As the seder in this shiur is that we don't go through a whole inyan pieces, a shtikel inyan of this, a shtikel inyan to discuss different נקודות in the Gemara that we learned. And the sevara is that you guys learned this Gemara already before Yom Tov and the Tosafos so even though we started over again but I might go further than maybe that some of the guys learned today. Hopefully not, hopefully you learned enough today that you will cover this ground. So we're going to go through some of the inyanim here. We'll start off with this תוספות בבא דרישא פטור ומותר. So this is Tosafos that asks a very obvious kushya. The Gemara says that in the first two cases of the Mishnah, first two בבות of the Mishnah, when one person does the whole melachah and he's chayav. Whether it's the ani that does the full הכנסה עקירה והנחה and mimela he's chayav or is the baal habayit who does the full הכנסה or hotzaah. What's with the second guy? So the Gemara says that the second guy is patur. Lemashal, if a person sticks his, let's give an example, if a person's standing inside and he takes something, picks something up and he sticks his hand out but he doesn't put it down and the guy outside takes it from him, what's the din there? The guy took it so they're both patur. What happens if the guy picked it up and the guy outside had his hand like this and this guy from inside put it down? The guy who took it out is chayav, pashut he did עקירה והנחה. He did a hotzaah, he's standing inside, took it out to the רשות הרבים, made the עקירה, took it out, put it down in the hand of the ani let's say, okay the guy is chayav. What about the ani? The ani is patur. The she'eilah is Tosafos asks why is he patur? So the Gemara says what kind of patur? Patur u'mutar. He didn't do anything. Only patur aval asur is if you did part of the melachah. You did an akirah only, hanachah only, so even though mid'oraita you're patur because you didn't do the full melachah but miderabbanan it's asur so it's patur aval asur.

Now just by the way let me just ask a she'eilah and let me see who's going to answer it because something we spoke about before. Lichorah why is it not אסור מדאורייתא על חצי שיעור? You're not allowed to eat a kezayit of chametz or a kezayit of treif. If you eat less than a kezayit, you did half of the shi'ur, you're also אסור מדאורייתא. You're not chayav but you're אסור מדאורייתא. Why is not here if you do an akirah without a hanachah or a hanachah without an akirah, why is it not אסור מדאורייתא? But why is it not mid'oraita? Not chayav. Why is it not אסור מדאורייתא? חייב מדאורייתא you're not because you didn't do the full melachah. But even חצי should be אסור מדאורייתא just like if a person eats a half a kezayit of chazir. If he eats a whole kezayit he's chayav malkot, chayav onesh, a punishment. If he eats half you're not chayav a punishment but it's אסור מדאורייתא. We know the machloket Rabbi Yochanan veReish Lakish in Yoma. Reish Lakish says חצי שיעור מותר מדאורייתא, it's only אסור מדרבנן. Rabbi Yochanan says חצי שיעור אסור מדאורייתא. Why is it here not, an עקירה without a הנחה or a הנחה without an עקירה, why is it not אסור מדאורייתא? Okay, let's use the real words, these are the English words. There's a difference between חצי שיעור and חצי מלאכה. חצי שיעור means you did the whole thing, the whole איסור was done. It was just in quantity how big you're missing. That's אסור מדאורייתא. But if you don't even do the full מלאכה, that's not חצי שיעור, that's חצי מלאכה, that's חצי מלאכה, that's not חצי שיעור so that's not אסור מדאורייתא but it is אסור מדרבנן. Okay, but let's pass that. But in the case where you did not do not an עקירה and not a הנחה, so then the Gemara says it's פטור ומותר.

Freget Tosafos why are you פטור ומותר? It should be אסור for a different reason, על לפני עיוור לא תיתן מכשול. You are not allowed to make somebody do an עבירה. So if you're standing there and holding your hand out and let's say give this example and the guy from inside puts his hand out takes it from your hand and takes it in, you helped him do the עבירה. Takeh he did the full עבירה. The guy inside did the עקירה. He stuck his hand out from inside to the outside, to the רשות הרבים, took something from the guy's hand outside, which means he did the עקירה in רשות הרבים, put it in רשות היחיד, made the הנחה, so he's חייב, he did the full thing. But the guy who's standing outside and holding his the stuff in his hand, allowing him to do it, he is עובר on לפני עור לא תתן מכשול. He made the guy do an עבירה. And there's a פסוק in the תורה, לפני עור לא תתן מכשול. What does the פסוק mean? Don't put down a stumbling block in front of a blind person, but what it means is, don't cause somebody to do an עבירה. That's the דין. You're עובר on לפני עור לא תתן מכשול. So how do you say it's פטור ומותר? Huh? No, no, no, that's something else. One second, you are causing because if not We'll see in a second. He because of you, he did the עבירה. If you wouldn't wouldn't be holding the thing in your hand, he wouldn't do the aveirah. So it's because of you. So you're over lifnei iver. Then Tosafot says, but maybe the case is where he could have done it without you? And Tosafot brings a ra'ayah that when are you עובר לפני עור לא תתן מכשול? Only in a case where if not for you, the guy couldn't do the aveirah. Tosafot brings the example of a נזיר. One of the examples, the Gemara it's a classical example in the Gemara. If you're one of the cases of lifnei iver, you're not allowed to give a נזיר who is not allowed to drink wine, you're not allowed to give him a cup of wine. And you if you do it, you're over on lifnei iver. And the Gemara says in Avodah Zarah, when are you over on lifnei iver? Only if you're standing two sides of the river. The The נזיר is on one side of the river, there's a cup It's an example. It doesn't mean the two sides of the river, but it's an example. The wine, the cup of wine is on the other side of the river, and the נזיר can't reach it, and you pick it up and you hand it to him. That's a case where if not for you, he would not do the aveirah. You are making him do the aveirah. Then you're over lifnei iver. But what happens if there's a נזיר and there's wine on the table, and he says to you, \"You know what? Please pass me the wine.\" If you wouldn't do it, he'll do it himself. So he would have done the aveirah anyway. So then there is no lifnei iver. So maybe that's the case Tosafot says of our Mishnah that he could have done the melachah himself, so you're not over. But Tosafot But that doesn't answer the kashya, because even though in a case like this you're not over on lifnei iver, there's an issur derabbanan. The איסור דרבנן, מסייע לדבר עבירה. There's a different issur. There's two inyanim and you have to keep this in mind. There's an issur of לפני עור לא תתן מכשול and there's an issur of מסייע לדבר עבירה. Lifnei iver is a din de'oraita, you're not allowed to cause someone to do an aveirah, and then there's a din of מסייע לדבר עבירה. What's מסייע לדבר עבירה? Assisting, helping somebody do an aveira. That means he could have done it anyway, but you are participating in helping him do the aveira. So even if it's a case where the guy who is standing outside with the object, if not for him with the object, the guy inside would have taken it wherever it is, he would have taken it anyway, but l'foal you are helping him. So you're not עובר לפני עור, but it's asur miderabbanan to do it. So the she'eilah is, so how does the Gemara say that in a case like this it's patur u'mutar? It's not mutar. It's asur miderabbanan at least, but it's asur. It's a din of מסייע לדבר עבירה. We're not going to get into Tosafot answer now. Tosafot gives an answer that we're talking about a guy is a goy and the object that you're giving him happens to be his, and then there is no aveira, you're allowed to do it. We'll get into that a little later maybe. Huh? What? Why if it means mutar, why say patur? You mean on the on the guy's the other guy? That means like this: l'foal it's a din of mutar. There's nothing wrong here the guy's doing. Had he been a Yid, he would have been patur u'mutar. I mean, the Rosh says it. We're going to maybe learn the Rosh on the side soon. But so I'm trying to get at another point. Then there is a Tosafot Yeshanim here. In the regular Gemara, it's on the side. In the Oz Vehadar, the Shas and הגהות that you have, it's on the they put it in the numbers, I think.

