Preparing video...
0:00 / 0:00
Zevachim 23
0 views
Comments(0)
Transcript
Auto-generated transcript. Not time-synced to the video.
Today's D is
and we are about 25 lines from the
bottom of
the two dots.
So the Mishna had mentioned different
people that would be possible to do the
avoid in the B mikdash. Not only are
they possible but if they did the
would be
one of those mentioned in the Mishna is
a to and today's daf is very much going
to be a pir on the words of the Mishna
to apostle now today's daf is known in
yeshivas as the of
it's not the easiest and it requires a
little bit of an introduction. So
there's a
that
what does mean in the event that of are
in the event that of the
tal is that the yidden were allowed to
bring carbon meaning ordinarily if
somebody's he can't bring a carbon if
however
or if
we
Now the carbon would be able to be
brought. The is
the learns it from the word. It says by
the carbon.
It says regarding the carbon
teaches us
that a carbon could be brought. What
does it mean if or if
would be Tommy? It's interesting
throughout there's a whether
or
if
it means that in the event that of
Israel is to the way we view the tumo
is as if it's not even there meaning the
laws of tum don't even apply relative to
carbon if it means the tum is there
however the of the carbon is going to be
able to be. There are many whether
or
one notable
says that if
the way to works is with the of the
tits. So we know that the tits was one
of the begotten that the kang god wore
but it also had an ability to be
maratza. So just like in avoid marza,
the tits had an ability to be maratz as
well. We'll actually see more about the
rits of the tits in the course of
today's daf. But the tits had the
ability to be mirata specifically as it
relates to. So for example, in the event
that a coin would do with datets to the
tits was mer and somehow it made the
isotomo go away. If you hold
the way the header of bringing the
carbon in a state of works is in tandem
with the ifra
then it would not have to come on to the
it's interesting that the way the of
is usually referred to as as the
which would almost imply that we pass
In reality however
is not
but rather
but that's semantics not really going to
be today's doc what we need to know is
there's a concept of
just to keep it simple we're going to
refer to it as
the inact
says that as it relates to
of the carbon pes the only time we say
is if it's a where if a would have that
he would be pushed off to so we know
there's a parish of somebody was
during he got pushed off to the gum says
the only time there's a parish of
is if it was such a to where if the y
had that he would now get pushed off to
pen so for example The says that if
someone is to me if if somebody is to
because he came in contact with a maze
he can't bring the pes and he gets
pushed off to the if would now be to
maze you would have the parish of where
they'd be allowed to bring the carbon
pes even in a state of
if however of would be to but it's
where if the y had that tomo he would
not get pushed off
Pes then if of has it there's no parish
of they would not be able to be the
carbon being that they're in a state of
to one of the places that there's a
discussion in the that maybe this would
be manifest is in the event that was to
sher so is known as a tomala somebody
comes in contact with the sher he's to
for the day meaning he has to go to the
mikvah wait for the sun to set and once
at that point they would be so whether
or not
would be
would there not be what's so we just
said it's a would be would he get pushed
off to or would he not get pushed off to
what's that tollian well that's tolly in
whether or not a Tommy tomasher could he
bring the carbon p or can he not bring
the carbon p now let's think about it
for a second if somebody's Tommy so
right now he doesn't have the ability to
enter the right he's stating that at
night at night he already will be tar
right so there is mockim to say that
somebody that is tomaser
should be able to therefore be included
in the para of pes as a result he would
not get pushed off the pesi if he
doesn't get pushed off the pesi so now
there would be no of
ifas was Tommy if however the that's
cannot bring the garden pes well then he
would get pushed off the pesi if he
would get pushed off the pesi now if ro
of beas they would be subject to the
as part of the introduction to today's
we're going to work with the assumption
that the is
that if somebody's him the would be able
to bring the carbon meaning it could be
brought on his behalf if that's the case
he would not be pushed off the if he
would not be pushed off the then if
they would not have the of as it relates
to the first part the introduction.
