English translation — אחרי ב

A.

At the conclusion of tractate Yoma, the Gemara says: "The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: One who sees a seminal emission on Yom Kippur should worry the entire year, and if the year passes for him, he is assured that he is a son of the World to Come. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said: Know that the entire world is hungry and he is satisfied. When Rav Dimi came, he said: He increases life, goes and increases."

Simply, one must say that the Gemara brings these sayings as a continuation in their content to the one who sees, as it stands there earlier: "One who sees a seminal emission on Yom Kippur descends and immerses, etc."^,

One must, however, understand: How does it come that this chapter of Yom Kippur — whose entire subject is

(as its name)

repentance³

and atonement,

and especially that the content of the <b>last </b>Mishnah and the Gemara after it is the matter of repentance, etc. — should the Gemara conclude and seal with a matter opposite⁴

of repentance and atonement,

about one of the harshest sins,

that it is intentional,

regarding repentance and atonement⁵

and about intentional is understandable regarding unintentional⁶

which is approximately

(somewhat)

to intentional — as is known from the differences in punishments

(for intentional)

and offerings, etc.

(for unintentional).

And although the Gemara explains,

that after all, on the contrary, "he is assured that he is a son of the World to Come, he prolongs life, increases and multiplies" — yet nevertheless what &lt;b&gt;after the time&lt;/b&gt;&lt;span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;

(after Yom Kippur)

there emerges from it a good matter,

but on Yom Kippur itself it is a thing that is contrary to the will of G‑d&lt;sup&gt;,&lt;/sup&gt;.

Also one must understand in the essence of the matter: How does it come that from a thing doubly undesirable,

"One who sees

(a)

keri

(b)

on Yom Kippur",

should come forth such a wondrous benefit — "he is assured that he is a son of the World to Come" and "he prolongs life, increases and multiplies"&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;?

Rashi explains in this: "Ra'ah alatah lo shanah - shelo met muvtach lo shema'asim tovim yesh b'yado shehagenir alav v'chomer&lt;sup&gt;,&lt;/sup&gt;

; but this is seemingly only a reasoning that &lt;b&gt;another &lt;/b&gt;&lt;span&gt;thing&lt;/span&gt;

(good deeds)

are protective that this should not harm him,

but from that which it says "haro'eh keri" is a sign&lt;sup&gt;9&lt;/sup&gt;

that muvtach k'v. implies that there is a connection between them&lt;sup&gt;10&lt;/sup&gt;,

is not understood&lt;sup&gt;11&lt;/sup&gt;

: how does it effect the advantage from &lt;b&gt;"muvtach &lt;/b&gt;lo shehu ben ha'olam haba&lt;sup&gt;,&lt;/sup&gt;

/ and moreover

(also in this world)

: mafish chayei sagi u'masgi b'banim u'vnei vanim?

B.

In the way to the question,

it is even more difficult regarding teshuvah mei'ahavah,

about which the Gemara&lt;sup&gt;12&lt;/sup&gt;

says that "zedonot na'asot lo k'zechuyot",

asks the Chida"g,

that it is a davar tamu'ah,

because it comes out that "choteh niskar" and he answers that when a person does teshuvah mei'ahavah it is "vadai she'oseh teshuvah gemurah u'mosif b'ma'asav hatovim yoter m'kdei hatzorech l'gabei oto avon v'harei otan ma'asim tovim she'mosif hem na'asim lo k'zechuyot u'kra d'mayti'ah mochi'ach ken she'ne'emar&lt;sup&gt;13&lt;/sup&gt;

Uv'shuv rasha m'rish'ato v'asah mishpat u'tzedakah aleihem chayeh v'go'&lt;sup&gt;14&lt;/sup&gt;

d'mashma mishpat u'tzedakah she'hosif la'asot al teshuvato aleihem chayeh yichyeh'".

The answer is, however, seemingly not understood,

because from the language of the Gemara &lt;b&gt;"Intentional sins become &lt;/b&gt;for him like merits" it is proven that here it is not speaking about another matter of intentional sins — an addition in &lt;b&gt;merits because of &lt;/b&gt;the intentional sins,

but that the intentional sins themselves become like merits&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;,

it remains, however, difficult as above: how can a sinner be rewarded?

