Transcript

Good morning rabosai. Let's take a look here in Perek Yud Aleph, Pasuk Aleph in Ramban. So the pasuk

וידבר ה' אל משה ואל אהרן לאמר אליהם דברו אל בני ישראל לאמר זאת החיה אשר תאכלו מכל הבהמה אשר על הארץ. המצות בפרשיות האלה נוהגות בישראל ובכהנים.

Meaning the Ramban is following up on what we saw in the hakdama to explain how everything in Sefer Vayikra is included because of its connection, its relevance to Toras Kohanim. So lichora these parshiyos that there's nothing which is, these parshiyos are equally applicable to Yisraelim and kohanim, thereby implicitly posing the question as to why is it in Sefer Toras Kohanim.

אבל ענינם מרובה בכהנים כי הם צריכים להשמר תמיד מנגיעת הטומאה.

So yeah the dinim are all equally applicable to Yisraelim and kohanim but they're much more relevant, they're much more significant to kohanim בעבור שיצטרכו לבוא במקדש ולאכול בקדשי. The fact that nevelasam lo sigo'u, that the nevela of all the beheima temei'a is metamei. So that's true, it's metamei Yisrael also, but it's not so relevant to Yisrael with the exception of Shalosh Regalim he has no chiyuv to be tahor, ma she'ein kein the kohanim by virtue of doing avoda and eating basar kodshim. So the dinei tuma are more relevant to them, hence its inclusion in Toras Kohanim.

ועוד כי אם שגגו ישראל בהם חייבים להביא עליהם קרבן שיקריבו הכהנים.

Meaning shagegu in that they incurred tuma and then they went into the Mikdash or then they ate kodshim. Ve'od shetziva osam so for that reason since it triggers korban, it also links up with the Sefer Toras Kohanim. And thirdly

ועוד שצוה אותם ולהבדיל בין הקדש ובין החול ובין הטמא ובין הטהור והנה הם צריכים להורות לישראל הטמא והטהור שיהיו נזהרים בהם.

And thirdly it relates to Toras Kohanim in that it's the responsibility of the kohanim to instruct Bnei Yisrael that they not be nichshal in tuma resulting in

איסורי טומאת מקדש וקדשיו. על כן היה הדבור הזה אל משה ואל אהרן שניהם

as is the case here in our parsha

אל משה שיאמר אל אהרן וצוה לשניהם דברו אל בני ישראל. ולכך נאמר בספר תורת כהנים. ויעשה בפרשה באכילה ובטומאה שלא יטמא המקדש וקדשיו.

So two weeks ago when we were learning the Ramban's hakdama to Sefer Vayikra, so we suggested there that the Ramban lichora all the reasons the Ramban has laid forth here for the inclusion of the dinim of kashrus here in Sefer Toras Kohanim all relate to the fact that well those animals which are asuros beachila so shechita is irrelevant, you do a shechita on a chamor it doesn't... So it's true that all these dinim have relevance to tumah as well, but they're also just dinim of issur v'heter. So we suggested based on the Ramban in the hakdamah, we had a diyuk. So is it just the fact that really it belongs in Sefer Toras Kohanim because there are dinim of tumah as well? And agav that, the dinei issur v'heter are also included? Or no? We suggested that what the Ramban means is that the issur v'heter and tumah v'taharah is one continuum. Let's just to review how that emerges from the psukim, just reading here beginning in pasuk daled: אך את זה לא תאכלו ממעלי הגרה וממפריסי הפרסה. So even though it chews its cud, and even though it has split hooves, meaning it has one of the two, but אף על פי כן, if it only if it doesn't have both, it's gonna be assur. It has to have both to be muttar.

את הגמל כי מעלה גרה הוא ופרסה איננו מפריס טמא הוא לכם.

And similarly

ואת השפן כי מעלה גרה הוא ופרסה לא יפריס טמא הוא לכם ואת הארנבת כי מעלת גרה היא ופרסה לא הפריסה טמאה היא לכם.

They all have one of the two simanim. So far the siman of ma'aleh gerah, of chewing the cud, but not the split hooves. V'es hachazir, which is the opposite,

כי מפריס פרסה הוא ושסע שסע פרסה והוא גרה לא יגר טמא הוא לכם.

