Jewish Audio on Chabad.org. Today's שיעור will be מסכת הוריות דף י״א, but we will start on דף י׳ עמוד ב׳ from the beginning of the משנה. And the משנה says: כהן משיח שחטא, a כהן גדול who did an עבירה, ואחר כך עבר ממשיחותו, and then was taken away from his anointment, which means he was not a כהן גדול anymore. And we know that when a כהן גדול does an עבירה בשוגג, he doesn't bring the same קרבן חטאת as a יחיד. Now here, when he did the עבירה he was still a כהן גדול, but when it came to bring the קרבן, he was not a כהן גדול anymore. וכן נשיא שחטא, and so if it was a נשיא that did an עבירה, which is the מלך, ואחר כך עבר מגדולתו, and then he was taken away from his greatness, he wasn't a king anymore. Now we know a נשיא also has a special קרבן. When he does an עבירה, he doesn't bring the same קרבן חטאת as a regular יחיד, but he brings a special קרבן, which is a שעיר. Now here, when he did the עבירה he was still the נשיא, but when it came to bring the קרבן, he was not the king anymore. The

דין is: כהן משיח מביא פר. The כהן גדול still brings the פר, because when he did the עבירה he was a כהן גדול, so he still brings the פר of כהן גדול, even though when he brings the קרבן he is not a כהן גדול anymore. והנשיא מביא שעיר, and the נשיא would still bring the שעיר, even though when he brings the קרבן he is not a מלך anymore, he still brings that special קרבן that a מלך brings, because when he did the עבירה he was a מלך. משיח שעבר ממשיחותו ואחר כך חטא, but if it was a כהן גדול that after already he was taken away from his position of being כהן גדול, that's when he did the עבירה. וכן הנשיא שעבר מגדולתו, or this מלך after he was already taken away from his position of being king, ואחר כך חטא, then did the עבירה. כהן משיח מביא פר. The כהן גדול still brings a פר. As long as he was once a כהן גדול, so then he will always bring a פר for his עבירה. אבל הנשיא כהדיוט. But a נשיא, since he did the עבירה after he was taken away from his position as נשיא, he is like an ordinary person, and he would bring an ordinary חטאת, which is a כשבה or a שעירה, and not his special חטאת, which is a שעיר. Now the

