abukspan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 52 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Chukas — Yisrael’s Potential #1878659
    abukspan
    Participant

    yes, i thought that would have been appearent from the totalaty of what I cited from the Rizhiner

    in reply to: Chukas — Yisrael’s Potential #1878550
    abukspan
    Participant

    I always likes The Rizhiner who said that when yaakov bought the Bechora, he said Michra ChaYom…
    He bought a day.
    Yaakov is 182, taking the Bechora -Pi Shenayim, he becomes 364.
    The day he bought from Esav is the 365th day, the day of Yom Kippur. The day that Saro shel esav has no shelita…..

    in reply to: Chukas — Yisrael’s Potential #1878477
    abukspan
    Participant

    very good

    in reply to: Chukas — Yisrael’s Potential #1878162
    abukspan
    Participant

    I was unaware of the chazal כי יעקב היה מחזיק באזני כלב עובר. I see the Tzror HaMor citing a Zohar and giving answers as to why Yaakov did this.

    To paraphrase you: I thought the simplest explanation is that Esav headed towards Ya’akov after being informed of his presence. He had no way of silently going in.

    I always assumed that Esav was the one who started things, as the passuk saysוְגַם֙ הֹלֵ֣ךְ לִקְרָֽאתְךָ֔…” I took it to mean that Esav had heard about Yaakovs return and came out after him. Chicken or Egg.

    I saw this Bechor Shor and thought he was klor like you, that Esav did not come until after the malachim came to him
    וישלח יעקב מלאכים – כיון שקרב אצל עשו דאג מן השטימה שהייתה לעשו עליו, ושלח מלאכים לחפור ולרגל ולהכיר דעתו של עשו. ולא רצה להזכיר שום דרך שנאה, אלא כאדם ששולח לאחיו ולאוהבו לבשרו טוב עניינו
    but I still am not clear. While on the way to him, Esav could have heard that Yaakov was coming – so he and his men went out towards them.

    That is mashma from the Radak: וגם הולך לקראתך – ששמע שאתה בא, ואינו הולך לקראתך לשלום אלא למלחמה, כי הוא בא בארבע מאות איש, נראה כי להלחם עמך בא.

    This Rashbam klor says like you, that Esav only came after meeting with the malachim. Its just amazing that they were coming to be mechabed Yaakov, See also Chizkuni.
    באנו אל אחיך אל עשו – ומצאת חן בעיניו כאשר אמרת,
    וגם הנה הוא מתוך ששמח בביאתך ובאהבתו אותך, הולך לקראתך וארבע מאות איש עמו – לכבודך, זהו עיקר פשוטו. וכן: גם הנה הוא יוצא לקראתך וראך ושמח בלבו (שמות ד׳:י״ד).

    thank you for your questions and good points.

    in reply to: Chukas — Yisrael’s Potential #1878047
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you for your comment.
    While I have seen or thought about Yaakovs possibility of returning “quitely” or un-noticed, it seems from the pessukim that Esav was already on his way, with the 400 men, even before the malachim came to him.

    in reply to: Shelach — Climbing the Ladder #1874093
    abukspan
    Participant

    nice

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Nasso — Talking to Yourself #1867187
    abukspan
    Participant

    shein

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Bamidbar: Ruling Over Nature: #1862443
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you

    in reply to: Emor and Mother`s Day Dvar Torah #1858371
    abukspan
    Participant

    Thank you. if you figure out how to contact me by email i can send you a pdf of a pretty nice sefer with many nice verter. and im not at gmail.

    abukspan

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Emor – Balancing Act: #1857921
    abukspan
    Participant

    yes, you must be referring to the chazal -Niskatzru HaDoros

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Kedoshim – Proof for Reproof #1855593
    abukspan
    Participant

    wow, your right. i only posted it because on the other one that had to do with another aspect of lo sisna and justified hatred, you started mishing in meforshim about tochacha and sina. i just wanted to show you that those unrelated things were something that i was BH well aware of. My mistake for not realizing that i had even put it up. Hope the Mods do not get upset. thank you

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Kedoshim — From Justified Hatred to Unjustified Rage #1855506
    abukspan
    Participant

    please see my upcoming post which will address several of the points you brought up

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Acharei Mos fascinating Chasam Sofer #1855044
    abukspan
    Participant

    “Maybe because of lack of time, Moshe Rabbenu overestimated his children and expected more from them.”

    I would be wary of saying such about Moshe Rabbeinu. It is treating him like you or me. Regarding his sons: it is far from true to say that they were “bad” or not accomplished. Do not have it handy, but Yalkut Lekach Tov (Rav Byfus) in pinchus brings a chusheva pshat based on medroshim that his sons were gedoilei yisroel but they did not accomplish as much as they could. I think the lashon was that they were Chachomim but “were not miyageia”. Far from being failed children do to C’v Moshe’s neglect (as per a favorite sefer of mine, the Ksav Sofer) it was their not working as hard as they could, in contrast to Yehoshua who was Lo Yamush, that led to not being selected for leadership.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Acharei Mos fascinating Chasam Sofer #1855042
    abukspan
    Participant

    Vort is complete. Toras Moshe does not say. His point was that that first fact, and loss of its attending lesson, was the goirem of the next two things for which these Kedoshim are faulted.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Acharei Mos fascinating Chasam Sofer #1854967
    abukspan
    Participant

    I be honest. I should not have posted the Chasam Sofer because it puts The two Kedoshim in a bad light. Are they like us, they did not have pusheta derech eretz? It is a nice chasam sofer but I hope not true. The Ksav Sofer you mention again sounds nice but is also so uncomplementory. I know the vort very well, I have discussed it with big people. Are we ready really to believe that there must be a trade off. You are either a good father (Aharon) with good kids, or a good Manhig (Moshe) with not great kids? That is clearly the yesod the Ksav Sofer presents and therefore the dilemma that Nadav and Avihu faced. They were to be the next Manhigim (that is his up teich of the gemora in Sanhedrin) so they were stuck about what to do, and ended up choosing to serve as great manhigim f or the Klal and not have children. As a bochur I liked the vort but have been explained and agree that it is hard to believe. Do we not have gedolim who can be machanech their children? Are we saying it is either or? Are we saying Chas VeShalal that Moshe Rabbeinu was a lousy father?

