K. Here in the Gemara in שבת דף ד עמוד א׳, גמרא says בעא מיניה רב ביבי מרבה, he asked a she'eilah, הדביק פת בתנור, a person puts on Shabbos in bread, dough into the oven, התירו לו לרדותה קודם שיבוא לידי חיוב חטאת או לא התירו. So, after he put it in, he wants to take it out because he realized that he leaves it in, he's going to be עובר on the איסור אפייה שבת and he'll have to bring a חטאת. Is he allowed to take it out or not? The Gemara went into shitos, and the Gemara said first the answer was אלא במזיד, the case is, whatever the kushya of the Gemara was, that the she'eilah is not חטאת, the she'eilah is במזיד. If a person במזיד put in bread into the oven and now he decided, he realized that he doesn't want to do it, he wants to do teshuvah let's say, so the she'eilah is can he take it out קודם שיבוא לידי איסור סקילה? Before he will come to איסור סקילה. That means if he leaves leaves it in, it'll bake. And since he put it in במזיד, he's חייב סקילה because for baking on Shabbos, it's one of the ל״ט מלאכות, you're חייב סקילה. So the she'eilah was, is he allowed to take it out to be עובר the איסור רדיית הפת? Because there's the איסור דרבנן of not being allowed to take out bread from the oven, even if it's baked bread. Nothing to do with baking on Shabbos. If there's an oven that bread put into the oven before Shabbos and baked, you're not allowed to take it on Shabbos. So can he do the איסור of רדיית הפת to save himself from the איסור סקילה? Comes Tosafos, and Tosafos says, ואם תאמר, in Tosafos קודם, ואם תאמר היכי אתי לידי חיוב סקילה, והתראה ספק הוא. How will he come to a סקילה? In order to be חייב סקילה or any punishment that בית דין will give, you're only חייב if you were warned, and has to be warned right before he did it. And you have to be warned, and you have to be told when you're warning the person, don't do this because if you do this you will be חייב מלקות or chayav sekilah, whatever the aveirah is. And the din is that you have to warn him hatra'at vadai, not hatra'at safek. If the melachah, the aveirah he did will not definitely make him chayav the punishment, then the warning doesn't count. If you tell a guy don't do this because if you do this maybe you will be chayav sekilah, because it's a situation where we're not sure, then even if it turns out to be that he's takeh chayav sekilah, but he won't be chayav befo'al. Why? Because the warning is not a good warning, it's called hatra'at safek. So he asks, how can he be chayav sekilah in this case? And it's a she'eilah really not in this case, it's a she'eilah in the regular, the general דין אפייה. How could anybody be chayav sekilah for the melachah of baking? We know that for every one of the ל״ט מלאכות you're chayav sekilah. How could there ever be by afiyah, how could he be chayav sekilah? When do you warn the guy? שבשעה שהדביק פת בתנור, שמא היה בדעתו לרדותה קודם שיבא לידי איסור סקילה. ומשלירדה, שמא שכח ההתראה. You're only chayav if you leave it in. Maybe he's going to take it out. So when you warn the guy when he puts in the bread in the oven and you warn him on Shabbos don't do it because if you'll do it you'll be chayav sekilah, that's not necessarily true. How do you know he'll be chayav sekilah? Maybe he's going to take it out. Maybe he's putting it in and planning to take it out in one minute. Now later on, when it, if he doesn't take it out, it continues baking, it's too late already. Then you can't warn him. You have to warn before he does the מעשה עבירה. Since he already did the מעשה עבירה, so now it's too late to warn. When do you have to warn him? Before he put it in. Before he put it in you're never sure that he's going to be chayav. So when you warn him don't put it in because you might be chayav sekilah if you leave it in, that's called hatra'at safek. ותירץ Riba, so the Riba answers, דכיון שהדביק תוך כדי דיבור של התראה, ובודאי תאפה אם לא ירדנה, לאו התראת ספק הוא. דוודאי לא היה בדעתו לרדות קודם אפייה, and that's not called hatra'at safek. He says like this: since when he put it in, and the din of hatra'ah is you warn the guy right before he did it, and he still doesn't listen and puts it in, so Tosafot uses the lashon so mistama he has in mind not to take it out, and putting it in, it'll bake by itself, he doesn't have to do anything more, the moment you put it in and you don't do anything, it's going to bake, it's not called hatra'at safek. Mistama he had a mind not to take it out. The bottom line, the nekudah of this terutz is that since when you put it in and you leave it in without doing anything, you'll be chayav sekilah, it's not called התראת ספק. Because you don't have to do anything later to be chayav sekilah. So when you warn the guy, don't put it in because you'll be chayav sekilah, it's true, because the moment he puts it in, that ma'aseh will bring him sekilah. The only thing that's possible, he could do something to change it, that, yeah, he could take it out. But when he takes it out, he will change the fact. The fact is that he's chayav sekilah. If he takes it out, he'll change that. So when we look at it, Tosafot says, when we look at it from when he puts it in, we're looking is that he's doing a ma'aseh which will bring him sekilah. Mimela, when you warn him, it's not called התראת ספק, because what he did will bring him sekilah. It seems that the terutz of Tosafot is this vort, that you should know, since it's going to bake by itself, without you doing anything else, just put it in, mimela it's not called התראת ספק. The she'eilah is, why does Tosafot, according if this is the terutz, then what's the kashya of Tosafot? Why does Tosafot ask? We know that in Tosafot דיבור המתחיל וכי, Tosafot said that legabei this din that you cannot do an aveirah, an עבירה קלה, small aveirah, to take away from somebody else a big aveirah, so the Gemara says you can't do it, וכי אומרים לאדם חטא כדי שיזכה חברך? פרעגט תוספות a kashya, but we do find in the case of Eruvin, בנוגע the טבל, we do find it. So Tosafot goes into peratim, but one of the things Tosafot says, ואומר ר״י