Bava Kama 2a: Arba Avos Nezikin, Toldos, and the Basis of Liability for Damage

Transcript

Hetzei overkrade, arba avos nezikin. What is the translation of the word avos? Avos, avos, avos. Why do we use the word avos for what supposedly is just a category of hezek? I mean, these are categories of nezikin, subtitles. I mean, we used to call them subtitles, right? Shor is one category, bor is another. What's the lashon avos? So you see that Rashi obviously was bothered by that she'eilah, which of course, not a pshat that you're bothered, but with that pshat, that's the first thing you have to address: avos. It's not what's the nusach avos. So Rashi, avos kari. So Rashi, we have to explain the avos. Why do we call it avos? Kari l'hanach d'chsivin b'kra. The word avos is used for those that are written in the pasuk, b'hedya, openly. U'vGemara mefaresh hein hain toldos, and the Gemara will explain what the toldos are. So the first diyuk I want to make, that Rashi explains that avos has to do with what's written in the pasuk. But does that give any chumra to the av? Does that say that the av has different dinim than the toldos? No. According to Rashi, it's not more than what it says in the pasuk. It's called an av. For English, we would say it's just an identification. How to identify, these are the ones in the pasuk we call them avos. Let's be medayek in another word in Rashi. Rashi says kari, avos kari. He didn't say avos are; he said avos are called. So you see that it's a question of how to address them. So it's like we give them a name. We give them a name because they're in the pasuk. The Rashi holds that there's any yichus, so to speak, to the fact that something's an av over a toldah, it doesn't say it. It doesn't say it in this Rashi. All Rashi says is that avos, I guess we give it a special title because it's in the pasuk, and it's kari that we call it this, not more than it's just called. I mean, it's not that there's any nafkamina. And to continue, Rashi's saying that the toldah is not necessarily not the toireh either. It's not the hedyot in the Torah. See the last three, four words of Rashi? Bichsivin bikra the hedyot, which means the toldah is also in the Torah. The only thing is, it's not the hedyot. What's the hedyot in the Torah that we give it a shem av, which again leads us to understand in Rashi that a toldah and an av isn't special miyuchas in its dinim. It's just that since it's in the pasuk, so we call it, and that's done that it's in the pasuk. It's the hedyot in the pasuk. So it's not even a chiluk of dergah. I used to the Rabbanan. I mean, they're all בעצם in the same realm. The thing is here it says it b'hedya. See, Rashi didn't even say, Av is kari l'hanich d'chsiva d'kra. Sim kra b'hedya. It's still a matter of, since it's openly in the pasuk, so then it becomes what? An av. It's openly in the pasuk. It's av. It's not open, it's not an av. That's what Rashi learns, it's kari. So it's the question how to call it. We give it a special name because it's open in the pasuk. L'chora, that's how I would read the Rashi before knowing further Rashis and before knowing Rishonim and before knowing Acharonim and before knowing Briskerovs. Let's read the Rashi. Let's be fair. This shiur is about being fair. To who? To the blatt. Let's be fair to the blatt. Voshteit. What does it say in this Gemara? Arba avos, avos. These are fathers. We know that there were three fathers. The Gemara says, Ein avos ela shlosha. We only have three avos: Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov. All of a sudden we have shor, bor, and mav'eh. The goyim have maybe avos, shor, bor, mav'eh, and hever. That could be the avos of the goyim. Avos, but these are not avos. So what does it mean, avos? All jokes aside — bad joke, but I'm not — the shiur is not about joking. So what's the avos? Rashi takke says right away, One second, avos, avos, what is avos? So kari.

We want to understand the pshat. The din according to Rashi is two things: the behadya, which means he's trying to say that the toldos are not that much different than the avos. It's not that one is דאורייתא, one is דרבנן, one is yeah, one is maybe. It's just that it's open in the pasuk, but there's a parashah of toldah also. It's all a zika. The second din according to Rashi is the kari. Rashi just says we call it; it's not too much more than it's a kari. It's not special dinim, or it's not a special yichus, so to speak, that it's an av over a toldah. Let's see another Rashi. In the Gemara, the Gemara says, מני תני אבות, מכלל דתולדות. Because there's avos, obviously there's toldos. תולדה סתם כי האי גוונא ממעטא. If you say avos, there must be toldos, because otherwise it's everything. So, תולדה סתם כי האי גוונא ממעטא. What's the shayachus כי האי גוונא ממעטא? So Rashi explains in the Gemara, לא שנא אב חטוש, לא שנא תולדה חטוש, לא שנא אב סקילה, לא שנא תולדה סקילה, so then מה איכפת בין אב לתולדה? So Rashi explains, האב מלאכה, הוא חייב; אבל התולדה, לא חייב. That the side of avos and toldos would be that for an av you'd be chayav, and for a toldah you wouldn't be chayav at all. So the shaylah of yes toldos, not toldos, is: are you chayav for the toldah, not chayav for the toldah? You with the Gemara so well? You don't know the Gemara? Make a quick run through the Gemara. The Gemara says, מני תני אבות, מכלל דתולדות. Right? If you say avos, there must be toldos. תולדה סתם כי האי גוונא ממעטא. So, gabi Shabbos, ... We see others, you can tell this. ... The question is, what about over here too? Says the Gemara says, what's the nafka mina? The ilu aved, she'aved, ... tells us, ... chayav al kol chad v'chad. The ilu aved, the toldah, lo mechayev ela echad. Mashenkein, if you only did the toldah b'makom av, you'll be mechayev one, av milacha. You'll be chayev for the av melacha, but the toldah, you wouldn't be chayev. So the shaylah would be, toldah same ki'aitzba, melav ki'aitzba, if you're chayev for toldah. That's Rashi's shitah. Brisker Rav brings this Rashi. He says, he פירוש Rashi, ... The shaylah is, what's over here? Rashi on the beis also, hacha mai? Toldos b'Shabbos, ... toldos d'tumah. V'hacha toldos d'nizakin mai? You see the shaylah, v'hacha toldos d'nizakin mai. Mi'amrinan toldos ki'aitzbahem, lo shna av, lo shna toldah, v'im hizik meshalem ... The safek of the Gemara is maybe ... patur on a toldah. So in other words, avos you'd be chayev on, and toldos you'd be patur. That's the safek of the Gemara on toldos, ki'aitzbahem, not ki'aitzbahem according to Rashi. Toldos ... because the Gemara goes through the cheshbon. Not the ... comes out stam toldah. It is toldah chayav. The question is, av oys chayin, toldos kiotz bohem chayav alav. It's this shitas Ravashi in the Gemara. So I know, rabosai, I'm not so sure if you know the Gemara, because I'm sorry to tell you to prepare it, but this is l'maaseh. When you read the Gemara, you'll see. You'll see that toldos shehein kiyotz bohem, kiyotz bohem, according to Rashi, it's often. There's a shaylah if you're chayav for toldah. Perek de Brisker Rav, I don't understand. So then what's with a toldah if you're not chayav? I mean, how can you have an av and a toldah? That means you're chayav in av, chayav, not av and toldah. I mean, what are the two צדדים, av and not chayav? So it means you're just chayav on these things when you're av and toldah. V'licho'orah eino muvan. D'im al ha-toldos leka chiyuv klal, l'inyan mai nikra toldos? What is it a toldah about? Av, so you could say toldah is less, toldah is different, but that toldah is nothing; toldah is mutar. You can't have av and toldah. But loy zeh shaminu l'masnisin, d'avis michlal deka toldos, u'val korcho, d'gam al ha-toldah deka chiyuv nezakin.

