Chulin 34

Today's stuff is learning the flame of David. And we are 10 lines from the bottom of the flame of Gimel base on the rubber laser on my rubbish. Today's stuff is being learned with Nishmas Nelson and Jacob Mayer and Yachezkal and Prime off the mayor. So, we're in the middle of a Sugya. In fact, we're very much in the middle of a Sugya. Uh Sugya that deals with the laws of Tumah V'Taharah. So, there's a few times over the course of Masaches Chullin that Chullin meets Tumah V'Taharah. These few dafin tucked away in the lameds and perek shoychet is very much one of those places. So, why we talking about Tumah V'Taharah? The Mishnah on daf Gimel aleph discussed someone that shechts a beheima, a chaya, or oif and no dam came out. So, the Mishnah says one of the halachos that would result because of the fact that there was no dam is that if somebody wanted to now eat this meat with your dayam voice, with hands that are tamei, it wouldn't be an issue. And the reason is because in order for food to really be uh tamei, it would have to first be mikabel tumah. And being that there was no dam, so it's for that reason in this instance, there's no ability to be metamei the food. Therefore, there's not going to be any problem. And the Gemara said that there's a fundamental issue with this Mishnah. The Mishnah is l'chura talking about Chullin. How do you know the Mishnah is talking about Chullin? There's four mekoros from the Mishnah itself that we're talking about Chullin. Number one, the Mishnah says beheima chaya or oif. There's no such thing as a chaya that's got him. Number two, the missioner says that just because no dam came out, that in and of itself doesn't render the shrita shrita pasula caught him. The equal shrita could be is even for the dam. And if that's the case, then if the missioner says you don't need the dam, must be we're talking about chulin. Additionally, the missioner is mevorer that the dam would be machsher the basar the kaval tuma. Dam caught him we know is not machsher the kaval tuma. And finally, >> [snorts] >> the missioner is mevorer that it's only when there's dam that the basar would be chukshur the kaval tuma. The halacha is when it comes to caught him, chibas akodesh machshavto, even if there is no dam the halacha is it's going to be machsher the kaval tuma. So that's pashut sachta gemara the missioner is talking about chulin. I have one raya, two raya, three raya, and since I have them all, I know for sure that we're dealing with chulin over here. If that's the case, says the gemara, I don't even understand what's going on over here. Because the missioner is having a discussion if somebody whose hands are tamei can now go ahead and engage in this meat. Your dayim are a sheni letuma. And a sheni can't be oiseh chulin into a shlishi. So what's the background to this? And this is really a background to almost every single tuma of the Torah sugiyah in shas. So we know that there are many different sources of tuma. A meis is a source of tuma. A tamei meis is a source of tuma. A zav, a zavah, a nidah, a metzora, a yoyeles, an aveilah. Very prominently featured in maseches. These are all sources of tuma. A source of tuma is what's known in the vernacular as an av tuma. Anything that comes in contact, or almost anything that comes in contact with an av tuma, becomes tamei. Adam, keilim, ochlin, mashkin. The tuma that the thing now is going to attain is a more diluted form of tuma. It's what's known as a vlad tuma. It's not the source of tuma. So it's only a of oiseh michlal de'ika toldos seiva de'ika madfeis. It's a vlad tuma. It's also a more diluted form of tuma. It what's known as a regional tumor. Regional tumor meaning it's the thing that made direct contact with the source of tumor. A regional tumor that touches oil and mashkin not all the macallan transmits tumor. That thing now is a little less tummy meaning it's tumor is a little bit diluted. It's what's known as a shane la tumor. A shane could be metamer but only something that's very vulnerable. Only something that's very sensitive. Only something that has a lot of kedusha such as truman kashan. So a shane can make truman kashan into a shane la tumor. And then finally a shane la tumor could be metamer kashan not truman because khalid in the kodesh maybe truman but the point is you could even have a review la tumor or be it only if it's kashan. Here's the point. In the world of khulan the highest or lowest depending on if you're a glass half empty or glass half full but the highest or lowest level of tumor that you can have is a shane la tumor because a shane can't be oil and khulan into a shane la tumor. So if they go more and the makasho our mission we have four eyes is talking about khulan. If that's the case what's this discussion of the khulan and the masua voice the fish and the khulan and the dam the dam and the masua voice is a shane la tumor and a shane is anyways not oil and shane because it's officially if the mission was talking about shane kashan boom. Kashan could be a shane or by the way it can even be a review but being that it's mukha that we're dealing with khulan so if they go more and the great sakasha I don't understand pasha and the mission and after a a very noisy daf gemara what emerged was [snorts] two pashatim that that my ram said to say pasha and the mission. The first was amra of nakman amra of abba of avua. He said the mission is talking about khulan granted but it's not the most typical khulan rather we're dealing with my shane. What's unique about my shane? My shane has all the characteristics bet aim of chulin. You could have a chiyuv of Maiser Shaini, the dam of Maiser Shaini for sure is going to be machshir. There's no chiyuv hakodesh when it comes to Maiser Shaini. If you shach Maiser Shaini, you don't have to be mekabel all the dam. But at the same time, Maiser Shaini, according to some shittos, it's the shittas acharonim, it's the Lo Yichal Me'ir, has a halacha that it's subject to the laws of shlishi letumah. So the Mishnah is talking about chulin. Hence, you could check off the four boxes that the Gemara feels is proof that we're dealing with chulin. What was the kasha? If it's chulin, there's no shlishi letumah. We're talking about a very unique type of chulin. We're talking about chulin Maiser Shaini according to the shittas that all the Maiser Shaini is subject to a shlishi letumah. The second teretz of the Gemara was Rab Papa. Rab Papa said that inasmuch as ordinarily your dayim are considered to be a shaini letumah, but there is a concept, it's Rab Shimon bar Elazar, Rab Akiva said it, there is a makor in the Tanaim that sometimes your dayim could be treifos. Your dayim could be rishon letumah. So Rab Akiva my shittah in our Mishnah, when it says nechalim be your dayim is treifos, we don't mean where it's a shaini letumah because that's pshita. What we mean is where it's even a rishon letumah. Kamashma lan being that it was never chulin because there was no dam, the halacha is even with a rishon letumah. Today's daf is going to present a third teretz. Now it's interesting because the third teretz is going to take about 1 second to say. We can literally finish the daf and call it a day or excel and go to the raid in less than a minute. Stating that today's daf has a repetition. And it's because despite the fact that the teretz itself that the Gemara is going to say is a very short and straightforward teretz, but there's a whole sugya that surrounds this teretz, specifically a machlokes Rab Eliezer and Rab Yehoshua, a machlokes Rab Eliezer and Rab Yehoshua which is always a big deal. But this one is in Maseches Tairus Bais Mishnah Bais, which means it's not only a big deal, but it's also a little bit obscure. The bottom line is, what is the third Tairus of the Gemara? Let's say it, Bal Pe'or's. The Gemara is going to say it's Omar Abba Lazar, Omar Abba Oshiya. The Mishnah was talking about Chullin, granted for Raya's is talking about Chullin. Chullin, however, that could become a Shlishi l'Tumah. I thought there's no such thing. We're dealing with Chullin she'nasu al tairus hakodesh. Now, the idea of Chullin she'nasu al tairus hakodesh appeared prominently in the very, very beginning of the Masseches on Daled Bais, Hekel Shochtin u'Shchitasun Ksheira, Hekel Asuya Mayim. The Gemara had six p'shatim and the first p'shat related to this idea of Chullin she'nasu al tairus hakodesh. So, what does that mean? So, once upon a time when the Yidden lived in a world of Kodesh, there