Chulin 13

Today's stuff is cool enough you'd get more. And we are eight lines from the bottom of Duff Yud Beis on Mid Beis, the two dots. Omar Reb Chiyah bar Abba. Today's Duff is being learned as a zechus for refuah shleimah for Eliezer Yishaya ben Broch. So, today's Duff is very much a continuation of the very end of yesterday's Duff. The very end of yesterday's Duff discussed the very end of the first Mishnah in the Massechta. A Cheresh Shoita and Katan are not allowed to shecht l'chatchila. Even b'di eved, you're not allowed to eat from their shechita. Stating that, b'di eved, if they shechted and there were people watching them, then the halacha is shechitasam k'sheira. Assuming everything went okay, you would be allowed to eat from their shechita. Today's Duff is going to begin with a discussion related to Katanim and shechita. More globally, it's going to be a discussion related to Katanim and whether or not their machshava is a machshava, whether or not their ma'aseh is a ma'aseh. I think it's kedai to be makdim l'shonei azov shel Remei Simcha in Or Sameach and this is in Hilchos Mikvaos. It's perek [snorts] aleph, halacha tes. It's a very, very long halacha. It has sif katan. This is in sif katan yud gimmel. Remei Simcha says as follows, "May atah mispainegtzus." Let's very Remei Simchadik be mispaineg a little bit. The hot barer, it goes without question. "Im ba'al cheresh o shoita." If you would have a man who's married and he's either a cheresh or a shota. The geresh, and now he wanted to divorce his wife, which is something that a heresh and a shota, being that they're not benei daas, can't do. But they did so b'cheirem umdin al gabav. They did it when other people were watching them. Avsham b'landinoisa, umrinoisa l'shem gereshin. Even if those people are rebbe's, and they're instructing him and coaching him exactly what to do and how to do it. Vadai lo mahani, it certainly wouldn't work. D'kinyan mahani b'cheirem umdin al gabav, because you don't find anywhere that a kinyan can work if it was effectuated by a person that doesn't have the ability to do so, only because there was a cheirem umdin al gabav. Because at the end of the day, given the lav bar kinyana if that person's not a bar kinyan, u'vai daas, v'rotzin v'lav bar rotzin hu. That's poshit, says R' Meir Simcha, would not work. Stating that, you find in the first perek maseches sh'kholim, there's a sugya of a katan, heresh, and shota being allowed to do sh'chita, o'bi it when a cheirem umdin al gabav, despite the fact that there is some level of machshava that you have to have when you do a a sh'chita. What's the p'shat? Says R' Meir Simcha, the o'imek is that a heresh, shota, and katan are not benei daas and benei rotzin. However, they are benei kavana. This is a poshit zachar R' Meir Simcha b'kama b'kamas p'shat. And that's something that is axiomatic throughout shas. So, the hakdama to the daas is very subtle and very nuanced, but at the same time, I think it's fundamental. We know a heresh, shota, and katan throughout shas are considered to be not benei daas, they're considered to be not benei rotzin, and that limits their ability to engage in transactions and do so many of the things that the Torah sh'b'al peh talks about. But at the same time, despite the fact that they don't have daas and rotzin, they could have kavana. They could have a machshava. That is something that they are shiyach to. And really, as we'll see, that is the gateway, the Pesach, to the beginning of today's daf. So, the hilchos gemara, Amora bar Rebbi Abba, said boy Rebbi Yochanan, Rebbi Yochanan cleared the following. He boyos Rebbi Abba, underrated as one of the talmidei muvchakim of Rebbi Yochanan, and he said, "Let me tell you what I heard from the Rebbi." He cleared the following question, "Katan yesh lo machshava or ein lo machshava?" Does a katan have machshava or does he not have machshava? Katan has machshava. We know a katan is not about daas, he's not about ratzon. A katan can't do anything in chash. Why would you think he could have machshava? That's a mere sifcha. Pashut beshas bekama mekoymos. That is a distinction between daas and ratzon on the one hand, machshava and kavana on the other hand. But either way, Rebbi Yochanan cleared, "Does a katan have machshava or does he not have machshava?" Now, Rashi says, "What's an example of where Rebbi Yochanan was clearing his shaila?" So, Rashi says, "I'll give you a shchita dikka example. Kegoyn, beshchitas katan deboy kavana." Shchitas katan, we know it requires kavana. It's the first mishna in maseches Zevachim. Daas, shchita, kabala, halacha, zerika, hadacha, avoda, all have to be done with a machshava leshma. Now, why did Rashi say shchitas katan? Why didn't he say kabala, halacha, zerika? That's easy, because a katan is not allowed to do kabala, halacha, zerika. But, shchita, which is something that's kosher, bizarre. Shchita, which is something that technically he would be allowed to do. So, the question is whether or not this katan is yesh lo machshava, is he shiyach to having a machshava of leshma or is he not shiyach to have a machshava leshma? Now, Tosfos asks a great shaila on Rashi, and that is why would there be a shaila whether a katan could have a machshava or not have a machshava. Let me hear he can't have a machshava. Stumble leshma is a kosher when it comes to katan. It's walking down the base of the base. So, if that's the case, twist this much as a little bit. I don't really understand why Rab Yochanan would have posed the question of my nafka mina. I mean, it's a nice shaila. Is his machshava of lishma ya machshava lishma not machshava lishma? But as far as I'm concerned, it seems to be academic in nature because being that stum is cut lishma anyways. So, even if a cotton can have a machshava lishma, he would go ahead and he would do a shrita. B'churi would be fine. But the bottom line is this Rab Bar Abba said was Rab Yochanan in shaila of cotton issue of machshava ain no machshava. And again, even though Rashi says the case is shritas cotton b'di kavana, Rashi prefaces it with the word k'gain, which in cheder we daich tzim baishel. So, this is only a mushal. Right, this is only an example. So, the mushal if a cotton would go and he would do shritas cotton and would have a machshava lishma, would it be a machshava would it not be a machshava? Only Rab Ammi turned Rab Ammi turned to Rab Chiyya bar Abba and he said "The tivoy le maiseh." Says, "I don't understand. Why did Rab Yochanan only clarify shaila whether cotton is yesh le machshava or ain le machshava? Rab Yochanan [snorts] should have also clarified another shaila. He should have clarified whether a cotton has a maiseh or doesn't have a maiseh." Now, there's two drachim the rishonim had to learn pashut shad in Rab Ammi's ta'ana and really pashut shad in the first chunk of today's daf. The rishonim, these two machlokes, are Rashi and Tosfos. We're going to deviate from what we usually do and that is we're going to learn the sugya b'shitas Tosfos, which is also the machlokes of the Me'iri and the Rashba and the Ran. So, it seems to be the ikka machlokes in the rishonim. The reason is it's an easier machlokes. Additionally, Tosfos asks a lot of obvious kashas to Rashi. So, if you're going to sit down and learn the Gemara Rashi dik, number one, it's a hard of shad and, number two, you're going to inevitably be bothered with some of the Tosfos kashas. So, we'll learn the Gemara with Tosfos and then afterwards we'll mention, al korbonem, a