KMTT - the Torah Podcast
KMTT - The Weekly Mitzva Yom Yerushalayim
KMTT - The Weekly Mitzva Yom Yerushalayim, by Rav Binyamin Tabory
KMTT kimit sion tece tora. This is KMTT the Torah broadcast. And this is, as a bit today, is Monday chaf gibmel yar. Today's shul is the shul in the weekly mitzvah of Aravina mintivari. This is the week of Yomirushadayim. And that will, as you will immediately see, will affect at least some of the shul. In fact, today's shul, the mitzvah of the week, is KMTutshadirushadayim, rather than a mitzvah taken from the poshata shavua. After the shul of Aravivari, I will be back with the alahayumit. This week, we're going to celebrate Yomirshalayim, kafqt yar, and today shiyur will be devoted to the kadusha of Yurshalayim. The man's sion, lo echashah, lo manyushalayim, lo echkout. We will not be silent on behalf of Yurshalayim. The topic that we are going to discuss is the actual kadusha of Yurshalayim. And the kadusha of his man has there. The rambam in Hilchol's base of Hirah, Pariglav, explains that the kadusha of Aritisrael is transient. And there were two times that the kadusha was imposed, once at the time of Yurshua. And that kadusha dissipated at the time of the gola. The second kadusha of Yursha of Aritisrael, what we call in Hebrew kadushashniya, that kadusha remains intact according to the rambam. However, the rambam says this is only as related to all of Aritisrael. As related to the base hamiktash, we ask him that the kadusha of Yurshalayim is eternally kadush from the kadusha rishona. The kadusha rishona, the first kadusha of Yurshalayim, came about Rishlomo, that he was mikadesh, the Azarah, and Yurshalayim. So not only does the rambam think that there is kadusha in the base hamiktash, which is eternal, the rambam thinks that the kadusha of Yurshalayim is also eternal, also based on kadusha rishona. And rambam, interestingly enough, tries to validate his sack by asking rhetorically, "Vallama aniom elba miktash biyushalayim kadushalayim kadushalayim kadushalayim kadushalayim kadushalayatidalavo," or "bikdushalayatishalayatidalavo," or "bikdushalayatishalayatidalavo," why did I decide that in Yurshalayim and mikdash, the kadusha is eternal from the time of the kadusha rishona, whereas as far as I said, I said, "The kadusha is not kithya latidalavo." The rambam said, "Because kadushat amiktash nayoshalayim nayoshrinah, ushrinah inenabatila." The kadusha of aritha'srael is based on kadusha yoshua, in the fact that yoshua or Ezra's mikadish, but the kadusha of the Beethamiktash, and therefore of Yushalayim, is the kadusha of the shrinah itself, and that shrinah can obviously never be removed. And the rambam quotes a text to prove what he says. He says, "Harehu o mair vashimotiek liktashikim," the Torah already warned us that because vahrhu will destroy the Beethamiktash, how do you see from this pathic, that the Beethamiktash, even though the kadusha retains the kadusha, the rambam just quotes hazal, anuul hahameen, asapish shamulmin bhiktushatamimondim. Even though they are desolate, they are hareis, they still retain the original kadusha. It seems to me that the rambam learns it from the pathicul, hazal learns from the pathic, vahrhuimotiekimimondim dashechaim, and he do grammar, you could have written this in one, two ways. Et miktashikim hazameen, I will have your Beethamiktash and destroy it. Or you could say, "Bashechaimotiekimondashechaim," I'll put the verb before the noun, I'll destroy the Beethamiktash. Apparently, the rambam thinks hazal thought, when the verb comes before the noun, vahrhuimotie, I will destroy it miktashikim means that even after it's destroyed, it retains its character, as the miktash, it retains its kadusha of the Beethamiktash. So the rambam poskims that Yushalayim and Beethamiktash have eternal kadusha from the time of shlomo. And we know that the rambam considers Yushalayim to be the city of the miktash for other halakhos as well. It has the same laws as the Beethamiktash, not only to kadusha, but other halakhos that are relevant. It's well known as the rambam in purishamishnayas. And in Hilchoshulfar, Parik Beethamiktash, the rambam explains that the law of blowing shulphar on shabis. Today, bizmanazheh, is that we accept exeira of raba. Ramb doesn't quote exeira, he just quotes the halakhah, that we do not blow shulphar today outside the miktash. On shabis, even if it's on shabis, we blow the shulphar in the Beethamiktash. The rambam extends that halakhah to all of Yushalayim. Of course, I'm