were people that took upon themselves a very, very severe stringency, something that they really didn't have to do. But they took upon themselves a Chumra and they said that we're going to be careful that we're going to eat our Chullin as if it was Kodesh. Meaning, we're going to watch it and protect it literally as if it's Kodesh. Kodesh has to be protected. Kodesh could become even a Revi'i l'Tumah, right? So, you have to be so careful that it doesn't come in contact with Tumah. Don't even let it come in contact with a Shlishi l'Tumah, kal v'chomer a Sheini, a Rishon, or an Av Tumah. Additionally, if Kodesh becomes Tamei and somebody eats it, that's Tumas Mikdash v'Kodeshav. If somebody is Tamei and he eats Kodesh, carbon oilah v'yoreid. There's some serious Halachas that are nigay'a the world of Kodesh of Tumah. Chullin, that's a whole different inyan. Amei Ha'aretz, we know where a Nazir to eat Chullin b'Tahara, the Chaveirim are, but even the Chaveirim that eat Chullin b'Tahara, they ate it b'Tahara, they didn't watch it as if it was Kodesh. Kodesh requires a Shmira m'ula. It requires a Shmira elyonah. That goes without saying. Stating that to a people that used to eat their Chullin al tairus hakodesh. They that thing that I know sometimes I eat kodesh and sometimes I eat who and what if I confuse my container of kodesh with my container of who and it could be a terrible terrible thing. As a result, I'm going to take all the food that comes in contact with me and I'm going to treat it literally as if it's kodesh. And that's what's known as kodesh. Okay, very nice. Kodesh to those people that used to eat their who and I'll tell you something, but here's the kodesh. It became a reality this in that said that if you're someone that keeps your who and I'll tell you something, well, guess what? Your who is going to take on kodesh qualities and kodesh properties. Now, come moving, but it's going to take on kodesh qualities. What does that mean? If you're a person that eats who and I'll tell you something, you can't eat who in that stomach. Can't eat who in that stomach? Yeah, because it's almost like kodesh in that stomach. Here's another one. If you're someone that eats your who and I'll tell you something, it could become a even though it's who. It could become a even though it's who. So, the is going to say our mission words that you can have who and that's a I thought there's no such thing. I thought the whole concept the whole institution is that on arrival the is the mission is talking about who and I'll tell you something, who and I'll tell you something takes on a life of its own. I'll tell you something, it could be a I'll tell you something. That's what's going on in the mission. So, if the mission is somebody who and I'll tell you something, I'll tell you something. And no came out eyes and I'll tell you something cuz you and I'll tell you something I'll tell you something. True, but who and I'll tell you something I'll tell you something that already is going to be different either way. That is the high level the shortest version of really the seculum of today's daf. But, now we have to learn the daf. So, is the halo gigamaru on my rabba osner? On my rabba oshio. So, rabba osner in the name of rabba oshio. Our mishna is chulishin as tires and it's these next words that usher in chul and daf lamed dalet and lamed dalet. Who the like of rabba yeshua. And then rabba osner said over I was mikabel from rabba oshio that if the mishna is talking about chulishin as tires and it's kodesh, it must be the mishna is the like of rabba yeshua. The t'nan we learned in the mishna. This is not a tanyo. This is very much a mishna. Perek base, mishna base in maseches tires. Let's give a tiny bit of an introduction to this mishna. The mishna is talking about if somebody eats food that is tamei. So, if you ask the man on the street, if somebody eats food that's tamei, what do you think the halacha is? He should tell you that based on the basic rules and regulation of how tumat tahaara works, is this person shouldn't be tamei. He shouldn't be tamei for touching it. He shouldn't be tamei for eating it. What's the reason? The reason is because ochlin can be at best a rishon letoma. And a rishon is not oiser sheini adam letahara. Only ochlin umashkin. Which means a person can't become tamei if he touches food. Now, the only exception to that is the nevala. We know that eating nevala. But, here's the point. If somebody would eat food that's tamei, the halacha is he himself really meikar din shouldn't be tamei. Stating that, now is going to tell us that the rabbonan came along and the rabbonan said that if somebody eats to- food that's tamei, he's going to become tamei. The shaila in the mishna is going to be what level of tuma is he going to have. By the way, this takana that if somebody eats food that's tamei, he himself becomes tamei is one of the yochas dvarim that's discussed very prominently in the latter part of the first paragraph of Maseches Shabbos, but it raises up the halocha in the Gemara in the Mishnah. Rebbe Eliezer Rebbe Eliezer said, "Ochel ochel rishon rishon." If somebody eats food that's a rishon l'tumah, he becomes a rishon l'tumah. Sheini, if somebody eats food that's a sheini l'tumah, sheini becomes a sheini l'tumah. Shlishi, if you eat food that's a shlishi l'tumah, shlishi you become a shlishi. In other words, according to Rebbe Eliezer, you are what you eat. You eat a rishon, you just became a rishon. You eat a sheini, you became a sheini. You eat a shlishi, you become a shlishi. Rebbe Yehoshua omer, Rebbe Yehoshua said way more complicated. "Ochel ochel rishon." If somebody eats food that's a rishon v'sheini or food that's a sheini, sheini becomes a sheini. >> [snorts] >> So, if you eat a rishon, you become a sheini. If you eat a sheini, you become a sheini. So, if you eat a sheini, you are what you eat. But, if you eat a rishon, you're a sheini. Shlishi, what if you eat a shlishi? This gets really tricky. Sheini, then you go to the eggs, then you're also a sheini. Additionally, Rebbe Yehoshua said in sheini l'tumah, there's no such thing as a sheini l'tumah. This is something we're going to talk about in tomorrow's stuff. And finally, Rebbe Yehoshua concluded his statement by saying "B'chulin sh'na'as al t'haras trumah." That this whole halocha is [clears throat] n'geya chulin sh'na'as al t'haras trumah. Now, why is Rebbe Yehoshua adding this line that we're talking about chulin sh'na'as al t'haras trumah? So, the Me'iri says, the Me'iri is in Maseches Sotah, but the Me'iri explains in the tome of the t'haras sugiyah there that if the Mishnah is talking about somebody that ate a shlishi l'tumah, then by definition the Mishnah must be talking about someone that did something very, very bad. The reason is cuz only trumah and kodshim can be a shlishi l'tumah. And not allowed to eat trumah and kodshim that's tumah. We don't want the Mishnah to be talking about someone [snorts] that ate something that's Rebbe Yehoshua put it out there. And he said, "I know these halocha's are true that if somebody would go ahead and eat the the real shlishi. But, it's also n'geya if the person didn't do an aveira. It's also n'geya if a person ate something that really is allowed to eat cuz there's nothing wrong with eating food that's tumah. Something that the prushim didn't do, but it's something really that you're not allowed to do. So, it's said that even in a case where you didn't do something wrong per se, where the recent change of a sushi, even the sushi was How's it possible to have a sushi that's cooling? The cooling should not all tires truma. Now, who's not all tires truma sounds very similar to who's not all tires but it's not the same thing. What's the difference? So, obviously the people that ate cooling all tires truma, they used to treat their cooling not as if it was that requires They used to eat it as if it was truma which only requires a schmear but here's the bottom line. Said in the name of I'm looking at in this mission and I see that is discussing a lot with somebody a sushi and he didn't want to say that it's talking about what the guy did in a where he ate truma that was done. So, he wanted it to be where it was cooling. And what was his where is it right? How do you have an example where you could have cooling that's a sushi he says I'll tell you how it's possible. Cooling should not all tires truma. You know what it sounds like? All tires truma in it sounds like it's only