This transcript is auto-generated and may contain errors.
0:00 streaming. Start recording. Good morning. Today's DA is 99. We begin today's DA by thanking all of our sponsors. We thank our sponsors to the month of we thank Mel and Karen Ram who sponsor all the dras for your shar. 0:36 We also thank Ed and Aris Miller as well as as Adam and Dr. Leslie Rosen for sponsoring all the Dr. Joseph Miller Ben Ruain. We also thank friends of Mayor Ben Per who sponsored all the for him. We also thank our week of learning sponsors. We thank Nathan and Beth Adler for sponsoring Shum for the week in commemoration of 0:58 the arts Benjamin Adler and we also thank our week of learning sponsors Ed and Faith Wolf who sponsor old Shalom Benh whose yard site was on 23 af. We also thank our dafomi sponsors to thank Steinberg for sponsoring in this of continued health for Islamist and for ultimate. We also thank Mishi 1:24 and Dvidita Trapper for sponsoring Dafomi in commemoration of Mishi's mother's 10th yard. Her name was alto was in the 23rd to the Yeshua for all of Israel. 1:48 So yesterday at the bottom of the we had two different opinions about what ratios are necessary for bal when it comes to all the in the Torah. Anytime you have a mixture of forbidden foods together with forbidden foods at the bottom of the whether you need to have ratio of 100 to one or a ratio of 60 to1 is sufficient. 2:13 I mentioned that both of them really were coming from exactly the same place. They just had a couple differences and it came from zerobasha means they cooked this isra this arm or I guess like a forearm of the animal the entire thing together. The question was whether it was cut up first not cut up. The bottom line is was cooked together with parts of it that were not kosher. And the 2:36 question just was how do you go ahead and make this calculation and the depending on how you calculated it will will determine whether it comes out to be a ratio of 100 to1 or 60 to1. That was yesterday's good. Now the problem that we began with yesterday is that we we have a a line in a braer that says this case of 3:02 is an example of of something which is permissible that comes from a forbidden mixture. Now the word zahu when you have the word zahu it points to a specific case and if you're pointing specifically to this case that means that there's something unique about there's something very special and individual about that says 3:27 yes but other cases not now the initial response we had to that was that maybe the mixture the the the proportions or the ratio of 60 to1 or 100 to1 is a specific proportion which is given only to you can't carry that over to anything else. Therefore, the wants to know, how are you just so simply carrying over the 3:51 ratio of 60 to1 or 100 to one from to other in the Torah? Maybe as the Bryer says, Zo refers specifically to that case, but nothing else. Again, is referring to the Nazer to the ram that was brought for another is part of his Tyra. Now the gor know we got to this yesterday a little bit but 4:14 let's just go back to the toaya and we'll we'll continue from there it's it's it's just a little bit more than um halfway down the when it says in other words the specific that's relevant to that is referring to the opinion of Omar he's of the opinion of 4:45 when it comes to when you have a similar mixture of two of the same exact type of items the only difference between them is their theiric status. So if two things exactly the same meat or flour or grain whatever it is that gets mixed together that one of those items is the other item is that's where says you're not going to have 5:09 what we learn is but when it comes to our case of even is going to be of the opinion that we're still going to have this principle over here and you're still going to be able to use the ratio to nullify it. So in other words, we still can learn the from all other in the 5:32 Torah. What's specific or what's unique about that different than every other type of iser? That is the answer is that it will become even though it's similar items. They are sigmar says okay why don't we learn everything out from there? In other words, why why don't we say that just teaches us the principle 5:56 that is in other words maybe your whole your whole principle is wrong when you say is not just look at this a nazer look at this ram that comes along with nazer as part of his ta process and you'll see that there is clearly a principle of of of even by similar items says no we can't do that because gal raman we already learned learn from 6:21 somewhere else. It's already revealed to us where where is this by by the blood on one of the processes was they would mix the blood of the ax and the blood of the goat. And you see that the gumar mentions clearly says even though the blood from an ax is so much more than the blood of this goat 6:47 and it's mixed together. So when it comes to the proportions, the typical BL proportions certainly would have made that the blood of the goat would be nevertheless the Torah still refers to it as how could he refer to it as damasar if it's the answer is that when it comes when it comes to similar items we're not 7:11 going to say. So we have a clear revelation from the Torah that when you have similar items and they get mixed together even though the proportions are going to be so great