ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf MENACHOS 48
(a) If two lambs were Shechted on four loaves, the Beraisa rules that one takes two of the loaves and waves them together with the lambs. The remaining two loaves - can be eaten as Chulin, once they have been redeemed.
(b) Rav Chisda commented on this that the author cannot be Rebbi, because according to Rebbi, since two of the loaves become Kadosh Kedushas ha'Guf, there is a problem where to redeem them (i.e. if one redeems them ...
1. ... outside the Azarah - the two un-redeemed loaves will be 'Pasul be'Yotzei' (due to the Pasuk in Emor "Lifnei Hash-m"). Consequently, seeing as we do not know which loaves are which, none of them may be taken out of the Azarah.
2. ... inside the Azarah - the two redeemed loaves may not be taken inside the Azarah, since this constitutes 'Chulin la'Azarah'.
(c) This problem does not exist, according to Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon - who holds that until the Kohen performs the Zerikah, the loaves are only Kedushas Damim, and can therefore be taken outside the Azarah.
(a) Rav Chisda solves the problem. In his opinion, the author could be Rebbi, and the two loaves must be redeemed in the Azarah. And he answers the Kashya of 'Chulin ba'Azarah' - by pointing out that from the time that they were redeemed and became Chulin, no-one actually brought them into the Azarah (since they were there already).
(b) When Ravina queried this from the Beraisa 'Ein Podin Ela ba'Chutz', Rav Ashi answered - that this Beraisa for sure, goes according to Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon.
(c) If one Shechted a Todah on eighty loaves (instead of forty) Chizkiyah rules that forty of them are Kadosh. Rebbi Yochanan holds - that they all eighty remain Chulin.
(d) The problem from the current Beraisa on Rebbi Yochanan is - that the Tana clearly holds that is such a case, the number that is fit to become Kadosh becomes Kadosh.
(a) To answer the Kashya, we cite Rebbi Zeira, who qualifies the Machlokes between Chizkiyah and Rebbi Yochanan. In his opinion, even Rebbi Yochanan will agree that the forty loaves are Kadosh - if the owner declares that forty out of the eighty are Kadosh.
(b) Similarly, in order to accommodate Rebbi Yochanan, we will establish the case of 'Sh'nei Kevasim al Arba Chalos' - when they specifically declared that two out of the four loaves should be Kadosh.
(a) Rebbi Chanina Tirsa cited a Beraisa which rules that if four lambs were Shechted on two loaves, the Kohanim first take two of the lambs and sprinkle their blood she'Lo li'Sheman - then they take the two remaining lambs and sprinkle their blood li'Shemo.
(b) They cannot first Shecht the two lambs li'Sheman (or all four lambs li'Sheman) - because then they will lose the last two lambs completely (which were rejected after the Shechitah, as we explained earlier).
(c) Rebbi Yochanan objected to that however - on the grounds we cannot permit someone to sin (by performing an Avodah sh'Lo li'Shemah) in order to gain.
(d) This objection is based on a Mishnah in Zevachim. The Chachamim rule there, in a case where the limbs of a Chatas which became mixed up with limbs of an Olah - that all the limbs must be taken to the Beis ha'Sereifah and burned.
(a) Rebbi Yochanan tries to prove from the Mishnah in Zevachim - from the fact that we do not permit the Kohanim to bring them all on the Mizbe'ach, in order not to lose the Olah.
(b) We refute Rebbi Yochanan's proof however - by confining the Mishnah in Zevachim to where one sins with regard to one thing (the Chatas), in order to gain something else (the Olah), whereas in the case of the Beraisa, the Tana is talking about sinning with regard to Kivsei Atzeres in order to gain Kivsei Atzeres.
(a) If Kivsei Atzeres were Shechted she'Lo li'Sheman, or before or after the due time, the Beraisa permits the blood to be sprinkled and the Basar to be eaten. The Tana rules there that ...
1. ... in the first case, where Shavu'os fell on Shabbos, and, after the Kevasim were Shechted she'Lo li'Sheman, the Kohen sprinked the blood - the Korban is Kasher, and the Eimurin are burned on Motza'ei Shabbos.
2. ... one is not permitted to sprinkle the blood on Shabbos Lechatchilah.
(b) We do not permit him to sin (in spite of the fact that both the sin and the gain concern Kivsei Atzeres) - because we only permit sinning on Shabbos in order to gain on Shabbos, but not in order to gain on a weekday.
(a) The Mishnah in Terumos discusses the case where a barrel of Terumah wine breaks in the upper wine-press (the tub) causing the wine to drip into the pit below. The problem with that is - that the Tana is speaking about a case where there is Tamei Chulin in the pit (and once the Terumah wine becomes Tamei, there is nothing that can be done about it).
(b) Both Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua agree that if it is possible to save even one Revi'is of Terumah wine, then one should - despite the fact that whilst he goes to search for vessels to save it, some of the Terumah wine will inevitably fall into the pit, rendering all the wine Asur (something which Rebbi Yehoshua is concerned about, as we shall now see).
(c) If it is not possible to save a Revi'is, then according to Rebbi Eliezer, he must rather allow the Tahor wine to drip into the pit than catch it in Tamei vessels; whereas Rebbi Yehoshua holds - that he may catch it in Tamei vessels (in order to save the Chulin wine)
(d) This is not a proof that one may even sin in one thing (to be Metamei the Terumah) in order to save something else (the Chulin) - because this case is different, seeing as the Terumah wine is going to become Tamei anyway.
