Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) IS AN HEIR "SOMECH"?

(a) (Mishnah): An heir is Somech.
(b) (Rav Chananyah - Beraisa): An heir does not Somech, he cannot make Temurah.
(c) Contradiction (Rava - Mishnah): An heir is Somech, he brings the Nesachim, he can make Temurah.
(d) Rav Chananyah: Surely, my Beraisa is mistaken, I will correct it to conform to our Mishnah.
(e) Rava: You need not correct it - your Beraisa is like R. Yehudah:

1. (Beraisa): An heir is Somech, he brings the Nesachim, he can make Temurah;
2. R. Yehudah says, he is not Somech, he cannot make Temurah.

(f) Question: What is R. Yehudah's reason?
(g) Answer: Regarding Semichah, he expounds "Korbano" - not his father's Korban;

1. He learns making Hekdesh (through Temurah) from Hakravas Hekdesh (Semichah) - just like an heir does not Somech, he cannot make Temurah.

(h) Chachamim expound "Hamer Yamir" to include an heir (he can make Temurah);

1. They learn Hakravah (Semichah) from making Hekdesh (Temurah) - just like an heir can make Temurah, he can Somech.

(i) Question: How do Chachamim expound "Korbano"?
(j) Answer: They use the three times it says 'Korbano' to teach that Reuven may not Somech on Shimon's Korban, that Semichah does not apply to a Nochri's Korban, and that every partner on a Korban must Somech.
(k) R. Yehudah uses one of the three to exclude an heir, he does not expound that every partner must Somech;

1. Alternatively, he holds that one 'Korbano' excludes Semichah on the Korban of someone else, be it a Yisrael or Nochri, one 'Korbano' excludes an heir (another verse is needed, for sometimes an heir is considered to be just like the deceased), the third require all partners to Somech.

(l) Question: How does R. Yehudah expound "Hamer Yamir"?
(m) Answer: This includes a woman (she can make Temurah):

1. (Beraisa) Question: The entire Parshah of Temurah is written in the masculine - what is the source that it also applies to women?
2. Answer: "Hamer Yamir".

(n) Chachamim use "V'Im" to include women; R. Yehudah does not expound "V'Im".

(a) (Mishnah): All do Semichah, except for a child, lunatic or deaf person, a blind person, a Nochri, a slave, a Shali'ach or a woman.
(b) Semichah is a remnant of the Mitzvah (if it was not done, one fulfilled his obligation.)
(c) One leans on the head with both hands; we slaughter right where Semichah was done, slaughter is done right after Semichah.
(d) (Gemara) Question: We understand why most of these may not Somech:

1. A child, lunatic or deaf person lacks understanding; Nochrim are excluded, for it says "Benei Yisrael" (Tosfos - this also excludes a woman on her own Korban);
2. But why is a blind person excluded?

(e) Answer #1 (Rav Chisda or R. Yitzchak bar Avodimi): We learn from a Gezerah Shavah "Semichah-Semichah" from the Sanhedrin (who are Somech on Par He'elam Davar. Rashi - a blind person (or any other Ba'al Mum) cannot be on the Sanhedrin, they must be unblemished, like Moshe).

1. (Tosfos asks, according to this any Ba'al Mum should be exempt from Semichah! Keren Orah - we only exempt a blind person, since Semichah must be "Lifnei Hash-m", he lacks proper awareness of being Lifnei Hash-m. Sefas Emes - the Gezerah Shavah exempts a blind person, for regarding the Sanhedrin it says "Me'Einei ha'Edah", they cannot be blind; we cannot exempt other blemishes, for our source that they are Posel for the Sanhedrin is from a Hekesh to Moshe, they cannot then teach through a Gezerah Shavah.)

(f) Answer #2 (the other of Rav Chisda and R. Yitzchak bar Avodimi): We learn from a Gezerah Shavah "Semichah-Semichah" from Olas Re'iyah (the Olah one must bring each festival - a blind person is exempt, for we expound 'Yir'eh - Yera'eh', Re'iyah applies to one who can see and be seen in the Mikdash);
(g) Question: Why doesn't the second opinion learn from the Sanhedrin?

(h) Answer: We learn a Korban Yachid from a Korban Yachid, not from a Korban Tzibur;
(i) Question: Why doesn't the first opinion learn from Olas Re'iyah?
(j) Answer: We learn from a place where it explicitly says "Semichah"; Semichah is not said regarding Olas Re'iyah, it is learned from the Parshah of Olas Nedavah.

