Eating Two Kezeisim of Matzah

0:00So on the 10th of Nalakh, someone wanted to know about Tukhiseism of Matsah. What's the Indian of having Tukhiseism of Matsah in the night of the Seder after all? The Mitzvah Zakhilah, Akhilah Zakhilah Zakhilah, and Akhilah is always to find in Nalakh as a Kizai, so where does it come from to have Tukhiseism of Matsah? So what's interesting is it does not come from the Gammar, the Gammar, and never says anywhere that one should be Tukhiseism of Matsah on the night of the Seder. Yet, the Shulkhunarach mentions it in Tafayn, hey, if I'll live, because this is quoted by Rishan in the Russian, tells us, the Rishan will quote this idea of Tukhiseism. So what's the reason for it? Shulkhunarach writes, Yohlenbe Haseb-e-Yachad, Kizaius Mikolachad, you have a Kizaius from a complete Matsah and a Kizaius from the Prusa, from the Broken Matsah, and if you're not able to eat the Shnei, the Kishnei Kizaius in Biyachad, Yushlita Hamotsi won first, and then the Akhilah's Matsah won, meaning the full Matsah, the whole Matsah first, and then from the Broken Peace. So Mishapur explains, why Tukhiseism? Mishapurans have contested, right?

1:01I mean, a Prusa Bivadeh's are Kizaius, from the Broken Matsah, of course you have to have a Kizaius, because that's the Al-Akhilah's Matsah. You need a Prusa, because that's Lachem-Oni, a Broken Peace is Lachem-Oni, that's your Mitsumavachila's Matsah, so you have to have a Kizaius from that. Why do you have a Kizaius from the whole Matsah? That's for your regular Lachem-ishna, for your regulars, that's Yantif, you made a Brakhav-Ahmotsi Lachem-Oni Arads, so for the Brakhav-Ahmotsi Lachem-Oni Arads, yeah, from the regular peace, that's assuming that the normal shear for the Brakhav-Ahmotsi, for Sudhas Yantif, is a Kizaius, right? That's the sheet of the Rosh, and the Mordechai, apparently, it's in Srimarashasadiala, in the Mishapurra, he says that the Makhlogs are poscum, for Sudhas Yantif, it could be that you need a Kibaitsa, not just a Kizaius, or at least with this Chumra, having took a Kizaius, and we're not going to be in Makhmir, they have to have a Kizaius plus a Kibaitsa, okay, good enough, they have a Kizaius, and what's the,

2:01and the Rosh and the Mordechai explain, because if you would have it all in one, it was just one, because I said there will be a violation of Eino-Semitsus-Ghavilus-Ghavilus, that have both Mitsus, both the Mitsus of Sudhas Yantif, and the Mitswa of Achilles Matsah on the same Kizaius, would be Eino-Semitsus-Ghavilus, so we separate them from the Prusa-Yav-Yarachilles Matsah, from the Shlema you have, you're Sudhas Yantif, and we're making that the Shlema only needs for Sudhas Yantif, you only need a Kizaius, Magna-Varamsa of Kondalin, gives another reason to have to Kizaius him, he says, Lakhavkili, Shlida Kizaius, from the Prusa-Samotsi, so Kullbrachas-Machaius-Kizaius-Hachal, each Brachah is Makhai of its own, its own Kizaius, again, seems to be really the same reason, but it's each, each Brachah requires its own Kizaius, Bira-Lakhavkili just wonders, in Simta-Vain-Adhi, Bira-Maskal-Kizaius-Mikhalakhali says, this is highly unusual, the whole Sugya, the Gamara, keeps talking about eating Kizaius-Matsah,

3:02a Shamis-Hachal-Kizaius-Matsah, below a Sabah, is he Yaut-Says, he's not Yaut-Says, nothing about Shnaise-Sem, don't say anywhere in the Gamara, they need Shnaise-Sem-Matsah, how could it be that there's a HAL-Lakhavkili, you have to teach Kishnaise-Sem, and it doesn't say it anywhere in the Gamara, anything about Shleise-Sem, so if Shachter and Safer-Eir-Sats-Vin, Simin-Dallin, Os-Yud, points out that probably you can answer the Bira-Lakh as follows, the Shita-Sarambham and the Seventh-Berg of Al-Khamits-Sem-Matsah, Al-Khavav and Al-Khazayin is, that there's a Mitzvah, an independent Mitzvah of Khayrus, that every generation of person has to be Lahar-Sazat-Sem-O, as if he's leaving Shibun-Mitsraim, so when he has a meal, the Laila is on, and I'd like to say there, he has to eat, and drink Shumay-Sav-Darekh Khayrus, everyone has to drink Dallikosus, Shleiain, etc. And that said, the Ramah-Paskins in Tafah-Ein-Basif, Zayin, Le Khavkhila, you should lean for the entire meal. So the Priskarov points out that Tossus and the Rosh disagreed with the Ramah.