Mai, k'mi boyei? So the fact is that the shecht always is chayav, and it's an ad, meaning that there's a toldah. The toldah has to be in the realm of chayav. It has to be in the sugya, in the parashah of chayav. You have a different din, kiyoitza. It's a lav kiyoitza. Zei fregt: What's pshat in Rashi, that the Gemara has a hava amina that a toldah should be patur? ... Also see the Rif. Now, be'emes, I want to know, taka pshat in Rashi. Why should a toldah be patur? If you learn that a toldah is a hezek, and a toldah is a toldah ... and you're a poshea in the mamon chaveiro, so you have all the ingredients to be chayav. What's taka the hava amina that a toldah should be patur? I don't understand. Why would you be patur on a toldah? It's b'ma'aseh shehezek. It's b'ma'aseh shehezek, which means ... It's also what? It's also that it's shemiraso alecha. You're a poshea. It's b'ma'aseh shehezek. It has all the ingredients. And don't forget, Rashi learns that ... is avos. So it's not ... a toldah. So why are you patur? Why should you be patur? What's taka the svara? According to Rashi that learns that ... pasuk ... So the teldos is not anything less. If Rashi would have learned the teldos less, and it's a chesaron b'etzem in the av in the toldah, then I could come and say, you know, there's something lacking in toldah, that because of this it's not chayav. But if the whole shailah is l'hedya b'kra, not b'kra, but l'hedya b'kra, not that it doesn't exist, it exists, but it's not l'hedya b'kra, otherwise it wouldn't be called a toldah d'nachah, then it's not a hezek, which means this with the Brisker Rav. The Brisker Rav is not coming to say that it's bichlal not in the parshah of nezik, that it's not niskash. It's kashus even if it's in the parshah of nezik, it can't be called a toldah of a chiyuv if it's not a chiyuv. In other words, is the Brisker Rav asking that according to Rashi, it's bichlal not the sugya of mazik? So why is it called a toldah? Or is the Brisker Rav saying that avad it's in the parshah of hezek, but because you're not chayav for it, so how can it be a toldah to a chiyuv? I think it's the latter of two. I don't think anybody thinks for a minute that it's not the parshah of hezek. The Brisker Rav is asking if it's in the parshah of hezek and you're patur on that hezek, so it can't be a toldah to a... In other words, I'm clarifying: when Rashi learns teldah, not the top Rashi, because the top Rashi is a kasha; it's mashma that it isn't in the parshah, just not l'hedya. But in the bottom Rashi, the Rashi on the beis, that says you're patur on the toldah... So what's the taich? Because it's not a mazik at all. Teldos not a mazik. So then the Brisker Rav is asking mamash stark: how can you be called a toldah if it's not a mazik? I mean, a toldah, the toldah inherits it. Could keeping Shabbos be a toldah to shechitah and zrika? I'm asking, could you say keeping Shabbos? No, one is about being mazik, one's about keeping Shabbos. Could hitting a child be a toldah of mazik? No, because hitting a child is ... it could be chmuchuyiv in certain cases, so it can't be a toldah to a mazik. You don't say it's a toldah of mazik that's patur, not a toldah of the mazik. Maybe that's the Brisker Rav's shailah, and therefore a toldah is not patur l'gamrei. Like, the Brisker Rav's shailah is even more: avad is in the parshah of mazik. It's a pele to say that it's not in the parshah of mazik, and Rashi himself says it's in the parshah, because it's just not the hedyot of the keren; it's avad in the parshah. And that's why it's called a toldah. The Brisker Rav's shailah is, so if you're patur on the toldah, so how can it be called a toldah? Not that it's not a mazik; it's a mazik, but you're patur on such a mazik. So the kashya is, how could a...

Why did they call the teller to a chayiv the kenas? Tell this mashma that it's a teller. So the emes, it comes out there's two kashas. The first kasha it is: why is it called a teller, brisker rav? ... even a ... shaila, or you're taka patur. So even if you say it's not a mazik at all, okay, that's why you're patur. Then the Brisker Rav's kasha becomes mamash a tzarich iyun gadol nifla. It's not a mazik; what are you calling it a teller for? Avada it's in the parashas mazik, and the Brisker Rav still asks his kasha. But the second kasha becomes, if it's in the parashah mazik, it has all the ingredients of mazik, so why taka patur? Why should he be patur? Darkei lehazik, ... ... you're peshia. Why are you patur? But why should he be chayiv? The Rif says another pshat in the safek of the Gemara of ... Rashi, we said, learns ... could be the teller is bichlal patur. Zogt the Rif, that iboi hi al chilukei hadinim sheyesh ... Each ... has unique dinim. For example, muad metechilah, yesh eino mishalem rak chatzi nezek, some only pay chatzi nezek. So the question is, is the toldah like the av? Indeed. Well, so that would be by ... about toldos obviously is very ... . ... mashma b'Rambam. Hilchos Nizkei Mamon, the Rambam is ... mashma. ... ein sham ... Rambam, look at the Rambam. The ... also ... ... also kashya. ... it's a very nice pshat. The question is, do the toldos have the same dinim as the av? ... chayav. It was never ... chiyuv. It's chayav for mazik. The question is which mazik. The mazik ... meaning the toldah of shor is having the same dinim as shor. That's the Rif's pshat. How could you be patur? Why did the Rif learn like this? Because of my kasha. The Rif says, how could you be patur? The Gemara could be ... Again, the lashon is also mashma like the ... ki yotzei, not ki yotzei mashma, is it like it? So Rashi says, is it like it, chayav. It's not a question of like it; it's a question of chayav. So Gemara should have said, chayav v'lo chayav. I could say Rashi learned that that's what it means, ki yotzei. Is it like it, like ...? Okay. Like the Rif, it's mamash peshutei ha-milim, the words of the Gemara itself: ki yotzei בהם, ולא ki yotzei בהם. Is it like it, meaning does it have the same parshah and dinim? No. The shor has a din of chatzi nezek. So I'm asking, all the dinim, whatever the dinim of each one is, the toldah will have to be... Same criteria. Same criteria, the same rules, the same regulations, as they learned the Rif. What's the maila of the Rif, so to speak? The maila — I don't want to say maila of the Rashi — but the taich is that in the Rif, the Rif is learning kiyotz bohem. The shaylah of the Rif is like it. Rashi is going to have to stretch it a little bit, kiyotz bohem, that you're chayav. It's kiyotz bohem in din. Not that it's like it, but it's like it l'gabei chiyuv, that you're chayav. Not comparing it, but it has the same dinim l'maskanah. Okay, I can hear Rashi learned it the Gemara that way; it's just peshat, not so big. But why did the Rif learn like this? Besides that it's kipshuto shel lashon, kiyotz bohem is it like it in dinim, it's straight say that tolds patur. He's bothered by this kasha: why would it tell them he's patur? I mean, he did a hezek; why should you be patur? On this the Brisker Rav has another kasha. V'gam ze l'choreh. The ma'acha d'chol toldos נלמדות לניחי וזאת מאב שלה. Where do we know the toldah? Toldah is learned from the av. So again...

