Transcript

So the Rashi says Lehishtaker beyayin. The Rambam also says, that the also says ישתה יין וישתכר וירדם. And they both say yayin. So lefi peshuto, what it means is Rashi says this, that Rashi and the Rambam are learning pshat that chayav inash levisumei is not a separate mitzvah. It's not a new mitzvah which the Gemara discovered or invented, but rather chayav inash levisumei is just a shiur, but the underlying mitzvah is really mitzvas simcha. And we know that אין שמחה אלא ביין. So mimmela, that's why it's understood that what we're talking about is drinking yayin, not drinking anything else, anything other mashkeh. And chayav inash levisumei, that's not the mitzvah per se, that's rather the shiur in the mitzvah. The mitzvah itself is a mitzvas simcha. And lichora, further rayah to that that the Rambam is understanding that the mitzvas simcha in Purim has the normal vehicles and expressions of simcha which we find in kol haTorah kullah. The Rambam also tells us that the seudas Purim should contain basar. The seudas Purim should contain basar. This is not mentioned explicitly in the Gemara, seudas Purim has to require basar. So how does the Rambam know that it has to require basar? So clearly the Gemara says that

שאכלה בלילה לא יצא ידי חובתו ימי משתה ושמחה כתיב.

So it has to be in the day. So the seudah is an expression of simcha, so mimmela it requires basar. והוא הדין והוא הטעם that basically the mitzvah of חייב אינש לבסומי בפוריא is a mitzvas simcha. It's not a, sometimes we're so distracted by the chiddush of the shiur that we're distracted, but the underlying mitzvah, it's a מצות שמחה על ידי יין and the shiur is chayav inash levisumei. That's lefi peshuto. Here too we're chozerin, we discussed this on other occasions, but lichora it means something else on other levels as well. And that is, obviously the shiur, it's not the mitzvah per se, but rather the shiur in the mitzvah of ad d'lo yada is very, on the surface, very strange and anomalous. Seems to run contrary to everything we're accustomed to. So what's the pshat, עד דלא ידע בין ארור המן לברוך מרדכי? The teretz lichora is as follows. We say in the Machzor Yamim Noraim: וכל הרשעה כולה כעשן תכלה. And in acharis hayamim, in acharis hayamim, all evil evaporates like smoke. Same way if you have some smoke, so a strong gust of wind totally dissipates the smoke and there's nothing left. So that's the way risha will evaporate. What is that imagery meant to convey? Certainly not our experience of killayon risha. Our experience of killayon risha is that we pay a very stiff and heavy price in order to vanquish the powers of risha. It doesn't happen ke'ashan. So what does it mean וכל הרשעה כולה כעשן תכלה in acharis hayamim? It means as follows. Yitzchak Avinu when he gave the brachos to Yaakov and to Eisav respectively, so he said to Yaakov: הוי גביר לאחיך וישתחוו לך בני אמך. So he guaranteed Yaakov sovereignty and mastery over Eisav. And not just Eisav, but that's implicit in that is also over Bnei Yishmael. Because since Yitzchak already כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע, so whatever Yitzchak passed, Yitzchak already had sovereignty over Bnei Yishmael. So when he's promising him sovereignty over Bnei Eisav, it means over Bnei Yishmael as well. Then when Eisav demands a bracha, when Eisav demands a bracha, so Yitzchak tells him: והיה כאשר תריד ופרקת עלו מעל צוארך. So Rashi explains from Chazal, what do the words mean? That when you'll have reason to legitimately to complain that Yaakov is not deserving of the bracha, so then ופרקת עלו מעל צוארך you'll be able to cast off, you'll be able to cast off the yoke of Yaakov. So what does it mean? It means as follows. Basically what Yitzchak Avinu told Yaakov and told Esav is that their relationship would be almost symbiotic. Dehaynu that Esav's fate is totally dependent and hinges on Yaakov's loyalty to Torah. And to the extent that Yaakov is faithful to Torah, so to that extent so then Esav will always be downtrodden and Esav will always be ruled over and be subject to the mastery and sovereignty of Yaakov. But vehayah ka'asher tarid when Yaakov will stray from Torah, so then you, Esav, representing risha will be energized. Or in other words, the truth is that risha has no independent kiyum in the world. And we make a mistake; we think that in order for good to overcome evil, so what it means is, so we have to have a better army, and we have to have better intelligence, and we all have eitzas to give Netanyahu and to give whoever the Prime Minister at the moment is how we can be stronger, how the kochos hatov can be stronger than the kochos harisha. But Yitzchak Avinu said it's not like that. Yitzchak Avinu said the kochos harisha, there is no such thing; there is no independent energy source for kochos harisha in this world. And it only comes from vehayah ka'asher tarid. The only source they're on a see-saw that Yaakov and Esav are always on a see-saw and it's only if Yaakov is weighed down with aveiros, only that allows Esav or the same is true for Yishmael to rise up. And that's what it means וכל הרשעה כולה כעשן תכלה. That's what we'll see in acharis hayamim. In acharis hayamim where we will perfect ourselves, so then we'll see that there won't be, that there won't be bloody battles where we suffer rachmana litzlan heavy casualties in order to vanquish risha the way we know it from history books, World War I, World War II, and the way we know it from the contemporary predicament in Eretz Yisrael. וכל הרשעה כולה כעשן תכלה because when tov will be perfected, when we'll perfect ourselves, so then risha will just evaporate because it has no independent kiyum. וכל הרשעה כולה כעשן תכלה. That's what it means, that's what that imagery means from the machzor. חייב איניש לבסומי בפוריא so we started, Rashi and the Rambam say it means by drinking yayin. Not everyone says it's by drinking yayin. So Chazal tell us that נכנס יין יצא סוד. So by drinking yayin, so a person is supposed to be able to have a certain insight and a certain penetrating glance and vision which he otherwise doesn't have. And what's ordinarily hidden and concealed then becomes revealed as a result of the נכנס יין יצא סוד. נכנס יין יצא סוד. So what sod is a person supposed to discover on Purim? So you would think Purim is a yomtov of mechiyas Amalek. So what should we do? A yomtov of mechiyas Amalek, we should go out and find a few Nazis and go shoot. A yomtov of mechiyas Amalek. What, can't find Nazis? Go find a few Hamastnikim or go find a few who don't call themselves Hamastnikim but are the same as Hamastnikim and mekayem mechiyas Amalek. And what do we do? How do we spend Purim? We spend Purim on mishloach manos and we spend Purim on matanos l'evyonim. And the Rambam says מוטב להרבות במתנות לאביונים because

