Birkat HaMazon, the blessing after meals.

Watch on YouTube

Birkat Kohanim in the Sephardic Yerushalmi tune, with the te’amim, for children.

Watch on YouTube

An Aleph Bet song for Simchat Torah, made for MESA by Rabbi Michael Livi and Rav Eliyahu Ben Haim.

Watch on YouTube

וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ-לֹהִים יְהִי מְאֹרֹת —

Rashi:

לא נבראו ביום רביעי, אלא ביום ראשון נבראו, וברביעי צִוָּה עליהם לִתְלוֹתָם בָּרָקִיעַ, ולשמש במלאכתם.וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ-לֹהִים יְהִי מְאֹרֹת —

“And God said: Let there be lights.”

[Rashi explains: The sun and the moon] were not created on the Fourth Day, but on the First Day. On the Fourth Day, God commanded that they be placed in the firmament of the heavens to fulfill their function.

In the following lines, I will analyze the events of the Fourth Day of Creation — the most misunderstood day in the entire Creation narrative. From childhood, we are taught that on the Fourth Day God “created” the sun, the moon, and the stars. However, this popular and simplistic interpretation does not align with the view of the vast majority of our Sages of Israel — including the rabbis of the Talmud, such as Ribbi Aqiba, and the classical commentators Rashi, Radak, Maimonides, and others.

To force the biblical text to mean that the sun was created on the Fourth Day would also require assuming miracles that the Torah never mentions — something that contradicts the philosophical approach of Maimonides and Radak, who maintain that God does not perform unnecessary miracles when a natural process suffices. Such a reading would lead to untenable conclusions: that the plants created on the Third Day could have existed without sunlight; that the Earth’s atmosphere, formed on the Second Day, functioned without solar energy; and that the alternation of day and night — already mentioned on the First Day — occurred without the presence of the sun or the Earth’s rotation. Above all, it would imply that a planet can exist without orbiting a star — something we now know to be impossible, since every known planet belongs to a solar system.

The process of Creation described in the Torah is gradual and systematic. It presents a sequence that, remarkably, can be understood today through the lens of modern scientific reasoning — with one essential difference: attribution. The Torah attributes it all to the Creator.

Once we understand that the sun was created on the First Day — or, more precisely, during the initial act of Creation — we must clarify what actually occurred on the Fourth Day. This is, without doubt, the most challenging part of the narrative.

In what follows, we will explore this subject in greater depth. The text is longer than usual, but I trust it will help us better understand the biblical account of Creation — and appreciate that the more we learn about our universe, the more we recognize the exquisite precision and wisdom of our Torah.

Genesis 1:14

“And God said (on the Fourth Day): Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years.”

Jewish tradition holds that the luminaries — that is, the sun and the moon (and the planets of our solar system) — were not created on the Fourth Day but on the First Day of Creation. More precisely, God created the sun, the moon, and the entire universe during the initial act of Creation (Genesis 1:1). The Fourth Day, therefore, describes the final positioning of the sun and the moon in their respective celestial orbits (reqia haShamayim).

This detail is not minor. Modern scientists emphasize that the Earth’s temperature — which allows the oceans’ water to remain in liquid form and sustain the evaporation/precipitation cycle that produces fresh water — depends on the planet’s exquisitely precise distance from the sun.

Our verse states, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens,” but the Divine command does not refer to the creation or appearance of the luminaries, but to their placement “in the firmament of the heavens,” that is, in their final, stable orbit.

This is the view of most Talmudic rabbis. According to our Sages, including Rashi (Genesis 1:14), this verse refers to the final placement of the luminaries. Rashi explicitly cites the expression teliyat ha-me’orot — “the suspension of the luminaries” — meaning their hanging or positioning, not their creation.

One detail confirms that this verse does not refer to creation: the absence of the verb bara (“create”), which the Torah uses to describe acts of creation ex nihilo. Instead, the verse uses yehi (“let there be”), a term already used for the formation of the atmosphere (Genesis 1:6), where the text referred not to creation from nothing, but to the establishment of a natural system derived from preexisting matter.

Once placed in their definitive orbits, the luminaries were assigned a broader mission. No longer would they merely mark the alternation of day and night, as before; now they would regulate other, more complex units of time — months, seasons, and years. (The seven-day week, however, remains independent of any astronomical reference and was established directly by the Creator.)