גמרא explains: הא גופא קשיא. אמרת עבר ממשיחותו ואחר כך חטא מביא פר, הא חטא ואחר כך עבר ממשיחותו שתיקה למימר. Since the דין is that if after he was already taken away from his position, and that's when he did the עבירה, still the כהן גדול brings the פר, so certainly if he did the עבירה before he was taken away from his position, he certainly brings a פר. So the question is: Why does the משנה have to tell us that? Since at the end of the משנה it says that the כהן גדול, even if he did the עבירה after he was taken away from his position, nevertheless brings a פר, so why did the משנה in the beginning have to tell us that if he did the עבירה while he was still כהן גדול, and then he was taken away, he brings a פר? If in the second case he brings a פר, certainly in the first! And the גמרא answers: צריכא למימר. It does have to tell us. משום דקתני גבי נשיא, because by the case of a נשיא the דין is: דכי עבר מנשיאותו ואחר כך חטא כהדיוט מעליא, that if he was taken away from his נשיאות and then he did the עבירה, he brings a קרבן like an ordinary person. אהכי תנא, therefore it says, גבי משיח concerning the כהן גדול, דחטא ואחר כך עבר מביא פר, that if he sinned and then he was taken away from his position, he brings a פר. In other words, what the גמרא is trying to tell us is, באמת concerning כהן גדול, the משנה wouldn't have to tell us the דין that if he did the עבירה while he was still כהן גדול he brings a פר, because that's self-understood and פשוט. But concerning the נשיא, the משנה did have to tell us, because by a נשיא the דין is that if he did the עבירה after he was taken away from his position, he brings like an ordinary person. So concerning the נשיא it had to tell us that if he sinned while he was still נשיא, even though he was taken away later from the position, he still brings like a נשיא. So since in the... then concerning נשיא it had to tell us the דין, so the משנה already told us the דין concerning the כהן משיח. Then the גמרא asks: מנא הני מילי? How do we know this דין concerning the כהן גדול, that if he did the עבירה after he was taken already away from his position as כהן גדול, he still brings a פר like a כהן גדול? The גמרא says: דתנו רבנן, that the רבנן learned a פסוק concerning the קרבן of the כהן גדול: יקריב על חטאתו. He should bring for his עבירה, מלמד, that teaches us, שמביא חטאתו משעבר, that he brings his חטאת for the way he was before. יכול, because I would think by a דין that here it's a קל וחומר: ומה נשיא שמביא בשגגת מעשה, what about a נשיא, that he brings his קרבן חטאת if there was just שגגת מעשה, there was just an act of an עבירה, אינו מביא חטאתו משעבר, he still doesn't bring his חטאת for the way he was before, because if he did the עבירה after he was taken away from his position as נשיא, he brings his קרבן חטאת like an ordinary person, משיח שאינו מביא בשגגת מעשה אלא על העלם דבר עם שגגת מעשה, so a כהן גדול כהן גדול, he doesn't bring a קרבן חטאת just for שגגת מעשה, just for doing a wrong act. He brings it only if there was העלם דבר עם שגגת מעשה, which means first he פסקנד wrong, and then if he did it accordingly, that's when he brings his קרבן. So, if like this, so certainly he should not bring his special קרבן if he did the עבירה after he was a כהן גדול. Since we see that by a כהן גדול, it is even stricter. There are more conditions to when he brings his special קרבן. So, if it is stricter, so certainly if he is not a כהן גדול now, he couldn't bring a special קרבן. If a נשיא is not that strict doesn't bring his special קרבן if he did the עבירה when he's not a נשיא anymore, certainly the כהן גדול would not bring his special קרבן if he did the עבירה when he's not a כהן גדול anymore. Ah, the תנא קמא, the way we learn out from the פסוק, יקריב על חטאתו אשר חטא, he should bring for his חטאת, which the extra פסוק teaches us, so מביא על חטאתו משעבר, he brings for his חטא his חטאת as he was before. It is his, his special חטאת, which means that he brings that special חטאת of a כהן גדול. So, then the גמרא asks, now that we learn out from the פסוק like this, so now you can make a קל וחומר! So now let a נשיא also bring his special קרבן even if he did the עבירה after he was not a נשיא anymore with a קל וחומר: מה משיח שאינו מביא בשגגת מעשה, like by a כהן גדול, that is stricter and he doesn't bring his special קרבן if there was just שגגת מעשה, מביא חטאתו משעבר, nevertheless he brings his חטאת as he was before, which means as he was a כהן גדול. נשיא שמביא בשגגת מעשה, a נשיא which is not that strict, which brings a חטאת even if it was just שגגת מעשה, אינו דין, so certainly, שמביא חטאתו משעבר, that he should bring a חטאת as he was before. And therefore, if he did the עבירה after he was not a נשיא anymore, he still should bring a special קרבן of a נשיא. תלמוד לומר, the פסוק says, אשר נשיא יחטא. But if a נשיא will sin, the פסוק continues with his special קרבן. So, we learn out from this פסוק: כשהוא נשיא אין. If he sinned when he was a נשיא, that's when he brings a special קרבן. But לכשהוא הדיוט, if he sinned when he's already an ordinary person, he doesn't bring that special קרבן. And now we will continue with the משנה: חטאו עד שלא נתמנו, if the case was that they sinned before they were appointed, whether it was the כהן גדול before he became the כהן גדול, or the נשיא before he became a נשיא, ואחר כך נתמנו, and then they were appointed, הרי הן כהדיוטות, so they are the דין of ordinary people. And the כהן גדול would bring an ordinary חטאת and so would a נשיא, because this תנא holds that the קרבן follows the time of the חטא. And since at the time of the חטא he was not the כהן גדול or a נשיא, so they bring the ordinary חטאת. רבי שמעון אומר, but רבי שמעון says, אם נודעה להם עד שלא נתמנו חייבין, that if they found out that they did an עבירה before they were appointed, then they are חייב to bring a regular קרבן. Because then the חטא and the ידיעה came when they were still ordinary people. The עבירה was done when they were ordinary people, and the ידיעה, they found out about the עבירה while they were still ordinary people. That's when they bring the ordinary חטאת. ומשנתמנו, but if they found out after they were appointed, פטורין, they are פטור completely. Because in order to be חייב a קרבן, there has to be the חטא and the ידיעה together. So, in this case, if they found out after they were appointed, so they can't bring an ordinary חטאת, because the ידיעה came when they are already not ordinary people. They can't bring a special חטאת because the ידיעה came after they were appointed to their special position where you have to bring this special חטאת, and they can't bring that either because the חטא was not done while they were these special people. And therefore they are פטור completely. And the opinion of רבי שמעון applies not only in this case, but he argues also on the first משנה that we learned. He holds that if they did the עבירה while they were in the position, and then they found out after they were already out from the position, they also don't bring any קרבן according to רבי שמעון. Because in this case, too, the חטא and the ידיעה weren't there at the same time, at the same position, and therefore they are פטור completely. Then the משנה continues: איזה הוא נשיא, who is the נשיא that the פסוק says has to bring this special קרבן? זה מלך, that is the king. שנאמר, the פסוק in bringing the קרבן of a נשיא it says, that if he will transgress against a מצוה, ומכל מצות ה' אלהיו, of all the מצות of השם his God. What the פסוק ה' אלהיו means, שאין על גביו אלא ה' אלהיו, is a person that has nobody on top of him, no higher authority than השם himself. Who is that? The person who is the highest authority of amongst people, that there is nothing higher than him but השם, so that is the king. Then the גמרא says: מנא הני מילי, how do we know this דין that is said in the משנה that both the כהן גדול and a נשיא did the עבירה before they were appointed they bring like regular people? תנו רבנן, that the רבנן learned, the פסוק says, אם הכהן המשיח יחטא, if the כהן גדול will sin, so we דרשן, פרט לקודם, it comes to exclude the עבירות he did before he became a כהן גדול. But then the גמרא says, why do we need a פסוק for it, בלאו הכי, then it's a קל וחומר that the כהן גדול should not not bring the special קרבן if he did an עבירה before he became כהן גדול. Because מה נשיא שמביא בשגגת מעשה, מה גבי נשיא who brings this קרבן when there was just שגגת מעשה, אינו מביא על קודמין, he doesn't bring for the עבירות he did before, משיח שאינו מביא אלא על העלם דבר עם שגגת מעשה, a כהן גדול who only brings a קרבן if there was העלם דבר with שגגת מעשה, which is stricter, אינו דין שלא יביא על קודמין, certainly he cannot bring his קרבן for the עבירות he did before he became a כהן גדול. So why do we need the פסוק? No, it's not so, because כי ענינן בנשיא we can answer you that we can't learn it out from נשיא. If you say by נשיא שכן אינו מביא חטאת שנתעברה, so by a נשיא we know the דין is that if he sinned after he was already taken away from his position, he doesn't bring the special קרבן. And that is why if he sinned before he became נשיא, he also doesn't bring the special קרבן. תאמר במשיח, but say by כהן גדול, שמביא חטאת שנתעברה, he does bring his special חטאת even if he sinned after he was taken away from his position. So therefore, הואיל ומביא חטאת שנתעברה, since he brings a special חטאת even if he sinned after he was taken away from his position, I would think יביא על קודמין, so he should also bring the special קרבן if he sinned before he became a כהן גדול. That's why תלמוד לומר, we have the פסוק, where it says: המשיח יחטא, that if the כהן המשיח will sin, פרט, כשהוא משיח יביא, if he sinned when he was a כהן גדול, that's when he brings the special קרבן, לכשהוא הדיוט אינו מביא, if he sinned while he was still a הדיוט, then he doesn't bring the special קרבן. תניא נמי הכי גבי נשיא כהאי גוונא. We learned concerning a נשיא a similar thing. It says by a נשיא: אשר נשיא יחטא, that if the נשיא will sin, then he has to bring his special קרבן of a נשיא. So we learn out פרט לקודמין, it comes to exclude if he sinned before he became a נשיא. And the גמרא asks, why do we need a פסוק for this? והלא דין הוא, isn't it a קל וחומר? ומה משיח שמביא חטאת שנתעברה, אינו מביא על קודמין, מה גבי כהן גדול who brings his special חטאת, his special קרבן, even if he sinned after he was taken away from his position, nevertheless אינו מביא על קודמין, he doesn't bring the special קרבן if he sinned before he became a כהן גדול, נשיא שאינו מביא חטאת שנתעברה, a נשיא that if he sinned after he was taken away from his position as נשיא doesn't bring a special קרבן, אינו דין שלא יביא על קודמין, so certainly he would not bring his special קרבן if he sinned before he became a נשיא. לכאורה, why do we need a special פסוק to tell us that a נשיא doesn't bring for the עבירות before, when we would know it from a קל וחומר? So then we say, the גמרא answers that it's no קל וחומר, because מה למשיח, you know why a כהן גדול doesn't bring his special קרבן for the עבירות he did before? שכן אינו מביא בשגגת מעשה, because we see by him there's a strict stringency that he doesn't bring a קרבן בכלל if there was just שגגת מעשה. תאמר בנשיא, let's say by the נשיא, שמביא בשגגת מעשה, that the נשיא does bring a קרבן just for שגגת מעשה. So we see that for a נשיא to bring his special קרבן is easier than for a כהן גדול to bring his special קרבן. So therefore you would say, הואיל ומביא בשגגת מעשה, since a נשיא brings just for שגגת מעשה, יביא על קודמין, he should also bring for the עבירות he did before he became a נשיא. תלמוד לומר, that's why we have the פסוק, אשר נשיא יחטא, that כשהוא נשיא יביא, when do you bring your special קרבן? If he sinned when he's already a נשיא, ולא כשהוא הדיוט, but not if he sinned while he was still a הדיוט. Then the גמרא continues: תנו רבנן, the רבנן learned, the פסוק's לשון is, אשר נשיא יחטא, and the real translation would be that a נשיא which sinned. יכול, I would think, גזירה, it is a גזירה, Hashem says, it's a גזירה that the נשיא should sin. תלמוד לומר, the other פסוק says: אם הכהן המשיח יחטא, concerning the קרבן of the כהן גדול it says, if the כהן גדול will sin, then he brings his קרבן. So we say: מה להלן לכשיחטא, just like by the כהן גדול what it means is, if he will sin, אף כאן לכשיחטא, so here by the נשיא also what the פסוק means is, if the נשיא will sin. So the פסוק doesn't mean it's a גזירה from Hashem that the נשיא should sin. Now another point: אמר מר, we just learned: יכול גזירה, I would think that אשר נשיא יחטא means a גזירה. גזירה, מי איכא כי האי גוונא? the גמרא asks. A גזירה, where would you get that it's a גזירה? What kind of גזירה is this that a נשיא should sin? Where do we find something like that, that if it's a bad thing, and the פסוק says a גזירה that this bad thing will happen, that it must happen? He says: אמר, I would tell you, אין, אשכחן, we do find something like that. We see, because a פסוק says: ונתתי נגע צרעת בבית ארץ אחוזתכם. Concerning the דינים of a נגע צרעת of a house, the פסוק starts off by saying that I will give a נגע צרעת in the house of the land that you inherit. So the פסוק is telling us, בשורה היא להם כדבעינן למימר, it is a בשורה, good news, that the נגעים will come upon them in their homes. And the reason is, because the כנענים, when they heard that the אידן are coming to conquer ארץ ישראל, they hid their gold and silver inside the walls, and the אידן didn't know where they were. So when Hashem would put a נגע in the house, and the דין is that you must destroy the whole house, so then they would find the gold and silver. So it is a בשורה that השם said, "I will put a נגע in your house." Did everybody hear that? Has anybody never heard it? You can imagine that this is not what the פסוק come to tell us with the words ונתתי נגע צרעת, but פרט לאנוסים came to tell us to exclude the נגעים that came by force. And the פסוק is saying which נגע makes the house טמא? If it was in a normal way. השם put it in normally. But if it was put in through a שד, through a demon, so then there is no דין of טומאה in this נגע. But in the meantime we see that if like we would say, even though it's a back sense to have a נגע, nevertheless, he learns פשט in the פסוק ונתתי as a good news that there will be a נגע in the house. Also over here too concerning the פסוק אשר נשיא יחטא I could say גזירה, it's a גזירה השם is telling us news a fact that the נשיא will sin. Therefore it says אם, you quote the other פסוק, it says אם הכהן המשיח יחטא to tell us that it doesn't mean that he will sin and it's a, but what the פסוק means if he will sin then he brings his mistake. Then the גמרא explains further, תימא מאי דאיתשיל בי רב כהנא, according to רב כהנא, is it true that if the נגעים happens through an אונס, it doesn't become טמא? But aren't we learning in a ברייתא and the פסוק says concerning נגעים, אדם כי יהיה, etc. and if a person there will be a נגע in his skin, the תורה goes on with all the דינים of the טומאה of נגעים? So it learns out from this פסוק מן הדיבור ואילך, it's only those נגעים that happened after the דין was given, those נגעים are טמא, whether it is by a house or by a person, but what the פסוק is telling us, אדם כי יהיה, if it will happen in the future. But if the נגע happened already before the דין was said, so that נגע is not טמא, even though now it is already after the דין. So the פסוק is telling us when is the נגע טמא? Only if it happened after the תורה gave us this דין. And then the ברייתא says, והלא דין הוא, isn't it a סברא? טמא בזב וטמא בנגעים. There is a דין טומאה by a זב, a person has this liquid comes from him, in a certain conditions he becomes a זב and he becomes טמא. So the תורה said there's a דין טומאה by a זב, and טמא בנגעים, there's a דין טומאה by נגעים, so we should compare the two and say מה זב מן הדיבור ואילך, just like the דין of זב is that when is a זב טמא? Only if the זיבה, the liquid came out of him after the דין was given, as we learned out from the פסוק where it says כי יהיה זב מבשרו, if it will be running from his flesh. So from here we know that only if it will be, means after the תורה gave us this דין, but those people that had this liquid coming from them before they are not טמא. אף נגעים מן הדיבור ואילך, so too the נגעים are only טמא if it happened after the דיבור, after the דין was given. So the question is why did we need a special פסוק concerning נגעים? Why don't you learn it out from זב? And the answer is, לא. If I know the זב, we can say that by זב the דין is like that, שכן אינו מטמא באונס, because a זב has a certain קולא that a זב doesn't become טמא if the liquid came out of him by force, it was forced out some way. For instance if it came through falling, or someone hit him, or someone burned him, or even if it came through a שד, so there the דין is that he is not טמא. תאמר בנגעים, but can you say by נגעים, שמטמא באונס, it's tamei באונס. So we see that נגעים are stricter than זב because נגעים are מטמא באונס, while זב is not. And therefore we couldn't learn out this קולא that נגעים are not טמא unless it happened after the דיבור from זב, because זב the קולא is easier. And therefore that's why we have to have a special פסוק by נגעים, אדם כי יהיה, that מן הדיבור ואילך, that which נגעים are מטמא? Only if it came מן הדיבור ואילך, but not those נגעים from before. And in the meantime we see in this ברייתא that it says מפורש that נגעים are מטמא באונס, that even if it happened by force, it is still טמא. How can we say before that if the says of the פסוק ונתתי נגע צרעת, where they said comes to tell us that נגעים are not מטמא? הגמרא answers רבא אמר, רבא said, פרט לנגעי רוחות. What did they mean when he said it comes to exclude נגעי אונס? It means to exclude נגעי רוחות, which means נגעים that happened through a demon, through a שד. When it says in that ברייתא that נגעים are מטמא באונס, it means if it happened by force, but not through a שד, through a person, a person did something to make it happen, that's when the

