Menachos 17

Today's stuff is Menachot and we are 12 lines from the bottom of 10 Zion on the base moving along in some of the most of the stuff and not only but in say the culture. So the topic of the day has been the pickles specifically as it relates to a carbon so people means was doing one of the avoid so if it's a carbon it was if it was a it was putting the into the or and he had a to do or the carbon is not just that if somebody eats from the carbon behind however there's not going to be a a chorus we've seen during the course of these very long that the more accurate definition of as it relates to people is not that a was doing one of the avoid that the rather the was doing one of the avoid that the ocean is that the says that in the context of describing the avoid that the was doing while he had a people in other words carbon has parts of it that become motor once the avoid are complete if a was doing one of the avoid that are not there and climates she already Menachot and had this much of the climate is it would be now what at first glance would therefore emerge from the is that and are all materials that the climate and putting the climate climate and not Torah are also materials stating that we saw very important tomorrow yesterday with the tomorrow says that when it comes to a carbon only this week is matter and when it comes to a mincha therefore only that Torah is matter however we know is matter that tomorrow says being that it's a bullet however it treats it like a matter because it will not have to tell me but really if you want to be accurate only this week only that Torah and comments and the way are materials how then do you understand the idea that you can be doing carbon and if they're not materials and the criteria the prerequisite is the one and the so what's this that you can be doing so we said that you have to say some sort of wonders that even though they are not the matter but they're in the matter because the dam is the that's matter and carbon are all avoiders in the of the dam being that the comments and the are materials so the and putting the comments in the and the are avoiders in the matter which is the comments regardless however you want to say the one that you can say more simply also the bottom line is the of carbon the of carbon is and its counterparts and as it relates to people is not the fact that they are avoiders but it's the fact that they are materials now taking it to the next level and this is important for this morning stuff is that not only is the one of people that you're being doing a matter but the is that you're being doing a matter about the thing that the matter is going to be matter so in the context of a carbon are matter what they're matter they're matter in therefore if you do an also not also while you're doing the avodah that's matter to the achila basar, or if you machshiv to do an aktara mincha mincha while you're doing the avodah that's matter to the aktara, that is machsheves piggul. Where it gets a little trickier is when you talk about shfichas shirayim and zrika. That's where Chaim Volozhin is machshiv the avodah l'avodah that we spoke about at the end of Daf Yud Daled, the end of Friday's daf. But that's not for this morning. But the simple havana of piggul is that you're doing an avodah that's a matter and you're thinking about the thing that the avodah that's a matter is going to be matter, but you're having a bad machshava, a machshava zara. You're thinking that that thing that this avodah that's a matter is going to be matter, well, it is mutar, I'm going to eat it or be maktir in a very, very inappropriate way. I'm going to do it with the mincha or the mincha. That is machsheves piggul. Same is true for the mincha. The dollar avodah that's a matter of the shiyurei mincha, that matter being maktir the kometz or being maktir the levoina. So I'm doing the kemitza and I'm thinking that I'm going to eat the shiyurei mincha mincha mincha. Being that the kometz is a matter. Again, only the aktara is the matter, but it's an avodah in the matter. It has some yichus of being a matter and I'm thinking about the thing that it's going to be matter mincha mincha. That's the idea of piggul. This should be sorted out in the Gemara in the Chulin whether m'faggel b'chatzi matter or ein m'faggel b'chatzi matter. There's many applications to this machlokes the Mishnah in Maseches Menachos Daf Tes Vav. And now I'll have to say yes, it is daf mentions three. The Gemara brought a braisa that already mentioned the fourth, the most simple one. But in Maseches Menachos now is the case of a mincha. Most minchos had had a chelek of kometz that had solas and shamen in it that went on the mizbeach. And there was also the levoina that went on the mizbeach. It was the two aktaras together that were matter to the shiyurei mincha. Thus, each aktara for itself is a chatzi matter. So if somebody had a machsheves piggul while he was maktir the kometz and not while he was maktir the levoina, or while he was maktir the levoina and not while he was maktir the kometz. According to R' Meir, m'faggel b'chatzi matter, it's going to According to the matter, it's going to be pigul. It's not going