Chulin 35

Today's stuff is Hulin da flamed hey. And we are 10 lines from the top of da flamed dalid omid base on my rule. Today's stuff's being learned as a refula shlema for Eliezer Yishai ben Bracha, Chava Miriam bas Malkah Freida, and Shloime ben Chaya Leah. So, [snorts] we're in the middle of a series of dafin, dafin tucked away in the lameds. Perek Shocheit of maseches Hulin, dafin that deal with some of the more obscure halachas in Shas, the laws of tumah v'taharah. So, just recap and set the stage for what will as we say Hashem be an intense exercise. And that is the Mishnah on daf lamed gimmel amud aleph discuss somebody that shechts Hulin v'lo yatza mehen dam, and no dam came out. And the whole Shulchan Aruch of how exactly we treat that beheima. One of the halachas that the Mishnah said was v'enachlin b'yadayim t'mei'os. You're allowed to eat the meat with hands that are tamei l'fi shelo huchsharu b'dam, because in order for food to become tamei, it would have to first be muchshar l'kabel tumah. Ordinarily, when you shecht an animal, the meat by definition is muchshar l'kabel tumah because of the dam. But being that this shechitah didn't involve any dam, it's not muchshar l'kabel tumah. Hence, if you want to eat it b'yadayim t'mei'os, it's going to be okay. The Gemara asked the Bamba Kasha. The Gemara said that it's mevorer from the Mishnah four rayos that we're dealing with basar Hulin. If we're dealing with basar Hulin, why is there even a conversation about eating basar Hulin with yadayim t'mei'os? Stam yadayim we know are sheini l'tumah, and a sheini is not oiseh Hulin shlishi. And what emerged from the last two dafin is three t'rutzim from the Amora'im to explain poshut p'shat in the Mishnah. The first was Rav Nachman Amar Rav he said we're dealing not with ordinary who and we're dealing with my secession according to the that hold my secession is subject to you're right you have four eyes when I tell you what cotton we're not dealing with cotton but at the same time we're dealing with a type of who and that subject to a solution the second was there is a in the world of tomorrow where the hands of a person can be a lot of money and in that situation the hands would be able to be because it wouldn't be making it a solution it'd be making it into a finally we're dealing you're right not with cotton we're dealing with hands that are shiny we're not even dealing with my secession what we're dealing with is but and that is a self-fulfilling prophecy and being that cotton we know is subject to a solution and even reveal so it's for that reason that we have a mission that discusses your diet in the context of that's the easy part of the recap the trickier part of the recap which was the topic really of almost the entire of yesterday was after made his third shot of the mission that we're dealing with that is good he added three words three immortal words he said that this is the lake of what was he even referring to he was referring to a mission in the Terrace mission of base review sure was discussing somebody who ate who and that was a solution and said who and solution of the there's no such thing." And he explained "B'hulin she naso al tehoros trumah." And Rebbi Elozar Rebbi Hoshia understood from the fact that Rebbi Yehoshua said that a heketemtsa of Hulin shlishi would be Hulin she naso al tehoros trumah. It sounds like Hulin she naso al tehoros trumah in, but Hulin she naso al tehoros kodshim loy. What would be the svara? It's because trumah was much more metsuyah in the words of Rashi than was kodshim. So, the only time Chazal said that your chumra is going to become your reality is something that shliach, which is in line with the way Chazal always make takanos. A nusa d'shliach like Rashi Rebbi Akiva So, Hulin she naso al tehoros trumah, which was shliach, which was metsuyah, so there Chazal said it's going to be a real thing. Hence, this an inyan that if you treat your Hulin al tehoros trumah, it's going to be subject to a a shlishi letom'a. Hulin she naso al tehoros kodshim was loy shliach. It was not metsuyah. I mean, that was not metsuyah. Even if you keep your Hulin al tehoros kodshim as much as it's counterintuitive because you would think it'd be more chamur than trumah, there's really no such thing. But, the bottom line is if our mishna is talking about Hulin she naso al tehoros kodshim, it must be the way Rebbi Yehoshua because in the world of Rebbi Yehoshua, there's no such thing as Hulin she naso al tehoros kodshim. Stating that what emerged was that not all Amora'im agreed with this understanding of Rebbi Yehoshua. Meaning, what Rebbi Yehoshua said in that mishna perek peh mishna bet maseches tehoros, Hulin she naso al tehoros trumah, did he mean there's no such thing as Hulin she naso al tehoros kodshim? Rebbi Elozar Rebbi Hoshia thought so. What emerged from the Gemara was that the chaver of Ulla, who got a name Rabba bar bar Chana in the name of his great Rebbi Rebbi Yochanan, thought so. But, Ulla himself disagreed. Ulla felt that when Rebbi Yehoshua said that I have a heketemtsa of Hulin shlishi, Hulin she naso al tehoros trumah, he didn't mean lafukei Hulin she naso al tehoros kodshim loy mi ba'ei kama. Fakir, he meant to say even but it was understood that if it's subject to call because that's to move it out of 101 so if there's an idea of >> [snorts] >> a true being a there's no question in the world the same would be true as relates to which would mean that the third character of the of the skin on the NASA does not have to be it could be a few of the ratio >> [snorts] >> Now when the moral presented this discussion of whether or stems in the world of there's not stem in the world of sure the presented the mission the mission where said the words that my the nest that the more brought the whole back and forth that had with his book in that mission who of course was rebel Yazer and it's good day to go through a little bit of that because that's very much going to lead us and segue us into today's stuff so again the background to issue is cryptic statement of the NASA was a rebel Yazer and issue in that world of the specifically if somebody eats now make it a day if a person eats he will not become Tommy and the reason is because at best could be a regional and a regional cannot be all of the killing to make them into a shiny >> [snorts] >> so if somebody would touch a carry slap it doesn't matter what you do to the you would not become Tommy stating that one of the has the volume that the more discusses in the first part of the show one of the 18 takanos that the Gamara says even had no view they don't have the ability to if somebody's going to go ahead and somebody's going to eat he himself is going to become the what is he going to have and that was the Rebbe and Rebbe Rebbe said that if somebody eats a he becomes a he tell me he becomes a he he becomes a in other words according to Rebbe you are what you eat. The basis for shitas Rebbe is Rebbe proved from the of the that somebody that eats is more than the itself. The cannot be but if a person eats the of an then it's his so the of the doesn't have the ability to be but the of the of the does have the ability to be hence you see that the is more than the so said Rebbe if that's the case if when I eat I'm more than the itself so if the is a now that I eat it I'm going to be at the very least the same I mean I'd say maybe more but at the very least I'm going to be the same so if I eat a I'm going to be a if I'm going to be a I'm going to be a if I'm going to be a I'll be a let's explain this a little bit better when when transmits so it gets diluted a little bit so if you touch the you're only a you touch the you're a you're you touch the you're a and as I it's because the is being diluted as it's spreading but when it comes to the Rebbe relationship the Rebbe said it's not the way it is to the contrary the remains intact and if anything it's more because the oichel tumah more chummer. Just to say it in one additional nusach, I think it's kedai. And that is that what makes something a rishon? What's the chashivus of a rishon? It's that if something touches it, it's now going to become a a sheini. If an oichel needs to be more chummer than the meichel, well, if the meichel touches something, it's going to be a sheini, then if the oichel, the person who ate the meichel is going to touch that same thing, it also has to be a sheini. If you're going to tell me that when a person eats the tumah, that's a rishon he now becomes a sheini, well, that means that when he touches something else, that's going to be a shlishi, which will mean that the meichel is more chummer than the person that ate it. Because when the meichel, which is a rishon, touches, it's making a sheini. But when the person who ate the rishon touches, he's making a shlishi because he became a sheini, he's making a shlishi, which would mean that the oichel is less chummer than the meichel. That can't be. Because if anything, it's just the opposite. Now, you would say maybe it should be more chummer, that you love him and I don't know what kind of but at the very least, it can't be any less. So, here's the point. If a person eats a rishon, says Rabi Eliezer, there's no way that I'm going to be any less than a rishon. Because being that I'm atzum in a more chummer space now than the meichel itself, and if the meichel touches, it makes a sheini, I