I discuss the following portion, regarding the three-way machlokes between Rabba, Rabbi Zera, and Rava, about why a Succah must be 20 amos or less, in a somwhat novel manner:
מנה"מ אמר רבה דאמר קרא (ויקרא כג, מג) למען ידעו דורותיכם כי בסוכות הושבתי את בני ישראל עד עשרים אמה אדם יודע שהוא דר בסוכה למעלה מעשרים אמה אין אדם יודע שדר בסוכה משום דלא שלטא בה עינא רבי זירא אמר מהכא (ישעיהו ד, ו) וסוכה תהיה לצל יומם מחורב עד עשרים אמה אדם יושב בצל סוכה למעלה מעשרים אמה אין אדם יושב בצל סוכה אלא בצל דפנות א"ל אביי אלא מעתה העושה סוכתו בעשתרות קרנים הכי נמי דלא הוי סוכה א"ל התם דל עשתרות קרנים איכא צל סוכה הכא דל דפנות ליכא צל סוכה ורבא אמר מהכא (ויקרא כג, מב) בסוכות תשבו שבעת ימים אמרה תורה כל שבעת הימים צא מדירת קבע ושב בדירת עראי עד עשרים אמה אדם עושה דירתו דירת עראי למעלה מעשרים אמה אין אדם עושה דירתו דירת עראי אלא דירת קבע א"ל אביי אלא מעתה עשה מחיצות של ברזל וסיכך על גבן הכי נמי דלא הוי סוכה א"ל הכי קאמינא לך עד כ' אמה דאדם עושה דירתו דירת עראי כי עביד ליה דירת קבע נמי נפיק למעלה מכ' אמה דאדם עושה דירתו דירת קבע כי עביד ליה דירת עראי נמי לא נפיק
Here are some mar'ei mekomos I used in producing this:
I decided to present a series of shiurim on Succah. No, it is not daf Yomi, which recently starting Arachin, but I don't imagine that it could follow the schedule of daf Yomi, given the depth and resulting pace. I present some interesting ideas in this, I think.
מתני' סוכה שהיא גבוהה למעלה מעשרים אמה פסולה ורבי יהודה מכשיר ושאינה גבוהה עשרה טפחים ושאין לה (שלשה) דפנות ושחמתה מרובה מצלתה פסולה:
גמ' תנן התם מבוי שהוא גבוה מעשרים אמה ימעט רבי יהודה אומר אינו צריך מאי שנא גבי סוכה דתני פסולה ומאי שנא גבי מבוי דתני תקנתא סוכה דאורייתא תני פסולה מבוי דרבנן תני תקנתא ואיבעית אימא בדאורייתא נמי תני תקנתא מיהו סוכה (דנפישי מילתה) פסיק ותני פסולה מבוי דלא נפיש מיליה תני תקנתא
and here
Here are some mar'ei mekomos I used in producing this.
The Short Vort on Shemos - from Shlishi to Rviii: Learn about the Michilta that says Moshe agreed to give his son Gershom to Avoda Zara first. Rav Shimon Schwab Z"tl explains what this midrash really means.
ש[יח, ג] ואת שני בניה וגו' נכריה-ש ר' יהושע אומר: נכריה היתה לו ודאי.
ר' אליעזר המודעי אומר: בארץ נכריה. אמר משה: הואיל וכל העולם עובדי עבודה זרה, אני אעבור לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם. שבשעה שאמר משה ליתרו: תן לי צפורה בתך לאשה. אמר לו יתרו: קבל עליך דבר זה שאומר לך ,ואני נותנה לך . אמר לו: מהו? אמר לו: בן שיהיה תחלה, יהיה לעבודה זרה, מכאן ואילך לשם שמים וקבל עליו. אמר לו: השבע! וישבע לו, שנאמר: ויואל משה, אין אלה אלא לשון שבועה,. שנאמר: ויואל שאול את העם לאמר. וכתיב: ויאמר נעמן הואל וקח ככרים,. לפיכך הקדים המלאך להרוג את משה, מיד ותקח צפורה צר ותכרות את ערלת בנה וגו' וירף וגו'.
Rav Schwab wonders how Moshe Rabbenu could have agreed to this; and also wonders why Yisro would propose this, given that Yisro had already rejected all Avodah Zarah. And thus it must not mean really for avodah zarah, but rather a different way of approaching avodas Hashem, through explanation rather than via simple emunah and masorah, received from one's father. This even though Moshe's did not receive it as a masorah, but rather experienced Divine revelation firsthand.
I haven't seen it inside Maayan haShoeva to see if this is styled as a derush, but it certainly reads like one, with a message of how we should conduct ourselves nowadays. And as a pretext for a drush, it is certainly fine.
