We'll go out of order, so let's understand the Ramban here at the end of Perek Chaf-Beis, ואנשי קדש תהיון לי ובשר בשדה טרפה לא תאכלו לכלב תשליכון אתו. ואנשי קדש תהיון לי.
Ta'am hakasuv kacha: כי עד הנה בפרשה הזכיר המשפטים והזהיר מהדברים המכוארים. ואתה כשבא והזהיר באיסור המאכל פתח ואמר ואנשי קדש תהיון לי. שראוי הוא שיאכל האדם כל מה שיחיה בו ואין איסור במאכלם רק טהרה בנפש שתאכל דברים נקיים שלא יולידו עובי וגסות בנפש. על כן אמר ואנשי קדש תהיון לי, כלומר אני חפץ שתהיו אנשי קדש בעבור שתהיו ראויים לי לדבקה בי שאני קדוש. לפיכך לא תגאלו נפשותיכם באכילת הדברים המתועבים.
The Ramban asks a marvelous pshat. The Ramban is clearly prompted by why is it at this point that the Torah introduces the mitzvah with ואנשי קדש תהיון לי? The Ramban says that until this point the mishpatim of the parasha focus on d'varim micho'arim, meaning things that just any civilized society can't tolerate, things that need to be regulated just on the most basic social level. You don't have to necessarily be focusing upon the spiritual dimension of a person to understand the mitzvos. That you have dinei shomer, that you have dinei of chovel and mazzik. So any civilized society has to address these situations, has to outlaw the d'varim micho'arim. Right? Not to... the Ramban... I think we discussed this Ramban a little bit when he's being massig on the Rambam's comment in Hilchos Melachim about why Shimon and Levi were justified in killing the anshei Shechem. So in that context the Rambam limits dinim, the seventh of the שבע מצות בני נח, to that there should be a judicial system that enforces the other six of the שבע מצות בני נח. And the Ramban says... It's much broader than that. It's that also, but it's much, much broader than that. You have to have mishpatim. There has to be bnei Noach also have to have something which says that you can't that an employer can't withhold payment from his employee לא תעשוק שכר עני ואביון. And it also has to address what happens in cases of chovel u'mazik. And that's the same idea the Ramban here, that ad heina, it's not the the mitzvot are not you don't need to introduce the spiritual dimension of a person. Even if a person were not going to be seeking, questing for kedusha, all those mitzvot would be totally warranted and necessary. Ve'ata, now, when the Torah's first introducing the first of the ma'achalot assurot, ואתה כשבא להשכיל באיסור המאכל פתח ואמר ואנשי קדש תהיון לי.
Excuse me. פתח ואמר ואנשי קדש תהיון לי. שראוי הוא שיאכל אדם כל מה שיחיה בו,
meaning on a natural level, so we would have said, a person there shouldn't be any distinctions, any differentiations between yes, you can eat tuna, but no, you can't be eating lobster. If you're hungry and the lobster's going to sustain you, so we would have thought, again, on the natural level, so we would have thought, there is no difference. We wouldn't have known any difference on that level. שראוי הוא שיאכל אדם כל מה שיחיה בו. If it gives you your protein, if it gives you the nutrition you need. ואין האיסור במאכל רק טהר הנפש. Says the Ramban, the root of ma'achalot assurot is the distinctions between those, between beheima tehorah and beheima tmei'ah, between ma'achalot assurot and ma'achalot hamutarot are all metaphysical, spiritual distinctions. Mitzad, again, on the physical, natural level. On the natural level, you have to have a parsha of avodah and you have to have a parsha of retzicha and you have to have a parsha of chovel bechavero and you have to have a parsha of arba'ah avos nezikin. It's on the spiritual level that you have the issur ma'achalot assurot. ואין האיסור במאכל רק טהר הנפש שתאכל דברים נקיים שלא יולידו עובי וגסות בנפש.
