Gemara Markings Daf Yomi
Bava Metzia 6, 7a
Boir of Xeira, which is on Vavumadalath, Momtzia, about 47% of the way down the yumwood, last door is the line of Xeira, underline of Xeira. Xeira asks the following question. Up until now we've been presented with the case, where basically, as far as, you know, two people walk in, each one has its feasts on the tallest. How about this? How about Tukfah, Efah, if one of the two of them grabs it away, like forcefully, from his friends, and he's got the whole thing. How do we say that? Oh, it's a little bit of clarity, like what's the response of the guy you had to grab to away from him? That could shed a lot of light on the issue. Hehty Dummy, Cola, Edith Shossik, if the guy had to grab away from him, and he's silent. Well, there's a basic concept that Shtika kaha'i dah, oi dui, oi dei lei, it's basic, like, ehh, you know, I don't really say anything, it's kind of embarrassing, but I'm admitting that it is that other fellow who grabbed it. On the other hand, if as soon as it was grabbed away, Vida kazavach, he's screaming bloody murder. What is going on here? That might have a little mavid, what else do you expect him to do? And he would have just as much of a right holding on to it, or if he had it grabbed away, and he's screaming. So the Gomar clarifies that the issue here is low, neither of those are the case, those are actually the extremes, rather Tshrikhla, de Shossikmi kara, his initial response is silence, and it's not clear is it Shot, is it admission, however, a few moments later, Vahadar Tshava. Then he's complaining, my, how do we look at that, colon, a, Odilma, b, a, mede, ashtik, a dui ei oi dei lei, from the fact that his initial response was silence, so that's basically admission that it belongs to the other fellow, Odilma is squiggling around the Odilmar, maybe b, cave in the kazavachashta, well, he's screaming now, saying it's his. Igloin milsah, that clearly is a revelation of the truth of what's going on, de hai de Shossikmi kara, that's what he was initially silent, Savaar, what do you figure? The rabbi is right here, ha, ka, kazule, rabana, they're both walking into court, one guy grabs it away, well, like the rabbi saw that, it sounds like you don't have the little kids in their fighting, it's a big, it's a much different presentation when mom and dad were watching as opposed to when mom and dad weren't watching, that's the kick usually takes place under the table 90% of the time, it's true even when your wife kicks, your wife kicks me, it's these days, 100% under the table, and I'm appreciative of most of those kicks. So the, now that we know what the issue is, I'm revnaapman tashma, so let's try to come and see from here, is it Brice? Brice it goes for two and a half lines and starts here. The Med varamamurim, when is it in our Mishnah where we said that the two of them split? That's shishram adukin ba, when both of the parties are holding on to the talas, and that's what we said, that the Mishnah tells us that they split up al-Haisat tala, states it's nithappas, the other shalakam, and if one of the two produces the talas totally on his own, well then there's a basic principle of humbo to mikhaber al-Avaraya, right? So if two people, one person has the item, sort of like pretty clear that it's probably his, the one who wants to seize it away, he can, but he just has to have proper proof. Now, that's him the Brice, connector Hehidami, well, do we really need this today's source? If it's exactly as it is, the two people coming to court, one guy's got the thing, the burn and the proof is on the one who doesn't, that's so obvious, of course it's on the other one, e naima kiddikatani, if we're to understand this as it literally is, that it's only one guy who's holding on to it, toad on his own, shita, it's like, of course it must be one of them, we have, we have five other sources for that, rather it must be a slightly different case, Ela, as we are case, where they both walked in holding it, shatok fa ekhad, if Anenu and one of them grabbed on to it, and then he had the initial silence, and then you had, shortly afterwards, a protest, that is the case, and what do we possibly, how much we're going to put on Ela Varya? Says the Gomorrah, no, lo, and I put a number one in the margin here, this is going to be the Gomorrah's first presentation of how to reject that as being a valid answer, and six, seven lines later, first word on the line is Aema, or E by S Aema, the alternative approach, I put a number two on the margin, so Gomorrah's two approaches now as to why this would not be a valid answer to our question, lo, kama, haf lama eskeenan, what's the case over here, ke goin de us sula kaman, kidded to fisulat travayi, no, the case is, they showed up, the kama is always in the presence, I don't have to be official in the court, in the presence of Dayanam, but in presence of people, kidded to fisulat travayi, they're both holding on to it, okay, and the rabbi's already got the amrin on the one, we, the