As a matter of understanding the midrashim, however, I am not yet convinced that this is a valid question. The Mechilta is a separate sefer of midrash than, say, Midrash Rabba. Unless one can establish from the perspective of the Mechilta that Yisro had explored and rejected all other religions prior to this, then we can say that Rabbi Eliezer HaModa'i in the Mechilta is entirely consistent. And I don't see this idea in the Mechilta. The closest I see is in parashat Yitro, in close proximity to the above-cited midrash:
וישמע יתרו -שבע שמות נקראו לו: יתר, יתרו, חובב, בן רעואל, פוטיאל, קני. יתר, שהותיר פרשה אחת בתורה. יתרו, שייתר במעשים טובים. חובב, שהיה חביב למקום. רעואל, שהיה כריע למקום. פוטיאל, שנפטר מעבודה זרה. קני, שקנא לשמים וקנה לו תורה.
But, he could have been niftar from Avodah subsequent to this incident.
Looking to Rashi, we see that other midrashim have a different account of the nature of this oath:
21. Moses consented to stay with the man, and he gave his daughter Zipporah to Moses.
consented: Heb. וַיּוֹאֶל, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: (וּצְבִי), and similar to this: Accept (הוֹאֶל) now and lodge (Jud. 19:6); Would that we had been content (הוֹאַלְנוּ) (Josh. 7:7); Behold now I have desired (הוֹאַלְךְתִּי) (Gen. 18:31). Its midrashic interpretation is: וַיּוֹאֶל is] an expression of an oath (אלה), he [Moses] swore to him that he would not move from Midian except with his consent. [From Exod. Rabbah 1:33, Tanchuma, Shemoth 12]
ויואל: כתרגומו. ודומה לו (שופטים יט ו) הואל נא ולין, ולו הואלנו (יהושע ז ז), הואלתי לדבר (בראשית יח כז), ומדרשו לשון אלה, נשבע לו שלא יזוז ממדין כי אם ברשותו:
and those are the midrashim that have Yisro abandoning idolatry beforehand.
16. Now the chief of Midian had seven daughters, and they came and drew [water], and they filled the troughs to water their father's flocks.
Now the chief of Midian had: Heb. וּלְכֹהֵן מִדְיָן, i.e., the most prominent among them. He had abandoned idolatry, so they banned him from [living with] them. [From Exod. Rabbah 1:32, Tanchuma, Shemoth 11]
ולכהן מדין: רב שבהן ופירש לו מעבודה זרה ונידוהו מאצלם:
Why would Moshe agree? It wasn't a good thing, and the midrash even says that Moshe was punished for it. I don't know that we need to ameliorate it.
Here is a dvar Torah that gives a bunch of answers from R' Menachem Kasher in Torah Shleima (volume 8, page 97). In that dvar Torah, the author attributes the oath to dedicate to idolatry to Midrash Rabba, but in Torah Shleima, that it not the case. It is the Mechilta. As noted above, while Midrash Rabba mentions an oath, the nature of the oath was not to leave without asking permission from Yisro first:
ויואל משה רבי יהודה אומר: שנשבע לו, ואין ויואל אלא לשון שבועה, שנאמר: (ש"א יד, כד) ויואל שאול את העם. ולמה השביעו? אמר לו: יודע אני שיעקב אביכם, כשנתן לו לבן בנותיו, נטלן והלך לו חוץ מדעתו, שמא אם אתן לך את בתי, אתה עושה לי כך? מיד נשבע לו ונתן לו את צפורה.
Of course, we do find the idea of Avodah Zarah not meaning literal avodah zarah, elsewhere, even in terms of a tradition relayed by Moshe to his descendants. We see in Bava Basra 110a:
(a) "Mi Hevi'acha Halom, u'Mah Atah Oseh ba'Zeh, u'Mah Lecha Po"- they asked him, don't you descend from Moshe, about whom it says "Al Tikrav Halom", "Mah Zeh b'Yadecha", and "v'Atah Po Amod Imadi"? Will you become a Kohen to idolatry?!
1. Yonason: I have a tradition from Moshe that it is better to hire himself out and doAvodah Zarah, than to be supported by others.
