Zevachim 41

Today's daf is alf and we are eight lines from the top of today's being learned as and so we're in the middle of a sug that began already two daffen ago with a bryer on the bottom of dlamites the bryer discussed a in paras that discusses the parel. The POS reads. Literally what the POS is saying is that the way you should treat the is the way you treated the affformentioned par which if you go back several the Tory had detailed the laws of the parsiah. In other words, the saying that the sed of the par mirrored the sed of the had on the and that is that if you go through what you're supposed to do with the pariah and then you go through what you're supposed to do with the par it's the same exact thing and if that's the case this entire p would seem to be superflous and it's because of that kazal gave us a bryo that spans more than an shas the In terms of how you're supposed to understand every single word of the Pik just to very very quickly the says that when the says what it really means is you should do with the what I told you to do with the why do you have to tell me to do what you already told me to do? Because in kach the rule is that if the tells you to do something once it's only if the tells you to do it twice. So essentially what the is saying is that the of the is when it says that word is actually a reference to the and the is coming to tell me that the parakurim is like the helm. In what way is it like it? that we saw in yesterday's d it was one held that the brac is going who holds that there is no anywhere that all the that were done on are and even though there is a that would suggest that the avoid that were done on yum with the big day love is but what was done with the big days of and even what was done with the big day love we don't know was the is saying that just like the everything is not so too when it comes to is going to be the same way said that this doesn't have to be could be the Bryce is going I'll leave the kyama and what the b is coming to teach me is that just like by the paral And by the there was a so too when it comes to the you can have the as well. What do those three words mean? Each one represents another from the word s we learn that if a was doing the and he had a m a growth on his finger it's not considered it's going to be okay. From the word, we learn that when the co does the for the he needs that there should be enough dam that there's be a and from the word we learn that you have to do a real as opposed to you can't scrape off blood that's on the walls of the k as it relates to the secondar that's mentioned in the means but Ironically, although the it sounds like the is saying is that treat the way you treat the in the in the BC is just the opposite. And really what the is saying is that just like regarding the so is that everything is when it comes to the power of as well. The next word was that's also an extra word that's coming to be the that's the that was brought together with the power in the event of and the is coming to be the to again just like the everything is so too when it comes to the everything is going to as well. When the Torah concludes and says then the Torah is coming to tell me you're going to get even if you didn't do then you're going to get or you're going to get even if you didn't do either way the part of the that we're in the middle of uh analyzing is the word means and as we mentioned and what the that comes out of this heckish is according to it's coming to teach me that when it comes to the I don't I know it from the I actually need a for this said no that I don't need a peckish to tell me that the are going to be this price could be going ali What then is it coming to teach me? It's coming to teach me the learned out from that just like they're true for the par and the going to be true for the paripur as well. Either way, today's daf is going to begin with another. Believe it or not, this is a kavas aipur. But as we're going to see the has more than just the line that supports the opinion of Raapa and really a big part of the of the Gar's analysis of this is the that's just going to come along for the ride the that's going to be mentioned says the supports again what did say that reason this is to tell me the says this is in the parish of the par. Why does the third have to tell me the word? Isn't that extra? Just like it's coming to be. But here's the punch line. What's it coming to be? Rabbi said it's coming to be for everything that's mentioned regarding the every that's true for the is going to be true for the as well. What does it mean? Every is not only that but everything that's true by one parish is going to be true by the other par as well included in everything is and that is the now this is a little bit of a a weak right usually when the says it's clear it's right there's nothing to even negotiate this is not as clear, right? It doesn't feel like your classic Tanya kavas and the truth is the garbage is going to revisit the tan kavas and the gumar is going to question it a little bit. But either way, the bry continues again. The tiny kavasi was from the first line of the bry. But the price continues and says that you don't need the word to tell me that the is like the or it's like the and the reason is I know it based on what's the carbon I know that there are two carbon where the min of the carbon are different meaning one is one animal and the other is another animal Still you find that the Tyra said that the m of one are like the m of the other. So the carbon then certainly if you would have two carbonas where then type of the carbon is the same there's no question that the should be the same. In other words being that the same carbon like the or like the so it's the same type of carbon. So there's no question in the world if it's the same type of carbon then should be the same as well. Again, why is it a because I'm going to show you says that there are a precedent for where so without a doubt then where it's in other words what is saying is the way the gar is understanding the right so Let's just focus on of and that is says I don't need a heck to teach me. And the reason I don't need a to teach me is because I can know it from and if I know it from I don't need a what's so certainly words. This is a power and that's a power. said