Tisha B'av : Rebbi Akiva Eiger Reveals Why the Shechina was Not With Us

this torah class is brought to you by torahanytime.com the kotzker was known to be one of the sharpest all-time minds and his his comments and his sayings and his questions are always so analytical and sharp and it gets you thinking in a way that almost no other type of comment can get you to things i want to share with you the katsuka rebbe's really electrifying question on the burning of the base hamikdash this cutscore is brought in and in this safer in semen mem hey of chuba's basic husker he also brings the kotskar's answer and the question is as follows the gemara says at the end of tainus that rabbi yochanan says if i was around when tishbo was legislated i would have made tishabhav on the 10th because the majority of the bassamikdash burnt down on the 10th the fire was set on the end of the ninth however the majority of the temple burned down on the 10th and therefore if i was around when tishb was legislated i would have enacted tisha bhava on the 10th and the ignorance says the opinion of the rabona is no ascalta de paranosa adifa the beginning of a tragedy is more severe so the qatar asked the following question we know in baba kama there's how do we view a fire ishay misham says that a fire is considered you are arrows so as in the fire is considered your arrow and every moment the fire is burning it's like you're acting you're acting you're acting then how is a woman allowed to light candles friday night right before shabbos very nice she lights the fire before shabbos bud the fire burns burns burns and that is attributed to the person who lit the fire so it's like you're doing a misa on shabbos if you hold the isha misham this is the famous question of the numuk yosef tuition is that even though it's like you're acting you're acting you're acting but all of the acts that we attribute to you are considered to have happened at the time you lit the fire and they're incorporated and they're subsumed by the original mice in other words a fire burning is your act and as it continues to burn it is continuously your act but it is considered part of the original act and it's considered like arab shabbos all of that burning took place and therefore since the woman lit the fire on arab shabbos hakal shah ravikayam everything is kosher of yosha because the lumda says yes it's your myself but the myself is embedded or re into the original nicer fractal cuts of and according to it means that all the continuous burning is already incorporated into the original act well in that case we have akasha because what's rubiochrome saying that if he was around he would have legislated tishabhav on the 10th because the majority burnt down on the 10th who cares that it burned down on the 10th but all of that continuous burning is subsumed and incorporated in the original fire that was set on the ninth and according to the the numuk yosef it's considered in a way as if it already burned down on the night so what's rabbi saying that if he would be there he would have enacted on the tenth because the royve of the hecha burned down on the tenth so what what about the new yosef that it's already considered subsumed in the original act so the basic haskell says that the kotsuku gave the following answer this lumped us of the nimuke oyssef that bosser may karaz lina that we go based on the beginning that's only from the vantage point of the one who did the misa that the ish hamad the one who made the fire it's ki'ilu he did everything but but regarding the item that burned regarding the item that burned it's considered like it's burning when it burns in other words there's sort of two dimensions over here regarding the one who did the act everything all the repercussions are subsumed in his original act but regarding the item that is burning it is not considered burnt until it actually happened hence rabbi yochanan says if he would have been around he would have legislated tisha b'av on the 10th because vis-a-vis the temple itself regarding the base of mikdash it's considered to have burnt mostly on the 10th in the safe for safe he brings the answer that the sacha chaver gave to the katsuka rebels kasha of according to the mukesh why would rabbi say that we should commemorate tishbov on the 10th what about basar meikara what about the swara of the nammu yosef says the avneza says think about the following scenario someone lit a fire in his house and it spread to someone's haystack and the owner of the haystack could have prevented and saved his haystack and he decided not to is the one who started the fire in his house kaiv of course not it's not his fault the owner of the haystack should have put it out and extinguished the fire he had the opportunity to if he doesn't take advantage it's his fault not the one who made the fire in that case when the person made the fire and then it spread to the haystack we can't say that the resultant burning of that haystack was incorporated in the original act because that could have been prevented so if something could have been prevented then we don't say that everything occurred before but rather it's occurring in real time therefore says the avne nezar when the set fire to the base hamikdash well you can't say it's considered to have already burnt down on the ninth because we had the opportunity to extinguish it uh but so why didn't we well the didn't let us so when they are not letting us when they are not allowing us then it's considered to have occurred at the moment that they're not letting us burn it down uh extinguish it and therefore is considered to be happening in real time because it's not the the original setting of fire which contr which caused the burning down of the basements but it's the fact that the gentiles did not allow us to because if it could be retracted then in lumber's work it's considered to be happening in real time adds the abney there furthermore the pasta says hashem um and if god shoots an arrow certainly at every moment he could take it back so when it comes to rebalance some sincere banjo has the capacity to take back his act so we don't say everything is considered to have happened with through the original setting of the fire but it's happening in real time since at any moment three bansham could take it out and therefore the alumnus take it back and therefore the alumnus of the nimukeos it does not apply and therefore is correct in saying that if he would have been around he would have established tish above on the 10th when the majority of the temple burnt down and the rabban on hold which means that in terms of the tragedy the tragedy was most tragic at the moment the temple was set aflame and actually it's interesting to know that explains it's because since there's a principle that when the came in they defiled the temple the moment the game set fire it wasn't the temple anymore the kadusa left and now it was a secular building burning down it was no longer a holy building burning down but this is the kash of the khatskar according to the mukesh saif what is shadin that he would have commemorated tisha b'av on the 10th and we have the answer of the qatsugar that this london only applies visa relative to the one who performed the act not regarding the item that's burning and the avneza says this does not apply when it's able to be retracted when it's able to be retracted we look at it in real time we should be zoeka as we say in the bayes of noise will you've just experienced another torah class brought to you by torahanytime.com