What could be a safek? If you learn out, tell us. It's chayiv to the Torah, it's chayiv because it's a toldah of that av. Yeah? Why is it toldah chayiv? Toldah is chayiv because it's a toldah of shor, of keren. Come on, it's keren. What do you think it was? It's bor? What do you think it should be? So how about the ki ayitzba? What's the safek? Because it's a biska machasha, b'tzarichiyin biur ha-davar. We need to ask. That's the bisker. So first he asks on Rashi: How could you be a toldah if you're patur? So I'm telling you it's a twofold kasha. First kasha is, I mean, how could you be patur on a toldah? And if you are a mazik in toldah, so why get... In other words, the Brisker is asking that why is it called a toldah? And I'm telling you deeper than that: why are you patur bichlal? That's a twofold kasha in Rashi, on Rashi, and in the Ritva you have a different kasha: How could there be a safek if ki ayitzba lav ki ayitzba? How about it's ki ayitzba? How about it's ki ayitzba? It's learned from the av. What do you... That's the bisker. In order to be chayiv, you need the shem mazik. I'll read you the lashon. How do you know? Itkeri boi, he got a teldus shemahav. If the toldos all set the shemahav, l'inyan adina mam yuchal l'mehem. The toldos of the bor, he atzmo shem bor. It's not the question, is toldah d'bor a toldah of bor. About it's a toldah of bor. The question isn't toldah of bor, bor. And if it's a toldah of bor, yeah, we know. The question is, is it bor? Because it's not enough for it to be a toldah of bor; it has to be bor. You have to give it the shem of the mazik. In order for toldos keren to be chayav, it has to be keren, and it's not enough for it to be toldos keren. Lashon again in the Brisker... it's a very, very, I guess you could say yesoidosdike loshon. Not everybody uses it. Hainu, d'iker ha'iboy hi, im gam ha'toldos shem ha'av aleihem, u'l'inyan adina miyuchadin hem. The toldah of the bor, he atzmo shem bor olav. Peirush, biur hadvarim: avadah we knew toldos bor is toldos bor, and avadah, mitzad sevara, toldos bor should be mechayev because it's toldos bor, like the kasha, the gzeilah on the Rif. No, but that's not enough, obviously, because it has to be not toldos bor, but it has to turn into bor. That's the kasha. That's why I'm here. Why do you think I come here? I come here to explain these things. See, this is, as they say, the meat and potatoes. Now you have to know what to do with it. You can make it also vor from it, you can make a cholent from it. Some people make a child from this. I want to make it something. What does he mean? What does he mean? The shem ha... Yeah, without the shem ha, that gateus doesn't work. I mean, if it's toldos bor, and your kasha was, briskero, that toldos bor avad is chayav for bor. No. So I have to know, ki yotzei bo doesn't get the shem. If it doesn't get the shem, I mean, toldos bor, and that was your kasha. Wasn't your starting point in your debate, so to speak, that toldos bor is toldos bor should be chayav for that? So how did you turn around and say, No, no, it's not, because it doesn't have a shem bor, and it has to be shem bor? Yeah, who said? And I believe that's what's bothering... That's what's bothering... What are you saying? I mean, your kasha was that toldos bor is patur chayav, and the teretz is no, toldos bor is not patur chayav because it has to be shem. ... Rashi. I'm going to be mazbir what an av and a toldos... I'm going to be mazbir.

I mean, the teretz, the kashya that the Brisker Rav has on Rashi, and the kashya that the Brisker Rav has on the Ritva. But we have to know well what a mazik is, to understand why are we talking about avos nezikin. We have to know well what a mazik is. What is mazik, and what is the mechayev mazik? We spoke in yesterday's shiur that Acharonim, based on the Rishonim, have mapped out for us two yesodos that make a mazik and that's mechayev a mazik. One is b'ma'aseh shehizik, through mamon, and the other one is the pshia, the shemirasan alecha that you didn't do. I ask you, rabosai, if it's true that it's the pshia, like many Acharonim take on in the Rishonim, that the ikar is the shemirasan alecha and by you not doing it you're chayav, so what's the difference between keren, shor, mav'eh, hev'er? As long as you're a poshea, and that pshia caused mazik, so why should there be בכלל be different categories of hezek? If the yesod hachiyuv... It's pshia, and you're chayiv. When you come to court, does the court want to know if you kicked in the window or punched in the window? What's the difference? The bottom line is you broke the window. So if the ikur is the pshia, why should there בכלל be categories of mazik? Shor, keren. Shor, bor, mav'eh. What's the difference? You're a peshia, you're shmira. What? Mazik. Finish. End of story. Everything. No, no, no, no, no. Slowly, slowly, slowly. And in my shiur, I'll soon explain to you how that works. But if you learn that the problem is pshia, it's very difficult to run away with the fact that the yesod of the chiyuv is, ממונא שהזיק. In other words, if your mazik, your criteria, your shem mazik results from the fact that you're a peshia in your shmira, then in these cases there is no difference, because in all these cases the pshia is all the same. So you can't make a chiluk in what type of mazik you are. If you're going to say it's ממונא שהזיק that's mechayev, so there's different mamonos. There's mamonei shor. There's mema'in of mavin, hefker. There's different categories of mema'in. But if the pshiyas shemirah is mechayev, so then it's all one. So at the end of the day that you have a tzarah shavos shebahen, so then there's no arba avos nezikin. Understand that the Mishnah is not teaching you how we get to the chiyuvim, because you could come and say we find in the Torah four, hatzarah shavos shebahen, and mimeila now it's all one. That's good for a shakla v'tarya in the Gemara. The Gemara should say like this: if we have four in the Torah, hatzarah shavos shebahen, so today we know that there's one chiyuv mazik, period, because hezik chaval mazik. But the Mishnah is after the tzarah shavah, telling us that there's arba avos nezikin. The Mishnah is not shakla v'taryaing for us. The Mishnah is stating now the results. The results shouldn't be arba avos nezikin because it's all one mazik of being poshe'a in shemirah. Gevaldike kasha. But you say, you hear the kasha. Hear it, because that's called understanding bava kama. Im mema'ino sheheizik, I could start saying there's a car that...

