KMTT - the Torah Podcast
KMTT - Berachot #08
KMTT - Berachot #08, by Rav Ezra Bick
KMTT and this is as we're back in today's Wednesday Bet Tammuz. Today's shul and KMTT is the shul in Misakhan Barrocha Talacha Vaagadah. Today's mamaa we're going to talk about in famous Kamala. I think everybody more or less knows at least the conclusion. I'd like to examine some of the halakhot involved as well as the particular language used in mamaa. Ta'fret amudalif imbarachot amar rafunabbar yuhuda amar habami. Nolam y ashlimadam parashyotab imatsibu. Shnaim mikrave hai ta'gum. Yafilo atarot vidivon. Shkola mashlim parashyotab imatsibu manlihin no yamar ushnotaf. Okay, so ravami said person should always make sure a lot of lamb. A person should always make a great effort. Make sure to complete his parashyot with the sibu, with the congregation. Twice the mikra, the text of the Torah, and once the ta'gum, the translation, afilo atarot vidivon. Even the words atarot vidivon, atarot vidivon are place names. And therefore they don't actually have a translation. We'll see exactly what that means in a second, but in intagumu, for instance, it says atarot vidivon. There's no way to translate any other language. Shkola mashlim parashyotabim sibu manlihin no yamar ushnotaf. Why should a person always make sure to do this? Because one who completes his parashyot with the congregation, his days and years are lengthened. Well, as we pointed out in some mamareem in the past, this doesn't translate into an obligation. If it said haiyav adam lashlim, it means you would have to do it. Here it says one should do it, and even gives the reason why you should do it. Now, because those are said, but because it's a very good, wise thing to do, because if you do it, then your days and years will be lengthened. So it's highly, highly commendable and very much recommended. But I think it would be wrong to describe it as being an obligation, an echiyuvat kannadar bhananot, diorite or anything else. Now, this is the, I almost said, obligation. This is the halakhah called shnayamik of echatagum. One should read the parashah every week, going over the parashah itself twice and once with tagam. Now, it's important to realize that in the time of the kavanah, it wasn't at all self-evident, they were the entire Torah in one year. We know at least two different menhagim, the menhagim baval, where Rambi lived, was in fact, to read it once a year. But the menhagim, echatsal, which undoubtedly was made with us to read it once every three years. And no place in the kamarat does it say that one reads the Torah once a year. However, you do read the Torah every week, and therefore la shnim pass your tab imaxibou means whatever the sibou reads, you should be reading as well. Since our menhagim, many of our Jews around the world today, is to finish the entire Torah once a year, we finish on some katarah, then this means that once a year, every single Jew who will be following this recommendation will be reading the Torah to himself together with the sibou, shnayamikra the echatag. What does it mean shnayamikra the echatagum? You'd write it reading it three times, twice in the original text, and once in the tagum. The kamarat says, a fido a'tarat vidivon. Rashi says, a'tarat vidivon, shnayam baval tagum. Tells us what asks an interesting question. He says, "Why is it?" If that's true, that tagumat vidivon, in other words, they have no translation, then why is it to pick a tagumat vidivon? In that vein, shnayamikra only, vidivon, just people's names. And in fact, Tosrat knows that a'tarat vidivon in the tagum. Your shnayamikra has a translation. There's more than one amamik, tagum to the tagumat. The one with me, with the skotagum onkulis. But there's another tagum, kotagum. Your shnayamikra. And in tagum. Your shnayamikra has a translation. Sort of a Jewish. In general, tagum. Your shnayamikra is more davshanim, it's more to the literal translation than those tagumat vidivon, which is very close to being a word-to-word translation. So, tagumat vidivon have a translation, tagumu shnayamikra. Tosrat says, well, that makes sense. That's why I feel like it was vidivon, because they have a translation in tagumu shnayamikra. And that's what they're most trying to say, that you should read the tagumu shnayamikra. If there's no tagumat vidivon, you should be tagumu shnayamikra. And therefore, Tosrat's conclusion is, that if you come across words which don't have any translation, so you should, if it's not in tagumu unkulis, you should read tagumu shnayamikra. And if it's no translation at all, then you should read it three times in the Hebrew. In other words, according to Tosrat, dalakha is, you have to read it three times. However, when you read it three times, one of the times you can read translation instead of the original. And of course, it's a benefit because then you'll understand it better. But if you, if there is no translation, Tosrat says, then read the Hebrew three times. So apparently, the three is an important number here. The chazal said you should read the Torah, go over the Torah, together with the tzibu three times. The only three times, so let's get a little bit of extra benefit, read it twice in Hebrew