Genesis 1:15

“And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth; and it was so.”

From their new, precisely calibrated distance from the Earth — what modern science calls the “galactic habitable zone” — the sunlight would benefit future life on Earth, which depends on a very specific and narrow range of temperatures (Radak, 1:14–15).

The sun’s mission is clearly stated in this verse: leha’ir al ha’aretz — to radiate energy and warmth in just the right measure to sustain life. The Earth’s average temperature of 14°C is astonishingly stable, within a narrow range that allows oceans neither to freeze (as on Mars or Jupiter) nor to evaporate (as on Venus).

The Earth’s oceans can thus maintain liquid water, and the planet’s climate system continues to produce rain, preserving and renewing the small portion — less than 3% — of fresh water on Earth. All this is possible thanks to the precise distance established by the Creator on the Fourth Day. This “habitable zone” was essential for the emergence of life on the Fifth Day.

Genesis 1:16

“And God made the two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; and the stars.”

The moon is 400 times smaller than the sun, yet 400 times closer to Earth — a ratio that allows them to appear almost the same size from our perspective. Its gravitational pull stabilizes the Earth’s tilt and elliptical orbit, which in turn produces the seasons and ocean tides — both crucial for maintaining a stable climate and supporting life in the seas.

Genesis 1:17

“And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.”

The biblical commentators explained that leha’ir al ha’aretz — “to give light upon the earth” — should also be understood as “for the benefit of the earth.” Siftei Chakhamim (a commentary on Rashi) notes that the luminaries were positioned for the benefit of the world’s inhabitants (olam), not merely for the planet itself (eretz), which does not require such delicately balanced solar energy.

This idea aligns with the view that during the Second and Third Days, a stronger solar light — directed by the Creator — operated to form the atmosphere, separate land from water, and shape the Earth’s surface. But by the Fourth Day, once these geological processes were completed, the sun was repositioned in a new orbit designed to sustain life and directly benefit animals and human beings.

This concept was developed by the Italian commentator Seforno (1475–1550) in his explanation of Genesis 1:15: “Now [on the Fourth Day] a balanced light (or memuzag) reaches the Earth from the luminaries, in the right measure for its inhabitants.”

In summary, the text reports two actions on the Fourth Day (Genesis 1:16–17). Yet for our rabbis, these two verses describe one continuous act: (Gen. 1:16) “God made [=set in their final position] the sun and the moon,” and (Gen. 1:17) “placed them in the firmament of the heavens,” meaning He established their final orbits from which they would radiate a balanced, life-sustaining light.

Genesis 1:18

“To rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.”

Rabbi Menashe ben Israel (1604–1657) masterfully illustrated the stages of Creation with a metaphor. He wrote that the Creator is the architect, builder, and interior designer of our world. His project — Planet Earth — resembles the construction of a house:

• First, God creates the basic materials, the skeleton and walls (Genesis 1:1–2).
• Second, on the Second Day, He builds the roof and the plumbing system that ensures a constant supply of water (Genesis 1:6–7).
• Third, on the Third Day, He constructs the floor and a system of bioengineering that provides a steady source of food and oxygen: vegetation (Genesis 1:9–14).
• Fourth, on the Fourth Day, once everything is ready, He installs the electrical system — the light, heating, and air conditioning.

The house is now habitable. The structure, roof, floor, and all essential systems are in place and functioning perfectly. The table is set, awaiting the honored guest: man.

Genesis 1:19

“And there was evening and there was morning, the Fourth Day.”

And on the Fifth Day, God created life.

 Did Hamas and the Palestinian Authority Fall Into a Trap From Which There Is No Escape?

Urgent: Has Israel once again reasserted the legitimacy of its position through President Trump’s festive plan for a ceasefire? Did this plan trap Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, leaving them with no way out? What are the real stages of the plan? Is it good or bad for Israel? Here is an exclusive analysis for Gplanet members.

In the festive halls of Congress and the White House, Prime Minister Netanyahu managed to put forth a joint plan with the Americans that included Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. For them, it will be very difficult to escape. If they do not cooperate at all, it will be seen as a blatant act of hostility toward Israel and the United States. That, in turn, would require them to pay a heavy price. This is something Israel has not had in a long time. And who gave us this new strategic depth? President Trump.

