Chulin 117

Today's is and we will begin from the Mishna on the last line of Zion. So we know that not all parts of a kosher animal is kosher. There's the certain fats of the animal that are not kosher. The dam of a kosher animal is not kosher. The ganosho is not kosher. the and the dam are unique that in addition to to them being they carry the of so if somebody eats of a kosher animal or if somebody eats dam of a kosher animal if he does a if he does a like he would have to bring aas so and dam of a kosher animal are similar in that they both areus and they both are stating that says the that although are very similar, they're not the same. has a that doesn't have and has a doesn't have if somebody would have the the of the of a that's he would violate the which means if he did a bash he would have to bring the special with the et of a that's subject to the laws of pigle to the laws of noiser and to the laws of which means that if you have a carbon that's pigle where is if somebody eats it even if someone would eat the you would beg if you have a carbon that's if somebody eats the he'd be over and if somebody's and he eats the of a carbon he would be for that as well as opposed to by there's And is not subject to the laws of it's whether they're kosher animals or non-cos animals opposed to which is only so again even though very similar but they each have their own over the other has that subject to the laws these are real fa They all relate to the of a carbon as opposed to dam has a dam is by doesn't matter if it's a kosher doesn't matter if it's a non-coosher as opposed to which is only and even that only by a kosher says the first that was mentioned in this was a over and that is that this by and the question is that it's mash that the of all are subject to the laws of not only and the truth is that the when it talks about the refers to the asmal understood to mean stating that from the it sounds like the laws of relate to all even the of now is not a why not zashi says because kachum is which sounds a little bit like throughout who holds that is but regardless the question is how do you know that even which is note has the of the says the context is the power that's the special that the had to bring if he did an And the Torah says that he has to bring a power. And then the Torah says that when he brings this power, you take the and there's a bunch of that have to be burnt on the right. Some of it is eaten by the and some of it had to be burnt on the and then the says that you should be just like of so you should be and asks what are we learning from the what does the mean when it says that beim of the just like you're being of if it's coming to tell me which amim is supposed to be macked the already said that if you go through the pik the pik says exactly ly what you're supposed to be and then the says just like you of the so you should be the of the what is that coming to be to tell me which the already specified which says the even though the simple reading the seems to be saying that is teaching something to really it's [clears throat] in the reverse the reason the mentioned is to teach me regarding that there's something in that you would have thought does not relate to does relate to what is that just because it's for sure subject to so even though it's still it's going to be subject to so the question was immediately how do you know that which is subject of to the terra that talks about the relates of the imm which really teaches me nothing must be instead of learning something about the mashiach from the we learned something about the from the mashiach specifically the mashia is subject to the laws of the is going to establish very nice but is there something wrong with the that said it says in the and we learn from is extra and it's coming to teach me even of what do you need this to tell me that such as subject to the laws of it's a re in the par of that says that even we only had that second I would have thought I would have thought of go on despite the subject despite the fact that it's but what about the that are not meaning there were that were included in the im that went but in addition to the there were other parts of the animal that also went on the misb for example theas theeras which is the diaphragm the two kidneys which also went on you can't be that is being of the included in the but what about the are that's why to tell me that all the of the apply to the as well not only the I mean I would have thought alo the less of the the of the of the tail which is not existent by the I would have thought that being that it does not go on the so it shouldn't go on either to tell me that even these two to teach me that of the of the why do I need both the why I need both. If I only had one, I wouldn't know the if I only had the other one, I would not know the between the two, I know that all the whether it's the whether it's the of the whether it's the any part of the of the are subject to the laws of says the if you're telling me that is coming to the of the that's what the came out in the so if that's the case then the of the of the should be included in the as well which says that if somebody eats certain and we know that you're allowed to eat the so the answer is it says the only type of that is that the and the all have of is only by the you don't have it by the that's why even though we're being to the but at the same time as relates to the included is at a different is called but it's called it has the surname it's not called when the talks about the [clears throat] talks about is not called That doesn't make sense because if you're telling me that can't be included in the because it's called and it's not called then how are you being from the that says is also so if you can't be to the then how could it be to the says to tell me that there's going to be an evil by must be you have to say the ter is like either way that concludes the first part of the ds again the mishna was discussing the [snorts] differences between and are very similar they're both parts of a kosher animal that you're not allowed to eat you have to do nikor to remove the you have to do malik to remove the d they both carry a harsh punishment of if you would eat either one of them you'd have to bring a that's why throughout you find etc stating that the first is it sounded like that all every whether it's or whether it's whether it's which is or whether it's according to is if somebody would have he would be subject to the laws of how do you know that the at the end of the day it boils down to two. One is a compassion where the talks about the says take all day. And then it says which is teaching me nothing must be that just like the of the subject to the so the of the subject as well. Additionally, we have a rabbi is not only but even to be what do you need two forms gave that either way. So the said that has that we just discussed and the subject to the laws of how do you know that is not subject to the laws of how do you know that is not subject to first my brother says says it says that's a real learn from this that come out of this. But for now what we need is the refers to the carbon and says what does mean it's yours? It's yours. meaning there's no way that if you would have from the you wouldn't be over to the typical which you would have if you would be from it says that this is something that isap and it's only with regards to that it has the beer and the Joshua but as it relates to doesn't have kadusha the whole kadusha is manifest as it relates to being but as it relates to anything else even who who It says who means it's always the same he was a Russian says right so who just like after you do this reco if somebody would have enough from the dam he wouldn't be so too if somebody would have no from the dam before he did this there wouldn't be either says why don't you say that d is no different than any other part of the carbon Therefore, it's subject to the laws of it says who maybe who in the reverse meaning you're assuming for sure there's no thus if you have who if there's no there can't be either because who means it's consistent how do you know how do you know for sure that there's no maybe there is if that's the case maybe D hasap and it's consistently that way because Even this says that can't be because there's a principle in that says that any of anything that's hectish that is hectish for a purpose and you fulfill the purpose with it, it loses it at that point or at the very least it loses its kadoo as relates to. So is to be brought once it's loses its from the perspective. You can't be in after it was already there's no who tells me that has to be consistent whatever is to be for sure there's no there's not going to be a but is that true is what true that is going to digress for a little Sorry. You find that even after you do the mitzvah of still on the dash itself. So what was that? That was the first that was done every single day in the B would go up the ramp. They make