Sunday, August 19, 2012

Berachot 17

PEREK III

[1] {Brachot 17b}

MISHNAH:ONE WHOSE DEAD [RELATIVE] LIES BEFORE HIMIS EXEMPT FROM THE RECITAL OF THE SHEMA' AND FROM THE TEFILLAH AND FROM TEFILLIN AND FROM ALL THE COMMANDMENTS MENTIONED IN THE TORAH.
Gemara: "{If the dead body} lies before him" - yes. Implying that if it does not lie before him - no.
And I'll pose a contradiction {from Moed Katan 23b}:

One whose dead body lies before him eats in another house. If he has no other house, then he eats in his friend's house. If he has no friend's house, he erects a partition and eats. If he has nothing with which to make a partition, he turns away his face and eats. And he does not recline {while eating} nor does he eat meat nor drink wine, and he does not mevarech, nor mezamen, nor do others mervarchin upon him nor do others mezamnin upon him.

Not mevarech -- to explain, the blessing of Hamotzi.
Not mezamen -- to bentch.
They are not mevarchin upon him -- that you should not say that it is he who does not say Hamotzi, but others eat with him and they bless Hamotzi and bentch, and he would fulfill via hearing. Therefore it informs us that he does not need.

Rashi explains: He does not need to bless the bracha of Hamotzi.

Which implies that if he wanted to bless, he is allowed. And that is not implied so in our sugya, for it is stated that here, outside four cubits, it is also forbidden. Thus, he is not able to bless.

And there are those who say that this that it implies that it is forbidden to bless is where he needs to engage in a need of the needs of the deceased, but if he already so engaged, or if there are others to engage, he is permitted to bless.

And in the Yerushalmi it is not implied so, for we learn there: He does not eat all he needs, and he does not eat meat, and he does not drink wine, and he does not bless. And if he blessed, they do not answer after him Amen. And others who blessed, he does not answer after them Amen. 

And {meanwhile} in answering Amen he is not taken away from attending to the deceased, and even so it is forbidden. 

And further, we say later on in our perek (daf 19): If the corpse is not there before him, they sit and read and he sits and is silent; they stand and pray and he stands and justifies upon himself the din.

And he does not engage in the needs of the deceased, from that which it states "he sits and is silent", and he is able to focus on the first pasuk. Therefore, it appears that anyone upon whom the aveilut is cast is forbidden to pray. And so is implied in the Yerushalmi in our perek.

For we learn there: They learnt {in a brayta}: If he wants to be stringent upon himself, they do not listen to him. Why? Because of honor for the deceased or because he does not have one to bear his burden? What is the practical distinction {between these two reasons}? When there is one to bear his burden. If you say that it is because of the honor of the deceased, it is forbidden. And if you say because he does not have one to bear his burden, behold that he does have someone to bear his burden.

But they learnt {continues the Yerushalmi}: "He is exempt from shaking the lulav!" Explain it as during the weekday.

But they learnt: "He is exempt from the blowing the shofar!" Could you say that this is during the weekday and not during Yom Tov? {Thus, it must be because of honor and not because of his burdens.}

Rabbi Chanina said: Since he has obligations towards it, [to wait for nightfall] to bring a coffin and shrouds for him (as we learn there, taninan, in Shabbat daf 151a, that we wait for nightfall at the Shabbat techum, etc., to bring him a coffin and shrouds), if is like he is carrying his burden.

And it is not that the Yerushalmi maintains that aninut is practiced on Shabbat, for behold in the Yerushalmi, it is stated "where are these words stated? During the weekday, but during Shabbat, he reclines {/makes a meal} and eats all his needs, etc." Rather, it brings a proof from that of Shabbat, and kal vachomer to Yom Tov, that it is permitted to engage in it in speech and to violate upon it a shevus {derabbanan}. Therefore, on Yom Tov, where it is permitted to bury him via non-Jews, and he is also able to engage with them and to wait for dark at the techum, we call him 'bearing his burden', and all the laws of aninut apply to him. But on Shabbat, since they do not bury him on Shabbat, even though it is permitted to wait for dark for him [the deceased], he [the mourner] does not practice aninut.

And there are those who say that whether for Shabbat or Yom Yov, aninut is not practiced in it, except for close to evening, since he is able to wait for dark at the techum. And this that he is exempt from blowing the shofar is dealing with where he did not have a shofar in the morning and he obtained one in the evening.

And so did they say regarding the Rambam za'l (that his sons died) [that his deceased was before him] on the first day of Rosh Hashana, and he commanded that they blow before him the shofar to fulfill for him the requirement.

Friday, August 17, 2012

Berachot 16b


 MISHNAH.
[RABBAN GAMALIEL] BATHED ON THE FIRST NIGHT AFTER THE DEATH OF HIS WIFE.
HIS DISCIPLES SAID TO HIM: YOU HAVE TAUGHT US, SIR, THAT A MOURNER IS FORBIDDEN TO BATHE.
HE REPLIED TO THEM: I AM NOT LIKE OTHER MEN, BEING VERY DELICATE.

