QUESTION: Rav and Levi argue whether a Zar (non-Kohen) who performs the
Avodah of Terumas ha'Deshen is Chayav Misah or not. The Gemara adduces proof
for Rav that a Zar is *not* Chayav Misah for performing the Terumas
ha'Deshen, but is Chayav for performing only one of four Avodos (Zerikah,
Haktarah, Nisuch Yayin, or Nisuch Mayim). The Beraisa says that a Zar is
Chayav for Zerikas Dam, Haza'ah of Chatas ha'Of, Mitzuy or Haktarah of Olas
ha'Of, and Nisuch Yayin or Mayim.
The Gemara asserts that since the Beraisa omits Terumas ha'Deshen, it must
be that a Zar is not Chayav Misah for performing the Terumas ha'Deshen, like
the opinion of Rav.
However, the Beraisa also omits Haktarah of all other Korbanos other than
Olas ha'Of, but Rav certainly agrees that a Zar who performs the Haktarah
for *any* Korban is Chayav Misah! How, then, can the Gemara prove anything
from the omissions of the Beraisa?
ANSWERS:
(a) TOSFOS (DH v'ha'Maktir) cites a Tosefta which switches the order and
says the word "ha'Maktir" *after* Olas ha'Of. That is, it refers to the
Haktarah of *any* type of Korban.
(b) TOSFOS says that according to the Girsa of our Gemara, perhaps the
Beraisa mentions only Haktarah of Olas ha'Of to teach a Chidush. It goes
without saying that a Zar is Chayav Misah if he does the Haktarah for other
Korbanos. The Beraisa is teaching that he is even Chayav Misah for doing the
Haktarah of an Olas ha'Of, even though other bird-offerings (such as a
Chatas ha'Of) have no Haktarah, and we might have thought that therefore one
is not Chayav for the Haktarah of any type of bird-offering.
(c) The CHAFETZ CHAIM in Likutei Halachos answers that "ha'Maktir" in the
Beraisa refers to any type of Haktarah. The Beraisa mentions specifically
Olas ha'Of because it wants to exclude Haktarah of a Chatas ha'Of, so that
one not think that there is a Chiyuv Misah for doing the Haktarah of a
Chatas ha'Of. A Zar is certainly not Chayav Misah for offering a Chatas
ha'Of on the Mizbe'ach, since it is a Korban that is supposed to be eaten
and *not* offered on the Mizbe'ach.
QUESTION: Rav and Levi argue whether a Zar who performs the Avodah of
Terumas ha'Deshen is Chayav Misah or not. Rav exempts a Zar because the
Terumas ha'Deshen is an "Avodas Siluk," a form of Avodah which involves
removing something (the ashes) from someplace (the outer Mizbe'ach), and
this form of Avodah is excluded by the verse which Rav expounds. The Gemara
adds that both Rav and Levi agree that a Zar is not Chayav Misah for an
Avodas Siluk performed in the *Heichal*. What Avodas Siluk is there in the
Heichal?
RASHI (DH Avodas Siluk b'Heichal) says that forms of Avodas Siluk in the
Heichal for which a Zar is not Chayav Misah are Dishun Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi
(cleaning off the inner Mizbe'ach) and Dishun ha'Menorah. Rashi adds that
Dishun ha'Menorah is an Avodah Tamah, an Avodah which is not followed by
another Avodah with the same item, and therefore had it not been an Avodas
Siluk a Zar would have been Chayav Misah.
Why is Dishun ha'Menorah considered an Avodah Tamah? It is followed
eventually by the lighting of the lamps of the Menorah! In fact, elsewhere
Rashi himself says that it is *not* an Avodah Tamah for this reason
(Sanhedrin 83a, DH Lo Mishum Zarus)!
Similarly, the RAMBAM (Hilchos Bi'as ha'Mikdash 9:5) writes that cleaning
out the Menorah and preparing the candles to be kindled is not an Avodah
Tamah. However, he writes (9:8) that a Zar is not Chayav Misah for doing the
Dishun ha'Menorah because it is an Avodas Siluk. Why does he not simply
write that the reason the Zar is exempt is because the Dishun ha'Menorah is
not an Avodas Tamah, as he himself writes earlier?
ANSWER: The BRISKER RAV (beginning of Hilchos Temidin u'Musafin) answers
that there are two different obligations that necessitate the Dishun
ha'Menorah. The first obligation is to remove the ashes which are to be
taken out and placed next to the outer Mizbe'ach. The removal of the ashes,
from this perspective, is an Avodah Tamah, because nothing else is done with
the ashes that are removed. The reason why a Zar is exempt, then, must be
because it is an Avodas Siluk.
The second reason for the obligation of Dishun ha'Menorah is that the
Menorah must be cleaned out and prepared so that it can be lit anew. That
obligation cannot be an Avodas Siluk, because the point of cleaning out the
Menorah is not in order to remove something, but in order to be able to
light the Menorah. A Zar is exempt, though, because this Avodah is not an
Avodah Tamah, because it is done in preparation for kindling the Menorah.
Since there are two obligations underlying the Avodah of Dishun ha'Menorah,
both reasons for the exemption of a Zar are necessary.