Transcript

I know we said we were going to come to the Chaim today, but I just think that there's something that needs to be added to what we were learning yesterday. So, we basically discussed yesterday that at first glance in Halacha Beis, when again the Rambam introduced the perek as being about Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem, and then in Halacha Beis, the Rambam mentions the חיוב יהרג ואל יעבור by the gimmel aveiros, so the first impression one gets is that the mechayev, like the Ba'al HaMaor, although the Rambam doesn't then introduce the distinction between hana'as atzman and le'ha'avir al hadas by the gimmel aveiros, is Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. So, we said, how do you square that with the yalfusos in the Gemara that the Rambam himself later quotes in Halacha Zayin? And basically, what we suggested was as follows: that the mechayev of yehareg v'al ya'avor mechazeir to the hekeish. Is taka Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem? The mechayev again is svara mechazeir, is a hekeish. Ela mai, once there's a חיוב יהרג ואל יעבור, then mimaila it's included in Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem, given the definition that we tried to arrive at for Kiddush Hashem. So, ad kan what we discussed yesterday. Now to try to continue that, first of all, I think you see something remarkable. In Halacha Beis, so the Rambam says במה דברים אמורים בשאר מצוות חוץ מעבודה זרה, again, so the perek begins

כל בית ישראל מצווין על קידוש השם הגדול הזה ומוזהרין שלא לחללו.

Good. Halacha Beis. By Avodah Zarah, Giluy Arayos, and Shefichas Damim,

ובשלש עבירות אלו אם יאמר לו עבור על אחת מהן או תהרג,

yehareg v'al ya'avor. Good. Halacha Daled, second line:

כל מי שנאמר בו יהרג ואל יעבור ונהרג ולא עבר הרי זה קידוש השם.

