KMTT - the Torah Podcast
KMTT - The Weekly Mitzva - Parshat Tzav
KMTT - The Weekly Mitzva, Shiur for Parshat Tzav, by Rav Binyamin Tabory
KMTT - Kimi Sionte-zeitura Welcome back. Today is Wednesday's Aimee Sun. The shurim of KMTT for this week are dedicated in the memory of Raham Benya Akov Berman. He is a Shor Baruch. Today's shur will be given by Rabinham Intovari, the weekly mitzvah for Prashat Sath. This week, we meet Prashat Sath. Since it's Shabbat Sagrado, I'd like to begin with an issue of Prashat Sath and continue with some of those ramifications to Prashat. Prashat Sath begins with the Lords given to the Koanim of Katchin, of how to deal with the Kabbanas. It begins with Prashat Sath, Ola, and goes on to talk about Shlamin. And the Torah tells me by Shlamin, the Yom by a Carbon Toda. A Carbon Toda is a Carbon Shlamin. The Torah says, "O the Yom Zevach, O Vessar Zevach, to Dachshlamaz, the Yom Kabbano Ye Echael." The Carbon can be eaten, or Carbon Toda can be eaten on the day that it's brought. There's an Easter to leave over the Carbon until the morning. We met there on the day of the Kabbana, but if the Carbon is a regular Carbon Shlamin, not a Carbon Toda, the Yom Kivo is a Zevach, O Yom Kabbana. It could be eaten on that day. O Mimacharas, on the next day, Vannosa, Mimendo Ye Echael. The rest can be eaten the next day, however, if it's left over more than that. Vannosa, after that, Vannosa, Mibsah Zevach, by Yomashlishi by Shisare, if, however, if it's left over past then, you have to burn the Carbon. So a Carbon Toda can be eaten one day. Loyah Niyakalini wa ad-Bulkar, a regular Carbon Shlamin can be eaten two days. After two days, it becomes no sir. The Tamaiyamikra, the Pasuk, has an interesting way of formulating it. According to the way we have the Echnakta, the break in the Pasuk, it says, "In that there on the Dvazevach Kabbana, the Yom Kivo is a Zevach, O Yom Kivo is a Zevach, Nikudab, Echnakta. It should be eaten that day." And then the Torah says in the second phrase, O Mimacharas, Vannosa, Mimendo Ye Echael, but what's left over is the next day can be eaten. It seems from the Tamaiyamikra that really it should be eaten on the day of the Zevach, but there is Allah, that it is no cold no sir on the second day as well, but that no sir may be eaten. It only becomes the Easter cold no sir after two days. The Ramban and Klamish suggest such a thing. The Ramban on the Pasuk says, "I would have thought that the Mitzvah is the first day. It can be a little bit the second day." O Allah, for the Torah came to tell me, Vannosa, Mimendo Ye Echael, O Mimacharas, Loshi, Shai, Mimendo Bakhavana. Not that you should leave over. What do you want to make out? Eat on the second day. You can't leave the whole thing for the second day. The real Mitzvah, the La Khattila, the idea of the Torah is that you should eat, Vannosa Bakhavana. What was left over, Bakhavana, just so happened that you have left over. Ye Echael, the Macharas, Niskar, Mitzvah, according to Ramban, Ye Echael, Mimendo Ye Echael, the real Mitzvah of the Torah, the real intent of the Torah is that I should eat, carbon shwamim, on the first day. However, you're allowed to eat it for two days. The R. Samaq pointed out that this question could actually be a makhlaka fishe oni. The gimmer says in Sakhhanda from the test of Adalis an interesting case would happen. A person who brought a person who's muhusakipurim. A person who is still waiting to bring his carbon to become Tahara. The Mitzvah says that in the case that he would have already made a carbon toda, he brought a carbon todava. A person who gave a carbon todava, but he can't eat the carbon because he's muhusakipurim. So it says that he could, according to Yocha Mimbroka, in the gimmera, he can bring another carbon and eat his carbon todava that day. A person who's muhusakipurim, that means he hasn't brought his carbon, he's sorry, but he hasn't brought his carbon. Tahara have the ocha-bakachin layer. So what he could do is he could bring the carbon after the carbon toda, in order to be Tahara, in order to read the, in order to eat his carbon. Now, to normally to bring the carbon after the carbon toda, can't you dig for the assay called Hashlama? Hashlama means a law Hashlama. When you bring the carbon, the carbon atomic, then our buying is the least carbon of the day, the same way the carbon toda opens the base of the ignition in the morning. The carbon, sorry, the carbon todava, opens the base of the ignition in the morning. The carbon todava, she'll bring our buying