קורת רוח לשבת - עונה 2 | פרשת וירא (פרק 54)

There are things that only happen in the family. >> For subscribers, dial 6485. You are listening to the Family Podcast. Rabbi Ephraim Zalman Glinski and Rabbi Yisrael Alter Gervais. An hour of Sabbath enjoyment with insights, stories, anecdotes, and debates on the weekly Torah portion. Second season. Hello and welcome to another episode in our podcast series, Sabbath enjoyment, with me, Rabbi Ephraim Zalman Glinski, and my good friend Yisrael Alter Gervais. >> And we are in our third edition of Parshat Vayera, or Vayeira, as they love to say in Hebrew, and we want, you know, as is our custom, to focus on one thing. It must be said that this is a very, very central Torah portion, as we discussed in the previous episode, oh, it is the portion of the Binding, you know, the Binding of Isaac and all that , which unfortunately we won't touch upon enough this time. Oh, what else is happening, this portion is arranged in a very, very interesting polarity. The previous portion ends when Abraham our father circumcises himself. This portion begins right after the circumcision. It's as if we have a new Abraham. An Abraham who circumcised himself, receives the news of Isaac and Sodom. And there is a very, very interesting contrast here between Abraham our father, who hosts guests at the beginning of the portion, and Sodom , which does not receive guests. And it seems, there is also a Midrash—a very interesting Midrash that says that Abraham our father, when the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to circumcise him , told him to circumcise; so he says to Him: When I circumcise, no one will come to stay with me. Meaning, the way I understand it, I will be a Jew, I will be different from them, they won't come. And the Holy One, blessed be He, told him that He would bring, that he would have guests. And here is what happens, that immediately after the covenant, three guests arrive. But what is very interesting is that something happens here that I think is the basis for all the Midrashim here. It is that there is a divine revelation here and it is not stated for what purpose this divine revelation was. And this is basically the foundation for all these Midrashim that we have on this portion. The beginning of the portion, that the Holy One, blessed be He, came to visit the sick. And this is more than Midrashim, this is Gemara. It is a Gemara in...we have three Gemaras on this: there is one Gemara found in Shabbat, there is a Gemara found in Shabbat, and there is a Gemara if I'm not mistaken that is found...well, in Sanhedrin. Let me just put things in order: the Gemara speaks about the fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, comes to visit Abraham our father. Yes, the basis for this is...it lies in the verse itself because there is an appearance, an appearance of the Holy One, blessed be He. >> And it is not written for what purpose He revealed Himself, which means from here it is evident that the appearance itself was the news here. And why? Because He came to visit the sick. This is the basis. Well, it is amazing—if you want, it is the same thing, as if the Holy One, blessed be He, is coming to visit the sick person. We see in the Rambam, in the Mishnayot, in the Mishnah in the prayer we say every day, welcoming guests and visiting the sick —it goes together, it is a story together, it is doing good. The Holy One, blessed be He, so to speak, comes to visit the sick, and Abraham our father goes to look for guests. We cannot ignore these parallels, and we want to talk...we mentioned this last time using the words of Chazal, in what is very much, in modern language, radical, because Chazal actually say: " Greater is hospitality than receiving the Divine Presence." They derive this from the verse, like, this isn't just a midrash, right? It is from the Gemara in Shabbat. The Gemara says, in the middle of a discussion, right? In a halachic discourse about whether one may clear straw on the Sabbath for the sake of guests, suddenly the Gemara there brings up that "Greater is hospitality than receiving the Divine Presence." And then the Gemara explains how they learn this—they learn it from our verse. We see that our forefather Abraham is standing, receiving a Divine revelation, when suddenly he sees three travelers and he runs, runs towards them. He is essentially interrupting the revelation , and then he says—there is a verse here: "And he said," We don't know, there is what appears to be the name " Adonai," and we don't know if it is a holy name or a secular one, which is essentially: "And he said, I will say it: My Lord, if now I have found favor in your eyes, do not pass by your servant." When it could be "my lord," meaning he is addressing the head of this group and saying to him: "Don't run away, don't run away, come, I want you to come into my home." Now, this is a major practical difference—who he is saying this to and how we can learn from this, and this is the simple way for us to learn this fundamental principle you mentioned, that...yes, what Chazal say, it comes from the understanding that this word is holy. >> It is holy, meaning, so for instance, the Gemara in Shabbat 127, there is a dispute, you know, it is a discussion in the Rambam as well, a halachic discussion. The names written regarding our forefather Abraham, the Gemara says the Tanna Kamma states it is a secular name, so Abraham our forefather is turning to the guests and asking them to stay. There is no great proof here because, ostensibly, the Holy One, Blessed be He, had finished the revelation, and then he goes to welcome the guests, but there is a pair here who say...Rabbi Hananiah the nephew of Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah, they say it is a holy name. And then our forefather Abraham is, as it were, saying to the Holy One, Blessed be He: "Wait, wait, wait a moment, I have three guests here.""Run now!" If you say that he is running, that our forefather Abraham is running in the middle of the discussion, then that already makes it "greater than receiving the Divine Presence." And the Gemara says: "According to whom does he say, 'Greater is [hospitality] than receiving the Divine Presence'—it follows that same pair." >> Aside from what you showed me once, that there is one of the Rishonim who derives this principle even without this verse. >> Yes, we, it's not the Rishonim, we will have to understand. So, so there is something very, very interesting here. First of all, let's, let's look at our Parashah. Well, Rashi on the Parashah, on the Torah, brings both interpretations, as if they are not contradictory. Rashi says: "Do not pass by," he says: "If I have found favor in your eyes, do not pass by." So Rashi asks, to whom was he speaking? He spoke to the greatest among them; in this language it is mundane, but in another matter, it is holy, and he is saying to the Holy One, Blessed be He, to wait for him while he runs. And you told me that we—you told me that Rashi is not obligated. >> There are places where the Gemara decides according to one side of a dispute, and Rashi on the Torah will not bring the ruling, but rather what fits the plain meaning. Rashi comes to explain the plain meaning of the verse, we have seen this. There are places where Rashi, I remember there in the dispute, that Rashi brings even the Rabbi. Even if the Gemara says the opinion of Beit Hillel is difficult, Rashi explains the passage according to Beit Shammai so that we do not get stuck with a word. >> So anyone who finds a contradiction between Rashi and a legal ruling, or even between Rashi and what Rashi says in the Gemara, that is not a question —because there is a certain role. Now , this is another thing we mentioned last time, and we must remember that there is a Ramban here who is very, very vocal about what happened here: Did, did three travelers really come to him? Did the Holy One, Blessed be He, reveal Himself to him? What, what is going on here? >> This is basically Rambam and Ramban. >> Rambam and Ramban, and the Ramban—the Rambam rather wants to say that this whole thing is a prophetic story, meaning it didn't happen, this story didn't happen, it