The Ramban subscribes to you are what you eat, but not in a physical sense, in a metaphysical sense, in a spiritual sense. Al kein amar, that's why it's at this juncture when the Torah's about to introduce an issur of ma'achalot assurot, על כן אמר ואנשי קדש תהיון לי כלומר אני חפץ שתהיו אנשי קדש בעבור שתהיו ראויים לי ודוקא בשאני קדוש לפיכך לא תגאלו נפשתיכם
ba'achilas hadavar hanissor. The Rambam in the hakdama to the Yad, so he after listing the minyan taryag, he then introduces us to the yud daled sfarim, tells us what the... name and the content, the subject matter of each of the Yud Daled Sefarim are. Sefer Chamishi. אכלו בו מצות ביאות אסורות ומצות מאכלות אסורות. In Sefer Kedusha of the Rambam, you have Hilchos Ma'achalos Assuros, Hilchos Issurei Biah, and Hilchos Shechita, which is basically part of Ma'achalos Assuros conceptually, right? אכלו בו מצות ביאות אסורות ומצות מאכלות אסורות לפי שבשני עניינים האלו קדשנו המקום והבדילנו מן האומות בעריות ובמאכלות אסורות ובשניהם נאמר ואבדיל אתכם מן העמים אשר הבדלתי אתכם מן העמים וקראתי שם ספר זה ספר קדושה.
So the Rambam clearly is also sensitive to this same question as the Ramban. The association of kedusha with ma'achalos assuros. But certainly elsewhere when the Rambam tells us about the specifics of which minim the Torah assared and what the Torah allows us to eat, the Rambam doesn't have any, that does not that the food has any kind of spiritual contamination. The Rambam explains it in that they're singled out for more mundane and earthly reasons. So then the question is again so what does it mean that בשני עניינים אלו קדשנו המקום והבדילנו מן האומות? And in fact what does that mean? Kedushas Yisroel expresses itself in taryag mitzvos. So what does the Rambam mean that beshnei inyanim elu? And when we made a beracha this morning אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להניח תפילין, so that's not beshnei inyanim elu. What what does the Rambam mean that it's beshnei inyanim elu? So let's say let's say someone someone will ask any of you either if you're already graduated or if those still in college what did you or what are you studying in college? Mistanma, you're going to say you're going to mention your major. I studied psychology, I was pre-med, whatever it is. You're not going to list every single isolated course that you happened to take and you're going to talk about your area of concentration. So le-pum reihata. It doesn't mean le-pum reihata doesn't mean that that kedusha is only associated, but le-ma'aseh, le-ma'aseh the Rambam writes in one place that the rov of the mitzvos ha-Torah are to curb our physical impulses and desires and to and to and to cut it down to size. So it's it's the area of concentration within mitzvos. But itachen that it goes much deeper than that. I think in in the past we had occasion to look at the teshuvos ha-Rambam, context of the teshuvos ha-Rambam in the Blau edition 224, context of the teshuvos ha-Rambam he was asked about listening to. So Arabic music. So the Rambam didn't think much about Arabs. He didn't think much about music and he certainly didn't like the combination of of the Arabic music and then he lists all the all the all the issurim as as he sees it. And then in that context the Rambam makes the following, and again obviously it's my translation. וכבר התבאר האמת במקומו והיא שהכוונה בנו she'nihiyeh goy kadosh. HaKadosh Baruch Hu gave us the Torah. ואתם תהיו לי ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש. הכוונה בנו שניהיה גוי קדוש.
What does that mean? What does it mean to be a goy kadosh? ולא יהיה לנו מעשה ולא דיבור אלא בשלמות או במה שמביא אל השלמות.
Again, הכוונה בנו שניהיה גוי קדוש ולא יהיה לנו מעשה ולא דיבור אלא בשלמות או במה שמביא אל השלמות.
The semantics of of the word kadosh, kadosh means to be set aside, to be designated for a specific purpose. Well, that's what the word means. You find be'lashon Chazal, again, we assign we have the most positive associations with the word. But in terms of etymologically, lav davka that that designation has to be positive. You find in Chazal, לשון הקדש לעבודה זרה. That something was was set aside for avoda zara. Hekdesh doesn't mean the the semantics of the word are not that kadosh or hekdesh means holy or sacred, but what it means is set aside for a specific purpose, isha kedeisha, set aside, designated for a specific purpose. The way it comes to mean kedusha in the sense of of what's sacred, what's holy, is when it's set aside for the most and designated for the most noble of of purposes. So when the Torah tells us that that kabbalas haTorah is is to give us the mitzvos, the roadmap to becoming a goy kadosh, it means to be a consecrated people. That's the translation of goy kadosh. To be a consecrated people. To be to be a nation, to be a people who are consecrated to what? To HaKadosh Baruch Hu. ולא יהיה לנו מעשה ולא דיבור אלא בשלמות או במה שמביא אל השלמות.