There's a cheisaron, a bowl that broke. I could start making chilukim in what did the hezek. What's called mi l'gabi mamoni, so there's different categories than that. My car, my yard. Someone slipped in my yard. Is it the same thing as my car ran him over? I could see where we have different categories in mazik. But if the yesod of mazik is pshias shemirah, so there's no different categories. Ela mai, I could say like this: about it there's no chiluk. The Gemara is just speaking the four categories. The Tana shavah tells me to put them all together, so the yesod is chava mazik. But that's a Gemara. That's not a Mishnah. The Mishnah is stating the facts. The fact is, after the Tana shavah, we have four categories. How are you talking there should be four categories? It's not four categories. It's all one mazik of pshias shomer. And I don't mean shomer, but pshias misha shemirah olav, shemiras chaveiro. So efshar kemenzog, that the arba avos nezikin is not in shem, but it's in din. L'maaseh they have different dinim. The categories that we break it up into is not because of what we want to give it titles. But because they do have different halachas, so therefore they're different categories. A person can have a sore throat. So it could be a sore throat because of strep throat, bacteria, or it could be a sore throat because he has a virus. It's a viral infection. So the end result is that you have a sore throat. But we have to break it up in different categories because how to treat it is different. The rules are different. That was a mashal I just thought of on the spot. You like it good, you don't like it even better. Now, the point being that arba avos nezikin, that we break it into categories, could be only because it has different dinim. It has different dinim. Since it has different dinim, so therefore we break it up. But ein hachi nami, in Shem mazik it's all the same. You can't say that in Rashi. Avos kari, kari, l'hanach d'chsivin b'kra. Avad avos is for shem. Avos is not mechayev different dinim, like I started this shiur and tell you in Rashi. Rashi never learned that the avos means that it has different dinim than the toldos, or that avos is mechayev different avos is mechayev different dinim. But rather, l'hanach d'chsivin b'kra has a shem avos. Unless you could say that all Rashi meant was avos lafukei toldos, because the avos within themselves, that we break it up into different avos, that is because of dinim tafel. But the reason that we speak the word avos lafuki, toldos is a halachic tichsiv in the kra. Maybe that's all Rashi means. In other words, Daniel, like this. What do you have to break up different avos? The teretz could be, could be, we break up different avos not because in mazik you're different, because sof kol sof, gzeiras hakasuv, they're different dinim. L'maaseh, different dinim: katzinezek and wood metchilah. So you can come and say that ein hachi nami, in shem mazik there's no nafka mina in avos. L'maaseh, Rashi tells me that the avos is avos not because of special dinim. Avos is because of shem; they have shem avos. The shem av is not because of dinim that the shem av has.

The ma'aseh Rashi doesn't say it. Rashi says avos kari, not because it has different dinim, but rather because it's hanachsiv b'kra. Unless you learn that Rashi wasn't referring to one av versus the other av, why they're different avos. Rashi's discussing avos, lafukei toldos. So ein hachanami, in avos, the Mishnah is not telling us shem mazik four different ones. Nacha, I see the oilam is almost there. Let me tell you, you gotta cheshbon it. You gotta make cheshbonos. You gotta go through it. When you have an av, so I asked you that it comes out that all the avos are the same if the chesaron is shmirah. Teretz is, could be, ein hachanami. So why are we breaking up the different avos? And the teretz is they have different dinim. I, Rashi discusses that avos is only a shem in name, not in dinim. That's when he puts it in contrast to toldos. In contrast to one each other, they're taka different avos, which means avos takes on two implications. One implication is avos lafukei toldos. And one is avos, one ava, and the other av. And that's a taich of avos. And אי Rashi only says kari. Yeah, legabei toldos it's kari, but legabei each av, it's a different sugya of av. The shayach why Rashi wouldn't say that, maybe Rashi says it's arba avos because each av is different. The kasha is just what's called avos, not toldos maybe. All Rashi's bother is avos like lafukei toldos. But the shem av, which I understand is main category, the translation is main category, has its nafka mina between one av and the other av. You have to break up avos to four to know that there's four, not all one, because each one has different dinim. I dilma, or maybe it's a din tefar avos. I feel if you're gonna say that the mechayev is the pshia, but the yesod is that you have a shem mazik, that even if it's true that the shmiras hanezek, like the Acharonim tell us based on the Rishonim, is the mechayev, but mechayev for what? For mazik. And for mazik you have to have shem mazik. In order to be chayev for the mazik that you are, it has to be a pshia. But Rabbeinu has to begin that you're a mazik, and I'll bring you a raya to this. B'emes, when the Gemara brings a tzad hashaveh, the Gemara said two things: darkei leilech ul'hazik. The Mishnah brings two things: darkei leilech ul'hazik, u'shmirasan alecha. In every tzad hashaveh, is it that way that you need two tzad hashavos? Klar, shaylah. Usually tzad hashaveh is if it has a common denominator, you need two? Chutz Rosh Hashanah, I don't know. I'm not so big baki in Shas. Huh? How many you need? Do you need one or two? You need just one. It's always different. Sometimes one, and sometimes it's two. This is for you. This is your forte, as they say. How many tzad hashavos do I need? I have one. Why does the Gemara bring two? And you know the teretz is: the Gemara is trying to make a tzad hashaveh that you're a mazik. So even if shemirasan alecha makes you a mazik, peirush, to be chayav, but the darkei leilech ul'hazik makes you the mazik that you're chayav on. The Gemara first has to establish you're a mazik, and then the Gemara has to establish there's a tzad hashaveh that you're a poshia to be chayav for that mazik. So even if the pshat is the mechayev, the darkei leilech ul'hazik, the shem mazik is the mechayev that you're chayav for.

