The Convergence of אמונה and שלימות - Rav Michael Rosensweig

So um again firstly uh I want to thank Yehuda who really arranged everything from the you know um sponsorships to the to the room. Usually we're in shank but we had to be a little bit nimble and um you know uh he really took care of everything and I want to appreciate I want to express my appreciation including the Makoros um sheet. I gave him a more berraggled, you know, copy and he um made it look uh I guess a little more presentable. Um so thank you very much and also to acknowledge the family members who are here. Um my wife and son and son-in-law, son-in-law, um and you know my my brother and uh sister-in-law. I don't know if any of the next generation some next generations are here. Ah okay. So, um, we're happy to see them as well. Huh? Right. We're always happy to see. Um, anyways, I'm not going to, you know, announce every person in the, uh, here, but, uh, it's really, uh, I I don't take it for granted. I know it's a very difficult, uh, you know, time in the year. Um, everybody's getting ready for, um, you know, for Kagamatsos. So she on on the concept of pesak right before Kagamatos um is an appropriate thing but it's not necessarily a convenient thing. So um I appreciate those who came out um in the um you know to commemorate my father's yard um and this year is dedicated nishmas. Um what I'd like to discuss tonight is a phenomenon that is very fascinating in the world of carbonos and more particularly um in the world of Corban Pesak and Schlamim and that is the idea of Moser um Pesak Schlam. We'll get to details in just a few moments and this is a very massive topic. I had a chance to do a little bit of it in a kalleon kabura which I'll overlap a little bit with on. It's a massive topic that ranges across many makasim and especially and a little bit of monos. Um obviously it's a very vast topic and we don't have the kind of time to do um extensive um survey and certainly not to do justice to the topic but at least uh I'd like to present at least some of the issues and um what I think is the hashkafa at least uh behind it you know also as a way of uh I say commemorating my father's yortsite and his persona um and also you know in the runup to to pesak. Um I think that the the principles that underly the halos are really very critical and very important. So the idea of mosar pesaklim is the idea that normally um you know this anomal after there's the haka of the carbon pak um and that is a singular moment in the year. Um the first you know of the regular carbonos are discussed in in paras vikra um say for vayra and paras vikra in yonoma. We're reading those parios right now or between vayikra and sav and vayikra and sav we outlined the primary carbonos which we'll discuss a little more in just a minute. They are mostly ola and fatas and asham and schlamin. But already in the paras and schmos we have a very um fascinating presentation of the pesak first pesak mitzim which played such a crucial role initimish you know they established their worthiness in a certain sense by bringing the pesak and what it implied in terms of amuna topic that we've discussed uh over the years. Um so that is carbon pak and it's a singular event and as we'll discuss it's a very unique um carbon as well. However, there are circumstances that sometimes force one after having uh established you know what looked like a corbin pak being a corbak um that you have to use that animal for something else. There can be numerous circumstances. the we'll get to in a moment. The animal um that was brought ages out. Um the animal gets lost. You have to bring another animal. Then you find the original animal. Um that's a vuim. You're not sure to begin with. You think, you know, you're anticipating a problem. So you're, you know, an extra potential carbon. There are all sorts of scenarios um including as we'll discuss the just the idea that you want to change you want to switch this carbon you decided against bringing it as a as a carbon pak. So there can be numerous reasons why um what was supposed to be designated or you know what was intended to be the carbon pak is not going to be used for that purpose and that's the mosar pakim instead of you know which you do in the case of katas you would destroy the corban in this particular case um that's not necessary the corbin pesak the former corban pesak we'll see how accurate that is um what we thought of as exclusively as the carbon pesak can metamorphosize if you will or be converted into a carbon schlamim and that's called moar pesak schlamim and the details are are very extensive some of which we will be um discussing the very notion of uh a metamorphosis or a conversion of the status of a carbon is um a challenging um idea The phenomenon itself is difficult. After all, Torahos to use the language that the Torah uses in paras to a z to z to a z to a z to aim. The the use of the word toas itself identifies the unique um status of each individual carbon. Every carbon is a different theme. um in the presentation in Vayikra in the second presentation in parasav the carbonos are distinctive they're discreet one from the other um in the Mishna they're formulated you know um separately and differently there are comparisons and contrast between the types of carbonos but the you know default principle is that each carbon is a Torah unto itself is a world unto itself The Rambam in Pirish Mishnayas in his introduction famously discusses the categories of carbonos and of course in hosa carbonos he follows up with that and he talks about how these discrete units um what they share in common how they differ etc. Um each one has you know peculiarities or particular protocols in terms of how the zika is done where the zika is done how the akila is done what are the laws of its lishma and so on and so forth and therefore one would have expected that the world of carbonos would be a very static world meaning it would be one in which a dynamic movement between different carbonos was excluded. These are fixed identities or categories and therefore you would think that the integrity of the category is such that there wouldn't be a possibility to convert or to move from one to the other. The very notion of a corban being brought lishma for example um is of course all about um the concept of um focusing individually on each individual corb not only each individual corban but in some cases shinoi kesh to use language that that the raam uses in particular shin kesh includes shinoi um I'm sorry shini aashame includes shinoi kodesh and shinoi bin even if you bring it for the wrong owner. That's a problem in a carbon. Uh but certainly Shin Kodesh highlights the distinctiveness and the discreetness of every corba. Now we do encounter this conversion idea even outside of Mosar Pakamim most particularly in Mosar asham ola if you have a corban asham. So occasionally um something could happen. Let's say again uh you lost your asham and then you found it later but meanwhile you know you already brought another asham and you already uh enacted the carbon and had the capara or there could be other cases as well. So the idea that mosar asham ola that if the asham is not brought as an asham that it can be converted into an ola is a concept. There's even an example of that in katas. I'm not going to go to those details. They're very important but not for now. Um however the truth is that that is only true or that is only applicable in cases where the carbon the initi carbon that was initially designated let's say to be an asham or in the case of katus even more so um can no longer be brought can no longer serve that function and therefore instead of you know um waiting till it uh you know um either dies or in some cases you're supposed to wait till it develops a um it's but if you go ahead and you bring that animal as a an ola in the case of asham you fulfill um a mitzvah of bringing um a carbon a corban ola however as I said that's only when it is disqualified number one number two there's a strong case to be made again I'm speaking very much in rash prain Each of these represents a topic but there's a case to be made that corbanola is a generic corban especially in the world of kache kadashim it's the first corban and in some sense the primary corban therefore you might say that every asham you know is in fact you know an ola plus an ola you know that becomes an asham and therefore can revert back to being an ola at least The time frame certainly is the same. Um, and even though asham is nal and ola is kala is right. the in the end of the day it's easier to explain Mosar asham ola um as we'll explain than it is to explain Mosar pak um schlammed and even then there's a very lively um debate in many of the makoros how to understand the den of mosar asham ola to what extent we're dealing with a real conversion and a metamorphosis you start out with an asham you end up totally with an ola or whether or not there isn't some stronger connection between them and that's a topic in its own right. However, when we talk about Pesak converting or metamorphosizing into Schlamim, the discrepancies are greater. We'll discuss some of them very briefly tonight. But the capacity to switch in advance is particularly unprecedented and was noted by the Mafarim. In other words, if you choose if you were Maktish an animal to as a carbon pesak and it wasn't lost and it wasn't after Pesak, but you just chose to no longer use it as a pesak, you can convert it by choice um into a schlumb and that of course is unprecedented. Moreover, there's a lot of evidence that establishes that there are differences relative to asham and these are I would say compelling evidence especially with regard to the need for akira which we will talk