Preparing video...
0:00 / 0:00
Menachos 10
0 views
Comments(0)
Transcript
Auto-generated transcript. Not time-synced to the video.
Today's stuff is Menachis stuff yud.
We are nine lines from the bottom of daf
tes amud beis, the two dots kamatz
besmoel vehakol. Today's stuff has been
learned as a zechus before [ __ ] for
Yitzchak ben Chaim ben Merel, Chava
Miriam bas Malka Freida, [ __ ] ben
Chaya Leah. Today's stuff has also been
learned as a zechus for Sora bas Silvia
that she find a zivug hagan bekarev.
So, we're moving along in the first
perek of meseches Menachis dealing with
laws related to
Menachis, obviously. Specifically,
today's stuff is going to discuss one of
the halachas mentioned in the Mishnah
on that daf vav. Specifically,
that the avodah of kemitzah had to be
done with the right hand of the kohen.
Kamatz besmoel pasul. In fact,
the avodah of today's stuff, and I'm not
using the word avodah
loosely,
from beginning until end is going to
discuss various sources to this idea
that kemitzah had to be done with the
right hand of the kohen. Now, the first
half of today's stuff, which is going to
present two of what we'll see are three
mekoros to this inyan,
discusses
the rather esoteric parsha of the Tairas
Tzara'as, which is not so talked away in
the beginning of Tzara'as Metzora. And I
think that it's critical to
the havanah of today's stuff to sit down
with a Chumash and just go through some
of the pesukim in an Even Ha'Ezer. So,
really the relevant pesukim will feature
prominently in the course of the daf,
but I think
at least to start off with a high-level
understanding of what's going on,
that will be be'ezras Hashem very
helpful. So, the
in order for him to be tar had to bring
carbonas. Had to bring an awesome. Had
to bring a
and he had to bring an
In addition to that, he had to bring a
of some. Had to bring a that's a sheer
of oil.
What did he do with the oil? So, there
were
that were done with the oil.
Additionally, some of the oil was put on
the
of the mid Sarah.
In terms of the
of the carbonas versus the
of the shaman. So, first the Korean
brought the awesome on behalf of the mid
Sarah. And afterwards, he did the
with the shaman. So, we're going to pick
up where the Korean just brought the
carbon awesome. He now has the dam of
the awesome. If you want to see it
inside, it's the second after it's
14 14. So, the second The
Korean took
from the blood of the awesome. The
and then the Korean would place it on
on the right ear lobe of the mid hair of
the mid Sarah.
And on his right thumb the
also on the right thumb of his foot. So,
the Korean takes from the dam awesome
and he puts it on the of the mid Sarah.
In fact, he puts it on three places of
the of the mid Sarah. And
on the right hand and on the foot and
it's all on the ear on the hand and on
the foot and it's all
on the hand and on the foot.
And the Korean would take from the of
some. And he would put it
pour it into the palm of another
Korean's left hand. The
asset on your money is min shemen asher
al kapayas smoles. Then he would take
his right finger, put it into the kaf as
smoles, which is where the shemen is.
The hezo min hashemen bets boy and he
would then do a haza from the shemen
with his finger sheva apom and seven
times, meaning seven azois. The shemen
he had to do this in the makom
hamikdash. Um yes rash emen asher al
kapoy. This is the part we need. And
then from the leftover oil that's in his
kapayas smoles, yitena kohen al tunoch
ozen hametayar hayomanis, val boyen
yoden hayomanis, val boyen raglen
hayomanis al dam haosh. The kohen would
then take from the leftover shemen,
leftover meaning after he did his nine
azois, and he would put it where he put
the dam haosh. He would put it al tunoch
ozen hametayar hayomanis, val boyen
yoden hayomanis, val boyen raglen
hayomanis. Sounds familiar? Yeah, cuz
that's where the dam haosh was. That's
exactly where the dam haosh had been
previous
ly been placed on the metzora. Then if
there was leftover oil, the kohen would
put it on the head of the metzora. He
would bring the chatas, he would bring
the ola, and that's how he would get
kapara. So,
asher megaleh in your name. The kohen
would bring the asham.
He would take from the dam haasham, put
it on the metzora in three places, on
the tunoch ozen, boyen yoden, and boyen
raglen. All three of them had to be
yomanis, yomanis, yomanis. Then he would
take the white shemen, put it into
kapayas smoles,
take etz boy hayomanis, dip it into
kapayas smoles, which is where the
shemen is, and then essentially rinse
and repeat. Take the shemen and put it
on the ozen, the yad, and the ragel.
Which one? The right or the left? Oh, we
know that. Yomanis, yomanis, yomanis.
In fact, the Torah says
that where do you do it? You do it on
damn awesome. So, it's not so bad,
right? Now, after the Torah finishes
this whole inyan, the Torah says as
follows, "V'im dal hu, what would be if
this metzora was an arman?" It matters
if he's an arman, yeah? Because a
metzora is one of the dugmayos in the
Torah where his carbonos are oil
v'yayen. The type of carbon that he
brings varies and it depends on whether
this person is an ashir or he's an
arman. In the event and that he's a dal,
v'ein yad omeres "Ein yad massegas." And
he can't afford to bring an asham and a
chatas and an oilah. So, the Torah says
like this, "The asham is not negotiable.
You have to bring the asham. This is a
critical part of the unique tyrah of the
metzora." As it relates to the chatas
and the oilah, so you can get away
instead of bringing two animals, you
could bring shnei torim u'shnei bnei
yonah, echad chatas v'echad oilah. And
then the Torah goes, and the Torah
literally chazars over verbatim several
psukim in the Torah where the Torah
says, "What do you do with the asham if
you're a dal?" Well, it's very simple.
You're going to take from it and you're
going to put it on the t'nuch ozen
hayemanis, on the boyen yad hayemanis,
and on the boyen raglay hayemanis. What
are you then going to do with the
shamen? Are you going to put it into the
kaf hasmoeles? You're going to take your
right finger, dip it into the kaf
hasmoeles, and you're going to put it on
the t'nuch ozen hayemanis, on the boyen
yad hayemanis, and on the boyen raglay
hayemanis, which is literally on the dam
asham. So, after the Torah goes through
this wordy seder hayirah of the metzora,
the Torah chazars it over. Why? Not al
chazarah chazarah noch umacha zarah.
That's not what's going on here. This is
not Mishneh Torah. The reason we're
chazaring it is because it's really
another parashah. There's the parashah
of the metzora ashir and then there's
the parashah of the metzora ani. So, the
Torah tells me all the details in the
parashah of the metzora ashir, and then
the Torah tells me all the details in
the parashah of the metzora ani. Now, if
you think about it, if our objective was
brevity, right? If we were trying to be
mekayem Rav's inyan of lo oilam yishnah
adam l'tamid b'derech tzara, Torah
didn't not have to chazar the whole
entire again by the
after told us by the
what the Torah could have said was and
maybe would have should have said was is
that
relates to so copy the carbon noise
instead of him bringing three animals he
can get away with one animal and
the Torah didn't do and the Torah went
ahead and the Torah over the whole and
if that's the case there has to be
dinner that I'm going to learn that from
this partial and that's exactly exactly
what the
of the first half disproportionate in
of the
is going to focus on now
just to set it up
we're going to begin this discussion
because we're trying to figure out how
do you know it was done with the right
hand and this is going to be a from this
partial believe it or not even though
there's no say of the word but we'll see
from this partial that we just learned
there's going to be a to it the is going
to say that you know at the so if
we're really in this
let's in this in the finish lines and by
the time we're done what we're going to
see is there's going to be a few
different parts of this partial that the
is going to roll its sleeves up and try
to understand so we'll try to set up
each one individually the first
that
the sees that there is to be had we're
pre-capping the so we're giving away the
punchline spoiler alert the first part
of this partial that the is going to
focus in on is the word smallest now how
many times does it say the word smallest
so let me say the Torah says
like a showman the
on
the has smallest right so there was a
mix for to do
from the
onto the left palm or into the left palm
of the coin okay and the says the
asset boy how you is the coin should dip
his right finger min hashem and asher al
kapoi has moles. Meaning into the
sherman which is al kapoi has moles.
Take the sherman and start doing what
the coin needs to do with the sherman.
So the Torah mentions the word moles
twice. Right? Wrong. Torah mentions it
four times. What's the four times? So
hopefully we gave it away. It's because
the Torah has it over the whole parsha
of the metzora a second time. So you
have the word moles twice as it relates
to the metzora asher. One time by the
yetzika of the yotzak al kapoi has
moles. The second time is the tfila. The
toval hakoinas atzboy hayomanas min
hashem min asher al kapoi has moles. And
then the Torah has it over all over
again by the metzora oni. Min hashem min
yetzika al kapoi has moles. And again,
the hizah hakoin atzboy hayomanas min
asher min asher al kapoi has moles. So
the Torah mentions the word moles four
times. Two times regarding the metzora
asher, two times the metzora oni. And if
the Torah mentions this word moles four
times, even though at some point we got
the hang of it, we hopped it's the left
hand, the left palm. It's in a yom el
dar sheni and that is the background.
Again, we gave it away already to the
first part of today's stuff. Zok the
hilig igamara. Komatz bismoil vachulu.
What is vachulu possel? Zok tomorrow
we're not immediately. What's the the
kometz has to be done with the right
hand. The rav said rav said rav said the
possuk says vayakriv es hamencha
vayimaleh kapoi
mimeno.
