Menachos 71

Today's is and we are 17 lines from the bottom of the two dots being learned. So we're moving along in the sixth par of parab discussing related to the carbon the and more generally the is so the on the bottom of said that there are five different grains that are subject to the isenas shua and chief it's in the that these are the same five grains that are subject to the laws of kala these are also the same five grains that are subject to the iss and that one can use to make matzah but the laws of kadesh apply to these five grains what's the you could have thought that the laws of kadesh apply only to and the reason is because what was matter it was the carbon and the carbon was brought from that maybe the is also only that the is but it's also the other four types of grain regardless the Mishna said that when we say that the ish relates to the five types of grains it means both the ofad and the ofadesh. So the better wellknown is as it relates to kadesh is the meaning a person is not allowed to eat from the until the carbon was brought. The lesserk known is within the world of kadesh is an isser. One was not allowed to harvest the tu in his field until the carbon was harvested in. And in the Mishna that the laws of rel to the mean the of kadesh and h is of kadesh. Now if you look at the Mishna inside the Mishna says meaning all five are and all five have an before the carbon the really it's mur from rashi and really from the sugia itself from the Mishna through the that we're going to start with right now that the gear that we have in the Mishna and the Ga that we're going to have the is actually the opposite of the way it's supposed to be. And really the way the Mishna is supposed to read is and essentially what the Mishna is saying is that the is or until the carbon was brought. We know the carbon is what was the or until because what was matter the of it was the of the carbon the carbon as we're going to see in the suga was done bel itself was brought beyan all carbon were brought during During the day the was done the night before is the second day pes which in is the first day in the night meaning the first night of pes is when the was done and it was the next day that the of the carbon was done but here's the point the point is that you're not allowed to harvest any until the harvesting of The that was ultimately going to be used for the carbon. When was that done? that was done on Pes which essentially means you were not allowed to do any up until Pes Pes itself you can't do and once Pes comes at that point you'll be able to do the because then you're going to do the of the carbon which will essentially be of the so the Mishna says you want to know what the is up until now of course you can't do it on PES. That's because it's one of the you anyways wouldn't be able to do it on PES and really as soon as the first day of PES passes you're going to do the of the which will be at that point the of the hence the Mishna says you want to know what the is until now the wording is a little bit tricky it's because number one P sounds like PES is what's M pes is not what's m what's It is the the of the carbon but being that the of the carbon was done immediately after the first day P. So therefore we could say P is anyways and at that point once you do the it's going to be M. So again the right is that the of is until the carbon was brought the really should have been until the of the carbon but the way the Mishna phrases it is up until but again the point of the was there's there's inside the not only but the and now is going to begin with the sources. How do we know that the and the are both all five grains? You have to change the gear. What's in the card said it says with regards to this and it says just like so again we have to change the gear is up until and it's true again for all five grades. It's learned that also from not but rather it's learned that from it says by and it says racious as well in the context of the carbon just like as the mission said iso mean so too when it comes to it's going to be all mean as well. So again the summary of the first few lines of the how do you know that the not only but it's learned out from learned out and is learned out from so the Mishna had said per the proper that the of is up until the was brought says Which stage of the carbon said it means up until the of the carbon said no until the carbon was brought. So going backwards says what does it mean that the carbon was brought? It's what we always thought it means until the carbon was brought. What does it mean to bring a carbon? So this is a it means you have to be the so until the of the sees for the definition of is there's going to be said you want to know what it means that the is until the it means until the now speaks out there's no way that the of the which was dumb would be m And this is really based on that we saw in the last several that's you would have to wait until the day. So what then is that once it's once the sun rises on at that point as long as the was done it's going to be m so you don't need to physically bring the carbon you need to do the but it's not the alone that's going to do the trick. It's the together with because if it wasn't there's nobody in the world that holds that is going to be. So really according to you know what the Mishna is saying is if you did of the carbon you actually have to bring the carbon says the let's see if there's a insight into this said and again we have to change the gear over and over and over again. are. So the Mishna said that there's an is and there's an but the expiration date of this is until when this is applies is different for the for the says that what does it mean that there's an of the and we know that there's an until p which really means until the of the well then I Understand? I understand why the Mishna made two categories. We made