basin, say to these two fellows, zilu, clogu, y'all go, y'all split it, like go and split it, okay, even naf goin they leave court, vahad arasu and then they come back in, I don't know if they're coming in an hour later, I don't know if they're coming in three days later, but we know them, we know the case, we know the issue, ke tof is lakhad bina haf her in this new scenario when they present themselves, one of them has a total hold on the item in question, now, what are each of them going to claim, hi, amar, this guy says, yeah, I have a total hold on it, oh, do we, oodily, my buddy over here, he admitted that it was more than he gave it to me, the hi, amar, and the other fellow who's not holding on to anything, what's his claim going to be, he says, yeah, you know, we came to an arrangement, I would like rent it to him, that half, or I say it's all mine actually, but I rented him the other half, vidami agarti niele, who has the more believable claim, well, down, amarina lei, we the basin say back to him, to the guy that's not holding on to it, hold on one second, you were in court like recently claiming that it's all yours, and otherwise all yours, adhashta, essentially you're suspecting that other guy being a thief, hashatat lei vegasla, the hashta mogros lei blaixandi, and now you want us to believe that you agreed to rent it out to him without any witnesses, that's very hard to believe. That's the case. Okay, but it wouldn't shed any light on our case though, this is a totally different scenario where they already told him to split it, and the claims that they should come back with, one is very believable, certainly in the face of the other one, which is much harder to believe. Ibiasema, I squiggle underline Ibiasema, a second approach to reject the original understanding is git tiktah tani, nope, it's just as it had presented traditionally, da asla kaman ki taf isla kat vinayu, they show up in court, one person is the one who's totally holding on to the item in question, they eat off, when we say totally we mean like 99% totally, what's the other guy holding on to, he doesn't have like a good graph on it, misrath basruki, there's a bunch of different ways that you can sort of translate that, it's kind of like barely clinging on to sort of holding on to like the threat, he doesn't have a good hold but he has a little bit of a hold, now is that considered a hold on something? Or not? I feel the sumpus, even according to the sumpus we already had in the misrath dementia, who said that in general moment on utoposophic, hulk and belay shvua, that when you have some sort of monetary issue and there's some sort of suffering, and each one of them has a hold on it, you split it without a shvua, sumpus is the one who is very much not for the shvua, here though, moi dis sumpus in this case, yeah, you have to have a hold on it, the little bit of the graph being on to the fringes or the barely clinging on to sarva, love klumi is not a hold at all, said, right, even according to sumpus is the one who's most likely to say split it, no shvua, this is not, that's not anything, we'll say that a hold, let's just say for simplicity's sake, holding is you're grasping on to with a stronghold, to reach facham at least, or to reach facham at least, or to reach facham of the material, which is the smallest amount of material, that itself is a hush of amount. I put a semicolon over here, because we're going to go back to something we had said up above. When we started this year, the question of robsera was that if some guy grabbed the talus in front of us, well, what do we do? Do we say, hey, buddy, give that back, the other guy had part of it, or not. So in Timcy Lymer, I underlight the word aim over here, and one line later, plus a word is another aim, it's going to be two in Timcy Lymer. So if you want to say, regarding the issue that robsera raised at the beginning of this year, if you want to say, if one guy grabbed away from the other guy in our presence, that motcien oso miyadoy, that we will seize it away from him, like, which I'll grab it, then, and this is a very important thing, because people like to often get holy when they get in a difficult situation, they have to get holy otherwise. Let's say he's mottish it. Let's say one of the two of them is mottish it. When you are mottish something, the basic principle is it has to be yours, it also has to be totally yours. So if you want to say that if the grammar were to take it away, that we would seize it back from him, then, in a mikudashus, you can't be mottish it, because it's not really yours. However, this is interesting. If theoretically we were to say, let's say you and I were holding on to a talus, and if I were to grab it away from you, I would actually be able to keep it, then maybe I could be mottish it, because theoretically it is mine. However, in team C. Leimmar, takfak habif neinu, with one of the two, grabbed it from the other one. In my scene I say miyadoy, let's say a horowitz grabbed it away, you would