is prophetic. >> And on the other hand, the Rambam himself learns from this passage. >> Or the Rambam. The Rambam: We have two interesting rulings of his. First of all, in the Laws of Torah Study, yes? There he discusses the Divine Names, so he says all the names mentioned regarding Abraham are holy, even this one that says "My Lord"(Adonai), "If I have found favor in your eyes," it is holy. From here we learn that the Rambam says that welcoming guests is greater than receiving...the Presence of the Shekhinah. There is a Rambam in the Laws of Hospitality, and this is what is interesting: Where would you expect the Rambam to talk about hospitality? >> Not in the Laws of Mourning. >> Not in the Laws of Mourning; the last chapter of the Laws of Mourning is dedicated according to the Rambam to all matters of loving-kindness, and it's like a continuation. >> Probably the reason is because it is a true kindness, all the... >> Yes, it is a continuation. Meaning, there is kindness. He perceives mourning as a law of kindness; he really gets into it, that anyone who does not go to comfort and so on, this is the matter. And then he reaches the fourteenth chapter of it, or whatever he calls it, and there he has clause two of this matter: the reward of escorting. Meaning, escorting, to escort a guest, is greater than everything. And he, there is something very interesting here that the Rambam says: And it is the custom that our father Abraham established and the path of kindness he practiced. Meaning, from where do we know that one must escort? This is a great innovation in the Rambam, our father Abraham acted this way: feeding travelers, giving them drink, and escorting them. And hospitality is greater than receiving ...than receiving the Presence of the Shekhinah, as it is said: "And he looked, and behold, three men," and escorting is more than hospitality. >> And he does not bring the verse of... >> He brings the beginning of the verse, he says "And he looked and behold," he has some men there. >> So you're saying, on one hand, one could say he is hinting at the continuation of the verse, but he doesn't write it, he doesn't say it, and you're also trying to understand. >> It seems, after all, the Gemara explains how to learn this. >> The Rambam himself, after all, he holds the side that it is a holy name, so why didn't he bring...the Hal? Many ask this, and there is a very beautiful and long discourse here by the Lubavitcher Rebbe. But I saw it from the Goa, I saw it very often, many trying to understand this Rambam. You know, a Chabad person, as is his way, starts digging and getting to it. By the way, it’s not just him; there is a very interesting Teshuva that we talk about sometimes, Rabbi Chernovich Arnovi, he is the Rebbe of the Rebbe of the Rebbe. >> A Kol Mevaser. >> So he brings it up there at length; he deals with this discussion. So I said before, Gemara in Sanhedrin; I wasn't right. The third Gemara that talks about this topic is found in Bava Metzia, and there the Gemara actually describes how Abraham our father sends Eliezer (to go out) to find guests. The Holy One, blessed be He, did not want him to go out to guests, He brought out the sun from its sheath—this is all the descriptions of the Gemara. So he sent Eliezer out to look for guests for him; of course, Eliezer went out and found none, "I don't believe you." The Gemara says that from there we learn that there is no trust in servants. He went out, he saw—he went out; Abraham our father goes out himself, he sees the Holy One, blessed be He—wait, imagine the description—he sees the Holy One, blessed be He, standing at the opening, that is what is written: " Do not pass from over your servant," that he turned to the Shechinah and asked it for this. The Gemara describes , yes, he sees the dressings, the Holy One, blessed be He, sees that he had bandages on. Abraham our father was still in the middle of this; he said to Him: "Run to meet them like you," it is not proper etiquette that I should see all of this. And then, "And he lifted his eyes," meaning he sees people, so something else happens. And when they saw that he was in pain, they also didn't want to come, and then he really begged them to come. The Tosafot there on the spot in Bava Metzia try to discuss whether, what does it mean that Abraham our father asked? After all, seemingly in our verse, it is implied that Abraham our father asked that the Holy One, blessed be He, should not leave, that the Holy One, blessed be He , should stay. In the Gemara Bava Metzia, it is implied that because he was dealing with the bandages, the Holy One, blessed be He, left. So the Maharsha there explains, and it is very interesting. That, that we see right away that the Holy One, blessed be He, it is written, "And he lifted his eyes and he ran toward them." Says the Maharsha: If it is true, what we explained until now, that Abraham our father turns to the Shechinah and tells it to stay because I need, there are guests; in the verse, it is the opposite; in the verse, he first runs, after that he says "stay." >> He should have asked for permission first. >> He should have asked for permission first, and therefore, says the Maharsha , from the very fact—and this is what you hinted at earlier—the very going, the very fact, not because he asked, but the very fact that he stood up and ran toward them. >> That this truly happened first. >> That it actually happened before, from here that it's all based on this, meaning from the discussion itself. >> And according to this, you have the simple explanation in the Rambam. >> Based on this, we can understand the Rambam. >> Very beautiful. >> Because why does the Rambam actually say that? >> True, the Name is holy, but that is not the proof that... >> The proof is from the very phrase " Vayir", "Vayir" wants...of course. >> That from the beginning of the verse, very beautiful. >> And Rashi, although what is interesting is that he brings an interesting proof, he brings that the Gemara in Kiddushin says that Uriah the Hittite is considered a rebel against the kingdom, why? Because he said before the king: " >> My lord Yoav," meaning when you stand before the king you cannot use "my lord " for someone else. >> Even though he is truly his master. >> But in the presence of the king, who is the greater master, you cannot call someone lower than him "master." >> Rashi wants to say, even if it is a form of "my lord," that is something he could say before the king. >> To use that word. >> You understand, to use in short. Now, the interesting thing that he brings here in the name of the Gaon, it's not, you know, like all the teachings of the Gaon—maybe you'll say a word about that—most teachings of the Gaon that are said on the Torah. >> First of all, these are not things he himself wrote. >> It is all from students, and even after his passing, a ban was issued by the Gaon of Vilna that things shouldn't be published in his name because there are many things, there are famous stories that explicitly say this is not his... and it is something regarding a firstborn by two, some calculation of the Gaon by two, and they say it is truly a mistake in the calculation of the...that we said last time. >> All the calculations, okay. >> Oh no, not in this context, in the context of "Parsos". >> Yes, so one needs to know that many things on the Torah, specifically as if by tradition, it is definitely written for us. In Halacha it is written for us , we have the Gaon's commentary and several editions, and they made a synthesis among them in what is printed for us. But specifically on the Torah, these are things that came from many sources; one of those who published it was Polish, his name was Rabbi...He also published the book "Gan Raveh," he also published the book "Nigstar." He was such a...and I think sometimes he also took similar ideas from here and there, and in many places they called it... >> Not long ago I bought at some auction Chiddushim of the Rashba that he signed ...wait, so what did he write about the Gaon? >> No, so he brings in the name of the Gaon, that...I don't...an, a special book on the Elijah, like in these compilations, a thin book like that. I think, if