Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 11th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph discusses why a found item of a minor belongs to the father: “Because the minor does not intend to acquire it for himself, as when he finds it, he runs with it to his father.”   The propensity of this young boy speaks of a form of attachment that fathers specifically enact. A father might toss his child in the air, simultaneously terrifying and delightfing him or her. While mother stands for safety and nu …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 10th, 2024

Our Gemara on amud aleph discusses the ability of a courtyard to acquire objects for its owner without his awareness.  However, Shulchan Aruch (CM 269) rules that if it is an unexpected object, then it does not acquire it for him, such as hidden treasure.   In Vayikra (14:34) the Torah speaks about tozraas blemishes that will afflict your houses, “upon your entry into the land of Canaan.”  This odd phraseology sounds li …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 8th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph discusses an important and recurring theme in Jewish religious philosophy that has halachic and metaphorical implications. Under many circumstances, an employee or laborer can quit on the spot. The rationale is that God wants no Jewish person to be encumbered by any mortal. The Gemara declares:   It is written: “For to Me the children of Israel are slaves; they are My slaves whom I brought forth out of the land …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 8th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses the method of acquisition known as “chatzer = courtyard”, where an object can be acquired by being placed in the person’s domain. A mobile courtyard, such as vessels to be acquired that are placed on one’s moving animal, cannot acquire the objects.  However, a boat is not considered mobile despite moving on the water, as the subjective experience is one of relative stability and stand …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 7th, 2024

Our Gemara on amud aleph makes a seemingly contradictory assertion that a deaf mute is lacking in enough intelligence or discernment to acquire possessions. The rabbis enacted a ruling that regardless, they should be allowed to possess objects. This was in order to forestall and protect a vulnerable population (the mentally impaired) from financial abuse.  If two people pick up an ownerless object at the same time, they acquire it jointly, e …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 6th, 2024

Our Gemara on amud aleph discusses a situation of two people, in dispute regarding possession of a cloak made with gold threads on certain parts, and how it should be divided fairly.   The literal word used for the cloak is “talis”. Does the Gemara really mean a Talis, the garment which is a mitzvah to wear with Tzitzis fringes attached? Possibly, as it may be that Jews routinely wore four cornered garments as a standard, and did …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 5th, 2024

Our Gemara on amud beis discusses the procedure of tithing animals.  Animals born from this year's cycle are put in a corral, and one by one, pass through a gate, counted by a staff.  Every tenth sheep is tagged with a red mark and becomes masser (Mishna Bechoros 9:7).  If a counted sheep somehow jumps over the gate and returns back to the non-tithed group, the entire group is now rendered exempt from any further tithing procedures …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 3rd, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses the parameters of the prohibition against jealously desiring the possessions of another. According to the simple reading of our Gemara, this prohibition applies even when the person is willing to make full payment and purchase the object. If so, is it ever permitted to see something that belongs to another and offer to purchase it? Perhaps it is not allowed to initiate an offer to buy items that are not for comme …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 3rd, 2024

Our Gemara discusses various aspects of a unique kind of oath, known as Gilgul Shevua, which we can roughly translate as “A rolled-on Oath.”  When a defendant is obligated to make an oath to defend their claim, the plaintiff has the opportunity to levy additional accusations, compelling the defendant to take oaths on those matters as well. Remarkably, this applies even when the subsequent accusations lack substantial legal basis, …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 1st, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud aleph uncharacteristically asks why the Torah obligates an oath by a person who partially admits, but exempts the person who flat out denies the claim. Usually the Gemara asks the “what”, but not the “why.”  For example, a Gilgul Shevua, on the face of it, makes little sense. (An additional oath, levied on the defendant once he already is obligated in a first oath, even if a second claim on the part …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

March 1st, 2024

The Gemara on this Amud discusses the proper way to adjudicate a dispute where two parties claim ownership over an object. Sometimes the remedy is to mandate that it be divided. However, that is only when there are grounds to consider each claim as equally valid, and possibly that both are equal legitimate owners.  But if one party had full possession of the object, and the other had no proof other than his claim, we would not divide the obj …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 29th, 2024

Our Gemara on amud aleph teaches that though it is permitted to kill an informer, there is an opinion that one may still not take his possessions. (In times where the local government was cruel and unjust toward Jews, an informant in the community posed mortal danger.) The rationale for this distinction is provided by the Gemara:   Perhaps he will have righteous children, and it is written: The wicked may prepare it, but the just shall put i …
1 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 28th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses the prohibition to buy stolen goods. The Rambam (Law of Theft 1:1) warns that to buy stolen goods of any kind is a grave sin, as it encourages the thief’s behavior.  Based on this, Yam Shel Shelomo (58:1) rules that it is still prohibited to purchase from a thief even if he technically acquired the item via making substantial changes so that it is no longer the same object, such as weaving wool into a …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 27th, 2024

