# dafyomi

lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' MENTIONING THE RAINS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The might of the rains is mentioned:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Eliezer):</font></b> From the first day of Sukos.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yehoshua):</font></b> From the last day of Sukos.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  Since rain on Sukos is a bad sign, why mention 
                    it?
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Eliezer):</font></b> I did not say to ask for it, only 
                    to mention that it happens at its proper time.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>(R. Yehoshua):</font></b> If so, it should be mentioned 
                    all year!
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  We only ask for rain close to its time.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah):</font></b> On the last day of Sukos, the Shali'ach 
          Tzibur for Musaf mentions rain, but not that of 
          Shacharis.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> On the first day of Pesach, the Shali'ach Tzibur for 
               Shacharis mentions rain, but not that of Musaf.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE BASIS OF THE 'MISHNAH'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Where have we learned that there is an 
          obligation to mention rain, leading the Mishnah to 
          discuss when this begins?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Suggested answer:</font></b> In Maseches Berachos, we learned 
               that the might of the rains is mentioned in the 
               Berachah of the Resurrection of the Dead.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Why was not the date of when it begins 
               discussed there?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  New answer:</font></b> Our Tana is continuing from Rosh Hashanah, 
          where we learned that on Sukos, judgment is passed for 
          water.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why does the Mishnah speak of 'the might of' 
          the rains?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Because they descend with might, as we see from 
          the following Derashah:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> A Pasuk describes the rain as being 'without 
               comprehension' and another Pasuk uses the same term 
               to describe the creation of the world, which is also 
               described as being done with might.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> How do we know that this should be mentioned 
          during prayer?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The Pasuk states that we are to serve Hash-m with 
               our hearts, which refers to prayer, and it is 
               followed by a reference to the rain.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yochanan):</font></b> Hash-m has three keys that are not 
          entrusted to an intermediary - those of rain, childbirth, 
          and resurrection of the dead, as derived from Pesukim.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) THE PRAYER FOR RAIN IN THE SHEMONEH ESREH</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Mishnah asks, 'From when do we recite the prayer of Gevuros Geshamim,' and proceeds to mention the day on which we begin to recite that prayer. The Gemara asks why the Mishnah assumes that there is an obligation to recite such a prayer, such that it asks 'from when do we recite' it. The Gemara answers that the obligation to recite a prayer for rain is taught by the Mishnah in Rosh Hashanah (16a) which states that on Sukos the world is judged for rain. If there is a judgment for rain, it is obvious that a prayer of appeasement ('Hazkarah') for rain must be recited. Therefore, the Mishnah here asks from when this prayer must be recited.
</p><p>
Why, though, is the judgment for rain on Sukos grounds for reciting a prayer for rain at that time? The Mishnah in Rosh Hashanah also says that the world is judged for its crops on Pesach and for its fruits on Shavuos, but no prayers are recited for those items on those festivals. Why is there a greater necessity to recite a prayer of appeasement in the Shemoneh Esreh on Sukos for rain than to recite a prayer of appeasement for crops or for fruit on Pesach or Shavuos?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) On Pesach and Shavuos, as well as during the rest of the year, we ask Hash-m to 'bless for us this year and all of its produce that they should be good for us, and place Your blessing on the face of the earth...' ('Barech Aleinu' in Shemoneh Esreh). In this blessing, we acknowledge that all produce comes from Hash-m, and thus it is not necessary to mention it in a prayer of appeasement as well.
</p><p>
In contrast, we refrain from asking Hash-m to send rain on (and immediately after) Sukos. Therefore, it is necessary to mention at least a prayer of appeasement for rain on (or immediately after) Sukos. We do not ask for rain on Sukos because rain during the festival is an ominous sign (28b). We do not ask for rain immediately after the festival because, in the times of the Beis ha'Mikdash, rain immediately after the festival would complicate the return home of those who came to Yerushalayim from afar (Ta'anis 4b). Therefore, it is necessary to say a prayer of appeasement (Hazkarah) for rain.
</p><p>
(b) The Gemara in Rosh Hashanah (16a) explains that on each day of judgment, the Torah bids us to perform <i>acts</i> of appeasement. On Pesach, the act of appeasement is the offering of the Korban ha'Omer. On Shavuos, the act of appeasement is the bringing of Bikurim. These two acts of appeasement are done in the Beis ha'Mikdash. On Sukos, the Torah describes two acts of appeasement for rain. The first act of appeasement is the Nisuch ha'Mayim, the water libation, which is performed in the Beis ha'Mikdash. The second act of appeasement is the Mitzvah of holding the Arba'as ha'Minim, which need large amounts of water to grow (Ta'anis 2b). This act of appeasement is done not only in the Beis ha'Mikdash but by every Jew in every location. Since every person performs an <i>act</i> of appeasement, it stands to reason that every person should make a <i>mention</i> of appeasement for rain in his Shemoneh Esreh. On the other festivals, when the act of appeasement is done only in the Beis ha'Mikdash, individuals do not have to make any mention of appeasement in their Shemoneh Esreh.
</p><p>
Why is there no public act of appeasement done on Pesach and Shavuos, as there is on Sukos? Perhaps rain is considered a more important commodity than crops and fruits, because the crops and fruits themselves grow only as a result of the rain. Therefore, the judgment on Sukos is the primary judgment while the judgments on Pesach and Shavuos are secondary, and that is why a special prayer of appeasement for rain is recited in the Shemoneh Esreh. (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>


<font><b>2) AGADAH: THE 'GEVURAH' DEMONSTRATED BY RAIN</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara says that the prayer for rain is called '<i>Gevuros</i> Geshamim' because the rains demonstrate the Gevurah (might) of Hash-m. In what way does rain, more than anything else, demonstrate the might of Hash-m?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>MESHECH CHOCHMAH</b> (Devarim 16:2) cites the Yerushalmi (end of Avodah Zarah 3:1) which says that although idolaters believe that their idols have power over the world, they admit that their idols have no power over the seas. The Meshech Chochmah says that in the same vein they admit that their idols have no power over water in general. For this reason, the Gemara in Sanhedrin (67b) says that water has the ability to nullify the power of Keshafim (sorcery). (Similarly, the Mishnah in Kelim (17:13) says that anything which comes from the sea cannot become Tamei.)
</p><p>
Similarly, the idolaters admit that their gods have no power over rain. As the verse in Yirmeyahu (14:22) implies, no idolater believes that his idol can bring rain. Since rain demonstrates the unique and unparalleled power of Hash-m as acknowledged by everyone, and which no one attempts to attribute to any other entity, the Mishnah refers to the prayer for rain as 'Gevuros Geshamim.'
</p><p>
However, several sources seem to contradict the Meshech Chochmah's assertion that the idolaters admit that their gods have no power over the sea, water, or rain. According to the assertion of the Meshech Chochmah, why did the shipmates of Yonah pray to their various gods to stop the storm at sea if they knew that their gods have no power over water? Also, the Gemara in Avodah Zarah (55a) relates that a certain idol visited people in their dreams and told them that if they sacrifice an offering to it, it will bring rain to them. (They offered a sacrifice and it indeed rained.) It is evident that the idolaters <i>do</i> believe that their idols have control over the sea and rain.
</p><p>
Perhaps the Meshech Chochmah understands that while the idolaters admit that their gods have no power over the sea and rain, they believe that sometimes their idols can persuade the true G-d to manipulate the sea or rain. They know that their gods have no permanent or independent power over water.
</p><p>
The Meshech Chochmah's assertion may explain why the Torah states that when the Jewish people follow the will of Hash-m, He provides rain in ample supply and at appropriate times (Devarim 11:14), and, conversely, when the Jewish people do not follow the will of Hash-m, He withholds the rains (Devarim 11:17). Since the rain is a clear indication of Hashem's power, it is an appropriate way to demonstrate the reward for following (or punishment for defying) the will of Hash-m.
</p><p>
The Gemara here says that the keys to rain, childbirth, and Techiyas ha'Mesim are in the hands of no one but Hash-m. The <b>RA'AVAN</b> (at the end of his commentary to Maseches Berachos, #204) writes that childbirth and Techiyas ha'Mesim, like rain, demonstrate the power of Hash-m. For this reason, they are also mentioned in the blessing of Hashem's Gevurah in the Shemoneh Esreh ('Atah Gibor...'). Following the Meshech Chochmah's approach, we may suggest that no idolater believes that his god has power over childbirth and Techiyas ha'Mesim. Since no one else claims to have the power of childbirth and Techiyas ha'Mesim, these things are also referred to as the Gevuros of Hash-m.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>VILNA GA'ON</b> (Aderes Eliyahu, end of the first verse in v'Zos ha'Berachah, Mahadura 2) suggests a different approach. He explains that the 'four keys' refer to acts that defy nature. According to the laws of physics, it is impossible for the dead to be resurrected. Similarly, rainfall (and weather in general) follows no natural physical, predictable laws. It is not like sunrise and sunset or the motions of the planets and celestial bodies which can be predicted thousands of years in advance. In this sense, rainfall is 'supernatural' and demonstrates the presence of the Creator more than any other event. Since it constitutes a clear demonstration of Hashem's might, it is referred to as 'Gevuros Geshamim.'
</p><p>
The <b>BEN YEHOYADA</b> here (DH Sheloshah) follows a similar approach. He adds that the 'agents' to whom all of the keys of the world are entrusted, with the exception of the keys to rain, childbirth, and Techiyas ha'Mesim, are none other than the forces of nature.
</p><p>
(c) In <b>BENAYAHU</b> (beginning of 7a), the Ben Yehoyada suggests another approach. As the Gemara says, rain is considered greater than the resurrection of the dead because it is beneficial not only to the righteous but also to the wicked.
</p><p>
The Mishnah states, 'Who is the mighty person (Gibor)? One who conquers his will' (Avos 4:1). The only acts describable as 'difficult' for the Creator, as it were, are acts through which He conquers His will and shows generosity even when it is not deserved. This is what the Gemara in Pesachim (118a) means when it states that providing sustenance for every person is as difficult for Hash-m as the Splitting of the Sea. The Splitting of the Sea was 'difficult' for Hash-m because He performed the miracle even for the sinners of the Jewish people, as the Midrash says: 'The idol of Michah passed through the sea' (Shemos Rabah 41:1). Since the evildoers were not deserving of the miracle, the act was considered 'difficult.' Similarly, Hash-m provides sustenance -- through rain -- for all people regardless of whether they deserve it or not. In this sense, it is fitting to refer to rain as the 'might of Hash-m.'
</p><p>
(d) As mentioned earlier, in the passage of 'v'Hayah Im Shamo'a' (Devarim 11:14-17) the Torah teaches that there is earthly reward and punishment for the acts we perform specifically in Eretz Yisrael. Eretz Yisrael lacks natural, self-replenishing water sources (in contrast to other places, such as Egypt). If we fail to appreciate Hashem's benevolence and do not follow His will, He will remind us of our absolute reliance on Him by holding back the rains (as He did in the times of Eliyahu and Achav).
</p><p>
In this respect, rain (or the lack of it) reminds us to trust in Hash-m and to turn to Him in prayer. It also reminds us of Hashem's constant presence and supervision by showing Divine retribution in a direct manner of cause and effect. Since rain reminds us of Hashem's presence and omnipotence, it is appropriate to refer to it as the 'might of Hash-m.' (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>
(Although these four approaches appear to differ from each other, a deeper analysis makes it evident that they are complementary. They reflect four perspectives of the same concept.)
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> In Eretz Yisrael, they added:</font></b> also the key of 
               sustenance.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> R. Yochanan held that that was included in rain.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>MENTIONING RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah quoted R. Eliezer that mention of rainfall 
          begins on the first day of Sukos.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Did he learn it from Lulav, and like Lulav, it 
          begins by day, or did he learn it from Nisuch haMayim, 
          and it begins from the evening.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> R. Avahu said that he learned it from Lulav.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  Some say he received this as a tradition, and some say he 
          derived it from the following Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> From when do we mention the rains?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Eliezer):</font></b> From the day that Lulav is taken.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yehoshua):</font></b> From the day that the Lulav is put 
               away.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Eliezer):</font></b> The Four Species are taken as an 
                    appeasement for water; like them, the world 
                    cannot survive without water (and therefore we 
                    should mention the rains on Sukos.)
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yehoshua):</font></b> But rain on Sukos is a bad sign!
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>(R. Eliezer):</font></b> I did not say to ask for rain, 
                    only to mention it, just as Techiyas ha'Meisim 
                    is mentioned all year yet only happens at its 
                    proper time; therefore, if a person wants to 
                    mention the rains all year, he can.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iv. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rebbi):</font></b> From the day that we stop asking for 
                    rain, we should also stop mentioning it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yehudah b. Beseirah):</font></b> The rains are mentioned 
               from the second day of Sukos.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>5.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Akiva):</font></b> They are mentioned from the sixth day of 
               Sukos.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>6.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yehudah, citing R. Yehoshua):</font></b> On the last day of 
               Sukos (Shemini Atzeres), the Shali'ach Tzibur for 
               Musaf mentions the rain, but not that of Shacharis; 
               on the first day of Pesach, the Shali'ach Tzibur of 
               Shacharis mentions the rain, but not that of Musaf.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> What is R. Yehoshua's response to R. Eliezer's 
          argument?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Techiyas ha'Meisim would be welcomed at any time, 
          but a Mishnah teaches that rain after Nisan is a bad 
          sign.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> What is the reason of R. Yehudas b. Beseirah?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> The letters of MaYiM are spelled out in the 
          Torah, beginning on the second day, alluding to the 
          Nisuch ha'Mayim.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b></b>  R. Akiva's reason is that the Pasuk of the sixth day 
          alludes to two Nisuchim, that of wine and that of water.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Perhaps they both refer to wine?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> R. Akiva holds of R. Yehudah b. Beseira's 
               acronym of MaYiM.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Why does he not also hold that it begins 
               on the second day?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> As the superfluous mention of Nisuch is on 
               the sixth day.
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>'NISUCH HA'MAYIM'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Nosson):</font></b> The Pasuk of 'Hasech Nesech' alludes to two 
          Nisuchin, that of wine and that of water.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Perhaps they both refer to that of wine?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> If so, it would use the identical term 
               twice.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> There is a Mishnah that speaks of Nisuch 
          ha'Mayim taking place all seven days of Sukos - who does 
          this follow?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> It cannot be R. Yehoshua, as he would hold that it 
               was only done for one day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> It cannot be R. Akiva, as he would hold that it was 
               only done for two days.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> It cannot be R. Yehudah b. Beseirah, as he would 
               hold that it was only done for six days.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Suggested answer:</font></b> It follows R. Yehudah b. Beseirah, and 
          he follows R. Yehudah's view that that Nisuch ha'Mayim 
          would take place all eight days; he follows it insofar as 
          saying that it took place until the eighth day, but 
          starting from the second, totalling seven days.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> But he discounts the first day because the 
               MaYiM allusion begins on the second day - yet it 
               finishes on the seventh day, so the Nisuch ha'Mayim 
               should finish then!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  New answer:</font></b> The Mishnah follows R. Yehoshua, and it is a 
          received Halachah that the Nisuch ha'Mayim takes place 
          all seven days.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The laws of ten scattered trees, Aravah, and Nisuch 
               ha'Mayim, are Halachos le'Moshe mi'Sinai.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>MENTIONING RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  R. Yehudah, citing R. Yehoshua, said that on the last day 
          of Sukos, the Shali'ach Tzibur for Musaf mentions the 
          rain, but not that of Shacharis; on the first day of 
          Pesach, the Shali'ach Tzibur of Shacharis mentions the 
          rain, but not that of Musaf.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Which R. Yehoshua is this?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> It cannot be R. Yehoshua of the Mishnah, as he said 
               that even the Shali'ach Tzibur of Shacharis on the 
               last day would mention the rain.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> It cannot be R. Yehoshua of the Beraisa, as he said 
               that the rain is mentioned from when the Lulav is 
               put away, which is on the seventh day, not Shemini 
               Atzeres.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question #2:</font></b>  Who is the ben Beseirah who is cited as 
          saying that the rains are mentioned from the last day of 
          Sukos?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> It cannot be R. Yehudah b. Beseirah, as he said that 
               it is mentioned from the second day of Sukos!
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> They both refer to R. Yehoshua b. Beseirah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> He was referred to as b. Beseirah before he received 
               Semichah, and as R. Yehoshua afterwards.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>DEW AND WIND</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> There is no obligation to mention the dew and 
          the wind, although he can if he so desires.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why is there no need to mention them?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Because they are never withheld.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> How do we know that dew is never withheld?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Eliyah ha'Navi, after swearing that rain and dew 
          would be withheld from Achav, told him after it was 
          revoked that the rain would return - but the dew was 
          never withheld.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) 'THE DAY THE LULAV IS PUT TO REST' -- THE SEVENTH OR EIGHTH DAY?</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION: RASHI</b> (DH Ela Rebbi Yehoshua) quotes Rebbi Yehoshua in the Beraisa (2b) who says that the prayer of Gevuros Geshamim is recited in the Shemoneh Esreh 'at the time when the Lulav is placed down' ('mi'She'as Hanachaso'). Rashi explains that this refers to the <i>seventh</i> day of Sukos, the last day on which the Lulav is held. This is Rashi's explanation in two other places as well (2b, DH mi'She'as Hanachaso, and 3a, DH ha'Amar mi'She'as Hanachaso).
</p><p>
At the end of Rashi's comment, however, he writes that according to the Gemara's conclusion, the Mishnah in Sukah (42b) -- which states that Nisuch ha'Mayim is performed all seven days of Sukos -- could be the opinion of Rebbi Yehoshua, who says that Gevuros Geshamim is mentioned 'on the <i>last day</i> of Yom Tov.' Rashi's words imply that Gevuros Geshamim is said only on the <i>eighth</i> day of the festival (Shemini Atzeres).
</p><p>
Rashi seems to contradict himself within the same comment. He first says that Rebbi Yehoshua (in the Beraisa) maintains that we begin to recite the prayer of Gevuros Geshamim on the seventh day, and later he says that we begin to recite it on the eighth day. How are Rashi's words to be reconciled? (<b>KEREN ORAH</b>)
</p><p>
Moreover, Rashi later (4a, DH Rebbi Yehoshua) writes that 'the day on which the Lulav is placed down' means the <i>eighth</i> day of Sukos. He contradicts his words here, where he explains that the day on which the Lulav is placed down is the <i>seventh</i> day. (<b>GEVURAS ARI</b> and others)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) <b>TOSFOS</b> (2b, DH mi'She'as) explains that when Rebbi Yehoshua in the Beraisa says that we begin to recite Gevuros Geshamim 'at the time when the Lulav is placed down,' he refers to the eighth day. Support for Tosfos' explanation can be found in the Mishnah (2a) in which Rebbi Yehoshua himself states that the Hazkarah of Geshamim begins 'on the last day of Yom Tov,' which refers to the eighth day. It is logical that Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah and Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa would express the same opinion. Further support for Tosfos is found in the Yerushalmi which clearly says that the time of Hanachas Lulav refers to the day <i>after</i> the seventh day, since the entire seventh day is fit for the fulfillment of the Mitzvah of Lulav.
</p><p>
This is the approach which Rashi himself follows in two of his comments (3a, DH Ela, and 4a, DH Rebbi Yehoshua) when he writes that the time of Hanachas Lulav is the eighth day. Why does Rashi here say that it refers to the seventh day?
</p><p>
<b>RAV BETZALEL RENSBURG</b> (2b, based on the <b>MAHARSHA</b> to 3a) suggests that when Rashi says 'the seventh day' he does not refer to the day on which we begin to recite Gevuros Geshamim. Rather, he means that the seventh day is the last day of the Mitzvah of Lulav, and <i>after</i> that day (on the eighth) we begin to recite the Hazkarah.
</p><p>
(b) Although this explanation resolves the first two comments of Rashi in which he says that the time of Hanachas Lulav is the seventh day, Rav Betzalel Rensburg does not address the third comment of Rashi (3a, DH Ha Amar mi'She'as Hanachaso) in which Rashi clearly implies that the <i>Hazkarah itself</i> begins on the seventh day and not the eighth. Moreover, Rav Betzalel's explanation of Rashi does not conform with Tosfos' explanation which is based on the Yerushalmi, because according to the Yerushalmi the <i>time of Hanachas Lulav</i> is also the <i>eighth</i> day (as the Mitzvah of Lulav still applies throughout the seventh day). (It is unlikely that Rashi's intention is to suggest a new way to explain how the Beraisa refers to the eighth day of Sukos, counter to the Yerushalmi.)
</p><p>
The <b>GEVURAS ARI</b> (2b) explains that the 'time of Hanachas Lulav' (according to the Bavli) indeed may refer to the seventh day (not like Tosfos says), and that Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa argues with Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah. He proves from the Gemara (end of 3a) that the two statements are in disagreement. The Gemara there asks whether Rebbi Yehudah was quoting Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah or Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa. The Gemara's question clearly implies that the two statements, both said in the name of Rebbi Yehoshua, express two different opinions.
</p><p>
He adduces further proof that the two statements disagree with each other from the Gemara earlier (beginning of 3a). The Gemara initially suggests that according to Rebbi Yehoshua, the Nisuch ha'Mayim should be performed on only one day during Sukos just as the Hazkarah of Geshamim is recited on only one day during Sukos. If Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa is of the same opinion as Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah and maintains that the Hazkarah begins on the eighth day (Shemini Atzeres), there is no proof that the Nisuch ha'Mayim should also be performed for only one day. The Gemara (at this point) assumes that Nisuch ha'Mayim is not performed on the eighth day. Hence, if the Hazkarah is on the eighth day, no conclusions can be drawn about Nisuch ha'Mayim from the Hazkarah of Geshamim. Rather, it must be that the Gemara's statement refers to the view of Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa, and the Gemara understands that he maintains that the Hazkarah is recited on the <i>seventh</i> day, and thus it is able to deduce that the Nisuch ha'Mayim is also done only on that day.
</p><p>
(Regarding how Tosfos answers these proofs against his explanation (that Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa and Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah are of the same opinion), the <b>DIKDUKEI SOFRIM</b> (#400) writes that Tosfos' text of the Gemara did not include the words, 'Iy Rebbi Yehoshua Hi,' and indeed there are manuscripts of the Gemara which do not have those words. The Dikdukei Sofrim writes at length to resolve the explanation of Tosfos through all of the Sugyos.)
</p><p>
These inferences in the Gemara are the source for Rashi's assertion (in the three places quoted above) that Rebbi Yehoshua maintains that the Hazkarah is recited on the <i>seventh</i> day of Sukos.
</p><p>
How, though, is the contradiction in Rashi's words to be resolved? What does Rashi mean when he says that the first time the Hazkarah is recited is the eighth day?
</p><p>
When Rashi here (end of DH Ela Rebbi Yehoshua) writes that the Mishnah -- which says that Nisuch ha'Mayim is performed all seven days -- follows the opinion of Rebbi Yehoshua who says that the Hazkarah is said on the last (eighth) day of the festival, he means that the Mishnah can follow <i>both</i> Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa <i>and</i> Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah. Nisuch ha'Mayim is a Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai and is not related to the Hazkarah of Geshamim. The Hazkarah is said at the end of Sukos because rain during the festival is a 'Siman Kelalah,' an ominous sign (28b). Nevertheless, the Hazkarah of Geshamim is mentioned on the last, or second to last, day because that late in the festival rain is no longer considered a 'Siman Kelalah.' When Rashi says that Rebbi Yehoshua maintains that the Hazkarah is said on the last day of Yom Tov (the eighth day), he refers to Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah because the Gemara at this point is discussing both Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah and Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa. At the beginning of his comments, Rashi mentions Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa because the Mishnah of Nisuch ha'Mayim could also follow the view expressed by Rebbi Yehoshua in the Beraisa. Rashi mentions the two different opinions of Rebbi Yehoshua because the Mishnah of Nisuch ha'Mayim can follow either one of them. (See Insights to Ta'anis 4:1 regarding Rashi's words there.)
</p><p>
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Why, then, did Eliyahu swear that it would 
               be withheld?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> He meant that dew of blessing would be 
               withheld.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Why, then, did he not say that the dew of 
               blesing would be returned?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> As it wouldn't be noticeable.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> How do we know that wind is never withheld?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Hash-m says that He has spread out Israel 'as the 
          four Ruchos.'
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b></b>  This cannot mean that He has made them live in all four 
          directions, as it would say <i>in</i> the four Ruchos.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b></b>  It must mean that just as the world cannot survive 
          without wind, so too it cannot survive without Israel.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Therefore, although if, in summer, he must start 
               again if he mentioned the rain, he need not start 
               again if he mentioned the wind.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Similarly, although if, in winter, he must start 
               again if he did not mention the rain, he need not 
               start again if he did not mention the wind.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> Even if he were to say that Hash-m makes the wind 
               and dew go away, he wouldn't have to start again.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(j)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> He is not obligated to mention the clouds or 
          the wind, although he can if he so desires.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The reason that he need not mention them is that 
               they are never withheld.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(k)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Surely, as a Beraisa notes, the Pasuk says that 
          Hash-m will stop the clouds and wind!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(l)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Clouds before the rain are not withheld, those 
          after it are; normal weak winds are not withheld, 
          unusually strong ones are.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Surely unusually strong winds are 
               essential for winnowing?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> It can be done with a sieve.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>BENEFICIAL WEATHER</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> Clouds and wind are second in value to rain.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> This refers to when they occur after rainfall.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> This means that they are beneficial - but 
               a Pasuk about a curse of the land turning to dust is 
               explained to refer to wind after rain!
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> Soft rain is beneficial; hard rain followed 
               by wind turns the ground to dust.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah):</font></b> Wind and clouds after rain are as 
          beneficial as rain; sunshine after rain is twice as 
          beneficial.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> This excludes the glow after sunset and the sunshine 
               between the clouds.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rava):</font></b> Snow is as beneficial to the mountains as five 
          rainfalls for the land, as derived from a Pasuk.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rava):</font></b> Snow is good for the mountains, hard rain for the 
          trees, soft rain for the fruits, and Urpila (a drizzling 
          rain) helps even seeds under hard clods of earth.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Urpila is an acronym for Uru Pili, 'Wake up, you 
               cracks!'
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rava):</font></b> Young Torah scholars are like seeds under hard 
          clods of earth; as soon as they begin to sprout, they 
          grow quickly.
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>2) WHEN TO MENTION 'RU'ACH' AND 'TAL' IN THE SHEMONEH ESREH</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara says that there is no need to mention Tal (dew), Avim (clouds), and Ru'ach (wind) in the Shemoneh Esreh. Since they are things that are always present and do not stop, there is no need to make a special request for them. The Gemara adds that although there is no <i>obligation</i> to mention them, one is <i>permitted</i> to mention them. The Gemara implies that these three things were not mentioned in the Shemoneh Esreh in the times of the Gemara.
</p><p>
The common practice today, however, seems problematic.
</p><p>
1. Today, a common practice is to mention Tal in the summertime ('Morid ha'Tal') in the blessing of Gevuros ('Atah Gibor...') at the beginning of the Shemoneh Esreh, but not in the wintertime. In addition, the widespread practice is to mention Tal in the wintertime in the blessing of Birkas ha'Shanim ('v'Sen Tal u'Matar'). Sefardic Jews mention Tal in that blessing throughout the year ('... Talelei Verachah').
</p><p>
Why do we mention Tal at all when there is no obligation to do so? If we mention it because we are permitted to do so, why do we mention it only during specific times of the year?
</p><p>
2. We mention Ru'ach in the wintertime ('Mashiv ha'Ru'ach u'Morid ha'Geshem') in the beginning of the Shemoneh Esreh, but not in the summertime. Why?
</p><p>
3. We do not mention Avim at all. Why do we not mention Avim if we do mention Tal and Ru'ach, the mention of which is also optional?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>RITVA</b> offers an approach to explain the common practice based on the rule that anything which provides irreplaceable benefit to the world, even if it is not essential for the world's survival, is worthy of mention in the Shemoneh Esreh.
</p><p>
1. He explains that Tal is mentioned in the summertime merely because without its mention the blessing of 'Atah Gibor' would seem to be lacking. Since we cannot mention Geshem in the summertime, we mention Tal.
</p><p>
In Birkas ha'Shanim (She'eilah), we mention Tal as a request to Hash-m to send dew of blessing ('v'Sen Tal... <i>l'Verachah</i>'). The Tal of blessing does not always come and therefore it is appropriate to ask for it in the Shemoneh Esreh. In the wintertime, no mention of Tal is made in the Hazkarah of Geshamim because the Gevurah of Hash-m is not recognizable in Tal, for both types of Tal (Tal of blessing and Tal which is not of blessing) look exactly the same. (The element of blessing in Tal is spiritual.)
</p><p>
2. No mention of (Hazkarah) or request for (She'eilah) Ru'ach is made in the summertime because the main benefit of the Ru'ach is when it accompanies the rain. Since no mention or request is made for rain in the summertime, no mention or request for Ru'ach is made either.
</p><p>
The reason why we mention Ru'ach in the winter, even though Ru'ach is something that does not stop, is because a specific type of Ru'ach -- a 'Ru'ach she'Einah Metzuyah,' a strong type of wind, is needed for the winnowing of the grains. This type of wind is uncommon. Although the Gemara says that we do not have to mention it in the Shemoneh Esreh since it is not absolutely necessary (for other instruments can be used for the winnowing of the grains), we still mention it because it is beneficial in two ways. First, such wind brings the rains (see also Rashi to 3a, DH l'Fi she'Einan). Second, such wind causes the grass and vegetation to grow. Therefore, even though we are not obligated to mention something which is not essential to the world, we mention something which is beneficial and which has no substitute. We mention Ru'ach only in the wintertime because only then do we benefit from it in these two ways.
</p><p>
3. Clouds are beneficial only when they accompany rain (as the Gemara says at the end of the Daf when it describes the clouds that follow rain). Therefore, we do not mention clouds in the summertime when we do not ask for rain. Why, though, do we not mention clouds in the wintertime, if clouds are beneficial when they accompany the rain?
</p><p>
The Ritva explains that clouds enhance the rain only when the rain is a poor, weak rain. If the rain is heavy and strong, the clouds do not enhance it at all. (The Gemara later continues and says that after a strong rain, 'sun that follows the rain is beneficial....') Since we pray for heavy rains, we do not ask for clouds. The type of rain which the clouds benefit is not the type of rain for which we pray.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>RAN</b> suggests a different approach. He says that the general principle is that we pray for anything which provides benefit to the world, even though there is no obligation to pray for it.
</p><p>
1. We mention Tal in the summertime in Hazkarah and in wintertime in She'eilah. We do not mention Tal in Hazkarah in the wintertime only because of the necessity to emphasize the mention of and request for <i>rain</i>, which is something for which we are <i>obligated</i> to pray.
</p><p>
2. We mention Ru'ach in the wintertime in Hazkarah because, as mentioned above, we pray for whatever is beneficial to the world. We omit it from She'eilah in order to give emphasis to the request for rain.
</p><p>
Why do we not mention Ru'ach in the summertime at all? The Ran answers that Ru'ach is something which we do not need at all in the summer. It is beneficial only in the winter, when it is needed to dry the soil.
</p><p>
3. We do not mention clouds at all, even though they are beneficial in the wintertime when they accompany rain, because most people do not recognize the benefit of clouds and thus mention of clouds in the Shemoneh Esreh will appear out of place.
</p><p>


