Menachos 16

Today's daf is Menachot daf zayin we begin from the Mishnah on the top of daf zayin amud aleph. So the context again are the halachot of piggul specifically as it relates to Menachot. So the Mishnah piggul b'koinets u'l'vinah. If a kohen had a machshevet piggul while he was being makdir the koinets but he did not have that same machshavah while he was being makdir the l'vinah. B'l'vinah but if b'koinets or he had a machshavah while he was being makdir the l'vinah but he did not have the machshavah while he was being makdir the koinets. Rebbe Meir omer piggul chayav ol ha'koinets. Rebbe Meir says he had a machshevet piggul it's chul ha'piggul. If somebody eats from this minchah he's going to be chayav kares. V'chachamim omerim v'chachamim say ein b'kares acharei af agav b'chol ha'matter. It's true the carbon's going to be passul from that standpoint the machshevet piggul does impact the carbon but at the same time there's no chiyuv kares and the reason is because he wasn't m'faggel in the entire matter. Of course the rest of the story as we've seen briefly over the last few dafin is that the haktarah of the koinets and the haktarah of the l'vinah were both parts of the haktarah of the minchah and they together were matter the shiyarei ha'minchah. So that being that it's the haktarah of the koinets and the l'vinah in tandem that are matter if you look at haktarat ha'koinets and haktarat l'vinah independently each one is a chatzi matter. They're flip sides of the same coin. It's they together b'shutafut via this partnership that accomplished the heter. Meaning each one in of its own is only a chatzi. Rebbe Meir holds m'faggel b'chatzi matter so that it doesn't matter that you're only m'faggel during haktarat ha'koinets or you're only m'faggel during haktarat l'vinah. At the end of the day it's a machshevet piggul and it has all the halachot of piggul. One of the halachot is kares. If somebody's going to eat from this minchah he's going to be chayav kores. The chachamim say it's true if someone's mechaver matter it's chaval pigul but only with regards to making the korban pesach. As it relates to the cheif kores for that you'd have to be mechaver in the entire matter. Ain by kores actually mechaver matter. So if the kohen would have the machshava is pigul during the kohen and the so we know then there would be kores being that he was only pigul the kohen so we label the so we label the kohen the is ain by kores. Says the mishna what I made I made a mincha or a mincha kanois. What's unique about those two minchas? A lot of things. But as it relates to this mishna is there was no there was no by the mincha there was no by the mincha being that there's no all there is is the all there is is the kohen so pigul the kohen if the kohen would have a pigul while he was to the kohen true pigul of kores shall kohen to a matter because in this case the haktores is not a matter. matter it's the entire matter there is no so where there's a like most pigul kohen alone would not be a pigul as it relates to as it relates to the mincha mincha being that there's no so pigul kohen is not pigul matter it's the entire matter the is you're going to be chayav kores. So the mishna is now going to give two additional examples where this from there and the are manifest in other words two other examples of a case of pigul matter. So the mishna says if a kohen one of the so we know the so we know the so we know the so we know the so we know the so we know the were matter in addition to the itself they were also matter so there was a korban mincha that was brought on it was the it was only after the was done with the that were brought on as well so so I only of the two were brought with Victor or if it was not one of the which were not the and even though he was only and he was only in other words he was doesn't matter when is the matter I want to say that she was a matter again whether or not in the matter of the what would be if the chef did one of the one of the but the one was not eating the rather it was to eat the of the itself who the and don't argue everybody agrees in this case it's going to be a regular what's the reason because although it's is a it's only a as it relates to the the two are not the thus each one of the is viewed as a matter but only as it relates to the as it relates to each individual carbon the is like carbon and just like every there was a part of it that was so the also had a part of it that was what was not the of the the each one of these were not each so if a therefore would have a while he was bringing one of the but the subject of the was the of the carbon that he was bringing that's not being that's a matter surely so the that's where the emphasis is if you're were to put quotations here, it would be on the word mean men who the marker a whole lot of money who piggle it's a regular piggle the very kosher which is also a the other kevis is kosher meaning the piggle only relates to this kevis itself it doesn't touch the other one what if the coin had a mind while he was bringing one of the class and to eat from the other kevis and this too is a because you would have thought that maybe the two class and market looked at as one meaning that's possible if a coin is bringing one carbon and he has a mind that he's going to eat possible from another carbon of course it's not piggle but here the two class and are each other on some level there is some energy that you know bounds them to each other so there would have been a have a minute that maybe the is that we look at them as one commission that not but either way the acre theme and really the primary of today's staff is this is remain the the matter or ain't that good but that's matter and again clear from the mission of three examples one example is every mincha mincha is made up of a coin mint and a levine if a coin would have a piggle while he was being mocked at the coin mint but not while he was being mocked at the levine or while he was being mocked at the levine not while he was being mocked at the coin mint he was met that good but that's the matter is a piggle or is a not piggle but two other examples is the two series that were brought on shivus that were mocked at the with the that were brought every shabbis that were mocked at the upon him if a coin would have a piggle during one not during the other would it be piggle or not according to the mayor would be piggle according to the mayor it would not be piggle stating that a very important on my right in as it relates to this and the first part of today's staff literally and up until about a third of the way down and after design of the base is verbatim a message and after my life so it's really for the that we've already learned together rob said my is the is