Shabbos 34b: How long is Bein Hashmashos? Rabbah said in the name of Rav Yehuda who said in the name of Shmuel: ¾ of the amount of time it takes to walk a mil.

Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 261:2: Some say that one must start keeping Shabbos early, and the period when one can add is from the beginning of sunset, when the sun is no longer visible, until bein hashmashos, which is a period of 3.25 mil. One may start keeping Shabbos early for some or all of this period, as long as he adds some part of the definite weekday onto Shabbos. And the length of bein hashmashos is ¾ of a mil, or 1500 amos walking time, before nightfall.

שבת לד ע”ב: שיעור בין השמשות בכמה? אמר רבה אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל: שלשה חלקי מיל.

שולחן ערוך או”ח רס”א ס”ב: י״א שצריך להוסיף מחול על הקודש וזמן תוספת זה הוא מתחלת השקיעה שאין השמש נראית על הארץ עד זמן בין השמשות והזמן הזה שהוא ג׳ מילין ורביע רצה לעשותו כולו תוספת עושה רצה לעשות ממנו מקצת עושה ובלבד שיוסיף איזה זמן שיהיה ודאי יום מחול על הקודש. ושיעור זמן בין השמשות הוא ג׳ רבעי מיל שהם מהלך אלף ות״ק אמות קודם הלילה.

On the last page of one of the volumes of the Chasam Sofer’s commentary on Shas (the volume on Pesachim, Hilchos Pesach, Megillah and Lulav), we find the following words: “One must know that we hold that from sunset to the emergence of the stars is 24 minutes or 35 minutes, and we follow the stricter of the two … and the lighting of Shabbos and Chanukah candles on Erev Shabbos must be done before sunset, which means 35 minutes before the emergence of the stars…”

When the Chasam Sofer’s chiddushim were reprinted in 1954 by the Debreciner Rav, this paragraph was omitted. Some people protested against this censorship with a poster hung in Williamsburg, showing the original text side-by-side with the censored version, and saying, “Recently, people have arrived in this country keeping the chumra of their country of origin, to keep Shabbos until 72 minutes after sunset. Of course, they have the right to do so, and may they be blessed for it. The problem, however, is that they enter Shabbos late and do work after sunset, whereas the custom here is to start Shabbos 18 minutes before sunset. This creates confusion and disunity among religious Jews: one person is going to daven while the other is carrying his wallet and going to the mikvah. How do they square themselves with the Mishnah, “One must accept the stringencies of the place where he arrives, and one should not deviate so as not to cause fighting.”

And the main problem is that when [those following the earlier zman] publicized the Chasam Sofer’s ruling, it bothered these people so much that they had the audacity to tamper with the Torah of Moshe and tear out this page, replacing it with this falsified version. This is a tremendous, terrible chutzpah!!! We are upset at the Reform movement for removing prayers from the Siddur. But how are we any different, if we also practice censorship, and someday, if someone doesn’t like a halacha in Shulchan Aruch, he can simply omit it or change it? This leads to the destruction of all our holy sefarim.”

The Debreciner Rav wrote a letter responding that the sefer was censored by someone else without his knowledge. After the Debreciner Rav passed away in 1997, Rabbi Meir Amsel, editor of Hamaor, wrote that the Debrecener Rav had told him that the Satmar Rebbe had commanded him to delete this section.

Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Harfenes explained that the Satmar Rebbe was not practicing censorship here. On the contrary, it was the previous printers of the Chasam Sofer who had committed a falsification by inserting this section, which was actually the opinion of the Chasam Sofer’s teacher, Rabbi Nosson Adler. It was first printed by the Likutei Chaver Ben Chaim, quoting notes written by the Maharam Schick of what the Chasam Sofer told him in 1786, in his teacher’s name.

