Menachos 76

Today's and we are at the Mishna on the top of the had to be rubbed 300 times and had to be beaten 500 times. These are not exaggerations, real numbers. So every single ma had to be rubbed 300 times and beaten 500 times. The tanakama said that the shifa and the rubbing and the beating was done while the was in its raw state. It was in the state of says it was done after it was already der every ma was made up of 10 loaves. We spoke about this yesterday that contrary to conventional wisdom the wasn't one or one cracker or one cake. Really it was made up of multiple loaves. How many? 10. upon him with the exception of him and the used to bring every day. They were not 10 loaves but rather 12 says right all were really made up of 12 loaves with the exception of the which was 40 breads but really it was four sets of 10 and the Naza used to bring together with his boys. So we'll see a lot more about that in a moment. But first the Mishna said it was rubbed 300 times and it was beaten 500 times. How exactly did this happen? He would rub it one time. Beat it twice. Rub it another two times. Beat it another three times. Repeat that a 100 times literally. And now you're going to have 300 shif and 500 bas. So if you look at the way the brighter presented it the shifa to bas on a three to five ratio one shaft to bates another two shafts and now you have three in total and another three. It's three to five. Do that 100 times. you're going to end up with 300 and 500 asked who very often asked questions to the that really didn't have a good answer to. So wondered he said that when we say rubbing it means moving it one way or going and coming back. In other words, if I go there and back is that one or is that two? When exactly the took place said it was done while the was still in its raw state of said when it was already says he means but not or perhaps he meant it was done even though the mission is a little unclear but in the brace it's more clear says it was done so according to the it had to be done according to it had to be done the second part of the Mishna was a an important between and regarding the classic what the Mishna refers to as they were made up of several loaves the question is how many Rabuda says they were made up of 10 loaves mayor says 12 loaves according of Yehuda your classic etc etc was made up of 10 loaves according to it was made up of 12 loaves now what was clear in the Mishna was that everybody agrees that there are certain that's mentioned in the that were 12 loaves and there are certain that are mentioned in the that were 10 loaves the was 12 loaves the that the used to bring every day was also 12 loaves the were made up of 10 loaves four sets of 10. The also made up of 10. The question then is not regarding the not regarding the not regarding the questions regarding according to was 10 according to a mayor was 12 says the said that the was made up of 12. How do you know that the said was also made up of 12? There doesn't seem to be any argument about that says the even though but we have was 12 was also 12. So the first mention that says the classic was made up of 10 loaves not like the not like the of the is all important but rather like the and how does he know that? So the says he learned it from just was made up of 10 breads. So is made up of 10 breads as well. Maybe learn it from him and soon is going to ask learn it from the but one at a time. So let's learn it from the upon him and say was made up of it. It was made up of 12. So maybe also be made up of 12. If you have a choice to learn from the or learn from it makes more sense simply in to learn from the rather than learn from the why because are more similar to the than they are to the upon and the gar is going to do what it's done so many times in this the gar is going to map out all the similarities now between the and the and the upon and prove its point that the classic is more similar to and does what it does. Number one is your standard is also a classic had oil like the did so they become possib couldn't have been brought now you can contrast that with the do not fit any of these criteria number one wasn't a brought the upon him it wasn't an adva it was there was no oil in the upon him it But there was no oil. It didn't become possible, you know. It would sit and it was brought on Shabas and it was brought. So clearly your classic is way more similar to the than it is to the I'll give you a list of similarities that the has to that it does not share with the number one is every was it was the classic with very few exceptions had the had were the was a very big that it had breads that were not matzah that were a classic is a tough it's not it's to the comes along with says the here you have a list of similarities in you have a list of similarities upon him. The list of similarities between the is longer than the list between of similarities between the thus we compare to was 10 was 10 as well. But the asks another why not learn and why not compare the to the of the that was the other example that the Mishna had mentioned that also has of scholars. Now the truth is that the gummor is going to ask that kasha right now but it's going to preface it with based on a very difficult because the truth is how