the coin mission nothing is a coin mint that's how the vine or >> That's only if the first hack Torah was done by Sh'tika and the second hack Torah was done by Machshava. And you do with the Machshava pigul. Everybody would hold it's pigul. And even though the Chachamim seemingly hold in the following matter, but if the first hack Torah was done with a Machshava pigul, then even if the second hack Torah was not done with Machshava pigul, we say it's chal pigul in the second avodah as well. By the way, so daf chof ches and on we're going to learn sugias about safeek pigul and it's filling in the sugya. So, it's good that you hang in there and tough it through some of these very difficult sugias here at the beginning of Maseches Menachos. Because there's some really really gishmaka sugias. I mean, these are the most gishmaka sugias, but again, some really nice sugias coming. But, yeah, yeah. But, regardless, so there's a svara of kol eisa d'as v'shaino eisa. So, once the kohen has a Machshava pigul during the first chatzi matter, the Machshava somehow extends itself to the second chatzi as well. Shmuel v'Shmuel bar Shmuel bar Chaim Machlokes. Not the same Machlokes between the Chachamim that you have if the first hack Torah was done by Sh'tika would be true if the first Machshava was done by Machshava. Meaning, there's no such thing of kol eisa d'as v'shaino eisa. And the Chachamim shita d'eima Machlokes Machlokes would be true even if the first hack Torah was done with a Machshava pigul and the second Machshava was done by Sh'tika. So, Rava was sitting down and was saying over this Machlokes between Rava and Shmuel. Is there a bar Rav Huna bar Rav Avos? Rav Huna had a son whose name was Rav Aha. And he was sitting, he was one of Rava's talmidim, so he asked Rav Akasha, he said, "I learned a braisa that discusses the machlokes Rav Meir and the chachamim of mafgin umchatzin matar. And that braisa adds language that I think it's checkmate, it's a clear raya to one of these studim in this machlokes Rav Shmuel. What's the braisa? Of a met v'al mamurim, this machlokes of mafgin umchatzin matar. No, this idea that if a kohen had a machshavas pigul called the pigul, that's only if he had the machshava b'kemitza, u'b'natin kli, u'b'hiluch. And he did it during the kemitza, during the equivalent thereof of the kabala, or he did it by the hiluch of abul u'matar. But if the kohen was doing the aktara, and then he had the machshavas pigul, and listen carefully to the lashon of the braisa. Nosan es hakemitz b'shtika v'sal hamayim machshava. If first he did the kemitz, and he didn't have a machshavas pigul, it was only by the aktara, sal hamayim, then he had a machshavas pigul. Or nosan es hakemitz b'machshava sal hamayim b'shtika. Or first he had the machshavas pigul while he was b'maktir the kemitz, and then he was b'shtika. Rav Meir omer pigul v'chayav al hakores. V'hachachamim omerim ain bo kores, ach pigul b'chol umar. What did Rav Aha bring Rav Huna? What? Tell me, said Rav Aha, nosan es hakemitz b'machshava v'sal hamayim b'shtika. The braisa clearly covered its bases. It mentioned both possibilities. Where are the kohen did the aktara, it's there's two parts to it. There's aktara es hakemitz, aktara sal hamayim. V'hachachamim hold that if he had a machshavas pigul during one, it's not going to be pigul. And it doesn't matter if first he had the machshavas pigul, or if it was second that he had the machshavas pigul. In either case, the halacha is, even if he was nosan es hakemitz b'machshava, v'sal hamayim b'shtika, the halacha is going to be, it's not going to be pigul. What's the kasha according to the man that holds? According to Rav that says that if first he had the machshavas pigul and afterwards he was b'shtika, the halacha is that kol ha'oilam daas v'shain on my soul. So why if first he had the people in this price and then he was doing the maintain their sheet that I don't know only true of first it was not and after it was cuz the first it was even though he was only but there's a new people that's how on the second half revealed this of that's we shine on my soul. So they say you have no choice but to edit the price of the farmers and we stick with my car. You have to say that what the means not that he did the first one and then the we stick with but you have to edit it and say but of course the first was not cuz of the first was not the one going to hold that it's people cuz that's we shine on my soul. They say you have no choice but to edit the price of the farmers and we stick with my car. You have to say that what the means not that he did the first one and then the we stick with but you have to edit it and say but of course the first was not cuz of the first was not the one going to hold that it's people cuz that's we shine on my soul. They say you have no choice but to edit the price of the farmers and we stick with my car. You have to say that what the means not that he did the first one and then the we stick with but you have to edit it and say but of course the first was not cuz of the first was not the one going to hold that it's people cuz that's we shine on my soul. They say you have no choice but to edit the price of the farmers and we stick with my car. You have to say that what the means not that he did the first one and then the we stick with but you have to edit it and say but of course the first was not cuz of the first was not the one going to hold that it's people cuz that's we shine on my soul. They say you have no choice but to edit the price of the farmers and we stick with my car. You have to say that what the means not that he did the first one and then the we stick with but you have to edit it and say but of course the first was not cuz of the first was not the one going to hold that it's people cuz that's we shine on my soul. They say you have no choice but to edit the price of the farmers and we stick with my car. You have to say that what the means not that he did the first one and then the we stick with but you have to edit it and say but of course the first was not cuz of the first was not the one going to hold that it's people cuz that's we shine on my soul. They say you have no choice but to edit the price of the farmers and we stick with my car. You have to say that what the means not that he did the first one and then the we stick with but you have to edit it and say but of course the first was not cuz of the first was not the one going to hold that it's people cuz that's we shine on my soul. They say you have no choice but to edit the price of the farmers and we stick with my car. You have to say that what the means not that he did the first one and then the we stick with but you have to edit it and say but of course the first was not cuz of the first