אין שם שמחה גדולה ומפוארת כמשמח לב עניים ויתומים ואלמנות והמשמח לב האומללים האלו דומה לשכינה שנאמר להחיות רוח שפלים ולהחיות רוח נדכאים.

So how do we accomplish our mechiyas Amalek on Purim? Again, so we should be confronting ra. So no, we don't confront ra, but rather we turn inward and we try to perfect ourselves through משלוח מנות איש לרעהו, through משלוח מנות איש לרעהו, through matanos l'evyonim, through matanos l'evyonim. That's how we try to perfect ourselves and that's how we try to accomplish the mechiyas Amalek. חייב איניש לבסומי בפוריא. A person is supposed to drink yayin and discover the sod עד דלא ידע בין ארור המן לברוך מרדכי. You think that you have to confront, you think the source of the problem in this world is arur Haman. That's not the source of the problem in this world. חייב איניש לבסומי בפוריא ad d'lo yada, the source of the evil in the world is not the arur Haman. The source is the flaws and the inadequacies and the failings within Mordechai, within us, not Mordechai individually rachmana litzlan, but Mordechai as representing within Mordechai collectively, so the flaws, the chesronos, the shortcoming, the bittul Torah, the lack of, the lack of dikduk in mitzvos and bein adam lachaveiro, bein adam lamakom, that that's the ultimate, that's the ultimate source of the problem. It's והיה כאשר תריד ופרקת עלו מעל צוארך. So that's what it means ad delo yada bein arur Haman. A person, if you still think that the confrontation is between Arur Haman and Baruch Mordechai and the way Mordechai is going to ultimately prevail is by getting more soldiers for Mordechai and more intelligence for Mordechai, so then a person hasn't drunk enough wine, he doesn't know the sod hadavar. The sod hadavar is when a person understands that the way mechiyas Amalek is accomplished is what we devote ourselves to on Purim, what we devote ourselves to on Purim, dahinu perfecting the Baruch Mordechai. We have to attack the b'ra within the Baruch Mordechai and that's the way you undermine and totally cut off from its energy supply the Arur Haman. And to realize that this false opposition between Arur Haman and Baruch Mordechai, to think that all our efforts have to be directed against the ra in the world and not to correct and perfect ourselves, biur hara shebikirveinu, so that's the sod of

חייב אינש לבסומי בפוריא עד דלא ידע בין ארור המן לברוך מרדכי.

