Chulin 21

Today's daf is chulin daf kuf alef and we are at the second wide line on daf kuf amud beis. Omar Zeiri, today's daf is being learned as a zchus refuah shleima for Eliezer Yishaya ben Bracha. So, we're in the middle of a sugiyah. The Mishnah on daf yud tes amud beis continued to discuss the halacha l'Moshe mi Sinai that governs shchita known as hagruma, which from a super duper high level means that it's not enough that the shchita is done on the konah and the vashet, but there's a certain makom within the konah and the vashet that the shchita has to take place. We already had two mishnayos that discussed the laws of hagruma. The first Mishnah talked about the upper limit of the konah, nothing about the vashet, and not even anything about the lower limit of the konah. Additionally, it discussed what would be if roiv of the shchita was done in the right makom, but there was only a miut of it that was not The greatest machlokes between Rebbi Yehuda and the chachamim. The second Mishnah that discussed hagruma talked about when the shochet attacks the animal, what side of the animal does he come from? And the Mishnah said he has to come either from the tzavar, which is the throat, or from the tzadin, from the sides. If, however, he would do it from the oref, the oref is the back of the neck, it's what the Torah refers to as the mul ha'oref, then the halacha is that it would be pasul. And then, in a rather interesting poetic way, what the Mishnah did was and says that, you know, as it relates to this part two within the world of hagruma, and that is that the shchita has to be either from the tzavar or from the tzadin, but if it's going to be from the oref, it's going to be pasul. It's actually the exact opposite, it's the inverse of the way melikah was done. Melikah the Torah said had to be by the mul ha'oref, and here, if it would be done min ha'tzavar or min ha'tzadin, it would actually be pasul. At the beginning of the mission says, whatever is kosher is possible in Malika, and whatever is kosher in Malika is going to be possible in Shrita. And we had a whole Sugya that talked about the Mishna, and part of what it talked about was Malika, because the Mishna talked about Malika. Today's staff is going to continue on this theme. And focus very much on the Malika part of the Mishna or the Malika part of the Sugya. And really, as a tiny introduction to today's staff, we just have to reacquaint ourselves a little bit with the laws of Malika. So we know that an Oif was able to be brought as a carbon. An Oif can come in the form of a Chatos or an Oila as it relates to the physical bird, either Torim or Bnei Yoina. One of the many differences between the Hakrova of an Oif versus the Hakrova of a Behema was the Hakrovas HaBehema began with a Shrita. Shrita Adam. Shrita, Kabala, Hiluch, and Zrika. An Oif did not require Shrita, rather it required Malika. Now this is a little bit of a Chidush because in Chulin, the way you Machsher an Oif is with Shrita. Now, Shitas Oif is different than Shitas Behema. We saw a little bit about that in yesterday's staff. But the way you Machsher an Oif in Chulin is through Shrita. The way you Machsher Behema in Chulin is through Shrita. The way you Machsher a Behemas Korban is through Shrita. So you would have thought that for sure the way you Machsher an Oif of Korban would also be through Shrita. But the Torah says very clearly that's not what you do. What you do is Malika. What's Malika? So that's what we're discussing right now. The Kohen doesn't use a sackin, rather he uses his fingernail. He doesn't come from the front or the sides, he comes from the back, the back of the neck. He makes his way through the mafreakas, through the neck bone, all the way to the simanim, and he severes the simanim in the same way that he would if he was doing a shrita. Now, there are you looking between the way malika was done in the event that the carbon being brought was a chatas olah, versus the way it was done if what was being brought was an olah olah. When it comes to the chatas olah for starters, the way the malika was done was b'siman echad. So, as long as one of the simanim was severed, that in of itself would be okay. Now, doesn't shrita always involve the severing of two simanim? Shritas beheima, not shritas olah. So, really the malik of the chatas olah is very, very similar to the way that the shrita of an olah of chulin is, and that is we're not discussing two simanim, but rather what we're discussing is only one siman. But that was only true for the chatas olah. When it comes to the olah olah, there, as we're going to see based on the mudim, chazal told us that it wasn't enough that only one of the simanim received the malika, but you would need that both of the simanim receive the malika. Another nafka mina is, in the world of shrita, shritas chulin, shritas kashin, one siman, two simanim, the halacha is rubo yishalech is kamayo. You don't have to do the entire siman. If you do rov, that's going to be okay. Kipshuta, it's based on the kol ha'torah kulah d'rabah principle of rubo k'kulo. We saw discussion on daf yud tes, where there's actually a very strong side in the gemara that, although the chachamim in kol ha'torah kulah hold rubo k'kulo, but when it comes to shrita, not in fact the mishna and all the sugias that say rubo k'kulo in the world of shrita are many of yosef of yehudah. But the pashtus is that there is a halacha of rubo and Kulei when it comes to Shrita just like there is in Hilchos Nazir and Hilchos Kedish and every single area of Halacha. Stating that we're going to see there's a very big Machlokes Tanaim whether the laws of Rubik and Kulei relate to the Malika of the Olas Ha'Of or maybe when it comes to the Olas Ha'Of it's not enough to go ahead and do the Malika of Rubai, but over there you're actually going to have to do the Malika of Kulei. The bottom line is Malika versus Shrita there's a Nafka Minas between the Malika of the Chatas Ha'Of [clears throat] and the Malika of the Olas Ha'Of. The most obvious one that's going to play itself out very much in today's daf is Chatas Ha'Of is Siman Echad like Shritas Ha'Of Chulen as opposed to Olas Ha'Of that's more like Shritas Beheima be it Katchin or Chulen. Do you have to chop it with both Simanim? Additionally, if we assume Rubik and Kulei when it comes to the laws of Shrita and Malika by Chatas Ha'Of for sure the Halacha is going to be Rubik and Kulei. When it comes to the Olas Ha'Of over there it may be different as we're going to see. Could be over there you would have to do a Fatik Malika. Either way, with that tiny bit of an introduction we jump in to another festive daf over here in Perek Hakol Shochtin the first Perek of Maseches Chulin. Amar Ze'iri, Ze'iri said Nishpera Mafrekas Veroiv Basar Imo, in the event that a animal had its Mafrekas, its neck bone broken and most of the Basar that's behind the neck was Nifsak with it, it also fell apart, Neveila the Halacha is that this animal is going to be an Aveila. So, when we learn Hilchos Treifos we're going to become familiar with the idea of Yudchas Treifos. The Rambam says that the 18 Treifos are Avos Treifos, Avos Mechalel YK Toldos and the Rambam's Maina different told this as well. But there are 18 treifos kidua that would make a animal not kosher to eat, quote unquote treif, even the event that it was a kosher shrit. One of those you [snorts] test treifos is nishpera mafrekes. So in the event that the neck bone breaks, that's considered a fatal wound. This animal's not going to be able to survive it and as a result it meets the criteria of a treifa. You will never be able to eat from a carbon like that. What Siri was machadish was that in the event it was nifs nishpera mafrekes veroyve basarim. So in addition to the fact that it was nishpera mafrekes, also royve of the basar dissipated, it crumbled, it fell apart, it tore. In that situation, not only is the animal considered to be a treifa, the animal's considered to be a nevela as well. So the halacha of nishpera mafrekes that's a treifa says Siri, that's talking about where it wasn't royve basarim. In the event that it's royve basarim, it's going to be different. The chiluk Rashi [clears throat] says is a matzeas. In the event that it's nishpera mafrekes, but the royve basar is there, so that keeps the mafrekes somewhat intact. And as a result, even though it's a treifa, it's not going to be able to survive very long, but the view it as an available, it's it's alive. Why would you view it as an available? If it's already nifsak the royve basar, so in that situation, now already you can't even look at it as being alive. And that's the chidush, despite the fact that it really is alive, the nevela's going to be a nevela. Now, an idea that's going to repeat itself a lot during the course of the daf, is the Siri saying that you have a live animal, but because of something you view it as if it's already dead. What does that mean? I thought that's what a treif is, right? If it's alive, then then it's alive. How could it be a nevela? So for anyone that's learned in kosher yeshiva knows the one word short answer, and that is mefarekeses, right? There's an idea that sometimes halacha views an animal that's alive, and even though it's alive, we're still going to treat it as if it's dead. This is a chiddush. And Z'eiri is leveraging that chiddush and he's applying it to a case of nishbera mafrekes, which the mishna says is a treifa. Comes again Z'eiri base madri says that's only because it wasn't roi basarim. But in the event it would be roi basarim, at that point it would be an aveila. Now, what's an af kamina if it's a treifa and an aveila? Either way, you're not allowed to eat it. An af kamina is tumah. A treifa, you're not allowed to eat but it's not metamei. An aveila, you're not allowed to eat. But an aveila is also metamei, right? This is something we have to have in our kishkes, literally, when you go through maseches chullin. And that is an aveila always wears two hats. An aveila features very prominently in the world of machalos asuros. It's in the conversation of the most famous of all the machalos asuros. Additionally, an aveila is also features very prominently in the sugiyos of tumah. Because an aveila is an av tumah. Just like the shmona shratzim and just like a meis, a zav, a nidah, a metzora, right? There's a type of tumah known as an aveila. It's actually a tumah chamura. Where it's metamei b'massa. So, the halachic naf kamina that Z'eiri was saying was that if nishbera mafrekes al ein, it's a treifa, it's metamei b'massa. If it's nishbera mafrekes roi basarim, at that point it's already considered an aveila, not just a treifa. And therefore, it's not only going to be assur b'achila, it's going to be metamei as well. >> [laughter] >> I think it's a m'furash mishna. Now, most days when you see these words af anan ami tanina, so it's like mitashmeiach. Ah, variety, Z'eiri, this is so gishmak. Wow, gevaldig. What Z'eiri said is really a a mishna. Rashi speaks out and we'll see it very meduyak in the gemara later, this af anan ami tanina is actually a kasha. So, when the gemara brings a mishna wants to ask a kasha, the gemara will say tanina, like mikama mashma lon. Like, why do you have to tell this to me? I know it already. Af anan ami tanina it sounds more benichusa. But we're going to see very, very clear, Rashi speaks it out that this af anan ami tanina is actually a kasha. So, we have to this more like a mask of all of his. I don't know what's going on over here. It's a