was not the one going to hold that it's people people doing that one it's possible that it's going to be people but it relates to the weaker people the 43 that were done on people so what was the 43 you need this for the there was 16 that were done on the been about them eight from the eight from the like two of the the communist premiere were brought on the five two of them are two of them were brought on people and you had the two that were on people was the power that kind of and then the one sorry one the other sorry one the one that went was brought so the kind of take from the and the he would go into the and he would do eight I guess the eight been about them 8 plus 8 is 16 then he would repeat to another 8 and 8 from the respectively on the that was on the that's 32 he would then go to the and he would do another 11 on the four on the four corners like with every premium so there was four with every single and then there was another seven that was done I'll tell you we'll see later in the other hold it was not 43 was 47 says 48 but regardless you really want to break it up there was three sets of that were done on people there was the 16 that was on 8 with the there was 16 that were done in the on the 8 with the and then there was another 11 that was done on the so says the this that we say one with one people kills the entire carbon that's only the I need I miss the money I miss the or so that >> Let's focus on the men give them of Yom Kippurim. Whether the master of the people was by the Shana, the 16 or it was the 16 the 11 So this is another application The three that we had in our mission all men is related. Whether it was a mincha But here the coding of price that mentions What's the like to the men give them a choice and the shower during the 16 but not here 16 but not for me says the price people being very What do we need? people It sounds like it doesn't matter if you had people during the first set or the second set of the third set. In all three cases There's no cars. people during the first set it should be Because once the king had people while It was now people It should be people came up The baby talking about what they were two different that did the other It's not possible. Maybe the king died. Maybe became Tommy. Maybe became possible. How do you even mind whether if something happened to the coin during the avodah? Some new coin godol that steps in, does he have to start from the beginning? Or could he pick up say according to the mind of that holds that he can come in the middle? So maybe here too we're talking about it was two different one coin godol did as always been about him. Another one did it afterwards. Therefore you don't say who I saw from one coin godol to the other coin godol. All you have is But according to the mind that says that if a new coin godol had to step in during the day, he would have to start from the beginning. So then you can't have base dayos. So about the price is talking about where it was one coin godol. If it's one coin godol and it was only but the price doesn't matter even if he had to pick up during the first set. So I call it that's what we should know what I saw says the my rabba my skinon. Again you have to edit the braysa. The is going to make two attempts at editing the braysa and then the end the is going to say kasha. Am I rabba skinon? He's going to pick up the shosha bishniya or pick up even though the way we read the braysa was whether you pick up or bishniya or bishlisha, that's not the real way you're supposed to read the braysa. You're supposed to read the braysa if he was picking up and then he was quiet bishniya and then he was again bishlisha. It's over there that say there [ __ ] I want. Say the same that's what we should know what I saw. He was picking up and then he was quiet bishniya. So say that's what we should know what I saw. And then because he had a pick up during the worst my sister yeah. Don't read it like that what I saw because if he's relying on what we should know what I saw my pick up during the following. Why is he having the pick up during the third set? So believe it or not he's a career. Sometimes more is less. The fact that he had a pick up during the third set that shows who I saw my friend yeah that he's not relying on what we should know what I saw. So you're right he was what I saw he was but you don't have a but the says master flower of the master was was very angry with a question. Maybe that's something that says I hear a lot of questions. He made a different question. You got to pick a question and you take out the word question he was very good question and then he was quiet question. So you'll say why shouldn't you say I said that's what I said I said don't mean anything but I said that's what I said a similar question. My heart is very good question. Again, take out the word question. Why did he have to have a question if he was relying on that's what I said I said. So that's again so it's not where he had the question but he showed me the question and you don't have to use the word question because you're right master master master master how can you add in the word question? We're not adding any words. What we're saying is very good question question and you're just taking out the word question. But the master you take out the word question but the master says well being being funny. So it doesn't work because the master is still editing the question. So it's not master. It's not so good. You're not adding a word. Listen to the subtleties of the master. To add a word question that's master master master. Right? Not all questions were created equally. Some are master, some are master, some are right? There's different questions that the master uses just showing where the master feels. Yeah, well being being funny something the master master I hear a lot of master master master master says the master master master is master master master master. And the master over here asks a question master master master master master meaning it's a question that is discussed in very great depth in the master you remember by London all over the world. We're going to do what we do but regardless the master's question is very very brief master. Master master master master which means that if a question would have a master master master let's talk about the case we just had the master master master master of master during the 16 of the main of Adam or the 16 of the paroches or during the 11 of Kim is better happening that would be enough to create a curse. So they can work out so we know that in order for people to be how you need actually you could be color material. We went to measure together last week. There's a halacha of how carrots are kosher carrots are possible. Meaning just like