Kaf there. This kaf which is talking
about the korban mincha. It's talking
about the koinas that's inside the palm
of the koin. Any idea about? I don't
know which palm is it. Is it the right
or the left? Meaning kometz is done with
the right hand, the left hand. Does it
even matter?
Kishui omer when the possuk says
velokach hakoin miloi kashomen veyotzak
al kapoi has moles. When the Torah says
regarding the metzora that the koin
should take the loi kashomen and pour it
on to the kapoi has moles. From the fact
that the Torah says the word moles, you
You what we learn? Kan small is. Here
it's the left palm. How come how come
she never copied every other place where
it says calf such as by kmitsa in the
earlier mitzva? And that's how I know
that the word calf that it says by
kmitsa is the right calf. Thus, kmitsa
has to be by a mitzva. But the Gemara
says "Take it to the drasha." From me by
lay the gufa. Maybe the reason the Torah
said that the yetzika of the shemen had
to be into the kaf has small of the
kohen is to teach me that it had to be
on the kaf has small of the kohen. Not
to teach me that everywhere else it's
the right calf. In other words, maybe
everywhere else it could be other the
right, other the left. But over here it
has to be dafka the left and that's why
the Torah is emphasizing small is,
right? A very obvious question. So after
the Gemara true, but small is an ox. It
says the word small is a second time,
right? We know it says it four times.
And being that the Torah says it a
second time and the second time is
extra. So you know why the Torah wrote
small is a second time even though I
know already that the shemen is in the
kaf has small. So the second time the
Torah could have just said the taval
betzboy hayomanus men asher men asher al
kapoy. Why Torah second time have to say
the word small is? It's to teach me this
drasha. It's to teach me that dafka here
it's small. But as it relates to
everywhere else, over there it's not
small. Over there it's yomanus. But the
Gemara says even if it says it a second
time, me taysi the drasha of the second
mention of small is is
that everywhere else that it says the
word kaf, what it means is
that
the kaf has to be yomanus. Ve'eima,
maybe the second mention of small is is
also coming to teach me a halacha
regarding the kaf of the metzora. And
you know what it's coming to teach me?
It's coming to teach me a miut achamiut
al rabis. Maybe the word small is a
miut. That's not maybe, it is a miut.
And the Torah told me small is a second
time in miut achamiut al rabis to tell
me that
we're not
yomanus from the fact that it says
small, but we're marbe yomanus. Meaning
if it says small is once, that's miut
yomanus. That's easy. If it says it a
second time, now it's a double miut.
Double negative is always a positive. So
maybe the reason the Torah told me small
is I say the small is actually to be
marbe yomanus. I'll tell you this, ask
the obvious kasha. If the objective over
here is to be marbe yomanus, and you're
telling me it could be either small as I
could say it in the forest, and in me al
rabus, it could be yomanus as well. So,
just
let's just not say anything. Don't say
smallus, don't say yomanus. It should
say yatzah al kapay, and I'll know it
could be either the smallus and yomanus.
So, kasha is really always a kasha when
you talk about the idea of emes but says
the Gemara, even if it says smallus, the
second time the second mention of
smallus is coming to
tell me that every other place it says
kaf such as kmitsah means the yomanus.
Maybe it's coming to teach me and
regarding the kaf of the metzora to tell
me that even though it says smallus, but
really if you want to do yomanus, it's
going to be good as well.
Zog the Gemara,
I hear, but smallus achrin says it says
a third time smallus. Again, we know it
says it four times. And we learn from
the third mention of smallus, kan
smallus in acher smallus. That here it
says smallus somewhere else, not.
Meaning, if it would have said smallus
twice, you would have tightched that the
second mention of smallus is coming to
teach me regarding the metzora gufa in
me
al rabus. But then it said it a third
time. Now already something's fishy.
Something's going on over here. Why
would the Torah tell to me three times?
See, you know what the drasha is? The
third mention of
smallus is a giluy in how to learn the
second mention of smallus. Don't tightch
the second smallus as an emes al rabus,
but tightch the second smallus that kan
smallus, but everywhere else it's really
yomanus. Hence, I know that kmitsah is
always supposed to be be a met. But the
Gemara says, even if you're going to
tell me that the third mention of
smallus is being
oyker the
emes al rabus, and instead is being
megaleh how you're supposed to learn kaf
in kol ha Torah kulah, aber al rabus,
maybe the way you should learn it the
kol ha Torah kulah is just the opposite.
Makkan smallus, af the al monami
smallus. Right, wouldn't that make more
sense? If the Torah telling me an extra
mention of smallest, so that we should
know how to tithe the word kaf and call
it akula, why would you assume that the
way you tithe the word kaf and call it
akula is different from the way we are
tithe it by metzora? It would make more
sense to say just the opposite, other
apple, that the way we should tithe the
word kaf and call it akula is precisely
the way we tithe in the word kaf over
here. Right? That's one of the midrashot
in the shas bam. It's called binyan av.
So, if you find something in one place,
it makes sense that that's the way it
should be somewhere else. Now, it sounds
like we would need three mentions of the
word smallest to be able to come to
that. Besay degover, but at the end of
the day, now that I already have the
third smallest, why am I using the third
smallest to tell me that everywhere else
it's different? It makes more sense to
say everywhere else it's the same. And
for the gemara, I hear, but our boss
smallest says but you should know it
says the word smallest a fourth time. It
says it a fourth time. That fourth extra
mention of smallest is megala how you
should learn the third smallest. And
that the third smallest is not coming to
say, oh, just like by the metzora it's
smallest, so that everywhere else it
says kaf it's smallest. Just the
opposite. That here smallest, everywhere
else not.
And it's for that reason, because of the
four mentions of smallest, like the
gemara says, trey banim trey avot, we
come to to this halacha either way. This
was a very unpredictable makah. I don't
think anybody would have guessed this.
So, how do you know that kemitzah is
bederech tan? It's very simple, because
it says the word smallest four times in
the parsha of metzora, trey banim trey
avot, and that's how I come to what the
shiyach is. Yeah, because by the
metzora, the kohen had to take the
shemen and he had to pour it into
kapayim smallest.
And
being that the Torah says it four times,
I end up knowing that here it's
smallest, but everywhere else the
word means yeminus. What's the
methodology? How does four mentions of
smallest get you to that point? Because
had it said smallest once, I would have
thought that maybe in kol ha'torah kulah
it could be either yeminus or smallest.
That here there's a taf smallest, as the
Torah told me a second time. But as the
Torah only told it to me a second time,
I would have thought
this possuk is not a b'chlav and how
you're supposed to learn
s'ka in kol ha'Torah kulah. But it's
coming to tell me that as relates to the
metzora it could be either the smallest
or the yomanus. How did the Torah tell
me either the smallest or the yomanus by
telling me the word smallest twice?
Straight out that would just made more
sense. Why have to tell me anything? I
so it's kash. But the bottom line is if
it said it only two times, I would have
thought
but it says it a third time. And the
third time is megaleh that the second
mention is not just for an
fact it's not. What it's coming to do is
it's coming to be megaleh Torah kulah.
But I would have thought it's coming to
be megaleh with opinion of that just
like here is smallest or to wherever
else it's smallest. But if it says it
already a fourth time, so now already I
know that the third mention that the
third mention of smallest is coming to
teach me not that everywhere else it's
also smallest but just the opposite.
Everywhere else it's yomanus. So if you
think about it, the fourth smallest was
megaleh on the third smallest
which was megaleh on the second smallest
which at the end of the day is really
the makar, right? So it's that second
smallest that's telling the story. But
believe it or not, I needed two more
smallestes to be able to get to where I
needed to get to. So the Gemara says who
said this Rav Zeira? So let's just try
to follow the narrative here. Amar lei
Rebbi Yirmiyah Reb Zeira. So Rebbi
Yirmiyah heard Reb Zeira's drasha. And
where Rashi explains Rebbi Yirmiyah
Rebbi Yirmiyah told Reb Zeira Rebbe, Reb
Zeira, according to the way you're
understanding that you have to sit down
and learn the parsha metzora and you
have to start darshaning four
smallestes. Well, if that's the case,
there's a lot of drashas that you're
going to have to start having. And the
reason there's a
lot of drashas that you're going to have
to start having is because number one
the parsha is wordy, number two the
parsha literally repeats itself. It
literally repeats itself because you
have the whole wordy parsha by the usham
by the metzora usham And then you have
the whole wordy parsha by the metzora on
you as well. So said
let's now take a step back. Let's
do a deep dive into the parsha of the
metzora and I'm just curious to hear how
you're going to start darshaning all
these other things that maybe need a
bigger darshan. Specifically
asked the following question. It says
the question was
the question was the question was the
question was the question was the
question was the question And again, if
you read the parentheses on top of the
it's a nice
dog cost of
the question was the question was the
question was the question was the
question was the question was I mean
very obvious question. Isn't that
redundant? Why do you have to tell me
that you're putting it on the question
was the question was the question was
the question was the question was the
question was the question was the
question was the question three places
where the was put. It was the same three
places and the question was the question
was the question was the question was
the question was the question was the
question was the question was the
question was
the question was the question was the
question was the question was the
question to darshan this? Really,
really, even if you wouldn't darshan the
metzora usher and the metzora oni,
there's a drasha to be had over here,
right? Because in the parsha of metzora
usher gufa, even if the Torah would not
have chazzed over the parsha of the
metzora oni, in the parsha of the
metzora usher gufa, there's a
there's a drasha to be had. What's the
drasha to be had? And that is that why
did the Torah have to tell me that it's
supposed to be al boin yadi hayeminis al
boin ragli hayeminis? If it says anyways
that it's supposed to be al dam asham.
