Preparing video...
0:00 / 0:00
Menachos 41
0 views
Comments(0)
Transcript
Auto-generated transcript. Not time-synced to the video.
Today's daf is Menachos daf mem alef and
we will begin nine lines from the top of
daf mem alef on the outside. The Gemara
Tanna Rabbanan on tallis kefulah. If
somebody has a tallis and he doubled it
over so that the original corners are
not really the corners
as far as the way that he used the
beged. The question is where do you put
the tzitzis? Do you put the tzitzis on
the original corners or being that this
person is doubling over the beged when
he uses it?
Perhaps he's supposed to put the tzitzis
on the corners of the folds. Says the
Gemara it's a machlokes tannaim. The
Tanna Kamma holds chayev b'tzitzis. You
put the tzitzis on the folds. Rav Shimon
poiter. Rav Shimon says you don't put
the tzitzis on the folds but rather you
put the tzitzis on the original corners
of the beged. The shavim, they both
agree shaim kofel of the tofer
sh'chayev. That if the person would have
just fold the beged but rather he would
sew the beged, then he would put the
tzitzis on the new folds. Right the
Gemara tofer Rav Shimon. You need a
price to tell me that obviously if he's
doubled over the beged and then he sewed
it that way then that is the beged. If
that's the beged, those are the corners.
There's no debate. There's no two
options in terms of where he's supposed
to put the tzitzis. Says the Gemara like
tzricha d'nochta b'sichi. Rashi says two
shittos. Rashi's second shitah is he
used white stitches which means that it
would be very easy to undo. Thus so
k'dei d'chaminah, even though he sewed
it, we should look at it as a regular
tallis kefulah, regular tallis that was
doubled over and as a result maybe you
should have an obligation to put the
tzitzis on the original corners.
Kamashma lan that everybody agrees that
if it was sewed together, even white
stitches, still the halacha is you're
going to put the tzitzis on the new
found corners of these folds. Rabba bar
Rav Huna equal to Rav Abba bar Rav
Nachman. Chaza Rav Abba bar Rav Nachman
so Rabba bar Rav Huna once met Rava bar
bar Nachman and he saw that he was
wearing a tallis katan. The Ramo they
hold he love it fell off and he was
wearing the tzitzis on the corners of
the folds. So, the Gemara says he told
him if she told the also who what
happened was one of the folds had un-
gotten undone and as a result he
couldn't wear it folded up anymore. He
was wearing it regular, but being that
the tzitzis had been placed originally
with the folds were, so now when he put
on this tallis it the tzitzis weren't
hanging from the corners, but rather
they were hanging like near his head.
So, the Gemara says I'm going to tell
him kind of the
by Raisa. This is all base. That's not
where you're supposed to put the
tzitzis. The tzitzis are supposed to be
in the corners. Now, the tzitzis were
originally on the corners because
originally this beged had been folded
over, but now something had gotten
undone and as a result the tzitzis are
literally hanging from where his head
is. So, the Gemara says he told him this
is a problem. Also, shavya
So, he took this tallis, he moved it
away, he took it off and he took it off
and he put on another beged on my way.
So, Rava bar bar Huna told Rava bar bar
Nachman he saw it was gabro talliso.
Meaning part of what you did was good.
You took it off, you put on a new beged
that has proper tzitzis. That's
wonderful. Thing is you can't just
remove a beged that has dalet kanfos,
put it into storage without putting
tzitzis on it. And the reason is because
tzitzis is not a chivas gabro, but
rather it's a chivas tallis or a chivas
cheftza. These are two very yeshivish /
lomdish tzaddim. In other words, what
Rava bar bar Huna was telling Rava bar
Nachman the chiyuv to put tzitzis on a
beged isn't just when you're wearing the
beged, but if you have a beged that has
dalet kanfos, even if it's sitting in
your drawer, it's sitting in storage,
it's in your hanging in your closet, it
doesn't matter where it is. There's an
obligation to put tzitzis on it. And as
a result he told him that being that
this tallis that had originally been a
tallis kfula now has tzitzis in the
wrong place, it doesn't have it on the
kanfos, you need to fix it even if
you're not going to wear that beged. So,
he told him it's a real ramiyya, go put
tzitzis on that beged even though you're
not wearing it right now. Says the
Gemara in Kiddushin, right? That tzitzis
is chiyuv as tallis, it's not chiyuv as
gever. Even in Mesayelei, I think I
might have a raya to this Kiddushin
Chazonim Rishonim, we had this in the
previous stuff. Kivan she'argu
ba'shaloish, lo yishayu matirin
ba'cheilos. As they were sewing a beged,
as soon as the beged was already a shiur
of shaloish, they would stop putting
cheilos even though they weren't wearing
it yet. Why were they putting cheilos on
it? Why were they putting tzitzis on
this beged? L'chora, when you're wearing
the beged, that's when you put the
tzitzis on. Kivan she'argu ba'shaloish,
once it had a shiur chashuv of a beged,
they already put tzitzis. Oh, must be
it's a chiyuv as tallis. So, isn't this
a raya? The Gemara says it is, but Chani
Chassidim in the Machlokes Rishonim, you
can't bring rayos from the Chassidim
Rishonim. The Chassidim Rishonim has
mentioned throughout Shas were big
machmirin. These were greatest
tzaddikim, greatest chassidim, and as a
result, just because they did something
doesn't necessarily mean it's halacha.
So, is there a leima mesayyelei that
there's an idea of having tzitzis on a
beged? Yeah. But, is there a leima
mesayyelei that in halacha tzitzis is
chiyuv as tallis? And as we'll see,
there are other nafka minas l'halacha as
well. The answer, says the Gemara, is
no. But either way, so the Gemara
mentioned this exchange between Rabba
bar Huna and Rabba bar Nachmani that
originated with regarding a tallis
kfula, but really digressed into a very
fundamental question. And that is, is
tzitzis chiyuv as gever or is chiyuv as
tallis? Again, what does that mean?
Chiyuv as gever would mean that if a
person's wearing a beged of dalet
kanfos, then he has to make sure there's
tzitzis. What does chiyuv as tallis
mean? That if a person owns a beged that
has dalet kanfos, even if he's not
wearing it, he has to have tzitzis. And
clearly, Rabba bar Rav Huna was of the
opinion that tzitzis is chiyuv as
tallis. Thus, he told Rabba bar Nachmani
that it's not enough to take off this
tallit katan and put it away and put on
a different tallit. That's fine, but you
still have to put tzitzit on the tallit
that you removed. Says the Gemara that
this chiddush of Rabbah bar Rav Huna,
who holds that tzitzit is chiyuv
b'tallit, who argue on the halacha. Not
everybody agrees with that. In fact, he
argues with a malach, a real malach, an
angel. The malach asked Rav Ketina, a
malach once met Rav Ketina the mitzisa
dina, who was wearing satin. He had a
linen beged on. And because he was
wearing the linen beged, he wasn't
wearing tzitzit. And that's related to
Yom Kippur's daf, yesterday's daf, where
the Gemara brings its machlokes
b'Shammai and b'Hillel whether the satin
with tzitzit is chiyuv b'tzitzit or
patur b'tzitzit. What's the reason that
you should be patur? Because satin is
linen and tzitzit, the treilis, is wool,
and as a result, it's going to be
shatnez. Stating that, we know "aseh
docheh lo saaseh." And not only is "aseh
docheh lo saaseh" aseh, but the source,
the makor in kol haTorah kulah, that
"aseh docheh lo saaseh" is from satin
with tzitzit. Stating that, not
everybody holds that satin with tzitzit
is chiyuv or patur. It's a machlokes
b'Shammai and b'Hillel. We'll see more
about that in a moment. So, either way,
the malach saw Rav Ketina, who was
wearing a beged made out of satin, and
there was no tzitzit. On my left, so he
told him, "Ketina, Ketina, sadina
b'kayitz, you wear satin when it's nice
weather outside. V'sarbulah b'chishtah,
and then when it gets cold, you put on a
sarbulah," which was a beged that didn't
have dalet kanfos. In other words, you
never wear tzitzit. Tzitzit show treilis
mayteh ohel.