The Chasam Sofer himself disagreed with this ruling, as can be seen in his teshuva in Orach Chaim 80. There he was asked about when to make the bris for a baby born at 8:30 PM on Shabbos, the 28^th of Sivan 5563 (1803), which he calls “bein hashmashos, on a cloudy day such that it was impossible to see whether the stars were out.” His response was that we hold like Rabbeinu Tam that bein hashmashos (the uncertain period between Shabbos and weekday) is the last ¾ of a mil, where a mil is 22 minutes, before the stars are visible. This period starts from the “end of sunset” (the term used by Rabbeinu Tam for the point in time that is 3 and ¼ mil after the sun sets below the horizon). Thus the uncertain period is between 71.5 and 88 minutes after sunset. He adds that the practice in these countries is that we do work on Friday until “an hour or 45 minutes” before the stars emerge. Thus we accept Rabbeinu Tam as the definite halacha, even to be lenient. We don’t take into account Rabbeinu Tam’s opponent, the Re’em, who holds that beis hashmashos is the last 16.5 minutes before visible sunset.

Now, on that particular day, the Chasam Sofer writes that nightfall was at 8:55 PM. The uncertain period thus began 16.5 minutes earlier, at 8:38 PM. If the baby was born at 8:30, then he was definitely born on Shabbos and the bris should be on Shabbos.

This teshuva, saying that we do work and light candles after sunset on Friday, and that Shabbos ends 88 minutes after sunset, definitely disagrees with Rabbi Nosson Adler’s statement that candles are lit before sunset and Shabbos ends at most 35 minutes after sunset. The teshuva was written in 1803, as opposed to the quote from his teacher which was written down in 1786, so it is more authoritative. Therefore, the Satmar Rebbe asked for the early zman quote to be deleted so as to more faithfully represent the Chasam Sofer’s opinion.

Source: Changing the Immutable, p. 104; Yisroel Vehazmanim, p. 873

[Why does the Chasam Sofer say that we do work on Friday until 45 minutes before the stars become visible, when actually one may work until 16.5 minutes before the stars? The answer is probably that the Jews of his time and place used to accept Shabbos early, following the Shulchan Aruch’s statement that one should add on to Shabbos. In any case, the fact that they worked after sunset shows that they followed Rabbeinu Tam; therefore the baby born 25 minutes before the stars emerged would be considered definitely born on Shabbos.

It also seems that the Chasam Sofer does not count 88 minutes forward from sunset to determine when tzeis hakochavim is; rather he goes by the actual appearance of the stars, and then counts 16.5 minutes backward to determine when bein hashmashos occurs. This is evident from his words at the outset of the teshuva that the baby was born “on a cloudy day such that it was impossible to see whether the stars were out.” Why not just determine tzeis hakochavim by counting from sunset? It seems that sunset was not visible from his location, or else it wasn’t clear to him which exact moment Chazal call sunset. Similarly, at the end of the teshuva he states that the stars came out at 8:55 PM that day, and does not state when sunset occurred.

It’s also notable that the Chasam Sofer doesn’t even mention the opinion, advocated by the Gra and later popularized by the Mishnah Berurah, that bein hashmashos begins at sunset. To the Chasam Sofer, the only two opinions on this subject were Rabbeinu Tam and the Re’em.]

Shabbos 23b: One who always has candles lit will be zocheh to have sons who become Torah scholars.

Orach Chaim 263:1 Rema: A woman who usually lights two candles and forgot to light one week, must light three candles for the rest of her life.

שבת כג ע”ב אמר רב הונא: הרגיל בנר ־ הויין ליה בנים תלמידי חכמים

או”ח סימן רס”ג ס”א ברמ”א: האשה ששכחה פעם אחת להדליק מדלקת כל ימיה ג׳ נרות (מהרי״ל)

Once a married couple was staying at the wife’s parents for Yom Tov, and the young woman forgot to light. Her husband went to ask Rabbi Eisenstein in Lakewood whether she now had to light an extra candle for the rest of her life. The rav responded with a story: someone asked R’ Moshe Feinstein if a mother and daughter in the same house should both light in the dining room or in two different parts of the house. Reb Moshe responded, “Before you ask me that, ask whether both of them should light at all. Maybe once there are candles lit in a house, there is no mitzvah to light more!” Rabbi Eisenstein concluded, “Since it’s not so obvious that your wife was required to light, now that she forgot, she is not subject to the punishment of adding a candle.”

