The Gemara, in Shabbat, page 10b, is being studied for the well-being of Terez and for the complete recovery of Moshe ben Malka, Rahel bat Rahel, and Daniel ben Esther. May they all be healed among the other sick of Israel.
We begin our discussion on page 10b, starting with the words, "From when does one begin to count?" The Mishnah teaches that a person should not sit down for a haircut before the time for the Mincha prayer. However, if he has already begun the haircut, he does not need to stop for Mincha. The Gemara asks: What constitutes "starting a haircut"? Once the barber places an apron on the client's lap to prevent hair from falling on his clothes, that is considered the beginning of the haircut, and he does not need to stop for Mincha.
Similarly, regarding entering a bathhouse, if one has already begun the process, he may continue. Taking off one's robe is considered the beginning of the bathhouse process. If one goes into a tanning room and has started the process, he does not need to stop for Mincha. What is considered the beginning of the tanning process? When one rolls up and ties back his sleeves in preparation for work. This is already considered the start. And what is considered the beginning of eating, such that if one has started, he does not have to stop? It is when he unties his belt. In ancient times, people would wear tight belts and found it difficult to eat with them on, so they would loosen them. Once a person loosens his belt, that marks the beginning of the meal.
There is no argument on this point; the difference in opinion concerns the customs of the residents of Babylon versus the residents of the Land of Israel. The residents of Babylon used to wear tight belts, so for them, untying the belt signified the beginning of the meal. In the Land of Israel, however, they did not wear tight belts, so the beginning of the meal was marked by ritual hand-washing. This is because the Sages from Babylon were accustomed to wearing tight belts.
According to the opinion that the Arvit prayer is optional, once a person has untied his belt to begin a meal, we do not trouble him to put his belt back on to pray. While it is commendable to pray Arvit, if he has already untied his belt, we do not impose the burden of putting it back on. However, according to the opinion that Arvit is obligatory, we would require him to put his belt back on and pray.
The Gemara then asks about the Mincha prayer. Mincha is obligatory for everyone. Yet, regarding Mincha, it states that if one has started a meal, he does not need to interrupt it. If, concerning Arvit, which some consider optional, there is a discussion about whether to make him put his belt back on, why, when it comes to Mincha, which is universally obligatory, do we allow him to continue eating once he has untied his belt? Why do we permit him to finish eating for Mincha but not for Arvit, even though both are obligatory? The Gemara explains that "starting a meal" means from when he takes off his belt.
The Gemara offers several answers. First, it suggests the concern of drunkenness. People generally do not get drunk during Mincha time. Therefore, if he unties his belt and begins to eat, we are not worried he will become intoxicated and unable to pray Mincha afterwards. We trust he will pray Mincha once he finishes eating. However, during a dinner meal, which precedes Arvit, people often drink wine. If we allow him to finish dinner first, he might become drunk and be unable to pray. Therefore, in that case, we instruct him to put his belt back on and pray first.
A second answer is that Mincha has a fixed, limited time. A person is therefore apprehensive about missing the deadline. So, even if you allow him to eat, he will be careful to pray Mincha on time. Arvit, however, can be prayed throughout the entire night. Because of this extended timeframe, a person might become complacent and delay the prayer, ultimately neglecting it. Therefore, regarding Arvit, we are stricter than with Mincha.
Rav Sheshet asks: What is the great burden in putting one's belt back on? If the beginning of eating is defined by untying the belt, what is the big deal about putting it back on? The Gemara then raises another question: Why can't he pray without a belt? Since when is a belt required for prayer? The Gemara answers that one must prepare to pray to God, and part of the preparation is to pray with a belt to separate the upper and lower parts of the body, which is a sign of respect.
The Gemara relates similar stories about the Sages. Rav Nachman would put on his slippers or special shoes before praying, as one must prepare to pray to God and cannot pray barefoot. Rav Ashi would remove his rabbinical robe, not wanting to stand before God in an overly distinguished manner, but rather with humility. He would fold his hands together as if bound, demonstrating tremendous fear of God, standing like a servant before his master. When the world was under stress and pressure, he would remove his esteemed rabbinical robe, tie his hands together, and pray like a servant. However, when there was peace in the world, he would put on his robe and cover his head with his tallit before praying, as it was more important to dress properly to greet God. Thus, his conduct depended on the situation.
