Audio Roundup

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

by Joel Rich

The Rama (O”C 17:2), commenting on the S”A’s statement of women doing positive time bound commandments, says women could put on Tzitzit with a bracha but it appears as Yuhara (halachic arrogance) and thus they shouldn’t (since it’s not really a personal requirement). Question – Why does the personal requirement (chovat gavra) make this any different than other voluntary mitzvoth in terms of Yuhara? (e.g. lulav)
~ ~ ~
The point in time of “Nigmar Hadin” (verdict is rendered) has halachic significance (e.g. Makot 11b if there is no kohain gadol at that point in time). The gemara in sanhedrin describes that even after an initial verdict in a capital case, the defendant can raise new claims even on the way to execution. Is gmar din in this case the initial verdict or the final rejection of any claims (and what if they reverse judgment?)

Please direct any informal comments to [email protected].

About Joel Rich

Joel Rich is a frequent local lecturer on various Torah topics in West Orange, NJ and supports his Torah listening habits by working as a consulting actuary.

Leave a Reply