can't be that if I touch, it's going to be less than a sheini, which by definition means I'm a rishon cuz that is the ta'am of a rishon. The ta'am of a rishon is that if I touch, I make a sheini. But here's the point. The point is according to Rabi Eliezer, you are what you eat. So, if you eat a rishon, a rishon, sheini, sheini, shlishi, shlishi. Rabi Shimon holds it's way more nuanced. Rabi Shimon held that the oichel is not more chummer than the meichel. I you see it by the nevelah of an oif tar, leig gam minei tichdish, can't learn anything from there. Okay. So, how then do we view the relationship between the eater and the food itself? Just the opposite. The cheftzus of the tumah is for sure more chummer than the person that eats the tumah. And by the way, I have a raya. The raya is from the shiyura because Michael is metuma because of a bayah as opposed to you would have to eat a pras with it. She says it's a So there's no question in the world says Rabbi Shimon if anything it's just the opposite. Okay, so if there's dvarim and we're saying that if somebody eats tuma even though really it shouldn't be this way but this is the way it is. So you're going to be tuma. You should probably follow the rules of how tuma always spreads. And the way tuma spreads is it's always in you always go down one madregah. So what should the be if rishon becomes a shaini? A shaini becomes a shlishi. A shlishi becomes a revi'i. Right? That's certainly what you would think. And when Rabbi Eliezer had it out with Rabbi Yeshua in Rabbi Yochanan's of what the back room conversation looked like you would think >> [snorts] >> that that's the way it should play itself out told Rabbi Eliezer to Rabbi Yeshua. But Rabbi Eliezer said Rabbi Yeshua let's be honest. You said anything but that. Right? What did Rabbi Yeshua say? If somebody eats a rishon he becomes a shaini. Yafa. That's good. In the words of Rabbi Eliezer because you're right that follows your methodology. Somebody eats a shaini he becomes a shaini? Come again. Somebody eats a shlishi he becomes a shaini? It should be a rishon shaini. Got it. Shaini should be a shlishi. Shlishi should be a revi'i. So the only thing that makes sense with your sheet is the first thing that you said. After that you're all over the place Rabbi Yeshua. So Rabbi Eliezer was mashiv to Rabbi Yeshua. He said I don't even understand your question. What emerged from the Gemara? What emerged from the Gemara was the reason according to Rabbi Yeshua if somebody eats a rishon he becomes a shaini is because that's the way it's supposed to be. The reason if you eat a shaini you become a shaini is because there's a concept that sometimes a shaini that touches chulin that thing is actually going to be a shaini. When is that? It's when there's mashkin on the shaini. The way it works mechanically is is because one of the dvarim is tumas mashkin. Mashkin is so vulnerable doesn't have to be because of the way it always becomes a rishon of tuma. So if the oichel that's a shiny is going to touch the mashka on the oil that's going to make the mashka rishon which will make it a shiny. But, once you find that a shiny is a shiny, so it's for that reason if you eat a shiny we're going to go to fast and rub it to fast and we're going to make you the most tummy you can possibly be and therefore you're going to be a shiny as well. I want to say the most tummy you can possibly be is a rishon being that if a michael of a shiny touches a mashka makes a rishon, so maybe if I eat it should be a rishon as well. No, mashka is different. Everyone understands that the chumas you have a mashka are not applicable to anything else. But, the point is as it relates to oil to oil will be a direct to mashka. You find that a shiny is like a shiny, so if you eat it you're also going to be a shiny like a shiny. Why isn't it that if you eat a shlishi you become a shiny? So, that Rebbi Yeshua said, "Look carefully at what I said. What I said was that if somebody eats a shlishi, he's going to become a shiny like it is. In fact, I first said that ain't shiny like it is." I was so clear. Only a shiny like it is, not a shiny like it is. And what's the lumbus? The lumbus [snorts] is because it's the halacha big day oil clay chuma is madras like it is. Which means that if somebody is an oil chuma and he eats his chuma but I had it to share but I had but I had it to share but I had his bag on them are assumed to be tall, right? There's no question in the world. Stating that if I'm an oil clay dish and I touch your bag or I sit on your bag and it's a madras. And as a result, I'm not going to be able to eat clay dish. It's a chuma. It's mentioned in the mission of chuma clay dish we be chuma in the third paragraph of the haggadah. It's one of those the rabbonim the chumas you say to them all made when it comes to clay dish. But, here's the point. What emerges is is that any shmira that a person has for chuma is not considered a shmira at all as it relates to clay dish. Said Rebbi Yeshua, "The reason I hold that if somebody would eat a chulin that's a shlishi, the halacha is that he would become a shiny is because I'm only saying it shiny like it is. And the reason is because what's this chulin that I'm talking about? This was the whole big deal, the huge ration the bottom I'm talking about chulin sh'nas al tairus And being that I'm talking about chulin sh'nas al tairus it was watched for trumah, but it was never watched for koidish. If it was never watched for koidish as far as koidish is concerned, I don't even know what it is. I have to think the worst. What's the worst it could be? A rishon. What happens if a person goes and eats a rishon? He becomes a shaini. That's why you're shaini. Now you only shaini l'koidish because it's only klapi koidish. What about klapi trumah? What about klapi trumah? They ain't shaini l'trumah. With regards to that, you're not going to be a shaini. But here's the point. The point is that Rebbi Yeshua told Rebbi Eliezer that I only said shaini l'koidish, it's because I'm talking about chulin sh'nas al tairus trumah, and therefore there was never a shmirah klapi koidish. Big day. Oichlei trumah is madresh l'koidish. Now when Rebbi Yeshua responds to Rebbi Eliezer and he says, the chulin sh'nas al tairus trumah, does he mean that's the only thing that exists? Or does he mean that's the kimta that I'm making when I explain why there's an idea of a shlishi that is a shaini? But if we were talking about chulin sh'nas al tairus koidish, maybe that does exist, but the point is over there the shlishi wouldn't be a shaini because being that it's chulin sh'nas al tairus koidish, you'd probably be a revi'i. More than that in today's daf. But the bottom line is that was again very much the avoid of yesterday's daf. The avoid of today's daf was to do a not such brief recap. The bottom line is we got into the sugi because of someone that could you could eat the basar with your da'as voice because it's not l'kabel tum'ah. We're dealing with chulin. We have four riyas for that. Your da'as is a shaini. A shaini anyways can't be oiseh chulin shlishi. We have three terutzim and the third terutz was we're talking about chulin sh'nas al tairus koidish. Is that ki Rebbi Yeshua like Rebbi Yeshua? This this cryptic line in the of the of someone who eats where it would seem to suggest maybe it doesn't even hold of such a thing as in fact that was the sheet of it was the sheet of stating that there are others that were not that way by the way very end of the yesterday's also held not that way but the bottom line is is that this next part of the Sugya which is really today's is going to focus more on the between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Shimon so we're going to see a lot more about a lot more about and we're going to do a deeper dive into this between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Shimon I think it's just for the sake of some see after the smile of clarity in today's to create a a tiny bit of a road map and really it's not the easiest stuff in I think we said that already but it's just to crystallize a little bit what we're about to do and really if you learn today's and then you go backwards it's really made up of two two both super duper obscure >> [snorts] >> the first is a memory that Ulla said and that discusses somebody that eats a of a tumor the second is a Rabbi Shimon bar said and that is regarding somebody that eats a of there's going to be a little bit of a two questions on he's going to say regarding a tumor and then the is going to say didn't say it already say it and didn't even say it in the name of Rabbi is going to say you almost said it not the same thing but the bottom line is the first schmaltz is going to be all in the world of a statement made by Ulla regarding someone that it's a schlichi of chulin al tiaras trumah. The second is going to be a whole discussion regarding a statement that was made by Rebbi Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marta as it relates to chulin al tiaras ha kodesh. Again, where it was a schlichi of chulin al tiaras trumah. This is very, very nuanced, but that's the setup. U'vei Yisrael Hashem nasiv v'natzliach. Sak d'heilech v'amar amar Ulla. Ulla said, "Oichel schlichi shel chulin al tiaras trumah." If somebody eats a schlichi of chulin al tiaras trumah. Every word matters. Like, for example, if you say, "Sh- revi'i instead of