Chulin 38

Today's stuff is cooling the flame and we are 11 lines from the bottom of the flame and Zion on the base hey hey dummy miss you guys. Today's stuff is being learned as a referral shame for Miriam milk of Rita and Schliemann Khaila. So we're in the middle of a social. The Sugya began at the beginning of yesterday's stuff and it will but as a session conclude at the end of today's stuff. So this is a two dollars Sugya. Regarding a as a miss you guys. So we know that an Availa one is not allowed to eat. A treif one is not allowed to eat. What about a miss you guys? A miss you guys is an animal that's at the end of its life. It's alive hence it's not an Availa. It doesn't have one of the same money treif hence it's not a treif. But at the same time it's an animal that clearly does not have a long time to live. The mission says that even though you could have thought that maybe it's not okay for one to check the miss you guys and eat it. The is this a miss you guys is going to be cautious stating that the only time it's okay to check the miss you guys and then eat from its meat is if it shows a sign of life during the course of the Schliemann. Meaning we're a little bit concerned that maybe at the onset of the Schliemann the animal died and it wasn't able to survive the Schliemann. Again an animal is not supposed to survive the Schliemann but it wasn't able to survive the part of the Schliemann that it is supposed to survive so that we could say that it was killed I'll you get the Schliemann of the right Schliemann. Now what exactly is the definition of Schliemann so that was three way mark like it's in the mission. The first Schliemann was Schliemann been Schliemann which by the way is a big Schliemann amongst the Schliemann is the Schliemann and Schliemann been Schliemann or is the Schliemann Schliemann and Schliemann are actually gores not the way we have it in the Mishnah. They're gores Rabban Gamliel, not Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. But regardless, the first sheet of the Mishnah was that if it jerks its hand and its foot, if it's mefarges its yad v'regel, that would be a sign of life. Rabbi Eliezer, we saw in the Mishnah was also the sheet of Rabban Shimon said that if it was zin kodam, if it coughed up blood, that would be a sign that it was alive. And finally, the sheet of the Chachamim was it's totally impure. Plus, but it doesn't have to be mefarges yad v'regel, oy yad oy regel, that in itself would be okay. Or if it wagged its tail, that would also be a sign of life. We spoke out Tosfos that says that even though the loshon of Mishnah had shocheches as a misukenes, sounds like it's only a b'dieved, truth is you could do it l'chatchila. You just have to make sure that mark it as a slave, mark it as a slave, or mark it as a slave, it's going to have a sign of life. But as long as it survives the shchita, then the halacha is hashoicheches as a misukenes is not only something that's b'dieved, it's something that's l'chatchila as well. That was the Mishnah. The first part of the Sugya discussed how is it that we know that a shocheches as a misukenes is something that's okay. Now, the Gemara's immediate reaction to this whole discussion was how do you know that a shocheches as a misukenes is shariya? U'mi mai teisa gad ayten da sira? So, the Gemara said, "I'll tell you why. Because the pasuk says zois achaya asher toichlu, and we learn from there chaya achol b'she'einah chaya lo yisochal. That will be a mess we darshan them with a treifa. But the truth is, meichit teisa aser with a treifa, it should be with a anything that doesn't have the ability to live. A misukenes doesn't have the ability to live. It's a quote-unquote einah chaya. And based on that pasuk, you would have thought it's assur. And if that's the case, how do you know it's mutar? The Gemara, in the course of the daf, made four suggestions, three of which stood. The first one was that from the fact that the Torah says a treifa is assur, zois achaya asher to misukenes that's b'chlall misaya mona in the treifa is really mutar. The second Makor was from a possuk that discusses the Halacha of an Avelah and the Halacha of a trayfa. And the third Makor was we learn it from a possuk in Yichazkel, which by the way, we know throughout Shas there are many, many Halachas that are learned from psukim in Yichazkel. Ad ke de kach, one of the slangs in the Talmud Bavli is, "This Halacha ad de osi Yichazkel min Agmira." If this is something that's learned from Yichazkel, how do we know before Yichazkel? The Gemara always says that it was a Halacha Gemira, it was Halacha le Moshe mi Sinai. That osi Yichazkel min Agmira. But either way, chalk this up as another Halacha that's learned from the world and from the novi Yichazkel. Either way, today we are going to continue to discuss this [snorts] very light or be a critical topic within the world of Shchita Shchulin, part two of the Sugya of a Shchita es ha Mr. Kennis. So, the Halacha Gemara again 11 lines from the bottom of daf lamed zayin amud bais. "Eich ba'i Mr. Kennis?" What is the definition of Mr. Kennis? So, loosely translated, a Mr. Kennis is an animal that's ot ot. We saw the end of yesterday's daf, the Shochet was screaming, "Koish! Koish! Shchach! Shchach!" But the Gemara wants to know a more technical definition of a Mr. Kennis. Am Rabbi Yehuda bar Rav, "Shmuel Yehuda said in the name of his great Rabbi Rav, "Koish mami de noise of inui medes." If this animal is so weak that if you would put it on its four feet, it would not be able to stand, meaning it would come falling down. That's a sign that it's a Mr. Kennis. That's when this Halacha applies. Which Halacha? It's mutar lechatchila, but only if it's mefarches. Only if it shows some sort of life during the course of the Shchita. Rav Chinena bar Shlamiya mishmei de Rav Amram, Rav Chinena bar Shlamiya, who was also a talmid of Rav, so he was mosif. He said, "I heard from the Rabbi Rav, "Afilu achilas bekayos." He's not coming to argue, Rashi says, he's coming to add. And that is that if this animal is mami de noise of inui medes, >> [snorts] >> even if it has the coyote to eat little twigs that that's still a sign that it's a missile Kenneth and Allah of a shake a missile Kenneth would apply Romeo by and here to Russia says he's not coming to argue he's coming to be moist if I feel I don't rub said I feel I because he didn't mean only because as opposed to even if it has even a bigger appetite and its teeth apparently are the teeth of a young fresh ox it doesn't matter at the end of the day if it's my mom the it doesn't matter how it is appetite is and mouth is operating at the same time it's going to have a lot of it missile Kenneth says the everything that we just said is the way this was presented in what we just say they have to come in kosher but he said over the name of he was moist if even if it eats because and was moist if even more than that even if it eats but he said a different version of this very similar in fact it's all similar you have to do a double take to see what the difference is they tell me missile Kenneth and they said that what's a missile Kenneth I have you said kosher also they know same definition that I feel like because even if it eats because and I have you said I feel like because not only if it eats because these little twigs but even if it eats because it eats beans still it's going to be considered missile Kenneth if it doesn't have the ability to stand on its feet what's the difference between the way they had it in the way they had it in so in there were three names have you done said the of missile Kenneth have you got added I feel like because and then added on top of that even if it eats because in they had a little differently in they said that gave the definition of missile Kenneth and he added I feel like because and was the one that added I feel like small met the middle of wrath. You know, a lot of the time of wrath after wrath passed away was much older than small. So after wrath passed away went to learn in the middle of small but the wrath small meets the time of wrath among who he told them my owner rather miss you can have a something you can tell me that wrath said in the world of miss you can I'm going to listen they told them I'll tell you what wrath said that as it relates to a miss you can we are the is that if it showed life and vitality through the course of the the it's going to be okay even if you want What is a definition of life? So wrath gave his definition go you if it makes the sound and an animal makes so if it's a cow it moves or if it's some other animal it does whatever those animals do on the farm they tell or if it goes to the bathroom the or if it wagged its ear raise a these are all examples of and if it's then the is that it's a sign of life So when small heard what the time of wrath said in the name of wrath what is the definition of life as it relates to a miss you