Previous daf

1)

(a) The Tana learns from Asham - that the fetus and the placenta of Kodshim are not sanctified.

(b) We know that the fetus and the placenta of an Asham are not sanctified - because an Asham is a male, and the concept does not apply to it.

(c) We learn from here - the principle that 'V'lados Kodshim' only become sanctified after they are born ('V'lados Kodshim be'Havayasan Hein Kedoshim').

(d) We might have thought that we cannot learn this from Asham - because logically, we might well say 'Ein Danin Efshar mi'she'I Efshar'. (In fact, this Tana holds 'Danin').

(a) The ramifications of the ruling that the fetus of Kodshim are not sanctified are - that one does not bring its Cheilev and kidneys on the Mizbe'ach.

(b) We cannot learn the same Halachah from Olah - which is totally burned, and since we do not learn other Korbanos from it with regard to burning the body of the animal on the Mizbe'ach, we would not learn the fetus and the kidneys either.

(c) We cannot learn that Zivchei Shalmei Tzibur can only be eaten by male Kohanim, from Chatas or Asham - since in each case by the very Din under discussion, the Torah writes "Kodesh Kodshim Hi/Hu" precluding other Korbanos.

(d) In the Pasuk "Rak Kodoshecha Asher Yih'yu Lecha", "Rak Kodoshecha" teaches us that Temuros are sacrificed, "Asher Yih'yu Lecha" - that babies of Kodshim are sacrificed too (but not fetuses).

(a) The Tana learns from ''Milu'im", besides the fact that the leftovers of Kodshim have to be burned - that if one designated a second animal to replace the first, the spare animal is not burned.

(b) The two possible cases of 'Mosreihen' are - if either the owner initially designated two animals (one as his Korban, the other, as a guarantee), or if the original Korban went lost, and after designating a second animal, the it was found and one of them was then brought on the Mizbe'ach.

(c) They do not apply to Milu'im because the concept of a 'substitute' does not exist by a Korban Tzibur.

(a) The Tana learns from "Shelamim" (where the Din of Pigul is written) - that a Machsheves Kodshim she'Lo bi'Zemanah on Kodshim can cause the Nesachim that come with it to because Pigul, and that they can themselves become Pigul.

(b) Rebbi Akiva in a Beraisa, learns the Din of Mekadesh bi'Veli'ah by other Korbanos from Minchah, though the Torah writes it by Chatas as well. We have already explained why we cannot learn Chatas from Minchah. Neither could we learn Minchah from Chatas - because it is not as absorbent as a Chatas.

(c) And he learns three things from "Chatas". 'min ha'Chulin' (that one cannot designate Korbanos from animals that are already Hekdesh) - that the Korban must be performed by day and that he must use his right hand.

(d) Rav Chisda learns from the Pasuk (in connection with the Korbanos of Yom Kipur) "Ve'hikriv Aharon es Par ha'Chatas Asher Lo" that it must be paid out of Aharon's pocket, and not with public funds - and that it cannot be brought from Ma'aser- Sheini (only from Chulin).

(a) We learn from the Pasuk "be'Yom Tzavoso" - that Avodah can only be performed by day.

(b) And Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Resh Lakish ruled that anywhere in the Torah that the Torah writes "Etzba" or Kehunah - the Kohen is obligated to use his right hand.

(c) The reason that Rebbi Akiva learned both 'ba'Yom' and 'be'Yado' from "Chatas" is - 'by the way' (seeing as it is possible to learn it from there, even though we don't need it).

(d) Alternatively, Rebbi Akiva learns 'be'Yado' from "Chatas" - because he holds like Rebbi Shimon, that "Etzba" on its own implies with the right-hand, but 'Kehunah' (on its own) does not. Therefore we need "Chatas" to teach us - that even by those Kodshim where the Torah writes 'Kehunah' (but not "Etzba") the Kohen must use his right hand.

(a) Rebbi Akiva learns from "Asham" - that the bones of Kodshei Kodshim belong to the Kohanim to do with as they wish.

(b) We cannot learn this from "Chatas" - because it is not with a 'Mah Matzinu' that we learn it, but from the Pasuk "la'Kohen Lo Yih'yeh", which is superfluous (and which is not written by Chatas).

7)

(a) When Rava says that if blood of a Chatas is underneath and that of an Olah on top, the garment requires Kibus, he means - that the former squirted on to a garment first, and the latter, on top of it.

(b) His She'eilah in the reverse case is - whether, bearing in mind that the blood of an Olah does not require Kibus, the garment requires Kibus or not, seeing as, although the blood of the Chatas is touching the Beged, it is not absorbed by it.

(c) He eventually decided - in the negative.

(a) Rava states that if blood is absorbed in a garment, it constitutes a Chatzitzah (an interruption) - meaning that, if it became Tamei, it cannot be Toveled until the blood-stain is removed.

(b) It will not however, constitute a Chatzitzah - if the owner is a butcher (who is not fussy about blood on his clothes), and the Tevilah will therefore be valid?

(c) Fat or wax on a garment does not constitute a Chatzitzah - if the owner of the garment is a salesman of that particular commodity.

(d) Rava's She'eilah whether both blood and fat on a garment constitute a Chatzitzah - concerns someone who is both a butcher and a salesman of fat, and the question is whether he does not even mind two such stains on his clothes, or whether two different stains is disgraceful, and even he will not tolerate it.

(e) The outcome of the She'eilah is - 'Teiku'.

9)

(a) Our Mishnah rules that a Kohen who is a T'vul-Yom, a Mechusar Kipurim or an Onan - does not receive a portion of Kodshim when they are distributed.

(b) A Kohen who is an Onan is forbidden to sacrifice a Korban - though he may touch it.

(c) A Kohen Ba'al-Mum Over (who has a temporary blemish) may neither ...

1. ... sacrifice a Korban ...
2. ... nor receive a portion (or eating Kodshim), just like one with a permanent blemish.

(a) The Tana rules that any Kohen who ...

1. ... is unfit to perform the Avodah - does not receive a portion either.
2. ... does not receive a portion of Basar - does not receive any skin either.
3. ... was Tamei at the time of Zerikas ha'Dam - does not receive a portion, even though he was already Tahor by the time the Chalavim were burned.

(b) The previous case covers - the entire night, since that is when the Chalavim are burned (meaning that he must have Toveled already before nightfall).

(c) The Tana learns from the Pasuk "ha'Makriv es Dam ha'Shelamim ... Lo Tih'yeh Shok ha'Yamin le'Manah" - that only a Kohen who is fit to eat the Korban at the time of Zerikas ha'Dam, will receive a portion when the Korbanos are distributed (as we just learned).