and closes the base of the ignition. That should be the end of the carbon of. Olaa, the Torah says, "Olaa, Hashlama kalakabana sculam." We say they're inhabiting the morning. "Olaa, Hashlama kalakabana sculam," that means that should be the last carbon. That's only a mitzvah's assay, "Olaa, Hashlama kalakabana sculam." There's no ether to bring the carbon after the carbon atomic. So, if Yauchanan Brakha says the importance of eating the carbon that you, yourself, brought when you're a mikhsi kippurim, that would override the assay of Hashlama. And if we could bring another carbon, talk about those with question left, in order to eat your carbon atomic. The commander goes on to explain really why is this assay. A different assay, but for our issue, for our purpose right now, we just know that if Yauchanan Brakha said, "In order to eat your carbon, your carbon, your carbon schlamaim," then you can go against the concept of Olaa, Hashlama kalakabana sculam, and you can bring your carbon and eat your carbon. Now, in what day is this talking about? When are we talking about? Exactly what are we talking about. So, the Bahamur, in talking, when that quinoa says, "Kaitan de basar kamint, kalay rah hai sarev." We're talking about doing this air to the carbon atomic. And he says, "The bishlamaim de esmal is the hat of the yameachio." We're talking about a schlamaim, and then he had brought the day before. Because now, if he won't eat it, this is his last chance. This is the second day. We're talking about a carbon schlamaim that he brought earlier. Yes, today, today is the second day. And therefore, if he won't eat it, it'll be over the assay of... He will not fulfill the akhilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. Aghilaz kachim. A discussion, what about shlamim, if it can be, we know for sure that a shlamim can be eaten two days, but is it really can be eaten two days? Lechaturira. Or is there really a lot of eating it one day and sort of, all right, you can eat it the second day. There is a, in general, a shidah mukhabatsas, that Ravelishmsteen quoted in his Shreem and Shreem that says, and I will use the phrases of the shidah mukhabatsas, ikar mitzvala akhlabiyama risham. I think that's almost exactly the words of the rambam, but we see that the real mitzvah is something on the first day, but the Torah said you can eat it the second day and it's also ikar mitzvah, the ikar ikar mitzvah. The concept of having an ikar and a tothail in ikar mitzvah, so the Torah, seems to be a revolutionary one. The Torah generally does not distinguish between them what we would call ikrilam, butyavad. The Torah doesn't get in points out in one place. In the Torah we never find a distinction between the ikrilam, butyavad. The rambam here seems to say that there's an ikar mitzvah, the way the Torah sort of wanted it ikrilah, but butyavad, it can be done a different way. The rambam has stated this idea in another place which I said will relate specifically to pessah. Rabbi Gamliya Lao, Mary Koshal, Amarsh Loshad, the by-mail of Pessah, Layatsay de Chabassah. In Haggadah we quote Rabbi Gamliya as saying that whoever did not say the following three things did not fulfill the obligation of pessah, Layatsay de Chabassah, it did not fulfill his riyos, which shiva we're talking about. So everybody seems to learn, Koshal, Amarsh Loshad, the by-mail of Pessah, Layatsay de Chabassah, so you did not fulfill the obligation of the pessah, it's right. The Torah told me if you've got to tell the Vinca, what's the maximum of the you've got to tell the Vinca, how much do you have to tell her if you've got to tell the Vinca? The answer of course is calamab, there is no limit. As long as tillah, tillah, tillah, or abokir, which every way we've asked, the mitzvah to tell the story is calamab, what's the minimum of telling the story? Now can you fulfill the mitzvah in the most minimum level possible? So Rabbi Naimlya says, Koshal, Amarsh, just one of the pessah, you have to say at least pessah, mah, samaar. The Rambhan in Brakhos, in the mochamos in Brakhos makes a very interesting comment. He said, when the Torah says, Layatsay de Chabassah, he doesn't really mean that you did not fulfill the abrogation. It's just for example, if Rabbi Naimlya said that you did not fulfill your abrogation, it doesn't mean that you have to eat natsal over again. Why would you have thought that you have to eat natsal over again? You eat natsal, and you tell the story, it's just the same. Why would you think the Rambhan had to tell us, that