There's a part two, but as it relates to
the first part of the introduction,
what does that mean
is they're allowed to bring the whether
it's the carbon whether it's the carbon
then one of the are whether it has to
work with the
known stating that we
stating that we're going to refer to it
as The of
is the only time of
is in the event it's a where if the had
that on
to bring the carbon pes he would get
pushed off the pes if however he would
not get pushed off the pesi then you
don't have the of
subject to this one of the places where
there's aiden as a result of this is
what would If was
meaning would there be no what's it
toian? It's totally if the himself who
was could he bring the or would he get
pushed off to the and that's a big [ __ ]
could bring a carbon on behalf of
someone that's Tommy to someone who will
become eventually in the evening or
that concludes the first part of the
introduction the second part of the
introduction which is really not an
introduction I think it's kadai before
we see the sheath of the quote unquote
zikn invening to just speak out the
path. So the zikn said
they said that being that there's a
that of
was to let's say Tomas mace is they can
bring carbonite or if
were tomas m is they'd be able to bring
carbonite sabore
the will be as well that if somebody
it's Tomas and he does the by
the
is going to be an avoid in other words
the of is obviously only
by a carbon it's also only of as relates
to a carbon
to is not let in fact it's one of the
mentioned in our it's the puzzle that
we're up to Right? We're holding
to puzzle two dots. Right? That's where
we're holding the right now. So of
course a to is not let when it comes to
a carbon stating that help any type of
that could have
would have that would be as it relates
to a carbon
you could do the well then as it relates
to a carbon even though it wouldn't be
okay to do the but if would do the
is that the
would be Now what exactly the of the
zikum is that the lum struggle to
understand a little bit but it's some
sort of migu
type of that you find throughout being
that if the
had this together with of the
he'd be able to do the
carbon then at the very least now if he
has this as a he should be able to do
the avoid as it relates to
Now the zikn when they said their they
said that it's true as it relates to
tumas m it's not true as it relates to
what's the pish so the pish is really
what we just mentioned in the
introduction it's because as we'll see
the zikn dham are of the opinion that
the only time there's tomah is by Tomas
m but there is no tomah as it relates to
if there's
So you're not going to have this caveat
now that says that that's
who goes ahead now and he brings a
carbon he does the
it's going to work because the whole
reason why would work is some sort of
being he could do the by
he'd be allowed to do the as relates to
a carbon but as it relates to a where
you wouldn't have such as why would
there not be
when it comes to is because like we
mentioned the only time you have the
para of
is where if a had this he would get
knocked off
sheni and the only time
gets knocked off the pesi is m but it's
not it's for that reason if a now would
be tomas
being that you don't have the you don't
have
that he'd be able to go ahead and bring
a carpenter. So too if he would do the
avoid as a carp
the would not be a either way that is
high level the of the and on that note
we're going to see it inside says the
said that a does the
is going to be possible
said this that
the said that if Tommy does the is going
to be possible to shar that's only true
form shar
But as it relates to
if he does the evidence
is the magic word.
So you could do it by a carbon.
You can do it by
whether to be the words or not to be the
words. We're going to learn the way
Rashi learns the gar and that is that we
take out the words. Meaning if the words
then the gumar is about to ask right now
is really it's a continuation of the
statement of the zikn. If you take out
the words then it's not so much a
continuation of what the ziknim said but
it's more of a or as we'll see it's a
kasha on a premise that the ziknar made.
It's not a cash on the of the It's not a
cash on the
but it's more on a premise that the make
again. So with taking out the words says
it would make sense that
the should be
from Tommy Mace meaning saying that when
the mission says Tommy apostle it's
talking about a Tommy Sharrett not a
Tommy Mace why because by Tommy Mace you
have to chitz by Tommy Shar you don't
have to chitz being that by Tommy you
have so you have a
you don't have to so you don't have a
but one of the premises of the is that
you have when it comes to mace you don't
have to when it comes to sher on that
which was something that we spoke about
at lent in the introduction to the daff
is asking again Tommy sherit nami lacy
Tommy maze Tommy
which is a much less right. It doesn't
require
it doesn't require any sprinkling from
the ashes of the
certainly it should be says the
held that
the way we look at the
is we equate we're the to the
are the ones that are facilitating theap
they're theim
are the ones that are the benefitial ary
of theapor they're the yidden that are
the bum of this carbon we are the to the
house soap m in Tommy shar's law just
like as it relates to the
ism
in
that the only time you have
is if
but if they were to he wouldn't have it
so as relates
Tommy.
The only time you would have that of
is if they were to not if they were to.
So just like the only time you would
have to is if they were to m not if they
were to. So too as it relates to the
only time you would have it is if they
were to
mace not if they're tomas.
Let's just clarify this line because
it's uh a loaded line. We spoke out in
the introduction that the reason to say
that there'd be no tommo as relates to
is because the only time you say is if
it's a where if the had that he would
get pushed off to but if it's a where if
the had it he would not get pushed off
the pi. So then you don't have the of
in it would make sense to say that that
should hold true as it relates to the
which states that if
so the way you would view the as it
relates to of being would correlate to
the way you would view the tum as it
relates to the that's but as it relates
to
The other
and that is that
you also say
as it relates to that
we should say that the only time we say
the is
that if the had that he would get pushed
off to the getting pushed off to pen is
the b he's the so the definition of toma
for
is totally in the definition of as it
relates to
but
not the
definition of should be in the
definition of the
of where the is really for that
preempting and they're saying
that whatever the definition is it's
also and if that's the case and Tommy
if regarding the it's true by Tommy it's
not true by Tommy and so as relates to
Tommy Tommy it's only going to be true
for Tommy it's not going to be true for
Tom either way
that's why the zikn held that the of ple
we
is going to be true only for to share.