נגעים are still מטמא. But when the said that נגעים are not מטמא באונס, it means if it happened through a שד. רב פפא אמר, רב פפא said פרט לנגעי כשפים. רב פפא said what did they mean that נגעים are not מטמא באונס? If it's a נגע that happened through כשפים, through magic. If it happened through any other אונס, it is מטמא like it says in the other ברייתא, but if it happened through magic, that's when נגעים are not מטמא in the house. And the גמרא continues, תנו רבנן, the רבנן learned, אשר נשיא יחטא, when the פסוק says if a נשיא will sin he brings this special קרבן, פרט לחולה, that comes to exclude if he was sick. Because if he was sick, then he's not a נשיא anymore, and therefore he doesn't bring that special קרבן of a נשיא. So the גמרא asks, משום דהוה ליה חולה אידחי ליה מנשיאותיה? Because he was sick, he's pushed away from his נשיאות? He loses his נשיאות because he's sick? אמר רב יוסף, הכא במאי עסקינן, here what are we dealing with, what does it mean, פרט לנשיא שנעשה מצורע, to exclude a נשיא that became a מצורע. What kind of sickness did he have? He became a מצורע, and then he is pushed away from his נשיאות. And that is what the פסוק says, וינגע השם את המלך, Hashem gave the מלך a נגע, ויהי מצורע עד יום מותו, and he was a מצורע till the day of his death. וישב בבית החפשית, and he stayed in the free house, ויותם בן המלך על הבית, and יותם, the son of the king, was appointed on the house. מדהקאמר בבית החפשית, since the פסוק says he stayed in this free house, מכלל דעד האידנא עבד הוה, that till now he was a slave. If he say that he was a מצורע, he stayed in the free house, that means to say until now he wasn't free, he was a slave. Now what does that mean? That means that until now he was a king, because a king is really a slave. He is a slave to all the responsibilities that he has, and therefore when the פסוק says that he stayed in the free house, that means that he was released from his job as being מלך. And now, therefore he was free, because now he didn't have these responsibilities. So in the meantime, we see here that a king who becomes a מצורע is released from being king. So therefore, we learn out from the פסוק, אשר נשיא יחטא, it comes to exclude a מלך that was sick, meaning a מלך that was a מצורע, that then he doesn't bring his special קרבן, but he brings a regular קרבן like a הדיוט. And now the גמרא is going to bring a story, which is in connection to what we just said, that a מלך really is an עבד, the king really is a slave. כי

