going to say what we said before, why? Concerning this שבת, this ענין of שבת is brought down in another גמרא. There's a גמרא in בבא בתרא and there's a גמרא in גיטין, and it says like this: חצי עבד חצי בן חורין. You have a person who's a half slave. To be half slave and half free. How is that possible? He's a גויישער slave, owned by two partners, and one of them freed him. So now he's half and half. So the גמרא says like this: So one day he works for himself, one day he works for a master. Comes בית שמאי and says, I don't know, this is this ain't good. Why? What about his marriage? לישא שפחה אינו יכול, to marry a שפחה he can't, because he's half ייד. לישא בת חורין, to marry a יידישע woman he can't, because he's half עבד. Can't get married. ליבטל, let him not get married? But the פסוק says, לא לתוהו בראה לשבת יצרה, the פסוק says it has to be לשבת. He's one person and he has both halves, so that's what it is. Right, you could have one person marrying a שפחה or a בת חורין. Still no good. No, it's still no good. Each half is going to have the the שייכות to the other half. So therefore, בית שמאי says what we do is, כופין את רבו, we have to force the master he should free him. That was, and free him becomes free. And he owes the money. It says, and he has to write in He doesn't have any money, because at the moment he's freed, till now he owned him, now he's going to start earning. So כותב, he has to write a document to his master that he owes him the money. That was he's, a promissory note, because what he's doing he what he's doing is he's selling him to himself without having any money, on credit. Comes תוספות and asks a קשיא: When the גמרא asked that he cannot stay unmarried, and the גמרא said why not, because it says שבת. Why didn't the גמרא bring פריה ורביה, which is a better מצוה? Now, the simple answer is, because פריה ורביה is only important for one half of him. Which half has the problem of not getting married? The Jew part. But the other part, that But if you mention שבת, it's a problem for both parts, that's why the גמרא would rather mention שבת. That's how תוספות answers. But the

ראגאטשאבער has another פשט here. The ראגאטשאבער is מחלק, makes a difference between the מצוה of פרו ורבו and the מצוה of שבת. He says like this: The מצוה of פרו ורבו is on the גברא. It's a מצוה on the person. You have an obligation to to have children. The מצוה of שבת is it's the מצוה It's a מצוה that there should be people in the world. And therefore, when there's a מצוה on the person, if the person is an אנוס, person is forced, you're פטור, אונס רחמנא פטריה. So what does the גמרא say? What's this חצי עבד חצי בן חורין going to do, he can't get married. Why can't he get married? Because he's not allowed, so he can't. So what's the problem? What's the גמרא's קשיא, what's going to happen with פרו ורבו? He's an אנוס. So the גמרא can't ask that. But שבת, אונס doesn't help, because here the bottom line is what counts. A guy is an אנוס and he couldn't learn. You're like, all right, you won't be punished, but an עם הארץ you still are. I mean, that's not going to There won't be people in the world. In other words, is that שבת is a דין the מצוה has to be done. רבי יוסף ענגיל says the same thing in אתוון דאורייתא, in other words. So therefore, the גמרא can't pick פרו ורבו, the גמרא picks שבת. The bottom line from all this is that the מצוה of שבת is a מצוה is a גדר is is a מצוה not on the גברא. If the ר\"ן holds that מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו is a דין on the גברא, so now we understand why the ר\"ן couldn't answer that what does the משנה mean מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו. The ר\"ן asks the קשיא, how does the משנה say it's a bigger מצוה on her to do it herself, that in when what kind of מצוה, so the קשיא is, he could have answered the מצוה of שבת, he couldn't! Because if the מצוה is שבת, you couldn't apply מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו, because the whole concept of מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו is that you're not a person. And the מצוה of שבת בכלל is not in that גדר in the person. So the ר\"ן couldn't answer that. So this is all if we could if we accept that the ר\"ן holds that מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו is a is a דין in the on the person. Now,

