The tractate of Megilla, on Daf Yud-Zayin, is dedicated by Zalman and Simcha Jamal in honor of the rabbi's parents, for their good health and contentment from all their descendants, Amen, may it be His will. We are on Daf Yud-Zayin, discussing a section that states that as long as Yaakov Avinu was learning in Yeshivat Shem V'Ever, or more accurately, Yeshivat Ever (since Shem was not alive then), he was not punished for not fulfilling the commandment of honoring his father and mother. Obviously, he could not fulfill this commandment if he was not home. He was, however, held responsible for the twenty-two years he spent collectively at Lavan's house and then until he came home, years during which he did not respect his father because he was not present. For this, the Creator of the World punished him with the story of Yosef, who was taken from him for twenty-two years, a measure for a measure. But in this reckoning, the fourteen years he spent in the yeshiva were, for some reason, not held against him.
The Gemara first needs to show us that he did indeed spend fourteen years in Yeshivat Shem V'Ever. If you look at Parshat Vayetzei, there is no mention of this; it simply states, "Yaakov left Beer Sheva and went to Charan," where Lavan lived. You don't see any pit stop, certainly not a significant fourteen-year one, nor any mention of him going to the yeshiva. So the Gemara now provides the calculation to demonstrate these missing fourteen years in Yaakov Avinu's life, years which we assume Yaakov spent in the yeshiva. How do we do this? The Gemara states, "Amar Mar, why are the years of Yishmael enumerated?" Yishmael was a wicked person, so there is no need to know the years he lived. The Torah tells us Yishmael's years only so we can figure out the lives of the righteous, "to attribute to them the years of Yaakov." Rashi explains that by counting Yishmael's years, we can determine at what stage in Yaakov's life various events occurred—how old he was when he left his father's house, when he married, and so on. From these calculations, Rashi continues, we learn that Yaakov served in the house of Ever for fourteen years. How so? Avraham was eighty-six years old when Yishmael was born. When Yitzchak was born, Avraham was one hundred. This means Yishmael was fourteen years old at Yitzchak's birth. Yitzchak preceded Yaakov by sixty years, as the verse states, "Yitzchak was sixty years old when he fathered them." Therefore, when Yaakov Avinu was born, Yishmael was seventy-four years old. This is a simple calculation. That is all we need to know for now. As it is written, "These are the years of Yishmael: one hundred and thirty-seven years." How much older was Yishmael than Yitzchak? Fourteen years. As it is written, "Avraham was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore Yishmael to Avram," and "Avraham was one hundred years old when his son Yitzchak was born to him." This places Yishmael at fourteen years old at that point. And it is written, "Yitzchak was sixty years old when he fathered them." Thus, maintaining the fourteen-year difference between Yitzchak and Yishmael, if Yitzchak was sixty, Yishmael was seventy-four years old when Yaakov was born. How old was Yishmael when Yaakov was born? Seventy-four. So we have the seventy-four. How many years are still missing from Yishmael's life? We know Yishmael lived to 137. We are at seventy-four. The gap is sixty-three years. We need to account for sixty-three more years of Yishmael's life. It is taught in a traditional teaching that Yaakov Avinu was sixty-three years old when he received the blessing from his father. This means Yishmael must have died exactly at that time. When Yaakov was zero, Yishmael was seventy-four. So when Yaakov was sixty-three, Yishmael's years ran out. And at that very moment, Yishmael died. How do we know he died then? Because right after the blessings, Esav went to get married. Where did Esav go to get married? He went to Yishmael. But look how careful the Torah is with its language: "Esav saw that he blessed his brother, and Esav went to Yishmael and took a girl." Who did he take? "Machalat, daughter of Yishmael." But she is also "sister of Nevayot." Why do I need to know she is the sister of Nevayot? Once you tell me she is the daughter of Yishmael, isn't it obvious she is the sister of Nevayot? This teaches that Yishmael betrothed her and then died. Esav went to Yishmael, so Yishmael was still alive and welcomed him. He took his daughter Machalat, and then before the seven blessings, Yishmael passed away. So, you see from this that Yaakov was sixty-three years old when Yishmael died. And Nevayot, her brother, married her off. So Yaakov is sixty-three years old. Now we need to account for Yaakov's life. Yaakov lived to 147. So the Gemara says, "And fourteen more until Yosef was born." This is because Yaakov worked for Lavan for two periods of seven years each. After he worked for seven and seven, he married, and then Yosef was born. Why fourteen more years until Yosef was born? Rashi explains that it is written, "I served you fourteen years for your two daughters." We know that he worked fourteen years for his two wives. And when Yosef was born, his years of service were complete. Although he married Rachel after seven years, he worked an additional seven years, and Yosef was born after the second set. Why? Because right after it says, "And it was when Rachel had borne Yosef," and "from then on he served for the wages of the flock." The next six years he worked for payment. Therefore, we know that Yosef was born fourteen years later. So now we have sixty-three plus fourteen. How old is Yaakov at this point? Seventy-seven. We are trying to reach 147. There will be fourteen years missing somewhere, which we will then plug in as the years he spent in the yeshiva. These are years accounted for in Yaakov Avinu's life. And it is written, "And Yosef was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh." Now we come to Yosef. Yosef, we know, was thirty when he stood before Pharaoh. Yaakov Avinu we have at seventy-seven. So at the point when Yosef was thirty, how old was Yaakov Avinu? One hundred and seven. Beautiful, he is 107 at that point. Also, once Yosef became the viceroy of Egypt, we must count the years of plenty and the years of famine. The seven years of plenty, and then the two years of famine—that is another nine years. Yaakov Avinu is still alive, so we have 107 plus nine, making him 116. So far so good. And it is written, "Pharaoh said to Yaakov, 'How many are the days of the years of your life?' And Yaakov said to Pharaoh, 'The days of the years of my sojournings are one hundred and thirty years.'" He says, "I am 130." Hold on. The way the math works out for us at this point, he cannot be a year or a day older than 116. How can he come along and tell Pharaoh that he was 130? At this point, there are fourteen years that we cannot account for in his life. For everything else, we know exactly where he was at what time. He was sixty-three here, seventy-seven here, 107 here, 116 here. And all of a sudden, he comes along, and we expected him to tell Pharaoh, "I'm 116 years old; I look older than I am." And he says 130. Was he 116? So the Gemara asks, "What do you mean he was 116?" Rather, "Therefore, learn from this that the fourteen years he was in the house of Ever were not counted." So it must be those fourteen years in Shem and Ever, somewhere in his life, that were not counted. The Gemara says, "As it is taught in a Baraita: Yaakov was hidden in the house of Ever for fourteen years." Hidden because he was hiding from Esav. Now, Ever died after Yaakov Avinu went to Aram Naharaim. And he went to Aram Naharaim. "He left there after two years and came to Aram Naharaim." So therefore, he is sixty-three. Let's just plug in the fourteen years at the sixty-three-year mark. He was sixty-three when he left his father's house and stayed there for fourteen years, so he did not get to Aram Naharaim until he was seventy-seven. Right? Sixty-three plus fourteen. So he says, let's read Rashi for a second. Ever died after Yaakov's descent to Aram Naharaim, and he came to Lavan's house and stayed there for two years. What is this talking about? "Go and calculate the years of Ever, and you will find that he died when Yaakov was seventy-nine years old." Ah, so he was seventy-nine, because he left at seventy-seven and then two years later, so Yaakov Avinu was seventy-nine. And this was two years after he came to Lavan's house. And when you count the fourteen years that he served in Ever. Now it says here, "It is found that when he stood at the well, he was seventy-seven years old." Very good. He was sixty-three plus fourteen, he was seventy-seven at the well. And very, very good. What is Ever? Why is that going into Ever with the... just information? Yeah, I don't know what they need that for for this calculation; we don't need to know what happened to Ever. There should be another fourteen, that's where the fourteen are missing. Yeah, no, I got to where the fourteen were, but what's it got to do with Ever? Why do I care when Ever died? Because if you know how old he is, maybe it's another proof. Another proof? I don't know how Ever died. It doesn't tell you how old Ever was. It doesn't tell you. I just know he died two years after Yaakov got to Aram Naharaim. Okay, Blessed be the True Judge. It's a terrible thing. Possibly. I mean, the point is I got the calculation without Ever, but it's a Baraita. The Baraita is giving some facts. Now, is it a fact though that a person could go learn and not do "honor father..." Oh, so now the Gemara's next question is, first of all, who says he didn't get punished, by the way? Who says he didn't get punished? Maybe he didn't get punished for the fourteen years that he's working in Lavan's house? I don't know what fourteen years he didn't get punished for. How do you know it's the fourteen years of...? So the Gemara asks, "And from where do we know that he was not punished?" "As it is taught: Yosef was separated from his father for twenty-two years, just as Yaakov Avinu was separated from his father." So the Gemara says, what? Twenty-two against the twenty-two. Just as Yaakov was away from his father for twenty-two years and did not honor him, so he was punished measure for measure that Yosef would be away from his father for twenty-two years. The Gemara says, wait, he was not away from his father for twenty-two years; "Yaakov's absence was thirty-six years." It is not a measure for a measure. So the Gemara says, "Rather, the stay in the house of Ever was not counted." You see? We are not counting those years. Again, I don't know yet, I know you're not counting fourteen years, that I got clear. But I don't know how the Gemara is so certain that it's the fourteen years of Shem and Ever that was not counted; maybe it was