Why do I need the to come and tell me something that's What is this is walking a kiss? It feels a little bit familiar, right? It's after some Zion. That's an inside joke. And this is something that we learned together in also more like the second in the event that a coin did Malika on a life whether it was a or it was an instead of him doing it with his fingernail, he did it with a second he did it with a message. That let me buy you it's not kosher because Malika has to be done with a not with a second. But in addition to that, this right now is going to be it's going to be to miss the villa. Now it's an obviously you're bringing it as a carbon and an is a very unique type of it's not when it's in the and when it's in the it's not only the person but the bottom line is what the mission says is that in the event a person was second the is it's going to be what's this kind of now if you're going to tell me that if it's even when it's have you all it is is a that so that means although this didn't get a Malika and it's not going to be kosher for you to be able to do all that with it there's not going to be any there's no that's coming from this but I may see that a and to the extent that you did a then why is it another words the time of the villa. The parents must be because being that the person was so that means he did the in the same exact way that the Malika would be done. How is the Malika done? It was done and when the Malachim was done, it for sure broke the mouth fracture. In addition to it breaking the neck bone, it also took off the right basilar artery. And that must be the reason that the Shofar is sucking is still going to make it into an Avelah. What's the reason? Because before you did the Shofar, before you got to the Simanim, you made it into an Avelah. At that point, it's already too late. If you make it into a treif, and then you do the Shofar, that's every treif. It was a treif before you did the Shofar. So, it remains a treif but not an Avelah. But if you going to tell me that in route to doing the Shofar, you made it into an Avelah, then it's very moving. Bottom line is, I'm going to have to say this after the only way I can fathom Shofar in this mission over here in Zevachim of Malachim is if you never want to hear it. If that's the case, the reason I'm saying this is because I don't understand why do I need to hear it to tell me something that every child that ever learned the mission in Zevachim already knows. So, the Gemara says, "I'm really it's not It could be the reason over there Malachim is not going to be able to do it. The reason we view it as an Avelah has nothing to do with the ears of Allah. You can't buy ears [clears throat] of Allah from the mission. That's why I need ears to tell me ears of Allah. He's very much for saying a But the issue over there was the ears of Allah he club. Because it wasn't a ears of Allah It's not the mission. It was a ears of Allah. But you were sucking an Avelah, and that's why No, no, no. The ears of Allah was not a Shofar. My time of why not So, this was really I'm going to have to put it in the mission of Allah. Maybe the reason is because you're So, one of the five The mission mission that we didn't get into yet is called Halacha. What's Halacha? Halacha means that when the Shofar does the Shofar, you have to be able to see the knife. It has to be the goal way. If it's borrowed into the animal to find that it's being done, it's not going to be okay. That's why the the Shofar can always does it in a way where it's the entire time. Malachim involves getting into the neck of the animal when coming in as I used to from an angle. But the bottom line is Malika is not governed by Halada, but if you're going to be Malak Basakin and you wanted to now be a kosher shita cuz now we need the Halada type of clay. It's like our from a regular shita. Well, being that you did it by eating Malika Malak Basakin the Mishnah says. So, by definition it was Halada. If it's Halada, it's dead on arrival. Which is really what the Sugya is all about and it's for that reason it's not going to be okay. Rava and Rav Ashi said "Mekhnashu." The puns flow in these Sugyas. But Rava said "Mekhnashu da'ires." The reason is because Malika is done in a way where you just press down and we know another one of the five Halakha leMoshe miSinai is durisa. Right? That's something you're not allowed to do. You have to be Malakha maybe. It's for that reason it's not going to be okay. So, the reason the Iri had to say a chiddish and it wasn't a meforesh Mishnah cuz Iri knew there's different ways you can learn the Mishnah. You can learn the Mishnah Malak Basakin either because it trips up in Halada or because it trips up in durisa. Says the Gemara. So, we have two different shotos, right? It sounds like it was a machlokes between Rav Huna and Rava. Sounds like Rav Huna dafka thought the Mishnah over there would be Halada before the Iri. Rava thought the Mishnah would mean durisa. Sounds like he thought dafka this, he thought dafka that, he thought not this, he thought not that. So, the Gemara explains "Mad am Mishnah machlokes Mad am Mishnah da'ires." Why didn't he say because it's Halada? Because some of them were Malakha maybe Malika kasha. Who said you were da'ires, right? This was in yesterday's daf. We saw a whole shaila whether you're allowed to be Malakha maybe when it comes to Malika. By shita you have to be Malakha maybe. By Malika it's a Sugya whether not you have to. For sure you don't have to, but whether you can. But the bottom line is if you hold that by Malika you're allowed to be Malakha maybe, so maybe the Malak Basakin happened in an aifa when you were Malakha maybe. Hey, so you were. "Mad am Mishnah da'ires." The Mad am Mishnah that said "Mekhnashu" "Mad am Mishnah machlokes." Why didn't he say "Mekhnashu"? He's going to tell you "Halada shita dami." What is the definition of Halada? It's "Kakhuda adara be'ikrei habatim." It's like a weasel. That's what the lashon Halada is. It's like a weasel that lives inside the the holes the lecher inside the house, the mikasha. The point is Rashi says it's mikush gamli. It's 100% covered. Hacha but over here when someone is shochet min aifa migalya, you could see the sack in a little bit. Again, this is a mitzius thing. It's not 100% mikusa. I mean it's not 100% mikusa. For that reason it's not going to be halal. The bottom line is the Erie walks into the base medrish and he says something earth-shattering. Nishbar mafkes that we know is a treifa that's only if it wasn't basarim. But if basarim then it's already going to be in a veil of mine of cumin it's going to be mitama. Rav Chisda heard this and he asked the kasha. Af anana mitonino. Why is the Erie have to say this is a mufarish mishna? Mishna says molech basakin when he boye it's not considered a kosher meleka in your kitchen, but it's not even a kosher shchita in chulin. It's mitama begod base of leya. What's the reason? Oh, must be because of Erie's halacha. Because in route to doing the meleka it was nishbar mafkes for a basarim. At that point it wasn't available. The shchita can't be mitared anymore. It's already going to be too late. So it's a great kasha. Why does he have to tell me something else in mufarish mishna? The gemara says it's not macha. There's different ways you can learn the mishna. In fact, there's two different ways you can learn the mishna. You can learn the mishna midin chalada. You can learn the mishna midin treifus. Amrav. Rava said e kashali ho kashali. If I want to ask a kasha, let me tell you what the kasha is going to be. This is where Rashi says you see that Rav Chisda when he said af anana mitonino wasn't saying of any chizus. He was asking a kasha. Why? Because when Rava attacked the Erie he says If you want to ask a kasha, let me tell you the kasha. That only makes sense if somebody already asked the kasha. And that kasha wasn't such a good kasha. So comes again Rava, I'll tell you a kasha that I think is a good kasha. But if no one asked the kasha yet, so what's the kashali ho kashali? Right, e kashali ho kashali presupposes that there was already a kasha asked. There was no kasha asked in the sugia. Okay, we're making a big big deal about this because we enjoy doing this in the chabura. Vais vais da is that the af anana mitonino was really a kosher and that kosher was not such a good kosher because we were doing and by the way, one of the Amiran that was doing it was Rova Lane. So, Rova opined on the his this kosher. He said, "No, this kosher doesn't bother me cuz I could tell you with my Judah this. You want to know what does bother me? You casually or casually and that is the him mesa or may my leg. We said that every time the coin does Malika, he goes through the mafrekas and he takes red basarim. According to the Erie, at that point, the oif is already in a vailo. So, then what do you being Malika? It doesn't make any sense. What's the heft of Malika? Malika is kill the animal in a certain oifen. Usually you do shrita. Over here there's a dish, you're going to do Malika. Usually you kill the animal by severing the two simanim or the one siman when it comes to an oif. And with a sakin governed by five shmos shnayim. Now you're going to do it. Me in you in your body is not with a sakin with a two point in not from the front to the side, you're going to do it from the back. Maybe one siman or two simanim. But at the end of the day, what you're doing is you're killing the animal the same way you always kill the animal. You're doing it by severing the simanim. Albeit, it's governed by an under shulchan If you're going to tell me that before you get to the simanim, the animal is already dead, so what are you doing Malika on? The him mesa my leg doesn't make any sense. Imagine saying, "Kill the animal then do shrita." And have no havana. Kill the animal then do Malika is the same exact thing. So, said Rova, "The him mesa my leg my leg my leg by you." So, by you told him, "Rova, I hear what you're asking. Is it but let me ask you a question. The tixu oif the side the boys they simanim. The him mesa my leg Let's say the Erie is wrong and you're buying it from your kosher because it doesn't make sense you're doing Malika on an animal that's dead. Oh, vice toys niche from mafrekas red bas eema is still alive. Okay, perfect. I will say [snorts] if you have to do Malika of two simanim. We spoke about that in the introduction. Once you sever the first siman, for sure it's dead. So, when you go now and you do the second seven it's right to him mesa my leg. the terrorists is it's that there's an Indian of being Now, what would be the a buyer be coming from that with because I'll tell you very close because Malika is an the whole of what is to go ahead and prepare the animal now be able to be eaten to be made Malika is much more than that. Is did an right that's not something that you're allowed to do. So, being that there's an avoid the component with it's not just coming to be so I'll tell you a very big fish. I'll tell you that the way you kill the animal by Malika is actually not by severing the you kill the animal by being like you know what the of the Malika is the is it's an it's different than I don't know there's a million that are done so but rubber is is much in because I'm going to buy you I don't know every I'm going to tell you don't bring me any from tell you there it's different it could be that the second seven that is severed when it comes to the that's talking not that's talking in a void and the whole year of it