nevertheless it's not going to be so we have a clear indication that there is no and therefore asar explains they're mixed together and they're not 7:35 going to be soar says okay so now we have ourselves stuck between two different places we have Nazir tells us that there is when it comes to the Nazir. We also have we also have the blood of these two different how do you know which one to learn it from? How do you know to compare all other in the Torah to 8:01 the blood of these carbon more than to compare to the Nazer? Maybe nazer should teach us a principle for every other cases that there will be a concept of nullification even by similar items. Mor says no is different because is different because typically there we don't say the concept of typically the is if you have a mixture 8:27 of and then you can't go ahead and mix them together and then and then just say I'm going to rely on. So again, if somebody wants for some reason to add in an ingredient into their into their food, I know they're making some food for Shabas today, they want to add a little bit of milk into their fleshic food is even if post facto. It's going to be it's going 8:52 to be nevertheless you're not allowed to add it in. Still when it comes to Naz, we see we're still cooking this whole limb of the animal together with the iser inside it. Never we and that's that's permissible. In other words, that violates the principle of and still we say it's going to be okay. 9:11 So in other words, that's when we have a whenever we have a novelty built into a case, we don't slept over the to anywhere else. We go with the simple understanding. Therefore, we prefer to learn it out from the blood of the of the carbon and that will teach us. 9:32 So again, okay, hold on a second. If you're telling me that is a then maybe the whole thing is aes how are you how are you learning over these ratios of 60 to1 or 100 to1 from you shouldn't be able to learn that that either because that case is a says hold on a second you have to focus on what is 9:56 a and what's not a says learning 60 to1 or 100 to one is no why Because when it comes to biblical we say tells us you follow ro that means you should go with a ratio of 2:1 we are being we're being very stringent over here and saying you need to have 60 to1 or 100 to1 that's actually quite a 10:24 quite a stringency we have no problem learning a from aesh because the that we're learning always goes to but thera of saying 60 to1 or 100 to1 that we should have no problem carrying Okay. Now Rabba gives another answer to this question because again as we mentioned before it says when it comes to we point to it and say this is a unique case where we learn 10:48 about which comes from general says what was that referring to what's that uniqueness ra says this teaches us of which is us now it's important to know that we We apply the concept of tomaker across the board. What does tamker mean? Tom kicker means we view taste as if it is actually 11:15 the substance. So again if a person has a dish which is cooking and their shabas food is cooking and a piece of na falls in and what cooks there for a couple minutes then they say oh my gosh I have na cooking in my chalan. 11:32 They pull out the Na. They take the entire NA out. The is unless you're going to have enough to be the that chal is going to be. Why? Because the flavor of that noa has been included into your dish. That's the answer to the tam of that noa is viewed as if it's it is the substance. 11:53 Even though the substance was removed, the flavor still maintains the of the actual substance. Ra is of the opinion that we only say this with regard to we don't say this with regard to now says this points out that when it comes to we say it teaches us to when it comes to we 12:19 don't say so again don't get carried away to say hold on a second my challenge is not therefore to my just regular meat. So even if it's strafe, if I take the meat out, I can still eat the chal that's not true. 12:34 That's not how we that's not today's but ultimately there's a big locus and the major about the bottom line is opinion is that's only relevant to and when the when the tells us that there's an exception when it comes to it was telling us that while it's true that what by the rest of is we say and if you 12:59 have the flavor of another type of kum a consecrated material that is the flavor has the of the substance when it comes to it's going to be permissible. We're not going to say that says okay why don't we just learn from why don't we learn from to every other case we don't say we don't say that the flavors like the substance by any other 13:24 carbon says we can't say that why the Torah already taught us revealed to us the of what does it say there says The bisara anything that will touch the blood of the caras is going to become is going to become sanctified. 13:50 What does that mean? Leosa it takes on it assumes the of the original source explains. If that carbon was pos then the carbon that it touches and it imparts flavor into will also become poser. If the carbon that it touched was also also kosher. 14:13 So for example, if you have a carbon schlum that comes into contact with a carbonas carbon has a lot more leniencies in terms of its consumption than with regard to carbonas. If the carbon the carbon kas come into contact with each other and the katas imparts its flavor into the carbonim carbon will then assume the of the carbonas. 