say, hmm, not going to take it away from horowitz, then the question arises, let's say horowitz decided to be mottish it. Hekdisha belai takfak. Obviously, if he grabs it away and we're not going to seize it away, you can be mottish it, because it's his. How about if it's before he grabs it away, but he has the potential to grab it away if he wanted to, and he could keep it. Hekdisha belai takfak mahu. Now it's got to be, of course, that when I grab it away from the other guy, he's quiet. If he's putting up a fight, then there's no way we're not going to be mottish it. So I grab it away from him, he's silent, and what do we say over there? That is going to be the question. Aodilma B. A. Hekdisha belai takfak mahu. Now it's got to be, of course, that when I grab it away from the other guy, he's quiet. Finalize, let's say I'm selling you a pen, is to give you the pen, and you take the pen. When you're dealing with hekdisha, you don't have to do that. A mere verbal declaration to hekdisha's tantamount to an actual physical giving over when it comes to Hekdisha. So since dhammar mar, ami rasa ligavaya just declaring to, are you going to give it to hekdisha. Kim is your hustle of hekdisha. It's like actually giving it over, dhammi. Then kimman, de takfak, dhammi. It says though, you want to be mottish it. Well, that's good enough. Oduma, or maybe I squiggle around the Oduma, be, well, that's wonderful if you had grabbed it, but you didn't grab it yet. You're both still holding on to the item, hasht amiya, lai takfak. And what's the general rule when it comes to somebody being mottish, an item, it's got to be his. Uksiv, based on the pasa, that says, ish kiyaktish as davar shallo kodish. That's what the pasa kodis said, a general thing, a person who makes holy something of his. But it didn't say that. A person who is maktish, his baso kodish. What's the uniqueness of baso? Well, makt baso, bhirishusai, it's in your rishus, off call. So to anything that you want to be maktish, it has to be bhirishusai. And we would say possibly over here, lafu ke hi, dole bhirishusai. It's not your rishusai, it's theoretically you could grab it with it, but you're having it grabbed it away. That's the question. Well, let's see if we can have a precedent for this. Rosh ma dahu ma sousa, coming here, there was a case with a particular bath house. And I called up the sousa bath house, Rosh ma dahu, how would you translate maktas? Bath house usually. Now, I always remember that when they were taken baths like in the old west, 150, 200 years ago, there was like a barrel and a guy with a brush on his back that, okay, well, we'll call it a bath house for now. Anyway, there's a bath house and there were two parties. So it was like Bob and Carl fighting over who's it was, davu mancilo betre, hi, amar bobs said DDU, that's mine, the hi, amar and Carl said DDU, it's mine. Okay, no, what are we supposed to do with it? Well, if you do it like the hotel, what's that hotel in the corner by the old city? It's been closed for 13, 14 years, family maklokus, or anyway, what are we going to do over here with this bath house? Especially since we have baths in our own houses, you need to take a bath, can you use this bath house? So kamkhad binaiyu, they probably could accept one of those two parties that was on the maklokus, octasha, and said that they were going to be maktasha. Oh boy, what do you do then? Well, parisimina, rakhananya and rakosha vakula rabbana. From that point on, the local rabbis, rakhananya abosha, all the rabbis, they did not use that bath house, okay, were they sure that they couldn't use it, were they not sure they couldn't use it? Well, there were two parties fighting over it. Maybe the hekfish could have been hollow, but how does he probably can't use it? Maybe the hekfish is in the hollow. What do they decide to do? Let's say, here's the hamburger, it could be kosher, it could be nakosha. You know, I think we're going to stay away from it until we can clarify. So there's an eclarify, Cesar Vaysho, who's one of the local rabbis, to Raba, online Raba. Raba was one of the, I wonder what Cesar Vaysho this is. I'm not sure again, later Cesar Vaysho, Vaysho says to Raba, you're going to be traveling soon, you're going to go see one of the Gedai Lei Hadore of Chissa, can you clarify this issue with Rif-Tista? He does list when you go to Kameh, the president of Chissa, where was Rif-Tista located in a place called Kafri? Well, you mean, ask him whether we can use it, whether we can't use it, did the hekfish work, did it not? Okay, so now Raba is in charge of raising the issue, and we're going to see Raba along his journeys and the different discussions he has with different rabbinical authorities. He also lisura, when Raba was on his journey to go see Rif-Tista, wherever Kafri is, he like the stop-off of his surah was on the way, on Marlei-Rav Hamnuna, I guess it was discussing the issue with Rav Hamnuna, and Rav Hamnuna said, "Muh-ho, when the māsa is in here, it's actually a mission