Zevachim 97

Today's daff is and we are at the first wide line on the two dots. Today's stuff's being learned as and so we're moving along in the 11th per of which deals with some of the unique that the Torah mentions in paras in the par of specifically the first part of the paric dealt with the that states that if dam of a carbon goes on a there's a mitzvah to wash the beades the latter part of the barrack discusses the which is mentioned in the very next pav In the event that is cooked. So if it's cooked in an earn in a Torah says you have to break that kali. If the was cooked in you don't have to break it. the some sort of the some sort of casuring process that you can do and it's referred to in the Tyra as what's known in the Mishna in the sug as now there's a fundamental difference between the that was mentioned in the very beginning of the peric that goes on a beed requires kibbus and the that's discussed in the latter part of the Peric and that is that's cooked in a that's cooked in a clean and the difference is the first is true only by a carbon the second is true not only by a meaning both of these are mentioned in the par of the Torah that talks about the katas it's mentioned in the par stating that one of these are taco unique only to the carbon kas the other is true for kachum as well now is it true for all kachum or is it true for some kachch so that was already discussed in the end of the mishna on and it's really on that topic that today's daf begins the mishna had very very curtly mentioned it's a mikistan on specifically as it relates to says the true for all and it's true for all says that does not require in other words and agree that the of is not true only by a carbon Like we just mentioned okay how broadly then is it applied that's already according to the it's true for all kadash and all kachum it's true for all kachum according to it's only true for kach kadashim it's not true for kachim kum regardless on that note the garra is going to begin with a bra that a is going to put a name to the face so we're going to get a name now for the tanakama / that were mentioned in our Mishna. Additionally, we'll see some of the mirus and how it is that the Tanakama and came to their position respectively and the Marta. This Bryce Rashi says is a says where does it say? And in that parish of the tells me I would think that is only true for how do I know that it's true not only but it's true by all as well says so one of the in the parish of now we know is so why did have to say to be that not only is the of true by the but it's true by now it's interesting we're being from the words you would think from the words you could only bees well see that is one of the opinions in the but it's not the of the first opinion rather from the fact that it says Not only you would think that we should be even meaning even that's cooked in a clean should be of the says what's coming to so is the first mentioned in the brace. So holds that even though the said in the parish of the but from the fact that it says you would think it's only that requires does not require this is of course the how do I know that because what's the boy to be more than just a carbon. Oh, if the rebel is like we said a second ago, then you could only be says how did know to be from even saying good says I'll tell you because from the fact that the terrorist said the word which understands is coming to if you need to well then for sure kachum kum is included because if even kachum kum is not included is not included kachum kum is more kadesh than so if I need a p to that's a very roundabout way of saying that kachum is included now where is kachum included must be when it says it means even what's going to respond to that meaning if Yehuda is right. Then now needs to be why would the have to tell me if even Kachum is excluded is going to tell me that Isa is actually coming to exclude but something else. It's not coming to exclude Truma. In fact it's coming to exclude what we already said it's coming to exclude. Now when did we already say is coming to exclude anything? Zashi takes us down memory lane. It was three ago said that from the word we learn that only uh that's included in this. If however it's possible even if it had and became later it's going to be included is not coming to be according to it's coming to be in the event that it was even if it was as a result the kasha is not aasha what was the kasha if you're going to tell me that even kachum is excluded why do I need according to is in fact not coming The bottom line is this is the slightly expanded version of the that we had in our Mishna. Again in our Mishna we had two. We had the and the hold that even though the said in the paras but really it's true for all said it's true for all but it's not true forum. What do we see in this price? Number one, a name to the face. Who is the that's the first thing that you see? Additionally, what we see over here is the to the reason Yehuda holds that it's true for all is because the Tory says he in the parab not onlyes but the rabbis all says it's true. It says that's but to be what's very funny that from the word you would be even is because it also says and understood is coming to if you're going to tell me that even from not only it's coming to hold like said that is coming to something else. It's not coming to if it's not coming to then I could tell you is being only it's not being march. So what's the mus between the isum do they require mifa do they not require mikifa coin who is the first opinion in the mission mifa is true for all