Now, Gemara Ketubot דף ל' עמוד א' עמוד ב'. The Gemara mentions, speaks here about, I don't know how far back we should go listening here to the Gemara. No, we'll go a little bit back. We know there's a din of קם ליה בדרבה מיניה. קם ליה בדרבה מיניה means that if a person does an aveirah which he, because of the aveirah, because of what he did, he has to do two things: he has to get killed, and he also has to pay money. So the din is קם ליה בדרבה מיניה, we learn out that he only gets killed and he doesn't have to pay. Now, the Chachamim normally we learn that this is only by מיתת בית דין, if he does an aveirah which the beis din will kill him, like a guy is מחלל שבת, if he commits murder, avodah zarah, anything like that, and at the same time he does something that he's, for that same thing he's chayav to pay, so he doesn't pay. Like in an example if somebody puts someone's house on fire on Shabbos. So now two things: he was מחלל שבת and he has to get killed for it, חילול שבת. At the same time, with the same act, he caused the guy a damage, so he's patur from paying because קם ליה בדרבה מיניה. Comes Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakana, Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakana says that this is not only by מיתת בית דין, not only when the guy deserves to die by beis din, even if by כרת, even if a person does an aveirah which is חייב כרת, which means he will die, Hashem will make him die young. And at the same time he also is chayav to pay money, mamon, so it's we call it כרת ותשלומין, תשלומין is payment, so Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakana holds we also say קם ליה בדרבה מיניה and this guy doesn't pay. In the words of Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakana itself there is a machloket between Abaye veRava whether this also applies, Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakana's opinion also applies to מיתה בידי שמים. Because we know there are two categories: one category is called כרת, one is מיתה בידי שמים. What is the actual difference? It says certain aveirot you get כרת for, it says a person dies young. So by כרת, the way it's accepted, he dies before fifty and by מיתה בידי שמים they say he dies before sixty. Plus by כרת it affects the children also, God forbid the children could die, and by מיתה בידי שמים it doesn't. So Rava says no, and it depends on where you learn out, Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakanah learns out this דין, but לפועל, Rava says it's only by karet, not by מיתה בידי שמים. Abaye says no, this also applies by מיתה בידי שמים. And the Gemara says, give me an example, where would there be a difference between the two? What is there a case of מיתה בידי שמים that we'll have a case where a person is חייב מיתה בידי שמים and at the same time money? Oh, so the Gemara says I'll tell you a case: זר שאכל... זר שאכל תרומה. זר שאכל תרומה, if a non-כהן eats תרומה. Now the דין is for eating תרומה you get מיתה בידי שמים, not not karet. And what happens if he took the תרומה from somebody else? Took from a כהן, stole his תרומה and he ate it. So here he is חייב ממון, is חייב to pay the תרומה. Why? It's his own. He can says, could have bought it. Or the מפרשים bring another example: he ירש it from his grandfather. His grandfather, his mother's father was a כהן, he's not a כהן, and his mother's father died and had the only ירושה was the grandson and he he ירש תרומה whatever. So if he ate תרומה from somebody else, he is חייב ממון, is חייב מיתה בידי שמים. So according to Abaye who says that by מיתה בידי שמים the rule applies that you don't pay, so he'd be פטור from paying. According to Rava who says it only applies by karet, not by מיתה בידי שמים, this case you'd be חייב. לאביי פטור, לרבא חייב. Comes the Gemara and the Gemara says, ולאביי פטור? And according to Abaye, you're patur, you don't pay? That's not true! And he says, I'll give you an example, והאמר רב חסדא, רב חסדא said, מודה רבי נחוניא בן הקנה בגונב חלבו של חבירו ואכלו שהוא חייב. Another example of where you're חייב כרת, whichever one would agree according to Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakanah, is chelev. If you eat the fats, the special fats from the from the בהמה which is forbidden, you get karet. What happens, he says, if a person steals somebody else's chelev and eats it? So you get karet for eating chelev, but now here you have to pay, and we don't say kam lei bidraba minei. So he says why? שכבר נתחייב בגניבה קודם שיבא לידי איסור חלב. Because it's not at the same time. He went and steals it, now you're חייב ממון, finish! Then he takes and eats it, now you're חייב כרת. Two things! אלמא we see, דמכי דאגבהיה קניה, when you pick it up, you're קונה, you're קונה, you acquire it, now you're chayav to pay. מתחייב בנפשו לא הוי עד דאכליה. And to חייב בנפש means חייב כרת, you're not chayav till you eat it. That's why Rav Chisda said that if you steal chelev and you eat it you're chayav to pay. הכא נמי, so The same thing, the example we gave with the terumah, the עידנא דאגבהה, the moment he picked it up, קניה, he was קונה it. מתחייב בנפשו לא הוי עד דאכיל ליה, you don't get מיתה בידי שמים till you eat it. So why would Abaye say that in this case you're patur because of kam lei bidraba minei? So the Gemara answers,