about briefly namely when you have this kind of conversion you have a corbon that was brought for a particular purpose and for whatever reason it's going to be converted into another carbon is there a requirement to formally um uproot its previous status and to confer a new status that's called akira in the case of mosar asham ola this is part of the suga of asham sha lia the whatever nitak is and whether it's a dissa requirement in addition to nitak is there more an additional requirement of akira but in the case of pesak as we will see there's also a discussion and a debate whether you need akira However, um the overwhelming evidence is that when you compare, if you were to do boxes, you know, and put them side by side, um for most rishonim at least, the overwhelming evidence is that if you require a kira in order to convert an asham into an ola, right, you do not have that same obligation or that same requirement in most cases when you are trying to convert a pesak into schlam. And the question of course is why if there is already a parallel phenomenon of conversion of change right why are there discrepancies the implication seems to be that in a way it's easier or more organic to change from a pesak to aim than it is from an asham into an ola and the question is why the gur in maybe we'll have a chance to read it later on it's certainly on the marakcomos and giml Giml and base does compare Asham Mosar Asham ola and Mosar Pesak Schlamim with regard to the requirement of Akira. the gur makes that comparison. But there are other gabbaras um which seem you know to have greater impact on the halaka which imply that there are discrepancies in this requirement of akira and mostly in favor of a smoother or more natural or more organic path for the pesak to be a schlamim than for the asham to be an according to all rishonim certainly not according to but according to most of the rishonim or the majority of rishonim uh at least And if this is the case then obviously explaining how even with less you know heavy lifting you can transform a pesak into schlamim less so even than its parallel is a challenging question. What is why is that true and what does it imply? Moreover, the singular status of Cormp Pesak, which I briefly alluded to at the outset, deepens the mystery of any kind of capacity of change to begin with. As I mentioned, Corbasak is a shimos corban and again in other talks about corbases highlighted many of these distinctions. It's brought outside of the framework of theim the doesn't apply to the corb. It is something which is ple when it's brought shalma which highlights the need to assert its proper identity. There are only two carbonos you know where lishma is one is the katas and the other is the carbon pesak. Both of these according to the Mishna inval with which is however when it comes to the you know there's much uh more compelling obvious reason for it to be makave the role that it plays in kapara and in specific kapara uh for that matter there's a lot of evidence that the katas is a non-generic corban um however pesak is kibalim. It's a a less stringent or intense kaduca. It's a a strange uh you know elite group to decide to connect pesak with katas and therefore it's um lishma which is maave is even more striking than katas. The Ram has a very famous shittita and that is the Ram Posins based on the Gamarra that if you uh bring a carbon kas lein right you bring a katus as if it's not even a corban at all that is not going to disqualify the because we have a principle no mal there's such a gap between the two the shame is meaningless however However, as a controversial in terms of where he gets it from, but the Rambam intimins that if you bring amp that is going to be positing the uniqueness of PES, there are other ways to explain it as well. Or has a a very interesting perspective, but all things being equal, the requirement of lashma is even more rigorous. if you will, in Pesak than it is in Katas and therefore it stands out this requirement of Lisma um as again highlighting how singular carbon pes is the different protocols and the different rules of y and zman which we'll get to in a moment you know you're not allowed to take carbon out of its precincts what constitutes precincts is different for carbon pest than everything else the timeline which we will discuss extensively which is to eat the carbon after nightfall not during the day and only according to Elizabeth only until that distinguishes it as we will discuss um the role of and is more prominent in carbon pes than any other carbon the misha says that because of that you can even eat corban pesakuma the status of corban pesak as a corban sib yid Kabura, something I spoke about last year in this yard share. Um, also the defying of typical categories um is something that is characteristic of carbon pach. All of these would seem to imply that you know if any carbon is not going to be dynamic or flexible or subject to change, it's going to be carbon pess. So in addition to you know the evidence which even compared to you know the closest example Mosar asham uh is in the favor of a more organic approach I'll explain what I mean by organic going forward to pesak turning into a schlamin in addition to that simply the category the nature of pesak itself would seem to militate against this perspective but in the end of the day maybe that's part of part of the organic connection as we will explain it. Okay, let me highlight this just a little bit further based on some of the marmiccomos. Um on page one here, as you can see, we have um the Mishna which um locates in the context of Khalim, but in a way that highlights again the things that are completely different and discreet about it. This is number one. I'm skipping to the last line. But only is eaten at night, not at all during the day. Only the night of tesv. Even though the is anytime after of the and the time frame is only till that's the binary disagrees we'll talk about that in a minute the is a special requirement of which is defined by the moment of the anal it's only roasted Meaning even just looking at the Mishna you can see the unique status of this. Moreover the says that is the mission is bigger than that but that's the relevant line for what we are discussing. Um after you're not allowed to eat the Corbin and it's also and the Gar explains noar that the d of nosar which typically applies in the morning in the even in a corba that you're not allowed to eat at night right you um you don't have the the prohibition and the obligation of strafa of nosar and the cures of nosar until until the learning but according to the Gamar Gamar's understanding nosar we qualify this a little bit later um is going to apply um already after you don't burn it after but that it has a status of nosar hence it's then the gar explains So this is very fascinating. The is derived from the experience of the experience of that's the morning. So this is very fascinating as well. So in the view of theim come not to limit this to it's very fascinating meaning for theim highlight the uniqueness of pes and how it's different from every other kba raka says the pukim come to also establish the uniqueness of pak but you need these pukim because otherwise we would have tried to apply more generic um uh you know more generic um standards to the Corbin Pak. So you might have thought like and what do you do with this very important lineos? Therefore, we're being told you don't do this. There was a strange meaning. You needed a to teach you that we shouldn't be looking at as if it's a kind of a schlamim, a little bit of a different kind of schlamim that's adjusted for the d of p. So instead of saying the typical schlamim is eaten, right? You have a day, a night and a day but you have three you know time frame three time periods. So if not for the sukim we would have said says rabaka that you have a schlamim a bit of a different schlamim but a but still a kind of schlamim paradigm for carbon pak it would be lila yom lila there's a very fascinating rashi rashim has two deos he says if it would be lila yom lila how comparable would it be would you would you think that maybe there's still an exclusion of yom and therefore it doesn't just exclude Yom the 14th, it excludes Yom the 15th. So then it would really mean Laya, right? And then, you know, you're not allowed to eat the whole day, but you're allowed to eat the second Laya. That's already looking a little different than typical, you know, Schlamim. um or or no if you're really motivated by the connection between and el so then it should be consistent with schlamim and it should be a continuous so true you can't eat on your dalid during the day but you eat tesv and then you can eat the whole day tesv at night then you have tesv during the day and then you'd have tion the night either way we don't pus in that way but it's just interesting that for binary Right. The unique status of Corbin Pasak is not even questioned. Whereas fora the same are there to teach you that it isn't in a typical mold of Schlamim. But you wonder whether or not the need for psukim doesn't also highlight that there is an organic there is a connection between pesak and schlamim even before anything else. Another important facet here in this gamarra is the conclusion. Not only because it's an important issue, but for reasons that we shall discuss then they're basically obvious. The gar says three lines from the bottom of this piece. If you eat matzah after meaning we don't have anymore, but let's say you wanted to eat matzah. of you know Mim Shabbul Sha I guess or Shabbader um right and um you know I guess they didn't you know have the of the uh of the or you know in that time so come So the reason this is important in its own right