Chasidim like to tell a story that the minhag among Chasidim is that they appoint a Purim Rav. And one of the rebbe steps aside and one of the Chasidim pruves the tish on Purim. So I think it was in the, I think it was the Zlotchover Maggid, I'm not sure with whom, they appointed such a Purim Rav, such a Purim Rav. And here was the, here was the Torah of the Purim Rav. Want a little bit of a hasaga of the type of Torah. So he went, took a candle, he took a candle and he said שלושים יום קודם החג you have to start learning the halachos of yom tov, to start learning the halachos of yom tov. So Purim, Yud Daled Adar is always by definition 30 days before bdikas chametz, 30 days before bdikas chametz. So he went over with a candle and went over to each of the Chasidim and held the candle keneged the hartz, says it's time to start learning for bdikas chametz, bdikas chametz. So what was he saying? It's the same yesod, that if you think that Purim, mechiyas Amalek means to go out and find Amalek, zachor, we don't even know where Amalek is, the Rambam says, we don't even know where Amalek is. Mechiyas Amalek is we have to look inward, we have to look inward, it's shloshim yom before bdikas chametz, the se'or sheba'isa is רצוננו לעשות רצונך ומי מעכב שאור שבעיסה. That's what we have to be oker and that's what simchas Purim and that's what simchas Purim is dedicated to and devoted to. And that's the sod and yesod of חייב אינש לבסומי בפוריא עד דלא ידע. Chayav inish livsumei, livsumei, livsumei, livsumei, chayav inish livsumei, livsumei, livsumei, livsumei, chayav inish livsumei, livsumei, livsumei, livsumei, chayav inish livsumei, livsumei, livsumei, livsumei. L'chaim, l'chaim, l'chaim, l'chaim, l'chaim. וכן מבטלין תלמוד תורה l'shmo'a mikra megilla,

קל וחומר שאר מצוות של תורה, שכולם נדחין מפני מקרא מגילה.