הכא במאי עסקינן, you know the case is, כגון שתחב לו חבירו לתוך פיו. He didn't pick it up, someone else stuck it into his mouth. Like Avner in the story, he took a bite. Yeah, the Gemara. But here someone else stuck it in. So the Gemara asks, סוף סוף, it's still two separate times. כיוון דלעסיה קניה, when he starts chewing it, then he's קונה it. מתחייב בנפשו לא הוי עד דבלעה, he's not חייב מיתה בידי שמים till he swallows it. So mimila, one of the answers is mashkeh, but that's the second answer. So in that case again, why would we say kam lei bid'raba minei, mimila you are patur, when it's not together? And the lashon, here the whole discussion now the shiur is going to be on these words. So the Gemara used the lashon: since he chewed it, already he's koneh it, so now you're chayav for stealing, and then a second, 30 seconds later, a minute later and he swallowed it, now you're chayav mitah, so they're two separate times. So the Gemara goes into it again. Is there ever a case where it's together? Yeah. In the case of in the case of eating, I gave an example before, a guy burns down your house on Shabbos. Shabbos. So the Gemara answers here the case is that someone else stuck it into his mouth, no, that's what we answered, and he stuck it in all the way down, mimila it came, and when he swallowed it he's chayav for swallowing. The Gemara goes with the whole answers how it's possible that the chiyuv of the mamon, the chiyuv to pay and the chiyuv of the מיתה בידי שמים come at the same time, and that's why Abaye would say you're patur. When he swallows. You're not chayav yet. You're not chayav yet. Unless then you swallow some juice, then you're chayav for the juice, whatever. But, okay. Is that a kenas? That's not a kenas, no. But that's true. Kam lei bid'raba minei. Like the guy burns down someone's house, it's not a kenas, he just owes the guy the guy's house, $100,000, he ruined it. Don't have to pay. Okay. Lefoal, the Gemara use a lashon here that as soon as he chews it he already is chayav to pay for the mamon, because the Gemara says לעסיה קניה, he's koneh it. And then when he swallows it, he's chayav mitah, which is later. Why does it have to mention he chews it? Why does it keep chewing, chewing? Why chewing? And if he wouldn't chew it? The moment it comes into his mouth, and it's in his mouth, and he plans to keep it, if he puts in my, the guy spit it out, someone else put it in and I spit it out, so obviously I'm not trying to steal, but the moment someone puts it in my mouth and I say, fine, I'm having it in my mouth, so I'm koneh it then, I'm stealing it then. And then when you swallow it, you're חייב מיתה בידי שמים. So when the Gemara wants to show how there are two stages here, why does the Gemara say like when you chewed it? כיוון דלעסיה, when you chewed it, then you are chayav, that's when you have to pay as if that's when you're koneh it. Comes the Maharam Shif here, the Maharam Shif says the Gemara doesn't mean that it's the chewing that makes it happen, that makes him koneh it, get it, and he's chayav for stealing. The Gemara just mentions it, he's chayav for stealing because it's in his mouth and he doesn't give it out. How do you know he doesn't give it out? Because he started chewing it. So it's not the chewing that makes it. Instead of giving it out the guy's chewing. Intent. So lafo'al, it's not the chewing that does it. Okay, that's what the Maharam Shif says. Likh'orah, I have a kashya on the Maharam Shif, because he could have answered a better terutz, that you fact have to chew it in order to be koneh it, you have to chew it. Why? Because the Ketzot, you see, if you look at the pages here, we have a Ketzot here, Ketzot number 3, the Ketzot here says, the first page, here's another word: stuck it into his mouth. If someone put it in and this guy didn't give it out, he should like spit it out, here's another one. So the Ketzot says that when a person steals with kavanah itself, with your mind itself, you're not chayav for stealing. You have to do a ma'aseh. You have to do an act. Where do we see it? That if a person steals, so I'll explain I'll explain in a second, you have to do a ma'aseh. Where do we see it? So he brings a ra'ayah in Bava Metzia דף י׳. That's next piece of Gemara.

In Bava Metzia דף י׳ it says like this, keep in mind, you know, that today gonna be a lot of details. You have to have all the details in mind. In Bava Metzia, the Gemara says that there is a kinyan called חצר, that if something comes into your yard, you're koneh The Gemara starts off like this. You see here, there's a pasuk that says, okay, we don't have the beginning of the Gemara, oh yeah, it does. The pasuk says, אם המצא תמצא בידו הגנבה, שנים ישלם. The guy steals, and you find the geneivah in his hands, he has to pay double, that's by geneivah. So the Gemara asks, אין לי אלא ידו, from there we see that if you help take it with your hand, you stole it, and you're chayav kefel. גגו, חצירו, וקרפיפו מניין, how do you know that if it comes into your חצר, and you keep it, you're also considered stealing, and you have to pay double? The Gemara says, אם המצא תמצא, מכל מקום, we learn it out from the pasuk. Okay. Comes the Rashi, and Rashi makes a comment. What's the example that if you stole through your חצר? So Rashi says, if a בהמה, someone else's בהמה came into your חצר, ונעל בפניה, and you locked the door, now you're stealing. So the Ketzos says here, that from Rashi we see that you have to do a maaseh, because otherwise, why lock the door? You see an animal, your animal goes into my yard, and I look at it and say, \"Oh, very good! I plan to keep it!\" You're a ganav? Machshavah doesn't work. So he says, in this case, yeah, machshavah doesn't work, kavanah doesn't work, you have to have a maaseh. He He does not bring it, but there is a Tosafot like that, and which is here, it's hard to see, see the Rashi, he quoted it here, this the copy didn't come out good. Oh, this place over here is not going to בבא קמא דף ס״ה ע״ב, okay, you won't be able to read it. בבבא קמא דף ס״ה, when also by חצר, the same thing, Tosafot gives an example. How are you גונב'ing through your חצר? If you see someone's animal, and you hit it with a stick, and you push it into your חצר, you're גונב, even though you never took it with your hand. Again we see, he picks an example, it doesn't say if someone's animal went into your yard, and you decided, \"Oh, I'm going to keep it!