Chulin 78

Today's and we are six lines from the bottom of Zion the two dots the coin. So we're at the very very end of what was a very very intense perk the fourth per of masha and it discusses the very end of the Mishna on the bottom of so the topic of the peric of course was in the world of the Mishna said that in the event that a behemoth miscarries a fetus, you're not allowed to take that fetus and bury it at the crossroads. Additionally, you're not allowed to hang it from a tree because if you do that, you'll be following the ways of and that's not something that you're allowed to do. So clearly implied from this Mishna is that there was some ancient pagan custom that in the event that an animal would miscarry the owner of the animal would take this shillia this schllill and would either bury it in a precious drain or hang it from a tree. The idea was there was some sort of superstition that if you do that that's going to prevent the animal from miscarrying again in the future. The Mishna is very clear and the Mishna says that if a yid wanted to do this it would not be okay and the reason is because it's dark. Now what does that mean? Because it's that means aid's not let do it. What is the to such an iser? To do something that the pagans used to do. Now to be clear a person is not let go in the way of the pagans in that if the pagans were going to bear. There's a homor that addresses that prohibition. It's arguably the most thing that it can possibly do. So to go in the or any other uh cult from back in the day and to be it's posh that's not okay. But this act of taking the schl and burying it in a brush or being from an elon it's not inherently it's quote unquote you're doing something that used to do and it's for that reason it's also the question is what is the so it's interesting if you look starting with here in the quote two different rashi quotes it's the context says you're going to come into the land of Cananan and you're going to see the and the says I'll tell you not let bow down to their desires nor you worship them in some other way you also not let it do the things that they do you're not let it bow down to their you can't worship their desire what does it right here in our what the Mishna is teaching me is that there's an there's a prohibition for a person to go. So that even if the thing that you're doing is not inherently but it's the maxim of the aar that too is not going to be okay as if to say in addition to keeping mitzvah but there's certain that he does this the of the there's also the of the or any one of the other pagan groups and that too the saying is prohibited it's in the it says Another one of the places in Shazal discussed the concept of in fact way more extensively than right here in our and over there Rashi quotes a different for a person to go and that's in it's says is not let go in the ways of the Egyptians that what does it mean you not let it go in their ways you not let it do their actions what it means is that in the event that they have certain certain things that they do even if it's not inherently in the sense of of the or of but if it's their ways that too is going to be prohibited. So we have that learns it from the we have that learns it from the it's interesting that does not bring this quotes that said what does it mean it's referring to the talked about in different places but the bottom line is we have two teaching the same even if it does not inherently involve it gets a little shout out here in the end masha dealing with specifically there was a darki to take this miscarried behemoth and either to bury a propious or to be from an Elon. The Mishna says this is not something that you're allowed to do stating that the Gamarra is going to begin with a statement that was made by Abaya and Ra. So usually if Abaya said it, Ra will disagree and if Ra said it, Abaya will disagree. This is something that Abaya and Ra were able to civily agree on. It's related to dark and it is going to be the topic of the very very beginning of today's daf which is the very very end of either way says any custom that involves does not involve if however it doesn't involve then there is going to be an Indian of in other words a r said even though there's a concept you not let it go If however you're going to get by following the that's something that's going to be okay. It's now it sounds a little bit like but is so important that it's stating that if you look into it's that is and really the point of is that if there's some practicalis of doing something just because the does it doesn't necessarily mean that you can't do it And the point is that you can't simply say, "Oh, I know that the will do this in the event that in's case there's a so therefore oh I can't do it because now it's all of a sudden as if when the yen came toan they observed what the did and then they had to rewrite their playbook to do everything in the inverse or differently from the way it was on. There's no way in the world that's the way it would be. If there's some there's some practical significance of what it is you're doing, then it's going to be okay. In the words of the extent in that instance, it's going to be okay. Is that true? We learn to pay an Elon that is shedding its fruit and the owner of the tree wants to save it. So if he wants he can paint some red ink on it, save it that way or he can put uh stones on it and laden it with stones. This is okay. I understand the concept of being what's the purpose of it? It's so that you would be able to now weaken it. And by you weakening it that way, you're going to save the tree. We're not farmers. But to go ahead and to paint it with this red ink on my What are you accomplishing by doing that? You know what that sounds like? That sounds like 101 where it's a can't tell me it's in other words is that seemed to say that although there's there's an exception to when it's and that is if it's but if it's there'll never be an exception it's always going to be awesome is I have a that seems to offer and suggest an exception to the rule even where there is no with the beer of the even where it seems to be a so how could a say that the only time there's going to be exception if it's where it's not a you see from here everywhere it's a it's going to be no it's not a because it could be even putting this red dye on it has a