possible to cooling was being eaten all tires a truma about tires light but not all tires must be cuz somebody holds cooling should not all tires possible. He obviously doesn't hold to something called cooling should not all tires and if that's the case that the mission is talking about cooling should not all tires it has to be the let's explain this a little bit better. What the name of saying is our mission is talking about cooling should not all tires a dish. You should know what's like cuz I have a right from the mission of he doesn't hold of cooling should not all tires you know I know that? Cuz made an attempt in the mission of what's the with the person ate a sushi where in his world what happens to you? You become a shiny you go backwards but what was the attempt of the attempt of what was why do you say cooling should not all tires truma? He could have said cooling should not all tires or must be because no such thing as Koidish. Oh, there's no such thing as Tyrus Koidish. Must be our mission is going to like it. Rabbi, yeah, hi, sure. Now, let's just hit the pause button for 1 second. It's before the understands right now that she does is there's something called Tyrus no such thing as Tyrus Koidish. Does that make any sense? What's the difference? If Tyrus takes on a life of its own and now it could become a why is Tyrus Koidish not be that way? Oh, and by the way, isn't it in Svara just the opposite? My Tyrus which is more than Koidish there's something called Tyrus then certainly Koidish which is more than Tyrus there should be something called Tyrus so Rashi asks the kasha and Rashi says you have to say the reason is because for someone to eat was a lot more than for somebody to eat Koidish. Why? So, first of all, for example, there's only the as opposed to a So, you can buy is a lot of even the are even allowed to so it was much more to be an than it was to be an Koidish. Being that it was more so the people that took on the camera to eat Tyrus that was like a prevalent thing. Oh, it's a prevalent thing. So, then we're going to say it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. You take on this well, your becomes your as opposed to Tyrus Koidish that the whole Indian of eating was not so rare and the fact to be an Tyrus Koidish that was extremely rare. In the words of Rashi, if you take on this you're a bottle of data. You're a you're just a huge huge Oh, and if that's the case, it doesn't necessarily take on a reality. But either way, tomorrow we have not talking about talking about Tyrus with the like of a show. because I see made in a mission must be because eat as opposed to that already asks the very obvious question. I mean it's so obvious and that is why did make an admission that we're talking about Kodesh. And therefore it has to be the making an admission is talking about Kodesh or and therefore it could be even according to but the terrorists is almost as obvious. The mission is can't say that don't even have such a because the mission is said the mission is is talking about now the what person used to eat his all of that makes any sense. You can't have that's true. But the mission is says my what if it's true it does make sense. There's no such thing as a mission. So if you tell him you can't have that's true and you could do whatever you want. You could eat your anything. Your Cheerios all of that's true. That's not the point. The point is is that you want to take on a life of its own. It has to be a real legitimate thing. It can't be a bottle of but the mission is says oh if it has to be real then why if somebody eats a all of that's true which our mission is clearly talking about would be real. The mission is says no it's very very different and the reason is is because mission is people that used to eat if you hold to something called all of that's true it would include all even that can't be why because so at the end of [laughter] the day if if this is some stringency that we're putting in place >> [snorts] >> then it makes sense it should be true by even that can't really be but and therefore if you're someone that's all of that's true it is no way in the world in your in the reality of your that it would extend itself to her. Therefore, our mission be talking about who knows there's no way has to be talking about in the world of America. It's only. That holds that there's something called who at the very least it's the way of cuz you said clearly who knows I'll tell you and it's not my in such a small one second make a very easy and that is the third of the world. Was I was the mission is talking not about who knows I'll tell you this. >> [snorts] >> Who knows I'll tell you this takes on a life of its own and one of the specific cotton of the fact that it takes on a life of its own is that it can become even a solution just added it's the way of who knows cuz you said in this mission that there's something called who knows but there's no such thing as who knows by the way who would be the mission of life so we mentioned the second of the year cuz that's the who knows didn't say that we're talking about who knows I'll tell you this. Who knows is the one that said we're talking about who knows I'll tell you this so from the steam of of probably he holds that I agree it's not for this to be a discussion about the real true man the real we're probably. Someone who didn't do like a terrible right now he ate what type of I don't know who knows I'll tell you this who knows I'll tell you this probably anyone he didn't get involved probably would be putting a name to the face in terms of who holds who knows I'll tell you this but the of the world is the way of who said that the only thing you have is who knows I'll tell you this. You don't have who knows I'll tell you this who knows I'll tell you this. I'm a ruler who said I'm a who knows I'll tell you this who knows I'll tell you. >> that the Mishnah is And it's the way of I'm all in on the third terrace. I just don't agree with that mate of the way of Yeshua. Now what's the basis to say the way of Yeshua? We talk about And what was the deal? I will just be opposite. I think the way you're supposed to read this is just the This was like we said in Sparta. It's partial of Yeshua all the way this works. But I think this is true even of Yeshua. In other words, in other words, is going with the terrace But he was in Yeshua just the opposite. the way of Yeshua Mishnah base terrace of Trumah terrace doesn't make sense I hold when he said terrace of Trumah he meant even of if that's the case terrace of Yeshua terrace terrace Yeshua So it's the same terrace. What's the is it the way of Yeshua or is it love of Yeshua? the way of Yeshua. Now Ulla said that who was it that said that the Mishnah is the way of Yeshua? man of Yeshua Who are the way of Yeshua or who is the way of Ulla that is referring to? And the Gemara says Rabba bar bar Hana. It's the Amora Rabba bar bar Hana. Top Tosfos Tosfos says, why you have to come up with a new Amora? Why can't you say it was Rabba bar bar Hana Amora bar bar Hana? Right? We already had this pshat like Rebbe Yehoshua. So Tosfos says it's because I have a raya from two Gemaras Bava Kama daf yud alef and Bava Basra daf kuf ches that Rabba bar bar Hana was always Rebbi. You wouldn't have called him a haver. So if he was referring to Rabba bar bar Hana wouldn't have said it. Fake Tosfos follow kasha. If that's the case, so why you even talking about your haver? Why don't you say my Rebbi like Rebbe Yehoshua and the halacha nishnas it. So I am Tosfos for Terrace today. But the bottom line is that's the top Tosfos on the amud. Regardless as the Gemara man haverayo, who's this haverayo? It's Rabba bar bar Hana. It's Rabba bar bar Hana. The Amora Rabba bar bar Hana Rebbi Yochanan cuz Rabba bar bar Hana is in the name of Rebbi Yochanan. We're going to have to hold that thought that Rabba bar bar Hana what he's about to say now is not his own shtikel Torah. He's saying in the name of Rebbi Yochanan. He said Maya had Rebbi Eliezer Rebbi Yehoshua had a machlokes. What was the shakta v'tarya between Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua? So Rabba bar bar Hana in the name of Rebbi Yochanan is going to present us that shakta v'tarya. But I think it's kedai before we see the shakta v'tarya to just chazer over the machlokes again because until now we really didn't need the machlokes. Until now we just needed Rebbi Yehoshua's one line and we had to know did he mean truma la fug