the and we made the we didn't lump them all together because they have the different the is the says what does it mean that means? Well, if that's the case, then it's not really two categories because the are both up until the Well, if that's the case, we shouldn't have lumped them together. And what we should have said was, so why do we have two categories? We should lump them together. If they have different then I understand, but if it's one, they're both so shouldn't we put them together? Now, Rashi speaks out. One second. Even though According to Rabina, the man of iss and the man of is also but it's not the same thing. And the reason is because we mentioned that even if you hold that means you still have to wait until it's until it's at that point there's nobody in the world that's going to hold that there's going to be as opposed to the you don't need as soon as you do the it's going to be okay which means that the are not one and the same that's similar they both don't require the but one the m and in the other it's together with that would be true if it was literally one's man. It's not really one's man. So Rashi says you have to say that even though it's true, it's not really one's man. But the maka holds it could be one's man. The reason it could be one's man is because what would be if was done right before it was done very very late at night. Well, at that point as soon as the is done, it's and now the was mira and it's m. So it's true in the event that the is done earlier in the evening and the is not happening for hours later. It would come out the are not the same but there is aims with the could be the same and that could be the same. So and now that's only a if you hold that it's only in hair if however one is two completely different then of course there's no but the bottom line is because of this of the says we have to revisit the says no way can hold what we think he held because it's literally from the you have to say that we had a a misunderstanding of the as a matter of fact they weren't weren't even arguing on this part of the mission. They were arguing on the Mishna, but a whole different part. Not the safet of the what did the S of the Mishna say? So the last line of the Mishna was the how do you know if something is considered part of this year's crop so that the is going to be M. So the Mishna said it's to if happened already before the then is m if didn't happen then the is not going to be m you have to wait until the next until it's on that line of the debate at this point what's the totally in the he said it's totally in the in Seriously. In other words, when we say did the happen or not happen, at what point would you need the to have happened in order for the to at what point of the bringing of the would you need the to have taken place? That's the it's the if at that point the took place, you're good to go. No, you would need the already happened. That's what the cave is. That's what they were arguing about. They were never arguing about the that for sure is not in the that's for sure in the actual it's that way because otherwise what then are they arguing about? They're arguing about a completely different part of the Mishna, the safe of the is it or either way says the told who lived in his generation. Now obviously if is talking to he's talking to the of his generation. If you look at the only reason the Gar is saying this were two and we want you to know the is talking to he's not talking about who was but either way this is what he told him. I do not want you to sit down. You cannot sit down until you explain the following thing to me. What do you need explanation? What's the mart to this idea that the had meaning this of the end and this idea that permeated really the last few this is one of the biggest in that but it's so asked what is the source to this there has to be some uh biblical source this is what he wanted to know so he told back mean you want to know what the is I'll tell you because the says caramel so this is discussing the and the pik says that the masurim had to be brought from now ov means that it's already ripened now from the fact that the terra says that it has to be brought from ripened. It sounds like that really you could have brought from something that's then no you have to bring from here's the point if anything that's not of anything that's not right is not part of the then it's part you can't bring the from that because if you're being m the you have to bring from the in order to be m so if the definition of the definition of that's included in this sug of the the carbon and the respectively is something that's fully ripened. Well, then it would be that the would have to be brought from and the reason is because if it's not of it's not from the and that's you have to bring from the to bear and the fact that the has to emphasize that make sure it's that really could be of it could be. So as long as it's as long as it was rooted that would be enough for it to be considered. But the Gar asks the very obvious question the B inserts the word. Maybe you're right from the fact that says had to be could be considered even if it's not but maybe it has to grow a certain share. What chair is so we know is like a magic number in these agriculturalis but the bottom line is how do you know is enough doesn't have to be fully wrapped doesn't have to be of but it has to be something is from somewhere else it says I'm sorry it says that after the carbon was brought. So he was supposed to count seven weeks. When do you count the seven weeks? It's from the time that the so the is the sickle began to do its thing with the standing grain. It's from that point. Now we see from here we see from here that the carbon had to be brought from something that you were able to use ash for. Meaning something that required a sickle. Now, why would the Tyra have to tell me that