Seuda Shlishis

Alright, we're going to try to learn a little bit about the shalosh seudos this morning. The Gemara is on the bottom of קוף יוד זיין עמוד בית, three lines from the bottom of קוף יוד זיין עמוד בית. Tanu Rabbanan, כמה סעודות חייב אדם לאכול בשבת שלש. How many seudos are we obligated to eat on Shabbos? Three. רבי חידקא אומר ארבע. Rabbi Chidka thinks that we're obligated to eat four meals over the course of Shabbos. אמר רבי יוחנן משמי מקרא אחד דרשו. Both of them inferred their opinions from the same pasuk. Vayomer Moshe in Parshas Beshalach, Shabbos morning Moshe Rabbeinu was addressing Bnei Yisrael and he tells them as follows,

אכלוהו היום כי שבת היום להשם היום לא תמצאוהו בשדה.

So the word hayom, right, very conspicuously is mentioned three times. רבי חידקא סבר הני תלתא היום בר מאורתא. These three mentionings of the word hayom are in addition to the meal at night. Moshe Rabbeinu was speaking to them Shabbos morning. So apparently he's telling them, in addition to the meal you had last night, there's another three additional meals you're supposed to have today. ורבנן סברי בהדי דאורתא. And the Rabbanan think that the three, the total of three which Moshe to which Moshe Rabbeinu's alluded includes the nighttime meal as well. Now whether or not this pasuk of hayom is it a full-fledged drasha or is it only an asmachta is a machlokes in the Rishonim. The Yereim and the Levush, the Acharonim quote, are actually of the opinion that the obligation for shalosh seudos is de-oraisa. That it's a mitzvah de-oraisa to have shalosh seudos on Shabbos. The prevalent opinion, the majority opinion is that this is probably intended just as an asmachta and that the chiyuv of shalosh seudos on Shabbos is only mi-derabbanan. Either way, some of the the poskim say that what exactly, be it in the form of a full-fledged drasha, be it in the form of an asmachta, the fact that shalosh seudos are correlated with the hayom three times, that that has added significance. How so? That the Magen Avraham quotes from the Shlah HaKadosh. This actually is a discussion which Tosafos has in the beginning of Arvei Pesachim as well. Let's say in the summertime when it's customary that people are mekabel Shabbos early and so davening is 6:30 or 7:00, so often by the time you get home and make kiddush and hamotzi it's still it's still daylight out. So the question is, does one fulfill the mitzvah of seuda Shabbos during the period of tosefes Shabbos? So the Magen Avraham quotes from the Shlah HaKadosh, again, the this discussion predates the Shlah HaKadosh but in terms of the how it's crystallized in the poskim, the Magen Avraham quotes the Shlah HaKadosh who says that since the chiyuv of eating gimmel seudos on Shabbos is correlated with hayom, so it's as if the Torah is stipulating that the three meals of Shabbos have to be eaten on the calendar day of Shabbos. And the idea of tosefes Shabbos is not that we extend the calendar day of Shabbos but rather that we extend kedusha Shabbos into late Friday afternoon, but it's not as if that the calendar day of Shabbos is adjustable. I'm sorry, I'd have to... sorry. It's not as if the calendar day of Shabbos is adjustable, but it's rather you extend kedusha Shabbos into late Friday afternoon. But the calendar day doesn't begin until shkiya, until tzeis hakochavim. So hence the Shlah HaKadosh says that when if one makes kiddush and eats mi-be'od yom, so one should have another minimally a kezayis, optimally maybe even more than a kebeitza after tzeis hakochavim. So usually that just means that at dessert time to just have in mind to have another piece of challah, which is something the Magen Avraham actually recommends. This distinction between the calendar day of Shabbos and extending kedusha Shabbos into late afternoon is something which we introduce in other contexts in halacha as well. For instance, the Rama in Hilchos Nidda deals with the following question. What happens if a woman was mekabel Shabbos early, again let's say in the summertime, and then she reminds herself that she forgot to make a hefsek taharah and she wants to begin counting from Shabbos the shiva nekiyim, the seven clean days? So the question is, well, do you say, well, look out the window, it's still light, you can still see the sun, so it's still Friday? So if she makes the bedikah now, she's making the hefsek taharah before Shabbos and now she'll still have zayin nekiyim. Or no, maybe you say it's already Shabbos, so it's farfalen. So there the Rema says there are two dei'os and the Rema says of course lechatchila she should certainly make the hefsek taharah before she's mekabel Shabbos. But bedieved, if it happens, she can still make the hefsek taharah as long as it's before shkiya. She can still make the hefsek taharah even once she has been mekabel Shabbos. So that's what the Rema is machria there. Now in Hilchos Aveilus, the Mechaber deals with a similar problem. Mechaber deals with the problem, let's say again, a person was mekabel Shabbos early. So it's 7 o'clock in the summertime Friday, a person was mekabel Shabbos already, and then rachmana litzlan he gets a shmua that one of the zayin krovim has died and it's already after the funeral. So there's no question in terms of when shiva should begin. So the question is what counts as the first day of shiva? Does Friday count as the first day of shiva or no, he was already mekabel Shabbos, so it's not until Shabbos, Shabbos will count as the first day. So the Mechaber says Shabbos is the first day, that the person cannot count Friday. And the Rema doesn't say anything. The Rema keeps, the Rema's silence is acquiescence, shtika kehoda'ah, the Rema doesn't say anything. So the Shach explains why not. The Rema in Hilchos Niddah said that even though the woman was mekabel Shabbos, but it's still Friday, tosefes Shabbos notwithstanding it's still Friday, so she can make the hefsek taharah. Ma she'ein kein over here in terms of aveilus, so now the Rema is, he doesn't say anything. So the Shach says no, the distinction is as follows. He says in aveilus we're not interested in seven calendar days. Veha'raya, what happens the last day of aveilus? We say mikzas hayom kekulo. Some rishonim say mikzas hayom kekulo even at night. We pasken we only say the mikzas hayom kekulo in the morning, but layis man depalig that the avel doesn't have to observe the full seven days. So we're not interested in seven calendar days, so it's seven halachic days, not seven calendar days. They don't have to necessarily match up perfectly with seven calendar days. So if that's the case, if you're interested in the halachic day, okay, well kedusha Shabbos has been extended, it's already Shabbos, so you can't count the first day of aveilus as Friday. However, by the zayin nekiyim, so there's no mikzas hayom kekulo. The entire first day and the entire seventh day have to be entirely clean, there's no mikzas hayom kekulo. So there the Torah is interested in seven calendar days. So if it's seven calendar days, kedusha Shabbos, the fact that we infused kedusha Shabbos into late Friday afternoon doesn't mean that the calendar day of Shabbos has begun. So that's, and there are many other places in halacha where this distinction surfaces as well. And according to some, and the Magen Avraham recommends, I don't know that he requires it, but the Magen Avraham recommends that one be careful with this shita that shalosh seudos also is a function not just of kedusha Shabbos, but because it's associated with hayom,