kachum even kachum and coin it's only true for kach it's not going to be true for kach but one thing is clear everybody agrees that truma does not require right that's a very very clear thing that truma not the sh is kach but as it relates to truma Not according to Yehuda it's a coming to be according to you don't even need a because according to even kachum kum is excluded certainly truma is going to be excluded but it's on that point that truma is outside looking in as it relates to the laws of that this last piece of gumar before the mishna is going to focus on faith is that true that truma doesn't require mico also known as micoa vata We learned in a now this Bryce that the Gumar is about to bring is what we'd refer to as 101. In fact, it's quoted in which if you've ever learned the or if you've ever learned that is like prime real estate this is the thick of the laws of this is everybody in the world knows if you have a pot that was used to cook baser meaning a pot you now let it cook let's say you went ahead and you did it but nice and time so depending on how much you have relative to the depending on the ratio that's going to determine whether you have a problem you don't have a problem meaning if the bus is being then you have an issue if not you're not going to have an issue the same is true regarding if someone has a potum you shouldn't cook and if you went ahead and you cooked in this pot if there's enough truma in the of the pot to be into the well then you have to treat it like truma you can't just go ahead and eat If you're a C, you could, but let's say you're not a C, you won't be able to eat it. If not, not. But what do you see from here? You see from here that the laws of relate to just like they relate to all if that's the case, break the how could it be that there's no of when it comes to Truma. If you see that 101 applies to Truma, then the laws of should apply to Truma as well. Now, the truth is we didn't really learn the yet. It's going to be the topic of today's d. So at the end of today's d hopefully we'll be a little bit more intelligent in the topic of mifa but the gumar's kasha right here is based on one obvious and that is that for sure you would think the laws of mikoa have something to do with the laws of ble and plus and haggalas kale how The pip shad is because kachin we know if it sits around too long becomes nicer. So if you have a piece of baser kachchim and you're supposed to eat it kachi kadashim a day and a night or kachum colum two days and a night and now that statute of limitations that amount of time that the grants you to eat it passes if you would eat it you would be you'd even be it's what's known as in the lies a very very big and that is that just like of baser kachum becomes nicer if it's time that you were supposed to have eaten it or been macked after it passes. The same is true if it's balua inside a kali it would become nicer as well which means that really the fact that you have to go ahead and you have to casher a kali that you call kachum inside of it is related to uh underlying which states that if you're not going to do that you're going to end up with if you're going to have yourself a problem that means at its core you would think is related to the well if that's the case And I know from the well there's no way in the world that there can't be of truma that has to be because to the extent you're not going to do you're going to end up a ple of Truman the pot and if you're going to end up with ple in Truman the pot it's not a heavl that you're allowed to just go ahead now and cook because you're going to end up with a a situation so tim that what do you mean there's no when it comes to truma that almost sounds like there's no laws of when it comes to truma and I know from that that's in fact not the case that would be when it comes to and if that's the case if you cook true in a pot for sure there should be a of so the now is going to give three truths to this kasha they're all coming from the same vein but it's three is the first you want to know what meant when they said there's no when it comes to what they meant was they meant the following that in the event that a little bit of the kay was cooked with kachin so you have to do on the entire clay that's because if you only cooked with a little bit of clay so there's only a little bit of the kali that has ble inside of it why do I have to go now and do ma on the entire that's aesh that's a special in the that really transcends whatif is predicated on which is the fact that this ble over here that that even if you only cooked with mix you have to do on the dire it's that that we say that's not true for truma because by truma all you would have to do is you would have to capture the bishial but you would have to capture the bishial said, I'll tell you where it's that there's no when it comes to the following it says in the so where does it say that and we learn from the fact that the terror says has to be done with water you can't do with wine we learn from the word it can't even be with diluted wine that has a lot of water inside of it it's still not going to be okay has to be 100% pure pure unadulterated water, right? But what's the point? The point is that when it comes to there's a special that has to be done with water. However, when it comes to there, there's no with water. You can do it with wine. You could do it with you would have to do some foreign. And the reason is because the laws of belie said he said a third time it's the following. So we're going to see this in the he of today's but we'll