shout out what exactly the machlokes of Rashi she But either way, so if Rab Ammi turned to R' Chiya bar Abba and said, "Why did R' Yochanan only clarify his shaila whether katan is yesh lo machshava or ein lo machshava? He should have clarified a second shaila, and that is, does he have a ma'aseh or does he not have a ma'aseh? What's the difference? Katan yesh lo machshava ein lo machshava means to the extent that he tells you he had a machshava where machshava is required. Is his machshava considered good or is it not considered good? Ma'aseh would mean where the katan is telling you he had a machshava, but you don't just have to take him at his word. You can look at his ma'aseh, and based on the ma'aseh that he did, it's abundantly obvious and evident that what he's telling you is the truth. So, it's not just that the katan is telling you he had a machshava, but rather the katan is behaving in a certain way where it seems to scream from the rooftops that he had a machshava. And as we'll see in a second, it's a m'furash Mishna b'Maseches Shkalim that when we deal with inyanim of machshava, there's a mayla where you see the machshava in a ma'aseh versus we don't see the machshava in a ma'aseh. So, R' Ami turned to R' Chiya bar Abba and he says, "R' Yochanan wanted to know whether the katan has machshava or doesn't have machshava. It's interesting. He didn't clarify whether he has ma'aseh or doesn't have ma'aseh." As far as I'm concerned, if you're going to learn up the sug you're good of machshava and ma'aseh and apply it to katan, so just like he has a safek whether the katan is yesh lo machshava, he should have a shaila of whether a katan has a ma'aseh. And R' Ami continued. He says, "I know why R' Yochanan didn't ask the question whether katan has ma'aseh. Ma'aseh ma'aseh d'leika m'vuyar. Why did he not clarify the question as it relates to ma'aseh? That's not cuz it's a m'furash Mishna. Where is the Mishna in Maseches Shkalim? Oh, what does the Mishna say? Yesh lo a ma'aseh. Well, if that's the case, that same Mishna Maseches Shkalim says something with regards to machshava as well. Machshava d'leika m'vuyar. He shouldn't have clarified the shaila with regards to machshava. And the reason is the in Maseches Shkalim where it says m'furash, yesh lo a ma'aseh and ein lo machshava d'tan. We learned in the Mishna. So, the background to this is that we know that even though there's a parsha of Toma, not everything is my camel Toma, right? So, people could become Tome. I couldn't imagine him to become Tome. Kaylin can become Tome. So, the mission over there discusses a loin, the haram mine, the egg guys. These are different types of nuts and fruits. She could come, they have a shell and T Noik has went and took out the inside of it to create a little bit of a a Kaylie, right? So, you have a walnut and take out the inside, you take out the prey. >> [snorts] >> So, now what you're left with is this little shell. So, in the event that T Noik has went ahead and did that and the purpose was long would be an offer, right? The mash over of the cotton was is cuz he wanted to be able to measure offer, right? He's trying to collect offer. He's playing in the sandbox literally and he wants to know how much offer he has. Like this he carves out for himself this little Kaylie. Oh, she's getting a little calmer now. Oh, the reason he did it was is cuz he was making a cotton mas nine, right? Think of this hour. So, the old school cotton mas nine. The bottom line is to may him the lucky is with my nation yes to him mash over. So, these things are now going to be royal to come a little more and the reason is because the cotton has my sir, not mash over, my sir. And being that he has my sir over here, the my sir is my here that he's making a Kaylie up to a my [laughter] sir that's my here and making a Kaylie. So, for sure it's going to be considered a my sir. Oh, but the in the mash over but at the same time it doesn't have mash over. What does that mean? In the event that he would see this egg guys for example and he would have a mash over to go ahead and do that, it wouldn't be okay. Now, that's in contrast to a got all. If a got all would have a mash over to turn something into a Kaylie, that in and of itself would be enough for it to be considered a Kaylie. Now, it would be royal to come a little more. But a cotton is in the mash over. But despite the fact that a cotton is in the mash over, he is yes to my sir. The bottom line is it seems to be a mash mishna that a katan is ein lo machshava. Forget about das and ratzon. He doesn't even have that little bit of machshava that you would need in order to render something a keili so that it would be ro'i lechabedam. But at the same time, if he does a a maisa, oh, the maisa that screams that he's having the machshava, so now betziruf with the maisa, then that loch is it is going to be okay. So Rabi Ami turns to Rabi Akiva bar Aba, he says, "Rabi Yochanan, clear the shaila whether a katan is yesh lo machshava ein lo machshava." He didn't clear whether it's yesh lo maisa ein lo maisa. You know what it sounds to me? It It sounds to me like he knew the mishna, but almost only knew half of the mishna. He didn't know the other half of the mishna. Because if he doesn't know the mishna in Keilim at all, so just like he's clearing whether it's yesh lo machshava ein lo machshava, he's clearing whether it's yesh lo maisa ein lo maisa. And if he does know the mishna, then that's not why he's not clearing whether it's yesh lo maisa ein lo maisa, well then he shouldn't be clearing whether it's yesh lo machshava or ein lo machshava, says the Gemara. Amalei. So Rabi Akiva bar Aba responded to Rabi Ami, and he told him as follows, "Machshava greidesa lo bei Keilim bei leyo. You're 100% right. Rabi Yochanan knew the mishna in Maseches Keilim. That's why he didn't clear the shaila whether a katan is yesh lo maisa ein lo maisa. And by the way, when he cleared the shaila whether a katan is yesh lo machshava ein lo machshava, he wasn't talking about whether he's shayeich to a machshava greidesa or all it is, he's telling you I had a machshava." In that situation, there's no shaila. It's a mefurash mishna. Okay, keep coming by leyo. What was his shaila? When machshavta is nikeres mitoch maisa. And the way Tosfos explains this is where he did a maisa which is a little bit more chiyuv his machshava. So it's not the case of yesh lo maisa where you see the tinoykes is going, he's in the sandbox, and he's taking the shell of the walnut, and he's making this little keili lamud dehana'ah far. Or you see clearly he has a masna'im, and he's looking to have a clay people and he's working on it. That my stuff ashore he has because that my stuff screams and if all it would be is he tells you I had a my stuff over but there was zero my stuff. That's possible and work either. And those one before the however learned the mission in Caleb cleared the shallow mission in Caleb and he said what would be if it's in between. What would be where it's not just a my stuff over it's a my stuff. But it's not but at the same [laughter] time need to take [clears throat] my stuff. It's a little bit going. What would be an example of this? So the example and this is why Rashi started off the gear talking about a case of culture right? Said cutting in the my stuff over and Rashi could have picked a lot of different applications to this and what did Rashi do? He said application is going to be culture. Why did Rashi say that because