if you do not say these three things, you don't have to eat natsal again. Of course, you don't have to eat natsal again. Apparently the Rambhan thinks, as we know, the Gimmari says, matzah is called la chamoni. The Torah is called matzah la chamoni, and although there are many interpretations of what la chamoni means, poor people's bread, bread of affliction, the Gimmari is one opinion. La chamoni is la chamoni, my love to her, my heartache. La cham, that we speak about. La cham, that when you eat natsal, there's a mitzvah to talk about it. The Rambhan obviously thinks, "Kol shiloh, amash, loshah, dweimar, pessah, liyazah, d'hiliyazah, d'hiliyazah." It means you did not fulfill la chamoni, the mitzvah to tell the story when you eat natsal. You must tell some part of the story, and the minimum part of the story, you have to tell the rambhan says, "The Torah just said, 'Lissah says, 'Lissah says, 'Lissah says, This is what we would call in our language, Mitzvah, the Iqah, Mitzvah, but yet the Mitzvah eating matzah is fulfilled anyway, even if you do not do this. So we see here also a question that matzah, and see if we can go hand in hand on the the ritesal level of Lechomony, but there is a concept called the Mitzvah in a Mitzvah. And there's another concept that you're going to say the Mitzvah, K'ilu, the divite. I don't know if the divite is the exact word to use, but not the way that Torah meant it. The same way we have by shlummim, an example, that the Torah meant that you should eat it the first day, but it's also okay if you eat it the second day. Here we say it's the same thing that really you should have eat matzah and tell the story. That's the Lechomony, but if you didn't do it that way, but you ate the matzah without telling the story, you're yachtsi at least, that's matzah. Let us now return to the original issue and bring it to connect, connect it with another law of tasach. We talked about the K'ah bin shlummim can be eaten two days. Lechotrila, we said it should be eaten one day. The K'ah bin todah, we said, can only be eaten one day. According to Ramban, it would work out very nicely. Really, a K'ah bin todah is like any K'ah bin shlummim that should be eaten the first day. The only difference is not inherently that K'ah bin todah is eaten one day, shlummim can be eaten two days. The difference is much smaller than that. A K'ah bin todah must be eaten one day. Even a regular K'ah bin shlummim should be eaten one day. The only thing is that Torah gave me an extension to the K'ah bin shlummim, and they could meet the second day. They did not give me that extension by K'ah bin todah. There is a famous reason why the people who explained to me, I miss us, explain why K'ah bin todah is different. K'ah bin todah is a grateful offering that a person who was saved from imminent danger brings when he feels the glory of a K'ah bin shlummim who he sings shear to the K'ah bin shlummim. I mentioned this, but can you bring a K'ah bin todah? You say a shear mismalah soda. You praise that K'ah bin shlummim when you bring a K'ah bin shlummim. In order to really acknowledge the miracle, so it is proper to tell your story to other people, that other people should join with you, make a sudah to thank a K'ah bin shlummim who would publicize whatever happened to you. The K'ah bin shlummim cannot be eaten by one person. One person will not be able to eat a K'ah bin shlummim then one day. The only way to eat a K'ah bin shlummim in one day would be to invite more people to partake of the K'ah bin shlummim. So a K'ah bin shlummim where I want the people to join together and eat altogether. All they should publicize the miracle together. Therefore the Torah limited it to one day and did not say that you can have a second day extension. But a regular K'ah bin shlummim which is more of a personal type of thing. You don't have to bring a community into it. So that K'ah bin can be only eaten in two days as a K'ah bin shlummim. So that can only be eaten one day. Of course that would bring us to the K'ah bin shlummim. The K'ah bin shlummim is like a K'ah bin shlummim. But it again has that provide though. That you have to eat the K'ah bin shlummim and eat the K'ah bin shlummim. Only one day. Not only only eating one day but we gave a sheer last week about is the myth of eating K'ah bin shlummim. You have to eat the K'ah bin shlummim and eat the K'ah bin shlummim. Or can you eat the K'ah bin shlummim and eat the K'ah bin shlummim and eat the K'ah bin shlummim. But here there is no doubt in the morning it