can he told them three above you say so she says was a washing of that small would refer to his friend wrath as above is like saying wrath like saying and small had a lot of respect for wrath and that's why he called him wrath is just the opposite to say that the same as him of wrath was above and just because small was a of wrath so he felt close to him he called him by his name he didn't have to refer to him as wrath but regardless he said that does wrath need that it should even wag its ear meaning that's like a very intense level of Helios, meaning it sounds like according to Rav, the bar is set very, very high in terms of what the definition of pirchus is. Okay. What did Shmuel hold? Shmuel said, "Kosha einai d'varim." So, we have the girsa Sh'chamisa, but if you look at the Shita of the G'mara B'raisa, they change it to Sh'chamisa. That "Kosha einai d'varim Sh'chamisa eisa" anything that a animal doesn't do when it dies, meaning any movement that's not a sign of death is by process of elimination going to be considered a sign of life. So, according to Rav, a sign of life means something proactive, something aggressive. It's goya, it's a t'luyah kishkush of azna, which seems like it's the biggest of the three. >> [snorts] >> According to Shmuel, any movement, unless it's a movement that's natural for an animal to do when it dies, then obviously it would be a sign of death, not a sign of life. But as long as it's not that, that would be okay. Says the G'mara, "Manin d'varim Sh'chamisa eisa." In the world of Shmuel, so what is an example of something Sh'chamisa eisa? So, so we know that that is eliminated as being a sign of life, but everything else would be considered a sign of life. Am Rav Anan, Rav Anan said, "B'dei d'dei m'farshalei m'nanei Amshul." I heard it from Shmuel. This is what he said, "Hoisi ad d'kufah in the event that the hand of the animal was bent, u'pash d'sa, and then it spread its hand out, d'var Sh'chamisa eisa." That's d'var Sh'chamisa eisa, that will not be considered a sign of life. P'shuta, if however it was uh out stretched, d'kaf u'far, and then it bent its hand, d'var Sh'chamisa eisa, that's something that the meis doesn't do, and that would be considered a a sign of life. So, according to Rav, it's goya, it's a t'luyah, kishkush of azna. According to Shmuel, as long as it's not something that uh a meis does, that would be a sign of life. G'mara said, "What is an example of something that a meis does?" So, I know what's not something that a meis does, so I know what's considered a pirchus, what's a sign of life. So, Rav Anan said, Shmuel explained it to me. Great to G'mara, "Ma kamash lan?" It sounds a little bit like, you know, Shmuel had to explain what's a sign of life, what's not a sign of life. Rav Anan says, "I heard it directly from Shmuel." Is it in the first emission? Meaning it's in the first emission what's considered a double emission also. Turning the mission the animal that the other way the animal that that was pushed the other way so that it's possible that's a sign of death that's something that the animal naturally does as it dies. It's not a sign of life. And what do you see from here? That it's only if it's pushed the other but let's say if I care let's say the animal was hand was stretched out and then it pulled it back in it sounds like that would be kosher. Meaning the mission told me what is not considered a sign of life. One thing and one thing only which is exactly what Shmuel said. So I'm going to tell him and then Shmuel explained it to me why we even having this conversation. All I need Shmuel to say is is that as long as it's not a double emission also I know that it's considered a sign of life. What that is plus the first emission. And really the mission said both things that Shmuel said. Shmuel said that if it stretches his hand out it's a sign of death. If it brings its hand in it's not a sign of death. Both things are in the mission. Stretches his hand out is explicit in the mission. Bringing his hand back in is implicit in the mission. But both of those things are technically in the mission. So the mission says almost true. If you must listen that all I had them was the mission how about me now I would have thought Dafka the Kaifa who pasta but the Kaifa. The only time it's considered a sign of life is if the hand was bent he stretched his hand out and then he brought it back in. So you were on my way and maybe right? You went the full circle you did a round trip that's when it's considered a sign of life. I will put you to the coffee for so long. But let's say the hand was stretched and he brought it back in maybe not. Now the mission only said if the hand was bent and then he stretched it out it's not a sign of life. But you'd be able to think that what's the difference if you do it this way you do it that way. When the mission said that if you stretch it out it's not a sign of life it's love for you cuz you only went one way and you have to do a round trip. It's the one way trip that bothers me. The could have been Malcolm to say that Kamasu and that's Ravana and tell him that he did me fish me native small and the mission. He explained it to me a little bit better. I mean I know the mission addresses it but the mission is a little bit sauce on and I needed the matter small to explain it to me and essentially was explaining his own position but the bottom line is we have here my Rav and small. What did the definition of life is as it relates to our mission of God. According to Rav it's way more than it is according to small. According to Rav it's a tila ray, it's kishkish of a bazna. According to small any movement as long as it's not what? As long as it's not something that a mesa and what is the mesa do? We have it in the mission and we have active small himself told it to Rav and that is as long as that's not a situation where the animal took its hand and just jerked it outwards at the time of the shrita. Anything other than that would qualify as a sign of life and you'd be allowed to eat this animal. It's a kasha on Rav mesa Rav. Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav and Rav all sounds that the animal makes are all the same. So, if it has a thick voice when it makes his moo sound, then it's going to be considered a sign of life. If it's amikolo, if it has a voice at that point, then it won't be. It means where it was metal ray, but it was very close to where it was. Matresis means where it shoots out the That is considered already a much more of a sign of life. And if it's matresis, that's what Rav was referring to when he said it ray. So, this really concludes the first part of the daf. Before we go further, So, we have a machlokes is Rav and Shmuel. What's the definition of life as it relates to the misokanes, right? If it shows life during the shrita, that means it survived the shrita. The shrita killed it. It's good. It's not, not. He hidami. What is an example of life? Machlokes is Rav and Shmuel, right? Throughout shas, you have a machlokes is Rav and Shmuel. Here too, you have a machlokes is Rav and Shmuel. Rav says goya vetila ray vikishkisha ba'azna. Now, he clarified a little bit. Goya means avikolo. Vetila ray means matresis. Vikishkisha ba'azna, these things are there. According to Shmuel, now anything that it does, as long as it's not this one thing that we know an animal naturally and instinctively does as it's dying, anything else is going to be a sign of life. Tosfos, so top Tosfos on the yomi, he doesn't ask it as a kasha, and he doesn't explain it with a teretz, but he addresses the obvious question. We had a mishna. In the mishna, there were three pshetim amongst the tana'im what the definition of life is. Rav Shimon Gamaliel, or Rabban Gamaliel, pick your gears so, said that it's achas defarchas bi'adu beregel. Rav Eliezer ben Azariah also the shita of Rav Shimon said Zinka." And then finally we had the sheet of the that said if it's the or the or it wags its tail. So we have three sheets of the why are Shmuel arguing in a that debated? Right? Just speaking example. We know there's a Rav and Shmuel. If that was Rabbi it would make sense. It should be Rav and Shmuel. Here's another one. Here's a Rav and Shmuel. It was a or a pigeon. Right? So if that was already a so you wouldn't have a between Rav and Shmuel. Rav and Shmuel that's what they argue with what's somewhere in a or a This is a Why they arguing? So says that it's that they weren't being Rav and Shmuel and really the Rav and Shmuel is which sheet in the that we like. And Rav who was and Rav said that if it's Rav and even means and even Rav and Rav says he's going like the most of the three sheets of the and who's the most of the three sheets of the first sheet sheets of the has to be and Rav. So Rav is going like the first sheet of the sheet of the whereas Shmuel that said that no as long as it does anything that's going to be okay. That's the third sheet of the