(a) When Rav Yitzchak arrived from Eretz Yisrael, he cited a Beraisa which rules that Kivsei Atzeres that one Shechted she'Lo ke'Mitzvasan - are Pasul, and that after Ibur Tzurah, they must be burned.
(b) By 'she'Lo ke'Mitzvasan', the Tana means she'Lo li'Sheman. We know that he does not mean that they were already in their second year (whereas Kevasim are supposed to be in their first) - because then, he ought to have said 'Kivsei Atzeres (not 'she'Shachtan', but) she'Hevi'an she'Lo ke'Mitzvasan'.
(c) These Kevasim require Ibur Tzurah - because the P'sul is not a P'sul she'be'Gufo (like Pigul, Nosar and Tamei). If it were, it would be burned immediately.
(d) Rav Nachman commented on Rav Yitzchak's use of the term 'Pesulin' - that the source for the Beraisa's ruling must be Chata'os (which, unlike most other Korbanos) are Pasul she'Lo li'Sheman, as we learned in Zevachim)
(a) According to the way we interpreted 'she'Lo ke'Mitzvasan' (she'Lo li'Sheman), Rav Yitzchak derives his ruling from the Pasuk in Emor "Va'asisem Se'ir Izim Echad le'Chatas u'Shenei Chevasim b'nei Shanah le'Zevach Shelamim". Had he meant lambs in their second year - he would have derived it from the Mishnah in Temurah, which teaches us that a Chatas after its time has expired, is one of the five Chata'os that must die.
(b) Tana de'Bei Levi rules that Kivsei Atzeres that one Shechted she'Lo ke'Mitzvasan - are Kasher ...
(c) ... on which Rav Nachman commented - that Tana de'Bei Levi must learn Shalmei Chovah from Shalmei Nedavah.
(a) The source for Shalmei Nedavah is another Beraisa learned by Levi. Tani Levi rules that '(Sha'ar) Shalmei Nazir she'Shachtan she'Lo ke'Mitzvasan' - can be eaten for a day and a night (like a Shalmei Nazir, even though a regular Shelamim can be eaten for two days), and that they require neither loaves not the Zero'a Besheilah (the cooked foreleg) to be given to the Kohen ...
(b) ... because they neither permit the Nazir to drink wine, nor does it render the owner Yotze his obligation.
(c) Tana de'Bei Levi disagrees with Rav Yitzchak's Beraisa (which learns Shalmei Chovah from the Hekesh to Chatas) - because he prefers to learn Shalmei Chovah from Shalmei Reshus.
(a) The Beraisa rules that ...
1. ... an Asham (of a Nazir Tamei and of a Metzora), which require a lamb (in its first year), but are brought as rams (in its second), or vice-versa (such as an Asham Gezeilos or Me'ilos) - are Pasul, and require Ibur Tzurah and Sereifah.
2. ... an Olas Nazir, Yoledes or Metzora that are meant to be lambs, but are brought as rams - are Kasher.
(b) The basis for ...
1. ... the former ruling (regarding Asham) is - Chatas, from which we learn Asham (in most regards).
2. ... the latter ruling (regarding Olah) is - Olas Nedavah (where someone who brings bigger or smaller animal than he promised to bring, is Yotze his obligation).
(c) The one Halachah regarding Asham that the Tana precludes from the Limud from Chatas is - an Asham she'Lo li'Shemo, which, unlike Chatas, is Kasher.
(d) This Beraisa poses a Kashya on Rav Yitzchak - inasmuch as it learns Olas Chovah from Olas Nedavah, even though one has the alternative of learning it from Chatas (together with which Olas Nazir and Metzora are written).
(e) Rav Yitzchak will refute the Kashya - by establishing the author of the Beraisa as Tana de'Bei Levi (with whose version he disagrees).
(a) In another Beraisa cited by Levi, which discusses Asham Nazir and Asham Metzora, the Tana rules that in a case when they were Shechted ...
1. ... she'Lo li'Sheman - they are Kasher, only the owner has not fulfilled his obligation.
2. ... in their second year - they are Pasul.
(b) The Tana incorporates in the latter ruling, an Asham Nazir or Metzora that was Shechted 'Mechusar Z'man be'Ba'alim' - meaning before the seven days of counting required by a Nazir Tamei (who is the one to bring an Asham).
(c) The problem this Beraisa creates for Levi, who learns Chovah from Nedavah (see Shitah Mekubetzes 3) is - why we do not then learn Asham from Shelamim (with regard to an Asham in its second year) rather than from Chatas.
(d) And we answer that it is one to learn Shelamim from Shelamim, but quite another to learn Asham from Shelamim. To explain why we do not at least learn Asham Nazir Asham Metzora from Asham Gezeilos and Me'ilos which are brought Lechatchilah in their second year, Rav Shimi bar Ashi says - that we only learn something which is Pasul (e.g. she'Lo li'Shemo) from something which is Pasul; but not from something which is Kasher.
(a) If Kodshim are taken outside the Azarah following the Shechitah, and then brought on the Mizbe'ach, the Beraisa rules - 'Lo Yerdu'.
(b) The source the Tana gives for this - is a Korban that is brought on a Bamah which is always Yotze, since a Bamah has no curtains, yet it is Kasher.
(c) Bearing in mind that we decline to learn something which is Pasul from something which is Kasher (as we just explained) - we have to admit that Bamah is not the real source, but ...
(d) ... the Pasuk in Tzav "Zos Toras ha'Olah", from which we learn, regarding all Olos 'Im Alu Lo Yerdu'.