Menachos 81

Today's daf is Menochis daf pay aleph and we will begin 25 lines from the bottom of daf pay omid base. So, the topic is the carbon title, which of course was a type of shlamim. The Rambam says that there were four minae shlamim. One shlomei tzibbur, three shlomei yochid, and the Rambam lists as his second category of shlomei yochid, the carbon title. The carbon title was unique for two reasons. Number one, whereas ordinary shlamims as all katzim tallim were nechalashnei yom avalaila, whereas the carbon title was nechal leyom avalaila. Additionally, an ordinary shlamim like most carbonois didn't have any breads that came along with the carbon. The carbon title had bread. Not only did it have bread, but some of the bread was chometz, whereas ordinarily you weren't allowed to be makriv any chometz in the Beis Hamikdash. In fact, there were 40 lachmei toda made up of four minim. Each min was made up of 10. 10 were chometz. The other 30 were matzah. The Mishnah on daf ayin tes on the base discuss different types of carbonois that have kedushas toda, but at the same time don't have a din to bring lachmei toda with them. One such carbon was temuras toda. So, what would be if somebody has a carbon toda and then he makes temuras toda? So, just a chazarah. What's temurah? Somebody says, "Hareizu ola." And then he has remorse. He says, "You know what? Maybe I shouldn't have made that animal the ola. Maybe I should have made the other animal an ola." So, he says, "Hareizu temuras ola." He changes his mind. He says, "Instead of this being the ola, the other one should be the ola." What happens? Says the Torah, "Vahoyo hu utmuraso yihye kodesh." The original animal is an ola and now the second animal is going to be an ola as well. Now, you're not allowed to do that. It says in the Torah, "Lo yamirenu velo yachlifenu." There's two lavin in the Torah for somebody that is over the issur temurah, but at the same time the temurah goes into effect, but it only goes into effect in the sense that the second animal that he just decided should be Kodesh Cham is Kedushas Toydo. So what happens if somebody was Mafrish a Korban Toydo and then he goes to another animal he says I raise a T'muras Toydo. So the Halacha is both of them are Kedushas Toydo. Both animals are now going to have Kedushas Toydo. Meaning they're both Shlomim, they're both brought on the Mizbeach, they're both Ne'echalin ba'Layla, but at the same time the Mishna said only the original Toydo has a Halacha that it comes along with Lachmei Toydo. But whereas the T'muras Toydo does not have a Halacha that it comes along with Lachmei Toydo. The Mishna gave other examples of how it would be possible to have an animal that's a Korban Toydo but at the same time it doesn't have Lachmei Toydo. So not all Korbanos Toydo had Lachmei Toydo. It's only the Ikar Korban Toydo that had Lachmei Toydo. But T'muras Toydo for example not. The Mishna gave an example of a Moiser Toydo or a Vlad of a Korban Toydo. But as it relates to at least the first Halacha of today's Daf, T'muras Toydo has a Din Toydo like all T'mura does, but at the same time Gzeiras Hakasuv that there's no Lachmei Toydo. Tonu Rabbanan Rabbeinu said Toydo Shenis'arev ba'T'muraso U'meiso. What happens if a Korban Toydo was Nis'arev with a T'muras Toydo? So a person said I raise a Toydo, then he went to another animal he says I want this animal to be T'mura of the original Toydo. So he has a Toydo, he has a T'muras Toydo. The two animals got mixed up. The person now is not sure which animal is the Toydo, which animal is the T'muras Toydo. U'meisa Achas Me'hen. And one of them died. So right now all he has is one animal that certainly has Kedushas Toydo. It's Ne'echalin ba'Layla. The problem is he doesn't know if it's an Ikar Toydo or if it's a T'muras Toydo. So Rabbeinu said there's no way to be Mafrish this animal. Why? Heichi Na'avid? Na'avid Lachmei ba'Hadol? Should he bring it together with bread? Dilma T'murei. Maybe it's a T'mura and the T'mura can't be brought with bread. It's only the Ikar Toydo that has lachmi toider. Lo in ach with lachmi bado, should we not bring bread? Don't we toider? Maybe it's a a carbon toider. So, here said that it's impossible if something like this happens to go ahead and bring the toider cuz one of on the side that it's a toider, it needs bread. On the side that it's a tumras toider, it's not allowed to have bread. As a result, there's nothing that you can do. The Gamora went and before it discusses Rab Hiyya's halacha in very, very, very great detail, the Gamora first says, "Let's just clarify Rab Hiyya's halacha for a second. He don't mean either am I alive? Are we talking about somebody that said "Hare alai toider"? As opposed to "Hare zu toider"? So, what's the difference between somebody that says "Hare alai" versus "Hare zu"? So, it's a Mishnah in the first paragraph of Sukkah from all places. If somebody says "Hare alai Hare alai shalom" or in our context "Hare alai toider", it's halachic on the gavra. It sounds longish. It's a here on the gavra to now bring a carbon toider. So, what happens if he says "Hare alai toider"? He's not bringing an animal as a toider. And then something happens to that animal. Bring another toider. If something happens to that, bring a third toider cuz there's a gavra to bring a carbon toider. Just like a person has a here every morning to put on this person now has a to bring a carbon toider. If somebody goes over to an animal, he says "Hare zu toider", he never took upon himself. It was never anything on the gavra in the sense that he has to bring a carbon toider. All he said was is that this should be a toider. What would happen if something happens to this toider right now? Nothing. If the toider the toider died for example, so there's nothing to bring. As a result, you wouldn't have to bring anything. So, says the Gamora, Rab Hiyya who said this kodesh that it's possible to have a toider that you won't be able be able to be macro because you're not sure if it's a toider or it's a tumras toider. If the case was where the original here to bring a carbon toider started with the words with a declaration of "Hare alai", then I think it's it's possible. Meaning there is a way for you to be able to bring this animal. How so? The It's a little confusing here the The point is let him go ahead and let him do as follows. He should bring another animal and this other animal should come along with bread so that although he started with one animal, an animal where he's not sure if it's a or it's a bring a second animal, bring that second animal together with bread and he should make the a He has to come If the animal that's alive, I'm not sure if it's a is really a then this new animal that I'm bringing, I want it to have I want the bread to be And if the original animal was a then that I want these breads now to attach themselves to the original animal but let the second animal be a in the Meaning being that I said and I have an obligation to make sure I bring a So it's reasonable for me to be allowed to be a backup So let this now be a backup for my my that I have when I said So the is arguing that said there's no way to bring this animal to bring this animal and then to attach bread to it. You can't do cuz maybe it's a and and if it's a you're not supposed to bring bread. But is the there's a way out. You know what the way out is? Bring the second animal and now bring bread and make a If the original animal was the then the second animal be a the bread will be its bread. If the original animal was a then let this animal be a known as a backup also known as a backup Now why can I bring a backup because I said I I so being that I have a to