So here the kasha is, Rambam says kal v'chomer that if וכן מבטלין תלמוד תורה l'shmo'a mikra megilla, it's קל וחומר שאר מצוות של תורה. So be'emes when it comes to עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה, so Talmud Torah is really kal from sha'ar mitzvos, right? The Rambam paskens based on the Yerushalmi in Moed Katan which the Nosei Keilim quote in פרק ג הלכות תלמוד תורה, in פרק ג הלכות תלמוד תורה, that היה לפניו עשיית מצוה even though he's involved in Talmud Torah, so if the mitzvah is אי אפשר להיעשות על ידי אחר there's no din of עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה for Talmud Torah. So when it comes to Talmud Torah... Talmud Torah is more easily, Talmud Torah is more easily nidcheh than any other mitzvah. So if that's the case, yeah Menachem, yeah yeah. You're calculating? So if, if Talmud Torah is more is more easily, more easily nidcheh than any other mitzvah, so then how can it be a kal v'chomer l'shear mitzvos she-baTorah? If, if Talmud Torah would be equal standard or more chamur when it came to עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה, so then it could be a kal v'chomer l'shear mitzvos she-baTorah. But if, if Talmud Torah is kal, if Talmud Torah is kal mi-shear mitzvos, how can it be a kal v'chomer? No no, we're going to come to that soon. No no no, Eli has special insight now, we're going to come to that soon, we're going to come to that soon, we're going to come to that soon. Well let's hear the kasha. Lomar Hem? What were we going to say about Talmud Torah? What? For example Tefilla, according to some de'Oraisa. If a person is, is basically Talmud Torah, doesn't matter if it's Shacharis, if it's a kvi'us, they are mafsik, they mafsik their Talmud Torah for it. So you see that Talmud Torah... No no, no, the point I'm trying to make is that the concept of Rashbi, even though Tefilla is a mitzvah de'Oraisa, then they're not mechuyav to be mafsik. Okay, so there's one mitzvah what they're not mechuyav to be mafsik, but every other mitzvah in the world if Rashbi v'chaveirav is mechuyav to be mafsik, even though he's osek b'mitzvah. So l'pumi de'Oraisa at least the phenomenologically it's, it seems to be that Talmud Torah is kal mi-shear mitzvos when it comes to עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה. So if that's the case, how can you say osek b'mitzvah that mevatel Talmud Torah שמכאן נילף קל וחומר לשאר מצוות שבתורה? So I looked in the Frankel Rambam, the only one they say who asks this kasha, I was looking for the kasha, the only one they say who asks the kasha is Reb Isser Zalman. Menachem just mentioned Reb Isser Zalman. He, he raises the kasha. Reb Isser Zalman was, was Rav Aharon Kotler's father-in-law. Rav Aharon was Reb Isser Zalman's son-in-law. No no no, you're tzuverbt in America. In America Reb Isser Zalman is Rav Aharon Kotler's father-in-law. In Eretz Yisrael Rav Aharon Kotler is Reb Isser Zalman's son-in-law. Maskim? Maskim. But we're, we're in America. We're in America. Al kol panim, so the p'shat is as follows. You're in America, I don't know where I am. Can't help you there. In all shuls that they have, not all shuls, many shuls they have from the Teshuvos Chasam Sofer says that the din of Mikdash Me'at, which Batei Keneisiyos have, is that when you're in a shul or an yeshiva, so it's as though you have kedushas Eretz Yisrael. So to'chei that you're not in America, to'chei that that's, that's the case. I unfortunately am in America. Who'll get me a plate? Al kol panim, who'll get me a plate? Don't you have a plate? Yeah, this is your plate. No no no no no. Let's have a niggun while we think about the kasha. This possibly be mehader af pi d'gars, and contradicts the Gemara in Sotah says that אנן בדידן ואינהו בדידהו. So there are many teirutzim in the Rishonim. One teirutz which Tosfos likes, I think Tosfos quotes it from the Riva, is that since Rav Sheshes was toraso u-mnaso. Tosfos likes to say, but Tosfos says v'hachi mistabra. No, Tosfos likes to say, Tosfos likes the teirutz. Hachi mistabra Tosfos says. אנן מסתברא לן כהאי תירוצא that Rav Sheshes was toraso u-mnaso. So the question is, so what that Rav Sheshes was toraso u-mnaso? Didn't we say that Yerushalmi says that even toraso u-mnaso has to be mafsik Talmud Torah for other mitzvos, because otherwise רבי שמעון בר יוחאי would never sit in a sukkah, רבי שמעון בר יוחאי would never take a lulav? So why is it that because Rav Sheshes was in this special class of toraso u-mnaso that he didn't have to be mafsik for krias ha-Torah, for krias ha-Torah? So l'chora the teirutz is as follows, the yesod is as follows. B'meh devarim amurim that Talmud Torah is kal mi-shear mitzvos in עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה is when the other mitzvah is a non-Talmud Torah mitzvah. When the other mitzvah is a mitzvah other than Talmud Torah, it's netilas... form of Talmud Torah, it's a specific form of Talmud Torah. Instead of learning Ha-ishah Nikneish, so now you have to, you have to lain Parshas Vayikra, you have to lain Parshas Tzav. But it's still Talmud Torah. So here already עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה does apply to Talmud Torah as well. It does apply to Talmud Torah as well. And lichora that's what the Yerushalmi, which holds that רבי שמעון בר יוחאי וחבריו are not even mafsik for Kerias Shema, so the Yerushalmi says because האי שינון והאי שינון. Kerias Shema is Talmud Torah, and what רבי שמעון בר יוחאי וחבריו are doing is Talmud Torah, so האי שינון והאי שינון. So again, it's the same yesod, that when do we say that Talmud Torah you have to be mafsik for she'ar mitzvos is only when that other mitzvah is a non-Talmud Torah mitzvah. But when that other mitzvah is a specific form, a specific cheilek of Torah, so do you have to drop your learning for that? So then the din is that no, then עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה applies even to Talmud Torah. Why is that? We'll see in one minute. We'll see right now. Mitzvah haba'ah leyadcha. Mitzvah haba'ah leyadcha. So lichora the teretz is, lichora the teretz is because be'emes, be'emes Talmud Torah is really no different than any mitzvos. Talmud Torah's really not different than any mitzvos when it comes to עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה. Really, Talmud Torah you shouldn't be mafsik for any mitzvah either. Aye, but the din is that even רבי שמעון בר יוחאי וחבריו have to be mafsik for tekias shofar, for netilas lulav, for asiyas sukkah. So the teretz is because if they wouldn't, so then that Talmud Torah would be מעין שלא על מנת לעשות. If רבי שמעון בר יוחאי וחבריו, if you wouldn't be mafsik Talmud Torah for מצות שאי אפשר ליעשות על ידי אחרים, so then it would be a chisaron in the Talmud Torah. If I'm in the middle of being a shomer aveidah and I don't give a prutah to the ani, so that by definition is not a chisaron in my shmiras aveidah. If that's not a chisaron in my shmiras aveidah, so then mimmeila עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה applies. But if by not doing the mitzvah, so that spoils the mitzvah I'm personally doing, so of course you can't say עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה. If by my sticking to my Talmud Torah and not being mekayem any mitzvas asei, so that, that denigrates, demotes my Talmud Torah into לימוד שלא על מנת לעשות, so then of course you can't apply עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה. So therefore it makes sense only that you'll have to interfere with Talmud Torah for another mitzvah, but if it's Talmud Torah in another form, so then you're not mafsik Talmud Torah for Talmud Torah in another form. Again, what are the ra'ayos to that? So ra'aya number one is what the Rishonim are saying, that Rav Sheshes was mahader appei vegoreis, that if he was Toraso umnaso, he didn't have to be mafsik his Talmud Torah for Kerias HaTorah. Ra'aya number two is the Yerushalmi of האי שינון והאי שינון. And that lichora is the pshat in this Rambam here. That be'emes, since Kerias HaMegillah is really Krias Kisvei Hakodesh, so the kiyum pirsumei nisa notwithstanding, the ma'aseh hamitzvah is what? The ma'aseh hamitzvah is Talmud Torah. So therefore I would have thought based on what I know from the Yerushalmi of האי שינון והאי שינון, and the Rishonim of Rav Sheshes Toraso umnaso, I would have thought that you're not mafsik Talmud Torah for Kerias HaMegillah because האי שינון והאי שינון, and yet you are. So in this case, where really עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה should have applied to Talmud Torah and doesn't, so in this case it takei is a kal vachomer leshe'ar mitzvos. Can't you say the opposite, that since now you have this Talmud Torah and Kerias is Talmud Torah, so you have an opportunity to be korei megillah, two for the price of one? Why not, why is what you're learning better than Mikra Megillah? You have kiyum hamikra megillah and Talmud Torah at the same time. But you see, but you see, I mean, you could have said like that, but you see meforash the Yerushalmi didn't say that in the Yerushalmi's case of האי שינון והאי שינון. Not on, but why isn't it Amram, good point, good point. It's Talmud Torah, so really you should have said עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה. Why is it called mevattel Talmud Torah? If it's a mitzvah of Talmud Torah itself, why is it called mevattel Talmud Torah? It's not mevattel. Yeah, but lichora what it means is mevattel what you're doing. Mevattel what you're doing. You're mevattel what you're doing. Rambam says מבטלין תלמודו של תורה לשמוע מקרא מגילה, talmudo shel torah. It's an actual bittul torah, stop learning. but it's still being m'vatel just set it up more or less like this. If you m'vatel a shiur, let's say let's say you're having a shiur in Kiddushin, and you m'vatel a shiur in Kiddushin to go hear Megilla. So it's correct to say that you were m'vatel the shiur to go hear Megilla. But you're not m'vatel Talmud Torah. It's not stam that you're m'vatel the Talmud Torah that you were that you were that you were occupied in. He could have been occupied in Megilla also. He could have been what if he what if he was what if he was what if he was like Megilla? So then you're still being m'vatel the limud b'iyun. You're still being m'vatel the zman. But the mitzvah of Krias Shema is not simply Talmud Torah, but is also קבלת עול מלכות שמים as part of the maiseh hamitzvah. The Yerushalmi apparently holds that the maiseh hamitzvah that ein hachi nami there is an inyan of kiyuum hamitzvah of קבלת עול מלכות שמים, but the maiseh hamitzvah is purely Talmud Torah, krias haparsha. And that's enough that you can say האי שינון והאי שינון. What about zecher l'yetzias Mitzrayim? I'm sorry? What about zecher l'yetzias Mitzrayim? All right, so that would depend upon whether zecher l'yetzias Mitzrayim is a separate mitzvah or, like Rav Chaim says about the Rambam, that it's really a part of קבלת עול מלכות שמים and part of mitzvas Krias Shema. But mistama, I don't know, mistama according to the Yerushalmi that Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and his chaveirov have to say zecher l'yetzias Mitzrayim, probably yeah. You probably can only say Rav Chaim's vort only according to the Bavli anyway. No, but the Gemorah in Berachos mashma it said both yetzias Mitzrayim and he said the Kabbalas Ol also. Isn't Talmud Torah b'tzibur like Krias haTorah, isn't that a cheluk than regular stam Talmud Torah in the first place? Talmud Torah again, is it? Talmud Torah b'tzibur. Isn't that a din chiluk than a regular stam Talmud Torah? Is it different? Yes, absolutely is. So wouldn't that be m'vatel the not listening to the Krias haTorah, wouldn't that already also be going morid bakdusha to say your own Torah, to go on your own Torah, even though even though you're only being m'vatel Talmud Torah b'tzibur, you're being morid it from Megilla you're saying? No, I'm saying for the Gemorah in Berachos that the Rabbi quoted by Rav Sheshet. So isn't he also going away from the greater thing of even though it was in the same beis Torah, it was it was different. It was a ramah dargah, yes. I hear, I hear, I hear your kasha. I hear your kasha. I hear your kasha. I don't know the answer. What about tefilla? What about tefilla? Why why are they mafsik for tefilla? L'chora the teirutz is as follows. L'chora the teirutz is as follows, that by tefilla also you have to say that the Rambam in Sefer haMitzvos quotes the Sifrei that says