So what we understood the Ramban to be underscoring here and highlighting is that this is very very distinctive in that the Torah is talking about the issur achilah and it's expressing the issur achilah in terms of tumah. Right? The Torah doesn't say לא תלבש שעטנז צמר ופשתים יחדו because tamei hu lachem. Now, it's true that here there also is a din tumah, right? The neveilah of these animals is metamei, but the Torah uses the lashon tumah even when it's talking exclusively about the issur achilah. Again, pasuk daled: אך את זה לא תאכלו ממעלי הגרה וממפריסי הפרסה, excuse me,

את הגמל כי מעלה גרה הוא ופרסה איננו מפריס טמא הוא לכם.

We're not talking about dinei tumah. We're talking exclusively about issur achilah and the issur achilah is attributed to the tumah. Right? That's what we discussed a couple of weeks ago. Dehainu, so what the Ramban's havana here is, no it's not the pshat that the dinei tumah pertain to Toras Kohanim, but heyos that the same donkey, the same chazir, the same shafan which has dinei tumah also has dinei issur v'heter, so we might as well take them all, deal with both of them together at the same time even though it's really two separate parshiyos. No, the vort is like this. The vort is that the tumah expresses itself hen in what we colloquially call tumah as well as issur. And that's why it's one continuum, and that's why heyos that tumah is the subject matter of Sefer Toras Kohanim, that these parshiyos are included in Toras Kohanim. The issur stems from the tumah. It's not that, that again, the very, the very classification that we use of behemah tmeiah when talking about issur v'heter reflects this yesod. L'chora, a further raya to this is the following. Let's look at the following two mekoros and b'ezras hashem. is the very last halacha in Hilchos Tumas Ochlin.

אף על פי שמותר לאכול אוכלין טמאים ולשתות משקין טמאים חסידים הראשונים,

meaning as long as it's chullin, right? Obviously if it's terumos so then there is an issur, but the Rambam is talking about chullin.

אף על פי שמותר לאכול אוכלין טמאים ולשתות משקין טמאים חסידים הראשונים היו אוכלים חולין בטהרה ונזהרין מן הטומאות כולן כל ימיהם,

meaning not only tumas ochlin, all tumah.

והם הנקראים פרושים ודבר זה קדושה יתירה היא ודרך חסידות שיהיה אדם נבדל ופרוש משאר העם ולא ייגע בהם ולא יאכל ולא ישתה עמהם שהפרישות מביאה לידי טהרת הגוף ממעשים רעים וטהרת הגוף מביאה לידי קדושת הנפש מן הדעות הרעות וקדושת הנפש גורמת להידמות בשכינה שנאמר והתקדשתם והייתם קדושים כי קדוש אני.

One mareh makom. Now if you turn in the Ramban to the beginning of Parshas Kedoshim, let's see another mareh makom. The very first Ramban, the famous Ramban in Kedoshim Tihyu after he quotes Rashi and then he quotes the Toras Kohanim. If you see where it says אבל הפרישות היא המוזכרת בכל מקום בתלמוד, Chazal darshen on Kedoshim Tihyu: Hevei Prushim, כשם שאני פרוש כך תהיו אתם פרושים. So what is this mandate to be a parush?

אבל הפרישות היא המוזכרת בכל מקום בתלמוד שבעליה נקראים פרושים.

Those who practice perishus are known as prushim. והעניין כי התורה הזהירה בעריות ובמאכלים אסורים, but on the other hand, והתירה הביאה איש באשתו ואכילת הבשר והיין. im kein,

ימצא בעל התאווה מקום להיות שטוף בזימת אשתו או נשיו הרבות ולהיות בסובאי יין בזוללי בשר למו,

and furthermore,

וידבר כרצונו בכל הנבלות שלא הוזכר איסור זה בתורה, והנה יהיה נבל ברשות התורה. לפיכך בא הכתוב אחרי שפירט האיסורים שאסר אותם לגמרי וציווה בדבר כללי שנהיה פרושים מן המותרות.

yemat b'mishgal tashmish ke'inyan she'omru

שלא יהיו תלמידי חכמים מצויים אצל נשותיהם כתרנגולין ולא ישמש אלא כפי הצורך בקיום המצווה ממנו ויקדש עצמו מן היין במיעוטו כמו שקרא הכתוב הנזיר קדוש ויזכור הרעות הנזכרות ממנו בתורה בנוח ובלוט.

