Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Pesachim 80

1) "EIN KORBAN TZIBUR CHALUK:" TWO DIFFERENT MEANINGS?

QUESTION: Rav states that when half of the Jewish people are Tahor and half are Tamei, we are Metamei one of the Tahor people with a Sheretz, thus creating a majority of people who are Tamei, and then the entire Tzibur brings the Korban Pesach b'Tum'ah. The Gemara questions Rav's statement, because it was Rav himself (79a) who ruled that when half are Tamei and half are Tahor, those who are Tahor bring the Korban Pesach Rishon together as one group, and those who are Tamei brings the Korban Pesach Rishon together as another group, b'Tum'ah. The Gemara attempts to resolve Rav's statement and finally concludes that Rav's intention was to say as follows:

The Beraisa immediately preceding the statement of Rav cited three opinions how to go about bringing the Korban Pesach when half the people are Tamei and half are Tahor. (1) The Tana Kama says the two halves bring the Korban Pesach Rishon in separate groups, one b'Taharah and one b'Tum'ah. This was also the opinion of Rav (79a). (2) Rebbi Eliezer ben Masya says that even if the number of Tamei people are greater than the number of Tahor people by one person, the Tamei group is *not* considered a majority and each group brings the Korban Pesach separately. In order to make a majority, there must be at least *two* more people in the Tamei group than in the Tahor group. (3) Rebbi Yehudah holds that even if half the people (or even a single Shevet) are Tamei and half are Tahor, *everyone* brings the Korban Pesach b'Tum'ah because the half which is Tamei is considered a Tzibur, and once the Tzibur is bringing b'Tum'ah, everyone brings b'Tum'ah because "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk."

The Gemara explains that Rav is saying that if there is a Tana who holds like the Tana Kama of the Beraisa (that when half are Tamei and half are Tahor, each group brings the Korban separately) and also holds like Rebbi Yehudah (that "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk") then it is not appropriate for half the people to bring it b'Taharah because it is embarrassing to those who must bring it b'Tum'ah (Rashi). Therefore we are Metamei a Tahor person so that a majority is Tamei and thus everyone will bring it b'Tum'ah.

This Gemara is very difficult to understand. How can the Gemara suggest that Rav is saying, "If there is a Tana who holds like both the Tana Kama and like Rebbi Yehudah" -- that is exactly the Shitah of Rebbi Yehudah! Rebbi Yehudah holds that when half the people are Tamei and half are Tahor, each half is considered a Tzibur in and of itself, and they really should bring the Korban Pesach in two separate groups; however, the principle of "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" teaches that they all bring it together. Why, then, does Rav say that one person must be made Tamei in order that a majority be Tamei so that everyone can bring the Korban b'Tum'ah? (DEVAR SHMUEL)

Second, RASHI says that the reason for the principle of "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" is because it is a disgrace for those who are Tamei to have people bringing the Korban b'Taharah. That is, it is important *not* to bring the Korban b'Taharah in such a situation. However, when the Beraisa presents the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah who says "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk," Rashi (80a, DH Ya'asu) says that those who are Tahor may bring the Korban b'Tum'ah *if they want*, but they do not have to bring it b'Tum'ah. If the whole point is that it would be a disgrace to those bringing it b'Tum'ah, then they should have no option but to bring it b'Tum'ah!

Also, RASHI on 79a, DH Tehorin, commenting on the opinion of Rav Kahana, implies that "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" applies -- and those who are Tahor may bring the Korban b'Tum'ah -- even when the people who are Tamei would *not* be bringing it then! If the reason that those who are Tahor bring it b'Tum'ah is in order not to disgrace those who are Tamei, that should only apply when those who are Tamei are actually bringing their Korbanos b'Tum'ah! (NODEH B'YEHUDAH, Mahadura Tinyana, OC 86)

ANSWERS:

(a) The principle of "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" which Rav is discussing is *not* the same concept that Rebbi Yehudah posits. Rebbi Yehudah holds that "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" simply *allows* everyone to bring the Korban b'Tum'ah if part of the Tzibur is permitted to bring it b'Tum'ah.

Rav, though, is talking about a *different* type of "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" -- not a Halachah d'Oraisa, but a Gezeirah d'Rabanan made for the explicit reason to avoid disgracing others. Hence, Rav is saying that if there is someone who holds like the Tana Kama, then when half the people are Tamei and half are Tahor, each group brings their Korbanos separately, *and* that Tana also holds of the principle of "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" to prevent disgrace -- i.e. he agrees to the statement which Rebbi Yehudah expressed but for a completely different reason -- then because of this Gezeirah d'Rabanan, that Tana would require us to make one more person Tamei.

Therefore, when Rav says that this theoretical Tana holds like Rebbi Yehudah, he merely means that the Tana holds of a *similarly worded* principle of "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk," but he does not agree with the reasoning of Rebbi Yehudah. This answers why Rashi explains the principle of "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" in two different ways -- because there are two different principles by that name!

