Here in the Gemara on דף ד', שבת דף ד'. We get a chance to ask more questions, of course. Make up for the people who are not here. The Gemara talks about two concepts. The Gemara brings a machloket between Rabbi Akiva and the חכמים, and in connection, I'm not going to go into it, but in connection to that the Gemara brings two types of concepts. One Here it goes. What was? Huh? Said you weren't feeling well or something. Well, this is out to sea, and it's getting better. So there are two concepts. One concept the Gemara discusses is the inyan of קלוטה כמי שהונחה. I'll explain it in a second. And one concept is whether ילפינן זורק ממושיט. We know that the

beginning of Shabbos talks about the מלאכה of הוצאה, מלאכה of carrying. There are all kinds of parts in the מלאכה of carrying. You have הוצאה, you have הכנסה. הוצאה means when you carry from רשות היחיד to רשות הרבים. Then you have when you carry from רשות הרבים to רשות היחיד, it's הכנסה. Then you have a מלאכה called מושיט. מושיט is a different type of מלאכה. If a person passes over something, takes something, starts, picks it up in a רשות היחיד, passes over to another רשות היחיד, but he passes it over a רשות הרבים, that's a מלאכה. Is that the literal taytsh, pass over? מושיט means to hand over, not passes, to hand over. That's the מלאכה of מושיט. Why is there a מלאכה like that? Because that's how it was in the Mishkan. In the Mishkan they used to have the wagons, and they used to have the קרשים, the boards, the walls. And you had two קרשים, two wagons, I mean, and the לויים would take from one wagon to the other. And the way they were standing next to each other, in the middle, in between, was a רשות הרבים. And the לוי would pass, hand over, one of the boards, the boards from one wagon to another. So what they did was they took from רשות היחיד, you have to keep in mind the details here, from רשות היחיד to another רשות היחיד over the רשות הרבים. The Beis Hamikdash? Not the Beis Hamikdash, this is the Mishkan. The area where it was was a רשות הרבים. This was outside. The interesting part of it is that this was passed over the רשות הרבים למעלה מי' טפחים, higher than 10 טפחים.

Normally we know a rule that the רשות הרבים עולה עד י' טפחים, and רשות הרבים starts from the ground, only goes 10 טפחים. On top of the on top of the 10 טפחים is a מקום פטור. It's a place that's פטור, that פטור from what? Pardon? If a person will carry something from a רשות היחיד and put it down on that area, he'll be פטור. And or if a person will take something from that area and put it down in the רשות היחיד or in the רשות הרבים, you'll be פטור, it's called a מקום פטור. So, רשות הרבים only goes till 10. So הוצאה or הכנסה, when you carry out from רשות היחיד to רשות הרבים, in order to be חייב, it has to be under 10 טפחים. You put it down under 10 טפחים. Or the opposite, if you carry from רשות הרבים to רשות היחיד, you're only חייב if it's under 10 טפחים. The חידוש of this דין מושיט is that when you pick it, when you hand something over from a רשות היחיד to a רשות היחיד, passing over the רשות הרבים but למעלה מי' טפחים, higher than 10 טפחים, you are חייב. Well, that's a different story whether only or also. In the Mishkan was certainly over 10 טפחים. Tosafot and all, all the ראשונים have a whole שאלה, what about under? We're not going to get into that, but that's another she'eilah here. That's if you're handing But l'ma'alah if you're taking it and passing it over, handing it over, that's the melachah of moshit.

What happens if you didn't pass it over, you threw it over? Now, a regular case of hotza'ah, or hachnasah, or any other type of issur of carrying, like l'mashal, another issur of carrying is carrying something ד' amot in רשות הרבים, throwing is exact same din like carrying. If a person will carry, throw something out from the רשות היחיד into the רשות הרבים, you're chayav for hotza'ah. If you throw something from the רשות הרבים to the רשות היחיד, חייב for hachnasah. If you throw something in the רשות הרבים, you pick it up and you throw it ד' amot, and it falls, so the same thing as if he would carry it ד' amot, all the same. The she'eilah here in the Gemara is, and that Gemara makes a machloket is, whether ילפינן זורק ממושיט. In the case where you throw from the רשות היחיד to another רשות היחיד over the רשות הרבים, למעלה מי' tefachim, are you chayav also zoreik like moshit? Because the whole moshit is a chiddush. And it's from the Mishkan, so the Mishkan was only moshit. What? So it was, so the she'eilah is if since the Torah, from the Mishkan we know that moshit is chayav, what about zoreik? So there is a שאלה in Gemara, and there is a machloket whether ילפינן, means we learn out זורק from מושיט, which means we compare throwing to handing over. Just like handing over from a רשות היחיד to to a רשות היחיד over the רשות הרבים on top of the 10 טפחים you're chayav, so too if you do the same thing throwing. That's one machloket here, one שאלה. Then