I am not mistaken, about the readers—we have some listener, a Jew, a Torah scholar, his name is Asaf, he will surely correct me here and there, but I think, I do not remember now. So he says like this: he wants to bring from the Halacha that we know that it is forbidden to run away from the synagogue. Meaning, when you arrive for prayer—we today are not so careful anymore—there is a concept to run into the synagogue, when you go out, you are not allowed to, because it looks like... >> You need to walk slowly and with your head bowed towards the synagogue. >> From the fact that we see Abraham our father ran, and it’s said he ran, even if the vision ended, you shouldn’t have run out like that, to run out and even run through. >> Unless it is great. >> Unless it is great, we are welcoming the Divine Presence. I will add the move, which is a very interesting move of the...of the Rambam, excuse me, of the Chavzekar. He wants to say in several places: First of all, he might want to say that in the Guide for the Perplexed, the Rambam himself says that all of this was only in a prophetic vision. As we mentioned earlier, that the Ramban...one must read the Ramban's opening in the Parsha, he is truly angry. I think we talked about it. >> I think we talked about it last time; these are probably the kind of issues we need to talk about. The things we actually have here, we mentioned earlier that the Rambam brings this whole thing in Hilchot Avel, in chapter 1, he brings commandments of rabbinical origin: visiting the sick, comforting mourners. He brings another list, this whole Mishna that exists: these are acts of loving-kindness in one's person that have no limit. Even though all these commandments are of rabbinical origin, it is not Torah-ordained, and everyone asks, if it’s great, we are welcoming the Divine Presence—why isn't it written in the Torah? So he says: Even though all these commandments are of rabbinical origin, they are all included in "Love your neighbor as yourself." >> And this is a rule for the Rambam: that a general commandment is not counted. Yes, that’s first of all, it’s not counted. But the Chavzekar makes a move here that is quite interesting; he wants to say, as I mentioned to you in Hilchot Avel, he brings that it is a law that Abraham our father established and the way of kindness he practiced. Now, he brings, he is a Torah scholar, he brings the Rambam's commentary on the Mishna on Chullin elsewhere, and he says: And there the Rambam writes like this: Pay attention to the great principle included in this Mishna, that which was said from Sinai is prohibited . In short, what he wants to say: Everything you see prophets doing and such, it does not obligate a Jew. For example, the fact that we don't eat a limb from a living animal is not because the Holy One, blessed be He, forbade it to Noah, but because Moses forbade us limb from a living animal in that... >> A famous principle of the Rambam. >> And likewise, we don't circumcise because Abraham our father, peace be upon him, circumcised himself. >> But because the Holy One, blessed be He , commanded us through Moses our teacher to be circumcised as Abraham our father circumcised his...that is how he continues. >> I just want to add something here parenthetically, it is true that the obligation to circumcise is an obligation from the Holy One, blessed be He, after Abraham our father, but in the blessing we say at the covenant. >> Which is indeed so. >> Yes, to bring him into the covenant of Abraham our father, so it is true that our obligation is because of the commandment that came later, but the commandment that came later is to bring us into that same covenant with. >> Right, the same covenant that the Holy One, blessed be He, established. >> Right. >> Why does the Chavzekar raise a question here? The Rambam writes that the whole matter of us welcoming is a law that Abraham our father established, so this Rambam doesn't fit the method. >> Yes, he said it doesn't obligate us. >> The Rambam says that...and then he brings a very interesting foundation, one that is interesting to think about, because I think it is truly beautiful. He says this: Gemilut Chasadim (acts of loving-kindness) has two sides. There is the side where the commandment is that the other person is lacking something, and it is fulfilled. He brings a Gemara. The Gemara says that if a person loses a coin, and a poor man finds it and goes and lives off of it, the Jew who lost it did not perform charity. Why? In Chassidut, they talk about this a lot: you don’t do* kavanot*(intentions), you don’t do them as individuals. >> In practice, he benefited. In practice, the deficit that was there was filled. So he says, that is one side of every act of kindness: that the other person benefits. He says there is another side . The second side, which is less emphasized, is you, the doer, the one doing the kindness. The doer, the action of the doer, the fact that he actually wants to do it, contributes to his own development—let’s call it that in yeshivish language. So if you take, for example, hospitality: there is the technical aspect—someone entered your house hungry as a dog, left full; that happened to him. But there is the concept of Hachnasat Orchim, where you take an interest, where you care. >> It is very interesting that we see this distinction in Tzedakah itself as well. >> Yes. >> When we look at the Rambam, it is true that there is a question of whether to give a lot of money to one person or not, so there is an interest that there should be many acts of giving on the part of the... >> On the part of the person who gives, that he also acts, and then he says: The Chafetz Chaim wants to innovate that, unlike everything the Rambam mentions in the first section, like visiting the sick and so on, here the point is to give to the other in Hachnasat Orchim. There is a law, the law that the Chafetz Chaim understands, that what you need to give here is the heart, the development, that is the story of Hachnasat Orchim. The reception of guests, not just feeding them, but the matter of taking an interest in them, of being with them. This thing is greater than the welcoming of the Divine Presence, and in this, he really feels that... >> It is an innovation, really, what he says; he says that the engagement of a person himself... >> In Hachnasat Orchim is the great merit, which is greater than the welcoming of the Divine Presence. >> He says that is why the Rambam says the first part of the verse, and the Rambam does not say the whole thing, because the main thing for him is that he runs. >> That he runs, and he ran towards them. In other words, the main thing is that he sees this, and he runs towards them. All this is after what happened with them and what he said. And therefore he also says: There is something very interesting here in the Rambam, because the Rambam brings all of this as a branch of accompanying guests. He says one must accompany guests because...he says that it is also not the welcoming of the Divine Presence. Now he goes into even more than that: he says, after all, in practice—this is already Chafetz Chaim style, I would say—after all, in practice, there was no Hachnasat Orchim here on the part of the receivers; they were angels, they did not need to eat. The Gemara says it was for the honor of Abraham; everything that was here was Abraham, he understands, it is only the act of the giver. He says that is also why our Sages, and why the Torah specifically chose this example. After all, he hosted many people at home; here he hosted angels, who gained nothing from it, only he gained from it. >> Yes, I actually saw one of the thinkers saying that the Holy One, blessed be He , so much wanted to bestow good upon Abraham—and we will touch on this later, God willing—that the true kindness is to be like the Holy One, where the desire to bestow good doesn't stem from the other's lack. There is a desire here on my part to bestow good. And the Holy One, blessed be He, arranged it in such a way >> that this kindness was not actually needed by the recipients. That is the crux of the point here. It is amazing because everyone asks, and it is a question that truly