the fourteen years, like I said, when he was working to get married. How was he away thirty-six years? Again, it's very simple. He was away twenty-two plus the fourteen of Shem and Ever. Yosef was thirty-nine when Yaakov saw him, no? Has to be... No, no, but wait, you go slow. We didn't discuss when he came back. He didn't come right back from Aram Naharaim. Oh, two years after he stayed. That we're going to get into that right now. But ultimately, we know that he comes back thirty-six years later. So now thirty-six, but he only got punished for twenty-two of them. So the Gemara comes and asks, "Ultimately, the time in Lavan's house was twenty years." So ostensibly, twenty and fourteen is thirty-four. So where are the missing two years? The Gemara says thirty-six! Where do you get thirty-six? We don't know how to count? It's twenty and fourteen, it's thirty-four! Where are the missing two years? The Gemara says, "Rather, because he delayed on the road for two years." "As it is taught: He left Charan and came to Sukkot." He got to a place called Sukkot. "And he stayed there for eighteen months," three seasons. How do you know? "As it is said, 'And Yaakov journeyed to Sukkot and built himself a house.'" He built a house. Now you only need a house for the winter, so "house" means six months. "And for his livestock he made sukkot." And sukkot you live in the sukkah when? During the summer. So therefore he stayed two summers and one winter, so that's basically eighteen months. "Sukkot" is plural, which is the summertime, and "house" is the wintertime. So we got eighteen months; we are just short six more months to get to two years. "And in Beit El..." Oh, then on the way home he went to Beit El. And what did he do in Beit El? "Six months and he offered sacrifices." He brought offerings in Beit El for six months. Now I'm sure he did more things in Beit El as well, the Maharsha will discuss that, but the point is, so there are your two years, and therefore we only see he got punished for twenty-two. So therefore you see the fourteen of Shem and Ever is not in the calculation. Look at Rashi here: "Twenty-two years, just as Yaakov separated from his father's house and did not honor him, so he mourned for Yosef for twenty-two years." Now we need to do that calculation. How do you know that Yosef was not around for twenty-two years? "How so? Yosef was seventeen years old when he separated from his father," the Torah says. "And when he reigned in Egypt, he was thirty years old," the Torah says, "as it is said, 'And Yosef was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh.'" That is thirteen years already. "And seven of plenty," so that brings you to twenty. "And two of famine." And then Yaakov came down after the two years. Point, that is twenty-two years, and that is when they were reunited. It is taught: "Twenty-two years that Yosef was hidden from his father, and Yaakov stayed twenty years in Lavan's house and fourteen years in Ever's house. Rather, learn from this that the fourteen years of Ever's house were not counted, for he was not punished for them." Now, if you go to the Maharsha, the Maharsha will fill in some of the pertinent information. So now the Maharsha begins: "Why are the years of Yishmael enumerated?" So Rashi said, you know why we don't have to count Yishmael's life? Because he was a wicked person. That's why the Gemara is asking. So Maharsha asks, what do you mean? I thought he repented at the end of his life? "Why are they enumerated? What need do we have to enumerate wicked people? And even though we say in the first chapter of Bava Batra that Yishmael repented, nevertheless, since he was wicked from his beginning, it is not proper to enumerate his years in the Torah except for the sake of Yaakov." That's it, he blew it. He lost his rights for his years to be mentioned since he was wicked from his beginning. And therefore it must be he's only being listed in order to understand Yaakov Avinu. Everything is for the righteous, my friends. "This teaches that Yishmael betrothed her." Now how do you know Yishmael married off Esav, meaning betrothal, and then died? "It was necessary to say that Yishmael betrothed her in his lifetime, for if not, from where do we know to say this, as it is written, 'And Esav went to Yishmael'?" The verse says he went to Yishmael, which sounds like Yishmael was still alive. "Which implies that he went to him in his lifetime to marry the daughter and betrothed her, for if not, why 'to Yishmael'?" If Yishmael wasn't alive, it should just say, "And Esav went to the house of Yishmael." What, "to Yishmael"? Sounds like he was there. So therefore it must be at that very moment he married and then he died, and Yosef finished the item. "And Yaakov was hidden." Now look at this here, this is a beautiful, unbelievable Maharsha here. Stick with me to the end because at the end he's going to reveal some of the most beautiful interpretations you've ever heard in your life. He says here, "And one can ask: if so, from the house of Ever, after he served fourteen years, he went to Aram Naharaim." So it must be what? He stayed in Shem and Ever for fourteen years, then he went to Aram Naharaim. That's what it is. "But the verse is written, 'And Yaakov left Beer Sheva and went to Charan.'" But the verse says not like that. It says he went from Beer Sheva to Charan. "And we say in Masechet Chullin, 'When he reached Charan, he returned to the place of his fathers,' and he just—he retraced his footsteps back to Jerusalem and he had the dream with the ladder." "And a ladder was standing in Beer Sheva," which means the ladder went all the way back to Beer Sheva in his dream. "From all this it is proven that from Beer Sheva he went to Charan." The Torah is very clear: he went from Beer Sheva to Charan, "and not from Beer Sheva to the house of Ever." Maharsha has a problem here. Very nice Gemara, but there is no hint of this in the verse. As a matter of fact, the verses are against it. He didn't go to Ever. "And after fourteen years he went to Charan." "It can be reconciled," look at this novel interpretation here, "that the house of Ever was also in Beer Sheva." You know where Yeshivat Shem V'Ever was? We never discussed this. Maharsha will tell you it was in Beer Sheva. So you know what the simple meaning is? He never left. That's the best trick. When you want to hide from your enemy, you hide right under his nose. You don't go anywhere. He stayed right there in Beer Sheva. So Esav is scouring the whole world; meanwhile, he's right under the table because he stayed in Yeshivat Shem V'Ever in Beer Sheva. So the verse is correct. "And Yaakov left Beer Sheva" after the fourteen years of Shem and Ever, "and went to Charan." And he didn't go anywhere; he stayed in Beer Sheva. "And it is implied from the words of the commentator that he was hidden in Beer Sheva." It means he's hiding. He's hiding. Exactly. Precisely. Precisely. He's hiding. That's the simple meaning. Beautiful. Exactly. Hidden. He was hiding from his—from his brother. You know, so the last place you're going to look is next door. You know, who's going to run away, go next door? Yaakov is clever. Next door is the last place you're going to look. "And he did not leave Beer Sheva at all for the house of Ever," Maharsha says, "but he was hidden in Beer Sheva because of fear of his brother, until fourteen years had passed." Then he left there. Now—now, you know what the amazing thing is here? Amazing thing is, that means he never left the yeshiva. If Esav could be walking around in the street, but for fourteen years he didn't—he didn't leave the yeshiva to see daylight. He stayed literally hidden. That's—quarantine for fourteen days? He stayed quarantined for fourteen years. Now it says here, "And furthermore, they learned," and now watch this here: the hint. "And there is a hint in the words 'Beer Sheva'." If you take the words "And Yaakov left Beer Sheva," look at the words Beer Sheva: "it contains the letters of 'Ever' and 'fourteen'." In the words Beer Sheva, you have the letters Ever and also spells fourteen. So it's coming to tell you: Beer Sheva fourteen. "And furthermore, it appears," not only that, there was another yeshiva in Beer Sheva. You know what yeshiva was in Beer Sheva? Not Porat Yosef. Yeshivat Yitzchak Avinu. So literally, it was like Bnei Brak those days. Beer Sheva was a rolling city with yeshivot. He says, "For his father Yitzchak also had a house of study there," as we say in Yoma, "Yitzchak was old and sat in a yeshiva." "And all three study houses," you had three yeshivot there. You had the yeshiva of Shem, you had the yeshiva of Ever, and you had the yeshiva of Yitzchak. All of them are hinted in the words Beer Sheva. "And that of Ever and that of Yitzchak were in Beer Sheva." "And a hint from Beer Sheva": the letters Shem, Ever, Av (father). Nice! Yeshivat Shem, Yeshivat Ever, the yeshiva of his father. That's "And Yaakov left Beer Sheva." "From Beer Sheva" has a hint of all the names of the three yeshivot that were there. Amazing hint that the Maharsha reveals to us. Now, "And he stayed there eighteen months." He spent eighteen months in Sukkot. And the Maharsha just points out—won't get into the technical part of it—like we learned it, but it says "house," which is a winter, and it says "Sukkot" twice. He's just dealing with a separate issue because it says, "And Yaakov journeyed to Sukkot." He says that "Sukkotah" is not counted as part of the seasons; that's just the name of the city. He went to the place called Sukkot. That's a separate—I don't count that as part of the, you know, tally of another—another time. That's what Maharsha is pointing out there. Right. He went to Sukkot. Right. He went to Sukkot. That's the name of the place. He just says Rashi Chumash doesn't explain like that, and the Re'em takes Rashi to task. Now, "And in Beit El," in Beit El what does it say? He stayed six months. What did he do in Beit El? He brought offerings. So the Maharsha is going to ask: What do you mean? For six months perpetually he just brought offerings all day long? That's not so. In Beit El, by the way, that's when all the fun happened. That's when Shechem happened and with Dinah and all—I mean, a lot of things happened in Beit El. Why is he just saying he just spent six months there bringing offerings? So he says, "And one can ask, why did they attribute all these six missing months to Beit El, that he offered sacrifices there? For how many events happened to him within those six months, which occurred in Sukkot, to Shechem, and Dinah went out, he pitched his tent to Migdal Eder, for all this also happened in those six years before he came to his father? And it can be reconciled that it teaches us that even for six of those six months, when he offered sacrifices, which is a commandment, he was punished for delaying to come to his