Chulin 2

Today's stuff is Hulin Daf Beis. And we are as the Siyum in the beginning of a new Masechta, Maseches Hulin. So, Maseches Hulin, as its name implies, deals with laws related to Hulin. So, in contrast to the previous two Masechtas that we learned, Zevachim and Menachos, which dealt with the laws of Korban, Maseches Hulin, which ironically isn't Seder Korban, doesn't deal with Korban. Rather, it deals with Hulin. Now, from the name of the Masechta, you would almost think that the topics discussed are going to be all things related to Hulin. The truth is, the Masechta is a lot more focused than that. In fact, the nosei of the Masechta are beheimos that are Hulin. So, that whereas Masechtas Zevachim specifically dealt with the halachos of beheimos that were Korban, Maseches Hulin is the contrast. It deals with the halachos of beheimos that are Hulin. In fact, many of the Rishonim scattered throughout Shas, when they would refer to Maseches Hulin, they would refer to it as Maseches Shechitas Hulin. Somehow, along the way, Shechitas Hulin became the shorter version of Hulin. The word Hulin is a little bit misleading. Shechitas Hulin is a more descriptive way of describing what exactly it is the Masechta deals with, and that is it's the laws of Shechitas Hulin. So, what exactly is Shechita? Everybody knows. Every Jew in the world knows that there's something called food that's kosher, and there's something called food that's not kosher. As it relates to meat, even if the animal whose meat you're eating is kosher, in the event that it wasn't prepared in the appropriate way, it would be deemed to be considered not kosher. How do you prepare meat in the kosher way? The first thing you have to do is you have to shacht it. The makor to the idea of shchita is a possuk in the Torah. It's in Sefer Devarim, it's Parshas Vayikra, it's perek Yud Beis, it's possuk chof alef. The possuk says, in the event that you're a Yid and you're going to be living in Eretz Yisrael, but you're going to be far away from the Makom Hamikdash, and you're going to want to eat meat, says the Torah, that's okay. However, you should shacht from the bakar and the tzon, the bakar and the tzon that Hakadosh Baruch Hu so graciously gave you, and you should shacht it k'asher tzivicha, in the way that I commanded you to shacht it. Vi'achalta b'sarecha, and if you do that, assuming the animal was not kochein, it's chulin and you'll be able to eat it b'sarecha, b'chol avas nafsh'cha, wherever you desire to eat it. So, the Torah says that in the event that a person wants to eat bakar and tzon, v'zavachta, you have to do a z'vicha k'asher tzivicha, in the way that I commanded you to do it. There's a very interesting Gemara that we'll get to b'ezras Hashem in Maseches Chulin daf chof ches amud alef, where Rebbe said that if you go back in the Torah and you look at all that were mentioned up until Devarim perek Yud Beis, there's nowhere that the Torah commands the Yid and instructs him exactly how to do a shchita. And Rebbe said, this word k'asher tzivicha is a remez in the Torah shebiksav to the Torah sheba'al peh. Advar matikin, but the point is that k'asher tzivicha must be some oral tradition, and what Hakadosh Baruch Hu or Moshe Rabbeinu or Moshe Rabbenu is telling Klal Yisrael is that you remember I told what I mean, what I mean, what I mean, what I mean, what I mean, what that is the source, it's the source of this concept of even if I'm eating meat from a kosher animal, the only time it's considered kosher is in the event that I do a Now what happens if somebody eats kosher meat? It's from a cow, it's from an animal that you're allowed to eat from. However, he didn't do a So number one, he violated the law of He was over this Now what exactly is from a perspective? That's something that would be the topic of the rate of today's talk. But in addition to the fact that he violated the law of He also was over a What So it depends. In the event that the animal was alive, then he's over the law of Every is unique that not only is it a law, but it's actually one of the In fact, it's the only one of the that relate to But the bottom line is Every is a very, very big law. The in refers to it as a because it's not only a law, it's a And again, the only one of the The only type of that relates even to somebody that's not a In the event that the animal wasn't alive, but you didn't do a So you weren't over cuz it's not It's an But at the same time, the person's over there isn't available, and available is a herb issue in the Torah. It's a lo saseh, it's a chiyuv malkus. The point is that if somebody would go ahead and he would eat meat without doing a shchitah, number one, he would violate the chiyuv to do a shchitah. What exactly is that? We're going to see. In addition to that, he's also over a lav. What lav? It depends if the animal's alive, he's over there, he's over min achay. And if the animal is not alive, then he's going to be over the issur of avel. Now, what exactly is shchitah? What's the definition of shchitah? So, Chazal, throughout Maseches Chullin, Rashi brings in the Chumash, everybody knows this. Shchitah [snorts] means that the animal was killed by severing its two simanim, the kanah and the veshet, in English, the trachea and the esophagus, respectively. Now, the animal does not need that all of its simanim was severed, rov of the simanim are enough. In fact, one of the greatest sugiyos of rov are in Maseches Chullin, because really, the whole inyan of how you do a shchitah is rov of the simanim. So, the word rov is going to come up again and again and again. So, number one, the way shchitah has to happen is by the severing of the kanah and the veshet. It's interesting, the Ramban on the Torah, in that pasuk that we mentioned before, in Mishneh Torah, Parshas Re'eh, perek beis, pasuk aleph, says that he believes that the idea that shchitah has to be al yedei severing the simanim, that's not Torah sheba'al peh. He said that's the teitch of the word shchitah, ein chok. But the Ramban says that you find different words that are used to describe killing. One of the words that are used is shchitah, also referred to as zvicha. Those are both leshonos in the Torah. And the Ramban says they mean the same thing, and they both mean killing in this way. So, shchitah's not the tight, you shchacht it. We have a mesorah that it has to be in this way. That is the definition of shchita. So, in the event that it wasn't base simanim, it's hariga, it's retzicha, it's some other synonym thereof. But, shchita is by definition zakor um in the event that you do this. But, there are other halachas that govern the halacha shchita. You think? Most notably, however, and this is something that needs to be spoken out already in the hakdamah to the mesechta. Most notably, there are five halachas l'Moshe miSinai. We'll see that three of them are already going to make a cameo appearance in chulin daf beis amud beis. So, what are these five halachas l'Moshe miSinai? So, it's helpful to be a shochet, but for the rest of us, just describe the words. Number one, shi'uy. So, when the shochet does the shchita, he's not allowed to pause for too long a period of time in the middle of the ma'aseh shchita. So, shi'uy means you're stopping, you're pausing. That's something that one is not allowed to do. The second one is derasa. So, derasa means that when the shochet severs, he has to be much maybe. There's a certain motion that he has to use. In the event that he presses against the he kills the animal, even if he got the base simanim and he didn't pause, that in and of itself is not going to be okay. The third [laughter] is chalada. Chalada is maybe the most technical, but chalada is where the shochet takes the sakin and he sticks [snorts] it, he pokes it into the animal in between the two simanim, between the kon and the veshet, and then he's much maybe, and he doesn't do a shi'uy, but that's where the starting point was, that also is not going to be okay. The fourth is what's called hagruma. Hagruma is where the shochet puts the knife or kills the animal just in the wrong place. So, it's not in the tzavar of the beheima. That's obviously not okay. And then finally, ikur. Ikur is where there is a gun in the sakan. So, we know one of the things that the shochet has to do is he has to be bodek the sakan, be bodek the chalaf. So, in the event that he wasn't bodek it, then there was a little bit of a nick inside the knife. So, then what we are concerned is that when he did the shchita, it could be he nicked the kana and the vashet before he severed it in the proper way. That too is going to be a problem. Again, this is technical and it's more negeya to technicians. But, the bottom line is what we need to know is conceptually there are these five halachas l'Moshe miSinai that