Menachos 99

Today's daf is Menachos daf tzadik tes and we will begin nine lines from the top of daf tzadik tes amud alef Tanu Rabanan. Today's daf is being learned as a zechus for shleimus refuah shleima for Miriam bas Malkah Freda and [ __ ] ben Chaya Leah. Today's daf is also being learned le'iluy nishmas Sarah Ratzio bas Rav Yosef Yehudah Leib. So, we're moving along in the 11th perek of meseches Menachos. We're dealing specifically about uh Devarim Pela. If you're not aware of it, that's mentioned in Melachim Alef and that is that when [ __ ] Hamelech built his Beis Hamikdash, he didn't just have one menorah like the Mishkan had, he had 11. Meaning, he added 10 addi- additional menorahs. He didn't just have one shulchan like the Mishkan had, he had 11. He added 10 additional shulchans. The Gemara [snorts] talked a little bit about the placement just in terms of logistics, how they were lined up, where exactly they were. We know the shulchan was in tzafon and the menorah was in darom. But, one shulchan, one menorah from an architectural perspective is not so complex, but once you're dealing with rows of shulchans and menorahs, so then things will get a little bit more complicated. Regardless, that was very much the topic of yesterday's daf. Today's daf is going to begin with a braisa that's going to discuss what exactly the purpose of all those additional shulchans and menorahs were. In other words, we know that the shulchan in the Mishkan, its purpose was for the lechem hapanim. The menorah, had lehadlik neiros. There was a mitzvah to light the menorah. Was that true for all the additional shulchans and menorahs of [ __ ] Hamelech? Or maybe inasmuch as there were all these shulchans and menorahs, but as relates to the avodahs that were done with the shulchan and the menorah, the lechem hapanim and hadlakas neiros respectively that was only done with one the one from my show that is as we're going to see in the topic of the very first part of today's as the I saw is also trying to make 10 meaning in addition to kind of made 10 more like stating that as relates to the cedar of the monument they were only there being the on the one from how do we know that because the says in the this is in the context of the discussion of the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it >> [snorts] >> the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that the price continues and says that made 10 additional however the only one that they lit was as the says and this is a in that's also discussing the the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the in the singular not the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had on it the big dish that had hashulchanois v'aleihem it says fakair it says it in the plural and it says not on it but aleihem on them. That as it relates to all the different menorahs that were there they used to be madlik all the menorahs. She nemer as the possuk says es hamenorahs v'neiroseihem l'olam kamishpat lifnei Hadveir zahav sagur. But again we need the first words of the possuk hamenorahs not menorahs and it says v'neiroseihem not neiroseiha. The bottom line is said Rabba Lazar ben Shamuel I disagree. You have psukim that are a little bit mashma that the lechem upon was put only on one shulchan and they were madlik only one menorah. I have psukim that are mashma fakair es hashulchanois v'aleihem es hamenorahs v'neiroseihem. It's mashma from there that they put the lechem upon them on all the shulchanois and they lit all the menorahs. Rebbe Yosi ben Rebbe Yehuda continued in the [snorts] braisa and he said lo hayu mesadrim al shulchan shnei. So Rebbe Yosi ben Rebbe Yehuda is a seemingly third shita although really he's stating the shita of the tanakam. That lo hayu mesadrim al shulchan shnei. That really the seder of the lechem upon them was only on Moshe Rabbeinu's shulchan. He brought a vorn and said el omani mekayem es hashulchanois asher aleihem lechem upon them zahav. What am I going to do with the possuk that Rabba Lazar ben Shamuel brought that was mashma shulchanois aleihem that they were mesadrim all of the shulchanois. Said Rebbe Yosi ben Rebbe Yehuda eilu shlosha shulchanois shehayu b'Mikdash. The shulchanois that's mentioned in that possuk is not referring to the 10 additional shulchanois that [ __ ] Hamelech built but rather it's referring to the additional shulchanois that the Beis Hamikdash had unrelated to the shulchanois that were in the actual eichel. What are those additional shulchanois? So the Gemara now is going to quote a mishna. You know what this Mishnah is? On Omid Beis. In our daf, it's going to be the beginning of tomorrow's daf, but really, if you turn the page, you'll see this Mishnah. Shnayim sh'hayu b'ulam, the Mishnah over there says that there were three shulchanos in the Beis Hamikdash. Two of them were in the ulam, mibifnim, meaning not in the heichal, they were in the inside the pesach bayis, but they were right next to the pesach bayis, right next to the entrance way to the heichal. What was the purpose of these shulchanos? Echad shel kesef, one of them was made of silver, v'echad shel zahav, the other one was made of gold. Al shel kesef, on the one that was made of silver, loisin lechem haponim bichnisaso. So, the Kohanim we'll see a lot more about this in the Mishnah on Omid Beis. But, the Kohanim that used to bring the lechem haponim into the heichal, so they're going from the azarah, they're bringing it into the heichal, so when they came to the ulam, which is the segway from the azarah into the heichal, they would pause for a minute, they would put down the breads on top of this shulchan that was made of silver. V'al shel zahav, and as it relates to the other one that was made of gold, bi'itzi'aso, that was something that the Kohanim used to put the lechem haponim on on their way out from the heichal back to the azarah. Now, the reason, says the Mishnah, that on the way in they put it on silver, but on the way out it was staffed on gold is because shema'in b'kodesh v'lo ma'iridin, because there's a halacha of ma'in b'kodesh v'lo ma'iridin. So, >> [snorts] >> when the lechem haponim was being put on the shulchan for the first time, so where was it coming from? It's coming from the oven. So, at that point, if you want to put it on a shulchan shel kesef, that's actually very chashuv. I think, "Wow, you have a shulchan that's made of kesef, that's very impressive." But, once the shulchan already spent a week, or once the lechem apon him spent already a week on those shulchanim with the hey I did that was in the heichal. Well, now already just spent a week on a shulchan that was made of zahav. So, if on the way out you're going to put it on silver, that's actually a you read it in terms of the chashivus of the shulchan. My little kiddush when I read it, on the way in you were able to put it on kesef, but on the way out already had to be of zahav. Now, we just said that there were three shulchanos in the mikdash. We just described two. What's the third one? Echad shel zahav is name. The third one was the shulchan that was made of gold that was inside. So, all of the lechem apon him tamid, that's what the lechem apon him had to be tamid. Tamid is a magic word, very much the topic of the beginning of tomorrow's daf. But, the bottom line is, says Reb Yosi Reb Yehuda, I hold like the tanna kama, that really the lechem apon him was only put on the one shulchan of Moshe Rabbeinu, not on the additional 10 shulchanos of [ __ ] I, Reb Elazar ben Shamua, had a dikduk in a pasuk in Divrei Hayamim Daze that seem to suggest that the lechem [snorts] apon him was put on the shulchan of Moshe Rabbeinu. Chashmal was put on all of them. Those Those shulchanos is not referring to the 10 additional shulchanos of [ __ ] but rather those shulchanos are referring to the two additional shulchanos that were not in the heichal, but rather were in the ulam, the shulchanos that are discussed in [snorts] the Mishnah on Amud Baze. So, it's interesting. Reb Yosi Reb Yehuda ostensibly has a third shita, but clearly his really the shita of the tanna kama. What was his >> [snorts] >> contribution to this braisa? His contribution was he was meyashiv one of the two kashas that Reb Elazar ben Shamua had on the tanna kama. The shita of the tanna kama is that even though there were 10 additional shulchanos in the menorahs, but as it relates to the avodas that were done with the shulchan of the menorah, it was only done with the one from Moshe. Reb Elazar ben Shamua said, "What do you mean? I have psukim that are mashma not that way." Reb Yosi Reb Yehuda was meyashiv one of those psukim. He was meyashiv the pasuk as it relates to shulchan. However, he was not me Yasha of the [ __ ] as [snorts] it relates to minute. Before we go wider, I think it's good I