Gemara Markings Daf Yomi
Bava Metzia 4
All right, Gimmel Amlud Bayes, five lines from the bottom, Ella. We squiggled on the Ella because it's a, we're going to start a new attempted calvogheimer. The brissa on Gimmel Amlud olive had said that there was some sort of calvogheimer. We attempted to figure out what the calvogheimer was. We thought that it was sourced from Piv, from that which a person himself gives Aegis about. And we're going to say now that no, it's actually from Edachad. From what we know about Edachad to what we'll say by Stade. So Ella, asya, learn the calvogheimer and be Edachad, Uma. And we have a diamond around this word Uma. And then we're going to have in six or seven pyrchas on that. And each one of the pyrchas is going to reject what we just said and then we'll have another suggestion. And it's going to keep rejecting until we get halfway down dala dama dala. So here's the attempted calvogheimer. Uma, Edachad. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I'm not sure. But if this comes along and says that he does so, he doesn't have to pay, but he does have to take a schrua. Then comma, edem, two witnesses, shimakai vinayi say mamayi. They could actually come and force them to have to pay based on what they said. Although more so, I know edem, shimakai vinayi say schrua, that they should be makai of him a schrua. And that would be the calvogheimer. The gmarsas, you can't compare that what you're trying to learn from Edachad to stay edem. Why? Ma. Put a triangle on this word ma. On the third line and dala-damad-alif, the second word is ma-malagilgulshua. Two lines later, there's another ma-malagilgulshua. Put a triangle on that one as well. Two lines below that, there's another ma-la-aidachad. That six lines below that is ma-la-had-sad-has-shava. And then about five lines below that is, again, ma-la-had-sad-has-shava, which I will go over as we're reading it if it's a little bit challenged to find. There they are. We'll get to them. So here's the first purkha. You wanted to use the source of the kabachamir to be edachad, but you can't because it's different than edem. Ma-la-aidachad, how does an edachad work? So the edachad came and said, "You duo, shekain al-ma-she-hu-may-id-hu-nishba." So if the edachad comes in and says, "Horowitz, you duo-x," just one, "What am I swearing that I don't owe-x?" On the same issue that he's talking about. Can you say the same? Can you make the connection? Can you make the kabachamir taimur be edem? It's a different case when it's too edem, because when too edem come, let's say the case is more than it makes us. I thought something you owe me a hundred. He said, "No, I owe you fifty, too edem come and say, excuse me." I say, "Oh, you a hundred?" He says, "Oh, it's nothing too edem come and say you owe fifty." What's the shoe about, not the fifty that they're talking about, the other fifty? They edem is a stronger institution if they force the person who we're not sure about to swear about something else, not what they're actually discussing about something else. And therefore, taimur could the same be said by the shwua that the two-aidem force shall ma shikafar hunishba. He doesn't swear about what they said, the fifty that he owes, he has to pay that up right away. They're forcing them to swear about the other half, in which case you can't compare edachad to sine edem, or what one-aid causes to swear to what two-aidem causes to swear. Almost parenthetically, I put almost like a dotted brackets around the next three lines and two words, el-amara-papa, repapa tries to restate the calvachomer. So the calvachomer we were going to learn, we thought, from edachad. El-amara-papa, usi, learn the calvachaimer from Gil-gul-shwua, the edachad. Gil-gul-shwua, the edachad, is this concept of once we're making the person swear about one thing, we could take something else that we wouldn't be able to make them swear about and have them swear about that also. Ma shikafar hunishba, the previous assembly. Yeah. We're going to use it a lot in both mitzvahs, especially in these Sukiyas. So Rashi says, me Gil-gul-shwua, the edachad, im nis-hayav-lai-shwua. So I was dealing with Bab, and I had to give Bab a shwua, for whatever reason. I say, al-de-e-de-he-ad-k-dam-ri-nun, vahai-sa-laf-tan-a-kara-sani-sis. You know what, Horwitz? I got another claim against you. Shulai-sa-mut-al-as-laf-a-shwua. You wouldn't have been able to make me swear about that one. Magal-gul-in, we kind of roll along with it. Ois-a-im-a-shwua-sai-s, binish-mau-sh-de-han. De-gul-gul-shwua is actually a direct principle, and Rashi brings the makar. But that's the, we're not going to learn from edachad, from the Gil-gul-shwua of edachnah. And by the way, the Gil-gul-shwua had nothing to do with what the counterclaim of the claim was, and still the edachad is making you swear about it. So you see, the edachad has that strength that he could force a shua on some other issue. "Well," says the Gomara, "here's the next peer hah," can't prevent anything from that. Magal-gul-shwua-de-edachad, shakain-shwua-guirares-shwua. Listen, once you start down the shwua path, it's not that hard to attach another shwua to it. "Haimar ba'edim," can you say the same when you're talking about edim, they're not hahive enishwua. They're just hahive mamma. So the guy said, "You owe me a hundred," the other fellow said, "Back, I