בו, דאפילו למאן דאמר דקטן אין לפשיט, ווי דהתם עדיין, yeah, by the case of the טבל the issur wasn't done, אבל הכא המעשה של איסור כבר נעשה וממילא יגמר, וממילא יגמר. Tosafot said already that by afiyah we look at it as the ma'aseh was done already. That's what Tosafot said in the previous Tosafot. By baking, when you put the dough into the oven, the maaseh is done, memeila it'll finish, you don't have to do much, it'll finish by itself. So Tosafos already said before that by baking, the מעשה אפייה and considered as if it's done is when you put it in. So what's Tosafos קשיא here? Tosafos has already gave us a yesod in Tosafos דיבור המתחיל וכי, that when you put it in, that's called a maaseh, and that maaseh is looked upon as if you finished it already, that's what Tosafos says, because bevadai, we said מאליו יגמר, so then what's Tosafos קשיא here? Tosafos comes and asks, how could you warn the guy by the putting it in, maybe it's not going to be chayav, maybe he'll take it out? But Tosafos just said that when you put it in, it's considered done, because you just leave it in and it'll happen, and lechora that's basically Tosafos תירוץ. What's Tosafos תירוץ here? Why takeh is it not התראת ספק? Because as soon as you put it in, it's going to happen by itself. But that we know already! We know already from the previous Tosafos that this is what that this is going to happen automatically, and memeila it's considered the maaseh is done. Tosafos does add the word בדעתו, but lechora that's not the ikar, because what's the chiluk what בדעתו is? The chiluk isn't the maaseh, in the maaseh what he's doing. It's not a chiluk what בדעתו is. The she'eilah is, if he's doing a maaseh, is it called that he's doing definitely a מעשה איסור which will bring him sekilah? Tosafos does add the words בדעתו, and that needs a biur in itself why Tosafos talks about בדעתו, but it seems like that the עיקר נקודה of Tosafos is that when you put in bread into the oven, we look at it as if you have finished the maaseh, and m'meila when I warn you, I'm warning you for the whole thing, and it's called התראת ודאי. The kashya was it's not, but l'chorah what's the shaila? L'chorah it's definitely when you put it in, we know already from before that this is what it is.

So to understand this, let's go into the general shaila of מלאכת אפייה. L'chorah we have to understand, how is a person taake chayav for מלאכת אפייה? Let's go back to this inyan that we're just speaking about, by putting it in, this whole vort that if you put it in, it's automatically, ממילא יגמר, it'll finish by itself, and it's as if you did a whole thing. But l'chorah what's the sechel behind it? When you put in bread in the oven, the maaseh that you're doing is not a מעשה עבירה לכאורה. It's not baked yet, so you're just taking dough and putting it into an oven. For that you're not chayav. For what are you not chayav? If you take it out, you won't be chayav. Ela mai, you're chayav when it gets baked. When it gets baked, you didn't do anything. It's baking by itself. So, how do we look bichlal at this מלאכת אפייה? How do we, how are you chayav? Meila by other melachot, let's say מלאכת of ketivah, while you're writing you're doing the מעשה עבירה. The maaseh that is asur on Shabbos is being done when you do it. Here, the issur is done later. The maaseh you do before the issur. So, ein hachi nami, if you leave it in, it's going to happen. What's so so what? So, it's going to happen. But at this point, you're not chayav, because you didn't do it, it didn't bake yet. What's going to happen later is happening by itself. Because you caused it. Good, but you're a grama, you're not doing the aveirah, you're not baking it. So, how could What's the reason, taake? To understand, what's the sevara? Why are you chayav, taake, from מלאכת אופה? How are you chayav from מלאכת אופה? The answer, bifshitus, will be that this is על דרך we find by היזק. When a one of the אבות נזיקין when you cause someone damage, there are different kinds of damages that you're chayav. One of the damages is הבער, making a fire. If a person makes a fire in his backyard, and the fire travels and goes someplace else and burns down somebody's house, you are chayav to pay. And you could ask a she'eilah, why are you chayav to pay? Likhorah, when the guy started a fire in his backyard, starting a fire in his backyard, or it's mutar, and even if it burns somebody else's thing, you burned, but later on it's going by itself. So, why are you chayav? The answer is because, especially according to Rabbi Yochanan who says in בבא קמא, אשו משום חציו. The reason you're chayav by אש is משום חציו. משום חציו means it's because it's like a person's arrow. When a person shoots an arrow, he stands in his house, shoots an arrow and it hurts somebody over there, you're chayav. Why are you chayav? You could say, \"I did something here. I pulled the trigger here. I could do whatever I want in my house. It comes there, that I didn't do that. It happened by itself.\" אלא מאי, we say you're chayav. Why? Because you started the fi- you shot you pulled the trigger, so you're chayav. You Same thing by fire. You started the fire, so you're chayav for everything that the fire does, הגם it seems like you're doing it by itself. So, the same way we say by אש that you're chayav for the נזק of אש, even though you started the fire here, and this could happen an hour later. An hour later it goes the fire travels and breaks something, burns something down there, you're chayav, the same way you're chayav by Shabbos also by baking. When you put in the the the the bread into the oven, so even though what you did now did not do the מלאכה yet, the מלאכה is not going to be done till it bakes, just like over here you weren't mazik yet, so nevertheless you're chayav, so you're chayav here too. And I want to explain exactly what this means. This is the דין by אש, אשו משום חציו, and I'm applying it the same thing by מלא- מלאכת אפייה. It's the same idea, but that גופא we have to understand. How does it work there?