Chassidim and everyone you go to asks: who was actually here, where did Abraham our Father learn this? We learn this from Abraham our Father, but where did Abraham our Father... >> Where did he innovate this bombastic novelty? It is quite brazen to get up in the middle of talking to the Holy One, blessed be He, to run and say to Him: "I have some guests here?" Truly, you don't do such a thing. And that is a real question. And regarding this question, many Chassidic commentators take the line that Abraham our Father —the Gemara says his limbs were so sanctified that he could not do anything against [God's will]. Run, run [to do a mitzvah]. >> Like the king says, regarding "a foot without..." >> I mean, to walk from another place, and a foot... >> Later in the portion, it is written: " And Abraham stretched out his hand and took the slaughtering knife." Everyone in the Chassidic literature wonders what "stretched out his hand" means. They say his hand did not obey him because his soul did not want him to slaughter. Therefore, he had to overcome his natural inclination. "And Abraham stretched out his hand." Because, in essence, Abraham our Father was entirely surrendered to the will of God. And therefore, suddenly Abraham our Father sees— "He lifted his eyes and he saw"—he suddenly sees, and even the Rabbenu Bachya says this verse is written twice: "He saw, and he saw," and he ran. Meaning, he suddenly sees himself running. He sees his own legs running >> in his state, in a state of illness. >> He sees his own legs running. This " seeing" is a term for understanding. He suddenly understands from the fact that his legs are running that "greater is the act of hospitality than receiving the Divine Presence." He says that the Be'er Sarim said that the Baba Sali once asked him: "How did Abraham our Father know all this, that hospitality is greater than greeting the Divine Presence?" So he said that it is written that the Holy One, blessed be He, came to visit him, and it says there: "And he was sitting at the entrance of the tent." He was so weak, he could not move, he was forced to sit . This contradicts the Gemara a bit, the [source] we mentioned earlier, which says: "Suddenly he sees he has the strength to run, and then he understood"—that is essentially the version— "and then he understood that hospitality is greater than greeting the Divine Presence." But I want you, if I may, to try to explain this matter , because there seems to be something very interesting here when we look at it from a logical perspective. Actually , we are limited in our worldview; it’s a—you know, a small thing. >> For people abroad, this matter of being watchful finds much more expression because there is a situation of such travelers; they are used to this, whereas people living here in Israel, the modern person, really doesn't get out much. >> Except for those who value yeshiva boys and seminary girls who study here in the country. >> True, true, but you think to yourself —I mean, in the world of the past, hospitality was a part of life. A person would arrive, and he also couldn't send messages beforehand; he would arrive, and there are actual stories of how on every Friday night in every synagogue, people stand up and take [them] in. >> Here, just this week, when I was teaching my students about the laws of Kiddush, they asked me why in the ArtScroll Siddur in English, there is a Kiddush on Friday night after the prayer. >> Which is Ashkenaz. >> Oh, so I say, and this custom still exists today in Ashkenaz; no one—no one here in Israel, there is a synagogue apparently of... >> Do you know in Boro Park a synagogue of ...that they do—you see the difference in the lifestyle. I mean, once it was a thing that every Sabbath there were guests in synagogues all over the world who had nowhere to go on Friday night, and we would give them— make Kiddush for them so they could eat in the synagogue. Today, that situation has changed. I mean, there is some—so you are right that also this matter that we are limited here in Israel, we ... >> It really bothered me when I was just, by the way, in the Rama's synagogue. >> Of course, yes. >> Today, people there are careful about what is "the custom of the place." >> True. >> There is some rabbi sitting there, actually a Yemenite one, and he doesn't even know that the Rama holds that one must make Kiddush on Friday night. You know, and tons of Hasidim arrive there on the way—who travels to these places? Tons of Hasidim, and you say: " This is the Rama's synagogue, here they must make Kiddush on Friday night." I don't know, there is a very, very interesting story, maybe we told it once, of the Divrei Yatziv, the Admor of Sanz—who, as is known, would pray Mincha very, very late because he was like Rabbeinu Tam, yes, so he would pray Mincha when it was already dark outside. But he once arrived to visit the grave of Rabbi Yehuda Halevi, and there he insisted on praying Mincha early, because, after all, he is the one who determines the...there are calculations here that one can pray Mincha...Earlier. He said: "I cannot, at the grave of Rabbi Yehuda Halevi, do the opposite of Rabbi Yehuda Halevi." True, I know that the Rebbe of Ger, may he be well, was in Krakow and he didn't agree to pray inside a synagogue [that used] Nusach Sefard. >> The Rama's synagogue is the Rama's synagogue, there is a "custom of the place" here; that is to say, there is also an understanding of what a synagogue is. >> If we are talking about changes in things, we don't even know what "custom of the place" is anymore; that is to say, this concept has also disappeared today. My father, of blessed memory—I don't know if you remember this incident, but there was a Pan Am plane that was downed by Libyan terrorists, by Gaddafi. >> Above a town in Scotland, called Blackcraig, my father had a friend he was truly close to, a great philanthropist from the United States named Rabbi Yosef Miller. My father traveled there to identify him, to bring him for burial, and he stayed in Gateshead, which is just across the way from that town in Scotland. He met a great Torah scholar there, who wrote many books on Jewish law; I think his name was Schorsch or something like that, he wrote on matters of monetary law and similar topics. He approached him and asked a question in Jewish law that concerned his task, and he said to him: "There is a 'Moreh Hora'ah' here, there is a 'Moreh Hora'ah' here." Rabbi Rakow was the 'Moreh Hora'ah' of Gateshead then; I don't rule on questions, there is a 'Moreh Hora'ah' today, we don't really have that concept anymore. >> One must say that technically, the world has changed; the world has become interconnected, there isn't really a ' Moreh Hora'ah'. >> It’s not because there are communities, there are communities, in one city there are eight communities and eight rabbis. >> I imagine that this whole thing stopped functioning when the Hasidim built their own independent communities within the... >> Among other things, I think that yes, that is one of the symptoms, but it stopped functioning. >> In my opinion, mainly when we moved from villages to towns, to cities, sorry, yes. >> When we became urban, then suddenly there is a description in a book called "Rabbi in the Big City," a very interesting book that talks about this transition; suddenly a community that used to number a few hundred grows to tens of thousands—tens of thousands, it's impossible for one rabbi to handle everyone. >> Also, there is no personal connection. >> It's just impossible; how can you rule in a place like Warsaw, which is essentially 30 towns, so there are 30 ' Morei Hora'ah' there. Things get complicated, but if we continue with the story of welcoming guests, there is something here: the first thing that happens after Abraham our father circumcises himself—there is a message here: the first thing is to be a good person, to welcome guests, to give to others. And I think that regarding this "giving," we need to dwell on it because, from an ideological perspective—and you have a lot to add—from an ideological perspective, this is the moment when the Holy One, blessed be He, says that Abraham our father begins to walk in the ways of