because if you're going to put this red dye people are going to wonder what's this all about and they're going to be told It's because this is a sick tree and it needs a rafuar and you know what people are going to do? They're going to start dominating. So like this there is some tayalis that's going to come out as a result of it and therefore it's going to be mult. Now I don't know if this is why the did it but at the end of the day being that you're going to be getting a tayalis from what it is that you're doing. So it's for that reason it's going to be good. And the says is a precedent for this exact type of from this referring to the what does it mean to a little dramatic we know he's going to be pronounced as being you have to get up in the says yes you have to get up in the reason you're supposed to do that is is because of if you're going to do that people are going to have compassion for you and like this they get a d for you and continue in this price and say any person that's involved in a situation he has any so people like to be private when they're going through things but there's also an idea of sometime because like this if you tell it to the right people that care about you they'll have compassion and they may be able to help you with their get you out of this the bottom line is there is some value there is some of idea or because of the superstition of the would make it there would never be an exception in that case. The reason it's based on as said on this so apparently there was a mimic that if somebody had a a palm tree that had seen better days. So they would take a cluster of dates and they would suspend it from the palm tree. feels a little dark orish. Yeah, people do it. So Ravina said if they're doing it, it's probably but I don't know why it's there's no from it. It seems like a so who are these people following when they do this said you want to know who it's like it's the affforementioned that said that it's to be why is it to be I why is that not an issue of the ter is because even though maybe the did it for superstitious reasons but you're going to have a a telis from it a real talis And that is based on the also true based on that this is something that's okay. And on that note, either way, we go from the fourth per immediately to the fifth per. And it's something that involves the laws of again. So everything that we've been learning even the digressions and the digressions then the digressions but they've all been from the backdrop of the laws of the topic of this next peric like its name implies are the laws of so truth is we spoke a little bit about earlier in the week the truth sayim Milo and all that read and involved the laws of in the context of but the begin right now. So just a tiny bit of an introduction and that is there are three related to Kachchan that are talked away in parishes. Paras is in Vayro. It's entire but really it's on the back end of say it's not in the realm that's whereab right that's the real flesh the real meat of all the that's where play out but we know from learning countless drushes over the last year plus within the world of kachum that there that are scattered throughout the there's three specifically that are tucked away in par we need one of them the says that if somebody has a or with its child on one day now this is a but it's true for as well which is why is so whether the animals are or whether the animals are there's a now does this mean mother and child does it mean father and child doesn't mean both so at the very end of today's and really more so the topic of tomorrow's daf we're going to see it's a big is between and not to give it away but for sure it's going to mean mother and child. The question is, is it also going to mean father and child, but there's a lot in the for a person to go and now a few things. Number one, it doesn't matter in what order the person does it. Even though the says, so you could have thought that maybe it's only prohibited if you do it in that order. The order does not matter. So it doesn't matter if you do or if you do. Another thing it doesn't matter if one person shacked both or if two different people are going to do the once you nobody's allowed to shy or once you nobody's allowed to. So if Ruven checked Ruven's going to get Malus, he's going to be over the of the if and Shim went ahead and it's going to be the same thing. He only and the says this is not a a difference. It doesn't matter if one person does it. If two people do it, it's going to be an issue in terms of the of understanding why the terra had an issue with that will be the topic of the raid of today's but for now we begin the talk as it relates to the you should know this is so it doesn't matter if somebody doesn't matter if he either way is going to be It doesn't matter if the mikt is standing or unfortunately is not standing. a person's going to be and finally it doesn't matter if the animals were or if they were they were in either case a person is going to be now this is going to be a very very long answer and I think it's kadai just to set it up for a second so from here until the end of the mission it's not hard but it's nuance the Mishna is going to go through 12 different scenarios of the ESPI where we are going to try to figure out whether the person is going to be over, he's not going to be over, what he's going to be over, and even how many times he's going to be over. So, we're going to go through 12 different uh permutations of a person shacking two animals where there's potential for because he's shing and we're going to try to figure out like we just said if he's and if he is how many times he's going to be. Now, why do you have all these permutations? What's this all about? It's because the mission is going to talk about in the context of and in the context of we just mentioned that it's additionally we're going to discuss it in the context of whether these took place in the bas in the azara or if they took place outside of the azara. So if you take and in the BA mdash outside the BA mikdash, you're going to end up with 12 different scenarios and the Mishna now is going to work through all of those 12 a few that I think it's worth to just internalize. We know all this already, but I think it's worth internalizing just before we start the Mishna cuz the Mishna is going to be straddling