We're learning here in Masechet Shabbos דף ו עמוד א. So let's go through the beraisa here: תנו רבנן ארבע רשויות לשבת. The beraisa tells us that there are four domains on Shabbos, four reshuyos: רשות היחיד, רשות הרבים, כרמלית, ומקום פטור. And then the beraisa goes through to tell us the dinim. איזו היא רשות היחיד? It says, what's a רשות היחיד? And the beraisa gives a few examples of what a רשות היחיד is. Then it says, after it finishes the examples, it says: זו היא רשות היחיד גמורה. That's a רשות היחיד, that's a real רשות היחיד. Then it goes vayter: ואיזו היא רשות הרבים? What's a רשות הרבים? Gives us examples: איסטרטיא, פלטיא גדולה, a big, big square, ומבואות המפולשין, plaza, מבואות המפולשין is, you have streets that are open on both sides to רשות הרבים. זו היא רשות הרבים גמורה, that's a רשות הרבים. Then it tells you the din: אין מוציאין מרשות היחיד זו לרשות הרבים זו, you can't carry from this רשות היחיד that we mentioned to this רשות הרבים or the other way, and if you did, this is a real issur de'oraisa. If it's beshogeg, you're chayav a chatat, bemezid, you get karet, sekilah. Then it goes: אבל

ים, בקעה, והאצטונית, והכרמלית, but a yam, the ocean, or a valley, or איצטונית, it's like these porches in front of the stores, and the כרמלית, which the Gemara later says comes to add, what does it mean? A קרן זוית, a certain corner where people do get in, but not the real... All that, אינן לא כרשות הרבים ולא כרשות היחיד. That's not either, that's the כרמלית. The din is, you're not allowed to carry—yam is a כרמלית? Yam is a כרמלית—and you're not allowed to carry from the כרמלית to a real... To a רשות הרבים or the other way, but you're not chayav, because it's only miderabbanan, so you're not chayav. And then there is a case of a מקום פטור. The reason I didn't read the examples is, it's not noge'a to the inyan. Comes the Gemara later on דף ו עמוד ב, and the Gemara says: ולחשוב נמי מדבר! When it gives a list of the רשות הרבים, why doesn't it count the מדבר, a desert? דתניא, because we learn in a beraita: איזו היא רשות הרבים? Another beraita says, what's a רשות הרבים? איסטרטיא, פלטיא גדולה, a big square, a big plaza, ומבואות המפולשין, and the street which is open on both sides for public, והמדבר! And the מדבר! אמר אביי, Abaye said: לא קשיא, no kashya. Because here it seems like a contradiction between the two beraitot: our beraita doesn't mention it as being a רשות הרבים, and this other beraita mentions it. If our beraita would hold that this was רשות הרבים, it would mention it. So the Gemara answers: לא קשיא, כאן בזמן שישראל שרויין במדבר, כאן בזמן הזה. One beraita is talking when the Yidden are were in the מדבר, those years when the Yidden were in the מדבר, and one beraita is talking nowadays. And

Rashi explains: בזמן שישראל שרויין ישבו במדבר, חשיבא רשות הרבים. When the Yidden were in the מדבר, it's a רשות הרבים. בזמן הזה, now, אינו מקום הילוך רבים, the desert is not a place where public people go, דהילכך מדבריות לא שכיחי, it's not common for people to go in the desert, and therefore now it's not a רשות הרבים, and what is it? It's a karmelit. Okay. Comes Tosafot, and Tosafot says: כאן בזמן שישראל שרויין במדבר, that a מדבר, when we say is a רשות הרבים when Yidden were in the מדבר, משמע קצת, משמע a little bit, דאין רשות הרבים אלא אם כן מצויין שם ששים ריבוא כמו במדבר. That just like in the מדבר you had 600,000 people, so too, when is it, when is any רשות הרבים a רשות הרבים? Only if it has 600,000 people. Now this din, this Tosafot is a big controversy amongst the ראשונים. Tosafot holds like that, Rashi holds like that. Rashi actually in Eruvin—this is שבת דף ו עמוד ב, Rashi in Eruvin דף ו עמוד ב, מן הסתם, also says the same thing—that we learn out from the מדבר that when is it a רשות הרבים? When you have ששים ריבוא. And based on that, according to this opinion, nowadays it says there is no real רשות הרבים unless, I don't know, Times Square maybe, or and so on and so forth. And it's not only Rashi and Tosafot, there are other ראשונים also hold like that. Then you have other ראשונים who argue. The Rambam is accepted to hold that you don't need ששים ריבוא, because the Rambam doesn't mention it. He The Rambam says הלכה. If the Rambam would hold you need ששים ריבוא, he would mention it. He says: איזו היא רשות הרבים? And he goes through: איסטרטיא, פלטיא גדולה, goes through רשות הרבים, doesn't mention ששים ריבוא. The Rashba doesn't hold like that, other ראשונים also don't hold like that. If you look in Mishnah Berurah in the ביאור הלכה on this din, fully מסביר all kinds of you know a lot of things he's מברר in this whole this שיטות. Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch brings it. In the new Shulchan Aruch, where they have the מראה מקומות on the bottom, they bring all the... He brings all the מראה מקומות with all the ones that hold like this, hold like that, the machloket. So let's just think, what is the sevara behind the machloket whether we learn out from the מדבר, that just like in the מדבר you had 600,000, you have to have 600,000? Now, l'chorah the peshat simple is that those that don't learn out from the מדבר is because the Ritva says in Eruvin, the Ritva says... that we only learn out from the מדבר major things, not the amount of number, not such a small number, how many people have to be. So mimela, not every little thing you're going to learn out from the מדבר. Mimela, we can't learn out the amount. The one that says that we do learn out from the מדבר is the סברא פארקערט, there's a sevara to say that since it's a place of רבים, what's called רבים? How do we define רבים? Since we have no place to define it, and the Torah would not let it, you know, להיות סתום, you know, not to know, so the only number that we find where we find a רשות הרבים is the מדבר, and there was ששים רבוא. So you have sevarot, I hear sevarot, you hear you could you could, otherwise, now we talk about the sevarot, what is the reason behind the two שיטות whether you learn out from the מדבר or not. Now,

according to the Rambam, we could even say even another a a much more simpler ביאור why the Rambam holds you don't need ששים רבוא. Why? Explain it. The Rambam בכלל has a very strange shittah here. The Rambam, when he says the list of רשות הרבים, he mentions what it says here, איזו היא רשות הרבים: פלטיא, פלטיא גדולה, the plaza, and מבואות המפולשין, and המדברות. How wide? Isn't it mentioned? No, wide, yeah, the width is mentioned as sixteen, Rambam mentions it, yeah, definitely. But he says המדבר is a רשות הרבים. Kenst farshteyn! Everybody is, who says the Rambam holds this? The Gemara said clearly not! The Gemara said that the baraita where it says that the מדבר is a רשות הרבים is only בזמן שישראל שרויין במדבר, when the Yidden were in the מדבר. בזמן הזה, it's not a רשות הרבים! So it's not a רשות הרבים, so how how so how does the Rambam say it's a רשות הרבים? And there's the mefarshim, the עיקר מפרשים on the Rambam talk about this. What they bring is the פירוש of Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam.

Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam explains his father, explains the Rambam, and he says that my father learned pshat in the Gemara the opposite of Rashi. Rashi The Gemara didn't say which is which. The Gemara just says one baraita is when the Yidden were in the מדבר, there are two baraitot. One baraita says the מדבר is רשות הרבים, and from one baraita it comes out the מדבר is not a רשות הרבים, כרמלית. So the Gemara says one is talking when the Yidden were in the מדבר, one is talking when the Yidden בזמן הזה. So Rashi says, as we learned before, that בזמן that in מדבר that's when it was רשות הרבים, בזמן הזה, it's not. If you learn like that, you've got a problem with the Rambam. How does the Rambam say now, it tells us now that מדבר is רשות הרבים? So he said, my father learned the pshat opposite. When the Yidden were in the מדבר, it was not a רשות הרבים, and בזמן הזה, it's a רשות הרבים. Why? And he explains why, and he says like this: very strange, I'm just saying this, and I'm going to come into the, the Rebbe in the Reshimot asks a very strong, not strong, asked and and on this pshat. He says, when the Yidden were in the מדבר, each one had his דגל, each one has his מחנה, everyone had his place, so people didn't roam around to other places, so it wasn't like it's a public. Nowadays, there are nothing מסודר, nothing there, anybody could go. Now, the fact that you don't have many people going, obviously, the Rambam holds that you don't need ששים רבוא. So the Rambam holds like this: כאן בזמן שישראל שרויין במדבר, it was a כרמלית, and כאן בזמן הזה, it's a it's a רשות הרבים, because בזמן הזה anybody could go. So you learn that the Rambam, this is the way he says. Now, according to this, we could understand why the Rambam doesn't learn the דין of רשות הרבים the ששים רבוא from the מדבר, because according to the Rambam, the מדבר was not a רשות הרבים, obviously! So you couldn't learn out from there that it was a רשות הרבים, according to the way that Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam learns. But this only answers the Rambam, but there are so many other, like the Rashba, who learns pshat in the Gemara here like Rashi, and still he argues on Tosafot and Rashi and holds that you don't need ששים רבוא. So there must be other sevarot, so we said this sevara before. Besides that, the whole peshat of Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam No, there's not a nafka mina here. It would have it would have been a כרמלית, it wasn't a רשות הרבים. Does the Gemara say that? The Gemara didn't say anything, the Gemara said that כאן כאן is talking about a כרמלית and a מדבר. It didn't mention the word כרמלית! The Gemara didn't even mention the word כרמלית! The Gemara said, how come we didn't mention רשות הרבים? The other ברייתא says רשות הרבים. This ברייתא does not hold it's a רשות הרבים. Rambam Hello! We're saying it's a כרמלית. But the Rambam will say, the Gemara answers the ברייתא which says it's a רשות הרבים is בזמן הזה. The ברייתא which does