father and mother." You see? He's saying that even though he was doing a commandment in Beit El, in what do you call it in Beit El, he still got punished for not honoring his father and mother. That's the novel interpretation. Even though part of the time he was there he was bringing offerings, so he could say I went to Beit El to bring offerings, it doesn't matter, he was still liable. "It is somewhat difficult: why was he punished for delaying to offer sacrifices?" Why did he get punished for that? "Since he did it by divine command." God told him to bring the offerings. "Arise, go up to Beit El and make an altar there." Maharsha doesn't answer, and it doesn't answer my question either. You know, how do you know, how do you know that the fourteen years that he didn't get punished was because of Shem and Ever? Maybe it was the fourteen years when he was going to get married that he worked? And the explanation I saw that, because who said he had to work for fourteen years? Who said he had to marry two wives? Marry one wife and go back home. Who told you you have to marry two wives? So he only stayed an extra seven years for Leah? For Rachel? But the point is, right, for the second one. Go home, you got married. So that was already extra. So therefore he's not going to be considered engaged in Torah study. Torah study doesn't get part of the part of the charge. That is the... You're saying he was in Lavan's house but he was involved in procreation for fourteen years? Oh, so why he can't do procreation by Shem and Ever? He can't do procreation by home? He can't take his wife home? If he was engaged in procreation, maybe he's even bigger than Torah study? Right. And yet see not, right, and yet see not because he was also liable for it. I mean he was also hiding, it's not a matter of life and death he can't go back? If you remember yesterday's Maharsha, yesterday's Maharsha, his mother sent for him. His mother sent for him and said, "Okay, I know we told you to go but now we tell you to come back, the coast is clear." And for whatever reason he didn't come back. We have completed Megilla Nikret. Okay, my friends, that is the first chapter, and we did it correctly, every Tosafot in the bank and every Maharsha. On that Maharsha that said he stayed in Beer Sheva fourteen years, do you just have to say Eliphaz waited fourteen years? Eliphaz got him on the way right away. That's why, yes, that's the Chida, that's Rav Chida's famous novel interpretation. Rav Chida says that he was planning on going to get married based on the Gemara that says that if you're a rich man get married first and then and then and then go learn. But once Eliphaz took all his money, so now you follow the other opinion that says "a millstone around his neck and he should engage in Torah study," so he went to learn first and then he went to get married. Okay, my friends, now we move on to the second chapter. "One who reads the Megilla out of order has not fulfilled his obligation." Okay, if you read the Megilla out of order, you have not fulfilled your obligation. You read it out of order and you read chapter two before you read chapter one. No good. The Megilla must be read in order. There's a famous interpretation of one of the Chassidic Rebbes that whenever you do commandments, you're not supposed to do the commandment as if you're paying a debt. You know, it's like some yoke that's on you. Like we learned in Masechet Berachot, "One who makes his prayer a fixed routine, his prayer is not supplication." And Rashi said what does "fixed routine" mean? Well you have to, you know, it's a yoke, I have to pray. So you're never supposed to do that. Now the way to say to pay in Hebrew is what? "Lifro'a." "Lifro'a" means to pay. So "one who reads the Megilla out of order," that you're reading the Megilla as if to pay a debt, "out of order" as if you know it's some tax, "has not fulfilled his obligation." That is, he has not fulfilled his obligation, meaning you didn't use the attitude of how commandments are not supposed to be done. You're not supposed to look at it as a debt, you're supposed to look at it as a privilege. "If he read it by heart," if you read the Megilla by heart, "if he read it in Aramaic," or for that matter any language, "he has not fulfilled his obligation." "But they read it to foreigners in their language that they understand." "And the foreigner who heard it in Ashurit has fulfilled his obligation." Ashurit, which is Hebrew, is type O, it's universal language, anybody can hear it even if he doesn't understand that language. Rashi says, "One who reads it to foreigners, any other language besides the holy tongue is called a foreign language." Right, any language outside of the holy tongue is called a foreign language. "And it is asked against this: 'If he read it in any language, he has not fulfilled his obligation.'" We have a contradiction in the verses here. In the Mishna. You just told me at the beginning, "If he read it in any language, he has not fulfilled his obligation." Then you tell me, but if you read it for a foreigner, he has fulfilled his obligation. How do you, how do you work that? "If he read it intermittently." That doesn't mean you were wearing a knitted kippah. What is the meaning of "if he read it intermittently"? "If he read it intermittently" means that he paused and stopped. That means stop-and-go traffic. He read a little and he stopped. He paused and he stopped. And we'll have to see that that is going to be okay. "And if he was dozing off," he was tired, he did it that day. So he's reading the Megilla dozing off, he has fulfilled his obligation. "If he was writing it," let's say he was a scribe and he's writing the Megilla, and as he's writing it he's reading, "expounding on it," he's giving a discourse on the Book of Esther, "or correcting it," or he's a scribe that's correcting, "if he intended," he has intention to fulfill the Megilla as well, he has fulfilled his obligation, "but if not," he has not fulfilled his obligation. We'll see that if maybe this could be a proof to the principle that commandments require intention or not. Stay tuned. "If it was written with sam," if let's say these are types of ink. Let's say they wrote the Megilla in a type of ink that's called sam, sikra, kumos, kankantom, "or on paper," not on parchment, "or diphtera," as a different type of parchment, "he has not fulfilled his obligation." It's got to be written in a very specific way, "until it is written in Ashurit on parchment and with ink," which is the black ink. The Gemara begins: "From where are these matters derived?" What's "from where are these matters derived"? "From where are these matters derived"? Whenever we have "from where are these matters derived," we're always looking for a source from the Torah. And what are we trying to source here? Rava said, "The verse says, 'according to their writing and according to their time.'" How do you know that you cannot read the Megilla out of order? How do you know you have to read the Megilla in order? So the Gemara says it's a verse, "according to their writing and according to their time." Just like time goes in order, so too the Megilla must be in order. We're making an analogy between the writing of the Megilla and the time. "Just as their time is not out of order," time doesn't go out of order, "so too their writing is not out of order." But the only problem is, who's talking about writing the Megilla? We're talking about reading the Megilla. So the Gemara asks: "Is reading written?" "Here, doing is written." Which means here it does not mention reading, it mentions doing. So the Gemara says again, "Is reading written? Here, doing is written." It doesn't say reading, it says doing, meaning you have to celebrate the days of Purim like it says, "as it is written, 'to do these two days.'" Yes, you have to make the days, the fourteenth and the fifteenth, whatever the days are. But where do you see from here that the Megilla itself is read? We're not talking about reading this verse, we're talking about making the holiday of Purim. "Rather, from another verse, from here: as it is written, 'And these days are remembered and done.'" Here we go. Now "remembered" is to read the Megilla, how you commemorate Purim you read the Megilla. So there's an analogy between celebrating, which is "done," and "remembered." "Remembrance is compared to doing." "Just as doing is not out of order?" Well, doing, obviously the fourteenth comes before the fifteenth, it comes in order the days, "so too remembrance is not out of order." So too the remembrance has to be in order. Rashi says, "Just as their time is not out of order, for it is impossible for the fifteenth to come before the fourteenth." Obviously the fifteenth cannot come before the fourteenth. Now the Gemara comes along and says, "It is taught: And so with Hallel." Okay, Hallel also has to be read in order. "And so with Shema Yisrael," also in order, "and with prayer." So we have four items: we have Megilla, we have Hallel, we have Shema Yisrael, and we have the Amidah. Now we're going to go one at a time. "From where do we know Hallel?" How do you know that Hallel has to be in order? Because it says, Rava said, "As it is written, 'From the rising of the sun to its setting, the name of Hashem is praised.'" I praise God like the sun rises. The sun rises in order. "From the rising of the sun" from the east and sets in the west. So just like there's an order of the cycle of the sun, it goes in order its path, so too the Hallel is in order. Another verse. Rav Yosef said, "'This is the day Hashem has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it.'" Just like the day goes in order, the day, "this day," the day follows order, the hours follow an order, so too Hallel also follows in order. Rav Avya said, "'May the name of Hashem be blessed.'" Now what does that mean, "May the name of Hashem be blessed"? Rashi: "As it is, so shall the praise of Hashem and His blessing be in its order." Which means just like the name of Hashem is in order, Y-H-V-H, so too you should praise Hashem. "May the name of Hashem be blessed" that when you're praising Hashem it should be like His name, which means in order. And Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, and some say Rav Acha bar Yaakov, said from here: "'From now and forever.'" That's the time from here until eternity, which means what? Goes in order. So therefore the same, the same item. Now, Shema Yisrael, "As it is taught: Shema Yisrael according to its writing, the words of Rabbi." Now we get to a fantastic dispute, we saw this in Berachot if you remember. Shema Yisrael, what language could you read the Shema Yisrael in? So the first opinion comes along and says "according to its writing," meaning in the holy tongue. Rashi: "In the holy tongue and not in another language." You can't read, you