Preparing video...
0:00 / 0:00
Zevachim 11
0 views
Comments(0)
Transcript
Auto-generated transcript. Not time-synced to the video.
Today's is
and we have four lines from the bottom
of the two dots.
Today's being learned as a for
today's also being learned as a
and
ben.
So today's daff is a little bit of a
continuation of the previous which
discussed the of the began
said and what emerged from the maso of
is that the titus rebelzar who adds
asham to the
exclusion list of
where
is a hish. The says
and said
and just like the based on that we had
earlier in the we know that a
would make the carbon possible so too an
ashma
would be possible as well. So the Gmorra
today is going to continue
discussing the rebel and it's going to
begin with aan which means quoting
aishna somewhere else where is this
somewhere else it's later in the
so just a tiny introduction one of the
pulim that you find in the world of
carbon is niknas now
is the lesser known
of the two that involve taking a of the
carbon outside of its the better known
of those two is the
so for example if the dam of a carbon
would leave the azara it would go to the
it would become why because it left its
the dam is supposed to be spritzed on
the mbe which is in the azor that's
where it belongs nowhere else if it
leaves that place it would become
possible. The reverse
counterintuitively is true as well. In
the event that you have dam that is
supposed to be spritzed on the misbeh
and then it's brought inside the dam
would become ple as well. That's known
as the so is when it leaves its
goes from the place of to a place of
lesser
is when it leaves its mock but it's
considered entering because it entered
the it actually went to a place that is
of a greater level of kadusha. Now the
to this is a it's
the says
so if you're going to take the and
you're going to bring it into the
it's going to disqualify the entire
carbon. Now notice the that talks about
is talking specifically about a
carbonas. So the Mishna over there
from the base brings three whether or
not that is in fact only true foras or
whether it's true for other and if it's
true for other which carbon and that's
really where today's stop begins learn
over there
any dam of a carbon that's supposed to
go on the in theor that is brought into
the will become possible meaning not
only the carbon
carbon as well. Now what is the
so in the it's rashi quotes it it's
because although the itself is talking
specifically about but it says
the word is extra it's coming to be but
not only the
no the talking about it's only
says it's not true for allonus but it's
also not only true for the asham is
included as well because the says
and this very much feels like
who said
that just like
so
is going to be poss
and a the talking about that's why it's
by Now we have a hatkish that says
that's how I know it's true by as well.
But the Rabonan my mom why do the Rabon
hold that it's only true by the and the
way Rashi explains the Gmorra is not
asking why the Rabon don't hold like
Rabaka who says that it's true by all
carbonas because the understands the
Rabon are not to Rabaka's
what's his says
maybe the word maybe the don't that
word. So the garra is not even asking
that kasha. What the gumar is asking is
seems to have a very basic. It says so
if there's a hkish between the katas and
the ping is talking about why wouldn't
we say that it includes the as well. Now
the truth is just to hit the pause
button for a second.
What do you mean the
where they clearly don't hold of the
say that
is
but we're not and we don't say just like
the iss
going to be possible as well. If that's
the case, it sounds like the don't hold
of the if they don't hold of the so
what's the
why not to with regards to the if
anything I would look at this Mishna I
wouldn't have any I would say it's very
very I would say there's a
we there's a that the regarding do we
apply it to the via or do we not say we
do the say we Oh, it's
in the first
where it says the
saying not that way. Now you also have a
third
whatever but the point is as it relates
to
the is asking
meaning I understand I don't understand
the raon no just like you understand
because he holds of the hish you should
understand they don't hold the hish and
it's theon
so if you look at the last rash on the
it's clear rashi was bothered with this
and rashi says quote
there's no way the raon completely
disregard this meaning it's true in our
mission don't hold the hold
but
at the same time to say that is that
they completely disregard the and now
make
that is not comfortable with and to the
contrary the says I don't understand why
would say that there's no when it comes
to an why are we not mish
in the same way was makish
says
explain and he said
that you can't say that when it comes to
an it was based on the of
which is very because all the was burnt
on still you find that this because of
the oil enter it would be
like so which is not as it's not
certainly it would not have meaning in
the world of
not
the only that would have is and maybe
the for sure not is all but not
we're acknowledging that it makes sense
that the rabbon would not hold like the
question is why only why not but even if
it would be also it would for sure not
be because what's the to be only if you
hold like would you be but in where you
don't have the for sure you're not going
to be once doesn't have
either
which is cool doesn't have well then
certainly
the asham which is can't have but says I
don't know if it's a
it's true has over an
but has over and that is the is opposed
to the which is not and by the way it's
to speak this out because we're ready 10
days in even though we know the is but
it's not really it's only a right it's
not really so has a in that is as
opposed to maybe because it has a it's
for that reason that you would have by
an despite the fact that there's no when
it comes to the says
the
brought was also brought right that's