It's not going to be true for Tom
because as relates to Tom there's a of
that this could have done the in a case
of Tom with this. So now when it comes
to a carbon
if he does that it's going to be okay.
However, that's only true by Tommy M.
It's not true by Tommy. Why is it not
true by Tommy? Because by Tommy if the
you would not have the of
and that you would have to that
undermines the whole you don't have the
of either. I you'll tell me that why
should there be aino as it relates to
the between and I understand the
definition of regarding too much of the
as relates to but as it relates to the
why should be telling that the answer to
that is because we're
now the makes one other obvious vious
observation again it's obvious only in
light of what we've been talking about
for the first 20 minutes and that is
what does
held that were not allowed to do on
behalf of somebody that's then
why would there be no
meaning why would there be no because
you'll tell me because the could bring
it but if you
then would not be able to bring the
carbon
Right?
If the could bring it, right? Or I'm
sorry if the can't bring it because
so then you have a situation of
you have to say that the held
as a result would not get pushed off to
if the doesn't get pushed off to say. So
now if has this there's no
and
so there's no situation where that's
able would be able to do the if that's
the case there's no situation we'd be
able to do the
so therefore you don't have
and that's why when the misha says which
is
oh must be talking about as opposed to
as opposed to if he was
you have and it would not be
again let's just do a little bit of a of
a recap here
in a state of
this
is going to be
said the Mishna has to be talking about
where the was doing the with a carbon
and the
and the tuma that he had was tumas chars
If however he was
even if he's doing the with it would not
be possible. Now clearly he's not
supposed to do it but it would not be
possible and the reason it would not be
possible is because being that if there
was a situation of a carbon and a
situation of
then he'd be able to do the in the state
of there's a that says that
only works for Tommy
not for Tommy that's why the mission
says Tommy Apostle must be talking about
where he was Tommy Tomas not where he
was Tommy Tomas. Now why is this only
true for Tom not true for Tommy? So
really the short answer is because
there's no
what's the reason for that? It's because
when
is when you invoke
it's not true if
and the reason is because the only time
the has the
is if it's
that if the had it
he'd get pushed off the
as
would not get pushed off the
he would
So that type of wouldn't apply to then
the other type of
would not apply either says
so heard what said and he reported the
following. He said
was so ta sounds like
but says
made a lot of noise. Look at that
changes the ga from toa. So some had the
lish have the but either way said over
that the
were given a very hard time for their
and he explained the reason that they
were given a hard time because really
the masa that the ziknarim are coming
out with seems to be contradicted by the
mida of kav and I think it's kadai again
not to go through the kav before we see
the But just conceptually to appreciate
what just happened essentially what the
zikna is saying is that as it relates to
a ken that's Tommy that does the
if he's
going to be more cool than if he's if
he's not allowed to do but the evidence
going to be okay if he's
not allowed to do the but the evidence
not going to be okay right so just the
idea that should be more cooler
more and Tomas M that in of itself is a
very big because in every sug
of the problem that
had with the but it was brought out in
in a lumpish way. So again,
when it comes to the laws of who is
better, is it the
or is it the
of the
you would think for sure that it's the
of the now the truth is the Gmorra is
going to explain we you see that the is
better but Rashi already speaks it out
here and Rashi says I'll tell you what
you Well, you see it is with regards to
because that's
the
could bring a carbon. Now he can't walk
into the but like we said a minute ago
holds
as opposed to a that's
the said that's the
it's not going to be okay. So you see
that the
is more than the when it comes to the
again where do you see it? You see it
because by the
it's fine. There's no problems.