Our Gemara describes an interlude with Rabbi Yochanan, where he misjudges a student, Rav Kahana, several times:   Originally Rav Kahana was seated in the front row of the Shiur, as his reputation preceded him. However he was under instructions by his master, Rav, to not ask any questions in Rabbi Yochanan’s Shiur for seven years. Therefore, he appeared in the Shiur as a lackluster scholar whose hype was not commensurate with his perfor …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 26th, 2024

The Gemara on Amud Aleph uses a phrase to characterize an event where a person’s animal that was doomed to drown was miraculously saved, “Min Shamayim Rachimu Aleh - from Heaven they manifested Rachimu.” Many translations of this Gemara translate “Rachimu” as mercy, seeing the Hebrew root R-CH-M from Rachamim, mercy.   I believe this translation to be in error. The Aramaic Rachimu, though of the same root, actua …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 25th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses the prevailing awareness at that time that vessels with liquid in them left open and unguarded can become contaminated by snake venom, as the snake is attracted to it and might have taken a drink.  The Gemara says it is forbidden to have one’s animal drink from it, and Rashi says perhaps you will slaughter the animal and eat it, thus exposing someone to the poison.   However, this seemingly contra …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 23rd, 2024

Our Gemara quotes Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi, using a distinctive phrase that other Tanaim do not use.  He introduces his opinion with, “Omer Ani”, which roughly translates to “I say” or “In my opinion”, but as we soon shall see, in Hebrew it has a different, more subtle and humble connotation.   Rav Yosef Engel (Beis Haotzar, Ma’areches aleph-vav, klal 33) notes that the meaning is something like &ldq …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 23rd, 2024

Our Gemara on amud aleph rules that certain days and times are improper to serve defendants with summons from Bais Din:   We do not set a court date for participants in the kalla, the gatherings for Torah study during Elul and Adar, during the months of the kalla, nor for participants in the public discourses prior to the Festival during the period leading up to the Festival. The Gemara relates: When people would come before Rav Naḥman dur …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 22nd, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud discusses the unfortunate situation of children whose father was a thief. Are the children who were supported by their father over the years, responsible to pay restitution to those whom he stole from? We won’t get into the Halachic specifics, but instead I thought to discuss the social and psychological impact of having a father who is a thief.   Unfortunately, there are crooks even in the frum world. Sometimes the …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 21st, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud aleph discusses the psychological assumption that many women prefer companionship over loneliness to the extent that they might be agreeable to marry someone far less suitable than she would have initially preferred.  The statement is in a thick Aramaic, which suggests it was an adage spoken by the populace (see Rashi Kesuvos 75a “Tan” and Rashi Kiddushin 41a, “D’amar”):   The phrase, &ld …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 20th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis considers the scenario where a woman’s husband dies childless, and therefore she now is incumbent to a levirate marriage with her brother in law who was smitten with a repulsive skin disease.  Can this be seen as grounds to undermine the valid intent of the original marriage, as surely she never would have agreed to this marriage had she known that it could lead to her being beholden to this person? The Gemara r …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 19th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph discusses the status of the Biblically penalty of an extra fifth imposed for one who confesses that he denied a theft under oath. The particular case is regarding someone who stole from his father, and then denied it under oath, and before he can make restitution, his father dies. Technically, he inherited part of the fine due to his father, and one might think that his percentage of the inheritance should be deducted off …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 18th, 2024

Our Gemara on amud aleph discusses a case where one stated the claim that a thief stole the deposit and took an oath and then witnesses came and testified that he had taken it, and he returned and again stated the claim that a thief stole the same deposit and again took an oath and then witnesses came and again testified that he had taken it. More notably, Rambam (Hilchos Geneiva, 4:5) rules that even if this occurred 100 times, if he makes the o …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 16th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph grapples with legal and textual inconsistencies, where the subject matter of the various legal cases and oaths described in Shemos (chapter 22) are difficult to ascertain. According to one approach, עירוב פרשיות כתוב כאן, there is a blending of distinct cases within the verses. In the same verses, one part might be referring to an oath for partial admission, while the second half could be referring to a …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 16th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud aleph discusses a scenario when a defendant swears falsely, and later is proven to have lied, certain exemptions of liabilities remain in effect nonetheless. The idea is that having made the oath, there was a certain settlement between the owner and him. Even though the oath was false, certain liabilities are dismissed by the act of swearing itself, almost in exchange for making the oath, true or not.   The derivation for …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 15th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph discusses a scenario where someone swore falsely and denied possession of an object.  If he confesses and wishes to repent, part of his responsibility is to return the principal object as well as one fifth additional payment.  This requirement is so extensive, that even if the victim moved to far flung regions, the strict letter of the law requires that he incur the trouble and the expense to restore the object …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 14th, 2024