So now yitachen what the pshat in in the Rambam's explanation of Sefer Kedusha and by extension of of our pasuk is avada avada every every mitzvas haTorah expresses and is a function of kedushas Yisrael, avada avada. But what what separates us which is the foundational aspect of kedusha is the perishus of those mitzvas haTorah which which a person can only be consecrated to HaKadosh Baruch Hu. A person can only be be be consecrated to HaKadosh Baruch Hu when he's parosh min hachomriyos. A person who's shakuah, a person who's wallowing in in the chomriyos and obviously the two primary primary urges, instincts, desires that that a person has are in these areas of bi'os asuros and ma'achalos asuros. A person can't be consecrated to HaKadosh Baruch Hu when when those taivos are sholtos alav. A person can't be consecrated. He can put on tefillin every day. He can put on tefillin every day. But lema'aseh if the person is is shakuah in those taivos, he's not kadosh. He's not kadosh to HaKadosh Baruch Hu. Again, obviously he has kedushas Yisrael. Kedusha avosecha a person is is born with. But in terms of personally realizing and actualizing and and living up to that kedusha, before a person before the the basis for it is is the the the perishus. which the whole system of mitzvos of bi'as asuros and ma'achalos asuros provide us. So on that level the Rambam would tell us you don't have to look for some some metaphysical spiritual contamination in in the beheima temeya and the dag tamei. Nakon, the spiritual contamination is the is the being shakua in gashmius, is the is the not being able to to curb and and channel as the Torah tells us to do so. Now that discipline which the Torah imposed upon us so how did Hakadosh Baruch Hu decide what what do his decisions reflect in terms of so lichora it's the same discipline if a person doesn't eat tuna but eats lobster as it is if he doesn't eat lobster but eats but eats tuna. So there the Rambam has you know how how he thinks what the what the rationale is for for singling out the that this is mutar bachila and and that's assur bachila. But the kedusha shebo again and and the avoiding what the Ramban continues אל תשקצו את נפשותיכם doesn't have to you don't have to find again some metaphysical spiritual contaminant which is inherent in in the the the the of tamei, the beheima temeya, the the the the dagim temeyim. Nakon, the spiritual contaminant is the the the lack of prishus, the the not being kadosh, not being consecrated. To be consecrated to Hakadosh Baruch Hu means that a person has to be osek in gashmius only to the degree that that it's that that it allows him to to live such a life of avodas Hashem. If you go back just a little bit earlier at Revei, אלהים לא תקלל ונשיא בעמך לא תאור. One of one facet of the Ramban's multifaceted genius was that he had a remarkable sense for language and we find etymologies here and there in the Ramban. So this is one of those places. אלהים לא תקלל. אונקלוס תירגם על הדיין. But this is the lav for kilalas hadayan שלא יקלל אותו כאשר יחייבנו בדין. Again Onkelos didn't say it right Onkelos just said in terms of the punctuation in the Ramban. Onkelos just said dayana lo sakil. He translates interprets Elokim as dayan. Then the Ramban is telling us on the level of ta'amei mitzvos there's a there's a issur to be mekalel anyone miYisrael lo sekalel cherish. So why does the Torah have an additional lav davka for the dayan? So the Ramban says because a person is is likely to to get angry if he if he's on the losing end of of a verdict in Beis Din. אונקלוס תירגם על הדיין שלא יקלל אותו כאשר יחייבנו בדין.
lo sakil which is the phrase from Onkelos, לשון קללה הוא בארמית. What that means in Aramaic is is to curse. מקלה הוא יכרת ה' לאיש אשר יעשנה ער ועונה וכן הרבה בלשון ירושלמי.