But if the is you don't even have this
that's when you have where to is going
to be pos okay so that's that is a
if that's the case we have a problem
in a place where the
have the gear here and whether you have
the gear or not the way you read it is
where you see that
what do you see where the bats
they have the ability to bring their
carbon yet
the
doesn't have the ability to be right
that's the we spoke out
a place where if the
is that if they want to send their
carbon they can't send their carbon
right if the bum is m you're in the
middle of your state of there's not the
only reason
is because he's going to be by the end
of the day but he's in the middle of his
seven days
now there is a discussion what about if
he's on the seventh day so he's already
at the end and by that night he's
already going to be taught so that
really is
but that's not what we're talking about
we're talking about where he's so if
he's
can't send his
a that became
then certainly he should not be able to
be in other words you see from that the
is better than the if that's true by
then the should have to be consistent as
it relates to me as well and what do you
see by that is better than because by
the
cannot be well if that's the case when
it comes toas it should have to be the
same way. Yet what's emerging from the
zikn is just the opposite because if the
bum is there's no that you could bring
the carbon on his behalf is argu
by the end of the day if the yeah but if
a wants to bring a carbon and he's in a
state of course he can't bring the
carbon on his behalf. Well if that's the
case how could it be then that if the
kan is and he goes ahead and he does the
then the evidence going to be okay. It's
mak as it relates to you see that the
kayap is better than the kayak. So how
could it be that when it comes to m it's
going to be the other way around. So the
said, you have to say just to make sense
of the ziknim that the ziknim were of
the opinion
you have to say that the ziknar held
that a m in as much as it's true that he
can not
go and bring a carbon
if a to mace would bring a a carbon the
carbon would be okay. Meaning what's the
time? The is the has to be better than
the
because you see the according to the
by the is better than the and for the
that the zikn are going to tell you it's
not true that the of the that the byas
is better than the why you assuming it's
better because you're telling me that if
the co goes and does the avoid in a
state of m it's going to be okay yet if
is in the state of M then it's not going
to be okay and it's not true disagree
with that
you thought that if someone's he can't
bring a carbon it's not true just like
so dude there's an idea of
carbon fra one second that can't be
what's exhibit A for the fact that it
can't be the pirate peni right what's
peni is somebody's m can't bring the
carbon You have to get pushed off. If
you're going to tell me that you could
bring a carbon on behalf of someone
that's stom how exactly you going to
make sense of the whole parish of
right isn't there
and from the fact that this is the
biggest riot that when someone's there's
no way right to bring the carbon says
maybe this idea of it could be that's
like there's a mitzvah to go ahead and
and bring but it could be if the carbon
pes was brought on behalf of someone
that's sto right it sounds like a
shocking it's going to be okay but the
have another problem with that says
had to be brought for people that were
if someone's told me to he's not going
to be able to eat at night right so says
yeah
but it's not triples that you tell me
it's not the time you went to the
it says by the
be and we learn from
had to be brought only for someone that
had RSVP, right? He was a bin in the
carbon.
You would think if somebody on behalf of
someone that's not one of them all it is
is as if you
but it could be it's not
it says
it says and then it says
it says twice this idea of
it has to be okay so what does it have
to do with someone that's this person
that's maybe RSVP right maybe he's an
owner it could be chipped in maybe he's
one of the but
Right? It makes sense that we should be
meaning if it's to be one of the then it
should be to be one of the as well and
being that someone that's can't be one
of the
now what's the basis for this
says
because the
of
is mentioned the same exact
and if says
should also be
if it's how could you bring a carbon on
behalf of someone that's
at the end of the day he's not someone
that's
not what's he that if it's to be one of
the it has to be to be one of the as
well maybe this didn't hold it as and
because they didn't hold it as so
therefore it's not necessarily
going to be let's just hit the pause
button for one second and that is
they came with a blitz
basically coming out that if
he does the
situation
is
going to be caution because of the if
however he would do the in a state of
would be possible
that as it relates to that's more if
he's than it is if he's
going to be
it's not going to be Tommy then I'll
really if you want to zero in on what we
need the hold that if a m and he does
the
avoid is going to be okay and the kasha
is that it can't be you know why It
can't be. The reason it can't be is
because if a bin is tommy tomas and a
carbon is brought on his behalf,
it's not okay. That's the assumption.
