Chulin 82

Today's D is and we are four lines from the top of the today's being. So we're moving along in peric dealing with the laws of espani which all emanate from one in the tucked away the says specifically the A alaf mentioned one of the more famousto of shim and shas. So underrated has some very positions scattered throughout. One of them is in the laws of where holds that it's in that we're learning right now. According to Shim, if a is not a that would mean that if somebody would check either or and it would be it wouldn't be the it would not be a violation of that law in the Tory. And the Mishna gave a whole bunch of examples of where it would be noa where this of would practically apply in the world of the espanite. Now the sadasha of all the examples that the Mishna gave was all of the are such that they're not m the and that really is the definition of a so any that doesn't do what says aita has to do is and in the world of reb not a what were the examples of the Mishna if somebody an animals. If somebody shacks an animal des if somebody shacks a paras also known as the paradum. If somebody shacks a hanis above if somebody shacks all of these cases are such that the buser even after the is going to be hence it's therefore it's mentioned in this Mishna on the base either way the gumar now is going to have a very brief discussion about one of these five cases that the Mishna mentioned and that is the arufah says the gumar the ela Is that true that if somebody would shack the eggla it would not be au we know what was supposed to happen with the eggla was it was supposed to be beheaded it was supposed to have done to it we're discussing where a was done the Mishna is clearly suggesting that that would not be it would be but the is questioning that premise is that in fact we learned that aishna and this mishna is emperic which is talk about tucked away in the very end of so what does have to do with you have to know the answer to that but periclah is in and over there there's a mishna that says what would be if the eggla was set aside so all the raanim are coming out and they're going to now embark upon this procession and lo and behold before they had an opportunity to behead this egel. They found the hier. The murderer was found. The case, the mystery was solved. Says the Mishna if it happened before the actual the egg is just a good oldfashioned egglaw and you can send it back into the field, let it graze, give it back to the past and treat it like any animal. What do you see from here? You see that an arufah doesn't become an eggla until you do the actual. Where do you see that? Because it's a regular kosher animal which would mean that if somebody would which by definition would had to have happened before the because once you do the it's a you can't sh it anymore. At that point you would think it would be regular kosher meat. If that's the case, it would be a how could you tell me and it's based on the fact that we know it's clear from the only time it becomes is after the where do you see it because the name this is such a strong kasha you have to say you have to take the words added a Mishna mech. There's no way to learn this Mishna with the words because the Mishna seems to be suggesting that the was something that is even if it had a proper and that is not the case. If it had a proper it would be which means would be but ask nice but could it be that said it right who said it the names matter could it be that this is something that said something else about that would seem to negate the probability that he would have said this what did Rabanai say I heard aul I heard a certain bound boundary as it relates to the of the I can't remember what it is. Meaning I remember hearing that when it comes to the specifically the fact that it's not always there's some sort of there's a line that's drawn in the sand where up until there it's only once it crosses that that it's going to be but to be honest with you it happens. I can't remember said Rabiani what that is stating that continued and he said however suggested the following read when the eagle descends upon the that's the arena where this is all going to happen at that point it becomes up until then once it's there it's already what's the marash of him is now if It's true that was asked the question that had reconciled the says the with the says and was such a he literally crossed out one of these two because he had no it can't be cuz you know what Rabana should have answered What he should have said was being that Rabana himself had a and was up until it went to the versus after went to the you know what should have said both Mishnim there's no reason to be any one of the two Mishn reconcile this it's very pos the says that's referring to not so much but it's referring to until it went until at that point it's still going to be okay. That's what it means that says talking about after already descended. So why would have to say so what's the cash is not on the term that's a plausible albeit the question is could have been the one that said it would have had a much much better answer would have given that you're right 100% I have to be honest with you that I understand there's this msra floating around here in the Padisa that it's in the name. We actually had a different mess that said it on his own. He didn't say in the name. If that's the case, okayish didn't hold in his mind. When the Mishna says it means literally and if that's the case it's always going to be to before the says not that way which would suggest that you have no choice but to say but it's not that said it it's said when we were even on the By the way, if you can appreciate a little bit what's going on over here is uh doing his holy and trying to figure out is this is it himself. So raashi is working this through and he's in the base or a papy and he's probably telling him over what's going on over here. We know it's not it's probably himself saying I have a problem with this also raashi you know why because meal could be would have said this but it might be learned as it relates to the used to bring as part of his ritualistic purification. So we know these were but the question is when did they become said from the time it's from the time that they were purchased I'm reading my time and we have a what was that already not he learned it with from the what's the just like the becomes already so too the are going to be the same way what's the bottom line you see from here that also holds that there's an is on the before that Rashi speaks out that it was that when would that be like when would that come about probably it would be the had heard that there was a before and after that's probably what holds as well. It's before but the bottom line is is that the has a before and after. If that's the case, the same kasha we had that why would say if he has an easier way to explain this would be true in as well clearly holds like how do you know that from his predicated on the fact that has which again says must mean but from the time that it descends upon but the bottom line is why would give this terret and say it doesn't make anyense. sense again it can't be luckish m because had a much better terrorist it can't even be al because llish also had a much better ter so it's interesting this is like punk dish right if it was any other in the world be shame another in the world sounds like a decent