do you know that the said you learn it from ask really doesn't say anywhere we just learn from here's the question if I know something in can it now teach me something else. So if the Garra is going to even attempt to argue that maybe we should learn from it's really it's contingent on a premise says the if you're willing to accept that it's something that's learned out from granted but at the end of the day it could be so why don't we say just scholars here should be the same says the makes more sense to compare the rather than to and here we have another list because there's a whole list of similarities number one the classic was brought by now there's a it was the topic of one of the daffin this week but meaning not a is a very unique it was brought to by has nothing to do with the it's a whole different type of so why are we comparing it to that the classic and the is the ma was something that he had to bring every day it was brought to just like the carbon was there's also another thing unique about the had to be brought in two halves as opposed to a and they weren brought in two halves piggle this piggle by pickle by the there's no pickle by the not just that the and the couldn't be brought to it could be brought to as opposed to which was brought I'll show you a list of similarities between the and number one was the same shear of they both had a kiish they were both kadash again as opposed to the which is they both had matzah They both didn't have any. They're both as opposed to that is a tuffle to the both have a they both go on the and by the way says the and this is a longer list. This is a longer list. Why are we learning from? We shall learn is from and even though there are so many similarities between the and the there's actually more similarities between the question is so why don't you learn from that although it's true we mentioned a whole bunch of similarities to and a whole bunch of similarities to the but there's one similarity that seems to resonate the most and that is at the end of the day the was brought by it's a separate para so if I'm going to learn which was brought by by not someone not necessarily the I'll learn it from the which also was brought by someone not necessarily the as opposed to the thus we're not going to learn it out from I mean said Romeo helped just the opposite. Romeo said the classic wasn't 10 loaves but rather it was 12 loaves. Obviously Rome doesn't learn it from the he obviously learns it either from the or from the says the at this point already the arithmetic is rather straightforward. He learned it from it was a longer list and he doesn't hold it yet. He says no it makes more sense. This is a longer list. Let's learn it from there. And if he holds you can't learn from them, he's going to learn it from the upon him. Why didn't we say the list of of similarities between the and the is longer than the list of similarities between the and the upon him? True. But there's one nuda of similarity between the ma and the a mayor thought was the determining factor and that is that both at the end of the day if I could learn from kadash or kadash from makes more sense learn thus learn the from the and do not learn the from the a little bit And then we'll speak out. So the mission said that were made up of four sets of 10 and well. How do you know that and the zeros of the in the par of the carbon the uses the word which is plural even though the seemingly is discussing one carbon. Clearly it's inferring that there's another carbon that has the same that has with similar must be referring to the that the used to bring when he too brought another he also had and just like the with so even though the is that there's supposed to be 40 breads of 10 four sets of 10 each set was prepared in its own way one was one was but they were right it was four sets incidentally the sug of carbon is the next so next was starting so we'll see a lot more about that then so was supposed to be 40 breads but that if you did four it's okay frankly how could four be okay no I mean of course it's supposed to be 40 but one of each is also is is that after the got his breads, he had to give to the in fact it's ara thera says very very clearly that the tire the says that you had to take one of each 10 so four out of the 40 ended up going to the kay so the kash is how could you have four? If you have four, how you going to be mounted for truth? What's the big deal from each one? You're going to take off 10%. The problem is when the describes the true says and the word suggests it has to be complete that you can't give a a part while it was still dove. You're right. Once you bake it at that point, you can't just cut off a piece cuz what they did was they would it while it was 40 breads. You can do whatever you want. But it's also okay to have four breads. If you have four breads, how you giving truma? You would have to give the truma while it's in the state of any that has too many breads, too little breads. Meaning you got you're off by the number. It's okay. The next one's what we need. Then a zero says too many or too little is not good. Argue with a price says it's true. There was a price. It's not like the time this price says the cost has a different list. But the pan come in this