Is the chiyuv that you're mechayev. Avadim ivri. That's what you see from the Mishnah. Nachon. I believe klor that avadim, shemirasan al haleches, mechayev. It's emes that it's mechayev, which means you have peshiah. But let me ask you a question. If a person is a poshaya without being a mazik, for example, I was a groma b'nezakin, but I was a poshea in that grama. Grama b'nezakin is patur, but I was a poshea in that. There was a shemiras halecha, and there was a peshiah in that, would I be chayev and v'adam patur? It's because the pshat is you're lacking the shem mazik. You're lacking the ma'aseh mazik. First you have to have a ma'aseh mazik, and through peshiah you become chayev for that ma'aseh mazik. The raya is because the Mishnah, when the Mishnah tries to establish the mazik, he brings two tzar hashavos. What do you need two tzar hashavos for? Just say tzar hashavos, dak leich l'hazik, u'shemirasan alecha. And the teretz is both are needed. Both ingredients are needed to make you a mazik. The first ingredient is dak leich l'hazik, that there's a ma'aseh mazik. And the second ingredient is shemirasan alecha, because every tzar hashavos is different. I don't think every tzar hashavos needs two. You can answer maybe if there is two, the Gemara will bring two. It says not luchach, because efsher, when there is two, the Gemara will bring two. Maybe that's the pshat. Not that we're looking for two; there is two, so you bring two. So that strengthens the tzad ha-hashavah. O dilma mefaket. Here it's not two; it's all one. What do you mean, mechadesh that the darkei leilach l'hazik and the shemirasan alecha is one? It's one nekudah of mazik, that the darkei leilach l'hazik is a maaseh mazik, and shemirasan alecha is mechayev that mazik. So be'emes, how many tzad ha-shavos did the Gemara bring? It's all one. It's the new klius of mazik, which means you're a mazik and you are poshe'a in the mazik. Why should it be in itself in the tzad ha-shavah, the chiyuv of the mazik? The what? Why should the payment, the pshia? What's the one about the payment? I mean the pshia of the chiyuv pshia. M'ma nafshach, mazik, and you have to be poshe'a for that. So why should it be in the tzad ha-shavah itself? Because you can't make a tzad ha-shavah shemirasan alecha, because the tzad ha-shavah is not the shemirasan, because that's not the din. That's the tenai of the din. The shemirasan alecha is the tenai of the din. In order to be chayav in mazik, you have to be a poshe'a in that mazik. But that's not the mazik. Havad the shemirasan alecha is mechayev, but it's mechayev as a tenai, not as an ikar, not as a yesod. The mechayev is the mazik. The shemirasan alecha is the tenai in the mazik. In order to be a mazik, you have a tenai, that it has to be that you were poshe'a. So the tzad ha-shavah is be'emes one. I'll tell you one thing. When I bring you two Tzar HaShabbos... Yeah, I'm going to do that. Slowly. What do you think, I wasn't going to do that? I was going to do that. Ayilasni. Shem mazik. What made me a shem mazik? Bishleima the pshia makes me a mazik, I hear, because I was poshea in shmirah, I became a mazik. But the way we're learning, that your poshea is just used and needed to be mechayev me in the mazik. So b'emes I was a mazik at first, and the pshia is to be mechayev me on that mazik, so I had to become a mazik. And the answer is mamon shehizik. You see that there's a geder called mamon shehizik, which we'll explain later. What's the geder of mamon shehizik? Is it you? Chaver, it's not you, it's mamon. But for argument's sake, and as for mimazak shaklav v'tarya, let's leave it right now that it's you. How and why it's you, we'll get to it later. I'll get to it. But that's pshat in mamon shehizik. Mamon shehizik is a taich that makes you a mazik.

The peshiah makes you chayiv for that mazik. It gives the ability for the Torah to come and say, pay for your mazik. Peshiah. Ay, you ask me, tasha, so forget. What do I need the peshiah? What's wrong with the fact I'm a mazik? I should be chayiv because I'm a mazik. Which is what I think Daniel's asking. Daniel, let's re-ask it. You don't need it. Once you're a mazik, you should be chayiv. It's my hezek. Why do you have to be peshiah for the hezek? It's efsher kemen zogen. It's a doge shmakeven ozen. The Rambam says that shemiraso l'echo would be a patur, but if you watched it well and something happened, you're patur. So the shemiraso l'echo is not the taich that's mechayiv you. The shemiraso l'echo would pater you. And the fact that you didn't have the patur is mainly a chiyuv. Avadi chayiv. And I hope that's the yesod that we're saying. Even if shemiraso l'echo is needed to be mechayiv, but the mechayiv is not the shemiraso l'echo. The mechayiv is the mazik. So then what's the shemiraso l'echo? Because if you had shemirah, you would have been patur. And that's taich of tnai. That's what a whole tnai means. What is tnai? See, when I said it, I know what I'm saying, but I see the people who don't know what I want are starting to get nervous. Daniel's getting nervous. What do you mean, tnai? Maaseh, peshiah. Maaseh, you're a mazik, and if you're a mazik, you don't have to come on to peshiah. I mean, what's— Ad mud laila, you’re always a peshiah. I mean, a mazik is a mazik. I have to be chayav for pshiah, chayav for mazik. I break your thing, I have to return it. Why is pshiah a tenai in mazik? If you look at Even HaEzer, the Rosh says a meiri ketaich. Shmiras haleches is a taich. Shh, it’s a taich. The fakert, if you would have watched, you would have been patur, al tenaius. Tenaius, what could you do? It would take you away from mazik. So it’s not that the shmiras haleches by not doing makes you the mazik. The mazik anyway. That’s not what a taich. It’s patur in the mazik. In a case you watched, it’s onus; it’s onus. I hold this Even HaEzer is mamash unzer veltel, that even on the tzad, even on the tzad that shmiras haleches makes you chayav, but it’s not the mechayev of it. It’s a tenai in the chiyuv. So Daniel says, what does it mean, tenai in the chiyuv? That’s what it means, because I would have been patur. If I watched, I would have been patur. If I didn’t watch, maybe I don’t have my ptur, because if I would have watched, I would have been patur. Ay, you ask me a kasha. So then how does it become one of the tzad chumros in the tzad hashaveh? Shezeh chava mazik, shezeh chava mazik. Excuse me, I’m sorry. Dake le’inyan mazik, that’s mazik, okay. U’shmiraso lecha, finished. It’s not a chumra. Patur. It's a Shmiraso l'echo is not the din to be mechayev you; it's a din to patter you. So that could be in the Mishnah. Really, a kasha. The yesod we're saying is that b'emes you're chayav for mazik. So even if you take on Shmiraso l'echo will be mechayev you, they don't mean that; that's the yesod hachiyuv. That's the tenai hachiyuv. There's yesod hachiyuv and there's tenai hachiyuv. Yesod hachiyuv is mazik. Tnai hachiyuv—tnai, tnai hachiyuv. Tnai hachiyuv is Shmiraso l'echo. So what's the two dinim? What does it mean, yesod and tnai? Lo teheva else is gargeshmak, because tnai hachiyuv means that because if it would have been Shmiraso l'echo, it would have been patur. Meileh, that's called tnai. I have to have not watched it, because otherwise I would have been patur. But avada the yesod hachiyuv is mazik. Ay, lasmi, then what's it doing in the Mishnah in Tzaras Shav? If it's only tnai hachiyuv, legabei patur. If it's legabei chiyuv, tnai hachiyuv, so that's one of the chumros in Tzaras Shav. We find the chumra of this and the chumra of Shmiraso l'echo. But if it's a patur, so how could it be a Tzaras Shav?