govern. So, even in the event that the shochet went ahead and he shachted the two simanim, he didn't just put a bullet through the eyes of the animal, but at the same time he has to conform with shiya, with derasa, chalada, hagruma, and ikur. So, the primary topic of meseches chullin is, without a question, shchitas chullin. In fact, that's why many of the rishonim refer to it as shchitas [snorts] chullin. But, as we're going to see, the topic is not going to just be the basic laws of shchita, but it's it's going to be rather all-encompassing. In fact, it's almost as if the topic of the meseches is, a person wants to sit down and he wants to eat a piece of meat, what do I need to Just give me all the halachas I need. Literally, [snorts] from the time that I identify the animal to shachting it, to cooking it, to making sure that it is fine until it's literally sitting on my plate with my fork and my knife and my little shmatke inside my shirt so I don't get dirty, and literally with my glass of wine. Everything. So, it's from the barn till my mouth, those are the halachas that are discussed in meseches chullin. Right, just to bring it out a little bit. We'll see that the meseches is going to discuss the basic laws of shchita, obviously. The laws of treifus, that plays a a huge role. There's a lot of the Torah I say to be that's a lot of the Torah that's that's obviously going to be discussed. There's a There's something called a Ben in the event that somebody an animal female animal and the animal had a fetus that fetus one is allowed to eat without a because we say the of the mother worked for the child the infamous Ben is featured very prominently. The whole thing that deals with the The laws of is very critical to the laws of because one of the things that the has to do he also has to be right you have to remove certain parts of the kosher animal that are not kosher. The third in the Torah it traces itself back to in this that one is not allowed to eat. All these things are going to be discussed. What exactly is even a kosher animal? Right? How do you know when an animal is kosher not kosher? So we know a little bit I hope but all the are discussed over here. By the way not just kosher animals what about what about fish? What about grasshoppers? Right? Grasshoppers could be kosher. So [snorts] all of these are going to be discussed. What happens if a person has kosher meat but it was with the meat that's not kosher? What happens if someone has kosher meat and it was inside of with both of the the of and are synonymous with the of the of the of the If you never open the you might think that's the only topic of the of the of the of the That's something that's going to be featured very prominently. The These were that were part and parcel of a that had to be given to the There's a whole the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the in the back end of the Masada. Even the laws of Shiloach and by of of is discussed over here Masada school. The bottom line is everything that's in any way associated with the preparation of flesh that's cooling is featured very prominently here in the Masada. This is not a Masada that's my stuff vegans and vegetarians. This is very very much a fleshy Masada and without further ado we begin one of the every Masada is as a hey idea in front of it but definitely once upon a time if you were a mention some fish you had a no Masada school and so really one of the epic epic Masada is in Chas. Masada school everybody is allowed to shaft and when they shaft their shaft is going to be a valid shaft you have to read the fine print so how can shaft and sounds very inclusive but at the same time the shaft and the cotton who are excluded from so many in the terror they're excluded from the laws of shaft as well and the mission gives a reason because we're concerned that maybe they're not going to get the shaft the right we said is very technical process number one you have to make sure you get rid of it to see my name number two you have to confirm with the five so we're concerned that maybe the not going to get it right it's for that reason they're excluded however the cool on the shaft in the event sounds like the cotton would shaft although we'll see a lot more about that in the topic of the first few that here and others are watching them shaft and it's going to be the reason is because if you saw that they didn't violate the I love guys the motion you see so then you know that everything is okay bottom line is the mission opens up speaking in very broad strokes which he does with me here and so So the begins with a discussing the first line of the line. The words sound like that everyone's allowed to the however then it says if the so it was or is it only which is the other. explains this tomorrow. a little bit better and I think we need to speak out this line. And that is it's possible there are people that are allowed to kill. There's an idea called in the so obviously there's someone out there that's allowed to kill. And I can hear that there are those that maybe not supposed to kill. But at the same time and kill. The question is it sounds like the same person that we're saying is the same person that is only the other. What does that mean? So the background is that we know wherever it says the word in a or in a it's always coming to be something. That means [laughter] is telling me that there's somebody in the world that I would have thought maybe is not allowed to but there's that person is included in this line. Even that person. So when the says what the saying is not just there are people that can kill. There's someone that's included in this line and that person is allowed to and then the says that same guy that was just included >> [snorts] >> in is only so there's A SPIRIT THAT PERSON who's included in the Hakol is that person shochet or is that person only shchitas b'dieved? And that was the Gemara's kasha. So the Gemara says Rav Papa turned to Rav Ashi and he told him, "I don't understand the kasha. The first kasha of Maseches Chullin is Hakol shochet l'chatchila or shchitas b'dieved? Whoever that Hakol is, it seems to be a stira. Is he allowed to shochet l'chatchila or is he only allowed to shochet b'dieved? It's assuming a huge premise. And that is Hakol shochet means l'chatchila. Is that true? The kol Hakol l'chatchila. Every time it says the word Hakol does it mean l'chatchila? Let me ask Let me ask you a kasha. The first Mishna in Maseches Temura says Hakol mamirin echad anashim v'echad anashin. Everyone is allowed to be mamer, side the men, side the women. Now, the Hakol over there Rashi says is coming to be mamer even a yoires. So, coming off of the heels of Zevachim Menachos, so we're familiar with what Temura is and the idea of a yoires in kodshim. But I point of the Mishna is that not only is there a parsha in the Torah of Temura, but even a yoires, somebody that yoires an animal from his father, his mother, whomever, there's an idea that he can go ahead and he can do a Temura. Now, are you going to tell me Hakol nami do a l'chatchila? When it says Hakol mamirin it means that a yoires is allowed to go do Temura l'chatchila. But see, it's a pasuk in the Torah. It says "L'chatchila l'chatchila l'chatchila." Rav Papa there's two lavin in the Torah, lavin [clears throat] for which there is malkus that one is over in the event that he does the issur Temura. So if that's the case, you're assuming a kasha told Rav Papa Rav Papa Rav Ashi. The first kasha in Maseches Chullin Hakol shochet whoever we're being mamer from Hakol is l'chatchila or shchitas no, it's only kasha b'dieved. As if Hakol means l'chatchila. I have another Maseches that it up with the word message tomorrow I call me mirror and for sure it's not because it's an incentive to go ahead and do tomorrow what is a mirror mean means but the evidence okay so I mean the evidence but the evidence is not telling time don't start to that mission message tomorrow because there the mission says that even though I'm opening up with the words hackle which would seem to suggest that it's but you should know it's not the mission says the mission says that even though I'm telling you hackle don't think it's a lotion moment in the event that you went out and you did the tomorrow but so you can and you're going to get 40 twice as much as by the way it's not 40 it's 80 because you're over to 11 but the bottom line is don't bring me a riot from because they don't mention it says that I call over there means with the evidence anything that mission is a riot that really means because of that moment with the evidence so why does the mission have to say lawyer show the mission you already told me that he's not allowed to because you said which means with the evidence so if anything if anything really is actually