another item.

Would you like to sponsor an episode? A series?   We'd love to hear from you : podcasts@ohr.edu   https://podcasts.ohr.edu/   00:00 Could the Rav elaborate on the Gra's view that the days of creation correspond to millennia?   02:47 How does the Rav feel about the state messing with the Meron situation?   7:40 Is there an issur of Kol Isha in front of a gentile man, and likewise is there an obligation for tznius if the Jewish woman is not responsible for their aveiras?   15:10 What is the Rebbe's advice if someone is attacked by inappropriate thoughts in the moment?   17:26 Zionists think that since we're not in Galus, the Talmud Yerushalmi has more authority now—does it?   25:55 Why don't women change their Hebrew name once they get married (since they change many other minhagim by their husband)?   27:35 Could the Rav speak on the topic of politician Aryeh Deri, what are the Rav's thoughts, whether he should be leading Am Yisrael, is the media blowing things out of proportion or is there truth to their claims, etc.?   29:55 How will Halacha work when techiyas Hamesim happens, in light of many changes that have happened over time?   34:00 Does the Rav think that the war in Ukraine has anything to do with precursors to Mashiach?   37:42 Since it's common to wear clothing made of animals, why is that not considered tumah?   42:10 Why are Pesach and Yom Tov names but not Sukkos, Shavuos, or Shabbos?   45:39 Is there a deeper (spiritual) understanding to if a man is mazria before a woman, having a daughter first?   49:09 Why are the curses in Bechukosai much stronger than the brachos in terms of description (and in Ki Savo)?   1:01:25 Do souls watch over us from above?   1:04:18 Why are the four questions we ask seemingly the only questions that are preempted by the Torah?   1:10:23 Why is there controversy around the author of the Zohar and how does this affect other controversial sefer authorships?   1:16:44 If tzitzis is lacking tcheles, why do we still say a bracha if the mitzvah is seemingly incomplete?   1:20:06 Recently there are images of Mars and new findings of caves, does Judaism accept the idea of life on other planets?   1:25:12 Is there a validity to the Yeshivish concept of “shtultz” (honoring older bachurim)?    1:28:38 Can you use Alexa/Siri/Google Home on Shabbos to turn on the lights or the AC? And is their a difference by Yom Tov?   1:29:26 What are the conditions necessary to make something no longer considered woman's clothing?    1:31:43 With regards to offerings or food in general, what did the Jews do when all they had was manna?   1:34:15 What does the Torah state is the ideal lifestyle (Nomadic vs Urban)?   1:37:10 What should we think about during Lag B'Omer?   Visit us @ ohr.edu   

#138With R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer discussing the forged Yerushalmi on KodshimWe discussed if there ever was a Yerushalmi on Kodashim, who was Shlomo Yehuda Friedlander-Elgazi, whcih Mesechtas he forged, who he "fooled" and how, who dicovered that it was a fake and how, and moreTo read R' Bechhofer's article on the subject: https://www.academia.edu/3017775/The_Talmud_Yerushalmi_on_Kodashim_Or_Shmuel_HTC_Skokie_IL_pdf_file_