Then Ramban continues ונשיא בעמך לא תאור and it's what we translate. then Ramban continues ונשיא בעמך לא תאור that's what we translate the nasi as the head, right, the more modern translation president says the Ramban what's it hanisa al ha'am. Someone who's elevated over the people, right, that's the etymology of the word nasi, that he's elevated in the sense that he governs, that he rules. ונשיא בעמך לא תאור הנישא על העם, the nasi is the person who is nisa, right, who is elevated over the nation, v'hu hamalech. And that refers first and foremost to the melech. And says the Ramban, same thing, why do you have a special lav here is he lo govha from any other Jew? Why wasn't the Torah just content with lo tekalel cheresh, which covers every Jew? והזהיר שלא יאור אותו, because the melech also has prerogative to dan people and to punish people. And there too, it's something that may anger a person and he might be he needs extra reinforcement, extra inhibition, not to curse. והזהיר שלא יאור אותו כאשר יחייב אותו במשפטו. ועל דעת רבותינו בגמרא,
according to Chazal, אלוהים לא תקלל אזהרה על ברכת השם אפילו בכינוי. Refers to the giduf, refers to Rachmana litzlan, birchas hashem, leshon sagi nahor. Vehineh hizhir, says the Ramban, so according to Chazal, so then the pshat is that the word elohim, on one hand it's lashon kodesh, on the other hand it's elohim lashon chol, it has both meanings. והנה הזהיר על המלך העליון יתברך ועל המלך בארץ. Again, refers to the מלך מלכי המלכים הקדוש ברוך הוא, but also refers to the melech basar vadam. והם אמרו בגמרא כי יכנס בכלל אלוהים השם הנכבד והשופט אשר ישב באלוהים בארץ. ולא נתבאר הלכה למעשה,
says in Chazal, and he'll bring a rayah in a minute, but it's not mamash mamash black and white. ולא נתבאר אם נכנס בכלל הנשיא ראש סנהדרין הגדולה שנקרא נשיא בגמרא.
Right, the head of the sanhedrin hagedolah who's described as the nasi, does he also have a din of nasi for purposes of this posuk, ונשיא בעמך לא תאור? Verabeinu Moshe, the Rambam, אמר שהוא בכלל האזהרה הזאת. Rambam says that he also has a din of nasi. וכן נראה לי ממה ששווה יהודה הנשיא על עצמו כגון אני מה אני בשעיר.
When it comes to the parshas hachattas, so the Torah also distinguishes asher nasi yecheteh in parshas Vayikra, the Torah also distinguishes between the nasi, again whoever qualifies for that designation, and the hedyotos, and the rest of us. And in that context, Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi says כגון אני מה אני בשעיר. So Yehudah Hanasi, again he wasn't he wasn't a melech, but he was asking whether or not I would have that din. V'im kein yomar, so with what the Rambam tells us that the Ramban thinks is correct al pi hagemara, so then the correct teitch of the posuk that emerges is לסמוך כל נשיא בעם שהוא ראש שררה על כל ישראל.
There's an additional lav not to curse anyone who is elevated, who wields srarah over Yisrael. בין שתהיה השררה ההיא בממשלת מלכות, whether the srarah, the authority that the person wields, is sort of call it governmental authority, that of malchus, בין שתהיה ממשלת התורה. נשיא הסנהדרין הוא במעלה העליונה בשררת התורה.
And just go back to the beginning of the parsha for for a minute. Very beginning. ואלה המשפטים אשר תשים לפניהם כי רצה להקדים להם המשפטים.
The first thing Hakadosh Baruch Hu wants to teach are the mishpatim. Why? At this point, why? כי כאשר היה בעשרת הדברות הדיבור הראשון בידיעת השם והשני באיסור עבודה זרה.
So as the Ramban will, maybe we'll Hopefully we'll see this Ramban bli neder im yirtzeh Hashem next week in his hakdamah to Parshat Terumah. So, the Ramban talks about how the aseret hadibros are sort of individual mitzvos, but they're individual mitzvos which are representative of categories of mitzvos, of the whole spectrum of minyan taryag. But obviously there are so many details which then need to be fleshed out. So in the aseret hadibros, היה בעשרת הדיברות הדיבור הראשון בידיעת השם והשני באיסור עבודה זרה.
So then, חזר וציווה את משה at the end of Parshat Yitro, כה תאמר אל בני ישראל אתם ראיתם כי מן השמים דברתי עמכם, שתזהירם אתה עוד שיתנו לבם למה שראו ויזהרו במצוות אלו שצויתים, כי אתם ראיתם כנגד דיבור אנכי ולא תעשון אתי כנגד לא יהיה לכם להשלים ענין עבודה זרה.