see is that anytime was done so it was a two-step process. First micoifa was done and that was done with cold water and then afterwards or beforehand there was also a hagala process that was done with hot water but there's two components there's the and there's the itself has to be in addition to that there's that was that then in addition to the you also have to do this that's true only as it relates to there's no you could just do it straight up and that in of itself is going to be enough but says this last only works if you that holds that was done it's only the so according to that it comes out that there is no when it comes to all it is is and if Truma also needs a which means said it comes out Truma is the same the says no it's not true I'll tell you where it's neg it's negated the it's still neg holds only the buta still has to be that you have to do a that's true only that's not going to be true so said you're telling me there's no that seems to suggest there's no bleum the famous there's a process when it comes to truma there's a hagal process but the of that you have those you don't have by trauma what are the abaya throughout and rabula throughout was that by you see that even if you mix have to do for the entire that transcends the basic of that's not true by Truma and that's what meant when they said or that is going to be excluded said it's neg that has to be done it's you can't use wine you can't use diluted wine when it comes to truma you have to caser it but you can caser it with wine you can caser it with diluted wine rabb said it's there's a special has to be done That's true only by with that is not going to be true when it comes to moving along another this is really going to get into the basic said that if it's and is being brought on yontiff and the kanim cooked with clean on. So you would think after they finish cooking you have to do the says no the whole counts as one long cooking and at the end of then you'll do the say no you have to do the by the we'll see more about another what's the m It's what's the type of it's so what's m oh what'sifa does that help you so without rash I don't think so rashi says I'll tell you what this means the is actually referring to that talks about everybody knows before you use you're supposed to wash the and the says over there is That requires you have to rinse the inside of the kali and you also have to rinse the outside of the kali. means the inside of the kali like the says that that's the requires that's what the means when it says is referring to the that's mentioned over and that's so means you rinse it you rinse the inside of the kali and you rinse the outside of the kali Okay, another says were both done with cold water. We saw that in the last right before these were different kum that were used for roasting in the those things were not used when it came to kasher with but rather it had to be used with water. Either way, there's a lot to unpack. The first part of the Mishna mentioned said as much as there's a of the say no say that you have to wait until it's by the you have to go and you have to do theifa Now the gumar is going to discuss the sheet of reptar. The gumar is going to discuss the sheet of the first we're going to discuss the sheet of reptar then the sheet of the reason we're going to do it in that order because that's the order that the mishna brings it in. First the Mishna mentions reparan and then the Mishna mentions the but I think we could appreciate repar if we do a little spoiler alert and we understand the drop better the say adds the is going to say that the of the is that the always had to be done by the of the food that was cooked inside the scale. So for example, if it's a carbonas which is what the is referring to even though it's other as well but let's say you cooked the carbonas in this so right you have the rest of the day and that night to eat it. So you go to the and it's by that you go ahead and you cook it. Now we're going to see in the gum tus is going to bring two gear in the gar whether they used to do it mamish by the manila or they waited for the manila to pass and it's then they did it. It's based on two different in the gar but either way it was done around the time of the manila. So as soon as the happens it's then that you have to go ahead and you have to do this says that's true every day of the year with the exception of when it comes to you cook on the first day keep on cooking it's fine you don't have to worry about until the end of by the end of then it's going to be an issue and the jumps on and says if ordinarily is like said so why is it going to be different so the says I'll tell you why because the says this is a very interesting this is in the over there is talking about the carbon pes you're going to come to the bd you're going to bring the carbon pes you're going to finish bringing the carbon you're going to eat it you're going to wake up in the morning and you're going to go home now are you go home the morning after you ate the carbon pak no and the reason is because it's the first day yontiff and if it's yontiff you are going to presumably outside the right and if that's the case you're going to have no ability to go home. So when the says it can't really mean the next morning. Okay. So what then does it mean? It means the next morning that you're going to be able to go home. But this which literally means the next morning when the sun rises really means sometime later. said that you see from that when the said the meant that the entire from the first night until the end of Y is