Rashi learned the more than the first more. And here the more it goes and the more it flashes out now with this new found understanding in a more nuanced way what I said was so this was the going to have a better and so there was a cotton. He had a sight of a cotton that's the words of on and he's in the Azara and the animal that he was doing was a carbon oil and the oil was in and we know she does but you and he brought the to shock that he shocked it over there. Now wants to know what would be the over there meaning over here there's some level of there's some level of a car. That the reason he's bringing it from down to the top and it's because he understands that he's bringing the carbon oil so [clears throat] when he tells you had a smart it really sounds like it's the case but it's not why is it not so the more it goes do you think I see but so the shock that you have a certainly sounds like that's what's going on. Maybe it was a little bit too busy in Dar and that's why I brought it over to Tsafan. But the bottom line is it's a situation where it's in the case of myself, but it's not 100% because you can always tighten it up a little bit different way. That was So that a cotton sailor greatest he knew that he's my soul where it's 100% What he wanted to know is what would be with my shop in the case of myself where it's only a little bit. What would be a case where the cotton is not just shaking you. He's telling you he did it with Shma. And he took the from Dar and he brought it to Tsafan. That's a nice that's a little bit that he has to deal with a carbon over here. So it's supporting what he's suggesting and that is that he's doing it with the proper of but it's maybe from Dar to Tsafan simply because there just wasn't enough room in Dar. But the says I'm going to No this could be what you can try was. Right? It's a nice parish in but at the end of the day I still have a little bit of a problem says the once addressed this very case. And if once addressed this case so doesn't make sense. He addressed it now he's addressing it again and it's even worse than that because as we'll see when addressed it he picked sides. He didn't have anybody. So here knows for sure what it is and here is not sure about it. So what's this other place that I have a background to this now? Is this In fact this is now. If you know that in order for to become they have to be has to become so one of the have to fall on the period and it has to be to the owner of the period that the went on it. So either the owner put the on it or it was raining. He saw it then was like, "Wow, I'm so happy my fruit are getting wet." Then if one of the schneider schwartz and would fall on it afterwards if some tumor would come in contact with it, we would say it's hochshol kapotoma. That's the background that we need to understand this mishna. As it says the mishna, mylo peyros of the gag, if somebody had peyros inside his house and he was bringing it up to the roof. And the reason he did it was mipnei hakininimo. Rashi says because there were kinim there, right? Of the makas sfam. Tzacha dashpa rag. So he's taking the peyros, he's bringing it up to the roof simply because he's trying to get it away from the kinim. Yod aleph yud mem tav. And then all of a sudden dew fell on it. Einam b'chiutan. So [snorts] it's not considered as if he put it on it. Ein b'chiutan means it's not much should be kapotoma. In this case in the gag. If however he had kavana harain b'chiutan, right? As long as he had kavana, so that in of itself is going to be okay. And Rashi says it doesn't matter when he had the kavana. Doesn't matter if he had the kavana while he was bringing it up or he brought it up mipnei hakininim. But it was only afterwards that in of itself would be fine. Halom cheresh ate of a katan. What would be a cheresh ate of a katan brought it up? So afel pishin is chavno l'kach. Even if they had kavana after the fact. So we're talking about with the cheresh ate of a katan brought it up mipnei hakininim. Didn't bring it up because they wanted the dew to fall on top of it. But rather mipnei hakininim. And then afterwards they had the kavana. Ein b'chiutan is not going to be chiutan. And the reason is mipnei she yesh lahem maiseh and machshava. It's mamesh this point. Yesh lahem maiseh. So to the extent that the machshava is nikar in the maiseh, so then yeah, yesh lahem maiseh. But if when they did the maiseh they were clearly not doing it for that reason. Forget it was nikar they were doing it mipnei hakininim. And then afterwards they had a machshava. They don't have a machshava. This mishna over here machshivin is matim with the mishna of masochas keilim. Again, these are very obscure halachas. But the sad ashava is a katan doesn't have machshava. Yet a katan has ma'aseh. Either way, enters Rebbe Yochanan ben Zakkai and said, "Lo shanu." This that we say that if a katan afterwards would have a machshava, it wouldn't be okay. Einam b'chiutan because a katan is less lay machshava, which again has a makor in another mishna as well, a mishna in meseches Keilim. But that's only true al lo shelo hipach bahem. If the katan didn't do anything, he wasn't even mahapach the peiros. He didn't flip it this way, flip it that way. Aval hipach bahem, but if he was mahapach them, harei zeh b'chiutan. At that point, it would be b'chiutan. What's the reason? Because once he's mahapach a little bit, at that point there's some level of a heichacha that it's nichlal that he wants to do to fall on it, right? What does it mean he's being mahapach? Just visualize it. The visualization is is that the dough is falling on this side, right? If you're grilling something, suddenly you flip it around. You take the burger, you flip it this way, you flip it that way. So, I want the dough to come to this side, and I want the dough to come to that side. There's a heichacha. Now, Tosafos speaks out, it's not muchach 100% cuz it could be the reason he's being mahapach it is for some other reason. But the bottom line is is that being that there is some level of a heichacha, Rebbe Yochanan said, "Harei zeh b'chiutan." That in and of itself would be okay. So, freaked the Gemara kasha here. Rebbe Yochanan said, "Katan yeish lo machshava oy ein lo machshava?" And the Gemara explained what is yeish machshava and ein lo machshava. We know a katan is ein lo machshava, and we know he's yeish lo ma'aseh. So, what exactly is the safek? Where [laughter] machshavto neged ma'aseh which again shittas Tosafos is the What does that mean? Where there's a heichacha but not a heichacha of the Gemara. And Rebbe Akiva seemed to be stumped. He didn't know. Rebbe Akiva had said before this in a very similar case, not Keilim, where the machshava is neged that a keili is not a keili, but rather a machshir where the machshava is neged is a muchshar l'kabel tum'ah or not l'kabel tum'ah. Very similar by the way, right? Because a keili is muchshar l'kabel tum'ah when it's a keili, and ochlin are muchshar l'kabel tum'ah when one of the seven mashkin fall on it. But the bottom line is here it said before this is so good. I mean you know what I'm saying and so what's going on over here is I'm so bigger than for sure exactly what the law is. The law says You have to say that topic was the other one. In other words, was certain that on some level that on some level there's a concept of a cut on having a master and he carries with there's there's no question about that. But he had it said that maybe that's only a number of and if it's