Menachos 54

Today's daf is Menachot daf nun daled and we will begin on the last line of daf nun gimmel amud bet. So, yesterday daf yomi began the fifth perek of Seder Menachot and the fifth perek begins with a halacha kol ha'menachot ba'im matza. All menachot had to be matza. Meaning, the breads of the korban mincha cannot have been chametz. If it was chametz, it was me'akev and the mincha wasn't kosher. With the exception of the chametz of the todah, some of the breads of the todah which were dafka brought chametz, the shtei halechem, and the shtei halechem which was brought on Shavuot. On that note, the Gemara brings a braisa from Rabbanan and Eima chinitzin b'tapuchin. The lachmei todah that had to be chametz and the shtei halechem which had to be chametz, you couldn't make them chametz using apples. Rather, they had to become chametz in the conventional means. So, either with yeast or some other form of sourdough, but it had to be leavened in the typical conventional way. You were not allowed to use tapuchin, apples. In the name of Rabbi Chanina ben Gamliel, it said that he argued and he said that you were allowed to make the lachmei todah and the shtei halechem chametz using tapuchin. that he heard in the name of Rabbi Chanina ben Chachinai regardless of machlokes Tana'im whether the lachmei todah and the shtei halechem could become chametz al y'dei tapuchin or cannot become chametz al y'dei tapuchin. Says the Gemara, also how did not the Mishnah in Seder Chometz that says tapuach she'riskayach, an apple that was crushed and was put inside dough and was put inside dough and now the dough became chametz, the dough rose. Ha'reizu assur, the halacha is that the karuvus is going to be assur. Now, this Mishnah is a Mishnah of the discussing an apple that was truma. Truma that's necessary with creates taruvos issues. Now, as long as you have have a sheer bittle, the little bit of truma would become bottle to the rest of the taruvos. The mission over here is discussing whether it was enough to be a little bit of truma that was inside the taruvos. Stating that the mission says that if the truma, in this case the tapuach, caused the dough to become chametz, the is that even if you have enough chulin to be the truma, how do you do the taruvos is going to be awesome. And the reason is because there's a cloud in taruvos that if it's nicker, the dover muar, even if it's technically bottle, but if it's nicker, if it's noticeable, if it's impact is felt and seen, then that negates the laws of bittle. And in this case, being that the tapuach is the truma, it's the dover awesome, so to speak, and it caused the dough to rise, it made this dough into chametz, thus its impact is nicker, so the halacha is that even if you have a sheer bittle, it's still going to be awesome. Says the mar come out, the shouldn't this mission be totally meaning of or trugen, meaning isn't it a raya that something that becomes are you there tapuach is considered because if you're going to tell me that something becomes are you there tapuach is not considered chametz, and it's for that reason that the total understand that when it's are you there tapuachin are possible to use as the respective then the halacha should be that it should be bottle because even though the dough rose, but if it's not considered in halacha, then why do you have this halacha that even if there's a sheer bittle but the says no, it's not the bottom name the government have look sure me I have it something called like so regular ordinary is the that if somebody eats on he's going to be caught then there's something called like so which is not coming in the purest sense that if somebody eats it on he's going to be caught but at the same time it is considered so that for example if somebody eats it he'll be kind of not it's not but it's not sure she says it's like an inferior type of but the bottom line is coming it's going to be it's the it's true that in that when it comes to understand if you would make them which they have to be it would be possible and that's a that all it it's not the perfect so it's possible and in the context of you wouldn't be caught if you eat that type of on but at the same time it doesn't mean that it's not at all from a standpoint if you like so and if somebody would eat that type of again something that became on he would be the point is that everybody agrees that on some level it's all be it so it's for that reason everybody agrees that if you have a saw that has a up of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even if there's a bit of even Now one of the kosher is shall be mixed up what's Kamita Malika Hafina that was and Kamita says that the most difficult Kamita to do was the Mincha and the reason is because the Mincha had two unique characteristics. Number one the reason is there was no oil there was no oil. The reason that there was no there was no oil it comes out it was dry and if it's dry it's much more difficult to do the Kamita. So what was the hard part of doing Kamita? The hard part was they had to make sure that the Kamita filled the three fingers that were the Kamita but you also had to make sure that nothing protruded because a Kamita can't be either or Kamita meaning if it's missing a little bit Kamita meaning if there's a little bit too much. So the Kamita had to be perfect. You had to take your three middle fingers scoop them and make sure that there was nothing protruding