\" So you have to do a maaseh. That's what the Ketzos says. What happens if you have a trap door on your on your yard? Yeah. So then you're chayav, according to this. You're not chayav. No, but that's not considered a maaseh. You have to do a maaseh. I don't know about that, but the purpose is to trap it, so. No, you're trapping I don't know, but the animal comes in, and you think you also got it to keep it. Usually, he stole it right away. Most of the time you need a maaseh to keep it, because I could think that's it's so long as I don't my hand and then take it from you, it's not. No, yes that's true. Normally in a maaseh, but talk about חצר. חצר is not a maaseh. חצר is in your yard. The whole idea of חצר is that you don't have to make a kinyan with your hand. Normally a kinyan is you take הגבהה, משיכה, you pick it up, you pull it. חצר means if something comes, let's see, not like a גנבה. If it's hefker. If I want to give you a present. A divorce. A divorce? Okay, that's called a divorce. I want to give him a present. So I don't have to give it to you. How are you koneh it? I can put it into your house, and you're koneh it, if I want. Or, What did you say? It's hefker. It's hefker. If an animal of hefker comes in, chatzer is koneh, I don't have to grab it. If it comes in my chatzer, I'm koneh it. But here the Ran and Rashi gives and says that when it comes in your chatzer and you locked it. So the Ketzos says here, he brings, Bava Metzia he says over here, כשנכנסה לרשותו ונעל בפניה, משמע, דאם נכנסה מאליה לרשותו ונתכוון לקנותה לגזילה, if he decided that he wants to steal it just by his mind, לא מחייב במחשבה גרידתא, you're not mechuyav. ואפילו חצר משתמרת. And here you see that it's number 6, and if number 5 is the Rashi, actually, from the Gemara, and number 6 is the Tosafot, in Bava Kamma. So do you need a ma'aseh? That's for malkot. We're talking about paying. You don't get malkot for for stealing anyway. No, not by geneivah, by geneivah for sure you did it. Yeah, according to this. Yeah. Yeah. So then lichora, he should be he's be stealing, so the Rashi says you're not. He should have said, he got a קנין הגנב, right, you stole it! Lichora, but Rashi says that you have to if you lock it, then you stole it. If you didn't do anything, you didn't. Oh, belongs to the original owner even if you took it with your hand! The she'eilah, you're koneh it by geneivah, and not that you're now chayav to pay, you're a ganav. That's what we call This kinyan is Of course it belongs to the guy. You have to give it back! והשיב את הגזלה, you have to return it. You cannot make a kinyan by machshavah, right? So he made So he says, you cannot make a kinyan, you have to do a ma'aseh. Okay. That was in Bava Metzia when the guy sees the money on the floor, and he says somebody pick it up, right, the one who picks it up is koneh? Yeah, but that's not, that's not a geneivah. There, because it didn't come to your chatzer, but if a metzia falls into your chatzer, you are koneh. And there, you're koneh it with machshavah. If an if a hefker animal comes into my my yard, and I have a mind to keep it and it's hefker, it's mine. No one could come and take it. By גניבה, we see Rashi says you have to lock it. According to this, you could have said exact that's the reason why it says here לא עשה. That's what the Gemara says, that when someone else put it into my mouth, so the Gemara says, so I'm קונה it. So I'm a גנב, now I have to pay. minute later I swallowed it, now at least it's two separate things. So the question that the Rosh Yeshiva asked, why does the Gemara mention chewing? Came to my mouth, it's in my mouth now, and I'm not giving it out, I'm planning to keep it, I'm a גנב. הא, but you see from Rashi and from Tosafot that you have to do a מעשה, so the Gemara is right, that they had to be לועס it. Nevertheless, the Maharam Shif doesn't say it. The Maharam Shif says that it's not you don't have to, he says if it mentions chewing just to show how do you know he's not giving it back? Cuz look at him there, he started chewing instead of giving it back. Why? So בפשטות, because we have a re'aya here from this Gemara that Rashi learns here that you don't need a מעשה. Which will automatically turn into a סתירה into two Rashis. But Rashi here we see doesn't. Where do we see it? This is also going to be a little bit complicated. You know what? Maybe it's not even נוגע, it's going to get too complicated, and it's not נוגע to that to the inyan, but there is a re'aya from this the way Tosafot here, Tosafot brings a Ritzba who's מפרש רש״י, and it comes out clearly that Rashi learns, different than Tosafot, not in this piece, a little piece further, that in this case you are קונה without a מעשה. Just by keep keeping it and having it in your mouth, you are קונה it. That's what the Ritzba says. Huh? You don't have to chew it. And because later we're talking about a case where you can't even chew it. Later the case where a guy stuck it deep down, and Rashi says that he's קונה just by not giving it back. When he swallowed it, says you could have give it back, whatever it is. And it's all the way down in his throat, and he can't chew it. And there's משמע that you do not have to have a מעשה. So לכאורה, that's why the Maharam Shif here taytshs לועס it doesn't mean that you need to chew it in order to make to do a maaseh, because he says how could I say that? Because later on we see the way Tosafos later, not Tosafos, Tosafos argues, the Ritzba in Tosafos explains פשט in Rashi, and it comes out that you don't need a maaseh. That's if you would agree with the Ritzba. No, but there's no other way to learn Rashi. That Tosafos has a קשיא on Rashi later, on a different piece of Rashi. The Ritzba comes to explain what Rashi means, and that only fits if there you don't need a maaseh and you're koneh without a maaseh. And the Kovetz Shiurim says that the reason why Tosafos argues on Rashi, because he says I cannot accept the Ritzba's תירוץ. Because you need a maaseh. According to the Ritzba, the way he learns later פשט in Rashi you don't need a maaseh. So he doesn't accept it. So the Kovetz Shiurim says that the מחלוקת between Rashi and Tosafos here, Tosafos says you need a maaseh, so that's why whatever that piece of Gemara doesn't fit, and Rashi seems like you don't. So therefore, it comes out that according to Rashi in this Gemara you do not need a maaseh for a גזלן. And that's why probably the Maharam Shif said לועס, why do you have to chew it? So he explained