Tosafot Yeshanim answers a different teirutz: אי נמי יש לומר דמכל מקום לאיסור שבת פטור ומותר. Very simple teirutz, that when the Gemara says that this is patur u'mutar, lichorah it shouldn't be patur u'mutar, the guy's עובר לפני עור, the other guy, says, \"vadai you're not allowed to do it.\" But that's from a different angle. That's because of לפני עור לא תתן מכשול, but as far as the melachah of Shabbos, it's mutar. That's what Tosafot Yeshanim answers. Again, מכל מקום, לאיסור שבת פטור ומותר. Concerning Shabbos, you didn't do any aveirah of Shabbos. You did an aveirah of לפני עור לא תתן מכשול תתן מכשול. But the Gemara is not going into that. When the Gemara says patur u'mutar, so in the kushya we think patur u'mutar means technically, if you'll ask a Rav, \"Can I do it?\", they would say, \"Yes, you're allowed to do it.\" So the kushya is the Rav will tell you you're not allowed to do it, you'll עובר לפני עור. So the answer the the Tosafot Yeshanim says, that's not what the Gemara meant, that you're allowed to do it. As far as the איסור שבת is concerned you're allowed to, because there's no melachah involved here, you're not doing any melachah, not even derabbanan. Even though lemaaseh you won't be able to do it, for a different reason, because of לפני עור. It's not only the not only the Tosafot Yeshanim here, but if you look in the Rosh, the end of the Rosh the the end of the first piece of the Rosh he says: וכל זה הדיקדוק אינו נראה לי, whatever he spoke about before I don't care, because דלא אלמוה דישראל, it's not like Tosafot by a goy, it's talking by a Yid, but אף על גב דאיכא איסורא דלפני עור לא תתן מכשול, even though there is a issur of לפני עור, how do you say mutar? So the Rosh says, לא איירינן הכא אלא באיסור שבת, that's all. We're talking about mutar as far as איסור שבת is concerned. וקרי ליה, it call he calls it פטור ומותר, כיון דלית כה איסור משום שבת, because there's no issur of Shabbos. And the Bach says here: וכן כתב הר״ן ובהגהות מרדכי. So you have the Tosafot Yeshanim here, you have the Rosh, you have the Ran, you have the Mordechai, they all give this answer: that the reason it's called patur u'mutar, not because it's mutar, you are טאקע עובר לפני עור, but we could call it mutar because לגבי שבת you're mutar. Obviously, Tosafot does not learn that. Tosafot because this is this the simplest answer you could think of. I mean, if you learn just the Gemara, anybody would think of such an answer. That why is it called patur u'mutar? Because you're not עובר שבת. Ah, there's other issurim! I'll give you an example. What would be if the object he's giving to the guy is chazir? There happened to be a shtickel chazir. Could you do it? No, you can't do it, you can't give the guy chazir. But you still could call it patur u'mutar, we're talking about Shabbos, not about chazir! There's other issurim! Same thing here, we're talking about הוצאה בשבת, we're talking about הכנסה, we're talking about מלאכת שבת. We're not talking בכלל if it's mutar. So we לגבי שבת we could call it mutar, even though it's asur. Tosafot obviously didn't like that tirutz. Even the beginning of the Rosh, where he brings the same tirutz as Tosafot talking about a goy is a goy, also obviously that opinion of that part of the Rosh, in other words those people who the Rosh brings, don't hold of that tirutz either. So basically we have, I would call it a machloket here. Some rishonim will accept this tirutz, so they will say that patur u'mutar could mean that you are asur for לפני עור, nevertheless we could call it patur u'mutar because לגבי שבת it's patur u'mutar. מה שאין כן Tosafot and the others will say, \"No, that's not a good tirutz.\" Why not? Why not a good תירוץ? To me it's a very good תירוץ, לגבי שבת לגבי שבת it's patur u'mutar. So the answer bifshitus will be, this is talui in a chakirah, this depends on a chakirah that the Rebbe brings from the Rogatchover, and the Rebbe himself brings it in a few places, and the Rebbe has quoted it quite a few times, a gekacht in dem, in the geder of לפני עור לא תתן מכשול. It's in chelek י׳, it's in chelek ל״ט, it's Likkutei Biurim on Tanya, in different places where the Rebbe brings this chakirah. And the she'eilah is like this, and I mentioned that Did I mention that in one of the shiurim before this year? No, last year, another time, this year I mentioned it already.