why it's called it's coming to be and
there's no with regards to a carbon now
you're going to say it's true what would
be there should be when it comes to a so
this is not the time to delve into this
but we know that there was an equivalent
thereof in a carbon to a regular carbon
and that is the
was to the what the dam was to so there
could have been a there should be on the
just like there's on the but the reality
is that there isn't so says the you're
going to tell me
which is
should have
and you find that it is not subject to
the in other words just because
something's a that in of itself does not
mean that it should be subject to the
now we're in the middle of the and the
is going to interrupt the program the
says that why did the say
why did we say
why did we jump to the
it's an example of a carbon that's yet
it doesn't have you're saying good but
you could have said it differently as
well
which is also it's more similar to maybe
it has real dam right but and still
says the reason is because it's not so
because really
had a whole suffic whether or not when
it comes to so to say would mean you're
getting involved in a big shar
is not willing to do that. So it's for
that reason says the
that you want to know why that even
though there's a hack of but there's
going to be
what's
the answer to that is
and still you see there's
But now we return to our program back to
the marvel but I still have a
note and being that it's not a ze we
said it's the equivalent thereof is like
but at the end of the day it's not a z
and being that it's not a z so it could
be it's for that reason there's no
where it's a
and despite the
I understand But is
I understand but is but that's not Yeah.
What's the between
the or theates
it's going to be
so
that too will be as well. So said that
the reason the did not hold up the
hackish
because as much as it's true yeah there
is a hish that would seem to suggest
that if there's when it comes to when it
comes to as well so there's a based on
between and at the end of the day are
both examples of that are not subject to
that is also
and is not going to be subject to in
other The was let's compare the to the
ter is we're not comparing the to the
we're comparing it to the and to the and
the
from is better than the
and it's for that reason says
there's no when it comes to say
I have a
there's a that a carbon and
has over an and that is there's no
minimum amount of money you had to spend
on a carbon. If you could buy an animal
for an oil at the most discounted price
in the world, go for it. Or if you could
buy the needed for the for a very cheap
price, that's okay. An had a minimum
price and that is it had to be worth at
least two.
So
maybe because you find that it has more
and therefore it would have
based on the
it should be subject to the in other
words we're back where we started and
that is
what
hold
like said the last days
on some There has to be a heckage
between the and the so has why does the
not have what are you going to tell me
because I learned from
based on
that what that it doesn't have there so
we shouldn't have here either
and if that's the case you can't learn
from there that there shouldn't be
says there must be a new reason
says
the word teaches me it's with
as opposed to of another carbon as
opposed to the of an is not going to
have
says.
So now the just said that even though
there's a limo there's a par that says
that is only true for the is not true
for the so who now needs to explain his
position
said that not only by the but even by
the it's based on well if there's a mut
of so what does do says
of
But
the is included. It's coming to be
is only if the d is not if the bosser is
how to be using
that to be had in the word and the
reason is
because if all the wanted to do was be
the buser then it could have just
I would know it's the dumb and it's not
the it's not the the fact that we add
the map at the end of the word dumb to
make it.
So that's coming to teach me a new mute
and that is not only for that I would
just need the word dumb the teaches me
it's also it's the d of the and it's not
the says
why is he not masking that there's two
to be had over here says
he held that to make two here is not a
good and is because if the would have
say
it would be poetically inaccurate. The
right way to say it is
now if the whole word is extra but the
word is not extra because I need the
word to tell me once I need the word so
then to add that's just
the other that's just a poetic
appropriate way of saying it there's
only one to be had there's not two to be
had and for that reason we're so we're
not going to be asham what's the bottom
line the bottom line is that the garra
had a a
whether an
holds that
and he added the to the list
was that the reason added the is because
of the
clearly don't hold of this hish at first
glance it would seem that this is the
regarding the because the is mentioned
by
Yet say it's not only true by the true
by the as well and it's based on the
heckage of
the so we said if we were writing the we
would say wow it's so
in the first
and later on holds a
here he said he said regarding and don't
hold the but actually took the opposite
approach the tarnered that for sure
their opponent on some level must hold
it a heckish now why did they hold akish
on day. So yesterday's but at the end of
the day on some level for sure they must
have held it a heckish and asked it as a
tight if the hold. So why do they not
hold it a heish when it comes to the of
and what was the because it says
and from there we learn that it's
and again the second part of the recap
is three regarding that's
hold is true by
the hold it's true only by the
holds if it's true for
based on the it's going to be true for
the as so now the is going to return to
the
and that is
a it's included in
according to it's included in the
exclusions
and according to
according to the that hold that
I know the
I understand why the was
and the was.