a who should do the sadash. He would go up he would take a like a scoop full of dash and put it next to the he would remove all the dash. That would be a big job. But he take a little bit of dash and he put it next to the and say that thera says that was yesterday's and we learn from there and and we learn from there but that has to remain there remain there meaning you can't benefit from it personally. So you see that even though you did still it could be a problem. We're assuming this. What about it's true in it's true that is an example of where you find but the problem is that there's another place in the you also find and counterintuitively if the tells you something twice it means you can't learn anything from it. Usually if the terrorist says something you learn from it. It's one of it's called but if the terrorist says something two times then you have of what's the second time? The second time is regarding the big day love and that the used to wear in your couldn't enter the with the big days of remind of the so therefore before he entered the he removed the big days of and he entered with the big day. What happened to the big day after yum? So the says and is in whether means it had to be left there forever. Nobody was ever allowed to benefit from it or just means that the himself couldn't use it for the next couldn't wear the same k the same big day loving that he wore the previous year but if a wanted to use it he could use it. So it says the according to the that holds that no one was ever allowed to use the big day once the gold means it's going to be there forever. No one can ever use it. [snorts] So if that's the case, you see that you have and if that's the case, you have because you have and now you have the big the big that's only then no one's ever allowed to wear it again. It's only the God himself that's not allowed to wear it again. bit of a kind [laughter] wants to wear it, he can then vice vers that he can't wear it a second time meaning it's only one that is if that's the case why don't we learn from there that says This is another and that is elahufa was also meaning the eagle itself after the process of beheading the eagle was done the says he can't have from the eagle or from the everything is off limits it doesn't make sense if there's a principle of so why is there an with the after the of the eagle already took place now is there It really depends whether it's or it's not we spoke about this but the point is for now is so you see a concept of and quote unquote so it's you can't learn from there now the ask the always asks when it mentions that says Again, what's the cash? Why is it so that I have two in the where you find after the did the mitzvah with the says is you can't touch it. You can't have enough from it. And then you see it again by the or maybe you see it by the but the point is is that if you hold to learn from these two parades. The reason is is because you can't learn from any one of these parses. as it relates to its only here you have this ordinarily which you only have here that even though it's not going to be but as relates to anywhere else in the rulers and I mean that it says over there it's for that reason that over there you're going to have that same as well either way says the gimar We have three to teach me the that there's no the question was why is there no you can't be in hectish there's nothing more hectish than d in a way is the dam is the right when you remember it's all about the everything else is the is the is the right everything is a to the is the that's that's the so if that's the case How's it possible that there's no when it comes to that? And the said three said that the Torah says you see the I could I to benefit from it. They said it says that it's true that has but only forap not for and finally said it says whoap it's there's no because then it's going to be ais and any what do you mean but the bottom line is those are exceptions to the rule as it relates to the rule. The rule is and who means it has to be consistent means also it's going to be in a way where there's no but now is meaning all three seem to be very solid you have you have and you have so three different sources and the to tell me how I know that there's no but the garra is bothered by that the thinks that and all acknowledge the other and if that's the case why do we need three and with that the is going to conclude it discussions you're right don't need three so what I do with the other two I learned the other of the said that there's four critical sug and that don't relate to the d you don't have m you don't have pigle you don't have noer and you don't have to now that I have three we thought all three were coming to explain one no we can reconcile it and we can say that the three relate to the three of the Mishna one is coming to tell me that there's no one's coming to tell me there's no nicer and the other one's coming tell me there's no what's the problem said four the said mah pickle nicer and all you have is three dashes so how do you know that there's no piggle when it comes to this is 101. We know that pigle is all about matter and n the in that idea that we need for this line in g is that the only part of a carbon that's subject to the is a pigle meaning if someone would eat from a car that part of a carbon pickle would be is only a part of a carbon that's it needed something to be mate so for example the buser of a carbon needs something to be mate what's m The is the thus the is so to speak it's something that is has something being mate and as a result it's subject to the laws of pigle theim have something that's mim until you do this so there too it's thatim on the so any of that needs something to be mate the is m so anything that has something being m it that has a has something being mad etc etc the point is is that nothing's the dam doesn't need an to be mo to eat you don't need it to go into doesn't need anything to be mo to go into as a result it's and is not subject to the I'll need a for that that's 101 so I have a for the fact that there's no fact that there's no there's no as it relates to piggle. I don't need a Joshua. And on that note, so the now is going to make one of the great digressions of all time. And we're going to turn our attention from the of [laughter] the I mean if you want to look at the the broader context of school we're learning about and what are we going to learn about now the next 12 or so do are going to be hardcore sis with regards to tumra But either way, [laughter] actually a little bit of an introduction that is so we're familiar with the basic concept of and to the extent we're not we'll become a lot more familiar with it over the next uh two or so weeks but just as a to this Mishna we know that food can become to food can also transmit to it's what's known as in order for food to become to or to transmit to it has to A proper the as it relates to is a even though usually but as it relates to this is the also has to aur in a sense in that it's a source of toma right there are different sources of toma a mace is a source of toma a sheret is a a source of toma a zava zava a need These are all they're sources of also. It's one of the big differences between a and a tra and a trava both they're both the significant difference being a and is that in addition to aa being it's also so we you learn about when you learn and you also learn a lot about when you go through sugis of because na is something that really straddles two worlds it straddles the worlds of of sassur and of as opposed to a tra had a kish in the sense that it was the but as relates to there's no but the point is that what's the as relates to so the that the first sug is going to discuss is what if you have food that has something attached to it something naturally attached attached to it. So for example, the pit of a fruit. So the pit is it part of the fruit or is it not part of the fruit as it relates to and really you have to look at it from three perspectives. Is a part of the fruit says number two what happens if the pit touches do the fruit now become if it's part of the fruit the fruit touch the dot. If it's not part of the fruit then the fruit did not touch a dom. What if the fruit was tame and the pit of the tummy fruit touch something that was tar? Does that do to now become to did it come in contact with the data to depends if the pit is part of the fruit that it came in contact with the data to if it's not part it didn't become part of the that's one thing that's going to be discussed another be discussed is what about the peel but the peel of a fruit or let's say the skin of baser the skin of an aa for that matter the so how do you look at the do you look at the as being part of the baser or do you not look at it part of again three as it relates to the shir as it relates to if the buser was to and now the came in contact with Tom does it now become to or in reverse if the buser was to and came in contact with the would it be to