Trump’s Belief in Peace

President Trump truly believes in peace in the Middle East, and he mobilized all Arab countries on the eve of releasing the plan. Netanyahu managed to alter the wording of the plan, so that instead of being a trap for Israel, it became a trap for Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.

As we already explained this morning on our Telegram channel, the plan has turned into a “red snare” against Hamas and the PA.

In the official announcement, which partly outlines a ceasefire, Netanyahu detailed the binding conditions that Trump agreed to. These conditions now oblige Hamas.

The Binding Stages of the Plan

• Stage One: Hamas must release all hostages alive within 72 hours. This is the only immediate and unconditional demand. Everything else is contingent. If this does not happen within 72 hours, or if not all hostages are released, Hamas will bear the blame, and Trump will enforce the consequences.

• Stage Two: If Hamas agrees to the plan, it must release everyone. This would mark an “Israeli-Palestinian ceasefire in Gaza,” but only after all hostages are freed.

• Stage Three: President Trump himself will establish an international body to separate Hamas from the civilian population of Gaza. This body will consist of Arab leaders—similar to Tony Blair’s role in the past—who ultimately left Gaza impoverished and ruined. This body would supervise the demilitarization of Hamas and prevent further attacks on Israel.

• Stage Four: If this international body succeeds, Israel will finally end the war, but only after full demilitarization and disarmament of Hamas. The war will not end merely with a ceasefire and the release of hostages, but only after Hamas has been fully disarmed—a stage that may never actually arrive.

This strikes at the very core of Hamas’s central demand: to end the war without disarming. Trump will not accept that.

• Stage Five: Only after demilitarization will Israel conclude the war. Until then, Israel will continue targeted strikes and separations. If demilitarization does not take place, Netanyahu’s government will reject the plan.

Strategic Depth for Israel

In any case, Israel will remain in full security control around Gaza without time limits, and it will preserve its freedom to operate militarily. These are central conditions for Israel’s security. Hamas, of course, will never agree to dismantle its military infrastructure—meaning Hamas will never accept the plan.

• If Hamas refuses these steps, Israel will destroy it militarily, this time with full support from Trump. In such a scenario, Israel would also be able to take additional measures.

• A final clause: the Rafah crossing would be opened to allow Gazans who wish to leave, but none would be allowed to return.

• As for the Palestinian Authority, it will not become a Palestinian state. Trump himself agreed to this point, as he does not trust the Arab leadership.

• The PA will have no role in Gaza until it undergoes “genuine, authentic change,” in line with Trump’s 2020 conditions: dismantling terrorist militias, halting payments to terrorists and their families, stopping incitement, canceling hostile steps in international institutions, recognizing Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, and much more. Clearly, none of this will happen.

The Trap Closes

The plan has shifted the focus from “Israeli concessions,” which are always demanded, to American presidential demands imposed on the Palestinians. Even Macron has admitted Hamas cannot implement the plan.

The plan now opens for Israel a host of new opportunities, including expanded ties with Arab countries.

The chances that Hamas will accept the harsh conditions are minimal. Even if it pretends to say “yes, but,” the plan forces Hamas into a corner at every stage. For the first time, a plan requires immediate “payment”—the release of all hostages upfront. Hamas has rejected such conditions many times before. This time, however, Trump is personally invested, and the whole world will focus on Hamas’s refusal.

Israel is now the decisive actor, watching everything Hamas does. Every terrorist who emerges will be struck immediately. Hamas has no intention of disarming or separating from its terror organizations—on the contrary. It openly declares its defiance.

Qatar

Netanyahu indeed confronted the Qatari Prime Minister over “the problem of Qatari mediation” and effectively neutralized Qatar within the process. But there is also a triangle of aid: Israeli, American, and Egyptian. To test Qatar’s hostility, consider Al Jazeera broadcasts, support for the Muslim Brotherhood, hostility toward Jews on campuses, and more. The evidence is overwhelming. Qatar is caught. From now on, an American blow against Qatar will follow.

This is a domino effect: one state after another returning to Israel’s side.

The Palestinian Authority Again

There is no chance the PA will agree to these terms—especially not recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. It will stumble over this point and collapse into Netanyahu’s hands. These conditions are already being discussed in a special White House conference and broadcast worldwide.

Both Hamas and the PA have already cried out for rescue after the plan’s publication.

Conclusion

Hamas now realizes this is a “deceptive plan,” much like the one Netanyahu and Trump imposed on Iran. If Hamas rejects or sabotages the plan, it will have to be removed from its current bases of support.