So this is repetitious? No, wasn't that clear in Halacha Beis? In Halacha Beis again, the perek is the perek of Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. In Halacha Beis, the Rambam said that by the gimmel aveiros is yehareg v'al ya'avor. So what's Halacha Daled adding? Ela mai, according to what we discussed yesterday, is mamash kaftor va-ferach. In Halacha Beis, the Rambam never said that it's Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. Halacha Beis again, how did Halacha Aleph end? Halacha Aleph ended with a din of וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם. Halacha Beis now tells us there's an exception, that וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם applies to most mitzvos ha-Torah but not all mitzvos ha-Torah. What's an exception? An exception is the gimmel aveiros. It doesn't—Halacha Beis didn't say that this is Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. Now comes the Rambam in Halacha Daled and says, and, and not only if a person is neherag v'lo avar, so not only is he being nizaher in the issur of lo tirzach, not only is he being nizaher in the issur of giluy arayos, which don't have the din of v'chai bahem, but he's also, he's also being mekayem the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem. Mamash what we said is Halacha Beis and Halacha Daled in the Rambam. Fine, let's go a little further. In Halacha Yud and Yud Aleph again what we saw yesterday when we were looking at the three examples or the three forms of Kiddush and Chillul Hashem that the Rambam has. So we saw that Halacha Yud again is where a person, again the Chillul Hashem is without some kind of physical taiva, physical yetzer hara, that's the Chillul Hashem and the Kiddush Hashem is לא מפני דבר בעולם. And Halacha Yud Aleph is the behavior whether it invites praise or whether it invites censure of an adam gadol ba-Torah, of an adam gadol ba-Torah. Fine. So why is it that in both Halacha Yud and Yud Aleph the Rambam begins with Chillul Hashem and then tells you the Kiddush Hashem? At the beginning of the perek so he mentions first Kiddush Hashem in Halacha Aleph and then Chillul Hashem. And similarly in Halacha Daled, right? He begins by telling you what a person does to satisfy... So I have a question for you about the Rambam in פרק ה הלכות יסודי התורה regarding the connection between Chilul Hashem and Kiddush Hashem. At the beginning of the perek he mentions first Kiddush Hashem in Halacha Alef and then Chilul Hashem. And similarly in Halacha Daled, he begins by telling you what a person does to satisfy Kiddush Hashem and then rachmana litzlan what a person could be guilty of that should be Chilul Hashem. So why didn't he follow that same pattern in Halachos Yud and Yud Alef? He should have first said in Halacha Yud, he should have said Kol haporesh mei'aveira that should have been the first half and the Kol ha'over bemezid should have been the second half. And similarly in Halacha Yud Alef. Why does he put the Chilul Hashem before the Kiddush Hashem? So my son-in-law suggested, I think it's amito shel Torah, that the pshat is as follows. The pshat is as follows. Again, take the Rambam's example, a person is taking a shvua. Taking a shvua. When a person is omed to be nishba, so right now he's chayav to be nizaher in the mitzvas lo sa'asei of לא תחללו את שם קדשי. Right now he's in a position where non-compliance with the לא תשבעו בשמי לשקר would be a Chilul Hashem. So he's muzhar in lo sechalelu. The same way if a person is hungry and there's a shtikel neveila on his plate, so right now he's muzhar on lo sochal neveila. He's muzhar on lo sochal neveila. In the flip side, the case which is exemplified by Yosef Hatzadik. He's not metzuveh in Kiddush Hashem. He's not—let's say Yosef Hatzadik would have been מונע עצמו מאשת רבו מפני פחד, mipnei yira, livakashas kavod. He wouldn't have been guilty of a bittul of Kiddush Hashem. He's not mechuyav or ought to whenever a person is עובר על מנת לקבל פרס he's guilty of being mevattel the mitzvas asei of Kiddush Hashem? Avada not. Avada not. So in terms of the Chilul Hashem he's mechuyav in the azhara. The Kiddush Hashem he has an opportunity to be mekayem but he's not—it's not incumbent on him. If he isn't mekayem he isn't going to be mevattel. If Yosef Hatzadik will be מונע עצמו לשום דבר בעולם, yiras honesh, he doesn't want to get Gehennom, leshum yiras honesh, he won't be guilty of having been mevattel Kiddush Hashem. If the person will be nishba lashaker, he will be guilty of Chilul Hashem. So mimeila, that's why the Rambam begins—you have to begin with the case where the mitzvah is a chiyuv mitzvah, not just where there's an opportunity to be mekayem the mitzvah. And the same thing is true in Halacha Yud Alef. If let's say you'll have a chacham, chacham, adam gadol batorah. And so he is muzhar, he's muzhar to abstain from דברים שהבריות מרננות אחריה בשבילן. He's muzhar on that. By virtue of who he is, by virtue of what he represents, so he's muzhar on that. The same adam gadol batorah mefursam vachasidus let's say he lives more in the neutral zone. He doesn't do things shehabrios mernanos achareha but on the other hand he doesn't elicit the reaction of הכל מקלסין אותו וכולי. He wasn't mevattel the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem. He wasn't mevattel the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem. You hear that rabosai? It's clear? So ad kan devarav. This is what my son-in-law suggested. Bechol zos, it's pshat in the Rambam. Hashta de'asina lehachi, Hashta de'asina lehachi, so now you have a teretz on the question that we've had open for a couple of months already. We've had the question open that the Rambam, again, so here in Perek Hei Yesodei HaTorah, the perek of Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem, the Rambam tells us the three forms of Kiddush Hashem, Chilul Hashem: yehareg ve'al ya'avor number one, number two again עובר בלא תאוה בלא תאבון or מקיים לא מפני דבר שבעולם, number three the behavior of a gadol batorah of a chacham. Fine. And over here he's telling you both vis-a-vis Kiddush Hashem as well as vis-a-vis Chilul Hashem. So we asked the question, so why is it in Sefer Hamitzvos, the Rambam's first chance to tell us that is in mitzvas asei, mitzvas asei tes when he's talking about Kiddush Hashem he doesn't say a word about it. He only tells does it to us in the מצוות לא תעשה סמך גימל when it's talking about the Mitzvos Lo Sa'aseh. And the kashya is more chamur than that, right? Not only does the Rambam omit it in the מצוות עשה מצווה ט, but the definition that the Rambam gives of Kiddush Hashem in Mitzvas Aseh Tes doesn't even... he doesn't even allow for this, right? 'Cause the definition the Rambam gives in Mitzvas Aseh Tes:

