בענין בשילה אוכלין מעשר שני וקק״ל בכל הרואה

The very very last Gemara discussed the Halacha of Kodeshim Kalim and Ma'aser Sheni in Shilo was able to be eaten Bechol Arev. The Brisker Rav in Kedushei Mordechai Halevi Halacha Torah in Parshas Re'eh quotes a Sifri. The Sifri is going on the Pasuk in Parshas Re'eh that says as follows, "Ma'aser Rishon and Terumah and Ma'aser Sheni and Bikurim and Terumah and Ma'aser Sheni and Bikurim and Terumah and Ma'aser Sheni and Bikurim." In short, the Pasuk is saying that Kodeshim Kalim and Ma'aser Sheni you're not allowed to eat Bisharecha. You can't just eat it wherever you live. Okay, so if I have Kodeshim Kalim and Ma'aser Sheni, where must I eat it? "Ki im Lifnei Hashem Elokecha Tochlenu." You have to eat it Lifnei Hashem Ba'Makom Asher Yivchar Hashem Elokecha Bo. In the place that Hakadosh Baruch Hu chose for it to be eaten. "Ata Uvincha Uvitecha Va'Avdecha Va'Amasecha Va'Levi Asher Bisharecha Visamachta Lifnei Hashem Elokecha Bechol Mishlach Yadcha." So, you can't eat Kodeshim Kalim and Ma'aser Sheni Bisharecha wherever you want. Where do you have to eat it? You have to eat it Lifnei Hashem Elokecha Ba'Makom Asher Yivchar Hashem Elokecha Bo. In other words, you have to eat it in Yerushalayim Ir Hakodesh. Now, the Torah doesn't say Yerushalayim Ir Hakodesh, but that's in line with the fact that the Torah never mentions Yerushalayim. Rather, the Torah constantly refers to a place that in the future I am going to choose. The Sifri on this Pasuk, "Ki im Lifnei Hashem Elokecha Tochlenu Ba'Makom Asher Yivchar Hashem Elokecha Bo" says as follows, "Ki im Lifnei Hashem Elokecha Tochlenu Zu Shilo." "Ba'Makom Asher Yivchar Hashem Elokecha Bo" "Zu Yerushalayim." So, although when you read the Pasuk it sounds like it's describing one Makom, "Ki im Lifnei Hashem Elokecha Tochlenu Ba'Makom Asher Yivchar Hashem Elokecha Bo," this is going to be a in the going to be a and it's there that you're supposed to eat the but it's a free that what we need to do with this is we have to do a yak. And the that's referring to Jerusalem. I don't understand. I think that if somebody wasn't familiar with the freeze, somebody didn't hear the rate by the one in Shilo and he sat down and he saw this he'd probably be very satisfied with what he saw cuz he would say I know that Shilo even though the Mishkan stood there for 369 years but it wasn't the and because it wasn't the so it's for that reason if the Torah would say we would say it doesn't mean Shilo it for sure means only Jerusalem. Therefore, the Torah has to say that it's not only in the gay at this when you're going to have the base on by by but it was 369 years of Shilo hence the would be which is not the additionally but here too do you going TO HAVE THAT BUT THE PROBLEM is we know that there are countless not countless but like four there's many with the says that whenever the Torah talks about the didn't only mean the base on but the was referring to it was referring to Shilo as well right just the this cuz I'm going to but right I'm going to choose a place but and there's no that says because that from amongst all your is it or is it so so the the The one that says from one of the that if you is referring to Shilo. The that's going to be from all the that's referring to Jerusalem. Another free. The free says It says twice the idea of verbatim. It says it two times. And all the were struggling. Why does it say it twice? Said the first is Shilo. The second that's already referring to Jerusalem. Let's mention another one. It says It says it's in the of the carbon acid. What does it mean by Shilo? I might as well mention the fourth one. In the of the room the Shilo So the is always Shilo. SO IF THAT'S the case, why does the have to single out Shilo? The boy is referring to Jerusalem. So the said an absolute classic. He said in Jerusalem we know column and my sister Shani was eaten in guns Jerusalem. When the was in Shilo, the was it was able to be eaten the whole day right. He said what's the get there of being able to eat the column and my sister Shani the whole day right. I really I think in order to understand the we have to take one step back. It's like a baby step back. And just like state the obvious. What's the get that of Warren? That cotton column and my secession was allowed to be eaten only in Jerusalem. I think partially you learn it's