4:04They all, that there is no Mitzvah of Khayrus, it's that Dallikosus, the Gether of Dallikosus, is Dallikbrachus-Dallikos, has Sabah is the way to do the Mitzvah of Mitzvah, the way to do the Mitzvah of Dallikosus, but it's not its own fulfillment of a Mitzvah of Khayrus, it is a how-to within the Mitzvah of Salayla. So it turns out, according to the Rosh, the only time you have to do a Sabah is when you're eating the Kizaius of Akhil-Smatsa, because that's the unique Mitzvah of Salayla for the Laila Seder, but not for the whole meal, like the Ramah says on an independent Mitzvah of Khayrus. Oh, so make sense, says Roshakhtar, that the Suga that's going to talk about the Mitzvah of his Sabah, according to the Rosh, is only going to talk about one Kizaius, because according to the Rosh, the only Kizaius that needs to actually be Behe Sabah is the Kizaius that you're doing for Akhil-Smatsa, the Kizaius that you're doing for your Suudah,

5:06that's independent, you don't need a Sabah for that, has Sabah is only an open Kiyom Mitzvah of Salayla, it's the way to do the Mitzvah of Salayla, so that's not a cash at all with the Birallah, Allah says, why doesn't the Qumar mentioned about Tukazasim? Qumar is only talking about his Sabah, it's not going to talk about Shanae Qazasim, that's Roshakhtar writes in Osuudah, it's Qudaius, he also Osuudah, over there what he says, in explaining the Shita of Saramba, but we'll leave that aside for now. Now, why is it? Now, first of all, this is not accepted by everybody, that you need to have Shanae Qazasim, the Mishra, right, since they've gotten you all certainly be the ever, if you eat only one Kizaius, you're certainly going to say, in the Orchus-Trabayno-Khelek-Pais, Pitch-Samach-Tas, they caught from the stipler that it's a Khumra-Gadolah to require Shanae Qazasim, and he says that the Qazalish, his brother-in-law, the Qazalish, is a Khazalish because of Lavraqah, Ahul-Rak-Kazai-Izachid, now it was a Khazalish Qazaius, but it was the Qazaius-Izachid, so maybe what would be Bayaz-Shanae Qazasim,

6:08but he ate only one Kizaius, he thought that it was a Khumra-Gadolah, now there's an additional Khumra, not just to eat Shanae Qazasim, but to eat Shanae Qazasim, Biyachah, to swallow Shanae Qazasim, and have them both in your mouth at the same time, to eat them both together. What would be the Svarah for that? So, Mishra-Buru, right, and Sivkhat-Nakhas, that if you eat first, if you were to eat the Kizaius of Hamotsi first, then it would be as if you're being mafsik between the brach-Avalachilles-Matzah and the Achilles-Haprusah, which is what the Alachilles-Matzah is going on. If you were to eat the Prusa first, and then the Shlema, it would also be a Hefsik, according to those posts, that the brach-Avalachilles-Matzah is going on the Shlema. So, therefore, you want to eat them together. So, the difficulty, look, or it is though, that the Khumra-Sazim, Sakhimdav, Qubt-Svava-Malalif, by a Kizaius-Rishon of Matzah, a moron, not to eat them together, Matzah moron together, because the moron-Dhira-Bonon is going to be Mavatah-The-Matzah-Dhira-Risa. So, he said, why don't we say the same thing over here, Lakhora,

7:09that if you're having both Kizaius-Matzah and only the Lakhamishna is Dharabana, and the Prusa is Dhar-Risa, so shouldn't we be concerned that the Tam-Matzah-Dharabana is going to be Mavatah-The-Matzah-Dhira-Risa? So, you have to suggest, isn't it, say, for Sukhas Khayin? He suggests, and Pedro is the ideal, that the Matzah, that you wouldn't say Matzah-Dhira-Bon is being Mavatah-The-Matzah-Dhira-Risa, because you can be Yotse-The-Matzah-The-Matzah-The-Matzah-Dhira-Matzah with either one strictly speaking, with the Prusa or with the Shlama, strictly speaking Yotse-The-Matzah-The-Matzah-Dhira-Risa, you would only say that something's Mavatah-The-Matzah-Dhira-Risa, when you couldn't be Yotse-The-Matzah-Dhira-Risa with both of them, but if you could be Yotse-The-Matzah-Dhira-Risa with either one, then you wouldn't say such a thing. Another suggestion is to why they should be eaten together in Sharatseun-Ozvav, he writes, that if you were to eat Aham-Otsi first, meaning the Shlama first, you'd already be Yotse-The-Khira-Risa of Matzah-Dhira-Risa, meaning it's not that it'll be a half-sick