don't know you owe anything." Two edim come in and say, "You owe fifty," there's no shwua there at all. There's mamma, they have to make the fifty, but there's no shwua to get started. "Well," says the Gomara, and I ended the dotted brackets there because Modemimiktas, "Piv-yoy-chia." That's about "piv," when a person himself is Modemiktas, "Hey, Bob, you owe me a hundred." "I owe you fifty." What does that institution of "piv" do? Is he's going to have to swear on the other half? So he admitted to fifty, the shwua that he takes is on the other amount. So we'll learn from "piv." All right? So we're not learning from edachad, we're not learning from edachad of gil lushwua, we're learning from "piv," that "piv," when a person himself says, "You're fifty." So shwua has to be taken on what, on the other fifty? So two, although more so, edim that could be able to have a high event straight out mamma, they should certainly have a high event with shwua. Says the Gomara, but there's something different about "piv," also, which would reject our ability to use it as the source of this kavachimer. Mala piv, chukhen ein un ba hacha, unlike witnesses, that if witnesses came in and said something, another set of witnesses said, "That's not true," or, "You guys are with us at the same time at a different place," you can't do that with "piv," because "piv," the person self is saying it. You can have a hundred people come and say, "If I'm admitting to something, no testimony can come to court afterwards and be maka shwua." Well, edachad of gil lushwua, edachad of gil lushwua, that is not a significant issue. Mala piv, chukhen ein un ba hacha, you can have, if one witness says something, two witnesses come along and say contrary, and yet it's maka shwua. So we try again. Mala edachad, okay, you want to learn from edachad, but you can't learn from edachad, chukhen, almasha, mayid, hoo, nishba. Now this is going to be a little bit repetitive, because we just said that a few points ago. Well, we use this right now. So the same be said by edim, like in the Rebchia case where the edim come, "sha'almasha kafar, hoo, nishba," which is, we just do that and that's what the good word is going to say, "Don't worry, piv is yachia," and then we're just going to say, "We're going in circles now." Khazr ha'din, which is what often happens in these sogis, the logic goes, it revolves, and low reizakriza. So you have piv on the one hand is not like edachad. Velo reizakriza and edachad is not like piv. Let's try to learn from the two of them combined. What's the similarity between the two, ha'd sadhah shavashebihana, underline those two words, that's sadh the issue that is similar to both piv and edachad is sha'al yedetana ukhfira hain boy. Hey, Bob, you owe me a hundred. I don't owe you anything. Then comes either piv, the admission, "Okay, I owe you something," or edachad shows up. And in both the cases, whether it's piv or edachad, venishwa, a shwa will have to be taken. Afa niyyav yal also bring edim, what do edim do, sha'al yedetana ukhrin, but why do they come in the first place? Because they were called to court, because there's this maklokas between the two parties, then nishwa, and there would be have to be a shwa. Now here's the next pirokh, the one that, I don't know if you got this one, this is another pirokh, I put a triangle around this. Now all the other pirokhas have to be not from just piv or just edachad, but a combination of the two. Ma la hatsada shawbishibihan, from piv and edachad, because in both of those cases, we don't put a stamp on the resume of the guy who was found to be problematic as being a outright kafran. Ma la hatsada shawbishibihan, sha'al yukhzak, he's not established via a definitive kafran, a denier, a thief, a absolute liar, as opposed to, and that's a big thing, because then he can't testify about anything else in court. As opposed to, Toymar, could you say the same by edim that when you have a guy who denies everything, and edim come and say, oh no, you definitely owe that 50, he's definitely hooks a kafran, he said you didn't know anything, two edim come and say, he's hooks a kafran, and therefore you can't learn from piv and edachad, two edim, because piv and edachad, you're not hooks a kafran, edim you are hooks a kafran. The gomars is actually, no, that would not be a good piv, oh, we could still have the leemud, because we're going like that unique opinion, ube edim yukhzakafran, really, when two indices come, for this case, no, vahamar of edibaravan, amar of kistah, I dot underline the next four words, haqayver bemilva kosur le edus, be pikadoen, pasa le edus, now this case we're discussing is a kafran bemilva, there's a massive difference between, if I gave you my bowling ball, and I said alright, Jim, where's my bowling ball, I don't know what you're talking about, or if I gave you a loan for $100, and Jim says, I know what you're talking about, the bowling ball, like, you shouldn't be using it, it's not given to you to use, I gave you to watch, the $100 is alone, of course you're using it, and we understand that a person really wants to pay back, but he can't pay back, so he has, so when two indices come and say no, you really owe it's a monetary issue, if you deny a monetary issue, you're still kosher le edus, as opposed to it, because of your posage, and this is a monetary issue, so you would