and juggling all these different ideas. Number one, if someone's he just violated and it's for that reason he's going to get malus if somebody he's also of malcus. So for espano he's malus foras he's of and he's also malcus notice there's no forpo that's just a good oldfashioned I say as relates to the that's one of the additionally we have to remember if somebody if somebody inside the a So that now becomes it's something that you're not allowed to do. But at the same time there's no because there's no explicit saying in the that says you're not allowed to do it and there's certainly no cars. In fact, it's for sure the outcome is that you're going to end up with an animal to eat because it's certainly but at the same time in terms of there being malus there's no malus for and there's certainly not going to be another thing that's worth remembering and that is the only time a person's is if something that was the Torah says when it talks about how awful it is for somebody to right you should have brought it into the instead you did shame on you you did something really really bad and as a result and you're going to be learn from there that the only time there's an of is if this was if however it's not in that situation there's not going to be an issue another thing that's worth mentioning And that is that Rashi speaks out that if somebody and now he wants to he's not allowed to in the world of that is considered a it's considered as if it's time has not come yet to be able to bring it as a car. So we know there's a concept of inch big time. Right now the most basic definition of is in the it's actually one of the three that are talked away in par it's the one that immediately proceeds the says you first lad bring a carbon when it's 8 days old first seven days the animals just like a boy that's born is until its eighth day so is considered until days old the medish makes my but the bottom line is that there's a concept in a person becomes it's as if now is not today because today it's not okay tomorrow you'll be able to sh right tomorrow's another day someone will come out tomorrow you'll be able to do it but not today and today it's considered if somebody would go and he would the ben when it was he would not be because it wasn't really because I look at it as if it wasn't 8 days old. I look at it as if it was simply uh one other cl that I think is worth mentioning and that is if somebody violates even though he was but at the same time the is going to be there's nothing that says such a is going to be again what do they call him number one as a result is going to be malus number two is something for which a person's And also it's and it's for that reason he's going to be is ple like is obviously puzzle but at the same time it doesn't involve any and therefore there's no malus and there certainly not going to be any there's no unless the animal was once Once you or once you then becomes because really you're not allowed to do a until the next day. If somebody is remains with we now have 12 cases that the Mishna is going to present. If somebody goes ahead and heck if both of the animals that heed and both of the says they're both going to be as relates to the second one is going to get let's think this through by ourselves. Somebody two animals that were but it was so the first that was perfect. You did everything you were supposed to. You were supposed to shock the you weren't supposed to shock the it's going to be the second one. Shame on you of it's and therefore of course it's not 40. It's really 39. But the bottom line is that's easy. What would be if both of them and it was so now ready? We have some issues for the first one or by the way can mean two things. Harishian can mean the first behemoth that you shacked or can mean the first person that shacked it because as we mentioned already it doesn't have to be the same person shacking both it can be two different people so let's call it right is going to bear why because it was they're both going to be possible right the first one's going to be possible because it's possible the second one's going to be possible because it's possible and they're Both both are going to get malus. The first is going to get malus because it's regular. The second is going to get malus also because it's now you're going to ask me one second why is only the first one getting kus. Right? What the mission says with regards to everything else they're both the same. They're both possible because it was they both get malus because it was but only the first one gets kus. Why does only the first one get kus? Why does the second one not get carus? It's very simple because the only time you get is if it was the first was the second was not why wasn't because it was already and therefore okay so why does he get malus he gets malus for eso doesn't get malus for so the first guy is getting malus for the second guy is getting malus for what would be if both animals were but Both took place. So you the two animals both they're both going to be possible because we said is possible. It's going to be a problem. The second one's going to be the second principle of he's going to be what if they were both and he went ahead and heeded both of them. So there were two in the first person right this person was just an old he did something amazing but as it relates to the second guy he is going to get malus what's he getting malus for heed he's getting malus forb additionally it's going to be possible why is it going to be possible it's possible because It's for that reason it's not going to be okay. Now if you notice the first four cases all had something in common. In fact they had two things in common. In all four of the cases you both animals that were of the same men, same ilk, either and both of them were slaughtered in the same place either or right we had they were both. So now ready it's going to get a little bit more nuance. What would be if it was what would be if you did? The first one was the second one was and they both happened. So she did and so right this is easy is going to be right. They didn't do nothing wrong. So as a result of course it's going to be the second one is a little tricky because the second one was already the second one. You're going to bear and it's going to be ple the second one is kach. So you're going to get malcus it's going to