ter to me I mean obviously but it would work butish nishana also no again if that's the case Somebody seemed to have said it's not. It's not. Who is it? You want to know who it is? It's And by the way, if you're holding implying that there's an Israel of the wall, it's doesn't hold that way. Why? It's not clear. It seems like it's probably because learns actually is literally it's always if it's always well then two things. Number one, if it's always our Mishna must be and also by the way there's no that's why as relates to the is going to be us and not because there's no it's going to be us only either way we now return very much to our regular program and that is the basic of let's just over two things before we start the next two number one as it relates to even though in the Tory it says so it sounds a little bit like the is first and then the same is true if it's done in the reverse order it doesn't matter if it's or if it's and second point that's worth and that is when it comes to this it doesn't matter if it's one person that shs both or if it's two people that shack the So if the same ru and then he's when he or if it would also be a problem of and again this is true even on a level it's true on the malus level right just to bring out this point in either case the second is going to come with a malus and again If one person did both or if two people did the two the one who does the second is in all cases going to get says the if there were two people that brought two animals and it happens to be a mother and her son is so they can't both on the same day it's going to be the second one's going to get mus so who has the to go first whoever bought the animal First, let's say the second guy went and he preempted the first person he's going to be immediately clarifies in the he says this Mishna is not a even though we're learn which is very much this is not a this is a meaning from the laws of I don't know whoever shacks first shacks first second person is going to have a problem on his hand. He's going to have to wait until tomorrow. But from the standpoint of there's something called and whoever bought it first, he has that. Now the Mishn concluded and said the second person went and he preempted he's going to be we learned in a not just the BR is always wordier sometimes much wordier sometimes even a little bit wordier it says not so what does that mean zor means he was a zor he's a zor as inus say from right as in riifu who was as in Abrau who was Vayashim. We learned from this read. So this person even though he was second if he went first he ends up being Gazarus because if you're going to be second there's a possibility you may end up doing an Ara. It comes out this animal that you have in your herd you know for the next 24 hours it's like having it's a very very bad thing. So there's actually a certain major of a sashem to be the zorist to go ahead and to go first. Additionally, Veniskar, what did the Bryce mean when it said Niskaristro? When he has dinner tonight, you have to wait until tomorrow. I get to eat today and as a result, I profit it. I end up benefiting. That's what it means. Niskar. Now, from the price, it sounds like, right, just let's meditate on this for one second. So, you have two people. One person buys the par, the other person buys the child. Whoever goes first, that's the person that has the first. So you would think the second person is supposed to be a good admid and he's supposed to say okay it's his I'll wait until tomorrow I I have this potential of doing an aa I mean that's what we're in this world for I'll fight the good fight as it relates to not shacking this animal I am not going to have meat until tomorrow it's the nine days anyways what are you worried about you meet you'll have another yapik so like it shouldn't be such a big dealish Dr. Bryson no for character to go and muscle your way through and if you do it your mad and not just that you're a little hard to understand struggle with this a little bit and say that it's only true if you do this in an up and up way meaning you reach out to this person who bought the other animal and you tell him that you know I would like to go first meaning if you do this in a civil manner then you're a Zoris. But if you do it like a you're not a Zoris you're have to start learning from you're not even holding by. Either way the next part of going to be a lot of fun in the event that if you like and hard if somebody goes ahead and he shacks a parro and afterwards shacked her two children. So this is a whole family. There was a par and she has two sons and this person went the par and the two sons but first the par and then the two sons says this person's going to get malus he's not only going to be one time malus but he's going to be he's going to get malus twice what's the reason because as soon as you there's an espano on each one of the children so the first child This second child you were over you were over it twice. Hence going to be twice says what would be same exact case but in the reverse order. This person went and he did the two sons of this and afterwards he went and heeded the mother. In that case he's only going to get malus one time. What's the reason? Because now he did one my vera not two myas. Now there are two for this right. What's the over here? So being that the two. So there's a double of but at the end of the day the iser is one. You did one is and therefore you're only going to get malus one time. What would be if somebody went and he did three? So this is mishan in his when he talks about the reasons for one of the reasons he gives and this person really went all out. He took out three grandmother daughter and granddaughter he's going to get malus twice meaning he's going to 80 patch. What's the reason? This is very simple because he now he was over two. There was grandmother and her daughter mother and then there was another mother and daughter. So because of the two sets of espan he's going to be twice. What would be if he did the grandmother the and the granddaughter the and then he went and heeded the daughter. Now when he shed the daughter what emerges is that now there's two sets of espan that was slaughtered stating that it was one he's only going to get 40 malus mayor mayor that you're going to get malus twice. Now Rashi speaks out that this says is not only a comment on the last case in Mishna. We'll recap the Mishna in a second but it's also a re a comment on one of the earlier cases of the Mishna and that is where it was the Mishna said because it was one on the mother is saying on that as well that you're going to be let's do the recap. There are four cases in the Mishna. The first case of the mission is so what's so if somebody and then doesn't just shack one of the children two of the children he's twice as a result he's going to get malus twice he's going to be that's easy what would be if he was so first heeded the children and then he shed the mother so This is the way Rashi learns to because he did one according to twice. Why you twice? Because when you shed now the mother the mother was from two boys because you haded two of the mother's children. So being that there are two boys for is for this mother that's a reason for you to be twice. What was the next case in the Mishna three sets you're going to be because there's two sets of what would be however if you the grandmother daughter and then