to be pigul. It's that holds that the matter is matter. It's a matter, but it actually is matter half of the which half but it's matter half of the that's really the basis of because he holds that the matter is the matter A half of matter does nothing or at best it's only matter qualitatively it somehow diminishes the level the of but in terms of something physically being matter when you're only matter the nothing really happens. Thus the matter holds a half of matter is matter therefore it makes sense it could be the matter matter does do anything. At best it's matter but not more than that. As a result you can't be the matter stating that we saw that even though the matter hold the matter matter but they agreed that the matter is going to be it's only with regards to the matter they hold the matter matter possible it's going to be what's the reason the matter matter says that it's the matter the matter the matter maybe it's the matter some of the we spoke spoke about yesterday either way these have been some matter and today's might be the cherry on top. This might be the matter with the either way says the matter 12 lines from the bottom of the matter the matter the matter the matter the matter was being matter the matter and he was matter a matter at a time. Now literally a matter is a sesame seed. He wasn't being matter the sesame seeds. He was being matter the matter but he was matter the matter like the of a sesame seed. He literally took a matter at a time and he was matter. And he had a matter pigul while he was doing this interesting matter and the matter pigul was the matter to eat the matter in but he had a mind that he's going to eat kosher something actually call it and at the end he did something something something something something he was very patient and eventually he was mocked at the entire with the but every single was a something with a to eat the shirim in kosher something what's the is it or is it not says the of the of the of the also the also says the of the also it would seem to say at first glance the says that it's kosher he was the so if you are something you are the of the also the who hold the but at the same time it's possible who are kosher who's the third Rebbe Rebbe discussed if somebody would one of the not both one each one has a matter and he would have in mind to eat a half a of of the stay that the matter so Rebbe said that being that you only did a matter and in the matter you only thought about a here that is it's going to be kosher that's really what happened over here the is a matter because the is the is the you thought about a because what's the matter the is so it's literally Rebbe's case so that would be the that holds the kosher but the says till my come maybe that's only if you are what's your classic case of matter you are the and you had in mind to eat a of the you are a full and you had in mind to eat a full the reason it's a matter is because you are only matter together with the but at the very least you were doing a full and you had in mind a full of over here where you only were in the what that kind of maybe when did the say in the say that's only where you weren't begula. You only did a hector of the shul matter but over here even though you did it in a shul shon at a time but at the end of the day cumulatively it added up. So you ended up being machshiv in the entire matter. So now maybe the problem maybe it would be pigul. And finally that kind of come up Hashem and it's true that Rebbi holds that if you did one of the atzeres which is a chazi matter and you had in mind the chazi it's not good. That's also the chazi matter that's where you didn't finish doing the job. I will do the chazi matter chazi matter the problem maybe over here would be possible. Says the you're right. At first glance we thought that this three way on my room is totally in these three that the last few have been circulating around. The says no. I'm a pigul the matter of that says it's pigul in this case could be going correct everybody. The matter of possible the matter of the matter of meaning it is no that this is on my room has anything to do with the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter and also there's no to say that Rebbi has any application to our what then is the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter he was going with the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter what's the matter of his matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter to sit down and eat for a regular person a shul shon matter of time. Some people nibble on their food and therefore being that it's considered okay it's considered normal when a person has a shul shon that he's going to eat the shul shon matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter it's considered a shul shon matter of the matter because he was to eat the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of matter of matter of the matter of matter of the matter it makes sense in the world of the matter sometimes people are one shul shon at a time. As a result the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter of the matter so you did a matter of the matter of the