Menachos 19

Today's d is and we have three lines from the bottom of so yesterday in middle of the daft we turned our attention from the sugis of piggle the very difficult and lishis of pigle to a rather straightforward mishna on the bottom of discuss different that the terra mentions with regards to not all pertain to all but These are all related and the Mish discusses what happens if these mitzvah were not done. Does that make them apostle or not? playish. So all of the affformentioned the Mishna said was the discussed the first mention of Mishna which was so we know that there were three servings so to speak of oil that were put into every garb the would take the he would pour oil then he would put silus on top of the oil put more oil do the bala and after bala he would put a third serving of oil that third serving was known as yetsika and as we saw in the garra yesterday there's a a side in the gamarra that it was actually an if it was an it would have to be done with a came out then when the mish says it doesn't mean that if there was no done at all that the is going to be because the mentions the mitzvah of more than one time clearly suggesting that it is what does the mean when it says it means in other words the holds that even though there's a mitzvah it's in the carbon but at the same time it's no different which is a carbon but it's so essentially the was not but is going to be caution said because there's a where discussed an idea of a we'll see more about that later in the he learned it from a that discusses a specific Only someone that believes in he is going to get the but that doesn't believe in the will not even though the singles that one the truth is that it relates to another 15 avoidas and he went on to list of aidas the first of shim's list of 15 was clearly shim is describing is an if it's an it has to be done with a thus that says is the according to so the picks up on that note what's the hold that it's my it says so the when it's describing the carbon so the mentions then the says take the put into the afterwards. Take the hand it over to the and let the dot say the it sounds like only from the forward is the that you require but anything that happens before not and for that matter says it's true the simple reading of the would suggest that it's only stating that the Torah sandwiched the words between the and the so that's true the man on the street who sits down he's the way he reads the is and only then the but says not only of but as well and being that thera wrote it then mentioned Baharin we say that Baharin is not only going forward on the but it's going backwards on the as well and it's for that reason holds that even though the simple reading of the would suggest that it's only but based on the idea of it comes out that how could say that we have information about also in by the way. But the point is when you see does not hold where is that. So the context is the was doing with the which we know was different than the that the did with all the other carbonas. Ordinarily the would take the cliches the misro and he would shove it in the direction of the misb and the dam would go from the kichar onto the misb was done differently did had a mitzvah he would take his finger dunk it into the dam and with his finger he would put it on the so that's the context which the darian is referring to the mitzvah of he takes his finger says kind of common this says that wrote the word between and we know wherever it says the word what does that mean and it wrote it between which means and which means so from here we learned that both and or have to be with the right hand of the coin I'm doesn't It says moving forward with regards to the venosab between the says is only going forward. It's going on the it's going forward and it's also going backward. It's also going on the bottom line is that you don't say you can move it forward but you can't move it backward. It's a this says that you know requires because although it says but it's also going backwards on the here says just the opposite says that the word is only going on it's not going backwards on the says that can't be why does hold that requires if anything the simple reading thera reading of the would seem to suggest that it's of the says the because when the Tyra says that after you do the and you put the on top of the take the and hand it over to the so they they should be able to do the Torah says with and the is the two it connects the two paras so that we say just like this par that we're about to mention so to the previous putting the into the requires kindness. the says this is referring to the carbon mentioned right in the beginning of the should take the dam and bring it to the we know over there means and we learn from there so what's the bizar so it's mentioned right in the beginning and then it's one of the ideas that keep on repeating itself throughout what's the same a similar to what we're discussing in our doesn't say anything about and then which means you need what's holds that is and therefore even though by the where it says but the says that what's mentioned earlier also requires kind to say the Same thing over here say possible because even though it says but it says that should be to what it said earlier. So if holds that requires based on requires based on and from all the shims that we've had throughout and is mentioned a lot as a in some of the very important inch but we've never had a shim that argues with the idea of we'd have to go back and revisit many many sugar says shi hustle a very big you're right also and that's bizarre I if that's the case should also be bazar if the is bazar would be as of you're right would have argued edited it from it's learned out from the right before the mentions the mitzvah of the mentions the mitzv of and from shim's that is clear bizar is not the if it was the would knock it out just like it does by the reason holds a different it says just like so is going to bear if based on a heish to but there's more that you need than for the not to be the actually had to be the bum was something that had to be done by that's why there were mis with the carbon because all of is the bum and we had to find a way for there to be representatives of