bring a carbon and if something happens to this animal that I was mafresh, I would have an obligation to bring another one. So, I can right now go ahead and bring a backup. Some mon of shoch, I can bring the original carbon, and I'll have bread, and I can make it work out. So, the Gemara says, "Lait shochi, you have to say the Amar Ha Reish of Rab Chiya, who said there's no eitza, was obviously discussing with a person never said Haray Lai Toida." What he said was Haray Zu Toida. If he never said Haray Lai Toida, there was never a chiyuv skavra. Thus, you can't be mafresh a Toida l'achrayus. You can only be mafresh a Toida l'achrayus if there is a chiyuv l'achrayus. If I'm obligated to bring a backup if something happens to the original Toida, then I can be mafresh a backup right now. And it's chaval and achrayus with Toida. But, if I said Haray Zu, there is no obligation to bring a backup if something ever happens to this animal, so then there'd be no makan for being me mafresh a beheima l'achrayus. Thus, Rab Chiya was talking about this is the clarification in Rab Chiya's point before we analyze it. This is not the analysis. This is just the clarification. So, Rab Chiya said again, somebody had an animal that was a carbon Toida, and then he made a tmuras Toida. So, one is a Toida, one is a tmuras Toida, they got mixed up, and one of them died. I don't know if it's a Toida or if it's a tmuras Toida. So, says Rab Chiya, "I can't bring this carbon Toida now. Why? Cuz if it's a real Toida, it needs bread. If it's a tmuras Toida, I'm not allowed to bring bread. Thus, I can't bring bread. Maybe it's a Toida that needs bread." Says there's nothing you can do. But, the Gemara clarified it's only an issue if he said Haray Zu Toida, cuz had he said Haray Lai Toida, there'd be a way around it. You could bring another animal with bread and make it tonight that the other animal is either a Toida or a Toida l'achrayus. Mon of shoch, I can bring it as a carbon Toida. I can bring the breads, cuz if the original was a Toida, the breads will attach themselves to the original Toida. If the original was not a Toida, then this one is a Toida, the breads will attach themselves to this Toida. Bottom line, that was the Gemara. Unruled the maidens may read the Gemara in Sukkah 100 and 100 and 100 says that wherever you find this line, "The maidens may read," Levi talking. So, unruled the maidens may read the told Rabbi, I don't understand. The lazy lechem, what's the big deal? Why can't I just bring bread? The bread never went on the mizbeach. Lachmei todah. Did the lachmei todah go on the mizbeach? No, we had a very severe zoyra kodesh in parshas tetzaveh that talked about the stay ha'lechem that it's as if it went on the mizbeach and Rabbi Yosef Engel in all his forums is very, very much me. How do you understand parshas shana dizain? Breads didn't go on the mizbeach. The minachas went on the mizbeach, but the breads, the the lechem that you find throughout maseches minachas didn't go on the mizbeach. The lachmei todah didn't go on the mizbeach. So what's the big deal? Why can't you just bring bread for lame? You have to say to him, if this animal that I have right now was a todah, okay, a lachma. Here's your lachmei todah. And he lied. And if it's a temurah, leibig lechulin, then what's the big deal? Let it just be chulin. The lachmei todah by the way wouldn't would catch him chulin that were nechal anywhere within the chumesh of Yerushalayim. So like, why is this even an issue? I'm going to who's a Rabbi told Levy v'chi machnisin chulin la'azarah. It's true that the breads didn't have to go on the mizbeach. And it's true that they're nechal anywhere in Yerushalayim. But at the same time they had enter the azarah. The bread had to be in the azarah at the time that the korban todah was brought. And being that this is a halacha that's you're not you're not allowed to machnisin divrei chulin la'azarah. Going to one moment even in this day and age. So so it's not an option because it's true it doesn't go on the mizbeach, but at the same time it has to be in the azarah. You're not allowed to bring chulin la'azarah. Right, a cohen couldn't bring lunch with him to the azarah that was chulin. You're not allowed to bring chulin la'azarah. So on that side that this is a temurah's todah, the breads don't have any kedushas lachmei todah. So you bring chulin la'azarah even though this would seem to be the most basic idea, just bring bread and mona shachris, it'll be lachmei todah or it'll just be chulin. That would all be good if you didn't have to bring the breads into the azarah. Now the gemara later is going to bring shitas Rabbi Yochanan who holds that the breads maybe didn't have to go into the azarah. And the gemara is going to revisit this. But for right now, the paschal sacrifices and the breads had to be in the Azara. They had to be in the Azara, it's not going to be innate, says the Gamara. But Levi continued and he told Rebbe, "I have another idea. The lacy beheima of Hashem, why can't I bring a second beheima together with bread? The layman says as follows, he have to come with a temura. this animal that I have, the original animal is a temura, a carbon of a lachman, then the second animal that I'm bringing now should be a carbon toda. And the breads should be its lachmei toda. Yachid came with a toda again, if the original animal is a carbon toda, then lachma, the breads I'm bringing now should attach themselves to the original animal. The hati have a shlavim. And let this carbon now be a shlavim. So why can't I bring a second animal? You're right. Just to bring the original animal or breads, I can't do because maybe it's a temura. But let me bring a second animal. Let me make a tonight. If the original one is a temura, so this will be a toda and the breads will be its breads. I'm bringing the breads in the Azara. It's not chulin ba'Azara because it's attaching itself to the second animal which was a carbon toda. If the original one is a toda, then let the breads attach themselves to the original one. And let this one be a shlavim. It's similar to what the Gamara had said right at the beginning where the Gamara introduced Rav Hiyya for the first time. But there the Gamara was getting involved in the second animal being an achrayis toda, which only works if he said are alive. The Gamara said Rav Hiyya said as a law, he said are alive. But even if he said are alive, so there's no achrayis toda. Let the second animal not be achrayis toda, let it be a shlavim. Amalu si told him my bakhi with a shlavim. So right now, when you bring the second animal, you're going to have a safek whether this second animal is a toda or whether this second animal is a shlavim. What does it depend on? What the original animal was. If the original animal was a toda, this is a shlavim. If the original animal was a temura toda, then this is a toda. I have this animal now safek in my mind now. Kapi shmayi vey no, but I don't know. Is this a toda or a shlavim? Now, a toda's nakhlis on the layla, a shlavim's nakhlis on the layla. I'm going to have no choice but to eat it layla on the layla because maybe it's a toda. That means what happens if the day and the night passes, the next morning I have the carbon sitting around. I can't eat it. The reason I can't eat it is cuz even though it was a schlubem, I can't eat it, but maybe it's a todah. And if it's a todah, it's nicer, it's kodesh. You're not going to be allowed to eat it. You're going to be forced to burn it. But maybe it's a schlubem and I'm burning kodesh and that's kosher. So what you're doing essentially is you're setting up a situation where you may be forced to take kodesh from that's kosher and be mevi a with base hamikdash. That's not something you're not you're allowed to do. And as a result, this is not going to work either. Where do you have this halacha? So that's what we were talking about before the daf. And that is the idea of you don't say mizmor l'sodah on erev Pesach. And the Ramah says you don't say mizmor l'sodah erev Yom Kippur either. So we spoke about this in length in the end of Maseches Zevachim. But what's the pashut p'shat? Why don't we say mizmor l'sodah on erev Pesach? So on Pesach we don't say mizmor l'sodah cuz they couldn't bring the carbon todah on Pesach. So on Yom Tov, if you couldn't bring it because it's a carbon yachid. But even a chalom might you couldn't bring it because the carbon todah had lachmei todah. 