So the Torah is reinforcing and a little bit fleshing out the dibros, the mitzvos of anochi and lo yihyeh. Ve'eleh hamishpatim, so how does the Parshat Mishpatim also how is that a direct follow-up to the aseret hadibros? Haramban says, ואלה המשפטים כנגד לא תחמוד כי אם לא ידע האדם משפט הבית או השדה,
right, beiso shel re'acho, sadeh-hu, etc., ושאר הממון יחשוב שהוא שלו ויחמדהו ויקחהו אל עצמו. לפיכך אמר תשים לפניהם משפטים ישרים ינהיגו אותם ביניהם ולא יחמדו מה שאינו שלהם מן הדין וכן אמרו במדרש רבה כל התורה כולה תלויה במשפט לפיכך נתן הקדוש ברוך הוא דינים אחר עשרת הדיברות.
A person can be very committed to being mekayem lo sachmod. Very committed to being mekayem lo sachmod. If he doesn't know the din Choshen Mishpat, what rightfully belongs to him and what rightfully doesn't belong to him, so all that commitment, sincere, and that determination, also sincere, is not going to translate, it's not going to add up to anything because a person is not going to know how to translate it. That's what the Chofetz Chaim has, must be, he has this amud in one place. But the Chofetz Chaim when he set out to put shemirat halashon on the radar to restore it to its rightful place in shemirat hamitzvos, so he set out to do two things. He has one work where he's melaket all the ma'amarei chazal about the chomera d'issura related to lashon hara. And then the Chofetz Chaim says that's very important, that will motivate us and that will get us to understand again rachmana litzlan what the chomer ha'issur is. But if along side shemirat halashon there isn't a sefer Chofetz Chaim which tells us what is lashon hara and what isn't lashon hara, so all that hitorerus isn't going to translate. Chazon Ish famously has that idea in his Emunah U'bitachon also. That all the mussar, all the hitorerus as sincere as it all is, to know how to appropriately express it, implement it, translate it, a person has to know. The Chazon Ish famously gives his example of, he says let's say you have a melamed in town and then someone else comes and opens up, he puts up his shingle, he hangs up his sign that he's a melamed and he's available to be melamed tinokos. And there's going to be this indignant righteous reaction that he's masig gevul and they'll rodef him. And the Chazon Ish says, but if you look in the Rama Choshen Mishpat, so the Rama says קנאת סופרים תרבה חכמה, so because of that, if there's competition, so then the other melamed will work even harder to be a better melamed and to teach even better. And because קנאת סופרים תרבה חכמה, so then... So he says that all those people who think that they're being מציל עושק מיד עושקו and really worked for him and really worked for him. And the Ramban says also in order for us to know how to be mikayem veshafopt we need to know can I be chomed this or not? Is it rightful mine? Isn't it rightful mine? Maybe just we don't have time for all of it. Maybe just one last part here in the Ramban. Ramban Pasuk Gimmel V'yatza ishto imo. So Ramban begins by quoting Rashi and he tells us that again Rashi as is almost always the case is a meimra Chazal. Rashi וכי מי הכניסה שתצא אלא מגיד שהקונה עבד עברי חייב במזונות אשתו ובניו.
A person who buys an eved ivri is chayav not only to give the eved ivri mezonos he has to give his wife and children as well. Midrash Chachamim hu. This isn't again this is not Rashi's din. Rashi is quoting the Chazal. But if the diyuk is in the phrase V'yatza ishto imo so where did the banav come in? והכניסו עמה הבנים מכתוב שאמר אחר כך ויצא מעמו הוא ובניו עמו.
So ein hachi nami our pasuk only reflects the chiyuv mezonos ishto but later in parshas Behar the other place where we have the parsha of eved ivri in the Torah so there you have the diyuk of banim as well. ויצא מעמו הוא ובניו עמו. ולא נתבאר לי בדין הזה אם מעשה ידי האשה והבנים לאדון כל הימים שיזון אותם.
Meaning the din is that when a husband supports his wife so in exchange for the fact that he supports his wife then he's entitled to her ma'aseh yadayim to her earnings. She can the way we pasken she can opt out of that arrangement if she wants. If she's crazy enough so she can say I'll take my salary and you can keep your pizza you were going to buy for lunch if for some reason she prefers that arrangement then yada al ha'elyona to opt out. But if she's accepting the support so then the din is that תקנו מעשה ידיים תחת מזונות. Ramban says what's the din over here when the adon of the eved ivri is mifarnes the isha u'banim so is he entitled to their ma'aseh yadayim? והנראה בעיני שהוא נכנס במקום הבעל. That the chiyuv mezonos is gufa that the adon of the eved ivri takes over the responsibility but also if there's whatever goes with that responsibility of the baal. שהוא נכנס במקום הבעל כי חמלה התורה על האשה והבנים שחייהם תלויים להם מנגד מצפה מידי הבעל ועתה שנמכר יאבדו בצרתם.
