Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 6 - CONNECTION BETWEEN THE SHEKALIM AND KILAYIM

The Mishna states: On the first of Adar proclamation is made regarding the shekalim and kilayim.

What is the connection between the shekalim and kilayim?

The Satmar Rebbe used to say: It is well known that the obligation to donate a half-shekel to the Beis Hamikdosh and not a whole shekel implies that a person is not complete by himself. He must join together with other Jews and only then will he be considered a whole person.

At the same time, one must be wary about bonding with a wicked person. It is written in Avos d’Reb Nosson (30:3): One who unites with an evil person even if he himself does not engage in the same manner as him will receive punishment similar to the retribution that will be administered to the wicked person. One who unites with a righteous person even if he himself does not perform virtuous acts will receive reward similar to the reward of the righteous person.

The proclamation and inspecting of the kilayim is to promote this concept. The Torah prohibits various mixtures of crops from growing together, so too, one must be careful as to whom his friends are.

Rabbi A. Leib Scheinbaum here quotes from Horav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld. He explains that a person must strive to cultivate relationships. As the Tanna says in Pirkei Avos 1:6, Knei lecha chaver, "Acquire for yourself a friend." One who lives as an individual lives as an incomplete person. He is missing a part of himself. Nonetheless, one must maintain criteria with regard to his relationships. He must be sure to associate only with those people who are appropriate. Just as certain admixtures of crops are forbidden, so, too, is it unwise to develop an affiliation with people of questionable or incompatible character. The positive effect of a good friend - and, conversely, the negative effect of a bad friend - cannot be emphasized enough.

Dr. Nosson Chayim Leff http://www.torah.org/advanced/sfas-emes/5764/shekalim.html cites a Sfas Emes who offers a different explanation. "On the first day of Adar, we inform people about their obligation to donate a half shekel to the Beis HaMikdosh and about kilayim (that is, the obligation, when planting one's field, to avoid mixing seeds of different plants, such as grapes and wheat)."

The Sfas Emes poses a basic question: Why were these announcements made specifically in the month of Adar? The Sfas Emes answers that the month of Adar resembles the month of Elul in certain important ways. We know that Elul is the month before the end of one year and the beginning of a new year that begins with Rosh Hashana. Thus its position as a potential turning point in our lives makes Elul a propitious time for doing teshuva, for repenting. So, too, the Sfas Emes tells us, the month of Adar immediately precedes the new year that begins in Nisan. Thus, Adar is also well placed for a person to look inside himself and do teshuva. Because of its importance, Adar is a good time for making the key announcements mentioned in the Mishna.
But, notes the Sfas Emes, there is an important difference between teshuva in Adar and teshuva in Elul. In Elul, we do teshuva from yirah (fear or a sense of awe). By contrast, in Adar, we can more easily do teshuva out of a sense of love (ahava) for HaShem. Indeed, that is why we experience heightened joy? simcha - in Adar. When Adar comes, our expansiveness and good feeling toward HaShem increase.

That is the reason for our obligation to donate half a shekel to the Beis HaMikdosh. Obviously HaShem does not need our donations. What He wants is to give us the opportunity to awaken our good feelings and dedication toward Him.

(Note, incidentally, that the Sfas Emes has just given us a whole new perspective on giving tzedaka. The conventional view sees us giving tzedaka because of our commitment to observe mitzvos. Ultimately, love for HaShem may enter the process. But that happens only if we work on ourselves diligently enough to do the mitzva not by rote and or out of social pressure but rather because of our love for HaShem. By contrast, the Sfas Emes sees the process as beginning from our love and good feelings to HaShem.)

Every Jew has within him a latent devotion to HaShem. What we need is an activity to express that devotion. The obligation to give the half shekel to the Beis Hamikdosh provides such an opportunity. And because Adar gives us an opportunity to express that love for HaShem, we feel more joy!

At this point, the Sfas Emes injects a note of severe caution into the ma'amar by citing a dvar Torah from his grandfather, the Chidushei Harim. The pasuk in Shir HaShirim (7:2) says: "Mah yafu pe'ahmayich bane'alim, bas nadiv." (ArtScroll: "But your footsteps were so lovely when shod in pilgrim's sandals, O daughter of nobles."). The Chidushei HaRim read this pasuk in the following non-pshat manner: The generosity and expansiveness of spirit (he is reading "pe'ahmahyich as "pulse rate," i.e., "spirit") of the Jewish people as the descendants of Avraham Avinu (whose great chesed and magnanimity entitled him to the sobriquet "the Nadiv," i.e., the "benefactor") is so great that it must be locked up ("min'al" = lock). That is, this love can be so overpowering that it has to be watched and controlled lest it go outside, i.e., be misdirected. (Anyone familiar with the devotion and love that too many Jews in Russia and Poland harbored for communism will concur in this comment of the Chidushei HaRim.)

The Sfas Emes continues, addressing a question that may have bothered you earlier. The Mishna quoted above juxtaposes two things. First, it specifies awakening people’s hearts to nedivus, expansiveness. The Mishna conveys his message by requiring all of us to make a donation to the Beis Hamikdosh. Then the Mishna warns us to be careful to avoid kilayim. What is the connection between these two items in the Mishna? The Sfas Emes answers this question by offering us a non-pshat reading of the word 'kilayim'. He reads the word as an allusion to "locking up" (as in "beis ha'kela" = prison). People must be warned to be careful with their idealism and generosity.

The Sfas Emes concludes: Every year when we read the parsha of Shekalim, our hearts are awakened to give all to HaShem. Unfortunately, we do not have the Beis HaMikdosh and thus cannot give our all as an offering. But in any case, HaShem's love for us is awakened, and we can do teshuva with simcha.

I saw another explanation offered by the members of the St. Louis Kollel. http://stlkollel.com/bits/5757/vayakhel.txt The Talmud in Megillah 13b states in the name of Rish Lakish, "It was well known beforehand to Him at Whose word the world came into being, that Haman would one day pay shekels for the destruction of Israel. Therefore, he anticipated his shekels with those of Israel, and so, we have learned "on the first of Adar, a proclamation is made regarding the shekalim and the mixed seeds (kilayim).

The Shem MiShmuel explains the connection between the shekels of Bnei Yisroel and those of Haman. He cites his father who says that the mitzvah of shekalim alludes to the giving over of a person's ten powers for the love of Hashem. (See Gur Aryeh, beginning of Parshas Terumah.) The shekel weighed ten gairah, an allusion to these ten powers a person possesses. It was from silver, kesef, which comes from the word nichsapha, desire or longing. The giving over the silver shekel represented the desire to give over, in love these ten powers. Haman's main intent was not to merely wipe out Bnei Yisroel for the sake of eradicating them. Rather, his intent was that the seventy nations of the world should take over Bnei Yisroel's role in the world and replace them in their special relationship to Hashem. His shekalim therefore, were very similar in intent to Beni Yisroel's. He handed over a fortune to Achashverosh in order to bring about the replacement of Bnei Yisroel by the 70 nations. His shekalim were also given over, as if to say, in love of Hashem.

"Shekalim" comes from the word "to weigh." Hashem weighed the pure intent of Bnei Yisroel, in contrast to Haman's intent that was not completely pure. His underlying intent was really to destroy Yisroel, and it was only clothed with the intent of the 70 nations gaining a closer relationship with Hashem. This explains the connection in the Mishna between shekalim and the prohibition to mix seeds (kilayim).

The shekalim have to be pure without any mixed intentions. Our avoda during Adar is to purify our intentions that we should truly desire to give over of ourselves all our powers for Hashem's service, without any selfishness.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 6 - Highlights

The braisa concluded with the words of Rabbi Yehudah: We assume that a beis haperas field includes an intact grave unless an elderly man or a Torah student informs us that it has been plowed since not everyone is an expert regarding this issue.

Abaye said: It can be learned from here that if there is a young Torah scholar in the city, all the city’s issues are incumbent on him. (6a)

Rav Yehudah said: If one finds an individual stone that has been marked with lime, it is evident that the area underneath the stone is tamei (people can see the stone due to its height and it will be noticed from a distance). If he finds two lime-marked stones, we rule as follows: If there is lime found on the ground between the two stones, that area is tamei, if not, it is tahor.

The Gemora questions this ruling from a braisa which states that the area between two stones is deemed to be tahor if the area has been plowed, but otherwise it is tamei.

Rav Papa answers: The braisa is referring to a specific case where the lime has fallen from the top of the stones. If there is plowing in between the stones, the area is judged to be tahor because we assume the lime has fallen because of the plow; otherwise the area between the stones is tamei. (6a)

The Mishna had stated: During Chol Hamoed, agents of Beis Din are sent out to inspect the fields for kilayim (the prohibition against planting together different species of vegetables, fruit or seeds – agents of beis din would be sent out at this time to warn the people to uproot any shoots of other seeds that appear among the grain).

