Speaking in the Gemara here about Pesachim, Maseches Pesachim discusses what is the meaning of אור? The Mishnah starts: אור לארבעה עשר בודקין את החמץ. אור to the 14th, you search for chametz. So the Gemara has two opinions, thinks at least that there are two opinions what אור means: one opinion it means the morning, one opinion it means the night. And the Gemara goes on to bring proof to either opinion. One of the proofs the Gemara tries to bring that what אור means is from a beraisa. It says in the beraisa like this: מאימתי ארבעה עשר אסור בעשיית מלאכה? On Erev Pesach, on the 14th day of Nisan, which is Erev Pesach, from when aren't you allowed to do melachah? From what time during the day can't you do melachah, can't you work? ר' אלעזר בן יעקב אומר משעת האור. ר' אלעזר בן יעקב says, from the time of אור. ר' יהודה אומר, ר' יהודה says, משעת הנץ החמה, from the time when the, from sunrise. אמר לו ר' אלעזר בן יעקב לר' יהודה, said Rabbi' Elazar ben Yaakov to Rabbi' Yehuda: You're telling me that you're not allowed to work from הנץ החמה, from sunrise. וכי היכא מצינו, where do we find, יום שמקצתו אסור בעשיית מלאכה ומקצתו מותר בעשיית מלאכה? Where do we find a day that part of it is forbidden to work and part of it is allowed to work? Now, you're telling me that from the morning you're not allowed to work, so the way pshat, the pshat in this beraisa is, and at night you are allowed. What do you, does he just mean if the day is אסור במלאכה, you can't work from the night on. אמר לו, so he said to him, what kind of question are you asking? הוא עצמו יוכיח, the same day is the proof! שמקצתו מותר באכילת חמץ ומקצתו אסור באכילת חמץ. Part of the day is mutar to eat chametz and part of the day is asur. So we see that the issurim could be part of the day yes and part of the day not.

From this, the Gemara wants to prove what the word אור is, that אור must mean night. He says night, he says אור, and he says הנץ החמה, so obviously it's night. But the Gemara goes a whole discussion that maybe it means עלות השחר. He says הנץ החמה, he says עלות השחר, and the Gemara goes... This is not noge'a to our inyan. One second. Here, the Gemara later on asks a question: שפיר קאמר ליה ר' יהודה לר' אלעזר. Didn't Rabbi' Yehuda answer good? Rabbi' Elazar said to him, where do you find a day that part is mutar and part is asur, so he said to him, what do you mean where do you find? Here you find, chametz! Chametz, part of the day is mutar, part is asur. It's a good answer! So the Gemara says, הכא קאמר ליה לר' אלעזר. This is what Rabbi' Elazar will answer him: אנא אמרי לך מלאכה דאיסורא דרבנן, ואת אמרת לי חמץ דאורייתא? I'm telling you about melacha, this melacha is only an issur derabbanan that you're not allowed to do melacha on Erev Pesach. You're bringing me a ra'ayah from chametz, which is a din de'oraita, that you can't eat chametz on Erev Pesach part of the day. By de'oraita you can't ask questions. דעד הכא אסרה רחמנא ועד הכא שרא רחמנא. The Torah, you can't ask, why did the Torah make this assur, why did it... Same thing, the Torah made, these hours the Torah wants to make assur, these hours the Torah wants to make... Is that a problem? We're talking about things that the Rabbanan made. Now, the Rabbanan make things, you have to understand, it has to make with a sechel, it has to be with a... So here we have to find, and that we don't find. So your answer that we do find chametz is not an answer. ואידך? What does the other guy do? It's a good kushya, a good answer to him, that you can't bring a re'aya from chametz because chametz is de'oraita and this is derabbanan. So the Gemara says, you didn't understand what he meant. שעות דרבנן. He didn't bring the re'aya from chametz that's אסור מן ה, מדאורייתא. De'oraita, chametz is assur

after six hours of the day, from chatzot, from the end of the sixth hour, from the beginning of the seventh you can't eat chametz de'oraita. Came the Rabbanan and they added. They said that two hours before already you can't eat, one hour before you can't have hana'ah. So here we also have a derabbanan. And what did the Rabbanan do? The Rabbanan didn't make the whole time assur, they only made two hours assur and the rest of the day, earlier part of the day is mutar. So you answered me that you can't bring a re'aya from chametz because chametz is a de'oraita, so he says, I'm trying to bring a re'aya from the derabbanan too! ואידך? So what does the other guy do? So the Gemara says, הרחקה הוא דעבוד רבנן לדאורייתא. You can't bring a re'aya from there, because even though the Rabbanan made it, but the Rabbanan made it as a har chakah, as a for the de'oraita. Since da'oraisa you can't have chametz from these hours, the Rabbanan made a סייג, made a הרחקה, a fence to the da'oraisa. But we're talking about מלאכה, which is a new, seemingly a new din. What's the raaya from there? And that's where the Gemara stops. Now, every time you ask, now it goes back, why doesn't the Gemara continue? The Gemara should have said, what does that got to do, Erev Pesach is da'oraisa? What, chametz? Yeah. Where do you have a פסוק? What? The פסוק says It says seven days you should eat No, the פסוק says seven and then there's another פסוק. Another פסוק, אך ביום הראשון תשביתו, this this there's no gantz pesukim. So he says to him, like he answers, so Rabbi Elazar answers him back, that you can't bring a raaya from chametz to מלאכה, even though chametz is also derabbanan, because chametz is a הרחקה to a da'oraisa. What does he answer him back? The Gemara doesn't say. So obviously this is what he stopped. Obviously this is the two where they argue. But he says that this is considered a הרחקה and therefore we can't bring a raaya. What does what does Rabbi Yehuda answer him? The Gemara doesn't say. So obviously there is something that's self-ominous, so we have to figure out what does he answer that we the Gemara doesn't even have to go further, because this is the point of their machloket. The machloket is, he says you can't bring a raaya from chametz, because chametz is like a da'oraisa, because it's הרחקה to the da'oraisa, and he says you and he claims you could bring a raaya from chametz. Rabbi Yehuda claims you could. So to first let's understand something the Gemara doesn't say. But besides that, likhora it seems that even by melacha it's also a harchaka to the de'oraita. This whole machloket here is not, that's why I'm explaining what you asked, is not after chatzot. After chatzot you're not allowed to do melacha, that's for sure. The machloket is