The husband the father who's the source of support for the family so now for the next six years his ma'aseh yadayim don't belong to him because he was sold as an eved ivri so what's going to be with his family what's going to be with his wife and children? So chamla hatorah the Torah has compassion for the wife and the children ולכן צוה האדון שלוקח מעשה ידיו להיות להם במקומו. And it says if you're going to basically not allow him to function as someone who can support his family because you're taking him as an eved so then you have to take over that responsibility. Says the Ramban ואם הכי אם כן לא יהיה על האדון רק חיוב הבעל בלבד.
He won't only have the obligations but he'll also have the quid pro quo ויקח מעשה ידיה כאשר יעשה הבעל ויזון ויפרנס. ובזהו לשון ויצא אשתו עמו.
What does it mean? What's the omek of the drashas chazal v'yatza ishto imo? It's not just that she was living there. Yetzia means a yetzia l'cheirus right? כי היתה אשת העבד עם בעלו כשפחה לאדון. That just as the ma'aseh yadayim of the husband of the eved belonged to the adon so too the ma'aseh yadayim of his wife if she was accepting support also belonged to him, and that's what it means you can use the same lashon of yetzia. שהרי מעשה ידי שניהם שלו וכל זמן שנושאן ein beinehem there is one big difference אלא שהרשות ביד האשה ללכת לנפשה. Again, the isha since she's not, she's not an amah ivriya, she's not the eved ivri, she has her reshus, so she can opt out of that arrangement the same way an eishess ish can opt out of that arrangement with her husband. Then skipping a few lines, then the Ramban has an amazing an amazing insight. He says, so how am I explaining this din of the Torah? I'm explaining that the reason the adon is mechuyav bimezonos for the isha and the banim of the eved ivri is that he's omeid bimkom habaal. Ay, but you'll ask me, ואף על פי שלא היה הוא מחויב במזונותיהם במזונותם מן התורה,
it is a machlokes in the in the Tannaim. So later in in this week's sedra by she'eira k'susa v'onosa, there's a machlokes in the Tannaim, so Rashi takeh quotes the opinion that she'eira means mezonos. Rashi quotes the opinion that the chiyuv mezonos of a baal to support his wife is mi-de'oraisa, and Ramban later in the sedra is massig and says no, that's a daas yachid, and the majority opinion is no, that's only a chiyuv de-rabbanan. Mi-de'oraisa he's not mechuyav. So Ramban says you'll ask me, how can it be? How can it be that I'm telling you pshat is that the Torah is mechayeiv the adon to stand in in the place in lieu of the baal, but the baal himself isn't mechuyav? ואף על פי שלא היה הוא מחויב במזונותם מן התורה כמו שנתבאר בתלמוד בכתובות אבל כיוון שדרך כל הארץ לפרנס אדם אשתו ובניו הקטנים צוה הכתוב ברחמיו להיות הקונה כאב רחמן מהם.
So clearly what what this means, again beyond what what just the meaning goes beyond the literal translation, is that very, very the Ramban here is telling us something very, very fundamental. There are things, many things, that the Torah expects from a person even though the Torah doesn't write it as a mitzvah. And you see clearly here that the Torah's not just sort of sociologically reflecting a sociologically reflecting a sociological metzius שדרך כל הארץ לפרנס אדם אשתו ובניו הקטנים, but obviously the Torah says that's what's supposed to be, that's what should be, that's what the Torah expects of us. So one can't infer, right? It's it's it's a fallacy to to infer that if there's no pasuk in the Torah that says it's a chiyuv, that the Torah doesn't expect it from us. Why are there some chiyuvim that the Torah sort of does codify in the Torah and there are others that are left as self-understood expectations? I don't know, that's takeh a big question to try to if if one can figure out what's what. But the absence of of a pasuk doesn't in any way translate into the Torah's not interested in it, it's optional. No, the Torah's expecting that a baal is supporting his wife, that a baal is supporting his his young children, and mimaila the Torah then says that that expectation, which which is supposed to be the case, which we expect of the baal, so that gets transferred to the adon in in the case of of the eved ivri.