you went ahead or grandmother granddaughter and then you went ahead and you did the daughter so here it's according to the why because you did one according to it's true you did one ma but through your one you have two sets of and that's a reason for you to be now as it relates to the lumbus and emphasis on the word lumbus of this is between and the tanakama this is something that the is very much going to discuss but before we get to the lumbness of sum the gumar starts with aasha and it's really a on the we just learned it's a on the previous mission on something that we've mentioned many times throughout the paric and that is that when we talk about the benoy even though in the it says and then but the order is if it's It's going to be the same thing. And the Gar asks the cash. Now, it's interesting. Why did the Gar asked the cash on this Mishna? And we could have asked on the previous Mishna literally five lines ago here too. It was clear that there's how do you know that? So they they're duking it out right now. Who gets the to first? Clearly implying that the is would be either way. So why are we asking it over here? It's posit because in the previous mission they just said that there was an isser to go over here. You see you get malus right? It's clear from this whole Mishna that uh you're going to get Malus regardless if it's which means that it's included in the P of the Torah literally on the biblical levels if that's the case that it doesn't say the answer is in a sounds like this was only how do you know if it's the other way right is the same as how do you know if When it says it's coming to be but two things. Okay. What does that mean? So it's a little tricky. If a person would check the par then if somebody would check the mother or if somebody would check the child then deals latter two people would be in other words if there were three one person checked the and then somebody shocked at the child somebody shocked at the mother first person didn't do anything wrong but the latter two people did and that's what it's coming to teach me so from the I know that it's not only but How could you tell me that doesn't that word just tell me the if it was extra then I would understand it's coming to be two examples of it doesn't matter if it's but is just it should have What the T should have said was that once you grammatically is extra and it's coming to teach me says I'm still not happy because I would have thought maybe what was coming to teach me is another that's axiomatic in par and that doesn't have to be the same that even if they're two, you're going to have this. So is even if there are two meaning cuz had it said I would have thought as opposed to soar says what the should says with they should not be slaughtered. We're not even looking at it from the standpoint of the it shouldn't be slaughtered is that's what is coming to tell me. So if all the wanted to tell me was it said what's the is coming to teach me that number one and number two it doesn't matter if it's or if it's so these two ideas again that permeate the whole paric and that is that the order is additionally that um esp It doesn't matter if it's one person that does it or if it's two people that do it. How do I know all this? I know from the same word in this. There's not a lot of words to work with, right? The whole this whole is but it's the word said teaches me these two exhale. So before we start this next piece of gimmar which is going to get into the we need a a tiny bit of an introduction. So we're familiar with the concept of malus very much the topic of this when does somebody get malus in the event that a person is the person was warned thou shalt not do this because if you do trust me you're going to regret it then is if he says bring it on then we bring it on and he ends up getting mal because that's the basic What happens if a person is over multiple lavend each of which have with it a a punishment of malus? How many sets of malus is he going to get? Now in the event that he was over five different lavend ate kazer, he ate noa, he was a nazer and he drank wine. I don't know if it's a whole uh slew of a then it's obvious each a that he does he's going to get an independent set of mas. What if he did the same m a vera multiple times? So he was a nuzzer that drank a reveion and another reveion and another revely an alcoholic but another reve. So what would be if that nuzzer went ahead and did that? Is he going to get one malus because it's the same a vera or is he going to get multiple sets of malis because each reus is its own a so it's a mission. It's a mission featured prominently in the third paragraph of makis. It depends on how many times he got hastra. If he got one and he took down a bottle of wine, doesn't matter how large that bottle of wine is, the is that he's going to get one set of malus. If however there were multiple then for each assuming he went and drank is after thera he's going to get an independent set of malus. So if he does different a sees each a assuming there was a you're going to get malus if he did the same a then the areic to the extent that there was one asteroid he's going to end up getting one set of malus if there were multiple then he's going to get multiple sets of malus there's one other important caveat to this and that is that in the event that this person went and he did the same a over and over and over again with one hassra which based on the rules that we just laid out would mean he should only get one. But if he did the a within he did them with different gofen. So then the is he would be for each one of these gofin that he went ahead and he did an error. So for example if somebody was bonita and he was bonita again again again and again. So theoretically, let's assume this mal is for you know theus for being bid now which there are but is so for each gof that this person was now buo even though it's all the same as and even though it was all one but the gffin with which he did the two are going to be again what's the kids as it relates to this is for so many but definitely for if a person's over he gets malus. What if he's over multiple a which are for each a that he does he is going to get mal. What if it's the same a so it depends on the if there was one astra he's going to get one set of malus. If there were multiple astros then based on how many asteris there were that's how many sets of malus he's going to get. In the vernacular the isik if there was one astra same a but it was with different gofin the gofin are also and then to the is he's going to get mult so different a are gofin are also now this relates to the carbonus as well so when does somebody bring a carbon kas in the event that he doesn't have that he had he done it he would have What happens if somebody did multiple different all of which require? So obviously he's going to have to go ahead and bring a kas for each a that he did. What if it was the same a so he did the same a again and again and again every single time he did a how many is he going to bring then? So there it depends on how many there were. So if it was done with one halama, halama means uh he was in some state of amnesia, right? He didn't what was going on. Hal is another way of saying so to the extent it was one halama like he forgot today and he treated it like a regular weekday. So then it's considered one hal he's going to end up bringing one. If