And although seemingly one could say that this very thing the Gemara means&lt;sup&gt;16&lt;/sup&gt;

&lt;span&gt; with "Intentional sins become for him like merits": since the addition in good deeds comes from this, that a person has changed and remade himself through the repentance on the intentional sins — it is therefore called that the "intentional sins" caused and are &lt;/span&gt;&lt;b&gt;the cause &lt;/b&gt;of repentance from love and of the merits.

Like we find regarding a document

(183,

229,

255)

;"&gt;¹⁷

That although an ordinary document is in the presumptive status of validity,

But through the fact that a challenge arises upon it and one upholds it in court,

The document receives more force than an ordinary document,

That did not have any challenge¹⁸.

It turns out,

That the <b>challenge</b> caused the <b>force</b> of the document¹⁹.

This, however, is not sufficient,

For the challenge only causes an elevation in the <b>document</b> and similarly in our case,

The "intentional sins" cause an elevation in the <b>person</b> who does repentance²⁰,

But from the language "intentional sins become for him as merits" it implies that the object of the intentional sins themselves become transformed into merits²¹.

3.

It will be understandable according to the explanation in the conclusion of tractate Yoma in the Mishnah²²

"Said R' Akiva: Fortunate are you, Israel! Before whom do you purify yourselves, and who purifies you? Your Father in Heaven, as it is said²³

And I will sprinkle upon you pure water and you will be purified, and it says²⁴

Just as a mikveh purifies the impure, so too the Holy One, blessed be He, purifies Israel."

R' Akiva says here two matters: a)

"Before whom do you purify yourselves,"

b)

"Who²⁵

purifies you,"

and upon this he brings the two verses: a)

"And I will sprinkle upon you pure water,"

b)

The hope of Israel is the L^,

"The hope of Israel is the L^,

" — explains the Rogatchover²⁶

<span>That in these two matters is expressed the difference between the two matters of purification — sprinkling and mikveh,</span>

That for sprinkling one must have intention for purification²⁷,

and purification in a mikveh does not require any intention,

A mikveh purifies even without intention for immersion²⁸.

And based on this is understood the difference in the language of the verses that R. Akiva brings: "And I will sprinkle upon you pure waters" and "The hope of Israel is the L-rd"

That although both verses speak about the purification by the Holy One, blessed be He,

But in the first verse it was said: <b>"And I will sprinkle </b>upon you etc.",

The Most High is <b>sprinkling</b> - the action of sprinkling; in the second verse, however, no <b>action</b> is mentioned at all

(- the intention of purification),

Because in this type of purification, intention is not a necessary thing.

And just as there are two modes in purification from the aspect of the purifier,

in our case from the aspect of the Most High,

so too are they present in the service of repentance and purification of man - and these are,

as the Gemara²⁹

explains,

the two general types in repentance: repentance from fear

(and through sufferings)

and repentance from love.

Repentance from love comes with the true intention and desire <b>to return </b>to the L-rd^,

and to rectify etc. But repentance from fear

(and all the more so - through sufferings)

his intention is not to come to punishment <b>and consequently </b>he has regret etc.

And the difference in their effect is explained in the Gemara,

that with repentance from fear the verse says³⁰

"their backsliding is healed,"

as Rashi³¹

explains "like a blemished person who was healed, part of his name remains on him"; but with repentance from love it is <b>"his sin is uprooted from its very beginning"³².</b>

<span>And this difference also affects halacha: When one betroths a woman on condition that she has no sins — if she later</span>

(regarding the sins that she had previously)

did repentance from fear,³³

she is not betrothed,

since the sins from the time of the betrothal were <b>not</b> uprooted³⁴

; but if she did repentance from love,

she is betrothed,

because her sins were <b>uprooted</b> <b>from before</b> and consequently she also at the time of betrothal had no sins.

And as the Gemara³⁵

distinguishes regarding vows and blemishes: "If she went to a sage and he permitted it

(the vow)

she is betrothed; if she went to a doctor and he healed her, she is not betrothed,"

because "a sage uproots the vow <b>from its root</b> and a doctor only heals from now onward."

4.