kodesh or is it like me by a comma? So what is the machlokes Rebbi Eliezer Rebbi Yehoshua? It's actually a fascinating machlokes as we're going to see. Rebbi Eliezer holds that when Chazal in the Yud Ches Dvarim were mechadesh that if somebody eats food that's tamei, he himself becomes tamei, what they said was you become what you eat. So if you eat a rishon, you're a rishon. You eat a sheini, you're a sheini. You eat a shlishi, you're a shlishi. That's a very big chiddush. Let's meditate on this for a second because ordinarily tumah dilutes. So if I touch tumah, I don't become what I touched. I become an achos darga. If I touch the navel of the nation become a nation, the nation become a nation, the nation become a nation. But when it comes to eating it there, it's different. When it comes to eating it, I am what I ate. Well, see, the one this is that if somebody eats tomer, he becomes the heft of the tomer. That's the word. The oichel is like the maichel. That's the nukuda. So, just like the maichel is a nation, if I ate the maichel, I become the nation. When I touch tomer, I don't become what I touch. The tomer gets diluted. But when I eat tomer, I become the heft of the tomer. I BECOME THAT. THE oichel is literally like the maichel. Rebbe Shimon says, "No way." If anything, we're going to say Rebbe Shimon holds that really when you're oichel when you're oichel it could be less because the whole concept of eating tomer is really a hidush from the word. But the bottom line is Rebbe Shimon says no such thing that if somebody eats tomer, he becomes the heft of the tomer. That's why I eat a nation, I'm a nation, a nation, a nation, a nation, a nation. Okay, so what is the halacha? So, you would think that I don't know, maybe if I eat a nation, it should be like I touched it, I should become a nation, a nation, a nation, a nation, a nation unless you come up with something else. So, if Rebbe Shimon gave us something straightforward, it would be easy answer to this question. Rebbe Shimon gave us anything but that. Rebbe Shimon said, "Let me tell you how it works. If you eat a nation, you become a nation." So, you don't become the nation, you don't become what you ate. What is it? It's like mom said, "You touched it." If you touched it, there's a dilution. Okay, if I ate it, there's also dilution. Makes a lot of sense. But one second, before you get excited, if you eat a nation, then you become what you ate. Okay, now I'm confused. You ain't seen nothing yet cuz if you eat a nation, now you actually become more tomer. You become a nation. So, Rebbe Eliezer is giving us a very clear daughter of how this works. You are what you eat. The oichel becomes the maichel. That's the gather. That's the one this is how this works. Rebbe Shimon's sheet that seems to be all over the place. If I eat a nation, that's like I touched it. If eat a shiny, I eat is I'm a shiny. Eat a sleazy, ooh, I just stayed into my Now I went from being a sleazy all the way back into a shiny. Shitas Rabi Yeshua is very much coming to the way. Rabba bar bar Chana Yeshua is going to give us the behind the scenes of what went on over here, and the Yeshua will at the very least have a better understanding of Shitas Rabi Yeshua, and also will see clearly where Rabi Yeshua was coming from when he told us that in the world of tumah and taharah, you are what you eat. So says the Gemara, Amar Rabi Eliezer. So again, this is Rabba bar bar Chana talking in the name of Rabi Yochanan on the Yeshua mesorah that this is the behind the scenes of Rabi Eliezer bar Rabi Shimon. One interesting point that Rashi makes a very big deal about, and that is that what we're about to present, this Shakal of the time of Rabi Eliezer bar Rabi Shimon is not mentioned anywhere. It's not a Mishna, it's not a Braisa, it's not a Tosefta. It's right here. Right, we had the maiseh of Rabi Eliezer and Rabi Yeshua, that was in the Haggadah shel Pesach. I got the very least, remember this is not mentioned anywhere either. This has a makor in Gemara. It's a Gemara over here in Chullin daf lamed aleph lamed aleph. This is the only makor, and it comes from Rabi Yochanan. There's a reason this is significant in the cheshbon ha-sugyos, as we're going to see, because being that it comes from Rabi Yochanan, you can argue with it. If it's a mefurash Mishna and a Braisa, that means this shakal of the time that we're about to present is etched in stone. But being that it was something that the Amoraim had the mesorah, it actually creates a little bit of a leak in terms of its authenticity, and if somebody wants to go ahead and he wants to be mefakteik, and he wants to be choleik, this is something theoretically he'd be able to do. But anyway, says the Gemara, Amar Rabi Eliezer bar Rabi Shimon, so Rabi Eliezer turns to Rabi Shimon, he tells him, "Matzinu ochel chomer min ha-ochel." Okay. So what does that mean? Need nekudos over here. Right, matzinu ochel, you see that if somebody eats tumah, chomer min ha-ochel, or it'd be better if it said michael, that if somebody eats tumah, he himself is more tome than the oichel, the tome itself. What do you see that? The evil of niflas oif tahor. Here's the example. The nevelah of an oif tahor. So, the halacha is b'chut l'meisah, if somebody touches the nevelah of an oif tahor, he doesn't become tome. The evil oichelah, but if somebody eats it, the oichel, the person, right? If you look at the person, the person is mitameh b'gode um m'beisah avosav. So, you see that someone that eats tome is more tome than the tome itself. The tome itself, the nevelah of an oif tahor, if you touch it, nothing happens. But, [snorts] at the same time, if you eat it, you become tome. After the kach, you can be mitameh b'gode um so, the halacha of this is that Rebbi Eliezer said, "If that's the case, heichu l'naso oichel k'meichel?" So, how could you tell me that at the very least, I love him in a day, at the very least, if somebody ate tome, he should be as tome as the tome that he ate. You see that someone that eats tome, he actually is more tome than the tome. So, if I eat a rishon, you're going to tell me that I now became a shaini. I have to be a very least have to be a rishon. I would argue maybe more, but that I love him in a day, at least cannot can't make him more. But, the point is, says Rebbi Eliezer, you see clearly that the oichel tome is more tome than the than the cheftz of the tome. The cheftz of the tome, the nevelah of an oif tahor, can't be mitameh, but the person that ate the nevelah of an oif tahor, he could be mitameh. Rebbi Shimon, what's Rebbi Shimon going to respond? He says, "Nevelah of an oif tahor l'gamrei no." Rebbi Shimon doesn't say you are what you ate. He clearly doesn't know that the oichel is more chomer than the meichel. Why not? Don't you see by the nevelah of an oif tahor, you do, but it's different. And the reason is the chiddush of this whole parsha, nevelah of an oif tahor is a chiddush. I mean, you can't come and tell me nevelah of an oif tahor is a rayah to this whole idea. It's way too of a much of a parsha. As a result, you can't learn anything from there. Elo, as a matter of fact, Rebbi Shimon turned to Rebbi Eliezer and he told him, "I'll prove to you just the opposite. Matzinu sham meichel chomer min oichel." I'll show you that the cheftz of the tome is more chomer than the oichel tome. How do I know that? The evil meichel, because when it comes to the meichel b'kaveyah, so the law is that when oichel becomes to me it could be met out of it, right? It's met out of it only if it's a most of the time I hold that when we say regarding to doesn't mean it has to be a in order to become to me it means it has to be a in order to be met out of it in order to convey to me but the bottom line is you need a in the of the in order for it to be able to be met out of it but as it relates to someone that eats to me who has an ability to be met out of it out of the out of This whole mission entire is has a sheer and the sheer is a price. Rashi says a price is two so it's a much bigger sheer. So if that's the case you see if I care you see the is more common than the because the sheer is a much more common than the sheer. It's a that's two you need less which means it's more common. So you see clearly that the is more common than the so if the is more common than the so [clears throat] you can't tell me then that when I go ahead and I eat the then I'm going to be more common at the very least as common or just the opposite. You see