a riot to the max of the that you see that I call really means over there it doesn't mean because the mission went and the mission expressed that it's not really and our mission didn't express that it's not really and if that's the case we have our cash or still go straight to which doesn't share but the mission says it wasn't finished he went to he says I hear okay tomorrow is not a riot if anything it's a riot to you but you have to have another cash or a cash or from the first mission in so the mission also begins with the word hackle so a little bit of a background what exactly is again we're coming off the heels of culture so we know a little bit Erchin is. Erchin is when somebody says, "I'm taking upon myself a pledge to give money to the Beis Hamikdash. How much money? I want to give the value, the Erchin of a certain person. If a person makes such a pledge, and he uses the magic word Erchin, the way we determine how much money he has to give to the Mikdash is not based on what the real value of that person is. Now, you're going to tell me, "How do you know the value of a person?" So, of course, a person doesn't really have a value that we can shots up. Person, just based on the potential that he has, is built the built the tachlis. But, at the same time, once upon a time, before Lincoln freed the slaves, there was a concept of a person having a value in the slave market. But, the Torah says it's not the way you go about determining how much money this person now wants hakdish, but rather there's a list price that the Torah gives, depending on the gender of the person, the age of the person. That's going to determine how much money he's going to have to give. Interesting. In the event that a person would say that I don't want to give the Erchin of Ploni, but I want to just give the value, not using the word Erchin, whatever that person is worth as an eved in the shuk, that's what I want to give. So, [snorts] then, in a chanam, you'd have to go to the shuk, and you'd have to speak to the mevinim, and you would come up with some independent assessment of how much the person is worth. And regardless of what it says in the Torah in that price list, no, whatever this person could be sold for today, whatever the comparables are, that's how much money this person would be obligated Anyway, so Maseches Erchin begins with a general halacha related to Erchin and nedarim. Nedarim in this context means the neder version of the Erchin, where he didn't say the word Erchin, so he gives the exact predetermined amount that's mentioned in the Torah. But, rather then, we would have to go and figure out how much this person could be sold for in the shuk. Anyway, so the Mishnah says, "A chol Erchin, ben Erchin, any person could be a me'erach." A me'erach means he could be Messiah himself when any person could be the subject of so if somebody would say I want to give the of that person doesn't matter who he is any single person can be included in the neither of any the same as true for the nether component any person can take upon himself the nether than any any person can be the subject now we said how always is coming to be right so what do we be with these so actually says I come says it's coming to be a move list of you would think only a God will could take upon himself and come out even a move list of a call of any is also coming to be something again calling the of any says it's coming to be a move move you would think has no value come out a call of any neither of any the bottom line is are you going to tell me that the move list of WHO'S THE OF ANY HE'S THE NEITHER HE'S ALLOWED TO go ahead and make any of the of any Could you say that [ __ ] say this is 101 the says in the of if you're going to stop making the you won't do what is that imply it implies that if you continue making the you're going to continue doing and if this is not enough there's a in the fixed said in we should better not to make a nether than to make a nether and not pay it in the 2000 that's better don't make a nether and make a nether and not fulfill the nether I could have told you that but in the we have a discussion in the what would be if one person didn't make a nether the other person made a nether and he paid the nether is it better not to make the nether or is it better to make the nether and pay my is to get 2000 of any the best is meaning better than not paying and better than even yet paying is just not even uh starting not making a nether at all. this is a call The best thing is to be noider of that's a mighty gazach. But you just have to make sure you're mashalim. We should This is in the Nedarim 101. Even Rabbi Yehuda who said he only said it by omer. I raise you. In the event that a person takes upon himself an edava. I will What do you mean by nadar? Loy. Then na. What's the difference between a nadar and an edava? This again is kasha 101, but actually the last sugiyah that we learned together in maseches Menachos. And that is if somebody says I raise a lie so he's taking upon himself a general obligation. Which means you have to do this literally come rain or shine. You have to figure out a way [laughter] to do it. If somebody says I raise you, if a person only takes upon himself an edava so then his obligation is limited to the specific animal that he designated. And if something ever happened to that animal at that point he would be off the hook. In the vernacular when a person says I raise a lie there's a chiyuv achrayis. When a person says I raise you there's no chiyuv achrayis. When a person says I raise a lie it's chalah obligation chaf to the gavra on the places of the match. When a person says I raise you it's chalah on the cheftza. It's only on that omer masuyim. The bottom is Rabbi Yehuda says I don't have such a problem with a person making an edava. An edava to be negligible in that is not It's this animal. Your chiyuv is something might even happen to the animal which would absolve you based on an onus. It doesn't bother me so much if you make an edava. What I don't like is when you say I raise a lie. That's a huge chiyuv achrayis that I'm not so sure you're going to be open to. But here's the bottom line. The bottom line is when it comes to making nedarim. Could you make a nadar or not? Number one Number two And if Is it or is it tight to be or Michelle Owen? The only regarding the dove that you would have to say the one who said with regards to but when it comes to another even agree. Certainly or in other words, everybody agrees that you have to say that. See you see it's not like you have to have to make another. If a person makes another and he says it's called in that. If a person makes another and he says it's called in that. You don't make another. You don't make another. That's all different. That's what you would have to say right here. But the point is good guys don't make another. If that's the case that you would have to say that. How could you say that? Whoever would be able to say that? You can't say that. It sounds like not that person can only do it. But yeah, but it presupposes that in grammar you say that. That's what you would have to say. Number one, okay, you have to say that. If anything is really does that you would have to say that. But what about that you would have to say that? You can't be able to say that. A person is allowed to be able to say that. A person is allowed to be able to say that. You are not allowed to be able to say that. You are not allowed to be able to say that. You are not allowed to be able to say that. You are not allowed to be able to say that. You are not allowed to be able to say that. That's what you would have to say. And the component of is similar to it's not because when a person has to say that then it's something that he has to say that. It's something that and it's for that reason it's something that you would have to say that. simply because he's concerned that maybe it'll be and maybe ultimately he's not going to be if everything and the counterpart would be like then it wouldn't be because then you could say that who holds that in certain instances it's okay for states the obvious and that is that are really similar to by if it's similar to according to nobody you're allowed to do and still it says the word so says Rashi. I can't understand the share of this great I don't understand the I have a precedent from a mission that the word means means for sure so look at and he told him to call so you mean to tell me that the word is not means that you're feeling you're feeling is means well I can't believe it right you're going to tell me that that's not that's for sure so it's not optional like oh but the other if you sit in the you did a but the other you would sit it's okay no of course that's so come on I can't believe no it says over there the