Zevachim 40

Today's stuff is walking off men and we are at the very top line at the very first word. This doesn't happen every day. On daf men aleph aleph aleph aleph Today's stuff has been learned as a school before of Miriam malcolm and Ben so we're in the middle of a in fact we're in the middle of a so The Gamorah on the bottom of aleph portal longest it began five lines from the bottom of aleph and it went all the way to the bottom of a short daf aleph base. Yesterday we went through the material of and mentioned that in today's stuff really even the tomorrow's stuff the Gamorah is going to do its deep dive analysis of the now the Gamorah pivots on one in the tire. The says also a part That is talking about a but not just any the hell so the which is discussed at length in was brought when of according to some time of one but broadly speaking didn't have says they make but they did it based on a mistaken by best. The says that in that instance every individual is not obligated to go bring his own but rather the brought one carbon us that carbon was a and was for anyone that was complicit in this now when you read this pasuk, what the Torah is saying is that the laws that govern this par should be like the laws that govern a different type of par that was brought as a carbon but you should treat this par the same way you treat the other par. What's that other par? It's actually referring to another unique type of carbon which is also discussed in great length. It was actually what's known as the par par is when the was did in a very in a very that had he done that he would have been he too acted the was based on a faulty and the Torah says that his carbon is unique as well. He brings par and there's a whole of exactly what you do with that par. Either way, the Torah is saying also that treat the par the same way that you treat the par par par. Stating that Khazal felt that these words are extra and really almost all the words in this pasuk are extra and the reason is because as much as this is a very critical line for if you go through the par of the par it's clear the Torah delineates what you're supposed to do and if you match it up with what you do with the par par it's the same exact thing which means these also par also would seem to be extra. The next words came also would would seem to be extra. The would seem to be extra. The whole pasuk technically is extra and it's for that reason we have this and a half of that went and explained each word, each line in the so what exactly is going on. Either way, in today's daf, we're going to noch a mol go through the bracha and this time with a little bit of eon. Now, the eon is going to begin with the very first part of the bracha. So, what was the first part of the bracha? The osam apar kasha osam apar is extra said that the reason the Torah wrote these words is to teach me not for osam apar kasha osam apar cuz that I know already, but rather for osam apar kasha osam. You should do what I'm telling you to do. Obviously, you should do what I'm telling you to do. No, there's a huge significance in the world of kasham cuz we know that when it comes to kasham, if I tell you to do something once, it's twice she not active. Now, if you don't do it, everything is turned upside down. So, when the Torah said for osam apar kasha osam with us, it's for osam apar kasha osam, it's a she not active. The limit in the words of the bracha she active me call me also like them that in the event that you're lacking and you're missing from even one of the she also like them, it's as if you did nothing. Now, the bracha continued and the bracha said I'm not sure she active if all it said was for osam apar kasha osam I could have thought that maybe this she not active is only in a the she not active. The seven of the she not active. How do I know it's true for the other four? That's what the Torah had to say in addition to the osam apar kasha osam can you also and can you also teaches me that it's not only the she not active, it's the she not active as well. So, first things first, what's the she not active? What's the she not active? So, the she not active was unique in that it had seven that had to be done on the additionally there were another four that had to be done on the four corners of the me. 11 hasois total and really all 11 are meshuna. The seven on the paroches are very meshuna and even the four on the mizbei'ach p'nimi are meshuna because ordinarily the hasois, the zrikos were done on the mizbei'ach hachitzona. But either way, had it only said "V'zaraq al paroches osso", even though that's a shina kasuv acher, ich volt gevolt mean that maybe the shina kasuv is only regarding the matan sheva. Why? Shema akvois b'chol makom b'matan dalid she'ein ma'akvois b'chol makom minayan. Tam l'mayma that's why the Torah had to say "Kein yehi osso." Either way, the first chunk of today's daf is going to explain that part of the braisa. So taking it again from the first word of daf nem amar al amar amar in the other matan sheva shema'akis b'chol makom. Had it only said "V'zaraq al paroches osso l'fnei adoshem l'chatas", I could have thought that the shina kasuv acher is only referring to the matan sheva. Why? Because it's ma'akis