matter of He had a machsheves piggul cuz there are achila bakach. It's regular machsheves piggul. Man of the possible the real achila. Man of the possible he says I'm also going according to everybody cuz over here holds derech achila bakach ve'ein derech actora bakach. And really the punchline is the ein derech actora bakach. By achila, we have the girsa derech achila bakach, but if you look in the parentheses, ein derech achila bakach. It doesn't really matter. What really matters is ein derech actora bakach. It's not the derech to be machtir something at a time. Being that you can't people are not machtir something at a time, you can't have a machsheves piggul while you're doing such an actora. Because in order for piggul to be chall, you have to be doing kosher avoidas. Asher yikrevu kol matirav. K'chartzoas kosher k'chartzoas pasul. You have to be doing a kosher actora. And being that it's not a kosher actora cuz ein derech actora bakach, nobody's machtir this way. The machsheves piggul never took root. Stayed in there the carbon's pasul. Why? V'havilu kimin choshel huktar cuz he didn't do actora. Because ein derech actora bakach. So because ein derech actora bakach it's not piggul, but also because ein derech actora bakach it's pasul cuz he never did a good actora. Man of the kosher d'viya kol. Man of the one that says kosher d'viya kol k'sava derech actora bakach. It is derech actora. So therefore he did do actora the coin even though he did it at something at a time. Ein derech achila bakach, but at the same time it's not derech achila. Therefore the actora is a good actora. The machsheves piggul is not a machsheves piggul. You have actora without the piggul. It's going to be kosher. Very simple. So this three-way machlokes has nothing to do with Rebbi and the Rabbanan and Reb Meir. Rather it boils down to derech achila bakach, derech actora bakach, ein derech actora bakach, derech achila bakach, etc. etc. Either way, says the Gemara, a classic. Again, this is a classic when you're learning Zvachim Menachos b'iyun. Amri says the Gemara, Charifi d'Pumbedisa. The Charifi d'Pumbedisa said a tremendous chiddush. They said hak a coin was being mocked to the coins. And while he was being mocked to the coins, he had in mind to be mocked to the Levona chutz l'zman. Said the Harif of Pumpedisa, it's pigul. Okay, the coin was being mocked to the coins and while he was being mocked to the coins, he had a machshava of pigul. What was the machshava of pigul? That he's going to be mocked to the Levona chutz l'zman. Says the Harif of Pumpedisa, that's pigul. He's doing an avodah of haktaras hakoymes. He had a machshava to do an achila chutz l'zman. That's haktaras hal'vona. Thus, it's going to be a machshava of pigul. Said the Harif of Pumpedisa, "A feel of d'rabbonan damye pigul machatzi mater. Even according to d'rabbonan that whole eima pigul machatzi mater." So you think at first glance this shouldn't be pigul because haktaras hakoymes is a chatzi mater. The koymes and the levona together make up the complete mater that is the haktora. How do you know when is that true? Eicha d'chisha b'vashirayim. When did d'rabbonan say the halacha of eima pigul machatzi mater in the context of haktaras hakoymes? That's if the machshava of pigul was in the shirayim. U'lavoda b'mosech mayim. But the coin wasn't thinking about the levona. Eicha d'chisha b'vav levona. But if the coin was thinking about the levona, k'ma d'chisha b'vekula mater dome. Over there even d'rabbonan are going to be moider that there's no problem of eima pigul machatzi mater because even though the coin wasn't doing the complete mater, but between the avoda that he was doing and the machshava that he had, he covered the entire mater. In other words, the Harif of Pumpedisa said a phenomenal chidush that's a game-changer in the lamdus of the sugia of eima pigul machatzi mater. D'rabbonan have a shita that if a coin was doing the avoda of haktaras hamencha, he was mocked to the koymes and had in mind to eat the shirayim chutz l'zman. So you'd say it's pigul. Said d'rabbonan, "No, because being that haktaras hakoymes has a counterpart known as the haktaras levona and it's the haktora of the koymes and the levona together that are mater the shira'im it's for that reason that this is a derabonon as a result it's not going to be pigul. Said the only time said their in precisely in that case where during that thinking about shira'im but let's say the coin was thinking about levona near the is it would be a pigul and there wouldn't be a problem with the I what do you mean again it's the same he only had the pigul while he was being to the he didn't have the pigul while he was being to the contrary while he was being to the he thought about being to the the is for you don't need that you should be doing the while you were doing both halves of this matter but if you were doing matter and thinking about the other matter that's enough of other matter in this pigul so that we can now combine we can be the matter that I have while I'm doing the with the that I was thinking about that together gives me the entire matter and that addresses the issue of the unbelievable all my said even