עבדהו בכל לבבכם ואיזו היא עבודה שבלב הוי אומר זו תפילה,

right? איזו היא עבודה שבלב זו תפילה. So the Rambam quotes the Sifrei really says that avodah she'blev is not only tefilla, avodah she'blev is also Talmud Torah. The Sifrei says עבדהו בתורתו עבדהו בתפילתו. So l'chora the pshat by Talmud Torah is the same as we're saying by the pshat by tefilla is the same as we're saying by other mitzvos of Talmud Torah, dahinu, dahinu when when there is an a common denominator to Talmud not a common denominator, when it's the same mitzvah of Talmud Torah with what you're doing now, so then you don't have to be mafsik the Talmud Torah. So since Talmud Torah is also a kiyuum avodah, that's why you don't have to be mafsik Talmud Torah for tefilla. No no, I don't I don't I wasn't m'dayek in the words at that point. That since Talmud Torah also constitutes avodah she'blev, the same way tefilla constitutes avodah she'blev, that's why you don't have to be mafsik Talmud Torah for tefilla. That's why you don't have to be mafsik Talmud Torah for tefilla. It's the same yesod that the same way we said you don't have to be mafsik Talmud Torah for another Talmud Torah, so too you don't have to be mafsik avodah she'blev for avodah she'blev. And that's what the Sifrei says, which the Rambam quotes in Sefer haMitzvos mitzvah aseh hei, that עבדהו בתורתו עבדהו בתפילתו. Even if it's a different form of avodah she'blev, if not it's a different avodah she'blev. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and his chaveirov never davened. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and his chaveirov did not daven. It's the same yesod that you can't continue Talmud Torah for another mitzvah, you can't continue Talmud Torah for a...

רבי שמעון בר יוחאי וחביריו ונתן הבבלי רבי שמעון בר יוחאי וחביריו ונתן הבבלי

wait, wait, I, it's the same Tosfot once a week. It's the same yesod that he can't continue Talmud Torah for another mitzvah. He can't continue Talmud Torah for another mitzvah. I don't understand.

רבי שמעון בר יוחאי ותנאי רבי עקיבא ורבי יוחנן בן נתן הבבלי רבי שמעון בר יוחאי ותנאי רבי עקיבא ורבי יוחנן בן נתן הבבלי

and he said kal vachomer you don't do another mitzvah. Was it his chavrusa? I think so. Or maybe you know, his chavrusa. I don't know who would be his chavrusa. Rabbi Akiva and someone else? No, it was like at the time of Succos of Akiva standing around the shiur. No, Shimon bar Yochai and his chavrusa, we never know. I don't know who would be the chavrusa. Number one, they woke up at chatzos. They started at alos hashachar? No, but when they woke up, you mean that at that point they weren't learning? Right. So they probably davened Shacharis? What, you think they woke up after zman tefillah? They slept during... and they slept during the night before chatzos. They had a choice. They woke up at chatzos, no? No, they woke up at chatzos. They would have to stop their learning to put on tefillin, no? Same question for Shabbos for sure. I don't know if they would have at whatever point, at whatever point they woke up, at that point they weren't being mafsik, so they should have davened at that point, you're asking?