that could solve that issue." And the quote of a mission goes for two lines, plus two words, and starts here. We know that if a person has a firstborn, whether they have a firstborn child or whether they have a firstborn animal, there's a certain caducia you have to do things with it. It's a saffic bhairas, let's say it's a saffic. Now, ekhad bhora, then whether it's a human being like the woman in the miscarriage, it wasn't driven to viable birth, not a viable birth, we just don't know if that thing that came out as a bhora. The ekhad bhora behaima, or animals. It's a cow or a sheep, or for that matter even a donkey. There's caducia to the firstborn donkey, ben to her and ben to Maim, it's Maim, it would be a khamor. What do we say over there? Normally, all else being equal, you're supposed to give it to the kowain. But here, it's not clear whether you get it. Well, ha-motsi mihave-rei-alav-haraya. The burden of proof is on the one who wants to seize it away from the other, which sounds like what it says, that if he's thrilled, the regular person has it. The kowain is the motsi, and he has to bring the proof that no, that's definitely your firstborn, or that's definitely the first sheep. Now, let's see the kowain grabbed it. Would the kowain be able to keep it? Do you throw it with silence? It sounds like, yeah, because then the kowain is the one who's got it, and the yest roll wants it back would be the motsi mihave-rei-rei. Okay? Vittani-alalal. We have another little brice of three words taught about this. That if the animal, which we're not really sure what it was, can you use it in the interim? Can you share it? Can you work it? It says it's brice. That's three words. A surin, ben guise-vav-rei-da. It would be forbidden to use because of the suffix, maybe it's kutosh. Why is it kutosh? Why don't you just bring it to the base of mikvash? Well, it might be a good problem, maybe there isn't a base of mikvash, or maybe it isn't kutosh, it's a suffix. Okay. Now, ve-ha-ha-ha-ha, in this case, da-am-ar, tuk-fuk-ay-ain, I might say mi-yada-ay. In this case, if the kowain were to take the animal in question, or even the, I don't think the baby would talk about the animals, in my scene, I died on the line, ain't my scene mi-yada-ay. We would not see it away from the kowain. Connected to katani, because it says very clearly that the sakus-ham-motsu-mikvash-ay-ay-al-av-rei doesn't say which one, it says either one, whoever's the motsu, bird-a-prus-on-him. Okay. Kama-zaki-loi-tuk-ful, let's say he didn't grab it, and the Israel's got it, and it's a sheep. What did we just say? A little brice-a. A surin, ben guise-vav-rei-da. You would not be allowed to use it. What do you see from here? That even if you want to say "tuk-ful" we're not going to take it away from him, but if you want to be motsu-shit, it's kar-dosh. That's the way everyone knew no one had to conclude the issue. Robbo, who is the emissary, who was supposed to clarify with her, this says back to him. I'm gonna lay Rob by. Circle Robbo's name. Oh, oh, oh, oh, one second. We, our question was about this bathhouse, and you're bringing me a solution from before Kaduzha's behor, says Robbo, Kaduzha's behor-ka-amris, but that would not be necessarily a good proof. And here's the point. Why? La-o-il-am, amalah, really. I can tell you, and I died under the line till the end of the line here. Tuk-fuk-ay-in. Motsu-ya-nai-se-mi-yad-doh. Oh, no. This is the guy's animal. If the Cohen grabs it, we will say, sorry, Mr. Cohen, you have to return that, even though we're gonna say you have to return it, which means it's like much more shy after the Israel's ownership. Afi-luh-hah-ki. Still, when the Israel has it, it would be us-er, but gizav-a-vida, forbidden to sheer it if it's a sheep, or get it into work it, probably if it's a cow. I don't think you sheer cows, and I don't think you work sheep. That's why I say this, too. Dik-kid-du-shah hab-a-me-la-ha-shah, this is a different type of kid-du-shah. What's the type of kid-du-shah? Like it exits its mother's birthing canal, and it's automatically kad-du-sh. That's a kad-du-sh kid-du-shah hab-a-me-la-ha, and that's the type of kid-du-shah that a before has, and that's where we have to suffer. What was our case, though, by the bathhouse? That wasn't automatically kad-du-shah, it was something that was declared because one of the owners declared it, could very well be, even if you want to say, "Tuk-fah," that if the Cohen grabs it, we will not choose a way from it. However, if he's mak-du-shah without tuk-fah, if it would be kad-du-sh, because how can it possibly kad-du-sh? You can't be mak-du-shah, that's not yours. Bottom line, the two cases are not similar, you cannot conclude one from the other. I put a bracket in over here, just because there's almost nothing left more than bracketing off one of the biggest sogias that guys learn in Yeshiva, the sogia of tuk-fah Cohen, and I really like the meat and potatoes of the sugia, it's a bit of a side point, because I'll start