though after arriving in the they call after the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the my love it sounds like that the of works in any one of the if you're doing one of the either what's the if you're doing one of the and you had a mind I don't understand but if I was doing and I had a mind my money then a problem with my love do me the of but it was kind of a lot of it could be as relates to the of their all you can do and have a as relates to if you're you'll have to have the both when you're being the and when you're being the but the point is if you're doing it maybe you can't be an why not simply because if you're then you can't be doing one and thinking about the other you have to be doing both always in order to be able to have the regardless the of that even according to the that so that if you had a while you were being the it's not unless you were also while you're being that's only if the was a lot but if you were in so you'll be the and you had a mind to be even though the are is a matter there would not be an issue of says the Gamorah you have to buy the and he said I want to tell you I heard from said that if a coin doing the he's doing that for example and he had a mind to be mocked at the love it's not and rub by God I continued he said that said that's only if you are in the the coin matter to do and that makes sense because the heart is matter that she write And even though it's only half but I don't know Mr. Sorry so it is matter I mean that it's matter you could be even in the over here where you will be mocked at the coin and you were thinking about that the coin love matter the over here the coin is not matter then there's no way in the world to be able to have this in other words said that I heard from just the opposite of the the said that if you had a to be Why you be mocked at the coin it's going to be even according to the that I have to I will just the opposite I heard from Mr. That said that even that holds going to disagree because only holds at the end of the day the basic principle of is that you're doing a matter and you're thinking about the thing that it is being matter that was the very important intro that we spoke up before this morning's because The only way the dynamic of are I'm doing a matter and I'm thinking about the thing that it's being matter the coin is never matter the I mean that the coin is never matter the so how could I be the about the so in your case even who holds is going to agree that I got to buy here's what I got to go to say in the name of I want to buy so I buy wanted to know the origin of this meaning what's the this was own or maybe heard it from his grace and Who was Rav Chizda's rebbe? Rav. So, I'm like, "Abaye, so Abaye tells Rav Nachman bar Rav Gadda, 'Oni Mari mishmei d'Rav, did Mari, did Rav Chizda say over this halacha in the name of Rav?'" I'm like, "In?" He said, "Yeah, he said in the name of Rav." It minami amar Rav Chizda amar Rav ein hakatorah mefagelus akatorah. Amar Rav Yaakov bar Idi bishmei d'Abaye. "Af anan ami tanino." So, Rav Yaakov bar Idi said, "I have a a postscript story, because I heard Abaye, after he heard this big chiddush, Abaye said, 'I'll bring you a raya from a mishna shochat um pasul um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um um The carbon that he had in mind to eat from his pigul kaveira kosh. Lecho me kaveira lo mochar. What if the kohen was bringing one of the kivsei atzaros and he had in mind to eat from the other? Chutz lesh mano. Then the halacha is ne'em ksheirim. They're both going to be kosher. My tamah was the reason lamishum the kivsei lo motar dedeihu. Being that each keves is motar the basar of its own carbon, but keves A is not motar the basar of keves B. So, if you're doing the avodah in keves A, you can't be mefagel in keves B. So, so too over here. The kohen is not motar the lechem so ein akatorah mefagelus akatorah. How could I have a machshavah's pigul in the lechem while I'm doing the avodah in the kohen? So, Abaye said, "After all this, I think there's a raya from our mishna, the last line of the mishna daf zayin amud aleph." But the gemara says lo chasam d'lo ikfu d'chad mana. That's very different. The two kvasim, even though they're me'akvei's ahadadi, so there is something connecting them, but physically they're not connected. They're two independent sheep. Aval locha d'ikfu d'chad mana, but over here with the kohen and the lechem, they sit in the same kisharis. Ki chad d'ami, I would have thought you should look at it as one. That's the chiddush. Kamashma lan, the bottom line is what we end up with is a machlokes between the Chareidi and Rav whether according to the the law is a feeling and according to Rav the thought it had a right from a mission we would like to Rav from a mission we would like what we left with is a machlokes we'll get back to this momentarily and speak out some rate but first another tremendous use I am rather I am not said I heard the following so I'm about to tell you what I want you to know I heard this from and it's so with the killer rashid says this next I'm about to tell you is as to me as everything else that I ever learned combined so this is like