    Reb Eliezer, I am not writing this to criticize you. It’s just that I posted a vort that does go over well, but may truly be insulating and therefore wrong and wrong to say, and you go a cite the one vort that is so much more insulting or disrespectful to Moshe. This has nothing to do with you. It has been what I was mekabel from my rebbeim and which has now been naase.delee

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos – Preaching Without Practicing #1854510
    abukspan
    Participant

    ME
    “what is the point?”
    “I accept that you do not like what was written.”
    ” It would be great if we could shmooze on a phone if you so desire but i cannot keep this up. If you think i am wrong, so be it.”
    “We can disagree. good night”

    YOU
    “thanks for contribution, but we are going in circles.”

    Boruch Shekivanta

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos – Preaching Without Practicing #1854452
    abukspan
    Participant

    ” A similar situation could have occurred over here. ”

    what is the point? Do you need me to agree with you and remove my post? Need I say that the words of chazal -in their entirety are wrong because Rav E. Feigu says a pshat in a gemora in Yoma?

    I accept that you do not like what was written. Bigger people than me have written this pshat and said over
    this pshat.
    Its fine if you dont but perhaps have one more patient go at what was written.

    This point can be proven from a pasuk in Rus and the explanation of the Midrash based on that pasuk: “Vayehi bi’mei shefot hashoftim – And it happened in the days when the judges judged” (Rus 1:1). The Midrash (Rus Rabbah 1:1) explains that in those days, the judges were judged by the population. And the Midrash laments, “Woe to the generation that judges its judges.” The Gemara explains that when the judge would say, “Remove a splinter from between your teeth,” the accused would say, “First remove the beam from between your eyes” (Bava Basra 15b).
    The judges themselves were more corrupt than the people they were judging. The judge would accuse a man of stealing a splinter and demand that he return it, while the accused would respond that the judge himself was guilty of much more than petty theft, since he had in his possession something as large as a stolen beam.
    Thus, the people discounted the reproof the judges gave because the judges were greater sinners. Although the people could claim, “Why listen to him? He doesn’t practice what he preaches,” they were still criticized for judging their judges and discounting their reproof and authority.
    The truth is still the truth, whether from the mouth of a saint or a sinner. It may be a bitter pill to swallow, but if the message being preached is correct, I have no right not to accept it. The Rambam, in his preface to Shemonah Perakim, says, “Shema ha’emes mi’mi she’amrah –Listen to and accept the truth from the one who says it.”

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos – Preaching Without Practicing #1854427
    abukspan
    Participant

    ” A similar situation COULD have occurred over here”

    This point can be proven from a pasuk in Rus and the explanation of the Midrash based on that pasuk: “Vayehi bi’mei shefot hashoftim – And it happened in the days when the judges judged” (Rus 1:1). The Midrash (Rus Rabbah 1:1) explains that in those days, the judges were judged by the population. And the Midrash laments, “Woe to the generation that judges its judges.” The Gemara explains that when the judge would say, “Remove a splinter from between your teeth,” the accused would say, “First remove the beam from between your eyes” (Bava Basra 15b).
    The judges themselves were more corrupt than the people they were judging. The judge would accuse a man of stealing a splinter and demand that he return it, while the accused would respond that the judge himself was guilty of much more than petty theft, since he had in his possession something as large as a stolen beam.
    Thus, the people discounted the reproof the judges gave because the judges were greater sinners. Although the people could claim, “Why listen to him? He doesn’t practice what he preaches,” they were still criticized for judging their judges and discounting their reproof and authority.
    The truth is still the truth, whether from the mouth of a saint or a sinner. It may be a bitter pill to swallow, but if the message being preached is correct, I have no right not to accept it. The Rambam, in his preface to Shemonah Perakim, says, “Shema ha’emes mi’mi she’amrah –Listen to and accept the truth from the one who says it.”

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos – Preaching Without Practicing #1854321
    abukspan
    Participant

    I do not know what to say. The pshat pashut in shfot hashoftim is the the people were judging the judges. However bad they were, and they were, chazal are criticizing -certainly – those who are judging the judges. It would be great if we could shmooze on a phone if you so desire but i cannot keep this up. If you think i am wrong, so be it. I can cite near countless seforim that the people were being criticized for their criticism of the shoftim. is that not correct. Forgive me if I have to now go to class

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos – Preaching Without Practicing #1854109
    abukspan
    Participant

    while true that the judges were not good, the lashon seems to be faulting the dor (namely the baalei dinim) that judge the judges. it is certainly the people that are being criticized -for judging their judges. The gemora explains the nature of why they judged them. We can disagree. good night

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos – Preaching Without Practicing #1854080
    abukspan
    Participant

    And the Midrash laments, “Woe to the generation that judges its judges.” The Gemara explains that when the judge would say, “Remove a splinter from between your teeth,” the accused would say, “First remove the beam from between your eyes” (Bava Basra 15b).
    Both things were occurring. The people judged the judges and were not mekabel thier words and the judges were worse than the people themselves. That is a way that the chazal can be understood. We see that even though the judges were perhaps hypocrites, the people are still wrong for judging them -d`hynu, not listening to them. Yes, a chiddush and not how we all were taught. see if it fits into the words of chazal.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos – Preaching Without Practicing #1854043
    abukspan
    Participant

    2 of the 3 chazalin you mentioned are in my piece. I bavornad exactly what you were bringing up. The medresh, that notwithstanding, is saying otherwise. I am not saying it is easy or that i can easially do it. (Even though, I truly believe that I and many others have been in such a situation and at least recognized the truth) The etzem teich, as mentioned, is from Rav Dovid Soloveichik. Chazal are saying that they were guilty of not going to get advice from one onother. Dus heist, that someone who is doing the same aveira, can see the truth for another and tell him to do the right thing. At the same time, I am responsible to be mekabel the truth even from a hypocrite. . It is not supposed to be easy, a very high madreiga. But chazal, (according to Rav Dovid) are faulting them and the dor of Avimelech of just that. One may not like the pshat, there may be other ways to account for the lashon in chazal. I would be happy to hear an alternative. And this is by far , not the only case where are Kedoshim are held to a high standard. What it may mean for me is between me and my Rav,Mashpia…..