<font><b>3) HALACHAH: 'MORID HA'GESHEM' OR 'MORID HA'GASHEM'?</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> In the wintertime Shemoneh Esreh, we mention the praise of Hash-m Who brings rain -- 'Morid ha'Geshem' -- in the blessing of Gevuros ('Atah Gibor...'). The custom among Sefardic Jews (Edot ha'Mizrach), as well as those who pray according to Nusach Sefard (such as Chasidim), is to mention 'Morid ha'Tal' in the summertime in the blessing of Gevuros (see previous Insight). This is also the custom in Eretz Yisrael, based on the practice of the Vilna Ga'on and the Ba'al ha'Tanya. Most other Ashkenazic communities (outside of Eretz Yisrael) do not make this addition in the Shemoneh Esreh in the summertime.
</p><p>
Many Sidurim vowelize the word 'Morid ha'<i>Geshem</i>' with a Segol (the 'eh' sound) and not 'Morid ha'Gashem' with a Kamatz (the 'aw' or 'ah' sound). This seems grammatically correct, because only at the end of a sentence (or at the semi-sentence break marked by an Esnachta) is the Segol under the Gimel replaced by a Kamatz. The words 'Morid ha'Geshem' are in the middle of a sentence in the Shemoneh Esreh, and thus the word 'ha'Geshem' should retain its Segol. The fact that the word 'ha'Geshem' does not mark the end or pause in a sentence is evident from the words of the <b>TUR</b> (OC 114). The Tur writes that the reason why we recite 'Morid ha'Geshem' immediately before the words 'Mechalkel Chayim' (and not at another point in the blessing) is because rain is also a form of Kalkalah (sustenance) and Parnasah (livelihood). Hence, the mention of rain is the <i>beginning</i> of the passage which mentions Kalkalah, and it is not the <i>end</i> of the previous passage ('Atah Gibor...').
</p><p>
However, there is an apparent inconsistency in the Sidurim. In most Sidurim which include the text 'Morid ha'Tal' (for the summertime), the word 'Tal' is spelled with a <i>Kamatz</i> (pronounced 'ha'Tawl' in the Ashkenazic pronunciation) and not with a <i>Patach</i> ('ha'Tahl'). According to the rules of grammar, the word should have a Patach and not a Kamatz since it comes in the middle of a sentence and not at the end. When the word 'Tal' appears in the Torah, the letter 'Tes' usually is vowelized with a Patach, which changes to a Kamatz only when it is at the end of a sentence or at a pause marked by an Esnachta (see, for example, Shemos 11:9, Devarim 32:2). Since 'Morid ha'Tal' is recited in place of 'Morid ha'Geshem' and is in the middle of a sentence, why is the word 'Tal' spelled with a Kamatz and not a Patach? If the Sidurim consider 'Morid ha'Tal' (with a Kamatz') to be the end of the sentence, why do they not spell 'Morid ha'Gashem' with a Kamatz as well?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) <b>RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN</b> zt'l (<b>IGROS MOSHE</b> OC 4:40) writes that the Kamatz of 'Tal' is correct because this phrase is indeed at the end of the sentence (as many Sidurim place a period after 'Morid ha'Tal'). Accordingly, it is proper to say 'Morid ha'Gashem' with a Kamatz as well, in contrast to the spelling in many Sidurim. Such an opinion is cited by the <b>LIKUTEI MAHARICH</b>. This is the way the word is punctuated ('ha'Gashem') in the authoritative Redelheim Sidur.
</p><p>
(b) Others, however, point out that the text of 'ha'Geshem' (with a Segol) appears in <i>all</i> early Sidurim, of all Jewish communities, as well as most current Sidurim (except for those based on the Redelheim Sidur). Moreover, as mentioned above, the logical flow of the sentence clearly indicates that 'Morid ha'Geshem' is <i>not</i> the end of the sentence (regardless of whether or not the printer placed a period there). According to <b>SEFER MECHALKEL CHAYIM</b>, Rav Moshe Feinstein himself retracted his opinion. Why, then, do most Sidurim spell 'ha'Tal' with a Kamatz and not a Patach?
</p><p>
The author of <b>SEFER SHA'AR HA'KOLEL</b>, printed in the back of the <b>SHULCHAN ARUCH HA'RAV</b> (who explains the Nusach of the Sidur of the Ba'al ha'Tanya) suggests that the word 'Tal' is spelled with a Kamatz because it is not part of the regular text of the Shemoneh Esreh as established by the Anshei Keneses ha'Gedolah (as indicated by the fact that many Ashkenazic communities do not say it, and the Gemara says that it is not obligatory). Rather, it was added to the text of the Shemoneh Esreh by the Mekubalim. As such, it is a separate insertion that stands by itself and is not part of the phrase that follows, and therefore it has a Kamatz and not a Patach.
</p><p>
(c) <b>RAV YAKOV KAMINETZKY</b> zt'l (<b>IYUNIM B'MIKRA</b>, p. 26) suggests that 'Morid ha'Geshem' is part of the sentence which continues with 'Mechalkel Chayim,' as the <b>TUR</b> says, because rain brings Kalkalah and Parnasah. In contrast, the words 'Morid ha'Tal' do not refer to the Parnasah-providing elements of dew. Rather, they refer to the Tal of Techiyas ha'Mesim, the Tal which will resurrect the dead. It is mentioned at this point because it follows the phrase '*Mechayeh Mesim* Atah Rav l'Hoshi'a.' As such, it is actually a continuation of the previous sentence and it does not flow into the following sentence. Therefore, it is appropriate to pause after 'Morid ha'Tal' before the phrase 'Mechalkel Chayim,' which discusses a different topic. Accordingly, 'Morid ha'Tal' is the end of the <i>previous</i> sentence which discusses Techiyas ha'Mesim, while 'Morid ha'Geshem' flows into the <i>following</i> sentence which discusses Parnasah! (Even though the verse in Tehilim 68:10 refers to '<i>Geshem</i> Techiyah' (see Targum there), that is not the Geshem to which we refer in the Shemoneh Esreh.)
</p><p>
(d) Grammarians point out that this may not be an inconsistency at all. Although the Segol of 'Geshem' becomes a Kamatz only when the word completes a sentence or a clause (either at the end of a verse or at an Esnachta pause), the Patach of 'Tal' is different. It becomes a Kamatz even at a 'semi-stop,' such as when the word 'Tal' has the cantillation 'Zakef-Katan' (see, for example, Shemos 16:13 and Devarim 33:13). (It is easier to turn a Patach into a Kamatz than a Segol into a Kamatz.) Since a slight pause (a 'comma') follows the words 'Morid ha'Tal' in the blessing, even though it is not a full stop the word 'Tal' acquires a Kamatz.
</p><p>
(It is also possible that the pronunciation of the word in rabbinical texts may differ slightly from the Biblical pronunciation. Perhaps in the times of the Mishnah, the word 'Tal' was commonly pronounced with a Kamatz, like 'Par' or 'Har,' unless it was associated with the word that followed it, such as 'Tal ha'Shamayim' or 'Tal Techiyah.')
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE NATURE OF A TORAH SCHOLAR</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rava):</font></b> If a young Torah scholar is hot-tempered, it is 
          the Torah which boils within him, as we see from a Pasuk 
          which refers to the Torah as fire.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Ashi):</font></b> Any Torah scholar who is not as hard as iron 
          is not a true Torah scholar, as a Pasuk refers to the 
          Torah as a hammer smashing rocks.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Aba):</font></b> We derive this instead from a Pasuk 
               speaking of the Avneha which are iron - it is not 
               read as Avneha (stones) but Boneha, builders.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Ravina):</font></b> Even so, they should conduct themselves softly, 
          as the Torah tells us to avoid anger.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>INAPPROPRIATE REQUESTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  Three people asked for things inappropriately; two were 
          answered appropriately, and one was answered 
          inappropriately:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Eliezer said that he would pick the first girl to 
               give him water - it could have been someone lame or 
               blind, but it turned out to be Rivkah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Shaul promised wealth and his daughter to whoever 
               would kill Goliath - it might have been a slave or 
               mamzer, but it turned out to be David.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> Yiftach said that he would bring as a Korban 
               whatever would come out  of his house first - it 
               might have been something Tamei, and it turned out 
               to be his daughter.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  The prophet bemoans that he did not go to have 
                    his oath annuled.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  A Pasuk speaks of that which Hash-m 'did not command, did 
          not speak of, and did not think of.'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> 'Did not command' refers to the son of Misha king of 
               Moav, who was brought as a Korban
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> 'Did not speak of' refers to Yiftach.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> 'Did not think of' refers to bringing Yitzchak as a 
               Korban.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Birchiya):</font></b> The Jewish People also asked for something 
          inappropriately, and were answered appropriately.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> They asked that Hash-m should be as the rain for 
               them, and Hash-m said that since rain is not always 
               desirable, He will be as dew instead.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> They also asked that they be as a seal on Hashem's 
               heart and arm; He said that since these are not 
               always visible, they shall be on His palms instead.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>ASKING FOR RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that we only ask for rain close to the 
          time of rain.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  Assuming that asking for rain and mentioning it are the 
          same thing, who does this follow?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rava):</font></b> It follows R. Yehoshua, who said that we mention 
          the rain from when the Lulav is put away.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Abaye):</font></b> Even R. Eliezer could agree to this; asking for 
          rain is different from mentioning it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> In some versions, this is phrased as a question that 
               it can only follow R. Yehoshua, and an answer that 
               it could even follow R. Eliezer.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) ASKING FOR RAIN 'NEAR THE TIME OF THE RAINS'</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Mishnah (2a) states that 'we ask (Sho'alin) for rain only near the time of the rains.' The Gemara initially assumes that 'She'eilah,' the request for rain, is the same as 'Hazkarah' (the mention of 'Morid ha'Geshem' in the beginning of Shemoneh Esreh), and thus the Mishnah is saying that 'Morid ha'Geshem' is recited only near the time of the rains. The Gemara reasons that this statement of the Mishnah must have been made by Rebbi Yehoshua, who says that the Hazkarah of rain is recited from the time that the Lulav is placed down (on the seventh day of Sukos), because that day is near the season in which the fields need rain (which begins right after the festival).
</p><p>
If the Gemara is looking for a Tana who maintains that the Hazkarah is recited near the time when rain is needed, why does it quote the statement of Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa (on 2b), who says that the Hazkarah is said at the time the Lulav is placed down? The Gemara instead should quote the words of Rebbi Yehoshua mentioned earlier in this Mishnah (2a), who says that we begin to recite the Hazkarah on Shemini Atzeres. That day clearly is near the time when rain is needed! Why does the Gemara go out of its way to quote an opinion from a Beraisa?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>GEVURAS ARI</b> explains that Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa argues with Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah (as mentioned in Insights to Ta'anis 3:1) and maintains that the Hazkarah of 'Morid ha'Geshem' begins on the seventh day and not the eighth day, Shemini Atzeres. When the Mishnah says that the Hazkarah begins '<i>near</i> the time of the rains,' it implies that we are to begin reciting the Hazkarah for rain <i>before</i> the rains are needed. The rains are needed from Shemini Atzeres and onwards, when people no longer sit in the Sukah. Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah, however, maintains that the Hazkarah begins on the eighth day (on Shemini Atzeres), and thus the Mishnah should not say that we mention rain in the Shemoneh Esreh '<i>near</i> the time of the rains.' The Hazkarah begins <i>on</i> the day that rain is needed, and not <i>before</i> ('near') the time it is needed. Therefore, the Gemara understands that the words of this Mishnah, 'near the time of the rains,' allude to a different opinion -- that of Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa, who says that the Hazkarah begins on the seventh day, when people still sit in the Sukah and the rain is not yet needed.
</p><p>
The <b>NETZIV</b> suggests that this may be Rashi's intention here as well. Rashi says that the time of placing down the Lulav is 'the eighth day.' Rashi seems to contradict what he writes earlier (2b and 3a), that the time of Hanachas Lulav is the <i>seventh</i> day. Why does he write here that it is the eighth day? The answer is that when Rashi says the eighth day, he is not referring to the time of Hanachas Lulav; rather, he is explaining when the time of the <i>rains</i> arrives. (According to this explanation, however, the words 'd'Hainu Yom Shemini' should be three words later, after the words 'Samuch l'Geshamim,' and not before them.)
</p><p>
(b) As the words of Rashi appear in our texts, Rashi (when he mentions the eighth day) does not seem to refer to the time when rain is needed but to the time of Hanachas Lulav. How are the words of Rashi here to be reconciled with the words of Rashi earlier, where he says that the time of Hanachas Lulav is the seventh day?
</p><p>
Perhaps Rashi understands that when Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa mentions the time of Hanachas Lulav, he indeed refers to the seventh day (see proof for this assertion in Insights to Ta'anis 3:1). The Gemara here, however, uses the phrase 'mi'She'as Hanachaso' the way the Yerushalmi uses it -- to describe the <i>eighth</i> day. The Gemara here is referring to Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah (as it is discussing a statement from the Mishnah) and not to Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa. Therefore, Rashi's words here do not contradict what he writes earlier. Rather, Rashi explains that the Gemara here uses the phrase 'mi'She'as Hanachaso' in a different way than usual.
</p><p>
Why does the Gemara use these words to refer to the eighth day, and it does not say simply 'the last day of Yom Tov' (as Rebbi Yehoshua says in the Mishnah)? The answer may be that the Gemara wants to explain <i>why</i> the eighth day is considered 'near the time of the rains,' the time when rain is needed. The Gemara explains that the fact that the Lulav is no longer held indicates that the Mitzvos of Sukos have passed, including the Mitzvah to live in the Sukah. Since there is no longer a Mitzvah to live in the Sukah, the time is fit for the rains to fall. (See <b>DIKDUKEI SOFRIM</b> 3a, footnote 400.)
</p><p>
(c) <b>RABEINU CHANANEL</b>, <b>RABEINU GERSHOM</b>, and the <b>RITVA</b> have an entirely different understanding of the Gemara. They understand that the inference of the Gemara is not that the Hazkarah for rain begins near the time that rain is needed, but rather the recitation of both the She'eilah and the Hazkarah begin on the <i>same day</i>. Since the Mishnah mentions the Halachah of the Hazkarah near the Halachah of the She'eilah (the petition for rain), it implies that both begin on the same day.
</p><p>
According to this explanation, the Mishnah cannot follow the opinion expressed earlier in the Mishnah by Rebbi Yehoshua, or the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer of the Mishnah. According to both views, the first time the Hazkarah is mentioned is on Yom Tov (either the first day of Yom Tov or the last day), but She'eilah is not said on Yom Tov at all. Therefore, the Gemara says that the Mishnah must follow the view of Rebbi Yehoshua of the Beraisa, who says that the first day on which the Hazkarah is mentioned is the seventh day of Sukos, which is Chol ha'Mo'ed (Hoshanah Rabah), when the weekday Shemoneh Esreh is recited and thus it is possible to insert the She'eilah for rain into the Shemoneh Esreh on that day.
</p><p>
(d) The <b>GILYON HA'SHAS</b> quotes the <b>SEFER HA'MACHRI'A</b> of the <b>RI'AZ</b> who omits the words 'mi'She'as Hanachaso' from the Gemara because of this problem. According to his Girsa, the Gemara indeed refers to Rebbi Yehoshua of the Mishnah.
<br> 
<br><br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
<b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>WHEN TO STOP ASKING FOR RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  R. Yehudah said that on the first day of Pesach, the 
          Shali'ach Tzibur of Shacharis mentions rain, but not that 
          of Musaf.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see otherwise in a Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yehudah):</font></b> We ask for rain until Pesach has 
               passed.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Meir):</font></b> We ask for it until the end of Nisan.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer (R. Chisda):</font></b> Mentioning it stops on the first day 
          of Pesach, but asking for it continues.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Objection (Ulla):</font></b> That is problematic - if we 
               mention rain at times when we cannot ask for it, we 
               should certainly mention it at times when we can!
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate answer (Ulla):</font></b> It is a dispute between Tannaim 
          as to R. Yehudah's opinion; each holds consistently 
          regarding mentioning it and asking for it.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate answer (R. Yosef):</font></b>  When R. Yehudah said that 
          we ask for rain until Pesach has passed, he meant until 
          the Shali'ach Tzibur of Shacharis on the first day has 
          concluded.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question (Abaye):</font></b> Surely we do not say the Amidah 
               which contains requests on Yom Tov!
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer (R. Yosef):</font></b> The person delivering the 
               Derashah mentioned the request.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> But it would be inappropraiate to ask for 
               it at this time!
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  Ulla's answer must therefore be the correct 
                    one.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate answer (Rabah):</font></b> 'Until Pesach has passed' means 
          until the time for slaughtering the Korban Pesach has 
          passed (midday on the fourteenth):
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Just as he begins by mentioning rain (on the last 
               day of Sukos) and not asking for it (until the next 
               day), so too he concludes by mentioning rain (until 
               Musaf of the first day of Pesach) and not asking for 
               it (which ended on the previous morning).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question (Abaye):</font></b> At the beginning, it makes sense 
               to mention it without asking for it, as mentioning 
               it sets the tone for the future request; but what 
               purpose would it serve at the end?
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  Ulla's answer must therefore be the correct 
                    one.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>5) </font></b><font color='blue'>WHEN TO BEGIN MENTIONING RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Asi, citing R. Yochanan):</font></b> The Halachah follows R. 
          Yehudah (that on the last day of Sukos, the Shali'ach 
          Tzibur for Musaf mentions rain, but not that of 
          Shacharis).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question (R. Zeira):</font></b> We see that we begin asking for rain 
          at a later time:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Mishnah):</font></b> We begin asking for rain on the third of 
               Cheshvan.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> (R. Gamliel) We begin on the seventh.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Elazar):</font></b> The Halachah follows R. Gamliel.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer (R Asi):</font></b> You cannot ask a question from R. 
          Gamliel's view to R. Yochanan's view.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate answer:</font></b> R. Yochanan was speaking about 
          mentioning it, while R. Gamliel was speaking about asking 
          for it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Surely R. Yochanan said that mentioning 
               rain follows when we ask for it?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> That referred to <i>stopping</i> them both at the 
               same time.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> R. Yochanan said that they also begin 
               together!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  New answer:</font></b> R. Gamliel was referring to Bavel (who still 
          have produce in the fields until the end of Tishrei), 
          while R. Yochanan was referring to Eretz Yisrael.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Just as Bavel has produce in the fields, 
               Eretz Yisrael has pilgrims from Yom Tov, so they 
               should also begin asking for rain later?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> R. Yochanan was referring to periods when 
               there is no Beis ha'Mikdash.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate answer:</font></b> We can now also resolve the original 
          difficulty by saying that R. Gamliel was referring to 
          Eretz Yisrael at the time of the Beis ha'Mikdash, and R. 
          Yochanan was referring to it when there was no Beis 
          ha'Mikdash.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>6) </font></b><font color='blue'>ASKING FOR RAIN NOWADAYS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> When should we, who have two days of Safek Yom 
          Tov, begin asking for rain?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer (Rav):</font></b> We mention it on the seventh day of Sukos 
          at Musaf, then we do not mention it again until the Musaf 
          of the eighth day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question (Shmuel):</font></b> After mentioning it on the 
               seventh day at Musaf, thereby showing it to be Yom 
               Tov, how can we then revoke that by not mentioning 
               it at Minchah?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer (Shmuel):</font></b> We mention it at Musaf and Minchah on 
          the seventh day, then we do not mention it again until 
          Musaf of the eighth day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rava and R. Sheshes):</font></b> Once we have started mentioning 
          it, we do not stop.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  Rav also came around to this view, as he said that one 
          counts twenty-one days from Rosh Hashanah until the 
          seventh day of Sukos and then begins to mention it, and 
          once one has started, one doesn't stop.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The Halachah is that once we have started mentioning 
               it, we do not stop.
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>2) 'HAZKARAH' AS A 'RITZUY' FOR 'SHE'EILAH'</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara points out a contradiction in the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah. In the first Mishnah (2a), Rebbi Yehudah says that we stop reciting the Hazkarah for rain at Musaf on the first day of Pesach. In the next Mishnah (5a), however, Rebbi Yehudah says that we ask for rain 'until Pesach passes,' and since we ask for rain ('She'eilah') through Pesach, certainly we also recite the Hazkarah for rain through Pesach (since the Hazkarah is said even when She'eilah is not said (on the last Yom Tov of Sukos)).
</p><p>
The Gemara gives several answers to resolve this contradiction. Rabah answers that when Rebbi Yehudah in the second Mishnah says that we ask for rain until Pesach passes, he means until the time of <i>Shechitas ha'Pesach</i> (the slaughtering of the Korban Pesach) passes, which is the day <i>before</i> Pesach. He is saying that Erev Pesach is when we stop <i>asking</i> for rain. The Hazkarah, however, continues through Shacharis of the first day of Yom Tov, even though the She'eilah stopped the day before.
</p><p>
Abaye challenges Rabah's answer and says that there is no point in reciting the Hazkarah once the She'eilah is no longer recited. The purpose of the Hazkarah is to serve as a Ritzuy, a praise of appeasement to Hash-m, before we recite the She'eilah in which we ask Hash-m to send rain. If we are not going to recite the She'eilah and ask Hash-m to send rain, there is no point in reciting the Hazkarah.
</p><p>
From a simple reading of the Gemara, it seems that when Rabah suggests that She'eilah stops after Erev Pesach, he means that She'eilah is said until Ma'ariv of the night following Erev Pesach (that is, Ma'ariv of the first day of Yom Tov Pesach), while the Hazkarah continues until the following morning. This indeed is how <b>RABEINU GERSHOM</b> and <b>RABEINU CHANANEL</b> explain the Gemara.
</p><p>
However, <b>RASHI</b> (DH Ad she'Ya'avor) explains that Rabah means that She'eilah stops after <i>Shacharis</i> of Erev Pesach. At Minchah of Erev Pesach we no longer recite She'eilah. 
</p><p>
Why does Rashi not explain simply that She'eilah continues through Minchah of Erev Pesach and stops only at Ma'ariv? Why should She'eilah stop at Minchah of Erev Pesach? (<b>GEVURAS ARI</b>)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>GEVURAS ARI</b> explains that Rashi understands that Rabah cannot mean that She'eilah is recited at Minchah of Erev Pesach, because if that is what he means, then how does Rabah understand Rebbi Yehudah's statement that She'eilah is said 'until Pesach (i.e. Shechitas ha'Pesach) passes'? According to Rabah, Rebbi Yehudah should have said simply, 'Until the first day of Yom Tov Pesach.' Why did Rebbi Yehudah establish the time of the Korban Pesach, and not the day of Yom Tov itself, as the reference for when to stop reciting She'eilah? It must be that Rebbi Yehudah meant that we stop reciting She'eilah even before Yom Tov arrives -- at Minchah of Erev Pesach.
</p><p>
(b) How does the Hazkarah serve as a 'Ritzuy' (praise of appeasement) for the She'eilah? There are two ways to understand it. It could be that the Hazkarah is a preparatory praise which must be recited <i>before</i> the She'eilah is recited at a later time. Accordingly, it is necessary to recite the Hazkarah a day before the She'eilah.
</p><p>
Alternatively, it could be that the Hazkarah is a Ritzuy for the She'eilah that will be recited <i>at the same time</i> -- that is, on the same day as the She'eilah is recited. It serves as a Ritzuy because it is recited in the Shemoneh Esreh before the She'eilah is recited.
</p><p>
If the correct understanding of Ritzuy is that the Hazkarah is a Ritzuy for the She'eilah of the <i>same day</i>, then what is the point of saying the Hazkarah on Yom Tov or on Shabbos when no She'eilah is recited? The answer is that if it is a day on which rain is needed, even though no She'eilah is recited on that day (because it is Yom Tov or Shabbos) we nevertheless recite the Hazkarah as a Ritzuy for the <i>potential</i> She'eilah of that day.
</p><p>
(Proof for the second way of understanding the Ritzuy of Hazkarah can be adduced from Rebbi Yehudah's statement in the first Mishnah (2a). Rebbi Yehudah states that the Hazkarah is recited until (and including) Shacharis of the first day of Pesach, even though the She'eilah is recited only until the previous day (according to Ula's understanding of Rebbi Yehudah in the Mishnah). If the first explanation is correct and the Ritzuy of Hazkarah is for the She'eilah of the <i>next</i> day, then what is the point of saying the Hazkarah on the first day of Pesach when there will be no She'eilah the next day? It must be that the Hazkarah is a Ritzuy for the She'eilah of the <i>same</i> day, <i>and</i> for a <i>potential</i> She'eilah, such as when no actual She'eilah is recited because of Yom Tov or Shabbos.
</p><p>
The Gemara here also provides support for the second explanation. If the Hazkarah is a Ritzuy because it is a preparation for the She'eilah of the <i>next</i> day, then the Gemara's Kal v'Chomer does not make sense. It is logical that the recitation of the Hazkarah should start the day before She'eilah starts and <i>end</i> the day before She'eilah ends, because on the last day of She'eilah there is no need for a Ritzuy for the next day, and the She'eilah of today has Ritzuy from the Hazkarah that was recited yesterday. According to the second explanation of Ritzuy, however, the Gemara makes sense. The Gemara's Kal v'Chomer is that since the Hazkarah is a Ritzuy for the <i>potential</i> to say She'eilah on Yom Tov, if the Hazkarah is recited on Yom Tov (Sukos) even though the She'eilah does not actually begin until after Yom Tov, then certainly the Ritzuy should be recited on a day on which She'eilah is recited.)
</p><p>
If this is correct (that a Ritzuy may be said for the potential to say She'eilah), then what is the Gemara's question on Rabah when it asks that there is no point in saying a Ritzuy of Hazkarah when there is no She'eilah on the first day of Yom Tov? This is not a question, because the first day of Yom Tov is a day that potentially has She'eilah since it is a day on which rain is still needed. The only reason why the She'eilah is not said is because the day is Yom Tov and personal requests (such as a request for rain) are not made on Yom Tov. It is logical that the Hazkarah be recited because, in theory, it is still a time of She'eilah. What, then, is the Gemara's question on Rabah?
</p><p>
From the fact that the Gemara says that there is no need for Ritzuy on Yom Tov, it must be that Rabah maintains that Yom Tov is <i>not</i> a time of potential She'eilah, since the recitation of She'eilah already ended before Yom Tov. For that reason, Rashi says that the recitation of She'eilah ends at Minchah before Yom Tov. By the time the Hazkarah is recited, it is no longer a time fit for She'eilah.
</p><p>
According to the explanation of <b>RABEINU GERSHOM</b> and <b>RABEINU CHANANEL</b>, why is Ula's answer for Rebbi Yehudah better than Rabah's answer? According to Ula as well, Ritzuy is still being recited on a day when no She'eilah is recited (or will be recited)! Rabeinu Gershom explains that although the Gemara concludes like Ula (that the two Mishnayos argue about the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah), the first Mishnah (2a) maintains that She'eilah <i>is</i> recited on the first day of Chol ha'Mo'ed Pesach, and that is why Ritzuy is said on the first day of Pesach -- it is for the She'eilah of the following day.
</p><p>
When the Gemara proves that whenever She'eilah is recited Hazkarah is also recited from the fact that the recitation of Hazkarah begins even when She'eilah is not yet recited, it does not mean that Hazkarah must be recited on every day on which She'eilah is recited, including the last day of She'eilah. Rather, it means that Hazkarah is recited until the day <i>before</i> the last day of She'eilah. On the last day of She'eilah, however, there is no Kal v'Chomer to recite Hazkarah because no Ritzuy is necessary on the last day (since there will be no She'eilah on the following day). (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>


<font><b>3) 'HAZKARAH' IS RECITED WHENEVER 'SHE'EILAH' IS RECITED</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> Rebbi Yochanan says that the Halachah follows Rebbi Yehudah, who says that the Hazkarah for rain begins in Musaf on the last day of Yom Tov (Shemini Atzeres). The Gemara asks why Rebbi Yochanan rules like Rebbi Yehudah, when Rebbi Elazar rules like Raban Gamliel who says that the She'eilah for rain begins on the seventh of Marcheshvan (and not in Musaf of Shemini Atzeres).
</p><p>
The Gemara first answers that the two rulings were stated by two different Amora'im. No question can be asked on a ruling of Rebbi Yochanan from a ruling of Rebbi Elazar.
</p><p>
In its second answer, the Gemara says that Rebbi Elazar's ruling does not contradict Rebbi Yochanan's because Rebbi Elazar's ruling refers to She'eilah, while Rebbi Yochanan's ruling refers to Hazkarah. The Gemara rejects this answer and asks that Rebbi Yochanan elsewhere states that whenever She'eilah is recited, Hazkarah is also recited, and thus Rebbi Yochanan's ruling also refers to She'eilah.
</p><p>
The simple understanding of the Gemara's question, as <b>RABEINU GERSHOM</b> and <b>RABEINU CHANANEL</b> explain it, is that it is not logical that Rebbi Yochanan rules like both Raban Gamliel with regard to She'eilah (Raban Gamliel maintains that the recitation of She'eilah begins on the seventh of Marcheshvan) and like Rebbi Yehudah with regard to Hazkarah (Rebbi Yehudah maintains that the recitation of Hazkarah begins on the last day of Yom Tov, two weeks before the seventh of Marcheshvan). Rebbi Yochanan himself maintains that Hazkarah and She'eilah are always recited together! Therefore, the Gemara rejects the possibility that Rebbi Yochanan agrees with Rebbi Elazar (and that he refers only to Hazkarah, while Rebbi Elazar refers to She'eilah).
</p><p>
<b>RASHI</b>, however, explains the Gemara differently. According to Rashi, the Gemara asks how Rebbi Yochanan can rule that the recitation of Hazkarah begins at Musaf on the last day of Yom Tov if She'eilah cannot be recited on Yom Tov (since the weekday Shemoneh Esreh is not said).
</p><p>
Rashi's explanation is difficult to understand for several reasons.
</p><p>
First, why does Rashi not explain simply that the Gemara challenges the previous answer (that Rebbi Yochanan agrees with Rebbi Elazar)? According to Rashi's explanation, the Gemara's question is unrelated to the previous answer or to Rebbi Elazar's ruling. The Gemara ignores Rebbi Elazar altogether and poses a contradiction between two rulings of Rebbi Yochanan. Why does Rashi not give the simple explanation?
<br> 
<br>Second, the Gemara answers its question on Rebbi Yochanan by saying that 'b'Hafsakah Itmar': when Rebbi Yochanan says that Hazkarah and She'eilah must be recited together, he refers to when their recitation <i>stops</i> (on Erev Pesach). According to Rashi, the Gemara means that the recitation of Hazkarah ends in the last Shemoneh Esreh of Erev Pesach (the Shemoneh Esreh of Minchah) so that it is no longer recited at Ma'ariv on the first night of Yom Tov (because there is no She'eilah on Yom Tov).
</p><p>
According to the Gemara's answer, even though Rebbi Yochanan rules like Rebbi Yehudah, he rules like Rebbi Yehudah only with regard to when the recitation of Hazkarah <i>begins</i>, but not when it <i>ends</i>, because Rebbi Yochanan maintains that the recitation of Hazkarah ends a day <i>earlier</i> (at Minchah on Erev Pesach) than the day on which Rebbi Yehudah maintains that it ends (at Shacharis on the first day of Pesach). This is an original opinion which no Tana expresses. What forces Rashi to create a new opinion? (<b>REBBI AKIVA EIGER</b>; see also <b>RASHASH</b>.)
</p><p>
According to the simple explanation (that of Rabeinu Chananel), the first day of Pesach is considered a day on which She'eilah is said (at least in potential), and thus it fulfills Rebbi Yochanan's requirement that Hazkarah must be recited only when She'eilah is recited. (She'eilah potentially can be recited on the first day of Pesach because the day itself comes at a time during the year when a request for rain is still appropriate. It is only the fact that it is Yom Tov and no weekday Shemoneh Esreh is recited which prevents She'eilah from being recited in practice.) The Gemara's question is that Rebbi Yochanan rules that Hazkarah is recited on the last day of Yom Tov (Sukos), but he also rules that the recitation of She'eilah begins only on the seventh of Marcheshvan.
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER:</b> Rashi does not explain the Gemara like Rabeinu Chananel because he is bothered by the Gemara's question. Why does the Gemara consider it problematic if Rebbi Yochanan rules one way and Rebbi Elazar rules another way? There is no reason why the two Amora'im should have to agree. The Gemara's first response to this question is clear: no question may be asked on Rebbi Yochanan's ruling from a ruling of Rebbi Elazar.
</p><p>
The second answer of the Gemara is also a true statement: Rebbi Elazar discusses only She'eilah and not Hazkarah. However, the Gemara's next question does not seem to make sense. The Gemara asks why Rebbi Yochanan says that Hazkarah must be recited on the same day as She'eilah, if he rules like Rebbi Elazar that the recitation of She'eilah begins only on the seventh of Marcheshvan (two weeks after the recitation of Hazkarah began). What is the Gemara's question? The Gemara just a few lines earlier states that no contradiction can be asked on Rebbi Yochanan's ruling from a statement of Rebbi Elazar! Why is the Gemara now concerned that the two opinions be in agreement?
</p><p>
For this reason, Rashi explains that the Gemara is not asking a question on Rebbi Yochanan from Rebbi Elazar's statement, but rather from Rebbi Yochanan's own statement. The Gemara is asking why Rebbi Yochanan rules like Rebbi Yehudah, if Rebbi Yochanan himself maintains that Hazkarah and She'eilah must always be recited together? According to Rebbi Yehudah, the recitation of Hazkarah begins a day before She'eilah. (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>
Rabeinu Chananel, on the other hand, maintains that it is not unreasonable to ask a question on a statement of Rebbi Yochanan from a statement of Rebbi Elazar. Rebbi Elazar was a close disciple of Rebbi Yochanan, and thus his rulings should be the same as his teacher's (see Yevamos 96b, Shekalim 11a). Rashi does not follow this approach because the Gemara here makes no mention that Rebbi Elazar was a disciple of Rebbi Yochanan and that he should have ruled like his teacher. (See <b>MITZPEH EISAN</b> and MAR'EH <b>KOHEN</b>.)
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' WHEN TO STOP ASKING FOR RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  We ask for rain until...
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yehudah):</font></b> Until Pesach has passed.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Meir):</font></b> Until Nisan has passed, as we see in a 
               Pasuk that Yoreh (the early rains) and Malkosh (the 
               late rains) fall in Nisan.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE EARLY RAINS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Yoreh falls in Cheshvan!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> This is referring to the era of Yoel b. Pesuel, 
          when the first rains fell on the first of Nisan, and the 
          prophet told the people to sow the remaining grain; the 
          second rainfall was on the fifth, and the Omer was 
          brought eleven days later.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> This is alluded to by the Pasuk of 'Those who sow in 
               tears...'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yehudah):</font></b> '...going and weeping... coming in 
               joy' refers to the ox weeping as it ploughs, and 
               eating sprouting vegetation on its way back.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Chisda):</font></b> 'bearing the sheaves' refers to the 
               ears of grain being twice the size of the stalks.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>EXPLANATIONS OF VARIOUS 'PESUKIM'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> A Pasuk refers to a seven-year famine - how did 
          the people survive?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> In the first year, they ate what they had in the 
          houses; in the second year, what was in the fields; in 
          the third year, kosher animals; in the fourth year, 
          non-kosher animals; in the fifth year, vermin and 
          insects; in the sixth year, the flesh of their children; 
          in the seventh year, their own arms.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> What does the Pasuk of 'It is holy in you 
          midst, I shall not come to the city' refer to?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Hash-m is saying that He shall not enter the 
          Jerusalem of Above until He has entered the Jerusalem of 
          below.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> We know that there is a Jerusalem above as a Pasuk 
               refers to the companion of Jerusalem.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> What does the Pasuk of 'They shall burn with 
          one...' refer to?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> One sin - idolatry - causes wicked people to burn 
          in Gehinom.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> A Pasuk refers to two sins having being 
          committed - but surely twenty-four were enumerated?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It means one sin which is as bad as two - 
          idolatry.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) ONE SIN WHICH IS CONSIDERED LIKE TWO</b></font><b>
<br>OPINIONS:</b> Rav Nachman asked Rebbi Yitzchak what the verse means when it says, 'My nation committed two evils' (Yirmeyahu 2:13). Rebbi Yitzchak answered that the verse means that the nation committed one evil which is equal to two. This refers to the sin of Avodah Zarah.
</p><p>
In what way is the sin of Avodah Zarah considered like two sins?
</p><p>
(a) <b>RASHI</b> says that Rebbi Yitzchak's teaching relies on the verse cited by the Gemara shortly afterwards. The verse (Yirmeyahu 2:10) states that the people of the islands of the Kitiyim and the people of the land of Kedar never deserted their gods even though they were worthless. 'One transgression which is equal to two' means that the Avodah Zarah of the Jews at that time was worse than the two idols of the Kitiyim and the Kedarim combined. When those nations went into exile, they brought their idols with them and remained loyal to them. In contrast, when the Jewish people went into exile, they deserted Hash-m and they began to serve Avodah Zarah.
</p><p>
(b) <b>RABEINU GERSHOM</b> also explains that Rebbi Yitzchak's teaching refers to the verse cited later. He explains that the two evils contained within one transgression were that the Jews served the idol of the Kitiyim and the idol of the Kedarim.
</p><p>
(c) The <b>ETZ YOSEF</b> and <b>AHAVAS EISAN</b> (in the <b>EIN YAKOV</b>) explain that the sin of Avodah Zarah was equal to two sins because one who commits idolatry transgresses both the Mitzvas Aseh of 'Anochi Hash-m Elokecha' and the Lo Ta'aseh of 'Lo Yiheyeh Lachem Elohim Acherim.' In that sense, Avodah Zarah is one sin which includes two.
</p><p>
Moreover, the first commandment of the Aseres ha'Dibros, 'Anochi Hash-m Elokecha,' is the root of all Mitzvos Aseh, and the second commandment, 'Lo Yiheyeh Lachem Elohim Acherim,' is the root of all Mitzvos Lo Ta'aseh. The sin of Avodah Zarah is equal to the two Mitzvos which are the root of the entire Torah.
</p><p>
(c) The <b>MAGID</b> of <b>DUBNO</b> explains as follows. When other nations served Avodah Zarah and exchanged their god for another one, it was not so terrible. They merely exchanged nothing for nothing. Since they were justifiably disappointed with their first god and his failure to respond to their prayers, they changed their allegiance to a new god. In contrast, it was a terrible transgression for the Jewish people -- who saw the great power of Hash-m and were the beneficiaries of His great kindness -- to give up Hash-m in order to serve useless and powerless idols. Accordingly, there were two evils in their sin of Avodah Zarah: they left the Almighty Hash-m, and they changed their allegiance to entirely worthless idols in His place.
</p><p>
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The Pasuk refers to the Kutiyim worshiping fire, 
               even though they know that the Kedrayim's god of 
               water extinguishes it, yet the Jews have replaced 
               their G-d with something useless.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> How can the Pasuk refer to Shmuel growing old, 
          seeing as he died at 52?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(j)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> He aged prematurely, regretting that he had 
          appointed Shaul.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> He asked that, like Moshe and Aharon, his successor 
               should outlive him.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Hash-m noted that He could not kill Shaul, as Shmuel 
               did not want that; nor could He simply kill Shmuel, 
               as people will think badly of him for having died 
               young; not could He let them both live, as David's 
               kingship was due to begin.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> Therefore, He made Shmuel age prematurely.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> This explains the Pasuk speaking of Shaul in Givah 
               and Ramah - it refers to the two and a half years 
               that Shaul reigned in Givah due to the prayer of  
               Shmuel ha'Ramasi.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  We see in a Pasuk that one person's life can be 
                    cut short on account of another.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>R. NACHMAN AND R. YITZCHAK</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  R. Nachman was asked by R. Yitzchak at a meal to speak, 
          but replied that one should not do so because one might 
          choke.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Afterwards, he said:</font></b> 'Yaakov did not die.'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> R. Yitzchak asked, 'Did they mourn, embalm and bury 
               him for nothing?'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> He answered that nevertheless a Pasuk compares him 
               to his descendants, that they are both still alive.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yitzchak):</font></b> Anyone who says 'Rachav, Rachav!' (the 
          name of a harlot) becomes a Baal Keri.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> R Nachman asked that he can say it without suffering 
               that consequence.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> R. Yitzchak explained that he was referring to 
               someone who is familiar with her.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  When they parted, R. Nachman asked R. Yitzchak for a 
          blessing.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> R. Yitzchak gave the parable of a starving traveller 
               who benefits from a tree, and can bless it only that 
               its descendants should be as wonderful as it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> In the same way, R. Nachman, who already had Torah, 
               wealth, and children, could only be blessed that his 
               descendants should turn out like him.
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>2) YAKOV AVINU DID NOT DIE</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> Rebbi Yitzchak says that Yakov Avinu did not die. Rav Nachman asks how could Yakov Avinu not have died -- the Torah says that the people eulogized him, embalmed him, and buried him (Bereishis 50:1-15). Rebbi Yitzchak answers with an inference from the verse which compares Yakov to his children. Just as his children are alive, so, too, he must be alive.
</p><p>
How does Rebbi Yitzchak's response address the fact that the Torah describes Yakov Avinu's burial?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>CHOCHMAS MANO'ACH</b> explains that Rebbi Yitzchak does not mean that Yakov is still alive today. Rather, it means that he was still alive when he was returned to Eretz Yisrael for burial in the Me'aras ha'Machpelah. The people mistakenly thought that he was dead and thus they eulogized him and embalmed him (just with fragrances, as Rashi points out in Bereishis 50:2).
</p><p>
The reason he remained alive until his return to Eretz Yisrael is because Hash-m promised that He would bring him back to Eretz Yisrael. In fulfillment of His promise, Hash-m ensured that Yakov Avinu was brought back to Eretz Yisrael before his Neshamah left his body. Similarly, the Gemara in Sotah (13b) says that Yakov and Esav died on the same day. When Chushim ben Dan killed Esav just before they were about to bury Yakov, Esav's head rolled onto Yakov's lap and Yakov smiled.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>KLI YAKAR</b> (Bereishis 47:29) explains Rebbi Yitzchak's statement based on the principle that 'Tzadikim are called alive even in their deaths, and Resha'im are called dead even when they are alive' (see Berachos 18a-b). When the Gemara here says that Yakov 'did not die,' it means that even though he died he was considered still alive because he was a Tzadik. The Gemara specifically mentions Yakov, and not Avraham or Yitzchak, because he was a Tzadik and all of his children were Tzadikim (in contrast to Avraham and Yitzchak, who each had a son who was not a Tzadik). Since children are considered a continuation of their father as long as they are alive, their father is considered alive as well. If, however, one's child is a Rasha, his father is not considered alive because 'Resha'im are called dead even when they are alive.'
</p><p>
This is also the intention of Rashi (in Bereishis 18:19) when he says that one who dies and leaves behind a child who is a Tzadik is considered alive. Indeed, Rebbi Yitzchak derives his teaching from an inference in the verse which compares Yakov to his children. Yakov Avinu is considered alive because he lives on through his children, who are Tzadikim.
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>'YOREH 'AND 'MALKOSH'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  'Yoreh' (the early rains) are so called because they 
          teach (Moreh) people to prepare for winter.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  Alternatively, they saturate (Marveh) the land.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  Alternatively, they descend gently (like gentle 
          teachings).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Perhaps Yoreh is harmful?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> Just as Malkosh (the late rains, mentioned 
               adjacently) are beneficial, so is Yoreh.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Perhaps Malkosh is harmful?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> Just as Yoreh is beneficial, so is Malkosh.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>5.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> But how do we know that Yoreh is 
               beneficial?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>6.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> A Pasuk states that Hash-m will give Moreh 
               as Tzedakah.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE TIMES FOR 'YOREH 'AND 'MALKOSH'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  Yoreh falls in Cheshvan and Malkosh in Nisan.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Perhaps Yoreh falls in Tishrei and Malkosh 
               in Iyar?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> The Pasuk states that Hash-m will give it 
               'in its proper time.'
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  'Malkosh' is so called because, in the nation's 
          desperation for it, it crushes their stubbornness (Mol 
          Kashyuseihen).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate explanation:</font></b> It causes the grain to fill out 
          (Memalei) in its stalks (Kasheha).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate explanation:</font></b> It descends on the ears (Melilos) 
          and stalks (Kashin).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> Yoreh falls in Cheshvan and Malkosh in Nisan.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Perhaps Yoreh falls in Kislev?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> Just as the Pasuk says that Malkosh will 
               fall in its proper time, so will Yoreh.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> (R. Meir) Yoreh is in Cheshvan and Malkosh in 
          Nisan.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Chachamim):</font></b> Yoreh is in Kislev.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Who are these Chachamim?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It is R. Yosi, as seen in the Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The correct time for the first rainfall:
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Meir):</font></b> The first part falls on the third of 
                    Cheshvan, the middle part on the seventh, and 
                    the last part on the seventeenth.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yehudah):</font></b> The first part falls on the 
                    seventh, the middle part on the seventeenth, 
                    and the last part on the twenty-third.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>(R. Yosi):</font></b> The first part falls in the 
                    seventeenth, the middle part on the 
                    twenty-third, and the last part on the first of 
                    Kislev.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Similarly, R. Yosi ruled that those who fast in the 
               absence of rain do not do so until Rosh Chodesh 
               Kislev.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(j)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Chisda):</font></b> The Halachah follows R. Yosi.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(k)</font></b></b>  Ameimar understood R. Chisda to have said as follows:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> We ask for rain on the third of Cheshvan.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Gamliel):</font></b> On the seventh.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Chisda):</font></b> The Halachah follows R. Gamliel.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>DIFFERENT RAINFALLS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> According to whose opinion is the following 
          Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Shimon b. Gamliel):</font></b> Rain that fell for seven 
               consecutive days counts as the first, second and 
               third rainfalls.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It follows R. Yosi (who holds that there is a 
          seven-day gap between each rainfall).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Chisda):</font></b> The Halachah follows R. Yosi.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We need to know the time for the first 
          rainfall, so that we can begin asking for it, and the 
          time for the third rainfall, so that we know when to 
          begin fasting if there has been no rain; but why do we 
          need to know the time for the second rainfall?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #1:</font></b> For the purposes of Nedarim:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Beraisa):</font></b> Someone who makes a vow until the rains, 
               is bound until the second rainfall.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) AGADAH: RAIN -- THE HUSBAND OF THE EARTH</b></font><b>
<br></b>The Gemara says that the first rain of the season is called 'Revi'ah' because it impregnates (Rove'a) the land, as reflected in the expression, 'Rain is the husband of the earth.' This metaphor has a number of profound implications.
</p><p>
(a) The Gemara earlier (2a) lists the three 'keys' which Hash-m holds and does not give to any Shali'ach: the key to rain, the key to childbirth, and the key to Techiyas ha'Mesim. When the Gemara here says that 'rain is the husband of the earth,' it means that rain is the key to <i>all</i> of the unique elements mentioned in the Gemara earlier which are not in the hands of any Shali'ach. In addition to being the source of Parnasah (sustenance) for the world, rain brings forth life (just as a husband and a wife bring forth life, and as the metaphor of the Gemara here implies).
</p><p>
Rainfall is also compared to Techiyas ha'Mesim (7a). The power of rain to 'resurrect the dead' is evident in two ways. In a practical sense, a poor person is like a dead person (Nedarim 64b), whom rain brings back to life when it causes his produce to grow (Rashi to 7a). Moreover, the verse in Tehilim (68:10) says that Hash-m brings the dead to life with a rainfall.
</p><p>
As such, it is appropriate to call rain 'Gevuros Geshamim' in the plural form ('Gevuros' instead of 'Gevuras'), because rain includes elements of all of the acts which demonstrate the power of Hash-m.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>VILNA GA'ON</b> (Peninim mi'Shulchan ha'Gra, Parshas Shemini) explains that there are two ways in which Hash-m makes the earth 'give birth.' One is through rain: when the rain falls it impregnates the earth, so to speak, by causing the earth to bear its produce. The other way in which Hash-m makes the earth give birth is through Techiyas ha'Mesim, as the verse says that the people who will come to life will 'sprout from the city like the grass of the land' (Tehilim 72:16). In both cases, the rain comes first and then the earth gives birth. In the present world, Hash-m expresses His mercy by sending the rain which causes the produce to grow. At the time of Techiyas ha'Mesim, Hash-m will express His mercy by reviving the dead through rain. In a sense, sustenance is 'born' from the rain above, while Techiyas ha'Mesim comes from the earth below.
</p><p>
These two types of 'birth' represent Ge'ulah in this world and the Ge'ulah of the World to Come. <b>TOSFOS</b> in Pesachim (116b) quotes the Midrash that says that when we experience a Ge'ulah (salvation) in this world, we praise Hash-m with a 'Shirah Chadashah,' a 'new song,' in the feminine form. In the future, when the complete and final Ge'ulah will occur, we will praise Hash-m with a 'Shir Chadash,' in the masculine form. The Gemara in Berachos (60a) says that when the man is aroused first, the child born of the union is a girl, and when the woman is aroused first, the child born of the union is a boy. In this world, the rains, which represent the male contribution to the earth's productivity, come first. Since the birth begins with the 'husband' of the earth, the resultant Ge'ulah is that of a feminine attribute, and thus we sing a 'Shirah Chadashah.' In the future, when Hash-m will cause the earth to be aroused first and to give life to those buried within it, the resultant Ge'ulah will have a masculine attribute, and thus we will sing a 'Shir Chadash.'
</p><p>
(c) The Vilna Ga'on points out that one of the impure birds listed in Parshas Shemini is the 'Racham' (Vayikra 11:18). In Parshas Re'eh, however, the same bird is called the 'Rachamah' (Devarim 14:17). The Vilna Ga'on explains why it has two names.
</p><p>
The Gemara in Chulin (63a) says that it is called 'Racham' because it knows when 'Rachamim,' mercy, is coming to the world (i.e. when Hash-m is going to send rain). When the bird perches on top of something and shrieks, that is a sign that there will be rain. The Gemara says that there is a tradition that if the bird would perch itself on the ground and shriek, that would be a sign that Mashi'ach's arrivcal is imminent.
</p><p>
The Vilna Ga'on says that the Racham's shriek alludes to a birth that will take place. (Birth is accompanied by shrieks, and the name 'Racham' is related to the word 'Rechem,' womb.) There are two types of births to which the Racham alludes: when the bird is perched upon something above the ground, it is a sign of a birth that will start from above -- from the rain. When the bird is perched upon the ground, it is a sign of a birth that will start from the earth -- the coming of Mashi'ach and Techiyas ha'Mesim. 
</p><p>
When the bird gives a sign that rain will fall, it is called 'Racham,' in the masculine form without the letter 'Heh,' which indicates that the impending Ge'ulah will be originated by the 'male,' referring to the rain, the husband of the earth. The Gematriya of 'Racham' is 248, which is the number of limbs in the body of the human male (Ohalos 1:7). In contrast, when the bird sits on the ground and shrieks, it is called 'Rachamah,' in the feminine form with the letter 'Heh,' which indicates that the earth, the feminine aspect, is being aroused first to bring forth Techiyas ha'Mesim. The Gematriya of 'Rachamah' is 253, which is the number of limbs in the female body, which has five more parts than the male body (Bechoros 45a, according to Rebbi Akiva).
</p><p>