אכלוהו היום כי שבת היום לה' היום לא תמצאוהו בשדה,

so consequently the three meals should be within the calendar day of Shabbos. Okay, let's continue here in the Gemara. So the last few words here on קיז עמוד ב, tenan, the mishna here in Kol Kisvei, נפלה דליקה בלילי שבת. If there's a fire in the kitchen on Friday night, so we have to limit the amount of tircha that the person's going to do. So how much food can he save without engaging in what will be considered excessive tircha for Shabbos? So the mishna says מצילין מזון ג' סעודות. Mai lav, since the mishna didn't really tell us whether it's before he ate or after he ate, מאי לאו דלא אכל must mean we're describing at the beginning of Friday night, it's before the meal, and he's only saving a total of three meals worth of food. So that would be in accordance with whose opinion? The Rabbanan and against Rabbi Hidka. So we would have a stam mishna that you're saving for food for what you need. If you want to hold out and agree with Rabbi Chidqa, you'll say the Mishna's describing a case where he already ate the Friday night seuda, so you're saving three meals for the rest of Shabbos. Similarly, the Mishna says שחרית מצילים מזון שתי סעודות. מאי לאו דלא אכל, again, same diyuk. Doesn't it mean that it's Shabbos morning, first thing in the morning, a person hasn't had his seuda yet, and he only needs two more meals, which clearly is the view of the Rabbanan? Lo de-achal. And finally, במנחה מצילים מזון סעודה אחת. If the fire breaks out, rachmana litzlan, in the afternoon, you save one meal's worth of food. מאי לאו דלא אכל? Again, doesn't it sound like even if it's first thing in the afternoon, he hasn't eaten, there's only one meal left to eat? Lo de-achal. Says the Gemara, והא מדקתני סיפא? But in the end of the Mishna, this is the Mishna in קיז עמוד ב that the Gemara is quoting,

והא מדקתני סיפא רבי יוסי אומר לעולם מצילים מזון ג׳ סעודות.

