Daf hayomi HOULIN page 130

During the time of the Torah, of the Temple, anyone who performed shchita at home, the slaughter of an animal, had to give three parts to the Cohen. The zroa, which is the, the shoulder, we call it that. There you go, the lechaya , the cheek. >> And the keva, that is the stomach.

A piece of the stomach, I don't know what they did with the Rashbam, maybe the Cohen or the tripe or, well, this was from the Torah, it’s the Cohen's share. This chapter is going to explain the details to us. Is it only in Israel , or even outside of Israel? It depends , there are many conditions.

We'll start on the first line. First, it is in Israel and even in France. Before the people of the house. We are talking about non-sacred meat, not sacred meat, we're talking about normal meat, it is the Cohen's share, the levy, the of the ...But he will not receive it from animals that are in the Temple as well.

In the Temple, there are already other categories. There are burnt offerings, those are only for God, we aren't going to take a commission for, so we're talking about at home. He did it now, so what are the details? >> But how can he be sure that it was really?

No, they, but they all knew it was from there, they don't eat. It is at...If there were animals that I consecrated for the Temple and then it developed a defect so that I can no longer bring it to the Temple, but I can still eat it at home. Yes. >> Well, in that case, I will still have to give the gifts to the Cohen.

Even though it had been consecrated for the Temple, I would have thought there were no more gifts. No. Otherwise, people would have found ways to cheat, right? They would have found an animal with a defect to claim that this one is for the Temple.

After a few days, he says, "I can no longer bring it to the Temple ." So, I can keep it for myself without giving anything to the Cohen. He likes the cheek. He wants to make a cheek couscous. So, we have the right to sell them.

We have the right to use their, uh, what do you call it, the wool, I don't know, if they're sheep, wool. We don't have the right to trade them, and if they die, we redeem them with the money from selling the carcass. Everything we have studied has nothing to do with the firstborn. The firstborn , whatever happens, he was at the end of the year he did the under the tenth he is also He consecrated it to the temple and afterwards there was a new defect.

It's not a defect that existed before that he didn't discover. It's a new one. >> A new one, he broke his foot. So what do we do after it was sanctified?

In that case, there's no need, you didn't pull any tricks there, it happened after the defect. So you don't need to give the gifts to the Cohen and we don't exchange them. So since they are still kosher, because those are still sanctified in a certain way. When I said those are for the temple, they were fine.

The defect came afterwards. So the defect that comes afterwards doesn't remove the status, so if it died you must bury it. So. Here is our subject, line 13.

Every time we have gifts to give to the Cohen, whether it's the firstborn, the tenth, it has nothing to do with all that. >> Yeah. Yeah. We were always God.

He always teaches us that everything that is ours is not ours. It's an orphan. An orphan, you can't give it to him. So.

Wait, why not give more gifts in the temple, to also give the chest? >> And the thigh. Thighs. A thigh.

>> A thigh. Okay. There's the shoulder, the two shoulders and two thighs. Should we give that too?

No. No. There are gifts in the temple, these are other parts, and there are gifts, tithe gifts at home. These are other parts.

If the word wasn't written, we would have given even the chest. There's no need to do the waving. Back then, you also needed the temple. >> That's only in the temple, but when you give the cheek to the Cohen, you don't need to >> lift it.

>> I'm turning to page 130B. Because that's a...it's only in the temple. Don't start doing tithes for me and at home because in the end it will end badly. It said if it wasn't done and by mistake he burned them or threw them away, there's no need to reimburse the Cohen.

He didn't do the mitzvah, but he didn't commit a sin. He won't now reimburse the Cohen because by mistake he threw away the cheek. Goufa is where the why can't he...why can't the Cohen claim the money? First of all, in it, it says only in the temple.

If you didn't do it there, well, you'll have to reimburse in the temple. At home, if you threw away what was supposed to go to the Cohen, who is going to come and claim it from you, the Cohen? You can always say, "But I didn't want to give it to you, I wanted to give it to another Cohen." So it's something that is unclaimable. That's it, it cannot be claimed.

There is no one who can say that it is mine. There is no owner. You didn't give it to me. >> Exactly, I'm not obligated to give to one, I can choose whichever one I want.

However, there is still a preference to take care of a Cohen who is wise. He comes before a Cohen who is >> less wise. Right? Because the wise one necessarily worked less and studied more than he worked.

So, we must not abandon him. Right? Anyone who holds onto the Torah, who studies, he has his share, but if it's someone who manages well, makes a very good living, and works, then he will come last compared to a student Cohen who has nothing. Bravo!

Because it's also about social poverty, you know. A second opinion says that if he didn't give the share, he can sue him. A Cohen, a Cohen who studies, a Cohen who doesn't work, can go and sue his neighbor saying, "Why didn't you give me my share?" Be careful, if the other one had given it to someone else, he can't say anything. But if he threw it away >> instead of giving it to the Cohen next to him, there is an opinion that says he can sue him.

He did it which means that even if he had told the Cohen before, "Here, I'll give it to you," and then he forgot, he threw it away, the other one can sue him in court. If someone is rich but has no money on him , he is somewhere, he has no money, does he have the right to go into the fields and take what is considered for the poor because, for now, he is >> he is poor, he doesn't have his credit card, and when he gets home, he >> he pays it back. It's a bit of the same topic, right? The Gemara asks: yes or no?

>> Does it ask or not? So apparently yes, it says yes, and even if he doesn't want to pay it back later, you can't sue him; the poor cannot sue him later. "You took our share." These are big topics: personally, does he have to pay it back or is he not obligated? at that moment, he was poor because it's true, someone who might have millions in the bank, but is in a place where he has no credit card, has nothing, is considered poor.

at that time, he had the right to eat. If he wants to pay it back later, it's a bonus. All right. Besides, we are finishing the page it's the same for today.

If someone makes a set-aside , sometimes for us when you have tithes at home, you make a set-aside, I put it aside, today we throw it away. Back then, we gave it to the cohen. If someone ate it today, by accident, they won't have to pay back what they ate. put aside he said here hello sir I put your fruits aside then his daughter came and ate them to tomorrow's page a foot start of the topic congrats to those who always follow the Have an excellent day everyone.