know, the Shema Yisrael in English. You gotta read it in the original. That's the opinion of Rabbi. "And the Sages say, 'in any language.'" And the Sages say Shema Yisrael in any language. "What is Rabbi's reason?" Now let's go, my friends, hold onto your heads here. What's the reason of Rabbi? "The verse says, 'And they shall be.'" "And these words shall be." "And they shall be" which teaches us what? As they are. "They shall be in their original form." And how are they? They're in Hebrew. So therefore don't change 'em. "And the Rabbanan say in any language." "What is their reason?" "The verse says, 'Hear.'" What does "Hear" teach me? "Hear" means understand. "In any language that you understand." So therefore we have a big dispute. What's the main word here? Is the word "And they shall be" or is the word "Hear"? The Gemara says, "And Rabbi too, is 'Hear' not written?" Oh, Rabbi, what do you do with the word "Hear" that teaches us in any language that you understand? No, "That is needed to teach: 'Let your ear hear what you utter with your mouth.'" Which means let your ears hear what you're saying, which means you have to read the Shema Yisrael in an audible fashion. That's what we learn from "Hear." Not in any language. We learned that you have to just say it audibly so they hear it. "And the Rabbanan hold?" What do the Rabbis hold? "Like one who says: 'One who reads Shema Yisrael but does not make it audible to his ear has fulfilled his obligation.'" They hold that that's not indispensable, that it's not indispensable. Rabbi must hold it's indispensable. "Hear." "And the Rabbanan" use the "Hear" for something else. So they hold like the other opinion that says what? "One who reads Shema Yisrael but does not make it audible to his ears has fulfilled his obligation." Now let's go the other way. "And the Rabbanan too, is 'And they shall be' not written?" What do the Rabbis do with "And they shall be"? Because "And they shall be" is what, coming to tell me as they are? "He would say to you: That is needed for 'that he should not read it out of order.'" "And they shall be" as they are, in order. Don't read the Shema Yisrael out of order. So the Gemara comes along and says, and Rashi says, "Thus, Shema Yisrael is not read out of order." That's the proof, by the way. All this was to bring this. This is what we need for. We're not in the discussion of Shema Yisrael in any language, we're in the discussion of not being able to read Shema Yisrael out of order. We found it. From the fact that it says "And they shall be" by Shema Yisrael, that's how we know it's got to be in order. "And Rabbi, from where does he know that it should not be read out of order?" Where does Rabbi know that you can't, because he learned from "And they shall be" it's got to be read in Hebrew? "From 'the words, these words.'" Oh, the extra "hei." It says "And these words shall be." So "ha," the extra "hei" comes and teaches me as they are. So the Gemara's "And the Rabbanan do not interpret 'the words, these words.'" They don't go with that extra "hei." So therefore they don't have it, so therefore they learn it from "And they shall be." So comes the Gemara and says, "To say that Rabbi holds that the entire Torah was said in any language?" Now we get to the famous discussion. When the Torah was given at Mount Sinai to read on Mondays and Thursdays and on Sabbaths, which language was it given to read in? So the Rabbis are coming to say according to Rabbi must be that the Torah was given to be read in any language. Why? Because that's why I need a special verse by Shema Yisrael to say but this item's got to be done in Hebrew. If the whole Torah was given to be read in the holy tongue, so what do you need a special interpretation by Shema Yisrael? Isn't Shema Yisrael part of the Torah? Rather, it must be the Torah was given to be read in any language, and that's why you need a special interpretation by Shema Yisrael to say "And they shall be," but Shema Yisrael's got to be the different. Now if you saw when it says "in any language it was said," a very important Rashi: "to read it in any language." He's talking about reading a Torah scroll. Okay. Tosafot will ask a bomb question in a second. If you want to look at the top of the Tosafot. "The commentary of the Kuntres is that it was given to be read in any language one wishes to read in a Torah scroll." Now that can't be, my friends, because the reading of the Torah scroll was instituted by Ezra the Scribe. It was not given at Mount Sinai. There was no reading of a Torah scroll in those days. So how can Rashi say that the Torah was given in any language to read? There was no reading. Reading came after. Understand the Tosafot's question? So Tosafot has a different answer: "And it seems that this is the interpretation: any reading in the Torah, such as the commandment of chalitzah, the section of the beheaded calf, the confession of tithes and first fruits." Oh, see, there are certain items that they have to recite from the Torah. These recitations... For example, in the chalitzah ceremony, the lady has to say, "My brother-in-law does not want to," and he has to say, or the confession of first fruits, "I have not eaten in my mourning," etcetera, "My father was a perishing Aramean," certain items, the section of the beheaded calf, "Atone for Your people Israel whom You have redeemed," understand? So the Tosafot is learning "the entire Torah was given in any language" to say these recitations, and those recitations are indeed from the Torah. So anyway, back to the story, the Gemara is going to come along and say that must be the Torah was given over in any language, that's why Rabbi has a special verse of "And they shall be" to come and tell me that Shema Yisrael is the exception. So he says, "For if you would think that it was said in the holy tongue," because if you're going to tell me that the Torah can be only in the holy tongue, "why do I need to write 'And they shall be'?" What do you need "And they shall be" for? So the Gemara is going to say very simple, you know why I need "And they shall be"? To offset "Hear." Because it says the word "Hear" also, and I would have thought that "Hear" is in any language, so I got "And they shall be" to offset the "Hear." "It is needed, lest you think 'Hear' is like the Rabbanan." I would have thought maybe the "Hear" like the Rabbanan that say in any language, "therefore the Merciful One wrote 'And they shall be.'" Now we go the other way, "Let us say that the Rabbanan hold that the entire Torah was said in the holy tongue." Must be according to the Rabbanan the Torah was given what? In the holy tongue. That's why you need a verse by Shema Yisrael to say but Shema Yisrael you can do in any language. So he says, "For if you would think that it was said in any language," because if the Torah was given in any language, "why do I need to write 'Hear'?" And why do you have to single it out? The whole Torah is given in any language. And you know why? To offset "And they shall be." "It is needed, lest you think I would say 'And they shall be' is like Rabbi, the Merciful One wrote 'Hear.'" So therefore you have no proof to what they hold regarding the way the Torah was given, rather I could even say that they held the Torah was given either in any language or not, and you just needed the verses by Shema Yisrael to offset the other interpretation. Now look at the second Tosafot here, my friends. "For if it was said in the holy tongue, why do I need to write?" Difficult. "In which are they said?" Tosafot brings us to Masechet Sotah. "The verse is needed both for one who says it was said in any language and for one who says it was said in the holy tongue." You look over there in Masechet Sotah, it's telling us in the Mishna there, "These are said in any language," these items could be said in any language, "and these are said" only in the holy tongue there. And the Gemara doesn't get involved like it got involved here. But wait, is it going for one who says it was said in any language or not? Here, the Gemara right away jumped onto that. There the Gemara just quotes Mishna that says these items are in any language, it's a list. And these items are in the holy tongue. Why didn't the Gemara go over there and start discussing and it gives verses, by the way? It shows verses for each one. So why didn't the Gemara get involved and say hey but this is going according to that opinion that says it was said in any language? So Tosafot answers, "And it can be said that there it was establishing additions according to all opinions." That Mishna was going according to all opinions. No matter what you come out on, whether it was said in any language or in the holy tongue, "for one who says it was said in any language, a verse is needed to include the holy tongue, and for one who says it was said in the holy tongue, a verse is needed to include any language." That's what Tosafot is answering. Over there the Gemara brought verses for everything. It brought verses for the "in any language" items and it brought verses for the "holy tongue" items. You following so far? Let's say there's seven items in the Mishna. It says these items are brought only in the holy tongue and it reads verses. And these items can be read in any language and it brings verses. Tosafot saying, "Alternatively, if you hold the Torah's 'in the holy tongue it was said,' you don't need those verses of the holy tongue." They were only written for the other Rabbi. And if you hold the Torah's "in any language," you don't need, so therefore the Gemara wasn't getting, the Gemara is going according to all opinions and it knew over there that you don't need verses for everything, but it's being brought just to cover both both opinions. Understand what the Tosafot says. Okay now the Gemara, look, we have a Tosafot on the first page, my friends. Let's just do this Tosafot. Very important Tosafot. "One who reads the Megilla." The Rabbanan say, "The verse says 'Hear,' one who reads 'Hear' out of order." "He has not fulfilled his obligation," or "he has fulfilled his obligation." So the Gemara says what what did it say in our Gemara here? "He has not fulfilled his obligation." "It appears that the halacha is like the Sages." So he comes along and says it seems that the halacha is going to be like the opinion of the Sages. "And furthermore, it says, 'And the Rabbanan hold like one who says: One who reads Shema Yisrael but does not make it audible to his ear has fulfilled his obligation.'" And he's discussing here in any language. That's the Tosafot's intention, not out of order. We have a dispute here: can Shema Yisrael be read in any language or not. So he says we're going to hold like the Rabbanan. And what did Rabbanan say? That Shema Yisrael indeed can be read in any language. How do we know that? So Tosafot says because with the rabbis themselves