is is because you want to be the head of the with the of the so we'll see a lot more about this in the latter part of today's stuff etc. etc. But rubber told about don't sue the Malika of the second seven of the to the Malika of the first seven of the the Malika of the first that's it doesn't make sense to me makes me want to make it it can't be no way you're killing the animal by breaking the way that's how it's going on I'll bet the second seven is that's really a whole different thing. For >> [laughter] >> the doesn't require the second simon, right? So there's something else going on over here. And you're right, at that point it's dead. No that at that point is 100% dead. What is it cuz there's a thing you have to be from the all you're doing is you be so the second where you're killing the animal doesn't make sense. Right? You're going in my way. And that's my cash over here on the ear. You're telling me so you have to spare from them the second the second has nothing to do with this Indian. That's but the says I told if that's the case if you're telling me that the of the of the second simon is not like and it's not even related to the of the first simon. But what is it? It's just a it's being between the and the so the should be that when you do the you should have to separate not only head from the rest of the as far as the go but you should also have to be the the skin that's attaching the and the rest of the and the is you don't have to. So if the is you don't have to must be the of the of the second simon is like the of the first simon. Didn't have all it is is it's a of how you're supposed to go ahead and do the and the and if you see over there that I mean so then by the first simon also you can't ask any questions on the ear. But I'm not impressed with that because I can tell you I'll tell you that the of the of the second simon by the is based on I mean it doesn't include the because when we talk about what we mean is anything that's part of the that's what requires so again the of the The Malika simon when it comes to is not to take away it's not the take away Shabba. It's for the Havdalah. I why is it to the Simanim? I don't know. That's the din. Call it why can't that be the Halacha? But I told Rava one second but a mere Simanim. The mere of the Simanim meaning after you do of the Simanim the mere that's left. The Rabbonon according to the Rabbonon the Bishchita or Akvi the Havdalah. So we're going to see that the sheet of the is that it's not enough to do Rubik when it comes to the you have to do all of it. We mentioned that there's a big is what the Malika Simanim by the means and whether you have the Halacha of Rubik the sheet of the Rabbonon is that you have to be the by the way is Shimon that says you do but the point is that the Rabbonon sheet is that you have to do. Now that little mere that you have to go ahead and be according to the Rabbonon in it is not something you have to it's yet it's the Havdalah. So it's that is Havdalah is not by you see it takes on a life of its own. So if that's the case that's the case there should be Havdalah by or also or it's not a din of Havdalah it's a din in Malika and there's no in the Malika of the first Malika of the second Simanim. But Rava says no let me just tweak what I said before. The Malika of the yes and Havdalah the in the and the Havdalah. The first of Rava was the Malika of Havdalah and the Malika of Havdalah. The second is not the what's the difference? The is not the but it's and the reasons are going to be shown in this is because when we say when it comes to Simanim or Malika Simanim the longest of it is is that when you do it as if you did the entire thing. So really even the was in it. So being that it was Nikhral Shchita, why it passes that it should be included in the Halacha of Havdala. But, as it relates to the Or, which is not included over there, it's not included. So, the bottom line is Viha Midon Navel. Rava said, "E Kasha Li Hakasha." Let me tell you what does bother me in Zeri. Zeri is telling me that if it's Nishba Mafrix Basi Ema, the Halacha is it's going to be Navela. If he makes a Mayla it doesn't make sense. Every single time you do the Malika, you're going to first be Nishba Mafrix Basi Ema. So, what you're doing Malika on a on a dead animal? The whole idea of Malika is the Shchita. Just like it wouldn't make sense to do Shchita on a dead animal, so too it don't make sense to do Malika on a dead animal. Rava told Abaya, Abaya and Abaya told Rava, Rava ben Chila Kvei Kvei Os Kdei Shva Rama. He says, "I don't understand. Every time you do the Malika on the second Siman of the Ayil Sa'if, isn't it like that?" Rava told Abaya, "No, that [laughter] that's no Shaychis. That second Siman is is a completely different Halacha. Every single time, right? Let's just think about this for a second. You Shacht an Ayil Chulen, it's one Siman. You do the Malika of a Chatis Ayil, it's one Siman. Punkt, when it comes to the Malika of the Ayil Sa'if, there is a second Siman. Obviously, it's different. Obviously, it's not the way we want to take away the Chiyus because why would that vary? Right? You don't find any distinctions anywhere. Even by Beheima Chulen and Beheima Kochen, there's no Nafke Mina of how you do the Shchita. After they Kacha is also Shchita of the Lady, it's the same Shchita. So, Punkt over here, you're going to tell me that near you need to take away the second Siman in order to take away its Chiyus and it's part and parcel of the Malika which is really mirroring the Shchita. The Torah says it's a Din of Davar. But, how is it a Din of Davar? But, Alma, there's no Tzushtol to that. And if that's the case, where are we? So, we come Kasha Prei Gemara says, "Hacha Kacha is Rava Duchtei. How could Eeri say that it's Rava Mafrix Basi Ema it's going to be Navela? That the Chaim Meisa Omen U'Mayla." So, the Gemara says, "Alma, Rava Rava said, because [snorts] of this V'chein Hu Oisa. You have to say that when the Kohen would do the Malika, he would be Choiteich the Shidra Umafrix Es B'lo Roiv Basa. You have to say it happened without Roy Bosser. It was done without Roy Bosser. It's not a kasha on Zera. That's the only answer. You have to say that an anami when the coin did the malika had to make sure not to take out the Roy Bosser. Cuz if you took out the Roy Bosser, then an anami is going to be possel cuz then it's going to be an aveila. You never did a kosher malika. Cuz like Rav Zera, a lot of anecdotes in the beginning of So when Zera came from Bavel to Eretz Yisrael, ashkeche the Rav Amidi come on the hashmaito. It's sort of Amidi was saying over this halacha. Which halacha? The Eeris halacha. Amalei Zera Zera told Rav Ami, I have a kasha. The chimaisa im du malik. Who is Rav Zera mechaven to? He's mechaven to Rava. Sh'teim mikasha Rav Ami heard this kasha, he thought he was a little taken aback. And then he said after that shochada, when he was a little bewildered, he told him, "Eima kachu aisa. Choy tech sh'adra. Uma frekas below Roy Bosser. Tanya ami it's really a mefurash braisa. Kitzor malik chatazoif. Any du malik chatazoif. Choy tech sh'adra. Uma frekas below Roy Bosser. Ach mikilo shochada malik chatazoif. Any du malik chatazoif. That's chatazoif. You have to do is one siman. Oi Ruba, you don't even have to do simanacha. You could do Roy as well. The Roy Bosser ima. And then you take the Roy Bosser, right? In the beginning you have to make sure that you choy tech sh'adra uma frekas below Roy Bosser. Then already take the Roy Bosser. Ubai when it comes to an shnayim, either two oi Roy shnayim or not two, but rather Roy shnayim is going to be okay. But the bottom line is Rava's pshat in the Eeris to answer his E kasha which was the second kasha. Rav Ami was mechaven to and really tanya ami hachi, it's a mefurash braisa. Now at the end of this braisa said that when you do the malika of the chatazoif, so you choy tech the sh'adra uma frekas below Roy Bosser. That's the tanya ami hachi. Get to the veshit of the corner, you get to pick which siman you want. You take it or you take Roy that you're going to be fine. When it comes to the oila, it's shnayim oi Roy shnayim. That last line is going to be the purpose and the instigator of a pivot that we're going to do right now, which is going to take us all the way to the Mishnah on the bottom of that half days on my dollars. There's the the last line of this price is that when it comes to the you need two seem on them, right? But it said either two meaning take out the two seem on them in the gallery sever them 100%. I write two thirds, right? Or do right away that also is going to be okay. Wait the money. Who is the time of this price? Either a button is it the how am I doctor the button hold that when it comes to the if you have to sever the two 100%. So again, we had the button one minute ago. We also mentioned the button in the introduction up by name, but we mentioned the sheet of the button that is no Rubik when it comes to the you have to sever the gun, right? You would have to take it out 100%. Now the more extended version of the button that's going to be the majority of the rest of the death. So if you're wondering now who are these button that I heard about already for the second time can you tell me more about them? It's got me. So says the but just high level the price is that is the time of the price of the button so it's right now it's not an option has to be and it applies in and if it's going to apply in a my right now and you can't even do as we'll see a little bit better when we go through in a wedding, but the bottom line is there's two sheets I know as it relates to one is that you can't rely on Rubik you have to take it out 100% and the other one is almost just as surprising that you can't take it out 100% you have to rely on Rubik so either you got to get it 100% or you can't get it 100% there's no one that holds these two options so now so what's going on over here money if it's the rabbonim, I understand shnayim, I don't understand roish shnayim. And if it's the blos Reb Shimon, I understand roish shnayim, I don't understand shnayim. The words are two to two to one. One parent in tomorrow says eima shnayim Reb bon roish shnayim Reb blos Reb Shimon. Meaning the time of the bris is is part is being completely uh neutral. He's not taking sides or positions. He's not getting involved in this machlokes. The reason he said shnayim or roish shnayim is because he knows there are those that hold shnayim, there are those that hold roish shnayim. Shnayim the mando of shnayim or roish shnayim the mando of roish shnayim. There's no person in the world that's going to say I hold you have two choices, shnayim or roish shnayim. Either you say them or you could say have a hard Reb blos Reb Shimon. It could be that really shnayim and roish shnayim are both shitas Reb blos Reb Shimon. I If that's the case, what my shnayim or shnayim mean? Reb blos Reb Shimon says it has to be roish shnayim. When he means the shiddaim of shnayim. That even though roish shnayim, but it has to be a roish that's nikker. And if it's not a roish that's nikker, in that instance it's not going to be okay. So according to the second shita, we have a chiddush in this Reb blos Reb Shimon that we didn't even meet yet. But this Reb blos Reb Shimon that enoch anami roish can't be called, but at the same time it has to be uh a roish shnayim that's doim in the shnayim. It has to be a roish that's going to be nikker. Zuk the Gemara. So the first part of today's daf was the