מקום שנהגו, which is according to Rashi, the next the perek begins מקום שנהגו. מקום שנהגו לעשות מלאכה בערבי פסחים עד חצות עושין. Certain places they had a minhag that till chatzot they would do melacha. So those places that had a custom that you could do melacha, you could do melacha. מקום שנהגו שלא לעשות, אין עושין. Those that say that you can't, no. And that's the machloket here. Those places, at least according to Rashi, those places that the minhag was that you can't, where did that start from? Did it start from שעת האור, did it start the night before, whatever whatever the she'elah is. But we're not talking about after chatzot. After chatzot is asur mide'oraita, is asur, is min hadin. This is only a minhag, that's a din. Tosafot says there דף נ׳, that after melacha after chatzot melacha, Tosafot uses the words ומשמע התם דמדאורייתא אסורא. What's takeh the reason why it's asur after chatzot? Because after chatzot you bring the korban Pesach. A day a yid brought a korban was a Yom Tov. And a Yom Tov, a korban you're not allowed to do melacha. Since every Yid is chayav to bring a Korban Pesach, so by every Yid this is אסור במלאכה. And he brings here, he brings a a Yerushalmi.

Yerushalmi asks your she'eilah: מאי שנא ערבי פסחים משאר יום טוב? Why is ערב פסח different than every other every יום טוב? And the answer, משום דזמנו של פסח מחצות ואילך, because the time of Korban Pesach is מחצות. ואף יחיד, קאמר התם, even an individual, Gemara says in Yerushalmi, בשאר ימות השנה, other days of the year, ביום שמביא קרבנו, אסור במלאכה. Forbidden to do melachah. And then the Gemara asks, so then you should be assur a whole day. So it says, well, other korbanot you could bring anytime in the day, so the whole day is assur. פסח אינו יכול להקריב, you could only be makriv after chatzot. And he goes on and then, but the ikar is, he says at the end, ומשמע התם, משמע in Yerushalmi, דמדאורייתא אסור, מדאורייתא אסור. And then he says, ונראה אף בזמן הזה, even now being that we know there's no korbanot, it's still assur. So according to Tosafot, that de'oraita it's assur, then peshitut, when the the issur comes before, the parts of the of the day before, it's probably also harchakah to de'oraita. It's also the same thing. Since de'oraita it's assur after chatzot, why would we also before, it's harchakah to the de'oraita. So what does he answer him? He said you can't bring a re'ayah from the case of חמץ דרבנן, the extra hours the Rabbanan made, to the din of melachah, because the case of derabbanan the chametz is only harchakah to the de'oraita. Mah she'ein kein by melachah it's different. Why is it different? Melachah is also לכאורה בפשטות it would mean after chatzot is a issur de'oraita, and this is harchakah to the de'oraita, and harchakah to the, and still I meant in general if this could be, we bring a korban, this is this is Yom Tov starting time when you bring the korban? No, no, that morning, that morning. The day he's going to bring the korban that morning on, why? Because you could bring it anytime. But korban Pesach you cannot bring till chatzot, so the only starts from chatzot. Not when you bring. Could be you'll be the last one, could be three hours later, but your Yom Tov starts from the time you're able to bring. But al kol panim, what is the difference? So to explain this, we explained last week bichlal, let's say in כללים which is נוגע to know, that when it comes to תקנות דרבנן there are two categories, two kinds of תקנות דרבנן as I explained last week. Sometimes the rabbanan when they made a takanah is that they took the de'oraita and they extended the de'oraita. Sometimes the rabbanan when they made a takanah, it's a new takanah. Could be the reason is because of a seyag, because they wanted to make a fence to the de'oraita, but the way they did it was that they made a new din. Why in different different cases they made, it's hard for us to know. בכלל Tosafot says in different places, in Chullin, Bechorot, different places that אין להשוות גזירות דרבנן זה לזה. You cannot compare גזירות one to another, and we really don't know the background of all these גזירות, why the rabbanan would make different things. Sometimes we know it from the results, from certain dinim that come out, \"Oh, why is a דין סתמא here they made it like this, and here סתמא they made it like this?\" It depends. In in many different like rules בנגע גזירות דרבנן, sometimes they use one, sometimes the other, and many times from the results we look back and we see that. But the same thing with this. Sometimes the Rabbanan made a gezeirah like this. Just to give an example, an example besides what we're going to get back to what we spoke about last week, another example also from Pesachim. In the first Tosafos that we actually spoke about last week, Tosafos says, asks the kashya, mid'oraita we know בביטול בעלמא סגי. Mid'oraita, if you have chametz, all you have to do before Pesach is be mevatel the chametz, nullify it in your mind and end it, you're not over. Came the Rabbanan and the Rabbanan said, \"No, it's not enough. You got to do bitul, but you got to do bedikah also. You got to search for it and you get rid of it.\" So Tosafos asks the kashya, why did the Chachamim do that? What would be wrong? Mid'oraita, bitul is enough, so let it be bitul. So Tosafos answered, שלא יבוא לאוכלו. Because if we're going to do just bitul, and we'll have the chametz around in the house, he might forget and come to eat it. Then Tosafos asks, how come we find other issurim that we don't say that? A lot of things you're not allowed to eat, and there's no issur to get rid of it. Why aren't we afraid you might come to eat it? Tosafos says, because this is something that you're used to eating all year round. Then Tosafos asks another kashya, what about the nazir? The nazir? A person who makes himself a nazir. So, what's the nafka mina? ביטול פועל? So maybe the kashya would be on Yom Kippur also. The truth is, the true the kashya, no, the truth, this is a side thing which I don't even want to get into it. The Maharsha says that Tosafos says nazir doesn't mean nazir, it means neder, because it's only a case of איסור הנאה, but not איסור אכילה. Lechatchilah there's no she'eilah. But it's an איסור הנאה, so I don't want to get into this context. Now we don't go there, now we don't go there, no, no. Now, it doesn't... it's not because it's a חפץ, because anything that's מותר בהנאה, the Chachamim wouldn't tell you to get rid of it. You could have hana'ah from it. Even though you might come to eat it, but since you can have hana'ah, Chachamim are not going to tell you to get rid of it. Something that's אסור באכילה and אסור בהנאה, you have nothing to do with it anyway, then then that's why chametz, since it's אסור בהנאה also, they had to get rid of it because you might come to eat it. That Tosafos, that's what Tosafos give an example, I didn't even, since you mentioned it, Tosafos asks, what about בשר בחלב, and ערלה, and כלאי הכרם? Tosafos only uses examples of something that's אסור בהנאה! And they're also אסור בהנאה, so there would be no loss if they would tell you to get rid of it. So why don't they tell you to get rid of it? So he said, because they're asur always! So it's not something that you're used to eating! Then Tosafos said, \"What about nazir?\" So Maharsha says, \"What do you mean nazir? Nazir is not an איסור הנאה.\" So he says they didn't mean nazir, it meant neder. If someone makes a neder that something should be אסור בהנאה upon me, it becomes אסור בהנאה. And it's something that he's used to! Till today, till he made a neder, he was eating it, so why don't they make there? So Tosafos answers, because איסורו שרי לאחריני. Because it's only asur to him, not to others, so how could they tell him to destroy it when it's not asur to others? That's one teirutz Tosafos gives. Then Tosafos gives another teirutz. I nami, it's basically not another teirutz, another detail. I nami, or, why is חמץ אסור, why did the Chachamim tell you to do bedikah and get rid of it, even though you did bitul? שאני חמץ שהחמירה בו תורה לעבור בבל יראה ובבל ימצא. Chametz is different than all these other cases,

