Transcript

משה קיבל תורה מסיני ומסרה ליהושע ויהושע לזקנים וזקנים לנביאים ונביאים מסרוה לאנשי כנסת הגדולה.

The Rabbeinu Yonah explains

משה קיבל תורה מסיני בין תורה שבכתב בין תורה שבעל פה.

There is an omek here lekhora according to the Rambam. If you have the, sorry I didn't bring it, if you have on the computer the Rambam in Hakdamah le-Perek Chelek where he lists the yud gimmel ikkarim, hayisod hashemini. For each of these Yud-Gimmel Ikkarim the Rambam initially has either a word or a phrase that encapsulates the yesod and then he elaborates it. Okay, so yesod ha-shmini: היות התורה מן השמים. Okay, that's the phrase, and he, here's the elaboration:

והוא שנאמין כי כל התורה הזאת הנתונה על ידי משה רבינו עליו השלום שהיא כולה מפי הגבורה כלומר שהגיעה אליו כולה מאת השם יתברך בעניין שנקרא על דרך ההשאלה הדיבור ואין ידוע איך הגיעה אליו אלא הוא משה עליו השלום שהגיעה אליו וכי הוא היה כמו סופר שקוראין לו והוא כותב כל המאורעות הימים הסיפורים והמצוות ולפיכך נקרא מחוקק ואין הפרש בין ובני חם כוש ומצרים ושם אשתו מהיטבאל ותמנע היתה פילגש ובין אנוכי השם אלוקיך ושמע ישראל כי הכל מפי הגבורה והכל תורת השם תמימה טהורה וקדושה אמת וזה שאומר שכמו אלה הפסוקים והסיפורים משה סופר מדעתו הנה הוא אצל חכמינו ונביאינו כופר ומגלה פנים יותר מכל הכופרים לפי שחשב שיש בתורה לב וקליפה ושאלה דברי הימים והסיפורים אין תועלת בהם ושהם מאת משה רבינו עליו השלום וזה עניין אין תורה מן השמים אמרו חכמים ז"ל הוא המאמין שכל התורה מפי הגבורה חוץ מן הפסוק הזה שלא אמרו הקדוש ברוך הוא אלא משה מפי עצמו וזה כי דבר השם בזה השם יתברך ויתעלה ממאמר הכופרים על כל דיבור ודיבור מן התורה יש בהם חכמות ופלאים למי שמבין אותם ולא הושג תכלית חכמתם ארוכה מארץ מידה ורחבה מני ים ואין לאיש אלא להלוך בעקבות דוד משיח אלוקי יעקב שהתפלל גל עיני ואביטה נפלאות מתורתך וכמו כן פירוש התורה המקובל גם כן מפי הגבורה וזה שאנו עושים היום בתבנית הסוכה ולולב ושופר וציצית ותפילין זולתם הוא בעצמו התבנית אשר אמר השם יתברך למשה והוא אמר לנו והוא נאמן בשליחותו והמאמר המורה על היסוד הזה הוא מה שנאמר ויאמר משה בזאת תדעון כי השם שלחני לעשות כל המעשים האלה כי לא מלבי.