and then there's a question whether we pasin like Rabika or Rabbin Aaria and with respect to matzah or not but there's another issue lurking here and that is since the gamarra links the status of matzah to the zman of carbon pak you have to come to one of two conclusions either that the din theman the unique zman of carbon pak is Not really. It did in the Corban from a Corban point of view at least, you know, this draconian like narrow window, you know, only Ballaya and only Tatos, you know, would not be true. But the very fact that it applies to matzah shows that it's a din in in in in the in the mitzvah sallay and in the relationship of mitim and matzah and barur and pak and we'll see that this is going to be actually consequential in our analysis or the analysis of some of the acronym later on. The other possibility is that if this is a den in carbon and yet it applies equally to matzah then in some respects it it it establishes a very striking idea and that is that the mitzil mitzim in this case is integrated into and defines the carbon meaning it's a real schmos carbon it's a real mitz kind of a carbon and therefore even its carbon time frame is connected to the denim of the mitzvos hal. Okay. Either way, um what I'd like to do is examine the evidence. What how does this work? What we see from the Gamarra is that Kasak is unique and we also see that there's a struggle rabbar and how they handle theim. um what is the default assumption about how unique Pak is and whether or not Schlamim is a paradigm that naturally applies to Pakum or not. So I'd like to examine some evidence about how Moser Pasak Schlame works. And while the evidence is mixed and complex and different uh views certainly emerge, I'm going to try to demonstrate cursorally that a compelling case can be made as I've already said that there is an organic bond between Pesak and Schlumin. That the dinner of Mosar Schlumb Pesak is not just you can't use it for the Pesak. We want to do something with it. um might as well bring a schlamim. You can't do it for pasak and maybe schlamim you know is a voluntary carbon so it's a natural um outlet for this for this animal but rather that there is a connection inherent connection between pesak and schlam what I'm going to try to show is that this is a birectional this is a two directional relationship because even if you take the view you know that a metamorphosis or conversion of a carbon from one identity to the other is not what's happening but rather there is some sort of a hybrid or there's a relationship between the two categories such that you can make that conversion. There are still two ways that that could be formulated and typically um those two ways diverge from each other like basically there are two corbonos in question which one is the dominant theme in other words if I say most pesak um schlamim am I saying that even a pesak is a form of schlamim or it's omade leos schlamim um in terms of its character and therefore the transition that's what I mean by being organic meaning it's it's already built into the DNA of this corban pasak right that it already has aspects of schlamim or potential of schlamim from the very beginning and therefore it's not the moment of conversion although that also still needs to be examined but it's omade leos schlamim schlamim is part of kasak you could also say in the opposite way and that is that when a pesak transforms into a schlamim maybe that's true with regard to the methodology of hakraba um and some of the other denim but the shame pesak the identity of the corban in some respects is retained in that respect it's not schlamim it's a pesak hyphenated schlum and then of course you have to figure out which denim depend on the identity or the remaining connection to the identity of the of the pak and which are the dina that are simply denim of schlam. So this idea that Schlommim could be part of the initial makeup of Pesak or the second idea which is even when Schlamim emerges it's a Pesak kind of Schlamim because Pesak's status stubbornly persists on the surface are two opposite ways to look at an organic connection between Pesak and Schlavit. What I'm going to try to show is that both seem to be true. And if both seem to be true, it's not a question of one being more dominant or one driving this. It's really um about the convergence of Pesak and Schlamim itself in both directions. Pesak is in some respect the ultimate schlamim, right? And Schlamim is at the heart of what Pesak uh intends to accomplish. I have to prove that. So um in the little time that we have I will try to do that. Okay let's begin. So in order to do this we should briefly explore the nature and implications of this convergence. Let's first document this. How do we know the den of mosar pes? So it's fascinating if you look at the gamarra in masahim the gamarra says is on page two um very remarkable gamarra pesak bizmano lishes on this is source number five the numbers are going to get a little tricky later on but right now they're goodman shalishmo you have to read this a couple of times when you you know when you first look at it like everything seems backwards right mano mean if you're bring a p it has to be lishma I mentioned that before if it's not lishma it's ple but what do you mean you bring a pash it's a strange usage question whether the language is significant I think it is maybe um it doesn't have to be it could just be signifying a case but what does it mean sha Now you bring a p and then the answer is if it's ple mean if you bring a p it's ple shalishmo if you bring it not lash you bring the pes not lash p somehow that makes it kosher kosher what does that really mean so the gar says me no honey what what's the mocker for that what it really means is that you bring the pasharos sashana as a schlam right but they don't call it that the emphasis seems to be that these are forms of pa that's a linguistic okay how do you know this so the first p they bring the immin where where is this puk so where is this puk this puk is in in the in the pukim that we're reading right Now in um in the context of what's that is a should be a wow that's one puk I'm going to highlight this I'll get back to this other point in the gar in a minute there's another puk that thear quotes and that's note number six. How do you know that a pak that's not going to end up being a p right it's mutar it's moar that it's going to be aim shmar here they're quoting the pvarim this is in the context of not but it says it is noar for So the doesn't make any sense unless you darian it properly. So there are two different and in different places um in elsewhere and here the garumar seems to be debating which of these sukim is the right pok we'll get back to this later on we talk about one of the ramboms um but basically um what I would say already you know already anticip ipating what some of the and what the I think the note of Yehuda says um in the um although he doesn't exactly have this in mind and that is that there are two different perspective I said a moment ago that there are two different ways to look at mosar pesakl this conversion at this metamorphosis like if it is organic it's not just that oh there's no pesak so we're going to a totally new carbon called schlam they have nothing to do with each other but this is just a method of avoiding baltashkis or or or something like that. But no, there's actually a relationship. There's a reciprocal relationship between these the reciprocity can go in either direction. I'm suggesting it goes in both. If it is a den, is this a den in schlamim? So then the puk that is quoted on right is more suggestive of that. or is this a denim p because the pok invarim that is quoted on seems to be connected to that. Okay, so we will get back to that but that's already just something to note. Um the gamarra in continuation the garbara ones for a minute has also a very interesting chakaria. The gumar saysimilo. So the gamarra ch it already challenges you could see what's going on in the shakari and the garra like what what is this relationship between pesak and schlamim you know how again I'll use the word organic you know is it or no it's just an outlet it's just a way of of bringing this as a corban and schlam isa and so on they're both kalim nothing more than that so the gar saysim Then the Gmorra says, I'll explain in a second. So the garam says okay so the conclusion of the gamarra is that if you bring a p that and you want to you know if you bring a palash which is what we're talking about um shal right so if you were to say I bring in this you know former pesak or whatever it is or this designated pesak as a katas as an ola as an asham that's the mascana of the gamarra it becomes a schlam no matter what it becomes a schlam but before that muskana the gamarra was challenging the garra had possibility of thinking one of two other things one is that if you want to convert a corbon pesak if you say I'm bringing ing this animal which was designated for pesak as a katas as an as an asham it would become a or an asham meaning in the havabina there's no unique relationship between pesak and schlabim right it the din is almost like pesak is pesak it's it's unique it's singular it can't you know it doesn't have any relationship to anything else it's a schmos corp it's needs to But I we don't want to throw it out. The answer is therefore when you can't or when you're not going to use it for p. So it's becomes a chameleon. It can be anything you want. You have the parallel opposite view Yoshi Beni who says you know the mission at the beginning of Zahim not only is it true that Pesak requires lashma but even if you were to bring another animal the shame Pak that would also be possible meaning Pak's properties are unique