10 of the lachmei todah were chametz. Can't be chametz. There's an issue of yom tov yom tov yom tov matzei. You can't eat the chametz. You're not allowed to eat chametz. So there was no way to bring the carbon todah on Pesach. What about erev Pesach? You can't eat the carbon todah erev Pesach, but you can only eat it until chatzos. And being that you can only eat it until chatzos, what's going to happen when chatzos comes around? If there is leftover of the carbon todah, you're going to be forced to burn it. So you're bringing kodesh from the base hamikdash. The Vilna Gaon says that that's child in the Ramah. The Ramah says you don't say mizmor l'sodah erev Yom Kippur either. It's the truth with the Biur Halacha. The achronim talk a lot about this. But it's before the Ramah. The Ramah says that you don't say mizmor l'sodah on erev Yom Kippur Pesach for the same reason. Because the carbon todah was nachalei olah in the night. So being that it was nachalei olah in the night, you're going to bring the carbon todah erev Yom Kippur. What's going to happen at night? You can't eat the lachmei todah that night. Can't eat anything that night. It's Yom Kippur. You're going to be forced to burn it if you don't end up eating it during the day. So there's the potential of being meima'ed b'chiyuv de'eidim. So again, it's the same issue. So here too, you can't bring a second animal and say that on the side that it's not a toy that's a shlamim because now you're going to have a safek if it's a toy or a shlamim. On the side that it's a shlamim, you're going to have no choice but to treat it as a toy anyways. You're being memuyad by the shlamim. So that second atzo doesn't work either. But Levi persisted. I'm a Levi the Rebbi. But Levi told Rebbi, I have a third idea. But I see the why can you bring again a second beheima together with bread? For laymen's make the following tonight. If the original animal was a temura, a toy of a loaf, very simple. Let this be a toy and its bread. And there's no wish. And if the original was a toy, a loaf, let these be its breads. The and the second animal to have a moiser the toy. Let it be a moiser toy. So what's a moiser toy? We had in the Mishnah. Moiser toy is where somebody was mafresh carbon toy and then something happened. He lost the animal. So he was mafresh a second one. And then he found the original one. So now you have an extra carbon toy. It's true for all carbonos. And there's a Shulchan Aruch that says how exactly you're supposed to treat the extra carbon. But the concept of a of a moiser of an animal in the context of a moiser toy, the moiser toy is a toy. Now a moiser toy two things. Number one, it's treated like a toy. It's not in the line. Number two, there's no bread. So Levi told Rebbi, why can't I go now be mafresh a second toy? Be mafresh a toy as moiser toy. So my mother of Shach, all I need is one bread because if the original one was a temura, the second one will be a toy. It will be and it will have its lachmi toy. If the original was a toy, the second one will be a moiser toy. The moiser doesn't need the bread. So the bread will only attach themselves to the first one. So my mother of Shach, I have two toys. They're both not in the line. And I only need one set of breads cuz my mother of Shach, one of the toys is either a temuras toy or a moiser toy. I'm a Levi. So Rebbi did not like what Levi said. And he let Levi know that he didn't like what he said. He told him that he may have no mind. It sounds to me like you have no mind. Like you have no mind. The question is you can go and be mafresh a toy an animal the mice are mice are if it happens. Once upon a time person had an animal and got lost he was another one then he found the original you stuck with a mice of title but you can't go to and say I want to be a mice of title so just doesn't work. We'll get back to this lady how long we're going to see in the really made it around so it started off with an exchange between Levy and Rabbi Levy had three suggestions and Rabbi enacted all three that we should move on sitting in front of and he told them I have an I don't understand what problem was I have an away out but I see bring the second animal bring it together with bread the lemon you should take like this the original was a total of a lot like this be a total and let it be exactly total the and if the original was a carbon total a lot without having tomorrow why can't I make another tomorrow why can't I be another animal and say my either it's a total or it's a tomorrow if the original was a total then it'll be a total and it's the breads will attach themselves to the second animal if the original was a total the breads will attach themselves to the original one and this will be a total again what did you accomplish what you accomplished is I have two animals that are both only need one set of breads cuz only the real total needs the breads the total doesn't need the breads so there's no problem with being a cuz they're both total and I'm not being it's not cuz I'm not the second one's not going to be a total that you can't do the total second one's going to be a total but the says also reacted on my way only money explain to me that we are going to the question you suggesting to do tomorrow tomorrow is also how in the world could you recommend a way out of this situation by going making a tomorrow so that's strike four says the of the was sick only got to be and went to be and throughout you find that during the the woman started talking and learning. They were discussing this they were discussing this with somebody was he had a they got confused. He doesn't know which one's which. The only way to be because if it's a you need you don't have so what are you supposed to do? So the suggested they said I may have a way out and the to the bottom have to be in the time that you're bringing the carbon but they could be then what's the big deal? Why don't you just bring bread and leave it outside of the you don't even need a second animal. Just bring the bread. The if the animals are a the and if it's not this was Levi's first suggestion that he told and what did Levi tell Levi? But now we have a Levi says that yeah that the breads could be carbon and this will get so why isn't this an so the says Levi said Levi was the and the was the one that answered. He said we should because their is that when a person brought a carbon he had to give also known as we discussed it in detail together. And so he said that tomorrow has to be has to be given to the and the has a to do to do with the tomorrow from the and that has to be in the because the kind of with the of the outside the it says in the that the has to be got away to bring it inside. Same problem. Therefore there's no way out. I mean even that says that the breads didn't have to be in the in In for them to get the all you the shchit of the carbon todah. But the tenufa of the truma slachmetodah have been offered