Rabbi Joey Soffer Shiurim
Bava Batra daf 93
Good morning, everybody, hey Sam, it's good to see you. I don't see you, I don't see the S on the screen, but don't get it. Okay, at least I know what to do with this stuff. Okay, boy, let's go. Today is September 26th on daft study gimmo. - Yes. - Study gimmo, okay. We stopped near the top of the page. Okay, the conversation we were having was, do we follow Rov by my money, right? That's the conversation that we're in. So Rov said, yes. Shimmo L said no, and we're in the middle of the conversation. Do we follow majority when it comes to monetary law? That's the question on the table. (speaks in foreign language) Okay, what happens? We have an ox that gores a cow, cow was pregnant. And now when they show up to the scene of the crime, we see on the floor a baby that was miscarried dead and the mother that's dead, okay? And the cow is the gorer, but we don't know. (speaks in foreign language) Did the cow just have a stillborn and then it was gored? Or was it gored and that's what caused the stillborn? Meaning, am I responsible for the death of the fetus? That's the question on the table. The cow, we gored, fine, got it. What about the fetus, right? - Yeah, close. - So he says, what does it say? It says, (speaks in foreign language) You pay half damages. This cow was not a, (speaks in foreign language) It was a time cow, first time, first time offender, okay? And we're gonna pay half damage to the mother. That's very normal. And a quarter on the baby. Now that's gonna weigh the questions to the country, okay? (speaks in foreign language) Why am I paying at all? (speaks in foreign language) Why don't we not, why are we not following the majority of cows, normal situation of a cow, is that it gets pregnant and it gives birth, okay? And this one, since it didn't happen, the fetus is a stillborn, 'cause the majority of cows that are born took our life. And this was a stillborn, so save for sure, it was gored, that's why it died. It died because of the goring. It might follow the majority. The majority of cows give birth to life-cafs. And this one is dead. Us being was gored. And therefore, it should have said, according to you, if we follow Rob, (speaks in foreign language) we should say you pay half damages for the mother and half damage for the fetus, okay? Says no, no, no. (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) He says, no, you're right, you're right. He says, Rob, we could follow the, we are following the Rob over here. We are following the Rob. (speaks in foreign language) He says, because in the Rob, that it was gored, there's still a sapphic if we have to pay. Why? It could be that the cow saw the bull charging at it. And from the fear of the bull running, it miscarried. And that would be grandma. That's not gonna be-- (speaks in foreign language) No, that's fear, fear is not the cow. And therefore, if that's what caused the miscarriage, I wouldn't have to pay for it. And the other possibility is that it didn't see, it came from the back and gored and killed the cow. So there's a 50th cow, I don't know. And even in the side that was Rob, because it was supposed to be born, and the cow gored and that's why it's dead, it's still a sapphic. It could have been that I was tattooed, because it's for charging, got scared and just carried. And then I wouldn't have to pay. So I take that mamonamutab, it's a fake, that half that I was supposed to pay, I split it in half, I pay a quarter. And therefore, no proof that we don't-- - I've been saying it like you learned before, like we ended yesterday with David. Once I have something that I say, kulam, I can't apply it Rob, and once I have something that's a fake, I can't apply it Rob. - Yeah, this is guaranteed sapphic. Even in the side that it's Rob, it's just still sapphic, so what should I have to say? - Kulam guarantees sapphic. - Right, right, right, right, right, right, right, good. Okay, and therefore, no proof. When I says lei makitana ei, shall we say that Ravn schmohr's idea of, right, do we follow mamon? We follow Rob in mamon? Or not is sapphic. I'm sorry, is makrogitana ei, right? As follows, here we go. (speaking in foreign language) We have an ox, it's grazing. (speaking in foreign language) And on the floor, next to this ox, happens to be a dead ox. (speaking in foreign language) Even though the dead ox is clearly signs that it's been gored to death, and the ox standing next to it, eating the grass, having his lunch, is a goring ox, he's mo'ad, mo'adli gakh, right? Or we found (speaking in foreign language) The dead one we see was bitten to death, and this ox is known to be a biter. