Daf Hashavua Iyun Sugya Kesuvos Daf 75 - The Lomdus of Chezkas Haguf Explicated by Rav Elchanan

this Torah class is brought to you by Torah anytime.com recording in progress okay good morning everyone nice to see everybody okay we uh have the great to try to dig in to two today on two of the most L sh uh moreover these are probably two of the most lumish T and CH if you had make like a list of you know top 10 to that you should know uh these might be uh I think uh they would they would likely be in uh on the list the first one we're going to learn on we know throughout between what takes precedence says you leave money where it is despite the fact that says if you have a shil was the woman a or we said she became AA at the last pass possible time and she was born aah so let's assume that if her status changed it happened at the last possible time so says if a woman says that it happened after Aris she's believed however says and she's trying to take money out of the husband's Reigns Supreme so you might mistakenly think that doesn't hold of so said about 10 lines from the top don't say that doesn't follow at all when does not follow that's if there's against if there is no and the brings that we know when it comes toas if the spot comes before the hair it's t if the hair become comes before the spot it's tar the say comes first but literally it's it's tar saf is tahar why is safik tahar cuz you're M whether this woman is or not says that she was born not a she we should assume she's not a so we see that R follows seems to be bothered why why would anybody ever say that Risha doesn't follow isn't it obvious that if there's no you would follow what Rua doesn't hold of kaka I need ra to say Risha holds of kazaka and the only reason he doesn't here is because he holds m is stronger why would why would I think that Rish does not follow if there's no so let's see tyus um let us see tyus I have to okay I have to resend it um because tus has a where the the G's point is not that Rua holds of but rather Rua holds of against other but not and uh we will see that let's [Music] see if it came in okay here it is okay tyus make a bigger nice and big says when the says holds of what that means is even though there is another for example really what Kaka is there in our mishna against aside from namely says that if they're or if she was violated happened at the last possible time but what about another kazaka kazaka is a that she was born unmarried so let's assume that she remained unmarried the point of R is not that Rua holds of against nothing of course the point is that if it's not for would destroy the other namely why is not strong against the because says how do I know what the means is that would destroy maybe it means would just work no says there's no other what would the what would ra come to teach us of course you why nothing contradicts it okay so meaning it's that holds of is it's only that nullifies would destroy other I so you'll ask and what about in the case that we prove raas from namely in the case of Saras right we're proving from Saras that we follow but there is not fighting any other so actually for that you have to see another tus another this is also one of mish the classic T inas where this to asks he quotes the we know that byas if you're what came first the say why would not follow says a Whopper and you need to know this to understand the firstes then in the case ofas there is aak against it while says that she was born without SAS so let's assume she's not the person's not a m says you know what we're talking about over here that before this Nega this person had a different Nega so they were so you're debating what came first the spot of the hair the spot or the hair SOA says well well follow now we're learning in middle of the first that doesn't everyone hold of and the point is that even overcomes other so says the here hold because against that says that she Remains Not A there's a that she is a m why what are we talking about her we're talking about where she already had not she he had another Nega she had a boil or a burn before from it and before becoming purified a was born and after they became from the first you were only left with the suff okay so basically um this is consistent with the middle of learning that the of is that R follows against other what other is there in the mishna that's even though says that the M happened at the latest possible time the that she's a p says that that it happened earlier in order for her to retain her status of being a single woman okay um now let's go back to the first tius okay the has the following T now that we've set up the that is saying follows even against and what other is there in the M there by there's there's now here's a Pella because there that means think about it Rua would have followed if not for the fact that there's but at the end of the day he follows and by the way the moment is being supported by okay you ready this is the million dollar question how could you say the that had it not been over here you would follow but it's one against two how so number one we should say re retain her in her status of being single if you're going to say if you're going to say no and she's but against the there's something called what do you mean when it's in full for you don't know if her body has changed says we should assume it didn't change but here we know it changed she has a mum now the question is when did the M happen so shooting in the is so it's two against one how could you