What's the background to the
said it says in theor
talk about the
it's like the kadosh and it's like the
which is said
why did the Torah compare the
teaching
that there's a certain and which is that
the one
It's like the which is
for that reason
with the
right the to the what the is to the is
also going to be possible. However, a
that's being brought not because
somebody did an a and now he's bringing
a to atone for his a but rather he's
bringing an a
therefore it's going to be treated like
a and
is going to be the says
but it that
So why is the compared to the compared
to the in other words the says
compared to it's compared to the what's
this all about? Is it the is it the
clearly there's a significance in that
it's like the significance in that it's
like so really addressed it
said that there's a certain that's like
and then there's a like
I'll tell you what if you did
like therefore if you do it's possible
like
if you did
like an
said very why the was
based on the between
is but this is all good according to the
but that is
according to rebel.
So you're going to tell me there's a
that's like
a
well they have the same.
So is according to
say
that it something that could be
explained based on another this isn't a
this is
in the event that did a and he didn't
put the into a so in a perfect world
after the ken does the kit he would take
the kit put it into a walk the
equivalent of and then on the which is
the equivalent of this. So what would be
if the
was not put in the says
is because the compared the to
know what held he held that the is
coming to tell me his f sometimes is
like a sometimes it's like an
in the event that the chooses not to
take the and put into a rather he's
going to be he's going to do the he's
going to walk the
holding it in his hand.
So then he has to hold it with his right
hand and do the with his right hand the
way you do the with
if he chooses to put it in a
then you put it into your left hand or
if you want you could put it in your
left hand which could be done with your
left hand. Now the truth is this is a
little bit of a kadesh because usually
avoid had to be done with right that's
the way anoid had to be done with your
right that's the way it's supposed to be
that only the had to be done with the
all the other were allowed to be done
with the said
that
who says that you could take
and put it in a not put in a it's put in
a it's really based on
who holds that any carbon other than the
could be done with the smo and shim saw
a heckish in the parish to the
and he was like puzzled he said what's
it coming to teach me he said you know
it's coming to teach me that
where you would have to do with the or
it could be like where it doesn't have
to be done with the admin it can be done
with the what's it to it's you put it
into a cliche said you're not put into
if you're doing a it would have to be
with the if you're putting it into and
then you could even hold it with the
left hand but what's the bottom line
what do you see from here another
application for this
nothing to do with but rather related to
doing with your right hand doing with
your left hand and could be other it's
based on that only the has to be done
with your right hand and that the does
not have to be put into but the bottom
line is what's has to do with the
I have the same
is
what isa it's this
of in the so if you do a little bit of a
a
what emerges what emerges is we have two
how to understand the he of
either it's coming to tell me that a
sometimes is like apostle
Or sometimes it's like depends if it's
or what's coming to teach me is that
sometimes has to be done with your right
hand and sometimes it can be done with
your left hand. What it depends on is
did you put the into the or did you not
put the inar two different
of why we would compare the mas either
to the or to the what's the problem the
problem is both of these is the the
brought to explain the heish which we
said would be the way the would explain
it was a who the of that is and then the
mishna that we brought to explain
was also
what's going on over here. How could
have his cake and eat it too, right? How
could you have two separately from this
is for which was the
And the reason holds that is as opposed
to which is really not based on the
hkish because the heck is taken based on
the way he explained his in the what is
the reason very simple.