Rabbi Yosi says regardless of what time of day it is on Shabbos, you can save three meals' worth. So doesn't that mean that the norm for Shabbos is three meals? מכלל דתנא קמא ג' סבירא ליה? Gemara says, you're right. אלא מחוורתא מתניתין דלא כרבי חידקא. Fine, so ein hachinami. The simple pshat in the Mishna is that the Mishna is like the Rabbanan against Rabbi Chidqa and the Mishna is describing again the fire Friday night before the Friday night meal, the fire Shabbos morning before the Shabbos morning seuda, and the fire Shabbos afternoon before shalosh seudos. Let's take a look here at Tosafos. Bemincha, on the top of קיח עמוד א. במנחה מצילים מזון סעודה אחת. So the Gemara takes for granted that what you're saving is for the meal you haven't eaten yet and we take for granted that come afternoon, there's no way the person could have eaten shalosh seudos yet, right? So says Tosafos,

מכאן משמע דזמן אכילה שלישית בשבת היא מן המנחה ולמעלה.

Says Tosafos, and this is something which the Rambam writes as well, so apparently the gimel seudos of Shabbos have to be staggered and that basically one is in each, in each of the time zones of the tefillos. That there's one at night, right, in the time zone of tefillas Arvis. There's one in the morning, after, in the time zone of Shacharis, and then Musaf is sort of all day, it doesn't have its own time zone. And then there's one in the afternoon correlated, corresponding with Mincha. And that's the impression you get from this Gemara, that the assumption is that come afternoon, if it's the beginning of the afternoon, there's no way one could have eaten shalosh seudos yet and that shalosh seudos should not be earlier than the afternoon. Tosafos says דלא כאותם שמחלקים סעודת שחרית ומברכין בינתים. As opposed to those who used to compress two seudos into the morning and they were of the opinion that the gimel seudos of Shabbos don't have to be distributed over the three time zones. Now it's interesting, everyone agrees apparently, and apparently everyone agrees that no one considers the possibility of eating two meals at night, right? And what's the best proof of that? How come we don't know that that's never? Because everyone, ערב פסח שחל להיות בשבת, we all know the question always is exactly how one satisfies the obligation of shalosh seudos on ערב פסח שחל להיות בשבת. Can't eat matzah in the afternoon, can't eat chametz in the afternoon. So how do you satisfy the obligation? Okay, so do you eat peiros in the afternoon? Are you mechaleik the morning seuda into two? But to be mechaleik the morning seuda into two is very rushed and it's hard to avoid the problem Tosafos is talking about of a bracha she-eina tzricha, or of just totally artificially dividing the meal into two, there's so little time to deal with it. So the easiest solution would have been and should have been eat two meals at night. At night you have plenty of time. You'll have one meal, ich veis, at 8 o'clock, you'll have another meal at 11 o'clock, and you can do it in a much more natural and less artificial way than the way we compress two meals into the morning. So how come no one suggests that? And again, even here in the Rishonim, the debate is can the third seuda be still in the morning or does the third seuda have to wait until the afternoon? Why not? Is there how come no one considers the possibility that maybe there are two seudos at night? So one answer is, we'll see in a minute that maybe this is not an... An answer, an explanation everyone will agree with, but one answer is that this mitzva of Shalosh Seudos is not a free-standing mitzva but is rather, this is the way the Rambam presents it and the way we assume the halacha is rather a function of mitzvos Oneg Shabbos, right? That mitzvos Oneg Shabbos, mitzvos kovod v'oneg, so one of the things which mitzvos kovod v'oneg dictates besides being dressed in Shabbos-dikke clothes and preparing for Shabbos, but it also dictates the chiyuv shalosh seudos. Now within kovod v'oneg there's a very interesting halacha. We generally think of Shabbos as one continuum, right? As one 24-hour continuum. But the truth is that al pi halacha, I mean the Ramban explains it al pi Kabbalah also, but even al pi halacha, that's not true. It's not true that Shabbos is one 24-hour continuum. How do we know that? Because the Gemara has a din of כבוד יום וכבוד לילה is kvod yom adif, meaning what? Meaning let's say you have a special dessert but you don't have enough of it to serve after both meals. So you can either serve it after the Friday night seuda or you can serve it after the Shabbos morning seuda, so the din is that כבוד יום וכבוד לילה