עניין זאת המצווה המצווה התשיעית היא שנצטווינו לקדש השם והוא אמרו ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל ועניין זאת המצווה שאנחנו מצווים לפרסם האמונה הזאת האמיתית בעולם ושלא נפחד בהזק שום מזיק ואף על פי שבא עלינו מכריח גובה יבקש ממנו לכפור בו יתעלה לא נשמע ממנו ולא נמסור עצמנו למיתה ולא נסהו לחשוב שכפרנו ואף על פי שלבנו מאמין בו יתעלה וזוהי מצוות קידוש השם המצווים בה בני ישראל בכללם רוצה לומר מסירות נפש למות ביד האונס על אהבת ה' יתברך ואמונת ייחודו

and is ma'arich, but he doesn't, A, again, A, it's omission, he doesn't say anything about menias Yosef atzmo, that that that category of Kiddush Hashem. He doesn't say anything of the חכם גדול שנמצאו הכל מקלסו. But it's more than that, it's such a narrow definition. אלא מאי הן הן הדברים. There's a difference between these three legabei Chillul Hashem legabei Kiddush Hashem. Legabei Chillul Hashem, these are three situations in which three ways in which a person is muzar in Chillul Hashem. A person is muzar in Chillul Hashem when he's confronted with yehareg ve'al ya'avor. He's muzar in Chillul Hashem when he's in a situation where he has to comply with a mitzvah and lack of compliance won't be lete'avon, for instance he's taking a shevuah, and he's muzar in Chillul Hashem if he's a chacham gadol not to do things shehabrios meraninos acharov. So legabei Chillul Hashem, it's part of the if you want to define what the chiyuv is, what the azharah is, you have to mention all three. Legabei Kiddush Hashem, no, that's what we just said. Legabei Kiddush Hashem, so the only case which is a chiyuv of Kiddush Hashem is the case of yehareg ve'al ya'avor. When a person's in a case, in a situation of yehareg ve'al ya'avor, if he's over velo neherag, he's mevatel Kiddush Hashem. It's not just that he lost an opportunity, he didn't create an opportunity, he didn't take advantage of an opportunity to be mekayeim, he's mevatel Kiddush Hashem. Mah she'ein kein the other two cases, again, menias Yosef atzmo and the chacham gadol, if they're not mekadeish Hashem in that situation, they weren't mevatel anything. If Yosef will be מנע עצמו מפני יראת האונס and the chacham gadol won't engender that hakol mekalsin, he won't have been mevatel. It's not part of the chiyuv hamitzvos. So the Rambam is giving you the definition of the chiyuv hamitzvos. Oh, so you with me rabosai? So nimtzeinu lomedim like this, nimtzeinu lomedim that what we were talking about yesterday in terms of what the mechayev of yehareg ve'al ya'avor is. So the emes is based on what we were discussing yesterday, so we all should have had the following question. So we said that the mechayev of yehareg ve'al ya'avor, let's say by retzichah, by gilluy arayos, we sort of left open avodah zarah, but let's say the first two, by retzichah and by gilluy arayos, that the mechayev is not Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. No, the mechayev is that mai chazis tells you that vechai bahem doesn't apply here. There's no vechai bahem. And the heikesh of