becomes nousa. If the K'ah bin shlummim, according to the K'ah bin shlummim, you can't eat it. That doesn't automatically mean it becomes nousa. But according to the K'ah bin shlummim and shlummim, it must be nousa. The myth of the K'ah bin shlummim and shlummim is in the K'ah bin shlummim. But the K'ah bin shlummim has also a shlummim. With this idea, I'd like to quote a Mishnah at the end of sachim. The Gumera says, the Mishnah says in sachim, a case of virech al-pessach. virech al-pessach? Patera shlummim. If a person made a carbon abracha on the K'ah bin pessach, so he can include in it and pater the virech. The K'ah bin shlummim that he eats on that day. And the Mishnah goes on virech al-pessach. So virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The virech al-pessach? The exact argument, whether they talk to each other, do not talk to each other, is not the main issue I'd like to discuss. I want to raise the issue of how could it possibly be? How could it be that a person makes a bracha on this virech? And we're discussing if it fulfills the appeal of this virech, or vice versa. If you made a bracha on the pessach, how could it be that it wouldn't be that you fulfilled a bracha on this virech? Now, what seems to be my problem? Of course, we all know that the carbon is eating the karmtessach as eaten a la sofa. The karmtessach is eaten at the end of the meal. Aim-masti-em-ash-a-pessach-a-thi-kamman means that after you finish the karmtessach, today after you finish the karmtessach, today after you finish the karmtessach, the ati-kamman-a-matsa, but in the time of the base amigdash, after you finish the karmtessach, aim-masti-em-ash-a-pessach-a-thi-kamman. You now have to eat afterwards. So the normal course of events would be to eat the carbon, the other kabana said you eat that night, the shamachagega, what other kabanas you eat. And afterwards, you'd end by eating the pessach. So I can understand the question in the Mishnah. If a person made a brachana zevach, would that preclude a bracha on the pessach which comes later? Fine. Completely understood. However, how can it be that there isn't at all a discussion of the biousacha pessach patering the zevach? You made a brachana pessach on the carbon pessach, and how could it be a question whether that bracha would be mostly the carbon zevach? You can eat the carbon zevach afterwards. Anymothi amatr fessach have become, and how could that possibly be? This question is found in Mishoni. The Arzaruach is the first that I know that really asked this question. And he came up with a novel hiddish which is very important, and I'll mention it although it's not my main issue, my main topic. The Arzaruach says that we can learn from here that a bracha which should be made preferably before a mitzvah can be made after a mitzvah as well. The ramban is known to have differed from this opinion. The ramban thinks that biousacha must be made before the mitzvah, and if it's a mitzvah that you fulfilled as opposed to mitzvah which is ongoing. But if a mitzvah that you fulfilled, then you cannot make the bracha afterwards. And if you make the bracha afterwards, it's a brachovatala. The ramban, for example, in the same as Hiddish says that bracha of Ariesim. The bracha that we make at the time of the formal halachic engagement. That bracha shared kachanim sos of the seasonal ayurayas. The ramban thinks that bracha is a bracha mitzvah. And the ramban says that bracha has to be made before the kiddushin. And if it was not done before the kiddushin, the ramban says you cannot be made afterwards would be a brachovatala. A brachacha mitzvah must be made before the mitzvah is done. It cannot be made afterwards, it's a brachovatala. There is a rachovatala. There is a rachovatala that says it's not true. The kachila you sponsor make a brachacha mitzvah. Remember, brachacha mitzvah is a ramban. But the kachila you should make the brachacha mitzvah before you do the mitzvah. However, the idea is that if you forgot to make the brachah, for whatever reason, before you did the mitzvah, you can make the bracha afterwards. And the rachovatala says this is what happened here. The person ate a zavach. He forgot to make a brachah a brachovat when a chilas kachin. There is a brachah quoted in the saffta on a chilas kachin. A brachah that you make before you eat kachin. Besides the brachah samayannin, besides making a brachah in food, you have to make a brachah samifsah when you eat kachin. So the rzuah says what the scenario when our mitzvah must have been that a