Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) BLOOD THAT ENTERED THE "HEICHAL"

(a) (Mishnah - R. Akiva): If the blood of any Korban was brought inside the Heichal (except of an inner Chatas) to atone, it is Pasul;
(b) Chachamim say, only blood of a Chatas is Pasul;
(c) R. Eliezer says, also blood of an Asham - "Ka'Chatas ka'Asham".
(d) Question: Why do Chachamim argue with R. Eliezer?
(e) Answer (Rava): They learn from a Kal va'Chomer:

1. An Olah is entirely burned on the Mizbeach, if its blood enters the Heichal it is Kosher - an Asham is not entirely burned, all the more so it remains Kosher!

(f) Question: But an Olah does not atone, we cannot learn to an Asham which atones!
(g) Answer: A Minchas Chotei (one brought for a transgression) proves that this is not a problem - it atones, yet if it enters the Heichal it is Kosher!

1. Question: Why didn't we use Chatas ha'Of to prove that even blood of something that atones can remain Kosher when brought into the Heichal?
2. Answer: R. Avin asked if the blood of Chatas ha'Of is Pasul if it enters the Heichal (and his question was not resolved).

(h) Question: We cannot learn from Minchas Chotei, it is not a Zevach!
(i) Answer #1: We learn from a Tzad ha'Shavah of Olah and Minchas Chotei - both are Kodshei Kodoshim and if their blood enters the Heichal it remains Kosher - the same applies to Asham.
(j) Objection (Rava of Barnish): We cannot learn from the Tzad ha'Shavah, because there is no minimal price of an Olah or Minchas Chotei, but Asham has a minimum price!
(k) Answer #2: Rather, Chachamim learn from "Damah" - blood of a Chatas is Pasul if it enters the Heichal, not blood of any other Korban;

1. R. Eliezer expounds, if its *blood* enters the Heichal it is Pasul, if the meat enters, it is permitted.
2. Chachamim learn that from 'Dam'; the extra 'Hei' in "Damah (*its* blood)" excludes that of other Korbanos.
3. R. Eliezer does not expound the 'Hei'.

(a) According to Chachamim (who say that Asham Lo Lishmah is Kosher), we understand why Minchah is equated to Chatas and Asham:

1. (Beraisa - R. Shimon): "Kodesh Kodoshim Hi ka'Chatas veka'Asham" - Minchas Chotei is like Chatas, if the Kometz (the handful taken from a Minchah and burned on the Mizbeach) was taken Lo Lishmah it is Pasul;
2. Minchas Nedavah is like Asham, if the Kometz was taken Lo Lishmah it is Kosher.

(b) Question: But according to R. Eliezer, Chatas and Asham are both Pasul Lo Lishmah, why must the Torah equate Menachos to both of them?
(c) Answer: This teaches another law of R. Shimon.

1. (Mishnah): If the Kometz was not taken in a Kli Shares, it is Pasul;
2. R. Shimon says, it is Kosher.
3. (Rav Yehudah brei d'R. Chiya): R. Eliezer learns from "Kodesh Kodoshim Hi ka'Chatas veka'Asham": if the Kohen wants to do Kemitzah with his hand, he must use his right hand, as he uses to throw the blood of Chatas;
4. If the Kohen wants to do Kemitzah in a Kli Shares, he may take it to the Mizbeach and throw it with his left hand, just as he may use it to carry and throw blood of an Asham.

(d) Question: But R. Shimon himself expounded this verse to teach the difference between Minchas Chotei and Minchas Nedavah!
(e) Answer: Really, he learns from the verse Kemitzah with and without a vessel;

1. He learns that Minchas Chotei Lo Lishmah is Pasul because it says "Hi", just as we expounded regarding Chatas.

(f) Question: According to Chachamim that argue with R. Shimon, why does the Torah equate Chatas and Asham?
(g) Answer: To teach that Asham requires Semichah, just like Chatas.

(a) (Mishnah): Yosi ben Choni says (any Zevach that was slaughtered l'Shem Pesach or Chatas is Pasul).
(b) (R. Yochanan): R. Eliezer agrees with Yosi ben Choni.
(c) (Rabah): (Tosfos - R. Yochanan means, he agrees about Zevachim l'Shem Pesach, but) he argues about Zevachim l'Shem Chatas.
(d) (Beraisa - R. Eliezer): If a Pesach more than one year old was slaughtered Lishmah at the proper time (to slaughter Pesach, i.e. the afternoon of Erev Pesach), or if other Zevachim were slaughtered l'Shem Pesach at this time, they are Pasul;
(e) R. Yehoshua says, they are Kosher.