the Almighty—the statutes of Abraham, as the Rambam says. >> That is truly the point you ended on; it is actually the starting point of a truly wonderful essay by Rabbi Shimon Shkop in his introduction to 'Sha'arei Yosher'. Now, I know many people know there is an introduction to 'Sha'arei Yosher', and usually, people can quote a sentence or two from it, which we will get to later, but... >> So let's just frame this; two weeks ago we spoke a little about Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi Shimon is a scholarly book. ' >> Sha'arei Yosher' blessed us with an introduction that is an ideological one , which even people like me can look into. >> He basically comes to explain why he is writing the book, 'Sha'arei Yosher', and the bottom line is that he wants to benefit the public, he is obligated to benefit the public, and that is the point he wants to emphasize. And he, and he, he opens with something very, very interesting. The first thing he opens with, the very first step, is the famous foundation that everyone knows from the Mesillat Yesharim: that the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted—the Holy One, blessed be He, created the world because He wanted to bestow good. That is the first point. From here he takes the idea that the Holy One, blessed be He, also wants us to be good like Him, and therefore we have an interest in imitating the Holy One, blessed be He. That is in the midst, exactly in the midst, of the instruction, of the opening. >> And here he says a truly wonderful innovation; we all know the famous Ramban on "You shall be holy"—I mean, one can say it by heart: the Torah couldn't...actually, the question the Ramban grapples with is, what does he have to add to all the mitzvot after we already... >> Whoever listens to our podcast hears this Ramban about every two weeks. >> Exactly. So, so what is the point of adding another commandment of "You shall be holy"? What is it said about? The Ramban says a huge innovation, that it refers to distancing oneself. From permitted things. Yes, the Ramban says that a person can be a "nabal b'reshut hatorah"(a scoundrel within the bounds of the Torah) if they do permitted things and eat and gorge and drink all day, so the Torah comes and says: no, abstain from what is permitted to you; that is called "You shall be holy." Rabbi Shkop comes and says he has one huge question on this Ramban, because we have an explicit Midrash, an explicit Chazal teaching, that on this verse of "You shall be holy, for I am holy," Chazal come and say: "Could one think [I should be] like Me?" >> And Chazal come and say: " >> Always, not 'like Me'—I am holy, My holiness is above your holiness." >> Beautiful. Rabbi Shkop comes and says: If the Ramban is right that it is to abstain from permitted pleasures, what is the point of comparison between the holiness of the Holy One, blessed be He , and our holiness? There must be a point of comparison, and then one would think that we are commanded to be exactly like Him, and there needs to be a conclusion: No, do not be exactly like Him because that is not relevant. That is to say, he doesn't understand the question at all. What does it mean, "Could one think like Me?" How could one think "like Me"? We, after all, have no connection at all between our holiness and the holiness of the Holy One, blessed be He. We abstain from permitted things. >> There is no relevance at all. Rabbi Shimon comes and says a huge innovation : he says this matter of holiness is to be like the Holy One, blessed be He, in this point—that the entire concern of the Holy One, blessed be He, is only to bestow good, net; there is nothing for the needs of the human being himself. That is to say, how is it the needs of the Holy One, blessed be He? Consequently, the needs of man. >> Therefore, here was the belief to come and say that our holiness—so he defines what holiness is? Holiness is that for a person, every action he does —by the way, he says in parentheses, even if I eat and drink to strengthen my body in order to benefit other people, even that is fine because I am actually doing it with the goal to benefit. >> Man, that is far-reaching to think that he actually says our whole purpose in life is not...it is not... >> It is to benefit others; that is exactly the definition. >> And what is our Torah? >> Oh, wait, wait. Now Rabbi Shimon comes and says, but it is written in Chazal: "Do not be like the Holy One, blessed be He," because if... >> You cannot be, so here a Rabbi comes and says something interesting. He says , ostensibly, we see that the Torah itself recognizes the fact that a person loves themselves more than other people, right? "Love your neighbor as yourself." >> Meaning, it starts with "as yourself," and now you must love the other just like you love yourself. >> Right, and it is written, Rabbi Akiva ruled this as the law, that if you have only... >> Water, you are walking in the desert, you have enough water to survive, you have a little and your friend has a lot . >> Then "your life comes first," it is written. So the Torah essentially—he proves it from many places—the Torah recognizes this and does not criticize this point that a person...by the way, I think Christianity, for example, doesn't think so, but rather that a person should, as it were, erase themselves completely for the sake of the other. Yes, so the Torah does not recognize that, and it is ruled accordingly by Rabbi Akiva. Shimon comes and says: The solution is this; we have two values here that we need to balance. On one hand, only to benefit the other, and on the other hand, one recognizes the needs—one must recognize the needs of oneself. He arrives with his immense innovation, which is that the Torah wants your " self" to expand beyond yourself. And then he says something interesting. He says: An ordinary person—their "self" includes their physical needs, and that is how their "self" is defined. A more spiritually developed person includes within that their spiritual needs as well; this "self" includes both physical and spiritual. A person of a higher moral level—their household and family are included in their own needs; they don't feel they are doing for another when they take care of their household. And the final state is that a person feels that all of the people of Israel, and he even adds the whole world, everything is an expansion of his own "self." I am part of this great thing, and when I help it, I help myself. >> Yes, when I act, I am actually acting for myself, and this is [from] an article by... >> I know that what you said in a nutshell is basically the foundation of the Kabbalah of Rabbi Ashlag, the Baal HaSulam. The whole story, essentially, the spiritual Kabbalistic story; you want it in a nutshell? Man is a creation of the Holy One, blessed be He , created in His image. What is "in His image"? It doesn't mean He has a nose and ears; "His image" is the simple quality of bestowing. In short, Rabbi Ashlag really expands on this, because the whole reason the world was created, the whole reason we are here, the whole reason there is Torah, is because the Holy One wants to bestow, otherwise it wouldn't start. And therefore, you also understand what is very interesting, that the foundation of the entire Torah is found, by the way, in this portion, in this story, when the angels descend and stay with Abraham our Father, they eat meat and milk. And I think that in the end, it all connects, because actually, when a person...the whole story is that it is hard for a person to give to others, and then he is able to give; for angels, it is neither hard nor easy. >> This is the answer that Moses our Teacher... >> And this is an answer that begins in this parasha, but I want for a moment, you know, to close this story to move on to the exiles; it's to return once more to a question that is an interesting question–where did Abraham our Father learn this from? So I told you that there is a booklet, I think we spoke about it last time, of a debate between Rabbi Akiva Yosef Schlesinger. He asked the question of where Abraham our Father knew, and Rabbi Akiva Schlesinger told him that it is written in Chazal that the Holy One, Blessed