But the kasha of Reb Zeira is a better
kasha. Because according to Reb Zeira,
there were not two small asists to
darshan, there were four small asists to
darshan. Even though two of them was the
parsha of the oni, which is really
chazaras hashir, but he says, "I don't
care why the Torah have to chaz at the
shir." So, if the Torah told me four
times small asists, that means there's
four drashas to be had. Well, if that's
the case, amalei Reb Zeira umalei Reb
Zeira, I have two groise diukim. I have
a diuk in the parsha of the metzora
usher and diuk in the parsha of the
metzora oni. By the metzora usher, al
boin yadi hayeminis al boin ragli
hayeminis is extra cuz it says already
al dam asham. What's it coming to teach
me? And again, by the metzora oni, you
have the same exact thing. That's also
extra. What's that coming to teach me?
So, Reb Zeira told him chada chada
stodem v'chad l'solsi
deit stodem. They're all coming to teach
me something.
Pashet, when we say
that the dam and the shemen when al boin
yadi hayeminis al boin ragli hayeminis,
what it means, it means the top part of
the hand where the fingernails are.
That's what it would mean the pashet.
But the Torah saying al boin yadi
hayeminis al boin ragli hayeminis, which
is extra cuz it says anyways al dam
asham, what the Torah is coming to be
marbeh is that even if you don't put it
on top, even if you put it on the
stodem. Rashi quotes the Gemara, that's
actually later in Maseches Menachos,
that the word al could sometimes mean
someach. So, the extra mention of al is
teaching me someach. So, al boin yadi
hayeminis, even if it's someach, it's
not mamesh on the top. Al boin ragli
hayeminis, even if it's someach, it's
not mamesh on the top. what about the
next one? Again, we're
four small
so that means all the extra things that
it says by the
are open for
so what about the extra
that it says by the that's
coming to be
it's
coming to say that yeah the top is fine
that's the obvious
the bottom is okay but the bottom what's
the bottom that's the palm side so that
side is already not going to be okay
either way that's how we deflect that
asks another
sounds like this is
talking to I'm awesome
I'll knock him down awesome
what's that coming to teach me so this
is
rushing to learn the
is the much simpler
so we're going to go with which is the
much simpler
and that is if you look by the
after the says that you're supposed to
put the
I'll
it
says where do you put it
if you look by the
it says the same exact thing and it says
where do you put it
so the question is why by the
does it say
and when it comes to the
does it say
so after the
I'll tell you
to be said in that way meaning I need
one person to say
and the other person to say
because
it said
I would have I would have thought you
say it's kind of
I would thought it has to be literally
but let's say the wasn't there it was
right it got cleaned off maybe then you
can't be
that's what the said even if it's on the
place where it was it's not physically
there it's still going to be okay
because
it said
I would have I would have thought just
the opposite
if it was cleaned away
but if it's there
I
maybe the should be a teaches the of the
sherman and maybe you shouldn't be able
to be here. It's a lot more than that
much of that's what he says I'm not
motion. So you want to know this nuance
why in one place it says I'm not motion
in the other place it says I'm claiming
that motion.
To teach me that it doesn't have to be
on the dam, but it's okay if it is going
to be on the dam. Either way, one more
question.
On my rubber. Rubber said
I'll dam harsh. Let's be at the kasha
outside first like we did with the four
small assist. So it says the word small
assist four times. Those are the link
account, right? They also talks about
the nectar. The nectar hand, the nectar
or.
The nectar fist, right? So tire mentions
the right also. You know how many times
it mentions the word right in the
parasha? If you do the math, it's going
to take a minute. 12 times.
It says it literally 12 times. Why does
it say it 12 times? So it's very simple.
Because the possic says by the matzora
usher, the locker coin dam harsh,
the nussing coin al tnu is in a matara
amonus. Val boyin yode amonus. Val boyin
ragle amonus. You have to know where to
put the dam. And then the tire says what
do you do? What do you do with the
left over? I'm sorry, what do you do
with the left over sherman? You put it
out tnu is in a matara amonus. Val boyin
yode amonus. Val boyin ragle amonus. So
you put it on the place of the dam
harsh. The tire has it over exactly
where and that place you supposed to get
and do it. Now by the matzora only, the
tire rinses and repeat. It says it all
over again. The shasha is given coin dam
harsh, al tnu is in a matara amonus. Val
boyin yode amonus. Val boyin ragle
amonus. And then it says the coin takes
the sherman and he puts it out tnu is in
a matara amonus. Val boyin yode amonus.
Val boyin ragle amonus. The bottom line
is it says the word amonus you know how
many times? It says it 12 times, right?
It says it a lot of times. And the
question is there's definitely
a lot of drashas to be had over here. I
mean you have it six times by the
metzora asher, you have it six times by
the metzora oni, and the question is,
why do I need all these mentions? Let's
see it inside, says the Gemara.
Omar Rava miyachad al dam ha'asham.
Being that it says that you're supposed
to put the
shemen by the metzora asher on the dam
asham. And then it says, "V'al makom dam
asham." And you're supposed to put the
shemen of the metzora oni not on the dam
asham, on the makom dam asham, right? We
saw that nuance in the previous Gemara.
V'chsiv al it says, "Yemanis b'dam." And
it says that where was the dam asham
put? Side by the metzora asham side by
the metzora oni. It was put on the
yemanis. Well, if that's the case, al
boyen yedei ha'yemanis, v'al boyen
raglei ha'
Right, it says that you're supposed Al
boyen yedei ha'yemanis, v'al boyen
raglei ha'yemanis. Dich sivi, not uch
sivi. Dich sivi b'shemen d'metzora asham
v'al oni l'malo. So, why does the Torah
have to mention yemanis, yemanis,
yemanis again? Side by the metzora asham
and side by the metzora oni. Well,
chairei it's extra. The word yemanis is
extra. That's what's throwing us for a
loop now. Right, that the yemanis word
seems to be extra. Now, in the previous
Gemara, we addressed already why we
mentioned al boyen yedei. Why did we
mention al boyen yedei? Start them and
see they start them. But yemanis, that
word's extra. And if we drash in all the
smalis, it's only chairei, it's only
fair that if we're going to drash in all
the yemanis as well. And this is the
kasha that Rava was very bothered with.
So, the Gemara says, "Because of this
kasha, because of this kasha, Rava was
going to have no way to give the g'neitz
with this." Ela, my Rava, Rava said,
"You have to revisit the whole Gemara,
and you have to find a new makor how you
know k'mitzahs b'yamin." Now, just to be
clear, why does this throw off the whole
system? The reason it throws off the
whole system is because the original
makor that k'mitzah had to be done
b'yamin was based on four mentions of
smalis, right? Remember, one mention got
you nowhere, two, nowhere, three,
nowhere. We needed four. But
if you're going to drash in four smalis,
that means you're darshaning what's
stated by the ocean, what's stated by
the army. You're darshaning everything.
There's nothing extra in this possuk.
Well, if there's nothing extra in this
possuk, there can't be anything extra by
the ammonuses. Rava has no way to give
the chiddush of that. You're going to be
able to figure out all these different
ammonuses. And if that's the case, that
we can't darshan the ammonuses, we're
also not going to darshan the smalluses.
And if we're not going to darshan the
the smalluses, then now all of a sudden
we're going to have a little bit of a
shaila of what's going on over here.
Now, we have to explain Rava a little
bit better. Again, the maro is going to
sort of speak this out, but we got to
speak it out by the possuk. So, what is
Rava wanting? What like what's Rava's
takeaway? Rava is like, "Listen, you
darshan four smalluses. Really? Let me
see you darshan 12 ammonuses. That was
impressive, but this will impress me
even more." Okay, so Rava of Bavel says,
"You see, what are you trying to say?
The Torah just wrote extra words. You
don't want to darshan ammonuses, why?
Because it's too hard? So, figure it
out. It's very nish. Kacheis on the
Gemara is supposed to be hard. Let's
figure out now all the ammonuses and
let's try to come up with some sort of
drasha." Now, Rava is saying something.
He's not just saying, "Can't be because
why are you doing all these ammonuses?"
What's Rava saying? What Rava is saying
is is that I think you can darshan the
two smalluses what's stated in the
parsha of the metzora rasha.
I think what you can't do is darshan the
additional two smalluses what's stated
in the parsha from the
metzora oni.
And if that's the case, I'm happy to
darshan and figure out six ammonuses
what's stated by the metzora rasha, and
that will give us chiddush with. But the
other six by the metzora oni, which I
can never figure out, I don't think
we're supposed to darshan there. Now,
what do you mean you're not supposed to
darshan? Why would the Torah write two
extra smalluses by the metzora oni? Why
would the Torah write six extra
ammonuses by the metzora oni? So, for
that we have a principle. This is
something that was taught in the Yeshiva
of Rabbi Shmuel, something that comes up
in under a platter in shas called parsha
shenemra venishnas. Like nishnas beshul
davash beshkalashba. Sometimes Torah
says a parsha, and then the Torah is
going to chazer it again to parsha, and
you're going to ask yourself why you
it?" over the entire parsha. Right?
Remember by
your first you'll have the office
so you ask yourself why the Torah has
over the entire parsha. You know what
the answer is?