It's not a chiyuv. It's not that shmiras halecha is mechuyiv to do it. So how can it be the tzad hashaveh? The teretz you could say is, this tzad hashaveh is not telling me the chumras hadinim. It's telling me taka the dinim. But where does it say tzad hashaveh has to be the chumras of the dinim, the mechayev of the dinim? I can't, the dinim. What's wrong if the pטur of the din is also one of the tzad hashavos? I mean, who stated that the pטur of the din can't be a tzad hashaveh? I'm not shibuk baki in hilchos tzad hashaveh, chas v'shalom. You should put out a sefer, Hilchos Tzad Hashaveh, and you should have all the klalim of tzad hashaveh. I don't know, you know the klalim of tzad hashaveh? You know that it has to be davka the chumras of the tzad hashaveh? What's wrong with the dinim of the tzad hashaveh? We find the pטur. We find an interesting pטur, tzad hashaveh, that shmiras halecha will be patur. What's the nafka mina? I clarified to you in the first shiur is that tzad hashaveh is the mechayev. If you learn that tzad hashaveh is the mechayev, these are cases of what's mechayev you, then hachanami, the shmiras halecha has to be a tenai l'chiyuv. But if these are not the reasons for the chiyuv, but just tzad hashaveh is in the dinim, hachanami, shmiras halecha can be a pטur, and it belongs to the tzad hashaveh. Remember we clarified, is the tzad hashaveh the chiyuv, and that's the reason to be mechayev? Well, the tzad hashaveh is just we find tzad hashaveh, so meileh shehaveh these dinim. So even if it's just these dinim, so even if it's just a pטur, shmiras halecha also belongs to the tzad hashavos. Yeah. If it's the mechayev, the dinim, it's the pטur of shmiras halecha doesn't belong in the tzad hashaveh. It doesn't belong here. How can you put it in the tzad hashaveh? It's a pטur, it's not a chiyuv. But if the tzad hashov is a taitz, because we find tzad hashovs in mamon that has to have all the צדדי השווה, even if it's only a patur, it also belongs to the Mishnah. What's the din of ma'oneh shehezek? Chalish? There's a din mazik kol ma'oneh shehezek. What is it? So pashut the taitch is, it's an extension of you, me, like we find gag, chateir v'kafifa minayin, that the Rishonim, Acharonim explain it's an extension of me. Mameila, it's shayach even by shlichus, v'nasa b'yado. It's considered as if you put it b'yado, because b'yado is gag, chateir v'kafifa also. Mameila we find it's an extension of your yad. So maybe that's the taitch here too, that if my mamon is mazik, it's ki'ilu I was mazik. Oy dilma, because of tifa. There's a special din that mamon shehezek is chayav. It's gzeiras hakasuv, mamon shehezek. It doesn't work that I was mazik through my mamon. There's a special din called mamon shehezek. There's a din I'm mazik and that I'm chayav, and there's a new parsha, a new din, mamon shehezek. And you don't have to tag it back to you, that you're the mazik, even if you're not the mazik. But mamon shehezek is also chayav for that, if that's emes. Huh? Because the Torah says so. That's what it says in the Torah. The first way is mema'en is an extension of me. Mimeila, it's me through my mom. It has nothing to do with me. The Torah is mechayev me on mema'en shehizik. Not shteit in pasuk, mema'en shehizik is chayav. You know, if I wanted to be charming, as they say, I would tell you the first ma'amar of Shimondik and the second ma'amar of Chaimdik. Reb Shimon says it's a sevara because it's like me, and Reb Chaim is saying it's a din. Fine, I charmed you. If it's emes that it's a din, you see, because it's all based on what we're taining that has nothing to do with the pshia. There's a din of mema'en shehizik on pshia. That's what being mechadesh. So once we have a din of mema'en shehizik on pshia, you have to know what the mema'en shehizik is. If the taich is that it is a pshia, and the pshia is also chelek of the mazik, so then I understand how I was a mazik through my mom. You know how I was a mazik through my mom? Because I was poshea. If there's a din mema'en shehizik, and there's a din also of pshia.

And the taich of the peshaya is, you see, let me explain to you what's going on here. There's such a thing called mema'enes shehizik, and the other thing called pshia — that's not me, that's the achraynim. But let me tell you what really it branches out into. We could say mema'enes shehizik is one mahalach, and peshaya is another mahalach, which is what it says in the achraynim. The problem with this is everything that we said till now, right? And I don't want to go through the whole shiur. The results that we came out was that mema'enes shehizik and pshia are tied together. You can't cut away the pshia from the mema'enes shehizik and just say, You know what? You were poshaya. That's it. It has nothing to do with mema'enes shehizik. It has nothing to do with the fact that you're a mazik. We proved that it's not true, that they are tied together. How are they tied together? That's already us elaborating on this yesod that they're tied together. We could say they're tied together, that they're both needed, or that one is the yesod and the other one's the tnai. That's what we spoke. Either we say they're both needed, or the pshat is not that they're two chiyuvim; one is the chiyuv and one is the mechayev, one is the tnai. On the tzad that one is a tnai, on the tzad that one is a tnai, so the pshia is not what makes you the mazik. And that's why I began to explain to you you're a mazik even before that. It begins that you're a mazik. So how am I a mazik with mema'enes shehizik? So then I have to say Reb Chaim's svara, that that's gzeiras hakasuv, or Reb Shimon Dick. Somehow that's you. Because if I learn that the pshia is part of what makes me a mazik, so then I understand how memonei shehezek makes me a mazik. It's the pshia that makes me a mazik. But if I'm taking away the pshia, I'm not saying the pshia makes me the mazik. So it's the maaseh mazik, I'm not a mazik, it's my mamon. Teretz is my mamon is me. Teretz might be teretz sheini. That's the din of the Torah that memonei shehezek makes me a mazik. If that's emes, so I want to say a tirutz to the he'ara over here. It comes out that memonei shehezek is not me through my mamon. There's a special din, my mamon was mazik. So it's not that I was mazik b'pshia through my mamon. So you need keren, maaseh keren to be chayav. If the sevara is that it's my pshia through the maaseh, so it really makes no difference if it's shor, if it's bor, what's the difference? It's a difference. I was poshea, so I'm a mazik, which is the kasha we began the shiur with. I'm a tzad that you're a poshea, so what do you need the different sheimos for? How could you have the different sheimos? And the teretz is even if the pshia is the mechayev, meaning it's a tnai in the chiyuv, here, but the mazik, like Reb Chaim dik, so to speak, is that I did this maaseh memonei shehezek. So you have to do it the way the Torah wrote it to be chayav for that memonei shehezek. In other words, and I hold this a tremendous gevaldige vort, I'm not a mazik through keren. I'm the mazik of keren. I'm the mazik of shor. I'm the mazik of bor, not the mazik through bor. Rav Chaim. If you break it up, that I'm a mazik, and the shemiras hanezek is just the peshiah, like even hazal, so to speak, that it's just a tenai, otherwise I'd be patur. So you have to know why am I mazik. And the teretz is, my mamon is me. Okay, Reb Shimon, very nice. I say Reb Shimon. I don't want to blame Reb Shimon for my mistakes. Reb Shimon never said it, and who says Reb Shimon would say it? But I mean svaradik. Svaradik, that's what I could say. It's not me; it's taka b'ma'aseh. And there's a gezeiras hakasuv, a din of the Torah, b'ma'aseh is chayav. And shemiras hanezek becomes a patur that I would be patur if it was watched. So what's the b'ma'aseh? We're taking me out of the equation. So it's not me through my mamon; it's b'ma'aseh. So therefore you could say that I need to do keren to be chayav for keren. If the taich is that it's me through the keren, so I don't need the keren; it's whatever I did wrong through my mamon. But if the taich is that keren shehizik is chayav, and for—