Thus the difference between teshuvah from love and teshuvah from fear in general — that teshuvah from love is the intention to return etc.,

but not so teshuvah from fear — there is in particular in the modes of teshuvah from love³⁶

itself:

That which through teshuvah from love "the sin is uprooted from its beginning" is only not the ultimate perfection in teshuvah from love; the ultimate perfection in teshuvah from love is,

when "intentional sins become for him as merits",

that the "intentional sins" are not merely "uprooted",

but they become "as merits".

In love there are indeed so many levels,

And in general: with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your might — and consequently there arise so many levels in the repentance that comes through them.

And since the advantage of repentance from love is that it comes intentionally as above,

it is understood that the perfection of intention is in the higher manner of repentance from love,

until one can say that the intention of the lower manner when "his sin is uprooted from its beginning" is not called intention³⁷

R"d M"z"l³⁸

Then "with love, with all your heart and with all your soul" - but not "with all your might" - one is called in the first will of the Omnipresent.

In general, this is explained in the language of the Rogatchover: "To remove the sin does not require intention, and to rectify the sin requires intention."

A kind of necessity,

that there is the aforementioned difference in teshuvah from love itself,

is from a clear halachah:

The Gemara³⁹

says,

that one who betroths a woman "on condition that I am righteous, even if he is a complete wicked person, she is betrothed, perhaps he contemplated teshuvah in his mind."

One asks about this: from either side — if it speaks here about teshuvah from fear — then the condition was not fulfilled,

because through teshuvah from fear he does not become a righteous person,

since "a part of his name is upon him"; but if it was teshuvah from love,

she should not be betrothed,

for a baal teshuvah is higher than a righteous person,

as our Sages said⁴⁰

in the place where baalei teshuvah stand, complete righteous people cannot stand⁴¹

to stand⁴²,

and the law is indeed that one must say "he misled to his advantage"⁴³

saying that he is of lesser lineage than he really is⁴⁴

; or to his advantage regarding money,

"on condition that I am poor and he is found to be rich"]

she is not betrothed⁴⁵.

Therefore it is that "perhaps he had a thought &lt;b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;

(from love such)

of repentance" only works that "his iniquity is uprooted from its beginning",

but not that he becomes a baal teshuvah,

and specifically about this level it was said that "in the place where baalei teshuvah stand, even the completely righteous cannot stand".

Moreover it can be said: At a time when there is a concern of &lt;b&gt;"thought &lt;/b&gt;of repentance" at one moment &lt;b&gt;and one instant,&lt;/b&gt;

there cannot be any completeness of the matter.

Therefore it does not work that he becomes a baal teshuvah,

that he should be higher than a tzaddik⁴⁶.

The explanation in this⁴⁷

: the advantage of a baal teshuvah over a complete tzaddik

(who never sinned)

is not only from the aspect of the advantage in quantity — that in addition to his merits of mitzvos, the baal teshuvah also has the merit of sins becoming merits — but also

(and primarily)

from the aspect of the advantage in quality: "Intentional sins become for him like merits^,

/ merits of a different quality.

And therefore "In the place where baalei teshuvah stand, a tzaddik <b>cannot</b> stand": even if a tzaddik has merits through his lofty service,

he cannot attain the new service,

a different quality⁴⁸

in merits⁴⁹

But this can be only when the teshuvah comes from the aspect of completeness of love as above,

and consequently — completeness of intention

(as follows),

which effects to rectify the sin so that the intentional sins themselves become merits.

5.

The explanation of the matter of completeness of love and intention,

and how the intentional sins become like merits,

the Alter Rebbe explains in Tanya⁵⁰,

that forbidden foods etc. are "forbidden and bound in the hands of the external forces forever and do not ascend from there until one does*⁰

* such a great teshuvah that intentional sins become for him like actual merits, which is teshuvah out of love from the depths of the heart with great love and desire and a soul thirsting to cleave to Him blessed^,

and his soul thirsts for Him^,

like a weary and thirsty land^,

because until now his soul was in a land of thirst^,

and darkness is the sitra achra and distant from the light of the face of the L-rd^,

to the utmost, and therefore his soul thirsts with greater intensity than the thirst of the souls of the tzaddikim, as their saying, 'In the place where baalei teshuvah stand etc.' And about this teshuvah out of great love they said that intentional sins become for him like merits, since through this he comes to this great love."