from the sides. Now what if there was something protruding so the Kamita discussed how the Kamita would take his thumb and his pinky and he would smooth it out. Now if the Kamita itself is of a liquidy form or it's at least it's it's somewhat moist it's not so difficult to do but a dry Mincha is going to be much more difficult. So the Kamita said that from all the very Kamitas in the kosher the Kamita the reason is because it was dry. Now the Mincha didn't have to be so hard and the Mincha didn't have to be so hard and the Mincha said a very big because even though the Torah says that just means you can't put oil but it doesn't mean you can't put any other liquid into the Mincha you could put water you could put water oil you can't like the Torah says but water maybe yeah the reason is the Torah says that why is there no oil? This is a and we don't want the clay taste carbon to be made with okay maybe that's a small in Sherman in oil oil would make the min Mahuta but my is not going to make him a hooter regardless of what he said that the commits of the milk is very difficult cuz it was dry if the terrorists says you can't put oil so you can't put in anything that you said no only oil you know what I put in but my you're allowed to put in says the at first glance would it be fair to say that this is and by is it just a local regional my latest regarding the house can I put water in or could I not put water in but rather it maybe it's a global Shiloh and that is the master of our commercial or master of our liquor my shall I use machine as we'll see this my latest right here these two will be the topic of today's so for now let's just go through it briefly and as we go through the will have a better understanding of what these two are but for now says the tomorrow would it be fair to say that maybe the is anytime you need a share of something so in this case you need a share of kindness you need a share of of a mix up do you look at the share right now or do you look at the share based on what it had been previously meaning the min her of the min her is made up of that's what the min is now you want to go ahead and add water okay but that's not the perfect the perfect min ordinarily has has has the case of there's no there's no it's made up of so we go ahead now and we say it's okay to add water now you have to down the share make sure you have the right do I look at the share based on the way it is right now based on the and the or do I look at the share on based on what it was supposed to be if the way I look at the share is based on its status right now which is made up of the Mayan, and the Mayan somehow gets included in the sheer comets that I need. So, then you would say that as long as this comets that I did is the right sheer. As long as it's not it's not everything would be fine. But if the way I look at a sheer is not not the way they are right now, but rather comets hang. The way it was, and the mental was before I added the water merely solids. So, it has to be a sheer comets of only solids. And if it's missing a little bit of solids, it's going to be or if there's too much solids, it's going to be so maybe that in and of itself would be a reason that I can't add water. Because once I add water, it's going to manipulate the sheer of the solids. And when we talk about a comets that's a comets that's I'm looking at it with only solids, not with any water. So, the time is to go perhaps this one between and what you're allowed to add water to the is it just a when the Torah says no does it only mean no or does it mean I can't add any foreign object? I can't add water to the maybe really it's totally a much bigger it's totally a all again the is going to go through other simpler applications of this but do I look at a sheer or do I look at a sheer as I look at a to extend I'm allowed to add water then you look at the sheer comets based on what it is right now. So, as long as right now it's not it's going to be fine. So, there's no reason I shouldn't be able to add water. But if I look at a that means the sheer has to be before I added the water. Before I added the water, I have to have a full comets of solids. Once I add water, I'm playing around with that. That in and of itself would be a reason that it should be possible. But says the the you look at it based on the way it is right now. So, based on that everybody should hold that it's okay to add water. What then is the question? get the my favorite Had to be it means dry in the sense that there's no oil. No dry means dry. You're not allowed to have anything in it. Regardless we mentioned over here, but there again to start them and how you look at it. Do you look at it sheer Kim or do you look at it sheer Kim? So the is going to digress now for an entire it's going to take us literally on to this in all Kim or we learned in a and this is a in the book. If somebody had meat of an she did he cooked it and because he cooked it the the meat the sheer the size of it expanded a little bit it blew up. Older animal that was cooked and when it cooked it shrunk. So the question now is is do I have a sheer regarding or not? So we know that becomes if it has a sheer of ordinarily when you talk about and you're thinking in terms of when it comes to because there's a few exceptions ordinarily you're thinking in terms of it. is not is not so does that mean that can't become if they have less than a what about when it comes