Why is a regular aas
because it says who right? We saw that
earlier in the word who is
extra to teach me that not only is there
but it's actually well
it says and it's for that reason holds
that is going to be possible. So really
used the heckage of
to teach me what he taught me the
mission not in the so how does he know
the of the is
based on it's based on the fact that it
says he by the which by the way is the
same word right but it's the same word
that it says regarding the regular
now you're going to ask this is the one
loop that the gar didn't close and that
is well the bis said that learns it from
keshadikas
It didn't say that he learns it from the
word he of you have to say that just
brought the as butami that's really not
his
in terms of whether you're going to
darish in the way in the or you're going
to dish in the way that
says the comes out from the
in the another
according to the whole that an asham
is
with regards to what is it the
now
we had two applications for the heckish
of today's one is our and the other one
is
both the are not anyone right why don't
they hold it akish regarding that's why
don't they hold it a heckish regarding
because it says with a
question is then if they don't have the
and they don't have the with regards to
so with regards to what do they have the
hkish now you'll tell me maybe they
don't have the hish so for the third
time we're going to read the last
and by the way the reason it's because
the put them together the
so if the lumps these two things
together there has to be a reason the
terra is doing that so if there must be
some heckish to be had. We're holding
strike two already because the two
attempts that we had in the to apply
this heish fell flat.
Knocked out both of them in a good way,
right? He accepted the hish in both
cases.
rejected both of them.
I'll tell you why very simple
just like require so to
say doesn't say do you need and if so
how do I know the answer is yes how do I
know it I know it based on the moving
along so the Mishna had said
so
was the third cheetah that was mentioned
in the Mishna Right. The four sheet is
in the regarding the first is the
was the second.
The third was
agrees with but he adds a wrinkle. He
says that just like apostle.
So too if you would bring another carbon
that would be possible as well. One
other thing that we have to mention
before we start this next is that we
mentioned before that the only time
apostle
is if you brought the pes so a man is
after
that is of when you're supposed to be in
the carbon if the pes was brought then
it's going to be possible however a
palis
has a dinner
And therefore,
regardless of what the is, it's going to
be in the same vein
holds that the only time if somebody
would bring a different carbon and would
have a mind that it would be possible is
if he brought that carbon.
If however he would bring the carbon
and have a mind in that instance, it
would not be an issue. Now it relates to
is a point. There's no man and no man
when it comes to is always but a has a
very unique time. It's a mitzvah
right it's
being that it has and just like the
Mishna said that is on the
level. It's also true in
where someone had
if that carbon was brought
that's when it would be a problem
otherwise not
that
you should know
that it's and which is interesting by
the way because is one of the four that
are mentioned in the Mishna is one of
the four that are mentioned in the
Mishna. So this is like a little
interesting but the bottom line is said
that this
also holds it was he said
that I agree that holds a little bit of
but not 100%
he says that yeah holds of
when it comes to the carbon not however
when it comes to the so if somebody
would bring a carbon lash
holds its plea would also hold its ple
but a carbon lash
where holds its pleaz
holds that really it is caution now from
here until the two dots about 10 lines
from the top of the days the gummor is
going to bring a bryer it's going to be
a long run on bryer and in this bryer
we're going to pause stop we're going to
pause We're going to stop and pause
twice following Rashi's lead because
really it's from this long bryer that
and Rabba are going to extrapolate and
demonstrate their respective positions.
So we're just going to have a long bryer
now and somehow we're supposed to figure
out why is bringing this now probably
has something to do with
look at the right has something to do
with this is that we just mentioned but
we're exactly
that's not so clear of course did the
work for us and the disclaimer before we
start this price is it's not the easiest
price in either way says the
we learned to so what's between and
Rabbi they were arguing whether rebel we
don't know if you know who this rebel is
yet but whether rebel held 100% like
or whether he held us like he 100% like
that
or are going to be possible or he held
like
are going to be possible but
are going to be cautious it says the gar
that is more than a year old. As a
result, it's no longer to be a carbon
and it was brought
during this Monday. He's supposed to
bring a carbon p and it was brought
essentially this person brought
it there was a p. Yeah, but we know
already
is a one of the three examples that
talked about where really
is just like an academic way of saying
someone that's holding a that was
brought
or much simpler or if somebody would
just bring a carbon other than a p and
he would have in mind
of the pasu
says it's going to be possible says it's
going to be now just first things first
it's here that holds of
as it relates to the right that's why
there's no debate between and whether
holds like
regarding or not the debate is whether
he holds like regarding but regarding
you can't really have much of a
conversation because it's
which is a
any other
which we said even
is going to be possible.