there's another machloket, whether קלוטה כמי שהונחה. If you take something from a רשות היחיד, and you throw it into the רשות הרבים under 10 טפחים, do we say that when it flew over the רשות הרבים, or inside the רשות הרבים in the air, קלוטה, it was נקלט, it was absorbed in the air, is it considered as if it stopped? קלוטה כמי שהונחה. It's mamash as One sevara is it's mamash as if it stopped. So, therefore, if a person takes something from a רשות היחיד, throws it over the רשות הרבים, and goes to the next רשות היחיד. So, it started in the רשות היחיד, finished in the רשות היחיד, but it passed over the רשות הרבים. So, one opinion is קלוטה כמי שהונחה, that if it was there, it's as if it landed, and you are chayav. We're going to get into that. And you are chayav. Why should he be chayav? Chayav for because you took it from רשות היחיד to רשות הרבים. Because if it landed, if it it's like it landed in the רשות הרבים, so you did an עקירה in רשות היחיד, took it to the רשות It went to the רשות הרבים and it כאילו it landed. So, if it landed, you're chayav for הוצאה. And there is a sevara that we do not say לא אמרינן קלוטה כמי שהונחה דמיא, we do not say that if it goes through the air, it's as if it landed. And you are not חייב. So, these are two machloket. Tosafot says that the one that holds קלוטה כמי שהונחה, cannot hold ילפינן זורק ממושיט. We said two two things. If you hold that if it goes through the air it's as if it stopped, you definitely cannot learn out the case of זורק from מושיט. Why? Because if we're considering it as if it stopped in the middle, so when you throw it from רשות היחיד to the רשות היחיד over the רשות הרבים higher than 10, higher than 10 is a מקום פטור. And if we say קלוטה כמי שהונחה, that means it's as if it stopped, so it's as if it stopped in a מקום פטור. What would be the דין if you take something from רשות היחיד to a מקום פטור? You're פטור. You're פטור. So מושיט, where you didn't stop in the middle, since you're taking it with your hand, it didn't stop, so there's a special דין. Special דין that if you take it from רשות היחיד into רשות היחיד over the רשות הרבים higher than 10 טפחים, that's חייב. But a זורק is completely different, because it stopped in the middle. Right. If you do not hold קלוטה כמי שהונחה, if you do not hold that if it goes in there that it should stop, then throwing it is the same as מושיט. Just like מושיט, when you take it from רשות היחיד over the רשות הרבים למעלה מיו״ד טפחים, higher than 10 טפחים, and you put it down, you're חייב, throwing is exact it's compared the same. What's the difference if you handed it or threw it? But if you hold קלוטה כמי שהונחה, that means that when it you throw it out, so then what happens is that it's as if it stopped, and since we're talking about higher than 10 טפחים, so it stopped higher than 10 טפחים, so you made a הנחה in the מקום פטור, so you should be פטור. So Tosafot says clearly, gives this sevara, that if you hold קלוטה כמי שהונחה, you cannot hold ילפינן זורק ממושיט, you learn out זורק from מושיט. Comes the Tosafot, then comes the Ramban, and the Ramban says it's not true. You could hold קלוטה כמי שהונחה, and when it goes through the air in the רשות הרבים it's as if it stopped, and you still could say ילפינן זורק ממושיט. Aye, we how could you learn out זורק from מושיט, even למעלה it's as if it stopped? If it goes higher than 10 טפחים, we do not say as if it stopped. The whole דין of קלוטה, let's call it קלוטה, the דין that is קלוטה כמי שהונחה, that if it goes in the air as if it stopped, is only למטה, is only within the 10 טפחים, only in the רשות הרבים. Over the רשות הרבים we do not say קלוטה. And it seems from Rashi that Rashi learns the same way, because Rashi says here And when you say מושיט, you're always talking above 10 טפחים? Well, מושיט is above 10 טפחים, but there is a שאלה in Tosafot if the same דין would also be למעלה, למטה instead of under, but it's also over. Rashi here, when Rashi says that when we talk about קלוטה, so Rashi says it must when are you חייב by קלוטה כמי שהונחה? Only if it goes from רשות היחיד to the רשות הרבים lower than 10. So פשיטא why? Because lower than 10 is a רשות הרבים. Higher than 10 is not a רשות הרבים, אלא עבר מקום פטור. מקום פטור, ואפילו קלוטה ליכא, there is no קלוטה. Rashi doesn't say that the reason why if you throw it on higher than ten, you're פטור because you it landed in מקום פטור. Rashi says because you don't say קלוטה. So here we

have a machloket between Tosafos and Ramban and Rashi, that Tosafos learns that the whole concept of קלוטה כמי שהונחה, which is a חידוש נפלא, קלוטה כמי שהונחה, it goes through the air, it's as if it's stopped. We only say this so Tosafos says we only we could say it also למעלה מיוד. The difference is, if it's למטה מיוד, we say it landed in the רשות הרבים, if it's למעלה מיוד, it landed in מקום פטור. But the concept of קלוטה כמי שהונחה we apply also to higher than יוד. And the Ramban and Rashi learn that we do not say the concept of קלוטה כמי שהונחה if it's למעלה מיוד. The question is why. That's what we have to understand. What is their machloket? They agree that below, yes? Huh? Well, if you hold קלוטה, that's what you hold. If you hold קלוטה, it means you hold that it's stopped. But קלוטה is written in Gemara under יוד. What's the What's the What the קלוטה where So we have to understand what קלוטה is בכלל. So two things we have to understand here. Number one, we have to understand what is the מחלוקת בכלל, whether we say קלוטה כמי שהונחה, whether we say it, which basically the she'eilah is not what the machloket is, the she'eilah is what's the reason of the מאן דאמר who holds that we say when it goes into the air, it's as if it stopped? What kind of logic is it? That's one thing. And the second thing is to understand what is the machloket between Tosafos and the Ramban and Rashi whether we say this concept, קלוטה, for whatever reason we say it, whether we say it only under ten or we say it למעלה מיוד, which is higher than the רשות הרבים, in the מקום פטור, we also say it. That is the she'eilah. What is the machloket here? So obviously, in order to get to understand the whole thing, we have to understand the concept of קלוטה כמי שהונחה. Why is it like that? So What is it? So as you know by now,