however there were multiple meaning he did the bash and then he said oops and then he did it again and then he said oops right he keeps on capping himself so for every he's going to in other words are to the what are to malus right is something that you give to make someone aware of what he's doing in the world of malus we have to be amazed you would have to have in fact says whole point of so is Malus where you have to be amazed it is a suggest you can't be amazed you have to be it's the antithesis of each other 180 degrees but the bottom line is when it comes to amazing like malus it's how many were there how many misides were there when it comes to the katas it's how many halas were there how many were there now just like when it comes to malist's an idea that the guffik when it comes to kas you have the same exact idea that the gofen Aralic. So again s with regards to malus and sight with regards to different ausik the astra in the case of malus and the hal in the case of kusalik and even where it's the same a and there was one astra or one hal there's an idea that the guffin are going to be as well. What do we need to over now very quickly from the Mishna? Just to segue right into the in the Mishna we had four cases. Two of them were a point of contention between the what were the two cases whereas the argued the first case was where somebody did two children of a and then the according to the you're going to be why you going to bear because you did one a and being that you did one a one you're going to get one set of malus according to you're going to be Because in as much as it's true you did one miser in as much as it's true you went ahead and you did one of but there were two boys of Isra this mother is to because you did this child and that child and that's enough somehow to be two malus the other point of contention in the between and the what was what would be if somebody checked the grandmother the granddaughter and then he went ahead and heeded the daughter according to the even though when you the daughter it comes out you two of but at the same time you're only going to be because you did one mess one you're going to get one set of malus according to you're going to be because even though you did one m but through the one MA THAT YOU DID what emerges is you now have a whole family that you wiped OUT THERE'S TWO SETS OF and that's enough for you to be says the turns to like he so often does in Talmud Bley and he said I'm learning this mission over here and I was trying to understand I was trying to fas a little bit better I was a little bit uh unsure how you do in fact how to understand the of what is trying to say that he holds that if somebody would eat two Z of and he would eat them. He would be two. Now if somebody eats two z based on the introduction that we said earlier would you be two or one you would be one that's the general rule but is trying to understand and he sees in maybe not that way. Thus thinking out loud about says is holds that this whole idea of one means one maybe doesn't subscribe to and by the way if it's true when it comes to it's going to be true to as well we're not learning of we're learning of is not which comes with it's comes with right that's what's going on so we're just using as the would be that if somebody went ahead and he did two he would also be now if that's the case really there's no reason for to be tucked away over here because his is not unique to this case. It's a very global which means somewhere in the third right really it should have been somewhere else. The reason it's mentioned over here is it was only to teach me even though over here there's an element of what was the element of. So again we're going to have to pick one of the two cases just to keep this simple. Let's pick the second case where said that so the and now you go ahead and the middle being that that middle that mother right is the grandmother and the granddaughter. So we see it up a little bit as and if you see it up as that would have been a reason based on the introduction they used to be according to the so that's why we mentioned in this case not to teach me the biggest biggest would have been to tell me of the reason we're talking about a whole case a case that has an element of as we'll see in a second that's even It is an element of holds that if somebody would eat which would mean that as it relates to it would be the same thing. So why do over here? It's based on the fact that it's in other words learned the mishna said I understand the sheet of the it's consistent with the rules and regulations that govern why because this person right now when he did that middle he did one meant one has to be and if that's the case one you can only be once you can tell me at the end of the day it's one 40 m and one astro. If it's the same a you're going to only get malus once. So it's certainly one m with one astro. You're going to only get and how do you know it's one? Because it's one mus. So obviously it's one m. There's no question in the world that you should become. Why two? What happened to the fact that one means by definition you could be drinking wine all day every day. Still one you're only going to get malus one time. says maybe doesn't hold this whole that whole introduction world right maybe doesn't hold of this whole again universally accepted in that introduction but maybe not in the world of says maybe not maybe all of that he just holds this is different because this is like and like we mentioned the introduction is one of the exceptions to the rule and now is this really this is not someone that was boiled to me this that's true it was one animal but there's two of the is coming AND IT'S COMING SO BEING THAT THIS two of maybe that's viewed as and if that's the case maybe that's he undermines the whole introduction he doesn't hold that you can only be one malus if there was one astra one astra draw I don't know every time you're doing a you're going to be here too that just took place and it's for that reason you're going to be or maybe he's mim to the introduction he holds that this case of is not your classic quintessential textbook example of but I could hear that it's on the spectrum of auim and maybe that's the reason according to you're going to be either way who asked this question asked it to said in what's in right not that this is the first he doesn't agree with the whole introduction he holds which means as relates to it he says how do you know this now let's set this up because this is going to take us all the way until This is going to take us till the end of the da. So the premise the unspoken premise of the is that would not have said such a big why create a sum that's a tanu even though he has the credentials but still like you don't pull out that badge unless you have to. So why would we assume that is being on something that everybody knows is true unless we was sort of forced into it and that's the question must have he from somewhere that uh this is and really the way the gumar is going to try to answer this question this very simple question of is by trying to find a satan somewhere in chass that seems to not hold of the introduction that holds with its counterpart as it relates to Malus. If we can find such a Tana then it's plausible to assume that we could put a name to the face and we could say who is that and really from here until the end of the Dar is