not mention רשות הרבים is that it's not a רשות הרבים. Now, we're saying it's a כרמלית if it's not a רשות הרבים, but then then those years it wasn't a כרמלית, it didn't have the דין כרמלית. But, and even that, it's not so pashut, the peshat of of Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam. I mean, they all ask, you have the Chasam Sofer, you have the Merkavas HaMishnah, they all ask on his peshat. The Rabbi in the Reshimot, that's what I'm going to discuss a little bit, asks also, he says, what's the peshat in the מדבר it wasn't רשות הרבים because they were were מסודר with their מחנות, so, so not all 600,000 roamed around all over. But the Rambam holds you don't need 600,000. So what do we care when there were so there were 50,000 in one מחנה, so why is that not a reshus harabim? In other words, what's the sevara that because they were מסודר was it asur to go? I mean they have all kinds of other pshatim. The Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam is a חידוש נפלא'דיק פשט. So his פשט בכלל we were saying that Rambam is based on the way the pshat in the Rambam why he learns not to you don't need ששים ריבוא because he learns pshat in the Gemara the opposite. Who says he learns the opposite? Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam. But most mefarshim don't learn like that. So עכ\"פ, I'm not asking a she'eilah. There's boundaries. The Rambam says there are boundaries. So therefore? Those are limitations. It's the opposite of what a reshus harabim is. So not a reshus harabim? No. It's it's almost like private property, and that was the whole thing about מה טובו אהליך. That's the houses, the tents. But it was clearly if each No, right, so that place where they had all these מחנה מחנה יהודה should have been should have been a reshus harabim. But the whole desert was No, but that מחנה יהודה, that's what No, the whole desert, no. that's where they were in, not the No, so each each מחנה itself, why wouldn't it be a reshus harabim? So within the מחנה Yeah. wasn't either, it was Between boundaries? Everyone could go in the streets, whatever streets they made, everyone could go there, and all the people of מחנה יהודה could go. The emet is people of other מחנות could also go. Some say it's an issur to go, everyone could go. But they didn't. Mila they didn't, people didn't. All kind of kushiyot, different Nobody lives in מדבר, that's the only Yeah, right, but he's saying farkert. So that's why, that's why He's saying now it's a reshus harabim. Why? Because everyone could go. Everyone could go, not live there. Live there and go Well, who cares? There they also could go! It's reshus harabim, reshus harabim means nobody live there. You have to reshus harabim you don't live? You could live in reshus harabim. No. יסוד רשות הרבים is everybody goes and comes, there is no It's a סתם רשות הרבים! It's a סתם רשות הרבים, going is a סתם רשות היחיד means that you live there. Reshus hayachid doesn't mean that. You don't have to live in a reshus hayachid. Reshus hayachid means live? No. You don't have to live, but that is רשות היחיד is an area whatever has four four walls and it's גבוה עשרה טפחים, ד' על ד'. Correct, so when you do that? When you live in it. No, in the street if you have a pole sticking out, it's also a רשות היחיד. Who is doing it? When מ'מאכט אזא זאך? No, because it's private. There is there is such a thing as living בעיר של רבים, but that's And רשות היחיד is in public and all Yidden were in public, how would you be bending the same time in a...? Mefarshim talk about that also. If they were there, so a pshat, some talk about this. What about the rest of the? Besides this, even according to Rashi's pshat, pshat pshat. So they want to say that because of the Yidden the whole, he's saying that even according to Rashi's pshat, it was a רשות הרבים because they were there. But they didn't live in the whole מדבר, they lived in a certain section. What about the rest of the מדבר? So הפשט as you learn, פשוט means that area, only there where they live. But some say not, because of them and the תגרי אומות העולם used to come there, merchants used to come, so m'meila it made the whole מדבר. Some say not. But that's already a different discussion. So to get to this inyan a little bit more, let's discuss this Rambam. So this Rambam is a פלא'דיקע Rambam where he says that the מדבר בזמן הזה is a רשות הרבים, which seems to be פשוט פארקערט than what seems פשוט'ע פשט in the Gemara. So we have the pshat of Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam, the other pshatim. But here I want to bring in in the רשימות there is a whole רשימה on this Gemara. And the רשימות, he says a new pshat. Different pshat. And he's מחלק between which מדבר we're talking about. There's the מדבר הגדול, that's the מדבר where the Yidden went. The מדבר הגדול is not fit for people to go. Why? Because it's very dangerous. ארץ נחש שרף ועקרב צמאון אשר אין מים, no one goes. There's a Midrash, it quotes a Midrash, there was once a שיירא, a whole group