there's no question in the world regarding those three that I learned from continues and says so what is coming to teach me it's coming to teach me now what's the obvious that's what the parish is talking about is to be the is in the parish of the wrote an extra word in the parish It's coming to be something outside of the is going to ask a little bit later and the second mention of is there again all of this will make sense later either way. So we're going to focus now said that I don't need a heish. I don't need an extra word to be to teach me why I know from where it's what was that example that had that he thought if it's certainly here it should be this maybe what he meant was the P that was born on Yamkip and the Sar that was brought on Yamiper. So the kango used to be a par right known as his par the power of the power and then there was the Sar. This Sar is one of the two goats. One went the other one. The one that went was a regular carbonas. I mean not regular very special but carbonas. Right now the parameir each other they're very very similar different animal but the m are mamish the same. So you see then that two types of animals a bull and a goat could have the same. So certainly two bulls should have the same. You can't you can't tell me that if the terra was mash the parakipur and the makipur then certainly the terra would be mash the right why those two are very very very the same in as much as they're different carbon but they have a lot of commonalities number one as opposed to let's say the or if you prefer the par one is the other one's not the point is those two are very similar in as much as it's like makes sense that it's you can't say these two have to be the same maybe meant something else he meant you find that and have a very similar where do you find that in our because you remember Bryce of also mentioned and was and it's true that really is true for everything. It's true. So here you have a situation where you have two different animals. One's a par one's a sawyer one's a bull one's a goat right and the same. So certainly when it comes to the two pars it should be the same. here to the says what they have in common is that both at the time that you're bringing the carbon you know about it as opposed to the which is on something that you don't know about but the or the is for something that you do know about and the truth is you could say it even a little bit sharifer the were very very similar remember from their mish one and the same. One is by Shaho and the other one is by a but they're eerily eerily similar as opposed to the paripurim and let's say the pariah those are completely different types of so again there's no to be had that if those two carbonus are the same then these carbon should be the same must meant something else what he meant was what he meant was that you find that The par and the was brought on were the same. One is a par, the other one is a you find the similar and these three next words are very critical. You find that the are the same with regards to we'll see what that means. carbon the carbon a situation where you find it's the same carbon where one is the not the and the other one is the power right the high then there's no question in the world that the should be the same in other words the was from the fact that you find that the and the was burning in are the same even though they're different animals so certainly when it comes to a par and a parro should be the same now where do you find that the and the was burning Kipper were the same. They weren't the same. No, the is unique. Yeah, it's one of the that were brought on required on the there are definitely some unique aspects to it, right? But the of it goes and there there were seven, right? Even on the instead of seven it was eight. So there's a lot more going on with regards to the than the that the should say that it's you know who muches tremendously with this rash. It's the top rash and Rashi struggles with this but Rashi says the wasing this. What was the gor said that you find that it's It's not completely the same. We know it's not completely the same. Here it is. And Rashi says what that means is is that everything that it says you were supposed to do with the par on some level you're also doing with the burning here. You have to bring it on. You're bringing it on the has to be on the car. It has to be on the car. You have to do you have to hear it's 70 here you also go there's more there is similar everything that it says by the you have some mirror image of that regarding the and that's enough in to say that it's and if that's the case what felt was that you find regarding the power of the that was burning him kipper that it's a different card, but yet it's again the punch line is so certainly as it relates to the there's no question it's the same. So for sure and you can't tell me that what I mean those two carbon the inherently have some bond yeah the are very very similar the was burning kipper are very very similar but this is not so similar it's not any more similar than the par/iach and the par that was birthing gipper and if you find there. It has to be here. And if that's the case, I don't need to teach me that the is of going to be true with regards to the I know based on the in fact and he said as false still middle of the in meaning you don't need a special word of but based on I can learn with regards to these three from the parco. Now notice he says from the parco and the truth is you know I keep on saying there's differenti if you remember the right we spoke about this in yesterday's is from the but really the word that it says in the sounds like we're being more either way they're both true because they both have the of but regards sounds like that. It was more from the additionally another regarding the s that was born on that too. It doesn't mention anywhere but I'll know it also. I can learn it from the what's the it's the same exact right. So certainly where it's hushu carbon carbon where is it carbon to carbon the same well if it's going to be true here then it should be true there as well but asks on the last what was the last how could you learn the espedal by the from the how do you know from the way you know it is based on a heish what's the he says in the parish of the and based on