So again there's no debate with regards
to whether holds like whe
because that's in the words of this
price the debate is going to be as we're
going to see regarding
if it's true for you could hear it would
be true for as well maybe is going to be
different says
so again it was between anduh turned and
he told him as follows
the whole year notes where
is not if it's brought right if you
bring a carbon
it's possible why is it possible because
it's not to bring the carbon yet
you find that carbon that are brought
with
are going to be cauter and this tells
even because even though
that's only if it's right it has to be
the whole if it's but even agrees
that are brought
it's going to be so if that's the
is
then certainly
that brought should be as well. So turns
rubble and he says you're saying you're
saying that if you bring
it's going to be possible to me that's
inconsistent with the
why because
we're
if you bring
it's going to be poson
that are brought
is going to be.
So
where even the
certainly
has to be what is proving is that
is better
than it is.
What's the proof? Because
but
is that means
is better than
the IS FROM THE ITSELF LIKE VERY PARTIAL
BECAUSE a
whereas a
pal
is possible. So if you see
is better
than
that
has to be
because again the
is a better than if
certainly
is inconsistent with the
toldu that if you're going to make this
type of you don't find this every day
but he says if you're going to make this
type of then I'm going to twist the a
little bit differently and you're going
to see what's going to a result is uh an
outcome that's not tenable that we both
agree is not endless because
I can use your logic and I can flip this
in a way that again we won't be able to
live with. How so? We'll say it's false.
We're going to say that
if you
is that it's possible
yet
is that if you would
it would be well then
then certainly it should be as well
says let's entertain this
if you
it's right why is it possible because
only if you bring a
move on it's going to be pos
then the is it's
so why don't we then make
and say that if so
which is
should certainly be
in other words you see that a bismano
aesi
more to beer than
right. Where do you see that? Because
is so
to be a man. So why don't we say that if
and why is that? because
and it's and for that reason
but the point is if a man then certainly
a man
and of course we know that's not the
case right
are you going to tell me that that's the
case of course you can't say that in
other words toldu you're telling me
based on the mid of that you are able to
prove that a
is a better
than it is than it is right
is a better
than it is. Where do you see that?
Because
and based on that you want to make a
certainly should be. That's the point.
But it's based on what's that
is better
than it is. Well, if that's the case,
I'll just flip around the cards a little
bit and I'll tell you a is for sure
better than a
Where do you see that? because
and
so
if that's the case if
then certainly
should be yet we know that
is is possible and again it's not the
same that the reb is responding to
Yeshua to but it's eerily similar You're
telling me that based on the
relationship between
you can extrapolate that
is better than and based on that you
want to be well I can also extrapolate
from the relationship between
that is just better than a so let's
extrapolate based on the same exact
logic that a
bisman should have to be cautioned
Because if it's certainly man and you
agree that that's not the case. Well, if
that's true, then obviously there's some
flaw with your kab. So again, didn't
address what the flow with kab is. But
he proved to him that you can't make
such a kabr because if you're going to
make this kabr, you're going to have to
make the other kab and the other kabr is
not really an option. But continued and
said, now let me frag up the kim
again. What's
is that you see
is better
than it is
where do you see it from the puzzle.
So
is better than
which is better has to be as well. So
now is going to hack up the itself. He
says
it could be although it's true that
but it's only
because the itself if you would
be the reason is because it's not a
does it make sense then to apply and to
say that
would also be
I don't know because
is actually possible. So it's very very
sesome and rash doesn't explain so much
either but what rebel's timing is that
at the end of the day there's a flu in
what you're saying again till now rebel
just said that if you're going to dash
and you want you have to dash my but now
he's talking to the actual and what he's
telling the is as follows what he's
saying is that it could be there's a
relationship between
what you're in whether or not that
should impact the carbon that you're
bringing right now. Two, had you been
bringing the carbon that you were
thinking about right now, what would be
the status of that carbon? So it could
be that the reason
is because
but
will be possible because
is is also going to be possible. So at
the end of the day there's a major to be
between
and the reason is because could be
there's a relationship. It could be
there's an inherent relationship between
whether or not this should pass this
carbon and what would be if I was
bringing that carpet that I was about in
an of right now. So again
will be because