still be kosher le edus, which would mean, piv, aneir echad, and edib, on a monetary issue, will not be making you a mousa le kafran, ella, aesquigalen le niella, ella parach haqay, and this is a, I guess the last in our series of triangles, the pyrokal would be, put a triangle around this word ma, look at it this way, ma la tzada shahshan, what sort of proof can you use as a source from, those two, from piv and aeir echad shikain, ane un biteras hazama, there's no ability, what a person himself said, and what the aeir echad said, for two other witnesses to come in and say, oh no, you guys couldn't have known that, either you, yourself, or the aeir echad, because you were, it's only in, if there was an age of two aedim, that the concept of aedim even comes along, as opposed to, like we just said, taimra, could the same be said, be aedim, when it's a plural, two people who came and testified, shahshan, which is a hazama, that totally is shahsh, a hazama, and maybe you can't learn from piv and aeir echad, because this is different, well, halaikasha, there's a lot of back and forth here in this, so yeah, that's not really a difficulty, because rubria, remember this whole thing is based on tani rubria, and then tani tune, it's all within what rubria would hold, well, rubria, tyros hazama lai parich, he doesn't see that as being, it's not significant enough, in other words, you could bring any issue, you could bring an issue that the two of us were the same, we're wearing white shirts, we have gray beards, rubria doesn't see that subtle issue as being significant enough to be purehable, okay, well then, so we have the leemoud, but rubria also did say, vittana tune, it was taught in the armishna, exactly along the lines of that, Ela, I spoke in one of the Ela, Ela takama, vittana tune, really, armish is similar to that case, me dummy, question mark connector, hossum, by rubria's case, le millva isle sahadi, le loiva leisle sahadi connector, deloimosic leva le medi, in the case of rubria, the millva's bringing witnesses, he's the one who lent out the money, the loiva, he doesn't have any witnesses to back up his claim that he doesn't know anything, dehavu leisahadi, let's say he did have witnesses, they didn't know anything, le loiva, deloimosic leva le medi, they didn't ever have any dealing or owe any money, lei by rubria leis shtabui, then certainly there would be no necessity for a schooa, that's much different than our mission's case, remember our mission's case, if we get back to it, one talus, two guys, first guy's holding on to part of the talus, second guy's also holding on to part of the talus, it's totally different, it's where there's almost like equal claims, it's not a much stronger claim back by witnesses, if we had mentioned on Friday that we were focusing just on one of the two of the people holding on to the talus, if you focus on both of them, just like anansahadi, the fact that a guy comes in holding on with an actual like kazaka on the item, it's a tense amount to the fact that we can testify that he's definitely gonna strike this to it, anansahadi lehi for this guy, well the other guy's also holding on to it, anansahadi also lehi, vahthi lehi, mishnabi, and even though that's the case, the mission has said that they have to swear, now okay it's one thing if basically all the evidence is going to indicate that this party is correct, we'll make the other party swear, but when both of them have equal claims, this is a schooa, we don't understand the connection between rubriya's case and the mishna, which has us to a significant change in direction, ela, as we will end on the ela, this is our Roman numeral two, we know rubriya said something, tara brisa said something about it, he's a first generation amara so he could kind of argue with brisa's and mishnais, we often don't like to say he does, but he can't, and then it was on another issue that he said the tannatuna, so even though we've spent a good part of almost a whole amount and a half saying that rubriya was coming off of the case that he said really ela kiyitmar of tannatuna, when rubriya said, and our mishna blacks it up, maybe the mishna of mitzia dapays, ela kiyitmar is actually going on a different rubriya, the amara rubriya, now it's interesting, the first time we had it, it was tanni rubriya, tanni is usually a brisa, here the lushna is amara rubriya, so I didn't want to box it off because it's not a brisa, but it's something rubriya said, but it's kind of sort of like a brisa, so I put a dotted line box around it, which is the best way that I can indicate that it's a statement rubriya, we might kind of view it like it, say, but it's not, it's not quoting a brisa, and in this case, it's a little bit different. In this case, manli bi ada hai bahab, you owe me a hundred, vahala amara and bahab says back, ela kabiyadi, ela kamishim zus horewitz, I only got 50 of yours, the haylach, this is the case of haylach, and here it is, kama, kayev, a double una kayev, there would have to be a schwah on the other half, now we don't say, where's my hundred, oh, I only owe you 50, and here it is, well that here it is basically is not in the picture, and the rest of it is basically looked at as a kofer bakal, but he's not agreeing to, but he's not agreeing to, and we don't, the way rashi says it, on the fourth line underneath the gomara, rashi says, kayev