Now and here the lines that we need to focus on:

וכן יפריש עצמו מן הטומאה אף על פי שלא הוזהרנו ממנו בתורה כעניין שהזכירו בגדי עם הארץ מדרס לפרושים וכמו שנקרא הנזיר קדוש בשמרו מטומאת המת גם כן.

Then the Ramban continues

וגם ישמור פיו ולשונו מהתגאל בריבוי האכילה הגסה ומן הדיבור הנמאס

v'chulu. So the yesod, the famous yesod of the Ramban here is that even in those areas which the Torah doesn't categorically... A person still has to practice moderation, has to practice self-discipline and and that's what the hiyuv of Kedoshim Tihyu is. Ma'achalot Asurot the Torah prohibits categorically. All kosher food the Torah obviously doesn't prohibit categorically, but even there Kedoshim Tihyu says that a person has to exercise self-discipline and and be moderate. He has to be parush, abstinent. The Torah lets a person drink wine. It's obviously not something the Torah categorically prohibits, but Kedoshim Tihyu says that a person has to be moderate in that consumption, vechulu. And the Ramban mentions יפרוש עצמו מן הטומאה in this context. But how how does that... so how does that fit with all the other examples? In other words, it doesn't... all the other examples seem to be of of the same. Obviously it's mutar to talk. The fact that it's mutar to talk doesn't mean that a person shouldn't be refined and disciplined in how he speaks. It's mutar to eat kosher food, but that doesn't mean that a person shouldn't be refined and disciplined and and moderate in in what he eats. So what... how does tumah fit in? No, tumah's only relevant if you want to go into the Beis Hamikdash. It's only relevant if you want to eat basar kodshim or or trumah. So what's... so here you see klar here from this Ramban. You see lich'ora it corroborates what what we've understood in the Ramban, what his explanation really is for why both Parshas Shmini and Parshas Acharei Mos have the dinim of kashrus, the dinei arayos, that both of these issurim are are expressed in terms of tumah is that be'emes there's some types of tumah that the Torah Torah categorically prohibits. Beheimah tmeiah is tumah that the Torah categorically prohibits. Arayos

ולא תקיא הארץ אתכם בטמאכם אתה כאשר קאה את הגוי אשר לפניכם.

Why? Because they, when they practice all these to'evos, vatitma ha'aretz. There's some types of of tumah such as arayos that the Torah categorically prohibits. But the same way there's some foods, ma'achalot asurot, the Torah categorically prohibits, but then Kedoshim Tihyu says even what's mutar a person should practice abstinence. Okay, a person has to know bemiddah ulemishkal to what degree vechulu vechulu. But a person should practice bemiddah ulemishkal hara'uyos... hara'uyim a person should should be parush. So the same thing is true for tumah. So you see lich'ora klar here, again this is the the same tfisah of the Ramban that tumah is on the spectrum of issur. Again, we we totally compartmentalize and tumah's got nothing to do with issur other than the fact that a tamei is assur to do some things. But the etzem tumah's got nothing to do with issur, right? A tamei can't eat trumah, he can't eat kodshim, he can't do avodah, he can't go into the Beis Hamikdash. Okay, but but the tumah keshelatzma we don't see as being on the spectrum as issur veheter. And the Ramban is saying no, tumah is on the spectrum of issur veheter. So there's some types of the tumah that the Torah prohibits categorically. Arayos is is something that act is such an intense form of tumah, is so defiling that that it's a tumah that the Torah categorically... is so defiling that the Torah categorically prohibits l'achila. But then, just as in every other case here in Parshas Kedoshim, there are other areas where the Torah doesn't categorically prohibit tumma. But that's where kedoshim tihiyu applies and says, but even there a person should be parush. So l'ichora what we see here in the Ramban is that same tfisa. Why is it a midas chasidus to avoid tumma? It's a midas chasidus, משל למה הדבר דומה, let's say Reish Lakish is of the opinion, it's a machlokes Rebbe Yochanan and Reish Lakish whether חצי שיעור אסור מן התורה. So Rebbe Yochanan says, and this is how we paskin, chatzi shiur is assur min HaTorah. But Reish Lakish holds no, chatzi shiur is only assur m'derabbanan. So haga atzmecha, would Reish Lakish say that it's not even a midas chasidus to avoid eating a חצי שיעור מן התורה? It's only because it's assur m'derabbanan and before the issur derabbanan was imposed or independent of the issur derabbanan, it's not a midas chasidus מן התורה? So I think one's intuition, one's correct intuition is of course it's assur. Of course it's a midas chasidus. It's on the spectrum of issur, of course it's a midas chasidus. Of course it's a midas chasidus. The fact that the Torah said categorically from k'zayis, but it's still a midas chasidus owing to the fact that it's on that spectrum. So that's for the Ramban, it's a midas chasidus to be nizaher from tumma because it's on that spectrum. Because at a certain level, at a certain point, so tumma does translate into issur. Now we said for purposes of contrast, look in the Rambam. How does the Rambam explain the midas chasidus of avoiding tumma? For the Rambam, the midas chasidus of avoiding tumma is inherent, is intrinsic. It's because tumma is on this spectrum of issur. That's why there's a midas chasidus to avoid it. But for the Rambam, v'davar zeh, we're reading here, the fact that they're נזהרים מן הטומאות כולם כל ימיהם the prushim. So ודבר זה קדושה יתירה היא ודרך חסידות. Why? What is the what is the midas chasidus in so doing? Why is it a midas chasidus to see to it that one's piece of fish isn't tamei before one eats it? One's one's dag tahor didn't become tamei b'tumma itself? Why why is that a midas chasidus? Or for that matter other types of tumma?