Whether it's an איסור כללי or איסור פרטי. That means, is לפני עור a prat, a detail in every aveirah, or is it a general issur, a separate איסור בכלל? In other words, like this: If a person is over on the issur of לפני עור חמץ בפסח, he gives a Yid to eat חמץ בפסח, so he's definitely doing an aveirah, the aveirah of לפני עור. Is the pshat he's doing the aveirah of לפני עור in connection to chametz, it's an aveirah of chametz, or is לפני עור a general din, a different aveirah no matter what, whether it's the issur of chametz or the issur of Shabbos or whatever, has nothing to do with that aveirah? There's a נקודה כללית: you are not allowed to cause another Yid to do an aveirah. Whichever aveirah you cause him has nothing to do, you have an aveirah, just like b'gashmiyut you can't put a stumbling block a blind person should fall and hurt himself. You can't make somebody, just like b'gashmiyut you can't make him hurt, you can't make him hurt himself b'ruchniyut, whichever way, makes no difference. Just like in a rock, you say, is there a difference a big rock, a small rock? Same thing b'ruchniyut in in aveirah. You're not allowed to cause someone to do an aveirah. Whether it's an aveirah of Shabbos makes no difference, it's all one issur of lifnei iver. One of the nafka minas the Rebbe brings between the two, just to make it clearer the the chakirah, and the Rebbe says it in two opposite ways, so I'm just going to pick one of the two ways. Does lifnei iver include פשוט בגשמיות not to put a stumbling like a a rock in front of a blind person? There's one shita that that's just only a mashal. If a person puts a stumbling block puts down a rock in front of a blind person and the person hurts himself, he's not over on lifnei iver. He's over being mazik a person, there's different aveirot, but lifnei iver doesn't mean that. Lifnei iver is just a mashal to causing someone to do an aveirah. And some say no, this includes that also and includes also a person doing an aveirah. The nafka mina is if it's a prat in every aveirah, if lifnei iver means if you do it on Shabbos you're over on Shabbos, which aveirah of Shabbos? Lifnei iver of Shabbos, but Shabbos. If it's another aveirah, then it has nothing to do with a blind person having a stone. But if you say it's a general דין, you can't hurt cause somebody to get hurt בגשמיות או ברוחניות, so it could include also בגשמיות also, but that's a איסור כולל. There's another nafka mina, I think that's a nafka mina I brought last time, which we see there's a מחלוקת ראשונים, an interesting מחלוקת. If a person causes somebody to do an עבירה דרבנן, מדאורייתא it's not even an aveirah, the רבנן made it into an aveirah. Are you עובר on לפני עור דאורייתא? A Yerushalmi. If the whole aveirah you made the guy do was only איסור דרבנן, how could you be עובר on an איסור דאורייתא? מדאורייתא, there is no such aveirah, the aveirah doesn't exist, so you didn't do anything. Tosafot says in Avodah Zarah at the end of the first פרק that if you cause somebody to do an עבירה דרבנן you are עובר מדאורייתא on לפני עור. And other ראשונים argue. What are the two sides to this מחלוקת? If לפני עור is a דין in every aveirah, if the aveirah is a איסור דרבנן, the לפני עור which is a פרט in the aveirah cannot be worse than the aveirah itself. So then what would לפני עור be? If you say that you are חייב a איסור עובר a איסור דאורייתא by a עבירה דרבנן, how could the לפני עור be more strict than the aveirah you're causing him to do? So if you hold that it's a איסור כולל, then it could be. There's a general you're not allowed to cause somebody to do something wrong. L'poal he's doing something wrong. The Torah, the Torah, the Torah, not the רבנן, the Torah said you're not allowed to cause somebody to do something wrong. So if he caused somebody to do an איסור דרבנן, the bottom line he caused him to do something wrong, the Torah said you're not allowed to do it. Just like you can't cause somebody to to fall. So מדאורייתא you did something wrong, you're עובר on לפני עור מדאורייתא. But if you say it's a פרט in every עבירה, if the עבירה is דרבנן, how could the לפני עור be a דאורייתא? So that's another place where we see a מחלוקת. Then there's another מחלוקת which is just to show the two sides that it's not just a חקירה, it's a lot of פרטים in these two sides of the חקירה. There's another מחלוקת. The Ran says in Sanhedrin דף ע\\"ד, we know that there are three עבירות which is יהרג ואל יעבור. There are three עבירות that even if they tell you that if you don't do it they'll kill you, you have to let yourself get killed. Which are the three? עבודה זרה, גילוי עריות, and שפיכות דמים. So if a guy comes with a gun and says, you know, kill this guy, if not, I'm going to kill you, you have to let yourself get killed, you can't do it. If he comes with a gun and says bow down to that עבודה זרה, if not I'll shoot you, יהרג ואל יעבור. What happens if the guy comes and forces you to do לפני עור by עבודה זרה? Is it a חיוב יהרג ואל יעבור? If a guy comes and says to to says to a person, he says, 'I want you to make this guy do עבודה זרה.' Not you should worship עבודה זרה. If he tells you worship עבודה זרה if not I'll kill you, Peshita you have to go get killed. But he doesn't say, no, you don't worship, but be מכשיל, you cause this other guy to do עבודה זרה. If not, I'll kill you. Do you have to go on מסירות נפש? Is it יהרג ואל יעבור? Ah? So the Ran says, they don't say the these words, but from what they argue we see that that's the חקירה. The Ran says in Sanhedrin דף ע\\"ד that there is no יהרג ואל יעבור. The din of getting killed is only for עבודה זרה itself, but The לפני עור, there is no din of ייהרג ואל יעבור. But other ראשונים, cuz the Rema in Shulchan Aruch paskes like that, but other ראשונים, the Razah, the Rabbi' Zerahia Halevi, the Ba'al HaMaor, he says that even for לפני עור of עבודה זרה you have to get killed. So, you have a machloket here. Ba'al HaMaor. In Shulchan Aruch, the Rema paskes you don't. The Maharal miPrag, in Gur Aryeh, in his פירוש on Rashi, he has a פירוש Gur Aryeh on Rashi in Parshat Lech Lecha, he also says the same thing, that you don't have to get killed for לפני עור of עבודה זרה. Not to force, not to force. I'm asking you, you make the guy do עבודה זרה, not force him. Bring him the עבודה זרה. Guy wants to worship עבודה זרה, he doesn't have one. So, the guy says, \"If you don't bring him this עבודה זרה, I'll shoot you.