to just exhale for one second and speak out two hours. The first hour is so we have discussion that's really coming to an end right here. With regards to the 10 additional Shulchan noise and the 10 additional mineroys of Schliemann and Alec. The truth is that there's more to the story. Hashtag rest of the story and this is in the Yalkut Shimoni on Malachim Aleph it's remes kuf pay hey. The Yalkut Shimoni over there says why was it that Schliemann and Alec made 10 Shulchan noise? Why was it that Schliemann and Alec made 10 mineroys? >> [snorts] >> The reason he did it was was to bring a tremendous shefa of parnossa in the world. We know Chazal say Haroisa la Hasher Yatzvin. Somebody wants to be masher so Yatzvin. Right, he should do his avoid this in the direction of Tzafon. Why? The reason is because the Shulchan was in Tzafon and the Shulchan had on it the lechem upon him and the lechem upon him is the parnossa the rabbish the shirus of Chlo Yisroel and as a result Tzafon is somehow associated with parnossa, it's somehow associated with ashirus. So says the Yalkut Shimoni that the reason Schliemann and Alec went and made 10 additional Shulchan noise was kidel Harbe Yisroel. Because he wanted that the Yiddish kinder should have parnossa. Says the Yalkut Al [ __ ] Moshe Echa. So why did Moshe Rabbeinu only make one? If Schliemann and Alec had that hasaga of making an additional 10, so how come Moshe Rabbeinu made only one? Says the Yalkut it's pasuk Shlo Hayu ba midbar tzrichin l'Yisroel. Because in Moshe Rabbeinu's time they either were in the midbar and that they were in the midbar, they had mana from shamayim. And as a result, they didn't need so much as far as relates to parnassa. Every single morning, they woke up and they had whatever they needed at their front door. But the key was that when [ __ ] came, as it says in the Torah, [ __ ] had to be marbeh. And the reason he had to be marbeh was because the nation of Israel needed more. And because they needed more, it was for that reason he went ahead and he made more shulchanos. The Torah goes and continues and says that why was Why [ __ ] made 10 additional menorahs? So he says the reason he did 10 additional menorahs is because every menorah had 10 menorahs. Haray shiv'im, 7 * 10 was really an 11th, but 7 * 10 is 70. K'neged shiv'im umos, it was k'neged the 70 umos. Shikol mancha neris dolkois, as long as these neris were dolkois, hayu miskavshim, they were always able to conquer all these nations. Umayam shikavu laneris, as a matter of fact, on the day that the neris were extinguished, it's at that point they lost. I think this is maybe a little bit of a havana in the Chanukah story, which is clearly a conversation for a whole 'nother day. But the bottom line is, says the Yalkut Shimoni, that [ __ ] felt that he was going to have to go and fight k'neged umos. And as a result, he wanted to have shiv'im neris to go k'neged the shiv'im umos. Moshe Rabbeinu, they had they went al derech nes, all the miracles, Sichon Melech Ha'Emori and Og Melech Ha'Bashan, and Moshe Rabbeinu lifted his hands to God k'neged Amalek. So he didn't need so many neris from the menorah to be able to go k'neged the nations. But in Shlomo's times, they're not living so much al derech nes anymore. They don't have the man, they don't have the Ananei HaKavod. And as a result, [ __ ] needed to go and he had to be mashlim everything through these additional shulchanos that brought the additional parnassa. And through the additional neris, that gave Klal Yisrael koach to be miskaveh. There's a lot more in this Yalkut, but just to get a little bit of a taste. But just two other khiddushim that I think are worth mentioning tucked away in this Yalkut. Number one, if you look at the Yalkut, the Yalkut also says "Vayikakh Kova Asor Kiyores." That just like [ __ ] Hamelech made 10 additional shulchanos and 10 additional menorahs, he also made 10 additional kiyors. Iron sharp. One other thing that you see over here in this Yalkut is the Yalkut is mefurash that [snorts] when [ __ ] Hamelech made these shulchanos and he made these menorahs, so he put breads on all the shulchanos. That was the whole idea to bring out all this ribui of shefa. And he lit all the menorahs because he wanted have the 70 menorahs. And it's mefurash that way in the Yalkut Shimoni beheimsha even more. Which is really one of the two shittos that we had over here in our braisa. In our braisa it's a machlokes whether the shulchanos were just tables and the menorahs were just menorahs or whether they were actually lit and whether the shulchanos actually had bread on it. But it's interesting because if you take a look at Rashi, Rashi in Sugyan when he's mefaresh the manda amar that says "Al kulam hayu mesadrim", so Rashi says "Pamin bazeh and Pamin bazeh." Rashi went out of his way to say that even that manda amar in the braisa that holds that they used to be mesader all the shulchanos and that they used to light all the menorahs, it was Pamin bazeh or Pamin bazeh. But even Rashi was lo al al daito to say that you would walk in and you would have all these different breads and you would have all these different menorahs. If you take a look at Khiddushei HaGrach HaChadash al HaShas, more popularly known as "Primin Stencils", so Primin over there has a little bit of a pshat why Rashi knew for a davar pashut that it can't be that they were mesader all the shulchanos and they lit all the menorahs, but in Yalkut Shimoni it's mefurash not that way. In Yalkut Shimoni it's mefurash that for the shefa of parnassa, no. On the other hand, there's no reidid in the Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai. There were breads on all the shulchanos and there were menorahs that were lit on all the different menorahs. Either way, we'll save the second ara for another day. But for now, let's go a little bit further. Either way, in the very, very last Gemara, just following the paper trail, we mentioned idea Milo McIver's for lame reading. Had to come up. So, we had the slices of challah, which is really a mission on a mid-base, but we had the slices of challah, the one challah the one challah with the hay idea, and then there were the two that were in the Ulam. The one of the two was made of cassock, the other one was made of Zahav. The one that was made of cassock is where the Kohanim would put the breads on the way in, and the one that was made of Zahav is where the Kohanim would put their breads on the way out. Incidentally, the reason they had to put the breads down, Rashi says, on the way in, the reason they had to put the breads down is cuz they were just a little bit tired, right? They're taking it from one of the lishkas in the Azarah, and it's, you know, we take for granted, not so easy. Avoid this Kodesh Shav Hamikdash. And as a result, they needed a little bit of a breather. On the way out, they didn't need such a breather, cuz on the way out, they're taking it from the Heichal, they just walked a couple of feet. What's the big deal, right? The reason Rashi says is because the Kohanim had to wait for the other Kohanim to be makhtir the bizkhay Lavoyna, which was first makhtir the lechem uponim. They would actually wait in the Ulam until they got the green light. They were told that the makhtir of the bizkhay Lavoyna took place, and then they would walk out with it. But here's the point, on the way in, it's on the shulchan of cassock, on the way out, it's on the shulchan of Zahav. And the reason it was in this way is she maylin b'kodesh v'lo mayridin. Now, it's interesting, this idea maylin b'kodesh v'lo mayridin everybody's heard of, right? Every kindler that learns a little bit of Gemara is familiar with this concept of maylin b'kodesh v'lo mayridin. This is a rather more obscure application of it, stating that over here, the Gemara [snorts] feels the necessity to ask the question, and that is ooh may na lon de in mayridin. How do we know this idea of in mayridin? And by the way, the next question is going to be ooh may na lon de maylin. So, how do we know this idea, really, of maylin b'kodesh v'lo mayridin? We're doing this in order of my the first we're going to talk about in my reading that we're going to be my dishes we're going to talk about how you know my is really it's backwards it's says the money in my reading how do you know this idea of in my reading when it comes to as if to say that once the it was on the of at this point you wouldn't be able to put it anymore on a show says the money says I'm not going to say and this is a positive and it says by my son from this by the by the by ultimately is the one that built the so the over the years says by my son by the by the by from here you see in my reading what do you see from here in my reading very not clear that it's so not clear that says three