Netanyahu has also challenged Qatar directly, exposing its duplicity. Qatar’s mask has fallen, and now American measures will follow. This process represents a return of states to Israel’s orbit.

As for the PA, it will be unable to accept the terms. Recognition of Israel as the Jewish nation-state is something it will never agree to. Thus, it too is trapped.

Hamas and the PA, having cried out in distress, find themselves ensnared in Trump’s plan—unable to move forward, unable to retreat. Israel, meanwhile, holds all the cards.

Bring Them Home או Let My People Go?

לפני שנה השתתפתי בניו יורק ב־Israel Parade, המצעד השנתי הגדול למען ישראל. הסיסמה של אותה שנה הייתה מרגשת: “Bring them home” — “החזירו אותם הביתה”. התרגשתי לראות עשרות אלפי אנשים מתכנסים בסולידריות עם ישראל ועם בני הערובה הישראלים שנחטפו. צילמתי סרטונים ושיתפתי אותם עם חברים במיאמי ובבואנוס איירס.

אבל הערה של חברי היקר ליאון גרמה לי לחשוב מחדש על נאיביותי הפוליטית. ליאון שאל אותי: “למי בדיוק מופנית הקריאה הזאת? לחמאס? לקטר? למדינות ערב שמממנות ומגינות על חמאס? או בעצם לממשלת ישראל?” אז הבנתי שבלי לשים לב נפלתי למלכודת פוליטית מתוחכמת: באמירה “החזירו אותם הביתה” הלחץ מונח על ישראל, כאילו נתניהו וממשלתו הם אלה שצריכים לשחרר את החטופים.

הסיסמה הזאת אינה נועדה ללחוץ על נתניהו שיחלץ אותם במבצע צבאי. המסר הסמוי של “Bring them home” הוא אחר: “נקבל את תנאי חמאס כדי להביא אותם הביתה”. כלומר: נפסיק את המלחמה, ניכנע, נמשוך את הכוחות מהשטחים שכבשנו בעזה, נשחרר אלפי מחבלים, ניתן עוד אדמות, עוד אוכל, עוד פריבילגיות, ונשאיר את חמאס בחיים. פתאום הדרישה שאמורה להיות מופנית כלפי הרוצחים ובני בריתם הבינלאומיים — מתגלגלת לעבר ישראל!

הנטל על הקורבנות

הגישה הזאת של להאשים את הקורבן היא מעוותת. חמאס ובעלי בריתו — האירופאים, הצלב האדום, האומות המאוחדות, אונר״א וכו׳ — הם האחראים. המשקל צריך להיות מונח עליהם.

דוגמה: תארו לכם שאירופה הייתה מאיימת על הצלב האדום שתפסיק כל מימון אם לא יגיעו מיד אל בני הערובה היהודים לבדוק את מצבם ולסייע להם רפואית. אני מבטיח לכם שבאותו רגע הצלב האדום היה מתנועע מידית.

הקמפיין “Bring them home” הופך את ההיגיון המוסרי: האחריות כבר אינה מונחת על הרוצחים ובעלי בריתם — הפעילים או הפסיביים — אלא על כתפיהם של הקורבנות ושל ממשלתם. מבלי להתכוון, המשתתפים בצעדות כאלה מחזקים את הנרטיב הכוזב של חמאס: שטבח 7 באוקטובר היה תגובה “לגיטימית” להתנחלויות ולכיבוש של ישראל. “נעשה את הוויתורים שהם דורשים ויעזבו אותנו בשקט”.

מחיר בני הערובה

לפני שנים, בטיסה מבואנוס איירס לניו יורק, צפיתי בסרט Ransom בכיכובו של מל גיבסון. בנו נחטף והפושעים דרשו כסף. בצעד נגד־אינטואיטיבי, גיבסון הופיע בטלוויזיה והכריז שלא ישלם סנט אחד. להפך — הוא הציע פרס על ראשי החוטפים. הוא איים: אם תפגעו בבני, הכסף הזה ישמש לצוד אתכם.

כל דולר שהחוטפים ביקשו הפך ללחץ נגדם. המסר היה ברור: איני נותן לכם כוח, אני לוקח מכם כוח.