once in translation. The rush, this agrees with the Tosrat. And he says, there's no translation, you can read it twice. Because the dinner is shnayamikra. And once tagumu. So if we have to read every plus of shnayamikra, and read it once tagumu, no tagumu, then you don't have to read it tagumu. But there's no need to read it a third time to make up for the fact that you're going to read the tagumu. There's a two separate other hod. One other has to read everything twice. And another other hai is to read the tagumu. Of course, only if there is a tagumu. So we have a makhlokit here. It's basically a numerological one. Tosrat thinks that you should read the Torah three times with the possibility, maybe even the recommendation of switching one of the three times from Hebrew to Aramaic. And the rush things, you should read the Torah twice. And also read the Torah once in translation. I'll get back to the significance of this makhlokit. But I want to mention another makhlokit between Tosrat and the rush. Tosrat claims here on dafret that you have to read tagumunkas. The Aramaic tagum that Chazal recommended. Chazal gave it a special status. It was part of even in the reading of the Torah in Shul. In the times of Chazal, the Torah was read once in Hebrew. And H. Persok was translated publicly by a translator stood next to the makhlokit into the tagumu we call "tagumunkas". Tosrat says, let's say you don't know Aramaic. How do you see the radical question? The people that Tosrat also didn't know Aramaic was no long of the language. The lingua frank wasn't the language that the Jews spoke. So some people said that translated into French. Tosrat says, no, it has to be translated into the tagum. Tosrat gives the reason because the tagum has certain commentary built into it. And that commentary is the commentary of Chazal. And another translation wouldn't have that. And therefore it's not as good. The rush has the exact opposite. Shita opinion. The rush says that if the grammar says "nayimikra ve'ercha tagum", then you don't have to read tagum. You can also read "p'il ruscha tara" that's because it "p'il ruscha tara". Since every word is explained in the "p'il ruscha tara", the commentary explains the word. So we don't need "tagumunkas". Can we "p'il ruscha tara" the "gra" claims the base of this rush that the best thing is to learn "chomish" with rashi. Could they will be that the rush meant rashi? Since rashi, a very in the time of the rush, who was only four generations after rashi, rashi was the "p'il rusch" the commentary. The "gra" says a "lakha lemisa" that the best, better than "tagumunkas", which we really don't understand and hardly explains to us, we have more trouble understanding "tagumunkas" that we would have understanding the original Hebrew, it's better to learn "p'imayimikra" twice. The Hebrew text and once learned rashi. Because rashi explains everything that needs explanation in the original text. I suspect these two different disputes between "tagumunkas" and the "rashi". "Ahabahatalia" it's the same one is "talia" on the other. According to the "tosto" you have to read the Torah three times. "tagumunkas" is a form of Torah reading. It's the officially sanctioned translation. Every word is translated and "hazav" saw it as being the translation and therefore it's another way of reading the original. In translations in general, we have two attitudes on translations. Obviously it's written in the original. On the other hand, it is a recreation of the original. It's not a, it's not a paraphrase. If someone, if you read Dostoevsky, if I ask you if you read "Kraman punishment", you don't say, "No, I didn't read Kraman punishment. I don't know Russian. I just read this other book called "Kraman punishment". That's translated in Kraman punishment. You read Dostoevsky, you read it in translation. So translations could be, I think this is what Dosto is saying, the translation of the Torah, the "chagumunkas" the Torah. The official translation, that is another way of reading the Torah and it has certain advantages because it helps you understand it better and therefore that's the way you should read it. But according to the verse, when you read "tagum" it's not a third reading of the Torah because as we saw, if there is no "tagum" you read the Torah only twice. You don't have to read the Torah three times. So you read the Torah twice. There's another "lacha" that aside from reading the Torah, you should also explain the Torah. The "tagum" here is not a form of "kriya", not a form of Torah reading, but a form of Torah explanation. And the original "hahra" was twice to be the Torah and once to explain it to yourself. So from this the verse said, there's nothing special about "tagumunkas" it's a very good explanation, but there are other explanations. And the great things that as far as we're concerned, "Rashi" is superior to "tagumunkas" because we understand "Rashi" and "tagumunkas" we have great difficulty understanding. So therefore, if this is correct and the explanation is correct, we have two different opinions here. One says you should read the Torah three times. One time could be in another version and the "Rashi holds" you should read the Torah