eirev member. Beheima and oif nishbera mafrekes Reb oif Reb basar eiva d'aloch is it's going to be an avail. There were two great sakashas that were asked on [snorts] the eirev. One was Reb Chizda, the other one was Rava. Both of them were defended. In fact, in fact, we saw that the eirev's halacha seems to be something that is even a tanya nami hachi. It's even a mefurasha bris. Now, we were talking now up until this point about a beheima or about an oif. That was the eirev's member. Zuk the Gemara. Omra Reb Yuda b'Reb Shmuel. Reb Yuda said in the name of Shmuel as it relates to a human being. Neshbera mafrekes, veroyev basar eemo, metameh ba'ayal. He's going to be metameh ba'ayal. So, this halacha of neshbera mafrekes veroyev basar eemo is not only true for a behema and an oyif, but it's going to be true for an adam as well. Which, by the way, means that this concept of mefarcheses is something that you have not only by a behema and an oyif, it's something you have by a a person as well. Cuz, again, you don't need to worry if the person's actually dead, right? You don't need Rav Yehuda bar Shmuel if we have a mays in front of you. >> [snorts] >> So, the whole conversation presupposes that a person could be alive, but he could be treated as if he's dead. So, you see that this idea of mefarcheses is not only true by behemas and oyifes, it's true by people as well. It's not only true for the tumah chamurah of masa, but it's even true for the tumah that's even more chamur than that, and that is tumas oil. Said Rav Yehuda in the name of Shmuel bar Yitzchak. In time, you're going to ask me a kasha, "Oisa im aysa d'Ayli, what about the story of Ayli?" This is also something that we spoke about on the Yarchi Kallah. We went over this parsha to go through this parsha together in Shilo mamesh. But, the pasuk says that when Ayli was very, very old, and he was sitting in front of a Mishkan Shilo, and the Yidden had gone to war against the Plishtim, and he is told that the Aron was taken into captivity and his sons were killed, and many, many Jews died. So, the pasuk says he was sitting, and he fell backwards. Va yishaver mafrakto, va yamos, and he died. Now, what's the kasha? Over there, mafrekes veroyev basar have I? It says that he shaver mafrakto, and it sounds like that in and of itself made him va yamos, even though there's no mention of roeyev basar. So, what's the kasha? It sounds like by adam, once it's nishbera mafrekes, even without roeyev basar, a bigger chiddush than Rav Yehuda bar Shmuel bar Yitzchak, that even if there was no roeyev basar, which in the world of behemas would only make you a treifa, but it sounds like when it comes to adam, that would be even worse than that. But, the Gemara says ikna shaini, that's not a cuz Eli was very, very old. He was very frail. So, for someone that old and that frail to be that he shoved in my fracture, that would be already a viomis. But, someone that's not as old and frail, then it would have to be robust. Even that's what Rebbe Yehuda bar Mucho was talking about. Now, how do you know that that's true? The Gemara says read the possuk. It says vihi ka'as kiroi es Aron v'Alekim vayipol me'al hakiseh acharei anes ba'ad yad Hashem vayishaber mafrakto vayomois. And the next words ki zokein ish mikaveh. And the beer of that is is the reason that he shoved in my fracture was viomis even though there was no robustness in him. It's because ki zokein ish mikaveh because he was very old and frail. Either way, that's not a kasha on what Rebbe Yehuda bar Mucho said. Talk to the Gemara. More halachas related to this concept of what loosely defined is mifarkeses. But, this idea that somebody or an animal can be alive but afilu hachi we're going to view it as dead. Not just a treifa but even more than that we're going to view it as neveila. Amar Rebbe Shmuel bar Nachmani, Amar Rebbe Yochanan Korech kidoche. We're talking about a person. If somebody was torn like a fish, so the halacha is metameh ba'al metameh ba'al. What does this mean he was torn like a fish? So, it means that he was cut along the length. So, somebody made this incision from the top of the person to the bottom of the person. Amar Rebbe Shmuel bar Yitzchak umikagav. It's only true if it happened from the back of the person. The front of the person this wouldn't be true. Amar Rebbe Shmuel Shmuel said, "I saw a gistera." Shmuel was talking about an animal. In the event that an animal was chopped into two, gistera in Brachot says always means cut into two parts. So, in the event that a person was hacked literally into two pieces. Not a person, a beheima. Neveila [snorts] the halacha is it's going to be considered a neveila. Obviously, isn't it dead? It means when it's mifarkeses. So, even if it's mifarkeses, we're still going to view it as if it's a neveila. Amar Rebbe Elazar, Rebbe Elazar said nitla ayerech v'chol oshaloh nikar. In the event that the thigh bone of an animal was taken away and you can see the chol. Chol means you can see like the socket, the cavity where the yerech once was. Neveila is going to be considered a Niveala. Again, even though it's Mefarkeses, it looks like it's alive. All these case, if it's dead, it's dead. We're not having this conversation. Let's talk about where it has a pulse, it's alive. But I feel this wound makes it Mamesh not like a Treifa, but like a Niveala. So then my Rebbe told me, "Give me a Shulchan Aruch and give me an example of a Shulchan Aruch Niveala." And my Rebbe Rebbe said, "Kosher Revutza Venira Chaser." In the event that it's Revutza and it sits Venira Chaser, you could see that it's missing its thigh. So when an animal sits, sometimes you can't see its feet. So if [laughter] it sits in a way and you could see the Chalo, that means it's so Nicker now that it's missing the Yerech and it's that in that situation that you're going to have this Halacha. By the way, not surprising, who's the Moreh De Shmaita of some of these last Gemaras? It's Shmuel. This is Shmuel the Amora, but it's also Shmuel the Doctor. Am Rebbe Yuda Am Rebbe Shmuel Nishbera Mafrekes D'Rai Basar Eema Metama Ba'al. Rebbe Zeiri said regarding Beheima and Oifus, but Adam, you have to speak to a doctor. Now you have to speak to a veterinarian. Here you have to speak to a doctor. Shmuel the Doctor says this is the way it is. Either way, let's go to Gemara Va'eiter. Tanu Rabbanan, we learned in the Mishnah again, "Omin Inyan De'Inyan Zeh Inyan De'Inyan Zeh." This Mishnah is in Maseches Ahalos. It's Perek Aleph Mishnah Vav. "Chutzu this is talking about the Shmoneh Shratzim. So the Shmoneh Shratzim we know are Metama. What would be if the Shmoneh Shratzim were beheaded? Okay. Says the Mishnah, "Af Pishaim Mefarkesin, even though it's Mefarkeses, Tamei'im De'Halacha is they're going to be Metama Tum'as Sheretz Kezano De'Hulta, like the tail of this Hulta." Shaim Mefarkeses, even after you chop it off, the tail itself takes on a life of its own, right? Don't try this at home. But it takes on a life of its own, pun intended, and therefore, says the Mishnah, "Chutzu Rosheim, Af Pishaim Mefarkesin, Tamei'im De'Halacha is they're still going to be Tamei." Says the Gemara, "Mai Chutz?" The Mishnah was a little Sossom. What does it mean Chutz Rosheim? Means the head was completely chopped off and that's the way we teach it. That's what he usually means. But is that literally what it means? So the says it was a shala. That's what it means. Hotsu manish. He said in the name of Rav Mani Kav Dollas Oylas No, it means like the Havdalah of an Oylas Ha'Oif. Does that help? We have enough information ready in today's daf. It was a big shala how they would the Oylas Ha'Oif. The Rabbanan said you had to take several and knock out the two simanim. As opposed to what Rav Shimon said, you weren't allowed to knock out the two simanim. So he said Kav Dollas Oylas Ha'Oif do you mean the Havdalah of like the Rabbanan and if that's the case there's really no between what Rav Shimon is saying and what Rav Mani is saying. Again, we're talking not about an Oylas Ha'Oif. We're talking about an We're talking about the Shmoneh Esrei. But the Mishna says something about Hotsu Roshayam. Hotsu Roshayam does that mean 100% not 100%? Rav Shimon had to get it Hotsu Manish. Rav Mani he really spoke in riddles. You had to be a to understand what he was saying. He said Kav Dollas Oylas Ha'Oif. Kav Dollas Oylas Ha'Oif where it's completely severed means you do it or Kav Dollas Oylas Ha'Oif where it's not completely severed. It can't be completely severed or the is there a or is there no if it's for the Rabbanan if it's then very much is Kav Dollas Oylas Ha'Oif or Rav Rav Shimon or there's another of this mentioned discussion. Rav Shimon again what does Hotsu mean? Hotsu Manish? Rav Assi Rav Mani said Kav Dollas Oylas Ha'Oif. Now in the first he said Kav Dollas Oylas Ha'Oif knowing what he meant. Rav Yirmiya asked Rav Assi did you mean the Rabbanan did you mean Rav Shimon and he told him back Rav Shimon. Over here we omit that whole middle exchange. He said very clearly Kabbalah's oil Ha'Oif lure of and really there is going to be a second is the same in these two the question is how cryptic was in the first he was extremely cryptic. Number one he said Kabbalah's which is cryptic and then he didn't explain is it Kabbalah's the see he was cryptic in the second this is the he was cryptic he said Kabbalah's but he wasn't cryptic cuz he said Kabbalah's so now already you have what he means to say that it's not hence the and had understand the mission in a paragraph of mission of that talks about of the either way the question we've been waiting for my my who are these who's this again we had this already now we're in the middle we're there was a between the and regarding the of the according to the it's but it's a 100% you can't be according to it's two but at the same time you could be and not only could you be you actually have to be on the question is these two very disparate positions must be rooted in like everything and the question is my did they go ahead and they formulate their positions let's do a tiny bit of an introduction to this part of the the now is going to focus very much from here all the way until the mission of the of the of the on one in the it's a in safe of partial of the of the It's perek A. It's possuk here. The context over there is the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil The carbon oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the a very select group of averos. What was unique about the carbon oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the fits all regardless of who it is that's bringing the carbon. In fact, depending on the financial situation of the person, that dictated what kind he was going to bring. To the extent that this person was able to bring a regular carbon oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil If it was too difficult for him financially to bring a regular carbon oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the that we need is discussing the second of the two oil of the oil of the oil of the which is the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of So the first oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of The second is going to be the oil of the oil of That second oil of the oil of the which is the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the should be brought oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of And there was a huge debate amongst the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil