Over here the page, page 10, the second column. The question that we learned was that the Rebbe asked a shaila that since the Rambam says that there are two types of, two ways of a Yid to serve Hashem. One is חסיד מעולה, the one that automatically, the one that automatically, automatically is directed, he only wants to do what's, what's considered a good thing. And then we have the case of people that always have, have to fight the יצר הרע, that their יצר הרע is very strong and they have to fight the יצר הרע. Since, like, מעשה אבות סימן לבנים, everything that happen, happens to the Yidden is comes from the אבות, has to be somehow by the אבות. Where do we find by the אבות such a thing that they had a יצר הרע and they have to fight it? It seems that there's an avodah of fighting the יצר הרע, there's still, there's something like that by the Yid. And the emes is you don't find. The אבות were the merkavah. Merkavah means that they completely never wanted to do bad. They don't, they're given over to Hashem so much. One of the faults of the speaker is, he says, and I'm quoting, and he writes it in Hebrew:

ואפילו שיר חדש ישראלי נשמע בתוך הקלטת. And even a new Israeli song is heard on the tape. And that song, and on that tape, it was about a year and a half ago, the background music was וכולם מקבלים עליהם עול מלכות שמים זה מזה, which was sung, I believe, by Dedi. Now, I have nothing against Dedi, but wait a minute! Dedi Graucher sings a song with the words וכולם מקבלים עליהם עול מלכות שמים זה מזה. The talmid chacham says this is שיר ישראלי?! Dedi Graucher sings about Israel, about politics, about army, about kibbutzim? It's a pasuk! It's from the siddur! וכולם מקבלים עליהם עול מלכות שמים זה מזה! What makes it a שיר ישראלי? Because Dedi lives in Israel? Because Dedi has an Israeli accent? Because the tune was composed by someone in Israel? Does that make it a שיר ישראלי? Are you crazy? If you have an Israeli accent, that means it's an Israeli song? You have a good tune, you have words from the siddur! It's a, it's a, it's a song of kedushah, of yirat Shamayim, of שבח להקדוש ברוך הוא, and a great talmid chacham... [Non-speech audio]

So how could Dovid kill him? Because if Dovid killed him, then Shlomo would have married בת פרעה right away. So he didn't kill him. So Dovid didn't kill him. Which brings us back to the earlier question: How was Rav Yosef able to derive that rule from this particular statement? Or, as the Gemara formulated the question: What did Rav Yosef come to tell us? מאי קא משמע לן? What does it teach us? If he's coming to teach us that we can write a document on a חרס, on an earthen shard, תנינא, we already learned that rule, we already have a Mishnah in Masechet Gittin. The Mishnah states explicitly: על הכל כותבין, you can write a document on almost anything, even on an olive leaf, and on a shard. And the question was, if we already knew you can write on a shard, then even if it was on a potsherd, we already knew that the document could be written on a potsherd. So what did Rav Yosef add? What did he innovate by bringing this as an example of a document? So the question was: מאי קא משמע לן? What does he come to teach us? אי דכתבינן על חרס, תנינא: על הכל כותבין, אפילו על עלה של זית, ועל יד של עבד, ועל קרן של פרה. And that's a whole list in Masechet Gittin. So the Gemara had to ask: מאי קא משמע לן? And what was Rav Yosef's answer? Rav Yosef's answer was that he wasn't teaching us that you could write on a shard. He was teaching us about the validity of a document that was written, that wasn't on a standard piece of paper or parchment, but on an earthen vessel, where there is a potential flaw. And what is that flaw? The flaw is that if you have words written on an earthenware shard, is it valid if it can be forged? And what does the Gemara ask? אי בחרס דמיזדייף, הא מיזדייף! If it's a חרס that can be forged, then it can be forged! אי בחרס דלא מיזדייף, תנינא! If it's a חרס that cannot be forged, we already learned that! We already learned that in the Mishnah! So what is Rav Yosef coming to teach us? What did he add? And the Gemara answers: לעולם בחרס דלא מיזדייף. Really we're dealing with a חרס that cannot be forged. וכגון דכתביה אמחוק, ורבי אלעזר היא, דאמר: עדי מסירה כרתי. מהו דתימא: דילמא כתב ליה תנאי ומחקו, ועדי מסירה לא אסיקי אדעתייהו, קא משמע לן דמחק דחרס מידע ידיע. What does that mean? We are dealing with a case where the document was written on an erasure on a חרס, and it follows the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, who says that עדי מסירה כרתי, that it's the witnesses to the delivery who effect the divorce, and not the witnesses who sign on the document. Now, you might have thought, מהו דתימא, that if it was written on an erasure, maybe the husband originally wrote a condition, a tenai, into the get, and then he erased that condition before giving it to the woman. And the witnesses to the delivery, the עדי מסירה, didn't pay attention, לא אסיקי אדעתייהו, they didn't realize that there was an erasure and that there was a condition that was erased. And therefore she would think she's divorced unconditionally, when in fact there had been a condition. Ka mashma lan, so Rav Yosef comes to teach us, דמחק דחרס מידע ידיע, that an erasure on a חרס is noticeable. It is recognizable, and therefore the עדי מסירה would have noticed it. And if they saw an erasure, they would have questioned it, they would have looked into it. And therefore we have no fear that there was a condition that was erased, and the get is valid.