treated like one day where do you see that because the morning not after you ate the car the morning is considered the next morning of it's all one big day if it's all one big day one big day so I don't have to do the until the when's That's why I haven't told y to do it. So, you know why? Because we look at the entire as being one day. Now, there's a long second on the asks a very obvious says that we just said that when it says in the it can't mean the next morning literally because the next morning you're presumably outside the must be it means the day after ya. How do you jump from the next morning until the day after the maybe means the first day first there's no way to go outside the right a lot of trips involve going outside the there's no problem of when it comes to so maybe when it says means the second day what right but the whole is considered one day maybe that first day okay so you get an extra RA day it's the entire but either way this is repar of art that the entire is the entire the entire is going to be considered but said if that's the case there should be no piggle. There should be no Allah of no what does it mean there should be no pickle there should be no of because there's no if the whole is one day what's if a is doing on the first day if he has a mind he's going to eat it three days later three days later is still not even morning yet it's not yet right it's not yet there should be no nicer nicer means once passes it's not until the end of you told Maybe according to that until the end of maybe there's no and maybe there's no but says even though it's but it's factually incorrect said only said with regards to he never said it with regards to the you have to say must be something else again if it would be true for pickle ander as well and we know it's not is based on something said in the name of the reason holds that is because they used to bring so many carbon specifically she says they used to bring a bunch of schlammans and the reason they brought a so many schlammans is because they brought the shami and they brought the shami sim right so there were a bunch of schlammans that were being brought over yontiff so what happened Because it was very unlikely that in the event that somebody could caution, it was ever going to come nicer that there should be an obligation for us to be proactive now and do mikifa. Again, marshifa is predicated on the fact that the bio inside the kali is going to become. It's something that was highly unlikely on yontiff. And the reason is just uh play it play it out. It's the first day yontiff. You went ahead and you cooked the kakatas, right? Let's start with katas because talking about a carbon kas at some point that day you're going to end up cooking a when you cook aim the schlamim is going to be mas and now the pot is going to be by the ble of is not going to become nicer for another two days and it's two days in a night the next day you're going to end up cooking another schlam the next day another schlam even if you throw in a katus in between and a katus does become nicer from day to day but there's always going to be schlamsi says And the schlams always buys you a buffer. It always gives you an extra day. As a result, the chances of these ble ever becoming nights are highly unlikely. It's said either way that when it comes to you don't have to do until the end of first based on said if that's true there should be no piggle or noiser either. And we know not that way must be shut in is based on the argued within the said. So theor says what exactly do mean? So we already spoiled this when we read the again in the name he is the here. He said you wait until and then you do the you always have to wait until the it's true every day and it's true on as well. Now we mentioned that said this two had a read this. So if you look at the last which sounds like you wait for the entire to pass and it's afterwards that you go ahead and do it. Thenis brings that there's another that says not you wait the entire but you wait until the but you have to before the for a little bit of a discussion on that says what's the supposed to do by the says that's the very next says Okay. Meaning the Tory juxtaposes and the Pik that says that the was eaten by the put them together to teach me that the is related to this and then you do the now the Mishna continued and the Mishna said she already explained what that means in the Mishna and then had to be done. So the is going to bring a that's going to mention another opinion number one elaborate on this little it's only what do you mean like all cashing anytime you cash it what does mean if you buy a k from a you have to cure it you don't cash it with cold water if you cash it with hot water everybody knows that. So this dude, the ma has to be done with hot water's going to respond, I know was done with hot water. And in fact, you think I think that when you cash this kay, you're going to capture it with anything other than hot water. Of course not. I hold that in addition to capturing with hot water there's a special den there's a special action you have to take that's called and that action mushifa that was done with cold wateron what hold if it's true that in addition to the there was also that was done and both of them were done with cold water Then told I hear what you're saying. Good come back. Meaning I hear you. You answered me. Very good. There's a component there. But you're telling me that the are both being done. But I think that for sure one of the two, the Marifa is the actual hag. That's what's being done with you. I