REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafYoma 40
YOMA 36-40 have anonymously sponsored towards a REFU'AH SHELEMAH to Shmuel
Yakov ben Ayala Hinda, Ilana Golda bas Chana and Klarees Marcia bas Mammie
(a) The Beraisa says 'Mitzvah Lehagril u'Lehisvados'; neither is crucial.
What does the Viduy refer to?
(b) What does Rebbi Shimon say?
(c) This Beraisa presents the same Kashya on Rebbi Yanai as we asked from
the previous Beraisa - according to the second Lashon. What is the problem
with amending the Lashon from 'Lehagril' to 'Lehani'ach' (like we answered
there)? Why would that leave us with a Kashya on Rebbi Shimon?
(d) To answer this Kashya, we explain the Beraisa by placing Rebbi Shimon in
What does the Tana Kama mean by Lo Higril, and what is Rebbi
(a) What is the meaning of ...
1 ... 'Par Me'akev es ha'Sair'? Is this Beraisa speaking by Avodos inside
the Kodshim or by those in the Heichal?
(b) Why can the latter not refer to the sprinkling of the blood of the bull
in the Heichal (i.e. towards the Paroches), before that of the goat in the
Kodesh Kodshim (i.e. towards the area between the poles of the Aron)?
2. ... 've'Sa'ir Ein Me'akev es ha'Par'?
(c) How will establishing the case when he sprinkled the blood of the bull
before drawing lots for the goat, pose a Kashya on the second Lashon of the
Machlokes between Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Yanai?
(a) So we try to establish the Beraisa when he sprinkles the blood of the
*bull* in the Heichal (i.e. on the Mizbe'ach) before sprinkling the blood of
the *goat* in the Heichal (towards the Paroches), and the author of the
Beraisa will be Rebbi Yehudah.
What does the blood of the bull mean?
(b) How would this solve our problem?
(c) Why is this explanation unacceptable?
(a) The Gemara finally explains the Beraisa in one of two ways. Either we
establish it in one of the previous cases - like Rebbi Shimon.
Answers to questions
What is the
case? What does Rebbi Shimon say?
(b) Or we establish it even like Rebbi Yehudah, who holds that the Goral is
How do we now dispense with the Kashya that we asked in 2c.)?
(a) "Yo'omad Chai Lifnei Hashem Lechaper Alav" (Acharei-Mos). According to
Rebbi Yehudah, the Sa'ir la'Azaz'el had to remain alive until the blood of
the Sa'ir la'Hashem had been sprinkled.
For how long did it have to remain
alive - according to Rebbi Shimon?
(b) The source of their Machlokes lies in the word "Lechaper".
each one explain it?
(c) Rebbi Yehudah derives his opinion from the juxtaposition of the phrases
"ve'Chilah mi'Kaper es ha'Kodesh ... ve'Hikriv es ha'Sa'ir he'Chai".
does Rebbi Shimon derive *his* opinion from the words "Lechaper Alav"?
(a) Rebbi Akiva's Talmidim asked him whether the lots needed to be re-drawn
- should the Sa'ir la'Hashem come out in his left hand.
What was his
(b) Why is this a Kashya on what we learned above - that the lots are a
crucial part of the Avodah?
(c) How do we amend the She'eilah?
(a) What does the Beraisa initially learn from the word "ve'ha'Sa'ir, Asher
*Alah* Alav ha'Goral la'Hashem ... "?
(b) Why can we not explain it to mean that Hagralah is (just) a Mitzvah?
(c) How does Rava finally explain the Beraisa 'Keyvan she'Alah, Shuv Eino
Tzarich'? What does "Alah" come to preclude?
(a) What does the Tana of the Beraisa learn from "ve'Asahu Chatas"?
Answers to questions
(b) What Kal va'Chomer would we otherwise have made from other Korbanos?
(c) What would be the significance of 'Kidesh Hashem' with regard to the two
(d) How do we finally prove conclusively from here that even Rebbi Yehudah
holds that the Goral is crucial? Who says that the author of this Beraisa is