So, to understand exactly how it works by אש, there is the famous Nimukei Yosef. The Nimukei Yosef learns like says like this in Bava Kamma. He says like this, an interesting ענין, בכלל this whole ענין is an interesting ענין. He asks a kashya. He says, b'pashtut when we say אשו משום חציו, that when you start a fire, whatever the fire does, and all the damage it does for days, makes you chayav because as if you did it. You know what that shows? That the Torah considers when you start a fire, as the fire keeps on going, it's as if you're doing it, right? Otherwise you wouldn't be chayav. It's as if you are continue to do it. And that's why you're chayav. So, he asks a she'eilah, if by fire we consider, the Torah considers as the fire goes on that you are constantly making the fire, how could we light candles Friday? That's what he asks. The Nimukei Yosef asks the she'eilah. This sounds like from Acharonim, the Nimukei Yosef has the she'eilah. How could you light a candle on Friday? Because as the candle is burning, isn't it considered like you are consider- constantly making the fire go? So, you're making a fire on Shabbos. How could you do that? Now, I once heard from the Rosh Yeshiva of 770, Rabbi Piekarski, and he said, as an answer to the Nimukei Yosef's kashya, I didn't say what the answered, but just as an answer to the Nimukei Yosef's kashya, he said that there is a Yalkut, an interesting thing, there is a Yalkut that said on the פסוק לא תבערו אש בכל משבתיכם ביום השבת, so the pasuk says don't light a fire on Shabbos, so the Yalkut says ביום השבת אי אתה מבעיר אבל אתה מבעיר בערב שבת. You can't make a fire on Shabbos, but you can make a fire on Friday. And he says it's very strange, what is that? Vadai, Friday is not Shabbos, you could do any melachah on Friday. You need a pasuk to tell you that you can't make that melachah of fire on Friday? Says now we understand, because the Nimukei Yosef according to his kashya, you shouldn't be able to light a fire on Friday if it goes into Shabbos. So the answer to the Nimukei Yosef's kashya would be there's a special pasuk, ein hachi nami it would be a she'eilah, there's a special פסוק ביום השבת, and we דרשן ביום השבת אי אתה מבעיר אבל אתה מבעיר בערב שבת, but this is not what the Nimukei Yosef answered. So let's go back to the Nimukei Yosef. His kashya is how could you, if the pshat in eish is that as it goes, we consider it as if you are constantly making the fire, and that is the reason why you are chayav, so how could you light a candle on Friday? And he answers that we got a mistake in pshat. The reason you're chayav there is not because as it continues it's as if you're continuing it. Punkt farkert, he says, when you light a fire, everything that happens later is as if it was done right in the beginning. That's why you're chayav. See, the hava amina of the Nimukei Yosef was that the reason we say you're chayav for אש, because why are you chayav everything for the next hour, everything it burns? Because every minute it's as if you are making the fire. And his answer is it's punkt farkert. You know why you're chayav for the whole hour? Cuz it's all included in the first As soon as he started a fire, anything that happens later is included in what you did before. So we have here a hava amina and a maskana of the Nimukei Yosef. לפי זה, we could say a very pashut pshat in Tosafos. Tosafos knew in the beginning that when you start a fire, when you put in something to bake, ממילא יגמר, it'll happen by itself. Nevertheless, Tosafos came and asked a she'eilah, it's still called התראת ספק? And Tosafos gave an answer, it's not התראת ספק because it's going to happen automatically. The chiluk in the hava amina and the maskana of Tosafos is the same hava amina and maskana of the Nimukei Yosef. The hava amina was that when you're chayav for baking, even though what you did didn't bake yet, is because as it continues to bake, you are, it's as if you are doing it. Since you started it, just like by the fire, since you started it, it's continuing, and it's considered that you are continuing, that's the pshat in ממילא יגמר. That's why you're chayav. That's why you're chayav for baking bichlal. Freigt Tosafos a kushya: if the pshat is as if you're continuing, maybe you won't continue, maybe you'll take it out? So mimela it's a התראת ספק. We don't know if you're going to continue. Vadai if you leave it in, it's going to go by itself. But what's the pshat it's going to go by itself? It's the pshat is that you are continuously doing. So you're chayav for when it gets baked because of what you did then, but if what you're doing now doesn't mean it's going to happen, because it's only going to happen as it continues, mimela now it's a התראת ספק. Answer Tosafot, no, like the מסקנא of the Nimukei Yosef, it's punkt farkert. As soon as you put it in, since it's going to happen by itself, it's as if you did it right then and there. So why are you chayav for baking on Shabbos when you just put it in? Because putting in means that you baked it. והראיה just like we say by the נזקין, according to the מסקנא of the Nimukei Yosef. Why could you light a candle on Friday? Because when you start the candle it's as if the whole candle is burned already. Just and if it would be a היזק and you start a candle, you take someone's candle let's say, and you light it and it burns down the whole candle and you cause them a damage, why are you chayav to pay for the whole candle? Not because as it's burning you ruined his candle you continuously ruined his candle, because lechatchila it was already called burnt. And mimeila it's not called התראת ספק. You could do? No, but and it's going to continue? And so for you're chayav for further, you're chayav, sure. Or should you be chayav before and now you're not chayav anymore? You're chayav. Why are you not chayav? You let it continue, why are you not chayav? The peulah was done though. Yeah. The peulah of everything that's going to happen, so the peulah of 10 minutes from now is done already also, and that peulah is a wrong peulah. So lichorah you could answer pshat in Tosafot that the hava amina and מסקנא of Tosafot is the same hava amina and מסקנא as the Nimukei Yosef. The she'eilah is only does Tosafot agree with the Nimukei Yosef בכלל? Cause according to this, the מסקנא of Tosafot is like the Nimukei Yosef's מסקנא that you're chayav for אש because in the beginning as soon as it happened it's as if you did the whole thing, and mimeila the מסקנא here too that the reason you're chayav the reason you're chayav for for אפיה is because right away it happens, memeila it's not עשייה בסוף. The shaila is does Tosafot hold like that? It seems from not it seems, the Ketzot says in סימן ש\"צ that Tosafot does not agree with the Nimukei Yosef. So the and we'll see that we'll talk about it באריכות, but derveyl what's the shaila? So the answer I the peshat I gave you can't give. Because Tosafot does not agree with the Nimukei Yosef's teirutz, so you can't say that's the maskana of Tosafot here. Where do we see that Tosafot doesn't agree with the Nimukei Yosef?