or not what about the here let's say there's a little fuzz on the on the fruit but let's say well let's say the hear of the of of an how does that relate as it relates to as we'll see there are three categories when you talk about things that are attached The first such as a pit is what's referred to as a yad. The yad is something that's used just to be able to handle to handle the fruit. So a pit is part of the fruit in the sense that you can carry the fruit by holding not the pit the right by by the stem. I keep saying the pit it's the stem. You can car you can carry the fruit by carrying it by holding on to the stem. It's considered a y the of buser for example is considered part of it because it's a meaning it's a y you can carry obviously the bus by holding the but it's also a in the sense that it protects it and then something like here it's not really a yad it doesn't really protect it so it's really going to be three categories when you talk about things that are with regards to the threeas that we just mentioned so you have you have to look at what that thing is does it fall into the category of yad it's merely something that's there for convenience purposes to help you handle it. Is it a a sh it's it's protecting it like the peel, like the skin, or is it none of the above? Regardless, on that note, the of the we know what that is. That's the little bit of buster that falls to the bottom of the pot. Thear is going to discuss what is and the bones and the horns. So if you have an and you want to know whether this has you want to know if it has a sheer so the and the but if you want to know if you have the another difference between somebody and he does and it's still alive it's going to is going to discuss this. There's no veils until it actually dies. If it's says there'll be and what you see from these two cases mentioned in the is that it's easier for something to become than it is. The first is you see all the things mentioned the etc are to and then the second which we don't know what that means now you see also it relates to the point is that's what we need to know is another says as it relates to the says if it's gathered together then it's possible that you will be Everything will be discussed in the Gmorra. But the first which is going to be the topic of the beginning of the par and that is that for the so if you have and this or attached to it or this keepa that was cooked with it and now it's on it or the horns the hooves of the so you want to know if you have the bay for but if you want to know if you have the is not This Mishna supports something that's what does it say in a something that's a is for the of is considered but it's not for it's not to the of which is considered to incidentally why is considered a and why is Na considered to so this easy answer is is because Na is a source source of toma. It's a tom is like anita. It's a source of toma. It's like a it's like a mace. That's what it is. It's dead that animal. It's like a mace. The point is is that it's a source of toma is never a source of how does food become. How has an apple become to? It would come in contact with so it would have to be wet first and then afterwards it would become but either way. So in general is you see from our that the iso it's not for now which parts of the Mishna is are considered. So the say the two things in the Mishna the is the skin protects the food and are considered as well. So the fact that you see how do you know that's a ton of so sounds a little wordy. It is and were bothered by it right means something that grows. What is coming to teach me? Now this says to how's the possible the context of the are when they're dead. So the of one of the fell on I mean how's it possible that it's going to be? What's the answer? Or wet. In order for food to become, it has to first be wet. The bum has to be okay with it. See, it has to be okay with it. But the point is is that if it wasn't wet then is but either way bothered with the wordiness of this you know it's coming to tell me it's coming to tell me that when you look at the food from a perspective as this is discussing you look at the food in the way that it's sewed in the way that it's planted in the way that it's put in the ground and if you're planting you'll do it together with its husk meaning when you eat you remove its husk then you're going to eat it you're not going to eat it together with the kipa you're not going to eat the dashim together with it but when you're you will be you don't care you'll together with it what the is saying is that when you look at the from a perspective you look at it what's what would you consider the if you were being not if you were eating it even though we're discussing But it doesn't matter. How would I look at this? What would be the what would be part of the if I was if I was being the would be part of the I'm not going to remove the before I plant this. It's part of it. If it's part of it with regard that's the the WHAT DEFINES THE AS it relates to the and therefore we say that these three these the clipus which are the and the anyway. So [laughter] is is that for this year now we're discussing that's what the is talking about where one of the fell on it that's good oldfashioned. So you see the clear how do you know that it says regarding the so that's the disc discusses not the but rather [snorts] the of and the says of as opposed to if somebody would touch the that doesn't have a baser and it sounds like even if the is But if you don't have a buser and you come in contact with the no you have to touch the actual not touching the I would think if somebody touches [snorts] the animal sounds like you're not touching the buser I would think you're not so at the same time you have a boy that says So is the say how do you just how do you read this price you read the price [snorts] of the first B is coming to say that if somebody would touch an he would touch a but it's only with meaning there's no together with you have a [snorts] no that is coming to What about if you had a and you now touched the I would think that being that you touched the you didn't touch the buser itself you shouldn't be mean you shouldn't even look at the as a handle of this say that through touching the earth it's as if I touched the as it relates to that it is going to be considered as if you touched the bosser in other words what the B is saying is two very important which which is going to segue very much into tomorrow's duff and that is is that the of an aa on the one hand is not considered part of the noa with regards to tum on the other hand it is considered part of the as it regard as it relates to in the sense that it's not to the kazay it's not considered part of the bos has a has a shir so the shar of na is a kaz what if I have less than a kaza but is that is you're not going to have too much. So the is not considered part of the NA as it relates to being mitarif to the kaz but at the same time it is considered part of the na in the sense that if I have a kazer anyways and I don't need the to be mitarif because it can't be mistarif but the question is did I touch the bus or not touch the bus or if I touch it via the it's as if I touch the bus so the first first part of the race is coming to tell me that the is not mitarif the second part of the is coming to tell me that even though it's not mitarif it's considered part of the in terms that if I touch the without making direct contact to the buser is as if I touch the bus. Bottom line is is we had a we have two bry. One bri is a that formal is that the isar and I have another that tells me that as it relates to the ve the is not the says I'll call I'll call that teaches me that when you're looking at what's the is what would be considered if you were coming to plant it being that you plant it together with it together with it the kipa is the at the same time as it relates It says that it can't bear. Either way, this is very much a segue into tomorrow's stuff. So, as it relates to raid, yesterday in a raid bite that we refer to as Coca-Cola part two, we discussed the history of the kashras of gelatin and to a much lesser degree glycerin. At first glance, gelatin and glycerin, which are in that they're both animal non-coosher animal byproducts, you would think would be problematic because there's a general principle to anything that comes from a non-coosher animal is non-coosher. And based on that very very broad 20,000 ft view this whole discussion should really be dead on arrival. stating that we mention that there are two very strong to potentially be make number one inb in sim discusses a case where somebody took the ka the abism of an animal that was salted to the point that it got completely dried out at this point it's it's something that a person would not eat says that It's to go and be together with and you're not going to be over the is but this is something that's brought down in the by the Rama. It would seem then that there's an idea that if you