b'chol makom. As the Gemara heicha, what's this chol makom that you find matan sheva is ma'akis? Amar Abba, said Abba said, "B'parah u'v'nega." You find it regarding the parah, the parah adumah, which required seven hasois connected the pesach of the oil moed. Now the parah adumah was brought not even on the Har Habayis. The parah adumah was some sort of a korban chatas, right? It was brought on Har Hazeisim, but it had to be done noichach l'fnei oil moed. How many hasois were done? Seven. Those seven based on limudim in the parsha of the parah adumah we know is ma'akis. So you find a matan sheva that's ma'akis. By negaim you find it as well. Negaim meaning the metzora where there was a halacha that the kohein had to take a light shemen and do seven hasois with the oil. Also a very unique type of hazah. It's not even blood, it's oil. But the bottom line is that matan sheva also based on a limud in parshas metzora we know had to be like Sotah. So, says the bris of Matan Sheva, whenever the number is seven, you find it's makif. You find it by the parah adumah, you find it by the like shalom in the Sotah. So, I would have thought that maybe the shalom here too is just a rumor that would make all the Matan Shevas consistent. However, Matan Arba Amot Matan Arba Amot that's where the bris of Sotah is. King yeah yeah but the Torah asks an obvious question. I understand the distinction between Matan Sheva Matan Arba. But at the end of the day, what is the makor that Matan Sheva is makif? It's not parah adumah. It's not the parsha of Sotah. It's the shalom of Sotah. Okay, so the shalom of Sotah doesn't sound like it's discriminating. It sounds like it's going to be true for everything. So, at the end of the day if I have a shalom of Sotah, then shouldn't that equal then be true for the Matan Arba as much as it's true for the Matan Sheva? Meaning you want to tell me there's a high look high level between Matan Sheva Matan Arba? Yeah, but who cares? I have a shalom of Sotah. So, if I have a shalom of Sotah then just like the Matan Sheva is makif the Matan Arba should be makif as well. In the Mishnah it says the one Matan Sheva is makif. Why is it that Matan Sheva we're saying is makif because the Torah said it and then said it again? Like it said it and then said it again. Matan Arba is the same thing. Matan Arba is the same thing. Matan Arba is the same thing. Matan Arba is the same thing. Matan Arba is the same thing. Matan Arba is the same thing. Matan Arba is the same thing. Matan Arba is the same thing. Matan Arba is the same Keren Karnois. So, earlier in the parsha of the chatos and specifically this is talking about the par Mashiach, the Torah says that the had to be done on the Karnois Mizbeach. Now, it said that had it said Keren it would have been one Keren. You put it on one of the horns, right? One of the corners of the Mizbeach. Now, that it says karnois, yeish eim l'mikra, I know you have to put it on two. And l'mata hu omer, further down in the parsha regarding the par helen dov shel tzibur, again, it could have said karen and it says karnois, which means another two. And two plus two back of the envelope is arba's four. That's how I know that the amount of azoyes that had to be done with the par koyem mashiach and the par helen dov shel tzibur was four. Rebbe Shimon as I hold Rebbe Shimon. Rebbe Shimon holds that what's the makar to four azoyes? When it comes to the par koyem mashiach and the par helen dov shel tzibur, it's learned out from merging the karnois and the karnois that it says by the two respective parshiyos. It says karnois by the par koyem mashiach, it says karnois by the par helen dov shel tzibur. One's l'mala, one's l'mata, right? Higher in the parsha and lower in the parsha, not l'mala l'mata on the mizbeach. But the bottom line is karnois is two yeish eim l'mikra plus two, what I end up with is with four. Rebbe Yehuda Rebbe Yehuda says, "In its I don't have to come on the back of the envelope arithmetic. I don't have to merge two parshiyos. I don't have to get involved in the shailo of yeish eim l'mikra, yeish eim l'mesora, but rather Rebbe Yehuda omer, the Torah says, "B'oyel moed." And it says it by the par koyem mashiach and it says it by the par helen dov shel tzibur that you should do the azoyes on the mizbeach lifnei Hashem b'oyel moed. And we learn from there kol omer b'oyel moed. B'oyel moed is extra and it's coming to teach me that you do the azoyes on every one of the karnois that's in the oyel moed. There's four karnois in the oyel moed, right? On that mizbeach. And as a result, what you end up doing is four. But either way says the Gemara, we have a machlokes Rebbe Shimon and Rebbe Yehuda what the makar is to the four azoyes by the par koyem mashiach and the par helen dov shel tzibur. According to Rebbe Shimon, it's a tzibur between the two parshiyos. According to Rebbe Yehuda, I know minei beih from each parsha individually. Omer Rebbe Yermiya, so based on that says Rebbe Yermiya, I'm going to tell you our braysa is going a little bit with Rebbe Shimon that holds that it doesn't say meforesh in the parsha of the par helen dov shel tzibur. That's the pasuk that we're learning now, right? That's the parsha that it's in. It doesn't