Gemara:
What is the reason? aninut {mourning of the first day, or before burial} is Biblical only in the day {and not the night} for it states (Amos 8:10)
י וְהָפַכְתִּי חַגֵּיכֶם לְאֵבֶל, וְכָל-שִׁירֵיכֶם לְקִינָה, וְהַעֲלֵיתִי עַל-כָּל-מָתְנַיִם שָׂק, וְעַל-כָּל-רֹאשׁ קָרְחָה; וְשַׂמְתִּיהָ כְּאֵבֶל יָחִיד,וְאַחֲרִיתָהּ כְּיוֹם מָר.10 And I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation; and I will bring up sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head; and I will make it as the mourning for an only son, and the end thereof as a bitter day.
and the Sages are the ones who decreed upon the night, and by an istinis {a delicate individual} the Sages did not decree.

And we see that a few post-Talmudic rabbis write that it is specifically Rabban Gamliel who holds that aninut of night is Rabbinic in origin, and that we do not hold like him. And even though it say 7 days 
{in Bereishit 50:10, regarding the mourning for Yaakov:

י וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-גֹּרֶן הָאָטָד, אֲשֶׁר בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן, וַיִּסְפְּדוּ-שָׁם, מִסְפֵּד גָּדוֹל וְכָבֵד מְאֹד; וַיַּעַשׂ לְאָבִיו אֵבֶל,שִׁבְעַת יָמִים.10 And they came to the threshing-floor of Atad, which is beyond the Jordan, and there they wailed with a very great and sore wailing; and he made a mourning for his father seven days.
and yamim - days might imply days but not nights,
}

nights are encompassed within {the meaning of} "days." And I saw regarding tha thing that these rabbis maintain that {all} the 7 days of mourning are Biblical, and they derive it from {the verse cited above,} וַיַּעַשׂ לְאָבִיו אֵבֶל, שִׁבְעַת יָמִים, " and he made a mourning for his father seven days."


And the matter is not so, for we say explicitly in perek Tevul Yom UMechusar Kippurim {Zevachim perek 12, daf 100b} (Vayikra 10:19, Aharon talking about not eating a korban on the day Nadav and Avihu died)
יט וַיְדַבֵּר אַהֲרֹן אֶל-מֹשֶׁה, הֵן הַיּוֹםהִקְרִיבוּ אֶת-חַטָּאתָםוְאֶת-עֹלָתָם לִפְנֵי ה, וַתִּקְרֶאנָה אֹתִי, כָּאֵלֶּה; וְאָכַלְתִּי חַטָּאת הַיּוֹם, הַיִּיטַב בְּעֵינֵי ה.19 And Aaron spoke unto Moses: 'Behold, this day have they offered their sin-offering and their burnt-offering before the LORD, and there have befallen me such things as these; and if I had eaten the sin-offering to-day, would it have been well-pleasing in the sight of the LORD?
"for me {Aharon}, the day is forbidden and the night is allowed. However, for {ensuing} generations, whether day or night is forbidden. These are the words of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon {or perhaps just Rabbi} says the aninut of night is not Biblical {midivrei torah} but rather midivrei sofrim {Rabbinic}.
and we also say there {immediately preceding the aforementioned brayta}:
Until when are we mitanenim {acting with aninut} upon him? That entire day, without its night. Rabbi says: the entire time that he is not buried {and our girsa there is: and if he is buried (the day)} grabs its night.
The Sages said this before Rava, and
he said: from the fact that Rabbi says that the day of burial grabs its night with it Rabbinically, we deduce that the day of death grabs its night Biblically, and Rabbi holds that aninut of the night is Biblical.
But we learnt {in a brayta}:


(Vayikra 10:19)
יט וַיְדַבֵּר אַהֲרֹן אֶל-מֹשֶׁה, הֵן הַיּוֹםהִקְרִיבוּ אֶת-חַטָּאתָםוְאֶת-עֹלָתָם לִפְנֵי ה, וַתִּקְרֶאנָה אֹתִי, כָּאֵלֶּה; וְאָכַלְתִּי חַטָּאת הַיּוֹם, הַיִּיטַב בְּעֵינֵי ה.19 And Aaron spoke unto Moses: 'Behold, this day have they offered their sin-offering and their burnt-offering before the LORD, and there have befallen me such things as these; and if I had eaten the sin-offering to-day, would it have been well-pleasing in the sight of the LORD?
"for me {Aharon}, the day is forbidden and the night is allowed. However, for {ensuing} generations, whether day or night is forbidden. These are the words of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi {and it does not say Shimon} says the aninut of night is not Biblical {midivrei torah} but rathermidivrei sofrim {Rabbinic}.
Really I will tell you that aninut of night is not Biblical but rather Rabbinic, and the Sages strengthened their words more than those of the Torah.
and we also learn in Pesachim {daf 91b} that an onen immerses himself and eats his {korban} pesach at evening, which shows that he maintains that aninut at night is only Rabbinic and as regards the {korban} pesach, they did not establish their words in a situation of karet {for avoiding eating the pesach}. And since we find all these Tannaim who hold that only the first day is Biblical, but its night which is the second night to the day of death it only grabs Rabbinically, and it is only Rabbi Yehudah who maintains that the day of death grabs its night Biblically, we derive that the halacha is not like him, for it is established for us, the indivudual vs. the many, the halacha is like the many.

