ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafTa'anis 15
(a) In time to come, says Rebbi Elazar (commenting on a Pasuk in Yeshayah),
kings will stand before B'nei Yisrael and princes will prostrate themselves.
In similar vein to the previous question, Rebbi Zeira (or Rebbi Shmuel bar
Nachmeini) disagrees with Rebbi Elazar. According to him, the princes will
prostrate themselves before Yisrael and stand before them as well.
***** Hadran Alach, 'Me'eimasai' *****
(b) A Yashar (someone who has *no* tendency to sin) is greater than a Tzadik
(who *has* but overcomes it - according to Rashi, though the Rashba
(c) In light of that, Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak comments on the Pasuk in
Tehilim "Or Zaru'a la'Tzadik, u'le'Yishrei Leiv, Simchah" - that Tzadikim
will experience light, and Yesharim, Simchah - exclusively (see Tosfos).
***** Perek Seder Ta'aniyos *****
(a) They would take the Aron ha'Kodesh into the street, and everyone took
Eifer Makleh and put it on his head. 'Eifer Makleh' - is ashes (as opposed
to dust or earth).
Nevi'im is referred to as 'Divrei Kabalah' whenever the Navi is *warning*
Yisrael - whereas whenever he is just relating a *narative*, it is *not*.
(b) Ashes were placed by others on the heads of two important dignitaries -
the Nasi and the Av Beis-Din.
(c) The wisest elder among them would say captivating words, which included
the Pasuk in Yo'el "Kir'u Levavchem ve'Al Bigdeichem". Based on Seifer
Yonah, he would remind the people that Hashem did not forgive the people of
Ninveh because of their sackcloth and fasting, but because they had changed
(d) The Chazen had to have four qualities: he had to be a 'Zakein ve'Ragil'
- and he had to have children and an empty house (which will be discussed in
(a) The Chazen inserted six extra Berachos in the Amidah - after 'Go'el
(b) According to the Tana Kama - the first two Berachos were Zichronos and
(c) The text of each the other four - was taken from Tehilim.
(d) Rebbi Yehudah re-placed the Berachos of Zichronos and Shofros with a
text taken from Tehilim and Yirmiyah respectively.
(a) The Tana lists *seven* 'conclusions' to the Berachos, when really, only
*six* were added - because it includes 'Mi she'Anah es Avraham be'Har
ha'Mori'ah ... ', which was really the 'conclusion' of the Berachah of Re'ei
ve'Anyeinu' (and not part of the extra six Berachos at all).
(b) The connection between ...
1. ... 'Zichronos' and our Fathers at the Yam-Suf - is based on the fact
that whilst Yisrael was in Egypt, it seemed as if they had been forgotten,
and now they were finally remembered.
(c) Zichronos' ends 'Baruch ... Zocher ha'Nishkachos' - Shofros, 'Baruch ...
2. ... 'Shofros' and Yehoshua at Gilgal - because it was whilst Yisrael were
camped there that they defeated Yericho through the blowing of the Shofros.
(a) The third Berachah reads 'el Hashem ba'Tzarasah Li ... ', and concludes
'Mi she'Anah es Shmuel ... ', the fourth, 'Esa Einai el he'Harim', and the
fifth, 'mi'Ma'amakim Kerasicha Hashem'. In the 'conclusion' of ...
(b) The *third* Berachah ends 'Baruch Shomei'a Tze'akah' - the *fourth*,
'Baruch ... Shmei'a Tefilah'.
- ... the fourth Berachah - we refer to the Tzadik Shmuel.
- ... the fifth Beracha - to Eliyahu.
(c) The final Berachah begins 'Tefilah le'Ani Ki Ya'atof'. In the
'conclusion' of this Berachah - we refer to David and Shlomoh.
(d) The *fifth* Berachah ends 'Baruch ... ha'Oneh be'Eis Tzarah'. The
*final* one - 'Baruch ... ha'Merachem al ha'Aretz'.
(a) When, in the days of Rebbi Chalafta and Rebbi Chananya ben Teradyon, the
Chazen concluded the Berachah of Go'eil Yisrael - nobody answered 'Amein'
(Presumably, they answered 'Baruch Sheim ... ' instead - see Ran).
(b) The Chachamim objected on the grounds that that Minhag was confined to
the Beis Hamikdash.
(c) It was the Shamash who announced 'Tik'u ha'Kohanim, Tik'u'! or 'Hari'u
ha'Kohanim, Hari'u'! before each Berachah.
(d) They blew a Teki'ah after 'Go'el Yisrael', a Teru'ah after Zichronos,
and a Tek'iah after Shofros, and so on - seven notes all in all.
(a) The ...
1. ... 'Anshei Mishmar' - comprised the members of the entire group of
Kohanim who served throughout that week.
(b) During the first set of fasts, according to Rebbi Yehoshua, the Anshei
Beis-Av would not fast at all - the Anshei Mishmar however - would fast but
would eat before nightfall.