Good, excellent. So there's something missing in yesod ha-shmini. The Rambam said the yesod ha-shmini Torah min ha-shamayim means that Torah she-b'chsav is min ha-shamayim, every every word, every letter is min ha-shamayim, and so is the perush ha-mekubal. What the Rambam doesn't mention which obviously is equally one thousand percent min ha-shamayim is Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai. Now the phrase perush ha-mekubal, the way the Rambam uses it throughout the Peirush HaMishnayos, it means a perush which is mityaches to a word, a pasuk, a phrase in the Chumash, in the Torah she-b'chsav. It's again perush ha-mekubal, mekubal meaning that we have it based on a masorah based on a tradition going back to Moshe Rabbeinu at Har Sinai. And perushim mekubalim are in contradistinction to what Chazal... Chazal referred to as Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. The Rambam in the Hakdamah to the Perush Hamishnayos says, given that there's perushim hamukubalim on every single of the on virtually every single mitzvah, so then why is it that Chazal singled out a few and only a few of Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai? So the Rambam says Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai Chazal use when it's not misyaches to anything in the Chumash. The fact that tefillin have to be black is not something which is nermaz in the Chumash. It's not it's not that if you learn the passuk וקשרתם אותם על ידך with all the correct diyukim and you apply all המידות שהתורה נדרשת בהם that you can elicit from the passuk that tefillin have to be black. No, it's Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai means that it's not misyaches to what what's in the Chumash in the sense that it's not telling you how to read the passuk. It's not telling you that you can elicit this from the passuk. No, it's not in the passuk. Hakadosh Baruch Hu gave it to Moshe purely orally. That's Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. Everything that Hakadosh Baruch Hu told Moshe Rabbeinu orally that can be rediscovered, that can be elicited from the passuk, that's a perush hamukubal. That that's a that's a perush hamukubal. So that means that the Rambam here in the Yesod Hashmini for some reason doesn't mention Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. Obviously Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai is a Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. And so why is it that in the Yesod Hashmini when he's talking about Torah Min Hashamayim, why doesn't the Rambam mention it? So the answer is as follows. The phrase Torah Min Hashamayim expresses much more for the Rambam than we sometimes realize. It doesn't only mean that Hakadosh Baruch Hu gave Torah Min Hashamayim. It means He gave Torah Min Hashamayim and we have that Torah today. We have that Torah that He gave Min Hashamayim. Maybe if you if you go back and just read that first line after the phrase of היות תורה מן השמים, klomar, klomar, Ezer, where are you, klomar... you can sing a niggun in the meantime. That's also good. Vechu nami? Yeah.

והוא שנאמין שכל התורה הזאת הנתונה על ידי משה רבינו עליו השלום שהיא כולה מפי הגבורה כלומר שהגיעה אליו כולה מאת השם יתברך בעניין שנקרא על דרך ההשאלה,

hash'alah, hash'alah dibbur ve-ein yodeia... hametzuy beyodeinu... did I miss that? Again go back to that. היות תורה מן השמים klomar שהגיעה אליו כולה מאת השם יתברך. It's probably a different girsa, so... No, metzuy beyodeinu? What do you have here on the computer? It says והוא שנאמין שכל התורה הזאת המצויה בידינו היום. hametzuyah beyodeinu hayom, right? כל התורה הזאת המצויה בידינו היום, meaning that we have the not just Torah Min Hashamayim doesn't just mean that so many thousand years thousands of years ago there was a Maamad Har Sinai in which Hakadosh Baruch Hu gave the Torah. It means more than that. Obviously it means that as well, but it means more than that. It means Torah Min Hashamayim means a nitzchiyisdike Torah. If it's lost somewhere in a genizah gathering dust, so it's not nitzchi, it's not nitzchiyisdike. It means that that Torah is metzuy beyodeinu hayom. Now the Gemara tells us in Masechet Temurah that some Halachos LeMoshe MiSinai were lost. Some Halachos LeMoshe MiSinai were lost. No perushim hamukubalim were lost. Every perush hamukubal and that's why the Rambam doesn't mention... Temurah tese-zayin... that's why the Gemara doesn't... that's why the Rambam does not mention Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. If the Yesod Hashmini were about Torah Min Hashamayim in the sense that Hakadosh Baruch Hu gave Torah Min Hashamayim, then of course the Rambam would have mentioned Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai because Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai was given Min Hashamayim the same way the Torah Shebiktav, the same way the perushim hamukubalim were were given Min Hashamayim, so too Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai was given Min Hashamayim. But heyos that the Rambam in the the Yesod Hashmini in the Yesod Hashmini is counting Torah Min Hashamayim in the sense that an eternal Torah was given Min Hashamayim in the sense that we still have it, it's metzuy beyodeinu hayom. And that's why he emphasizes later when he talks about the Torah Sheba'al Peh that we, the way we build the sukkah is betavnis hasukkah that Moshe Rabbeinu made. And and the way we have our tefillin is is betavnis that... Meaning that there's nothing lost. Nothing of which I'm speaking here in the yesod hashmini that the Rambam tells us has been lost. So that means again that the Torah she'ba'al peh we have every single word of the Torah she'ba'al peh and we have every single Perush Mekubal which Hashem gave. It is not true that we have every single Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. Some were lost. 300, 3,000, however many were lost. There were Halachot LeMoshe MiSinai Gemorah in Temurah tells us that were lost בימי אבלו של משה. So mi'meila, the yesod is because the ha'yesod hashmini is Torah min hashamayim which is metzuya beyadeinu hayom, so the Rambam doesn't mention Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. I think the newer translations, I'm not sure what you have on the computer, but if you go to the Hakdamah le'Perush HaMishnayot on the computer where the Rambam has HaChelek HaRishon, HaChelek HaSheni, HaChelek HaShlishi of the Dinim which comprise Torah. HaChelek HaRishon, HaChelek HaSheni. Not sure whose translation is printed there. Do you see that? החלק הראשון הפירושים המקובלים. You see that?