have that come to the point where right now they're in that in it of itself would be a to say that maybe it would be mutter. Now we mentioned that the ina said a very important caveat the not such fine print in terms of understanding this Ram theuda said that the raka with regards to and the reason is because that ka that's being now with the that's creating the woke up in the morning it was really regular kosher food which means then that at the time that it's becoming it's already in a state where it's could be it's then and only then that is it's not going to be a problem. If however you would have something that came literally from something that's also which woke up in the morning it was already a problem. Now it became could be the fact that it later became any is not enough to be from its soil is a says that it could prevent it from becoming but it's not as to say that if it's already it's not going to be the is also in the world of inact And went to prove that we paskin like that rakin like that. And it's for that reason said that this ram is a very important ra but you have to use it responsibly. You can only invoke this to the extent that the that is maybe becoming is in a state of but if you have something that was for sure and now it became at that point at that point you wouldn't say that now it's going to be but we mentioned that despite the fact that and issued the that he issued But it goes down amongst the as a and is definitely number one because the Mishna believe that the is not like that based his whole on in but rather like the ra which is the raj and the both pasant like and you find already that predates such as the who was a contemporary of the and later the held that as much as the said what he said but as it relates it's not something that we necessarily have to take on but here's the point the point is there is an idea based on be with a whole that says that it could be once becomes at that point this is not something that's going to be an issue anymore well if that's the case as it relates to gelatin And as it relates to glycerin, these are foods that were for sure once part of a non-coosher animal, but in the process of becoming gelatin and glycerin, in the process of becoming commercially viable, they [snorts] certainly go through a phase where they're and based on the there would be a That's the first to say that even though you would think what do you mean it's made of pig skins why are we even having this conversation the terret is because is to potentially say that it's going to be m the second [snorts] is the rush and paricates quotes who said uh with regards to something that was commercially very much used back in the day and that is there was a certain product called musk. Some people ate it, some people used it as an odor, a fragrance, a cologne, but musk was something that was very popular and it came from a non-coosher animal, the musk deer, but it came from a a non-coosher animal. And there was a big tuml whether or not you're allowed to eat, you're allowed to even smell this musk or maybe not. And Rabina issued a very important sack. He said that it's okay. And the reason is because from the time that the musk becomes commercially viable, it goes through a complete alteration to the point that it doesn't anymore resemble what it was when it was inside the gof of the non- kosher animal and said there's a concept of where we have a right to say that if something came from a raser but it was altered to the point that it no longer resembles it somehow. Now it's it uproots itself from its and we're no longer going to look at it as that and it's for that reason this mosque is something that's going to be we mentioned shock value we mentioned that if you take a look at the para of the where one of the sim of the shamishka was the murderer it was also one of the 11 that was inside the karus and brings that his what was the of it was musk. And then he brings from Davidzra that said what? They put musk on them as the if a person in his basement would go and try to replicate the so how in the world could you tell me that included in that was this musk that comes from a a non-coosher animal a proverbial gelatin it's not even something you can fathom how could it be and Ramb gives a little bit of an but we mentioned that really this of his mafarian included in that is the raaman himself quotes it's Raom and one of the people that had a major issue with this was derive on that he's based on the he doesn't but he essentially says there's a and even though it's true it originated from but right now it's already kosher and if that's the case there's no reason there's no reason for this to be a problem the point is as it relates to gelatin and again glycerin there's no question they go through such rigorous chemical and acidic treatment that it would be extremely highly reasonable and rational to assume that the ofen as it relates to musk would apply to this as well. So it's true it comes from a but at the end of the day right now it's kados and if right now it's kadosh is based on that you would think that would be a very to be so we have two that we talked about yesterday that would lend itself to have maybe a conversation of a that at least allows us to sit at the table and have an intellectually honest debate whether or not maybe there's mohamm to today that [snorts] what we thought is dead on arrival, gelatin and glycerin tra on arrival maybe really is is not as posh as we thought number one because even if you look at it as and even if you look at it as a but at the end of the day it's and if it's well that in of itself would be a reason for it to be additionally it could be that we don't even see it as because being that is. So we look at it as a new entity the fact that it originated from and even though but once it's at that point we're going to view it already different that was really yesterday's share a tiny recap to segue [snorts] into today's another big that the pim talk about if you go through the Indian specifically of gelatin is that a lot of gelatin was made from the bones of animals. And there's a big shaw in the pkin whether or not that of a non-coosher animal or not meaning are you also not eat how do we view the that we know but the question is as it relates to the or are the truth is that if you take a look in the and this is in this in these are literally the sugis that we were learning in the last couple of weeks. So this is says if you have a that has meat on it and there's also bones there that fell into a hat there says the When you put them on the balance sheet, you put them on the side. It goes without saying as relates to the the [clears throat] marrow that's inside that already of that. So is the what about the But the says that as it relates to that of not only don't they count as in the world of but to the contrary we put them on the other side they actually count as says there are those that are there people that are not to be together with the stating because really the is what the And [snorts] that is that of are really at first glance it would seem to be an that are not even there's no is in the world to go ahead and to eat of an stating that it's really really not so and the reason is because the in I'm sorry the inasur's perical says says that he goes through the different parts of an animal that are in the event that this animal is and he says as follows right so if somebody eats not let or you eat from a non-cultur animal says follow is in all those situations even though what you did is you're not going to get malus because they're not royal. So says to Raam, I have a list of body parts of non-coosher animals. Being a veil trait which is a kosher animal bot or be it a legitimate bonafide non-coser animal pun intended bonafide as it relates to a non-coser animal where all these things are not included in the iser as it relates to malus but at the same time they're going to be again what's the list the all these things says the EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT going to get malus it's the raom says It's awesome for a person to go ahead and really ask at first glance it seems to be a stereo which usually follows the of the where the says that when it comes to the are on the side and they're actually for all the inside to go ahead and be which would imply that of are mut if they count as that means they're 100% mut says that when it comes to but at the same time it's going to be which by the way could mean but for sure means how could the on the one hand who goes say that that is yet at the same time yet at the same time there's a that says that if somebody would go ahead and eat At that point it would be us. So if you go through the there are two to answer this kasha there's more than two but there's two one mahalik that the said is that not all were created equally. There [snorts] are that are mut 100% to eat even if it comes from a non-coosher animal or from an af. And then there are where at the same