POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous dafPesachim 88
Pesachim 81 - 95: We are grateful to Mr. Mark Frankel of Queens, N.Y. for
suggesting the idea of "Point by Point Summaries" and sponsoring its initial
two weeks -- Tizkeh l'Mitzvos!
1) THE DATES OF BAVEL
(a) Ula taught that [the reason the Jews were sent to Bavel is so
that] they could eat the dates there and [be free] to study
2) HAR HABAYIS
(b) Ula discovered that dates were very inexpensive in Bavel.
1. He remarked that the residents did not learn commensurate to
the ease of their sustenance.
2. When he discovered that they caused indigestion, he remarked
that despite this the residents still studied Torah.
(a) The Beis HaMikdash is called [by the Pasuk in Yeshayahu] the
House of the G-d of Yaakov.
3) THE INGATHERING OF THE EXILES AND CREATION
(b) Question: Why not call it by reference to Avraham and Yitzhok?
(c) Answer: Avraham called it Har, Yitzhok called it Sadeh, while
Yaakov called it Bayis.
(a) The day of the ingathering will be as great as the day in which
heaven and earth were created.
4) THE ORPHAN AND "BEREIRAH"
(b) The comparison involves Rosh Echad...Yom Yizrael and Yom Echad.
(a) Question: It seems from here that we apply Bereirah.
5) AN "EVED" OF PARTNERS
(b) Answer: Not necessarily, since the Torah allows automatic
appointment of household members (servants and minors).
(c) Question: Why is a wife singled out among the adults whose
agreement is needed for them to be counted in?
(d) Answer: The Bereisa means a wife and those similar to her.
(e) Question: There seems to be a contradiction in our assumptions
regarding a wife's participation with her husband.
1. One Bereisa implies that wives need to agree to be counted
with their husbands.
(f) Answer: The first Bereisa means that their agreement is assumed.
2. One Bereisa implies that unless they are counted with their
husbands unless they indicate otherwise.
(g) Question: But the Bereisa when dealing with the case where the
adult slaughtered on his/her own, the we see that a woman's
participation is *not* assumed?
(h) Answer: There cannot be a stronger statement of non-
participation than slaughtering one's own Korban Pesach.
(a) Question: There is a Bereisa which contradicts our Mishna!?
6) HALF-EVED HALF-FREE
1. Our Mishna says that the servant may not eat either one.
(b) Answer: One speaks where the two owners are at ease with one
another; one where they are particular with one another.
2. The Bereisa says he may choose whichever he wishes.
(a) Question: The Bereisa contradicts our Mishna!?
1. Our Mishna implies that he may make his own Korban.
(b) Answer: One is the Mishna Rishonah; the other the Mishna
2. In the Bereisa he may not eat his own nor his master's.
1. Beis Hillel held that such an Eved works for himself one day
and for his master the next (Mishna Rishonah).
7) MISHNA: THE MASTER INSTRUCTED AN "EVED" TO SCHECHT A KORBAN
2. Beis Shamai pointed out that he would then not be able to be
3. Beis Hillel retracted (Mishna Acharonah).
(a) If the Eved Schechted a kid, he eats a kid; if a lamb, a lamb.
8) A KING AND QUEEN AND THEIR KORBAN PESACH
(b) If he Schechted both, he eats whichever was Schechted first.
(c) If he forgot his instructions, he Schechts both on condition.
(d) If the master forgot his instructions, both animals are burnt,
but they need not bring a Pesach Sheni.
(a) Question: How can the master eat whichever was first?
9) THE "EVED" AND CONDITIONAL SLAUGHTERING
1. This would mean that he could be appointed to two Korbanos.
(b) The Mishna is speaking of a King and Queen.
2. This would imply Bereirah (Rashi).
1. The King told the servants to ask the Queen her preference.
(c) In another incident where they found a (presumably dead) Sheretz
in the royal kitchen and thought that the whole meal was Tamei.
2. The Queen told the servants to ask R. Gamliel.
3. R. Gamliel said that since the monarchs have no preference,
the first Korban is theirs, unlike other people.
1. They asked the King who referred them to the Queen.
2. The Queen referred them to R. Gamliel.
3. R. Gamliel tested the Sheretz and found it alive, and the
meal was Tahor.
4. Such was the chain of command regarding the meals.
(a) Question: What the Eved acquires becomes his master's?!
10) CONFUSION BEFORE OR AFTER "ZERIKAH"
(b) Answer: The shepherd gave him the animal on condition.
(a) Abaye taught: This (that they are Patur) only applies after
Zerikah, but if before Zerikah, they must make Pesach Sheni.
1. The above could be a qualification of the Mishna [the master
forgot what he had instructed his Eved], or;
(b) Question: How can *all* five groups be exempt from Pesach Sheni?
2. This could qualify the Bereisa [five skins of Korbanos
Pesach became mixed and one was found blemished].
3. If the qualification applies to the Mishna (where both
animals were acceptable), then it certainly applies to the
Bereisa (where one animal may have had a blemish).
4. If the qualification applies to the Bereisa, then we might
say that the exemption of the Mishna is unqualified since
Heaven knows which Korban is which.
(c) Answer: We have no other option.
1. We cannot have each of the groups bring a Pesach Sheni [on
account of the doubt] since that would bring four Hulin
animals into the Azarah!
(d) Question: Let each group bring a conditional offering (either
Pesach Sheni or Shelamim)!?
2. We cannot have them combine to bring one Pesach Sheni since
it would be eaten by those who are not appointed to it!
(e) Answer: That is impossible, since the Kohanim could not eat from
those Shelamim which are, potentially, Korbanos Pesach.