from many, many times in the shiurim, we have the inyan that whenever the Gemara says that one thing is like something else, we have mainly the two ways to learn. Mamash. Mamash. Al derech like by shlichut. Yeah, shlucho shel adam kemoto. A shaliach is like the meshaleach. The question is that there are two ways. Basically there are three ways, but there are mainly two ways. Do we say that it means that even though the shaliach is not the meshaleach, the Torah says he is, shlucho shel adam kemoto mamash, or we say no, shlucho the shaliach does not become the meshaleach, but if he's not a meshaleach, how does it work? קודם if a guy has to מקדש an אשה, he has to do it, not somebody else. The Torah was mechadesh that if you appoint him as a shaliach, even though he's not you, whatever he does, the Torah says no problem that it's not you, it still works. That's the two ways. Or you say that he becomes mamash It's a big chiddush. Just by the way, which one is a bigger chiddush, the first way or the second way? Ah, it's good, we can play it both ways. Both ways. The bigger chiddush seemingly, the first, that Shimon becomes Reuven. That everything But on the other hand, but after but after Shimon becomes Reuven, that's a big chiddush, but after he becomes Reuven, so then no problem, no chiddush that it works. And the other way is farkert. Shimon doesn't become Reuven. Vadai, that's that's nothing, that's not a chiddush, he doesn't become. But how could somebody who is not Reuven and nevertheless it works? I mean that's that's the bigger chiddush. Is this only when he does the maaseh? Yes, only Right, not not the other he's the shaliach the whole way. Oh, beginning to I mean, he is like Reuven, Shimon is like Reuven the whole way. That's a different שאלה, if it's בכל כלו. That's a שאלה. And and as I always say, this is not only a she'eilah by shlichus, every time we have two things are like We already in Kiddushin, the Gemara had a sugya, שוה כסף ככסף. Something has a value of money is like money. So we have the same she'eilah, does it mean that it becomes like money, or do we say even though it's not money, it still accomplishes the same thing? Which if you want to use the real words for it, if you say it's mamash the same thing, it's חיובי. It becomes the same thing. The other way, it means שלילה, which means that even though it's not, which mimeila there is a problem, the Torah says we don't care about the problem. In that case, the problem doesn't doesn't bother us. We take care We we overlook the problem. That's It's like a shlichus. The first way is the Torah said the the shaliach, which is Shimon, becomes Reuven. It's a psak. The Torah made something. The other way is Shimon didn't become Reuven. But then there's a problem, he's מקדש the אשה, he's not Reuven, how does it work? The Torah says, in this case, we don't care if he's not the guy. The problem we don't care. And this goes in any case where we have the she'eilah, does it become mamash, or even though it's not, nevertheless the same thing? The Rogatchover has this שאלה בנוגע, I guess we know to be chayav when you eat something treifah, you have to eat a kezayit. But if it's a בריה, if it's a whole creature, whole insect, you're chayav even if it's very little. So he has a she'eilah: is the peshat that Torah made that a בריה is like a kezayit, or the Torah said even though it's not a kezayit, you're still chayav? All right, what's the nafka mina? No, he brings up nafka minot in this case. Yeah, yeah, this is And the same all over. שוה כסף ככסף is a she'eilah, טעם כעיקר, wherever we go. Do you remember we learned in Pesachim also? In Kiddushin and Pesachim. Remember by Pesachim when it says that chametz is not really yours. When it comes Pesach, chametz is אסור בהנאה, so it's not yours. But if it's not yours, how are you עובר on בל יראה ובל ימצא? So the answer is, the Torah made it like yours. So the same she'eilah: Is the pshat that לגבי בל יראה the Torah says chametz is not really yours, but we make it yours, or the pshat is that even though it's not yours, because you didn't do anything before Pesach to get rid of it, you are chayav as if it would have been yours. Like even though it's not yours, you're still chayav. Whatever it is, but we find the same thing. The she'eilah is only whether the chiyuv, no? It's still a chiyuv. Well, chiyuv, one is more on the שלילי point of view, שלילי. Well, they make you chayav, that's. Good, but the she'eilah is: Are you it, or you're not not it? You don't have the chesaron of this type, so. Two negatives make a positive. But in this case it doesn't. There is no problem like or not. Now, if we say it by every case where we have כ, why is it automatically here too: קלוטה כמי שהונחה, that if it's in the air, it's like it stopped. So you can learn the same two ways. Does it mean, yes, it stopped, we're saying that when it's in the middle of the air it stopped, or we saying in the middle of the air it didn't stop? Takeh it didn't! The din is, just like when you make a hanacha normally you're chayav, here you're also chayav even though it didn't stop. Now you have to have a biur for each way. Why would you learn like this? Can you just tell sorry, can you just tell me a case of like of where someone could have thrown something and said, \"Ah, with that קלוטה כמי שהונחה\"? So I gave the example, you weren't here in the first part. Someone picks something up in a רשות הרבים, right, in a רשות היחיד, throws it to another רשות היחיד, but it passes over רשות הרבים. So it passes and it falls into רשות היחיד? רשות היחיד. Ah, okay. Now, if you say קלוטה כמי שהונחה, that means that it stopped in the רשות הרבים. And you put it at ten at ten טפחים and it's still No, no, למעלה is ten טפחים. That's if he's למעלה. This is right under ten טפחים, and it flew through the רשות הרבים. If you say קלוטה כמי שהונחה, that means that you made an akirah, you picked it up in a reshus hayachid, and it stopped in the reshus harabim! You're chayav for it! But if you don't say קלוטה כמי שהונחה, then it didn't stop. Then it started in reshus hayachid and finished in reshus hayachid, so you're patur. That's the that's the case we're talking about. So how do we explain both ways? One way to say קלוטה כמי שהונחה means it's mamash as if it landed. And one way that בפירוש it did not land, and the Torah, what we mean to say the halachah is, just like when you are מניח, you put it down you're chayav, you're chayav here also. So let's start with the second way. And this all goes back to what we were talking about many times. The מלאכת הוצאה is a מלאכה גרועה. Tosafos says it's not a real melachah. It's a melachah really, but it doesn't have the quality of a melachah. Why doesn't have the quality of a melachah, we said? Because every melachah has a change. When you cook, you changed something, you created something. Hotza'ah is not, you took it from one reshus to another, nothing changed. Okay. So that's what Tosafos says, we would not learn it out from the Mishkan, we would we have to have a pasuk for it, all kinds of things. Fine. Then the question I asked: So why takeh are you chayav? Why is it takeh a melachah? Are you chayav because we have the לימודים, but why is it a melachah if it doesn't have the quality of a melachah? So I said, that's where akirah and hanachah comes in. That's why there's a din that in order to be chayav for carrying, you have to pick it up from one place, in one reshus, and take it to another and put it down. Then it's as if you made a change, because, I said, in theory, in abstract thinking, or which word did you use? Conceptual. Conceptual, when something is laying on the on on on the floor, let's say, it's not only laying on the floor, it's as if it became part of the floor. נקבע in it. And when you pick it up, you are as if you're uprooting it. That's why we use the word akirah, we don't use the word הגבהה, you should have said the Gemara should have used picking up and putting down. עוקר, you're tearing it out. Fine. And that's why this melachah of hotza'ah is a melachah. Okay. Now the question is, why do we need a hanachah for? If you pick it up from the floor, you're already uprooting it from its reshut, and then you take it into the next reshut, even if you didn't put it down you should be chayav, because there's a shinui already. The whole idea we're looking for a change, there's a change! Before, it was part of the רשות היחיד, let's say, and now you picked it up and you took it away, it's not רשות היחיד anymore, and you took it out into the רשות הרבים, so there was a change from what before and now. Why is there a din that you also have to have a hanachah? So, there are two ways you could say. You could say, well, the Torah wanted you