And if it's not okay when the bum is to
m well then it can't be okay if the is
either. Why is that? based on the meat
of because you see by
that
is better than because a Tommy
whereas that's
the case of Tommy. So you see that the
tum is more when it's the co than it is
the Bible, right? The of the is better
it's more lenient than is the of the
well if that's true by you would think
it has to be consistently true with
regards to
m as well yet by m if the ismas m it's
possible. So then for sure it has to be
that if the isas m it should be possible
the is how could the zikn say that the
if the m it's going to be okay what's
the answer in short that the zikn
disagree with the you're making that if
someone's
he can't have a carbon even brought on
his behalf it's not true it's not true
the zikn disagree with that zikn hold
that you could bring a carbon on behalf
of someone that's Tommy tomas and being
that you could bring a carbon on behalf
of someone that's Tommy tomas
So consistently so if the claim is
that he would be able to bring the the
carbon as well the whole seems to not be
that way then knocks it out. NO IT'S NOT
TRUE
that's
but it could be if was brought on behalf
of somebody that was Tomas it would be
okay that is the of the
witness spoil from this. So it's
interesting the
is that there's a
it's not by based on everything that
we've been talking about up until this
point as a derivative of that what
emerges is the name that if somebody
is and a carbon is brought on his behalf
it's going to be okay but the gmorra
asks another
says
Even if the dares
to the
of the carbon meaning they hold that a
carbon p that's brought on behalf of
someone that's m is going to be the
still
and the gar is
meaning the
of the
would still seem to be a noar is going
to argue Now that the way we answer the
by saying that the dorm hold that you
could bring a carbon pes on behalf of
somebody that's you could bring a carbon
on behalf of someone that's
not enough to properly and
satisfactoryly
be this uh
said why because I'll ask you the same
the same
and this you're not going to be able to
get out of why we
in a situation where if the
is that their lattice and their
right
a situation where if the
would not be able to send
Because even
they're only saying if the
it's going to be okay. But
well and it didn't change. So certainly
if the became it should not be able to
be in other words there's another that
you could ask the same and the terret at
the zikn hold that someone that's
tommyas maze could have a carbon brought
on his behalf. It's not going to get out
of it. And that is by
the Bible
he could bring the what about as relates
to the if he brings it even it's
possible it's
so you see that we're the
in this state of
if the is in that state of it's even
well if that's the case then we are If
the bim can't do it with that m how
could it be that as it relates to the
it's can end up being better certainly
if the does it not
with the could do it with a
could bring the car if the cen would do
it in that state of it would not be
certainly m where if the bim
wanted to do they couldn't do It's more
than well then certainly then certainly
as it relates to the it should have to
be more not how is it possible that
the
can bring and by the coin it's not
the can't bring you'll tell me you can
bring it to the okay but
can't bring it can't bring yet for
It should be
you see the the relationship between
the
and the as it relates to and you would
think that relationship should have to
be consistent as it relates to the
relationship with regards to and what
comes out from the is that it's going to
be so the we asked the right what was
the original of the original is is aub.
So we said, oh the is better. How do I
know the is better? I know it from
well how could it then be that the of
the
is going to be better than the byas? If
the is better than the by then how can
it be the is better than the when it
comes to the answer that the dorm hold
the is not better than the
byases it's the as it relates to
me is also that it's going to be big is
only
but the bottom line is we able to get
but now is working with the same
building blocks of the asking
and that is that you see
you see that the of the
is so much more than the by that where
the could do the is even possible the so
how could it be then where the is where
even the can't do
good but you ask him you can't do
then the should be able to do or it
should be certainly it should not be if
it's not by where the
it should not be
where the cannot where the bum cannot
do they can only do it and really the
Gmorra just abruptly stops there and
pivots to a me. If you look at the side
of the gar they quote from the
had one word that we don't have in our
gamar that is kasha other words says I
hear kasha we're not fragging up sikn
right we know kasha always means as a
terror but the bottom line is
this was the sheet of the arms again
let's recap the ziknim the darm said
when it says in the
is a big it's not something that the
really fleshes out in terms of
understanding but the bottom line is
there is and the will tell me that being
that byas therefore the who's would have
the that's would have the
at the very least the
would not be possible Now it's only true
by Thomas M. It's not true by based on
the notion that there's no even when it
comes to that in itself is totally init.
It's also totally in the concept of
the Gorash that at first glance it just
doesn't make any sense because how could
it be that when it comes to Tomas
the is better than the but when it comes
to Tomas Mel the is going to be better
than the
Tommy
but
the
If someone's
you can't bring the carbon on his behalf
yet
and it's going to be and to answer this
said you have to say that the hold that
would be that
there's a par of
it's you see that shouldn't be and this
person has told me to can't eat from the
so shouldn't that be
they hold
and as a result that is not going to be
a either either way now is going to ask
uh another
and this is really not on the of the
which was the on the
as opposed to because of the but it's
more of this derivative piece that very
much emerged from the ziknar which is
that
hold that at even though the is not
supposed to bring a carbon but the ev
could be brought on his behalf even a
carbon p and even though we know the
whole parish was meant for amongst other
people people that are but that's only
the mitzvah but the he would go ahead
and he would bring a a carbon p this is
something that would be okay and thear
is going to ask a kasha now from a
mishna that's going to be the topic of
the next part of the daf it's aishna
not surprisingly
on
I think it's just to read the Mishna and
she says as follows
after is done the made aware that the
was
as long as the is wearing the sits
incidentally there's a that holds that
even if the was not wearing the sits it
had the ability to be mirat but the
point is that sits has ability to be and
says that this is going to be a nit
mahag
What would be if the goof was to now
what exactly nitm means? That's going to
be a sha in the gar. The gumar initially
is going to understand means that the
bim was to gonna entertain a possibility
that maybe means the kim was but it's
not the dam that was but it's one of the
players one of the people were the known
as the or the known as the but it's
that is not going to be
the reason because said
as it relates to theer And the person
that's bringing the carbon
is not form. Now what does nausea mean?