עם חמאס צריך לנהוג כך. אין לתגמל את החוטף בוויתורים או בהפסקות אש שמחזקות אותו. האסטרטגיה היחידה ההגיונית היא להגדיל את הלחץ הפוליטי, הצבאי והכלכלי, עד שיבינו שחטיפת בני הערובה עולה להם יותר ממה שהיא מועילה.

Let My People Go

הסיסמה הנכונה איננה Bring Them Home. הקריאה האמיתית היא זו שאמר משה רבנו לפרעה: “שַׁלַּח אֶת עַמִּי” — מופנית לפרעה, לא למשה.

יציאת מצרים הייתה הסוף השמח של אירוע טראגי: קודם הטבח של הילדים היהודים שהושלכו ליאור ואחר־כך החטיפה ההמונית של עם שלם, שנשבה בכוח ושועבד — לא רחוק מעזה. התורה איננה מסתירה את פרטי העימות ההוא בין משה לפרעה, כי היא רוצה שנלמד ממנה את האסטרטגיה שעלינו לזכור וליישם באירוע דומה.

הדיאלוג שלא עבד

בהתחלה משה נכנס לארמון עם בקשה דיפלומטית: ביקש בנימוס מפרעה לשחרר את העבדים היהודים. תגובתו הראשונה של פרעה הייתה להסלים: הוא הקשה את השעבוד. העמיס עוד עבודה, דיכא עוד יותר את העם. זו הייתה תשובתו של העריץ למילות הנימוס של משה. כצפוי, העם החל ללחוץ ולתקוף את משה.

משה חזר והראה לפרעה את כוח האל באמצעות מופתים: הפך את מטהו לנחש, הפך את מי היאור לדם והשאיר את המצרים בלי מים. בתחילה פרעה העמיד פני אדיש.

אחר־כך הגיעו מכות קשות יותר: צפרדע, כינים, ערוב, דבר. ואז הלחץ החל להשפיע.

ככל שהמכות התרבו ופגעו בכלכלה, בבריאות ובחיי היומיום של מצרים, פרעה החל לחוש את הלחץ של עמו עצמו. אז התחילו ה”משאים ומתנים”:

• “עשו את הקרבנות כאן, במצרים”, הציע פרעה. משה השיב: בלתי אפשרי.

• “לכו, אבל הנשים והילדים יישארו”. משה ענה: כולם יוצאים.

• “לכו כולכם, אבל השאירו את רכושכם”. משה שוב סירב.

משה עמד איתן. לא קיבל תנאים. הוא לא ניהל משא־ומתן, כי ידע שעם עריצים וחוטפים לא מנהלים משא־ומתן.

כל סירוב החליש את המדכא, כי המכות הלכו והתגברו. עד שהגיעה המכה האחרונה: מכת בכורות. ורק אז, כשכאב נכנס לארמון עצמו, העריץ נשבר.

הלקח ברור: המדכא מוותר רק כשהמחיר על עקשנותו הולך וגדל.

מה אנו לומדים מהאירוע הזה?

בלתי מובן לי איך עם ישראל בשנת 2025 לא פותח את התורה כדי למצוא הדרכה ודגמי פעולה במצבים דומים. אנחנו עם הספר — אבל משאירים אותו סגור. סיפור השעבוד במצרים, הטראומה הלאומית שלנו, צריך להיות הניסיון והמדריך שלנו. חמאס, כמו פרעה, איננו מבין ויתורים או טיעונים מוסריים. הוא מבין רק לחץ ותוצאות. והוא ייכנע רק כאשר יבין שהחזקת החטופים מחלישה אותו ולא מחזקת.

אם כל יום של שביים מביא לחמאס ויתורים או הישגים פוליטיים — כמו הפגנות נגד ממשלת ישראל — חמאס ימשיך להחזיק בהם. אבל אם כל יום של שביים מביא אובדן — טריטוריאלי, פוליטי או צבאי — אז, ורק אז, הם ישוחררו.

תארו לכם דוגמה מעשית: על כל יום שחמאס לא משחרר את בני הערובה היהודים, ישראל תספח רשמית קילומטר רבוע אחד מעזה ותכריז עליו כשטח ישראלי. מה יקרה? עבור חמאס, איבוד קרקע הוא התבוסה הקשה ביותר: פסיכולוגית, צבאית ודתית. המתים הם “שהידים”, ואינם נספרים כהפסד. אבל איבוד קרקע — זה מה שהם אינם יכולים לשאת. זה, ורק זה, יכריח אותם לוותר.