Rav Ketina, you never wear tzitzit. So,
the malach meets Rav Ketina and he gives
him mussar. He tells him, "Ketina,
Ketina, when are you ever going to wear
tzitzit? If you're going to wear satin
during the springtime, and then when it
starts getting a little chilly outside,
you put on your sarbulah, you're never
going to wear tzitzit." The Gemara says,
"Amalei say, he told the malach on she
so asei, do I have to be worried?"
Meaning, are there ramifications in
shamayim? Do they punish people? If
someone's over a If someone's mevatel
mitzvas asei, the Torah says, the child
of course. I mean if you have to do it
and you don't do it, you would think
there'd be some sort of repercussions.
In fact, says we know that even was in
action
when it came to putting on tzitzit,
right? Has an ability if somebody says
I'm not going to sit in a sukkah. If
somebody says I don't want to do a
certain mitzvah. So it's in Kosev
Maseches Kesubos where the says very
clearly that
could physically force a person to do a
mitzvah. So if even is in action when it
comes to mitzvah say certainly Shamayim
would be in action but this is a
different type of mitzvah because it's
not a mitzvah that you wake up in the
morning having. If you have a beged
katan, then you have the mitzvah. So
what if I don't have a beged katan to
tie
tzitzit? Why? Because I wear
and
that was his question. And she said I'm
going to tell him
risk and she not always but if there's a
risk in Shamayim, then the answer is
yes. What's the catch?
I have
then I understand why the kind of
because there's a kind of and he wasn't
satisfying his kind of and he kind of
so if it's a kind of and I don't have a
kind of
tzitzit, then why would they punish
Katina even the
but the
immediately says that there's no from it
because
okay so you want to tell me that is a
kind of now you understand the story?
Now you understand why the told Katina
that being that is a kind of but even
risk you're going to get punished.
Means that if you're wearing a beged of
katan, then you have an obligation to
put on tzitzit but
but if you're not wearing a beged katan,
there's certainly no obligation to put
on tzitzit. What
was the telling Katina? He wasn't
telling him you're blatantly violating
the tzitzit. You're not because whether
it's a kind of
or whether it's a kind of
or you're wearing a beged of dalet
kanfos or you own a beged of dalet
kanfos, there's no obligation to wear
tzitzis. Rav Ketina owned sadin and he
owned a sarbalot. That's what he used to
wear and that's what he had in his
closet. So whether it's chiyuv tallis,
chiyuv gadol, either way, there was
never an obligation to put on tzitzis.
The ta'ana was
chachi kamali, titch stigalim if the
nafshi mitzitzis, that you shouldn't be
circumventing the mitzvah of tzitzis.
There is a mitzvah of tzitzis. There's
ways to get away with it. Very simply,
don't put on a beged of dalet kanfos.
But at the same time, it's the wrong
thing to do. Not only is it the wrong
thing to do, in shamayim they punish.
Not always, but be'idin rishcha, it's
dafka then that they would punish.
Either way, the Gemara thought for a
moment that there was a raya from the
malach, no less, that tzitzis is a
chiyuv gadol. The Gemara said, really
it's not a chiyuv gadol. So Rabba bar
Rav Huna held it was chiyuv tallis and
there's a little bit of a discussion in
terms of what the malach held, whether
it's chiyuv gadol, chiyuv tallis. At the
end, the Gemara sort of leaves it
unresolved. So the Gemara's going to get
back to it later, but for now, that was
the exchange. I should tell you
something interesting. There's a Gemara
in Maseches Shabbos daf kuf chet amud
bet. It's a well-known Gemara. The
Gemara talks about the chachamim that
the tanna Rebbi Yehuda, Rebbi Yehuda bar
Rebbi Ilai, used to make before Shabbos,
right? Ahu chassid, the Gemara says, in
shas it's always Rebbi Yehuda bar Rebbi
Ilai. Whatever it says ahu chassid, so
Rebbi Yehuda bar Rebbi Ilai, in addition
to being the great tanna Rebbi Yehuda
about Plukta d'Rabbanan Talmud Rebbi
Akiva, he was also a chassid. And the
Gemara says, kach hoya minhogei Rebbi
Yehuda bar Rebbi Ilai. Erev Shabbos
mevi'in lo re'um lechem. Erev Shabbos he
would sit and they would bring him an
areiva that was full of hot water.
Verocheitz panav yadov v'raglav. He
would wash his hands, feet and his face.
U'misatech.
And he would put on a tallis. Vi'yoshev
besadinin hamitzuyatzin. He would put on
linen that was mitzuyatzin, had tzitzis
on it. Vedoyeh malach Hashem Tzvakos.
And if you look at Yehuda bar
as he was waiting to greet the Shabbos
this is the that is an Indian to greet
the Shabbos but either way he looked
like a
and his
would hide from him the corners of their
bag
why you
the
base of
the
mission sites of the describing
he's sitting he's wearing his bag head
of sudden that was made out of linen
it's sudden how much you want to send
this citizen it the
his
they're sitting with the
and they're also wearing their
which are also made out of sudden and
they don't have to on it and because
they don't have to on it they're hiding
it now why are they not wearing
cuz they held like base shot I be shy my
whole sudden is potter from
review the hell of course like
that sudden is sudden this
and as a result they had to hide the
corners of their bag head cuz they
didn't want their rabbit to see that
they're going like
when in reality the review is tiny like
this regardless this is the matter that
the describes the context is
it's describing the way you do
used to be Shabbos it's interesting that
the
describes you do that he looked like a
sudden the passion is like if somebody
says he saw rabbit and he looked like a
mouth
it looks like
that's
the way you read the but if you look at
the
says the
you know why the refers to the
as a mouth it's based on this that we
just learned
that the says that the maker of and he
gave a
but now where he says you wear sudden
when it's nice outside you wear
when do you ever going to wear the midst
of tzitzis? And says the Maharsha, I
think it's much in the time of the
malach that the malach wanted Rav Ketina
to be wearing tzitzis when he was
wearing a sadin. Cuz he held that sadin
is higher than tzitzis, like Beis
Hillel.
Whereas the minag, like the talmid of
Rabbi Yehudah bar Ilai was, they follow
Beis Shammai that sadin is part of the
tzitzis. But the bottom line is Rabbi
Yehudah bar Ilai is wearing sadin and he
has tzitzis on it. He's relying on
not like shitas Beis Hillel and shitas
Beis Shammai.