Therefore, the first day, which is the day of death, it is Biblical, but the night of the second day and on is Rabbinic, and this is the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, who holds that aninut of the night is Rabbinic, and the halacha is like him.

And these seven days {of mourning}, the Sages did not base it on Bereishit 50:10:

י וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-גֹּרֶן הָאָטָד, אֲשֶׁר בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן, וַיִּסְפְּדוּ-שָׁם, מִסְפֵּד גָּדוֹל וְכָבֵד מְאֹד; וַיַּעַשׂ לְאָבִיו אֵבֶל, שִׁבְעַת יָמִים.10 And they came to the threshing-floor of Atad, which is beyond the Jordan, and there they wailed with a very great and sore wailing; and he made a mourning for his father seven days.
but rather they relied on the hint in this verse in Amos 8:10: (mentioned earlier for the last words of the pasuk)

י וְהָפַכְתִּי חַגֵּיכֶם לְאֵבֶל, וְכָל-שִׁירֵיכֶם לְקִינָה, וְהַעֲלֵיתִי עַל-כָּל-מָתְנַיִם שָׂק, וְעַל-כָּל-רֹאשׁ קָרְחָה; וְשַׂמְתִּיהָ כְּאֵבֶל יָחִיד, וְאַחֲרִיתָהּ כְּיוֹם מָר.10 And I will turn your feasts [yourchags] into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation; and I will bring up sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head; and I will make it as the mourning for an only son, and the end thereof as a bitter day. {P}

Just like your chag {=Succot festival} is seven, so too mourning is seven.

And if you ask from what we learn in masechet moed katan, in perek eilu megalchin {perek3, daf 14b}: A mourner does not conduct himself in mourning during the festival, for it is written (in Dvarim 16:14):
יד  וְשָׂמַחְתָּ, בְּחַגֶּךָ:  אַתָּה וּבִנְךָ וּבִתֶּךָ, וְעַבְדְּךָ וַאֲמָתֶךָ, וְהַלֵּוִי וְהַגֵּר וְהַיָּתוֹם וְהָאַלְמָנָה, אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ.14 And thou shalt rejoice in thy feast, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter, and thy man-servant, and thy maid-servant, and the Levite, and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, that are within thy gates.

If it was a mourning of earlier {before the }, then the positive commandment of the multitudes comes and nullifies the positive commandment of the individual. 

And if we try to derive from this that there is a Biblical obligation after the first day, that is the day of death, departs, this is not a question at all, for this is what it means to say: the mourner does not conduct himself in mourning during the festival according to all opinions, and even according to the one who says that the first day grabs with it its night Biblically, for if the mourning was initial, then the positive commandment of the individual will not comes and nullifies the positive commandment of the many.

This is according to the position of the Rif, za'l, and according to a few of the Geonim, that the mourning of the first day is Biblical.

But Tosafot write that there is no Biblical mourning at all, even though aninut of the first day is Biblical. Aninut is entirely a separate thing from aveilut {mourning}, and that which is forbidden in this is permitted in that, while that which is forbidden in this is permitted in that.

And this that an onen is prohibited on the first day Biblically, this is in terms of eating of kodshim, as is stated in Zevachim, perek tevul yom, and in terms of eating maaser, regarding which is written {in Ki Tavo} 'lo achalti be-oni mimenu'. And they were stringent in it further Rabbinically to forbid in it those things which are explained in the beginning of perek Mi Shemeito {next perek}, while his dead is not yet buried. But aveilut, we do not find in any place that it is practiced on the first day Biblically. And so do we learn in a Mishna in Sanhedrin (daf 46b): the relatives are not mitablin but are rather onenin. Thus, it implies that aninut and aveilut are two separate matters.

And a proof to this matter is what we say in the first perek of Ketubot (daf 4a) "if the father of the groom died, or the mother of the bride, we take the corpse to another room and the bride to the bridal canopy, practice the seven days of feasting, and afterwards practice seven days of aveilut." And were it so that aveilut of the first day is Biblical, how could we push off the Biblical mitzvah because of the party of the bridal-canopy, which is Rabbinic? At the very least we should say that they should practice the first day [of aveilut] first. Rather, all seven days of aveilut are only Rabbinic.