to Hashem. Thus, at the end of the day, you're going to be forced to bring these breads into the Azara. I mean, that you're not sure if the breads really are lachmetodah or not, because you don't know if it's a todah or a tmuras todah. So, again, you're left with the same problem, the sixth todah. A suggestion, ask a floor. Rav Shisha brei Rav Idi im islo d'Chizkiyahu, d'amar katchu arbaim mitoch shmonim. Chizkiyahu is right. Chizkiyahu was uh mentioned on daf ayin ches. Where Chizkiyahu had said a halacha, what happens if a person brings a carbon todah and instead of being mafresh 40 breads, he's mafresh 80 breads. So, it was machlokes Chizkiyahu and Rav Yochanan. What's the halacha if you mafresh 80 instead of 40? So, the halacha is that 40 get regular kedusha slachmetodah. The other 40 are treated like backups. So, if they're not kodesh but kedusha slachmetodah right now, but at the same time, they are set aside that muchad now l'achrayus. That if something will happen to the 40 that do have kedusha slachmetodah, they will be used as backups. So, Shisha brei Rav Idi said that according to Chizkiyahu, I think there's a way to circumvent Rav Papa's problem. L'aise she beheima. Bring another beheima, second beheima. L'aise shmonim adah. And bring 80 breads. V'leimen tzei as follows. If the original animal was a carbon todah, honami tavei todah. Let this one also be a todah. V'hashmonim, and these 80 breads that I set aside, they should apply. 40 for the first animal and 40 for the second animal. E ach d'chaim t'murei. Now, if the original was a t'mura, then have todah let the second one be a todah. V'halachman, I want all 80 breads to attach themselves to the second one. What happens if all 80 are attached to the second one? V'liktu l'shuar b'mitoch shmonim. 40 of the 80 are going to be kodesh. Okay. So, how did we accomplish anything? At the end of the day, I have to bring all 80 into the Azara, cuz maybe they're both todahs and only 40 40 of them became kodesh. Explains Rashi, because even though only 40 out of the 80 became Kodish, but you can't tell me that the other 40 are Kodish and not Azara. I don't have a right to bring it into the Azara. Because at the end of the day the other 40 are serving a purpose. They're here to serve the original 40. Thus, they're not Kodish in the Kodish sense that I can't bring it into the Azara. So, it's true only 40 of them will be Kodish, but at the same time all 80 have a right to go into the Azara. So, I'm allowed to bring all the breads into the Azara. Either because all 80 are Kodish or because 40 are Kodish and the other 40 are Kodish, which is enough of a reason for me to be allowed to bring it into the Azara despite the fact that it's really Kodish. Precedent for this is that the Gemara says that he was very worried about the Elo. So, whenever he'd be Mafresh a Korban, he'd be Mafresh the Korban in the Azara. He'd be Mafresh the Korban in the meaning he didn't want to say I raise the oil and then bring it to the Beit Hamikdash. What happens if something happened to it along the way? He didn't want to get involved in issues. So, he would bring it into the Azara. The Gemara says he would bring it Kodish into the Beit Hamikdash and he would say I fragment the Rishonim. You're not allowed to bring Kodish into the Azara. The Torah says this isn't Kodish into the Azara because his intent was to be Kodish it right now. So, the other 40 Kodish I could bring it into the Azara. So, all he's doing is coming up with a way to be able to bring all the breads into the Azara. Regardless, said Rav Shmuel Bar Rav Idi, isn't this a way around Rav Shmuel's problem? So, the Gemara says no because right now when I bring these 80 breads, I'm not sure if all 80 are Kodish or only 40 are Kodish. This means I'm going to have to eat all 80 because otherwise I'm running into a Nossar issue. So, I have to eat all 80. What happens if I eat some of them? I don't eat all of them. It's going to come out that I created a Nossar. What created the Nossar? The other 40. Because could be had I only had 40, I would have been able to finish all of them. Let's say I ended up eating 50. So, there's 30 >> Could be had I only had 40, I would have been able to finish all of them. Let's say I ended up eating 50, so there's 30 left over. So, had all I had was 40, eating 50 would have been enough to prevent nicer. But being that I had 80, eating 50 wasn't enough to prevent nicer. So, it could be I'm going to end up leaving over the breads that have to choose me tighter because of the other 40 breads. So, it doesn't work in the moment of shock because you're being by the bomb similar to what the Gamora said earlier, you're being by the the shaming. Thus, the sixth idea falls short as well. I have actually the kind of actually the kind of have another reason to be a kind of if you have a kind of right. Who said if those were barriers, if someone's carbon does, that's a new barrier. So, those almost always was in a cave. So, if someone was a kind of those and the kind of those was new barriers gave birth to a child. So, the Gamora is also a kind of also a kind of a kind of a kind of a kind of person who goes over to a a baby that's a new barrier and says, I raise you kind of those. Now, the baby's born. You have a choice. According to you a kind of you can either bring the mother as the kind of those or you can bring the child as a kind of those. Now, the truth is that there's a kind of a kind of those that has a child that the child is a kind of a kind of a kind of a kind of a kind of a kind of a kind of the the animal the kind of those became a new barrier after it was already happened. If you have a kind of those talking about where you were not fresh the kind of those when it was already in a state of new barrier. So, the kind of those you have a choice. What's a kind of a kind of a kind of a kind of a kind of now the Gamora doesn't speak to sell but it's insinuated from what the Gamora is about to say that the Gamora understands at this point that according to you a kind of if you want both could be a kind of those also. So, really you have three options. The mother could be a kind of those, the baby could be a kind of those or they could both be a kind of those. And really the way seems to be looking at this behavior of new barriers is as two independent behaviors. So, it's like you went over to two behaviors that are really one kind of and you said on both of them I raise you kind of those. So, you you suddenly have you suddenly have options. The totally with the you have if you have a kind of that it's not separate entity. If it was Yarchimai, then it's two, but it's still one. So, that's where it seems to understand. That's the way to have a few options. Let's apply the same thing to a carbon the way around is why don't you bring a that's and now you should be sure that carbon the way it is going to give birth the way to bring 80 breads the way it was if the original animal was a tomorrow hot and I want it and the child both of them to be watch my name and these 80 breads are going to belong to both of them. If you have the if the original one was a carbon and then let this one also be a but how much money do you have and let the 80 breads be 40 for the original and 40 for the second the and what about the extra animal didn't you say that both going to be let the extra animal be a so I should go ahead and make two more days and let the second either be a real or be a depending on what the original was if the original one was a then of the two the mother and the child one will be a one will be a if the original one was a then they'll both be the mother I only need 80 breads cuz only the real need