If there's one dish in the new parsha
that's enough. Now there's a dish in the
parsha of the
what's the
the carbon that he brings? It's the
that's the in the parsha and once
there's a dish in that parsha there's a
if there's a
dish you can't ask questions anymore
while while it's
so it says I'm not just making
this from your I have this to be had and
by the way two small we're going to have
to figure out but four you don't have
because if you have four small
you have 12
and you can't figure out 12
and as a result must be all you have is
two small
I what's the other two because called
shall never be
explained and
as a result the actual two small they
don't need to be
because of the
and the same issue with regards to the
actual six
the bottom line is Robert says your is
knocked out because you needed four
small you don't have four small
let's all my let's go to the drawing
board and let's figure out what's going
on over here. Now ironically you know
what Robert's going to be the has to be
it's going to be the three extra or one
of the three extra
because again according to Robert
there's two small and the six you want
to say
right? I mean it's a simple by the way
right? I mean
if you can visualize it so there's two
small
one is not extra the second one really
is the one we're going to figure out and
there's six you want to say the first
three are not extra the other three
we're going to figure out it's from the
extra three you want to say
that I have my
let's see it inside yeah yeah the the
reason that has it over there it has to
be the
why the dog was so yad yamin? To teach
me there's another parsha in the Torah
that involves the yad, and there too you
need the yad yamin. You know what that
is? The yad of the kohen that's doing
the kmitzah. And we learn from it the
kmitzah has to be b'yamin. Regel, regel.
You know why the Torah chazit over
b'ayin ragli hayeminis? To teach me
another halacha that is nogea a foot.
And there too you have to know it's the
regel hayemin. What is that? Lo
chabritzo. It has to be the white foot.
The white foot, the right foot. And
ozen, ozen retziah. And as it relates to
ozen, there's another halacha related to
an ozen. Where is that? It's nogea the
parsha of retziah by the eved ivri.
Doesn't want to go free after six years.
And the retziah was done with which ear?
The right ear. How do I know that?
Because it says "yeminis" extra time,
and that's what is megaleh that you're
supposed to go ahead and you're supposed
to learn from it. Says the Gemara, just
to close the loop here, smolis.
L'mayosa. What do you do with smolis?
Now notice it says the word oni, and
there's also like
uh like 17 klein oisiyos over there.
There's a dal, there's a hay, there's a
vav, there's parenthesis.
Welcome to Menachos. But the right four
hagoyis on the same word, they all mean
the same thing. Take this word out fast.
Right, cuz not smolis d'oni l'mayosa,
it's smolis d'osher mayosa. It's the
extra smolis, that second smolis, that
even R' Akiva acknowledges you have to
do something about. So what do you do
with that word smolis? I'm going to have
sheisha b'reidei R' Akiva l'siman the
kohen b'Mitzrayim. It's coming to tell
me that if the kohen wanted to use his
right, it's not going to be okay. Shelo
yitamei, because you could have argued
him out of Mitzrayim. R' Akiva says
smolis, R' Shimon usually it's the right
and not the left. So you would have R'
Akiva smolis and then R' Shimon says
smolis. So maybe over here, even though
it says smolis, it could also mean the
right. Meaning, I would have thought if
it said smolis one time, it means that
smolis is also okay. But now fukei
yamin, so it's for that reason, it's for
that reason they wrote it a second time.
Like a That caused the lack of of thing.
To tell me that it's after the smell not
the human. Says the either smell is the
other smell is
the yard the regular money the only the
way also had his brother explain why the
Torah mentioned smell is two extra times
by the only and then mention your money
is like six extra times essentially as
it relates to the honest. We spoke to
say that already about that, right? we
gave it away. That's the time of
compassion and
this is filled with this
excels. So what's the bottom line? The
bottom line is what is the matter?
That needs to ask to be done with the
right hand. So we have two guys. We have
the matter and we have this is going to
be a third. But for now we have the
matter and we have
the matter and they're both learned out
from the parish show of the
what does it say by the
so it talks about left and right, right?
This four mentions of small is 12
mentions of your money
and it's from those words that we know
this said it's learned out from the fact
that the Torah says four times two by
the parish of the
and two by the parish of the
that the had to be poured into
small from the four mentions of it we
learned after here it's small everywhere
else it says it's your money is tell me
by mention the word and that's how I
know that it's
how you money is that's how I know that
has to be done with the right hand.
According to it's not learned out from
small it's actually learned out from
your money. Rather held that
the extra mentions of small and your
money is that it says by the only are
not in play. What is in play is whatever
is extra by the
so you're
by the
Torah mentions an extra time you have to
have your money is why?
Cuz the Torah says the down was put on
your money is by your money is
and then the Torah says the was put on
by your and it says on the
down so we know it's the
right? And even after all the judges we
still know it's the
so I have to tell me is teach me how to
do the other knitsa. A gavorkhi, we also
darshined a lot of other things related
to the parsha in the metzora.
Regardless, moving along. So, the gemara
now is going to mention
another topic regarding right and left
in the context of avodah
in the beit hamikdash and bederech agav,
very much what's going to emerge here is
this same discussion. Mekor is related
to how, you know, knitsa had to be done
with the right hand of the kohen. Amar
Rabbi Bar bar Chana, amar Rabbi Shimon
ben Lakish. So, Rabbi Chana said in the
name of Shimon ben Lakish, "Come on,
guys. Remember etzba v'kohuna. Every
time you have a parsha in the Torah and
the Torah says etzba and kohuna, so the
Torah says the kohen has to do the
avodah and it says do it with your
finger. Okay, ein ela yamin. It always
means the right. So, if it says the word
etzba and it says the word kohen by the
way, kohen as opposed to benei Aharon.
It has to say the word kohen. And etzba
as opposed to yad. If it says those two
words, etzba and kohuna, you know that
it means the right finger." Says the
gemara, Look at da'itoh. So, when the
olam, ha'Torah, heard Reish Lakish's
memra, right? Rabbi Bar bar Chana said
it over in the name of Reish Lakish.
When they heard what Reish Lakish said,
this is what they thought. They assumed
that etzba v'kohuna meaning, you know,
the way we explained it, that it has to
say two words. It has to say the word
etzba and it has to say the word kohuna.
K'dei k'seiv, "Where do you find a
parsha that it says both?" It says,
"V'lakach hakohen
midam hachatat b'etzba'o." Says it by
the chazois of the korban chatat.
"V'lakach hakohen." It says kohuna. And
it says, "Midam hachatat b'etzba'o." It
says the word etzba. The gemara, "And
what would be the makor that every time
it says etzba v'kohuna has to be
b'yamin?" D'kseiv, it's the parsha of
the metzora, the parsha we we just
learned. Because it says, "V'tovel
hakohen etz etzba'o hayemanit." Right?
It says that the kohen should be tovel
etz etzba'o hayemanit. So, it says
hakohen, it says etzba, and it says
hayemanit. Oh, this is probably the
makor. So, when the olam heard Reish
Lakish's memra, this is what they
assumed. They assumed that he probably
meant to say etzba and kohuna. What's an
example of that?
Hotas. And what's the mccard to it? It's
probably the partial learning the
mitzrayim. The
and that's the word as it's written.
That's the word
and it says before you tell him on this.
But the says when they heard this they
had a question. They said
the light see about
but it doesn't say the word all it says
is
the word in our mission. It comes with
small parcels. It says with small
parcels. So doesn't this knock out this
rule of Kesh?
If you're going to tell me said it's all
that it says and
how are you going to reconcile that with
the partial of
that has to be
where it doesn't say or Kahuna.
That's hard to say this question with a
straight face, right? What's the
question? We just spoke out to
how you know that it
had to be done with the right hand. It's
learned out from small and
nothing to do with the fact that it says
or
I mean if the
of how you know that it had to be done
with the right hand is because it says
and
it doesn't say
so
I
see from
even if it says I guess only right? It
doesn't say or Kahuna. But that's not
the we actually had a different I am
that struggled to understand the answer
to this question. I am either way I am a
rover but because it is over so let me
tell you what must have meant. He meant
it or
he must have meant now wherever it says
and
but what he must have meant was when it
says it
and that's why where it says
it's not with the right hand. I'm a
buyer.
A buyer told rover it can't be. It can't
be that rule is true. So you're
basically telling me because of this
question of
that
if it ever says either the word
or the word
what's it going to mean? It's going to
mean with the right hand. Let me ask you
a question.
One of the ways in the base of was with
the would take the they would walk it up
the ramp to do the the Kahuna which has
the word Kahuna. The
Kahuna Kahuna is
What does it mean?
The smile
the right foot of the animal was in the
left hand of the Kahuna. Now it doesn't
say the word over there, right? It says
the word Kahuna and still it means the
right hand. Right, he's not holding all
these with his
that's for sure not to do
you know with his that's all
to go ahead and start carrying all the
of the animal with his
to clearly doesn't say the word that
We're talking about the Kahuna
and I feel the
you need a Kahuna and presumably why?
Because it says the word Kahuna.
I'm sorry. It says
scratch. It's It's something that can be
done with the left hand despite the fact
that it says the word Kahuna. So it must
be that just saying the word Kahuna in
and of itself is not going to be okay.
It's
if it says Kahuna or that must be the
explanation
of why
the
is okay. This
smile despite the fact that it says
Kahuna but
I'm not impressed from that. You know
why? Because I mean
when it says club that if it says either
the word or Kahuna that means be a
minute but being that the whole was not
active so
the
whole was
not active
so certainly
the
whole
was not active
so the whole was not active so this is
outside the scope the scope of this
rule. But yes another question very
what about
the whole the whole
the whole
the whole the whole the whole the whole
the whole the whole the whole
Because of the Kahuna says the word
Kahuna
but we don't give a smile possible.