be He, had to bring the sun out of its sheath so that guests wouldn't come, [and] if they were great or not great, [but for] guests, receiving the Divine Presence, there is no need to bring out the sun because Abraham our Father would not stand and would not run to them. >> From the fact that He brought out the sun >> So he understood that this is happening now. The novelty that we also touched upon: there is "I heard from my teacher " at the end of the book Toldot Yosef, "I heard from my teacher" in the name of the Baal Shem Tov, he brings the following statement–which is a very strange statement that at the time I heard there were complaints about the entire book because of this thing. He says: I heard from my teacher an explanation, that hospitality is greater than receiving the Divine Presence, and he raised a difficulty, he doesn't say what the difficulty was, and it concludes that sometimes hospitality is a neglect of Torah or gossip, and nevertheless, hospitality is greater. Yes, that is to say, if a person has–sometimes hospitality causes him to waste time, to miss this, and to guard against lashon hara, that is the worst, lashon hara removes the Divine Presence. >> And even so, hospitality is greater than receiving the Divine Presence. And I saw that someone brings [that] he asked what is the difficulty? What, what is difficult about what the [ teacher] said? After all, the moment a person receives guests, he is doing a mitzvah; at that very moment there is a receiving of the Divine Presence. Receiving the Divine Presence is not some appearance, so how can it be that hospitality is greater than receiving the Divine Presence? So he said: Here, there are times that [receiving] the Divine Presence causes the Divine Presence, sometimes hospitality causes the Divine Presence to depart, and despite that, hospitality is greater, which is very, very unique. By the way, according to what... >> One can understand why they didn't like the... >> Yes, but according to what we learned earlier (in the Gaon) and I know that there are also later authorities who addressed this. The Gaon also says that in the end he ran outside; he acted contrary to custom in order to receive the Divine Presence, or to host guests. This is also interesting, and there is a discussion about it: what actually happens if a person, for the sake of guests, loses time for Shema? There are discussions about this, there are very interesting rulings. I saw in Tzel Hachochma and such, they say that the Chofetz Chaim was... >> Chofetz Chaim is not quite the same, but the Chofetz Chaim would completely skip Shalom Aleichem, there is a testimony of his at night... >> There is a testimony of a guest who was with him and he simply sang songs during the meal. >> So if we are approaching the end, I just saw a beautiful insight. There was a Rabbi Yirmi of Opole—that’s what he was called—who was a son of Rabbi Yaakov Dov of Amszynów. >> Today Opole is related to Mszczonów, right? He is his son-in-law, but he is a grandson. >> Ah, he is a grandson of that... >> He is also related to Amszynów, yes. Now, what he asked, what I asked you earlier: if visiting the sick is such a great mitzvah, why isn't it written in the Torah? Why is it only included under "Love your neighbor as yourself," as the Rambam says? So he says that if the Torah had written it explicitly, it would go along with a whole story, and it would happen that a person would suddenly grab his friend and force him home, because—it has to be "Love your neighbor as yourself." This was told with a story of someone who didn't want to come in, so he told him this insight . He said: "I don't want to come in right now." The mitzvah you are doing is to do good for me, do you understand ? You cannot, in the name of doing good for me, do something that is not good for me. >> Yes, we mentioned in the past the story of the Beis HaLevi, right? That... >> Where... >> Someone came from the house of Brisk to visit him, and he (who was sick) told him: "If I might be bothered by you, do not come to visit me," because he meant it. No, I saw, I think Rabbi Zalman once came to visit someone, and he was wise and realized: sometimes a sick person needs you, but you shouldn't come. So he says, from where do we learn that one must visit the sick? Our Sages learn it from, "The way they shall go," meaning: visiting the sick sometimes means needing to leave. >> That is the mitzvah. >> The mitzvah is to get up and get out of here. >> No, regarding this, they point out that we have a mistake in understanding the word "bikur"—visiting the sick is like... >> Like the inspection of the sacrifices in Sivan, in the month of Nisan—it is to see if the sacrifice [is fit]; that is the matter of "bikur." It is to see what the sick person needs; it is not a "visit," it is not a visit for the sake of social etiquette. I would like to understand the simple meaning of the Gemara that way. For instance, what we mentioned earlier, the Holy One, blessed be He, arrives and sees him dealing with the bandages. No, not for the sake of staying; can't the Holy One , blessed be He, see bandages? I think that is the essence of visiting the sick, not to stand there when it is unpleasant. >> Beautiful. >> Meaning, you agree with me that this is the simple meaning of the Gemara. >> That is it. Now, just to conclude the matter—which is always at the end, I'm always at the end—first of all, I will read to you the Shem MiShmuel, when he recalls this Gemara, he uses very strong language. He says: The explanation of the matter is, behold, Abraham our father, peace be upon him, had never before merited such a revelation of the Shechinah in such a sublime way as he did then. As mentioned in the Holy Zohar: The Zohar says that until he was circumcised, he did not have such a revelation of the Shechinah. And in the Ramban, it says that this revelation of the Shechinah was a healing for his circumcision. The Rambam says that when the Holy One, blessed be He, came, it was not just a simple visit to the sick, as the Gemara says: visiting the sick means He takes away one-sixtieth of their illness, as it is said: "In the light of the King's countenance is life." It is understood how dear this revelation of the Shechinah was to Abraham our forefather , and according to human capacity, we cannot fathom the pleasures of the World to Come; moreover, there is no greater pleasure than the revelation of the Divine to a person. >> Regardless, in order to fulfill the mitzvah of hospitality, Abraham our forefather did not pay attention to all this and all his immense pleasure. And this is the essence of his attribute of kindness—he forgot his own self and his needs entirely, only the purpose of the intention (this connects somewhat to what you mentioned earlier from Rav Shimman), only the purpose of the intention was to benefit others. And the last thing I want to mention relates to the Yahrtzeit we have this week on the 3rd of Cheshvan. It is the Yahrtzeit of our Rabbi, Rav Dovid, not Aybeschutz, but rather "Har VeNachal." >> The "Levush Serud." >> The "Levush Serud" for you? Oh, I actually think that in Europe they called him "Levush Serud" because it is his most famous work. And I saw that Rav Menachem Kluger, a Kluger, the son of Rabbi Kluger, writes in the introduction to...he has another book called "Nifla'ot Adas," which is the book of the "Chibat Yerushalayim" by Rav Dovid...yes, Serud. And then he explains why he has no introduction to the book. I...I will say first of all a full disclosure: in the "Har VeNachal" edition that came out in the Mir edition, I wrote the biography. If I may say so, I think no work has been done since then regarding "Har VeNachal ," and even after that, all those who came later took from there. I saw, I even have notes, because I traveled specifically to the National Library to open memorial books to...and I see it, darling, there isn't any, today is today, that's how it goes. And there I saw that he brings in the introduction there: What? What shall I write to glorify the author’s merit? Who is the deaf man who has not heard of the praises of the genius, the Rabbi, the author? In short, what he...what he implies