Monday, February 13, 2017

Monday, 17th of Shevat, 5777

Sefirot Combination (Cycles of Seven Weeks):

6th day of Week 20 and the 41st day of the cycle of Tiferet (Balance/Beauty), Yesod shebeYesod shebeTiferet, Foundation within Foundation within Balance/Beauty.

Alef-Bet/Psalms (Cycles of 22 days):

7th day of the 7th cycle. Zayin within Mem and Nun:

Psalm 145:

Of the remembrance of Your abundant goodness they will speak, and of Your righteousness they will sing.

זֵכֶר רַב טוּבְךָ יַבִּיעוּ וְצִדְקָתְךָ יְרַנֵּנוּ:

Psalm 119:

At night I remembered Your name, O Lord, and I kept Your Torah.

זָכַרְתִּי בַלַּיְלָה שִׁמְךָ יְהֹוָה וָאֶשְׁמְרָה תּוֹרָתֶךָ:

Hayom Yom:

There is a custom of eating black buckwheat on this Shabbat.
On Shabbat B'shalach 5621 (1861) the Tzemach Tzedek said the maamar R'u ki Hashem printed in Likutei Torah. Shortly afterward he said to his son, my grandfather: On Shabbat B'shalach 5565 (1805) my grandfather said this maamar. Afterwards he sent for me and told me that in 5529 (1769) when he was in Mezritch the Maggid had summoned him to his room and had said:
On Shabbat B'shalach 5516 (1756) the Baal Shem Tov said a Maamar on Vayashav hayam...l'eitano, "The Red Sea returned to its strength," quoting the Rabbinic play on the last word, l'eitano - litnao, meaning to its condition or agreement. In 5521 (1761), a year after the Baal Shem Tov's passing, my Rebbe (the Baal Shem Tov) came to me, said the maamar, and added an explanation of the subject "doing His will" in contrast to "doing His word." And today my Rebbe again came to me to repeat the maamar.
Then the Maggid repeated the maamar to the Alter Rebbe, adding an interpretation of "River Ginai, part for me," which is similar to k'riat yam suf, the splitting of the Red Sea.
The Tzemach Tzedek concluded: Today the Baal Shem Tov, the Maggid and the Alter Rebbe came to me, each repeating the maamar in his own style.
Several hours later the Tzemach Tzedek called my grandfather again and told him an interpretation of the maamar.


But you shall choose out of the entire nation men of substance, God fearers, men of truth, who hate monetary gain, and you shall appoint over them [Israel] leaders over thousands, leaders over hundreds, leaders over fifties, and leaders over tens.

And they shall judge the people at all times, and it shall be that any major matter they shall bring to you, and they themselves shall judge every minor matter, thereby making it easier for you, and they shall bear [the burden] with you.

If you do this thing, and the Lord commands you, you will be able to survive, and also, all this people will come upon their place in peace."


7. On the day of my distress I call upon You, for You will answer me.
8. There is none like You among the supernal beings, my Lord, and there are no deeds like Yours.
9. All the nations that You have made will come and bow down before You, my Lord, and give honor to Your Name,
10. for You are great and perform wonders, You alone, O God.
11. Lord, teach me Your way that I may walk in Your truth; unify my heart to fear Your Name.
12. I will praise You, my Lord, my God, with all my heart, and give honor to Your Name forever.
13. For Your kindness to me has been great; You have saved my soul from the depth of the grave.

This, then, is the meaning of the verse, “For this thing is very near to you...” For at any time and moment a person is capable and free to rid himself of the spirit of folly which renders him insensitive to the separation between himself and G‑d caused by sin, and the forgetfulness that he has a love of G‑d by virtue of which he desires to unite with Him, through the fulfillment of the mitzvot.

He is always able to remember and arouse his love of the One G‑d, that is certainly, undoubtedly, latent in his heart. This is the meaning of “in your heart”

This love carries with it also fear; that is, the dread of being separated on any account from G‑d’s unity and oneness. Even if it means sacrificing his life without any reason or logic, but purely out of one’s divine nature.

Surely, then, it is far easier to subdue one’s appetites, since this entails much lighter suffering than death which he would willingly endure so as not to be torn away from G‑d. Mastering his evil inclination is easier, both in the category of “turning away from evil” even when it concerns a minor Rabbinic prohibition so as not to transgress G‑d’s Will, since at the time that he does the forbidden act, he thereby becomes separated from G‑d’s unity just as much as through actual idolatry.


If three people the lender, the borrower and a third party (the intended recipient) are standing together and the lender tells the borrower, "Give the maneh that you owe me (whether an entrusted article or a loan) to so and so the third party," that third party acquires the manehin question. None of the three can retract. Our Sages described this law as a dictate whose reason cannot be explained. Therefore, one cannot derive any other precept from it.

Daf Yomi:

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: And Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, who said that townspeople can bar craftsmen who come from other cities, concedes with regard to perfume salesmen who travel from one town to another that the townspeople cannot prevent them from entering their town. As the Master said: Ezra instituted an ordinance for the Jewish people that perfume salesmen shall travel from town to town so that cosmetics will be available to Jewish women. Since this ordinance was instituted on behalf of Jewish women, the Sages ruled that these peddlers could not be barred from entering a town.


If one vows not to derive any benefit from one's friend, but [the friend] has nothing to eat - he may give [food] to a third party [as a gift], and [the friend] is permitted [to take it]. It once happened in Beit Horon that someone's father was forbidden [by vow] to benefit from him. [Now, the son] was marrying off his [own] son, and said to his friend: "May the courtyard and the festive meal be a gift unto you, on the condition that my father come and celebrate with us at the festive meal." "If it is truly mine," he said, "then let it all be consecrated unto Heaven." [The son] said to [his friend]: "I didn't give my property to you for you to consecrate it unto Heaven!" He replied: "You gave it to me so that you and your father can feast together, and be reconciled, while the transgression of breaking the vow will fall upon [me]!" When the case was presented to the Sages, they ruled: any gift not given in a manner allowing for consecration is not a gift at all.

No comments:

Post a Comment


Blog Archive