the brackets here before the word 'amar,' and they end on Zion Amud alif, about ten lines down, it's usually about a month to a month and a half in most of the sogias. The first words in line are ma'aastra and vahim shalu'i. After the word shalu'i, I close the brackets, and immediately after that, why do I put bracketing? Because if the mara says, "Well, my havella de misusa, what's going on with the bathhouse?" After we got sidetracked for six weeks on tuk-fah Cohen, now we're not going... Here we go. Let's do the bracketed section, 'amar lei rev channanya le roba,' so roba's really getting it from all sides. Roba first was the one who was appointed by revasharsha to clarify the issue of this stuff. And he now is going to deal with revchannanya on the issue. We have not come to revchestia, we have not come to revchestia, we're watching the discussions along the journey. 'amar lei says, robchannanya le roba, tanya de misayalaf.' We actually have a risa that would support you when it comes to subic baklairas, that if the coane grabbed it away, we'll say, "Sorry, Mr. Cohen, we have to take that away from you and give it back to the owner." And here is the, uh, today's source, it's, uh, Mishman, and this happens to be higher, it's sort of like an abridged version of it, but it says as follows, four words. I boxed off, say, uh, let's say, a paraphrase of that Mishnah, "hassef eikos, nipnas, nipnas, nidir, lehi tasseir." Now, it's not so clear who the suffix are of yours, some sort of suffix pace, and if you're talking about going into the corral, to be tides, we're talking about the newborn animals that you have every, uh, bring out nine, and then the tenth becomes the masar behemoth, the spheikos, and I don't know if I want to say the spheikosar, maybe we should let's say Rashi says, um, we're going to say, let's talk about Pigeon peter ha'mor, first born donkey, you can, um, transfer the holiness, it has onto a sheep, um, let's say you have a suffix first born donkey, which then means that the holiness and transverse on the sheep makes the sheep a safek sheep that was used to, um, redeem a first born donkey, the spheikos, what do you do with that sheep? That's, that's a young sheep, does that go in with the other ones, then the newborn ones to be counted towards mites or not, so the spheikos, nipnas, nipnas, nidir, lehi tasseir. Now, kama, the isalka daita, if you were to take the position, that takf eikon, that if the koaan grabs away the case of the safek, ain mitesi nipnas, nidir, that we do not seize it from him, a mine kasseir, you can't, you can't put cardboard cutouts of sheep in the deer, you also can't put something that is really shy to somebody else's arren, nipnas a ze pote er mumon, a bit mumon a sho, koaan, let's say that's the one that comes out the tent, so what are you doing, you're taking care of your mice or responsibility, using somebody else's assets, okay, and that would be a good support, well, where there's a roba, there's often an avaya, and here comes an avaya to say no, that would actually not be a good support, amar lei abaya, now I think abaya is speaking to roba again, which kind of makes sense, as a star student, he says to roba, that's not the way Rob Kannanya wanted to suggest to you a good support, imishum ha, lo tisaye al amar, that would not support your approach, why, hak hab amayaskina, what is the case over there that we're discussing, it's a very interesting case, in his entire, I don't know, flock of animals or group of animals, that season he has nine first borns plus this one, hak hab amayaskina in the case here, hak hab amayaskina, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina, hak hab amay amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab wasayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, hak hab amayaskina in the case, that animal to jump back in is one of the ten of the groups that you're my swing or not one of the ten. La acer, min manascha. Why? To eat bharki uva who, if the ten that you took, didn't include the jumper. So they were ten animals then, shop or masa. Then it perfectly works. The nine that you brought out. Those are the nine ones and the ten that is my sir. Eat la bharki uva who, if it's not a few because the jumper is one of the ten, nith dar ben mininarowi. Well then it shouldn't be promidal because the ones that already went out. There's a whole corral filled with animals. So you count. One, two, three. All the nine, if you say this one, we're worried it's the ten. Well those nine were great because there were a whole bunch of them left in the animal. We didn't know which one was going to come out ten. The amarava, and rava is the one who mentions this principle that as long as when you're counting the animals out, there's a minion, haruu. There's still a bunch of animals left. Regardless whether some are not really miserable. Hold there. It would make the ones that came through. Putter. And yet we don't sell that. Ella mais la flamémar. What do you left to say? It's got to