schlichi, or sheini instead of schlichi, you got a flask." Or if you say, "Tiaras trumah or kodesh." I meant trumah. No, you didn't mean trumah. You have to say trumah. So, again, "Oichel schlichi shel chulin al tiaras trumah." If somebody eats a schlichi of chulin al tiaras trumah. Nifsul gufo miloch ha trumah. miloch ha trumah. The halacha is that his guf is now going to be pasul. He will not be allowed to eat trumah. One thing is clear from the Gemara. Ulla's going in Rebbi Yehoshua's world. How do you know that? Well, you will see it from the Gemara. But, besides, we know that because if it's machlokes Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua, how you deal with somebody that eats trumah, it's pashet being Rebbi Eliezer shamuti, we're going to pasken like Rebbi Yehoshua. So, this is all in the world of Rebbi Yehoshua. And in that world, Ulla said that if somebody eats a schlichi of chulin al tiaras trumah, the halacha is nifsul gufo miloch ha trumah. He's guf is going to be pasul, meaning he will not be able to eat trumah. Now, what would Rebbi Yehoshua say about this? So, Rebbi Yehoshua did a lot of talking, but interestingly enough, this is the only thing he didn't explain clearly. He said if somebody eats a rishon, he becomes a sheini. If somebody eats a sheini, he becomes a sheini. If somebody eats a schlichi b- chulin al tiaras trumah, maybe he'll say but for sure also he becomes a tiny little I hear but what about regarding true all he said was the ancient enters and says you want to know what the is with regards to true as it relates to true he doesn't become a tiny that's not what it is tiny he becomes a tiny we know the already but it's only with regards to tiny that he becomes a tiny he also right now is not going to become a quote unquote review to where his relationship to true will be negligible but rather in the words of the way we view and is as a tiny and therefore if he wants to eat true he will not be able to eat true let's explain this a drop better with holds that when a person eats true so his true gets diluted right so for example if somebody eats a he becomes a tiny what does it mean he becomes a tiny so we spoke this out in the a little bit better what it means that he becomes a tiny is is that if he touches something else that other thing is is now going to become a tiny and was forced to say this because he learned from that the is more common than the what all is being is is that this that there has to be a dark between the and the that's only as it relates to that's only as it relates to if I now go ahead and I touch something so what I'm able to convey and transmit is going to be less than what the source of the was able to convey and transmit which is the opposite of what holds but as it relates to my relationship with this to and in terms of what I can or cannot eat here it doesn't have to be a all is being and here is saying that if I go ahead and I eat a shlishi of chulin she nazir olah tiras trumah, I don't become a revi'i, I actually become a shlishi. And here's the halacha, a mensch that's a shlishi letumah. This is all make-believe because a person can't be a shlishi letumah. How do you become a shlishi letumah? By coming in contact with a sheini. And a sheini can only be ochlin umashkin. Ochlin umashkin can't be metamei adam. But in this world of yud ches devarim, where ochlin could somehow be metamei a person, a person that's a shlishi can be tumah. Why is a person that's a shlishi can be tumah? Because there's an idea that trumah could become a shlishi. So if the gever is a shlishi degavah can be tumah. So there's a kasha. But for example, let's say a person that's a revi'i would be able to eat trumah because there's no such thing as trumah berevi'i, right? But here's the point. So Ulla said that if somebody eats shlishi shel chulin she nazir olah tiras trumah, nifsal gufo miloche betumah, he himself now becomes the shlishi. We don't say in the chos darga, we only say that regarding magah. But as relates to achilah, we don't say in the chos darga. Therefore, the person himself now becomes a shlishi. If you're a shlishi, shlishi and trumah can't coexist. Therefore, nifsal gufo miloche betumah, you yourself are not going to be able to eat trumah. This is Ulla's halacha. But the Gemara says Mikea Mashma Lan. I don't even know what Ulla's chidush is. Don't you know? Isn't it meforesh in the Mishna? Which Mishna? Rabbi Yeshaya's Mishna. Perek Beis, Mishna Beis Maseches Tiyrus. What did Rabbi Yeshaya say? Shlishi. If somebody would eat a shlishi sheini lekodesh, she becomes a sheini letumah. And he's not a sheini letumah. And he said meforesh bechulin she nazir olah tiras trumah. That is talking about chulin she nazir olah tiras trumah. Now, sheini who do I have? A shlishi have. What does it sound like? like this that shlishi is always a sheini bechulin she nazir olah tiras trumah. That's only klappi kodesh. But if it's negiah trumah, it sounds like at the very least you're going to be a shlishi. And if you're a shlishi, it's pashut you shouldn't be able to eat trumah. Because a person that's a shlishi should not be able to eat trumah. So what's Ulla being mechadesh? Meaning, it came as news to us. But really, the Gemara is arguing that if you not have learned the Mishna properly, it should really be not meforesh, but it should be implied in the Mishna. Because if the Mishna says if somebody eats a shlishi of chulin she nazir olah tiras trumah, you become a sheini lekodesh, but you don't become a shiny look like this. What does that like? Only a shiny don't become. But it sounds like a slushy. Everything else is common. That's not all right. If you may have here I only had that deal could be sure. How about me now I would have thought we shiny have a little slushy have a. I would have thought you're not a shiny and you're not a slushy. And you know why is after he look at this rash is all like huge every single one. It's because Rebbe Yishmael holds this always in the highest dagger when it comes to somebody that eats truma. So just like if I eat a rishon I become a shiny So if I eat a slushy if I don't have the hashbin of big day truma is magish with kodesh well then I should become a revi. And being a revi is not a steer to truma I should be able to eat truma. So based on the deek of the mishnah I would have thought we shiny have a because you don't have the stickle tire that you have clappy kodesh over the way slushy have either because if you're not a shiny then you're going to be a revi right? Again Rebbe Yishmael holds that really this should always be in the highest dagger whenever you eat. That's why rishon says a shiny. Why is shiny not a shiny? A stickle tire. I mean why is shiny not a slushy? A stickle tire. That's why shiny is like a shiny. Why is slushy like a shiny? It's only the kodesh. A stickle tire and also a stickle tire. But if I don't have that stickle tire and also a stickle tire slushy should be like a revi. If I'm a revi I'm not going to have a problem with eating truma because there's no such thing as revi and truma it's not a steer. There's no difference between revi and truma. And if that's the case it should be okay. So it's for that reason I could have thought that maybe in the world of Rebbe Yishmael if somebody would eat now the slushy as it relates to truma you wouldn't be a shiny and you wouldn't be a slushy. Okay well if that's the case so why did you only say that you're not a shiny? That was a little bit misleading. Because I did not shiny because being that is related to kodesh you do become a shiny. So I'm going to be a shiny with truma. So as it relates to truma you wanted to say the same way. Come on that's why he felt that he had to be like that. He felt that even though it's true what he's saying is a beer and Rebbi Shimon, but it's not meforesh. Not like Kamash Ulla and Rebbi Nuna. It's anything but meforesh. You could have argued that you're not a shaini cuz you don't have the cheshbon of big day oichelay truma a medras le koidish. And at the same time, if I eat a shlishi, I'm a shlishi, that's Rebbi Eliezer, that's not my shita. This is becoming a revi'i. And if that's the case, I should not have any problem moving forward and eating truma Kamash Ulla and that's da'locha. Is Rebbi Avram Nuna Ulla? So, Rebbi Nuna asked the kasha to Ulla. And this kasha is from a mishna, and this mishna is Tiyrus perek bais mishna gimmel. It's from the very, very next mishna in this s'chtes Tiyrus. Now, just a little bit of a disclaimer before we start this mishna, and that is, you see this long Rashi and Tosefta over here. Rashi has two different sh'tatim how to learn the punchline of the mishna. Punchline as relates to today's daf. Tosefta has a whole third mahalach. We're going to learn with Rashi's second shat, which by the way starts about 20 lines from the top of daf lamed hay mem aleph if you want to see it innovatively. It starts with the words "venirali". So, really, everything that Rashi says from the first wide line of lamed dalet lamed bais until venirali, about 20 lines from the top of lamed hay mem aleph is not going to be matim with what we're saying right now cuz that's all Rashi's first shat. And Rashi fires away with kashas on his first shat, and Rashi says the shat I like is the second. So, we're going to go with the shat that Rashi likes. Second disclaimer is not an easy shat. Meaning, there's lecher