breads the doesn't need breads and the doesn't need breads the old there's no problem with cuz all 80 are real so the there's a way out of my way now what are you going to ask me the only are you going to ask me is is isn't there a didn't we say before you can't bring and over here really you bring a because you're going into this not knowing whether the mother and child are right now two or a and a moisten tiger. The hula, it's a tiger and a moisten tiger comes out of his mouth first, moisten the tiger. So, the machine explained that being that we're going according to and we're talking about a case where it's a mother and a child. This type of moisten maybe be able to be moisten the tiger. When can you be moisten the moisten the tiger? That's where it's a random animal. But being that it's part of one goose, it's moisten maybe over here would be different. But regardless, I'm a lady. So, kind of told him I don't think you understand what you're saying. I'm sure I don't think you understand what you're saying. I'm sure I don't think you understand what you're saying. That means you look at the mother and the child as independent entities. So, you could be mother could be the the child could be the or maybe they could even be both tigers. Same would be true over here. A mother and a child, the mother could be the tiger, the child could be the tiger, or they could both be tigers. I don't know if that's true. Maybe you have really hold they can't both be tigers. Maybe you have they can't be both tigers. In fact, I'm sure based on the case of the mother and the child. I'm sure I don't think you understand what you're saying. I'm sure I don't think you understand what you're saying. I'm sure I don't think you understand what you're saying. The reason that you can use the child is the child is considered something that grew from that. Maybe you have the that you can use as bringing a carpet. The point is what we need the punchline is is that could be never said both could be tigers. So, to both can't be tigers. As a result, we're going to knock this out. Says the one final attempt. I mean you could have been here. I mean you could have been here. I mean you could have been here. I mean you could have been here. I mean you could have been here. I mean you could have been here. I mean you could have been here. One of the daily had our he comes to here. So, I mean you could have been here. I mean you could have been here. And he says, you know, there's a big tunnel. We heard about Bryson. Okay, it's case where there's an animal you don't know if it's a tiger or it's tiger. There's no way to be because you need bread if it's a tiger. You can't bring bread if it's a twin of a todah. And there was a big tumult about it, and we already had seven attempts to circumvent Rav Hiyya's issue, and they all fell short. So, Rav Dimi brother Rav Huna tells Rav Dimi, "I think I was able to solve this riddle. I think I have a way out." He told him as follows, "Velayse beheima, let him bring a beheima. Veleima, and say hare olai, hare olai todah." Not harezu, hare olai. Once he says hare olai, now he has a chiyuv to bring a korban todah, even if something happens to this animal, there's a chiyuv achrayas. Now that he said hare olai velayse beheima achrayas, let him bring a second animal or a third animal. But you have the original animal. He goes, he says hare olai, and he's mafresh an animal. And then he brings another one. What's the purpose of the other one? It's a backup, cuz once you say hare olai, you're allowed to have one l'achrayas. Velayse shmonim lechem adanim bring 80 breads. Veleima, he should say as follows, "E achas camees mor, if the original was a tomorrow, ani tarti tidas, then these latter two are tidas. V'achas shmonim lechem adanim and these 80 breads belong to them. Vi'achas camees tidas, if the original was a korban todah, v'dam real olai, nami l'havi todah, then the second one, when I said hare olai, is also a todah. The third, v'achas shmonim lechem adanim the 80 breads belong to the original todah, and now the second one, meaning the first of the additional two that I brought, v'idach, and the last one is going to be the achrayas of 80 breads, of three tidas. I they all nachalei olah v'olaila, you're not permitted by chiyuv of anything. All 80 breads is is not an issue because they're all nachalei chulin, so you can bring them into the azarah, you could do the tenufah lifnei Hashem, you're not permitted mafresh ma'asrais, you don't need a pregnant animal. You're able to make this work, it's beautiful. And essentially, if you think about it, what did what did Rav Dimi brother Rav Huna ben Damhuri really do? When we started the Gemara, at the very, very beginning, so we introduced Rav Hiyya, the Gemara said that if Rav Hiyya's case was where somebody said hare olai todah, there's a very easy way out. All you had to do was bring another animal, like a rayas, bring it together with bread, and make a that the second animal will only be the rayas if the original was a toyda. But if the original was a tmura, then it'll be a toyda. So now one toyda that needs bread, you have another toyda that doesn't need bread. Cuz the other one is either a tmuras toyda or it's an achrayis toyda. One of them needs bread, one of them doesn't need bread. The problem was Reish Lakish said that only works if you said are a lie. What if you said are a zoo? If you write it said are a zoo, that doesn't work. If you said are a zoo, then you can't be mafresh la achrayis. Cuz there is no achrayis when you said are a zoo. The Gemara says I hear you. You know what? There's a way out. Go now and be mafresh a toyda la achrayis. And be mafresh one Go now and say are a lie toyda and then be mafresh another one la achrayis to that. So all you're doing is you're recreating the scenario where you're able to make it work. Do the math and everything works out beautifully. So he was so excited, he met the Godol and he said immediately he went running to him and he says, I think I solved this puzzle. Amaleh Rebbe told Rebbe Dimi, doesn't work. Cuz the toyda says a pasuk in Koheles, toyda It's not a good thing to make a neder. A neder is always considered a bad thing. You suggesting go say are a lie. We do not encourage saying are a lie. Saying are a lie is very discouraged in fact. And as a result, this will not be an eitza excel. So before we go right there and start part two of the daf, which is only a little lighter than part A, just one hora'a. So let's just speak out a hora'a on the last thing that we just said. So the Gemara thought there was an idea, there was a way to circumvent it by going and saying are a lie toyda right now. But Ravina said you can't say are a lie toyda cuz the toyda toyda So to just go frivolously It means not frivolous. You're making the neder to fadin a carbon. You have an animal now that that has kedushas toyda. And there's no way to be makrivin on this mizbayach. Rabeinu didn't care. Rabeinu said at the end of the day, [ __ ] HaMelech said in his great wisdom, we discourage making nedarim, and therefore this will not The truth is this pasuk of Toyva Shelo Sidur Mishe Sidur Shelo Shalam, and really the spirit and the theme of the pasuk, and that is that nedarim are strongly discouraged, is something that is very much a part of Maseches Nedarim. It really permeates many sugyas in Maseches Nedarim. Just to bring it out. The Mishna says in Maseches Nedarim daf ches amud beis, the Mishna is discussing yotzei's nedarim. So the classic way of making a neder would be to say "Hareini olai" or to say "Koinam zu" or "I want this piece of meat to be ossur to me like a korban." What happens if a person says "Kinidrei rishaim"? So