the entire Jewish nation every time a carbon was going to be brought because the mitzvah is a din so the question is if that is so let's take the heckish further and say so that can't be Whyap doesn't require then which is notapar certainly shouldn't need says the you'll tell me that's what kind of is that aimed on an maybe would need bum the problem is bazarita needs a kay I'm sorry bazar needs a koita however which is bazar maybe does need b how could you tell me doesn't need basri doesn't need biome maybe does need bum or Zika would need Bum if it were feasible. The reason there's no D by Z is not possible. It's because it's bazar. It has to be a cayenne and if the bum is not a then obviously the bum won't be able to do but which is maybe it should be require as well and don't tell me based on it's not a good because I hear I have a different how I know that doesn't the terrorist says that when he brought his he himself had to do the how to do the on the we learn from there if always needs violin. Why do I need apostle to tell me that his own power? is the bin. Of course, he had his own does not need thus we have that according to how do I know that just like so but at the same time I also know that I can't learn why do I know that because I have a li that teaches me that the himself had to be the one that did the he's the Typically, of course, he has to do the it was his he is the says he is the must be there's no that requires violence. So either way what comes out from this is we know and throughout the brought is really it's only one of two. Now we know the rest of the story that is the according to the but there is a shim who holds in that and based on methodology regarding it would then emerge that this would not work in world thus he needs a new what's the new it says then it says if it's from then maybe it should need b and theor said I know for sure it doesn't need either from or if you're going to tell me there's a that says that the required even though he's anyways the violin that the fact that the is the bim wouldn't in and of itself be I need a new to tell me that he has to be the one to do the because there is no that the bim has to do the so bizarre but at the same time does not have to be done with the bim The bum did not have an obligation to do the truth is that one and then maybe we'll speak a little bit more ra later and that is inva so it's actually he says at the end that what I'm about to tell you is but at the same time it's so he says like this I'll quote Even though he says historically speaking most times was not done by the it was done by the that there was one carbon with the bin themselves the original owner used to do the and that was that the the would be the ones they were giving it over to the but they themselves would be says for why. So he says the reason is because the mitzvah or the is right it's a you should tell him we know that when performed the miracle of it was did it by himself. So it says there was a cloud that the would always do the of the carbonar by themselves. So whoever owned this he was giving it over to the but he himself would be the one that would come to the base he would do the even if he's and the reason he did it was connected then he touches the what's the son this is one of the what's the question he wants to know what's going on like what's this all about says this is a brisk he wants to know why are you doing the I know but still you can give it over TO so why are you doing it yourself you know you should tell him it was okay and it's for that reason I'm doing it myself me too I'm being the same and then he says at the end it's for that reason we mind that whenever they do the mitzvah they never do right you hand it over to usually does the does the there are mitzvah that people do but it's for the same reason and he fears that like the mitzvah of bringing the being that it's connected being that it's connected the mitzvah it's connected and the emphasized it was on We do it in that way as well. What came to mind is a few things but just one is says that in the three mitzvah that did when came to the beginning of parishes. But the Gmorra says that if you look a little bit more carefully didn't do everything by himself, it's true. There was a but ran to the bucker by himself. He did it by himself. The came from I'm skipping. But when it came to the didn't by himself it was only it all came so did by himself came back whatever did such as so got punished for it on some level they didn't get the in the same way they got as well. Here you have whatever does by himself. He got back whatever we know that got back in this is reversed that we too we go with the same was so there was an idea of connected give back to this it's the flip side give back to there's more to talk about in this every time you see the words that means raid either way we'll Wait till the end of the and we'll speak at a little bit more rate about that. But for now another time it says in the words and the words what it means is that the affformention or the that's going to be mentioned is so sometimes in the context of are only the mitzvah. There are certain things that Allah said, I'll give you a good rule. Anytime it says that you need the word and you need the word an example of that is in the beginning of the context of the it says it says everything is that was what was trying to say that anytime it says it says the and why is it doesn't say if the rule is it sounds like if it doesn't say it's not so by the it says only doesn't say and still which is one of the mitzvah by the says about is the equivalent of and therefore even though it doesn't say but it says something that rhymes with so to speak a synonym of and that too would be enough. It says also the word it says and then the says the four breads the four types of breads by the carbon it only says although it doesn't say by the but in the context of the rabb of the rabbi And we just said that by the even though it doesn't say it says so just like the third it says and it doesn't say the word over there what are the four says the word also was commanded What about so the first three were from that it says the now we have where it only says it says but it doesn't say the word