referring to Yushalayim Biznimah, you're shining inside the walls of Yushalayim. But the rambam thinks that in Yushalayim Biznimah, we blow shulphar on shabis. Today, there was a whole asic once upon a time. In Radzevan quotes, this is safer, in Modimarah, all historical incidents where some people really wanted to blow shulphar in shabis. They explained that even bizmanazheh, we would blow shulphar in shabis in Yushalayim, even though we don't blow shulphar in the Beethamiktash. Be that as it may be, the historical story is very interesting. But according to rambam, theoretically, you should blow shulphar on shabis in the Beethamiktash, and if we should blow shulphar, be Yushalayim. The same is also true according to the rambam in Purish and Mshnayyas and soka. That the law of taking a lulav is midaraysa, you take a lulav big vulim, outside Yushalayim, outside the Beethamiktash, rather. You take a lulav one day, and the rest is drabannam, bizmanazheh. The rest of lulav, the whole week, is only a mitzvah drabannam. But in the Beethamiktash, u smaktam lusnayashem lukhe, kim shabasya amin. In the Beethamiktash, the law of Simcha seems to be, seems to be best of patsakul. K'a'am lukheam lukheam lukheam biyamar isham priyyasadak, patsa lalv, tayim bannaf, it's a lulav, vaviyyas. Akhau, u smaktam lusnayashem lukhe, kim shabasya amin. The Torah is said in one patsak. You take the first day, you take the four meaning, you take the lulav and esra, etc. And u smaktam lusnayashem, and you should rejoice before Akhau the sperchu seven days. So we explain the first patsakas referring to outside the Beethamiktash, where you take the lulav only one day, but wherever the last days, the next six days of sakas, u smaktam lusnayashem lukhe, that means you take the lulav as an extension of the Simcha, the Beethamiktash, you take the lulav, kol shiva, all the whole week. Narayama paskin, that you take the lulav, midaraysa, and all of your shalayim. That's the Ramam's opinion, that your shalayim has the same laws as the miktash. Of course, we should point out that it doesn't have all the laws of the miktash, it has certain laws of miktash, which we'll go and refer to a little later. Deriveded is as well known, disagrees with the Ramam as far as the Beethamiktash itself goes. According to the Ramam, we said that the kodusha Beethamiktash remains today, and therefore, according to the Ramam, the kodusha siri shalayim has the kodusha of the miktash. Deriveded disagrees. And the Riva says, "I think that the kodusha of miktash is also not intact today," and he explains the halakhic ramifications. And then the Riva is well known, saying, "Kashni glali miso da shamiriyav," some sort of a mystical statement, the Riva says, "I have such a tradition that someone told me miso da shamiriyav," the secret. I told those who fear him that the Ramam, the Riva then goes on to say, "The Sisa hanikna sa tasha manbo karis." Today, if a person walks into the place of the miktash, there is no key of karis. In other words, the Riva says the kodusha is not the same as it was in time of the Beethamiktash when there was such an Easter chamour, such a severe prohibition to going into the makamamiktash that you would be high of karis. You would actually receive the penalty, the punishment of karis. The Riva here is important to note. The Riva did not say that you were allowed to go into Hara Bias. The Riva did not say that at all. The Riva just said, "Hanikna sa shami manbo karis." Today, the person who goes into the Hara Bias, even Hara Bias. I am not even talking about your shalam. I am talking about Hara Bias. The Riva says you know karis. There is a long discussion and I have shown him exactly what the Riva meant and why he is an enigmatic comment, "angle karis." He didn't say it's allowed. He just said, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Riva says, "You have no karis." Some people have answered that the random thing that Arita Shrill also has kadusha today. It's true that the random thinks that the first kadusha of Yushalayim of Baysamikdash is permanent. Whereas he thought that the kadusha of Yushua, the first kadusha of Arita Shrill, that could evaporate when the Jews got to go. But today the random does think that there is kadusha of Arita Shrill. We ask him that according to the random, that the kadusha of Ezra, the kadusha which Ezra, with which Ezra endowed you, Arita Shrill is intact today. But yet the random thinks, explains this very clearly in Hills of Shrimos, Parakales. Why