be that when you tithe, you are tithing from a group that vahdai needs to be tithe. Asuri vahdai amarachmana. When it says the tenth, that means the tenth, absolutely the tenth. The ten animals for sure are all not intended to be tithe. Voila asuri safek. Woden haa khanamebe s as well. Asuri vahdai amarachmana. It's got to be a definite tenth. Voila asuri safek. Asuri safek. Asuri vahdai. For sure tenth, hitsra khasavasur. You have ten and the tenth that came out is definitely needed to be tithe. That's your need to. Voila hitsra khasavasur safek. But you do not have to take maisur if there's any case of safek. Now, it says rashi. In this case we had the jumper jumping back in. Rashi is on the second line on the top of the zainamudaliv. Right at the end of the second line. Vakhola asuri shippakan. In this case where one of the animals jumped back in, safekan. How many animals are left in the corral when it jumped back in? Shafilo yat sa hapateh bakamishi. Shui nasi hakure asiri. Okay, let's say he's one of the ones that comes out, but he's not the tenth. He's the fifth. Well, then when you got to number nine, were you really at number nine? Or more importantly, that's the number ten. No, you were still at number nine. Ela tishi shi potarena mina mina mina. The bottom line is you need to have for sure ten that haven't been maisur. Now, there's another revakami difti le ravina. When we had said, we had this term at the beginning of our bracketed section. It was a phonetic source. The sfekos go into the corral to be maisur. That's what we had said. That sfekos. It says revakami difti le ravina. My, I put this word in right angles because it's a quote from the original Reisa. My sfekos. What are we talking about? What is the sfek exactly in this case? All we're going to do now is basically back up a way of how we originally presented it, but it's more like getting into the Kishkas of how we got that provision. You either have a case of sfek befyrus, or you have a case of sfek pinen petzer hummer. So you either have the animal itself, which has kutusha, and we don't know if it's the first one or not, like the sheep, or the cow. Or it was really a donkey, and then you redeemed it onto a sheep, and that's what we're talking about. So what is the sfek here? Ilay my school in any Ilayma. Sfek befyrus. If it, the animal itself is, we're not sure if we're first born or not. Well, is that going to really be a sfek? Pasek says regarding the Haira Samihiek kutusha. When you are taking maisur, the tenth shall be kutusha, which means it was not before. Amarachmana. The lotion of our kutusha. Those are the before kutusha already. Yeah, from the moment it's born into this world, it's kutusha. So it can't be. That we're talking about, the sfek is a kutusha before, because on the side that it really is the before, it won't even work for maisur. Ella, this is why we explained it, the way we originally explained it, I squiggled it on the Ella. Ella, the case of the sfek, where we say you bring it into the corral to be tied, is a sfek pijin peter khamor. It's a sheep that was used to redeem a donkey. Ukhidirav Naqmen, namirav Naqunamiravuwa, Yistroel. Let's say you have a Yistroel, who has, in his possession, Shiaslai asara, ten sheep, all of them were sfek, pitre, khamor, but it's quite a handful, quite a mouthful. If you had a sheep and it was separated out because of the sfek peter khamor, which even is about their khamor, the sheep doesn't have the full fledged kutusha. So he's got now these Yistroel, ten of these. Well, if he's got ten of them, if they're sheep that were needing to be misirred, the fact that they might be used for a peter khamor, or might not be used, still requires mister to be taken. Mafrshalim Asara, saying, he has to separate out ten sheep, Umaasran, and take mister from them, Vahain shalai. That's the end of the bracketing section. What happened to the bathhouse? My havi ala, to Visousa. It's wonderful. Tafu Cohen, you could spend a lot of time on it. What about the bathhouse? Bottom line, can they use the bathhouse or not? The rub on on the community wanted to know. Well, he was originally sent to Hu, Rivkista. Now we're going to see Rivkista all I know. Let's see over here. Well, the Amor of Thiabar Avin, the Avaravan reports have a uve de bay. Ah, Rivkista. Yeah, it had this incident, it came through of Kista, and Rivkista bumped it up to the highest level, Beira Vuna, Upashta, Mehad de Rav, Naftman. And they started with Naftman, and they concluded it from the case of Naftman. Here's the rule of thumb, komamai, she ain yawkala hudseah bida yannen. Any issue, anything of value that the person in question would not be able to take it for himself. If he went to court, he had D'Shayna Kaudosh. That's like a sign that it's not his. That's the sign that if he tries to be magnified, he wouldn't work. Let's make a d'Yuk from Naftman. Ha'yawkala would say something. You don't have full possession of it right now, but you could, if you go through the court