is kvod yom adif, you're supposed to save it and serve it after the Shabbos morning seuda. So you see that interestingly, right? A, you see that it's not one simply one 24-hour continuum, there's the Friday night component of Shabbos and there's the daytime component of Shabbos. And B, having sort of identified those two different components of Shabbos we now rank them and the Gemara says and the mitzva of kovod v'oneg of the daytime component of Shabbos is a greater mitzva, if you have to choose between the two it's a greater mitzva than the Friday night, than the Friday night component. Now that being the case, so l'chora again and the application of that is the dessert, if you have one what challah, one egg challah and you have a preference so then you take the one you prefer for the daytime etc. But l'chora another application of that will be that's why no one will entertain the possibility of having two seudos at night. If the gimmel seudos as a whole are a form of Oneg Shabbos, that's one of the manifestations of Oneg Shabbos and if kovod v'oneg is כבוד יום וכבוד לילה is kvod yom adif, then certainly two of the three meals have to be in the day and that's not open for discussion to have two meals at night. Okay, the only thing is did Chazal sort of break it down even further? Is it just kvod yom and kvod layla? But within kvod yom there are no two time zones. So it makes no difference whether there are two meals in the morning, one meal in the morning and afternoon, or maybe there are even two time zones in the daytime as well. The Ramban says the same idea he refers to this Gemara of כבוד יום וכבוד לילה and he says that's true al pi Kabbalah as well. And he says al pi Kabbalah he says that we know in Zachor v'Shamor, so Shamor represents the mitzvos lo sa'aseh of Shabbos, Zachor represents the mitzvos asei of Shabbos. So the Ramban says that in Parshas Yisro that al pi Kabbalah that the nighttime of Shabbos corresponds to the Shamor and that the daytime of Shabbos corresponds to the Zachor, which is why the Ramban says that since Zachor is a mitzvas asei which represents ahava, Shamor is lo sa'aseh which represents yira, so ahava is greater than yira, hence the halacha is that כבוד יום וכבוד לילה is kvod yom adif. Okay so it's true al pi Kabbalah also. You know in Lecha Dodi, so the opening stanza is that שמור וזכור בדיבור אחד נאמרו. So I remember once being told by an authoritative source when I was a child that why does the paytan say Shamor v'Zachor and not Zachor v'Shamor? Should have been Zachor v'Shamor, right? Because in Yisro it's Zachor. It's because his name wasn't Zalman, his name was Shlomo. Had his name been Zalman haLevi Alkabetz so it would have been Zachor v'Shamor. But since his name was Shlomo haLevi Alkabetz it's Shamor v'Zachor. But the emes is that Shlomo haLevi Alkabetz was sufficiently ingenious that if the correct thing to write would have been Zachor v'Shamor then he would have found some other way to begin this stanza. So why is it Shamor v'Zachor? So the answer is that on every level, even though Shamor is written in Parshas Va'eschanan and Zachor in Parshas Yisro, it's supposed to be Shamor v'Zachor. On the most elementary halachic level so the hekesh, the Gemara says that we have a hekesh between Shamor v'Zachor. There's an equation between Shamor v'Zachor. Kol sheyeshno b'shamor... is also obligated in Zachor, i.e., in making kiddush. And hence נשים חייבות בקידוש היום despite the fact that it's a מצוות עשה שהזמן גרמא. So the hekesh is, first comes Shamor and then Zachor is equated to Shamor. Why? Because lechumra makshinan. That's a מידה שהתורה נדרשת בה. If you have an equation between two things, and we can either say, well, who's ever exempt from Zachor should be exempt from Shamor, or you can go in the other direction, who's ever chayav in Shamor should be chayav in Zachor, so the מידה שהתורה נדרשת בה is that לחומרא מקשינן לקולא לא מקשינן. So hence it's Shamor and Zachor. So on that level, it's supposed to be שמור וזכור בדיבור אחד נאמרו. On another level in terms of the Ramban, in terms of how the day of Shabbos al pi Kabbalah unfolds, it's also Shamor is the night and Zachor is the day. And the Sfas Emes says has a beautiful explanation al pi aggadah. What does it mean כל שישנו בשמור ישנו בזכור? Shouldn't it be why not have it in the opposite direction? What does it mean al pi aggadah? So he says as follows, that what it means is the following, that Zachor represents the the experience of Shabbos, the aesthetic, spiritual, religious experience of Shabbos. So comes the Torah and says that unless that experience of for that experience