14:34 And clearly we see from here when it comes to kachim we are going to say tomkick. In other words we have the naz which says no tokick. When it comes to nazer we say the flavor is not like the substance. When it comes to carbonas we say the flavor is like the substance. And therefore says the what's going to be the exception? The exception is going to be nazir and the rule is going to be theas. 14:56 As you could expect the is going to say how do you know which one is the rule? Which one's the exception? Maybe the rule over here is what we see when it comes to Nazir in we say there's no Tom and maybe that's the exception that's we do say Tom says no you can't learn the doubt from because as we said earlier the same exact thing 15:23 as we mentioned earlier has a novelty there's a dispensation over here that says you're allowed to go ahead and before the fact cook the whole together with the and we're still going to rely on the that's a novelty that's that that's something which is a unique leniency when it comes to we'll be able to learn it from there asked the same question we asked before 15:46 which is if that's the case if it's a novelty which is an exception to the rule we shouldn't be able to learn the proportions of 60 to1 or 100 to one from there either gives the same terrors he gave earlier which was which is we're not learning any leniency of 60 to1 or 100 to1 from Nazer that's actually quite a quite a major it's a 16:12 it's a major why we're speaking biblically we follow the concept of which tells you that even 2:1 would make it permissible we're going ahead and being mmed to say you have to have 60 to1 or 100 to one and that is certainly something we have no problem learning out from Nazar Even though Nazer is a kadesh, nevertheless, we have no problem 16:36 learning that we or should say we have no problem learning the proportions of 60 or 100 to one from there because that's not a major that's actually quite a big raven gives one more says when we pointed to and said this is a unique case where there's something permissible coming from something which is that would refer to 16:59 another. What is that? Typically the is if you have something which is forbidden which is connected to something which is prohibited and you cut off the forbidden piece the is the place of the cut remains forbidden. You have to go ahead and take off a little bit more than that. We learned about this. If you 17:27 look at Rashi, Rash points out anytime you have prohibited and permissible items which are connected. For example, we had this fetus sticks its hand out. You have an animal, a pregnant animal and the fetus sticks its hand out is even though the animal will be the the limb that came out is going to be prohibited and you have to 17:58 cut that one off. The is the area where you cut it off is also going to be prohibited. You can't eat that either. So go back to the when it comes to where you cut it off is going to be permissible. 18:17 Okay. So we have three answers as to why we still can learn the proportions of 60 to1 or 100 to1 from a nazer. Even though Nazer is unique, the uniqueness of it does not impact our ability our ability to learn the 60 to1 or 100 to1 from Nazir for one of three reasons. The uniqueness either is that even though we 18:40 typically say is not that's not true by Nazer or the uniqueness is that even though typically we say we don't say that by nazer or the uniqueness is that even though typically when you have permissible items connected to forbidden items and you have and you cut it off typically the is going to be at as well 19:04 the place where it's connected or where you cut off will be as That is only true with regard to other cases but nazir even the place where you cut off is going to be permissible. So in other words, the zahu was referring to those threeim. But we have absolutely no problem carrying over the proportions of 60 to1 or 100 to1 that we learned from 19:27 this entire forearm which is cooked together with the iser to every other case of every other is in the Torah. And therefore we can learn the 100 to1 or 60 to1 respectively according to whichever opinion you're going to follow. 19:43 Hashimi was learning this and he said he and he he he told the which is this says so again going back to yesterday's he was the one who told us it has to be 100 to one so now the says he responded responded to him and said 20:11 is that really True. You have to have 100 to one. When it comes to all other in the Torah that's not true about we have a Mishna that tells us this word is not it's with regard to what? So let's just translate these words means something which causes it to become leaven. So typically that would be you have some kind of sourdough starter. You mix it into to a into 20:40 another dough and it causes the dough to rise. Means to season to put spices on. Means to have a mixture. So with regard to which cases did we say with regard to these three scenarios? Either a sourdough starter spices or just a mixture. 20:59 When when do we say we're always going to be strict? Mindamino that is by a mixture of similar items. know again the status is going to be different. You'll have permissible items and forbidden items but the actual substance is is sim the substance is similar. 