the heckish I know that anything that's true by the and also it says the mashia in that it could be also everything I know regarding the pariah is going to be true for the of okay so the fact that was true by the I know from if I know it from and now I want to learn the from that that means I'm using to learn from now the background to this we've already seen a few times but the is coming up in the next And that is in there. What about that's all talked about in the but here the holds that you're learning from the price holds. If he holds you can do it. Well then if that's the case then there's no problem. You'd be able to do it. By the way, we mention is for the parsiah or is it from the par if it's from the then it's a straight right the says by the if it's from I only know by the through a heish from the which means you would have to come on to the fact that which is fine because That is the of this. That's the of this regardless. But again, those two is the being learned out from is being learned out from the it doesn't make a difference because from the next part of the we know that is the of the but it is just in terms of understanding the properly we could breathe for a second but either way. So again what was the first part of today's dath? It was a brica. started off this brace because of a riot that said that the reason the terrorist said to be in the parish of the to teach me where do you see it in the you don't really see it but it says it's and we know it says by the I know But it's and if it's so it's included that's a wrap up then who says no that's not what is coming to teach me I don't need to teach me I know it from right I know from so I don't need it what then is coming to teach me it's and when we saw the words inside the bra we asked the obvious question you need the word to be in a that's talking about the this next is going to ask is going to say I don't understand why I need the reason the mention is because the terror wants to learn the act that when they were theim of the included in the was the those body parts of the animal. Now that's something that it doesn't say anywhere by the hence we need to learn it and we want to learn that from the now the problem with learning it from the we have to hold a little bit of is it doesn't say anywhere by the that's a big problem doesn't say anywhere the when you do you have to be marked so why are we even having this conversation you're trying to learn something from somewhere that it doesn't say that thing. The reason is because the is that by the of the wed and the reason is because in as much as it doesn't say it by the it does say it by the par it's rather very helpful to be fluent and safe when you go through these but uh either way it says it by the pariah and we have a heckish now between the parhelm and the parashia. Oh, so that's why there's even to have this conversation. But just because I know from the state by doesn't give me a now to go ahead and beame to the and the reason is because how do I know it by the through we know it's not so to be able to go ahead and beam either way this is the background of what's going on over here. again. So says that the reason in the parish of the even though we're talking about the par it's because we want the parish of we wanted to teach me that by the problem is back into the it doesn't say it anywhere by the rather I know from the therefore it's so the wrote a second mention of the by doing that it makes it as if whatever is learned out from the heish to the state and if that's the case and now it's not going to be that's again we we got to do this one more time, right? So, it says the you want to know why it says a second time the par because there's a that I want to be the now ordinarily when it comes to so this idea would not work but the Tyra went ahead and the Tyra circumvented this the Tyra preempted this issue and what the Tyra did was the Tyra wrote in the that's the parel to the a second mention of the mention to tell me that this heish between the is from all the other every can't be the but this heckish could you know why because didn't make the heckish once ter made it twice and again how did do that for is being by the mentioning what the Tory is doing is the Torah is reinforcing this hish and the Torah is saying there's like a doubleish and the double heish allows it to be now I'll have the ability to go ahead and say that whatever it says by the is going to be true with regards to the and if it's going to be true regarding the that's how I know there's a when it comes to the either way who said this and this is really the theme of the another not nearly as hard as the previous one but that supports the says it's all the same why does it have Say because the says now we have to see this whole this is by it says we really need that part the gram part. says when it says it's referring to the that's referring to the right that's what the says what the is coming to say is that I want you to treat the which is the like which is the with regards to what with regards to The denim that you find by one should apply to the other. Specifically regarding the of the as it relates to the in this price. Where did you learn that? You learned it by a double between the two to teach me that what that even though ordinarily can't be but when it comes to this this will have the ability to be so again from this we see clearly that the reason the overall in this is to reinforce the he between the paral and so that now the should be able to be what's it parti but it's clearly what the B is talking about and it's coming to beame that by the just like there is by the without this reinforced it wouldn't work because how do I know it by the But now I have it in like this. I'm going to be able to make it all work. But the has a kash on this a postcript. The last we learned in the bryer right here. This last price that we just mentioned that it says is referring to the said to right what's that just like when it comes to the which is there's a even on the so when it comes to the gonna have the same thing. In other words, this parish is where you find that the so therefore I know via this that is the double hackish right that's the answer but if you're holding the jumps off the page I need this as a mocker as a source that is a