Rav. It's the sheet of the that says if it moves its or it's or it's all those things would be fine. The bottom line is Rav and Shmuel is not this new Rav and Shmuel. It's really a which one of the sheets of the do we like. Either way on that note we now turn our attention to the next part of the which is going to take us almost until the very very end of the day. So high level what's about to happen now is the is going to discuss. So as it relates to if it shows life during the shita, kosher. If it doesn't show life during the shita, it's not going to be kosher. At what point of the shita would it have to show life? Beginning of the shita? The middle of the shita? The end of the shita, right? I mean, I guess those are the three possibilities. Now, you would think that for sure the best case scenario would be the end because the whole idea is to make sure it survives the shita. So, if it shows life at the beginning of the shita, but it didn't show life but it didn't survive the shita, then how do I know it actually survived the shita? So, the best you can get is that if it showed life the shita, that would be great. Next best would be the end so because you know for sure it survived the shita, it's still knocking during the middle. I was going to say kicking, but that's a bad pun. It's still kicking in the middle of the shita. So, that gives you a better chance of it knowing that it's alive at the end of the shita. And of course, the worst case scenario or the least you would have is if it showed life the shita. Bottom line is is it the the end so the spoiler alert, it's three shitas amongst the shita holds as we'll see the end so the shita holds the shita holds the shita. How How they all come about in their respective shitas, that's something that we're going to see now as we go through the shita. The shita said the shita said As it relates to the shita that the said the shita said that the shita said that the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita said the shita soif it's just not forget the shita. But really it's all about the answer hashita. Meaning you could have thought you could have thought that you need that shita is enough. Come ash below the soif but not that it has to be mamesh by the shpitz shpitz soif. As long as it's the answer then already you know that it's surviving the shita and there's no reason to assume that it's going to end up dying at the very very end. So the mala I'm going to have this of a no mean a lot. How do I know this? Meaning how do I know that this shmua that pirchus the soif shita doesn't mean the soif shita mamesh but it means the answer. So meaning not soif but not shiva but the answer. So that it's not I know from the mission. Because the mission the mission the other way zero right the mission gave an example of where if the animal was mifarches it's not a sign of life. What was it? A daka that was the other way zero. We just spoke a lot about that. It said the is the when exactly did this happen? Meaning the soif shita if it happened at the end of the shita call hey hey hey hey the taysel well has to live so long. Meaning if it happened the soif shita essentially what you're telling me is that if this animal is still able to make this kind of movement the soif shita mamesh. And Rashi adds that if it happens the soif shita it's going to probably continue even after the shita because the soif shita is like a nano second. So it's going to happen even after this at the end of the shita. So you're telling me that if it has that much life at the very end of the shita it's not a sign of life. It's a sign of death. Sign of death would mean if it happened like before the end of the shita. But even the missioner that says there's this jerk that the animal does at the end of its life that's a sign of death. But it can't be that it's doing it big matter shita or maybe better even after the shita already concluded. It's not possible. Obviously it did it the shita. So what do you see from the missioner? That really a pirchus the answer shita is enough. Just this pirchus is not enough. But it's for sure the missioner said but that a purely I shall not SAY MUST BE BUT YOU WANT TO KNOW HOW I know that's how I know. Told that could be means I want to know how if it's that means that purely that's not good even not good so as in the maybe even a second after how's that possible? What was the hey hey hey so yes I don't know what it doesn't do this we are doing must be that it died earlier. Now there was this some but about this my click is going on over here but the bottom line is but felt that there's no way that if an animal jerks in any way shape or form at the matter of the that it would be anything other than a sign of life. Which means then that when the mission that says that if that is not a sign of life must be talking about it was the answer which means that the purely is playing itself out but it says I categorically disagree with your premise. I think that no there is an idea that an animal will sometimes jerk and it could be that movement will even go beyond after the was already completed and it's still considered a sign of death which doesn't which means then that there's no that the purely is playing itself out and so it could be it's very much playing itself out but either way that's the first sheet pretty straight forward. It's but holds that so I heard there's an Indian of so but he clarified what is so mean it means purely really it's but it doesn't have to be so would be too early in the game because just because it was alive at the it mean it survived the and the but as long as it's that's that happy medium and hopefully there it's going to be okay. He said that when it says it says it means that it says it says it says He didn't hear this that it says he is he said that you want to know what it says and how do I know that it says and he brought a time when he saw the animal and he woke up and he saw that the walls were filled with blood the animal is going to be meaning you said that the animal is dead and you don't know whether it showed signs of life simply because you couldn't see it was so if you wake up in the morning and you see the walls are filled with blood it's okay because it means that the blood means that it says in the who said that is a sign of that's a sign of life that what is the mean when it says it says it says it doesn't mean the walls of the barn it means the place of the okay I mean tell me it says if you going to tell me that it says then I understand but if you going to tell me it says and by the way what does it say it says it says it says it says it says it says it says or like explain it means that it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says that it says it says it says it says it says it says that it says it says it says it says it says >> [snorts] >> it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it says it's the longest says that why did the throw in the middle that when it says in the it says it says it says it says it says it says it says and why was that important to the narrative Let's say the kaislim mean the walls of the barn, the the schlachtois. Would anything change? So, Rashi says yeah. Cuz Rashi says that if an animal coughs up blood outside, you would actually be able to tell, again, we're not farmers or shochtim. So, if an animal would cough up blood and you would walk in, you see like a murder scene. There's this big mess on the ground. You'd actually be able to tell whether this zinka took place b'chila b'emtza b'saif. There would be a way to know. If it's in the bais hashchita, there's no way to know. And that's why the Gemara had to throw in v'alma shmuel kaislei bais hashchita shmuel CUZ IT'S ACTUALLY ACTIVE IN THE Gemara's right. Without Shmuel's memory, there's no Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak. But either way, says Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak avo m'furash d'raya from the Mishnah. Cuz you see in the Mishnah that Rav Shimon said that hashocheit balayla u'l'machar motzei shabbos layl Shabbos k'sheira she'a zinka. U'k'shei d'Rav Eliezer d'dayim zinka. And there's no way for you to know the dam which is on the k'solim. If k'solim means kaislei bais hashchita the way Shmuel explained it, there would be no way in the world to know if it happened b'chila b'emtza b'saif. Why does it doesn't matter? So, it doesn't matter when it happened. Even if it was b'chila, that dam is always going to be okay. Must be perches works. A field b'chila shochtim the dam has a kasha. V'du mash'ani zinuk d'odif. Maybe there's a cheilek between the sign of life that is zinuk versus the signs of life that come from just the animal throwing its hand or its feet and making different movements and jerks. Maybe there's a certain preferential treatment that zinuk gets because maybe that's a greater sign of life. In other words, it could be that as it relates to just being matir the