    I do see that you disagree, but I have yet to hear a kashya that disproves what is a yesodesdica upteich of two Chazalin and mistameh the truth about human nature.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos – Preaching Without Practicing #1854000
    abukspan
    Participant

    As I wrote: “Although the ideal is “Keshot atzmecha ve’achar kach keshot acheirim – Adorn yourself and after that adorn others” (Bava Basra 60b), it does not mean that the other sinner’s advice can be discounted and ignored, even if the other brother does not practice what he is preaching.”

    While it is appropriate to first correct yourself then others קשוט עצמך ואחר כך קשוט אחרים, that is the optimum. Yet, those same words are the criticism of a person who is unwilling to take tochocha. Tul Korah m`bein einecha…., why should I listen to you when you are no better or even worse.

    But chazal are here, by nadav and avihu, saying (and as understood by Rav Dovid Soloveichik and others) that they are faulted for not hearing the tochocha of the other -even when the other, on his own, was doing the same wrong thing. that is the whole point/chidush here. and the same thing is seen from the medresh in Rus.

    in reply to: Etymology of "Day of Atonement" #1853998
    abukspan
    Participant

    oh, yes. Both the Shunamis and Bilaam teach us the same message. ty

    in reply to: Etymology of "Day of Atonement" #1853940
    abukspan
    Participant

    thanx for responding. teaching a class now, will look at later.

    in reply to: Chidushim on Daf Yomi Shabbos 30 #1853716
    abukspan
    Participant

    a good point. The lower water did have a tyneh on being lowered. ultimately, they all are elevated to one place

    in reply to: Megillas Esther Interpretation #1853715
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you for letting me see myself and my actions in hindsight.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Metzora #1853698
    abukspan
    Participant

    What do you mean it was named after Balak? Where can I find that? Ty

    in reply to: Megillas Esther Interpretation #1853673
    abukspan
    Participant

    Regarding your post feb.26 at 10.13. Are you saying it must “be read in order” in order to chap that we had the tzoros and only then the yeshua? I recently heard from a rabbi Luban that that is the pshat in HAKOREI…..LIMAFREIA.LO.YUTZA. It is easy to look back through the meggilah and see in retrospect where Hashem was directing things all along. That it no kuntz. The avodah is to live a life where we do not chap His hand in everything and still have trust. You have to read it straight and not LIMAFREIA. I did not do justice to what I think is a chusheva yesod. Sorry for my lack of clarity ad for my arrogance before.

    in reply to: Chidushim on Daf Yomi Shabbos 30 #1853670
    abukspan
    Participant

    What you wrote regarding machlokes and accepting others with different opinions reminded me of the following.

    It says in Midrash Tanchuma (Pinchas 10), “ Ke’sheim she’ein partzufoseihem shavin zeh la’zeh, kach ein daasam shavin zeh la’zeh, ella kol echad ve’echad yeish lo daas bifnei atzmo – Just as people’s faces are not the same, their thoughts are not the same; each one has his own way of thinking.”
    The Gerrer Rebbe asks: Why does the Midrash prove its point by mentioning the fact that no two people look alike? We all know that our thoughts and feelings are unique to ourselves. After just two minutes with a person, we can usually size him up and realize where we differ and disagree. Why do Chazal have to prove this point by pointing out that we all look different? Additionally, why is there a need to make the second half of the statement – that each has his own thoughts? What is being added that we don’t know on our own?
    He explains that the emphasis is in our response to the other person’s differences. No two people look alike, and we should not hold that against our friend. I may not like seeing a certain feature on a person, but that should not give me cause to think less of him. Likewise, we should not be critical of a friend who does not share our opinions and sensitivities.
    A person whose ideas are different from mine, or a person I find too thin-skinned, should be accorded no less respect and be treated no less pleasantly than my doppelganger.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Metzora #1853642
    abukspan
    Participant

    You are right. It all adds. . It was a very wrong of me to write what I did. I hope you will not stop adding to the discussion because of my arrogance. Sincerely sorry.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Metzora #1853467
    abukspan
    Participant

    Dear Rebbe Eliezer,
    It seems we keep trying to add unrelated things to what was said. I believe that more would be gained if we bring a nice tzu-shtell or a valid question to the subject rather than presenting important and nice points that distract from the vort being said. This way, all our fellow coffee drinkers can shteig from the enhanced vort that results from people working together. Relatedly, many of your added points weold make for nice topics for you yourself to post.

    Avraham

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Metzora #1853262
    abukspan
    Participant

    In truth, even chirping or speech cannot be at one extreme. We warn from the dead chirping bird to not have bad speech but the living one sent away teaches the need to have good and correct speech. Please read below.