in order for a kosher carbon you need for avoid this so to a normal for a carbon to have a always people you need for avoid this as well. Now you can't have for avoid this carrots in order to create people because by definition there was a lot of people somewhere along the way which made the carbon possible. So the way we explained it just very simply is you need a situation that down mean a the master of the people the carbon would otherwise be kosher. But the bottom line is we know next carrots lay my higher actually you could be color material. There's no here of carrots in the master of the people actually you could be color material. I don't know. You wrote it says the way you wrote in the parish of people and we know carrots are kosher carrots are possible. Carrots are actually color material. Carrots are kosher you need to be mindful of the material. After carrots are possible actually you could be color material. What's the master of the people according to Hera casual given the kosher of the name once the color and God will have a master of the people while he was doing the same of Adam parsley the carbon became possible. Of course it became possible. It's people now right? It became possible. It's commodity when he does a Zureco in the hall my album commodity. He's doing Zureco with water because the dam is possible. So what makes it dam? The shivers of dam is not that it's blood. It's the shivers of dam is the shivers the lucky status of dam. And being that this is not dam anymore big from a lucky standpoint it's possible so for all intensive purposes it's my album. How could you do a dam with my album? What's going on over here? My rabbit rabbit said my album part of my you You to say it's talking about where they didn't use the dam that the coin did the hazard with Ben Adam and had his master of his people for the next set of eyes. Every set of eyes always the more he refers to it as four sets, not three sets. Four sets, the 16 that were Ben Adam, the 16 that were on the perimeters, the four that were on the four corners of the maze back and then the seven that were on the show of his back. But the four sets were used with four different animals. Thus, it is no problem my Obama. As if to say the swallow of my Obama is is when you move from the Ben Adam to the echo. From the echo, that's when you have a problem from using the same dam. That dam that had the master of his people, that's my Obama. But if I'm using new dam, over there it's not going to be a problem. Rob Obama Rob Obama said I feel the pain of my Obama so that you don't have to make that a Kim toe. The school of my Obama see. It's true the dam is my Obama. But being that it's only my Obama because of my master of his people and all we want out of this carbon is for it to be a carbon people. We're not looking for it to be a carbon culture. We know that. We took that off the negotiating table. What we're trying to get is let it be a culture of carbon people. Actually more of it, but that's what we want. A culture of carbon people. For it to be a culture of carbon people, it's not viewed as my it's my Obama copy any other day. But as relates to people, why should we look at it as my the problem with this Kamara is and Rashi asks the cash flows. When Rashi asks the cash you know it's a big cash, right? Because Rashi is a partial place this. Starts with the be curious. But Rashi just asks if it's possible shop cover and you can you possible can't even get to the next line. Rashi says I hear the have a minute of Kamara. The Kamara the have a minute of Kamara according to my Kamara so the claim of my Obama is people while he's doing the other way to be my Obama. The Kamara how could it ever be curious? The Kamara of my Obama is curious. In order for there to be curious, you need to complete the Obama. Once you have my master of his people, there's no way for you to be curious of my Obama. Fake Rashi, every single people is the same exact problem. You did shake it up. Good for this man in order for it to be how people that this should be a huge goddess, you have to do Kabbalah Zriko. How could you do Kabbalah Zriko? You're doing Zriko, it's my once you had a Zriko. So Rashi says it there is he saw some. Rashi walking is my a little bit more. Like I said in the brisk urine, there's a tremendous I'll tell you the words. I'm not going to go into this, but there's a from Briscoe said that it's not a coincidence that the asked this question in one place in shots. If this is my verbally it's the same as the same as my and it's both in the context of the name of it was in the context of the avoided that was done in keeper. Said it's true every single piggle was my but when the coin does the piggle, you have a of and so the of the somehow makes the okay that it should be a as it relates to piggle. So you don't have the problem of because at the end of the day there's a of but over here with that is not being done in the it's being done it's being done in the that's the there's no and that was the question. The question was never from the that was done in the the question was who the all the flying either way the way the way we get a little bit of a breather. So the says the way you the 43 on keeper is the and it says not 43 47 is the question of the of the but the question of the is what does that mean? The question of the it says 43 I thought there was a that says 47 so the question is really the question whether they were on keeper the and the before the did the on the four corners of the or not. The says the damer part and the damer part were separate when they did the 16 and they not bad. They were separate when they come go to the 16 on the then when he came to the he makes them together. So even though you have damer part and damer part it's only 11. If they were in it would be 22 cuz it's four and seven. But now they're already together. So the damer part and the damer part is all one. But the is a man number that says in the corners that it's true for the seven of the 11 they were but for those four not. So add it up 40 you have another 40 you have 47. But the I have another man but 48 like there's a man from the course who holds that it's the five according to the so we can count it as one of the minion has those. Thus it's not going to be 43. It's not 47. It's 48. By the way they could be a man number that holds 44 also. We don't have that price. But in theory they could be a man number that holds 44. You could hold the corners and you could hold that is not good. So you could have 43. You could have 44. You could have 47. You could have 48. Really it comes down to two shivers. The corners or the corners are not good or they're not good. So if you thought the was long dish up until now you ain't seen nothing yet. What