be ple. Why you getting malus? You're getting malus not for because it's not royal love because it's why you getting malus you're getting malus because of why is the bele the bele because well he's shot so there's no way for that animal to be ker but the bottom line is you're going to be getting malus because of the not because of the and by the way it only says it doesn't say if it because of the obvious cursed as well. What would be if you shed it not but it was done in the reverse order it was first. So the first guy so that's easy that's a and obviously it's going to be the second guy it's going to be right because what was the second one it was so the animals going to be kosher however even the second person is going to get malus and the reason even the second person is going to get malas is because he was and like we mentioned the one of the column being doesn't make get that it should be possible. So the first one gets malus. Why? Because it's second one gets because it was next case. So we had now we're going to both going to be and the second person is even the second person is even going to get. So the first person is not an is however it's possible. So it's for that reason the second one was the problem is it was so you're going to get malus for being this is also going to be pos. So for that reason it's going to be an issue. So again both of them are going to be puzzle only the second person who was going to get malus eighth case what would be again they were both one was but in this case he did the kach first second so the first person who did he did everything fine the second person who did he is going to be possible for and it's going to be possible because of the fact that it was either way so what was the X4 which is really the second set in this case in the of one is the other is however they're all being done in the same place why four cases because which happened first so you have and then so again they're all in the same place all in the same place one is and one is the question is what's the And which one came first? You end up with four options. Hence another four cases. The last cases what would be if somebody did they were both but one was and one was. So notice in this case they're both the same. They're both however one was and one was the places were different. That's easy. Nothing wrong with that. The second one was because of next case. So again it's the same min but one is one is the first person. So again we throw the whole book at him. He's going to be and he's going to get is going to be right. So the first one is Mish the worst of the worst but really both of them are not going to get they're both going to be apostles again the first one who is and the second person who is obviously not but at the same time he was and it's going to be possible because it was so we had Now we have we're just switching the order of the first one is possible what he did. Shame on you. He wasn't over therefore it's going to be right. It's the first one. So there's no there's no level for sure. Therefore you're going to be the second person who he's going to get Malcus. Why? because he was already it's going to be why is it because even though it's not a reason for it to be possible and you it's going to be okay. Last case is what would be if a person two animals that were and one but first and then the case we had earlier was in this case it's the first again he's the best of the best the second person that's terrible however being over cuz then he would be over the once is he getting malus he's getting malus for being over the obvious it is going to be possible the bottom line is the question was k like how do you have a situation of what we had was 12 different cases or if you break it down you can break it down into three categories the categories were where the min and the muckim are the same where the min is different but the muck is the same where the min is the same but the muck is different you end up with 12 different possibilities as long as you know the claw limits plug and play it's actually not very challenging to figure out either way so the mission began And it's says how do you know maybe it's not now actually discussed why would you think would be excluded from the love of even if is broad and it's not exclusively talking to kachim but why would it not inclusively have kach I'm For now, just the B. It says in the what does it say afterwards? This is the that for the first seven days after an animal is born, it needs to stay together with its mother. There's an very next being that the first is talking about righte. So we say the next the one that it says immediately next to it is also talking about this where we learn that this is so how do we know again you have to know what the mean is but how do we know that it's from the juxiposition of the so we mentioned there three in the talked away in par that talk about by the way the third one right what's the third one third one is the is so we'll have at some point maybe during this per what's special about these three that some of they were all lumped together really it's something that I think requires a little bit of but the bottom line is is that from the fact that you have and you have immediately next to each other from there we learned that you know something I'm so persuaded by the I'm starting to think says the maybe it should only be known by man is only a so maybe is also so says I hear but it and really if you have a open in front of you it's very helpful and brings this to life next if the whole you already said why is it why is it that the felt that it had again says the mention of is coming to teach me this is different you know it's different that's this I'm so convinced, right? This uh this Bryce is like very persuadable. I'm so convinced with I'm all over the place here. Says and because you have that extra V, it's for that reason. We know that as much as also being so is IT A TER is it's being that it's but it's well the bottom line is how do you know is I know even though it's in the location location of because I know it's despite the fact that it's because it says vish And the connects it to what was mentioned in the previous par just one obvious thing and that is actually makes a big deal in the Mishna of how the creates a scenario of for the after the it's beautiful the