Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Yoma 76

76b

QUESTIONS: The primary Inuy of Yom Kipur is the requirement to refrain from Achilah and Shetiyah, eating and drinking. Those two acts are considered as one Inuy, since Shetiyah is included in Achilah. The Gemara proves that Shetiyah is included in Achilah from a verse regarding Ma'aser Sheni which lists the items that one may buy with the money of Ma'aser Sheni and eat in Yerushalayim. "You shall buy with the money whatever you desire of cattle, sheep, wine, and old wine (Shechar)... and you shall eat it there" (Devarim 14:26). Since the verse says that one shall "eat" the food of Ma'aser Sheni, we see that drinking Shechar is considered "eating."

The Gemara rejects this proof and says that perhaps the "Shechar" mentioned in the verse refers not to an intoxicating beverage, but to an intoxicating *food*, such as "Deveilah Ke'ilis," a type of fermented fig. Consequently, there is no proof that Shetiyah is called Achilah. The Gemara shows that there exist intoxicating figs from the statement of a Beraisa. The Beraisa says that if a person eats "Deveilah Ke'ilis" or drinks intoxicating beverages and then enters the Mikdash while under the influence he is Chayav Misah, for the verse says, "Yayin v'Shechar Al Tesht... v'Lo Samusu" (Vayikra 10:9).

The Gemara retorts that "Shechar" must be referring to a *wine* beverage, since the Torah prohibits a Nazir to drink Shechar, even though it spells out that he is only prohibited from "what comes from grapes." The word "Shechar" by Ma'aser Sheni, then, must also be referring to an intoxicating beverage, and not to a food. If so, we have a proof that drinking a beverage is indeed a form of "Achilah."

There are a number of problems with this Gemara:

First, why does the Gemara learn the meaning of the term "Shechar" in reference to Ma'aser Sheni from the term "Shechar" in reference to a Nazir (where "Shechar" must mean wine)? The Gemara could just as well learn it meaning from the term which was written in reference to entering the Mikdash while intoxicated (where "Shechar" includes any food item that is intoxicating, such as Deveilah Ke'ilis)! Why does the Gemara assume that it is better to learn Ma'aser Sheni from Nazir than to learn Ma'aser Sheni from Bi'as Mikdash (entering the Mikdash while drunk)?

Second, with regard to Bi'as Mikdash itself, why is a person Chayav for entering the Mikdash after eating an intoxicating fig? If the meaning of Shechar by Ma'aser Sheni may be learned from Nazir, why is the meaning of Shechar by Bi'as Mikdash not learned from Nazir? We should learn from there that the "Shechar" of Bi'as Mikdash refers only to wine and not to figs!

Third, even if Bi'as Mikdash is not compared to Nazir, there is another reason to exempt a person for entering the Mikdash after eating a Deveilah Ke'ilis. With regard to Bi'as Mikdash the verse says, "Wine and Shechar you shall not *drink*" (Vayikra 10:9). We see that the verse specifically refers to *drinking*. Even if we assume that Achilah also includes Shetiyah, certainly we cannot say that *Shetiyah* includes Achilah! Why, then, should a person be Chayav for Bi'as Mikdash after *eating* an intoxicating fig dish, if the verse specifically refers to *drinking*?

ANSWERS:

(a) The TOSFOS YESHANIM answers all three questions as follows. We asked why the Beraisa says that one is Chayav for Bi'as Mikdash when he enters the Mikdash after eating intoxicating figs -- the word "Shechar" of Nazir, which refers only to wine, should teach us that the "Shechar" of Bi'as Mikdash also refers only to wine, and not to intoxicating figs. The answer is that indeed, when the Gemara says that we learn "Shechar" of Ma'aser Sheni from "Shechar" of Nazir, it also means that we learn "Shechar" of *Bi'as Mikdash* from "Shechar" of Nazir, and one will *not* be Chayav for eating intoxicating figs and entering the Mikdash!

What about the Beraisa that says that one *is* Chayav? That Tana disagrees with the conclusion of our Gemara, while our Gemara holds like Rebbi Shimon (in Nazir 4a), who maintains that one is *not* Chayav for Bi'as Mikdash after eating intoxicating figs (one will only be Chayav for drinking wine). The Beraisa that our Gemara cited earlier to the contrary was expressing the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah, who holds that one is Chayav for entering the Mikdash after eating intoxicating figs, but when our Gemara concludes that we learn Ma'aser Sheni from Nazir, it is rejecting his opinion and accepting the opinion of Rebbi Shimon, who does learn Bi'as Mikdash from Nazir.

What about the other two questions? According to *Rebbi Yehudah*, why is one Chayav for Bi'as Mikdash after eating intoxicating figs? Even Rebbi Yehudah agrees that "Shechar" of Nazir refers only to wine, so "Shechar" of Bi'as Mikdash should also refer only to wine, and not to food items! Also, the very fact that the verse says, "... you shall not *drink*" should teach that one is only Chayav for entering the Mikdash after *drinking* an intoxicating beverage, but not after *eating* an intoxicating food!

The Tosfos Yeshanim answers that the verse which discusses entering the Mikdash while intoxicated gives the reason why one may not drink wine and enter the Mikdash -- "so that he can differentiate between Kodesh and Chol... and so that he can teach all of the laws to B'nei Yisrael" (Vayikra 10:10-11). Following through the logic of this reason, we may conclude that *anything* which causes one to be in a drunken state may not be consumed (whether a beverage or a food) before entering the Mikdash. Thus, intoxicating foods *are* included in the prohibition of Bi'as Mikdash. (That is, they are not learned from "Shechar Al Tesht," but from the end of the verse, "l'Havdil u'l'Horos").

(b) TOSFOS (DH Gamar) suggests that there is no argument about eating a fig and going into the Mikdash; everyone agrees that it is forbidden, even Rebbi Shimon. Even though we always find that "Shechar" means wine (as we learn from Nazir), and furthermore, the verse here says "you shall not *drink*," implying that the prohibition of Bi'as Mikdash applies only to wine, nevertheless pure logic teaches that the prohibition applies even to eating intoxicating foods. The reason the Torah says not to go into the Mikdash while intoxicated is because it is a disgrace for someone to stand even in front of a king of flesh and blood in such a state; all the more so in front of Hashem. If so, the same logic should apply to one who eats anything that makes him intoxicated. Because of the logical difference between entering the Mikdash while intoxicated and other laws, the laws of entering the Mikdash while intoxicated may not be learned from Nazir, nor may the laws of Ma'aser Sheni be learned from it.