Click on Right Side of Player to Download the Shiur
Learn the “גמרא מג: “איתיביה אביי (middle of the Amud) until “דף מד. “א”ל אביי (seven lines from the top of the Amud)
Questions:
What changed after the destruction of the beis hamikdash that created an issue of people in chutz laaretz doing things differently than the Jews in Eretz Yisrael?
Rashi “מד. “לדידהו says this is an issue of לא תתגודדו but the Gemara Yevomas clearly states that לא תתגודדו is only an issue when there are different practices in one city?
Learn “תוספת מג: “והביאו
Learn תוספת דף לד. “ואחת
Questions:
Why does there need to be a uniform practice both in chutz laaretz and Eretz Yisrael?
Learn “רש”י דף מד. “לדידהו who explains because the prohibition of לא תתגודדו – having groups performing mitzvos differently as it gives the appearance of two religions.
The גמרא יבמות דף יג:-יד states that לא תתגודדו is only an issue according to אביי when there are different practices in one city and according to רבא even in one city it is acceptable if there are two different ruling courts (שתי בתי דין) which explains how on Purim there are different days for reading the Megillah (see תוספת שם “כי & רא”ש ס’ ט)
So how could Rashi say there is an issue of לא תתגודדו to have chutz laaretz have different practice than Eretz Yisrael when they are two different regions?
According to the Gemara, only after the destruction of the Beis Hamikdash did they institute a universal rule regarding taking Hoshanos on Hashanah Rabbah that coincides with Shabbos.
During the time of the Beis Hamikdash why was this not an issue of לא תתגודדו?
What changed after the destruction of the beis hamikdash that created an issue of people in chutz laaretz doing things differently than the Jews in Eretz Yisrael?
See מאירי דף מג. ” ושאל בה איננו דיי בקיבועא דירחא
Question on halacha אין צריכין ליגע – side posts do not need to extend until the top crossbeam.
Why not?
See משנה ברורה שס”ב ס”ק סב which says the reason is because of גוד אסיק
Major Question:
In the Sugya of כיפה in the case of a doorframe which is an arched on top. The gemara says if the side posts are ten tefachim tall everyone agrees it’s considered a צורת הפתח. Rashi says this is a proof that the side posts do not need to extend to touch the top cross beam.
How could this be considered a צורת הפתח through גוד אסיק , there is solid material separating the top of the side posts and the cross beam?
See אבני נזר או”ח ס’ רס”ד which asks the rule of גוד אסיק is universal, why does רב ששת say צריכים ליגע?
Why is an arched door frame which starts to arch from the bottom of the side posts not obligated in mezuzah?
Is it only when lacking width of 4 tefachim with a minimum height of 3 tefachim or is it because a door frame needs to have straight side posts and a flat lintel?
Is a doorframe which is wider than four tefachim that begins to arch from bottom of the side posts considered a צורת הפתח ?
Click on Right Side of Player to Download the Shiur
Very quickly review גמרא דף מג: “אי הכי (thirteen lines from top of the Amud) until איתיביה אביי (middle of the Amud)
Questions:
According to the opinion that taking Aravah post churban is just a minhag and not even a mitzvah from the Rabanan why would one have permission to handle the Aravos on Shabbos as they are muktzah?
See ריטב”א “ופרכינן אי הכי for an answer.
The Gemara answers “Because we are not experts to calculate the precise day of Yom Tov that’s why we can’t take aravos on Hoshana Rabbah that coincides with Shabbos.”
What’s the major concern even if hoshana Rabbah is really the sixth day of Sukkos there is no issue with taking the Aravah as the Gemara said in essence one should be permitted to take Aravah every day of Sukkos to publicize that it’s a mitzvah from the Torah just we don’t to prevent people from treating the mitzvah of Lulav lightly?
Learn “תוספת מג: “לא איקלע
Learn the “גמרא מג: “איתיביה אביי (middle of the Amud) until “דף מד. “א”ל אביי (seven lines from the top of the Amud)
Questions:
What changed after the destruction of the beis hamikdash that created an issue of people in chutz laaretz doing things differently than the Jews in Eretz Yisrael?
Rashi “מד. “לדידהו says this is an issue of לא תתגודדו but the Gemara Yevomas clearly states that לא תתגודדו is only an issue when there are different practices in one city?
Learn “תוספת מג: “והביאו
Learn תוספת דף לד. “ואחת
Questions:
Why does there need to be a uniform practice both in chutz laaretz and Eretz Yisrael?
Learn “רש”י דף מד. “לדידהו who explains because the prohibition of לא תתגודדו – having groups performing mitzvos differently as it gives the appearance of two religions.
The גמרא יבמות דף יג:-יד states that לא תתגודדו is only an issue according to אביי when there are different practices in one city and according to רבא even in one city it is acceptable if there are two different ruling courts (שתי בתי דין) which explains how on Purim there are different days for reading the Megilah (see תוספת שם “כי & רא”ש ס’ ט)
So how could Rashi say there is an issue of לא תתגודדו to have chutz laaretz have different practice than Eretz Yisrael when they are two different regions?
