the Gemara here in Bava Kamma דף ט עמוד א close, close to the bottom. אמר רב זירא אמר רב הונא, רב זירא said in the name of רב הונא, במצוה עד שליש. That when you do a mitzvah you have to go up to a third. The Gemara says מאי שליש? What do we mean that you go up to a third? אילימא שליש ביתו, it doesn't mean that when it comes to a mitzvah you have to pay up to a third of your possessions in order to do a mitzvah. Let's say you can't get an etrog unless you pay a third of what you own, so maybe that's what he means, that a mitzvah you have to pay up to a third. He says that cannot be, because אלא מעתה, if so, אי איתרמו ליה תלתא מצות, so if you have three מצות ליתיה לכוליה ביתיה? You give up all your money? So Tosafot mentions even though it's a third, but still, that's very much, eventually you won't have anything left. So the Gemara says, אלא אמר רב זירא, רב זירא said the peshat is different. בהידור מצוה עד שליש במצוה. That when it comes to do a הידור מצוה, to do a mitzvah nicer, then you have to do it up to a third of the mitzvah. Which means, so

Rashi says like this: שאם מצא שני ספרי תורה לקנות, if you find two Sifrei Torah to buy, אחד הדור מחבירו, one is nicer than the other one. So how much, should you buy the nicer one even though it costs more money? So we say yeah, even though it's only a hiddur, the mitzvah you could perform by getting the first one, then another one is nicer, you're doing a hiddur, so you should spend extra money for the hiddur. How much? יוסיף שליש בדמים. You should add up to a third of how much this first one was worth, and if it's up to a third more, the הידור, יקח את ההידור and buy the hiddur. דתניא, like it says in a ברייתא, זה א-לי ואנוהו. What, the beraita quotes a pasuk. The pasuk says this is my God and I will beautify Him. התנאה לפניו במצות, make the mitzvot nice for Him. עשה לפניו ספר תורה נאה, you should have a nice ספר תורה, לולב נאה, a nice לולב, טלית נאה, a nice טלית, ציצית נאה, a nice tzitzit. So it's important to have a הידור מצוה. So you should spend up to a third of the mitzvah. The Gemara here goes in to ask the question whether it's a שליש מלגיו or שליש מלבר. There are two types of of fractions in halacha. Sometimes we say a third, let's say, from inside or a third from outside. A third from inside means let's say the first one costs six dollars, you have to go up to eight dollars, you have to add up to a third. Then there's a third from the outside, meaning that when you add the third it'll be a third, which means up to nine, because when you add the three, now it'll be a third of what the other one was. The other one was six, this will be nine, so it's a third from the outside. But that's not, the Gemara says תיקו, we don't know exactly. But it No, no, it doesn't say so. No no no psak did, but the main thing I was saying is that what does Rashi learn, does the Gemara mean that the hidur mitzvah you have to go up to a third of the mitzvah? So Rashi says that if the mitzvah is more b'hidur, is a nicer mitzvah, and you will have to pay more money for it, so up to a third of the price you should do it, you should spend. If it's more than a third, then don't spend, then keep to the original mitzvah, then don't buy the more expensive one.