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Sorry, it's not definitive. No, we won't say that the outstanding ox there, that standing there with blood dripping down his mouth, right, is the one who bit the guy. And his horns are full of blood, and not him, sorry, no, no, we won't say that. Okay, I'll be a little overexaggerated. Maybe that would have been a seman, but, okay, but anyway. But in general-- (speaking in foreign language) Yeah, in general, no proof, okay. That's Tanakama. (speaking in foreign language) If you have a camel that's in heat, and he's running after the females to have relations, (speaking in foreign language) And you find a dead camel, male, next to this guy, that's in heat, (speaking in foreign language) you can be sure that this camel killed the other one, 'cause when they meet it, when they're meeting, the males attack each other, okay? That's what he says. This guy is running after the male. Now, you know, he's running after the females. I don't think he, we know that this male-- This male camel is running after the females, and I find another dead male next to this male. I say he killed them. So that's an aha. Okay, so now it seems like Tanakama seems to be arguing. That's what it seems like. Tanakama says, oh, it's not the ox. And aha says, yeah, it's the camel, right? Both of them say-- Different behavior of this male. We'll see in a second, but right now, the understanding is, at least, about saying, (speaking in foreign language) We see, so they want to set this up as a mahokatana. Even try to plug the mahokatana into this. You're right, maybe it's not the same right now, but at least in where we are in the havamina, we're looking at it like, hmm, the cow, the ox, next to the dead guy, he didn't gore. The camel, next to the dead guy, he did it. So it seems like there's a mahokatana in going on, and maybe we can plug the mahokatana into this, right? It's a rov, by Tanakama, we would say, we don't follow the rov, that's Shmo's opinion. And then aha who says, yeah, we can rely on the fact that this camel did it, would be love. - But what's the rov, in this case, the fact that there's no rov here? - Okay, so when I says, like Richard just said, (speaking in foreign language) Assume for a minute, you're right, it's not a rov, but it is a hazaka. The hazaka that the camel is in, he kills all the camels, and the gory ox, hazaka, he's a gorer, and assume that, just like we would say, that by, we follow a rov, we could also follow hazaka. And if I could say that there's a mahokatana in the hazaka, I could say it's a mahokatana in by rov, also. That's where the-- - It's the side of it. - So about all right, same time, what's the difference? I'm relying on something because it is whatever, what time it's a hazaka, or I'm relying 'cause it's the rov, but I'm relying on something based on an outside factor, and then the assumption is that they're the same. It's about what, they thought to say, that ruba, the hazaka, he had that in any one, just like there's a mahokatana in the hazaka, it's a mahokatana in the rov. Maha says, no, not so fast, obviously, right? Lemma, rav de ama, kirav, aha, before we do that, Maha says, set it up, which I already said outside, that rav would be like rav aha, which is the second opinion in the barita, that the camel is the killer, right? - Which means mahmo-- - That we would follow the hazaka, and therefore, we would also follow the rov. - Right, the rov de mamore. - Right, and schmuel de ama kitana kama, that we didn't follow the hazaka, so we won't follow the rov, right? The axe is not the guy who killed the one on the floor. Good? Ama de kara, not so fast. And the amna feel the tana kama. When I said that we do follow the rov, right, de mammon, I can be like tana kama of this barita, who said that the axe, we don't say, is the killer. - How? - I can look at the tana kama hazaka, that the axe is not the killer, ela de los lina batar hazaka. Ava bataruba hazlina, who said, you again, sevarua, you tried to equate rov and hazaka, who said they the same? Tana kama says that we don't follow the rov, we don't follow the hazaka, doesn't mean he says we don't follow the rov, we do follow the rov, that's what ab says, and therefore, tana kas like me too. Okay? Ushimo ela malle ka, ana de amre, a feeling of aha. When I say we don't follow the rov, I can even be like, aha, who says the dead camel, is the camel, is the killer, the camel next to the guy, is the killer. Ad ka lo ka amar hazaka, the one standing next to him, is the killer, ela de hazlina batar hazaka, de hava gufe muhzak, where what, we're following the hazaka of that camel, that there's a hazaka on that camel, that he will kill camels when he's in heat, 'cause that's what they do, okay? And that's what he is right now. Ad ka lo ka amar hazlina, you want to tell me, follow this camel, because most camels? Two, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. You want to tell me this camel, this, I got you, that's the hazaka, but the rov, who says? Aha, and it doesn't work, not in mahokutani. No proof, okay, bye. Hihofi, tashima, ha mokher perot mahavero, Uzira an, obviously the whole reason we got into this conversation is almishna, but the guy who bought the apples to plant the seeds, that's where it came from. So finally, after a page you may have, they come back to almishna, good? Okay, tashima, ha mokher perot mahavero, Uzira an, guy sells fruits to his friend, and the guy planted the seeds, and villotsam ho, they didn't grow, right? Aufillu zara pishtan, even if it was flax seeds, enohaya