And there is another proof in Bechorot (daf 49a) regarding redemption of the [first-born] son, anything that last 30 days among humans is not a nefel {miscarriage}, for it is written {Bemidbar 18:16}:
טז  וּפְדוּיָו, מִבֶּן-חֹדֶשׁ תִּפְדֶּה, בְּעֶרְכְּךָ, כֶּסֶף חֲמֵשֶׁת שְׁקָלִים בְּשֶׁקֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ:  עֶשְׂרִים גֵּרָה, הוּא.16 And their redemption-money--from a month old shalt thou redeem them--shall be, according to thy valuation, five shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary--the same is twenty gerahs.

And it is a question for us: Does the thirtieth day count as before 30, or after 30? And we conclude that the 30th day is like after 30, stringently. And we say upon it there: and in term of an aveil, it is not so, but rather the 30th day is like before 30, for we establish that the halacha is like the one who is lenient by aveil.

And if it were so that the first day is Biblical, we should have said that the 30th day is like after 30, stringently, for in a case of Biblical double, we act stringently. Rather, certainly, there is no Biblical aveilut.

And this that they say in perek veElu megalchin, that the asei of the many comes and pushes off the asei of the individual, even though it is only Rabbinic it is called an asei, as is stated in Zevachim (at the start of the third perek) that it is stated that a tevul yom who enters the camp of the Levites violates an asei, and it is explicitly evident that there is only a Rabbinic prohibition.

And this that it is stated here that Rabban Gamliel holds that aninut of the night is Rabbinic, this is not because during the day there is a Biblical prohibition [of rechitza], but during the day of the death, where there is Biblical aninut, they did not wish to be lenient even in aveilut, such that there was a Rabbinic prohibition. But at night, where there is no Biblical prohibition, he washed, because he was an istenis.

And the Ramban brings a proof to the words of the Geonim from this that we learn in a Mishna in masechet Semachot (perek 4): "If there was a doubt if he was his brother or not, or a doubt if he was his son or not, he mourns [mitabel] and is an onen and does not become ritually impure." Thus, we see that since he practices aveilut and aninut from doubt, it is clear that the first day is Biblical.

And Tosafot bring this from masechet Semachot, about the doubts in which they act as aveilim and onenim upon them, and explain the doubts as a doubt as to whether he [the deceased] was a nine-month birth to the first [husband] or a seven-month birth to the latter [husband], such that we are onenin and mitablin, for it will be a disgrace if we do not mourn for him, since from one side [of the doubt], he had brothers.

But, in a case of istenis, the Rabanan did not decree. For since it is not done in order to enjoy, it is permitted to wash in the days of his mourning. And so is it permitted to wash {?} his head if there are scabs. And so too a woman who has given birth, during the days of her aveilut, for she is no worse than an istenis of here.

And so do we find on Yom Kippur, even though anointing of forbidden, we say (on Yoma daf 77b): One who has sores on his head should anoint in the usual manner, and not be concerned.

And we say say in the Yerushalmi in our perek that a mourner is forbidden in bathing all seven. This is said regarding bathing of enjoyment, but bathing not of enjoyment is permitted. Like that in which Shmuel ha sores, and he came and asked Rabbi Assi if he could anoint,  and he said to him to anoint. With what are we dealing? If it was a matter involving danger, even on Tisha b'Av or Yom Kippur as well! Rather, where there was no danger.

And this is not as Rabbenu Chananel za'l explained, that istenis means that he was in danger; for since it was for the sake of healing, in case of pressing need, it was permitted to him. And not everyone who says "I am an istenis" do we believe, until experts say so.

MISHNAH:
WHEN TAVI HIS SLAVE DIED HE ACCEPTED CONDOLENCES FOR HIM.
HIS DISCIPLES SAID TO HIM: YOU HAVE TAUGHT US, SIR, THAT CONDOLENCES ARE NOT ACCEPTED FOR SLAVES?
HE REPLIED TO THEM: MY SLAVE TAVI WAS NOT LIKE OTHER SLAVES: HE WAS A GOOD MAN.

{Our Mishna has adam kasher. Rosh has here adam yashar.}

Gemara:
The Sages learnt: The servants and maidservants, we do not stand in a row {of comforters} for them, nor say upon them the blessings or mourners, nor the comforting of mourners. And there was a story that the maidservant of Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaria {we just have Rabbi Eliezer} died, and his students entered to confort him. When he saw them, he ascended to the attic. They ascended after him. He entered an antechamber. They entered after him. He entered an anteroom. They entered after him. He said to them: I thought that you would be scalded with warm water; and now, even with hot water you are not scalded! Did I not teach to you: The servants and maidservants, we do not stand in a row {of comforters} for them, nor say upon them the blessings or mourners, nor the comforting of mourners. But rather just as they say to a man upon his ox or his donkey that died - May Hashem fill your loss. So say to a man upon his servant or maidservant that died - May Hashem fill your loss. 