For some reason, will mechayev the baal hamamon, which the Acharonim already ask: how is baal hamamon mechuyav in maaseh keren? We'll discuss that maybe a different time. Baal kol ponim, the taiches that it's keren that's gone. It's bor, it's shor, it's mav'eh, it's hever. So then the pshat is in the ovis, in the shem ovis, because that's the mechayev. It's not that I'm a mazik through these ovis. I'm the mazik of these ovis. Was I mazik you? No, I was shored you. Was I mazik you? No, I bored you. Was I mazik you? No, I mav'ed you, I hevered you. Shor, bor, mav'eh, hever is chayav. If I do these things, I'm chayav. That's takke pshat in Rashi. Hani d'chsiv b'kra. What does it mean, those that are in the pasuk? What is it, a special name that something that's in the pasuk gets a special title? No, because if it's in the pasuk, the pshat is, so I'm chayav for what it says in the pasuk, because the pasuk says I'm chayav. Not that I'm chayav al ta mazik and grab that these mazikim are said in the Torah, l'afuke others. I'm chayav for what it says in the Torah for. If I do shor, so the Torah's writing shor, chayav is mechayev me. Why am I chayav for shor because I'm a mazik? No, I'm a mazik; my shor did it. Speak to the shor. What does, what do you mean, my shor? I spoke; I didn't do it, the shor. Did I tell the shor what to do? What do you want from me? Vos vilstu fun mir? Peretz is, the Torah states shor is chayiv. So that's the chiyuv, shor shehizik, that's the chiyuv. Hanich d'chsiv b'kra is the taich that they become avos categories of new types of mazik. These are new types of mazik. So meileh keren and shor and bor, they're different. They have to be different, because each one is a chiddush by itself. If the pshat is I'm chayiv because I did a hezek of bor, I was mazik you through bor, so what's the difference how I was mazik? The bottom line is, you know, I'll be mazik somebody. You're chayiv when you're mazik somebody. The Torah is telling me I'm not chayiv; I wasn't mazik you. What the Torah is saying is I'm chayiv for bor. So only if it says in the Torah, chayiv for bor, then I'm chayiv. Can I be chayiv for what the Torah didn't say I'm chayiv for? No, because I didn't do it. Why should I do it? Why should I be chayiv? If you learn that the pshi is the mechayev, because then if shmirasan alecha, however we learn issur mazik from shmirasan alecha, so then I'm chayiv anyway for everything. So the avos is just a name, that's all it is. I mean, l'maaseh I'm chayiv. I'm a mazik. What's there to talk about? But if the taich is I'm not chayiv b'etzem, misvara, because I'm not a mazik, so what's mechayev me? The fact that the Torah was mechayev me. So harei d'chsiv b'kra becomes avos. And that's the hav amina of Rashi that tells us a taka patur. Shteit doch in the pasuk. Only problem I have is the behedyah in the pasuk. I don't know what you do with the behedyah. I guess behedyah doesn't mean that the toldos are learned from the others. Behedyah means, vos the Torah is mechayev me. I have to just change the word behedyah a little. Pashut, the behedyah means behedyah lafukei limud, that it's nilmad. The way Rashi could mean it's meant to say was, behedyah voshteit in the Torah, that's all. More than—meaning all the mazik that I am, voshteit nisht in the Torah, I'm patur. That means I should be patur for it. What? Why should I be chayav for it? Tell me something. If a person walks around a whole Shabbos toiling, moving his keilim mimakom l'makom, is he chayav on Shabbos? Yes, he worked on Shabbos. What's the answer? That's not what the Torah asser. That's not what the word lo sa'aseh kol melachah means. So the same thing by mazik of bor. I mean, I'm not a mazik. I didn't do anything. If you're going to come and say I did, okay, you're right. So what's the difference what I did? I was mazik. But if the chiddush is that you're chayav for bor, not chayav for mazik by doing bor. I'm chayav for bor. So why would I be chayav something that looks like bor and sounds like bor? What do you want? If the Torah tells me bor, I should come and say what?