lishava al-hashar, the loyamrin, and we don't say, now the next, like half line in rashi is what we don't say, you might if I'd say we don't say, on the fifth line underneath the gomara and rashi, hani te kamayi de labigavayu, the 50 that he's admitting, hole vishnubay, now they're right here, it's like a $50 bill on the table, kimandana kulu dame, it's almost as though the malva's already holding it, rather, we look at it like a regular modem, it makes us, and kayev, remember kofer bakal is not kayevishw, only a modem makes us, and we're looking at this modem makes us, even though it's a haylach case, and haylach is basically like, oh, I'll almost give it back to you, I'm just saying like, here it is, take it, okay, my taima, now why is it that haylach would be kayev, says the gomara back in the gomara, because haylach, that concept, or that approach, or when the person says haylach, nami ken muy to makes it a taina dame, he's viewed like one of them makes us, now if that's what rashi had said, that's is still rashi or vetana, tu nai put a diamond around vetana, tu nai, and the author of our Mishnah, in other words, our Mishnah we started with a dafbeiz, taught the case of shnayim out in batalis, which is in right angles, and now let's sort of match up like we did on friday, the ribcia case, and this case, and it seems to match up, because the ha ha ha, here, kayev and dafbeiz, you have two people, each one is taifis, from the perspective of the first guy, there's another guy, and another guy is tofis, so the, since the shnay is taifis also, is an anansahadi demai de tofis, that's what she's holding on to, that's basically a case of haylach, as far as the first guy's concerned, in fact that the second guy's actually holding on to it, you can't get more haylach than that, he's actually got it, the katani yet, still it's said, yishava, that you have to swear, and that would be like our Mishnah, that said yishava, and that ribcia is prisa, which is the case of haylach, which is yishava. Rameshius doesn't say that, rameshius who we circled, and we're now going to go back and forth between rameshius, and rameshius, I'd say to the end of the shear, but it's actually going to be tomorrow's shear also, between rameshius and rameshius, no, haylach is potter, and I double underline potter. Okay, did we ask maitaima when rameshius said haylach is kayev, so we got to do the same thing for shatius, why maitaima, well cave into amarle haylach, and I kind of gave this away already, but you say Horwett show me a hundred, I say, no, yo, you're 50, and here it is, a and b, a, honeys, uzi de kamba, you do the 50 that I agree that I owe you, the monded nakhidlu who milved it dumb, it's almost as though you have it in your hand already, because I'm admitting to it, as it's right here, I hear, and sure I'll give it to you, b, be inachamishim, the other 50, haloi muy vie, I'm not admitting anything, hilkach, therefore, from that perspective, lekhoi does mitzvah taina, there's no muy de mitzvah's there, it's basically a den is just like that of a kofr bikal, and there's no schfuhr, ula rifshas, I don't know shasas, now when ribchia said his approach, he brought the michna to support him, well what's rifshas you can do with the michna, doesn't the michna seem to support the other approach that you would have to take a schfuhr, ula rifshas, I don't know shasas, kashim has decent question mark, answer, I'm not rifshas, rifshas would tell you no, the michna is not a question why, because the michna is a takhanas kafamim who, it's not because of like witnesses testifying, rather it's because it's an anansahadi, and just like there's an anansahadi for this one, there's an anansahadi for that one, if both people come with the equal claims, it's based on anansahadi, not a full fledged aedus, okay, that's great for rifshas, kama, vida, hodrabhiya say to that, question mark, isn't it, just a takhanas kafamim, you would say, yeah, of course it is, in takhanas kafamimim, umihu however, if you want to say iyarmis bishlamah, that on a, the arisa level, heilachis kayev, then like the rabbanan often do, they'll come along, and when it's a similar case, they'll be metak in a de rabbanan, metak in a rabbanan, schwah, kaina de arisa, if you want to say, like rifshas does, me de arisa heilachis potter, then where the rabbanan and whipping up this schwah that has to be taken from metak in a rabbanan schwah, the laisithik of arisa, but they clearly see it differently, rifshas is heilachis being haif, rifshas is heilachis being potter, and now we're going to have a series of snake sources that are brought, either as questions on rifshas or questions on rifshas, so I put a triangle on this mace way, I don't want to, it shouldn't get confused with the previous series of triangles, it probably won't, but the triangle is regular one with the point going up, this is going to be a quashit anrubhiya. On omelet bays, a dallet omelet bays about, about 13 lines down, first word line is karkoi, so it then says ika demoisef misefah and that ika demoisef misefah, there are those who flip it around and ask it differently, it would be on that page somewhere, and there's a triangle pointing down on the ika demoisef misefah. And then we continue with upside down triangles, about, I'd say, third of the way before the end of the omelet, the last word line is bray, it's masef