is that he is so famous that there is no need to write about him, and therefore today we really lack some information about him. >> Because of his fame, they didn't write about him today, and by the way, I think this happens—it's a phenomenon that happens a lot in many places; because of too much fame, they don't write. And what is interesting is that he is buried here in Safed; that is to say, I will just give a moment for the context. >> We know he immigrated to the Land [of Israel], right? >> Yes, yes, yes, yes, he immigrated to the Land, we even know he sat here, he sat in Safed, he is buried in the same cave as the Ari HaKadosh, oh, it's a cave that is difficult to reach, we have documentation, therefore it took several years until they knew any details at all. I will give you basic details: there is a book called " Masa'ot Yerushalayim,""Sha'arei Yerushalayim," the one who wrote it is R 'Moshe Nussbaum. >> Yes. >> He was called Reb Moshe Reischer, because he was this—he was a traveler , an emissary, and he also wrote "Shaar Yerushalayim," a very beautiful book, with many, many descriptions from the field, descriptions. That, and then I, So he writes there that he notes that he went down—you have to understand, he went down a few years after the great earthquake that took place in Safed, which basically destroyed the city, and then there was a huge mess there, and they couldn't find anything at all. And then he says that he went down into this cave (this cave still exists today) and there was the grave of the genius and pious Rabbi Dov—[ Reb] David Solomon, author of the books "Levush Yesharim" and "Rav Nachal" and responsa—and there was no sign or tombstone visible, just a tradition that this was his burial place. He says : I enter, I see nothing; the only thing we know is that he is buried here . I took some of my friends and we dug. He says: I told them to start digging and we found deep in the earth an old tombstone, with faint letters engraved: Here lies the Rabbi, the genius Rabbi David Solomon, son of [Rabbi] Avigdor, the year 1805, 1805. >> This is something Moshe Reischer did himself. >> Yes, he says I dug in the earth and found it—and does this tombstone still exist today? They have already renovated it four times, but wait a moment. >> The year 1822, [month of] Cheshvan, and we made a large monument over his grave , and we carved the old tombstone and it was made like new. And I personally engraved large, deep letters on it: Here lies the great genius, the righteous and pious man and famous rabbi, Rabbi David Solomon [son of]...[ text omitted]...who passed on to the heavens on the 22nd of Cheshvan, 1822. And I put black paint in them, and we placed this large stone on the grave. " May my God remember me for good," and at his [side] the grave of the righteous Rabbi Dov of Avritch. Now, he made a mistake, he didn't...he didn't decipher correctly the... >> the grave. >> the tombstone. >> Wow. >> This—it’s not that much of a "wow." He wrote that his father was Avigdor— not true, his father was Rabbi Rachmiel , and it’s not the year 1805, it is the year 1804. >> Ah, but it is the same tombstone for the same... >> Yes, the tombstone—not sure, because I saw in some book later that, since in another place they dug, they found another tombstone inside; meaning, there were several tombstones. >> Apparently, someone came right after the earth [caved in] and did something temporary. We can't even understand today how much we take it for granted that graves are preserved, but in the ancient world, it wasn't like that. Anyway, if I take a step back for a moment: he was born while the Baal Shem Tov was still alive, but he didn't see him. He was born in the area, probably in 1750. And his father was [Rabbi] Rachmiel. He was born in Ozarzyn; I went to look for the book that mentions this community. >> I think that in Ozarzyn—I once wrote an article many, many years ago—there was the first grandson of the Ruzhiner from... >> There was an Admor, I remember that detail. >> And in short, later on, he became the son-in-law of a Jew named Moshe Avrum Avish, son of [Rabbi] Tzvi Margolies, and...He gave him to write/edit the book. He is the son-in-law of Rabbi Yechiel Michel Margolies, who was the Rabbi of Lashkovitz. Even that town was hard for me to find, no, Shkovitz it’s called, it is a small town. Truly, for Duzrein he took him as a son-in-law. The first literary work created by Rabbi Nachal, it is a work where he actually edits his uncle’s book, which is called Chidushei Maharama a Tzilused Avrum, and in the introduction there is a long poem that actually praises the editor’s work, who is Rabbi Dov Zev, and the Torah innovations of his uncle were compared to a basket without ears. In short, there is a really long and interesting poem to read, which is actually the first time you find such a poem for the benefit of the editor, not the author. And then he became a rabbi, he moved, he moved a lot, he became a rabbi in Netvorna, he was a great scholar, and after that he became the rabbi of Rostokov. Everywhere I have described it at length, and the last place to which he moved. He was also in Brezhanov, Buzhanov excuse me, and then he moved to Soroca. Soroca is in Bessarabia, more in the Romanian regions, and he was one of the first— there is a book by the late Yitzhak Alfasi, a book called Hasidism in Romania. He is one of the first to bring the tidings of Hasidism to that region. Now, I’m just saying, for those interested, who else was in Bessarabia in Soroca is Rabbi Yehuda Leib Maimon Fishman, who was the Minister of Religious Services. >> Yes, one of the heads, actually the head of the Mizrachi. >> The head of the Mizrachi, at least here in Israel, I don’t want to say— there is some expression of disdain regarding him, and he also wrote—it should be said to his credit that he had a very important grandson whom I knew personally, the great scholar Rabbi Shilo Raphael, who became closer through the Besis Yisrael. He writes, Rabbi Maimon writes that he was—I am talking to you, yes, he is at the end, at least 100 years after his passing— he says, "I still remember the study hall that was in Soroca, that the table and chair of Rabbi Dov Zev..." >> Young men in Soroca would stand there and sit to study around that table. But on the Rabbi’s chair, no stranger would sit, and even the rabbis who came after him, among them Torah giants, did not allow themselves to sit on the chair of this great genius. It is a great description. Anyway, I have a lot to say; he has sermons. His book, Rabbi Nachal, is an amazing book, it must be said. He was a Hasid, he brings many Hasidim, he doesn’t write as much Hasidic thought. He does describe that he came to some town and everyone there was arrogant. Why were they arrogant? And from his perspective, it was because they had never seen great people before. So he says in this sermon—I’m just quoting you a passage, I’m not going to read the whole thing: "I once arrived in a small town and saw that since they had never seen any distinguished people there, they were all arrogant, each and every one toward the other, and the matter troubled me greatly, and I said in the synagogue this sermon to condemn pride, as you will see below." Anyway, so he —all of this I am skipping now. He passed away here in the land and was buried here in the land, as I said, in Safed. His most famous book is the Levush, especially the sections on Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah. And he brings...and I bring all this because there was a side-point this week. So he says, He enters this discussion: where did the patriarchs gain their knowledge from? Now he takes it to my favorite area, that of foreknowledge and free will. Meaning, if Abraham our forefather—if Abraham knew that it was written in the Torah that he had to get up and flee from his home and that there would be suffering, then he had no free will. And if he did have free will, then where did he know it from? Do you understand? The question itself is here. He writes like this: "If he knew all the commandments and practices only from the Torah, then why do we learn this from Abraham?" Regarding Abraham, how did he