going to be why
is going to be possible as well. Now if
you look at Rashi, Rashi says that this
time there was number one there was a
like a response hit the ball over the
net to like aim but also Rashi has one
very important line and this is the
first time we're going to pause the
middle of the and that is this is also
this is also
just gave you his explanation. He just
gave you his why has to hold that if you
bring
it's going to be possible because if you
do right now would be a problem. So just
like if you were bringing that carpet
that you might be a problem if you bring
another car that it's also going to be a
problem
again this is the first pause that
I see from the BR that he holds like now
we said the first line of the B you see
already you see that he holds like
regarding
he said I'm a furish
but
holds like him 100%. Maybe only holds
like him with regards to
regarding and
says
he's not him 100%. He disagrees as it
relates to says you know what my is
where Rashu speaks at right here says my
is from the time of because explained
himself raza said there's a relationship
between if I would bring this carbon
would be possible then if I bring
another CARBON AND
THAT CARBON it's also going to be
possible that's the reason as a whole
that if you bring
it's going to be possible well if it's
true for the should be true for the as
well. What's the difference? There's no
inherent reason to be between and if
it's going to be true for the should be
true for the that is that is the reason
said that I know that said his not only
with regards to the even though in the
brace it's only by the
look at his reason if his reason is
right whatever that means but the bottom
line is what he seems to be saying is
there's a relationship between if I
would bring this carbon it's possible
well then if I'm possible if I would
bring that carbon it will be then if I'm
going to be if that's why
as possible then it has to be true as
well there's no between the but again we
just hit the pause button in the middle
of the continues and the bryer says
Rabishua told another tiny He came from
another angle. He said,
he said, "I have another problem with
what you're doing here." And the reason
I have a problem with what you're doing
here is because what's going to emerge
is is that in a way a schlim
is going to be more
than a pes to a certain degree as it
relates to and that can't be because I
mean learn the first 10 blood is more
than when it comes to and based on what
you're saying I don't know I'm not so
sure I have aims where a pes is actually
more than a How is that? How is that? If
you bring a
It's possible. But if you bring a
it's going to be a
that's
going to be a problem.
meaning
we're going to call that
that is a for that reason it's going to
be now we understand why but says I'm
very uncomfortable with this and he says
that's why I don't like your so the
continues he says
and he attacked this from another angle
he said
he said so we find that
is right we know different examples of
what means but is brought as
there's no such thing as like a leftover
is going to be brought as a said if
that's the case
with the meaning there's a between
what's
a little in it because
still you find that if you
it's going to be possible
We don't find this that the can be
brought as a
then certainly if you would bring it
should be possible says
that that
is possible then
has to be possible and the reason is
because the pes has more of a to
meaning
is less of a foreign
than is a and the reason is because
every has in it some
but there's no in the reverse. So
is
then certainly a
should have to be.
Now, not to go too crazy, but the have a
little bit of a problem with this part
of the because it feels a little bit
just from the flow of the
was in response to where Yeshua told him
right initially
came with his he says it's very simple
if
right now it would be possible then if
something else is also going to be
possible what would tell them
you came up
So
that can't be based on the so says okay
I hear
let me attack it from somewhere else and
he comes with a nice
so if
I hear but you didn't answer's problem
you still have the same anomaly that for
some reason has an issue with
Either way to this already this is extra
credit I am back but either way so
what's
version 2.0 knows McCart
he's not just saying that if a puzzle
then if
it should be possible as well he comes
with a whole blitz
and still
is not a
chain
let me ask you a question you find
Now what's the case of
Rash gives us a whole case but there's a
time where a would sometimes not be
brought as a but instead they would wait
for it to get a and then they would
redeem it and they would take the money
for kids right for times that the was
idols like this there's always going to
be activity on the it's an example of
that's being brought
yet
is never brought as a
can be brought as
according to your logic why don't we
make the following
means it has a connection to yet
but you don't find that
it should come out according to rebel
that
should be possible I never heard of such
a thing according to your of why you're
arguing out that
is possible. It should come out that
should also be possible. And I never
heard that
should be possible. And really based on
the methodology, it's the same thing.
