KMTT - the Torah Podcast
KMTT - Avodat Hashem #02
KMTT - Avodat Hashem, Shiur #02, by Rav Moshe Taragin
(music) (speaks in foreign language) Welcome back to KMTT. And this is Azubik, and today is Tuesday Yud Alif. Yaa. Today's shoe is by Arav Moshe Tarragan. And it's the second shoe in the series on essentials in Abu Dhabiat Assham. Second part of the shoe you began last week, on Torah. I'll be back after the shoe with today's Alahayomit. In our previous shear, we discussed the role of Talmatura in affording as close an approximation of Akurushbarah's will to the human intellect. Therefore, Talmatura's study has always classically been centralized as the primary hub of religious experience. The previous shear noted the difficulty, which is latent within the religious experience, religious experience which challenges and inspires toward an encounter between the mortal mind and the infinite wisdom of Akurushbarah between human and divine, an encounter which is flawed, it's very root. Lahavdel the pagan response or a paganistic response of attempting to humanize the divine essence to render it more accessible and identifiable to the human imagination. Yiddishkai has steadfastly rejected any and every attempt to humanize the divine image throughout history. Instead, it relies on Talmatura. To yield an insight to Akurushbarah's will and his mind, his intellect. And through that insight to afford a relationship, a relationship which serves as the cornerstone of Otis Hashem and religious experience, as the Rambam writes in Huchl's Chuvah, Perik Yud, Halakhavav. In order to love Hashem to think of him constantly, you can only love Hashem to the degree that you know him. And as the Rambam highlights Al-Pihadeya Tiyahavah, the degree of love will be based upon the degree of knowledge. In Ma'at, Ma'at, if the knowledge is limited, then the love is curtailed. If I'm Harbe, but if the knowledge is thorough and significant, Harbe, and the love itself, will reflect that sweep. In the previous year, we detected two locations in Chazal, where the centrality of Talmatura in yielding an understanding of Akhur Jbarachu's essence where this centrality is noted. The first instance is in the Sefri, Departia's Vaischanan. The Sefri describes the inclusion of Talmatura within the first barter of Kuyashama, which typically discusses theology. The Sefri writes, (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Through Talmatura study, you will understand Hashem. The Ramban based on the Sefri details three elements to the first parash of Kuyashama. Kuyashama, the first parash of, contains Yixar Hashem, theology, accepting Hashem's unity. Exclusivity, Havasa, loving Hashem, Vitamudo, and studying his Tarashu Aikaragadol, Chakultalibo, the central pivot of religion. The second instance in Chazal, where Tarash study is highlighted in its capacity to yield the knowledge of Hashem's Ratsalne, is in Avastra, Vinasa on the fourth parak, the first Mishnah. A gloss to the famous Mishnah in Parkeavas, Ashloshid, Devarm, Holm, Omaid, Al-Tara, Al-Avoda, the Altamilo's Chassadin. Explaining this very famous phraseology of Shivanasadik, Avastra, Vinasa, and claims, Talmatura, Khavivalif Nahamakom is more precious through Akarashbar, who than any religious pursuit, and certainly in this case, more precious than sacrificed than Olos. The fishe Ima Damlomaid Tarah by studying Tarah, Yodai Adai Doshomako making grasp, the knowledge, the will of Akarashbar. In the previous year, we also discussed, a nickname for Tarah based on this reality. The Tarah is referred to twice in the Tarah Talm, Tarah study is referred to as Shhem Hashem. One Pasak is in Hazino, Kishhem Hashem Ekra, Havugodel, a volcano, which Chazal and Brachos. Interpreate as a reference to Tarah study. And by interpreting as a reference to Tarah study, they derive the mitzvah of Birhasa Tarah of reciting a Bracha before Tarah study, based on the Pasak Kishhem Hashem Ekra, the name of Hashem is Talmatura. Second Pasak is in the end of Yisra. (speaking in foreign language) And the Mishnah in Perkayaval's Pergimo Mishnah Vav employs this Pasak and Yisra, which includes the phrase Ashir Askira Shhemi, the name of Hashem, to describe the presence of Akhur Jibarahu during even individual solitary Tarah study. Chazal saw the phrase Shhem Hashem as a reference to Tarah just as Lahavdul, a person's name is not his essence, but it's the way that we access, refer to that person, call out his name, know them, think of them, or imagine them. Similarly, Tarah is the way we, so to speak, name Akhur Jibarahu. It's our access point, it's the root, the porthole, through