 And the servants and maidservants, we do not eulogize them, not do we call them Father Ploni nor Mother Plonit.  And we only call fathers {patriarchs} three, and they are Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov. And we only call mothers {matriarchs} four, and they are Sarah, Rivkah, Rachel, and Leah. 


MISHNAH: IF A BRIDEGROOM DESIRES TO RECITE THE SHEMA ON THE FIRST NIGHT, HE MAY DO SO.RABBAN SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAYS: NOT EVERYONE WHO DESIRES TO TAKE THE NAME {SCHOLAR} MAY DO SO.Rif: And the is like the first Tanna {that one may}.


HADRAN ALACH HAKOREI

END PEREK II








Berachot 16a


 {Brachot 16a}
"If he read and made a mistake, he goes back to where he made a mistake."
{He found} a Tanna recited a brayta learnt before Rabbi Yochanan: If he made a mistake between chapters and does not know in which chapter he made a mistake, he returns to the first perek. If in the middle of a perek he returns to the beginning of the perek. Between two instances of וכתבתם, he returns to the first instance of  וכתבתם.

Rabbi Yochanan said: We are only talking about where he has not yet reached limaan yirbu yemeichem. But if he has already reached limaan yirbu yemeichem he can assume that he has taken his regular course {and said it correctly}.

This that it stated 'and he did not know where he erred, he returns to the beginning of the perek', this is specifically where he did not know where he erred. But if he knew that he said this perek and remembered that he omitted a specific pasuk or a specific word, he only needs to start from that pasuk and on.

And so is taught in the Tosefta in our masechta, in the second perek: If one read Shema and erred and omitted a single pasuk, he should not begin from the beginning of the perek (Other sefarim: he should not return and read that pasuk by itself) but rather should begin from that pasuk and finish until the end. And so too in Hallel and so too in Megillah, and so too in tefillah.

[13]
MISHNAH.
WORKMEN MAY RECITE [THE SHEMA'] ON THE TOP OF A TREE
OR THE TOP OF A SCAFFOLDING,
A THING THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DO IN THE CASE OF THE TEFILLAH.

Gemara: The Sages learnt {in a brayta}: Workmen may recite [the Shema'] on the top of a tree or on the top of a scaffolding, and they may say the tefillah, on the top of an olive tree and the top of a fig tree, but from all other trees they must come down to the ground before saying the tefillah, and the employer must in any case come down before saying the tefillah, since his mind is not settled {because of a fear of falling}.

Thus, were it not so, he would be able to say tefillah. And it is not comparable to that which we said earlier (daf 10b): A person should not stand upon a chair, footstool, or other high place and pray. For since he has ascended the tree in order to do work, he is like someone who has ascended to an attick, ans so he can pray; however, his mind is not settled.

Yerushalmi: Why say specifically at the top of an olive tree and on top of a fig tree?
Rabbi Abba and Rabbi Simone both say: because their bother is a lot {presumably since they are high it is difficult to descend and ascend}.

Mari the son of the daughter of Shmuel asked Rava: we learn in the Mishna "workmen may recite [the Shema'] on the top of a tree or on the top of a scaffolding" which implies that you don't need intent. Contrast with this: Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai says: one who reads the Shema needs to direct his heart ={have intent} as it states Shema Yisrael {Hear O Israel} and later in, Dvarim 27:9:
ט וַיְדַבֵּר מֹשֶׁה וְהַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם, אֶל כָּל-יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר: הַסְכֵּת וּשְׁמַע, יִשְׂרָאֵל, הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה נִהְיֵיתָ לְעָם, לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ.9 And Moses and the priests the Levites spoke unto all Israel, saying: 'Pay attention, and hear, O Israel; this day thou art become a people unto the LORD thy God.
Just as there it is with paying attention, so too here with paying attention.
He {Rava} was silent.
He said: have you heard any {saying} on this?
He said to him: so said Rabbi Yochanan {we have Rav Sheshet}: they stop their work and read.
But we learnt {in a brayta}: Bet Hillel say: they involve themselves in their work and read.
It is not a question. Here {Rabbi Yochanan, where intent is required} in the first perek, here in the second perek.

This is an answer according to the opinion of Rabbi Yochanan who holds that you need intent during the entire first perek, as we wrote before, but according to Rava it is not because you need intent in the entire first perek that it says to stop their work, but rather so as not to make it {the Shema} temporary, like that which we learn in the first perek of Yoma {daf 19b}:
Rabbi Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marta cited Rav: One who reads the Shema should not wink with his eyes, nor whistle with his lips, nor point {/make signs} with his fingers. And we learned {in a brayta}: Rabbi Eliezer Chosma says: One who reads the Shema and winks with his eyes, whistles with his lips, or points with his fingers, upon him the verse states (Yeshaya 43:)
כב וְלֹא-אֹתִי קָרָאתָ, יַעֲקֹב: כִּי-יָגַעְתָּ בִּי, יִשְׂרָאֵל.22 Yet thou hast not called upon Me, O Jacob, neither hast thou wearied thyself about Me, O Israel.
{but instead you are calling to someone else.}
and we establish in the first perek and the Sages explain that it is because he made it temporary. Here too, if he does not stop his work, he makes it {the Shema} temporary. For if you do not say this, it is a question Rava upon Rava, for over there, Rava says that the halacha is like Rabbi Meir {as he ruled earlier in Brachot like Rabbi Meir that you need intent only on the first pasuk}, and here he says {or would seem to say} that you need intent in the first perek. Rather do we not derive from this as we have said, such that you do not have a question Rava on Rava.