Not like shitas Beis Hillel. And here
you have the malach who holds the same
way. Thus says the Gemara, he was like
the malach Hashem Tzevaos. It's
interesting by the way, Tosafos says in
Maseches Sukkah daf gimel amud alef, so
Tosafos says that there he brings from
Rav Amram Gaon that there's six places
in Shas that halacha is like Beis
Shammai. Of course the halacha is always
like Beis Hillel. Not only is the
halacha always like Beis Hillel, but
Beis Shammai are mocking Beis Hillel in
a Mishnah here.
It's not even Tosafos mocking shitas
Beis Shammai relative to shitas Beis
Hillel. There's not even Indian to be
machmir. You're not going to find a baal
nefesh machmir when it comes to shitas
Beis Shammai. Beis Shammai are mocking
Beis Hillel in a Mishnah stating that
Rav Amram Gaon said that there's six
times where the halacha is like Beis
Shammai. One of them, the most famous
one, the most notable one is Sukkah.
What's the shear of a kosher Sukkah?
It's a machlokes Beis Shammai Beis
Hillel. Beis Shammai says rosha v'rubah
v'shulchan. It's big enough that you
could have rosha v'rubah and your
shulchan.
But Beis Hillel's shita is enough that
it's rosha v'rubah. We pasken like Beis
Shammai. That's why this Tosafos is in
Maseches Sukkah daf gimel amud alef. The
idach, what's the second one? Menachos
perek chailes gabai sadin and tzitzis.
Beis Shammai poiterin u'veis Hillel
mechayvin. And we pasken like Beis
Shammai that we don't put tzitzis on
sadin. But the bottom line is, as says
the Maharsha, that's why he was like the
malach Hashem Tzevaos. Just make Indian
the Indian
and that is as the Gemara in Maseches
Nedarim daf chof amud alef. The Gemara
over here is discussing Omar Rav
Yochanan ben Zakkai. Rav Yochanan ben
Zakkai
I learned four things from
I heard four things from
these are all things in terms of if a
child or a lady was born and there's
something wrong with the child that the
reason is is because there was something
imperfect
and that's what caused the child to be
born this way. The Gemara ends up saying
that the law is not like Rabbi Yochana
Ben D'Havai
who said this over in the name
who
said over in the name of Malachim
because the law is that there's no such
thing as an imperfect the shots call my
shoulder
either way says the Gemara over there
I'm a name Malachi is
when
Ben D'Havai said over these four things
in the names of Malachi
he must have meant not really Malachi
but what he probably was referring to
was
that were that were like Malachi eating
Malachi mommy say if you're going to
tell me
he was literally saying what he heard
from a Malach how come Rabbi Yochana Ben
D'Havai
how could the law not be like Yochana
Ben D'Havai
you want to tell me there's a one this
hey I understand Malachi okay like it's
between a major London and a Malach so
maybe the law is not like the Malach
there is
but over there the Gemara is discussing
something very different the Gemara is
discussing why children are born in a
certain way and the Malach was relating
it to a Tashmish you would think that
when it comes to those types of
in the key but there's a lot
they're more but there's a lot
so if they're more but there's a lot
how's it possible the law is not like
the Malach says the Gemara
that when Yochana Ben D'Havai said over
the name of he didn't mean a real Malach
he meant
Sadikim that are like says the Gemara if
that's the case if they were Malach my
car the Malachi
the Gemara says the
Malachi
cuz they were unique like Malachi
so what does that mean if If in the run
the run quotes that Pesach says the run
mitzini
ashares says shahi mitzuyanim ven if dol
mish neyadam kamalachi ashares kidam min
hagod malame on yom shai is mitzuyanim
sham kamalachi ashares am this neyatzman
floy nisar mitzrayim says the rabbis the
rabonim the mitzuyanim chapter
mitzuyanim right but that mitzuyanim
sham they're separate and as a result
the reason they were referred to as
malachi ashares cuz they were
mitzuyanim. Rashi the mofaris on the
shas had a different on the gemara.
Rashi's gersa is not vamai kor malachi
ashares demitzini kamalachi ashares.
Rashi had the gersa demitzitsi
kamalachi ashares. I remember chiyos
maseches sodam chof
and Rashi says two words demitzini demar
chiyos changes it to demitzitsi sha
atufin betzitzis. You know why they were
called malachi ashares cuz they used to
wear tzitzis like malachi ashares.
Interesting. Obviously the two shas of
this Rashi the gemara maseches shabbos
daf chof
but either way there seems to be some
correlation between a malach and
tzitzis. The marsha in maseches shabbos
says specifically to sadam betzitzis and
he relates it to the gemara that we just
learned menachos daf mem alef amud alef.
Rashi speaking more generally demitzitsi
actually doesn't say anything about
sadam betzitzis maybe he means rebbi
huda rebbi loyes doim malachi ashares
and he's referring to demitzitsi
betzitzis. Either way gemara to omer
tuvi barkisno amashmu. If you close the
door with somebody has talisois in a
kufsa he has to put tzitzis on them
because tzitzis is choyvas talis not
like the malach but rather like rabba
bar maydeshmu asha the choydesh that a
soken an older person that preparing
tachrichin is getting ready for the next
phase so tachrichin doesn't need
tzitzis. My timer asha chasa amra
the high rabba su ya vida because
tzitzis only put on a beged that
somebody is going to wear in a usual and
customary, right? Being that tachrichim
uh oh a live person doesn't wear, it's
really made for once a person dies, it
doesn't satisfy the criteria of Asher
tachseva, and therefore, even though
tzitzis is chiyuv somebody has
tachrichim sitting in his closet waiting
for, you know, to be worn at some point,
so they don't put tzitzis on it. Says
the Gemara stating that by he shaita,
when a person dies and now the chevra
kadisha, they put the the
tachrichim on the person, vadai
raminoli, then they should affix tzitzis
to the tachrichim. And the reason is
mishum loye lurosh cherpaso, because if
the meis isn't going to be wearing
tzitzis, it's going to be a bichina of
loye lurosh. What does loye lurosh mean?
You're not supposed to laugh at someone
that that can't afford or who's less
fortunate than you. Here too, this
person is less fortunate because the
chevra kadisha, they're wearing their
tallis and they're wearing everything
and and now this person's lying here
dead is already a chiyuv in all mitzvos.
So therefore, we put tallis tzitzis on
the tachrichim because otherwise it
would be loye lurosh. Now, it's pretty
it's pretty clear in this Gemara that
there's an inyan to put
tzitzis on tachrichim, right? It's
pretty clear. Truth is that there's
another Gemara, a Gemara in Maseches
Bava Basra daf ayin dalet amud alef. The
context over there is also Rabba bar Rav
Huna and the Gemara over there is
talking about the Rabba bar bar Chana,
I'm sorry, not Rabba bar Rav Huna. Rabba
bar bar Chana where the Gemara tells all
the different stories that that
happened, the fantastic ma'asim and all
the the famous aggadeta, but either way,
one of the stories the Gemara says that
Rabba bar bar Chana said I was once in
the midbar and I met an Arab and the
Arab says, "You want me to take you to
see the meisei midbar?" And he takes him
to see Korach's family, he takes him to
see Har Sinai. And one of the places he
tells him is, "I'll take you to the
meisei midbar." We know the Jews were 40
years in the midbar died. So if you
want, I can take you to the ma'ara, the
caves where they're buried. So wow,
Rabba bar bar Chana couldn't believe it,
so he goes along with him. Says the
Gemara, he saw the meisei midbar and
when he was there, he had the kind of
the
kind of night. He ripped off the corners
of one of the big bottom of the Mayse
Midbar that had on it. He wanted to
bring it back to the base madras because
a whole bunch of learning a whole bunch
of
There's a lot of big
between
when it comes to
So he figured this is exhibit A. This is
perfect. You talk about
You want to know how they measure of
times, find one of the Mayse Midbar.
