Zevachim 16

is and we are at the beginning of the new. So the topic of the first was primarily the of began. We saw that this idea that can pass the carbon is true not only if the was done but rather miss whether the was whether it was whether it was it would be the carbon would even Apostle stating that not all were created equally and we saw it at the very beginning of the mak and a little bit more in detail at the end of and that is the said that is bazar and are not bazar the reason bazar the gumar very mysteriously it's a very important memorbe is what do you mean I thought it's one of I thought you could have I thought the first Mishna says that will impact the garbage. It's true. So on some level of course it is an but then again you can't deny the say on some level it's not going to be an it's not an that it's going to bear stating that and are all going to bear. So the beginning of the second par picks up on that note and that is not the of but rather the of who is to do that and who was possible to do that the speak out. So again although the misha says kabala it doesn't mean kabala per se but so if any one of those were done by someone that's somebody that was tummy went to the mikvah but the says that someone that's goes to the mikvah doesn't become completely until this until the sun sets. see a lot more about that in tomorrow's or somebody that was went to the mikvah. But the says that his such that in order for him to be he even has to bring a carbon and he didn't bring that carbon yet or that did the but he wasn't wearing all the he was supposed to wear. If he was a he wasn't wearing the if he was a godly he wasn't wearing the but he didn't wash his hands and his feet from the K or he wasn't he was a good oldfashioned he was sitting as opposed to standing or he was standing but was standing on top of was standing on a gabi or he was standing on his friend's feet all those cases as the Mishna apostle if the cabal was done with the left hand ple that's also possible over here argues says cautious and the Mishna essentially listed a whole group of people that are pled to do of although the mission says as we mentioned it applies to as well soarita is going to be the topic of the third par we're going to see that all the but are and being that they are it's for For that reason, you have to be a kasher. What's the definition of a kasha? You have to be a kayar. That's the first of the but the mish mentions other people as well. They would be excluded if they would do the is the would be invalidated. It wouldn't be a what's the definition of so we're going to speak out about that tomorrow but for now. So the first ple mentioned in the isar. How do you know that someone that's not a can't do the says it's a now the context of that is actually talking about someone that's discussing a that's and it says that a can't do the and the continues if he does the he's going to be meaning this shouldn't do so that so that he won't be so won't be but the garra says it's false why did the have to say the holds that those words would seem to be extra it's it must be coming to teach me something meaning obviously which should the be separated separated from if it's not from the culture of soar says I have a few suggestions maybe the emphasis on that that if it's a if it's a male it's a man that's bringing the carbon maybe there the is that is not do but if a woman if the carbon is a carbon where it's not maybe that's the emphasis of maybe over there there's no is not let what that doesn't make any sense what would be that a can't do the avoid with a carbon of a but he could do the with the carbon of an isa doesn't make any sense says maybe it's coming to you the carbon of a guy we know and it's learned that from a in the whereas right there was an idea that a guy would sometimes bring a carbon that's the story of cancer but a hadn't right to bring a carbon so maybe that's the emphasis the with the carbon of the but if it's from the from the maybe over there it's going to be good but the says it can't be you know why is that if the dam of a carbon was put on the while it was Tommy so the sad was done with dam that's Tommy so that's a no no obviously the dam has to be tar if the dam is to you can't do the if the was done with dam tom But it was done is that the sits that the coen wore was it somehow facilitated the dam to be okay despite the fact that really it wasn't okay. So one of the sugis that we haven't really touched upon yet was this idea that the big day kahuna had a certain kayak that by the virtue of the kayen or the kayo wearing the bead that they were supposed to wear there was certain kapar cert that took place. So one of the magical powers of the tits was somehow the tits was that went on the now that's only true if the dam was from a carbon but if the dam was from a carbon of the tit wasn't says the which was that went on was only if the carbon was a carbon but not for So even if it says but if it's a carbon of a it's not so does it make sense that that's should be able to go with now and be of the carbon of a you see when it comes to the carbon of it's not less it's more because which is by is not for a god. So what does that mean that the laws of when it comes to a god? So how could you tell me that was only but there's no when it comes to the says the this is so compelling it's such a difficult question to answer that what we're going to have to do is we're going to have to make a super over here this is the way you read the period or not cuz Ben is not