heckage between the and I know it from our original, right? We've gone through this crisis so many times. We started it off as a precap today's coming to teach me. So let's see in says I know it from the original again the Gar is not questioning the the math of the B is amazing but the Gar just doesn't understand why I need the heckish to be the we've been working with this P for a few days now we have this P and the par of the so who comes to the rescue again who's the There's not one mention of beer in these who is the says I'm going to tell you why we needed this new I could have thought I could have thought that that of is only regarding the why because that's what the is talking about where do you see the talking about it says right it's talking about the but as relates to the of And to tell me that the I not mentioned in that mentions that original with the power. So I could have thought I would have thought not. Therefore I have this extra extra. So Rashi speaks out and really look at the P. Okay. Yeah. That means that means of view as carbon is a fire. What goes on the fire? That's this pig mentions. So had I only had the originalish, I would know there's a heish. But I would know there's a heckish regarding the DNA. But I would know there's a heckish regarding the kamash this here you find there's a heish even with regards to the either way the started. said that it's coming to as opposed to is related to say what does it mean it means everything includes everything and that's says the told I think not a tiny to you ra it seems like papa knew about this kavasi it's not a tiny to you if anything sounds like yeah but the also meaning if you remember said that I need to said when it comes to he said yeah says no no it's going to everybody and we don't need a to be I only need it to be so the bry sounds more like you I don't think it sounds like you because you made a big deal about the fact that I don't need the word to be if anything sounds like also the yes it's a little bit like you it's but by the way you think that the doesn't hold that is coming to be he probably also is but the pus is at the very least is coming to be the that's the and you made a big deal about the fact that I don't need it to be the right if anything it's mashma If anything, it's it's mashma that it's really everything and everything is mash even. So says I hear really it's how so as opposed to not that way because see these rashies inside there's some insight and some history in these rashies here. Let's just see it inside. says anytime you have a ton of that's not what is but every is the original meaning says I agree I don't think this price is a riot to me and in fact I was explaining the original price where this whole gash started three days ago and that price is a regular ton of that's a ton of and as it relates to he's only this was a it taught and it was compiled in the lot of that engaged in that Bryce is like me that Bryce is not only being so what started off as a really at the end of his rapa had to defend that price and He said, "No, I was coming to explain the ton of that's a ton of this is a ton of can ask from a ton of rabish." So, we have to put a little uh note here, little sticker to come back to at some point what the is between and certainly sounds interesting tucked away here from the base. But we have some more work to do says the on the note of so one of the things that we just saw in today's a lot of information but one of the things we saw is that is that when you the included in the was the clo but where does it say it in the it says it by the pariah how do I know it by the I know it and like it's true by both right he said I'll explain to it some have the gear so sounds intense it's also intense but not as intense on his on a good friend of his because he loved him so he was a little bit ber when when the sins that's that's a problem right but when sins that by the that's much much worse it's much much worse by the saying that the his requires not just the regular but you have to give the and the what you're doing is you're exacerbating the sin the ter didn't want to do it by because that's the and there's no on or nothing that loves more than the of Israel. The kashiach I'll tell it to you over there. Even though he's the kashiach, right? That's why he has to bring the special power. He's the god of ostensibly doesn't come to the and that's why for I'd rather make IT SOUND LIKE YOU DON'T NEED SO MUCH. So I'll tell it to you by the you rather need it by the I'll hint it through a heish or a double heckish. The end of the day it's going to be true by the but you want to know what the time of the is. This is what it is. More on this note. So the of the were both on the butch the refers to the as the and by the par it doesn't say the it just says as why by the mashiach is it the pakesh but by the double was only the said I'll explain to you again with ash the sinned if only some people sinned you know no one's necessarily losing their job right heads are not necessarily rolling but in if most people sin even the pomala is not going to be able to survive this the pomala is going to end up getting into trouble what's the nimil the nimil is the Mashiach sins the is still kesh it doesn't lose its kadusha the pala doesn't somehow get knocked out but if sins it affects the affects the kadush of the paras and that's why it can't be referred to as the it's simply referred to as the paras exhale and then immediately inhale so really if you thought this was the hard part of pericles shami Think again. No. So, uh Shai is really a tale of uh two parts. There's the first part and the second part, right? Naturally, the first part is hard because of the the second part is hard because of the in fact in yeshiva when they learn second very often the starts from the two dots that we're about to start from right now. So these next five or six daffin have a disproportionate amount of of similar to right started with nishb and it got into all the pigle etc etc. So this is a very similar wave coming up now to the next several days. So much less but a lot more lumbus and it really begins with the very last line of the mishna in the beginning of the param again. So what was the first of that? What about as it relates to the put on if you're missing one, you