1. R. Yehoshua: Any other day, Pesach Lishmo (l'Shem Pesach) is Pasul, yet other Zevachim l'Shem Pesach are Kosher - on Erev Pesach, when Pesach Lishmo is Kosher, all the more so other Zevachim l'Shem Pesach are Kosher!
2. R. Eliezer: (If you learn such a Kal va'Chomer,) perhaps you should say just the contrary! Any other day, Pesach Lishmo is Pasul, yet Pesach l'Shem another Zevach is Kosher - on Erev Pesach, when Pesach Lishmo is Kosher, all the more so other it is Kosher l'Shem another Zevach (and we know that this is wrong)!

i. Just as you do not learn this Kal va'Chomer, you should not learn yours!

3. Also, there is a difficulty with your Kal va'Chomer - other Korbanos are Kosher l'Shem Pesach on other days, because Pesach l'Shem other Korbanos is Kosher then - but we cannot say that other Zevachim l'Shem Pesach are Kosher on Erev Pesach, when Pesach l'Shem other Korbanos is Pasul!
4. R. Yehoshua: If you say thusly, Shelamim Lo Lishmah is Pasul more than Pesach (i.e. if Shelamim is slaughtered l'Shem Pesach at the time for Pesach, it is Pasul, but Pesach l'Shem Shelamim at the time of Shelamim (i.e. every day except Erev Pesach) is Kosher - but the Torah taught that Pesach Lo Lishmah is Pasul, not Shelamim)!

(f) R. Eliezer: I learn from a different Kal va'Chomer - Mosar Pesach becomes a Shelamim, Mosar Shelamim is not a Pesach;

1. Even though Mosar Pesach is a Shelamim, if Pesach is slaughtered l'Shem Shelamim at its (Pesach's) proper time it is Pasul - Mosar Shelamim is not a Pesach, all the more so if Shelamim is slaughtered l'Shem Pesach at this time it is Pasul!

(g) R. Yehoshua: We find that Mosar Chatas is an Olah, but Mosar Olah is not a Chatas;

1. Even though Mosar Chatas is an Olah, if Chatas is slaughtered l'Shem Olah it is Pasul - will you say that (because Mosar Olah is not a Chatas), Olah slaughtered l'Shem Chatas is Pasul?!

(h) R. Eliezer: You cannot learn from Chatas, for it is always Kosher Lishmah;

1. Pesach is only Kosher Lishmah on Erev Pesach, any other day it is Pasul, therefore it is Posel other Zevachim (if they are slaughtered l'Shem Pesach).

(a) (Mishnah - Shimon Achi Azaryah): (Any Zevach that was slaughtered l'Shem a Korban of higher Kedushah is Kosher, one slaughtered l'Shem a Korban of lower Kedushah is Pasul).
(b) (Rav Ashi): Shimon Achi Azaryah learns from "V'Lo Yechalelu Es Kodshei Benei Yisrael Es Asher *Yarimu*" - slaughter l'Shem a Korban of higher Kedushah does not Posel, slaughter l'Shem a lower Kedushah does Posel.
(c) Question: The verse is needed to teach Shmuel's law!

1. (Shmuel): One who eats Tevel (untithed produce) is Chayav Misah - "V'Lo Yechalelu Es Kodshei...Asher *Yarimu*" - this refers to something from which Terumah will be taken, i.e. Tevel.

(d) Answer: If it only came to teach the first law, it should have said '...Asher Hurmu';

1. Since it uses the future tense 'Yarimu', we also learn Shmuel's law. (Shitah - if it only came to teach Shmuel's law, it would not say "Es Kodshei Benei Yisrael").

(e) Question (R. Zeira): (Shimon Achi Azaryah say that if it was slaughtered l'Shem a higher Kedushah, it is Kosher;)

1. Does this mean (like the first Tana) that he does not fulfill his obligation (and they only argue when it was slaughtered l'Shem a lower Kedushah)?
2. Or, does it mean that he fulfilled his obligation (and they argue in both cases)?