It's not going to be easy, but that's So
Rabbi Bar Bar Hana just stumbled upon
the Mayse Midbar. He figured this is
checkmate, right? So he takes off the
kind of the
and the Gemara says, get They get back
on the donkey and they're going to go
back to the base madras
and
but the donkey wasn't moving. I'm a
lady. So the
tells Rabbi Bar Bar Hana,
did you take something by any chance
from the Mayse Midbar? So the Gemara
says, I hear, yes, I did. I had to give
it back. Take it immediately cuz there's
a tradition that man the meaning of
if you take something from the Mayse
Midbar, you're stuck in your tracks,
literally. You're not going to be able
to move. So the only way we're getting
back home is if you return it. So Rabbi
Bar Bar Hana had no choice.
Begrudgingly, he takes this corner of
the bag that has the on it. He puts it
back in the cave and he goes back home.
Says the Gemara,
came to base madras. He told the what
happened. He
told
the Rabbi Bar Bar Hana and they they
spoke to him in a almost in a derogatory
way. He said, call
and call
Bar Bar Hana Siksa. They basically told
him he's a fool. They said,
I don't understand. You were there
because you wanted to see how the Mayse
Midbar wore that. So you figured you'll
take it with you. Then you realized you
couldn't take it. So what's the next
step? Choice? What? See, start measuring
and start the three or four
Right, take a picture. You snap a You
know, there's things you could have
done. So I don't understand. Why did Why
did you leave it? So the Gemara says, I
hear, but either way, Rabbi Bar Bar Hana
didn't find out.
So Rabbah bar bar Hana finds the cave
with the Meisim midbar. And they're
wearing
So the Torah is the Gemara. It's the
Gemara. That the Meisim midbar were
buried in their shrouds, right? It seems
pretty clear. See Gemara Menachos 111.
And you have the Gemara Maseches
Bava Basra, very good. And I don't know
if it seems to be two Gemaras that you
bury a person with their tzitzis.
Stating that we know the Minag Yisrael
is not that way. The Minag Yisrael is
that we do not bury people with their
tzitzis. As a matter of fact, what they
do is is they make the tzitzis passul
right before Again, I'm not
This is certainly what's brought down in
Shulchan Aruch is that they make the
tzitzis passul right before they bury a
person. So usually there will be tzitzis
on the person. And what they do is they
make it passul. So it's hepek of the way
it's supposed to be. And the truth is
the Baalei Tosfos already struggled with
this Minag. And Rabbeinu Tam speaks
about it. And there's long Tosfos in the
Shas. The bottom Tosfos in our Gemara,
Menachos 111, says Pirush in the Perek
Pasul d'Niddah. But the truth is not
only Perek Pasul d'Niddah. It's also in
Brachos daf 34. There's many places in
Shas where Tosfos is very very
to explain why is it
that the Minag Yisrael is just the
opposite from what at first glance would
seem to appear from the Gemara. The
Gemara is mashma that they would davka
put tzitzis, right? Tachrichim doesn't
need tzitzis. Because
but at the same time, right? When they
bury the person, then they will put the
tzitzis on it. Because it's a
And we do just the opposite. We make it
passul at the last second. The Shas
seems to be the most satisfied with his
He brings from the Ritzba throughout
Shas that the Ritzba said that he found
a Mefurash in Maseches Smachos. So
Maseches Smachos talks about dinei
aveilus. So Maseches Smachos says
clearly that you're supposed to make the
tzitzis passul right before you bury a
meis. And that's where this Minag
Yisrael comes from. And says Tosfos,
even though you're going to tell me
Maseches Smachos on one side, Talmud
Bavli on the other side, shouldn't you
pasken like Talmud Bavli, two Gemaras
seemingly, over Maseches Smachos? Says
Tosfos, no. It's not always the case.
And I'll you precedence for it because
we know the Gamarra says at the end of
Masochist Megillah that on a time of
you take out the safe of Torah and you
lay. What do you lay on a time of
says the Gamarra you lay in the claws
supposed to lay in the
yet the minute
we lay in
you know what it's based on it's based
on the Masochist
says just like we find that the minute
we follow Masochist
in terms of the Torah at the time of
we lay in not the claws of
perhaps the same thing is true over here
so essentially what we're doing is we're
following the Masochist again it's an
but that is the bottom line just tell
you something interesting
in
it's in
read you a little bit
the whole of Israel should not
that they carry the mace with the
before they put the mace into the cabin
noise can
they rip off one of the claws they
should not go
the bias code of
some do it in the house before they they
go to the base of I will take you
the preferable way of doing it is to rip
off this hood right before the the
says the
I'll
two stories regarding to
I had
she
one of them told his
to bury him in the he wanted to be
buried with the claws like the Gamarra
but I say tell me she get
when it came time to put on the this
time of
suddenly he started feeling something in
his stomach he also and he literally had
to run outside with some shall be sure
so people continue doing the job well
you
but they weren't aware of this
from this God of
they not
may have
and they just ripped off one of the
tzitzis. They take off
He literally walked out right when that
happened. So he comes back in and he
sees what happened. He's like, and he
began to yell. He said, "I have a kind
of
I heard from this Godol that I have to
make sure that he's buried with
tzitzis."
Must be a similar because he left at
that second and we're going to leave it
the way it is. That was the first story.
The second story is that
the cavern called a tzitzis there was
another Godol that wanted to same thing.
He said, "Bury me in my tzitzis." So
they buried him in his tzitzis and they
put the body into the cave there and
when they were taking the they were
putting a nail into the coffin
the yes the yes
they accidentally knocked the nail into
the corner and they ripped off one of
the tzitzis.
And they saw that this from this Godol
was wrong. And then he says, "You want
to know who these two Godolim were? The
first one was the Vilna Gaon. The second
one was the Taz." The second one was the
Taz.
Play play. But anyway, this is in the
Orach Chaim it's in Siman 111 Seif Katan
Gimmel. It says
"Towers that tore." So if the tear is
more than
three from the corner of the beged more
than three spies from the corner of the
beged yetfar, you can sew it back up.
Why yetfar? So if a beged tear is more
than three spies, you can sew the beged.
But if it tears less than three, don't
sew the beged. If it's more than three,
you can sew the beged.
If it's more than three, you can sew the
beged.
What's the issue? The issue is that
we're afraid that when you're sewing the
beged you're going to leave a string
hanging. And that string may be confused
with one of the tzitzis of the tzitzis.
And really it's possible that string cuz
of the lemon also. You have to have a
beged that's ready for tzitzis when you
affix the tzitzis to the beged. Meaning
that this string was there while you
were sewing the beged, so it's not
kosher to be one of the tzitzis. So, if
the tear is more than three etzba'os,
then it's not a problem because the
tzitzis anyways can't be more than three
etzba'os from the corner of the beged.
So, it's not going to be an issue. If
it's within three etzba'os, so it's in
the area where you could have tzitzis,
then you can't sew it. So, tear it more
perhaps, whatever you do, but you
probably is the point is you can't sew
up this beged.