Shabbos 153b: If one is stuck on the road with his wallet, and has no non-Jew with him, he should place the wallet on the donkey. But then he is working the animal, and the Torah says, “You shall not do any work, you… and your animal!” Rav Adda bar Ahava said: He should place the wallet on the donkey while it is already walking.

Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 266:2: Some say that he should not urge on the animal by shouting at it as long as the wallet is on its back.

שבת קנג ע”ב: אין עמו נכרי ־ מניחו על החמור. והלא מחמר, ורחמנא אמר (שמות כ) לא תעשה כל מלאכהִ ־ אמר רב אדא בר אהבה: מניחו עליה כשהיא מהלכת.

שולחן ערוך אורח חיים רס”ו ס”ב: יש אומרים שצריך ליזהר מלהנהיגה בקול רם כל זמן שהכיס עליה:

Someone asked Rabbi Ben Zion Abba Shaul if it’s allowed to tell your dog to turn on the light on Shabbos. Based on an inference from a Gemara (Shabbos 19a), he concludes that it’s forbidden. However, he says there is a difference between telling a gentile and telling a dog. In the case of the gentile, there are two reasons, listed by the Shulchan Aruch Harav 243:1:

1) He is considered the shliach – agent of the Jew.

2) It is classified as weekday speech.

Therefore, on Erev Shabbos, although reason 2 does not apply because it’s not Shabbos, still reason 1 applies, and that is why one may not instruct a gentile on Friday to do work on Shabbos (e.g. delivering an overnight letter). But in the case of a dog, the animal cannot be your shliach. The only reason is that it’s weekday speech. Therefore, you may train your dog on a weekday to do melacha, such as turning on the lights for you whenever you enter a room.

Source: Ohr Letzion v. 1 Siman 23

[Why did Rabbi Ben Zion Abba Shaul have to resort to forbidding it because of “amirah” – similar to amirah l’akum? Why didn’t he forbid it because of the Torah prohibition of “mechamer” (doing work with your animal, which is forbidden even if you don’t lead it physically, only with your voice – Orach Chaim 266:2), or “shevisas behemto” (which is forbidden even if a gentile borrows your animal and works with it)?

Although this is not written in Rav Ben Zion’s teshuva, I heard (from Rabbi Moshe Zoberman) that he said that these two prohibitions apply only when you force the animal to work, such as by yelling at it angrily (see the Mechaber’s language “b’kol ram” and the Mishnah Berurah 266:1 “yigor”). But a trained dog can respond even if the owner asks it nicely, out of loyalty to its owner.]

Shabbos 19a: One may not depart on a ship less than three days before Shabbos. This is only on a pleasure trip, but for a mitzvah it is permitted.

שבת יט ע”א: תנו רבנן: אין מפליגין בספינה פחות משלשה ימים קודם לשבת. במה דברים אמורים ־ לדבר הרשות, אבל לדבר מצוה ־ שפיר דמי.

A girl named Amalia took a flight from New York to South Korea. The plane took off an hour after Shabbos, and flew northwest over Canada and the Arctic Ocean. When she landed, it was Monday morning in Korea. However, during the Arctic part of the flight, before crossing the dateline (according to any opinion as to where the halachic dateline is located), it became light for a while. She asked: Did she have to keep Shabbos during that period? And was she allowed to take the flight in the first place?

Let’s assume she was traveling for pleasure. The Rishonim disagree on the reason why it’s forbidden to embark on a ship in the last three days before Shabbos. The Mishnah Berurah lists five opinions in his introduction to OC 248. Let’s go through them and see if any of them apply to our case.