    Metzora 1 — Two Chirping Birds
    וצוה הכהן ולקח למטהר שתי צפרים חיות טהרות ועץ ארז ושני תולעת ואזב: וצוה הכהן ושחט את הצפור האחת אל כלי חרש על מים חיים: את הצפר החיה יקח אתה ואת עץ הארז ואת שני התולעת ואת האזב וטבל אותם ואת הצפר החיה בדם הצפר השחטה על המים החיים:והזה על המטהר מן הצרעת שבע פעמים וטהרו ושלח את הצפר החיה על פני השדה
    The Kohen shall command; and for the person being purified there shall be taken two live, pure birds, cedar wood, a crimson tongue of wool, and hyssop. The Kohen shall command; and the one bird shall be slaughtered into an earthenware vessel over spring water. The live bird, he shall take it and the cedar wood and the crimson tongue of wool and the hyssop, and he shall dip them and the live bird into the blood of the bird that was slaughtered over the spring water. Then he shall sprinkle seven times upon the person being purified from the tzaraas; he shall purify him, and he shall set the live bird free upon the open field” (Vayikra 14:4-7).
    The metzora’s purification process includes two birds, one of which is slaughtered and one of which is sent away alive. Rashi (v.4) explains why birds are used in the purification of the metzora: Like the person who spoke lashon hara, birds are constantly twittering. Accordingly, chirping birds are used as a kapparah for the one who “chirped too much” and shared derogatory information about others.
    Unlike all other occasions when two birds are required, here the Kohen does not kill both; the second one is released. As mentioned earlier (Vayikra, Tzav), the Ramban (Vayikra 1:9) maintains that animal sacrifices are intended to cause the one bringing the korban to imagine that he is the one slaughtered, for this will bring him to repent. But what value is there in setting one of the birds free?
    The Kli Yakar (v.4: “Ve’taam lishtei tziporim…”) writes that the two birds represent two types of speech: that which is forbidden and that which is a mitzvah, that which must not be said and that which must be said. By engaging in proper and positive speech, the metzora remedies the sin of the improper speech. The forbidden speech, as represented by the first bird that is killed, must cease and desist. True expiation of sin requires that the sinning stop. But that is only half the battle. To atone for the misuse of speech, what is now required is the proper use of speech.
    The Kli Yakar specifies just what kind of speech will bring kapparah to the metzora. By using his mouth for Torah and tefillah, he is able to undo the ill effects of causing hurt and harm through that mouth. So while the bird that represents the harmful speech is killed, the second bird must live on, to demonstrate that the antidote for lashon hora is not a vow of silence but a commitment to speak properly. The second bird represents judicious and good chirping: engaging one’s mouth in Torah, tefillah, and constructive talk, which must be strengthened and nurtured.
    In his sefer Apirion (cited in Yalkut Lekach Tov), Rav Shlomo Gantzfried brings the same point; to that end, he cites the Gemara (Chullin 89a), where Rabbi Yitzchak quotes the pasuk, “Ha’umnam eilem tzedek tedabeirun — Is there indeed silence when you should be speaking righteousness?” (Tehillim 58:2). While it is true that at times a person is obligated to be silent like a mute (eilem), this does not apply to a discussion of Torah, as it says, “Tzedek tedabeirun — Speak righteousness,” meaning the words of Torah. This is as we see in the Gemara (Erchin 15b): What is the remedy for one who has spoken lashon hara? If he is a talmid chacham, he should toil in Torah. As Shlomo teaches us (Mishlei 15:4): “Marpei lashon eitz chaim —The remedy for the tongue is the Tree of Life”; the tongue is referring to lashon hara and the Tree of Life is the Torah. So we see that one cure for lashon hara is limud Torah.
    The Zohar (Vayikra 46b) adds another dimension. Just as a person is punished for malicious gossip and speaking inappropriately, he is also punished for not speaking appropriately. The Zohar quotes the words of Tehillim (39:3) to corroborate this: “Ne’elamti dumiah hechesheisi mi’tov u’cheivi nekar — I became mute with stillness, I was silent even from good; my pain was intense.” According to the Gemara (Berachos 5a), “tov — good” means the Torah. Thus, David HaMelech is telling us that because he was silent and did not speak words of Torah, he was punished, his pain intense.
    The Sfas Emes (Metzora 5661) brings the words of the Zohar, along with the words of Shlomo HaMelech in Mishlei (18:21), “Mavess ve’chaim be’yad lashon — Death and life are in the power of the tongue.” He then adds that a person must be careful not only to avoid lashon hara, but to stay away from any speech that will take him away from his true objective — of learning Torah. The two birds are there for two separate purposes: The slaughtered one removes the sin of unnecessary talk, and obviously lashon hara, while the other one is sent away in order to prepare the mouth of the metzora to be used only for divrei Torah.
    When stating that death and life are in the hand of the tongue, Shlomo HaMelech is informing us that just as the tongue can cause death and destruction when not used properly, it also brings life, when used for Torah and mitzvos. Words not only take away life, but also give life. This concept is illustrated in a well-known Midrash (Vayikra Rabbah 33:1). Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel sent his servant to the market, instructing him, “Bring me the best thing you can find.” The servant brought him a tongue. On another occasion, Rabbi Shimon told the same servant to purchase the worst thing he could find. This time, too, the servant returned with a tongue. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel was startled and asked his servant, “How can the same item be the best thing and also the worst?” The servant responded, “There is nothing better than a tongue that speaks good and nothing worse than a tongue that speaks evil.”
    This brings us to another famous incident mentioned in the Midrash (Vayikra Rabbah 16:2). As a peddler made his way through the towns near the city of Tzipori, he called out, “Who would like to purchase a life-giving potion?” People crowded around him to see what he had to offer. Rabbi Yanai, who was nearby and heard and saw the commotion, told the peddler to come show him his wares. At first, the peddler answered, “Neither you nor those like you have need for it.”
    When Rabbi Yanai persisted, the peddler quoted from Sefer Tehillim (34:13-15), “Mi ha’ish he’chofetz chaim oheiv yamim liros tov. Netzor leshoncha mei’ra u’sefasecha mi’daber mirmah. Sur mei’ra va’aseih tov bakeish shalom ve’radfeihu — Who is the man who desires life, who loves days of seeing good? Guard your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking deceit. Turn from evil and do good, seek peace and pursue it.”
    The Kli Yakar (v.4: “Aval rocheil zeh… “) points out that this peddler, this rocheil, had himself been a baal lashon hara, one who peddled his wares of gossip, causing arguments and breaking up friendships along the way. But now he had resolved to do teshuvah and he had succeeded. As such, he wanted to share his success with others and bring merit to the tzibbur and help them do teshuvah, as well. Therefore, he went to the cities surrounding “Tzipori,” meaning those cities that were similar to a tzipor — the bird that chirps and chatters — with the express purpose of educating those towns where people had stumbled through evil speech and were chattering like birds. Thus he used his tongue for good instead of bad, and went from being the itinerant gossip to the itinerant maggid. He killed his bad bird by releasing his good bird.
    We see that this peddler, this recovering gossip, did not merely stop speaking. Rather, he taught others the lessons he had learned. The end of the pesukim the peddler cited instruct: “Sur mei’ra va’aseih tov bakeish shalom ve’radfeihu — Turn from evil and do good, seek peace and pursue it.” As mentioned, “tov” refers to Torah, so once again, as the Kli Yakar posits, the way to veer from evil is through learning and speaking words of Torah.
    But there is more: We must also seek peace and pursue it: “Bakeish shalom ve’radfeihu.” If we constantly look for the good in others and look for ways to make peace, we will find that we automatically avoid evil speech and nasty gossip.
    With this in mind, we can understand a citation in the Magen Avraham (Orach Chaim 60:2) when discussing the berachah of Ahavah Rabbah in Tefillas Shacharis. There we find a reference to Kavannos U’Kesavim, where it is taught that the Sheish Zechiros, six events we must constantly remember, are alluded to in Ahavah Rabbah. One of these events is: “Zachor eis asher asah Hashem Elokecha le’Miriam ba’derech be’tzeis’chem miMitzrayim — Remember what Hashem, your G-d, did to Miriam, on the way when you departed from Egypt” (Devarim 24:9). As Bnei Yisrael were traveling in the Midbar, Miriam spoke lashon hara to Aharon about Moshe and was punished with tzaraas (Bamidbar 12), and this is what we are to remember every day lest we, too, fall into the trap of lashon hara. The words that correspond to this reminder in the tefillah of Ahavah Rabbah are: “le’hodos lecha — to offer praiseful thanks to You.” As it says in the Kavanos U’Kesavim, “The mouth was only created to express gratitude and not to speak lashon hara, and this is the remembrance of the incident of Miriam.”
    I heard from Rav Aharon Dovid Willner that lashon hara and expressing gratitude are flipsides of the same coin. One who speaks lashon hara is a person who focuses on the negative side of things, never looking at what is good and praiseworthy. He can’t appreciate that all Hashem does is for the good, and he feels entitled to have everything his way. Such a person will also be bothered by the faults he sees in man and will speak ill of him. On the other side of the coin, we have the person who lives up to the ideal of “le’hodos lecha,” of focusing on feeling grateful for all he does have, and of appreciating all of mankind. Such a person will be free from the bottomless pit of negativity — even if things don’t go his way or he finds something unfavorable in another individual. Consequently, he will never feel the need to express something negative about another, let alone Hashem, even at times when his expectations are not met.
    Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 1:18) cites the verse in Mishlei (28:12),”Ba’alotz tzaddikim rabbah sifares u’ve’kum reshaim yechupas adam — When the righteous exult, there is much splendor, but when the wicked rise, victims are sought.” Tzaddikim praise and honor others for every virtue and positive quality they find in each individual, while reshaim seek every blemish and fault within others in order to degrade and demean them.
    Lashon hara… or divrei Torah? Critique and complaints… or praising Hashem and others? The choices are ours. Which will it be?