The Gemora asks from a Mishna in Shekalim (which indicates that they were sent out before Chol Hamoed Pesach). The Mishna states: On the first of Adar proclamation is made regarding the shekalim and kilayim. On the fifteenth of adar, they read the Megillah in the walled cities and they would be sent out then to remove the thorns from the roads, fix the streets, measure the mikvaos (ensuring that they contained forty se’ah of water), attend to all the needs of the public and they would inspect the fields for kilayim. Why does our Mishna state that they would be sent out for kilayim on Chol Hamoed Pesach?

The Gemora offers two answers: Either the Mishna is referring to the early crops or it is referring to grains. Our Mishna is referring to the late crops or to vegetables. (6a)

The Gemora asks: Why would the agents be sent out on Chol Hamoed and not any other time? The Gemora answers: We can find cheaper workers at this time (since people are not performing their usual work on Chol Hamoed). (6a)

The Gemora states: If the inspectors would find kilayim growing in the fields, they would remove the foreign growth. The Gemora asks: We have learned in a braisa that if kilayim is found, the inspectors would proclaim that the entire field in considered ownerless? The Gemora answers: Our Gemora is referring to the time period before the decree that the fields should be considered ownerless was enacted.

The Gemora elaborates by citing another braisa: Initially, the inspectors would remove the kilayim and feed the animals with it. The owners of the fields were happy with this arrangement. Their fields would be weeded and their animals would be fed. Subsequently, the Rabbis issued a decree that the inspectors would throw the kilayim into the streets. The owners were still happy on the account that their fields were being weeded. The Rabbis issued a final decree that if they would find kilayim, the field would be declared ownerless. (6a – 6b)

The Mishna states: Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: One is permitted to draw water from one tree to another on Chol Hamoed by creating a path from the tree that has water underneath it; however, one is forbidden to water his entire rain-watered field (since the watering is beneficial for the grain growing between the trees and not to prevent a loss.) Plants that were not watered on a consistent basis before the festival may not be watered during Chol Hamoed. The Chachamim disagree with both halachos and state that one is permitted to water a rain-watered field and the plants can be watered even if they had not been previously watered. (6b)

Rav Yehudah qualifies the first halacha mentioned in the Mishna. One would be permitted to water the entire rain-watered field if the field was originally moist and presently dried up. (This is because if it wouldn’t be watered now, there would be a tremendous loss to the produce.) (6b)

The Gemora cites a braisa: One is permitted to sprinkle water on a field of grain during Shemitah but not during Chol Hamoed. The Gemora questions this from a braisa which explicitly permits sprinkling a field even during Chol Hamoed. Rav Huna answers: The braisa which prohibits sprinkling reflects the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ban Yaakov cited in our Mishna and the other braisa follows the opinion of the Chachamim. (6b)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 5 - Highlights

The Mishna had stated: On Chol Hamoed, one may make repairs to the water containers in the public domain, and clean them (from the mud and small stones that accumulate in them).

The Gemora infers that one may clean the containers from the debris on Chol Hamoed, but it would be prohibited to dig new containers.

Rabbi Yaakov said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: If the new containers are needed by the public, it would be permitted to dig new ones.

The Gemora questions this from the following braisa: One may clear away the debris from the pits, ditches and vaults of an individual during Chol Hamoed and certainly with regard to those of the public. One is not permitted to dig new pits, ditches and vaults of the public and certainly with regard to those of an individual.

The Gemora assumes that the braisa is referring to a case where the pits of water would be needed for the festival and nevertheless it is prohibited to dig them. The Gemora answers that the braisa is referring to a case where the public does not need them and that is why it is prohibited.

It would emerge according to this, that in the parallel case by an individual, it would be permitted to clear away the debris from the pits even when he doesn’t need them for the festival.

This is challenged from a different braisa which states: One may collect water into the pits, ditches and vaults of an individual during Chol Hamoed, but he cannot clear away the debris from the pits nor may he apply plaster to the cracks. One may clear away the debris and apply plaster to the cracks for the pits, ditches and vaults for the public. This braisa explicitly prohibits clearing away debris from the pits of an individual.

The alternative is to explain the first braisa to be referring to a case where the individual needs the pits. According to this, in the parallel case of the braisa, it would be referring to a case where the public needs the pits and nevertheless we are not permitted to dig new pits.



This is challenged from a different braisa which states: One may collect water into the pits, ditches and vaults of an individual during Chol Hamoed. He may clear away the debris from the pits but he may not apply plaster to the cracks, nor clear into them and he cannot coat them with lime. We are permitted to dig pits for the public and to coat them with lime. This braisa explicitly permits the digging of a new pit, at least when the public needs them.

The Gemora is compelled to emend the first braisa as follows: One may clear away the debris from the pits, ditches and vaults of an individual during Chol Hamoed, providing that the individual needs them and certainly with regard to those of the public providing that the public needs them since even digging new pits when they are needed by the public is permitted. One is not permitted to dig new pits, ditches and vaults of the public where they are not needed by the public and certainly with regard to those of an individual since even clearing away the debris when the individual doesn’t need them is prohibited.

Rav Ashi proves that our Mishna supports this ruling and concludes that it would be permitted to dig new pits of water for the public. (4b – 5a)

The Gemora cites a braisa: Agents of Beis Din are sent out during Chol Hamoed to remove thorns from the road, fix the roads and streets and measure the ritual baths. If the mikvah does not have the required forty se’ah of water in it, they would fill it up. From where is it known that if they do not go out and as a result, some blood is spilled (people get injured or even killed), that it is regarded as the Beis Din themselves have spilled their blood? The Torah states [Devarim 19:10]: The blood will be upon you. (5a)

The Mishna had stated: They may mark the graves during Chol Hamoed. (The purpose of marking the graves is to ensure that those that are eating terumah should not go there.)

Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi cites a verse in Yechezkel which indicates that there is a Biblical obligation to mark the graves. It is written [Yechezkel 39:15]: And when they that pass through shall pass through the land, and when one sees a human bone, he shall build a marker by it, till the buriers have buried it in the valley of Hamon-gog.

Ravina asked Rav Ashi: What transpired before Yechezkel spoke this verse?

The Gemora answers: It was a received tradition and the verse in Yechezkel provides Scriptural support.

Rav Avahu cites another Scriptural verse indicating that the graves should be marked. It is written [Vayikra 13:45]: And he shall call out, “Tamei, tamei.” The metzora calls out to the people passing by “Stay away since I am tamei.”

The Gemora asks on this explanation: There is a braisa which derives from this verse that the metzora should call out for the sake of informing people of his misfortune and this way they will pity him and plead on his behalf for compassion.

The Gemora answers: Since there is an extra letter “vav” in the word “v’tamei,” we can derive both points from the same verse.

The Gemora cites other Scriptural references indicating that the graves should be marked. (5a)

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One who appraises his conduct (he considers the loss he might incur by performing a mitzva against the eternal reward that the mitzva will bring, and the benefit he may obtain by committing a sin against the tremendous loss that will result) will merit seeing the salvation of Klal Yisroel through Hashem.

Rabbi Yannai had a student who would consistently ask questions during the lecture. On the Shabbos of the festival (within thirty days of the festival, the scholars would teach and discuss the laws of the festival), the student wouldn’t challenge Rabbi Yannai (since there were many people attending and if Rabbi Yannai wouldn’t know how to respond, he would be embarrassed). Rabbi Yannai said in reference to him: And to him that appraises his way, I will show the salvation of Hashem (due to the student’s careful calculation). (5a – 5b)

The Gemora cites a braisa regarding the markings for various sources of tumah: We do not mark an olive’s volume of flesh from a corpse, nor for a bone the size of a grain of barley, nor for anything that does not transmit tumas ohel (if the tumah source and a person or object is under the same roof). We do mark a spinal column or the skull of a corpse, the majority of the structure of the skeleton, and the numerical majority of bones in the skeleton.

The braisa continues: If there is certain tumah there, there is no need to mark, but we must mark locations that are questionable if there is tumah there. The following are cases that we are uncertain if there is tumah there: Those having trees with spread out branches, stones projecting from the walls (leading to a cemetery) and a beis haperas (a field in which the grave had been plowed over).