Our Gemara discusses a particular kind of signet, used as an identifier, known as a Dyu-Koni, which seems to consist of some unique emblem or picture. The words Duo-Koni likely comes from the Greek word, icon, and Du is two. So perhaps a double image, or an image on two sides. (Shall we say, Du-Coin, double coin?)   The Dyu-Koni is used in many instances particularly to connote a human form. For example, the Targum Yonasan on the verse (Bere …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 13th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses an incident that occurred to “a certain pious individual” “chassid echad”, who was involved in a purchase transaction, and there was question as to whom he should pay. There was a debate about whether the case involved a false oath. The Gemara challenges this position, because the litigant was described as a pious person. The Gemara then says, perhaps this situation came up after he repent …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 12th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses the status of a person’s possessions, when he declares all of them as Hekdesh, sanctified for the Temple. The Gemara wonders if certain necessities and obligations ought to be exempt, as could he have meant literally everything he owns? The Gemara rules that the clothing of his wife and his children are not included, as we assume he still meant to provide for them and meet his responsibilities toward family …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 11th, 2024

Our Gemara on amud beis discusses the halachic status of changes in appearance, such as dyes.  This is known as חֲזוּתָא מִילְּתָא “A surface appearance has its own independent significance”. There are numerous halachic implications discussed in the poskim such as if the dye is stolen and is on an object, is returning the object like returning the dye?  Some even relate this discussion to if it is permissibl …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 9th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph derives the ethical directive to go beyond the letter of the law, Lifnim Mishuras Hadin, from the following verse (Shemos 18:20):   וְהִזְהַרְתָּ֣ה אֶתְהֶ֔ם אֶת־הַחֻקִּ֖ים וְאֶת־הַתּוֹרֹ֑ת וְהוֹדַעְתָּ֣ לָהֶ֗ם אֶת־הַדֶּ֙רֶךְ֙ יֵ֣לְכוּ בָ֔הּ וְאֶת־הַֽמַּעֲשֶׂ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר יַעֲשֽׂוּן &nbs …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 9th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis records an incident where a person sought an expert opinion from Rabbi Chiyyah who was appraising the quality and value of a certain coin.  He appraised it incorrectly, causing her financial loss. The Talmud rules that experts are not strictly liable for errors made in good faith. Nonetheless, as an act of piety, Rabbi Chiyyah took financial responsibility. He made a cryptic notation in his record book, “Deyn Es …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 8th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses an incident when Rav Ashi burned another person's promissory note, and Rafram required him to pay the full amount. In this instance, the destruction of this key evidence prevented the debt from being collected.  Even though the loss was not direct, as a mere few pennies worth of parchment was destroyed, but since it caused an immediate and prompt consequential loss, it is treated as if he actually destroyed …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 7th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis describes the coinage in the time of Avraham, on one side was an elderly man and woman, on the other side a young man and woman. (See Tosafos and other commentaries if this was an image, or a written word.  By the way, archeological evidence is that not only did the Jews refrain from using images on their coins, but even when under Roman dominion in the first Century, the Romans honored the Jewish custom and used coin …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 6th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses which kinds of changes to an object constitute enough transformation so that even a thief acquires it. (The thief, of course, must still compensate the owner. However since the object was so dramatically changed, it no longer has any connection to its past and he does not have to return the physical object.) The change must be irreversible in order for it to reach this threshold of becoming a new object.   U …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 5th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Beis references a monetary custom in silent partner and share cropper agreements. The silent partner can take between ⅔, one half, one quarter for himself. This seemed to be a common financial arrangement that was not considered exploitative, despite the large percentages.   The Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni 892) speaking for God, as if He were justifying the mitzvah to tithe: “It is customary for the owner of the field …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 4th, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph discusses the moral quandary of whether one should recite a blessing over stolen food: רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: הֲרֵי שֶׁגָּזַל סְאָה שֶׁל חִטִּין, טְחָנָהּ, לָשָׁהּ וַאֲפָאָהּ, וְהִפְרִישׁ מִמֶּנָּה חַלָּה, כֵּיצַד מְבָרֵךְ? אֵין זֶה מְבָרֵךְ אֶלָּא מְנָא …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 2nd, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph warns: “The curse of an ordinary person should never be regarded as light in your eyes, for Abimelech cursed Sarah and it was fulfilled in her descendant.”  The Gemara explains that Yitschok’s blindness later in life was caused by a passing remark of Avimelech, who felt misled by Yitschok, in letting him behave “blindly” by taking Rivkah as a wife who was actually married to Yitschok. Th …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 2nd, 2024

Our Mishna on Amud Aleph tells us that even if a person who caused an injury pays full restitution, he is not forgiven until he asks forgiveness, and it is granted. This concept is derived from the Biblical story of Avimelech and Avraham. When Avimelech had a prophetic dream, alerting him to the fact that the woman who he appropriated was not actually Avraham’s sister, but instead, his wife, God instructs him: Now therefore restore the wife …
0 comments

Author: Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, DHL, LCSW-R

February 1st, 2024

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph references the principle that once a defendant is convicted for a capital crime, there is an imperative to carry out the punishment immediately, so as not to prolong his agony. (See Sanhedrin 35a and Rashi “Lidayne”.) This is known as Iynuy Hadin. However, curiously in our Gemara they are referring to delaying the death of an Ox that was convicted for goring a person. The commentaries struggle with trying to u …
0 comments