Is it permissible to ask a gentile to turn off the air conditioner in the synagogue if it is too cold in the room? Many synagogues set the air conditioner on a timer, so that it goes on during the day for the Shabbat morning service. It occasionally happens that the air conditioning is set on a timer, but the weather turns sharply colder, such that the air conditioning makes it very uncomfortable in the synagogue. In such a case, would it be permissible to ask a gentile to turn off the air conditioning?Rav Moshe Feinstein (Russia-New York, 1895-1986) addresses this question and rules that one may, indeed, ask a gentile to turn off the air conditioning if it is too cold in the synagogue. Rav Feinstein notes the ruling of the Shulhan Aruch that people are at risk of taking ill due to exposure to the cold, and this concern overrides the prohibition of Amira Le'nochri (asking a gentile to perform an activity forbidden for Jews). Moreover, he writes, uncomfortable conditions in the synagogue may likely cause people to leave, and they will miss the Torah reading, Kaddish, Kedusha and so on. Rav Moshe cites a ruling of the Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) that one may ask a gentile to fix a dismantled Erub on Shabbat, as this is necessary to prevent Jews from violating Shabbat. Similarly, Rav Moshe writes, it would be permissible to ask a gentile to deactivate the air conditioning in the synagogue to prevent people from leaving.In one's home, there is even greater reason to permit asking a gentile to deactivate the air conditioning in such a case, since one has nowhere else to go. When the air conditioning causes discomfort in the synagogue, one might have claimed, we should perhaps instruct people to return home, rather than ask a gentile to turn off the air conditioning. If this happens in one's home, however, Halacha would certainly not require him to go somewhere else. Therefore, if Halacha allows asking a gentile to deactivate the air conditioning in the synagogue, then certainly one may ask a gentile to turn off the air conditioning in one's home if it causes uncomfortably cold conditions.Is it permissible to ask a gentile to turn on the air conditioning if it is uncomfortably hot in the synagogue, or in one's home? The Shulhan Aruch allows asking a gentile to turn on the heat due to the fact that people are sensitive to exposure to the cold and may become sick. Would this also apply to turning on the air conditioning under uncomfortably warm conditions?The Minhat Yishak (Rav Yishak Weiss, 1902-1989) addresses this question and notes an interesting story told in the Talmud Yerushalmi. The Yerushalmi relates that Antoninus, the Roman emperor, once embarked on a trip, and before he left he asked his friend, Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi, to pray on his behalf. Rabbi Yehuda prayed that God should protect the emperor from cold weather."I don't need a prayer for protection against the cold," Antoninus said, "because if it gets cold I can put on a warm coat!"Rabbi Yehuda then prayed that God should protect the emperor from the heat. Antoninus thanked him for the prayer, noting the verse in Tehillim (19:7), "Nobody can hide from His heat" ("Ve'en Nistar Me'hamato"). There is no method of protecting oneself from heat, as opposed to cold, from which one can shield himself by wearing layers of clothing.This story, the Minhat Yishak comments, demonstrates that heat poses an even greater risk than cold. Therefore, if Halacha allows asking a gentile to turn on the heat under cold conditions, then certainly one may ask a gentile to turn on the air conditioning under hot conditions. The Minhat Yishak further notes that activating an air conditioner might constitute a Rabbinic prohibition (as opposed to a Torah violation), and Halacha allows asking a gentile to perform an act which the Sages forbade if this is necessary to alleviate discomfort. Therefore, under uncomfortably hot conditions, one may ask a gentile to activate the air conditioner. This applies both at home and in the synagogue. This is also the ruling of the Yalkut Yosef.Of course, if the home or synagogue can be made comfortable by opening a window, this should be done instead of requesting the services of a gentile. Our discussion here relates to especially hot weather, under which conditions open windows will not alleviate the discomfort.Summary: It is permissible on Shabbat to ask a gentile to turn on the heat or turn off an air conditioner if the home or synagogue is uncomfortably cold. Likewise, it is permissible to ask a gentile to turn on an air conditioner under uncomfortably hot conditions, if opening a window would not alleviate the discomfort.