The braisa concludes: The markers should be placed on the precise spot of the tumah (rather a short distance away), in order to ensure that objects of tahara do not inadvertently become tamei. The marker shall not be placed too far away from the tumah source because that will waste land in Eretz Yisroel (people won’t use the land in between the marker and the tumah, thinking that the entire space is tamei). (5b)

The Gemora questions the first halacha mentioned in the braisa. The braisa stated: We do not mark an olive’s volume of flesh from a corpse. This is seemingly because it does not transmit tumas ohel. The Gemora asks: The Mishna in Oholos explicitly states that an olive’s volume of flesh from a corpse does transmit tumas ohel? Rav Papa answers that the braisa is referring to a case where the piece of flesh is precisely the size of an olive and since eventually it will diminish in size (due to shriveling); there is no need to place a marker. (5b)

The Gemora questions a different halacha mentioned in the braisa. The braisa stated: We must mark locations that are questionable if there is tumah there, such as a beis haperas. The Gemora asks: Rav Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel that a beis haperas does not transmit tumas ohel; why do we need a marker? Rav Papa answers: The braisa is referring to a field in which a grave was lost and this type of beis haperas does not transmit tumas ohel. Shmuel is referring to a beis haperas in which the grave was plowed over. This type of beis haperas does not transmit tumas ohel. (5b)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 5 - Perils of Smoking

The Gemora cites a braisa: Agents of Beis Din are sent out during Chol Hamoed to remove thorns from the road, fix the roads and streets and measure the ritual baths. If the mikvah does not have the required forty se’ah of water in it, they would fill it up. From where is it known that if they do not go out and as a result, some blood is spilled (people get injured or even killed), that it is regarded as the Beis Din themselves have spilled their blood? The Torah states [Devarim 19:10]: The blood will be upon you.

Rav Shmuel Vozner in Shevet Levi (10:295) was asked regarding the custom of people that smoke cigars and cigarettes, which is well known that they cause great hazards to people’s health.

He cites the Rambam in Hilchos Rotzeach Ushmiras Hanefesh (11:5): There are many things that the Rabbis prohibited on the account that they are dangerous to one’s life. One who transgresses this and says that he is willing to put himself in harm’s way and does not care what others say; Beis din has the right to administer thirty-nine lashes to him.

The Rambam lists various types of food and drink that are hazardous to one’s health. The Ritva in Shavuos (27) writes: Food that damages one’s body is included in the Biblical prohibition of guarding oneself and protecting one’s body from any harm.

The Chasam Sofer (Avoda Zora 30) writes: It is incumbent on the Sages of their generation to monitor this and caution the entire community to watch what they eat and drink and to ensure that they remain healthy. If the Sages do not supervise over this and people become ill or die, it is regarded as if the Sages themselves killed them.

Rav Vozner states that it is integral on the leaders of their community to counsel and caution the public in regards to the hazards and dangers of smoking cigarettes, something that has been proven without a shadow of a doubt, that causes lung cancer and ultimately for people to die before their time.

He concludes that it is strictly forbidden for someone to start smoking and Biblically mandated for parents and teachers to ensure that younger boys should refrain from smoking.

Heaven forbid, that one should smoke in a place where it can cause damage to others.

Newspapers and magazines should not advertise on any smoking related products.

Anyone that heeds the words of our Sages and prevents others from commencing life-threatening habits will merit for himself and his family a long and healthy life.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 5 - HE DIDN’T KNOW FROM HIS RIGHT TO HIS LEFT

In the city of Dvinsk, there was a very prestigious and scholarly man named Reb Leib. He was referred to as Reb Leib Charif, the sharp one, due to his intelligent insights in torah. He was extremely close to Reb Meir Simcha, the Ohr Sameach, and they would spend many hours in each others company discussing Torah matters together.

There was once an incident where they were both sitting in the Beis Medrash when a different scholar was delivering a lecture to thirty laymen. Reb Leib heard how the scholar was explaining a certain topic to them and immediately asked a penetrating question that the scholar was incapable of answering.

Reb Meir Simcha arose from his designated seat near the eastern wall, walked to the back of the Beis Medrash and admonished Reb Leib: “Someone that doesn’t know between his right and his left, should be asking questions in the middle of a lecture?” Reb Leib was quiet, left the Beis Medrash in embarrassment and the scholar continued on with his lecture.

All those that witnessed the incident were bewildered. Is it possible that Reb Leib Charif could ask a question that was not fit to be asked? What did he do so terrible that caused Reb Meir Simcha to react in such a manner?

Reb Leib was puzzled as well and he went to Reb Meir Simcha’s house to inquire of him why he took such offense with his question, which was seemingly a legitimate one.

Reb Meir Simcha told him: “Did I say that your question was not a valid one? No, I did not. I was repeating a Gemora in Moed Katan.”

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One who appraises his conduct (he considers the loss he might incur by performing a mitzva against the eternal reward that the mitzva will bring, and the benefit he may obtain by committing a sin against the tremendous loss that will result) will merit in seeing the salvation of Klal Yisroel through Hashem. He cites a verse in Tehillim [50:23]: Vesam derech arenu beyasha Elokim, And to him that sets his way, I will show the salvation of Hashem. Do not read it as Vesam (and to him that sets), rather, read it as Vesham, and one who appraises his way.


Rabbi Yannai had a student who would consistently ask questions during the lecture. On the Shabbos of the festival (within thirty days of the festival, the scholars would teach and discuss the laws of the festival), the student wouldn’t challenge Rabbi Yannai (since there were many people attending and if Rabbi Yannai wouldn’t know how to respond, he would be embarrassed). Rabbi Yannai said in reference to him: And to him that appraises his way, I will show the salvation of Hashem (due to the student’s careful calculation).

Reb Meir Simcha concluded: “You, Reb Leib, should have been cognizant of the difference between the right and the left of the letter sin; it was written vesam, with the letter sin, which has the dot on the left and the Gemora expounds it to mean vesham, with the letter shin, which has the dot on the right. Vesham means that one should appraise his ways and calculate his every move and word. When this scholar was lecturing in front of thirty laymen, you should not have asked a question that quite possibly could embarrass him.

(Margoliyos HaShas)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 4 - Highlights

The Gemora concludes that the halacha of extending the restrictions of Shemitah prior to the seventh year was transmitted to Moshe at Sinai only according to Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva derived this halacha from the Scriptural verses. (4a)

Rabbi Yochanan said: Rabban Gamliel and his Beis Din nullified all the halachos restricting labor prior to Shemitah, even those halachos that were derived from Scripture. He was empowered to do this because he had his own Scriptural source proving otherwise. Rabban Gamliel’s source was through a gezeira shavah of the words “Shabbos, Shabbos,” from the Shabbos of Creation. Just as there, it is forbidden to perform labor on the day of Shabbos, but prior to that day and afterwards it would be permitted; so too regarding Shemitah, only the seventh year would be subject to the Shemitah restrictions and not the sixth or the eight years.

Rav Ashi objected to this explanation: How can a gezeira shavah come and uproot a halacha transmitted to Moshe at Sinai or uproot a halacha derived from a Scriptural verse?

Rav Ashi explains: Rabban Gamliel and his Beis Din maintained that the halacha restricting labor thirty days prior to Shemitah was a halacha transmitted to Moshe at Sinai, but Rabban Gamliel maintained that this halacha applied only in the times that the Beis Hamikdosh was in existence, similar to the halacha of the water libations on Sukkos, which was applicable only in the times that the Beis Hamikdosh was in existence. Therefore, one would be allowed to plow any type of field up until Rosh Hashanah. (4a)

The Mishna had stated: One may not water his field during Chol Hamoed from a pool of rainwater or from a well. The Gemora asks: We understand that watering from a well should be prohibited because it involves excessive exertion, but what is the reason to prohibit watering from a pool of rainwater?

Rabbi Ila’ah said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: The Rabbis issued a decree against watering from rainwater to safeguard the prohibition against watering from a well. (They assumed that if people will water from a pool of rainwater, this will lead to watering from a well as well.)

Rav Ashi answers: They were concerned that the pool of rainwater will lose water and eventually become like a well, which will also involve excessive exertion (one would be required to use a pail to water his field from there). (4a)

It was taught in a braisa: One is not permitted to water his field on Chol Hamoed from water basins or trenches that were filled with water prior to the festival (the water level might drop and he will be compelled to use a pail, which will involve excessive exertion), however, if there is a water channel passing between them, it will be permitted (since even if the water from the trenches dries up, the water from the channel can be used).

Rav Papa maintains that this is only true if the channel contains enough water to irrigate a majority of the fields at one time. Rav Ashi disagrees and holds that it would be permitted even if the channel does not contain enough water to irrigate a majority of the fields at one time because the person will say: if it cannot be irrigated in one day, it will be so in two or three days, and he will not bother himself to bring water from elsewhere. (4a)

It was taught in a braisa: We may draw water for vegetables in order to eat them, but it is forbidden if it is to improve them.

