Today’s learning sponsored by

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here

 https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU=

 Summary 

 Mishna: 

If one buys a lulav from an [am ha’aretz] in the Shemittah year, the seller should give him the esrog for free because one is not permitted to buy fruit from an am ha’arts during Shemittah. (Since sukkos is at the beginning of the seventh year, the lulav is a sixth year lulav and permissible, but the esrog is counted from the time of its picking, making it a seventh year esrog [31.6]).

 Gemara: 

 Question: What if he doesn’t wish to give it for free?

 Rav Huna: The price of the esrog may be included in the lulav’s price.

 Question: Why can’t one just pay for the esrog straight out **?

 Response: Because money of shemittah -fruit cannot be given to an am ha’aretz*.

 Beraisa: More than three meals worth of shemittah-fruit money cannot be given to an am ha’aretz [because the money has kedushas shevi’is and is transferred to whatever is bought with the money. So we don’t trust the am ha’aretz to use it only for food. Since he may need to purchase three meals at a time - before Shabbos - we allow him this amount of money]. If he was given more money the giver must make a pronouncement that the money should be redeemed for other fruits.* Those fruits then acquire kedushas shvi’is. But this is only if the am ha’aretz is leaving it hefker, but if his garden is kept locked, then even the smallest coin shouldn’t be given to him (because if it’s not hefker, it’s ossur b’hana’ah - [the Tosfos on this is included in tomorrow’s shiur]). 

Click here to listen to the shiur with Tosfos

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RQt72CWDtlAq-wLw5-VO26sBzXbksLlv/view?usp=sharing

* Tosfos: He can’t make transactions with his property which is no longer in his possession. This is a punishment for him because he gave the money to the am ha’aretz. 

* *Tosfos: It isn’t considered business with shemittah -fruit as long as the seller didn’t pick the fruit to sell. The Yerushalmi adds that even if one picked the fruit himself, he may sell it, if it’s mixed with fruit picked by someone else. The “sochrei shvi’is” criticized by the gemara is a case where they set up an official shop which is always forbidden. Or perhaps it refers to people who buy and sell at a profit.

* Rashi: Since the money has kedushas Shevi’is it must be spent before the zman biur. Tosfos: What about the things that don’t have biur? The reason is because we’re worried he would spend the money on things he is not allowed to use shevi’is money for.

Today’s learning is sponsored by

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here:

https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU=

 Summary 

 They asked of Rabbi Chiya bar Abba: If one heard [hallel] but did not say it, what is the law?

 Rabbi Chiya bar Abba: Everybody is in agreement that he was yotze. 

 Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi quoting Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi from Bar Kappara: The principle of shomeia k’oneh is learned from the verse “The words read by the king” but actually Shafan read it to the king.

 Challenge: Perhaps he read it himself afterwards. 

 Resolution: The other verse states “When you heard”, it means he heard them but did not read them.

 Rava: One shouldn’t pause between “Baruch Haba” and “Bsheim Hashem”. (We don’t welcome everyone who comes just to form a crowd, only those who come b’sheim Hashem).

[The parenthetical remark in the gemara here should be skipped, its proper place is later].

 Rava: One shouldn’t pause between “Yehei Shmei Rabbah” and “Mevorach”. 

 Rav Safra: “Moshe! Are you saying correctly?!” (He’s talking to Rava, Moshe means “Great man”) In both cases he is merely concluding his phrase*.

We learned in the mishna (30.6): “Where the custom is to repeat verses, he should repeat, and where that is not the custom, he should not repeat.”

 Beraisa: Rebbi Would repeat the Ana Hashems. Rabbi Elazar ben Porta would add more verses.

 Abayye: He would add from Odcha and on. 

 We learned in the mishna (30.6): “Where it is the custom to recite a bracha he should recite a bracha.” 

 Abayye: This refers to the final bracha [melech mehullal batishbachos] but beforehand one must say a bracha as Rav Yehuda quoted from Shmuel: One must recite a bracha before [the Hebrew word “over”] doing the mitzvos. 

 Question: Where do we find that the word ‘over’ means ‘before’?

 Rav Nachman bar Yitzchok: Vaya’avor es hakushi. 

 Abayye: V’hu avar lifneihem. 

 Or: Vaya’avor malkom lifneihem vaHashem b’rosham. 

_________

* Tosfos : From the gemara in Sotah it seems that Rava came to accept Rav Safra’s opinion.