ba not the holds that the that has too many or too little is also culture. So it's true is not like a but there's another where it's really and in that has the thus it's not that is not like has a supporting him in a different similar if the maf was baked one but it's okay my time because the describes the maf as a mat and it says to suggest Even if it's only one matzah, it's okay. It sounds like the only reason it's okay is because it says, but if then it would be okay with the said that also one is going to be enough. You don't need 10. As long as you have four, one of each, that's enough. But you don't need. So how could Rafa say that the only reason one matzah is okay? Because it says mat. It's clearly not like has a case where it says matz and their one is also okay. says the ple you have to say that argued with Rahuna argued with what said in the name of and according to Rahun it can't work was trying to say only by the where the says do you have this one is going to be okay but by the where it says matzah mole rafa would argue with and rafa would hold that it has to be 10, four sets of 10. And if it would be only one, it would not be okay. Excel. So we just learned a gum that discussed how many loaves each ma had to be made up of according to Yehuda 10. According to Ra 12 stating that the Mishna said that there are some cases where everybody agrees 10 or 12 and the 12 the and the used to bring everybody agrees was made up of 10. So it's interesting this idea that the uponim was made up of one of the themes of this according to mayor as a result were made up of but was certainly it was made it was says it's a it's actually something that has an interesting ramification and just a little bit of that everybody's familiar with the misha So when you sit down to eat a suda Friday night shab you break bread but not one bread two breads it's what we know as the to the shabas you're supposed to sit down to two loaves of bread because the p says it says that on shabas the m didn't And as a result, Friday of Shabas, two portions of man would fall. So they didn't they would go out on Shabas and they would find alab that there wasn't just one portion but two portions simply to accommodate for the fact that tomorrow Shabas and on Shabas going into the field and collecting money will involve some form of Shabas. So being that on Arab Shabis you had two times the normal amount fell as a result to the incidentally the say that the reason we take it's not just to the emphasis on to the miracle of the it's a so for example is len right there certain things that we do to remember certain miracles The idea over here is is we're remembering the miracle of the brings that says that even though the mitzvah is a mitzvah but said that because what we're doing really when we're taking is is we're remembering the miracle of the miracle of the specific miracle the played itself out in Shabas therefore everybody takes this is something we're all familiar with what we're not all familiar with is the next line said, "I saw break bread on a at a shabas table." And what he did was he was he took two breads, picked them up, he made a bought, but he only cut one of the breads. He said that even though it says in the but it says it's only two, but when it came to eat to eat from two breads, you could eat from one bread also. Had a different meaning. What does that mean? He means that he did exactly what Rav Kahana did. He would take one of the breads only. He would cut it, but he would cut a very very big piece. He would cut a piece big enough for the entire suda. So instead of cutting a bunch of small pieces, he would take one very big piece and that's what he would eat from the entire doesn't pass. It looks like you're so hungry, you're starving that you need such a big piece of bread. Wouldn't it be a little bit more fine, a little bit more able if you would cut a a little bit? He told him being that I don't do this the whole week. I'm only doing it on I don't think that makes me. So the bottom line is the brings in stating that the gar brings two with one with and the other one through how exactly they would pick up the two breads but he would only cut one did the same thing but he would cut a larger piece of bread the way Rashi explains the right here in Shabas but there's another mahal And that's the raj learn a little bit differently. The Rashb says that did what Rashi says he did. He took the two he made the but he was he said it's only the has to be to but when it comes to actually eating it actually cutting the bread no for that all you need is one says I don't think did what rashi says he did not mash that way I think did something else means he cut both breads so he didn't just cut one kala he cut two kalas and if there were multiple kalas he would have he started cutting all the kalas on the table so he made a at every he and that's why they told him told and looks very hungry. This is why he has to cut all the breads on the table. He can leave something for tomorrow. Why do you have to cut everything? And then he told him according to there's no everybody agrees that even though there's it's only with regards to the in terms of how many breads you're supposed to physically break. you break one of Kahana just