Let's say you want to put tzitzis on the
corner of a beged. So, what if I have
another beged
that has tzitzis on it? Can I tear off
an amal amal, tear off a little part of
the beged and sew the beged that has the
tzitzis on it already? The answer is no.
Again, it's possible lemon also. You
have to have a perfect beged with four
corners
and then you put the tzitzis on the
beged. But over here, where you're going
to take the tzitzis with the corner, so
the beged's getting its corner together
with the tzitzis, that's going to be a
problem. Shoven maybe treilos mikom
acher batel hu. So, even though you
can't take a corner of a beged put it
onto another beged, but you can take
treilos of beged A and move the treilos
to beged B. U'vavadai she'lo haye
moves akes. As long as you have kosher
size strings. If you're going to move
the treilos from beged A to beged B,
make sure that the treilos is the right
share.
My kiyurish u'mai ashmeina, what's the
cheilish? Of course. I mean, obviously
tzitzis has to have a share. If it has
to have a share, it has to have a share.
It doesn't matter if you're moving it
from here to there or from there to here
or if it's it's a new beged that was
never used before. If it needs a share,
it needs a share. Either way, it's like
the Gemara weiter. Shamit mino, should
we prove from here? The fact that you're
allowed to take treilos and move it from
one beged to another beged. That
material be beged to beged. We'll see in
a few lines. It's machlokes Rav and
Shmuel whether you're allowed to take
tzitzis from one beged and move it to
another beged. Checkmate. Isn't this a
mefurash a braisa? So, isn't it a
mefurash a braisa to this shaila amongst
them Rav and Shmuel matir beged to
beged? The Gemara says no, don't the
whole is
will see
is a question of
so is it okay to remove from
one and move it to another but let's say
that shirt or that
where the
were can't be used anymore because the
the went bad then of course there's
nothing wrong with removing the contrary
what are you going to be going is it
let's use it there's no reason not to
use it therefore you have no material
we're discussing moving
we are there's no
to the there's no other really good
option regardless you have no
if
somebody has a
that is completely
called
so you can put all different color
of on it
with the exception of
you just have to make sure that it's not
called called was a blue color that was
very similar to
that's the only color that you're not
allowed to use now we know that it's
just in a perfect world
was made up of two colors you had the
and you had the
now the truth is that that's the first
in the of the
is
as far as the love of the doesn't say
love what the says
which we
means
of that it's supposed to be the same
most were made out of love and as a
result most
had
but really there's no
love
there's a of
and there's a
that's the
is that supposed to have four and that
get folded over and as a result you have
eight we'll soon see that
it's not
it's another one of the six times we
pass but
either way it's four that really are
eight. Two of the four are made of
trailers and two of the four are made of
Hakon of Min Kona. The question is what
happens if the bag is made out of
trailers? So if the bag is made out of
trailers and now that Hakon of Min Kona
and the trailers are the same color. So
the way you're supposed to do is you're
supposed to have trailers. Two that are
made out of trailers and you're supposed
to have two that are not trailers. So
what should those other two be? It could
be anything cuz there really no is no
Hakon of Min Kona. The Hakon of Min Kona
is the trailers and you don't want it to
be all trailers. So what you're going to
do is you're going to have two of
trailers which is going to really
satisfy the Hakon of Min Kona and the
trailers. The other two have to be
something else. What's that something
else? Whatever you want. Just make sure
it's not called a Elon. And the reason
it can't be called a Elon is cuz called
a Elon looked very similar to trailers
and they were a mom. Trailers was very
expensive. Let's see one of the unique
character traits of the trailers is that
it was very rare. Dumb of you current
and as a result was very very expensive.
Wasn't cheap. It was very expensive. And
called a Elon was very cheap. So the the
charlatans, what they would do is is
they would take called a Elon, they
would sell it as if it's trailers when
really it wasn't trailers. So therefore,
says the tomorrow any color is really
okay with the exception of called a
Elon. May say Talis ain't put about a
Min only it's own Min. Talis is called a
trailers. What about a called a
trailers? Maybe trailers with a Davar
Acher. The Talis about now you take
trailers and a Davar Acher. The called a
Elon don't be called a Elon but maybe
kosher. But with the avid, called a Elon
is kosher and the kosher is the May say
that is it seems to be a steer whether
with the avid called a Elon is okay or
it's not okay. Yes, it's like kosher
kind of Talis but
kind of Talis but Schmoina what is
talking about a Talis that's made up of
four Hooten. The other one is a Talis
that's made out of eight Hooten. A Talis
of Arba Hooten that's made of four is
the perfect Talis. It's four gets folded
over into eight. Such a Talis he can't
have any called a Elon on it. When we
and the avid if you have called a Elon
it's going to be possible. When is it
okay with the avid if there's called a
Elon? That's if the Talis was made up of
eight Hooten. Eight cotton double over
into 16. Being that you anyways have a
kosher tallis without the color ilan if
cotton number 9, 10, 11, 12, it's that
shmona shishim shisha asar. It's in that
second eight or four where you have the
where you have the color ilan. In that
case, but the evidence can be okay. Now,
the obvious question is how could you
have tzitzis that are made up of eight
strings that are really 16? I mean, you
think this is about place of 101. So,
who asked this kasha? Toyse asked this
kasha. The first Toyse in perek chailos
is a very long Toyse. But anyway, the
very first Toyse in perek chailos
discusses this kasha. The in kam but the
point of the Gemara is that being that
it's the actual cotton over there but
the evidence the color ilan is going to
be the chailos not but with the evidence
going to be okay. Says the Gemara shamin
min matir me beged beged. From the fact
that you're telling me don't put color
ilan on tzitzis, is that not a raya that
you're allowed to be take tzitzis off a
beged and sell it or remove it? So, if
you can't remove beged tzitzis from one
beged to another beged, then what's the
shash? You're worried about someone is
going to sell this beged as if it's
chailos when in reality it's not
chailos. In reality, it's color ilan.
Once it's on a beged already, then the
kashas a moot point. He's not going to
do anything. So, says the Gemara shamin
min matir me beged beged. The Gemara
says of it, no. No one said this person
who's selling color ilan as if it's
chailos is obviously not following the
shulchan aruch like a chailos, right?
So, I mean, he's a goner. So, bidi'eved,
if he removed it, there's always a
concern that he might sell it. That's
where you run into the shash. Says the
Gemara Rav and Rav beged beged. Rav and
Rav beged beged. We mentioned this
discussion whether you're allowed to be
matir tzitzis me beged beged or not. The
chilik is Rav and Shmuel. Rav and Shmuel
another machlokes is Rav and Shmuel and
Rav and Shmuel.
On Chanukah, this is a Gemara in perek
madlikin. You're not allowed to light
your menorah from one ner to another
ner. Shmuel says no. We can light ner
with that. It's the same swara by the
way. Be doing mitzvah. Why you being a
mazel of mitzvah when you take from this
narrow to light up another narrow? And
finally, Rabam in
the greater Rab holds it's not like Rab
Shimon. Rab Shimon who holds a dove in a
miskaven on Shabbos is mutar. Rab does
not hold like Rab Shimon. But Schmoo no,
alacha like Rab Shimon in the greater.
Rab Abaya said call me the mar.
Everything that mar did, Abaya's mar was
Rabo. That was Abaya's rebbe. of to Rab.