2. He thought that this means idolatry. Really, it means work that is foreign to him.
Sometimes it happens that an individual attending a d’rashah (Torah lecture) may not be enthralled with the speech. Upon its conclusion, he takes the liberty to share his critiques of the speaker with his peers. The Chofetz Chaim decries this somewhat prevalent practice (Hilchos Lashon Hara, footnote to 2:12). Amongst the numerous reasons he supplies in condemning such slanderous behavior, the Chofetz Chaim makes a poignant observation: Simply put, people vary in their tastes. Some prefer to hear a novel interpretation of a verse; others are more eager for an intricate theoretical discourse; and still others favor a nice parable or an interesting story. The end result is that it is nearly impossible for any speaker to satisfy the particular interests of all listeners. That being the case, where is there room, really, for complaints about a given speech? Perhaps the very thing that this individual didn’t like was actually quite appealing to someone else; and had the speaker curtailed his remarks to appease the complainer, someone else would be equally disappointed! Against this backdrop, we have a clear illustration in this week’s parshah of the multifaceted nature of Torah exposition. When appearing in the Burning Bush, Hashem tells Moshe, וַיֹּאמֶר, אַל-תִּקְרַב הֲלֹם; שַׁל-נְעָלֶיךָ, מֵעַל רַגְלֶיךָ--כִּי הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה עוֹמֵד עָלָיו, אַדְמַת-קֹדֶשׁ הוּא. "Remove your shoes from your feet, for the place upon which you are standing is holy ground." (Shemos 3:5). In keeping with the theme of people’s varied interests, this passuk can be understood on a number of levels: practical, philosophical, halachic and inspirational. It is our hope that each individual will find an approach suited to his unique preference.
My guess is that the reason for issuing this warning is the last explanation they offer, from Rav Kanievsky, and against the backdrop of the viral video "Yeshiva guy says over a vort". If you haven't seen this video before, here it is:
Krumbagel, the author of this video, explained his intentions in this Hirhurim post. As part of the post, he noted the following:
One final point about the d’var torah that the yeshiva student repeats in the video. It can be found on the internet and is cited in the name of R’ Chaim Kanievsky. So doesn’t that mean my video is poking fun at R’ Chaim? No. As I mention above, it is my firm belief that this vort belongs to a certain genre of d’var torah referred to as “shalosh seudos torah.” Their main goal is to be playful and clever rather than to explain p’shat in the pasuk. What makes me confident that this is the case? The vort makes no sense as p’shateven if one accepted the maximalist position. As the tan bear herself asked, if Yaakov knew the whole Torah, how can he be uncertain about the bracha on lentils? Also, the vort isn’t even about Yaakov’s mitzvah observance. It is about Esav’s. So the d’var torah goes beyond even the maximalist position. In fact, a sefer of R’ Chaim’s divrei torah on Chumash was recently (?) published. It is filled with short questions and answers somewhat similar to the yeshiva guy’s dvar torah. I recently perused it quickly and noticed that one of the questions asked about some inconsistency between a certain story in Bereishis with halakha (I don’t recall the details) and his answer was simply “we don’t learn halacha from the stories in Bereishis,”
Given that the final explanation of the pasuk given in this parsha sheet is a vort from Rav Chaim Kanievsky, and indeed along the same lines as the vort by the Yeshiva Guy, it makes some sense that this was the prompting of their warning to the reader.
Their final explanation, from Rav Kanievsky, is as follows:
Based on its phraseology, R’ Chaim Kanievsky perceives additional halachic undertones to this directive. There is another term – bypassed by our passuk -- that is commonly used in the context of shoe removal: חַלִיצָה. This would have indicated a more hands-on approach, where the wearer removes his shoe manually. Instead, the word שַׁל was employed.
here, implying a mere sliding off of the shoe without actually touching it. Hashem purposefully instructed Moshe in this manner, to facilitate the communication. Had Moshe actually touched his shoe, he would first have had to wash his hands before engaging in such sacred activity. (Derech Sichah, vol. II)
This is actually not so bad as assuming that Yaakov would keep to a machlokes in the gemara as to the beracha on lentils, but does seem to assume that Moshe would keep halacha. Of course, we can say like the Rashba (in his "maximalist" position) that halacha was laid out explicitly later, but reflects an underlying reality. So too here, washing hands after touching a shoe reflects a spiritual value, and the same would have held true in the time of Moshe. And so, Hashem might have insisted on this method.
(One could argue, wondering whether shal means the same thing in sefer Rus, and what basis there is to assert that this is the precise meaning of shal as opposed to chalotz,as well as this general trend of the avos, etc., keeping the Torah. Also, this is a neo-midrash which Rabbi Kanievsky is creating here.)
Without mocking it, still, there is room to question such divrei Torah, and to wonder from what perspective Rav Kanievsky is approaching this. Is this shaleshudes Toirah, meant as an intellectual and enjoyable exercise within the framework of halachic assumptions? Is this an attempt at peshat? Does he believe that this is literally true. These are things to consider, surely. Are we operating in the same universe of possibilities and plausibilities that Rav Kanievsky (and indeed, the chareidi word in general) operates in? Is this a bar towards communication?