bahrayutan, good? You know, you are not, that's what the mishna said, you're not responsible. Okay, Ma says, my aufillu, right? What do you mean, my aufillu, right? What's wise, even flax seeds, you're still not responsible, what do you mean, I've even flax seeds, right? My love, aufillu zara pishtan, de rubal is in your eyes, abneh, dafillu haki lo aslina, bata rubal. You know what the word aufillu means? That's exactly opposite your opinion, right? Thraaf, that what? Even though the majority of people, by flax seeds to plant, 'cause flax is for linen and linen, it's a very important fabric in old days, they lived on linens, mostly, more than anything else. Kind, more than kind, that's for sure. So, Ma says, even if the guy bought flax seeds and planted them and even grow, you're still not responsible. Aufillu pishan, aufillu haki lo aslina, konim zara pishtan, lin toa, right? You're still patur, even though it didn't grow, which means what? There are, there's a minority of people by the flax seeds to eat, and you can't come and tell me now, hey, I bought these seeds and plant them, they didn't grow, 'cause why? I'll tell you back, I don't care. You bought it to eat. No, no, I'm from the rough. I don't care. Aufillu zara pishtan, bata rubal. That's the aufillu, the aufillu, that we don't follow the rough. - Right, so you want to set up the machinize as-- - The first part is I'm buying the apples for the seeds, and therefore, that's one thing, versus buying the flax, I'm sorry, I'm buying the apple normally people would buy it for the fruit, but they're buying it for the seeds. - No. - Or I'm buying the pishtan, or, yeah, I'm saying, in terms of the rub, you want to set up that zara pishtan, the first kai, the rejshalamish now with the apples is generally people buy it for fruit, and the guy happens to be using it for seeds, right? - I don't know that that's true. - Because the flax would be the opposite, the flax would say normal people buy it for seed. - No, because once I got to the aufillu zara pishtan, the rejshal, the way you want to explain it is pashoot. It's lots of, I don't need it. It's calvohomer, I don't need it. It's all one statement. - No, I need it, because normally I need it. If it's all the same thing, then I don't need it. - Once I tell you that even if you bought it against the rub, I don't care what you did anymore. - So, if the rub is for fruit or if the rub is for seeds, no matter what, I don't care. That's the way I was understanding it. - But you're only, all right, it's all one statement. - Yeah, but I'm saying it's giving it all sides to you. - To prove it. - Okay, fine. - I thought that's what that's what we were saying. - I can hear it that way, otherwise I feel it. - I'll tell you what, I feel it once, 'cause don't think when I told you over there before that the reason you patour is 'cause you bought the apples to eat, and that's why if you plant in the seeds and then you grow your patour. No, no, no. - Even if you bought the seeds. - Even if you bought them for planting and they didn't grow, tough luck. - And how do I do that? - I feel it. - I feel it. - I feel it. - I feel it. - I feel it. - Rob is a problem. Rob's stuck. This mission is against Rob, okay? Rob says we follow Rob. If Rob says follow Rob, I should get a refund on my flax, but I don't. So Rob's got a problem. So Rob says, you're right, Tanahi. You're right, there's no way this mission is Rob, and therefore, in order for Rob's opinion to be valid, he must have another source. And there goes, you're right, Mahoget Tanahi. We need to go find another Tanah to support Rob, okay? 'Cause this one is schmoole, 100%, okay? When I say Tanahi, the Tanah, here's the paratha. (speaking in foreign language) I sold fruits to his friend. (speaking in foreign language) And he played with the seeds and they didn't grow. (speaking in foreign language) If they were seeds that were not edible seeds and they did not grow, it says this paratha, you are responsible. (speaking in foreign language) - The yuhu, the yuhu, who is the yuhu in that case? - The person who sold the seeds. - The seller. - Yeah, okay. Which is totally now against Amishna, clearly, right? - It's 100% against Amishna, which means, okay, this is Rob now, there is a Tanah out there that's holding like Rob, right? (speaking in foreign language) But if it was flax, you're not responsible, okay? 