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Metzora #1852982
    abukspan
    Participant

    Very nice of you to say, thank you! You have to get hold of my email address which i am not permitted to disclose on Yeshiva World. From your name -formoerla- it looks like we both might be former (Los) Angelino`s: I now live in Miami Beach. I have an English sefer that was put out by Feldheim and would be happy to send you a pdf of it, as well as weekly verter. Try google. happy hunting

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Metzora #1852706
    abukspan
    Participant

    This Tos. Yom Tov (Negaim 12:5) mentions five or so Terutzim including what you mentioned

    כנגע נראה לי בבית. אפילו ת”ח ויודע כו’. דאי אינו יודע. מהיכי תיתי שיאמר נגע נראה לי והא לא ידע. וא”ת למה אסרה התורה מלומר נגע. והלא עד שיאמר הכהן טמא. עדיין אין כאן טומאה. כדתנן ברפ”ג. והרא”ם כתב בשם רבותיו. דכיון דבדבורו לא יוכל לשפוט. הלכך לא יאמר בלשון ברור. ע”ד אמרם. ולמד לשונך לומר איני יודע. ולי נראה מפני דרך ארץ שצריך לנהוג עם הכהן כו’. א”נ שלא ימהר הכהן ויגזור טומאה. ע”כ. וג”א כתב. משום דובר שקרים לא יכון. דהא כל זמן שלא נזקק הכהן לאו נגע הוא. ואיך יאמר נגע כו’. וכתב בעל קרבן אהרן. דלא דק בזה. שהכהן אינו עושה אותו נגע. אבל הטומחה עושה בו. וקודם שיבא הכהן. נגע הוא. ע”כ. ואפשר לתרץ שכשיאמר נגע. המכוון ממנו מה שקוראין נגע. והיינו נגע טמא. ומכיון שעדיין אינו טמא. הרי דובר שקרים. ולי נראה בהפך. דלהכי הקפידה התורה מלומר נגע. כדי שלא לפתוח פיו לשטן לו כדדרשינן בפרק מי שמתו (ברכות דף י”ט) מאמרו שמעו קציני סדום וגו’ הרי אפשר שיחזור ויכהה טרם בוא הכהן. ולכל הטעמים נראה לי שבכל הנגעים הדין כך. שלא יאמר נגע עד שיטמאנו הכהן. ואפילו את”ל דאין הדין הזה. אלא בנגעי בתים. וכן הרמב”ם לא כתב שיהא נוהג גם בשאר הנגעים. י”ל דנגעי בתים הואיל וקודמין בזמן כדלקמן לכך הקפידה התורה ביותר. משא”כ בשכבר בא עליו נגע הבית כשאח”כ בא עליו נגע בגדיו. וכן גופו שוב לא הקפידה בכך:

    …It is for this reason that the Torah was exigent about not saying, “A blemish [has appeared…]”: In order that he not open his mouth to prosecute himself, as we derive in the chapter, Me SheMeto (Berakhot 19), from [Isaiah’s] saying, “Listen, you captains of Sodom,” etc. Behold, it is possible that it proceed to lighten up before the priest comes…

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Shemini: Short and sweet vort from Rav Eliyashev #1850113
    abukspan
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer, are you adding anything? I`m not sure what you are trying to say. thank you

    in reply to: Dvar Torah for Az Yashir, very cute #1849599
    abukspan
    Participant

    Thank you, that is exactly the point I was making by writing that word. Even without your comment, the facts presented in the vort are clearly not what occurred. The kids did not walk separate from their mothers, the animals could not be left to follow them. The chushiva rav (look him up) clearly was saying something clever: explaining Pharaohs words based on Moshes. There is an old zug: A nice vort is 15 steps away from the truth. Emes, Vyatziv, Vnachon.........VYUFE.

    abukspan
    Participant

    This relates to what you wrote.

