Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) THE MINIMUM AGE OF A CHILD FOR RE'IYAH

(a) Question: If the minimum age of Chinuch for a child is when the child can be carried by his father (Beis Shamai) or walk by himself (Beis Hillel) from Yerushalayim to Har ha'Bayis, how did the child get to Yerushalayim from his hometown? (It must be that he is old enough to walk that far, and if so, this is an older age than both Beis Hillel and Beis Shamai say!)
(b) Answer: His mother brought him, for she, too, is obligated to come to Yerushalayim because of the obligation of Simchah.
(c) Question: According to Beis Shamai, why did Shmuel's parents not bring him to the Mishkan when he was old enough to ride his father's shoulders (Shmuel I 1:22)?
(d) Answer: His mother Chanah saw that he was especially weak (and that is why she, too, did not go, even though she was obligated because of Simchah).

(a) A lame or blind child who will never be healed is exempt, like a lame or blind adult.
(b) A lame or blind child who will recover is also exempt.

1. The rule is that whenever an adult is exempt, a child is also exempt.

(a) Beis Shamai maintains that the minimum value of the Korban Re'iyah is more than that of the Korban Chagigah, because the Torah gives importance to the Re'iyah (an Olah) more than the Chagigah (a Shelamim).

1. An Olah is completely burned to Hashem, and not a Shelamim.
2. More Olos are brought than Shelamim on Shemini Atzeres (Vayikra 23).

(b) Beis Hillel maintains that the minimum value of the Korban Chagigah is more than that of the Korban Re'iyah, because the Torah gives importance to the Chagigah (a Shelamim) more than the Re'iyah (an Olah).

1. A Shelamim is more important because it was brought in the Midbar before the Torah was given.
2. More Shelamim were brought by the Nesi'im than were Olos (Bamidbar 7).

(c) Beis Hillel responds to Beis Shamai's reasons.
(d) Beis Shamai responds to Beis Hillel's reasons.

(a) Beis Hillel maintains that Shelamim were brought in the Midbar before the Torah was given (Shemos 24:5).

1. When the verse (ibid.) says that an Olah was brought, it refers to the Olas Tamid (from which we cannot learn the laws of other Olos, such as the Olas Re'iyah).

(b) Beis Shamai maintains that both Shelamim and Olos were brought in the Midbar.

1. When the verse (ibid.) says that an Olah was brought, it refers to the Olas Re'iyah.

(c) Beis Shamai, R. Yishmael, and R. Eliezer all maintain that the Olah brought in the Midbar was the Olas Re'iyah.
(d) Beis Hillel, R. Akiva, and R. Yosi ha'Glili all maintain that the Olah brought in the Midbar was the Olas Tamid.
(e) Their opinions are inferred from statements that each Tana made.

(f) R. Yishmael's name is removed from the first list because the proof cited as to his opinion is invalidated.

(a) Question: The verse states, "... they brought up Olos and they sacrificed Shelamim to Hashem, oxen." (Shemos 24:5)
(b) Does it mean "they brought up [lambs as] Olos, and they sacrificed oxen as Shelamim to Hashem,"
(c) Or does it mean "they brought up oxen as Olos and as Shelamim to Hashem?"

1. The practical difference is to know where to pause when reading the verse.
2. Alternatively, the practical difference is for a person who vowed to bring an Olah like the Olah that was brought in the Midbar (i.e. does he bring a lamb or an ox?).

(d) Answer: The question remains unanswered (Teiku).