do I think that there is no bin of Shrimos and Masras today because of the side reason? The kadusha of Arita Shrill is complete. But there is another bin that in order to be high of Shrimos and Masras, you have to have Bias Kulham. You must have a time when bin Asras come together to Arita Shrill. Like Kita, Vololars, Mushwa Taqim. When you enter Arita Shrill as a unit. And therefore the random thinks of this man as that, since there is no character today in Arita Shrill of Bias Kulham. Therefore, Shrimos and Masras only mature upon him. By the way, there is an interesting Mochlokas between Rivhayim, Rivhayim, Rivhayim, and the other Gidolim, whether this din of Bias Kulham is just really a side in, or there is an issue of Kadusha involved. Maybe, according to the random, it is just a side issue. The Kadusha of Arita Shrill is really, really complete. However, a side din of Bias Kulham means that it is a technical reason, there is no Shrimos and Masras. The same way there would be no high of Shrimos and Masras on certain types of growth, which we are not going to go into now. So the same way, there is no din of Shrimos and Masras because there is no Bias Kulham. Or it could be that Bias Kulham means there is a lack of Kadusha Saaretz because there is no concept of Bias Kulham. If you learn one way, the way that the Kadusha is intact, it is rather easy to say that you are showing even though the Kadusha is intact, still the din of Shrimos and Masras even inherit yourself, even in your Shallayim, means that you have to have Bias Kulham. Since we don't have Bias Kulham, it's not as bad. There is no Shrimos and Masras. There are other Akhulam who say a very important distinction about the Kadusha of your Shallayim, which we will explain now. The question was, since we think that the Kadusha of your Shallayim, which is the Kadusha of the Biasamikdosh, is intact, why are we not trying to have Shrimos and Masras today in your Shallayim? In all of the various Shallayim, perhaps the Kadusha is not intact. If you learn that Bias Kulham means that somehow, as he saw him, a pagan, there is some sort of a lack of the total Kadusha of various Shallayim because there is no Bias Kulham, that applies to the place where the Kadusha has to come about and be restored. But in the Ramban, the Kadusha of your Shallayim is the Kadusha of your Shallayim. So, why is the Kadusha of your Shallayim? Retain its property to be had in Shrimos and Masras. So, many Akhulam and point out, I think, it's the first, perhaps, in the Mikdosh of it, but many people have discussed the sense that there is an inherent difference between the Kadusha of your Shallayim and the Kadusha of your Shallayim. The Kadusha of your Shallayim, besides being spiritual concepts, which perhaps we will discuss later, besides that your Shallayim has Kadusha in the very earth of various Shallay, a fire of various Shallayim. The land of various Shallayim has Kadusha, physically an askadusha. They tell about Radha Chazonish that when he first came to visit Kravit Sahayim, the Kiblitz called Kravit Sahayim, the first year of Shmita, that he was there, that he visited. They kept Shmita properly, I don't know exactly which year it was, but when he came there, he bent down, kissed the ground and said, "Kachagas, the shavta'a, shavta'a, shavta'a, shavam." The land itself, the earth itself has a Kadusha. That Kadusha will create a shield, an obligation of too much the masters, from things that grow from the ground, because the ground has Kadusha, what comes out of the ground has itself as Kadusha, and therefore you have too much the masters. However, the Kadusha of your Shallayim is not a Kadusha of the earth, it's not a Kadusha of the ground, it's a Kadusha of Maka, it's a Kadusha of the place. The Kadusha of your Shallayim, as the Kadusha of Basar Midash, is more of a concept of the place, Hayyam Makkam, the place that Shiyi Prasham, the place that Kadusha Prasham chooses, is the place where the Shrina rests. This is not really because of the earth, of the place, of the land, it's aloha, aloha, in the atmosphere, in the air of your Shallayim. So if that would be true, then the question of too much the masters, would mean that you are Shallayim, as far as the earth goes, and it has the same Kadusha of all the very children, obviously. The special Kadusha, the unique Kadusha of your Shallayim that we're talking about, is not the Kadusha of the earth, it's not the Kadusha of the earth of your Shallayim, it's the Kadusha of the