the most piece of rate I ever heard in my life okay we're waiting with baited breath Victor needs some serious background and to appreciate what appreciated the way if the lack of the lack of what say it to my voice he had a mind to be and people then it's going to be people so the previous was discussing where was not the and he had a mind to be that was not this rather I am not from rather he was discussing where he had in mind the two number one to be and number two to eat the says the Michael what essentially the of says the he had if I if the was that was which was the the let him just say that. Why do you have to have two why do you have to think both and let him just say he their I'm not going to be now if the is if the is the second thing that he said that I can be I I should have cuz I like to again why do you say both for then he doesn't need the first thing that he said and if he's coming to say two that's what so number one number two that's wonderful but that's really the way you have to read this the way explains it that means either one will be a if you have to it's a why do you if you have to why do you have to why do you have to why do you have to it's said you need both if you both and says the Gamara it's there's only one way to understand held like not like the the like the like the like the like the like the the but he was saying that if you take zero plus zero you end up with something if you take two that in and of themselves are not because because he was not because he was not because he was not because he was not because he was both to be mocked at the way the money. And does your money over here it's going to be piggle. Why? The shiny the postally max of because of you between that way that you were doing and the max of voice washing up and that you had, you covered the entire mincha. You will be mocked at the climates. You thought about that and you literally hit for the cycle. You covered everything. You got every single possibility. You covered the entire mincha between the that you're doing and the max of that you had. That's already a max of a spiggle. So you're right. He climates I want to ask no. He climates I want to ask I finished but he climates I want to ask being that between your and your max of voice, you had everything covered. That will be a max of a spiggle. Obviously, it's something that is so we do what we do says the 20 20 which is 20 20 he climates I want to ask somebody and he did it with the I want to ask so again he climates I want to ask so every case has its own nuances. You got to go through them carefully. He climates I want to ask I want to ask the piggle. Now, could that be true? The piggle? Of course not. That is 101. That is the backdrop of the matter. I want to ask matter so I want to ask piggle. I want to ask I want to ask I want to ask I want to ask possible. I want to ask piggle. I want to ask even that all. I want to ask I want to ask matter but they that it's possible. So the says however once you added in the bracha, is just a good question that you know, very often you could think and you know, once you're going to edit the bracha, maybe it is the edit this way, maybe edit it another way. The doesn't usually ask that question. He didn't ask ask the question. Now once we're going to go down this road and we're going to amend the bracha, then how do you know to amend the word pigul and switch it to passul? Lema had raised that pigul. Instead of changing the word pigul to passul, keep the word pigul where it is. Just straight change the word divrei kodesh to the words had raised that. The lema had raised that keep pigul where it may be and just say that the bracha is going going to be a mayor. So the bracha says tanu divrei kodesh as nuyah. The tanu said divrei kodesh. The tanu didn't say had raised that. Now you're going to tell me the tanu said pigul. The tanu didn't say passul. Pigul but passul michlal had raised that but divrei kodesh loy michlal and on that note hadranu alach. A fast the perek akoymes as I'm going to have to before we go by there. We have to speak at a little bit of rage just in case the double wasn't hard enough. So we have to do our histadlus and our contribution to make sure that this stuff is as wondrous as it possibly be. No, but all kidding aside, just one hora'ah that my brother Moshe shared with me last night, it's a kasha from Rabbi Akiva Eiger. It's a meseches Zevachim daf mem bet. The context over there is a very important mishna in perek bet shamayim where the mishna discusses a korban pigul. So you have a korban pigul. You did shchita amanas lecho basar chutz l'zmano chutz l'komo. Amanas l'haktaras emurim chutz l'zmano chutz l'komo. A classical a pigul 101. It's not a chatzi matter. It's not charifi d'pum p'disha. It's a very straightforward case of pigul. The mishna says that just because a korban is pigul doesn't necessarily mean that every single aspect of the korban, if one eats, will he be chayav kares for. There's certain parts of a carbon pigel that if he eats those parts he's going to be high of chorus. But there are parts of a carbon if he eats those he's not going to be high of chorus. And the mission says a little warm