being anything it's not being the carbon of a it's not being the carbon of a of a So really the way you have to read it is all the is not. So what does Ben mean? The way you read it is that just like we're saying that has to be because if not he's going to be so not a we're talking about a a good oldfashioned Jew who's not he too has the same he too has to make sure he doesn't do the and if he does the he's going to be so what's the that is that does the is the becomes it's learned out from this super talking about he can't do the and if he does the words extra to teach me that the really mean something else as well it's talking about if he does the is going to be possible it's also talking about if he does the pos they had a different learn from Joshua There's no posing for it. How do I know it? I know who's allowed to eat. Someone that's not a who is not allowed to eat then certainly is that if he does the he should be meaning what's more when it comes to aar or aar is more. The reason is because a zar can't do the avoid a zar can also not eat kachchal can't do the avoid but a kind that's doesn't lose his to be able to eat kach. So it says it's a who's the he's allowed to eat kach is if he does the is going to be possible. So who's not allowed to eat certainly if he does the should be possible the says why is it so that aar is more than I can argue that maybe is more it has a thera is that if the carbon itself is the carbon becomes possible if the carbon if the behar there's no doesn't make sense no such thing as a a so the applies to the mac it also applies to the k as as opposed to that's only to the it's not to the car. So maybe that does the is also that's the we just mentioned that's the of that the says that a to that does the and can't become but a live animal has no way of coming to so you can't tell me that the reason is because for that I have a where the is also and over you don't have but the say has a over could be if a zar touches a he doesn't make the k into a zar if a touches someone that's not he's the person but the says I hear but then again if he touches someone that's not a he doesn't make that personal so what do we have the bottom line is Zechariah between Tommy is that they're both meaning do the avoid and if they do the avoid they possibly avoid I'll bear as well too can't do the how do I know that if he does the becomes possible I know it from this says let me know on the how do you know that Aar is not let do the meaning we're saying what's the what's the lim is that can't do the and if he does it he's a can't do the if he does thear who can't do the he too will say the same thing that if he does it he's going to be how do you know that can't do the tell me you learned from the that we began the with and we're going to say that the word is extra to teach me that although the is telling me that is not allowed to do the but it's also coming to tell me that is not allowed to do the if that's your that is not allowed to do the then why do I need the once I have that to tell me that the zar can't do the I already know that if he does the same says so I wouldn't need is coming to that if you don't want have another way to know that is giving meaning the whole is predicated on us not because if we're going to that then I don't need you can't tell me that the is from that cuz if that's the I don't need Rabish Rabish's living in a world where you don't have that Pik if I don't have that Pik again what's in the car that is a different say can't do the bottom line is says you want to know how I know that if the I know it from I learn it from that does the as well you're going to tell What's the between they're not allowed to do the and if they do the it's what does that mean is possible. What does it really mean? We have to wait for tomorrow. But for now again it's an how so too there's no reason to say that who's also how do I know he's because it says if he does the should be possible says that have that doesn't have that wasn't allowed to do the on wasn't allowed to do the on as opposed to a zar that was allowed to do the avoid on. So they have a says because of this you have to say that the is not going to be from and but rather it's going to be from and how so we're going to learn from what are you going to tell me for that I'll say I'm gonna say too there's no such concept of an animal being an oint. But you're going to tell me an oan has a is not allowed to eat. He can't even eat all off limits as opposed to who's allowed to eat says the isser. What's between? They're both Muslim. They're both not let do the and if they do the they're who's also Mus he also is not allowed to do the we're going to learn that if he does the he's going to be now what did we accomplish by replacing with by saying that the is not and but rather the because in the first the was so The assumption now is is that this doesn't have that. Why not? We're going to assume obviously that was allowed to do the on the Tommy couldn't do the above. So if the was from those two, you can't learn because could do the so they too have a that Zar doesn't have. But if the is from so the assumption is that could do the so you don't have an who's could do the but says is that so are we so sure about that why don't we ask the same meaning over here there's some gray area here we can work with it so the bottom line is not sure we don't know for a fact that was allowed to do but we also don't know for a fact that was not allowed to do. So the bottom line is if we're looking for a mocker over