2. ... 'Anshei Beis-Av' - comprised one of the seven groups into which each
Mishmar was divided, each group serving one day of the week (others say that
the Mishmar was divided into six groups, each of which served on one of the
weekdays, whilst on Shabbos, all the six groups would serve).
(c) During the second set of fasts, the Anshei Mishmar were obligated to
complete the fast - and it was the Anshei Beis-Av who would fast but eat
(d) That is the opinion of Rebbi Yehoshua; the Chachamim are more lenient.
According to them ...
1. ... during the first set of fasts - neither the Anshei Mishmar nor the
Anshei Beis-Av would fast at all.
2. ... during the second set - the Anshei Mishmar would fast, but they would
eat before nightfall; whereas the Anshei Beis-Av would still not fast at
(a) According to Rebbi Yehoshua, both the Anshei Mishmar and the Anshei
Beis-Av had to complete the fast during the third set of fasts. According
to the Chachamim - the Anshei Mishmar would complete the fast, the Anshei
Beis-Av would not.
(b) The Anshei Beis-Av were forbidden to drink wine for the twenty-four hour
period that they were on duty - even at night-time, when they had to take
any limbs or parts of a Korban that they found *off* the Mizbei'ach, *on* to
(c) The Anshei Mishmar were forbidden to drink wine during the day because
they might be needed to assist in the Avodah, a prohibition that did not
extend to the night-time - because there was not *so much* to be done then
that the Anshei Beis-Av could not cope with it on their own.
(d) The Anshei Beis-Av and the Anshei Ma'amad (Kohanim, Levi'im and
Yisre'eilim whose turn it was that week to represent Yisrael, to stand by
the Korbenos Tzibur that were brought that week) were forbidden to have a
hair-cut and to wash clothes during the week that they served, except for
Thursday, when the prohibition was lifted because of Kavod Shabbos - a
concession which applied equally to the Anshei-Mishmar.
(a) The days on which Megilas Ta'anis forbids even eulogizing, the
prohibition extends to the day *before*, according to the Tana Kama - in
case one goes on to eulogize on the Yom-Tov itself, but not to the day after
(since that reason does not apply).
(b) According to Rebbi Yossi - the prohibition applies both to the day
before and to the day after.
(c) The days on which only fasting is prohibited, the prohibition is
confined to the day itself, but not to the day before or to the day after -
Rebbi Yossi forbids the day before, but not the day after.
(a) We have already learned that a series of fasts never begins on a
Thursday, in order not to raise the prices before Shabbos. According to the
Tana Kama however, the second set of fasts would begin on Thursday (where
the first one had left off). Rebbi Yossi says - that just as the *first* set
of fasts cannot begin on Thursday, neither can the *second*.
(b) Initially, one does not decree a fast on Rosh Chodesh, Chanukah or
Purim. Bedieved however, once they began the fasts, should one of them fall
on any of these three days, they nevertheless fasted. That applies both to
Chanukah and Purim, which are only mi'de'Rabbanan - and to Rosh Chodesh,
which, although it is called a Mo'eid min ha'Torah, is not a Yom 'Mishteh
(c) The Halachah is the opinion of Raban Gamliel - Rebbi Meir comments that
even though Raban Gamliel maintains that one does fast on these three days,
they do not however, complete the fast.
(d) Rebbi Meir incorporates - Tish'ah be'Av that falls on Friday in this
(a) They took the Aron ha'Kodesh out into the street - only on the third set
(b) It is evident from the Beraisa that the author of our Mishnah who says
that it was *ashes* that they placed on their heads, is Rebbi Yossi. The
reason that he insists on *ashes* and not just earth like the Tana Kama of
the Beraisa - is because it is reminiscent of the ashes of Yitzchak (i.e. of
the ram) of the Akeidah.
(c) We learn that in matters ...
1. ... of greatness one begins from the most eminent person - from Moshe,
who first addressed Aharon and then Aharon's sons, Elazar and Isamar.
(d) In our Mishnah, they nevertheless first placed the ashes on the heads of
the leading dignitaries and only then on their own heads - because although
we are dealing with a case of curse, by placing the ashes first on the heads
of the important dignitaries, one was acknowledging their greatness
(implying that they were the ones who were fit to Daven on their behalf).
2. ... of punishment one begins from the smallest - from Hashem, who first
cursed the snake, then Chavah and then Adam.
(a) The reason that others needed to place the ashes on the heads of the
leading dignitaries, whilst everybody else placed the ashes on their own
heads - is because with important people, the embarrassment is far greater
when they are shamed by others than when they shame themselves (which is not
the case by ordinary people).
(b) We derive from the Pasuk in Yeshayah "Lasum la'Aveilei Tzi'on Laseis
Lahem Eifer Tachas Pe'er" - that the ashes should be placed on the head, on
the place where the Tefilin normally lie.