POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf
Zevachim 91
ZEVACHIM 91 (11 Elul) - dedicated by Mrs. Miriam Pogrow of Monsey, NY,
l'Zecher Nishmas her mother, Malka (Manya) Milner, the daughter of HaRav
Meir Ashkenazi, zt'l, the Rav of Shanghai. May all of her children,
grandchildren, and great-grandchildren follow in her path of Yir'as Shamayim
and Ahavas Chessed.
|
1) "TADIR" VERSUS "MEKUDASH"
(a) (Gemara) Question: Which takes precedence - what is more
Tadir, or what is more Kodesh?
(b) Answer #1 (Mishnah): Temidim come before Musafim.
1. Even though Musafim are more Kodesh, Temidim come
first, for they are more Tadir.
(c) Rejection: Musafim are not more Kodesh - Temidim brought
on Shabbos also receive the Kedushah of Shabbos!
(d) Answer #2 (Mishnah): Musafim of Shabbos come before
Musafim of Rosh Chodesh.
1. Even though Musfei Rosh Chodesh are more Kodesh
(Rosh Chodesh is called Mo'ed, Shabbos is not),
Musfei Shabbos come first, for they are more Tadir.
(e) Rejection: They are not more Kodesh, Kedushas Rosh
Chodesh affects all the Musafim.
(f) Answer #3 (Mishnah): Musafim of Rosh Chodesh come before
Musafim of Rosh Hashanah;
1. Even though Musfei Rosh Hashanah are more Kodesh,
Musfei Rosh Chodesh come first, for they are more
Tadir.
(g) Rejection: They are not more Kodesh, Kedushas Rosh
Hashanah affects all the Musafim.
(h) Answer #4 (Beraisa): Another reason (why the Brachah on
wine precedes the Brachah Mekadesh haShabbos in Kidush) -
the Brachah on wine is more Tadir than Mekadesh
ha'Shabbos, Tadir comes first.
1. This applies, even though Mekadesh ha'Shabbos is
more Kodesh!
(i) Rejection: It is not more Kodesh - the Brachah on wine
also receives the Kedushah of Shabbos.
(j) Answer #5: R. Yochanan taught, if the time for Minchah
came and a person did not yet pray Musaf, he should first
pray Minchah (it is more Tadir), and then Musaf (which is
more Kodesh).
(k) Rejection: Musaf is not more Kodesh - Minchah also
receives the Kedushah of Shabbos.
(l) Answer #6 (Mishnah - R. Meir): A Shelamim of yesterday
comes before a Chatas or Asham of today.
1. Inference: If both Korbanos were of today, all would
agree that Chatas or Asham is first (for it is more
Kodesh), even though Shelamim is more Tadir!
(m) Rejection (Rava): Shelamim is more *common*, it is not
more Tadir (the only obligation to bring Shelamim is on
the festivals - Chata'os must be brought every Rosh
Chodesh and festival! The Diyuk only applies to Chatas -
Shelamim would precede even Asham of today.)
1. Question (Rav Huna bar Yehudah): Indeed, what is
more common is considered Tadir!
i. (Beraisa) Suggestion: Perhaps there is no
Chatas for (failure to bring) Korban Pesach,
but Chatas is brought for (neglect of) Milah
(circumcision), for this is more Tadir!
2. Answer #1: It means, it is more Tadir regarding
Mitzvos (13 covenants were made regarding it).
3. Answer #2: Compared to Pesach, Milah is Tadir (Rashi
- Pesach is only once a year, Milah arises (within
Klal Yisrael) every day; Sefas Emes - even though
Milah is not *performed* constantly, a circumcised
man *fulfills* it constantly.)
2) IF THE LESS "TADIR" OFFERING WAS SLAUGHTERED FIRST
(a) Question: If the less Tadir Korban was slaughtered first,
what should be done?
1. Do we finish offering it, and then offer the Tadir
Korban?
2. Or, do we have someone stir its blood (so it will
not congeal) until we finish offering the Tadir
Korban, and then finish offering the less Tadir one?
(b) Answer #1 (Rav Huna of Sura - Mishnah - R. Meir): A
Shelamim of yesterday comes before a Chatas (or Asham) of
today.
1. (Assumption: The case is, the Shelamim was
slaughtered, the Chatas (or Asham) is ready to be
slaughtered.)
2. Inference: If both Korbanos were of today, all would
agree that if Shelamim was slaughtered first, we
stir its blood and delay Zerikah until we finish
offering the more Kodesh Korban (Chatas; similarly,
if a less Tadir Korban was slaughtered first, we
delay Zerikah until offering the more Tadir Korban!)
(c) Rejection: Perhaps R. Meir and Chachamim argue when both
(yesterday's Shelamim and today's Chatas) were
slaughtered - we cannot deduce whether or not we would
disgrace a Korban (to delay its Zerikah) until offering a
more Tadir or Kodesh Korban!