21:19 When do we have cases where it depends sometimes will be will be make or will be lenient and sometimes will be going to be strict. That's that's by a mixture which is of dissimilar items. Now the explains the we learn at the end of that when it comes to what what is the cases of being 21:49 lenient and being what's the case so gre is some type of ground beans means which got cooked together with lentils. Now in Israel nowadays if you go by barley it will say on the bag grem it's not referring to barley it was referring to some kind of it's translated as pull greashi 22:20 shall pull the truma pull some type of some type of legume some type of beans. So you have this let's just call it baked beans that they're mixing a couple beans together that what happens is you have greim which are truma. So the typical y is not allowed to eat it because it's not a co. 22:36 So you have these greim you have these truma be beans that got cooked with adashim with lentils which are permissible to be eaten. Now says the garraen if there are enough grem mixed into this dish over here that it's going to impart its flavor on to the onto the lentils. 22:56 Now whether or not you have a proportion of 100 to one in this case is it's going to be it's going to be prohibited and you're not going to be allowed to eat it if there aren't enough greas in this case to impart its flavor onto the lentils. 23:23 Whether you have 100 to1 ratio whether there isn't 100 to one ratio is going to be permissible. In other words, what's the what is the guiding rule over here? Whether or not these greim were able to go ahead and impart its flavor onto this dish. Now, you don't have enough. In other words, you don't have enough for 100 to1 ratio. 23:53 So what do you have in other words looks at it as follows and says let's just look at this is a case of because greim and adashim are not the same mint they're not the same thing you mix them together now it does not give flavor it's one of these mixtures where it does not give flavor and it says you don't have to have a a mixture a ratio 24:18 of 100 to1 so what do you have to have says the garra so Okay, you don't you don't have to have 100 to one. What do you have to have to make it permissible? The gar says so what do you have to haveishim? Isn't that teaching you that has to be shishim? In other words, this is a bay kash. 24:35 goes ahead and says no the Gar quotes this opinion of who says you have to have 100 and says do you have to have 100 and he quotes this price and this price essentially tells us that it's sufficient even if you don't have 100 to one what proportion do you have to have says 25:01 what is it doesn't that All you have to have is a ratio of 60 to top of 99 says no what you have to have is 100. 25:16 Now the says hold on if you're telling me that the beginning he's talking about whether it's 100ish the in other words there's got to be some difference between the beginning and the end the ratio. What is the ratio? Let's go back up backtrack a little bit to understand the ration the beginning of the that case was what's the case where we're always going to be strict that's 25:42 when we have a mixture of similar items and what's the case what's the example you have a sourdough starter which is made out of wheat that fell into a dough made out of wheat there's enough of that sourdough starter to cause that dough to rise whether or not you have 101 26:11 as a proportion or even if you don't have 101 is in other words makes no difference you have 10 to1 ratio 100 or you don't have 101 ratio is the fact that it is similar items and One second. And it's able to make it. 26:37 It's able to make it rise. It's going to be user. So now I just lost my place for a second. Let's just go back a second. What's the case? It's similar items. You have a sourdough starter of wheat which gets mixed into a dough of wheat is enough to be able to cause the dough to rise. 27:06 Whether you have 101 you don't have 101 it's now you don't have 101 ratio over here. Hold on. So if you don't have that proportion of 10 to1 whether it's strong enough to cause it to rise is going to be now 27:45 you telling me that both the ratio and the talking about when is 100. In other words, what's the difference? The ratio is talking about the case of Mimino and that's we're gonna go ahead and be tell you have to have this this this proportion of 100 and the we talk about exactly the same thing is low the talking when you have 101 and the is talking about when you have 100 in other 28:09 words I was going back and forth with this 101 100 the actually is quite it's quite specific the ratio is talking about when you have a 101 one to one. The sist we have 100 to one and that's the difference. In other words, you wanted to go ahead and say that it's not 100 to one, it's 60 to1. We're 28:32 saying no, the ratios where there's 100 one to one, the safest where where there's 100 to one and could still stay alive. Am I ble? 28:49 He wants them to know if you have 101 to one ratio here. Why is it not is it is the taste going to be so strong that it's going to it's it's still going to impart flavor even when you have a ratio of 100 to1. So he didn't have a good answer ultimately. So he responded to him the questioner he responded to him. said 29:14 it could be that when it comes to since the ability