all this is just like an introduction that just like we have these two sides concerning כוונה and ברכות המצוות and and אין עושין מצוות חבילות חבילות and מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו, we could have the same חקירה נוגע הידור מצוה. This whole idea of doing a מצוה בהידור, is this a דין in the מצוה or is this on the person? In other words, when you do a מצוה, you could do it not בהידור, you could do it, yeah, בהידור. You could say, look, as far as the מצוה is concerned, it's exactly the same. There is what the מצוה is, and if you do the מצוה, you do the מצוה. What's the הידור? The הידור is on the person. The person should show the אייבערשטער that I really am trying to be nice to you and I'm trying to do I feel good for you, I want to make it nicer. So when it says התנאה לפניו במצוות, make a nice טלית, make this, that's not because the טלית, the performance of the מצוה will be a better מצוה. It'll be a דין in me. Just like by אין עושין מצוות חבילות חבילות, there is negative way. Don't throw them all, because you're going to show the אייבערשטער that you don't care. Here you're going to show the אייבערשטער that you do care. Or you could say no, it's a דין in the מצוה itself. If you do the מצוה without the הידור, you did it, certain degree. If you do it with a הידור, the מצוה is a better מצוה, it's not a נפקא מינה. Now, what are the difference, it's not in הלכה, the difference is this: whether when a person does a מצוה בהידור, is the גדר concept of this התנאה לפניו במצות, one מצוה, no matter which מצוה you do it in, one ענין, or it's in every separate ענין. In other words, if I perform the מצוה of תפילין בהידור, so I can say like this: I did two ענינים here. I did the מצוה of תפילין, then I did a מצוה called הידור מצוה. But הידור מצוה, so when I put תפילין on בהידור, and I eat מצה בהידור, I in both cases fulfilled the same מצוה. The מצוה of מצה is different than the מצוה of תפילין, but הידור מצוה, there's one מצוה of הידור מצוה, and that מצוה is the same by all מצות. It's a מצוה כללית, a general מצוה. Or, you could say no, if it's a, if it's a פרט in the מצוה, so הידור מצוה of תפילין is a פרט of תפילין. הידור מצוה of כשרות, is of of of מצה is a דין of מצה. It's similar to the famous שאלה, there's a דין of לפני עור לא תתן מכשול, you're not allowed to put, before you go to מכשול, you just said before to say he did the מצוה itself, but it's a מצוה כללית. Now, also is a difference if it's חפצא, that means if you did the, that's what I'm saying now, that whether it's כללית or פרטית is an outcome of whether it's in the, in the חפצא, in the מצוה, or the person. Now,

לפני עור, what's לפני עור? It says you shouldn't put a stumbling block in front of a blind man. What does that mean? You're not allowed to be מכשיל, you're not allowed to make somebody do an עבירה. It's terrible, that's לפני עור. Now, here is a שאלה, the ראגאטשאווער has a שאלה: is לפני עור a פרט, a detail in every מצוה, in every עבירה, or is it one general thing? למשל, if someone is מכשיל somebody in שבת, what עבירה was he עובר? So you could say he was an עובר a כללות'דיקע עבירה, that you're not allowed to make someone stumble over doing something wrong. Or you could say, no, you're עובר on שבת. Well, which part of שבת? Well, שבת has a lot of details. One of, is the לפני עור of שבת! If you're מכשיל somebody in eating טרפה, you're עובר on the איסור of טרפה. And it would depend: if it's the לפני עור of שבת, it's worse. But the other way, it's one לפני עור. One of the ראיות they bring to one צד, to one side of the of the discussion, it's one of the ראיות, a ראיה is something to bring out, תוספות in עבודה זרה says that if a איד makes somebody do a איסור דרבנן, he's עובר on לפני עור מדאורייתא. Now, how's that possible? How could, I'm causing the person to do an עבירה, if that whole עבירה is דרבנן, how could I be עובר on לפני