should have a hanachah, why? Because as long as you didn't put it down, it's not called a real change. When you picked it, you oker it from the original reshut, you take it down the second, and you put it down, which is basically as if you're planting it in, then it's a full-fledged change. Or you could say no, be'emet, picking it up itself, akirah itself is just as good. Akirah, you pick it up, you take it into the other reshut, it's already a change. The problem is, why is not a real change, because there is something wrong here. Since you picked it up to this reshut with your hand, so now it's in this reshut in your hand, and it's still in your hand when you're taking it out. So really, really, in theory, it never left the original reshut till you get rid of it, till you put it down. So it's not because you need an hanachah in order to fulfill the shinui, to make a real melachah, because since it was in your hand, that holds back from the shinui, from the change really taking place. I'll just give an example, not a real example, but something that just a mashal, not a mashal, but there's, by a get, there's a din, and if you throw a woman a get, and there is a string attached to it, and you are holding the string, and the get is in her hand, she's not divorced. Why? Because it's still in your hand, although the get is in her hand, but the Gemara says it's not called כריתות. Right. By get, it has to be cut off, and it it never really cut off because sof kol sof, there's still a connection to you. So I'm just using an example. When you pick it up, so you took it away, but since you picked it up with your hand, and that same hand that you picked it up in this reshut is here, and it never went out of your hand, it never really, really left. There's something missing in the leaving of the first reshut.

When are you chayav? When you put it down. So these two ways is the two ways of of of bichlal of how you look at the hanachah. One way, you need a hanachah as a positive thing. In order to be chayav, you have to have an akirah, you have to have a hanachah. And the second way is the reason you need the hanachah is because if you don't have hanachah, there is something that's spoiling the shinui. Since a melachah is a shinui, there's something that's not letting the shinui The real shinui that's making the melachah is akirah. So, akirah makes it. But there is something that's holding back from the akirah really working, because it's still attached, because it's still in your hand. Yeah, so there so you so what happens here, you don't have both. You don't have either. So you still have it connected, and you're taking it out. So then, in order to get rid of the חסרון, the problem that the hand does, that's why you need hanachah. Now, the difference between these two ways is pashut. If you'll learn the second way, what happens if it came into the You made an akirah, and it came into the other רשות, but it didn't come with your hand? Would you need, then, to have hanachah? No, you'll be chayav just like in the normal case you're you're chayav when you put it down, here you're chayav even though you didn't put it down. The same way you're chayav in the normal case when you make a hanachah, here you're chayav without a hanachah. So now you could learn like this.

What are we talking about? קלוטה כמי שהונחה. What is קלוטה? You picked it up, and you threw it. When you threw it, what happens? It left your hand, and it came into the other רשות. Who says you need a hanachah? So you don't need a hanachah. That's why you're chayav. So it's not the פשט קלוטה כמי שהונחה means that when you threw it in the air, the peshat is כמי שהונחה, you're chayav because this is called a hanachah, this made a hanachah. No! So what is it? Because if you threw it, there is no problem if there is no hanachah. Like we say by the case of sheliachut, that's it, the other way. Shaliach, one כמותו, means it became. The other way is not. But normally, if it's not the guy, is a problem. Here it We don't care about the problem. Here, we don't care about the problem that there was no hanachah. That's the פשט כמי שהונחה. Not that it is hanachah. That's one way to learn. According to this, you don't really need a hanachah. You can transfer from one hand to the other hand No, the other hand is the same person. But if you would transfer to another person, maybe. Yeah. But if you threw it in the air, you did like this, what if you No, but if it's going to your other hand, it's automatically still Well, you could say that. I mean, it's still part of you. You never got rid of it. But if you throw it away, then you get rid of it. But the

reason why we need akirah and hanachah was that's what they did in the mishkan and something called No, no, well, that we went through other shiurim. It's not pashut. Even if it did It's true that they did in the Mishkan, but that's not enough reason. Why? Because they did in the Mishkan so many other things that they did in the Mishkan. The Gemara says that a melachah is only that was in the משכן חשיבות. They walked in the Mishkan, too. They they they walked when they made stopped by the Mishkan and they did all kinds of things. They spoke. Maybe that should be a melachah. Everything that was in the Mishkan is a melachah. There's a logic that if it's in the Mishkan and it makes sense that this should be a melachah, then the chachamim understood it is a melachah. But just because it was in the Mishkan, that's not an answer. So if akirah and hanachah has no logic, that's why I explained it in other shiurim. If there's no reason for akirah and hanachah, just it was in the Mishkan, it doesn't work. Has to be some What's the logic? The logic is that akirah is the one that makes it. How about a figure only has an akirah once you have a hanachah? Because if you pick something up in your own property and you put it right back down, then there's no there's Right, because you didn't Because you have to do a hotzaah. You have There is no akirah until you put it somewhere else. Not because there's no akirah, there is an akirah, but there is no hotzaah. Oh, okay, no hotzaah. Hotzaah has to be the purpose. Transfer of reshut is certainly part All right, right. So, but if you have an akirah in your reshut and make an hanachah in the other reshut, why? So I'm saying two two sevarot. Or a reason because you taake need an hanachah, because otherwise the akirah normally you need an hanachah. If you learn like that, then you have to taitch קלוטה כמי שהונחה that if it flew in the air and it's like an hanachah because that's called an hanachah, it's a positive hanachah. We'll get to that in a second, what's the sevara. And the other way you don't have to say it's like hanacha. If it's פירש not, but we don't care if there's no hanacha because there's no chesaron. Now

