Transcript
Auto-generated transcript. Not time-synced to the video.
Okay, good afternoon.
Today we have a very interesting topic.
We're going to talk about the garra on
vav where the garra was saying that in
who says
the fact that he could bring
for hakanim
the fact that the says
means forar kap you don't need
soar had a question you should be able
to bring a carbon pes for your friend
cuz you could bring a pesak for your
children. Why do say if you're pes for
your friend and you were not him?
Why don't we say
just like
for
your children who they're not benedas.
They're not benedas.
So too
without the das of
um the people who you're doing it for.
The same way you could do it for your
children because they don't have das,
you should be able to do it for someone
else. Even if you didn't get their das
to which the gar says no you can't learn
out from the fact that you could be you
could be maybe
bringing a carbon for your family is not
the and the brings a proof cuz you could
tell your children I'm going to sh the
pesak for whoever comes up first. So
since once you're the first child sticks
his head into your he for himself and
the others. So Gar says I understand
he's for himself because the fact that
he came up first
that he's a kid who you meant to for but
how is he for the other siblings after
it was already
it's that
is not there are two interpretations of
case is not you have the and you have
let's see
Dan is the second w line
really in this kind of scenario we are
but you can't learn out from the current
because
it's not that you could be mock for your
children even though you're not you
don't need to be
you can't
is not
because
the kanim don't need to
be appointed with the other members of
the
rather they eat from it
even though they weren't invited
even though the can only be eaten by
those who are appointed.
That's only if someone is worthy to be
appointed
who can't be appointed
because they don't have
the meaning learns what does it mean? He
says not that means children your your
family members do not need to be
appointed. Why? because it's not
possible to appoint them because they
don't have das. However,
other people who do have das, they do
need to be appointed and if you don't
appoint them, they can't be. So the per
of
means children do not need to be even
though the is only
we say
still that doesn't apply to one's own
children. That's the run to has another
take on this.
See,
bring this up here. Ah.
This is what holds him.
Wait a second. How could you feed your
children the if they weren't invited?
It's true. If you see a kan eating in a
vea bzdon doesn't have to stop but
you're now to be
you're now to hand aim.
If you see the eating doesn't have to
separate him but you're now to feed him.
How could you feed the to someone who's
not invited?
True
doesn't have to separate him.
You can't feed him
like we learned.
So Ty is clearly is gripping
that when the gar says c is not
it doesn't mean your children don't be
have to be nimn
so then how is tyus learning but because
tyus learns that your family members do
have to be invited tous is asking how
are you allowed to feed them the pesak
you're causing them to do an iss
says
the you can't actively feed.
We learn at
do not feed them.
You're only now to feed the if it's like
a rodent
but such a case
where you're being
in other words the actively feed an is
if it's only an isser but what if
there's also a a mitzvah of involved
then you could feed them something which
is asser in other words in aami
do need to be
you must invite your son and your
daughter I but you can't invite them
because they don't have das so if you
they don't have das and you can't invite
them how do you feed it to them you're
feeding them no it's only to feed avar
if it's only but if it's also a matter
of
you could feed them
so the ram learns No, the reason I'm
allowed to feed it to them is it's not
the Torah never said I need to invite my
children because since it's not possible
to I don't have to. The of
does not apply to
learns it does apply to it's just I'm
allowed to do it anyway because of the
what does that mean? It's not that the
mitzvah of overrides the it's
technically it's not I can't feed a
there's a special don't feed a
that is only saying that's only but if
it's also I could feed them
now
then the points out a very interesting
between and the
could you include include a
in the in
could you include a or you know let's
say somebody somebody there's someone in
the sh they're they can't hear and they
can't speak or someone who's a a shaita
so there's no way to invite them could
you include them in the current pak what
would you Okay.
Says
according to every single participant
must be invited. I how do you include
your children
of overrides? There is no to
you would not be allowed to include
them. According to the logic is someone
who doesn't have das the Torah doesn't
require you to invite them whether it's
a and presumably if they're also so just
points out that this would be a between
and take a look over here
according to there's
Only
there's no if someone's not invited.
It's only someone who's fit to be
invited.
You could say the same thing would apply
to
even though there's no mitzvah at all
is not applicable to them.
They will never come to mitzv.
So even though is not applicable to a
or a or a by the way why not why is not
applicable because they'll never be
but still I'm allowed to include them
because there's no of
it's
You can't invite
you're not
they are equal
Islam there's no
you know how to feed them
since they're exempt from the you can't
invite them and it's an is
yeah that's what I got for you today
again we have to say How you learn celib
is notice. So the raan learns that since
they don't have das
you don't have to invite them. There's
no prohibition of of feeding to someone
who is not invited if they can't be
invited. says presumably that would
apply to aus
learns that celebrates notice meaning
you'd be allowed to feed them because of
the says that would not apply to a
that would not apply to a or there's no
to or
say enjoy the rest of your day
and thanks for Coming up.