1. (A reciter of Beraisos): "Va'Yakrev Es ha'Olah (of the Milu'im) va'Ya'aseha ka'Mishpat" - like the law of Olas Nedavah;
2. This teaches that Olas Chovah requires Semichah, like Olas Nedavah.

(k) (Mishnah): A slave, Shali'ach or woman (does not Somech.)
(l) (Beraisa): (Semichah is done with) "Yado" - not his slave's hand; Yado" - not his Shali'ach's hand; Yado" - not his wife's hand.
(m) Question: Why do we need all of these?
(n) Answer: Had the Torah said "Yado" only once, we would have said that it excludes a slave; for a slave is not obligated in (all) the Mitzvos, but a Shali'ach can Somech, for he is (i.e. his actions are) considered like (those of) Ploni (the one who sent him);

1. Had it said "Yado" only twice, we would exclude only a slave and Shali'ach; for they are not considered like Ploni himself, but his wife can Somech on his Korban, she is considered like Ploni himself.

(o) (Mishnah): Semichah is a remnant of the Mitzvah.
(p) (Beraisa) Question: "V'Somach...v'Nirtzah" - atonement
does not come through Semichah, rather, through (Zerikah of) Dam - "Ki ha'Dam Hu ba'Nefesh Yechaper"!
(q) Answer: This teaches that if one treated it like a remnant of a Mitzvah (i.e. omitted it), the Torah considers it as if he did not atone (l'Chatchilah) but did atone (b'Diavad.)
(r) We learn similarly regarding Tenufah:

1. (Beraisa) Question: "Li'Snufah Lechaper" - atonement does not come through Tenufah, rather, through Dam - "Ki ha'Dam..."!
2. Answer: This teaches that if one treated it like a remnant of a Mitzvah, the Torah considers it as if he did not atone but did atone.

(a) (Mishnah): On the head.
(b) (Beraisa): "Yado Al Rosh" - he is not Somech his hands on the (throat side of the) neck; "Yado Al Rosh" - not on the back; "Yado Al Rosh" - not on the chest.
(c) Question: Why do we need all of these?
(d) Answer: If the Torah only taught one exclusion, we would have used it to exclude the neck, for it is not even with the head; but not the back;

1. If it only taught two exclusions, we would exclude the neck and back, but not the chest, for Tenufah is done with it.
2. Therefore, all three exclusions are needed.

(e) Question: May one Somech his hands on the sides (of the head, i.e. the jaws?)
(f) Answer (Beraisa - Aba Bira'ah): "Yado Al Rosh" - not on the sides.
(g) Question (R. Yirmeyah): Is a cloth (Rashi Kesav Yad - wrapped around one's hands) a Chatzizah?
(h) Answer (Beraisa): ...As long as nothing separates between his hands and the Korban. (I.e. a cloth is a Chatzitzah.)
(i) (Mishnah): With both hands.
(j) Question: What is the source of this?
(k) Answer (Reish Lakish): "V'Somach Aharon Es Shtei Yadav" - 'Yadav' is written missing a 'Yud', like 'Yado' yet it explicitly says that he uses both hands!

1. This is a Binyan Av, it teaches that wherever it says "Yado", it refers to both hands unless specified otherwise.

(l) R. Elazar taught this in the Beis Medrash (Sefas Emes - he also thought of this answer), he did not say it in the name of Reish Lakish; Reish Lakish was upset.
(m) Question (Reish Lakish): If you say that "Yado" always refers to both hands, why does it sometimes say "Yadav", e.g. "Yadav Tevi'enah", "Yadav Rav Lo", "Sikel Es Yadav"...?

1. He asked 24 such questions; R. Elazar could not answer. When Reish Lakish ceased to be upset, he himself answered.

(n) Answer (Reish Lakish): "Yado" written regarding Semichah refers to both hands.
(o) Question: Why must it say "Va'Yismoch *Yadav* Alav", it refers to Semichah!
(p) Answer: "Yado" written regarding Semichah on animals refers to both hands.
(q) (Mishnah): We slaughter right where Semichah was done, slaughter is done right after Semichah.
(r) Question: What does this mean? (Rashi Kesav Yad - since slaughter is right after Semichah, obviously we slaughter right where Semichah was done! Rashi - the Mishnah connotes that slaughter is done at the same place on the animal as Semichah, this is obviously wrong!)
(s) Answer: It means, slaughter is done at the same place in the Azarah as Semichah *because* slaughter is right after Semichah.