of people went in this מדבר and they got swallowed up by a snake, by snakes. It's a, so people don't go. So in the מדבר הגדול there's a difference between now and בזמן בזמן and בזמן the Yidden were in the מדבר. When the Yidden were in the מדבר, the מדבר was ראוי for people then. They protected the the the ענני הכבוד, they made it, so then in that time, the מדבר was a רשות הרבים. בזמן הזה that that מדבר is not a רשות הרבים. A regular מדבר is always a רשות הרבים, never different. It's always a רשות הרבים. The Gemara is לכתחילה talking, that's the way he טייטשט, that this Gemara which makes according to the Rambam, we're saying פשט in Rambam, that according to the Rambam when the Gemara makes a חילוק between מדבר בזמן שישראל במדבר ובזמן הזה, he's only talking about מדבר הגדול. Good, falls like a פשט. The only question that I have on this פשט is: לפי זה, why doesn't the Beraita which gives a list of רשות הרבים mention מדבר according to this? If we're learning a regular מדבר, this is an exception of a מדבר where the Yidden went, but a regular מדבר is למתכונתה and that's how we say the Rambam learns, is always a רשות הרבים, was was and is, that's no difference in times. So when the Gemara asks the kashya, let him count the מדבר, So we're back to the question now, if we learn that pshat. So why doesn't the מש- the ברייתא count the מדבר as a רשות הרבים, cuz the מד- as as the Rambam does? The Rambam goes says the same לשון more or less like the ברייתא. What's a רשות הרבים? אסטראטיא, פלטיא גדולה, מבואות המפולשין and a מדבר. And according to this pshat, what does he mean? He means a regular מדבר, not the מדבר הגדול. So if you learn that's a regular מדבר, so why is it taka not written here in the ברייתא? Now lichora let's analyze this. Lichora you could ask the same kashya even according to Rashi. When Rashi says that בזמן הזה it's not a רשות הרבים, it's a כרמלית. So I have another she'eilah. Why doesn't the ברייתא mention as a כרמלית? The ברייתא mentions כרמליתן? So why doesn't the ברייתא mention מדבר? Now that's not a kashya. Mefarshim talk about this, because the ברייתא lechatchila does not mention every כרמלית. The ברייתא does not mention every כרמלית, whatever a כרמלית is. And the ברייתא didn't even say איזו היא כרמלית. By רשות היחיד it says זו היא רשות היחיד, by רשות הרבים איזו היא רשות הרבים, by כרמלית it didn't say איזו היא כרמלית, it just mentioned a few things are כרמלית. Give examples. It give examples. So mimeila and and therefore if it's a כרמלית, it's no problem. So according to Rashi there's no problem. But according to the Rambam, now you could ask, according to the Rambam the way the רבי learns in the Reshimot, you have a you have a kashya on why doesn't the Gemara means the braita mention it? Now let's ask a kashya even not according to this, according to the peshat of Rabbi Avraham ben HaRambam, why can't you ask the same she'elah? According to Rabbi Avraham ben HaRambam, that nowadays, the Rambam learns בזמן הזה it's a רשות הרבים, so you have the same she'elah! Just like the Rambam mentions it, why doesn't the braita mention it? Well, that you could answer. But since it's not always the same, since this thing changes, it used to be not a רשות הרבים, according to him, in the בזמן שישראל במדבר it was not a רשות הרבים, now it's a רשות הרבים, the braita doesn't want to mention. Only something that's concrete. But לפי זה, but the, so this you could answer. But according to the רבי, how could you answer? According to the רבי's peshat in the Reshimot, that he says that a regular מדבר is always a רשות הרבים, it doesn't change, so why didn't the braita mention it? Right. That's a regular מדבר. And you can't say it doesn't mention it because not the, not every מדבר is the same. That's not an answer because that we do. When we have things, certain things are a כרמלית, certain things the same thing in a different מצב has a different דין. Take lemashal, the braita mentions like this: מבואות המפולשות, if you have a מבוי, street which is open on both sides לרשות הרבים, it's a רשות הרבים. The same מבוי if it's not open, it's not a רשות הרבים. And the Baraita mentions it. The Baraita mentioned מבואות המפולשות רשות הרבים, and in the כרמלית it mentions חצירה של רבים ומבואות שאינן מפולשין. Then No, here. There are two different things. You have to make an eruv or whatever. So you do mention things if one situation like this, one situation like this. So if a regular מדבר is always a רשות הרבים, ממילא if you say you can't make a concrete din because that it could change. But something that doesn't change, according to the Rambam, according to this pshat, it's always a רשות הרבים, a regular מדבר, it just changes which מדבר, okay? That you do, whether it's like this, like this. So then why doesn't he mention it? Okay. So with the she'ela here, why doesn't he mention in the Baraita, according to this pshat, why doesn't he mention מדבר as a רשות הרבים, the way the Rambam says, a מדבר רשות הרבים, and not like Rabbi Avraham ben Rambam's pshat? Is this supposed to be an exhaustive list? These are the only things that can be רשות הרבים, yeah, seems like. It says איזו היא, and then it