time it's going to be what's the difference of the or if they completely dry they have nothing in them. They're just a dry bone. And it's those that was referring to when the says that but it's he's talking about that are soft that are on some level a little bit edible and because they're somewhat edible. So it's for that reason those are going to be also and that's what Ra was referring to. It's not a steer. The other primary mahalik in the to answer this is that from the fact that says that the even of the insert count on the side that's a that when the [snorts] said it did not include the so what then does the rama mean the raam held the rael that the reasons are considered mut is because nobody eats and because nobody eats them it doesn't have a kashiv of so therefore if you drop it in a kad I don't see it as I just see it as something that has the ability to absorb is so therefore I count it on the side however if a person takes an he bites into it I enjoy the bone right if you're that kind of guy oh so if you enjoy the bone by you going ahead and biting into it you're gave it of right that's the buzz word so to the extent that you go ahead and you're recognizing this as something that it's really not that's something something that in very often you have the power you have the ability to do and it's for that reason in that case if you go ahead and eat it it's going to be so in the case where it just fell into there was never an if there was never an so then and therefore it counts on the side of the ledger if however you took a bite into it that's what the Ram's talking about so now you were just oh to the extent that you went ahead and you so in that situation it's going to be different in that situation it's it's going to be awesome in these two stardom would be gelatin. So gelatin as we said very often was made from our meaning forget about everything else. FORGET FORGET LET'S GO BACK TO ITS ORIGIN. LET'S GO BACK TO ITS ORIGIN. the underlying these are they user or these it's really in this [snorts] if you hold that the reason that says that is because the and the were not talking about the same. So when the Ram says he meant and when the passing he was talking about well if that's the case gelatin was made from and by the way even though the gelatin was made from could be originated as rais but once it becomes at that point it's for sure and for sure it would be included in the test but the bottom line is so it's evasious is going to be if however the between the is not versus but the is was it an or was it not an so then there's a mock to say that if I'm taking these and I'm manufacturing them I'm pulling out the collagen I'm literally processing them in a way because I want to use them so could be or at the very least that's an and to the extent that that would could send it and so then that summap would be but the bottom line is that this was another huge talking point in the sugo specifically of gelatin which very often was made from the and there there's an an additional a third reason in terms of the way we're keeping score for why maybe the gelatin would be motor and that is forget the fact forget of it could be there's a a new time a new reason why and that is because if it's made from assuming these have no buser on them no skin on them and they're they're 100% dry when it comes to is a special and being that there's a special when it comes to again totally in a little bit of raid but at the very least you can always turn to the sim that says If I'm going to be okay. So again, what seemed like a conversation that should be done then on arrival and I'm pretty confident that if you ask the man on the street is gelatin kosher or not kosher he's going to say right he's going to he's not even going to want to have a conversation with you but really really there's three that you can go to to at the very least have an open honest intellectual conversation. Number one in number two as quoted by the inad and number three the also to an extent ina and that is that are going to be m okay so what's what's the bottom line I think we did a lot of leg work did a lot of hakma and So what's the bottom line? When the started seeing this shah surface back in the day, how exactly did they go about it? So really every good smoo on the topic of gelatin has to start with. So [clears throat] the great great villager aliv all the yeshivas and all the whole litfisher world literally relied on 100% wrote several truas on the topic of gelatin and you may be shocked to hear this was a very vocal a very adamant make when it came to gelatin no strings attached no bishakm He held it was 100% m just to get a little bit of a feel of the way went about the sugatan. So one of the chas is in giml it's in siml it's oer [snorts] was asked about this new patent gelatin that's being made from and he has a whole opening paragraph in terms of the chemical processing [snorts] that it's going through and the sh the person who sent the shil to he thought it should be mut so writes back to him he says but He says that what you said I agree with 100%. So what did he say? He right away made a beline to the Ramon and he said what do you mean it's based on that it should be and writes back to him again this is all what the is saying but he has the likes it he says to the added he said I think that when it comes to the ones that are made from because that's what was described over here assuming which I know they are then for sure there's no right there's no question in the world that in that case it's going to be OKAY that as it relates to making it from there's no question in the world that this in of itself is is not going to be an issue one of the that addresses in this cha he says maybe there should be a of maybe once you decide that you want these maybe it should be okay is not getting involved in how of the this between the and the but at the end of the day throws out just as a unto itself maybe there should be enough said he says that even though there is a concept of that's if you eat it as it is. But if you're going to just take a little component of it and put it into a and even then you're not putting it there because you want to eat it. Gelatin doesn't taste like anything. You're using it because you want it to gel. That's literally what it's for. It's a in a situation like that. It doesn't even fall into says to you 100%. There's another truth, but this one's in also in this is in in now this is already a little bit different because over here the gelatin quote unquote wasn't being made from ats. It was being made from art. Even though that raam threw and atom together, but is actually a little bit more than atomus is. But the bottom line is this was being made from art in which case it would be even a little bit more either way. So the again talks to and it's he seems to know that is a big in fact writes to him. He says he says I see that you already saw my and you know my take and my opinion as it relates to as it relates to this whole Indian of gelatin. Now one of the things that brings up in this cha that he doesn't mention in the previous chuva is that there's a rate if you take a look at the shock on that the shock says to me you shouldn't be on that it's enough so really based on that the whole might be dead on arrival because it's a shock again the shock doesn't say it doesn't work but the shock says don't be so good don't be so find kosher jello or kosher marshmallows or kosher ice cream. I don't know. But based on that, maybe it's not something that's going to be okay. But says that don't worry about that shak don't worry about that shak. He says, you know what, cuz take a look at the chuva and the chuva brings from and from that the only reason the shak said it should be something that you should be nisarin is because he was worried what would be if the ca wasn't 100% dried out. So then it would come but said in all these gelatin cases it would anyways never be because it's always going to be bottle bats and being that it's never going to come. So already had that caveat on the that said you don't have to be worried and based on that this is not something that I'm going to worry about says last paragraph he says what about you're probably wondering I'm in all my tru is referring to that and I'm even getting ADDED A SHOCK BUT WHAT ABOUT said it only worked BY WHERE THE CA was mut so once it's ready can't become awesome. But if something was based on that we spoke about for a half hour yesterday [laughter] was already brought from other and he says besides by other Even but he says besides over here we already had chemically it was already altered. I think in this situation even the night is going to be my you know why because it's so I'm telling you is kosher so really as it relates to being on the kulas of gelatin was none other than the great litfisher gan POK had and that is Moisa. Another one of the very important Min in the Sugi of Jelatin was the G of London Talmud Brisker. Another one of the great