The Navi (Prophet) warns regarding speech on Shabbat: "V'Daber Dabar"-(From speaking talk). The Hachamim derive from this phrase that one's speech on Shabbat should be different than his speech during the week. Rambam understands this to mean that it is prohibited to speak on Shabbat about activates which would be forbidden to perform on Shabbat-whether by Torah or Rabbinic law. For example, one may not say, "Tomorrow, I am driving to New Jersey," or "Tomorrow I am flying to Miami." Since those activities cannot be performed on Shabbat, it is also prohibited from saying it. However, Tosafot have a different understanding of this issue. They learn that not only is it prohibited to speak about prohibited activities, but it is even prohibited to talk excessively about any mundane topic, such as news, politics etc. They cite an incident in the Midrash, in which Rabbi Shimon rebuked his grandmother for talking too much on Shabbat about any subject. The Talmud Yerushalmi records that the Hachamim barely permitted saying Shalom on Shabbat. Of course, there is no issue with talking words of Torah, Tefila and Musar.Interestingly, Shulhan Aruch (307:1) records both the opinion of the Rambam and the Tosafot. It is important to know that the Aruch Hashulhan (Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein of Nevarduk, 1829-1908) understand the opinion of Tosafot, who hold that any excess speech is problematic, as a preference and not as actual law. He proves this from the comment of the Rema who adds that if a person derives enjoyment from talking about permitted topics, he may do so. Clearly, if the issue was a bona fide prohibition, enjoyment would not be a factor to permit it. The fact that someone may enjoy turning on lights does not justify violating the Shabbat. Thus, even though the Halacha says that one should curtail his speech on Shabbat, it is regarded as Midat Hasidut-the behavior of the righteous.The Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) cites a custom of certain Sadikim to speak only in Lashon HaKodesh-Hebrew- on Shabbat. Doing so enabled them to avoid idle speech. Other Sadikim would engage in a Ta'anit Dibur-a day of silence-every Shabbat. While this may seem extreme for most people, these practices underscore the lofty nature of Shabbat. It is not just a day for rest and relaxation. One should focus on the Shechina and the pursuit of holiness. For most people, refraining from speaking during the Torah reading is a challenge, but for the Sadikim, the entire day of Shabbat was like one long Torah reading, and hence they refrained from speaking.SUMMARYIt is a bona fide prohibition on to speak on Shabbat about activities which are prohibited to perform on Shabbat. It is preferable to refrain, in general, from speaking about mundane matters on Shabbat, unless he derives special benefit from doing so.

00:00 Why do we say Kaddish?   04:28 Could you please describe the Kabbalistic middah of Malchus?    09:20 When did souls become “Jewish" souls?    17:11 Does anyone say that the Jewish transformation happened at Mt. Sinai?   18:24 Why do we stand with feet together in the Amidah?   20:13 Why are there very few Levites?   24:07 If Hashem created Teshuva for all people, how can Elisha Ben Avuya say the Acher couldn't do Teshuva? And how do we make Teshuva for “dead and gone” situations?    29:34 How come we don't know where the lost tribes are today?   35:48 If someone is traveling and they are looking for a shul, how do I know it's a kosher minyan (e.g. if it were reform or conservative)?    43:10 What does the Rambam mean when he says we shouldn't do Mitzvos for the sake of reward?    48:00 When does it become appropriate to study Kabbalah?   58:08 How does one know which voices to listen to inside oneself?   1:04:16 What is the Torah's perspective on ghosts?   1:06:00 How do you explain learning Gemara to kids?   1:14:45 Are women allowed to learn Gemara?   1:20:53 Are there makhlosim between the Talmud Yerushalmi? Why is the Talmud Bavli more widespread if the Yerushalmi was written in a holier place?   1:30:58 Why is there not more of a push to learn Machshava in Yeshiva?    1:35:30 How would the Rav describe the fundamental difference between a Jew and a non-Jew to someone who has no idea about Judaism?   1:39:15 How do we relate to Avoda Zara references or images in literature?   1:42:45 Why do some sects of Judaism not learn on certain days (non-Jewish holidays)?   Comments? Feedback? Would you like to sponsor an episode? A series?   We'd love to hear from you : podcasts@ohr.edu https://podcasts.ohr.edu/ Visit us @ ohr.edu !   Produced by:

Class description Here are the topics for Session Twenty: Urban Legend: “On Tu BiShvat, you're supposed to eat dried fruit!” Frauds, Fakes, Forgeries: “A Sephardic rabbi discovered the long-lost Talmud Yerushalmi on Kodashim!” Street Torah: “Chanukah presents are just a variation of the older custom of Chanukah gelt!” Factitious Fiction: The Rabbi Small Mysteries: “Judaism doesn't believe in an afterlife or petitionary prayer!” People Thought the Darndest Things!: “Eating fish with meat is dangerous!” Misunderstood Text: “The Mishnah Berurah says women don't have to light Chanukah candles, because they're not as important as men!” Stranger Than Fiction: “Sufganiyah” (Chanukah donut) is related to “sponge.”