So Abaya said that his rebbe, Rabo,
would always follow Rab. But class of
except these three alachos. He would
follow Schmoo. Number one, he was makeo
materion me beged le beged. Number two,
he was makeo me narrow and narrow. And
finally, was makeo alacha like Rab
Shimon in the greater. What's alacha
like Rab Shimon in the greater? The
price of Shimon in the greater Adam me
to key say the socks on your lot of
schlepper a bed or a chair or a table on
Shabbos. You have to have a lot of you
have to make sure you don't have in mind
to make a hole in the dirt. But if you
have in mind to make a hole, then you're
over. Kaver guma bina.
In common but regardless,
we're mentioning it because materion me
beged le beged is our sugia. The derech
agav mad we can be narrow and narrow.
And Rab Shimon's alacha of dove in a
miskaven says the Gemara. So we just
mentioned that trelos was very
expensive. And people would sometimes do
a ramot in that would sell color ilan
which was a blue dye that
looked like trelos and they would sell
it as if it was trelos. Based on that,
the Gemara discusses is it okay to take
a beged of
a talis that has trelos on it and give
it to your cleaners?
What's the shash? Maybe you should be
worried that the person is a gana and
he's going to cut off the trelos. He's
going to replace it with color ilan and
he's going to sell you trelos. It says
the Gemara that the master of the gats.
Rab Yehuda used to give it to the to the
cleaners. He trusted them. Rab Chanina
Rab Chanina would fold it up in a
certain way. Rabina Mecha cuz literally
sew it into the hem of the beged because
he was very afraid of the
cleaners.
We'll speak a little a little bit of it.
We'll see how much time we have
afterwards.
So, we're learning perek chalas, which
obviously discusses halachas of tzitzis.
It discusses chalas. But we're also
learning maseches menachos, which
in theory we were supposed to be
learning katchin right now. So, which
we'll be learning in a few days, by the
way. So, just to
marry these two ideas for a moment, and
just one ha'arah as it relates to chalas
and katchin. And that is, there's a
gemara, it's actually on Shabbos's daf.
The gemara is daf mem gimel amud alef.
The gemara brings a braisa. The braisa
says hakol chayavim betzitzis.
Everybody's chayav betzitzis. Kohanim,
Levi'im, v'Yisraelim. Everybody's chayav
betzitzis. Say to the gemara, kol
chayavim betzitzis, Kohanim, Levi'im,
v'Yisraelim, pshita.
Which one of these did you think maybe
is not chayav betzitzis? A kohen? A
Levi? A Yisrael? Of course. Says the
gemara, de'ika Kohanim, Levi'im,
v'Yisraelim pturi. If they're not the
ones that are chayav, man lo chayav? So,
the gemara says Kohanim betzitzis.
There's a chiddush in saying that
Kohanim are chayav betzitzis. So, good
night to come in. I would have thought
kol Yisrael bashatnez umami bashatnez
ya'akov Yisrael lo
the Torah is someich. We
there's a juxtaposition between the lo
sa'aseh of kilayim and the mitzvas
sa'aseh of tzitzis. So, I would have had
a ha'amina mandu Yisrael kilayim legabei
v'vishu demachayev betzitzis. But how
can Kohanim chayav Yisrael kilayim
legabei lo lo chayav? I would have
thought that someone who has lo Yisrael
bashatnez, unequivocally, he has the
mitzvas tzitzis. But being that Kohanim
don't have lo Yisrael bashatnez,
unequivocally, because we know that the
big day kohen had kilayim, and it was
Yisrael
the Yisrael kilayim, so maybe they
shouldn't have the mitzvas tzitzis
either. Kamashma lon, hakol chayavim
betzitzis, Kohanim, Levi'im,
v'Yisraelim. What's the chiddush? The
chiddush is Kohanim. Because
in mitzvah tzadik ches
makes a gevaldig deyak in this gemara.
Because it says it sounds a little bit
like from this gemara that Kohanim, when
they wore bigdei kehuna, if and when
applicable,
would wear tzitzis on the bigdei kehuna.
He says because if not, the gemara
should have said a much bigger khidush.
If you're going to tell me that the
Kohanim didn't wear tzitzis on the
bigdei kehuna, you want to know what the
khidush is? That Kohanim are khayav in
tzitzis. I'll tell you what the khidush
is. When they wear bigdei kehuna, they
don't wear tzitzis.
Elo, so there would be a hava mina maybe
they don't wear tzitzis.
The gemara says what's the hava mina
that Kohanim are patur from tzitzis?
Because it says tzitzis in the same
neighborhood as it says the lav of
shatnez. And they sometimes wet when
they wear bigdei kehuna, don't have a
problem with shatnez. The mail or you
would have thought they don't have
tzitzis ever. So what basis says the
Mekhes Khinukh? If they're not khayav in
tzitzis when they wear their bigdei
kehuna, then it's a much better
hava mina. The hava mina is is that
tzitzis gufa when they wear the bigdei
kehuna, they don't wear.
Elo mai, says the Mekhes Khinukh, it
sounds a little bit like from this
gemara that the Kohanim used to wear
tzitzis when they wore the bigdei
kehuna. And the truth is, says the
Mekhes Khinukh, if you think about it,
the mail
technically was khayav in tzitzis. And
it works out just physically why the
mail had dalet kanfos, thus was khayav
in tzitzis. So he says it sounds a
little bit like from this gemara that
the Kohanim wore the wood tzitzis on the
bottom of the mail. So I've never seen a
picture of the mail that had tzitzis on
the bottom. But says the Mekhes Khinukh,
you would think that the mail had
tzitzis. But the Mekhes Khinukh says
that it's it it can't be. Because lo
ra'inu v'lo sham'anu, the Mekhes
Khinukh's pictures they never have
tzitzis on the bottom of the mail. He
says no one ever saw it. No one ever
heard of such a khidush. So says the
Mekhes Khinukh, I don't but how do you
give khidush with this gemara? In other
words, the Mekhes Khinukh's deyak IS A
KASHA. FREAKS THE Mekhes Khinukh a
kasha. No one ever heard that the
Kohanim wore big day Kohanim wore
tzitzis on the big day Kohanim. From
this Gemara, it's a little mashma that
they did. So now one is a kasha on the
Gemara. Why does the Gemara say
the love of Kohanim
therefore they would have been
say better being that they don't wear
tzitzis. But really says the
real kasha is why not? Why did the
Kohanim not have to put tzitzis on their
big day Kohanim? Says the
answer is very partial cuz we know that
a tallis
is partial tzitzis. That's why if you
put on a tallis you forget your tallis,
you know you walk into a shul there's a
tallis so it's a shaila what you're
supposed to do. Tallis is different than
a tallis.
But in
but the point is a tallis you borrow
somebody else's tallis, you don't make a
bracha on it. Tallis is partial tzitzis.
Being that a tallis is partial who owned
the big day Kohanim?
Hektish owned it. The Gizbar owned it.
The base of Hektish owned it. It was
paid for by the masses. So So being that
it was paid for by the masses it didn't
belong to the Kohanim. It didn't belong
to the Kohanim. It's not his. It's like
God and the tallis. Says the
what I'm telling you is partial it's but
it's partial. And the only reason I'm
telling it to you is I don't have the
in front of me. But he says I asked this
question to many and I stumped them and
they didn't know. And that's the only
reason I'm writing it because apparently
what's so obvious and what's so partial
a lot of people don't realize. But the
bottom line is says the the
the mail was technically in tzitzis. But
despite the fact that the mail was in
tzitzis the Kohanim did not wear
tzitzis. Why didn't he wear tzitzis? The
reason he didn't wear tzitzis is because
it was a tallis
and it's for that reason says the
Gemara didn't say
tzitzis by the Kohanim cuz it's not
true. It's not right. Because a
non-Kohanim in the same circumstance
wouldn't either put tzitzis on this type
of tallis cuz it's a tallis
and on a tallis
there is no
to put on tzitzis. You know there's a
mesechta, it's one of the mesechtas
ketanos, it's called meseches tzitzis.