know that because if maifa are both being done within then why the word ma and the wordifa they should been both called the same thing. They both should have been called ma they both should have been called. And by the way, even though we know the Mishna said is but the could have said which would teach me or which would teach me why to me is that there's a fundamental difference between and you know what the fundamental difference must be one is hot one is cold. So I don't think you have to conjure it with hot water and then on top of that do sifa inside and outside with cold water. I think what the terra is telling me is that one of the two is done with the hot water and that's the ma cuz the comes first and the mentions the ma first. So I think that the ma which is the inside that was done and then afterwards you're going to do it with cold water and that is going to be the verbi. What's Rabbi going to respond to that meaning? If you're telling me that are both being done with cold water, so why didn't the terror just say Rabbi says I'll tell you I would have thought I would have thought that you just repeat the same thing twice. Rinse and repeat, right? Pun intended. You want to know why the Torah used? Because one of them is inside and one of them is outside. That's why the terror used two different words. It's not because one's with hot water, one's with cold water. It's because one's inside, one's outside. Had the said, I would have thought maybe they're both inside, maybe they're both outside. One is going to be inside, the other one is going to be outside. So what's the bottom line? How connected with the but in reality we have a that mentions. It's and really really everybody agrees that the first things first is you had to capture it without water. There's no sha you're capturing without water. There's no sha in the world. You're first casuring without water. So what's then the shila? The shila is the mifa itself. What is that? According to it's both one's called ma one's called because the location location location is different. The is done is again the actual is being done with then there's a and there's a both of which were done with according to the the itself is the so you don't do in addition to the the includes it and the in fact the reason it's called m andifa is not because of the location location but rather it's because the mas is done and the is actually being done. So it's a number one procedurally what was done according to then according to the then there's no that preceded what the according to the is both the of the is not for today but There is a big piece from Mona Grizz from the brisker oven safer in the Rambam in Hilisa Carbonus the Rambam is in where the scrub brings from that was this that you have when it comes to which according to it's true really for all according to at the very least it's true by Is that or is that a mitzvah to go ahead and do a right after we learn the we can appreciate the a little bit better meaning that's you have to even that is that you have to do a regular and the is related to the like we've seen so many times throughout the but the question is this special what is that is that some ritual at Kachim dig. So there's so many inch. So go chalk this up to another one of such or is this really at its core more of like a is this more of a play is that also or is that not that and much much more isn't that very very long piece from we're going to go back to Mishna like if somebody went and he cooked in a ki and or kach kadashim and kachim. So are completely different obviously kadesh and kachim are also different in many ways number one there's number two who's allowed to eat it so there's now in terms of the tar of what you just cooked inside this pot so it says the mission as follows if the is able to be or if the is able to be so specifically as it relates Kachchik kadasham that was cooked together with kachum column. If the kachik kadashim is able to be nice and time into the kachum column you would have to treat the kachum column as if it's kachadashim because it has ble of kachikadash inside of it. It's nice and t so it wasn't able to mat it. So you have to treat it like that meaning it has to be eaten within a certain by certain people in a certain place by the way also right it has to be so you're going to have to treat it now like additionally is going to clarify what that means and if somebody would or something would touch this it would not pass the maga would not be as if it touched that dber In the event that that is possible, this is also something that requires just simple which is going to do another. So if you have a rocket literally is a wafer but a that touched another orch says the or some. So you would think that if a rock touches a rock and a touches a where one is possible the other one is kasha. So the ka now would become possible because it touched the ple says the entire doesn't become possible in fact it's the place where they touch where they made contact with the bah actually happened where something transmitted from one to the other that's where you have issues but the entire the entire that not is a very cryptic theor is gonna jump right in might come second first part of the So if the is being nice and if so you have to treat the now as if it's right the you have to treat like it's the you have to treat like it's number one number two doesn't require what does that even mean which we seems to be saying that If the was ple and someone touches the tar now it would not become ple. So the gmorra says my I don't even know