which we're able to access knowledge and ultimately relationship, not just based on knowledge, but fear and of love. Based on the description of Tarah as the closest approximation of Akhur Jibarahu's essence in human terms, there are two statements in Chazal, which articulate Tarah's ability to facilitate encounter with Akhur Jibarahu. More precisely three. Two are direct statements, and one is a parable or a metaphor. The Gomar and Tamid, Daphlam Adbezim and Alif, states as follows. Tani Rebihia, Kahlahosek Batarah Balayla, Shrinah Kineggdo, specifically targeting Tarah's study at night. Kahlahosek Batarah Balayla, Shrinah Kineggdo, whoever studies Tarah during the evening, the Shrinah appears with the Shrinah is present, is imminent. Highlighting again, reinforcing Tarah's study's ability to draw the Shrinah into the presence of the person studying Tarah. Of course, the emphasis on Tarah's study at night based on the Pazak Kumironi Balayla, La Rosh Hashmurah's, which of concludes with the phrase "Shif-Chih-Chamayim-Libayk," no Haq Penaashm, that by studying Tarah during the Ashmarah's Haalayla, person attains the status of no Haq Penaashm in the presence of Akhur Jibarahu. The selection of Tarah's study at night seems to be based on two factors. At a practical level, night affords greater ability, greater capacity to engage in Tarah's study. The details, the responsibilities, the preoccupations of the day, of finance, of politics, of day to day, intercourse, those responsibilities dissolve at night, freeing time for Tarah's study. But beyond the practical allowance of Tarah's study, which night affords, the Pasek itself, the Gomara based on the Pasek, and to a degree, the Ramban's comments suggest that there is a unique, almost mystical capacity, mystical potency to Tarah's study at night, the Ramban and Hichlestal Matara towards the end of the third parak. In the third parak of Hichlestal Matara, the Ramban employs the phrase "Kesser Tarah," the crown, the nobility, the dignity of Tarah, not just the study of Tarah, but the transformation of self, which the Tarah's study enables, he employs that term three times. In the very beginning of the third parak, he describes the three crowns of Jewish nobility, Kesser Tarah, the crown of Tarah, Kesser Kuhuna, the crown of priesthood, Kesser Malchus, the nobility of a malach, three different forms of Jewish royalty. And of course, the Ramban, based on the Gamaran Yoma, describes Kesser Tarah as both the most democratic form of nobility, as well as the most superior. It is democratic in the sense that it is available to each and every Jew, regardless of race, or not regardless of race, regardless of which Shavit he belongs to. Konim can only stem from Shavit Lavi, and Malach can only stem from Shavit Jhuda, but Talmataras, the Ramban rights, Kowmisha Yirtzayavov Ito, it's democratic, it's equally available, it's equally accessible. The second time, the Ramban describes Kesser Tarah. Not just Tarah study, but the crown of Tarah study, is in the same parak. Halachavav, Misha Nesal Alibol, the Ka'e Mitzvazu Karah, a person whose heart stirs him to fulfill the Mitzvaz of Tarah study appropriately. Viliyos Mokhtar be Kesser Tarah to become be knighted in the crown and jewel of Tarah. Sir Ramban describes, he has to have a almost unifocussed commitment to Tarah study. (speaking in foreign language) He cannot divert his attention to other pursuits, he cannot aspire to both acquire Tarah, as well as affluence, as well as fame, very famous Misha Nesal Alibol, (speaking in foreign language) to a degree a person has to allow, or invite some level of personal deprivation. The third location in this famous third parak in which the Ramban employs Kesser Tarah, is based loosely on the Skimar and Tamid, as well as a parallel Skimar and Avarizara. The Ramban writes, (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) even though a person is commanded to learn, both during the day, as well as during the evening, based, initially, on the phraseology in Barshas Vessranan, (speaking in foreign language) more extensively, based on the Pasuk, in the first parak, (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) a person has equal responsibility to study Tarah during daylight hours, as well as during evening hours. But the Ramban writes, (speaking in foreign language) person will only achieve the majority of his Tarah acquisition of his Tarah delivery during Tarah study at night. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) person who desires to achieve, again, the crown, the nobility, the personal transformation, the nobling effect of Tarah. (speaking in foreign language) he should be extra scrupulous during his evenings. (speaking in foreign language) I should not waste his time as evenings with eating and drinking and nonsense and mindless activity. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) The poetry, the beauty, the charm, the personal transformation upon the Tarah study here occurs primarily through the experience of studying Tarah during the evening. This Ramban seems to portray Tarah study during the evening and this supremacy, the superiority of Tarah study during the evening in more than just practical terms. One may have claimed that the Gamaran Tamir refers to the superiority of Tarah study at night because practically the night affords greater capability and greater time resources. The Ramban's poetic ode to Tarah study at night seems to elicit a mystical poetic quality to night study which the day study may not possess. A very similar sentiment about Akonjebaruku's presence being elicited by Tarah study is provided by a Madesh Tanfuma in Parshas Vayakel, Simen Zion. This matters, stated in much more clinical terms, but it evokes the same image. (speaking in foreign language) Wherever the Tarah is, the Shrina could be found. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Therefore, the iron which hauls the Tarah is more relished, is more precious than any other of the utensils of the Mishkan and that's why its construction is constantly stated at the beginning of the list of Mishkan utensils and Mishkan vessels. There may be a slight nuance difference between the Madresh in Tanfuma, Madesh Tanfuma Parshas Vayakel and the aforementioned Gamaarintamid. The Gamaarintamid relates to Tarah study, Kalaosek, Bhattara, Balaila, whoever actively studies Tarah, whereas Narambha writes, (speaking in foreign language) The Madresh in Tanfuma is not necessarily describing Tarah study as much as the presence of Tarah, describes the iron, presumably the iron and the safe for Tarah which the iron haulsed, served more as a symbol for Tarah study unless as a catalyzer or an enabler for Tarah, at a catalyst or enabler for Tarah study, because no one presumably was able to employ the safe for Tarah and the iron for personal Tarah study. The language of the Madresh in Tanfuma, (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) perhaps generalizes the association between Tarah and Akharsh Barghu's presence beyond the limited experience of active Tarah study, extending more to the presence of Tarah and safe for Tarah within our midst. The third reference in Chazal, which associates Tarah study with the presence of Akharsh Barghu, is found in a fascinating Madresh in the beginning of Parshas Truma. Parshas Truma describes the initial stages, the blueprints, planning towards constructing the Mishka. Typically, we view the Mishka and the Mikdash experience as almost a separate track, a separate element of religious experience, separate from Talmitar. The events surrounding the delivery of Tarah, the events that Tarah see and I have concluded. And the urbonicinal now commands the construction of the base of Mikdash, primarily as it were, to facilitate Corbonus, atonement, sacrifices, ritual, ceremony, perhaps a slightly different track toward approaching the urbonicinal. Yet the Madresh and Madresh Raba, Paraklam and Gimmol in Parshas Truma provides a very, very different snapshot of the function of Mishka and its affiliation with the events in Harsini and the delivery of Tarah. Parshas Truma begins with a very, very strange verb describing the donation of material and goods towards the construction of the Mishka. The Yikhu Li Truma. Typically, presumably, the Parshas should have begun, have begun with the phrase Viyitnu Li Truma. They should donate or dedicate various goods and materials as contributions towards construction of the Mishka. And yet the Tarah writes the Yikhu Li Truma. Chazal in this Madresh sees the phrase the Yikhu Li, they sees it as a image of the ability to acquire Hashem through Tarah study. Hashem is telling us that by purchasing or by constructing the Mishka and contributing towards its construction, we are purchasing a Krsabarha. Viyitnu Li, we are acquiring him as it were, we are possessing him. How are we possessing him? Why are we possessing him? Why is the Mishka in an acquisition of a Krsabarha? So the Madresh describes a parable. King has a lone daughter, who ultimately marries a prince. At the event of their marriage, the king begs his new son-in-law as follows. I cannot withhold my daughter from you for you have married her. She's narrow your wife and she has to live with