What here he says both matters: the elevation that becomes in the man - intentional sins call forth the "thirsts his soul more intensely than the thirst of the souls of the righteous"; the change of the object that becomes in the intentional sins,

"since through this comes to great love etc."

The explanation of this according to the halachah:

Regarding the matter of preparation and readiness for a certain action,

one finds many differences in laws and levels in their importance and in their relationship to the action⁵¹.

For example — accessories of a mitzvah,

since without them one cannot fulfill the mitzvah,

they themselves receive importance, and according to Rabbi Eliezer⁵²

<b>"They cut wood </b>to make charcoal to make iron" for the sake of a knife for circumcision on Shabbat,

according to his opinion,

(most)

accessories of a mitzvah override Shabbat⁵³.

Above this one finds according to the Jerusalem Talmud&lt;sup&gt;54&lt;/sup&gt;

Regarding the preparation and qualification for the mitzvot of sukkah, lulav, etc.,

That &lt;b&gt;"the one who makes &lt;/b&gt;a sukkah for himself says: Blessed [are You...] Who sanctified us with His commandments &lt;b&gt;and commanded us to make&lt;sup&gt;55&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/b&gt;

sukkah etc.; the one who makes a lulav for himself says: Blessed [are You...] Who sanctified us with His commandments &lt;b&gt;and commanded us to make &lt;/b&gt;a lulav etc.&lt;sup&gt;,&lt;/sup&gt;

And so too regarding mezuzah, tefillin, tzitzit, etc.&lt;sup&gt;57&lt;/sup&gt;.

&lt;span&gt;What, simply, is the reasoning in this: Since the Torah commanded to fulfill a certain mitzvah,&lt;/span&gt;

Which can be carried out only through a specific action of preparation&lt;sup&gt;58&lt;/sup&gt;

One must say that this is also included in the mitzvah&lt;sup&gt;59&lt;/sup&gt;

(Or: the action itself receives an importance akin to the importance of the mitzvah

(And according to the Jerusalem Talmud - regarding sukkah etc., it also becomes a mitzvah)).

A higher level in the preparation of the matzot is found in the service of the Temple — and particularly in the bringing of the blood to the altar,

that although the bringing is only for the sake of the service of the sprinkling of the blood upon the altar,

the law is⁶⁰

that the bringing itself has the importance and the category of service⁶¹

to the extent that "improper intention invalidates" in it⁶².

And more generally,

there is the concept of service akin to preparation,

service that is not complete⁶³

: it has laws and categories of a service,

but it is not a "service that finishes and completes the matter"

(because there is after^,

service),

and consequently a non-priest is not liable to death when he performs this service.

&lt;b&gt;And this &lt;/b&gt;is also understood in our subject: Since to the highest level of teshuvah from love he can come

(as above in Tanya)

only through his previous intentional sins

(and through them is afterwards

(also)

his fulfillment of the commandments

(his merits)

in a higher manner),

the intentional sins themselves become elevated and acquire the status of merits — similar to how this is regarding accessories of a commandment.

6.

This, however, is seemingly not sufficient:

a)

The accessories of a mitzvah themselves are indeed not transformed and become a mitzvah,

they remain <b>accessories!</b> even according to the opinion of R. Eliezer;

Also according to the opinion of the Yerushalmi,

that regarding the making of a sukkah and lulav one recites the blessing "Who <b>..</b>

has commanded us, etc.",

it remains only a mitzvah of <b>making</b><span> a sukkah and not the mitzvah of "In sukkot you shall dwell"; likewise — bringing the blood to the altar is not a complete service: b)</span>

And the main point: In all the above, this is a preparation and action that is in category and moreover — is directly related to <b>the</b> mitzvah itself,

he makes a <b>sukkah and lulav</b> etc. / he <b>brings the blood to the altar —</b> but not so in our case, for on the one hand,

he performed an action <b>opposite</b> to the matter of merits,

and on the other hand,

one even says,

that they themselves become "as merits".

The question becomes even stronger - seeing that even when the instruments and the preparatory action are reshus,

like plowing and sowing etc. and the entire order of "and you shall gather your grain, your wine, and your oil",

it is that although without all this one cannot fulfill the commandments that are connected with them: terumot, ma'asrot etc.,

nevertheless one does not find that this should have an importance of a commandment,

even not as instruments of a commandment⁶⁴.