כאשר יקום איש על רעהו ורצחו נפש כן הדבר הזה

tells you that that's also true for gilluy arayos. It's just that once there's a chiyuv yehareg ve'al ya'avor, it belongs to Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. But the question is if Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem are their own mitzvah in the minyan hamitzvos, shouldn't it be that there's a case that or cases that they govern specifically, right? Le-chora, it can't be that it's just there to say that once you're already chayav in yehareg ve'al ya'avor because there's no vechai bahem, that it's also Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem and that therefore in Hilchos Teshuvah it's going to be more chamur to get kaparah because not only will one have been over on issur gilluy arayos, one will also have been over on... So the question is what cases is the mechayev the Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem directly? And here the pshatus is two answers. One: the cases of befarhesia. We'll leave aside now sha'as hashmad, we have to talk about that separately bli neder, befarhesia. And the other case is that the pshatus in the Rambam is that within the gimel averos there's a distinction. That within the gimel averos the mechayev of yehareg v'al ya'avor by giluy arayos and shfichus damim is not Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. Is not. Mai chazis has got nothing to do with Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem and the hekesh of na'ara hime'orasah to rotzeach, that's got nothing to do with Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. The mechayev is not Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. Again, ela mai, once there is a din that you're chayav in yehareg v'al ya'avor so now it becomes, now it becomes a situation of Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem, but that's only because you had an independent mechayev. Ma she'ein kein, that's what the Rambam is telling you in Sefer Hamitzvos here and that's why in Sefer Hamitzvos the only thing he mentions is the Yichud Hashem because there the mechayev is takeh Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. By the yehareg v'al ya'avor of avodah zarah has a different mechayev. Samuch l'kach, if you take a look in the sugya in Sanhedrin on עין דלת עמוד אלף. So on עין דלת עמוד אלף there is a view of Rabbi Yishmael where the Rambam doesn't paskin like Rabbi Yishmael, but there is a view of Rabbi Yishmael. והתניא אמר רבי ישמעאל if you have a Sanhedrin take a look here, it's עין דלת עמוד אלף more or less around the midpoint, a little bit past the midpoint.

והתניא אמר רבי ישמעאל מנין שאמרו לו לאדם עבוד עבודה זרה ואל תיהרג מנין שיעבור ואל ייהרג תלמוד לומר וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם יכול אפילו בפרהסיא תלמוד לומר ולא תחללו את שם קדשי ונקדשתי.

So Rabbi Yishmael holds, Tosafos has an extraordinary lashon, Tosafos in Avodah Zarah has an extraordinary lashon, they write chas v'shalom that we would paskin like Rabbi Yishmael. But l'mayseh Rabbi Yishmael, Rabbi Yishmael holds that avodah zarah is only yehareg v'al ya'avor befarhesia and that avodah zarah betzina is not yehareg v'al ya'avor. Lo shamanu that Rabbi Yishmael holds that by giluy arayos and avada lo shamanu that they would hold that by retzicha, mai chazis obviously has got nothing to do with whether it's farhesia or tzina. So how is it that you have Rabbi Yishmael holding that of the gimel averos avodah zarah is davka yehareg v'al ya'avor davka befarhesia and not and not betzina? So the teretz is no because it's different mechayvim. It's different mechayvim. The mechayev of yehareg v'al ya'avor by by shfichus damim is mai chazis, there's no din of v'chai bahem. The mechayev of of yehareg v'al ya'avor of giluy arayos is no din of v'chai bahem. Mimeila it's Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem, but the mechayev is not Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. So avada if the mechayev is not Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem there's no difference between tzina and farhesia. Shfichus damim is an averah betzina also. Giluy arayos is an averah betzina also. But when you come to avodah zarah, so avodah zarah the mechayev is Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. So here thing here holds Rabbi Yishmael the Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem is davka befarhesia not not betzina. And we need to elaborate this bli neder im yirtzeh Hashem. And even Rabbi Eliezer who disagrees, whose view is the one that is accepted l'halacha, that the chiyuv yehareg v'al ya'avor is even betzina, but he agrees with that distinction. He agrees that the mechayev, that the mechayev is Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. And you look at the Rambam here in Sefer Hamitzvos, it's just so compelling that that's his, that's his mahalach in the inyanim. That's why in the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem there's no mention of giluy arayos, there's no mention... mention of Shfichas Damim. Aye, but the Rambam in the Yad tells us that כל מקום כל מי שנאמר בו yehoreg ve'al ya'avor so that it's kiddush Hashem chillul Hashem. The answer is, but that's not the mechayev. So it's not going to doesn't belong in Sefer Hamitzvos. The mechayev isn't the kiddush Hashem chillul Hashem. Here he's telling you what what the core chiyuv what what what kiddush Hashem is is mechayev. There are at least two other important questions here. Again, so how do we darshen, how do we derive the chiyuv yehoreg ve'al ya'avor by avoda zara? So again, you have the Gemara in Sanhedrin דף ע"ד עמוד א take a look right after Rabi Yishmael, so the Gemara quotes אינהו דאמר כרבי אלעזר. What does Rabi Elazar hold? Desanya, Rabi Elazar omer,

ואהבת את ה' אלהיך בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך ובכל מאדך. אם נאמר בכל נפשך למה נאמר בכל מאדך? ואם נאמר בכל מאדך למה נאמר בכל נפשך? אם יש לך אדם שגופו חביב עליו מממונו לכך נאמר בכל נפשך. אם יש לך אדם שממונו חביב עליו מגופו לכך נאמר בכל מאדך.