you. However, I cannot separate from her because she's my only daughter. Instead, please perform the following favor. Build a little house or a little anti-chamber, a little room, and everywhere you travel, please allow me to reside in that room so that I could be near a proximate to my only daughter, my beloved daughter. Similar to this king, a Krsabarha who pleaded, as it were, with Amisra. I delivered my daughter to you. I delivered the Torah, and here a very different parable, or a very different metaphor to Torah is being suggested. The Torah is not the name of Hashem, it's Hashem's daughter. I delivered my only daughter. I cannot disassociate myself from this daughter. I cannot tell you, on the other hand, not to take this daughter into your midst and study her and acquire her, possess her. So please perform the following favor. Wherever you travel, build a house that I can reside so that I could be near my daughter, near my Torah. Please build the Mishgun, which is Hashem's house, to accompany the Torah, which he delivered. In a very, very stunning reversal, this medrish casts the construction of the Mishgun as a consequence of Harsini, as a consequence to our acquiring a Krsabarha's daughter, and as a plea from the Rabona Shalalam so that he can reside not just near the Jewish people, but near the Jewish people who have now acquired and are performing his Torah. The asu Lee Mikdash, according to this medrish, is not just suggesting the base Amikdash or the Mishgun as a shelter for Hashem's presence. It's not merely casting the Mishgun as a framework for Hashem's Shrinna, Asu Lee Mikdash. According to this medrish, the term Lee suggests motive. Please, Hashem says, build a Mikdash for me, for my needs, for my interests. And therefore, the parasha begins the Yikhu Lee, suggesting that this is a request of a Krsabarha's which we are fulfilling, as well as a manner of acquiring his presence. By acquiring the Torah, we almost force him to reside within our midst and within the Mishgun. Of course, this very provocative medrish strikes an entirely new balance between Torah and Mikdash between Torah and Avoda. It portrays the Mishgun in terms which far surpass the mere location for enabling sacrifice and ritual. But these, of course, are issues which lay well beyond the framework of this year. But this parable as well evokes Torah study as a tool to acquire, to enjoy the presence of a Krsabarha, either at a personal level, as the Gomarin Dammit suggests, Kalaussik, Bhatara, Bala, Shrinah, Kineggdo, or at a national historical level, as the medrish in parasha's Truma describes, by building the Mishgun collectively, we establish a national presence of a Krsabarha, affiliated with the Torah which he delivered. This view of Torah, of course, has accounted for its central value throughout Jewish history. Even though Jewish history has witnessed the emergence of so many different forms of religion, forms of Elavurta sashhem and styles and cultural differences, classically, Talmatura was always placed as the central pivot. As the Ramban writes in Parakshalishi, a very famous parak which I mentioned earlier, (speaking in foreign language) Talmatura is equivalent to all the other myths in the Torah. As I alluded to in the previous year, Chasidos made an effort to try to, I won't say, decentralize, but try to raise the significance and the value of other areas of religious performance. And to a degree, this process threatened, at least, to detract from the centrality of Talmatura, perhaps intentionally, perhaps unintentionally, at least in the beginning. The movement, of course, elicited much opposition. The opposition of the Vilnagon was staunch and famous, don't complain famous or infamous. And the opposition was voiced very, very powerfully by the Vilnagon's disciple, his star student, Rekremvolution. Kremvolution was the founder of the modern Yeshiva movement. He founded the first Yeshiva, the first modern Yeshiva, in the beginning of the 19th century, the Yeshiva of the legend. But it is also known for having written a very famous, say, for describing the value of Talmatura, the theological import of Talmatura, is a for known as Neffesachayim. Neffesachayim, in the fourth section known as Shire Dalid, issues some very, very powerful, and in some cases, strident statements about Talmatura. And there's no question that many of these statements were hurled at Chasidos, not just in an intellectual, or ideological sense, but in some manner even as a polemic, to defeat some of the claims of Chasidos, which a behind Vilnagon have felt threatened by. A behind Vilnagon are quotes that very