fact that the put the of and the is of right next to each other to the point that we even learned the of from It's because really from the perspective is they're both either way and really as we'll see two kashes. So just a a tiny bit of background to this next kasha of the gumar and that is there's an idea that in the world of kachin if you have an animal that's a mixed breed right so its father is a goat and its mother is a sheep. So if you would have a Rashi's example, if you would have a a mixed breed, it cannot become kachin. You can't be mak you can't put it on the misbeh. It's excluded from the world of kachchan. When it comes to the laws of if somebody would the mother sheep and the child goat let's say you would be over that love of of learned that as we'll see from it's a mafur asks if you're going to tell me first that there's a jo of and of and it's from that justosition This we learn that is no mash even though you would have thought maybe not it is. So why don't we say that just like Mktashim excludes these mixed breeds can't go anywhere near them as so maybe in the same vein there should be no when it comes to these mixed breeds as well says why don't we say that to the extent that there's some between the and the laws of so we should say Just like there should be no when it comes to what's in so the infamous we're going to talk a lot about but why is the or right we're not 100% sure what it is but the bottom line is is that why is it that's what we need right now If it's as relates to I have another reason why there should be no it says this is a it's coming to be now This is coming from a that says from there learn not for now that anytime it says in the word the word say in the I know that is excluded from it says so why is the no we're discussing now in the context of which was not mentioned in our and we asking two one is if there's just like and oh by the way I have another kasha it says Say and Rob already said wherever it says set there's a that teaches me wherever in the world it says it means to exclude how come we don't exclude over here both caches with one word oi says the word oi not o it says and we learn from there it's coming to be it says is telling me it's says telling me was said that word is extra. It's coming to teach me that even if it's going to be included. How could you tell me that the word is extra and it's coming to teach me to be don't I need what does it mean? I needed to know that the is of is not only if a person the and the and their respective but it's going to be right. Somebody asked you what would you think that means? I don't have and it and its child and then I'm going to be over this. What if you and its child? No. What if I and its child? No. So if it says, you would think you need both, right? Somebody asks you now. Oh means or. So either or is extra. I need oi to learn P. I can't read the I can't be mised without the word. I needed to differentiate and distinguish between to teach me that each one individually because I had not said the word I would have thought the word teach me that each one individually how could I be extra to bear says natural if somebody would ask you if you would say you need both grammatically you'd be wrong you know why if you would have to do both. You know what the would have had to have said or is in the singular and I know from the word already. Thus grammatically without the word I would know for each one individually. There's no need to have the word uh I hear I think I still need to look at the for something that's actually taught in it. I would have thought I would have thought that you only fair enough but one of their children but it has to be and one of the children isn't the literally addressing this point and it's coming to say no is saying that I hear from the fact that it says in the singular I know already that you're only in the singular but Maybe it means for one of the offspring but at the same time as it relates to the mother the father maybe for that you would need both and that's why I WOULD NEED AND OH BY THE WAY IT'S THE BRYSON says right clearly I shouldn't think it's and one of their children but you can't tell me that the word is extra I need Not because that I know from the word but I need that I don't and isn't it you know you're not reading the B what the B is saying is the B is addressing why say it could have just said why does it have to say from the word that's in the singular that's where we learn it's and it's either one of their children for that already going to be high the price was never you know because you don't need the word without the word from the word I already know here's the point I know from I know I don't need the word if I don't need the word so the word I is extra the word I is extra I could use it to be again the was why do we say don't need to and why do we say And already taught us says the word. Wait, it says the word I needed. No, I don't. It says it says I know between the parents. I know between the offspring and as a result the word is very much going to be extra. But says one sec. This understanding that I learned from the word that assumes that the word is extra and that's not at all. Yes. But according to who the word is actually but according to who holds that the word is not extra mean. Now what exactly this is is a good and if it's bothering you to the at the very end of is going to say so is actually going to ask the we're going to get to it but the didn't feel that we need to know what it is in order to go. So we're going to follow the cue of the Gar. But what the Gar is saying is there is a as we're going to see momentarily between and whether we the word to teach me some do not does. So the ising like this according to the was not used for that we're going to learn about later. So this that says is learned from will be going according to will be referring to right it's going to mean if that's the case is extra extra but according to you don't have in this brace over here to teach meal because it's taken already for something else if that's the case for sure the word is needed not because that I know from bi But many if that's the case I don't have to be afraid to give that the question is why is there the ter is I learn it from I I need says no I don't I know from I know from but that's all good according to the I don't use