According to the Gemara only after the destruction of the Beis Hamikdash did they institute a universal rule regarding taking Hoshanos on Hashanah Rabbah that coincides with Shabbos.
During the time of the Beis Hamikdash why was this not an issue of לא תתגודדו?
What changed after the destruction of the beis hamikdash that created an issue of people in chutz laaretz doing things differently than the Jews in Eretz Yisrael?
See מאירי דף מג. ” ושאל בה איננו דיי בקיבועא דירחא
Review גמרא דף יא: “אשכחיה רב ששת (seven lines before the Mishna) until the Mishna.
See רש”י “חייבת which brings two גירסאות in the gemara. Rashi says this gemara is proof that the side posts do not need to touch the top post.
What is the proof?
Is the proof only from the opinion of the Rabanan or also from Rebbe Meir?
What is the difference between the two גירסאות?
Why is an arched door frame which starts to arch from the bottom of the side posts not obligated in mezuzah?
Is it only when lacking width of 4 tefachim with a minimum height of 3 tefachim or is it because a door frame needs to have straight side posts and a flat lintel?
Learn גמרא דף יא: “אשכחיה רב ששת (seven lines before the Mishna) until the Mishna.
Clarify what the concept of חוקקין להשלים
See רש”י “חייבת which brings two גירסאות in the gemara. Rashi says this gemara is a proof that the side posts do not need to touch the top post.
What is the proof?
Is the proof only from the opinion of the Rabanan or also from Rebbe Meir?
What is the difference between the two גירסאות?
Why is an arched doorframe which starts to arch from the bottom of the side posts not obligated in mezuzah?
Is it only when lacking width of 4 tefachim with a minimum height of 3 tefachim or is it because a doorframe needs to have straight side posts and a flat lintel?
Click on Right Side of Player to Download the Shiur
Very quickly review גמרא דף מג: “אי הכי (thirteen lines from top of the Amud) until איתיביה אביי (middle of the Amud)
Review תוס “שלוחי
Learn the ריטב”א and see how he gives a different explanation than Tosfos as to why the Gemara assumes that post Churban Beis Hamikdash there should be no concern of גזירה דרבה when taking the Aravah on Hoshana Rabbah when it coincides Shabbos.
Note the difference in explanation between Rashi and the ריטב”א “אי הכי כל regarding “אתי לפקפוקי בלולב”
Questions:
According to the opinion that taking Aravah post churban is just a minhag and not even a mitzvah from the Rabanan why would one have permission to handle the Aravos on Shabbos as they are muktzah?
See ריטב”א “ופרכינן אי הכי for an answer.
The Gemara answers “Because we are not experts to calculate the precise day of Yom Tov that’s why we can’t take aravos on Hoshana Rabbah that coincides with Shabbos.”
What’s the major concern even if hoshana Rabbah is really the sixth day of Sukkos there is no issue with taking the Aravah as the Gemara said in essence one should be permitted to take Aravah every day of Sukkos to publicize that it’s a mitzvah from the Torah just we don’t to prevent people from treating the mitzvah of Lulav lightly?
Learn תוספת “לא איקלע
Learn the “גמרא מג: “איתיביה אביי (middle of the Amud) until “דף מד. “א”ל אביי (seven lines from the top of the Amud)
Learn תוספת מג: “והביאו
Questions:
What changed after the destruction of the beis hamikdash that created an issue of people in chutz laaretz doing things differently than the Jews in Eretz Yisrael?
Rashi says this is an issue of לא תתגודדו but the Gemara Yevomas clearly states that it is only an issue when there are different practices in one city?
Quickly review משנה ברורה ס’ שס”ב ס”ק סו which discusses a machlokes whether the top crossbeam/ string needs to be taught so it will not sway in the wind.
The Gemara says Aravah is permitted to be taken on Shabbos when it coincides with Hoshana Rabbah because שלוחי בית דין מייתי לה
List
1. The argument between the ריטב”א “ומהדרינן and מהרש”א whether this a retraction from the first reason of לפרסום שהיא מן התורה
2. The argument between תוספת מג: “שלוחי and the ריטב”א as to why the Gemara assumes that post Churban Beis Hamikdash there should be no concern of גזירה דרבה when taking the Aravah on Hoshana Rabbah when it coincides Shabbos.
3. The explanation from Rashi and an alternate explanation from the ריטב”א “אי הכי כל of “אתי לפקפוקי בלולב”
Questions:
According to the opinion that taking Aravah post churban is just a minhag and not even a mitzvah from the Rabanan why would one have permission to handle the Aravos on Shabbos as they are muktzah?
See ריטב”א “ופרכינן אי הכי for an answer.
The Gemara answers “Because we are not experts to calculate the precise day of Yom Tov that’s why we can’t take aravos on Hoshana Rabbah that coincides with Shabbos.”