say mefurash Matan Davar. It says Matan Shtaayim. Between the two parshas I know Matan Davar. It's for that reason that you can't say that when it says "Va'asu k'asher asu", it's "k'sivon u'k'lavon". Because I can always argue that the k'sivon u'k'lavon is only on what's mefurash in the parsha. And what's mefurash in the parsha is two, not four. Now, the Matan Zion, that's mefurash in the parsha. But the Matan Davar is actually not even mefurash in the parsha. Being that it's not mefurash in the parsha, even though I know it, but it's not mefurash in the parsha. And if it's not mefurash in the parsha, so meheicha teisei "Sei shina k'asav l'aki". It's for that reason I need "K'nei Yosa" to teach me the "shina k'asav l'aki". And just to explain this a drop better, even though it's mefurash the Matan Zion, and the Matan Zion has a "shina k'asav l'aki", so once I know the Matan Zion, maybe learn the Matan Davar from the Matan Zion. Al zein dem other words of the braisa, I can't learn Matan Davar from Matan Zion. Because Matan Zion you find that "ma'akiv b'chol makom". As opposed to Matan Davar, you don't find this "ma'akiv b'chol makom". That's what the braisa is trying to say. The Gemara is just asking "So why do I need to learn Matan Davar from Matan Zion? Lo chayeira, just like Matan Zion is "k'sivon u'k'lavon", Matan Davar is also "k'sivon u'k'lavon". The answer is not true. Matan Zion is "k'sivon u'k'lavon", that's mefurash. But according to Rebbi Shimon, it's really not. So, in other words, what's emerging is that the braisa is going according to Rebbi Shimon, and it's only according to Rebbi Shimon that you need the "K'nei Yosa" to know that Matan Davar is also going to be "ma'akiv". But according to Rebbi Yehuda, I'll leave it to Rebbi Yehuda. Just like Matan Zion is "k'sivon u'k'lavon", Matan Davar is also "k'sivon u'k'lavon". If that's the case, I don't need to learn Matan Davar from Matan Zion, and I don't need a special limud for Matan Davar, because the same "k'sivon u'k'lavon" I have for the Matan Zion, I have for the Matan Davar. And if that's the case, lo chayeira, I don't need "K'nei Yosa". So if it's according to the Gemara for Rebbi Yehuda, "K'nei Yosa" "meheicha teisei"? What does Rebbi Yehuda do with the words "K'nei Yosa"? So Gemara says me boy le le Tanya needs it for the following price. Officially in the by my keep pulling. Listen me call fish Adam. You don't find anywhere in the Torah that the par that was brought on Yom Kippur required smicha and required shlichas shira'im. Doesn't say it anywhere in the Torah. Me and how then do I know it? Tam lomar. So, the Torah said Kenya also to teach me a halacha with regards to the par Yom Kippurim that the par Yom Kippurim is treated like the par helam dover shel tzibur. And just like the par helam dover shel tzibur required smicha as before in the Torah, it required shlichas shira'im as before in the Torah. So, too the par Yom Kippurim required smicha and required shlichas shira'im. So, according to Rabbi Yehuda the words Kenya also is actually not even teaching me anything regarding the ikar par which is the par helam dover shel tzibur, but it's teaching me something regarding a different par, the special par that the Kohen Gadol used to bring on Yom Kippur. But, the Gemara says well the par Yom Kippurim madu you tell me I need Kenya also to teach me smicha and shlichas shira'im by the par Yom Kippurim because otherwise I wouldn't know it. Amri if you refer back to the braysa, you'll see the Tanna of the braysa said that when it says la par zeh Yom Kippurim. Now, we'll see more about this part of the braysa later. But, the next words of the braysa if you turn back to the bottom of lamed tes aleph, so the braysa said that when it says but also la par kasha also la far, the word la par and la far are also extra. Meaning, the whole concept of the pasuk is extra. But, even if you wanted to tell me she not kasha la kasha, you could have said also kasha also. I know we're dealing with a par and I know you're referencing a par. So, the word la par and the word la far are extra. And la par chazal said zeh Yom Kippurim and the purpose of it is to teach me that the halachos of the par hakohain mashiach relate somehow to the halachos of the par yom hakipurim as well. But the bottom line is I don't need kinyan yosair to teach me that that the par yom hakipurim is like the par dam hashulchan tzibur cuz that's what la par already teaches me, right? But Amri this same braisa already said la par sin yom hakipurim dam hashulchan tzibur and it always said la par I would have thought that maybe this that we equate the par yom hakipurim to the par dam hashulchan tzibur that's only with regards to the avoidos that are ma'akev kaparah. So regarding the dinei hazoyos then you're going to have it avoda ma'akev kaparah but as relates to avoidos ma'akev kaparah such as smicha which is extra credit, such as shlichus which is extra credit, that's why I need kinyan yosair. According to Rabbi Yehuda so kinyan yosair is coming to teach me matan dalid is ma'akev. According to Rabbi Yehuda kinyan yosair is coming to teach me halacha not even regarding the par dam hashulchan tzibur rather the par yom hakipurim and it's coming to tell me that just like we compare the par yom hakipurim to the par dam hashulchan tzibur regarding dinei hazoyos which is the dover that's ma'akev kaparah we also compare regarding avoda she'einam ma'akev es hakaparah such as smicha and such as shlichus but nothing is another kasha. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai oilam might say again we have a kasha Rabbi Yehuda what are the makoros to matan dalid by the par mashiach and the par dam hashulchan tzibur. According to Rabbi Shimon it's karnis karnis we merge the two parshios. According to Rabbi Yehuda the word oilam might is extra in the parsha of par mashiach and the parsha dam hashulchan tzibur to teach me on all the karnis of the oilam might. Now Rabbi Shimon doesn't use oilam might to teach me that he learns it from karnis karnis. So says the Gemara the Gemara will assume that the words oilam might are extra in Rabbi Shimon's world just like they're extra in Rabbi Yehuda's world. That's the case it's nitan l'd'rasha. So great Gemara what exactly does Rabbi Shimon do with those words? Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai oilam might my other way. So the Gemara says oilam might one of Rabbi know what does with the word by oil my? By oil my comes to teach you a very long de shalaha. Shimin niftacha tikra shel heichal lo haya maza. That the only time the oil my is considered an oil my is if it's an oil." Right, it has a roof on its head. But if there's no oil because for whatever reason there's crack, it was niftacha the tikra of the heichal, the roof opened up, well then you couldn't be maza because it doesn't have a din oil my. It doesn't have a din heichal. So the words by oil my are coming to teach me there has to be a cheft shel an oil. But the extent that you're missing the roof, then you're not going to have the halacha. Says the Gamara, "Viidach, Rabbi Yehuda who uses by oil my to teach me the matan dalid. How does he know this halacha niftacha tikra shel heichal lo haya maza?" So the Gamara says he learns it from the word asher. So the word asher is in the by oil my that's in the parsha of the parah aduma shel tziva. It says, "Umin Adam yiten al karnotav beich." asher lifnei Hashem asher by oil my, right? You see the word asher is extra. It could have said asher lifnei Hashem by oil my. Asher lifnei Hashem asher by oil my. So by oil my teaches me one thing and the word asher teaches me something else. According to Rabbi Yehuda, the word by oil my teaches me dalid and asher teaches me niftacha. Viidach, what is Rabbi Shimon going to do with the word asher, right? Rabbi Shimon learns matan dalid from karnot. Oil my is teaching me niftacha. So the word asher is extra. So the Gamara asher lo yidrash. She doesn't darshan the word asher. Okay, so if you don't darshan the word asher, meaning it's lo dafka word that you can darshan. Sometimes dibra Torah bilshon bnei Adam. But the bottom line is is there's no drasha to be had. If there's no drasha to be had, so nothing is going to be learned from here. So just hit the pause button for 1 sec. The daf began explaining the very first part of the braisa. Baasa kasha osas extra she na kasav lach. I would think maybe only matan Zion, that's Matan Matan Matan David may have to say we can't learn Matan David from Matan Zion, so maybe it's only referring to the Matan Zion. Tom can you ask 50 tomorrow? I need to learn Matan David from Matan Zion. You're being between the two. The same you have regarding the Matan Zion, you have regarding the Matan David. Says the Gamara on Yirmiyahu and the price is going a little bit of Shimon holds that it doesn't say before the Torah with regards to the parallel It says kindness which is two. It also says kindness by the park of but it's not it's not Seva anywhere Matan David. Being that it's not Seva the kosher also is not favored and it's for that reason I don't have it mean in the parsha. That's why I need Kenya Yassa. Now, if that's the case what emerges is the time of the price so is that the Reb Shimon. What is Reb Shimon's to do with Reb Yehuda to do with Kenya Yassa? So the Gamara made all the business and did all the math. But the first part of the Gamara to this kosher of why I need Kenya Yassa to be married to Matan David isn't it included in the and it's Reb Shimon Reb Shimon it's not a bio or more a bio is the second part of the Gamara. He says Reb Yehuda it's you don't have to make an that the price is going to be the Reb Shimon cuz even the Reb Yehuda that holds that the Matan David is in the parsha of it's still not favored. You still need Kenya Yassa. Why? Higher just like I know Matan Zion I know Matan David. I'll tell you what I thought that I would have thought. Maybe they have to I would have thought that it should be like Shimon and Shimon the after Shimon even though it's Shimon right because the Torah mentions Shimon and mentions Shimon by the and then it says which means it's but it's still it's not Now how do you know it's not So for again you have to refer back to the end of yesterday's you have to go back now to the end of the price of the end of the price of said that the and from those words we learn so in as much as the smith and the but we have a special word that