hold that "one who reads Shema Yisrael but does not make it audible to his ear has fulfilled his obligation." So that's the proof that they must be learning that the word "Hear" is not coming to teach me the audible law, but "Hear" is coming to teach me the understanding law, which means any language. Again, first of all, he says, "This is an individual opinion in a place of many." We're going to follow the Rabbis' opinion in any language because it's a dispute between Rabbanan and the Rebbe. Obviously, "individual versus many, the halacha is like the many." "And furthermore, since the Rabbanan rely on the opinion that one who reads Shema Yisrael but does not make it audible to his ear has fulfilled his obligation, in Masechet Berachot we conclude like the first Tanna of Rabbi Yosei who said so there." And in Gemara Berachot we hold like that opinion as well, which is Rabbi Yosei. And therefore, from all that we see what? That the halacha is going to be like the Rabbanan that say "one who reads Shema Yisrael" Shema Yisrael is in any language. Okay, how are we doing on time, my friends? We good? 41. Beautiful, my friends. We now move on. "From where do we know prayer?" Famous Gemara, my friends. How do we know prayer has to be in order? "As it is taught: Shimon HaPakoli." That's the Rabbi called Shimon HaPakoli. Rashi says he was involved in cotton, so therefore Pakoli is cotton. So therefore Shimon HaPakoli "arranged the eighteen blessings before Rabban Gamliel in order." He put the blessings in order of the Amidah in front of Rabban Gamliel in Yavne. "Rabbi Yochanan said, and some say in a Baraita, it is taught: 120 elders." There were 120 elders, "and among them several prophets, instituted the eighteen blessings in order." That Shimon HaPakoli did not write the Amidah, and he really didn't even put it in order. It's the Men of the Great Assembly who did that; he just came back and maybe gave the proofs why the order should be as the Rabbis did it. He just sourced it, or they forgot it and then he re-established it. Now the Gemara comes along and says, let's look at Tosafot for a second, my friends. So what does it mean here "in order"? That sounds like the Amidah has an order. Tosafot already comes along and says, "From here it is difficult against what Rashi explained in Berachot regarding the middle blessings having no order." There's a Gemara in Berachot, that's not Rashi's problem, it's a Gemara in Berachot that says "the middle blessings have no order." And how did Rashi explain "they have no order"? "He explained that if one erred in one of the blessings and forgot one of them, he must return and say that blessing he forgot in the place where he remembered it, and complete his prayer." Which means let's say a guy is in the middle of praying the Amidah and he's in "Tishkon" and he remembers he didn't say "Barech Aleinu." So let him go back to "Barech Aleinu" and then continue from "Tishkon." So therefore you can be out of order. That's how he learns the Gemara. But what are you talking about? It says in this Gemara here that you made "prayer in order." And we're learning that what? That the Amidah has to be done in order. That's one of the things that we're learning here. So how can Rashi learn over there in Gemara Berachot that when it says "they have no order," it means you can go out of order? So Tosafot says, "And it is difficult, for if so, he is saying the eighteen blessings out of order." You're reading them out of order. "And here, Shimon HaPakoli instituted them in order." Understand his question? We just read that Shimon HaPakoli came along and gave the order of the Amidah. Now I understand there's a Gemara that says "they have no order," but we have to square it off. The way Rashi did it, Tosafot says, they're at odds with each other. But he said, "I can square it off, but it's not at odds." "Rather, it seems to explain there 'they have no order' means it is not like the first three and last three blessings, where one returns to the beginning of the three if he erred in one of them." Which means normally how do you learn the first three blessings of the Amidah? The first three blessings of the Amidah are a set. It's a one unit. And therefore let's say a guy messes up in "Ata Kadosh" and he says "Ha'el HaKadosh" instead of "HaMelech HaKadosh." He doesn't go back to "Ata Kadosh." You gotta go back to the beginning of the Amidah. Why? One unit. The same thing in the last three blessings. But the middle blessings, you don't have to go back to "Ata Chonen." You go back to the blessing where you made the mistake and then you continue from there in order. It's the same group. That's what it means "they have no order," which means "they have no order" means you don't have to worry to go back to the beginning of the order. It's not considered one order. Each one is a separate blessing. Understood? "Rather, he returns to the one he forgot." And then you continue from there. Meaning in order. In order, of course in order. Right. But you don't gotta go back to the beginning. In the beginning, if you made that same mistake in the first three blessings in the Amidah, you don't go back to "Ata Kadosh." You gotta go back to "Hashem Sefatai Tiftach," the beginning. "And regarding 'they have no order'," "they have no order" means it's not considered a... an order of its own. Each one is a separate blessing, so therefore you can go back to the blessing you forgot and continue from there. Except he makes an exception, the Tosafot. He says, "And he completes from it downwards, all in order." "But regarding 'Anenu'," the cantor when he's repeating the Amidah, now let's say he forgot "Anenu." Now you have a problem, because he can't just go say "Anenu" where he wants at whatever blessing. He cannot say "Anenu" where he wants, he's got to go back, but he's got to actually say it after the blessing of "Re'eh Na Be'Onyeinu." He's got to put it in between there, so he's gonna have to say go back to "Re'eh Na Be'Onyeinu." "He does not return, since he passed its place." You passed the place. Once you pass its place, a regular blessing you can just go back, but "Anenu" they're not going to make you go back because then you're going to make all these blessings again in vain when you read them in order. So that much they didn't make you go back for "Anenu." "And so too we say later regarding the Megilla, that if one skipped a verse, he returns and reads that verse and downwards." Same thing in Megillat Esther. What happens if you forgot a verse? You go back to that verse and you just continue. Now you don't go back to the beginning of the Megilla. So we have a big dispute between Rashi and Tosafot. How do you learn "they have no order"? So it means according to Rashi, if you forgot "Anenu," just put it right where, put it right there. Make a blessing and continue. Plug it in wherever you want to plug it in and continue. You're not going to make any blessings in vain according to Rashi. You're just going to plug it in wherever you want and continue where you are. Whereas according to Tosafot, no, "Anenu" you got to go all the way back and say all these blessings again. That much we're not going to tell you to do. But the point is "they have no order" according to Tosafot means you don't have to go to the beginning of the order, you just go back to the blessing that you forgot and continue. Continuing the page for Yud-Zayin Amud Sheni. "The Rabbanan taught: From where do we know that we say 'Avot'," which is the first blessing of the Amidah? "As it is said, 'Ascribe to Hashem, O sons of the mighty.'" So who are "sons of the mighty"? "Sons of the mighty" is referring to our forefathers, the strong ones, "the rams of the earth." So that's how you start. All the blessings are hinted at in verses. So therefore, "Ascribe to Hashem, O sons of the mighty," start off talking about the strong ones, which is the forefathers. "And from where do we know that we say 'Gevurot'?" How do you know if it's mentioned "Gevurot"? "As it is said, 'Ascribe to Hashem glory and strength.'" "Strength" is might, which is "Gevurah." "And from where do we know that we say 'Kedusha'," or "Ata Kadosh," "Kedusha"? "As it is said, 'Ascribe to Hashem the glory of His name; worship Hashem in the beauty of holiness.'" So basically in the first couple of verses in this Psalm of David you have a hint of the first three blessings. "And what did they see to say 'Bina' after 'Kedusha'?" Why did they mention "You graciously grant knowledge to man and teach mortals understanding" right after "Kedusha"? "As it is said, 'And they shall sanctify the Holy One of Yaakov and shall revere the God of Israel.'" So it mentions the concept of "Kedusha." And then what does it say after that? "And it is juxtaposed: 'And those who err in spirit shall come to understanding.'" And the people that are wayward will learn wisdom. So therefore you see that after "Kedusha" comes "Bina." Then the Gemara says, "And what did they see to say 'Teshuvah' after 'Bina'?" After the blessing of "Ata Chonen," we have the blessing of "Teshuvah," "Hashiveinu." How do you know that that should follow it? "As it is written, 'and his heart will understand and return and be healed.'" Put "and be healed" on the side for a second. It says "and his heart will understand," once he'll understand, then what does that bring him to? "Teshuvah," "and return." So therefore we put "Teshuvah" after "Bina." "If so, let us say 'Refuah' after 'Teshuvah'?" So ostensibly the next blessing should be "Refaeinu," because it says "and his heart will understand and return and be healed." And therefore "Refaeinu" should be. The Gemara says, "No, it does not enter your mind." No, we wouldn't think that at all. "As it is written, 'And he will return to Hashem, and He will have mercy on him, and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon.'" So the verse puts "Teshuvah" next to "Selicha." It says "And he will return to Hashem" and then it says "for He will abundantly pardon." So therefore it must be "Hashiveinu," and after "Hashiveinu" it has to be what? "Selach Lanu." So the Gemara says, I don't understand, "And what did you see that you relied on this and relied on that?" Why are you relying on this verse that puts "Selach Lanu" next to "Teshuvah" and why don't you rely on the other verse that puts "Refaeinu" next to "Teshuvah"? You have two verses, it's a pick 'em. Why did you pick the verse that puts "Selach Lanu" next to "Teshuvah"? "Another verse is written: 'Who forgives all your iniquities, Who heals all your diseases, Who redeems your life from the pit.'" So therefore we have a verse that clearly says that "Selicha" comes before "Refuah." So since "Selicha," because here it says "Who forgives all your iniquities" and then "Who heals all your diseases." So therefore since we have a verse that puts "Selach" before "Refaeinu," so