\" So, if you bring the guy the עבודה זרה, you're doing לפני עור of עבודה זרה. So, the Ran says that you don't have to go on mesirat nefesh. Ai, it's עבודה זרה, but it's only לפני עור. It's not עבודה זרה, it's לפני עור. While the Ba'al HaMaor says that you are chayav. What's the machloket based on? Obviously it's based on, and they don't say that, but it comes out based on this chakirah. If לפני עור is a ענין כללי, so you're עובר on which עבירה are you, if you make a guy do עבודה זרה, which עבירה are you עובר? לפני עור. לפני עור is not one of the three עבירות you have to die for, so you don't have to die. Mah she'ein kein, if you say it's a דין in every עבירה, so it's not לפני עור, it's לפני עור, but it's לפני עור of עבודה זרה. So, you're also עובר an איסור עבודה זרה. Which פרט of עבודה זרה? לפני עור of עבודה זרה, but you also עובר עבודה זרה. Now, by עבודה זרה, the דין is ייהרג ואל יעבור. So, this is part of the עבירה. The Ran says he's not חייב ייהרג ואל יעבור. So, obviously, what would hold the Ran? That it's a כלל. The שאלה, would it fit to the same thing cuz the... Yeah, the שאלה is does he hold like that or he just brings as an answer. I'm not going to try to say that they go לשיטתו in everything. I'm just bringing out that the מחלוקת could be. There could be some cases there's another reason why he would in that case add, but looking at it מן הצד, the סברא'ס of the מחלוקת could be this. Now, if you find one מאן דאמר holds here like this and here like this, it doesn't fit, so מן הסתם he holds there's another פרט here that makes it אסור or makes it מותר. You got to find that. But I'm just trying to use it as to give to understand the two צדדים of it. Is it a דין in every עבירה or not? By doing this, this is how we understand it. So, נחזור לעניננו. It all started with the Tosafot here. Tosafot asks a kushya: How does the Gemara say that in the case of the רישא it's פטור ומותר when you're עובר on לפני עור? And the Tosafot Yeshanim and others answer: You're takeh עובר on לפני עור, but you still call it מותר because in איסור שבת it's מותר. That teretz could only be said if לפני עור is a איסור כללי. If לפני עור has nothing to do with the specific עבירה you're doing, so you could say, לגבי שבת it's פטור ומותר. איי, there's another עבירה, you're עובר on לפני עור? לפני עור is a separate עבירה, we're not dealing with לפני עור here. But if we're going to hold that לפני עור is a דין in every עבירה, so what comes out? That if you're עובר on לפני עור in Shabbos, if you cause somebody to do a הוצאה on Shabbos, you are עובר on איסור שבת. You are עובר on איסור הוצאה of שבת. But איסור הוצאה has many דרגות. It's a איסור הוצאה which is לפני עור of הוצאה. So, you can't tell me מצד שבת it's מותר, מצד הוצאה it's מותר, it's אסור על צד הוצאה, cuz lifnei iver is a din in הוצאה. See what I'm saying? So, therefore, this could be the machloket here. That the Tosafos Yeshanim answers that patur umutar means לגבי שבת it's patur umutar even though it's asur, cuz Tosafos Yeshanim will hold that what's the geder of lifnei iver? It's a klal. Since it's a klal, you're not עובר על שבת. On Shabbos, you're purely mutar. There are other aveirot. Like I said, if you give the guy חזיר, you're עובר איסור חזיר, we're not talking about חזיר here, we're not talking about lifnei iver here. But Tosafos who does, as a she'eilah, doesn't accept this teirutz, obviously doesn't answer this teirutz, will hold that lifnei iver is a din in Shabbos, it's a din in מצה, it's a din in everything. So, you can't tell me פטור ומותר, מצד שבת it's mutar. מצד שבת it's asur. Therefore, you have to find a different teirutz, that's why Tosafos found a different teirutz. I just want to mention that Tosafos said maybe is not עובר לפני עור because the goy could have done it anyway. Nevertheless, he says you're still over what? מסייע לדבר עבירה, which mid'rabbanan is asur. I just want to add that the same chakirah that we have in lifnei iver, you could kler in מסייע לדבר עבירה. It's not going to be noge'a to the answer of the kushya, huh? Yeah, the same she'eilah. Is the din of מסייע לדבר עבירה מדרבנן a din in every aveirah? If you help somebody do an aveirah, even though he could do it himself, but the Rabbanan said you're not allowed to. And if you do help him, you're עובר מדרבנן that aveirah, or it's a ענין כללי, there's a issur to מסייע לדבר עבירה, you can't help somebody to do an aveirah even though the guy could do it himself. So you could have that chakirah there also. The nafka mina would be, there's a din, there's a person that's called a mumar, right? There's a case of a person called a mumar. Somebody who doesn't keep Shabbos is a mumar to Shabbos. Somebody doesn't keep is a mumar to the aveirah. And a mumar l'Shabbos is דינו כעכו״ם לכל דבר. If a person is a mumar to Shabbos, doesn't he does aveirot of Shabbos, then he's called like a goy, like על פי דין. His wine is יין נסך and he cooks is is בישול עכו״ם and it's all. What happens if a person does is mechalel Shabbos, but only by איסורי דרבנן? There's certain איסורי דרבנן, he doesn't care. Is he still called a mumar? So it's a מחלוקת הפוסקים. Some poskim say that since it's only an איסור דרבנן, then he's not called a