Today’s learning is sponsored by

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here

 https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU=

 Summary 

 Rava: Mighty halachos can be learned from the minhag of hallel. 

Rashi: Originally, not everyone was able to say Hallel on their own, this is why our mishna (30.6) teaches that if one hears it from an adult male he is yotzei and if he hears it from a woman he must repeat the words himself. In Rava’s time everyone was able to say Hallel on their own, but they still followed certain customs to remember how Hallel was originally said. The original custom was that the crowd [of the uneducated] was silent while the Shatz recited Hallel aloud [and the educated said the words silently along with him], and after every phrase, they [the uneducated] would respond “Hallelukah”. The first “Hallelukah” was proclaimed even by the educated. They [the uneducated] would also repeat the first verse of every chapter. Rava now delineates the current custom [of his time]:

The Shatz says Hallelukah, and everyone shouts Hallelukah. This shows that originally everyone responded to the first Hallelukah.

The Shatz says Hallelu avdei Hashem and everyone shouts Hallelukah. This shows that originally the uneducated responded “Hallelukah” after every phrase [read to them by an adult male].

The Shatz says Hodu LaHashem and everyone repeats it. This shows that originally the uneducated repeated the first verse of every chapter.

The Shatz says Ana Hashem hoshia na and everyone repeats it. This shows that originally the uneducated repeated the entire Hallel [if it was read to them by a woman].

The Shatz says Ana Hashem hatzlicha na and everyone repeats it. This shows that if one wishes to repeat the verses he may do so (30.6).

The Shatz says Boruch Habo and they [are silent and] respond “B’sheim Hashem”. This shows the principle of shomeia k’oneh for people who cannot repeat at all.

Today’s learning is sponsored by

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here

 https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU=

 Summary 

 Gemara: 

 Beraisa: B’emes Omru [this is an expression that denotes a law accepted by the Sanhedrin] a boy can be motzi his father with Birkas Hamazon*.

 An eved can be motzi his master and a wife can be motzi her husband with Birkas Hamazon, but a curse should come upon such a man (because he’s scorning Avodas Hashem, he should be the kohen gadol in his house). 

 Rava: Mighty halachos can be learned from the minhag of hallel**.

_________

* Rashi: In masichta Brachos the gemara explains that this is only if the father is not obligated in birkas hamazon d’oraysa. ( Tosfos there discusses whether the child can be motzi his father, if his meal also only has a d’rabanan obligation on birkas hamazon, because then he has two d’rabanan obligations).

* *Rashi: From our custom nowadays, we can learn what the original customs were, see tomorrow’s shiur.

Today’s learning sponsored by

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here

 https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU=

 The mishna discusses shaking the lulav; the naanuim. 

 Summary 

 We learned there (a mishna in Yevamos): [There is a mitzvah of tenufah for the] Shtei Halechem and the Kivsei Atzeres, this is how it’s done: The loaves are placed on the lambs, and everything is lifted up together. He moves them to and fro, up and down, as the possuk states: ‘Hunaf’ [horizontal movement] and ‘Huram’ [vertical movement].

 Rabbi Yochanan: It is moved around in honor of He to Whom all directions belong. It is raised and lowered in of He to Whom heaven and earth belong. 

In Eretz Yisroel they said: Rabbi Chama bar Ukva quoting Rabbi Yosi b’rebbi Chanina: It is moved around to protect against storm winds. It is raised and lowered to protect against bad dew. 

 Rabbi Yosi bar Avin or Rabbi Yosi bar Zvila: This teaches us that the remnants of a mitzvah protect against adversity; although the shtei halechem and the korbanos are kosher without tenufah, this extra part of the mitzvah is a protection against adversity; stormwinds and bad dews [see here for more on this subject]. https://torasavigdor.org/parshas-reeh-3-nation-of-volunteers-2/

 Rava: The same procedure [and protection] applies to lulav

 Rav Acha bar Yaakov would point his lulav as he waved it, he would say “This is an arrow in the Satan’s eye”.

This practice should not be emulated as it can cause the Satan to bring great tests upon one who does so (it is a principle not to curse the Satan because he is a malach doing his job faithfully).

 Mishna: 

Someone who was travelling and did not have a lulav, he should take the lulav when he comes home [even] at his table.

If he did not take the lulav in the morning he can take it in the afternoon, all day is kosher. 