say had it not been for had it not been for but it's one against two what's the one against two is fighting and where do we ever get this thing that makes it one against two because this would this is considered to to the detriment where that's measured and it's found to be missing we say anything that was that was immersed in the why because on the one hand says the waser for the longest possible time and if it became possible became possible recently you um why we say item that was immersed let it retain its status of being is no good to say if you're going to say that it was good and say it was not missing you see it is missing you ready listen to this is you have a guy he's T he immersed in a Mikvah he measured it last week it was good he immersed comes out of the mikah the 39 why because he has yeah but the has so why don't we say it it's missing water it happened after he immersed no but the is is imped is weakened how is it weakened cuz you measured it and you see it's missing so if it's missing says that it happened at the last possible time is weakened so we tagged against so just like we tagged him against the we tag team against the then how could the say that had it not been for you would have followed the of the woman but why don't we tag team and where it was found whether or um maybe not it sounds similar to the difference okay the difference between and is very subtle but it's clear says if it was found in a domain then that Mum existed in that domain at all times says don't you tell me that this person was born without an issue because you see the issue in front of you and therefore you cannot and therefore that that that says it weakens similar to only weakens it in that domain but weakens it period where it could even say it existed before so is gerain to that is uh is a buster of now I want to point out a very important question on you hear this it's worthwhile coming for your soul to come down from under the to hear this it's called tag team we see by mikah that if somebody was T and now there's a question in the tag teams with so why don't we say the same thing in that let the Tag Team with I would ask a very what in the world does this have to do with RAB Yeshua R follows why does ra follow but against the you have and you have so why are we asking on what R says Rua would have said had it not be for R follows even with it's you could ask how could he follow it's one against three the is asking on Rua in the way ra learns Rua you could ask also it's just in Ram it's just in ramam it seems that is nothing in the face of ha so by the same token you could say he holds is the same thing is nothing why would that be different than not look at to's answer ready for to's answer VBA by the way this rashba is not the rashba this is one of the Bal is is a force against the of the Mikvah and therefore the joins up with is nothing why that's tus okay that's the starting point now we come to um another basic question but you you'll see we're going to come back to this bottom line is what's T saying that had it not be would destroy says but it's one against two no so strong is blown out of the waters why why is any stronger than any any other that a had not been for would beat number two even though it's one against two says it's not one against two because destroys the that it doesn't exist and they're all earned out of one if it would be learned that from you could say they they have different there's only one how could you divide the den in half says very important idea what is the logic of Kakak says things didn't change status quo so what is a moral compelling status quo that a physical thing didn't change or that A din didn't change what's more of a force of a status quo that a person's body Remain the way it was created or that a marital status didn't change or a h status of T didn't change it's much harder to change something physically than to change something in lambas the principle that the matter didn't change from what it was before the suff was and from here we can learn even if it did change you just have a doubt did it change a lot or a little reasonable to assume that it only changed a little not a lot that's why is stronger than other it change a physical change is a bigger change than if it just changed in status Kaka it would be similar to if you had two kakas against one kazaka two would win this is after the of that says it didn't change we say two is greater than one here's what is saying the L ofak is we should assume something didn't change and if something did change it's better to say it changed a little than a lot so in the parameter of measuring what is a bigger change a physical change or a change in then a status in then it's a much bigger change to say something changed in physical reality than to say it changed in then so when you're discussing on the one hand we have a question when she developed the mum did it happen before or later we should assume it happened later a change in her body is a very big change but a change in whether she's married or not that's not a big change you look at a woman before after she's married there's no physical difference in her it's just that a stat a change in status is stronger than other because the lumus of is we should say that if something changed it happened in the last possible moment and a a change in physical reality is a much more Dynam um much more drastic change than a change in uh spiritual status or or Hal status okay and now the moment you've all been waiting