What’s the major concern even if hoshana Rabbah is really the sixth day of Sukkos there is no issue with taking the Aravah as the Gemara said in essence one should be permitted to take Aravah every day of Sukkos to publicize that it’s a mitzvah from the Torah just we don’t to prevent people from treating the mitzvah of Lulav lightly?
Click on Right Side of Player to Download the Shiur
Learn גמרא דף מג: “ערבה שבעה כיצד (two dots) until איתיביה אביי (middle of the Amud)
Questions:
Why doesn’t the Gemara open with a similar question that it asked on Lulav on דף מב asking why Aravah is not taken on the first six days of Sukkos when it coincides with Shabbos?
The Gemara says Aravah is permitted to be taken on Shabbos when it coincides with Hoshana Rabbah because שלוחי בית דין מייתי לה
Is this a retraction from the first reason of לפרסום שהיא מן התורה?
Learn ריטב”א “ומהדרינן
See מהרש”א
How does the fact that שלוחי בית דין מייתי לה agents of the court bring the aravos avoid the concern of someone carrying an Aravah on Shabbos?
The Gemara ask “Why don’t we post Churban Beis Hamikdash take the Aravah on hoshana Rabbah when it coincides Shabbos”
What is the logic to permit this as our practice is that everyone takes the Aravah not just שלוחי בית דין and therefore the גזירה דרבה is applicable and we should be concerned someone might carry the Aravah?
Learn תוספת מג: “שלוחי
Learn ריטב”א who gives a different explanation than Rashi and Tosfos
Question on Rashi:
Rashi explains the opening question of the gemara is based on גזירה דרבה. How could the gemara than offer the explanation of גזירה דרבה when explaining why Lulav is not taken on Shabbos as this is already known?
The Gemara says Aravah is taken only one specific day of Sukkos that coincides with Shabbos as if it would be taken any of the seven days of Sukkos that coincides with Shabbos “אתי לפקפוקי בלולב”
See Rashi for one explanation
See ריטב”א “אי הכי כל who gives different explanation
According to the opinion that taking Aravah post churban is just a minhag and not even a mitzvah from the Rabanan why would we have permission to take them on Shabbos as the Aravos are muktzah?
See ריטב”א “ופרכינן אי הכי for an answer.
The Gemara answers “Because we are not experts to calculate the precise day of Yom Tov that’s why we can’t take aravos on Hoshana Rabbah that coincides with Shabbos.”
What’s the major concern even if hoshana Rabbah is really the sixth day of Sukkos there is no issue with taking the Aravah as the Gemara said in essence one should be permitted to take Aravah every day of Sukkos to publicize that it’s a mitzvah from the Torah just we don’t to prevent people from treating the mitzvah of Lulav lightly?
Link to ריטב”א on the entire Gemara who addresses many of these questions
We asked the two following questions on the Rambam
1. The Rambam concludes that each situation individually a צורת הפתח is valid. However when both are combined in a case of an opening wider than 10 Amos and פרוץ מרובה על העומד than it is disqualified.
If each situation independently is valid, why is the combination deadly?
2. Our Gemara said the source to disqualify a צורת הפתח when there are more openings than closures – פרוץ מרובה על העומד is from the halacha of Rav who rules a צורת הפתח can not close an opening wider than 10 Amos. Since the Rambam concludes a צורת הפתח is valid on an opening wider than 10 Amos where is the source to disqualify it when there is פרוץ מרובה על העומד ?
Learn מגיד משנה for an answer
Learn ר’ חיים על הרמב”ם שבת טז, טז who gives fundamental principles in Hilchos Mechitzas
Click on Right Side of Player to Download the Shiur
Very quickly review the דף מג. “דאיתיה בגבולין (fifteen lines from top of the Amud) until “וסוכה גופא מנלן” (thirteen lines from bottom of the Amud)
Question: Are the disqualifications of the Daled Minim in the Beis Hamikdash all seven days the same as those of the first day of Sukkos?
There is an argument between Tosfos and the Ramban whether the requirement of לכם – to own the Daled Minim – applies for the Daled Minim for the entire Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash
Is there any current practical application of the halacha requirements of Daled Minim in the Beis Hamikdash all seven days of Sukkos even though we don’t have a Beis Hamikdash?
See Mishna .דף מא
Rashi on the Mishna
And פירוש משניות לרמב”ם on the Mishna who argue what area is considered מקדש
The Rambam concludes that each situation individually a צורת הפתח is valid. However when both are combined in a case of an opening wider than 10 Amos and פרוץ מרובה על העומד than it is disqualified.
If each situation independently is valid, why is the combination deadly?
Our Gemara said the source to disqualify a צורת הפתח when there are more openings than closures – פרוץ מרובה על העומד is from the halacha of Rav who rules a צורת הפתח can not close an opening wider than 10 Amos. Since the Rambam concludes a צורת הפתח is valid on an opening wider than 10 Amos where is the source to disqualify it when there is פרוץ מרובה על העומד ?
Learn מגיד משנה for an answer
Learn ר’ חיים על הרמב”ם שבת טז, טז who gives fundamental principles in Hilchos Mechitzas