And going to Kanievsky shlita wrote a
peirush on meseches tzitzis. And right
in the beginning of this peirush, he
wrote two peirushim. One is called Chaim
and the other one's called Argaman. So,
it's the first ha'arah on the Argaman
side of the page. And Kanievsky over
there brings the Minchas Chinuch's
kasha. This kasha, that why is it that
the Kohanim didn't have a chiyuv to put
tzitzis on the bigdei kehuna. Now, the
Chofetz Chaim has the kasha from the
Me'il. Chaim says that the truth is that
the kasha is the kasha from the Eifod
also. Cuz the Eifod also had four
corners. He said presumably, the reason
didn't ask the kasha from Eifod is cuz
all four corners were behind the person.
And there are Rishonim that hold that
the only time you have a chiyuv to put
tzitzis on a beged of four corners is if
you have two corners behind you and two
corners in front of you, like we wear
tzitzis right now. But the truth is that
many Rishonim don't hold that way. But
regardless, Chaim came out that the
kasha is a kasha from the Me'il. And the
kasha is a kasha from the Eifod either.
Regardless, he shocked the Torah, he
concludes like the Minchas Chinuch, he
brings the Minchas Chinuch at the end.
The last line is Shulchan Aruch Minchas
Chinuch Mitzvah Tzitzis tes, she heya
b'zeh etc. And he brings the same Torah.
It's the thing that belonged to hekdesh,
it was a tallis
wool. One more remarkable that Kanievsky
brings that I thought is relevant cuz
it's related to the way that we spoke
about when we learned meseches Vakim is
this Gemara in meseches Vakim daf chof
alef.
So, the Gemara over there discusses this
halacha that the Kohen had to be in the
Azara obviously when he was doing the
avodah. Kodshim kodashim, kodshim kalim,
but all kodshim, there was a halacha you
had to be in the Azara. And the question
is, what if a person is suspended from
the Azara? Or what if a person is a
little bit inside the Azara, a little
bit outside the Azara? Al yarech, all
the different Gemaras over there. One of
the shailos the Gemara asked, what would
be if a person is standing in the Azara,
the Kohen, as he's doing the avodah, but
tzitziso, his tzitzis were outside of
the Azara. Is that a problem in lifnei
Hashem? Or is not a Is Is not a problem
in lifnei Hashem? Says Rashi, what does
tzit tzit so I mean? Tzit tzit roshoi.
The hair of the sorry. It's referring to
tzit tzit roshoi. Right, we spoke out
right at the time. The question is how
was he able to have tzit tzit roshoi? We
know the halacha is that often they had
to take haircuts. Some say it was his
payos, but was a cohen even allowed to
have payos? Not so simple. But
regardless,
they ain't coming to come up. But Rashi
says tzit tzit so I mean tzit tzit
roshoi. Right, that going Kanievsky
shlita. He says, I don't understand. Why
did Rashi say tzit tzit roshoi? At the
end of the any person sits down to learn
this Gemara and he sees the tzit tzit.
So the first thing that comes to mind is
tzit tzit roshoi. Now the truth is, just
to be honest, is the Gemara and tomorrow
is not going to say that the מקור to the
word tzit tzit is פסוק in יחזקאל and
really comes from tzit tzit roshoi. But
at the end of the day, you don't find in
ש"ס where חז"ל refer to the word tzit
tzit and it means a chop. It means hair.
Whenever you find the word tzit tzit in
ש"ס with that ש"ס, what it always means
is it means tzit tzit. It means the
I'll tzit tzit, I'll tzit tzit, I'll
tzit tzit. Right, that's what it means.
So the question is, why would Rashi say
that the cohen who's inside the עזרה
tzit tzit is outside is referring to
tzit tzit roshoi? Say פשט, the group.
Why don't we say it's talking about his
tzit tzit on his בגד? Says Rav Chaim,
it's a ראיה. Rashi must tell that the
cohen didn't wear tzit tzit. If the
cohen didn't wear tzit tzit, so that's
where it's נגש. So Rashi knew it
couldn't have been tzit tzit בגד. It
must have been tzit tzit roshoi. So I'll
tell you something interesting. I saw
there's a sefer called דעת נוטה. It's
tshuvas from a going going Rav Chaim
Kanievsky shlita.
So and there's a whole volume all on
halachos of tzit tzit. Pretty big
volume. And it's and it's all on
halachos of tzit tzit, different shailos
that were asked to Rav Chaim Kanievsky.
So on the back, they bring a whole list
of הערות that Rav Dov Landa shlita, he's
the rosh yeshiva in Slabodka, sent Rav
Chaim on his perush on מסכת ציצית. So
Rav Chaim Kanievsky wrote a perush on
מסכת ציצית. Rav Dov Landa sent הערות to
Rav Chaim Kanievsky on his perush on
מסכת ציצית. The first הערה that Rav Dov
Landa wrote him what I saw right at the
beginning pure government of a message
he discussed
and that is that why did the not have to
wear why did the not have to wear this
is actually didn't even want to learn
big wanted to be Russia the
the
the why not says Landau
because we know that
no
we know that
the only time
is that time the world allowed to wear
big tuna was a
but
a was not allowed to wear big
that means the only time he's ever
wearing the big while he's doing the
if he's doing the is being a
the washing is because the that he's
doing is
so we discuss the the
or it's the we say that the
with the holds that putting on the big
in it of itself the
but regardless it's because there's some
going on oh there's a going on you're a
big tuna I think it's bottom of the
so says you want to know why the big
didn't have
because it was only a game with a big
anyways always doing a
but you're not a big tuna so what's the
grace of the meal is A YOU'RE BEING A
BIG TUNA HOW CAN YOU WEAR A MEAL WITHOUT
HOW CAN YOU WEAR A WITHOUT you only wore
the meal and the
big tuna I mean that you only wore it
big tuna so there's an issue of a big
tuna bottom of the
so maybe just based on that it's going
to be okay David Landau
so he responded and said I
similar
so that
is a very good
it's a feeling and the over there says
it's really a
big tuna
the big tuna the big tuna
the
big tuna the big tuna the big tuna the
big tuna
the big tuna the big tuna the big tuna
the big tuna the big tuna unbelievable
that even though there's a big tuna the
big tuna the big tuna the big tuna the
big tuna but people that are big tuna
the big tuna the big tuna they're okay.
They don't have to wear tefillin the
whole day. They should wear it just as
k'shas wearing tefillin. But other than
that, they're not chayav to put on
tefillin. And the reason is, says the
Ramah, the whole issue with mitzvah part
of a mitzvah acheres. Meaning that
they're oisek b'mitzvah, oisek b'mitzvah
is poter min a mitzvah. Stating that,
says the Ramah, one important caveat.