in what the now you would say if she says three it means there's three obvious reasons just the opposite if has to tell you three for something that means doesn't have one good because if he had one good he'd tell you the one plus one is not two or three or four it's two right you know exactly what it is especially in the world of where doesn't have and so if tells you three it means that is bothered with what we're bothered with and that is where exactly do you see it so [snorts] they can see inside it's the by the so they give you that eight lines from the bottom with the of from the fact that the begins with the word by the and it ends with the word by by the by the by the by the by the so the first word used to describe being a building the was by and the last word was by in between the two by it said by the by the by the but it started vayakim and it ended vayakim. So, [snorts] Rashi, you know, you see from here, dafilu b'sachas halashon, lo yored, shma minah in my reading, that even in the language that the Torah is using, the Torah didn't want it to be a yerida. As if to say, we started vayakim, we started on top, and we're ending vayakim, we're going to end on top as well. We didn't start vayakim and end vayiten. That would be like a little bit of a yerida, cuz vayakim it says suggests he lifted. Vayiten just means he placed, maybe he put it down. We start vayakim, we end vayakim, in sachas halashon dafilu there's no inyan of yerida, kal vachomer when it comes to l'maaseh, for sure there can't be yerida. Ve'inam is a Rashi, another p'shat is d'lo yisa'u echad hakohanim ba'komas hamudav va'adanim. Shma minah in my reading, dilufi kohen as ach ba'achein, that being that Moshe Rabbeinu was involved. So, Moshe nobody helped Moshe Rabbeinu build the Mishkan, cuz if somebody would have helped Moshe Rabbeinu building, that person's histatfus would have been a yerida in the asiyas hamishkan. So, it's for that reason, it's for that reason nobody helped Moshe. Now, where do you see nobody helped Moshe? Vayakim Moshe, vayiten, vayokim again, right? Vayosem. So, from the fact that all the lashons are Moshe Rabbeinu, and there's no lashon rabbim over here, there's nobody helping him over here, that's the raya to this inyan of in my reading, because if there was a musag of my reading, then for sure people would have helped Moshe. And then Rashi says, lishana acharina, I'll tell you a third p'shat. D'me'ikar the pasuk says vayakim Moshe as a Mishkan, it says vayakim Moshe as a Mishkan, da ein hu yerida is, which are referring to the yerios. So, Moshe Rabbeinu lifted the Mishkan, kipshuto means the yerios hamishkan, right? Going back to parshas trumah, all the different yerios, I think it's three or four. But, the bottom line is, Moshe Rabbeinu first first lifted the yerios. She'be'tchilah pares hay'erios, v'lo he'ridan ba'komas hamudav va'adanim. But, he didn't put them down while he was putting up all the amudim and va'adanim. Elo achas hay'erios is b'yadai ach hekim kulan. So, this is like an incredible feat. So first put up the area is where you put the roof up first and then you start building the foundation and you build the the walls and then you start putting the electricity in and all the while that you're holding the the area. Now most of them was very strong call me motion. We have memory the Dharma has someone else but the bottom line is is that why would you do it this way? This just seems like a terrific to make way of going about it. The terrorists goes motion of them was told to lift up the area is what you lifted them going to put them down. So now what? So motion of them was forced to work backwards and retrofitted the entire mission into the area. So from there you see it's that there's an Indian in my question but again she's motion over here very clearly he's struggling. He's grappling to understand Pasha shot and as a result Russia came up with three suggestions of maybe where you sit. But the bottom line is from all places this is the market to this idea of in my reading. There's the more of I took me all in the my land. How do you know my land the way we know in my reading how do you know my land? I'm a guy I'm a brother passing says is my heart whatever I say something. So the context over there is referring to the other side of and the other side of the 250 so they came with all their pants right? That was the beginner to figure out if I could chose iron or if I could chose now after they all died so they laughed at of the and the people that had sinned in their souls those were were around. So I could have said that what you should do with it is we could have you should flatten them out and you should take the metal the silver and use it to put on the back to be a covering for the key equivalent of the because they were used as some sort of a by a country you may stroll and this is going to end up being a nice little Israel. What do you see from here that they were told that when you're going to use it now, we wanted around as a nice little Israel to remember the story of Korach. But what are we doing with it? We're going to use it for something more than it had been previously been used for. But initially it was used for the tires. It was used for the back. The actual now is back. Now became the of the back. So you see from here that there's an Indian that you have to be mild. So we know in my reading and we know my reading that both learn from the goddess. The bottom line is this is the this Indian of my reading the Indian. It's very obvious that we need to speak out. It's the obvious to me. Once I have a of my reading why do I need a that I'm reading? If the is my reading you have to be mild. It almost sounds like if I want to go shove it I wouldn't be allowed to do it. I have to be mild. So the my reading isn't that in it of itself a a riot that I'm reading? Why do I need a car sight for in my reading and sight for my reading. Once I know my reading so I know it can't be shove it I also know you can't be my reading. So what's a car for in my reading once I have a car for my reading? So the said that it's from the matter that when the says say throughout my reading the it doesn't mean that you have to be mild. If you want shove it that's okay as well. What it means is that you could be mild. There would have been a have a minute that once something is locked into a certain of so this is the way it has to be forever and even to be mild you're not allowed to. Come out my reading this should move to that if you want to be mild you could be mild. Oh if that's the case of the possible I need a in my reading. I need a to in my reading to know that I'm allowed to be my little but I'm not allowed to be married because if my little man is a to be my little so let them be my little that is I was my little doesn't mean there's a to be my little it means my little because okay so what does that mean as it relates to my reading? That's a little bit unclear. Come on that is an Easter there's an Easter to go ahead and to be married because it's don't think just like you're allowed to be my little so to I'm allowed to be married no my little that's what I will when it comes to me reading in my reading that already [snorts] is going to be an Easter either way. So the first part of today's off especially since we started nine lines from the top was not terribly complicated from here until the end of the day especially since we're going to stop by the mission about 14 lines from the top of all the days is going to be much welcome much welcome to pray I got to tell you the passage says I show she bought the the something what's the context of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the after my mother seen the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of and he broke the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of I could tell you mission you should go ahead and write new mission and you should put the new mission in in the why you writing new mission because the first mission were broken what should I write in the new mission whatever it said as I told you mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission [snorts] of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission of the mission barto the something bottom we learn tiny Rabbi Yosi shall Lucas Lucas that it wasn't just the new Lucas that were in the ark but the shivrei Lucas of the Lucas or were also in the ark. Where do you see this a partial shot is cuz the words Asher she barto extra. Why do I have to say Asher she barto? For after all as the word of you Allah Lucas the something bottom Asher she barto mean everyone knows that we broke the Lucas. So what do we have to over in this Asher she barto Asher she barto the something bottom that even the Lucas that were broken the shivrei Lucas