how to read it. And the reason the doesn't know how to read it is for two things. Number one what does it mean? Well first of all if you cook kachen with hoolen or kachadashum kadash for sure according to everybody requires marika. So if it's been nice in town, so for sure you need Marie Kushifa now fish. If it was not nice in town, I could understand why you don't need Marie Kushifa cuz it's buckled to the Kachum. Maybe you'll tell me we're going Quinton Mand doesn't require Mikushifa. We'll see in the Gar or if the Kin was cooked within okay for sure doesn't require Marie Kushifa. So I understand why there would be no of Kushifa. But you're telling me it's been nice and time, right? Then what if the of course it require also what do you mean if it's been nice and it's possible so it was not in the if it wasn't ble so then why is it that if something else touches it now it's not going to become possible in other words the misha said three one mitz and three the mitsus was you kum within orch and It's been so what are the three number one number two number three the first we understand we understand why because there's a double that's not it's been but what do you mean if you that's not and why if something touches. So now it takes on the status of that kachum. Right? So if that's the case and the kachum is not so then why would it be? This is what the gumar can't wrap its head around. And because of that, the gumar is going to do a whole edit on the Mishna which will obviously make everything work. Says the gar enters the Here's the edit that we had in the makes a lot of sense. Not rather makes perfect sense. and time. Talk about an edit. If however it's not then edit and everything works itself out good. Right? We had one case and three one of which we understood two of which we didn't understand. But really after the edit we have two cases with uh six and the three is one is applied to the case that's mentioned. The other two are applied to the case that we inserted via the edit. Everything is good. I have another question. One of the that the Mishna said was that if was cooked together withum and it's based on the edit then what's a why? Because the kachikadashim was bottled to the kachchum kalum. What's the marz kasha? Mars kasha is forget about kachukadashim. Kachchum kalum also requires mikifa right. Doesn't kachum kalum require marshifa? Now is that so that kachum requires? Hopefully not that was the first 20 minutes of today's thear is going to revisit it. First thear is going to bring us when the or really when the Mishna says that if it's not it doesn't require it doesn't mean it doesn't require at all. It means it doesn't require the of it requires the kush of kachumad. Now what's the difference between the two is nothing. The difference is this man when exactly you did it you always do it by the so if it's not time so comes out we view it as so. So when are you going to do the at the end of the second day if however it's time then we view it as kach. When are you going to do the you're going to do it at the end of the first day. This mission is going according to according to it doesn't require because that is only according to I understand according to why the Mishna told me two cases to tell me the right what were the two cases and Then it's and with the editor of the why do I need these two cases? So according to I'll tell you why because the wanted to teach me one that I only know from the case from there I know that there's no require and this is not and when it says in the per the edit they don't when It just means you don't need by this man of need by this man of why you telling me two cases why do I need just tell me and I'm not again like coming to teach me but it's not so why do I need the second case you need both said I would have who is maybe able to be mat. This whole concept of B in our sug is only true by and because has the ability to because it's very different and we know whenever it comes to the more different things are the more of a it has to be is not even at all right is not because it's too similar to the in order to have a BL you need the two things to be different so I would have and which are so different. There's a bit being that they're very similar because at their core they're both maybe there's no at all and only said I mean I would have thought maybe only is strong enough to but when it comes to maybe does not have the ability doesn't have the capacity to that's why I needed both cases. So the reason we have both cases according to is not because of some footnote. No, no, no, no. I needed fundamentally to understand the sug between and there's between and the next part of the Mishna was so we're talking about two that came in contact with each other. One was the other was or two or that came in contact with each other. One was one was possible. Says the Mishna that you would think that now the one becomes completely possible. It doesn't it's the place where they made contact. It's the place where the ble took place but otherwise otherwise not. So the is going to bring a now that's going to expand on this. Now the background to this bra is another one of the in the parish of it says anything that touches the bus of says the you would think anything that touches a carbon kastosh becomes kadesh even if there was no ble meaning two cold things touch each other maybe it becomes 's right you have a very similar is predicated on that. So there is an idea you touch you become has something to do with. So you would have thought that as long as it touches it says and from we