Previous daf

1)

(a) What does our Mishnah say about ...

1. ... the Kometz, the Isaron (of a Minchah), the Yayin and the Levonah?
   What do they all have in common?
2. ... the So'les and the Shemen, and the Kometz and the Levonah?

(b) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra ...

1. ... where the Torah repeats "M'lo Kumtzo"?
2. ... "mi'Soltah" (which contains an extra 'Hey')?
3. ... "Kachah" (written in connection with the wine and with the Minchas Nesachim)?
4. ... "u'mi'Shamnah" (in connection with the Minchas Nedavah)?

(c) And what do we learn from the Pesukim ...

1. ... there "mi'Soltah u'mi'Shamnah" and "mi'Girsah u'mi'Shamnah"? What does "mi'Girsah" mean?
2. ... "al Kol Levonasah" (Vayikra) and "ve'es Kol ha'Levonah Asher al ha'Minchah" (Tzav)?

(a) And what does our Mishnah say about ...

1. ... the two goats of Yom Kipur, the two Kivsei Atzeres, the two Chalos (the Sh'tei ha'Lechem), two rows of the Lechem ha'Panim and the two Bazichin containing Levonah?
2. ... the rows of Lechem ha'Panim and the Bazichin, the two species of the Nazir, the three species of the Parah and the four species of the Todah, of the Lulav and of the Metzora?

(b) What constitutes ...

1. .. the two species of the Nazir?
2. ... the three species of the Parah?
3. ... the four species of the Metzora?
4. ... the four species of the Todah?

(c) Finally, what does the Tana say about the seven Hazayos between the poles (of the Aron), the seven Hazayos towards the Paroches and the Hazayos of the Mizbe'ach ha'Zahav?

(d) To what does this last ruling pertain?

(a) What do we learn from the fact that the Torah writes ...

1. ... in Acharei-Mos "Ve'haysah Zos Lachem *le'Chukas* Olam"?
2. ... in Emor (in connection with the Kivsei Atzeres) "Kodesh *Yih'yu* la'Hashem"?
3. ... "So'les Tih'yenah" (ibid.)?

(b) We know that each of the two Sedarim is crucial, as is each of the two Bazichin, from the fact that the Torah writes in Emor "me'Ishei Hashem *Chok* Olam".
From where do we know that they are also Me'akev each other?

(c) We also know that the two species of the Nazir is crucial from "Kein Ya'aseh" (in Naso), and the three of the Parah, from "Chukah" (in Chukas). What do we learn from the Pasuk (with regard to the former) "al Zevach Todas *Shelamav*"?

(d) And what do we learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Zos *Tih'yeh* Toras ha'Metzora"?
2. ... in Emor "u'Lekachtem Lachem"?

(a) What does Rav Chanan bar Rava mean when he says that as long as one has the four species of the Lulav, they are not Me'akev each other?

(b) What does the Beraisa say about the four species of the Lulav? How does the Tana subdivide them into two groups?

(c) What does that have to do with the Pasuk in Amos "ha'Boneh ba'Shamayim Ma'alosav, va'Agudaso al Eretz Yesadah"?

(d) How do we reconcile the Beraisa's initial ruling with what Rav Chanan bar Rava, who just said that the four species of the Lulav do not need to be bound?

(a) Which Tana holds that the four species of the Lulav require binding?

(b) How does he learn this from "Agudas Eizov"?

(c) The Rabbanan do not learn this 'Gezeirah-Shavah'.
What problem do we have with the Beraisa 'Lulav Mitzvah le'Agdo, ve'Im Lo Agdo, Kasher'?

(d) We nevertheless establish the Beraisa like the Chachamim.
Then what Mitzvah is the Tana referring to?

(a) From where do we learn that the seven Haza'os, as well as the various sets of Haza'os of the Par Kohen Gadol on Yom Kipur are Me'akev each other?

(b) What problem do we have with the Pasuk "Ve'asah le'Par (He'elam Davar shel Tzibur) Ka'asher Asah le'Par ha'Chatas (shel Kohen Mashi'ach)"?

(c) Why indeed, does the Torah then write it?

(d) What do we learn from ...

1. ... the word "ha'Chatas"?
2. ... the continuation of the Pasuk "Kein Ya'aseh"?