something else. And therefore, you're not going to have to pay. No. He says you have to pay. You have to pay, cuz you're chayav right away, which without chewing it you're chayav, and מיתה you're חייב as when you swallow, so it's not together. But the problem we have now is that there's a contradiction in Rashi. Rashi in בבא מציעא says clearly, the way the Ketzos learns, although someone without the Ketzos you could say maybe Rashi is just giving an example, came into this They're talking about a חצר. They're talking Oh! But it's about a חצר. That's what we have to get to. L'chorah, the difference is they were talking about a חצר and here you're talking about a mouth. Now, this seems to be an answer, but the Ketzos, he's like, l'chorah, what's the difference? What's the difference? But l'chorah this will be the answer to the קשיא, the סתירה in Rashi, that over there it's talking by a חצר, when you're stealing through your חצר, and here you're talking when you're stealing, it's right through your mouth. But you need a הסברה, what is the difference? And mimeila it will have to come out that we will say that show that there is some difference, but obviously Tosafos holds there is no difference because Tosafos later on says that's a קשיא on Rashi. So there's a מחלוקת Rashi and Tosafos whether there is a difference between חצר or not. Now Tosafos obviously learns there is no difference between a חצר and a mouth, and Tosafos makes sense because the logic normally you learn why כוונה doesn't work. It makes sense. Might not make sense here 100%, but you could see, imagine a guy sitting back like this and he's חייב for גניבה. Why? Because he thought something is in his mouth, mine! And now he looks through the window, sees an animal walk in, and now he thinks oh good, I'm going to keep it. You're חייב for גניבה? It sounds very strange! So the same thing with the mouth. I didn't do anything, someone put it in my mouth, I'm חייב for that without doing anything? So l'chorah, there should be no difference. So we have to understand Rashi. Why would Rashi learn that there is a difference between חצר In order to understand that, let's see why do you need a מעשה in that Gemara over there by the חצר? So according to Tosafos, we know why we need. I just said, because כוונה itself doesn't work. But I want to explain that l'chorah afterwards a whole אריכות you could explain what the reason is why over there you need a maaseh, and we'll see that this biur that I'm saying only fits for chatzer. And since the biur only is a reason for chatzer why you need a maaseh, automatically when it's not chatzer, you don't need a maaseh. Okay. So, let's get into another inyan here. As you all know, we always try to bring in the רבי'ס ביאורים in all these inyanim. So we have here, you see number seven,

Likkutei Sichos, the Rebbe has a whole biur on a piece of Gemara and a Rambam. So to get to that, let's explain the Gemara. There's a Gemara in Avodah Zarah, דף נ״ג, and also דף מ״ו. The Gemara says it like this: if somebody bows down to somebody else's לבינה, לבינה is a brick, as an Avodah Zarah, now we know that if you make something into Avodah Zarah, actually in the Rambam, we're learning Hilchos Avodah Zarah, this halachah, that if someone makes something Avodah Zarah, it's asur b'hanah. It's asur. So the Gemara says that if someone bows down to somebody else's thing, it doesn't become asur. Why? Because אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו. A person cannot make asur something that belongs to somebody else. Now, obviously, it's not talking about something that there is something physically that you did. If I take your meat and your milk and I'll mix it together, it won't become treif because how could I how could I make asur your thing, that's not true. It means anything that I have to with my machshavah or with my put a chalos, make a din on it, so if it's not mine, I don't. Okay. Nevertheless, the Gemara says, same Gemara, that if the owner of the לבינה, the owner, זקף לבינה, picked it up and put it down, thinking that he's going to do Avodah Zarah, and then this other guy comes and bows down, then he's, \"Thinking he's going to do Avodah Zarah, I think.\" He wants to bow down to it. \"Ah, the owner.\" The owner. But the owner didn't do anything. \"Not yet.\" Didn't do it. So the other guy who comes, \"He bowed down.\" and he bows down to it, so the Gemara says that it is Avodah Zarah. אי אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו? So the Gemara says that the fact that he bowed down is גלי דעתיה, the fact that that guy picked up the לבינה, גלי דעתיה דניחא ליה, he showed that he's happy, so the second guy who does it, שליחותיה קא עביד, that's the לשון of the Gemara. He does his shlichus, and this word is important for later. He's like becomes like a shaliach, and therefore it becomes עבודה זרה. Comes the Rambam, and the Rambam has this din. Look in the Rambam, okay, look in the second column here: יובן בהקדם מה שכתב הרמב״ם. This is the Rambam brings the din and the Rambam adds two words to the Gemara: ישראל שזקף לבינה להשתחוות לה, if a Yid, see, the second column here, the, the second paragraph, second column: ישרא- יובן בהקדם it starts, ומה שכתב הרמב״ם: ישראל שזקף לבינה להשתחוות לה, if a Yid put up a לבינה to bow down, ולא השתחוה לה, and he didn't bow down, ובא עכו״ם והשתחוה לה, came a goy, or even if this goy doesn't mean actually a goy, another Yid who's worshipping עבודה זרה, and bowed down, נאסרה בהנאה, now it becomes asur. And the Rambam adds two words: שזקיפתה מעשה, because putting it up is a maaseh. And the Rebbe asks a kashya: where did the Rambam get this idea that you have to have a maaseh to to to do this? So, and he brings, farkert, it seems like from the, from what the Gemara said that you don't need a maaseh. There's actually it was a hava amina in the Gemara that you might need a maaseh. It seems like you don't need a maaseh. Sevara, the Gemara doesn't say you don't need, but there is no source in the Gemara that you need a maaseh. What is the rea- so take- so takeh, so