anywhere in the parish of says says you're right what meant was not it has to say what it means is If it says Tyra or And if that's the case, you don't have to come on to the three that we said for the course. It says is enough to be it says in those three paras it says therefore the respective paras are all it also says the word a lot of even though it says which that's the all the but the point is it says the word says You're right. You have to say that in and of itself doesn't really do much for you. In and of itself is promise and what did he mean? Either he meant or he meant he meant the two of them together. But the point is is how could you tell me that Soar says a little bit just in what this means. What it means to say is is that if it says the word that in of itself means it's but if it says the word in and of itself does not mean it says wherever you have the over something twice by it means it's active. It sounds like only if there's a do we say it's but if there's no then it's not what's the it says you're telling me wherever it says the word such as it's okay if that's the case why do you need doesn't in any way say so it's true it says by the but where does it say the It says it's talking about the isitzvah. You can't tell me that when it says the word in the context of it means because we know for a fact is not. So there's no way then that that word suggests any even with regards to other by the you're right the the word is mentioned but it's mentioned in a in a part of the that we know is thus there's no on the rest of the to tell me it's and it says it by the says the This is not really our but says it three times not just three times it says in this and based on clearly the fact that it says but what does it say by the eating of the upon him I thought eating is in itself so the word of can't suggest well says what do you have to say what's what do you see from that even though it says the word in the par of but really it means the entire par if that's the case so again what's the cash is it says as well so what's the how says anytime you have it's what do you mean I thought the rule is wherever it says it's that was what Rav said wherever it says or these are two members of Rav said wherever it says tora means Even though the is from everything was even though it only says it says and said that the only time something's not how do you reconcile again wherever it says it says that would mean everything by the yet said you want to know when something says it twice it says And don't tell me because it says because I know from the parish of Allah says you have to say that that the is different and from the words that we had this earlier in the we learned that the of and the shar of oil is if it was if it was it's a Frank was very bothered. Why do I need a for that? What do I need for is anyways why is or more accurately that the word by the doesn't suggest. So when is something if it's then it's going to be but otherwise it's not going to be more along the same thing. wherever you have something twice a say not to us that when it comes to a is not argued with said there's two things that's how do you know that says but everything else even if it's not is that possible. What? There's no concept of when it comes to of course it's over here is with regards to what does that mean? Meaning agrees to ra's statement of that if something is mentioned twice by the when said that only he seems to be unsure insecure about this idea of he's referring to a certain type of not but a certain type of such as what does that mean? What's the this riddle the big so one place when the mentions it says another place mentions we learn from there that the ken wasn't allowed to see what his practicing at all so he's trying to write hard so he wants to know what how big his kit is he figured out the size of his could he go into the mikdash when it comes time to do the kit and instead of physically sticking his hand in maybe he should just measure with a cup the sh of the kam and stick it in his hand. Oh, I have it. That was easy. So why does he have to actually do the kam with his hand? So that's what we learn from here. It's learned out from that because there's another that's talking about a real time example of when a was brought it's playing out there. It's not because there's no what do you mean? It says the terror is suggesting he actually did it with his hand. So doesn't that isn't that you have number one and then you have number two one the second was it was talking about a very specific a that was that would never be brought again it was a that was brought by and being that you don't have it so when said that I disagree with you ra that He wasn't disagreeing with the principle. Of course, he agrees. It's true. Even he was disagreeing with a certain type of application of this principle. What would be if you have two one of them is mentioned in the context of the other one is mentioned in the context of would that be enough to say is saying even when one is one is holds that no not I agree with the idea but they would have to be both if one was show one was not Because is that true? You can't learn. Thus, you don't have a wen that was used for liquid could be a liquid and that were used for dry things such as a so for example had to be done with. So what if you used one of the one of the that were really for the carbon and you the dam with that is that going to give the dam the necessary kadusha that it needs for you to be able to do this reco what about the reverse you have a carbon and you took the and you put it into a a was used to be do does it get the kad or not so that's this mission then name and he added a very important caveat to this. He said, "If you have a misro that was used for and was able to be used and he said, you know, I know that I know it from a that we all know. It talks about the brought and the says So you're dealing with a listen carefully. That's how much this mis weighs is a misra. A mis is used, right? Thus, it's called misle. It was used for the you heard this a thousand times. But now you know the rest of the story. You have a that's used for what's going on. It's a how's it even though the mishna says that there is one exception to the rule. could be it's I thought so just like didn't want to learn from the that it's that that's the that the coin has to do the with his hand that he can't measure his co and stick it in his hand and then do what he needs to do. No, because that's from the same is learning from he that even though the says but the mis was able to how does he know that he says it happened when did it happen I thought you can't learn from so says traces so there's something right you have you've heard of we've had some of the fours, right? We had recently where something was mentioned the Tyra four times. But here you have something that's mentioned the Tyra 12 times. 