started cutting a piece of bread and had an interesting minute he cut a bigger piece of bread but the point is one kala he only cut one of the kalas the way the raj was learning the words meaning's meaning was fundamentally different meaning was to break one of the zer's meaning was to break both of the and the truth is it's very very important to know whether we follow rashi or we follow the raj You know why? Because if he was a So if Rashi is in the way he understood the Gmorra that there was really nobody agrees you're only supposed to cut one of the okay then there's nothing to debate. But if the it comes out it's and then would be like if would be like then what should come out is when you pick up your and you say you're supposed to go and cut both of the so what's the take a look in it says You're supposed to take them both in your hand and you're supposed to cut the bottom says that's only on Friday night. But during the day you're supposed to cut the upper says this is all based on sight. This is a a well-known that Friday night you cut the lower day you cut the the upper. The bottom line is what's clear in the weren't like rashi and this was the of it was the of the only difference in was to cut a bigger piece but the bottom line is you only cut from one of the that's the has to be but when it comes to actually being that's all but then the point is you're only supposed to cut one of the two breaths take a look at in his argues says, "But I don't agree." Is that really what you're supposed to do? You're supposed to cut both breads like the learn also learned to that way says the when the gummor says used to cut means he used to cut all the bread says the way Rashi learned the garra that he cut one big piece says why did he look like because he cut a big piece according to the I understand he every piece of on the table. So yeah, looks like he's very hungry, but he cut a bigger piece used to cut sounds like the entire table. It sounds like in terms of not a larger piece. Bottom line is is the like he very often does. Not like the he says the is like the and the like the bottom line is you're not supposed to cut only one of the you're supposed to cut two of the so bottom line supposed to cut one you're supposed to cut two the is one the brings two it comes down to really a very basic between if you take a look at the mish brings the he says And then the says that if you want to be like that and you're just afraid it's too expensive because now you're going to start cutting a lot of over the course of every meal you have to cut two. So he gives you an says the make three big three small ones. But the bottom line says the is like the not like the not like the not like the not like the not like it's interesting that this [ __ ] is brought down in the mav the iss of course the safer that the grow regarding the hogim of the vaguen and in the mav they bring that the vaguenos the used to be to And what he would do is he would break he would cut both. But not only would he cut both, he would cut both. He would do this every sudo. He would do this as well. says that there's a well because he followed the which the we spoke at says the says so he would end up cutting six over the course of the shabas and the had another his and then the says one time there were many sitting at and he went ahead and he cut all the that's the way the learns it but the mser throws in two things number one the mser says that the gun used to cut both at the same time number two the mser says that in addition to the rajbas versus rash there was a cabalistic as well he did it aloya so what's the zya so it's above my pay but if you take a look at the mavs they bring on the side the lash zoya and the tune zoya and And there's a lot of cabalistic sources that all say that just like on Shabas in the Bikto there was a that had every single year on his shabas table is supposed to have the emissal says and the the on the side of brings this held that the zy is supposed to be taken literally and as a Eden have based go to a rabbis especially you know that has to tile a lot of had the rabbis would have read to you the he says exactly how you're supposed to do it and it's based on a fact there's an idea that you're supposed to have but the said benagrais Isaac they said you know what the understood desire means it doesn't mean you're supposed to have what it means is every suda you're supposed to have two and you're supposed to cut both of the way understood the way the rajas every suda you start off with two and then you cut the two in half you cut them into two so every suda you're going to have four times three sudas is 12 that's how you're going to be mud kawas So words that Rizel understood is meant to be taken literally. You're supposed to sit down at aud supposed to be 12 at the table. The said that's not what it means. It doesn't mean you're supposed to have what it means. You're supposed to have two but you're supposed to be the two and as a result and they bring him from one of the said that I'm right. You know why? Because the way I'm learning said it's the same with desire. What do you mean? Is it two or is it 12? The terror says it's two but you're supposed to cut both. The way the learned the way the supposed to cut both