only a then it's something that would only work when you're being if however you're being made gold in the maybe not. So it's true knew that being master the couple to master of the carrots of that in between level that certainly would be okay. But still didn't know for sure whether or not a cotton is going to be considered a good and that we would assume that his master would be a good master of and it's for that reason it was meaning if it's a bigger than then if it's it would only work but so the two of you are the same because knows when you're going to this is the way it is. His whole subject is when you're going to by the way just sheds a little more light on the to of the right by cutting over come up with so many cases. Yeah, but you also have to come up with a case now where you're going to cool, right? You have to come up with a case to cool because at the end of the day in essence that was really rub your hand inside either way what we just learned is the first version of this discussion. You knew this was coming. But not last night at a whole different the after mentioned. He said the other one and he said by the that's a pretty obvious difference between this version and the previous version. In the previous version, the question was the issue of over here it's again it's the same he turned and he told him he said, why are you only clearing in the why didn't you also clear whether he said, I know probably why coming by later tonight and then I What's going on over here? So, in the first version, what is the question was where it's not some in between my cell. Where it's that in between state, but in the second version says the said, let me tell you let me tell you what the child was. The other his child was whether we say that a cotton is is [snorts] it or is it only meaning could we assume on his that his is good only like in the case of the mission or do we assume even in a case where it's going to be cooler says the partially and he was this version we actually have the resolution that is the other even the other it doesn't have the other other so always doesn't matter if it's the other and the other always don't even have to be the other other what about if it's in that in between stage so in the second edition of the that wasn't the but at the same time there is a you You have to know what you do. My chef my cell. which by the way was one of the which was essentially the style of in the first list now of the Gamara. So the bottom line is not the easiest half a but none of you can have this big silo as it relates to a cotton and mashallah and again We start cotton and mashallah cotton as does cotton never has rotten and cotton is not about Kenyan. So I hope what's going on over here says between that and rotten and mashallah and cotton. By the way this is the second time we're speaking at we didn't even attempt to explain it. We'll leave that for the London. But the bottom line is says this is a mashallah and cotton. But the bottom line is had this grace of question and we have two new toys in what exactly the question was. In the first he was clearing whether a cotton is yes mashallah and what's mashallah and really his clear is coming from a mission where it's that a cotton is mashallah greatness. Yes mashallah greatness. So he wants to know what would be in the in between stage. And by the way knows for sure that we're going to say that in that in between stage he's going to be considered to be a yes mashallah. But he wants to know is that only is it even if I can give you an example. What would be an example? What's the deal of our it would be of a cotton cotton cotton and he's taking the animal from door into soften. So it's a little bit my stuff that he has to what's going on over here. Therefore we can give him the benefit of the doubt and we can give a not just the benefit of the doubt. We give his mashallah and as a result his mashallah would be considered a machshava, doesn't would be considered the shita of the mana in the second nusach. The iboya was actually not yesh l'machshava ein l'machshava, but rather yesh l'ma'aseh or ein l'ma'aseh. And it means ma'aseh ma'aseh ma'aseh, the real real ma'aseh. I isn't that a foolish mishna in Keilim? Maybe that's only mid'rabana, maybe it's not mid'oraisa. The main nafka mina if it's mid'rabana, then it only works for the chuma like in that mishna. If it's mid'oraisa, it would work l'kula as well. Either way, these were the two lishnas of what the shaila was. At the end of the day, in the second lishna the Gemara came out with the Shulchan Aruch. And the Shulchan Aruch was yesh l'ma'aseh filu mid'oraisa, ein l'machshava afilu mid'rabana. And if machshava is nikaris mitach ma'aseh, then mid'oraisa ein l'mid'rabana yesh l'ein. And if you look, there's a dalet and a hey and a vav next to these words in Gemara, which means that if you look at the Rambam's, the Rambam paskins this Shulchan Aruch that the Gemara lays out in the second lishna of this Gemara. That's a little bit of a postscript to this Gemara. Bo yi minei Shmuel me Rav Huna. Shmuel asked Rav Huna the following question. Minayin l'masis b'kodshim tzu pasul? How do you know that if somebody is masis b'kodshim that it's pasul? Meaning, if somebody shachted kodshim, but he didn't even realize he was shachting. So, what did he think he was doing? I don't know, he's playing with knives, right? Bad boy, but that's what he's doing. So, in the event that somebody would go and he'd be masis and it just turns out, right? He got it ricocheted like the case that we had at the end of yesterday's daf. So, how do you know it's pasul? Sh'ne'emar v'shachat es ben habakar. And we learn from there sh'tei sh'chitos l'shem bakar. Now, this by the way is in contrast to what we saw in the end of yesterday's daf, where there was a machlokes from Nosson and the chachamim where the sh'chita is b'kavana sh'chita is l'oi b'kavana. And the Gemara therefore said that there is an idea according to Rav Nosson that if someone is Zores, Shachtin, when they are because of the Halacha of Shachta, it would be okay. That's all true when you learn in Halacha. But when you're dealing with Katchum over here, Katchum is different than it's based on the Limud of the Shacha that's been Aboker. Should they Shchit the same Boker? Am I allowed? So, the Gemara says that when Rav Puna told this to Shmuel, he said, "Zubi Adeino he." Now, we knew this. He said, "I would ask you the Shilo." What I wanted to know was like, "How come you know it's How do you know it's Ma'akiv?" And he told him back, "I'll tell you how you know it's Ma'akiv." Right? In order for it to be Ma'akiv, you have to have it a second time. Because in Katchum, that's the rule. Whatever it says once is Halacha Whatever it says twice is Shina Kasa Ma'akiv. So, he told him it says L'tzonchem Tizbachu. And we learn from there L'da'atchem Zvuchu that it has to be L'da'at. So, you have Sa'iv the Shacha that's been Aboker Shchit the same Boker. And Sa'iv the Tzonchem Tizbachu L'da'atchem Zvuchu. From there you learn Shina Kasa Ma'akiv that this is going to be Ma'akiv. This Gemara sounds familiar? It's the last Gemara in Maseches Menachos. For those that were Masaya in Maseches Menachos, these were literally the words that were mentioned in the Hadran. We said we were going to speak out Shitas Rashi, but we said Bli Neder, we're going to go by this. The Mishna there Shchitas Oved Kochavim Neveila U'metamei B'masa. A one-line Mishna. This is a Mishna that's Me'uta Kamos, but