now the Rebbe brings sof kol sof, he brings a source in the Gemara. And then the Rebbe continues and he says, based on that I'll answer another shailah. The Gemara had a shailah: what happens if it wasn't a לבינה? It wasn't a brick, it was a ביעה, a guy picks up an egg. Is it also good? And the Gemara has a shailah: איבעיא להו, so לא מינכרא זקיפתה, since it's small, you can't tell, like this, the shape, you mean you can't, brick or a לבינה is like this, so you you can pick it up, you see it. This is לא מינכר, the Gemara says לא מינכרא זקיפתה, it's not clear when it's put up. So the Gemara says: is that enough or not? So he brings here that R'' Shlomo Kluger asks a kashya: what's the difference if it's מינכר or not? The Gemara seems to be saying that as long as you were מגלה דעת, and it seems like even by speaking that you don't care, it's enough. So who cares if you can see it? As long as the guy picked up the the egg! So the Rebbe says the Rambam says, according to the Rambam it's understood. Since the Rambam says it has to be a maaseh, the question is: is this called a maaseh? Is picking up something that you can't tell, so really you didn't do anything, so that's the Gemara's שאלה. So we see here the Rebbe's, this is a chidush of the Rebbe, there's no place in the מפרשים that say this. The Rambam just says it, and the Rebbe says that the Rambam is telling us that שזקיפתה מעשה, that in order to be chayav, to become an avodah zarah, it has to be through a maaseh. What's the reason? Besides that the, the Rebbe shows a לשון הגמרא, you find in the Gemara, is the Rambam's מקור. What's the sevara? So here you have הערה 56. See, on the third column at the bottom. וההסברה בזה יש לומר... Also, yeah, in shelichut. He says like this: זה שגילוי דעת מועיל הוא לפי שאז הרי הוא כעין שלוחו. What did we say? Why if the first guy shows that he doesn't care, עכו״ם doesn't care, the second guy could asar even though it's not his? So the Gemara use that לשון, because then שליחותיה קעביד. He's like his shaliach. Look at the לשון הגמרא, he brings the לשון הגמרא: כי אתא עכו״ם אפלגא, when the goy comes, שליחותיה דהאי קעביד, he's doing his shelichut. או, what kind of shelichut? אבל אין זה שליחות גמורה. Can't be a real shelichut. How could there be a shaliach? אין שליח לדבר עבירה. There's no shaliach for an aveirah. And besides that, you can't make a goy a shaliach. Or even if he's a Yid, but if he's a Yid who's a עובד עבודה זרה, he's a mumar, you can't make him into a shaliach. So אלא מאי? This is not real shelichut, but it's כעין שליחות. So if it's כעין שליחות, how do you make the guy into a shaliach? So he says: לכן צריך להיות הוכחה מקודם על רצון חזק. So you really have to have a real, real strong proof that you really mean it. שאז נעשה אחר כך כעין שליחות, that could make him shelichut. ולכן צריך להיות מעשה דווקא, therefore you need a מעשה, המורה על תוקף הרצון, which shows how much you really want it. How do you check the maaseh? If you want it so much you do something. So here we have a הגהה in the Rebbe that he is מסביר that when it comes to making something שליחות, כעין שליחות, but to make שליחות, and there is a problem in the שליחות because אין שליח לדבר עבירה. If it wouldn't be a problem לדבר עבירה, so it would be no problem. It's a שליחות. But since there's a problem because אין שליח לדבר עבירה, so you can't make him a שליח. So in order for the concept of שליחות to work, if you do a מעשה, that will overcome the problem, וממילא this guy could become כעין שלוחו. That's what he says here.

Okay. Now that we know why over here you need a מעשה is to make him a שליח, let's now turn to the case of חצר. We said before חצר works. חצר could be קונה for you. The Gemara in Bava Metzia has a שאלה: Where is the source of this דין חצר? So this piece in the Gemara that quote here Bava Metzia דף י' ע״ב, so the Gemara has a שאלה: Is it מטעם יד, or is it מטעם שליחות? Is a חצר like your יד? Just like you're קונה with your יד, you're קונה, or is it מטעם שליחות? Or is it like your שליח? The מסקנא of the Gemara דף י״ב is, and according, על כל פנים the Gemara's לשון is חצר מטעם יד ולא גרע משליחות. It's for יד and not worse than שליחות. But they say that the Rif, that's not worse than שליחות, but the Rif learns and the Rambam learns that mainly it's shlichut. And if you look at the here, next page, דף ה׳, here, not eight, but nine, the Rambam says: אבל איש למדנו שחצרו קונה לו כשלוחו. A chatzer is like a shaliach. כדרך שקונה לו שלוחו כך קונה לו חצרו. Just like a shaliach is koneh, so chatzer. Right, so the chatzer is like your shaliach. What difference if it's b'yad or shlichut, it's the zelbe zach. No, no. Because there's most psukim, and there are different dinim, shayach by katan, by ketanah, noge'a to other dinim. But lema'aseh according to many rishonim, the maskana is the ikar is shlichut. So what is the pshat that a chatzer is your shaliach? So lichora there's a wide, big kashya. We have a rule that a shaliach has to be a bar da'at. A katan cannot be a shaliach, because he doesn't have da'at. A goy cannot be a shaliach, you have to be a ben brit. We know that from the psukim. Where do we know shlichut? One of the places is like by terumah it says כן תרימו גם אתם. Gam is marbeh shaliach. So the Gemara: מה אתם בני ברית, אף שלוחכם בני ברית. You're a Yid, the shaliach has to be a Yid. You're a גדול, the shaliach has to be a גדול. You can't have a קטן, because a קטן is not a bar daas. Now, if a קטן cannot be a shaliach, how could your floor be a shaliach? How could a chatzer be a shaliach? If a goy can't be a shaliach, how could a floor be a shaliach? It's not a human being at all. How could it be a shaliach? So the answer is, and that was explained in one of the shiurim, that חצר משתמרת... You didn't do anything. Chatzer is קונה without even you being there. How is it קונה? So the pshat is like this: ein hachi nami we learn out from a pasuk it has to be a bar daas, and it has to be a Yid, but there's a logic behind it. It's not a גזירת הכתוב that it is. The reason is, and that's another place where I have him saying here, in