So the makor here comes from ve'ahavta. So if that's the case, so here's the first question. So why do we associate the chiyuv of yehoreg ve'al ya'avor by avoda zara? Again, ואהבת את ה' אלהיך אפילו הוא נוטל את נפשך means that to what degree does a person have to hold fast to the belief of ה' אלהינו ה' אחד? The previous pasuk, right? To what degree does a person have to hold fast and and uphold the belief of ה' אלהינו ה' אחד ad kedei kach בכל נפשך אפילו נוטל את נפשך. So why isn't the simple pshat that the chiyuv of yehoreg ve'al ya'avor avoda zara is mi'dinei ahavas Hashem? Why do we transport it and say oh, this is the makor, this is defining kiddush Hashem, chillul Hashem? No, this is telling you that if a person is the anas says עבוד עבודה זרה או תהרג, so mitzvas ahavas Hashem demands that that he be neherag. So if ואהבת את ה' אלהיך wasn't its own mitzva, okay, so then we gotta have to shlep it into some other mitzva. But ואהבת את ה' אלהיך is its own mitzva. So why is it that the din of אפילו הוא נוטל את נפשך which is in this pasuk, so how is it that that it belongs to the mitzva of kiddush Hashem? One question. Second question. The Rambam here in Sefer Hamitzvos well before we get to the Rambam, so how does the pasuk in Parshas Emor, how does the pasuk go? ולא תחללו את שם קדשי ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל ani Hashem mekadeshechem maybe. So the pasuk says ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל. Rashi al hasar quotes the Toras Kohanim, the Rambam Sefer Hamitzvos does as well.

על מנת כך הוצאתי אתכם מארץ מצרים על מנת שתקדשו שמי ברבים.

The pasuk of kiddush Hashem. So the pasuk of kiddush Hashem is beravim. And the Toras Kohanim says it. Rashi quotes Toras Kohanim. The Rambam himself quotes it here. Velashon Sifra

על מנת כך הוצאתי אתכם מארץ מצרים על מנת שתקדשו שמי ברבים.

So in addition to the first question we asked of given that the אפילו הוא נוטל את נפשך is written in the pasuk of a different mitzvah, bechalal, how can you associate it with the mitzvah of kiddush Hashem when the mitzvah of kiddush Hashem is defined as being beravim? And we hold that the drasha of אפילו הוא נוטל נפשך is even beyachid. So those were the two questions. Why don't we take it as why don't we lichora take it at face value as being part of mitzvah's ahavas Hashem? Again, lav davka that that would have any nafka minnas. Lav davka that that would have any nafka minnas. But and number two, how can it be understood to be part of mitzvah's kiddush Hashem when clearly the pasuk is meforesh that kiddush Hashem is beravim? And that's what the Sifra says and the Rambam. So if ich veis if the Rambam wouldn't be quoting the Sifra, you'd say I don't know maybe the Sifra somehow or other is reflecting Rabbi Yishmael. I'm not sure how glatt a teretz that would have been, but so maybe you could have said that. But the Rambam's quoting this as a raya that it's a mitzvah. He's quoting this as a raya that kiddush Hashem should be counted as an independent mitzvah when he clearly paskens that you have it even beyachid. So kimdomeh that the Rambam learns peshat here something hafle vafele, hafle vafele. Well, what's the din of asara? What's the din of asara? People like to ask and if you'll have so you can have ten million bnei Noach, nothing, nothing. I'm kidding. So like this we say because the audience we're interested in is Yisraelim. So true, but the emes is lichora the Rambam learns peshat as follows, the Rambam learns peshat as follows. The din of asara, it's not peshat that the din of asara is that שאר מצוות להעביר על הדת becomes a test of kiddush or chillul Hashem when there's an audience of asara. The peshat is that כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא. It's not the peshat, you hear rabbosai, it's not the peshat, it's not the peshat because you need an audience. That's not the peshat. The peshat really in in asara is כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא. Dehainu when is it that שאר מצוות להעביר על הדת becomes an issue of kiddush Hashem, chillul Hashem hangs in the balance? When there's some special association, connection of Hakadosh Baruch Hu in this context? Ah, says the Rambam as follows. You can't take the din of... Even if he takes your soul, even if he takes your soul, doesn't, can't be just a din in Mitzvas Ahavas Hashem. Why? Because what's the Rambam's definition? Again, obviously, we don't need to do it now, but this has its own background. But what's the Rambam's definition of Ahavas Hashem? So we all know, right? The very, very famous, the Frankel doesn't have the loshon that the regular Dfus says. על פי הדעה תהיה האהבה. The Rambam here, it's