And one can say the reason - because according to the opinion of Rashbi⁶⁵

it is not desirable: "Perhaps a person will plow etc. and sow etc. Torah what will become of it."

And from it - according to the opinion of the Rabbis it is at any rate not in the category of desirable

(instruments of a commandment and the like).

7.

So the explanation in this in brief:

But in every mitzvah there is the general aspect and the common denominator with all mitzvos - and in the language of Chazal "doing the will of the Place" "I said and My will was done"

(and its opposite in every transgression - "violating the will of the Place"),

and their particular aspects: circumcision of the foreskin,

In sukkos you shall dwell etc.

Regarding all the particular aspects mentioned above,

although the preparation and qualification is <b>in </b>the object or <b>in relation </b><span>to the object with which one performs a mitzvah,</span>

they are nevertheless not a <b>part </b>and <b>detail </b>of the mitzvah itself: preparing the knife for circumcision is not a <b>part </b>of cutting the foreskin; <b>making </b>a sukkah and lulav is not a part of "In sukkos you shall dwell" etc.; <b>bringing </b>the blood is not a part of sprinkling.

Teshuvah in general - its subject matter is,

in the language of the Rambam⁶⁶

: "And what is teshuvah? It is that the sinner abandon his sin and remove it from his thought and resolve in his heart not to do it again⁶⁷,

as it is said, 'Let the wicked forsake his way' etc.⁶⁸.

- D.

H.

It is in the type and moreover in the same "place" of the general subject matter of mitzvos

(and sins)

: a decision in the will and "resolve in his heart".

And since that teshuvah out of love with such a yearning is caused and evoked by the intentional sins,

therefore the intentional sins themselves become as merits⁶⁹.

This is only when there is the completeness of the love and intention mentioned above,

then become

(from the aspect of the love and intention)

the intentional sins a part of the service of teshuvah,

and consequently as merits; but when there is not that completeness,

although he does teshuvah out of love,

then the intentional sins do not become as merits,

rather only "uprooted from its beginning"⁷⁰.

Ch.

Examples for the above - at any rate <b>similar to </b>the above and in a possible way - briefly:

Accessories of a mitzvah in the same matter of the mitzvah and they become a mitzvah:

Type of chinuch: sacrifices and services of the days of the consecration

(the consecration⁷¹).

The meal-offering of <b>consecration</b> of the priests.

The matter of the consecration of the son to Torah study is from the Torah*⁷¹.

Fulfillment of the commandments in exile - according to the Sifri⁷²

On the verse "And you will perish among the nations and you will place My words on your heart": Even though I exile you, be distinguished in commandments, so that when you return they will not be new to you⁷³.

And more.

In a manner that intentional sins become for him as merits, the &lt;b&gt;mitzvah itself: &lt;/b&gt;the scapegoat and the red heifer

(and the broken-necked heifer)

- then specifically the service&lt;sup&gt;74&lt;/sup&gt;

&lt;b&gt;Outside - &lt;/b&gt;becomes the atoning service

(The Torah calls it a sin-offering&lt;sup&gt;75&lt;/sup&gt;)

As with all sacrifices, their service &lt;b&gt;Inside &lt;/b&gt;specifically,

and furthermore&lt;sup&gt;76&lt;/sup&gt;.

In a manner like this - the ram of Eli&lt;sup&gt;,&lt;/sup&gt;

on Mount Carmel

(as a temporary directive).

And more.

And more.

Moreover - from our Rabbis, may their memory be blessed: from

and in

father threw into

axe*⁷⁶.

The great principle in the Torah - danger to life

(even)

by means of all⁷⁷

transgressions of the Torah except for these - three that one should be killed

(although one who commits suicide has no portion in the World to Come*⁷⁷)

and let him not transgress,

and more.

And one should elaborate on this.

And elsewhere more.

9.

Based on this, the conclusion of the tractate will become understandable: "One who sees a seminal emission on Yom Kippur should worry all the entire year, and if the year passes for him, he is assured that he is a son of the World to Come, etc." — and prefacing to explain the precision of the language "should worry all the year," and not like the usual language in such a case: "a bad sign for him."

