Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) "KIDUSH L'CHATZA'IM"

(a) Question: Did R. Elazar (above, 7B, 3:d:3) really say that blood is not Mekudash l'Chatza'im?!

1. (R. Yochanan): Chavitei Kohen Gadol do not become Mekudashos l'Chatza'im;
2. (R. Elazar): Since they are l'Chatza'im (half in the morning, half in the evening), they become Kadosh l'Chatza'im.
3. If he holds that blood is not Mekudash l'Chatza'im, he should learn Chavitim from blood!
4. Suggestion: Perhaps he does not learn a matter from a different matter.
5. Rejection: R. Elazar taught, if Kemitzah was done in the Heichal, it is Kosher, for we remove the Levonah from the Lechem ha'Panim in the Heichal, and this corresponds to Kemitzah.

(b) Answer: R. Elazar learns (the law of) a Minchah from another Minchah, not from blood.
(c) Question: He does not learn a Minchah from another Minchah!

1. (Beraisa): If the Lechem ha'Panim was Nifras (became Chaser) before it (Rashi - the Lechem ha'Panim; Shitah Mekubetzes - the Levonah) was removed, the Lechem is Pasul, we do not Maktir the Levonah;
2. If it was Nifras after it was removed, the Lechem is Pasul, we Maktir the Levonah.
3. (R. Elazar): When it says before (or after) it was removed, this really means before (or after) the time came for it to be removed - once the time comes, it is as if it was removed.

i. We do not equate this to a Minchah that became Chaser before Kemitzah (it is Pasul, even though the time came for Kemitzah, it is not as if Kemitzah was done!)

(d) Answer: The Kometz is different than the Levonah - we cannot consider it is as if was already taken, for we do not know which part of the Minchah will become the Kometz;

1. The Lechem ha'Panim and Levonah are already distinct (therefore, once the time comes, it is as if it was removed.)

(e) Question: If so, the Lechem becoming Nifras should be like Shirei Minchah that became Chaser in between Kemitzah and Haktarah, we do not Maktir the Kometz!
(f) Answer: Amora'im argue about this, R. Elazar holds like the opinion that we are Maktir in this case.
(g) (R. Yochanan): Chavitei Kohen Gadol do not become Mekudashos l'Chatza'im;
(h) (R. Elazar): Since they are l'Chatza'im, they become Kadosh l'Chatza'im.
(i) (Rav Acha): R. Yochanan learns from "Minchah...Machatzisah" - the Minchah must be brought (complete), then it is divided into halves.
(j) Question (against R. Elazar - Beraisa): Chavitim were not brought in halves - a full Isaron was brought, and divided into two;

1. (Beraisa): Had it said 'Minchah...Machatzis', this would teach that half an Isaron should be brought in the morning and offered, and similarly in the afternoon;

i. Rather, it says "Machatzisah" - half of *it* (the complete Minchah, i.e. all of it is here).

(k) Answer: This is l'Chatchilah, but b'Diavad, they become Kadosh l'Chatza'im.
(l) Question (Rav Gaviha of Bei Kesil): But it says "Chukah" (which always teaches that something is Me'akev!)
(m) Answer (Rav Ashi): Indeed, he must bring a full Isaron from his house, but it can be Mekudash l'Chatza'im.
(n) Contradiction: R. Yochanan taught differently (elsewhere)!

1. (Rav): If one separated half an Isaron and intends to add more, it is not Kadosh;
2. (R. Yochanan): It is Kadosh.

i. If R. Yochanan holds that Chavitim do not become Mekudashos l'Chatza'im, he should learn from them to this case!

3. Suggestion: Perhaps he does not learn a matter from a different matter.
4. Rejection: The following teaches that he does (learn about the Heichal from the Azarah)!
5. (R. Yochanan): If Shelamim was slaughtered in the Heichal, it is Kosher;

i. It says "U'Shchato Pesach Ohel Mo'ed" - the Tefel (the Azarah, it is valid for slaughter only because it faces the Heichal) should not be greater (more Kosher for slaughter) than what is primary (the Heichal)!

(o) Answer: Intent to add more changes the law.

1. (Beraisa): "Mele'im" - Klei Shares are Mekadesh only if they hold the complete quantity;
2. R. Yosi says, this is only if he does not intend to complete the measure - if he intends, every amount put inside immediately becomes Mekudash.

(p) Question: (Rav said that if one separated half an Isaron and intends to add more, it is not Kadosh -) what is Rav's opinion regarding Chavitim l'Chatza'im?