great liter the author of the onaK he too wrote a truva. Now it's interesting the trua that wrote was written to rebel valdenberg about and it's printed of now he starts off as follows. It's very interesting he says it's borrowed to me that the gelatin that is made from is not a new creation. that you could say that it's right that it's something completely new. The gelatin because the way I see gelatin said is that really it's included in the originally all these chemicals that are added to it. I don't think this is saysky because in my opinion the way I see the gelatin is is that whatever is there the collagen it was always in the and really all the chemicals are doing is just separating they're not transforming they're not creating they're not physically or chemically altering what they're doing is just separating taking something that was so to speak and being maf with it. So now all of a sudden it's not going to be part and parcel says stating that stating that I think it's anyways and he goes ahead and he writes a whole says even though I don't think the is a is a over here he didn't get involved in the but as it relates to that one of the three saras that we mentioned I don't think is a but at the same time as far as I know the gelatin being made from atamas now again not all gelatin was made from but a [snorts] lot of it was and the ones that I made for and the reason is because and then he writes a whole langu and the upshot of the tru is is that it's in the mut again he has a whole pimple but the way he answers the cash is it's not fair because talking about and was talking about and gelatin is made from and based it's an off that it's going to be and don't and he has again a whole tr on this but the bottom line is he comes out Then at the end he says that you know I'm just a little bit nervous because I'm hearing that you know a lot of people think that it's really and they can't fathom they just don't understand how something like this could possibly be mut and they're making a big tommo. This was going on in America big time and these rabbis they're corrupt and they're on the take and someone's paying them all. Right? There was a lot of this stuff that was going on back in the day and sham or don't be in sham. [laughter] But the bottom line is he says so based on that it could be there's like a to be m he says but you want to know what I think as far as gelatin goes 100% there's no question in the world I think that this is something that's going to be m another chuva that I think that's worth referencing is a chuva that was written by hagod the g ofimi pes frank and this is printed in it's in siml the name of the gelatin. So this is ice cream that they mix together with gelatin and the if you go through is made by the way listen to the shil that was even asked gelatin. So I'm talking about different ice creams that are sold and these ice creams are made with the dust gelatin the right this where does it come from the gelatin it comes from literally I mean this is the question that was presented it comes from the and he goes on to explain how they converted from a literally literally a pork chop all of a sudden into suddenly going into your kosher ice cream. It's my bargain. But this is the way the goes ahead and he sets it up and says to me I'm going to tell you what it's this is the way I see the to me it in he talks about the became 100% and he says it's even though the says I'm not worried about that but the bottom line is that's to ME WHAT IT'S STOLEN MY PROMISE is because that you can't be on that said it's only true by the which is now that It's maybe it can't become if it's something that was like so maybe it has no way of becoming even if later becomes said really it's up to you you want to be I'm not so comfortable saying that because really IT COMES DOWN TO THIS are you going to take on or you going to go like many other by the way one of the pkim that a lot of the pkim held was they had a riot from a shakim we didn't talk about that yesterday but it could be the shock is also on the ledger of which would bolster that other side big time. But the bottom line is it's really it's a big and it's not something that I'm so comfortable getting involved in. And then at the end he says but I would just look into one more thing and that is you know this whole sh of is where to the extent that it becomes that's then it's already less. He says to me it sounds like this goes through a phase where it's not even royal and to the extent that it's not even going to be royal you know at that point I think it's going to be even more kitic. So he says I don't know I'm not in a position now to have the time to look into this but he tells the find out and he says you can do it with orv go ahead and find out see if a dog would eat it. If a dog would not eat it then it would be and then even this is a whole another angle that even would be bottom line is again was approaching it with again assuming you're willing to go away from the but the bottom line is again the idea is just to get a little bit of a time what's going on was all in all incl Branson's bead the was his big to be which would only help you for the gelatin that's made from [snorts] thought that you know if you're willing to go that would be a and in his mind it's this is in which case this is 100% going to be m but the bottom line is we just mentioned three of the biggest of all time that for sure had a as it related to the entire sugatin. The truth is if you go through all the piskim you'll be shocked you'll be stunned at how many pisk held that gelatin was mut it's a hall of fame list of gelkim you know fast forward to more contemporary times the definitive tru that was written on this topic was written by and that's the we referenced yesterday it's in anyone that's interested in being on this topic should go through that chuva from the first word until the very last word and one thing that you're going to see over there is is that was and the way he sets up the chuva is really the way we set up these raid bites we plagiarize it's the way we set up these raid bites and that is there's three to go ahead and to be number one there's the ramon number two there's raven and number three there's and in the world of raf it was check check He held that all three tus were 100% m everything is m he held we don't pass in like four pages proving that we don't go like this the world he brought from that went and as far as goes it was part to him that is not a problem by the way one of the ters that says that's so shar he says that you know as it relates to there are people that say how could you is based on the test. It's says how in the world could you be on that says that it's right. So he said two different and maybe that's says he says it's to me he said I don't think the right is there anyone who understood the psychology of the better than in the last uh 100 years I don't think anybody so says let me tell you what the was doing he wasn't passing like the ra he knew the ra's not like him he was passing like the rajbah he says the raj says that are always mut It's a but says yeah. He says everybody made a choice because [laughter] everybody thought that the always goes with the ram. Similarly was a STE AND NOBODY WANTED TO TAKE ON THIS without recognizing there's a ra and that's why there was so many and a lot of these ended up and based on that you're going to have a problem ALL THESE DIFFERENT HE GOES I HOLD IT'S A never meant and then he has in parenthesis a whole we're ready the knew that very often the meant the raja not the ra this is not just a gelatin this is nea all the but the bottom line is he never meant the and he said if that's THE CASE IT'S AN I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SO YOU'RE GOING TO go the bottom line is goes he's make all over the place and this is the last line of the now he says that he was also and there's a gillion here that was written by this is a little number and the last line of the trua this writing who's the who's he was also so you have in more contemporary times and you have the titzer in contemporary times and you have dian fisher in contemporary times and they will all make an incredible and is a flatout. It's an all-encompassing all-inclusive under so [snorts] it's it's a it's a double right because no one in the world there's no mainstream cautious organization that would even entertain giving a hashk there's no uh in the world of controversial kash topics this is the a voiceky [snorts] pes I mean for sure because that's an all-encompassing and then there's again there's a whole list of of who's who of that held with and fast forward to and they all went ahead and were so what's going on with it? How did gelatin become such a problem? Where did it come from? Where did it come from? So the short answer is the short answer is you know where it came from? It came from two American that were very very it was mosha fee and it was and they held very very strongly that gelatin