The explanation in this: the content of the matter of "he should worry all the year" is - the service of teshuvah&lt;sup&gt;78&lt;/sup&gt;,

because his worry is

(not

(so)

due to the fear that he will not find his year,

but on that which "he saw a seminal emission")

as Rashi says "perhaps his fast was not accepted and they satisfied him with what is in their hand to satisfy him, like a slave who pours a cup for his master and he poured a pitcher on his face"

(and as the Alter Rebbe&lt;sup&gt;8&lt;/sup&gt;

&lt;span&gt; adds)&lt;/span&gt;

- "that is to say it is impossible in your service"; and this worry and contemplation brings him to a higher manner of service

(service)

than that which he did previously.

In a slightly different style: since that the "one who sees a seminal emission on Yom Kippur" was for him "not intentional"&lt;sup&gt;81&lt;/sup&gt;

- Yom Kippur is indeed a time when one afflicts oneself with the five afflictions and one does not contemplate sin&lt;sup&gt;82&lt;/sup&gt;

- this is a proof,

that this came not from the side of the evil inclination but from Divine providence; and since that "from the mouth of the Most High does not go forth evil"&lt;sup&gt;83&lt;/sup&gt;

one must say that the supernal intention in this was that he should through this come to a higher manner of service,

to a service of teshuvah which from the side of the regular order of service of a tzaddik he would not have been able to come to it

(in the manner of the above in Tanya).

And when by him there is the completeness of the service of repentance – "he should worry all year",

there comes an addition not only in spiritual service,

but also in physicality – "he extends life" – more than was set forth from the side of the root of his soul and from the side of the regular order of service.

<span>10.</span>

Based on this it is understood what from^,

Yoma chapter "And Yom HaKippurim" one concludes and seals with the statement "one who sees a seminal emission on Yom HaKippurim",

and the connection and continuation to that Mishnah and sugya^,

<span> which before that:</span>

In the Mishnah, R. Akiva speaks about the two matters of purity through the Holy One, blessed be He: sprinkling and immersion,

that sprinkling requires intention and immersion does not require intention; and afterwards the Gemara continues in the matter and explains the difference between the two modes of repentance by man:

Repentance from fear and repentance from love,

that repentance from fear is without

(completeness of intention,

but not so repentance from love.

And in more particularity: the two manners in teshuvah out of love itself—the manner of teshuvah through which "his sin is uprooted from its beginning" and he becomes a tzaddik,

for which even a thought of teshuvah in a single moment without

(completeness of)

intention is sufficient,

in the likeness of the matter of immersion,

and then the higher level of teshuvah which effects that "intentional sins become for him as merits",

which comes specifically through completeness of intention in the likeness of the matter of sprinkling,

as above at length.

And the sugya of teshuvah the Gemara concludes also with these two matters: a)

"He is assured that he is a son of the World to Come",

i.

e.

there does not come to him any new matter,

rather "good deeds are in his hand",

in likeness to the matter of "his sin is uprooted from its beginning",

and as Rashi⁸⁴

says "one must know that he is a complete tzaddik"; and although here there was the "he should worry all year"—teshuvah with intention,

but not intention in its completeness.

<b>"He lengthens</b><span> life greatly and increases": this</span>

(which see: read on Yom Kippur)

is not merely no deficiency and punishment, heaven forbid,

rather,

on the contrary,

there comes to him an advantage and addition,

"he lengthens life",

in likeness to the matter of "intentional sins become for him as merits",

which comes through completeness of intention⁸⁵.

And the novelty in this conclusion on the preceding topic

(Regarding the two levels in teshuvah from love)

Consists in: a)

It comes out more explicitly and clearly <b>how </b><span>it is opened</span>

(Both the matter of "his sin is uprooted from its beginning" and that which "intentional sins become for him as merits"),

Because

(a)

By the one who sees etc. <b>Yom Kippur</b>

(Not intentionally)

<span>It is indeed emphasized that this is with premeditation on the part of Providence,</span>

b)

(b)

Through "he shall worry all the year like etc." - the completeness of the intention

(And the repentance)

Which the "one who sees" aroused,

Become the intentional sins as merits.

b)

The addition that through the work of teshuvah comes out also in

(Reward)

Physical,

"He shall lengthen days" until also in the completeness of the reward children and children's children engage in Torah and commandments.

(From the talks of 6 Tishrei,

Shabbat of Parshat Haazinu,

Day of Simchat Torah 5736)