going to take three cracks at it. We're gonna try three times to find a but we're gonna try to find a that holds that one can be several malus. If that's the case, it's your and it's Mabber that that anonymous Tana over there is really over here says the why would have assumed such a a big which usually is in probably because he had a somewhere that holds this way and is making a nightf who's the great Sai see the end of Brahis and the end of Haras is now being Madame And he's saying it's that is the author of that says we learn to you didn't see double. That's what it says. like if somebody plants is going to get malus says the gar does like does mean like and really what the price is saying is that if someone is a rare gets I mean if someone say I don't need a special price to tell me it gets right this sounds like sh right what is why does say the word twice what what's in this help me out Ellis says right there's Ellis and there's obviously this person was and okay so now ready was saying something THAT MAYBE I WOULDN'T know we're already holding but says let's work through the case a little bit better is it talking about where the person was and then he went he was a second time And he was warned before each time he was this is also it's also that was drinking wine the entire day. We always say that's why he was because he drinks wine the whole day but we don't have to go back to that. So, so this person is only going to be one if they told him this is the mission that says that but the bottom line is that if they were to be twice I don't need this says the again it's also part of the elita that not only was he a rare twice But it was he must have done them both literally at the same time which means that there was one right the guy's about to be and he warns him and he goes twice and what does it say you're going to be two times who is the holds that one if you go ahead and you're going to be two times is it of our Who's that holds that when you the mother after the grandmother and the granddaughter you're only going to be like can't be because it of because there's two that are the of this say you're part from the second m over here we there's no goof like kk certainly now by the way why is it so posh that there's No mlim you you planted two sets of kalion. So why should that not be? So all the say the reason is only makes sense where each is. So two human beings or even two animals would be considered but two seeds is not considered kufinik if the goof is a but another is not enough of a to say that that's going to go ahead and be able to be. But either way, it can't be that according to the rabbon that youn over here you're going to be like twice. It must be it's the plug and just like holds and he's going to hold you're going to get twice. What do you see from that? If that's the case, you see that what's the it's not because he learned up. It's because he holds that YOU COULD BE TWICE EVEN FOR ONE and that's why he holds the same thing when it comes to when it comes to says why did I learn up in that is not but it's because he holds it's I didn't see it in the I would have taken on the less why make it but I know it from somewhere else cuz I know there's a twice climb and it's where it was climb twice. It's also where it was one and twice one must be the such a I know it could be that's says it's not there's no talking and tells there's no I'll tell you I'll tell you that the says is not there is no such you say don't don't go The never said one and it's going according to and it's talking about where the two happened. It's talking about where it happened. So what's the the if it happened we said then it's you're going to be twice because if it happened it was asteroid. So right that's the two asteroids for sure twice the there is a little bit of in the world of it's a that there are two types of said the only time a person is if he plants and it's then and only Then if you did it in one shot that you're going to be for the laws of that was the first that was the second in the world of you do a one after another twice was because in the world of it would have been one is one it's not but it's If you hold is one and is one, well then is going to end up being two and that's the it's not it's the bottom line is it's talking about two it's going has nothing to do with our and as a result successfully was rais's first attempt to try to find eight times that holds that which would be then a to say that maybe that and would emerge as a understanding of our Mishna says the tash now is going to try to bring another to have such a and this is from a Mishna and this is the so it's discussing the laws of coming on and one of the that feature prominently in the peric is that there's a if somebody eats the two ganosh so the gdanosh is in the thigh of the animal so animal has two thighs hence there's two gdanoshas if somebody goes and eats the two gdanoshas is it going to be malus twice for eating the two gdanoshas or is it only going to be malcus once now this is a little nuance because really what the Gar is going to do now and is going to actually do it twice in the balance of the D is really tal having a we don't learn yet but the has a little bit of a discussion why Rhuda holds that if you eat the two gan you're going to be one you're not going to be too it's an one side is is because holds that only one of them is uh well that's for sure there holds only one of them is however the gar has a suffic whether it's knew which one is or rahuda was misupic which one is kayuda was msupic which one was so that would explain why if you eat one you can't get malcus if you eat two now already you can get malus how many malcus are you going to get you're going to get one malus not two because from the two that you ate you know you for sure ate the the wrong one has another knows which one for and it's the right one, not the left one. It's the right one. The right thigh, not the left thigh. And it's for that reason, if a person goes ahead and eats two, he's only going to be of one. Not because of one, but because only one of them is even knows which one is. It's the right side that's not the left one. Either way, says that in the event that somebody went ahead, he ate a link twice. He only gets malus once. What's the case? What is the physical case where according to the is talking about is it talking about where he ate first the right then the left and not just that there was a before he ate the right one there was astra before he ate the left one which would explain why according to the right there were two astros as a result you're going to get twice a but you did it twice as a result you're going to be but if that's the case my time why does that you're going to get malus and we know that now this question of the safik is on the side of the come on this is where you have to know the later a little bit better it's on the side of the gum that why you only like garban is because he's maf he doesn't know if it's the right one or if it's the left there is such a side in the SO ON THAT SIDE that is you shouldn't even get our boy if it happened again there's a clear sign in the is if that's THE CASE YOU WOULDN'T GET even our bun if it happened so just play it out person eats the right you warn him don't eat what you're about to eat maybe it's not and then you eat the left one don't eat what now he did but each WAS AN SO THAT CAN'T be