<font><b>2) BLESSING THE 'HODA'OS'</b></font><b>
<br>OPINIONS:</b> The Gemara says that when the rains come, we recite a prayer in which we thank Hash-m for every single drop of rain. Rebbi Yochanan maintains that at the end of the prayer we say, 'Baruch Rov ha'Hoda'os.' The Gemara asks that this praise seems derogatory because it implies that Hash-m deserves only 'Rov ha'Hoda'os' -- <i>most</i> praises of gratitude but not <i>all</i> of them. Rava answers that we say instead, 'Baruch <i>Kel</i> ha'Hoda'os' -- 'Blessed is the G-d [who is deserving of all] of the praises of thanksgiving.' Rav Papa concludes that 'therefore, we say both, 'Baruch Kel ha'Hoda'os v'Rov ha'Hoda'os'' (see following Insight).
</p><p>
What is the meaning of the words, 'Baruch Rov ha'Hoda'os'? Their literal translation is, 'Blessed are most thanksgivings,' which has no meaning.
</p><p>
(a) <b>RASHI</b> explains that 'Baruch Rov ha'Hoda'os' means the same thing as 'Baruch <i>b'Rov</i> ha'Hoda'os' -- '[Hash-m is] Blessed <i>with</i> many praises of thanksgiving.'
</p><p>
(b) The <b>RAMBAM</b> (Hilchos Berachos 10:5) has a different text of the Gemara. In the Rambam's text, Rav Papa does not rule that we should say, 'Baruch Kel ha'Hoda'os v'Rov ha'Hoda'os.' Rather, Rav Papa rules that we should say, 'Baruch Kel Rov ha'Hoda'os.' 'Rov ha'Hoda'os' is an adjective which describes 'Kel,' Hash-m, Who is the G-d of many thanksgivings.
</p><p>
What does Rebbi Yochanan's original suggestion of 'Baruch Rov ha'Hoda'os' mean? The <b>RAMBAN</b> (Milchamos, Berachos 59b) explains that 'Rov ha'Hoda'os' can be understood as a descriptive statement about Hash-m even without the word 'Kel' before it, as in the phrase, 'Rov Onim v'Amitz Ko'ach' (Yeshayah 40:26). It means, 'Blessed is Hash-m, the One [worthy] of many blessings.'
</p><p>


<font><b>3) RAV PAPA'S COMPROMISE</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara says that when the rains come, we recite a prayer in which we thank Hash-m for every single drop of rain. Rebbi Yochanan maintains that at the end of the prayer we say, 'Baruch Rov ha'Hoda'os.' The Gemara asks that this praise seems derogatory because it implies that Hash-m deserves only 'Rov ha'Hoda'os' -- <i>most</i> praises of gratitude but not <i>all</i> of them. Rava answers that we say instead, 'Baruch <i>Kel</i> ha'Hoda'os' -- 'Blessed is the G-d [who is deserving of all] of the praises of thanksgiving.' Rav Papa concludes that 'therefore, we say both, 'Baruch Kel ha'Hoda'os v'Rov ha'Hoda'os'' (see previous Insight).
</p><p>
Why does Rav Papa rule that we say both phrases if the Gemara just explained that it is improper to say 'Rov ha'Hoda'os'?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) <b>RASHI</b> and the <b>RAMBAN</b> (Milchamos, Berachos 59b) explain that when the phrase 'Rov ha'Hoda'os' accompanies the phrase 'Kel ha'Hoda'os,' it has the connotation of 'many' and is not derogatory. Without the phrase 'Kel,' the connotation is 'most' Hoda'os, which implies that He is not deserving of <i>all</i> praises. Since 'Kel ha'Hoda'os' already implies that Hash-m is deserving of all blessings ('Kel' means the all-powerful G-d), it is clear that the following phrase, 'Rov ha'Hoda'os,' has the same meaning. (This is particularly evident according to the Rambam (Hilchos Berachos 10:5; see previous Insight) who maintains that the two phrases are combined into a single statement, 'Baruch Kel Rov ha'Hoda'os,' and 'Rov ha'Hoda'os' is understood to be an adjective when said together with 'Kel ha'Hoda'os.')
</p><p>
The Ramban adds that the reason why we mention 'Rov ha'Hoda'os' and praise Hash-m as the G-d of many praises of thanksgiving is because we thank Hash-m for each and every drop of rain (as the prayer begins). We mention the 'many' praises of thanksgiving that He deserves for the many droplets of rain.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>BA'AL HA'ME'OR</b> (Berachos 59b) has a different text of the Gemara. His text does not say that we recite both 'Kel ha'Hoda'os' and 'Rov ha'Hoda'os.' Rather, when Rav Papa says that 'therefore, we recite both,' he refers to the two prayers of 'Modim Anachnu Lach' and 'Ilu Finu Malei Shirah.'
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #2:</font></b> For olives
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Mishnah):</font></b> A person is allowed to take his Leket, 
               Shikchah and Peyah once the 'Nemushos' have been;
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> He may take his Peret and Olelos once the poor 
               people have been;
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> He may take his olives after the second rainfall.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> What are 'Nemushos'?
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer (R. Yochanan):</font></b> Old men on staffs.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>Alternate answer (Reish Lakish):</font></b> Those who 
                    collect after other have already collected.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #3:</font></b> To take short cuts through the fields of 
          others, which can be done until the second rainfall.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #4:</font></b> To remove produce of Shemitah:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Mishnah):</font></b> One may use and burn straw of Shemitah 
               until the second rainfall.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The reason is that the Pasuk says that you can use 
               it as long as there is produce still in the fields.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>TYPES OF RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  Rainfall is called Reviyah because it fertilizes (Rova) 
          the land:
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah):</font></b> The rain is the husband of the land, as we 
          see in a Pasuk referring to the land giving birth.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Avahu):</font></b> The first rainfall penetrates one Tefach into 
          the ground, the second makes the soil suitable for 
          sealing a cask.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Chisda):</font></b> Rain that fell to this degree has not been 
          subjected to the punishment of stopping up the Heavens.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Rain that fell earlier in the day than that 
               punishment is read aloud (in Shema) shows that it is 
               not subject to it.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Abaye):</font></b> This is only true if it fell before the evening 
          Shema, but not if it fell before the morning Shema:
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  The morning clouds are worthless, as seen in a Pasuk.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Surely a folk saying has it that rain in the 
          morning means rain all day!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> That is only when it pours down from a heavy 
          cloud.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>5) </font></b><font color='blue'>UNDESIRED RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah):</font></b> It is a good year if Teves is a widow (i.e. 
          rainless).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Some say:</font></b> Because the roads to the schools will not 
               become pot-holed.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Others say:</font></b> Because the crops will not be subject to 
               blast.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Surely R. Chisda said that it is a 
                    good year if Teves is slushy?
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> That referred to where no rain fell 
                    previously.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Chisda):</font></b> Rain that fell on part of the country has 
          not been subjected to the punishment of stopping up the 
          Heavens.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Surely a Pasuk about rain falling on one town 
          but not on another was explained to be a curse for both?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> That referred to where the town received 
          excessive rain.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  This is also seen from the wording of the Pasuk.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>6) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE BLESSING UPON RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Avahu):</font></b> We bless on the rain from when the Chasan 
          goes to meet the Kalah (the raindrops hit the rebounding 
          raindrops).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Which Berachah do we say?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer (R. Yehudah citing Rav):</font></b> 'We thank you, Hash-m our 
          G-d, for each drop that You cause to descend.'
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yochanan):</font></b> Conclude: 'If our mouths were as full of 
          song...' until 'Blessed is the One of Rov ('many' or 
          'most') acknowledgments.'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Only 'most' and not all?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer (Rava):</font></b> Say, 'G-d of acknowledgments.'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Papa):</font></b> Say both.
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE GREATNESS OF RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Avahu):</font></b> The day of rainfall is greater than that of 
          Techiyas ha'Meisim, as the rain benefits both Tzadikim 
          and Reisha'im.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> This disagrees with R. Yosef who said that rainfall 
               is equal to Techiyas ha'Meisim and was therefore 
               placed in the same Berachah in the Amidah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah):</font></b> The day of rainfall is as great as the day 
          when the Torah was given, as the Pasuk says that Hashem's 
          'Lekach' shall fall as rain, and another Pasuk refers to 
          the Torah as a good Lekach (purchase).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rava):</font></b> It is greater than the day the Torah was 
               given, as if the Pasuk compares Torah to rain, rain 
               must be the greater thing.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question (Rava):</font></b> This Pasuk says the Torah will 
               pound as rain, but another Pasuk compares it to 
               dew!?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> It will descend as dew on a suitable Talmid 
               Chacham, but it will batter as pounding rain anyone 
               else.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  The Torah is an elixir of life for anyone who studies it 
          Lishmah, and a poison for anyone who does not study it 
          Lishmah, as seen in Pesukim.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>VARIOUS COMPARISONS IN 'AGADAH'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  R. Zeira felt too faint to teach R. Yirmiyah, so he told 
          him an Agadic teaching:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> A Pasuk refers to man as a tree.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> One Pasuk tells us to eat a tree's fruit and not to 
               harm it, whereas another tells us to cut it down.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> This means that if the person is a proper Talmid 
               Chacham, we should 'eat of his fruit,' otherwise we 
               should avoid him.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  A Pasuk refers to iron sharpening iron; likewise, 
          Talmidei Chachamim sharpen each other.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  A Pasuk compares Torah to fire; just as a fire cannot be 
          lit with only one stick, so too Torah is not established 
          in someone who learns alone.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  A Pasuk alludes to a curse on Talmidei Chachamim who 
          study alone; it also alludes to their growing foolish, 
          and to it being sinful.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  A Pasuk compares Torah to wood; just as a small stick can 
          set fire to a big stick, so do junior Torah students 
          sharpen senior scholars.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> In the same vein, R. Chanina said that he had 
               learned much from his teachers, and even more from 
               his peers, and even more from his students.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>TORAH IS COMPARED TO WATER</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  One Pasuk says that water should be brought to the 
          thirsty, while another says that the thirsty should go to 
          water.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The allegorical resolution is that if the student is 
               worthy, his teacher should travel to him; otherwise, 
               he should travel to his teacher.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  One Pasuk says that the waters shall spread out, while 
          another says that they shall be for you alone.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The allegorical resolution is that if the student is 
               worthy, tell him the secrets of the Torah; 
               otherwise, keep them to yourself.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  Torah is compared to water in that just as water flows to 
          the lowest place, so does Torah only become established 
          in the humble person.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  Torah is compared to water, wine and milk in that just as 
          these liquids can only be preserved in the cheapest types 
          of vessels, so does Torah only become established in the 
          humble person.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Caeser's daughter asked R. Yehoshua b. Chananya how 
               such beautiful wisdom could be contained in such an 
               ugly vessel.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> He suggested that she place her father's expensive 
               wines in suitably expensive containers of gold and 
               silver; when she did so, they spoiled.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> R. Yehoshua was challenged to explain beautiful 
               people who are wise; he said that if they were ugly, 
               they would be wiser.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) AGADAH: TORAH IS LIKE WATER</b></font><b>
<br></b>The Gemara quotes a verse which compares Torah to water (Yeshayah 55:1). The Gemara explains that just as water naturally flows from a high place to a low place, the Torah goes away from those who are 'high' (conceited) and remains with those who are humble. The <b>BEN YEHOYADA</b> (in <b>SEFER BENAYAHU</b>) demonstrates an allusion to this concept in the order of the Hebrew alphabet.
</p><p>
The word for the letter 'Mem' can be spelled Mem-Yud-Mem, which also spells the word 'Mayim,' water. Hence, the letter 'Mem' alludes to water.
</p><p>
The letter that precedes 'Mem' is 'Lamed.' The 'Lamed' is the tallest of all of the letters of the alphabet. The letters that follow 'Mem' are 'Nun' and 'Samech.' When spelled out in full, the word 'Nun' is spelled Nun-Vav-Nun, and the word 'Samech' is spelled Samech-Mem-Chaf. The 'hidden' (Nistar) letters of those words (meaning the letters of its written name that are not seen when the alphabetical letter alone is written) are Vav-Nun (of the word 'Nun') and Mem-Chaf (of the word 'Samech'). Together, these four letters spell the word 'Namuch,' which is the word the Gemara uses to refer to the humble person to whom Torah flows like water.
</p><p>
Thus, the order of the letters in the alphabet show how water ('Mem') leaves a high place (it turns away from the 'Lamed') and proceeds towards the lowly, humble place -- the place which is 'Namuch' (which is alluded to in the letters Nun-Samech which follow Mem in the alphabet).
</p><p>
An addition to the Ben Yehoyada's insight may be suggested. The attribute of height is alluded to in the letter 'Lamed' in a very different manner than the way the attribute of lowliness is alluded to in the letters 'Nun' and 'Samech.' The height of the 'Lamed' is apparent at first glance; the very shape of the letter gives it prominence which is immediately noticeable. In contrast, the lowliness of the 'Nun' and 'Samech' is apparent only in the letters which are <i>hidden</i> in the words 'Nun' and 'Samech.' Moreover, their attribute of 'Namuch' is split between two letters.
</p><p>
These differences allude to the fact that the tall 'Lamed' represents the haughty person who always tries to make himself conspicuous and prominent, like the letter 'Lamed.' The letter's height is reflected in a single letter, which signifies that the haughty person views himself as unique and above everyone else, and he prefers to do things by himself. (This is the reason why the Gemara speaks so sternly about the scholars who 'learn by themselves.') In contrast, the person who is 'Namuch' is modest and always tries to remain hidden from view (Nistar). Moreover, the word 'Namuch' is split into two letters because the humble person does not seek to do things by himself but prefers to work together with others ('two Talmidei Chachamim who sharpen each other...').
</p><p>
The Gemara in Chagigah (15b) explains that the evil Doeg and Achitofel asked four hundred questions on the subject of 'a tower that flies in the air.' According to one explanation of Rashi, this means that they expounded on the upper part of the letter 'Lamed' which looks like a tower that rises over the other letters of the alphabet. Perhaps the Gemara there means to imply that their downfall came about through their arrogant behavior; they identified with the tall 'Lamed' rather than with the lowly 'Mem' or 'Nun-Samech.' (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Alternate explanation:</font></b> Torah is compared to these 
               three liquids in that they all require careful 
               guarding.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE GREATNESS OF RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  (R. Chama b. R. Chanina) The day of rainfall is as great 
          as the day that Heaven and Earth were created.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  (R. Oshiya) The day of rainfall is so great that 
          salvation sprouts on it.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>5) </font></b><font color='blue'>SINS STOPPING RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Tanchum b. Chanilai):</font></b> The rains do not fall unless 
          Israel's sins have been forgiven (there is a dispute 
          regarding which Pasuk it is learned from).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Tanchum b. R. Chiya):</font></b> The rains are not withheld 
          unless Israel is liable for destruction (there is a 
          dispute regarding which Pasuk it is learned from).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Chisda):</font></b> The rains are withheld because of neglect of 
          Terumah and Ma'aser.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Shimon b. Pazi):</font></b> The rains are withheld because of 
          those who speak Lashon Hora.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Sela citing R. Hamnuna):</font></b> The rains are withheld 
          because of those who are brazen.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Anyone who is brazen will eventually sin in illicit 
               relationships.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Nachman):</font></b> Anyone who is brazen has clearly 
               already sinned in illicit relationships.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rabah bar R. Huna):</font></b> It is permitted to call a 
               brazen person 'Rasha.'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Nachman bar Yitzchak):</font></b> It is permitted to hate 
               him.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Katina):</font></b> The rains are withheld because of Bitul 
          Torah (there is a dispute regarding awhich Pasuk it is 
          learned from).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Ami):</font></b> The rains are withheld because of people 
          stealing.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>6) </font></b><font color='blue'>BLUNTED IRON</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Ami):</font></b> A Pasuk refers to an effect of blunted iron 
          being caused by damage. This means...
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> If the skies are like iron (not releasing rain), it 
               is because of the wicked deeds of the generation.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  The solution is for them to strengthen 
                    themselves in the trait of mercy.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b></b> They are in all the better a position if their 
                    deeds are proper in the first place.
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>2) AGADAH: WHEN IT RAINS, IT POURS</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara says that a day on which rain falls is like the day on which the heavens and earth were created. Even salvation comes on a day of rain.
</p><p>
What makes a rainy day so special? (See Insights to Ta'anis 2:2.)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER:</b> Perhaps the Gemara refers to the rain which fell immediately after Creation, as mentioned in Bereishis (2:6). <b>RASHI</b> (Bereishis 2:5) explains that even after the world was created, the trees and grasses had not yet appeared on the surface of the earth; they were underneath the surface waiting to grow. When Adam ha'Rishon was created, he saw that the world needed rain. He prayed for rain and the rain came down. At that moment, all of the earth's produce sprouted and the Creation of the world was completed. Accordingly, the final touch of Creation was the coming of the rain which brought about the sprouting of the plants from the earth. Since rain materialized the Creation (which had been only potential until that point), it is considered as great as the Creation itself.
</p><p>
The second statement of the Gemara, that salvation (Yeshu'ah) comes on a day of rain, may be explained in a similar manner. 'Salvation' may refer to the final redemption of Techiyas ha'Mesim, as the verse mentions, 'Let the earth open and salvation grow from it.' (Techiyas ha'Mesim sprouts from the earth; see Insights to Ta'anis 6:1:c.) Even when the time for Techiyas ha'Mesim arrives, the Techiyah does not actually occur until Hash-m sends rain, which then causes the resurrection to begin. Since the rainfall materializes the Techiyah, the rainfall of Techiyas ha'Mesim is considered as great as the Techiyah itself. (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>BLUNTED IRON (cont.)</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Reish Lakish):</font></b> If a Talmid Chacham is finding his 
          studies as hard as iron, it is because he hasn't prepared 
          his Mishnah properly.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The solution is for him to increase his time in 
               yeshivah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> He is in all the better a position if he has 
               prepared his Mishnah properly in the first place.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> Reish Lakish would prepare his Mishnayos forty 
               times, paralleling the forty days that Moshe spent 
               learning the Torah, before going to study under R. 
               Yochanan.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> R. Ada bar Ahava would prepare his Mishnayos 
               twenty-four times, paralleling the books of tenach, 
               before going to study under Rava.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>5.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rava):</font></b> If a student finds his studies as hard as 
               iron, it is because his teacher is not treating him 
               well.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  the solution is for him to amass friends.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b></b> He is in all the better a position if his deeds 
                    please his teacher in the first place.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE 'NACHASH'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Ami):</font></b> A Pasuk refers to the Nachash biting because of 
          Lachash. This means...
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> If the skies are as rusty as copper (Nechoshes), not 
               giving rain, it is because there are none who pray 
               the silent Amidah (Lachash).
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  The solution is to find someone who knows how 
                    to pray it.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b></b> If he prays and is not answered, they should go 
                    to the Chasid of the generation for his 
                    intervention.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b></b>If he prays, is answered, and grows conceited 
                    as a result, he brings anger to the world.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iv. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rava):</font></b> If two Talmidei Chachamim in a city do 
                    not cooperate in Halachah, they bring anger to 
                    the world.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Reish Lakish):</font></b> The Pasuk refers to a future 
               assembly of all the animals with the snake, where 
               they will challenge him as to what benefit he 
               receives from biting others, since he doesn't eat 
               them.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  The snake responds that he is like the 
                    slanderer, who also receives no benefit.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>GOOD QUALITIES</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Ami):</font></b> A person's prayer is only heard if he places 
          his soul in his hands.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Shmuel showed that even if prayer is 
               tutterly insincere, it is answered!
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> That is referring to the prayer of a 
               congregation.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Ami):</font></b> The rain falls in the merit of those who 
          possess integrity.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> We see how great such people are from the story of 
               the Chuldah and the well.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> If someone who places his trust in a Chuldah and a 
               well succeeds, how much more so someone who places 
               his trust in Hash-m.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yochanan):</font></b> Anyone who conducts himself with righteous 
          precision on earth will receive the same judgment Above 
          (i.e. strict judging of his sins in order to cleanse 
          him). (There is a dispute as to which Pasuk this is 
          learned from.)
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehoshua b. Levi):</font></b> Anyone who rejoices in his 
          suffering brings salvation to the world.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Reish Lakish):</font></b> When the Heavens are stopped up from 
          giving rain, it is like a woman who has labor pains but 
          cannot give birth.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The Torah uses the word Atzirah (stopping up) with 
               both the Heavens and women.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) AGADAH: RAIN FOR THE FAITHFUL</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara teaches that rain falls in the merit of those who fulfill their word. In what way is this reward measure for measure ('Midah k'Neged Midah')?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER:</b> The <b>YERUSHALMI</b> (cited by <b>TOSFOS</b> to Shabbos 31a) explains that one who is involved in the cultivation of the land displays his faith in Hash-m. The farmer 'has faith in the One above when he sows his seeds.' Without rain, not only will his crop fail, but he will have wasted perfectly good food by burying it in the ground (as seeds). (This is why the verse (Yeshayah 33:6) alludes to the laws of Zera'im with the word 'Emunas'; see Shabbos 31a.) When a person shows that he is faithful and true to his word, Hash-m repays him in kind by showing that He is trustworthy to send rain.
</p><p>
In a similar sense, rain revives one's belief in the resurrection of the dead and the World to Come. When a person passes away, his loved ones bury the body in the earth with faith that although the body will initially disintegrate, eventually Hash-m will show His faithfulness and bring the promised resurrection of the dead. 'They will grow... like the grass of the earth' (Tehilim 72:16). The Midrash (Eichah Rabah 3:8) says that this faith in Techiyas ha'Mesim is the meaning of the verse, 'Rabah Emunasecha' (Eichah 3:23). When one sees Hashem's faithfulness through His rains, he becomes convinced with renewed conviction that the day will come when Hash-m will bring the dead back to life and show His power in the world. 'Great is a day of rain as the day on which the dead come to life.' (Adapted from 'Seasons of Life,' published by Targum Press.)
</p><p>
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The Torah uses the word Leidah (giving birth) with 
               both the Heavens and women.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> The Torah uses the word Pekidah (marking down for 
               giving birth) with both the Heavens and women.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> One of these Pesukim refers to a container in the 
               atmosphere from where the rains come.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Shmuel bar Nachmani):</font></b> A Pasuk teaches us that if 
          harsh rain was decreed but Israel repented, it will fall 
          harmlessly on the mountains or on trees; if good rain was 
          decreed, it will fall on fields and cisterns etc.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> In his generation there was both famine and plague.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The people said that they cannot pray to be saved 
               from both, so they opted to pray for release from 
               plague.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> R. Shmuel bar Nachmani told them to pray to be saved 
               from famine, as Hash-m grants sustenance for people 
               to live (and they will have to be saved from plague 
               too).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> We know that we cannot pray for two things from a 
               Pasuk about praying for one request, implying that 
               another request was not prayed for.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  In R. Zeira's generation the government issued decrees 
          against the Jews, including one that they must not fast.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> R. Zeira instructed the people to pledge to fast, 
               and to carry it out when the decree would be 
               revoked.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> He knew to do this from a Pasuk about Daniel's 
               prayer being answered from when he <i>decided</i> to 
               fast.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yitzchak):</font></b> Even in years as parched as those of 
          Eliyahu, rain on Erev Shabbos is a bad sign.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rabah bar Shila):</font></b> The day of rainfall is as harsh 
               (noisy) as the days of (Beis Din sitting in) 
               judgment.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Ameimar):</font></b> If it was not that we needed the rain, we 
               would pray that it be cancelled.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yitzchak):</font></b> Sun on Shabbos is charity for the poor.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>5) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE GREATNESS OF RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yitzchak):</font></b> The day of rainfall is so great that even 
          non-rain-related works are blessed on it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Berachah only occurs in that which is concealed from 
               the eye (i.e. whose amount is not known).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Beraisa):</font></b> One who enters his granary to measure it 
               should pray that his work receives blessing; once he 
               has started to measure it, he blesses Hash-m for 
               sending blessing upon it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> If he measured it and said the Berachah afterwards, 
               it is in vain, as blessing cannot happen to items 
               measured, only to those things concealed from the 
               eye.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yochanan):</font></b> The day of rainfall is as great as that of 
          the ingathering of the exiles.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  The day of rainfall is so great that even army troops 
          halt on it.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  Rain is withheld because of those who are assigned to 
          distribute charity in public and fail to do so.
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>2) AGADAH: BLESSING IS FOUND ONLY IN OBJECTS THAT ARE NOT COUNTED</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara says that 'Ein Berachah Metzuyah Ela b'Davar ha'Samuy Min ha'Ayin' -- 'blessing is found only in an item which is hidden from the eye' (i.e. it has not been counted). <b>TOSFOS</b> asks that the Gemara in Chulin (25b) says that Shedim ('demons,' or forces that inflict harm) have no power to take away something which has been counted or tied in a bundle, which implies that they <i>are</i> able to take away something which has not been counted. Why does the Gemara here say that blessing is found only in something which is not counted? 
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER: TOSFOS</b> answers that the Gemara in Chulin means that Shedim have the ability to take away only something which is Hefker, ownerless. Once something has been counted it is no longer Hefker, and thus the Shedim cannot take it. Before it has been counted, Hash-m gives a blessing to the item so that it increases, as the Gemara here says. The increase itself is Hefker (until it is noticed by the owner when he counts his objects). That extra bit can be taken away by the Shedim before it is counted. By not counting one's produce, one makes it possible for his produce to increase as a result of Hashem's blessing. That extra produce is then vulnerable to harm from the Shedim, for it is Hefker until it is counted.
</p><p>
The <b>KAV HA'YASHAR</b> explains the first verse of Birkas Kohanim (Bamidbar 6:24) based on this approach. 'May Hash-m bless you' -- the concept of 'blessing' refers to increase and proliferation, or 'Ribuy' (Rashi to Sotah 10a, DH ba'Meh Bircho). The next phrase in the verse is, 'And may He protect you,' which the Sifri (Naso 40) explains to mean 'may Hash-m protect you from Mazikin (Shedim).'
</p><p>
Since the first part of Birkas Kohanim contains a request that Hash-m give us bountiful blessing, there is concern that the extra increase that He gives will have the status of Hefker which the Mazikin are able to damage. Therefore, the blessing continues with a request that Hash-m protect us from the Mazikin.
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>R. YOCHANAN AND RESH LAKISH'S SON</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yochanan):</font></b> The Pasuk of 'Aser t'Aser' teaches us to 
          give Ma'aser so that we should grow wealthy (Ashir).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> R. Yochanan asked Reish Lakish's son to tell him the 
               Pasuk that he had just learned, and he replied with 
               this Pasuk.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> He asked R. Yochanan to explain it, and he gave this 
               explanation.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> When asked to explain how he knew it, R. Yochanan 
               told him to test Hash-m on it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> The boy challenged him with a Pasuk that we may not 
               test Hash-m.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>5.  </font></b></b> R. Yochanan cited R. Hoshaya that this case is an 
               exception, as seen in a Pasuk.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>6.  </font></b></b> The boy replied that had he reached that Pasuk, he 
               wouldn't have needed R. Yochanan and R. Hoshaya's 
               explanation.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  R. Yochanan found Reish Lakish's son saying a Pasuk from 
          Mishlei about a person sinning, coming to harm, and not 
          acknowledging why it happened.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> R. Yochanan mused that there must be a Pasuk in 
               Chumash alluding to this.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Reish Lakish's son replied that the episode of 
               Yosef's brothers in Egypt alludes to it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> R. Yochanan lifted up his eyelids to look at the 
               intelligent boy, whereupon his mother took him away, 
               so that R. Yochanan's look should not kill him as it 
               did his father.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE MERIT THAT BRINGS RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yochanan):</font></b> Rain falls in the merit of an individual, 
          but general sustenance only comes in the merit of many.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see that general sustenance comes in the 
          merit of an individual:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yosi b. R. Yehudah) Israel had three good 
               providers:</font></b> Moshe, in whose benefit there was Man, 
               Aharon, in whose benefit were the Clouds of Glory, 
               and Miriam, in whose benefit there was the well.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> When Miriam died, the well disappeared, but it 
               returned in the merit of Moshe and Aharon.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> When Aharon died, the Clouds of Glory disappeared.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> Canaan heard that Aharon had died and the Clouds of 
               Glory had disappeared, and presumed that he now had 
               a right to fight Israel.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>5.  </font></b></b> Likewise, the Pasuk about Israel seeing that Aharon 
               died can also be read as them being exposed 
               <i>because</i> Aharon died.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>6.  </font></b></b> This follows Reish Lakish's teaching that 'Ki' can 
               mean if, perhaps, rather, and because.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>7.  </font></b></b> The Clouds of Glory and the well returned in the 
               merit of Moshe.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>8.  </font></b></b> When Moshe died, they all disappeared, as we see 
               from a Pasuk speaking about three shepherds being 
               cut off in a single month.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Moshe is different because he was requesting 
          these things on behalf of many people.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  When Rava died, his students went to R. Papa. They would 
          signal to each other when he said something that they 
          disagreed with.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) THE GIFTS GIVEN IN THE MERIT OF MOSHE RABEINU, AHARON, AND MIRIAM</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara says that the well, cloud, and Man were gifts to the Jewish people in the merit of Miriam, Aharon, and Moshe Rabeinu respectively. 
</p><p>
The Gemara here seems to contradict the Gemara in Bava Metzia (86b). The Gemara there cites Tana d'Vei Rebbi Yishmael who states that in the merit of the three acts which Avraham Avinu performed when he served his guests, the Jewish people merited to receive three gifts when they sojourned in the wilderness: the Man, the cloud that protected them, and the well of Miriam.
</p><p>
The Gemara there does not mention that these three things were in the merit of Miriam, Aharon, and Moshe Rabeinu. Moreover, the Gemara there explicitly refers to the well as 'Be'erah Shel Miriam,' the well of Miriam, which clearly implies that the well was in the merit of Miriam. Why, then, does the Gemara there say that the well was in the merit of Avraham Avinu? (<b>MAHARSHA</b> to Bava Metzia 86b)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>MAHARSHA</b> answers that in the merit of Avraham Avinu's three deeds with his guests, the Jewish people would have received only a momentary miracle of the Man, cloud, and well. It was in the merit of Moshe, Aharon, and Miriam that these miracles continued for many years while the Jewish people sojourned in the wilderness. This is why the cloud departed when Aharon died, the well disappeared when Miriam died, and the Man stopped falling when Moshe Rabeinu died.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>BEN YEHOYADA</b> writes that Hash-m originally designated these three gifts -- the Man, the cloud, and the well -- to be given to the Jewish people in the merit of Avraham Avinu's deeds. However, when the time came for the Jewish people to leave Mitzrayim and receive the gift of the cloud, they did not deserve that gift. The verse relates that they left Mitzrayim 'b'Yad Ramah' (Shemos 14:8), which can be translated as 'with a haughty spirit' (this translation is in clear contrast to the normal understanding of those words). As a result of their haughtiness, they lost the merit to receive the protection of the cloud. Hash-m gave them the cloud only in the merit of Aharon.
</p><p>
When the Jewish people consumed all of the food which they had brought with them when they left Mitzrayim, they should have received the gift of the Man in the merit of Avraham Avinu. However, they lost that merit when they complained, 'You took us out into this wilderness to kill us with starvation!' (Shemos 16:3). Hence, it was given to them only in the merit of Moshe Rabeinu.
</p><p>
Similarly, when the people arrived at Refidim, they should have received the gift of the well in the merit of Avraham Avinu. However, the people sinned there when they complained to Moshe Rabeinu, and they lost the merit to receive the gift of the well. However, Hash-m gave them the gift of the well in the merit of Miriam.
</p><p>
(c) <b>RAV CHAIM SHMUELEVITZ</b> zt'l in <b>SICHOS MUSAR</b> (5732, #8) gives a metaphor to answer this question. Although a small seed is able to sprout into a huge tree, the seed itself cannot sprout without external factors contributing to its growth, such as soil, water, and sunshine.
</p><p>
Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz explains that when the Gemara in Bava Metzia says that the gifts of the Man, cloud, and well were granted in the merit of Avraham Avinu, it means that the 'seeds' of these gifts -- the initial reason for granting them -- were given in the merit of the Chesed of Avraham. However, these 'seeds' needed additional factors to cause them to sprout and come to fruition -- these were the merits of Moshe, Aharon, and Miriam. (I. Alsheich) (See also Insights to Bava Metzia 86:3.)
</p><p>
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> He was disheartened and dreamt of the Pasuk of three 
               shepherds being cut off.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The next day, he told them to go in peace, so that 
               the dream would be harmlessly fulfilled through the 
               farewell greeting.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  R. Shimi bar Ashi would ask R. Papa many questions. One 
          day he saw him lying down and praying to be saved from 
          the shame he was causing him, so he kept silent from then 
          on.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  Reish Lakish also held that rain falls in the merit of an 
          individual, even if he only needs it for a single field 
          or even a single plant, as learned from a Pasuk.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> An example is R. Daniel bar Katina, who would tour 
               his garden daily and say which rows required water, 
               and it would rain on those rows.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> The Pasuk says that 'Hash-m makes 
               Chazizim' - what does this mean?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> It teaches that Hash-m makes a separate 
               Chaziz for each Tzadik.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> What are Chazizim?
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> Porchos.; they signify approaching 
                    rain.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>Question:</font></b> What are Porchos?
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iv. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> Light clouds beneath thick clouds.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> Fine rain before regular rain means that the rains 
               will last a long time; fine rain after regular rain 
               means that the rains will stop.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  The Siman for the former is a sieve; the Siman 
                    for the latter is goat dung.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b></b>  Ula went to Bavel and saw Porchos clouds; he warned 
          people to clear away their goods, but it did not rain.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> He noted that just as Babylonians lie, so do their 
               clouds.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b></b>  Ula went to Bavel and saw a basket of dates for a zuz; he 
          wondered why people were not studying Torah if food was 
          so cheap.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> But when he suffered ill effects from eating them, 
               he wondered that they were able to study at all, 
               considering the ill effects of abundant food.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE 'BERAISA' ABOUT THE SOURCE OF RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Eliezer):</font></b> The world drinks from the ocean, as we see 
          from the Pasuk that 'a mist went up and watered the 
          ground.'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question (R. Yehoshua):</font></b> Surely seawater is salty?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> It is sweetened in the clouds.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehoshua):</font></b> The world drinks from the Upper Waters, as 
          we see from the Pasuk that it 'drinks from the water of 
          the Heavens.'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The Pasuk about a mist going up refers to the clouds 
               rising and accepting water from above
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> They then rain on the ground, a hairsbreadth between 
               each drop.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> This teaches that the day of rainfall is as great as 
               the day that the Heavens and Earth were created (as 
               per Daf 2a).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  The Pasuk of 'He waters the mountains from His upper 
          chambers,' explained to refer to the chambers of Hash-m, 
          goes according to R. Yehoshua.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> R. Eliezer would counter that when the water rises 
               up their, it is referred to as the upper chambers.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> We see that such an explanation exists from the 
               Pasuk about dust and ashes falling from the Heavens.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  The Pasuk of Hash-m filling the storehouses with the 
          depths goes according to R. Eliezer.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> R. Yehoshua would counter that that is referring to 
               the creation of the world.
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>2) THE PROOF THAT RAINWATER IS NOT SALTY</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua argue about the source of rain. Rebbi Eliezer says that rain comes from clouds which absorb the water from the sea. Rebbi Yehoshua says that the clouds fill up with water from above the sky (the 'Mayim Elyonim'), and then the clouds drop that water onto the earth. Rebbi Yehoshua challenges the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer and asks that if the rains originate from the sea, then rainwater should be salty, but rainwater is not salty.
</p><p>
<b>RASHI</b> explains that the proof that rainwater is not salty is because no grain can grow from salty water.
</p><p>
Why does Rashi choose to give this strange way of proving that rainwater is not salty? It is obvious that rainwater is not salty because people <i>drink</i> rainwater and nobody finds that it tastes salty. Why does Rashi say that the proof that rainwater is not salty is because plants cannot grow from salty water? (<b>REBBI AKIVA EIGER</b> in <b>GILYON HA'SHAS</b>; see also <b>EIN YAKOV</b> and <b>BEN YEHOYADA</b>.)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER:</b> Rashi's explanation may be motivated by the following consideration. The Gemara cites proof for the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer from the verse, 'A mist arose from the land and watered all of the ground' (Bereishis 2:6), which clearly implies that rainwater originates from the earth. Rebbi Yehoshua, who says that rainwater comes from the upper waters, responds that the verse does not mean that the clouds collect their waters from the earth itself, but rather that the clouds must rise up from the earth to the upper heavens in order to receive the water from there.
</p><p>
There is a much simpler answer that Rebbi Yehoshua should have given. He should have said that the verse does not describe the physical nature of rain, as Rebbi Eliezer understands it, but rather the verse discusses a singular event that occurred only once in the history of the world: at the time of Creation, the water that fell onto the ground came from the sea. Normal rain, in contrast, comes from the waters above, as is evidenced by the fact that the water is not salty. (The <b>ETZ YOSEF</b> in the Ein Yakov discusses this question.)
</p><p>
Apparently, Rebbi Yehoshua had reason to be certain that even the rain that fell at the time of Creation could not have come from the sea, and that is why he gave another answer, an answer which would explain how even the rain at the time of Creation did not come from the sea. How, though, did Rebbi Yehoshua know that the rain at the time of Creation did not come from the sea? Perhaps that water indeed came from the sea (and indeed was salty). 
</p><p>
It is for this reason that Rashi writes that Rebbi Yehoshua's argument was that salty water cannot <i>grow crops</i>. Since the verse says that the water that fell at Creation watered the ground and caused all of the plants to sprout, that rain must not have been salty because plants cannot grow from salty water. That is why Rebbi Yehoshua insists that even the misty rain of Creation did not originate in the sea. (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>'ERETZ YISRAEL'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  Eretz Yisrael was created first, and then all the world.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  Hash-m waters Eretz Yisrael directly, and the rest of the 
          world through an intermediary.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  Eretz Yisrael drinks rainwater and the rest of the world 
          takes a remnant.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  Eretz Yisrael drinks first, and then the rest of the 
          world.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> It is like a man kneading cheese; he takes the 
               edible part, and discards the waste.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE SOURCE OF RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> R. Eliezer said that the seawater is sweetened 
          in the clouds - how does he know this?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> He merges two words in two Pesukim about rain to 
          read that it is 'prepared' in the clouds.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> What does R. Yehoshua do with these Pesukim?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> He learns from them that light clouds contain 
          little water, whereas dark clouds contain much water.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  The Beraisa about the Pasuk teaching us that the upper 
          waters are suspended with the word of Hash-m and bear the 
          fruit of rain follows R. Yehoshua.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  R. Eliezer counters that that Pasuk refers to the fruit 
          of Hashem's labors.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehoshua b. Levi):</font></b> The entire world drinks from a 
          remnant of  the waters of Gan Eden.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> From the remnant of a container that waters a Beis 
               Kor, one can water a Tarkav - one-sixtieth.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>RELATIVE MEASURES</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> Mitzrayim measures 400 by 400 Parsah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  It is a sixtieth of Kush, which is a sixtieth of the 
          world, which is a sixtieth of Gan, which is a sixtieth of 
          Eden, which is a sixtieth of Gehinom.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  Thus, the whole world is like a pot-cover for Gehinom.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  Some say that Gehinom has no measurement.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  Some say that Eden has no measurement.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Oshiya):</font></b> A Pasuk alludes to Bavel having abundant 
          grain because it is situated on ample waters.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rav):</font></b> Bavel is wealthy in that it need not rely on 
          rainwater for its produce.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Abaye):</font></b> It is shady and moist, not dry.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' ASKING FOR RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Tana Kama):</font></b> We begin to ask for rain on the third of 
          Cheshvan.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Raban Gamliel):</font></b> We begin on the seventh, fifteen days 
          after Sukos, so that the last pilgrim can reach the 
          Euphrates.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>5) </font></b><font color='blue'>ASKING FOR RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Elazar):</font></b> The Halachah follows Raban Gamliel.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Chananyah):</font></b> In Bavel, they only begin to ask for rain 
          sixty days into the season.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Huna bar Chiya citing Shmuel):</font></b> The Halachah follows 
          Chananyah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Surely Shmuel said that we ask for rain 
               from when firewood is brought into the house of 
               Tabus the bird-trapper?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> Perhaps they are both the same date.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Is the sixtieth day counted with the preceding 
          period, or is part of the ensuing period (and we ask for 
          rain on it)?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Rav said it is past of the ensuing period, Shmuel 
          said it is part of the preceding period.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The Siman for this is that Rav, who lives in the 
               high ground of Eretz Yisrael, requires more water, 
               and therefore begins asking for rain earlier; Shmuel 
               lives in the lower ground of Bavel and needs less.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Papa):</font></b> The Halachah is that the sixtieth day is part 
          of the ensuing period.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>6) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' FASTING FOR RAIN</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  If no rain had fallen by the seventeenth of Cheshvan, 
          select individuals would fast three fasts.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> With these fasts, they would eat and drink at 
               nightfall.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> They were permitted to perform Melachah, wash, 
               anoint themselves, wear leather shoes, and engage in 
               marital relations.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  If no rain had arrived by Rosh Chodesh Kislev, Beis Din 
          would decree three fasts upon the community.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> With these fasts, they would eat and drink at 
               nightfall.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> They were permitted to perform Melachah, wash, 
               anoint themselves, wear leather shoes, and engage in 
               marital relations.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>7) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE FAST OF THE INDIVIDUALS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Who are the 'select individuals'?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer (R. Huna):</font></b> The Rabanan.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Huna):</font></b> The three fasts of these individuals are on 
          Monday, Thursday and Monday.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> We already know that fasts may not begin 
               on Thursday, because of its effect on prices!?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> One might have thought that that only 
               applies to community fasts, but not to individuals 
               fasting.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> A Beraisa likewise states that the individuals would 
               fast on Monday, Thursday, and Monday, breaking for 
               Rosh Chodesh and the festive days listed in Megilas 
               Ta'anis.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) HALACHAH: WHEN DO WE BEGIN TO ASK FOR RAIN</b></font><b>
<br>OPINIONS:</b> The Mishnah records an argument about when we begin to ask for rain in the Shemoneh Esreh ('v'Sen Tal u'Matar'). Raban Gamliel maintains that we begin to ask for rain on the seventh of Marcheshvan, fifteen days after Sukos has ended, in order to give time to the people who came to the Beis ha'Mikdash from far away to return home after the festival. Rebbi Elazar says that the Halachah follows the view of Raban Gamliel.
</p><p>
The Gemara cites a Beraisa in which Chananyah states that in the Golah (outside of Eretz Yisrael, in Bavel), the request for rain begins on the sixtieth day after the Tekufah (the vernal equinox). Shmuel says that the Halachah follows Chananyah.
</p><p>
Based on these rulings, when should the people in Eretz Yisrael begin to ask for rain, and when should the people in Bavel and in other places outside of Eretz Yisrael begin to ask for rain?
</p><p>
(a) The Gemara earlier (4b) explains that we begin to ask for rain on the seventh of Marcheshvan in order to give the Olei Regalim time to return home, as the Mishnah here states. The Gemara points out that nowadays in Eretz Yisrael we ask for rain right after Sukos, because the Beis ha'Mikdash is no longer standing and there are no Olei Regalim for whom we should delay the request for rain. In places outside of Eretz Yisrael where the rain season differs from that in Eretz Yisrael and the fruits are still drying in the fields after Sukos, the request for rain does not begin until the seventh of Marcheshvan.
</p><p>
When Chananyah says that the request for rain begins on the sixtieth day after the Tekufah, the Gemara explains that he refers to an area like Bavel which is naturally saturated with water and does not need rain until much later in the winter. The Rishonim, therefore, write that based on these Gemaras, there should be three different times, for three different places, at which the request for rain begins:
</p><p>
1. In Eretz Yisrael when there are no Olei Regalim, and in areas outside of Eretz Yisrael where the fruits are not drying in the fields, the request for rain should begin immediately after Sukos.
</p><p>
2. In any place where fruits in the field need to dry, or in Eretz Yisrael when the Beis ha'Mikdash is standing and there are Olei Regalim, the request for rain should begin on the seventh of Marcheshvan.
</p><p>
3. In any place in which rain is not needed until later in the winter, the request for rain should begin only sixty days after the Tekufah.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>RIF</b>, however, quotes only the Gemara that says that the request for rain begins on the seventh of Marcheshvan in Eretz Yisrael and on the sixtieth day after the Tekufah in the Golah. He makes no mention of the option of asking for rain immediately after Sukos. The <b>RAMBAM</b> also makes no mention of this option. Apparently, they rule that when the Gemara earlier (4b) mentions the opinion of Rebbi Yochanan who says that we ask for rain right after Sukos, the Gemara concludes that the Halachah does not follow Rebbi Yochanan's opinion and thus that date is not an option.
</p><p>
The Mishnah, however, says that the only reason why we begin to ask for rain on the seventh of Marcheshvan is to give time to the Olei Regalim to return home. Today there are no Olei Regalim, and, therefore, we should begin to ask for rain right after Sukos. Why do we wait until the seventh of Marcheshvan?
</p><p>
Perhaps the reason why we wait until the seventh of Marcheshvan is because once the initial Takanah was instituted to ask for rain on the seventh of Marcheshvan (to give time to the Olei Regalim to return home), that Takanah remains in effect even though the reason for its institution is no longer present. (See Beitzah 5a.)
</p><p>
The <b>RAN</b> gives another reason for why we wait until the seventh of Marcheshvan even today. He asserts that it was customary in his day to travel to Yerushalayim for the festivals in commemoration of Aliyah l'Regel. Therefore, we still must wait for the people who traveled to Yerushalayim to return home before we begin to ask for rain.
</p><p>
(The <b>RAMBAM</b> in Perush ha'Mishnayos adds that the people in every country begin to ask for rain on the date which is their country's equivalent of the seventh of Marcheshvan in Eretz Yisrael -- that is, the date when it normally begins to rain in that land. However, he makes no mention of this in the Mishneh Torah.)
</p><p>
According to this view, there are only two possible times to begin saying 'v'Sen Tal u'Matar': the seventh of Marcheshvan, and sixty days after the Tekufah.
</p><p>
(c) The Rishonim (<b>ROSH</b>, <b>RITVA</b> and others) write that the common practice in their areas was to ask for rain on the sixtieth day after the Tekufah in all of Chutz la'Aretz, even outside of Bavel (such as in Spain and Germany). This was a tradition from the Ge'onim.
</p><p>
The reason for this practice is apparently because all of Chutz la'Aretz follows the custom of Bavel (as <b>RASHI</b> mentions in DH Tasa'i). However, applying this rule to the time at which the request for rain is said needs further explanation. The date on which we begin to ask for rain depends entirely on the climate of the region. Why should all countries follow the practice of Bavel if their climates differ from that of Bavel? (<b>ROSH</b> 1:4, Teshuvos 10:4)
</p><p>
The <b>RITVA</b> explains that, in principle, the Chachamim preferred that people in different regions not begin the request for rain at different times. Therefore, the Chachamim enacted only two times to begin asking for rain: immediately after Sukos when there is no Beis ha'Mikdash and there is no reason to delay saying it, and sixty days after the Tekufah when there is a reason to delay asking for rain (such as in Chutz l'Aretz, where the fruits are still drying in the fields). Although the Gemara earlier (4b) says that the request for rain begins on the seventh of Marcheshvan in a place where fruits are drying in the fields after Sukos, the Gemara immediately afterwards says that only in Eretz Yisrael, when the Beis ha'Mikdash is standing, does the request for rain begin on the seventh of Marcheshvan. The Gemara at that point retracts its previous answer and says that nowadays the request for rain does not begin on the seventh of Marcheshvan <i>anywhere</i>. Consequently, there are only two possible dates on which the request for rain may begin: immediately after Sukos, or sixty days after the Tekufah. Similarly, in the times of the Beis ha'Mikdash there were only two possible dates on which the request for rain could begin: the seventh of Marcheshvan (in Eretz Yisrael), or sixty days after the Tekufah (in Chutz la'Aretz).
</p><p>
The Ritva agrees with the Rif and Rambam that there are only two possible times to start saying 'v'Sen Tal u'Matar' nowadays, but he argues about what those two times are. According to the Ritva, the two possible times are right after Sukos and sixty days after the Tekufah. According to the Rif and Rambam, they are the seventh of Marcheshvan and sixty days after the Tekufah.
</p><p>

