Previous daf

1)

(a) Our Mishnah now discusses Menachos. Like Chata'os, they can be eaten by male Kohanim, inside the Kela'im ... .
Whereabouts in the Azarah is the Kemitzah performed?

(b) From where does Rebbi Elazar (ben P'das) learn that if the Kemitzah takes place in the Heichal, the Minchah is Kasher?

(c) Rebbi Yirmiyah queries Rebbi Elazar from a Beraisa. What does the Tana learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra "Ve'hevi'ah (ha'Zar) el B'nei Aharon ha'Kohanim, ve'Kamatz *mi'Sham* M'lo Kumtzo"?

(d) What does ben Beseira learn from there with regard to a Minchah whose Kemitzah the Kohen took with his left hand?

(a) Rebbi Yirmiyah himself (or Rebbi Ya'akov to Rebbi Yirmiyah bar Tachlifa) answers the Kashya. In fact he says, the Tana Kama is coming not to teach us a Chumra (to preclude the Heichal from Kemitzah), but a Kula.
Which Kula?

(b) Why might we have thought otherwise?

(c) Why could the source for this supposition not have ...

1. ... the Olah ?
2. ... the Chatas?
3. ... the Asham?
4. ... all three?

(d) We conclude that the source is in fact, the Pasuk in Tzav "ve'Higishah el ha'Mizbe'ach ... ve'Heirim Mimenu be'Kumtzo".
What would we have learned from there, if not for "Ve'kamatz mi'Sham"?

(a) What does Rebbi Yochanan learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with the Shelamim) "u'Shechato Pesach Ohel Mo'ed"?

(b) What does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Korach (in connection with Achilas Kodshei Kodshim) "be'Kodesh ha'Kodshim Tochlenu"?

(c) Bearing in mind that we learn Achilas Kodshei Kodshim from the Pasuk in Tzav "ba'Chatzar Ohel Mo'ed Yochluhah", what Kashya does this pose on Rebbi Yochanan?

(d) How do we reconcile Rebbi Yochanan with the Beraisa? What distinction do we draw between the Kemitzah of the Minchah and Achilas Kodshei Kodshim?

(a) The Tana now discusses Chatas ha'Of.
To which corner did the Kohanim bring it? What does the Tana appear to say about this being crucial?

(b) That corner was used for three things below the Chut ha'Sikra and three things above it. Two of the things below were the Chatas ha'Of and the Hagashos. What does 'Hagashos' mean?

(c) What is the third thing that was performed there?

(a) One of the three things to be performed by the Keren Ma'aravis-Deromis was the Olas ha'Of.
Was that its regular location? Where did the Kohen stand when bringing it?

(b) Which other two things were performed on top of the Mizbe'ach by the south-western corner?

(c) Which side of the ramp did the Kohanim ascend and descend to perform the Avodah of the Chatas Beheimah, arrange the Ma'arachah or turn over the limbs on the Mizbe'ach?

(d) What are the three exceptions to this rule?

6)

(a) Rebbi Elazar learns from the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with the Minchas Chotei of a Korban Oleh ve'Yored) "Lo Yasim Alehah Shemen ... ki Chatas Hi", that a Minchah, like a Chatas, requires Tzafon.
What is wrong with this text?

(b) Neither can the Torah be comparing a Minchas Chotei to a Chatas Beheimah, and the Minchas Chotei is an exception, because then our Mishnah ought to have said so.
Why is it also illogical to say that?

(c) In which regard then, is Rebbi Elazar comparing a Minchah to a Chatas?

(a) Rebbi Elazar also compares a Chatas to a Minchah, in that like it, its Avodah requires the south-western corner.
How will we reconcile this with the earlier Mishnah, which permits Kemitzah anywhere in the Azarah?

(b) And which Avodah of the Chatas ha'Of is Rebbi Elazar referring to?

(c) As far as the Minchah itself is concerned, the Beraisa learns it from a combination of two Pesukim in Tzav, "Lifnei Hashem" and "el P'nei ha'Mizbe'ach". What does each of these imply?

(d) To which exact point does the Kohen therefore bring the Minchah?

(a) What alternative way of reconciling the two Pesukim does Rebbi Eliezer, in a Beraisa, suggest?

(b) What principle does he apply to reject this suggestion? Why does he opt for combining the two directions, rather than giving a choice?

(c) How does Rav Ashi explain the fact that the southern corner is considered "Lifnei Hashem"? What must Rebbi Eliezer hold to accommodate this fact?

(a) How does Rav Ashi explain the statement in our Mishnah (in connection with the Chatas ha'Of) 'u've'Chol Makom Haysah Kesheirah'?

(b) What does the supporting Beraisa initially say about the Haza'as ha'Dam (of the Chatas ha'Of)?

(c) What does it subsequently say that appears to clash with that?

(d) Why can we not reconcile the two statements by saying that the Tana requires two Ha'za'os?

(a) How do we amend the Beraisa to answer the Kashya? If 'Hizah Damah be'Chol Makom Kesheirah' does not really pertain to Haza'ah at all, to what does it pertain?

(b) What is 'Mitzuy'?

(c) Then why does the Tana mention Haza'ah at all in that statement?

(d) Under what condition is the Chatas ha'Of Kasher, irrespective of whereabouts the Mitzuy is performed?

Next daf