Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) LASHES FOR EATING "KODSHIM" IN A FORBIDDEN WAY

(a) Answer #2: Rather, we expound a different verse - "Va'Haveisem Shamah Oloseichem v'Zivcheichem...Va'Achaltem Sham";

1. Question: Why does the Torah list all of them again - it could have said 'Lo Suchal l'Achlam'!
2. Answer: They are repeated to forbid each by a Lav. (Tosfos - indeed, if a Zar eats Olah before Zerikah outside the wall, he is lashed five times; Rashi - it suffices to learn lashes for eating before Zerikah (or Bikurim before Kri'ah); lashes for eating Kodshim outside are from "U'Vasar ba'Sadeh Treifah Lo Socheilu" (below)).

(b) (Rava): If a Zar eats Olah before Zerikah outside the wall of Yerushalayim, according to R. Shimon he is lashed five times.
(c) Question: He should also be lashed for "V'Zar Lo Yochal Ki Kodesh Hem"!
(d) Answer: That only applies to Kodshim permitted to a Kohen, Olah is forbidden even to Kohanim.
(e) Question: He should also be lashed for "U'Vasar ba'Sadeh Treifah Lo Socheilu" - once meat leaves its (allowed) border, it is forbidden!
(f) Answer: That only applies to meat permitted in its boundary, Olah is forbidden everywhere.
(g) Question: He should also be lashed on account of R. Eliezer's law!

1. (R. Eliezer): "Lo Yochal Ki Kodesh Hem" - one is lashed for eating any Pasul Kodshim.

2. Answer: This is only if it was permitted before it became Pasul - here, it was always forbidden.

(h) Question: He should be lashed on account of R. Eliezer's other law!

1. (Beraisa - R. Eliezer): Wherever it says 'Kalil Tihyeh (it will be entirely burned)', there is a Lav not to eat it.

(i) Answer: Rava only teaches about the lashes R. Shimon expounded from "Lo Suchal Le'chol bi'Sh'arecha...".
(j) Version #1 (Rav Gidal): If a Kohen eats Chatas or Asham before Zerikah, he is lashed.
(k) Question: What is the reason?
(l) Answer: "V'Achlu Osam Asher Kupar Bahem" - they may eat only after Kaparah;

1. A Lav inferred from an Aseh is like a Lav, one is lashed for it.

(m) Objection (Rava): "V'Chol Behemah Mafreses Parsah...Osah Tochelu" - you may not eat other animals;

1. If one is lashed for a Lav inferred from an Ase, why must it say "Es Zeh Lo Sochlu"?

(n) Version #2 (Rav Gidal): If a Zar eats Chatas or Asham before Zerikah, he is exempt.
(o) Question: What is the reason?
(p) Answer: "V'Zar Lo Yochal Ki Kodesh Hem" only applies when (the beginning of the verse) "V'Achlu Osam Asher Kupar Bahem" applies, i.e. after Zerikah, when Kohanim may eat them.

(a) Version #1 (R. Elazar): Hanachah is Me'akev Bikurim, Kri'ah is not Me'akev.
(b) Contradiction: But R. Elazar said, if Reuven separated Bikurim before Sukos, and did not bring them before Sukos, he must let them rot (for we do not do Kri'ah after Sukos)!
(c) Answer: He cannot bring them after Sukos on account of R. Zeira's law.
(d) Question: But R. Zeira taught, if a Minchah is small enough that it could be kneaded, even it was not kneaded, it is valid;

1. If it is too big (60 Esronim, there is not enough oil or room in the vessel to knead it), it is invalid because it was not kneaded (nor even possible to knead it)! (Here also, since he cannot do Kri'ah, this disqualifies them!)

(e) Version #2 - Rav Acha bar Yakov - (Rav Asi citing R. Yochanan): Hanachah is Me'akev Bikurim, Kri'ah is not Me'akev.
(f) Contradiction - Question (Rav Asi): When are Bikurim permitted to Kohanim?

1. Answer (R. Yochanan): Bikurim for which Kri'ah can be done are permitted after Kri'ah, Bikurim for which Kri'ah cannot be done are permitted after they enter the Azarah.
2. This implies that Kri'ah is Me'akev, Hanachah is not Me'akev!

(g) Resolution - part 1: He said that Kri'ah is Me'akev according to R. Shimon, he said that it is not Me'akev according to Chachamim.
(h) Resolution - part 2: He said that Hanachah is Me'akev according to R. Yehudah, he said that it is not Me'akev according to Chachamim.

1. (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): "V'Hinachto" - this refers to Tenufah (waving).
2. Question: Perhaps it really refers to Hanachah!
3. Rejection: "V'Hinicho" already teaches about Hanachah, "V'Hinachto" must refer to Tenufah.

(i) Question: Who is the Tana that argues with R. Yehudah?
(j) Answer: It is R. Eliezer ben Yakov.

1. (Beraisa - R. Eliezer ben Yakov): "V'Lakach ha'Kohen ha'Tene mi'Yadecha" - this teaches that Bikurim require Tenufah.
2. Question: What is his reason? 3. Answer: He learns a Gezerah Shavah "Yad-Yad" between Bikurim and Shelamim (regarding which it says "Yadav Tevi'enu");

i. Just as Bikurim require Tenufah by the Kohen, also Shelamim;
ii. Just as Shelamim require Tenufah by the owner, also Bikurim.
iii. Question: How do both do Tenufah (at the same time)?
iv. Answer: The Kohen puts his hands under the owner's, and they wave it together.