in high of a little mission pigel. A coin mints the high of chorus the high of a little winner or min high of chorus or min high of a little Messiah the high of a little warm the high of a little warm the high of a little warm the high of a little warm. So the mission gives a short list of parts of a carbon where if they're part of a carbon that's pigel which means possible the high of a little of chorus. But if somebody would eat that particular part of the carbon he wouldn't be high of chorus. Now what's unique about that group? What's unique about those that group is that group is considered a warm in high of a little material. So when you learn your day of chorus familiar with the concept of a little warm in high of a little material a little warm in high of a little material. Here the word means something else. In that context it means something that could be a little warm doesn't become bottle. Over here means something that has a matter. So any part of the carbon that has a matter. For example possible of a carbon has a matter. The damn is matter the possible a little warm in high of a little warm a little warm in high of a little warm the high of a little warm. These things do not have any material. And being that they don't have any material if somebody would eat any one of those things the high of a little warm is he would not be high of pigel. One of the things mentioned in the mission is a little winner. The mission says a little winner is a little warm in high of a little material. And being that it's a little warm in high of a a little material it's on the outside looking in as it relates to being a part of the carbon where if somebody would eat from it he would be high of chorus. Right to say the entire I don't understand why the mission assumes that a little winner is a little warm in high of a little material. It says to say it's like this. I know it's true that there were two of winners that were done with the coin mints two of winners. There was coin mints and there was a little warm. And that's possible that the chorus of coin mints was not matter the chorus of a little winner. How do I know that? Because the actora of the levona says that you can flip the order. You don't have to be matter to the comets before the levona. If you want, you can be matter to the levona before the comets. Even though the seder always mentioned this first, the comet was matter to the comet then he was matter to the levona. But really, if you wanted to, he could have been matter to the levona before he was matter to the comets. So from that standpoint, the comet wasn't matter to the levona. Thus, you can make the case that the levona doesn't have a matter. What exactly was matter? But says tosfos, I think that's partial. Nera says tosfos that although you can be matter to the levona before you were matter to the comets, but you can't be matter to the levona before you did the actual comets. So visualize the setup of the mincha. You have the klishores, you have the solas, shamen, you did the belila, the yetzika, you did the avoda that you had to do, and then on top of that you have the levona. Could the cohen before he even did the comets take the levona, do the liku levona, walk it to the mizbeach, and be matter it? Or at the very least, do we say the comets has to be done before the actora of the levona? Says tosfos, mekom omer koide matter comets vadai nera de en lachtera. It's partial to me, says tosfos, that you can't be matter to the levona before you do the comets. If that's the case, says tosfos, doesn't it sound like the comets is matter to the levona? Because if you have to do the comets before you matter to the levona, shouldn't by that by definition mean that the comets was matter? If the comets was matter, the levona is a double cheshul matter. So why does the mishna say if somebody eats the levona of the carbon pigul, he's not going to be chive koresh because it's a double cheshul matter. I think it's a double cheshul matter. It's true that the actora of the comets is not being matter matter to the levona, but the comets itself has been matter to the levona. Because you cannot be matter the levona before you do the comets. Thus, it sounds like the comets is matter the actora, right? Matter and matter. The comets is matter the actora of the levona. It's a cheresh davar she'eish lo matter. As I said to you. Says Rav Akiva Eiger, you have to be the same hazal. and this is a question. This is vintage places held in that you can't do that before the first place itself that the cells like it's it's not the same way that is considered but what was the question was I read to you the entire just to get the big picture very accurate material. Even though you could be the before the could become the second that I knew that before the first question to me says that you cannot be marked the before the actual says it sounds like I had no place to do for sure that you can't be the before the place held that way and he was pretty self-confident but only that I knew the keyword is near means I think I'm pretty sure that I'm positive but near all in the world of all of this is the clearly didn't have because I had a he would have