it's Ro'i For Echos. One of the Mishnayos in Maseches Chulin. So, Shchitas Oved Kochavim The Shchita of a [ __ ] is Neveila. U'metamei B'masa. And that's just there. That's the real deal Neveila. A Neveila is Metamei B'masa. This is somebody carries a Neveila even if he didn't touch it, the Halacha is he is going to become Tamei. That's one of the uniquenesses of uh uh Neveila and it's Tuma. When a [ __ ] Shacht, it's not just Neveila with regards to you can't eat it, but it's Metamei B'masa. It has the whole Tuma of the Torah component with the Ganza Chaim that it not only if somebody touches it, but it's something that's going to be so again the message to begin how cool is that we will write we will write a ton of people we will write a we were my we were my mom the mission itself says as long as it's a lot of people going to be so the mission that we have over They have that is related to a guy I hope this ends the conversation she not just a lot of people in the Israel it sounds like that when a guy it's okay what could be worse than a lot of people tell you what it could be even a lot of >> [snorts] >> people who must be a lot of people that holds that it's not a lot of people all it is is a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people a lot of people and there's no question it's that all it is is and it's not but I think the reason the mission is wasn't just to tell me that it's going to wanted to tell me another I think we just said so saying that I think there's another day to be had over here and that is that is emphasis on carbon but the man but if you would have a year that's a man and he's a man that went ahead and he so then already we would assume that he and then it wouldn't just be but rather then it would be says the the way I'm is learning the mission that the mission is saying as opposed to men that's even tell me that this supports something that's in a price that men love is considered to be meaning it's people his bread you know his wine is part of his different kinds of men these are like the sorcerers bad stuff pay rise of his pay rise fall is obviously not you know that is say that even his children are why would his children be because we don't even trust his wife that she is uh not being with the holds that we throw the whole book at him right his is the of passes his wine is his kinds of men his but it doesn't hold of but that the bottom of so what is the hold because he's not going to be his wife and And it's for that reason mafka zo'ev not. But the bottom line is this is clearly tanina lo achad u tanin rabbonon. And that is that shchitas min is la avodas kochavim. So the first part of the Gemara's analysis of this short Mishnah was the Mishnah said shchitas over kochavim nevelah. Nevelah in issur hana'ah and there were two girsos in what the takeaway is. One takeaway is the like Rabi Eliezer. You say that all it is is nevelah. I mean you think nevelah is the worst thing in the world, believe it or not, it could get worse. It could be avodah zarah. And what the Mishnah is saying is almost like with a ko'ach detera. Shchitas over kochavim all it is is nevelah. Right, that's like the the nusach how you have to say the niggun. But what the Mishnah is essentially telling me is like Rabi Eliezer. The second the second version the second version of what the diuk is is that shchitas over kochavim nevelah. Yeah, for sure and not ossur b'hana'ah. But there's another emphasis over it and that is shchitas over kochavim is only nevelah. But when it comes to a min then already it's going to be much more chomer and that's something that's mefuresh in a braisa. I saw that the rishonim say what's the basis for the diuk? Right, it sounds like even getting into a nuanced way a little bit of a diuk. Because really grammatically speaking what the Mishnah should have said was shchitas over kochavim pesulah. Right? Just to be clear. Shchitas over kochavim is describing the verb, the action. We're describing the shchitah. A shchitah is not nevelah. The possul that comes about from a bad shchitah would be nevelah. Shchitas over kochavim really should have been pesulah. Now what's pesulah? Ask your local rabbi. But what it should have said was pesulah. So really the whole word nevelah is out of place. And it's for that reason it was much to the amora'im that there's some diuk that's meant to be had over here. And the diuk that's meant to be had is that it's only nevelah as opposed to the crave like and remind me time is I'm not even happy with that because maybe like we said what you're going to rearrange the words to tell me not that why would you think that that's the law I think what you want you to know is is that it's that's that's a very important that's already something that is going to be worse than that that's going to be relevant that in the oven that shaft all of this is the veil is that but at the same time in the event that you have you throw that's a mint that shaft at that point it's going to be more common than that it's going to be treated like avoid the Zara freak the Gamora every single over the oven isn't he the very least like a sick man I mean you think he's even a better man so if a man is more common than an over the oven and every over the oven is a man so then it doesn't make any sense so how could it be that over the oven is only nevelah she doesn't mean it's worse than that but every over the oven we should be maybe he's a man I'm not I'm in meaning but almost over the oven there's no thing as a man when it comes to over the oven what what cuz you know the echo it says the Gamora ain't more ain't over the oven meaning most of the over the oven were not meaning them and being they have a right to go see who so for that reason you don't have to worry about this says the Gamora what does that even mean what over the oven were not meaning them so I'm not going to over the oven man said that the were not real over the oven meaning that we say with them. There was a Sadaris in the world of Azara. Yeah, listen, they grew up in certain ways and they just followed in the footsteps of their illustrious Yichus. But the bottom line is but the bottom line is is that they weren't real of the Azara and as a result this whole concept of men is really something that's only it's not an if you had an you knew was a men so yeah then he's talking But as it relates to a Kahana of that in of itself is not a Kahana. In meaning there's no such thing as the concept of a men when it comes to the says the with regards to what discuss do you mean with regards to Hashashina the people they can't be you can't tell me there's no such concept of a men when it comes to you want to tell me tell me no that I have no problem with because because it's only saying be a day but to tell me that the even if you know for sure he's a he's a fighting a men you tell me he's not a men it doesn't make any sense if you show could be a men why can't a guy be a men can't be Ella says the maybe I read it maybe it's so this is old school of course but once upon a time there was a concept that if somebody saw a men this is a real trouble maker and you had an opportunity to be married him into the bar so this was something that you were allowed to do this is one of the sensor but the bottom line is there was a concept of of my reading so maybe that's what he was saying over in the name of the great in meaning but you don't have the my reading which is meaning but you can't say this only you can't be you can't be if you show