הא דרבן גמליאל ורבי יהושע הוו אזלי בספינתא, a story that רבן גמליאל and רבי יהושע once traveled in a ship. בהדי דרבן גמליאל הוה פיתא, בהדי דרבי יהושע הוה פיתא וסולתא. That רבן גמליאל had along with him loaves of bread, but רבי יהושע had bread and flour. סליק פיתא דרבן גמליאל, the bread of רבן גמליאל was finished. סמך אסולתא דרבי יהושע, he depended on the flour of רבי יהושע. אמר ליה, רבן גמליאל said to רבי יהושע, מי הוה ידעת, did you know דכולי האי עכבינן, that we're going to be held back so long, דאיתית סולתא, that you brought flour? In other words, what made you think that our journey would take so long that you brought flour that we could have what to eat? אמר ליה, so he said to him, כוכב אחד לשבעים שנה עולה, there's one star that comes up once in 70 years, ומתעה את הספנים, and it confuses the sailors. In other words, the way they knew how to travel was because they followed the stars, but there's one star that comes once in 70 years and it confuses the sailors. ואמינא, and I said, שמא יעלה, we're up to 70 and maybe it will go up now and it will confuse us, and then we will get lost and our journey will take much longer. אמר ליה, so he said to him, כל כך בידך, you have so much in hands, you seem to be so smart, ואתה עולה בספינה, and you still travel in a boat? In other words, for your livelihood, you must take these trips, if you're so smart, you should not have to go through this travel of making a פרנסה. אמר ליה, so he said to him, עד שאתה תמה עלי, while you're wondering about me, תמה על שני תלמידים שיש לך ביבשה, why don't you wonder about two students you have in the dry land, ר' אלעזר חסמא ורבי יוחנן בן גודגדא, שיודעין לשער כמה טיפות יש בים, that they're so smart that they're able to estimate how many drops of water you have in the ים, ואין להם פת לאכול, and they have no bread to eat, ולא בגד ללבוש, and no garments to dress. So why don't you worry about them? נתן דעתו להושיבם בראש, so he made up his mind that when he comes back, he will appoint them to a high position. כי סליק, and when he came, שלח להו, and sent after them, ולא באו, they didn't come, because they understood why he was calling them, because he wants to give them a position, and they didn't want to take the position. חזר ושלח, they sent after them again, ובאו, and this time they came. אמר להם, he said to them, כמדומין אתם, you think ששררה אני נותן לכם, that I am giving you rulership? עבדות אני נותן לכם, slavery I am giving you! שנאמר, as the פסוק says, וידברו אליו לאמר, and spoke to them to say, אם היום תהיה עבד לעם הזה, if today you will be an עבד to this nation. And this is speaking about appointing somebody as a leader, and he said I am making you into an עבד. And that's what he said to them, you didn't come to me because you didn't want to accept to become rulers. It is not rulership really, it is עבדות, it is slavery. Because to be a leader, you are really full of responsibilities and you are like a slave to the responsibilities. So here we see that a leader, a ruler, a מלך is called an עבד, and that's why the פסוק says there that when he became a מצורע, he was in the free house, meaning that now he is free. Till then, he was an עבד, and now he is free. Till then, he was the king, and now he is free because a מלך that becomes a מצורע loses his מלכות, loses his kingship. Now, the גמרא continues, תנו רבנן, the רבנן learned, פסוק says, אשר נשיא יחטא.

אמר ר' יוחנן בן זכאי, so רבי יוחנן בן זכאי דרש, for the word אשר comes from the word אשרי, which means happy. אשרי הדור, happy is the generation שהנשיא שלו מביא קרבן על שגגתו, that its נשיא, its king brings a קרבן for his עבירה that he did unintentionally. And this is a lesson to others, that אם נשיא שלו מביא קרבן So a person should think, if his נשיא brings a קרבן, פאלט א לערנען על הדיוט, we have to say that an ordinary person has to bring a קרבן. So this will bring that all other people who have to bring קרבנות should bring קרבנות. ואם על שגגתו מביא קרבן, if he brings a קרבן for his שוגג, פאלט א לערנען על זדונו, so certainly we have to say concerning his מזיד, that if he does תשובה and brings a קרבן for his עבירה בשוגג, certainly he will do תשובה for his עבירה במזיד. מתקיף לה רבא בריה דרב עילאי, so רבא the son of רב עילאי asked a קשיא, אלא מעתה, if we דרשן the word אשר from the word אשרי which means happy, אי הכי, the פסוק says, איש אשר יחטא מן הקדש בשגגה, that that when he sinned from the קודש he should pay, so there it also says אשר. So would you tell me that that means that it's good that he sinned? וכדברי ירבעם בן נבט דכתיב, and certainly ירבעם בן נבט it says, אשר חטא ואשר החטיא, that he sinned and that he made others sin, הכי נמי, would you also tell me that אשרי הדור, the פסוק here means good and happy is the generation that this happened? The גמרא says, שאני הכא, this can be proven differently, the פסוק of אשר נשיא יחטא is different, because here the פסוק changed in expression. Some other where, when the פסוק writes אשר, it doesn't mean from the word אשרי. But in this case with a king, the other people who did עבירה that the פסוק speaks about, it says אם. It says אם הכהן המשיח יחטא, and it says ואם נפש אחת, if a person will sin. When it comes to the נשיא it says אשר נשיא יחטא. So obviously the תורה changed the word to teach us something, and that's why here we דרשן the word אשר from the לשון of אשרי. Then the גמרא continues, אמר רב חסדא אמר רב הונא, רב חסדא said in the name of רב הונא, מאי דכתיב, what is the meaning of the פסוק where it says, יש הבל אשר נעשה על הארץ וגו'? That there is foolishness which is done on the earth, and here also the פסוק uses the לשון אשר נעשה על הארץ. So he also דרשנס the word אשר from the לשון אשרי. And he says this is what the פסוק means: אשריהם לצדיקים, happy is for the צדיקים, שמגיע אליהם כמעשה הרשעים של עולם הבא בעולם הזה, that they get in this world what the רשעים get in the next world. To the רשעים in the next world, there are all kinds of problems. So it is good for the צדיקים that they get in this world what the רשעים get in the next world. אוי להם לרשעים, and bad is for the רשעים, שמגיע אליהם כמעשה הצדיקים של עולם הבא בעולם הזה, that they get in this world what the צדיקים get in the next world. In other words, when a רשע gets in this world what a צדיק gets in the next world, which is good, that means that he will not have anything in עולם הבא, because we know השם gives a רשע, for the little bit of good that he did, he gives him all good things in this world, so when it comes to עולם הבא, to the world to come, he won't have to give him any reward at all. So it's bad for the רשעים the fact that in this world they have everything good. And look at what he's saying here: bad is for the רשעים that they get what the צדיקים get in the next world, which means all good things, they get in this world. But for צדיקים, it is good that they get in this world what the רשעים get in the next world.