The same you have from
you have from
now let's hit the pause button for the
second time right now. And here we're
going to introduce
says one second I I don't I don't
understand according to
that holds that is of
he didn't only mean he really meant he
meant that bring that
so if you would bring
it would be possible as well. Now he
said it by Pak said it by pas no but he
meant by kus as well. Well, if that's
the case, so what's Yeshua's and at the
very least right now should say of
COURSE I HOLD THAT it's true also just
like
is also
but Yeshua didn't think that that was
what and himself didn't respond that way
says this was this is all part of the
this is the that's going on in
This is where saw in this saw that said
he only meant he actually did not mean
it either. So what did yes response
again is from what didn't respond. What
did
he said? It's it's not at you can't
compare
the
to the
why because
when it comes to the shank
it could be the reason that an is not
possible
when you
is because
the whole year being that itself is the
whole year. So it could be
is not such a
we
only right
the whole year but only
being that you find that the itself is
so limited even when you're bringing up
it's
during six hours a year. So
says that it should be regarding other
things as well. This is already a very
nuanced but either way tells that it
could be a pes
and the reason is because even
you find is so limited in terms of when
it's going to be a it's only
the whole year. So of is more of a than
where do you see it in
respectively. So it's for that reason it
could be between
which would be a problem and again you
see it in the furish's response what
held and that is that even only said
when we're dealing with as opposed to
when you're dealing with katus again as
promised this is not the easiest price
in but the bottom line is is that we
have here
that is in line with these
said that just like awar
So too if you would bring
it would be possible as well. Turns out
we have a and a hard
regarding and there was
whether who said
regarding did he mean it also regarding
or did he mean it only regarding said
in fact
said no he meant it only regarding he
didn't mean it regarding where did and
respectively
get there. It was from the in the back
and forth between Yeshua in this price
that we will not recap. But the point is
if you really just want to identify the
punchline regarding the Raban was
focusing on the first exchange between
Rebel and Rabu and Rabbi was focusing on
the second exchange. Right in the middle
of the you have
all of a sudden he comes with like he
comes from a whole another angle
extrapolated his from the racial the
initial din between raz and rabb from
the dinar either way we're going to
finish now this last that's going to
take us to the second Mishna already
here in the so moving along the Mishna
had said
was the fourth sheet in the
say
in the event that a carbon was brought
to if it was brought to but the carbon
that you had in mind was
carbon that has more it's going to be if
it's a lesser kadusha it's going to be
possible and he gave two examples
that's
That's
is going to be possible says
so some said in the name and others said
what did they say
what is
what's his based on the following it
says
Now we saw already on that this is
related to the right. This was the this
is the
of
this but either way this is the way
question
right means it's it's more so in the
event that you had but the was for more
then it's not it's not considered a
if it's not it's not then it's going to
be a problem this is the says
but really is this person coming to
teach me this
I need to teach you
how do you know that if somebody eats
right someone eats
what's the so learned that from this
and he learned it's talking not about
it's actually talking about
and the is talking about something that
in the future
and ready
to teach me that if you have something
from where in the future you're going to
be now we're ready to go ahead and to
eat but what do you see from here
that's what this is coming to teach me
how could you tell me the is coming to
teach me I needed to know the or
says in if this is all the was coming to
say then
let it
It's coming to teach me both. The point
is as follows. From the fact that it
says theu
that's me
bigger. That's how I know.
But from the fact that it says it in the
future tenseu not that's how I know
about something that we're going to do
in the future. And it's from there I
know the that is a
relates to by the way if you're
wondering
brought twoes from
we just a second ago we learned
moving along
had to understand
what are his words
Now we know that can mean
this is so wanted to know
when
said that
it's he meant
it's not but it's in contrast to where
it's actually going to be possible. Now
if that's what he holds that means he's
arguing with the regarding one thing
meaning he agrees
where's he arguing whereas say that's
also
don't discriminate between
says no it's going to be possible
maybe
it's
possible comes out he's arguing with
both because according to it's always
according
If it's
possible it's actually never
said some say it was that said right
that's a good name in bring from the
itself
right gave two examples one example was
the other example was
Now that second example
is going to be
going to be possible. Now
if you're going to tell me that when we
say it means it's meaning
and by the way as well
there's no
it's a gift that you give a ken it's not
that's what it is there's no element of
so when shimar
gave in his second example of gavaya
What did he mean when he said he for
sure meant you know why because there's
no even because there's no such thing as
so means
so if the case of
is a case of
then certainly certainly
of
kadoshim should
It should also be a case of
meaning the case of
there's no there because there is no
so if that's the case be consistent and
we should assume that
it's also going to be but says
maybe when we say regarding
being that it's impossible to have a
because it's not a that's even subject
to the laws of
but
maybe it would be Ella says
so if that's the case why did we even
mention that case in other words in the
followup is explaining a little bit
better what the original question was
right
sometimes from the follow-up question
you understand what the original
question was the original question
wasn't just what do you mean you see
so probably
is also
right the the riot was as follows the
riot was why did
two examples of one example was
and the second example was
one example would be enough
If you're going to tell me that
is on how to understand
has to be
because there is no so
and we'll be patient.