(f) Answer (Abaye - end of the Mishnah): If a Bechor or Ma'aser was slaughtered l'Shem Shelamim, it is Kosher; if a Shelamim was slaughtered l'Shem Bechor or Ma'aser, it is Pasul;

1. 'Kosher' cannot mean that he fulfilled his obligation, this does not apply to Bechor and Ma'aser!
2. Rather, it must mean that it is Kosher, he did not fulfill his obligation - surely, 'Kosher' also means this earlier in the Mishnah.

(g) Rejection: No - in this clause, it means that he did not fulfill his obligation, but earlier, it means that he fulfilled his obligation!
(h) Question: (If we would learn from the last clause (what 'Kosher' means) to other clauses, we would understand why it was taught - but if not), is the Chidush of the last clause that a Zevach slaughtered l'Shem a lower Kedushah is Pasul)?!

1. We already know this from the previous clause!
2. (Mishnah): If Kodshei Kodoshim were slaughtered l'Shem Kodshim Kalim, (they are Pasul...)

(i) Answer: One might have thought, only such a case is Posel (because Kodshei Kodoshim are much more Kodesh than Kodshim Kalim), but not when Kodshim Kalim are slaughtered l'Shem Kodshim Kalim (since all have the same level of Kedushah) - the clause of Shelamim slaughtered l'Shem Bechor or Ma'aser, teaches that this is not so.
(j) Objection: We already know from a Mishnah that Shelamim is more Kodesh than Bechor!

1. (Mishnah): (If there are Shelamim and Bechoros to offer,) we offer Shelamim first, because its blood must be thrown onto all four walls of the Mizbeach, it requires Semichah, Nesachim and waving the chest and foreleg.

(k) Answer: Primarily, our Mishnah teaches that Shelamim is more Kodesh; that Mishnah taught it in passing.

(a) (Mishnah - R. Yehoshua): If a Pesach was slaughtered Lo Lishmah in the morning of Erev Pesach, it is Kosher, as if it was slaughtered on the previous day;
(b) Ben Beseira says it is Pasul, as if it was slaughtered in the afternoon.
(c) Shimon Ben Azai says, I heard from 72 elder on the day that R. Elazar ben Azaryah was appointed Nasi, that any Zevach that is eaten that was slaughtered Lo Lishmah is Kosher, but the owner did not fulfill his obligation, except for Pesach and Chatas.

1. Ben Azai disqualifies Olah, but otherwise he agrees with the first Tana (of the first Mishnah); Chachamim did not agree with him.

(d) (Gemara - R. Elazar): Ben Beseira says that a Pesach slaughtered in the morning of Erev Pesach is Kosher, because the entire day is its proper time.
(e) Question #1: If so, why did he say 'as if it was slaughtered in the afternoon'?
(f) Answer: He said this for parallel structure to R. Yehoshua, who said 'as if it was slaughtered on the previous day'.
(g) Question #2: If so, why did R. Yehoshua and Ben Beseira argue about Pesach Lo Lishmah, they should argue about Lishmah!
(h) Answer: If they argued about Lishmah, one might have thought that R. Yehoshua admits that Pesach Lo Lishmah is Pasul, because part of the day is the proper time to slaughter the Pesach.
(i) Question: "(Pesach is slaughtered) Bein ha'Arbayim (in the afternoon)"!
(j) Answer (Ula brei d'Rav Ila'i): No, it means between the nights (after the end of the previous night and before the next night, i.e. anytime during the day).
(k) Question: It says "Bein ha'Arbayim" regarding the second Tamid offered each day, we do not say that it may be offered any time of the day (it must be in the afternoon)!
(l) Answer: Since the first Tamid is offered "Ba'Boker", surely "Bein ha'Arbayim" said by the second means in the afternoon.
(m) Question: Perhaps the first is offered in the morning, the second can be offered anytime in the day?
(n) Answer: "Es ha'Kevesh *Echad* Ta'aseh ba'Boker", two may not be offered in the morning.
(o) Question: Regarding the Menorah, it says "Bein ha'Arbayim" - will we say that it may be lit anytime in the day?!
(p) Answer: There, it also says "Me'Erev Ad Boker";

1. (Beraisa): "Me'Erev Ad Boker" - one must put enough oil in the lamps so that they will burn from evening until morning.
2. Also - this teaches that no Avodah (which must be done by day) may be done after lighting the Menorah, until the next morning.