that's a a parallel opposite meaning the shame pesak but it's not a real Pak is always postell or if it's not going to be the same pesak. It can be anything. Of course, we don't pask in that way. The other possibility that the Gar considered was that maybe in order for PES to become a schlamim, it has to be shamelim, which is very reasonable. But in light of that, the masana of the gamarra, which is even if you say it's a shame, it still becomes aim. The discrepancy between that second havamina and the muscana, never mind the rejection of the first havamina, further highlights that there seems to be a special connection between pesak and schlam. Moreover, um the gamar has three examples of most pesak schlamin. Let's look at them for the moment. The Garra says on the bottom of the last few words of number six, The lower the can teach you three types of mo. There are actually more one is when the animal ages out, right? It can no longer be a pak, meaning objectively it can't be a pac. So that's going to turn into a schlamin. The other is the opposite direction. You just choose. It's it's before pak. Pass hasn't gone by yet. It's still a candidate for pesak and it's not aging out but you choose to make it something else right that's the other extreme right it's not naturally unfit for pesak it's totally a pesak candidate but you choose to make it something else and then the middle one is the animal's fine it could have been a pes but pes has passed now you didn't bring it and therefore it's thear says So we'll get back to this in a moment. It seems clear that the most difficult of most pesaklim is the case where you have a pesak which you know is fit. It's a candidate and it's kmo and nonetheless even that constitutes mosar peslam that's what somebody noted wow that there's nothing like that in mosar asham schlamim etc. Okay, we we'll see in a moment that that is relevant to the question of Akira um as well. Okay, this formulation of pesak shalishma as I mentioned before is it only a convenience or does it signify that even though the idea here is that you're lamelim the real idea is if it's not going to be a pes meaning even a schlamim that emerges from both a pesak schlamim is due to the dominant remaining identity of the pesak there's pesakma and there's a pesak shalishma which becomes a schlam. If the identity of the corban remains in some respects connected to its status as a yet the rules of how it is are those of Schlamim. So then you would have to deflate you have to play a very careful balancing game. On the one hand, you can't destroy the origins of pesak because part of the identity this pesaklamim is that it is a form of pesak. On the other hand, you have to tamp down the impact of the pak because you want it to be klam. And we'll see that that creates some complexities um in a moment. Okay, that creates certain tensions in the denim of Mosarim which I will examine in a moment. The gar in a way highlights this linguistic question but has a conceptual connection as well. If you look at the gamaru base, the gumar says mask. This is a gamar is talking about which is a a fascinating kind of foil for all of something to violate it has to be moed. It has to be something that could be brought on the msbayak but you are you know basically thumbming your nose at the msbayak and instead bringing it. So is an important category. So the gamar is talking there about this you know kind of phenomenon the case not important for the moment like an enigma you know like a a trivia question. Is it ever possible that if you bring something lish right then it's going to be possible but you bring something shalishmo it's going to be kosher. Right. Craig's thinking about it, right? So the says, "Of course, that's an easy oneash." Ain't no the shalish mo, right? If if if pesos right after p you want to bring what the animal that was supposed to be the only if you bring it right p it's going to be a problem apparently we'll see what that is in a moment only if you bring it shal right again it doesn't have to be lashim right just interesting linguistically that it's lash so pakashar so therefore you do have this phenomenon. What do you mean there's no such phenomenon? So the Gar's answer is fascinating although we don't know what to do with it. The Gumar says, "No, that's not an example." Meaning it if if it was if it was a it were, you know, you had the phenomenon of this corbun for its own sake is low. That's what we're looking for. But the reason that shalishma is possible not because shalishma but schlam okay and if you look at rashi rashi says uh that although again you know it's question how much retain but toss was troubled to say if you look at the second line in tomar this is number right? Doesn't you know whatever you sh it for it's good. So it's not really says yeah but if you were to bring a schlamim shalish beer so maybe it would be but it would be so that's good enough meaning this gamarra isn't so simple but the gamarra's question and answer highlights to what extent the lishma of Mosar pesak schlamim is a schlamim. It means it converts in lashim or it remains related to the status of pesak itself and it could be that the rashi and toss here are relevant. So let me explain what I mean. There seems to be a major argument between rashi and the baltosos. if lashim pesak disqualifies a schlamim under all conditions or not as we've seen and we'll see more in a minute right the way the gumar explained it in in zahim was if you bring a p shalobismano lash pak it's possible that's what the gumar says so what we're going to see is that there's a major discussion in the what's the problem the problem is if you A schlam shalom you say bring orim for that matter a real schlam not a not a pes it's totally kosher because unlike is not m so if you had a pure you know and and you brought out whatever lash anything right the would be kasha so how could it be that we're saying that moser pes Pak is Schlam and it still sounds from some gamaras that if it's shame pak that that will be posel the schlam how would that be postl so the baltosis all over the I'll read you a couple in a second basically say that depends there's another factor and that's clear from the gamarra that there's another factor and that is what I alluded to before do you need akira or not when You convert whether it's asham into an ola or a pesak into aim. Do you have to design do you have to proclaim you know do you have to verbalize in some way right that you are doing you have to be okayare the the previous and and usher in or confer the new status or not so what the balas say and I'll read you this inside in a second is that in aami the mosa pesaklam is a pure did it's a schlamim and therefore you treat it like any other schlam and all things equal. If that were the case, then lash pes, which is what most of peslim right now is, would be kasher. Unless you require a then it's not a pam in the lash. It's just that if you bring the schlam pak, there's no akira. So the baltosis were of the opinion see in a moment that there are certain mosar pesak. There's a debate in the gumar about Mosar Pak whether or not it requires a baltosis basically split that argument into three. They basically said as follows in the case of Avra shinasa it's chinaso meaning the animal ages out so that either way it's not right to be a carbon that's a tossa says on if you look here for a second um this is probably on page four um tossis on days om number 18 Yeshua uh Yeah. when it comes to says you don't need a separate whether he means that it's automatically a schlamim because it's not worth it's not roy to be a pesak or he means that there's a mimea akira that is not so clear but either way there's no such requirement either there is an akira or you don't need an akira and therefore even if it's pa even if it's lash pak according to the voltosis that wouldn't be a problem however in the gamar that we're going to look at in just a minute a different gamarra there the gamar discusses the following if you look at the garamar here just for we'll look at it now on samkar says this is on page three oh I'm sorry is it three I'm sorry It's really the the top of four um on if you bring and you you know it gets complicated. It's at the same time. So the gar says and the gar goes back and forth. I don't want to get into the details in a moment. So Tulsa says what's the problem either way? It's a schlamim, right? So if it's aim then then you know you can you can make it the biggest you want. So Tulsa says says in this we're talking about a perfectly fit corbas a cute little you know animal corban pasak that wants to be a carbon pak that is worthy to be a carbon pesak right however you changed your mind so it's kimmano the animals fit everybody agrees everybody would have to agree it's pesak it's not if If you just shacked it, it's not a schlamim. What makes it a schlamim? If it ages out or it's not the timing of pesak, it's one thing. So in order to be okerit here, it's co you have to be oker. So says ah that's the reason why the gar is back and forth about what if it's they want to know is that an akira or not because you need an akira. However, the mir he learns zakamara. He says it's not dafka lifna's mono or maybe lifnom's mano doesn't require akira. No, it's just uh shalma is actually poss what similarly this is the argument as you'll see in a moment. Similarly, you have the s the Mishna on number 12. Here the Mishna says the following. If you an animal during Pak meaning after you know whatever you shed an animal and you have in your home, right? Even not a a regular carbon and you have in your home, right? That's also a violation of a love. Okay, that's what these words mean. On number 12, that's the last line. Oh, first