word means [laughter] you're obligated to do it I can't believe but in our mission says I can't believe right it doesn't say the word and we asked him what about this mission everyone's allowed to do so on the so the so I said men say women now if you're holding from the end of women are allowed to do so the first mission women are not allowed to do in fact there's two in that women are not allowed to do and that's why every in the takes out the words of but the bottom line is I can't believe Not okay now the love of God killer. You going to tell me that what that that's uh Not that it's only the right so for sure over there so thought of telling me from the mission in this mission for sure so I don't understand I know the maker called the other. I'm not telling you that I call means video of it. I'm telling you I call can mean video of it. I think it can mean it can mean video of it, right? My point that I was trying to make is you know why did you assume that the word means that and you had a cashier and you maybe means and it shouldn't be a is crystal ball working it through together in real time. What he was asking at the end of the mission who is only so whatever is this from could he do it but this cash is predicated on an assumption that our mission means that told sometimes I call means I know that but sometimes it means video of it like I call my then I and if that's the case why would you assume that I call the mission to ask a question. Wouldn't it be more reasonable to assume that I call means video of it and like this everything is going to be okay. Something I said on my way. I turned to explain myself. What was bothering me was the next words meaning the other that call in an almost counterintuitive way said. that from the fact that the Mishnah said that was my Raya that why cuz the cuz if you're going to tell me that Shrek then is the ever why do you have to tell me the word ever twice so said Rav Ashi I know that the word in a vacuum can mean either or and I would for sure prefer to define it in a way that everything is going to be good rather than define it in a way where there's going to be problems. But in this case if Shrek then means then why does it say Shrek then say that? Which also means it's redundant. And it can't be the Mishnah who speaks is going to open a and literally say the same thing twice. It has no there's no precedence for anything like this. Must be means which means and if that's the case I have a which by the way doesn't mean we're going to the Mishnah means we're going to have to figure out a way to get out of it and we'll see this is going to be six lessons six approaches in the to reconcile the Mishnah. But the bottom line is you want to know where I'm coming from it doesn't make sense that Shrek then should mean Shrek then should mean cuz then the Mishnah said the same thing twice. However my Shrek then means Shrek then means it can't be a which means we're going to have to come up with some sort of but you want to know what my question was you want to know what was bothering me? This said Rav Ashi is [snorts] what was bothering me. Now we're going to start and we're going to see the first of the which is going to take us to the top of Gimel just want to speak out one point it's a that we're going to get to maybe already on and that is if you were following the of the Mishnah who asked the question of Shrek then Shrek then say that? It was the storm of the Rav Ashi heard the question he turned to Rav Ashi and he told Rav Ashi I don't understand the kasha." So, they go back and forth and at the end Rav Ashi says, Rav Ashi tells him, "Let me explain to you a nosh he tossing shira kashali. Let me tell you what I was asking. Let me tell you what was bothering me." Freight to us this Rav Ashi didn't ask the kasha. The Gemara was a stomach of the Gemara that asked the kasha. Rav Kahana was trying to answer the kasha and Rav Ashi IS DEFENDING THE KASHA. BUT, IF YOU DEFEND RAV KAHANA'S KASHA, it doesn't make you ba'al bos on Rav Kahana's kasha. That's called plagiarizing, right? It's not your kasha. SO, WHAT WAS RAV ASHI? This is what was bothering me. It's not Rav Ashi's kasha. It was the Gemara's kasha. Right? Again, the names matter, you think? The Gemara started with a kasha in the stomach of the Gemara. Rav Kahana had a problem with it. Rav Ashi defended it. And then Rav Ashi says, "LET ME EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT MY KASHA WAS." HOW DID IT BECOME YOUR KASHA? IT'S A TOISFUS KASHA. IT'S NOT YOUR KASHA. SO, Toisfus and it's Toisfus Dibra Mascula nosh he tossing shira kashali. You see from here me kinda raya shura of Ashi seder Gemara. You see from here that Rav Ashi was mesader the Gemara. So, if the Gemara asks a kasha without giving a name, you want to know who's the one asking the kasha. Rav Ashi is the one that's asking the kasha. So, Toisfus sounds like it's the stomach of the Gemara. No, we could put a name to the face. It's Rav Ashi and that's Toisfus kashali. So, it's Rav Ashi is the mesader the Gemara. This is really an inyan that requires an enormous amount of inyan that be Isreal Ashi I think is kinda to get to in one of these next few days. But, either way, for now, we have a kasha. We worked out the kasha. A close shaikh in is mashma whoever would be my from my coil is last shaikh the kashali shaikh tossing shira is mashma is only allowed to shaikh the yavin. Is it the kashali or is it the yavin? What is going on over here? Look to here in the Gemara. First of six roots and the only one we're going to see today. Amar Rav Ashi bar Rav Ulla. So, Rav Ashi bar Rav Ulla said, "Hachi tanani." Let me tell you how you're supposed to read the Mishnah. Hakol shochtin. Everyone's allowed to shacht. Hakol is the rabbis, right? Hakol merum was to be marbeh yerish. Hakol merichen was a muflas someach layish. Hakol nerochen was coming to be marbeh mukashchin. Right, these hakols very often are being marbeh something very obscure and abstract. Said Rabba bar bar Chana, the hakol, you want to know what it's coming to be marbeh? Afilu tumay b'chulin. It's coming to be marbeh that even somebody that's tumay feels like we're going back to Zevachim Menachos, but even somebody that's tumay is allowed to shacht. As long as it's chulin. As long as it's chulin, kodesh, no way. But as long as it's chulin, he's allowed to shacht. Now the Gemara says, once again, tumay b'chulin my lemara? Why would you think a tumay is allowed to shacht chulin? Since when is there even a sugia of tumah when it comes to chulin? Tumah is a problem in kodesh. If someone's tumay, he's not allowed to touch, shacht, eat chulin. Like, what's going on over here? So the Gemara says, I hear b'chulin she'nasa al teharas hakodesh. It's referring to chulin she'nasa al teharas hakodesh. What's the background to that? Rashi says there were certain people that were very nazir that they would only eat their chulin b'taharah. And the reason was is because in a world where there was trumah and there was kodesh, so if a person's going to eat chulin b'tumah, he may come to one day eat kodesh in b'tumah. Rachmana l'tzlan. So to prevent something from that happening, people were nazir to eat their chulin al teharas hakodesh. Okay. So we're talking not stam about chulin. We're talking about chulin she'nasa al teharas because sofer in the time of the Mishnah holds chulin she'nasa al teharas hakodesh k'kodesh dam. That chulin she'nasa al teharas hakodesh has to be treated like kodesh. This is a din d'rabbanan that if somebody takes upon himself that his chulin is going to be eaten b'taharah, well then on a rabbinic level, he has to treat his chulin as if it's kodesh. Not really, right? So of course it's chulin, but at least mid'rabbanan, that's something that you have to do. Now, being that for a tumay to go and shacht kodesh in would be a problem, so it's for that reason when it comes to Khulin she Nassa Al Tarus Akodesh being that it's Kedusha D'Omo, it would also be a problem. Zoch the Mishnah Akol Shochtin L'Rabbos, Tomay B'Khulin that even B'Khulin she Nassa Al Tarus Akodesh even though IT'S KEDUSHA D'OMO, BUT AT THE SAME time if he wants to Shacht his L'Rabbos Shacht. Now, could you just go ahead and Shacht? No. Ketzas Oisa. What does he do? Maybe Sakin Arocha. He brings a long knife to Shacht it by the Shacht with the Kedusha where Yigah B'Osar. Like this he won't touch the Basar. Meaning, if he touches the Basar you're going to have a problem. But, if it's a Sakin Arocha he's not so worried. Either way, when the Mishnah says Akol Shochtin, who's the Akol L'Rabbos? It's coming to be Marbeh Tomay. Tomay, why would you think a Tomay is a problem? Because we're dealing not just with ordinary Khulin, we're dealing with Khulin she Nassa Al Tarus Akodesh. And we're going to make a Khulin