instead of using the word neder, he says that I want this thing to be like the neder that rishaim make. So the halacha is nodar benazar ubekorban ubishvua. If a Whatever he says afterwards will be in effect, cuz the words "Kinidrei rishaim" are loshon neder. What if he says "Kinidrei ksheirim"? I want this to be kinidrei ksheirim. Lo yochal makluf. It's good enough. You know why? Because rishaim make nedarim and ksheirim don't make nedarim. So if a person says a loshon neder but he says "Kinidrei rishaim", that's a loshon neder because rishaim make nedarim. If a person makes a loshon neder but he says "Kinidrei ksheirim" lo yochal makluf. And the Gemara says why not? The Gemara quotes this pasuk. Toyva Shelo Sidur Mishe Sidur Shelo Shalam. It's based on this pasuk right here in the other Gemara. Nedarim daf chabaze amud aleph. Benazon ain nodair. Somebody makes a neder, it's ke'ilu boneh bama. V'ha mekuyam, if someone's mekuyam a neder, it's ke'ilu makriv olah u'korban. It's even worse. V'chol hanodair ke'ilu boneh bama. So you see clearly that it's it's not a good thing for a person to make an ad. And the reason because you're putting yourself in a very vulnerable situation. You're making an ad and you take something that's motor. It's really not also. You decided that it's See you make an ad you're not going to eat meat anymore. So now if you eat meat, you're over the Yakov the void. Might as well say you're involved in a two assets. So you're setting yourself up in a situation where you're making yourself very very vulnerable. As a result it's a bad thing to make an ad. There's so much so that even an Argamora Rabina didn't view this as being an ad. It's stating that there are some exceptions to the rule. And just to mention two. Two exceptions where it's okay for a person to make an ad. And maybe it's a little bit of a Argamora. The first is Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer is discussing this idea of we discourage people from saying there's an idea of the Argamora Rabina Yakov made a Yakov Avinu makes an ad. He's on his way to Lavan's house. The Yakov Avinu made an ad in the year 2000. The Yakov Avinu makes a deal with the Argamora Rabina. He says I'm going to give you 10% of anything that you give me. But Yakov Avinu prefaced it with the words Yakov Avinu made an ad in the year 2000. The Yakov Avinu makes a deal with the Argamora Rabina. He says I'm going to give you 10% of anything that you give me. But Yakov Avinu prefaced it with the words Yakov Avinu made an ad in the year 2000. The Yakov Avinu makes a deal with the Argamora Rabina. He says I'm going to give you 10% of anything that you give me. But Yakov Avinu prefaced it with the words Yakov Avinu made an ad in the year 2000. The Yakov Avinu makes a deal with the Argamora Rabina. He says I'm going to give you 10% of anything that you give me. But Yakov Avinu prefaced it with the words Yakov Avinu made an ad in the year 2000. The Yakov Avinu makes a deal with the Argamora Rabina. He says I'm going to give you 10% of anything that you give me. But Yakov Avinu prefaced it with the words Yakov Avinu made an ad in the year 2000. The Yakov Avinu makes a deal with the Argamora Rabina. He says I'm going to give you 10% of anything that you give me. But Yakov Avinu prefaced it with the words Yakov Avinu made an ad in the year 2000. The Yakov Avinu makes a deal with the Argamora Rabina. He says I'm going to give you 10% of anything that you give me. But Yakov Avinu prefaced it with the words Yakov Avinu made an ad in the year 2000. The Yakov Avinu makes a deal with the Argamora Rabina. He says I'm going to give you 10% of anything that you give me. But Yakov Avinu prefaced it with the and in fact if a person finds himself in an a sorrow it's okay to make another from this that it's actually to make another and that's the words of the client also know that learn from Yakov Avinu. This is the blueprint that whenever you find yourself in an a sorrow that you either Yakov another lemon. The bottom line is is you find that although it's true and at the same time base sorrow it is okay for a person to go ahead and to make another. Parenthetically in the act of a we shall not do the same for the same for the bottom of the same for the same for the same for that talks about the school of was written by the who was a Hungarian roof rubber poison but all of this through the Holocaust and during the war he felt this idea that maybe the Yidden should have gone up to you know when there was a to go up there to decide that he's going to write a safe for that you should that you maybe this will be a source that through this will be saved from what was going on in the world at the time and right in the beginning he starts off he brings this possible we can't places in the name of the rather that if a person finds himself in an a sorrow he's supposed to make another. So he says he wants to be and he wants to do what Yakov Avinu said and he makes and he's making another and his another is that if he survives the war he's going to go to and he's going to write a he's going to write a safe for about the importance of that you should do this a few of his men and then he went on and he said as follows he thinks what was Yakov Avinu's another and what he did so Yakov Avinu is bargaining, negotiating. He says, "Okay, let me tell you what I want, and then I'll tell you what I'll give you back." Number one, you have to give me money. I'm going to return safely to my father's house. You're going to be with me. That possuk is all what Yaakov Avinu is requesting from Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Says Yaakov Avinu, what I'm going to do, I'm going to make a Beit Elokim. I'm going to give you my stuff. But Rabbi Shimon the Taiglach said that he doesn't think that's pshat. When Yaakov Avinu says, that's not what he's asking from Hakadosh Baruch Hu. That's what he was giving Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Meaning, that's all what Yaakov Avinu was requesting. From possuk 21, if you see it in front of you, that's Yaakov giving back to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. That's Yaakov giving back to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. What Yaakov Avinu was saying was that if you're going to take me out of this sorrow, I'm making a neder, I'm going to go back to my father. He couldn't leave Eretz Yisrael, so I'm going to go back to Eretz Yisrael. I'm going to go back to live with my father. Based on the Gemara in Sefer Kesubos, I'm going to go back to my father. I'll have an Aliyah here. So V'haya Hashem Li L'Elokim, So the Taiglach said that he wants to be Mekayem the ma'aseh of a siman l'banim of what Yaakov Avinu did. Yaakov Avinu was noideir by Sura. And what was his neder that he made by his Sura? V'shafti v'shalom l'veit avi. V'haya Hashem Li L'Elokim, I won't be a dar b'chutz la'Aretz. So the Taiglach says, it's so beautiful the way he writes it. He says, "Shall that Sh'ma Yisrael and Gamani I want to make another God of Israel?" That's what this power and I'm going to dive into writing during the Holocaust. That going to be with me right now during the Holocaust. And I shall going to watch me literally. I'll have a little bit of bread. That's what people needed. Who they get little bush to make it through the the winters and in in the camps in Eastern Europe and in Siberia. My family will come out unscathed. Beautiful. He says the end of this is a really this idea that he's learning from the he says it's the first the base of the king. He brings from the half of a fellow. He says the says the word the nice of a bottom of the declare supposed to supposed to have in the he says was