Just in time for Pesach! Make it appear that Eliyahu HaNavi is drinking from the kos shel Eliyahu with this trick goblet.
Someone on a private mailing list posted this site, which sells that trick goblet for only $29.95 (though they will be raising the price by five bucks soon). The way it works is as follows:
Together they came up with the Elijah Cup, a vessel that drains a ¼ cup of wine when properly manipulated.
...
At that point, while the cup is lifted in prayer, a plunger button at the bottom of the cup is depressed. Once the cup is returned to the table, the wine slowly disappears.
Here is a video of it in action:
Cute, and perhaps a way to keep kids up until the end of the seder. But I have my objections to it. Adults shaking the table and joking that Eliyahu sipped is one thing. But having the wine mysteriously drain as the child watches is another. This might, in some circumstances, constitute fooling our children in matters of faith.
I have already encountered at least two adult who believes Eliyahu comes to every seder and drinks the wine, and that such as a concrete practical fact is a matter of established Jewish belief. See what I write about it here, where I try to debunk this. (Though there is a source that claims this -- see the comment on that post, and follow the link to the updated article.)
As such, I am not so sure it is a good idea to use this glass, if it will promote a false belief in our children.
{Update: wow, oops! corrected. I meant to say "having them come back from the door and having it mysteriously drain," or something of that nature. I must have typed when the focus was in the wrong place, or must have been really tired. At any rate, now corrected.}
Despite the frequent need to say the bracha of “Al HaMichya” in general, as well as in schools, kindergardens, and camps (eg. meals, birthday parties, snacks), we are all too familiar with the problem of children (and adults!) who have difficulty learning this bracha by heart. The problem usually stems from the length of the text and/or the similarity of it’s words to those of the benching (usually slipping around "רחם נא ה' אלוקנו על ישראל עמך..."). A simple and pleasant solution is to download the following catchy tune composed by Rav Ari Chwat, Rosh HaMidrasha of the Tal Orot (Torah Lishma) program in Michlelet Orot, to enable the easy learning of the bracha. The professional arrangement of Leib Ya’akov Rigler is enhanced by Israel’s leading musicians, and children’s choir in the background which helps kids enjoy and identify with the singers, as well as the song.The song has already proven successful in aiding hundreds, if not thousands, of children to learn the “Al HaMichya”. Please aid us in publicizing this tune by downloading it and sharing it with others, adults, children, grandchildren, or students in schools, camps, or kindergardens.
Indeed, there is a problem remembering the words of Al HaMichya. I would venture that there are a several factors which lead to this difficulty:
1) It is somewhat lengthy. 2) It has words similar to bentching, but it differs from bentching. 3) It lacks a song. Birkat HaMazon is much longer, but put to a tune, we remember it. 4) We do not say it as often as bentching. 5) We are used to saying bentching from a bentcher, such that we read it from a text over and over until it finally sticks in our heads. Al HaMichya is not always said at a formal sit-down meal, such that a bentcher is less likely to be available. And if available, less likely to be offered since, after all, it is shorter. 6) Unlike Borei Nefashot or Asher Yatzar, we insert special mention of the day on days such as Shabbat and Yom Tov. In bentching, this is its own paragraph, and so does not interrupt the flow. For a short prayer like Al HaMichya, if we suddenly insert a single extra phrase, we ruin the flow of the words off our tongues and get flustered. And we have to remember where to stop to insert that extra phrase. 7) We are further confounded by duplication of words, most specifically the leEchol miPiryah veLisboa' miTuvah at the start matching up to the venochal mipiryah venisba' miTuvah at the end.
As such, a tune would be exceptionally helpful. But perhaps we can do even better, addressing other complicating issues along the way, and thus aid in our kavana when saying it.
One important thing to realize is that Al HaMichya is a Bracha MeEin Shalosh, that is, it is intended to be a shorthand for the three, or rather four, blessings of Birkat HaMazon. Each span of text corresponds to a blessing in Birkat HaMazon What we should do, when teaching it, and committing it to memory, is to separate each component of Al HaMichya.
We should memorize each independently. (For young children, perhaps build up to the whole thing.) That way, what we need to remember is much shorter. And we are less likely to get flustered, since when we finish one unit, we move on to the next short unit. Furthermore, the tune we should use for each segment should be the very same tune which we use in Birkat haMazon. That way, we recognize the parallels between them and have an overhead map of where we are going.
