Previous daf

1)

(a) According to our Mishnah, what does Rebbi Yossi concede in a case where a Kohen performed a Kemitzah with the intention of eating the Shirayim or burning the Kemitzah tomorrow?

(b) If however, the Kohen's intention is to eat the Levonah tomorrow, Rebbi Yossi holds 'Pasul ve'Ein Bo Kareis'.
What do the Rabbanan say?

(c) What do the Rabbanan mean when they ask Rebbi Yossi 'Mai Shanah Zeh min ha'Zevach'? Which case are they referring to?

(d) What did Rebbi Yossi answer?

(a) The Tana says 'Modeh Rebbi Yossi ba'Zeh ... ', based on his ruling in the Seifa.
If the Tana had not said it, what might we have thought? What reason would we have ascribed to Rebbi Yossi that would have applied equally to the Reisha?

(b) What, according to Resh Lakish, is Rebbi Yossi's reason?

(c) Similarly, Resh Lakish continues, Rebbi Yossi said that one of the Bazichei Levonah cannot render the other one Pigul, either.
Why did he need to say that? What might we otherwise have thought?

(d) What problem do we have with this from our Mishnah, where Rebbi Yossi explicitly said 'ha'Zevach Damo, u'Vesaro ve'Eimurav Echad, u'Levonah Einah min ha'Minchah'?

3)

(a) If Rebbi Yossi is not saying what we just suggested, then what is he saying? What distinction is he drawing between the Dam and the Eimurim (or the Kometz and the Shirayim) on the one hand, and the Kometz and the Levonah, on the other?

(b) If, on principle, the Rabbanan agree that 'Ein Matir Mefagel Matir', why do they argue with Rebbi Yossi?

(c) In which case do the Rabbanan then rule, like Rebbi Yossi, that one Matir cannot render another, Pigul?

(a) What is Likut Levonah?

(b) Rebbi Yanai rules 'Likut Levonah be'Zar, Pasul'.
How does Rebbi Yirmiyah explain this ruling, considering that Likut Levonah itself is not an Avodah?

(c) Why is this considered Holachah, seeing as the Zar did not walk with it (see Shitah Mekubetzes 7)?

(a) Rav Mari proves that Likut Levonah is indeed an Avodah, from the Mishnah in the first Perek, which lists the four Avodos of a Minchah. Kometz, we learned, is equivalent to the Shechitah of a Zevach, Molich, to Molich, and Maktir to Zorek, What is the link between ...

1. ... Kometz and Shechitah?
2. ... Haktarah and Zerikah?

(b) On what grounds do we initially reject the suggestion that Nosen (Kometz) bi'Cheli is an Avodah because it is similar to Kabalah?

(c) What, do we then think, turns ...

1. ... Nesinas K'li into an Avodah?
2. ... Likut Levonah into an Avodah?

(d) On what grounds do we reinstate our original suggestion (that Nosen bi'Cheli is an Avodah because it is similar to Kabalah)?

(a) What does Rebbi Yossi say about a case where the Kohen Shechted the two Kivsei Atzeres having in mind to eat one of the loaves on the following day?

(b) What parallel case does he discuss?

(c) What do the Rabbanan say?

(d) Why do the Tana'im not contend with the other Korbanos that are brought at the same time as the Sh'tei ha'Lechem (i.e. seven lambs, one bull and two rams)?

(a) What does Rav Huna say about the second thigh of a Korban, in a case where the Kohen is Mefagel a Korban, having in mind to eat one of the thighs after the allotted time?

(b) He bases this on a S'vara and on a Pasuk.
Which S'vara?

(c) And how does he learn it from the Pasuk in Tzav "ve'ha'Nefesh ha'Ocheles Mimenu Avonah Tisa"?

(a) Rav Nachman queries Rav Huna from a Beraisa.
What does he extrapolate from the Beraisa (in connection with the Sh'tei ha'Lechem) 'Le'olam Ein Bo Kareis ad she'Yefagel bi'Sheteihen bi'k'Zayis'?

(b) Why can the author not be the Rabbanan of Rebbi Yossi?

(c) If the author is then Rebbi Yossi, what is the problem with Rav Huna's statement?

(d) If, on the other hand, the two loaves are able to combine, based on the fact that the two thighs are considered one entity, then why does Rebbi Yossi in our Mishnah, rule that if the Kohen is Mefagel one loaf, the other one is not Pigul?

Next daf