ודבר זה קדושה יתירה היא ודרך חסידות שיהיה אדם נבדל ופורש משאר העם ולא יגע בהם ולא יאכל ולא ישתה עמהם.

So the Rambam says emes is like this. The Rambam doesn't see that that it's inherently or intrinsically a midas chasidus. The Rambam says that that someone who's nizaher to eat chullin b'tahara, he's not going to he's not going to join gatherings of amei aratzim. He's not going to be at a beer drinking party where they're ich veis eating their pretzels and drinking their beer because the his midas chasidus of of insisting to eat chullin b'tahara is basically going to mean that there are very few venues if any where he can be, so he's not going to be at these parties. And a-vada a-vada he's not going to go to the Kiddush Club. And he's not going to he's not going to be involved with amei aratzim which would lead to ma'asim ra'im. שהפרישות מביאה לידי טהרת הגוף ממעשים רעים. Once the person avoids those ma'asim ra'im and attains that taharas haguf, so the טהרת הגוף מביאה לידי קדושת הנפש מן הדעות הרעות. By focusing on eating chullin b'taharah, it keeps a person away from the wrong places. So even though the conscious focus, as it were, is just on taharas haguf, but by staying away from the wrong places, so if a person does end up joining in the wrong gatherings, participating in the wrong gatherings and meals, so it's not just tumas haguf that a person gets there, it's tumas hanefesh, because the type of excess that happens there is something which represents a kilkul hamidos. טהרת הגוף מביאה לידי קדושת הנפש מן הדעות הרעות. Again, de'os for the Rambam mean midos. Ayin Hilchos De'os. וקדושת הנפש גורמת להידמות בשכינה. So a very very different kavanah on the midas chasidus of taharah. Sometimes this is true in so many different areas and so many different contexts. A person can have a zehiras on something which kshel'atzmo doesn't seem or maybe even isn't, objectively, so significant. But that set into motion a chain reaction which does result in very significant hakpados. Let's take a moshal. Let's say a person has a hakpadah weiss of going to sleep by a certain hour. Maybe that hakpadah initially, maybe it's even motivated by, or even if it's not motivated by, it can be framed by sustaining one's health. But itachen and again, obviously, this is just intended as a moshal, whether one finds this literally true or whether one needs to tweak and adjust it is not the point. But itachen me'od that that same harchakah, when a person gets very tired, so sometimes a person's guard drops, there's less self-discipline and the person is more prone to doing the wrong thing at 2:00 in the morning than 2:00 in the afternoon. So that's certainly true some of the time for some people some of the time. I don't know if it's true for everyone all the time, but it's likhora certainly true for some people some of the time. So that's the type of application of, that's the, that's an illustration, another illustration of the Rambam's yesod. Chulin betahara again seems to be a tremendous hakpada on something relatively speaking minor or insignificant. And the Rambam says, yeah, but you know what, it sets into motion a process which results in lehidamot bashechina. Basically it's the, what we're talking certainly overlaps with the rationale of harchakos derabanan as well. By being nizaher on things which maybe ein hachi nami objectively are small and minor, but the dividend is great and certainly major. Okay. Let's take a look just, we don't have too much time, maybe just briefly at the Ramban here by Nadav and Avihu in the beginning of perek yud. So the pasuk:

ויקחו בני אהרן נדב ואביהו איש מחתתו ויתנו בהן אש וישימו עליה קטרת ויקריבו לפני ה' אש זרה אשר לא צוה אתם.