for the okay learning a you're a different person I would say it's it's like a physical change okay before and after it's not like before you were somebody without a now you're something with a learning you're you're a different Adam you're a different person so let's just get the structure first structure of to is how could R have said that had it not been of course you follow why wouldn't you says because there's a competing to which asks but then it's two against one it's to which says against is nothing we still haven't explained then why is something and not but let's see theit theit quotes TUS the by the way yeah we I guess the the main question here is why by Mikvah do we say the is something against why don't we say the same thing by mikah it's not two against one the is nothing against that's what the is going to deal with since is stronger than any even if there's is not to make it two against one so theit asked the following question we could have asked so what why by Mikvah is it two against one and the is going to deal with mik on the last paragraph I'm going to be brave now I want to see one more question the brings in a gar in the beginning of n you have a barrel a barrel that became vinegar over there the first three days it was wine from the third day on it's a suff Why by mikah do we say it's definitely no good so the case is like this you have a barrel it's now vinegar you took off truma from the barrel to be uh you took off truma from that Barrel to be able to to be mafish for other barrels so you were you were mafish truma and we say the first three days it was definitely aan even though the there is a here so on the one hand you have you have you have but and there you're fighting and you're fighting so so there even though two against one we say and the asks but it's how is it different than mik um by we say so the first three days we say it's Yin from there and on it's a suff it's a suff Why by mikah do we say the wine has so the schit is asking from the in the beginning of nid so if you have a barrel and it's now so the first three days we say V from there on suff the is that we say the the situation of barrel is going like and we say that we're going to use to say it's not a good chuma instead of using the um to say it is a good schuma even though is worse than because the body Changed by there is a because it became vinegar the the Goof of the iron changed and is stronger thanaka of status change so nevertheless the that it's theak of is actually going to be stronger than the that is okay let let's put aside this case OFA for a moment and let's try to see if we could distinguish between the case of Mikvah where we say that the of the Mikvah actually Beats by mik we say we say even though the of the person and the and the will overcome the and we don't say that the in other words what's says we say that the person's T cu the T Stands Tall to the so why don't we say the same thing by our gar why don't we say theas P stands tall to theas of the woman that she was born without M so listen to what the says you know what the difference between Mikvah and a woman is theas of the mikah is not that is not that strong [Applause] why we say by a that was measured and it was found to be missing it's two to the detriment what is it you have two problems number one you have and number two you have it's missing in front of you I you have no by mik you don't really have a full-fledged you don't really have a since the its body didn't change you're just missing a little bit of water but in a situation the but a situation where there's even though it's missing listen to this the distinction between Mikvah and a woman who has an issue with m is that when when you have a woman who is born without M having a mum is such a drastic change in her physical entity that is so strong that it makes the it makes it disappear it completely negates it it completely nullifies it in the face of a strong is non extent I by mik also isn't there a strong no the that by Mikvah missing a little bit of water is not a real change in the entity of the Mikvah what are you going to say well the Mikvah had a that it wasn't missing any water yeah it had that it wasn't missing any any water but missing a little bit of water even though that little bit of water renders it a apostle Mikvah is not a major change in the physical state of the Mikvah having a m is a radical change in the physical reality of a person missing a little water is a change but it's not as much of a change again this only would make sense in the world that the lumus of kazaka is that we have to assume change did not happen and if change happened the smallest amount of change possible happened so in that world we could distinguish between a Mikvah missing water and a person having a mum a person having a mum is a radical change in a person's entity a a Mikvah missing a little bit of water is not a radical change in the Mika's entity it's a it's a change in the Mikvah status but it's not a change in the Mikvah entity okay so going back to tsus tsus wanted to know why by Mikvah do we say it's um it's t Why by Mikvah do we say and not by the woman see by the woman it's not is nothing by by Mikvah the is something against for the Mikvah because the Mikvah being missing a little water is not such a radical change in the state of the Mikvah okay that will be uh the first answer the question is okay let's hold it here for stage one you've just experienced another Torah class brought to you by Torah anytime.com