even they have to be in the ark. Said Rabbi Yosi me can and from here you can learn a musser the talmud should talmud that a talmud that forgets his learning machmas because he got old he was a because of an in the minute just like we had to treat the shivrei Lucas the Lucas and with a certain level of sanctity. Why? Because it once had in it the the even though now all it is is shivrei Lucas even though right now it was park with no there's nothing inherently but being that at one point at one point these a volume housed the double the that was the so it's for that reason it retains a certain level of so Rabbi Yosi said you know you see from here a talmud should talmud machmas and by minute the and the spirit and says that it's possible this was the Rabbi Yosi who we know was a and because of his he forgot his learning that's what he's always reminding him of things that he said or didn't say Rabbi Yosi almost being himself said that I see from the partial of the shivrei Lucas that even though I feel now like shivrei Lucas but at the same time the there are times that if someone's learning that's actually a way of establishing so usually how you by learning but probably there are times where how do we know that it says she I don't know like I don't know you know what the word means you actually thank you for breaking the now breaking the is in the show you doing the zoo the threat after you learn the in the in the in the where the talks about the that client so we're at when they had and the level that they fell at the time of the so this was an incredible Indian of so but I feel said this is not the time to talk about this but there were tremendous benefits in so you see that even so that could be way of actually establishing and founding if you take a look at the top actually says what is an example of this giving us some practical advice just like that the when I don't know what's the the is that if you know what that would right now because of because of whatever it is is not on the same of learning you can't be with them in the okay what's the practical take away of sometimes that we use so he says about what that's what that's that's why my name is the bicycle >> Somebody's in a situation where right now he has to move out of the for the what's he would think what do you mean I'm learning tell me can I get cool I'm going to be for this I'm going to be losing come with me but you going to get your home I saw that in he pushes a rush a little bit partial when you think sounds like saying is you do an act of being PLAYER AND BECAUSE YOU PLAYER YOU GOING TO BE THE WAY THAT YOU WANT to be had you not been the rush is coming in much softer where rush is saying is that sometimes if you're doing the right thing then you going to get for not learning you would have gotten learning but not that the actually will put you in a place where you GOING TO BE BETTER OFF than had you been learning. Certainly the way it's quoted in the certainly the way it's quoted in the is always that I'm all about the carrot because sometimes you have to do a reader with there's a concept of an issue usually falls into that category rush is for whatever reason seem to go away from that is actually though you say the rush has a over here I don't mean that you're being the the his title rush is not happening through title number one sometimes it's the right thing to do and if it's the right thing to do you're not going to lose you'll get THE WAY YOU TELL US by learning you're not going to be told ever by being told it's not the more popular way of understanding it but I'll go upon him as I stated on rush either way moving along another man from I'm a town of commerce a town of that went bad sort of little means he's spoiled, he smells, right? What does it mean? What it means is that in the event that the Talmud the Talmud chacham is nischal ki so hu kalaila, you should just keep it b'chazrei chadorim. Leave that skeleton in the closet, you're not supposed to be mefarsem it. A little bit of a chiddush cuz you think if the Talmud chacham is soraich, he is the real deal. Turns out he's not legit. So if that's the case, maybe expose him. It's natural. To the extent that he's a Talmud chacham, that criteria alone earns him the protection, and you have to be machashech the chet that he did literally kalaila. Amora Resh Lakish. Resh Lakish said another memra, and this memra of Resh Lakish is going to be the topic of the race. If somebody forgets one thing of his learning, the pasuk says, said Resh Lakish, in this pasuk you see that if somebody forgets he's over on a lo sasei. Where do you see that? Doesn't say lo sasei over here. What does lo sasei usually mean? Lo this, lo that. Doesn't say lo sasei. The background to this is something that Rabbanan Omar Rabbi Lo famously said. Wherever it says the word "hishamer" or "pen" or "vav", any one of those three words, eino ela lo sasei. It means a lo sasei. And being that it says over here "hishamer", "hishamer" is a lo sasei. "Hishamer" u'pen shnei lavinin hu. Not just going to be over one Lo Sase, you're going to be over two Lo Sases. And the reason you're going to be over two Lo Sases is because it doesn't just say he shomer, it says pen. So being that it says two, you're going to be over two. You're going to be over three Lo Sases. It says he shomer twice. And being that it says he shomer twice and it says pen, so you're going to end up being over three. You would think that a person would be over these Lo Sases even if he was an onus. If he forgot his learning something because he was an onus. It says open your suru And being that it says open your suru we learn It's only if you do like a an act of some sort, like you just want to forget your learning, you want to put that part of your life behind you. That person is the person that's over the Lo Sase. You would think a person would talk for all of Mishnah. So let's say somebody is learning a lot and it's hard, it's hard, and it's hard to remember, and it's hard to properly It's just hard. There's There's a lot of learning. So you would think even that person is over the Lo Sase. It says rock. Right? The possuk begins rock. Rock is always an exclusionary word. This is major, major carve out, major exception to this Indian. Rock You should know that as much as I'm telling you a lot, but this love is not something that is always going to apply. And to the extent that somebody forgot his learning because he was talk for all of Mishnah, so so that person is not going to be over the love. Now truth is there's a big discussion in the Rebbe. This is not what we're going to talk about, whether Mishnah means like we described it where a person does an action and he he managed tries eradicating it from his memory and his conscience and he really, really wants to get past that part of his life. Or he means someone that just doesn't do enough to remember. So he doesn't have it properly or something along those lines. So this is a an Indian that I heard him talk about Iin Sham. But just in terms of partial shine in the Gamara, recapping what we just had, so Reish Lakish in a string of Reish Lakish memories said that from the possuk that if somebody forgets his learning if someone is literally one aspect of his learning, this person is already going to be over a life. Why? Because it says he shuns. Rav Avina and Rav Avina said one laugh, two laughing. It says he shuns and it says pet. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said two laugh. And you're saying good, say better. It's three laughing. Cuz it says he shuns twice and it says pet once. Now, Rav Huna, I would have expected to be a fourth man in the Gamara. I thought there was going to be a man somebody that was going to say over laughing. You know why? Cuz it says he shuns twice and pet twice. Rashi shuns pet tish ufen two he shuns and two pets. Why do we stop here? Tzorch beer. Another tzorch beer is what is the machlokes of what's partial shine in the machlokes? I understand. Reish Lakish knew that you're over a life. How did he know it? Because what do you mean? Rav Avina Rav Avina said wherever it says he shuns pet so it for sure says he shuns and pet. And it says he shuns twice. I think it also says pet twice. But the bottom line is Reish Lakish stops by one. Even Rav Avina stops at two. Rav Nachman Yitzchak is the greatest in the Sugya. He says three. He also stops by four for some reason. But partial shine, how do you read this Gamara? We've read this Gamara many times the years. How do you read Parshas Shavua in the Gamara? So the Torah Parshas Shavua seems to be Reish Lakish was of the opinion that he Shomer Pen Va'al but at the same time all the Shomers Pen Va'al as relates to one Lo Saseh count as one. Meaning as much as there's a Mussig of Lav Va'al B'Shnei Lavin there's nothing to talk about. Two [snorts] Loys would count as two Lavin. But a Shomer Pen Va'al is a more subtle word that describes Lo Saseh. L'maina Nafke Mina all the Shomers Pen Va'al are going to count as one. Ravina said I disagree with you. I hold he Shomer and Pen should be two. Now I agree that two Shomers is one AND TWO PENS ARE ONE. Over a Shomer and Pen I don't see why they shouldn't count as two. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said no. If he Shomer Pen Va'al is a Lo Saseh so this is a Lav Va'al B'Gimmel Lavin. I don't see what the difference should be between Shomers and Pens. Now for some reason Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak draws the line. He says the two Shomers yeah and the two Pens not. Like one of the them you can count as two but you can't have two of them counting as two. That's already a little bit of a leap of faith. But I think in terms of P'shuta Shel Mikra understanding the Machlokes Amora'im between Reish Lakish, Ravina and Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak clearer in P'shat Torah it seems to be that as much as he Shomer Pen Va'al Lo Shainas of Lo Saseh but the more softer Lo Shainas of Lo Saseh. Either way one [snorts] more Gamara. Zochte Heilige Gemara Rav Yochanan and Rav Elazar the Amrei Travayo. Rav Yochanan and Rav Elazar both said Rav Yochanan and Rav Elazar the Amrei Travayo. Right the names matter. Rav Yochanan and Rav Elazar the Amrei Travayo. I think [snorts] we made the point. Torah Nitna B'Arba'im. The Torah was given after 40 days. Meaning 40 days from Ma'amad Har Sinai the Torah was given. U'Nishmas Noitzas B'Arba'im. And the Nishama gets infused in the child the embryo of the a after 40 days. Kol HaNishama Torah any person that watches the Torah and nishmasam yishtameres, his nishama is going to be watched as well. But if somebody doesn't [snorts] watch the Torah inside of him and nishmasam yishtameres, his nishama is not going to be watched as well. I mean, if somebody watches the Torah that he has, he protects it, he doesn't forget it, right? That's the segway over here. That's the hemshich. That person's nishama is going to be watched. Obiv choshech in a mishama Torah, if someone doesn't watch the Torah and nishmasam yishtameres, told Rabbi Shmuel Yeshiva Rabbi Shmuel they used to say the following price. Mashal Adam shomas tzippor dror lavdei. There was a person an Adam or he had an eved, maybe it was a melech an adon. He gave his eved a tzippor dror. He gave him a tzippor to watch. Amar, he said kimeduma ateh, you think shem adom avdo shani noitel mimcha issur bidomim? Do you think that if you lose this tzippor, this bird that I asked you to watch, then I'm going to ask you for an issur? So issur was probably the value of the tzippor. So yeah, no worries, I'll lose the tzippor, I'll make you whole. Absolutely not. If you don't watch it properly, nishmascha ni noitel mimcha. I'm going to take your nishama from you. Meaning, you better watch this. Don't just make me whole. No, no, no. You're going to have to protect this. So too Hakadosh Baruch Hu says, I'm giving you the Torah and if this TORAH IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME, it's very valuable. And don't think that you'll say, "Okay, so I'll forget the Torah, you know, make you whole somehow." You're not going to make me whole. Nishmascha ni noitel mimcha. This is a very, very serious matter. Exhale. So, as it relates to the last portion of the daf. From that [snorts] possuk it says Rabbi [ __ ] you see that if somebody forgets dover echad mi talmudoi, he's over a life. Ravina said, you're not only over one life, you're over two love. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said, you're not only over two love. In fact, you're going to be over three love. Then you have to read the fine print, which says that the only time this is true is the misserum liba. You have to know what that means. Yochana talk for all of Mishnasay. For that already we have the word rack for sure in that situation, a person is not going to be over. From our Gemara, it sounds like that this was a discussion amongst the Amora. The Amora. Resh Lakish, Ravina, and Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak. This Indian that if somebody forgets his learning, it's very serious. Over by one love, over by two love, over by three love. The truth is, the Indian of there being a issur associated with forgetting one's learning was already discussed by the Tana. In fact, it's a Mishna. In fact, it's a Mishna in Pirkei Avos. It's perek gimmel Mishna yud. Rav Dostai bar Rabbi Yanai mishum Rav Meir. Rav Dostai bar Rabbi Yanai said in him Rav Meir. If somebody forgets one item of his learning, we consider it as if he's chayav misah. She nemar, the possuk says, Yochana said, Rav Meir, afilu talk for all of Mishnasay. You would think that even if it was talk for all of Mishnasay, u'pen ya'suru the love But really, the makor to this Indian of it being very chomer for a person to forget his learning is really meforsha Mishna. Now, if it's meforsha Mishna, so what's Resh Lakish coming to be masiv? So it's poshit. The Mishna didn't say that there's an issur per se. The Mishna didn't say that there's a lo ta'aseh. From the Mishna you see that it's a davar chomer. Malvin alav kilu mischayev ben ashay, which implies some sort of obviously. But in terms of what the nature of the issur is, for sure they didn't mention. That was already discussion in Am Yisrael. Is it one lav, is it two lavin, or is it three lavin, right? In Am Yisrael and came Am Yisrael. So on some level in the Mishnah, it was implied already that there's an issur. What issur is that, we don't know. SO AM YISRAEL WENT AND AM YISRAEL DID WHAT AM Yisrael always did, and that is they expanded and they commented. They were mefaresh the Mishnah. The Mishnah says malin all of Kilo Mesukai Ben Ashi. Vice doist is an issur. What is the issur? Resh Lakish says it's the heshamer. Rabina said it's the heshamer and the pan. And Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said it's the two heshamers and the one pan. But the ikkar idea of Kol Ashur Tover Echad MiMishnaso, that's something that's rooted in a Mishnah, a Mishnah in Pirkei Avos, stating that as it relates to this whole shmuzz, dig it Kadaita, be marechiv the inyan a little bit, and be ezras Hashem, speaking about four ha'aros. The first ha'ara is, we've mentioned many times over the years and a few times recently, the Ramban, Hayedu'a U'mefursam in Parshas Vayikra. The Ramban on the pasuk, "Rak hishamer l'cha u'shmor nafshicha me'od, pen tishkach es hadvarim asher ra'u einecha v'lo yasuru mimenu kol yemei chayyecha." The this pasuk is it's a pasuk that l'daati is a mitzvas lo sa'aseh. Hizaharu me'od. And it's a lo sa'aseh that the Torah is warning us in [snorts] a very, very wordy and a very, very intense way. And what is the side of this issur? The side of this issur is, "Shema tishkach Maimonides Sinai mikol hadvarim asher ra'u einecha v'lo yasuru >> [laughter] >> mimenu kol yemei chayyecha." A person has an obligation to always remember and never forget my middle Sinai. In other words, Raban says that this is referring to my middle Sinai. Truth is, we kept on reading the possuk. Rashi [ __ ] Nachman but really there's a next possuk. You and the possuk goes on and describes my middle Sinai. Says the Raban, you want to know what this is? It's a lo and what is the of this lo? Thou shall never forget my middle Sinai. This Raban is a Raban and this Raban is related to the Raban and then the parshas boy and it's from the as relates to the that the it's related to the but at the same time the Raban seems to have set a beautiful in a possuk the lo ka the Raban and it's the lo ka in that first glance the Raban the Raban goes and the Raban says you want to know what this possuk means Rashi [ __ ] it means my middle Sinai. My middle Sinai we just learned it. It's a mission in the words of call it's not the same language right? But the bottom line is it's it's referring to taylor you're not allowed to forget your learning. You learn you have to remember. How could the Raban come and say that it's referring to my middle Sinai? Isn't it the lo ka sugya in shas? Oh by the way a mission. How is it possible that this is the way the Raban went ahead and the Raban was mefarish. Truth is that at first glance they'd be welcome to say that when the Raban said what he said he didn't mean that all the possuk means is that you have to remember my middle Sinai. About the possuk is saying you have to remember your learning, but [snorts] in addition to remembering your learning, you who the oy grow there's another Indian in this possuk exactly the Ramban and that is that you have to remember my mother Sinai. I just to bring out the