Kadisha Jerusalem. That's always the way you you think of it. But the truth is we're learning the Sugas now. It's a little bit deeper than that. Together is Jerusalem was Machne Yisrael. That's together, right? The whole Jerusalem Machne Mikdash is divided into Machnes. Just like two Machnes in the Midbar, there's Machnes Jerusalem as well, right? The Azara is more Kodesh. It's also the Machne of the Shechina, which is the Gizunta way of expressing why it has Otzei Saf Kodesh. The rest of Har Habayis, yeah, it has more Kedusha than the rest of the world. Less Kedusha than the Azara, but it's also Machne Revi'i. Jerusalem is is Machne Yisrael. It's Poshet that the get there of why Kodshim Kalim Ma'aser Sheni went Nechlav Kol Ha'ir, they were able to eat in Ganz Jerusalem is because it's Machne Yisrael and it's part and parcel of this Inyan that it's able to be Nechlav Machne Yisrael. So with that better Nusach, K'lav Mar Nagris, what's the get there that in Shilo you were able to eat Kodshim Kalim Ma'aser Sheni B'chol Ha'raya? Is the get there that B'chol Ha'raya, wherever you are, it was Machne Yisrael. That is the Taitch in Machne Yisrael in Shilo. As it relates to the Achilas Kodshim Kalim Ma'aser Sheni was Nikva not based on a Chiyuv like it was in Jerusalem. It's not based on boundaries. It's not a block and lot number, BUT IT WAS BASED ON B'CHOL HA'RAYA. AND AS LONG as I could see it with a couple of tables from Rebbe Akiva Eiger, what the definition of B'chol Ha'raya even is. But the bottom line is it's B'chol Ha'raya because the Taitch of Machne Yisrael in Shilo was B'chol Ha'raya. As I heard from my say the Brisker Rav, B'chol Ha'raya was not Koveya Machne Yisrael. Not the Chiddush from the idea that you find that you were able to eat that you were able to eat Kodshim Kalim Ma'aser Sheni B'chol Ha'raya in Shilo is that whereas ordinarily a is OVER HERE WAS NOT OVER HERE WAS NOT OVER HERE WAS OVER HERE was over here was over here was over here was over here was OVER HERE WAS OVER HERE WAS OVER HERE WAS over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was OVER HERE WAS OVER HERE WAS over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was over here was They didn't have three magnets. They really had four. The really considered on a level of and then he said when they only had two magnets and the way that the whole cycle of the tire which one of the magnets did they not have what maybe they didn't have it's an issue in the of what to say anyway had it said maybe they didn't have magnets that was also a little problematic in the of what came out of they really had all three magnets in what is What does it mean that they were only two magnets it means something very nuanced it means that this Indian that the were didn't have the ability to be late when they were in but said the how could it be the had it said that there was no that there was no that there was no when they were in how could there have even been such a and then he said no they didn't have it said that there was no that there was no that there was no when they were in how could there have even been such a and then he said no they didn't have it said that there was no that there was no that there was no when they were in how could there have even been The gather of the is if there WAS NO THEN HOW COULD THEY HAVE EATEN WHAT TO SAY ANYWAY HAD IT SAID THAT THERE WAS NO THAT THERE WAS NO THAT THERE WAS NO WHEN THEY WERE IN HOW COULD THERE HAVE EVEN BEEN SUCH A AND THEN HE SAID NO THEY DIDN'T HAVE IT SAID THAT THERE WAS NO THAT THERE WAS no that there was no when they WERE IN HOW COULD THERE HAVE EVEN BEEN SUCH A AND THEN HE SAID NO THEY DIDN'T HAVE IT SAID THAT THERE WAS NO THAT THERE WAS NO THAT THERE WAS NO WHEN THEY WERE IN HOW COULD THERE HAVE EVEN BEEN SUCH A AND THEN HE SAID NO THEY DIDN'T HAVE IT SAID THAT THERE WAS NO THAT THERE WAS NO THAT THERE was no when THEY WERE IN HOW COULD THERE HAVE EVEN BEEN SUCH A AND THEN he said no they didn't have it said that there was no that there was no THAT THERE WAS NO WHEN THEY WERE IN HOW COULD THERE HAVE EVEN BEEN SUCH A AND THEN HE SAID NO THEY DIDN'T HAVE IT SAID THAT THERE WAS NO THAT THERE WAS NO THAT THERE WAS no when they were in how could there HAVE EVEN BEEN SUCH A AND THEN HE SAID NO THEY DIDN'T have it said that there was no that there was no that there was no when they were in how