Tosafos says עד שליש במצוה, פירוש, שמצא אתרוג כאגוז כמו ששיערו חכמים, that if you find an etrog that's the size of a nut, which is the minimum shiur that חכמים said, which by the way halacha is not like that, we know for sure it has, minimum shiur is a כביצה, size of an egg, not the size of a nut. So, but there is a שיטה like that, Tosafos took that שיטה for whatever reason, but he means to say if you find an etrog that has a minimum שיעור, ואחד גדול הימנו, and one that's bigger, שליש, a third, יקנה, you should buy it. You should buy an etrog that's bigger up to a third. You should buy it. If it's less than a third, then you don't have to buy it, but if it's a third, you should buy it. So the Gemara, according to Tosafos, is talking about the size of the etrog, the size of the mitzvah. Not talit, he's talking about etrog, or other things, yeah. If you buy bigger, a bigger talit, bigger tzitzit, so you should spend, so Tosafos, according to Tosafos the Gemara doesn't tell us how much money to spend. The Gemara doesn't talk about the money. The Gemara when it says the third is talking about the size of the mitzvah. So according to Rashi, the Gemara when it says a third is talking about the money, that you should spend a third more for the hiddur of a mitzvah. According to Rashi we're not talking about size, we're talking about nicer, more mehudar. According to Tosafot we're not talking about money, the Gemara doesn't mention how much money, but it talks about the size of the mitzvah, it should be a third more. Rashi says nicer, Tosafot talks about size. And the, and then the

Rosh, the Rosh learns basically like Tosafot with one difference: it's talking about size, but the third third is not the third in size, but the third is in money. That means if you could buy a bigger etrog, bigger, yeah, there's no amount of the size, you could buy a bigger etrog up to a third of the price you should pay. If it's a third more, you should buy. So, in kelalot, basically Tosafot learns the Rosh learns like Tosafot. That means that this the concept that we're talking about here is the size of the mitzvah, but it's about the money. But generally speaking, there are two sides here. There is whether we're talking about buying a more mehudar'dike mitzvah, or we're buying a bigger mitzvah. Right, it could be that one is nicer, but this one is bigger. If we're talking about bigger, right, right. Now in Shulchan Aruch, both opinions are brought down, meaning the opinion of Rashi, and the opinion of the Rosh. Well, it seems like well, if you went we're getting into that. Okay, there is a there is a machloket. Okay, first we'll get to that. There is a machloket between the Magen Avraham and the Yam shel Shlomo. The Yam shel Shlomo says that Tosafot is only talking about an etrog. It's only fits to an etrog. So, only by an etrog you would have the maalah of the of bigger. But by other mitzvot, not. Etrog, maybe etrog and lulav, but not other mitzvot. But the Magen Avraham says that this is by all mitzvot. If you could buy it bigger, based according to the Rosh, because the Shulchan Aruch brings the Rosh, you should buy the bigger one. So, we have these two opinions in Shulchan Aruch, and we have the based on these two opinions over here in the Gemara Rashi and Tosafot. Rashi and Tosafot, and then the Rosh. Now, what we need to is to understand what is the basis of their machloket, whether we're talking about hiddur, or we're talking about size. But in the size, then that's the hiddur, and then the size is not the point here. The question is there's is the hiddur. Here we're talking about the size or the hiddur. When it comes to things like this of hiddur mitzvah, and things which are similar to hiddur mitzvah, as we'll explain in a moment, there is a חקירה that's brought down in different ספרים, and we will see that there are different things that could be dependent on this, whether this is a din in the גברא or a din in the חפצא? Is it a din in the person, or is a din in the object, meaning here in the mitzvah itself? And this question, what we will discuss, is הידור מצוה, כונת המצות. There's a din that you have to have a kavanah when you do a מצוה, לשם המצוה. Then you have ברכת המצות when you make a berachah, which is a a result of kavanah, I'll explain everything. Then you have a din by a mitzvah: מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו, that when you could do a mitzvah through a שליח, and there are certain mitzvot you can do through a שליח, you can't do tefillin through a שליח, but there are certain mitzvot you could do through a שליח, but nevertheless the halachah is מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו, it's better if you do it yourself. Same question: is this, that it's better to do it yourself, is this a din in the person, or a din in the mitzvah? And then you have the other thing I'm going to talk about is a negative thing, which is אין עושין מצות חבילות חבילות, that you're not allowed to bundle up mitzvot and make them in packages, to throw a few mitzvot together, do a few mitzvot on the same cup, and do a few mitzvot together, you're not allowed to do that either. Again, it's a שאלה, is it a din in the גברא, דין in the חפצא?