therefore we chose the other verse that put "Selach" after "Teshuvah." So therefore the Gemara comes along and says: "To say that Geulah and Refuah are after Selicha?" Also that comes out that what? That "Geulah" and "Refuah" based on this verse here comes after "Selicha," because the verse said "Hasoleiach" first and then it says "Harofei" and then it says "Hagoel." So is that so, that it comes after "Selicha"? "But is it not written, 'and return and be healed'?" What do you mean? It says in the verse "and return" and then "and be healed," right? Which is "Refuah." So how are you telling me here that "Geulah" and "Refuah" comes after "Selicha"? Ostensibly it sounds like it comes after "Teshuvah." "That is not a healing of diseases, but a healing of forgiveness." Oh, so the verse there is not referring to "Refuah" of sickness, but it's referring to "Refuah" that's related to "Selicha." So let's go back now learn these verses. So we have a verse that says "Who forgives all your iniquities, Who heals all your diseases." So I have a blessing that says "Selicha" and then right after that it says "Refuah," which is really the order that we have. We have "Refuah" after "Selicha." But we have another verse it says "and return and be healed." That "and return and be healed" is not referring to physical "Refuah," it's referring to a spiritual "Refuah." So therefore when it says "and return and be healed," it doesn't mean you say "Refaeinu" after "Teshuvah," rather you have to put "Selicha" after "Teshuvah." And therefore we have no contradiction in the verses. Again, when it says "and return and be healed," that "Refuah" is talking about what? "Refuah" of spiritual. However the other verse that says "Who forgives all your iniquities, Who heals all your diseases," that's putting "Selicha" first and then "Refuah." The only problem is ostensibly in that verse it puts "Refuah" before "Geulah." So ostensibly why is "Refuah" coming before "Geulah"? In our Amidah the "Geulah" comes before it. So Gemara asks: "And what did they see to say 'Geulah' in the seventh?" Why are you putting "Geulah" in the seventh? Rashi: "And not 'Refuah' after 'Selicha,' as the verse says, 'Who forgives all your iniquities, Who heals all your diseases.'" Ostensibly if you're following the verse, right? After "Selicha" should come "Refuah." Why are you putting "Geulah" in the seventh spot? Rava said, "Because they are destined to be redeemed in the seventh." Because the "Geulah" is going to happen in the seventh year. And therefore like it says, "The week in which the son of David comes." "It is different from other years." "First year famine." "And in the seventh, wars." "At the end of the seventh, the son of David comes." It's a seven-year process. So therefore since he's going to come after the seven-year process, so we put it in the seventh. "Therefore they established it in the seventh." "But did not the master say: 'In the sixth, voices; in the seventh, wars; at the end of the seventh, the son of David comes'?" It doesn't say that it's coming in the seventh year, it says it's coming in the eighth year, the end of the seventh year, "at the end of the seventh." Gemara says: "War is also the beginning of Geulah." When the war starts in the seventh year, that's already the beginning of the "Geulah." So therefore we do it in the seventh spot. "And what did they see to say 'Refuah' in the eighth?" Now why are you putting "Refuah" in the eighth? Now before we do that, let's just read the big Rashi here. "The beginning of Geulah, and even though this Geulah is not the Geulah from exile, but that He will redeem us from troubles." Even though the "Geulah" in that verse is really referring to the regular trouble, not necessarily the exile. "For the blessing of ingathering and building Jerusalem and the shoot of David, each has its own blessing, apart from this Geulah." Exactly, which means we have the "Geulah" of blessings. We have the "Geulah" in the blessing of obviously "Tishkon Betoch" and "Mekabbetz Nidchei Amo Yisrael" etc. "Nevertheless, since the name Geulah came up, they established it in the seventh." But again since the word "Geulah" is mentioned over there, so we put it in the seventh blessing. Now why is "Refaeinu" in the eighth spot? Okay, well where do you want it to be? Already we have to put after "Selicha" and we have to put "Geulah" in the seventh spot, so therefore we really don't have no choice but to put it in the eighth spot. Rabbi Acha said, "Because circumcision was given on the eighth." That since the circumcision is given on the eighth day, which requires "Refuah," and the kid needs a "Refuah," "therefore they established it in the eighth." Okay, now what's really this question? We'll have to see. Ostensibly... Where did you want to put it? You wanted to put it where? "Refaeinu" has to come after... so why does it have to come right after "Geulah"? Maybe you could put it later on. It's got to come after "Geulah," but it could be maybe later on. "And what did they see to say 'Birkat HaShanim' in the ninth?" Why is "Birkat HaShanim," "Barech Aleinu," in the ninth spot? Rabbi Alexandri said, "Corresponding to those who raise prices." Oh, that's corresponding to the price gougers, the guys in the market that raise the prices on the food. "As it is written, 'Break the arm of the wicked.'" That God's going to break the hands of these gougers. "And David, when he said it," where's that verse in Psalms? "He said it in the ninth." That's in the ninth chapter. So since it's the ninth chapter, so therefore we put "Barech Aleinu," which is the blessing for the product, in the ninth spot. Now Tosafot, Rashi says it's a problem, "And if you say it is the eighth." Actually, if you look at the Psalms in Rashi's version at least, you found this in the eighth chapter, not the ninth chapter. So he reminds us that the first two chapters are considered separate. "Ashrei" and "Lamah Rageshu" are two sections. So therefore if you consider them as two sections, so then the eighth chapter turns to the ninth chapter. "And what did they see to say..." now if you look at Tosafot for a second. Tosafot says, "The commentary of the Kuntres, and even though there are only eight psalms until there, 'Ashrei HaIsh' and 'Lamah Rageshu Goyim' are two." That's Rashi. "And it is difficult, for in the first chapter of Berachot it says that it is one section." The Gemara there says it's actually one. "And it concludes there that any section that was beloved to David began with 'Ashrei' and ended with 'Ashrei,' such as this one that begins with 'Ashrei HaIsh' and ends with 'Ashrei Kol Chosei Vo.'" So therefore he's asking on Rashi that the Gemara Berachot actually says it's one chapter. "And that is the end of 'Lamah Rageshu,' so it is one section." "And it is necessary to say that 'Lamnatzeach al Mut' and 'Lamah Hashem Ta'amod BeRachok' are two." No, so he split two different ones up. Not those two, other two. But bottom line, it'll make the ninth chapter, it'll make the eighth chapter the ninth chapter. "And what did they see to say 'Kibbutz Galuyot' after 'Birkat HaShanim'?" Why do we say "Kibbutz Galuyot," the ingathering of the exiles, after the blessing "Birkat HaShanim"? "As it is written, 'But you, O mountains of Israel, you shall yield your branches and bear your fruit for My people Israel, for they are soon to come.'" And therefore, what's going to happen after... after we have "Birkat HaShanim," it says that what? That the Children of Israel are going to come back. Rashi says, "Thus, the ingathering of exiles is at the time of Birkat HaShanim." Exactly. Which means "for they are soon to come." The Jews came back. What are they going to come back? When the fruit starts growing. So therefore that's connected to "Birkat HaShanim." "And since the exiles are gathered," now all these things are going to happen back-to-back to each other. Once "Kibbutz Galuyot" takes place, what happens then? "Justice is done to the wicked." Now we can set up a court system and we can start judging the wicked, "as it is said, 'And I will turn My hand upon you, and I will thoroughly purge away your dross.'" "And it is written, 'And I will restore your judges as at the first.'" Bring back the judges. "And since justice is done to the wicked, the transgressors cease." There goes the transgressors. So therefore we pray for them, "and all the arrogant shall perish in a moment," which is the blessing "Lamalshinim VeLaZeidim." That's why they put it over there. "And as it is said, 'And the transgressors and sinners shall be broken together, they shall perish.'" "And since the transgressors cease," once you got rid of the bad guys, "the horn of the righteous is exalted." "Al HaTzaddikim." Now we can highlight... once you got rid of the negative, you accentuate the positive. "As it is written, 'And all the horns of the wicked I will cut off,'" once I uproot the wicked, "'the horns of the righteous shall be exalted,'" I elevate the strength of the righteous. And we put "converts of righteousness" also in there. "And includes the converts of righteousness with the righteous." Why? "As it is said, 'You shall rise before the gray-headed and honor the face of an elder,'" which is talking about Sages. "And it is juxtaposed: 'And if a stranger sojourns with you.'" So we see there's a connection between Sages and converts. "And where is their horn exalted?" Where is the glory of the righteous going to be elevated? "In Jerusalem." That's why the next blessing would be "May You dwell within Jerusalem," "as it is said, 'Pray for the peace of Jerusalem; may those who love you be at peace.'" "And when Jerusalem is built, David comes." Then King David appears, "as it is said, 'Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek Hashem their God and David their king.'" "And when David comes, prayer comes." Why? Because they'll build the Temple and now we have prayer, "as it is said, 'And I will bring them to My holy mountain and make them joyful in My house of prayer.'" Now once already we have the Temple, which is prayer, "and when prayer comes, service comes," then we can start doing the service again. Blessing "Retzeh," "as it is said, 'Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be acceptable on My altar.'" "And when service comes, thanks comes." Now we can bring a thanksgiving offering, "as it is said, 'Whoever offers a thanksgiving sacrifice honors Me.'" "And what did they see to say 'Birkat Kohanim' after 'Hoda'ah'?" And right after... So this says Aaron lifted his hands to bless the people, "as he blessed them." "And he came down from performing the sin offering and the burnt offering and the peace offerings." And then he what? He came down and he brought the offering. So it sounds like what? That actually kohanim have to come before offering. So the Gemara says, "Let us say before service." Or maybe from that verse it sounds like he did it before the service. "No, it does not enter your mind, for it is written, 'And he came down from performing the sin offering,'" meaning from doing it, which means he did it already. "And is 'to do' written? 