I'll read the end. Meaning any that is that is brought when there's in your possession is a violation. What about a carbon p? I mean what used to be a corbon pak then you didn't eat as a corbon pak so the answer is lishmo if it's pak lmo it's ptor why because it's no longer pak so you're bringing a mosar pak lame pak and that's not that's ple since it's ple you don't get the balus okay but if it's shalishmo it's like you know a little bit of an enigma if it's shalishmo it's kosher so it's kosher you bring a carbon on comets if you're bringing Corbin comets you get balus. So it comes out of the Mishna according to the simple reading that if you bring a p a lame that it is possible right. Oh, so the gamdal says this is the gear of it sounds like the gar is saying oh what's if you bring it let's say you didn't say anything one way or another you're neutral it sounds like shalishma right would be would be pot you treat stama like like the garamar says am I why so it's why can't why is the why is why is the going to be so the says no sham that's because not because it's not ama problem it's because you didn't do the that's That's the garamar says that there's a debate whether you need aar p again to's view is if if it ages out you don't need an akira if it's before pak you need an akira if it's after didn't age out that's a makus and the question is how do you pass it that's the gar then the gar says no the whole thing is wrong we're talking about people okay it's talking about something which could be used from. So Rashi explains this the question of the gamaru but if you look at that's what we talked about but Tossa says no Rashi's wrong what did Rashi say the Garra was asking from stama but the gamarra was okay with what if if you said explicitly I'm bringing this used to be pak lane pak everybody would agree it's not a good car bun And therefore there's no malus. Why? It it it's not it it's it's so the answer. So the gumar says right that the gar seems to be asking from stama. Why weren't they asking on this? So says the question of the gamar should have been why does the Mishna say that if you bring a pishmo after p that that's not a proper carbon and therefore there's no balus if there's why is it possible it's like bringing a schlam pak Right. That's the Gibbar's question. And then the Gabbar says, "Oh, for a different reason, but it's not for the Akira." You're right. There's no of the shame in in a even. So what emerges from these two sources, two places and you find this throughout these others uh weigh in on this issue. There seems to be the following argument. Tossis takes what seems to be the conventional orthodox view which is if Mosar pesak is a schlamim then the dishma of the schlamim should apply and a schlam and if you bring a schlamim lashim not even lash it's kosher the only thing is if you need accar or in a situation where you need a then the problem's not problem it's going to be if you bring it lash pock there's Akira but according to the mama that there's no requirement of Akira or in circumstances where there's no requirement of Akira and the issue is only lishma this is a regular and we treat it as such that is the shittita of the baltosis but what emerges from rashi is and a little bit from the mi is that that isn't true namely we don't treat mosar pesak schlamim completely like a schlamin What we're saying is apparently that as even though it is a schlamim, it's a pesak hyphenated schlam meaning there's still denim of pesak that are mixed up here in this issue. So two things actually emerge as as an argument. Number one, there's a debate about akira. We'll get to the pak of that in the ram in just a second. The debate about Akira itself is relevant. How easy is the path from Pesak to Schlavin? Right? If you need always an Akira, the implication is that it's not. There could be other explanations, but the point is there's no organic um transition, right? You have to artificially proclaim the Schlamim status. Whereas if you don't need an Akira, apparently it's built in to what a pesak is originally. That's one argument. If you look carefully in the Rambam, there are some stiras in the Rambam, but we'll get to it maybe a little bit later. The Rambam, there are those who think different way, but in most of the Rambam, it seems like there's no dabbakiro whatsoever. In hospian mcdashin there's one difficult rama but in my carbonos and in carbon pasak I'm not going to read them because it'll take a little too long they're here on the maromos the ramshittita seems to be that there's no requirement of a of a pasak moreover according to the rambom even if anytime lma also is not going to be a lame pak is not going to be a pam or a pul in the schlug that's one argument which is very critical to how organic This den is and the second argument is the argument between Rashi and Tossus and and the those who join the the debate and that is is the law of Schlamim Shalishma completely applicable to Moses Schlamim? Yes or no? According to Baltosis it is. We treat with regard to this at least we treat like a regular schlam. According to Rashi, it would appear that there are some additional by virtue of the fact that pesak schlamim is a category in its own. This question may also be connected to another gamarra another discussion in the gamar and then we'll move on try to the next point if you look here on um yeah if you look here at the garamar sak base second um the gamarra discusses the following question this is on 18 but the second paragraph of 18 says again this is a little complicated so I want to streamline it a little bit but just to be clear which is brought by the cabana when you bring it is for the wrong owner that's called as I mentioned before that's al called right and that just like you need you need lashim as well that's the if it's bim it So the gamarra had this very clever you know um suggestion lashma takes a pesso right and makes it into a and it's better to be lishma than to be lishma right and that's why the wondered what if you have lishma and lishma together right so now they're wondering let's say you took a kb pasak shalobismano I mean it's a candidate to be schlamim or And let's say you brought it to Shinui Bin. So shin is a inb is it going to help you to get the conversion to schlam? That's a bit strange question. The the assumption that that would work at least when you talk about lish pesak you could say well that's a kind of an akira right? How does the shininoi bim maybe maybe it it it's a kind of an akira of the status of corbin pak there's a kdish in that too that you need to be ochre that remnant of the corbin pak but then the garamar's masana is even more sensational if you look at 19 the gar goes back and forth then the gar says actually wow And this is how the rakins if you look at the par go to the second last line. Everybody is trying to scratch their head over this one. Meaning you bring a if you bring a corb regular corblum right bishu bin and it's not a good thing to do don't get me wrong but it's not pos again is katus and pak this is shalobismano this is not a corp anymore how is shinui binim and this is the language of the gamarra which is the language of the ram copied for good NASA can be the reason that this is no good. It's it's disqualified is because if you did it to when it was in its passage state, it would have been possible. Meaning there is according to this view now I should and I should mention that Tulsus has a whole different read of the Gamarra. Others do you know um contortions to try to explain that the garamar is talking about something else. Um but at the end of the day if you take the gar muscana literally it highlights the fact that a moar pesak remains somewhat a a pesak and that surely is is very um significant. Okay. Um I should say that one more thing the the Rambams Sakim and Akira as I mentioned before are tricky and especially when you compare Asham and and Moses um there's mixed evidence depending on how you read different Rams in my opinion the consensus that emerges even though there's controversy about both is that Moser asham Ola requires an Akira Mosar pesaklamim does not and that would be if that's True. That's how the notuda understood it. The notuda thought that that was the reason that the Rambam never registers the suffic of the gumra vishalishma. So why didn't the gra why did the rama mentions the shini bin one? Why not mention the valishma? That's also very imaginative and creative, right? He said because the raom it's not an issue for the raam. It's schlamim and and we'll see. But it's Schlumim by virtue of being a pesak. But by virtue of being a pesak for the raam, it's a full schlum. Okay, that's in one direction. Let me talk about the other direction very quickly. I apologize for the repetition to the kalium people. The Gumar says in Mas um Tamura, this is on page um five uh number 14. We went back a little bit, right? In the numbers, it's like a little bit of a Muserhask, you know, a little bit of so we're back to number 13. What's the second 13 which is really I'm sorry we're back to 14 which is really 21 but for now when it's 14. So um the gamarra says and tomorrow the following just a little background for a second I'll try to make this part hard part I won't do all of it and that is as follows. So the garra has um a major debate in Mishna among the tanoim etc. And that is if you um are makdish a corban improperly right let's say episcoco you can't bring a female corban for a pesak female works forim as zakar but not for pesak and not for right and not for us. So the view of the kakim is that if you are baff such a corban it's a kind of a placeholder for kadusha sagu you can't bring it on the misbak but it's not like you just donated money you