Something that sounds like bar and has... The Torah is mechayev me for bor, yeah? So you know what you're going to come and say? By me, by me being gorem you a hezek, that's also bor. It's also bor. You know why? What's bor? Bor is grama. Do it b'yadayim. But you know what the answer is? Yeah, but that's not bor. The bottom line is it's not bor. And you want to know something? If you look at the Gemara, the Gemara discusses this, maybe dafka al yedei bor. There's nekudos in the Gemara like this. In other words, if you're going to handle that you're a mazik, there's no makom to be mechalek between the different hezekim and a tzad hashava. I need a tzad hashava. Tzad hashava is you're a mazik, finished. You know what the Gemara should say? Ma kol shedarko lehazik, a tzad hashava, because he's a chaval mazik. What are all the dinim? I need dinim. Every time I mazik you, I'm chayav. End the story. Have a nice day. That should be the whole Mishnah. The Mishnah should be: Kol hamazik es chaveiro chayav, shene'emar, like it says, yeshalem yeshalem, and finished. What is a tzad hashava? What are you learning one from the other? What do you have to learn out? You have to learn a bor from what? And the answer is, because it's shtei bor, then it's bor and not anything else. That's what it says. And I need a tzad hashava to learn out one from the other. That's what it says in the Gemara. Zogt Rashi, so the tola... I don't know if I'm chayav for. Rashi understood that from the tzad hashava in the Mishnah we see that you need to learn things out, otherwise I wouldn't know one from the other. No? I have to learn between four mazik? No, every time I'm mazik you, I'm mazik you. You don't understand what common sense doesn't tell me? You want to know something? According to Reb Leib's, Vortner Reb Shimon, that the issur mazik is a sevara. So shilu mazik is also a sevara. Is a mazik, so shilu is also. What do you need a tzad hashaveh for? The answer is because it's not a sevara. That's because it's b'ma'aseh shehizik, mechtais. I understand, I have to watch to make sure that things don't go wrong, but who's saying I'm chayiv for? And I need a tzad hashaveh. And if I need a tzad hashaveh, then v'shtein, pasuk shtein, v'shteit nisht, v'shteit nisht, v'shteit nisht. So, krashe, toldo be patur. Hai bazoi, ken a farshtein Brisker Rav also. The Brisker Rav zogt in the Riv, now what's the taich of kioytzim lav kioytzim? Does it have the shem mazik? Does the toldah have the shem mazik? So why does it need the shem mazik to be chayiv? What's the difference? And you know what the teretz is? It sure does need the shem mazik, because you're not a mazik without it. If you're not doing bor, you're not chayiv. That's the whole yesod. Avadeh it was mazik you through bor, and avadeh if I was mazik you through the toldah of bor, I was mazik you through the toldah of bor. But I'm not chayiv for mazik, I'm chayiv for bor. I'm chayiv for bor, dos zogt the Brisker Rav, I'm chayiv for bor, and if the toldah doesn't have a shem bor, so there's nothing what to talk about. Memonei shehizik is only chayiv because it's bor, not because it's memonei shehizik. The geder of memonei shehizik is not— that's what I'm telling you. It's not me through bor was mazik you. I bored you. I was mazik you bor. No? Clarify as much as you want, this is gold. Yes, what do you want to clarify? I'm not trying to. I am not trying. I'm doing it very successfully. Try to is when you're not doing it successfully. I have explained to you. I clarified to you. The what? Answering the griz. I'm explaining the griz. I'm explaining— no, I'm answering all the questions I asked you. First of all, I asked you on Rashi. This is good, take this stuff. According to Rashi, what's the taich kari of this? You call them of this. Hanach d'chsiv b'kra. What do you mean? What does it mean, what's in the pasuk? I don't understand what that means. It's in the pasuk, so it's an av. And you know what the answer is? Because that's the mechayev. It's only— the mechayev is that it says it in the pasuk. It's because the Torah wrote me, 'bor'— your friend, you're chayav for bor. What's— what? Because it's not in the pasuk. So it's nothing. No, it's nilmad. It's nilmad, or it's— on the tzad that it doesn't have a shem, so it's nothing. Huh? Something doesn't have a shem mazik. I'm telling you. What do you mean? You're talking about in the Rif now? I'm not holding the Rif. In Rashi it's— ... that's why Rashi says you might be patur l'gamrei. That's the safek. It's nothing. Some explain to you. Why is it— no.

What'd she say? The Brisker Rav wife called a toldah, that's your kasha, and it doesn't... You're right, I don't have an answer to that. That doesn't even bother me. I was more bothered, what's tamish b'patur, if you're mazik? That to me is a bigger kasha. Why? What are you patur about? You broke the guy's window. What are you patur about exactly? And you know what the answer is? Yeah, so what? Where does it say I'm chayiv? You know where it says? It says in bor. So then whatever's b'hedya by a pasuk, then whatever's not b'hedya, it's not that way. If the Torah wrote bor is chayiv, fine. This is mamish the same situation as bor, so what? So what? So what? If you learn that this is pshat a mazik, so then the pshat is a toldah, an option, חייב. Just because one says it clearly in the pasuk, so what? What's the difference? Yeah, you mean the Brisker Rav's kasha. L'maaseh, what's the toldah if you're patur? That's your kasha. Okay. Okay, I mean, my main nekudah is why should you be patur on a toldah? And the answer is, of course I'm patur on a toldah. Mehacha mechayev on a toldah. I asked you the other way around: how could you be chayav on a toldah? What's the riff, and what's the Brisker Rav's hesber in the riff? Ki oytzem, if you have the same dinim, toldah l'shem av. Why is it toldah l'shem av? What's the difference? And the teretz is, I'm only chayiv if it's a bor. If it can't be called bor, just because I'm a mazik like bor doesn't mean I'm chayiv. What? I can't hear. It says anyway you're chayiv. Could be I'm chayiv altz mazik, maybe. The Riv is mechalek on this nekudah. You're right, I'm not saying Rashi's the Riv. You'll be chayav al tamazik, but in order to be chayav for bor, it has to be bor. Bor is its own mazik. But the Brisker Rav is saying like this: in order to have the dinim of bor, right, that's the Brisker Rav. So I'm explaining what's the shem mazik, because the tak is a new shem mazik. Bor is not mazik. You know what bor is? Bor is bor. That's what the Brisker Rav is saying. I'm reading the Gemara. So there's three gedarim, actually. There's mazik through bor. There's mazik of bor, right? There's mazik through bor is what pashut pshat. Someone asks you, what's bor, mah d'hev? It's mazik through these situations. In Rashi and Fataichi, that there's the mazik of bor. What's the Riv? What's the Brisker Rav? Not that I'm a mazik of, of bor, that bor is a different type of mazik than regular mazik. There's a mazik, but then there's a bor, which means is I didn't do mazik, I did bor. And bor has its own dinim of mazik. It has its own rules. It's a different type of hezek. Me'alde toldos, that al nilma me'av. If it has that shem av, it'd have different dinim. Nachum, one last time, this last nekudah. Pashut pshat is there's arba avos nezikin, that I'm mazik through these arba avos. Leit Rashi, the taich is, I'm mazik the arba avos. Loi briska rav and the Rif, the taich is, I'm not a mazik. I did bor, shor, hever. It's different than a regular mazik. It's something else. There's mazik and then there's bor. Bor has its own parsha. It's its own sugya. Lu yitzuri, I did a toldah. If it has the shem bor, then it's something else. If not, it's a regular mazik. So I'd be chayav, a mazik, avada, but it's not bor. You understand? Nachon. Where'd you get lost? The last point. The last point is like this. This is after the shiur. I want you to translate the Rashi, the Mishnah. Arba avos nezikin, kipshutai, are four ways that a person could be a mazik. There are four main categories through which a person could be a mazik. That's the simple way of translating, right? There's four main categories, avos, through which a person could be mazik somebody else. In Rashi, I don't want you to say that. In Rashi, I want you to say as follows: There are four...

The main categories of mazik. Not four ways through which I could be mazik you, but there's four avos of mazik. There's the mazik of bor, there's the mazik of shor. Anything which isn't what it says by bor, it could be patur. What's the riff? The riff is the third way how to translate the Mishnah. Different than another mazik, there's separate four mazikim. See the difference? Different than the regular parshah of mazik, there's four substantial, unique cases of mazik, which can't be defined as your regular mazik, and that is shor, bor, maveh, hever, and they have different halachos. They're different sugyas and different halachos. So you wonder what happens to the toldah? Very simple. If it fits into those four uniques, then it has those dinim, and if not, it becomes a regular mazik. You're chayav, it's a regular mazik. Regular mazik. Shehizik chaval mazik. Finished. It's finished. That's, rabosai, arba avos nezikin.