Previous daf

1)

(a) According to Rabah, if the Sheriri were separated before Chatzos (midnight) and returned after Chatzos, the following Chatzos renders them Ikul - which means that from that time on, there is no Me'ilah, and 'Im Yardu, Lo Ya'alu'.

(b) According to Rav Chisda - Amud ha'Shachar already renders them Ikul.

(c) Amri de'Bei Rav (see Tosfos DH 'Amri de'Bei Rav') explains Rav Chisda's ruling - with a 'Kal va'Chomer from Chatzos which renders Sh'riri Ikul (even though it does not create Linah), Amud ha'Shachar (which does create Linah) should certainly render them Ikul.

(d) If the Sheriri were separated before Chatzos and returned after Amud ha'Shachar, Rabah issues the same ruling as he issued in the previous case. According to Rav Chisda - they never become Ikul.

(a) Rav Yosef objects to the current Machlokes - on the grounds that Chatzos renders the Sheriri Ikul, whether they are on the Mizbe'ach or not.

(b) Consequently, according to Rav Yosef, when Chatzos arrives (even if they are not on the Mizbe'ach) ...

1. ... Me'ilah - no longer applies.
2. ... they are - Asur be'Hana'ah mi'de'Rabbanan.
3. ... 'Pak'u - Lo Ya'alu'.

(c) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba and Tana bar Kapara corroborate Rav Yosef's opinion. Assuming that Rabah and Rav Chisda also conform with Rav Yosef, we establish their Machlokes - by particularly fatty limbs, which do not become completely Ikul, even if they have dried up from the heat.

(a) Rava asked Rabah whether Linah invalidates a Korban that is on the Mizbe'ach when dawn breaks. He cannot be referring to a Korban which remained on the Mizbe'ach even after that - because even a Korban that is lying in the Azarah when dawn breaks, is Kasher if it is subsequently taken up on to the Mizbe'ach (how much more so one that is already on the Mizbe'ach at that time).

(b) He must therefore be referring to a case - where after dawn break, the Korban is taken down into the Azarah.

(c) According to one side of the She'eilah, we compare the top of the Mizbe'ach to the Shulchan, which would mean - that whatever is there when dawn breaks, does not become Pasul (and that even if 'Yarad, Ya'aleh'), like the Mishnah in Menachos, which rules that if the Lechem ha'Panim remained on the Shulchan for a whole week - they do not become Pasul.

(d) The other side of the She'eilah is - that we compare the top of the Mizbe'ach to the floor of the Azarah, which renders Pasul whatever is on it, when dawn breaks.

(a) Rabah replied 'Ein Linah Mo'eles be'Roshah shel Mizbe'ach'.

(b) We ask whether Rava accepted Rabah's ruling or not, and we answer by citing a Machlokes between them. Both agree that limbs that remaoned overnight ...

1. ... in the Azarah - are burned until dawn break.
2. ... on top of the Mizbe'ach' - are burned even after that.

(c) Rabah then rules that if, in the latter case, 'Yardu, Ya'alu'. Rava holds - 'Lo Ya'alu' (a proof that he did not accept Rabah's answer).

(d) This is no contradiction to his his previous ruling (that limbs that remained on top of the Mizbe'ach may be burned at any time) - which is due to the principle 'P'sulin she'Alu, Lo Yerdu'. Note, that the criterion for 'Linah' is not 'being off the Ma'arachah all night', but 'being off the Ma'arachah at dawn-break'.

(a) We know that the Mizbe'ach sanctifies whatever is fit for it from the Pasuk in Tetzaveh "ha'Nogei'a ba'Mizbe'ach Yikdash". The Beraisa learns from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "u'Mashachta es Mizbach ha'Olah" - that the Kevesh sanctifies too.
2. ... "Kol ha'Nogei'a Bahem Yikdash" - that the same applies to the K'lei Shareis.

(b) Resh Lakish asked Rebbi Yochanan whether the K'lei Shareis sanctify Pesulin as well. When Rebbi Yochanan cited him our Mishnah "ke'Sheim she'ha'Mizbe'ach Mekadesh ... Kach Keilim Mekadshin', he meant - that whatever is sanctified in a K'li Shareis, can no longer be redeemed (because that is what the Tana is speaking about).

(c) Rebbi Yochanan's reply therefore, did not satisfy Resh Lakish - since *he* was speaking about bringing the P'sulim on the Mizbea'ch Lechatchilah.

(a) Rebbi Yochanan then tried to resolve Resh Lakish's She'eilah from our Mishnah 'she'Kiblu Pesulin Ve'zarku es Damo', which he interoreted to mean that Pesulin both received the blood and sprinkled it - implying that had Kesheirim subsequently sprinkled the blood, it would be Kasher ...

(b) ... a proof - that K'lei Shareis sanctify Pesulin even to the point that they may be brought on the Mizbe'ach.