{Having finished quoting the Rif in all the above, the Rosh continues:} The general rule of the matter in terms of intent is that we need in the first pasuk, which is Shema; and in terms of not making at temporary, we need the whole perek.

We learnt in Yoma {daf 19b}:
The Sages learnt {in a brayta}: Dvarim 6:7:

ז וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ, וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם, בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ, וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ.7 and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.
in them {Shema you (may) talk} and not during prayer {=Shemoneh Esrei}.
{Rashi explains cites Rav Hai Gaon as saying this means Shema you speak loud enough to hear but Shemoneh Esrei you say silently, while Tosafot interprets it to refer to answering because of honor or fear.}
וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם - In them you may talk {Rashi: divrei Torah} but not other matters {silly things}.
וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם -make them permanant.

[14] The Sages learnt {in a brayta}: The workmen who do work next to the employer read the Shema, pray Shemoneh Esrei three times, and eat their bread, and bless before it, and after it two blessings. How so? The first blessing {after it} as it was established, and the second, he begins with the blessing on the Land {Nodeh Lecha} and includes in it boneh yerushalayim {Builder of Yerushalayim} in the blessing of the Land, and finishes with the blessing on the Land {Baruch Ata Hashem Al HaAretz VeAl HaMazon}. In what are these matters said? When they work for wages. But when they work for their food, or when the employer eats with them, they bentch in its usual established formulation four [brachot].

MISHNAH:
A BRIDEGROOM IS EXEMPT FROM THE RECITAL OF THE SHEMA' FROM THE FIRST NIGHT UNTIL THE END OF THE SABBATH, IF HE HAS NOT CONSUMMATED THE MARRIAGE.
IT HAPPENED WITH R. GAMALIEL THAT WHEN HE MARRIED HE RECITED THE SHEMA ON THE FIRST NIGHT:
SO HIS DISCIPLES SAID TO HIM: OUR MASTER, YOU HAVE TAUGHT US THAT A BRIDEGROOM IS EXEMPT FROM THE RECITAL OF THE SHEMA'.
HE REPLIED TO THEM: I WILL NOT LISTEN TO YOU TO REMOVE FROM MYSELF THE KINGSHIP OF HEAVEN EVEN FOR A MOMENT.

GemaraFrom where do we know these words?
For the Sages have learnt {in a brayta}: (Devarim 6:7)

ז וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ, וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם, בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ, וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ.7 and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.
בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ - "when thou sittest in thy house" - to the exclusion of one who is involved in a mitzvah.
וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ - "and when thou walkest by the way" - to the exclusion of a bridegroom.
From here we derive that one who marries a virgin is exempt, and {one who marries} a widow is obligated {to read} for he is not distracted.

Thursday, August 16, 2012

Berachot 15b

Berachot 15b

Gemara: Rav Yavi cited Rabbi Yoshiya: the halacha is like the words of both of them leniently.


Rav Ovadia learnt {a brayta} before Rava: Dvarim 11:19 states:
יט וְלִמַּדְתֶּם אֹתָם אֶת-בְּנֵיכֶם, לְדַבֵּר בָּם, בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ, וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ.19 And ye shall teach them your children, talking of them, when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.
velimud tam {= "the teaching should be perfect"}. such that you give a pause between the letters that connect together.

Rava responded: for example, 
Dvarim 6:6:

ו וְהָיוּ הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה, אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם--עַל-לְבָבֶךָ.6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be upon thy heart;


Dvarim 6:5:

ה וְאָהַבְתָּ, אֵת ה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, בְּכָל-לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל-נַפְשְׁךָ, וּבְכָל-מְאֹדֶךָ.5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
Dvarim 11:13:
טו וְנָתַתִּי עֵשֶׂב בְּשָׂדְךָ, לִבְהֶמְתֶּךָ; וְאָכַלְתָּ, וְשָׂבָעְתָּ.15 And I will give grass in thy fields for thy cattle, and thou shalt eat and be satisfied.
Dvarim 11:17:

יז וְחָרָה אַף-יְהוָה בָּכֶם, וְעָצַר אֶת-הַשָּׁמַיִם וְלֹא-יִהְיֶה מָטָר, וְהָאֲדָמָה, לֹא תִתֵּן אֶת-יְבוּלָהּ;וַאֲבַדְתֶּם מְהֵרָה, מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ הַטֹּבָה, אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה, נֹתֵן לָכֶם.17 and the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and He shut up the heaven, so that there shall be no rain, and the ground shall not yield her fruit; and ye perish quickly from off the good land which the LORD giveth you.
Dvarim 11:18:


יח וְשַׂמְתֶּם אֶת-דְּבָרַי אֵלֶּה, עַל-לְבַבְכֶםוְעַל-נַפְשְׁכֶם; וּקְשַׁרְתֶּם אֹתָם לְאוֹת עַל-יֶדְכֶם, וְהָיוּ לְטוֹטָפֹת בֵּין עֵינֵיכֶם.18 Therefore shall ye lay up these My words in your heart and in your soul; and ye shall bind them for a sign upon your hand, and they shall be for frontlets between your eyes.

Bamidbar 15:38:

לח דַּבֵּר אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם, וְעָשׂוּ לָהֶם צִיצִת עַל-כַּנְפֵי בִגְדֵיהֶם, לְדֹרֹתָם; וְנָתְנוּ עַל-צִיצִת הַכָּנָף, פְּתִיל תְּכֵלֶת.38 'Speak unto the children of Israel, and bid them that they make them throughout their generations fringes in the corners of their garments, and that they put with the fringe of each corner a thread of blue.

Bamidbar 15:41:

מא אֲנִי ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם, אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתִי אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם, לִהְיוֹת לָכֶם, לֵאלֹהִים: אֲנִי, ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם. {פ41 I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: I am the LORD your God.' {P}


Yerushalmi: Rabbi Levi and Rabbi Aibo from Chipa cited Rabbi Sissi: One is required to stress the zayin of tizkeru (in Bamidbar 15:40)

מ לְמַעַן תִּזְכְּרוּ, וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֶת-כָּל-מִצְו‍ֹתָי; וִהְיִיתֶם קְדֹשִׁים, לֵאלֹהֵיכֶם.40 that ye may remember and do all My commandments, and be holy unto your God.


One needs to make a pause between vechara and af so that it does not sound like vecharaf [and he blasphemed]. 

We learn in perek makom sheNahagu {Pesachim 55b} as regards the 6 things the people of Yericho did etc. - they said the Shema without pausing - How did they do this? Rav Yehuda said: They would say "Shema Yisrael Hashem Elokeinu Hashem Echad" and not interrupt.

And Rashi explained: They would not interrupt between echad and veahavta, even though one needs to extend in echad and [so] pause between acceptance of the yoke of heaven and other matters.

Rabbi Yehuda says: They would interrupt, but they did not say Baruch shem kevod malchuto leolam vaed.

Rava said: They would interrupt, but they would say hayom al-levavecha, which implies today upon your heart and not tomorrow.

And we, for what reason do we say  Baruch shem kevod malchuto leolam vaed? Rabbi i: (Bereishit 49:1,3)


א וַיִּקְרָא יַעֲקֹב, אֶל-בָּנָיו; וַיֹּאמֶר, הֵאָסְפוּ וְאַגִּידָה לָכֶם, אֵת אֲשֶׁר-יִקְרָא אֶתְכֶם, בְּאַחֲרִית הַיָּמִים.1 And Jacob called unto his sons, and said: 'Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the end of days.
ב הִקָּבְצוּ וְשִׁמְעוּ, בְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב; וְשִׁמְעוּ, אֶל-יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲבִיכֶם.2 Assemble yourselves, and hear, ye sons of Jacob; and hearken unto Israel your father.
ג רְאוּבֵן בְּכֹרִי אַתָּה, כֹּחִי וְרֵאשִׁית אוֹנִי--יֶתֶר שְׂאֵת, וְיֶתֶר עָז.3 Reuben, thou art my first-born, my might, and the first-fruits of my strength; the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power.
Yaakov wished to reveal to his sons the end of days, and the Divine presence left him. He said: perhaps there is in my bed {=progeny} a pesul - like Avraham my grandfather that Yishmael came from him, and Yitchak my father, Esav came from him. They said to him "Shema Yisrael, Hashem Elokeinu, Hashem Echad." Just like there is in your heart only one, so too there is only in our hearts one. At that time, he {Yaakov} began, saying "Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuto LeOlam VaEd" - "Blessed be the Name of His glorious kingdom for all eternity!"

The Sages said: how shall we do? Shall we say that which Moshe did not say? Shall we not say that which Yaakov said? They established to say it silently.

Rabbi Yitzchak of the House of Rabbi Ami said: a parable to a princess who smells tzikei kedera {a pudding consisting of minced meats and mixed with wine and spices} and wants it. If she asks for it, she is disgraced. If she does not ask for it, she is discomfited. {So what is done?} Her servants go and bring it to her quietly.