The structure of Al HaMichya is as follows:
1) A blessing on food, parallel to Hazan Et Hakol 2) A blessing on the land and food, parallel to Nodeh Lecha. 3) A blessing on the Yisrael, Yerushalayim, the Bet Hamikdash, and food. There are actually two components here -- one parallel to Rachem Na, and one parallel to UVenei Yerushalayim. This is the end of the third blessing, since the three Biblical blessings are the first three. 4) In bentching, we would put retzei or yaaleh veyavo before uvenei yerushalayim. Here, we finish the preceding topic, and then we say retzei or whatever mention of the day is appropriate. 5) HaTov veHameitiv, parallel to bentching's Rabbinic blessing of HaTov veHaMeitiv. 6) The closing. This is a rehashing of the concepts of the first two blessings on the land and on food, followed by an actual blessing with those concepts mentioned again.
ברוך אתה ה' אלקנו מלך העולם על המחיה ועל הכלכלה ועל תנובת השדה ועל ארץ חמדה טובה ורחבה שרצית והנחלת לאבותינו לאכל מפריה ולשבוע מטובה. רחם (נא) ה' אלקנו על ישראל עמך, ועל ירושלים עירך, ועל ציון משכן כבודך, ועל מזבחך ועל היכלך. ובנה ירושלים עיר הקודש במהרה בימינו והעלינו לתוכה, ושמחנו בבניינה, ונאכל מפריה, ונשבע מטובה, ונברכך עליה בקדושה ובטהרה, כי אתה ה' טוב ומטיב לכל ונודה לך על הארץ ועל המחיה ברוך אתה ה' על הארץ ועל המחיה.
I'll now present each of these components, sung to the proper tune:
1) Sing this to the opening of bentching, since it is parallel to Hazan et HaKol. ברוך אתה ה' אלקנו מלך העולם על המחיה ועל הכלכלה ועל תנובת השדה
2) Stop here. Begin the next portion with another tune, that of Nodeh Lecha, since it is its parallel: ועל ארץ חמדה טובה ורחבה שרצית והנחלת לאבותינו לאכל מפריה ולשבוע מטובה.
3) Stop here. Begin the next portion, to the tune of Rachem, or of Rachem Na. רחם (נא) ה' אלקנו על ישראל עמך, ועל ירושלים עירך, ועל ציון משכן כבודך, ועל מזבחך ועל היכלך.
4) Stop here. Begin the next portion, to the tune of Uvenei: ובנה ירושלים עיר הקודש במהרה בימינו והעלינו לתוכה, ושמחנו בבניינה, ונאכל מפריה, ונשבע מטובה, ונברכך עליה בקדושה ובטהרה
5) Stop here. You have now finished the parallel to the Biblical bentching. Say or sing retzei or whatever is appropriate. ורצה והחליצינו ביום השבת הזה
6) Stop. Then say, or sing, just the portion which parallels HaTov veHaMeitiv: כי אתה ה' טוב ומטיב לכל We have now covered every portion of bentching.
7) We are now up the chatima, which will reiterate some of the earlier concepts, namely that of the land and of food, and then will attach that to a blessing. Thus, say: ונודה לך על הארץ ועל המחיה ברוך אתה ה' על הארץ ועל המחיה
Now, to demonstrate this without the explanatory notes in the middle:
ברוך אתה ה' אלקנו מלך העולם על המחיה ועל הכלכלה ועל תנובת השדה ועל ארץ חמדה טובה ורחבה שרצית והנחלת לאבותינו לאכל מפריה ולשבוע מטובה. רחם (נא) ה' אלקנו על ישראל עמך, ועל ירושלים עירך, ועל ציון משכן כבודך, ועל מזבחך ועל היכלך. ובנה ירושלים עיר הקודש במהרה בימינו והעלינו לתוכה, ושמחנו בבניינה, ונאכל מפריה, ונשבע מטובה, ונברכך עליה בקדושה ובטהרה, כי אתה ה' טוב ומטיב לכל ונודה לך על הארץ ועל המחיה ברוך אתה ה' על הארץ ועל המחיה
Here is that video again:
A shorter version, without my explanatory comments, is here:
A how-to. This takes you through the steps of: 1) Opening up the control panel and opening up the Regional and Language Settings Dialog Box. 2) Going to the Language tab and checking off the check box to enable complex right-to-left languages (including Thai). 3) Clicking on the "Details..." button and adding Hebrew to the list of languages. 4) Setting up the Language toolbar on the bottom of the screen. 5) Setting up the keyboard shortcut of Left Alt-Shift to toggle between your two languages. 6) A short example of typing in Hebrew and English, in notepad and in Microsoft Word.