it has to be from something that requires a sickle? If it doesn't require a sickle, well, that means that it's already so not ripened that it's not even what do you see from that there is something that's not ash and it's going to be considered from the well. If that's the case, you can't tell me that the only time it's going to be okay is if it brought a schlish already because a schlish is ash. And you see from the fact that the says that the had to be brought from something that's ash that even something that's not is technically considered. So you can't tell me that is if it's because I know from that that no even if it's even if it's less than for sure be okay or for sure it would be considered from the well if that's the case what's less than that would be okay but the says and here too the inserts the same exact word maybe you're right you see from here that considered even if it's not but maybe it has to grow at least to the point where it's something again it has to be something if all it has is that would be okay but said I'll tell you why because it says from the fact that the says also it has to be from that was brought from standing grain was that really could be even if it's not standing grain again it's the same exact if we're telling me that the had to be brought from and that means something that's not of something that is not subject to the something that's not even that in of itself would be okay now at the very least is so it must be that this even something that's less than that would be considered and that's probably something that merely had but the Gmorra again says and again the inserts the word maybe right even if It's not a baram means that it's able to stand straight. Aam would mean that you could bend it. So maybe it has to have more than something grew but it's flimsy. You'd be able to bend it. It's not but at the same time it's more than always means this is the end of the conversation. So said it says from the fact that it says in the so again it says regarding and even though by the way is talking about so that's more of a just like the carbon was so it's really one but the bottom line is you see clearly regarding the in the carbon it's totally in the Shaz is going to be enough. But the has one followup question. It sounds like all you need is so even before. So why is not enough? Why is the so the says ra was told by raba meaning raba responded to papa and he told him he said it says the word bas take a look at rashi rashi says what does it mean has a whole bunch of one says another rashi says is that we Rapa used to make beer and because Rapa used to make beer so he had his like secret recipe he knew how to make in a way that uh other people didn't know and it's for that reason it he was known as Rashi says means it's a that brings a person but the bottom line is ra referred to our papa as he told him that the answer to your question is it says basodic means that you didn't just plant it but became a the only time it becomes a is when you plant it but also it's rooted but until the it's not a that's how you know that the is going to be either way what's the recap of the latter part of the how you know that once something is already it's considered and at that point the carbon is is going to be m it's learned from the fact that it says regarding Ironically, but has to be part and parcel of the which would mean at the very least there was already either way the or the Mishna now is going to discuss different related to the of the carbon. So we saw in the previous Mishna that just like there's an is of there's also an iser of stating that the Mishna now is going to carve out a lot of times where it was mut for one to do it was for one to harvest the even before the carbon itself was already harvested says you had to do with in a so is of the first fame. This is a field that's irrigated as long as it's deep in a valley, but although you're allowed to harvest, so you're allowed to go and cut the but if you want to make bundles of the that's something that's already not going to be okay. We're going to see in the reason is because you weren't allowed to bring the from it was considered inferior quality and being that you weren't allowed to bring the carbon from there you don't have the is only from where you can bring the carbon but being that you could bring the carbon from there it's not going to be a problem. So therefore you're not let go and make piles and that's for a different reason. that if you're going to be you may come to eat it that for sure you do have and it's for that reason the people that lived in they used to do and that was just said it's also that was we just said you're not allowed to do it but even though a person is allowed to before the has ripened. So says unripened if he's using it to feed his a lot more about this in the said when is this is only true if the didn't grow ash yet once it growlish it's going to be a problem says if you look at the and from there it's that as long as you start before it growl even if later calls it's going to be okay says is not limited to the he says no even if it growlish it's still going to be okay a lot more in this another time a person's allowed to do even before the is if he's doing it so if somebody has in English saplings and amongst the saplings he has and he wants to cut that it's fine and the reason is for the same reason we mentioned earlier cuz you can't bring them in from the adds. So therefore, there's no additionally in the event that there's a B and they have to have the of the and they need place to sit and the only way they're going to be able to have place to sit is by doing that's additionally if they need a so that too if they needs a place to sit. So you you'd be allowed to do and what's the reason that it's because of the mitzvah and being that we're dealing with a mitzvah says and it's for that reason