twice, but also make sure that you understand it by reading it a third time or going over the third time with a commentary and not merely the original text. Now what in fact is the significance of the "lahaha" of "shnayyin mikko bekhatang"? As I said in my first sentence, I think we've all heard of this "lahaha" can't help noticing that "lahaha" is widely not observed. I think once it was understood that there is a real "riyin" like this, I said, I admit, I said there is no "riyin" but I think it was taught to children this should be done. I can't help noticing that I think many, most people don't do "shnayyin mikko bekhatang". What is the significance? Why in fact it has our view it so highly and recommend it with the words that "marikin no yamabushanatab" it's a "sagula for long life"? I think the key is found in the expression "yashlim parshiyotav imhatsibu". Why do you have to go over the Torah "imhatsibu" together with the reading of the congregation? "imhatsibu" means "kriyata-tara" and "shul". Tell us if instance was bothered, "hahlaha lamaisa" if it does that mean that you have to read it three times, shabbas morning. "imhatsibu" so the Torah, the "sibu" reads the ones and at the same time, I don't know, a few minutes before, a few minutes after, we just read fast, we read three times. It says, "no, since we know that we begin reading the parshiyot from minkhah of the shabbat beforehand and we read it the whole week and Mondays and Thursdays, so the whole week is called "kriyata-tara" so that gives you a week to finish the parshiyot as opposed to two hours. But what's the point? What do you have to do with "imhatsibu" The specific sense, as I pointed out, it's not at all clear that they saw the reading of the Torah as being divided up in a particular time cycle. So I think the answer is, first we understand why do we read the Torah bit sibuot? From the "kriyata-tara" it's quite clear that the gamaa thinks that "kriyata-tara bit sibuot" is a recreation of "mat" and "tara". The gamaa learns a number of hahlahaat, concerning "kriyata-tara" from "mat" and "tara". Specifically, the first "kriyata-tara" in the beginning of "migida-nikreit" or "med vioshev" The gamaa says that the person who reads the Torah has to stand as motion stood when he got the Torah from God. There are also other places where the "krazal" have a comparison between "kriyata-tara" and "mat" and "mat" and "tara". It's on that basis, for instance, that it's one of the reasons, but the reason I was very important in the eyes of the verbs is why one should stand "kriyata-tara" not just the person who's laning, the reader, but the rest of the sibu as well. And the "mat" hahlahaat are learned by comparison to "mat" and "tara". There was a "takana", "kriyata-tibuot" is not video writer, it's a "takana-moshava" brain or "takana" as well so far. That when you are away from Hasinai, so you have to keep the experience of "mat" "tantara" alive. The story that the "mat" tells about "moshavainu" was that the "euchuslos" "emim" below Matsumai, the Jews went three days, it says in the Torah and didn't find water, and then they complained, they had to be brilliant. As I'll say "ein nai-mele-tara" there were three days where I learned "tara" and I said okay I'm going to make to make sure that this doesn't happen again, that they three days without "tara" they became "veslas" and "emmunctus" and "rebellis", we're going to have "kriyata-tara" about Mondays and Thursdays. "Bai-euchusloshaigemim" they left Hasinai, they left the meeting of God, they weren't getting, God wasn't speaking to them, and the personality has changed. So it's not so much that you have to learn "tara" because you have to know "tara". After all the Jews learned "tara" every day when they were in the desert with "noshua-beinu" but you need "kriyata-tara" a public seabore getting together to hear the words of Hashem just like a Hasinai to maintain this connection to hearing "dvarashem". That's "kriyata-tara-tara-bitzibu". What is "Yashlim-pao-shi-otara" in "mat-sibu"? So I think with the fact that you do it three times in either of "tosfot" or the Russia's version there's a difference between "kriyata-tara" which is "matan-tara" and "Yashlim-pao-shi-otara" which is "kabbal-latatara". In other words there are two different aspects here. One is the Torah is being given by God and two is that you're accepted you're receiving the Torah. It's two different things. The Torah is read out loud we all hear it but you also have to accept and accept it means means means putting it inside absorbing it. So for "tosfot" for instance you have to do the Torah three times. Number three in "hazal" when it comes to learning is a standard number of not merely learning selling ones but doing "hazal" going over it until you know it. "hazal" an expression "kangrash-shan-nab-es-shilesh" somebody learned, repeated and tripled. That means he got to know it well. It is true I have to read it is true the "hazal" say in "sanhedrin" that "en-o-dome" "mishulom-aid" "mei-be-hat-pameim" as opposed to one who learns 100. 