Okay, that's good. So
it says it's kosher. So it has a rule
that whatever it says the word or Kahuna
that is it requires you mean then how
could it hold that
could be the smile?
Right? Okay. If you need Kohuna and
Etzba, it doesn't say Kohuna and Etzba.
But if it's I Kohuna I Etzba, then how
could a bottle be this small? And again,
according to the Khakhamim and the
Sanhedrin, the Khakhamim say Kiva this
small possible. But the Khakhamim are
leaving it to Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Shimon
is makshir. This small. And it says
Kohuna.
So the Gemara
asking me a kasha on the Shulkhan Arukh
from Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Shimon holds by
the Shulkhan Arukh never said I'll leave
it to Rabbi Shimon. He's going to bring
from the Khakhamim. So I said, why are
you asking for Rabbi Shimon if you can
bring a raya from the Khakhamim? The
Khakhamim say Kiva this small was
passul. Rabbi Shimon is the one that's
makshir. And I mean, I'll leave it to
Rabbi Shimon. The rule doesn't stand,
but it's very much supported with the
Khakhamim. You see the Khakhamim hold
Kiva this small is
passul.
Cuz it says Kohuna. Even though it
doesn't say Etzba, so you see I Kohuna I
Etzba. But the Gemara says, when we buy
Rabbi Shimon Tarti, I have a problem cuz
does Rabbi Shimon hold that you need
Tarti? Meaning what we're saying is that
according to the Khakhamim, it's I Etzba
I Kohuna. According to Rabbi Shimon,
there's no such thing. Now, the Gemara
is saying maybe according to Rabbi
Shimon Tarti, like you would say both,
yeah. But for sure one or not. Says the
Gemara, is that true Rabbi Shimon needs
Tarti? Meaning according to Rabbi
Shimon, if it says I Etzba I Kohuna, it
doesn't mean Yamin by Tarti willing to
the Bracha. Rabbi Shimon I meant to make
a full Bracha. addressed this point.
Any I mean Yamin. Etzba any I mean
Yamin.
Wherever it says the word Etzba it means
You see Rabbi Shimon subscribes to the
theory. So how do you How does Rabbi
Shimon stand? So the Gemara, what did
Rabbi Shimon say? Rabbi Shimon didn't
say wherever it says I Etzba I Kohuna,
Rabbi Shimon says wherever it says
Etzba, Etzba by Kohuna, Kohuna by Etzba.
The word Etzba is by Kohuna.
Meaning Rabbi Shimon holds that if it
says the word Etzba, it means Yamin.
However, if it says the word Kohuna, it
doesn't necessarily mean Yamin. And
that's why by Kabbalah where it says
etzba, but says kehuna, whereas the
chachamim say,
kibel b'smol is pasul, because kehuna
means yamin. According to Rav Shimon Rav
Shimon holds etzba would mean yamin, but
kehuna isn't
does not mean yamin, and that's why you
don't need kehuna. Says the halacha
l'maaseh. So, if the word kehuna,
according to Rav Shimon, doesn't
necessarily mean yamin, so why would the
Torah in a certain parshas even mention
the word kehuna? Right, let's say in the
parsha of kibel. Why is the Torah
mention the word kehuna? But we know
it's the b'nei Aharon. Vayikrevu b'nei
Aharon hakohanim. Why you mention the
word koha? According to me according to
the chachamim mentioning the word koha
is to teach me yamin. But according to
Rav Shimon that it's even b'smol kosher,
so why does the Torah mention hakohanim?
So according to the Gemara b'kehuna it's
coming to teach me that he has to be
kehuna. That's Rashi on the yomi.
B'bigdei kehuna has to be wearing the
bigdei kehuna. That's what it's coming
to teach me. Right, we know that a kohen
that's not wearing the bigdei kehuna is
not b'kehuna. He could be a din of a zar
even. But the bottom line is is that
that's why the Torah mentions it. But
Gemara's continuing to say V'ariz reko.
What about z'riko? Diloi kasav ela
kehuna. Z'riko it says the word kehuna.
Right, it says that who's supposed to do
this z'riko? V'zarku.
Hakohanim. Right, vayikrevu b'nei Aharon
again v'sadon v'zarku. So we know the
kohanim are the ones that are supposed
to do the z'riko. Yet v'tana zarak
b'smol pasul. It says zarak b'smol
pasul. Okay. Filoi palig Rav Shimon. And
Rav Shimon is not cholek. Rav Shimon
shouldn't have been cholek. Rav Shimon
should have said just like kibel b'smol
was kosher, because kehuna doesn't mean
yamin, then z'riko b'smol should also be
kosher, because
kehuna doesn't necessarily mean yamin.
Now b'shlamai if it said z'riko it would
have said etzba and kehuna, so maybe Rav
Shimon thought he might. So that would
explain why zarak b'smol is pasul. But
v'ariz z'riko diloi kasav ela kehuna.
That's the hakdama. It doesn't say
etzba. Even though there's certain
z'rikos that are done with the etzba,
but it doesn't say the word etzba. What
it says is only kehuna. And I feel it is
not Kohanim. So, how do you reconcile
Reb Shimon who holds Kiva Bismol is
possible because Kohanim doesn't mean
Yamin with Reb Shimon that seems to hold
Zarek Bismol is possible? I will just
say that Kohanim. I'm going to buy this.
I buy this and that even though it was
true Reb Shimon is not Kohanim.
In the Mishna, but he's probably the
brightest. There is a brightest Reb
Shimon was saying at the time he went to
the brightest. Kiva Bismol possible. Reb
Shimon Machshir. Zarek Bismol possible.
Reb Shimon Machshir. Reb Shimon is
Shitosai. Taka is Kohanim. The bottom
line is Reb Shimon said a member. Reb
Shimon said Kohanim and Etzba Kohanim in
only
Yamin. What comes out of Mascona is that
according to the Kohanim it's Etzba
Kohanim. That's what Reb Shimon means.
According to Reb Shimon the time of Reb
Shimon Bar Yochai what it means is Etzba
V'Kohanim. The main Nafka Mina?
Huge Nafka Minas. Kiva Bismol or Zarek
Bismol. According to the Kohanim it's
possible. According to Reb Shimon it's
kosher. According to the Kohanim it's
possible even though it doesn't say the
word Yamin anywhere, but it says the
word Kohanim the Kriva B'nei Aharon Ha
Kohanim and it says the word Kohanim by
Zarek as well. And wherever it says the
word Kohanim Etzba what it means is it
means Yamin. According to Reb Shimon
Kohanim doesn't mean Yuminarity. And
being that Kohanim is not Yamin so it's
for that reason Reb Shimon holds Kiva
Bismol is kosher. That's in the first
Mishna. And Zarek Bismol possible
kosher. That's not in the first Mishna.
That is a Braisa. The Gemara did say
that even though we're saying Reb Shimon
is by Yuminarity, but really Etzba alone
is enough. Meaning if it says Kohanim
then he's by Yuminarity. Then he would
also need Etzba, but really Etzba by
Kohanim the Gemara said it's only
Kohanim
that's by Etzba. Okay, so what does that
have to do with
us? So, we we gave a little shout out to
Kohanim in the beginning of the matter,
but now the Gemara is going to get to
what it's really driving at and that is
El Hal Adam Rava. Rubber said in the
first half of today's daf, "Yad yad like
me so that what's the makor that kometz
has to be done with the yamin?" It's the
extra boyin yodeiha monis that it says
by the metzora osher. What do I need
that drasha for? Me kohuna nafka.
Lecheira, it says by kometz that a kohen
has to do the kometz. So if it says that
a kohen has to do a kometz, and rubber
is the one who tight shrei shlokish as
holding what? That oy kohen and oy
etzba. So if that's the case for the
Gemara, a kasha vos dafra of a drasha of
an yad yad like me so the extra boyin
yodeiha monis. Lecheira, it says kohen.
And just like I know kibud av u'me is
pasul, and I know zorik b'smol is pasul,
so lecheira I know that what? I know
that kometz b'smol is also pasul.
Gefaldige kasha.
Kabala has to be b'yamin. Zrika has to
be b'yamin. Kometz has to be b'yamin.
You know I know kabala has to be b'yamin
cuz it says the word kohen.
You know I know zrika has to be b'yamin
cuz it says the word kohen. Okay, so you
know I know kometz has to be b'yamin.
Says the word kohen. Apparently that
wasn't good enough because rubber needed
a whole fancy tzera shava in order to
teach me this halacha. Rubber let you
toss a frei Gemara, why do I need yad
yad like kometz? Lecheira me kohuna
nafka. And for the Gemara, chad l'kometz
v'chad
l'kidush kometz. The reason is is
because there are two avoidas that
involve kometz. I mean it's really four,
but two specifically that we need a
makor that had to be done with the
yamin. One is the act of kometz, and the
other one is taking the kometz and put
it into a klisharis. The reason there's
two drashas is because one would tell me
the act of kometz, and I need another
one to tell me that putting the kometz
into the klisharis that in and of itself
is
that in and of itself is going to be
okay as well. Now the Gemara doesn't
clarify which would be which, right?
Which I would know from kohen and which
I would know yad yad. But the bottom
line is that there's two drashas true.