And let's go step by step, and I'll explain everything. Let's start off with כונת המצות. There are two ways you can learn the din of whether you have to have what what what what the inyan of a כונת המצות. When you do a mitzvah, you have to be mechaven, you have to have in mind that you're doing it לשם המצוה. Now, this could be a din in the person. That means, as far as the mitzvah is concerned, the mitzvah consists only of the maaseh. You take a pair of tefillin, you put on the tefillin, that's the mitzvah. Then, there is a din that the person, at the time he is doing the mitzvah, there's something that has to go on in the person: the person has to have a kavanah. But it's not a din in the mitzvah. On the other hand, you could say no, that it's a detail in the mitzvah. Just like the mitzvah has so many details, you have to have a box, and you have to have the straps, one of the way parts of the מעשה המצוה as it's done is the kavanah. In other words, if you didn't have the kavanah, it's something lacking in the mitzvah. There's something missing in the mitzvah itself. According to the first way, the mitzvah is just as good whether you had kavanah or not, there's something lacking in the person. I once spoke about this by, בנוגע לשמה, not בנוגע this type of kavanah, but just to use an example that will maybe explain this even better. When you write a ספר תורה, you have to write, you have to have in mind lishmah. Now, if you don't have in mind lishmah, you could say like this: what's missing? The ספר תורה is just as it was written properly, the person did not do something at the time when he wrote it. Or the ספר תורה, just like if you write a word which is wrong, there's something wrong in the ספר תורה, if you wrote it without כונה, לשמה, you didn't have a mind for the ספר תורה, for the שם of an אויבערשטער, then it's no good. I'll give a better another example: a get. A get

has to be written lishmah. When you write a get, you have to have in mind for the sake of this this woman. Here you have a sheilah. Is it a din in the person? That means that if you write a get, and everything's right, you just didn't have in mind this person, we know the get is no good. But could it be not because the get is no good, because the גירושין is no good? By a get there are two פרטים, two details: there is the get, which is the document, and then there is the procedure of the גירושין, of how you divorce. You have to take this get, you have to put it into her hands. What happens if a person writes the get, everything's fine, and it wasn't put into her hand properly? She's not divorced. Is it a חסרון, a problem with the get? No, it's a problem with the גירושין. In, in Encyclopedia Talmudit, where they have all the different, what's it called, ערכים, how do you call ערך? Topics. Topics, I mean. So they have two separate topics. There's one topic with pages upon pages called גירושין, divorce, and there's a separate topic called get. Because they're two different dinim, the dinim in the document, and dinim in, in the גירושין. The she'eilah would be, if a person wrote a get and didn't have in mind lishmah, is there a problem in the get? Or is a problem in the גירושין? And there are different ways to learn it. We spoke about that also. גברא or חפצא? It's not the word חפצא, but it's like, is the mitzvah, גברא or the mitzvah. No, גברא or mitzvah. Is a din in the person, something that the person has to do at the time when this is happening, or if he doesn't have this, then what he did was not done properly? Now, by us we're going back to the mitzvot, is kavanah of the mitzvah that you have to have a kavanah, is it a din in the mitzvah, just like there are a lot of details in the mitzvah, there's a din in the mitzvah, or You call it חפצא, but it's not חפצא which means object. We're not talking about the object, the tefillin object. We're talking about the mitzvah as the קיום המצוה, the mitzvah was not done properly, or the mitzvah was done properly, but the person had to do something at the time of the mitzvah and he didn't do. Now one might think that this is the basis of the machloket whether מצוות צריכות כוונה or מצוות אין צריכות כוונה. There is a machloket whether if you do mitzvot without kavanah, whether you are yotzei the mitzvah. Different דעות. The halachah is that in many things מצוות אין צריכות כוונה, you're yotzei without kavanah. Now one might think this is the, this is the machloket. If the taytsh of kavanah is it's in the person, but the mitzvah, it doesn't have anything to do with the mitzvah, so then the mitzvah you're yotzei. If mitzvah, if it's a din in the mitzvah, you're not yotzei, but that's not true. This is nothing to do