famous Kamara Naderim, that if Tara's study were to cease at a particular moment in time, the entire universe would collapse. In lo'abrisi Yom-valayla, Chukoshayimayim Varets, Los Amte. The Gamara Naderim, "Lamedeis," cites this passek from Yermia, paracalamed Gimmel, and interprets it as a reference to Tara, if not for my covenant, in lo'abrisi Yom-valayla, my covenant of Tara. Chukoshayimayim Varets, Los Amte, the laws of nature, the laws of the cosmos, would not have been installed, and according to Yom-valayla, would cease, would cease to operate, would cease to cycle. Quotes a very famous phrase from Shira Sheerim, shokavamudeshesh. The legs, the hips of the earth are pillars of marble, which Chazal interpret as an allegory to Tara. Hence the passek in Shira Sheerim describes the hips of the universe, the foundation of the universe, Talmatura. And of course, Yom Chaim Velajan are also quoted, the Gamaran Shabbis. The Gamaran Shabbis provides two images to describe Yureshamayim. Hopefully, Yom-valayla, in this series of Sheerim, will describe the various forms, various opportunities for Yureshamayim. But the Gamaran Shabbis, Talmatura, describes Yuresham as an ulcer. Yureshamhi ulcera, the Gamaran quotes the passek in Yeshaya, paraklamud gimbal, that Yureshamayim is a silo. The continuation of the Gamaran describes Yureshamayim as a preservative, as a salt, which preserves wheat. And Quayam Velajan acclaim this follows. Yureshamayim is not the essence of religion. It's the container. It's the preservative. It will ensure that Torah study remains pure, sincere, as a worship of Akhuraj Barghal, rather than as an experience for personal glory or for intellectual stimulation. But ultimately, Akhuraj Barghal acclaims, through Devakos, clinging to Hashem, interaction with Akhuraj Barghal, can only be reached by Torah study. And in a very, very clear, and blatant attack on Hashem. Yureshamayim claims that if a person disrupts his Torah study. Even Torah study, which may seem technical in nature, the laws of an animal, which whores another animal, the laws of marriage, the laws, the very, very minute laws of Corbanos, the laws of Tumavitara, an individual disrupts his involvement in that learning in order to consider his relationship with Akhuraj Barghal. He has essentially reduced his level of Devakos, walked further away from Akhuraj Barghal. When he's studying Torah, he's encountering Akhuraj Barghal through Akhuraj Barghal's own revealed will. How dare he disrupt that encounter to consider Akhuraj Barghal through his own human mind and his own human heart. As the Katskar once said, "When I dive in, I speak to Hashem. When I learn, Hashem speaks to me." So the highest level of Devakos, according to Haim Vilasana, is studying Torah. Of course, Yureshamayim has to be conditioned, has to be striven for, has to be worked upon, so that the Torah remains an essential part of religious experience rather than allowing it to be perverted or distorted for ulterior motive. Haim Vilasana in a practical level suggested that every period of Torah study should be prefaced by a few moments of Devakos of Yureshamayim. Not of Devakos, of course, because Devakos ultimately will be reached by Torah study, a bit of Yureshamayim, a certain person of religious inspiration, to set the framework for the ensuing Torah study, to create an environment, a set of expectations and mentality. But ultimately, true religious experience, the highest religious experience, can only be achieved by full engagement in Torah study. Of course, this polemic between Akhaim Vilasana and Hasidos set the stage for another interesting debate about the role of Torah study, and the viability of introducing alternate means to generate a vodus Hashem, excellent a vodus Hashem. Of course, the Musa movement. The Musa movement did not question the ideal function of Torah study in granting a deep and intense encounter with Akhaim Vilasana. The Musa movement questioned the ability of modern men given the rapid and dramatic changes which modernity had visited upon the human condition. It questioned his continuing ability to draw Devakos' religious meaning solely from Torah study. Most rebellion undoubtedly did not require any Musa safer. For his view and his experience of Akhaim Vilasana was continuous, was lucid, was pure, as Khazal described, Aspaklariha Meira, an unmediated encounter with Akhaim Vilasana, Pehl, Pehl, Daburbo. So for Musa, Ben and Torah had the unique capacity to convey that immediate relationship with Akhaim Vilasana and the relationship itself served as moral compass to create piety and humility and to improve