1. Rabbeinu Chananel, as well as Rabbi Shmuel ben Eli, Gaon of Baghdad in the Rambam’s time (quoted in Igros Harambam p. 278), held that the reason is techumin. If the bottom of the boat is less than 10 tefachim from the bottom of the river, then there is definitely a problem of techumin. And even if the water is deep, there is a sofek (Eiruvin 43a) whether techumin apply above 10 tefachim. The rule is sofek d’oraisa l’chumra, so one would not be allowed to travel more than 12 mil on such water, because 12 mil is the techum d’oraisa. In Amalia’s case, however, there is no problem of techumin because she departed from New York AFTER Shabbos, and one’s techum can only be established at the onset of Shabbos.

2. The Rif and Rambam argued that if the problem were techumin, it would not be permitted even on Sunday, Monday or Tuesday, or for a mitzvah. Rather, it must be that on a body of water there is never a techum d’oraisa. Therefore, if the boat’s bottom is more than 10 tefachim off the bottom of the water (or in an airplane flying over water), techum is always m’drabbanan and one may travel as far as one wants. What then is the prohibition of embarking on a ship within three days of Shabbos? It is because sea-sickness will prevent him from enjoying Shabbos. In our case, there is no sea-sickness on an airplane.

The Shulchan Aruch OC 248:2 and 404 paskens like the Rambam’s leniency about techumin on water. Here, since the flight traversed land in the Arctic too (Canada), the Rambam’s leniency in techumin does not apply. However, as explained above, one’s techum cannot be established in the middle of Shabbos, only at the onset.

3. The Baal Hamaor holds the reason is because the Jew might be forced to do melacha in the middle of the voyage. On an airplane, passengers never have to do any melacha.

4. The Ramban holds that the non-Jews on the ship might have to do melacha for the Jew. The Mishnah Berurah says this would not apply when the ship belongs completely to a non-Jew. Presumably, it must also be true that most of the passengers are non-Jews – see Shabbos 122a. This is usually the case on flights to South Korea.

5. Tosafos hold that the reason is because water travel is similar to swimming. This reason would not apply on a plane.     

This was all written regarding the ships of the Gemara’s time, which were sailboats. What about ships with a steam or internal combustion engine, or airplanes? Seemingly, two new problems would arise.

1. By sitting in the ship or plane, the Jew is adding weight and thus causing more fuel to be burned. This would apply if he boarded on Shabbos; however, when boarding before Shabbos it would seem to be a passive transgression, which would be mutar. It would be similar to sitting down on the gas pedal of a vehicle before Shabbos and remaining there for the duration of Shabbos.

2. The Ramban’s reason – that the non-Jews do melacha for the Jew, might become a problem now even when the majority of the passengers are non-Jews. The reason is that we consider the work to be done primarily for the majority only in a situation like lighting a candle, where the Gemara says, “a candle for one is a candle for a hundred.” But here, every time the pilot accelerates, he is adding a bit more fuel for the Jew. This is called ribuy shiurim – adding on to the same melacha. This would be analogous to the case of a non-Jew who warmed up water for the use of two non-Jews and one Jew, or for a sick person and a healthy person – would it be allowed to use that water? Tosafos in Gittin 8b is uncertain about this question.

The Shemiras Shabbos K’hilchasa (30:55) says that it’s allowed to travel on a motorized ship driven by non-Jews, provided that the ship departs on a fixed schedule, whether there are enough passengers or not. Apparently, he paskened that ribuy shiurim by a non-Jew is permitted. Thus in our case – the plane traveling on Shabbos – it would be permitted as well.

Finally, even if someone were to disagree with any of the logic above, and they were to argue that one or more of the Rishonim’s reasons do apply to planes (e.g. they would argue that people do feel motion sickness on a plane, or that there is some chance that the Jew will have to do melacha, or that one could indeed have a techum when popping into the middle of Shabbos) I would still contend that it is mutar because in our case, she departed on Motzaei Shabbos, not on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday. Just as Chazal permitted departure at the beginning of the week even though they knew that the voyage would include a Shabbos, so too it is allowed to depart on Motzaei Shabbos even though one knows that part of the flight will be on Shabbos.