it's it's less and if it's less then you probably should follow the that you always follow in the world of conveying to me and that is if there's to me so what happens is always in a higher so if you eat the you should become a right that would be more but what's going to respond to all the is more common than the so then why is it when it comes to the in the reverse he said to me I don't know You can't prove anything from Rashi says that the reason is because the are all based on Rashi says the is a quotes the in the learns it from a which is a as it relates to why the is when it comes to someone that eats to me that the talks about in Shabbos places brings it on the bottom of days, again from the Yud Kuf Dvarim, the gives a reason for it. But being that there's it for those shiurim, so that has special chashbonos. And being that there's special chashbonos, you can't get involved. All right, Rebbi Eliezer is talking. He said, "L'fi rach, according to you, shani oichel um rishon shani oichel. I understand why a rishon becomes a shani and a shani becomes a shlishi. Meaning, you're telling me the oichel is not more common than the mashkeh. Okay. So what then should the halacha of an oichel become and be? Probably it I don't know, follow the regular gidurim of how tumah is transmitted. So an av makes a rishon, a rishon makes a shani, a shani makes a shlishi. So if I eat a rishon, I should become a shani. So zogt der Reb Rebbi Eliezer, "It was gut. Yoffeh. You're saying very nice. As it relates to why if you eat the rishon, you become a shani. Ober shani, shani lamah?" Right? But why is it that if you eat a shani, you become a shani? Based on your methodology, a shani should become a shlishi. Meaning, Rebbi Yehoshua, you're telling me you're not you're not what you eat? Got it. Then how come when you eat a shani, you are what you eat? Why are you a shani? I'm a layman. So I had to get back to this. He told me the matzinu sha shani oichel shani al yedai mashkin. Because there is a time where a shani touches a shani or a shani touches oichel and that oichel is going to be a shani as opposed to a shlishi. When is that? If it touches al yedai mashkin. Now the background to this halacha is that if a shani letumah touches mashkin, the mashkin becomes a rishon letumah. This is also one of the Yud Kuf Dvarim. Chazal were very machmir on tumas mashkin. You know why? It's an interesting reason. It's because oichel, in order for it to become tamei, has to become muchshar lekabel tumah. Mashkin wakes up in the morning muchshar lekabel tumah. Right? It's liquid by definition. It doesn't need to be muchshar lekabel tumah. As a result, it's way more vulnerable. If a sheretz falls on your potato, lav dafka it's tamei. But if a sheretz falls in your glass of wine one of the shmona shratzim, you have yourself an issue, right? So oichel is less vulnerable than mashkin. And therefore, Chazal were more machmir when it comes to mashkin. And one of the Yud Kuf Dvarim is that mashkin always becomes a rishon l'tumah. But here's the point, what would be if a shaini l'tumah would touch food that was wet, that had mashkin on it, right? There was real mashkin on it right now. It would make the mashkin into a rishon and then the rishon of the mashkin would make the food into a shaini. So you have a So said you want to know why I hold if you eat shaini, you become a shaini. Not because I hold you are what you eat. It's because I hold when you eat it's as if you touched. But once you find the mussig of a shaini touching food that becoming a shaini or be it derech mashkin. So I hold this is the way it should be in this case as well. Am So [snorts] Rebbe Eliezer told Rebbe Yehoshua back, well if that's the case for a mashkin not me t'rila hava. So why don't you say that if somebody eats a shaini, he should become a rishon? Why should he become a rishon? Because if you touch food sometimes it could become a rishon. When is that? If you touched mashkin. So if again shaini touches mashkin the mashkin becomes a rishon. And we're saying that when you eat it's the equivalent of touching. Well, if that's the case, then if you go ahead and you eat a shaini, maybe you should go ahead and you should become a rishon. Now what's the makor that mashkin becomes a rishon? Now we just spoke of that, it was implied from the fact of motzi shaini osei shaini al dei mashkin. But here we have the The t'na kol hapoislin b't'rumah m'tamin mashkin poislin b't'rumah m'zei a shaini l'tumah. So anything that's a shaini l'tumah makes the mashkin into a rishon l'tumah. Who's b'tvoiyo m'zei a shaini l'tumah but it's a more kolish t'ga shaini l'tumah over there it's going to be different. So said Rebbe Eliezer to Rebbe Yehoshua, I still don't understand what you're saying. Because again, I I understand that you hold that uh becomes a shaini. Because you hold eating is like touching. I HOLD when you eat, you become the shiktum. Right? What's my raya? My raya is from the Nilus of but you disagree with me. Okay, so when you eat it, it dilutes. Like it always dilutes. That's why when you eat a rishon, you become a shaini. But then why when you eat a shaini, do you become a shaini? You should become a shlishi. So what are you going to tell me? No, because sometimes when a when food touches a shaini, it does become a shaini. So therefore, I'm like the food. So if I touch the shaini, I'm also going to become a shaini. I hear not bad. But if that's the case, you're working with sometimes. Sometimes when food touches a shaini, it actually becomes a rishon. When is that? When it's mashkin. So maybe if you go ahead and you eat a shaini, you should also become a a rishon. Besides the oy, there's another kasha I have. Shlishi shaini lamo. Could you please explain to me Rabbi Yeshua why if you eat a shlishi, you become a shaini? That I really don't understand. So again, I understand why a rishon becomes a shaini. I disagree with you, but I got it. You hold eating it is not better than touching it. Why a shaini becomes a shaini, I hear. Because there is a time that a if food touches a shaini, it becomes a shaini. I rather don't understand it because there's also times it becomes a rishon. So if you eat a shaini, you become a rishon. And explain to me please why when I eat a shlishi, I become a shaini. You have a hint so when food touches a shlishi, it becomes a shaini. I don't. So if that's the case, why in the world would that ever be the case? So I I just don't understand. Possible shot I don't understand possible shot how this could play itself out now. It's interesting. Rabbi Yeshua now is going to respond. And really it's in Rabbi Yeshua's response that we're going to have the punchline of this whole debate. This whole shaka of a tie. But Rabbi Yeshua is only going to answer the second kasha. He's going to answer the shlishi shaini lamo. He's not going to answer the first kasha of why it is that the shaini is only a shaini. Meaning if you eat a shaini, you become a shaini, why you don't become a rishon. Sounds like Rabbi Yeshua just ignored that question. He wasn't even going to answer this question. Rashi says I'm going to tell you why he ignored it because Rabbi Yeshua turned to Rabbi Eliezer and he said, "Wink wink, come on. That's not even sphere. In the world of Rebbe Eliezer, Rebbe Yeshua, you know the answer. The answer is don't too much mashkin. Mashkin's very different. Mashkin's very vulnerable cuz I'm very when it comes to mashkin. So I know mashkin that touches a shaini becomes a rishon, but it doesn't mean that if a person eats a shaini, he should become a rishon. I think the most you could have is that if a person eats a shaini, he could become a shaini because you find that touches a shaini could become a shaini or be it mashkin. So as it relates to that kasha, Rashi's not even going to discuss that kasha. Rashi, by the way, doesn't agree so much with Rashi's in the sugia and this is a primary reason why he doesn't. But the other kasha is a bomb kasha and that is what's the shot that if a person would go ahead and he would eat a shlishi, that the halacha is that now he would become a a shaini. What should he become? I don't know, he should become a revi, right? In the world of Rebbe Yeshua. Why is it that he's going to become a a shaini? So the Gemara says, So the Gemara says, "Amala, he told him, "When I said my halacha, didn't I tell you? I thought I was very clear in the Mishnah. I said that the Mishnah is talking about I told you that. I told you we're