avir of your Shallayim, the Kadusha of the air, of the place of your Shallayim, and therefore you must the masters would not apply, but the Halachas, for example, are blowing Shulphur in shabbis, or taking a luluf, called Shiva, or other Halachas that might apply to the Basim English, might apply to Shallayim, apply to Basim English, might apply to Shallayim as well. I said before, not all the Halachas that apply to Shallayim, to Basim English would automatically apply to Shallayim. For example, in Parachales of Hilkah's Basim Prira, the Ramam quotes, the famous Halacha, "Ain Bonim es amigdish Valaywa." You, when we're not allowed to build the Basim Ikdash at night time, or we are much in its amish now. The Basim Ikdash has to be built in the day time. There are questions, and I'll show you what would happen if you built the Basim Ikdash in the day, in the night time, is it possible, is it not possible, but for our purposes, that's just learning the basic Halach. Ain Bonim es amigdash Valaywa, the Basim Ikdash is not to be built at night. The Rezvaz on the spot says that this Halacha only applies to Sharnikhanar Ullasim, to that gate of Yushalayim, which is called Sharnikhanar, within that gate, you know that, because that's called Mikdash, of Al-Hara Baysh, Shukaneged Mahalabiya. Even Hara Baysh, even the Temple Mount itself. Bonim es amigdah Valaywa. That you could build at night. So the laws of Yushalayim are not exactly the laws of the Basim Ikdash. Yushalayim is an extension of the Basim Ikdash. It's an Yishba Mikdash. Since it's an Yishba Mikdash, therefore the Kedusha of the Mikdash applies to Sharnik, but I would apply it to the general atmosphere, to the general place of the city of the Mikdash, rather than to the earth itself. However, this answer raises another issue that's a little complicated. There is a din in the, that's called the Gagimva Aliyas, of Yushalayim, of the Hara Baysh, the Basim Ikdash, the laws that apply to the translated as the roof, the attics in Arita Shrall, in Yushalayim, and the Basim Ikdash, do these halakal, do the Kedusha, the laws of the Kedusha of Basim Ikdash, and the Kedusha of Hara Baysh, those Kedusha, so they apply also to Gagimva Aliyas. The, in fact the Dittamudis, under the title Gagimva Aliyas has a whole section about the different laws. Just to summarize a little bit what he says, the Aliyas of the Heikal, of the Kedusha Kedashim, the, the, this attic of the Kedusha Kedashim itself certainly has the Kedusha, not only is that the Kedusha, it seems to have a very high level of Kedusha. The current God will even go there at all. You only go in there once in a very long time to check, to see if things are, are okay, but that does that Kedusha. Whereas the Kedusha of the, of the Heikal, of the Kedusha Kedashim, one is Kedusha. That's a special Allahah, that the, the Gagim, of the, of the, of those places, even though the Aliyas, Kedusha, the attic, what we would call the attic, but the Gag does not have Kedusha. And then he goes on to explain the other places. In Yushalayim, it's a whole, whole, long story, is the Gagimva, the Ashigashim, loan is captured, came is captured, to beat my focus, to me, show name is there, santasos, whether the Aliyas and Gagimva, shalani is Kedashim. According to what we said, it seems to be that it should be Kedash, because if you talk about the earth, the source of Kedusha comes from the earth itself, then I could somehow understand that the Gagimva relates to what grows from the ground, and from the ground up, that part is Kedashim. If you go further and further and you create a separation between the ground and the level, where you are, attics, higher floors, roofs, I can understand the discussion whether the Kedusha should apply, but if you learn the Kedusha, the Kedusha is a Kedusha of the place itself, then it would seem strange that the laws of Gagimva Aliyas wouldn't apply to all of Yushalayim. The Mihasthina in Myssa shinsamikbait, has a whole discussion of this point, and he has, as a matter of fact, thinks that according to the Ramban, the Kedusha of Gagimva Aliyas does apply to Yushalayim. Interestingly enough, the Mihasthina is the one that we asked the question, why don't Yushalayim also apply to Yushalayim? According to his line of reasoning, the Yushalayim also seems to be a ground halacha, and that would apply in Yushalayim. Now the question of Gagimva Aliyas wouldn't have bothered me as much, but nevertheless, he says that according to the Ramban, Gagimva Aliyas and