let's see, if you learn like this, we have in Gemara a machloket whether we say קלוטה כמי שהונחה. What would be the other sevara? If you learn that the whole reason why you need an hanacha is only because otherwise the hand is the problem, so if it goes in the air there is no problem, so why would there be a sevara ולא אמרינן קלוטה כמי שהונחה, that we do not say? So I'll tell you what the sevara is. The sevara could be because when you throw it, it still never left you. The fact that it's flying in the air, it's flying with your koach. How is it flying? The כח הזריקה, since you picked it up and you threw it, that it's it's How how long is it flying there? Depends how much koach you put in. And when your koach wears off, it falls, because naturally objects can't fly in the air, they fall. So there's your כח הזריקה. So the machloket is like this: whether we look at the כח הזריקה also as part of you, and memeila you still need a real hanacha and the hanacha in the air is not enough, because it's not No one said it's an hanacha. Ela mai, there is no problem. So one of you says there is a problem. Just like by the hand there is a problem, there's a problem in the flying too. And the one that says קלוטה כמי שהונחה is the pshat that when it flies, it's already you threw it away, it's not considered connected to you, while if you take it out with your hand it is. So if you fly, you say קלוטה כמי שהונחה. Even if the first According to the one who holds, even if it is your power that makes it go, the whole problem we had before with with with holding onto it was that I'm still in control of it. Not I didn't say with control, it's still connected to you. It's still connected to me, fine. And here also it's you're still in it. I mean, I see what you're saying, that's why the one that holds קלוטה כמי שהונחה, but I see the sevara of the other one that says that it's still not enough, you gotta get really 100% no connection to it. Like doing, we start a fire and, you know, you're responsible for that, or you shoot an arrow, we still Yeah, I would agree with you, but going through it flies that it's still connected. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It doesn't leave your Yeah. We that we learned and spoke about אשו משום חציו last week. Right, right. Yeah. Now