person ate a zavach. And you forgot to make a brachah. Now, I see from our mission that you can make a brachah after the zavach. Now the question is what should you do? Should you make a brachah in the zavach because you ate the zavach already and you make the brachah chilu backwards? Now, I make the brachah in what I did already, which is legitimate. Or perhaps I can make a brachah in the pasa which I am about to eat, and the brachah sa pasa with pasa to the zavach, which I already ate. And therefore, the brachah sa pasa would preclude a brachah for a brachah sa zavach. This issue, according to the rzuah, is the source of our haloah so that you can make a brachah asya sah. You may have brachah samifsah after it was done. Of course, this perush is very clever according to the rzuah. The ramam would obviously disagree. The ramam would say you cannot make a brachah sa zavach after you eat the zavach. You must eat the zavach before the pasaach. So the question arises again. How could it possibly be that a person could eat the carbon zavach after the carbon pasaach? Well, how could he possibly enter a situation where he is going to eat the carbon make a brachah of the zavach after he eats the pasaach? How could the brachah sa pasa pasa? There is a simple explanation which we could say which would avoid my discussion. In all fairness, I should point it out before I enter a more lambda-shah type of suggestion. We have assumed that you eat the carbon zavach. And then you finish, you have to eat the carbon pasaach. And after the carbon pasaach, you can't eat again. So therefore, the order of brachah has to be that the brachah sa zavach comes before the brachah sa pasaach. But it could be that that's not the way it has to be done. A person sits down to the meal, the night of pasaach. He sits down, Leila say there. It could be that he's allowed to eat the carbon pasaach first. He was not allowed to finish the carbon pasaach first. Because if he would finish the carbon pasaach, then he can't eat the zavach afterwards. But it's possible that he could eat a little bit of carbon pasaach. Make a brachah at that point in carbon pasaach. And leave over some, at least Shirahila, leave over for later. And then afterwards, he'll eat the zavach. And then afterwards, he'll eat the carbon pasaach again. In which case, we would have a perfect bala pasaach way of doing the brachah sa pasaach before the zavach. And then the question would be, would brachah sa pasaach talk to the zavach? So, really, there's no need for an alumnusch explanation how it could be that the brachah sa pasaach could come before brachah sa zavach. Or how could we eat the carbon pasaach before we eat the carbon pasaach. But I'd like to suggest two other interpretations. One is based upon what we have explained so far that a kampasaach is really a carbon shalam as well. It's possible that even according to your blessing of an azaria, I must eat the kampasaach till katos. True. But if you don't eat it until katosach, the tower says it becomes melted in the morning. Now, we pointed out lastly, katosach has this kasha in brachah sa pasaach. That why should it become nicer in the morning if you're not at eating it after katos. We quoted in our samayak that said that you can eat the carbon pasaach after katos. Not the torah's carbon pasaach. You can eat it but torah's zavach. Although the mitzvahs I say, according to your blessing of an azaria, eat the kampasaach until katos, that doesn't mean it's not a shalamim. But torah's shalamim, it can be eaten one day, only one day as like a carbon toda. And again, the same idea would be that we're eating the habura. We're eating the whole group. We want to get the whole group of sipuhi sasmasayim. If you want to do it all together as a community. So there the torah told us this shalamim should be eaten only one day. According to the lezim and azaria, only until katos. But it doesn't become nosa, like any other carbon shalamim, until the next day. So therefore our samayak with makhadeh, that you can really eat the kampasaach after katos, bitar shalamim. If that's true, then we would have another issue of what brachah to be made at this time. And that would enter a whole discussion beyond our present time limitation to discuss really after katos, what is this carbon, according to your samayak that I can eat it, it really is a kampasaach. It's not a kampasaach as a karmash shalamim. And what brachah should I really make? And which brachah should die too rich? In any case, this would be a very elegant way of