as a result two really is four times three sudas you end up with 12. But the way that learned you have a steer between the nigla and the says it's supposed to be two and says it's supposed to be 12. And the goen said that if we can reconcile the niga without turning it into some heij is that's the proper way to learn it. So the goyan held that his in was right and the way every could be on his on his table. this idea of is by taking the the cutting them into two which the held was the right but the bottom line is I'll just tell you we're speaking about and we're in the spirit of digressing so just two fest just the market and that's it no rate on it the first is the which is in from all places the context over there is the is discussing someone that doesn't have enough money to buy and shabas so which one is says If there's no light in the house, he has money for he doesn't have and he also doesn't have what's more important in other words or says says says the says the very big that the was very careful was very it said that if you have a question of ord says you know why because you don't have to so it's a question of two that of because that's about pursuing If it was a question of would hold passes more important skipping there's to our even why this taz was the taz held for that we just learned It's not no it's a real mitzvah do not agree with the many on the that's the first the second is a beautiful that I saw in the he brings a kasha that he heard from his brother who told him that he heard this kasha from the it's not printed in but it's printed In he said that his brother told him that he heard this from the parenthetically the talks a lot about his brother throughout his cyer. So his brother was who was and the writes a lot about him in his he talks about what a prodigy he was and unfortunately he passed away at a very young age but he writes about the amount of that he learned and what he had accomplished and certain that he had written. It's just the that he had for his brother and and the apparently his brother had. One of the things he says is that when his brother was 11 years old, they started reading him already. The whole Europe already wanted a wanted and he said that there were that were pressuring his father. They were worried. They said they wanted him. They wanted a nail. They were putting down deposits. They wanted to make sure that they weren't going to lose him. This is what he was. He said his father once said that now he understands a we know that you say at a brisk and the ask this is a real asks it's out of order is when you become when you're 13 that's the so why is mentioned before it should be and then because first you become mitzvah and then afterwards and then afterwards he go to the kopa says father said now I understand we're giving the child the bra that he should be such a superstar he should be such a prodigy that they should be reading him before the mitzvah son was 11 years old all the already wanted to take him as a native so this was his brother so he says so he brings this that is why we We have because of Shabas there was a a double portion of manfell asked if that's the case if yontiff falls out on chabas or if yontiff falls out on a Sunday there was yontiff in the midbar too so what happened if yontiff was Friday yontiff was Friday and then came shabas there was no on chabas there was no month on Friday either we take on yont the reason there's yant because the month didn't fall on yont either that means the month fell on Thursday how much money had to fall on Thursday three as on a that falls out on an air of Shabas or Y that falls out on the day after Shabas you shouldn't need two breads you should eat three breads and why is it that you don't find and he says his brother told him that stumped himself he didn't have a good my brother says I don't know even asks the it's pretty dramatic. Either way was was very very impressed with this. He wrote a 20page of just either way on that note we have some office to learn. So the carbon which was a carbon was made up of an of but it came from three. We already learned the whole par about so we're pretty fluent in these. So we know already that it started off with three and from the three it got sifted until what was left was. So it was an is that came from three sons was two that was it also came from was it was 24. So if you think about it, the ratio of how much was used to how much it started with varied between the carbon and that's what this Mishna is is essentially saying in the one from three they got two from three they got one for each was 24 from 24 what's the and all this says the as it relates to the he came from it was had two things working against it. Number one, if you have it's very hard to get good refined flour. Number two, barley in general seems to have more. It's not so easy to get good refined flour. So the that was you needed a full three in order to walk away with one refined is that was going to be proper to use for the garbage. you're able to get a little more. Why? Because it came from didn't come from it had one strike. It was therefore you were able to take two from three. There you were able for each you were able to pull out a fully sorry because this had given number one