would be if a coin is doing the long with the carbon he's being the coin that's he was ready to do it in all it's in the and he's bringing it to the and he had the people while he was doing that. Is it considered or is it not considered? Now according to the holds the matter it's certainly going to be the according to the that holds the matter. So if the coin that was people while he was being marked through the coin that was not while he was being marked through the or vice versa. Is it then it's not people cuz aim with people with What about you look? The look of the coin is that has he matters and not matters. And just like by the coin that was not marked through There's no issue of has he matters. Spoke Rashi middle after all of that Rashi says that even though there was a counterpart to the coin that was not marked through and that was the liquid but there was no coin that was not marked through one was coin that was not marked through one was liquid coin that was not marked through so it comes out coin that was not marked through is so just like if you during the coin that was not marked through it's clear that it's going to be marked through people everybody holds that there's no problem with matters. I look at the coin that was not marked through no I look at the coin that was not marked through says the I understand it could not be the coin that was not marked through it makes perfect sense because the truth is just like there was a coin that was not marked through there was a coin that was not marked through as well. So it makes sense to say that why should the coin that was not marked through be a coin that was not marked through anymore than the coin that was not marked through one makes the coin that was not marked through cuz there was also there was also a coin that was not marked through okay there was also the coin that was not marked through one was coin that was not marked through one was liquid it's not the same thing but as it relates to the coin that was not marked through it's exactly the same thing. So if the coin that was not marked through is considered a coin that was not marked through then the coin that was not marked through should be considered a coin that was not marked through So the says starting this I understand it could not be the coin that was not marked through I understand it could not be the coin that was not marked through but what's the coin that was not marked through cuz of the coin that was not marked through listen to this call of the coin that was not marked through of the coin that was not marked through when is there a coin that was not marked through and this is going to shake our world as it relates to our understanding of pigul? When is there a law of mefaga pigul that says the machsheves pigul took place while you were doing an avodah that's matter? So the haktores which was matter the shiurei mincha and the haktores al ha mizbeiach which was matter the shiurei mincha each one is viewed as a chatzi matter that's according to Rabbeinu Tam but halacha was never a matter halacha's not a matter. Halacha is not an avodah but it's not an avodah that's matter. Pigul that's not a matter you don't have an issue if you're only mefagaul during chatzi of it because the e chashivus the chisoron of a chatzi matter is when it's an avodah hamateres and you're only chatzi matter but if you're an avodah you're not a matter you're an avodah and I'm only a chatzi there's no chisoron chatzi. Chatzi is a chisoron in matter chatzi is not a chisoron in avodah. Unbelievable law this. So when there's an issue of when you're a matter and you're only a chatzi matter that's a problem. Hi I'm a matter but I'm a chatzi matter that's a problem. I lose my chashivus but if I'm an avodah I'm not a matter and I'm only a chatzi chatzi avodah is ganz as a ganz fine a yachsen that's not an issue that's not a big problem. So haktorah which is a matter there there's you have to be a full matter and if you're a chatzi matter it's a chisoron but halacha which is never a matter in the first place the fact that you're a chatzi is not an issue. Amaleh but Abaya has a kasha Harei shchitas echad min hakvasim the avodah she'einah matiras what about the shchitas of the two kvasim which shchitas lachuro is also not a matter because if halacha is not a matter why should shchita be a matter? What's the chisoron that halacha is not a matter? Because you look at the haktorah as being the matter nothing else is being matter the haktorah is what's being the the So lachuro Torah, it relates to the series, it's this week that's being mattered. It's nothing else. The Mishnah, the Mishnah clearly stated the of the matter in the by schitas have blossom, which is what? Again, not a matter because if the Torah is not a matter, why is the schita matter? You're saying the Torah is the matter, meaning only the Torah. There's no reason the Torah should be any worse a matter than the schita. So, you see that you can have the of in the matter even by an avoida that's not a matter. Oh my way. This says the Torah. So, I have to ask you a question. When you bring the Torah and now the what gives the Torah its You think it's the Torah? The truth is this brings the is that some hold it is the Torah. But for this conversation, it tells you think it's the Torah? It's not the Torah. Schitas in the It's the schita that's in the and you ready for the next line? The Torah in the Torah being that the schita is in the Torah even though it's not a matter. But in the Torah in the Torah we had to wait until the Torah to see this Actually, had a little bit of base in the Torah so that even though really schita is not a matter, but it's in the Torah. A Torah is like a matter. Thus, the is if in the Torah so to in the Torah that's why you find the concept of in the Torah even by schita but not in the Torah cuz the Torah is not a matter and the Torah is also not a matter. Most of the Torah another here in the Torah in the Torah in the Torah the context of the Torah by the Torah Pesach, find the by the carbon Pesach, you find a hidush that is a machshava that passuls a carbon that doesn't passul any other carbon. Or in other words, when you think of machshavas haposes, you think of shulchan shama, that's the first mishna in zevachim and the first mishna in menachos. You think of machshavas pigulim, as well as machshavas koyem. There's another machshava of pisul that's called a machshava that was had while the carbon Pesach was being brought that someone that's not supposed to eat the carbon Pesach will eat the carbon Pesach. So for example, an arel is not allowed to eat the carbon Pesach. If somebody did shchit this carbon Pesach and he had in mind that the one that's going to eat the carbon Pesach is going to be an arel. He