(c) We refute Rebbi Yochanan's proof however - by interpreting the Beraisa to mean that either Pesulin received the blood or they sprinkled the blood.

(d) And the Tana is coming to teach us that even though the Eivarim became Pasul through the Zerikah, 'Im Alu, Lo Yerdu'.

7)

(a) We ask whether 'Avir Mizbe'ach ke'Mizbe'ach Dami O Lo' - meaning that if a Pasul limb is suspended above the Mizbe'ach, is it considered to be on the Mizbe'ach (in which case, 'Lo Yeired'), or not.

(b) Assuming that we hold 'Avir Mizbe'ach La'av ke'Mizbe'ach Dami', the problem that will create with regard to transporting the Pasul limbs from the Kevesh to the Mizbe'ach - is that (bearing in mind that by the same token 'Avir Kevesh La'av ke'Kevesh Dami') they will not considered to be on the ramp. How can the Kohen then take them up to the Mizbe'ach?

(c) We get round that problem - by pointing out that he can drag them up the ramp.

(a) The problem that remains regarding the gap between the Kevesh and the Mizbe'ach is - once again, if we hold 'Avir Mizbe'ach La'av ke'Mizbe'ach Dami' - how can the Kohen carry the pieces across it (like we asked just before).

(b) We resolve it - by considering the remainder of the piece to be wherever the majority is (in which case the tiny gap does not affect the issue).

(c) Rami bar Chama asked whether 'Yesh Chibur be'Olin' or not - whether we consider all particles of Kodshim that are brought on the Mizbe'ach as being joined, or not.

(d) We ask why we cannot then resolve his She'eilah from our previous statement. And we answer - that indeed we can (because otherwise, as each piece reaches the gap, it ought to be forbidden to move it across).

(a) Rava bar Rav Chanan asks on Rami bar Chama that if 'Avir Mizbe'ach ke'Mizbe'ach Dami', how does an Olas ha'Of ever become Pasul be'Machshavah - specifically Olas ha'Of, because unlike Olas Beheimah, the Kohen kills it (with Melikah) on top of the Mizbe'ach ...

(b) ... and the Kashya is - that seeing as even if it does become Pasul, seeing as it is already on the Mizbe'ach, it is burned on the Ma'arachah (negating his Machshavah which renders the Korban Pasul).

(c) We answer the Kashya - that it would become Pasul if the Kohen were to have in mind at the time of the Melikah to take the bird down from the Mizbe'ach, before returning it and burning it. And seeing as it would be Pasul if he carried out his Machshavah, it will be Pasul even he doesn't.

(a) Initially, we establish the previous answer like Rava, who holds 'Linah Mo'eles be'Rosho shel Mizbe'ach, but not like Rabah - who holds 'Einah Mo'eles'.

(b) However, we establish it like Rabah too - in a case where the Kohen thought to take the bird down before Amud ha'Shachar and to return it after Amud ha'Shachar, in which case, Linah would take effect even according to him.

(a) Rav Shimi bar Ashi countered those who tried to prove that 'Avir Mizbe'ach La'av ke'Mizbe'ach Dami' from Chatas ha'Of Pesulah, with which the Kohen performed Melikah on top of the Mizbe'ach she'Lo li'Shemah - and with which he will subsequently perform Haza'ah.

(b) Rav Shimi bar Ashi tries to prove from there - that 'Avir Mizbe'ach ke'Mizbe'ach Dami', because otherwise, how can the Kohen sprinkle the blood on the Mizbe'ach, seeing as when he does, the bird and the blood are not actually on the Mizbe'ach (but in its air-space).

(c) And he brings a further proof from the Pasul blood of Korbanos - which, according to Raban Gamliel (in the opening Mishnah in the Perek) 'Dam Pasul she'Alah, Lo Yeired'.

(d) His proof from there is - that, like in the case of Olas ha'Of, the blood only reaches the Mizbe'ach from the air in front of it, so how can he perform the Haza'ah, which entails the blood going through the air before reaching the actual Mizbe'ach?

(a) To answer Rav Shimi bar Ashi's Kashya, we suggest that the Kohen performs the Haza'ah and the Zerikah respectively - by holding the bird's neck and the bowl right next to the Mizbe'ach.

(b) Besides the fact that this is not the way Haza'ah and Zerikah are normally performed, we ask - that the Haza'ah is in fact 'Mitzuy', and the Zerikah 'Shefichah'.

(c) Rav Ashi refutes Rav Shimi bar Ashi's proof from Chatas ha'Of. Acording to him, the She'eilah of 'Avir Mizbe'ach ... ' is not affected by the case of 'Chatas ha'Of Pesulah' - because, since the Kohen is standing on the Mizbe'ach, it is as if the Korban is lying on the Mizbe'ach, too.

(d) And the She'eilah is - in a case where the Korban is hanging from a cane.