to spoken a lot about that. What does it mean that it only can be but just to keep it simple let's assume a meat that cannot become unless you have a sheer of a so you had over here was is you had meat that either expanded or shrunk because of some of something that you did to the meat. The question is when I done does it have a sheer regarding do I look at it based on what it was before I cooked it or do I look at it based on the way it is right now? So says the Mishnah, it's a Mishnah in the second paragraph of possible English and the question is what's the right gears in this Mishnah? Rav Rav Mishnah commercial and the right gears in the Mishnah is commercial meaning you look at the way it is right now. If right now it's a bear it's going to be Tommy to my if right now it's not a bear it's not going to be Tommy to my brother Mishnah and we come up with a way to look at the way it is right now but rather you look at where it was. So if when you stuck it into the pot before you did anything to it if it had a sheer of bear then it's going to be Tommy to my if it didn't have a sheer of bear it's not going to be a Tommy incidentally if you look at these names a little bit more carefully so these were good good you have Rav on one side small on the other side Rav on one side and by Rav on the other side Rav by Rav both come be them of Rav the both probably plucked them and then you have Rav on one side and we on the other side either way so in the gears in this Mishnah is it or is it very big these are diametrically opposed understandings of the Mishnah do you look at the way it is right now or do you look at it the way it was previously but what makes you possible English possible didn't have a sheer of and then you did something to it and as a result it expanded and now it does have the sheer what's the price of the time when it didn't have the sheer if anything touched it it's going to be tough but we come from the time that it was already tough if something touches it it's going to be tough so you see clearly that you look at it you come you look at the way it is right now you don't look at it the way it was you only look at it the way it was if you done it with but if you looking at it we come then you look at the way it is right now. So isn't it a to those that hold like a hand? If you take a look at Rashi says that it's a race that holds like a hand. I don't know why only picks it's really a on and the and but the bottom line is it's a on the that holds you look at it the way it was see from here you look at it the way it is so the says deals and my mom going to hold that really this holds you look at it like a and being that it didn't have a share really I said to be taught the reason the says that going to be is only he said for the promise that is safe the price is the same is going to be true regarding the I have dealing with the level I understand people and and the beer in the cash is that people and both carry with them a chorus and that's possible The understands that the only time there would be a chorus for someone that is having is if he is over he violates the heavy on the level but if somebody violates the heavy on the level for that is not going to be chorus so if the says that this is true for and it sounds like from the steam have that will even be chorus which seems to suggest that we're dealing on a level we're not dealing with the so when the price is says it means even so because the way you look at the share is the way it is right now and right now it has a share I don't care what was I look at it the way it is this second like a hand like and and I understand the application to people and I really am but if you get to tell me that really look at the way it was like and but when we say we just mean and people and it could be a people and with do you have chorus when it comes to the rabbonim? So the Gemara says, "Aimo v'heimo d'tumah s'pickle v'heimo d'tumah s'nice." When the braisa says "pickle and nice", it doesn't mean the key of pickle and the key of nice, but rather what it means is tumah s'pickle tumah s'nice. And that's based on a mishna in Maseches Zevachim that says that the chachamim will go through tumah on nice and on pickle. So in addition to all the sugias that you have regarding pickle in Maseches Zevachim and Menachos, that injury to insult or insult to injury, what you also have is you also have tumah. Oh, by the way, if a kohen touches pickle, he becomes tamei. If he touches nice, he becomes tamei. Now that tumah s'pickle tumah s'nice, of course, is only d'rabbonan. And that's what the braisa is saying. What the braisa is saying is is that not only if it expanded the food there to a shiur beitzah, is there going to be tumah mid'rabbonan mikol lav ba. You're also going to have the tumah of nice because if it was pickle and nice, we're going to say that now it becomes tamei as well. Why would you think tumah s'pickle tumah s'nice is different than ordinary tumah s'nice? So could I come in and I would have thought "Hey, but tumah s'pickle tumah s'nice is d'rabbonan." Being that the whole tumah is a fabrication of the rabbonim, it's only it's only d'rabbonan. It's not a d'oraisa dig a dig. It's all d'rabbonan. They're the ones that instituted this whole tumah. On a d'oraisa level, there's no such thing as tumah s'pickle tumah s'nice. So kuli alma d'rabbonan lehavi d'rabbonan. I would have thought the rabbonan weren't machmir