The Ketzot brings the Gemara in Bava Kama דף י\"ז עמוד ב'. The Gemara there says like this, an interesting din. If a person זרק כלי מראש הגג, if someone stands on top of a roof and takes somebody's keli and throws it down, now it's going to break, no question about it, came in middle before it landed on the ground, someone with a stick hit it and broke it. Who's chayav? The guy who threw it down or the one that broke it? So the Gemara says that the one that threw it down is chayav, because the one that broke it is considered מנא תבירא תבר. He broke a broken keli. So why is he chayav? Because it was going to break anyway. It's מנא תבירא תבר. That's the Gemara. Comes Tosafot, and Tosafot says like this. This din that the one that broke it is chayav is only in the case where you threw the keli down. You threw down a keli, it was going to break anyway, and the guy broke it, the guy the second guy is not chayav. What happened if זרק חץ? If there's a keli laying on the floor and I from far I'm throwing a rock on it, and the rock is going חץ the arrow is going straight at it, and it's going to break it, but before the arrow reached it, somebody else went and broke it. Zogt Tosafot in that case the second guy will be chayav, not the guy who threw that rock. And Tosafos says, וסברא פשוטה לחלק בין זרק חץ לזרק כלי. It's a very simple sevara, makes a lot it's very simple to understand the difference between if you threw the כלי and someone broke it first that the first guy is chayav versus the guy who threw the rock on the כלי, then the second guy is chayav. I just want to say derech agav, I once heard from somebody who told me he heard a shiur from the Rogatchover, and the Rogatchover mentioned this Tosafos, and the Rogatchover said these words בשעת he mentioned Tosafos: בא מיר פלאצט די קאפ צו פארשטיין דעם חילוק, און תוספות גיט א זאג א סברא פשוטה לחלק. That's what he said. בא מיר פלאצט, by me my head is breaking trying to understand what is the chiluk between the two, און Tosafos says it like that בפשטות, א סברא פשוטה לחלק. Anyway the bottom line is that Tosafos does say this vort, whichever which pshat, that if you throw a חץ on a כלי and someone else broke it, the second guy is chayav because we do not say the sevara מנא תבירא תבר. זאגט the Nimukei Yosef that this is a re'aya that Tosafos זאגט the Ketzos I mean, that this is a re'aya that Tosafos does not hold like the Nimukei Yosef. Because according to the maskana of the Nimukei Yosef that the reason you're chayav by fire and Rabbi Yochanan says אשו משום חציו, fire is the same thing as the arrow, that not that as the arrow is going and breaking things it's as if the you are taking the arrow along and that that's why you're chayav. You're chayav because right in the beginning when you shot the arrow, it's already considered broken. That's why you're chayav. The same thing by fire, cause arrow, cause Rabbi Yochanan says אשו משום חציו, the same thing. Now the Nimukei Yosef says the opposite. No, Tosafos says that when you throw a חץ and someone else breaks it, we do not consider it as broken. We don't say that when you threw the rock it's already was broken already then, and mimela the second guy who broke it broke a broken כלי. It doesn't say it. So if he would hold like the Nimukei Yosef, the דין should be the same, that when you threw the rock at the כלי, according to the Nimukei Yosef the way he learns peshat in אשו משום חציו, the peshat is that it's already done right away in the beginning, so here should also be a מנא תבירא תבר, should be a broken כלי. Zogt the Ketzos, comes out that Tosafos disagrees. And Tosafos holds why are you chayav by אש or by חציו Like the hava amina of the Nimukei Yosef. As it's going, it's breaking. So here, as long as it didn't happen, it didn't happen yet. It didn't break, it's not broken. So לפי זה, Tosafos argues with the Nimukei Yosef. If Tosafos argues with the Nimukei Yosef, so we come back to our peshat, we can't say the peshat we said before, that the hava amina and maskana of Tosafos here is the hava amina was that by fire by baking, it's when are you chayav? It's going to happen by itself, but as it's baking, it's as if you're doing it. The maskana is no, that it's lechatchilah as if everything that's happening later was done before. So if Tosafos does not learn like the Nimukei Yosef, we can't give that peshat because we're saying that the maskana of Tosafos is like the maskana of the Nimukei Yosef. Huh? By what? Tosafos. If he doesn't hold like the Nimukei Yosef, so we're back to the שאלה. Yeah, if we don't hold like if we can't answer what we said, so we're back to the שאלה: what was the hava amina of Tosafos? Why is Tosafos feel it's a התראת ספק in the havah amina, when Tosafot knew already before that it happens by itself? So we try to say the chiluk is how you look at it: you're chayav because it happened by itself, what's the way? But now we can't say that. The only thing is we have to go into, is it clear like the Ketzot says that Tosafot disagrees with the Nimukei Yosef? Cuz there are some that want to say different than the Ketzot, that Tosafot doesn't disagree with the Ketzot, with the Nimukei Yosef. The Nimukei Yosef never meant that when it starts in the beginning, it's as if everything was done. He means that the whole אחריות is upon you then. And the truth is, if we're going to learn like I'll explain in a minute, what I'm going to bring out is, if we're going to learn like this, then the kushya is even worse. Now we're saying that Tosafot does not learn like the Nimukei Yosef. We're going to, according to some, the Nimukei Yosef himself never meant it! Which is not like the Ketzot. The Nimukei Yosef never meant to say that the terutz is that we look at it as right in the beginning as if everything was done. What he meant was, they say, that as soon as you started, the אחריות of everything that's going to happen is upon you. It's only an אחריות, and therefore you're chayav. But not that it's as if it's done. So he's saying like this: that be'emet you're chayav as it's happening later. The אחריות is upon you right away. And therefore he wants to say לגבי שבת, since the אחריות is right away, mimela that's why you're allowed to put it on on Friday, because the אחריות of everything that's going to happen is now. And benoge'a paying, you have to pay. But when it comes lich'ora to the baking, let's say no, to the guy who threw the כלי, who threw down the the rock, you are not chayav till it actually happens. It's not considered, we're saying now the sevara, it's not considered that it's really broken already, even according to the Nimukei