the case being that sad that the issaf and you see you get at least one mus it can't be was two astro because each astro would have ended up being an so it has to be by definition that there was one astro now you know holds this is a little parenthetical that digresses for a few lines he goes case he's talking about where someone didn't know who his father is he narrowed it down to two people but he doesn't know who his father is either Ruben your father your father. This person went ahead and he was both people. So he got his father or he cursed one and then he cursed the other. He hit both of them at the same time. At the same time he was father says he's going to be potter. Why is he need to be because he can't tell the person don't hit this man he's your father maybe he's not and then afterwards maybe he's not so you can't tell me that the case of the two is talking about where was two because then in Huda's world you could have on the side of it's a sophra would have been a It's the only way to learn this has to be talking about we the case was where the person ate the two and there was one interesting so it was one and still the says who is the let's rope it back to Who that when you the mother after the grandmother and the granddaughter one set of from the second over here like it has to be and it must be IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT A name to the face of this it must be there's no one else that we're aware of must be that of this is that you're going to be says I'll tell you it's talking about this Mishna where the person ate the two and it's going according to right there's nothing with because there is no such sheet as I if that's the What was the issue? The issue was how do you understand the hold you're going to be and it sad that it's the holds like another. So in as much as we just brought a a says potter. But there's another Tana in the world of Rabuda who holds that is that suffic says in the so from the carbon and then the says from the carbon says so as much as the said immediately Afterwards, doubled it and followed it with an to me that you don't get on the that's not the reason the reason there's no is not because but rather because it's what do you see? You see the holds that were not for the fact that no was the you would get malus on the frag how could you get malus on the what's the you should get malus on the is the only thing you get malus is if there's a how would you give a ner just uh try to visualize it you have a person who brought the carbon pes and there's a little bit of baser from the pes sitting around you go over to him and you tell him you better eat this right now because if you don't eat this right now you're gonna flask Right. Well, it's not true. What do you mean? Look at the look at look at your watch, right? You still have a couple hours. So, that is not going to be a real astra. But I know but maybe maybe that's from the fact of the holds that theoretically hypothetically were not for the fact that was you would get on the must say the is talking about according to how even our It's safic and isra that's one version in there's another version is in the world of that suffic is really one last so this is already a it's talking again about it's talking about where somebody ate two gim but the case was where he ate two gim from two from two behemoths. Now it was the same. It was the same side but it was two gidds meaning two sets of malus says you only get malus one time. Now Rashi says that in that sug knew which side it was and it was the right side because if he doesn't know then according to you shouldn't get at all. If you eat the right side and then the right side from another animal, why you being if it was you shouldn't get anything. So the in this is not consistent with in the previous we know that the previous the was bringing a from the real time of the gumar. Here we're bringing a ride from a price that the actually introduced when it was but anyway says the price again in the event that somebody ate two according to the according to it's only what's the case is talking about which would explain why then why would you only get if there were two that's like the Naz that drink and of course he's going to get malus twice. Why has to be there's no other way to learn. It's talking about where it all happened in in one shot and there was one and that would explain why holds our bum. But the problem is then why does hold that it should be part there from a second it must be so it has to be this t over here and that price and must be of the opinion that one you could still get two sets of hence says this saw that belt and that's why he took on says no there's no right from here either strike three I'll tell you this price is also talking about where he ate and of this everybody holds. What's the problem? Or even if it's the same, but it was two. Of course he should be no it's talking about it's talking about the one of these two didn't have a so what the for that you have to have some bikers in the world of gdanosha because in that there's a says as follows if somebody would eat a full gdan but there was is says no you only if there's a you want to know what the and the price all different is not a mak this is a that's very local it's regional it's specific it's nuanced very micro to the world of and it's that hold or that debated and that argued whether the requires like almost all or maybe if someone eats a maybe that would be enough for the person to be therefore where one had a one didn't have as long as the other one is a good who cares that if only one of them had that is like a funny roundabout that way of presenting what they already argued in a more straightforward way that you don't have the bottom line is tried proving that there's a in the world that undermines and disagrees with this whole uh premise with the introduction that we gave to the daf at the end of the day it's a is not happy with it but those that learn every day shouldn't be stunned that and that wasn't so happy about it but the bottom line is exhale. So as relates to raid and you know really uh a raid bite as it pertains to the sug. So the Mishna in the beginning of the paric after it introduced the basic idea of he said how does play itself out and the Mishna went and gave 12 different scenarios juggling cases where the animals were kachen where theas happened meaning in the azara or outside of the azara and what would be in each one of these cases. The first of the 12 cases was the most obvious and the simplest said in the event that both of these animals were and both took place both of these animals are going to be meaning you be allowed to eat the meat of these animals. and as it relates to the second one you can be this is the classic case of as it relates to very very straightforward this is not it's not it's in of somebody goes and he shacks two animals that are you want to eat the meat of the animal you're allowed to eat the meat of the animal however the second person who did the he's going to get malus for what it is that he did the dbra mascul says being that in the course of the Mishna the Mishna is going to mention in the other 11 cases times we are if you an animal in a scenario of the meat of the animal is going to be possible. So it's for that reason we mentioned in the first in other words was bothered. Why does the mission say why would you think they're