So we know one of the very prominent
sugis that talk about m is with relation
to the nazer. The nazer was not allowed
to come in contact with a mace. The Tory
says that in the event that he came in
contact with a maze
and he has to start counting all over
again. So the question is if a Nazer
came in contact with a mace but the
was wearing the tits. So right would
that make an impact? So
as it relates to the then yeah so the
was bringing his carbon
and we find out that the was for that
you would have the
it wouldn't help form
what would be if the
was meaning the of the wasata
then the tits would be mirata Now what's
to
mean is where a person came in contact
with he did not know he came in to at
the time later he found out he came in
contact with and the tum that he had
come in contact with was a tum that
nobody was aware of no one in the world
knew about this to that's what's known
as and there's a special ka in the of as
it relates to and pes and that's the end
of the
as much as it sits not for the but if
it's In that instance, it already is
going to be miratus. So again, this is
the mishna. The garra now is going to
break down this mishna a little bit. And
again, what's the objective? It's a lot
going on here, but the objective is
we're asking on the ziknar, which part
of the ziknar, not the original part of
the ziknar, but really the derivative
that emerged from the ziknar and that is
hold. They were forced to hold it to
answer the the
although we know someone that's is not
supposed to bring carbon but if a carbon
was brought on behalf of someone that's
even though we can't eat from the carbon
it doesn't matter is it's going to be
okay. It's true even by the even by the
carbon
we just read said
right so there's a concept of the let's
say the was done with became but not if
the became what are we talking about
are we talking about where the tumo was
tomaser now one thing that we should
speak out is the understands that the
Mishna means where the bum became right
when we read the Mishna we said that
well see in the there's two ways he
could learn either the bum became or the
is so we're going to go with the
assumption right now that it's the bum
that's Tommy and the wants to know what
kind of did he have
is talking about and we're saying that
in the event that a person became
so it's not as it relates to Nazer and
and carbon pes right we'll focus more on
carbon pes because that's what the sug
has been talking about so became the sit
is not going to be but the says you need
the tits to be if the y became
didn't we just says
right to shar and by the way even though
we mentioned it's a whether shar or not
but hold shar that's the whole reason
they hold that tom by shar because
there's no
as opposed to as it relates to Tomas but
for sure of
talking about so the Mishna can't be
talking about Tomas Must be what kind of
tomas
and what does the Mishna say the Mishna
says that the tit is not
what do you see from here
meaning is talking about with the owner
The B came talking. It's not tomas. It's
cuz daddy could bring the So what else
must it be? Tomas m right now. Is it not
possible? It's another type of tomas.
We'll see in a second. But for now,
probably Tomas M. And what do you see
from here? You see that? You see that in
the event that the bum became tommyas m
that tits is not even
why do I even need the tits to be it
should be good. Right.
is an idea of me tells me that why what
should be the problem as it relates to
toas
when the b is told to say anyways so
what are you telling me that is not what
do you mean I thought that anyways it's
going to be what do you see from here
that no
says if the when it said to was talking
about whether became and he became tomas
you would even have to come It's it's
part
you want to know what's going on over
here. It's talking about
it's talking about where the became
Tommy and he became Tommy Basher. It's
not where the Bible became Tommy. If the
Bible becomes Tommy Tomas, it's going to
be okay
where the became Tommy and he became
Tommy Bashar. Now why do you have say
the co became Tommy Basharitz? Why can't
you say the co became Tommy M? Oh,
because it's a zikn zign hold if the co
is tom but the evidence also going to be
kosher. But if he's bash then it's not
going to be kosher. So no again it can't
be talking about where the B became
because then you could even bring it. It
can't be talking about where the B
became because then it be
that's the derivative of it can't be
talking about the and the became
because that's the the first part it's
the ratio of that for sure is going to
be okay. What is he talking about?
That's what's going on in the
look at the last line of the
that as much as the
but then already it would now
we know
the only time as it relates to
we say it's true didn't mean
that is No.
Now what's the point? If there's no that
means the Mishna can't be talking about
because the Mishna is saying became the
good became
the assumption is the same type of right
we're consistently talking in this
mission about the same type of if
there's no such thing as
so that means the last line of the
can't be talking about well if that's
the case in the case of also can't be
talking about so you want to
that is talking about who's the goof
that became the what type of to become
that's how you can check over the boxes
make with the whole sheet of the first
part and the derivative part of it can't
be the talking about the reason it can't
be talking about is because it says and
said
isn't it
by that's
But it could be for there is meaning
doesn't mean
it means as opposed to something else.
What's something else but it could be
relates to that's going to be included
and if is going to be included could be
talking about and if the talking about
it can make the work.