explaining our issue of how you can make a carbon or even how you can make a brachah saphasaach, and afterwards have a carbon edu zevach. The last possibility that I would like to suggest is based on the idea that I also said last week. The other name there in Sriman Shaitan Payalis came up with his famous pappent, his famous idea. What should a person do if he forgot or whatever happened? He did not eat the atikama until katos. So he said what he should do is after katos, you should make it tonight. You should say like this, "If Allah has like rebelazim in Azaria, then I am eating now." Atikama. And then wait a few minutes, according to rebelazim in Azaria, after the time of Atikama, and then you could eat, you could only eat, you must refrain from eating the time that you could be out there in the mitzvah. But after katos, when you can't be out there in the mitzvah, you should have led them in Azaria, you would say, that you could eat. So he said, "That's what you do, when you go into katama, what you say is before katos, I am eating, but I don't, if Allah has like katama, then I don't mean to eat." Now come atikama. And I mean now to eat a regular piece of matter. And then you can continue eating your meal because you didn't eat the atikama yet. So in this logic, we could give another scenario in our case. It's almost katos. A very nasty to katim tazakh. So here, you would say, to eat the katim tazakh, according to rebelazim in Azaria, should be eaten before katos. But afterwards, he can eat a zabakh. After a katos, he's allowed to eat a zabakh. So therefore, we would have another way of saying, first, you make a birchessa pazakh, and afterwards, you make a birchessa zabakh. It's true that you have to eat the katim tazakh before katos. But once you finish the katim tazakh, you can wait till katos. And then you can eat a regular zabakh. You don't have to eat the katim tazakh, but always zabakh. The regular zabakh, and then the question would be, "The brother I made a pazakh, could that fulfill the zabakh?" That's because the ultimate idea is that a pazakh and a shalamim really are connected. A pazakh is a shalamim. A pazakh is a kabakh. A pazakh is a kabakh and a shalamim. And therefore, we can raise the issue of the Mishnah if there, one braka, would be fulfill the other. Briefly, to summarize, we said that a kabakh and toda, we started with parashat a shavua. That a kabakh and shalamim can be eaten two days. Although a kabakh and toda can be eaten one day, kabakh and shalam can be eaten two days. Whether it's le katilah two days, or really only but the other two days le katilah is one day. We saw the raizid and the rambam, obviously think that the one day is the ikramid. So the second day is also, but the average kilu. You can eat a second day, but le katilah should be eaten the first day. We connected that to a kabakh and tazakh, which in that respect is similar to a kabakh and toda, it can all be eaten one day for a good reason. And we said that we should not forget that a kabakh is really a shalamim. According to rambamid, it's like the prototype of a shalamim, which really should be eaten one day. And here we don't have the extra advantage of eating it a second day. Since the kabakh and tazakh is a shalamim, we discussed the nature of the brahah that you would make. The bhishat a mitzvah, if it could be a brahah, which patras the zeba, who doesn't patras the zeba. And then we had a whole discussion, how could it be that bhishat a patras could come before the bhishat a zeba. [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] You have been listening to the shire of a rambamid tavoori, the weekly mitzvah for kashat zav. And to today's arachayomid, we continue with, as much as we can, a review of different hammahat a patras. Ramit is prohibited to be eaten on patras. All are prohibitions, all ishre achirah, food prohibitions in the Torah. There's a general definition of what is considered to be a food. If it doesn't have the status of food, it will no longer be prohibited. And the general definition is, if it's not edible, something which is not eaten, not fit for human consumption, for human consumption, is not considered to be a food, and is no longer prohibited. For abitians, not to apply only to food. However, for hammats, there's a more restrictive definition. Not unfit for human consumption, but they know that uilakhilat kalat will not be eaten by a dog. Not suitable for any kind of consumption, even not the higher, more finicky standards of people. If it's any uilakhilat