The Gemora records a related incident. Ravina and Rabbah Tosfa’ah went for a walk on Chol Hamoed. They observed a man drawing buckets of water with a pail and watering his vegetable field with it. Rabbah suggested to Ravina that this person warrants excommunication for violating the Rabbinic decree of watering a rain-watered field. Ravina disagreed and he quoted the braisa mentioned above that one may draw water for vegetables in order to eat them. Rabbah replied: The braisa does not mean that one can draw water for the vegetables; rather it means that one may pull out from an overgrowth of vegetables, provided that he will eat them on the festival. Ravina said back to Rabbah: There is an explicit braisa which allows one to draw water for vegetables in order to eat them. Rabbah said: If it was taught in a braisa like that, I retract my opinion. (4a – 4b)

The Mishna had stated that one should not make ugiyos for the grapevines. The Gemora asks: What are ugiyos? Rav Yehudah answers: They are ditches, which one digs around the roots of a grapevine in order to collect water.

The Gemora qualifies this ruling and prohibits the creating of new ditches (which involves strenuous labor), but cleaning an old ditch would be permitted. (4b)

The Mishna had stated: Rabbi Elozar ben Azarya says: One may not create a new irrigation canal during Chol Hamoed or Shemitah. The Gemora asks: We understand why this should be prohibited on Chol Hamoed because it involves excessive exertion, but what is the reason to prohibit creating a canal during Shemitah?

The Gemora offers two reasons: One Amora says that it resembles hoeing to benefit the crops. Another Amora says: It is preparing the banks of the canal for planting.

The Gemora states: A difference between the two reasons would be in an instance where water fills up the canal as he is digging. It would still be preparing the banks for planting, but he obviously is not intending on hoeing there.

The Gemora rejects this explanation because both reasons are valid and they both should be applicable.

The Gemora states: A difference between the two reasons would be in an instance where he throws the dirt a considerable distance away from the canal. He is not preparing the banks for planting but it can be forbidden on the account that it resembles hoeing.

The Gemora rejects this explanation as well because both reasons are valid and they both should be applicable.

The Gemora answers: In fact, digging a canal does not resemble hoeing because the purpose of hoeing is to soften the ground and that is why one who hoes, places the earth back in its place; however, one who digs a canal, moves the earth away and therefore it is not similar to hoeing. (4b)

The Mishna had stated: One may make repairs to the irrigation canal in the public domain, and clean them (from the mud and small stones that accumulate in them).

The Gemora asks: To what extent is the damage to the irrigation canal?

Rabbi Abba answers: If the canal is presently one tefach deep, it may be restored to its original depth of six tefachim.

The Gemora inquires: If the canal is presently two tefachim deep and he wishes to restore it to its original depth of seven tefachim; is that permitted? Do we say that since he is only digging five tefachim, it should be permitted just like from one to six or do we say that it should be prohibited on the account that he is digging an additional unnecessary tefach (since a canal runs efficiently when it is six tefachim deep). The Gemora lets the question remain unresolved. (4b)

Abaye allowed the inhabitants of Bar Hamdoch to clear away the branches of the trees growing in the river on Chol Hamoed. Rabbi Yirmiyah permitted the inhabitants of Sechavta to clean a clogged river. Rav Ashi allowed the inhabitants of Masa Mechasya to clear away a sandbank from the river Burntiz. He said: Since many people drink from its water, it is considered a public necessity, and our Mishna states that all work for the public is permitted. (4b)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 4 - Food (Round Matzos) for Thought

1. The Gemora concludes that the halacha of extending the restrictions of Shemitah prior to the seventh year was transmitted to Moshe at Sinai only according to Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva derived this halacha from the Scriptural verses.

It emerges that there is a dispute if there was an Oral Law transmitted to Moshe at Sinai regarding the pre-Shemitah restrictions.

Doesn't the Rambam state that there cannot be disputes regarding any halacha l'Moshe misinai?

2. Rabban Gamliel’s source (that there are no pre-Shemitah limitations) was through a gezeira shavah of the words “Shabbos, Shabbos,” from the Shabbos of Creation. Just as there, it is forbidden to perform labor on the day of Shabbos, but prior to that day and afterwards it would be permitted; so too regarding Shemitah, only the seventh year would be subject to the Shemitah restrictions and not the sixth or the eight years.

Isn't there a halacha that one is required to add time to the beginning of Shabbos and afterwards as well (tosfos Shabbos)?

3. the Mishna had stated that one should not make ugiyos for the grapevines. The Gemora asks: What are ugiyos? Rav Yehudah answers: They are ditches.

Rashi states that the word "ugiyos" means agul, round, similar to the words "ag ugah," he drew a circle around himself.

The Torah says [Shmos 12:39]: And they baked unleavened cakes of the dough which they brought forth out of Egypt. The term used for the unleavened cakes, i.e. matzos is "ugos" matzos. This would be a source that matzos should be round and not square.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 3 - Can a Woman Plow during Shemitah?

The Gemora presents a dispute between Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Elozar whether one would incur the thirty-nine lashes if he would plow during Shemitah.

Rashi (2b) states that there is a positive commandment which forbids plowing on Shemitah. It is written [Shmos 34:21]: From plowing and harvesting you shall desist. The point of contention between the two Amoraim is if there is a negative commandment as well.

The Rambam in Hilchos Shemitah rules that one who plows during Shemitah does not incur the thirty-nine lashes. Kesef Mishna explains: Since in our Gemora, it was left ambiguously regarding which Amora held what, we cannot administer the lashes when there is uncertainty.

Sha’ar Hamelech in the beginning of Hilchos Shemitah writes that the Yerushalmi in Shabbos (7:2) states that Rabbi Yochanan is the one who maintains that he does not receive the lashes and the rule is that when Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Elozar argue, the halacha is in accordance with Rabbi Yochanan.

Minchas Chinuch (112) comments that women are obligated in this mitzva even though it is a positive commandment that has a time element to it and the principle is that women are exempt from any positive mitzva which is governed by time. He explains that this is applicable only regarding a positive mitzva that is incumbent on the body of the person and not a mitzva like Shemitah, which is a mitzva that is dependent on the land (mitzvos hateluyos ba’aretz).

Proof to this is cited from the Ritva in Kiddushin (29a). The Gemora rules, based on a Scriptural verse that women are not obligated to perform a circumcision on their sons. Tosfos asks: Why is a possuk necessary; circumcision is a positive mitzva which is governed by time since the mitzva can only be performed by day, and women are exempt? The Ritva answers: Any mitzva which is not related to the person themselves; this principle does not apply. The mitzva of milah is to perform the circumcision on the son and therefore women would be obligated if not for the special verse teaching us otherwise.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 2 - Highlights

(There is a matter of dispute among the Rishonim if the prohibition against performing labor on Chol Hamoed (the intermediate days of Pesach and Sukkos) is Biblical (Rashi) or Rabbinic (Tosfos). There are many different categories of labor that is permitted on Chol Hamoed. The first Mishna discusses the permissibility of performing labor on Chol Hamoed when otherwise; the person will suffer a substantial loss (Chagigah 18a). Even in such cases, one cannot perform labor that involves excessive exertion.)

The Mishna states: One is permitted to water an irrigated field (one that is located on a mountain and cannot survive on rainfall alone) on Chol Hamoed and during Shemitah (the Sabbatical year, when generally, it is forbidden to work the field). This may be done whether the water is from a newly emerged spring (where the walls are not very strong and there is a concern that they will collapse and he will repair them in a manner that is prohibited to do on Chol Hamoed) or from an older one. One may not water this field from a pool of rainwater or from a well and he may not dig ditches surrounding the grapevines (these are all forbidden on Chol Hamoed because they involve excessive exertion).

Rabbi Elozar ben Azarya says: One may not create a new irrigation canal during Chol Hamoed or Shemitah but the Chachamim maintain that this is permitted during Shemitah. One may repair a damaged canal on Chol Hamoed.

(Performing labor for the sake of the public is also permitted on Chol Hamoed.)
One may make repairs to the water containers in the public domain, and clean them (from the mud and small stones that accumulate in them). One may repair the roads, streets and ritual baths, and they may do all public needs, and they may mark the graves, and they may go out to inspect the fields for kilayim (the prohibition against planting together different species of vegetables, fruit or seeds – agents of beis din would be sent out at this time to warn the people to uproot any shoots of other seeds that appear among the grain). (2a)

The Gemora states: The Mishna rules that it is permitted to water an irrigated field on Chol Hamoed whether the water is from a newly emerged spring or from an older one; however, it is forbidden to water a rain-watered field because the water is not needed to prevent damage to the crops.