<b>HALACHAH:</b> The <b>SHULCHAN ARUCH</b> (OC 117) rules that the people in Eretz Yisrael begin to ask for rain on the seventh of Marcheshvan (like the Rif and Rambam in (b) above), even nowadays. The people in Chutz la'Aretz begin to ask for rain on the sixtieth day after the Tekufah (like the practice of the Ge'onim in (c) above), in all parts of Chutz la'Aretz.
</p><p>
The Shulchan Aruch rules that if a person said 'v'Sen Tal u'Matar' during the summertime in a country which needs rain in the summer, then b'Di'eved he may rely on the opinions that maintain that the request for rain in each country depends on when that country needs rain (Rosh, and Rambam in Perush ha'Mishnayos), and he does not need to repeat the Shemoneh Esreh. (He may recite the Shemoneh Esreh again as a Tefilas Nedavah if he wants to be stringent.) However, the Acharonim argue about what defines 'a place which needs rain in the summer.' Some maintain that this refers to a country which normally receives rain in the summer and in which rain is beneficial for the land at that time as well. Others say that it refers to a place which is suffering from a drought and is in <i>dire need</i> of rain (and only in such a place does one not repeat Shemoneh Esreh if he asked for rain in the summer). The <b>BI'UR HALACHAH</b> concludes that because of the uncertainty, one should repeat the Shemoneh Esreh as a Tefilas Nedavah if he is in a place in which rain normally falls in the summer but in which there is no drought.
</p><p>


<font><b>2) DECEMBER 4, 2100</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara rules that outside of Eretz Yisrael, the request for rain in the Shemoneh Esreh begins 'sixty days after the Tekufah of Tishrei.'
</p><p>
What is special about this date?
</p><p>
<b>RAV YONAH MERTZBACH</b> (<b>ALAH YONAH</b>, p. 22) explains why this date was chosen. In Eretz Yisrael, where rain is needed more, in the event that no rain falls until the first of Kislev, Beis Din institutes days of prayer and fasting. The Chachamim chose to institute the prayer for rain in Bavel on a day which corresponds to this important date in Eretz Yisrael since it is the latest time for the rains to begin in Eretz Yisrael. However, since most people outside of Eretz Yisrael are non-Jews who use a solar calendar, and since the rainy season is actually more closely related to the solar year than to the lunar year, the Chachamim instituted that the request for rain should begin on the first of the 'solar month of Kislev.' The Gemara in Rosh Hashanah (15a) similarly refers to a 'solar Shevat' which is 30 days after the Tekufah of Teves. Likewise, 'solar Kislev' begins 60 days after the Tekufah of Tishrei, and that is when those outside of Eretz Yisrael should begin to ask for rain.
</p><p>
Tekufas Tishrei, the vernal equinox, occurs on September 23 (or September 24 in a year which precedes a leap year). Hence, 60 days after Tekufas Tishrei would be November 22 (or November 23 before a leap year), which indeed is the date given by the <b>AVUDRAHAM</b> for when the request for rain begins (as cited by the <b>BEIS YOSEF</b> OC 117). Why, then, in Chutz la'Aretz is the practice today to begin to ask for rain only on December 4 (or 5), 12 days later?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER:</b> The Gemara in a number of places quotes Shmuel who makes an important statement about the length of the year. Shmuel says that each of the four Tekufos (seasons) of the year lasts 91 days and 7 1/2 hours. Accordingly, a year is 365 days and 6 hours long (91 days and 7 1/2 hours X 4). 
</p><p>
In the year 3714 (46 BCE), Julius Caesar arranged the first <i>solar</i> calendar, a calendar based on the earth's position in relation to the sun. His calendar is the basis for the one used by the modern world today. Caesar's astronomers advised him that the solar year is exactly 365 1/4 days (365 days and 6 hours) long, the same as Shmuel's calculation. (Besides the 365 days of the average year, he instituted the addition of a 366th day every four years in order to reflect the extra day that the solar year gained after the passage of four years, due to the four extra 1/4 days of each year.)
</p><p>
This figure, however, is imprecise. The exact length, rounded to the nearest second, is 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes, and 46 seconds. Thus, the actual year is 11 minutes shorter than Shmuel calculated. In practical terms, every 128 years the equinoxes and solstices will arrive one day (11 minutes X 128) late on Shmuel's calendar.
</p><p>
As time passed, it became evident that the calendar was not compensating properly for the true length of the year. In order to prevent the summer months from occurring during winter and the winter months during summer, the astronomers modified the Julian calendar and adopted a new version known as the Gregorian calendar. In the year 5342 (1582 <b><b><b>CE</b></b></b>), they cut out the ten days that were added to the year over the passage of time due to the miscalculation of the Julian astronomers. (The day after October 4 that year was not October 5, but October 15.) They also agreed to deduct three leap years every 400 years. Three out of four centesimal years (for example, the years 1700, 1800, and 1900) will <i>not</i> be leap years, even though they are divisible by four (those years have no February 29). Only a centesimal year in which the number of <i>centuries</i> is divisible by 4 (such as the years 1600 and 2000) will be a leap year. According to their calculations, the average year is 365 days, 5 hours, 49 minutes and 12 seconds long. This is actually off by approximately 26 seconds, but it is sufficiently accurate for most practical purposes. The calendar will be ahead by one day only after 3,323 years.
</p><p>
At that time, the Jewish authorities agreed that it was not necessary to institute a parallel change to the Jewish lunisolar calendar with regard to calculating when the Tekufos occur (which, in Halachah, affects the date on which we begin to recite the request for rain, and the date on which we recite Birkas ha'Chamah). We still rely on Shmuel's calculation of the solar year. However, as a result of the change made by the Gregorian calendar, sixty days after the Tekufah was changed from the night of November 21 (which becomes November 22 at midnight) to December 1. In 1700, when another leap year was skipped by the Gregorian calendar, the day for saying 'v'Sen Tal u'Matar' became December 2, and in 1800 it moved up to December 3 (this is the date recorded as the time to say 'v'Sen Tal u'Matar' by the Chayei Adam and his 19th century contemporaries). In 1900, the date was moved up to December 4. This is why 'v'Sen Tal u'Matar' is said in Chutz la'Aretz beginning from December 4 (or 5, in the year preceding a leap year) today.
</p><p>
This date, December 4 (or 5), did not change upon the arrival of the year 2000, since that year is a centesimal year divisible by 400, which <i>is</i> a leap year according to the Gregorian calendar. Only in the year 2100 will we have to change the date for starting to say 'v'Sen Tal u'Matar' in Chutz la'Aretz, and Mashi'ach certainly will have arrived well before that date.
</p><p>
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
<b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>8) </font></b><font color='blue'>CLASSIFYING PEOPLE</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> A person should not say that he is only a 
          Talmid and unworthy to be one of the individuals who 
          fasts; all Talmidei Chachamim fall into this category.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Who qualifies as one of these individuals - someone 
               who is worthy of being appointed as head of the 
               community.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Who qualifies as a Talmid - someone who can reply to 
               any question, even one from Maseches Kalah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa) (R. Meir):</font></b> Not everyone can be one of these 
          individuals or a Talmid.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yosi):</font></b> Anyone can be one of these individuals, 
               and is remembered for the good; it is not good for 
               him, but painful.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa) (R. Shimon b. Elazar):</font></b> Not everyone can be one 
          of these individuals or a Talmid.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Shimon b. Gamliel):</font></b> Anyone can be one of these 
               individuals, and is remembered for the good; it is 
               not good for him, but painful.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>9) </font></b><font color='blue'>CHANGES IN THE SITUATION REGARDING FASTING</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> If someone was fasting on account of troubles 
          and it passed, or an account of a sick person and they 
          became healed, he should complete his fast.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> If someone travels to a place where they are 
               fasting, he should join their fast.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> If he travels from a place where they are fasting to 
               a place where they are not fasting, he should 
               complete his fast.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> If (in case a1) he forgetfully ate and drank, he 
               should not be seen to do so in public, and he should 
               not indulge.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  We find this with Yaakov, when he told his sons not to 
          appear satisfied before Eisav and Yishmael.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>10) </font></b><font color='blue'>TRAVEL TIPS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  Yaakov also told his sons not to get too involved in a 
          point of Halachah whilst journeying in case they would 
          lose their way.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Surely R. Ela'i said that two Talmidei 
               Chachamim who do not converse in Torah during their 
               journey deserve to be burned?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> They must review their studies, but they 
               must not become engrossed in analyzing them.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  This Pasuk was elsewhere explained to mean that one 
          should not take big strides, which take away one-five 
          hundredth of a person's vision.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  Yaakov also told them to enter the city during daylight.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah citing Rav):</font></b> A person should always leave and 
          enter a city during daylight.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah citing R. Chiya):</font></b> A traveler should not eat 
          more than he would eat during years of famine.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> In Bavel, they gave the reason as being so as to 
               avoid stomach sickness.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> In Eretz Yisrael, they gave the reason as being so 
               as to save his food.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  A practical difference would be in the case of 
                    a person travelling in a ship, where there is 
                    only the latter concern.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b></b> An alternate difference would be in the case of 
                    a person travelling from village to village, 
                    where there is only the former concern.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b></b>R. Papa would eat some bread every Parsah; he 
                    held that the only concern was sickness, which 
                    he would not suffer from (being generously 
                    built).
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>3) AGADAH: 'AL TIRGEZU BA'DARECH'</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Beraisa says that if one mistakenly ate on a public fast day, he should avoid being seen in public so that all of the people who are fasting should not feel bad when they see that he is not suffering (Rashi). This principle -- that one who is not suffering should be concerned with the feelings of others who are suffering -- is derived from the verse in which Yakov Avinu, whose family had ample food to eat, told his sons not to let themselves be seen satiated among the other people of the land who were suffering from famine (Bereishis 42:1). <b>RASHI</b> points out that for this reason Yakov Avinu sent his sons to Mitzrayim to buy food even though they had plenty of food in their home and were not suffering from the famine.
</p><p>
The Gemara quotes another verse, 'Al Tirgezu ba'Darech' (Bereishis 45:24), which expresses Yosef's directive to his brothers not to get involved in learning Torah while they travel lest they lose their way. The Gemara continues with other similar Halachos for the traveler, and then it returns to the topic of sensitivity for others who are suffering.
</p><p>
What connection does the Halachah of not getting involved in learning Torah while traveling have with the Gemara's teaching that one should be sensitive to the suffering of others?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER:</b> To answer this question, some other difficulties need to be addressed.
</p><p>
First, why did Yakov Avinu himself not instruct his sons to avoid getting involved in learning Torah while they traveled?
</p><p>
Second, why did Yosef give them this directive only on their final trip home? The first two times they left Mitzrayim, he did not tell them to avoid getting involved in learning Torah.
</p><p>
Third, since the brothers traveled to Mitzrayim to buy food to bring back to Eretz Yisrael during the famine, they were involved in the performance of a Mitzvah. The Gemara teaches that those who are involved in the performance of a Mitzvah (Sheluchei Mitzvah) will not be harmed (Pesachim 8a, Kidushin 39b, Chulin 142b). Why, then, did Yosef need to warn them to be careful?
</p><p>
Upon further thought, it becomes evident that the third question answers the first two questions. Since Yakov Avinu was sending his sons on a Mitzvah mission, he saw no need to warn them 'Al Tirgezu ba'Darech.' In contrast, when Yosef sent them back the third time, they were not involved in a Mitzvah. Therefore, Yosef needed to warn them to be careful.
</p><p>
What Mitzvah, however, were they involved in when Yakov Avinu sent them to Mitzrayim? They were not involved in the Mitzvah of procuring food for their family, because they already had plenty of food as the Gemara says. Rather, the Mitzvah that they were fulfilling by traveling to Mitzrayim was the Mitzvah to be concerned for the feelings of others. The Gemara is teaching that concern for the feelings of others is not merely a minor concern, but a fully binding obligation in the laws of Derech Eretz. The Gemara teaches this by pointing out that when Yakov Avinu told his sons to show their concern for the feelings of others by traveling to Mitzrayim (to make it look as though they suffered like the other residents of Eretz Yisrael), he did <i>not</i> warn them to be careful -- because he did not <i>need</i> to: Sheluchei Mitzvah will not be harmed. This shows that the requirement to be concerned for the suffering of others is a Mitzvah and an obligation in the laws of Derech Eretz.
</p><p>
In contrast, when Yosef sent them back to Eretz Yisrael he warned them to be careful because they were no longer involved in the Mitzvah of not being seen by those who were suffering. They had already traveled to Mitzrayim like the other residents of Eretz Yisrael who were actually suffering from the famine. The fact that Yosef told them to be careful and Yakov Avinu did not shows that they were originally involved in the Mitzvah of being concerned for the feelings of others.
</p><p>
This approach answers an additional difficulty in the verses. The full verse of 'Al Tirgezu ba'Darech' states, 'He sent away his brothers and they went, and he said to them, 'Al Tirgezu ba'Darech.'' The order of the verse is very strange. It says that he told them to be careful <i>after</i> he had already sent them away and they had left! The words 'and they went' should be written <i>after</i> the words 'and he said to them, 'Al Tirgezu ba'Darech.'
</p><p>
Perhaps the answer is that Yosef initially intended to send them to do a Mitzvah, and thus he had no need to warn them to be careful. The Torah relates that Yosef told his brothers not to be concerned about what they had done to him because it was all part of Hashem's plan (Bereishis 45:5). He told them that Hash-m sent him to Mitzrayim in order to insure the survival of his family (45:7), and that it was only Hash-m Who sent him there to make him the head of Pharaoh's household and ruler over Mitzrayim (45:8). Yosef told his brothers to tell their father that Hash-m made him master over Mitzrayim. Yosef was sending his brothers on a mission of a Mitzvah -- to relate the greatness of Hashem's providence.
</p><p>
Accordingly, the verse means to say as follows: 'He sent away his brothers' with a particular Mitzvah to perform, but 'they went' with their own agenda. They began to leave without accepting the mission Yosef had assigned to them. Indeed, when they returned to Yakov Avinu they did not relate to him what Yosef had told them to say. They did not mention that Hash-m had caused Yosef to become ruler in Mitzrayim. All they said to their father was that Yosef was still alive and that he was ruler over Mitzrayim (45:26). They did not mention that it all came about through Hashem's providence.
</p><p>
When Yosef saw that his brothers did not accept upon themselves the Mitzvah mission which he asked them to do (the Mitzvah of relating the greatness of Hashem's providence), he realized that they would not be considered Sheluchei Mitzvah and thus would be in danger of harm along the way. Therefore, at that point he needed to warn them to be careful, 'Al Tirgezu ba'Darech!' (<b>RAV YAKOV</b> D. HOMNICK in <b>MARBEH SHALOM</b> #36)
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>CONDUCT DURING FAMINE</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah citing Rav):</font></b> Anyone who deprives himself of 
          food in years of famine is saved from unusual forms of 
          death, as alluded to in a Pasuk.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Resh Lakish):</font></b> It is forbidden to engage in marital 
          relations during years of famine, as we see that Yosef 
          only had children before the famine.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> Childless people may engage in marital 
          relations during famine.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> If the community is in distress, and someone 
          separates himself from them, his two escorting Malachim 
          place their hands on his head and say that he will not 
          live to see the salvation of the community.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> When the community is in distress, a person 
          should not say that he will go home, eat and enjoy his 
          security.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Concerning such people, who say 'eat and drink for 
               tomorrow we die,' the Pasuk says that their sin is 
               only cleansed through death.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Such happens to people who at least acknowledge that 
               they will die; but with wicked people who do not 
               even admit to that, the Pasuk says that even 
               Tzadikim will die.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> Rather, a person should afflict himself in sympathy 
               with the troubles of the community.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> We find this with Moshe, who sat on a stone rather 
               than on a chair, to show empathy with the plight of 
               the Bnei Yisrael.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  Anyone who afflicts himself along with the community 
          merits seeing the salvation of the community.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b></b>  A person need not be concerned that no one will testify 
          about his doing so, as the Pasuk says that even his walls 
          and ceiling-beams will testify.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (D'bei R. Shila):</font></b> His two escorting Malachim testify 
               for him.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Chidka):</font></b> His Neshamah testifies for him.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Others say):</font></b> His limbs testify for him.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>REWARD AND PUNISHMENT</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Pasuk of 'the G-d of integrity' means that just as 
          Hash-m exacts retribution from Resha'im in the next world 
          even for minor sins, He exacts retribution from Tzadikim 
          in this world for minor sins.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  'Without injustice' means that just as He rewards 
          Tzadikim in the next world even for minor mitzvos, He 
          also rewards Resha'im in this world for minor mitzvos.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  'He is righteous and just' means that when a person dies, 
          a complete account of his deeds is listed to him, and he 
          admits to them, signs to them, and accepts the justice of 
          the verdict.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE VALUE OF FASTING</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Shmuel):</font></b> Anyone who fasts is called a sinner.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  He holds like the Tana of the following Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Elazar ha'Kafar citing Rebbi):</font></b> The Pasuk refers 
               to the Nazir as having sinned, because he deprived 
               himself from wine.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> If he is called a sinner just for abstaining from 
               wine, how much more so someone who abstains from all 
               food.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Elazar):</font></b> The Pasuk calls him 'holy.'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> If he is called holy just for abstaining from wine, 
               how much more so someone who abstains from all food.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> How does Shmuel account for the Pasuk 
                    calling him holy?
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> That refers to his hair being forbidden 
                    for benefit.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>Question:</font></b> How does R. Elazar account for the 
                    Pasuk saying that he has sinned?
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iv. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> That refers to a Nazir who became 
                    Tamei.
<br>            <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>v.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Surely R. Elazar said that a person 
                    should treat his insides as holy and not 
                    deprive them of anything!?
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) PERSONAL CONDUCT DURING TIMES OF FAMINE</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara teaches that marital relations are prohibited during times of famine, as derived from the conduct of Yosef during the famine in Mitzrayim.
</p><p>
If marital relations are prohibited during a time of famine, how was Yocheved conceived? Yocheved was born to Levi when the family of Yakov descended from Eretz Yisrael to Mitzrayim (as Rashi points out in Bereishis 46:26), which was two years into the famine. (<b>TOSFOS</b>)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) <b>TOSFOS</b> answers that the Gemara's statement is not law, but preferable behavior. Refraining from marital relations during times of famine is 'Midas Chasidus' and is not obligatory. (According to the <b>CHIDA</b> in <b>EIN ZOCHER</b> (Erech 'Asur'), Tosfos understands that the word 'Asur' in the Gemara means only Midas Chasidus. According to the <b>MAHARSHA</b> here, Tosfos means that only <i>for Yosef</i> the prohibition of marital relations was Midas Chasidus, because he did not yet have a daughter and thus had not yet fulfilled the Mitzvah of Piryah v'Rivyah.) Levi and his wife did not practice this Midas Chasidus. (The <b>RA'AVAD</b> writes in Sha'ar ha'Kedushah that before the Torah was given, the Avos and their children did not observe practices of Midas Chasidus, but only the actual Mitzvos.)
</p><p>
The <b><b><b>OR</b></b> HA'CHAIM</b> (Bereishis 41:50) questions this approach. The verse explicitly refers to Levi as 'Ish Chasidecha' (Devarim 33:8), implying that he <i>did</i> conduct himself with Midas Chasidus.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>DA'AS ZEKENIM</b> (Bereishis 41:50) quotes <b>RABEINU YEHUDAH HE'CHASID</b> who explains that marital relations are prohibited only when one knows, from a Navi's prophecy, that the famine will continue. Yosef was aware of the prophecy that was expressed in the dream of Pharaoh, and thus he knew that the famine would continue. Levi did not know the prophecy, and therefore he was permitted to engage in marital relations.
</p><p>
Apparently, Rabeinu Yehudah he'Chasid understands that the reason for the prohibition is to preserve the limited resources available during times of famine. Accordingly, the prohibition applies only if the child will be <i>born</i> during the famine and necessitate the consumption (either by him or by his mother) of more food.
</p><p>
(c) The <b>MIZRACHI</b> and the <b><b><b>OR</b></b> HA'CHAIM</b> answer that the prohibition against marital relations during times of famine does not apply to a couple which has no children, as the Gemara here says. The reason presumably is because their obligation to fulfill the Mitzvah of Piryah v'Rivyah overrides the prohibition against marital relations during times of famine. Although Levi had boys, he had no girls, and thus he had not yet fulfilled the Mitzvah of Piryah v'Rivyah. 
</p><p>
However, Yosef also had no daughters. Why, then, did Yosef refrain from marital relations while Levi did not? (See <b><b><b>OR</b></b> HA'CHAIM</b>.)
</p><p>
The <b>DA'AS ZEKENIM</b>, who also gives this answer, explains why Yosef acted differently from Levi even though they both had only boys. Yosef maintained that one fulfills the Mitzvah of Piryah v'Rivyah with two male children. Levi, on the other hand, maintained that one fulfills the Mitzvah only when he has at least one boy and one girl (both of these opinions are discussed in Yevamos 62a). Therefore, Levi maintained that he was included in the category of those who are permitted to engage in marital relations during a famine, while Yosef maintained that he was not included in that category.
</p><p>
(d) The <b>RITVA</b> here, as well as the <b>CHIZKUNI</b> and <b><b><b>OR</b></b> HA'CHAIM</b> in Parshas Vayigash, suggest that the reason why Levi did not refrain from marital relations during the famine was because the famine did not affect his family, which had plenty of food. Only the natives around them suffered, and there was no obligation to join in their suffering in this respect. (Although Levi knew that Yosef -- if he was still alive -- was in Mitzrayim and may have been suffering from the famine, he assumed that since Yosef was not married the rest of the family was not required to refrain from marital relations because of one member's plight.) Yosef, however, did not know that his father and brothers had food and he thought that they were suffering from the famine. Therefore, he joined them in their suffering and refrained from marital relations.
</p><p>
Perhaps we may suggest that even if Yosef was confident that his family had food because of the great merit of Yakov Avinu (after all, if he merited to have food himself, then certainly his father Yakov merited the same), he still separated from his wife because the Egyptians around him were suffering. Why, then, did Levi not separate from his wife out of concern for the suffering of his Canaanite neighbors? The <b>MIZRACHI</b> (beginning of Parshas Vayeshev) explains that when, many years earlier, Yosef reported to his father that his brothers were eating Ever Min ha'Chai (limbs from a live animal), he reported only his interpretation of their act. They were actually eating meat from an animal that had been slaughtered properly but was still kicking. An animal in such a state is permitted for a Jew to eat but is prohibited as Ever Min ha'Chai for a Ben Noach. The brothers maintained that they had the status of Jews, and therefore the animal was permissible to them. Yosef, however, maintained that they were considered Bnei Noach since the Torah had not yet been given, and thus they were forbidden to eat the animal.
</p><p>
Accordingly, Levi followed his own reasoning when he did not separate from his wife. He maintained that since he had the status of a Jew, he did not have to share in the suffering of the Canaanite natives around him. Yosef, on the other hand, maintained that the sons of Yakov were considered Bnei Noach. Therefore, he maintained that he was required to be concerned for the feelings of his fellow Bnei Noach (just as Noach did during the Flood; see Rashi to Bereishis 7:7). That is why Yosef separated from his wife while Levi did not. (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>vi. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> That was referring to a person who 
                    finds fasting overly difficult.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Resh Lakish):</font></b> Such a person is considered a Chasid.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Sheshes):</font></b> A Talmid Chacham who fasts might as well be 
          doing so because a dog ate his food.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yirmiyah bar Aba):</font></b> The extra restrictions of 
          community fast only apply in Bavel to Tish'ah b'Av.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Citing Resh Lakish):</font></b> A Talmid Chacham may not fast, 
               as it detracts from his studies.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>SPONTANEOUS FASTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Ze'ira citing R. Huna):</font></b> If an individual accepts a 
          fast, even if he ate and drank all night, he says Aneinu 
          the next day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  If he slept through the next night without eating, he 
          does not say Aneinu on the next day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question (R. Yosef):</font></b> Does R. Huna hold that a spontaneous 
          fast is invalid, or does he hold that a spontaneous fast 
          is valid, but Aneinu is not said for it?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer (Abaye):</font></b> He holds that a spontaneous fast is valid 
          and one <i>does</i> recite Aneinu for it; the difference here 
          is that the fast was not declared in advance.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  Mar Ukva was unable to answer the following questions in 
          Ginzak:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Is a spontaneous fast valid?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Is a jug that has been used to store wine of 
               non-Jews forbidden for usage?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> Which garments did Moshe wear while performing the 
               initiation of the Mishkan?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  At the Beis ha'Midrash, he was answered:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> A spontaneous fast is valid, and one says Aneinu.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The jug is permitted for use after twelve months.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> Moshe wore a white linen robe.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Kahana):</font></b> He wore a white linen robe without 
                    a hem (to remove suspicion of theft).
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>2) THE DEFINITION OF A 'TA'ANIS SHA'OS' </b></font><b>
<br>OPINIONS:</b> The Gemara discusses whether a 'Ta'anis Sha'os' is considered an actual Ta'anis and, if it is, whether or not one recites Aneinu (the prayer said on a Ta'anis) in the Shemoneh Esreh. What exactly is a Ta'anis Sha'os?
</p><p>
(a) <b>RASHI</b> understands that a Ta'anis Sha'os is simply a Ta'anis which one did not formally accept upon himself the previous day (one fasted without declaring, on the day before, a formal Kabalah to do so).
</p><p>
Why, though, is such a Ta'anis called a 'Ta'anis <i>Sha'os</i>'? In what way is this Ta'anis related to 'Sha'os' ('hours')?
</p><p>
Moreover, why does the Gemara say that when one continues to fast throughout the night which follows a Ta'anis ('Lan b'Ta'aniso'), it is not called a Ta'anis Sha'os because 'he was not Mekabel it.' By definition, every Ta'anis that one was not Mekabel is a Ta'anis Sha'os! Why should this type of fast without a Kabalah not be considered a Ta'anis Sha'os?
</p><p>
According to Rashi, the logic for why a Ta'anis which one did not accept upon himself the day before is called a 'Ta'anis Sha'os' is as follows. Since one did not accept the Ta'anis the day before (but only after the arrival of nightfall), that day of fasting is not a full day of Ta'anis. It lasts only a certain number of 'hours' and not a complete day, since it starts at the time he accepted it and continues until the end of the same day. In contrast, when one accepts the Ta'anis the day before, the entire day -- and not just a certain number of hours in the day -- is viewed as a '<i>day</i> of fasting' and not just '<i>hours</i> of fasting.'
</p><p>
Even though one who accepts a Ta'anis before nightfall is permitted to eat at night and his fast does not begin until daybreak, the night is still considered part of the fast. (Rashi in Shabbos (24a) writes explicitly that one who accepts a Ta'anis the day before should recite Aneinu at night, even though he still eats and drinks at that time.) If one accepts the Ta'anis after the night begins, the entire day cannot be considered a 'day of fasting' because the day itself began before he accepted the Ta'anis.
</p><p>
The Gemara says that when one continues to fast throughout the night after a Ta'anis ('Lan b'Ta'aniso'), this is not considered a Ta'anis Sha'os. This is because the person not only failed to accept the Ta'anis upon himself the day before, but he <i>never</i> accepted it upon himself at all. Only <i>after</i> he fasted did he express his desire to say Aneinu for his 'retroactive' fast, but by then it was too late to convert his act of fasting into a formal Ta'anis.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>ROSH</b> maintains that both a Ta'anis and a Ta'anis Sha'os are the same with regard to one's acceptance (Kabalah) of the fast. One must accept upon himself the fast the day before in order for it to be considered a valid Ta'anis. The difference between the two types of fasts is that for a Ta'anis Sha'os, one accepts to fast only a certain number of hours during the day (as the term 'Ta'anis Sha'os' implies). An ordinary Ta'anis is when one accepts to fast the entire day.
</p><p>
In the case in which the person did not accept the Ta'anis the day before but only <i>on the day</i> that he started to fast (albeit before the fast began), it is not considered even a Ta'anis Sha'os.
</p><p>


