Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) THE DISQUALIFIED KOHANIM THAT CAME WITH EZRA

(a) Question: What is so great about the Chazakah?
(b) Answer #1: Before (in Bavel), they only ate Rabbinic Trumah; now, they will eat Trumah of the Torah.
(c) Answer #2: Now, also they will only eat Rabbinic Trumah. Lineage is only established by eating Trumah of the Torah. The greatness of the Chazakah is that even though there is now reason to decree not to eat Rabbinic Trumah, lest they eat Torah Trumah, no decree was made.
(d) Question: Did they really not eat Torah Trumah?

1. "That will not eat from the Kadshei haKadoshim" - from sacrifices they will not eat, but they will eat Trumah of the Torah!

(e) Answer: Expound the verse thusly: They will not eat something called Kodesh (Trumah), nor something called Kadshim (parts of sacrifices given to Kohanim).

(a) (Beraisa): Any of the following establish that a man is a proper Kohen:

1. Duchaning in Bavel;
2. Eating Chalah in Surya;
3. Receiving gifts (parts of a slaughtered animal given to a Kohen) in the big cities.

(b) Suggestion: We see that Duchaning establishes him as a Kohen - is this not regarding lineage?
(c) Rejection: No, it is regarding Trumah.
(d) Counter-question: Presumably, he is established as in case 2, and there it must be for lineage (since Chalah has the same law as Trumah, we cannot say that eating Challah establishes him to eat Trumah).
(e) Answer: The Tana holds that Chalah is Rabbinic nowadays, but Trumah is a Torah law. Seeing one eat Rabbinic Challah establishes him as a Kohen to eat Torah Trumah.

1. This is as Rav Huna Brei d'Rav Yehoshua will say later.

(f) (Beraisa): Any of the following establish that a man is a proper Kohen:

1. In Eretz Yisrael - Duchaning or receiving Trumah at the granaries;
2. In Surya or any place where messengers informing the fixing of the new month arrive - Duchaning, but not receiving Trumah at the granaries.

i. Bavel is considered as Surya.
ii. R. Shimon Ben Gamliel: Even Alexandria used to have the law of Surya, since Beis Din was fixed there.

(g) Suggestion: We see that Duchaning establishes him as a Kohen - is this not regarding lineage?
(h) Rejection: No, it is regarding Chalah.
(i) Counter-question: Presumably, he is established as by receiving in the granaries, and there it must be for lineage.
(j) Answer: The Tana holds that Trumah is Rabbinic nowadays, but Chalah is a Torah law. Seeing one eat Rabbinic Trumah establishes him as a Kohen to eat Torah Chalah.

1. Rav Huna Brei d'Rav Yehoshua: I found Chachamim learning that even the opinion that says that Trumah is Rabbinic today, admits that Chalah is a Torah law - we see, during the 7 years of conquering Eretz Yisrael, and the 7 years of dividing it among the tribes, there was an obligation to take Chalah, but not Trumah.
2. Rav Huna Brei d'Rav Yehoshua: Just the opposite - even the opinion that Trumah is a Torah law today says that Chalah is only Rabbinic!
3. (Beraisa): "When *you* (plural) come to the land" - when all of you come, not when a minority of you come.

i. When Ezra took the returning exiles to Eretz Yisrael, only a minority came.

(k) (Beraisa): The following are a Chazakah for Kehunah: Duchaning, receiving Trumah at the granaries, and testimony.
(l) Question: Is testimony a Chazakah?!
(m) Suggestion: The Beraisa is saying that Duchaning is as testimony - it establishes lineage!
(n) Rejection: No, it teaches that testimony which is based on a Chazakah is as a Chazakah.

(a) A man came in front of R. Ami. 'I know that this man is a Kohen, because he read first in the Torah'.
(b) Question (R. Ami): Perhaps he is not a Kohen, but was the greatest person in the Shul!
(c) Answer: A Levi read after him.

1. R. Ami established the person as a Kohen based on this.

(d) A man came in front of R. Yehoshua Ben Levi. 'I know that this man is a Levi, because he read 2nd in the Torah'.
(e) Question (R. Yehoshua Ben Levi): Perhaps he is not a Levi, but is a great person!
(f) Answer: A Kohen read before him.

1. R. Yehoshua Ben Levi established the person as a Levi based on this.

(g) A man came in front of Reish Lakish. 'I know that this man is a Kohen, because he read first in the Torah'.
(h) Reish Lakish: Did you see him receive Trumah at the granaries?
(i) R. Elazar: If there are no granaries, no one can be established as a Kohen?! (Certainly, it suffices that he read first in the Torah!)
(j) A similar episode occurred when they were in front of R. Yochanan.
(k) Reish Lakish: Did you see him receive Trumah at the granaries?
(l) R. Yochanan: If there are no granaries, no one can be established as a Kohen?!

1. Reish Lakish scowled at R. Elazar. 'You heard these words from R. Yochanan and did not say them in his name?!'

(a) Among Rebbi and R. Chiya, one established a person as a Kohen from his father's testimony; the other established a man as a Levi from his brother's testimony.
(b) It must be that Rebbi established a man as a Kohen from his father's testimony.

1. (Beraisa - Rebbi): 'This is my son, he is a Kohen' - he is believed regarding Trumah, but not regarding lineage;
2. R. Chiya: If he is believed regarding Trumah, he should also be believed for lineage; if he is not believed regarding lineage, he should not be believed for Trumah!
3. Rebbi: I believe him regarding Trumah, since he can feed him Trumah; I do not believe him to marry off his son to one of checked lineage, since this is not in his control.

(c) Since Rebbi establish a man as a Kohen based on his father's testimony, it must be that R. Chiya established a man as a Levi from his brother's testimony.

1. Question: What is the difference, just as one cannot testify on his son, so too on his brother!