Yosef one of his teshuvos points out all the mekomos at the moment. So l’choira one thing it’s important to realize and again here too there are sometimes other issues which come into play. But l’choira the concern for kibbud av va’eim when choosing a place to live you always hear it discussed in context of Eretz Yisrael and it should be discussed. It is a shayla and it should be discussed and it should be answered and it should be clarified. But l’choira where you don’t hear it discussed where the question is simpler is if for whatever reason a person is not living in Eretz Yisrael. As long as a person resides in Chutz La’aretz so then the question of where you live and how close you live to your parents is a much stronger consideration. When all is said and done so there are many who maintain that yishuv Eretz Yisrael would come first. Okay. There are many who would maintain that. There are many who would maintain that. But let’s say when a person lives in Chutz La’aretz so whether he lives on the West Coast or the East Coast or whether he lives in Canada or the US or whether he lives in England or in France or it’s all the same tum’as eretz ha’amim. All the same tum’as eretz ha’amim. Doesn't make a difference. So l’choira there too a person should when he and I don’t know maybe people think about it but just don’t talk about it and it’s on people’s minds but you certainly don’t hear this discussed with the same frequency that you do in the context of yishuv Eretz Yisrael. There too if at all possible a person should live close to his parents so he can be m’kayeim kibbud av va’eim. So there too again the question the issue in reality is more complicated than it is the hypothetical case we’re discussing. Let’s say let’s say you want to live in a neighborhood where better chinuch is available for your children and that’s why you have to live far away from your parents. Ein hachi nami. So that’s an issue. Let’s say you have parents who are overbearing and that’s why you can’t live too close to them. Ein hachi nami. That’s an issue. So again I’m not implying that there aren’t many dimensions to this question. But hypothetically theoretically all other things being equal all other things being equal if a person baruch Hashem has a wonderful relationship with his parents. He has wonderful parents and he has a wonderful relationship with his parents. No problem with parents being overbearing. And where the parents live so excellent chinuch opportunities are available for his children. And again everything being equal. So l’choira l’choira a person should live closer to his parents. And a person should choose bedavka to live close to his parents so that he can continue on a regular basis to be מצוות כיבוד אב ואם. מצוות כיבוד אב ואם is a mitzvah gedolah a mitzvah chashuvah me’od l’ma’an ya’arichun yomecha and it’s certainly a mitzvah which we should be rodeif after. So rather than creating an ones for ourselves where without compelling reasons so I mean how much kibbud av va’eim can you do long distance? There’s only so much you can do. You can call. But there’s only so much kibbud av va’eim you can do. Whatever you can do avada you should do. But there’s only so much you can do long distance. So it’s very important that when a person chooses where he’s going to live so not only if he’s discussing Eretz Yisrael should kibbud av va’eim become a consideration. No if anything maybe there it’s ultimately going to be decided should be less of a consideration. But bedavka if a person’s going to live in Chutz La’aretz. So again there are other there are other considerations there are other factors. All that is true and I don’t mean to suggest otherwise. But the point is this certainly is a very major factor and a very major consideration. A person should look to position himself. To be mekayem kibud av. So what do you do if the the husband's the husband's parents live in live in one one ir and the wife's parents live in the other area? So mistama the din certainly is that since a married woman is basically ptura from kibud av em because reshus acherim aleha, so it should be that you would look for the husband to be mekayem to be מקיים כיבוד אב ואם. But it certainly should be a very major consideration. It certainly should be a very major consideration. What if I don't know, I'll just have to be me'ayen very carefully, בא באתי אל האור. What if what if you don't like the you