<font><b>3) RECITING 'ANEINU' AFTER FASTING THROUGH THE NIGHT</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> Rav Huna says that if one fasted during the day and continued to fast through the next night, he does not recite Aneinu in his Shemoneh Esreh the next day.
</p><p>
Why would one have thought that he should recite Aneinu on the day after his fast? <b>RASHI</b> (DH l'Machar) explains that one might have thought that he should say Aneinu in order to fulfill the obligation to recite Aneinu for his act of fasting of the <i>night before</i>. Rav Huna teaches that there is no obligation to recite Aneinu for his nighttime fast because he did not accept upon himself to fast during the night.
</p><p>
Why does Rashi explain that Rav Huna means that Aneinu is said retroactively for the fast of the previous night? The person presumably has not stopped fasting, and thus he should recite Aneinu during the day for the fast that he is <i>still</i> observing.
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER:</b> The Gemara (12a) states that the Ta'anis is considered a Ta'anis Sha'os only when one eats nothing <i>until the end of the day</i>. Accordingly, when one continues to fast throughout the night after a fast, he cannot say Aneinu the following day because he is going to eat before the end of the day. The night's fast does not qualify as a valid Ta'anis on which one may say Aneinu.
</p><p>
For this reason, the <b>ROSH</b> says that Rav Huna does not refer to a case in which one fasts for a single day and wants to say Aneinu on the following day before he eats. Rather, he refers to a case in which one decides, on the morning after a Ta'anis, to fast for two full consecutive days. He wants to say Aneinu after the first night and not eat again until nightfall. (<b>KORBAN NESANEL</b> 1:10:5)
</p><p>
Rashi does not accept that explanation because the Gemara uses the words 'Lan b'Ta'aniso,' which imply that the person had no intention to fast a second day but merely to fast during the night following his one-day fast. Therefore, Rashi explains that the prayer of Aneinu which one wants to recite during the day after his nighttime fast is for the fast that he <i>already</i> observed (the previous night) and not for the fast that he is observing at the time that he recites Shemoneh Esreh during the day. When the Gemara later (12a) says that one must fast until sundown, it refers to a case in which one started his fast at sunrise. Rashi understands that just as a fast from sunrise to sunset constitutes a valid Ta'anis, so, too, a fast from sunset to sunrise constitutes a valid Ta'anis. For this reason, Rashi says that one might have thought that he may recite Aneinu because of the fast of the preceding night which had a status of a Ta'anis Sha'os. In contrast, there was no reason for the Gemara to presume that one should recite Aneinu when he fasts for a short while on the next day, because he is going to eat before sundown and thus that day does not have the status of a Ta'anis. (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>SPONTANEOUS FASTS (cont.)</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Chisda):</font></b> A spontaneous fast is only valid if he 
          fasted all day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question (Abaye):</font></b> Obviously that is a perfectly 
               valid and normal fast!?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> It refers to a case where after not having 
               eaten in the morning he spontaneously decided to 
               fast all day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Chisda):</font></b> A fast is only valid if it lasts until 
          sunset.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> A Mishnah says that the men of the Mishmar 
               would fast for only part of the day!?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> They fast simply in solidarity with the 
               community.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> We find that one family of Kohanim, when 
               Tish'ah b'Av was delayed until Sunday, only fasted 
               for part of the day, because that day was a festival 
               for them!?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> They, too, fasted simply in solidarity with 
               the community.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>5.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> R. Yochanan once declared that he would 
               fast until he arrived home!?
Answer: He said it only 
               to avoid having to eat with the Nasi.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>ADVANCE ACCEPTANCE OF FASTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Shmuel):</font></b> Any fast that was not formally accepted from 
          the day before is not considered a fast.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> If he does fast, he is no better than a bellows full 
               of air.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> When should he accept it?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer (Rav):</font></b> At the time of Minchah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #2 (Shmuel):</font></b> During the Minchah prayer.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yosef):</font></b> Support for Shmuel can be seen in 
               Megilas Ta'anis which refers to someone being 
               Yeyaser, which presumably means committing himself 
               during prayer.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Refutation:</font></b> It means that he has become forbidden to 
               eat (but not necessarily through Tefilah).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> R. Chiya and R. Shimon b. Rebbi argue over whether 
               the phrase says Yeyaser (meaning as explained) or 
               Ye'aser.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  According to the latter, it is saying that if 
                    someone accepted to fast on Monday and Thursday 
                    all year, and the festive days of Megilas 
                    Ta'anis coincided with one of these, then 
                    whichever came first takes precedence.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>EATING BEFORE A FAST</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> Before a daytime fast, one may eat:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rebbi):</font></b> Until daybreak.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Eliezer bar Shimon):</font></b> Until the rooster crows.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Abaye):</font></b> If he had finished his meal, all agree that he 
          may no longer eat..
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> We find that he may eat even after 
               standing after finishing his meal!?
               Answer: That is only where the table was not removed 
               from him.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate version:</font></b> (Rava) If he slept, all agree that he 
          may no longer eat.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> We find that he may eat even after 
               standing after sleeping!?
               Answer: That is where he was only dozing.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> What is classified as dozing?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer (R. Ashi):</font></b> It refers to someone who is 
               half-awake and not fully able to converse.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) EATING BEFORE AND AFTER A 'TA'ANIS SHA'OS'</b></font><b>
<br>OPINIONS:</b> Rav Chisda states that a Ta'anis Sha'os is a valid Ta'anis only when the person does not eat anything until nightfall.
</p><p>
If a Ta'anis Sha'os is when one does not eat for the entire day, in what way does a Ta'anis Sha'os differ from an ordinary Ta'anis?
</p><p>
(a) <b>RASHI</b> says that although a person who observes a Ta'anis Sha'os does not eat all day, his Ta'anis differs from an ordinary Ta'anis in that he did not accept upon himself the Ta'anis the day before. Only during the day that he actually fasted did he decide to formally accept upon himself the day as a fast. In contrast, when one accepts the Ta'anis the day before, his fast is an ordinary Ta'anis. (See Insights to Ta'anis 11:2:a.)
</p><p>
(b) The <b>RAMBAN</b> and <b>RITVA</b> cite the Yerushalmi which says explicitly that a person may observe a Ta'anis Sha'os even after he ate cheese and drank water. They explain that when the Gemara here says that a person may not eat anything on the day of a Ta'anis Sha'os, it means that one may not eat anything as a Se'udas Keva, a normal meal. One may, however, taste foods and then start his Ta'anis Sha'os afterwards, as the Yerushalmi implies.
</p><p>
When Rav Chisda says that one may not taste anything on a Ta'anis Sha'os until nightfall, he means that one may not taste anything <i>after</i> he starts to fast. He <i>may</i> taste something <i>before</i> he starts to fast.
</p><p>
(c) The <b>RAN</b> also rules like the Yerushalmi and says that one may eat on the day of a Ta'anis Sha'os before the Ta'anis begins. In contrast to the view of the Ramban and Ritva, however, he does not differentiate between tasting food (a snack) and eating a full meal. This is also the ruling of the <b>RAMBAM</b> (Hilchos Ta'anis 1:13). The Ran and Rambam maintain that Rav Chisda discusses only the obligation to fast <i>after</i> one starts the Ta'anis Sha'os until nightfall. He does not mean that one must fast from daybreak until the time of his Ta'anis Sha'os.
</p><p>
(d) The Yerushalmi cited by the Rishonim adds another point. Not only is one permitted to eat before the Ta'anis Sha'os, but one may even observe a Ta'anis Sha'os during the first half of the day and eat <i>after</i> the Ta'anis, during the second half of the day.
</p><p>
The Yerushalmi's allowance seems to contradict the Gemara here which says that one must fast until nightfall. The <b>ROSH</b> (1:12) and <b>TOSFOS</b> (Avodah Zarah 34a) suggest that perhaps the Gemara here and the Yerushalmi do not disagree, and that the Gemara here also maintains that one may eat before nightfall after he observes a Ta'anis Sha'os during the first part of the day. When Rav Chisda says that one must fast until nightfall, he means that l'Chatchilah if one wants to experience the severity of a Ta'anis properly (in order to recite Aneinu), he must refrain from eating until nightfall. However, even if he accepts only to fast until midday and he plans to eat afterwards, his word is still binding because a half-day fast is also considered a fast with regard to his obligation to fast until the time he stipulated.
</p><p>
(This is in contrast to what Rashi writes numerous times throughout the Sugya, that when one accepts to fast for only part of a day, his Kabalah is not considered a 'Nidrei Mitzvah' at all and is not binding. See Rashi DH l'Tze'urei Nafshei.)
</p><p>
(e) The <b>TERUMAS HA'DESHEN</b> (#157) asserts that when one accepts to fast until midday and to eat afterwards, even Rav Chisda would agree that his fast is a full-fledged Ta'anis Sha'os and that he must recite Aneinu. Rav Chisda maintains that one must fast until nightfall only when he accepted upon himself to fast for an <i>entire day</i>. If he accepted only a Ta'anis Sha'os, he may eat after the Ta'anis Sha'os is over, as the Yerushalmi says.
</p><p>

<b>HALACHAH:</b> The <b>SHULCHAN ARUCH</b> (OC 562:1) cites the Gemara here which says that one who accepts a Ta'anis only until midday does not recite Aneinu. The Shulchan Aruch (562:11) rules like the <b>ROSH</b> and says that although one does not recite Aneinu, he is required to fulfill his pledge to fast until midday (or from midday until nightfall), but he may eat during the rest of the day.
</p><p>
The <b>REMA</b> (562:1) says that one should take into account the opinion of the <b>TERUMAS HA'DESHEN</b> who rules that one recites Aneinu even if he accepted to fast only until midday and plans to eat after that. Therefore, one should recite Aneinu in the blessing of 'Shome'a Tefilah' on such a fast. The <b>MISHNAH BERURAH</b> (562:6) adds that this applies only if one recites Minchah before he ends his fast. If he eats before Minchah, he does not recite Aneinu even according to the Terumas ha'Deshen.
</p><p>


<font><b>2) ACCEPTING UPON ONESELF A 'TA'ANIS SHA'OS'</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> Shmuel says that if one does not formally accept upon himself to fast the day before he intends to fast, his fast is not a valid Ta'anis. The Gemara earlier (11b), however, discusses a 'Ta'anis Sha'os,' a fast which one observes without accepting it the day before (as Rashi explains there), which is nonetheless a valid Ta'anis.
</p><p>
According to Shmuel, such a fast should not be a valid Ta'anis since the person did not accept it upon himself the day before. How are these two statements of the Gemara to be reconciled? 
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>RITVA</b> and <b>RAN</b> explain that Shmuel emphasizes that one must <i>accept</i> upon himself the Ta'anis before he begins to fast, but he does not necessarily have to accept it the day before he fasts. A Ta'anis Sha'os also needs a Kabalah, but it does not need to be done the day before the fast. Shmuel refers to an ordinary Ta'anis, when one accepts upon himself to fast the entire day. In the case of an ordinary Ta'anis, the person must accept the fast on the previous day.
</p><p>
(b) <b>TOSFOS</b> in Avodah Zarah (34a) and the <b>ROSH</b> (1:12) indeed rule that one must accept the Ta'anis Sha'os the day before (see Insights to Ta'anis 11:2). This is easy to understand according to the Yerushalmi which says that a partial Ta'anis (Ta'anis Sha'os) is acceptable even when one eats on the same day as the Ta'anis (before it starts or after it finishes). One may accept upon himself, on the preceding day, to observe a Ta'anis Sha'os which will last for only a few hours, and he may eat until the time at which his fast starts.
</p><p>
However, according to those Rishonim (such as Rashi) who explain that a Ta'anis Sha'os refers to a full-day fast without a formal Kabalah the day before, how is it possible to <i>accept</i> upon oneself, the day before, to observe a Ta'anis Sha'os on the following day? By definition, the fast is a Ta'anis Sha'os only when one does not accept it the day before!
</p><p>
Tosfos in Avodah Zarah explains that even according to those Rishonim, it is possible for a person to accept upon himself a Ta'anis Sha'os on the previous day. The person can accept upon himself that <i>if</i> he does not eat (for whatever reason) the next day until midday, then <i>now</i> he accepts upon himself to fast from midday tomorrow until the end of the day. In such a case, he fasts the entire day with a Kabalas Ta'anis, but without accepting upon himself to fast the entire day.
</p><p>
(c) Tosfos and the Rosh cite <b>RABEINU TAM</b> who says that Shmuel requires a Kabalah only l'Chatchilah. The Kabalah makes a person's fast into a valid, full-fledged Ta'anis. Even without a Kabalah, however, his fast is still considered a valid Ta'anis (and he fulfills his obligation to fast, and perhaps he may even recite Aneinu). When the Gemara says that one who fasts without a Kabalah is like a 'blown-up sack,' it means that he must repent for the misdeed of afflicting himself without a formal acceptance of the Ta'anis.
</p><p>
(d) The <b>RIF</b> omits the entire Sugya of Ta'anis Sha'os. The <b>RAN</b> suggests that the Rif may have understood that Shmuel argues with Rav Huna and with those who say that a Ta'anis Sha'os is a valid Ta'anis, and he rules like Shmuel that there is no such thing as a Ta'anis Sha'os. One must accept upon himself his fast the day before, and there is no partial Ta'anis.
</p><p>

<b>HALACHAH:</b> The <b>SHULCHAN ARUCH</b> (OC 562:5) rules like Shmuel who says that one must accept upon himself a Ta'anis the day before. He cites two opinions ((a) and (b) above) with regard to whether a Ta'anis Sha'os requires a Kabalah the day before or not (562:10). The <b>REMA</b> (562:5) cites the opinion of Rabeinu Tam who says that the requirement to accept the Ta'anis is only l'Chatchilah, and even if one did not formally accept to fast he may still recite Aneinu. (The <b>MISHNAH BERURAH</b> adds that one may recite Aneinu when he fasts without a Kabalah only if he fasts for the entire day, but not if he fasts for only part of the day. However, he still may recite Aneinu without the words 'Yom Tzom Ta'anisenu.')
</p><p>
In the case of a Ta'anis Chalom (a fast for a bad dream), everyone agrees that no Kabalah is necessary and one may recite Aneinu.
</p><p>


<font><b>3) 'YE'ASER' OR 'YEYASER'?</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara records a dispute between Rav and Shmuel about when one must accept upon himself a Ta'anis. Rav maintains that one may accept the Ta'anis at any time before the day of the Ta'anis. Shmuel maintains that one must accept the Ta'anis specifically in the Minchah Shemoneh Esreh on the day before the Ta'anis.
</p><p>
The Gemara cites support for Shmuel's view from a Beraisa in Megilas Ta'anis. After the Beraisa lists the days on which fasting is prohibited, it says that 'any person who accepted upon himself from before those days, Yeyaser.' <b>RASHI</b> explains that 'Yeyaser' means that the person must 'make himself prohibited' from eating by accepting the 'Ta'anis' again before the day of the Ta'anis. Even though he already accepted upon himself to fast, his initial Kabalah did not make the Ta'anis binding enough to override the Yom Tov of Megilas Ta'anis. Only if he formally accepts upon himself <i>again</i> -- with the wording of an oath -- to fast is his Kabalah considered strong enough to override the Yom Tov. The Gemara infers from this Beraisa support for the view of Shmuel who maintains that one must accept the Ta'anis during the Minchah Shemoneh Esreh.
</p><p>
In defense of Rav, the Gemara cites another version of the Beraisa which reads 'Ye'aser' instead of 'Yeyaser.' 'Ye'aser' means that 'he will be prohibited' from eating because he accepted upon himself to fast. The Gemara asks that according to this version of the Beraisa, what new law does the Beraisa teach? It is obvious that one becomes prohibited from eating when he accepts upon himself to fast! The Gemara answers that the Beraisa teaches that the status of his Ta'anis depends on when he accepted the fast: if he accepted the fast <i>before</i> the Chachamim declared that day a Yom Tov, his oath to fast is binding. If he accepted to fast <i>after</i> the Chachamim declared that day a Yom Tov, his oath is not binding and his fast is not observed.
</p><p>
A number of points in the Gemara need clarification. First, what is the Gemara's proof from the Beraisa for Shmuel's opinion? While the Beraisa does indicate that one's acceptance of the Ta'anis must be made in advance, how does the Beraisa prove that it must be made in the Minchah Shemoneh Esreh before the Ta'anis?
</p><p>
Second, why does the Gemara explain -- according to the version of the Beraisa which reads 'Ye'aser' -- that the status of the Ta'anis depends on when the person accepted the Ta'anis? What difficulty does the Gemara have with the Beraisa such that it needs to give additional details in order to understand it? Why does the Beraisa become less clear if it says 'Ye'aser' and not 'Yeyaser'? The Beraisa still teaches something new, because one would have assumed that he is <i>not</i> required to fast when he accepts upon himself to fast on one of the days mentioned in Megilas Ta'anis. Since those days were instituted as days of celebration, one might have thought that even if he accepted upon himself to fast on one of those days he is not obligated to fulfill his word (as the Gemara indeed concludes). The Beraisa, therefore, is needed to teach that he nevertheless must fast.
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) According to Rav (who says that one is not required to accept the Ta'anis specifically in the Minchah Shemoneh Esreh), one may accept the Ta'anis <i>any</i> time before the day of the Ta'anis, even months in advance. Just as Rav is lenient and does not require that one accept the Ta'anis in Shemoneh Esreh, he is lenient and does not require that one accept the Ta'anis immediately before it starts. (<b>RITVA</b>)
</p><p>
According to Shmuel, however, one's decision to observe a fast is never binding unless he formally accepts the fast in the Minchah Shemoneh Esreh before the day of the fast, <i>immediately</i> before the fast.
</p><p>
This assumption provides clarity for the proof from the Beraisa for Shmuel's view. Why does the Beraisa say that one who accepted a series of fasts must accept them again ('Yeyaser')? It must be that there is a requirement to accept each Ta'anis immediately before the day of the Ta'anis, as Shmuel says.
</p><p>
When the Gemara cites the version of the Beraisa which says 'Ye'aser,' it re-explains the Beraisa based on that change. If the Beraisa means merely that the person is prohibited from eating, then why does the Beraisa mention that 'if he accepted the Ta'anis <i>from before</i>, he becomes prohibited from eating'? What is the meaning of the words 'from before' -- 'from before' <i>what</i>? Those words seem irrelevant; the Beraisa should have said that 'if he accepted the Ta'anis, he becomes prohibited from eating,' without the words 'from before.'
</p><p>
According to Shmuel, the need for the words 'from before' in the Beraisa is clear. Since he accepted the Ta'anis <i>long before</i> the day of the Ta'anis, he must re-accept it right before the Ta'anis. According to Rav, however, what do the words 'from before' mean?
</p><p>
The Gemara answers that the Beraisa means that one's Kabalah makes the day into a Ta'anis only when it was proclaimed <i>from before</i> the day <i>became a Yom Tov</i>. If his Kabalah was made after the day became a Yom Tov, he does not have to fast because the celebration overrides the Ta'anis. (-Based on the <b>RAN</b>.)
</p><p>
(b) <b>TOSFOS</b> apparently has the opposite Girsa in the Gemara. Tosfos asserts that the version of the Beraisa which says 'Ye'aser' (with an Alef) is proof for Shmuel's opinion because 'Ye'aser' means that one has succeeded in prohibiting himself from eating (by making a Kabalah to fast). 'Yeyaser,' on the other hand, implies that he is 'removed' from the obligation to fast -- his Ta'anis is pushed aside by the Yom Tov and he may eat. The Gemara asks what the Beraisa means by this. The Gemara answers that the Beraisa means that the status of the fast depends on when he made his Kabalah: if he made his Kabalah before the Chachamim enacted the day as a Yom Tov, then he must fast, and if he made his Kabalah after the Chachamim enacted the day as a Yom Tov, then he does not fast but rather 'Yeyaser' -- he is removed from the obligation to fast.
</p><p>
According to Tosfos, how does the Beraisa support Shmuel's opinion that one must accept the Ta'anis in Minchah the day before? The Beraisa says only that he is prohibited from eating ('Ye'aser'); it says nothing about when he needs to accept the Ta'anis! Moreover, what is the Gemara's question on the version that says 'Yeyaser'? Perhaps that version of the Beraisa teaches simply that one's Kabalah to observe a Ta'anis Yachid does not override a Yom Tov of Megilas Ta'anis.
</p><p>
Tosfos' explanation can be understood based on the comments of the <b>HAGAHOS MAIMONIYOS</b> (Hilchos Ta'anis 1:7) who explains the Gemara in the opposite way of Rashi. While Rashi says that the Kabalah for a Ta'anis is more effective when it is made closer to the Ta'anis, the Hagahos Maimoniyos says that the Kabalah for a Ta'anis is more effective the <i>earlier</i> it is made. The Hagahos Maimoniyos quotes the <b>RA'AVYAH</b> who says that it is better to make the Kabalah long before the day of the Ta'anis. Shmuel says that even a 'weak' Kabalah -- one made close to the Ta'anis -- suffices, <i>even</i> if it is made immediately before the Ta'anis begins (in the Minchah Shemoneh Esreh of the day before). Rav is more stringent and requires that the Kabalah be made <i>before</i> the Minchah Shemoneh Esreh of the day before the Ta'anis.
</p><p>
The inference from the Beraisa in Megilas Ta'anis may be based on the words, 'if he accepted the Ta'anis <i>from before</i>....' The words 'from before' seem extra. Apparently, they teach that from <i>any time</i> before the day of the Ta'anis, the Kabalah is valid (as Shmuel says), even if it is made only a very short time before the Ta'anis. Thus, the Beraisa supports Shmuel.
</p><p>
The Gemara then cites the version of the Beraisa which reads 'Yeyaser,' which means that one does <i>not</i> need to fast. The Gemara asks what do the words 'from before' mean according to this text of the Beraisa. If the Beraisa intends to teach that the Ta'anis never overrides the Yom Tov, what difference does it make whether the Kabalah was made immediately before the Ta'anis or much earlier? Even if the Kabalah was made earlier, the Ta'anis should not override the Yom Tov.
</p><p>
The Gemara answers that the Beraisa teaches that if one makes his Kabalah <i>shortly before</i> the Yom Tov arrives, when the Chachamim had already instituted that day to be a Yom Tov before his Kabalah, then 'Yeyaser' -- his obligation to fast 'is removed.' If, however, he accepted the Ta'anis long before the Yom Tov (i.e. before the Yom Tov was even instituted), the Ta'anis remains binding. (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
<b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>WEARING SHOES DURING FASTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Kahana citing Rav):</font></b> An individual who accepted a fast 
          is forbidden to wear leather shoes, in case he undertook 
          a Ta'anis Tzibur (a community fast).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rabah bar R. Shiloh):</font></b> In order to avoid this, he should 
          announce that he is accepting a Ta'anis Yachid (a private 
          fast).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  The Rabbanan told Rav Sheishes that other Rabbanan wore 
          shoes during a Ta'anis Tzibur.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> He angrily replied, 'Perhaps they also eat!'
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  Abaye and Rava would wear shoes without soles.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  Mareimar and Mar Zutra would switch their right and left 
          shoes.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  The Rabbanan of Rav Ashi's Beis Hamedrash wore their 
          shoes as normal, because they held that the only Ta'anis 
          Tzibur in Bavel is Tish'ah b'Av.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>5) </font></b><font color='blue'>MAKING UP FOR LOST FASTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah citing Rav):</font></b> A person can eat on a voluntary 
          fast and repay it another day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Shmuel):</font></b> He need not repay it, as it is not a Neder; he 
          simply undertook to afflict himself, and if he cannot do 
          it, it doesn't matter.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate version (Shmuel):</font></b> Obviously this is true, as it 
          is like a Neder which can be repaid on another day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> When R. Yehoshua b. R. Idi was offered steak at R. 
               Asi's house, he declined as he was fasting.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> They suggested that he repay the fast another day, 
               in accordance with the aforementioned teaching.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> He replied that he was fasting because of a dream 
               that he had the previous night.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  A fast is as effective for negating a bad dream as fire 
          is for destroying flax.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Chisda):</font></b> It must be done on the next day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yosef):</font></b> This is true even if the next day is 
               Shabbos.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> How can he rectify having fasted on 
               Shabbos?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> He should fast again in repentance for it.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>6) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' FURTHER SERIES OF FASTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  If the series of fasts beginning on Rosh Chodesh Kislev 
          did not bring rain, Beis Din decree three further fasts 
          on the community.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> People may only eat until nightfall, and are 
               forbidden from Melachah, washing, anointing, wearing 
               leather shoes, and marital relations, and the 
               bath-houses must be locked.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  If these fasts did not work, Beis Din decree a further 
          seven fasts on the community, totaling 13.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> These have the extra features that the Shofar is 
               blown and the stores are closed.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> On Monday, the doors to the stores would be 
               partially opened before dark, and on Thursday, all 
               day, because of Shabbos.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  If these fasts did not work either, people must decrease 
          business, building, planting, betrothals, weddings, and 
          greetings, like people who have been excommunicated from 
          Hash-m.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  The select individuals would fast until the end of Nisan.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  If rain fell after Nisan had passed, it is a curse.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>7) </font></b><font color='blue'>FASTS AND 'ATZERES'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why is Melachah forbidden - it is pain rather 
          than pleasure!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> The Pasuk compares the day to Shemini Atzeres/ 
          Shavuos, and it is likewise forbidden from Melachah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Maybe it should likewise begin from the night 
          before?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> The Pasuk says that the elders should be 
          gathered, which takes place by day; likewise, the Ta'anis 
          is only by day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> It should then begin at midday, when the elders 
          gather?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> This supports R. Huna's view that they would 
          gather in the morning.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> During the morning, they would investigate the 
               spiritual affairs of the town; for the first half of 
               the afternoon, they would Leyn the Torah and 
               Haftorah, and for the rest of the afternoon, they 
               would pray for mercy, as we see in a Pasuk that they 
               did these things.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Perhaps they did the reverse?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> We see in another Pasuk that they did it in 
               this order.
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>4) 'BORROWING' A TA'ANIS AND 'PAYING IT BACK'</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> Rav says that one may 'borrow' a Ta'anis from one day and 'pay it back' to another day ('Loveh u'Pore'a'). That is, if one pledged to fast on a certain day but was unable to fast when that day arrived, he may make it up on another day.
</p><p>
According to the Gemara's first version of the dialogue, Shmuel disagrees with Rav and says that when a person accepted upon himself to fast and then found himself unable to fast on the designated day, he does not have to fast and he is not required to make it up on another day because he never made a Neder (a vow) to fast. According to the Gemara's second version, Shmuel agrees with Rav that one must make up the fast on another day if he does not fast on the day he designated as a Ta'anis.
</p><p>
Why is a person's Kabalah to fast not considered a Neder? His Kabalah should be binding like a Neder and he should not be permitted to delay its fulfillment by fasting on a different day.
</p><p>
Moreover, why does Shmuel say (in the Gemara's first version) that one who finds it difficult to fast is not required to fast and is not required to make it up on a different day? Why is his Kabalah not binding?
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>RAMBAM</b> (Hilchos Nedarim 4:16) explains that Rav's statement refers only to a case in which one accepted to fast a certain number of fasts but did not specify on what days those fasts would occur. He began to fast on a day he thought would be a good day on which to fulfill one of his fasts, but as the day progressed he discovered that it was not a good day to fast (for example, he was invited to a Se'udas Mitzvah, or it became very hot and he was weak). In such a case he may 'borrow and pay back' because he never accepted upon himself to observe a fast specifically on this day. (According to the Rambam, an acceptance to fast without specifying the day is considered a valid Kabalah for the Ta'anis.) The Rambam's explanation is based on the Yerushalmi, as cited by the Ran.
</p><p>
This approach explains the view of Rav. Why, though, does Shmuel say that the person's Kabalah is not binding at all, and if one cannot fast on the day he intended he does not have to fast or make up for it? Since he made an oath to fast for a certain number of days, he must fulfill his word and complete that number of fasts. If he does not make up for this day, he fails to fulfill his word to fast for a specific number of days.
</p><p>
The answer is that the Rambam learns like the <b>BA'AL HA'TZEROROS</b> (see also <b>RABEINU CHANANEL</b>) who says that the Gemara refers to a case in which the person fasted part of the day and then he needed to stop. The physical distress that he experienced from his partial fast counts as a day of Ta'anis to fulfill his Neder. Rav argues and says that he must make up his fast on another day because his Kabalah was to fast a full day.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>ROSH</b> explains that according to Rav, when the person originally accepted to fast he did not accept the fast with the terminology of a Neder or Shevu'ah. Rather, he merely said that he accepts upon himself to fast. He is obligated to fast not because of a Neder but because of his Kabalah to do a Mitzvah. When a person makes a Kabalas Mitzvah to fast, he presumably has in mind to fulfill the Mitzvah of fasting whenever he has the opportunity, and he leaves himself the option to choose a different day on which to fast if the day he originally designated turns out to be inconvenient.
</p><p>
The Rosh cites the <b>RA'AVAD</b> who quotes the Gemara in Erchin (7a) which says that when one makes a Neder to give certain coins to a charity, he may change his mind and give different coins until the treasurer comes and takes the actual coins which he promised to give. The <b>NIMUKEI YOSEF</b> here explains that this is based on the same principle as a Kabalas Mitzvah to fast: when a person makes a Neder of Nidrei Mitzvah, he presumably intends to retain the right to do the Mitzvah at a different time or with a different object if the need arises.
</p><p>
According to the Rosh, Rav refers even to a case in which one specifies a date for the Ta'anis (in contrast to the opinion of the Rambam). He may still 'borrow' the Ta'anis from that day and 'pay it back' on another day, because that was his original intention. 
</p><p>
Shmuel extends this condition and says that if a person sees that it is too difficult for him to fast on this day, not only is he not required to fast on that day, but he is also not required to make up the fast on another day. Shmuel's reason is because it is assumed that the person had in mind at the time of his Neder to fast only if he would be able to fast.
</p><p>