    Encircled With Love:
    ויסב אלקים את העם דרך המדבר ים סוף
    G-d led the people roundabout, by way of the wilderness at the Sea of Reeds (Shemos 13:18).
    The Midrash (Shemos Rabbah 20:18) says that we can learn a halachah from the word “Vayaseiv – And He led roundabout.” At the Seder, even a poor person is required to eat in a reclining position. The word for reclining, heseibah, has the same shoresh as vayaseiv: י.ס.ב.
    While the letters are the same, the similarity seems to end there. י.ס.ב. in our context means roundabout (as in a dreidel, a סביבון), while in hilchos Pesach it means to recline. Additionally, where do we see anything pertaining to a pauper in our pasuk?
    It says in the previous pasuk (13:17), that Hashem did not lead the Bnei Yisrael by way of the land of the Pelishtim, so the Jews would not be afraid when they see a war and want to return to Egypt. My father (see also Ke’Motzei Shalal Rav, which cites the Chasam Sofer; and Bircas Yitzchak) explained that the reason for vayaseiv, for the circuitous route, was in order to avoid the civilized and even inhabited lands. The Al-mighty wanted us to learn and become accustomed to the true value of a Jew. Rather than becoming preoccupied with amassing material wealth, a person should be involved in more ethereal and lofty goals. For a Jew, success means having a close relationship with Hashem and leading a life committed to the Torah and its precepts. In fact, the very nature of real freedom is dependent on this, as the Mishnah in Avos (6:2) tells us: “Ein lecha ben chorin ella mi she’oseik be’salmud Torah – There is no free man but the one who engages in the study of Torah.”
    When the Jews left Egypt, they were free from the bondage of slavery, but they needed to be freed from the bondage of self – and not remain caught up in pursuing pleasure. Only after living 40 years in the proving grounds of the desert, with no physical pleasures, were they able to enter Eretz Yisrael and live a life based on agriculture and commerce. During the time spent in the desert, the Jews learned the importance of limiting one’s preoccupation with financial gain, and the need to focus one’s energies on moral and spiritual excellence.
    In a comparable vein, the Midrash (Shemos Rabbah 20:15) explains that the Jews were not yet trained in mitzvos, specifically those pertaining to Eretz Yisrael. For this reason, Hashem said that He would first give them the Torah and then bring them into the Land.
    We now understand the correlation between our pasuk and the halachah that even a poor person must recline. When one learns this lesson – that a person’s freedom and true worth are dependent on his ability to serve Hashem and study his Torah – then even the most downtrodden among us have cause to celebrate, for they recognize their value as part of a holy nation; their nobility is not determined by dollars and cents, but in Torah and mitzvos.
    The poor person who reclines like royalty on Pesach is a testament to this value. A Jew, notwithstanding his circumstances, is a royal and deserves to act and be treated as one. Hashem took us out of Egypt in a roundabout manner to teach us that even nomads living in a desert can receive the Torah and be deemed holy by Hashem. And halachah demands that we acknowledge our nobility by reclining at the Seder.
    Perhaps, based on this, the mindset of the obligation to provide for the poor person should not be: “Oy, a poor fellow. He’s so needy,” but “Ah, a fellow royal. He deserves nothing less than I!”
    Thus far, we’ve understood the word vayaseiv as describing the route we had traveled, under Hashem’s directive. The first part of the above Midrash, however, explains the word in a different manner: that Hashem surrounded us when we left Egypt. The Eitz Yosef on the Midrash explains that He surrounded us with the Ananei HaKavod, Clouds of Glory.
    This, again, begs the question: What does being surrounded by heavenly clouds have to do with a mendicant man leaning at the Seder?
    Rav Bentzion Feinhandler, in his sefer Gei Chazon, explains that the Ananei HaKavod were so named because they brought kavod, honor, and pride to those sheltered within. Beyond the protection they afforded, they were a display of Hashem’s love toward us. Unlike the Manna and the Well, this was one ongoing miracle that was unnecessary. He took us into a desert; He had to provide us with the essentials. But providing us with an air-conditioned environment was going above and beyond the call of even His duty. So, more than a safeguard or shelter, the Clouds were a sign of His special relationship with us.
    This is one way to explain why we have the holiday of Succos to commemorate the Clouds, but no corresponding holiday to commemorate the Manna or Well. Hashem must provide the necessities of life, as Middas HaDin would dictate. The Clouds, however, were a welcome but unneeded bonus, a true sign of His love and a manifestation of His Middas HaChesed.
    We are special; look how He treated us! Everyone, even those without riches or rank, was afforded the glory and pride the Clouds conveyed.
    Thus, at the Seder, we celebrate this singular honor by acting as royalty and reclining like kings. This is in remembrance of the kavod and regard that Hashem displayed for us when He took us out of Egypt.
    We can do no less.

    abukspan
    Participant

    not showing off but you might enjoy the other pesach verter i posted under aviaviavi avraham bukspan

    in reply to: Pesach vort All for the best: Relates to ארמי אבד אבי #1846027
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you

    abukspan
    Participant

    Yes. While not mentioning her specifically I cited above the Zohar regarding Lots family. The reason is as y ou wrote

    abukspan
    Participant

    I actually have a word doc with 23 pretty good Pesach verter that are mostly unknown. . I also have a pdf of a Feldheim sefer I wrote that I would be happy to send you. I know we cannot give email addresses to one another. In the meantime I did post 2 or 3 other verter under aviaviavi. If you google my sefer, classics and beyond you may figure out how to connect. I hope I am not doing anything in violation of the rules. Stay safe z d look for those verter

    abukspan
    Participant

    Thank you! I have two other posted verter that are also novel and good. Ayein.sham