to cause it to rise is so strong, it's such a strong flavor. Therefore, it's going to it's it's not going to be about even 100 to one. Again this is not really today's sug but there is a concept called and one of the things that are not going to not going to become but are there are certain things which just have 29:40 such a strong taste it's it's a it's there to give flavor or something else called a mime something which is actually the the um the stabilizer of something it could be that just it imparts something too significant in other words The concept of bal always is that a certain point in time whatever was added by the isra is so insignificant that we 30:04 ignore it and that's the typical idea you have a chal and a tiny drop of milk gets mixed into the chal so the halak over there is going to be ble because whatever the milk added to the chal is so insignificant that it's not recognizable when you have a bachalant the next morning so in other words the point is that it's insignificant it's not recognizable however when you have something which is very significant It's a strong flavor. It's there to flavor 30:28 the dish. So even though it would seem to be that it's just very significant in size, but it's flavor is very strong. The same thing is true when it comes to sourdough is that since it causes the whole dough to rise, it's how could you say it's insignificant? It is what made this dough into what it is. It is what made this bread into what it is. So you can't 30:51 just ignore it. Now once he once he mentioned that he responded and said you reminded me of something which is very important taught us when it comes to proportions for they're not always going to be the same when it comes to juice that comes out of a fish 31:14 you have to have close to a proportion of 200 to one for it to be bottled for learned dog zero If you have a fish which is not kosher, the juice that comes from it from it is going to be how much Omar he says. 31:33 You have to have raas in a now when it comes to raas in a if you make the the math and the calculation of ascalavu know ascalav gudu one apha is three you know I'm talking about right alf lid v on the top and put giml v dal v on 31:55 the bottom so you have an apha is three s a sa is Six lug, right? I'm talking about a lug is four ask lugan, right? 32:18 Ask I'm losing myself over here. But by the way, ask is the assa alug a beta and then it's the numbers on the bottom. If you look at rashi, he cancels it out. Look at rashi. Let's do this together. If I had a white, this would be this would be a great whiteboard moment right here right now. Look at Rashi in raas reel. 32:40 If you have reas of fish juice from from a not kosher fish juice, I mean it's some we'll see soon. It's some some type of liquid that comes out of the fish. I don't think there's an item yet in the store called fish juice. You can go to the juice aisle and say I'll have a that was talking about of kosher fish juice. 33:13 What does that mean? It is 200 minus 8. Okay. So 192. So you see carve in other you see how he says it's to me it's not exactly 200 it's a one 92 to1 ratio now he explains is arugan one is four 33:39 is four so if you have 16 for a just does the math for you in other you have to multiply ly by by four times. Bottom line is Rashi tells you how he gets to the calculation of 192 and it follows that rule of good. You know what I'm talking about. Ever heard this before? Okay, we'll go through another time. If you want to know how these calculations work, you write the letters 34:05 ascalav on top and you put in the bottom in the middle. So one is three and you follow along with that pattern. That's the idea. But the bottom line is what do we see when it comes to this fish juice? is extracted juice from the fish. You have to have almost 200 times to go to that's point as the question. 34:34 How could you have you how could you have any you're talking about fish juice? So if you have shark juice together with salmon juice, it should never be because they're both fish. Norah says no. Isaiah is a little bit different and sear is different that because it's it's not considered to be a real substance. It's just like a sweat. It's not really 34:56 sweat. But when it comes to when it comes to juices of something being exactly like the substance we have a concept called maperos, for example, the classic example is going to be olive oil or wine. So olive oil and wine are a real significant element of the olive or the or the or the grape. 35:16 So that's not considered za. When it comes to other fruits and apple, the juice that comes through is referred as za just some type of sweat. Not sweat would gross you out. Drink a cup of apple juice. But the idea really is it's not viewed as much as may peros as it as as much as it is like when it comes to olive oil or wine. Doesn't mean that it's much squeeze on chabas. The bottom the bottom line just is that it has a different status. So now when it comes 35:39 to this fish juice, we don't view the fish juice actually as fish. It's a lower status and therefore we have room to be lenient and to say that even though typically we would say mimino is not bal here it will be b however it's going to have to have a very high proportion of 192 to one or as the gmorra says close to 200 to1 for it to become because it because it has a very strong taste 36:04 goes on if you go back to our mishna this is where this all comes from it says If you have this that was cooked together with the giranh if the giranh was able to impart its flavor onto it it's going to be now the immediately asked so how do you how do you know how do you calculate this how do you estimate this 36:33 it's like meat cooked together with this turnip that's the mishna says now back to It's like you have to calculate it with like meat which is cooked with the top of the lefus. What does that mean? Look at Rashi. 