on their own d'rabbonan. Kamashma lan that that's not the way it is. The bottom line is we have a machlokes again between the gedolei gedolei amei roei. If something didn't have a shiur and now it has a shiur, or something had a shiur and now it doesn't have a shiur, and you want to know with regards to the tumah s'ochlin she'shiurei b'kebei, a mishna Maseches Uktzin, do you look at it based on the way it is right now, or do you look at it based on where it was? Some hold kim b'shein, you look at where it is right now. Others hold lik b'shein, you look at it where it was. Kind of like the Gemara having a forsh braisa. A braisa says that if I had something that didn't have a shiur and now it has a shiur, so it's totally solid. That's the posture. And it's going to be Why is it totally Firstly, if you look at it the way it is right now. Okay, right now it has the shear. That's why it's totally But if you look at it the way it was, who cares that now it has the shear? So, the camera you hold, you look at it the way it was, then it's possible. If you hold it the way it was, you're going to have to say it's possible." I mentioned nicer and bigger those that they rise bigger ideas. Thomas nicer, Thomas bigger. That's what I mean. And those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right ideas. Those are not the right I'll bring you a raya from the next part of that price. The boss came to show you the shear. This is the opposite case. Here the boss came and had the shear. It was all cooked because it cooked, it shrunk. And now it's a shear. So, what's the problem? The shear is going to be totally solid. But the shear is going to be totally solid. But the shear is going to be totally solid. But the shear is going to be totally solid. But the shear is going to be totally solid. the problem? The shear is going to be totally solid. What's the problem? The shear is going to be totally solid. What's the problem? The shear is going to It had the shear. You see, you look at it the way it was. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at it the way it is right now. You don't look at a sheer everybody is going to agree that was the first touch my the right from the first prize so mid rabbonim everyone's going to agree that mid rabbonim it's going to be Tommy keep leaking what's the mark like is you going to tell her by cashier there was a sheer with some mark and then it shrunk because of it and then it expanded again so it right now has a sheer but there was an interim time when it didn't have the sheer what's the shiloh another you say this shiloh the matter yesh the matter and so we're very familiar with the concept of the because it's a culture term and that is something that is possible to be used as a carbon it's possible carbon even if that so later goes away the carbon remains possible it takes on a life of its own it's what's known as the something that was once remains forever though now there's shilohs if something's is there a doctor when it comes to shalom plastic tomorrow we say regarding the laws of but that's the basic gist of the that once something gets pushed away even if later the circumstances that pushed it away no longer exist but it doesn't matter once you're pushed away you're forever pushed away that's the concept of of the regardless time is the in this case with something had a sheer for and now the sheer went away it's not there anymore and now something happened again that it suddenly does have the sheer so the shiloh is do you say that once it was once it was less than the sheer at that time it was I don't care that later was why because there's even though we're not dealing with it's not a even though we're learning but this is not a this is the laws of and she as it relates to but the point is is that just like this Allah of when it comes to caution is a lot of when it comes to Israel as well. In other words, I don't know anything about so once it gets pushed away, I don't care. As long as right now it has a sheer, that's enough to say that there's going to be a so the child is not whether or so much as it is whether or so we completely change the nature of the fundamental principle that these were arguing about. We thought it was a but it's still a but it's still a but but it's not but rather what it is is so much as it is whether it's possible to hold it's true and there's a concept of by you find it as well by the way but but in terms of is there anyone that holds the issue So you have a a sheer of that's totally You left it outside and now it shrunk thus it doesn't have the sheer anymore to hide it. It tossed you now it expanded again to make now the law has become What's the bottom line? You see that even though it had once shrunk and it was once at a point where it would not have been but once it's that law is you have all over again. In other words, so is it possible that this holds the issue and the law says in other words, checkmate. So the law says I'll bring you a rival to the original side. So again, we started off with the shilo of kim mosheyn or licho mosheyn. Why are we talking about the shilo of kim mosheyn or licho mosheyn? Is it okay to put mayim or is it not okay to put mayim? And that's where said that we know kimitzu was one of the kashas because the was dry. There was no oil, there was no water, there was no ingredient inside the right there. And as a result, it was very difficult to do the kimitzu. Rabbi said