Now we just said in order to make this
mission work I'll leave the
when the Mishna says
what does it mean to right not that the
became because if the became right if
it's
fine and even if it's hold it's fine so
what does it mean it means the became
and became because again would become
then That's fine. That's the sheet of
ziknim right in our mishmle and it's not
true by Tomas because but it's talking
about where the became but the says
actually had a sh in that
is being he's bringing the
does he have does he not have he wanted
to know if
at Koula where no one knew about the Tom
said then everything is going to be okay
then this is going to be mira is that
true even if the was the one that became
or is only true if the if the is talking
about the
it's the works for the because the whole
is talking about the so what was
says asking on the way we're saying
from Romy and all kind of that is the
Romy
from the fact that Romy
didn't learn the Mishna
that the Mishno is talking about
the became Tommy rather he learned means
the B became Tommy that's why he's
right if means the co then the talks
about obviously is referring to the co
from the fact that is not sure about
So
is that when the says it means the from
that it's that doesn't hold like the why
is it because means the and means that
the bi became right it can't be can't be
because
must be what must be it's m and if it's
m so you see that it's not going to be
okay.
If someone's talking to Tommy to M, he
can't have a carbon being brought on his
behalf. And if the
can't get to me, the certainly can't be
when he's
right. That was the
So, it's true from
who said that the mission is talking
about the Bin. You see, not like the
derivative of the ziknar. So, it's for
sure not like the ziknar. That's without
a question. But as it relates to the
ziknim, there's no grace of one thing
that we're certainly not going to go
into, but is worth at least mentioning
that the is talking about either or
maybe the talking about and you don't
have a even from not like the is a
already an either way. Either way, the
Gmorra said, "We understand ziknar.
There's a bigish that comes out from
zikn a derivative and we can even make
shom. There's a way to work out the
pay."
Now, what emerged is that
there's a between and if someone's tummy
and a carbon pak was brought on his
behalf, would the carbon be cautious?
Would it not be cautious?
would be
that's a mitzvah. That's the way you're
supposed to do it. But it actually would
be okay. That's not what you're supposed
to do. You're not supposed to be part of
a
supposed to bring the but if you did it
would be okay. It has to be that way
because if the
carbon that was brought on his behalf
would be okay. But Ramy Bar we said Ramy
Bar for sure doesn't hold that way. How
do you know that? From the way learned
the mission. How do you know how learned
the from the Ramy had? He wasn't sure if
this must be that's mentioned in the is
talking about where the Bcamear now is
going to ask a
from a Bryce. The Pik says regarding the
tits,
right? It was supposed to be on the
forehead of the
is the Marta. This idea that this is
that by wearing that had the ability to
attain
for the aches.
This is the bright talking what a ver
what oven was the situ for pigle doesn't
mean piggle meaning let's say pigle
while the was or even maybe even wasn't
wearing the you tell me that is it makes
that carbon can't be it says
that means even but the evidence not
okay
maybe it means so what's so
what was piggle So says, right?
are both sometimes referred to as pigle.
So
is so you can't tell me that
is
you can't tell me it's
because
must be that what is the
right which is what the says
and the reason to say that
Right? Makes sense because you find a
when it comes to that you don't find it
by piggle or by
right you find it by and being that you
find that ka so therefore you're going
to have this ka as well so the now is
going to try to understand what to this
price is referring to and we're going to
lead up to the
on my what's the price is referring to
when it says it sits as
doesn't in Tomas meaning in a situation
that
the or the
Tommy was saying that it is going to be
it can't be why because the price gave a
time of the crow we said why is it that
it says because you find another cool
the other
you don't find as it relates to you only
find it as it relates to Tomas Must be
what does the Bryson mean what it means
is Tomas Maze right that's what the are
fear the
okay now the laugh the price says that
if there's
going to be aren't we talking about
where the became
right again
we mean even if the bim are the ones
that became it could be the k
but is talking about even where the b is
and what do you see from here alum
you see clearly that it is
when the Bible is
right. So you see
that that's the way it is. Now the
Gmorra continues and the Gmorrah says
now really at this point you already see
a kash on because you see that if Tomas
so there's an idea that he could be
right you see there's a concept that he
should be able to be mashall but just
because we see that we didn't
necessarily knock out Romy Bar yet the
reason we didn't knock out Romy Bar yet
is because who said that this price is
talking about carbon pes right again
Romy
said that m can't be carbon as it
relates to the carbon right those are
really the cases of the
up until now we see that the tit is
going to be for a that's
but we don't necessarily know it's
talking about the
was talking about and as a result we
don't necessarily have a kashi so the
gar has to continue
are we talking about that the carbon
that the beat for is
It can't be because
of
the says clearly that in the event that
all of a sudden he becomes
that he has to start his nazerus all
over again. Meaning in the event that
the Nazer becomes Tommy Tomas there's no
way in the world that the carbon could
be brought on his behalf that since
campa
he has to start his nazerus again and as
a result there's no way that it's going
to work for him
must be it's talking about for the but
the bottom line is you seem foolish that
in the event that the B became the pess
could be brought on his behalf.