according to the second way that you need a real hanacha pashut because otherwise it's not a real shinui until you have an hanacha, so then what's up with קלוטה כמי שהונחה? So here there's all kinds of sevarot in mefarshim, but I think a sevara like this which you might it's a very abstract sevara, but you might, you know, might accept it or not, based on things that the Rogatchover says, that when something flies in the air, really what's happening? It's not flying. It's stopping and going, stopping and going, that's how it works. But it goes so fast that you can't tell. That and and that's really there's a she'eilah. Is it all one המשך? Or is it like a נקודות נקודות? That's the Rogatchover's לשון, נקודות נקודות. Or we call in Chassidus ratzo v'shov. Right. That's ratzo v'shov. When something we say המחדש בטובו בכל יום תמיד מעשה בראשית, the Aibershter makes this continues, but it's stopping and going, stopping and going. But why? How come we don't see the world stop? Because it's so fast that you don't see. The same thing here. It's stopping and going, stopping and going. What gave me that idea once is just stam, it's it's going to sound stupid, but when they had I remember I once someone gave me a little booklet. Like when you go like this Yeah. you see the cat moving. Yeah, yeah, pictures. Why? Because each picture is it moved up further further, and when you go fast, so really they're separate things, but when you go fast, it's moving. Like a filmstrip. That's a filmstrip, exactly! They are little little pieces. How can you be חייב for for the ד' אמות in רשות הרבים? Huh? You're never going ד' אמות. So that's a שאלה בכלל of קלוטה כמי שהונחה, how you How is שייך ד' אמות? Throwing you mean? No, carrying No, carrying you're not stopping. Ben Azai holds. Anyway, Tosafos, they ask Tosafos on דף ח' asks a shaila, according to Ben Azai who says מהלך כעומד דמי, how is this, and Tosafos וכן קלוטה, according to the one that says קלוטה. But that has nothing to do with this pshat or that pshat, whichever pshat you're saying. Whatever פשט קלוטה כמי שהונחה is how do you have the issur of זריקה ד' אמות ברשות הרבים? But Tosafos says, I'll read you what Tosafos says. So Tosafos says in Yerushalmi says if you jump, anyway. But here Tosafos says because because Gemara says הזורק ד' אמות ברשות הרבים, הלכתא גמירי לה. הלכה למשה מסיני. וכן קלוטה לרבי עקיבא אף על פי אף על גב דכמי שהונחה דמיא, הזורק ד' אמות ברשות הרבים חייב, ולא אמרינן כמי שהונחה תחת ד' אמות ברשות הרבים, because הלכה למשה מסיני. That's that's a שאלה, זייטליכע שאלה, a side shaila. So I want to say that if you hold קלוטה כמי שהונחה, The second way is that כמי שהונחה means it taka stopped. We said two ways: כמי שהונחה, or we don't care if it didn't stop, or it taka stopped. If you learn like this, this is the pshat. As it's flying in the air, we consider it stopped. How? You don't see it stop, because you don't see it. The only shaila usually when it stops it needs to stop on a something which is ד׳ על ד׳, so the Gemara brings a ra'ayah from קלוטה that you don't need ד׳, that that מ״ד holds he don't need ד׳ על ד׳. Like it stopped, right? Like it. So in this case, why, like it stopped. We only call it like because you don't see it, but be'etzem, it's m mamash stopped. And like you say, שלוחו של אדם כמותו. The other way not. So according to this, what is the machloket between two if you hold that קלוטה כמי שהונחה means that it has to mamash stop, what's the machloket whether we say קלוטה כמי שהונחה or we don't say קלוטה כמי שהונחה? Well the one that says קלוטה כמי שהונחה holds it's like it stopped! And the other one that says no, it's flying in the air, we don't look at it as it stopped. That's pashut. So we have two ways here. So again, one way is that קלוטה כמי שהונחה means it didn't stop, but it's still chayav because we don't need the problem, we don't need an הנחה, and the other way, קלוטה כמי שהונחה means it take stopped. If we learn that the peshat is it take stopped, then what's the chiluk if it's למטה מיו״ד or למעלה מיו״ד? Wherever it goes, it stopped! Wherever it flies! Ela mai? למטה מיו״ד, you're chayav, because it's רשות הרבים. למעלה מיו״ד, you're patur, not because there is no קלוטה! Not because there's we don't say קלוטה כמי שהונחה. We say קלוטה כמי שהונחה there too! But but it's patur, makom patur! So you're patur. According to the other way, that we say קלוטה כמי שהונחה, it didn't stop, אלא מאי, דקלוטה כמי שהונחה because we don't care if it if it didn't stop, you're still chayav, that only applies in the case where it's למטה מיו״ד. But למעלה מיו״ד, where it's a מקום פטור, how does הנחה fit there? We don't say קלוטה כמי שהונחה there. There's no קלוטה there! Because the whole taytsh of קלוטה is when there's a שינוי רשות, so when it goes into another רשות, בעצם, the moment you made an עקירה, and you took it into another רשות, that's enough. But the hand is the problem. But when you throw, there is no problem. Going into a מקום פטור is not called going into another רשות. It's only When is the the עקירה itself called when it goes into another רשות. A מקום פטור is not going into another רשות. Why not? Well, if you hold a מקום פטור בכלל is no רשות, certainly. Even if you hold it is, but it's a רשות that you're פטור. Let me explain: there is a שאלה, we know that a מקום פטור you're פטור, is a מקום פטור called a רשות or not? You can say two things: a רשות is only רשות היחיד and רשות הרבים. Why is everything else a מקום מדאורייתא, that's all we have and then we have a מקום פטור. רבנן came, and things which are called a מקום פטור, they divided into that. Some things of a מקום פטור, they turned into כרמלית, which is also מדרבנן, and some they left as a מקום פטור. So you could learn one way, and that's not called a רשות. There are only two רשויות. The rest, which doesn't fall doesn't qualify for רשות היחיד, doesn't qualify for רשות הרבים, is not a רשות! And that's why you're פטור when you carry. The לשון of the Mishnah on דף ע״ג, which goes through the list of the מלאכות, and one of the מלאכות is carrying, know what the לשון is? It doesn't say המוציא מרשות היחיד לרשות הרבים. המוציא מרשות לרשות! And there is a שאלה, let's explain it, a שאלה, מחלוקת המפרשים, הכנסה, which is the other way, from רשות הרבים to רשות היחיד, is it an אב or is it תולדה? Is it the same as as רשות as הוצאה? Or is it an offspring? You're chayav anyway, but it's an offspring. Normally, when you learn המוציא מרשות לרשות, it doesn't say from רשות היחיד to רשות הרבים. From any רשות! So whether it's היחיד to רשות הרבים, רשות הרבים to רשות היחיד, it's all כולל. And what about מקום פטור? It's not a רשות! So if you learn it's not a רשות, it makes sense. The Torah didn't ask for from רשות היחיד to רשות הרבים. The Torah said you cannot carry from one רשות to another. Which means you can't carry from רשות היחיד to הרבים, רשות הרבים to היחיד. A מקום פטור is not another רשות. What about רשות היחיד to רשות היחיד according to this? Well, that's מושיט. That's a new מלאכה. That's not in that's that's a תולדה of הוצאה. That's not a that's not הוצאה. It's not a So, that's one way to learn. The other way you could learn is that מקום פטור is a רשות. It's a רשות that you're patur. But it's a רשות. Actually, if you look at the simple לשון of the Gemara on דף ו׳, תנו רבנן: ד׳ רשויות לשבת. There are four רשויות לשבת. And what are they? רשות היחיד, רשות הרבים, כרמלית, ומקום פטור. So he calls them also רשויות! So it seems like it is a רשות. But other places, it's mashma that it's not called a רשות. From this לשון המוציא מרשות לרשות, if this is a רשות, you should be chayav to carry carrying from רשות היחיד to מקום פטור, both are a רשות. Why is a מקום פטור, it's another type of a רשות? But anyway, and there are more re'ayot from לשונות of Rashi and לשונות of Tosafot, the two ways whether a מקום פטור is a רשות or not. So if a מקום פטור is not a רשות, so certainly you can't say קלוטה כמי שהונחה, because the whole sevara of קלוטה כמי שהונחה is that when it goes into another רשות, you don't need the hanacha. If it goes without the hand, you don't need the hanacha. So if you threw it from רשות היחיד through מקום פטור, so if it's not a רשות, you need the hanacha in order to be chayav, to make it landed, and this was no hanacha. And and you say there is no chesaron that there is no hanacha, there is a chesaron, because you never went to another רשות. But if you learn a מקום פטור is a רשות, but still you could say it's still not included, because it's a רשות that's patur. So it's not really a difference. When do you say that by picking it up and taking into another רשות, that's already enough be'etzem as a shinui, the only problem is if your hand, but that shinui is only if you go from one רשות to an opposite רשות. But if it goes from the רשות to a מקום פטור, which is not a setira, no contradiction to it, that's not called a real שינוי. So it comes out like this, that if you learn קלוטה כמי שהונחה that it's you don't need the הנחה, so the קלוטה כמי שהונחה only applies in רשות הרבים or רשות היחיד. מקום פטור, it doesn't apply. If you hold that קלוטה כמי שהונחה means pashut physically that it stopped, it applies to מקום פטור also, and that could be the machloket between Tosafot against the Ramban and Rashba. Tosafot says, like we said before, that you cannot say קלוטה that we do say קלוטה כמי שהונחה if it's למעלה מי׳. And therefore Tosafot says, if you hold קלוטה כמי שהונחה, you cannot say when you throw it, ילפינן זורק ממושיט. זורק is when you throw from רשות הרבים רשות היחיד to רשות היחיד over the רשות הרבים למעלה מי׳, Tosafot says, if you're going to say you're chayav, it can't be. You can't hold קלוטה. Why can't, because if קלוטה means that it stopped, it stopped in the middle of למעלה מי׳, it stopped in the מקום פטור, how could you be chayav? So Tosafot learns that קלוטה כמי שהונחה means it mamash stopped. If it mamash stopped, by מקום פטור we will say the same thing, it mamash stopped. So if it mamash stopped, so how could you say קלוטה כמי שהונחה and say when you throw over למעלה מי׳ you should be chayav, when קלוטה כמי שהונחה it stopped in the middle? The Ramban and Rashba say it doesn't matter. You say there too, you'll be patur for a different reason, but you say קלוטה. Why? Because they hold they they say we don't say קלוטה, sorry, they say we don't say קלוטה, Tosafot says we say קלוטה over למעלה מי׳ also. And they hold you don't say קלוטה, why not? Because they hold that the פשט in קלוטה כמי שהונחה is not that it became הנחה. There is no problem if there's no הנחה because you took it into the other רשות, and the hand is not there. So you have to have that condition that you took it into the other רשות. A מקום פטור is not considered taking it in another רשות, so we can't say קלוטה. Not למעלה מי׳.