tells me smith especially what that teaches me that she is not once I know the down and not so I would have thought that then maybe the should also not be that's why I need so you're right that and if that's the case it's also but I still need a special because there are things that are that are not included in the based on a you would need a for it and I would thought that maybe compare to and that's why I need that's the one one point that's worth speaking out just have a little more in the why would you think that the should be comparable to the and the the answer is because when it comes to the that was brought in the or when it comes to all that you didn't have to do all the is never if it's a but the that the is so yeah you can't compare to other the the latter three you actually could compare because the latter three are very similar to and if you're not sure yesterday's right it's very very similar you do very very similar so therefore that latter three of the Matanot should be like those two. And for that, I have a foolish possuk that there's no That's the Kamasha Malan. So, the bottom line is to drock and how you can learn the braysa. Either the braysa is going dafka like and the reason you need a special possuk can you also why I isn't fail on the since I only know based on a hekesh between the two parshas or you could say that it's going like there would have been a that the latter three are like smicha like smicha the extra credit and for the extra credit things I have a foolish akira in the failon. The upper smicha and this one maybe this should be the same thing. Kamasha Malan, at the end of the day, that's why I have Okay, yeah, you all saw like going back to the braysa. So, the next part of the braysa, which we referenced already in the early part of the daf, was that the braysa held that the words kasha la por la fara o s'rachsha. So, zeh par Yom Kippurim. Kasha la far zeh par kohen mashiah. Now, if you remember, we spoke at length Rashi by said that we're coming my the gemara is going to tell us why the Torah threw in over here the par and the par Yom Kippurim with regards to what halacha. I mean, we're talking about the par kohen mashiah. So, with regards to what and the par So, with regards to what halacha is it Now, as it relates to the next part, kasha la far zeh par kohen mashiah. So, that Rashi already explained. And Rashi said that that's coming to teach me that just like all the Matanot, the Matan Zayin and the Matan Dalet are when it comes to the par so too they're going to be when it comes to the par kohen mashiah as well. Meaning, even though the issue of mikra is that you should treat the par like you treat the par kohen mashiah. However, the meaning the what the Torah really is telling me is that you should treat the par the way you treat the par and just like you have the one it comes to the par so too you can have the as it relates to the par but we're going to focus now on the par not the far but once with a par once without a par but we're going to focus on the par now. The par is the par will be somehow to the par why Rashi left us in suspense for about 24 or so hours and now we're going to see what the reason is says the la par zeh par it's referring to the par with regards to what is the Torah telling me that the par is similar to what's going on in this par maybe for the we just said for coming to teach me so maybe I need this word la par to tell me that just like when it comes to the par so too it comes to the par so too it's going to be but the Torah says if that's the case I know that already I don't need la par chuka tziva bay it says the word chuka now where does it say chuka v'osisa lachem l'chukas olam and this is that's the chuk of the that is the and the Torah that chuka is coming to teach me that the is so I know that is which means I know that is so so why then do I need this so the Torah says that you want to know why we need this it's coming for you it's coming for you it's coming for you that even though it says regarding the it's only referring to the big day the word chuka is only referring to number one that is that the did with his big day so we know that used to change his clothing several times throughout the day he changed from his big day love, which is what he wore the whole year, to his big day love on the special white linen clothing that he wore on Yom Kippur. He didn't want to go into the Kodesh Hakodash with the big day love and got taken out of Sanhedrin, but used to switch back and forth. And every time he switched, he would toivel and would be mikadesh raglav two times. Regardless, Rebbe Yehudah's shita is that when it says chuka regarding the avodah on Yom Kippur, it's only negaya the avodahs that were done with the big day love. And here's the punch line of the fnay. The fnay means lifnayv lifnay. In the Kodesh Hakodash. And regarding those halachas, the Torah says chuk, meaning shem heek the maaseh l'chaveiro lay oso lay kol. That not only is it makpid to do everything, but even the seder is makpid. You have to do it exactly in the order that the Torah lays out. Avodah min has big day love min b'chotz. But Rebbe Yehudah's shita is regarding the avodahs that were done even with the big