system, the d'Yuk would be ha'yawkala, you should, it would be ha'yawkala. You could declare that you're dedicating to the base of English, that wouldn't work. Ahf al-Gavdulay, ahfke, is that even if you haven't yet, sees it away from the other party that's claiming it. Bahama Rabioh Khanan, we have a case, it's brought a number of times recently, these last three, four months. Let's say Ghaz'al Vallungis de Aishua Bailin, you have a person who stole something. He's one who has possession of it, it's not really his, and the rightful owner has not been in the Yish. Shneiye mei nahi ha'yawk al-Gavdulay, neither of them, they decided to dedicate to the base of English, it wouldn't work. Why? Z'a d'Yuk stole it. Well, it's pretty obvious why he can't be magazine, if you shayna shalay, it's not his. Remember, there hasn't been no Yayush, so it's really not his. What about the rightful owner who doesn't have possession of it currently? Z'a, la fishein of the rishusai. I squeal on shayna rishusai, he can't be magazine, because it's not in his rishus. Now, in general, with Z'a'la, when somebody steals something from somebody else, like out in the open, the standard case, you could go to court and get it back, because everyone saw what happened, and yet what do we see over here? He can't be much, because it's not in his rishus. Okay, I guess the original assumption, the first word on the previous unload is Masousa, the bathhouse, and I translate it as a bathhouse, but I think what we have to go back and understand it as is more of like a big barrel, or maybe we'd call it like an ancient type of bathtub, some sort of thing that actually you could pick it up and move it somewhere else. Not a bathhouse that is Mukubala Karka, but a bathhouse that's small like a portable barrel. Misauvres, so they've been more a clarifies, who's telling us that Masousa meteltalinesque, and we're talking about, I'll call it a barrel, I know bathtubs now are very, very heavy cast iron, maybe they weren't as heavy, but it has to be movable. We're not talking about that. Our case was that Masousa met Karkaoy Eskinen. It was a bathhouse that was attached to the ground, which I always thought all bathhouses were. De Kiyokhola hai tzimid dayonen rishus encame, where if it's land, and you can legally get it away using the court system, it's almost as though it's in your rishus already, because by definition land is something that can't be taken away, can't be hidden, can't be stolen, period. Tanya of Taklifa barmarrava, from out west, from Arithus Ral, he taught a brice in the presence of Kamehir Babot. It goes for about two lines and two words and starts here. Very similar to the opening mission in Armesefta. Shainemantu kimbitalis, you've got two people grasping onto the same talis, Zennites al admakam shiadamagas, so how do we split it? Well, this guy gets, whenever his hand is grasping onto, the Zennites on the other guy gets, admakam shiadamagas, whatever his hand is grasping onto, the hashaar, adadanalanda shaar, the rest, hulkin bishava is an equal split, which is interesting, because if one guy is actually holding onto physically more than the other guy, he'll end up with a little more than 50%. Okay, now that was the brice that was taught in the presence of Babot. What was Babot's response? Makhthilei Revavohu, ubishvua. You have to take a schvua. You don't just like split it, but you split it with a schvua. Well, then the Gamura asks Ella Masneesen, our opening mission in Dafbeys, dikhatani, that had said, dipalgivahadadi, that they split it, that was our mission's case. The low khatani, it didn't specify like this one did. It just said split it. It didn't say that each one gets, however much they're holding onto. Heihi mishkaf asla. Well, what would be the case over there? Amorapapas or Apapas places. The case in our mission is Dafbeysi bikhaar kashda, where what's being grasped onto is, it's not like each one has a big chunk of garment in their hand that's crunched up. It's rather bikhaar kashda is the border where the fringe is. Now, it's not just a little string. It's a good hold, but it's something that's like secondary to the talus itself. And that's why we said, you split the whole talus, because all they have in their actual hands is the border of the talus. Whereas if they actually have parts of the talus in, then we have to say the rest is vultra. Amorapasarsha, shmami na, that since each one gets what they're holding onto, it must be. And this is probably the most common kinyun we do now is the old kinyun suder. You know, whenever somebody's efficient at the wedding, there's a pen, the pen or the kerchief or the hat or the kipa. Hi, sudra, when you're doing a kinyun suder, what do you have to do with the suder? It's always a question. It takes the rabbi's pen, just lift it up, smiles for the camera. What do you do with the cross pen or the kerchief or the kipa? I guess you use the kipa once under the hat. They take the kipa out from underneath the hat, but if you don't have the hat