learn no it's only a problem if it's there has to be a but if there's no it's not going to be a problem you would think you would think of a little bit of maybe the entire to become it says the word and we learn from there it's the place where it touched that happens. Okay, it's not okay. How does that play itself out? So, what do you do? If only that part is possible but the rest of the Ber is really you cut off that please right what's known as right and then once you cut that off it's going to be okay it says we learned from there it's only the but the horns all that other stuff that's not going to have the ability to impart any of this what does mean it means Whatever the status of the is the thing that touched it is going to take on that same status as well. Okay. Then she too this piece of meat that touched it is going to be possible as well. And if then this you're going to be allowed to eat. And what does it mean? You're going to be allowed to eat it. You're going to have to eat it like the has to eaten for a day and a night. has to be eaten within the it can only be eaten by so all the rules and regulations that govern exactly hey is going to govern this as well and this next kumar that we're about to learn is an absolute classic it's a classic in the world of raid seven and a half years ago in tomorrow's we spoke about it truth is we've spoken about this many times over the years but the now is about to aska. So what emerges from the many that we just learned in the affformentioned is that if you have a piece of that's and it touches a that's going to be it's now going to be possible. If it's possible means you're not going to be allowed to eat the the kachum right now eat kachchum that's possible. Does say if you eat kachchum that's possible. You're not going to be allowed to eat it. It's going to be possible. Why can you eat this? When a person eats he's when someone eats that's possible he's let the of I'm eating a kosher piece of be of the ple that I'm eating the of the pleat that's right now inside the kishkas of this kasher the piece of meat that I'm eating. In other words, when I eat this piece of meat, on the one hand is a mitzvah. On the other hand, there's a a mitzvah is the is the possible the arguing that it's both. It's possible. Which means when I take a bite out of this, I'm doing a mitzvah and I'm doing a Now, what's the rule? Every time you do a mitzvah and a we should say now the truth is this is a little bit of a hard kasha to understand. First of all you would think it's a tufus and it's either it's not kosher. What do you mean it's not right? You would think it's one or the other. Additionally, the Gar just said we learn from if there's a that teaches me. So you think it's you can tell me say from today till tomorrow. What the seems to be telling me is that even though I say they not going to be allowed to eat it. These two and much much more is all discussed by the on this. But we're gonna learn the said I'm gonna tell you the answer to this. You want to know why you don't say has no ability to be the says. Okay. Where does it say that? It says that regarding the carbon P break the bone of a carbon P when it says in the what it means is it means whether the has marrow inside of it means there's a little bit of bus or pes inside or if it doesn't have either way you're not allowed to break it meaning what would be if you have a bone of a carbon pes and inside the bar of the carbon pes there's right some people like that a lot can I break the bone to go ahead and eat It sounds like no said that when the boy means even said I don't understand why don't we say of eating the carbon of because when I break the bone I'm going to get the I'll be making the mitzvah of what do you have to say you want to know why the of the is not going to be it's because when it comes to the mikto over there is not said a different the word is an it's an it's true but not and when the what the Torah is saying is that it's off limits. This not eat it. Now it doesn't say thou shalt not eat it. It says which is what we have then is that's why there's going to be no so two roots and why there's no according to according to it's because the now we just mentioned that on this there's there's so much raid and I am the related raid bites but I just want to end with one kasha it's not the easiest kasha ever but it's kadai it's just one that angel asked that is the guru in this is really a guru that repeats itself in several places in discusses the of which by the way is very much related to today's d we had a lot of and in today's which is very much related to the what is the of so it begins with a member for with the exception of ordinarily if somebody would eat and he would eat it together with something that you're allowed to eat. So somebody eats na and he puts it in a sandwich. So he takes a bite out of a sandwich. There's a little bit of naan and there's also a bun that this is inside. If he didn't eat a kazayas of Nao, he's not going to get malus. We know was awesome in but he's not gonna get malus if he didn't eat a kaz of even if the bun itself is mash to where he ate a kazas between the no and the bread. It doesn't matter because the bread is not inherently the bread is m and as a result being that you only ate of even though you ate a little bit of together with it, it's going to be okay. The of states that there are times where if somebody eats is together with the itself is going to be and we'll say that even if the person ate of but if he was the is and now it's going to be if he ate he's even going