kalat, then it is not prohibited as hammats. The most immediate implication of this has to do with the prohibition of vai'in, vai'in, vai'in, vai'in, matang. If you have something which was made out of a hammats base, but it's not fit for any consumption whatsoever, normally we don't have things which are spoiled around the house, which is what the Gma was talking about. But we have today things which have been commercially chemically developed. It could be that it came from a bread base, but if it's not uilakhilat kalat, it will not be eaten, because it's a dry powder, which is a terrible taste. Then there is no prohibition of vai'in, vai'in, vai'in, matang. However, it can't be eaten, so the Vash has a sallah called Akshavi. He says, "Since the prohibition is on food, and a nova uilakhilat," something which is not suitable for consumption, is no longer considered to be a food. So the Vash claims that if you eat it, then you have subjectively made it into a food. Akshavi, you've made it important, you've given it a new status. Now, subjectively, it could be a food. The reason why it's not true is because people don't eat it, but you do eat it. So therefore, subjectively to you, it becomes a food. That's the story of the Vash, and therefore, even something which is a nova uilakhilat, the Vash says you can't eat it, because when you eat it, it becomes relative to you, uilakhilat, able to be able to eat it. Now we'll be showing them with the Vash, many of us showing this degree. What's more, there is largely a distinction between the general category I mentioned, that we know uilakhilat, and uilakhilat, it could be that something which is not eaten by people, because it's somewhat caved or spoiled, and you eat it. So it becomes a food for you, because who said it's not a food? People find it inedible, but you think it is edible, and this was for you as a food. But it could be that the highest standard, which is one applicable to the Vash, if we know uilakhilat, calev, is not a subjective standard. It's not eaten by people, because, frankly, even if it wasn't eaten by people, it would be prohibited. Here, it's not eaten by any animal. So there, it could be that that's an objective standard. That is not food objectively, and you cannot turn it into food. Even if the Vash is right in general, it could be that it's not right in hummus and pesto. And as I said, although I've shown you a whole topic on the Vash. The most common application of this has to do with toothpaste or medicines, things of the sort. And so many people are makhmih, and they look for hensure on those things. But most postkim argue logically that even if the Vash is correct, and that might subjectively eating something, turns it into a food, even though most people think it's not a food, that's only if you eat it. In other words, you've done that action, which indicates that you think it is a food. Putting it in your mouth is not the action which to us described as Akshay. Not that your mouth makes it important. It's the fact that you treat it as a food, makes it into a food. Because remember, the original head-to-face is based on the fact that this is not called food. So eating it makes it into a food. And therefore, it's hard to see what you're using toothpaste, which you might accidentally swallow, but it's not an action of Akshay. It's not an action of giving it a status of food. And frankly, the same is true of medicines, because medicines are not foods, and swallowing the medicines is not the same as eating. And therefore, Al-Pidin really is known necessity to have cardiovascular effects of medicines. We're the medicines are basically inedible. And after it doesn't apply to flavored medicines, which might be edible. But a medicine which is in the old kind of medicine, just a pill or a capsule, there is no Alachic need, based on this flour, for having an extra leprechaun. There are many medicines available. It might be good either to have it, but if you can't find a kosher leprechaun medicine and it's not a flavored medicine, then in most cases, if you can't find the kosher one, the ones that are actually, then the regular one is suitable for tasak as well, since it's a nova ui lakhilat, lakhilat kenas. That's it for today. We'll be back tomorrow with issue on tasatas-savur, which will be for tasat-sav, and we'll napty over so much in tasak. And this is the last week of K&T before tasak's application. And we'll be back tomorrow. We've been listening to K&T, Kimi Kion, tesetora, udavar hashem mirusadain, cultus. [BLANK_AUDIO]