Rabbi Yirmiyah was once praying at great length in his Amidah prayer. Rabbah said to him: "You are leaving eternity (the study of Torah) and getting involved in temporary matters!" Prayer is for this world, for Olam HaZeh, while Torah is for Olam HaBa. You are leaving Olam HaBa for Olam HaZeh. Rabbah believed that each time has its own purpose: a time for prayer and a time for Torah study, each in its proper moment.
On another occasion, Rabbi Yirmiyah was sitting before Rabbi Zerach, studying Torah. When the time for prayer arrived, they were still learning. Rabbi Yirmiyah jumped up and ran to pray. Rabbi Zerach said: "One who removes his ears from hearing Torah will be despised!" This implies that even though praying is a good deed, one should continue studying Torah when in the middle of a lesson.
The Gemara continues: Once a court session begins, one does not have to stop. What constitutes the beginning of a court session? One opinion says it is when the judges put on their robes. Another opinion says it is when the litigants begin to present their cases. There is no argument; it depends on the situation. If they were already judging cases, they would already have their robes on, so the beginning is when the litigants present their case. But if they were not judging, the beginning of the first case is marked by putting on their robes.
The Sages would study Torah in the Beit Midrash, next to the beams that supported it. They would bend at the threshold of the door and announce: "Court is open! Whoever needs a judgment, whoever needs to sit in court, let them come now, and the court will hear their case." They would sit in court all day, becoming hungry and weak. It is said about Moshe Rabbeinu that he judged the people from morning until evening. Do you think this means literally from morning to night? When would he study Torah if he was busy judging people? The verse does not mean this literally; it teaches a lesson: Any judge who renders a true judgment, even for one hour of the day, is considered as if he became a partner with the Holy One, Blessed Be He, in the work of creation. How do we know this? It is written about Moshe, "And he stood over the people from morning until evening." And regarding the creation of the world, it says, "And there was evening, and there was morning, one day." This is a perfect sign for the Parashat Bereishit that we read today. You see that it does not mean one must judge the entire day; it is enough to judge even for one hour, so long as it is a true judgment. It is as if you become a partner in the creation of the world.
Until when do judges sit in court? When do they break for lunch? Until the time of the fourth hour. The first hour starts at six o'clock. How do we know that judges and Sages have a specific time to eat? Because it says in the verse: "Woe to you, O land, whose king is a youth, and whose princes eat in the morning." This is not the right thing for Sages to do. "Fortunate is the land whose king is noble, and whose princes eat at the proper time, for strength and not for drunkenness." This means their strength is in the strength of wisdom, that they are always learning and not involved in drinking wine. But you see that there is a proper time to eat, not right when they wake up in the morning, but later in the day. So, there was a specific time for the Sages to eat.
The Gemara says: The first hour of the morning is for gluttonous people. The second hour is for thieves. The third hour is for heirs, people who inherited a lot of wealth and do not have to work much, so they sleep a little in the morning and eat right away when they get up. The fourth hour is for workers who work for a householder. The fifth hour is when everyone eats. The Gemara says: I told him the fourth hour is for everyone. The Gemara says: Okay, let's change it. The fourth hour is for all people, the fifth hour is for workers, and the sixth hour is for Sages. So, the sixth hour is clearly the time Sages used to eat. But if you eat after the sixth hour, it is like throwing a rock into a barrel of wine. It does not benefit you, even though the wine might rise a little. The Gemara says: When did we say that eating after that hour does not benefit? If you did not taste anything in the morning. However, if you tasted something in the morning, then it is okay to eat even after that time.