don't like the neighborhood, you don't like the state, you don't like the where your parents live, stam it's not your tastes, it's not your tastes? Too much snow, too little snow, too hot in the summer, too too cold in the winter, whatever, you have it's not your it's not your first choice, it's not according to your taste. So what's the din then? So can a person then say, well, we pasken משלו ולא משל בן, so I shouldn't have to sacrifice my own preferences in order to position myself for kibud av em? Lich'ora that too is I mean if you were to take משלו ולא משל בן to an extreme, so then you would say well if he wants me to get him a cup of water, I'd rather be playing tennis now. So isn't that isn't he encroaching upon what I want to do? And that should go against משלו ולא משל בן. So obviously the the psak of משלו ולא משל בן isn't a blanket heter for not having to kibud av em does involve self-sacrifice, does involve self-sacrifice. So it's not clear let's say in the again the hypothetical case we gave that one could really invoke משלו ולא משל בן in such a case, I don't know, that's not that's no more mishel bein than just the fact that you have to give up the time which kibud av em can demand. So there too that's not considered mishel bein or if it's considered mishel bein, that much mishel bein is by definition involved in the mitzvah. So it's not clear that this case would be any different. So it's very important, very important not only when thinking about Eretz Yisrael that kibud av em should be weighed into the picture. It should, and when necessary an eitzah should be should be sought. But even outside of Eretz Yisrael, even if for whatever reason a person's going to find himself outside of Eretz Yisrael, so then lich'ora there על אחת כמה וכמה the chiyuv is even greater that we should take into account מצוות כיבוד אב ואם in deciding where we live and to try as much as possible to position ourselves to be mekayem the mitzvah. Said that with his children, he always teaches them Chumash. He doesn't want to delegate it. It's too important, it's too important a limud and to do it properly is so difficult that he doesn't delegate that. Whatever we figure you delegate the you delegate Chumash and you get up to Gemara, when you get up to Tosfos, Akiva Eiger, so then it's time to take over yourself. And he said no, he doesn't doesn't delegate limud Chumash with his children, and he gave an illustration from last week's sedra. When HaKadosh Baruch Hu sent the message through Moshe Rabbeinu to Pharaoh prior to makkas barad about ha-pa'am ha-zos. What's the lashon ha-Torah that הנני שולח את כל מגפותי אל לבך, something like that is the lashon ha-pasuk. So it's a machlokes Rashi and the Ramban whether or not here whether referring to makkas barad... For some reason, sort of out of context, Hakadosh Barukh Hu was already alluding ahead to Makkas Bekhoros. No, I think the Ramban says, no, it's referring to Barad. Barad. Anyway, Rav Pesach Abramsky has a similar mehalach as the Ramban's pshat. The question is why of all the makkos was Barad described as a מכה אל לבו של פרעה? Why was Barad more of a strike at Pharaoh's heart than any of the other makkos? They were all equally, equally traumatizing, equally damaging, why is Barad described as שולח את כל מגפתי אל לבך? So Rav Pesach Abramsky said if you look a few psukim later that הירא את דבר ה' הניס את עבדיו ואת מקנהו min hasadeh. And then it says ואשר לא שם לבו, ואשר לא שם לבו אל דבר ה',
so then he left them outside and then they were destroyed in the Barad. So here too again it's ואשר לא שם לבו. So Rav Pesach Abramsky said the pshat is that Barad is described as a makkah against libo shel Paroh because Barad was the one makkah which it was beyado, entirely beyado to avoid. It was beyado to be safe from the makkah. All he had to do was go inside. Go inside. If you're told there's going to be a hurricane, so you board up the windows, you take your precautions. So they knew there was going to be Barad. So they knew that they had to get inside and they had to seek cover and they had to seek cover. So this makkah is described as הנני שולח את כל מגפתי אל לבך because here within the makkah gufa, within the makkah gufa, the makkah was highlighting and therefore coming to punish that obstinance which he had, the hard-heartedness of vayechazek Paroh's libo that he didn't accept the hasra'ah of Hakadosh Barukh Hu. All the other makkos, all