says זו היא רשות הרבים גמורה. So, so l'chorah you could say like this here. Sort of like this. We know certain things are רשות הרבים, certain רשות היחיד. Want to say that there are certain things, there's a certain thing or things which is the original real רשות הרבים, and then there are things which have a din of a רשות הרבים. But that's not, have the same din of a רשות הרבים, but that's not the real רשות הרבים. So L'mai nafka mina? We'll see a nafka mina here maybe, but bichlal, even if not. I'll give you an example where we find this. Like an ארבע אמות בפרהסיא, opposed You could, you want to say, could be. But there, maybe, maybe that's an example. The Gemara, when I said before that the Gemara mentions the כרמלית, when the Gemara says ים, בקעה, איסטוונית, והכרמלית, and the כרמלית! The Gemara asks here: and the כרמלית? אטו כולהו דאמרן לאו כרמלית נינהו? They're all כרמלית! The Gemara answers, כי אתא רב דימי אמר רבי יוחנן לאתויי קרן זווית הסמוכה לרשות הרבים. The כרמלית comes to add another כרמלית. What's the other כרמלית? That if you have a house which is a corner, there Rashi means two pshatim, if you have a רשות הרבים, then you have the houses on the side. What happens if one house is like a little bit more in, so there is empty space, and when people are crowded they come in, that's סמוך לרשות הרבים. Now that is a כרמלית. It's not a רשות הרבים, even though that רבים could go in, because that's not a regular רשות הרבים. So the Gemara says that the word והכרמלית comes to add this case of קרנות זוויות. Comes the Baal Hameor here, interesting Baal Hameor, the Baal Hameor says, yeah he brings the גמרא, כלומר זו היא עיקר כרמלית שגזרו עליה חכמים, that's the that's the real כרמלית חכמים have decreed, משום דזימנין דדחקי רבים, sometimes people are crowded, ואזלו להתם ומתחזי כרשות הרבים, so it looks like a רשות הרבים, ושוויוה ככרמלית, it's only a כרמלית because לית ניחא תשמישתיה, וכולהו הנך אחרינייתא, and all the other כרמליתים, משום לא תסור דהא גזרו בהו, because of this one, וזו היא עיקר הגזירה. So we see by כרמלית, it's not the same, כרמלית is derabbanan, but we see there is what is the עיקר כרמלית, and then the other things which is not the עיקר, it's like okay it's it's a it's a טפל on the כרמלית. The same, we have sometimes things which even if mid'oraita, because this is miderabbanan, you can say derabbanan made one and then they made another. Even mid'oraita, there are certain things which is the עצם הדין and certain things which is not the עצם הדין. And this also we find in different places, in one place where the Rebbe also explains something very interesting, he brings the Zohar in Parashat Behar, that an עבד עברי goes out in Shmitah. Very interesting. A Zohar, it doesn't make any sense. An eved goes out in שמיטה? יובל. יובל goes, yeah. It says ובשביעית יצא לחפשי, the seventh year doesn't mean שמיטה. Seventh year from when he was sold, what שמיטה? What does going out in שמיטה? So he says, who says that an eved goes out in שמיטה? Zohar, Zohar. So he says a peshat, there are certain dinim which the Torah said that the עצם הדין is this way, and then the תורה לכתחילה that it not always if it come out this way and still the din is like, but that's like a a secondary din. Bediavad. And he brings the example of of of sefirah, for Shavuos. Sefirat HaOmer we know there is whichever day of the week it starts you count sefirah. The צדוקים said it has to start on Sunday. The Midrash says שבע שבתות תמימות תהיינה, אימתי הן תמימות, when is the ספירה תמימות? When it starts on Sunday. What, the Midrash talks like the צדוקים? But that's what it says, when it starts on Sunday then it's temimot. In other words, it's not temimot? Every year it's temimot. So the peshat is, it comes with a chidush, that the Torah tells us certain dinim, that be'etzem the din is if if the weeks of sefirah fit with the weeks of the with the days of the week. The first week of sefirah is full week, the second week. The Torah said that even if it's not, I still want you to count sefirah, that's already a tafel. The same thing says here: be'etzem, the ענין of going out of the עבד עברי, if it comes out the seventh year is שמיטה, a dacht zich that the best that is that's the real esek. If it doesn't come out, also. He brings other דוגמאות. Gives an example of korbanot. Yom Tov, it says by Torah, what makes Yom Tov? The korbanot. When there's no korbanot, there is no Yom Tov. It's still it's it's talking other things. But then, but lema'aseh, and then at the end he says, דצריך עיון למאי נפקא מינה. Yeah. But lema'aseh, it's no nafka mina. The bottom line is there's still Shavuos, and it's still He gives, by the way, for example, Shavuos is זמן מתן תורתנו. What happens if Shavuos comes out on ז' or on ה'? Because the Gemara says פעמים בה', פעמים ב-ו', פעמים ב-ז', because of the קידוש על פי הראייה, so it didn't come out, even though it's זמן מתן