tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post1687250359275610350..comments2024-03-28T23:20:49.777-05:00Comments on Beis Vaad L'Chachamim: Metzora, Vayikra 14:46-7. Tefillin Wearer and Tefillin Carrier: Who Goes First?Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-38701988212827621992017-03-09T23:54:52.908-06:002017-03-09T23:54:52.908-06:00Ok, I was mevarer that it's the Beis HaLevi. T...Ok, I was mevarer that it's the Beis HaLevi. This is heard from Rav Moshe Soloveichik of Chicago, Reb Ahron's son. I'm going to edit the post. Thank you.<br />Secondly, I saw a very nice vort from Rav Sternbuch in Titzveh 28:38 about the Tzitz, that the issur hesech hadaas is only when he's wearing it and being mekayeim the mitzvah, because then it becomes a cheilek of him, as opposed to stam if he's carrying it, because then his daas is irrelevant. The connection to this discussion is obvious.Eliezer Eisenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-24950283544789624762010-05-25T08:27:31.205-05:002010-05-25T08:27:31.205-05:00Naftali, you can find more about Rabbi Askotsky he...Naftali, you can find more about Rabbi Askotsky here:<br>http://www.stam.net/about_me.aspxBarzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-43900468002170680812010-05-25T06:14:53.332-05:002010-05-25T06:14:53.332-05:00" lesser unknown said...more acronyms for an ..." lesser unknown said...<br>more acronyms for an older post:<br><br>2) If i remember correctly, the beginning of each sefer of chumash has an acronym for a mitzvah. for example, breishis stands for bechor rechem emo shloshim yom tifdeh. and shemos stands for shnayim mikreh v'echad targum. I dont know what the other 3 stand for...<br><br>another acronym for בראשית is בן ראשון אחרי שלושים תיפדה... <br><br>and i was just wondering Rabbi Y Askotsky why the Rabbi "divrei Torah and insights related to tefillin."? b/c i really do too just wondering what the rabbi's reasons were?....Naftalihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539413646364538245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-74841002410845304542010-05-24T15:31:24.535-05:002010-05-24T15:31:24.535-05:00thank you! for reasons that are obvious to those t...thank you! for reasons that are obvious to those that know me, I enjoy divrei Torah and insights related to tefillin.Rabbi Y Askotzkyhttp://www.stam.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-20347739166199366942010-04-22T16:22:30.245-05:002010-04-22T16:22:30.245-05:00I just received an email from a wonderful young Ra...I just received an email from a wonderful young Rav at the Kollel at Yeshiva University. After subtracting the honorifics and bimchilas kvodos etc (replaced with tildis and stars,) this is what he wrote. There's a lot to digest here, and before even beginning, I wanted to post his letter, as follows:<br><br>1) My understanding is that the Psak is Mi'Yuchas to the Beis HaLevi, not Brisker Rov. See Teshuvos V'Hanhagos vol. 4 pg. 426, and I believe it can also be found in the Beis HaLevi's biography, ראשון לשלשלת בית בריסק. Apparently, it was recorded in the name of the Maharal Diskin, as well, but not exclusively, see Teshuvos V'Hanhagos vol. 1 siman 535. If you have concrete evidence that this originated with Brisker Rov, please enlighten me. Maybe I am wrong. Where is Rav Yaakov quoted?<br> <br>2) I would like to ~~~~~~~ and ******** address your assertion that Bayis HaMenuga depends on K'vias Makom (~~~~~~~ ********, because I am sure that you put more thought into this than I). My understanding is that the Tumah is, indeed a Din of ביאה לבית, and it depends on the מעשה ביאה. I once wrote about this, and I don't have everything off the top of my head, but in short, see Hilchos Tumas Tzara'as 16:5, as well as Reb Chaim there. Moreover, see Reb Chaim in Hilchos Bias Mikdash Perek 3 [cf. with Reb Chaim in Hilchos Bias Mikdash 1:15, as well]. Basically, the Din Biah is a Din in כל התורה כולה, and so הנכנס דרך אחורנית is not Tameh until he is entirely inside. Likewise, many Achronim (see Reb Chaim there and Minchas Chinuch 184) assume in Rambam that one is פטור for ביאת מקדש if he comes in שלא כדרכו - and likewise ביאה שלא כדרכה to בית המנוגע has a מיעוט. This, of course, all begins with גמ' שבועות יז.<br><br><br>INITIAL RESPONSE TO PARAGRAPH ONE:<br>I had heard the attribution to the Brisker Rov many times in the past, and I most recently heard both that attribution and the attribution to Reb Yaakov Kaminetzky from Reb Yaakov's talmid, Rabbi Dovid Zucker, Rosh Kollel of Kollel Zichron Shneur (Teh Lakewood Kollel) in Chicago. Not concrete, but on the level of סןגיא דעלמא in Sanhedrin 33a. I haven't seen the Teshuvos Ve'Hanhagos; I will try to do so.<br><br>As for paragraph II, Thank you for the marei mekomos: I'll need time.Barzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-84268355440396851822010-04-20T14:57:25.414-05:002010-04-20T14:57:25.414-05:00נא לזכור שכל מקום שנאמר השקפה אינו אלא לרעה חוץ מו...נא לזכור שכל מקום שנאמר השקפה אינו אלא לרעה חוץ מוודוי מעשר<br><br>maybe you should write hashkofo about maasergreat unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-88086154668851826642010-04-17T14:43:20.009-05:002010-04-17T14:43:20.009-05:00I don't understand what you don't agree wi...I don't understand what you don't agree with, so I'll try to rephrase. I agree the Halacha is unique to Batim, but not because of a different definition of והבא אל הבית which is unique to Nig'ey Batim [(a) by Ohel it also says כל הבא אל האהל (b) as you mentioned, here too whatever was in the Bayit before is also Tame]. I rather prefer to say that the basic rule for being "in the house" is just the same. However, there is a Mi'ut "האכל בבית יכבס בגדיו" telling us that Tuma for worn Bgadim is delayed *even though* they are in the house. I suggest that this is not because they are not considered "in the house". In fact, they are "in the house" as we see in Goy (and I don't like to distinct between Bgadim worn by Goy or Jew). However, they are *also* considered "worn" at the same time.