yad, the regel, etc., if it happened b'chila, that wouldn't be a raya necessarily that it survived. But if it had so much koach that it was able to be a zinuk, well, that's a raya that for sure it's able to survive. So, could be ordinarily siman of chiyus b'chila is not a gilui on the emtza b'saif. But maybe zinuk is better. But the Gemara says you can't say that cuz is better and this is what we going to learn but now the mission that is false again remember the mission of three sheets of the first sheet of or that said actually the yard of second and he says in what do you see from in many of us yard to do less even if you're what do you see from in less than yard the regular but the more says I don't know if that's such a tiny cuz I could always say the meal here you see the is not like the mission but maybe but maybe it's more than the meaning copy the sheet of the kind of rubber rubber and it's in but at the same time it could be is better than the third sheet of the third sheet of the yard or so if you're going to compare and contrast those two and zinc but it would be enough but it's not a riot upon him the riot but it won't be a riot of if it was yard of that would be okay but the said I mean I said some the that actually a boost from that a the father of a boost from who actually says was a boost from asked but I mean some say wasn't the father of a boost from from who was a boost from but it was the brother of a boost from that the bottom of the could you suggest that sheet is a Muhammad and the bottom of the can't be why cuz I don't know the mission of the third sheet of what they say or the yard or the regular right that's the third sheet of or the yard or the regular rubber on the who is the rubber on the front of the rubber on the I'll be going back rubber on the and that's what it sounds like a little bit right rubber on the or that said yard and the rubber on the come along and they say or yard or regular but if that's the case, given pirchos me by it. The loshon achas tifarches oy yad oy regel sounds like, you got to do more. No, it's not enough ad until you go a little What do you mean? It's less. What he should have said was a loshon that connotes less. For example, kivan, right? That would be a loshon that would mean less. Achas tifarches means I got to do more. Kivan tifarches means that I don't have to do so much, right? Yad v'regel, whichever we did first, other than yad other than regel, that's going to be okay. Elo pshita, right? We always say this. There's an elo and then there's an elo pshita. Elo pshit is poshet, just from the grammar at the Rebbe Eliezer, that he's commenting Rebbe Eliezer, which makes sense. The first shita was Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai Rebbe Meir. Second shita is Rebbe Eliezer. The chachamim moanim to Rebbe Eliezer. Now if it's odef, if it's odef, if it's more, or meaning, if Rebbe Eliezer is more than the chachamim, then my ad, then again it doesn't make sense the loshon of of ad. Again, it should have said a loshon of kivan, not a loshon of ad. So, it's poshet. It's poshet poshet that the chachamim can't be talking to the first shita, the shita of Rebbe Gamaliel {slash} Rebbe Shimon Gamaliel. It has to be that they're talking to Rebbe Eliezer. And if they're talking to Rebbe Eliezer and use the loshon of ad, must be Rebbe Eliezer is the less stringent position. Bottom line, if that's the case, you see that Rebbe Eliezer is less than Rebbe Gamaliel. Dayo im zinko, he said it bok tzeina. You see that Rebbe Eliezer is less than the chachamim, not from what Rebbe Eliezer said, but from what the chachamim said. They said ad. So, Rebbe Eliezer is the least of the shitas. Zog Rebbe Nachman bar Yitzchak, if Rebbe Eliezer says zinko is enough, and in Rebbe Eliezer you see it's enough if it's petur shita. How do I know that? From Rebbe Shimon who was going with shitas Rebbe Eliezer said that if you find the walls of the Beis HaShchita with ad, that's a sign of life, even though I don't know if it happened in the beginning, the middle, the end because frankly I don't care. Well, if that's the case and it's true by Yitzchak which is the least of all that it's only going to be true for everything else. This is the sheet of Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak that holds not like this schmutter of Chizkuni heard Schmita and he was clearing we've called it Shita Schmita and Shrita and of course all this stuff. Here's the disclaimer, it's always Shita. But either way, so it's [laughter] not like this that figure out what else we could call it. It's not like this Shita or this Shmua or Shchita or Shmita, I'm lost now. It's not like what Rav Chizkuni had heard and that is that it's Shmita Shmita and we tried to figure out if it's or really but rather what it is is regardless we've done two of the three Shitas and now we're >> [laughter] >> up to third Shita about Shita. Rava Rava says Rava says that >> [laughter] >> when Chazal said it's Shita he heard the same thing Rav Chizkuni heard, right? He heard it Shita but he didn't say that means really Emtza and only reason we're calling it is but rather the reason we're calling it cuz we mean what we say and we say what we mean. Shita means literally not Emtza we would have said Emtza. That is I'm a Rava Rava said I mean a lot. How do I know this? Now it's interesting. Rav Chizkuni proved his Shita from the Mishna. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak proved his Shita from the Mishna. Rava is not going to prove his Shita from the Mishna. In fact, it's going to be a wild this is very much so says Rava how do I know this I know from the following price. It says in the Torah Shoy I Kasef I Ays Kivali this passage tells us the that you know an animal till it's eight days old. We know the hazal, it's a megish rabin parshas emor that says that we compare a carbon to a person. And just like a person, a boy, bris milah happens by yom shmini, so too is by yom shmini v'hol hayotzei as it relates to an animal as well. And this is the makor to this famous ray that the gaon brings us in his beer hagolah hilchos milah that when a person is machnis a son with bris shalom avinu be'ito u'bizmano even sh'lo be'ito u'bizmano he's bringing a carbon. He's not just doing a mitzvah. From this comparison that hazal made in the din yom shmini as it relates to bris milah versus yom shmini that a child has to be 8 days old. This is the shuta shuta shuta sh'meiker this pasuk stating that hazal darshin this pasuk and learned that a lot of other halachos. It says shor oy kesev. Rashi says the word oy is extra. Didn't have to say oy kesev. We learn from here prat l'klayim. So in the event you would have this mixed breed of animals, it wouldn't be kosher to be brought as a carbon. It says oy ayil. Again, the word oy is extra. And we learn from there prat l'nidma. So what's a nidma? So by the way, this is sugias that's going to be coming up towards the latter part of the masecta, but a nidma is where a sheep and a goat gave birth to a child. The child is technically a goat, but it looks like a sheep. The bottom line is it's not something you can bring as a carbon. kivalei when it says kivalei we learn from here prat l'yotzei dafen that the only time an animal is kosher to be brought as a carbon is if the birth was a natural birth. If however it was a C-section, right? It wasn't born naturally, yotzei dafen it's not going to be kosher. It says v'hayu shivas yamim. We learn from here prat l'choser zman. Has to be 7 days old. That's pretty straightforward. AND TACHAS IMOI PRAT L'YOSAM. That if the animal is a yosam, it can't be brought as a carbon. Says the gemara. >> [snorts] >> Rava is going to work. Hay yosam heichi dami? What does the bris mean when it says that a yosam can't be brought as a carbon? E leima d'yoladetei imei. Does it mean when we say how do define Yosam? It means that there was a mother animal gave birth to a child and then at some point it died. So right now this CHILD DOESN'T HAVE A MOTHER WHICH is the definition of a Yosam. But says right we had the same but this animal the mother has to live forever. It's a funny that if the animal doesn't have a mother it's a Yosam and you can't bring it as a carbon it doesn't make sense. Ella the Mesa the day Maybe what it means is not that at some point a year later the mother died but it means the mother died before the child before this animal was born. Well if that's the case as if the mother died while the baby was in its womb that means the mother lost the ability to deliver the child naturally which means that the child is going to be a which means it's already in a from I don't need right this is not just a Right those two possibilities are not possible. The first one is just because it's untenable and the second one is because it's already taken. I already have a for this. Hello what must have happened was is that it must be of the later right as the baby animal