It should be brought oil of the oil of the oil of oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of Now, what are the options? So I think if you would think about it logically, there's two possibilities. One is we're dealing with the second oil of the oil of It's the oil of the oil of the oil What's the first? The oil of the oil of the oil of So the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of That's one option. Another option would be this is in the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of This is plan B. What was plan A? To bring a oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of So the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the oil of the And as we're going to see, this will the the was is it like the or is it like you bringing the the question is are you bringing it like it's on the this is the so the is being brought in the same way that the was brought or not I'm playing B and I'm being brought in lieu of plan A so this is the way plan A was supposed to be brought another thing that's good to mention and that is so you do by the by the we mentioned the introduction to the the are not one in the same as a matter of fact when the describes the of the of it says very very little the says in dealing with dealing with the dolphin in the minute I mean as they had then it goes on and describes the rest of the but as it relates to the just as one word that's all it says what is okay so it's not the toes we know it's the but that's the only thing we know about it we know it's it's all it says when the describes the of the and that's by the is not in the that's in this over here here the says the voice the heaviest of the machine in the last the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest of the heaviest a but I shouldn't yes I will come and so here it doesn't just say it says me more or by the lawyers of the here's the question when it says me more or by the lawyers of the by the is that also true for the by the lawyers of the say that all it said was is the lawyers of the now obviously these big took him in the micro is from violent this whole came about and that is the differences between the lawyers of the and the and what exactly are they that would even be differences just look in the here it just says here it says me more or by the lawyers of the just appreciate a little bit better our mission how did we get into this whole discussion in the first place it was because we were comparing and it doesn't start it doesn't even say the word by the lawyers of the lawyers of the I don't know maybe you could do lawyers of the from some other part of the animal I mean it says so ultimately you're going to have to get there but for sure and sounds like would be okay I don't know but that's the way it make it taste and shouldn't be here by the >> [laughter] >> it says and you'll tell me what I mean if it's that way for the that way for the that sounds like you never opened the in your life so of course we know and it's not necessarily the same so the bottom line is it's from this that by the says yet when it comes to the it says that's where you see the again helpful to have learned or at the least open up a and see some of these bottom line is we're here in the home stretch of the and that is my and is the basis what is the what is the basis what is the this and I'm going to bring a long so the new we learned in the it says regarding the oil last oil last which is the second of the two that were brought for the only in the parish of the carbon it says the commission board. What is commission board means say the time of in this price of commission board it means you bring it like the mission board of the what is the mission board of the but for now commission board of the how do you know it's commission board maybe it's commission board and Russia it's very why the possible would have to say commission board you know why because it doesn't describe first of all how you bring the it doesn't say a word about it and even if you're intuitively going to say what is an and I know from that you could that the this probably also requires okay but they didn't tell you how to do the it just said over here it says what is it what is it very important says means you only do on one summit right very important we're getting up to that but the point is is that maybe it's commission board and it makes sense to say commission board because number one I don't know how you're supposed to bring it and even if I look at maybe the of the and Russia over here it says as we only one summit like I don't know if all these things are going to be true as it relates to the says the coming talking it says now what does it say we have to jump a little bit this it says back in when we're dealing with the that's brought in the so it says what should it have said why does it say there's only one carbon that's being discussed over there it's the so why does it have to say it's coming to It's coming to me that you don't bring commission but the are cool this has its own unique way of being brought. If that's the case money so what does the mean when it says it must be right that must be what it means see right in the self and by the way it probably would be even more logical and we'd have to see how the but it probably would make sense it should be brought in the same way that the has been brought. The problem is in the which means it has a if what then must mean it must be okay [laughter] so what does it mean this is all the in only brought from but you can't use to bring the same way that the has been So who by this had to be brought during the day says all of it has to be done during the day and you had to do it with the hand who by that's what it means it means says the in the nation I am You're telling me that the should be brought like the same way that the requires what is the definition of right Rubik's Cube is going to be okay so if that's the case when it comes to the you should have to do Malika on two morning and right of the should be okay makes sense time with it says who and it says so this again is going back to that same in the same That's the we're jumping between that's the of that's brought in the and that's the again I and then it says the I'll kill him it says the the juxtaposition between these two things teaches me just like when it comes to how do you know that by the way that's but that's not the rushes out from when it comes to I learn here too that the has to be and the has to be I know that they have to be completely separate to the bottom line is is the first of three sheets that I can be mentioned in this it's the sheet of the also known as the sheet of the what do the say that when it says in the of yes I wish but it means not that should be brought like the what it means is that the should be brought like the behima what does it mean like the behima it's it has to be brought after by and it has to be done after with the other one is maybe it means that you should bring the same way you bring the it says in the of to teach me that it has a a completely different than Malika okay if that's the case that you bring the in the same way you bring the behima by the behima we say maybe by the we should also say by it says the by the by the by the by the when it comes to the by the by the by the the by the by the by the what's the bottom line that emerges from this first sheet over here in this that is that when you go ahead and you do the Malika of the it has to be a by the by the by the this is the sheet of that hold that even though ordinarily when it comes to the we say but when it comes to the oil not What's the market to it? It's because it says one question just in case it's bothering you that the more is going to ask and that is The more had a little bit of a pill pole and that is when it says it What would commission mean? So the price is what would commission mean? The sugar of how you do the of the way you mirror the way you do the of the what's unique of the way you do the of the mean is one another one is what is mean? You do only one cinnamon. The more thought that maybe commission is telling me that the more of the is what was the answer the means no the has to be done differently. So there is one cinnamon over here means it's going to be two cinnamon. Isn't that what I learned from you go through the price again? It sounds like do it do a two to discuss how do I know that the more of the is not commission the more of the the is one and the more there is two. I don't think I need to teach me the same exact this is something that the more is going to talk a little bit about but again This is the first of three sheets in the price sheet number two says when it says in the this says you know what commission means it means commission that that is no more glad than it means okay, what's the more means right? How would you know that the more of the is supposed to be more doesn't say it commission teaches me that I can see that if you tell me that it's and you're learning don't I know it from no because it doesn't say it over there. Okay, but the bottom line is if I'm learning to teach me that you have to do so maybe I should learn well it says right it says right going back it says going back to the and from the that it says in I learn that no it has to be different. Okay, so if it has to be different in what way is it going to be different? It's going to be different that was by the when it comes to the it's going to be now the price of stops here as it relates to be but picks up with the price leaves off and some long lashes over here on the as you can see. So let's just speak our speaks that cuz it's very in the price. So as I if you think about it right here we're a little bit stuck because understood that means like the of the what's it coming to teach me? more boy if that's the case maybe teach me also it says right how do you know to learn from more and from the right that you don't say maybe maybe just the other way. Maybe say from I'm going to learn but it's going to be as opposed to from and from the I'm going to learn that it's not supposed to be more right. Let's say this a little bit more terms. More is the of what the is. The defines the nature the action of what it is you actually have to do when you get to the right place. Kamishbat being used to say that the mokem of the oil side and the mokem of the oil side is the same. Oh, but the kriva is coming to tell me that the process of exactly how it's done is going to be different for the oil side. Make it taste and do it this way, maybe do it the other way. Look Rashi, it's pashut that the reason the matter didn't speak it out is because the matter knew that it was being so what the matter already said previously. And once it was said in the matter wasn't needed anymore to say and that is we have a drasha that says in Malachi matter of the Torah matter of the Torah matter of the Torah and it's for that reason that the matter assumed or matter assumed that it makes more sense that the din should be two matter of the Torah matter of the Torah for the so just like at the end of the discussion of the matter we had this that why don't you say matter of the Torah and it should need the matter of the Torah should be okay. What was the answer? It says it's not the same but it's a similar matter of the Torah maybe learn from that it should be a matter of the Torah the Torah again it says I will ask me if it says already matter of the Torah if it says already matter