point a little bit better. Right, if you look at the possuk Pushet based on the Gemara Menachot and the Mishnah in Avot, what the possuk is saying is referring to the Torah. The Torah The Torah. The Ramban when in the Ramban was mechadesh and the Ramban said read the next possuk. The next possuk says Yom Asher Amadeti Lifnei Hashem L'Kach L'Chorev. [laughter] In other words, the divarim Asher Ro'i Nacho that the Torah is saying Ishmeru Nafshoteichem Pen Tishkachu is referring not to the words of the Torah, it's referring to my mother Sinai. U'Pen Yisuru Milvavchem Kol Yimei Chayeichem is my mother Sinai. V'Yidatem Livneichem V'Livnei Veneichem is my mother Sinai. This is pushet the way you always understand the Ramban. But being that we discovered it's it's a a sugiyah, the first Mahloket the Ramban can't be oyker l'gamrei the first p'shat. What he's going against Resh Lakish, Ravina, Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, and Rav Me'ir? It's impossible. How could you even say such a thing? The teretz is, maybe what the Ramban means is the Ramban is saying that there's two things going on in this possuk. Number one is Ishmeru Nafshoteichem Pen Tishkachu Es Ha'Dvarim Asher Ro'i Nacho referring to the Torah. U'Pen Yisuru Milvavchem Kol Yimei Chayeichem the Torah. V'Yidatem Livneichem V'Livnei Veneichem the Torah. Additionally, the next possuk Ishmeru Nafshoteichem Pen is also referring to the Yom Asher Amadeti Lifnei Hashem L'Kach L'Chorev. So there's two things you have to remember. You have to remember the words of the Torah and you also have to remember you also have to remember my midrashim. But it's not much for that way. First of all, if you look at the Ramban, it's not much for that way. But it's even more not much for that way. You know why? Because if you take a look at Rashi in Chumash, Rashi on this pasuk, Rashi Shomer lo cheresh min nafsho lo id. So Rashi says as follows, If you're not going to forget your learning, you'll be considered chachamim u'vinanim. V'im ta'afsu oisam, if however you're going to forget it, m'toch shichla, simply because there's something called shichla, yecheshvu shotim, you're going to be considered shotim. What's pashut in Rashi? How do you even read this Rashi? So this Rashi is really explaining this pasuk b'hemshech to the previous psukim. If you go back a few different psukim, the psukim say "U'shmartem va'asitem", you should keep the Torah, "Ki chachmatchem u'vinatchem l'einei ha'amim". >> [laughter] >> Look Rashi, you know what this Rashi Shomer lo cheresh is? It's a tnai in the umos ha'olam looking at the Yidden and being impressed. We're saying the umos ha'olam are going to look at the the Yidden and they're going to say "Wow, ki chachmatchem u'vinatchem". They're going to say "Rak am chacham v'navon [ __ ] gadol hazeh". "Ki mi [ __ ] gadol", I never saw such a nation like this in my life. They're going to be BLOWN AWAY BY KLAL YISRAEL. YOU KNOW when that's going to happen? Rashi Shomer lo cheresh min nafsho lo id, if you're going TO KNOW YOUR TORAH. BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO FORGET YOUR TORAH, THEN on that Dr. Ramban, that Rashi learned that this pasuk Rashi Shomer lo cheresh min nafsho lo id is not an azhara. It's not an azhara. What is this pasuk? It's like a an asmachta, it's a caveat. It's the fine print. That you want to know when the world is going to be impressed by the Jews? If you're going to remember your Torah Rashi Shomer Shabbas tonight in the Ulam Olam saying RASHI turned this into like a tonight in Well, you want to look cool in the eyes OF THE ULAM OLAM, don't forget your learning. SO NO WAY, it's much more serious. This is a I've got to say this is a It's a that his AND IT SHOULD THE RAMBAN'S ISSUE OVER HERE is to be master of Rashi. The Rashi learned this not a fact that And you want to know what THE DON'T FORGET YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE SEE THE MISSION IT'S A I'LL TELL YOU MORE THAN THAT. THE RAMBAN K'ilu wrote a commentary on the Rambam's Sefer Hamitzvos. A sub commentary that the Ramban wrote to the Rambam's Sefer Hamitzvos is at the very very end of the Rambam's Asin and Lavin. The Ramban has a list known as the Shichchas Asin and as the Shichchas Halavin. If you look at Shichchas Halavin number two in the Ramban's Sefer Hamitzvos, so Dr. Ramban, what is number two? Hamitzva She'anemno Anush Nishkach M'Har Sinai. V'lo Noser Oiso Midasenu. Aval Yehe Einenu Shom Kol Hayomim. The Ramban goes and he's very and he says the same exact Shittah that he wrote in his The Ramban Shittah in Parshas Vayishlach. If you look at the Rambam, the Rambam did not mention the Issur of He didn't mention it in the Nusach of the Shittah and the mission of his and he didn't say the Ramban Shittah that he writes in Parshas Vayishlach. The Ramban was very bothered. How did the Ramons forget this possible in the Torah? He somewhere came out of the house I say. There's an issue in the Torah there's a a love that probably intended the problem forgot, right? There's a Shikha LOVE OVER HERE. WHICH LOVE THE LOVE of Shikha and fake the problem what's going on over here? But when the problem was mastic on the problem, he was only mastic that he left out the love not to forget my HOUSE IN THE IF the problem holds that [laughter] there's two love and the problem is just being mastic. He's just being mastic on what the the problem is in the mission and over to say that the problem was the problem will get out of here in the second. PROBLEM YOU FORGOT A POSSIBLE IN THE TORAH. OH, IT SOUNDS to me you know what he should have said you learn it like Rashi that this is not really a license which is could be in the problem. But it sounds to me like YOU LEARNING LIKE RASHI. And if that's THE CASE, HOW DO YOU LEARN IT LIKE RASHI? THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT LOVE. AND BY THE WAY LOOK AT THEM AND NO, HE ONLY BROUGHT THE SECOND THING IN HIS HE WAS SUPPOSED TO SOCIETY from the problem and Rashi in his society and society from the problem and the problem in the it's very much from the problem that problem held there's only one myth and that one myth is not the myth that's discussed in and that's discussed in the mission in the mission in the mission in the mission. I think it's a question at summer on the problem and we going to leave that as the first Torah. The second order is this is something that we mentioned in the past of the base magic can't learn this tomorrow. Speak out four hours and this not to be one of them. And that [snorts] is it's your door that the problem was in this is brought down in case that that even though the problem was not flick as relates to the issue for a person to forget the mission of the mission of the but in the words of the problem that the problem was the problem that the problem was the problem. That can't work. This was only true for the problem that they used to learn the problem of the problem of the problem. For the problem that used to learn the problem of the problem of the problem the an issur for a person to forget a d'var halacha m'mishnaso. But once it's l'shaim shamayim Torah she'b'al peh and the Torah is written down, they were mad that writing Torah sh'b'al peh should like d'shtaka. At that point, there's no issur anymore for a person to forget his learning. This is an incredible, incredible kula in the sugiyah of a person forgetting his learning, which in the Mishnah in Avos HaReishonim is chayav b'nasikah. Even m'chayav b'nasikah. And in other sugiyahs, you see the one, two, or three lavin. But said Rabbeinu Chaim Volozhin, it was only true for the rishonim sh'lamdu b'peh. But as it relates to b'zmanenu where the Torah sh'b'al peh is written at this point, this is not something that's relevant anymore. The Brisker Rav al haTorah in Parshas Va'eschanan, so he brings this Rabbeinu Chaim Volozhin and he explains the oimek of it. Said Maran HaGriz, "Normally you learn, what's the issur of a person forgetting d'var halacha m'mishnaso? The person has Torah, you can't forget the Torah. It's an issur. You're not allowed to forget learning. Can't eat neveilah, can't eat basar b'chalav. You can't forget Torah. It's a regular issur. Gadol a person is not allowed to forget his learning." Said the Brisker Rav, "What Rabbeinu Chaim Volozhin was being m'galeh to us was that the yesod of the issur is not for the yachid not to forget his learning. The yesod of the issur is Torah sh'b'al peh once upon a time was given over b'maseirah. It was given over ish m'pi ish. Moshe kibel Torah m'Sinai u'm'sarah l'Yehoshua, Yehoshua l'zkeinim. That's the way Torah was given over. To the extent a person who had some level of achrayus of making sure the maseirah went over, forgot d'var halacha m'mishnaso, he just blew the entire maseirah. Can you imagine