this inyan there is a lot of inyanim that we find in the Rebbe's sefarim. So in one place, Likkutei Sichos חלק ל״ג, the Rebbe goes a whole אריכות to explain that The reason is because in order for somebody to be my shaliach, he has to be like connected to me, he has to be extension of me, he has to be batel to me. A goy cannot be batel to a Yid. They're two separate entities, they can't unite, so he can't be a shaliach. A קטן who has daas is a separate entity. He's a מציאות since he has daas. איי, a גדול also has daas? A גדול has more daas. A gadol has enough daas to be mevatel himself. A katan is nisht ahin un nisht aher. A katan has too he has daas enough that he's not nothing, he's not just batel to me, he's a metzius. So mimela, he cannot be a shaliach cuz he's batel. He's not enough daas, he's not a bar daas to say that in his mind he's mevatel himself to me, so he can't be a shaliach. A gadol could be a shaliach if he's a Yid could be batel, and if he's a bar daas enough as an adult could understand, \"Yes, I'm going to do it for him and I'm going to be batel to him,\" so it's possible. Lefi zeh, what's the problem with chatzer? It's not the peshat that you need him to be a Yid, what's the peshat that you need him to be a bar daas? For goodness, the reason you need him to be a bar daas is because daas is a problem! Since you have your own daas, you have a problem. So you're fine. Since you're a smart person, you could be mevatel yourself. The chatzer is batel to me, it's my chatzer, so it's batel. So chatzer could be my shaliach even better. And actually, in the Shita Mekubetzet in Bava Metzia דף י' takeh, he quotes Rav Yitzchak Abuhav who writes that החצר הוא השליח האמיתי והעצמי. He's the best shaliach. Yeah, he's השליח האמיתי והעצמי. It's the lashon of Rav Yitzchak. When I saw it, I was very excited cuz it mamash brings out this whole this inyan as a shaliach. It's a klal when I speak about it in this I tell the guys in yeshiva, whatever, you got to be batel. You can't You can't just, you know, come with your own seichel this You have your own and you think your own this, it ain't going to work. You ain't going to be a shaliach. Huh? What does that mean? השליח האמיתי? A real shaliach and the essential shaliach. It's essence, עצמי, the עצם, עצמי. It's a לשון, אמיתי ועצמי, השליח האמיתי והעצמי. So b'foal it comes out like this: why is חצר קונה? Because chatzer is your shaliach and it's batel to you, it's your shaliach. Okay. But I have a problem: by גניבה, how could chatzer work? אין שליח לדבר עבירה. Well, that's not my kashya, that's the Gemara's kashya. Look at the Gemara, that's why we had shelichut here, because אין שליח לדבר עבירה. Yeah, but by גניבה I'm saying. So how could you If something goes into your chatzer and then you you want to steal it through the chatzer, so you're chayav? Why are you chayav? You didn't steal it, your shaliach did it! But אין שליח לדבר עבירה! If a shaliach does it, it doesn't apply to you because the שליח וכו'. So the Gemara asks the she'eilah. Actually the Gemara in that sugya, going back number four here, the Gemara here when the Gemara says chatzer is מטעם יד or מטעם שליחות, the Gemara asks a kashya: how? If it's מטעם שליחות, אין שליח לדבר עבירה! Huh? If it's not his, could be also like it's not like a גזלן. If if a חצר is חצר is yours. Like a shaliach. No, it's like a shaliach, but how could a shaliach, whatever the shaliach does helps for you as if you did it, but not by aveirah! So if the shaliach if the חצר steals, it's not you. And that's that's your shaliach. The Gemara has this שאלה, you can see the Gemara. Well, the That's why That's what the Gemara answers. The גמרא אי סלקא דעתך חצר משום שליחות, it says, רבותי, אם כן, מצינו שליח לדבר עבירה וקיימא לן אין שליח לדבר עבירה. The Gemara gives two teirutzim. the three ways, but that's not נוגע here. Shaliach is you doing it, so But still, by aveirah you can't! K, the שליחות doesn't work, the Gemara says. Could be a חצר cannot have an aveirah. Oops! Well, that's the answers! The Gemara answers two teirutzim. One teirutz the Gemara is when is the דין of אין שליח לדבר עבירה? If the shaliach is a בר חיובא. If the shaliach is not allowed to do it, so then if he himself is not allowed to do it, then he cannot If he does it, it goes for him, not for the other guy, he can't be a shaliach. And by חצר it doesn't apply. And there's another one, another teirutz: אי בעי עביד אי בעי לא עביד. When is there אין שליח לדבר עבירה? If the shaliach has a choice. If he does, he does not. He could have a choice not to do it, and you chose to He chose to do it. Hey, you're so meshuga. דברי הרב ודברי התלמיד, דברי מי שומעין? Who told you to listen to him? You have to listen to the Eibershter! But that's only by a human being who could listen. By a woman who she would she even if it's not a shaliach, like Oh, that's the Gemara does nafka mina. The Gemara says nafka mina between these two, I don't think I don't think we copied this piece. The Gemara explains nafka mina, if a woman is going to take cut the payot of a of a child, someone asks her to cut, it's אין שליח לדבר עבירה. If you say this sevara, the reason is because a person who has a choice to do it or not, אין שליח לדבר עבירה, so then by a woman also, she has a choice. So if someone a man asks her to cut the payot, the man is not chayav. She's not a בר חיובא, and memeila there would be יש שליח לדבר עבירה, the man would be chayav. And that's, this is all, the previous, the Gemara deals with this question of how can a חצר be a shaliach for an aveirah by גניבה, אין שליח לדבר עבירה, and the Gemara answers. The shaylah is something else, in addition to that. אין שליח לדבר עבירה is the problem is of the shaliach part, the shaliach's side. So we say in this case we say אין שליח לדבר עבירה. The shaylah is from the משלח's side, the one that made the shaliach. By an aveirah, since it's an aveirah, wouldn't it be that you have to make the shaliach? What's How do you do a regular shlichut? A regular shlichut you have to be memaneh. You have to appoint a guy as shaliach.