connected goes bubble connected this is from the base of the king. And the is and are really the the blueprint of the the client need in order to be able to creep out of this of the way. He says that's the that all of this is this. Who is this who is this who is this? Who composed the composed he says the first had a kids ball. You the second goes bubble also had a kids ball. It was a set time 70 years. He Daya that you going to be old, all of them even said nevu'ah that you didn't want to be in galus for 70 years and at the end ef [ __ ] des but the last galus doesn't have a kets for. He says, "You know why?" He says, "Cuz the last galus is probably in us." The Gemara in perek chelek "Hayoyim bekoy beshmol the mais shmuel eliyahu hanavi." Eliyahu hanavi shmuel eliyahu, right? When is mashiach coming? He said, "Today." He went back to him and said, "Eliyahu hanavi lied to me." He said, "It's going to be You don't understand hayoyim bekoy beshmol cuz any single day it could happen and that's the that's the tfilas kind of tfilas arvis reshus because really the tfilas klal yisrael had during galus mitzrayim and during galus bavel those tfilas couldn't not in in of them all take the yidden out of galus because there was a there was a kets. There was a kets for. There was a certain amount of time that yidden had to do in galus before they were going to be allowed to come out. But tfilas arvis reshus it's an our reshus. We have the ability through tfilas arvis through yaakov avinu's tfilas to take us out of the galus acharonah cuz there is no there is no kets for to the galus acharonah. When is mashiach going to come? Today. Bekoy beshmol. But that's the point. That's the oinek of tfilas arvis reshus that he said that you see already from the from the bas eliyahu came from the mabed and he brings from the brings from the lubliner rav the chazon lublin who said this idea as well that yaakov avinu's tfilas with the mais of a similar bottom of the tfilas the klal yisrael need by the galus acharonah. He said by yidden yaakov nedar leimar mikanshin nedar meysara. He's going to make a nedar. And not only is he making a nedar but yaakov avinu's nedar. What was yaakov avinu's nedar? "V'shavti b'shalom el beis avi." That was the nedar. That was what yaakov avinu was giving hakadosh baruch that I will return. I will go back to eretz yisrael. You know why? A little bit lighter. Look at the mishna "Omer if somebody says "Hareini l'eit oido." So if somebody says "Hareini l'eit oido." "Yovi hi v'al achim so we saw already in the first part of the daf there's a difference between somebody that says "Hareini l'eit oido." and somebody that says "Hareini zu oido." "Hareini l'eit oido." There's a chiyuv achrayus. That means the god for the person has an obligation to bring a carbon tighter. If something happens to this particular tighter that he set aside, bring another tighter. If somebody says I raise you tighter, there is no here by rice. Mishna, the first paragraph of Mishna says the beginning of something now happens to this animal that you set aside, it's going to be okay. So the basic difference between someone that says I raise a light tighter and somebody that says I raise you tighter is what happens if something happens to the carbon tighter. Is there a here by rice or is there no here by rice? I raise a light is a here by rice. I raise you, there is no here by rice. The Mishna presents another nafta mina between I raise a light I raise you. There's a cloud called in a bar element of if somebody has an obligation to bring something, you can only fulfill your obligation using something. You have a here to bring a carbon cutters. You can't use my shiny money to pay for your cutters cuz this cutters is a double and it's only moist moist and shiny is not cool. Any double the cover is bar mina cover. If something is not a double cover, then you can use even my shiny for example. It doesn't have to be double the cover. Says the Mishna if somebody says I raise a light tighter, it becomes a double cover cuz now it's a incumbent upon the god to bring a carbon tighter. Thus in a bar element of if somebody would say I raise you being that there's no here on the god or he would be able to say I raise you even to something that's not cool. So it's something Mishna I raise a light tighter you have a here the animal and the light meter that have to be both tighter a light meter the light meter master. What if somebody says I want the tighter to be meter and the light meter should be from the light meter. He specifically said that the breads can be from light meter money. You have a here the light meter doesn't matter. The breads anyways have to be light meter. You know why? Cuz once he says that the carbon tighter is going to be light meter. So now we're ready it becomes a shelf the are ancillary to the carbon toida but even though we specifically carved out he said the should be able to be it won't be able to be moment of to eat them in a the minute this question here in the but what if he says the reverse I want the to be able to come in a and the breads to be you have so then he can do what he said then the could be a but the breads will have to be cool cuz he specifically said the bread should be even though the breads are tough to the but he specifically said that the breads are going to be only be so he can't bring the from he the what if he said they should both come in a then he could do what he said but he I would be that would be the topic of tomorrow's stuff so stating that you shouldn't use actual of but what you could do is you can bring my I'm going to really like so I put it in a very straightforward the is going to ask questions on every question in and of itself is total beer so that's so clear what the cash is going to be from a total perspective this requires some work but either way it begins with a very straightforward said if somebody says maybe you have to bring a and what do you mean he only said I really like why does he have to bring the carbon he only wants to bring the breads maybe you have to wait a minute cuz this person he's not he knows such thing as without the actual carbon and really what he wanted to do is he wanted to bring a and I don't so why do you only say to you though so I just picked the the last part but really understood and we assume that his intent was not just to talk in the but rather to bring the and said if someone says I really like you though even though he only mentioned in his beat to it the last method he's obligated to bring a total and last method on mission said if somebody says to you that I miss her the last minute I if somebody says I want my total to bring from nicer and the last thing should be from cooler so what's the he does what he said fighting the moral of my given being that he said the last thing should be from a cooler you have to give the last minute I why don't we only look at the last thing that he said what do we say how am I really last minute I he has to bring a total and last minute I so this person said I really like total and I miss her the last minute I forget about the fact that he said total and I miss her let's only focus on the fact that he said last minute I last minute I is as if he said total and I miss her so even the total should have to be bought last minute I why is it that the total could be bought in a nicer if I am I really like total I hear in that the total and the last minute I then I am I total and I miss her the last minute I let me hear in last minute I total and last minute I and I should have to be the total and I miss her why am I allowed to be the total and I miss her now what's the obvious answer if all he said was last minute I