to get malus in the name of when it comes to every is not. So if somebody eats and he eats a little bit of bread with it, he's not over the only time we say is when it comes to the said is not let him right but the didn't just say don't eat the said and from the fact that the said we learned from there that if somebody would eat another together with a double motor to zamine The would be to and it would create the over here. This is the of the on the very bottom of it goes to the top of asks that I don't understand if we have a in the so then why don't we learn from and say just like by it says so too in we should also say that and And the Gmorra says, I'll tell you why. You're right. Really based on the we should say that it's but being that there's another time the said of so comes out the didn't tell to me once the told to me twice. We know the rule. If the terror tells you something twice, you can't learn nothing from it. It's what's known as it's for that reason I don't have the ability to learn from that says the fact that by it says I learned it from the word where in the mention I know from the following it saysto the topic of the last part of today's you would think that even if somebody would take and eat baser that touch of a carbonas but it wasn't by from it still it would be and we learn from there has to be what does It teaches me that in the event that something would go ahead and would touch the carbon. So the is it would take on the status of the carbon. In the event that the carbon kas is it would have a carbon and in the event that the isle it would have a carbon. Now the gum over here says that why did the Tyra have to tell me this to tell me that touches the is from the of course it's by from the why would you think not must be it's coming to teach me of this is the so says the it's true that by you see and you would think that if by we should now take and apply it to and say you can't because you have it by and I have it by as well by I have mis by I have is coming to teach me what does it mean of by the way if you look at rashi in today's on the top of two lines from the top actually quotes this that it's from here that we learn the because that's what is coming to teach me not just that this bully is a plaintist that are going to transfer from one to the other but at the end of the day at the end of the day I know from here the of now the gumar goes and the garments a little bit more and the garra says like this what's the always of ancake If you can learn from then why would the have to write and if I can learn from why would the have to write so from the fact that the told to me twice that's a right you can't learn from the what so the goes says had it said I wouldn't necessarily know to learn because you could always argue maybe by which is but when it comes to which is not maybe But why don't you must be it's because you're not allowed to learn from and that's how I know that even though but it's not true by from the fact that the wrote by must be I can't learn from because if I can learn from the Tyra would not have Tell me because it's anyways something I would know from oh must be it's I don't understand that the word teaches me something very important you know what it teaches me not only that this is a plate this not only that it teaches me that there's an I'll tell you the assay is not well if that's the case and that's why I can't learn from that because if I could learn from then why do I need let me learn from tell you I could learn from it's not a so why did tell me the word because included intash is is an assay and that assay is a very important assay that I would never know from this and the is telling me the word so I should know there's no when it comes to of eating that's possible based on the fact that you have the regular say you're never allowed to eat that's possible and I also have the that said that the word is coming to teach me not only that this belieus not only but in terms of an in the world of well if that's the case the word is not extra it's not you should be able to and the are not talking to each other. This is the kasha that of Engel asked. Now you want to know how much of a Rab of Engel had in this kasha of Engel wrote a whole safer. He wrote a whole safer the safer is called I am 70 to roots into this kasha. Now what is this reminiscent of? This is reminiscent of another safer that wrote that's also very much neg was called angel had a sense of humor as well that was called where he wrote aiding to root him to a different remember that kasha that kasha was acquainted that holds that so every time a woman brings her hero she always has the ability to have avas which is going to knock out the if you act out the m the is not going to work and even if she's guilty she's not going to blow up and everything isn't going to be kok right that was bakasha and he wrote a safer called 80utum to that kasha well here he stopped by 70 trust me there were more where these 70 came from but wrote a safer called where he said 70ut toasha every single one of his alder pilpades this is not mishkash of eight days. It should have been seven days, right? Which has that were written try to be this. These catches are a little bit more intense. I need it for the so you shouldn't say this is maybe not the type of you could say over at the next party but at the same time it's you want to see what a was also if you want to get a little just go through a little bit of the angle each one is but regardless this is at the very least the kasho the backdrop to angle safer I am paner