she Nassa Al Tarus Akodesh Kedusha D'Omo. But being that it's only a Din D'Rabbanan, we're willing to be Makel. Albeit, if you're going to use a Sakin Arocha. Now, when the Mishnah goes and says Ushchitasin Shaira, now we're talking not anymore about the Tomay who Shacht Khulin she Nassa Al Tarus Akodesh. Now we're talking about the Tomay that Shacht Kodshim. U'B'Muktashin. When it comes to Hektish L'Yishchoyit, then he's not allowed to Shacht L'Chatchila Shema Yigah B'Basar. Even with a Sakin Arocha, right? Because we're afraid that he might go ahead and touch the Basar. If Shachat, but let's say he Shachted it was B'Di'eved. When he says Bar Elu Sh'Lo Nigati, I'm telling you I'm very confident that I never touched it. Sh'chitasin Shaira, in that instance the Sh'chit is going to be Kosher. So, how do you reconcile the Mishnah Akol Shochtin U'Sh'chitasin Shaira? We're talking about a Tomay. Akol Shochtin is he's allowed to Shacht Khulin. Psito Khulin she Nassa Al Tarus Akodesh even though there's a Mandoma that it's Kedusha D'Omo with a Sakin Arocha we're not worried Shema Yigah. Sh'chitasin Shaira is if a Tomay would go and Shacht Kodshim L'Chatchila, [laughter] that's why it's Mashma B'Di'eved cuz it is only B'Di'eved. L'Chatchila would not be okay. But at the same time if he says Bar Elu, in that instance it's going to be okay. What's essentially the Teretz to Akol Shochtin U'Sh'chitasin Shaira? Two different cases. Akol Shochtin Khulin she Nassa >> Why would For that reason, the killer is not okay. But really, it's going to be okay. Now, Bar answered the question. This was the big question. He answered it. But he's going to now take his new found shot in the opening line of the Mishnah and now drag it along to explain the rest of the Mishnah, right? If the beginning of the Mishnah is talking about the It would be interesting to hear how would have learned the rest of the Mishnah. So, no suspense. He's going to tell us right now. >> [snorts] >> Even when it comes to regular meaning not regular regular one. Even it's not going to be okay. And even if he's by the way, right? And even if he's a in all situations, it's not going to be okay. And the reason is cuz we're afraid he's not going to get the right. What are we worried about? He may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate he may violate The three of the five solutions everybody's asking to themselves. Why you only mention three? Why not mention the other two? This five the only worried about the three the other two you're not worried about. So I am worried about the other two also, but the other two you can tell. If somebody messes up with the meaning if there was a nick in the second, you'll be able to look at the kind of and you're going to see it. So the other two are things that you'd be able to know how as well. Which part of the animal was it in? It's not good these three. You don't know if he paused. You don't know if he was a rough, if he was a baby, and you don't know if the knife started off in between the kind of the vessel. He got the kind of the vessel. I mean, everything looks good, right? When you look at the scene right now, looks good to me. You just don't know how it happened. It's for that reason we maybe didn't get it right. It's going to be a problem. Stating that, the mission continues and the mission says right, what did the mission say? The mission says all these people if they and people were watching them it's going to be okay. So, what's that referring back to? So, again, I call a tall man but who says it's okay? Who tell me when it comes to who's even if he's not even if it's regular tell me your calculation because he may botch up with the whole office and the mission says the mission says now when we learn the mission we learned it the way anybody would learn the mission. The mission from the mission and people were watching them. So, now you know whether they messed up or they didn't mess up. The mission says I'm not convinced that's the mission. It's the first stab pun intended of the mission. I had to say to the mission if you're going to tell me when it says the mission is referring to the mission and what kind the last thing we mentioned was the mission. I mean that the last thing we mentioned was the mission. Why do you have to refer to the mission now as the mission? You remember the mission? Um, yeah, you just told it to me a minute ago. Not a minute ago, a second ago. So, why would you have to refer to them as the mission? What should the mission say? The mission says the mission says The same mission that I just told you are not allowed to if they and people are watching it's going to be okay. Hello. Maybe it's going back maybe it's going to the first mission. The mission says the mission says you have to have a mission. You have to remember we spoke about them three lines ago. So, there it is already and you interrupted it with the mission. So, it makes sense then that you use the word the colon. But how could you tell me that regarding the tummy the colon you said you're allowed to do that way tell me maybe it's referring to the tummy the who is that referring to someone that's tummy who got him up there is not allowed to do something that's not allowed to do that. And it's not the last thing you mentioned cuz you interrupted with the word the colon saying that's the colon that but the question is do you need people to see it? We said earlier even if nobody's watching it but as long as he says and for the the last of the it's talking about where the tummy the he was not allowed to do it. But the evidence okay if he was here and he told you I never touched the boss. We would believe him and that would be but at the same time he wasn't here so now we don't know so people come forward and they say we watched this tummy he used the second he never touched the >> [snorts] >> animal in that instance it's going to be okay I was talking to my height tummy the way explained the mission. When it says it's referring to the of the tummy even with a second we can say but the evidence is going to be okay and by the way when it said the colon is also referring to the tummy that in the event that he's not here to say but other people say that we saw it and everything worked out okay it's going to be fine but the says you're telling me that is the address this is the that discusses the of the tummy faith that you may I know it from somewhere else. In other words, it's a different stam mishna. I usually ask some questions like I'm learning it from here, I'm learning from there. Rashi says that we don't mean what the source that we're deriving the law from is, but Rebbe felt that he wanted to make a stam mishna somewhere. Is this the stam mishna that talks about tamei mukdashin? I don't think so. It's a different stam mishna. What's the other stam mishna? A mishna in maseches So we know that So it's not stam that this cryptic mishna of base is telling me that tamei mukdashin because [laughter] it's already a cryptic stam mishna over there. We are in maseches so the Gemara says Really the source that the tamei mukdashin is beginning of maseches Why? Even though we're dealing with dealing with we're also dealing with and we want to contrast between and so you should know when it comes to a tamei should not be maseches is okay. But when it comes to real then it's not going to be okay. I if it's a stam mishna here, why do I need the stam mishna? You don't need stam mishnas repeating themselves. You don't need it twice. Awesome over there. I did the shas one. Being that we mentioned over there and all the that are not allowed to do all the heaven that we come this qualified but when it comes to okay such as Tsar and also we mentioned also the time but you want to know where the real sources is our mission over here and don't ask me a question that if the mission here is telling me isn't it already a mission in him the mission is only mentioned we buy you saying alternatively you could say it a little differently awesome maybe really there is the place that felt I want to tell you the laws of that makes a lot of sense you have to know who's a lot of culture to be culture right it's in culture and that's the of culture over here I did the tell me think that we mentioned over here what is tell me is a lot of even that if you can use a second so tell me tell me right we just want to compare and contrast the Indian of the tell me it's for that reason we mentioned it but said Ula our mission is very much not only discussing related to but discussing related to culture when it says means tell me and when it says again that part of the mission is also referring to tell me tell me one more question we have to get more I tell me that this tell me that right now is checking in our mission I will check this check the mission