could there have even been such a and then he said no they didn't have it said that there was no that there was no that there was no when they were in how could there have even been such a and then he said no they didn't have it said that there was no that there was no that there was no when they were in how could there have even been such a and then he said no they didn't HAVE IT IT BECAUSE IT'S MUGBAL TO MACHNE YISRAEL. Over here it's not mugbal to Machne Yisrael, but rather over here it's going to be B'skrov has other faster eyes this level as well. Just mention one other beautiful K'nach and that is the Mishna says everyone knows this Mishna. In the In Bain Shilo and Yerushalayim Elisha and Kodesh Kodashim and Shilo. Yerushalayim and the B'skrov said this Mishna this such simple Mishna bothers me. You know why? Because is there really enough K'mina between Shilo and Yerushalayim? There's no K'mina. They both have a din that you're supposed to eat Kodesh Kodashim in Machne Yisrael. You want to know THE MACHNE YISRAEL? OBVIOUSLY IT'S DIFFERENT. ONE IS SHILO and one is Shilo. What do you want it to be the same? Obviously it's going to BE DIFFERENT. HERE MACHNE Yisrael is Kodesh Yerushalayim. Here Machne Yisrael is B'skrov. Said Maran it's in the Mishna. Ain Bain THAT IS A DEAL BETWEEN THE OF HOW KODESH KODASHIM WAS EATEN WHEN THEY ATE them in Yerushalayim versus when they were in Shilo. In Yerushalayim it was to a Machne. It was MACHNE YISRAEL. BUT WHEN THEY ATE THEM IN SHILO THEY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH A MACHNE. OVER THERE IT WAS B'SKROV. And the B'skrov the thesis half love of fellow the of what's going on in this and the sheet of free is in four places that the Machne that that Machne that place is true not only as it relates to Yerushalayim it's true for Shilo. But he said the fact that Kodesh Kodashim and Shilo would be mugbal to the Machne that was true only for Yerushalayim. That wasn't true for Shilo. What does it mean K'mina and Machne Yerushalayim I'm going to choose a place and that place will BE THE MOCKING WHERE YOU'LL BE ALLOWED TO EAT. IF YOU'RE STANDING ONE FOOT OUTSIDE THAT MOCKING, YOU WON'T be able to. If you're in THAT MOCKING, YEAH. THERE'S GOING TO BE A MAGNET called magnet Israel. But mocking my children, I'm not telling you which city yet. You're going to have to wait for a Rav Nachman Yevusi and Shmuel base perakim dalet to figure that out. But the bottom line is there will be a mocking in some place in the future and in that mocking and only in that mocking are you going to be allowed to eat kodeshim kalim and and ma'aser sheni. But that's only true as it relates to your shulchan aruch. As it relates to shilo, said Maran agrees it's mevu'ar that dear kodeshim kalim and ma'aser sheni was ne'echal bechol ha'aretz. And being that over there it was ne'echal bechol ha'aretz, so over there it has nothing to do. Over there it has nothing to do with makom. If it has nothing to do with makom, it can't be nichlal in the makom asher yivchar. So what is it tolin? What is it tolin? Ki im lifnei Hashem Elokecha tichlenu. If you're lifnei Hashem, IF YOU COULD SEE THE MAKOM AND MISHKAN, if you could see the SHCHINAH BECHOL MAKOM ASHER TATZRIACH, THERE YOU'RE GOING to have it then. And those are the sifrei KI IM LIFNEI HASHEM Elokecha tichlenu, ZU SHILO. CUZ THAT'S TOLIN LIFNEI HASHEM. THAT'S TOLIN bechol ha'aretz. Ba'makom asher yivchar Hashem Elokecha, zu yerushalayim. Cuz that's not tolin bechol ha'aretz. That's tolin THE MAKOM. THAT'S TOLIN THE fact that a magnet Israel just to say a drop out all the other places that the sefer says mefu'arash that the makom asher yivchar is shilo and the Beit Hamikdash, it's talking about bringing the bikurim. It's talking about bringing the korban pesach. It's talking about the issur chotz. Those things are not tolin the makom asher yivchar. MITZAD THE CHEFTZ OF MISHKAN, V'CHAS V'SHALOM DEMACHNESH SHCHINAH SHEBO, v'chas v'shalom demachnesh THE LIFNIM V'ACHORIM. THAT shilo was no different than the mikdash. Echad v'echad gemina in magnet Israel specifically with regards to one halacha, WITH REGARDS TO EATING KODESHIM kalim and eating ma'aser sheni. THAT'S THE ONE PLACE SAID THE BRISKER RAV THAT THE SEFER TA'AM BA'MAKOM ASHER YIVCHAR WHAT IS SHE LIKE THAT'S THAT'S THE COLOR as opposed to the boy. As opposed to the that's already the mixture.