with this, because in both ways you can learn both ways. You could say it's a din in the person, and you're not, and you're still not yotzei the mitzvah because the mitzvah was done, but when the mitzvah was done in a way that the person lacked the kavanah, the mitzvah, you're not yotzei the mitzvah. Or you can say the opposite, that it's a din in the mitzvah, and still you could be yotzei because certain, every mitzvah has details. Certain details if you don't have it, you're not yotzei. Certain details that you have to do, if you don't have it, bediavad you're yotzei. So it's not, this is not, you could have, you could hold מצוות צריכות כוונה and hold גברא or חפצא, you could hold מצוות אין צריכות and hold גברא or חפצא. So what is the machloket? So I'm saying the machloket is dependent on this, but in a different way. It is, the machloket is dependent whether kavanah is a din in the person or a din in the mitzvah, and that would be the מחלוקת צריכות or not. How is it? In, in the sichah as the

Rebbe is masbir, he asks a kashya, in חלק ד׳, he asks a kashya like this: By, by aveirot there is a din that אינו מתכוין, you're not over. If a person does an aveirah without kavanah, there's no aveirah. So the Rebbe asks, how come by aveirot you have to have kavanah to do an aveirah, by mitzvot, in many mitzvot, if you don't have kavanah, the mitzvah is still a mitzvah? How come? Mima nafshach, if without your kavanah the, the act is not considered an act, that's why an aveirah is not considered an aveirah, so how come by mitzvot it is considered? So first he says, because whenever a Yid wakes up in the morning, he says מודה אני, and davens, so he already proclaims in the beginning of the day that, 'I'm giving myself over to Hashem.' So anytime he does a mitzvah, so the kavanah is there anyway. Then the Rebbe, what happens to those people who don't say מודה אני, don't daven? So by them, if they do a mitzvah without kavanah, would be a different din? So he says, 'Well, the truth is like this, even without saying מודה אני, the halachah is, it's a halachah in Rambam, that every ייד בפנימיות wants to do all the mitzvot. But no one wants to do aveirot unless you decide to do it. So by an aveirah, if you don't have kavanah, then it's not, not an aveirah, because be'etzem you're not mechaven, you're not interested in the aveirah. By a mitzvah, if it's, if you have kavanah not to do it, that's something else, you're not yotzei. But if it's neutral, since בפנימיות הנפש you want to, so it's as if there is an built-in kavanah there. So therefore, you don't need the kavanah, even without kavanah you're yotzei.' Who says, who says you've got to do the kavanah? A person who puts on a tallit, he obviously intends whether he says מודה אני or not. No, that's if you're doing it, He feels, he feels, That's if you're doing it l'shem mitzvah, I'm not talking about that. Obviously he's doing that. That's it, so that's. We're talking about now, let's say what would happen if a guy, on Rosh Hashanah a guy liked, likes the tune of a shofar, so he took the shofar and blew it for the music. Didn't have in mind not to be yotzei, but he did it for the music. A guy likes mitzvot, and happened to be Pesach night, he sat down and ate these crackers without kavanah. Is he yotzei the mitzvah? Shofar is different than matzah though, because shofar... Okay, but I'm not going to get into that difference. We're talking about... I'm just giving an example of a mitzvah that you're without kavanah. If he sat down to eat matzah because it's Pesach, obviously he had kavanah for the mitzvah. But if you ate matzah stam azoy, I'm giving an example, so you're yotzei. Why are you yotzei? Because be'etzem you have kavanah for the mitzvah. So anything which is a mitzvah you have kavanah. That's the reason why מצות אינן צריכות כוונה, or מצות צריכות כוונה. The question is what's the reason for the opinion that holds מצות צריכות כוונה, that you takeh have to have kavanah and if you didn't have kavanah you're not yotzei? Why don't we say that every person has kavanah? Obviously this person, this, this מאן דאמר, this opinion holds that this פנימיות'דיקע כוונה, that kavanah that you have, the hidden kavanah, is not good enough. Now why not? So I'll tell you, this is the, this is the machloket. When we say you need kavanah by a mitzvah, if it's a din in the person, so the פנימיות'דיקע כוונה is in the person. The פנימיות'דיקע כוונה doesn't affect the maaseh. The maaseh is already something that he does. So the kavanah that he has and the maaseh that he does have no connection. But in the person, it's there. So if kavanah is a din in the mitzvah, so you have to have a kavanah that's there