Page 71 - Chayei Adam LAYOUT sivan 5782

םדא רפושה ןיד - מ “ ק ללכ ייח

ּ
ּ
ּ
ּ
אָּּ ל ֶא ,ֹו ּ לֻּכ ל ַּטִנ ּו ּ ל ִא ְּכ ּהיֵל יֵוֲה ַד ,לּוסָּ ּפ ,ֹו ּב ֻר ְּב .ר ֵ ׁשָּּכ ,ֹוטּוע ִמב ְּּ 12 ,ֹו ּב ְּח ָּרְּל ק ַדסִנ ְּ ]זט[
בי ִ ׁשֲח אָּל ְּו ,וי ִּפ דַצְּל אּ ֶ ׁש ּו ּ ל ִפֲא םי ִר ְּמֹוא ׁשֵי ְּו .רּוע ִּשַּכ ׁ 14 וי ִּפ דַצל ְּ 13 רֵּי ַּת ְּ ׁשִנ ןֵּכ ם ִא
ֹל
ּ
11 :ץֵצֹוח ֹוני ֵא ֹוני ִמ ְּב ןי ִמ ְּד ,ק ֵס ְּפ ֶה
ּ
ַעֵגֹונ רָּפֹו ּ ׁש ַה ןי ֵא ֶ ׁש ןָּויֵּכ ,לּוסָּ ּפ ,ֹו ּב ע ַק ָּת ְּו ֹו ּב ַחֵּפַנְּל וי ִּפ ִמ רָּפֹו ּ ׁש ַה ת ֶא קי ִח ְּרה ִ ]זי[
16 :וי ִּפ ל ֶא

ּ
לָּּכמּו ִ 17 .ה ָּרֵבֲעַּב ה ָּאָּּב ַה הָּו ְּצ ִמ יֵוֲה ַד ,ֹו ּב ַעֹק ְּתִל רּוס ָּא הָּּ ל ִח ְּתַכְּל ,רָּפֹו ׁש לֵזֹוּגה ַ ]חי[
ּ
ּ
ּ
ןי ֵא םֹוק ָּמ לָּּכ ִמּו .לֹוק ְּב לֶזֶּג ןי ֵא ְּד ,םיִלָּע ְּב ַה ּו ׁשֲאי ְּתִנ אל ּו ּ ל ִפֲא ,אָּצָּי דַבֲעי ִד ְּב םֹוק ָּמ
ּ
ּ
ֹ
ָּ
בַּג לַע ף ַא .ויָּלָּע ןי ִכ ְּרָּב ְּמּו הָּּ ל ִח ְּתַכְּל ּו ּ ל ִפֲא ןי ִא ְּצֹוי ,לּוא ָּ ׁש רָּפֹו ׁש ְּב לָּבא ֲ 18 . ויָּלָּע ןי ִכ ְּרָּב ְּמ
ּ
ּ
ּ
ּ
ּ
ם ֶּת ְּח ַקְּלּו" ]מ,גכ ארקיו[ בי ִת ְּכ ִד בָּלּו ּ לַבּו ,"םֶכָּל הֶי ְּהִי הָּעּור ְּת םֹוי" ]א,טכ רבדמב[ בי ִת ְּכ ִד
םדו רשב
53. The reason it is still valid is because under extenuating circumstances, one may
we view the rest of the shofar as if it was rely on this opinion. (Mishna Berura)
דמ
severed and since another full tefach remains,
the rest of the shofar is kosher. Therefore, 55. Since it is the same species and was
most rishonim (Ran, Rosh, Rambam) never removed, it is not considered a chatzitza
המ
understand that the shofar is only kosher if (Mishna Berura).
this minimum remains on the inner part of the
ומ
shofar (i.e. the part closer to his mouth) and 56. Poskim
not the outer section. The reason why the
remainder of the shofar is not considered an 57. Levush. Although this is not an explicit
addition, (which is posul as above, siman 9) is ruling in Shulchan Aruch, since the wording
because it began as part of the same entity. there is that ‘one has fulfilled his obligation’
(Taz) the implication is that it is only b’dieved. (Bach)
אמ

58. Since a stolen item is repulsive to
54. Baal Ha’Itur and Ritz Gei’us See Hashem, praising Him by reciting a beracha is
במ
however, Aruch Hashulchan who qualifies that insulting. See K’lal 149 (hilchos lulav) for
זמ
even according to this opinion, it is only valid further discussion.
if it doesn’t affect the sound of the tekiah. גמ
Although the halacha follows the first opinion, 59. Bamidbar 29:1

70