Yosef's terutz. What do we say? We learned peshat in the Nimukei Yosef that he says that why are you chayav when you throw make a fire or you throw an arrow? Because right away, as soon as you throw it, everything that happens later is already done. So we're saying no, the Nimukei Yosef that you're אחרי for you start your אחריות because you started doing it. So it's no setirah to the Tosafot in Bava Kamma. Why? Because over there, he's talking, is it called a broken כלי? It's not called a broken keli. Why? Because all it is that the אחריות is upon you, but it's not broken. So if someone else came and broke it first, so he broke it first, so mimela he's chayav. The she'eilah And mimela we can't we don't have a re'iyah or we're not saying that Tosafot argues and against the Nimukei Yosef. But על כל פנים what comes out from here, that even according to the Nimukei Yosef we don't say such a concept that it's burnt lechatchilah. So vadai we can't say this peshat in Tosafot. We're trying to say peshat in Tosafot that the maskana of Tosafot is why is it not התראת ספק, because it happened you're חייב לכתחילה, why are you chayav? Because it happened the גאנצע לכתחילה. Even the Nimukei Yosef doesn't say it. The Nimukei Yosef באמת holds even the maskana that it happens later on, you are doing it later on. The reason he says you're allowed to, because it happened that the אחריות comes from before. So lema'aseh if we're not saying even according to the Nimukei Yosef, the she'eilah is stronger. The she'eilah is, but can we learn peshat like that in the Nimukei Yosef? Because the lashon in the Nimukei Yosef is not like that. The Nimukei Yosef says clearly that it's finished lechatchilah he says, right away when you start, it's already as if it's finished. So he says clearly that he holds that it's as if it's finished. And another thing, from the Rabbi we see that he definitely doesn't hold peshat like this in the Nimukei Yosef, and he holds peshat that in the Nimukei Yosef, that the Nimukei Yosef learns that it happened, everything happens right in the beginning when you start the fire, right away as if you, everything was done. Where do we see it? Cuz there's a famous sichah, this is one of the famous sichot. Why is it famous? Cuz it's in חלק א׳, and חלק א׳ is, when the חלק א׳ came down, this was the only, out it was the only sefer of the Rebbe. So obviously everyone knew it, so it's, I think it's still famous, I don't know. So the Rebbe asks a very interesting shaila in that sicha. The Rebbe asks the shaila, he says in the Gemara that Rabbi Yochanan said that had he been in the time of the חורבן בית המקדש, he would have made to fast not on Tisha B'Av, but on י׳ באב. Not on ninth of Av, but tenth of Av. Why? Because most of the בית המקדש burned on the tenth of Av. They started, they put the בית המקדש on fire towards the evening on the ninth of Av, and it burned throughout the whole day the next day. So he would have made that they should have made fasting on י׳ באב. So the Rebbe asks a shaila: according to the Nimukei Yosef, who says pshat in the same Rabbi Yochanan? Rabbi Yochanan is the one that says אשו משום חציו, and the Nimukei Yosef learns pshat that everything, when you start a fire, everything that's done later is as if it happened right in the beginning, not the pshat that everything that happens later is you are continuing doing it, but everything is included in what you started. So when the fire started on Tisha B'Av, according to Rabbi Yochanan, you should fast on Tisha B'Av. Why does Rabbi Yochanan say he would fast on י׳ באב? And the Rebbe gives a teirutz what the kashya is. But if you learn like those mefarshim that learn that the Nimukei Yosef didn't mean that, that the Nimukei Yosef didn't mean that be'emet everything is included in the beginning, ela mai he meant that the אחריות is on, what's the Rebbe's shaila? Nimukei Yosef doesn't mean that when you start a fire and you're chayav because everything, you're אחראי now for what happens later, but the fire is burning later. Mimela you understand Rabbi Yochanan's vort that you have to fast on י׳ באב, not Tisha B'Av. The fact that the Rebbe asks the she'eilah, mashma that the Rebbe learns pshat in the Nimukei Yosef כפשוטו, that the Nimukei Yosef, and it's mashma from his lashon like that, that what's the pshat? That when you start a fire, you're chayav for all the היזקות that the fire causes. Why? Because it's all included in the beginning. When you start a fire, everything that is going to burn is as if you did it now already. Mimela the she'eilah is: why does Rabbi Yochanan say you should fast on י׳, not on ט׳? So it seems from here that this is not the pshat in the Nimukei Yosef. So the Nimukei Yosef learns כפשוטו. Tosafos, al kol panim, seems definitely to argue on the Nimukei Yosef. From this Tosafos in Bava Kama where he says that if you threw a חץ on the כלי and someone else broke it, the second guy is chayav, and we do not say מנא תבירא תבר, that he broke a broken כלי, cuz it's not broken yet. But if Tosafos would learn like the Nimukei Yosef, then even when you throw down the חץ, the rock on the כלי, as soon as you throw it, it's as if everything is going to the, the whole breaking is already done. So when someone else breaks it, you should call it a broken כלי. The fact that Tosafos says that you're, the second guy is chayav, not the first, is a re'ayah that Tosafos disagrees with the Nimukei Yosef. So mimela afilu if we're going to say that the Nimukei Yosef does learn like that, but Tosafos לכאורה doesn't learn like that. So if it doesn't learn like that, we're back, we cannot answer the answer we gave. We gave an answer that the chiluk between the hava amina and the maskana of Tosafot is the hava amina and the maskana of the Nimukei Yosef. The hava amina, why Tosafot thought it's התראת ספק, because he learned at the hava amina that it doesn't happen till later. Umimeila even though it's going to happen by itself, but now when you started it, it's not there yet. שאין כן the maskana is that everything is included right away, so when you put it in, the ma'aseh is done, everything is already, the whole baking is included, that's why you're chayav. But now we say Tosafot doesn't learn like that. So can we say that's the peshat? So be'emet, yeah? What should be de'oraita? I don't know. No, he does the ma'aseh right away. But the she'eilah is, but the ma'aseh is not mechayev him yet. We don't know if he'll be chayav. That's the she'eilah here. Tosafot knew that hatra'ah has to be right before the ma'aseh. There's no such... So the she'eilah is, yeah, but when it's done