<b>HALACHAH:</b> The Halachah follows the view of Rav, in accordance with the principle that in any argument between Rav and Shmuel which involves a non-monetary matter, the Halachah follows the view of Rav. The <b>SHULCHAN ARUCH</b> (OC 568:2) rules like the Rambam's understanding of Rav, that when one accepted upon himself to fast a certain number of days but did not specify which days, he may change his mind on a day on which he begins to fast if he realizes that he will not be able to fast that day, and he may make it up on another day. However, one may do this only if there is a strong reason not to fast; for example, he was invited to a Bris Milah or to a Siyum, or he was invited to dine with a Torah sage. Being invited to dine with friends is not a valid reason to push off his fast (<b>MISHNAH BERURAH</b> 568:9).
</p><p>
The allowance to push off a fast to another day applies only to a Ta'anis Yachid, but not to Ta'anis Chalom or to a Ta'anis Tzibur (<b>REMA</b> 568:2).
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>BATHING RESTRICTIONS ON DIFFERENT DAYS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rafram bar Papa citing R. Chisda):</font></b> On any occasion that 
          is due to mourning, such as Tish'ah b'Av and regular 
          mourning, it is forbidden to bathe whether in hot or cold 
          water.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  On any occasion that is due to refraining from pleasure, 
          such as a Ta'anis Tzibur, it is forbidden to bathe in hot 
          water but permitted in cold.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Idi bar Avin):</font></b> This is also evident from our 
               Mishnah, which states that on a Ta'anis Tzibur, they 
               would lock the (hot) bathhouses.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Abaye):</font></b> This is no proof - if even cold water were 
               forbidden, it could not have said that we lock the 
               rivers!
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Shisha b. R. Idi):</font></b> The intent is that since it 
               already said that bathing is forbidden, it wouldn't 
               have to say that the bathhouses are locked unless it 
               was to point out that only hot water is forbidden.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Support:</font></b> A proof for R. Chisda is suggested from a 
          Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Those who are obligated in Tevilah can do so as 
               normal even on Tish'ah b'Av and Yom Kipur.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> This cannot be referring to warm water, as warm 
               water is drawn and invalid for Tevilah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> It must therefore be referring to cold water, and we 
               see that only such people may bathe in it, but not 
               others!
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Dismissal (R. Chana bar Katina):</font></b> It is no proof; it may 
          be referring to the hot springs of Tiveriya.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Support:</font></b> In the latter part of the Beraisa, it is noted 
          that the loss of the Beis ha'Mikdash justifies losing one 
          bathing a year - we see that even cold water is 
          forbidden!
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Dismissal (R. Papa):</font></b> It refers to a location where cold 
          water is not to be found.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Contradiction:</font></b> A contradiction to R. Chisda is suggested 
          from another Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The Beraisa states:
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  The prohibition of Melachah on a Ta'anis Tzibur 
                    only applies by day.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b></b> The prohibition of wearing leather shoes only 
                    applies within a city.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b></b>The prohibition of washing only applies to the 
                    whole body, but not to the face, hands and 
                    feet.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iv. </font></b></b> The same applies to an excommunicated person 
                    and to a mourner.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The latter clause presumably applies to all the 
               aforementioned laws.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> It cannot be referring to warm water, as a mourner 
               may not wash any part of his body with warm water.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> So it must be referring to cold water, and we see 
               that on a Ta'anis Tzibur it is forbidden to bathe in 
               cold water!
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Resolution:</font></b> It refers to warm water; it is only the 
          earlier laws that are also being applied to a mourner.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Contradiction:</font></b> Another contradiction to R. Chisda is 
          brought:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> When R. Yosi b. R. Chanina's sons died, he bathed in 
               cold water during the seven days of mourning!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(j)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Resolution:</font></b> In that case, it was allowed because he had 
          consecutive periods of mourning:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Beraisa):</font></b> If a person had consecutive periods of 
               mourning, then if his hair grows overly long, he can 
               cut it with a razor, and he can wash his clothes in 
               water.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Chisda):</font></b> He can use a razor but not scissors; he 
               can wash them in water but not with detergents or 
               sand.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>WASHING FOR MOURNERS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rava):</font></b> A mourner may wash in cold water all seven days - 
          it is no different from eating meat and drinking wine.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) THE SHEMONEH ESREH: 18 OR 19 BLESSINGS?</b></font><b>
<br>OPINIONS:</b> The Gemara quotes a Beraisa which says that the only difference between the Shemoneh Esreh recited on a Ta'anis by an individual and the Shemoneh Esreh recited by the Shali'ach Tzibur is that the individual's Shemoneh Esreh contains 18 blessings and the Shali'ach Tzibur's Shemoneh Esreh contains 19 (because of the additional blessing of 'Aneinu').
</p><p>
<b>RASHI</b> asks why the Gemara refers to the ordinary Shemoneh Esreh of an individual as having only 18 blessings when it actually has 19 blessings (even without the blessing of 'Aneinu').
</p><p>
(a) <b>RASHI</b> answers that the title of the prayer, 'Shemoneh Esreh,' refers to the 18 blessings which it contained when it was originally composed. The blessing of 'v'la'Malshinim' was instituted later by the sages in Yavneh (Berachos 28b).
</p><p>
(b) The <b>TOSFOS RID</b> disagrees with Rashi. He explains that the reason why the Beraisa says that the ordinary Shemoneh Esreh contains 18 blessings is because the Beraisa maintains that there indeed are only 18 blessings in the Shemoneh Esreh. He cites a Tosefta in Berachos (end of chapter 3) which states that the 18 blessings include the blessing of 'v'la'Malshinim' (which mentions the downfall of the Minim and the Posh'im). The blessing of 'Boneh Yerushalayim' (which mentions the rebuilding of Yerushalayim) and the blessing of 'Es Tzemach David' (which mentions the restoration of the dynasty of David ha'Melech) are merged into a single blessing. The Tosefta concludes that if one recites two separate blessings, one in which he mentions David ha'Melech and the other in which he mentions the rebuilding of Yerushalayim, he fulfills his obligation to recite Shemoneh Esreh. This implies that the Tosefta maintains that l'Chatchilah one should include 'Boneh Yerushalayim' and 'Es Tzemach David' in a single blessing, and thus, according to the Tosefta, the Shemoneh Esreh indeed contains only 18 blessings even after the addition of the blessing of 'v'la'Malshinim.'
</p><p>
The view of the Tosefta is reflected in the Piyutim, the additional prayers composed for the Shali'ach Tzibur to recite during each blessing of Shemoneh Esreh on festivals and fasts, and which reflect the theme of each blessing. There are consistently only 18 of these additional prayers; the Piyut which mentions the rebuilding of Yerushalayim is always the same as the one which mentions the restoration of the dynasty of David ha'Melech.
</p><p>
The Tosfos Rid points out that this opinion was also the practice of the Yerushalmi (Berachos 4:5, Rosh Hashanah 4:6). The Yerushalmi mentions that the Chasimah (closing blessing) of one of the blessings of Shemoneh Esreh is 'Baruch Atah Hash-m Elokei David u'Voneh Yerushalayim' -- it includes David ha'Melech and Binyan Yerushalayim in one blessing. This is what the Beraisa means when it says that the ordinary Shemoneh Esreh contains only 18 blessings.
</p><p>
The Bavli, however, clearly counts 'Boneh Yerushalayim' and 'Es Tzemach David' as two separate blessings (Megilah 17b). In addition, the Gemara in Sanhedrin (107a) relates that David ha'Melech asked Hash-m that a mention of 'Elokei David' be included in the Shemoneh Esreh, like 'Elokei Avraham.' The Gemara says that Hash-m did not acquiesce to David's request. Accordingly, the Bavli is consistent with its view that the blessing of Boneh Yerushalayim does not include the words 'Elokei David,' and instead a separate blessing of 'Es Tzemach David' is recited. (The Tosefta itself says that if one recites separate blessings for David ha'Melech and Yerushalayim he does not need to repeat the Shemoneh Esreh, and this apparently was the practice adopted l'Chatchilah in Bavel.)
</p><p>
The practice today follows the view of the Bavli. Rebbi Elazar ha'Kalir and the other authors of the Piyutim lived in Eretz Yisrael and followed the practice of the Yerushalmi, and thus they wrote Piyutim for only 18 blessings and merged the prayer for Yerushalayim and the prayer for David ha'Melech into a single blessing.
</p><p>
Although no Jewish community today follows the practice to combine the prayer for Binyan Yerushalayim with the prayer for David ha'Melech. Even in contemporary Sidurim remnants of the early practice can be found. In the end of the blessing of Boneh Yerushalayim, the words 'v'Chisei David...' are said. This phrase is probably a remnant of the original practice to conclude the blessing with the words, 'Elokei David u'Voneh Yerushalayim,' since the end of the blessing (before the Chasimah) must reflect the words recited in the Chasimah. <b>RAV YEHUDAH LANDY</b> adds that this also explains why the blessing of Boneh Yerushalayim begins with a Vav - '<i>v</i>'li'Yerushalayim Ircha...' -- the Vav ('and') indicates that this blessing was added to the Shemoneh Esreh when the single blessing for Yerushalayim and Malchus Beis David were separated into two. (Perhaps 'v'la'Malshinim' begins with a Vav for a similar reason. The Vav indicates that it was added later and was not part of the original Shemoneh Esreh.)
</p><p>
The Tosfos Rid implies that the original practice, before the addition of the blessing of 'v'la'Malshinim,' was to recite only 17 blessings in the Shemoneh Esreh. When the additional blessing of 'v'la'Malshinim' was instituted in Yavneh it brought the total to <i>18</i>, and not <i>19</i>, blessings. Indeed, the Midrash states this explicitly (Bamidbar Rabah 18:21, and Tanchuma, end of Parshas Korach; see also Midrash Tehilim 17:4). The Midrash says that the number of blessings in the Shemoneh Esreh is equal to the Gematriya of the word 'Tov' (17). Even though our Shemoneh Esreh contains 19 blessings, the original Shemoneh Esreh contained only 17 blessings because 'v'la'Malshinim' and 'Es Tzemach David' (or 'v'li'Yerushalayim') were later additions. According to the Midrash, the blessing of 'Es Tzemach' was added even later than 'v'la'Malshinim.'
</p><p>
(The Midrash seems to disagree with the Gemara in Berachos (28b) which states that the blessing added in Yavneh was the <i>nineteenth</i> blessing. It seems that the original enactment of Shemoneh Esreh included only 17 obligatory blessings as well as an <i>option</i> to split 'Boneh Yerushalayim' and 'Es Tzemach' into two blessings (as the Tosefta clearly permits). Consequently, both the Midrash and the Gemara are correct: In Yavneh the <i>eighteenth</i> blessing was added, but that blessing could be viewed as the <i>nineteenth</i> because a person was entitled to divide 'Boneh Yerushalayim' and 'Es Tzemach' into two blessings. It is interesting to note that according to a common Girsa in the Yerushalmi's version of how 'v'la'Malshinim' was added in Yavneh (Berachos 4:3 and Ta'anis 2:2), the Yerushalmi cites the story to explain why there are <i>18</i> -- and not just <i>17</i> -- blessings.)
</p><p>
The Bavli, which says that the words 'Elokei David' are not recited in the Shemoneh Esreh, implies that it was never the practice to mention 'Elokei David.' Apparently, before the blessings of 'Boneh Yerushalayim' and 'Es Tzemach' were split, the Chasimah was '<i>Magen</i> David vi'Yerushalayim,' and not 'Elokei David u'Voneh Yerushalayim.' When the people of Bavel divided the blessing into two, the people of Eretz Yisrael correspondingly gave the single blessing a double ending, thereby granting David ha'Melech special status by mentioning him separately in the Chasimah. The people of Bavel did not accept this practice for two reasons. First, the Gemara says that 'Elokei David' should not be said in the Shemoneh Esreh. Second, the Gemara (Berachos 49a) says that two subjects should not be included in the Chasimah of a single blessing.
<br> 
<br><b>RAV DAVID COHEN</b> shlit'a (in a special section at the end of <b>OHEL DAVID</b>, vol. 2) uses this approach to explain the words of <b>TOSFOS</b> in Megilah (17b, DH v'David). Tosfos implies that Rashi had a tradition to count chapters 9 and 10 of Tehilim as one chapter. (Indeed, there is a strong contextual connection between the two chapters, which implies that they should be connected: In chapter 9, every other verse starts with a consecutive letter of the Hebrew alphabet, but reaches only until the letter Kaf. The first verse in chapter 10 starts with the letter Lamed, and the final alternating verses of the chapter begin with the letters Kuf, Reish, Shin, and Taf.) Why, then, in contemporary books of Tehilim are they divided into two separate chapters?
</p><p>
Rav David Cohen explains that they originally were one chapter and later the Chachamim divided them into two chapters. The Gemara in Berachos (9b) says that, originally, chapters 1 and 2 were one chapter. The <b>MAHARSHA</b> there explains that the first 18 blessings of Shemoneh Esreh were instituted to correspond to the first 18 chapters of Tehilim. The Shemoneh Esreh concludes with the verse from Tehilim, 'Yiheyu l'Ratzon Imrei Fi....' When the Chachamim added a new blessing in the Shemoneh Esreh (bringing the total to 19 blessings), they decided to add a new chapter number in Tehilim so that the verse of 'Yehiyu l'Ratzon' would appear after 19 chapters, and therefore they divided the first chapter into two.
</p><p>
Similarly, chapters 9 and 10 were originally one chapter. However, after the Chachamim added the blessing of 'Es Tzemach David' to the Shemoneh Esreh, they wanted to add a new chapter so that 'Yiheyu l'Ratzon' would still appear in Tehilim after the corresponding number of blessings in the Shemoneh Esreh, and therefore they split another chapter of Tehilim into two. (He points out that the contents of Psalms 2 and 10 correspond to the contents of these two blessings. The content of Psalm 2 corresponds to 'Es Tzemach,' while the content of Psalm 10 corresponds to 'v'la'Malshinim.')
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see otherwise in a Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> A Bogeres (adult girl) may not let herself appear 
               ugly while mourning for her father.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The implication is that a Na'arah (sub-adult girl) 
               may.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> This cannot be referring to hot water, as nobody is 
               allowed to wash in hot water while mourning (not 
               even a Bogeres).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> So it must refer to cold water, and we see that 
               anyone other than a Bogeres is forbidden!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It is not referring to washing; it is referring 
          to wearing makeup.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  A proof for Rava is suggested:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> When R. Yosi b. R. Chanina's sons died, he bathed in 
               cold water during the seven days of mourning!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Refutation:</font></b> In that case, it was allowed because he had 
          consecutive periods of mourning:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Beraisa):</font></b> If a person had consecutive periods of 
               mourning, then if his hair grows overly long, he can 
               cut it with a razor, and he can wash his clothes in 
               water.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Chisda):</font></b> He can use a razor but not scissors; he 
               can wash them in water but not with detergents or 
               sand.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate version:</font></b> (Rava): A mourner may not bathe in 
          cold water during the seven days of mourning.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b></b>  It is different from meat and wine, which are permitted 
          to help lessen one's sorrows.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b></b>  A proof is suggested from a Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> A Bogeres may not let herself appear ugly while 
               mourning for her father.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The implication is that a Na'arah may.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> This cannot be referring to hot water, as nobody is 
               allowed to wash in hot water while mourning (not 
               even a Bogeres).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> So it must refer to cold water, and we see that 
               anyone other than a Bogeres is forbidden!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Refutation:</font></b> It is not referring to washing; it is 
          referring to wearing makeup.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Chisda):</font></b> If wearing makeup is forbidden, then so 
               is washing clothes.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(j)</font></b></b>  The Halachah is that a mourner may not wash his body 
          whether in hot or cold water during the seven days.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> He may, however, wash his face, hands and feet in 
               cold water.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> He may not anoint himself in even the slightest 
               amount, except to remove sweat.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>WHERE TO SAY 'ANEINU'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Where do we recite the Aneinu prayer?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer (R. Yehudah):</font></b> An individual in a private fast says 
          Aneinu between the Berachos of Ge'ulah and Refuah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Objection (R. Yitzchak):</font></b> Surely an individual cannot 
          establish his own separate Berachah!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  Rather, he recites it within Shome'a Tefilah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> R. Sheshes holds the same.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see otherwise in a Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Beraisa):</font></b> The difference between an individual and 
               a Tzibur on a fast day is that one says eighteen 
               Berachos and the other says nineteen.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> 'Tzibur' cannot refer to the Shalich Tzibur, as he 
               says twenty-four Berachos.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> It must refer to an individual who accepts a private 
               fast, and an individual who accepts a Ta'anis 
               Tzibur.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> We see that the latter may establish his own 
               Berachah of Aneinu, thereby totaling nineteen 
               Berachos!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It refers to a Shali'ach Tzibur, and it is 
          discussing the first three fasts, when there are not 
          twenty-four Berachos.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Surely it says that the only difference between 
          the first three fasts and the latter fasts is regarding 
          the prohibition of Melachah!?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> It left out this other difference.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question #1:</font></b> What else was left out, such that we 
               can say that this was left out?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question #2:</font></b> It says that this is the <i>only</i> 
               difference!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  New answer:</font></b> The Tana is only referring to prohibitions, 
          not to the forms of prayer.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Alternate answer:</font></b> The twenty-four Berachos are not 
          recited in the middle series of fasts either.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(j)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Objection:</font></b> A Beraisa states that the only difference 
          between the middle and last series of fasts is that in 
          the latter, the Shofar is blown and the stores are 
          locked!
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Suggested answer:</font></b> It left out this other difference.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Refutation:</font></b> It says that this is the <i>only</i> 
               difference!?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> 'Only' cannot be a precise term, as it also 
               left out the difference that the Aron is only placed 
               in the street for the latter fasts.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Refutation:</font></b> That is not mentioned as it is done 
               publicly.
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>WHERE TO SAY 'ANEINU' (cont.)</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Support for objection (R. Ashi):</font></b> We see that the second 
          and third series of fasts were identical in having 
          twenty-four Berachos from the Mishnah:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The Mishnah states that the last series were 
               different to the previous series in that the Shofar 
               was blown and the stores were locked.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The implication is that they were identical in all 
               other aspects.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Suggested objection:</font></b> Other differences were left 
               out.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Refutation:</font></b> It says that 'these were the [only] 
               differences'!
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>5.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Objection:</font></b> But we know that the difference of the 
               Aron being placed in the street was left out!
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>6.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Refutation:</font></b> It was not left out; it was mentioned in 
               the other Perek.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Objection:</font></b> If so, we can also say that there is a 
          difference in the number of Berachos, and it was not 
          mentioned as it is mentioned in the other Perek.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> In conclusion, where does one say Aneinu?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Opinion #1:</font></b> Between the Berachos of Ge'ulah and Refuah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Opinion #2:</font></b> In the Berachah of Shome'a Tefilah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  The Halachah is that it is said in the Berachah of 
          Shome'a Tefilah.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>PREGNANT AND NURSING MOTHERS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Tana #1:</font></b> Pregnant and nursing mothers fast in the first 
          set of fasts, but not in the last set.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Tana #2:</font></b> They fast in the last set of fasts, but not in 
          the first set.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Tana #3:</font></b> They do not fast in the first or last set of 
          fasts.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Ashi):</font></b> If we explain that they fasted in the middle 
          set of fasts, we can reconcile all these statements.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>'SHOFAR'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah states that the last series were different to 
          the previous series in that they were Masri'in and the 
          stores were locked.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah):</font></b> Masri'in means that the Shofar was blown.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah b. R. Shmuel bar Shilas citing Rav):</font></b> It means 
          that they would cry out with Aneinu.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  The presumption is that each does not hold of the other's 
          view.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see in a Beraisa that in the last set of 
          seven fasts, there were a total of eighteen Hasra'os, and 
          Yericho is the Siman - and Yericho was conquered with 
          Shofaros!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> All agree that Masri'in refers to Shofar; the 
          dispute is whether it also refers to Aneinu.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see in a Beraisa that Masri'in only refers 
          to Shofar:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> For other plagues, such as skin disease, locusts, 
               flies, hornets, mosquitoes, snake and scorpion 
               infestations, they were not Masri'in, only cry out 
               in prayer.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It is a dispute between Tana'im:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Beraisa):</font></b> On Shabbos, we are Masri'in for besieged 
               or flooded cities and storm-tossed ships.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yosi):</font></b> We do so to call aid, but not in prayer.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> It cannot be referring to Shofar, as that is 
               forbidden on Shabbos; it must refer to Aneinu, and 
               we see it is referred to with Masri'in.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) 'SHOFAR' OR 'CHATZOTZEROS'</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Beraisa records a dispute about the intention of the Mishnah when it says that we are 'Masri'in' on the fast days of the third set of Ta'aniyos. One opinion says that the Mishnah means that we are to blow a Teru'ah with the Shofar. Another opinion says that it means that we are to cry out in prayer and say 'Aneinu' in addition to the blowing of the Shofar. The Beraisa says that a mnemonic for the fact that we blow the Shofar on seven days during the series of fasts is 'Yericho': just as the Jewish people blew the Shofar for seven days when they waged war with Yericho and Hash-m answered them, so, too, we blow the Shofar when we fast and pray to Hash-m in times of distress.
</p><p>
The Mishnah in Rosh Hashanah (26b) states that in the Beis ha'Mikdash on a Ta'anis, both the Shofaros and the Chatzotzeros are blown, with the Chatzotzeros in the middle (between the Shofaros). The sound of the Chatzotzeros is elongated because the Mitzvah of the day is to blow Chatzotzeros.
</p><p>
The Beraisa there (27a) says that this practice applies only in the Beis ha'Mikdash. Outside of the Mikdash, Shofaros are not used at all when Chatzotzeros are used (such as on a Ta'anis), and Chatzotzeros are not used at all when Shofaros are used.
</p><p>
It seems clear from the Mishnah and Beraisa there that the Mitzvah on a Ta'anis outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash is to blow the Chatzotzeros alone without the Shofar. Why, then, does the Gemara here say that Shofaros are blown on a Ta'anis, and why does it bring support from Yericho where Shofaros were blown? Only Chatzotzeros should be blown on a Ta'anis.
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>RITVA</b> (12b) cites the <b>BA'ALEI HA'TOSFOS</b> who explain that the word 'Shofar' in the Gemara here refers to the Chatzotzeros and not to the Shofar. The Gemara in Shabbos (36a) and Sukah (34a) says that the names 'Shofar' and 'Chatzotzeros' became switched after the Churban, and the people began to refer to the Chatzotzeros as 'Shofaros' (see Insights to Shabbos 36a for the Chasam Sofer's explanation of this change). This is why the Gemara refers to Chatzotzeros as 'Shofar.' According to this explanation, the proof from Yericho is merely that some sound must be blown with an instrument. The events at Yericho do not prove <i>what</i> instrument must be blown.
</p><p>
The <b>RITVA</b> adds that 'based on this reasoning, the Jews in France have the custom not to sound any Teki'os on a Ta'anis,' since the Mitzvah is to blow with Chatzotzeros but the Chatzotzeros do not exist nowadays (as it is unknown exactly how they are to be made).
</p><p>
This also appears to be the opinion of the <b>BA'AL HA'ME'OR</b> in Rosh Hashanah (26b) who says that he does not understand why the Ge'onim write that we should blow the Shofar, and not the Chatzotzeros, on a Ta'anis. This also appears to be the understanding of the <b>RAMBAM</b> (Hilchos Ta'aniyos 1:4) who writes that we blow the Chatzotzeros on a Ta'anis.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>RA'AVAD</b>, as quoted by the Rishonim, answers that there are two stages in the Tefilah of a Ta'anis at which Teki'os are blown. The first set of Teki'os are blown during the actual blessings of Shemoneh Esreh. These Teki'os are the subject of the Mishnah in Rosh Hashanah, and they are blown with the Chatzotzeros. A second set of Teki'os are blown <i>after</i> the Shemoneh Esreh, during the additional supplications and prayers. These Teki'os are blown with the Shofar. The second set of Teki'os is the subject of the Gemara here when it says that we blow the Shofar.
</p><p>
The Ra'avad cites proof for his explanation from the initial assumption of the Gemara. The Gemara initially assumed that the opinion which interprets 'Masri'in' to mean that we recite the prayer of 'Aneinu' maintains that we <i>only</i> recite 'Aneinu' and we do not blow the Shofar. Why does the Gemara entertain the possibility that there is an opinion which maintains that the Shofar is not blown on a Ta'anis? The Mishnayos clearly say that the Shofar is blown during the Shemoneh Esreh on a Ta'anis (15b, 16b)! It must be that everyone agrees that <i>Chatzotzeros</i> are blown during the Shemoneh Esreh. The dispute cited by the Gemara here involves what is done <i>after</i> the Shemoneh Esreh. One opinion says that Teki'os are blown with a Shofar, and the other opinion says that only 'Aneinu' is recited (according to the Gemara's original assumption; according to the Gemara's conclusion, 'Aneinu' is recited <i>and</i> the Shofar is blown).
</p><p>
(c) The <b>RAMBAN</b> (Milchamos, Rosh Hashanah 26b) writes that the Mitzvah to use Chatzotzeros applies only in the Beis ha'Mikdash. Outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash, Chatzotzeros are not used at all on a day of distress. He reasons that the purpose of blowing Chatzotzeros is 'l'Kenufya' -- to gather the entire nation together, but this is necessary only in places where a large representation of the nation is present. Therefore, only the Shofar is blown on a Ta'anis, and not the Chatzotzeros. When the Mishnah in Rosh Hashanah says that the Mitzvah on a Ta'anis is to blow the Chatzotzeros, it refers to what is done in the Beis ha'Mikdash. Outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash the Shofar is blown, similar to what was done in Yericho, as the Gemara here says.
</p><p>
What, though, does the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah (27a) mean when it states that outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash there are times when only the Chatzotzeros are blown and not the Shofar? The Ramban explains that the Gemara there does not refer to a Ta'anis but rather to a time of war, when the Chatzotzeros are used to gather the nation together for battle. For any other time of communal trouble, the Torah does not specify whether Chatzotzeros or a Shofar must be used. The Minhag, therefore, is to use a Shofar.
</p><p>
(d) The <b>RASHBA</b> in Rosh Hashanah (27a) offers a fourth explanation. Like the Ramban (c), he says that when the Mishnah specifies that the 'Mitzvah of the day is to blow Chatzotzeros' it refers only to the Teki'os and Teru'os in the Beis ha'Mikdash. When the Gemara says that outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash, 'when Chatzotzeros are blown the Shofar is not,' it does not mean that there is a time when only the Chatzotzeros may be blown outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash. Rather, it means that either Shofar or Chatzotzeros may be blown outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash. However, if we choose to blow Chatzotzeros we may not combine them with the sound of a Shofar, and, likewise, if we blow the Shofar we may not sound the Chatzotzeros as well.
</p><p>

<b>HALACHAH:</b> The Poskim rule like the Ramban and Rashba (as cited in (c) and (d) above), because they express the majority opinion. Hence, the Shofar may be blown on a Ta'anis outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash. Current practice, however, is to blow neither the Shofar nor Chatzotzeros. (For the reasons behind this practice, see Insights to Ta'anis 15:1.)
</p><p>