The Gemora Asks: Who is the Tanna that holds that it is permitted to perform labor on Chol Hamoed only if it will prevent one from suffering a substantial loss; however, it will be forbidden to perform labor for the sake of making a profit or to cause a benefit; and even when it is permitted to perform labor, it will only be allowed if there is no excessive exertion involved.
The Gemora answers: it is the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov. He states in a Mishna below (6b): one is permitted to draw water from one tree to another on Chol Hamoed by creating a path from the tree that has water underneath it however, one is forbidden to water his entire rain-watered field (since the watering is beneficial and not to prevent a loss.)

The Gemora asks: it is evident that Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov maintains that one can not perform labor on Chol Hamoed if it is only beneficial and not to prevent a loss, but we do not see that he holds that there is a prohibition against excessive exertion even in situations where he is performing labor to prevent a loss?

Rav Papa answers: The Tanna of the Mishna is Rabbi Yehudah. We have learned in a braisa: One may water from a freshly emerging spring, even for a rain-watered field. This is the opinion of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehudah says: One may only water an irrigation field that has dried up. Rabbi Elozar ben Azarya disagrees and says: Neither this nor that (whether the old spring dried up or whether it didn’t). Furthermore, Rabbi Yehudah says: One should not clean out his spring of water and use it to water his garden or his ruin on Chol Hamoed.

Abaye explains Rabbi Yehudah’s viewpoint: One may water an irrigation field if the spring of water that was used until now to water the field has dried up and now there is a new spring of water which can be used (stopping the watering of the seeds will cause damage).

It emerges from Rabbi Yehudah that one cannot perform labor on Chol Hamoed for the sake of a benefit because he holds that it is only permitted to water the irrigated field if it has previously been watered; he also maintains that one cannot use excessive exertion even to prevent a loss and that is why he ruled that one cannot clean out the spring of water to water his garden.

The Gemora challenges Abaye’s proof: Perhaps Rabbi Yehudah would hold that an old spring of water, where we are not concerned that the walls will collapse, may be used to water even a rain-watered field. This would be inconsistent with our Mishna which ruled that a rain-watered field may never be watered.

The Gemora answers: That cannot be Rabbi Yehudah’s opinion, for if so, our Mishna would not be following the opinion of any Tanna. The Gemora concludes that Rabbi Yehudah does not make a distinction between a new spring and an old one. Both springs may be used to water an irrigated field but they may not be used to water a rain-watered field. (2a – 2b)

(The Gemora discusses a halacha pertaining to Shabbos, which will be relevant to our discussion later.) The Gemora asks: On account of which category of labor shall we legally warn a person who weeds or waters seeds on Shabbos? (There are thirty-nine main categories of labor that are forbidden on Shabbos and in order for one to be liable to receive a punishment for intentionally performing a prohibited labor on Shabbos; he must receive a legal warning prior to performing the act not to perform this specific labor.) Rabbah said: He is warned not to plow. Just as plowing softens the earth, watering and weeding soften the earth. Rav Yosef said: He is warned not to plant. Just as planting causes the produce to grow, watering and weeding the seeds cause the produce to grow.

Abaye disagrees and maintains that he is actually transgressing both plowing and planting and therefore, he can be legally warned on account of either one.

The Mishna had stated: One is permitted to water an irrigated field on Chol Hamoed and during Shemitah. The Gemora asks: It is understandable why this is allowed on Chol Hamoed but not during Shemitah? It is forbidden to perform labor on Chol Hamoed because it is considered exertion and where there is a financial loss, the Rabbis were lenient and permitted it. In regards to Shemitah, where there is a Biblical prohibition against planting and plowing, why would one be allowed to water an irrigated field?

Abaye answers: Our Mishna follows the opinion of Rebbe who maintains that Shemitah nowadays is only a Rabbinic injunction.

Rava answers: Even if Shemitah nowadays is subject to the Biblical prohibition, only the main categories (av melocha) are Biblically forbidden and not the secondary labors (toldos). (2b - 3a)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 2 - Why Moed Katan?

What is the meaning in the name “Moed Katan”?

The Torah refers to the sun as the meor hagadol and the moon as meor hakatan. Rashi cites from Chazal that they were both created the same size, but the moon complained and said that two kings cannot use the same crown and therefore the moon was diminished. The question is asked: It is well known that the moon does not have any intrinsic light source of its own, but rather it is only reflecting the sun light. What is the meaning that they were created equally?

The Gemora Bava Metziah (12b) states: An adult who is supported by his father is regarded as a katan, a minor and a katan who is not provided for by the father, but rather supports himself, he is referred to as an adult, a gadol.

It emerges that the term gadol means that he has from himself and katan means that he receives from someone else.

Reb Aryeh Tzvi Frummer answers that that this was precisely the punishment to the moon; the moon did not decrease in size but rather its retribution was that it will not contain its own light and it will only provide light that it receives from the reflection of the sun.

Initially, the sun and the moon were both gedolim since they both had an intrinsic light source; afterwards, the moon became a katan because it could not provide light by itself. The Zohar in Breishis seems to explain in an identical manner.

The Beis Yosef (O”C 31) cites the Zohar in Shir Hashirim that Chol Hamoed is akin to the moon; it does not have its own sanctity but rather it receives kedusha from the Yom Tov.

It is for this reason why the name of this Mesechta, which contains many halachos regarding Chol Hamoed, is called Moed Katan.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Moed Katan 2 - Incident with the Chafetz Chaim

Reb Moshe Bik used to say over the following incident: It once happened in Radin that there were several men that passed away one after the other in a very short span of time. They called a gathering to contemplate as to what was the message that Hashem was sending them.

The Chafetz Chaim arose and proclaimed that the Mesechta Moed Katan is complaining to the Ribino shel Olam that it is a Mesechta that the Yeshivos do not learn. Only mourners learn this Mesechta and that is why many people were passing away.

(Sefer Meir Einei Yisroel 2: P. 239)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 32 - VOWELS IN THE MEGILLAH

The Gemora provides the reason for Rabbi Meir: One recites the blessing when the Torah is closed in order that people will not think that the blessings are written in the Torah.

Shulchan Aruch (691:9) rules that a Megillah which has been vowelized (the nekudos have been written in) or the blessings have been written on the front page, is not disqualified and it may be used.

The Mishna Berura writes that one should not initially write the blessings in the Megillah. It can be inferred that one may be permitted to insert the vowels and punctuation into the Megillah if he doesn’t know how to read the Megillah otherwise.

The Gr”A rules however, that it is forbidden to place the vowels into the Megillah.

The Maharsham rules that one should not draw pictures on the margins of a Megillah.

Reb Yitzchak Zilberstein comments that if a person cannot read the Megillah without punctuation and vowels written in, one may insert them in the verses and words that if they are read incorrectly would invalidate the reading.

The Aruch Hashulchan (691:14) rules that it is preferential to read the Megillah without the trop than to write the trop inside the Megillah.

Perhaps one can write the vowels and the trop on a piece of paper and tape it to the Megillah.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 32 - Highlights

The Gemora cites a braisa: Rabbi Shimon ben Elozar said that Ezra established that the curses in Vayikra should be read prior to the festival of Shavuos and those mentioned in Devarim should be read prior to Rosh Hashanah.

Abaye and others say that it was Rish Lakish explain: This is in order for the year to end together with its curses.

The Gemora asks: This is understandable regarding Rosh Hashanah, but Shavuos is not a new year?

The Gemora answers: Shavuos is a new year for the fruits as we have learned in a Mishna that we are judged concerning the fruits of the trees on Shavuos and it is therefore appropriate to read the curses prior to Shavuos, so that the year relating to the fruits will end along with the curses. (31b)

Rabbi Shimon ben Elozar states further: If elderly men tell you to destroy and young men tell you to build, you should destroy and not build because the destroying of the elderly is building and the building of the young is actually destroying. The Gemora cites Rechovam, the son of Shlomo as a proof to this (he listened to the advice of the young ones and not the elders – he eventually lost the kingdom because of this). (31b)

The Gemora cites a braisa: Rabbi Meir maintains that the place where the Torah reading concludes on Shabbos morning, that is the place we begin by Shabbos Mincha; the place where we conclude by Mincha is the place we begin on Monday; the place where we conclude on Monday is the place we begin on Thursday; the place where we conclude on Thursday is the place we begin on Shabbos morning. Rabbi Yehudah disagrees: The place where we conclude on Shabbos morning is the place we begin by Mincha, Monday, Thursday and the following Shabbos. The Gemora rules according to Rabbi Yehudah’s opinion. (31b – 32a)

The Gemora cites a braisa: Rabbi Meir maintains that one who is called up to read from the Torah, opens it and looks where he will begin reading. He then rolls the Torah closed and recites the blessing. He then opens the Torah and begins to read from it. Rabbi Yehuda holds that he should open it to see where he will begin reading and recite the blessing without closing it first.