know and therefore you have to buy a corban it it does have some kaduca and therefore and the nafkamina for having kadusha sag is that it's osetura if you try to swap it out the animal that you try to bring in to replace it would have the status of kadusha and other such thing and addition to that you can't you know this animal has kadusha and therefore you have to wait for it to develop a mum right and then sell it right you can't just sell it because it has kadusha it can't be pent until it has a so that's the view of the shimon disagrees says not in all cases but in most cases if there isn't something that approximates more you know closely kadusha sakraba something you know that makes this more of a a more serious um hakadasha so then it's just like a monetary donation and it's not can't be osatura on the other hand you don't have to wait till develop either you can just sell it because it's really just the finances and nothing more there's a major debate it's called migui and we've been dealing with it in the colum um issue and concept. So that's the argument. However, the gamarra here in says an amazing thing and that is the following. So let's look at it for quickly. The garamar says he gave a a to be an it doesn't work but nonetheless it's this placeholder. It has some push according to the so it's osmura if you try to swap it out the animal that you try to um you know replace it with would be keshim though on the other hand says disagrees. Then came the big big reveal. So rebi said I agree with Shimon generally that the standards for what constitutes even if it's not are higher right and just because you put an animal there you know and has some general connection with a carbon that's not good enough there has to be something more however I think that if you were to be mish a or mafish a mabel episcoco even though You can't bring it as a carbon pesak since a schlamim can be brought from a nava in theory and since most pesak is a schlamim. Therefore this nea through its schlamim potential is connected enough to the p that it's called kadusha. So the garamar says so the garamar says it's like a dream garra says why don't you say the same thing you're saying and therefore even though the nikava is no good for pak since there can be a nava for schlamim This isn't like an absurd haktasha. It has substance, right? So if you're looking to forar the conversion as a way of defining the connection, why not plug in the parallel example of Mosar asham ola? That's I say it's a dream gamar. It's almost like you know this gamar is saying what's the relationship between pasak moim and mosar asham ola. So the answer I'm not going to go into I don't have so much time and I want to get to a few other things etc. I'm not I'm not going to explain that here because that would take too long. The thrust of it is I'm going to go to Tossis for a second has trouble with it is even easier but to say What the means is if you look at the asham, you look at the ola, the asham is a carbon. The ola that it would be translated to is has corg connotations. So that what that highlights basically is that this is a conversion that's an absolute conversion meaning you took uh carbon A and you swapped it and you and now you're turning it into you're converting it into carbon B and they have very little to do with each other and since they have very little to do with each other therefore the fact that in in state B there could be an aa doesn't help you in terms of kaduca sago But in that's not two different things. They're related. They're similar. Not only that, why terrific line when you are not something it's almost like the potential that it might turn into aim is inherent in it also at that moment. Wow. This is the other direction. Till now we've been discussing cases of what when a schlamim when when most of pes becomes a schlamim is it still connected and therefore affected by the original pesak. Now we have a case the opposite which is do you anticipate in the state of Pak its status potential status as Schlamim and I'm not going to go through these details right now but if you look at the arsame suggests that the I'll just read the line in it's too good not to read it's amei it's hard to read two lines from the number 16 Omarabin he asks ex Same lies the but gives a different answer. The difference is is as follow for rebih when a p turns into aim right it's the pak that's becoming aim meaning the schlamim is already there in the pak before there's a hyphenated relationshipim but in hiknish asham ola in the case of moer asham Anguocarbola, right? It's a it's a total change. It's from carbon A to carbon B. Here it's carbon 1 A to carbon 1B. The Osame the others I put here in the Marakcomos has many other issues. He talks about another case or two other cases. I'll just mention one of them very quickly. There's a law which is that a turra if you have an animal and you want to swap it out. So you can do that once in the gamarra but you can't do it twice. Okay. If you do it the second time you know you can't do it doesn't work. So let's say you took a carbon pesak and as a carbon pome and you tur it right you tried to swap it out so you get a pock right then it turned into a schlamim most pesaklam can you do it again is it a new carbon or is it is it the 1B version of the same corbon that's your thinks is a debate in the he has other issues as Meaning what we try to show is not only is schlamim when it's a schlamim after the conversion still pesque but the p even when it's a p right is omade. So let's go to the next point. There's much more to say about this one but let's go to the next point. Try to go more quickly. What about eating the mosar pesaklam? But when you eat it, let's say you have a pesak, it became a schlam. So as a schlamim, there are certain regular rules, right? You usually most schlamim are you're allowed to eat them two days in a night, right? Uh that requires, you know, they have certain type matanos. We saw a little bit in the mishim before, right? There there's tanufa kaz. There's a whole you know there are protocols connected to Schlamman. Does Mosar Pesak Schlamman get the protocols of Pesak of Schlamim or or of something in between? That is a very interesting question. If it's only Schlleim that would be significant. Again neither of them prove but if it's Pesak that's shocking that it would be significant. If it's Schllean it, you know, it it's hard to know. If it's a hybrid, that's certainly significant. So the garra inf tells us the following. This is on page seven. The gamarra speaks here on number 22. The garra says that this is on line three of number 22. I'm skipping a little bit. The the thrust of it is if you look at the garlim is a hybrid. It's fascinating. It has the denim the denim of a schlamim. But the time frame is not of a typical schlamim. It is the time frame of not exactly carbon pasak either but it is the time frame of yom vala. The gamar here implies that loyal is relevant to carbon pasak. We'll get back to that if we have a chance as well. Oh, uh, the cifra and the Ramban quotes it. If you look here at number eight, I think. Yeah. If you look here, I'm not going to read the whole thing. It's very important, but it's not for now. Look at the second last paragraph of the Ramban. I boldened it. Ramban explains like why is it that this Mosar pak isn't treated like a regular schlum in timing two days and a night? So he quotes the it goes by which is the implication is that fundamentally is which we'll get back to but the point is this a technical statement doesn't sound like it meaning even though now it's courage Right. It's shame with regard to certain is retained. However, the Rambam in which we have here number 25 says what did the Rabb leave out? He doesn't discuss the timing. That's the issue. But the next tells us in part of that there if you have a p and it gets mixed up with regular so it can't be a p anymore because you don't know what it is right but you could do it it'll be a mosar p so you have a mixture of mosarlim and schlam so the ram says in this yu if it was if it was you know schlamim and other carbonos or or or mosar pesak and other carbonos you'd have to wait till they get a mum and sell them but if it's moar pesak and schlamim you could bring everything to schlamim so all the mask you can't do that a regular schlamim is two days and a night right this schlamim according to the gamarra this moim is one day in a night you're you're if you skip the skimp on the time you're you're bringing it lease up soul You can't do that. So there are two problems. The Rambam omits. There's a third issue. The Karanora makes the har. I should have put it here on the marmakos, but I didn't. If you look at the Rambam carefully carbonos brings schlam, he says schlam are always two days in a night, right? With a couple of exceptions. Corbintooda, a nazier, they're exceptions. They're one day in a night. So the keranora says how come the ram didn't say moim based on argamara. So for that reason the not behuda the kanora many of the akronim say obviously the raim really holds against argamara that moar pak schlamim is two days on a night maybe that's consistent notuda thinks with the fact that there's no akira either it's a real schlamin though so just to take a step what does he do with our gamarra so if you remember we started mentioned that there are two different sukim in the gumar that are brought from Moser Pak right one comes from the para of of this par in right and the other comes in vikra from the para of so some of the acronym I believe it's not I think the say something a little different but on the same mentality suggest suggests that according to the Rambam the ones which says that what that aar pesim is eaten a day and a night not like a typical schlam even though the rest of its denim are like a typical and so on and so forth etc that gamarra is according to the mandom right who thinks that the puk is the pus and devarin or the rabbau. So basically even though the dina hakraa are schlamin the identity of a carbon remains a pak and therefore it doesn't have two days and a night however maybe the ramkins which he seems to based on his rendering of that he uses that one for it seems that for him most name is derived from the puk in vayikra in the context of schlam. Ah, so if that's the case then then then it would be a full schlam. You would it wouldn't be pesak uh dominated. So this question also spills over um into a whole other issue and that is as follow just very quickly before we get to that there is a tota everybody speaks about it um and that is the shita ben aza I don't have time to develop it fully but in tota and Um, peres gimmel says that mosar pesak schlamim is kipesak. We have it here I believe in the marmiccomos. Do I uh one second one second? Maybe it was page eight. If I don't find it, it's not the end of the month. >> Um, >> what is it? 27. Oh. Oh, I have it through the >> Okay. Yeah. Um, and that is the shittita of Ben Azai. The Sheita Ben Azai is I'm not finding it here. >> What is it? 27. >> 23. 