(d) Answer #2 (Beraisa): Another reason - the Brachah on wine
is more Tadir than Mekadesh ha'Shabbos, Tadir comes
first. (Even though it is already Shabbos, we delay
Mekadesh ha'Shabbos until after the Brachah on wine -
similarly, we should delay the less Tadir Korban until we
offer the more Tadir one!
(e) Rejection: Since the wine is ready in front of, this is
analogous to the case when both Korbanos are already
slaughtered (surely, we offer the Tadir first in this
case.)
(f) Answer #3: R. Yochanan taught, if the time for Minchah
came and a person did not yet pray Musaf, he should first
pray Minchah (it is more Tadir), and then Musaf (even
though the time for Musaf came first)!
(g) Rejection: Since it is now the time for Minchah, this is
like when both Korbanos are already slaughtered.
(h) Answer #4 (Rav Acha brei d'Rav Ashi - Mishnah): If Korban
Pesach was slaughtered before midday, it is Pasul, for it
must be "Bein ha'Arba'im"; if it was slaughtered before
the afternoon Tamid, it is Kosher, we stir its blood (and
delay Zerikah) until after Zerikah (of the Tamid.)
(i) Rejection (Ravina): It means, if the Tamid *was
slaughtered*, we offer it first, but l'Chatchilah, we
should first finish offering the Pesach.
(j) Support (Rav Acha Sava): The Mishnah says, 'until after
*Zerikah*', it does not say 'until after slaughter and
Zerikah'.
(k) (Mishnah): Kohanim may eat (Kodshim) any way they want...
(l) Question: What is the reason?
(m) Answer: "L'Mashchah" - in grandeur, the way kings eat.
3) A "NEDAVAH" OF OIL
(a) (Mishnah - R. Shimon): One may not volunteer (a Korban
of) oil - therefore:
1. The only oil that is divided among Kohanim in the
Azarah is the excess oil after smearing Rekikei
Menachos (Matzah wafers) of a Yisrael, or the
leftovers of the Log of oil a Metzora brings;
2. The only oil that is burned on the Mizbe'ach is the
excess from Rekikim of a Kohen, or from the Minchah
of a Mashu'ach (anointed Kohen Gadol.)
(b) R. Tarfon says, one may volunteer oil.
91b---------------------------------------91b
(c) (Gemara - Shmuel): According to R. Tarfon, when a Yisrael
brings oil, Kemitzah is taken (and Niktar), the rest is
eaten (by Kohanim). (Tosfos Yom Tov (Menachos 12:5) says,
since oil cannot be held in the fingers, Shmuel must mean
that a Kemitzah's worth of oil is taken in a vessel. R.
Gershom (Menachos 74B) says that the oil is solidified to
take Kemitzah; Rashi (Kesav Yad) and Tosfos there say
that Kemitzah of wine cannot be taken (it is too clear).)
(d) Question: What is the source of this?
(e) Answer: "*Korban* Minchah" - this is extra, it teaches
that one may volunteer oil;
1. A Korban of oil is like a Minchah - Kemitzah is
taken, the rest is eaten.
(f) Support (R. Zeira -Mishnah - R. Shimon): One may not
volunteer oil - therefore, the only oil divided among
Kohanim is the excess of Rekikei Yisrael or the leftovers
of the Log Metzora.
1. Inference: According to the opinion that one may
volunteer oil, it is divided among Kohanim.
(g) Question (Abaye - Seifa): One may not volunteer oil -
therefore...The only oil burned on the Mizbe'ach is the
excess from Rekikei Kohen or from Minchas Mashu'ach.
1. Inference: According to the opinion that one may
volunteer oil, all of it is Niktar (burned on the
Mizbe'ach!) (Abaye assumes that if one sees Haktarah
of oil, he would see if it was only a Kemitzah or
the entire excess from Rekikei Kohen or Minchas
Mashu'ach. Since according to R. Tarfon, one would
not know whether or not the oil is Nedavah, it must
be that a Nedavah is totally Niktar; therefore,
Abaye cannot explain the Mishnah like R. Zeira below
(i). However, this is unlike Shitah Mekubetzes, who
deletes 'all' from the text.)
(h) Questions: The Reisha is difficult for Abaye, the Seifa
is difficult for R. Zeira!
(i) Answer - part 1: The Seifa is not difficult for R. Zeira
- indeed, according to the opinion that one may volunteer
oil, also Kemitzah of oil is Niktar!
(j) Answer - part 2: The Reisha is not difficult for Abaye -
the inference is invalid, the Reisha was taught only for
parallel structure with the Seifa.
(k) Question: We understand, a Seifa may be taught merely for
parallel structure with the Reisha, but would a Tana
teach a Reisha just for parallel structure with the
Seifa?!
(l) Answer: Indeed, he would!
1. (Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael): The Reisha was taught
for parallel structure with the Seifa.
(m) Support (for Abaye - Beraisa - R. Akiva): A voluntary
Korban of wine is poured into the Sefalim (conduits from
the top of the Mizbe'ach to the bottom);
1. R. Tarfon says, a voluntary Korban of oil is burned
on the Mizbe'ach.
