ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafBeitzah 19
(a) The Tana Kama forbids one to Tovel a Tamei vessel during Bein-
Hashemashos of Erev Yom-Tov - because it may be Yom-Tov, and one is not
permitted to Tovel vessels on Yom-Tov.
(b) Rebbi Shimon Shezuri is even more strict - he forbids a Kohen (who uses
his vessels for Terumah - Rashi later in the Sugya), to Tovel during *any*
Bein-Hashemashos, because from the fact that he is Toveling it Bein
Hashemashos, it appears that he intends to use it straightway (before the
(c) But does the Tana Kama not hold of the Din of Ha'arev Shemesh? Why does
he restrict the Isur of Tevilah to Bein Hashemashos of Yom-Tov?
(d) The Talmidim in the Beis Hamedrash established the Machlokes between
Rebbi Shimon Shezuri and the Tana Kama when they saw the owner running to
Tovel as Bein-Hashemashos approached - the Tana Kama holds that the fact
that he is running (to beat the clock) demonstrates that he knows about Bein
Hashemashos, and the moment he discovers that he was too late, he will
refrain from using the vessel before the following night. But Rebbi Shimon
Shezuri argues that he may well be running because he is busy, and not
because he is aware of the Din of Ha'arev Shemesh.
(a) Rava maintains that, if the owner is running as Beis Hashemashos
approaches, even Rebbi Shimon Shezuri will agree that the owner knows about
the Din of Ha'arev-Shemesh, and that their dispute is confined to a case
when he comes to ask about a second vessel - whether less than a k'Adashah
of Sheretz with which it came into contact, renders it Tamei or not.
(b) Rebbi Shimon Shezuri maintains that - if he doesn't know that less than
a k'Adashah is not Metamei, then he doesn't know either the Din of Ha'arev
Shemesh; whereas the Rabbanan argue that just because he doesn't know about
the Shiur of Tum'as Sheretz (which is *not* written explicitly in the
Torah), it doesn't necessarily follow that he doesn't know the Din of
Ha'arev Shemesh (which *is*).
(c) Our Mishnah permits Toveling on Yom-Tov ...
1. ... 'mi'Gav le'Gav' - meaning that if someone Toveled his vessels
intending to use them to press olives, and then changed his mind and decided
to use them for wine-making, he may Tovel them on Yom-Tov (because strictly
speaking, they do not require Tevilah at all. Consequently, if he does
decide to Tovel them, it is only a Chumrah, not a real Tikun).
2. ... 'me'Chaburah le'Chaburah' - that if he Toveled his vessels to use
with one group of people eating the Korban Pesach, and then changed his mind
to join another group, he may Tovel them again on Yom-Tov (for the same
reason as 'mi'Gav le'Gav').
(a) Beis Shamai permit Shelamim to be brought on Yom-Tov without making
Semichah on them, but they forbid Olos. They forbid ...
1. ... Semichah on Yom-Tov - because Semichah entailed leaning one's hand on
the head of the animal with all one's strength, as a result of which the
animal prevented him from falling. And it is forbidden to ride an animal or
to support oneself on it on Yom-Tov.
(b) Beis Hillel disagree. According to them, one does make Semichah on Yom-
Tov, and one does bring Olos (even Olos Yachid - we will now see which
2. ... the bringing of Olos - because they are brought purely for Hashem,
and the Torah writes in Bo "Hu Levado Ye'aseh *Lachem*" (forbidding all
preparation that is not for the consumption of a Jew). This prohibition is
confined to Olos Yachid, but not to the Tamid and the Musaf, whose times are
fixed, and which therefore over-ride Shabbos and Yom-Tov.
(c) Rav Ada bar Ahavah agrees with Ula that the Shelamim to which Beis
Shamai and Beis Hillel refer are Shalmei Chagigah exclusively. Nedarim and
Nedavos, whether they are Olos or Shelamim, cannot be bought on Yom-Tov.
(d) The Olah that Beis Hillel permit is an Olas Re'iyah.
(a) Beis Shamai learns from "va'Chagosem Oso *Chag* la'Hashem" - that it is
only the Chagigah (part of which is eaten by the owner) that one may bring
on Yom-Tov, but not the Olas Re'iyah; whereas Beis Hillel learn from
"la'Hashem", that whatever is for Hashem is included in the concession (even
the Olas Re'iyah - provided that is, it is a Yom-Tov Korban).
(b) Beis Hillel agree that Nedarim and Nedavos are forbidden - because they
are not due to be brought on Yom-Tov (they could either be brought later or
should have been brought earlier).
(c) We learn the obligation to bring an Olas Re'iyah on Yom-Tov - from the
Pasuk in Mishpatim "ve'Lo Yeira'u Panai Reikam".
(d) Even though one has seven days in which to bring one's Olas Re'iyah and
Shalmei Chagigah, they are nevertheless permitted on Yom-Tov - in case
something happens to prevent one from bringing them altogether ('Mitzvah
ha'Ba'ah le'Yadcha, Al Tachmitzenah'). Perhaps one can also explain that
even though the Torah gives seven days of Tashlumin, the main Mitzvah is the
first day (particularly by Olas Re'iyah, where the Torah writes "ve'Lo
Yera'u Panai Reikam", implying that one should not arrive in the Azarah
(a) We amend the Reisha of the Beraisa which states that 'Beis Shamai and
Beis Hillel *agree* that one cannot bring an Olah that is not for Yom-Tov,
and that one *can* bring a *Shelamim* that *is*', to read - 'that 'Beis
Shamai and Beis Hillel *agree* that one cannot bring an Olah *or a Shelamim*
that is not for Yom-Tov'; and the Seifa that their Machlokes is over 'a
*Shelamim* that is *not* of Yom-Tov', to read - that it is over 'n *Olah*
that *is* for Yom-Tov'
(b) Rav Yosef fails to see why it should be necessary to amend the Beraisa -
because even if *this* Tana clashes with Ula's opinion, there is *another
Tana* who holds like him (in fact, the previous Beraisa is a minority
opinion, as we shall now see).