later, sof kol sof you'll be chayav for putting it in. There's no she'eilah that you're chayav for putting it in. The she'eilah is, but you're not sure that that putting in will really bring you to a chiyuv, because you might take it out. So this putting in is not really chayav yet. When it bakes, then you'll be chayav for the putting in, but now you're not chayav yet. So if you're not chayav, maybe yeah, maybe not. It's התראת ספק. That's Tosafot's she'eilah. And we said that's no, it's called as if the ma'aseh is done already. That's why, because as I explained, that's why you're chayav for You're chayav for baking bichlal, how are you chayav for baking when you didn't do anything wrong? You put it in, there's nothing wrong with putting it in, you can take it out. So the answer is we're chayav because like this, like like the fire or like the the throwing the חץ. But in that way gufa you could learn two ways, and we learned a hava amina was one way and the maskana is the other way. But now we're saying Tosafot doesn't learn like that maskana of the Nimukei Yosef. If Tosafot doesn't learn like the maskana, so you can't say that this is pshat in Tosafot. So what we could say is like this: that Tosafot does not argue with the Nimukei Yosef. Tosafot learns like the Nimukei Yosef maskana. And the hava amina of Tosafot is like the hava amina of the Nimukei Yosef. That the hava amina was that it's you're chayav because it's continuing to as if you're continuing to do it, so you're chayav for what's happening later. Maskana is that you're chayav for what you did right away because everything is included. And the whole Tosafot learns like that. Ai we know that he has a good re'aya from the Tosafot in Bava Kamma that Tosafot does not learn like the Nimukei Yosef? So we'll have to say takeh a little bit different than the Ketzot, that from Tosafot over there is no re'aya. Listen to the vort, it's no re'aya from there. Why not? This whole klal that we say that when you send a חץ or you send a fire and eventually it does some damage, we're saying that it's all included in the beginning, that's only if it actually happened. If you put a you send a חץ and the חץ came and broke something, then we say that when did you have whatever happened later is included in what you did. But what happens if it doesn't happen? What's the קאפ פשט if it doesn't happen בפועל? If you send a חץ and it didn't hit it, is that the pshat that it's included? I once saw a sevara somebody wrote this is the it's not a sefer, it was a pshat in the Nimukei Yosef, I saw he wrote like this: When you start a fire, I'm laughing already, when you start a fire, potentially it could burn down the whole world. No, could go, you just see it could go and go burn down everything. So when a yid, when a person starts a fire, be'etzem right away he's chayav for burning the whole world. If it didn't burn, whatever it didn't burn is a patur. He gets patur because it didn't burn it. 'Cause has, otherwise what what's the pshat in the Nimukei Yosef? Nimukei Yosef says in potential, but how do you know how far it's gonna go? The fire could go for one mile, and if it could stop, could go for two miles. So what's included? So he says be'etzem include everything. If it didn't go whatever it didn't go it's not שטותים. So what's the pshat? The pshat in the Nimukei Yosef is that when you start a fire, and takeh you don't know how far it's gonna go, when it goes and it burns down, then we say all that is included in what you did. It works like retroactive, it's included in what you did after it happens. So that's what the Nimukei Yosef means at the end that in the beginning it includes everything if it happened. What's Tosafot case? He threw a a chetz, a rock, a keli was laying on the floor and he threw a threw a rock at it. What happened? Nu, what's the case? Someone else came and broke the keli before it got there. Did your rock break the keli or not? No. So if it didn't break the keli, it was never included, so we don't say mana tevirah tavar, we don't say a broken keli. What is the she'eilah? According to the Nimukei Yosef everything is included, so as soon as you throw it, it's as if it broke it already, it's included, so m'meila when the other guy breaks it, he broke a broken keli. When do we say it's included if it happens b'fo'al, if you broke it? Then what happens is it's not the pshat you're chayav what what's the case if it broke it, you wouldn't be chayav because when it hit the keli you'd be chayav for throwing it, because what happens later is included in what you did. But that's only if it broke it. If it didn't break it, it's not included in anything. And that's what Tosafot is saying. Be'emet Tosafot holds like the Nimukei Yosef. That be'emet what is it? You're chayav right away, it's included in it like the Nimukei Yosef says. It's only included if it happened. So therefore, in this case, when you threw the chetz and someone else broke it, then it's not included. Ah? That's a pshuteh chiluk between throwing the keli itself. Yeah, exactly. Not the pshat, it's סברא פשוטה לחלק, yeah. Basically, there it started already in something in itself. Um'meila if you learn like this, so we are able to learn back again to the sevara that the hava amina and the maskana of Tosafos is the same as the hava amina and maskana of the Nimukei Yosef, because Tosafos learns like the Nimukei Yosef. The hava amina was that you're chayav for אפייה because as it's continuing to bake, you are doing it, but in the beginning, you didn't do it yet. U'mimeila freigt Tosafos it's התראת ספק. איי we know lechatchila that it's gonna happen by itself, but The fact that it's going to happen by itself means that you have to continue doing it, even though the פעולה is going to happen by itself. Mah she'ein kein the maskana of Tosafos is that it's בשעת you're putting it in everything is included, because Tosafos does learn like the Nimukei Yosef, so mimeila you did it already. There's nothing else that you have to do later. The only thing that could happen later is if it happens later that you could change it. That, yeah, you could take it out. But be'etzem when you put it in, it's already done because it's everything is included if it'll get baked, farshteit zich. But when it does get baked it's included in the beginning, so it's not an התראת ספק at all,