 Gemara: 

 Challenge: It seems that one must stop his meal in order to shake the lulav, but we learned [in Shabbos]: “If he began his meal, he need not stop [to pray]”.

 Rav Safra: He need not stop when there is still time to finish the meal, but here it is already close to nighttime.

 Rava: There is no difficulty; lulav is d’oraysa, tefillah is d’rabbanan.

Today’s learning sponsored by

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here

 https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU=

 Summary 

 Rabbah: The lulav shouldn’t be pushed into the bundle, because the leaves that come loose will form a chatzitzah. 

 Rava: Min b’mino eino chotzetz - Leaves of the same kind cannot be considered a chatzitzah. 

 Rabbah: The lulav shouldn’t be sawed off once it’s in the bundle, because loose lulav leaves will remain and form a chatzitzah. 

 Rava: Min b’mino eino chotzetz - Leaves of the same kind cannot be considered a chatzitzah. 

 Rabbah: The hadas set aside for the mitzvah should not be smelled, but the esrog may be smelled.

The hadas is used for smelling, so it is set aside from smelling, but since an esrog is for eating too, it is set aside only from eating. [When one does a mitzvah with an object, he elevates that object. He thus sets it aside from its normal use in order to elevate it].

 Rabbah: The hadas may be smelled (on Shabbos) while it’s attached to the ground, but the esrog may not be smelled.

The hadas is used for smelling, so we’re not worried he will cut it off, but since an esrog is for eating too, he may cut it off the tree in order to eat it.

 Rabbah: The lulav should be held in the right hand, and the esrog in the left hand.

The lulav has three mitzvos but the esrog only has one.

 Rabbi Yirmiyah to Rabbi Zrika: Why do we mention only the lulav in the bracha on the 4 minim (Al netilas lulav)? 

 [Rabbi Zrika]: Because it is taller than the rest.

 [Rabbi Yirmiyah]: Let him lift the esrog up high?

 Rabbi Zrika: It is the tallest object and most conspicuous.

 Mishna: 

Where are the naanuim made? At the beginning and end of [Rashi: the chapter of] Hodu LaHashem. Beis Hillel: And at Ana Hashem hoshia na. Beis Shamai: Also at Ana Hashem hatzlicha na. 

 Rabbi Akiva: I observed Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua; although the people shook their lulavim, they only shook their lulavim at Ana Hashem hoshia na. 

 Gemara: 

 Question: Who said anything about shaking? 

 Response: This is following up on the mishna (24.4): “A lulav whose length is 3 tefachim [and another tefach] so that it can be shaken, is kosher.” So the question here is, when is the lulav shaken.

Today’s learning sponsored by

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here

 https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU= 

 Rabbah: One shouldn’t hold the lulav with a towel, it must be held fully - lekicha tamah. 

 Summary 

 Rava: Holding by means of something else, is still considered holding. 

(According to Tosfos, the towel extends beyond the lulav and creates a sort of handle which he is holding; but merely grabbing it with a towel wrapped around one’s hand is not under discussion here).

 Rava: I have proof from the following mishna: 

“If the bundle of eizov (11.2) is too short to be dipped, it can be lengthened by means of a thread or it can be held with a fork.” 

But the Torah uses the expression of lekicha with regard to Eizov, so we see that it is still considered holding it.

 Challenge: There it is attached to the eizov, but in our case the towel is not attached to the lulav?

-(According to Rashi, this mishna is discussing a completely different case than holding something wrapped in a lulav, but according to Tosfos, the cases are similar because the lulav isn’t just wrapped in a towel but extended by means of a handle)._

A different proof: 

“[If the ashes of the Parah] fell from the tube into the vessel [where it is to be mixed into the Mayim Chaim], it is possul. 

It seems that if one spilled the tube intentionally, it would be kosher even the though the Torah uses the expression of “lekicha”. 

This is indeed a satisfactory proof.

Today’s learning is sponsored by

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here

*https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU=*

 Summary 

 Mishna: 

 Rabbi Yehuda: The lulav may only be tied with its own kind. 

 Rabbi Meir: Even with a string.

 Rabbi Meir: The anshei Yerushalayim would bind their lulavim with gold wire.

 They said to him: It was actually tied with its own kind, they covered it with strips of gold for ornamental purposes.

 Gemara: 

 Rava: Even the [loose] bark of the palm tree, or its roots [is considered ‘its kind’ by Rabbi Yehuda].