me you'll be married then for sure you'd have a my reading right the life of the year is so there's no question in the world that can't be the I'm going to tell you I'm going to tell you what it means like have [snorts] a man carbon it's to accept a carbon from it says Adam by the way if these next few lines of sound familiar we just learned them together a few days ago so Adam from we learn that is not allowed to bring a carbon right this is right in the beginning of talking about and it says can't bring a fact that it says me can we also learn we make this distinction between it comes to we are already we don't make that distinction says me my maybe what the policy is saying is me is well me cabell voice cabell from a year you should take from the good ones not the bad ones right to the moment cloud cloud when it comes to take it all versus that can't be time to it's the best way to we learn from there that is to be that we know that is allowed to bring another we know he's allowed to bring a carbon so can't be that me can is coming to tell me that we know is in we know okay so what's the point in the parish of it says me can and here we have a mirror the moment but in the parish of we don't have that and that's how we know that moment can't bring a carbon but in moment can bring a carbon and that's where men when he said he didn't mean with regards to that the greatest of he didn't mean it with regards to my reading of things to be married just like it's my reading for it's going to be my reading of him as well rather what did he mean what he was referring to what he was referring to was in the event that a man over wants to bring a carbon whereas there's a din that we don't take a carbon from the assault that's a man but from the man him already we would take one more and then master. The Schlitter of is in a veil and not only is it in a veil it's even master of the veil of the master. What's the if it's in a veil of course it's master of my rubber said I'll tell you what the point is zoom at the master. What the mission is saying is is in a veil and master and tough this Schlitter of the carbon which is only in a veil. That is also only the master of the there's another Schlitter she feel the oil that's more time it's the is the cravers of is the cravers of in the way that somebody would share there would be even more calmer than it would even be by the cravers of this car that the cravers of is oil is the cravers of said the minute will bring what then the cravers of said and what exactly his source was. But the bottom line is as the they you want to know why the mission is said it's coming to teach me that zoom at the time of the master as opposed to the cravers of the time of the time of the master over there it's actually going to be the oil it could have been some said this is the way you have to read the mission zoom at the time of the master. This is the time of the master of the that's also the master of the oil. So the way you read the mission is whenever a it's always only the time of the master not of the time of the time of the master as opposed to the Schlitter of the moment let's say a words the same of avoid the no Schlitter of the carbon think in all the situations it's only only going to be metama bemassa, and the reason is because it's never metama be I didn't say or say that what? That the of the of the of them is metama be oil? Yes. With the like however, we're going to like so who's this right the mission is either or not but the end of the day what did say? So this is a of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of and Mason Mason just like Mason oil, right? After of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the but the bottom line is the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of it's not just going to be the veil. It's actually going to be awesome. It's going to be more common. Additionally, when you talk about the tumor, not necessarily going to be to me only to miss master as common as to miss master is, but could be it's going to be even more common than that. It's going to be to miss soil. That's the sheet of Rabbi and the Sarah. Exhale. So, the latter part of the death discusses the sheet of an over and the mission says sheet of over and the veil of and the matter of the master meaning in the world of hackle shake and all the people that are in Israel. And the other day I had and maybe there's a benefit of this at the very least I got to learn with all God of but the over of them is in a class of his own. The over of them is excluded after they got sheet of over of them the veil. It's one stick the veil maybe even worse than the veil of in the socket. What the matter didn't discuss at all is what is the source? What is the matter that sheet of over of them the veil? This is a very very big powerful line and it's not the veil what the sheet of them this is. The over of them is considered about us. He's considered about the veil. It's not like sheet of them has to be the sheet of them where you can maybe still to the socket of an over of them when he does things he operates and he does it at night of the night shift. So, really it's not clear from the matter why is it that sheet of over of them the veil? And being that the matter doesn't discuss it, so the matter of them in fashion in the places came and they suggested the matter of this. Twice this the matter of them in base it's the second last twice on the matter of the master of the matter of them says twice this the matter "Ushchita The extent that you would hold that Kuta Magaria that would mean a Kuta is a guy and a Shchita would be possul." K'mo Just like the Shchita of That's the Mishna Dalfim says Tosfos and what is the that the Shchita of an is possul? Because the possuk says V'achal'ta V'samach'ta with And from we learn right? You have to be in order to be able to eat and says Tosfos, "Oiseh who buys someone that is a Someone that needs in order to be the is the person that's able to As opposed to he's going to be excluded." Either way, the Tosfos is but Tosfos [laughter] says, "They want to is because it says the is it's because it says Shlomim V'achal'ta Sham Someone that needs to be a is considered to be a but somebody that doesn't need in order to be he's going to be excluded. In other words, because a guy is not in the parish of when the Torah said wasn't talking to him because he doesn't need to be a In order to be It's for that reason he's not someone that's able to shach. The Noda B'Yehuda in his very very first Tshuvas of Shailos U'Tshuvas Noda B'Yehuda Madura Tinyana, so this is Madura Tinyana, it's Orach Chaim, it's Siman Aleph. He was asked a shaila with regards to what apparently was an issue where there was a certain shtot where there were cotton that were writing tefillin. Cotton. And the question of is there any way to be these tefillin were presented to the this that you ask there's this the says that a cotton is not allowed to write film. And the reason a cotton is not allowed to write film is because it says in the film and then it says afterwards and we learn from there someone that's big big >> [snorts] >> but someone that's big is in fact the in his in the end of film says that even a cotton even such a cotton at the end of the day being that so right so he's still not a even such a cotton would not be allowed to write film. Similar to brings the and the says I want to say even more than that. I hold that even if the cotton was he already had a he's 13 years old but