עור מדאורייתא? Yeah, but what עבירה, I made him do something wrong, if it's only wrong מדרבנן, oh, if לפני עור is a דין in every מצוה, then it can't be worse than that מצוה. So let's say if I make somebody eat חלב עכו''ם, I'm עובר on לפני עור on חלב עכו''ם. So I'm עובר on a איסור, חלב עכו''ם is דרבנן. חלב עכו''ם has many פרטים in it. One פרט is you can't drink it, you can't do this, you can't make someone עובר on it. So then it can't be a דאורייתא, because, what like that? But if you say it's כללות, if the תורה says that we have in every מצוה, one לפני עור, so you could be עובר on the איסור ד, imagine! You cause somebody to do an איסור דרבנן, and you, by causing him, are עובר an איסור דאורייתא! And the same thing here, when you do a הידור מצוה, the שאלה is, is it a כללות'דיקע, it's one מצוה התנאה לפניו. Now, when, in any מצוה possible, but the other way is, no, it's a part of every מצוה. That's one נפקא מינה. But then there is another נפקא מינה, and this is what I'm trying to get to. The other נפקא מינה is: is there a concept of הידור מצוה when you add something on the outside of the מצוה, something that's not part of the מצוה? For instance, for instance, we'll get to that, that's what we're getting to, but I'm getting even before that: is there a ענין in הידור מצוה to take a silver box and put your אתרוג in? Is that a הידור מצוה? Well, it would really depend on this שאלה. If it's a דין in the מצוה, the the box is not the מצוה, so there is nothing there. If it's a דין in the person that you want to, there's a, there's a דין that you should show the אייבערשטער how you like His מצוה, then you could show a silver box also, and it's also part of הידור מצוה. Now,

when we have, when you have a מצוה, and the מצוה has a size, the Rebbe writes in, actually in ספר השיעורים, in שיעורים בספר התניא is brought down, a letter sent from the Rebbe לגבי a certain ענין the אלטער רבי'ס in תניא, but he says anything bigger than the size is not part of the מצוה. למשל, a person the שיעור of ציצית is י''ב גודלין, 12 גודלין. So one guy's going to say, well, I'm going to have long ציצית like this. It's not part of the מצוה, there's nothing, nothing to it. It's only an outside thing of the מצוה. That's from the outside שיעור. So לכאורה, what's the ענין of having a bigger אתרוג? If the שיעור is a שיעור That's the שיעור. So what, you have more? Is anything anything extra there, more? Like I once heard from somebody, he said, that he was pretty fat, he said, \"You know why I'm fat? Because I'm נאך ייד, another piece of ייד. Every, the גוף ישראל קדוש, if there's more like this there's 150 lbs of ייד, there's 180 lbs of ייד, it's a big...\" Same, is there more ייד to it because of that? Here, is there more אתרוג if you have If that's the שיעור, that's the שיעור. So the משנה ברורה says, the משנה ברורה, שולחן ערוך, says a בעל הבית'ישע reason, that you should buy bigger because you know, after a while it gets איינגעשרומפן, what's it called, shrinks, so it might lose the שיעור. It's not משמע here that it's because of that. It's משמע that it's a דין. So לכאורה, what's the אלא מאי? If you add to it, it makes it, no, make it look bigger, you have more of the מצוה, but not more in the הלכה of the מצוה. Now, if הידור מצוה is a דין in the מצוה, then there's no ענין in having a bigger אתרוג or any longer ציצית. If הידור מצוה is a דין in the גברא, so it could be, yeah, that even something from the outside, you could also, the outside you could also do that. So you have a מצוה. Now, this could be the מחלוקת between תוספות and רש״י. רש״י says that what is the ענין of הידור here that the גמרא talks about, it's פשוט הידור מצוה. It doesn't accept the fact that you make a bigger אתרוג. There's no such thing as a bigger אתרוג according to רש״י, because רש״י goes that the ענין of הידור מצוה is a דין in the מצוה. If it's a דין in the מצוה, then it could only be in הידור מצוה, but not in size. תוספות לערנט that the גדר of הידור מצוה is a דין in the גברא, in the person, and therefore תוספות לערנט, you make it bigger, it also has a And this will have an effect on another thing.

