בענין החידוש של כזית בכדי אכילת פרס

The garra on the top of the said that when came from above, they both said over that had this very back and forth with regards to the laws of we say it in what would be If somebody took a of it, broke it into two, ate one half and then a minute later he ate the other half. Would he be or would he not be? What's the rash? He explains we saw the rashi inside already. On the one hand, we know in as long as you eat them within the shear that it takes to eat a brass. So, is so you would think it would conform to the general rules that governs or maybe is different because what's the it's not just a buser that needs to be eaten but is altogether to the and being that you find this that it's maybe you should say and could be. Whereas in but when it comes to there may be not or maybe not just like so too when it comes to it's going to be the same thing and no I like the other side better. I think that being that and two even though in all areas of are when it comes to over here it's not going to bear in other words being that is there's a of that quotes throughout and therefore this that is not going to be true. And asks what would seem at first glance to be a blatant steer from another. And this is the over there is discussing the very obscure that of is so we know not all to was created. Equally not all conveys to in the same way. Perhaps the most of para in the world of is that the ofar we know is but only if a person eats it and even then it's and the learns it out from in fact the has for this that seems to say that the only time of is if a person would eat it it would be a and you would eat a kay Meaning just like in the so would have to be and the asks and that is that why do I need to one should be enough and for the one is coming to teach me that when we say that in the other one's coming to teach me but the gmor explains you ready I would have being that so I would think so maybe you should be even if you ate the two within a time frame that's more than where it's more than the 2 to 9 minute time frame maybe IF I ATE THEM SIX HOURS apart that would also be ENOUGH ONE person could tell me the is and the is coming to teach me that what's the in other words being that so I would have thought that maybe it's not what yeah I would have thought even it has to be the way Rashi was with Irish argu here. I have two gumaras that are flat out sor each other in our being that is so suggesting could be the two wouldn't be even I would have to do one whereas it's being so therefore I would have thought that it could be even if it's now whatever the here is and whatever the here is Let's put aside for a second. I have two that seem to be a flatout steel. When he brings this init, he says this already made it onto the and as a result it's not a that I think I need to spend so much time on. Says the same thing. He says this has made its rounds. It's been on the desk of the great and as a result I don't think it's something I need to be so one of the that this made it on was on the desk of the and in this is one of the that were written to the great asks this to says a little bit of a pull but the truth is just want to bring out one point from this kasha and that is what what lies at the core of this steer again had to be mash of the ste this is already something you have to be for but what is at the core of this theor what's at the core of this is a in the world of what would be if there was no that what would you have thought I mean we You know in whenever the Tyra says eat or don't eat doesn't mean eat in one shot or don't eat in one shot. There's a a definition of what is the definition of as long as the happens within the time frame of an it's going to be considered what would be if you didn't have that of what would you have thought could be I would have thought that you have to eat in one shot and if you don't eat in one shot it's not considered you don't have to eat in one shot and as long that in of itself is going to be okay. You could hear it a little bit differently. What you could hear is that were it not for this of it would have been that I don't have to eat in one shot where I have to just sit and press I have to shove it down my throat all the you would have thought that you don't have to eat it cuz I eat it in one shot. In fact, YOU WOULD HAVE THOUGHT I DON'T know I could EAT IT MAYBE ALL DAY. I DON'T KNOW. I I'm not sure what's the time frame of but I would have thought maybe during the suda I don't know you come up with some definition that you don't have as much TIME AS YOU THOUGHT YOU did the definition of means it has to happen within a tight time frame and it has to happen within the amount of time that it takes to a in other words without would I have thought that has to happen literally or if I cared I would have thought I have way more time is of that I don't have to eat it in one shot or is the I have to eat it within a tight time frame albeit not one shot but at the same time within a tight time from the way that therefore you shouldn't say It's that theor holds that is a in that you don't have to eat it in ONE SHOT. SO BEING THAT there's a to say that by you don't have the so now you're going to go back to the status quo. WHAT'S THE STATUS QUO? SO MUCH SO and then afterwards says you're going to be from the it's just the opposite from the it's that being that is and the whole of you can't say the of you can't say the so you have to now revert to the status quo What's the status quo? I don't know. I would have thought I had more time. the separate. So this this steer over here that was the steer between is not just a steer in it's a steer fundamentally in how that we would have understood we're not for the not for the you would have to eat in one shot. Therefore, which is you don't have the I need to do and after you're going to be from it's just the opposite that without you would have as much time as you wanted. It's for that reason being that it's the had to tell me that you should know that don't say that there is because without that I would have thought refer to what the pas would have been and what's the pas I have all day every day can go ahead and to eat it the bottom line is Alpiri and is really the two of this in terms of what would have been what could have should have been were it not for the fact that there was that it would have the definition of would have been one from the definition of would have been that you have a lot more time to eat this than you really thought you do. You know there's that we're all familiar with it's it's quoted in the says that when a person is the you should eat the mat in one shot you should try to swallow it in in one shot. Don't just eat it. You should eat it in one shot. And the says and the end of the seventh bar that you should try to go ahead and you should try to eat it in one shot. And there's a prim where do you see in the end of I mean off the bat we just learned there's a few suggestions and possibilities. If you take a look at the girls, you know what the meant when he said, you know what he meant when he said in the end? What he meant to say was he meant this because what was this to say? And by the way, why say you're going to be it's because being that So it could be what do you see from here? You see from that really means OF which is you don't have the but it's that the perfect is really there's a that you can eat the it's a leap of faith but the if you find that the perfect on the of is eating. I think when you sit down to be in your mitzvah, you should try to eat. Why shouldn't you try to eat? Because you should try to go ahead and do it in the perfect way and don't rely on this of I saw some say I wonder what would be in the reverse. Let's say you have where is right you give him whatever he needs in order to besides for to make it out alive but if you ask of course he would eat let's say the doctors say this has to eat there would be a for not to eat but rather to eat it what's the But just like the said that it's from the way explained it that the perfect is one shot and using the term loosely is a so when you're doing a mitzvah you don't do the you do the so too when it comes to an even though you're allowed to do it but we know the rule is you try to minimize the damage as much as possible. So why do the inway if you could do it in the way? So don't eat the but rather eat it peace meal. Eat a little bit. Eat a little bit. Eat a little bit. But the bottom line is this is a famous mug of and again you know the brisketss are very mad in this mug of not just with one kazay with two kazim too. But the bottom LINE IS THIS IS A famous and the is it comes from it literally comes from today's of that's all true. If you learn like is in the over here and then the and that is that without the of you would have thought means eating it in one shot THERE'S A YOU DON'T HAVE TO EAT it in one shot but eat it in one shot that is the basis for this it's just the opposite it's that it has to be within that time frame But what would it have been without the you'd have all day maybe to eat it or at the very least you would have a longer time frame to eat it. You don't find anywhere that there's any to eat it. But you don't find any if that's the case to go ahead and just chow down your be said. He didn't say he was brings by the way brings in other places as well that he says we quoted the of and the of and other handled the sh what at first glance seems to be just a steer between two gumaras. But if you a little bit more, it's not just a steer between two. It's a fundamental steer. It seems to be a of what could have should have been the definition of it not for and maybe a maybe even two. The one for sure seemingly would be this mug and that's brought down in and maybe even another one when it comes to would there be a mile to not have him just chow it down to eat it carefully and slowly or not either way there's another related to the end of that we will save maybe for Come on.