because chametz, the Torah said it's אסור בבל יראה. החמירו חכמים לבדוק ולבער אפילו היכא דבטליה. So, since mid'oraita you're not allowed to have it, without bitul, obviously, but the Torah gave an issur on chametz that you're not allowed to have it, so the Rabbanan came and said, \"We'll also be machmir, that even when you were mevatel, we'll also get rid of it, משום דילמא אתי למיכליה, because you might come to eat it.\" So the chashash is you might come to eat it. Ela mai, you're asking, if you might come to eat it is the reason why you have to get rid of it, what about the other stuff? בשר בחלב? So I'll tell you, other things don't have an איסור בבל יראה in any in any form or shape, so the Rabbanan didn't come and do it. Mah she'ein ken, since chametz is אסור בבל יראה מדאורייתא, so the Chachamim, what they did is that even in a case where it's not assur because you were mevatel it, they also made an issur. Now according to the second way, you don't have to answer that why this is different than בשר בחלב because this is all around all year. Lechatchila, the whole reason they made it here is because it's בל יראה. All the other things, not נזיר, not נדר and not בל יראה, not בשר, לכתחילה בל יראה. First Tosafot said that. Tosafot is Tosafot. Yeah, but in Tosafot he holds, don't all you have to do is is mevatel? Tosafot, what happened to the first Tosafot? No, mid'oraita. That's it. The way it was mid'oraita. Alright. Came the Rabbanan and we're discussing why did the Rabbanan do this. But so what I want to say just a little depth into the difference between these two reasons. The difference between these two reasons is when the Rabbanan said that even though you were mevatel, you have to do bedikah,