of the Torah to teach me that you need two matter of the Torah why do I need the kriva? It's a good it's the same exact that we spoke out in the sheet of the and we mentioned in the sheet of the matter is going to ask it. When the matter is going to ask it after you learn you'll realize matter is not only asking it in the matter is asking but here's the bottom line what emerges from matter of the Torah is that holds like the >> [laughter] >> so till now we said matter of the Torah the matter of the Torah two of three sheets has mentioned over here in this the matter of the Torah as in the matter of the Torah matter of the Torah matter of the Torah that's why you don't say even though it's matter of the Torah matter of the Torah matter of the Torah not saying over here because it's a matter of the Torah love my love my love my love my love my love my love my love my love my Here in addition to that You wouldn't be able to be on either way the third one but said when it says I will come you know what means it means not like the but like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could But I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could To the I wish I could The way you do the I wish I could is when the head and the I wish I could to each other and you know that cuz it says I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I When it comes to the I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could and just like I wish I could side if it's taco one cinnamon but by the side if it's going to be two cinnamon. But I wish said clearly he said it in book saying that when it comes to the side if you're not allowed to be it. You have to make sure they're hanging on. Now you have to do two cinnamon because it says but at the same time he says that it has to be and what's the of cinnamon not that's not what's coming to teach me. What it's coming to teach me is I guess the book Bottom line is this is where it comes that you can't be the bottom line is the and the in the price of they hold that you have to go ahead and separate 100%. What's the you can't. What's the because it says and it says and I have to like the price of rather than to teach me that this is going to be >> [laughter] >> there is a here it's one cinnamon two cinnamon but that's because it says something else. But as it relates to this but it's going to be so again fascinating. She Rubik's Cube if it's a right with the two cinnamon if it's a if it's right with the one cinnamon but also with the Rubik's Cube when it comes to the there is a whole different Indian. It's a different Indian because of one cryptic possible Indian and this sets in motion the but the bottom line is because of all these during the you end up with a situation where it's for sure not Rubik's Cube. It's right you can appreciate the catch a little bit better earlier in the year. We had the price of both things either you're walking away from this saying or the or you're walking away from the the there's no such thing over here of having either way let's just wrap up the says the going back to the and the way Rashi out is not only the Tanna Kamma, it's also Rabbi Yishmael. According to the Tanna Kamma and Rabbi Yishmael and after Amalek V'Hekter, they hold at the end of the day that when it says Amalek V'Hekter, that teaches me that you have to sever the two small again. Tanna Kamma said it before that's why the Gemara is addressing the Tanna Kamma. Rabbi Yishmael Rashi said it was implied from him from the way the Gemara just left it hanging that he holds the same way. But once they have Amalek V'Hekter, V'Ekrivoi why do I need V'Ekrivoi? Right cuz if you remember side of the Tanna Kamma and side of Rabbi Yishmael both use V'Ekrivoi to tell me that has to be severed 100% that you can't be some of the Han on Rubai K'Kuloi. Right, the Tanna Kamma was saying it to address that if it's K'Mishpat Chatas B'Heima, Mishpat Chatas B'Heima is Rubai Siman and let it be Rubai Siman and Amir as well. And Rabbi Yishmael was using it to address that if it's K'Mishpat Chatas Oif and there is a Din of Oif and Yado, for sure it's Rubai K'Kuloi to say it over here as well. So, the Teres was V'Ekrivoi but then I have Amalek V'Ekter. So, what do I need Amalek V'Ekter and V'Ekrivoi to tell me the same thing? So, the Gemara says Ilavi Krivoi. Had it not said V'Ekrivoi, Hava Mina I would have thought my K'Mishpat K'Mishpat Chatas Oif. I would have thought again this is in the Tanna Kamma now that had it not said V'Ekrivoi, I would have thought for sure that when it says K'Mishpat it means K'Mishpat Chatas Oif. I Eemi Shuma Amalek V'Ekter. I says Amalek V'Ekter, Hava Mina I would have thought Maha K'Tores B'Rosh Hashana B'Yach. That it's coming to teach me something else. It's coming to teach me that just like K'Tores B'Rosh Hashana B'Yach, of Malika B'Rosh Hashana B'Yach. Maybe the Malika also has to be B'Rosh Hashana B'Yach. In other words, if all I had was Amalek V'Ekter and that was going up against K'Mishpat, I would have thought for sure K'Mishpat tells me it's 100% like Chatas Oif. That's what it is. It's coming to teach me K'Mishpat Chatas Oif, not Chatas B'Heima, not Chatas Oif. Like Rabbi Yishmael says from Oif is a book. That's what it means. I you're you're steering in the eye of a Hekesh or Drasha or Amalek V'Ekter, maybe it's coming to teach me something else. K'Tores B'Rosh Hashana B'Yach, right? Every K'Tores in the world B'Rosh Hashana B'Yach. So, the Malika also has to be right we know that avoid of the had to be but the bottom line is I would think that's what it's coming to teach me to the but now that it says so they has all in the story is in the commission but so now already it opens up the gave me the to go ahead and to a little bit and say that even though it's commission but say that according to the but it's not necessarily 100% that's when they have a right to go ahead and but without I would never go and I would never the like that either way let's get to the mission so according to the camera according to the camera what does it mean that it's commission but is the model the price is said what does it mean number one that means is it about it also has to be brought from that is it about it it also has to be brought by and the had to be brought the other so to the has had to be brought with the other so these are three things that we're supposed to know that number one is the model is only it's only by and it's only be and we're now telling it to to teach me that has to be the same way how do you know all these three things by the model to now know to it to the that is the model of the law I'm going to I'm going to say that this is talking about the power that the God used to bring on this was his own power and we learn from them the way he had to pay for that in his own pocket additionally we also learn that it couldn't be brought from Russia says it says twice and one teaches me "V'lo yimshal tzibur." The second one teaches me "Not maiser shaini." Bottom line is, you see from here that "Aharon HaKohen's chatas beheimah" couldn't be brought from maiser shaini. Why? Cuz it has to be brought from "Achul." And that teaches me every chatas beheimah. And "Kamishpah" teaches me it's also true for the "Olas Ha'if." "B'yom" was the second one. Faced the Gemara "Kasha." I know the makor of how you know that "Chatas beheimah" has to be brought by day, right? That's something everybody knows. It's learned out from a possuk in the Torah. "B'yom tzavoisai es B'nei Yisrael l'hakriv korbaneihem l'Hashem." If that's the case, the Gemara even asks it as a "Kasha." It's not "Min ha'olam d'halacha." It's I don't even know why you need to come on to a "hekeish" to tell me that the "Olas Ha'if" is like the "Chatas beheimah" to know this "halacha"? For the same reason, faced the Gemara, that the "Chatas beheimah" had to be brought during the day because it says "B'yom tzavoisai in ol avoydim in the Beis HaMikdash" to be during the day. Okay, so for that reason the "Olas Ha'if" would also have to be brought during the day. So faced the Gemara "Kasha." "B'yom miyam tzavoisai nafka." Why do I have to come on to "Kamishpah"? And the Gemara you're right, "Kadi na." It's only been mentioned with "D'aracha d'agav" over here. There's no real reason that this needs to be "Acha Yomanis." Right? As it relates to the "Odei Acha Yomanis." Faced the Gemara "D'oichei d'kasha." Why do I need a "limud" of "Olas Ha'if" from "Chatas beheimah" to learn that the way the "Olas Ha'if" had to be done with the right hand? "Mid'Rabba bar bar Chana nafka." I know the "Rabba bar bar Chana amar Rabba bar bar Chana amar Rav Shemuel bar Nachmani amar Rav Etzba Kohen ain yamin." Wherever it says the word "etzba" it says "Kohen" means "yamin." And being that it says the word "Kohen" in the "Parshas Melikah" "D'ikri "HaKohen." So I know for sure that has to be "b'yamin." So the Gemara says "Ve'idach distana held "Kohen" "b'etzba" "etzba" "loy b'kohen." That is sometimes this "Rabba bar bar Chana amar Rav Shemuel bar Nachmani" was misquoted. Right? The way we had it was if it says either the word "etzba" or "Kohen" it means "yamin." There was another version and that is wherever it says "Kohanim" unless it says "etzba" it doesn't necessarily mean "yamin." If it says "etzba" even if it doesn't say "Kohen" it doesn't mean "yamin." In other words, "Kohen" doesn't mean you're men. And that's what doesn't mean you're men. Being that it says Kahuna, but it doesn't say ex but, that's why I have to come on. That's why I have to come on to address off afraid to come on with one last kasha. And that is the Tana Kama who doesn't come Mish but as I said in the Yasa over come Mish but that is referring to come Mish but to be him. The Rabal Bar Shimon and Rabal Bar Shimon who doesn't come Mish but but what's it coming to teach me? Come Mish but that there's a din for Yado. Me Mul I have me no. How do they know that the Malika of the had to be me Mul like every nuance of the laws of Malika of the needed Limud. So if that's the case, the only one that had a Limud to teach me that the Malika of the had to be done me Mul like the was Rabish Mul. He said that's what come Mish but is coming to teach me. But the Tana Kama said it's come Mish but to be him. And Rabal Bar Shimon said it's come Mish but but a different >> [laughter] >> so me Mul me no. And by the way, talk about coming full circle. This is really where the whole thing is starting. It started with a Mishnah feels like a long time ago. But it started with a Mishnah that mentioned the Ika that Malika has to be done me Mul sounds like Malika is Malika is After this whole that we only got into because of you have to sever it 100%. If you say Rubik but after all is said and done, we have two of the three that I don't even know. How do you know me Mul says the Gomer Malika me Malika. At the end of the day, they're both called Malika. It's like a Mama you know you don't have to have a fancy for this. And Mama Malika is me Mul so too when it comes to the Malika of an life, it's going to be me Mul as well. I know we wrote hashtag rate. We're not going to speak at any rate right now. But we're going to attach a rate by. So just to set up the read by that's going to be attached. So, we mentioned according to the Tanakama and the brysa, when it says kamishpot, what does it mean kamishpot? It means kamishpot chatus b'eima. We learn that three things that the olas ha'if has to be like chatus b'eima. Number one, in a element achulin. Number two, it has to be