Previous daf

1)

(a) Bearing in mind that, according to Rebbi Shimon, the Se'irei Rosh Chodesh do not atone for Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav she'Ein Bahem Yedi'ah Lo bi'Techilah ve'Lo be'Sof', what does he first of all learn (regarding the Se'irei ha'Regalim) from Rav Chama b'Rebbi Chanina's D'rashah "Se'ir", "u'Se'ir" from Rosh Chodesh?

(b) Then why does he not learn Se'irei ha'Regalim from "Sa'ir" "u'Se'ir" that they should atone for the same as the Sa'ir of ...

1. ... Rosh Chodesh (a Tahor who ate Tamei Kodshim)?
2. 2. ... Yom Kipur (ha'Na'aseh ba'Chutz ['she'Ein Bah Yedi'ah bi'Techilah ve'Yesh Bah Yedi'ah be'Sof'])?

(c) Why can they not atone for Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav where there was ...

1. ... 'Yesh Bah Yedi'ah bi'Techilah ve'Yesh Bah Yedi'ah be'Sof'?
2. ... 'Yesh Bah Yedi'ah bi'Techilah ve'Ein Bah Yedi'ah be'Sof'?
3. ... 'Ein Bah Yedi'ah bi'Techilah ve'Yesh Bah Yedi'ah be'Sof'?

(d) So what *does* it atone for?

(a) Once again, we quote Rebbi Chama b'Rebbi Chanina's Hekesh ("Sa'ir u'Se'ir") to explain Rebbi Meir, who holds that all the goats atone for everything.
What is the sole exception to this sweeping statement?

(b) What do we mean when we suggest that this means 'Kol Chad ve'Chad me'Chavreih Gamar'?

(c) We have a problem with this explanation however, from a statement by Rebbi Yochanan.
What did Rebbi Yochanan say about learning a Lameid from a Lameid?

(d) So how do we then suggest that we learn it?

(a) What is the problem with applying Rebbi Chama b'Rebbi Chanina's D'rashah here at all?

(b) We finally learn all the cases one from the other - from the Hekesh quoted by Rebbi Yonah. Which Pasuk does he quote?

(c) Rosh Chodesh is considered a Mo'ed only because of the Pasuk in Eichah "Kara Alai Mo'ed".
How does Abaye explain this Pasuk?

(d) What is the significance of Abaye's statement?

(a) Even Rebbi Meir will agree, says Rebbi Yochanan, that the Sa'ir Penimi does not atone for the atonement of the other Regalim, or vice-versa. What is his source for saying that ...

1. ... it does not atone their atonements?
2. ... they do not atone its atonement?

(b) And we corroborate Rebbi Yochanan's statement from a Beraisa.
What is the proof from the Beraisa that ...

1. ... it does not atone their atonements?
2. ... they do not atone its atonement?

(a) According to Rebbi Shimon, the Sa'ir of Rosh Chodesh does not atone for the sins of the other Regalim, because the Torah writes "Avon", restricting its Kaparah to only one sin.
But why do *they* not atone for *its* sins?

(b) The Se'irei ha'Regalim do not atone for the Sa'ir ha'Na'aseh ba'Chutz of Yom Kipur because the Torah writes "Achas ba'Shanah".
But why does *it* not atone for *them*?

(c) But is "Achas" not written by the Sa'ir Penimi, whereas we are concerned with the Sa'ir ha'Na'aseh ba'Chutz?

6)

(a) According to Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah in our Mishnah, the Se'irei ha'Regalim atone for 'Tahor she'Achal es ha'Tamei' as well as 'Ein Bah Yedi'ah Lo bi'Techilah ve'Lo be'Sof'.
How will he counter the Tana Kama, who argues on the basis of the Pasuk "ve'Osah Nasan Lachem", 'Osah Hu Nosei Avon, ve'Ein Acher Nosei Avon'?

(b) Then why does the Sa'ir of Rosh Chodesh not atone for 'Ein Bah Yedi'ah Lo bi'Techilah ve'Lo be'Sof' (like the Se'irei ha'Regalim)?

(a) Similarly, the Sa'ir ha'Na'aseh ba'Chutz of Yom Kipur atones for both of the above, as well as for 'Ein Bah Yedi'ah bi'Techilah ... '.
How does he initially counter the Tana Kama, who argues on the basis of the Pasuk "Achas", 'Kaparah Achas Mechaper, ve'Eino Mechaper Sh'tei Kaparos'?

(b) What is the basis for saying this?

(c) How does the fact that he agrees that the Se'irei ha'Regalim do not atone for 'Ein Bah Yedi'ah bi'Techilah ... ' create a problem on what we just said?

(d) How do we therefore reinterpret Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah's reasoning, based on the Pasuk "Ve'chiper Aharon *al Karnosav* Achas ba'Shanah"? Does he Darshen "Achas" or not?

(a) Ula Amar Yochanan discussed Temidin that were redundant.
What did he mean by that? Why was this inevitable?

(b) What ruling did Rebbi Yochanan issue with regard to them? What are the ramifications of his ruling?

(c) What would happen to the Chulin money on which they were redeemed?

(d) Why could one not simply redeem them on to the money of the new Terumah directly?

(a) What did Rav Chisda say to Rabah, when he quoted him Rebbi Yochanan's statement? What was the basis of his objection?

(b) In response to Rav Chisda's Kashya, Rabah quoted the Mishnah in Shekalim in connection with Mosar ha'Ketores.
What is 'Mosar ha'Ketores'? Why could one expect there to be Mosar ha'Ketores?

(c) How would they use it to pay the mixers their annual wage?

(a) What does Rabah try to prove from there?

(b) What led him to believe that the Ketores was Kedushas ha'Guf?

(c) What did Rav Chisda retort? What was Rabah's mistake?

Next daf