was being born that the mother that the child says if what the person essentially is telling me when it says Yosam is is that the mother has to be alive at the end of the I get this meaning it wasn't a from because the animal the mother was alive long enough to deliver naturally but at the second that but if you're going to tell me that you don't need that the mother should be alive at the later And if it would die a little bit earlier, like that's what this Allah is coming to teach me. Well, if that's the case, then why do I need the drasha? Me Wally enough guy know me it's just a little bit of a word in tomorrow what which is why it's a little bit hard to read in real time. Sort of repeating ourselves. But basically what Rob is saying is that it's clear that this drasha of is coming to say that the mother has to be alive all the way to the end through the of the but if it dies then it's it's not going to be okay. Why? Because if it's coming to tell me anything other than that that if the mother died before that that's when it's going to be a problem. But really it doesn't have to be alive till the very very end of the well that was already in this from so must be what we're coming to say is is that this of teaches me that if it's going to be a soul because it's not meaning it has to be alive a little bit more than that. It's a price. So again you have a price that I learned that a whole bunch of from the what you what we need is teaches me probably we're at the of the that what do you need? You need that it should be alive the mother a little bit more than that. Once it's alive a little bit more than that, it's long as it wasn't you don't need that it should be alive forever. Right the was not a requirement. But at the very least it has to be up to that. And Rob back into how I know that's what the drasha is. That's the wordiness over here. Okay, so what does what does have to do with our we're learning the we're trying to figure out what the is. We're trying to figure out when the is. We know I know from this price. So if you take a look at it Zeh pure shlamisa. So Rashi says it's washing in on craw. So essentially what's this possible my teaching me? The being in at my later. That the mother has to be alive until the my later or and it even has to be alive a little bit after the later. Because if it's that pure shlamisa that's exactly what we're going to might from the if not have a it's going to be a right? The height of the later. Right? That's obviously what it's coming to be might. Okay, so what does it have to do with us? So if you skip to Rashi from here you see that you see from here that the being in you see from here that anytime say you have to have you would have to have the when all the way at the very very end. The that the mother has to have it has to have all the way to the end. So when we say that the him has to have otherwise it's going to be a problem it means it has to have all the way to the end. So again what's the that whenever said you need it means that you see it from this because otherwise the animal is going to be considered a if you see it over there you're going to see it as it relates to the him as well. So what's the what's the what's the recap this second part of the half? The is that the if it shows life during the course of the it's going to be okay. The question is at what point of the does it have to show life? It's a three said and said and said and they all had a that it's was really based on a that he heard. But he heard a but he knew that he knew couldn't mean that he knew that >> So he knew that it has to be the answer is why? Because you see that an animal that jerks itself in a way that a master will sometimes do is not considered a sign of life. And his mind if that would happen the sure would be a sign of life. is not talking about the man who is is over so he clearly because the answer is going to be fine. the answer is okay. He said okay. What was his his was from the man He said if someone alive and he finds that the walls the walls of the man laying down that's a sign that the sign of life And don't tell me maybe is more because it's actually less. We went through the mission and we heard it on it. You see that from the three sheets in the mission there's no question in the world the most common sheet is the is the sheet of the man or the man who second is the and third is the man who is the So for the man who is the sheet is enough certainly it's going to be okay for the other sheets and then finally said that and the sheet of the man who is What's my my is because you see whenever we talk about always means the man I know it from the man of the leader of a man in the world of the man who is the man and the same is going to be true here. What does do with the with his desire with his desire [clears throat] that doesn't mean it means the answer So if you remember addressed it already. He was the one who was of his desire When we went to the man real time we didn't realize that the man was really setting himself up to be able to go ahead and say another shot. So the reason Rava didn't care of of Chizda's raya, he already dressed that he was the bal plukta, he was the one that was makchish raya that he brought. What about Shimon's raya? Doesn't Shimon have like a really good raya? Or Nachman bar Yitzchak's raya from Rav Shimon? You see zinka, and zinki have no way of knowing if it's b'chila or emtza or b'saif. That seems to be a good raya. And this is something that the whole shmua has to be meyushev. Rav Chizda's shaat in the shmua, Rava's shaat in the shmua. How do you meyushev that? So, Tosfos speaks it out, and Tosfos says that it was lo shchiach zinka to happen b'chila. It was lo shchiach for it to happen in the saif. So, even though it's true beyond a reasonable doubt, you have no way to know, but the metzius is that usually the zinka took place b'saif. And being that usually the zinka took place b'saif, so it's fair to assume that that's what happened over here as well. Either way, moving along to the third part of the daf. Amar Rava, Rava said, "Hilchos k'hilchos issur, as it relates to the halachos of all these dinim, it follows the following braisa." The braisa says, "B'heima daka she'pashta yada v'lo achzira psula. That a b'heima daka that was pashta yada v'lo achzira psula." So again, a b'heima daka as opposed to a b'heima gasa, it was pashta yada, stretched his hand out, it was lo achzira psula. We knew this already from the mishna, cuz that's a sign of death, not a sign of life. But Medvarim Amurim stating that, says the braisa b'yad, that's only true if it was pashta b'yad. Aval b'regel, if it was the foot, bein pashta v'lo kafa, bein kafa v'lo pashta, it doesn't matter if it stretched out or it stretched it back. In either situation, she'eira is going to be kosher. But Medvarim Amurim like the braisa b'daka, it's only true if it's a b'heima daka. Aval b'gasa, if it's a b'heima gasa, then [laughter] bein b'yad, bein b'regel, right? B'heima daka matters if it's the yad or the regel. But over here, bein b'yad, bein b'regel, bein pashta v'lo kafa, bein kafa v'lo pashta, she'eira in all situations it's going to be kosher. Aval and as it relates to a bird, a filu lo rifref ela gapa, Rashi says rifref is less than kishkush. So, kishkes is, just subtract a little bit and you have a riffraff. But, even if it wagged something, it's uh wing the light kishkes, right? And it didn't do a kishkes cuz riffraff is less than kishkes. Uh I'm sorry. The light kishkes is not right. >> [laughter] >> And it was makashkes then it itself would be considered a pirchus. So, Rava says, "You want to know what the halacha is? I'm giving you the halachas." The halachas are like this. It comes to beheima daka, if it's pashta, it's a sign of death. If it brings it back in, that's already a sign of life. That's only true if it's the hand. If it's the foot, pashta kafa, it's all the same. That's all true for beheima daka. Beheima gasa, doesn't matter if it's the hand or the foot, and if it went out or in, in every situation we'll be fine. As far as it relates to a bird, even if just gives a little tweak or tweet, even that itself is going to be okay. And the Gemara asks, "I understand. My kamashma lon, what's the grace of chiddush over here of uh Rava? Isn't it in a Mishna? Isn't it a Mishna? Beheima daka de Mishna said pashta yada v'lo yachzir pasula. She'eino lo etzlo nafash. That was the Mishna. Now, the Mishna wasn't nearly as wordy as the braisa. That should not come as news to anybody. But, at the same time, really everything that you have in the braisa, you can extrapolate from the Mishna. Why? Because what does the Mishna say? Beheima daka she pashta yada o yada in ragloi. Sounds like as it relates to the ragla. No, the foot is always going to be a a sign of life. It's always going to be kosher. Not just that, it's a beheima daka. Daka in gasa loi. So, as it relates to as it relates to gasa, doesn't