אמר רבא, so רבא asks, why is it? אטו צדיקי, if צדיקים could have תרי עולמי, if צדיקים if they would have both worlds, מי סני להו, would they hate it? In other words, why is it good for a צדיק to have in this world what the רשעים have in the next world, which means it is good for the צדיק to have it bad in this world? Why is that good for him? What would be wrong if the צדיק could have it good in this world, too? He has it good in the next world, and if he could have it good in this world, too, he wouldn't hate it either. אלא אמר רבא, therefore רבא said the פשט is different, what the פסוק means is אשריהם לצדיקים, good is for the צדיקים, שמגיע אליהם כמעשה הרשעים של עולם הזה בעולם הזה, good is for the צדיקים that get in this world what the רשעים get in this world, which means it's good for those צדיקים that have it good in both worlds. The world to come they definitely have good, and if they have it good in this world, too, like the רשעים have it in this world, then it's כפול good for them. אוי להם לרשעים, and bad is for the רשעים, שמגיע אליהם כמעשה הצדיקים של עולם הזה בעולם הזה, that they get in this world what the צדיקים get in this world. There are many צדיקים in this world that don't have it good, so bad is for the רשעים who have it in this world like those צדיקים have it in this world, because then they have it bad in this world and in the next world. The next world they definitely have it bad because they're רשעים. Now if they also have it bad in this world, then it's כפול bad for them.

רב פפא ורב הונא בריה דרב יהושע אתו לקמיה דרבא, רב פפא and רב הונא son of רב יהושע came to רבא. אמר להו, so he said to them, איקיימתון מסכת פלוני ומסכת פלוני? Do you know this מסכתא and that מסכתא? אמרו ליה, they said to him, אין, yes. And then he said to them, איעתרתון פורתא? Are you rich a little bit? Do you have פרנסה, or are you rich a little bit? Good, אמרו ליה, they said to him, אין, yes. דנקיטינן קטינא דארעא, because we bought a little piece of land, and from that we're able to draw our livelihood. קרי עליה, so he called upon them, אשריכם הצדיקים, טוב לכם הצדיקים, דמטיא להון כמעשי רשעים דעולם הזה בעולם הזה. That they get what the רשעים get in this world, the צדיקים also get into this world. And that's why he sent them back, because they had it good in this world, they had good פרנסה. Then the גמרא says, אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן, רבה בר בר חנה said in the name of רבי יוחנן, מאי דכתיב, what is the meaning of the פסוק where it says, כי ישרים דרכי ה', that the ways of ה' are straight, וצדיקים ילכו בם, the צדיקים go on this road, on this ways, ופשעים יכשלו בם, but the פושעים, the רשעים, they will stumble in this ways. Which means that they will stumble in the ways of ה'. What does that mean that the רשעים will stumble in the ways of ה'? The ways of ה' are מצוות. So what's the פשט that the רשעים will stumble through the מצוות? So it says, משל, it's made near, a משל to two people, שצלו את פסחיהן, that they both roasted their קרבן פסח. אחד אכלו לשם מצוה, one of them, who's a צדיק, he ate it for the מצוה, for the מצוה to eat the קרבן פסח. ואחד אכלו לשום אכילה גסה, and the other one ate it just to enjoy a substantial meal, an extra meal. זה

שאכלו לשם מצוה, the one that ate it with intentions to perform the מצוה, on him we say the part of the פסוק, צדיקים ילכו בם, צדיקים go on it. This is a מצוה. Eating the קרבן פסח is the way of ה', so צדיקים follow the way of ה'. This צדיק ate the קרבן פסח לשם מצוה. וזה שאכלו לשום אכילה גסה, the one that ate it just to enjoy an extra meal, on him we say ופשעים יכשלו בם, that the פושעים, the רשעים, they will stumble in it. In other words, he did the מצוה, but nevertheless he stumbled in it. אמר ליה ריש לקיש, so ריש לקיש said to him, רשע קרית ליה? This person who ate the קרבן פסח לשום אכילה גסה, you call him a רשע? נהי דלא עביד מצוה מן המובחר, it's true that he didn't do the מצוה in the best way, because you have to do the מצוה with the intentions of לשמה, but פסח מיהא קא אכיל, but didn't he eat the קרבן פסח? After all he fulfilled the מצוה of קרבן פסח, even though he had in mind to enjoy the good meal. So how could you call him a רשע? אלא, therefore, a משל, it's made near, a different משל. A משל to two people, לזה אשה ואחותו עמו בבית, to one of them his wife and his sister were with him in the house, ולזה אשה ואחותו עמו בבית, and the other one also his wife and his sister were in the house. אחד נזדמנה לו אשתו, one happened to meet up and make contact with his wife, ואחד נזדמנה לו אחותו, and the other one made the contact with his sister. זה שנזדמנה לו אשתו, the one that made his contact with his wife, צדיקים ילכו בם. On him we say that צדיקים follow the ways of ה'. וזה שנזדמנה לו אחותו, and the one who happened to make contact with his sister, on him we say ופשעים יכשלו בם, that the פושעים, the רשעים, will be stumbled in it. Because he did a מצוה, he had relation with his wife, and the other one did an עבירה, he had his relation with his sister, which is one of the עריות. But then the גמרא asks the גמרא, how can you compare them? אנן חדא דרך קאמרינן, we're saying one way. For the פסוק is trying to say that there is one way of ה', and in the same way the צדיקים will follow the way and the רשעים will stumble over the way. But הכא, here, תרי דרכי נינהו, there were two ways. One did one thing and the other one did something else. So how can we say this is the meaning of the פסוק? אלא, therefore, we say what does the פסוק mean?