that I got this mission that I got this check the mission that I got this check the mission this tell me right now how exactly did he become tell me I limit the maze well again let's just take a step at it did he become tell me by coming in contact with a maze which would make him what a tell me maze the says the word I will have a lot of you got to play also and we know from the word halal from the juxtaposition between the halal and the kherev. The halal is the corpse, the kherev is the sword. We learn kherev that a kherev a metal kherev is like a halal which means that in the event that a sword made of metal as we'll see touches a mace, it becomes like a mace. Unbelievable khidush. A mace is not just an av hatumah, he's the zeda. He's the av avos hatumah. >> [snorts] >> If something someone touches a mace, it becomes one darag less. An av hatumah by the way. In the event that a kherev touches a halal touches the mace, it actually becomes the av avos hatumah. This halakhah is true not only if the kherev touches the mace but even if a kherev touches a tomay mays. So if a person touches a mace, he becomes a tomay mays, an av hatumah. By the way, this is the only time where someone can be an av hatumah even though he became tomay by coming in contact with tomay, right? A mace is an av hatumah and a tomay mays is also an av hatumah. That's why the mace is called the av avos hatumah because when it is metama when it transmits its tumah, that tumah is not a rishon, it's not a toldah, it actually maintains its status as being an av, not av avos but only being an av. The halakhah of kherev areyuqa khalo relates to the av hatumah of the tomay mays as well which means that in the event that the kherev touches someone that's an tomay mays, it now becomes an av hatumah. Well, if that's the case right to the gemara, this tomay right now who's shechting? He's shechting khulin bakhatkhilah. He's shechting kodshim bidi'avad. How exactly did he become tomay? by coming in contact with the maze but you can't be the maze himself cuz he's a maze he can't be shachted. Then he's the shochet. Right, he can't be shachted. But this person right now, he's a tame maze. Well, if he's a tame maze, then the knife that he's using, the chalef, based on the principle of cherev are'eil kacholo, itself now became an av tame. Well, if it now became an av tame, meaning the tame the sakin, the sakin became an av tame. The ozel sakin, the sakin can then go with tame the basar and it can be tame the basar. Which would mean that even if the shochet himself never touched the basar, he was so careful, he used the sakin arucha. But at the same time, he touched the knife which touched the basar and if that's the case, the basar is going to be tame. So says the Gemara, in the event that this tame became tame by coming in contact with a maze, well that means he's a tame maze and to the extent that he's a tame maze, that means then sakin is also a tame maze, it's an av tame. Which means that when it touches the basar, it has the ability to make tame the basar. Now Rashi asks very obvious kasha. Even without cherev are'eil kacholo, the cherev would be able to ask this kasha. Because let's say that we know a law of cherev are'eil kacholo. The shochet himself is an av tame cuz he came in contact with a maze. When he touches the sakin, he makes the sakin at the very least into a rishon tame. And then rishon could always make basar say chulin. Certainly chulin should not tire us out completely. Certainly the real deal, the real kachin into a sheini tame and a sheini tame is also tame, right? So really, it's only the rav the milso that the Gemara added cherev are'eil kacholo because lo yimei ba'ei would be tame but believe it or not, it would even be a rishon tame. It would be a pretty high-ranking official within the world of tumah. But the bottom line is freight in tomorrow hi Tommy me ba'ei. while sucking the is also and if that's the case you can have an issue so the says you're right talking about where he was Tommy to my he was Tommy to my if he was Tommy to my he himself is a right somebody comes in contact with a share is the the himself is a and being that the is a the can't make the into a cuz only can be a second cannot be a and as a result there's no issue the issue would be if he himself touched it he's a he can make the that would be a problem BUT BEING THAT HE HIMSELF is only the when he touches the the doesn't become Tommy cuz a can make into a the Tommy it can't make into a as a result the only way for him to transmit the as if he physically actually went ahead and touched the second we trust him and as a result he won't be in the either way it's the same you could say that he was Tommy to my you don't have to say that it was Tommy to my he was Tommy to my what was the problem if he was Tommy to my well then he's the second which is going to be very it's going to go out you're going to end up having problems after tomorrow no it's talking about we could go to Michelle kind of he didn't with he didn't with metal but rather the way he with was a read so he took the kind of right he took like a certain part of the kind of he was biting it why was he biting it cuz every has to be biting it second so he went ahead he was biting the kind of Michelle kind of that's what he kind of went into the but kind of you allowed to anything being being being kind of you can use a rock you can use metal and you can even use a read if you would ahead and would use a a cherev, so you would have a problem that you went ahead and you were metame the cherev, but you didn't use that. What you used was you used a kremishal kana. And being that you used a kremishal kana, it's not going to be an issue. Now, push you learn the gemara, what does it mean kremishal kana is not going to be an issue? You don't have cherev areel kachol. But you remember Rashi spoke out that really the gemara's opposition to saying that he was tamei to mas meis even without the halacha of cherev areel kachol. Because if he's a tamei meis, so he's a rishon letoma. He He's an av letoma. He makes the sakan into a a rishon letoma, which now has the ability to make the basar into a sheini letoma. So you'll tell me there's no cherev areel kachol cuz it wasn't metal. You used the kana, you used the reed, right? But even if he didn't use metal, so you're right, you don't have the leravcha demilsa of cherev areel kachol that we had in the gemara's original kasha. But you still seem to have a problem. The answer is Rashi addresses it. Rashi says kremishal kana is pshutei kli eitz, the lo mekabel tuma. It's pshutei kli eitz. Pshutei kli eitz is not mekabel tuma. It's not going to become tamei. If it's never going to become tamei, the only way for the tuma to be transmitted is you yourself touch it. As long as you use a sakan arucha, that in of itself is going to be okay. Bottom line, misheches chulin began. Hakol shochtin ushchitasam ksheira chutz mikheireish shoteh vekatan shem yakchilu shchitasam. Vekulam sheshochtu bachirin lo einasam shchitasam ksheira. You learn the mishnayos, right? You're on to the next mishna already. This is pretty straightforward. But when you're learning gemara, you're introduced to Rav Ashi's kasha. Hakol shochtin lechatchila ushchitasam ksheira bedi'eved. I seem to have an open stira. We're being mareh be somebody from the hakol shochtin, but there seems to be a contradiction whether that someone is allowed to go and shochat lechatchila or whether that someone is only allowed to shochat bedi'eved. So what exactly is going on over here? Who is the person that's being misraveh? And could he do it lechatchila or could he do it bedi'eved? and he said even though I know sometimes I call means but the other I know I call my theory means but the other but if I call but the other and you stop repeating yourself. Which for sure doesn't make any sense. I call but he doesn't share but the other and you have been there and you know. How exactly are you supposed to make sense of this? We mentioned it's going to be six to roots and we just know one. The first one is rather but rather but he said I call I call rather what's the coming to be married but I call my mirror was being married but I call my was being married but I call my was being married but I call my was being married but I call my you want to know what I call is coming to be married but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call but I call You would have thought don't do it because you're going to be with whoever is going to eat it's going to violate some sort of the is you use a second of all. Being that the whole concern is a concern but the other but I should be but the mission continues and says but he doesn't share it's the same coil. Right? It's the same coil. It's who it's again the other but now