in it. The problem is all the sh'tatim have holes in it. As a matter of fact, you open a mishna and you look at the meforsha mishna, you're going to find even more sh'tatim. So, there's a lot of sh'tatim in this cryptic mishna. We'll see, the crypticness of it is going to jump off the page, but either way, Isbay Rebbi Avram Nuna Ulla, Rebbi Nuna asked Ulla the following question. You get what Rebbi Avram Nuna's What's Ulla's chidush? His chidush is that if somebody eats a shlishi of chulin she nasu al tiyras truma, he becomes a shlishi. Shlishi is like a shlishi in the world of Rebbi Yehoshua. Even though that sounds a lot like Rabbi Eliezer to me, but I feel it chaki. in the world of Rabbi Yeshua it's going to be a shlishi. Lamayna kemina, nafka mina is you will not be able to eat it tomorrow. if you have a rishon shel b'chulin, so this is chulin and that's a rishon of tumah, tamei. The halacha is it's tamei umitamei. So the definitions over here are very nuanced. Tamei means that it can make chulin into a sheini. Mitamei means it can make trumah into a sheini where the trumah will be able to make another trumah into a shlishi. Just in terms of definition, when you say something is tamei, it means it has the ability to transmit the tumah and make that thing be exactly like this. When you say something is mitamei, it means it's toifeach al menas latfeiach. What it means is it has the ability to make something tamei which will in turn have the ability to make something like itself in the same exact state of tumah. So a rishon of chulin is tamei because it can make chulin into a sheini letumah. It's mitamei klappei trumah because it can make trumah into a sheini which will have the ability to make its like trumah into a shlishi. That sheini, what about chulin that's a sheini letumah? Pasul. So it's not tamei. Why is it not tamei? Because tamei would mean it can make its like tamei, it can't. Sheini is not oiseh chulin into a shlishi. What it can do is it can be pasul. Pasul is more of a lashon where it's going after something else, like a foreign object. It can make trumah pasul. And what is the word pasul mean as opposed to uh maybe mitamei? What's the nuance? The nuance is it can make it tamei where it itself is going to be tamei, but it won't be able to convey any further. And those are really the next words of the Mishnah, v'einah mitamei. That's not something it has the ability to do. V'ha shlishi, what about chulin that's a shlishi? That's interesting. But chulin that's a shlishi is nazid is it dadema? This is the cryptic words in the Mishnah. This is something you're allowed to eat with nazid dadema. So let's just teitch the words of nazid dadema. Nazid is from the lashon of nazid that lotion, right? The parsha is told us fame. Dema always means a taruvas. So the law is if you have a a shlishi you could eat the shlishi. Meaning you have a shlishi of chulin and it's mixed together with truma. This is something that's going to be okay. Okay, what what's a severe of what's wrong over here? So the marsha is like this. I'm written if you're going to tell me nifso guf of the truma. If you're going to tell me that the law is that if somebody eats a shlishi of chulin nasso taruvas of truma. The law is you're not allowed to eat truma moving forward. So why is it mutar to eat this shlishi that's together with the dama. So finally the possible you're giving him something to eat right now that is not allowed to eat. Why? Why? Maybe the shlishi of chulin over here is good old fashioned chulin. Who said that it's anything but good old fashioned chulin. So the way Rashi explains it in the second shot is because being that this chulin had in it a taruvas of truma. So by definition this chulin had to be taruvas of truma. Not because of chulin forget the taruvas we're not learning that part of I was going to say we're not learning chulin but we are but forget about that part of chulin. But the fact that this a taruvas of a of truma over here. So that forces me to look at the chulin and eat it as truma. So I have now chulin [snorts] that's tame. It's a shlishi. It's not nothing because it's taruvas of truma. Why is it taruvas of truma because there's something there. But here's the point I'm allowed to eat it right that's what the mishna says. A rishon chulin is tame. A shlishi is possible shlishi ask is it tame. Right that's what the mishna says. Nachel dama is it a is it a dama. Right eat it no problem. What do you mean? Why is it so possible I should be allowed to eat it. What's the question so finally maybe the possible would you feed a person something that's going to make his goof puzzle? Meaning being that holds that if somebody eats shlishi of he is now can eat truma. There's no way we're going to tell a person here here's a fork you're never going to give a person something like that. And Rashi says you know why? Because there's an issue of to make a person tame. Wow. I can take that's what Rashi says. That's one of the problems that Rashi does that has with the bottom line is there's some issue over here to do that and if holds that it's a person who eats a person he now is not going to be able to eat truma. We would never say because this is not again we're not talking about the truma that's tame. That would be a whole another issue. We're talking about the that's that's in the same mixture over here. But because it's together so the same half of it is I have no choice but to have it at and the bottom line is still you tell me I can eat it. Meaning it's because it's together with truma so by definition it has to be because you're watching the truma so the official watching this too. So it's by definition not and you tell me I can eat it. It's not like because going to you become possible. And you know how to tell a person to go do something that's going to make him possible. This is the way Rashi explains the on my way and so he told me is it the like that he has to pass. What told me is even though this is not our now but you have to reckon a little bit with the it's a tough. And the case over there was was even though there's of truma inside but it's very little. In fact it's less than which means that if you would eat press worth you wouldn't end up eating a which means that the amount of truma that's there is negligible which means you don't have to worry about the truma which means that the doesn't have to be watched as if it was truma which means it's not chulin sh'nasah al teharas trumah, which is the reason you're allowed to eat it. And if this chulin was a bonafide chulin sh'nasah al teharas trumah, you'd have a problem. We wouldn't feed it to you, cuz Ulla holds you become pasul, and you would never give something to someone to eat that's going to make him pasul. But why are you assuming it's not al teharas trumah? Because there was trumah. It's like exactly what Ulla said. And it's like exactly what Ulla said. In that instance, you don't have to worry about it either way. Amar Rav Yochanan Amar Rav, so again, what did we do so far? Ulla made a statement that if somebody eats a shlishi sh'nasah al teharas trumah, nefsal gufo m'lavo b'trumah. We had two kashas. The first one was my kasha. Wasn't it so obvious? Didn't Rabbi Shimon say the answer is no? He just said you don't become a sheni. He didn't say anything about becoming a shlishi. If anything, it's far from becoming a revi'i, which means you would be allowed to eat trumah. The second one was a kasha from this cryptic statement about shlishi nefsal m'zida d'ema, which is actually mentioned in the very next mishna over there in Maseches Terumos. In the exact context of the machlokes of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon, we deflected that kasha as well. Says the Gemara, Amar Rav the third statement in the context of Ulla's memra. Amar Rav Yochanan Amar Rav Oichel shlishi shel trumah atzmo. So if somebody eats a shlishi of trumah, so he didn't eat a shlishi of chulin sh'nasah al teharas trumah, that Ulla said. If somebody eats a real bonafide shlishi, a shlishi shel trumah atzmo, asur l'eichel. So the halacha is this person right now is going to become a shlishi, which means he will be asur to eat trumah moving forward. Umutah l'eichel. However, if he wants to touch trumah, that's something that he will be able to do. The reason is because essentially he becomes a shlishi, and being that he becomes a a shlishi, so he can't eat cuz a shlishi is a spirit of trumah, but a shlishi is not oser trumah revi'i. And as a result, it won't be a problem. So what did Rabbi Yochanan Amar Rav say? He said almost exactly what Ulla said, with one nafka mina. What's the nafka mina? Ulla was talking about chulin sh'nasah al teharas trumah, and was talking about the real thing. But the says that it's I need the regarding and I need it with regard to even though I only had I would have I would have thought this only true I would but as it relates to the but again I may also I would have thought it's but again as well meaning I could have thought that if somebody eats the real of the could be he's not allowed to touch them. Why would you have thought that? What's the say that? Right? Again, we're going in world. I mean when you eat the you're cuz that really sounds like what's the mean that you'd be able to even make a review but there's no such thing. So says it's not then. We don't mean you'd make it a review. But once we say that if you