here, we're looking for a source. How do I know that is either we have the or so we can learn it from that is not from it's from and it presupposes one thing and that is that was allowed to do the Obama as long as he was allowed to do the on there's no that have in common that is doesn't have as a result that would be the second how you know that a zar who of course is not allowed to do the but that does do the he's going to be had a third he said the is not from the is not from the is not from the is from the Mishna had listed as one of the scenarios we that does the aid is going to be possible was yo k has to be standing The coin does not let it be sitting. If that's the case, it's going to be possible. Once you know why not, you can eat while you're sitting. To the contrary, probably the point is is that of course he let us sit while you're eating. still that is but if the does the while he's sitting it's going to be it's going to be that's not allowed so even though he can be who can't be certainly should be so very interesting is we learned this together not so long ago in the beginning of per so the is that when somebody walked into bed and he testified even he had a And the says so you see that has a there's no that impacts. So maybe is possible to do the because as opposed to talk about but either way says maybe we could learn it from the says that so the was that when he would walk into the would sit while he was saying so the maybe is not from a it's from who doesn't have that of could sit while he's saying but says the concept of you find you don't find the concept of Zarus when it comes to say I don't know if that's already a bottom line is you know what the is that does the is going to be possible is from who can eat is certainly if you're going to tell me that you do like the mean you can't learn from why not because you find the idea of at the end of the day you can learn from and one of the affformention what are the affformention either with what are you going to tell is not possible either and is not. So the bottom line is is you can always learn it from those two that they're not let it do the if they do becomes possible to we know we can't do the if does the is going to be possible. Now again, if we're going to learn it from between from and the other two, we're going to have to assume now that there's no that has in common. Now, what was the had in common in the previous in as opposed to that's so we're going to assume now says the that's not a why not? Because even though couldn't do the Obama and Tommy couldn't do the we weren't sure if he could do the but is sure could do the do the and is one half of the so this no issue of learning from because there's no there's not true how do I know says the noem said If it's where it has to be doesn't have to be you could be a too is going to be an opposite. The bottom line is is that we know that aar can't do the avoid. That's not the the topic of the suya. Azar of course can't do the avoid. The topic of the is how do you know that if aar does the avoid the avoid is pos. So if aar would do the carbon's pos if a would do the zika the z is possible. That's the question. How do you know that if a zar does the it's that it's that you have this idea when is the one that does the and essentially we had three we had a it says of that is talking about that was that that's the emphasis of the stating that the word was extra to teach me that not only is the telling Tommy can't do the but regularly regular can't do the either. Alternatively we had who learned it from a what was the so after the went through it a little bit. It was a between a and anal that does the so I'm going to be the only leap of faith that the said you have to take to accept is you have to say that was allowed to do the which apparently wasn't clear to the but that's something you would have to assume because otherwise you'd have a kind of bizarre. And finally, the third we had was said or either way. So that's the first part of today's d and that is the of aar. So the emphasis is that when you talk about a zar, you have to know what exactly is the definition of a zar. We spoke out raid at the very beginning of the from Yeshua and with the says what's the definition of anyone that's not meaning if you're not a you're a or if you're a but you're also going to be a zarin. So the is very very clear. The says the definition of aar is someone whose father is a but that's only one of the criteria. The other criteria is you that someone needs to be a has to bear. Bas and whose father is a despite the fact that she has a special place in she's when she's in so regarding but as it relates to the definition of the very very clearly says that a bas has a bazar the em is it's a mash that way from our mishna cuz our mishna went through a whole list we the mishna runs the entire gamut of people that are possible to do the you know what the doesn't mention we know a woman can't do a woman can't do even if you're standing on your friend's foot even that was mentioned in the left hand was mentioned in the Mishna and is not mentioned in the Mishna how can not be mentioned in the Mishna it's posh It's something that's universally accepted throughout the that is a woman cannot do the so if a woman couldn't do the why did the Mishna say because the said zar and once the Mishna says like their says included in zar is an is what's a so is as much as is someone that's an interesting we know that the had to do the yesterday's parish. So who did the oner couldn't do