the other makkos was really not beyado again to avoid the makkos once they were if they were going to come he couldn't save himself. Couldn't do anything about the tzfardaya. Couldn't do anything about it. So that's not described as el libcha. But here the Barad was designed to punish the libo because what created all the problem was just the fact that it's ואשר לא שם לבו אל דבר ה'. So that's what was unique about makkas Barad. Now that was his example of something when you learn Chumash of something to be attuned to, those leshonos in the psukim. He said that's why he doesn't delegate learning Chumash, even the learning of Chumash, he doesn't delegate and he does it himself. So mistama maybe that's the pshat in the Rambam also, that it doesn't mean chakham l'afukei that a person has to be defined as a talmid chakham and otherwise he doesn't have a chiyuv of lilameid acheirim Torah. Mistama the Rambam would just mean a דבר תורה בלשון הווה that whatever the limud is, so a chakham can better transmit that limud. Again even if it's just Chumash, a chakham can better transmit that limud than someone who's not a chakham, so mimeila so a chakham is kodem. But mistama ein hachi nami even rest of us are also mechuyav in that mitzvah. Anyway, so al kol panim they initially made this mistake. אינך זקוק לייסרו יותר מדי. If it will produce results, so why shouldn't he be אינך זקוק לייסרו יותר מדי? Obviously it means אינך זקוק לייסרו יותר מדי because it's not going to be effective. It's not going to be effective and being overbearing and being too tough on the discipline just boomerangs, it doesn't help. You can't spoil, you have to discipline. But on the other hand if you're meyaseir v'lo atzvah or meyaseir is that no good, but on the other hand to be meyaseir yoseir midai also is no good. Also on the contrary it just arouses opposition. Just arouses opposition. So you try makka kala. You try makka kala and if that doesn't help, so אינך זקוק לייסרו יותר מדי. What do you mean eincha zakuk? But eincha zakuk consequently eincha rashai because it's just going to boomerang. It's just going to boomerang. And not only that, ולא לסלקו מלפניך אלא ישב עם אחרים בצוותא וסופו לעשות לו.
Rav Moshe has his tshuva he says that b'meh dvarim amurim where the presence of the talmid doesn't become disruptive to other talmidim. But clearly at a point where the man d'lo kari becomes disruptive to the other talmidim so then you would be mesalek milfanecha, would be mesalek milfanecha. The gemara here means just in terms of what you're trying to accomplish with that yachid, so then that's not the best thing to do. But at the point that the yachid is disruptive to others, so then avada you would have to be mesalko milfanav. Meisivei. Tshuva also in Choshen Mishpat Chelek Alef where Rav Moshe says that if a melamed is hired, even though he's hired only initially for one year and he's never promised that his contract is going to be renewed, he's never promised tenure or anything, so Rav Moshe says if he did a good job and there are no tainos against him, the only taina is that we never committed ourselves to you for more than one year, so Rav Moshe says that's no taina and he becomes muchzak. He becomes muchzak already based on one year. That's Rav Moshe's famous tshuva. And then basically you can't arbitrarily fire a melamed. But in other if you hire someone to work your field for a year and he does a very good job, but you told him you're only hiring him for a year, so then you don't need any reason, you don't have to renew him, you don't have to keep him on. But when it comes to a melamed, he becomes muchzak in one year. He becomes muchzak because he did a good job. What taina would you fire him? What taina would you fire him? Baruch Hashem, what a difficult question. And I hope you never find out the answer to my question. Wonderful question. So that's what Rav Moshe says. However, so people generally quote Rav Moshe's tshuva as you can't fire a melamed, you can't fire a rebbi. And again, there is under certain circumstances that's what the tshuva says. But the tshuva obviously isn't addressing and in no way intends chas v'shalom to contradict this gemara, which as reassuring as that tshuva may be to a melamed, so this gemara is equally sobering. It says on the contrary, if the guy who is basically doing a good job, oy vavoy. If the guy who is basically doing a good job, האי מקרי ינוקי דגרס. So