on, then you're probably not taking a kipa. In any event, a kinyun suder, what does the one who is holding onto the sudra have to do? Cave into toughest base, shaushal shaushal, once he's got three fingers by three fingers worth, which is the smallest amount of shaushu material, karina bei, that's good enough to refer to it as the nasan le rei ehu, but he didn't give it. He didn't even lift it up. He was just holding onto it. The kaman deposted dami vikani. It says, though, it's almost detached and he was clean to him. So certainly, if you give me the cross pen, I'm actually holding onto the cross pen, that's one thing, but even if you have a kerchief and I hold onto three fingers by three fingers worth, without even lifting it up, that's good enough to have the kinyun suder kick it. Well, the kumaras, well, one second. How is this any different? It's going to go down to the third wide line. Then right, we have a couple of minutes. Maishna, me durof kista. How's this any different than rofkista? Damar, and I circled here, rofkista. You can see why the, I guess, the early creators of Mad Magazine and Cracked and a lot of the silly Hollywood humor were probably Jewish because the kumaras had a very interesting sort of subtle sense of humor. Man and woman. They were. Seven of the eight founding Hollywood studios were Jewish owned. Anyway, it says rofkista. If you have a married couple, they can get divorced, he gives her a get, their divorce. Let's say get biyada, the get is in her hand, but there's a string attached to it, and the guy is still holding on to the string. Is that considered that their divorce when he hands with the get or not? Well, it depends. If you can give a tug at the string, Uluhavi has lay and bring that get back to him, ain't under gressias, it's not a good divorce. Veem, love, and if not, which means that it's a tat, if you could tug it, but it wouldn't come back. Like, right? Then, no strings attached. Exactly. Veem, love, and the gressias, even if there's a string attached, but if he tries to tug at it, and one more, then the gressias. So, how's this any different? Well, here's the difference because we know, at least hopefully remember from a status get-in, there's a very specific requirement to take a married couple and separate them. It has to be an absolute total 100% severance completely. And if he's still got the string in the hand, literally, awesome by get, crease was waiting and the puzzle requires it to be an absolute total cut off. Like if he's got the string in his hand, he could pull it back to him, you don't have that. Whereas, haha, in the regular case of a Kenyan, you don't need to have a crease rather than a sina, but you only need to have a givind behind. He's got his three fingers holding on to the piece of material. You have that. Period. Ama Rava. Rava's going to finish off today's sheer by telling us that let's say this wasn't just a regular talus that they were holding on to, but it had a gold strip on it. That makes it very valuable, talus. Ama is a talus mous heves, hulkin. Okay. So, it's not only like a regular talus, a wool talus. If you have it as a valuable talus, they will split it. It's like I'm going to say treat them. Like, why wouldn't they? Whatever the value of the item is, if they're both holding on to it equally, they will split it. Well, says it's more low. That's not so simple, rather. Srikha, de kai, daha vah be mitzi. The gold strip is actually sort of in the middle of the garment. Well, says the gomara. So what? Hanamipshita. They split it. Well, it's also not so posh, it's low. Srikha, because the gold strip, normally you would think at least, both times, garments are symmetrical. So the gold strip will be symmetrically somewhere in the middle. Let's say it wasn't. Let's say it was the mikr of the gabe de kad, which was that picture that I sent out earlier. It's a very simplistic picture. You can see my art skills is what led me to, not good art school, but if you have a talus, and that talus is held on to by two different people, and the gold strip is actually closer to one of the two. Maotitim, you might have thought to say that the fellow who's holding on to it, from the left of the picture, that has a gold strip closest to him, can say, "Yeah, sure, why don't we cut it like right down the middle, and I'll take my haft. I'm gonna lay polite haki. Kamashman the shiddish of rave is..." No, no, no. The other guy can say, "Damarlay, with all due respect, my dear colleague, my cause is to palk his haki, polite haki." We're not gonna divide it along the number one dotted line. We're gonna divide it along the number two dotted line, and then we'll each have, even though what they're gonna have might be, as far as the materials concerned, a little bit less valuable, which is less square than in the picture, but certainly if there's a gold strip, the fellow who's otherwise got no gold strip would prefer half of the gold strip and a slightly more, slightly less usable piece of material. Alright, ad con.