What does the Ramban say? זה חטא נדב ואביהו. What was their chet? So תדעהו ממה שאמר ויקריבו לפני ה' אש זרה. The key to understanding is to notice that the Torah describes that the chet was that they offered an esh zara.

ולא אמר ויקריבו לפני ה' קטרת אשר לא צוה אותם,

but rather אש זרה אשר לא צוה אותם. The fact that they brought ketores nedava, that wasn't the chet. The Ramban is saying no, during the chanukas hamishkan, so the nesiyim every day brought a korban chatas nedava. There is no such thing ledoros. There's no such thing ledoros as bringing a chatas nedava. And yet as hora'as sha'ah it did happen and it was merutzeh. So the fact that the ketores is אשר לא צוה אותם, that wasn't the issue. So what's the esh zara?

והנה הם שמו קטורת על האש כענין שאמר הכתוב ישימו קטורה באפך ולא שמו לבם רק לזאת והנה לא היה אישה ריח ניחוח. וזה טעם וישימו עליה קטורת שלא אמר וישימו עליהן קטורת כאשר נאמר בעדת קרח ושימו בהן אש ושימו עליהן קטורת ושם עוד ונתתם עליהם קטורת אלא אמר בכאן עליה לרמוז כי על האש בלבד שמו קטורת.

So if you happen to be looking in a Toras Chaim Chumash, so you can look in footnote 35. That's what I'm reading from now. Vehamaktir lemidas hadin. This is a quote from Rabbeinu Bachya who often elaborates things that the Ramban says.

והמקטיר למידת הדין אין ראוי לו שיכווין אלא לשם המיוחד לבדו. נדב ואביהו טעו בכאן אחרי מידת הדין ולא כיוונו אל השם המיוחד אלא למידת הדין בלבד ולכך לא היה אישה ריח ניחוח לה' ומידת הדין עצמה פגעה בהם.

So the Ramban, if you go back, this is a recurring motif in the Ramban. If you go back to פרק א' פסוק ט' for a moment. After the Ramban quoted the Rambam and was massing the Rambam and gives his own alternative to the Rambam al pi nigla for the kavanos, so then the Ramban says ve'al derech ha'emes. So this is the Ramban פרק א פסוק ט. Again in the Toras Chaim Chumash it's page yud, the paragraph beginning here in the right-hand corner,

ועל דרך האמת יש בקרבנות סוד נעלם תתבונן בו ממה שאמרו רבותינו בספרי ובסוף מנחות אמר שמעון בן עזאי בא וראה מה כתיב בפרשת הקרבנות שלא נאמר בהם לא לאל ולא לאלהיך ולא לאלהיכם ולא לשדי ולא לצבאות אלא