In conclusion, Amalia may take the flight, but she should be careful not to do any melacha during the part of the flight when it is Shabbos.

Shabbos 65a: Shmuel’s father made mikvaos for his daughters in the springtime, but in the fall they immersed in the Euphrates River with mats under them to prevent the mud from sticking to their feet. Why did he not let them use the Euphrates in the springtime as well? Because he held that the springtime swelling of the Euphrates is due to rainfall in the west, and he was afraid that the majority of the river’s water might be rainwater, which cannot be used as a mikveh while it is flowing.

שבת סה ע”א: אבוה דשמואל… עביד להו מקואות ביומי ניסן, ומפצי ביומי תשרי… מסייע ליה לרב, דאמר רב: מטרא במערבא ־ סהדא רבה פרת. ־ סבר: שלא ירבו הנוטפין על הזוחלין.

Over the hot springs in a certain city in England (possibly Bath), a famous spa was built in which the boiling hot groundwater flowed into a pool, where tap water was mixed in to cool it down to bathing temperature. There was always a large amount of hot spring water present – more than 80 se’ah. The spring water continued to flow out of the pool, replenished by the spring, and the tap water likewise flowed out, replaced by new tap water. The question, presented to Dayan Aryeh Leib Grossnass of the London Beis Din, was whether the pool could be used as a women’s mikveh.

Seemingly, this would be the same problem Shmuel’s father had with the Euphrates in the spring. Just as in that case, despite the fact that the river contained a tremendous amount of groundwater, it was still invalid as a mikveh while flowing due to the presence of a majority of rainwater, here too a majority of the spa’s water was tap water.

However, Dayan Grossnass found that this depends on a dispute between the Taz and the Shach on Yoreh Deah 201:2. The Mechaber brings the halacha of Shmuel’s father, and the Taz (3) asks: Why is the problem of flowing water (zochalin) worse than the problem of drawn water (mayim sh’uvim – water that has been contained in a vessel, such as tap water)? In the case of drawn water, we know that once you have a kosher mikveh of 40 s’ah, you can add even 1000 s’ah of drawn water and it will still remain kosher. But here, though a spring can be used as a mikveh even when flowing, rainwater cannot, and once the rainwater becomes the majority of the mikveh, it cannot be flowing!

The Taz answers that actually, a spring can still act as a mikveh while flowing even if a majority of rainwater is added, but only in a place where the spring water itself would have reached. Shmuel’s father feared that the amount of spring water in the Euphrates was so little that, if not for the rainwater, mixed into it, it would have dried up before reaching Babylonia, so the rainwater becomes dominant. According to the Taz, in the English spa there was plenty of hot spring water, so the mikveh would be kosher.

However, the Shach (32) disagrees and says that the rule of Shmuel’s father applies in all parts of the river, even where the spring would have reached alone. Dayan Grossnass followed the Shach and therefore did not permit women to use this spa as a mikveh.

Then he sent the question and his teshuva to the Chazon Ish, who replied that it was permitted for two reasons: 1) When the spring water is there first, you are allowed to add drawn water and it can still be flowing. 2) Flowing is only a problem if the water is visibly moving. But here it was not visibly moving, although it was possible to detect the outflow by measurement. Therefore, said the Chazon Ish, the spa could be used if there was no other mikveh available in that city.

Source: Shailos Uteshuvos Lev Aryeh 37

Shabbos 139b: If someone died on the first day of Yom Tov – only non-Jews may bury him. On the second day of Yom Tov – Jews may bury him.

Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 526:2: If someone died on the first day of Yom Tov, it is forbidden to hold the body overnight until Yom Tov Sheini so that Jews may bury him.

שבת קלט ע”ב: מת ביום טוב ראשון ־ יתעסקו בו עממין, ביום טוב שני ־ יתעסקו בו ישראל.

או”ח תקכ”ו ס”ב: מת ביו״ט ראשון אסור להלינו עד יו״ט שני כדי שיתעסקו בו ישראל.