The Gemora provides the reason for Rabbi Meir: One recites the blessing when the Torah is closed in order that people will not think that the blessings are written in the Torah.

Rabbi Yehudah holds that this logic is applicable only to a different halacha. The reader of the Torah should not help the translator because people might think that the translation is written in the Torah but it is well known that the blessings are not written in the Torah. The Gemora rules according to Rabbi Yehudah’s opinion. (32a)

Rabbi Shefatya said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: One who is rolling a Torah scroll closed should make sure that the seam (that joins one piece of parchment to the other) is positioned in the center of the Torah. (32a)

Rabbi Shefatya also said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: The most prominent person among the congregants should receive the honor of rolling the Torah scroll closed. It was said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi that the one who rolls the Torah scroll closed receives a reward equal to the reward of all the readers from the Torah. (32a)

Rabbi Shefatya also said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: One who reads from the Torah without the trop (cantillation) or he recites a Mishna without singing it is regarded as a sin.

Abaye disagrees with this interpretation and he states that it is considered a sin if two Torah scholars reside in one city and do not properly communicate with each other in halachic matters. (32a)

Rabbi Parnach states in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: Whoever holds a Sefer Torah without a covering will be buried bare. The Gemora offers various explanations of this statement. It is not understood why one who holds a Sefer Torah without a covering should be buried without shrouds. The Gemora then suggests that the statement means that the person will be buried without any mitzvos. The Gemora questions the logic behind this, and concludes that the statement means that he will not be buried without that specific mitzvah. Tosfos explains that if he had been studying from the sefer, he does not earn the reward of that study. If he had rolled the sefer Torah with his bare hands, he does not receive the reward of the gelilah (rolling the Sefer Torah). (32a)

It was taught in a braisa: Moshe ordained that we should publicly lecture on the duties of each day. We must lecture on the halachos of Pesach on Pesach, the halachos of Shavuos on Shavuos and the halachos of Sukkos on Sukkos. (32a)

WE SHALL RETURN TO YOU B’NEI HA’IR

AND TRACTATE MEGILLAH IS CONCLUDED

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 31 - WHEREVER YOU FIND HASHEM’S GREATNESS, THERE YOU WILL FIND HIS HUMILITY

It is said (Psalms 99:2): HaShem b’tziyon gadol varam hu al kol hamim, (before) Hashem Who is great in Zion and Who is exalted above all peoples. Rabbi Mordechai Bennett explains that the word gadol, great, connotes something that is at a low level and rises to the top, whereas the word ram, high, connotes something that is consistently on high.

The nations of the world erroneously assume that Hashem remains aloof in the heavens and thus He does not supervise the actions of those down below on earth. Rather, this administration is under the jurisdiction of the constellations. For this reason the nations declare that HaShem is exalted above all peoples. The Jewish People, however, are cognizant of the fact that Hashem is in control of every action performed by man, and for this reason the Jewish People declare that Hashem is great in Zion, as Zion refers to HaShem’s Chosen People.

With this interpretation we can understand what is said (Devarim 4:7): For which is a great nation that has a G-d Who is close to it, as is HaShem, our G-d, whenever we call to Him? We refer to HaShem as great, gadol, and He is close to us, thus obviating the need for an intermediary to submit our requests. Rather, we can beseech HaShem directly for all our needs.

This, then, is the explanation of the statement in our Gemora. Wherever you find Hashem’s greatness, there you will find His humility. Where Hashem’s greatness, gedulah, is found, there you will find His humility. Hashem’s greatness is that he resides among us and supervises all our actions.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 31 - WHEREVER YOU FIND HASHEM’S GREATNESS, THERE YOU WILL FIND HIS HUMILITY

Rabbi Yochanan said: Wherever you find Hashem’s greatness, there you will find His humility. The Gemora cites Scriptural references to this.

The Imrei Eish says a novel explanation in this: When Hashem provides greatness, wisdom or riches to a person, how does he know if it is coming form Hashem or chas v’sholom from the sitra achra?

Rabbi Yochanan provides him with the key. If the gifts bestowed upon him lead to humility, this is a sign that it came from Hashem; however, if it leads to haughtiness, this illustrates that it was not a present from Hashem.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 31 - Shabbos in the Daf

by Reb Ben

Megillah 31a

The Gemara states that wherever one finds the greatness of HaShem, that is where one finds His humility. This is truly a fascinating concept. The sefarim write that Hashem is infinite, yet He created the world by constricting Himself, so to speak, into the world, thus allowing a finite world to come into existence. This idea can be applied to Shabbos. On Shabbos, HaShem reveals Himself as a king, and if we were to contempt this phenomenon, we would be overwhelmed with the thought that we are preparing ourselves to accept and delight in HaShem’s kingship. Yet, HaShem bestowed upon the Jewish People this wondrous present called Shabbos, and in His humility, He allowed us to become partners, so to speak, in creation, as the Gemara (Shabbos 118b) teaches us that one who recites vayechulu Friday night is akin to being a partner in creation. This idea is manifest in the morning prayers of Shabbos, when we declare: Shochen ad marom vekadosh shemo, He Who abides forever, exalted and holy is His Name. We then recite the words: Vechasuv: ranenu tzaddikim baHaShem layesharim naavah sehillah, and it is written: (Tehillim 33:1) ‘sing joyfully, O righteous, before HaShem, for the upright, praise is fitting.’ We initially declare that HaShem is exalted and holy, and then we say that the righteous and upright sing before Him and praise Him. This indicates that despite HaShem’s greatness, He humbles Himself and allows the righteous and upright to praise Him. Similarly, later in the Shacharis prayers we recite the words laKel asher shavas mikol hamaasim bayom hashevii nisalah veyashav al kisei kevodo, to the G-d Who rested from all activity, on the seventh day He sat on His throne of glory. Although Hashem sits on His throne of glory, he allows us to delight in the Shabbos. We should take advantage of this opportunity where HaShem allows us to delight in His gift, His precious and holy Shabbos.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 31 - Highlights

The Mishna states: On Pesach we read from the passages of the festivals in Vayikra. On Shavuos we read Seven weeks. On Rosh Hashanah we read On the seventh month, on the first day of the month. On Yom Kippur we read After the death. On the first day of Sukkos we read from the passages of the Festivals in Vayikra. On the other days of Sukkos we read from the passages dealing with the sacrifices of the festival. On Chanukah we read from the portion dealing with the korbanos offered by the princes. On Purim we read Then came Amalek. On Roshei Chodashim w read And on your new moons. On the Ma'amados we read regarding the Creation. On the fast days we read the blessings and the curses. The curses cannot be interrupted; rather one person gets called to the Torah and reads all of them. On Mondays and on Thursdays and on Shabbos Mincha we read from the regular Torah reading of the upcoming week. These verses must be repeated again on the following Shabbos.

The Mishna concludes with the verse [Vayikra 23:44]: And Moshe declared to the Children of Israel the festivals of Hashem. This teaches us that there is an obligation to read each festival section in its proper time. (30b – 31a)

The Gemora cites a braisa which teaches us the Torah reading for the festivals not mentioned in our Mishna.

On Pesach we read the portions referring to this festival, and the haftorah from the Prophets should be from Yehoshua pertaining to the Pesach of Gilgul. Presently, that we are in exile, and we observe two days, the first day should be about Gilgul and the second day from Melachim pertaining to the Pesach of Yoshiahu. On the remaining days of Pesach we read from selected small portions in which the Torah mentions Pesach. On the last days of Pesach we read And it came to pass when Pharaoh sent, and the haftorah from the Prophets should be from Shmuel And David spoke. On the eighth day (in exile) we should read All the first-born males, and the haftorah from the Prophets, in Isaiah, As yet to-day will he remain at Nob.

On Shavuos we read Seven weeks and the haftorah from the Prophets in Chavakkuk. Others say that we read In the third month and the haftorah from the Prophets should be from Yechezkel dealing with the Divine Chariot. Presently, that we are in exile, and we observe two days, we follow both opinion but we reverse it.

On Rosh Hashanah we read In the seventh month, and the haftorah from the Prophets Is not Ephraim a dear son. Others say that we read And Hashem visited Sarah and the haftorah from the Prophets regarding Chanah. Presently, that we are in exile, and we observe two days, we read as the others said and on the second day we read Hashem tested Avraham and the haftorah from the Prophets Is not Ephraim a dear son.

