Previous daf

1)

(a) Bearing in mind that the Pasuk in Emor "Kedoshim Yih'yu l'Elokeihem" (written in connection with the Kohanim) is written with reference to bringing Kodshim be'Tum'ah, what do we learn from there?

(b) Why do not learn Tum'ah itself from there?

(c) On wht grounds do we suggest that the Pasuk is referring to a Kohen who makes a bald patch for dead person or who destroys his beard with a razor?

(a) We answer by citing the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Chilul" "Chilul" from Terumah.
What do we mean by that? How does the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' work?

(b) How do we therefore know to establish the Pasuk by a T'vul-Yom who performs the Avodah?

(c) Which three Pesukim do we have with regard to various degrees of Tum'ah?

(d) Rabah explains why we need all three.
Why can we not learn ...

1. ... the other two from Tamei?
2. ... Mechusar Kipurim from T'vul-Yom?
3. ... T'vul-Yom from Mechusar Kipurim?

(a) We also refute the attempt to learn one from two.
Why can we not learn ...

1. ... Mechusar Kipurim from Tamei and T'vul-Yom?
2. ... T'vul-Yom from Tamei and Mechusar Kipurim?

(b) Why does Rabah make no attempt to explain why we cannot learn Tamei from the others?

(c) Even if we did include Tamei in the deliberations, we would not decline to learn Tamei from Mechusar Kipurim because there it is lacking an act (like we said with regard to T'vul-Yom).
Why not?

(a) We ask that, when all's said and done, the Tum'ah of a Mechusar Kipurim has become weaker (after nightfall).
So what if it has? How does that serve to counter the current Pircha?

(b) What do we answer? What must Rabah hold?

5)

(a) The Tana Kama in a Beraisa rules that if an Onan or a Mechusar Kipurim burn it, it is nevertheless Kasher.
What is the Beraisa referring to?

(b) What does Yosef ha'Bavli say?

(c) How do we initially establish the basis of their Machlokes?

(d) What will both Tana'im hold with regard to a T'vul-Yom (who is not Chayav a Korban) burning it?

(a) We reject this interpretation however, by referring to the Pasuk in Chukas "Ve'hizah ha'Tahor al ha'Tamei" (when the Torah could have written "Ve'hizah al ha'Tamei").
What do we Darshen from there? Whom is the Torah permitting here to sprinkle the ashes of the Parah Adumah?

(b) What is the basis of the Machlokes between the Tana Kama and Yosef ha'Bavli?

(c) What will both Tana'im then hold with regard to Mechusar Kipurim de'Zav on principle?

(a) Seeing as whether we say 'Mechusar Kipurim de'Zav ke'Zav Dami' or not, makes no difference with regard to the Parah Adumah, what are its ramifications?

(b) What is the basis of the Chumra of a Mechusar Kipurim over a T'vul-Yom who is not a Mechusar Kipurim?

(a) What does Rebbi Avahu Amar Rebbi Yochanan (or in the name of Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon) learn from the Pasuk "Ve'chagarta Osam Avnet Aharon u'Vanav ... Ve'haysah Lahem Kehunah le'Chukas Olam"?

(b) And what does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Shemini "Yayin ve'Sheichar Al Teisht ... u'le'Havdil Beis ha'Kodesh u'Vein ha'Chol"?

(c) In which three regards (in connection with the Mitzvos of Kehunah) does the Torah write "Chukas Olam"?

(a) By Shesuyei Yayin, the Torah adds "be'Vo'achem el Ohel Mo'ed ve'Lo Samusu".
Given that this refers specifically to those Avodos for which a Zar is Chayav Misah, which four Avodos does it incorporate?

(b) What do we learn from the double 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Chukah" "Chukah"?

(c) Seeing as the Tana learns Mechusar Begadim from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah', why does Rebbi Avahu then need to learn it from "Ve'chagarta Osam Avnet ... Vehaysah Lahem Kehunas Olam"?

Next daf