But if you're going to tell me that
really it's not necessarily because
maybe
the
well if that's the case then my what is
the why mention the second case now
you'll tell me
maybe you're coming to tell me the
first case
says no really
and the reason we mention the case of is
and how to understand
you want to know why we mentioned it.
Maybe when you're dealing with
they're so different, there's a
but if you have two levels of which is a
type of
which is also a type of maybe those are
all the same thing. Maybe it's not even
a same level. It's a diff it's not a
different level and therefore it doesn't
pass within the world of
it would have been mock to say the whole
concept of is only within the same
class. So within the world of or within
the world of then you could have it. So
maybe that's the I know this from a
different
say
which comes first. So it says the comes
before the
Arab because the
required four of the additionally it
required
as opposed to the but what do you see
from there you see that the schlman has
more kaduca than the bkar from the fact
that it comes before the so I know
already that the is on a higher level
than the bkar and even though they're
both kachum kalin but within the world
of kachum kalin there's subcategories so
can't tell me the reason mentioned
another example of
to teach me that. So why do we even have
to imagine says
of there being nuances and levels within
the world of the
and that's why told us what he told us
heav
and the way he set it up was number one
if you have
and kadashim or even within the world of
kachum kum itself there's a mus of
levels where you can have levels of
kachim God, don't I know that from a
Mishna later? Yeah, it's an idea that
repeats itself in another Mishna, but
this is the place. And by the way, this
is the first Mishna in the Mazak. Does
it make sense? This would be the place
over there. We're going through all the
different and the what comes first. So
in the world of Kadima, we mentioned
that the Schlam comes before the but
it's not being mentioned to tell me
there's a between the Schlam and the
Bakar. It's just it's a in the world of
Kadima of Carbonis. But the real place
that we're coming to mention that that
was in levels that's and that's why he
mentioned that case not to be on
and really if you think about it the
comes out with
so for sure holds that
is going to be what he wasn't sure about
was
it
or is it going to be
so the truth because today was a tough
data
through so I think we're going to leave
the raid on the table we'll save item
but just to end with one because we just
finished really the first
here of and that is I was discussing
with my son
that the first in the
says what does it mean that was brought
you brought
there's so many different variables
there's so many different ways that you
can concoct a curb in
what does Rashi want how did he know to
say
so
Number one, Rash is coming to teach you
that that
mean the first thing Rash's telling you
is that you know what it means to bring
a carbon you have to think about another
carbon because if you're not going to
think about another you're only going to
think well that in and of itself is not
going to be
so it's
as opposed to just note
It has to be
because
another thing that Rashi is coming to
say is that when the Mishna says
it means you say of course I mean no
it's not true because really the laws of
and they're also I am the first in the
where is not sure how to learn the is
the only talking about or is it talking
So for sure Rashi is saying that as
well, right? So there's two easy
lowhanging fruit that Rashi is coming to
tell me. Number one, it's a
and number two, it has to be.
But if it's
why would say
is because Rashi wants is coming to
bearish the sheet of the Tanakama. The
shittita of the tanakama is his unique.
It's the
who holds that
it's going to be possible. If the
is
and he holds that when it's
really going to be so it behooves him to
give me a case where it's so it makes
perfect sense why Rashi would pick a
case of but even in
Rashi didn't have to pick right he could
have picked he could have picked a case
of
but you have in the now why couldn't
Rashi say he couldn't say because
it's not okay why couldn't Rashi say
I'll tell you why because when the
Mishna says
that line of the is also read the
Rebel is also leveraging that first line
of the
who holds
and with who
if Rashi wants to tell me a case of
because he wants to go from Shini Aario.
Well, Rashi only has one example that he
can give. It has to be the it can't be
the because everybody holds the is not
true
because that's in the right. That's the
can't say because that's in.
So this line of
can't be
and the is talking
this line and so the only one of the
kados that are available is
that's why Rashi said
why did
first Rash is coming to teach me that
not that's suffic right in the beginning
of
Number two, it has to be
because
but also what after you learn through
the four and the
argue with the Mishna with the where he
argues with the
now by the way does he argue with also
that's
We're not going to get involved. The
only thing we know for sure that HE'S
going to be. So you want to bring out
the
inn
the one you have to talk to is right.
This line is the and
is talking about
something else that's not this. So
really you're talking to so you want to
bring out that it's going to be true
even what is
okay so what are my options here my
options are right what's it could be
could be an it could be it could be a
right we're not talking about that's
easy right so is off the table nozzle
and he said the only thing you can be is
that's
said
Clarki
here in the Messiah.