mumar. Some say, what's a noge'a? L'ma'aseh it's an איסור דרבנן of Shabbos, and by Shabbos you're a mumar. What would be if a person is over on מסייע לדבר עבירה in Shabbos? He doesn't, he helps somebody once, he doesn't care, he helps other people do aveirot in Shabbos, in a way that it's not mid'Oraita, because the guy could have done the aveirot anyway, but he helps him. So he's over an issur derabbanan of being מסייע לדבר עבירה. This guy who did this מסייע לדבר עבירה, is he called a מומר לשבת? If you hold that by issur derabbanan you're also called a מומר לשבת, it all depends. If it's a איסור כללי, then this guy who's mesaye'a somebody else to do Shabbos is not is not a mumar for Shabbos. He's not doing an איסור שבת. What's his issur that he's doing? מסייע לדבר עבירה, it's a issur, that's issur derabbanan. Not every issur derabbanan that you do you become a mumar, that you become like a goy. An issur derabbanan you don't become like a goy. It's only by Shabbos. Did this guy do an issur derabbanan of Shabbos? No. But if you hold that מסייע לדבר עבירה is a din in Shabbos, so and it's derabbanan only takeh, but he did a issur derabbanan in הלכות שבת, and if you hold that a person who does a issur derabbanan of Shabbos is called a mumar, then this guy would be called a mumar. זה נוגע להלכה, זה נוגע למעשה בפועל. So this would be a nafka mina between the two cases. Okay. That's noge'a. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Ah, you could ask a she'eilah, so all these frei yidden, what do you do then? So many frei yidden now that you bring to your house, and if their din if they have a din like a, no, they're מחלל שבת, they drive. Sure, they drive to your house. And they don't keep, and they don't take it. Not you, those, no, I'm talking about this, not that not us מסייע, not not No, didn't ask, I didn't mean that. I meant the people themselves. If we're saying now that even a מסייע לדבר of Shabbos could be called a goy, the guy who is מחלל שבת himself certainly is called a goy. So how do you do? A goy you can't be מצטרף to a minyan, right? You can't give an aliyah. So how do we give these guys aliyot, we bring them into the Chabad house and we do all kind of things, how do you do that? Because these guys the the heter is that they're not doing it because they know and they don't care. תינוק שנשבה, they don't know, they never brought up, they don't know. But I want to add one thing: we don't know and therefore we give them an aliyah. Still, at the same time, the same Yid who we give an aliyah and we're מצטרף him to a minyan, I wouldn't let him cook in my house. I wouldn't let him touch my wine. Ay, mah nafshach, you're considering him a Yid? Well, it depends for what. לגבי him, we do everything that he should not be considered a goy. But לגבי myself, I have to be machmir, and I have to say we don't shouldn't accept that heter. And we use it lekula if you have to, if a if a frei yid cooked in your house, which בישול עכו״ם אסר'ס the keilim, would that keilim, all our keilim become become treif. If a goy cooked in your house, all the keilim that were cooked become treif, you gotta kasher it. If a frei yid, would you do the same thing? I'm not so sure. Ela mai, for ourselves, for ourselves we're machmir. Now, we use it as a heter in case it's very hard, with this and this, you find you use it as a snif. But I wouldn't rely if a freye yid, a real מחלל שבת touched my wine that wasn't mevushal, I wouldn't drink it. Even a תינוק שנשבה. No, that's for sure. There, there, there's no heter. Yeah, but just should we rely on the heter, it's only לגבי him. There's no heter if the guy knows, if the guy goes off the derech, as we call it, a ישיבה בחור learned in yeshiva and then decides to become frei, that's a big problem. I'm not saying anything. So everybody like this? So, no, so there's no such thing as a person מחלל שבת not being תינוק שנשבה. Everybody, obviously a guy who goes against doesn't know, cuz if he'd know better, he wouldn't do it. Anyway, I'm not getting into that. I just want to say לגבי the wine, there's a letter from the Rebbe that someone wrote to the Rebbe that he's having מקרב יידין and is bringing freye yidin to his house, what should he do with the wine? And the Rebbe answered, cook it over. This is before they used to sell mevushal. The Rebbe didn't say, well, he's a תינוק שנשבה, don't worry about it. Because for ourselves, we're machmir. It's only לגבי him. We don't want him to have a din of a גוי לגבי him, so we gotta find all kulot for him. Like by an agunah, we have to be meikil, you find all kinds of kulot to help a person. But for me, why should I rely on the kula? I don't rely on the kula. If there's a need for it to be meikil, so we would find use the kula, but to say lechatchilah, do you rely on it? What's had to realize? You told him, someone said, guy doesn't know you can't drive on Shabbos, so I'll walk over to him, I'll tell him, you know, you can't drive on Shabbos. Finished, that's called he knows? Doesn't mean Doesn't mean knowing. No, that means he never If a guy learned and knew and this, and then he decided to turn away, that's a problem. No, a guy you told once if a guy is learned and a guy is told once doesn't mean that's To him it's like Chinese, you come over to a guy and you tell him, you can't drive on Shabbos, he'll laugh at you. Doesn't know what you're talking about. I mean he hears words, but it doesn't mean. But a guy learned and knows and is frum, and then he turns away, that guy is a is a is a mumar. Anyway, okay. This is not halachot going into the halachot of Chabad houses. Like just throwing it in from time to time because you guys are going be'ezrat Hashem open Chabad houses, keep in mind all these dinim. Don't just disregard these things. Okay, let's go vayter.

