Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) IS HAIR A "YAD" OR "SHOMER"?

(a) Version #2 - (Mishnah): The following can join with meat for the Shi'ur for Tum'as Ochlim, but not for Tum'as Neveilah - skin, Rotev, spices...
(b) (Reish Lakish): This applies only to bones (and skin...), which are Shomrim, but not hair.
(c) (R. Yochanan): Even hair is a Shomer.
(d) Question (Reish Lakish): Can there be a Shomer (hair) for a Shomer (the skin)?
(e) Answer (R. Yochanan): Hair is rooted in the skin.

1. Question (Rav Acha bar Yakov): If so, how can we write Tefilin, we must have a pure writing!
2. Answer: We can answer like Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael taught - we are not concerned for any hole that the ink passes over.

(f) Question (R. Yochanan - Mishnah): If skin (of a Neveilah) has k'Zayis of meat on it, one who touches a strand or a hair opposite the meat becomes Tamei.

1. Suggestion: The hair is Metamei because it is a Shomer.

(g) Answer: No, it is a Yad.
(h) Question: One hair cannot serve like a Yad!
(i) Answer: We can answer like R. Ila'a taught, when there are many strands at the top of a sheaf, each is a Yad, because one can take it by all the strands;

1. Similarly, when there are many hairs, each is a Yad.

(j) Question: Where was R. Ila'a's law taught?
(k) Answer (Mishnah): Strands at the top of sheaves bring Tum'ah and are Metamei, but they do not join for the Shi'ur for Tum'ah.

1. Question: What can the strands be used for (why are they considered Yados)?
2. Answer (R. Ila'a): The case is, there are many strands at the top of a sheaf.

(a) (Mishnah): The Rotev...(joins for Tum'as Ochlim).
(b) Question: What is Rotev?
(c) Answer #1 (Rava): It is fat.
(d) Objection (Abaye): Fat itself has Tum'as Ochlim!
(e) Answer #2 (Abaye): It is congealed juice of the meat.
(f) Question: Why must we say that it congealed - even if did not, it joins for the Shi'ur of Tum'ah!

1. (Reish Lakish): Brine on vegetables joins to the quantity of a date (to be liable for eating on Yom Kipur).

(g) Answer: Liability for eating on Yom Kipur depends on what calms the mind of someone fasting (for this, a liquid on a solid helps like a solid);

1. For Tum'ah, it joins only if it is congealed.

(a) (Mishnah): And Kipah...
(b) Question: What is Kipah?
(c) Answer #1 (Rava): It is dregs of meat.
(d) Objection (Abaye): Dregs themselves have Tum'as Ochlim!
(e) Answer #2 (Rav Papa): It is spices (cooked with the meat).
(f) (Mishnah): If Reuven cooked blood until it hardened and one ate it, or if one melted Chelev and drank it, he is liable.
(g) Question: We understand the first law - by hardening the blood, he shows that he considers it important;

1. Why is he liable for drinking melted Chelev - the Torah said not to *eat* Chelev, drinking is not eating!

(h) Answer (Reish Lakish): "A soul [that will eat Chelev]" - this includes one who drinks (for this also satisfies the soul).
(i) (Beraisa): If one melted Chametz and drank it he is Chayav Kares; if one dissolved Matzah and drank it, he did not fulfill the Mitzvah.
(j) Question: We understand the latter law - this is not "bread of poverty" that we are commanded to eat;

1. Why is he Chayav Kares for drinking melted Chametz- the Torah said not to *eat* it!

(k) Answer (Reish Lakish): "A soul [that will eat Chametz]" includes one who drinks. (l) (Beraisa): If one melted the Nivlas Of Tahor using fire, one who drinks it becomes Tamei;

1. If he melted it in the sun, one who drinks it does not became Tamei.

(m) Question: Why does he become Tamei for drinking it - the Torah spoke of one who *eats* it!
(n) Answer (Reish Lakish): "A soul [that will eat the Neveilah of a Tahor bird]" includes one who drinks.
(o) Question: If so, even if he melted it in the sun, he should become Tamei if he drinks it!
(p) Answer: It spoils before it melts.

(a) The Torah had to teach all three cases:

1. If it only taught about Chelev, we could not learn to Chametz, for [Chelev is more stringent and] it was never permitted;

i. Also, we could not learn to Neveilah, for one who eats Chelev is Chayav Kares;

2. If it only taught about Chametz, we could not learn to Chelev, for [Chametz is more stringent because] it is never wholly permitted (like Chelev is, as we will explain);

i. Also, we could not learn to Neveilah, for one who eats Chametz is Chayav Kares;

3. If it only taught about Neveilah, we could not learn to Chametz or Chelev, for Neveilah is more stringent, it is Metamei.

(b) Suggestion: Perhaps one of them can be learned from the other two!
(c) Question: Which could be learned?