8:09between your brother and being Yotse-The-Khira-Risa, no, you'd be Yotse-The-Khira-Risa with the Shlama, and that's a less than ideal way to be Yotse-The-Khira-Risa, because you're supposed to eat Aham-Oni, Aham-Oni is Mardak or Shalani, the Prusa should be eaten from the broken piece, and to eat the Prusa first is also not correct, because the Shlama is on top of the Prusa, so in my veer and al-Mitzus, you shouldn't bypass the Shlama in order to eat the Prusa, and maybe that's where the practice comes from, to eat them both simultaneously. And Shulkhunar writes, in Tafai'in Asif al-Lif, that you eat them best, say, but be Yachad, Kizai'is Mikhalechad, in Kizushulkhunar, if you test it, if he explains, you're both Sayah Minah El-Yonah, and you take, you cut off a piece from the top one, and also from the Prusa, Kizai'is from each one, and you give Kizai'is from each one to everyone sitting around the table. So, Kizai'is of the top one, Kizai'is of the bottom one, to everyone sitting around the table. Now, the Abbi's problem with that is, most often,

9:09it's going to be hard to find, especially in the Prusa, a Kizai'is within one broken piece of Mata, for everyone around the table. How big is this Mata, even if you have a small sheer of a Kizai'is? Roshakhtal pointed out that, you know, this was the Millaghi, said his father-in-law, he used to eat a pair of Shimshkops Sayah, and of Shimshkop, he had a Sayah that would take the Mata, and he'd break off five or six Kizai'is for everybody at the Sayah there. He says, what, five or six Kizai'is from one Mata, was he about my face that the Mata was growing? Now, Kizai'is is not as big as you're thinking this, Kizai'is only, but still from a Prusa to get two Kizai'is from everybody at the Sayah there, and very often, there's more than five or six people at the Sayah there. So, how are you going to do it? So, the main thing is that we add other Matsas to be mushroom the Kizai'is for everybody, and you have a little bit of the Prusa for everybody, a little bit of the Shlema for everybody, for other Matsas as well. So, now, but wait a second, why do we have two Kizai'is in the first place? Either because we're in Mesupak, whether the Allah-Khizah's Matsas going on the Shlema

10:10or it's going on the Prusa, so you want to have a Kizai'is of each, or because you Shalita, Lakhavkhili, you Shalita, Kizai'is from the Hamotsi, and a Kizai'is from the Mitswa of Mata. Kizai'is from Lakhamishna, and a Kizai'is from the Mitswa of Mata. Lakhavkhili according to both of those reasons, that's only Nogaya to the Matsas on the Kaira. That's where you have a Suffolk, what the Achlilus Matsas going on, the Shlema of Yonor, the Prusa and Sa'is. But when everyone else is not eating from the Matsas on the Kaira, they're just getting extra, the Allah-Khiz Matsas going on, whatever it is that they're eating, and that's why Shlema Salman Orbach, and Ali Shlema Paryctesive Men, says that this whole Indian of having Shlema Kizai'is in is only for the person leading this age, that for the person who actually has the three Matsas in front of him. But for everybody else, he doesn't have to be in front of him. He's just eating from the Matsas. It's good enough to have only a single Kizai'is. You don't even have to observe this Khumr of Shnakazasim. It happens to be in Kitzershul Khunaruch, he says that the other Mesubin also eats Shnakazasim.

11:13But Pasha's is the Khura like Roshal Muzaman, and that's what they quote from Avalyashiv, and that had God of Avalyashiv, that's what they quote from the stapler, and Roshal Srebeneh, who wasn't into the whole Khumr of Shnakazasim so much. In the first place, that's certainly even if you're going to be marked with the Shnakazasim of Shul Khunaruch recommends, and like to be shown in recommend, it should only be for the person who is eating from three Matsas, but it's not necessary for everybody else.