2. Suggestion: Just like wine is totally poured into
the Sefalim, oil is totally burned on the Mizbe'ach
(according to R. Tarfon!)
(n) Rejection: No, their laws are dissimilar (only a Kemitzah
of oil is burned on the Mizbe'ach).
4) A "NEDAVAH" OF OIL (cont.)
(a) (Rav Papa): Tana'im argue about a Nedavah of oil:
1. (Mishnah): One who volunteers to bring oil must
bring at least one Log;
2. Rebbi says, he must bring at least three Lugim.
(b) Question: What is the source of the argument?
(c) Answer #1 (Rabanan): Chachamim hold Dun Minah u'Minah
(when a matter is learned from another matter, we learn
everything from the source - we learned Korban oil from
Menachos, the smallest amount of oil in a Minchah is one
Log;
1. Also, just like a Kometz of a Minchah is Niktar and
the rest is eaten, also regarding oil;
2. Rebbi holds, Dun Minah v'Uki b'Asra (we learn the
basic law from the source, other laws are according
to the law of the matter being learned) - from
Menachos we only learn that oil may be brought
voluntarily, other laws we learn from Nesachim (i.e.
of wine):
i. Just like the minimal Nedavah of wine is three
Lugim, also regarding oil; just as wine is
totally put into the Sefalim, oil is totally
Niktar.
(d) Objection (Rav Papa): If Rebbi learned from Menachos, he
would agree that Dun Minah u'Minah!
(e) Answer #2 (Rav Papa): Rather, Rebbi learns from "Ezrach".
(f) Refutation (Rav Huna brei d'Rav Noson - Beraisa): "Korban
Minchah" - this teaches that one may volunteer oil; the
minimal Nedavah is three Lugim.
1. Rebbi is the one who holds that the minimal Nedavah
is three Lugim, and it says that he learns from
"Korban"!
(g) Rav Papa: I was wrong, I had not heard that Beraisa.
1. (Mishnah): One who volunteers to bring oil must
bring at least one Log;
5) A "NEDAVAH" OF WINE
(a) (Shmuel): A voluntary Korban of wine is sprinkled on the
fire (on the Mizbe'ach.)
(b) Question: What is the source of this?
(c) Answer: "V'Yayin Takriv la'Nesech...Ishe Re'ach
Nicho'ach"- ("Ishe" refers to something burned on the
Mizbe'ach).
(d) Question: The wine will (partially) extinguish the fire
(where it lands), this is forbidden ("Esh Tamid Tukad Al
ha'Mizbe'ach Lo Sichbeh"!)
(e) Answer #1: The Torah only forbids totally extinguishing
the fire.
1. Question: But Rav Nachman taught, one who takes a
coal down from the Mizbe'ach and extinguishes it is
liable!
2. Answer: Rav Nachman discusses when no fire was left
on the Mizbe'ach.
(f) Answer #2: (Really, one is liable even if some fire
remains on the Mizbe'ach - however,) extinguishing is
permitted for a Mitzvah (e.g. bringing a Nedavah of
wine.)
(g) Question (Beraisa - R. Eliezer ben Yakov) Suggestion:
Since Terumas ha'Deshen is a Mitzvah, perhaps it is
permitted to extinguish glowing ashes for this!
1. Rejection: "Lo Sichbeh".
(h) Answer: There it is forbidden, for there is no need to
extinguish them - one can wait for them to extinguish by
themselves.
(i) Question #1 (Beraisa #1 - R. Akiva): A voluntary Korban
of wine is poured into the Sefalim;
1. R. Tarfon says, a voluntary Korban of oil is burned
on the Mizbe'ach.
(j) Question #2 (Beraisa #2): Nesachim of wine are poured
into the Sefalim.
1. Suggestion: Perhaps they are thrown onto the fire!
2. Rejection: "Lo Sichbeh".
(k) Answer: Shmuel holds like R. Shimon, who permits Davar
she'Eino Miskaven (something he does not intend for;
Rashi - he does not intend to extinguish, and it is not a
*Pesik Reisha* (inevitable result), wine can be thrown
without extinguishing; Aruch - even though it is a Pesik
Reisha, he is not happy about this), the Beraisos are
like R. Yehudah, who forbids this.
(l) Question: But Shmuel holds that we may extinguish (on
Shabbos) a metal coal (which is normally forbidden
mid'Rabanan) in Reshus ha'Rabim, in order that people
will not be harmed, but not a coal of wood (for this is
forbidden mid'Oraisa);
1. R. Shimon holds that extinguishing even a wooden
coal is forbidden only mid'Rabanan (unless this is
done to make a wick), it is permitted to prevent
injury!
(m) Answer: Shmuel holds like R. Shimon regarding Davar
she'Eino Miskaven, he holds like R. Yehudah regarding
Melachah she'Einah Tzerichah l'Gufah (he obligates one
who does a Melachah even if he does not need the result).
Next daf
|