Yushalayim might not have Kedusha, according to the Ramban in the right, but according to what we're saying, it makes more sense, according to the Ramban, that Gagimva Aliyas should have the Kedusha of the base hemikdush because that's Kedusha's out here. Perhaps we would have to say an answer because, for a specific reason, there were places outside the Hekhah that there was a special halacha that they would not make hadish to Gagimva Aliyas, since the Kedusha of Yushalayim is an extension of the base hemikdush, it would not be logical that the Kedusha of Yushalayim should have, in tail of Kedusha of Gagimva Aliyas, when in the base hemikdush itself, not all parts of the base hemikdush had Kedusha of the Gidimva Aliyas. And then all we would have to do is understand why those side reasons that they imposed the law that the Gagimva Aliyas of the base hemikdush itself were not sanctified. The Ramnikr, the Kedusha of Yushalayim, according to the Ramban, is complete. We explain that it's the Kedusha of the Azir, and it's the Kedusha's because it's the city of the base hemikdush. While we have discussed the laws of Yushalayim throughout the ages, explained that Kedusha of Yushalayim is permanent, we realize that for many, many years Yushalayim was in the state of Khurban, Yushalayim was in the state of desolation, destruction. And in fact it's a special halacha that a person who sees Yushalayim when it's Kharev, so he asked the tear Kriya. He's required to tear his garments. There are three laws of tearing garments down places in our Yushalayim. The first is that the person sees one of the array Yuhudah, one of the cities of the area of Yuhudah, and he sees that city desolate. So it has Kriya, it says the past again, and it has Kriya, and the same is true if he sees Yushalayim, and the third is true if he sees the makama mikdush, the place of the base hemikdush. And many people have discussed, Rabbi Shakti wrote an article about it, "If today, Bismana Zah, we have to tear Kriya in these places." So let's just discuss the laws of tearing Kriya on your Yushalayim. With this applied Bismana Zah. So as John Shekster explained, the discussion would be, "Why is Yushalayim unique that you tear Kadusha on your Yushalayim more than you would on a regular city in Yuhudah?" And there might be two explanations for this. One explanation would be that Yushalayim is the city of the base hemikdush. While it's not the base hemikdush itself, but to even add more, since it has the Kadusha of the base hemikdush, according to the mama mam, since it's the Yushin Yash, it's the city of the base hemikdush. Therefore there would be a special law of tearing Kriya this mama even when there's no base hemikdush. On the other hand, we might say that the reason Yushalayim is unique, that you tear Kriya a specific time, an additional time, more than Arayudah, is because Yushalayim represents the capital city of Yushalayim. It represents the seat of the kingdom of Yushalayim, and when Yushalayim is tired and is the government is absent, so therefore that itself would be a reason to tear Kriya. It certainly is true that Yushalayim represents both to us. The capital city of Yushalayim, the city of the kingdom, as well as the city of the base hemikdush. In fact, in Yushalayim we say, in four short words, mikdushmalaq imaluqah. Mikdushmalaq, the king of the king of the king, the capital city, and we address Yushalayim when we say le Khadadi, and we say mikdushmalaq imaluqah, kumitzimitokah. Jews, throughout the ages, have prayed about art as well, and Yushalayim specifically. The Tiyot, the song, the song, the Khadadi that we sing Friday night, written by the Kabbalist of Spat, was written with the idea that they live in Spat, but they have tremendous desire to live in Yushalayim. And most of le Khadadi is actually addressed to the city of Yushalayim. mikdushmalaq imaluqah, the capital city. The city of the base hemikdushmalaq, kumitzimitokah, faykhah. Adlakshah has been makdushannas, for you to be in a state of desolation. It's time to rebuild yourself, to come back to being both the capital city of Yushalayim and the city of the mikdush. If we would assume that Yushalayim is both Allahqas, then we would ask, which one is the main reason that you would tear kriya on Yushalayim? If you say it's the capital city, then you would argue, perhaps, and you could discuss a very important argument. Today, you would not tear kriya in Yushalayim at all, because bar-hasham Yushalayim is rebuilt. Bar-hasham, Jews, live