MENTION AND OMISSION OF CHANUKAH IN THE MISHNA - Shiur by Rabbi Nachum Scheiner

the we're learning now. But today's shir is not on the daff. It's the Gomorrah says ai nimala. I know we're in Kaneka but the Gmorrah says the razor and Kaneka together so we could speak Porm also. The Gomorrah says just like the the crack of dawn in the morning is the end of the night. The story of Esther it's the end of the fractur the story of Purim is the last nest is the nest of Kaneka that happened later Purim the story of Puram happened between Bayas and Bayeni right before Bayeni the story of Kaneka happened about 200 years later 200 years into Bay Sheni So freom what do you mean this the nest of purim is the last nest that happened later in the year first comes then pumm but pur happened a good 200 years earlier what does it mean the last mess in the history of Israel that's written down inav is pur of course the early in the but then later on in is written these other n that happened the last nest to be written down is migill that's the last nest and yuma so we understand why there is no mention of cuz Esther was the end like the Gomorrah says the end however is why is there no that's the who wrote the Mishna wrote it after means at least 200 years after. So why is there no makas? Why is there no we were discussing with before we were discussing if in the should also speak about the nest or just meill doesn't speak about the nest but you have migill but if we don't have a migill it's not written in so maybe the it should be written as well the nest as well to say there should be a speaking about the nest as well as also the of now you might look at me and say I here to make a whole I mean how much how much is there already but the truth is these these gamorra these gammor about it and if you take a look in there many so there should be there should be a few proist should be you know written uh they should be there should or a few others among others. What is interesting is that even though there is no mea it's mentioned a couple of times in Mishnayas and I just want to go through I just want to go through for a brief moment the places in Mishnayas to understand and see that the word is mentioned but it's it's these almost no that are relevant to the of the first place in the mission says mission of leg. Um when you bring maybe the when you bring you you have to you read the paris. So then the the the part the mission says you bring and you also read up once it's already you bring so there's a mention of the Mishna the Mishna in Russia Shana says that there are six months in months in the year that you the go out to notify when was if the month was a molly or aer to know what day is fat to know when sukus is n to know when pes is ztoishna and kisl to know when kanuka is so there's a brief mention in the mishna not like gans but that gets mentioned in mishna is tinus per bay's mission yud aim You make for example if there's no rain in Russ you make a you make a notes on that's a relevant fast on so you see one in per of tinus speaking about the mod says the Mishna that there was no because the Mishna doesn't say the word but the Mishna says what does it mean by every but then the mission gimmel the mission says that your creat every Monday and Thursday yesterday as well as Monday the first day of Kaneka we didn't read the parashik we read that's a Mishna comes you read and it overrides the par so too says the if if comes you don't read the parasha you read the cre of kaneka The mission further the go through what you lane [snorts] says. What are you laying on the says that you minimize a you minimize a and lastly lastly the eighth Mishna these eight Mishn mention the last one is inama speaking about putra outside in said therefore if somebody passes by and his merchandise catch on to fire says the that's the one place the one place that mentions is near Kaneka the other places is Kaneka. So the shil is why isn't there that speak about inh that's recorded from theam says something very interesting and they also bring it in the name of the that because raenu aadesh was an from David and David was from Yehuda. The Kashm had the Ramban says even though they would talk they would not would have forgotten the Tory. However, they were they had they were by grabbing the in other words went in that's one of the big things of the in was a very serious like Rashi brings gave that the 13 should be able to fight the many tens of thousands. was a nest volume though it could look like it wasn't a nest but upon him the went out to fight but when they went out to fight they took the they took the like the says in the beginning of the raiml starts before that is pur and the raam says the whole story. The Raum records this story and the Raom says won the war. Then it says they took one of theirs to be a meal. Should they have done? >> They shouldn't have taken from them. If they're bringing back the ro they should have took somebody from Yehuda the said shave it the Yehuda which means the should forever always stay by Yehuda. We spoke about it at the night coil once a whole she on this topic itself this Ramban but the Ramban says that it was a Tina even though they were and they accomplished that was not forgotten still it was a Tina they they were mo they shouldn't have they shouldn't have became kings what they say that was of like they say of course Shamayim was if the right word is sticking up he was you know of his greatgrandfather that the mala was taking taken away from David therefore he didn't write into Mishnayas maybe at least that's an answer why he didn't write about the nest cuz the nest included also taking away the of course they explain it wasn't a personal thing. It was something even though you find um you see the Mishna [clears throat] of Yamipper and those who are also from the base. So you see that Raen actually does mention in the Mishna. So for that they answer and they say of course would be and the however if what entailed in the was taking away the that's where refrained it doesn't mean that didn't talk about the didn't speak about it when it came when it came for this for uh when it came to this of taking away the muk that's where left it out of the Mishna you find such a concept purim like I mentioned before the raam is puran so we could speak a little bit about purim on purash of shak these Citra says it's like uh that you say by every part the goyan said yus we spoke about this I'll show it to you inside I don't remember about that we have to we'll have to check up >> I never saw down >> we'll look it up afterwards and we'll look it upon him this was written written by one of the tano rebelzar who's a son of kit goes through every piece of the of the nest of puring there's one piece of all of that doesn't have it doesn't have it you take a look in the sidak doesn't have a piece so the what happened to the pus the terret is that the k which was written by by and go goes together I think with afterwards um [snorts] what's um yeah goes together they there's no separate that's the why there isn't a on Others say the terrets because of Esther were from the from so for that day not to speak about of course we mention other times of course we mention but on the happened with from we don't speak about it such a type of concept this terret is a little bit it's interesting ter say that raenuades left out of Kaneka the story of because of this it's a little bit it's interesting it's interesting they ask some want to change the gear the new might in the new um they actually add in the words that because he wrote of course he wrote aesh so it was left out to say that didn't lie is a little harder to understand. So at least he it was that left it out but that's also like and what does it have to do because he was of if it was a t on the so it was left out. It was left out. So this terret is a little bit of a needs a little bit more just to recap so you'll be able to follow right through it is very simple. Why is there no mishayas makus kaneka? No, the story of kaneka happened hundreds of years at least 200 years before the mishnas was written. Why is it no mishna? So this terret is a little bit into the terret interesting themselves with this ter. But the em is that himself in asked this question and he has different here. He writes he writes a terrors and this is on the following says that when a person gives a get he has to tell his wife that with this get you're being divorced. Says to I'm cyher if you need to do it that that's what you do and you have to do it. Why doesn't the same murish in the Mishna that you have to say when giving the get that your that the wife she's murious with this get says theamifer cuz it's posh it's paret [clears throat] everybody knew it was posh and he says that things that are posh didn't have to be written into the Mishna theam says why is there no misusan Muza in the back of but why is he know says theam because things that are mafurish that are better than mafurish well known there's no it doesn't have to be written down and the em is that this point is aldama The ra the raam says when the ra explains what the definition of is who is but says the raam that really after there was no more writing you know right was supposed to be but says the raam it was always learned however Why was it written? Was really is not supposed to be written. However, not to forget it. You're allowed to write it. says and the says that it's already a not but the general says why is there no a few lines over here says the things that were clear everybody it's like the way he says it that everyone knows it everybody does it everybody wears fillin there's no Mishna that says that you have to wear fillin every day cuz everybody knows everybody wears every day. Everybody wears these so many from but everyone does it. Everyone knows it's there's no need need to write it down. He also says that's why he's no for and he's no for because everybody knows it says everybody knows so that's why no what was the question why is there no everybody knows the story of everybody knows the of it wasn't necessary to write it. Oh, you're asking why is it different than PM? So, first of all, I want to ask you a little bit more than that. [clears throat] is the soam says literally it's it's loved. It's cherished. People are appreci like the mitzvah. So yeah, even though it's once a year, people are very familiar with the mitzvah. people are into it maybe and this is the difference between Purim Lisa when they wrote the Mishna it wasn't very far away from the nest of Kaneka it it was taka let's say about 200 years later but it was it was still not that far away could be so many people still like you know their great greatgrandfather was still by the nest of Kaneka so you was still it wasn't uh so far removed and that's why it didn't have to be written. So this is one terret that the reason why it's not written is because everybody knows the later on came the gammorra by the time of the gammor already many years later was starting to be forgotten and wasn't clear the raam another terret the says that it's actually yes written where's it written we the gammorra says t the tunnel and the goes through and shabas of where's the source of that the ra where did the raon learn where so if you look over there the gmor the the go the mar for that is migillas tus migill's tus was written during byi all the yum and all the and the days that you don't fast and the days that you do fast migilla's tiness take a Gillis, it's written over there. As a matter of fact, you go through it's everything's written. The story is written over there. The are written. So when Rabenuadesh came to write down the Mishnas, there was no need for him to write down because it was written already. was written 200 years before 100 years before and was written already in the Gillist simple terrorists was taken pur wasn't written the gillis tinus were the niss that happened during bayeni as well as also the yeus so it was written these another terret also with the mcgillis tinness idea but the opposite it this says in a safer sham he says like this the Russian sha speaks claris this migillas tus we're not so familiar about it or tiness it's not really it's it's not brought the garra clares in rashashana if migilla's tiness was bottle or not bottle clares a shila and the gmorra concludes that McGill's tinus was bottle. The girl's tinus was bottle. You know why Kadesh didn't bring it? Cuz it was bottle. It was bottle. Khan was bottle. We keep and it's brought in the rak is one of the tinus. So he says that's why didn't because it was bottle clear ter it was bottle bottle we do have kanek we do have kanek so here says explains asks the gmorrah says shi it's pan and rashi explains means bottle and because it's bottle it's bottle but even though it was bottle just to conclude foods with an important vert an idea speaking about the y of it's not in the Mishna is it's mentioned in the Mishnasim said that you're supposed to sit down to learn after you light the nearest of why because the nearest of Kaneka represent the B mikdash They wanted we should forget the Tyra. So if we're lighting the N after lighting the he should go and put him to sit down to learn. brings that the kaj the kajun mag asked somebody once after after dvening did you [clears throat] sit down to learn what you didn't understand what you learned before ding something that you didn't understand and then you said so you asked did you sit down afterwards now that you asked for and you sit down if you can understand it there's a story with the kazh somebody came to the kazin to ask him if to do a complicated surgery. So the kazh said I don't know I need to have a ma now right after mka the person stayed for mka right after mka the kazh told him clearly you don't have to do that the surgery what happened before you didn't know now you knew he said I ded We should be to take the good shabas a good and kanaka. Yeah.