that? If one halacha is forgotten, it could be someone's going to darshan a kal v'chomer and there's a pircha on the kal v'chomer you don't know about it because it was forgotten. Riboiso dam akula, a churban mamesh in a ruchnius'dige sense could take place if a dover echad mi'mishnaso is forgotten. And that's why he was so chomer kol asher dover echad mi'mishnaso. Harei zeh chiyuv misah b'av sei. And you have even one lav, two lav, and three lavin. And like the Ramban says, the Torah was his remmal all these leshonos, all these adjectives, it's because it's such a CHOMER THING. YOU KNOW what we're dealing with over here? What we're dealing with over here is the gantz ha'mesorah. And if somebody's going to chalilah forget the mesorah, there could be A TREMENDOUS KHURVAN. THAT'S WHAT THE ROSH WAS BEING MEGALEH to us. The yesod of this is not a yachid who learned now forgot his learning. The yesod of the issur is that you have to make sure that you protect the mesorah. And if you're not going to protect the mesorah, then takah tremendous Khurvan could happen. So that was all true when the mesorah was going me'ish mi'pi'ish. But once already it's asur leshanos divrei Torah she'b'al peh, forgets his learning, all that it is is an issur gavra. At this point you're not forgetting mesorah anymore. If you're not forgetting mesorah anymore at this point, there's not something you have to be worried about. The Piskei Rosh said that he believes this is the oimek in the Gemara Maseches Sotah daf lamed zayin, which was by the way when we spoke about this by Reishis. The Gemara over there talks about the brochos and the klalos of Har Gerizim and Har Eival. And the Gemara says that for every brocha and every klalah, like for every boruch that's mentioned in the pesukim, and for every arur that's mentioned in the pesukim, there were really four different brochos and klalos. So each one was made up of four. Why? Because for each one of the mitzvos, both assei and lo sa'asei, boruchs and arurs respectively, there was a boruch lilmod, you have to learn it. There was a boruch lilamed, you have to teach it. There was a boruch lishmor, and there was a boruch la'asos. And the same is true for the arur. So there was a lilmod, there was a lilamed, there was a lishmor, there was a la'asos. In other words, a person has to learn the mitzvos. You have to teach the mitzvos. You have to be lishmor the mitzvahs. And lastly, you have to do the mitzvahs. Said the Brisker Rav, if you take a look at the Masha in Sukkah the Lam Zayin, he much as what is learn mean? We know what learn means, to learn. Learn means to teach. Lastly means to do. What is learn? Now said the Brisker Rav, I know what you're thinking. Isn't lastly mitzvahs say and learn mitzvahs say? Zacher Shomer, right? Zacher is the say and Shomer is the say. Sometimes the word Shmira is in the context of say. That's true. But over here it doesn't work. The reason it doesn't work over here because you have to learn and the lastly on the say and on the say. So if you had the lastly on the say and the learn and the say it would work. OH, BUT FOR EVERY THERE WAS A LEARN AND LASTLY. WHAT'S THE learn of the say? And for every say there's a The Torah says lastly means do the mitzvah. If it's a say it's a say. If it's a say it's a say. So what's learn? Said the Brisker Rav, that Lulay the Mistafeeno, you know what learn means? Learn means YOU HAVE TO PROTECT IT. YOU HAVE TO WATCH IT. THE YIDDEN WERE told you have to learn Torah. The Yidden were told you have to teach Torah. And the Yidden were told you have to watch the Torah. You have to protect the Torah. And the Yidden were told lastly you have to go ahead and you have to do the mitzvahs. Because the Torah is the Torah. Again, we don't appreciate this so much anymore. But once upon a time, the Torah was something that was given over If it's given over it's What's going to happen if if it gets forgotten? That's where you find the Torah and they're a person died with him the Torah as well. There was such an incredible sensitivity when it came to all these But the point is learn means you have to watch it. Learn means you have to protect it. The [snorts] Yidden was told to learn Torah and then after you learn it, PROTECT IT. WHY PROTECT IT? Because if you're not going to protect the Torah, who knows if there's going to be Torah in the world? And you can't have a world without Torah. And that's why part and parcel of the Torah was learn it, teach it, do it, and learn. This is something you have to watch as well. And that's the Imeq of Chaim Volozhin. The Imeq of Chaim Volozhin was this inyan. It's not just an issur gavra, but don't forget your learning. But it's lishmah. You have to make sure that you're going to protect the mesorah. Stating [snorts] that, if you take a look in the Shulchan Aruch HaRav, in Hilchos Talmud Torah perek bais, and this is in sif dalet, Shulchan Aruch HaRav has a whole arichus on the inyan of the issur shichchas haTorah, and then he says as follows, "Vegam achshav, even now, she nisht of the Torah shebaal peh, that Torah shebaal peh is already written, so that if somebody learned something and he forgot, okay, he could learn it again. It doesn't help at all. He's already over the lav kodem she ya'ayan, before he's going to be me'ayan, the olden days, if a person forgot his learning, even though it wasn't written, you could have asked somebody and he could have told you the Torah again. The Torah says it didn't help. So too now bizmanenu, said the Shulchan Aruch HaRav, that it's not going to help as well. In other words, there seems to be a fundamental machlokes in Hilchos Talmud Torah between Rav Chaim Volozhin and between the Baal HaTanya, the Shulchan Aruch HaRav. And that is the issur of shichchas haTorah. According to Rav Chaim Volozhin, it's an issur in the mesorah. It's you're not allowed to leave out any chelek of the mesorah. You have to make sure that the mesorah is going to be kept 100% intact. And that's what this was only negaya when the mesorah is something that was takke given over ish mi piyush. But [snorts] now that already you're allowed to write the Torah shebaal peh, at this point, this is not something you have to be concerned with. However, the Shulchan Aruch HaRav held not that way. He held it's an issur gavra. A person is not allowed to forget his learning. And as a result, the issur is going to be true today just like it was back in the day, a machlokes between Rav Chaim Volozhin and Reb Shneur Zalman as it relates to Hilchos Talmud Torah. This is not the Machlokes between Reb Chaim Volozhin and the Baal HaTanya in Hilchos Talmud Torah, but definitely a very interesting Machlokes nonetheless, and that is the second hour. The third hour is Who is the Baal Memra in Or Gedulah that said "Kol Hamashkiach Dover Echad MiTalmidav"? He's over by love, two love, and three love. Who is the original Baal Memra? It was Reish Lakish. According to me, Reish Lakish is very worried. Do not forget one Halacha of your learning. Certainly the way the Shulchan Aruch HaRav understands it. Do not forget one Halacha of your learning. The Gemara says in Maseches Sanhedrin Daf Chof Daled Amud Alef Amar Ulla "Haroeh Es Reish Lakish Beis Medrash." If somebody saw Reish Lakish in Beis Medrash learning "Ke'ilu Oker Harim Detocham DeZaza." He was such a charif. He was literally like observing an Oker Harim. He was uprooting mountains from the ground and he was grinding one against the other. Reish Lakish was an Oker Harim. What does that mean? So, we know that all Talmidei Chachamim back in the day were divided into two groups. They were the Sina'is and they were the Oker Harims. The Sinai was someone that was a big bakki that his Mishnayos was Seduros like a Shulchan Aruch, just like it was at Sinai. And the Oker Harim was the great Salmden. He was the big charif. Reish Lakish falls into the category of being an Oker Harim. It's in Maseches Gemara in Sanhedrin Daf Chof Daled Amud Alef. But, the point is Reish Lakish the Oker Harim, Reish Lakish the super Salmden, Reish Lakish is the one that said you're not allowed to forget one ounce of your learning. Means also shmeinen that because Reish Lakish was a super Salmden, it meant he had a schwache bekius. REISH LAKISH IS OF THE OPINION THAT IF SOMEBODY FORGETS DOVER Echad MiMishnayosav or Dover Echad MiTalmidav, that's his loshon, he's already OKER A LOVE. THE TERETZ IS HIS ikker inyan of his stoinus wasn't being an Oker Harim, wasn't being a Salmden. But, as it relates to as it relates to his bekius, of course he had a bekius in his own words. What did he say? He said that if somebody would go ahead and figure out one thing of his learning behavior of R' Akiva Eiger. It occurred to me further, who's the man down in the Mishnah? Who said in the Mishnah if