<font><b>2) HOW MANY 'TERU'OS' ARE BLOWN ON A TA'ANIS</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Mishnah (12b) describes the third and final -- and most severe -- set of fasts observed during a time of distress. The Beraisa here mentions that each of these seven Ta'aniyos 'has 18 blasts of the Shofar.'
</p><p>
What is the basis for this number of Shofar blasts? <b>RASHI</b> explains that since six blessings are added to the Shemoneh Esreh on the Ta'anis, and a set of three blasts (Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah) is blown during each of these blessings (as the Beraisa on 16b says), there are a total of 18 blasts each day.
</p><p>
However, the Mishnah (15a) and Beraisa (16b) later say that six blessings are added after the blessing of 'Go'el Yisrael,' and in the blessing of 'Go'el Yisrael' itself extra verses and prayers are added. The Mishnah clearly says that the Shofar is blown in all <i>seven</i> of those blessings -- in the six additional ones and in 'Go'el Yisrael' itself. Accordingly, since three Teki'os are blown during each blessing, the Beraisa should say that there are 21 Teki'os and not just 18. What is the Beraisa's source for 18 Teki'os? (<b>GEVURAS ARI</b>, <b>LECHEM MISHNEH</b> Hilchos Ta'aniyos 4:17)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) It is because of this question that the <b>VILNA GA'ON</b> here changes the Girsa to read '21' instead of '18.' However, no record of such a Girsa is found in any of the older manuscripts of the Gemara or in the Rishonim.
</p><p>
(b) According to the Girsa of <b>RABEINU CHANANEL</b>, the <b>RAMBAN</b>, <b>RITVA</b>, and <b>RA'AVAD</b>, the Gemara says that '<i>seven</i> blasts of the Shofar' are blown in the seven blessings of the Ta'anis. Each blessing contains only <i>one</i> blast and not three (Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah). (The blasts alternate from a Teki'ah to a Teru'ah.)
</p><p>
The words of these Rishonim seem to contradict the Beraisa (16b) which clearly states that a set of Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah is blown during each blessing. The <b>RITVA</b> (15b) answers that the Beraisa there expresses the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah, who says in Sukah (53b) that the three blasts of Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah are considered to be one long sound (and not three sounds). The Chachamim, who argue that they are considered three distinct sounds, maintain that only a single Teru'ah or Teki'ah is blown for each blessing (as the Beraisa at the beginning of 16b says). Hence, both the Chachamim and Rebbi Yehudah agree that only 'one sound' is blown for each blessing, for a total of seven sounds.
</p><p>
The <b>RA'AVAD</b>, as quoted by the Ramban, understands the Girsa of 'seven Teru'os' in a slightly different manner. The Ra'avad understands that the Beraisa refers to the Teki'os blown <i>after</i> the Shemoneh Esreh (see previous Insight). Only one Teki'ah is blown after the Shemoneh Esreh on each day of the Ta'anis. Accordingly, when the Beraisa says that during the seven days of Ta'anis 'seven blasts of the Shofar' are blown, it means that a <i>total</i> of seven Teki'os are blown during those seven days, and it refers to the Teki'os blown after the Shemoneh Esreh each day.
</p><p>
(According to the Ra'avad, the events at Yericho allude both to the seven days of fasting and to the seven Teki'os: when the Jewish people surrounded Yericho, they circled the city for seven days, and each time they circled the city they blew the Shofar.)
</p><p>
(c) <b>RABEINU GERSHOM</b> has yet another Girsa in the Gemara. According to his Girsa, the Beraisa says that during the seven days of fasting, '<i>13</i> blasts of the Shofar' are blown each day. He arrives at this number in the following way:
</p><p>
The Beraisa later (16b) says that one of the prayers recited during each of the seven special blessings of a Ta'anis is the prayer of 'Mi she'Anah.' When the Beraisa describes the order of the special prayers of a Ta'anis, it says that in the first of the seven blessings 'they announced, <i>'Tik'u'</i> -- 'Let the Kohanim blow a Teki'ah,' they recited 'Mi she'Anah,' and then the Kohanim blew <i>Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah</i>.' The second part of the Beraisa says that 'in the second blessings they announced, <i>'Heri'u'</i> (and not 'Tik'u'), they recited 'Mi she'Anah,' and then the Kohanim blew <i>Teru'ah-Teki'ah-Teru'ah</i>.'
</p><p>
Most Rishonim understand the Beraisa to mean that at the beginning of 'Mi she'Anah' the Kohanim were summoned to blow the Shofar, but they did not actually blow it until after 'Mi she'Anah' was recited. Rabeinu Gershom, however, understands the Beraisa differently. He says that at the time the Kohanim were summoned to blow the Shofar, they blew the first blast (before 'Mi she'Anah'), and they blew again after 'Mi she'Anah' was recited. In other words, they blew the Shofar at two different times during each blessing.
</p><p>
However, the Teki'os they blew at the time of the announcement to blow differed from the Teki'os they blew after 'Mi she'Anah.' Before 'Mi she'Anah,' they blew only <i>one</i> blast, alternating from a Teki'ah to a Teru'ah for each successive blessing. After 'Mi she'Anah,' they blew <i>three</i> blasts, alternating between Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah and Teru'ah-Teki'ah-Teru'ah.
</p><p>
According to this count, there is a total of 28 blasts of the Shofar. From where does Rabeinu Gershom derive the number 13?
</p><p>
Rabeinu Gershom explains that the Gemara counts only the Teru'os ('Hasra'os,' in the words of the Beraisa). These are the sounds of the Shofar which arouse the people to do Teshuvah. During the first blessing, only one of the four blasts of the Shofar is a Teru'ah. During the second blessing, three out of the four blasts are Teru'os. Hence, the first two blessings have a total of four Teru'os. Similarly, the next four blessings have a total of eight Teru'os, while the last blessing has only one Teru'ah -- a total of 13 Teru'os.
</p><p>
(According to Rabeinu Gershom, the events at Yericho allude not only to the seven days of blowing the Shofar, but also to the number of Teru'os as well. In Yericho, the Jewish people circled the city once each day for the first six days, and they sounded the Shofar at each circuit. On the seventh day, they circled the city seven times and blew the Shofar seven times. Altogether, they circled the city and blew the Shofar <i>13</i> times in <i>seven</i> days.)
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
<b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>ADDING MORE FASTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  In the days of R. Yehudah ha'Nasi, thirteen fasts were 
          decreed, which were not answered, so he considered 
          decreeing more.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  R. Ami told him not to overburden the community.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  R. Aba claimed that R. Ami only said this to avoid 
          fasting himself; rather, for any troubles other than 
          rain, we fast until we are answered.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Likewise, a Beraisa states that the sequence of 
               fasts was only said for rain, but for other 
               troubles, we fast until we are answered.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Doesn't this contradict R. Ami?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It is a dispute between Tana'im:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rebbi):</font></b> We do not impose more than thirteen fasts 
               on the community, so as not to overburden them.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Shimon b. Gamliel):</font></b> The reason is that the time 
               for rainfall has passed.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>5) </font></b><font color='blue'>PLACES WITH SPECIAL NEEDS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  The Bnei Ninveh asked Rebbi:</font></b> 'We who need rain even in 
          midsummer, should we pray for rain like individuals, in 
          Shome'a Tefilah, or as a community, in Birchas ha'Shanim?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  He replied that they should pray like individuals.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see otherwise in a Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The given order of fasts applies to an era when the 
               seasons function as normal and Yisrael are in their 
               land, but nowadays, it changes according to the 
               needs of the year and the location.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> You cannot challenge Rebbi with a Beraisa; he is 
          a Tana and he can argue with it.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> In conclusion, where should they ask for rain?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Nachman):</font></b> In Birchas ha'Shanim.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Sheshes):</font></b> In the Berachah of Shome'a Tefilah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b></b>  The Halachah is that they should say it in Shome'a 
          Tefilah.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>6) </font></b><font color='blue'>CLOSING THE STORES</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that on Monday, the doors to the stores 
          would be partially opened before dark, and on Thursday, 
          all day, because of Shabbos.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Does this mean that on Thursday they would be 
          partially open all day, or fully open all day?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> We see the latter in a Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> On Monday, the doors to the stores would be 
               partially opened before dark, and on Thursday, they 
               would be fully open all day, because of Shabbos.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> On Monday, if he had two doors, one should be open 
               and the other closed.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> If he had chairs blocking the view of his door, it 
               can be left open.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>7) </font></b><font color='blue'>BUILDING AND PLANTING</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that if these fasts did not work either, 
          people must decrease business, building, planting...
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  Building and planting refers to buildings and plantings 
          for pleasure.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  Building for pleasure refers to building a house for 
          one's son who is about to marry.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  Planting for pleasure refers to planting a tree in honor 
          of the king's new son.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>8) </font></b><font color='blue'>GREETING</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah also forbade greeting people in these 
          circumstances.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> Talmidei Chachamim may not greet each other.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> If greeted by an Am ha'Aretz, one should reply in a 
               low voice.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  They should dress and sit as mourners, as excommunicated 
          people, despised by Hash-m, until He has mercy upon them.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Elazar):</font></b> An important person may not prostrate 
          himself in prayer unless he is as certain as Yeshoshua to 
          be answered.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  An important person may not wear sackcloth unless he is 
          as certain as Yehoram ben Achav to be answered.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  Not everyone is answered by rending their clothes, and 
          not everyone is answered through falling down.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Moshe and Aharon were answered by falling on their 
               faces.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Yehoshua and Kalev were answered by rending their 
               clothes.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Objection:</font></b> Since it says '*And* Yehoshua', it means 
               that he did both.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b></b>  Not everyone is answered by bowing down, and not everyone 
          is answered by prostrating themselves.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Kings are answered by bowing down.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Princes are answered by prostrating themselves.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Objection:</font></b> Since it says 'Princes <i>and</i> they shall 
               prostrate themselves', it means that they did both.
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>REWARDS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Nachman bar Yitzchak):</font></b> Not everyone merits light, and 
          not everyone merits joy;
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Tzadikim merit light, and Yesharim (the straight of 
               heart) merit joy.
<br>
<br><center><font color='ff0000' size='+1'><b>*****<b>PEREK SEDER TA'ANIYOS KEITZAD</b>*****
</b></font></center><p><b>
<br><b></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' THE ORDER OF THE FAST DAY</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The order of the fast day is that they would place the 
          Aron in the streets, and put ashes on it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> They would also put ashes on the head of the Nasi 
               and the Av Beis Din, and then everyone would put 
               ashes on their own heads.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The eldest present would deliver a moving speech 
               about how Ninveh was saved not through fasting, but 
               through sincere repentance.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  They would then be led in prayer by someone old, 
          practiced, having children, and poor, so that he can pray 
          with a full heart.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> He would say twenty-four Berachos; the usual 
               eighteen, plus an additional six (as discussed).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> He would conclude the Berachos by respectively 
               blessing Hash-m for having answered Avraham at Har 
               ha'Moriah, the Bnei Yisrael at the Yam Suf, Yehoshua 
               at Gilgal. Shmuel at Mitzpah, Eliyahu at Har 
               ha'Carmel, Yonah in the fish, and David and Shlomo.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) THE EFFECT OF AN 'AND'</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> Rebbi Elazar (end of 14b) says that in the future, the kings ('Melachim') of the world will stand up in respect for the Jewish people, and the officers ('Sarim') will bow down, as the verse says, '... Melachim will see and they will rise; Sarim, and they will bow down' (Yeshayah 49:7).
</p><p>
The Gemara asks that the verse does not seem to support Rebbi Elazar's teaching. Had the verse said, '... <i>and</i> Sarim will bow down,' it would have provided support for Rebbi Elazar's teaching by implying that only the Sarim will bow down and not the Melachim. However, the verse says, '... Sarim, and they will bow down,' which implies that the Sarim will do both -- they will stand up in respect for the Jewish people <i>and</i> bow down to them.
</p><p>
The Gemara's question is difficult to understand. The previous Gemara (14b) says that Moshe's prayer was answered because he supplicated through 'Nefilah' (prostration before Hash-m), while Yehoshua and Kalev were answered only through 'Keri'ah' (tearing their clothes in supplication). The Gemara asks that the verse says, '<i>and</i> Yehoshua and Kalev... tore their clothes' (Bamidbar 14:6), which implies that they did what was mentioned in the previous verse ('Nefilah') 'and' they <i>also</i> tore their clothes. How can the Gemara now ask that had the verse said, '<i>and</i> Sarim will bow down,' it would have implied that they will <i>only</i> bow down and not stand up? The addition of the word 'and' should link this part of the verse with the first part and imply that the Sarim will do <i>both</i> what the Melachim will do (stand) <i>and</i> bow down. (<b>RASHASH</b>)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER:</b> The <b>RASHASH</b> and <b>SEFAS EMES</b> point out that the text of the Gemara as cited by the <b>EIN YAKOV</b> omits the word 'Sarim' in the Gemara's question on Rebbi Elazar. According to that Girsa, the Gemara says that had the verse said 'they will bow down,' it would have meant that the Sarim will <i>only</i> bow down; but now that it says '<i>and</i> they will bow down,' it means that the Sarim will do both -- stand up and bow down. Therefore, the Gemara here is consistent with the Gemara earlier. 
</p><p>


<font><b>2) HALACHAH: FAST DAYS FOR A DROUGHT NOWADAYS</b></font><b>
<br>OPINIONS:</b> The Mishnah describes the 'Seder Ta'aniyos' -- the order of the day on the last seven of the thirteen public fast days that are declared when no rain falls in the rain season. It describes how the Sefer Torah is brought into the public area where the people will pray, and how ashes are placed on the foreheads of the Nasi and Av Beis Din, as well as on the heads of all of the people. It describes the elder's words of rebuke, the six blessings added to the Shemoneh Esreh, and the blowing of the Shofar. In addition, the Mishnah later (26a) teaches that on a Ta'anis Tzibur a Tefilas Ne'ilah is recited, the fasts are 24-hour fasts, work is prohibited, and all five Inuyim (afflictions) of Yom Kippur are observed (12b). 
</p><p>
The Gemara (14b, 19a) teaches that these fast days were practiced not only during times of drought, but whenever a life-threatening situation existed. The <b>TUR</b> and <b>SHULCHAN ARUCH</b> (OC 579) record these Halachos at length.
</p><p>
Is this series of thirteen fast days, and all of their related laws, observed outside of Eretz Yisrael when there is a drought or another life-threatening situation?
</p><p>
(a) The Gemara earlier (12b) cites Shmuel who says that 'there is no Ta'anis Tzibur in Bavel except for the ninth of Av'; that is, the unique severity afforded to these fast days is not practiced in Bavel (Rashi 11b, DH Ein Ta'anis Tzibur). <b>RASHI</b> in Pesachim (54b) explains that since Bavel is a naturally wet land (see Ta'anis 10a), drought there is not a life-threatening situation and there is no need to treat Ta'aniyos for rain with such severity (or to decree fasts for rain in the first place).
</p><p>
The Rishonim point out that if the only difference between Bavel and Eretz Yisrael is that there is never a shortage of water in Bavel, then when a different type of life-threatening situation arises the people of Bavel <i>should</i> be obligated to observe the full severity of the fast days. Why does Shmuel say that there is <i>no</i> Ta'anis Tzibur in Bavel except for Tish'ah b'Av?
</p><p>
The <b>RITVA</b> (12b) explains that Rashi may rule like the <b>RAMBAM</b> (Hilchos Ta'aniyos 3:11, 4:1) who maintains that fast days instituted for any reason other than lack of rain are not as severe as fasts for rain. Only fasts for rain have the same degree of severity as the fast of Tish'ah b'Av. Since Bavel does not need rain, it has no severe fasts other than Tish'ah b'Av. This appears to be Rashi's view in Pesachim (50b, DH Ta'anis Tzibur; 54b, DH Ein Ta'anis Tzibur). Although it is clear from the Gemara that in other life-threatening situations the people of Bavel also decree fasts and blow the Shofar (as the Ramban here and Ritva (ibid.) prove), Rashi and the Rambam apparently distinguish between the requirement to blow the Shofar and the requirement to observe the Tish'ah b'Av aspects (that is, the five Inuyim, the prohibition against working, etc.) on a Ta'anis.
</p><p>
The Rambam and Rashi are not in complete agreement, however. Rashi's words imply that only in Bavel is the severity of these Ta'aniyos not practiced. The Rambam, however, implies that not only in Bavel but everywhere outside of Eretz Yisrael the fast days are not practiced with the severity of Tish'ah b'Av. Only for fasts for <i>rain</i> in <i>Eretz Yisrael</i> did the Chachamim institute such stringent laws.
</p><p>
(b) The other Rishonim reject this approach and assert that the full severity of these fasts applies whenever a fast is instituted because of a life-threatening situation. Why, then, is the severity of a Ta'anis Tzibur not observed in Bavel? The <b>RAMBAN</b> and <b>RAN</b> (end of the first Perek) quote the <b>RA'AVAD</b> who explains that the above-mentioned practices were not instituted in Bavel because they are too difficult for the people to observe.
</p><p>
Wearing shoes on fast days in Bavel is not prohibited because the ground there is very damp and the discomfort experienced there when walking without shoes is far greater than the discomfort experienced in Eretz Yisrael without shoes. The Chachamim did not institute 24-hour fasts or prohibit work on a fast day because the people of Bavel were poor and such enactments would affect them too severely (see end of Kidushin 29b and Rishonim). The Chachamim did not prohibit them from washing their bodies and smearing oil, since they were generally in a weak state of health and such enactments would have had detrimental effects on them. Since there was reason to suspend some of the Inuyim on fast days in Bavel, none of the other five Inuyim were enacted in Bavel. (The other laws of a Ta'anis Tzibur, such as Ne'ilah, Shofar blasts, and the six additional blessings of Shemoneh Esreh perhaps <i>do</i> apply in Bavel.)
</p><p>
According to the Ra'avad, only in Bavel is the severity of a Ta'anis Tzibur not observed, but other places in Chutz la'Aretz are considered like Eretz Yisrael with regard to a Ta'anis Tzibur. (The Ramban, however, suggests that the Ra'avad maintains that the severity of a Ta'anis Tzibur was not enacted in any country outside of Eretz Yisrael, because of the countries which are similar to Bavel.) 
</p><p>
(c) The <b>RAMBAN</b> rejects the Ra'avad's explanation as 'weak.' Instead, he prefers the explanation of the <b>RA'AVYAH</b> who suggests an entirely different reason for why the laws of Ta'aniyos in Bavel are not as severe as the laws of Ta'aniyos in Eretz Yisrael. This is also the explanation of the <b>RITVA</b>, <b>RAN</b>, and <b>ROSH</b> (1:9).
</p><p>
The Yerushalmi teaches that the only time a Ta'anis is practiced with its full severity is when it has the status of a 'Ta'anis <i>Tzibur</i>' by virtue of having been accepted unanimously by the entire congregation. However, such a unanimous acceptance of an enactment can be accomplished only through a central judicial authority or through a Nasi. Since there is no Nasi in Bavel and the members of the Jewish courts there do not have Semichah, any Ta'anis they accept upon themselves would have to be accepted individually by each person. In that case, however, by definition the Ta'anis would be only a Ta'anis Yachid! (Even though Rav (12b) says that a Ta'anis Yachid has the severity of a Ta'anis Tzibur, the Rishonim explain that this is true only in a time and place in which a Ta'anis Tzibur <i>could</i> be practiced.)
</p><p>
Accordingly, fast days instituted <i>anywhere</i> outside of Eretz Yisrael for <i>any</i> reason do not have the severity of Ta'aniyos in Eretz Yisrael. However, the Ramban cites a tradition from the Ge'onim (and for which he provides support from the Gemara) that this applies only to the requirement to fast for 24 hours, the five Inuyim, and the prohibition against working. The extra prayers (the Tefilah of Ne'ilah and the six additional blessings in Shemoneh Esreh) and the Shofar blasts should be observed even outside of Eretz Yisrael.
</p><p>

<b>HALACHAH:</b> What is the common practice today in Eretz Yisrael and in Chutz la'Aretz with regard to a Ta'anis Tzibur?
</p><p>
1. <b>INUYIM</b>. As mentioned above, many Rishonim agree that where there is no Nasi or qualified Beis Din, every Ta'anis is considered a Ta'anis Yachid and does not have the severity of a Ta'anis Tzibur. This is the accepted ruling (<b>MISHNAH BERURAH</b> OC 575:25). Therefore, outside of Eretz Yisrael the requirement to fast for 24 hours, the five Inuyim, and the prohibition against working are not observed. (See #4 below for the practice today in Eretz Yisrael.)
</p><p>
2. <b>TEFILAH</b>. All of the Rishonim seem to agree that the Tefilah of Ne'ilah, the six additional blessings in Shemoneh Esreh, and the Shofar blasts should be observed everywhere, even in Bavel and other lands outside of Eretz Yisrael. However, the <b>RAMBAN</b> and <b>RITVA</b> write that in their region, the only practices of a Ta'anis Tzibur that were observed were the addition of the six blessings to Shemoneh Esreh and the blowing of the Shofar (see also Ritva and Ran, beginning of 17a). Ne'ilah was not recited because it may be limited to the fast days which have the laws of Tish'ah b'Av, which are not practiced outside of Eretz Yisrael (as mentioned in (c) above).
</p><p>
The <b>RAMBAM</b> (Hilchos Ta'aniyos 3:11, 4:1), however, writes that the six additional blessings are recited only on a fast day for <i>rain</i> in <i>Eretz Yisrael</i>.
</p><p>
3. <b>SHOFAR</b>. The <b>RITVA</b> (later on 12b) mentions that the common practice in France was not to blow the Shofar on fast days (based on a ruling of Tosfos). Since the Mitzvah is to blow with Chatzotzeros on a fast day, and the Chatzotzeros do not exist nowadays (as it is unknown exactly how they are to be made), there is no Mitzvah to blow the Shofar. (See Insights to Ta'anis 14:1.)
</p><p>
The <b>MAGEN AVRAHAM</b> (beginning of OC 576) wonders why it is not the practice to blow the Shofar on publicly-decreed fast days today as the Torah commands. Although some Acharonim contend that the Mitzvah applies only in Eretz Yisrael (see <b>RAN</b> to Rosh Hashanah 26b; <b>NESIV CHAIM</b>, OC ibid.), the <b>BIRKEI YOSEF</b> writes that even in Eretz Yisrael the blowing of the Shofar is not currently practiced on a Ta'anis. Perhaps the reason why the Shofar is not blown is because we rely on the minority ruling of the French community mentioned by the Ritva. The <b>PRI MEGADIM</b> (cited by the <b>MISHNAH BERURAH</b> OC 576:1) answers that perhaps the Mitzvah to blow the Shofar applies in Eretz Yisrael only when Eretz Yisrael is under Jewish authority. Alternatively, perhaps it applies only when a majority of the Jewish people faces the same threat.
</p><p>
4. <b>ERETZ YISRAEL</b>. The <b>PE'AS HA'SHULCHAN</b> writes that the Seder Ta'aniyos are observed in Eretz Yisrael today exactly as they are described in the Gemara and recorded by the Shulchan Aruch. The <b>BIRKEI YOSEF</b> (OC 575, cited by the Mishnah Berurah ibid.) -- who lived around the same time as the Pe'as ha'Shulchan -- records that he actually met elderly Jews in Yerushalayim and Chevron who remembered observing such Ta'aniyos when they were young.
</p><p>
In practice, no Ta'aniyos with the unique severity, prayers, or Shofar blasts of a Ta'anis Tzibur have been observed in recent years even in Eretz Yisrael. This is consistent with the ruling of the <b>RAMBAN</b> and other Rishonim that when there is no Nasi, the Ta'aniyos do not have the severity of a Ta'anis Tzibur anywhere in the world. Although the <b>BIRKEI YOSEF</b> mentions the possibility that the Gedolim in Eretz Yisrael today are 'the delegates of the original Semuchim,' this apparently is not the present-day practice.
</p><p>
This explains why the laws of the Inuyim and Ne'ilah are not observed in Eretz Yisrael today. Why, though, are the 24 blessings of Shemoneh Esreh not recited today when the people in Eretz Yisrael observe a day of fast due to a drought? (Perhaps it is because today a drought does not pose the danger that it once posed, because today food and water can be imported with ease from other countries. In that sense, Eretz Yisrael today is like the Bavel of old.)
</p><p>
<b>RAV YECHIEL MICHAL TUKACHINSKY</b> zt'l (in <b>SEFER ERETZ YISRAEL</b>) writes that although in modern times the Seder Ta'aniyos are not observed, one part of the Ta'aniyos <i>is</i> observed today. During a time of drought in Eretz Yisrael, the prayer of 'va'Aneinu [Borei Olam b'Midas ha'Rachamim...]' is added to the Shemoneh Esreh in the blessing of 'Shome'a Tefilah.' (This is the 'Hasra'ah b'Peh' mentioned in the Gemara earlier (14a), which is recited in the Shemoneh Esreh in the blessing of 'Shome'a Tefilah.' The text of this prayer in most Sidurim differs slightly from the text recorded by the <b>TUR</b>, and there are different Minhagim as to which Girsa to follow.) No other changes to the Shemoneh Esreh are made, and no Teki'os are blown.
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  There was a case when the people did not respond with 
          'Amen'; instead, there was a call to blow Shofar.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The Chachamim responded that the custom was to do 
               that only in Shaar ha'Mizrach and Har ha'Bayis.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' THE 'MISHMAROS 'AND THE 'BATEI AVOS'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  (R. Yehoshua):
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> For the first three fasts, the men of the Mishmar 
               would fast but not all day, and the men of the Beis 
               Av would not fast at all.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> For the second three fasts, the men of the Mishmar 
               would fast all day, and the men of the Beis Av would 
               fast but not all day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> For the last seven fasts, they would both fast all 
               day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  (Chachamim):
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> For the first three fasts, neither group would fast 
               at all.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> For the second three fasts, the men of the Mishmar 
               would fast but not all day, and the men of the Beis 
               Av would not fast at all.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> For the last seven fasts, the men of the Mishmar 
               would fast all day, and the men of the Beis Av would 
               fast but not all day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  The men of the Mishmar may drink wine by night but not by 
          day; the men of the Beis Av may not drink wine at all.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  Both groups are forbidden to have haircuts or wash 
          clothes, except on Thursday because of Shabbos.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' 'MEGILAS TA'ANIS</font></b>
'(a)	Any day mentioned in Megilas Ta'anis as being forbidden for 
     eulogies is likewise forbidden on the preceding day, but not 
     on the following day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yosi):</font></b> It is forbidden on both the preceding and 
               following day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  Any day mentioned in Megilas Ta'anis as being forbidden 
          for fasting is permitted on both the preceding and 
          following day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yosi):</font></b> It is forbidden on the preceding day, but 
               not on the following day.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>5) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' FASTS CONFLICTING WITH FESTIVALS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  We do not decree an initial series of fasts beginning on 
          Thursday, as it will drive food-prices up; instead, the 
          first series of three fasts runs Monday-Thursday-Monday, 
          and the second runs Thursday-Monday-Thursday.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yosi):</font></b> Just as the first series cannot begin on 
               a Monday, the same is true for the second and third 
               series.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Raban Gamliel):</font></b> Fasts are not decreed upon the community 
          on Rosh Chodesh, Chanukah or Purim; but if a series of 
          fasts had already begun, it is not stopped.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Meir):</font></b> Even though the fasts are not stopped, R. 
          Gamliel agrees that one does not fast all day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The same applies to Tish'ah b'Av that fell on Erev 
               Shabbos.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>6) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE 'ARON HA'KODESH 'DURING THE FASTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that the Aron is placed on the street, 
          presumably even on the first fasts.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> A Beraisa states otherwise:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> For the first two sets of fasts, everyone would 
               gather in Shul to pray.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> For the last set of seven fasts, the Aron would be 
               taken into the street, and dust was placed on it and 
               on people's heads.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Nosson):</font></b> They would use ashes.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> The Mishnah is only referring to the last set of 
          fasts.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>7) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE ASHES</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that first ashes were placed on the 
          heads of the Nasi and the Av Beis Din, and then everyone 
          would place ashes on their own heads.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> The order should be the reverse, as we find in 
          a Beraisa:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rebbi):</font></b> With great things, we begin with the 
               greatest, as we find that Moshe spoke to Aharon 
               before his sons.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> With matters of punishment, we begin with the 
               lowliest, as we find that first the snake was 
               cursed, then Chavah, then Adam.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> This is a matter of greatness for them; we are 
          telling them that they are sufficiently great to pray on 
          behalf of the community.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Why do the Nasi and the Av Beis Din have 
               other people place the ashes on their heads?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> Someone who shames himself does not compare 
               to someone who is shamed by others.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Where are the ashes placed?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> On the place of the Tefillin, as the Pasuk 
               speaks of replacing the Efer, ashes, with the Pe'er 
               - Tefillin.
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE ORDER OF THE FAST DAY</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why did everyone go out into the street?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #1 (R. Chiya bar Aba):</font></b> To proclaim that we have 
          cried out in the privacy of Shul and have not been 
          answered, so now we are demeaning ourselves in public.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #2 (Resh Lakish):</font></b> To proclaim that we are 
          undergoing exile as an atonement.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The practical difference would be in a case where 
               they moved from one Shul to another, which would 
               only be effective according to the second 
               explanation.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why was the Aron taken out into the street?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> To show that our private vessel has become 
          demeaned through our sins.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why do the people wear sackcloth?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> To proclaim that we are no better than animals 
          (and therefore wear animal skins).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why are ashes placed on the Aron?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> As Hash-m is with His people in their distress.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Zeira):</font></b> 'When I first saw them place ashes on 
               the Aron, my whole body trembled.'
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(j)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why would everybody place ashes on their head?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(k)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #1:</font></b> To proclaim that we are considered before 
          Hash-m as ashes.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(l)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #2:</font></b> To raise the memory of the ashes of Yitzchak.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The practical difference is that according to the 
               first answer, dust would suffice.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(m)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why would everyone go to the cemetery?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(n)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #1:</font></b> To proclaim that we are considered before 
          Hash-m as the dead.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(o)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #2:</font></b> So that the dead should pray for mercy on our 
          behalf.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The practical difference is that according to the 
               first answer, a non-Jewish cemetery would suffice.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(p)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why was Har ha'Moriah so called?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(q)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #1:</font></b> It is the mountain from which teachings 
          (Hora'ah) went out for Israel.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(r)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #2:</font></b> It is the mountain which caused fear (Mora) 
          for the non-Jews.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE SPEECH</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that the oldest present would deliver a 
          moving speech.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> If there is an elder present, he delivers it; 
          otherwise, a Chacham delivers it; otherwise, a person of 
          stature should deliver it.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Does this mean that the first choice is an 
               elder even if he is not a Chacham?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> It means that the first choice is an elder 
               who is also a Chacham.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  He should say that, as we find with the people of Ninveh, 
          it is not sackcloth and fasting which help, but 
          repentance and good deeds.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  The people of Ninveh tied up the animals away from their 
          young, and told Hash-m that if He did not have mercy on 
          them, they wouldn't have mercy on their animals.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  They challenged Hash-m that the righteous should sway the 
          fate of the wicked, rather than vice-versa.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> What does the Pasuk mean with 'they repented from 
               the violence of their hands'?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> A person who stole a beam and built a 
               building with it destroyed the building to return it 
               to its owner.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> A person who has stolen something and repents 
               without returning it is like someone holding a 
               Sheretz for whom all the waters in the world will 
               not work for Tevilah.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  But as soon as he discards it, forty Se'ah 
                    alone works as a Tevilah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> The Pasuk says that we have to place our heart in 
               our hands i.e. to repent in deed.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE 'SHALI'ACH TZIBUR'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah says that an elder etc. would act as the 
          Shali'ach Tzibur.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> Even if there is an elder who is a Chacham 
          present, the Shali'ach Tzibur must be someone who is 
          practiced.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  It must be someone with dependants whom he cannot 
          support; agricultural concerns; an empty home; a noble 
          history; humble; beloved to the people; pleasant voiced; 
          familiar with Tenach, Midrash, Halachah and Agadah; and 
          familiar with all the Berachos.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  R. Yiztchak bar Ami was considered to meet these 
          criteria.
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) THE ALLOWANCE TO USE ASHES OF HUMAN BONE</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Mishnah (15a) teaches that as part of the Seder Ta'aniyos, ashes are placed upon the heads of the Nasi and Av Beis Din. <b>TOSFOS</b> (here and on 15b) writes that these ashes should come from a human bone that was burned.
</p><p>
How can Tosfos suggest that ashes of a human bone be used? The Torah forbids the mutilation and desecration of dead bodies; human remains must be buried. How can the Mishnah permit the defilement of human remains by burning them so that the ashes can be placed on the heads of the congregants? (See following Insight.)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) <b>RASHI</b> in Berachos (5b) writes that a bone less than the size of a barley seed does not need to be buried. Perhaps it may also be burned and its ashes used, and doing so is not considered a disgrace to the dead.
</p><p>
(b) <b>RAV</b> S. Z. <b>BRAUN</b> in <b>SHE'ARIM HA'METZUYANIM B'HALACHAH</b> cites the <b>MAGEN AVRAHAM</b> (OC 311:3) who implies (perhaps based on Tosfos here) that the prohibition against disgracing a Mes does not apply when the body has been burned to ashes (see also <b>TOSFOS</b> to Chulin 125b, DH Yachol). Presumably, after it has become ashes it is considered a new entity and burial is not required.
</p><p>
Rav Braun points out that many Acharonim do not accept the ruling of the Magen Avraham.
</p><p>
(c) The Acharonim ask another basic question. Tosfos says that the ashes of human bone should be used in order to commemorate Akeidas Yitzchak. However, no human was actually burned at the Akeidah. It would be more appropriate to use ashes from wood or from a ram, since that is what was burned at the Akeidah. (<b>KEREN ORAH</b>, <b>YA'AVETZ</b>)
</p><p>
The <b>SHE'ARIM HA'METZUYANIM B'HALACHAH</b> suggests that there is a printer's error in the words of Tosfos. In place of 'Etzem Adam,' the words should be 'Etzem Ayil' -- 'the bone of a <i>ram</i>.' (He proposes that in an earlier manuscript the words in Tosfos read 'Etzem A'' (Alef), an abbreviation for the word 'Ayil,' and the printer erred and wrote 'Adam' instead of 'Ayil.' Alternatively, perhaps the words of Tosfos originally read 'me'Etzem O Dam' -- 'from bone or blood' of an animal (but not from the meat of an animal, since one may not waste something edible by burning it for this purpose). Since a ram was burned at Akeidas Yitzchak, a bone from a ram should be burned to arouse Hashem's mercy for the Jewish people. (See Rosh Hashanah 16a: 'Blow before me the Shofar of a ram, so that I may remember Akeidas Yitzchak.') The words 'me'Etzem O Dam' may have been mistakenly copied as 'me'Etzem Adam.'
</p><p>


<font><b>2) THE SOURCE TO USE ASHES OF HUMAN BONE</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Mishnah (15a) teaches that as part of the Seder Ta'aniyos ashes are placed upon the heads of the Nasi and Av Beis Din. <b>TOSFOS</b> (here and on 15b) writes that these ashes should come from a human bone that was burned.
</p><p>
Several explanations are given for why the ashes of a human bone may be used for this purpose even though the Torah forbids the desecration of human remains. (See previous Insight.) All of those explanations agree that Tosfos maintains that a specific type of ash should be used.
</p><p>
What is Tosfos' source for this? The Gemara itself implies that <i>any</i> ashes may be used. The Gemara records a dispute between Rebbi Levi bar Chama and Rebbi Chanina with regard to the reason for the ashes: do they remind us of our worthlessness (we are no better than ashes) or do they remind us of Akeidas Yitzchak? The Gemara says that the practical difference between these two opinions is 'Afar Stam' -- ordinary dirt. According to the opinion that the reason for using ashes is to remind us of our worthlessness, we may also use dirt. According to the opinion that the reason for using ashes is to remind us of Akeidas Yitzchak, we may not use dirt because dirt does not remind us of Akeidas Yitzchak.
</p><p>
If, as Tosfos says, the opinion which associates the ashes with Akeidas Yitzchak maintains that ashes of <i>bone</i> must be used, the Gemara should have offered that as the practical difference between the two opinions: according to the opinion that the ashes are reminiscent of the Akeidah, ashes from <i>bone</i> must be used, while according to the other opinion <i>any</i> ashes may be used. The fact that the Gemara does not offer this as a difference between the two opinions implies that ashes of bone are <i>not</i> required. (<b>BIRKEI YOSEF</b> OC 579 and Acharonim)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWER:</b> The reason why Tosfos says that the ashes must come from human bone is because he is bothered by another question. The Mishnah explicitly states that 'Efer Makleh' (ashes) must be used. It adds the word 'Makleh' to exclude dirt (as Rashi explains in the Mishnah). Why, then, does one opinion insist that since ashes are placed on the heads of the people to show that 'we are worthless like ash,' dirt may also be used? The Mishnah clearly contradicts this opinion. (<b>KEREN ORAH</b>, <b>RASHASH</b>)
</p><p>
Moreover, the Amora'im who discuss the source for the requirement to place ashes on the head seem to argue about a subject that is already debated by the Tana'im. The Gemara earlier (15b) cites a Beraisa in which the Tana Kama states that plain 'ashes' may be used (he omits the word 'Makleh' and thereby includes dirt). Rebbi Nasan argues and says 'they would bring Efer <i>Makleh</i>,' referring specifically to ashes and not dirt. Why does the Gemara not mention that the dispute of the Amora'im here is the subject of a Machlokes Tana'im?
</p><p>
These questions led Tosfos to understand that when the Gemara says that the difference between the two opinions is 'Afar Stam,' it does not refer to dirt. The word 'Afar' here means <i>ashes</i> (as in the verse, 'Afar Serefas ha'Chatas' (Bamidbar 19:17); see Rashi in the Mishnah). <i>Both</i> opinions among the Amora'im permit <i>only</i> ashes to be used. They argue whether a <i>specific type</i> of ash must be used or any type of ash may be used. The opinion that the purpose for using ashes is to remind us of Akeidas Yitzchak maintains that only the ashes of bone may be used, while the other opinion allows any ashes. Accordingly, both opinions concur with the ruling of the Mishnah, and with Rebbi Nasan of the Beraisa, that ashes must be used and not dirt.
</p><p>
This understanding is implied by the wording of the Gemara (according to our text). The Gemara says that they argue whether 'Afar Stam' may be used. Rashi (DH Afar) says that the word 'Stam' is extra and should be omitted from the text because it makes no sense for the Gemara to refer to 'plain dirt' as opposed to some other type of dirt. Dirt is dirt. Tosfos, on the other hand, emphasizes that the Girsa is correct and should not be changed. He explains that the word 'Afar' means <i>ashes</i> and not dirt. When the Gemara says that the Amora'im argue whether '<i>plain</i> ashes' may be used, it means plain ashes as opposed to a specific type of ashes: ashes from bones. (M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>
One question remains to be answered. According to the other Rishonim who explain that <i>dirt</i> may be used according to the Amora who says that ashes are placed on the head to give the people a feeling of lowliness, how can this opinion be reconciled with the Mishnah which says specifically that 'Efer Makleh' is used?
</p><p>
1. Those Rishonim may understand that the reason why the Mishnah says 'Makleh' (ashes that come from a furnace or from an ordinary fire) is to exclude the ashes of a Parah Adumah, as one opinion cited by the <b>ME'IRI</b> indeed writes. (This is apparently the opinion of the <b>RASHBAM</b> in Bava Basra 60b, DH Efer Makleh.) One might have thought that the ashes of a Parah Adumah must be applied so that everyone will view himself as Tahor, and thus the Mishnah emphasizes that any type of ashes may be used. The Mishnah does not intend to exclude dirt by writing 'Makleh,' and dirt may be used. The Tana Kama of the Beraisa argues and insists that ashes of a Parah Adumah are applied, for the above-mentioned reason.
</p><p>
2. Rashi, who does not learn like the Rashbam, offers a different solution (15a, DH Efer), as the <b>LECHEM MISHNEH</b> (Hilchos Ta'aniyos 3:1), <b>KEREN ORAH</b>, and <b>RASHASH</b> explain. Rashi implies that even though dirt may be used since it also denotes worthlessness, it is better to use ashes which display even more worthlessness (since ashes are not fertile soil).
</p><p>