משל ללוט ושתי בנותיו, the משל would be of לוט and his two daughters. That after they ran away from סדום, and they hid in the cave, and they thought that the whole world was destroyed, so the older sister said to the younger sister, if the whole world is destroyed, there will be no more children, so let's get our father drunk, and one night I will have relations with him, and the second night you will have relations with him. And that's what they did, and they both became pregnant, and from then on we had the two nations of עמון and מואב. מואב was the son of the older daughter, and עמון was the son of the younger daughter, and later on they turned into the big nations. So we say הן נתכוונו לשם מצוה, they that had intended for a מצוה, so צדיקים ילכו בם, and so on them we say the act they did would be called צדיקים ילכו בם, that צדיקים follow it. הוא שנתכוון לשם עבירה, he who intended for an עבירה, on him we say ופשעים יכשלו בם, that the פושעים, the רשעים, will be stumbled with it. But the גמרא asks the גמרא, ודילמא איהו נמי לשם מצוה מיכוון, maybe he also intended for the מצוה? אמר רבי יוחנן, רבי יוחנן said, we know that כל הפסוק הזה לשם עבירה, this whole פסוק was set for עבירה. And this refers to the פסוק in פרשת לך לך, י"ג... י"ג פסוק י'. Where the תורה speaks about לוט, that after the shepherds of לוט got into an argument with the shepherds of אברהם, and אברהם אבינו asked לוט to leave, so the פסוק says וישא לוט את עיניו, לוט picked up his eyes, וירא את כל ככר הירדן, and he saw the whole plain of the ירדן, כי כלה משקה, that it was all watered very well. So רבי יוחנן said that this whole פסוק, every word of the פסוק indicates that לוט's intentions were for an עבירה. And he explains how. The first word where it says וישא לוט, that לוט picked up, that is similar to another פסוק where it means an עבירה. And The פסוק where it says ותשא אשת אדוניו את עיניה, the פסוק concerning the wife of פוטיפר when she saw יוסף, and she wanted to do the עבירה with יוסף, so the פסוק says ותשא אשת אדוניו את עיניה. So we see here that he uses the same לשון. There it says וישא לוט, the same לשון, here it says ותשא אשת אדוניו את עיניה. So we compare the two, and we say just like over there the intentions were עבירה, so by לוט also his intentions were עבירה. Then the פסוק continues. After it says וישא לוט, it says את עיניו, so that also indicates עבירה, because there is another פסוק that says ויאמר שמשון, going to שמשון he said, אותה קח לי כי היא ישרה בעיני. Her you should take for me because she is right in my eyes. So from there we understand that when it says here וישא לוט את עיניו, he also had intentions for a similar thing. Then the פסוק says further וירא. That is also an עבירה, because there is another פסוק that says וירא אותה שכם בן חמור, concerning דינה when she was captured by שכם, so the פסוק also says וירא אותה שכם בן חמור. שכם had also an עבירה in mind. And here it also says וירא, so that tells you that this is also with the intention for an עבירה. Then it says further, what did he see? את כל ככר הירדן. So that is similar to another פסוק where it says כי בעד אשה זונה עד ככר לחם, that for an אשה זונה, a man could become up to a loaf of bread, which means he could give everything up for a loaf of bread. So here it says the word ככר, and there it says the word ככר. So just like here we are talking about אשה זונה, there also it means he had intentions for an עבירה. Then the פסוק continues כי כולה משקה, that he saw that it was watered well. This is similar to another פסוק where it says אלכה אחרי מאהבי, I will go after my lovers, נותני לחמי, the ones that give me my bread, ומימי my waters, צמרי my wool, ופשתי my flax, שמני my oil, ושקויי and my drinks. So we see there that it's talking about following the lovers, which is an ענין of זנות. So here too it uses the same לשון, כי כולה משקה, just like over there it says that she's following lovers to get her drink, so here also it means that he intended for an עבירה. So therefore, when we ask the question that maybe לוט intended to go so he can serve a מצוה, so רבי יוחנן said we know from this פסוק that his whole intentions were for an עבירה. But the גמרא asks, how can you say that? והא מינס אנס, wasn't he forced? Doesn't it say that his daughters gave him to drink wine, fell asleep, and he didn't know what was happening? So he didn't do it intentionally. The גמרא says

תנא משמיה דרבי יוסי ברבי חנינא, we learned in the name of רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא, למה נקוד על וא"ו שבקומה של בכירה? Why is there a dot in the ספר תורה over the וא"ו of the word בקומה of the older daughter? It says that after the older daughter did the act with her, it says ולא ידע בשכבה ובקומה. And he didn't know בשכבה of the laying down ובקומה and of the getting up. And on the וא"ו of ובקומה there is a dot, לומר לך to tell us, שבשכבה לא ידע, of the laying down he in fact didn't know, אבל בקומה ידע, but for the getting up he knew. In other words, he did know after the מעשה happened what had happened. But the גמרא asks, מאי הוה ליה למיעבד? What could he have done? מאי דהוה הוה, what happened happened already. The גמרא says נפקא מינה, the difference was, דלאפניא אחרינא, for the next night, לא איבעי ליה למישתי, he shouldn't have drank. And he nevertheless went and not long and drank. ממילא even though it was באונס, the truth is that he also intended for the עבירה. Then the גמרא says, דרש רבא בר בר חנה, מאי דכתיב, what is the meaning of the פסוק where it says, and this is a פסוק in משלי קפיטול י"ח פסוק י"ט, the פסוק says אח נפשע מקרית עז, a brother's transgressions against a strong city, ומדנים כבריח ארמון, and their contentions are like bars of a castle. What does that mean? אח נפשע מקרית עז זה לוט. The פסוק says a brother's transgressions against a strong city, that refers to לוט who took from אברהם and separated himself from אברהם. אברהם is a strong city, and he separated himself from him. ומדנים כבריח ארמון, and when the פסוק says their contentions are like bars of a castle, that means שהטיל מדנים בין ישראל לעמון, that he made an argument between the אידן and עמון. Namely, because it says לא יבא עמוני ומואבי בקהל ה', there is a דין that an עמוני or מואבי, a person from עמון or from מואב is not allowed to get married into the Jewish nation. So who was the cause of that? That was לוט. Then the גמרא says, דרש רבא בר בר חנה, ואית דאמרי דרש רבא בר עולא, מאי דכתיב, what is the meaning of the פסוק, and this is the first פסוק in קפיטול י"ח of משלי where it says לתאוה יבקש נפרד בכל תושיה יתגלע, that he who separates himself, he seeks his own desires, and he goes out against all sound wisdom. What is the meaning of this פסוק? So he teitsches לתאוה יבקש נפרד זה לוט, who separated himself from אברהם. This refers to לוט who separated himself from אברהם. And when it says בכל תושיה יתגלע, so he teitsches the word יתגלע, as if it would say with a ה' which would mean from the לשון of revealing, שנתגלה קלונו בבתי כנסיות ובבתי מדרשות, that his embarrassment was revealed in all the all the שולס. Why? Because we learned עמוני ומואבי אסורים איסור עולם, that עמוני and מואבי are אסור forever. That nobody from עמון and מואב is allowed to enter כלל ישראל ever. And that's what they're learning in the ישיבות and in the שולס. So לוט, what he did revealed his embarrassment in the ישיבות and in the שולס. And the גמרא continues, אמר עולא, עולא says