don't have anything. And the Mishna gave navas, right? One was as it relates to the carbonas that went on the If you do the first one properly and the second one would be with a pickle. Keep it. It's fine because once you did the first one, you already got fact they had pickle afterwards. That's neither here nor there. What about let's say you would do the first one even though ordinarily knocks out not to make it cauter obviously now it's a double but at the very least that the bosser won't carry with it of but in this case if the was and the was still going to be pig I thought once you have another right at this point it's not going to be pickled anymore being that the first the first mat was done properly and at that point you already got the what happens afterwards is already again not that's true as it relates to what about says differently there all the if all of the number one number two and number three the third one or the fourth one I should say meaning it's going to be possible stating that there's not going to be it's going to be possible because even though the first one was done right here all four and if one of them was not right it's not going to be okay at the same time a carus why the reason it's a karis is ostensibly because there's an idea called and being that you only is by one of the so therefore it's not going to be possible stating that this next that we're going to learn and it's going to go right into tomorrow's of we're about to see we're also about to see that although the simple understanding of the Mishna the last line of the Mishna is the great that that's Actually, we learned in over there and there is in the event that a had piggle while he was being mocked to the but not while he was being or he had piggle while he was being macked but he didn't have a mash ple while he was being mocked to the so the only background that we need for this Mishna is that when a min was brought there was a done with the min right with the and there was octur that was done with the as well. It was the two together that effectuated theap. It was the two together that was the right. So just to be clear, the was a carbon and it mirrored a regular ze. Obviously were a little bit different. Right? Aita there's no by a ze has kabala. There's no blood when it comes to a ma. Right? But in as much as a min doesn't have it had kam. That's the parallel. And even though there's no cababala, there's nothing to receive. But the would take the and he would put it into a that's the equivalent of the just like there was a carbon you had to walk the db there's when it comes to the you have to walk the to the and just like there was when it came to a carbon you spritz the db there was the proverbial you take the kits and you m it on the mb. Now in the world of kachchim and this is basic but it ties itself into some very gush but it is very basic the really accomplished two things right number one it's the equivalent thereof to the of the d it's also the equivalent thereof to theim of a carbon right so really is usually think of it as it's the z is well but again what we need is just one thing and that is the hakar that was this was not just of the it was the and the was part and parcel of the so the mission over there says what would be if a had while he was being the but not while he was being it's regular pickle and if you eat this you're going to be actually the Only time is if this mission is very straightforward and being that the is of the and this was only by one of the two. So he wasn't you're not going to be the possible because once you have a bad you're done but at the same time is totally in the over here you don't have the says even though it's clear the they said it right this is very important this little that but don't infer from at that time is the certainly feels that way. What's going on in this? It's talking about it's talking about where first was the and he did it with a bad with a pickle and then he was and he did without any at all and holds that once you start doing the even if later you're not thinking anything it's but and the isle of it carries itself over to the in other words that even though it's clear that who says that says is also what do you mean he says you have to make is where whatever came first whether it was the you did what is and then the second part you did hold that. So it's for that reason if you started off in a big now that is not going to carry up. What do the holdag period they hold if first you didn't have the and even if first you did have the doesn't matter is always in all situations and that's very because the of is that he holds so he needs a little bit of and said I'll bring you from our be my mikon What did the Mishna say again was talking about and it said that all four therefore if you do the first three properly and then you would do the last one with what would be it would be there would not be of what does it sound like sounds like right is just the opposite you know what it sounds like to me if you would do the first one pickle, then it would be pickle. If the first one was done wrong and then afterwards you got it right, it sounds like it would be pickle. Meaning, as much as the Mishna is telling you the but it sounds like it's only if it's in that order. It sounds like only if first you got it right and then you got it wrong. But let's say first he got it wrong and then you got it right. It sounds like over there, right? It sounds like it would be big. Who's the you going to tell me it's in all situations right they say it's not negotiable it shouldn't matter if you had first or second or third or fourth in all situations you have to say it's it must be didn't tell you what he holds now if you can tell me then what's the difference which you had first even at first you got it right and then you got it wrong you were in the mago at the last second right you were at the end of the day and hold even and that's why if first you got it right and then you got it wrong what's it's going to be however you could be that at first you got it right first you got it wrong and then you got it Right. Right. If it was in the reverse order, then it would be a problem says I have two in the and if you hold there are mayor holds this in will not line up with any of the two and that's a