there are two ways we could explain what they did. We could explain they made a new din. Mi'deoraita this situation when you did bitul, that's it. Came the Rabbanan and made a din, you have to do bedikah. What's bedikah? Bedikah means find it and get rid of it. The Rabbanan said you have to get rid of it. Or you could say the Rabbanan didn't do that. They said like this: mi'deoraita there's a din that you have to get rid of it if you were not mevatel. That means the din the din that you have to get rid of chametz has a limit. It's limited to if you were not mevatel it. If you were mevatel it, בל יראה stops. Came the Rabbanan and they extended the din of בל יראה even after bitul. But according to the first way, not. Huh? Mevatel within What do you mean they extended the דין בל יראה? They made a new din that you have to do bedikah, not that they extended No, we're not talking about bedikah now. We're not talking about bedikah whether you have to search for it or not. We're talking about biur. We use the word bedikah because to search for to to get to מבעיר, the she'eilah is, why is it that even though you did bitul you have to get rid of your chametz? Yeah, so it's not that they extended בל יראה. Yeah. Is there a מדרבנן בל יראה if you don't do bedikah, if you don't do biur? Yeah. If you do bitul and you don't do bedikah You're עובר בל יראה ובל ימצא מדרבנן. 100%, that's not a she'eilah. Alter Rebbe uses many times the לשון בל יראה ובל ימצא מדרבנן. Where does it say in the Gemara בל יראה ובל ימצא מדרבנן? Well, that's the peshat of Tosafot. Because what the Rabbanan did is exactly what the דאורייתא did. דאורייתא says, what מדאורייתא if you wouldn't do bitul, what would you have to do? You have to burn it. Why do you have to burn it? Because if you don't burn it, what, you're עובר בל יראה ובל ימצא. That's מדאורייתא. The only thing, the דאורייתא said, this דין that you have to burn it not to be עובר בל יראה, is only if you did not do bitul. Came the רבנן, and the רבנן what they did was, they said, we're taking this דין דאורייתא, and we're telling you that even in a case where you did do bitul, we tell you that you have to if not you're we we can extend the בל יראה. And that's the difference between the first terutz and the second. And it's נוגע, I don't want to get into it because everybody's not interested in this thing, but it's נוגע to the end of Tosafot, because it'll answer the פשט and the Rashba that Tosafot says there. But this is the חילוק. It's not just a The חילוק between these two ways is how do we look at the חכמים's דין that they said that you have to do ביעור, בדיקה and ביעור, even if you did bitul. For the first one says, it's a גזירה שמא יבוא לאוכלו, and it has nothing to do with the בל יראה of דאורייתא. Why is there a דין בל יראה מדאורייתא? I don't know, Torah said you can't have חמץ. Why did the רבנן say that you can't have חמץ if you were mevatel? שמא יבוא לאוכלו. So they shouldn't come to eat it. They're two different דינים. It has not It's not. Comes the second terutz in Tosafot says, אי נמי, no. Since פשט-פשט you learn in Tosafot is since the Torah was מחמיר, they were also מחמיר. I'm saying much deeper. Not since. They took this that the Torah is machmir, and they extended it into the case where mi'deoraita it would not be asur. This that the Torah gave a בל יראה, we make the

בל יראה even in a case where where there is no בל יראה מדאורייתא. So we extended the limit that you have, we crossed the border mi'derabbanan. Either way, you could use You would call it over either way mi'derabbanan. Yeah, either way you could use the words. See, the words you could use 'you're עובר בל יראה ובל ימצא מדרבנן' either way. The chiluk is, is it only like a mashal? בל יראה means don't have it. Or the pshat is Who else explains בל יראה ובל ימצא מדרבנן? Are there any Rishonim? Alter Rebbe says יש כאלה. Maybe not כולם. There's some Rishonim. I didn't I didn't look in Likkutei Sichot. In fact, the lashon 'בל יראה ובל ימצא מדרבנן' mi'derabbanan? Yeah. Some even answer pshat in Rashi like that. Remember last week we spoke, Rashi says, בדיקה כדי שלא יעבור על בל יראה. So Tosafot asks, what do you mean? You did bitul, so why? So some say בל יראה ובל ימצא מדרבנן. That Rashi even meant that. רש״י לכתחילה meant בל יראה ובל ימצא מדרבנן. Well, what is the practical difference between the first answer and the second? You know what I mean? If if you have to have the specific teirutzim on בשר בחלב, according to the first way you have to have a teirutz. Because you you yeah you could either you eat it all year round you don't eat it all year round, or according to the other teirutz you don't have to. You don't have to. So that's really the only Yeah, could I don't know if there's any practical difference lema'aseh, whether it's an extension or not, I don't know. I don't know. Halachah is, you don't I don't know. I It's it's possible there is, but I'm not I have to think of a case that maybe there it could be a difference. Somebody that goes away on Pesach. Yeah. Then he anyway has to burn it. Mhm. According to the first one, he wouldn't. The second one, he would. Why? Because he's not going to come to eat it. See, the second also says you come to eat it. It's שמא יבוא לאוכלו. They did it שמא יבוא לאוכלו only in a case where there's בל יראה. See, what you are saying now is to get to the second half of Tosafot. Don't want to get off track.

Tosafot continues here, וניהו דהרשב״א, אפילו לפי טעמא אחרא. צריך לומר דהחמירו חכמים בכל חמץ, אפילו בחמץ נוקשה, דהתם אף על גב דלית ביה לא יראה. And he goes into re'ayot. So, the she'eilah is, why? And that I don't need it anyway. Yeah, lichorah, it's not shayach, but it's it's but are they עולות? So, all I'm using here is an example from our Gemara, that we see these two ways. Whether the Rabbanan came with a new din derabbanan, or the Rabbanan came and they extended the de'oraita. And it's possible, we see in חמץ גופא, there is two שבועות, two sevarot in Tosafos. Because each time the Rabbanan made a gezeirah, you could learn this way, you could learn that way. And a lot, like I said before, I'm stressing it because you will see why. That not always will we have a hechreach in the Gemara, how which way they did it. And not always will we know why in one case they did it. But, from the results, we will see, oh, sometimes they Going back to our inyan that we said here before. בנגע the re'ayah that he brings, that we find he asked, where do we find a day that's part mutar in melachah part asur? So, he said chametz will prove. So, he said, מה כל כך חרב בחמץ, חמץ is de'oraita. He said, \"No, we will prove from derabbanan.\" And he said, \"Nah, you can't prove even from חמץ דרבנן, because that's an harchakah to the de'oraita.\" So, we said, \"So, what does the other guy answer? Plus why is by melachah not a harchakah?\" When he said a harchakah to the de'oraita, this what he meant. He meant to say, the real issur of chametz is mide'oraita, part of the day. Came the Rabbanan and added the two hours. When they added the two hours, it's an extension of the de'oraita. And mimela, you say you can't bring a re'ayah to melachah. By melachah, it's not an extension. And what is the machloket between the two? He holds by melachah, it's also an extension. In other words, we don't know what exactly the issur of melacha The fact that melacha is אסור ערב פסח after חצות מדאורייתא, doesn't mean that when the rabbanan added the hours before, they made it an extension. They could have done it this way, they could have done it that way. Especially here, it's even less to be even a gezeirah by מלאכה בפרט, because memeila by chametz, they added an hour or two. The Gemara says that people can make a mistake. אדם טועה שעה אחת, שתי שעות, can make a mistake. They didn't have watches. So, what did they do? They look at the sun. So, you can't tell exactly, is it two hours more late, four hours? But to make a to make a din a whole morning, is really not because of that. It could be it's an additional thing. Al kol panim here, what I'm trying to bring, out you could learn either way. And the So,