Why do I need two drashas for the same
thing? The two drashas are not coming to
tell me the same thing. The two drashas
are coming to tell me two things. Two
things that granted are Indian Indian
but at the same time they're not the
same thing and that's
what's going on over here. But the one
is a follow-up kasha and that is the Reb
Shimon. According to Reb Shimon, the loy
by kodesh
koymets. Reb Shimon has a shita and
really this Reb Shimon is is discussed
extensively the Gemara daf kaf vav amud
alef. Take a look at Rashi. Rashi gives
us a little bit of a a snapshot of that
Gemara. What emerges in that Gemara is
is that according to some Amora, Reb
Shimon holds there was no chiyuv to take
the koymets after the coin did the
kmitsa and to put it in a klisharis.
That inyan of taking the koymets and
putting it in a klisharis, according to
one shita, is not something you have to
do with the Reb Shimon.
There are other Amora'im that are
chiyaylik but even according to the
other Amora'im,
you don't have to do it with the right
hand, you could do it with the left
hand. Okay, so from the Gemara kasha,
the Reb Shimon the loy by kodesh
koymets, according to the shitas that
hold that I'll leave it with Reb Shimon,
you don't have to put the koymets into a
klisharis. U le man de amar nami de loy
by kodesh, but even according to the man
de amar that holds that Reb Shimon
holds, you do need uh kodesh koymets Reb
Shimon. Aval u be smol achshav u be smol
achshav. But he's moyde that Reb Shimon
holds you could do it with the left
hand. Well, if that's the case, yad yad
de Rav Amram alei. So why do I need the
drasha of Rav of yad yad? Lechora, I
should be able to learn it from the fact
that it says koyen.
Mar is the kasha. Why does Rav Amram
need a drasha of yad yad? Typically it
says koyen. Wherever it says etzba
kohen, what does it mean?
It means it has to be done with the
right hand. What was the Gemara's
tairutz? One is to teach me the kmitsa
has to be done be'yamin and the other
one is to teach me that the kodesh of
the koymets, putting the koymets into a
klisharis, has to be done with the Yamin
as well. the Gemara, According to
I don't understand this. You know why?
Because has a
that either you don't need
comments
and even if you do need it you can for
sure do with your left hand. Well, if
that's the case I only need one of Yamin
as relates to comments. So, I have the
one we have the one because it says
so if it says that's how I have the one
so why does need the
this is the question where pushed the
question.
We had a question on what does need to
for? What was the
one is for the
the other is for the
there's no such thing as
so no such thing as
so all I need is one I have the one why
do I need two? Now, how do you even
how do you even make sense of the
question can't go with a straight face,
right? Why can't you go fighter because
if you're holding
that either way
it's the
either way it's the
himself So, that holds the with the
question and that holds the with the
question
we the fact that it says by you would
have comments with also question. That's
why he needs the
you know who asks this question the
it's the next line of so the says like
this if you're going to tell me in the
question
if you're going to tell me what do you
mean I need it for the one
for the fact that needs it. What do you
mean? I need it doesn't it say no
because
the says is
because being the
is what? The is that is by so the fact
that it says doesn't mean
so maybe that's what I needed for but
the says no because I
would
because it just so happens that
already had another
what's that other a third that we
haven't seen yet.
What's
says
it says it regarding the mincha. Right?
The mincha is called
like a and it's like an we learn from
the of the yad.
We learn from there that
the mincha is sometimes like a and the
mincha is sometimes like an
if he's coming to do the
with his hand, so he's to be a mincha.
If he's coming to do with a
then he's to be a
but what do you see from here? The
meaning you're doing the with your
right? That's how the was done. So you
do it
be a min. Right? And how do I know that?
From the fact that it says
so for
itself even though doesn't have the word
but he has
so he has already a min. You don't need
a second with
why do you need a second
because doesn't have the second
so if that's the case
yeah yeah
I live there
I don't know yeah yeah I live there I
understand. One is coming to tell me
meaning the fact that it says
teaches me that the has to be
and the teaches me that the
has to be
but according to I only have one and if
I only have one so why do I need two
and what are you going to tell me?
According to you don't have two
because according to you don't have
because she did the word that says
doesn't necessarily mean
that's true but that's true but has
another
that we didn't have up until this point
and that is that it says
so again if it says
so I already have one I don't need two
because there is no two
so then why does it say
why does
need
says I'm going to tell you why
needs to the of
it's Yeah, comments one specific
that the men
say that
I would have thought that
being that has a sheet
of the time of the crop, right? And said
that there's no shaman that was put into
the
and the reason is because he's a we
don't want his carbon to be very nice.
So I would have thought he comes to be
small discussion just like there's no
shaman
maybe could be done in an inferior way
as well. And if you do the with the
small it's going to be okay.
That's
what the one ahead and the said that no,
the said that it has to be
it's coming to teach me what? It's
coming to teach me even the
would have to be
so according to the
the reason there are two
would be one for the
one for taking the putting into
according to why would there be two
one would be a general and the other one
is to be
that this is going to be true for the
if I had one I wouldn't know the
I need two to know that it's true for
all
not only
it's true for the
as well. So the bottom line is if you do
come on the
so again, what was the of the what was
the
the purpose?
The purpose was to try to figure out and
to try to determine how we know
how do you know not how do you know how
do you know how do you know the to be
done with the right hand and if we do a
little bit of a there were a lot of that
came to the surface. We had
Russia said the word small is four times
regarding the
the fourth one is
on the third which is the
second that half a small is only true by
the everywhere else that it says the
word always means
says half by the
by
the by the by the
oh it says the word that's how I know
that comments this small is possible has
to be done to be a man. We had the
Russia Robber from the fact that the
Torah has it over in the parsha the
metzora asher as boy and yodeh monas
it's coming to teach me yad yad the
kmitza that kmitza has to be done dafka
with the yomanas. There was another idea
that came
alive in the Sugya and that is oh it's
very simple you want to know how we know
kmitza has to be done with the yomanas
because it says the cohen has to do it.
And Resh Lakish said wherever it says oi
etzba oi kohuna at least that was
robbers understanding of it. Oi etzba oi
kohuna it means yomanas so that would be
that would be a makar. We had another
makar and that was Reb Shimon. Reb
Shimon says that the Torah describes the
carbon mincha as asham. What does it
mean
just like the chotas had to be done with
the right hand so too if you're doing
the chelek of the kmitza that was done
be yad it also had to be done with the
with the right hand hence you have a
makar that kmitza has to be be a man. So
at the end of the day there's four
possible makars. Now you don't need four
possible makars right? Now as it relates
to the first two that was machlokes
between Reb Zeira and Rabba. Reb Zeira
had his makar Rabba had his makar. The
Gemara explained why according to the
chachamim you would need two makars. One
is for kmitza and the other one is for
taking the kmitza to put it into a klie
sharis and then the Gemara explained in
the world of Reb Shimon why you would
need two makars. One is to teach me
sharmon achos
and the other one is coming to teach me
the minchas choteh as well exhale.
Literally.
So as it relates to raid I think it's
kedai
to speak out another ha'arah related to
this week's parsha. So in chumash we're
holding parshas Bo. This week's parsha
is parshas Bo so we have the benefit of
the chumash here really being dover
b'ito matoiv so I think it's kedai
to speak out one ha'arah and it's it's
really not a ha'arah it's a foundational
rate by.
It's one of the divrei
hayamim shel Olam.
It's arguably
the most famous Ramban al ha Torah, the
Ramban in the end of
Parshas Bo. So, just to set it up.
The
theme of the latter part of Parshas Bo
is Makos Bechoros, Yetzias Mitzrayim.
And the many mitzvos that Hakadosh
Baruchu gave Klal Yisrael to observe
zecher l'Yetzias Mitzrayim. If you take
a look at the Sefer HaChinuch
from mitzvah hey through mitzvah chof
gimmel, every single mitzvah is a
mitzvah that's related to Yetzias
Mitzrayim. Just going to mention them
really quickly. Mitzvah shchitas Pesach.
The mitzvah to eat from the basar of a
korban Pesach. There's a lo sa'aseh,
you're not allowed to eat the korban
Pesach if it's new, right? Al gabruten,
umvushal, or if it's cooked. You're not
allowed to leave over from the basar of
a korban Pesach. There's a mitzvas asei
of tashbisu. There's a mitzvah to eat
matzah. There's a lav of bal yera'eh.
You're not allowed to eat something that
has even a taruvos of chametz in it.
You're not allowed to give from the
korban Pesach to a benecha. You're not
allowed to give it to a ger toshav.
There's a unique psul yotzei that the
basar of a korban Pesach has. You're not
allowed to break the bone of a korban
Pesach. An orel, someone not
circumcised, is not allowed to eat from
a korban Pesach. You have the mitzvah of
bechoros, which is zecher l'Makos
Bechoros.
You're not allowed to eat chametz on
Pesach. There's a lav of bal yera'eh.
V'higadeta l'vincha bayom hahu leima,
what we know as the mitzvah of sippur
Yetzias Mitzrayim. And then you have two
mitzvos that relate to a firstborn
donkey, the mitzvah pidyon peter chamor
and the mitzvah of arifas peter chamor.
If you count 19 mitzvos in Parshas Bo
that are related to the idea that a Yid
has to remember
Yetzias Mitzrayim. Truth is, there are
many other mitzvahs that are zecher
Yetzias Mitzrayim. The mitzvah of
tfillin, which by the way, the Chinuch
doesn't count in parshas Boi, but it's
also mentioned twice in parshas Boi. In
the parsha of Kadesh Li Kol Bechor and
in the parsha of V'haya Ki Yatzia.