then in last minute I you hear total and last minute I but if he says total and last minute I why should I hear total and last minute I he said total if all he said was last minute I we assume that he meant total and last minute I cuz otherwise he's been mighty the battle but here he said total and last minute I so total and last minute I and he clearly said that the total should be bought in a nicer and the last minute I should be bought in a cooler so what's the cash that he's been that he said last minute I even the total should have to be bought in a so I hear I am pretty sure but he answered once he says total and I miss her and I really like last minute I total social plan here >> The way we look at it is that he's saying two things. He's saying "Toidem and a meiser." And that he that I have to bring toidem and a meiser, I'm saying now that I want the lechem to have to be bom and a chover. As if the lechem and a chover is really a safa on the toidem and a meiser. Similar to the terrace that we wanted the gemara to say. That he's We look at it as two separate remarks. As if to say, imagine one person would say, "I'm going to bring a carbon toida." And then another person would say, "I'm going to bring his lechem for him." So clearly there's a a bituya of toida, there's a bituya of lechem. And the bituya of lechem is just being mefarish the bituya of toida. That's essentially what we're doing over here. The way we're going to look at it is as if he said toidem and a meiser, the lechem and a chover. But the lechem and a chover is a perush on the toidem and a meiser. Being that it's a perush on the toidem and a meiser, it's not going to redefine what the chiyuv a regular ha real I toida, that's not a perush, it's the actual hischayvus, then we say included a real I lechem toida is the chiyuv toida as well. But over here we look at it more as a perush, thus we treat it differently. Ee chachi reisha de kani, why don't you say the same thing in the reisha toidem and a chover and lechem and a meiser? Yovi he lechem and a chover. And if he said toidem and a chover and lechem and a meiser, there even the the lechem toida had to be bom and a chover. Hacha nami freid the gemara, why don't we say nassei kimai real I toida lift the lechem and a shulchan pnei? Why don't we say that the toida is being mefarish the chiyuv lechem and say that the toida only should have to be bom and a chover, but the lechem should be able to be bom and a meiser. The gemara says hachi hashi bishlam lechem lift the toida asi. Toide lift the lechem yaasi. The lechem could be a perush on the toida. Cuz the toida is the iker and the lechem only comes because of the toida. But to say that the lechem has the iker and the toida is the perush on the lechem, that doesn't make sense. Tashma ha imai real I toida with lechem. If somebody this is the opposite of what said. I'm going to say here we have the reverse. And specifically said no or he said I want to make a carbon without that have to come along with this carbon. We force him to bring the desert says the time it sounds like toy the way you have to bring toy and toy toy But I have without maybe you don't have to bring this again. What's what's the deal? Two different one is when he said I like me the other one is when he said but that's the it's toy the way you have to bring the but you don't have to bring the toy and the but it says no I didn't have to my toy really if you would have just said I like me toy to be the same but I did the way I must be toy But the mission wanted to say two wanted to say toy and now for you couldn't say it in what if somebody says I wouldn't be true that you have to bring all you have to bring is the you wouldn't have to bring the with the and it's for that reason we wanted to say a lot about and that is true for toy and so we had to pick the case that the pick not case cuz the case of I really like me toy that would work for like me toy but like me toy that would be toy but it wouldn't work for this case works for as well the more asks another I am I not if somebody says I really like the toy but I like or if somebody says I really like the way why you have to bring a toy and the way why don't we say just the opposite why don't we say the thing that you said toy I like or you really want to bring a title below and also don't people know that there's no such thing as a title yeah, maybe it's your way of backing out of another maybe when you said a real life title but I like him. It's your way of saying I really like title that you know what forget about it but I like him meaning it's silly. I can't do it and a person is a lot of so I really like title you bring a title why don't we assume that this person really wants to be closer let it be like another and a person this is not a real another and a person but let it be like another and a person what you want to do is you want to be the one according to and then says from things now it's not also to eat things but he's another cuz we look at the fact that he said already another we don't care about the fact that he said men have grown they saw they saw says he's not another so you see says you always say so if you say two things that contradict each other so if you say two things that contradict each other we look at the so to here if somebody says below we look at the title part and as a result you can have a that says you don't say look at the whole picture so another is not another so the same is going to be true here whole picture and you're not going to be in a car no working so what a person said specifically he stipulated he was very clear he said that I'm letting you know the reason I said is cuz I thought it was possible to bring I know it's not possible I wouldn't have said this why am I why are you forcing him the person was to bring here he said before the only reason he said is cuz he thought he could bring otherwise he would have brought so the talking about where afterwards he tried backing out. You can't you can't bring you have to bring the you can't bring this really had I known that I wouldn't have done it. We force them we say we tell them you have to do what you said you're going to do. And even though you didn't realize it doesn't matter. So again this person said again so I can play the song. And then he said had I known that I was going to have to bring I mean I said had I known I was going to have to bring I would have never said it. We force them we tell them you have to do it. According to who said that the original price is this price is also I And once he says even though he said I can I realize that even though he said and he's screaming he's kicking and yelling and he's saying I never meant to bring it doesn't matter. I really know you're not there. So I really I told him I don't care that you said after I who said that the price is going according to all that doesn't know he said it was not another but we assume that that's what you meant to do he is saying it's not what he meant to do so how could you force him to do it? So the says I I got to go and say this I agree with I just said the first price is not this price so has to be the first price of the person is not kicking and yelling so it's talking about where he said he's okay to bring it with him this where he's kicking and yelling he says it doesn't work according to my father in law must be he's going according to we tell him I matter I'm going to buy you a buyer said I have a title we tell him bring the title I matter I have a lot double washing bring the title bring the washing I have a title I have a lot more I we tell him bring the title and it's I matter I shall tell you please do not do this again in the future.