anything else so I can use so I don't need but according to I only have not so I still need if that's the How could I use to be? So the says that according to you're gonna have to say meaning it's the same the word is coming to me I don't I need to know that it's not it's holds that you don't need or you don't need you don't eat anything and the reason is the because held by who's this is famous from the It says regarding the it sounds like from the only time a person's of is if he's of how you know if somebody's only his father or his mother says in the said that the had to say to tell me that a person's only for only for said you don't need anything for that because when it says in the it's but also this is the punch line it's also or in fact unless the goes out of its way to say the word we always assume whom it means oi without saying the word oi. Here's the point. Raen has this as quoted literally throughout that anytime the puts two things together. Even if it doesn't use the word oi, it's assumed that it's one or the other unless it says that they have to both be together that you don't need any if you don't need o could be. So the bottom line is how do we know that there's why would you think not two reasons number one the justosition to wouldn't make you think not also say and we know wherever it says the answer is one word it says in the o don't I need two to answer this one is that yeah I really theoretically should need but already says andalik The other mahal is if you hold you actually don't need if that's the case there's no question in the world that the word would be extra specifically in in the of the which approach you go do you go with the approach that yes I need a word but I have or I like that the said is and according to you don't have to come on to it was according to come on to now is going to conclude with this discussion and that is my what is this what do we know about we know one thing that the word did not the word says the what is this by mothers but it's not by fathers. So again, it's for sure no by male and female offspring, right? The bi for sure doesn't matter if it's the boy, the girl, but we're talking now about the father versus the mother. So according to but not mother's mother with her son mother with her daughter but not father's father son and father daughter daughter no it doesn't matter what's that hold that only to You would have thought it should be. Is that true? Is that true? Why is it so to you that you would think that you find an is of you also find the of is coming up one of the broken that we're going to learn. But uh we know there's a mitzvah. We know there's a mitzvah just like when it comes. So you would think if anything logically it should only be it should not be why if anything learning now from is mothers this should also be mothers says I don't think that's I'm tell you why I think it should be even because you find the only time a person is right if you bump into a conce but if you didn't bump into it says if you own it if the is yours there's no as doesn't matter if you do own it or if you don't own it right either way in that situation you're going to be what's the point the point is is that when it comes to you see it's more inclusive than so is true is only the mother but maybe is going to be the father as well right so again says one second. Why you say no? Because you see this is more inclusive. So now we return to regular program resuming the from the fact that it says we learn. So we know it's only and being that I know it's only so therefore I know it's not okay says the price of being that you know there's a between and you know that it's only one now already I can make I can say you find and you find just when it comes it's mothers and not fathers to when it comes to it's going to be by is not going to bear in other words at the end of the day at the end of the day and hold that the mitzvah of is only is not how do I know it I know it because it says is a and it teaches me it's only or which one oh so now already I have to see what makes the most sense I think it makes the most sense to say mothers. Now just one obvious point that needs to be spoken out the initial reaction was just compare it to and say you can't compare because okay says the it says and I have to pick and choose so let me compare it to you just said line earlier you can't compare but the ter if all I have is of I can't compare it to because But once I know that I have to pick and choose, I know I have to go to the right or go to the left. I know it's either or I know it's something. Oh, so now already it makes sense. It's reasonable to use the to say that it should be. So if all I had was the I would say it's not a good it's not a b means it has to be a direct comparable. it's not direct enough and as a result I wouldn't have it but being that now I'm being forced to find a comparable so now I use the best comparable available right just to be clear if I didn't have a dr of all I had was the banav I would need a perfect comp teaches me you're not looking for a perfect comp you're looking for the best available comp right sometimes you're looking for something perfect and sometimes you're just looking for the best available right true in all areas in life so the garamar is saying that if you want to work with a binav, well, you have to have a perfect bin. Says the gamorra, this is a binav that's a little nuanced in that find the best available option. That's not how works. By needs to be perfect, right? We need perfection when it comes to isgala that you can now use your skills to come up with what you think is THE BEST. WASN'T A PERFECT BUT IT'S the best available. That's why at the end of the day says the right we're not finished with the we just interrupted because we got excited but moving along if you're going to action and you're going to tell me you have a little bit of a cash over here I don't know that I'll tell you it says and we learn from there doesn't just mean your your biological child it means Right? When the kid's hanging on to you, it's the father, right? Most situations, the child is not hanging on to the coattails of the father. It's more the mother. Child clings to the mother more than the father. And that's how you know if you had to pick one or the other, you're picking that is says the what's this