ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafShabbos 71
(a) Someone who reaped and then ground first be'Shigegas Shabbos, and then
he did vice-versa, becoming aware first of the Ketzirah of Shigegas
1. ... according to Rava, he will be Chayav *two* Chata'os, one for both of
the Ketziros, and the Techinah which accompanied the first Ketzirah, and
one for the second Techinah, because he does not hold of Gereirah
(b) The Chatas that someone brings for eating one Kezayis of Chelev,
automatically covers all Kezeisim of Chelev that he ate within the same
2. ... according to Abaye, he only needs to bring *one* Chatas, because he
holds of Gereirah li'Gereirah.
(c) Rava originally thought that the third Kezayis, which was eaten in the
same Ha'alamah as the second Kezayis, but not as the first, will not
combine with the first (due to Gereirah), because initially, he did not
hold of Gereirah at all.
(d) Rava changed his mind when he heard from Abaye that Gereirah is
(a) Rebbi Zeira was not certain what the Din would be if someone reaped and
ground one half a ki'Gerogeres be'Shigegas Shabbos ve'Zadon Melachos, and
another half ki'Gerogeres be'Zadon Shabbos ve'Shigegas Melachos, whether he
is Chayav to bring a Chatas or not.
Abaye and Rava took for granted that Shigegas Shabbos and Shigegas Melachos
combine as if they were one Ha'alamah; Rebbi Zeira is not so sure.
(b) Someone who eats within one Ha'alamah ...
1. ... a Kezayis of Chelev, one of blood, one of Nosar and one of Pigul is
Chayav four Chata'os.
(c) As far as two Kezeisim is concerned, it makes no difference whether he
eats them within a Kedei Achilas P'ras or not.
2. ... two Kezeisim of Chelev, is Chayav only one Chatas.
(d) Somebody who takes longer than a Kedei Achilas P'ras to eat two
*half*-Kezeisim of Chelev, is Patur from a Chatas.
(a) The Mishnah, which obligates someone who eats two half-Kezeisim of
Chelev within a Kedei Achilas P'ras, is speaking about two different kinds
of dishes, and goes according to Rebbi Yehoshua, who holds that, when it
comes to eating two Kezeisim of Chelev eaten in one Ha'alamah, the two
dishes divide, and are considered like two La'avin, so he is Chayav two
In that case, we may have thought that in the case of two half Kezeisim
too, the dishes should divide, and exempt him from bringing a Korban. The
Chidush of the Mishnah is that Rebbi Yehoshua holds dishes divide only
le'Hachmir, but not le'Hakel.
(b) In any event, we see from Rebbi Yehoshua that it does not follow that
whatever divides the Chata'os (by two *whole* Kezeisim) cannot combine
(i.e. the equivalent case by two *half*-Kezeisim)? So how can Rav Asi
decide that the two are interdependent?
(c) The Gemara answers that Rebbi Yehoshua should not be quoted on the
Reisha of the Mishnah, because there, the author of the Mishnah cannot be
Rebbi Yehoshua, since according to him, he would indeed be Patur if he ate
two half-Kezeisim of different dishes of Chelev.
Rav Asi learnt that when we establish the Mishnah like Rebbi Yehoshua, it
is not on the case of 'mi'Min Echad (of two half-Kezeisim) Chayav' but on
that of 'mi'Sh'nei Minin, Patur'.
The Chidush, he explains, is according to Rebbi Yeshoshua, because two
kinds means two dishes, because, since 'two dishes' divides, it cannot
combine, as we just explained.
(d) The Chidush of the Reisha, which declares him Chayav if he eats two
different dishes of two half-Kezeisim of Chelev, speaks when he realized
after eating one of the half-Kezeisim, that he had sinned. The author of
the Mishnah is Rabban Gamliel, who holds that Yedi'ah only divides *full*
Shiurim, but not *half*-Shiurim.
(a) "Al Chataso ve'Hevi" implies - according to Rebbi Yochanan - that one
must bring a separate Chatas for each sin.
(b) "me'Chataso ve'Nislach Lo" implies - according to Resh Lakish - that
even though he only brought a Chatas for a part of his sin, he is forgiven
for the whole sin.
(c) Resh Lakish concedes that if he becomes aware that he sinned only after
he had actually *brought* his Chatas, that he is Chayav two Chata'os; he
learns it from "Al Chataso ve'Hevi".
(d) And Rebbi Yochanan concedes that, if he became aware of eating one
Kezayis, after having eaten one a half Kezeisim, after which he ate another
half-Kezayis within the Ha'alamah of the first *half*, that he only needs
to bring one Chatas. Why is that?
Because a half-Kezayis is not Chashuv, and does not require a Yedi'ah for
its atonement. Consequently, the Yedi'ah that he had after the first
Kezayis covers the half-Kezayis too, in which case it is also Gorer the
second half-Kezayis together with it. He learns this from "me'Chataso
(a) Hafrashah Mechalekes means that, even if a Yedi'ah of one Kezayis (in
between two Kezeisim that one ate be'He'elam Echad) does *not* divide
between them to obligate a second Chatas, Hafrashah - separating his Chatas
(b) According to the second side of the Sha'aleh, even Rebbi Yochanan, who
holds Hafrashah divides, will agree with Resh Lakish that Yedi'ah does
*not*. Resh Lakish maintains that Hafrashah does divide, though even he
will agree that Kaparah (actually having brought the Chatas will most
certainly divide - and that is the one case with which everyone agrees.
(c) According to the first side of the Sha'aleh, Abaye and Rava, who said
earlier that Yedi'ah does not divide, hold like Resh Lakish; according to
the second side, it is unanimously agreed that Yedi'ah does not divide.
(a) The third side to the Sha'aleh is that Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish
argue in both cases: Rebbi Yochanan holds that both Yedi'ah and Hafrashah
divide, whereas in the opinion of Resh Lakish, neither do.
(b) The Gemara tries to prove the accuracy of the third side, from the
earlier statement of the Gemara. If Resh Lakish would agree that Hafrashah
divides, then why did it establish the Pasuk of "Al Chataso ve'Hevi"
(according to him) specifically by after *Kaparah*, and not - even by after
*Hafrashah*? And if Rebbi Yochanan would agree that Yedi'ah does not
divide, then why did the Gemara establish the Pasuk of "me'Chataso
ve'Nislach Lo" (according to him) by someone who ate one and a half
Kezeisim of Chelev etc.? It should have established it by after Yedi'ah?
This suggests seems to prove the third side of the Sha'aleh - that the
dispute between Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish extends to both Yedi'ah and
(c) The Gemara rejects this proof however, on the grounds that the Gemara
earlier was not certain of the extent of their Machlokes, so it conceded
both to Rebbi Yochanan and to Resh Lakish, only what it knows for sure (the
minimum Chidush): namely, that Resh Lakish agrees that Kaparah divides, and
Rebbi Yochanan in the case of someone who ate one and a half Kezeisim,
remembered the one and then ate another half, within the Ha'alamah (and
within a Kedei Achilas P'ras) of the first.