in the mitzvah. So the kavanah that you have in your heart, pnimiyus, which is hidden, is not good. That's why you're not yotzei the mitzvah if you didn't have kavanah. The one that holds you are yotzei the mitzvah without kavanah, because he holds kavanah is a din in the person, and the פנימיות'דיקע כוונה is there in the person. So here we see these two inyanim, these two sides, which bring out the result of these two, of the halachah whether מצות צריכות כוונה or not. The same will turn over to ברכות המצות, to making a berachah to the, to, on a mitzvah. Now the Ritva in Pesachim says that the brachah of a mitzvah is connected to the kavanah. The brachah of the mitzvah is like an expression of your kavanah, because midoraita, from the Torah, you don't need a brachah. The brachah is midrabbanan, and also ברכות אינן מעכבות. We know that the brachot, if you didn't make a brachah the mitzvah is still good. The reason for the brachah is just for the kavanah. Now

there is a machloket when it comes to the brachot of mitzvot. We know there is a din that you have to make the ברכות עובר לעשייתן, before you do a mitzvah you have to make a brachah. What happens if a person made a, did the mitzvah and did not make the brachah? Can he make the brachah after the mitzvah? So the Rambam פסק'נט clearly in הלכות ברכות that if you finished the mitzvah you cannot make the brachah. Let's say it's As long, as long as you're still in the middle of the mitzvah you still could make the brachah, the Rambam says, but if the mitzvah is finished, you cannot. On the other hand, the Or Zarua and the Hagahot Ashri, they both hold that bediavad if you made, did the mitzvah and you didn't make the brachah, you can make the brachah afterwards. For instance, the, the Hagahot Ashri says this regarding, regarding shechitah, that's what he talks about. If someone shechts, you have to make a brachah before you shecht, אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על השחיטה. What happens if you finished shechting and you didn't make a berachah, says make the berachah after shechitah. Right, right, obviously. So there's a machloket here whether it helps after or not. What is the basis of the machloket? The basis of the machloket is this: is this ברכת המצות, which is part of the kavanah, is a דין in the mitzvah or in the person? If it's a דין in the mitzvah, you have to do it before. If the mitzvah is over, what will the berachah help? If it's a דין in the mitzvah it means that when you do the mitzvah it has to be done with a berachah. When the mitzvah is done without a berachah they're finished, now you, it's not a mitzvah anymore. If it's a דין in the person, so this has an השפעה, the person taka finished the mitzvah, so lechatchilah you should do it before the mitzvah. But when you finished, it has the effect, as it has on the person, so it could be after the mitzvah, you could still have that המשך of feeling of the, of the mitzvah. The mitzvah itself is over, the feeling could be there. So the kavanah to this person could be, and not, if not not. So the Rambam who holds that it's a דין in the, in the, the Rambam who says that you can't do it later holds it's a דין in the mitzvah, and the Hagahot Ashri and the Or Zarua hold it's a דין in the person. This is לגבי... Which person? Huh? Which one? Yeah. Hagahot Ashri?

Hagahot Ashri. We have another, another case that I mentioned, אין עושין מצות חבילות חבילות, which means you can't pile up a lot of mitzvot. What is the reason for that? So there is a Rashi in Sotah and a Tosafot in Moed Katan. Rashi in Sotah says the reason is if a person is going to pile up a lot of mitzvot on one thing, he shows that it's like a burden on him, he's trying to chap them all arein. Tosafot in Moed Katan says, because if you do two mitzvot together, your mind, your heart will not be panui, will not be able to concentrate on one mitzvah, because you can't concentrate on two, on two things at the same time. Huh? I'll see in, in a second. I'll tell you the mashal now. It says you're not allowed to do two bris'n at the same time. Yeah. You can't mashkeh two sotot. You can't, when you bring a Sotah to the Beit Hamikdash, you can't do it two at the same time, אין עושין מצות חבילות חבילות. Huh? The kohen, yeah, to do to them. You can't on one cup of wine do two mitzvot at the same time, like to make a... and bentch on the same cup. Huh? Sheva Berachot. Yeah, we don't say Sheva Berachot and bentch, we don't do it. So Rashi says the reason is because if you do it all the same, you're showing that like you tried to get rid of it, you tried to pile it all up. Tosafot says because you should be able to concentrate on each mitzvah.