Tosafot says we say קלוטה למעלה מי׳ also. And therefore, if you hold קלוטה כמי שהונחה, you have to say it למעלה מי׳. So like it stopped למעלה מי׳. So how could you hold that if you throw it over למעלה מי׳ you're חייב? It stopped למעלה מי׳. And the Ramban says, no problem. The whole concept of קלוטה is not said למעלה מי׳. So לגבי למעלה מי׳, we do not say קלוטה. So you can't say you should be פטור because of קלוטה. Why not? So I say because because the Ramban says that there is no such thing as קלוטה כמי שהונחה like it stopped. Only if it comes in another רשות, we say כמי שהונחה, we don't care if it didn't stop. But if it didn't come in another רשות, then the שינוי that you did is not a real שינוי, so it's not really taking away. So it's not considered stopped. So when does a שינוי So if you throw from רשות היחיד to רשות היחיד over רשות הרבים, when does the real שינוי take place? When it comes to the second רשות היחיד. So there we don't say קלוטה כמי שהונחה in the middle. And if you don't say קלוטה כמי שהונחה in the middle, therefore you could hold normally קלוטה, you could say קלוטה כמי שהונחה, but it's only למטה מי׳. למעלה מי׳ we don't say קלוטה. I hope I didn't get it across. No, it's just that, wait, so what's the, like why why do you need to what if they say what if they say what if they don't say that it's it's klutah, that it goes through? Why why is there a why Then they're not arguing on the same thing, they're arguing apples and oranges. Oh, they're not, they're the same thing. One is saying it just doesn't apply, the other one says it has to apply.

No, Tosafot says it applies. Right, it has to apply. No, but what? I'm saying why? Because תוספות טייטשט קלוטה כמי שהונחה means pashut it's a physical thing, because this is stopped. What's the chiluk where, here or there? So if it stopped on so if you say klutah over למעלה מי׳, it's a מקום פטור. So if a person throws from רשות היחיד to רשות היחיד going over רשות הרבים למעלה מי׳, you cannot be chayav. If you hold klutah, you cannot be chayav. why? Because it stopped, and it stopped in a מקום פטור, you can't be chayav. So the one that says it is chayav if you throw it, because he holds compares זורק to מושיט, cannot hold klutah, because if you hold klutah it's chayav. The Ramban says it's not true, you could still be chayav. You can you can say that that you say קלוטה כמו שהונחה, אלא למטה מ-י׳ you're chayav, if you throw from a רשות היחיד to over רשות הרבים, but inside י׳ you're chayav because of klutah, but if you throw over the י׳ you will not be patur. It won't make you patur because you stopped there, why? Because למעלה מ-י׳ we do not say klutah. Why not? So I'm saying now, because we don't say klutah which means it stopped, it means that קלוטה כמו שהונחה means that the the idea of the עקירה you made in the previous רשות, and you took it into this רשות is enough that you don't have to put it down. Why? Because the whole idea of the עקירה נוחה is to change רשות to make a change, so when you take it in the other רשות, it's a change already. אלא מאי? To take it by hand, there's something stopping that change, but if you threw it there is a change. But that's only what makes the change, the fact that it went into an opposite רשות, so it changed from this רשות to the other רשות. But if it came to a מקום פטור, there was no change there, because a מקום פטור is not a change. If it's not a רשות at all, that's fine, but if it is a רשות, מילא if it's not a change, you can't use the concept of קלוטה, because the concept of קלוטה means that without the הנחה it's still a change. That's how we פשט. קלוטה כמו שהונחה means that it's מונח, if it's קלוטה and goes into the air, and it's not doesn't rest, it's okay, it's still חייב, because there's no hand involved, there's no no problem, but that's all because there was a change. But in a מקום פטור there is no change. We're both getting to the same halacha at the end, it's just that one thing, Tosafot is Tosafot is saying that the reason why it's We're not getting to the one הלכה, תוספות says that the one that holds קלוטה can cannot say למעלה מ-י׳ you're you're חייב. And the Ramban? And the Ramban says you can. And the Ramban says you can. Why? Because you don't say קלוטה there. He says you can say קלוטה over 10, Right. but under 10 you do say קלוטה. So you're חייב under 10, but over 10 you're חייב from מושיט. Right. And we don't say it stopped in the middle of the air in the in the מקום פטור. What How can you say that that there's no קלוטה over 10, but under 10 there is קלוטה? What's the reasoning behind that? That's exactly what I'm trying to tell you! Now I'm getting Because he doesn't hold that it stopped, קלוטה doesn't mean it stopped, קלוטה means that if you change from one רשות to this רשות without the hand, it's enough to be חייב. Right, right, right, aha. But in a מקום פטור you didn't change to another רשות, so it's not enough to consider it, so it's not to consider that it landed, but because it didn't land, it should be it should be פטור there. But it doesn't count מקום פטור like another רשות. Right, it's the same רשות. Not the same, it's not opposite the רשות. Right. In a מקום פטור you have a lot of עקירות and הנחות standing. It's like like עקירה. Every second, yeah. Everything is possible, but it doesn't really matter, because Yeah, exactly. That's what it Did you see the thing for Harvey? Yeah, Harvey. Light in the desert. My yeshivah and and Queens, yeah. They're sholchim from Beis Chayeinu. Over there. What's his name? Chasif. Oh, one of the brothers lives here, yeah, in Bal Harbour. He comes, comes to. He learned by us. Yeah, the two brothers. Yeah, there's 12 12 brothers I know, but the two brothers went by us. Now, I