had in mind shulchan shama, someone that's not supposed to eat the carbon Pesach. That would be That would be a That would be a machshavas haposes. No, you only have it by You only have it by Pesach. So the Right, exactly. So the ikar is l'achila. So what's the halacha? The halacha is if a kohen had a machshava of shulchan shama, it's passul. So this braysa discusses hikdim mulam l'arelim. What if the kohen had in mind both? What if he had in mind that mulam are going to eat it, someone that's allowed to eat from the carbon Pesach, and arelim are not going to eat it, someone that's not allowed to eat from the carbon Pesach. So depends which one did he have first? Hikdim mulam l'arelim, that's kosher. Hikdim arelim mulam, the first he had in mind arelim, that it's going to be passul. The chachamim over there argue, we don't have the chachamim. The chachamim say it doesn't matter. If you were hikdim mulam l'arelim or arelim mulam, it's always going to be kosher. What's the machlokes? The kayam l'an b'chatzi matza puggi. Machlokes is b'fagum b'chatzi matza in b'fagum b'chatzi matza. In other words, the case was where the machshava was had during the shchita and the kohen or the zar that was doing the shchita had in mind one while he shchited one of the two simanim and he had the other one while he shchited the other of the two simanim. Rebbe Meir holds acherim is Rebbe Meir. We should toss in b'fagum b'chatzi matza. So once you are m'fagel l'shem arelim, once you had that machshava of l'shem arelim, that's enough to make the carbon possible. The Shomer relim is not matter, so you can't just have it it's not pigul over here, but you can't just have it by itself during one of the two simanim because it's it's technically chotzi matter. Being that it's technically chotzi matter, it's a problem. But what's the kasha? She does not a matter. And over here you don't have the breads to say kol habolim kodshim kol ha'avodah domim. So why is there a shaila between R' Meir and R' Yochanan? You shouldn't make a shaila between R' Meir and R' Yochanan to the case of shechting the carbon Pesach shechita it's not a matter and it's not mekadesh. It's not a matter because you're telling me now a new chiddush, something I didn't know until this daf, that I know only the shrita is mekadesh. And now you're telling me another chiddush that okay, shechita even though it's not mekadesh it's a matter, but it's a bolah kodshim. The shechita is not bolah kodshim. I'm a lamid zechus dam b'tza'ar b'heima kodshim dam tzayid kodshim says the Gemara. What's mekadesh the dam? It's not the tza'ar b'heima that's mekadesh the dam, it's the shechita that means every shechita is mekadesh. It's even not only the shechita of the kisei ha'otzaros, even an ordinary shechita. The mail the same lomdus about bolah kodshim, kabalah ha'damim. But the bottom line is we have a machlokes with Reish Lakish. If a kohen had a machshavas pigul while he was doing the avodah of the kohen it's not while he was doing the avodah of the levi'im. According to R' Yochanan, the avodah is it's going to be pigul because even though the rabbonan hold im pagum b'chotzi matter, the avodah is not looked at as a chotzi matter. What do you mean? This two avodahs, this avodah of the kohen this is the avodah of the levi. Says R' Yochanan a major lomdus, the only time you say im pagum b'chotzi matter im pagum b'chotzi matter that's if it's a matter. So if it's a matter and you only were mepagel during chotzi of it, there there's an issue. But if the avodah was never a matter in the first place, then it's not a problem. A noisefdig chiddush bolah kodshim is kabalah ha'damim. But it doesn't matter, the avodah is not a matter and it's not a mekadesh either. So if you don't have the chisoron of chotzi, being that it isn't avodah, it's enough to say machshavas pigul. Reish Lakish says no, Reish Lakish says I don't hear this lomdus. At the end of the day to me avodah of kodshim is a half is a half a ma'aseh because there's also avodah of levi'im, just like haktores kodshim is a half a ma'aseh because there's the avodah of haktores of levi'im. And just like the chachamim in the first mishnah daf zayin amud alef say the avodah of im pagum b'chotzi of the Kodesh Hakodashim of the Avodah. Same as it's going to be true as it relates to Torah. Says the Gemara, "Touch my bring you a Raya from the Brisa that we said in the Menachot of the Mem Vav Mem Mem. The Brisa said that when did the whole that is Pigul become Mitzvah or Matan Kli or Hiluch?" Those were the examples. Says the Gemara, "My love Hiluch? Hiluch of the Aktara? It sounds like you're taking the Kli Sharit bringing it to the Mizbeach. That's Mefurash Brisa that like Rabbi Yochanan. It's a Kasha Lakish it's Mefurash that the whole that there's no problem with Chatzi Matan when it comes to the Avodah. Says the Gemara, "No, Hiluch of the Matan Kli. We mean a different Hiluch. We mean taking the Chaimet and putting it into the Kli Sharit. And over there it's Pashet." Says the Gemara, "Even Rish Lakish is going to agree that it's not a Chatzi Matan because you don't have the counterpart by the Avodah because the Avodah never went into a Kli Sharit. It went into the original Kli Sharit but not into the second Kli Sharit. Only the Chaimet went into the second Kli Sharit. Thus it's not a Chatzi Matan." But the Gemara says, "E Hachi, then in the Seder Hadvarim, what comes first? The Hilacha or the Matan Kli?" E Hachi, the Matan Kli over Hiluch, the Hiluch over Matan Kli we mean both of them. Because the Hilacha is putting it into the Matan Kli. What's the Seder? Kemitza, Hiluch, Matan Kli, Hiluch. It sounds like it's the Hiluch that happened after the Matan Kli not the other way around. So the Gemara says, "Holy Kasha, Teni E Hachi, flip it around. You could It's not the end of the world." But the Gemara asks another Kasha. When is the Machlokes the Brisa said? "B'Olei Ha Aktara." Not B'Olei Ha Aktara. The Machlokes started earlier. B'Olei Ha Hilacha Mibayeleh. The Gemara says, "Also holy Kasha, give me the Hilacha over the Aktara Koli Aktara." Brisa just means B'Olei Ha Aktara is coming to do the Aktara. It doesn't mean the physical Aktara. He's coming to initiate the Aktara. He's going to take the Kli Sharit. He's going to bring it to the Mizbeach. So that if you do B'Olei Ha Aktara is a is much more general term. It could include in it Hilacha as well. But the Gemara says, "But it says Elo Nosan Es Ha Chaimet B'Shtika Hiluch Mibayeleh." Why we talk that clearly talking about not B'Olei Ha Aktara. I'm up to the Aktara part of the Avodah. You're just physically doing the Aktara. You should have said Hiluch. And then after tomorrow says, Kasha exhale. So before we go by to if we have time to go by to we'll see just a