it was and it was didn't have to be remove able to get a good from so early we discussed what would be if you had more than 10 loaves more than 12 right you had more too many loaves here we're discussing not too many loaves but more than anyone the right amount of loaves but it just came from too much flour or too little flour. If the amount you're supposed to start with was either too much or little that's all but yeah but that's going to be so they would take the three that was going to be used for the carbon you have to take. So how do you get from the three son to an east? So what they did was they sifted it but there were 13 thieves and that's a real number 13. It's but there's no magic no number of how many you needed was is to make sure that it was properly sifted. In fact if you wanted to buy the soil that's also good. You don't have to sift it. The point is the carbon itself has to come from that's how do I know that says you can even buy the all you need is as long as you satisfy that doesn't matter how it was done so holds was exactly how that happened says that there were two that were used one was da one was a a little finer. The other one was gassa. It was a little more coarse. And they would go back and forth. They used the daka, then the gassa, then the dhaka, then the gasa. Repeat after went through it. So it wasn't 13 utensils. It was two. It was a da and a gasa. They went back and forth and they did it 13 times until they did what they had to do. There were actually 13 of these and they all were the size of the holes were all a little bit different. So the one on top was a little coarser and as you work your way down to the 13th it was a little finer. Bottom line is through everything you're able to sift the problem you can buy. We learn from there and if you want to buy the shims you can buy the you don't have to buy the if you want to buy you can buy the says so you have you have a choice if you want you can buy the if you want you could buy the now this is describing the upon so we're talking about the soon you had the choice to do it either way I would think by you have that option as well that if you want to buy the you can buy it that way. No, it's over there meaning ordinarily you had to buy it. Ordinarily you had to buy it. Correction. Ordinarily you had to buy it. But you had the option to buy it if you wanted to. And the reason is because of money's money and as a result can sometimes become more expensive than so when it comes to soyra wants us to have the option of being able to buy and not necessarily have to buy whereas ordinarily by classic holds the you're supposed to go ahead and you're supposed to buy so by upon him. We're going to allow you to go buy the simply because it could be cheaper. And we don't have that. How do you know that? I mean, it could be very expensive to to be an orthodox Jew. So, we need a for this. How do you know says you know what the is tucked away? This is paras. The context is the main tells talk to the rock and when you talk to the raq it's gonna start flowing water and when you get the water you know what you're going to do is going to have what to drink the and the also going to have what to drink. Why do we care about the behemoth? This is the it's a it's tucked away. It's the last line in the seventh bar of what's the the s it's interesting the inv. So in his chisel wrote a a sha wrote a he was very he calls him he gives him unbelievable titles and he tells him like this just beautiful the poetry of the says before I I respond and I write the truva obviously he's responding to a question that was asked to him I want you to know why it took me so long to respond to your you shouldn't have I don't want you to think that the reason I didn't write it to you immediately don't have such a as big and think that it's because what you wrote to me wasn't it wasn't we have the recently says the medish that's the that's the Don't think that he says when I got your I was so it was the entire day I was smiling that's every line here why did I do this that's also always means I'm going to tell you one of two and three reasons that I He says, "I didn't want to the postage." Very, very expensive. And so I figure, why I'm going to pay for postage? I'd rather find someone who's going to you like this. I won't have to pay. And he says, we'll get back to this in a second. I was waiting every day, right? So I can find like a caravan of people that are going from here to there. He says in the interim I got I have to give a share every day all the issues that I have in the city. Then he says he wasn't well. He ended up in bed for a little while. I heard from who told me that after he's going to fell this troop is off the charts. bottom line is so say he didn't want to just stick it into you know the FedEx because it's very expensive and he says so so classic in parentheses right after he says I want to tell you that I have the says that and that's why holds there was a difference of how the were brought versus an ordinary what's the it's a mikra and on two rashes in the first and it's discussing the that were in the which were similar to the and the were made up of they were made up of silver and the Gmorra says why were they made out of silver why not