<font><b>3) HAR HA'MORIYAH</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara explains that the name 'Har ha'Moriyah' means either the mountain from which Torah was taught or the mountain from which fear [to the nations] emanated.
</p><p>
<b>RASHI</b> and <b>TOSFOS</b> write that Har ha'Moriyah refers either to Yerushalayim and the site of the Beis ha'Mikdash, or to Har Sinai.
</p><p>
The verse which discusses 'Eretz ha'Moriyah' (Bereishis 22:2, see Rashi) and 'Har ha'Moriyah' (Divrei ha'Yamim II 3:1) clearly refer to the site of the Beis ha'Mikdash and not to Har Sinai (which is not in Eretz Yisrael at all). Why do Rashi and Tosfos suggest that it refers to Har Sinai? (<b>MAHARSHA</b>)
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) The <b>KEREN ORAH</b> and others point out that the Yalkut Shimoni (to Shir ha'Shirim 4:6: 'I will go to Har ha'Mor') records the same dispute with regard to the meaning of the words 'Har ha'Mor.' The Yalkut Shimoni, however, is not discussing 'ha'Moriyah' but 'ha'Mor,' which indeed may refer to Har Sinai. Perhaps the Gemara here should be emended to read 'Har ha'Mor' as well. (According to this Girsa, the reason why the Gemara mentions this dispute here is because the same Amora'im who disagreed in an earlier argument disagree about this as well, as Rashi himself writes (beginning of DH Mai Har, although it is clear from the rest of his words that his Girsa is 'ha'Moriyah'). The Gemara's citation of this dispute here is unrelated to the Mishnah's mention of 'Avraham on Har ha'Moriyah.')
</p><p>
(b) The Gemara in Megilah (29a) says that Har Tabor and Har Carmel came to the desert, to the area of Sinai, at the time the Torah was given. The Yalkut Reuveni (Parshas Yisro, DH bi'She'as) suggests that in the same way Har ha'Bayis, the place of the Beis ha'Mikdash, 'jumped' to the Sinai desert in order for the Torah to be given upon it.
</p><p>
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Is not having dependants whom he cannot support 
          the same as  having an empty house?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It refers to having a house empty of sin.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b></b>  'A noble history' means that he did not get a bad name in 
          his youth.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b></b>  The Pasuk about a lion 'roaring against me' refers to an 
          unsuitable Shali'ach Tzibur.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE EXTRA 'BERACHOS'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> The Mishnah says that six Berachos were added; 
          yet it lists seven concluding Berachos!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> The seventh does not conclude a seventh new 
          Berachah, but rather the seventh Berachah from the one 
          which was added on to:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> This is the Berachah of Go'el Yisrael, which is 
               lengthened and responded to with Amen; the Chazan 
               then calls for a Tekiyah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> After the next Berachah, he calls for a Teruah, and 
               alternates in this way for all of them.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  This was only true in the rest of Eretz Yisrael, but not 
          in the Beis ha'Mikdash, where they do not say Amen.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  We know this as the Pasuk, referring to the Beis 
          ha'Mikdash, says that when Hash-m is blessed, the people 
          whould respond with Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuso l'Olam 
          Va'ed.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b></b>  One might think that this response is only said once; the 
          Pasuk therefore says that it is said in response to every 
          Berachah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  The Chazan then calls for a Tekiyah, and after the next 
          Berachah, he calls for a Teruah, and alternates in this 
          way for all of them.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> R. Chalafta acted in this way in Tzipori, as did R. 
               Chananyah b. Tradyon in Sichni.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> The Chachamim responded that the custom was to do so 
               only in Sha'ar ha'Mizrach and Har ha'Bayis.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b></b>  The Gemara then lists an alternative rendition of the 
          Beraisa (as cited).
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b></b>  R. Yehudah said that Zichronos and Shofaros need not be 
          amongst the six extra Berachos.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> His reason is that these are only said on Rosh 
               Hashanah, Yovel, and during times of war.
<br>

sjt:
<p>
<font><b>4) THE PRAYERS ON A TA'ANIS: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 'MIKDASH' AND 'GEVULIN' </b></font><b>
<br>OPINIONS:</b> The Mishnah relates that once, on a public fast day in the times of Rebbi Chalafta and Rebbi Chananya ben Teradyon, the Tefilos for the Ta'anis were conducted in an unusual way. When the Chachamim heard about it they objected and said that we do not pray in such a way outside of the Mikdash.
</p><p>
What exactly did the people do which caused the Chachamim to object? Why was their mistaken practice supposed to be done only in the Mikdash?
</p><p>
(a) <b>RASHI</b> (15b, DH v'Lo Anu) explains that instead of answering 'Amen' after each blessing, they answered 'Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuso l'Olam va'Ed.' Rashi's version of the incident (third line on 15b) reads, '... and they did <i>not</i> answer 'Amen' after him' (which is the Girsa in our text as well).
</p><p>
The Chachamim objected because the only place where 'Amen' is not said after a blessing is in the Mikdash, where 'Baruch Shem Kevod...' is said instead. The reason for the difference is that in the Mikdash, the four-letter Name of Hash-m is pronounced 'k'Kesivaso,' as it is written (see <b>RITVA</b>). Since the holier Name of Hash-m is pronounced, a special ending for the blessings was instituted to reflect the sanctity of the holy Name. In the Mikdash, instead of saying, 'Baruch Atah Hash-m...,' one says, 'Baruch Hash-m... <i>Min ha'Olam v'Ad ha'Olam</i>,' as the Gemara here mentions. Since the blessing itself is different, the response after the blessing is also different and reflects the change in the blessing itself ('Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuso <i>l'Olam va'Ed</i>'). (See Insights to Yoma 37:1.)
</p><p>
The Rishonim disagree with Rashi's explanation. Rebbi Chalafta certainly would not have made such a mistake and let the people say 'Baruch Shem Kevod' and not 'Amen' after the blessings. Everyone knows that only in the Mikdash is 'Baruch Shem Kevod' recited after a blessing. The Rishonim therefore assert that this was not the mistake they made. (Their Girsa of the incident as recorded in the Mishnah reads, '... and they <i>answered</i> 'Amen' after him.' This is also the Girsa in the Yerushalmi and in the Dikdukei Sofrim.)
</p><p>
(It could be that this disagreement is based on another difference in the Girsa of the Mishnah. The text of the Mishnah as recorded by the <b>RITVA</b> reads, 'An incident occurred <i>involving</i> Rebbi Chalafta.' The Girsa in our texts, which is also Rashi's Girsa, reads, 'An incident occurred <i>in the days of</i> Rebbi Chalafta.' According to Rashi's Girsa, it is possible that Rebbi Chalafta was not involved in the incident and it was the laymen who erred. -Y. Shaw)
</p><p>
(b) The <b>RAMBAM</b> (Hilchos Ta'aniyos 4:17, according to the <b>MAGID MISHNEH</b> ibid. 4:3 and the <b>RITVA</b> here) explains that they blew the Shofar during the recitation of the blessings of Shemoneh Esreh on the Ta'anis. The Chachamim objected because the Shofar is blown only during the blessings on a Ta'anis in the Mikdash, and not outside of the Mikdash. (The source for this ruling may be the verse in Bamidbar (10:9) which relates that when the Shofar is blown in a time of trouble, 'You will be remembered <i>before Hash-m</i> and you will be saved from your enemies.' 'Before Hash-m' implies in the Beis ha'Mikdash. -M. Kornfeld)
</p><p>
<b>RASHI</b> (15b) questions this explanation and says that it cannot be that the Chachamim objected on those grounds, because the Gemara mentions in numerous places that the Shofar is blown during times of trouble even outside of the Mikdash. The Rishonim answer Rashi's question on the Rambam's explanation by saying that the Rambam agrees that the Shofar is blown outside of the Mikdash, but outside of the Mikdash it is supposed to be blown only <i>after</i> the blessings. Only in the Mikdash is the Shofar blown <i>during</i> the blessings. The Chachamim objected when the people outside of the Mikdash blew the Shofar <i>during</i> the blessings.
</p><p>
(c) The <b>RE'AH</b>, quoted by the <b>RITVA</b> and <b>RAN</b>, explains that the people altered the order of the blessings. Instead of reciting the supplication of 'Mi she'Anah...' and then the Chasimah (the closing words of 'Baruch Atah Hash-m...') of the blessing, they recited the Chasimah first and then recited (or repeated) 'Mi she'Anah.' The Chachamim objected to this practice for the following reason. The blowing of the Shofar must be done <i>with</i> the blessing. Outside of the Mikdash, the people who hear the blessing answer only 'Amen.' When the Shofar is blown afterwards, it is considered as though it is blown immediately after the blessing that was just recited; 'Amen' is not an interruption between the blessing and the Shofar-blowing because it is part of the blessing that was just recited. In contrast, the people in the Mikdash answer 'Baruch Shem Kevod...' to each blessing that they hear. 'Baruch Shem' itself is a new, independent blessing. Consequently, the Shofar cannot be blown after 'Baruch Shem' because it will not be part of the blessing of Shemoneh Esreh that was recited; 'Baruch Shem' interrupts between the blessing and the blowing of the Shofar. Therefore, in the Mikdash the Chazan repeats 'Mi she'Anah' while the Kohanim prepare to blow the Shofar so that the blowing of the Shofar will be connected to the blessing.
</p><p>
This apparently is the <b>VILNA GA'ON's</b> (Hagahos ha'Gra #1) understanding of the Gemara as well. He removes the words 'v'Chozer v'Omer' from the Gemara's description of how the blessings are recited outside of the Mikdash, but he does not remove them from the Gemara's description of how the blessings are recited in the Mikdash. According to his Girsa, the Gemara is saying that in the Mikdash the Chazan repeats the passage of 'Mi she'Anah' which he already said ('v'Chozer v'Omer'), while outside of the Mikdash the Chazan does not repeat anything but proceeds to the next blessing. (The Rambam also seems to learn like the Re'ah.)
</p><p>
(d) The <b>RITVA</b> quotes others who explain that the mistake the people made was identical to the mistake made 'in the times of Rebbi Chalafta' as recorded in Rosh Hashanah (27a). The Gemara there relates that in the times of Rebbi Chalafta and Rebbi Chanina ben Teradyon the congregation blew both the Shofaros and Chatzotzeros (as opposed to Shofaros alone) outside of the Mikdash. The Chachamim told Rebbi Chalafta that only in the Mikdash are both types of instruments used, while everywhere else only the Shofaros are used. This difference is based on the verse, 'With Chatzotzeros and the sound of the Shofar you shall blow a Teru'ah <i>before the King, Hash-m</i>' (Tehilim 98:6), which implies that the only place where both are used is 'before the King, Hash-m' -- in the Beis ha'Mikdash. They explain that the Mishnah here refers to the same incident. (According to this suggestion, however, the Mishnah omits the main part of the incident.)
</p><p>


<font><b>5) 'AND SOME SAY' -- THE SECOND BERAISA'S VERSION OF THE TEFILOS AND TEKI'OS ON A TA'ANIS</b></font><b>
<br>OPINIONS:</b> The Gemara records a Beraisa which describes at length the procedure of the Tefilos and Teki'os of a Ta'anis, both inside and outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash. The Gemara adds, 'And some say (v'Is d'Amri)...,' and proceeds to cite another version of the Beraisa which describes how the Tefilos and Teki'os are done in the Beis ha'Mikdash.
</p><p>
The Gemara's introduction of the second version with the words 'and some say' implies that there is some point of difference between the two versions of the Beraisa. The two versions, however, seem to say the same thing. What is the difference between them?
</p><p>
(a) <b>RASHI</b> (DH v'Is d'Amri) explains that the two Beraisos do not argue at all. When the Gemara says 'and some say' it means only that some taught the Beraisa with a slightly different wording, but they both mean the same thing. The words 'v'Is d'Amri' are not the same as the words 'Ika d'Amri' ('there are those who say') which always imply a second opinion which argues with the first.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>RITVA</b> (15a) explains that instead of the words 'v'Is d'Amri' ('and some say'), the text of the Gemara should read 'Rebbi Yehudah Omer.' (See also <b>DIKDUKEI SOFRIM</b>.) The Ritva says that the difference between Rebbi Yehudah and the Tana Kama is whether only a single Teki'ah is blown for each blessing, or a full set of Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah is blown for each blessing.
</p><p>
Rebbi Yehudah is consistent with his opinion elsewhere. He says in Sukah (53a) that the three sounds of Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah may not be interrupted by any other sound; they must be blown together in one breath. Rebbi Yehudah maintains that the three sounds of the set have the status of one long sound, and thus they may not be divided. For this reason, he says here that after each blessing a complete set of Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah is blown.
</p><p>
According to the Tana Kama, however, each sound is independent from the others. Therefore, the Tana Kama maintains that a Teki'ah is blown with the first blessing, a Teru'ah with the second, and a Teki'ah with the third, and so on. Those sounds comprise a proper set of Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah, and the intervening blessings do not constitute an interruption. (According to the Girsa of the <b>RITVA</b> on 12a, there were a total of seven (and not eighteen) Teki'os in each Shemoneh Esreh. This is also the Girsa of <b>RABEINU CHANANEL</b>.)
</p><p>
The Ritva here does not have the words 'Tanu Rabanan' in his text of the Gemara. (These words appear in our text five lines after 'v'Is d'Amri.') According to the Ritva, the entire discussion is all part of one long Beraisa, and there are not two separate Beraisos (as the <b>KEREN ORAH</b> points out).
</p><p>
However, if the Beraisa follows the view of Rebbi Yehudah as the Ritva asserts, why does the Beraisa say that the second blessing is <i>Zichronos</i>? Rebbi Yehudah maintains (Mishnah, 15a) that the blessing of Zichronos is not recited. Apparently, the Ritva's text of the Beraisa does not mention that the second blessing is Zichronos. Alternatively, Rebbi Yehudah does not argue about the Chasimah (end) of the blessing, as the Dikdukei Sofrim (in Hagahos) suggests; he agrees that the Chasimah is 'Zocher ha'Nishkachos.' This is why the Mishnah makes no mention of how Rebbi Yehudah ends his blessings, a point about which the <b>RAN</b> wonders. Rebbi Yehudah argues only that all of the verses of Zichronos are not recited. He agrees that the blessing of Zichronos is recited.
</p><p>
Why does the Beraisa say that in some blessings, the Kohanim are told to blow the Shofar with the command 'Tik'u' ('blow a Teki'ah'), while in other blessings they are commanded, 'Heri'u' ('blow a Teru'ah')? In both cases, both a Teki'ah and a Teru'ah are blown! <b>RASHI</b> and the <b>RAMBAM</b> explain that the command 'Heri'u' means that they should blow a set of Teru'ah-Teki'ah-Teru'ah (as the text of our Gemara reads, four lines from the bottom), while 'Tik'u' means that they should blow a set of Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah. The <b>RITVA</b>, however, explains that Rebbi Yehudah maintains that Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah is one long sound, and that the proper Girsa in the second blessing is also 'Teki'ah-Teru'ah-Teki'ah' (with Teki'ah first, followed by Teru'ah). This is also the Girsa of the Dikdukei Sofrim.
</p><p>
According to the Ritva, however, why are the Kohanim told to blow with the word 'Heri'u'? The answer is that the Kohanim need to be told to blow the Teru'ah slightly longer than the Teki'ah. When they are commanded with the word 'Tik'u,' they blow the Teki'ah slightly longer than the Teru'ah, and when they are commanded with the word 'Heri'u,' they blow the Teru'ah slightly longer than the Teki'ah. (The Ritva points out that on a Ta'anis it is acceptable for the Teru'ah to be longer than the Teki'ah.)
</p><p>
(c) The <b>RAMBAM</b> writes that outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash, the Shofaros are not blown during the blessings (as mentioned in the previous Insight). The <b>KEREN ORAH</b> comments that according to the Rambam, this might be the intention of the 'v'Is d'Amri.' The two Beraisos argue whether the Shofar is blown outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash. When the second Beraisa ('v'Is d'Amri') describes what is done outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash, it omits the Teki'os, but when it describes what is done in the Beis ha'Mikdash, it includes the Teki'os. That Beraisa must maintain that no Teki'os are blown outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash (in Gevulin), and thus there is nothing to describe. The earlier Beraisa, however, maintains that Teki'os are blown outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash just as they are blown inside the Beis ha'Mikdash.
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE EXTRA 'BERACHOS' (cont.)</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that the Berachah about Shmuel would 
          conclude with Shome'a Tze'akah, while that about Eliyahu 
          would conclude with Shome'a Tefilah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  Some switch these around.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> It is understandable that both versions 
               exist with Shmuel, as the Pasuk uses both terms, but 
               with Eliyahu there is no mention of Tze'akah!?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> The Pasuk of Aneini is a form of Tze'akah.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Seeing as Yonah lived after David and Shlomo, 
          why is the Berachah about him mentioned first?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> As we want the final Berachah to conclude with a 
          mention of Eretz Yisrael (which is what David and Shlomo 
          prayed about).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Others, however, do not conclude that Berachah with 
               a mention of Eretz Yisrael, but with 'Blessed is He 
               that humbles the haughty.'
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> The reason why it was ruled that the men of 
          the Mishmar may drink wine by night but not by day is in 
          case the men of the Beis Av require their assistance.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  The reason why it was ruled that the men of the Beis Av 
          may never drink wine is that they are engaged in constant 
          duty.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b></b>  Based on this, it was ruled that nowadays, any Kohen who 
          knows which is his Mishmar, his Beis Av, and which days 
          they worked, may not drink wine that day (in case 
          Mashiach comes).
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> If he knows his Mishmar but not his Beis Av, but he 
               knows that his Beis Av did work in the Beis 
               ha'Mikdash, then he may not drink wine all that 
               week.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> If he does not knows his Mishmar or his Beis Av, but 
               he knows that his Beis Av did work in the Beis 
               ha'Mikdash, then he may not drink wine all year.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Rebbi):</font></b> With this reasoning, every Kohen should always 
          be forbidden to drink wine, in case all the Kohanim are 
          needed for the Chanukas ha'Bayis; but we see that all 
          these concerns have been disregarded.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Abaye):</font></b> Kohanim nowadays that drink wine are following 
          Rebbi's view.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>HAIRCUTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that the men of the Mishmar and of the 
          Ma'amad may not have haircuts or wash their clothes 
          except on Thursday.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why not?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> To ensure that they do it beforehand and do not 
          begin their work looking slovenly.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> A king should have his hair cut every day; a 
          Kohen Gadol every Erev Shabbos; and a Kohen Hedyot every 
          thirty days.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> A king should have his hair cut every day as the 
               Pasuk says that he should be beheld in his beauty.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> A Kohen Gadol should have his hair cut every Erev 
               Shabbos since that is when the Mishmaros are 
               renewed.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> A Kohen Hedyot should have his hair cut every thirty 
               days as derived from the identical use of the word 
               Pera with Nazir, who has his hair cut after thirty 
               days.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> How do we know that the Nazir has his hair cut 
          after thirty days?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> An unspecified Nezirus is usually for that 
          period.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> How do we know this?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> The Pasuk says Yihiyeh (he will be) which is of 
          Gematriya 30.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Maybe the Pasuk means that he should not grow 
          his hair long at all?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(j)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> The wording of the Pasuk means that the long hair 
          may not be grown any longer.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>HAIRCUTS NOWADAYS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> If it is thus derived from a Pasuk, should not 
          it also apply nowadays?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It is similar to the prohibition against drinking 
          wine, which only applies at a time when the Beis 
          ha'Mikdash can be entered.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see that only a lone opinion permits 
          drinking wine nowadays:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Rebbi):</font></b> Every Kohen should always be forbidden to 
               drink wine, in case all the Kohanim are needed for 
               the Chanukas ha'Bayis; but we see that all these 
               concerns have been disregarded.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Abaye):</font></b> Kohanim nowadays that drink wine are 
               following Rebbi's view.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> The implication is that the Rabanan forbid Kohanim 
               to drink wine even nowadays!?
<br>
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) CUTTING A KOHEN'S HAIR</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Gemara teaches that a Kohen is not allowed to grow his hair for more than 30 days. This prohibition is derived through a Gezeirah Shavah from the laws of Nazir. One verse (Bamidbar 6:5) says that a Nazir must let his hair grow 'Pera' (uncut), and another verse (Yechezkel 44:20) says that a Kohen may not let his hair grow 'Pera' (uncut). This Gezeirah Shavah teaches that just as a Nazir is not allowed to cut his hair for 30 days, a Kohen is not allowed to let his hair grow for 30 days.
</p><p>
The Gemara asks that perhaps the verse in Yechezkel ('... and uncut hair they may not grow') means that the Kohen may not grow his hair <i>at all</i> ('Lo Lirbu Klal').
</p><p>
How can the Gemara make such a suggestion? The Gemara has just stated that a Gezeirah Shavah teaches that the Kohen is allowed to grow his hair for 30 days!
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) <b>RASHI</b> (according to the corrected version of the Girsa, according to which the word 'b'Chol' should be 'b'Chaf-Tes,' as the Menachem Meshiv Nefesh points out) and <b>TOSFOS</b> answer that the Gemara does not mean to ask that the Kohen must cut his hair everyday. Rather, the Gemara means to ask that perhaps the Kohen is not allowed to grow his hair for 30 complete days, but only for 29 days, and he must cut his hair on day 30.
</p><p>
This approach explains the Gemara's question within the context of the Gezeirah Shavah. However, the Gemara explicitly asks that the Kohen should not be allowed to grow his hair 'at all' ('Klal'), which clearly implies even for 29 days. The <b>BACH</b> therefore suggests that the word 'Klal' must be deleted from the text of the Gemara.
</p><p>
However, there is no record of such a Girsa in the Rishonim, and no such Girsa is cited by the Dikdukei Sofrim.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>CHESHEK SHLOMO</b> quotes his brother, the MAR'EH <b>KOHEN</b>, who says that according to Rashi and Tosfos the text of the Gemara should read, 'Kol Lamed' -- 'all 30 days,' instead of 'Klal' (that is, the letters Kaf-Lamed-Lamed were accidentally placed together by the printer, and they should be separated to read 'Kol L''). Thus, the Gemara is asking that perhaps the Kohen is not allowed to let his hair grow for a complete 30 days, as Rashi and Tosfos explain.
</p><p>
(c) <b>RAV YEHUDAH LANDY</b> suggests another way to explain the Gemara according to Rashi and Tosfos. When the Gemara asks that the Kohen should not grow 'it' at all, it does not mean that he should not grow 'his hair' at all. Rather, it means he should not grow 'Pera' at all. What is 'Pera'? 'Pera' refers to hair that has grown for a period of 30 days. Thus, the Gemara is asking that perhaps the Kohen is not allowed to grow his hair for 30 days (Pera), but he must cut his hair after 29 days (and not let it grow for 30, which would be Pera, and then cut it). The Gemara answers that the verse implies that the Kohen <i>may</i> grow Pera, but he must cut it immediately after it reaches the stage of Pera.
</p><p>
(d) The <b>CHIDUSHEI HA'RAN</b> in Sanhedrin (22b) and the <b>KEREN ORAH</b> here explain that the Gezeirah Shavah is not a real Gezeirah Shavah. The verse which says that Kohanim may not let their hair grow is a verse in Yechezkel. A Gezeirah Shavah from a verse in the Torah to a verse in Nevi'im is not a real Gezeirah Shavah (see Chagigah 10b). It is only a 'Giluy Milsa.' Therefore, Abaye asks that since it is not a real Gezeirah Shavah there is no imperative to learn anything from the laws of Nazir. Consequently, the Gemara asks that perhaps a Kohen may not grow his hair at all (literally) and he must shave his head every day.
</p><p>


lvr: 29
dfh: b
trd:
</p><p>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #1:</font></b> The reason for the ban on wine is in case the 
          Beis ha'Mikdash is suddenly rebuilt and the Kohen's 
          services are required, so that he should not be 
          incapacitated; but if he has unkempt hair, he can simply 
          have a haircut immediately.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> Surely with wine there is also a solution 
               of him sleeping a little, as it was said that 
               walking a Mil and the slightest amount of sleep 
               remove the effect of wine?
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Answer:</font></b> That statement was qualified as referring 
               only to where a Revi'is was drunk; but if more than 
               that was drunk, walking and sleeping exacerbate its 
               effects.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #2:</font></b> Inebriation, which is Mechalel the work in the 
          Beis ha'Mikdash, was subject to decree; unkempt hair was 
          not.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see that unkempt hair is Mechalel and 
          therefore should be subject to the decree:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Beraisa):</font></b> A Kohen who is drunk or has unkempt hair 
               is subject to death at the hand of Heaven.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Drunkenness is explicitly prohibited in the Torah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> Unkempt hair is linked by a Pasuk in Yechezkel to 
               drunkenness, and is thereby also liable for the 
               death penalty.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> Likewise, just as drunkenness is Mechalel the work, 
               so is having unkempt hair!?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It is only compared regarding the death penalty, 
          but not regarding being Mechalel the work.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> If it is learned from Yechezkel, who 
          established the rule before Yechezkel?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> We see that that line of argument doesn't work:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Chisda):</font></b> The rule that a Kohen who is 
               uncircumcised because Milah killed his brothers may 
               not serve, is learned from a Pasuk in Yechezkel.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Until Yechezkel said it, it was known as a 
               tradition; he merely provided Scriptural support.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> Similarly here, it was a tradition that unkempt hair 
               is liable for the death penalty, and Yechezkel 
               provided Scriptural support.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MEGILAS TA'ANIS'</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that any day listed in Megilas Ta'anis 
          as forbidden for Hespedim is also prohibited on the 
          preceding day but not on the following day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Beraisa):</font></b> There are some days that have been designated 
          as forbidden for fasting, and some of these are also 
          forbidden for Hespedim.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> From the first until the eighth of Nisan, when it 
               was successfully proved that the Tamid must be 
               communally brought, it is forbidden for Hespedim.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> From the eighth until the end of Yom Tov, when it 
               was successfully proved that the Omer is counted 
               from the day after Pesach, it is forbidden for 
               Hespedim.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why was it necessary to include the first of 
          Nisan - it is anyway Rosh Chodesh and forbidden for 
          Hespedim?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It was necessary so as to also forbid the 
          preceding day.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why is not the preceding day anyway forbidden 
          as being the day before Rosh Chodesh?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Rosh Chodesh is d'Oraisa and does not require 
          such reinforcement:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Beraisa):</font></b> The festive days listed in Megilas Taanis 
               are forbidden for fasting on the days preceding and 
               following them as well.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> With Shabbos and Yom Tov, one may fast on the 
               preceding and following days.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> The reason is that the latter are d'Oraisa, which do 
               not need reinforcement, whereas the former are 
               d'Rabbanan and need reinforcement.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why was it necessary to include through to the 
          end of Pesach - it is anyway Yom Tov and forbidden for 
          Hespedim?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It was necessary so as to also forbid the 
          following day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> This follows R. Yosi's view that the days both 
               preceding and following the days in Megilas Ta'anis 
               are forbidden for Hespedim.
<br>


lvr: 29
dfh: a
trd:
<b><font color='blue'>1) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE NECESSITY TO PROHIBITING FASTING ON CERTAIN DAYS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> If we are following R. Yosi's view that the 
          following day is also forbidden, then why did we need the 
          Tamid-victory in order to forbid Hespedim on Adar 29th; 
          it would anyway be forbidden as being the day after the 
          28th:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> The government decreed that Jews may not study Torah 
               or circumcise their sons and that they must 
               transgress Shabbos.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> Yehudah b. Shamua and his friends asked advice from 
               a princess who was familiar with all the prominent 
               Romans.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b></b> She advised them to make a demonstration at night.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> They did so, and said, 'We are all brothers, why do 
               you persecute us?'
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>5.  </font></b></b> The decrees were annulled, and that day (the 28th of 
               Adar) became a festival.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #1 (Abaye):</font></b> The Tamid victory prohibits the last 
          day of Adar when it is a full month.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #2 (R. Ashi):</font></b> If it only preceded or followed a 
          festive day, it would be only forbidden for fasting, but 
          not Hesped; but since it is sandwiched between two 
          festive days, it attains the status of a festive day and 
          is forbidden for Hespedim.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why did the Beraisa need to forbid Hespedim 
          from the eighth of Nisan due to the Omer victory - it is 
          anyway forbidden due to the Tamid victory?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It is necessary in case of a harsh decree 
          annulling the festival of the Tamid victory.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b></b>  This now provides a third answer to the question above; 
          we forbade Adar 29th based on the Tamid victory in case 
          the festival of the Torah victory were to be annulled.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>2) </font></b><font color='blue'>THE DAYS PRECEDING AND FOLLOWING JOYOUS DAYS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Chiya bar Asi citing Rav):</font></b> The Halachah follows R. 
          Yosi that both the days preceding and following the days 
          in Megilas Ta'anis are likewise forbidden for fasting.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Shmuel):</font></b> The Halachah follows R. Meir that only the 
          preceding day is forbidden.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see that Shmuel held both days to be 
          permitted:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Shimon b. Gamliel):</font></b> The double usage of the word 
               Behon (not to fast 'on them' or give Hespedim 'on 
               them') tells us that only those days are forbidden, 
               but not the preceding or following days.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Shmuel):</font></b> The Halachah follows R. Shimon b. Gamliel.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> Originally, Shmuel thought that R. Meir was the 
          most lenient view, so he followed him; when he heard that 
          R. Shimon b. Gamliel was even more lenient, he followed 
          him.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Bali, citing R. Chiya bar Aba, citing R. Yochanan):</font></b> The 
          Halachah follows R. Yosi.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Chiya):</font></b> R. Yochanan only said this regarding the 
          prohibition to fast on the day before, but not regarding 
          the prohibition to give a Hesped on the day after.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(g)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> We see that R. Yochanan did not hold that the 
          preceding day is forbidden:
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Yochanan):</font></b> The Halachah follows anonymous 
               Mishnayos.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (Mishnah):</font></b> Those villages which read Megillah before 
               the fifteenth of Adar may fast and have Hespedim on 
               that day.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>3.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> Question:</font></b> What is this referring to?
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>i. </font></b></b>  This cannot refer to a walled city reading it 
                    on the fourteenth, as it says in Megillas 
                    Ta'anis that the 14th and 15th are forbidden 
                    for Hespedim everywhere.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>ii. </font></b></b> Nor can it refer to a village due to read it on 
                    the fourteenth which is reading it on the 
                    thirteenth, as that is Nikanor Day, which is 
                    forbidden for Hespedim and fasting.
<br>             <b>  <b><font color='darkgreen'>iii. </font></b></b>Nor can it refer to a village due to read it on 
                    the fourteenth which is reading it on the 
                    twelfth, as that is Toraynos Day, which is 
                    forbidden for Hespedim and fasting.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>4.  </font></b></b> So it must refer to a village due to read it on the 
               fourteenth which is reading it on the eleventh, and 
               the Mishnah says that it is permitted to have 
               Hespedim and fast even though it is the day 
               preceding Turyanus day!
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(h)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> It refers to a village due to read it on the 
          fourteenth which is reading it on the twelfth; Turyanus 
          Day was annulled, as it is the day on which Shemayah and 
          Achya were killed.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> Likewise, we find that R. Nachman decreed a fast on 
               the twelfth, noting that Turyanus Day had been 
               annulled.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(i)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> Why wouldn't fasting be forbidden due to it 
          being the day preceding Nikanor Day?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(j)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer:</font></b> If the day's own festive nature was annulled, it 
          certainly will not be affected by the following day's 
          nature.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>3) </font></b><font color='blue'>NIKANOR DAY AND TURYANUS (TRAJAN) DAY</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  The story behind Nikanor Day:</font></b> Nikanor was a Roman 
          Chieftain who would shake his fist against Judea and 
          Jerusalem, that they should fall in his hands; when the 
          Chashmona'im conquered him, they hung up his amputated 
          extremities on the gates of Jerusalem.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  The story behind Turyanus Day:</font></b> Turyanus took Lulynos and 
          Papus for execution, challenging them to be saved like 
          Chananya, Mishael and Azaryah.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b></b> They replied that they were not as worthy to be 
               saved; that he was not as worthy to have a miracle 
               performed through him; that Hash-m had other ways of 
               killing them; and that Hash-m chose this way to 
               exact retribution from him.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>2.  </font></b></b> He executed them and was promptly brained by Roman 
               officers.
<br><b>
<br></b><b><b><font color='blue'>4) </font></b><font color='blue'>FASTS THAT CLASH WITH FESTIVALS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The Mishnah said that fasts are not decreed upon the 
          community on Rosh Chodesh, Chanukah or Purim; but if a 
          series of fasts had already begun, it is not stopped.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Question:</font></b> What is counted as 'already begun'?
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #1 (R. Acha):</font></b> Three fasts.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  Answer #2 (R. Asi):</font></b> One fast.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(e)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (R. Yehudah citing Rav):</font></b> It is only according to R. Meir 
          that the fasts are not completed through to the end of 
          the day; the Chachamim hold that they are completed.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(f)</font></b><font color='darkgreen'>  (Mar Zutra citing R. Huna):</font></b> The Halachah is that they are 
          completed.
<br>
<br><center><font color='ff0000' size='+1'><b>*****<b>PEREK SEDER TA'ANIYOS ELU</b>*****
</b></font></center><p><b>
<br><b></b><b><b><font color='blue'>5) </font></b><font color='blue'>'MISHNAH:' EVENTS WHICH INVOKE THE FASTS</font></b>
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(a)</font></b></b>  The aforementioned procedure for fasting is performed if 
          the first rainfall did not transpire; but if the wrong 
          crops grew (or they were malformed), the procedure begins 
          immediately.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(b)</font></b></b>  The same is done if there was a forty absence of rain 
          between the first and second rainfalls, as it signifies 
          drought.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(c)</font></b></b>  The same is also done if rains that benefits only plants, 
          trees, or cisterns fell.
<br> <b>    <b><font color='darkgreen'>(d)</font></b></b>  A city which did not receive rain sounds the Shofar and 
          fasts, and the surrounding cities fast but do not sound 
          the Shofar.
<br>       <b>   <b><font color='darkgreen'>1.  </font></b><font color='darkgreen'> (R. Akiva):</font></b> The surrounding cities should sound the 
               Shofar but not fast.
<br>

sjt:
<font><b>1) 'YOM TARYANUS' -- TRAJAN DAY</b></font><b>
<br>QUESTION:</b> The Chachamim instituted that the thirteenth of Adar be observed as a day of commemorative celebration, called 'Yom Taryanus,' or Trajan Day. This is one of the Yamim Tovim recorded in Megilas Ta'anis on which fasting is prohibited. This Yom Tov commemorates the events that occurred when Taryanus, the wicked Roman emperor, sought to execute Lulianus and Papus, two Jews who willingly gave up their lives Al Kidush Hash-m and who became known as the 'Harugei Lud.' They told Taryanus that Hash-m put them into his hands in order to punish him if he killed them. He killed them and, indeed, immediately afterwards a delegation arrived from Rome and killed Taryanus in a gruesome fashion. A Yom Tov was instituted to commemorate the awesome vengeance that Hash-m demonstrated for His loved ones.
</p><p>
The simple understanding is that this day celebrates Hashem's act of retribution against the killer, through which He showed the world that He avenges the blood of His beloved. However, something tragic also happened on this day -- the righteous Lulianus and Papus were put to death. Why is it fitting to institute a day of celebration on the day on which two Tzadikim were murdered? Had they come away alive, there would have been reason to celebrate, but their deaths on that day should eliminate any cause for celebration.
</p><p>
<b>ANSWERS:</b>
<br>(a) <b>RASHI</b> explains that initially the Romans decreed annihilation for <i>all</i> of the Jewish people. Through the martyrdom of Lulianus and Papus, the rest of the Jewish people were saved. It is that salvation which is celebrated on Yom Taryanus.
</p><p>
(b) The <b>DIKDUKEI SOFRIM</b> records a different Girsa of the Gemara based on the text of a manuscript which omits the words 'nevertheless he killed them.' According to that Girsa, Taryanus did <i>not</i> succeed in killing Lulianus and Papus before his sudden death.
</p><p>
This is also the way the incident is recorded in Megilas Ta'anis (ch. 12) and in Toras Kohanim (Parshas Emor, ch. 9). Since the evil ruler was killed before he carried out his plan to kill the Jews and they were miraculously spared, the Chachamim enacted a day of celebration on that date.
</p><p>
This approach explains why the Yerushalmi says that the Chachamim cancelled the celebration of Yom Taryanus when <i>Lulianus and Papus</i> were killed (and not Shemayah and Achiyah, as the Gemara here says a few lines earlier). The Yerushalmi means that although the Yom Tov was instituted when they were saved from the hands of Taryanus, it was annulled when the same two Tzadikim were killed by another governing body some years later.
</p><p>
This might also be the intention of the <b>ARUCH</b> (recorded in the margin of the Gemara here) who writes that Shemayah and Achiyah were the Harugei Lud. Why does the Aruch say that Shemayah and Achiyah were the Harugei Lud when the Beraisa says that Lulianus and Papus were the brothers killed in 'Ludkia' (Lydia, or Lud, as Rashi explains; see also Midrash Koheles Rabah 9:8)? It must be that Shemayah and Achiyah were the Hebrew names of Lulianus and Papus. (See <b>YEFEH EINAYIM</b>.)
</p><p>
The <b>YEFEH EINAYIM</b> also cites the exact circumstances under which Lulianus and Papus were eventually killed. He refers to the Yerushalmi (Shevi'is 4:2) which states that Lulianus and Papus were killed when they refused to drink from a cup which the emperor gave to them, upon which was inscribed the name of an Avodah Zarah. This event occurred later, after the miraculous incident with Taryanus. Apparently, when they were killed by the new emperor, the Chachamim annulled the Yom Tov which had been instituted to commemorate their salvation from the old one.
</p><p>
(According to this approach, Megilas Ta'anis -- which records the day of Yom Taryanus as a Yom Tov -- must have been written during the lives of Lulianus and Papus, shortly after the destruction of the Beis ha'Mikdash. See Shabbos 13b.)
</p><p>