talking about And being that I said we're talking about that is the answer. You know why? Because even though we're dealing with someone that washed this al tiras truma, but his washing of al tiras truma is only good for truma, it's not good for and therefore even after treat the person as a shaini with him. So what does this even mean? So the background to this, which is going to be discussed more in the in tomorrow's daf, is really a Mishnah in Chagiga. The Mishnah says big day is madras which means as follows. People that were people that used to eat truma. So in our house we eat truma, right? So these people their bigadim was considered tamei. It was a madrish, that's a fancy way of saying tumah. It was considered tumah for people that were oichel kodshim. I wouldn't mean if these people eat trumah, they're probably nizzar that begotten should be tahor. It's true, but they watch their begotten on the trumah level. They don't watch it on the kodshim level. Now, it's the same thing, but it's not because there's a certain z'chirus people have when they know that kodshim is at stake, tumas mikdash v'kodshav, and less so when they know that only trumah is at stake. So, there's an idea that big day oichlei trumah is madrish l'oichlei kodshim. Right, just like there's an idea big day am ha'aretz is a madrish for everybody. Even the begotten of someone that's oichel trumah, and he does it mamish b'taharah, but it's still a madrish l'kodshim because this is one of the chumaros that you have in kodshim that you the begotten klappi kodshim are going to be treated as tumah. Okay. Says Rebbi Yishmael, I told you in the Mishnah that the Mishnah, as far as I'm concerned, is only nigaya chulin she'nasu al taharas trumah, right? Isn't that the conversation we had? So, we're talking about chulin she'nasu al taharas trumah. Being that I told you we're talking about chulin she'nasu al taharas trumah, that means that this person who is watching his food was only watching it for trumah. He wasn't watching it for kodshim. Being that he wasn't watching it for kodshim, so it's for that reason klappi kodshim klappi kodshim, anything that this person is going to put in his mouth is going to have to be treated as if it might be tumah. It's going to have to be treated as if it might be tumah. Okay. So, if this person now, this person who's eating shlishi of chulin she'nasu al taharas trumah, klappi trumah, it's a shlishi. Klappi chulin she'nasu al taharas trumah, it's a shlishi. Oh, but klappi kodshim, what is this food? This food might be rishon l'tumah because any shmirah that he did for this food was not considered a shmirah in the world of kodshim. What's the halacha according to Rebbi Yishmael? If you eat a rishon, you become a shaini. That's why you're going to become a shaini. The reason you're going to become a shaini right now is because as far as I'm concerned, you didn't watch this food at all. Right, there's no shmira whatsoever over here. And if that's the case, you have to be chiyush that maybe it's a rishon of tumah. And to the extent that it might be a rishon of tumah, what do you mean it's a rishon of tumah? I I I I I ate a shlishi. Klappi trumah, it's a shlishi. But klappi kodesh, there was no shmira at all. I mean, the klappi kodesh there was no truma shmira at all. You have to think the worst case scenario. What's the worst case scenario? It's a rishon. What should this Rabbi Yeshua if you eat a rishon, you become a shaini? It's for that reason the halacha is that you are going to become a shaini. But either way, either way, you ready? This concludes the exchange between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yeshua. So again, Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yeshua had this big debate. If somebody goes ahead and he eats tumah, which may correct me, it shouldn't be anything. But it's one of the yuchas d'varim that we say that it's going to be a problem. Rabbi Eliezer's shittah was extremely straightforward. You are what you eat. Meaning, the oichel becomes the maichel. Eat a rishon, you're a rishon. Shaini, you're a shaini. Eat a shlishi, you're a shlishi. Meaning, if I eat a rishon and I touch something, I make it a shaini. I literally become the oichel. What is Rabbi Yeshua? Rabbi Yeshua says, "No, there's no such thing that the oichel becomes the maichel." Right, Rabbi Eliezer's makor was nivlas ha'tar. Rabbi Yeshua says, "I'm not maskim to that. Nivlas ha'tar like a minyan, that whole parsha is a chiddush." Okay, so what's the halacha? If you eat it, it's as if you touched it. Really, is that Rabbi Yeshua's halacha? Let's see. So, Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yeshua duked it out. Right, this is where they had the machlokes. Rishon becomes a shaini. Ah, that's gevaldik. Shaini becomes a shaini. So, Rabbi Yeshua explained. He said the reason a shaini becomes a shaini is because you find sometimes that a food touches a shaini, it becomes a shaini. Ah, you're saying good say better. You find sometimes that if something touches a shaini, it becomes a rishon. Oh, that's mashkin. Rashi says Rabbi Yeshua didn't even feel he had to respond to that. Why if I eat a shlishi, do I become a shaini? The reason is is because if I ate a shlishi, so it needed this shmira, but it's not considered a shmira l'inyan kodesh. And therefore, klappi kodesh, we have to treat me as if I'm a shaini because klappi Kodesh we have to think the worst that it might even be a rishon l'tuma. If it's a rishon l'tuma, I'm going to be a shaini. But if you go back to Rabbi Yeshua's halacha, Rabbi Yeshua said that if somebody eats a shlishi, he's a shaini l'Kodesh. He said it m'forash. HE DIDN'T SAY you're a shaini for everything. Only l'Kodesh you're a shaini. BECAUSE ONLY KLAPPI'S Kodesh we assume that you never even washed it. So I don't know, might be the real tuma. And it's for that reason Rabbi Yeshua d'shitasu holds someone who eats a rishon becomes a shaini is going to hold that in this situation the klappi Kodesh al k'vanam is going to end up being a shaini l'tum. So again, this is the shakul v'taryo between Rabbi Eliezer and between Rabbi Yeshua. But why did we bring the shakul v'taryo? We brought it for one reason. Because Ulla said Chavraya amri b'chul sh'nasu al t'aros hakodesh d'like Rabbi Yeshua. That the Chavraya held that when Rabbi Yeshua said in the Mishna that we're talking about chul sh'nasu al t'aros hatuma, he meant dafka chul sh'nasu al t'aros hatuma as opposed to chul sh'nasu al t'aros hakodesh. Which was like Rabbi Elozar said in the name of Rabbi Shimon. It's not Rabbi Elozar and Rabbi Shimon, he's not the Chavraya because he's the Rebbe. But at the same time, that sheet that mahalek. But Ulla said am choyevik. I hold not that way. I hold that when Rabbi Yeshua said chul sh'nasu al t'aros hatuma, he didn't mean l'afuke chul sh'nasu al t'aros hakodesh. But the certainly l'mebayah, it goes without saying that it's going to be true for chul sh'nasu al t'aros hakodesh. Question was, where did Chavraya say it? Where did you see it in Chavraya? The answer is, it's from this shakul v'taryo that Chavraya, who was Rabbi had b'mesora from the great Rabbi Yochanan, was the behind the scenes shakul v'taryo between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yeshua. Now the question is, where do you see it in the exchange? Where do you see it in the exchange? Do you see that Rabbi Yeshua held that chul sh'nasu al t'aros hatuma is dafka? Oh, so you see it from the end, right? You see it from the last line. Amar lei Abaye l'Rabbi Amarti al um hatuma. We talk about chul sh'nasu al t'aros hatuma. And that's why if somebody eats a shlishi, he becomes a sheini. Cuz if somebody would eat the khum sh'na'as al ta'aris hakodesh shlishi, you wouldn't become a sheini, right? Why would you be a sheini like kodesh? In what Yeshua's world, you'd probably be a revi. But if khum sh'na'as al ta'aris of truma, not kodesh, and that's why klapi kodesh, it's not a shmira at all. And that's why you end up assuming that it might even be a reishin. And that's why you're going to be a sheini. Right? That's the short answer. And I think that the for that for the yemi purposes, you could probably get away and make a bee line for the end of this daf if you chose to just by saying this ta'aris. But it's not intellectually honest if you walk away saying that. And that's why there's a very long krashia on the bottom of daf lamed alef metatei And the reason is as follows. The reason is because