תורתנו, and באמת על פי הלכה then, they didn't have they wouldn't say זמן מתן תורתנו. They wouldn't say in Shemoneh Esreh, when it came out not on ו' they wouldn't say זמן מתן תורתנו. Yeah. Ah? That, there has a nafka mina, yeah. But לפועל, לגבי the kedushah of the Yom Tov, there is no nafka mina. I want to say, I'll use this as an example here, I don't know if anybody says, don't see anyone say it, maybe it could be it's בבא מעשיות, it could be it's שטותים, but that there is a רשות הרבים, and there is a secondary רשות הרבים, which is also רשות הרבים, and there could be נפקא מינה להלכה. Where What Where do we see this? There is a Chacham Tzvi, brings the Rashba. The Rashba says like this: We say סרטיא ופלטיא is a רשות הרבים, it's a big square, ומבואות המפולשים is a רשות הרבים. If it's a road, a מבוי, it's a private street, but if it's open on both sides, it's a רשות הרבים. See, the Rashba says that איסרטיא, פלטיא גדולה, even if דלתותיה נעולות בלילה, even if you close the doors at night, it's still a רשות הרבים. A מבוי המפולש, if you don't if you close the doors at night, it's not a רשות הרבים. And he says, I don't understand the difference, they're both a רשות הרבים. Not even when it's open? Even when it's open, right, because it's So he comes and he explains, he says like this: The peshat is that the איסרטיא, פלטיא גדולה belongs to everybody. It's it's property, which means that it's the public. So there, if it's a רשות הרבים, we don't care if it means that דלתות דלתותיה נעולות. A מבוי is private, it belongs to the people who live there, it doesn't ela mai, since it's open both sides, people can pass by, people go through, it's a רשות הרבים. So he says, so there it's not the same. So there, if there's a time when it's closed, it's not a real רשות הרבים. He doesn't really go to explain lichora what's what's the peshat, what's what's the chiluk, so it belongs to them. So I'm trying to say maybe this is the peshat. The real רשות הרבים is איסרטיא, פלטיא גדולה, and this is secondary, and I'll explain why. We taytsh always that רשות הרבים means מקום הילוך הרבים, that's how we taytsh. It's not so pashut. There is a in the back of Frankel's Rambam, there is a peirush, called פירוש קדמון from Mitzrayim, somebody, an early peirush, and he says what's a רשות הרבים? Where you have שליטת הרבים. שליטה, the שליטה, the the the control of the רבים. So lichora you could say like this: to be a רשות הרבים, there are two conditions, two things to make something a רשות הרבים. Number one, it's I don't know number one or number two, הילוך הרבים, people go there, or ישתמש, and then the baal־batishkeit of the רבים. What does that mean? Well, in this case you see clearly. איסרטיא, פלטיא גדולה belongs to the רבים, so baal־batishekeit of the רבים plus it's a מקום הילוך הרבים, so it has both If it has both conditions, that's a רשות הרבים. The מבוי, it doesn't that's what the Chacham Tzvi says, doesn't belong to the רבים, ela mai it's הילוך רבים. If it's הילוך רבים, it's one condition. So as long as there is one condition, this condition it is still a רשות הרבים, but it has a דין of a רשות הרבים. It's not as good It's not as good, as a strong רשות הרבים as that. But and therefore, here, if you close it at night, and you take away the baal־batishekeit of the other and don't let them go, it loses the רשות הרבים. If you don't close it at night and they could go always, passt azoy. But what we really want to say is that there are three דרגות. There's the דרגא of איסרטיא, פלטיא גדולה, that's the real רשות הרבים. This דרגא of this מבוי המפולש is also רשות הרבים, because even though it only has one condition, but the other condition is there a bissel, quite a little bit, because the fact that a רבים goes there, the fact that the רבים goes already gives them a certain בעלות. They go with with רשות. They don't go against the רשות. People don't If they don't want they can they can stop them. At least this this they cannot stop. Rabbi, after they got it! After they got it, that's something else, yeah. But it says, because מקום שהחזיקו בו רבים, that's something else. I mean, but they got permission, they didn't come like גנבים, they came, because when they started going they could have stopped them, so they got רשות. So this is, but it's still not the same as a regular איסרטיא, פלטיא because it doesn't belong to them. The property will never belong to רבים. Huh? The property will not belong Yeah, it never belongs to the רבים. So this has one condition, the איסרטיא, פלטיא גדולה has two conditions. That's רשות הרבים. This מבוי המפולש has doesn't have the second condition completely, it has a little bit. Then we have a third case, where it only has a baal־batishekeit of the רבים, and it doesn't have the הילוך הרבים. That has one condition. That's where you will have a מחלוקת between the Rambam and the rest. A מדבר. A מדבר is not a מקום הילוך הרבים. The Rambam The Rambam will not argue against Rashi in Metzia. Rashi says אינם, בזמנם אינם מקום הילוך הרבים. הילוך במדבריות לא שכיחא. So