על פי הדעה על פי האהבה אם מעט מעט ואם הרבה הרבה.

So Ahavas Hashem, the Rambam says, is poel yotzei, is a function of and impossible without deyah, without yediyah. So what does that mean? That a person who is told to be over avodah zarah or be killed, so how can you say that it's only Ahavas Hashem? Let's say he's a pashte Yid, pashte Yid, he knows bekoshi he knows aleph beis. Bekoshi he knows aleph beis, but he knows avodah zarah is an absolute. He knows that. Avodah zarah is an absolute and he's neherag. So what was he mekayem? It doesn't, it doesn't fit Ahavas Hashem, it doesn't fit the Rambam's definition of Ahavas Hashem. If he's a chacham gadol, if he's a chacham gadol, so then his dying al kiddush Hashem is certainly an expression of

אהבת הקדוש ברוך הוא נקשרת בלבו של אדם כשהוא שוגה בה תמיד כראוי ויעזוב כל מה שבעולם חוץ ממנו כמו שציווה ואמר בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך.

Avadei it can be an expression and a kiyum of Ahavas Hashem as well, but there's no way that the Torah wants us to understand that it's only that because it doesn't fit. It doesn't fit. You can have a person who's neherag, who's neherag not to over avodah zarah and it isn't an expression of Ahavas Hashem given the Rambam's understanding of Ahavas Hashem. Or, now, hashata de'asinan lehachi, listen to this rabosai. Hashata de'asinan lehachi that the pshat in asarah is not an audience. That's not what the גזירת הכתוב בתוך בני ישראל is. The גזירת הכתוב בתוך בני ישראל is that כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא, that it's that Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem hang in the balance when there's a special association, connection of Hakadosh Baruch Hu here, so if yichud Hashem is being challenged, so that's going to be the equivalent of what the bei asarah accomplishes by shear mitzvos. And mimaila, that's how, that's how we say that the din of אפילו הוא נוטל את נפשך belongs to the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem because the fact that the content of the ones is to be over avodah zarah, to encroach upon yichud Hashem, so that's the equivalent, that's the equivalent of what the din of beferhesya accomplishes by shear mitzvos. Lichshe'timtzei lomar that the din of beferhesya by shear mitzvos is an audience, so then it's takeh a peleh because the pasuk says and the Sifra underscores this, that the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem is davka b'rabbim. So how can you say that the yehareg v'al ya'avor of avodah zarah is Kiddush Hashem and the mechayiv is Kiddush Hashem betzina? However, lichshe'timtzei lomar that the din of asarah is not a din of an audience, right? It's not a din of an audience, but it's a din of כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא. So what does that mean? It means when is something an issue of Kiddush Hashem or Chillul Hashem? Again, that Kiddush Hashem or Chillul Hashem can be the mechayiv, right? That's what we're talking about. That Kiddush Hashem or Chillul Hashem can be the mechayiv. It has to mean that it's not just a mitzvah, but it's a mitzvah with some special, as it were, presence, connection, association with Hakadosh Baruch Hu, with Shem Hashem. That Shem Hashem, the kiddush or chillul of Shem Hashem hangs in the balance more than it does, above and beyond just the routine in a mitzvah. So it can be any mitzvah if כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא or it can be if the mitzvah is yichud Hashem. Okay, maybe just to add one other halacha that pertains to what we were discussing yesterday. So we were trying to understand what the core definition of Kiddush Hashem is that allows for all three examples. And again, what we said today isn't, I don't think that conflicts at all. So we said that the Kiddush Hashem is that a person is totally totally mivatel himself to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. So obviously the most dramatic and fullest expression of that is when a person is mamash moser nafsho. A person sacrifices his life as אין לך התבטלות גמורה מזו to Hakadosh Baruch Hu, that when a person sacrifices his life. When you have the example of that a person is