in Yushalayim, and there's a government of Jewish people in there to sell. And to call that a kurban, I think, would be very difficult. So if that would be the reason that we would tear kriya, then we went to tear kriya. If you say that you tear kriya, because it's the city of the vesamikdush, you might argue and say that the city of the vesamikdush means that as long as there's no vesamikdush, even though we go to the kata, even though some people even go to Harabayis, but the vesamikdush yourself is not built. It's true that there's kudusha of the vesamikdush, according to the rambam. But the vesamikdush is not built. If the vesamikdush is not built, so then, according to this line of reasoning, you would tear kriya. This man is there, and today you would tear kriya in Yushalayim, and therefore you would also tear kriya on the city of the vesamikdush. In davening, we talk about bonne yushalayim. Because it's Baruch who builds Yushalayim. Interesting in the Tanya, not still about a shatanya. There's a safe air of a risham, the tanya, rabbasi. It's a compilation of all the laws in the vesamikdum that was written by one of the mishanam, Rabbi Shiel Harofe. He lived in Rome, and he wrote a safer tanya rabbasi, including the minal king, Rabbi Felder. The big tanya rabbas from Toronto wrote a long commentary on this, on the tanya rabbasi. But the tanya rabbas, the clothes, kishid, bhanas, shlamalas, vesamikdush, miyyat, paskumalahreya, share, vamu buruch atasham bonne yushalayim. When shlamal built the vesamikdush, the manlachim began to sing a song, bonne yushalayim. Interesting. The bonne yushalayim was the bracha that they made when they built the vesamikdush. So you see from here how closely the vesamikdush and yushalayim are intertwined. The building of the vesamikdush is actually the building of the shalayim, as long as the vesamikdush is not built, then you shalayim is not in fact. So therefore we really dove in the vesamikdushalayim. You should return to your shalayim, vesishkumalasoka kashidibarita, and you should dwell in it, as you promised, the vesamikdabadabadamadavatamadavatakim, and establish the chair of david. The chair of david is the Davidic chair of kingdom. So building your shalayim includes building the vesamikdush, as well as establishing the seat of david, both the city of your shalayim will assign both characteristics, the capital city of the Zavidic kingdom, as well as building the vesamikdush, the mayor of your main. In Africa, today is Al-Akhayomid. After saying shalayim, we have Khazar Atashats. Khazar Atashats is a Takanad Rabbanan, a rabbinic enactment. The explicit reason given in Daguemara is to allow those who do not know how to daven, that they should fulfill their mitzvah by listening to the Khazan, and they fulfill it, their yosei, through his tphila. However, the poskim rate, that it's still a Takanad Rabbanan. The kanad is that everybody, that the Sibur should be included in this tphila, and therefore, there is Al-Akhayom in Shoshan Arah, that one is not allowed to talk. Or, basically, not to listen, or is not allowed to detach oneself from the Khazar Atashats, for instance, by talking. There is a general prohibition to talk in shul, about things which are not connected to shul, the vreihulin. But there is a specific issue to talk to the Khazar Atashats because of the Takanad Rabbanan, that we are all partaking and participating in Khazar Atashats. There is another al-Akhah, that says that one answers a main after every bakhad at one hears. That's a general al-Akhah. And therefore, when the Khazan makes a bakhayim Khazat Atashats, one answers a main. The Rabban, when he quotes the Khazat Atashats, says the Khazan gets up to Daven, everyone stands and listens and answers a main, in which the verb of salivatric was midayak, he understood that Rabbanan is saying the general obligation to answer a main after every bakhad. Not every place the Rabban mentions a bakhah, does he say that you have to answer a main. But here he says this is the way Khazar Atashats takes place. The reasoning being that Khazar Atashats is that fila of all of us. One person is davening, but it's the fila of everyone. And the a main is not merely the obligation to agree when someone makes a bakhad to himself. It's your participation in the communal fila, filaats hatsibu, which we call Khazar Atashats. The tool, the vash, excuse me, the tool, quote the vash himself says that his father's minut, the vash's father Rabban here, had him in height to