it's going to be okay. Now the Misha just gave a few times where it's okay for us to do specifically this last list says the Mishna stating that all these cases now bundles you should leave them untied there's a mitzvah to bring the carbon from right then says so from standing graz So let's say you couldn't find you could bring from bundles there's a mitzvah to bring from moist you could bring from jo the mitzvah is to do the by night if you did it during the day it's going to be okay if the was not during the day tomorrow is going to discuss what is but the wasab regardless the mentioned a whole bunch of different is related to the carbon. It began by saying of a irrigated field that's deep even before the of the carbon you can't bundle it. Then the Mishna said that the were the meaning they were and the says you're allowed to do it says you're not allowed to do it that were not so now is going to discuss everything that we just mentioned you don't see every day said you should do the bring the carbon This is a little bit that you could do of before the carbon was bought except there's another that says that no the has to be the carbon which would imply before the carbon okay said you know what the is coming to tell me that there are times there are times not and it's totally am I being that I could bring the carbon from or not. If the answer is yes, well then it's going to be awesome. That's racist. If however I'm doing that I can't use as the carbon that's okay. That's and afterwards as and this is the to the first of the we said what's the reason? It's because he can't bring the carbon from there. So what it's because there's a that's coming to teach me that there is a head as long as it's not from a place that he can bring the carbon asks how do you know that the way was the accurate way maybe what the means that sometimes there's an exterior sometimes there's anx is not is it a mo from where you can bring the carbon nightmare. Maybe that's not the mim is not what's maybe it's the min that's if it's a min from where you can read the carbon what was the carbon brought from then don't cut the first for yourself cut the first for the carbon if however it's something from which you can't bring the carbon then so maybe the way you reconcile the is to teach me that is what's thear's terret the first part of the daffar says he can't say that because the mission already said that had a to it so once you have you have a at that point that's not an option how then must be that's the to the first line of the now the said so the they were and they were from the base. Now the part was the part was but the Mishna makes an emphasis and says that the were not the is going to begin we'll speak this out with a very subtle dick. It sounds like this was a situation where were not as if to say there were other times that the did things that were not okay and meaning and why is that even a sug if they said were involved in different controversial practices and we know the were on some and not on others. This is on the list of This is the background to the initial take on the man's who is the who holds that there were interesting observed and that sometimes and sometimes they were not and that's the case is of the opinion that when the went ahead and did it was does hold now it's but does hold in other words the is suggesting that the has because he's the one that has a called with the not for this controversial practice the problem is that is you can't be as a matter of fact is going to prove that held that the who were like the Mishna says did that which would mean at the time of so is the only one that we know has a of were and we also know has a that when the were based So is the we have a big problem. again says there were six things that did that were three of them were the following were the ones that were and this is another incredible they used to graft the palm trees the entire day which day P. So there's a major in fact whole per that discusses could you do you not do so we know it's a mic begins with this this before but the bottom line is this is a could you do literally can you work in your field so the would be the entire day even after the additionally They would bend. So what does that mean? It means they wouldn't be specifically if you look in the says they weren't between and additionally they were even before the carbon was brought. Now these three things even though they were but these things the following three things they weren't just but they were also that we know that's our additionally if they would prune tree carob trees and sycamore trees and shikma respectively that belong to hectish they would have ho from the pruned branches and they didn't treat it as being hectish. Additionally, they would make holes in their fields and their gardens. And the reason they did it was to allow poor people in. So they would breach the fence. So anything that fell would be able to eat during hungry years. tell you they would do this on you think this is a beautiful thing but this was actually also the reason were afraid that the may come specifically and go on top of the tree and beer and end up doing the bottom line is did three things these three things the three things that were they would be the entire they were and they were the three things that they was they were they were na from the pruned branches from the carob and sycamore trees of hesish and finally they would make these breaches and their friends to allow to come and take that fell from the tree on chabas and y these are the words now notice ra is talking about six things of three good three bad doesn't say a word about three were and Who's the one that has the we mentioned this five times in the beginning of this part of if these three things that you just mentioned were how come everybody doesn't do it? I mean the only people I know that do this or