marsutra brayder of nathmen, that would also get another upside down triangle, again another triangle, and again there's a question on rifshas, yep, masef marsutra brayder of nathmen. And he yamud alif, which is going to be exactly where we're going to stop, because we're not going to get to that one, but on the sixth line is a tashmah, that has another upside down triangle, and it's pointing down. So even though we start out, the first question is going to be questioning rifshas, the whole rest of basic rifshas, and even into, is going to be un-rifshas. So masefah, we bring it to make source, we have a question on rifshia. This is a bit of a strange thing, especially with Jews who are usually very precise when it comes to money, let's say I have a document, a document says, "Babos me dollars." How many dollars, let me say, just dollars, or "Babos me shekels." I don't know, how many, usually a document will say how many. So what would you think it means that if it doesn't say how many? At least two. Right, at least two, or maybe even it has to be two, because you can't prove anything more than two, but we're not sure, it doesn't say. It could be three, it could be five, it could be a hundred. So that's the case, as strange as it is, it's a bracelet closer, but three and a half lines and it starts here. Slime or dinnering, say like dollars or shekels. That's what's written into the document. You know, "Bab, borrowed from Carl, dollars." Now, how many dollars? Well, there's a disagreement about that. The mill of the one who lent out the money on Mark Jame Chateau. Oh, it's for five dollars. Comma, the lovel on the one who borrowed says, "Shallosh, it was for three dollars." Now, these are very precise numbers, and this is how we want to bring out the maklokas. Maklokas are shimmina loza versus Rabi Akiva. Rib shimmina loza is who we boxed. Oymer, he says, "Hoyil the Hoda mixes at Taina, Yishava." Like the mother, it makes us, right? The claim is Yomi 5. He said, "Three, so you have to swear that you don't know the rest." Rabi Akiva, who we boxed. Oymer, this is not like a moto mixes. "Ain no ella kineshiv aveda oopater." "Meshiv aveda." What's "Meshiv aveda?" "Well," says Mr. Lova. The document here says, "Dollars." Probably means two dollars. I said three. I'm like, I'm giving you something that I totally was not backed up by the star and therefore, if I'm going to be a meshiv way to believe me when I say, I don't know you the rest. You're claiming five? No, it's three. What is it, two? It's three. That's what Rabi Akiva looks at in there for, potter. Okay, what do we want to focus on? Because we're bringing this as a question on Anrukhia. Kitani Mihai, it says, "However," and here's a one line plus one word quote from the rice we just had. We want to focus on the shimmina loza's opinion. Shimmina loza is Rabi. "Hoyil vahod micsas hatayna ishava." Okay. This is a case of modemicsas, and that's where there's a shua. Taima, apparently the reason is because as the case was presented, it was five versus three. That's where it's modemicsas. Taima da amar shalish, where the claim of the love was that it's three. Ha, I put a diamond around the word ha, the diyu could be. Let's say it was one says five, and the other one said two. Ha, shtayim, it would be potter. Because we're trying to bring out the case of Rabi, and I guess if you were high, the coin or shimmina loza would have said even in the case of two. But you brought the case of three. The high star de kamoyi deebe. What's the star that said dollars? That's basically halachu. That's as equivalent as much as it could possibly be as halach. And what do we see if the diyu is correct that shtayna would be potter, and it's a case of halach, schmamina halachus potter. I died underline those words. It would seem that halachus potter, which would be a big question on Rabiya, who said cases of halachu would be kayif. Don't let this getting grains too deeply into your mind, because we're going to flip everything around in about five, six lines from now. But says to kamora lo. La ola me melach, really I could tell you the diyu that we made two lines ago is not correct. Shtayim would also be kayif. So if the claim was Yomi 5, and he said back too, he would also be kayif. Why didn't he teach it in the context of 5 verses 3? The hi daktani shalache, not for ripschim and menalazar, but for the other opinion, for Rabiya keefo, la fuqimidurabi ekiva, da amar. What does Rabi keefa say? Oh, this guy's going to make shtayva veda o potter. Where's he going to make shtayva veda? If he says to me how to make shtayva veda, the star says too. He's going to make shtayva veda. He said three. He said more than what was written into the star. That's why it's made shtayva veda o potter. Kamashmallan. The kiddish of ripschim and lazar is that this is a moto mixed shtayna vuqayif. Okay. So really what ripschim and lazar is trying to tell you is it's moto mixed, that's in there for your kayif. Well, why didn't ripschim and lazar just say that? Ihakhi. Ripschim and menalazar eimir. Ho'wil the hui dum mixed shtayna ishava. If you're telling me that you'd have to swear it three and you have to swear it two also, well then say ah zai ye shava. This one also, that's a very simple word you could throw in which would indicate not only the case of three but also in the case of two. Ah zai ye shava. Those