In a case where something is good for you, we have a concept called זכייה מטעם שליחות. You could be zocheh for me and you become like my shaliach. There's a din that if lemashal if I want to give him a present and he's not here, I tell him take this, this is mine, pick it up for him. The moment he picks it up he's koneh it. That's called zocheh. We do that actually by עירוב תבשילין, we always do it. We ask somebody to be zocheh, and we're mezakeh for everybody else. So the Gemara says, so the Rishonim learn, why, how does it work? מטעם שליחות! You are like his shaliach. I never made you into a shaliach! So Rashi says anan sahadi! Since it's a zechut, it's something good for him, anan sahadi, we are witnesses, we know for sure that probably he would have agreed. There's no she'eilah that he would have agreed. So mimela you become a shaliach. So even though there was no minui, there's no appointment, but it's like an anan sahadi. You have the get, I understand. One second, we're getting to that. That's what I'm trying to say, that's where the ma'aseh comes in. You have to finish the shiur. Huh? If you do it to his wife, your wife? Yeah, if you do it to your wife, that's a big she'eilah, she's סמוכה על שולחנו, you can't have, no choice, you do that, otherwise you try somebody else. And the children who are in your house, it doesn't work. Fine, spiritual, if not so you're not zocheh for anybody, but you tried. You have to have if you have an adult child who is not part of your household, happens to be there for Yom Tov. Eiruv tavshilin? I did that, not tend to, fine, to be mezakeh for others. If you want to include others, it's not. For yourself, you don't need anything, you hold it, you don't have to give to anybody. But you say ani mezakeh, so yeah, איש אחר, and he picks it up and you say ani mezakeh, I'm mezakeh, so he's zocheh for everybody, and that's why you're able to include other people in your eiruv. But if you don't want to include, you want to just do it for your own family, you don't have to do it. But the practice is to always do it. Just clarify on עבודה זרה. Yeah. A Jew puts up a עבודה זרה. Yeah. Somebody comes and That's עבודה זרה? You're talking about a a לבינה, a brick, yeah? Yeah, somebody comes and bows down to it. Yeah, it's עבודה זרה. We're talking about shaliach, who's the shaliach there? The guy who bowed down, the shaliach of the owner. What about a goy? A goy, or or a goy or another Yid. A goy can't be a shaliach. So we just said that, that's why the Rebbe said you have to have a ma'aseh. If you do the ma'aseh, then it works. What's the ma'aseh? That a guy picks it up. So by doing a ma'aseh, you show how much you want it, and it works. That's the whole point I'm trying to get to. So the she'eilah here is, אין הכי נמי, the Gemara explained why there's no problem by chatzer from a שליחות, from אין שליח לדבר עבירה, because because of the שליח side, he has or he's not a בר חיובא or because he has no choice. But where did the משלח make him into a שליח? So if it would be some not an aveirah, something good, so you say anan sahadei! We say this, but since it's an aveirah and he never made him into a שליח, so as much as we explained that a חצר is the best שליח, that's when he's made into a שליח. So he's made a שליח, so he is the best שליח. But if the guy never made him into a שליח, so how could he be a שליח? So there is the fact that it's an aveirah is like blocking it from you making him into a שליח, there's nothing that made the שליח. And באמת you can go into deeper into this That's why you need a maaseh. Oh! So that's the reason why you need a maaseh. So I'm explaining now why you need a maaseh. His machshavah that machshavah that he wants to keep it, so that would be the same thing חצר, you don't need to say it's a anymore, because it's No, I'm not saying it has a din of זוכין לאדם שלא בפניו. This is not a דין זכייה, it's a דין דין חצר. But I'm just using it as an example. But here, the anan sahadei is not enough. Why is it not enough? His machshavah is making No, machshavah doesn't work. If you want, I'm looking at the clock now, מחשבה, בכלל, is not strong enough that you'll have an effect on something when there is something blocking The effect of your machshavah. You know what? I'll spend five minutes on it, so it'll

We said before the din of אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו. You can't אוסר something that's not yours, right? The Rambam says why not, and it comes up in the Gemara. You see here in the Rambam here, he brings, why can't... no, that's not this at all. He says, so too when someone שחט something for somebody else and he has something bad in mind, it doesn't פוסל, why? שאין אדם מישראל אוסר דבר שאינו שלו, the end of of this number 10, and he gives a reason why: שאין כוונתו אלא לצערך. Because we assume that if you're doing it to somebody else, you didn't really mean it. No, פיגול is a special din, that's a din on the kohen. You were talking about something has nothing to do with kohen, that's a din that the kohen could do. But something is going to אוסר my thing, so if someone else makes it asur, it doesn't work, and the Rambam says why: because if somebody else does, we assume he's only trying to to to make trouble for him, but he doesn't really mean avodah zarah, definitely in there. So I have a shaila, are you so sure? Maybe, אי הכי נמי, but maybe not! So it should be ספק עבודה זרה. Why do we say it's not? In a case where the guy bows down to your לבנה, you didn't do anything, he bows down. So they say, no, it's not asur. And the reason why it's not asur, because mistama he's just raving, it's mistama, you don't know, at least the Beis Din should say it's not asur ודאי, it's a ספק. And what's the pshat? And I'll tell you another shaila. The shaila is this: here in another place here in this place you could have asked a shaila: if this is the pshat, if this is the pshat that the reason why you can't אוסר somebody else's thing is because we we say that you didn't mean it, so what has that got to do with אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו? What does it have to do with it's yours or not? It should be a din anytime you don't mean it, then it's not asur! Why is it connected to אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו? And he says, obviously this sevara we say it's only in the case of אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו, ואין כאן מקומו, we won't go into it. What is the pshat? So in a different place, we know it says אתי דיבור תרתי, עניים במקום אחד, עשירים במקום אחר. It says poor in one place. In different place, the Rebbe in one line explains it, but the Achiezer, the Rav Chaim Ozer, has a whole explanation, a very this is the same thing as the Rebbe says in one line, he explains it. He says like this, a very logical sevara: as I said before, we're talking about not a fact that you did something, you took בשר בחלב and you mixed it, something that you, your machshavah has to have an effect. How could your machshavah have an effect on somebody else's thing? Imagine this is lying here, it's yours, I'm sitting here and now in my mind thinking how does my mind travel to this? So memela if I do a I pick it up and I do something to it, so I connected myself to it. Memela if it's mine, good, the cheftza mine, so it works with me. It's not mine, I didn't touch it, I'm sitting over here, and my machshavah works? Can't be. That's from the words אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו. But when my מחשבה, and so the the the Achiezer says, when it's מחשבתו ניכרת מתוך מעשיו, if my מחשבה is obvious, very obvious, then my מחשבה connects. That's what it is. As long as there's a possibility that you didn't mean it, that מחשבה doesn't work. Not a ספק anymore, even if you meant עבודה זרה, but since it's only a מחשבה that's not obvious, automatically it doesn't connect. So if it's If you make it obvious, אי הכי נמי, but if you didn't make it obvious, אלא מאי, if you that doesn't work. So it comes like this: it's connected to אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו. If If סתם I would say anytime a person doesn't have such a מחשבה, it does only means לצער, it doesn't become אסור. In a case like this, normally I would say ספק ספק, maybe uh, but we say it's ודאי not אסור, why? Because it's not yours! And since it's not there, so you have no connection. Basically what it comes out from here I'm trying to say that your a מחשבה of a person cannot affect something and make a change in it if there is something blocking. Here it's blocking that it's not mine, there has to be something more than that. So how could my מחשבה make the חצר into a שליח to do the עבירה? It's only מחשבה! So here the חצר happens to be mine, I'm not saying the חצר is not mine, but I'm I'm using it as an idea: when there is an עבירה, the fact that this is an עבירה, this is like a blockade which stops it. So how could my מחשבה work? The answer is you have to do a מעשה! So by חצר, in order to be קונה the גניבה, you have to do a מעשה. If it's not a גניבה, אי הכי נמי, since it's a good thing, so my מחשבה works, because it's mine, it could be a שליח, and and on that side, it's a good thing, and the דין works. But if it's a if it's an עבירה, how does it work?