The Shivchei Habesht tells us that the Baal Shem Tov passed away on the first day of Shavuos. On the first night of Shavuos the talmidim gathered and stayed up all night, and he spoke Divrei Torah before them. In the morning he asked them to gather in his house, and he requested that Reb Leib Kessler and someone else take care of his burial. He taught them how to tell that his soul was departing from each of his limbs in turn.

All the people of the town of Medzibuzh came to say good Yom Tov to him, and he spoke Divrei Torah to them.  And then, at the meal, he said to his talmidim, “Until now, I have done chesed with you; now you do chesed with me.” He stood up and went to the outhouse. His attendant wanted to accompany him, but he said, “Why is today different, that you wish to accompany me?” So he did not follow him. The Baal Shem Tov also gave his talmidim a sign: at the moment of his death, both clocks in the house would stop. When he returned from the outhouse, he washed his hands and the larger clock stopped. The talmidim tried to prevent him from seeing the clock but he said, “I know that the clock has stopped, and I’m not worried about myself, because I know that as soon as I leave this door I will enter the other door.” He sat on his bed and asked them to stand around his bed as he told them Divrei Torah about a pillar stretching from the lower Gan Eden to the upper Gan Eden. He asked them to say Viyhi Noam, and he lay down and sat up many times in succession, saying words so softly that they could not hear. Then he asked them to cover him with a sheet and he began to tremble just as he would during Shmoneh Esrei. Then he rested and they saw the small clock stop. They waited a bit, then tested his nostrils with a feather and knew that he had passed away.

 For many years, people disagreed as to whether the Baal Shem Tov had passed away on the first or the second day of Shavuos. According to the author of Kerem Yisroel, already in the first year people did not know the day of his passing. This tradition is also quoted by Betzalel Landau in his book “Habesht Uvnei Heichalo”. Each of his biographers chose whichever date they felt was right.

However, the correct tradition is preserved in the Shivchei Habesht: that it was the first day of Shavuos.  This is also the tradition of Rabbi Isaac of Komarna (Heichal Habracha, Parshas Teitzei), as well as the tradition of Chabad Chassidim (Sichah of the Rayatz 20 Kislev 5692).

The question was finally laid to rest with the discovery of the siddur of Rabbi Avrohom Shimshon of Rashkov, the son of Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polonne, who was the Baal Shem Tov’s leading talmid. The siddur was completed 13 days after the passing of the Baal Shem Tov, and it contains the following sentence, “I received the tradition of annulling a bad dream from my master, Rabbi Yisroel Baal Shem of blessed memory who, due to our many sins, passed away on the first day of Shavuos which was Wednesday of the year 5520…”  Checking the calendar, we see that the first day of Shavuos fell on a Wednesday in that year. (Furthermore, the second day of Shavuos cannot fall on a Wednesday in any year.)

(Hayachid Bedoros p. 136-137)

Rabbi Moshe Zoberman heard that the true date of his passing was the first day of Shavuos; however, the talmidim did not make it public until the second day because they wanted to have him buried by Jews. Although the Shulchan Aruch says not to do this, the Raavad, the Meiri and the Shitah Mekubetzes (brought by the Biur Halacha) say that if the departed was a great and well-respected man such that it would be an insult to his honor to be buried by non-Jews, they may keep him overnight until Yom Tov Sheini.

(Rabbi Zoberman, tape on Shabbos 139 33:14-34:00)

Shabbos 31b: Rabbi Simon and Rabbi Elazar were sitting, when Rabbi Yaakov bar Acha walked by. One said to the other, “Let us stand up for him because he is a man who fears sin.” The other replied, “Let us stand up for him because he is a Torah scholar.” The first one retorted, “I tell you he is a man who fears sin, and you tell me he is a Torah scholar?”