the learn that from if would do the oner would he have a den of a or would he not have a zar meaning was claring that maybe clapping the yum has a zar and all the of would maybe apply to this. for example that does maybe if would do this that he's not allowed to do but maybe it also be or no the definition of zor is is is always going to be the same it's like the in the beginning of par or maybe no theor is that if I can't do the I'm not the right for the that's what qualifies me as a so when it comes to being that you have to be so either way I am discusses it. There's more rate to talk about but we're going to go in the meantime said three someone that's he can't he too can't do the say no how do you know that he can't do the or not that he can't do the avoid that if he does the is going to be possible the emphasis of this is without finding to the as much as we're finding how you know that if this person mentioned does mean to think that I can't do it, but just because I did it doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to be possible. The iss finds out that a relative of his died, he's now he's in the mik, he's doing the says supposed to remain in the bash, he should continue doing the and no worries. Don't think that because you're now you're going to be when you do the it's not going to happen. What's the what are we telling? You could do the and when you do the you're not being avoid it's that if he wasn't the kind if he was merely the and he would do the sounds like he would be avoid from that it's a from a says you learn from a different so what's that so for that we need a little A little bit of of background information. The context over there is is so of course is referring to not the eth day of the month but it's the eighth day of the it was the seven days the last seven days the year that the the Mishk was erected acted as he himself was the one that did the was on the eighth dayu now handed over the torch. He was no longer going to be he was going to be no longer fit to do the avoid but rather from here to forward a and his family they were going to be the himself was going to be the and we know that on that day a brought a zor whatever exactly the a of a was but the bottom line is is that and died and because au died a and they all became a was an because he lost the son is because they They lost their brothers respectively and now the question was what do you do with all the carbonas? They were just they're bringing carbonas. There was a lot going on now that they have a so what happens you have to stop or are you allowed to continue? So there was a tells go tell that even though they're don't think about it and and you have to continue moving on as if nothing happened stating that when came at the end of the day he saw that there was one that was born as a that didn't eat they burnt it and was very upset he got angry at them the says If you got angry, why didn't you eat it? You're supposed to eat it. Why didn't you eat it? And there's a big in the it's really more at the end of the of why it was that Allah and didn't eat it and what the sh of between and are in the until finally they tell why it is they didn't eat it. One mandar says that the reason they didn't eat it was because they were eating it. I wasn't there that as an they were allowed to eat it. They felt that the only related to the Rashi says there were three that were brought on that day. One was brought because of the it was the during the special carbonas that were brought and the was also a special carbon that was brought and one of the carbonas was a sawyer. There was a goat there was a katas. There was a special kas that was brought on that day. It was also and you always bring the katas. It was also the first day of the carbon that were going to bring every day for the first 12 days of the mishk. So there were three and one of the carbonas that he brought was was the carbon was a was a so one of the carbonas that he brought was a so there were three that were brought. There was the sar that was brought for there was the s that was brought by the and then there was the sar that was brought simply because it was held that the only that they had a right to eat despite the fact that they were with the that was special for the day the was brought for is so the that and they're allowed to eat the carbon applies to that the carbon that brought that was that was a one time carbon okay so the applies to that but the of the that was a carbon that was going to be brought every single so being that that was always going to be brought for that they help that didn't apply either way there's a there's a shock of that's taking place alternative there's another mama that argues that mama says that the reason that burnt the carbon wasn't because of the of anos there was already but the reason that they burnt it was because it had become it was nitma and being that it had become it's for that reason they burnt again This this is an idea that the is going to discuss in great detail. So now we just need one practice says the it's learned out from this the says. So those are two excerpts of one of the in that para that's where now talks to he says you think that are the ones that that brought the carbon they're not the ones that broke the carbon it would seem to suggest had they been the ones that brought the carbon then The right thing to have done would have been to burn it. Meaning in the shock of it's a little confusing between and as to why exactly they burnt this carbon. So seems to suggest