That's only true in tzorech troyach aval
im yachol la'asos sheteim k'achas b'loi
troyach, if you can do the second
mitzvah without a tircha, ya'aseh
sheteim. Meaning that's poshut. If you
can do both mitzvahs, that's twice as
much kindness that we spoke about last
week. Kol adam sheyeish lo mezuzah al
pischah with tefillin al rosho, he
should be poter from all the mitzvahs.
Of course not. I'm not being oisek in
the mitzvah. You have to be an oisek.
You have to be deemed an oisek
b'mitzvah. You need to be labeled an
oisek b'mitzvah in order to be placed
poter min a mitzvah. The Ramah is saying
a chiddush that even if you're an oisek
b'mitzvah, but if it doesn't involve so
much tircha, so says Rav Chaim
Kanievsky, what's the greatest tircha
before you do the avodah? So much to
just put tzitzis on the beged. So you
wait at the end of the day b'shaas
you're doing the avodah, you're an oisek
b'mitzvah poter min a mitzvah. So you
want to tell me it's not a kasha how
you're wearing a beged without tzitzis?
But l'maaseh, being that it doesn't
involve so much tircha, so Rav Chaim
told Rav Dovid Landau, it's poshut that
this Ramah is the mar'eh makom. And
that's why the Mishnah Berurah and
that's why that's not the teretz.
Because you can't use, you can only
invoke oisek b'mitzvah poter min a
mitzvah if it involves tircha. But if it
doesn't involve tircha, you wouldn't be
able to do it. Just one ha'arah there,
Rav Dovid Landau. When he wrote his
teshuvah to Rav Chaim, so he told Rav
Chaim that really at first glance you
have to be me'orer something else. And
that is oisek b'mitzvah is poter min a
mitzvah. But an oisek b'mitzvah is not
poter from a mitzvah lo ta'aseh. So you
can't say, "Oh, I'm an oisek b'mitzvah,
okay, so I can eat my challah and my
rice." Oisek b'mitzvah poter min a
mitzvah. That's a mitzvah ta'aseh. It's
a mitzvah lo ta'aseh, right? That's like
a technical. Of course it's not halacha.
Oisek b'mitzvah is poter from mitzvah
ta'aseh. An oisek b'mitzvah can't do an
issur. Not an issur d'oraisa and not an
issur d'rabbanan. An oisek b'mitzvah
can't do an issur. So the sad Reb Dovid
Landau that maybe you don't have an
issur permits a bottom of a mitzvah.
Because over here if you're going to
wear a beged dal kanfos without tzitzis
aren't you being over an issur of some
sort? You're not allowed to wear a beged
dal kanfos without tzitzis. So if you
can't wear a beged dal kanfos without
tzitzis so an issur
permits a bottom of a mitzvah. So I
don't have to do a mitzvah. But does
that mean I can now go become a baal
teshuvah say and wear a beged dal kanfos
without tzitzis? But the teretz of that
is very very pashet. And he brings the
Beis Yosef in the end of siman yud
gimmel that's Orach Chaim hilchos
tzitzis who brings a discussion amongst
the Rishonim.
The
shem the Mordechai. The Mordechai brings
from one of the Rishonim who said a
chiddush that if somebody has a beged
dal kanfos right? If I ask you ask a man
on the street you have a beged dal
kanfos or a beged that you wear it has
dal kanfos driven tzitzis. Then on
Shabbos one of the tzitzis tore. So now
it's possul the tzitzis. Are you allowed
to wear the beged or not?
So most people say of course not. How
could you wear it? It's you're not
allowed to wear a beged dal kanfos. It
sounds like one of the worst things you
could do. Right? You're wearing a beged
dal kanfos without tzitzis. Chalila
v'chas. And the Mordechai brings that
one of the gedolei Rishonim paskened
that way. But the Rashba read the
leshon. The Rashba said no you're wrong.
You're making a ta'us. You're allowed to
wear that beged. And listen to the
loshon of the Rashba. He said after his
raya the Kach Ner L'Dovid. The mitzvah
says that tzitzis
Torah never said do not thou shalt not
wear a beged that has four corners
without tzitzis. The Rashba says
because if had the Torah said that then
these poskim would have been right that
you're not allowed to wear such a beged
on Shabbos. But the Torah doesn't say
that. All the mitzvahs I say greater
What the Torah says is you have a
mitzvah to say to put on tzitzit. We
become in a tallis also
Nobody said that there's an independent
issur, independent of the mitzvah to put
tzitzit on. Tonight we're a beggar
without tzitzit. The guy
says the
as quoted by the Mark quoted by the
that if somebody has a beggar comes and
he wants to wear in Shabbos and on
Shabbos the tzitzit is torn, you could
put the beggar on. He says, "You know
why? Because even though it's also wear
beggar without tzitzit, but that that
issur is not an independent issur. It's
an issur that's no issur
from a mitzvah. What's the mitzvah? The
mitzvah is to put on a beggar put
tzitzit on your beggar without tzitzit.
The issur is being
the mitzvah of putting on the tzitzit.
But, being that it's Shabbos and I can't
put the tzitzit on, so what issur am I
doing? The issur is not wearing the
beggar without tzitzit.
The issur is not the
because the Torah never said
The issur is the fact that I'm being a
mitzvah. I have an obligation to put
tzitzit on this beggar and I'm not.
That's what the mitzvah is. So, IF I'M
WEARING A BEGGAR without tzitzit, I have
a mitzvah to put tzitzit on it. By not
putting the tzitzit on it, I'm
the mitzvah. But, being that it's
Shabbos and I can't be the mitzvah, so
I'm not being the mitzvah. I'm not being
I can't do it. Can't make the on
Shabbos. So, being that I I'm not being
So, there's no reason not to do it. If
there was an independent issur that says
you shall not wear a beggar without
tzitzit, so it could be Shabbos from
today till tomorrow. It doesn't matter.
I can't put on such a beggar. But, there
is no issur. All there is is a mitzvah.
So, if I have the mitzvah and I don't do
the mitzvah, I'm being the mitzvah. But,
being that I don't have the mitzvah
today because it's Shabbos, I can't
physically be the mitzvah. So, it's for
that reason. For example, what would be
in the
What would be if you have a beggar
titus? You're on an island somewhere
you're cast away somewhere and you just
don't have titus. So can I wear the bag?
The answer is yes. Because I'm not being
someone who I don't have a way to put
the So I'd rather be able to. If there's
an issue to wear a bag of titus,
then of course you would be able to wear
the bag. But there is no issue. What
there is is a mitzvah. What there is is
a mitzvah to put titus on the bag.
If I could be a mitzvah, then there's an
issue to wear the bag because by wearing
the bag without being a mitzvah, I'm
being over an issue which is the bit of
mitzvah. But the issue that I can't be a
mitzvah, why? Because I'm on an island
somewhere or because of it's no problem.
So that's
that it's What's what
the reason the didn't have to put on the
on the middle of the was why? Because it
was
because the only time you anyway
was
because there was a mitzvah like the
says and a mitzvah but a mitzvah. The
question is a mitzvah but a mitzvah
can't be an issue. It can only be a
mitzvah. It can't be an issue. And to
wear a bag of titus
No, it's not. It's a mitzvah. All it is
is a mitzvah. So if I have the mitzvah,
then it's awesome. But if I don't have
the mitzvah because I'm on an island, I
don't have the mitzvah because of or I
don't have the mitzvah because I'm in a
mitzvah. Plus I'm a part of a mitzvah.
In all of the aforementioned cases, this
wouldn't be a
We're going to have to stop this short.