we're not talking about who now we're talking about the real question for someone to eat that's coming in the other being that that's in there we are concerned I feel I feel but I should be that's why it's not okay it's only but the other if you did it and he said but really everything is going to be fine. Continue and said but I should be but I should be but I should be but I should be Even if that and even if it's regular ordinary because we're concerned that maybe they're going to violate on but I should be can't we see? You'll only know two of them but you're not going to know the other the and as a result unless people If if they're going to go ahead and do it, it's going to be an issue. This is referring back to In the event that it happened and he's not here to say whether he was careful or not careful. In that instance, everything is going to be okay. The Gamora said that just the whole idea even of a shacking Why is the not the second in that and of itself should go ahead and be the boss. had two ways. One was he's only to my share. If he's to my share, he's a regional to my can't make a second into a to my. So unless he touches the boss. Boss can't become a there's no way for the to move forward. Alternatively, it could be he was even a to my space who is an to my which means he could be to my home. But he would take three eights. How do you take three eights? Don't you need a second? No, the price of we learned that all of them are good. The even by the way. And being that you're allowed to go ahead which is not to my again touching the second is neither here nor there. The only way the would be transmitted is you touched it. In that instance, it's going to be Okay, so just to end of base with one heart. And that is So the overwhelming majority of the overwhelming majority of the deals with the laws of shaking. Here's the question. If somebody shakes is he a or is he not a or is he not a? Meaning before you shake in you put on the guard on. You say you had right? Are you being a you have Is shaking a or is or is shaking a not a mitzvah? Now you tell me, you have to eat chulin? You have to wear beged or DALET KANFOS? NO, BUT when you wear beged or dalet kanfos there's a mitzvah to put tzitzis on it. So, I don't have to eat chulin, but if I want to eat chulin now there could be a mitzvah to say the rice to go ahead and shochet it. So, if you take a look at the Rambam, perek aleph halacha aleph in hilchos shchita, the opening verse of the Rambam chulin, says the Rambam, mitzvas assei sheyishchot misheyeirtzel lechol basar beheima chaya v'oyef v'acharkach yochal shenemar v'zavachtem mikol beheima Rambam says in the first mitzvas assei there's a mitzvas assei d'oraisa for a person that wants to misheyeirtzel lechol basar beheima chaya v'oyef to first do a shchita. And the Rambam says what's the makor? It says v'zavachtem mikol beheima where does it say that? That's the pasuk that we mentioned in the introduction to the daf. k'masheifcha v'zavachtem mikol beheima k'asher tzivi sicha that's a loshon mitzvah by the way k'asher tzivi sicha and the Rambam quotes that pasuk in Mishneh Torah Devarim perek yud beis pasuk aleph from there you see v'zavachtem is a mitzvas assei in the event that you want to eat chulin you have a mitzvah to go ahead and to shochet the chulin. The Rambam Lushiy Tosai in the Sefer HaMitzvos in mitzvah kuf mem vov he says tzivanu lishchot beheima chaya v'oyef v'acharkach yochal basar v'shelo yihyeh lo hen heter elah [laughter] bishchita b'vad v'on yis'al v'zavachtem mikol beheima umitzoncha k'chulu k'asher tzivi sicha. So, the Rambam Lushiy Tosai in the Sefer HaMitzvos also says that one of the 613 mitzvos is the mitzvah of shchita. Take a look at the Chinuch in his Sefer HaMitzvos mitzvah tof nun aleph mitzvah shchita shekol misheyeirtzel lechol basar beheima >> So the Rambam and the both the two most famous of and their meaning of of they were the stating that the Riving in his on the Rambam. So everyone knows the Riving wrote on the Rambam's what's a little less known is that the Rambam also the Riving also wrote on the Rambam's safer and in the Riving's on the safer of the Riving says he says The fact that the Rambam would say that there's a to say that has no time for maybe love above if anything Riving maybe it's a love above in other words it's not a mix for putting on and saying maybe what it is is an is what the Torah is saying that you cannot eat from meat that didn't have a proper but rather than say thou shall not eat meat that didn't have a proper to The Torah told it to me not only eat meat if it had a that I understand that there would be an issue to go ahead and do it but to refer to it as a mix for says the Riving has no time I have no understanding no why it should be a mix for the Ramban in his on the Rambam's safer also is massive and he says I don't know why would be a mix for it's not something you have to do it's only something that in THE EVENT OF OKAY SO there's a of how you go ahead and you prepare meat a mix for is something that the wants you to wake up in the morning and do and try your best to to do mix for there's limitations how much you have to exert yourself. Are you allowed to do this or is it prohibited, etc. But at the same time, a mitzvah is something you're obligated to do. You don't find anywhere there's an obligation to eat meat. And if you don't find anywhere there's an obligation to eat meat, it's not a mitzvah to eat meat. Truth is, this Ramban in his safer mitzvahs is also a Ramban in his commentary. It's Ramban in Parshas Bereishis. In Parshas Bereishis, the Ramban is talking about how Adam Harishon was not allowed to eat meat. This is something that Hashem will get to at some point. And then at the end of a long Ramban, which really could have been the introduction to the school. But at the end of this long Ramban, he said, "I want to explain to you what the issue is. He said, "I want to explain to you what the issue of shechitah is." He said, "It's what they said when they said the reason The reason there's a mitzvah of shechitah and you can't just go ahead and recklessly kill an animal is because we have to be sensitive to the life and to the nature of an animal. And you can't just go ahead and kill an animal. And it's for that reason the Torah went ahead and said the Ramban, "It's for that reason we make a bracha before we do shechitah. You know why you make a bracha when you go ahead and you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal and you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. You know why you make a bracha when you go ahead and you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal and you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. And you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. You know why you make a bracha when you go ahead and you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal and you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. You know why you make a bracha when you go ahead and you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal and you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. You know why you make a bracha when you go ahead and you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal and you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. You know why you make a bracha when you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal and you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. You know why you make a bracha when you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal and you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. You know why you make a bracha when you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal and you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. You know why you make a bracha when you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal and you're being sensitive to the life of the animal. You know why you make a bracha when you do a shechitah? It's because when you do a shechitah you're being sensitive to the life of the animal it's because bal chaim deraisa. And that's why you make a bracha. You're making a bracha cuz you're b'kium the inyan of bal chaim deraisa. And the real nusach of bracha k'ilu would have been safer asher kidishanu b'mitzvotav v'tzivanu al bris. But, the Ramban was mutching over here. Why do you make a bracha mitzvot? Why do you make a bracha when you do shchita? Oh, must be bal chaim deraisa. And even though the bracha is al shchita, really it's k'ilu. You want to know what it is? It's k'ilu you said I'm making a bracha. It's k'ilu you said I'm making a bracha al bris. If shchita is a mitzvat assei deraisa, it's pashut you make a bracha on shchita. You make a bracha on shchita the same reason you make a bracha before you put on your