    in reply to: Dvar Torah for Pesach (Seder) #1845442
    abukspan
    Participant

    Meaningful Hesber on an alternative reason for the 4 Cups

    The Cup of Redemption:
    וכוס פרעה בידי… ואשחט אותם אל כוס פרעה ואתן את הכוס על כף פרעה… ונתת כוס פרעה בידו
    The cup of Pharaoh is in my hand… I squeezed them into the cup of Pharaoh, and I gave the cup on the hand of Pharaoh… and you shall give the cup in Pharaoh’s hand (Bereishis 40:11-13).
    When the cupbearer of Pharaoh told his dream to Yosef and when Yosef interpreted it, the word cup appears in the verses four times. We are told (Shemos Rabbah 6:4, Yerushalmi Pesachim 10:1) that the four cups at our Pesach Seder correspond to the arba leshonos shel geulah, the four terms of redemption, which are mentioned in the Torah (Shemos 6:6-7). They are: “Ve’hotzeisi – I will take you out” of Egypt; “ve’hitzalti – I will rescue you” from servitude; “ve’ga’alti – I will redeem you;” and “ve’lakachti – I will take you” as My people.
    The Yerushalmi (ibid.) says that another reason for the four cups is the four times that the cup of Pharaoh is mentioned in the above verses. What message were Chazal trying to convey in this association? What lesson can we learn from the cup-bearer’s dream and those four cups of Pharaoh, when we drink our four cups of wine at the Pesach Seder?
    Rav Eliyahu Klatzkin, in Chibas HaKodesh (Cheilek HaDerush #1), offers a beautiful explanation of this Yerushalmi, which takes into account the actual context of the four cups of Pharaoh – namely, the dreams and ambitions of an imprisoned man, the sar hamashkim.
    What was it that led Yosef to give a favorable interpretation to the cup-bearer, and a moment later to give a dismal interpretation to the baker? This question takes on great significance in light of the Gemara (Berachos 55b), which states that a dream follows its interpretation, and is often a reflection of what the dreamer thought about during the day. Although the Gemara says that the interpretation must be similar to the dream, why was Yosef unable to find something within the dream of the sar ha’ofim that could be interpreted favorably, as he did for the cup-bearer?
    As we read the cup-bearer’s rendition of his dream, we note the repeated emphasis of the cup of Pharaoh, which indicates a person longing and even obsessed to return to his former post. The cup-bearer had obviously taken pride in serving Pharaoh before, and hoped to be given the chance to return to his job. Thus, when Yosef listened to the dream, he gave a positive interpretation. Since the cup-bearer was a person who only wanted to serve his master, any offense he may have committed (in which a fly was found in the cup of Pharaoh) was no doubt inadvertent, and he deserved another chance.
    In the dream of the baker, however, there is no indication that he longed to return to serve Pharaoh. He never mentioned or described himself as baking for or serving his master, only that there was a basket of Pharaoh’s bread above his head. In fact, he should have carried the bread in his hand, where it would have been safer from birds. Signs of loyalty or devotion to his master were starkly absent from the dream. It seems he never cared about the royal personage he served; he only wanted the job so that he could fill his stomach with royal fare. The offense, in which a stone was found in the bread of Pharaoh, was a true offense to Pharaoh. According to the letter of the law, he deserved to be punished for his wrongdoing. Yosef could not find any redeeming factor in the dream to enable him to interpret it favorably. Therefore, Yosef delivered the interpretation that the baker would be killed and would never return to his position.
    This, writes Rav Klatzkin, is why Chazal mandated four cups at the Seder, corresponding to the four cups of Pharaoh. When we drink our wine and reflect on our liberation from Egypt, we should have in mind something akin to the longings and ambitions of the cup-bearer. He only wanted to be freed in order to return to serve his master and to continue to show his devotion to the king. In the same vein, when thanking Hashem for deliverance from Egypt, we should also recall the true purpose of freedom.
    Whatever pit we find ourselves in, our longing and prayer for redemption should be only to serve Hashem. Our ambition must be to keep His Torah and mitzvos and bask in His radiance, not the personal pleasure or physical perks that come with geulah and freedom.
    And just as the longing to serve was the catalyst for the cup-bearer’s freedom, so, too, our desire and longing to serve Hashem will be the merit that frees us from our pits, and allows us to go from darkness into light.

    in reply to: Pesach Divrei Torah #1844931
    abukspan
    Participant

    A clever pshat in the 4 Cups

    Cups, Captivity, and Calculations:
    ומושב בני ישראל אשר ישבו במצרים שלשים שנה וארבע מאות שנה
    Now the sojourning of the people of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was 430 years (Shemos 12:40).
    The Gemara (Sanhedrin 91a) describes a legal claim the Egyptians brought before Alexander the Great. They were trying to recoup the vast fortune that the Yidden had taken from Mitzrayim at Moshe’s behest. Their argument was that the Jews had only borrowed this great wealth, and now it needed to be returned.
    Geviha ben Pesisa advocated on behalf of the Jews. His counterclaim was that 600,000 people left Egypt (Shemos 12:37), who had been in Egypt for 430 years (ibid. V.40). Geviha demanded, “Pay us wages for that many people working for those many years.” After thinking it over for three days, the Egyptians realized that whatever was taken from their country was not adequate compensation for all those years of servitude.
    Case dismissed!
    Yet, the Maharsha asks an obvious question: We did not work in Mitzrayim for 430 years. We weren’t even there that long; we were only in the country for 210 years. And most of those years were not spent as slaves. When we first descended to Egypt, we were treated royally. We were the family of Yosef, the savior of Egypt. Only after all the shevatim died did the mistreatment begin.
    In fact, the Midrash (Shir HaShirim Rabbah 2:11) writes that there were only 86 years of hard work. (The gematria of אלה-ים, which alludes to Middas HaDin, is 86.) These years began from the birth of Miriam, Moshe’s older sister; that is why she was called Miriam, which comes from the root of מר, bitter, since that was when the Egyptians began to embitter the lives of the Jews, as it is written, “Vayemareru es chayeihem ba’avodah kashah – They embittered their lives with hard work” (Shemos 1:14).
    So how could Geviha ben Pesisa state that we were there for 430 years and claim wages for all those years? The Maharsha says that the 86 years were so harsh that it was like 430 years.
    Rav Marcus Lehmann, in his Haggadah shel Pesach, explains it differently. It’s true that we did not work for 430 years, but only 86. On the other hand, although 600,000 people left Egypt, five times that amount did the actual work. The Torah tells us, “Va’chamushim alu Vnei Yisrael mei’eretz Mitzrayim – And the Children of Israel were armed when they went up from Egypt” (Shemos 13:18). Rashi gives an alternative definition for the word chamushim, armed. חמשים can come from the word חמשה, which means five; one fifth of the Bnei Yisrael ascended from Egypt, while four fifths died during the Plague of Darkness.
    Thus, three million people worked for 86 years, which is the same as 600,000 people working for 430 years: 600,000 x 5 =3,000,000; and 86 x 5 = 430.
    Geviha ben Pesisa did not have to fear that the Egyptians would question the validity of his claim, even though he said that the Jews had been in Egypt for 430 years. For if they would have countered that this was not the case, he could have brought up the abovementioned fact.
    Rav Lehmann writes that based on this, we can bring a hint to why we have four cups at the Seder. כוס, cup, is 86 in gematria. We raise the כוס four times to thank Hashem for the four times כוס – 4×86 – which he took off of the calculation. By all rights, we should have worked for 430 years, five periods of 86, or כוס. (Our accounting of 430 years actually began from the bris bein habesarim, when Avram was told that his children would go into exile. The 400 years that Hashem told him about at that time began with the birth of Yitzchak; see Rashi Bereishis 15:13.)
    Hashem, in His kindness, only had us work for 86 years, one period of כוס.
    This is as it says in Tehillim (116:13): “Kos yeshuos essa u’ve’Sheim Hashem ekra – I will raise the cup of salvations and the Name of Hashem I will invoke.”