that did this were the if this was everybody should have done I have a different understanding of this messiah all six things everything everything was and the list is where there were two lists was three of these six and by the way my six is a different six as And went and he said first the three things that were not okay but not number two so far so good. Number three, this was however and the following three were the ones that was so far so good. Also so good. And the third one was they would make pay even onus. Why is that a bad thing? The reason it's a bad thing is is because pay is put on. So essentially they were being ruckus which is not really subject to the laws of from and those three things went ahead and the bottom line is we have over here regarding six things of and these six were divided into two groups three and three like the better three and the lesser three according to the better three were three things that were done the lesser three were things that were done according to all six things were done the better three were the ones that were and the last three were the things that the bottom line is in Yehuda's list we need holds that one of the three things that were not was they were did both like we have in our problem is the problem is that seems to hold very very clearly that were done. Well, if that's the case, can't be the town of our said that was the told me. Okay, so who cares? Let the town of the not behud since when is that a problem? Okay, I'll tell you why it's a problem. Because the Mishna is that on the and the only one we know who has a right we appreciate the after we see the so the only one who has such a is the if that's the case it sounds like the mission is if the mission is holds that was also not the how do you make sense of the missions of It says according to you mean you're asking a what's the you're bringing this as a as a how you going to now reconcile with our mission this says or the says well according to you has seven things why do you have seven things because the three things that That's that's one. So now already you have four and then you have the other three that the bottom line is you have seven said six. How could it be seven? You have to erase one. Which one are we going to erase? It's easy. Oh, we're going to erase everything is going to show. Now you have no to erase. But to make the we're going to erase and if we erase like this of the Mishna is if the T of the Mishna is so don't you have a isn't that you're not allowed to be no you're allowed to be said that's if you have that so obviously you're not going to have an issue the Mishna continued And the Mishna said another example that one is allowed to cut the before the carbon was brought is in the event that he's so is unripened for. So in the event that the is not ripened in that instance it's going to be okay. But the Mishna adds and this is going to be a big deal in the which implies that the only time it's even is if you're being the Mishna then continued and the Mishna mentioned with regards to the said when is it true that you could be that's only if the didn't grow yet and like we spoke out from Rash and the Mishna that if it started the before it grew then you can go v after it grew. But the point is it has to be that it didn't grow ashim said no it's okay even if it already grew a so whether it's only true if it didn't grow yet it's so shakas it's so unripened or even if it already grew a says we learned aishna over there and where's there so this is aishna is pa peric b michishna olive Ifa over there is discussing what's considered a heik in a field with regards to the laws of paya that would now make the two sides of the heik into two fields and that would require the owner of the field to leave not one pay but two payers. So we know what pay is a person has an obligation to leave the pay of his field for the anishn over here says that there are times that there's something inside a field that can be deemed a division within the field so that the two parts of the field will now be considered two individual fields which would be mai two different payers. So the Mishna says what's an example of things that are a streamlash says that's a body where rainwater has gathered or a path that the takes or a path that the takes or is like where again either the takes or the takes but only if it's and then the is that it be considered during the summer during the winter as the hab or if there's a area within the field that's completely fow there's nothing there the haneer or there's an area that was plowed or or if you have a field where you have one type of zera that's growing and now in middle there's a patch that's a that's something else or this is what we need in the event that somebody would go and he would be that would be considered a say as it relates to it wouldn't be considered a only time doing work inside the field would be considered aikes only if you went ahead and you did but if you didn't plow it all you did was was that in itself is not going to be a so the gives a whole list of things that and then at the end of the list the Mishna mentions one controversial item in fact it's a matter of debate if somebody He waser the he harvested the produce before it was fully ripened according to ra that's a hik according to the that's not a now what's the in ra the ram is that if a person is kiter in the middle of a field that can't make that area a heick to divide the field into two parts and the reason is because being kitser a field is part of what you do with a field and being that it's part of what you do with a field. So that's just it's not like some weird thing that you have in the middle of your field. If however you that's not considered and being that that's not considered. So now we view what's in the middle of the field as being and it's for that reason holds that too would be. So