brought a just like brought a in the beginning that you can't be that you could be the before you the if I had a that you can't be before the place would have arrived for that as well. Place I know you could be the BEFORE THE COULD BUT AS IT RELATES to being the before the I don't have a but that I knew I'm pretty sure that you could think I SAYS NO I HAVE A I have a what's the all of this is the same the same as the same between the and I thought I forgot all of that even according to but if the could was being mocked at the coin mint and he had a mind to be mocked at the coin mint, even according to the whole matter, but here being that you thought about the other coin mint, that creates the entire matter. That's enough. And the law is it's going to be a matter. Rav argued. Rav said just the opposite. Just the opposite. He said even according to the whole matter, he said even according to the whole matter, even why in the He said because the only time you could have a matter is if I'm doing a matter and I'm thinking about the thing that it's going to be matter. Over here you were being mocked at the coin mint and you were thinking about the other coin mint. That coin mint is not matter to the other coin mint. You could be mocked at the other coin mint before the other coin mint. It's not matter. So you're missing the fundamental principle of what every single coin mint is. So even who holds the whole matter, you still have to do a matter and you have to still have to think about the other coin mint. You don't have the matter relationship and as a result it's not going to be a matter. So what's going on over here? What's going on over here? You forgot the first matter what's going on over here? You forgot the first matter in the second matter. What was the first matter? If a coin was doing a coin mint, if a coin was doing a matter, not a matter to the other coin mint, that's what you were doing which is a full matter like it speaks out throughout because there's no counterpart when it comes to doing the full matter, a matter showing me doing and you had a mind to be mocked at the other coin mint. That's what you were doing. It's a matter of the other coin mint. The other coin mint says it's not a matter. The other coin mint says it is a matter. The other coin mint says it's not because they hold matter can't be a matter of a different matter. And being that the coin mint and the other coin mint are two tracks, that was the other coin mint and the other coin mint, it doesn't work. The other coin mint argue we pass like the other coin mint. The other coin mint hold that the coin mint you could be the other coin mint. SO THE OTHER COIN MINT IS GOING TO BE THE OTHER COIN MINT. How could the other coin mint tell me that you can't be a matter of the other coin mint? akolmes and akolmes al avoyno? Because the koimes and the avoyno don't have a matter the relationship. I hear it's a very nice swara, but if that's the case, how do you understand the in the mishna given alaha? The said very clearly that if the same exact machshava took place bishas akolmes, you were doing akolmes and you had a mind akolmes al avoyno it would be as it happens to argue we don't pass like akolmes. We pass like the akolmes. So it's a mishna that you could be mephago while you're doing avoyda and akolmes about akolmes al avoyno. What's pashut shaina Rav? Says Rav Musman Zogen there's a between the akolmes and the akolmes. The akolmes is not matter to the avoyno, but the akolmes is matter to the avoyno. If that's the case, I have A GEMARA THAT SAYS THE AKOLMES is matter to the avoyno. If the akolmes is matter to the avoyno, I can't be matter to the avoyno before the akolmes. It's also I need to be matter it first. What's matter to the akolmes? It's fake also. I'm pretty sure you're not pretty sure it's it's A GEMARA HOW ELSE DO YOU LEARN THE OF the of the of the blames darko sorry either way I don't know I closed the wrong gemara. So the mishna writer the rest of the daf is a little lighter. The akolmes amicha akolmes amicha somebody does akolmes lecho shidarko lecho ulahakto d'obel she'ein darko lecho ulahakto d'obel she'ein darko lehakto kasho if kohen is doing akolmes and he has a mind to do an achila whether it's achila achila but he had a mind that the kohen is going to eat part of the korban that's not darko lecho. Which part of that? The akolmes. Or or the or he had a mind to be matter to the part of the carbon that's not dark in the after. That's the sheer remnant of part of it was eaten. Part of it was put on the mizbeach. So if you had you flipped the order, the halacha is kosher. That's a place where the lesson says it's possible. We've had this already. If the coin got it right, but he had in mind because I is he didn't have a mind this year, that too is going to be kosher. Lecho zayis kosher every part of this mission of the gemara already discussed. In fact, the last line is a mafresh of mishna in the previous perek. But the bottom line is three halachas. Number one is a coin had a machsheves pigul, but it was lecho davar she'ain darko lecho or davar she'ain darko lehakto. Machlokes is Rav Eliezer and chachamim. According to chachamim it's