What is the basic nekudah of the machloket? Rashi is on the person. That the person shows to the Oibershter that so far as the mitzvot, if you do two mitzvot together, the mitzvot are fine. There's nothing lacking in the mitzvot. It's you who did something wrong. You are showing Hashem that you don't care about the mitzvot. You're almost like you're mevazeh the mitzvah, because you're trying to get rid of it. Maybe farkert? Not that he's a, but maybe he enjoys all the mitzvot, he's chaping mitzvot? And Tosafot פשט is the opposite. Tosafot פשט is that the mitzvah will not be done properly. So it's a din in the mitzvah, there's a חסרון in the mitzvah if you do it like that. Which one nekudah is a difference will come out, there's a Magen Avraham in Shulchan Aruch, it says like this: He talks there about, you know, you're not allowed to do two bris at the same time. So the question is can you bring the two children to the בית הכנסת at the same, to the shul at the same time? And he says it's connected to a machloket between Rambam and Tosafot. By a Sotah, one of the places where we said is the din that you can't put two things together, it says you can't, אין משקין שתי סוטות כאחת, you can't give to drink two Sotot. There's a machloket in the Rishonim if you could bring them to the Beit Hamikdash together. One says since you're bringing them for the sake of the mitzvah, so already you can't do it. And the other one says, \"No, you could do it. You can not do the mitzvah together, but this is only הכנה to the mitzvah. So why can't you do it together?\" What is the basis of the machloket? Huh? What do you have מחשבות for? It's not מחשבות, here's not machloket, it's a machloket. What is a מחשבה? No. The שאלה is the Chachamim make this in the mitzvah. The peshat is your mind, you can't have your mind on both. Let let let him finish. Obviously this is the difference. If the reason is because it'll be something lacking in the mitzvah, that you won't be able to do it properly, you won't concentrate, אינה״נ, there's no reason not to. So why can't you bring it together? But if it's it shows to the Oibershter that you're trying to get rid of things, so then not only if you do the mitzvah that way, even if you do the הכנה to the mitzvah, also shows to the Oibershter how you're trying to get rid of it. And this is the machloket. So obviously we have the two sides here. So the machloket between the two is between these two shittot is whether the din of אין עושין מצות חבילות חבילות is a din in the mitzvah, there's a lack of the mitzvah if you do it together, or and then you could do it by hachana, or is it a din in the in the גברא? Which the same thing would be bringing two children to to mohel. Because if it's the mitzvah, if it's מצד a chesaron in the mitzvah, this is no problem. If it's a chesaron in the person, it is a problem. Is it two children of the same father, or? Lav davka. Why? Not not from the same father. The same person Yeah, the Now there's the other Huh? By two סוטות the same husband. One after another. Finish one, you bring the other. There was a bris in this basement here for two two brothers together. What do they do with They didn't bring them together. But two different fathers, that wouldn't according to even according to the one that says it's on the person, that wouldn't matter, because it's on the person, so it's on two people. And it's whether or not I'm trying to Yeah, but I'm thinking I'm thinking about the mohel. Oh, the mohel, that's the problem. That could definitely be if it's the same mohel. Two different mohalim then ina hachi nami, that's not together. Yeah. What do they do in the shul that the the הכנסת... They bring one, they finish one, they take him out, and they bring the other. But how does one mohel do two בריתן at the same time? Can not bring all in mind. No, that's still together. He goes from one to the other, they're both there, and he's doing another. And one beracha. And one beracha, right. Then we have the

other case. The case of mitzvah bo yoter mi-beshelucho. That it's when you do a mitzvah, it's a greater mitzvah to do it yourself than to do it through your shaliach. What is the reason why, takeh, if you can do it through a shaliach, what is wrong, why is it a greater mitzvah to do it yourself? So the Tevuat Shor says the reason is because it is as if it shows that you're trying to pass it out, yeah, you're not interested in doing the mitzvot. So that's one way to explain it, and then what's the pshat? The pshat is that it's a thing on a person. The other way to explain it is that a mitzvah that you have to do, if you do it yourself, the mitzvah is done better. Not because the mitzvah will be done, it's a hidur of the mitzvah, it's better for the mitzvah, it's more b'shleimut, the mitzvah is more complete if you do it yourself. So we have these two ways, whether it's a din the first way is definitely a din on a person, the mitzvah is just as good. It's just that you show to the Eibershter that I'm trying to pass on the mitzvot, so it's a chesaron in the גברא, and there's no chesaron to the mitzvah. Or the other way is that it's a chesaron in the mitzvah, the mitzvah is better, מצוה בו, the mitzvah is better if it's done by itself. Now it's possible, not, this is not a הכרח, I'm not saying, this would be a machloket between the Rosh, between Rashi and the Ran in Kiddushin.