On Yom Kippur we read After the death and the haftorah from the Prophets For so says the Exalted and the Uplifted One. During Mincha we read about the laws of the forbidden marriages and the haftorah from the Prophets regarding Yonah. (31a)

Rabbi Yochanan said: Wherever you find Hashem’s greatness, there you will find His humility. The Gemora cites Scriptural references to this. (31a)

The braisa continues: On the first day of Sukkos we read from the passages of the Festivals in Vayikra and the haftorah from the Prophets Behold, Hashem’s awaited day is coming. Presently, that we are in exile, and we observe two days, we read on the second day the same as on the first, but the haftorah from the Prophets is And all the men of Israel assembled. (31a)

The Mishna stated: On the other days of Sukkos we read from the passages dealing with the sacrifices of the festival. On the last day of Sukkos (Shmini Atzeres) we read Any firstborn which is preceded by mitzvos and laws regarding the Sukkos season and the haftorah from the Prophets is And when Shlomo had concluded. On the next day (Simchas Torah, to those that are in exile) we read the last section of the Torah, which is V’zos Habrocha and we read the haftorah from the Prophets And Shlomo stood. (31a)

Rav Huna says in the name of Rav: Shabbos of the Intermediary Days, whether Pesach or Sukkos we read Look, you and on Pesach the haftorah from the Prophets is Dry bones and Sukkos On the day that Gog comes. (31a)

The Gemora discusses other readings of the Torah and other haftoros from the Prophets. (31a – 31b)

The Mishna had stated that some of the Israelites assigned to the mishmar would stay in their cities and read from the Torah portions pertaining to Creation. The Gemora wonders as to what is the connection between the ma’amados and Creation. It was said in the name of Rav Ashi that if not for the ma’amados (korbanos), the heavens and the earth would not be in existence. The Gemora states that Avraham Avinu asked the Ribbono shel Olam by the Bris Bein Habesarim "Perhaps Klal Yisroel will sin before You and You will do to them like You did to the Generation of the Flood?" The Ribbono shel Olam responded that He will not. Avraham asked as to what will be the method for Klal Yisroel to atone for their sins. Hashem responded that it will be with the bringing of korbanos. Hashem told Avraham Avinu that even after the destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh, at whenever Klal Yisroel will read the Torah portions pertaining to the korbanos, it will be regarded as if they brought korbanos and their sins will be forgiven. (31b)

The Mishna had stated: The curses cannot be interrupted; rather one person gets called to the Torah and reads all of them. The Gemora cites a Scriptural source for this. Rish Lakish says that it is because a blessing cannot be recited on a curse. The Gemora explains that the reader begins with a verse preceding the curses and concludes with a verse that follows the curses. (31b)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 30 - WALLED CITIES ON SHABBOS

If Purim falls out on Friday, Rav maintains that Parshas Zochor should be read on the Shabbos preceding Purim since the remembering of Amalek should be accomplished before the mitzvos of Purim (based on the verse in the Megillah ‘nizkarim v’na’asim.’ Shmuel holds that Parshas Zochor should be read on the Shabbos following Purim since there are some walled cities that will mention Amalek and fulfill the mitzvos on the same day.

Why does the Gemora say that there are some walled cities that read on the fifteenth; all walled cities read the Megillah on the fifteenth?

In sefer Shoel Umeishiv (Tlisa’ah 3:29), he answers: The halacha is that the Megillah is not read on Shabbos because we are concerned that one might carry the Megillah in a public domain. This halacha is not applicable to a walled city since the city has an enclosure; it is therefore not regarded as a public domain and will therefore be permitted to carry inside of it. In such a city, there is no injunction against reading the Megillah on Shabbos. However, regarding a city that had a wall from the time of Yehoshua and presently does not; the Megillah cannot be read on Shabbos since it is regarded as a public domain.

This is what the Gemora means that there were some walled cities that read on the fifteenth; if the fifteenth of Adar falls out on Shabbos and it is still surrounded by a wall, they will read the Megillah on the fifteenth.

Dayan Weiss, in his sefer Minchas Yitzchak (6:67) answers: There is a dispute in the Gemora (14a) as to why Hallel is not recited on Purim. Rav Nachman states that the reading of the Megillah replaces the obligation to recite Hallel. Rava explains that there is no obligation to recite Hallel on the miracle of Purim because we are still servants of Achashverosh.

The Meiri writes that according to Rav Nachman, one who does not have an accessible Megillah has an obligation to recite Hallel.

If Purim would fall out on Shabbos and a Megillah would not be accessible, what would be done?

This would depend on the two reasons provided in the Gemora above (4b) as to why the Megillah is not recited on Shabbos. Rabbah explains: Since everyone is obligated to read the Megillah, but not all are able to read it; the Rabbis issued a decree not to read the Megillah on Shabbos as a precautionary measure, lest one take the Megillah in his hand and go with it to an expert to learn to read it, and at the same time he will carry four amos in a public domain. Rabbi Yosi offered another reason: It is because the poor anxiously wait for the day when the Megillah is read to receive gifts which are usually allocated when the Megillah is read. Since the money cannot be distributed to the poor on Shabbos, they moved the reading of the Megillah to a different day.

According to the first reason, there is no concern regarding Hallel and it can be recited on Shabbos. According to the second reason, we would not recite Hallel on Shabbos as a replacement for the Megillah.

This is what the Gemora means that there were some walled cities that read on the fifteenth; if the fifteenth of Adar falls out on Shabbos and a Megillah is not accessible, they will recite Hallel on the fifteenth.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 30 - Highlights

The Gemora discusses how to read Parshas Shekalim (Ki Sisa, according to Shmuel), when the weekly portion is Parshas Tetzaveh. Rabbi Yitzchak Nafcha maintains that six people should be called to the Torah for Parshas Tetzaveh and the seventh should be from Ki Sisa for Shekalim. Abaye disagrees because it would not be recognizable that there is a special reading because Ki Sisa is immediately after Tetzaveh. Abaye holds that the sixth person called to the Torah should read the last portion of Tetzaveh and the beginning of Ki Sisa; the seventh person should repeat Ki Sisa (demonstrating that it is being read for the special portion). (30a)

The Gemora discusses how to read Parshas Shekalim (Ki Sisa, according to Shmuel), when the weekly portion is Parshas Ki Sisa. Rabbi Yitzchak Nafcha maintains that six people should be called to the Torah for Parshas Ki Sisa from after the section dealing with the shekalim and the seventh should read from the beginning of Ki Sisa for the special reading of Shekalim. Abaye disagrees and holds that six people should be called to the Torah for Parshas Ki Sisa starting from the beginning and the seventh should begin again Ki Sisa; the section dealing with the shekalim. (30a)

If Rosh Chodesh Adar falls out on Friday, Rav maintains that Parshas Shekalim should be read on the Shabbos preceding Rosh Chodesh since otherwise there will not be a complete two weeks (from the time that Parshas Shekalim is read until the fifteenth of Adar) where the bankers will sit and collect the shekalim. Shmuel holds that Parshas Shekalim is read on the Shabbos following Rosh Chodesh because the bankers will not remove their tables until after Shabbos. The Gemora states that the dispute between Rav and Shmuel is a Tannaic dispute. (30a)

If Purim falls out on Friday, Rav maintains that Parshas Zochor should be read on the Shabbos preceding Purim since the remembering of Amalek should be accomplished before the mitzvos of Purim (based on the verse in the Megillah ‘nizkarim v’na’asim.’ Shmuel holds that Parshas Zochor should be read on the Shabbos following Purim since there are some walled cities that will mention Amalek and fulfill the mitzvos on the same day. (30a)

If Purim falls out on Shabbos, Rav Huna maintains that there is no dispute and everyone agrees (even Rav) that Parshas Zochor is read on the Shabbos following Purim. Rav Nachman holds that there is an argument between Rav and Shmuel in this case as well. (30a)

The Mishna had stated: Parshas Parah is read on the third Shabbos. The Gemora asks: What is the meaning of the third Shabbos? The Gemora answers: The Shabbos following Purim. Rabbi Chama the son of Rabbi Chanina says: The Shabbos which precedes Rosh Chodesh Nissan. The Gemora explains that there is no argument here; they are discussing two different scenarios (one, where Rosh Chodesh Nissan fell out on Shabbos and the other, where it fell out during the weekday). (30a)

The Mishna had stated: On the fifth week, we return to the regular procedure of reading. Rabbi Ami says: this is referring to the regular procedure of the Torah reading (since during the four weeks, we would only read from the special portions). Rabbi Yirmiyah says: This is referring to the Haftorah from the Prophets (since there were special Haftoros read during the four preceding weeks). (30b)

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 29 - THE SMALL SANCTUARY

By Gil Student

Hirhurim

The Talmud (Megillah 29a) expounds on the prophetic verse "I shall become to them a small sanctuary in the countries where they shall come" (Ezekiel 11:16) - that in the times of exile the synagogue is the equivalent of the Temple. Synagogues are not merely a post-exilic invention to facilitate communal prayer but, rather, are part of an historical continuum beginning with the Tabernacle built in the Desert, continuing with the two Temples in Jerusalem, and culminating with the third, messianic Temple. This equation bears clear and documented halakhic ramifications.