day love. But if they were done b'chotz, meaning they were done outside of the Kodesh Hakodash. For example, the azoy stah were done on the peroches. There were certain avodahs that were done with the big day love min b'chotz. So over there, heek the maaseh l'chaveiro maasha oso oso. Rebbe Yehudah's shita is there's no chuka. And the words of Rebbe Yehudah are, "It's for that reason if you would be makpid one to the other, it would be okay." Now, says the Gemara, Rebbe Yehudah just told us that the word chuka is talking dafka about the avodahs that were done with the big day love min lifnayv lifnay. But as it relates to the avodahs that were done with the big day love min b'chotz, not. Therefore, I would have thought aimo the may that it's seder not makpid. Being that the seder is not makpid, those are the words of Rebbe Yehudah. So as oy stah not oy makpid. Maybe that azoy stah should not be makpid. Kamash malan, that's why I need Lapar to teach me that the azoy stah al k'ponim are going to be makpid. In other words, the kasha is why do I need Lapar? A hekesh to the par aduma shel tzibur l'hakiv chuka k'tzibur. Chuka is only going on the avodahs that were done with the big day love min lifnay. But as it relates to the big day love min b'chotz, tonight, come out small on la part. Now, how does that stem with the mask on the rubber you do you the taco holds there is no equal there is no hooker when it comes to that way this is what we're doing with big love and my whole tonight. It's talking about it in the seder. The seder is not so hooker referring to the big day love and the name and not the big day love and my whole tonight has a place with regards to the seder of avodah. But as it relates to doing the avodahs based on la part, I'm going to know that it is going to be me active. So the bottom line is la part right now the gamora says is referring to what? It's referring to the party of Yom Kippur. When my hill that has always are all my active don't I anyways know it from hooker not from hooker would only know that I've always that we're done with the big day love and the I would not know that has always that we're done with the big day love and my I will mask off la la papa. The papa asked the cash of me could you still say that la part of Yom Kippur is coming to teach me this but I know I have a another brice the brice says the me copper as hot this is also a classic in my character Zion and the crease I told you they might could dish the seder of avodah on Yom Kippur the me copper as hot dish says the brice in keeper killer the way the way the dashing this classic is backwards the killer me copper that killer finishing the avodah and keeper and getting capora are totally that but it's the killer that's totally in the next word that's totally in keeper and what does that mean in keeper capora is usually contingent upon doing all the necessary all the necessary as always so if the coin got on Yom Kippur did all the necessary as always killer then he's done meaning you get whatever you were supposed to get then like keeper if you didn't do all the necessary as always, like keeper of keeper of keeper is that all the as always are not active, but only as always are not active. I'm going to do what you do what you said. If my way give it to you that you deposit backwards. So it's a mix. Wouldn't it make more sense? Wouldn't it be more glad to say not the copper and keeper kilo and like keeper like keeper, but just the opposite. The copper says first, the copper says second. In kilo, if you finish doing all the avoiders, keeper you get copper or then like kilo and if not like keeper, you're not going to get copper. In other words, according to Akiva what finishing is totally in is keeper. Keeper always means as always. According to Judah what copper is totally in is kilo. Finishing Finishing means everything. Like keeper means as always. Kilo means everything. Akiva says that kilo everything is totally in keeper. Akiva Judah says no. Keeper gaining atonement I guess is totally in kilo and in finishing. But what's the bottom line sensor of papa? This is where Akiva Judah is talking. The names matter. Akiva Judah is very very clearly that when it comes to Akiva keeper based on the kilo as Akiva Judah I know you have to do everything. And if you don't do everything you're not going to get copper. Just explain it a little bit better. Even though Akiva Judah just said in the previous price of that the only things that are active based on Akiva is the things that were done with the big day love and not the things that were done with the big day love. That's regarding the save the avoider. But what is the game doing the avoider of Akiva Judah? I know the kilo as Akiva Judah and kilo copper and like kilo like copper. Since Akiva Judah you can't tell me that the price of the Akiva Judah that says to be married with the Akiva Judah is coming to tell me that it's Akiva Judah I'll leave it to Akiva Judah who holds that Akiva Judah only Akiva Judah the big day love and because that same Akiva Judah anyways has a different Akiva Judah. And that is the kilo as Akiva Judah. So at the end of the day, according to all the tana'im in shas, I know that the azoyus of the par mikpurim