kosher, according to Rav Eliezer it's going to be pasul. If he had a mind lecho davar she'ain darko lecho, lehakto davar she'ain darko lehakto, but he didn't have a mind le kazayis, here the halacha is everybody holds it's kosher. And if he had a mind a chatzi zayis of achilo and a chatzi zayis of aktoro, that too was kosher, even though achilo and aktoro each one in and of itself if you would have the proper share would be a machsheves pigul, but at the same time ein achilo v'aktoro mistafen. Amar Rav Asi amar Rav Yishmael, amar Rav Eliezer. Why does Rav Eliezer hold that if the coin had a machshava lecho davar she'ain darko lecho or lehakto davar she'ain darko lehakto it's going to be a machsheves pigul? Amar Rav Nachman amar Rav Asi, it says in the parsha of pigul "V'im hei ochel yei'achel mipigul zevach shlavim." And that of course teaches me "Bishtei achilos achas of midaber." And that's the makor of the machsheves pigul means you were thinking about achilo. It says "Hei'ochel yei'achel" "Shtei achilos" "Achilas adam achilas mizbeach." Lo emar lecho. And from the fact, as we'll see in a moment, that the Torah used the word achilo to describe aktoro, which is a funny word because you would think the Torah would say "V'im hei ochel" and then would say "Lehakto." The conventional term used in the Torah to describe aktoro is aktoro. Why did the Torah use achilo? Lo emar lecho. She'ain shomei'a achilo adam kach mechashev. described Haktara as Achila. The significance of that is to teach me that you can mix and match Otherwise the Torah would have used the word Haktara. It's to teach me that if a Kohen had a mind to eat a davar she darko l'haktir or to be maktir a davar she darko l'eichol even though you'd think it's like that. But the Torah referred to each one as Achila to teach me that it's okay Why did the Torah use the word Achila to describe Haktara? to teach me something else. To teach me that in and of itself that if a Kohen would have a machsheves pigul or utter a machsheves pigul more accurately and he would use the word Achila as opposed to using the word Haktara. Say he would say that I'm being doing this avodah and I'm going to have the mizbei'ach eat these eimurim kodshim min hamizbei'ach. Had the not used the word Achila, you would think it's not machsheves pigul because you used the wrong word. that the nusach of the machsheves pigul would have to be Haktara. From the fact that the Torah used the word Achila, that teaches me that the nusach could be Achila. because Achila Haktara because Achila to teach me a different The shaar Haktara is because Achila. because the Torah used the word Achila and Achila is always because Achila. So if Achila is always because Achila and here the Torah used the word Achila here too it's going to be because Achila as Rebbi Eliezer How does Rebbi Eliezer know those halachos? He uses Achila to teach me that you can mix and match. How does he know the aforementioned Halacha is that the Rabbonon news in Kimli Rachman in Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli in my Kimli Kimli two ways says the what's this ambiguous price of the time you went to the price of a if a coin shaft in the carbon in the head of mine to drink the blood the marker in other words the heart that makes sorry the marker to be marked at the bus what's the show between all these three things he's doing a double [ __ ] in dark of a car the is cautious that's the [ __ ] in our mission as a person says it's possible that if the coin just had in mind not to drink the blood the next day not to be the down the next day he had in mind to just leave it around the person says it's going to be possible after the time this is all part of the price of the time in the price of says no that that case of if the coin had in mind just to leave the down around the marker is also totally the same as the person the coin says that you don't need to go to that's going to be possible where is the coin it's going to be cautious says the person let's focus first on the person the person discuss the coin had in mind to leave the down around didn't have a mind to drink it not to be it he just had in mind to leave it there what did the person say it's going to be possible who is it going according to that hold that the only time something is bigger is if you have in mind to do an but in that's dark of a car the person says that if you have in mind to drink or to eat the down the marker it's going to be cautious how the coin is certainly if you have in mind to do nothing with the down it's going to be cautious how can the to do nothing with the down be worse than a to drink the down the to drink the down inevitably has in it a machshava have the down around so if having the dam around in and of itself is a reason for the carbon to be possul, then if you had in mind to drink the dam chutz as money, the carbon zachar should be possul. So, obviously when we use this possul, it wasn't going according to Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Eliezer Eliezer Rabbi Eliezer He obviously was going according to Rabbi Eliezer. In other words, Rabbi Yehudah was saying that according to Rabbi Eliezer that holds if you have a machshava to