'From doing' is written." And therefore he did kohanim, he did the offering first, which is the blessing "Retzei," which is service, and then the kohanim. "And to say after service?" Why don't you say it after service? Because we're not, we're doing it after, in middle of "Hoda'ah." So initially we should follow the verse that he brought the offering and then he blessed the people, so it should be after service. "No, it does not enter your mind, for it is written, 'one who offers a thanksgiving sacrifice.'" The verse says "one who offers a thanksgiving sacrifice." That first you bring an offering and then you say "thanks." So therefore you cannot separate "Retzei" from "Modim," or "Modim" from "Retzei." "One who offers a thanksgiving sacrifice." So the Gemara says, wait, we have one verse that sounds like "Birkat Kohanim" should be in service, and then we have another verse that says you shouldn't separate "one who offers" to "thanks." "What did you see that you relied on this and relied on that?" Why are you relying on one verse over the other? "It is reasonable that service and thanks are one matter," which means it is reasonable it's considered the same item. Rashi says, "Even thanks is a service to God." That's also service, giving thanks to the Holy One, Blessed be He, and especially if it's a thanksgiving offering. So therefore service and thanks are one item, so therefore they go together. "And what did they see to say 'Sim Shalom' after 'Birkat Kohanim'?" Why do we say the last blessing of "Sim Shalom"? "As it is written, 'And they shall put My name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them.'" God says I will bless. And what's the blessing? "The blessing of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is peace," so the blessing of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is what? Peace, "as it is said, 'Hashem will bless His people with peace.'" So that's why we have that in that order. That is the order, my friends, that we have. Now, just to get some of Rashi's here. It says "the transgressors cease." Who are these transgressors that we're going to get rid of once the Mashiach comes? "Those who do not believe in the law of Moses that it was from Heaven." They don't believe the Torah is from Heaven. "And therefore they juxtaposed to it the blessing of the transgressors, as it is said, 'Those who forsake Hashem, these are the transgressors.'" Fine. Now let's go to the Maharsha, my friends. There is a lot of Maharsha here and he's going to explain us the concepts here of the blessings. "From where do we know that we say 'Avot'?" Okay. Let's go to the verse here, "as it is written, 'and his heart will understand and return.'" So how do we know that "Teshuvah" comes after "You graciously grant knowledge to man"? Because it says "and his heart will understand." And then what does it say? "And return." So therefore, first he'll understand and then what? "Teshuvah." So he says, "That means that a person will understand the greatness of his sin." He can't make "Teshuvah" until you have understanding how big your sin is. "And against whom he sinned," not only corresponding who you sinned against. "And then he will surely return in Teshuvah, as it is said." "And it is asked, 'If so, let us say Refuah?'" Which means why don't you put "Refuah" because it says "and return and be healed." So it sounds like right after "Teshuvah," what should be the next blessing? "Refuah." "According to what you would think now that the verse speaks of healing of diseases." Now obviously at this point we're thinking that when it says "and return and be healed," it's referring to physical sicknesses. The Gemara is going to answer that it's talking about spiritual sicknesses, but at this point we're thinking that what? When it says "and return and be healed," "Teshuvah" is "Teshuvah," "Refuah" is physical, so initially "Teshuvah" should be the next blessing after "Teshuvah" should be what? "Refuah." "This is what it means: even with a sick person who cannot return at that moment through action." If he understands "that his sin caused him the illness," "and he returns in his heart and is healed." Which means, it means that a person will come to the realization that the sickness that he has must be because of his sins. So therefore "and his heart will understand." He'll understand two things. Number one, that he did great sins. And he'll also realize that his great sins caused him what? To become sicker, physically. Therefore "and return" and then what? "And be healed." That's the flow at this point. "However, it is somewhat difficult," says the Maharsha. "For it would seem that this verse speaks of healing." "How could it enter your mind to say that healing precedes forgiveness?" Is it possible that you're going to get a "Refuah" before you ask for "Selicha"? What is "Selach Lanu"? Forgive us. "Teshuvah" is that you're returning. And then what? You have to ask for forgiveness. So then how could you think you're going to get a "Refuah" before you actually get "Selicha"? "For certainly Hashem sends forgiveness and atonement." You need atonement for his sins. "And afterwards the Holy One, Blessed be He, will send him healing for all his illness." "And it does not seem at all that the Holy One, Blessed be He, will send him healing before He forgives him." It doesn't make sense that you're going to get a "Refuah" before "Selicha." "And it can be said that what you would have thought, that after forgiveness, that means that the sufferings of illness atone for him." Aha. That there's two ways you can get "Selicha." One way is through the sufferings. So then what we would have thought, "and return," and then what, you don't need to actually make "Selicha." The sickness itself is the "Selicha" and the atonement. "And it itself is his forgiveness and atonement." That is indeed the "Selicha" and the atonement. "And it concludes that it is not so." It's not so. "For even if a person has a great sin," "and it was not enough for him through sufferings to atone." It's not enough to have sufferings. "And he was not worthy of healing" and it's not, really shouldn't have got a "Refuah" because he deserves to get sick, "nevertheless the Holy One, Blessed be He, abundantly pardons" "to one who returns with all his illness" when a person's sick and he makes "Teshuvah," "to send him healing after the forgiveness." That means you need it, sufferings is not going to be enough. You can't get rid of the sufferings through a "Selicha." That's why they said that you need "Selicha." "And therefore one should precede the forgiveness, as it is written, 'and he will return to Hashem, for He will abundantly pardon.'" That means "Selicha" and "Teshuvah" are next to each other. "And to this the text intended." We have this in the prayers of Yom Kippur. "My God, before I was formed," "and what I have sinned before You," and whatever I have sinned, "erase and cleanse with Your abundant mercies," forgive me or clean it up, "but not through sufferings and severe illnesses." Which is because we know that could be an atonement. "That is, not with such severe and numerous sufferings that would atone for the sin to forgive." Not such sickness that would be so severe that it would cause us to have "Selicha" through sufferings. "Rather, that the forgiveness should be through abundant mercies." Just give us a "Selicha" gratis, exactly, with abundant mercies "before the severe sufferings come along and debilitate." "And as to what was asked: 'And what did you see that you relied on this and relied on that?' Let us say that this is because sufferings atone for everything, and it is his forgiveness." Fine. So that is that foundation there. So "Selicha" can be accomplished through sickness, however we pray that it should be done like we said with great mercies. Okay, then the Gemara answered that no, when it said "and return and be healed," that "Refuah" is referring to a spiritual "Refuah." That when a person makes "Teshuvah," he spiritually is healed. "And it can be explained that this verse speaks of one whose sufferings atone for all his sins, that his healing is his forgiveness." It's referring to the guy who's getting sufferings which is part of the "Teshuvah" process. Which means the sufferings are so strong that it's like a "Selicha." "But if so, it should have said that sufferings are forgiveness, which is more apparent." Right, the Gemara is saying "rather, a healing of forgiveness." What does it mean when the Gemara says "that is not a healing of diseases, but a healing of forgiveness"? What does it mean "healing of forgiveness"? It's not really a "healing of forgiveness," it's sufferings of "Selicha." The Gemara is not precise according to Maharsha, he's saying. If you're learning that that "Refuah" is connected to "Selicha," so therefore it's not the "Refuah" that's dependent on "Selicha," it's the sufferings that's connected to the "Selicha," not the "Refuah." So he says, "And it is more apparent to explain according to what the Rambam wrote in 'Eight Chapters' that the illness of the soul and its healing is like the illness of the body." That means the spiritual maladies of a person's soul are similar to the physical maladies of a person's body. "And its healing, and the healing mentioned in this verse, is not a healing of the body but a healing of the soul, which is forgiveness." Which means just like when a person makes "Teshuvah," he will get a "Refuah" of the soul, which means his cure will be, that's what we're referring to in that verse. So therefore it's not referring to "Refuah" of the physical. "And what did they see to say 'Geulah' in the seventh? That is Geulah from exile," like we said. "But the Geulah of the sick person from death is already explained that it is after Refuah, as it is written, 'Who heals all your diseases, Who redeems your life from the pit.'" Right. Now we understand very good. In that verse that said "Geulah" after "Refuah," it's not referring to "Geulah" of the exile. That "Geulah" in the verse of "Harofei" and "Hagoel" is referring to that the sick person will be redeemed. Understand why in that verse it says "Goel" after "Refuah"? It says "Who heals all your diseases, Who redeems your life from the pit." That "Geulah" is not "Geulah" from exile. That "Geulah" is from the sickness, blessed be He. Therefore you have no proof to put "Geulah" after "Refuah" from that verse. Otherwise you'd ask yourself a question, it says "Harofei Hagoel." The other verse, which is the seventh spot, that we learn "Geulah" from exile. That he's taken care of that. Okay, my friends. "And what did they