שבת לא ע”ב רבי סימון ורבי אלעזר הוו יתבי, חליף ואזיל רבי יעקב בר אחא. אמר ליה חד לחבריה: ניקו מקמיה, דגבר דחיל חטאין הוא, אמר לו אידך: ניקו מקמיהֹ דגבר בר אוריין הוא. אמר ליה: אמינא לך אנא דגבר דחיל חטאין הוא ואמרת לי את בר אוריין הוא?

During World War I, Reb Elchonon Wasserman headed the yeshiva in Smilovitz, founded by the Chofetz Chaim. There was a debate in that period about whether to institute an official mussar seder in the yeshiva. However, either way, the students could learn mussar just by watching Reb Elchonon. One student from Smilovitz wrote, “The fear of G-d constantly hovered over him. One could almost touch with his fingers the fear of Heaven that suffused his face. Only on the rarest occasions, on Simchas Torah or Purim, could even the slightest smile be noticed on his face. His economy of words was truly astonishing. He would speak only to the point, and say only what was necessary. He regarded the fear of sin as the crown of all virtues. There was among us at the time a student who excelled in piety, observing the lightest mitzvah as punctiliously as the gravest, although his application to study was by no means great. Yet Reb Elchonon would always rise up before him. On the other hand, I once saw him expel a student who bordered on genius in ability, and was considered outstanding – but who had behaved improperly. Reb Elchonon did not put him to shame in public, and also refrained from communicating the expulsion order directly. Instead, he took a volume (the Shulchan Aruch or some mussar work), turned the pages until he found the relevant passage where the deed is censured, took the open book to the bochur and pointed to the text. The bochur took the hint and left.”

Source: Reb Elchonon (Artscroll), p. 91.

[The Gemara is not a source to say that one should stand up for an ignorant person who fears sin – after all, all agree that Rav Yaakov bar Acha was a Torah scholar too, and he is mentioned many times throughout Shas. Reb Elchonon was not advocating this either; the student in this story was at least somewhat scholarly. And in fact, there is no such thing as an ignorant person who fears sin, as Pirkei Avos (2:5) says, אין בור ירא חטא. Rather, Reb Elchonon’s chiddush is that even if the person is far below your level of learning, you should stand up for him because of his piety.]

Shabbos 152a: Rav Yehuda said: If someone dies and has no relatives to sit shiva, ten people should go to his place and sit shiva for him.

 שבת קנב ע”א: אמר רב יהודה מת שאין לו מנחמין הולכין י’ בני אדם ויושבין במקומו.

Rabbi Simcha Wasserman and his Rebbetzin were not blessed with children. The Rebbetzin at first used to say she hoped to predecease Reb Simcha so that she shouldn’t have to live without him. Then she changed her mind and said, let me outlive him so that I can sit shiva for him. In the end, she passed away exactly nine days after him.

Source: A Canopy of Stars

[We see here that aveilus is not just for the aveilim; it’s for the niftar. That is why the Gemara says that if there are no aveilim, ten people should go and sit shiva. And by the same token, the Rebbetzin wanted Reb Simcha to have someone to sit shiva for him. See my notes on the story “Learning Torah is Better than Kaddish” brought on Sanhedrin 104a, where it seems that this is a dispute between the Rambam and the Ramban.

In fact, in Yoreh Deah 376:3 the Mechaber quotes our Gemara (that ten people should sit shiva), and the Rema comments that he has not seen people do this; however, there is a minhag to hold daily minyanim in the niftar’s house for seven days. It could be that the Gemara and the Mechaber are going with the opinion that aveilus is for the niftar, while the Rema is going with the opinion that aveilus is for the aveilim.]

Shabbos 73a: Dyeing is one of the 39 categories of work forbidden on Shabbos.

Yerushalmi Shabbos 51a: One who dyes red lips red is liable for working on Shabbos.

Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 320:20: One who eats strawberries or other colorful fruits must be careful not to touch his clothing or the tablecloth with colored hands, because this would be dyeing.

Magen Avraham: This is all the more true if the garment is red, because then he would be improving its color with the red juice on his hands.

שבת עג ע”א והצובעו.