Musa's moral personality. But Musa challenged the ability of modern men to continue to receive religious inspiration solely through the experience of Tal-Matar. And initially the Musa movement itself met with much opposition. It was not immediately accepted by much of the Ishiva world. Today, of course, Musa is a staple in almost every Ishiva. It was a very famous meeting which took place between Akhaim Vilasana and Rabbi Nftali Amsterdam. And we saw Salantar, who was the patriarch of the modern Musa movement, had three Talmedim. Each of his Talmedim took where we saw Salantar's innovation and formulated his own brand of Musa. One Talmed was Abitrak Blaser. One Talmed was Rabbi Nftali Amsterdam. And the third Talmed was of Simcha's Isil Brody. In any event, Abitrak Blaser, the author of the Paha Deetschach, once encountered Abhaim Vilasana. And Abitrak Blaser tried to convince him of the importance of Musa's study. So, we quoted a Gomara in Brakhos, Dafhei, which challenges a person who feels threatened by the Itzahara to consider the Itzr Tov. Yargis Adam, Yaytzr Tov, Yaytzahara to try to prioritize his good Yaytzahara. And if not, if he doesn't succeed initially, he should study Tara, Yasak Bhattara. If that fails, the Gomara says she should read Kriya Shema. If that fails, he should consider his own mortality and the possibility of death, which hopefully will reintroduce moral sobriety. Yisak Blaser claimed that you see from this Gomara that Talmed Tara cannot be counted on as the sole tool to introduce moral clarity and religious success. The Gomara says, first think about your Yaytzr Tov. If that fails, study Tara. If that fails, read Kriya Shema. And if that fails, consider the Ammisa. Consider your own death. Evidently, Tara's study cannot be universally relied upon to protect the human experience of the human psyche from religious failure. Rabbi Heimvalajan responded with a Gomara in Kedushin. The Gomara says, in Paga-Machamanovol, if you feel the Yitzahara beginning his attack, "Mashkalabais hamedrash." Draw him into the base madrash, begin Tara's study, and presumably, the encounter with Akrash Baruhu, which Tara's study affords or mediates, will provide some sort of relief against the Yitzahara. And both Rabbi Trog Blazr and Heimvalajana took differing stance on the ability, not theoretically, but in the modern context of Tara's study, to continue to create this undisturbed Supreme Devakus, even without Yureshamayim, in a frontal sense, studying Musar, discovering alternate tracks to achieve Devakus, to assist, and to preserve, the purity of Tara's study. Rabbi Heimvalajana's statements in the Nefishahayim, of course, are harsh. He must be understood within the historical context. However, the spirit of these statements has fueled the modern Yjiva movement, and has informed our own recipe, our own brand, the Mavodha-sasham. The centrality we placed on Tara, the matter in which we invest, the recognition that orthodox religious behavior can not be complete without some element of Tara's study. Think of our Mavodha-s claims that for some, it's more, for some, it's less, "Acha-ra-marba viecha-ra-marma-mit." But the Tara's study serves as the central pivot, the central anchor of Ahodha-sasham. This, as I mentioned earlier, is undeniable, and has always, despite the various derivations, the various varieties of Ahodha-sasham, a religious formula, a Tara's study, has always served as the central pillar, as the rambam rites, aikaragadol, "cha-kaltaliba." You have been listening to our Moshe Taragan and share our essentials in Ahodha-sasham. Today's the Vaha-ra-yomit. We're up to saying of Kadusha. In every Keda, whether it's Keda-ra-sashat, in the third Vaha, the Vaha of Kadusha, of Akhilakadosh, we add the Tvila we call Kadusha. Kadusha consists of three sukim. The sukadosh-kadosh-kadosh, When we say 'to shah' there is also an introductory sentence beginning the 'cadacious and 'fagolam' on the 'tishcha' introductory sentence. Top of the speaking, that sentence belongs to the 'hazan'. All things which are the 'vashubiktusha' like 'tusha' like 'cadish' like 'bohu' consist of a 'hazan' calling 'to' the congregation to respond and to bless the name of God. The call of the 'hazan' 'tusha' is the saying of the 'cadacious'. The congregation responds by saying 'cadosh, cadosh, cadosh, cadosh'. The meaning of the reason and it's fairly universal as everybody says in the 'cadash'. But that's an obscure the original structure. Two distinctions, two repercussions. One is the 'hazan' must say in the 'cadash' after the Tiburah said it because he still has to call to them to respond. And therefore even if the whole congregation says in the 'cadash', the 'hazan' should wait till they say it. And then he should say in the 'cadash'. And specifically I think, not just the end, not just kakatouv, but the 'cadacious' is the actual call. 