make them out of gold so the Gmorra says says How do you know it's a bias? And we learn from this. The context is it's discussing a bias could become a what happens if a bias is vulnerable. It may or may not be the first thing did was let's get everything out of the house because you don't want everything in the house to become. So first let's get rid of everything and then the kay will pass it because until the kayask that it's tummy it's not t. So take everything out of the house before the so like this you won't have to ruin all your what do you see from here you want to know it's yesterday we mentioned with it's the same so there two is discussing the basket that was used for the two in the So it was made out of wood. Was it made out of wood? Why not make it out of gold? And for the mentioned in my so I want you to know that I recently had then he said he heard that of Berlin had the same and he said I was very happy that I was the I was so upon him was asking that discuss We just learned this second brings a different it's not it's learned out from the says that this rashi inash is really a it's actually a it's a from all places of what are you worried what what do you think is becoming you're worried about the clothing the doesn't become it becomes but you could always put in a mikvah make what then are we worried about the things that you can't What can't you bear says the if the Torah is worried about the ming that's even buzzly this is but the bottom line it's a it's a ready come was the one who said that you see from here concept of so the says that really if you're going to ask the cash properly it's more because after further review is really quoting it's a and that's where's coming from that's where is coming from so if anything it's learned from isn't it It's audi also wrote a cha on this and it's so the truth is that the very next chuva is a tru that we've spoken out in the which has absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about right now but that's something we've spoken at many times that's where the defended did his that he didn't write about and that's where he talks about and is it okay for that's this one is it's a much shorter chuva not nearly as well known but it's a short chuva and the chuva is an answer to his who asked him this that here you that says and here you have a brings okay how do you reconcile this each is teaching me something else the is coming to teach me that is willing to perform even a miracle even a nesh was willing to perform Because really the water that came out of the was so you would have thought right we just said why have to build why even have to be so big it was anyways so you know that we'll make the for so why are we making the nest for the behemoths on a level that will even perform a miracle for that's the emphasis that's the punch line that's the of this But also has a makar als has a kadesh. There's also a punch line that you don't know from here because this was all of is one. He has a house that has a shah it's he brought it to the kay the says I'm going to inspect it. This one he has a few pots. He has a dishes. So for that one that you need a different and goes through his why brings this here and why the brought that here but regardless that's the just to end on a digression from our digression. So we mentioned the so big is burnt out from here. ramifications, right? But there's an interesting there's another that's learned out from this and that is everyone knows the says that back in the day when people had beus in the backyard so you weren't allow eat until your ate and then afterwards it says so first you have to give the and then afterwards you're eat yourself the he says that that's only true when it comes comes to eating. But when it comes to drinking, you can drink before you give your animal to drink. Now the context over there very interestingly is the the is discussing now be after you wash before you make you're not let right you're not let unless it's so if there's no salt or if you need or if there's no knife if it's bring the corkcrew if it's then then maybe that's something you're then you're allowed to do it. So the gives examples of what's so one of the examples the gives you're allowed to say feed the animals. You know why you're allowed to say feed the animals right? Did the goats eat yet? You know why you're allowed to say that? Because it's because you're not allowed to eat until the animals eat. Don't try that at home. And then afterwards says a person comes for us. You know what the is the is coming up tells Alza drink and I'm going to give you camels to drink as well. So what did she say first? First I thought it's just the opposite. I thought first animals are supposed to eat and afterwards you're allowed to eat that. That's only true when it comes to it's not true when it comes to now the truth is that the to this is really a says if you look at these two I think it's but says not just one he says two brings this from he says have another you know my is the says and afterwards it says first the You have another from this number one from the fact that there was a n for the with the emphasis will make a and the second thing that you see from here is the idea that first and afterwards the SPD.