no, it wasn't so hard. Well, you can make it just as moist as you can make an ordinary one. I am not allowed to put shavin. Yeah, shavin you're not allowed to put. But you're allowed to put water. Of course, the one with the shilo. So the thought maybe the shilo is when you done the sheer minutes after adding water. Would you look at the sheer based on the with the water? Or do you look at the sheer based on where it was before the water? Is it kim mosheyn or is it licho mosheyn? If it's licho mosheyn then adding water would create a shilo of yosher. As a result, the suggested And the in the same breath, literally on the same line that's not what the shilo is. Nothing to do with that. Could be everybody agrees kim mosheyn. The question is when it says that From there the digress. We mentioned the shilo of kim mosheyn, licho mosheyn to another application. And that is the oktan where the mission actually uses the words kim mosheyn. And a big shilo in maron is the kim mosheyn or licho mosheyn? But the bottom line is is a shilo over there if you had oichel that needs to be in order for it to be tame. What happens if it wasn't and now it was mayim? It wasn't mayim or in the reverse it wasn't and now it is. So what is that impact from a cycle in the cave? I thought very simple, came by saying only came by saying but the cave replies this way, replies that way and the bottom line is the cave said that child is something else. It's a child of yesh the cave is sore or in the cave is sore. The cave says touch my or bring you a riot to this child of came by saying or in the cave by saying from a third area in the cave and that is the cave is of my sister. Says the mission of tormenting and our heart grows. You're allowed to take tumor or my sister as we'll soon see from pain and things are allowed to grow gross on behalf of dried figs but only the minute only way you're allowed to do it is based on minute. And really the the background to this hollow core which is a taste after in the sister's tumors is that there's really three ways you can take my sister. So my sister has to be 1/10. My sister mission is 1/10 of your produce supposed to give to the lady. Ezra can't believe it but you're supposed to take 1/10 of your my sister and you're supposed to give it to the lady. How exactly do you assess the 10th? So a 10th of what is a 10th mean? So it means if I have 10 apples, I have 10 figs, I take one. So there's three ways you can do it. You can do it either the minute, the meter or the mission. The meter would mean yeah, you have 10 apples, take one, give it to the lady. Nine for me, one for you. That's the way it would work. The meter would mean that you measure. You measure the apples and you take 1/10 of the measurement, you give it to the lady. 9/10 you keep for yourself. The mission would mean you wait. You would wait and you would take 9/10 of what you wait you keep for yourself. 1/10 you'd go ahead and give away. Now the truth is the perfect way of doing it has all said was either the meter or the mission. The minute is sort of the cop out way of doing it. But the minute allowed you to do the minyan way. And the reason is cuz at the end of the day, the numbers are all going to be very, very similar. It should pretty much work itself out, right? Because you're always being asked there from one man on behalf of another man. It's apples on It's apples to apples, right? Not apples to oranges, right? That's the way it's supposed to be. And as a result, so it whether it's midah or whether it's mishkal or whether it's minyan, give or take within very, very small room for error, it's going to end up being the same number anyways. So, even though the perfect way of doing it, this is important to understand this Sugya, is bemida ubemishkal, but you could do it really in one of three ways. You could do it beminyan, bemida, ubemishkal. Stating that, Zokh the Beraita in Masekhet Terumot, if somebody was being torem from te'enim on gregros, now te'enim are figs and gregros are figs. The difference is te'enim are figs, gregros were pressed figs. They're already dried figs. Once you have dried figs, the figs, they shrink. Rashi says that they shrink with a ratio from one to two. So, if you want to look at it from a size or a weight standpoint, one regular gezinte fig is going to equal two gregros, two eiskeklapte figs. That's pretty much the way it's going to play itself out. As a result, if you're going to do the ma'aser bemida ubemishkal, you're going to end up with issues. So, think about it. If you're going to take a regular fig and you're going to be torem on behalf of the dried figs, so for 10 dried figs, if you're using the mida or the mishkal, being that it's a one to two ratio, you're going to end up being ma'aser a half a fig. A half a fig on behalf of 10 is the wrong number. It has to be one on behalf of 10. It's for that reason the Hakhamim said over here you can't use mida. You can't use mishkal. What you have to use is minyan. And if you use minyan, it's going to be fine. Why is it going to be fine? Because then it's going to be one fig. It doesn't matter if it's dried or if it's not dried. At the end of the day, for every 10 you're going to take off one and you're going to keep nine for yourself. Says Zokh the Beraita, "Tormin te'enim al hagregros." But, here's the key word, minion. So, it's like the gregoris, but here's the gregoris when it comes to all shiyurim. Whether