not? What would the to say it's not? Of course, the meat is kosher. It's true. The second person was HE WAS BUT WHY would you think that the meat should be suddenly there's no reason in the world that you would think it? There is no at all to even suggest something like this. If that's the case, why did the name? The reason the name is because the Mishna is going to mention a lot of cases where the meat is going to be ple there's be a lot of cases where there's going to be so we're going to mention cases where the meat is going to be ple. So we mention over here we state the obvious that this meat is going to be which is really to the but says I respectfully disagree. The reason the Mishna said I could have had that maybe the second one should be possible brings from that says and we learn from there that anything that was any that came about if that's the It's partning that for whatever reason that of doesn't apply and therefore the meat is going to be that he said there's no it's all mentioned I disagree there is a not going to be now even according to this there's something that's mention because the mission says so the second one is that you don't say but once I needed to say that the second one is so I'm going to say only the shi is kosher that's not true the first one's also so it's for that reason the went ahead and the said so there's a that it says on the bot is it was written by one of the and he brings printed of over here that he heard from his a different to explain what the is why you would have thought that if somebody maybe it shouldn't be okay and it's based on a well-known in the first is Like the this is a global which comes up in the world of raid literally anytime the says you're not let it do something if you go ahead and you do it anyways so said that are both mooching what's the if somebody it's part THAT IT'S BECAUSE THE SECOND person that went ahead and he was over. So I would have thought that would say is not a that it's going to be. Now there's a a longer version of this which ties into that we spoke about in the beginning of the why don't you sayfulness it's a very light of ra that we spoke about in this already iron chunk but the bottom line is a second to explain why it is that you would think that maybe if someone's based on the in other words the whole thing was mentioned and are both no it's not so in the of the second animal that you would have thought maybe the boss is going to be pos said based on it's a lab said based on of stating that take a look at the Ram and the Rambam is right in the beginning of pericute days of that's where the Ram discusses the laws of if somebody is going to be it's only the second person that gets The tour in brings and the in on the tour says that from the way the Rambam presented the it sounds a little bit like the Rambam held that there's aesh in the fact that if someone checks the M or the Ber is going to Now says the I know Rashi already discussed this but from the I think I see a little bit more because the Rambam says the Ram doesn't say the Ram says it sounds like all of the and it sounds a little bit says the Bach that the Rambam holds that there's some over here that I need to tell you that not only is the boss of the shi going to be but the boss of the is also going to be and says to me this is a good in other words we spoke out that was in the noish at all in the fact that if somebody unless there was that why would you think it's even though the s name was only mentioned even that went ahead and said no there's a is that is of but that there should be that the bus of the and by the way even of that's all in THE SHI WHERE YOU ARE BUT THE which was there's no in the world that that should somehow be that I would need to TELL YOU IT'S THE SAW IN THE very subtle that the ra SAYS HE DIDN'T SAY the he said THE BOSS WHICH SOUNDS LIKE all the buses and the wonders out loud is the ra trying to tell me that there's a saying the inside the says it's that this is not a and the is probably just quoting the and the tour is quoting the quoting everybody but the tour is quoting the ra quoting so the bottom line is it could be there isn't such a dick to be had and whatever the mission is that's going to be the rabbis the bach is a little sounds like in the of how the Ram should have presented this he felt that there was a little bit of a dick here and if that's the case it's definitely something worth exploring a little bit is there to say that I could have had a in the world of not only the buser of the second animal that I shed should be motor but maybe there's even aish that the buser of the first one is motor as I saw they say from school that's from a summer garbus and this is in pericid has a whole perk on uh the lumbus of understanding and as he speaks out there it's that once you come to to understanding a little bit of the lumbness how works it would be a little bit of a shot in the bik in the ram And really a completely new albeit simple in this of as it relates to the love of what is the using that word very very uh specifically of the is the of the is that when you mother now the says the child becomes a or when you check the child. Now the mother becomes the as if to say that when a person is the ising the child after you the ising the after you the child of the don't the mother and the child. It just so happens that if you only shack the mother, then it's not in play yet to have the isser. Or if you did shack the mother, then it's not in play yet to say don't sh this because uh I'm allowed to sh this. It's only once I check this that I'm not allowed to sh that. But the point is that when somebody goes ahead and checks the he did was not just that HE IS THAT HE did was that he what's the is or the IS it plays itself out the same way it's only it plays itself out that after you're not let and by the way only the person that shaks is going to get malus we're not debating that but the question is what is the What's the what's the gather of the iser? Pick your cliche. Pick your cinema. What is the IS the iso? The truth is from the it sounds a little bit like the iso. It doesn't say don't after you the proverbial is which sounds like is included part and parcel of the of the in as much as is included and is part and parcel of the but this is a very basic in the world of is the not the after or is the not So said I'll bring you that is not just after but that the is not just mention a few in the that needed a to teach me that the is true if the same person and if one person shed and another person. Why would you think that the only time there's an is now? But if you what's that once was now becomes so nobody should be allowed to if you go into the time of the of the and the again there's no what should be the whether one person both or if two people but if you're going to tell me that the of the one person's not let her go ahead and that you're not allowed to go ahead and check then to say that the only time this is going to be true IS IF I ONE PERSON did the whole because if need of so it's been that you need one person to go ahead and of but if two people are going to there's going to be no way in the world there's going to be no way in the world to go ahead and make us from the fact that we need a limu to tell me that the only that there's an iso even if one person and the other person that's a very that is therefore you would have thought that