eat it there's a problem I would have thought that maybe I would say to because but either but it's not a real cuz in the of how the is being transmitted is something that doesn't make sense. But either way I could have thought that only had I only had Ula's that is but by the if somebody would eat the real maybe it'll be to teach me to teach me which part? The legal part. Even though I only had I would have thought I would have thought I would have thought it's only I would have thought but even I mean I would have thought maybe don't have this meaning as much as but does that mean for every last of maybe not. It's for that reason I needed both and this concludes part one of today's stuff. So what's part one of today's stuff? The recap will be much easier than the precap and much easier than the itself. It's actually not so impossibly not straight forward. It traces itself back to Yeshua's halakha in the Mishnah Maseches Taharos Perek Beis Mishnah Beis, where Rabbi Yeshua said that if somebody goes ahead and he eats tumah, depending on what level of tumah he ate, that's going to depend how tamei he's going to be. If he eats a rishon, he's going to become a sheini. Eat a sheini, you're going to become a sheini. Eat a shlishi b'chulin she'naslu al taharos ha'trumah, you're going to become a sheini l'kodesh. What happens if I eat a shlishi b'chulin she'naslu al taharos ha'trumah as it relates to trumah? Never said anything. He never said anything. Enter Ulla. Ulla said that you want to know what the halakha is, you're going to become a shlishi. A shlishi with regards to achilah [snorts] is achilah, but not with regards to magah. So, basically, you're going to end up becoming a shlishi as it relates to you will not be able to go ahead and eat any trumah moving forward. The Gemara said, "Isn't that m'furash in the halakha of Rabbi Yeshua?" Because Rabbi Yeshua said that when you eat the shlishi b'chulin she'naslu al taharos ha'trumah, you become a sheini l'kodesh. It's Well, but you don't become a sheini l'trumah. What does it sound like? It sounds like you just don't become a sheini l'trumah, but a shlishi, yeah. It's not m'furash. Im hayei hava minah, you don't become a sheini, and you don't become a shlishi, either. You're a revi'i, which is nothing as it relates to trumah. So, that's why Ulla had to clarify. Don't I have a kasha from the next Mishnah, the very next Mishnah, Mishnah Gimel over there in Perek Beis? Because the Mishnah over there talks about a shlishi that's ne'echal b'nezid adashim. That shlishi which is chulin is ne'echal al taharos ha'trumah because it's b'ta'aruvah together with trumah. If it's ne'echal, if by me eating this chulin I will moving forward not be able to eat trumah, it shouldn't be ne'echal. In the words of the Gemara, "Safina l'meidi d'pasul lei d'gufah." Which actually says kodesh is even in this rice. There's no way in the world we would allow you to do it. And the Gemara said, "No, that's not a kasha because that chulin was not ne'echal al taharos ha'trumah. It was b'ta'aruvah with trumah. It was d'leika chiyuv achilah prasa. It wasn't a sheer that even had [laughter] a a reckon to it. Then the tomorrow just said that this member that Ulla said regarding Hulin Shanas Al Tyrus Al Chuma that if it's a shlishi and you eat it you can't eat truma moving forward. Rebbe Yitzchak [laughter] said it with regards to the real deal and the one made it why you need both. Either way now shift our attention from someone who ate a shlishi shall Hulin Shanas Al Tyrus Al Chuma to someone that's going to eat a shlishi shall Hulin that was Nasa Al Tyrus Al Kodesh. So the Gemara Yosef Rabbi Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marta came in the Rav Nachman so Rabbi Yitzchak the son of Shmuel the son of Marta was [snorts] sitting in the presence of Rav Nachman for Yosef came in and he said the following Halacha Oichel shlishi shall Hulin Shanas Al Tyrus Al Kodesh if somebody eats a shlishi of Hulin that was Nasa Al Tyrus Al Kodesh to eat Al Tyrus Al Kodesh the Halacha is he's allowed to eat Kodesh. Ain lo davar shall Oiser Revi ba Kodesh Ela Kodesh Mekudash ba vad because the only thing that can make a Revi ba Kodesh is Kodesh Mekudash and being that you just ate shlishi not of Kodesh Mekudash but of Hulin Shanas Al Tyrus Al Kodesh that's not the real thing that's the fake that's not Kodesh Mekudash and therefore the Halacha is that if you want to eat Kodesh you'll be allowed to eat Kodesh. >> [snorts] >> All right we have to unravel this. This is going to be fun. But before we even do that just notice the contrast between what Rabbi Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marta is saying versus what Ulla is saying. It's 180 degrees almost. What Ulla said was that if somebody eats a shlishi of Hulin Shanas Al Tyrus Al Chuma which is for sure the cow Nifsal Gufai Melecha Al Chuma. Rabbi Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marta says no way. As a matter of fact if you eat a shlishi of Hulin Shanas Al Tyrus Al Kodesh which if you believe exists is more hummer than hum shana tires nachuma. Even then that Allah is going to be that if you want to eat kodesh, you will be allowed to eat kodesh. And he gave a major explanation for it. He said that the reason is revealed by kodesh What does that even mean? So Rashi says kodesh means means hectic, but not just hectic. Hectic that's already in the sky dish Rashi gives some real kosher examples could go in carbon What's that shinnish of a kitchen glaze I was going backwards. But the bottom line is Rashi gives some faster kosher examples of what it even means kodesh makodesh. Okay. So there's a few observations right out of the gate that we have to make as it relates to Rabbi Yitzhak Nachman and this is now going to force us to very much go back to yesterday's stuff. Parts of yesterday's stuff we haven't even gone back to yet. Number one, clearly Rabbi Yitzhak is of the opinion that there's something called shana tires of kodesh. You going to tell me of course everyone knows Honda base shana tires of kodesh. No, not everybody knows. That was a huge discussion and then in the world of Allah there's no such thing as shana tires of kodesh. It was and that there is. But the bottom line is clearly Rabbi Yitzhak Nachman is of the opinion there's something called shana tires of kodesh because otherwise it can never become a and if it couldn't become a shana we're not having this conversation. The second thing that's very clear or be it shocking is that I think if you ask the man on the street give me the basic shall us of how Thomas transmitted say he would say that uh on Adam to make it into a a can be even to make it into a a can only be Thomas could change him to make it into a and either Thomas could could be could change him to make it into a V. But for sure one of the ways to become a would be coming in contact with Thomas. If you should buy said >> [clears throat] >> And that rules out who is not good I think for the same price. It's also going to rule out which would mean that at first glance if you understand this on a very superficial level it sounds like in the world of this is no such thing as a Thomas being anything. There's no such thing as a making a but Thomas doesn't exist and there's no such thing as a making a because Thomas is not Thomas it's not what she describes as being carbon It's don't get me wrong. But it's not Thomas that is not and the you see from here not that way. There's another thing you see from here. And that is that this is had a fundamental disagreement with what happens if somebody goes ahead and somebody eats Thomas in terms of how we're going to treat his goof. Not in terms of what he'll be able to convey that matter but how we're going to treat his goof. What did he say? He said that if somebody eats Thomas Thomas Thomas Thomas so goof I think his goof becomes a Thomas. Very Thomas What do you mean this isn't his world this supposed to be you sound like you are Thomas. Thomas is being with as it relates to his ability to convey Thomas Thomas [laughter] Here Thomas holds that if the of meaning the makes then the eater also has to make Thomas says no it's but as it relates to Isuria that result of this Thomas so that says it's going to be one in the same. And therefore in the world of said that if somebody would eat of you become if you became you'll be able to eat you become a that if somebody eats a you know you're allowed to eat you know why? Because the only time you could become a is if it came through the house. Who's talking about a be a I don't have to be a I'm happy with a by the way I'm happy with a I would prefer over a right two three times but the bottom line is is that I'm happy being a stuff I mean but that's another story but [laughter] I could be a instead of a and a you could be even if it's not there so the idea of having to come through is when we're dealing with a real but she not so let me be a and a of course is not allowed to eat it. It's clear it's that disagrees with his grace said that said from the copy the food that's only regarding not regarding eating and that's why you fight you need all the real or like said in the name of if I eat the real of that is I can't eat a if agreed with that that if I eat which in his world exists then I would become a and I would have a problem I wouldn't be able to eat from the fact that he's saying I'm a there's