החלק הראשון הפירושים המקובלים מפי משה שיש להם רמז בפסוק או שאפשר ללמדם באחת המידות וזה אין בו מחלוקת כלל אבל כל זמן שיאמר אדם קיבלתי כך וכך נסתלק כל הדיבור והוויכוח.

Good. And HaChelek HaSheni please.

החלק השני הם הדינים שנאמר עליהם שהם הלכה למשה מסיני ואין עליהם ראיה כמו שאמרנו וגם זה ממה שאין בו מחלוקת.

Okay. So the Rambam says the HaChelek HaRishon of Dinim that we have from the Torah, again, which aren't written explicitly, spelled out in the Torah she'bichtav, but those based on Perushim Mekubalim. And the Rambam says since they're Perushim Mekubalim mi'Sinai, so there's no machloket. There's nothing to argue about. Moshe Rabbeinu came down from Har Sinai and said that Ayin tachat ayin means Mamon. There's nothing to debate. He said that Pri Etz Hadar is an Esrog, there's nothing to debate. Then the second group of the Dinim is Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. And again, what distinguishes Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai from Perushim Mekubalim is Perushim Mekubalim Moshe Rabbeinu was told and transmitted to us that these, that this is in the words. What I'm telling you was in the words, that Pri Etz Hadar is an Esrog is something that that's in the phrase of Pri Etz Hadar, which is why we have a Gemorah in Bava Kamma that says how do you know that how do you see in the words Pri Etz Hadar that it means an Esrog? הדר באילנו משנה לשנה etcetera. How do you know that Ayin tachat ayin means Mamon? How do you know from the words that it doesn't mean mamash? So we have a whole Sugya in Chovel about that. Because those are Perushim Mekubalim. Again, Perushim Mekubalim means Moshe Rabbeinu was told this is what the words mean. This can be elicited from the words with מידות שהתורה נדרשת בהן. Ma she'ein ken Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai, again, it's the same absolute authoritative source Hashem told Moshe Rabbeinu, but here it's not something that you find in the Chumash. It's not something that you can elicit from the Chumash. But there too there's nothing to argue about. But the Rambam says it differently. The first one he says אין בו מחלוקת כלל. And the second one? וגם זה ממה שאין בו מחלוקת. Yeah. But without the klal. The other translation, I don't know, the word klal got lost, but I think both of the newer translations have it. So why does the Rambam say אין בו מחלוקת כלל by Perushim Mekubalim and he says by Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai ein bo machloket? Again, it's the same fact precludes all machloket. The same fact precludes all machloket. Hashem said this is way it is, that's the way it is. All right, so it's clear what it means is like this. We do find that there are plenty of examples in the Mishna, plenty of examples that we have in Shas about הלכה למשה מסיני where there is a machlokes. The Mishna in Niddah has a machlokes Tannaim whether or not the yud aleph yom between niddah to niddah do we darshan it from pesukim or is it a הלכה למשה מסיני? Is aravah shebamikdash, is that הלכה למשה מסיני or do we darshan it from Lashon Arvei Nachal? So there is machlokes. So what do you mean ein bo machlokes? As everyone asks that kasha on the Rambam there. What do you mean ein bo machlokes? There clearly is machlokes. So it's clear what the Rambam means is this: there isn't machlokes in the sense that if you show up in the Beis Medrash and you say, "I have a kabbalah from my Rebbe going back ish mipi ish on Moshe Rabbeinu for a din of aravah shebamikdash that it's a הלכה למשה מסיני," there's nothing to argue, "No, but it's not הלכה למשה מסיני because I can show you how you darshan from Arvei Nachal." There's nothing, you can't engage in debate about that. There's nothing. If you darshan something מדות שהתורה נדרשת בהן so someone else can push back and say, "No, that drash is not mistanver v'chulu v'chulu." You can have milchamta shel Torah over it. Someone comes and says כך מקובלני מפי רבותי such and such a הלכה למשה מסיני, there's nothing to debate. Now, because the metzius is that some הלכה למשה מסיני were forgotten and some were partially forgotten in the sense that we find that some Tannaim had a kabbalah and some Tannaim didn't have a kabbalah, so you do have machlokes in the sense that aravah shebamikdash, is that something which is in the Torah? That's what the lashon Arvei Nachal means? No, Arvei Nachal just means two aravos. And aravah shebamikdash has no remez in the Torah. It has no remez in the Torah. Aravah shebamikdash is clearly הלכה למשה מסיני. In that sense you have machlokes. You don't have machlokes in the sense that there's anything to argue about, that there's anything to debate. If you have such a tradition, then you have such a tradition and if you don't, you don't and there's nothing to engage over, there's nothing to have milchamta shel Torah over. So that's ein bo machlokes, but you're not going to say אין בו מחלוקת כלל because there is machlokes in the sense that avadai there are examples where one Tanna says it's הלכה למשה מסיני and one says it isn't. But perushim mekubalim, not a single one was ever forgotten, so says the Rambam it's not only that ein bo machlokes, it's אין בו מחלוקת כלל. There's no machlokes becholal. No machlokes becholal. Ma she-ein ken הלכה למשה מסיני, ein bo machlokes in the sense that you can't argue against, you can't argue with someone who has a tradition, you can't argue with someone who doesn't have the tradition. He has it, he doesn't have it. But there is machlokes in the sense that yes, we have such examples in the—there are definitely are such examples. Le-chora the omek of our mishna of