הלקח מההיסטוריה הקרובה

הקול שלנו חייב להיות ברור ואחיד: LET MY PEOPLE GO — שַׁלַּח אֶת עַמִּי. והוא צריך להיות מופנה לכל התומכים בחמאס, במיוחד למדינות האסלאמואירופיות כמו צרפת, אנגליה, אוסטרליה וקנדה.

אסור לנו לחזור על טעויות העבר. מאז 2009, כל הפסקת אש עם חמאס שימשה אך ורק כדי שיתחמש מחדש ויתכונן לטבח הבא. ה־7 באוקטובר היה תוצאה ישירה של אותן ויתורים והסכמים שחיזקו את החוטף.

המדיניות הנכונה היחידה שישראל חייבת להחזיק בה כיום היא ברורה: לספח שטחים מעזה ולהחזיק בהם, ולהמשיך לספח עד שבני הערובה ישוחררו. בלי ויתורים. בלי משא־ומתן דרך קטר או מצרים.

על המחבלים לשאת בתוצאות פשעיהם. רק כך הם לא יחזרו עליהם.

זה עבד עם פרעה, זה יעבוד גם עם חמאס.

One of the symbolic customs instituted by our Sages to remember the destruction of the Bet haMiqdash—particularly during moments of great joy—is the placing of ashes on the head of the groom (chatan) before the chuppa.

Talmudic Source

The Talmud in Baba Batra 60b records:

אמר רבא: בשעה שחרב בית המקדש גזרו חכמים שלא ישא אדם אשה, ולא יוליד בנים… אמרו לו: נניח ישראל בלא פריה ורביה?! אלא כך אמרו: סד אדם ביתו בסיד, ומשייר דבר מועט… עושה אדם כל צרכי סעודה ומשייר דבר מועט… עושה אדם תכשיטי אשה ומשייר דבר מועט… עושה אדם חתונה לבנו ומשייר דבר מועט. מאי היא? אמר רב פפא: אפר מקלה בראש חתן.

Translation:

Rava said: When the Bet haMiqdash was destroyed, the rabbis enacted decrees to limit joy… Among these: “A man may prepare a wedding for his son, but he must leave something out.” What is this omission? Rav Pappa said: He places ashes from the hearth on the groom’s head.

Halakhic Codification

This halacha is codified in Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 560:2:

נוהגים לשום אפר מקלה בראש החתן במקום הנחת תפילין…

Translation:

It is customary to place ashes from the hearth on the groom’s head, at the spot where the tefillin are placed (i.e., the top of the forehead).

The Rema (Rabbi Moshe Isserles) adds:

וכן נוהגין בכל המקומות…

And this is the practice in all communities.

Details of the Practice

• The ashes used are traditionally ashes from a cooking fire (called efer mikleh), symbolizing mourning.

• They are placed specifically on the spot of the tefillin shel rosh—the holiest part of the head—indicating that even at the peak of joy, a Jew remembers the destruction of the Temple.

• Some communities recite the verse from Tehillim 137:6 at that moment:

אִם אֶשְׁכָּחֵךְ יְרוּשָׁלָ‍ִם, תִּשְׁכַּח יְמִינִי. תִּדְבַּק לְשׁוֹנִי לְחִכִּי, אִם לֹא אֶזְכְּרֵכִי…

“If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its skill. Let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you…”

Contemporary Practice

• Many Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities still maintain this custom today.

• In modern weddings, it is often carried out right before the groom walks to the chuppa, sometimes by the rabbi or officiant.

• The act is intended to be brief, symbolic, and discreet, but deeply meaningful.

Although our official mourning for the destruction of the Bet haMiqdash ends the day after Tish’a BeAb, our rabbis established certain traditions of mourning that are maintained throughout the year, as a permanent reminder that the Bet haMiqdash has not yet been rebuilt.

The Gemara in Baba Batra 60b mentions that when a Jewish family builds a house, it should not cover the walls with ceramics, carpets, or other elaborate coverings. Maimonides codifies this as follows:

משחרב בית המקדש, תיקנו חכמים שהיו באותו הדור, שאין בונין לעולם בניין מסוייד ומכוייר, כבניין המלכים; אלא טח ביתו בטיט, וסד בסיד, ומשייר מקום אמה על אמה כנגד הפתח, בלא סיד.