ירושלמי שבת נא ע”א המאדם אודם בשפה חייב. קרבן העדה: פירוש אפילו בשפה שהיא אדומה אלא שמוסיף בה אדמימות חייב משום צובע.

שו”ע או”ח ש”כ ס”כ: יש מי שאומר שהאוכל תותים או שאר פירות הצבועים צריך ליזהר שלא יגע בידיו צבועות בבגדיו או במפה משום צובע.

מגן אברהם סקכ”ה: ונ”ל דבגד אדום כ”ש דאסור לקנחו דמתקן הוא.

Rabbi Moshe Chaim Lau described how his grandfather, Rabbi Yitzchak Yedidya Frankel, went to obtain semichah from Rav Shlomo Dovid Kahane zt”l of Warsaw. R’ Shlomo Dovid was famed for his expertise in finding ways to free agunos and permit them to remarry. Indeed, he succeeded in permitting thousands of such unfortunate widows after World War I. During World War II, he immigrated to Eretz Yisroel. Many more agunos came to his door after the Holocaust.

Every young rav in Poland dreamed of receiving semichah from Rav Shlomo Dovid, for this accomplishment guaranteed a coveted position in a prominent community. Rav Shlomo Dovid regularly delivered a shiur on Shabbos from three in the morning until Shacharis. When the yungeleit would arrive in the driving snow, he would smile widely and offer each one a cup of steaming tea. Generally, some ten yungeleit gathered around his table for the shiur. Now and then, he would address one and ask him a challenging question. Every once in a while, he would tell the young man to come back on Sunday to receive his writ of semichah. Often he asked the yungeleit to come back for a few Shabbosos to be tested again.

When Harav Frankel came to attend the Shabbos morning shiur, the subject was hilchos Shabbos. Harav Kahane addressed an outstanding young man and asked him what to do if someone is bleeding heavily on Shabbos. Should he use a red cloth or a white cloth to stanch the bleeding?

The spontaneous answer, coming from someone who doesn’t know the halacha, is to use the red cloth, because if he uses the white cloth, he will color it red with the blood. Someone familiar with siman 320 in the Shulchan Aruch, however, knows that the Magen Avraham ruled it is better to use the white cloth, explaining that the blood dirties it, which is not considered coloring. On the contrary, if the red cloth is used, the blood colors it a deeper red. The Eliyah Rabbah has a different opinion. Because he was unaware of this information, the young man simply smiled and said that if such an unusual incident would happen, he would hurry to open his sefer and find out what to do. Practically speaking, however, such a case would never come up.

Rabbi Frankel said that he would never forget Rav Kahane’s reaction to this answer. He froze in place and turned ghostly pale. Banging his hand on the table, he screamed out, “A Jew’s blood is flowing, and you have the leisure to open a sefer and study it?” Needless to say, that brilliant young man never got his semichah.

Rabbi Frankel saw this incident as a seminal lesson for every rav. They must know the halacha before the case comes up. They must be able to act quickly and decisively, and above all with care and empathy for another Jew’s suffering.

Source: Hamodia, Inyan, Vayechi 5781, p. 20

Shabbos 66b: A woman may go out on Shabbos wearing a retaining stone (to help her retain her pregnancy and not miscarry) or with another object that weighs the same as it – even if she has never miscarried in the past, and even if she is not yet pregnant.

שבת סו ע”ב: תנו רבנן: יוצאין באבן תקומה בשבת, משום רבי מאיר אמרו: אף במשקל אבן תקומה. ולא שהפילה ־ אלא שמא תפיל, ולא שעיברה ־ אלא שמא תתעבר ותפיל. ופירש הט”ז או”ח ש”ג כ”ד שטערי”ן שו”ס.

A woman was in the delivery room for hours but could not give birth. The husband called R’ Meir Scheinberg and asked him what to do. Rabbi Scheinberg asked, “Did she take off the ruby from around her neck?” She took it off, and immediately she was able to give birth.

Source: Rabbi Yehuda Aryeh Scheinberg