The Tosefta (Megillah 3:14) rules that a synagogue’s doors must be opposite its ark as was done in the Tabernacle. This architectural law, based solely on the equation of a synagogue with the Desert era sanctuary, is cited by halakhic authorities throughout the ages. This is certainly an indication that the synagogue’s designation as a "small sanctuary" is an halakhic mandate, particularly in regard to its architecture.

Similarly, the Mishnah (Megillah 3:3, 28a) states that a synagogue that is in ruins and unusable retains its sanctity because the Torah relates God’s statement, "I will make your sanctuaries desolate" (Leviticus 26:31); even in destruction they are still called sanctuaries. Thus, the status of synagogues as small sanctuaries has halakhic ramifications in terms of holiness, as documented in a Tannaitic halakhic passage. The medieval commentators expand on this as follows below.

The precise sanctity of a synagogue is explained by Nahmanides as being the same sanctity of any other item used for a mitzvah, such as a sukkah or shofar. This is a holiness that exists while the mitzvah is being performed. However, at times when a synagogue is neither in use nor set aside for a mitzvah it retains no sanctity. Rabbenu Nissim of Gerona (Ran on Rif, Megillah 8a) disputes this understanding at length and instead explains that synagogues are imbued with a holiness while certain key prayers are being recited and, for other times, the Sages decreed that a rabbinic sanctity be instilled into synagogues. R. Eliezer of Metz (Yere'im, 324), however, is of the view that synagogues always have a biblical sanctity similar to that of the Temple in Jerusalem and, therefore, the biblical obligation to fear the Temple (Leviticus 19:30) applies equally to synagogues. This is echoed by R. Moshe of Coucy (Semag, aseh 164) and R. Yitzhak of Corbille (Semak, 6). Significantly, commentators have deduced from Maimonides' words that he is of the same view. Certainly, according to R. Eliezer of Metz et al., the synagogue is halakhically and biblically a small sanctuary. Even according to Rabbenu Nissim the equation of synagogues and the Temple stands, albeit alternating between a biblical and a rabbinic level. Only according to Nahmanides is the equation left on the aggadic level.

The Gemara (Megillah 28a-b) quotes the Tosefta (Megillah 2:11) that frivolity is prohibited in a synagogue. Many see the root of this prohibition as the holiness due to its status as a "small sanctuary." Just like we are obligated to fear the holy Temple, we are similarly required to act respectfully inside its exilic counterpart.

R. Mordekhai ben Hillel (Megillah, ch. 3 no. 827) writes that the biblical prohibition against tearing down parts of the Temple also applies to a synagogue because it is a "small sanctuary." This is agreed to by many of the scholars mentioned above and is brought down as practical halakhah by R. Moshe Isserles in his authoritative glosses to Shulhan Arukh (Orah Hayim 152:1).

In an important responsum (no. 161), R. Yosef Colon (fifteenth century) contends that the Sages consistently equated synagogues with the Temple. In addition to the passage of "small sanctuary" and the Mishnah regarding a desolate synagogue, R. Colon cites Shabbos 11a where the law is stated that the synagogue must be the tallest building in a town. As a prooftext for this rule the Talmud quotes a verse in Ezra (9:9) regarding the building of the Temple – "To raise the house of our Lord." Evidently, the Talmud considers verses about the Temple to be valid indicators about the proper architecture of the synagogue. R. Colon further cites the Mordekhai who extends this equation to the holiness of the Temple, as we saw above, and then extends the concept himself to equate donations to a synagogue with donations to the Temple.

Clearly, the idea of the synagogue having the status of the Temple is more than a mere homiletic device and has extensive halakhic applications. In the lands of exile our sole refuge of holiness from the mundane world is the synagogue, the sanctuary that accompanies us in our wanderings. All agree that the respect due to such a holy place demands that frivolity be prohibited in the synagogue much as it was in the Temple.

It is also noteworthy that the classical peshat commentaries to Ezekiel – Rashi, R. David Kimhi, R. Yosef Kara, Metzudat David, R. Yitzhak Abrabanel – all explain the phrase "I shall become to them a small sanctuary" (Ezekiel 11:16) as referring to synagogues in exile.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 29 - Highlights

It is written [Yechezkel 11:16]: Yet will I be to them as a minor sanctuary. Rabbi Yitzchak said: This is referring to the houses of prayer and Torah study that are in Bavel. Rabbi Elozar said: This is referring specifically to the house of Rav. (29a)

Abaye said: I initially studied Torah at home, and prayed at the house of prayer; but when I heard later that which David Hamelech said in Tehillim [26:8]: Hashem, I love the site of Your house, I went to study also in the house of prayer. (29a)

Rabbi Elozar Hakappar said: The houses of prayer and Torah study which are at present in Bavel will in the future be established in Eretz Yisroel. (29a)

The Mishna had stated: One is forbidden from using a synagogue as a shortcut. Rabbi Avahu qualifies this ruling: If the place where the synagogue was built was originally a path, it will be permitted to use the synagogue as a shortcut and it is not considered disrespectful.

Rabbi Nachman bar Yitzchak qualifies the ruling as well: If one initially entered the synagogue with the intention of staying there a while and afterwards changed his mind, he may exit through the other door (effectively using the synagogue as a shortcut) and it is not considered disrespectful.

Rabbi Chelbo says in the name of Rav Huna: If one entered the synagogue in order to pray there, he may exit through the opposite door. (Some Rishonim learn that by doing so, it is a sign that the synagogue is cherished by him.) (29a)

The following Mishna and Gemora will discuss the four special Torah readings in the weeks preceding the festival of Pesach.

The Mishna states: If Rosh Chodesh Adar falls out on Shabbos, Parshas Shekalim (the portion in the Torah referring to the collection of the coins for the new korbanos) is read on that Shabbos. If Rosh Chodesh Adar falls out during the week, Parshas Shekalim is read on the Shabbos preceding Rosh Chodesh. If the second scenario happens, there will be no special portion read on the following week. The following Shabbos, Parshas Zochor (the portion in the Torah referring to the mitzva of remembering what Amalek did to us – it is read then to be adjacent to Purim, connecting the erasing of Amalek to the erasing of Haman) is read. The following Shabbos, Parshas Parah (the portion in the Torah referring to the warning of ensuring that the korban Pesach will be performed in purity) is read. The following Shabbos, Parshas HaChodesh (the portion in the Torah referring to the korban Pesach) is read. On the following Shabbos, we resume the regular order of the Torah readings.

We would interrupt the regular order of the Torah readings for all festivals, Rosh Chodesh, Chanukah, Purim, fast days, Ma’amados and on Yom Kippur. (29a)

The Gemora cites a Mishna in Shekalim: On the first of Adar proclamation is made regarding the shekalim and kelayim (the prohibition against planting together different species of vegetables, fruit or seeds – the proclamation serves as a warning to uproot any shoots of other seeds that appear among the grain).

The Gemora asks: It is understandable to proclaim on the first of Adar regarding kelayim because it is the conclusion of the time of planting; but why did they proclaim at this time regarding the shekalim?

The Gemora answers: There is a verse which teaches us that every Nissan, they would start to purchase animals for the korbanos from the donated shekalim. This is why it was announced a month before to bring the shekalim. (29a – 29b)

The Gemora cites a dispute between Rav and Shmuel as to the content of Parshas Shekalim.

The Gemora discusses how to read Parshas Shekalim when Rosh Chodesh Adar falls out on a Shabbos whose regular Torah portion is close to the Shekalim portion. (29b)

Rabbi Yitzchak Nafcha describes the proper procedure for reading the Torah on Rosh Chodesh Adar that falls out on Shabbos, according to Shmuel, who maintains that Parshas Ki Sisa is read for Shekalim.

Rabbi Yitzchak Nafcha also describes the proper procedure for reading the Torah on Rosh Chodesh Teves that falls out on Shabbos, which is also Chanukah. (29b)

The Gemora cites a dispute among the Amoraim as to what is regarded as the primary reading of the Torah on Rosh Chodesh that is also Chanukah. (29b)

Read more!