see to say 'Refuah' in the eighth?" Why are you putting "Refuah" in the eighth spot? "One can ask, and what is difficult for him?" You have no choice. Where else can you put it? You just told me you have to put it after "Selicha." And if it's after "Selicha" and you got to put "Geulah" in the seventh spot, so therefore you got to put it in the eighth. Where are you going to put it? "Since it is appropriate to juxtapose it to forgiveness, as it is written, 'Who forgives all your iniquities, Who heals,' but because Geulah interrupted in the seventh, nevertheless, what is possible to juxtapose to forgiveness is juxtaposed." You have to put it as close to "Selicha" that you can. So therefore what's the question why you're putting it in the eighth spot? You have no choice. That's where it belongs. Right, seven's got to be "Geulah," so that's it. "And still it is appropriate to juxtapose it to Geulah." "It can be said that this reason, because they are destined for redemption, does not decisively determine to say Geulah in the seventh." He says if that's your whole reason, the seventh year we're going to get redeemed, that is not such a strong reason to put "Geulah" in the seventh to take away "Refuah" from "Selicha." "On the contrary, with the reason of the verse 'Who forgives all your iniquities, Who heals'?" Because of a hint of the seventh year you're going to take away a verse? Precisely. You're pushing "Refuah." "It is more appropriate to juxtapose Refuah to Selicha and not to interrupt." "And the Gemara says: 'Because Refuah also has another reason that it is appropriate to say it in the eighth,'" because of the Brit Milah. So that's why we do it then. And that's why there's a difference. Brit Milah. Precisely. Be strong and blessed. If it wasn't for the Brit Milah we'd put it in the seventh spot. However, since the Brit Milah is in the eighth, so that's why, my friends, we have in the blessing in the eighth blessing we say "Healer of the sick of His people Israel." But when we come out of the bathroom we say "Healer of all flesh." Because the eighth blessing is corresponding to Brit Milah, it's only "Healer of the sick of His people Israel." Coming out of the bathroom, gentiles and gentiles go to the bathroom. So therefore in that sense we're all the same. So therefore one is "Healer of all flesh" everywhere and one is "Healer of the sick of His people Israel." Great answer. The Ba'al Hatosafot says, "Be strong and blessed." That's precisely. There's your answer. "Corresponding to those who raise prices." Okay he cuts that over there. Nice, nice Maharsha here. It says in the verse "Break the arm of the wicked." Now how did we learn "Break the arm of the wicked"? Break the arms of the wicked. Simply it's referring to the gougers. He says beautiful, "See Rashi's commentary that the entire section was said concerning those who raise prices, and since he does not bring the verse 'Break the arm of the wicked' but explained that 'shevor' is written deficiently." It's not written with a "vav." So it's from the word "shever." Ah, "shever." What is "shever"? Food. "Shever in Egypt." So therefore "there is shever in Egypt" and "his arm" is from the word "zeri'ah." And "shevor zero'a," "zero'a" is from planting, "to plant." He's changing the whole context of the verse here. "That he desires that the Merciful One should cause the produce and wickedness of the wicked not to be found and to come in its time, meaning that the sowing should be successful with abundant produce and harvest, and he will no longer be able to raise prices." It's saying "shevor zero'a," let there be a plentiful amount of the plantings of the "shever" so the wise guys will not be able to gouge prices. It's the prayer against price gouging. Okay, my friends. Want to continue? Yes. Okay, go ahead. Okay, "For he said it in the ninth." So it says and in this verse of "Break the arm of the wicked," it's in the ninth chapter. "Rashi's commentary, 'And if you say it is the eighth.'" Right? He said. So then he said "Lamah" and "Ashrei HaIsh," why those two chapters? "Its interpretation is garbled." Maharsha says I don't like his interpretation, it is garbled. Why? "For it concludes in the first chapter of Berachot that 'Ashrei' and 'Lamah' are one beginning, not like Tosafot's difficulty." "And furthermore," this is unbelievable, "you will not find in any book of Psalms that 'Break the arm of the wicked' is in the eighth but in the tenth." You will not find open any Psalms book, "Break the arm of the wicked" is not in the ninth chapter, it is in the tenth chapter. So then move the first one. Well but Tosafot, well Rashi is asking it's in the eighth. And therefore he says no it's in the ninth because we're joining two. Maharsha is saying it's not in the eighth, it is in the tenth. So what are you talking about? "For he wanted to say there that he made 'May it be Your will, the utterances of my mouth.'" "We count 'May it be Your will, the utterances of my mouth'" is in the nineteenth chapter, to be juxtaposed to "Lamnatzeach Mizmor LeDavid," which is in the twentieth chapter. "And it is necessary to emend Rashi's commentary." He says you have to change the words of Rashi. "And so it is necessary, 'And if you say in the tenth.'" Ah, so the scribe's error. You have to say Rashi was asking it's really in the tenth chapter, and therefore you have to say that "Ashrei" and "Lamah Rageshu" is one chapter, so therefore you run out of Tosafot's question and therefore you bring it back to the ninth spot. Beauty as they say. Okay, my friends. Now let's look at the Maharsha that says, "And since judgment was done to the wicked, the heretics ceased." Once you've made the judgment on the wicked, you get rid of the heretics also. "This is how it is reconciled from a previous proof based on logic." It's a logical inference. You're doing you're cleaning up house basically over there. And it says, "The judgment of the heretics is Gehennom, it ends, but they do not end." That means they outlive Gehennom, these heretics. They're going to just burn forever. "And what he said, 'the heretics ceased'," but here it says "the heretics ceased." But over there it says in the other Gemara, "the heretics did not cease." They're going to just forever. "And it can be said that this is what it means: they ceased from the world, but the judgment of Gehennom does not cease from them." Means the heretics ceased from the world, but they did not cease from Gehennom. That's that story there. Now let's get to the next, "And since the heretics ceased, the horn of the righteous is exalted." The righteous will be elevated. "And before the blessing against heretics was instituted," now what do you do before the blessing against heretics? Before the blessing against heretics you have "Restore our judges as at first" and right away "Al HaTzaddikim." "Certainly these blessings were in order, for so too it can be said, since justice was done to the wicked, as explained in the blessing of 'Hashiva'." Meaning even in the blessing of "Hashiva" you're doing justice to the wicked. "Restore our judges as at first." Who are they judging? The wicked. So therefore "Al HaTzaddikim" the righteous are elevated. So it still works out even without having the heretics in that spot. And you put "righteous convert" in between like we saw the connection between that as well. Okay and then we said where does that happen? It happens in Jerusalem which is the next blessing. Okay look at the Maharsha now on Daf Yud Chet. "And since David came," what happens? "Prayer came." King David is going to come, "the shoot of David," and then what's after "the shoot of David"? "Hearer of prayer." Because once David comes then right away we're gonna establish the concept of prayer. "It is implied that here David came, as it is in Sanhedrin in the last chapter: 'Three commandments were commanded to Israel upon their entry into the Land of Israel.'" When the Children of Israel, Mashiach comes, three commandments that we're gonna have. Number one, "to appoint a king for them." Number one to establish a king. Number two to get rid of Amalek and number three to build a Temple. "And it concludes: 'to appoint a king for them first.'" And if so, "in the future too it will certainly be so," as it's written, "And I will bring them to My holy mountain," "that the building of the house will be first." "Therefore David came first." If there's a Temple then David is already there because he comes first and therefore "and since David came, prayer came." Meaning the order. And said, "And since prayer came," but once there's the prayer means there's the Temple. So once there's the Temple what comes after that? Service. Understood? "Service came." "The prayer which is service of the heart precedes the service of the altar." Nice. First we have service of the heart and then we have service. It's a nice concept by the way. You have the Amidah by the way. "Hearer of prayer" and "Retzei." One is service of the heart and one is service itself. Understood the connection? Nice. "And since service came," what's after service? The thanksgiving. "For thanksgiving is from the word 'confession' regarding the offering." Ah, not gratitude. Confession? Confession. Because when you bring an offering you have to make a confession on the offering. "And that is a thanksgiving sacrifice, that upon the sacrifice a person confesses." "And that is the conclusion: service and thanksgiving are one matter." That's what the Gemara means service and thanksgiving is one item. Because thanksgiving comes at the time of the service. Its translation as being confession? That's right. "And confession is appropriate everywhere on an offering and is juxtaposed to it." "And the conclusion is the act of confession." Now I have to explain I guess that when we're doing the blessing "Modim," I guess "Modim" also means obviously to show gratitude but in this interpretation it's learning it from the word confession. "The blessing of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is peace." How does he make that connection, just thanksgiving becomes confession? It's the same word. Thanksgiving is confession, from the word confession. "Confession is the language of thanksgiving." It's the source source of the word. And therefore, "Certainly the priestly blessing has several blessings." What do you mean? God's blessings is not only peace. Why are you saying God's blessing is peace? Because the last word, the last word of the priestly blessing was peace. There's six blessings in the priestly blessing: "Ya'er," "Yissa," "Veyichuneka"... so he says, "Certainly the priestly blessing has several blessings, but everything follows the conclusion." The main thing is the end "and grant you peace" which is the essence of all the blessings. And we'll end off on that note that peace is the most important of all the blessings.