brought by yom. And number three, it has to be brought beyond ha'eimoris. The Gemara dissected this part of the brysa and what emerged was as follows. The fact that chatus b'eima has to be brought dafka min achulin is a chidush. It's a chidush that the Torah says dafka by chatus b'eima the hekev ha'aronis par achas asher lay the par that [snorts] the Kohanim used to bring on Yom Kippur. Oh, kamishpot teaches me that if it's true for the chatus b'eima, it's also going to be true for the olas ha'if. As it relates to yoday ha'eimoris, that's also something I would never know from the parsha of olas ha'if. Because if it says etzba, I would know, but it doesn't say etzba. So, how am I supposed to know? Oh, chatus b'eima. Chatus b'eima does say etzba. So, there I know there's an idea of yoday ha'eimoris. So, if I know it there, I know it here as well. The one part of this brysa that the Gemara struggled with a little bit was the fact kamishpot teaches me that just like the chatus b'eima had to be brought during the day, so too the olas ha'if had to be brought during the night. The Gemara asked a kasha, by yom? Maybe yom tzav osei nafka. I know that from yom tzav osei. Every avoda had to be during the day. Why would I think the olas ha'if is different? The Gemara said you're 100% right. Kadi naspa. It was thrown in with darka. Which if you think about it, is a darka nifla. Right? It's incredibly darka. Kadi naspa. I'm just telling it to you for no reason. I'm telling it to you for no reason. If there's three things to learn, tell me three. If there's two things, tell me two. It's not like these three things always come together that let me throw it in over here for good measure. Like why in the world would you even mention by yom? Gemara that without question is is very very darka. There's a Tosefos ha'Roshba with a shail apparently had found a manuscript of a Gemara where the Gemara said something a little bit different. Make sense that the Gamara would have said something a little bit different cuz the Gamara the way we have it is very very straight. On this kasha by Yoram, "We be Yom Tov also nafka." The Gamara gave a teretz. The Gamara says, [snorts] "Ola good karbanos I would have thought Ola tamid is different. It's true, every single avoda that has to be done nafka during the day. Ola but maybe not Ola tamid." Kamashpalan kamishna. Now in that shuva the shailah asked the Rashba, "Why would Ola tamid be different? If every single avoda had to be done during the day, so why in the world would I think Ola tamid not?" If the chatos and the asham and the ola and the shlamim and the toda and the bechor ma'aser and the pesach and the chatos ola for that matter. And it's true for the shchita and the kabala and the hiluch and the zrika. It's true for the smicha that's taken for shchita. It's true for every single avoda in the world. Right, that's the kasha that he always asks. So why do I always need to bring my nation for my avodas? Yesh shiyur whatever in the world avoda let it be a mincha. It could be the kemitza. It could be the gosha. It could be the tenufa. It could be the hakatora. It could be the hakatora shnaim b'sichin l'avod. Every single avoda on planet earth has to be done during the day from the same source. "Be Yom Tov also." So Tosafos always has a mishech shiyur mangar. But the bottom line is here the shailah told the Rashba of a Gamara that says I would have thought Ola tamid is different. Why in the world would I have thought Ola tamid is different?" The short answer is "I ain ar sameach." The long answer is it's the Ra'avad that is going to be attached. It's the Ra'avad that we spoke out few times over the years. Most recently in the beginning of Maseches Shavuos I ain sham. So one of the predominant topics of the beginning of Maseches Shavuos is the korban ola v'yored. The Torah says in the beginning of Parshas Vayikra that there are three types of aveiros that if a person violates them he is going to have to bring a korban known as the korban ola v'yored. Now the korban ola v'yored was a korban chatos. Don't let the word ola oil fool you. It was inherently a carbon hattos. The reason it was called an oil of the oil aid is because in contrast to an ordinary carbon hattos, which was a fixed animal that the person had to bring, >> [snorts] >> when it came to the oil of the oil aid, the type of animal or the type of carbon that was brought varied. It was oil of the oil aid, and really it depended on the financial status of the person that was bringing the carbon. The Torah says that if a person was a man of means, so he brought a behema as his carbon. Most carbonos were behemos. This person would bring a behema. In the event that he couldn't afford to bring a behema, so the Torah says in lieu of a behema you could bring two birds. What type of birds? Either bene yonah or torim. In the event that the person was such a dull that he couldn't even afford to bring birds, so the Torah said there's an option C, and that is he was able to bring a carbon mincha. So inherently the oil of the oil aid was a hattos, but being that the type of carbon varied and depended on the person's financial status, it's for that reason it gets this unique name. It's known as the carbon oil of the oil aid. Now, who brought the carbon oil of the oil aid? So we mentioned three chataim. What were those chataim? So it's all delineated very very clearly in the beginning of parshas Vayikra. Number one, if somebody violated shvuas bituy. Number two, if somebody violated shvuas ha'eidus. Number three, if somebody violated tumas mikdash v'kodashav. The reason we're discussing the oil of the oil aid in the beginning of meseches shvuos is because two out of the three people that brought the carbon oil of the oil aid were people that violated shvuos, specifically shvuas bituy, which is really the way the meseches begins. The reason we've also been discussing tumas mikdash v'kodashav, it's It's the topic of the first 20 or so daf in other masechta. It's ID the Naka Shvuos Stein chain Arba. We mentioned those Yitzias Hatuma Stein chain Arba. And it's not just an ID that they're both Stein chain Arba, but like the Gemara said in daf Kima Lam Alef, they both have the carbon of the Yored. That's their common denominator. And it's for that reason we talk about one Stein chain Arba that has the carbon of the Yored. We mention another Stein chain Arba that has a carbon of the Yored as well. The Ramban in his Pirush Al Ha Torah makes two observations as it relates to this parsha of over the Yored. The first observation that he makes is that why is it, the obvious question, Kan Ha Ben Shoyel, that these three Chataim, which [clears throat] are inherently Chatais, have the cooler of over the Yored as opposed to every other Chatais that person may have to bring, we it did not have with it the cooler of over the Yored. Meaning, it's Sukkim in the Torah, and obviously on some level everything in Toras Kohanim is above our pay grade. But the Ramban asks the obvious question, and that is Mana Shana these three Carbonois from all the other different types of Chataim for which a person ordinarily would have to bring a Carbon Chatais he could afford it, he can't afford it, figure it out. You have to bring a Beheima. Yet when it comes to these three Chataim, it's going to be different. So the Ramban says, I think the Pshat is as follows. As it relates to the two Shvuos, the Shvuos Bituy and the Shvuos Eidus, where there's a parsha of Carbon over the Yored, there the question is easy. The reason it's easy is because really who brought a Carbon Chatais? Someone that didn't have a Vera, that had he done it BeMeizid, he would have been Chayev Kores. If he does it BeShogeg, he brings a Carbon Chatais. Shvuos Bituy and Shvuos Eidus, if somebody violates these Aveiros BeMeizid, he gets Malkus, but he's not going to be high of chorus. So really I will be showing them on the mix star and says the Ramban that they're even high of to bring a carbon hot us. No, the Torah was my goddess. They bring a carbon hot us. Above all me they don't have to have the home rule that regardless of whether they could or can't afford it, they're going to have to bring the behavior. The Torah said that I'll be my goddess of hot us, but at the same time it's going to come along with a cooler. The cooler is that it's going to be an over the year. But says the Ramban that's good as it relates to the two scores. Who brings the over the year? What about Thomas McDickens for God of where deep in the sewers right now and we know that the Thomas McDickens for God of the amazing this chorus. So that's your classic delicious doing a chorus for sugar goes to hot us. So why would you have the cooler of over the year? So the Ramban says something beautiful. He says who the Thomas McDickens for God of the nation who told you that I meant to cuz at the end of the day if a person violated McDickens for God of let's be honest at the rate of the base of McDickens at the rate of Mc Gotcha. He did something bad. It's so bad that he's high of chorus. Chorus is the worst of the worst, but at the same time he's going to be my mentor. The above the McDickens for his talk of a voice. The Torah gave him additional life and him to be able to get the power. So says the Ramban the reason is these three hot times that have the cooler of over the year. As it relates to the two scores it's because it's not a delicious doing a chorus and the M is all the way to the moment star and why they're even high of the hot us. No hot us with the cooler of over the year. As it relates to the Thomas McDickens for God of the reason is McDickens for God of the nation who told you that I meant to. He's [snorts] going to be sick with McDickens for the day of the nation on some level and it's for that reason even though it's true what he did is very very common and he needs the power and the amazing he would have been high of chorus, but the mice of throw them a bone and we say that in the event that it was done by you have the cooler of this is the first observation and the first discussion in the that [snorts] the talks about the second observation that the makes is so if somebody was able to afford to bring proper then he brought proper and the fact that it's really neither here nor there if however the person couldn't afford to bring a carbon student the terrorist says he brings or what's the of the person you would say being that the bird is an inferior product versus the animal so even though we give you the cooler to bring a bird but you have to bring two and by the way two birds are probably still cheaper than one animal but the point is being that you're doing something inferior it's for that reason you have to bring two but the truth is the person says that the reason is one of them was brought as a carbon and the other one was brought as a carbon as in other words when the usher brought his carbon he brought one animal and it was a we said the is the however when the other man brought the so then the two animals were one which makes sense cuz that's what the is but the other one was going to be an and the asks the obvious question he says if the person that is over the has to bring in addition to a also and if he doesn't have to bring a carbon so why is the other man bringing us now you want to tell me you have to bring two beside there. You want to tell me two and I hear but they should both be why is it that one of them is a and the other one is an oil. So, the quotes whatever Ezra says the says the that