Is it permissible on Shabbat to polish one's shoes, and would there be a distinction in this regard between color and clear polish?Polishing shoes on Shabbat transgresses the Torah prohibition of Tzovei'a, dyeing on Shabbat. When Benei Yisrael constructed the Mishkan, they dyed animal skins to be used as curtains in the Mishkan. The Talmud Yerushalmi in Perek Klal Gadol, Halacha 2, tells that they would dye the skins by beating the animal so that blood would form in between the skin and the flesh. This establishes the Melacha (forbidden activity) of Tzovei'a, which forbids coloring materials – such as shoes – on Shabbat. This includes all types of shoe polishing, even with clear polish.The Torah prohibition of Tzovei'a applies specifically to applying a permanent dye, and the Sages later enacted a prohibition against applying even temporary dye (Rambam, Hilchot Shabbat 9:13). It would thus seem, at first glance, that polishing shoes, which has but a temporary coloring effect, is forbidden on Shabbat only on the level of Rabbinic enactment. In truth, however, this prohibition obtains even on the level of Torah law. When a person polishes his shoes, his hope is that the polish remains on the shoe permanently, and, what more, the polish in and of itself is capable of remaining permanently on the shoes. The fact that the shoes' wear-and-tear and exposure to the elements naturally fades their color does not render the polishing temporary, because intrinsically, its effect is permanent. Therefore, polishing one's shoes on Shabbat transgresses the Torah prohibition of Tzovei'a. (Menuhat Ahava, Helek 3, page 6)It should be noted that even buffing one's shoes with a dry cloth would be forbidden on Shabbat, given the whitening effect is has on the shoes (ibid).A fundamental rule relevant to Tzovei'a establishes that this prohibition does not apply to foods or beverages. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Hayim, siman 320:19, and Yichaave Daat 6:23.) Therefore, Halacha allows placing a teabag in hot water (provided that no violation of Bishul – cooking – is involved), despite the consequent coloration of the water. This applies as well to adding colored spices to foods or drinks; since these spices are added for taste, and not for coloring, no prohibition is involved.Tzovei'a does apply, however, when one mixes foods or beverages specifically for the purpose of color. Therefore, if a person wishes to use white wine for Kiddush, he may not add some red wine to change its color for the purpose of satisfying the requirement to use red wine for Kiddush. Since in this case one mixes the wines specifically for the purpose of coloration, the mixing is forbidden due to the prohibition of Tzovei'a. (Menuhat Ahava, Helek 3, page 17.) See Halichot Olam, Helek 4, page 280, that is lenient to add red wine to whit wine.Summary: One may not polish shoes on Shabbat with colored or clear polish, or buff his shoes with a dry cloth. One may mix foods or beverages together or add spices to a food or beverage, even if this results in the coloration of one of the foods or beverages, provided that he does so for the purpose of taste. One may not mix foods or drinks for the specific purpose of changing the color of one of the foods or beverages.

One of the thirty nine Melachot-prohibited activities on Shabbat is "HaOfeh"-baking. Although baking was not actually done as part of the construction of the Mishkan, cooking was done. They would cook the various plants to extract the dyes for the fabrics and skins. The Hachamim explain that cooking and baking are the same process-using fire to change the consistency of an entity, by making hard objects soft or soft objects hard. Therefore, both cooking and baking are prohibited by the Torah.The Mishna in Masechet Shabbat (p. 38) states that one may not place an egg next to a hot urn in order to roast it. That is, not only is cooking directly from a fire prohibited, but even cooking via surfaces which were heated by a fire, in this case the metal of the urn. The Talmud Bavli understands this to be a Torah prohibition. The Rambam in Hilchot Shabbat (Ch. 9) and Shulhan Aruch (318:3) rule in accordance with this Gemara that there is no difference between cooking with "Ur"-fire and "Toldot HaUr"-indirectly cooking with thing materials heated by the fire. It should be pointed out that the Talmud Yerushalmi argues with this assumption and holds that "Toldot HaUr" is only prohibited M'Drabanan. The Halacha is in accordance with the Talmud Bavli.SUMMARYIt is prohibited by Torah law on Shabbat to cook on surfaces heated by a fire.

