Previous daf

1)

(a) Our Mishnah obligates the Mitzvah of Matanos (Zero'a, Lechayayim ve'Keivah) under most circumstances, ba'Aretz u've'Chutz la'Aretz, bi'Fenei ha'Bayis ve'she'Lo bi'Fenei ha'Bayis.
Which is the one exception?

(b) Why does the Tana find it necessary to mention 'ba'Aretz u've'Chutz la'Aretz'?

(c) What does 'she'Lo bi'Fenei ha'Bayis' mean?

(a) What does the Tana learn from the Pasuk in Tzav (in connection with the Chazeh va'Shok) "va'Etein *Osam* le'Aharon ha'Kohen ... "?

(b) From which 'Kal-va'Chomer' would we have otherwise learned that Kodshim are Chayav Matanos too?

(c) Under which circumstances is a Kodshim animal which is a Ba'al-Mum, Chayav Bechorah and Matanos, and once redeemed, it goes out to Chulin to be shorn and worked with, and its babies and milk are permitted? What does 'Chayav Bechorah' mean?

(d) What does the Tana say about the above animal regarding ...

1. ... someone who Shechts it ba'Chutz?
2. ... the Din Temurah?
3. ... redeeming it after it dies?

(a) What is the reason that is common to all these rulings?

(b) Which are the two exceptions to the rule? Which two types of Kodshim take effect even on a blemished animal?

(c) In which case will the Hekdesh take effect on an animal with a blemish, even with regard to other categories of Hekdesh?

(a) The Seifa of the Mishnah teaches us that where the Hekdesh precedes the blemish, all the above rulings are reversed.
What is the problem in the Seifa, with the ruling 've'ha'Shochtan ba'Chutz Patur'?

(b) We therefore establish this ruling specifically by the blemish of 'Dukin she'be'Ayin'.
How does that resolve the problem? Who is then the author of our Mishnah?

(c) And what is the reason for the ruling in the Seifa 'P'turin mi'Bechorah u'mi'Matanos'?

(d) And what do we learn from the Pasuk in Shoftim (in connection with P'sulei ha'Mukdashin) "Rak be'Chol Avas Nafsh'cha ...

1. ... Tizbach"?
2. ... v'Achalta"?
3. ... Basar"?

(a) And what do we learn from the Pasuk in Bechukosai (in connection with Temurah) "Tov be'Ra O Ra be'Tov"?

(b) Which two reasons govern the final Halachah that the animals in the Seifa must be buried, should they die?

(c) We learned in the Mishnah that, if not for "Osam", we would learn Matanos by Kodshim from Chulin.
How do we refute the Pircha that Chulin are different, since they are subject to the Mitzvah of ...

1. ... Bechor?
2. ... Reishis ha'Gez (even the males)?
3. ... Ma'aser Beheimah (even the goats)?

(d) And how do we refute the Pircha that even old goats of Chulin ...

1. ... once entered the pen to be Ma'asered?
2. ... that were purchased or that were born a Yasom are of the species that are subject to Ma'aser?

(a) We then ask why Chulin are not subject to the Mitzvah of Chazah ve'Shok from a 'Kal-va'Chomer'.
Which 'Kal-va'Chomer'?

(b) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Shoftim (in connection with the Matanos) "*ve'Zeh* Yih'yeh Mishpat ha'Kohanim me'es ha'Am"?

(c) What problem do we have with the suggestion that Chulin should be Chayav Chazeh ve'Shok, based on the fact that they require Tenufah ('mi'Mah Nafshach')?

(d) Why is this considered Chulin ba'Azarah? Surely it is part of the Avodas ha'Korban?

(a) We therefore conclude that "Zeh" is needed to teach us Rav Chisda's Din.
What does Rav Chisda say about someone who damages Matnos Kehunah? At which stage does he do that?

(b) How do we learn this from "Zeh"?

(c) Why else might he be Patur from paying?

8)

(a) The Beraisa describes the Matanos as 'Din'.
What would that mean if we interpreted this literally (a Kashya on Rav Chisda)?

(b) We conclude however, that this is not the case.
What does he then mean?

(c) This is based on a statement of Rav Shmuel bar Nachmeni.
What did Rav Shmuel bar Nachmeni Amar Rebbi Yonasan say, based on the Pasuk in Divrei Hayamim? (in connection with Matnos Kohanim and Levi'im) "Lema'an Yechezku be'Toras Hashem"?

(a) In another Beraisa, Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseira reiterates that Matanos are Din.
What does the word "Zeh" come to preclude?

(b) Why can we not now interpret Din to mean 'Lecholko be'Dayanim'?

(c) If it therefore means that he has to pay damages, how will we reconcile this with Rav Chisda?

(d) What is the problem with learning the Beraisa like this?

(a) So how do we establish the Beraisa?

(b) And what is then the Chidush?

(c) Why is he not by the same token, then Chayav for destroying the Chazeh ve'Shok?

(a) What does Rebbi Eliezer in the Mishnah in Pe'ah say about a wealthy man taking Matnos Aniyim whilst he is traveling?

(b) Bearing in mind that there are no claimants, how will Rav Chisda explain this?

(c) We ask on this two Kashyos. One, how can Rav Chisda interpret 'Yeshalem' as 'Midas Chasidus'.
What is the other?

(a) So we query Rav Chisda from the Rabbanan in the Seifa.
What do the Rabbanan say?

(b) What do we now infer from their words that poses a Kashya on Rav Chisda?

(c) What does he answer?

(a) The Beraisa exempts a Yisrael who ate his fruit, or a Levi his Ma'aser, whilst it was still in a state of Tevel.
How does it learn this from the Pasuk in Emor "ve'Lo Yechalelu es Kodshei B'nei Yisrael Asher Yarimu"?

(b) What does the Tana mean by 'Ma'aser that is in a state of Tevel?

(c) What can we infer from the Beraisa that poses a Kashya on Rav Chisda?

(d) What do we answer?

Next daf