it's the shiyur of the coin, that's how this all started, or whether it's the shiyur of gregoris as it relates to gregoris, or whether it's the shiyur of the fruit as it relates to the laws of gregoris. You always look at it like gregoris, the way it was, not the way it is. Then I understand the gregoris why when you maintain all that gregoris, so you have to do it be minion. Because these gregoris were once regular gregoris. And if you're going to go and use gregoris, it's going to come out that you're not being gregoris the proper shiyur. But if it's supposed to be all shiyurim the way they are right now, then what's the problem of doing it this way? In fact, you should have to do it gregoris. You shouldn't be allowed to do it gregoris. Because if you're going to do it gregoris, you know what's going to happen? You're going to end up giving too much gregoris. You're going to end up giving too much gregoris. Because essentially from a gregoris standpoint, which is the perfect way of being gregoris. That's why this is important, because the only way to understand this gregoris. The real way to do it is gregoris. If you're going to do it now gregoris, it's going to be double the gregoris based on that one to two ratio. If that's the case, you're giving twice the amount of gregoris you were supposed to give, and that's a bad thing. You see, what do you mean? I give gregoris, right? I I want to give more gregoris. It's not so it's not so gregoris. Yeah, maybe with gregoris, tell me all the gregoris. Ask your local rabbi. But that's because there's no gregoris implications. But when it comes to gregoris, when you're dealing with laws of gregoris, it's not so simple to be gregoris. In fact, it's a gregoris. If someone gave more than a tenth of his gregoris, gregoris, the gregoris gregoris, but the gregoris itself is messed up. It's gregoris. Why? The gregoris is like this. If you give more than a tenth of gregoris, so let's say you have 10 figs, and you take off instead of one, you take off one and a half, or you take two, or you take three. So now you took off three figs, let's call it, right? So the seven figs that you left are not tevel anymore cuz b'chlav u'v'saimanah, if I took off 30% included in that is the 10% that I had to take off, so there's no issue to tevel anymore. Where you run into problems is that the three that you took off are not on ma'aser. Only one of them is ma'aser. And number one, number two, the one that's ma'aser didn't make the other two that are not ma'aser not tevel anymore. Cuz when you were tairum, when you were ma'aser, all you were being ma'aser on behalf of was the ones that were remaining. But the ones that I took off I never had in mind to be ma'aser for. So then nishtehina nishteha, they weren't they weren't left over in the kri so that we should say that what I took off was ma'aser on the its behalf. At the same time it wasn't chamishah on it. As a result, the ma'asers themselves are going to be tevel. If the ma'asers themselves are going to be tevel, so now I have tevel u'or with my ma'aser. So says the Gemara, peiros u'm'sukonim, whatever's remaining is fine, but the ma'aser itself is going to be m'kuko. Says the Gemara, elo ma'aser, this is a a raya that you go k'mo she'hay, because if you it's a raya that you go likemo she'hay, cuz if you go k'mo she'hay, then it shouldn't be okay to go ahead and do it b'minyan. Because by doing it b'minyan, you're being a marbeh b'ma'aser. Elo says the Gemara, ma'ay, k'mo she'hay is again telling me okay, so you have a raya for me then it must be likemo she'hay. Elo says the Gemara, take a look at the case of grogeros and the middle one is ma'aser in the reverse case. What happens if you're taking grogeros on behalf of tainim? So then you're ready to do it b'meisah. Feig says the Gemara, eya am bishlamo k'mo she'hay. Bishlamo if it's k'mo she'hay. Shapra, you look at it the way it is right now. I got why you can use meisah. Eliyahu am b'likmo she'hay. But if you tell me you're supposed to look at it based on the way it was, again you're a marbeh b'ma'aser. Elo says the Gemara, must be halacha this Tosefta m'saches trumah u'ma'aser u'gedolah skinan. It's talking not about ma'aser, but rather it's talking about trumah gedolah. The ratio by in Yaffa, the safer by in Yaffi. What's the difference if we're talking about trumagidola or my sir? It's a very big difference. My sir is 1/10. My sir has a scientific number. Truma is chitas patara as agreed. Truma is far as Yaffa. There's an iron rod. There's a concept of a banality. There's different ways of giving truma, but it's not a perfect science. Where it's a perfect science such as my sir, so then you have issues of being married to the my sir. You have to know is it kimoshain or is it likimoshain? That's what this whole aforementioned discussion is relevant. But says the gamora from this brice of the ratio and the safer together it's much that we're not talking about my sir, rather we're talking about truma. I mean that we're talking about truma, there's there's no issues. I why does the mishnah want me to do it one time this way, the other time the other way? What's the difference if I'm being mafres from the tainam or the gregers or the gregers on the tainam? If there's no science to it anyways. If it's anyways chitas patara as agreed. Says the gamora it's all in the realm, it's all in the world of iron Yaffa. There's a concept of being tied up