somebody forgets Mal al avos kiilu miskayev ashei? It's R' Meir. R' Meir is the one in the Mishnah of the story of R' Akiva and R' Meir. If you look at that very same Gemara, it's in Sanhedrin 20. The next Gemara says R' Akiva said, "Like all of R' Meir in Beis Medrash." If somebody saw R' Meir in Beis Medrash, it's kiilu oiker harim b'soch avazaim. It's not only as if you see someone being oiker harim, this is oiker harim b'nei Yisrael harim, right? So, R' Meir wasn't just an oiker harim, he was an oiker harim. R' Meir who's the shpitz oiker harim. You think R' Meir was misalzel when it came to his bekius? Chalila. He's the one that said kol oiker harim Mal al avos kiilu miskayev ashei. Truth is, we've mentioned a similar art to this many times over the years. And that is the Maharsha says in Maseches Megillah 20. We know that R' Meir was a sofer, right? R' Meir was a a sofer. The Gemara says alacha ain l'daber an ois achas of kisvei kodesh l'man achas. So, when a sofer is writing, whatever he's writing, he has to he's writing Sefer Torah, he has to look in the Sefer Torah and you have to go ahead and you write it. Like the Gemara says R' Akiva and the sofer R' Meir, he once went to be ma'avir the shonim Asya and they didn't have a Megillah. They didn't have a Megillas Esther. He said, "No worries." He sat down and he wrote the Megillas Esther. How could he write a Megillas Esther? What do you mean he wrote it achas? So, R' Akiva said shani R' Meir, d'mekayin beih avos avos. Yishiru l'negdecha. He was someone that by him his Torah was so clear and he had such clarity in his information that he was able to write it achas. Now, we've mentioned many times over the years R' Akiva Eiger has said that what's the avos avos yishiru l'negdecha? So, look at the beginning of the pasuk. Einech v'noiyach yishiru l'negdecha. That a person has to have the Torah so clear that he literally sees it in front of him. And he goes and he gives us all the that there are two types of people that have good memories. Some people just have what he calls the current phenomena, right? In English, a phenomenal memory. And he says there are other people that when they see something, they take a picture. They literally take a picture and they could just upload the image if they ever need it. And like this, they see it in front of them. What the was saying about was that was different that for him it was a matter WHEN HE WAS IT WAS CUZ SAID THE WAS TAKES ONE TO KNOW ONE, had a photographic memory. And because he had a photographic memory, so he was being What's the problem? THE PROBLEM IS NOT BY BUT THE WAS TRYING TO SAY WAS NOT HAD A GREAT MEMORY. Great memory is unless you have it stored. Oh, if you have it stored, then you're seeing it. A photographic memory means you're looking at it. That's the end OF THIS BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS IS AGAIN. Although is the right the says in that we never pass why cuz had the ability to be shots in and the didn't have to be that was such a super duper You think it's only a No. had this incredible is the one who says the two that describes as incredible But at the same time you find the same thing. Let's take you one to this. You wait the you know. It's so subtle but I think it's and that is Remember the get? Obviously, we're not going to recap the get now. But [snorts] the story of the get with Isaac and his Bene Bayis, and that whole episode that took place. So, obviously it was a discussion in Hilchos Shabbas, did Itzik have a din of a Shoteh, did he not have a din of a Shoteh, but the reason that the Cleves get took over the world, and the reason it was Marsha Lomis the way it was Marsha Lomis, is because Rebbe Yisrael Lipschitz, who was the Mesader Get, who was a Gaon Olam, he felt that Itzik was Bedas when he went ahead and he divorced his wife, and then the Frankfurt Beis Din went Kinder Get him, and they decided that he was really a Shoteh, and the Frankfurt Beis Din never explained why they felt the way they felt. And even though Rebbe Yaakov Emden and the Shaagas Aryeh, U'varoshum the Noda B'Yehudah, everybody reached OUT, JUST GIVE US AN EXPLANATION, they refused to explain themselves. And what happened was this, how Shailoh went from being a Shailoh about a divorce, a Shailoh about a Get, to now all of a sudden it was a a Shailoh about what the responsibility of a Beis Din is, and do does one Beis Din have an obligation to explain itself to another Beis Din, and this is a little bit of what was going on. As a matter of fact, the Frankfurt Beis Din, at least to the human eye, seemed to have been getting agitated that so many people were speaking out against it and and questioning their authority, and people were asking legitimate SHAILOHS, BUT THEY FELT THEY HAD NO CHIYUV, they had no obligation to go ahead and to respond to it. And as a result, the Get of Cleves didn't just divide a husband and a wife, but really it divided the entire Europe. If you look at the Noda B'Yehudah's lengthy Tshuvas on the topic of the Cleves Get, he wrote many many Tshuvas. So, this is towards the beginning of the first Tshuvah, and he's writing it Reb Abish Frankfurter, his close Yid, and he says that I don't understand why the Beis Din has such a hard time with the question. Isn't it just one line? He says, "V'ma af al yad Hadavar Kein, let's say we're nothing compared to you, we're Mamish Talmidim M'makom Ravam, but a Talmid is allowed to ask his Rebbe a question, and a Rebbe is supposed to get agitated when he asks his question when a Talmid asks him a question. Halo Yirei [ __ ] Talmidei Shel Rebbe Yochanan Haya." He said, "Rebbe he was a good FRIEND AND HE ARGUED WITH HIM IN MANY PLACES and I DON'T KNOW OF ONE PLACE that the Buddha that Buddha got upset. He got the [ __ ] the and the reason is because this is the natural and the hit me. What's the of the words? You just gave a muscle and the every word is honest. What did you learn this week? We learned the last week where God upset. We started with the and you when you get upset. He got upset when he was in the mattress and he was saying and he wasn't saying it over his name and he felt bad cuz he knew and we've always mentioned have you lost his 10 sons during his lifetime and he needed his and as a result he was very disappointed. He said I'm going to lose and the society the big and the word says another word. The word says THAT AFTER [ __ ] LEFT THE WORLD DIED LEFT THE WORLD AND was so lost HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT to do. So he must have I don't know sitting learn together with you he'll be with you and started saying learning and what did HE SAY? YOU CAN and then >> [laughter] >> in one of the great moments in turns to and he tells I'm going to say something to you. He said you don't think I know I'm saying good. I need you to tell me you know how he when I used to [ __ ] I used to say something AND HE WOULD BOMB AWAY AT ME. HE USED TO ASK ME 24 QUESTIONS ON EVERYTHING I EVER SAID and you know what to and like this WE CAME OUT WITH THE YOU'RE TELLING ME I DON'T NEED YOU FOR THAT. THAT'S WHAT was saying. YOU FIND GOT UPSET. HE GOT UPSET AT EVEN MORE THAN one time. Who's if [ __ ] is his talent moving as in 18? So Rebbe Eleazar is one. HE'S BEEN VERY VERY he's a close second. YOU KNOW WHEN HE GOT UPSET AT HIM WHEN HE TOLD HIM TANYA MIHAKI. HE GOT UPSET HE WASN'T saying Torah in his name. Over where I think the night of you just saw a little Nakia big big pain that the time he didn't if they don't OBEY PROPERLY. REMEMBER REMEMBER THE WITH THE THEY COULDN'T BE WITH REBBE TRIED REBBE TILL HE CAME OUT. HOW COME YOU CAN'T BE LIKE THE INFANT BY NIFLA ADAM I'LL TELL YOU ANOTHER ONE. REMEMBER the mice with then the Rebbe was asking questions and he had that smirk and it was just because of something related to his face and he WAS THE INFANT KIND OF DIED BECAUSE OF THE REBBE THE STICKLE CAPTAIN IN THE MEGA YOU SEE IT CLEARLY YOU SEE he has this Nakia beta but he was never one place IN REBBE IT SAID THE NIGHT OF YOU WOULD HAVE THINK THAT IF THERE WAS ANY PERSON HE WOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN REBBE WAS NEVER I CARED HE WANTED HIM TO ASK QUESTIONS AND THE PAIN ON REBBE ELEAZAR CAME BECAUSE OF THE TANYA Rebbe did IT WITH A LITTLE HE THOUGHT HE WAS LAUGHING AT HIM BUT THERE WAS IN ONE PLACE the night of you would have Rebbe Eleazar tell me they should Rebbe hire the next like all of the Rebbe he Rebbe I think it's endless this is the this is what the night of you would have meant to say over there this is what's going on over here but I'll go upon him. That's this Indian that's what's going on over here as it relates to Rebbe we said four hours we're going to stop after three and tomorrow we'll come back and we'll over this of Rebbe and not forgetting one's learning.