whatever's on one side of where you would have whatever the other side would also have say no even when it's not going to be considered if you plow with fields that's already a whole different but not says the rabbis this is going with the inishn what say in our that it's to be kitas before the carbon was brought or before the of the carbon nightmare and there was the is that true only if it didn't bring a yet or even if it was already a shim said what do you see for that as long as it's unripened it doesn't matter if it has a or doesn't have a either way it's not considered and that's why even though it says in the has to be it has to be but this not considered oh holds that the is not considered considered that is literally holds that of is not considered. Therefore that area that you becomes a heftic it's even though regular not what's the regular is hence it's considered part of what you do at the field as opposed to is not hence it's an anomaly it's not something that you do at the field in other words of is that is not it's literally from the fact says any example of shakas even if it's already is considered hence mayor and so this is what said over in the name of the great so the says so was sitting he said over what had said in the name of the great was there and he turned to and he asked him a question a question from in the event that again a person has a field and we're trying to figure what's considered a so if grasshoppers would go and would eat from this field. By the way, this is another or if ants would go and would eat part of the field or the wind would destroy part of the field everybody would agree that in the event that he was also would be considered a halfish but if he wasn't it wouldn't be considered a halfic. In other words, the price says that when it comes to grasshoppers, ants or wind making some sort of destruction, everybody agrees that's not a halfic. not now said when the Bryson says who does the Bryson mean even though Rameor holds that ordinarily is a half but is not considered a halfsake and that's why even to what the said what saying according to that would be the case when it comes to but says and this is talking asking on what had said over in the name of the says I don't understand why would be why if when the said is considered a it's talking about whether Then I would understand why the BC is different. is talking about where it was being that it was considered a if it's considered a you would have to be but according to the name as recounted now by that said that is not considered even that means also holds that it's even it's not going to be considered well if that's the case I don't understand over there where you did a proper not considered over here where you didn't do a proper like it shouldn't be considered in other words said that this says that it's not considered a halfick is obviously ra he's the hakim Which means that even though Romeo says a shakas is considered a halfsick, this is considered a halfsick. And said there's no way in my mind to be able to make sense of this. How could it be a is a half sick as opposed to these things are not a half sick? Let's explain a little bit better. Why does hold is a half sick? Because it's not not a what do you mean? It's not it's just some strange thing. If the farmer goes with all his farming tools and he's not considered why because it's in a state of so you're gonna tell me that over there it's going to be different. It's not possible. There's no way in the world that that should be considered a myak. If this is not a myster then there's no way that's a my because that was done by grasshoppers. It was done by null, right? It was done by the there's no way in the world what must the terret be the must be that the only time mayor said that is not considered is when it didn't grow a certain stage yet where it was if it was late vlish so it's so unripened so that's not considered in the event however it was at that point the is going to be considered but if you're going to tell me there are many holes that the is not considered a even where it's a so if when the farmer does it it's considered when the should be considered exterior. So how would you be able to make sense of being in that case it has absolutely no and this is on what said in the name of the name which is that as if to say I think from this price it's he said it only where it would be considered it wouldn't be considered a half in fact Even a would be considered not to be a half sex either way. So the gamorra says that because of this you have to say raor that what meant in the name of was that not but rather just the opposite is goingud. What say? He said a when is it true that your letter beer before the carbon is brought that's only if you started but if you started after was already at that point it's going to be that's precisely like we just proved from the way we reconcile it must be hold and now we're ready we're going to say that was on thus is not just the opposite but asks one more it's true that you see holds that is not considered if it's but when did say is not considered that's the he only said it if you're being he didn't say it if you're being because if you're going to tell me you said it even when you're being then what would emerges in our Mishna that that there are really three shittas and in the mission there's only two shittas. What does that mean? So we made this when we learned the Mishna. We made the when we started the garish said you could be it was very clear that this is only true that you could be if you but if you be then already not. Now now commented on that. He said was he said but the ising that it has to be that there are really twoas in this meaning and are being in the not arguing with the now if you're going to tell me there areas that means that didn't say only where it was being he said it even if you're being why