1. If he holds like R. Elazar (they become Mekudash), he should learn from this, half an Isaron should also become Kadosh!
2. Suggestion: Perhaps (he does, but) he does not learn a matter from a different matter.
3. Rejection: He does!
4. (Rav): If a Minchah was brought without oil (even if it requires oil), it is Kadosh - we learn from Lechem ha'Panim, which do not contain oil;

i. If a Minchah was brought without Levonah, it is Kadosh - we learn from Minchas Nesachim, which has no Levonah;
ii. If it was brought without oil or Levonah, it is Kadosh - we learn from Minchas Chotei, which has neither.

(q) Answer: Rav must hold like R. Yochanan (Chavitim do not become Mekudashos l'Chatza'im.)

(a) (Rav): If a Minchah was brought without oil (even if it requires oil), it is Kadosh - we learn from Lechem ha'Panim, which do not contain oil;

1. If a Minchah was brought without Levonah, it is Kadosh - we learn from Minchas Nesachim, which has no Levonah;
2. If it was brought without oil nor Levonah, it is Kadosh - we learn from Minchas Chotei, which has neither.
3. If oil or Levonah was brought by itself, it becomes Kadosh:

i. Oil becomes Kadosh by itself, as we find regarding the Log that a Metzora brings;
ii. Levonah becomes Kadosh by itself, as we find regarding the Levonah of Lechem ha'Panim (it is removed and offered by itself).

(b) (R. Chanina): If it (should have, but) lacks either oil or Levonah, it is not Kadosh.

(c) Question: (There was a measure in the Mikdash that held one Isaron, it was anointed with oil to Mekadesh it.) According to R. Chanina, why was it Mekudash? This is the amount of flour for a Minchah, there is no room for oil or Levonah, therefore it does not Mekadesh!
(d) Answer: It is Mekadesh Minchas Chotei (which does not require oil or Levonah).
(e) Question: According to R. Chanina, why was the measure of a Log Mekudash? (He says that oil alone is not Mekudash!)
(f) Answer: It is Mekadesh the oil that a Metzora brings (alone).
(g) Shmuel holds like Rav:

1. (Mishnah): Klei Lach (Klei Shares that hold liquids) are Mekadesh (Kodshim) liquids, dry measures are Mekadesh dry (Kodshim);
2. Klei Lach are not Mekadesh dry, dry measures are not Mekadesh liquids.
3. (Shmuel): This only applies to (liquid) measures, but buckets (even though they hold liquids, i.e. blood) are Mekadesh dry;

i. We learn from the Menachos in the buckets donated by the Nesi'im - "Shneihem Mele'im Soles".

(h) Question (Rav Acha mi'Difti): A Minchah (is kneaded with oil, it) is like a liquid!
(i) Answer #1 (Ravina): Surely, some of the flour was not kneaded well and is dry - we learn from the dry part.
(j) Answer #2 (Ravina): Compared to blood, a Minchah is considered dry.
(k) (R. Elazar): If Kemitzah was done in the Heichal, it is Kosher, for we remove the Levonah from the Lechem ha'Panim in the Heichal, and this corresponds to Kemitzah.
(l) Question (R. Yirmeyah - Beraisa): "V'Komatz mi'Sham" - from where the Zar stands (i.e. in the Azarah, not in the Heichal);

1. Question (R. Yehudah ben Beseira): What is the source that if Kemitzah was done with the left hand, he returns the Kometz, and does Kemitzah again, with the right hand?
2. Answer: "V'Komatz mi'Sham" - from the place where Kemitzah was already done.

(m) Answer (R. Yirmeyah - some say, R. Yakov): The verse does not exclude the Heichal, it comes to include the entire Azarah;

1. One might have thought, since Minchah is Kodshei Kodoshim like Olah, Kemitzah must be in the north, just like slaughter and Kabalah of an Olah must be in the north.
2. Question: We cannot learn from Olah, for it is Kalil (totally burned on the Mizbe'ach)!
3. Answer: We would have thought to learn from Chatas.
4. Question: We cannot learn from Chatas, for it atones for Chayavei Kerisus!
5. Answer: We would have thought to learn from Asham.
6. Question: We cannot learn from Asham, for it has blood!
7. Answer: We would have thought to learn from the Tzad ha'Shavah of Olah, Chatas and Asham.
8. Question: We cannot learn from them, for all of them have blood!
9. Correction: Rather, since it says "V'Hegishah El ha'Mizbe'ach", and it says "Veherim Mimenu b'Kumtzo" one might have thought, just like Hagashah is in the southwest corner, also Kemitzah;

i. "V'Komatz mi'Sham" teaches, this is not so

(n) (R. Yochanan): If Shelamim was slaughtered in the Heichal, it is Kosher;

1. It says "U'Shchato Pesach Ohel Mo'ed" - the Tefel should not be greater than the Ikar!