in Yaffa. And then hanami it's not something that's make ready. But the gamora says I'm a safer. There's a safer that I have to honor the words of Rabiosi. He said I have a whole lot of esrogas of who is Rabiosi's father? Who is his the time of Rabiosi he says Rabiosi used to take 10 esrogas of 10 esrogas of altishin color and he would use that for the 90 that were remaining in the color. What's the kasha? Very obvious question. What's the kasha? The even trumagidola. If we're talking about trumagidola, esther my ability. Why is it 1/10? The brice itself said to the animal gregers. We thought truma means my sir. And my sir no it means truma. If it's my sir it has implications to our if it's truma then it's just a shiva of iron Yaffa. It has no real implications on our but the gamora says that has a safer and the brings a nice with an eight dollars of Rubble also Rubble name of father of YC who's discussing the same figs versus dried figs and he's talking about a tent. Obviously we're dealing with dealing with mice. So now we have to go and reassess everything we just said in light of the show you love Kim or Shane or Liam or Shane but the says it's not and although Rubble YC was talking about a tent where he may be meant was still true. But not regular true mature master. Rubble true master again, what's true master? So after the Rubble got mice he had to now take 1/10 and give it for true master. And even though his Rubble was 1/10 but as we'll see now his 1/10 is not like the mice 1/10. It's much more similar to the laws of true. The laws of true master mirror according to some sheet is the laws of true Rubble Tanya Rubble the Torah talks about true master true master Rubble which suggests two types of true. True master Rubble Rubble true master so the possible was not then true master Rubble and true master Rubble my the same true master Rubble tell us Rubble true master Rubble tell us Rubble Rubble Rubble Rubble number one Rubble made you don't have to measure it Rubble Rubble Rubble you can take your best guess in it and give true master Rubble that way. The same as true for true master additionally true master Rubble is tell us Rubble master Rubble so true master Rubble is Rubble master Rubble additionally Rubble master Rubble Rubble Rubble true master Rubble Rubble this concept of but the bottom line is just because Rubble Rubble YC said that Rubble Rubble Rubble in the same case Rubble Rubble and Rubble Rubble Rubble Rubble Rubble a tent doesn't necessarily mean that he was talking about mice Rubble. He too was talking about true Rubble Rubble thus you can't bring any Rubble but the Rubble says it's not true. You can still bring a Rubble Rubble with this. Rubble Rubble Rubble is that true? What did Rubble Rubble Rubble say? So Rubble Rubble Rubble was being Rubble true Rubble very true not true not my situation it was true my situation and what did he used to do what was his minute was now clearly he was trying to get it 110 and even though it doesn't have to be 110 you're right because it's but I mean just like but at the end of the day what was he trying to do? He was trying to get it as 110 and what was the 10th that he was doing? He was counting he was being a communion so that at the end of the day we could still be because the way it was sharper than I understand that he's taking 10 figs on behalf of 90 regular figs and even though based on the meter and the Mishkol it doesn't work but it works based on the reason he's working on the minion is because he understood that you have to based on the way it was so even though right now from a meter and a Mishkol standpoint it doesn't work but you don't look at where it is right now you look at where it was and once they were all and that's why he was doing it but if you look at because the 10 that he took were already as a result they were pressed figs if they were pressed figs it was half the size so he was taking it's like he was taking off five on behalf of the 90 not 10 on behalf of the 90 says the isn't it at the end of the day look at my situation it's not great so you have to look at the situation after this whole where we go down this journey of laws of my situation Mishkol my situation the bottom line is as it relates to the basic the basic of or look at my situation at the end of the day being that you could make it back, you have you have to work out the but that you can make it back to at the end of the day, that's why it's different. You do see from the that's only because the was transient or at the very least the status quo was something that you could very easily undo. But when you have a that you can easily undo, over there the bottom line is we had a over here of every time you have a it was once like this and now it's like that. like that now it's like this. You look at the way it was, the good old days, or do you look at it based on the way it is right now? We have three three completely different the first one was a of the you add maybe it's totally the second was with regards to the of and the third is a trueness and that is with being what happens if you from one thing onto another thing where one shrunk such as pressed figs which are shrunken from the way it is naturally and the other one is in its natural state. So the question is is from a from a standpoint you can't give too little then still going to be you also can't give too much cuz but my these were the three areas in but this is