פורש מעבירה עושה מצוה לא מפני דבר בעולם אלא מפני הבורא ברוך הוא

so vaite, it means that this total hisbatlus. It means that there's no other cheshbon, there's no self, there's no other cheshbon, right? It's just מפני הבורא ברוך הוא, this total total hisbatlus. And we said that the pshat in halacha yud aleph is not that the Kiddush Hashem is the hakol mekalseno, but the hakol mekalseno is a shiur in his representing ratzon Hashem. So here the following parallel comes to mind and it can't be a coincidence, mamash can't be a coincidence. So what does the Rambam say over here? Says והוא שלא ישחק הרבה ולא ישתומם the second line from the end if you have the Rambam halacha yud aleph, take a look the second line from the end עד שימצאו הכל מקלסו ואוהבו ומתאוים למעשיו. Again, עד שימצאו הכל מקלסו ואוהבו ומתאוים למעשיו. All right, so what does that remind you of? So go back to

יסודי התורה בב. היאך היא הדרך לאהבתו ויראתו? בשעה שיתבונן אדם במעשיו וברואיו הנפלאים הגדולים ויראה מהם חכמתו שאין לה ערך ולא קץ, מיד הוא אוהב ומשבח ומפאר,

parallel to m'kales, ומתאוה תאוה גדולה לידע השם הגדול. It mamash, it can't, it isn't, it is. coincidence that the Rambam describes the chacham who's mkayem Kiddush Hashem that that he engenders the same reaction, he elicits the same reaction as as his hisbonenus במעשיו וברואיו הנפלאים הגדולים, and that's the ultimate hisbatlus, the ultimate hisbatlus that the person is so misbatel to rtzon Hashem that he becomes an embodiment, so much so that he now elicits, he engenders the same reaction. Now obviously there's devarim amukim meod here why the Rambam changed meshabeach umefaer to mekales, devarim amukim meod, I don't know but the the there's an omek, there's an omek gadol here, but it's clear, it's clear that that there's a parallel, it's clear that there's a parallel, and that's the pshat, that's what the Kiddush Hashem is, the Kiddush Hashem is again, the definition of Kiddush Hashem is that hisbatlus gemura. When a person is so misbatel himself to Hakadosh Baruch Hu and Hakadosh Baruch Hu's Torah and Hakadosh Baruch Hu's ratzon that he now engenders the same reaction as as when you look at him, when you see him, he engenders the same reaction as the hisbonenus bema'asav ubu'av haniflaim. And when the Rambam quotes the pasuk from from where's it in Yeshayahu? No, when the Rambam quotes the pasuk of עבדי אתה ישראל אשר בך אתפאר, he's not just interested in the second half of the pasuk espaer, he's interested in the first half Avdi ata. Eved, what Eved represents is לית ליה מגרמיה כלום. Eved has nothing. מה שקנה עבד קנה רבו. He has no, he has nothing of his own. Avdi ata, you're a reflection of לית ליה מגרמיה כלום, you're not there's no ego, there's no in the negative sense of the word, there's no self in the negative sense of the word. It's just a reflection of

תורת הקדוש ברוך הוא, חכמת הקדוש ברוך הוא, רצון הקדוש ברוך הוא,

that's also a bchina of hisbatlus gemura and also constitutes a kiyum of Kiddush Hashem. Okay so so we're going to do the Pnei Yehoshua so maybe bli neder we'll we'll see that that tomorrow beezras Hashem.