תמר זינתה וזמרי זינה, תמר committed adultery, and זמרי also committed adultery. תמר זינתה יצאו ממנה מלכים ונביאים. תמר committed adultery, and what was the result? That from her came out kings and prophets. זמרי זינה, זמרי committed adultery. What was the result of that? נפלו כמה רבבות מישראל, tens of thousands of Jews died. תמר was the wife later of יהודה, and through the act that she did, and since she intended it לשם שמים, and so then the result of that was that from her came out מלכים ונביאים. And זמרי committed adultery, and his intentions were not לשם שמים, but לשם עבירה. The result of that was that tens of thousands of Jews died. As the חומש says that there was a מגפה amongst כלל ישראל after the מעשה of זמרי, and the מגפה did stop because of פינחס when he killed זמרי. And otherwise there was a מגפה, and until פינחס managed to kill him, tens of thousands of Jews died. So we see that for the same act, if you do it לשם שמים in the proper way, then the result is that you have a lot of reward. If you do it in a way of עבירה, so then you cause a lot of trouble. And the גמרא says, אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק, רב נחמן בר יצחק says גדולה עבירה לשמה ממצוה שלא לשמה. It is greater, it is better to do an עבירה with the intentions לשם השם, for the sake of השם, than to do a מצוה with not having intentions for the sake of השם. שנאמר, as we find a פסוק that says תבורך מנשים יעל אשת חבר הקיני, that from all women, יעל, the wife of חבר הקיני should be blessed. מנשים באוהל תבורך,

from women in the tent she should be blessed. This was יעל who killed סיסרא during the war that סיסרא had against the Jews. After he ran away and stopped off at the house of יעל, יעל killed him. And later on, when דבורה הנביאה sang שירה, so she said that יעל should be blessed more than the women in the tent. The גמרא says, מאן נינהו נשים באוהל? Who are these women in the tent that she said that יעל should be blessed more than them? That is שרה, רבקה, רחל ולאה. And nevertheless, she should be blessed more than them. And the truth is, the way she killed him was because of an עבירה. As the גמרא will say soon that she first had relations with סיסרא, and that's how she weakened him, and that's how she was able to kill him. So we see here that because she did an עבירה לשמה, she was blessed. But then the גמרא says, איני, it is not so. How can you say that an עבירה לשמה is better than a מצוה שלא לשמה? והאמר רב יהודה אמר רב, didn't רב יהודה say in the name of רב, לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ומצות אפילו שלא לשמה, a person should always involve himself in תורה ומצות even if it is not לשמה, because שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה, because from doing it שלא לשמה, he will come to do it לשמה. So we see that doing a מצוה שלא לשמה is not bad. So therefore the גמרא says, אימא כמצוה שלא לשמה, that doing an עבירה לשמה is not better than a מצוה שלא לשמה, which would be saying that a מצוה שלא לשמה is no good, but what it was meant to say was that an עבירה לשמה is as good as a מצוה שלא לשמה. Now the גמרא will explain, where do we see that she did an עבירה לשמה? דאמר רבי יוחנן, רבי יוחנן said שבע בעילות בעל אותו רשע באותה שעה. Seven בעילות, seven times relations the רשע had with her at that time. שנאמר, because the פסוק says בין רגליה כרע, between her feet he kneeled, נפל, he fell, שכב, he laid, וגומר, etc. Further it says בין רגליה כרע נפל באשר כרע שם נפל שדוד. So it says seven times the same expression, which tells us that he had relations with her seven times, and that's how she weakened him, and that's why she was able to kill him. And that's what we mean that she did an עבירה, but it was לשמה, and that was greater or as great as a מצוה שלא לשמה. But then the גמרא asks, והא קא מיתהני מעבירה? But didn't she have pleasure from the עבירה? אדרבה, the reason she did it was in order to weaken him and to be able to kill him, but at the time of the act she had pleasure, so she had pleasure from the עבירה. אמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחי, רבי יוחנן said in the name of רבי שמעון בן יוחי, אפילו טובתן של רשעים, even the good thing of a רשע, רעה היא אצל צדיקים, by a צדיק it is bad. So even the pleasure that a רשע gives to a צדיק, by the צדיק it is not pleasure, but it's considered bad. And therefore she did not have pleasure from what the רשע, סיסרא, did to her. Then the גמרא says, אמר רב יהודה אמר רב, רב יהודה in the name of רב, לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ומצות אפילו שלא לשמה, a person should always involve himself in תורה ומצות even if it is not לשמה, because שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה, that through doing it שלא לשמה you will come to do it לשמה. Because we see שמשכר מ״ב קרבנות שהקריב בלק הרשע, in the reward of the forty-two sacrifices, קרבנות, that בלק הרשע brought to השם, and even though he did not do it לשמה when he brought the קרבנות it was because he thought that this is going to be the way that בלעם is going to be able to curse the יידן, but בפועל ממש he brought קרבנות to השם, so it was a מצוה even though it was שלא לשמה. Because of that, זכה, he merited ויצאה הימנו רות, that רות came out of him.

דאמר רבי יוסי בר חוני, because רבי יוסי בר חוני said, רות בת בנו של עגלון, רות was the daughter of the son of עגלון, who was בן בנו של בלק מלך מואב, who was the grandson of בלק מלך מואב. So we see that רות was a great-great-granddaughter of בלק, and what זכות did he have, the granddaughter of רות, because of the קרבנות he brought to השם, even though they were שלא לשמה. So we see that you should always do מצות even if it's שלא לשמה, because from the שלא לשמה you will get to לשמה. Then the גמרא says, אמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן, and רבי חייא בר אבא said in the name of רבי יוחנן, מניין, how do we know שאין הקדוש ברוך הוא מקפח אפילו שכר שיחה נאה, how do we know השם doesn't deprive the reward even for a good expression? מהכא, from here, from the case of לוט and his two daughters. דאילו בכירה, because we see that the older daughter, דקריא מואב, she called her son מואב. And the reason she called him מואב to show that מאב he came from the father and he was born from her father. אמר ליה רחמנא למשה, so concerning מואב השם said to משה, אל תצר את מואב ואל תתגר בם מלחמה. Do not surround מואב and do not start a war with them. So what does the פסוק mean? מלחמה הוא דלא, a war you're not allowed to start with them, הא צעורי צערינן, but to tease them, to annoy them, you're allowed. ואילו צעירה, but concerning the younger one, דקריא בן עמי, she called her son עמון, because to show בן עמי, but she didn't outright give him a name that would show that he came from the father. אמר ליה, השם said to משה, אל תצורם ואל תתגר בם כלל. It says do not surround them and do not tease them at all. אפילו צעורי לא, even just to tease them, just to annoy them, you're not allowed. And the reason for this is because she was more צנועה, because she was more modest. The name she gave her son wasn't so outright to show that it was a son that came from her own father. The older daughter called him מואב, which was outright מאב, so here השם said that you are allowed to tease her children. But the younger one was more modest, and the expression that she used, the name that she called her son, was a more modest expression, so השם rewarded her that we're not even allowed to tease her children. Here we see that השם doesn't deprive the reward even for just a modest expression. Then the גמרא says, אמר רבי חייא בר אבא... אמר רבי יהושע בן קרחה, that רבי חייא בר אבא said in the name of רבי יהושע בן קרחה, לעולם יקדים אדם לדבר מצוה, a person should always try to do a דבר מצוה as soon as possible. שבשביל לילה אחת שקדמתה בכירה לצעירה, because of the reward that one night the older one did it before the younger one, זכתה וקדמתה ארבעה דורות למלכות, that she had the זכות that her royal status by יידן came four generations earlier. Because there was a king by יידן who came from מואב, there was a king by יידן who came from עמון, but the king by יידן who came from מואב was four generations earlier. The king who came from מואב was דוד המלך, and the king who came from עמון was רחבעם בן שלמה who came from נעמה העמונית. So the first person who came from מואב was עובד the son of רות. So we have עובד, and his son was ישי, and his son was דוד, and then שלמה. And שלמה's son, he was from עמון. So we see that four generations before the person who came from עמון was the one who came from מואב. And the reason for that was because she was מקדים herself to the מצוה before her younger sister. So the same like we learned before, the example that the גמרא gave of the פסוק of צדיקים ילכו בם ופשעים יכשלו בם. So the first משל was concerning two people who roasted the קרבן פסח, one ate it לשם מצוה and one ate it לשום אכילה גסה. And the גמרא asks that the one that ate it לשום אכילה גסה, even though he didn't do מצוה מן המובחר, but still he did the מצוה of קרבן פסח. Now what is the meaning of אכילה גסה? So we learned before, אכילה גסה means he ate it for the pleasure of eating a good meal. That's the way רש״י learns. As רש״י has the לשון, he ate it לשום קינוח סעודה, which is like a dessert that you eat at the end of the meal for the pleasure of eating the meal. So the תוספות הרא״ש asks a קושיא, that what is wrong if the person ate it for קינוח סעודה at the end of the meal as a pleasure like a dessert after the meal? This is the עיקר מצוה. We know that קרבן פסח is נאכל על השובע, that has to be eaten after you're full already as a kind of dessert, that's when you're supposed to eat the קרבן פסח. So what is wrong if this person who ate it, it became אכילה גסה according to the פשט of רש״י, that he ate it for dessert? And another קושיא he asks, what is the meaning of the word אכילה גסה? According to רש״י it means that he ate so much before, he is so full, that what he's eating now is גס for him, which means now it is not nice because he's only eating it for pleasure. But why does the גמרא use the לשון אכילה גסה? The main thing the גמרא should have said, one ate it לשם מצוה and one didn't eat it לשם מצוה. Why mention the word אכילה גסה? Therefore, the רא״ש learns the פשט different, and that means he ate it after he was so full that he didn't even have pleasure from the eating. And that's the meaning of אכילה גסה. אכילה גסה means when you eat after you are completely full and you don't have pleasure from the food, that is called אכילה גסה. Normally, you have to eat the קרבן פסח על השובע, which means after you are full, but not that you are full so much that you don't have pleasure from eating it. The reason you have to eat it after you are full, because this is the דרך of the מלכים, that after they finish their whole food, then at the end they eat a kind of dessert which they enjoy. So you're supposed to eat the קרבן פסח at that time, too. But if you are full so much that what you eat now you have no pleasure from, that you're not allowed. And that's what the גמרא means here, one ate it לשם מצוה, and the other one ate it not לשם מצוה, but אכילה גסה, which means he ate it in such a way that he had no pleasure from it. And nevertheless, the