basically, the bottom line of the machloket between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Elazar ben Yaakov is this. He says, \"I could prove from chametz to melacha, because they're both the exact same thing. Chametz, by chametz, the שעות דרבנן is an extension to the de'oraita, and I learn that the איסור מלאכה is also an extension to the de'oraita. So, you're asking me, where I find? Here I find, derabbanan which is an extension and it's not the whole and not the whole day, same thing with melacha.\" And he says, \"I don't accept it. You're right, over there it is stuck a harchakah, and here it's a separate din, a new din. So, memeila, how do you Where do you find and the new din that rabbanan did?\" So, that's how you could learn the machloket between the two. This all is similar to what I explained last week. That's how we get back to last week. That when the rabbanan made this din and as we said before, בנוגע that even if you were מבטל חמץ, you have to do bedikah. So, we just said now, that it could be that the bedikah is an extension of the bitul. Not what we said in Tosafot, that's what I'm saying in Rashi. And like brought it out in Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, when the rabbanan said that after bedikah, you have to do bitul, so you could learn two ways. You could learn the Rabbanan said like this, mi-d'Oraita, bitul is enough. We come and we add that you have to do bedikah also. So, the bitul that you do is fine, but you have to do a second thing. Or you could learn that the Rabbanan came and said that we take the bitul that you did and we say that the bitul isn't good. Mi-d'Oraita, it's good, and we extend the issur of chametz even in a case where you did the bitul. So, mimela the bedikah is not a new din, a separate din of bedikah, the bedikah is part of bitul. As the Alter Rebbe as we go to the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, the Alter Rebbe uses this lashon here, when he brings the din that mi-d'Oraita in תרל״א This paper is not learned yet. He brings here the whole din that mi-d'Oraita you bitul is enough. Then he says in סעיף ג׳, אבל חכמים גזרו that you have to have bedikah also. So, like I said, what would I write? The Chachamim said that bedikah, in addition to the bitul, you have to have bedikah. חכמים גזרו שאין ביטול והפקר מועיל כלל לחמץ אף קודם שיגיע זמן איסור הנאתו. That the bitul will not help unless אלא הוא צריך לחפש אחריו. So, it's as if saying that the Rabbanan did not just make a new din of bedikah. The Rabbanan came and said, it's like a holding mi-derabbanan. I tried to say last week that maybe, who says, it comes mi-d'Oraita also, but it's hard to say. But at least mi-derabbanan, they took and said mi-derabbanan, we extended that the bitul will not help unless you also do bedikah. Could it put the chametz back in your רשות? Could it be that they make the bitul not work? It seems to the lashon to make the bitul not work. That's what it seems like from the lashon, to make the bitul not work. They said that the bitul does not work mid'Oraisa. I, that in miderabbanan. I tried to say even a possibility that they make it not work mid'Oraisa. Now, how could the rabbanan make it not work mid'Oraisa? That's a sevara. Because, and this was בהמשך of the whole אריכות I said last week, that according to Rashi, what's the geder of bitul? It takke becomes hefker when it's hesech hada'at. And if the rabbanan say that still it's still yours and that that you still have to do bedikah, so there's no real hesech hada'at. So so you didn't do the bitul mid'Oraisa. But it's hard to, and I wanted to answer Rashi, and that's what Rashi says, if you don't do בדיקה, שלא יעבור בל יראה ובל ימצא מדאורייתא. But that but that's going really too far. But at least to say that it's miderabbanan, but it's extending the d'Oraisa, it has an effect on the d'Oraisa, similar to what we're saying now that the rabbanan have a right to extend. And we find examples of this in other cases. Sometimes we even find that it could affect the d'Oraisa mamash. There are sevarot. Lemashal, just a classical example, נוגע to this year, ש יום טוב של ראש השנה שחל להיות בשבת, ראש השנה בשבת, מדאורייתא you have to blow shofar. Miderabbanan you're not allowed to blow shofar. It's a gezeirah derabbah, gezeirah. The שאלה is, is it just a gezeirah, it's a new din that you can't, but they can't change the mitzvah.