of kedusha to be genuine and to be authentic, it has to be rooted in the discipline of Shamor. Unless one has the discipline of Shamor of issur melacha on Shabbos, without that discipline, so then one can't have, one cannot genuinely, authentically have the religious experience which is represented by Zachor. So on that level also it's כל שישנו בשמור ישנו בזכור. Hence if his name had been Zalman Halevi Alkabetz, he would he wouldn't have begun Zachor Veshamor, he would have come up with he would have come up with something else. And lahalacha of course with the exception of erev Pesach or some other extenuating circumstance, so we generally lachatchila do distribute the shalosh seudos over these three time zones. There is a famous limud zchus from Reb Chaim, according to which maybe we don't always do the fact. Reb Chaim was melamed zchus. This was a sort of ex post facto limud zchus. It wasn't a lachatchila recommended course of action. But the problem is that sometimes sometimes we're not as medakdek on having shalosh seudos, especially this time of year as as we should be. So Reb Chaim was melamed zchus and said as follows, right, that it's very very common that that people have a mezonos kiddush in the morning. People have a mezonos kiddush in the morning. And then later then you have it in shul, some people let's say the minhag in Europe in in Poland, if if you know people who who have minhagim from Poland and Europe, so I know there, so they always they often, maybe other places in Europe as well, they used to have a mezonos kiddush at home also. It wasn't just something when you wanted to when there was a simcha in shul or you were socializing in shul, but even even at home also as part probably as part of getting your me'ah brachos. That's one of the way to help, you know, get the me'ah brachos on Shabbos which we're missing because of the short Shemoneh Esrei. Okay, so a minhag of mezonos kiddush and then you take a little a little break, learn a little bit and then then you have the seuda. So says Reb Chaim it's a diyun in the poskim quoted in Shulchan Aruch, the Mechaber quotes the whole range of opinions in Shulchan Aruch, whether or not the third seuda on Shabbos does does it require pas or no? Maybe even if you don't have pas, maybe even mezonos is enough, maybe you don't even need mezonos, maybe you could have basar, maybe even peiros is enough, maybe even drinking a cup of wine is is is enough. So that's a diyun in the poskim. So Reb Chaim's limud zchus was he says, who says if you're going to rely on the shittas that mezonos qualifies for shalosh seudos, who says that it has to be first two seudos of pas and then a third seuda of mezonos? No, who says that it has to be davka in that sequence? No, you can have one seuda of pas, you can have one seuda of mezonos, and then another seuda of pas. So that was Reb Chaim's limud zchus on the on the velt for for not eating shalosh seudos is that they're knowingly or unknowingly relying on the mezonos kiddush in the morning. Tosfos just mentions in any kol makom you don't have to say davka Mincha, just it sounds like it's from zman Mincha. Right, so Tosfos right Tosfos isn't misyacheis to that question of whether it should bedafka be after Mincha. If I if I for example went to early minyan. If I, if I, for example, went to early minyan, came home, I washed at 10 o'clock in the morning, 9:30 in the morning, and then I decide to eat lunch at 12:30. That's prox, it's prox Mincha Gedola a little bit. 12:30 this time of year. Right, it's Mincha Gedola. So then I should be at least Seuda Shlishis but after Mincha. Right, I think everyone would agree that b'dieved you're yotzei. The question is whether it's l'chatchila. I'd say even l'chatchila because it's already z'man Mincha. He says it's min hamincha ul'maala. Right. So some say that I think the Aruch Hashulchan quotes that that al pi Kabbalah it's a very big inyan that Shalosh Seudos should be after Mincha. But I think even according to them, there's no question that b'dieved one is yotzei. As I say, point, Tosafos doesn't seem to link it actually davening at all. Right, Tosafos links it just to that time zone. That's correct. That's entirely correct. Okay. So why would we make, if all the Gimel Seudos are based on the pasuk Hayom three times, so why would we make a chiluk? Right. So why do you have this whole range of opinions? So just somewhat simplistically, the background to that is as follows: The assumption is, for instance, take a look right here in kuf yud ches, the mishna where it quotes the Mishna in Pe'ah, right after where we had gotten up to in the Gemara:

מי שיש לו מזון שתי סעודות לא יטול מן התמחוי.

Tamchui was the food kitchen which provided daily meals for aniyim who simply lacked food to eat. So the meal allowance per diem is two meals. And that's the, that's considered the norm, as far as that's the way it was at the time of Matan Torah, when let's say when the Gemara describes that the first meal is either in sha'ah revi'is or sha'ah chamishis for ba'alei batim, for talmidei chachamim, and then the second meal is at night. So the norm is that you eat two meals, that you eat two meals a day. So again, let's continue with the mahalach that Gimel Seudos is a kiyum in oneg Shabbos. So then the question is, well, maybe anything where you exceed two, so that's the way you manifest the oneg Shabbos. Meaning that the norm on Sunday through Friday would be two meals a day and on Shabbos going beyond that is the way we manifest the oneg Shabbos. So that's the question: Well, you have to manifest it with a full-fledged seuda or no, maybe as long as you exceed the norm of two, that's already a manifestation of oneg Shabbos. And that's the, again, generally speaking, that's the direction which allows for the norm is normally two, then on Friday, does that mean that the person should have had two meals before they had supper Friday night? But either way, Shabbos you're adding. Now, your question is good, your question is correct, but either way, again, if you didn't have Shalosh Seudos, right, if you didn't have I'm not asking Shalosh Seudos, I'm going backwards first. Friday afternoon, is the person to eat two meals? Or Friday, the weekday, Friday the Erev Shabbos? Like Thursday even, did they eat two meals on Friday? Or did they eat one meal on Friday? When the mishna talks about being min hatamchui, two meals, does on Friday they only have one meal and one meal counted for Shabbos? Or do they actually have two meals on Friday in the day? I think the answer is they had one. Excuse me? I think the answer is they had one. They only had one. So what's really happening is that you're transferring the meal, one of the seudos hachol and making it one of the seudos of Shabbos. Right. So when you continue, your cheshbon is correct. And if you continue, so basically what your cheshbon will do is is give you a new perspective on Melave Malka and why Melave Malka is so important. Because the emes is that without the Melave Malka, all you really did is sort of shift a little bit, you shifted the times of the meals. And with the Melave Malka, that's correct. So even without the Melave Malka, okay, so the shifting shows oneg Shabbos. But then by having the Melave Malka, so it's not stam a goodbye party, it's not only the goodbye party for Shabbos HaMalka, but the truth is that by having the Melave Malka, so that now accentuates the fact that Shabbos had an extra meal. It's not just that one sort of adjusted the timing of our rations anyway. So that mahalach gives you, gives one added, I think, appreciation for what the Melave Malka is about. Now, just very quickly, we don't have time for the whole mahalach. If you have a Gemara with the Rif in the back, just take a look very quickly and I'm sort of not going to do justice to this at all, but I just want to just mention very quickly in passing. On מ"ד עמוד א... It's מ"ד עמוד א' in the dafei haRif, דיבור המתחיל וכתב רבינו תם. So the Ran writes, וכתב רבינו תם ז"ל דנשים חייבות בג' סעודות, that women are also obligated in shalosh se'udos, וכן נמי לבצוע על שתי ככרות, and they also have to have lechem mishneh. Again, despite the fact that maybe our initial reaction might have been that these are simply מצוות עשה שהזמן גרמא. What's the reason, says Rabbeinu Tam for this psak, which of course is what it says in Shulchan Aruch as well? שאף הן היו באותו הנס. Right? Interesting. Right? So we associate אף הן היו באותו הנס, because we know the Gemara says it by ner Chanukah, the Gemara says it by mikra Megillah, the Gemara says it by arba kosos. So it's a good trivia question, give four examples of אף הן היו באותו הנס. According to Rabbeinu Tam, there's a fourth application of אף הן היו באותו הנס as well, which is the chiyuv shalosh se'udos is also אף הן היו באותו הנס. The nes of the man. Says the Ran, Rabbeinu Tam's psak is right, but you don't need his reason. ואין צורך שבכל מעשה שבת איש ואשה שוין. With regard to all mitzvos in Shabbos, there's no difference between men and women,