23. Okay. 23. Got it. Thank you. Um so the way the just to widen we have the rau holds maybe based on the it's a full schlam for everything we have the compromise of our gamarra and then you have the shita Benazi question is is it fully like p or it's also hybrid but a dominated p hybrid but according to benazi schl are only that's not the main thing but there and according to other that's the next piece that of course is a total totally dominated schlamin pesaklam category. So there's another issue that is also related to it. I'm not going to go to details and that is two other questions that the acronym discuss based on maybe also the language and the ta and that is what about moser pes we've discussed the timing three positions on the timing what about pesab eating on or I'm sorry whatever it is eating during the day and what about after katos Because according to Benaz according to right the pesak can only be eaten after does that translate is that you know part of the cloning that goes on the do pesak dominated part there's a question for Benazi and a question for the hybrid view of the right what about after and what about before so this is a discussion the spas the keranora the I don't want to get into details let's suffice it to say so part of the argument goes to what we talked about which is this the makes the connection to matzah the garra says matzah also you can't eat after right so the question is are the denim of corbas that they are limited to katos according to you can't eat it during the day are these dm of corbant pesak Or are they denim that are addition to there's a carbon p and then there are denim of p as part of the mitzah anything having to do with the mitzah sallaya is not going to be translated to most pakan during the next of the year but if these are denim in the uniqueness and they're integrated into the carbon then they marry very well maybe so you have a range of views are those who say that with regard to both lila both y I'm sorry. And after we hold that Moser Pak is capac issues, they're not capac. And then there the Orsame and Keranor and others make the distinction for them the Den of Laya as opposed to Yom that's more of a technicality. This says that's a lava ml. It has nothing to do with the carbon. But the d of katso sosar is something that may very well have to do with the carbon um itself. Good. Um there's more to say about that, but this is as you can see the range of views of how you actually treat and eat the timing and the details of mosa is related to this question. There's another question um and that of course is again something I want to touch on very very briefly and that is this pas itself on the one hand as we've said before we started with this the base says that is right and then it goes on to show how even though it's and it's you know it's you know It's but in the end of the day it's still different. It's right. It's right. It isos it's not how how unique and how different um is it. So the gamarra um basically tells us um that according to you can't eat after and everybody agrees that you can't eat on the other hand and rashim on his own says this sometimes characterize pesak as a carbon of bala and and the topha and and the mccorus that we were discussed they're saying it comes from pak that's why What do you mean by there's no bay in carbon p so this led some of the acronym to suggest especially for Ben maybe even for theim that maybe there are also two inb itself famously the has the suggestion that really you could eat after katos you could eat corbas after katos just not the corbas but the toas schlam is suggested you can't do that beforehand and the obvious used to say name his father I think it's written up in the in the grid um that his father didn't go that far he didn't think that you could actually eat schlamin but he did think that the cures of nosar and perhaps the isser of peel would not apply because it's a dian But it's still a manorban because there's a schlamim element. So basically what emerges without going into more detail is that in addition to the unique combinations of mosar pesak schlamin how it's eaten how it's brought etc even the carbon pesak itself may exhibit um dimensions of um schlum. Okay. So basically what we've done is we've examined mosar pakam we've tried to establish you know the difficulty in the concept even as compared to asham and ola then we've shown tried to show that there is an organic relationship between most pesak between pesak and schlamin in a way that is certainly transcends that of asham and ola and in both directions you would think normally that is a problem but I think the bigger takeaway and then we went from there to Mosar ailas Mosar pasak and from there to ailas pesak itself but the takeaway is that there is this unique or organic connection between pak and on the surface it's very strange because we know pesak to be a corbuna we know pesak is is focus it's the corban you know of of the seabore it's the equivalent of brisma the shakares What does that have to do with Schlub? But I want to take a minute or two to examine what Schlubman is and then to talk about this convergence for a minute as well. If you look at the character of Schlubman, this is a topic in its own right. What emerges is di again dialectical evidence. There are two opposite ways you could look at Schlub. You could look at it as either the nadir or the apex or of the world of carbs. You have to look at schlamim especially olos and zlimos word and zlam are always ref almost always references to schlam. It's clear that in khalashem the first of the carbonos the one that the Torah speaks of without even speaking about it just assuming it imola carbono right etc. It's clear that that is a foundational carbon. Um that's the generic carbon kashm it's the it's the misbaka ola right it's tone all the many of the dm come from and it's clear that it has an elevated status schlim is kimal right it's nishkara the bim can eat it it seems clear that certainly has less kaduca but what you find in the mafarim and in the evidence is that there are maximalists and minimalists when it comes to schlamin. I'm a maximalist um tonight. No, all night. Um when it comes to schlamin um olusvan what is the relationship between? Let me just highlight it like very um very quickly. Are we talking about ola and schlamim? Are we talking about equal parallels or opposite poles? Both are called Don in different places which is very intriguing. The first of the carbonos presented in Vikra is of course ola. The last of the carbonos in parasra and paras is I'm not going to read all these inside because it'll take too long. Basically says how could we begin with ola because it's the you have it here in the marmos but I'm not going to read it. It's the marbanos. How come we've end with God shalom, you know, we finish with shalom. You know the s allows you to you know to to to be moshes like like the Rambam's paration a little bit you know in the end of meaning you start with the most holy with the most um significant and the reason we have mishlim it's the last but also it has a very nice message but if we look at the kakar throughout kakar was a schlamim maximalist he felt that the carbon is of hers also I should say hers calls it the carbon of claus according to cleakar the voluntary we'll see in a moment and the you know um the fact that this is not bound up with any kind of orap but is a carbon is what establishes schlamim as the carbon he doesn't talk about the order but if he would have he would have said that we begin with Ola because it's one kind of you know apex and we finish you know with a bang you know with schlamim because they're parallel opposites but each one represents the heights of kbat theim and speaks about the extended space and time for eating forita and so on and so forth The garland of the base has the position of who said that in the midbar you couldn't eat what do they eat. So while some understand basically schlam are like a heet for the minimalist view. The other way of course to look at it is that basically even when you eat koulen there's an opportunity to elevate that the Rambam when he talks about both in you know hashita and in the context of kachim makes it perfectly clear that which isra bazar and is not navoda in one respect is also the avoda in a different respect the first of the a vod and it is the bridge between ailasim and ailas kin and the way the raam I think