In this din of מסייע לדבר עבירה, we're going to go in some details of Tosafot if Tosafot brought a re'iyah that even though the guy could do it himself, the aveirah, so there's no lifnei iver, nevertheless, you're not allowed to help him do the aveirah, even if he could do it anyway, miderabbanan. How did Tosafot say it? מכל מקום איסורא דרבנן מיהא איכא. And Tosafot says שחייב להפרישו מאיסור. There's a din that you have to stop somebody from doing an aveirah. Certainly, you can't help him do an aveirah. Okay. So here we have the Rosh. Know it, if you go בישוב the Rosh, we'll learn a shtikel Rosh here. Look in the Rosh, find the Rosh. Rosh, it's it's אותיות מחכימות. If you look in the words, it makes you understand it better. In middle of this first piece of Rosh he says, he has this kashya of Tosafot, and he says, ואין לומר דהכא מיירי בהאי גוונא, that here we're talking a case דאפילו אם לא היה נותנו בידו, that even if he wouldn't give him, היה יכול ליטלו, he could have taken it anyway, דהשתא לית כאן משום לפני עור לא תתן מכשול. Now there is no lifnei iver, and he brings the re'iyah from the Nazir Okay, we'll skip those that it's only two sides of the river and he can't take it, but if he could take it himself, there's no lifnei iver, so he says, מכל מקום איסורא דרבנן איכא. There is still issura derabbanan. What's his re'iyah there's issura derabbanan? So he says similar to Tosafot, not exactly like Tosafot. Tosafot just said because you even have to stop him from doing an aveirah, certainly you can't help him. He says like this: דאפילו קטן אוכל נבלות בית דין מצווין להפרישו. Even if a katan does an aveirah, a katan eats terefah food, בית דין has a din that you have to stop him. כל שכן גדול, certainly a gadol you have to stop, שלא יסייענו, you can't help him. Because there's a din that בית דין מצווין להפרישו, that if a katan does he wants to eat teref, בית דין has to stop him. That's even by a katan, and there's a din. So, a גדול אודאי, and certainly you can't help a gadol. That's his re'ayah. Tosafot didn't bring a ma'aseh with a katan here. Tosafot just said since you have to stop a person an aveirah, certainly you can't help him. He brings the דין קטן מצווין לה- בית דין מצווין להפרישו. That's what the Rosh says. The פלא of this Rosh is, it's a machloket in Gemara whether by a קטן בית דין is mechuyav to stop him from doing an aveirah. If he wants to eat tref, if בית דין has to stop. It's a machloket. One מאן דאמר says בית דין מצווין להפרישו, בית דין have to stop the katan. One מאן דאמר says בית דין does not have to stop him. The halachah is By a קטן או על גדול? By a katan. By a katan. The halachah is אין בית דין מצווין להפרישו. That בית דין doesn't have to stop him. How does the Rosh say that the halachah is, no, he דאפילו קטן אוכל נבלות, בית דין מצווין להפרישו? He says that בית דין have a חיוב to stop him. I'll just read you the Alter Rebbe's lashon in סימן שמ״ג, famous סימן which talks about קטן. So the here, mamash the beginning of שמ״ג. קטן העובר על דברי תורה, if a קטן is doing an עבירה, להנאתו, for his הנאה, כגון אוכל נבלות או מחלל שבת לצרכו, אין בית דין מצווין להפרישו. בית דין doesn't have to stop him. If he's doing it for you, that's a different story already, but if it himself, the halacha is אין בית דין צריכין, מצווין להפרישו. He says the father has, אבל אביו is חייב בחינוך, so he has to stop him. Then he says, I just want to mention this next הלכה because it's נוגע soon to the other part, כל זה לענין הפרשה מאיסור. The din is you don't have to stop him from doing an עבירה, אבל לספות לו איסור בידים, but to give a קטן a טריפה food, pashut to give it to him, אסור לכל אדם מן התורה. No one could give him. And that's אפילו אין בו הבנה, even if he's a child before חינוך, he doesn't understand, שנאמר לא תאכלום, פירשו חכמים לא תאכילום לקטנים. And even it's אסור מדרבנן, you can't give. So the שאלה על כל פנים that we have here on the Rosh is, how does the Rosh say that the ראיה that you're not allowed to help someone do an עבירה is because the din is that even by a קטן בית דין is מצווין להפרישו, when the דין is that בית דין is not מצווין להפרישו? The truth is the Beit Yosef wants to bring a ראיה from here that the Rosh paskent different than all the poskim. All the poskim takeh say like that we just brought so the Alter Rebbe that בית דין אין בית דין מצווין להפרישו. If a קטן does an עבירה, בית דין doesn't have to stop him. Weist du, Beit Yosef says that the Rosh, I'll tell you which סימן it is, the Rosh in סימן, טאקע in סימן שמ״ג on this דין. So the Beit Yosef says that Rosh holds like that. What's What's the difference if they're talking about בית דין? No, no, no. First of all, he doesn't say It's משמע that it's מפורש, not. There's a פלא on this תירץ of the Beit Yosef, I'll tell you why. If you're going to say that Rosh holds like that, that means he פסק'נט like that מאן דאמר that בית דין must stop the guy, must stop the קטן. When we find a מחלוקת whether בית דין מצווין להפרישו or not, the one that holds בית דין מצווין להפרישו holds it's מדאורייתא. So if the if the רא״ש פסק'נט like that, that's the דין. In Gemara, it's a מחלוקת, and it's the one מאן דאמר says מדאורייתא he's has to stop him, and some say you don't have to stop him. Now, if you have to if if he פסק'נט like that מאן דאמר, that means that the רא״ש פסק'נט that מדאורייתא בית דין מצווין להפרישו by קטן. What's What? You just did it. The problem is, in that case, every מסייע לדבר עבירה according to the Rosh should be a איסור דאורייתא, not איסור דרבנן. Because the Rosh says that it's a כל שכן. What does the Rosh say? How do you know you can't help someone do an עבירה? מה דאך בית דין must must stop the קטן from doing it, certainly a gadol, and certainly not to give him. Whatever the din of Beit din stopping him from doing it, whatever the din is, certainly even more by a gadol, and certainly by helping him. So if the רא\"ש פסקנ'ס בית דין מצווין לאפרישי, and that's a din de'oraita, so according to the Rosh, what should be the din if you help