כדילפינן מזכור ושמור. כל שישנו בשמירה ישנו בזכירה. ובכל זה הרי כל חיובי שבת.

So says the Ran you don't need Rabbeinu Tam's reason. Now just very and I apologize for I hope I'm not being too too brief here. So what's Rabbeinu Tam's answer to that? The Ran says you don't need an אף הן היו באותו הנס reason to be mechayiv nashim in shalosh se'udos because you have the reason of zachor ve-shamor. כל שישנו בשמור ישנו בזכור. So the answer is, who says a כל שישנו בשמור ישנו בזכור should have any connection or relationship with shalosh se'udos? For instance, what's another kol she-yeshno? So we know, bal tochal chametz, ישנו בקום אכול מצה. לא תאכל עליו חמץ, same pasuk, שבעת ימים תאכל עליו מצות לחם עוני, hence כל שישנו בבל אכול חמץ ישנו בקום אכול מצה. So nashim are chayavos in achilas matzah. But we still need the reason of אף הן היו באותו הנס to say they're chayavos in dalet kosos. We don't say that that that heikesh is going to spill over and engulf all the mitzvos of the Seder. We don't say that at all. So me-heicha taisi, who told the Ran the fact that we have zachor ve-shamor, כל שישנו בשמור ישנו בזכור, that that should spill over and encompass shalosh se'udos as well? And that's obviously what Rabbeinu Tam's response to the Ran is. Yeah, but that's got nothing to do with shalosh se'udos and were not for אף הן היו באותו הנס, I wouldn't know that nashim are chayavos in shalosh se'udos. Hence Rabbeinu Tam says what he does. It's quite clear that what the Ran has in mind, if you take a look in the first volume of the Yotzei Shiurim, so the Rav has a whole Yotzei Shiur in Kavod Ve-oneg. So the first half of the Yotzei Shiur, which I'm spoiling now, is devoted to the following the following yesod, that the Rav explains that despite the fact that Kavod Ve-oneg are ostensibly only mitzvos mi-divrei kabbalah, rooted in the pasuk in in Sefer Yeshayahu, but the truth is that what the pasuk in Sefer Yeshayahu tells us is how to implement zachor ve-shamor of the mitzvos de-oraisa. And that shamor says, zachor ve-shamor say, again, that the day of Shabbos has to be manifest as a unique and special day. That's what zachor ve-shamor, especially shamor for the Rambam is not only a lo sa'asei but a'asei as well, is that it has to be manifest that that it's a special and unique day. So that's amorphous. It is amorphous. So comes the pasuk in divrei kabbalah and now says and the way one highlights the fact, the way we objectify that Shabbos is special, that Shabbos is unique, that Shabbos stands out from all other days, is through Kavod Ve-oneg. So according to this understanding for which the Rav has many many rayos, so Kavod Ve-oneg are not independent mitzvos mi-divrei kabbalah, but rather they're fleshing out and and telling us how to implement the de-oraisa of zachor ve-shamor. So that being the case, so then the Ran is 100 percent correct. Right? According to that approach that shalosh se'udos, which are part of oneg Shabbos, which in turn is the way we're... instructed to manifest and implement the mandate of Zachor v'Shamor. So then the Ran is absolutely, absolutely correct. One, one last he'arah and with this, with this we'll conclude. If you sort of just let your eye peruse מ"ד עמוד א' in the Divrei HaRif, so you'll see the Rif quotes a lot of the beautiful, beautiful mammarim which the Gemara has in kuf yud chet about the schar which one receives for being makpid on Shalosh Seudos. For instance,

אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי משום בר קפרא כל המקיים שלש סעודות בשבת ניצל משלש פורעניות.