he learns, ich veis, he learns with seven-year-olds the whole Sefer Bereishis and they know it well, and he's been doing it for years. Comes along a super melamed, comes along a super-duper melamed, so he's able to do with a seven-year-old not only Sefer Bereishis, but he's also able to do half of Sefer Shemos. So even just the fact one guy was good, but the other guy was excellent, the other guy was excellent, so just the overriding concern for ribui chochma is such that the first guy, the first guy is mesalkinan lei, that you can dismiss him. Does garas mean that he's teaching them more or that he happens to know more than the previous? I think it means he's teaching them more. He's teaching them more. So it goes off of output, but if the previous Rav had chochma or knows more than the No. Again, I mean to the that's what we were talking about before, to the extent that how much a person knows affects how much he imparts, yes. But just as an independent consideration, no. As an independent consideration, it means that he learns more, he learns more with the talmidim. כל שכן דגרס טפי קנאת סופרים רבוי חכמה. And how long how long does it take to make a mistake? A few minutes. A few minutes in which the melamed teaches them. So that wasted few minutes is a b'tila d'la hadra. The waste of time is a b'tila d'la hadra. Famous story with Rav Yisrael Salanter. Rav Yisrael Salanter, famous story, you're familiar with it? He walked by it was at night and the shoemaker was working to the light of a flickering candle. Candle was almost extinguished, but it was flickering at the very end right before it goes out. the light is low, it's night, you're about to be plunged into total darkness, what are you still working for? And he answered them that כל זמן שהנר דולק, as long as the candle is still giving any light, as long as the candle is still burning, so you want to try to take advantage of that to do a little bit more work. So some wanted to say the same mussar haskel from this shoemaker, so we're supposed to learn נר ה' נשמת אדם. So the same mussar haskel applies of כל זמן שהנר דולק, as long as כל זמן שהנשמה בקרבנו, so a person has to take advantage of every second. That's taki not just mussar, but that's the point of Tosafot, that's the halakha here in the Gemara that it's considered pshita because of the time wasted on a mistake. Rav Kotler had the same idea in his first of all in the Mishnat Rabbi Aharon from the Gemara in Bava Metzia. Gemara says in Bava Metzia that when Reish Lakish was dying, so his what was to be his estate amounted to a kava d'morika, a very small amount of some kind of yellow dye or something. That was the extent of the yerusha which he was going to be leaving to his children. So the Gemara says that when he was on his deathbed, when his petira was imminent, so Reish Lakish said about himself referring to the money that he was bequeathing to his yorshim, Gemara says v'azvu l'acherim cheilam. K'ra anafshei v'azvu l'acherim cheilam that he's leaving all his power and all his might to others. So what's pshat? So he explains there that the only reason Reish Lakish ever worked was just because he needed the parnassa. There was no intrinsic value to it, he needed the parnassa. Every minute which he had to expend on his livelihood which was taken away from Torah was only justifiable Reish Lakish's thought if it was necessary. When he realized that he had worked a little bit too much, he realized that he was going to die and he had worked too much, he had worked an extra hour, he had worked an hour more than was necessary. He had diverted an hour's time away from his Torah and mitzvot to working. So because of that Reish Lakish said v'azvu l'acherim cheilam because the money represented time and it turned out that he didn't need, he hadn't needed the money and avoi lo l'mapreia, in retrospect he realized that that time had been wasted and that was Reish Lakish's agmat nefesh of v'azvu l'acherim cheilam. The Chofetz Chaim used to illustrate this that in the parsha of ha-chozer me-orech ha-milchama, מי האיש אשר בנה בית חדש ולא חנכו. So what's the minimum shiur of bayit? 