Berachot 15a

Berachot 15a

Rabbi Chiya bar Abba cited Rabbi Yochanan:
One who wishes to accept upon himself the yoke of the kingship of Heaven completely, {Brachot 15a} should go to the bathroom, wash his hands, put on tefillin, read Shema, and pray, and this is the complete yoke of the kingship of Heaven.
And anyone who goes to the bathroom, washes his hands, puts on tefillin, reads Shema, and prays, the Scripture considers it as if he has built an altar {in a good way --mizbeach} and sacrificed upon it a sacrifice, as it states in Tehillim 26:6:

ו אֶרְחַץ בְּנִקָּיוֹן כַּפָּי; וַאֲסֹבְבָה אֶת-מִזְבַּחֲךָ ה.6 I will wash my hands in innocency; so will I compass Thine altar, O LORD,

Rav read kriat Shema, donned tefillin, and then prayed. And we conclude that it was the messenger who was at fault, for he delayed in bringing the tefillin until after he [Rav] had read kriat Shema, and so he interrupted and donned tefillin so as not to pray without tefillin.

And it is found written in the name of Rabbi Yitzchak za'l, son of Rabbi Yehuda, that the messenger brought him his tallit after kriat Shema and he wrapped himself in the tallit and prayed. And he brought a support to his words from this of Rav, that he donned tefillin between kriat Shema and tefillah, and the same would be true for tzitzit.

And it seems that there is room to differentiate, for tefillin are different, as is stated [in the continuation of the gemara]:
If he put on tefillin, read Shema, and pray, and this is the complete yoke of the kingship of Heaven.
And furthermore, it seems that from logic, there is to differentiate, for tefillin are different in that there is written in them the acceptance of the yoke of kingship of Heaven and the yoke of the commandments, and the Scriptures called them a remembrance.

And furthermore, this is a mitzvah with the body of a person, but the mitzvah of tzitzit is not in his body, but rather that the Scripture requires it in the garment which happens to have four corners, and if he did not wear it now, he will wear it after a time.

And [so], one should not interrupt between kriat Shema and tefillah for the sake of wrapping oneself in a tallit.

Ravina said to Rava: Does Master see this member of the Rabbinate who has come from the West {=Israel} and said: one who does not have water to wash can rub his hands with a pebble, or dirt, or sawdust?
He {Rava} said: He says well. Does it (the pasuk in Tehillim 26:6) say beMayim - with water? It says בְּנִקָּיוֹן - in cleanliness. Any substance which cleans.

Rav Chisda would curse anyone who looked after water at the time of prayer.

Rosh: There are some seforim in which is written "And these words are in terms of reading Shema but for prayer {=Shemoneh Esrei}, he needs to go back {looking for water to clean your hands}. For Resh Lakish said: for kneading {betahara} and for netila {before eating} and for praying {with a tzibbur}, four mil." As we learn in Pesachim, perek Elu Ovrin (daf 46a) and in Chullin perek haOr vehaRotev (da 122b). 

And the Rif as well wrote so, and this girsa is not found in old sefarim. And also [Rashi] did not explain [have a girsa] of this. And it seems that he was not gores this, for {it doesn't make sense, for just as} he should not go back at the time of kriat Shema, so that the zman would not pass, so too would be the case in terms of tefillah, for why should one differentiate one from the other? And even though kriat Shema is Biblical while tefillah is Rabbinic, the Sages gave strength to their words just as for Torah.

And Rashi as well does not explain there {in Pesachim} a reason for tefillah {going back} as because of netilat yadayim, but rather in order to pray with ten. And so too later on in perek Mi Shemetu (daf 22a) it is stated 'they cancelled the washing like Rav Chisda, for Rav Chisda cursed one who went back for water at time of prayer', and it does not mention kriat Shema at all.

MISHNA:

IF ONE RECITES THE SHEMA' WITHOUT HEARING WHAT HE SAYS,
HE HAS PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION.
R. JOSE SAYS: HE HAS NOT PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION.

IF HE RECITES IT WITHOUT PRONOUNCING THE LETTERS CORRECTLY,
R. JOSE SAYS THAT HE HAS PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION,
R. JUDAH SAYS THAT HE HAS NOT PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION.

IF HE RECITES IT BACKWARD {out of order}
HE HAS NOT PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION.

IF HE RECITES IT AND MAKES A MISTAKE HE GOES BACK TO THE PLACE WHERE HE MADE THE MISTAKE.

Rabbenu Moshe za'l wrote that if he did not read the parshiyot in order, he fulfills, for behold in the Torah, they are not written in order. Even though we learn in a Mishna "why is Shema said before vehaya im shamoa", it is only lechatchila that its order is such, but the seder is not meakev. And this that Rabbi Yehuda said that between Vayomer and Emes veYatziv one should not interrupt, this is when one reads the parshiyot in order of the institution of the Chachamim.