1. We cannot learn Neveilah from the others (they are more stringent) - one who eats Chelev or Chametz is Chayav Kares!
2. We cannot learn Chametz from the others - they were never permitted!
3. We cannot learn Chelev from the others - they are never wholly permitted!
4. Question: Where do we find that Chelev is wholly permitted?

i. Suggestion: Chelev of Behemos is offered on the Mizbe'ach.
ii. Rejection: We also offer Neveilah on the Mizbe'ach, i.e. birds killed through Melikah!

5. Answer: Rather, Chelev of Chayos is permitted.
6. Question: Also Neveilah is wholly permitted, Kohanim eat Chatas ha'Of! 7. Answer: Chelev of Chayos is permitted to people;

i. Chatas ha'Of is Kodesh, Hash-m allows Kohanim to eat it, even though it is Neveilah - but we never find that Neveilah is [directly] permitted to people.

(d) (Beraisa): "*Ha*'Teme'im (Sheratzim)" - the extra 'Hei' forbids their brine, Rotev and Kipah.
(e) Question: Why is a verse needed - we should learn from these three (Chelev, Chametz and Neveilah)!
(f) Answer: The verse is needed - one is liable for any of the three only if he ate a k'Zayis, we cannot learn from them to Mechayev for less than a k'Zayis. (But one is liable for k'Adashah (a lentil's worth) of Sheratzim, "Ha'Teme'im" obligates for a k'Adashah of their brine, Rotev and Kipah.)

(g) Question: Why can't the three be learned from Sheratzim?
(h) Answer: Sheratzim are more stringent, a tiny amount (k'Adashah) of them is Metamei (and is Mechayev one who eats it)..
(i) (Beraisa): Regarding the following Isurim, liquids that come from a solid are like the solid:

1. Tevel (untithed produce), Chadash (grain planted after Pesach, it is forbidden until the day the Omer is brought (the second day of the coming Pesach), Hekdesh, Shemitah, and Kil'ayim.

(j) Question: What is the source of this?
(k) Answer #1: We learn from the above four Isurim.
(l) Question: In the four Isurim, the Isurim come automatically;

1. We cannot learn to Isurim which do not come automatically (Rashi - Hekdesh; Tosfos - Kil'ayim)!

(m) Answer #2: That is learned from Bikurim.

1. Question: What is the source that liquids of Bikurim are like solids?
2. Answer (Beraisa - R. Yosi): "Fruit" - fruit is brought for Bikurim, not liquids.
3. Question: What is the source that if grapes were brought and they were made into wine, that the wine is considered Bikurim?
4. Answer: "You will bring" is extra to include this.

(n) Objection: We cannot learn from Bikurim, for they require Kri'ah and Hanachah (reciting verses and placing them on the ground)!
(o) Answer #3: We learn from Terumah.

1. Question: What is the source that liquids of Terumah are like solids?
2. Answer: The Torah equates Terumah to Bikurim.

i. "Terumas Yadecha" refers to Bikurim.

(p) Objection: We cannot learn from Terumah, [because it is more stringent in that a Zar who eats it is Chayavei Misah bi'Ydei Shamayim (if Mezid), or (if he ate b'Shogeg) adds a fifth (when paying for what he ate)!
(q) Answer #4: We learn from [a Tzad ha'Shavah of] Terumah and Bikurim.
(r) Objection: These stringencies apply to both Terumah and Bikurim!
(s) Answer #5: We learn from Terumah (or Bikurim) and one of the above (Rashi - Chametz or Neveilah; Tosfos - Neveilah or Sheratzim).

(a) (Mishnah - R. Eliezer): If Terumah fruit was used to make date honey, apple wine, vinegar (from grapes that never ripen), or other fruit juice:

1. If a Zar drinks it b'Shogeg, he gives Chulin to the Kohen (and it becomes Terumah); he gives as much as he ate plus an added fifth.

(b) R. Yehoshua exempts (from the added fifth; if the Zar did not own the juice, he pays its value).
(c) Question: What do they argue about?
(d) Answer: They argue whether we say Don Minah u'Minah (when we learn from a source, we learn all laws from the source) or Don Minah v'Uki b'Asrah (we learn only the basic law, other laws are according to the matter we learn).

1. R. Eliezer holds, Don Minah u'Minah: i

. Regarding Bikurim, liquids of the seven special species of Eretz Yisrael are like the solid - similarly, liquids of Terumah (which are mid'Rabanan, except for wine and oil) are like the solid.

2. R. Yehoshua holds, Don Minah v'Uki b'Asrah;

i. Regarding Terumah of grapes and olives, which is mid'Oraisa, the liquid is like the solid - we do not apply this to juice of other fruits, for Terumah of other fruits applies only mid'Rabanan.

(e) (Mishnah): The only liquids we may bring for Bikurim are wine and olive oil.

1. This is like R. Yehoshua, who holds Don Minah v'Uki b'Asrah;
2. He learns Bikurim from Terumah.

(f) (Mishnah): The only liquids of Orlah for which one (who eats them) is lashed are wine and olive oil.

1. This is like R. Yehoshua, who holds Don Minah v'Uki b'Asrah;
2. He learns Bikurim from Terumah; he learns Orlah from Bikurim from a Gezeirah Shavah "Pri-Pri."