(One may wonder why the Gemara referred to the words "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" as Rebbi Yehudah's statement, rather than the Tana Kama's. The Tana Kama also used those same words, albeit in a situation where most of the peope were Tahor. However, the Dikdukei Sofrim points out that the words "Ein Korban Tzibur Chaluk" do not appear in the Tana Kama's statement in many manuscripts and in Rabeinu Chananel and the Yalkut.)

(b) RABEINU CHANANEL suggests an entirely different approach to the Sugya. He explains that the Gemara's conclusion is that Rav's ruling applies if there is a Tana who holds like the Tana Kama *or* like Rebbi Yehudah. If there is a Tana who follows their ruling, then in a case when half of the people are Tamei and half are Tahor according to Rebbi Yehudah (in which case everyone may bring the Korban b'Tum'ah), or in a case when there is one more Tamei person than there are Tahor people according to the Tana Kama (in which case the Tana Kama says that the Tamei people become a majority and everyone may bring b'Tum'ah), although it is permitted to bring the Korban b'Tum'ah under those conditions according to each respective opinion, nevertheless we should be stringent and require a majority of two or more Tamei people, to satisfy Rebbi Eliezer ben Masya's view. Therefore, we must be Metamei one of the Tahor people so that everyone may bring the Korban b'Tum'ah even according to Rebbi Eliezer ben Masya. According to Rabeinu Chananel, Rav is not saying that if there is a Tana who holds like both Tana Kama and Rebbi Yehudah, and therefore his approach avoids the question altogether.

80b

QUESTION: The Mishnah says that the Tzitz is not Meratzeh for Tum'as ha'Guf (when the person bringing the Korban became Tamei, in contrast to when the animal or its blood, or the utensils used for offering it, became Tamei).

We learned earlier (77a) that if Tum'ah is *Dechuyah* b'Tzibur, the Tum'ah will only be pushed off when there is also Ritzuy Tzitz. The Mishnah (79a) tells us that when the Tzibur or the Kohanim are Tamei, then "Tum'ah Dechuyah b'Tzibur" applies and the Korban may be brought b'Tum'ah. How can the principle of "Tum'ah Dechuyah b'Tzibur" apply in such cases, if there is no Ritzuy Tzitz for Tum'as ha'Guf?

ANSWERS:

(a) TOSFOS in Menachos (15a, DH v'Hacha) answers that Ritzuy Tzitz is only needed wherever it will work. Thus, Ritzuy Tzitz is necessary when the flesh of the Korban is Tamei, because Ritzuy Tzitz is effective for the flesh. When the Tzitz does not work, such as for Tum'as ha'Guf, then it is not needed.

This explanation needs clarification, because the Gemara (78a) taught that even if we hold that the Tzitz is not Meratzeh for items which are eaten ("Ein Tzitz Meratzeh Al ha'Achilos") -- which effectively means that when the meat of the Korban which is eaten becomes Tamei (Tum'as Basar), it is equivalent to Tum'as ha'Guf -- the principle of "Tum'ah Dechuyah b'Tzibur" does *not* cause the Tum'as Basar to be pushed aside to permit the Korban to be brought, because the Tzitz is not Meratzeh for it. However, according to Tosfos, Tum'as Basar *should* be Dechuyah b'Tzibur even without the Tzitz!

Tosfos must mean that the Tzitz is nonetheless Meratzeh for the *category* of Nikravin (items which are offered as part of the Korban), such as the blood of the Korban. Since that category is receptive to Ritzuy Tzitz, therefore every part of the Korban which is offered (Nikravin) requires Ritzuy Tzitz in order to be brought b'Tum'ah, even those parts for which the Tzitz does not work (such as the Basar).

The Tzitz does not work, though, for the category of *Makrivin* (those who bring the Korban). Since it does not work for them, they do not need it. All they need is the principle of "Tum'ah Dechuyah b'Tzibur" in order to bring the Korban b'Tum'ah.

(b) The RAMBAM (Hilchos Bi'as Mikdash 4:7) explains that when Tum'ah is Dechuyah b'Tzibur, the *combination* of the Tzibur and the Tzitz helps to be Meratzeh for Tum'as ha'Guf. If so, the Tzitz indeed provides the Ritzuy even for Tum'as ha'Guf, in this case. The CHAZON YECHEZKEL points out that the Rambam's source is the Gemara earlier (78a) which says that even though the Tzitz is not Meratzeh for Achilah (edible parts of the Korban) according to Rebbi Yehoshua, when the Korban is also a Korban Tzibur then Rebbi Yehoshua permits bringing it b'Tum'ah. The Rambam explains this to be because the Tzitz then serves to be Meratzeh for the Achilah. (See the Lechem Mishnah, in Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashin 1:34 at the end, where he discusses the Sugya on 78a according to the Rambam's opinion.)