we don't know for sure whether he has even though we know there's a that once a boy turns 13 at that point he has but we're only for the we're not so even as cotton cotton would not be allowed to go and be able to write film. But the bottom line is that that in order to be a a so even you have to be a and being that a cotton is not a cotton even if he's even if the he's not going to be considered a he won't be able to write. So the in this asked the question he said that it's in the first that is why this is because it says and being that a not a vehicle it's for that reason he's not somebody that's allowed to say that also the first that a cotton in certain situations are allowed to be the if it's that a cotton is not considered about and why is it cotton not considered about because at the end of the day he doesn't have a gift to put on to And even if it's I don't care even if it's I'm not even going to be the he's not considered about so if he's not considered about for he shouldn't be considered about as it relates to the so that's the case that should be being that they're not should be also so how are you talking when it comes to cotton or be it because you got the as long as you know he's keeping the five and we find the going to be Okay but when it comes to there it's going to be because he's not about you'll tell me that this he's going to be about you can tell me a hundred reasons why you think there should be a between the cotton and the and they're all good reasons but at the end of the day there's a precedent you see that in a lot of the cotton is not about so if he's not about why is he about and at first glance said the this is a big question says the you would have is a fundamental difference between filling and between shrita and that is filling is a say as opposed to shrita is a say What's the so the says this is a that we have to have in our bones says in the way he this is in the of now that he why he said And we darshan it says lo as if it said lo and it's coming to say that not only is a godol not let it eat shrotsim but a godol is not even allowed to feed a cotton shrotsim. The gemara continues and the gemara says it says in the Torah kol nefesh mikem lo in the partial of achilas dam and we learn from that pasuk it's the pasuk actually says la to teach me that not only is a godol not allowed to eat dam but you're not allowed to feed a cotton dam either. A third braisa. It says in the Torah it's coming to teach me that not only is a kohen that's a godol not allowed to be metameh to a meis but he has to make sure that his child is not going to be metameh to a meis either. Says the gemara brings three braisas that bring three drashas. One in the partial of shrotsim, one in the partial of achilas dam, and the third time in the partial of tumas keinim that says that just like a godol is muzhar on those aveiros, so too a godol is not allowed to go and facilitate for a cotton to go and violate those aveiros as well. Says the that if you find this inyan of not giving a cotton an issur bi yad ayin with regards to these three aveiros, it's going to be true for all aveiros. Now is it going to tell me is that the case? We know there's a halacha shnei and the gemara says that even though there's a whether shnei or maybe but everyone's mighty when it's I was actually thinking that's not a kasha. You know why it's not a kasha? Because the gemara itself works through the exercise and the gemara says three why I needed the three Let's read the gemara inside. The gemara says meaning shrotsim. Had I only had the limit of shrotsim, I would have only learned from these two masos. It has a climber also be my shoe. I will die. It requires Yes, I would have told me something I will start to make my Yes, I would have told me something I would have told me something this room in I would have told me something I would have told me something worked out every single nuance of why you need all three. And if we need all three, that means it's not and therefore it's possible that if the Torah told me not once, not twice, but three times that there's a concept of the that means when it comes to every single in the world, you're going to have such a concept. So by you have the love of and it's not only it's it's also the love of and it's and by the way doesn't say anywhere in the Torah don't look for it. It says but it's known in the world as the love of so when it comes to loving over there you have the love of and being that you have the love of and that's not gay the cotton so the cotton is going to be considered a but when it comes to when it comes to over there there's no there's no and being that there's no over there so that's why a cotton goes down as being an inner so that relates to the of okay I showed you the cotton as long as it's a good and it's and you know that everything worked out this week is going to be a good week I don't you have to be a cotton is a why is the cotton cuz as opposed to when it comes to when it comes to the of filling over there there's no and mean that the cotton himself doesn't have any even only a myth with the rabbonim. So there you have the halacha that cotton can't write filling. The even if he's a but we don't know what he brought sites can't even be but at the end of the day that's why the cotton is considered and that is that the cotton is not going to be considered a bark shira. The truth is This night of Yehuda is commanded the shock is in it's similar it's cotton I'm just going to read the last two lines of the shock. The shock says the table the minute base in the shock of the club. And can't check mission I will the cotton but a cotton for sure must be surely also because you find the cotton is not even out again we just spoke out the tail end of the shock but if you take a look at the prima golden and on this shock right here so the prima golden you want to know what was going on in this shock the shock was bothered with this which essentially was the of the and that is that my we look at the guy as being in my snow we look at the cotton as yes being a and the carrots at the shock was saying was is because the cotton what do you talking about then you give them a the carrots is because it's a lot of and that would be the issue as well of why it's something that would only the guy but it's not something that would be the guy either. If you think about it what emerges from this night of Yehuda is really a double nifla. I think it's something that requires a little bit of worth meditating on for a minute. And that is the relationship between a cotton and mitzvah says is different than the relationship between a cotton and a mitzvah says. Right? Just to demonstrate. A cotton is cotton in a mitzvah. We know that. But at the same time, a cotton is included in the love and of the Torah. But he's not included in the essence of the Torah. He's included in the love and of the Torah and not that he himself is bound by that thou shall not this and thou shall not that. But when the Torah gave the love, the Torah included him. Meaning the people that are bound by the mishpat Torah were told that be careful and make sure this cotton, right? If you want to visualize it, who probably has no mind and doesn't have to take care of himself, you make sure that he doesn't do any love. But when it came to the essence, the cotton is not bound by essence, just like he's not bound by love. When it comes to love, there's a relationship that the cotton has with the love. When it comes to essence, you