Where does the Gemara say מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו? In Kiddushin, the second perek in Kiddushin, the first the first Mishnah the second perek. There the Gemara says האיש מקדש בו ובשלוחו והאשה מתקדשת בה ובשלוחה. A man could give Kiddushin to a woman, or himself, or through a shaliach. A woman could receive the Kiddushin, or herself, or through a shaliach. And the Gemara asks, well, if the Mishnah says that he could do it through a shaliach, certainly we'd know he could do it himself. Why does the Mishnah have to say that? Mishnah says, the Gemara answers, you know why the Mishnah mentions he could do it himself? To tell you מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו, it's better if he does it for himself. The same kashya the Gemara asks on her, why does the גמ- Gemara say, why does the Mishnah say it's a mitzvah she could do it through herself or a shaliach? If it says through a shaliach, certainly through herself. And the answer is, it's a bigger mitzvah if she does it herself than through a shaliach. What's her mitzvah for receiving? What? You're what's the, what? You're you're asking the point, oh, that will, so Rashi and the Ran, Rashi explains there that what's the פשט מצוה בו? A mitzvah that's done with his body is better. He says בגופו. They are different dinim, but not that he has to hold that each thing is the same thing. It's not like one din, it's just giving examples of different cases. The Ran holds that a mitzvah is better if he does it, if he does it himself, he doesn't say בגופו. Now it seems from here, this is not מוכרח, that when you want to talk about it's better מצד the person, you say it's better if he does it himself. That's the whole vort. If you do it yourself, then it's better, has something in yourself. If you stress the fact that it's a body, it's not the word yourself, it's part of the מעשה המצוה. If that if your hand does it, it's a better thing, so the mitzvah is better. Like the Rambam, the Rambam here uses the לשון that for a woman it's better if she receives it בידה. Doesn't say it's better if she receives it בעצמה, receives it herself, receives it בידה, with her hand, as if saying the מעשה is a better מעשה. But if you say it's a din in the person, then the vort is, it's better if he does it than if he sent a shaliach. Is a shaliach or is he an extension of that hand? An extension. It's only an extension, but it's still not his, it's not the hand, it's an extension of the hand. So we're saying now, if this is right, that the Ran holds that it's a din in the person, not a din in the mitzvah. If you

say like that, there is a question on the Ran that could be answered. The Ran comes and asks the question that you just asked: When it says it's a bigger mitzvah if he does it himself than a shaliach, we understand there is a mitzvah on a man to get married. So if he gets married himself, does the kiddushin himself, it's a bigger mitzvah. There's a mitzvah and this is an even bigger mitzvah. On her, a woman has no מצוה בכלל. A woman is not מצווה on פריה ורביה. The mitzvah of having children, of getting married, is on the man, on the woman there's no mitzvah of פריה ורביה. Comes the Ran and answers: ein hachi nami, she doesn't have a mitzvah to do it, but since the husband cannot perform his mitzvah without her participation, without a wife, so she automatically has part of the mitzvah. In other words, when she gets married, she's not commanded to get married, but when she does, she is mekayem a mitzvah, so there is a mitzvah by her marriage. If there is a mitzvah in marriage, that's what the Mishnah means, that if she gets married herself, it's a bigger mitzvah than if she sent a shaliach. The Korban Netanel on the Rosh asks the kashya on the Ran: Why did the Ran have to give this teirutz? He could have given a better teirutz! We all know that besides the mitzvah of פריה ורביה, there's a mitzvah called שבת. The class that we had on פריה ורביה on Monday night I ex- I explained that שבת, there's a pasuk that says לא תהו בראה לשבת יצרה. The world was not created to stay empty, but to be inhabited. That's called שבת. And because of that, a person should have children. And that mitzvah is not limited to men, not limited to Yidden, it says even goyim are obligated to do שבת. It's a it's on the world. It's a mitzvah on the world, not, that's, where do how do we know women are are exempt from the mitzvah of פריה ורביה? Because the pasuk says פרו ורבו ומלאו את הארץ וכבשה. Be fruitful, multiply, fill the world, and conquer it. So, who conquers? Men conquer. דרכו של איש לכבוש. So the mitzvah of פרו ורבו is on men, women not. So the whole exemption of women is only from פרו ורבו, but from שבת, women are obligated. So comes the Korban Netanel, asks a kashya on the Ran, why, you, Ran, did you answer that you ask the kashya, she has no mitzvah, and you answered, well, because she helps her husband, she has a mitzvah, say pashut! So it's the mitzvah of שבת! It's also a mitzvah. And he doesn't answer. It's not yet, but it's a it's a closely connected thing. As a matter of fact, some say that all the seven mitzvot of the goyim are all part of this one Shabbos, because their mitzvah is to have the world civilized and have have it in a civilized and normal, that's Shabbos. So there's a כללותדיקע obligation of Shabbos. So why doesn't the Ran say it? If we're gonna say that the Ran holds that מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו is a din on the person, that