משה קיבל תורה מסיני, משה קיבל תורה מסיני, משה קיבל תורה מסיני

u-mesarah l'Yehoshua. So Moshe Rabbeinu obviously now lashon Torah so you can sort of use it colloquially, loosely, or you can use it say as a proper noun. Torah not as a proper noun means teaching. So is הלכה למשה מסיני part of Torah in that sense? Of course it's part of Torah in that sense. Is it part of the mitzvah of Talmud Torah? Of course it's part of mitzvah Talmud Torah. Torah in as a proper noun refers to Torah She-Biksav and to Torah She-Ba'al Peh. משה קיבל תורה מסיני, just like the Ramban in the yesod hashemini is talking about Torah She-Biksav and Torah She-Ba'al Peh, not talking about הלכה למשה מסיני, so too that's what our mishna is talking about. And the omek of our mishna is like this rabbosai: משה קיבל תורה מסיני. What was Moshe mekabel of the Torah? Ninety-nine percent of the Torah? Ninety-nine point... no. Moshe Rabbeinu mekabel one hundred percent of the Torah u-mesarah l'Yehoshua. And one hundred percent of that Torah was nimseres to Yehoshua, and one hundred percent to the Zekeinim, and one hundred percent to the Nevi'im. There's nothing was ever lost. Because again the lashon Torah here, again as a proper noun, some words they can be used as a proper noun, they can be used not as a proper noun. Adam can mean man or Adam can mean Adam Ha-Rishon. narrow specific meaning, it can have a broad meaning. So the word the Lashon Torah is used that way also. ויכתב משה את התורה הזאת, Torah means Torah shebiksav. By virtue of the fact that Torah sheba'al peh that perushim mekubalim misyaches to the Torah shebiksav, so therefore Torah sheba'al peh. Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai which isn't misyaches to Torah shebiksav in the sense, it's not telling, it's misyaches to Torah shebiksav in the sense that tefillin are in Torah shebiksav and Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai says they should be black. So in that sense it's misyaches, but it's not misyaches to the words of Torah shebiksav in the sense that it's telling you that oh, if you read ukshartem the right way you'll see that tefillin have to be black. No, you can't see from the words that tefillin have to be black. Hakadosh Baruch Hu chose that that should be purely purely oral. So again if you're using Torah as a proper noun, not as mitzvas talmud Torah, not as what we received from Hakadosh Baruch Hu, but if you're using it as a proper noun, so then Torah means the Torah shebiksav and it means the perushim mekubalim which are also called Torah by virtue of the fact that they're misyaches to the Torah shebiksav. And that's the way our mishna is using it and that's what it means. משה קיבל תורה מסיני, the whole Torah. umasrah liYehoshua, masar osah it, the whole Torah to Yehoshua and Yehoshua to the Zekeinim, and that's what the Rambam tells us that the perushim mekubalim basically this mishna is the yesod hashmini in the Rambam, that nothing from the perushim mekubalim were ever forgotten. There was a hashgacha that nothing of perushim mekubalim should ever be forgotten. Hakadosh Baruch Hu wanted that the Torah, the Torah shebiksav he gave would be nitzchis, again nitzchis in the sense that that we always have it. And he guaranteed, he ensured that the Torah sheba'al peh, again Torah sheba'al peh, that those perushim mekubalim which are also called Torah by virtue of the fact that they're misyaches to the Torah shebiksav also is nitzchi in the sense that nothing was ever lost and that's guf what our mishna is saying: משה קיבל תורה מסיני umasrah liYehoshua. But at the time of kabalas haTorah wasn't Moshe Rabbeinu obviously alive, so those Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai were all intact, so why is that not nichlal in the umasrah? nichlal in what? In the umasrah. It was, but the point was that the Gemara in Temurah says that somehow Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai was lost. Well, when Moshe Rabbeinu gave all the halachos as it were, so shouldn't that be part of the Torah as a proper noun? No, Torah as a proper noun doesn't refer to... Torah as a proper noun... you have in Parshas Vayeilech, where is it, in perek lamed aleph, vayichtav Moshe, perek lamed aleph, ויכתב את התורה הזאת. Please.

