3922 —עיון תלמודי על נבואה, משיחת יהושע, ודיני שבת

B"H, 2 Kislev, 5716.

Brooklyn.

Haraha"g iy"a nu"n oseik b'tzt"z Mohe Ephraim Zev Garbuz

Shalom u'Vrachah!

In response to your letter sharing the good news about your son's wedding on Wednesday, the upcoming 15th of Kislev. May it be G‑d's will that it be for a good and auspicious mazal, at a fortunate and successful time. May they build a home in Israel—an everlasting edifice—on the foundations of Torah and mitzvah as illuminated by the inner light of Torah. May Hashem fulfill all the desires of your honored heart to derive much nachas from him, and may you continue to labor in the tent of Torah. With blessings of mazal tov, mazal tov.

On this occasion I also acknowledge receipt of the sefer—Mechilta with commentary Kav HaMidah and Har Ephraim—and out of fondness for the matter, even though time is short and I do not have permission, I nevertheless glanced through its pages quickly. Below are some comments. The teaching of our Sages is well known regarding the verse Et Vahev B'Sufah (Kiddushin 30b): Even a father and son or teacher and student who engage in Torah study together become enemies but do not leave until they become beloved friends—as it says: Et Vahev B'Sufah (do not read 'B'Sufah' but 'B'Sofah'—at its end).

Har Ephraim. Section 1. The prophecy of Chanan'yah ben Azur (Sanhedrin 89a) is considered as one who prophesies what was said to another (to Yirmiyahu), since it is derived by kal v'chomer from what was said to Yirmiyahu. Nevertheless, even though he prophesied generally without saying it was told to him directly, we cannot interpret his words as merely repeating what was said to Yirmiyahu because Yirmiyahu had not yet learned this kal v'chomer. The difficulty is clear. On the contrary—it seems more logical that even if he intended Yirmiyahu's prophecy, this would not change the law; even then he would be liable. But all this difficulty is unnecessary because there is no question from the outset: Even if we say that whenever someone states a prophecy generally (not "to me") we judge him favorably as only quoting another prophet—not claiming it for himself—in Chanan'yah's case we cannot say so because this prophecy came specifically to another prophet—to Yirmiyahu—as it says (Yirmiyahu 28:1-2): "Chanan'yah said to me... Thus said Hashem... I have broken the yoke of Babylon." It is clear.

Kav HaMidah 60b. The Mechilta says "that day Yehoshua was anointed," which implies it was in the fortieth year at the end of Moshe's reign. But this cannot be explained in Mechilta since immediately after Rabi Yehoshua's statement comes Rabi Elazar HaModai's view that this was a hint to Moshe that he would not enter Eretz Yisrael—a hint unnecessary in year forty when it had already been stated explicitly. Nor can we say that Rabi Elazar disagrees about when this section was stated; if so, something essential is missing from the text. In general there is no need to explain "anointed Yehoshua" as literal anointing with oil for kingship (and where would they get anointing oil then?)—rather it means appointment to authority as Rashi explains on Shemot 29:29: "for anointment" means greatness or leadership.

[And if one insists on interpreting literally as kingship—even so there is no problem since Shlomo was anointed during David's lifetime at his command; but then why did Moshe later request "appoint a leader over the congregation," since Yehoshua had already been anointed? Thus there is no need to say his anointing was for kingship.] The dispute between Rabi Yehoshua and Rabi Elazar HaModai remains straightforward: whether "place in Yehoshua's ears three times" refers to appointing him or merely hinting at his future role.

On what I wrote in Har Ephraim there—note also Chizkuni's comments on that passage.

Har Ephraim at end of sefer (121a) explains Mechilta here based on Mechilta d'Rashbi. This serves as proof against [the previous explanation]: The difference in language between "Kohanim say" versus "Yisrael say" indicates a difference in subject matter. The simple meaning of Mechilta is that only those labors permitted in the Mikdash are allowed there; all other labors remain forbidden on Shabbat elsewhere—and these constitute most of the thirty-nine categories of labor. The question raised by Zair—I did not understand.

Summary

The Rebbe blesses Rabbi Garbuz upon his son's wedding and offers deep Talmudic analysis regarding prophecy transmission between prophets, nuances in appointing Yehoshua as leader versus king, and clarifies distinctions between Shabbat observance inside and outside the Mikdash—all emphasizing careful textual study.