That's why those are two of the four
parshas that every single Yid
has inside his tfillin. The mitzvah of
mezuzah
is a zecher l'Yetzias Mitzrayim. Even
though the parsha of Kadesh Li Kol
Bechor and V'haya Ki Yatzia are not in
the mezuzah, but we'll see soon. The
mitzvah of mezuzah is also a zecher
l'Yetzias Mitzrayim. Shabbos is zecher
l'Yetzias Mitzrayim. We say it by
kiddush. Sukkos is zecher l'Ananei
Hakavod. When we did we get the Ananei
Hakavod? When we left Mitzrayim, right?
Shavuos also we say in the nusach of
davening and we say in kiddush, it's
related to Yetzias Mitzrayim. So, if you
sit down, there's so many mitzvahs that
we have zecher l'Yetzias Mitzrayim. And
the question is, why is Yetzias
Mitzrayim so critical? Why is it so
important that the Torah
gave us so many mitzvahs where the
purpose of the mitzvah is not even so
much what you're doing, but do this to
remind you of Yetzias Mitzrayim. Do that
to remind you of Yetzias Mitzrayim. From
the fact that Yetzias Mitzrayim has so
many reminders, and some of them are
huge ones, right? It must be that
Yetzias Mitzrayim is something that a
Yid is really, really, really never
allowed to forget. And the question is,
why?
So, the Ramban in the end of parshas
Boi, it's a very, very, very long
Ramban. It would be very geshmak to go
through the Ramban from beginning until
end in a vening, but that would be like
learning another daf now. So, we're not
going to do that. But, there are some
excerpts that I think are worth just
reading and hearing
the golden words of the Ramban, and I
think it's just good night to go with
through inside. Says Ramban, the other
cloud the time it was rubbish. I'm going
to give you now a principle, a general
rule that relates to many myths.
From the time that I
descended onto the world, tracing back
all the way to Enosh.
So, the day is
started getting very confused as it
relates to meaning people's faith became
corrupt. Mayhem came from the acre.
There were those that started to deny
the existence of God. For them they said
they said that the world's always been
there. There was no gracious
the world is cut my in the world's
always been around. There was nothing
that created the world. The quotes a
positive in
where you may
quotes and refers to certain as saying
they deny the existence of by
they said he doesn't exist at all. They
have other
that acknowledge that God exists.
However, they
deny the fact that
has any idea that he has a clue of
what's going on in the world. I'm really
said it can tell him
the age
has it possible that God knows and he
has any idea what's going on over here.
There were others who idea they
acknowledge the fact that God existed.
They acknowledge even the fact that God
knows what's going on. However,
but they deny the fact that he
supervises and that he's actually paying
attention. Meaning he knows, but that he
cares and would ever do something about
it. They also they treated man could get
a yacht as if they're fish. So, they
that
was not paying any attention to them.
He's not overseeing them in any way. The
any mom has and as a result there's no
consequences to anything good or bad
that they do. There's no such thing as
these people would quote the
that the
talked about and that is
yeah, he exists. Yes, he knows what's
going on but he's
doesn't really care.
In other words, the sets up the with
three types of friend. Do with the that
were
by by your way.
You may okay.
doesn't exist.
He's not there. Do with those that said
Yeah,
I know he exists but at the same time
does he have any idea what's going on
and then there were those that said what
the
describes in
and that is
it.
But when I
who shows favor to a group of
people or to an individual.
And he's going to go ahead he's going to
perform a miracle that's going to
involve a deviation from the natural
course of how the world runs. He's
through that it will be clear to all
All of these heretical ideas that I just
explained said the man. Because
in the event that you have some
supernatural Moses that shows you
that must be some God that's making this
happen.
And if that
doesn't just happen but it's actually
predicted to happen through a way then
you
may you know what else will be clear?
Not only that there's someone behind the
face but also
the fact that that
is telling the truth that also will be
clear. playing itself out, what will be
through the
playing itself out, what will be
communicates to man. And he's
And through that, anything that that
is going to go and share with his people
are going to be proven to be true. Says
the
Being that through
a person can come to
that not only does
but the
knows what's going on and that the cares
about what's going on. It's for that
reason when you look at all the
that
went ahead and performed, you'll see the
that bring out this point. That's why it
says
because through the miracles it was
clear that
because he's not
and there's no
so why is he punishing the Egyptians,
right? Clearly
you see he didn't just abandon the world
like a lot of people thought he did. The
also says
that through the miracles it was evident
that
owns the world.
Because if
could be
in the world, must be he created it.
You know what else we saw by the
miracles? You see
You see from there how powerful is. He
shall
that he rules over everyone. They
the other nobody can get in his way. All
of these things, the fact that
exists, the fact that
knows, the fact that
pays attention, and the fact that
all these things
The
they either denied outright or at the
very least they were agnostic about. In
case and if that's the case,
so it's for how much of doing.
All the miracles that took place in
Mitzrayim are Edim Ne'emonim. They are
trustworthy witnesses that
in the Emunah that we have that Kodesh
Boruchu created the world and also in
the entire Torah. It's Emunah that
Hakodesh Boruchu created the world. Why?
Because how could Hakodesh Boruchu do
this if he didn't create the world? It's
also Emunah in the entire Torah. Why?
Since the Ramban says in a more nuanced
way, because all of what happened was
predicted. It came about with a
forewarning
from Moshe Rabbeinu which implies that
Moshe Rabbeinu was tapped in. And if
Moshe Rabbeinu was tapped in, that means
that the Nevuos of Moshe Rabbeinu were
Emes. Like come love the oy of Yisrael
K'Moshe. And it's for that reason the
miracles of Yetzias Mitzrayim were not
only a Hoyochacha, they weren't only a
Gilyui, a revelation on Hakodesh
Boruchu's existence and his power, etc.,
etc., but also on the Nevuah of Moshe.
Meaning, if there would have been
miracles, but Moshe Rabbeinu would not
have been the Emtzoy of these miracles,
so yeah, the miracles would be a ray of
light that Kodesh Boruchu created the
world, but who said the Torah is Emes?
But being that it happened through
Moshe, this is part and parcel of this
Ramban. Being that it happened through
Moshe, so comes out that the miracles
are not only being Megalah on Hakodesh
Boruchu, on the Emunah of the Borei,
it's also on the Emunah of Torah Kulah,
because they came through Moshe and this
is the Gilyui that Moshe Rabbeinu was
telling the truth, says the Ramban.
Here's the punch.
U'va'avor, being that the Metzius is
K'Hashem Lo Yisah Oisois Mofsim B'chol
Dor B'einai Kol Rosh O Kofer. That
Hakodesh Boruchu, the way he created the
world is that he's not going to perform
miracles like this in every generation.
Not every dor and not every person that
is Mesupek in his Emunah is going to be
Zocheh to see Makos or Krias Yam Suf or
all the miracles that the Yidden
witnessed. It's for that reason Yitzav
Oisoinu. Hakodesh Boruchu commanded us
She'Naseh Tamid Zicharon L'Oisois Asher
Royinu.
>> that we should constantly make reminders
and signs
to have over and to never forget what we
saw when we left Egypt.
And we should transmit it to our
children and to our grandchildren and
tell them to transmit it to their
children and grandchildren
to the last generation.
And being that there's so much at stake
in terms of
being
this mitzvah, it's for that reason the
Torah was very about it.
Right, where do you see the
someone needs on Pesach is chorus. If
someone doesn't eat from the carbon
Pesach, he's chorus. Not just that.
The Torah said that it's not enough
that, you know, one time a year a year
for a week you're going to remember and
you're going to remember with the
severity of chorus. I want constantly
there should be a reminder on your hand
and between your eyes and that's why we
wear fillin.
And then the Torah said that I want that
every single time you walk in and out of
a room you're going to look at a mezuzah
and you're going to see in the mezuzah
not just that. This should not be like
this.
And you should say that in your mouth
every morning and every evening. Come on
said I must be out of the race. You must
come and kiss him from the time
right? We say
and in the third part of we talk about
mitzrayim. Because this is so important
that they wish to want that we should
say it twice every single day. Not just
that. We should not be like this.
And we should go ahead and we should
make a every year. We can be like this
all the boys. There's so many mitzvahs
and everything is for the same reason.
We always love the
so we should have in every generation
eight of those
we should have witnesses, wonders. We
should not
forget for a year and play like this
like him. It's like this a that's going
to want to deny the existence of God
won't have the ability to do it cuz
you're going to tell him you
that happened thousands of years ago.
But if we make these reminders in the
right way then you
something that could be alive today.
And that's the way to go ahead and to
deny the for. says the
if somebody purchases a for a coin.
For one measly
who
he puts it on his door then it's
and he's
what the idea of the is
through doing
of
what we get is
what we get is a
in the
and the trustworthiness of the
which is really the of
says the
being that
was something that was so critical. It
was such an important thing for us for
future generations. So
wanted that we should remember it. And
now we made sure we remembered he gave
us 19 in by
all of almost all of them associated
with the
with the seven days of
but in addition to that he said
constantly constantly remember
what we put on
what are we remembering? We're
remembering
right you remember
to
he asked him that I don't understand why
do women not wear women we should say
what do we wear
say
it's
boy right let's not forget that. So
what we put on
because we're trying to wrap this
concept on our hand and we're trying to
wrap it between our eyes, right? On our
hand connected to legs, and between our
eyes connected to my head. And then we
put it on literally on the door posts of
our house. And then we say it twice a
day, constantly remembering it see us
mitzrayim, it see us mitzrayim. What's
the avoid of remembering it see us
mitzrayim? The avoid is because through
that we remember that created the world,
and knows what's going on in the world.