really there's makom to say that in the shakwa of the ta'aya where Yeshua tells Rebbe Eliezer af anilo yo marti ela b'truma is not that it's only possible to have khum sh'na'as al ta'aris truma and sh'nei g'zeirim of khum sh'na'as al ta'aris kodesh but it's an kimta in what he said. Meaning I'm telling you that if you eat a shlishi, you become a sheini. You tell me it makes no sense, Rebbe Yeshua. I'm telling you khum sh'na'as kinam of khum sh'na'as al ta'aris truma. Not that there's no such thing as khum sh'na'as al ta'aris hakodesh. There is such a thing as khum sh'na'as al ta'aris hakodesh. And when you eat khum sh'na'as al ta'aris hakodesh shlishi, you become a revi. YOU DON'T BECOME A SHEINI. But when I said sheini like kodesh, I meant as asur truma. But you want to know what I would have said if I was told my khum sh'na'as al ta'aris kodesh? I would have said a revi. But where do you see the Rebbe Akiva and Rebbe Yochanan hold there's no such thing as khum sh'na'as al ta'aris kodesh? Again, he said the words af anilo yo marti ELA B'TRUMA. BUT DOES THAT MEAN HE DOESN'T HOLD of khum sh'na'as al ta'aris hakodesh? NO. IT MEANS ANILO YO MARTI. THIS HALACHA is only true about khum sh'na'as al ta'aris truma. What would BE IF IT'S KHUM SH'NA'AS AL ta'aris hakodesh? It would be another a So what shiyachus? Makes no sense. Where does Ulla see in Rabba bar bar Chana that Rabba bar Chana understands Reb Yehoshua that there's no such THING AS WHICH MEANS THAT OUR MISHNAH WE WERE MAKING the Mishnah must be the way Reb Yehoshua holds of something called it's just THIS MISHNAH POINT IS NOT TALKING ABOUT. IT'S WHAT SHAI'ICHIS. What felt like such an easy p'shat in the Gemara really has zero avon in the world. He never said the this is the only thing there is. He said I found it later in my Mishnah that shlishis shainis is talking about shlishis shainis. That's why there's a long Rashi. So what does Rashi say? So Rashi says as follows. Rashi says that if that's what Reb Yehoshua meant, if what Reb Yehoshua meant when he said shlishis trumah was to explain why if someone eats shlishis he becomes a shainis kodesh. If that's what he meant, Reb Eliezer should have understood that's what he meant. And he shouldn't have asked him the question in the first place. You want to ask me why a shainis shainis? I understand. You want to ask me why a shainis not shlishis? Reb Yehoshua didn't even think he needed to answer that question. That I also always gets exciting when there's Reb Eliezer Reb Yehoshua. But you're asking me why the shainis why the shlishis shainis? I told it to you. The shlishis trumah I explained it. The parentness when Reb Yehoshua said shlishis trumah and there's no one who would have understood Reb Yehoshua meant better than Reb Eliezer. When Reb Yehoshua said the words shlishis trumah you know Reb Eliezer heard him say? He heard him say that when I talk about eating shlishis, I'm not talking about eating the real shlishis. I'm talking about chulin. Okay, what's shai'ich to chulin? Shlishis trumah. Right? That's That's shai'ich. He didn't hear Reb Yehoshua explaining his halacha of why if someone eats a shlishis becomes a shainis kodesh. He heard HIM SAYING A FACT THAT IT'S ONLY IN A GAY AS THAT'S WHAT I look at. It's only in a gay as that's what I look at by so let me show YOU HOW I EXPLAINED HIMSELF. BEING THAT he never explained himself, so really I have to ask so why is it shiny? So I told him back. He said didn't I tell you that my is only in a gay or that's what I look at. If it's only in a gay or that's what I LOOK AT IT'S POSSIBLE WHAT MEANS TO SAY AGAIN. It's possible what the Torah Once you understand that you should you should have if it's also in a gay or that's what I look at. So you're right it doesn't make sense cuz but being that I'm only saying this or that's what I look at. And we know big day is so you can understand it. But here's the point. If was explaining his position but not telling you macro high level what he holds in the world of that's what I look at then there's no basis for his question. The only reason question makes any sense is cuz I explained himself. IF I EXPLAIN myself you don't ask me what I meant, right? I mean you explain yourself well but the point is at least you know what he's TRYING TO SAY. FROM THE FACT THAT is on the defense it sounds like he never gave a he never explained his so what did he mean when he said he's making and he's making a global statement. He's saying this whole is only in a gay or that's what I look at. I'll tell you this. I told him. Okay but he never explained himself oh and by the way there's two ways to even interpret that statement cuz you can understand the statement it's only in a gay or that's what I look at or you can understand the statement it's even in a gay or that's what I look at. And let me buy you it goes without saying it's going to be in a gay or that's what I look at. But he's about what he's looking at Yeshua. He certainly never explained this halacha. And even if Rebbe Eliezer can anticipate what Rebbe Yeshua might be thinking, what's the reason that if you eat shlishi become a shaini? But that would only explain it in the case of I don't know. I'm looking at Rebbe Yeshua. I think he might hold this halacha even cuz maybe when he said he's saying it's possible from the fact that Rebbe Eliezer asked the question, you see Rebbe Yeshua is laying out the law of the land that's called all areas of and what do you see from his terrace to Rebbe Eliezer? I find WHEN I MADE THAT STATEMENT, THE STATEMENT WAS NOT LIKE ME IT WAS ONLY THAT and if it's only that, that's the only place I said my halacha of the only place I said my halacha is only that's that it's possible what the terrace is. What's the bottom line? The bottom line is again, the terrace to the Mishnah going way back to the beginning of the daf is so easy. Mishnah that there's a concept of having a shlishi fighting the daf started with the like Rebbe Yeshua cuz Rebbe Yeshua said in a a Mishnah Rebbe Yeshua said and and I say why? Ulla said that my Rebbe also learned that way that when Rebbe Yeshua said Rebbe Yeshua meant which means the Mishnah is without a question the way Rebbe Yeshua. However, Ulla said I don't hold that way. Ulla said I'm I hold Rebbe Yeshua held that way as well. Now one of the things that Rashi and Tosafos both mention with a little bit. So how did Ulla understand what Rebbe Yeshua meant when he said so Rashi says the easiest chat is is that when he said Rebbe it was not so tired of a truma, he wasn't making some macro statement. He wasn't coming and giving a state of the union in terms of what he holds when it comes to the laws of not so tired of a truma. He was just making an attempt to in this particular Allah. When do I hold that if you eat a truma, you become a truma. That if it was not so tired of a truma because big day truma is just like but in terms of is there a truma of is there a truma of not so tired of a truma yet? I from the fact that between the years and truma from the fact that asked the truma that that's where truma understood from truma truma that he held not that way. So, what about that? So, he says that being that we said this whole truma is not mentioned in the anywhere and it's not in the truma or truma, it's not mentioned. So, it's for that reason he's not truma to this. If he's not truma to this, it's based on that he doesn't have to hold the truma he's truma to the truma truma could just be explaining the exact case where it's negated that if you eat a truma, you're going to become a truma. But he's not saying that there's no such thing as truma truma. He's just saying that truma should be become a truma. That's only negated by truma truma. Truma the bottom line is we have this big truma but according to who said before this something called truma is there also something called truma truma or not? Either way, there's a little postscript to this. Omar Omar Omar the name is matters specifically. Which name would matter? Omar Omar Omar all the names matter but based on picking up off the heels of Omar Omar was featured on and the truma is going to ask a question now from seemingly said over here. Truma truma if somebody eats a truma of truma that was not so tired of a truma they have to be careful. He ate a shlishi of Kodesh and that's why I'll Tyros Kodesh naseh gufoi shaini l'Kodesh. His guf is going to become a a shaini l'Kodesh. So, if you eat a shlishi of nachum sh'nasal Tyros