ויכתב משה את התורה הזאת ויתנה אל הכהנים בני לוי הנשאים את ארון ברית יהוה ואל כל זקני ישראל.

You have the Ramban on the posuk?

ויכתב משה את התורה הזאת מתחלת בראשית עד לעיני כל ישראל.

Torah refers to Torah shebiksav, that's what the word means initially. By virtue of the fact that perushim mekubalim are misyaches to Torah, so the posuk at the end of the tochacha in Bechukosai refers to Torah belashon rabim, Toros, אחת בכתב אחת בעל פה. Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai again in the sense of the proper noun of Torah, in the sense of a teaching, right, which is what Torah means not as a proper noun, hora'ah, right, as a teaching, adaraba, that's Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai is Torah, and adaraba min hashamayim, and adaraba from Hakadosh Baruch Hu, and adaraba it's mitzvas talmud Torah, but it's not part of Torah in the sense of ויכתב משה את התורה הזאת, right, as a proper noun. Our mishna is tracing the same way the Rambam in the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim is speaking of the masorah of again Torah in the proper noun which was 100% was conveyed. Not 100%, Moshe Rabbeinu conveyed 100% of the but right away in Temurah somehow Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai was forgotten. Okay, maybe just one other comment for today. In the phrase משה קיבל תורה מסיני, so that the two two questions arise. Number one, it's unlike the rest of the Mishna in that it speaks mitzad hamikabel rather than the moseir. Right? It doesn't say Yehoshua kibeil miMoshe, but it's rather masar lo liYehoshua. Right? We shift to we describe the masora from mitzad right using the verb of moseir as opposed to kibeil. Initially we refer to why not say HaKadosh Baruch Hu מסר תורה לו למשה and then say and then Moshe liYehoshua? Why switch the verb from kibeil to masar? And number two, why the sort of the euphemism of MiSinai as opposed to from HaKadosh Baruch Hu? Obviously that is what it means, but why not say it? Why say it this way? Why is it relevant when when Rav Shechter quotes the Rav, he doesn't say I've heard at 500 West 185th Street in Manhattan I heard such and such. He says the Rav said such and such. Nafka mina, okay, so Moshe Kibeil Torah, that's sort of the equivalent of saying 500 what's the address of first 500 West West 185th Street. So the pshat is like this. HaKadosh Baruch Hu has the famous vort, so to the effect, HaKadosh Baruch Hu

הקדוש ברוך הוא הניח כל ההרים וגבעות והשרה שכינתו על סיני.