answer, "Pahrukhum varakh shimau." When he heard the shamasham in a vahra. The language of the vasham prays that he didn't think it was a hiyev, it has no source in the Khamara. It was the khasim of a vihir. But this khasim has become more of this universal. And people answer vahrukhum varakh shimau. Including in Shranasra in Khazar Atashats. There is some question whether it's, I think, the gras was opposed. But he was opposed for a practical reason. If people answer vahrukhum varakh shimau, and the Khazan doesn't pause, then you're liable to miss the end of the vahra. You won't hear the Khazan say the end of the vahra, and that's a real hiyev to answer a main after the vahra. So therefore, he thought it was better if you don't say vahrukhum varakh shimau. The opposite conclusion from the same problem would be to instruct a khasim to wait. When they say vahrukhum varakh shim, the pause, the hard congregation can say vahrukhum varakh shimau, and then to continue. But there will be some tension whether the khasan will really do that. The vahra have had a further objection. All parts can agree, you don't answer vahrukhum varakh shimau. In a place where you can't be master, we are not allowed to say things. Because vahrukhum varakh shimau, it's a minnow, which will be a hiyev, the vahra's father made up. And it's not an obligation. So if you're in a place where you're not allowed to be master, then of course even if you could say a main, you can answer a main to certain vahrukhum varakh shimau. The vahra felt that you shouldn't interrupt in khasat shaats. For the same reason we said before, khasan rata shaats is the communal trilah. You are participating in it. You're actually saying shimau as part of the community. And therefore he thought you shouldn't answer anything other than the a main, which is your participation. But everything else should be hectic just as you wouldn't answer vahrukhum varakh shimau in the middle of shimau. If you heard someone else, say a vahra. So again the minnow goes yes to say it, but to try to say in such a way that it doesn't ruin the vahra, to say quickly and to hear the khasan answer, the end of the vahra and answer main after him, as I pointed out, the grath thought it wasn't such a good minnow, and the vahra was actually opposed to the saying of vahrukhum varakh shimau. I mentioned the vahra and says that the khaal stands and answers are main. And apparently the vahra and thing stands means stands. There are we shown who say specifically that when sitts jul khasa vahra shaats one could sitts jul khasa tashats, but since the vahra has been all in roshashana, the vahra and vahra and the vahra and the vahra and the thought you should stand. And the reason would be, again this is the word in the standing in the vahra, that the congregation is davining shimau nessay, jul khasa lata shaats. The davining shimau nessay, through the words of the khasa, as a community, as a unit, and therefore they should behave as though they were standing before the king, specifically one stands, jul khasa, the rab added what should stand with one's feet together, just like when one says shimau nessay. The rama says yesh omim to stand. There was an opinion to stand that apparently is the rama's sak, and on the basis of that people stand, but they don't really stand necessarily like shimau nessay, the way the rab suggested, and the rama says also to stand, which would also make sense, because standing is an basic expression of ami dal dif neha madar, standing before the king, during the king's presence. The other lahra might be more connected to how one actually says the words. But, again, the meaning of most people is to sit a mid-sitting during khasa lata shaats, and almost all spouty congregations, that's the meaning. And, as long as khasa am, there are this way, and both minhagim are present. We try to explain the reasoning behind it. Al lahra maysa, most parts can feel that it's permitted to sit and to listen, but you should listen carefully, paying attention to all the words, and answer a mane at the proper time. That's it for today. You will listen in to KMTT, the shul av hara vinaminta vorri in the weekly mitzvah, and the hara hai omit. This is, as a big question to you, Kultur. We'll be back tomorrow with the shul av, hara v moshitaragan on the essentials of a vodata shaam. And, until then, Kultur v vibhakata tor ami tion. Umi et tion. This has been KMTT, the Torah Podcast. KMTT, et tion, tece tore. Uda vahra shaam, miyushalaym. [BLANK_AUDIO]