no such thing as cuz it's not so you see disagrees with by the way not only with my rabbi right clearly because again the really is really was not but the nuance was are we dealing with the or the real but they're both making this that if you eat swishy you become swishy because if anyone of them holds that if you eat swishy you become a then there's no problem to eat moving forward because there's no steer between good he said it regarding eating the he said it with regards to the real deal but the bottom line is that's the third observation you see from and that is that it's the also really my rabbit. But there's a fourth observation that's going to force us to go back to a party yesterday's that we glossed over that we didn't even over in the recap and that is if you remember on the very top of that base. If somebody goes ahead and he eats a swishy of his becomes a now we brought that member all because we just wanted to show from here what holds with regards to whether or not there's something called the in the world of to ask and the came out. But let's digest that statement should not so I'll try this what's explain a little bit better it's going to segue into the latter part of this stuff let's just a little better. That if somebody eats swishy of that becomes a we said what's the how does that in the world of momish makes no sense the reason is it's because big day is >> [snorts] >> so if you now eat it's nothing you have to assume the worst what's the worst which original you know you should become a shame. And that's why the koidish not the trumah. It's the koidish. What about trumah? That's ulah. But as it relates to koidish, it's partially going to become a You're going to become a shaini with tumah. Rebbi Yoichanan bar Reb Zeira bar Reb Assi bar Reb Yoichanan bar Reb Yannai is saying the same thing with regards to someone that eats a shlishi shel chulin she nasah al teharos hakoidish. Nasa gufo shaini lakoidish. Here it's not big day oichlei trumah. It's big day oichlei koidish. It's chulin she nasah al teharos hakoidish. So how's it possible that if I eat the shlishi, I'm going to become a shaini lakoidish? It has no havana. Avo de pshat kimuvor bachreinem is >> [snorts] >> it's because obviously Reb Zeira bar Reb Assi bar Reb Yoichanan bar Reb Yannai was machalik between real koidish and between chulin she nasah al teharos hakoidish. Meaning it is much as chulin she nasah al teharos hakoidish is a shmirah lyonah, it's a shmirah me'ulah, it's a shmirah on the koidish level, but it's not the real thing. It's still not like koidish. So you're right. Ha'oichel shlishi shel chulin she nasah al teharos hakoidish is not going to be nasa gufo shaini lachulin she nasah al teharos hakoidish. But with regards to the real koidish, that will be. Because just like big day oichlei trumah is a medras lakoidish, big day oichlei chulin she nasah al teharos hakoidish is a medras lakoidish. It's the same smara. Because at the end of the day there's still a chilluk between chulin she nasah al teharos hakoidish and koidish as well. But one thing is clear. Yosi bar Rebbi Yehudah bar Rebbi Shimon bar Rebbi Mattisyahu bar Rebbi Nachman bar Rebbi Yosi bar Rebbi Yoichanan bar Rebbi Shimon bar Rebbi Mattisyahu bar Rebbi Nachman bar toina achas bakoidish lo. Shaini d'chudasha oiseh revi'i bakoidish al hakoidish mukdash mevad. If he held like Reb Zeira bar Rebbi Assi bar Rebbi Yoichanan bar Rebbi Yannai, then he would never say this. You know why? Because you would not be able to eat koidish. The reason you wouldn't be able to eat koidish not because you're a revi'i. Taka not a revi'i. Well, he could hold all day every day that in lachudasha oiseh revi'i bakoidish al hakoidish mukdash mevad. And he could say that this is not basar korbon b'chultzo tzeva'im l'veiso l'chulday amiroch shechito b'chulei, right? You That's fine, but you're a shaini. What do you mean why am I a shiny? Because clappy this kodesh anus might be 100% tummy. And on this It's not that it's 100% tummy. Now I became a shiny. So of course I can't eat kodesh. A shiny can't eat kodesh. The Torah teaches you see from here that he held not like Reb Zeira am asked him Rebbi Akiva. And so again, through Reb Yitzchak's memra, through going through it, a bittle, so we also had an opportunity to chazer a lot of what we did in the last two days on a chomer. Yossi Reb Yisrael bar Shmuel bar Matya came in Reb Nachman bar Kamma. What was his halacha? If somebody eats a shlishi shel chulin she nasu al ta'aris hakodesh, to'er lecho l'kodesh. No worries, you can eat kodesh. Because if anything you're a revi'i and you only can become a revi'i through the real kodesh. You can't become a revi'i through chulin she nasu al ta'aris hakodesh. You see four things over here. Four observations that need to be made. Number one, there's something called a shlishi of chulin she nasu al ta'aris hakodesh, which was machlokes Shmuel and Rebbi Akiva, part of yesterday's daf. Additionally, you see from here that the only way you can ever be a revi'i by kodesh is if it comes through kodesh makodesh. What about trumah? I don't know. It sounds like not even through trumah. The next thing you see is that when a person eats tumah, there's an achais darga even clappy his status with regards to future dinei achilah in the world of Reb Yehoshua. Obviously no. Ulla said not that way. Ulla said it's only with regards to magga. It's not with regards to myusturi achilah. And finally, and finally, if you see from here that he holds not like Reb Zeira Reb Asi Reb Akiva Reb Nachman that there's a chilluk between chulin she nasu al ta'aris hakodesh and kodesh itself to the point that we would say big day oichlei chulin she nasu al ta'aris hakodesh is a madras while oichlei kodesh mamash. Regardless, this is the statement that Reb Yisrael bar Shmuel bar Matya came in Reb Nachman made. And the Gemara now is going to do what it did after Ulla's statement. The Gemara is going to fire away. Most of Rebbi bar Chama. So Rebbi bar Chama he the first crack at it. And he asked the kasho. He said, "How about briso shlishi sheni l'koidish? I'm sorry, this is not a briso. This is Rabi Shua's statement in the Mishnah in Tyras base Mishnah base. What did Rabi Shua say? If somebody eats a shlishi, he's a sheni l'koidish. They ain't sheni l'trumah. B'chulin sh'nasnu al Tyras trumah. Right? What was Rabi Shua's halacha? Rabi Shua's halacha was that if somebody would eat a shlishi of chulin sh'nasnu al Tyras hot trumah, he would become a sheni l'koidish. Amay? Why do you become a sheni? Halacha of koidish m'kudasho. It's not koidish m'kudash. And if it's not koidish m'kudash, so how in the world is it possible that you're becoming tamei? In other words, if you take Rabi This this kasho doesn't bother us cuz we've gone through this so many times already. But Rabi Shmuel bar Marisa's statement is if somebody eats shlishi sh'chulin sh'nasnu al Tyras hakoidish, you're tahor l'achol b'koidish. Then how does that stem with what Rabi Shmuel M'furash said that if somebody eats chulin sh'nasnu al Tyras trumah, you become a sheni l'ein koidish. So how I understand at the very least become a sheni, right? Why is it tahor l'achol b'koidish? You're tahor [laughter] l'achol b'koidish cuz there's no revi'i? Okay, then at least become a sheni. At least become a sheni. Rabi Shmuel himself said that if he eats even chulin sh'nasnu al Tyras trumah, you become a sheni l'koidish. If you're a sheni l'koidish, you can't eat koidish, right? So how is it possible that if I eat the shlishi sh'nasnu al Tyras hakoidish, it's going to be any different? Nachum. If I eat a shlishi of chulin sh'nasnu al Tyras hakoidish, gesund to hate. Eat the kashin. If I eat a chulin a shlishi of chulin sh'nasnu al Tyras trumah, no gesund to hate. I'm a sheni l'koidish. So how can it be that I can't eat koidish if I eat chulin sh'nasnu al Tyras trumah, I'm even a sheni. And when it comes to chulin sh'nasnu al Tyras hakoidish, which you would think is more chomer, there the halacha is I am ready koidish. But we know the answer. Am l'eisi d'olam nachal trumah sh'taharah so tamei it's like ektish. Ah, it's a it's a whole different svara. Over there, you're chulin sh'nasnu al tarut trumah, which means you never had a shmirah for kodshim. So kodshim kodshim, I have to assume the worst. I have to assume that it's mamash even original tumah. That's why you're saying you like kodshim. But over here, it's Khulin she na'asol al tarut kodshim. You had shmirah for kodshim. If you had shmirah for kodshim, it's not something you have to worry about. Now, maybe you only had shmirah for Khulin she na'asol al tarut kodshim. You didn't have shmirah for the real kodshim. That's a good hora. It's Rav Zeira Rav Asi Rav Yishmael Rav Yona that we left on the table at the end of yesterday's daf. But he's not like sphere. Like one of the four hadushim. He doesn't have to agree with that amora. So the bottom line is, as the Gemara I don't know. I know it comes out ironic and counterintuitive. But end of day, it's not a kasha. So it's going to be not tameh. What is the makor? Rav Yishmael talking. What is the makor? That there's a chelek between Khulin she na'asol al tarut trumah versus Khulin she na'asol al tarut kodshim. And that ironically and counterintuitively, Khulin she na'asol al tarut trumah is going to be more chomer. And the reason is because a shmirah for trumah is not