three words in a phrase marking with a double under the off. Just say also this one is a schwa and I would know that he would say the schwa by two and also by three. Mi bile is what ripschim and lazar should have said. Ella le. Eulum really? It's got to be that if there was a counterclaim of two is what I owe you potter. The haylach is hayif. Why? Because there's one thing to say haylach. It's another thing to have a star. If you say Ho'wil is to owe me five and I say I owe you two and here they are. Okay fine but when you say you owe me five so I say and the star itself says dollars, this shiny Ho'wil is different over here. De kamisai le shdara. There's an actual star which backs up that it's at least two. That's almost like tantamount to aid him. The truth is this aid him sign on the star probably. Inami, another way of rejecting this, I spill in on the inami. Mi shum de have le shdara shibu kakkauis. It's not just a verbal loan. How much do you owe me? Disagreement. How much do I owe you? Shibu kakkauis. Mi shum de have le shdara. If it's written into a document in Shibu kakkauis and by the way as much as we might cause a schwuz on monetary issues karka you don't swear on. The anishmain alkfir is Shibu kakkauis. Something that is a denial but it's a denial which ultimately will fall back on a lien which is on land. There's no schwuzland and it's only monetary issues that there be. Monetary issues which are not lien to land upon which there is schwuz. Okay so rekhi at this point is okay. Rekhi can say that halak is still going to be kaya. The rest of the shear in the beginning of tomorrow shear also is going to be questions now on rusche shis. Rusche shis was the one who came and said halak is patr. So ikadamaysev miseifah. That's why this has a triangle facing in the other direction and we're essentially going to take everything that we did in the first approach, the first say seven eight lines and flip it around and then it will become a question. When we first read the to make source the first three and a half lines we're focusing on shimulah's opinion. Now let's roll this on Rekhi was opinion. So here we go. Line quote and put right angles in it's the Rekhi that we had on the third line repeated now. Revya kiwa aumir ain no ela kumashu veda patr. Hey Bob you owe me five, he says it's three. Rekhi was says well that's a kumashu veda because the document said dollars. He's saying more than that and therefore he's patr from the shua. Let's make a diyuk now. Taima dhammarshala is the way that the Brice presented the case with five versus three and that's the reason why he would be but ha the diyuk would be able to diamond around this ha to correspond to the diamond that we had in the sixth line because this is the diyuk that we're going to make in this way of question ha shtayim kayev and I double and run shtayim kayev even though Revya kiwa would tell you that three is going to be patr well shtayim don't make shua veda. I have documents that show me dollars, yomi five, he says back on you two that's no may shua veda in echai but the ha star ke van de kamaydi be ke heilach dhammi. If he said meaning to two that's based like as much heilach as possible, heilach is and here it is. Well the star says two, that's like heilach shmami na heilach is kayev and I double underline shmami na heilach is kayev sounds very much like the star which is exactly like heilach and you're kayev so heilach would be kayev. Question on Roushations who said cases of heilach are patr. So what would Roushations do with this? Well he would answer you like this, lo, lo, oilame amalach really I could tell you I Roushations could say shtayim na me patr, three is patr and two is also patr. Why didn't it teach the case as the claim and counterclaim as being five versus three if two is also patr, fahai diktani sholosh, you'll never guess. When we were questioning Roushava Roushav said it was tafra bikiva, now we have the question of rabikiva, we'll say he will tell you because it was la fuqimidur shmami na lazar. What's Roushava shmami na lazar opinion, da amar, moi de mixis atina havei vakhayim. Oh this is a moi de mixis, five versus three is moi de mixis in there for yakhayim, kamash malan connector, de meishiva veida hoo, upatr. Dr. Min says dollars, he's saying three, don't tell me that's anything more than him of his like kindness if you will in clear honesty offering more than it even says and every repatr, kamah, hachayim na meistabra and actually makes sense to say like this, that too would also be patr from ishvua, which is what Roushava shmami says because even in the case of halak, he says patr, do you saqateq taqsh tayim kaya, let's just imagine for a minute that if he came with a counterclaim with juhi bhiyev to take ashvua, then how in the world beshalaish heihi patr, lere bhikiva, hachayim kiva say if he says three, he's off the hook, he really maybe owes five, the document says dollars, he says three, he's a pretty sharp cookie, what's he trying to do, hai yarumi kama arim, he's basically trying to trick us, pull the wool over our eyes, savar, he ain't no dummy, he knows if the document says dollars and he says yes, two dollars, thank you very much, you didn't tell us anything, savar, and by the way, the way the order is first claim was yomi five, what's he thinking point, if I say two, I'm still gonna have to, I'm stuck