because a mayor said it will being he to make a distinction between Michael and if a mayor does then if that's mayor that would also have to be well if that's the case it would emerge then that there are three in the mission how so you could only be number one holds that it's true even if you're who probably being that didn't say the words is like is going to say even for but what's going to emerge is that you're gonna end up having threeas if you're going to have three in the now so what's wrong why can't you have threeas if you have three shittas so says I'm going to tell you what the problem is the problem is that says wherever he says the word is coming to be mafarish. If he says then he's coming to be but the word a masai is being mafarish and over here he said a masai. So if he says a mosa is being mafarish so for sure there's three shittas over here there's two shittas over here there's not three shittas if there's only twoas that means that means also holds only works if you're being that means it can't be because although they're both saying something very similar eerily similar they're both talking about this of being and not be considered but according to the who's being it's only true If you're being to be whereas according to it's going to be true or according to I should say in the pay it's going to be true even if you're being so first the thought that maybe is with shim and the gar said it can't be because of the under then the thought maybe ram is bashita's but the gar says it can't be because talking about even being and said which means he's being he's only saying it if you're So the says so came from and he repeated a lot of things that he heard init specifically from the great said that you want to know said wasn't going rather he was going and again he wasn't going because clearly holds that the only time is not considered But once it's at that point is not even he's not going said that the only time is not considered is if he did hold even so is he going like who said that even is not considered what's this also similar The case what we were discussing earlier if somebody turns his field into a leopard and he left rows of that were moist. So what's the case? The case is where somebody has a field that has rows and rows of and he went ahead and he plucked every other row. So he left one and the other one he was says that being that you have gaps of rows. Each row is considered an individual field and pay to give pay for each individual one. No, it's considered one field and you only give one pay. This is what we need to send. The only time is it's only if the things that you took out you took out. Now apparently when somebody was he would use he used says not only is but so if you took it out so then it's considered a half sick each row now becomes an individual field if someone's at the store and when people were they were after it was already fully ripened that's what you're putting you're not putting away something unripened you're putting away things that are ripened law in that case it's not going to be considered a heaps but what do you see from here says Ravimi you see from here that holds that if somebody is it's not considered meaning it creates a and even if it's which is exactly that even is considered not being where do you see because he said who eats clo so says that didn't because said it only where it's said it even where it's he didn't mean said only and he said he meant talking about it's bingo but asks one came he said a little bit differently used to say so is saying something different not than what said even though maybe indirectly he is but what said but what do you see from here you see from here that according to if somebody would go ahead and he would be even if it's still still the would be that you would be I'll call well if that's the case is being where it was already called right and by the way it's for sure more than we know only said his even then only but according to it's not yeah you see this of being but it's even where it's a situation where it's more than in other words according You see more than holds that the only time it's not considered is if you would see the held even more. So the says that according to this you would have to say the mayor would still be but how so that there's a concept of a not being considered even where it's not like reading the where it seems like it's only it's true even if it was called whereas according to it's only going to be if it was. So the bottom line is the topic of the very very last part of the was the next line of the is an idea that if someone's not considered in our Mishna was neg it's not considered in that instance it's going to be okay in the isa it's where if somebody does a in a field but it's not considered It would create a heftic in the field. So now this field would be in multiple payers potentially. What emerges is a whole bunch of different shittas. Number one, in our mission, it would seem that the only time is not considered is only if additionally is if is it true only if it was even if it was from the discussion from it would have seen that even if was even then it could be it's not considered coin to only if it was and accus where if it was already bish even at that point there would be a concept there would be a concept that in the event that somebody did some sort of could be it would render a heftic in the field but the bottom line is the latter part of the daf the majority of the daff discussed the which mentions different times where it's actually to do before the so in the there's also an but there are carveouts There are times that it's Mishna gave a whole list. We went through two of them today meaning number one there's an idea that a person's allowed to be whole discussion about and number two a person is allowed to be also a major in terms of the nuances of how you apply This Allah.