matter hand or foot, it's always going to be fine. So, what's the kasha? So, what's the kasha? It's really mefurash in the Mishna. So, if it's mefurash in the Mishna, so it's not a kasha on the braisa, it's a kasha on Rava. Rava said hilchos kimah masnisa. Of course, that's the halacha mefurash in the Mishna. Rashi explains cuz we know halacha k'stam Mishna. And being that halacha k'stam Mishna, and if this is all a stam Mishna, so I don't need to know of a braisa to know what the halacha is. Meaning, it sounds like Rava walked into Beis Medrash and said, "I'm going to tell you a halacha. You to Everyone listen clearly because it's a very important halakha l'maaseh. The halakha is against the maaseh. This way, that way, it's it's it's so obvious. Everyone knows this. Any person that's a a ben essel a mishnah is going to notice a halakha cuz he's going to know that the mishnah said it's established the behama daka dakin gasoloy shepos yode yode in ragloy. So, isn't it almost for sure the mishnah bracha says, "Yes." Oif, it's three reigalim tonight. The one part of this braisa that Rava needed in order to lay down the law of the land was as relates to oif. Didn't say one word about rish rish, who would remember that? Didn't say the word rish rish in the mishnah. That was something that is only exclusively in the braisa and it's for that reason that Rava felt he had to say hilchesa ke hora maaseh naisa exhale and really this is an exhale on the whole sugia of hashoichet es hamisu kedas. So, as it relates to raid, two hours. The first, we're going to go back to the Beis Sal Levi and talk a little bit more about it. The second one is dvar agoda just to end this series of intense stuff and on a little bit of a lighter note. So, over the last several days, we've been discussing the Beis Sal Levi in chelek beis siman yud aleph, which discusses shitas Rashi in the sugia of chechla d'meitze manim, which is on daf lamed amud beis, and shava d'meitze manim, which is on daf lamed amud beis amud aleph amud beis. The gemara in two places here in perek hashoichet had any boya. What happens if somebody messes up shoyichet d'meitze manim? He tripped up on one of the halachas l'Moshe miSina. And daf lamed amud beis, the gemara's question is, if he did chechla d'meitze manim. And daf lamed amud beis amud aleph, the gemara's shaila is, he did sh'hiya d'meitze manim. Both cases, chechla d'meitze manim mau, shava d'meitze manim mau, and the gemara gives the same answer. In both Sugyas, it's a one-word answer, take two. Tishbi Ataris Kushis Vibois. We mentioned that this Machlokes is Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam. How do we learn the Posuk from the Gamorah? Rashi learns that the Shaila was in the event that the Shochet already did Rov of the Siman Bekashus, but he messed up in the meat basar. Do we say that being that Rov is really all you need, and he already got Rov right, so this is a kosher Shchita, and it's for that reason what you do in the meat basar is neither here nor there. Or do you say being that you went weiter, so the Halacha is now you have no choice, but you have to get it right. And if you got it wrong, you're a Moiser Keriah. Rabbeinu Tam is Chaylek with Rashi, and the primary reason is cuz how could it be that if you already got the Shchita right, even though you decided to go weiter, but if you messed up only in the meat basar, it would be an issue. And it's because of that Rabbeinu Tam learns that the Shaila was Hech with the Shabbat meat Simanim, but not the meat basar. It was only the meat kam. NOW, YOU ENDED up getting Rov right, hence the Shaila. But the point is it was not the meat basar where the mistake occurred, but rather it was the meat kam where the mistake occurred. We mentioned that as it relates to Shitas Rashi, there's a big Machlokes Rishonim what Rashi meant. The Rashba and the Ravad is a bias, the Maharshal and Yam Shel [ __ ] and really Rov Rishonim understood that even Rashi, who learned that there's a Sugya in two places, Lamed Aleph Beis, Lamed Beis, Lamed Aleph, Hech meat basar Shabbat meat basar, and there's a Tzadd that even though you got it right, maybe now you were Moiser Keriah. So, what do you do with the Rabbanan? We go with the meat basar out to the meat kam. But, MideOraisa, it's Poshet. Once you get it right, you got it right, there's no way to mess it up. Stated that the Tzlosh brings from Rabbeinu Yerucham that said that Al Liba de Rashi, the Gamorah's Ibaya is an Ibaya DeOraisa, and it's even Mashma that way from Rashi, cuz Rashi said that being that the Gamorah says Takeu, the Halacha is we go with the Chumra, and if it's a Shaila with the Rabbanan, it would be a Sfek DeRabbanan LeKula. And from the fact that we go with the Chumra, it's Mashma that Sfek DeOraisa LeChumra. And if that's the case, really the Shaila then becomes what's the one that what's the side that even though I did what you did already and that's I got it right, but [laughter] if I was master to be an issue. So the base of levy says that Rashi is that when we say that only has to shut the road of the same on the is the touch of Ruby that the sheer of how much of the same and you have to shut is the right and once you do the right, the rest of the same and might as well just be the foot. It's not a mocking. It's not a anymore of where the needs to be all is not over the same and the gun nervous because of Ruby I don't need to shut the whole same and to have a in the whole same. If I shut over the same and that itself can get me a in the gun so the base of levy Rashi understood that has to be in THE WHOLE SAME. NERVOUS RUBY tells me that when I shut the right, I get a in the mute bastard as well. If I would not shut the mute bastard, it's true. I would have a in the mute bastard. I you did the of the right, but that's possible. If I decide to go and shut the mute bastard, so the is not because of the make believe that I got the is there because OF WHAT I DID. SO IF IT'S HOW IN THE MUTE BASTARD, WELL THEN WE understand why if you have a mute bastard, you shut the mute bastard, it's going to be a problem. If the way Ruby works and specifically Ruby tomorrow on the world of schooling is that the only how in the right. So it's not how in the mute bastard. SO IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW I SHUT IT. IF I SHUT IT, WHEN I SHUT IT, WHY I shut it. It's like shutting the ear of the foot. It's not part and parcel of the so there's no way that I have a mute bastard and a mute bastard would be a problem. The Rashi learned that the was always how in the mute bastard. NERVOUS IT'S HOW IN THE MUTE BASTARD I YOU DID the right, but if YOU DECIDE TO GO AHEAD AND do the shita in the mere past or yourself, then it's been halal shita. That is what Rashi understood and hence this Gemara's with a take off. Oh, and hug over the camera. But this is the longest that the base of Levy extrapolated from shita's Rashi. Sayan daflam on the base fry on daf lam and base on the off. Now we will move a file full a little bit. That's Hashem in this shita of Rashi the cloud in the Havana of shita's Rashi of the base of Levy before. We spoke about it a little bit from the culture perspective cuz in culture there's a term called mirror. Comes from a mission or in Yuma daflam and also on the base. And mirror is the hash loma. It's the mirror of the shita. And we brought two rias from the earlier that the mirror of a shita in the world of culture is not treated like the shita. The kind of Godel on Yom Kippur where there was a paid of him to do all the avoda, he would do the shita of the tamid shacha, but because he had to do the kabala, he had no choice but to have someone else do the mirror. And there was no paid on that. The Tosefta in the beginning of Masachet Zevachim says that if Rashi the shita would be done with Adam Rashi shima, but the mirror would be done with Adam Rashi shima, it's neither here nor there. And the shira is what's the reason that in shita's shulen have to be a pastor. The shama mirror pastor is a take off with a shiv kashan shulen that you're supposed to be machmir, yet in the world of culture mirror I don't care if Zohar does it on Yom Kippur. You want to do mirror with Adam Rashi SHIMA GOT RASHI RIGHT ALREADY MY MOTHER SHACHA. IF YOU HAVE THE LONGEST in the base of Levy as a shita in the mirror pastor. Now what's usually how you did the right, but now that I went ahead and did it, it's happening through my shita. So why should it be okay if a non kind of Godel does it on Yom Kippur? And why should it be that if Adam Rashi shima it shouldn't be a problem? So that was something that we will move a file full about. More recently, we mentioned the Hadash from Brisk that fresh Pesach brings in the side street that he heard from Israel Velt a Hadashah K'chaya in the city of Brisk where there was a Shochet that was B'meah V'asrah, but was Mekel because the animal wasn't Meturgus based on our Sugya