(a) According to the Tana Kama of the Beraisa, one may not bring a Korban
(b) we learn from the Pasuk in Ki Savo "ve'Zavachta Shelamim ve'Achalta
Sham, ve'Samachta ... " - the principle of 'Ein Simchah Ela be'Basar' (one
cannot fulfill the Mitzvah of Simchah with anything other than *meat* -
others say than with the meat of *Shelamim*).
- ... on Pesach - because it includes forty loaves, ten of which are Chametz.
- ... on Shavu'os - because one cannot bring Nedarim and Nedavos on Yom-Tov.
(c) Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon permits a Todah on Sukos, even to fulfill
one's obligation of Simchah, but not a Chagigah - because one cannot fulfill
one's obligations with something that one is already obligated to bring (the
Shalmei Simchah are different - because we include all kinds of Korban, even
those that one is already obligated) from the Pasuk "ve'Samachta
(a) When the Tana Kama forbids bringing a Todah on Pesach because it
contains Chametz - he is referring, not to Pesach itself, which is obvious,
but to Erev Pesach. The reason for the prohibition is because one only has
until midday to eat the Chametz-breads. This increases the chances of one's
not finishing the Korban and having to burn the leftovers. We therefore
apply the principle 'Ein Mevi'in Kodshim le'Beis ha'Pesul' and forbid
bringing it at all that day.
(b) When he permits the Todah to be brought on Sukos - he is referring to
Chol ha'Mo'ed, because on Yom-Tov itself, there is no more reason to permit
bringing it than on Shavu'os.
(a) Rebbi Shimon learns from a Hekesh that whatever cannot be brought on
Pesach and Shavu'os, cannot be brought on Sukos either. The contention that
he is referring to the Chol ha'Mo'ed Sukos of the Tana Kama is unacceptable
- because, if cutting wood from trees is permitted on Chol ha'Mo'ed, how can
bringing a Todah be forbidden.
(b) We conclude that Rebbi Shimon concedes that one is permitted to bring a
Korban Todah on Chol ha'Mo'ed Sukos, and that when he compares Sukos to
Pesach and Shavu'os, he is talking about 'Bal Te'acher' - meaning that any
Korban that was promised *before* Pesach (and was therefore obligated on
Pesach), one has Shavu'os and finally Sukos, on which to bring it (after
which one will have transgressed 'Bal Te'acher'); but if it was promised
only *after* Pesach (and was not obligated on Pesach), one can still bring
it after Sukos (until the following Sukos - before one transgresses 'Bal
Teacher'). Note: The apparent concession to bring the Korban after the first
Yom-Tov, is not absolutely correct, since, it is unanimously agreed that,
after the first Yom-Tov, one transgresses an Asei (as we will learn in Rosh
Hashanah). The bone of contention in our Sugya is when one transgresses Bal
(c) When the Tana Kama says 'Aval Meivi Adam Todaso be'Chag ha'Sukos' - he
is merely offering a sound piece of advice, because in his opinion, one is
Chayav 'Bal Te'acher' after three Yamim-Tovim, irrespective of their order.
Consequently, failing to bring the Todah on Sukos will result in having to
make a special trip to Yerushalayim to bring one's Todah. Why is that?
Because on *Pesach*, he will not be able to bring it on account of the
Chametz that it contains, and on *Shavu'os*, because Nedarim and Nedavos
cannot be brought on Yom-Tov (as we learned earlier).
(a) Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon permits bringing a Todah on Sukos. He cannot
mean on Chol ha'Mo'ed - because then he would simply be repeating what the
Tana Kama says.
(b) What he must therefore mean is that one may even bring it on Yom-Tov -
and it now transpires that he is the author of the Beraisa on the previous
Amud, who holds that Nedarim and Nedavos can be brought on Yom-Tov.
(c) The reason that he mentions specifically Sukos is - because, in his
opinion, someone who fails to bring his Neder or Nedavah by Sukos,
transgresses Bal Te'acher, irrespective of whether he made the Neder before
Pesach, Shavu'os or Sukos.
(d) In his opinion, that is why the Torah in Re'ei finds it necessary to
insert the words "u've'Chag ha'Sukos" (even though Sukos is what is
currently under discussion). Rebbi Shimon explains this apparent redundancy
as the source for his explanation (as we learned earlier) - that one only
transgresses 'Bal Te'acher' on Sukos (but provided the three Chagim have
passed in their right order).
(a) We ask whether, if someone declared an animal a Todah, on condition that
he may fulfill his obligation of Chagigah with it, he may subsequently rely
on that condition. The answer is that he may not.
(b) The Gemara bases its answer on the answer that Rebbi Yochanan gave Resh
Lakish who asked him whether - if someone undertook to become a Nazir on
condition that he will be able to bring his Korbanos using the money of
Ma'aser Sheini, he may rely on that condition, to which Rebbi Yochanan
replied in the negative.