kind of shmirah for kodshim. You know, I know that it's not the Mishna. Again, this shouldn't come as news to anybody. Big day amora. It's medras leprushin. Big day amora. It's considered a medras leprushin. Big day prushin medras le'achlei trumah. Big day achlei trumah medras le'achlei kodshim. That's mefuresh in the Torah. It's based on that Mishna. I mean that's based on that Mishna. That's the pshat. Amora. So Rav Huna Rav Yitzchak said, he said I'm not so sure it's a good tzushta. You know, we've been taking it for granted for two days now. I'm not sure it's a tzushta. Because medras is chomer. Medras is a very unique term. Right? Let's explain a little bit better. What's a medras? So a medras is if someone has a tumah that's yotzei migufah o migufah. And then the tumah sits or lies on something, that thing becomes tumas tumas medras. Tumas medras is another tumah. It's a very unique type of tumah. But the point is, medrasos were very unique in the world of tumas vetaharah. And the reason is because it was very shchiach. Every person sits down or lies down or stands on something. You can do something. So the idea of a medras was very shchiach. And that's why you find certain chumras in the world of tumas medras that you don't find in world. So Robert said, the only the car you have that if I watch something for truma say he's not going to watch copy code dishes in the world of mattress, right? It's this mission big day truma mattress the codish but Robert said mattress is covered. I don't think you can still to food. That's what we're dealing with over here, right? Greece and Chaney's switches and reviews is by definition dealing with food. Mattress is covered shiny mattress is mattress is different sham alarm is Rashi says not sham sham all right, the future tense would be But sham of Joshua because that's so silly Rashi says and as well as they were concerned I will prepare you but maybe when it comes to Paris, you don't say that from Yitzhak is going to tell you the pain in the army is going to tell you no, this is something that you say as it relates to Paris as well. This is something very very much true as relates to base of my house is that true me and Perry. Do you make this look at you say big day I play truma mattress the codish or Perry I play truma is going to be considered to may as it relates to codish but we learned in the mission and this mission is a message to say I'm married fresh to the reviews codish. So we're dealing with someone that was in a marriage and that marriage was not Neman in the world of truma and my stress and Tyra and he had a whole vet of Tyra and he's not Neman to say that it's okay. Even if there was a truma inside. That's what was there. So he doesn't have an amnesty in that if he says he fresh to the reviews codish. If he says that you know, some of what I had over here, I decided to be mocked to start of the world then that law has Neman and the reason is because in as much as we don't trust on my orders when it comes to codish we trusted him. Now, that's interesting. We don't trust him for Tyra truma master We don't trust him for truma but codish codish McCodish that we're going to trust him for. The answer is yes cuz we're afraid that if we're going to distance himself in the base of my in the words of the Gamara, he's going to be by an amaretz, and who knows what kind of carbon can come out. See the end of Menachus, right, with Chanya and bad things can come. So, it's for that reason we actually trust him when it comes to kodesh. So, here's the Mishnah. If a you have an amaretz, you had trumah, let's say, and it was all tairus, he says it's tairus, tairus, tairus, we don't believe him. If he says afterwards if you take kodesh, the halacha is he's ne'eman. Now we trust him. Meaning we're going to trust him about everything inside of it that it's okay. What's the kasha of coming to trumah kodesh? Right, we don't say that being that I didn't trust him for the trumah, maybe I shouldn't trust him for the kodesh. We say no, it works. Now, what's the kasha of if you're going to tell me that to me the kodesh the trumah the kodesh faith well I have a different problem. You know my problem is? My problem is is just think of the case. The case is where I had trumah. Now I have a little bit of kodesh inside the trumah. When it was trumah, when even if you assume that the amaretz was watching it. Let's assume he's a tzadik but it was not considered shmira with regards to kodesh. So, now that it's kodesh, we should assume that there's a problem with it over here because being that it wasn't watched prior, so even though it was watched, maybe, but it's not considered being watched, so it should be an issue as well. So, if you're going to tell me that even when it comes to payers we invoke this of payer of trumah is considered kodesh, so I don't understand why you're letting me eat this here. So, the Gamara says don't talk about coming to trumah kodesh. Don't talk about coming to kodesh. That's a very unique area in halacha. Remember kodesh and trumah. It works with the bottom line is that's a more cooler type of tumah and it's for that reason that in of itself is not going to be a tumah. Now there's one very important that's worth giving a shout out to. We're not going to go through the doses, but it's it's definitely something that's worth mentioning. Again, Rebbi Yehuda bar Shmuel bar Marta said that if somebody eats a shlishi of chulin she nasan al ta'aros hakodesh, you're allowed to eat kodesh. The Gemara's kasha was, how's this shita with Rebbi Shmuel? Rebbi Shmuel said if you eat a shlishi of chulin she nasan al ta'aros trumah, you can't eat kodesh. So, how could it be that if you eat a chulin she nasan al ta'aros hakodesh, then you could eat kodesh? Right? Very straight It's like a very simple kasha. Again, it's not simple cuz it's We know all the chishbonos already a little bit, but the bottom line is is the kasha at its surface is a very, very straightforward kasha. How could you tell me chulin she nasan al ta'aros hakodesh shlishi, if I eat it, I could eat kodesh, if you're telling me that chulin she nasan al ta'aros had trumah shlishi, if I eat it, I can't eat kodesh? Right? That's the kasha. What's the terutz? The terutz is that you're shtelling two trumah? Trumah is very different because of this idea of hanachah letzumah she ta'arosah tumah etzel hekdesh. We know temurah. That's a Mishnah in Chagigah. It's a Mishnah in Chagigah. What's a Mishnah in Mishnah in Chagigah is talking about madras. Maybe shani madrasos? Rebbi Yitzchak called it true even by peros. How's this shita with another Mishnah in Chagigah? The Gemara makes a work to shani. Over there it's going to be a little bit of fake Tosfos. What's going on? Why is Rebbi Yitzchak being forced to defend this position that the svara of bigdei am ha'aretz, madras leperushin, and bigdei perushin madras le'ochlei trumah, and bigdei ochlei trumah madras le'ochlei kodesh is not only true for madras, even though that's much more metzuya, but it's true for ochlin as well. Rebbi Shmuel said it. How else are you going to learn Rebbi Shmuel? Forget about Rebbi Yehuda bar Shmuel bar Marta. Let's say Rebbi Yehuda bar Shmuel bar Marta is incorrect. We have four reasons why he could be incorrect. Let's pick any one. It's incorrect. No, no, not even just fingers chulin she nasan al ta'aros hakodesh. Whatever the svara is on this side. At the end of the day, what did Rebbi Shmuel say? Rebbi Shmuel said meforesh, shlishi shaini le'kodesh v'shaini le'trumah. B'chulin she nasan al ta'aros The Gemara made a huge deal on the bottom line of Amud Daled Amud Daled. Kodesh doing I'm going to be suicide box to the of course it's based on that also [ __ ] forced to defend it all did was was repeated something we knew when we read the in real time it was hard to read the casher cuz the carrots was so partial. Why is it cuz I'm the whole yesterday? So why is forced me to defend this position the whole rises right just read the and talk about the base two lines the period of the period of the period of the period of the period of the period of the period of the period of the period of the period of the period of the period of the the whole another direction that's beyond the scope of what we need to do what we do need to do is finish the as it says the must know that I don't know what happened another casher on the matter and his casher was I see and this is from a mission and this mission is stairs it's base we're skipping a few stairs now this is already mission of love so we did mission of base mission of and now we're doing mission of love if you have and that's a shame and it makes mission of love mission of love mission of love and what's the unique nuance of the definition of the word now it doesn't make it it makes it in a way where it'll be able to be a lighter what's because mission becomes a mission which means it can make a so it's going to make mission of love mission of love even in a way where it could be how's that possible right usually is not to me it's not it can only be to me right but when it comes to mission of love you have this that it actually could be mission of love mission of love it could be mission of love mission of love mission of love mission of love into a shlishi, but it's only possible because Truma love make revi into Truma. That shlishi metama mashke kodesh as relates to a shlishi of