auctioning? Right? We said if you can auction, you don't like the we had so we have like a plan B. What? What may you not like? You're going to tell me. I'll tell you why. Because at the end of the day, let's be honest. You're telling me is one. You have to pick between the father and the mother. You're picking the mother because it's more similar to really. I think doesn't it sound more father than mother? You're going to tell me that's why we needed a little extra help over here. We need a second level of defense. where it's not the bottom line is that is the what is it says which is at the end of the day this is going to be and it's going to be as So according to the only by and it's according to it's based on the fact that it's similar to where it's mothers also holds its father and mother because o say teaches me father and bi teaches me mother going back to the gumar right the gumar had said that you're telling me that oi is Actually, I don't need that's good going that whole says my who learns from father is not extra who did not learn from father was extraalik and that is closing the loop on the of the again this is going to pick up tomorrow's very very much. So we're going to exhale and just speak out one related to today's daf and and that is so the topic of today's overwhelming majority of it was the new per that we just began. So it says in theory and this is not in par but rather this is talked away in par in the par of says theight of this mitzvah of is the same as the of the of because the reason underlying both of these ideas is it's that we shouldn't have a a heart of anx and we shouldn't be in a situation where we're not showing compassion. The Tory said that and only afterwards right that you shouldn't go ahead and torture the mother by taking its child away from it. So therefore first and then afterwards when the mother's not there it's so that we should be trained not to be to the bird. In the same vein, we also have to be trained to make sure that we're not going to be and therefore don't them one day because she one day you're becoming the and you're becoming someone that really has no compassion. Additionally says could be the idea of meaning even though we know we're allowed to go ahead and we're allowed to animals but at the same time to wipe out an entire min that's not okay. even though but don't wipe Adam and if you're going to go ahead and you're going to you're going to kill the mother and the child symbolically you just wipe that of animals and that's not something that you're supposed to do. says in Raman to me the concept of and the concept of are very related to each other in the tama mitzvah I think they're both the same concept and I have two approaches of how they can be explained how they can be rationalized number one they're both related to not being an towards the animal they're both related to the idea of not wiping out an entire species says The ina he also addressed why the said that is so important is so critical. He said it's that we shouldn't check the child in the presence of the mother because animals are able to experience pain. said that animals feel pain if something happens to their children just like humans do. And it's for that reason you have to be sensitive. Therefore, there's a midst of and therefore of says the it comes out that the real is don't do something to the child in the presence of the mother as opposed to don't do something to the mother in the presence of the child which would mean what's the would be not oh I'm sorry the would But you have say the reason the said also and not was like but it's not that way. It's not because ifra it's related to not causing the mother the pain of seeing something happening to its child. It should have been it's out of order says therefore I think it's more proper in to say like I'm saying so you shouldn't come to not so different that what I'm saying but a little bit of a different nature the bottom line is gave us three it's nuanced but three all very similar to understanding the of in all They're somewhat related to the sensitivity that we have to have towards the animal kingdom in Raman's first shot that to wipe out is is not let in the second shot. It's can't be you have to recognize that who created the bria even though he allows you to have a steak dinner but at the same time to wipe out a that's not something that's okay. And the third which is really the ram it's more related to the specific pain that the mother has when something happens to the child. Another thing that we saw in the Rambam's in the and in the Ramban's first is that there's some connection some similarity between the I mean the words of the I think one thing that's obvious is the right abundant of learning that and what do we learn it from? We learn it from the mitzvah of of a fellow right of the isaldic. What's the saying that just like whose pain are we sensitive to? We're sensitive to the mother's pain. We're not sensitive to the father's pain. It's the pain of the mother that the sensitivity is to. So it makes sense of it's going to be the sensitivity of the mother, not the sensitivity of the father. That's where it's going to play itself out. But the bottom line is one shot two shot three. It's all a similar and that is we have to be sensit sensitive to the animal kingdom. You can't just go ahead and be anx even towards animals is true even in the animal kingdom. And this is really what the whole idea said that is sensitive to the of his but the he doesn't even care about people and you find that as the says Who is the Who's this? The Torah was sensitive to the relationship between a mother and a child. Said he killed the mothers with the children. He had no sensitivity. Was sensitive to the behemoths. The is not sensitive to the people. That's what he's referring to. It says in the it's referring to Hmon the Russia said by him was so sensitive to the to the Russia Russia was even when it came to people, he wasn't sensitive. How do you know that? Because what did Hmon say? The medish is comparing and contrasting the sensitivity that the has to animals versus the sensitivity that that animal had to had to people. Yeah. It's true. And what did Hmon say? He said, What's the because there was an understanding there's a sensitivity of want to do but just one of this and that is in one of the more moving