'Let us, let us sacrifice God's name.' And therefore he should wait till they all finish and say, 'Nikadeh sith shimkhara bonam anakti shimkhara bonam anakti shimkhara bonam anakti shimkhara bonam anakti shimkhara.' That they should hear him saying that to them, he's calling out to them. And then they respond by saying 'cadosh'. Another 'nafkamin', another verification is that since properly speaking the 'cadash' is only 'cadosh' and 'bohr'. But not 'nakadeh'. Therefore sometimes you have a place where you're in the middle of davening in a place where you wouldn't be 'mafsik', but you are 'mafsik' for krushar. For instance, if you're in the middle of dukkut kriyajna, or sukhita zimha, a place where you're not allowed to interrupt, but to answer krushar, you're allowed to interrupt. So you're allowed to interrupt those parts that you're supposed to say, like 'cadosh, cadosh, cadosh', and 'bohrk shimkhara bonam hutal'. And the 'bohrkhuya shimkhara' can come along, excuse me, but not 'nakadeh sith'. So if you're in a place like that and the 'cibhu' comes up to 'krushar', or if you haven't seen the 'cadosh' by himself, go back to the original 'nakadeh sith' with the 'cibhu' in that same 'cadosh' and only answer 'cadosh' and 'bohrk'. The 'madana yankov' says that, now that how we just mentioned now, applies to this first 'tubsukin', 'cadosh' and 'bohrk', but not the 'imlohr'. The reason being is that 'krushan' is maddled on what the prophets heard the 'madana shim sai' before God, which is the 'pansukk of cadosh' in Yesa'yau and 'bohrk' in Yesa'yam. The 'sukk of Yimlohr' was not said by the angels. We don't find any such description in Tanakh. And therefore he claims, in many post-conquodusala, I can't conclude in 'Mishnabhura', that it also is not properly a full-fledged part of 'krushar'. And in places where you don't want to be 'nakadeh sith', you should say only the first 'tubsukin bhanat yimlohr'. I'm not sure that that is correct. It really has no maka. You can remember nowhere describes it exactly what is said in 'tushar'. It's true, you don't have a passion to not subscribe to the angel saying it. But it's seen in the central 'krushar'. 'Krushar' consists of praise and God and the claim to be king on everything. So again, which was not to say, it's been since another third case would be if you're having finished happening. We had a common case. You had the happening and the cousins very started saying 'kasarafasat'. So if you're in the middle 'krasar', you cannot answer. If you've gotten to the end 'krasar', then you can. If you've finished the last 'krasar', then you say you are 'krasar'. And then you can answer. But you also want to say 'lakadeh sith so'. You want to finish the extra part of 'krasar', we'll get to that in a few weeks. And that's permissible. To say krushar at that point, then we turn and finish saying, what kind of 'krasarafasat shalam'. 'Krasarafasat' only the first 'krasarafasat shalam'. But don't say 'yimlok' in that place. I will disclose, tell you the truth. I do say 'yimlok', I think 'yimlok' is a full part of krushar. I mentioned many posts have the opposite opinion. And one final point, since we're talking about 'krasarafasat' saying the 'krasarafasat' out loud, that people can hear it. But salvechik, Zat'al also knows the science thing, both claimed that 'krasarafasat shalam' should say 'krasarafasat shalam' after the 'tibur' finish saying 'krasarafasat shalam'. And not together. I think in many, many shows, you'll hear him saying 'krasarafasat shalam' and he'll only say out loud, they'll ask few words. She'll call for the next line. 'Lumatam ba lukho yomayumu' or 'jureko chukha kutublimu' or. But the actual 'krasarafasat shalam' actually, 'krasarafasat shalam' says it quietly or together with the 'tibur'. But she finds being the verb both says that 'krasarafasat shalam' should say it out loud, which means also waiting and saying it out loud and separately and distinctly, so that people can hear it. They said it for different reasons. The verb of 'krasarafasat' is not only what I said, the 'krasarafasat shalam' and the 'tibur' answering. We thought that the structure of the 'krasarafasat shalam' is the 'krasarafasat shalam' and the 'tibur' answering separately, which is what we do, for instance, in Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. 'Krasarafasat shalam' says Baruchu. [BLANK_AUDIO]