I know why maybe you brought burnt it. Maybe you burnt it because they were the ones that were mak of it. I mean that they're the ones that were of it. So maybe that's the reason that you went ahead and burnt it and that Aharin says that would be true of Hiko, but they're not the ones that were of it. Let's just take out that pro for today's we have to get the story properly because it's just but but for now let's just get this. What do you see from here? that there was a T over here that had they been the ones that were as that would have justified the fact that they burn the essentially we have two one was it says regarding the if he doesn't leave the he is going to be the second is so says who is the second ch why didn't he learn from the is going to tell All it says is that if the god does the when he's allowed to do he's not. So we assume that there's a here would do it would be says it's not mean that it's not maybe the he's also not the first in the garra the we don't know who it is but the first why didn't he learn like because he knows that the carbon that was burnt had nothing to do with anos it was related to that other and in the how he explains the aircraft if you want to see it rashi in the bottom of the oven. But as it relates to that shakaria, he said it it has nothing to do with anos. Has nothing to do with anything to do with the so when we need it, we'll get back to it. But for right now, we're not talking about anointing. There was no shakar about it's all about bottom line is how you know said the same who in the first said it's not from it's learned from the same thing here. You know that I know that's all if he does that's not eat can't even eat that can't eat if he does avoid how could you learn from what's the same we had in the previous just like the mac can't be the carbon can't be a balum there's no that the animal can't be but I could be from in the previous you couldn't say because we were trying to figure out but now when we're learning the name so now we can use as a resource so we say two is how do I know that in the previous and there's no that animal can't be a so you see one has nothing to do with the other has the next day is not going to be anymore also has tako You could have sometimes the goes away and they're both not allowed to do the and if they do the says where do you see that is not allowed to do the again we're discussing that if an does the it's possible and we're saying how do I know that I learned it from a mahad from Balm and Zar. What's the between the three that I have a a right a to learn this is not allowed to do the he's a do he's and if they do it it's it's so to who's not allowed to do the we should argue that if he does the it's going to be okay so we're presupposing that an is going to tell me then why does need in the first place if he has that If he sees a net posing a that it's only the that's allowed to say but a head you're not. So once he makes the then take the to the finish line and say then I have a that you can't do is and that if he does the it's going to be so why does he need so needs obviously it's because he doesn't agree with the like said in the gor he doesn't agree with the if he doesn't agree with the that means we're trying to figure it out without that. So if you don't have that again it's from the he holds that the reason that that was burnt was because of the wasn't about it was about and in that he has an he sees that is not the either way but says that how do I know does a he learns it from a mat between a and a you never find that could do the avoid. You never find that a z could do the avoid. can never ever ever do the as opposed to could sometimes do the how is allowed to do the you never find a sad when it comes to those as opposed to allowed to do the say but I could throw in another we can use you have that of of so you have the idea of being and also the is that if he's the first we had in the beginning of the so from the that's how you make this work doesn't that have bottom line is it's from not but from you have to throw tom or into the into the equation. The bottom line is you're going to have and that's how you're going to learn even that's that's what's helping us and saying that you have that's what is that but is only if you're bringing a carbon apply only to a carbon we're going to see more about this in tomorrow's but applies only to a a carbon as opposed to even by a carbon was allowed to do even by a carbon but the Gmorra says but that's really not a bottom line is is that if you if the wasn't at all then you would have a but it is be it by a carbon is true it's even a bigger even by a carbon I hear but at the end of the day that's not enough of a to knock out this is not from with this elaborate that's very straightforward. I learned from eat certainly if he does the same at the end of the day there is a there's a something you don't find when it comes to now maybe didn't think that that was a good tell me that he did hold it was a good it's going to be from and one of the affformentioned the bottom line is is that when it comes to we have not three but four is how you know that if he's either it's learned from that it says by if he doesn't leave he does the when he's said it's from the pari When Misha got angry, it's from that group which only works according to the holds that that was burnt not because of a tum but rather because of anos said it's out from what's the bal and which eventually morphs into said you can learn it straight up from or from Han Excel.