HaKadosh Baruch Hu bypassed Mount Everest, all the tremendously impressive mountains and mountain chains and he opted for lowly Har Sinai to give the Torah. And a person should be nilmad middas kono. Right, so it illustrates shiflus. The pshat b'kurtz is as follows. Torah is a davar hanivra. HaKadosh Baruch Hu created the Torah. In creating the Torah, he created something which made chokhmato accessible to us. Right, Chazal speak of Torah kadma le-olam, however many years kadma le-olam, but Torah is also a davar hanivra. HaKadosh Baruch Hu created Torah and then he created something which makes chokhmato accessible to us. So imagine imagine you have a preschool teacher and she she goes over to Albert Einstein and she says I heard you won the Nobel Prize and that you have this this new theory of relativity and special relativity, maybe you could write a version of your paper for my three-year-olds. They're all very cute kids and they're all very... So we would expect him to dismiss her out of hand and tell her what you're making making fun, I should take this this most profound breakthrough in in human thought in in centuries in in millennia and and you're making making fun of it that it should be a children's storybook. So Ribono Shel Olam takes his chochmah, Ribono Shel Olam who is ein sof and his chochmah is ein sof and he makes it accessible to us to preschool preschool intellects. That's the a little bit of the omek of what the Gemara in Sotah says, that's what it means that Hakadosh Baruch Hu the the shiflus of Hakadosh Baruch Hu is again it's symbolized by Har Sinai as as opposed to Mount Everest or whatever the other the other candidates would have been. But the substance of the shiflus is the etzem fact that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is giving a Torah. It's symbolized and therefore that's that's symbolically reflected in the choice of venue. Now, to let's again let's rewind for a moment. So Torah is a davar hanivra. If if the Mishna would have used the phrase that הקדוש ברוך הוא מסר תורה למשה and Moshe l'Yehoshua so then we would have sort of imagined so here's Hakadosh Baruch Hu, he has he just came back from the sefarim store, has his has his Tanach, he has his Shas, his Rambam, his חידושי רבינו חיים הלוי and he gives it to he gives it to Moshe Rabbeinu. But Hakadosh Baruch Hu if you sort of just if if in the picture frame kaviyachol if in the picture frame there's only Hakadosh Baruch Hu, there's no Torah. Torah is is for us right because because Torah is a davar hanivra because that's the only way that we can access חכמתו של הקדוש ברוך הוא. Torah comes into the world for us. And and that's why it's described mitzod hamikabel not mitzod hamosar. Obviously yes הקדוש ברוך הוא מסר תורה למשה רבינו. Moshe Rabbeinu took dictation of every word in Chumash from Bereishis einei kol Yisrael. And and Moshe Rabbeinu received all the perushim hamikubalim. Yes all of that yes practically factually Hakadosh Baruch Hu was moser but if to say it that way intimates or or can be misunderstood to mean that as it were the Torah exists even in Hakadosh Baruch Hu's realm. No Hakadosh Baruch Hu's realm there's no need for Torah. There is no no there is no need for that davar hanivra of Torah. The Torah exists because of because of our realm. That's what's reflected in the phrase of משה קיבל תורה מסיני. U'lichora that's also the pshat the I think Rav Schechter has this in Nefesh HaRav. It's actually even someone printed someone went to Rav Chaim and and asked him for a haskamah on a sefer. So it used to be there used to be a certain style of sefarim on Chumash with pilpul and and and to show how achreis hamachlokes Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam was really a machlokes between Moshe Rabbeinu and Bezalel or something. And so such a style. So this mechaber had such a mahalach. So Rav Chaim so he prints Rav Chaim's haskamah where Rav Chaim told him the whole sefer is okay but that siman is apikorsus. He to his much to his credit because of his honesty he said when I went when I went to Rav Chaim so so the Gaon MiBrisk told me and I told him that if the printer if it's possible printing was obviously very different in those days than it is today. If it's possible to pull it out I'll pull it out. But either way he prints that Rav Chaim told me that that siman is apikorsus. I want you to know Rav Chaim said that's and even though I told him that I'm not the first one to say it Rav Chaim said okay it's still apikorsus whether the other person to say it or the second one to say it. than Moshe Rabbeinu. So what's the pshat in that? Lichora the pshat in that is, again, because of what we're saying in משה קיבל תורה מסיני. Torah came into the world as given and understood and grasped by Moshe Rabbeinu. So you can't disagree with Moshe Rabbeinu. Torah didn't come into the world as given, as grasped by Yehoshua, by anyone else. You want to say there was a contemporary who had a machlokes with Yehoshua not about a peirush hamikubal, we can say that. Yehoshua's havana of things that, that again, weren't given to him by Moshe Rabbeinu as a peirush hamikubal but which were being debated based on מידות שהתורה נדרשת בהן, then you could disagree with Yehoshua. Torah came into the world as defined by the havana of Moshe Rabbeinu. You can't, you can't disagree with, with, with Moshe Rabbeinu. So that's the pshat. Moshe kibel Torah, not הקדוש ברוך הוא מסר, and mi'Sinai to convey this idea again that the etzem existence of Torah is the reflection of again that shiflus which Har Sinai symbolized. Okay.