What is the reason that the מנהג חב״ד, we don't have נוי סוכה? Why don't we have these designs in the סוכה, decorations of the סוכה? So the רבי once spoke about it. And the נקודה the רבי said was that it's, again, not in the גברא. He says, \"What's the ענין? What's nice? The סוכה is nice. מילא, if you say you want to have nice walls, the the wall, the סכך is nicer, so the מצוה is nicer, that makes sense. But to put on a decoration, so it's the decoration that's nice. It's not the מצוה. So what's the big ענין? That's why we don't do it.\" And the רבי even asked, \"אי, we know that in the גמרא it's mentioned that תנאים, אמוראים, they had נוי סוכה.\" It's very simple. They were such great people, to them, the decoration on its own had no meaning. So to them, the decoration was בטל to the סוכה. So it decorated the סוכה. But to us, the decoration in itself is nice. So to us, it's a side thing outside of the סוכה, so there's no ענין. And he even brought an example where we find that sometimes you can be מבטל, sometimes not. The example is like this: the סוכה, if a סוכה, the סכך is higher than the floor more than 20 אמה, you can't sit in the סוכה. So the עצה it gives, the גמרא, שולחן ערוך, make the floor higher. It says you can take straw and being pile up on the floor, and the floor gets higher, now there is less than 20 אמות, it's כשר. It says, \"But if a guy's going to say, 'Okay, you know what? When I sit down to eat, I'll take my pillows out of the house, and I'll put them on the floor, and I'll sit on top of that.' That's not כשר. Why? Because the pillows you're not מבטל to the floor. But the straw, you are מבטל.\" So there is a thing of an outside thing, but if you have in your mind you're מבטל it, and you're putting it, so it becomes part of So by the תנאים, אמוראים, the decorations were is בטל to the to the wall, became part of the wall, so then the סוכה is better. But to us, not. But what does this all come out? This לכאורה fits if we're going to hold that it's a דין in the חפצא, a דין in the מצוה. So it comes out that this would fit more to רש״י, that it's a דין in the מצוה. So that's why we, based on this, according to our opinion, we accept that. And we see also we don't, there's nothing wrong in having a silver אתרוג box, but there's no ענין in it. What's the ראיה there is no ענין in our מנהג? The ראיה, the רבי didn't have it. If there would be an ענין, a good ענין, the רבי would have it. A a מגילה case, so the רבי in later years someone gave him a present, he used it, but like this, it wasn't לכתחילה לכאורה. If it's a הידור to have a All these things, we don't have an עטרה on our טלית. We don't have a silver קערה. Even a כתר on the ספר תורה is a new thing from תש״ל that the רבי, משיח'ס ספר תורה and then it's But like this ליובאוויטש never had this. Why? Because it seems like ליובאוויטש follows the שיטה that it's a דין in the מצוה, outside it's not. The only thing that is left to me Because that's a הידור in the מצוה. פארקערט, that's a that's the best example! Big תפילין, because the תפילין are bigger! It's no and there's no, there's a הידור in in הלכה because it has to be, but there's a שיעור. There's a מחלוקת what the שיעור is, and there's a הידור to have a bigger שיעור, so there there is a הידור. But in in other things when it's an outside thing, not. The only שאלה is the אתרוג, where it seems, it's not written anywhere, but it seems that by us we're מהדר in getting a bigger, everyone wants a big אתרוג. Now we're saying if the

שיעור is a שיעור and the bigger doesn't make it any more מצוה, so what's the ענין? So could be that in this the רבי learns like the ים של שלמה. The ים של שלמה learns we just I mentioned in תוספות, there is a special דין in אתרוג. So maybe he learns like בעצם הידור מצוה is a דין in the מצוה, and therefore, in in in making bigger like longer ציצית is nothing. In אתרוג is a special דין, הדר or whatever, it's fitting to make it bigger, that's why. But בעצם what we accept is that the ענין of הידור מצוה is a דין in the מצוה and not a דין in the גברא. It's nothing to do with כוונה, we're talking about הידור now. No, כוונה could be either way. כוונה is Well, according to that, but what are you saying? That it's not a שאלה, what are you saying? It's part of, it's a דין in the גברא, it's a What? To be יוצא the מצוה. הידור מצוה. No, I'm saying walking, walking Walking further. Walking further Yeah. is, it's considered a כוונה of doing that מצוה. No. You, you said before that you don't have that כוונה,