36:54 It's like it's the vegetable of of a turnip says Rashirophes. The top of this turnipo is more sweet than its tail. The tamaseros. 37:17 The flavor of the meat will be easier to impart itself on the tail end of this turnip than the top. Liftos. When it comes to the top of this turnip, ain't no nick or elabasher gum. you're going to have to have a much strong a much high much stronger ratio of meat. In other words, this is very interesting. If you are a 37:41 turnip expert and you're told to go ahead and estimate how much meat would impart its flavor into a turnip, you might say, "Hold on a second. Depends which part of the turnip. Is it the bottom of the turnip or the top of the turnip?" So, don't worry about says we calculate it based off of how much flavor it would take to get its flavor into the top of the turnip. 38:03 says our mission is very nice. However, our mission does not following does not follow the following Tana. Who is that? The Tanya for Londoner the son of Mroa says sorry the ganasha does not give any flavor at all. It just doesn't impart flavor. This whole concept, this whole idea of saying that we calculate the sciatic nerve, how 38:32 much flavor it would impart into the meat, sorry, there is no flavor that comes from it. There's this person who shut up before and have auditing at the gate. So just imagine this. You have you have a yeshiva and inside yeshiva you have who's learning. And if sitting outside the yeshiva at the gate 38:58 when this person left the shul the yeshiva said to him what happened inside you clearly went inside to ask what did he tell you? He told me he permitted me to do this. So what did he permit me to do? He must have been asking him whe whether if he cooks a uh 39:23 meat together with giranha how should he go ahead and calculate whether it's going to be permissible he said no problem nothing to worry about there's no flavor that comes from so if told this the questioner go ask him again so the guy said okay fine no problem when he went to ask this question said 39:45 hire He said, "What are you coming back to ask me again? Is there someone outside sending you back in to ask me all these questions? Who's bothering me outside?" That's what he said to him. Who's bothering me outside? Go back to that guy who's sitting outside sending you back in to ask me this question. Go tell him unequivocally does not give any flavor and stop sending people back into asking these 40:16 questions over and over again. Okay. So he was insisting that that's and they would come to ask this question he would say you know what I don't want to answer the question. So it's Arab Shabas a woman calls up and says ami I have a problem and by mistake the ganasha together with my chalant what should I do you know what he would say he would say good shilah I don't really want to ask answer this question right 40:44 now go call up the famous in town his name is he's and he is much more make with regard to this call him which is actually a very fascinating concept in as to when you're allowed to do this. In other words, sometimes a person will call with a shilah and you know it's a very consequential shah in your opinion 41:09 the is it's going to be asser you realize once they ask you the question they got upsak it's inappropriate and sometimes even asser to go ask the sh again once you get ups so sometimes a r will say very good shilah the truth is go ask soand so rv down the block he he's a he's a bucky in these areas so instead of telling the guy that it's 41:32 user you go Tell someone to ask this happened to me recently. Someone asked me a shila. I knew my opinion I'm going to be mir. I said to him there's a r in town. His name is Rab so and so. I think you should ask him the shila. Now we 6:42 we only have three minutes left. And this is a whole she in and of itself as to at what point of time he could tell someone to go ask someone else the shila. But ultimately we see a precedent from here that didn't want to answer the 41:56 question and say it's user. He said go ask. He himself didn't hold it. We pass actually that a gan does not impart flavor onto anything. So if you cook it together something else, there's not going to be a problem. However, if you look at Rashi, Rashi wants to make sure we don't lose ourselves over here. 42:24 Whether it was cooked whether it was salted whether it was roasted you take it out says the shamo the actual g itself the nerve the sciatic nerve itself doesn't have flavor the fat that surround will indeed give flavor if you didn't take the fat away from it 42:50 first then it's going to be so then you're not going to gain anything but this is a specific with regard to the just the without it. We'll stop here for today. Have a wonderful day and a wonderful Shabas.
Expand transcript 6,274 words