which is similar to the case that the Gilyon Hashas brings on this inyan, on the tirutz of Tosafos, he says עיין Gittin דף ל״ג עמוד א׳, סוף דיבור המתחיל ואפקינהו. What does it say in the Gemara there and the Tosafos there? So the Gemara there is an interesting Gemara. The Gemara says like this, if a person sends a get to his wife, so me'ikar hadin, mid'oraita, what happens if he decides that he doesn't want her to get, doesn't want her to get divorced? He sent it away with a shaliach. So mid'oraita you could take three people or a beit din here where he lives, says \"I'm mevatel the get\" and the get is בטל. The Gemara says that you're not allowed to do that, the חכמים made not to do it, and different Gemaras give different reasons. And one of the reasons is just as mentioned, because she might not know that you were mevatel the get, she'll think the get is a good get, she'll think she's not married anymore and she'll go marry somebody else and have children mamzerim. So the Rabbanan said, \"Don't do it.\" What happens if the guy did not listen to the Rabbanan, and he did it? He sent a get, and then he made a beit din here and was mevatel the get. So mi-de'oraita, what should be the din? The bitul is a bitul, and if the bitul is a bitul, the get is batel, no get, she's an eshet ish. So if the guy did this, what's the din? Is the get batel or not? So the Gemara brings one opinion that even if he did it, the get is not batel. Since the Chachamim said that you shouldn't do it, if he did it, the get is not batel, and the get is a good get, and she's not married. Fregt the Gemara the famous kashya: How could it be? A woman that mi-de'oraita she's considered an eshet ish, the get is no good, she's an eshet ish, and the Rabbanan are going to make a woman who's an eshet ish, we make her not an eshet... we say the get is not batel, it's a good get, and she's not married? So the Gemara answers: אפקיעינהו רבנן לקידושין מיניה. The Rabbanan took away the kidushin. The rabbanan have a right, because when a person gives kiddushin he says, \"הרי את מקודשת לי כדת משה וישראל.\" So he makes a condition that it should be that the chachamim should agree. So here if this if he does this, know what the chachamim say? They don't say they say the get is a good get, not because they say the get is a good get. They say if this happens, we disagree with the kiddushin that he did 45 years ago, and she was never married. Frekt Tosafot a kashya: How is it ever possible to kill a woman, an אשת איש, for being מזנה? When a woman is מזנה you tell her, \"Don't do it, because you'll be חייב מיתה, אשת איש.\" How do you know she's an אשת איש? Maybe her husband is going to send a get, will be מבטל the get before a בית דין, not to the shaliach, not to the woman, and then the rabbanan are going to say אפקיעינהו רבנן לקידושין מיניה, so it'll turn out that she never was an אשת איש! So even if it doesn't happen, but when you warn her you're not sure it's going to happen. Zagt Tosafot two teirutzot. One teirutz is that and m'meila it's התראת ספק, that's the word. Tosafot says how do you so when you warn her it's התראת ספק, you don't know if it's going to happen. So one teirutz Tosafot gives is, רוב אין מגרשין נשיהן. Most women, most people don't divorce and send a shaliach, and then this is a very far-fetched thing, and m'meila it's not considered התראת ספק. That's a simple teirutz, a בעל-הבתיש תירוץ. Then there's another teirutz. The teirutz is not this. The teirutz is because she has a חזקת אשת איש. Now she's an אשת איש, so when you warn her, \"You're an אשת איש, you're going to do the aveirah, you'll be חייב.\" The chazakah is there. Tosafot brings a re'ayah. There's a din by a nazir, if he makes a neder to be a nazir, and he doesn't keep the dinim and he drinks wine, he's chayav malkot. A nazir, if he wants, could go and be sho'el on a neder, he could come to a beit din, to a rav, and he could be mevatel could be matir neder, and then he never was a nazir. So when a nazir drinks wine and you warn him, \"Don't drink because you'll get malkot for drinking,\" how do you know? It's hatra'at safek! Maybe later on he'll decide he'll be matir the neder, and then and the neder works le-mafre'a, he never was. If he never was a nazir, so he's not going to get malkot. So when you're warning him, it's a hatra'at safek. אלא מאי? Tosafot says, assume that we don't look at it that way. We look at now he's a nazir, it's called hatra'at vadai. The chazakah. פרעגן מפרשים on that Tosafot, see the Gilyon HaShas just brings עיין, עיין Gittin דף ל״ג Tosafot דיבור המתחיל אפקעינהו. But the mefarshim ask a kushya on that Tosafot. That li-khe'orah, how can we say that there's a she has a חזקת אשת איש? Usually a chazakah is the peshat that there are a certain thing that's definite, then there's something else we're not sure, so we say as long as we don't know, we follow the chazakah. But in a case like this, if he'll be mevatel it, then she never was an אשת איש even now. So that basically we we'll get to that in a minute, just to understand the Tosafot, before we get to this. But דער וויילע, what do we see there in that Tosafot? That we consider this a התראת ודאי. Why? Because as it's standing now, according to the second teirutz, we're standing now, she is an אשת איש. And because she is an אשת איש, we say it's not a התראת ספק even though something might happen that will make her lose the אשת איש. But because if things go the way it is now, she's an אשת איש, based on that we say that this is not a התראת ספק. And the same thing is by the nazir. The same thing is נוגע here, the the רדיית הפת, when at the and it's the מלאכת אפייה, when you put it into the oven and it gets baked, as from the beginning on, as you put it in, it includes everything that's going to happen later. If it's going to get baked later. But לפועל, when it does get baked later, we say that everything was included already before. So it's just like over there. מצד what's happening now, the din is that she's an אשת איש. In the case of the nazir, he might be נשאל על נדרו, he might go back and מתיר the נדר, but the way it's now, the way now the נדר is a נדר, and he's a nazir. Ela mai? He could do something to be מבטל it. So the same thing is here also. When you put it in, right away it's happening, because Tosafos learns we're saying like the Nimukei Yosef. So right away it's happening. Ela mai? You could do something to change it. So it's exactly like over there. And this is what the Rabbi Akiva Eiger means to bring. But it all fits to what I'm saying. If we would not say this, then it's not so pashut. Since we're saying that the pshat in the in the מסקנה of Tosafos is that it happens right away, that's why you're chayav. Not because as it's being baked you are continuous to bake it. It's happening right away, so it's exactly like over there. The way you put it in, you are chayav. Ela mai? It's only if you're