somebody do an aveirah? אז ודאי, it's a de'oraita. So how does the Rosh want to say it's a derabbanan? So it's not a it's not a derabbanan. Uh? What did the Rosh say? The kashya was, it's לפני עור, okay? So he said maybe it's not לפני עור, because the guy could do it anyway. Oh, so he says, even though it's not לפני עור, but מסייע לדבר עבירה is asur mi-derabbanan anyway. Where does he get that it's asur mi-derabbanan anyway? Because since by a katan the din is Beit din has to mafrish, so this is certainly worse. So if he פסקנ'ס that בית דין מצווין לאפרישי, that means he פסקנ'ס as de'oraita. So this should be an issur de'oraita. So מסייע לדבר עבירה, according to the Rosh, should be an issur de'oraita then. Why does that mean he פסקנ'ס that it's issur de'oraita? No, if he פסקנ'ס like that man de'amar. Why does that That's the way the Beit Yosef says. You could say a different peshat, אוקיי, you could learn a different peshat not like the בית, saying the kashya on the Beit Yosef, because he says that he פסקנ'ס like that man de'amar, and that man de'amar holds that it's de'oraita. You can say a little bit different, a little bit like the Beit Yosef, but a little bit different. That what he means is like this. He says that de'rabbanan it should be a din. Not that he פסקנ'ס like that מאן דאמר. He says that even the one that holds אין בית דין מצווין לאפרישי, but de'rabbanan is מצווין לאפרישי, וממילא, כל שכן by a גדול. Uh? No, but this is אין מצווין לאפרישי, it's not No, the two the two extremes if you if they would say give him, you're allowed you should give him. If there would be a מאן דאמר that says you're allowed to לוספו בידים, and he says it's a issur de'oraita, that would be a too That would be a סברא הפוכה. It's not סברא הפוכה. He says you're allowed, he said not. He could say it's issur de'oraita, he can say it's de'rabbanan, and he says it's not a issur. Can you say you have a case that You could have. Somebody calls issur de'oraita, and somebody says it's not asur. A lot of things like that, half of the Torah we find machloket. He says it's issur de'oraita, he says it's mutar, because the Torah meant something else. We find it many times that. Could be that. So could be that's the peshat. What's the problem if we say that it's de'rabbanan Because he's saying it's de'rabbanan. We're trying to saying peshat in the Rosh, and he says it's de'rabbanan. We said earlier that he holds that בית דין מדרבנן. Could be the Rosh holds that de'rabbanan is בית דין מצווין לאפרישי. וממילא, it's a כל שכן that by a גדול you're not allowed to help, de'rabbanan, the same איסור, כל שכן, yeah. No. No, he could learn that the one that said that we פסקן like the other מאן דאמר, אין בית דין מצווין לאפרישי. No, but but מדרבנן מצווין, so when that מאן דאמר says אין בית דין, that's מן התורה, but de'rabbanan is מצווין לאפרישי. The Mahartz Chajes has a different pshat. He says like this. Interesting pshat. When he says that since where does he get that you're not allowed to help a gadol do an aveirah? Because kol shekein from the fact that Beis Din by a קטן מצווין לאפרישי. So he says an interesting pshat, it doesn't mean that he paskens that בית דין מצווין לאפרישי. He means to say like this, listen to the vort: Since there is a מאן דאמר that holds that בית דין מצווין לאפרישי מדאורייתא, so even though we don't pasken like him, but at least that makes sense that by a gadol it should be אסור מדרבנן, at least. That's what he means. The words when he says like this: איסורא דרבנן איכא דאפילו קטן אוכל נבלות בית דין מצווין לאפרישי, so all you have to add is: דאפילו by a קטן יש מאן דאמר that בית דין מצווין לאפרישי, so kol shekein that by a gadol you can't do it, and certainly you can't help him, at least miderabbanan. It's not so pashut the teirutz, because who says? I mean what's the re'ayah? Because there is a מאן דאמר that you're אסור מדאורייתא a siman that the other Everyone holds it's אסור מדרבנן? It's not clear. I mean, and also if it's based on that מאן דאמר, then why is that not איסור דאורייתא? If he's basing: since there's a מאן דאמר that by a katan you have to stop him, so everyone should agree by a gadol. So it should be a de'oraita, too. So it's not so pashut, this teirutz. Unless we could say a different vort, which is not clear in the Rosh, that he doesn't mean what he says. What he means is not that you have to stop him, Beis Din has to stop him. He means that mide'oraita no one could give him, that's what he means. There's a din that you're not allowed to, like I read from the Alter Rebbe before, כל זה ענין להפרישו מאיסור. To stop him you don't have to, the Beis Din doesn't have to. אבל לספות ליה איסור בידים, but to give it to him, and even if he could take it himself, to give him is assur l'chol adam min haTorah. And that's what the Rosh means. Since there's a din that you can't give him, he uses the לשון בית דין מצווין להפרישו, but it's maybe like an indication of a certain type of a halacha, but not that this is the case he means. So even though he says the לשון בית דין מצווין, but he doesn't mean the din of בית דין מצווין. In this din of בית דין מצווין להפרישו, there is one detail, that to give him, everyone is assur. Not even בית דין, not the father, even a stam a person, you're not allowed to mid'oraita. Ah? How is he? No, so it says it makes sense that if that's so, then kol shekein in a case where you're not giving it to him to eat, it should be at least assur mid'rabbanan. That if if to give him in the mouth to eat is an issur d'oraita, here you're not giving him in the mouth to eat, you're not making him do it, you're just allowing him to do it, you're helping him. So it makes sense that if that's assur mid'oraita, then it makes sense that by a gadol to help him should be at least assur mid'rabbanan. That's again, no hechreach, but it's mistaber. So whichever way we drai zich here, the Rosh the way he writes it is not not 100% clear, but we have to drai one of these some of these ways the way it seems from here.