15 rooms, 20 rooms, 40 rooms? What's the minimum shiur of his bayit that because of this a person is chozer me-orech ha-milchama? שימות במלחמה ואיש אחר יחנכנו. So the minimum shiur the Gemara in Sukkah and elsewhere says is arba al arba. That's the minimum shiur for בונה בית חדש ולא חנכו and he gets a ptur, he's exempted from his military service. So how long does it take to build a house which is arba al arba? Not too long. Not too long, rather modest quarters. Chofetz Chaim said אף על פי כן, apparently since he invested this time to create a bona bayit chadash, so the Torah says we have to see to it that at the very least he has the opportunity to be mechanech the house, to be mechanech the house. He invested the time. He invested the time to build, to be bona bayit chadash, so the Torah says that investment of time is so important, that minuscule investment of time is so important that he's chozer because of that me-orech ha-milchama. So the notion of... I wanted to come and I wanted to use this as the transition, one or two inyanim which emerge from the parsha. We're all familiar with the Rambam, Ramban about the Rishonim and the early the midrash, the question of Pharaoh losing his bechira chofshis. Did he lose the bechira chofshis just in the last five makkos? Did he lose the bechira chofshis throughout? Okay, but at some point apparently ויחזק ה' את לב פרעה. At some point Pharaoh was deprived of his bechira chofshis. אפשר שיחטא אדם חטא גדול או חטאים רבים עד שיתן הדין לפני דיין האמת שיהא הפירעון מזה החוטא על חטאים אלו שעשה ברצונו ומדעתו שמונעין ממנו התשובה ואין מניחין לו רשות לשוב מרשעו כדי שימות ויאבד בחטא שיעשה או שעשה.
There's a different girsa she'asa now then veyoveid bicheit either she'ya'aseh or she'asa. הוא שהקדוש ברוך הוא אמר על ידי ישעיהו השמן לב העם הזה כלומר חטאו ברצונם והרבו לפשוע עד שנתחייבו למנוע מהם התשובה שהיא המרפא ולפיכך כתוב בתורה ואני אחזק את לב פרעה לפי שחטא מעצמו תחילה והרע לישראל הגרים בארצו שנאמר הבה נתחכמה לו נתן הדין למנוע התשובה ממנו עד שנפרע ממנו ולפיכך חיזק הקדוש ברוך הוא את ליבו ולמה היה שולח לו ביד משה ואומר שלח ועשה תשובה ואמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא אינתה משלח שנאמר ואתה ועבדיך ידעתי ואולם בעבור זאת העמדתיך כדי להודיע לבאי העולם שבזמן שמונע הקדוש ברוך הוא התשובה לחוטא אינו יכול לשוב אלא ימות ברשע שעשה בתחילה ברצונו.
And then goes on to give other examples. כולם חטאו מעצמם וכולם נתחייבו למנוע מהם התשובה. So at times on rare occasions, rare, rare occasions, so averos are so great that he's deprived of the opportunity of teshuvah. But be'emes there is another somewhat more subtle self-inflicted loss of bechira chofshis which is much more common. The Or HaChaim HaKadosh says In the parsha of Ben Sorer U'Moreh has a very interesting kashe. Ben Sorer U'Moreh, the one the parents bring him, so they say בנינו זה סורר ומורה einenu shomea bekolenu. Wayward and rebellious, doesn't listen to what we say. So Or HaChaim HaKadosh asks, why doesn't the Torah say eino shomea bekolenu? Eino communicates the same idea which einenu does and you save one nun. Why did the Torah add that extra nun? Why didn't the Torah simply say eino shomea bekolenu? Why did it say einenu? So Or HaChaim says something amazing. Or HaChaim says if it were true that eino and einenu both have that same meaning of not, negative, einenu has a second meaning as well. Let's say ויתהלך חנוך את האלהים ואיננו כי לקח אותו אלהים. So when you have both nuns, so then einenu also means like if you're taking attendance and someone's not here, so you say einenu. He's not here. It doesn't just mean you can't say eino if you want to describe a person as being absent, so you can't in lashon hakodesh say eino, but you have to say einenu. That's the way it works in Hebrew. So einenu has that second meaning, not just eino meaning not, but einenu meaning that the person is absent. So Or HaChaim says gevaldig, Or HaChaim says that's the pshat. The Ben Sorer U'Moreh, he says this on two lines. The Ben Sorer U'Moreh who's נידון על שם סופו wouldn't be nidon so harshly if he were only eino shomea bekolenu. If he were there and he were listening, but ich veis he wasn't mekabel, he wasn't accepting the mussar because the yetzer hara was too strong or because he was a wild adolescent or whatever the case may be, so he wouldn't have been נידון על שם סופו, wouldn't have been נידון על שם סופו. He only becomes a Ben Sorer U'Moreh. The Torah says you should know that the reason he has become a Ben Sorer U'Moreh and the reason he's nidon so harshly נידון על שם סופו is that he's not only eino shomea bekolenu, but he's einenu shomea bekolenu. What does that mean? That means it's not just that he hears, it's not that he hears what the parents say, but again