Previous daf

1)

(a) If, as we just concluded, "Zevach" is a 'Ribuy', then back comes the question 'Let the Pesach become the Korban that one Shechts it as (an Olah or a Chatas)'.
On what grounds do we reject Rav Avin's answer, that since a Pesach is eaten, it can only become a Korban that is eaten?

(b) How do we therefore amend Rebbi Avin's answer?

(c) How does Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Avin put it? How does *he* categorize the type of Korban that a Pesach can become?

(a) Why, according to Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Avin, asks Rav Yitzchak b'Rebbi Savrin, if the Pesach was Shechted as Ma'aser Beheimah (which is Kodshim Kalim), should it not become Ma'aser Beheimah?
Besides the fact that Ma'aser does not require Nesachim, what difference will it make whether it is considered a Shelamim or Ma'aser?

(b) We answer by quoting the Pasuk "ha'Asiri Yih'yeh Kodesh".
How does that answer the Kashya?

(c) In similar vein, he asks, why, if it was Shechted as a Bechor (which is Kodshim Kalim too), should it not become a Bechor. Besides the fact that Ma'aser does not require Nesachim, what difference will it make whether it is considered a Shelamim or a Bechor?

(d) How will the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Avrah" "Avrah" solve the problem?

(a) What does Mar Zutra b'rei de'Rav Nachman learn from the Pasuk in Bechukosai "Ve'hayah *Hu* u'Semuraso Yih'yeh Kodesh"?

(b) What are the ramifications of the suggestion that if the Pesach was Shechted as ...

1. ... a Temurah, it becomes a Temurah (besides the fact that it cannot be sold or redeemed)?
2. ... a Todah, it becomes a Todah?

(c) What objection do we raise to the answer that since the Pesach does not require loaves, why should the Mosar Pesach?

(d) How do we amend this answer?

(a) We have so far taken for granted that "ve'Im min ha'Tzon Korbano" refers to Mosar Pesach (i.e. a Shelamim, which comes from Tzon). Rav Yeimar b'rei de'Rav Hillel however, queries this.
Which other Mosar does he suggest it refers to (which also comes from the sheep family)?

(b) How does Rava, based, we presume, on the word "min", refute Rav Yeimar's suggestion?

(c) How does Rebbi Avin bar Chiya (or bar Kahana) query the Limud from "min"?

(d) Rebbi Mani answers that here too, "min" comes to exclude.
What does it exclude?

(e) If Rava does not learn it from "min", then what is his source?

(a) What problem does the continuation of the Pasuk ("ve'Im min ha'Tzon") "Im Kesev ... ve'Im Eiz" create? How does this seemingly negate the theory that the Pasuk is talking about a Mosar ha'Pesach?

(b) If the Torah was not talking about a Mosar ha'Pesach, what would it be coming to teach us?

(c) We answer that the Pasuk is indeed talking about a Mosar Pesach, and that the Beraisa explains "Im Kesev ... ve'Im Eiz". What does the Tana learn from ...

1. ... "Kesev" (with regard to the Pesach itself)?
2. ... "Im Kesev" (with regard to a Pesach which has entered its second year, and Shelamim ha'Ba'in Machmas ha'Pesach?

(d) What are Shelamim ha'Ba'in Machmas ha'Pesach?

(e) And what does the Tana then learn from "ve'Im Eiz"?

(a) What do we ask from Shmuel's father, who learned above that Mosar Pesach is brought as a Shelamim from "ve'Im min ha'Tzon Korbano le'Zevach Shelamim" on the Beraisa that we just learned.

(b) And what does Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah learn from the Pasuk in Re'ei "Ve'zavachta Pesach la'Hashem Elokecha *Tzon u'Vakar*"?

(c) How do we now reconcile all three Pesukim? Which case would we have learned had there been only one Pasuk?

(d) Why would we have not known from there a Mosar Pesach after Pesach, but that is still less than one year old?

(e) And why do we still need a Pasuk to teach us that the same applies to a Mosar Pesach before Pesach?

7)

(a) What did Rav in the name of Mavog say about a Chatas which is Shechted as Chatas Nachshon? What is 'Chatas Nachshon'?

(b) How does he learn this from the Pasuk in Tzav "Zos Toras ha'Chatas"?

(c) What does Rebbi Shimon say in a Beraisa about a Minchas Marcheshes (that is cooked in a pot) from which the Kohen took a Kemitzah having in mind a Minchah al ha'Machavas (fried in a flat pan [or vice-versa]); or a Minchah mingled with oil, having in mind a dry one (or vice-versa)?

(d) What is the reason for this?

(a) What does Rav Mesharshaya extrapolate from Rebbi Shimon? What would be the Din from one Minchah to the other, assuming that the distinction was not noticeable?

(b) How does that create a Kashya on Rav quoting Mavog?

(c) Why did we not ask the same Kashya on Rava, (whom we will quote shortly and) who learned earlier 'Chatas Cheilev she'Shechtah le'Shem Chatas Dam, Kesheirah'?

(d) We therefore amend Rav's statement to 'Chatas she'Nishchatah al-M'nas she'Yiskaper Bah Nachshon, Kesheirah'.
Why is that?

(a) Why did Rav then refer specifically to Chatas Nachshon, and not just the Chatas of any deceased person?

(b) We ask on this however 'Hani Olos Ninhu'?
What do we mean by that? Why do we refer to a Chatas Nazir and a Chatas Metzora as 'Olos'?

(c) What are the ramifications of the Kashya?

(d) So how do we amend Rav's statement once again, to conclude 'Chatas Nachshon Olah Hi'?

(a) Others amend Rav's statement to read 'Chatas she'Shachtah le'Shem Chatas Nachshon, Pesulah.
Why is that?

(b) Then why did Rav in the name of Mavog present the case of Chatas Nachshon, and not a Chatas Nazir or Metzora?

(a) What does Rava say about a Chatas Cheilev that was Shechted ...

1. ... as a Chatas Dam or a Chatas Avodas-Kochavim? What is the special Chidush with regard to a Chatas Avodas-Kochavim?
2. ... as a Chatas Nazir or a Chatas Metzora?

(b) Why the difference?

(c) Rava asked what the Din will be if one Shechted a Chatas Cheilev as a Chatas Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav.
What are the two sides of the She'eilah? Why might it be ...

1. ... Kasher?
2. ... Pasul?

(a) Rav Acha b'rei de'Rava maintains that all the current cases are Pasul. How does he Darshen the Pasuk "Ve'shachat Osah le'Chatas"?

(b) What did he then reply when Rav Ashi asked him how he presented his father (Rava)'s She'eilah? In which case did Rava rule ...

1. ... Pasul?
2. ... Kasher?

(c) And what was his Safek?

(a) If one Shechts a Korban li'Shemah but has in mind to sprinkle its blood she'Lo li'Shemah, Rebbi Yochanan holds Pasul.
What does Resh Lakish say?

(b) What is ...

1. ... the principle on which their Machlokes is based?
2. ... the source of their Machlokes?

(c) Why does Resh Lakish decline to learn P'sul Kodesh from Pigul?

(a) They also indulge in a similar Machlokes in a case where someone Shechts a Chulin animal.
What is the case?

(b) What is Rebbi Yochanan's source to say Pasul?

(c) What are the ramifications of that Machlokes?

(d) Why do they to repeat this Machlokes twice? What would we have thought with regard to ...

1. ... the first case, had they only presented the second Machlokes?
2. ... the second case, had they only presented the first Machlokes?

Next daf