one person has to do the complete is but one person with and the other person with each person is doing a half plus a half in this world is not going to bear to a second or a second. There's a big discussion in the if somebody goes and he is he going to be or not the brings from we spoke a lot about last week of that's where the but says why because If you're gonna tell me that it's or that there's no problem when happens so why even have to and he's coming to be you don't have to worry about the mother that is the so it's one that as it relates it's true whether it happened or it happened if you're going to tell me that of is and meaning is part and parcel of the is just like is so it makes sense if I did if I did but if is really not in the iso AFTER IF I NEVER BECAME when did it become it only becomes after I now The truth is the truth is this is really to in a in a of right this would be a good example of that because I wouldn't be able to sh one after the other. So if that's the case there's a big on this it's not that you always say so from the fact that you see the grace from the is that if you're going to go ahead and you're going to you're going to it would be included it's probably because the iso it's not that It's only the becomes and that the becomes for that reason it was there's another that bring and that's from today's the whole second half of the d the fun part of today's daf discuss and the mishna in the mishna which rashi says is really but we'll mention the second mention of in the mishna in the event that somebody went ahead and checked a grandmother and then a granddaughter and then afterwards he went ahead and checked the mother. So according to you only like according to you're going to be like a very in fact it's that of it's because so that although in the case of the there was only one but at the same time it's no different than one of where the is that you're going to They all ask they all ask the same and that is I don't understand in the case where a person a goes to the core of understanding a little bit of the lumbness of today's If somebody eats two zim or if somebody would eat two zim and it was done with one he did two a he did two a he ate this kazayas he ate that kaz there were two of a that he did being that there's two of a that he did this mock to say you should get malus twice the was one GOOD BUT THE WHAT ARE THE TWO I ate ate that in the case of IN'S CASE YOU ONE HOW YOU TWICE for one there's one of that you did you shed one THERE'S TWO THAT'S like very comes with this massive Over there you ate two over here. All you did was youeded one animal is that's true. If the of the is it's just the second animal that you shed. SO IF THAT IS WHAT THE OF THE is Ied one animal one animal I hear it's a good order. How can I be two malus? One animal I do with two. Who cares? I still shed one animal. But this if the way works is that when I was and when I also did an A THAT'S PART AND PARCEL of the then it's because WHEN I GO AHEAD AND I the mother comes out I'M DOING TWO SETS OF a now now the baba and the mother was an aa and now with gla that the mother and the ano was an aa where it's the two is in the glory of then now the grandmother and the granddaughter were also my if however nothing is being in the grandmother and the granddaughter then not included in the of the so all I did was oneita on the mother oneita on the mother is less than OVER THERE AT LEAST I OVER HERE I DIDN'T EVEN NEED to and the truth is just from the call it right had throughout the is an element of says it's two of but now the is much sher it's not just two oh this this mother is of the grandmother and of the granddaughter when you this mother now there's a of grandmother mother and there's aer of mother and granddaughter it's actually it's not just two that's what learns it's more than twoas It's actually but the bottom line is this of that is not only in the but it's also in the this is the of understanding the a lot better over here in today's stop another right here in the he asks he asks that why is it Mishna said that if somebody would go ahead And somebody would check the grandmother and then the granddaughter and then he would check the mother. So what's the is that according to you're only going to be but according to you're going to be why don't we say on the second bomb when you did the grandmother first the daughter became there's an now you're going to go ahead you're going to the granddaughter so what do you want that the other should be because of it's right here in the with this in the back. So there's a whole list of uh so he brings a ter that he heard from the sonasha asks this and the of the famous his son wrote a on his father and who was saying and he said he said if you're going to tell me that the way works is the is only on the benoy. That's what the T is telling you don't do. If you now don't go ahead and the is the so then it's a murder became when you say how's it becoming again when you went ahead and you but if the don't go ahead and the was not after you WHEN YOU WOKE UP IN THE MORNING THERE WAS an iss Don't sh this and don't sh that. THERE WAS NO ONE that was before the other. If the is only NOT THE THAT IS FIRST after but the is on and on when's that WHEN YOU HAVE AN SECOND when this be was little at that POINT IT WAS DOESN'T pass now to go ahead and to say the bottom line is the bottom line is if you go through and this this from he brings This is all from where they all and that is that the like it's not that after now it's no is and really the is on in as much as it is now in the world of how the the how the malus plays itself out it's only the second one that gets malus like the ram says When it comes to the malus, it's only the that's going to get malus. But as it relates to the gufa is as it relates to the goof is the is true for the is true for the as well. But the bottom line is the Mishna said that if somebody says it's the rest of where you're going to have a bunch of cases where there's going to be so that's why we mentioned over says no you don't have to say that there's a is that the is why would you have thought the shen is possible it's because you would have thought you would have thought that maybe so that you're not going to have an is The first one that's only mentioned but we mentioned but we mentioned that the wasma the what's the might be what's that we mentioned earlier where said that you could say of why Even though still is it's going to be good. And if you're going to neon and lundus that the is of after you the sheni is not only on the shi it's on the also the sheni is the only one that's but as it relates to the sheni then this mim to say that if you would hold once you even the should beer BECAUSE IS TRUE FOR ANYTHING THAT'S included in the and the is true for the and it's true for the shi as well. Not only the shi is the kasher, they're all kasher. Why would you have thought the both? Because I would have thought and that's what the rama was coming to say even though are included in the said. So both of them were in violation. Now all the are only on the sh because he can't punish the guy when that way DID THE WAS CAN'T GET PUNISHED FOR THE was part of this and if that's the case I would have thought maybe it should be that for whatever reason we don't say based on and taking the one that seems to be the and the as relates to the in the O say vaspanite.