he can't overcome his taivas or his yetzer hara to accept what they say. He's einenu, bichlal he totally blocks out anything and everything which might influence him letova. And that Or HaChaim HaKadosh says that's what's responsible for his being a Ben Sorer U'Moreh and his being נידון על שם סופו because he's einenu. If he was just eino shomea, it wouldn't be so bad. We could still work with him. There would still be hope. But because he's einenu shomea bekolenu, so that's what makes it such a terrible, terrible situation. It's worthwhile to reflect for a moment when we tend to be einenu shomein. Not just einam shomein, but where the lack of the shmia kabbala is because einenu, not just because einam shomein, but einenu, but einenu. When does that tend to happen? It happens in a few areas. It happens in a few areas. And again it's very... One of the asara devarim which chas veshalom me'akvin es hateshuva if a person is sonei tochacha and certainly this bechina of einenu, the Or HaChaim's bechina of einenu is certainly no better than one who sonei tochacha. If a person is einenu in that he just doesn't, it doesn't register, so it's certainly no better than someone who sonei tochacha. So when are we prone to become in the bechina of einenu? There are a couple of areas. One area is everyone has certain, whether it's occupations or character traits, involvements, everyone has certain things by which they define themselves, which they think give them their self-worth. And then there are other things which are more peripheral to how we view ourselves and whom we think we are. So when we deal with peripheral things, so then the tendency to be einenu is not that strong. It's not that strong. Because you can weather criticism and you basically walk away from it intact. You're not so shaken up. Someone, someone reminds us that we talked during chazaras hashatz, or we talked during kaddish, or we talked bein gavra legavra during kerias hatorah, not in divrei torah. So here, whether we're mekabel or not, but we'll hear it. We won't be in a bechina of einenu. We will hear the mussar because for better or for worse, not necessarily for better, but for better or for worse we don't really define ourselves or pride ourselves as someone who never talks during chazaras hashatz. So we can hear it and we can accept it and hopefully we will accept it and hopefully we'll resolve that it shouldn't happen again. It shouldn't happen again. But then there are other things, again whether it's dreams or aspirations or self-perception which a person has which is just so integral and such a major part of his life that it's untouchable. It's untouchable. If you come and you tell a person who's a doctor, who's a rebbe, who's in any type of any miktzoa, and he prides himself in that miktzoa and he works hard in that miktzoa, and you come and you tell him, you come and you tell the doctor that basically he's a lousy doctor and that he doesn't know his stuff. And let v'loz zain that it's true. We're not talking about if it's not true. If it's not true, of course don't listen to him. But it is true. It is true. There is a basis for it. There is a basis for it. He blows every fourth diagnosis he makes a mistake on. There's a lot of basis for it. But he prides himself in terms of his own self-identity, he prides himself on the fact that he is a good doctor, that he's a successful and good physician. That's what he prides himself on. Then the yetzer hara to slip into a state of einenu, not to be willing to listen to a devar mussar when it's addressed to us becomes very great. And that's very dangerous because it's very often in the most important and central things that we have a netiya to become bechinas einenu. If a person hears a, again let's say for argument's sake, just to simplify things, a person hears a devar hashkafa or a devar torah which is muskam. Not talking about where there are different valid shittos, eilu ve'eilu vechulu. Let's say you hear a devar torah, a devar hashkafa which is muskam. muskam lakol. And again it implies that a person's values are somewhat The role which he attaches to his profession or the price he pays for pursuit of his Olam Hazeh goals, his material goals is too great. But that he's been living with it so long that again those dreams, those aspirations are part of who he or she is. So again there's a very, very dangerous tendency which we have, sort of comes