are based on chuka. And even the one tana that maybe it doesn't hold that way, that's Rebbe Yehuda, he gradually shitoso. It's Rebbe Yehuda shitoso as a different drasha that says it's machkesh. At the end of the day, the par mikpurim, we know it's machkesh. So again, said Rav Papa, the par sheyom hakipurim l'mayo eila achid shita, right? We're back to where we started, the first line of the Gemara's analysis of this part of the braisa. So, the Gemara, because of this kasha, says Omer Rav Papa, or some have the girsa, elo omer Rav Papa, because Rav Papa is going to come now with a new drasha. Like nischra, you want to know why we need la par sheyom hakipurim? You want to know what we're learning about the par mikpurim that I otherwise wouldn't have known? It's coming to teach me three halachas, three halachas that I learned out from three words in the Torah. Elo le es dam u'betfila. So, those are the three words that represent three halachas, as the Gemara is about to explain. Those three halachas, just high level, are not mentioned in the parsha of the par mikpurim. And it's for that reason, based on the iker parsha of davar d'yom kippur, I wouldn't know it. I wouldn't know it l'kuva. I wouldn't even know it l'chatchila. It has nothing to do with the healing of Kippur. It has nothing to do with chuka, cuz it doesn't even say it anywhere. So, there'd be no way of knowing it. Where does it say it? So, this is interesting. You would think probably by the par d'avodas hatzibur. Nope. It actually says it by the par kohen mashiah. It says it by the par kohen mashiah. The words es, dam, and fila. And from those words, I learn three halachas. La par sheyom hakipurim is coming to teach me, it's coming to teach me that just like it's true with regard to the par kohen mashiah, so too it's going to be true for the the mikpurim. Now, at first glance, you're going to say, "If it says the words S dam and filah by the par kohen mashiah, not by the par of the double shall tzibur, then how could la par Yuma Kippurim that it says by the par of the double shall tzibur be referring to that?" So, you know as this kasha, Rashi as this kasha, take a look at the last words of Rashi on the amud dalet mem amud aleph. Ikasha. The high krah par Yuma Kippurim la par ha'elem hu de iskash. De bedei deiko am nishtoi krah u'be par ha'elem like tziv es bedam u'tvilah, right? Rashi asked the obvious question, "If you're holding cheshbon, so Rashi on more than kasha also la par zeh par kohen mashiah al mul par kohen mashiah nami iskash. Says Rashi, "Inasmuch as it's true that ikar pasuk is talking about the par of the double shall tzibur, but we said it says la par and it says la far. And the par is the par Yuma Kippurim, the far is the par kohen mashiah. So, that just like in this pasuk there's a hekesh between the par Yuma Kippurim and the par of the double shall tzibur, there's actually also a hekesh between the par Yuma Kippurim and the par kohen mashiah. And the la par Yuma Kippurim is actually coming to be makashe to the par kohen mashiah. And it's for that reason we're able to learn what it is that we're about to learn. Either way, okay, so what do we know? What are these three halachas? I mean, they're represented by the words S dam and filah. By the way, just to read the pasuk, we didn't do that yet. The tovel la kohen es etzba'i badam vihizam min adam sheva pa'amim lifnei Hashem es pnei par ha'kodesh. So, the tovel is one, es is two, badam is three. Those are the three words it says by the par kohen mashiah. Doesn't say it by the par Yuma Kippurim, we'll be makashe the par Yuma Kippurim so Rashi not to the par of the double shall tzibur, but to the par kohen mashiah to teach you that these halachas are again what are these halachas as you know we learn from hello in the event that the coin had like a wart he had something a growth on his finger so the question is could he take that finger dip it into the dam now and do a hazah you could have thought that maybe it's a the Torah says you're allowed to it says s at spy s is always a double toffle right s is toffle to the iker But the point is that ace is always the double toffle what's toffle to the ace but this is a wart or whatever exactly it is and it's not going to be considered a hazizah but the dam teaches me that at the time that the coin does the hazah you have to make sure that there's enough dam inside the case and not only when he's doing the toffle but even when the original kabbalah was done you have to make sure that there was enough dam in the case to have a a sheer toffle and finally it says the toffle we learn from the above masafik that it has to be a proper toffle but if he's going to take his finger he's going to scrape the walls of the klishores and to go ahead and do a hazah that way that's not going to be okay so from the s we say that if there's a hazizah there's a growth on his finger so that's something you have to worry about but the dam there has to be a sheer toffle at the time of the kabbalah and the toffle is the toffle masafik says the gemara and this is a little bit of a mysterious gemara it says the gemara it has to say but the dam the it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam the it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the dam it says the gemara it has to say but the Torah said because had it said badam and then not said the tovel, I would have feel the safek. I would have thought the safek is good. Because that's why the Torah said the tovel. So, as much as it's three drashas, it speaks out of them all, you have to have three. Because you wouldn't be able to learn one from the other. Why is this a little bit of a mysterious Gemara? Because what's the hava mina? You should be able to learn the halacha that you learn from the tovel from badam. And the halacha that you learn from badam from tovel. They're two completely different halachas. Right, when do you always find the Gemara will say the itz derech? When I have two halachas that are so similar or two words or psukim that are teaching me something so similar, so maybe I could learn one from the other. The tovel teaches me halacha in the kabala, how much dam I have to have in order to later be able to do the vitovel. And badam teaches me the shid feel or the other way, right? But the bottom line is is that they're two completely unrelated halachas. If they're two completely unrelated halachas, maybe you wouldn't even have a hava mina to be able to learn from the other. But the bottom line is this is where it's negaya. Lafar the yom kippur. So again, the next part of the bracha was that it says lafar the par yom kippur. And the question was lemai hilchosav. Where is it negaya that we're being makish the par yom kippur to the par l'dovashal tzibur? I know that the par yom kippur everything is makiv. How do I know that everything is makiv when it comes to the par yom kippur? Because it says chuka. And even though the chuka is only talking about the avodas that were done with the big day love and lifnaim lifnim, but it says the kilo mikaper hakodesh. And the way Yehuda darshans it, not like Akiva. Im kilo kiper and lo kilo lo kiper. So we know that everything is makiv. So where exactly is this negaya? Amar Rabba. Rabba comes to the rescue and Rabba said it's negaya three halachas. Three halachas that I know by the par kohen mashiach. Three halachas that I know by the par mashiach. Three that I learned out from S, dam, and tvila, those three halachas don't say anywhere by the par Yuma Kippurim. The Torah said the par to be makdish the par Yuma Kippurim to not the par helam davash al tzibur, but rather the par kohen mashiah to teach me that just like the par kohen mashiah has those three halachas, the par Yuma Kippurim is going to have those three halachas as well. Now, b'derech agav on amud aleph, the Gemara had darshined a passuk that it says by the par kohen mashiah, "V'nasan hakohain min hadam al karnois mizbeach k'tores hasamim lifnei Hashem asher b'ohel moed." The "eitz kol dam hapar moed." What part of this did we darshin? So, we darshined the word karnois, right? R' Shimon darshined karnois, and we darshined the word "b'ohel moed asher b'ohel moed." Right? So, this was a passuk that was very much g'darshined on amud aleph. So, being that we very much g'darshined it, so the Gemara is going to take it to the finish line. There's one more drasha to be had on this passuk. This is a digression from the core braisa. Says the Gemara, "Mizbach k'tores hasamim ohel moed." Why does the Torah have to refer to the mizbeach that was in the ohel moed as the mizbeach of the k'tores hasamim? Everybody knows the k'tores was burned on that mizbeach, known as mizbeach hak'tores, right? Look in the parsha of the k'tores, and the Torah says that that's what you're supposed to do with the k'tores. You're supposed to bring it on that mizbeach. Why does the Torah need a d'rukusa over here that that mizbeach is called the mizbach k'tores hasamim? Says the Gemara, "Shem going to s'chanech hamizbeach b'tores hasamim ohel moed." Come to teach me a halacha of chinuch hamizbeach. Right? So, chinuch hamizbeach is a big sugya in kashan that you couldn't just take one of the kelim or even one of the bigger kelim and use it for the first time for whatever you wanted to use it for. There's a chinuch "anachnu na'ar upi darka gam ki askinu lo yasur mimenu." First you have to inaugurate it. You have to be m'chanech it. You have to establish it in its name, and only then then you're able to use it for whatever you want to use it. The way that the mizbe'ach haketores was nischanech was davka by using a ketores. And the svara behind it is because that was the ikkar purpose of that mizbe'ach. It's known as mizbe'ach haketores. That's the ikkar tachlis of it. Right? Every now and again there was chazoris that were done and avoidos that were done. But that was the main thing that was done tamid b'ahava every single day, right? So that's machsis of a boker, machsis of a erev. That was the main purpose of it. I mean that that was the main purpose of it. So therefore the only way that it could be nischanech is if you're going to use it in that way. And we're going to stop here only because really if we would not stop here, we would have to recap this part of the daf in the beginning of the next daf. So it's an erev Shabbos, we'll stop a little bit short and be'ezras Hashem we'll pick up a longer daf mem alef tomorrow night.