'Cause why, 'cause flax is still edible. So as he qualified the first part, (speaking in foreign language) If I know with 100% certainty, you bought these seeds to plant, right? You're going to be high up for the seeds, that's what he's saying, okay? (speaking in foreign language) If it's flax, which is now, there's a mihut that actually eat them, right? (speaking in foreign language) Even though the majority says we plant them for flax, you'd still not be responsible. - That would be like some oil. (speaking in foreign language) Okay, (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Which means the Biosi disagrees on Tanah Kama's explanation of Zara Pishtan. He said, Tanah Kama says, right, that the Zara Pishtan, you'd be patoor because there are people that eat it, there's a mihut that eat it, that's more. The Biosi says, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. You give money back for the Pishtan, which means that's tough, right? Why? Because there's a majority of the seeds of flax are planted, are not eaten, they're planted, and therefore you get your money back. - The problem with this is you have (speaking in foreign language) - No, it's actually it's all, it's all (speaking in foreign language) The Biosi is only to have. The first part is, it's more also. Because yeah, because more could agree, if I know with 100% certainty that they're only for planting, there's no growth, it's 100%. There's Zara in Anechalese, even Chmowal agrees to that, that's Chmowal, and then Zara Pishtan, you don't pay, there's a new-- - Everybody buys them for planting, yes. - That's right. - I'm saying that's-- - They're not edible, they don't even wait, they fall, right? So even Chmowal would agree in that. - That's very fine. - So Chmowal ended up. - This is like a digression, but isn't there some responsibility on the buyer, like what if he didn't, you know, like farm them properly? - It ain't nothing, 100% true, 100% true. - 100% true, if I left them out in a storm, I got bored, I soaked them, not a question. You have to say that the guy did everything that he was supposed to do, the neighbor did the same as I did, and his grew, and no, I did it, but he bought seeds from somebody else, and I put them in, you have to say, I'll have to imply, 100%, 100%. He can't blame it on the seller, if you need to do what he's supposed to do, right? Okay, fine. So one of the answer back to the BOC, the BOC just said, sorry, majority of the people buy flax for planting, you gotta pay back, which was Rob's opinion. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Many people buy flax seeds for other purposes, that's what they responded to BOC, that's the end of the bon item, okay? So bottom line is now, let's figure out what's going on over here, we already did it outside, but it seems like the BOC is Rob, and therefore Rob, when he says that we follow the Rob, he has something to hang his hat on, right? (speaking in foreign language) But this BOC is nice, okay. (speaking in foreign language) So now, if you tell me now, there's a Mahlukatanah eam over here, right? So who's the wisdom of Mahluk between? (speaking in foreign language) If you wanna say it's between the BOC and the less opinion in the Bharata, that says they said back to the BOC, there's many people that buy it for planting, for other purposes, right? (speaking in foreign language) They both sound like they're talking about Rob, they're only arguing about what the Rob is, is the Rob for eating or the Rob for other purposes, for planting, but they both follow Rob. (speaking in foreign language) So, (speaking in foreign language) more Azio, Bataruba, the Ince, or more Bazar, Azio, Bataruba, this idea, right? Some, one of them is following the majority of people, (speaking in foreign language) that's the Amrulo, and other ones are there for planting, that's the BOC, but they're both following Rob, so that's not a Mahlukatanah eam do we follow Rob or not, (speaking in foreign language) And the other side, it's the BOC over Amrulo, either one, what they actually are, but they're both following that Rob, we would follow that off, so it's either the BOC and Amrulo on the other side of Tanakama, so (speaking in foreign language) and (speaking in foreign language) very opinion about it, okay, we have Mahlukatanah eam and that's okay, so now if you're either BOC, you can be Amrulo either way, the following Rob, and therefore, the answer to our question is the Mahlukatanah eam, and it's done, we know, (speaking in foreign language) we don't follow Rob by Mahlukatanah. (speaking in foreign language) We follow Shmoen in general, correct, that's correct, that's back up another reason to say why, plus we have established now that's stealing this, we don't follow Rob, (speaking in foreign language) this is what I taught, so, okay, fine. (speaking in foreign language) So according to the period it says that I have to give back my money, in a scenario where I would, where the money would be, I have to give back, so it could be (speaking in foreign language) where I know with absolute certainty that the seeds were for planting, absolute certainty, or it could be that I'm following it to BOC or (speaking in foreign language) that it was a scenario where majority was for planting, and now I'm obligated to give money back, so okay, what do I have to give back? So now the guy took the seeds, and the guy hired workers, planted, he's got a water bill for irrigation, he's got, yeah, he's got fertilizer costs, and he's got, so now the question is now, do I have to pay for all that, or what I'm paying for, right? (speaking in foreign language) you come back and I give back the money for the seeds, not the expenses that were incurred to plant those seeds, another thing he says, no, no, even the expenses that were incurred to plant. Okay, when I