out of a distorted self-preservation. As though if you insulate yourself against criticisms which go to the core, that somehow or other that helps save you. But obviously in reality the opposite is the case. So in those cases, whenever the, whenever the criticism or the mussar that we're subjected to is not peripheral, but really goes to the core of who we are, what we are, how we live our lives, what we live our lives for, what we should be living our lives for, we have to be on extra careful guard not chas v'shalom to make the mistake to become einennu. Because once a person is einennu, so then even if the Ribbono Shel Olam rachmana litzlan doesn't deprive him of his bechira chofshis, but he does. Because if a person doesn't listen seriously to, or even if not listen, if a person's not willing to engage in cheshbon hanefesh on these core issues of who he is, what kind of Jew he is, what kind of parent he is, what kind of child he is, what kind of family member he is, on all these core issues if a person is not willing to be challenged on them or to challenge himself on them, so then chas v'shalom we run the risk of ending up as einennu. And when a person is einennu, so the reason rachmana litzlan that the ben sorer umoreh can be נידון על שם סופו. So how, how does that shtim with ba'asher hu sham then אין אדם נידון אלא לפי מעשיו של אותה שעה? So obviously is gezeiras hakasuv. Doesn't, doesn't really need a kasuv hashlishi, but al derech hamussar the teretz is that it's נידון על שם סופו, the pshat in נידון על שם סופו is that it's על פי דרכו של אור החיים הקדוש, is that it's a foregone conclusion. Is that once he becomes einennu, so then the sofo is already a foregone conclusion. There's no variable, there's no variable to it. So we have to be very, very careful and the older you get, the harder it gets because the more years you live a certain way, so the more defensive you tend to become about how you've lived. Whether it's even on little things like people who sometimes tend if they go to a certain butcher and they've been buying from this butcher for ten years and then, again, I'm not, let's again for hypothetically, not every case matches this hypothetical case obviously, but hypothetically that turns out to be a real serious problem with that butcher, migloi milsa l'mafreia that he's never been reliable and for some reason or other just wasn't caught, so the longer people have been involved so the more defensive they become and the less willing they are to look back and to concede that how long they've been making a mistake. So the older we get, and it's very important to remember this and be mindful of it, the older we get, the harder it is. The harder it is because the more time you have to admit mistake and the less time you have to correct it and reverse it. But אף על פי כן, אף על פי כן, chas v'shalom that we should ever end up in this bechina of einennu. Throughout our lives we always have to be ready to scrutinize everything, not just the peripheral issues. Not again, not just I slipped and I talked on chazaras hashatz once. Okay, that's, that's peripheral to a person's self-perception usually. But even on those core issues of what kind of chinuch he's giving his children and what kind of home environment he's giving his children, you have a parent who's working from eight in the morning till eleven at night to give his... Is shown the best things. And then you come and you tell him you're not giving your children the best things because all the affluence you're giving them is spoiling them. And instead of giving them an environment of kedusha and taharah, you're just giving them an environment of taanugim and redifah achar hamamon. So that's very hard to hear. You slave away 14 hours a day and in your mind it's to be a good parent and then someone comes and they pull the rug out from under you and tell you the opposite is true. So then the defense, a person's defense system begins to operate. And it's very, very important, it's very, very important, אין אדם צדיק אשר יעשה טוב ולא יחטא. And if that's the case, we have to always be willing to engage in a cheshbon hanefesh with no holds barred. Otherwise we run the risk of the einenu. Just one or two other very brief he'aros to just call your attention to one interesting line in the Ramban at the end of the parsha. Ramban where he's talking about why the Torah has so many mitzvos. Zecher yetzias mitzrayim.