What would be if a person blew shofar on Shabbos? He clearly went, violated the din derabbanan. Did he fulfill a mitzvah mid'oraita? למשל, a nafka mina, just a stupid nafka mina, if a person is told by the doctor that for his cure he has to blow shofar, I'm just gonna do that, should he make a bracha? Cuz he's allowed to do it. Cuz even though the rabbanan said not, but he's allowed. פיקוח נפש דוחה כל התורה. Is he mekayem a mitzvah? Should he make a ברכה, אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו לשמוע קול שופר? Then you're not yotzei even in the weekdays. Can't make a bracha either way. Can't make a bracha either way. Did they talk about it on Shabbos? Yeah, sure. This year Temple Shalom didn't blow. This year Temple Shalom didn't blow on Shabbos. They said for the sake of unity, all the Yidden, the Orthodox don't blow, so we're not going to blow either. Reform, Temple Shalom. Temple Shalom? Reform, yeah. Conservative doesn't blow. It's only the Reform that does. But they didn't blow the second day either. They only have one day Rosh Hashanah. They only hold one day, so... They only hold one day, right. It's like in Eretz Yisrael. That's why they blew on Shabbos. In Eretz Yisrael they also have two days of Rosh Hashanah. Oh, the Arabs, yeah, that's right. If Mashiach's coming the second day, why would we need Mashiach? Anyway, this is a shaila. So what's the shaila? When the rabbanan made this din that you're not allowed, did they affect the de'oraita? In other words, do they have a right to change it, that now mid'oraita you're not yotzei? It's it's noge'a to to certain other dinim, too. Should he make a bracha? No, that that would be the two sides. If they if they make change the de'oraita, then you can't make a bracha. If not, you could. Noge'a, there was what do you call, Harav Shlezinger once in Yerushalayim, famous, he was חולק about 80 years ago or 90 years ago, he held that you have to blow shofar in by the Kosel you have to blow shofar on Shabbos. הא? In Beit Din they did it. In Beit Din they always blow. They didn't, by them the shaila was, since he's going to blow, should they might as well go listen? Yeah, should they might Cuz lechatchilah, they won't blow cuz they didn't hold of it. But if he's blowing already, and he's allowed to blow cuz he held cuz he held a shittah that you're allowed, so they might as well listen and be mekayem a mitzvah without an aveirah. The Rif blew. The Rif, cuz that's something else. The Rif blew cuz the Rif held, but that's not that's a different reason. The Rif the Rif held that when the Gemara says that in בית דין הגדול you blow, it doesn't mean בית דין הגדול of Jerusalem, it means בית דין הכי גדול שבדור, the greatest בית דין of the דור. The Rif knew that his בית דין was the greatest בית דין. So the Rif takeh blew shofar on Shabbos. But here he held because a different reason, because in the מקדש you have to blow, and he held מקדש doesn't mean davka the בית המקדש, but the מקום המקדש. And whatever, that was the whole Right. I don't know exactly which פרטים. In הר הבית or he went to the כותל, I think he went to the כותל, by the כותל ממש, which is by the הר הבית. I guess I don't know the, but but this was a she'eilah, should they go listen or not? We have same thing, this is in in in mitzvot.

Another example of a mitzvah, the Alter Rebbe paskent that תפילין מדאורייתא לילה זמן תפילין. We know that at night you don't put on tefillin, but that's only מדרבנן. That's a machloket. Some say לילה לאו זמן תפילין מדאורייתא. Alter Rebbe paskent like those poskim that night is זמן תפילין מדאורייתא, it's only מדרבנן that it's not, שמא you might fall asleep. What happens if a person puts on tefillin at night? Is he mekayem the mitzvah? He did he did an issur. No, he's not allowed. The רבנן said you're not allowed to. But if he did, is he mekayem a mitzvah? Pashut If a person never put on tefillin in his life, he's like a קרקפתא דלא מנח תפילין, and he put on at night, is he a קרקפתא דלא מנח תפילין or not? It's נוגע if the רבנן affected it that now that they made it, mid'oraisa there isn't, can. Well, the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch has a pshat. You got to look into, in הלכות, in הלכות תפילין how it comes out. It's not. Then I have an opposite shaila, and this was a שאלה הלכה למעשה we had once here, and no rav wanted to pasken. There was a woman, someone, a shaliach called me up. There was a woman he's mekarev, she's ready to go to the mikvah, but she doesn't want to count שבעה נקיים. Now may also come, she wants that that's, she's always Jewish, it's not a גיורת. No, no, not, not geirim. She want, yeah, Jewish woman, and she wants to, he's mekarev, she didn't want to keep the seven clean days. But she's ready to go to the mikvah. Now mid'oraisa, you don't need the seven clean, only a זבה needs, only in certain situations, but a never, a regular נדה doesn't need. So mid'oraisa, if she would go, she's טהורה, which means that there's no איסור כרת. Mid'rabbanan, she's still a נדה. But the shaila is, should she go or not? Do we say that when the רבנן made this דין that you have to have שבעה נקיים even by a נדה, פרצת גדר, let's say if it's not. So, if she wants to go, should you stop her or not? Let's put it this, not pasken, should you stop? And this was a maaseh years ago here, and it was middle of the winter, and I asked so many רבנים here, because you know, guest רבנים who came, who I met, and no one wanted to pasken. No one. Had to be in a very short period of time. She wasn't asking months in advance. Not months, but like a week in advance. She was ready to begin, to start to keep taharat hamishpachah only if she doesn't have to keep shivah neki'im. What, for the future? Forever? Not forever, this next month, and then after that was, if he's mekarev her more, she'll do more. But at that stage she didn't want to. But what would this depend on? Depends if when the Rabbanan made this din that you have to have shivah neki'im, did they take, change the דין דאורייתא? That now even mid'oraita it's nothing, so there's no no purpose? Or no, mid'oraita it's, yeah? The real reason, פרצת גדר, not to do things that people will start think that's that that's a different, I'm not talking, I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about sort of halachah, halachah itself. So that's why there's a din that you have to cut, the Shulchan Aruch that you have to cut your nails. But if she doesn't want to cut her nails? In a din you have to cut your nails, have to be clean, doesn't necessarily be cut, but because you should make sure it's clean, they say you should cut. But what if a woman doesn't want to cut her nails? So Rav Zalman Shimon actually said, don't, tell her not to go. Tell her not to go? Yeah. You didn't put the word don't in there, so people like that, they listen, they don't know where the don't goes. Tell her not to go. I don't know if anybody paskens like that, and definitely nowadays you don't, nowadays I mean even for 20 years ago things changed. So many ba'alei teshuvah they're coming in, and so many don't want to cut their nails, if you're going to do this, no one, I don't think anybody will will realistically pasken like that. Because that's not a din. That just, it says, it's it's a Shulchan Aruch, it's a se'if in Shulchan Aruch, but not מצד הדין. The question will be פרצת גדר. If you allow it, then people... But here we're talking about not just, something that the chachamim made. Chachamim said that you have to shivah neki'im. I thought it was that the that the the women were mekabel on themselves. But that's derabbanan. Yeah, it's started because the women mekabel. But the women mekabel means that the chachamim accepted it. It became, it became a din, no? Huh? Al kol panim, al kol panim itself, isn't it kedai she should go? No, if if the pshat is that mid'oraita it's still, so isn't it, right? Might be a chashash, zav is bichlal not a normal thing. According to the Rambam, every woman, if she wants a zavah or not, the Rambam has a special cheshbon of of way he counts the completely different, he says that every 11, 11 and 7, 11 and 7, 11, every every 18 days if you get if you see a blood, you're a zavah. That's why the cheshbon, that's the Rambam, but we don't hold like that. So in most cases, women are not zavot, they're niddot. Could be the the logical reason Rav Zalman Shimon said that you should tell her not to go, is because if you tell her it's okay to go, so then she will never come to go. That's what I'm saying, פרצת גדר. It's this way, yeah, yeah. So she won't go this week, this month. Next month she'll come to understand that she has to cut her nails, so... And because of that one month she should be over on issur karet? Who? By being niddah. So, I don't know what happened at the end. I didn't try to know. So what happened with this particular case? So I told the shaliach, do whatever you want. That's a ruling. That's a ruling! That's a ruling. In my mind, I hoped he would tell her to go, but I could never say it. That's why I said what I said. That's a pesak. In other words, if I would say no, I didn't want to say no. I could have said no. I didn't want to say no, and if I did, I didn't want to say yes. But I thought that if she goes, I assume... I don't know what happened. I never got back. Okay. Were