So I'm trying to say that the reason why Rashi learns in Bava Metzia that by גניבה you have to do a מעשה, and Tosafos learns, is because of חצר, based on what the Rebbe Just like the Rebbe explains here that by the case of the לבנה, why do you have why does the Rambam say that you have to do a maaseh? Because אין שליח So how does it become, how does the guy become your שליח? So in order to do a maaseh you connect. So I'm saying the same problem you have by חצר, that how do you connect? The connection is through the maaseh. Okay. But פיגול is what? פיגול is going to be called by... פיגול, that's a din on the kohen, that's a לכתחילה דין on the kohen. See, we're talking... Who says the kohen is not an ish? So how's he going to do the פיגול? All right, but the din is that the כהן אסר it, the baal habayit, the owner can't even אסר it. The owner thinks פיגול is nothing, it's a דין בשעת הקרבה, בשעת עבודה, it's a special din of עבודה, and therefore it's on the kohen. But here we're talking about somebody got nothing to do with somebody else, it's my thing and I could אסר it. But if somebody else would make that שליח, you have to have maaseh. So comes out like this, that the whole reason why Rashi learns, and Tosafot learns in Bava Kama and Rashi in Bava Metzia that you have to lock it, you have to do a maaseh, is not because there is no דין גניבה without a maaseh. It's because no שליחות without a maaseh by גניבה. So if you learn like you said, although we didn't get in yet, the reason is because there's no דין גניבה, so there's no difference whether it's by חצר or it's by פיגול, by משהו. גניבה cannot be without a maaseh. So Tosafot learns like that, and Tosafos says clearly that you have to have a maaseh, definitely if you argue not Rashi, you have to have a maaseh. And according to the Rosh when it said לעסה, he chewed it, you have to chew it. If he didn't chew it, it's no maaseh. Rashi here learns it doesn't have to be a maaseh, and therefore the Maharam Shif says לעסה doesn't mean it he chewed it, but that's not the thing. Ai, cause Rashi holds you don't need a maaseh. Ai, what do you mean Rashi holds you don't need a maaseh? Over there Rashi says you need a maaseh. Rashi said it by חצר! And by חצר, what's the difference? That by חצר, since חצר is your shaliach, and shaliach by גניבה you got a problem on how you connect it, so the maaseh makes the connection. Like it says here, a shaliach by פיגול is not a shaliach of you. So here in fact you don't need a maaseh, and without a maaseh it's also, to tell you, it's right. Somebody wants to be motzi with קידוש, is that making a maaseh? But in קידוש can you make a maaseh? Machshavah like. Okay. Yeah. You can stop right there. Because if he's a Jew there's no blockade. To the Jew there's no blockade between doing an aveirah. No, see, once you did a maaseh there's no blockade. No, but if there's no maaseh, how is he... No, you don't need a maaseh. It's an aveirah. But here, no, here it's not a חצר, it's not a shelichus. Right. So it's not shelichus, there's no problem. There was no blockade to begin with. That's that's what I'm saying. Yeah, yeah, to a Jew it's no... and therefore it's it's... Yeah, yeah, you don't need a maaseh. You said that you said you can't have a a bad effect on somebody else's item. Item, with machshavah only. With machshavah only. So Uri Geller, the ayin hara... I can I can... It's not like that. That's that's an energy issue that can have a damaging... What's machshavah without a ma'aseh? Who is the shaliach of machshavah without ma'aseh? Ain't no machshavah without ma'aseh. Look at what we have today in... Yeah, but that's not a halachah nafka minah, that's a... By the halachah, there's no shlichut. So that's it! In other words, machshavah is not a machshavah... That's what you mean? No, no. Is it a machshavah? Right, but it's not a halachah, this is a different thing. But in halachah there's no spoons with Uri Geller, this is... Listen, next year energies already connect... It's all in the mind. You don't want to come to Ruth, make a pizza. Next year they might do that. If you want... The whole reason why we say that it can't be with the machshavah is because the possibility is that it could. Why don't you say it can't? Okay, but that is... No, there's machshavah is something, but not enough to make to have an effect. But you have to... Yeah. Hello. Yeah. Okay. I'll call you back in five minutes. He's a lawyer. It's in halachah it doesn't have an effect, but spiritually... for ten years and he's no trouble... No, it's you know... It's not...