If a person consistently, conscientiously fulfills the mitzvah of Shalosh Seudos, so then in that merit he's saved from gimmel puranios, chevlo shel mashiach, dinah shel gehenom, and milchemet Gog u'Magog. Next, רבי יוסי בן זמרא says כל מי שמענג עצמו בשבת, a person who enjoys himself on Shabbos, נותנו לו נחלה בלי מצרים, he receives an inheritance without borders,

שנאמר אז תתענג על ה' והרכבתיך על במתי ארץ והאכלתיך נחלת יעקב אביך,

etc. All these beautiful, beautiful mammarim. So what's the point? So what's all this doing in the Rif, right? We know that the Rif generally omits the aggadata and only quotes the parts of the Gemara which are halacha. And this is a very, very conspicuous violation of the Rif's self-imposed style. So why does the Rif have all this aggadata? So one idea that the Rav emphasizes and this also needs to be developed, again, ultimately the mitzvah of Zachor v'Shamor is, again, what let's say we just quoted from the Rav is to outwardly demonstrate and manifest that Shabbos is special, that Shabbos is unique, to accord respect to Shabbos, to show that Shabbos has a special standing. Okay. So now imagine the following. Let's say, let's say a talmud chacham were to walk into the room. So we think he's a talmud chacham but we don't necessarily think that he's one of the gedolei hador. Then אף על פי כן we stand up and we do what we should. Okay, but in terms of what our attitude is, he's a talmud chacham, a fine talmud chacham, but I haven't heard that he's one of the gedolei hador, right? And then later, later we hear, you know, that person, he's very self-effacing, very unassuming, but he's really one of the greatest people around. So perhaps there was nothing more we could have done, but אף על פי כן we don't feel that we manifest the proper kavod, right? Because even if, even if we stood up and I couldn't have done more than I did, I stood up melo komasi, I stood up entirely, but in terms of what attitude of reverence and respect was being manifested, it wasn't the accurate degree of respect and reverence, right? Even if, even if outwardly, superficially, you couldn't discern it, but I know that it wasn't the same. So in order to be, in order to be מקיים מצוה שלש סעודות בשבת, to be mechabed Shabbos, to be m'aneg Shabbos, even if, even if I have all the matamim, but if I don't appreciate, if I don't have some appreciation for kedushas Shabbos, for the greatness of Shabbos, even if I do everything else but I just underestimate Shabbos, so then my, in halacha, my kavod v'oneg Shabbos is lacking. Not just my understanding in terms of talmud Torah, but in the halacha that I have to be מכבד ומענג את השבת requires that I have as accurate an understanding and perception of the greatness of Shabbos, of kedushas Shabbos. Without that, without our looking in sefarim, without our looking in the mamarei aggada in Chazal about what Shabbos is, about what the greatness of Shabbos is, so we can have the most, the most wonderful delicacies on Shabbos, we can do everything outwardly, but the attitude will be lacking. And part of the mitzvah of being מכבד ומענג את השבת is appreciating Shabbos. The appreciation is supposed to be manifest, is supposed to be demonstrated, but it's supposed to be an appreciation for what Shabbos is. Says the Rif, so this isn't just aggadata, this is halacha also, because without it we can't properly. Without it we can't properly be mechabeid and oneig haShabbos without understanding what it is that we're trying to be mechabeid, what it is that we're trying to be me'aneig. The Tur says in סימן רנב, it turns out that we should have the floor washed on Erev Shabbos before bein hashmashos, so we should do it now. So I mean one is supposed to try to wash and clean and everything else before Shabbos, but bedieved if Shabbos kodesh is about to start, you want the house to be clean and you don't have time, so you just have to finish quickly. Okay, let's continue. In סימן רנב, the Tur writes as follows:

צריך שיבדוק כליו מערב שבת עם חשיכה שמא יש בהם שום דבר ויצא בו.

This is based on the Mishnah in Masechet Shabbos. One has to check their pockets. And the reason for this is because it might be that there's something in your pockets and you might come to carry in the reshus harabim. And it's a gezira of the Chachamim that you shouldn't carry on Shabbos, so you have to check your pockets before Shabbos.