problem. If however you hold then our mission is and everything is going to be good. So again, let's this one more time. The Mishna says that therefore if the first three you got right and the last one you got wrong, there's not going to be a mid that it sounds like only time it's a carus is if first you did it with a good mash, then you did it with a bad mash. But if first you do with a bad maka, then you do with a good then already the would be that it's going to be. In other words, it sounds like the t of our holds. It depends on what came first. If first you got it right, well then if you get it wrong, if at first you got it wrong and then you got it right, then it's that is the of the he doesn't hold unequivocally because then even if you got it wrong first, it would be possible by he doesn't hold unequivocally because then even if you got it right first and then you got it wrong, it would be possible by cars. He owes says who is the now we know it's not one but it's the same difference they're both matters now in that there's no sh in the world holds by now In Rome this story we could say that holds in all cases because he holds the matter or maybe only in some cases says I don't know I'm learning my I have an offen that says that there's a hold not I know there's two in the is one sheet never meaning always not there's another that's open for interpretation maybe always yeah maybe I'm not had to learn in the in Either ways, I know I'm saying a little bit of a you wouldn't have thought this. What should I do? I have this here may steer me in the eye and as a result I hold this is the he said I'm going to tell you our is going and if they hold that's the our Mishna said now what bothered why did feel that our Mishna can't be going because made a was that it sounds like from the only if it was if however you would do it first and then sounds like then you would be according to it's always going to be a problem right it's always a issue of and as a result you should never of course says really you want to know what the means when it says means that's what it means it means that you did everything meaning in way you got it right as far as establishing the piggle and then Afterwards, it was you didn't do it in the way that you're supposed to do it as it relates to a a mach. And what the Mishna then is saying is that if you did it first with a makle and then not with a mashlear. Now, if it's true where you had the makle first, it's going to be true. Well, you didn't have the pickle first. If that's the case, the whole goes by the wayside. holds you always say you don't hold you don't hold and if that's the case in all situations is going to be the Mishna is not and as a result there's no G from our as relates to what exactly the of would be but the asks on In other words, the Gmorra is saying you want to tell me the word means it's an interesting but I can live with that. But what does means that it was done with Adam with a with a that was done with Adam's piggle be referred to as says I hear it's a subtle but said I'll tell you what it means maybe it means said what it means is it means it was done with a in other words you did it with not He also does wasn't that's why you could refer to it as a means can't be but it was or it was done with a of what's the point if you do one of so that's going to stare the pickle right just like would stare the piggle but this would also stare the piggle and being that this was It was a it was a therefore all you have is the mission is going on hold in all situations. So the says I hear you even but I still have a problem because at the end of the day what does it sound like from the if means or it means what does it sound like that when the last was it's over there that it's going to be possible but let's say it would have been sounds like then there would be cars. Now what would be this is because we know a is from right we know this from previous so it's always that way so you're going to tell me that's going in all situations I why did they say it only in the case where first you got it right no they said in the case where first you got it wrong what do you mean it says you DID MEANS BUT THE problem is then you said and when you went ahead and you said it made it sound like only when the next it's a bad that's if you hold that even says good you want to know why the Mishna said very this is poetic symmetry and we're preferring the poetic symmetry over the accuracy what's the poetic symmetry because what was the was talking about the was brought And over there the mission said of course what was the punch line that if you did the first one and then you would do one afterwards with even though ordinarily that has the ability to be mighty here it won't be able to be mighty because once you got the first one right or wrong right you did a mash is big at that point it's already going to pickle. So we just in the we went with the same exact case that that's all true by the but there at first you went with and then afterwards he did it with there it's not going TO BE PICKLE NOW REALLY EVEN IF YOU at that point it's not going to be pickle and the only reason we said that the last one was done which has to mean the only thing it can mean is because we want to be symmetric And by the case where first you did and then you did. So therefore in this case we go about it in the same way. But as it relates to as it relates to the even if you were it would be the same. The truth is if you do theum right now again we're going to walk right into this in tomorrow's d so we don't have to go v. But if you do the what emerges is that even though it sounds like says hold over there. So he had a fire. Israel was from the in the beginning because the seems to hold that first you have the bad if first you had good hold you always say must be open for interpretation right is open for business there you can hear two ways so maybe it's going now did the make the most compelling case in the world no does still have 100%. So the is not telling that you're not saying all that's emerging is that a we don't have we don't have a we don't have a clar which means we still need to talk about this a little bit and really that's going to walk into tomorrow's d where the gmorra is going to begin with a me exhale and we're going to stop So,