few hours. Really it's a super long stuff. And really the rate on this stuff, I mean the stuff itself is the rate number one. And number two, the the the rate rate is beyond the scope of what we do. But just tell you just a few maramacoimas as it relates to the sugi. The first thing is we just have to point out one one this. It came out from this Gamara that we know that the dollar voiders really wore two hats. They accomplished two things. Shrita gabali as rito as relates to zvachim. And the kamitsa matan kli lacha and actor as relates to the mincha. Number one they were maratsa. They created the ritsa. If somebody had to bring the carbon, he had to bring the mincha. These dollar voiders were marative. Everything else is shure but these were the voiders that were marative. In addition, these dollar voiders were materium. What does it mean they were materium? They were matter by zvachim and by mincha. The shure mincha lachiva. They had the ability to be matter. I think until now most people would have thought that all dollar voiders were materium. Just like the shrita is an avoider that's marative kapora, it's also an avoider that's materes. Kabola is an avoider that's marative kapora, it's also an avoider that's materes. Hilochas rita. The same is true for the dollar voiders in the mincha. This sugi and again we saw it briefly in dafi dala but this is the iker maramokim. You see it here again. You see it in that because you see here is that really only this rita is considered a matter when it comes to the zevach. And only the kamitsa is considered the matter. I'm sorry, only the actor is considered the matter when it comes to the mincha. Now as it relates to halacha, we have a right to view shrita as a matter because of this wondrous kabola kadesh kabola hatudomit. But it's just meaning in halacha you can look at it as a matter but it's not really the matter. What's matter is the zrita by a zevach and what's matter is the actor when it comes to a mincha. The reason this is a game changer from a long this standpoint is because we always speak out that the hashivus of the dollar of voidas as relates to pigel is not the fact that they're dollar of voidas it's the fact that they're matter and that's why you always find the word matter. Whenever you talk about pigel pigel synonymous with matter. In the final of the chotzi matter. Actually you could call matter. You find the idea of zrika the sharia basar and the pigel. So you're always talking about matter matter matter matter because the hashivus of the avoida as relates to matter of the pigel is the fact that you were avoida of the matter. Problem is now you tell me only the zrika the matter only the matter the matter what's going on. How can you shchit? Okay so shchit you tell me the kodesh but how can you kabala? How can you kabala what about kmitza? What about putting it in the sharia? What about the kabala? So you have to you have to work this out. So I discussed this with my brother Mo Moshe who just spent the last two years learning the sugyas of kabala. And he told me that the that they say in the yeshiva is that it's true the hashivus of shchit the kabala and zrika is the fact that shchit the kabala is the matter. But at the same time listen to this their avoida is in the matter. Because the avoida that's matter is zrika. But the chefsta that's matter is the dam. Right? There's always the gavra and the chefsta. Right? This is like wonders 101. Okay so there's chefsta and gavra. The chefsta that's matter is the dam. The gavra that's matter or the avoida that's matter is the avoida of the zrika. But that's partial that the dam is the chefsta that's matter. When you do shchit the kabala and avoida you're doing avoida in the dam. You're doing avoida in the chefsta that's matter. That's the tonight. The tonight is the feeling of the kodesh of the dam that's like the matter is you have to be doing an avoida in the matter. You don't have to be doing that avoid that actually matter, but you have to be doing avoid the inner double that is matter. Now rather the double is matter when you do this week and I'm not doing this week now, but it's still the matter. So it's an avoid that is matter. This is the way as we talking in London. We'll take the word for it. Either way that's the first order. The second order is so we have a The fact that matter we had a few applications to it. Number one, if you forgot during that it's not doing that avoid. During one of the two keep say during one of the two pectoris of the and then we had it with regards to the the and we had the and the very briefly as well. According to there's an idea of according to the in the just one as relates to understanding a little bit better and one relates to understand the a little bit better. Again this is shot. As it relates to there's a very important tomorrow. I forgot to bring the tomorrow to me. It's right here. There's a very important tomorrow that's talked away at the end of that tomorrow together and that is the tomorrow clears the way. We're there's an avoid that's made up of of two parts. For example, let's take the so it's made up of different each kiss my way. How do you look at each individual so you have to do four in order to get your for the if you do what did you do anything? Did anything happen? You one of the did anything happen? Or did or do you say that no nothing happens until you do it's an all or nothing. So if you now all the is going to be but if you only one of the two you're not going to have anything or maybe no maybe there's an idea tied to the Gamara that when you matter one of the two you know. some of the upon him is matter or something happens. When you matter the other of the the rest of it takes place. The Gamara's washing is when you matter the when you matter some of the and the Gamara comes out in that suit what we need right now is that according to that holds you have to say that when you matter the you're being matter half of the when you matter the one of the you matter half of the when you do this you matter some of the because if you're going to tell me that when you matter the nothing happened it's all or nothing then there's no way you can meaning you say that is the that is predicated on a fundamental understanding of what the does. According to actually does something it accomplishes which is very but that's what the Gamara says no other way to understand the Gamara says it's predicated on that understanding that it's not an all or nothing it's not to the all the is matter but if I'm only matter to the the then nothing is matter it's not the way it works. That would be all or nothing. We have to do everything no the way it works is is you matter the you have 50% you matter the other you have 50% and by the way 50% in half