the hours of the tefillah established beforehand, so that we're going to say because the tefillah comes first, so if a person gets to the morning, he didn't do bedikah, can he do bitul? Does he do Sure he can do bitul, but he could do bedikah in the morning too. Bedikah. Right, so that's why I asked you if there's a certain time when you have to Not time when you have to, but if you can only do it at night, so now lechatchilah, yeah, chachamim said you have to do it at night, but if you didn't, you can do it in the morning. All this talk about bedikah, is it talking about checking, finding the chametz, or you have to be meva'er? We're talking about bedikah and then bring it to biur. It's not the bedikah itself. It's the biur, you understand what I mean? Chachamim said biur comes after that, after the bedikah. One hours. The actual biur comes after, yeah. What did they say in the case book? What's the difference? Let her go, cuz if she doesn't, if she goes and there was and it was okay for her to go, so she gets out of karet. And if it wasn't okay, so what? So she went and had an aveirah anyway. That's that's why I said I hoped she would tell her to go. But to say that means they're all פוסקן that a woman who has money who doesn't have shivah neki'im is allowed to go? Didn't ask her, not sure if told her to go. Huh? Didn't ask all of them, not sure if told her to go. I don't remember. Okay, let's go vayter. All this was נוגע last week לגבי that שיטת רש״י is that what is the geder of bitul? The geder of bitul is hesech hadaas. And then it becomes hefker. Right,

trying to explain last week, and even though Tosafot is the one that learns that bitul is hefker not Rashi, but from the Ran we see that the Ran learns Rashi and Tosafos together. He learns that bitul comes from תשביתו, and the Ran says also that bitul, what what's the ענין of bitul? Hefker. So I said that that's exactly what Rashi learns. And since it's הסח הדעת, that's why I said it could affect the de'oraisa. And bitul is הסח הדעת, and and becomes hefker. Based on that, we could explain another נקודה. The Gemara says later on that bitul does not help after זמן איסור. After the time of the issur, it doesn't help. Once the once the Torah says it's assur, and then even when derabbanan says it's assur, then you can't be mevatel anymore. And the Gemara gives a reason why. Because in order to be mevatel, it has to be yours. And since chametz is באמת אסור, is אסור בהנאה, so it's באמת not yours. אלא מאי, so why are you עובר? גזירת הכתוב made it yours. But it's not in your hands to be mevatel, you can't be mevatel.

Normally, the way we learn pshat in Rashi, and according to Rashi, bitul is only that you're מסיח דעת, and if bitul is השבתה בלב, תשביתו, why can't you do bitul after the זמן? Just like you could destroy it after the זמן of issur, why can't you be mevatel it after the זמן איסור? Why can't you? Who cares if it's not yours? To destroy it, you could. You could take it and destroy it even if it's not yours. What's, according to Rashi the way stam we we learn, Rashi learns it's not hefker. Rashi learns that chametz is that it a bitul is תשביתו. It's another form of destruction. Like Rashi says, השבתה בלב היא השבתה. In your mind, you're משבית. And even if we learn it's hesach hadaas, so you're masiach daas. So why can't you, this chametz, I'm masiach daas from this chametz? What's wrong with that? So if you learn that even according to Rashi, bitul, the result of bitul is hefker, then we understand. See, according to Tosafot, we understand lechatchila, know why you can't be mevatel? Because what is bitul? Bitul is, I am mafkir. I can't be mafkir something that's not mine. There's no such thing of being mafkir something that I don't have the right over. So I understand that when the time comes and I have no right over it, I can't be mafkir. But according to Rashi that we learn kefshuto, that bitul is not hefker, bitul is just that you take your mind away, and bitul is that you just what's why can't you do that after the זמן איסור? So who cares if it's not yours? So based on what I say that even according to Rashi, it's a form of hefker, just a lighter form of hefker, then even according to Rashi, you can't do bitul because it's not yours. But then there's a tifere vort. We're saying according to Rashi, it's the geder of hesach hadaas. It's not just you're משבית it. It's hesach hadaas which turns into hefker. Because we say it's hesach hadaas, we understand why if it's not yours, it doesn't work. And I'll tell you why. Lichora, who cares? You're masiach daat from it, and I don't want it, so big deal if it's mine or not mine, I I'll explain. Based on a different ענין לגמרי, there is a famous klal, and this is just oh, it's very late, so I don't know if I'll try to to condense it. There is a klal which we spoke in one of the shiurim, I don't remember when, last year, two years ago, whenever, which is the din that is called The

