Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) PLAITING THE ANIMALS

(a) R. Yochanan taught, like a braid.

(a) The Beraisa teaches that those who burned the Par and Seir would not cut it up after flaying it (like an Olah); rather, it would be cut up without flaying.
(b) Question: How do we know both of these things (that they cut them up and did so without flaying them)?
(c) Answer: The words Or, Basar and Peresh link the Par/Seir to the Chatas Kohen Mashiach (where there was Nituach without Hefshet).
(d) Question: What is the source by Chatas Kohen Mashiach?
(e) Answer: The Beraisa learns it from the Pasuk VeHotze.

1. Question: Perhaps it should also be *burned* whole?
2. Answer: By linking it to the Olah the Torah teaches that the parts are to be separate.
3. Question: Perhaps we should learn from Olah that it requires Hefshet?
4. Answer: VeKirbo U'Firsho teaches that it was burnt without Hefshet.
5. Question: How do those words demonstrate that?
6. Answer (R. Papa): The Torah links the removal of the Eimurim and Peresh with flaying the hide and flesh of the Par, that both are done without Hefshet.

(a) Question (Beraisa): Why does the Torah speak of leaving *three* Machanos for Sereifah by the Par HaEidah (He'elem Davar) and Kohen Mashiach, while by the Par Yom HaKipurim, which is identical, the Pasuk speaks of leaving only *one* Machaneh?
(b) Answer: It must be that the *one* Machaneh identifies the point of Tumas Begadim.
(c) Question: What is the source that the Par He'elem Davar is burned outside three Machanos?
(d) Answer: The Pasuk Vehotze...MiChutz LaMachaneh implies outside three Machanos.

1. Question: Perhaps this implies outside *one* Machaneh?
2. Answer: There are three indications of going out.

i. Two references to "taking out."
ii. The Pasuk teaches that the Par HaEidah is to be burnt in the same way as the Par Kohen Mashiach.
iii. These combine to push us out of three Machanos.

(e) Question: What will R. Shimon do with MiChutz LaMachaneh?
(f) Answer: It serves to link the Parah Adumah with the Par Yom HaKipurim.

1. Thus the Shechitah of the Parah Adumah is outside the three Machanos, like the burning of the Par.
2. Further, the Par Yom Kipur is done in the East, like the Parah Adumah.

(g) Question: Where would the Rabanan (who do not utilize MiChutz LaMachaneh in this way) locate the burning of the Par and Seir?

(h) Answer: In the North, outside the three Machanos.
(i) Answer (R. Yosi): In the Beis HaDeshen, meaning that ashes from the Mizbeach must first be brought to that place to render it a Makom Shefech HaDeshen.
(j) Question (Rava): Which Tana disagrees with this?
(k) Answer: It is R. Eliezer b. Yakov, who interprets El Shefech HaDeshen to mean that the place must be on a tilt.
(l) Question (Abaye): Perhaps R. Eliezer b. Yakov is coming only to *add* that requirement (not to disagree)!?

(a) The ones who do, or assist in, the actual burning contract the Tumah, but not the ones who arrange or ignite the wood.
(b) It is a Machlokes regarding the point beyond which the Parah no longer imparts Tumah.

1. (Tana Kama) Once it is ash.
2. (R. Eliezer b. R. Shimon) Once it is scorched and not thought of as Parah.

(a) The Kohen Gadol was notified of the Seir's arrival at the Midbar, such that he may continue the Avodah.
(b) There are three opinions regarding how they knew:

1. (Tana Kama) They would wave a signal from one lookout to the next back to Yerushalayim.
2. (R. Yehudah) They would time the return of the first group of escorts to when the usher would arrive at the Midbar (three Mil to Beis Chidudo).
3. (R. Yishmael) The red thread would turn white.

(c) (Abaye) We see that Beis Chidudo is in the Midbar.
(d) This teaches that, according to R. Yehudah, *arrival* alone to the Midbar is sufficient to allow the Kohen Gadol to continue the Avodah.

1) MISHNAH: READING THE PARSHIOS OF YOM HAKIPURIM

(a) The Kohen Gadol went to the Ezras Nashim (dressed either in the Bigdei Lavan or in his personal white garments).
(b) The Sefer Torah was passed by the Shamash of the Beis HaKeneses to the Gabai who handed it to the Segan who gave it to the Kohen Gadol.
(c) The Kohen Gadol read from Acharei Mos and Emor.
(d) He then rolled up and held the Sefer, announcing that there is more contained within.
(e) He read the Parashas HaMusaf (from Pinchas) by heart.
(f) He recited eight Berachos, as listed.
(g) The burning of the Par/Seir and the Krias HaTorah took place at the same time in different locations such that one who attended one could not attend the other.

(a) From the Mishnah which allows the Kohen Gadol to wear personal clothing we may infer that Krias HaTorah is not an Avodah.
(b) From the Mishnah which permits him to wear the Bigdei Lavan we may infer that it is permitted to derive benefit from the Bigdei Kehunah.
(c) Question: Perhaps the Kriah is a Tzorech Avodah (but general benefit may *not* be derived from Bigdei Kehunah) given that deriving benefit from Bigdei Kehunah is a subject of investigation?
(d) Answer: The Mishnah in Tamid (that Kohanim are only restricted regarding sleeping but may eat in their Begadim) was invoked to prove that they *may* derive benefit from them.
(e) Perhaps there, too, the eating is a Tzorech Avodah and may not generalize to all forms of benefit.

1. The Beraisa teaches that the owners get Kaparah when the Kohanim eat their Chataos and Ashamos.
2. This lends support to referring to their eating as a Tzorech Avodah, even if it is not, itself, an Avodah.

(f) The Mishnah in Tamid (by restricting sleeping) seems to imply that walking about in the Bigdei Kehunah is permitted.
(g) In fact such strolling is not permitted.

1. Question: Why, then, did the Mishnah single out sleeping as being impermissible?
2. Answer: The reference to sleeping is necessitated by the Seifah which permits them to fold up their garments and place them under their heads when they slept.