chulin, it can be metama mashke kodesh, right? That makes sense because a shlishi would make kodesh not only pasul, not only tamei, but it would actually be metamei it, right? Let's get this clear. So, you have a shlishi that's going to be metama using that word very specifically, metama kodesh. Now, usually a shlishi shouldn't be able to metama kodesh. The best a shlishi should be able to do is be pasul kodesh. It should make the kodesh into a revi, but it will never be able to go further. How's that possible? By mashke. Because the geder mashke is that it always becomes a rishon. Now, usually when you think of mashke, so you're thinking of the world of chulin, that's what most cases are. So, a sheini which usually can't be metama, which usually can't be metama chulin, could be metama mashke chulin and it could even make you into a rishon. A shlishi can't be metama mashke chulin because a shlishi can't be metama any mashke, but it could be metama mashke of kodesh, but when it makes it into a tamei, it makes it into a rishon tumah because that's always the din of mashke. Mashke is always a trey tumah. It always starts from the beginning. So, therefore, as related to metama mashke, u pasul oichlei kodesh. Additionally, it's pasul oichlei kodesh, right? Because if it's not mashke, then you don't make it into a rishon, you can't be metama. You can only make it tumah where, you know, the buck is going to stop there. It won't be able to go any further. And this is true when? This is true be chulin she nasah al tzei sakodesh. This is true, this shlishi that's being metama mashke kodesh and it's being pasul oichlei kodesh is true of chulin she nasah al tzei sakodesh. What's the mutzav? What's the kasha? Very straightforward. I thought the only time you could have a revi is if it's kodesh mikodesh. I said this kasha is from the easier part of what Rav Yisrael Bar [ __ ] said. He said in the Ella something that came to here you have him in the first case that even could be revealed. Where do you see it? Has and it's talking about clearly poison music making to reveal. You see you have the ability to make a reveal. So the master said no, it's true. It's my foolish not like that's a problem. But at the same time it's really what's this turn on? The Tanya we don't somebody has have the law is it's like it's not meaning there's no such thing as that's what it sounds like. Which by the way we our whole smooth that we had was on the world of this is a price of it's not so the time to come of this price of all there's no such thing as that doesn't help us. What we need is said they know there is something called and the way you view it is you view it like what does that mean? It's two and it's possible as one. What does this mean? So there's a you look at it the time is the same as she the the time is the same as she the the time is the same as she the possible the that the way you view it is is that the of it that's what it means and the same of it are going to be time it because the reason can make the same and the same can make the same but the as it relates to the same as she it's possible meaning it stops there possible it doesn't go the time is the same as she it can make I feel that cryptic statement in the price of that said that the time is the same as she I know it's cryptic as she said so you know it's a cryptic statement. That's what it's saying. saying that there's no such thing as review same as she but which means it doesn't go up to a review. Why doesn't go up to review? If there's something called That's If there is, then it should go to review. If there isn't, it shouldn't go to So, why is it you need to go to review? You should even go to sleep. The carrots is there is such a material. I don't hold like you don't have a comma. But, I hold it doesn't make a review. Why wouldn't make a review? So, which kind of is He's the second of of these two we said it's really a whether or not this is true that can make a review or not. Or it has to be Who's the The first time it is the first must have which is possible likely that the way it You see that even even though it's not has the ability as opposed to the other time that is like who said that the time means this means when you get to the at that point you only possible. You can't have a review and the reason is cuz either way either way. This concludes the second part of the which was also thought of and it was based on this huge statement and again today's was a tale of two years. Which as I think we saw by the end of the very much relate to each other. In fact, the two Sugyos very much are at odds with each other. The first Sugya, the first half of the daf was Ulla's memra. He's saying it in the world of Rebbe Yeshua. Who holds that when a person eats tumah, his madregas tumah that was instituted by the Yud Ches Dwarim becomes one madregah less than the tumah that he ate. Stating that it's only true with regards to magah. It's with true with regards if he touches something what that next thing will be in terms of level of tumah. But as relates to him being able to eat, we treat him as if he ate the tumah that he ate. Even Rebbe Yeshua agrees that when it comes to eating, you are what you eat. And that's why if you eat a shlishi of chulin she nasu al tairus ha trumah, the halacha is you yourself are going to become a shlishi. What if you eat a shlishi of real trumah? That was Rebbe Yochanan ben Nuri, who said the same exact halacha. But the point is what Ulla is saying was that if I eat a shlishi of chulin she nasu al tairus ha trumah, or with Rebbe Yochanan ben Nuri so I suffer. If I eat a shlishi of the real trumah, the halacha is I myself am going to be a shlishi even in the world of Rebbe Yeshua, even though really at first glance you would think it defies the logic of what what Rebbe Yeshua said. The second part of the daf was Rebbe Yishmael bar Elisha, who said such a similar halacha. He was talking about someone that's eating a shlishi of chulin that was nasu al tairus ha kodash, but not tairus ha trumah. Nasu al tairus ha kodash. And what he said was tairus ha kodash. That if you want to eat kodash, you're going to be allowed to eat kodash. Clearly he doesn't hold of kodash. There's a lot of things he doesn't hold of. But for sure he doesn't hold of ulla. Cuz if he held of ulla, then when you ate this shlishi, at the very least you would become a a shlishi. And the whole svara of Rebbe Yishmael bar Elisha was that ein lo chabura istarei el kodash mikodash mimuvdal. You don't have to become a revi'i. You become a shlishi. The Torah says because in the world of Rabbi Yeshua when Rabbi Yeshua said that if I eat tumah I become one madregah less that's true not only with regards to me touching and me conveying moving forward Derek Maga it's even with regards to my issur and my din which Rashi said might be issur deoraisa but the bottom line is it's even with regards to that sugiyah it's even in that world that you're going to to have this halacha and really if you think about it at the core of this whole daf that's what we have over here again it's such a noisy daf in terms of the amount of things that we went through but you want to really break the daf down to its finest part baruch haba kook me and all of us really what's the machlokes over here in today's daf you have Ulla's memory in part one and Rabbi Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marta's memory in part two and they're having a yesod in this machlokes when Rabbi Yeshua says in the Mishnah of Maseches Taharos perek beis Mishnah beis that the michal is more chomer than the ohel and therefore if somebody's going to go ahead and somebody's going to eat tumah your madregah of tumah is going to be a one less if I had a rishon and a sheini besides for the exceptions which are a lot but besides for the exceptions that's only true with regards to my madregah of tumah in a magah moving forward but as it relates to as it relates to me now being allowed to eat or not eat depending on what I ate and what I wanted to eat that Rabbi Yeshua never spoke about could be that was the shittah of Ulla Rabbi Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marta said no that the same Rabbi Yeshua that there's an achrayus d'agar as it relates to being metameh moving forward Derek Maga is going to be true as it relates to what I will or will not be able to so really that's the common denominator between the first and the second part of the daf that's where these two memories meet one was chulin taharos and tumah the other was chulin taharos and kodshim so many hanachos so many kashas but at the end of the day that's really the shailah it's a machlokes of my rabbonim how to understand what Rabbi Yeshua meant when he said that the Michael is more common than the and that when I eat tomorrow I am going to have an dagger either way. This concludes the third death here in the llamas that talk about some of the time. Tomorrow's death is really the fourth death. However, it's much calmer. Tomorrow's death we can breathe. Tomorrow's death we can exhale. Tomorrow's death Again, it's the entire can actually go back to the mission and talk about of Shimon and it's more of a bigger the Israel we put the raid with a question mark in parentheses. The idea was we'll see how the death goes. I think it would be socially awkward if we went back to the base of Sunday now. The Israel will save that for another day.