have I have three of them in my yeshivah. Oh, really? So, the boy was just texting me and telling me, \"You won't believe it. I'm sitting here in a shiur in a shiur, and I hear my rabbi yelled here.\" Something from Chabad. Yeah, his name is Isaac Chasif. Isaac, yeah, Chasif, yeah. They're related to you? No, so he said, \"What? What's his name?\" Rabbi Shapira. They'll answer you. You didn't get to to record it? No. Is the one that is nine, or the one that is 14? No, this is a brother of Cuz here I know they have a lot of children. Yeah. 12 brothers? They're all boys? I think 11 boys or 12 boys and two girls, yeah. Okay, yeah. Where's his yeshivah again? In Queens, in Kew Garden. In Kew Garden, yeah. People start hearing 12 for one gender, it's like, how could anybody not think it's? I wanted to ask you a she'eilah. I had a she'eilah, I tried to look around to find when it was parashah, what was Yaakov thinking when he was stealing the berachah? How is he going to steal a berachah? Yitzchak had in mind, \"I'm giving a berachah to Esav.\" Right? And and and you're playing a game, making believe that you're Esav, but, \"I have in mind I'm blessing Esav, I'm not blessing you.\" What was Yaakov's I don't think he had in mind to bless Esav, he had in mind to bless the bechor. He didn't have in mind to עשו, בני, בכורי That's why he asked him, yeah? And since he brought the was the bechor, so it goes to here. No, but uh Yeah. What what Yaakov was thinking, \"My father is going to think I'm going to bless the bechor and that's Yeah, yeah, yeah, and that's and that's emet. Why did he say, \"גם ברוך יהיה\"? In the end, because I thought he felt the berachah that it was chal. Right, right. So he said, \"I'll take it More than that, because he said that's why he asked him, \"Are you Esav, my bechor?\" Why did he care it's the bechor? It should have been, \"Are you Esav?\" Because the kvetsh was the bechor. Yeah, I understood the berachah only goes on the bechor. No, and he and he meant to Esav as bechor, not Esav as Esav. Although if you go in chasidut, he went to תוקף where עשו יש לו... Yeah, well that's על פי חסידות. He wanted to מברר him, to bring into... to bring him up, yeah. But that's taking koach to give him to somebody who needs that koach, and בפועל Yaakov needed it, so mimela if Yaakov needed it, it goes to Yaakov. That's על פי דרך... But על פי פשט, this is the pshat that he meant the bechor. And Yaakov was really the bechor, he bought the bechorah. Also, I have another she'eilah:

why didn't Hashem come to Esav at night and tell him, \"Don't you talk to Yaakov like he did to Lavan. Don't you talk to יעקב מטוב עד רע\"? Why didn't he do the same thing with Esav like he did with Lavan? When? When he ran away or later on? No, when when Yaakov was coming to Esav. Met him? Yeah, he was afraid of him, right? When Lavan was running after Yaakov, Hashem told Lavan, \"Don't talk to him anything, you shouldn't be saying saying...\" When it comes to Esav, he didn't do that. What... Lavan is worse than Esav. Lavan... Not only that, that's that's yeah. Aside of that, Lavan was a disguised rasha. That's the worst thing. That's why... Yaakov knew it. Yaakov knew, but Lavan himself, it's you know, you've got to be careful because he makes himself like a like a friend and the... like what's it? It says in חסידות the לשון is he was דאס איז דער רע... רע... ער טראגט א העלם. He was the רע, he was bad, but he was bad in a way that the thing that you can't... Therefore it says, got to be more careful of these people who who make it sound like... But Esav was an open rasha. The open רשע Yaakov could deal with him, but this, Eibershter has to make sure that it doesn't happen because a guy like that is much harder to take care of. Doesn't Pirkei Avot say to be more wary of your neighbor than your enemy or something? There's like a Pirkei Avot some comparison between a neighbor and an enemy, right? Yeah. Okay. Yasher koach. Yeah, yasher koach. Just the same she'eilah you asked with the berachah, someone has the opposite she'eilah.

Rivkah said, \"עלי קללתך בני\", what does that mean? How could she take the curse? If Yitzchak is giving a curse, she said, \"I'll take the curse.\" What do you mean you take the curse? He cursed him, how can she take the curse? Yeah. That's where she had the berachah, that's one thing, but the kelalah, how could she take... Yeah, the same answer. The curse will will He has in mind the curse should be chal on whoever deserves the curse. You can always say that type of answer. Yeah, yeah, ein hachi nami. This is this is the answer that didn't mean to curse this person. The person isn't doing wrong. Yeah. And it's her fault for doing wrong, it'll go on her. Yeah. Yasher koach, yasher koach. Gute nacht. What time is Shacharit here tomorrow? Ten. When she says, \"עלי קללתך בני\", so why would Yaakov be happy for such a thing? Why should Yaakov, yeah, how can he accept that? How can he accept, I mean, why should she be cursed? Yeah. So, what does it mean? She's going to be appeasing him? \"Don't worry, don't worry, עלי קללתך בני.\" So, the Rebbe says that it's a very big inyan, and she understood that these berachot must go through Yaakov no matter what, and it's also a very, very important for all the future First is the תוקף של תורה. And therefore to get these berachot, you have to go through mesirat nefesh. So she says, \"עלי קללתך בני, I am ready to do anything. I even will take the curse.\" To get into mesirat nefesh. \"The question is, my son, are you ready? Because this to work, we both have to be on the same page. I cannot handle it alone. So, listen to me, שמע בקולי, and do what I'm telling you.\" When Yaakov said to her, \"I'm going to listen to you\", she said, \"Now we are on the same page, so you can go in to see your father and get the berachot.\" So now he goes to get the berachot, but he says to her, \"You know that it's a very dangerous game. How can I do this? Maybe he's going to open his eyes and feel me and curse me, so that's it.\" She says, \"No, you go like davka in being the Esav, davka in being the Esav. You have to get the berachot davka in being the Esav.\" So he says, \"Well, so we can argue nicely.\" So he says to her, it's a conversation. \"Remember what happened to your father and mother. Hashem said to your father, 'שמע בקולה'. Why don't you go to Father and tell him, he'll listen to you. You know his very high ideas of chasidut, he wants to מברר עשו. But you know it's not going to help, you should tell him.\" All right, I, the one also that the other is not gonna work, give him the berachot straight away, straight straight to Yaakov. And she says, \"No, the berachot he has to get taken such a way, in cheating way, and בגדי עשיו.\" So the Rebbe says the following: is that she recognized that if Yaakov will get the brachos in a straight way, the way he is, the brachos will be transferred to all the Yaakov's, all future generations, all the shaychus, you know, the Yaakov in us. And she was not maskim to this. She wanted that these brachos from Yitzchak should be transferred to all of her children, even who is like בגדי עשיו, will be included. And she insisted, you go davka in בגדי עשיו, and this is the way that the brachos will be brought, and to apply to all my children, all future generations. So I'm not maskim the bracha should be only given to Yaakov, the way Yaakov in us. And that's why it took these two mesirut nefesh, once they were both ready, she was ready, he can go and get the bracha. That's it. He was he was quicker. Kayn ayin hara. Which one? All right, it's fine. כבר עבר? כבר עבר, ברוך השם. כל כך מהר? Baruch Hashem.

Sorry, do you mind if you give me my coat?