Kodesh, Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Kodesh, the halacha is you yourself are going to become a shaini. Now, this is obviously in the world of Rabbi Shimon. It can't be in the world of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Eliezer holds you are what you eat. So, if you eat a shlishi a shlishi, this is Rabbi Shimon shlishi who said that they eat a shlishi become a shaini. But, Rabbi Shimon on aleph we thought was talking about Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Kodesh. Over here he seems to be saying about Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Kodesh. It's Rabbi Zeira and Rabbi Assi. So, Rabbi Zeira and Rabbi Assi are kasha. Shlishi shaini l'Kodesh v'ein shaini l'Trumah b'Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Trumah. We said it's only true b'Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Trumah Tyros Trumah and not Tyros Kodesh sh'loi. Right? You see for sure, if you eat it on Tyros Kodesh, it's not the way it's going to be. Amora told him back, "Let me buy your camera." He said, "No, when Rabbi Shimon said b'Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Trumah, he didn't mean that it's only true b'Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Trumah. He meant even if you're going to go ahead and you're going to eat Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Trumah shlishi, you're going to become a shaini. But, really if you eat Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Kodesh shlishi, you're also going to become a shaini." But, the Gemara says "ha af anila amarti ela b'Trumah kama." Rabbi Berachya on amud aleph who Ulla approved, held that Rabbi Shimon doesn't even hold of such a thing of Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Kodesh. He said his halacha in the name of who? In the name of Rabbi Yochanan. Right? Af anila amarti ela b'Trumah. That was the line on the bottom of amud aleph amud aleph that Ulla was proving is the raya that Rabbi Shimon doesn't even hold of such a thing of Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Kodesh and attributed itself back to Rabbi Yochanan. So, how could it be? Amar Rabbi Zeira Amar Rabbi Assi Amar Rabbi Yochanan, "Oichel shlishi shel Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Kodesh naseh gufoi shaini l'Kodesh." If Rabbi Yochanan himself seems to hold that in the world of Rabbi Shimon there's no such thing even of Kodesh sh'nasal Tyros Kodesh. So, the Gemara says Amar Rabbi Yochanan Amar Rabbi Yochanan. You have to say it was a machlokes Amar Rabbi Yochanan in the world of >> Either way, we're going to stop here, but just to do a sikum on the daf, we'll save the rest for tomorrow, hashem. But just to do probably the next day. But just to do a sikum on the daf, and that is again, we had a mishnah. Mishnah discussed somebody that shocheted chulin and no dam came out. A whole shulchan aruch of how we go about it. One of the halachas was "If an chulin be dam meshuva, you can eat it with hands that are tamei." The official shulchan aruch dam, and the gemara asked the kasha that your dam is a shaini letumah. The mishnah is clearly talking about chulin. Four rayas that the mishnah is talking about chulin. And shaini is not oise shlishi letumah. So, what's the issue over here? Yesterday's daf we saw two terutzim. We saw Rav Nachman in the name of Rav Adda bar Ahavah. We're talking not about regular chulin, we're talking about ma'aser shaini according to the shitas that hold that ma'aser shaini could become a shlishi letumah. Rav Papa said we're talking about your dam that's original letumah. It is possible for your dam to be original letumah, ach mai shaini, and that's what's going on. Today's daf we had the third terutz. Amrav Amrav Hoshaya, "Hacha bechulin shinasu al ta'aros hakodesh askinan. We're not talking about regular chulin, we're obviously not talking about kodesh. Four rayas we're not talking about kodesh, but we're talking about chulin that could become a shlishi. How could chulin become a shlishi? Chulin shinasu al ta'aros hakodesh." The debate of the gemara was whether or not this is something that can stem even in the world of Rav Yehoshua, or is this something that by definition is the leiker Rav Yehoshua? We know Rav Yehoshua said in a mishnah in maseches ta'aros perek bais mishnah bais, there's something called chulin shinasu al ta'aros tumah, and there was a huge debate amongst the amayra'im. When he said there's something called chulin shinasu al ta'aros tumah, did he mean davka chulin shinasu al ta'aros tumah because it was prevalent to a shiyach, but chulin shinasu al ta'aros hakodesh, no such thing, it can't become shlishi or revi, or he meant zakat. Who should not tell us it's not even so khomer. Who should not tell us it's much more khomer. And if there's something called khon sh'naso surely there'd be something called khon sh'naso and this was a big discussion. Rav understood Yeshua there's no such thing as khon sh'naso khodesh. The khaveirim of uh Ulla specifically Rav Abba bar Khana and Rav Yochanan also felt that way. Ulla himself said no, I disagree. I think Yeshua holds khon sh'naso khodesh surely is going to hold the khon sh'naso khodesh. Khodesh. By the way, Rav Assi in the name of Rav Yochanan also said that. So this is a a big shaila and really the whole nafka mina of the daf besides for the one line of hakha b'khon sh'naso khodesh askinan was this discussion. Whether kuchtum with Rav Yeshua or nachtum with Rav Yeshua. Now as far as the meat of the daf it very much revolved around a makhlikus of Rav Eliezer and Rav Yeshua that's negaya one of the yotzei d'var. One of the yotzei d'var was that if somebody eats tumah the halakha is he becomes tumah even though it makes no sense because really okhlin can't be m'tameh adam cuz okhlin at best with the exception of it. But okhlin the best thing it could be is a rishon l'tumah and a rishon can't be oseh adam into a shaini l'tumah. But khazal one of the yotzei d'var made a takanah that if somebody eats tumah he's going to become tumah. Major league makhlikus Rav Eliezer and Rav Yeshua what darga of tumah. Rav Eliezer was super straight forward you are what you eat. Rishon you're rishon, shaini you're shaini, shlishi you're shlishi. As a matter of fact Rav Eliezer holds that somebody that eats tumah is more tumah in this again make believe world of eating tumah becoming tumah. But if this what we reckon with that world if somebody eats tumah you are more tumah than the tumah itself. You know what the raya is the navel of an oif. Rav Yeshua says no way. If somebody eats tumah you're not going to be more tummy. As a matter of fact, oichel tumah is less tumah than tumah. You know what the raya is? From the shiur. That's the raya. Because the shiur of an oichel being metameh is bigavaya, but if somebody eats, he would have to eat a chatzi pras in order for there to be any issues. So, from the shiur you see that it's actually just the opposite. Okay, so what is Rebbe Yehoshua's halacha? So, you would think, I don't know, probably the way tumah always transmits. So, you eat a rishon, you probably become a sheini as if you touched it. Sheini, shlishi, shlishi, revi'i. Anything but that is the truth. If you eat a rishon, you become a sheini. That's the only part of this that's Rebbe Yehoshua's shitah. If you eat a sheini, you probably become a sheini. How does that make sense? Because sometimes a sheini is always a sheini. Derech mashkin. Oh, sometimes a sheini is always a rishon. Yeah, mashkin's different. But the bottom line is, sheini become a sheini. And as a matter of fact, sometimes if you eat a shlishi, you could become a sheini. When would that be the case? Be'chulin she'nasu al teharas ha'trumah. >> [snorts] >> Being that you're only watching if a trumah, it's considered as far as you're concerned, tumah regarding kodesh. What level of kodesh? The highest level of kodesh it could possibly be. What's the highest level of kodesh it could be? A rishon letumah. You have to assume the worst. You have to assume that you just ate a rishon letumah. To the extent that you just ate a rishon letumah, that rishon letumah is oiseh makes you into a sheini. And that's why if you eat a shlishi, you're going to be a sheini. Regardless, this concludes the first part of the tumah v'taharah segment tucked away here in the lameds of Maseches [laughter] Chulin. Be'ezras Hashem, tomorrow we're going to continue with this machlokes Rebbe Eliezer and Rebbe Yehoshua and pick up with part two.