    in reply to: Pesach Divrei Torah #1844930
    abukspan
    Participant

    What follows is a meaningful hesber of the 4 Cups based on the Yerushalmi that they corrospond to the 4 Cups of the butler, the Sar Hasmashkims` dream.

    The Cup of Redemption:
    וכוס פרעה בידי… ואשחט אותם אל כוס פרעה ואתן את הכוס על כף פרעה… ונתת כוס פרעה בידו
    The cup of Pharaoh is in my hand… I squeezed them into the cup of Pharaoh, and I gave the cup on the hand of Pharaoh… and you shall give the cup in Pharaoh’s hand (Bereishis 40:11-13).
    When the cupbearer of Pharaoh told his dream to Yosef and when Yosef interpreted it, the word cup appears in the verses four times. We are told (Shemos Rabbah 6:4, Yerushalmi Pesachim 10:1) that the four cups at our Pesach Seder correspond to the arba leshonos shel geulah, the four terms of redemption, which are mentioned in the Torah (Shemos 6:6-7). They are: “Ve’hotzeisi – I will take you out” of Egypt; “ve’hitzalti – I will rescue you” from servitude; “ve’ga’alti – I will redeem you;” and “ve’lakachti – I will take you” as My people.
    The Yerushalmi (ibid.) says that another reason for the four cups is the four times that the cup of Pharaoh is mentioned in the above verses. What message were Chazal trying to convey in this association? What lesson can we learn from the cup-bearer’s dream and those four cups of Pharaoh, when we drink our four cups of wine at the Pesach Seder?
    Rav Eliyahu Klatzkin, in Chibas HaKodesh (Cheilek HaDerush #1), offers a beautiful explanation of this Yerushalmi, which takes into account the actual context of the four cups of Pharaoh – namely, the dreams and ambitions of an imprisoned man, the sar hamashkim.
    What was it that led Yosef to give a favorable interpretation to the cup-bearer, and a moment later to give a dismal interpretation to the baker? This question takes on great significance in light of the Gemara (Berachos 55b), which states that a dream follows its interpretation, and is often a reflection of what the dreamer thought about during the day. Although the Gemara says that the interpretation must be similar to the dream, why was Yosef unable to find something within the dream of the sar ha’ofim that could be interpreted favorably, as he did for the cup-bearer?
    As we read the cup-bearer’s rendition of his dream, we note the repeated emphasis of the cup of Pharaoh, which indicates a person longing and even obsessed to return to his former post. The cup-bearer had obviously taken pride in serving Pharaoh before, and hoped to be given the chance to return to his job. Thus, when Yosef listened to the dream, he gave a positive interpretation. Since the cup-bearer was a person who only wanted to serve his master, any offense he may have committed (in which a fly was found in the cup of Pharaoh) was no doubt inadvertent, and he deserved another chance.
    In the dream of the baker, however, there is no indication that he longed to return to serve Pharaoh. He never mentioned or described himself as baking for or serving his master, only that there was a basket of Pharaoh’s bread above his head. In fact, he should have carried the bread in his hand, where it would have been safer from birds. Signs of loyalty or devotion to his master were starkly absent from the dream. It seems he never cared about the royal personage he served; he only wanted the job so that he could fill his stomach with royal fare. The offense, in which a stone was found in the bread of Pharaoh, was a true offense to Pharaoh. According to the letter of the law, he deserved to be punished for his wrongdoing. Yosef could not find any redeeming factor in the dream to enable him to interpret it favorably. Therefore, Yosef delivered the interpretation that the baker would be killed and would never return to his position.
    This, writes Rav Klatzkin, is why Chazal mandated four cups at the Seder, corresponding to the four cups of Pharaoh. When we drink our wine and reflect on our liberation from Egypt, we should have in mind something akin to the longings and ambitions of the cup-bearer. He only wanted to be freed in order to return to serve his master and to continue to show his devotion to the king. In the same vein, when thanking Hashem for deliverance from Egypt, we should also recall the true purpose of freedom.
    Whatever pit we find ourselves in, our longing and prayer for redemption should be only to serve Hashem. Our ambition must be to keep His Torah and mitzvos and bask in His radiance, not the personal pleasure or physical perks that come with geulah and freedom.
    And just as the longing to serve was the catalyst for the cup-bearer’s freedom, so, too, our desire and longing to serve Hashem will be the merit that frees us from our pits, and allows us to go from darkness into light.

    in reply to: The Importance of Having Short Hair #1757650
    abukspan
    Participant

    While Rav Eliyashev was alive, in deference to his
    Father-in-law who wore a wrist watch, Rav Kanievsky would not make any mention about his opinion that a watch is beged-isha.

    in reply to: Aruch Hashulchan #1061677
    abukspan
    Participant

    I was taught that the Chazon Ish was citing the BY MA and M`B to the effect that we must recognize a Rabeinu Tam as being as chashuv as the words of sanhedrin. He was never saying that those three are like the Sanhedrin.While this may be news to you, please read the full words of the Chazon Ish! In fact, in that Yeshurin- on a note on the bottom-they point out the mistake that people make thinking that the Chazon Ish was saying……. the M.B. is like sanhedrin. that was really referring to the psakim of rabeinu tam

    in reply to: Etymology of "Day of Atonement" #897254
    abukspan
    Participant

    Aaron Chaim

    is the article on-line? can you perhaps e-mail it to me? thanxxx

    in reply to: Etymology of "Day of Atonement" #897252
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you! you are correct.

    ab

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 52 total)