Gemara says in עבודה זרה דף נ״ג, אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו. A person cannot make assur something that is not his. The Gemara gives an example. Someone takes someone else's לבנה, I will take someone else's rock, and I put it down, and I bow down to it, say, \"You are my god.\" And if I like I look at it and I bow, it doesn't become assur. If a person will do it to his own rock, it's Avodah Zarah, it's אסור בהנאה, all the inyan of Avodah Zarah. But if you do it to some to somebody else's rock, אין אדם You can't asar somebody else's thing. That's what the Gemara says. And then the Gemara continues and says, \"Why not?\" So the Gemara says, \"Because we're afraid דילמא לצוערו קא מכוין. That really, when you did that, you didn't really mean Avodah Zarah. You were mechaven to make him trouble. You wanted him to feel bad. So that's why we say that it's not assur. Now, there are two she'eilot here. If this is the reason, then what is the, why do we refer to it as a person cannot asar something that's not his? It has nothing to do with his or not. It's just any time when we're not sure he did it, won't become assur, that he really means it, it's not assur. It's just practically, if you do it to yourself, to your own, who are you going to play around with? So mistama you mean it. You do it to somebody else's, we're not sure. But it's not in the category of אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו, it's because we don't know if you're mechaven. This she'eilah the Rebbe asks in Likkutei Sichot, in חלק י\"ד, the Rebbe brings this, and he says אם כן, if the reason is because we're afraid you didn't mean it, למה לקשריה? Why do we connect it to אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו? Then come the then answers. Okay. Maybe, but with a rock, there's no such thing. That's a good point. Then there's another she'eilah. A moradik, I think it's a moradige she'eilah, they ask the she'eilah. What do we say? Why don't you make it assur? Because when you bow down to it, let's use this example, we're afraid, maybe you didn't really mean it, so it's not really Avodah Zarah. Are we sure? We don't know, maybe. It should be safek! ספק עבודה זרה! Yeah? So it's a safek avodah zarah, safek avodah zarah should be asur! Whether it's asur bediavad, but the Gemara says clearly אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו. So there is a he'arah from the Rebbe in one of the letters, in the Igros. The Rebbe says it in three words, but the Achiezer, Rav Chaim Ozer, has a גאנצע ביאור about it, and this is the nekudah. And the nekudah is like this: This whole klal, it's a gevaldike interesante zach in itself, the whole klal of אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו, a person cannot aser something that's not his, is

only in a case when the issur happens through his machshavah, through his thought, not through ma'aseh. When an issur happens through ma'aseh, we don't say that. For instance, if I will take your milk and your meat, and I'll mix it together, you say אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו? No such thing, because it happened, ווילסטו, יא ווילסטו נישט. The only time we say it is in the case when the issur happens like avodah zarah. What makes it avodah zarah? If a person bows down, maybe I'm bowing down to pick up, like the ma'aseh of I didn't know it's a It's because he's mechaven. When he bowed down, he's mechaven that he's mishtachaveh to the avodah zarah, he's bowing down to the avodah zarah. So it's the machshavah that makes it. My machshavah cannot affect someone else's thing. What kind of relationship is there between my machshavah and the thing? It's one of the two: If the thing is mine, so since it's mine, it's connected to me, so my machshavah has an effect. If the thing is not mine, but I did something to it, so again, I took it, I changed it, I did something physical. Here we have both chesronot. It's נישט מיינע, it's not mine, and I didn't touch it. I'm standing here thinking thoughts in my mind about this, like a remote control? What kind of shaychut do I have to this? How does this affect it? Huh? No, they didn't, על פי דין, על פי דין they couldn't. They didn't want to make a chilul Hashem. Avodah zarah, they would not have been over avodah zarah. It's just people shouldn't think it's avodah zarah, that was, they went on mesirut nefesh. The last one, right, right, right. It's not theirs, and it takeh wouldn't have been asur. This thing wouldn't have been עבודה זרה. No, that's not touching it. Physically me! Not to that, I didn't touch that. No, yeah, so I'm bowing down, I could bow down, I could look at the floor. What makes this, how do we affect it? So I can take anything that belongs to you, because I could have machshavah, it doesn't have an effect. It's yours, it's not mine. What, the גנב'ס קל וחומר anyway? Yeah. And you takeh mean it? It won't become asur, probably you'll be over. If you takeh mean it, it won't become asur. Right, yeah, yeah. But let me just finish. So it comes out like this: that be'emet the klal is אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו, it has to do because it's not yours, you can't aser it. But if it's a kind of machshavah that the lashon the way Rav Chaim Ozer uses that מחשבתו ניכרת מתוך מעשיו, it's a machshavah that you could, it's very obvious, that's like a ma'aseh, because you can see that this is what he means. So that does have an effect. And that's exactly what the Gemara means. If, since we don't know whether you meant it or not, automatically it's a machshavah that's not nikar. The moment it's not nikar, you can't aser it, so it's not even a safek. The kushya was, but maybe maybe he did mean it. So the emet is that afilu if you

meant it, it won't work, it won't make it oser, because machshavah cannot make oser someone else's thing unless it's a kind of machshavah which is very obvious. So here, since it's not so obvious because דילמא לשורו קא מכוין, it doesn't oser it. No, it's אוסר לעולם. עבודה זרה is אוסר לעולם. Right, that's why it's not oser. But you don't know