here, I'm gonna look like a big satik and say it's three, now really the claim is five and we'll actually give a little bit maybe more validity to that five claim, we're not sure about it, savar, he figures like this, yea mina shtayim being inishtabui, if I say two, they're able to say that's great, now swear that you don't know the rest, however, aima, I really don't want to take a shwa, I feel very uncomfortable taking a shwa, especially if it's gonna be a false shwa, aima shawl, I'll say three, da havi kame shawl, I'll come out looking good, they'll put me on the cover of the, of the weekly paper as being such a satik, the ipatsra and I'll be off the hook, I'm having to take the shwa, elishmami na, it must be shtayim nami patir, okay, well if shtayim is patir, meaning patir from taking a shwa, back on rokhi, it's a question, because rokhi has said that it would be hayiv, ela kashler bhiya, well, rokhiya will answer the same way he did about 15 lines ago, which is this case is different than the standard case, shiny hoss, I'm going to become a silage starra, the normal back and forth there's no starra, here there is a star which backs up that, no, two is an obvious claim because the document itself says dollars, inami, alternatively, a swigland line in inami, mishum da havi le star, shtayim would karkai, since it's in a document it becomes lean to the land and as a general rule, schwoolers are not taking over issues that have a land lean attached to the varnish brian elkhiyus, shtayim would karkai. Okay, so we took the slime or dindran bray, so we looked at shtayim ela kashler's approach and brought his big question rokhiya, we looked at their bikiva approach and we saw this big question on rokshas, and each one of them answered the opposite of what they did, and we're back to square one, because we don't know, is haylach going to be haylachwa, or like rokhiya says, or in patr, like rokshasim says, so must of marzutra, braydu of nathmen, and I believe this is going to be a question on rivshas, it goes about seven lines, I put a long question marking in the margin, down to the line, first one line is lay, and here we go. I say, "Bob, hey Bob, you owe me six frying pans and a parcel of land." That's the case, calim and karkos, ta anai calim bikarkos, as braydu goes through about three lines, started there, now there's four possibilities, there's probably a few more possibilities, but possibility one, hoydibik calim, oh yeah, that's right, what's that, I use six frying pans, the kaffa bikarkos, I have no idea what you're talking about, I don't know what you're going to land, or comma case two, hoydibikarkos, yeah yeah right, I owe you the land, the kaffa bik calim, what are you talking about, frying pans, I don't know, are you any frying pans? In both those cases, potter, now wasn't that like a partial kafir and a partial hoydah, yeah but they're two totally separate things, and therefore on one thing there was a total kafirah, and on one thing there was a total hoydah, and that doesn't bring a schfua, the motive of this concept of a schfua is, when within one claim you admit to part of it, and now even though this is like one case in court, you're meant, but they're two separate issues, comma, possibility three, hoydibikksas karkos, so you said, let's go, six frying pans and an acre of land, oh no, I owe you half an acre of land, I don't even know what you're talking about with the frying pans, the only thing you was invited to is part of the land, potter, the fourth case is the one we're really going on focus on, let's say mix this kalim, okay you owe me six frying pans and an acre of land, I don't know you owe you any land, and of course I owe you three frying pans, so there was a modo mixus within the kalim, that's the case that it's going to be modo mixus, okay that's the end of the today's source, and let's make a duke, and then we'll make the duke, and we'll see the following time of the reason in, now how many cases do we have four possibilities, let's focus on possibility two, hey you owe me an acre of land, and you owe me six frying pans, oh yeah, okay here's your acre of land, I don't know you any frying pans, time of the kalim, the karkos, that what, we said potter over there, let's say, the karkos is lavash vuahi, why is it that if I made it to part of the land, it's that moment, because you don't squire on karka, you never squire on karka, we saw that before, and therefore even though the partial admission was there, but it was a partial admission within karka, and you don't swear a full denial on karka, a partial denial, you never squire on karka, the duke would be though, let's say you said hey, you owe me six frying pans, and three sandwich makers, that's kalim and kalim, you would squire on both of them, so let's say ha, I put a diamond around the word ha, and again, the three diamonds that we've had out of the page is the initial duke that we'll make from the snake source, to either bring the question or keyword, to bring the situation, ha, kalim, the kalim connector, do me the kalim, the karkos, like we said, six frying pans, and three sandwich makers in a parallel scenario, apparently would be kayev to take a schwa, now hejidomi, what is the case, lavda amarle, haylaf, six frying pans, and three sandwich makers, no, no, no, I don't owe you anything, I owe you three frying pans, and here they