it's missing the הילוך הרבים. It has the condition that it's public. So here, so other Rishonim, practically most Rishonim say, that if it has the two conditions, Farshteyt zich. If it has one condition, the condition of הילוך הרבים and a little bit of the רשות, that's But if it has only the רשות and doesn't have the הילוך, that's not a reshut harabim. And the Rambam says, I feel that even if it doesn't have the הילוך, it still is. But it has to be ראוי לרבים. Otherwise why is it a reshut harabim? So that that everyone says, it has to be ראוי for the רבים to go. If it's ראוי for the רבים to go, and even though they don't בפועל go, it's very לא שכיח, but since it's ראוי לרבים and and they have the first condition, so since it's all based on the fact that it means שליטת הרבים. So there is a the שליטה that the רבים has, because they have the זכות there, they have the right. Mimela that's the difference, and now I'm going back to the Rebbe's pshat, that's the difference between מדבר הגדול and a regular מדבר. מדבר הגדול also belongs to רבים, but it's not ראוי להילוך רבים like it is in a מדבר סתם. משא למעלה ממשוי. This is exactly a reshut harabim. Why is it reshut harabim? Ya ya ya, ya, ya. That was when I was in the מדברות. Also from ya, that's what you got to learn. To have the 16 אמות? Ya, it's a מבוי, ya. So, so it's like this, and this is the pshat in Rambam that the Gemara he learns makes a chiluk between בזמנינו and the time of the מדבר, it's talking about מדבר הגדול. Because in the time of the מדבר, ספק if it was a רשות הרבים, nowadays it's not a רשות הרבים. Even the Rambam will agree, normal agree. Why? Because it's missing a full-fledged condition, and it's not even ראוי לרבים. A regular מדבר is missing the condition of הילוך רבים, but it's ראוי לרבים. The Rambam holds ראוי לרבים because other Rishonim hold ראוי לרבים is not enough, it has to be בפועל הילוך רבים. So, it comes out like this, that the סרטיא ופלטיא גדולה that's the real רשות הרבים. The the case of מבואות המפולשים is close to it. The מדבר, according to the Rambam, is also a דין רשות הרבים, but it's definitely missing the that's the real רשות the one it's all it's missing the real רשות הרבים. Be'etzem it has a דין רשות הרבים, he said, but it's not a real רשות הרבים. And therefore, this, I'm going to answer why the Rambam the ברייתא doesn't mention according to the Rambam, because the ברייתא says, after it gives the examples, it says, ״הרי זו רשות הרבים גמורה.״ גמורה. Clearly רשות הרבים גמורה, it is not. It's a רשות הרבים, but it's not a רשות הרבים גמורה. And the that's so the Rambam doesn't write the word גמורה, but the Rambam brings Ah? בלשון גמורה? It is מן התורה. Why did בלשון גמורה? Because as much as I said it's a second level, but it still has part of both conditions: one fully and one This doesn't have one condition at all. And that halachadik difference between סרטיא ופלטיא and and מבואות המפולשין comes from Rashba? That Rashba, ya, ya. That's why there's חילוק in הלכה. But you still could throw it under the category of גמורה. But the מדבר, even according to the Rambam, the מדבר cannot go under the word גמורה. Because it's missing this ענין of הילוך. Could a כרמלית be a a רשות הרבים? Could you? A common, would be common It is a כרמלית. Ya, desert is a כרמלית. No, it's not according to the Rambam, according to the Rambam it's a רשות הרבים. It's just a According to the Rambam it's a רשות הרבים, but like a כרמלית, no. No, it's not a כרמלית with כרמלית, no, it's more It's It's It's something that has a דין of a רשות הרבים. So you'll be חייב בחטאת? בחטאת, if you throw it there, חייב סקילה. How is it a רשות, what kind of a רשות is it? How to wish this? It's it's it's the person that's if you want to use other words, the גברא will have to behave like in a רשות הרבים. By the גברא, not by the חפצא? Ya. Not that the object is a that, but the person has to behave like in a רשות הרבים. Uh? Ya, ya, ya, that's the main thing. So, the רב actually believe that is a חפצא. There is no In the answer of why one ברייתא to the other, it turns around the around the Rambam. No, like this, not like a Rambam and the Rambam, it's like the Rebbe knows this. This is the pshat of the Rebbe in the Reshimos. This is the pshat. I'm saying not a cover on the Rambam. The Rambam is learning how the Rebbe says, that the Gemara makes the chiluk between the פלוגתא במדבר and nowadays in the מדבר הגדול. A regular מדבר, the Rambam says, is a רשות הרבים. And everyone agrees with it. And everyone agreed. Ya, according to the Rambam. And the she'eilah by me, kushya on this רשימה, when I is that, why, according to this, doesn't the the beraisa say it? So, I'm saying because the beraisa says הרי זו רשות הרבים גמורה, כי גמורה you can't say it's not by them. גמורה you can't say on this. And that's why the beraisa doesn't make, even though there's a דין רשות הרבים. So, I'm trying to get to Now, based on this I just wanted an interesting he'arah. In in Manhattan, builders, developers, get special rights to