said the oil. connected the she all of them is the offer period says the the says that the the Ezra made this observation and the Ezra said a double and the somewhat surely says as it relates to what the Ezra said the offer period I think he's saying a very nice and I agree with him 100% so the Ezra he says [clears throat] that we know that the hottest was cool so in the world of the that were brought as carbon oils for the most part a carbon had a haywire that went and sometimes to the and the haywire that went the one exception to the rule was the carbon oil the carbon oil was cool which means that all of the of the carbon oil was brought as a that was no of the carbon oil that was as it relates to the oil there the oil had that same unique quality as the oil that is that it was cool oil but interestingly as it relates to the oil it was cool oil the now the oil just to be clear had a haywire that went to the had a haywire that went the oil was cool oil so the oil was cool oil just like the oil was cool oil the oil was cool oil so said the Ezra that in the event that the man right now is going to bring only oil whether it's one or whether it's two and they're going to be hot toys. What's going to emerge is that his entire carbon is going to be and there's going to be no way that of the boss or of this animal that's going to be brought to that's going to be brought as a because the coolest and that's a problem. The reason it's a problem is because the same which is what the are being brought in lieu of have a that was and also had a that was and now that you're bringing is you're only going to have the coolest thing. You're not going to have the so what we need to do now is we need to supplement that piece. The way we supplement that piece is by saying that in addition to your also bring it the always is cool like the so transition the which goes to the and the which goes to the what you have is your proverbial same and that's why although the did not have to bring an the had to bring an oil. The reason he's bringing an oil is because not that he needs an oil. What he needs is a of a carbon that's going to go he can't get that from the because the is cool and for that reason he had to bring the it's a that says and brings it and is he says the offer the truth is that if you look around in the other than said the same exact thing that the brings the same I'll just mention one. That is in the of the says it by he asked this why is it that the in addition to bringing he also had to bring his washing is one of and the the more it says and right but why would the throw upon him on and the only question is the of the both okay so you'll tell me you need two to make up for the one that the usher is bringing. But you see that's not what it is. What it is is that in addition to this carbon he also needs an oil. Well, if the usher doesn't need an oil, then why should other men need an oil? Then came the and you saw as well says the I'm skipping a little bit. The usher was able to bring one carbon. That's why he has to have both. Says it very very even when I quote he quotes it very but the says it >> [laughter] >> he says cuz at the end of the day a carbon If you bring the you're going to have it. If you're going to bring the you're not going to have it. So the of the as it relates to the carbon was really to fill the role of the and it's for that reason it's for that reason whereas the usher only brought a the other man had to bring it's a dual. that is in her said a in this world I'll Peter 7 the message of the school again this is very relevant to what we're learning right now cuz we're holding teeth in the of the carbon so the other sins one of the in the of the carbon the passage says regarding the state that he has to come to keep the usher just brings the animal. The man brings the two birds. One is hot sauce. That's a shame. And the second one is Yasha. And he should bring it come Mishpat. So the Gamorah says, what does it mean come Mishpat? You should bring the second of the birds, which is going to be an oil come Mishpat. So says the Gamorah, come Mishpat means that the oil should be brought with the same Shulchan Aruch as the hot sauce. My Neshama came in a says the Gamorah three things. My hot sauce came in here in a bottle of oil. Just like a hot sauce came in here has to be brought in a bottle of oil. Oh by oil. Not just that, has to be brought during the day. Oh by oil they hire money. And when you do the oil you have to do it with the right hand. I have oil so oil. So too when it comes to this oil so oil in a bottle of oil. It has to be brought in a bottle of oil. Oh by oil. It has to be brought during the day. Oh by oil they hire money. And with the right hand. That's the only way you do the oil. So the Torah in the parish of the carbon oil of a year old when it's talking about which slot the oil so oil says the word come Mishpat to teach me three Allahs. The oil so oil had to be brought in a bottle of oil. The oil so oil had to be brought during the day. And the oil so oil had to be Dafka by oil they hire money. So I'm skipping a whole Dafka. The Gamorah in Dafka page dissects this price. And the Gamorah says like this, by oil. One of the things that we learn from the word come Mishpat in the parish of oil so oil is that the oil so oil had to be brought during the day. Straight the Gamorah, I need a limud of come Mishpat that it's like the hot sauce to tell me it has to be brought during the day. Me beyond such so nice girl. The positive says being such so oil. As been a year so I have to score the name of a shame. And from that positive we learn that all of oil of all different carbons had to be brought Dafka during the day. Even straight to which the Gamorah says love of oil had to be done during the day. It's straight to the Gamorah, why do I need a limud of come Mishpat to tell me that the oil so oil had to be brought during the day? Isn't there a general thing that all carbons had to be brought during the day? And the Gamorah says you're right come in ask but in a minute. we tackle don't need a limo to tell me that had to be brought during the day. Why then what's the mention? You mention two, we threw in a third. But kadi naspa, the whole thing is one big toys. The Rashba [snorts] in a chuva, and this is in a siman ayin vav, was asked the question by a shoyel, where had a manuscript of a maseches chulin, right? This is before the Bamberg and the Soncino shas, and when the way the Talmud was circulated was in manuscript. And this shoyel had a manuscript, and his chulin daf chabesa amud aleph was a little bit different. In his girsa, when the Gamara says, bayom mi beyom savoi nafka, why would I need a limud of kamish to tell me that had to be brought during the day? It's poshut had to be brought during the day. So this is what it said in that girsa. Salga daas achamina, not cuz I would have thought, hanimi chotas the when is there a halacha bayom that's chotas avo soiv em but this the smallest in the world somewhere to tell me that maybe not. Kamashmalon, the halacha of kamish and the shoyel asked the Rashba, what's poshut shas? What would be the hava mina the from all the carbonos in the world that somehow is not included in beyom savoi benai Yisrael carbonem, the yeah the not and the Rashba wrote back to him, you're 100% right. This is a girsa girsa meshubeshes. Don't even pay attention to this girsa. It's a mistake, you put it in the Cairo Geniza, don't pay any attention to it. This is one big mistake this girsa. So when they in Orach Chaim and this is very much tucked away, it's in Hilchos Maaseh Sheni perek zayin, he brings this girsa that the shoyel and the Rashba told the Rashba that in the Gamara in Chulin daf chabesa amud aleph, and he brings the fact that the Rashba said be moiche the girsa, it's one big toys. But [laughter] Rebbi Meir Simcha the Michtav I think you could be meyashev the girsa. Because the emes is it's a right, we're dealing here with the in the parsha of the and the Ben Ezra already asked the greatest kasha that the Rambam brings and that is the why does this other man even have to bring a carbon oil? The doesn't bring a carbon oil. So why would he have to bring a carbon oil? And the Ben Ezra and the and he said that the reason is because being that a has to have a that goes and the oil was going so there's no that goes so we're bringing out the the oil so like this there should be a oil that's going to go on the mizbeach. So we know that even though the Torah says that all that had to be done during the day, but there's one that was able to be done at night and that's that in first [clears throat] Mishnah in Shas Brochos Amud right? We know >> [laughter] >> so we know that was able to be done the entire night and being that the whole of the is so we're yesh that's why there would have been a have a mino that maybe the has to be done at night. Maybe doesn't have to be done during the day. Come on come to tell me that even though the >> [laughter] >> of the is but it's included in the din that has to be done during the day. But there's an interesting postscript to this half of the or and that is in a safer called Boruch and this safer was written by a Jew whose name was Boruch Ginsburg. So the more popular was written by the Torah Temimah, but this was written by a Jew whose name was Boruch Ginsburg. So some of you speak out. He was a great Litvish goyen and he once went to visit he brings this in the this safer. He said [laughter] he once went to the he walks into his study and he saw was beaming. He was so happy. He never saw him like this and he said with think why are you so excited? Is there something uh you want to share with me? Did something happen? And you know what? I'm going to share with you a mice to show you that I was sitting and learning right now and I came across the Gamora by which sounds like it was a happening in the Gamora that as it relates to the maybe that's enough. I would be a kosher said that there's no in this case will be the case and I had this maybe based on that maybe you could bring this by as well and as I thought of this >> [laughter] >> I fell asleep. I fell asleep. All of a sudden I had a and in my sleep I had a dream. And in the dream I was standing in Shamaya. And there was a big kitchen going on in the world and the kitchen was that the prosecution was saying that there's such a this is in Torah right now that there's no one in this door that can be to sadness. This is what he sees in his dream and as this was happening and they're trying to figure out what do we do about this all of a sudden the he walks into Shamaya and he said it's not he said because there's a in Lithuania in a who just now set up shop in a he was that 800 years ago I said had no and he was to and and you can't be on the door because there is a in this door right now that has the ability to be to and this so may look at this and he said that's why I'm so because of this that I just had and the truth is if you take a look at the in the and he'll say to say I after May Simcha says this word he very mysteriously says the following. He says, "L'fi ma she p'rational based on our p'shat, he nussach daf komes." May Simcha sprach, "The nussach is a miduyakdik nussach. The girsah is a real girsah. The samachti ma'oid she'ein chani Yisrael b'derech emes." He said, "I was so b'simcha that the Aibershter led me b'derech emes." What it's What's brought down in the hakdamah to that safer in the Keren Boruch is what we like to say is the rest of the story.