tzitzis, and when you sit in a sukka, and when you light the menorah, and when you eat matzah. It's the same reason you make a bracha every time you do a mitzvah. Per the shittas of the Ramban and the Shittas It's the Ramban's shitta in his hassagos on the Rambam's sefer hamitzvos, where the Ramban held that it's not a mitzvah shchita because you're not obligated to wake up in the morning and find an animal to go ahead and shacht. If it's not a mitzvah, so why are you making the bracha asher kidishanu b'mitzvotav v'tzivanu al shchita? The terutz is zocher Ramban's terutz. It's because bal chaim deraisa, it's k'ilu the bracha would have been asher kidishanu b'mitzvotav v'tzivanu l'rachamim al bris. In other words, we have a machlokes rishonim whether shchita is a mitzvat assei deraisa or shchita is not a mitzvat assei deraisa. The Rambam in his Mishneh Torah, perek aleph shchita, and the Shittas in his sefer hamitzvos, mitzvah kuf mem vov, and the Chinuch of mitzvah taf nun vov, both say that shchita is a mitzvat assei deraisa. The Ra'avad in his hassagos al Rambam in sefer hamitzvos, the Ramban in his hassagos al Rambam in sefer hamitzvos, and the Shittas in his pirush al parshas Bereishis are of the opinion that shchita is not a mitzvat assei deraisa. Maybe it's a lav haba b'klal assei, but it's not a regular mitzvat assei deraisa. The only thing is, the Ramban was mutching a little bit. The Ramban in Berachot. He said if shchita is not a mitzvah, I say deoraisa, so why is it that you make a bracha asher kidishanu bemitzvosav vitzivanu ala shchita? If it's a mitzvah, you make a bracha on mitzvahs, but if it's not a mitzvah, so why you making a bracha on mitzvahs? Said the Ramban to tear it, it's related to tzar baalei chaim deoraisa. And like the Sam Sofer said, really the bracha is not on the cheft of the shchita, it's asher kidishanu bemitzvosav vitzivanu lerachem ala briyos. So maybe you could say one or or, and we're going to end with this. Why is it that if you hold shchita is not a mitzvah, I say deoraisa, shitas Harav and shitas Ramban, still you make a bracha asher kidishanu bemitzvosav vitzivanu ala shchita? If you do a the Rosh in the first perek in meseches Kesubos, in the sugia of birkas erusin and birkas chasanim. So we know that under a chupa the mesader kiddushin makes a bracha. What's the bracha? So the Mekor is Kesubos daf zain, asher kidishanu bemitzvosav vitzivanu ala arayos, ve'osanu asar arayos, ve'itlanu asar nesuos, ayu dechupa vekiddushin, baruch ata Hashem mekadesh amo Yisrael al yedei chupa vekiddushin. The Rosh asks a bunch of kashas on this nusach bracha. Yesh makshan al nusach bracha zo. He says, number one, it sounds like it's a bracha on the erusin. Right the Rosh, if it's a bracha on the erusin, so why don't you make a bracha asher kidishanu bemitzvosav vitzivanu lekadesh es ha'isha? That seems to be the more uh obvious nusach bracha. Ve'oyes, says the Rosh, where do you find anywhere that you make a bracha on an issur? In the nusach bracha you say vitzivanu ala arayos, those are issurim. Ve'osanu asar arayos, those are issurim. Where do you find a situation that you would ever do that? And besides being that this is a bracha on the erusin, why do you fear oyes mekadesh amo Yisrael al yedei chupa vekiddushin? Right ve'itlanu asar nesuos al yedei chupa vekiddushin. You're dealing with an Why ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT CHUPPAH? It's as if when you sit in the sukkah you make a bracha on the lulav. I understand it's mayan inyan leinyan, but it's the inyan. But we're dealing now not with the chuppah, you're dealing now with the erusin. Why are you mentioning the erusin? Why are you mentioning the chuppah? As I frecht the Rosh, zogt the Rosh a dover nifla, that it's much from these kashas, that even though the bracha on erusin that the mesader Kiddushin makes on every chuppah looks and feels very much like a bracha on a mitzvah, it's not a bracha on a mitzvah. He's a bracha The truth is there's not even a mitzvah taking place right now. What are they doing? They're doing Kiddushin. Kiddushin is a mitzvah in the Torah. The mitzvah is pru urvu. They're not having children right now. And oh, by the way, zogt the Rosh, pru urvu you can be mekuyem even on a day pilegesh. It's not even mechayev to go ahead and do a Kiddushin. So really, there's no mitzvah taking place. So if there's no mitzvah taking place, zogt the Rosh, it's poshit THAT WHAT'S HAPPENING OVER here is not a bracha on a mitzvah. Well, if it's not a bracha on a mitzvah, then what is it? Zogt the Rosh, and I quote, "U'vracha zu niska l'os shevach l'akodesh baruch hu." It's a big shevach. We're praising akodesh baruch hu. "Asher kidishanu b'mitzvosav v'hivdilanu min ha'amim v'tzivanu l'kadesh ish es ha'museres lanoo v'lo achas min ha'arayos." Says the Rosh, you want to know what the bracha is? It's a bracha on the on the fact, "Thank you, Hashem, a big shevach, that v'hivdilanu min ha'amim." You were mavadil us from the amim. We're different. The amim are prutzin ba'arayos. The fact that we're nizhar ba'arayos, ein l'cha havdala gedola mizu between Yisrael and amim. The way we go about this inyan of ishus, "Hakol yod'im lama kallah nichneses l'chuppah," but it's done with such an incredible tznius. Contrast that with the attitude of the umos ha'olam towards the inyan of arayos. Ein l'cha havdala gedola mizu. And that requires a shevach b'yado l'akodesh baruch hu. "Asher kidishanu the midst of the world and That is the most of the world that is what the world is it's fundamentally not a midst it's fundamentally a that is so manifest at this time right here off and on in the that's why the of the world is the world because really is the world brings out this of the world is the world that we were already in the beginning of the world is the I was thinking maybe it's even possible and that is if you look in the end of the world is the world is the world It's one of the places that the world talks about the world says the world we have them in the world the world you should be make sure you're going to discern between the world the world and the world the world The world the world the world the world the world the world the world the world and if YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT THE WORLD IF YOU'RE GOING TO STAY AWAY FROM THE WORLD IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND BE BETWEEN WHAT'S THE WORLD AND THE WORLD YOU'RE GOING TO BE THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD AND THROUGH THAT I'M GOING TO BE THE WORLD YOU THE WORLD WITH THE WORLD IS made is our world between us and the world is this is this the world the world If you take a look at the world the world says the world the world the world the world the world the world THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD THE WORLD the world the world the world the world the world THE WORLD THE WORLD THE world the world the world the world the world the world the world The world the world the world the world the world the this is something that's not just a mitzvah. It's something that's if that's the case that we make a brocha under the at a time when we see that have when WE SEE THE WE GO AHEAD AND WE MAKE A BROCHA and what's the brocha? It looks like a it feels like a it's a it's a it's a on THE FACT THAT WAS BETWEEN THE WAS this is THAT A PERSON WHEN A PERSON DOES SOMETHING THAT BRINGS OUT THE IN that same way when you go ahead and when he brings out the in the where the says that that's it passes A BROCHA NOT A OF IT'S A OF A OF THANK YOU for being thank you for making us you know the brings his which volume of the Torah 14 volumes that's why it's called the which volume does the bring it? He brings it in he brings it in this three in that are mentioned in just three this is beer and this these are the two things that the felt bring out and the push him and and this these him here in the end of of and by the way and by the way the is it again in the end of with the over and over again these are the two and that bring out is so these are the two that bring out the just like when it comes to the Indian of Isuria beer, we make a brocha and the rush said it's not a brocha mitzvah. Not a brocha mitzvah. It's a brocha shevach on the fact that we're kedusha mikadesh Israel the fact that was mavdil son of Adam on the machlokes of suras on the shchita that passes the same exact brocha. This brocha that we make on the shchita maybe maybe is not a brocha mitzvah after all but rather what it is a brocha shevach. Because I'm so happy that when you make the brocha it's like a brocha shevach maybe you could say in a different way make when the makes the brocha it's like a brocha shevach a brocha shevach the brocha shevach that's the maybe and what the brocha a brocha shevach of shchita is that