don't have that. And really at first glance, it's something that's hard to hear. I mean, essence and love. They're the two halves of the same coin. They make up the Torah. I have a year, right? I mean, so many ways we can go with this, but the Torah that is such a fundamental difference which is manifest here in the beginning of Torah that the [laughter] cotton is a person, but he's not a person of knowledge. How is that in this Torah that come about from this Torah? I don't know why would it be that way. Why would it be that the person of love is talking to the cotton or be it via the gallows. And [clears throat] the parish of Essendon, I found the Rubicon and the this is in Simian iron hay. It's a cotton hay. So he's talking a little bit about the the midst of Enoch. And he says I'll just read an excerpt. >> [snorts] >> He's talking about the man that holds cotton in the veil of the official. Going on in this Rubicon, but the punchline will be in the game. He says that reason of being my freshman cotton from Lavan, you would think should be in a game midst of say as well. And being that you find there's a day right to get application of what's the right to get application? Even if I'm not in the right to be my freshman, but for sure I'm in the right to not to feed him. So why is not in the right? This is in any element of a bond. This is my colleague says Rubicon. I heard to be my The mean midst of my cotton That's how you're allowed to do. And I would put a little and say I'm just going to be over. The first two of my daughter and Yana. I don't know the feeling. Why is there such a fundamental difference in terms of the cons relationship to a midst of say than it is his relationship to a midst of say. So maybe you can say maybe it's even partial. We keep on coming back to this, but I think it's good day and that is the Gamora and the sector of Zuma. The flame of the olive says When a person doesn't have a it's my time to miss life. How do I know that you know what the process says when they sit down with them? then it may send bomb out tick reaving it may send element eat hunt him. It's a my footage of a Gamora. It's a ton of the rubbish mall that when a person doesn't have air it causes Kim to have a life. Now we spoke about how the eco Indian of Kim to my life is by my whole of service. And that's how the way I can learn up places in and that throughout that says the head of the city of the community is referring the way to history of but read the Gamora. The Gamora says I've been come to me but it's not only true with regards to my whole of service. It's true for all of this. Now why is it you by my whole of service when it has see that it's you by my whole of service. They saw because that the way to make some of state by my whole of service. Over the last night Gamora is obvious and that is very come to me but we mentioned the last night of the show with the show after he brings his Gamora he says that you see from this Gamora show how we come to me but we show that every is come to me but we show that Kim is a lucky man who had they all meet this the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the says the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to make sure that the way to There are ramas in your days to see me pay off. Everyone knows this rama. The rama says a feel you Israel is the water in my serum. May neck is someone that's nursing a child should not eat the water in my serum, right? Do not eat the water in my serum if you're nursing a child. Why? Because you're nursing the child and you don't want to now impart the water in my serum onto the child. Break the shark. So, a woman that's nursing a child she should not eat the water in my serum. The rest of you, knock yourselves out. How could that be? So, the shark you know what's going on over here. It's talking about when you have a woman who's a holy So, she's allowed to go now and she's allowed to eat the water in my serum. But, if you're nursing a child don't do it. Find them a neck is someone else to do it if that's what the situation is. Don't a feel when I must have and the reason is because the sewers are going to go into the little baby and it's going to impact the baby. little bit. But, most everybody is my care from this that you seek local pit cutter. You see my foolish that this Indian of tip to my liver through even for a baby. That's the case. Meet the boy. About to say and I'll just say. If a cotton has no nexus to mix this because he's a cotton, he's not a bad ass and that's the case. So, why should I have to have a shark to an ass? Why should I have to have a shark to a ass? But, when it comes to a ass there's an element and that is a very famous and it's not only true for my ass. It's really true for all of areas and it's for that reason that's maybe maybe that's the reason when it comes to a various there's a lot of there's an Indian of making sure making sure that this child is going to stay pristine. Child can't fend for himself. He's a child. He's not a bad ass. And if he's going to go ahead and mistakenly it cuts him and him and he's going to eat them and the villa and he's going to eat all these things he's not supposed to eat. Well, my husband when he gets older because that that was given to him when he was born that [laughter] could do so that he got when he was Nemo etc. etc. That's all going to be diluted on some level. You didn't know it wasn't about that he wasn't Muslim but at the end of the day it's a very and it's for that reason we have this thing. You know, it's interesting. is [snorts] only the father's mitzvah. A mother has a mitzvah of right it's a mitzvah with the father. It's every single year you have to look out for this child to make sure that this child is not going to be you know another interesting phenomenon the that you find of you find by right two of the three that the brings in is by so so I found another Rashi. This is in Shmini. The classic This Indian appears more than you realize and it appears disproportionately by the because and that Indian you see was said in the because I can see that even though it's true by every but the that you find could be this Indian is related to the second [laughter] thing of every right every is but there's also that that's true by that's not true by that we know is true by to Amish the cutting can't be on the he's not about that he's not on the mitzvah but at the very least we have an obligation to make sure that our children are going to remain with the higher that's a mitzvah we have and that's a mitzvah now because the I don't even know he's not mitzvah so he was Mitzvah be Mitzvah also. What's the difference? The reason is is because if he doesn't do an essay nothing happened. But if he does a essay that is very much very much going to put this child behind the eight ball and it's for that reason we have a responsibility and an obligation to make sure that our children will remain holy and pure. It could be that's the Indian of the children. But the bottom line is what's the takeaway of this rate? It's a fest right? But Mitzvah level fest. But I think at the same time the takeaway is a cotton has to be a cotton has to be kind of carrots said it is but really what lies underneath it is is that the relationship that the cotton has with Mitzvah is fundamentally different than the relationship that he has with Mitzvah and the husband is the Gamora in Yuma. That all the cotton used to explain the Indian of the cotton used to explain the Indian of