The Gemara says that a person can even pray in a bathhouse. We need to analyze this because there are three rooms in a bathhouse. The Gemara will say there is the outer room where people sit dressed. Then there is the inner room where some people are dressed and some are undressed. And then there is the actual bathhouse itself where people are totally undressed. The Gemara discusses a contradiction from a Baraita: If a person enters the bathhouse, if it is the outer room where people are dressed, he can read the Shema, he can pray, and he can even say "Shalom" there. If he is wearing his Tefillin, he does not have to take them off. However, in the middle room, where some people are dressed and some are undressing, he can say "Shalom," but he cannot read the Shema or pray. If he is wearing his Tefillin already, he does not have to take them off, but he cannot put Tefillin on because it is not a fully covered place. But in the actual bathhouse itself, where people are standing without any clothes on, he cannot say "Shalom," he cannot read the Shema, and he has to take off his Tefillin. So, what are you telling me, that a person is able to pray in the bathhouse? Here it says it depends on where you are. What if we are talking about an empty bathhouse, with nobody there? It is a place designated for people to be undressed. It does not matter whether there are people there or not. Or, simply, a bathroom, even if there is no one in that spot, you still cannot read the Shema and pray. The Gemara says: You know what Rabbah was talking about? A new bathhouse that was never used before. The Gemara asks: What do you mean, it was never used? If it was designated, perhaps that is enough. Ravinah had a big question: If you designated a bed but did not use it, is the designation enough to prohibit prayer, or only actual use? We never answered this question. This is the same question regarding a bathhouse: if you just designated it as a bathhouse but never used it yet. So how can you automatically say that it is a new bathhouse and we are allowed to pray in it? This was a question by a latrine; similarly, it should be the same question by a bathhouse. The Gemara says: No, no, perhaps the term "latrine" implies something disgusting. The name "latrine" really implies waste. However, just because you call it a bathhouse, "bathhouse" is not a bad name. So, it could be that the question we had about a latrine, whether designation is significant or not, might not apply to a bathhouse. Therefore, a new bathhouse could be permissible for a person to pray there, even if a person designated it.
Rav Huna comes along and says: In the actual bathhouse, a person is not allowed to say "Shalom" to his friend. Why not? Because it is written, "And He called it Hashem Shalom." God's name is "Shalom." So, you see that "Shalom" is one of the names of the Holy One, Blessed Be He. So, we cannot say it in the bathhouse. The point of this is that we should not be able to say the word "emunah" (faith) in a latrine. Why? Because it is written, "God is the God of truth." If you tell me that is true, it is permissible to say. So, what is the difference between the word "emunah" and the word "Shalom"? The Gemara says: God is not called "Ne'eman" (faithful); He is called "Elaha Mehemnah" (the faithful God). However, when it comes to "Shalom," the name itself is "Shalom." "Shalom" is an actual name.
Before you give a person a gift, you should tell him that you are going to give him a gift. Why? Because he might be embarrassed to receive a gift, but if you talk to him beforehand, you will appease him, and he will accept the gift nicely. When God was giving Shabbat to the Children of Israel, the verse says, "You shall know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you." God tells Moshe Rabbeinu, "Keep the Shabbat and go tell the people, 'You shall know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you.'" I am coming to tell them that I want to give them holiness. The Gemara says: "You shall know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you." You should know that I am the God who sanctifies you. I have a special gift in My treasure, the Shabbat. The Holy One, Blessed Be He, refers to Shabbat as a precious gift, a treasure of God, and I want to give this gift to the people of Israel. Go tell them. That is why it says, "Go tell them."
If you gave bread to your friend's child who came over to play, and the mother fed him, you should tell the other mother that you fed him. How do you tell the other mother? Take some oil and rub it on the kid's face, or take some blue makeup and put it on the kid's face. The mother will say, "Hey, what happened to your face?" And the kid will say, "Oh yeah, the lady gave me bread to eat; she put that on my face." And that will be an indication that the other mother will find out that a gift was given. But today, if a kid comes home with oil on his head, people will think it was witchcraft, and therefore we are not going to do that today. So, what should you do? Whatever they were eating, put a little of that food on the kid's face. If it was a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, put peanut butter and jelly on his face. And the kid comes home and says, "Oh, where did you eat? You ate something." And therefore, it will make peace because the people will know that you did that.
And they said: We have a contradiction. You give a gift to your friend, you do not have to tell him. It is written that Moshe did not know that his face was glowing. He did not know his face was glowing because God did not tell him. So, you see, you do not have to tell him. The Gemara says: It all depends. On something that is going to be revealed anyway, you do not have to tell him. Moshe was going to figure it out eventually that his face was glowing; somebody was going to tell him. However, on something that people are never going to figure out, therefore, you have to tell them. The Gemara says: What do you mean? Everybody knew there was going to be Shabbat. So, what does that mean, to tell Moshe Rabbeinu to tell him the secret of Shabbat? It is a gift that is going to be revealed. Rabbah says: You are right, the reward is not going to be revealed. Which means, go tell him the reward of the Shabbat. That is what the secret was, what God was telling him. Even though the people knew that they had to keep Shabbat, the reward was not known.