The Yeshiva of Newark@IDT presents a unique offering to the Torah world.We are all aware of the Daf Yomi,learning throughTalmud Bavlia page a day-Now you have the ability to follow master teacher Rabbi Avraham Kivelevitz through the lesser learnt Talmud ofEretz YisroelorYerushalmi-Sunday through Thursday weekly!Gain an understanding ofSeder Zeraim,that explore the agricultural laws ofEretz Yisroel,and enjoy the crisp logic on display by theAmoraim.Listening regularly will sensitize you to the salient differences between the two Talmuds on a host of issues.Join Rabbi Kivelevitz's students,Daf Yomi Bavli veterans, who are participating in ZOOM teleconferencing and really appreciating the general approach the Yerushalmi has in solving Halachic difficulties,oft times cutting to the heart of the matter in language that resembles the cogent definitions of the Great Sephardic Rishonim-Ramban,Rashba,andRitva.The class is dedicated to the continued health and growth in all ways of Caleb Nathan Topoloskyכלב נתן בן אליעזר יעקב ורנה רחלPlease leave us a review or email us at ravkiv@gmail.comFor more information on this podcast visityeshivaofnewark.jewishpodcasts.org See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast is powered by JewishPodcasts.org. Start your own podcast today and share your content with the world. Click jewishpodcasts.fm/signup to get started.

The Yeshiva of Newark@IDT presents a unique offering to the Torah world.We are all aware of the Daf Yomi,learning through Talmud Bavli a page a day-Now you have the ability to follow master teacher Rabbi Avraham Kivelevitz through the lesser learnt Talmud of Eretz Yisroel or Yerushalmi -Sunday through Thursday weekly!Gain an understanding of Seder Zeraim,that explore the agricultural laws of Eretz Yisroel,and enjoy the crisp logic on display by the Amoraim.Listening regularly will sensitize you to the salient differences between the two Talmuds on a host of issues.Join Rabbi Kivelevitz's students,Daf Yomi Bavli veterans, who are participating in ZOOM teleconferencing and really appreciating the general approach the Yerushalmi has in solving Halachic difficulties,oft times cutting to the heart of the matter in language that resembles the cogent definitions of the Great Sephardic Rishonim-Ramban,Rashba,and Ritva.The class is dedicated to the continued health and growth in all ways of Caleb Natan Topoloskyכלב נתן בן אליעזר יעקב ורנה רחלPlease leave us a review or email us at ravkiv@gmail.comFor more information on this podcast visityeshivaofnewark.jewishpodcasts.org See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast is powered by JewishPodcasts.org. Start your own podcast today and share your content with the world. Click jewishpodcasts.fm/signup to get started.

In this class given with ZOOM technology Rabbi Kivelevitz leads the audience in an examination of 3 Halachic issues all placed within a few lines in the Talmud Yerushalmi in Pesachim-The fasting of the Bechorim-The takanah not to eat Matzah on Erev Pesach-and whether an indentured Jewish servant assumes the physical ambiance at the Seder of his Masters.The Baal HaMaor,Ramban,Pri Chadash,Chok Yaakov, Rav Tzvi Hersh of Zidachov Mishna Brurah,, Rav Avraham Yitzchack HaCohen Kook and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerabach are all invoked and commented on with crucial textual readings in the Yerushalmi and Rambam that yield a different albeit meaningful halachic romp to get your mind off Covid and primed for Erev Pesach and beyondPlease leave us a review or email us at ravkiv@gmail.comFor more information on this podcast visityeshivaofnewark.jewishpodcasts.org See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast is powered by JewishPodcasts.org. Start your own podcast today and share your content with the world. Click jewishpodcasts.fm/signup to get started.

Rabbi Kivelevitz and the class explore the theories behind the differences between the structure and approach of the Talmud Yerushalmi to the Bavli.The history of the Gaonim and Karaites are discussed,as well as the novel approach of Rav Kook ztvk"l.Please leave us a review or email us at ravkiv@gmail.comFor more information on this podcast visityeshivaofnewark.jewishpodcasts.org See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast is powered by JewishPodcasts.org. Start your own podcast today and share your content with the world. Click jewishpodcasts.fm/signup to get started.