101 is better than 100 that's true the more you learn it the better you know it but there's a standing expression that's something that's done three times that's like become permanentized it's become it's become part of you and the expression appears in many places "kara-shan-nab-es-shilesh" somebody who didn't just have a passing acquaintance with the Torah you learned but really knew it well really had had had had had imbied it had absorbed didn't it that's called "kara-shan-nab-es-shilesh" he read reviewed and tripled reviewed so I think that foot of thought that's what's being done here the reader Torah once ensured the "hazan" reads the Torah to you so you've heard God's voice that's God giving you the Torah but for you to actually accept the Torah a meaning accepting not just accept to do it but to accept the lemur Torah to accept the content of Torah so you have to learn it and repeat it and triple it and that's what I've spelled it three times so then because the purpose is really accepting it so there's a special advantage in reading at least once "tau-gum" translation rather than original because the point is to understand and not just to hear here you could do it once there's nothing between hearing it three times and hearing it once understanding for learning it there is a difference comprehension is three times rather than one so even better is for one of them to have been "tau-gum" to sink in to your mind the understanding more even than just reading it a third time if there's no "tau-gum" the principle is to have it three times take according to the rush it's a little bit different and I guess the hour is maybe even easier to understand in order to accept the Torah you have to learn it and comprehend it so once you read it and to you you study it you you explain it either to translation or through parish rashy or through some other commentary but it's part of the kabbalata Torah is to not just hear it and not just go over it but also to explain it to yourself therefore according to the rush that to the panama hod one is to read it and kazasa to read it twice because that's simply the principle of repetition means remembering so once you read it and to you go over to make sure that you really that you really will remember it kazara shana means you remember it and once you explain it because those are two separate aspects of acceptance once is getting the words down right and two is really understanding then properly which requires commentary which again could be "tau-gum" it's a form of commentary according to the rush "tau-gum" is not a form of the original it's a form of commentary on the original and therefore it could be also rashy parenthetically I would like to remark that this is a basic disagreement as to what translation is which is as i say it's basically because it's part of the tension in kazal that they have as far as translations are concerned according to the tells about the translation it leaves tau-gumunkos there was a really good translation when there was done by kazal and in there are some places where it applies that tau-gumunkos is the ruacha kaudesh it's it's almost part of the term itself but a really good translation is the original it's another form of the original whereas according to the rush all translation is commentary you can't actually translate a text and translation therefore you lose the original and it's only i say only it has an advantage it's a good commentary but as far as the original text is concerned it's only commentary most famous question we have concerning kazal's attitude towards translation in general is connected to the story of the Greek translation to the tau-ra-tau-gumashivi in the Septuagint where the kazal say that the day of its completion was declared to be a fast day they simply were opposed to having a translation done at all because and the usual explanation given is because any translation loses from the original knowing that the people from whom the Greek translation was made were using it to replace the tau-ra they didn't speak Hebrew at all and their tau-ra was the Septuagint the Jews of Egypt and the kazal were very much afraid that basically they were now getting a a forge version of the tau-ra-tau it's an inaccurate version of the tau-ra because any translation is going to be inaccurate in terms of the pristine original although i might have other advantages namely being maybe being commentary so i think that's the question that's really involved here until it's not concerning tau-gum-gulus do we view it as being a version of the original which in terms of comprehension is even might even be better in some in some respects oh no there's no such thing it's merely commentary but kazal want you to have also a good mere commentary which leads to the eventual recommendation of rashi instead of instead of tau-gum-gulus why yeshlim imazibur so it's the complete the same thing you you're going back to mamat hansinai you're going back to hansinai you know sinatore is given but also accepted and it's death where it's very important to do the two together the quinoa continues about somebody who i can't say he couldn't keep up and but he wanted to really complete a tau-ra so it says (speaking in foreign language) it was one day when he was off eveyam kippa the shiva was closed he was hanging around he said what a great time not gonna baton