(e) From the second "la'Par" ("ve'Ka'asher Asah le'Par ha'Chatas") we include the Haza'os of the Par shel Yom ha'Kipurim in the Din of Ikuv.
Why do we need a special Pasuk for this, seeing as we already know this from the word "Chukah"?

7)

(a) The Beraisa invalidates the Haza'os of the Parah Adumah (on the Har ha'Zeisim), those she'bi'Fenim and those of a Metzora (by the Sha'ar Nikanor), if they are performed she'Lo li'Shemah.
Why is the former Pasul?

(b) What do the Haza'os 'she'bi'Fenim' incorporate?

(c) The Tana invalidates the Haza'os of the Parah Adumah that were not 'Mechuvanos', but validates all the others.
What does 'Mechuvanos' mean?
Why is the former Pasul?

(d) What problem do we have with this? What did we learn in another Beraisa regarding 'she'Lo Mechuvanos' of the Parah Adumah?

(a) And we establish this as a Machlokes Tana'im, as we shall see shortly.
What does the Beraisa say about Mechusrei Kaparah or Tevulei-Yom or other Temei'im, who entered the Azarah be'Tum'ah ...

1. ... be'Shogeg?
2. ... be'Meizid?

(b) If the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos "Mei Nidah Lo Zorak Alav" teaches us that a Tamei who did not Tovel is Chayav Kareis for entering the Azarah, what do we learn from ...

1. ... "Od Tum'aso Bo"?
2. ... "ve'Ish Asher Yitma ve'Lo Yischata"?

(c) What will be the Din if a Tahor Zarim enter ...

1. ... 'Lifenim mi'Mechitzasan'? What does 'Lifenim mi'Mechitzasan' mean?
2. ... 'el P'nei ha'Kapores' (in front of the lid of the Aron)?

(d) Over which area do Rebbi Yehudah and the Rabbanan argue?

(a) The Torah writes in Acharei-Mos "ve'al Yavo ve'Chol Eis el ha'Kodesh, mi'Beis la'Paroches, el P'nei ha'Kapores ... ve'Lo Yamus".
On what grounds do the Rabbanan disagree with Rebbi Yehudah, who explains that "mi'Beis la'Paroches" is only subject to a La'av?

(b) How does Rebbi Yehudah counter their argument? What would we have thought had the Torah omitted "mi'Beis la'Paroches"?

(c) The Rabbanan refute this theory, based on the Pasuk in Terumah "Ve'hivdilah ha'Paroches Lachem Bein ha'Kodesh u'Vein Kodesh ha'Kodashim". What do they extrapolate from there?

(d) And on what grounds does Rebbi Yehudah disagree with the Rabbanan?
What, in his opinion, ought the Torah to have then omitted?

(a) How do the Rabbanan counter that? If according to them "el-P'nei ha'Kapores" comes to teach us 'Derech Meshupash', what might this mean?

(b) What is the root of the word 'Meshupash'?

(c) The source for this D'rashah is a Beraisa.
What does Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov learn there from the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos "el-P'nei ha'Kapores Keidmah"?

(a) Rebbi Yehudah too, agrees with this D'rashah.
What does he now learn from the word "el"?

(b) What do the Rabbanan say to that?

(c) How does this Machlokes reflect on the Pasuk in Chukas (in connection with sprinkling the blood of the Parah) "Ve'hizah *el* Nochach P'nei Ohel Mo'ed"?

(d) What have we proved from here?

(a) The Torah requires the Kohen Gadol to sprinkle the blood of the Par and the Sa'ir "al-P'nei ha'Kapores" (towards the lid of the Aron)? According to the Mishnah in Yoma, how did they achieve this during the time of the second Beis Hamikdash, when there was no Aron ha'Kodesh?

(b) On what grounds does Rav Yosef query this, according to Rebbi Yehudah?

(c) How does Rabah bar Ula answer this Kashya, based on the Pasuk there "Ve'chiper es Mikdash ha'Kodesh"?

(a) Rava establishes both Beraisos ('she'Lo Mechuvanos, Pesulos' and 'she'Lo Mechuvanos, Kesheiros' according to the Rabbanan).
How will he then explain the Beraisa which says 'Pesulos'?

(b) How will he then establish the Beraisa which rules 'Kesheiros'?

Next daf