Now let's go to another prat here. The one, what was it you were saying, that he doesn't mean בית דין מצווין to stop him, 'cause there we פסקן אין בית דין מצווין להפרישו, but there's another prat where we do pasken that you're not allowed to give him in his mouth, you're not allowed to feed him. That's what he means. Since by a katan you can't feed him, so kol shekein by a gadol, at least you can't help him. And that would be mid'rabbanan, because it's not you're not feeding him. To feed a gadol is assur mid'oraita. It's not it's much more than a katan, but we're not feeding him, we're only mesaye'a. Okay, let's go back to Tosafot for a few minutes. What is Tosafot' teretz? What's takeh Tosafot' teretz? How come it says פטור ומותר when it's assur of לפני עור? Nu? Talking by a goy. But by a goy it's also asur? It's his own thing. Oh, that's the teirutz of Tosafos. That we're talking by a goy, and it's his own חפץ, his own thing, when it's a goy's own thing, then there is no issur. Look at the Rosh, we have the Rosh open, so let's look at the Rosh. He says, וכי תימא דהכא מיירי בנכרי, that's not לפני עור, איסור דרבנן still, he brings that you're not allowed to give a goy his thing. So memeila it's asur. ויש לומר דהכא מיירי שהחפץ של הנכרי. Same teirutz as Tosafos. וכהאי גוונא ליכא איסור. If it's a goy's חפץ, no איסור, אפילו נראה כנושא ונותן עמו להוציא. See, if it's a Yid's חפץ that you give it to the goy, why is it asur? What's taka the reason? Why is it asur? He's standing in the רשות הרבים and you're giving him something, giving him food to eat. Why is it asur? מראית העין, people think you're he's doing it for your sake. But if it's your חפץ, if his חפץ, there is no issur. So he says, כיון שאין החפץ של בעל הבית. Then the Rosh brings, so this is like Tosafos, that by a goy's חפץ you're allowed to give him and there's no issur. זאגט דער Rosh: ובאשכנז ראיתי, in Germany I saw, מורים לאיסור אף בחפץ של עכו״ם. That in Ashkenaz they pasken that even a goy's object, not like Tosafos. Like, I'm Tosafos, בעלי Where did the Baalei Tosafos live? You know, Spain, the Sephardim, Baalei Tosafos were Ashkenazim. They lived in both in Ashkenaz and in Tzarfat, they lived in France and in Germany. But al kol panim, he brings that in Ashkenaz they paskan that it's asur. And the Rosh says, וכן מסתבר. Says that's what I think too, I think they're right, that this is no tirutz, 'cause there's no there's never mutar. And he gives a reason, כיון שאסור משום משום מראית העין, since the whole reason why you can't give him, even though you're giving it for his sake. See, let me explain the din. Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch has ש״כ ה, you can learn the dinim. Why can't you give him, if you give it to him outside, he should take it for your sake, that's ממש אסור. Which isur? אמירה לעכו״ם. You can't tell a goy to do a melachah for you, so asur. What happens if you give it to him for his sake? He's hungry, he wants to eat, and you're giving him. It's asur because people don't know the difference. They don't know, they think you're giving him that he should take it for you someplace, so it's marit ha-ayin. So the Rosh says, and if it's a chefetz of the goy, what's the difference? There's no difference, since the whole is says מראית העין, כי הרואה סבר שנותן לו ונוטלו להוציא, because someone who gives him thinks he taking him giving he should take it out for you. אין לחלק, so mimela what's the difference? כי הרואה אינו מכיר של מי החפץ. The guy who sees knows the difference? Someone from the side will watch, marit ha-ayin. Think he knows if you're giving him that that that's chefetz is for it's his own, it's the goy's or it's his? What does he know? So the marit ha-ayin is still there. Okay, so we have here offer the machloket. In the רא״ש גופא you have two shitot, and Tosafos holds like the first shitah. So it's a clear machloket between Tosafos and the Rosh. The Rosh paskens like the Ashkenaz, and Tosafot says no, that you are allowed. What's the sevara of the machloket? The sevara of the machloket could be like this. I'm going to say it in short, בהמשך to what we said before. Just like you have a chakirah by לפני עור לא תתן מכשול, that chakirah you have by many things. We said before you have the chakirah by מסייע לדבר עבירה. Is it an איסור כללי, is a prati? The same she'eilah is by מראית העין. When you're not allowed to do something from a מראית העין, is it a general din a Yid has to behave in a way that no one should suspect him of doing an aveirah? It's all based on the pasuk. What's the pasuk? והייתם נקיים מה׳ ומישראל. A person has to be clean, no one should suspect him. See, people think מראית העין is because somebody else might see and and he'll do the aveirah. No, it's not. That's a that's something it's a seyag, it's a chashash. That's not מראית העין means that someone will think you're doing an aveirah. You're not allowed to behave in a way that someone should suspect you of doing an aveirah. Because you have to be clean, והייתם נקיים מה׳ ומישראל. Now, any aveirah that anything that I do which is not an aveirah, but people might think it's an aveirah, so it's אסור על מראית העין. Is מראית העין איסור כללי? There's an issur of מראית העין, there's a chiyuv to be clean in the eyes of whichever aveirah makes no difference. Or it's a prat in every aveirah? If you do מראית העין on Shabbos, then you're over on איסור שבת. What's איסור שבת? מראית העין of Shabbos, not the melachah, but מראית העין. Now if we're going to say that it's an a מראית העין is an איסור כללי, then makes no difference what. Whatever you'll do and someone else he think you're doing an aveirah, can't do. So since no one is going to know if this a חפץ of a goy or a חפץ of a Yid, it's מראית העין. מראית העין is an issur. You can't have do something that someone else That's the Rosh's סברא. But if you hold מראית העין is an איסור פרטי, has to be a פרט of an issur. When you're doing something that has no beginning of an איסור בכלל, if you take a חפץ of a goy and you're giving it to the goy, it's nothing to do with you. So you are not involved in any issur. Fact is people might think you're doing an issur, but מראית העין is not a דין כללי. If you say מראית העין is a פרט in an aveirah, there has to be an aveirah which it's a פרט in. There's no aveirah here, there's nothing, no beginning here. When it's your object, there's a beginning of there's a possibility of him doing it for you, so there's אמירה לעכו״ם, so it's a מראית העין of אמירה לעכו״ם. But if there's no beginning, it's you're giving it for him and it's his חפץ, so even מראית העין won't work here. So weiss das Tosafos will learn that מראית העין is a איסור חיוב פרטי, וממילא, in this case, מראית העין will not be, and the Rosh holds farkert. Which comes out that by Tosafos מראית העין and לפני עור What did they say before does Tosafos hold on לפני עור? It's also איסור פרטי. Tosafos didn't answer that פטור ומותר means that מצד שבת it's מותר, because it's Tosafos holds it's אסור on Shabbos, because it's a איסור פרטי. Same thing with מראית העין. Tos' holds that's Tosafos holds that on Shabbos it's a איסור פרטי מראית העין, and therefore in this case it's farkert, it's מותר, because there's no עבירה to begin with that it should be a פרט in. מה שאין כן the Rosh here, both ענינים, holds that לפני עור is an איסור כללי, that's why he says פטור ומותר on Shabbos is מותר, and מסייע is also an איסור כללי, and if it's an איסור כללי, מסייע לדבר עבירה fits even if it's a חפץ of a גוי. And מסייע is also איסור כללי, and if it's a איסור כללי, מסייע לדבר עבירה fits even if it's a חפצא of a גוי.