of Metzukenes which that if it's Meturgus it's N'veilah K'chachah the Ramah says what to allow. So if that's true it should be true as well and said that being that it wasn't Meturgus must be that it already died and if it died IT MEANS WHAT YOU DID IN the Meah V'ASRAH WAS NOTHING. SO EVEN though it's true all the you could Shochet IN THE MEAH V'ASRAH BUT ONCE IT'S DEAD ALREADY THEN obviously you can't do nothing. And it's for that reason went ahead with his Teyku and we spoke out of to others and some more contemporary as it relates to this Hadash from but just to mention one more and it's really this is one of these mind teasers and it's a fascinating fascinating Shailah that the discuss and it begins with a Shmaitzah. The Shmaitzah's in Shmaitzah Aleph it's Perek Chof Beis. So here's the background. We know S'feikah D'Oraisa L'Chumrah S'feik S'feikah D'Oraisa L'Kulah stating that the is it's based on Sugyas Hashas that the only time you go L'Kulah when there's a S'feik S'feikah D'Oraisa is if it's not going up K'negad Chazakah. But if there's a Chazakah K'negad the S'feik S'feikah then the is even the S'feik S'feikah you're still going to go L'Chumrah. So S'feik S'feikah D'Oraisa but only K'negad Chazakah. But that's in contrast to a one S'feikah where you go L'Chumrah even K'negad Chazakah. But if you have a S'feik S'feikah K'negad Chazakah the is you're going to go L'Chumrah. It's for that reason the it that if a Shochet and he has a sfeikos sfeika whether the shchita was okay or not okay, we don't eat the meat. And the reason is, based on the Gemara in Daf Tes, where the Gemara says "Beheima bechayaha b'chezkas issur omedes", and therefore it's always considered to be b'chezkas issur actually v'od al achas kamma until you know for sure that something happened. Every beheima, before it gets a kosher shchita, is considered to be b'chezkas issur. Now, what's the chezkas issur? That's machlokes Rashi and Tosfos. Rashi learns the chezkas issur is the chezkas "eima menachas". Tosfos says once you shacht the animals for sure now they're "eima menachas". So you can't say "eima menachas". Rashi holds "machshakinan l'issur". This is a whole 'nother inyan. But Tosfos says what's the chezkas issur? It's the chezkas "eina zevucha". Because it says in the Torah "v'eina zevucha", which might mean either a mitzvas asei tzarich s'ramem al But the bottom line is that if YOU DON'T SHACHT YET, you're violating "k'ilu" the "eina zevucha" or you haven't fulfilled yet the "eina zevucha". And if you go ahead and eat it, that would be considered the issur "eina zevucha". And that's what the chezkas issur is. But the bottom line is every animal until the shchita is b'chezkas issur. And for that reason it's brought down in Shulchan Aruch that if there's a sfeikos sfeika in the shchita, you don't eat it. "Ai, it's a sfeikos sfeika, but it's k'neged chazaka." WHICH CHAZAKA? CHULLIN DAF TES AMUD ALEPH. It's the chezkas issur according to Rashi, chezkas "eima menachas". And according to Tosfos, it's the chezkas "eina zevucha". Clarifies the Shach Shmaitza. What would be if there's a sfeikos sfeika in the midbar? What would be if the shochet shacht in the midbar? And he had a sfeikos sfeika. "L'didei dan, d'we machmir like shitas Rashi." That a shchita in the midbar is considered shchita, and therefore you better get it right. "A feel in the day rise." So l'chumra l'chumra l'chumra. What would be right now if you had a sfeikos sfeika? Says the Shach Shmaitza, "I'm very very not sure. On the one hand, my feeling is it should be no different than if I had a sfeikos sfeika in the treif or the answer the shita. If there's a sfeikos sfeika in the shita, even though sfeikos sfeika even with the roiv you always go to kulah but not k'neged chazaka. Over here there's a cheskas issur. So, cheskas issur is odd from a sfeikos sfeika. Ob zogt the shmeitza, I'm not sure. You know, I am not sure. Because when this shochet went ahead and he shocheted the roiv, at that point it became kosher. SO, AT THAT SECOND the cheskas issur went away. The even achai, the cheskas ain boiach. At that point the issur went away. IF AT THAT POINT THE ISSUR WENT AWAY, now that I go further with THE MEAT BASAR, I'M NOT SO SURE THAT MEAT BASAR IS GOING HEAD TO HEAD anymore with a chazaka. Up until the roiv, you had the chazaka. But the minute I did the roiv, at that point the chazaka went away cuz the issur went away. Right? If you would shochet the roiv, drop your knife and take a bite out of this uh animal, it's kosher. YOU DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG. THAT MEANS THERE'S A MOMENT IN TIME WHERE THERE'S no cheskas issur. So, if there's a moment in time where there's no cheskas issur, so if I go further and I have a sfeikos sfeika, I can't treat it anymore as a sfeikos sfeika, can I get this? What's the other side? The other side is that being that there's a long distance, we know what the long distance is, the base aleph. But being that there's a long distance, then when I go further it's considered part of the shita. And when I go further, these are the words of the shmeitza, igoy mussar mafreya. That the shita zich nisht opgeton. I'll you do the roiv. But now the shita is happening right there everything. I I only have to do roiv? No, really have to do everything. I just get to everything through the roiv. But the extent that I go further this is shita, [laughter] WHICH MEANS THE SHITA IS NOT FINISHED YET. SO, IF THE SHITA IS NOT FINISHED YET, it's still going up k'neged chazaka. So, sfeikos sfeika k'neged chazaka is going to be a problem. Here's the point. Do you look at it in the real time or do you look at it based on what's going on in the world of the mafreya? When I get up to the mid basra and I'm about to do something that's going to involve a safex faker, at that second there's no there's really no hazaka. It's when I go and I fear roish and now it's a gloi mussel mafreya that I continue to walk and that I was mashlim the shchita al ye day the physical shchita that limafreya in the world of retroactive that that hazaka went away. So when I was living in in real time the hazaka wasn't there because the issur went away. But then again I went weiter and the minute I decided to go weiter so now we're ready the gloi mussel mafreya that the hazaka really never went away. And if that's the case it's safex faker can have a hazaka. It's a close the shmeitza. It's funny you shmeitza is a a hard safer, right? You sit down. If you're not holding in chulin lamed lamed beis daf tes and the sugias that we're learning right now this is an almost impossible shmeitza. But the truth is we're holding in it and this is already the fourth reid by psiyat dishmaya on this topic so we know the indian a little bit. It's like a shmaka shaila. Indian that he had a safex by usually safex faker mid bas when you're learning bava kama this is hard. But um safex faker in the mid basra where ordinarily a safex faker in the shchita being that it's connected to chezkas issur would be dead on arrival but now that it's in the mid basra and in real time etzem the chezkas issur went away so maybe it's a safex faker shlog in a hazaka dalachta digol digol or DO YOU SAY NO igloi mussel mafreya when I decided to go weiter that the shchita was not nishlam so now it's had a din that it's ain as a voch as a even in a chaya and if that's the case based on this I should be a problem. The zoch the so is venira. What do you think the zoch is going to say? What's the hergesh of the zoch? Venira. The chol igafna given the shchita surva huta afel gaf the halacha is a nala basafek in mid basra vim shav the mid basra >> So at that point the Khazaka went away and if it went away my hair goes that's what it's going to be. Then the toy says I have a riot and the toy says riot is from issue which is beyond the scope of this rate fight. But this is the good old Khazaka and our own Messiah that was another Khazaka that said what the toy said will be at the Khazaka and he brings a from a riot that's not beyond the scope scope of this rate fight. From a Khazaka that we learned together the Khazaka is the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of His riot is in Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka The Khazaka of the Khazaka in that Khazaka is discussing the Khazaka of the Khazaka The Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka that Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka says the Khazaka of the Khazaka Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of I want to share with you a Khazaka that I had. Khazaka Khazaka Khazaka When does the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka in the world of Khazaka Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka So we know when Khazaka Khazaka Khazaka animal the Khazaka of the Khazaka goes away. Right for a guy Khazaka of the Khazaka is Khazaka of the Khazaka for a year it's Khazaka of the Khazaka. So the