Rav Chisda was a Kohen. How do we know Rav Chisda was a Kohen? We learned in the second chapter of Berakhot that there were eighty brothers who were Kohanim who married eighty sisters. The Gemara said that they searched in the whole town and found only the daughters of Rav Chisda. That means they were the daughters of a Kohen. Eighty Kohanim married eighty sisters, and they only found the daughters of Rav Chisda. So, we see that Rav Chisda was indeed a Kohen. It says he had the priestly gifts because he was a Kohen. He used to give the gifts from animals. When you slaughter an animal, the foreleg, the cheeks, and the stomach go to the Kohen; that is his gift. So, he was holding onto his gift; he could do whatever he wanted. He used to give even to Israelites. So, what happened? He made an announcement: "Anybody who can tell me a new insight in the name of Rav, I will give him this gift." He loved Rav's Torah teachings. He said, "This insight: 'If you want to give a gift to your friend, you should tell him.'" So, the Gemara says: "You love Rav's insights so much?" He tells him: "Yes, I love it. That is what Rav said." A coat made of the wool of a young sheep that was just born, the wool is very, very fine. He says: "It is very precious to one who is accustomed to wearing it. The people who are accustomed to wearing it appreciate its value. So too, you, you are a student of Rav, and therefore you appreciate his statements. It is a beauty." Rav Chisda also said: "I tell them like this: Even more than the first one, I would give it to you as well."
Now there is a problem here, because if you remember, we learned in Masechet Berakhot that there are certain customs that we accepted. One of the customs we accepted is that nowadays, Kohanim do not receive the gift of the first shearings of wool. In the old times, in the Temple, they would get it, but outside the Land of Israel, there is no gift of first shearings. That is what the Gemara said there. So, what do you mean? And he is getting priestly gifts? The first wool, or the first part of the animal (the foreleg, cheeks, and stomach) is the same thing. So, what was Rav Chisda doing? Rashi asked this question. Let us read Rashi inside. This is a long Rashi but it explains all these concepts. Rav Chisda had the two gifts of the animal: the foreleg, the cheeks, and the stomach, which also go to the Kohen. "Give it to me, sir." Do not learn from this Gemara that there is still a concept of priestly gifts that you have to give these parts to the Kohanim, because the Gemara said that the custom today is like the three old rabbis. We follow the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda in a certain law when it comes to diverse kinds of seeds and when it comes to going to the ritual bath for a man who had a seminal emission. And what did Rabbi Elai say? He said: So if it is not customary outside the Land of Israel, what was Rav Chisda doing getting gifts outside the Land of Israel? Even though he was only talking about Rav Chisda, it applies to gifts as well. We are forced to say that in Rav Chisda's time, it was not customary yet to follow Rabbi Elai. This means that the custom of Rav Chisda came after he accepted gifts. But after it changed, in the times of Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, they followed Rabbi Elai regarding the first shearings, but not regarding the other gifts. They did not yet accept that. But today, the custom is not to accept even the other gifts. We follow Rabbi Elai on all priestly gifts because they do not accept them outside the Land of Israel. Just as they had the custom regarding the first shearings, we do not change the custom. Therefore, do not bring me a proof that that was before the world was not like Rabbi Elai from the Gemara that said.
The Gemara concludes: A person should not favor one son over another son, even for a small amount, two silver coins' weight of wool. Jacob gave Joseph a coat of many colors, more than the other brothers. As a result of that little extra favoritism that Jacob gave to Joseph, it caused jealousy and caused them to go down to Egypt. Look at this Rashi; it is very interesting here. "Two silver coins' weight" is a very small amount of wool; it does not sound like it was a coat of many colors. So, the Rashi says that does not mean a small amount, it is more than that. The "coat of many colors" (Ketoret Pasim), "pas" comes from "pasiyat," which is the palm of the hand. Everybody got a coat of many colors, but Jacob stitched that little extra fabric so it reached the palm of Joseph's hands. So, for that little extra fabric, when the brothers saw he had a little extra sleeve length that was able to cover his hands, that already caused the jealousy. So, it was not that he got a special coat, but because he got a little extra sleeve length, not the entire coat. Blessed is the Lord forever. Amen.