says (speaking in foreign language) who is this second opinion that says that you have to pay also for the expenses, who is that? (speaking in foreign language) it's a bunch of (speaking in foreign language) how do we know? When I says, (speaking in foreign language) which a bunch of (speaking in foreign language) where did you learn that that opinion is a bunch of (speaking in foreign language) that's basically the question. You have to bring me to the bar, I tell you that you know that the (speaking in foreign language) BOC says you have to incur the extra expenses, and then say okay, that's 'cause he said it there, it must be him over here, but where is that over there? Where is that from? So when I says (speaking in foreign language) if you want to tell me (speaking in foreign language) it's from the (speaking in foreign language) the following (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Right, if you want to say, but the rest of the (speaking in foreign language) says, (speaking in foreign language) Right, (speaking in foreign language) Right, that's the place where I'd be responsible. Okay, (speaking in foreign language) He is, right? I think he was, right? (speaking in foreign language) So if that's the source you want to tell me, (speaking in foreign language) you want to say what's the responsible responsible, even for everything? Good. (speaking in foreign language) Where is the source? Who says that you have to pay the extra expenses? Who's the payer? (speaking in foreign language) Okay, where would you get it from? If you want to say the source (speaking in foreign language) where is the box says, that when did we know that was for the garden (speaking in foreign language) Right? (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) How would you know that hotel hours included in that? Not just selling him. We don't know, we don't know that yet. We don't know that yet. I'm just saying that. No, no, we don't know that yet. (speaking in foreign language) No, your name is anything. The man didn't say it. Okay, so (speaking in foreign language) Sorry, no problem. Yeah, let me just give my friend my place once I go and say something. Okay. (speaking in foreign language) Okay, wait. So one minute, lots of (speaking in foreign language) And then what? (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Right? So the way, the inference, again. (speaking in foreign language) Wait a minute, we did, in a second. We'll go right like this. The Tanakama, which didn't have a name, right, told us that if you sold fruits to your friend and plant them, they didn't grow. Even if it's (speaking in foreign language) you're not (speaking in foreign language) Why? Because we don't follow the roof. Right? (speaking in foreign language) Which means that if it was with absolute certainty, infer from there, absolute certainty that I knew that was planting it for planting, you would be (speaking in foreign language) Right. 'Cause the only reason why I'm not (speaking in foreign language) of here is 'cause there's a possibility to say that you did it for some other reason. Ah, and if you didn't do for any other reason, you didn't only for planting, what would Tanakama say? (speaking in foreign language) Okay, so let's assume that Tanakama is (speaking in foreign language) 'Cause that's what you just said, right? (speaking in foreign language) By the way, if it's something that's not for any other purpose other than for growing, you're responsible. But you know what? He's not arguing, Tanakama said the same thing. The inference of Tanakama is exactly what Ashbach says. So there's no (speaking in foreign language) - Right. - Right? (speaking in foreign language) So where's the (speaking in foreign language) Tanakama says the ones that you plant, because the ones that are (speaking in foreign language) So where's the (speaking in foreign language) Because Tanakama says, you know why you don't pay, there's some other purpose you could use it. You could use it for eating, you could use it for something else, but with absolute certainty, of course you would have to be responsible. And then Ashbach says, absolute certainty, you're responsible, okay? So where's the (speaking in foreign language) In the love, (speaking in foreign language) must be what they argue about is what our question is. Are you responsible for the additional expenses? They both say you're responsible, right? So okay, so what do they argue about? No, no, they must be talking about what we're talking about. Up to what level of responsibility are we talking about? We're just talking about the seeds, or we're talking about the additional expenses also. (speaking in foreign language) That would be Tanakama. (speaking in foreign language) That would be Ashbach. And therefore I can say that the (speaking in foreign language) that says at the end that you're responsible even for the additional expenses is Ashbach. He's arguing on Tanakama to end on the Tanakama. To say hey, right? You guys say responsibility, I agree. Responsibility, responsibility plus, plus the expenses. And they say no, no, no, no, no, no. Seeds, no expenses, right? And therefore Ashbach. - I don't need Ashbach. - What's the saying otherwise? Saying the same thing as them. Okay. (speaking in foreign language) Why would you set it up that way? (speaking in foreign language) Because once you're deciding that there's a (speaking in foreign language) over here between them, that Tanakama, right? And Ashbach are arguing about the extra expenses. Why would you put that opinion on Ashbach? They both said the same thing. Why are you assuming it's Ashbach? Maybe it's Tanakama. Maybe he's the one who says more expenses. 