12 times the Tyra mentions it. I hear that already is a Gilo that you can learn from both said and every time it says something twice in the par of the it's says twice the mitzvah of Hagosha. It's so what's the mitzvah of Hagosha? So aasha was one of the things mentioned it's going to be but he's supposed to do aasha was known every the would take the before the so he has the kichares and he has the and the shman and the leav and before he did the kamita he would take the entire kichar and bring it to the mbah he would physically put it on the muzzbah take it off the mb and then he did the kamitzah it was known as the mitzvah of the said it's not is one of the things that are either way and said it's not where do you find that it was where's the says so you have to work with the over here so the first that's the first mention of it and Then in which is really earlier it says see it says it twice and it's not that's the says the only time you say is we the is extra it's a superflous there's no rational explanation for why the ter mentioned it twice other than to tell me that it's but if there's any that's learned out from second mention of the PK. So then you don't have any right to use it for it says that this of these that we're discussing over here are not extra because I learn from one that I wouldn't know from the other. Why? I know the the just speaks in general terms. Take the put it on the which part of the we know mattered this. So Makim is a very big deal when it comes to when it comes to but the T never told me where to do the Hagash. It's these two that are where the muck is. The point is the punch line is going to be it's not extra thus you don't have. That's why what's this? Where do you see this? So the says based on I would have thought you could you should do a bay. Why? So you have a picture on the because when you walked into the when you walked into the B mikdash so you walked in mis and you were going towards so the and the was on the side. So would be towards. So you would think that you should do the haga on the part of the misb that's facing but the plea also says literally the face of the misb that's always the ramp means the ramp of the misb and the ramp the misb itself went from to the ramp was on the durham side the misbeh itself was on the toughen side but it went it traveled south to north so if You walked in to the B. So you were walking east to west. The misbeak was horizontal and it went from to from south to north. So the is going to be the is going to be. So what's going on over here is okay. How do you make sense of these two things? He did it on the corner. Which corner? So the point is is that that extra is teaching me something I wouldn't know. It's not the fact that the mentions that is the it's from that I know this idea of by the way let's just finish the price holds not that way. You don't have to do it on the anytime you have if you one of them you could be the other one. But if you the other one you can't be the other. It's basic logic. If you have two and you can interpret the two ways one way you'll be everything. The other way you're not going to be everything. So what do you do? you leave the one that's says I'll apply it to this when it says if you were going to do it based on there's no way to there's no way but if you're going to do the you could be no says you don't have to do it on the corner of you could just do it on and by doing it on that in of itself will be enough how will you be in this we had this in rezer holds like that the misbeak wasn't in the midpoint between and but rather the entire was on the side which means that when you walked out of the if the was walking outside of the if he would put the min on the durham side of the msbayak then it would come out he's Because the dham side of the is facing the entrance if the if the is smack in middle between then when he walks out of the he's not he's only if he goes all the way around and he gets to the ramp but if the is on then when he walks out of the he makes a left turn boom he hits so and dur is also a so coin triple you don't have to do it on the on the corner of my In order to be able to open as long as you do it on that in and of itself would be enough for you to be able to be mim exhale. So before we end just to go back and speak out one maybe two but one for sure with regards to the idea of it comes out throughout chass and just one as it relates to the askasha on this idea from a medisha in par. The maj is discussing the yidden that were living in the midbar. And the medish brings who holds that the midbar were not allowed to eat and says the if somebody wanted to eat meat when they were in the midbar what they have to do the say they had to bring a carbon. They had no other choice. So they would take the carbon go to the mishk and hand it over to the wouldo and he would do the an interesting mish and even if the bum was sitting and they were having all the in the world nobody cares because all that matters is what the is thinking. This is not like raba that holds. But the bottom line is it says the medish that when they were in the midbar if they wanted to eat meat what they do they would take the their animal they would bring it to the mishk hand it over to the co would do the oh and that's the way they were able to eat flesh. Why did the kayen have to do the bizar? I saw in the in the beginning of right in the beginning when the mentions for the first time by the carbon he asks this and says theim based on a that's mentioned throughout the shame the rem also known as the remleis brings from one of the who