 Rava: Rabbi Yehuda’s reasoning is that “Lulav tzarich agad”, since that’s the case, binding it with another kind would mean that you’re taking 5 minim instead of 4 (see 25.3 for the explanation of Tosfos). 

 Rava: I have proof that the bark and roots are considered the lulav’s ‘kind’ from this beraisa: 

“You should dwell in sukkos” Rabbi Meir: It [the schach] can be made of any kind. Rabbi Yehuda: Only from the 4 species of the lulav. This can be derived logically. Since lulav which is only taken during the daytime, must be of the four species, certainly sukkah which applies even during the night, must be of the 4 species.

 They said to him: A kal vachomer [a logical argument which intends to apply a stricter standard] which results in a leniency, is not a valid kal vachomer. This will result in a leniency, because what if he doesn’t have the 4 species, should he remain without a sukkah? The Torah says “You should dwell in sukkos”, it means that everybody, even those who don’t have access to the 4 species, should build sukkos. 

Additionally there’s a proof from the possuk in Ezra which mentions other species as well “Go out to the mountain and bring olive leaves, oil leaves, hadassim, lulavim and aravos” (10.3).

 (Rava’s proof will be continued tomorrow)

Today’s learning is sponsored

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here:

*https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU=*

 Summary 

An esrog that was pierced by the teeth of rats: Rav: It is not hadar [and thus possul]. 

 Challenge: But “Rabbi Chanina would dip the esrog [in oil] [and chew a piece of it] and then use the esrog”. (So we see that even an esrog pierced by teeth is kosher).

 Question: Isn’t Rabbi Chanina opposed by the mishna (28.1) which disqualifies a pierced esrog? 

 Response: The mishna can be referring to the first day of Yom Tov, while Rabbi Chanina used the esrog on the second day.

But according to Rav, since it’s disqualified by not being hadar, it should be possul on the second day as well (the arba minim are disqualified for all of yom tov only if it is possul because of ‘hadar’, see 24.5)?

 Resolution: An esrog that was pierced is kosher on the second day, but if it was pierced by rats, it’s disgusting and not hadar. 

Some say: An esrog that was pierced by the teeth of rats: Rav: It is hadar despite being chewed upon, because “Rabbi Chanina would dip the esrog [and chew a piece of it] and then use the esrog”. (So we see that even an esrog pierced by teeth is kosher). 

 Question: Isn’t Rabbi Chanina opposed by the mishna (28.1) which disqualifies a pierced esrog? 

 Response: The mishna can be referring to the first day of Yom Tov, while Rabbi Chanina used the esrog on the second day.

 We learned in the mishna (28.1): A small esrog: Rabbi Meir: It must be the size of a walnut. Rabbi Yehuda: It must be the size of an egg. 

 Rafram bar Papa: The same machlokes can be found regarding avanim mekurzalos (stones that are used as toilet paper, either ‘smooth stones’ or ‘elongated stones’. While stones may not be used on Shabbos, Chazal allowed for what is necessary for personal hygiene): 

 Beraisa: Three avanim mekurzalos may be taken* in to the restroom on Shabbos. Rabbi Meir: Stones the size of a walnut. Rabbi Yehuda: Stones the size of an egg.

We learned in the mishna (28.1): A large esrog: Rabbi Yehuda: He must be able to hold two in one hand. Rabbi Yosi: Even if he can only hold one in both hands, it’s kosher.

 Beraisa: Rabbi Yosi: Rabbi Akiva once lugged an esrog to the synagogue on his shoulder [it was so large]. Rabbi Yehuda: That is no proof, the Chachomim said to him that he cannot fulfill the mitzvah with such an esrog which is not hadar. 

Click here to listen to the shiur with Tosfos: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o0LtEvylz1gZIZ3sBYUYUWFVh_4bIeac/view?usp=sharing 

__________

* According to Rashi the issue here is muktzeh, because he is carrying it less than 4 amos in a karmelis [they relieved themselves on open fields]. 

 Tosfos: The beraisa states “to take in”, additionally, the word ‘beis hakisei’ is used which does indicate a room. Tosfos explains that the permission regarding these stones was to carry them from a karmelis to a reshus hayachid. Actually handling muktzeh is more severe than carrying in a karmelis, so Rashi should admit that it is permissible if he believes muktzeh was permitted here. Nowadays when it’s possible to prepare before Shabbos, this special permission does not apply.