of the becomes now I don't know which half you have to work out all the but the bottom line is I half of the right now is going to be matter that's a fact because of is predicated on him holding that that something meaning if R' Meir would agree that nothing happens when you do hotze, if I'm just halfway home, but really nothing happened yet, then R' Meir wouldn't hold of a sheetum of a hotze matter. The reason R' Meir holds of a hotze matter because he holds that a hotze is something. Very important Gemara. We yesterday we take a look at Zevachim daf kuf yud alef. Again, just a mukem as relates to R' Meir. As it relates to the Gemara in Tosafos in Zevachim daf mem alef amud bet, makes the deal. Tosafos says that it's muvar throughout shas that in our mishna is one of the rayas that even though even though the chachamim hold in the fact of a hotze matter, it's only with regards to the key of koresh. Right? What was the chachamim's lashon in our mishna? The chachamim omer in koresh actually in the fact of a hotze matter. But it's very clear that as it relates to the psul pigul, even on a hotze matter there's still going to be a psul. So where the chachamim's sheetum in the fact of a hotze matter only manifests itself as it relates to the koresh, but pasul, yeah, it's definitely a machshavas pigul. Tosafos is not sure why. Tosafos says that l'chora, if the chachamim's sheetum in the fact of a hotze matter like we just explained based on that Gemara in Zevachim daf mem they hold it's all or nothing. So I didn't do anything. So l'chora I was mefagel during nothing. So if I was mefagel during nothing, then then why is it even pasul? Why is it only koresh? Why is it only in by koresh? It shouldn't even be pasul at all. And Tosafos has a very big chiddush. Tosafos says it's not pasul mid'oraisa. Tosafos says it's only pasul mid'rabanan. It's a gezeira. It's only pasul mach mazeh. And Tosafos says my makor is the Gemara in daf yud alef amud bet where the Gemara says that the reason the chachamim hold pigul or because of the fact of a hotze matter, it's pasul. Right? The Gemara said R' Yehoshua gozer, chachamim gozer. That was the Gemara in daf yud alef amud bet. The Gemara says because the rabanan were gozer chaimets of an ordinary mincha at the chaimets of mincha shleima with the original lavina. See, you see it's based all on a on a gezeira. What's the gezeira? At the chaimets of mincha shleima. So with the original lavina. With the it's not a hotze matter. But the point is it's only at the rabanan. It's based on a gezeira. Tosafos has a kasha. We don't have to go through that whole Tosafos. But just one hora'ah and that is from R' Simcha in Or Sameach Hilchos P'sulei Hamikdash perek bet. proved that even though the but it's says it's it's and he had a right from the Simcha says I agree but says I'm going to tell you what the was I'm going to tell you what the was you know what the was says you what would be if had a during the matter so the is doing that of the is doing the of one of the kids and he had a would it be a problem or would it be a problem do you say just like in the but maybe there's an between says I'm going to tell you a but it's 100% and that is the of is only by but but you don't have the of the what's the what's the the what's the you holding it's because it's that the whole of is only when we're dealing with a when I need the so I wait a matter and I only have half of it there is a problem of but when I don't need matter what I need is there's no problem of that's what it holds that if you had a while you were doing the of the even though you didn't have the same while you were doing the of the that is it's going to be I and it's only a because you have a what did say how did explain a matter when I'm a because when I'm a there's a of but when I'm not a there's no of a of there's no issues with it's matter that's the problem so is not a matter so there's no of says Simcha the only time there's an issue of chatzi is when you need the hashiva of matter. Al zeh nemar eima pagum b'chatzi matter because a chatzi matter is is a davar chaser. It's a problem. It's not enough to have machshavah l'shaim bigel. By bigel says Rebbe Simcha, the gantze bigel dreht zich around matter like we always speak out. Actually you could have called it matter but davar hamavi enu l'dei achilah k'zeh b'dav. So we could have said your basar lo mepagel. It's always matter matter matter. So this is halacha we have a pagum b'chatzi matter from chatzi matter not a matter. How much Rebbe machshavah l'shaim bigel? But sh'lo l'shmah is not totally a matter. Manda chashvei whoever related matter to sh'lo l'shmah. Sh'lo l'shmah is totally an avodah. So even as Rebbe Akiva or as Torah Akumis where I have a machshavah in a chatzi, there's no reason in the world that a chatzi avodah should That's a gemara. It's a gemara in Menachos daf zayin amud beis. A chatzi avodah is just as chashuv as a gantze avodah. It's just a chatzi matter that's a chaser. But chatzi avodah is not. So by bigel we'd have to come on to matter. There's a chaser of chatzi. But by sh'lo l'shmah we don't have to come on to matter. Over there there's going to be no chaser. So Tosfos said that the chashivus of the shittas Hakhamim throughout Chazal that the posuk in Vayikra is related to a g'zeirah. You want to know what a g'zeirah is? You know what a g'zeirah is? The g'zeirah is auto sh'lo l'shmah. Bigel auto sh'lo l'shmah and Rebbe Simcha said posuk g'zeirah. Because these are the machshavos of posuk that was the gantze Voch in Menachos dreht zich around. So you have a bigel, you have a sh'lo l'shmah. If there's an eima pagum in the chatzi, if there's a if there's a problem with sh'lo l'shmah by a chatzi, then it makes sense to make a g'zeirah. Even though eima pagum b'chatzi matter that there should be a problem of a of a machshavah sh'lo l'shmah when it comes to a when it comes to a chatzi as well. Says Rebbe Simcha, if that's the case, why did the gemara in Menachos daf zayin amud beis have to say that the Hakhamim said posuk in Vayikra by Torah Akumis auto Haktoras damim b'chatzai? Why didn't they say auto sh'lo l'shmah? Says because that's the first mishnah in Menachos. Kol haMenachos sh'einam t'kainim sh'lo l'shmah sh'einam chotzmin. Minchas chotzmin Minchas k'noid. Every other Mincha every Mincha that has the volume there is no this one. So the main way it had to be Mincha's quite a bit. There was no option of but let's say you're bringing a like a regular where there's a concept of where there's a concept of there over there makes perfect sense to say all to this one this one. It's going to be possible either way. In the front you can take a look at the simple reads very very beautifully. You have fully correct as I am and we'll stop.