גמרא asks that still, okay, he's not a מצוה מן המובחר, but the מצוה of קרבן פסח he did fulfill, because after all he did eat the קרבן פסח, so he fulfilled the מצוה. How can we call him a רשע? Ah, he asks, that we know that when you eat אכילה גסה, it's not even called אכילה. We know that לגבי יום כפור that the דין is that if a person right at the beginning of יום כפור, after he finished his meal, and he is so full that the food that he will be eating now is אכילה גסה, so on יום כפור you wouldn't be חייב for eating that food, because it is not considered אכילה. On יום כפור you're not allowed to eat, but if you eat אכילה גסה on יום כפור, it is not considered אכילה and you're פטור. So we see from there that אכילה גסה is not considered אכילה. So how could the גמרא ask here that even though he didn't do a מצוה מן המובחר, he still fulfilled the מצוה, but if it was an אכילה גסה as the רא״ש learns, which means that he had no pleasure from the אכילה at all, so it shouldn't be considered אכילה at all, so he didn't fulfill the מצוה at all? So the רא״ש says, this דין that we say it's not considered אכילה at all, that's only if by eating the אכילה גסה it actually hurts him because he ate so much. But if it doesn't hurt him, even though it's an אכילה גסה, it's still considered אכילה. And that's what the גמרא means, that even though it's an אכילה גסה, so he didn't do a מצוה מן המובחר, but the מצוה of אכילת קרבן פסח he has. Also, concerning the פסוק that the גמרא brings later on, לתאוה יבקש נפרד, and the גמרא says this refers to לוט, who separated himself from אברהם. But the רא״ש asks a קשיא, what's the פשט he separated himself from אברהם? אברהם told him to leave! So the רא״ש says, that why did אברהם tell him to leave? Because there was an argument between the shepherds of לוט and the shepherds of אברהם. Now, it was up to לוט to stop this argument. And since he didn't stop, so it comes out that he was the cause why he had to leave. Plus, based on what the רא״ש says, that the אמת, we see that he wanted to leave, because as soon as אברהם asked him to leave, right away he left. If he really wouldn't want to, he would have asked him not to leave. And since he accepted it, that means that really he wants to leave. He just waited for the opportunity, and as soon as the opportunity came, he left. So therefore, the

פסוק that says לתאוה יבקש נפרד could apply to לוט because of him leaving אברהם. It's also interesting to note concerning what the גמרא says, that לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ומצות שלא לשמה, שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה, there is the famous פירוש ופשט in it, which I have mentioned once in a previous גמרא, that the פשט is, מתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה, that the תוך of the שלא לשמה is לשמה. In other words, it is not only the פשט that when you do a מצוה שלא לשמה, it is שלא לשמה, the only reason to still do it, because eventually you are going to come to do it לשמה. The פשט is, that even while you are doing it שלא לשמה, the תוך, the inner part of it, is לשמה. So מתוך שלא לשמה, the inner part of שלא לשמה essentially is לשמה. And this is similar to what the רמב״ם says in the end of the second פרק in הלכות גירושין, that the אמת, every איד wants to do all the מצות, ולהתרחק מן העבירות, and to stay away from the עבירות. And even if we see a person that is not like that, it is only because יצרו הרע אנסו, his יצר הרע forces him to go against his own true will. And therefore the רמב״ם says there, that there's certain דינים of כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני, that you're allowed to force a person till he says "I want," and that is considered his רצון. And he explains it because of this, because באמת every איד wants to do the right thing, if he doesn't want it, it's because of the יצר הרע that forced him. So when you force him to say "I want," the פשט is you are forcing away the force of the יצר הרע, and what is revealed is his true inner will, which is to do תורה ומצות. And the same thing here also: באמת every איד wants to do every מצוה לשמה. Even if he does it שלא לשמה, it is just outwardly it seems that it's שלא לשמה. But inwardly, inside the עצם, the תוך of the שלא לשמה is לשמה. And that is the אמת the reason for the פשוט פשט also. The פשוט פשט is that when you will do a lot of שלא לשמה, מתוך שלא לשמה, by doing it שלא לשמה, you will get to לשמה. But why is it? Because באמת even while you do it שלא לשמה, the inner part of it is לשמה. So therefore, when you do a lot of it, so this inner, hidden part, which is the real לשמה, will break through the barrier of the שלא לשמה, because if you do it a lot of times, the פנימיות of it will get stronger, and it'll come out into the גילוי, it'll be revealed, and even בגלוי, openly, this person will do the מצוה לשמה.