is and it's because of that that the went ahead and they were and by the way these of go back are 1950s 1960s they go back a very very long time I mean this is uh you know early stage American jewelry in terms of you know the way it developed to where it is today and already at that time at that time you know when Mosha was writing chu that people said he didn't really mean but he was only doing it because you know of the American Jews it was at that kufa that was being mach on on gelatin and Rabarin was Makma gelatin and it's really based on that that the American cautious organizations go full stop and say that it's problem but the question is why right I mean how you make sense of it at the end of the day there's three very compelling arguments to be made to say that it should uh it should be mut so why have such a surah right I mean where's where's it coming from so let's see I mean as it relates to the in so you could always argue that there's right you could always say there's and being that there's so based on that based on that we're going to suggest we're going to argue that it's not so that you could so That's that was they held that they didn't want to go to lakehuda was willing to go to lake behud the marsh was willing to go to lake behudah is open to the possibility of going to lakehuda this willing to go to lakehuda and this is what it boiled down to no jello for you because I'm not willing to go to lakehuda is that what's going on over here is that what's going on over the emphasis if you go through the truth for raosha and by the [snorts] Right. Ramosa never wrote a full chuv gelatin. There's some hack on this but Ramosa never you have to speak to the Ramos never wrote a proper chuva. He throws it in and I saw three places where he just like oh by the way but you would have thought that I mean we have chuvas on sher cask and mish everything that was very important at that time. There was a reason the de claimed did not want to write a chuva against gelatin. Again this is be way beyond the scope of this share but the bottom line is is that but in those chas there was a said and really in his spoke about this tru as well this is a very very big theor is that the whole premise of the in is that [snorts] if you have that becomes there's mohamm to say that now it's going to be what happens if that goes from now it's roy again. What happens if whatever had happened to it that caused it to be was suddenly undone. Would that change anything or would that not change anything? So the truth is with the said that it's still going to be Abu of Aaron has a whole they didn't want to be and based on that it could be this whole doesn't really start because even though it's true it started being but now it's an ingredient so now it is so right now it's could be based on that it would be you would have to treat it like regular in fact adds I'll read it inside. And this is in if you would have that became and now it's going to be used as an ingredient. I wouldn't be Why not? You'll say maybe. No, it doesn't say Because why does it become it's you're making any it's not because it's sat in your backyard you know through a a boiling hot summer June July August and now all of a sudden no one's going to eat it. No, YOU DID IT. YOU DID IT CUZ YOU WANTED it to be. SO NOW YOU SHOULD BE able to use it in a way where it's going to be in a situation like that. This was Ramosha's grace as far and and really and they both felt very stark that even though at one point it was only but now all of a sudden it became again and being that it became once it's that it becomes at that point it's not what about what right says that's maybe already a different thing has to do with any right we spoke about the distinction between those two what about at this point it's a it's a kadashi I didn't see this inside but that the said that it could be not because was talking about a case where the kadash was into a do it went from being a a to like the baser that fell into dash so it started off baser and now it's dash but to the extent that this new thing that it became is not an inherently dut it's I don't know it's the same nervous it's it looks different it was chemically altered but it didn't proactively murish become a dam. So maybe in that situation it's uh still going to retain its maybe you're not going to say padashes. We had who said his reason why he doesn't eat this kadash. By the way we mentioned that from the tital has he says he doesn't hear it at all. He says I can't imagine that the chemicals and the acid that's added to gelatin is any less than whatever happened to the musk in the case of but there is maybe and as it relates to that as it relates to that here the the held very very strongly they held very strongly to be just read to you from this is also in this is the last paragraph And being that it's gelatin and everything is going to bear and his mister felt very strongly that way. It's actually interesting where says that he believes that the was coming that the was coming not from the Rambl but it was coming from the he actually quotes and he says that you know if you go through his ch it's inarvis very long not easy so it's very very long and hard troub [laughter] is busy with the and The he's referring to And then he brings all the Rama very often does that. So with the very often does that but alon when said what he said he was he was talking to he said he wrote two long tr he never mentioned his who's a tan republican and it was posh me that's what he was going like but here's the bottom line the bottom line is is that gelatin it starts off dead on arrival or like we said trafe on arrival but really it shouldn't be so pushet that it's trafe because you have threeus maybe to be make number one you that once it's at that point there's a you have that says and to the extent it's made from you have the test that says of go on the on the ledger and really it's based on these three that there was a lot of toml amongst and a lot of seem to invoke all three of these koulas and really fast forward Forward 50 years later did the same thing. You go through the ch from some invoked all three, some invoked some, some invoked one. But at the end of the day is there was a tremendous on something that you would think should be on arrival. Frankfolder you had over here that had stating that really there's on everything as it relates to the I mean number one there's number two the says this is not something that you should be and then there's the grace of that it could be that even though it But now that it's again maybe it changes and certainly being that your intent was you know to make it what about so if you go through the number one mention the rush was so there are those that say that even though you know his all the maybe is not 100% it's not so clear you have the other that we said that maybe only when to something that's as opposed to it's it's the same thing. It just was altered and it's and as it relates to the even in the case of there is to say that at the end of the day the says and that's what said what do you want me to go said maybe and maybe he's being and maybe it's totally an and now you have the so because at the end of the day there was there was not so partial that that's the way it should be and Clearly the American PK of they held very much the Hakmer and the Kashmus organizations go based on that. Either way, this is a little bit of a two-part synopsis of the suga of kosher or non-coosher jatan. But what does that have to do with Coca-Cola, right? I mean, today she has Coca-Cola part three. We haven't even mentioned Coca-Cola yet, I don't think. So, what does all of this have to do with uh Coca-Cola? So I'll tell you something very interesting. I was talking to Rabbi Benfeld last week and he told me that you know we spoke about how the belt is under the impression that the first person to ever give a proper ashk on Coca-Cola was Reptovy Gaffin. In fact Geffen goes down in history as the Coca-Cola rabbi and in Atlanta Georgia 1935 he's the first person to go and to give this hashkah. But we mentioned that's not true because in 1931 Rabinfeld Zeta his namesake Rabbi Binfeld right was making it not only kosher but even kosher Pesak. So was Rabbi Binfeld the first person to ever give the hashk on Coca-Cola? The truth is before Rabbi Binfeld gave the hashka there was another big RV that gave a hashkah on Coca-Cola and that is Aron Halevi Paris. So who is Raful Parades? So Raful Parades was a European Goen who came to America in 1924. When he came to America he settled on the Lori side. He was aroved there in the Montgomery street synagogue for 3 years and then in he left New York and he went to Chicago. Now [snorts] Rashul Parardis was a great uh European Goian but he was famous for his circular his journal that he was the editor-in chief of and that was the hapardes journal. Now it's interesting the history of the apares journal goes back already to Europe preworld war I a very young rapardes