not gonna sit around tooling my thumbs eveyam kippa i'll complete the whole tau-ra of the wall of power shirt either he was behind or perhaps he really didn't do it the whole year he was gonna do the entire tau-ra in one day so tonally clear about (speaking in foreign language) you can't do that because eveyam kippa this particular day that you've chosen the only thing when you have time is it's a mitzit to eat famous salacha that eating on eveyam kippa is like fasting two days so he said oh okay i can't do it then (speaking in foreign language) he said (speaking in foreign language) whatever you'll do before the tibur i have some time now i'll do three pastures four pastures ten pastures get ahead of the of the game get ahead of the sibur (speaking in foreign language) so the old man said to him (speaking in foreign language) you should not be learning it ahead of the sibur and not learning it after the sibur (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) so it's it's crucial it's really it's a special emphasis here not that you should learn the tau-ra once a year twice three times but that the din a real din of having created sibur in (speaking in foreign language) in the beta knesset should be accompanied by an individual not you don't do this bit sibur but each one of us when we hear the tau-ra being given bit sibur to cloud you so we are taking it into our hearts our souls our minds our understanding especially according to the rash and that's why you should join the two (speaking in foreign language) and (speaking in foreign language) by the individual Jews last question why is (speaking in foreign language) we've asked this question a similar question almost a no almost half the member that we read the member has a habit of recommending certain things by saying if you do this you will get the following we would and we saw Benojona asked about the din of smhud gulalat vida that is (speaking in foreign language) you know why is he Benojona bar what's the connection say something else is good about him why is he Benojona bar so you're asking the same form of the same question why is longevity why is long life the appropriate response the appropriate result of learning of of being finishing the tau-ra imak sibur shnei mikabecha tagma the answer well to tell you the truth i don't know the answer this one really really stumps me and if you know the answer i'll be happy to hear please write (speaking in foreign language) but i can think of something i'm not maybe i'm being a little bit too uh too different here it's a little simple but in the meantime this is what i think the answer is you're not necessarily a big (speaking in foreign language) if you finish the tau-ra shnei mikabecha tagma because you haven't learned michten, you haven't learned kambal, you haven't learned shaas and you haven't learned sifuis, if i got it, you haven't learned kar takul so the the recommendation here isn't it should learn a lot of tau-ra that's a different michten meaning to know a lot of tau but if i'm correct that shnei mikabecha tagma means that you've accepted the tau-ra you've received it except in a sense of that god gives you a present and you and you accept you receive the present you make it yours, you go over it until it's part of you so fakhazal there's a simple equation between tau-ra and life (speaking in foreign language) we say this in davening every day (speaking in foreign language) tau-ra is life because you have it and those (speaking in foreign language) he who finds me, finds means that if you're walking in the street and suddenly find a treasure so you grab it (speaking in foreign language) if you find tau-ra if you mean if you've required it then you find life, having tau-ra in your heart means having a pacemaker, having a lot of life i think that tchazada was a simple association, tau-ra is life (speaking in foreign language) who when there was a decree, the Roman government (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) you're gonna get killed he told the story of the fish who were asked by the fakhs to jump out of the water because the fishermen were chasing them he said come and dry then you'll be safe in the fishermen and they said if in the water which is our oxygen it's our environment we have problems existing what will happen when we're out of the water, tau-ra is the water it's it's life it's the stream of life for the Jew and what he was saying is tau doesn't mean that you have to be a tau-ra you have to have tau-ra be part of you, tau-ra part of you is the act of yeshlim (speaking in foreign language) of when you go to shul and god gives you the tau-ra you're right there to accept it how you accept it by going over it once twice, third time with the parish, third time with the tau-gung tells us about all the rush and thereby you're now a someone who tau-ra is inside him, tau-ra is inside you, you're breathing tau-ra, then marihimlo yamav ushnottaf his days and years are long because he's acquired he's acquired life that's it for the shure from a second brochord and now for today's me drash, me drash yumi, this is still as we're big still in pashat, still in pashat kohr, but tiftach ha'arets et pia, the earth opened its