gimaras related to the related to the concept The garra tells a story and this is we all know the story but it's good to hear the words of the gar inside again just to get into the mood it's said that there's a certain p in that talks about the terrible and something very specific that happened that was just beyond so was referring to a mother and her seven children. So this mother and her seven sons were brought in front of the and first they brought the oldest son and they told this person bow down to the and by the way if you bow down to this everything is going to be okay. So the child said it says in the I serve one god I can't bow down to this they brought him out and they killed him. They brought the second one in front of the told him. He said, "I can't do this." Immediately they killed him. See you later. They brought the third child. They told him, "Kill this. Bow down to I'm not allowed to do it." They killed him. They brought the fourth child. They told him bow down to this. They brought the fifth son. They told him they killed him as well. They brought the six son. They told him, "Bow down." They killed him as well. And then they brought this woman's youngest child, her seventh child. They told him we told him it says we have a pact with we took upon ourselves that is our one singular God says we're going to be the one singular nation. We going to be the kid said, "We swore to GOD and he swore to us. He's never going to swap us out for another nation." The case turns to this kid. He says, "Listen, you boys are making me look bad. You're making me look bad. I need you to at least fake it. Let me tell you what I'm going to do. I'm going to take my ring. I'm going to throw it on the ground. just bend down and pick it up like this. All the people that are observing and are watching are going to say, "Daddy, just bow down to me. Just do it. Just fake it. I know you don't mean it. I I I understand that. But just do that." So the child told the you realize how sensitive you are to your honor. You feel you're the king and therefore you have to be treated accordingly. So, doesn't that mean that I have to be that much more sensitive to the honor of the So, they took this child out and they brought him to be killed as they were bringing out this seventh child and the mother is there and she's watching this. So, the mother turns to the people of the quesar and says, "Yah, can I please have my child for one moment? I want to kiss him just for one moment. Let me just kiss my child before he dies. They they said that's fine. They said she went and she told her child, my son, I want you to go and I want you to tell Abramino, you know, you're going to be killed right now. You're going to be executed in a matter of moments. And you're going to have the to be greeted in the next world by Abramino. When you see Abramino, I want you to tell him the following. I have a message from my mother. He said, "You brought one. You took one son and you put him on a miss. And I didn't bring one. I brought seven. She too went on top of the roof. She fell off for me and she died. There was a bas that came out for said this is a well-known story. in the climax of the but there's a rest of the story in fact this that's brought somewhat piter here in is brought much more in it's medish it's par number one the medish over there puts a name to the face there was a story with Miriam the daughter oft and it goes in it and tells this whole story. It's interesting if you look in the pish of the marzu one of the classic on the so the pish marzu says as follows there's a very similar story that's told in safer and there the woman's name is not her name is and that took place not during the when did that take place everyone knows this during the story right it happened says I'm not sure how to reconcile these two stories maybe two different stories but either way there's a lot of hisophas in the medish's account of the story versus the garamarus we just need one so after the case goes and he kills sends out the six boys and now it's the last uh it's the last child the mother turns to the and says in the honor of the I beg you. Can you please kill me first and only afterwards kill my I can't I can't see this. I can't watch this anymore. Do me a favor. Take my life first. So the case looks at the mother and said, "I'm not listening to you because you know what it says in your I can't kill you. I'm sorry. I can't kill you. I'm killing your children. And as a result, I CAN'T KILL YOU BECAUSE IT SAYS in the Now Miriam responded. She said, you're holding by. The bottom line is the medish ends and it's again it's a it's just a it's an incredibly moving story but in the there's one and that is the kings I can't because it says in the I was thinking the mentioned is more sensitive to the then these are sensitive to even human beings. But what's the sometimes the they come and they actually act as if they're being compassion compassion but really what lies underneath it it's a bunch of that lies underneath it. this invoked the that's a that's all about the IT'S A LIKE ALL THREE IT'S RELATED to the same idea of it was it was really exactly the opposite and we've all heard the Germans how they were very polite when they gazed the Jews right there was a certain as says in the added Nazi playbook it's unbelievable but the bottom line is You know my have been learning for the last two and a half months and really you know you think about kinis a little bit you know so many of the metaphor that were used by the and you find it in is that we're compared to sheep that were being slaughtered right when mom is being butchered we were butchered and we were treated like but like the med says even worse than because at least we have a sensitivity when we learn we do we're sensitive to there's an idea of there's a concept of we didn't even get that we haven't even been to that throughout the either way we should talk we should be that all those look at all the all the that we've brought that we talk about how many of given up how many proverbial how many proverbial are there and have there been throughout the generations and we should be that this shabas and really this next week should be we should be not to have to pray for we should straight to Shabas in a couple of hours. We should be to have a a month Shalma the mayor be amen.