are, ushmami na, haylaf is kayev, the fact that we saw from the duke that you'd have to take the schwa, sounds like it would be kayev, question and reshations, who says haylaf is potter, turns around the gomara and says, no, low, really, even in the case of kalim, the kalim, six frying pans, and three sandwich makers, la olamimala, kalim, the kalim, nami potter, why then would you bring the case out in six frying pans in a parcel of land, that you're potter, when even if it's six frying pans and three sandwich makers, you would be potter, that would be a bigger finish, why would you ve ha, de katani, towards the right angles, kalim and karkos, to teach you the kiddish, now the kiddish can come from the second case, for that I don't owe you any lands, and the frying pan six, no, I owe you three in that case, haylaf ala karkos, not only are you haylaf for the other three frying pans, but you're also haylaf the land, what's that called, gildul schruwa, okay, so that's what we're being taught, now by the way, this Mus of Marsutul Bader of Naftman, they should have mentioned at the time, it's a mission, it's a mission in Masechres, I can cheat over here, my Masechas is on the side, Masechres schruwa, it's a mission in Masechres schruwa, hmm, that concept of gildul schruwa is something that's new to us, we do not need to be taught the concept of gildul schruwa, we know gildul schruwa, you don't need to tell me that a mission is structured in such a way that teaches gildul schruwa, the Gamarno has, so then one second, my kamashman, what are you telling me the status is, question mark, comma, zikikin, that once you're scoring on one issue, which you have to swear by, you can cause a schruwa to be taken on something else, also tannina, that's a Mafurish tannai mishna, we have, let's box it off, it goes for two lines and it says, zikikin on nachasum shayin, nachasum shayin, nachasum shayati, nachasum shayin, nachas, le shavelaian, that's why this person could be, that once there's a schruwa having to be taken on one type of asset, we could make it also on the other type of asset, so why are you telling me that the status is in case number four, that we can once we're enforcing a schruwa on the frying pass, we can enforce a schruwa on the land, well, the truth is, one place is enough, but one place is the main place we learn it, and one is learned secondary, we're not saying both places are the main sources, hacha, that's interesting, we say over here, no, over here would be because we're focusing on the mission of sekashruas, is the ikr place that we learn it, haasum by kidushin, in massakas kidushin, when we have this snake source, what we just brought, that's agav, grara, nasvat, sort of brought in, which rashi says on the, almost the bottom line, what's the agav bura, what's it brought in because of, something else, agav grara, nachasum, over there, we're talking about nachasum shayin, nachasum shayin, nachas, nichnim, can be acquired with nachasum shayi, shayin, nachas, by using kessar shavel haasaka, so an acquisition that wouldn't work for a particular item would, if you're acquiring another type of item, you could acquire a long agav since dairi deniknidimahin, so what better place to sort of mention, matter of factly, just like certain assets can be acquired with other assets, using a king that would only be good for one of them, so to the shua can also, if you have to take a shuan one, category of assets, it could require shuan the other, category of assets, well the manta amar, well let's then ask back on rashias, according to rashias, it says haylach is potzer, why do you need a potzer? Am I history kra le muutte karkamishvua? Isn't karkam by definition haylach, I mean I could, I could take your watch and I could put in my pocket, or I could take your watch and I could present it to you, but land, you can hide it, it's always haylach, the land is always there, am I history kra, why would you need a potzer to be muem in my karkamishvua, hakoko karka's haylachu, and if rashias is every case of haylach, it's potzer from a shua, then by definition it'd be potzer from a shua, well rashias will answer, amar lach, here's why you need it, it's strich kra, you need a potzer, haikha, that's right, if the land that we're talking about is in the exact same state as it was when we made the original, it'll deal fine, but let's say I changed it, let's say I dug some holes, let's say I, then it's different, it's not haylach, here it is exactly what you gave it to me, but now it's not exactly what you gave it to me, so amar lach, it's strich kra, haikha, da kafar ba, and that's a typical case, the kamarois brings us where you dug pits or excavated tunnels or caves, kafar ba barushi kunumaras, inami, alternatively another reason why you might need it, and with this we're going to conclude, haikha, da kalim, vek karkais, hey yomi, six frying pans, and a couple parses of land, vahodah ba kalim, oh yeah, I owe you, all those six frying pans, the kafar ba karkais, that's what you would need it for the teacher that even though there's two separate issues, that that would be the din, okay, we'll pick up imitation with this upset and translation, which is going to be yet another today's source, which is going to be a question on the recious approach, essentially it says, hey lach, it's potzer from Ishvua. I'm just a business of living.