not if if it's going to get baked. Sof kol sof, if you're not going to get baked, you're not going to be chayav. But what's doing now, it includes everything that's going to happen later when it happens. So you're chayav, just like over there. And Tosafos over there says clearly it's not the same thing. It's not a התראת ספק because of this reason. So the same thing here also, that's the מסקנה. Huh? In the previous Tosafos? No, cuz there it's לגבי a different thing, there it's not לגבי חיובים. There it's only a שאלה, do we say that you can't do an עבירה so to יזכה חברך, so there it's enough, the fact that you put it in and it's going to happen, that's enough. For that inyan it's enough. If we're bringing in the Tosafos of of Gittin, be'emes there's another way you could explain the hava amina and the maskana of Tosafos here, based on the kushya that I said before on that Tosafos. Ask the kushya, I think the Machaneh Chaim has the she'eilah, what's Tosafos teretz that she's a חזקת אשת איש? When do we say we go בתר חזקה? If something is a safek and we don't know, but this is for sure, so this we follow, mistama this is the same. But if if this is going to happen, if he will be mevatel the get, she never was an אשת איש! The chazakah itself is going to get changed! So the one the nekudah just in this in in mamash in minutes of what you could say pshat in the hava amina and the maskana of Tosafos over there is like this: when she is an אשת איש and you do אפקעינהו רבנן, and he he sends the get whatever, and the Rabbanan take away the קידושין למפרע. In taking something away leme'afre'a, there are two ways to learn. One is נעקר הדבר למפרע, and one is איגלאי מילתא למפרע. איגלאי מילתא למפרע means that when later on something happens, we find out what it was in the beginning. And after it happens, it's as if it never happened. And sometimes we say נעקר, it did happen, you have an koach to take it away leme'afre'a. Now after you took it away, you change מכאן ולהבא how it was leme'afre'a. Follow? You change מכאן ולהבא how it was before. But before before, it תקי was like that. Actually, by Nedarim, there's a machloket between the Tzemach Tzedek and the Mishkenot Yaakov. The Tzemach Tzedek speaks about Nedarim in the beginning of a נדר. And he says when a חכם is עוקר is a נדר למפרע, takes away the נדר from before, it's not a peshat he makes that it never was a נדר. He now changes the fact that it was a נדר before. מכאן ולהבא, he changes it למפרע. But למפרע למפרע, it was there. That's what the Tzemach Tzedek says. And the Mishkenot Yaakov says, \"Not like that. If a חכם changed the נדר, he changes it that if it never was.\" It's נוגע to מחלוקת Rosh and Ran. So, there are two ways of למפרע. The hava amina and maskana of Tosafos over there is what kind of למפרע happens when you say אפקעינהו רבנן דקדושין מיניה? When the רבנן take away the קידושין and there was never קידושין, is the peshat that the רבנן make that it was never קידושין? Just like imagine someone gives קידושין, and after 40 years, he realized that there was a mistake, pashut. The קידושין weren't קידושין. So, there never was קידושין. He just didn't know about it. It's called איגלאי מילתא למפרע. Now you find out, so it never was. So, you could learn אפקעינהו רבנן דקדושין מיניה the same thing. When the רבנן take away the קידושין, it never was קידושין. Or you could say till now it was קידושין, the רבנן now anything that's נוגע from now on, they make as if it never was. That's אפקעינהו. That's the חילוק in the hava amina and the maskana of Tosafos over there. The hava amina of Tosafos was it's התראת ספק. This woman every if a woman in you're going to warn her, \"You'll get killed.\" You're not sure, maybe this is going to happen, there'll be אפקעינהו רבנן דקדושין, it'll turn out maybe in 5 years from now, it'll turn out that she was never married. So, it's התראת ספק, you don't know, maybe yeah, maybe not. Because Tosafos in the hava amina learns that if they will do אפקעינהו, it'll be איגלאי מילתא למפרע. There never was, she wasn't married, and now we don't know what it'll be. The maskana of Tosafos is, \"No. Even if you'll do the אפקעינהו, she still has a chazakah.\" Why? Because even if you'll say למפרע, but it's not that it never happened. Then they will change it that as if it never happened. But לפועל, it did happen before. And if it did happen before, that's called תוספות חזקה. So, Tosafos says, \"It's a חזקה דאשת איש because it is a chazakah.\" So, we have a hava amina and maskana over there. You can have the same thing here, too. The hava amina and maskana of Tosafos is like this. We said that how are you chayav for baking? Because in right in the beginning, we said that he learns like the Nimukei Yosef, right in the beginning, it's included. But when is it included? We said, \"Only if it actually happens at the end.\" So, when it happens at the end, it's למפרע that when you put it in, it was a מלאכת אפייה. Which way is the מלאכת אפייה going to happen? Is it איגלאי מילתא למפרע, or נעקר it becomes למפרע? If you learn איגלאי מילתא למפרע, means that when it burns, when it bakes, נתגלה געווארן that when you put it in, it baked. Because we said Tosafos learns that it's it's included in the beginning. But when it happens, it gets included. So, it was included in the beginning. Or you could learn, \"No, that later on it'll be נעקר הדבר למפרע.\" That means when you when you put it in, you're תקי not chayav. Later on, it becomes when it starts it bakes, it's as we look at it that it's as if before when you put it in, it baked already. So, it's למפרע, but it's it becomes למפרע, but not that it was. And that's the שאלה here. When the guy put it in, so if you say that it's going to happen later איגלאי מילתא למפרע, that means that really what's going to happen the the the when you put in the stuff, and when it'll get baked, you baked it, תקי. It happened like right away lechatchilah. Mah she-ein ken if you learn that it's נעשה דבר למפרע, then לפועל as it is, it didn't bake. This is one way, there's a opposite way to learn, but this is one way. So, the hava amina, it would be that it's נעשה למפרע. That means that לכתחילה לפועל, it's not baking. It's going to happen later, it'll become taking. So the בעילת איסור's a safek. The maskana is that it's gonna be a גילוי מילתא למפרע, that means that when you put it in, the ma'aseh that you put it in is. אלא מאי, it's gonna happen later, but בפועל later it makes it that it was לכתחילה, and that's why the issur is not איסור ספק. Come here. You got a case? Yeah, but I have the pencil. Let me see that case. You wanted me to send you, but you never gave me your