<br><br>Now, I agree that the rule of delayed Tuma in unique to Nig'ey Batim. Had there been no Miut of Pasuk 47 we have just said they are in the house, period, like in Ohel. However, but we can learn from it that a worn Beged is perceived *both* independently and as being secondary to the person wearing it [otherwise, how does the mi'ut work? if the Beged is there, it's there]. This concept may be used in other areas of Halacha too.Elihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12793717193734899866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-43621484359573223002010-04-16T12:34:19.656-05:002010-04-16T12:34:19.656-05:00Thank you, Eli. I was relying on ancient memories ...Thank you, Eli. I was relying on ancient memories of set theory and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_(set_theory)<br>I changed the post to reflect the correction.<br><br>As for your mehalach, I just don't see in the Toras Kohanim that the tumah of the begadim stems from the man being metamei begadim. And, as I said, if it's not true by tumas ohel of a meis, you can't derive anything from a halacha unique to nigei batim.Barzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-48606033359841941122010-04-16T10:15:55.088-05:002010-04-16T10:15:55.088-05:00A. you probably meant intersection(A,B) and not Au...A. you probably meant intersection(A,B) and not AuB.<br><br>B. One may suggest an alternative approach: a worn garment has a dual status - it's both in the house and it's also worn by the person. Now, if not for Pasuk 47, we wouldn't have cared that it's worn, since it's in the house it's Tamey. Now that the Torah tells us that a person entering the house is מטמא בגדים after KAP, we learn from this that for a worn garment we suspend the rule about טומאה *even though* it is in the house. For a Goy etc. where there is no reason for such suspension, we follow the general rule. For someone who could have entered the house in a way Pasuk 47 would be applicable, but did not - machloket R. Yehuda and chachmim.<br><br>What we learn from that is that Tefillin that are considered both indepepndently to the wearer *and* also Tafel to him. When we need to choose, we prefer the other Tefillin that are totally independent of the person carrying them.Elihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12793717193734899866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-84725447919515947442010-04-14T21:28:13.523-05:002010-04-14T21:28:13.523-05:00Thank you, lesser. I'm putting your comment w...Thank you, lesser. I'm putting your comment where it belongs, and putting the acronyms in the post.Barzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-60813753988531571222010-04-14T18:50:29.912-05:002010-04-14T18:50:29.912-05:00more acronyms for an older post:1) sifrei EMES (al...more acronyms for an older post:<br>1) sifrei EMES (aleph, mem, saf) for the 3 seforim of tanach (Iyov, Mishlei, and Tehillim) that have their own set of trup<br>2) If i remember correctly, the beginning of each sefer of chumash has an acronym for a mitzvah. for example, breishis stands for bechor rechem emo shloshim yom tifdeh. and shemos stands for shnayim mikreh v'echad targum. I dont know what the other 3 stand for...<br>3) (a dikduk one) the letters yahu are the 4 letters (yud, heh, vav, aleph) that don't have an invisible shva nach when they end a word, and therefore the first letter of the word following them does not get a dagesh kal, if it is one of the letters of beged capos (which someone else mentioned)<br>4) if we are making up our own, (i dont think i heard these, just threw them together now) yesh shem for the niviyim rishonim, kra aish, for the 5 megilloslesser unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-62468123555150311972010-04-13T07:34:37.765-05:002010-04-13T07:34:37.765-05:00Naftali, I understand what you're saying. Eve...Naftali, I understand what you're saying. Even if clothing were bateil to the wearer, Tefillin might not be. Tefillin are more chashuv, and we wear them not to serve us, but instead because of our obligation to serve Hashem.<br><br>Still, the din by Metzora seems to apply to all begadim, and tefillin are technically called begadim, as seen in Hamotzei Tefillin.Barzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-16153231442275062202010-04-12T09:39:39.246-05:002010-04-12T09:39:39.246-05:00It's not my connection. The Brisker Rov and R...It's not my connection. The Brisker Rov and Reb Yaakov say that the rule by Nig'ei Batim teaches us that clothing that is being worn is not viewed as an independent thing; it disappears. So they say that the person wearing the tefillin would not have precedence to enter the room before the person carrying the tefillin. On the contrary, the person carrying them must enter first. This is odd and counterintiuitive. That, alone, is no big deal. Plenty of dinim are. But here, I don't understand their basis for saying so, which is what the post is about.Barzilaihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-83281743100440001902010-04-12T09:32:07.036-05:002010-04-12T09:32:07.036-05:00but how does it help clarify it?but how does it help clarify it?Naftalihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539413646364538245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-85571402008126767012010-04-12T06:06:19.792-05:002010-04-12T06:06:19.792-05:00Barzilai was comparing the way the din is applied....Barzilai was comparing the way the din is applied.<br>Interesting, missed your posts, thanks!NonymousGhttp://gtorah.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6453787673476195995.post-84256545341792870372010-04-12T04:45:52.712-05:002010-04-12T04:45:52.712-05:00who conect's it to Tefillin and shouldn't ...who conect's it to Tefillin and shouldn't Tefillin be Different than the din for clothing???Naftalihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539413646364538245noreply@blogger.com