was already uh you know very entrepreneurial in terms of going out and having this journal where there was a lot of back and forth. It was a good money maker too because there's a lot of advertisements in it. This was a good gashaft. But the bottom line is this was something that he was already doing preWorld War I. But then it came to a a crashing halt and it really it stopped circulation for over 10 years. But when he came to America and he settled in Chicago in 1927, he reinvigorated he brought it back to life and this time he did it with a whole new cast of Rabonim. It was all the the American Rabonim and the in America. They were all very very involved and very influential contributing articles and going back and forth and discussing different things in the aparades in the aparades journal. So I'm going to read to you from an advertisement in a hapard's uh journal and this is from 1930 right showed me the original I just took a picture of it so this is how it starts sounds familiar drinking Coca-Cola again olive is I'm not sure what mter means Labig in energish. Okay, I guess it gives you energy. I think that's what it means. Skipping the next line because I'm going to botch it. Nits Coca-Cola is by the way. That's a good thing. And vine in candy stores, restaurants, and drugstores. Not drug stores, but right without going there. This is just gelatin. Drugstores food Coca-Cola. You walk into a drugstore or you walk into a restaurant or you walk into a candy store, you should ask for a cocoa. This is the advertisement. Then there's a little box and listen to what Rabbi Paradis writes. Pisman recently Coca-Cola Shell Georgia. So I was I was I visited [gasps] Coca-Cola in Atlanta Shell, Georgia. Right. Atlanta, Georgia. the and the chemist. He said, "They revealed to me all the secrets." This is one of the greatest puns of all time. [laughter] The taras of the soda. He writes a parenthesis secret, right? Soda. So the of the soda, I'll leave you paradise. So paradis already wrote IN 1930 THAT 5 YEARS BEFORE gean he was already inside the b of coca and they were mgala the of the mgala to him exactly what's going on in the coca and he says YOU HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT IT'S KOSHER BUT HERE'S THE KASHA IT WASN'T KOSHER THERE WAS GLYCERIN INSIDE CUZ NOW FOR SURE WE KNOW FROM RABBI GAFF so how is he so what was going on over here so what was going on over here so said I don't know but it's very very possible And this I do have there's a safer it's called the safer was written by he was a he contributed heavily to his own journal and we have a safer from him it's called and innish there's a section called and it's gelatin he writes a gelatin and if you go through the chuva it feels like it feels so much like he goes with the and he says to him As a matter of fact, in the back of this there's a whole it's called today took over the parades after ais was and he was very involved in and he wrote a whole contress with regards to gelatin and like parades himself he was a very very big maker. As a matter of fact to the he has a collection of chu a small collection of chu that wrote him and one of these were written [snorts] after sat down and he wrote his truth about gelatin he sent it Moisa and Moisa wrote back to him and Moiser wrote back to it's printed here. This is not printed in azer. This is printed in one place in because it was a custom letter that was sent by and it was sent to and he tells him I went through your whole uh shila. It's actually interesting the way starts gelatin. This is talking. But at the end of the day he says I'm masking to your tru and when you went ahead and you said that it's mut this is something I'm mask him to 100%. >> [snorts] >> He said felt it's talking it's talking that the reason that repardis was m wasn't so much wasn't so much was based on the fact that what's the issue there's glycerin inside okay so there's glycerin inside glycerin is like gelatin now it's not mamish the same as gelatin it's again I mean we have to make this disclaimer over and over and over again because uh you know I feel uh I feel uh the blitz coming but at the same time again obviously gelatin is different gelatin very often was made from this is made from baser this has a taste gelatin doesn't have a taste there are kilukim but at the end of the day if you go to the core principles of the gelatin the first two core principles which are and so at the end of the day there's a mali gelatin mal glycerin and based on that IT'S SO CLEAR A PARADISEL GLYCERIN was mut or at least gelatin was mutter >> [laughter] >> that it's not to say that the reason he went ahead and he was m was based on the fact that what you're dealing with over here is something that's anyways if you're dealing with something that's it shouldn't be a problem. THIS WAS THROUGHOUT his with he had on his trou from which was really the opinion of the rubro back in the time and that is that it's mut so if it's mut was basically he said who cares I SAW THIS GLYCERIN SO WHAT GLYCERIN IS MUT so if glycerin is mut it's not going to be an issue in other words just to come full circle just to tie raid bites one two and three of Coca-Cola together you know we mention of gein came and he you know he got access through Mr. Harold Hershka through Ashkaha to the ingredients of Coca-Cola and he said there's glycerin over HERE ALAKULA THIS IS going to be a huge problem and even though it's 1,000th of the entire but there's a raja and even though the said but I DON'T CARE YOU CAN'T GO AND BASED ON that brings the raj and there was no way he was allowing this to go through and there was no way he was going to be but we said that binfeld before him was and now we're saying that p this Even BEFORE HIM WAS WHERE WERE THEY COMING FROM? Soel said that he had from his that it's audition even if it's dark and even though the said there's no EVEN THOUGH SAID THAT IT'S we asking like this but at the same time said and we spoke suffer from his only brought this over sometimes even it's way more and it's because of that he went so was the was being when he was where was Rapard is coming from he was coming from a whole another angle could be you're right as it relates to the and it could be it's it's not to be on that it could be you're right the the sensitivity the sensitivity of saying that if it's we're not going to go ahead and be BUT WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH BECAUSE at the end of the day we're dealing with glycerin and glycerin like gelatin there's mock and you know why there's moh because you can go to lake you and go not like the Nudo. But the bottom line is see you had over here the Coca-Cola rabbi who goes down as the rabbi that was not the [snorts] Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola was Mutter before it was Mutter before before Gaffin. It was Mutter in 1931. We know for sure by Rabbi JB, Rabbi Jacob Binfeld. We know that it was mut in 1930 by parades as mentioned not only is Coca-Cola gazint. It's also something that's kosher and it's something you can find in the candy stores, the restaurants and the drugstores wherever you go. This is something that uh you're going to be able to find. But the bottom line, this is before it had real coke in it by [laughter] the way. You were buying it anyways but after I SHOULD SAY. BUT THE BOTTOM line is uh that might have to be edited. Here's the bottom line that [laughter] we have over here sai rafeld and we had sardis they were both being but at the end of the day they weren't being for the same reason was being he was being glycerin to the end of the day you know I think this just brings out the legacy of gein that much more because the end of the day when he went ahead and he changed the recipe of of Coca-Cola he was mamish making it that Coca-Cola kof olive kuf olive kuf olive lammed olive should Aluses he wanted it should be Alusesh and there should be no glycerin we shouldn't have to be and all the chu that glycerin is culture and it shouldn't even have to get involved with and and bles at the end of the day why should you have to be he wanted it should be it should be 100% which by the way wasn't just a gamecher as far as Coca-Cola goes but it was a gamecher in terms of the way American rabbon we're going to view kashas you know this is a young America where you know things are evolving very very quickly and there's going to be commercial cas organizations and what is the hashkafa going to be and repu geffen set it on a path where it was going to be 100% aesh in the 1930s in the the spiritual world that America was at the time it wouldn't have been so to be from the and it wouldn't have been to be on a from the 150 years earlier the great on the other school had this heres he had this sensitivity lit at that point an elit living in Atlanta Georgia and he says we're going to make Coca-Cola very much changed the landscape of how kashas would be treated in the United States of America either way. This concludes CocaCola part