And
who's
this
and
is the detective
and that being that it was all
forewarned that every single thing
played out exactly how
had said it was going to play out. So we
remember that I meet this voice Moshe,
which means that I meet this of
these are this is what makes a yet. It's
this mitzrayim is the core principle of
and it's for that reason says the
it's so critical, it's so important to
remember it see us mitzrayim. The man
continues skipping all the way to the
end. He says when I need some
of the some of the mighty the Nissan
to him you say that
this
we spoke about already many times. We're
not going to go back into that, but this
is the part of the that we need for
right now. And that is is the reason
there's so many that is mitzrayim is
because our
is very much
contingent upon the miracles that took
place when the left mitzrayim. The truth
is everyone knows this and then the boy
The repeats this idea in many many
places. Just want to mention two very
very
We know that I did this I mentioned
twice in the
The I did this I mentioned in
parshas
Yes, right? Say
and it's also mentioned in parshas
Vayakhel in Torah. In parshas it says
Why? Why do you keep
because
I shall make this
I shall make this I
>> Why do we keep Shabbos? It's zecher
l'maaseh bereishis, because Hakadosh
Baruch Hu created the world in six days,
he rested on the seventh, and when we
rest on the seventh day, we're
remembering the fact that Hakadosh
Baruch Hu created the world.
Shamor es yom haShabbos l'kadsho
sheishes yamim ta'avod v'asisa kol
melachtecha uvayom haShvi'i
asher dibarti avadecha v'amasecha seches
v'shocher v'chamor uv'chol behemtcha
l'maan yanuach avdecha v'amasecha
v'zacharta ki eved hayisa b'eretz
Mitzrayim vayotzi'acha Hashem Elokecha
misham b'yad chazakah You know what it
says you don't say this in Kiddush, so
you don't remember this. al kein tzivcha
Hashem Elokecha la'asos es yom haShabbos
So the Ramban in Parshas Va'eschanan
brings from Ibn Ezra who was very
bothered. He had a stira. And he brings
it from the Rambam in the Moreh Nevuchim
who was also very bothered. He had the
same stira. That in Parshas Yisro the
Torah says that why do we keep Shabbos
zecher l' maaseh bereishis ki sheishes
yamim asah Hashem es haShamayim v'es
ha'aretz And in Parshas Va'eschanan we
say v'zacharta ki eved hayisa
b'Mitzrayim, it's mashma zecher l'tzi'as
Mitzrayim. So the Sifrei and Ramban,
which one is it? Is it zecher? Is it
zecher l'maaseh bereishis or is it
zecher l'tzi'as Mitzrayim? So the Ibn
Ezra and the Rambam and the Moreh, they
all struggle very much to come up with a
pshat. But says the Ramban the Ramban
says v'al lo yoisif lo yimar b'avur
hayoisisi es Mitzrayim moreh al Elokim
Being that Yisroel Mitzrayim is the raya
that is a Elokim kadmon mechadesh
chofetz v'yochal k'sheberashti like I
was mefaresh already al kein amar
b'chein im ya'aleh b'vavcha safek al
haShabbos if you're going to have a
safek about Shabbos
which is really of story of creation. If
you're not sure about creation, tiska
remember mashero and it says mitzrayim.
Remember what you yourself saw by
mitzrayim.
That's the right. So says the that's the
case. Beautiful ocean.
The mitzrayim say shabbos. What emerges
is shabbos is it says mitzrayim. And it
says mitzrayim is shabbos. You know why
shabbos is it says mitzrayim? The reason
we observe shabbos is not oh, so I could
remember mitzrayim. The reason you
observe shabbos is to remember
what it says in the torah. But you can
say
what it says in the torah. You start
thinking
like the
what's the torah friend? It says
mitzrayim. So inevitably by keeping
shabbos you're going to end up by it
says mitzrayim. So shabbos is it says
mitzrayim. And it says mitzrayim is it
says shabbos through knowing it says
mitzrayim you're going to come to
shabbos. Another place that the says is
very
and this is right by the
introduced himself to man for the first
time.
What did
introduce himself as?
Right? Wow. This is the introduction
that what?
Saying good say better.
I'm the creator of the world.
Basic creator of the world. You know
what the right is? I share it
you just saw it all happen. I am that
God. I am
that made all that happen. Because
mitzrayim is the right of the world. The
reason there's so many
is because our whole comes from it says
mitzrayim. It's an interesting thing.
You know, the Layla Seder, what's the
avodah? What's the avodah? So, the
avodah is we got to tell them
who Layma. The avodah is we eat matzah,
we don't eat chametz, and we do all the
mitzvahs de Oraysa, and even so many
mitzvahs de Rabbanan. And why are we
doing this? Why are we doing this?
They'd be mocking to think the reason
we're doing this is
Thank you, Hashem. That's why we're
doing it.
Right? We always have to give shvach
isn't that the theme of the Layla Seder?
Yeah, it's for sure one of the themes.
It's for sure one of the things to give
to Kadosh Baruchu, but that's not the
iker. The iker is what we're doing is is
to remember Yitzi's Mitzrayim. It's to
inculcate Yitzi's Mitzrayim in our
bones, so it should be real to us
because through that we're going to get
the chizuk and emunah that it is that we
need. You know, people sometimes
travel, you know, from one end of the
world to the other end of the world to
try to,
you know, understand
the mysteries of life and
But the truth is the Torah told us what
we're supposed to do to remember. We're
supposed to over the parsha of Yitzi's
Mitzrayim, and we're supposed to
understand it, and we're supposed to
pack it into our brain. And by us doing
that, we're going to get the chizuk and
emunah. The night of the Seder is a
night of giving Of course, how could
Now we we were taken out, so of course
we, you know, we lift the second glass
of wine. And when the
You have them. I got it. Of course,
that's something that we need to do. But
that's not the avodah of the Layla
Seder. The avodah of the Layla Seder is
we got to tell them
who Layma. It's remember Yitzi's
Mitzrayim. We do it every single day.
When we put on tefillin,
we kiss the mezuzah,
when we say the third parsha of
every single day, it's
And then on the Layla Seder, it's a
seven-day or an eight-day boot camp of
Mitzrayim,
Mitzrayim. every sandwich that you eat
involves master and it's just it's non
stop second time because that's the one
time a year where we have to drill it
into the kitchen and over there it's so
that if somebody violates he violates
he's even going to be chorus chorus is
like probably deserve
yeah because our faith is contingent
upon this this is so so critical but
says the look around you going to see
the second time everywhere and you want
to know why you see
everywhere
this is the reason you know I was
thinking one of the things we say by the
say there is
shall
right it's something that we deal with
why does that come into the the
what's
welcome the he shall
this is
into the
so like we're giving recognition the
fact that
saved us then so we have to say thank
you for everything we have to give you
know
for the whole because they're always
I
think the
deeper than that it's you do
write some one of the
that when he thinks about the fact that
exists as a nation
when he thinks about the fact that we
are
today he gets a bigger than
that when he thinks about all the and
the floors that took place at the time
that you didn't laugh at me try
he said the fact that the Jews who have
been so persecuted for over 3000 years
are around to tell the tale and all the
people that persecuted us are footnotes
in world history he said the second of
the moon that he gets is so crazy he
said more than the
when he thinks about try it's a famous
line that writes in one of the
avoid of the there is it's the of the
moon and Yaakov Emden said, you know
where he got amuna from? When he used to
be mispallen in this inyan. The hisha am
the love of his saying of the world on
him. Right, every generation the Em da
malenu koli saynu akodesh baruchu
matzilenu meadom. In a certain way, in a
certain way a person can come to the his
of amuna that he needs. A person can
arrive in that place from thinking about
the hisha amda. Like Dovid Hamelech
said,
amuni, I got so much nachama from the
tzaros of klal Yisrael. A Yid sometimes
is in galus and you know, you're sitting
by the leil haSeder, right, in the
Warsaw Ghetto or wherever. And you know,
he's not holding. He's not He can't even
think. The hisha amda can get you to the
same place. The tzaros, the Warsaw
Ghetto is the is a raya as the baalei
oilam. And that is your idea and that is
mashgiach and that is a baal yichudim.
Right, it's the same raya. It's the same
raya. The hisha amda plays so much into
the depths of the theme of what it is
the leil haSeder. But anyway, this is
the inyan. The inyan is we have a chiyuv
to remember yetzias Mitzrayim and the
Ramban says the reason we have a chiyuv
to remember the inyan of yetzias
Mitzrayim is because our entire amuna,
our entire faith our entire amuna, our
entire faith is predicated on that.
Either way, this is just a again, it's
an excerpt. It's a rather large excerpt
of maybe the most famous Ramban al
haTorah. You know, when the Chasam Sofer
wrote in his tzava'a that Chumash,
Rashi, Ramban
you should learn and you should teach ki
hu rosh emuna omen because it's the
foundation of our amuna. There's no
question that in the pen of the Chasam
Sofer there was a little wink wink, a
little shout out to this Ramban. This is
definitely rosh emuna omen is the
foundation of our amuna. The Or
HaShulchan Aruch talks about the
foundation of our amuna. Either way,
with this we'll conclude today's daf and
parshas bo.