So if that's the case, isn't there
from this price and not like
said that the current can't be brought
on behalf of somebody that's Tommy
Tomas? You see that that sits with on
behalf of somebody that's Tommy and it
says
which must mean it's and it's talking
about the carbon pace can't be talking
about the because by the you wouldn't
have this because the says very clearly
what happens becomes it's so isn't that
probably what's going on but the bottom
line is you see that is for someone
that's
says no
is only
What's the we said
it sounds like we're talking about
that's
what we mean is is not that it's for
where that actual is
what we mean is that it's for the
because you find by the concept that
it's but the type of
is not the type of to where it's going
to be and the reason is because what is
the where you find that it's tumas for
tumas is actually not
right for it's not that's the way
understood the mission
it's not going to be what type of tommo
will it be for it for butami as it
relates to m as it relates to m so what
does the bry mean when it says all the
bry means when it says
is is that it makes sense that should be
of again you go back to the Bryer the
Bryer said that is what's for is it is
iter not because you don't find you find
now you find by and we're saying it's
going to be for but what we mean when we
say that it's going to be
is for
and that is where this is going to be no
says
There were those that asked from this
not on but they asked from this on the
how so the had said
that's the
is now there's a little bit of a dick
here
it sounds like the tits could only be
for that's Tommy meaning if the dam is
to but if the makishim are to whether
it's the coin or even if it's the bin
then it's not going to be okay. And it
sounds like if the bum is that even it's
not going to be fine. Which are we
talking about when we're saying that if
the
not going to be
do we mean
it can't be why?
Because when we said
is okay because it's
sounds like it's
now the now is it's the but it's
now you don't find
must be it's and still you find
if the dam itself became that's when the
mir
but
of the makes meaning if the
bi or if the k would be to then it would
not be and if that's the case you have a
big cash on the in fact you have a cash
on both parts of the zikn because you
see over here if the is
that is going to be possible even the
tit is not going to be that's a problem
with the first thing said when the says
it means not to but rather what it means
is rather what it means means is and
with the derivative
as well because we said that it has to
be if the
it's going to be well then if the
here you see both the
it's not going to be good even says this
is cuz that's related to you can't make
the
even
when it's
only with regards to
saying the reason
is
what it means is the same exact part
that you find that's why it makes sense
that not for not for but for it's only
going to be as it relates to
not but because when it comes to
are going to be okay either way again
this is a very hard. It's very hard to
do justice to it in a in a setting. It's
something that requires an enormous
amount of just to understand
and go through it properly
and certainly to try to understand some
of the behind it. But the the shortest
recap possible is the possible
that is possible
is going to be possible. It's true only
if he was talking to if however he was
talking to you don't have this
what's the reason
being that
could be when it meets the criteria of
therefore at the very least if he's
bringing a carbon
is that it would have to be
which is not subject to the laws of
why because
and the only time you have the
is where the would be pushed off to and
if that's true by the it's true by the
as well. So you don't have the par of
therefore you don't have to is going to
be possible
said if
that's
going to be it has to be that if the
carbon is
if he sends carbon it's going to be as
well the reason it has to be that way is
because otherwise you would have a major
problem because you find by that the is
better than the by the
Tommy
it's even that's the way understood the
mission of Tommy Pel it's Tommy to you
see the is much better than the but it
would have to be consistent it would
have to be better as well so it's
untenable to think that if the carbon is
m it's going to be pled even yet if the
ismas then it's going to be And it has
to be said that held that just like if
the in a state of it's going to be so if
the carbon would bring his carbon
in a state of m it would be there is no
way around that I the whole par of
that's only the mitzvah I we find that
it's to be from the you would think it
should be to be from the as well this
guy who's can't be from the right the
one that's could be from because we
taught but this person can't be from the
were not they didn't hold this business
that you have to be able to be they
didn't hold from this business you have
to be from Isn't there
where it's that was if the dam was to by
the carbon but not if the was to it
sounds like if the barbon
was to if the balac carbon was to so
then
would be that it wouldn't be said. It
sounds like probably where it's no it's
talking about not where the
carbon was. We talk about where the was
and not even where the was because that
would be fine but also but it's talking
about where he was said clearly learned
the
it's talking about where the carbon was
and he was Tomas and from the showed
that obviously was
because of the opinion that if the balac
carbon is to he would not be able to
have a carbon pak be brought on his
behalf it's not something that would
Even if that's true then the whole the
whole domino effect of the would
implode.
One version the gumar was asking on the
other version was asking on the zikn
either way the gumar was the same way.
This concludes the sugi
version of it of the ziknid.