build big buildings if they create a plaza for the for for for for for the public. But that part is always open. The public has a right, but one day one day a year, they close it. Oh, really? To show that it's ours. To show No, to show ba'alut. They didn't lose and wave their ownership. It's not the בעל בתישקייט of the of the of the כלל. Not the בעל בתישקייט. It belongs to me. They don't lose it to adverse possession. Right. Ya, right. They don't lose it to adverse possession, right, because of this. Good example. So, this fits right in Fits in, ya, exactly. If it's there If not, let it go through, then it means you're mochel, and you give it up. So, it only has a דין רשות הרבים. What's over there? Ya. It has a דין רשות הרבים. Thousands of people go through every day. If you need 600,000, that's it's not that, but that's not... But at least there's a hiluch. Ya, they're not once a year, close up every night. Well, de'oraita is the ננעל בלילה, but if it's once a year, I don't know if it's Somebody closes it, it's probably Probably security, though. Who does it? It doesn't belong to anybody. Right, belongs to everybody. If they close it for security probably, though. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's nothing personal. If they close at night, it's for security reasons probably, though. No, but even for security reasons, it loses by not by פרטי פרטי, by מפורש מפורש. But I just want to get to now, so it comes out like this, that the real רשות הרבים is if it's hiluch and בעלבתישקייט, בעלות. Between the two, which is the ikar? Hiluch is definitely an important part of it. No, לאו דווקא is the Because if you have the other one without the hiluch, you can't No, that's what I said. The other one without the hiluch. But if you have the hiluch, because the hiluch has a little bit of the other one also. That's why, why is this second better than this third? Because if you have the hiluch and you go with permission, you have a certain ba'alut, certain ba'alut, because it belongs, even though it belongs to you, but it doesn't belong to you, but you could use it. So mimela it's not that peshat that it doesn't have, because the reason why that's better, because it has a little bit of the second also. But this, but when you have both, mamash both, which one is the ikar? Mamash, the regular case, רחבה פרטית גדולה. You can still break it down the other way. How could it be the ikar if you have that and none of the hiluch and then it's no good, or even a little is No, because you have to have both. No, with hiluch you can have a little bit of ba'alut and it works. Yeah. No, because then you don't have the other. If you have ba'alut without hiluch, you don't have it at all. If you don't have it, you don't have it. You can have a little bit of Maybe then it would be good, ta'ake. What I'm saying is if midbar is לא שכיחי. According to the Rambam, Rambam said it's still, but not according to the Rambam. If we learn we ta'ake both of the shittot say midbar is not, even though it's ראוי לרבים, because people don't go. So the hiluch No, you don't stand there forever, it's לא שכיחי. What's the difference which is more stronger? Oh, so I want to say, this will be the What? Yeah, yeah, according to the Rambam it's clear, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. But not according to the Rambam. What I'm saying, so you could say that if you learn the main thing is the hiluch, so when the Torah gave us the גדרים of the רשות הרבים with the hiluch, it didn't say what the רבים is. But if it didn't say what the רבים is, we got to find it ourselves. Where do we find that some number? So we find שישים ריבוא in the midbar. But that's only if the ikar is the hiluch. If the ikar is then the other way, the בעלבתישקייט, and how many people, and the people going is like a תנאי, then you could say the Torah didn't have to give us because that's not the עיקר נקודה of what we're dealing with. So just coming back to the beginning, that was the מחלוקת whether we learn out from the midbar or not. If the ikar is the hiluch, then we assume that the Torah told us what the hiluch is. If the ikar is not the hiluch, אז ממילא that we have to, ikar was the fact that it belongs to that's a public thing, that's obviously public, and that whatever hiluch we don't have to, so ממילא לאו דווקא we have to have a רבים. Either the she'elah will be how much? That's takeh a she'elah, what's considered a רבים? In the בית המקדש, I mean, forget, no halachah lema'aseh. But those other שיטות that say you don't need שישים ריבוא. But at least we know why the Torah didn't have to give us, and we don't say that the Torah made We don't have to learn out from that number, because it's not because, yeah. Correct. Yeah, Rabbi. We should get this. We should get the Reshimot here. We should get Reshimot here, yeah. How many are there? How many are Depends which set. Some have six volumes, four volumes. Depends how they print it. It's been reprinted many times. It's good to have here.