understand this? Did he even keep Eruv Tavshilin? It was from the side that he attained the entire Torah by himself, but it isn't written anywhere else in the Torah besides with Abraham, so how is that? >> Even if he had the Holy Spirit, he couldn't have known, because it does not appear in the Torah except for him, except for... >> On this point he pauses: indeed, this is a disruption, that all the stories of the Torah are, in fact, written in the Torah. >> Beautiful. >> Again, foreknowledge and free will— yes, it is written in the Torah as explained in the Holy Zohar, only at their root—here he enters a path that seems to me like the Ramban's, the Ramban says the Torah was written in advance without punctuation of letters. >> In other combinations. >> Only that at their root they are other combinations and holy names, and it was rearranged, meaning the events that happen here in the world, actually. >> And he knew all of this, and consequently he also knew the story. >> No, and then he continued it, and therefore, therefore he actually says: Abraham our forefather continued those same combinations that were already written. He merely aligned them; it is written in the Torah. Our father only aligned the combinations; he knew, he knew how to understand what is written in the Torah. We can now learn what Abraham our forefather taught us that is written in the Torah. Wait, wait, before we finish, I want to—I have placed this on your shoulders, because we are considering here both Yeshiva students, and Sephardim, and this—we have the figure of Rabbi Nochum Partzovitz, who also had a side-lesson this week, and this I place entirely on you. >> I will tell you, it is very, very interesting. This figure is very, very interesting because until you enter the world of Yeshivas, there is a type of Torah giant that the outside world knows in all kinds of contexts. Yes, even secular people, unfortunately, they know all kinds of Torah giants only in their political context. Yes. For example, Ovadia Yosef—with the secular, what they know is the sentence and a half that he would say at the end of the satellite lessons. Yes. Everything that led up to there does not interest them, but there are Torah giants who are all concentrated within the study hall. >> I was in Kedumim, so the book is there. >> Yes. >> He writes there that once there was a Jew who asked his father, Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetsky, and he told him...he mentions there over 80 great Torah scholars of the Lithuanian world that none of them are known, so he tells him : "You speak like a yeshiva student; these were the greatest, do you know how many heads of yeshivas..." >> Beautiful, in short. So first, one must know that there are great Torah scholars who were only recognized— that is, they were known only within the yeshiva world—and one of them is the name you mentioned earlier: Rav Nochum Partzovitz. And here comes a very, very interesting thing; that is, if you go to Bnei Brak and Ponevezh and those areas, the name of Rav Nochum does not carry the same weight as it does in Jerusalem. In other words, in Jerusalem—both in Chevron and in Mir —Rav Nochum is like the foundation of the*lomdus*(analytical study) on the Talmudic topics; meaning, a person who doesn't know Rav Nochum on the topics is missing something. That is to say, for both the*Rabbanim*and the*Rosh Yeshiva*, Rav Nochum was the basis of* lomdus*after the Holocaust here in Jerusalem. >> First, place him for us; he is the son-in-law of... >> He is the son-in-law of Rabbi Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was the son-in-law of Rav Eliezer Yehuda Finkel, who re-established the Mir Yeshiva in Jerusalem after the Holocaust, and his son-in-law is Rav Hillel; we have here a legacy, generation after generation. >> Up, all the way up. >> Now, you need to know, I heard this from my teacher and rabbi, may he rest in peace, in the beginning... >> My teacher and rabbi is... >> Rav Aharon Yaffe, may he rest in peace. In the beginning, Rav Nochum Partzovitz was a very, very humble man, and truly a man with wonderful character traits, and he was not well-known. That is, certainly during the lifetime of his father-in-law and his father-in-law's father-in-law, he was a very, very modest man and was not famous. And then suddenly, there was this...his name spread like lightning, and he started to become the most popular*shiur*(class ) in the yeshiva world. In other words, the story they told back then is that to hear a*shiur*from Rav Nochum, you had to... >> Which years are we talking about? >> We are talking about the 60s and 70s, I think. In my opinion, to our great regret, Rav Nochum fell ill at a relatively early age, and he was simply at home until his passing. I think, I believe it was even 10 years; that is, when I already arrived at the Chevron Yeshiva, Rav Nochum was already ill. So they told that they spoke with one of the greats about how there is a state where a person reaches their perfection ...ah yes, and that’s it. >> It's not pleasant to say it, but Rav Nochum was the foundation of the yeshiva world, certainly in Jerusalem. And for those from abroad as well, when they arrived in Israel, it became a phenomenon entirely. And whoever sees the*emunah*(faith)*shiurim*of Rav Sherali, that is our continuation; he is essentially saying the teachings of Rav Nochum. I will try to say in one word how I feel, because I am a student of my teacher and rabbi, the Gaon Rav Dovid Cohen, *shlita*, Rosh Yeshiva of Chevron, and he himself, as a boy in Chevron, learned under Rav Nochum; he would go to Mir to learn under Rav Nochum Partzovitz together with Shmuel Yaakov Bornstein, may they be separated for long life. The way I understand things is this: generally, "Lomdus" in the Yeshiva world works in this way. You have a topic, you have a strong question on the topic, or a strong question on the Rambam related to the topic, and you have a good answer. That is the basis of the lesson. Yes? A good question, dialectic, and a good resolution for it. That is the framework of things. Rav Nochum's lessons, the way I understand it. Rav Nochum had a method like this. If it is written A, if every Rishon interpreted a certain topic in a certain way, and another Rishon interpreted the topic even in a specific detail, each one at the same point, each one says something else, it must be that every Rishon had a different approach to the topic than the previous Rishon. And this is a very , very Sisyphean work, so to speak, where it starts being that he must have understood the question differently, he understood the subject differently, and the answer of the Gemara differently, and he simply goes through the "moves" as they are called in every topic: what is the approach of the Rashba in the topic, what is the approach of the Ramban in the topic, what is the approach of the Ritba in the topic. And this is very hard work, but it provides clarity of the topic itself. These are not things outside the topic, these are exact details on every word in the Rishonim within the topic itself. And someone who leaves the topic with Rav Nochum in their head has abnormal clarity on the whole topic, so... >> May their merit protect us. >> And we, God willing, will meet here next week. May it be for the best. The mouth. And their rewards. Words, words. God. You have been listening to "Korat Ruach" for Shabbat from the Mishpacha podcast house. I am Rabbi Ephraim Glinski, and with me is Rabbi Saul Alter Gurbiez. Thanks to the editor Tehila Siton-Am, production manager Ayala Goldstein, and sound editors Avri Meizel, Daniel Levin, and Yalla Wilhelm . All series and episodes are waiting for you on the Mishpacha website, and all podcast apps, and on the phone line 07722, Extension 65, see you in the next episodes. [Gibberish] Give. And the fund of love. For him, not from. God, Honor in. Their honor. And also them. Words. Words. Oh, oh, honor. So much. That says. He is...That the...and the...Dawn, dawn. Dawn. And returned. And in all. And we. Its path. And entered. All of it. And fell. In boiling. Fallen among them. Among them. And Talmud. Torah. And study of. Against. All. From this. Mit. (End)