question is at what point does the Khazaka of the Khazaka go away? So ordinarily Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka when you Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka of the Khazaka goes away. But what would be says the come the [ __ ] if the [ __ ] [laughter] decided to go right there and he decided to shut even though me a pastor, do we say the thing that he went right there it going muscle of my friend that is even when I had it did not go away when you shut it the right. What do you say the thing that if you shut the right and you drop your guns at that point, the is even when I had it is gone. It's not going to come back cuz you decided to go right there. And even though there's a suit of pastor of [ __ ] me pastor, but say THAT THAT JUST MEANS THAT IT'S HOW SHOULD IT EVEN IN THE MID PASTOR? BUT WHAT'S THE GOOD is even when I HAD IT WENT AWAY. SO IF IT WENT AWAY, WHAT AM I AFRAID IT'S GOING TO COME BACK? THIS IS THE subject that the [ __ ] had. This is the party. When would the is even when I had it? So it's interesting. He says that the real thing I had this was that the is even when I had it should go away when you finish the [ __ ] So that even though it's true if you pause the screen when you do right of this one of there's no way to save him in the head. And if somebody would take a bite out of this animal right now, he's not over the is [ __ ] of even when I had it. But if you decided to go right there and you see that's considered a [ __ ] so you going to muscle of my friend or not? So he said is the real thing is that there should not be an is even when I had it stating that that the the is even when I had it should be there. Cuz if you decided to go right there, so the is even when I had it he will do my friend and just jump right back. Stating that he says I have a foolish [ __ ] I have a foolish [ __ ] not the way. And the [ __ ] is from a very good [ __ ] tomorrow. The [ __ ] that we went together and we went back to one of the earlier rate bites in the [ __ ] and that is in [ __ ] in the [ __ ] of days. The [ __ ] that it brings that there was a [ __ ] of and [ __ ] regarding the [ __ ] of a [ __ ] If you have a [ __ ] he [ __ ] an animal and it turned out that the animal was a [ __ ] The question is does the [ __ ] need to [ __ ] the [ __ ] now or does he not have to [ __ ] the [ __ ] now? What would be the side that he should have to [ __ ] the [ __ ] it's cuz we know that the base of [ __ ] is [ __ ] It's considered to be hot and as a result this [ __ ] and [ __ ] To the extent that he shocked at the second is bliss of a he shocked at the treifa said is bliss of treifa inside the second right now. So, he should have to go ahead and do a go and that's what's going on over there. And the more is different style them of what the shilo might exactly says the Gamara. The I have a rye that if somebody shocked treifa you don't have to cut your the second. You know what the rye is? Because if I shocked at the second treifa the second needs a go low THAT EVERY SINGLE TIME YOU SHOCKED AN animal the second should need a go low. And the reason is because when the shilo goes in and shocked the animal before the shilo is right to more than the animals even in a high which means that the second is bliss of even in a high. So, if it is bliss of even in a high because of the SEE IT SHOULD ALWAYS HAVE TO DO A GO SO WE SPOKE ABOUT THIS IS A rye for me that there's something called bliss of even in a high. But the bottom line is so says the Gamara it's possible that a second of a treifa you don't have to be my go. Because if you have to be my go the second OF A TREIFA THEN EVERY TIME THE SHILO SHOCKED YOU HAVE TO BE MY GO no one ever heard of such a thing. But the more says that's not a rye. You know why it's not a rye? Because it's true that the base of shilo is high. And it's true when you shocked an animal that's not kosher with a second it's going to be by layer from the animal there would be a problem. OH, BUT WHEN DOES THE BASE OF shilo become high? When does it become hot enough for it to do what it does in the world of Yeredea? It's at the Gamara the shilo. At the Gamara the shilo is not even in a high anymore. Because it's only even in a high before the Gamara the shilo. And we know that at the Gamara the shilo is not even in a high. So, mathematically it just doesn't line up and so that reason it's not going to be a problem. No it's THE MORE SAYS BUT ACTUALLY YOU'RE RIGHT. EVERY single time you shocked an animal the man down there second treifa is by a go low you should need a go low on the second. BUT TECHNICALLY it's not an issue because when it's even in a high it's not high AND WHEN IT'S HIGH IT'S NOT EVEN in a high. So, you never have it that it's high and even IN A HIGH SO LIKE THIS you're going TO HAVE AN ISSUE. SO, THE shilo down there he says that's all good when you shocked only right. He says but what's going to be if the shilo goes in and he shechts the ENTIRE SEMEN? WHICH SHILO GOES IN AND SAYS HE'S SUPPOSED TO DO?" THAT'S THE right we saw right in the beginning of TELL THE HE'S SUPPOSED TO GO AHEAD AND SHECHT. RIGHT, HE'S SUPPOSED TO GO AHEAD AND DO IT. IN THAT SITUATION, every time the shochet does you can end up with this problem. You know why? BECAUSE WHEN YOU SHECHT THE ROVE, IT'S THE You're going TO HAVE THE HOW DO I KNOW THAT? CUZ ALL THE ARE TOTALLY IN A SHITA. AND THE ROVE is considered A SO IT'S POSSIBLE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE OF THE WHEN ALL YOU do is you shecht the rove. And if you're going to tell me that Rashi's SHITA IN WHEN I GO WIDER, it's of the SO WHEN I SHECHT THE THE SECOND BEING FROM IT'S TRUE UP UNTIL THE ROVE YOU'LL TELL ME THERE'S NO BUT when I go ahead AND I SHECHT ROVE NOW it's high. IT'S SUPER DUPER HIGH NOW. SO FOR SURE WHAT HAPPENS IN THE DOES DOES HAVE THE ABILITY to be And if it's GOING TO BE IT SHOULD BE A PROBLEM. SO THAT'S THE CASE IT'S clear that even though my was that if I go wider in the world of Rashi you have to say is going to be there. I will have to admit the is going to be there. The is really not going to be there. It's really not going to be there. As long as you have no choice but to say that this is the way it's going to be. If you think about it, the and in the your They both arrived in the same exact place. They're both saying the same thing. What they're both saying is is that even though there's a of and there's a of but this whole is only that if you mess up in the shita, the shita is going to be a shita. But at the same time that's clear that as it relates to the it's a be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it be it the is it going to go away in this world what would be if you had a fake in the by the way it could be you don't even need a in the because if you remember the whole of the is a with a so could be even one would be but anyway a in the would be not considered a fake but would be considered regular you would go to which the says because in English when there's a fake but in the as a much as but being that it's over there not the was DISCUSSING IS THERE THAT WAS HIS DISCUSSION is there and the said the same thing that even if you go where we look at what you did being part and parcel of the but at the same time but at the same time that is only as it relates to if what I did is and not BUT THAT'S IS IS GOING TO GO AWAY the same thing the both say that even though the goes in the but what's how I view the animal right when I finish the they're both saying I view it now as a kosher animal I view it as a kosher animal now if I mess up then you're going to have a problem but the I view this as a I view this as a kosher animal and therefore in the world of the you don't have any of the issues and in the world of in the world of the in the world of the you're not going to have any of the issues what's interesting though is that the in his mission in his was the the the mirror the chef schmitzer there's no one who's a a bigger authority in the world of hazakis than the chef schmitzer, right? So the chef schmitzer maybe the chef schmitzer's brother the conscious of Vegas and but the chef schmitzer in his valinera though the valinera of the chef schmitzer was that this is the way it should be. The the [ __ ] gonnagoinem the [ __ ] was about plukta of the chef schmitzer the >> [laughter] >> the [ __ ] was a learning with the see this kivegen the schmitzer the schmitzer was the varshiver off the schmitzer his valinera was just the opposite. His valinera was the other way around. The end of the day they both they arrived in the same exact place. They both arrived they met up because at the end of the day they had rias. Ironically the schmitzer did not have a ria from the of the schmitzer had a ria in the floor from the of the schmitzer but again it's a fascinating discussion a little bit of a mind teaser. We'll save the second rate by next time for tomorrow and we'll stop here.