“When our Bet haMiqdash was destroyed, the rabbis of that generation established that we should not build a building covered as the residences of kings. Rather, when plastering the walls with clay and lime, one should leave a space of one ama by one ama without lime.”

As we see, there are two elements to bear in mind when finishing a house:

1. Not coating the walls of the house with luxurious materials.

2. Leaving a space of the wall unfinished (Peninei Halakha, Ha’am veha-Arets, p. 186, according to Beit Yosef on Shulhan ‘Arukh 560).

Other rabbis, following the opinion of the Tur (Rabbenu Asher ben Yehiel), were more lenient and did not restrict the materials used to coat private Jewish homes. According to this view, all that is required is that, when building a house, one should leave at the entrance, facing the front door, a square of the wall unfinished and unpainted, so that every time we walk into our home, we remember that the house of haShem is still in ruins.

Most contemporary rabbis follow this second opinion.

The size of this uncoated section is approximately 1.5 ft by 1.5 ft (אמה על אמה). This area should be left unplastered and unpainted. Similarly, if one uses wallpaper instead of paint, this segment should be left without wallpaper.

If possible, the unfinished segment should be on the wall opposite the entrance or as close to the front door as possible, so that all who enter the house will see it. Among Ashkenazim, some leave the unfinished square above the main door.

If someone purchases a previously inhabited home, does he need to remove plaster to expose an unfinished section?

It depends. If the previous owner was Jewish, and thus obligated to leave the uncoated square and did not, the new Jewish owner is now responsible for fulfilling this obligation. However, if the previous owner was not Jewish—and therefore not obligated—the new Jewish owner is not required to leave an unfinished section (Shulhan ‘Arukh OH 560:1), although he may choose to do so voluntarily.

In this case, or in other situations where there is technically no obligation (such as a rented home), one may instead hang a picture or decorative piece featuring Yerushalayim, its walls, or the phrase:

אם אשכחך ירושלים
“If I forget thee, O Jerusalem…”

This serves to educate ourselves and our children to remember the Bet haMiqdash.

Following the destruction of the Second Temple, a major change took place in Am Israel. It seemed that after the destruction and exile, it was no longer possible to live in a normal manner. The people could not conceive of pursuing a life with joy and celebrations without the Bet haMiqdash.

The Talmud (Baba Batra 60b) tells the following story:

“When the Temple was destroyed for the second time (68 CE), many Jews began living as ascetics, depriving themselves of eating meat or drinking wine. Rabbi Yehoshua said, ‘My children, why do you not eat meat or drink wine?’ They replied: ‘How can we eat meat, which used to be brought as an offering on the altar (mizbeach), now that the altar is ruined? How can we drink wine, which used to be poured as a libation on the altar, now that the altar is destroyed?’ He said to them, ‘If so, do not eat bread anymore, because the offering of bread (lechem haPanim) was also disrupted.’ They said: ‘[You’re right. From now on we will not eat bread;] we will consume only fruits.’ ‘Nor can you eat from the fruits of Israel,’ Rabbi Yehoshua told them, ‘because they are no longer being offered as first-fruits (bikkurim).’ ‘So we will eat other fruits of the earth (such as vegetables and legumes),’ they said. ‘But,’ he said to them, ‘you will not be able to drink water, because water was also poured on the altar (nisukh hamayim), and that has been disrupted too.’ At this point, they no longer found a possible answer. So Rabbi Yehoshua said, ‘My children, listen. Not to mourn for our Bet haMiqdash is impossible, but mourning excessively is also impossible, because we cannot impose restrictions that most people are not able to follow.’”

Rabbi Yehoshua went on to explain that we must continue living a normal life. We cannot allow our great mourning for the destruction of the Holy Temple to produce a permanent and eternal state of national mourning, and forbid eating meat or drinking wine, which are symbols of celebration. We need to find the delicate balance between national mourning and personal joy. There are some symbolic, discreet things we can do to remember the destruction of the Bet haMiqdash in times of celebration, so that while our Temple is in ruins, our happiness will never be complete.

Therefore, the Sages taught, for example, that on the wedding day, the groom should have the Bet haMiqdash in his mind above his personal joy, placing some ashes on his head as a discreet sign of mourning. Similarly, when a celebratory meal is prepared, we leave aside one dish in remembrance of the destruction of the Temple.