mouth that's the language that the tau-ra uses to describe how the great pit opened up and they fell inside but tiftach ha'arets et pia, marihby huda, the major says, votoch a'n iftach hula a'arets piffiyyotar bei, that what actually happened was that many many mouths opened up shenae marahas, you know that because it says bakareph kohli Israel that the earth opened up its mouth in the midst of all of Israel, so of you the saying how if it's in the midst of all of Israel there has to be a lot of different little mouths because some people fell there and some people didn't, they were all mixed up, if you need that a pit should open up and they need the feet of every single person that fell in bakareph kohli Israel in the midst of all of Israel, so the machanei cell is very very big and in the midst of all that large camp there was a mouth meaning many mouths, a'babhi nachamya, not true, vahrei, tiftach ha'arets et pia, it says the earth opened up its mouth and the earth only has one mouth, the language of the pasa kohli indicates one mouth a'amahalalalabhiu the saitre of the mihamya, vahrei, bakare of kohli Israel, so how do you explain the fact that it says in the midst of all Israel, so we answered elisha na asaita a'arets kimashpekh, bakhal ha'arets kimashpekh, bakhal ha'are chimashpekh, ha'are chamya mayamidkal gilbi arayd, uba imo, that the ground, the entire area became like a funnel, in other words it was it became inclined towards the middle point and wherever any one of them, one of the people from Adat Kaurakh, was found he began to roll until he got to the point of the real mouth of the of the earth and in sait mikleim bakare bisa e'amu, uma kai'imba tiftach ha'arets et pia, that's where you can have both bikare of kohli Israel, that it was in the midst of all Israel and also only one mouth because it was one mouth but it opened up everywhere meaning this sort of funnel shape and then the drop it's a little bit humorous no there's a slight incline of a funnel you get to the middle and then boom you fall down you fall down to the bottom so we have a makhloket in the middle hush between wahudhu who says many mouths and namina khamya who says one mouth of the middle but a funnel leading to it what's the meaning of this midrash i think the explanation is his father's the people in Adat Kaurakh who are all different people not just in theory we say that all everyone is different but in terms of their argument clearly they came for different reasons kohli had his beef apparently he wanted to be kohingadol he was angry at Adat nbaviva they're they're not they're not calidates to be kohingadol they had another beef they were angry at machella bano to tell them what to do own ben pellet another famous right there where he wanted the mataym jhami shimish came for other reasons they were searching for god they wanted to bring katoret and there were all kinds of other people the midrash explains how kohli spent all night looking for every cause of the tension he could find and adding them to his camp basically you have here a collection of people who what unifies them is that they're angry at somebody else so in theory they should each receive a different punishment or a different the different destiny and that's what wudhu says if they're being swallowed up by the earth which sounds like the same thing but each one of them is swallowed up differently each one has his own mouth that grabs him each one gets buried in his own particular place but kernef kohi each one according to his place within israel that's where he was swallowed up different different bites for each one a little nibble for you and a different nibble for you that being jhami says the pasaq says one mouth how do i have one mouth there was this funnel shape and they all rolled and got to it what does that mean i think he agrees that each one is different but he says the cause if you go deeper behind them all stood color so the earth inclines underneath the individual feet of each one but then he rolls until he comes to that sensual point which pulls them all together that's the whole of color in other words the mahloket the distinction the dispute between them the jhami and maybe hudah is are they treated for what they've done or for the underlying psychological cause which unifies them all and the question is like what is the destiny are you is what you do that's who you are or there's god who sees deep into one's heart really judge and in the end put a stamp on a person on the basis of his ultimate motivation and the cause that unifies his actions and this is expressed by the two different places that they were swallowed up or they swallowed up by the ground underneath their own feet or did they roll roll roll following gravity till they got back to the place which pulls them all together which i think is where korax mouth was found and that was the mouth of the earth would swallow them all up that's it for today we heard today this year on musaket barakot alakhaba bakadah followed by the daily mitt rashman pashat korax tomorrow we'll be back with a pashat a shavua and until then kul tob this has been as a big wishing you the best learn well bibakat atarah mitzi on and we'll be back tomorrow