Yud-Key shem hamiyuchad. Korbanos of the שבעה שמות שאינם נמחקין. Right, we know there are seven names of Hakadosh Baruch Hu. שבעה שמות שאינם נמחקין. So korbanos are always associated with Yud-Key-Vav-Key. What does that mean? So the again very superficially, the difference between the name Yud-Key-Vav-Key, right, which is referred to as the shem hamiyuchad, as opposed to the other shemos, the other shemos all derive from what we observe Hakadosh Baruch Hu acting in the world. So we observe Hakadosh Baruch Hu acting as with din, with srara, so hence we have the name of Elokim, שאין אלהים אלא דיין ונתתיך אלהים לפרעה, you'll have the srara over Pharoah. It's din u'srara v'chulu. The other shemos all refer to different midos that we in our fragmented view see in Hakadosh Baruch Hu's conduct and governance of the world. With the shem hamiyuchad we just refer to Hakadosh Baruch Hu without trying to capture or depict a mida that we see in Hakadosh Baruch Hu's conduct or governance of the world. We're just referring to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When a person is makriv korbanos, and the truth is this applies to all mitzvos, but when a person is makriv korbanos, a person can rachmana litzlan make the following terrible blunder. A person's kavana can be that this korban has the koach to assuage and deflect a midas hadin. So I'm orienting my hakravas hakorban to that midas hadin. I'm looking to assuage that midas hadin. Ketoires which is the most potent of the korbanos is otzeres mageifa. So it means that the ketoires has a koach to deflect, to assuage, to silent, to suppress a midas hadin. So what's so terrible about that? What's so terrible about that is that the person makes the midas hadin as it were almost into something independent and it verges, it borders on avoda zara. But isn't it true that ketoires is otzeres mageifa? That's the raz that the malach hamaves taught Moshe Rabbeinu and Moshe Rabbeinu then taught Aharon. So the kavana has to be I'm makriv the ketoires, I'm makriv the chatas, I'm makriv the olah, I'm makriv the shelamim לעשות רצון אבי שבשמים. Now it is the case that we know that it's retzon avi shebashamayim is that in response to the ketoires the mageifa ne'etzara. It is retzon avi shebashamayim that in response to the chatas... So that there will be kapara forthcoming to the cheit. But if a person omits in his kavanos, in his perception, omits that link, so then what's the most sacred form of avoda, easily, just like that, ke-heref ayin borders on avoda zara. Again, what Nadav and Avihu are thinking on their madreiga versus this, I don't know if we can understand on their madreiga, but what their cheit means on our madreiga, that's what the Ramban is depicting. הם שמו קטרת על האש, again the eish, the fire, representing the din. It wasn't an ishe reiach nichoach. It wasn't לעשות רצון אבי שבשמים, and yes, Hakadosh Baruch Hu did tell us what his ratzon is for what the effect of the ktoras will be. No, but it's directed, it's directly to the eish, it's directly to the middas hadin, not to Hakadosh Baruch Hu, and then we happen to know what Hakadosh Baruch Hu, he tells us how he'll react to the ktoras. When you think about it, obviously the example of ktoras, obviously we don't have, we're not makriv ktoras, but this yesod, never to skip that link of I'm trying to do what's retzon Hashem. Yes, we do know, in some cases, Hakadosh Baruch Hu says what his response will be when we do retzon Hashem in bringing a korban chatas, so we do know. But the kavana is la-Hashem, not la-Kel, not le-Elokim, not to any of the middos, but to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Let's say there's such a thing as a kameiya. There's such a thing as a kameiya, the Mishnayos in Shabbos talk about it. So obviously it's something real. If a kameiya is a kameiya mumcha, it's been proven, so then there's no issur hotza'ah on Shabbos. But a person, it's all too easy for a person to slip into the mindset that the kameiya is poel. The kameiya has these magical potencies. And if only I had a kameiya, so then this malady, rachmana litzlan, or whatever it is, would be cured. That's an eish zara. Ay, but isn't there such a thing as a kameiya? There is such a thing as a kameiya. The pshat in the kameiya is that there are tzinoros. When Hakadosh Baruch Hu wants to give rain, so rain comes from clouds. But it's Hakadosh Baruch Hu's world, and it's retzon Hashem that that's the way rain comes into the world. It's not because the cloud has a koach. So in the spiritual world, the same way in the physical world there are tzinoros, in the spiritual world there are also tzinoros. So there is such a tzinor as a kameiya, well whatever the pshat in that is, whether we understand it or we don't understand it, it doesn't make a difference. There is such a, in the spiritual world there's such a thing as such a tzinor, such a conduit, such a pipeline. When we run to check mezuzos, when there's some big problem in people's lives and we run to check mezuzos, so are we running because Hakadosh Baruch Hu gave us a mitzvah mezuzah, וכתבתם על מזוזות ביתך ובשעריך, and we want to be... Or in our minds again when you say it it sounds ludicrous but that doesn't mean that that's not what we're sort of unconsciously or subliminally superficially thinking and relating that way. Or no, if the mezuzah's good so then then the mezuzah has a koach, it's going to be shomer. And and the whole thing is happening, Ribono Shel Olam's not in the picture. The whole thing is happening on the level of if I have a good mezuzah, so then then there are not going to be problems in the home anymore. Mitzvos have all kinds of effects. When we do a mitzvah, we're doing the mitzvah because the Ribono Shel Olam said so. We may or may not be aware of how the Ribono Shel Olam chooses to respond, how he structured and created the world as to what his response is that he programmed to that mitzvah. But the mitzvah's to the Ribono Shel Olam, it's not there's no shortcut that the mitzvah is poel on on sort of directly. That's what the Ramban is saying here by Nadav v'Avihu. Okay, we'll stop here rabosai. Good Shabbos, kol tuv.