said what's the reason is an hak is an allas So why is it that why should not be avoid? So he said very simple because the truth is anytime you eat from a carbon or from an animal even you have to do is not something that's unique to anytime you want to eat an animal right starts with that's the first also talks about right we're going to learn the all over again when we learn because starts with that's that's that's where all the technical parts of are something that's not unique to kachin it's true by as well so said that you want to know why because every animal if order to be thus it makes sense to say that the reason you're this animal is not it's because no different than just like you need to be so too when it comes to it's the same thing but this is the aspect of the preparation of this carbon It's not so there's no there's no there's no thus it's unique to the carbon which tells me it's an but you have as well it's not said that's how knew that because you find it by as well says we know we often speak out but what we need now is held that when the were in the midb for 40 years they were allowed to eat in English that means they didn't have to do this this concept of was aesh that was when the came into but the 40 years that the were living in the midbar aesh if you're not familiar with the but it's and said that when that 40 years later they will add there was no says the let's do the back of the envelope arithmetic the rem said but when the end of the No. So when the Torah says in the middle, what does it mean? Because that's the way you prepare meat. It's not true. It's not the way you prepare meat is no different than it's unique to. If it's unique to then it's an so says the true but that was only once entered then. in the midbar zer over there there was no so if there was no it comes out the was unique to kachin if it was unique to kach then was going to be a this medish over here is describing the mishk it's describing what went on when the were in the midbar when they were in the midbar they would take their carbon they would bring it to the kay yeah then the kay had the wasn't avoid but it was only when the were in the midbar the throughout that say that's of course talking about over there where you find a concept of then already is going to be but I thought it was interesting because it comes out it comes out then that although it comes out then that in between the 40 years they didn't wear the midbar and when they went into if you think about it a little bit it comes out something very interesting when the yidden were in the midbar. If a yid wanted to bring a carbon, there was no way for him to bring the carbon himself unless he was a kay. But if he wasn't a kayan, he couldn't be m of the carbon. The only thing he could do is be makish the carbon that works with the par of but beyond that it's already out of his control. He had to take it to the b to the mishk and he had to hand it over to the there was no role that he himself was allowed to execute. It all had to be done. It had to be done. He himself could not play any role in the bringing of his car. If he wanted to bring up like said it wasn't something he was able to do to show it wasn't a possibility. It wasn't something he could do was this happened when the enter when the yen entered. Now the zar all of a sudden is able to play a role in the hav of his own carbon. He's not an innocent bystander anymore. He suddenly was able to play a role. I was thinking maybe there's a over here and perhaps based on a a piece from ink's where says something unbelievable. He says that asks Hashem I'd love to see you. Right? He says I want to see you tell it's not possible. You can't see it's not nobody's allowed to sing that even though there was a polic says that three times a year every single had a mitzvah to be what's the mitzvah to bego that aid was able to see Leroy both ways of that's one of the places in so you able to see couldn't see and now all of a sudden has a a right to see yeah because he lived in the midbar it's true it's all true but he wasn't init and because he wasn't in there was a certain closeness that he never had and because of that he was never able to seek the who's living alma who's living in he's able to see in other words there's a different relationship there's a different connection that aid has when he's in versus what has in even the 40 years that the were in the midbar the says that's why the first of is all written the second what's the first who hate right it's allian Then you start you're talking straight. He says why because who wrote the first wrote the first was as much as was able to dive and he was never never able to dash but he couldn't talk straight. So it's all it's all it's in the third person enter. And because enter it's already and has an if you want to look it up it's but he says over here that he says there's different majes of there's a madre of and there's a madrego of who he says the highest madre is who where is right we don't even know where kadesh bar is but there's a majre of at means you could talk straight to kadesh bar and the madre of was manifest when the yidden were in enter that's why there was a mic of you're talking straight and because you're talking straight that's why is whereas was not that way that means there's a certain kurva that the yid had once he entered that he didn't have in the midbar so I was thinking maybe when the yid were in the midbar had to work with son they couldn't do it by themselves wanted I want I WANT TO GO DO THE I WANT TO play a role in it and even though we know but of course You have to know it's when you say but if a does it not so but the bottom line is at some level but if wanted to play a role in his own carbon that wasn't something he had the right to do why not because he needed to you can't talk straight to Hashem you don't have the ABILITY TO SAY TO HASHEM YOU DON'T HAVE A right to say you have to hand it over to shave it But that's who you have to hand it over to to the to the folk of only they can do it. Once the enter even the he's already he already has a little bit of over there is going to bear. The Zar wanted to play a role in the bringing of his own carbon. That was something he had a right to do.