'Cause you told me definitively, oh yeah. That bad I tell that says extra, that's Ashbach. And you want to learn it from Amishna where we don't see an explicit (speaking in foreign language) and it's inferred from the fact that they're saying the same thing that you want to subscribe now that Ashbach is the one who says the extra. How do you know, maybe Ashbachama, he says (speaking in foreign language) That's not a good question. Why? (speaking in foreign language) When the second opinion joins over here, don't you think he's coming to add something on top of the first opinion? Would it be that the first opinion is saying, well, and other guys are subtracting? That's how it works. He heard responsibility. He says, by the way, you're right. Responsibility all the way to the expenses. That's how people talk. And therefore the assumption, if I have an assumption, I'm going to assume the second opinion is being more (speaking in foreign language) than the first opinion. Okay. So he says, well, (speaking in foreign language) maybe the whole Mishnah is actually Ashbach. You yourself, you have to infer this (speaking in foreign language) Maybe it's really old Ashbach and really I understand the Mishnah as a part was missing and this is how you would understand it. (speaking in foreign language) Uzira An guy sells fruits to his friend. He plants them. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Even if they were flax, (speaking in foreign language) You don't have to, right? You're not responsible for the costs, okay? And infer, oh, but if they were absolutely 100% planting, you would be (speaking in foreign language) Why? (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Yeah, (speaking in foreign language) And it tells you why, (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Correct. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) And you explain yourself the safe and it's all done, okay? (speaking in foreign language) Therefore, you're right. Technically, I could explain the Mishnah that way. And if I do, I don't know anymore that the one who says additional expenses is Ashbach. 'Cause when it says now (speaking in foreign language) And there's no (speaking in foreign language) I would not say it's a (speaking in foreign language) with the expenses. No, it's just responsible for the seeds. And if I don't have a source anymore to say that this bad item, it says the additional expenses is Ashbach, (speaking in foreign language) I don't know it's Ashbach anymore, 'cause our Mishnah now is all Ashbach and all it says is that you're responsible. So it says, (speaking in foreign language) And I would not assume the responsibility means all the way to the end. That's (speaking in foreign language) You can't do that. I don't have a source. - But if I learn Ashbach as a homishnah, when he comes at the Seifah, right? And says, (speaking in foreign language) - He's explaining why. (speaking in foreign language) I was explaining why I said this. I'll tell you why. 'Cause (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Cost of seeds. - You would know that from the first part. For sure, if I bought, if I bought it for perot, and I used it and it didn't, I don't have (speaking in foreign language) So for sure, I'm not gonna have my wife for seeds and it's not gonna grow. - When I stick in (speaking in foreign language) I continue and say, (speaking in foreign language) You're right. But once I told you, I didn't, the Mishnah remember, the Mishnah doesn't say in it, the Tanakama is (speaking in foreign language) When I says (speaking in foreign language) it doesn't mean fixed about (speaking in foreign language) It means understands how to fix the Mishnah. - As if it's saying (speaking in foreign language) - As if, right. That's it. That's not really here. So I said, I bring Ashbach in the end to tell you, oh, that's what he says. It's all Ashbach. Okay, okay. So now, once I do that, I no longer have this (speaking in foreign language) between Tanakama and Ashbach to say that Ashbach is adding on the extra expensive. I don't have it anymore. So Ashbach is actually just saying, you're responsible for the seeds. Now I don't have any more source to say the other one I thought we started out with that says you have to pay the expenses to Ashbach anymore. I don't know what it is. - We don't know who the Yeshamim is. - That's exactly trying to figure out who it is. You tried to say (speaking in foreign language) and I tell you, I'm not so clear. Ella, are you right? I'm going to try again. (speaking in foreign language) It's the following, (speaking in foreign language) that should give us clarity. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) I'm taking my grain, my wheat to go get ground from the milk. (speaking in foreign language) And they were not soaked before they were ground, which was supposed to do to remove part of the shell. (speaking in foreign language) What he gave me back was bread or whole wheat, which is not what I asked for. (speaking in foreign language) Or I took my (speaking in foreign language) I took my flour to the baker. (speaking in foreign language) And he made bread that flapped, didn't rise. Or (speaking in foreign language) I took my animal to the (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) And he made a mistake. He turned my animal to (speaking in foreign language) I slaughtered him properly. (speaking in foreign language) The milk, the baker, the (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Why (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) He is getting paid. When you get paid, (speaking in foreign language) Right? You got extra, extra, extra careful. You messed up. Okay. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Or have. Not only-- - Extra. - Right, extras. It's not just the damages. Now, you had a party and the people came there and also there's no meat 'cause the butcher messed up and the bread flapped, right? And the (speaking in foreign language) Now-- (speaking in foreign language) Same idea, right? Same idea. You messed up and now you embarrassed me because I brought all these people to the party and they know food. So you have to pay for my embarrassment also. That's the extra expenses. Who is that? (speaking in foreign language) Okay? - In France. - In civil war. - Yeah. - In America there's a good penalty. It's called a latent defect. - Right. - Or a patent defect. (speaking in foreign language) A latent defect is what you can see. Patent defect is something you don't see. - We don't know. - But it hurts other people. - Ah, ah, ah. There you go. - Yeah. - Right. Good. Good. (speaking in foreign language) So the latent one, you'd be responsible to find out. You're saying it's something that I could know about, right? Mr. Caten? The latent one is what something that I could have found out about. - Right. - And I should have known. - Yeah. - Gotcha. So that's what he's saying. Okay, fine. This is, that's what he is over here. Okay, now. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) Period. Okay. (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) So the spark is like this. Okay, we had a mock look between Tanaka Manaj Bag about a person who took his green to be ground at the mill or his flower to the baker or his animal to the butcher. - Right. - Okay. So if they messed up in their work, right? The mill didn't soak the flower and he gave back brain or the baker for the bread flock. They didn't put enough yeast, right? Or the butcher messed up on the strita and the animal's on kosher now. Tanaka Ma says, you pay for the damages, so you'd have to get back green, you'd have to give back flour, you'd have to give back a new animal. Now, she pucks, says, no, that's not enough. You have to also pay for his embarrassment. He was making a party. He was having guests and they all came and there's no food now because you Mr. Baker, Mr. Milmer, Mr. Shahid messed up the catering door. You forgot to deliver the food. You messed up. And now he's embarrassed 'cause all these people are sitting here and it's not even to eat. You have to pay for that embarrassment. Is it specifically bullshit or it could be like expenses? - We learn from here that it's all, it's expensive. The case that he's talking about over there was a bullshit. - I'm saying it could be at the time. - And after an army. - I drove a half hour to come and get it from my guest. - And the fact that I say that's back says I can add on to the actual damages. Now go back and say, oh, you sold seeds that didn't grow and you had to hire workers and get fertilizer and get water bills and get this and all that. And sun lamps and all kinds of stuff. Ah, that's all. - And they would almost be like a call shit. - A call shit for sure. - All the extra expenses. And that's what I was talking about. That's what he's talking about, okay? And then Minhag Gaddal, he said that what? That when you messed up the food, you have to pay the bullshit. And all the Minhag was, we have to realize that we figured out, we go to weddings, we go to parties, the food is endless, doesn't it? That's the way it used to be, right? They used to have, whatever was done was done. So you don't want to come into a place where there's not enough food anymore, it's hype. So they would leave the curtain at the door when it was closed. That means you can come in. Once the curtain was opened, there's not enough food for you anymore, don't come anymore. That's why that was the main ad. So people don't get embarrassed or what that. (speaking in foreign language) Have a great day, everyone. Have a great day. Bye. Bye.