understands differently than others that the turn ra the concept of is that it's not a you can eat it but at least do it in the mishkan at least do it in the context of ku but on the contrary it is the elevation of of Akila kasher civa which comes from the world of kachim and is elevated even further by virtue of the fact that it is exported to elevate the world of kulin is the epitome of what schlamim is all about. The word schlamim or zeblim of course highlights mostly schlamim has nothing to do with kapara. Its theme is that of chevah the carbonos in peragiml explains he says yearly what do you do when you're s on top of a carban if you're so on and asham you're misvap that's based on the garb the garb doesn't say anything about you you do have what do you do so Now the rashmishants these are marmiccomas that are all here. I'm just not going to read them because it's light. The rash mishants in the cifra also thinks like ola that's a don but there's sign of a capara that is connected with schlamin. There are other macoros that imply that as well. But the mainstream view in the gamarian and the raam says the of aim is drab the rajam highlights the fact that every in one way or another is ana or a it's voluntary. Some of the ask again what do you mean it's voluntary? So, so is an ola. And the answer that they give is an ola is voluntary, but it's triggered by a sense of deficiency. A sense that you are out of sync in your relationship with the racial. You need to be aui to the raon as the ram in parasikra explains. But a schlamin is something that comes from simka and from a sense of accomplishment and from a sense of aspiration simply to be in the presence of the ribonola. It's a don like ola and it's comparable in its importance to ola but in the end of the day it's the parallel opposite of ola. The clear notes that only in Schlamim do we keep repeating the words lashem lashem lashem he says because you're you're not coming for kapara you're coming simply to bask in the's presence and to give for having the opportunity to be an oade hashem pigle and onain other dinim are derived davka in the para of schlam and from there exported throughout about cudship. You could say as if you're a minimalist even Schlamim has a den of peagle. Even Schlamim has a den of Onane and so on. But I would argue as a maximalist that the pigle and the onain sorry the pigle and the onain are highlighted in schlubim because that in some respects is the uber corban at least as a voluntary corb but as a corban of shevak vahoda which is why onain is not acceptable and why it's particularly important to have rules and principles and parameters which is the idea behind I'm saying all this very quickly Yeah. Um while the gamarra discusses whether a no whether a benoak can bring a schlamim the garamar's conclusion the ramak is that a benoak can bring an ola but he cannot bring a schlam rah hers in his parishra says of course he can't. It's the quintessential Jewish corban. It's a carbon of sim and and hashemilad has nothing to do with negating you know deficiencies in our relationship with theam as the quintessential is it is excluded from a non the garra says in zakim with respect toim that you have to do the while the doors of the are open if the doors of the aren't open at the time that is a that's a schlam and there's a debate among the but of the opinion it's a special inlim so if you look at the nitiv in his parishra he says yeah it's overcompensation the you barely know that it's you can eat it anywhere anybody can eat it so at least you know in order to highlight that this is you have to have open but I would argue the opposite namely this is the ultimate it's it's being in the mikdash it's being nana from the relationship to the shalom and in that respect it requires that the doors of the are open to bridge to dka connect the kachim kalim of schlamim for this high purpose with the keshakadashim itself the I should say I'm sorry the quoted by Rashi says thatim is connected to shalom shalom like but also to sharing to the balance of interests and as many of the mafarian point out even the kaz Bashoke. One of them comes from the bim and one of them comes from Gaboa. All different dimensions, all different personalities are included in the sha. But according to the Raan, the definition of schlam is connected to the concept of call it perfection or the idea of complimentary the idea of a wide he on the one hand and the idea of consistency and a holistic approach to a vote that includes all aspects. explains that means I say it right something like that. The word ze in as we know refers often to the claims a suda in which is expressed. But what is saying is that right the idea of upgrading ailas by virtue of and im imitating or mimicking again when there was an easter in the mishkan in the aftermath of bringing pas and mim that is the idea that enlas is um formulating in a very dramatic way You could say that the first schlamim of note was actually not my others have said it as well. But if you look at theim in shimos something that emerges from it very very powerful and that is one second this is on page we're skipping a lot we're getting to the end page 13 and 14. you have the then of course innumera and then in Israel the ben is This is the carbon and the explains. And in the second paragraph, and so on. And the final words this paradigmatic was not only a but it established controversial that elim can go along with that's the schlabim with the velo in a certain sense Schlamim's convergence with Pak the convergence of Amuna and Schlamos is the convergence of Mitim and Matan Torah. But in the bigger idea, it's the idea of it's the idea that humanity or human hashem is actually preferred more challenging but also a bigger payoff. callos. The capacity of man to be an oem despite the fact but due to the fact that he is human. That is the singularesh of that is encapsulated in zeblim in schlamos in zebak in theita and that is really what pesak schlamim is really all about. One of the schlamim is of course the kaga and the shimka and of course on shabuos the time of matra there has to be because it's related to the concept of schlamim theore only one that we have which is also keshashim is the keras which is connected to the so this balance this heave this aspiration This combining of it and amuna on the one hand and a massive expansive aspirational matan tora mitzvos on the other famous discussion of the gamar mas chabis how not the balim but human beings were intended to receive the Torah. This principle is really about the interface of Pesak and Schlam. Amuna and Schlleamos, Amuna and Amuna and Zel. And of course it is a relationship which is reciprocal and mutually enhancing in every single way. This theme of human spirituality deeply resonated with my father's carinal labra as his most um consistent uh and constant um parishioner. My father I followed my father around for many many decades. I was a congregant of his and a show draashv and his sharim. Um I can clearly testify that this was a major theme in my father's he often uh like to quote the very famous Kotkervort that was his plesia background which began in his early days in the kabraas of Toronto the ane kesh tuni sakman is here the mumka inidus right rendered by the katskarbi as ha but mention right holy men davka men theodalam is interested in de hashem who are mention their spirituality manifests not despite but because of their humanity along the lines of the garamarian chabas that we were talking about and the raan we should add in light of our analysis that the pus focuses on eradicating traa meaning the absence of heterosita and the role that zeblim that plays a lynchpin of schlamos nikaya kadisha as we had it. So when we speak about pesak and schlam pesm zak pes these are are themes that undergur this perspective. My father embied this theme in his youth in which on his own initiative he attached himself to the worlds of g and katsk and sakachv where these themes were very pervasive. His rebi or price in his Imra Abra visits these themes ubiquitously and he was even more impacted by this orientation when he became a lifelong devoted Talmid of the Rav Zatal who in his different way more philosophical way expounds on this very principle in isala the very beginning of isa is about the contrast between isala and homo religiosis homo religiosis who tries to escape the world. Isao tries to bring spirituality into the world and beam his other printed essay m extensive printed essay which is very a large section of which is devoted to this very concept and principle and of course was ubiquitous in all of his writings and his churin as well. This hallelgimemention perspective, the embodiment of Schlleamus was integrated with my father's principled Corban Pesakamuna initiative and persona, his very strong principled stands when they were necessary, but combined with this sense of balance and perspective and the expansive idea of human of Oda Sashen which impacted his Rabonos, his rabbitic leadership, his method an approach to teaching Jewish history here in the yeshiva with its emphasis on humanity and hashkahaka. In that sense, he was an unselfish unself-conscious sorry devote though certainly also critical and reflective of Torah umada and Torah and Derakarets alongside the principle of integrity. He truly ema embodied the convergence of pesak and schlamim of deep faith devotion to the raon shalom but with heke and with balance and I together with my siblings feel great hakaristo to have been raised in that kind of environment sused with both pesak and schlam it's a special ashka that his yardite coincides and therefore intensifies for us during these uh special days these enduring and timely of Yahadus. Thank you.