Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) IF "PESULIM" SLAUGHTERED (cont.)

(a) If any of these Pesulim was Mekabel the blood (with intention) Chutz li'Zmano or Chutz li'Mkomo (since his Kabalah is always invalid, his intent does not Posel the Korban), if Dam ha'Nefesh is still coming out, a Kosher Kohen should Mekabel it (to Zorek it);
(b) If Kabalah was done properly (by a Kosher Kohen with the right hand in a Kli Shares), then the blood was given to a Pasul (or transferred to the left hand or put into a Chulin vessel), it should be returned to a Kosher Kohen (or the right hand or to a Kli Shares);
(c) If (after a proper Kabalah) the blood fell to the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher;
(d) If the blood was put on the wrong part of the Mizbe'ach, i.e. on the ramp, or not over the Yesod, or if blood that should be put above (or on the inner Mizbe'ach) was put below (or on the outer Mizbe'ach), or vice-versa:

1. If Dam ha'Nefesh is still coming out, a Kosher Kohen should Mekabel it.

(e) (Gemara) Inference: If a Pasul slaughtered, it is Kosher b'Diavad - l'Chatchilah, it is forbidden.
(f) Contradiction (Beraisa): "V'Shochat" - a Zar may slaughter;

1. A Zar, woman, slave or Tamei may slaughter even Kodshei Kodoshim.
2. Suggestion: Perhaps a Kohen must slaughter!

i. We learn from "V'Ata u'Vanecha...l'Chol Davar ha'Mizbe'ach", this applies even to slaughter.

3. Rejection: "V'Shochat...V'Hikrivu (Benei Aharon)" - from Kabalah and onwards, Kohanim must do the Avodah;

i. This teaches that anyone may slaughter.

(g) Answer: Really, Pesulim may slaughter l'Chatchilah;

1. The Mishnah permitted this b'Diavad because one of the Pesulim, a Tamei, may not slaughter l'Chatchilah, lest he touch the meat.

(h) Inference: The Mishnah does permit the slaughter of a Tamei b'Diavad.
(i) Version #1 Contradiction (Beraisa): "V'Somach...v'Shochat" - just as only a Tahor can Somech, only a Tahor can slaughter.
(j) Answer: That is only mid'Rabanan, mid'Oraisa a Tamei may slaughter.
(k) Question: Presumably, Semichah requires a Tahor on account of "Lifne Hash-m" (in the Mikdash);

1. (Tosfos - we cite Vayikra 1:3, written just before Semichah; Rashi - we cite Vayikra 1:5, which teaches that slaughter must be in the Mikdash; slaughter must be (able to be done) Tekef (immediately) after Semichah. Only a Tahor may be in the Mikdash.)
2. Likewise, only a Tahor may (be in the Mikdash to) slaughter!

(l) Answer: A Tamei may stand outside the Mikdash and slaughter (a Korban in the Mikdash) with a long knife.
(m) Question: Likewise, a Tamei may stand outside the Mikdash and stick his hands in to Somech!
(n) Answer: The Tana holds that Bi'ah b'Miktzas (partial entering) is like full Bi'ah (into the Mikdash, a Tamei may not do this).
(o) Version #2 - Rav Chisda - (Beraisa): "V'Samach...v'Shochat" - just as only a Tahor can slaughter, only a Tahor can Somech.
(p) Question: A Tahor must slaughter because it says "Lifne Hash-m" - the same applies to Semichah (Tosfos - since it also says "Lifne Hash-m" regarding Semichah; Rashi - since slaughter must be Tekef after Semichah)!

(q) Answer: A Tamei may stand outside and stick his hands in to Somech.
(r) Question: Likewise, a Tamei may stand outside and slaughter with a long knife!
(s) Answer: The Tana is Shimon ha'Temani:

1. (Beraisa): "V'Shochat Es Ben ha'Bakar Lifne Hash-m" - the Korban must be Lifne Hash-m, the slaughterer need not be;
2. Shimon ha'Temani says, we read this as if it said 'Shochet...Lifne Hash-m', the slaughterer's hands must be closer to the Heichal than the animal.

(a) (Ula): If a Tamei entered his hands into the Mikdash, he is lashed - "B'Chol Kodesh Lo Siga (v'El ha'Mikdash Lo Savo)" - the verse equates touching and entering:

1. Just as partial touching is like full touching, Bi'ah b'Miktzas (partial entry) is like full Bi'ah.

(b) Question (R. Oshaya - Beraisa):If the eighth day of Taharah of a Metzora fell on Erev Pesach, and he had an emission of semen on that day and immersed:

1. Normally, a Tevul Yom (one who immersed and is not fully Tahor until evening) may not enter the Ezras Nashim - in this case, he may (to complete Taharas Metzora, blood must be put on his ear, thumb and big toe in the Azarah), to enable him to bring Korban Pesach;
2. An Ase which has Kares (failure to bring Korban Pesach) overrides an Ase without Kares (that a Tamei, even a Tevul Yom, must leave the Ezras Nashim).
3. (R. Yochanan): Mid'Oraisa, there is not even an Ase (for a Tevul Yom to leave)!

i. "Va'Ya'amod Yehoshafat...b'Veis Hash-m Lifne he'Chatzer ha'Chadashah".
ii. Question: Why is it called new?
iii. Answer: They made a new decree, that a Tvul Yom may not enter Machaneh Leviyah.

4. Summation of question: If Bi'ah b'Miktzas is considered Bi'ah, how can he enter his ear (and finger...) - this is punishable by Kares, just like (failure to bring) Korban Pesach!

(c) Answer (Ula): Just the contrary, the Beraisa supports me!

1. Once the Torah permits Bi'ah b'Miktzas of a Metzora (before his Taharah is complete), it permits Bi'ah b'Miktzas of a Tevul Yom. (Tosfos - this must be the reason, for the Beraisa permits only if he became a Ba'al Keri on the eighth day, since he already (from morning, before he saw Keri) was permitted to bring his Korban and enter his ear; if he saw Keri the night before, it is forbidden.)

(d) (Rav Yosef): Ula would say that if most of Benei Yisrael were Zavim (only Tum'as Mes is permitted regarding Korban Pesach), and they became Teme'ei Mesim, since Tum'as Mes is permitted regarding Korban Pesach, also Tum'as Zivah.
(e) Objection (Abaye): The Torah never permitted Zivah - it is unreasonable that because they became more Tamei, they are now permitted!

1. Suggestion (Abaye): Perhaps you meant, if most of Benei Yisrael were Teme'ei Mesim, and they became Zavim, since Tum'as Mes is permitted regarding Korban Pesach, also Tum'as Zivah.
2. Rav Yosef: That is correct.

(f) Question (Abaye): Still, these are different! A Metzora is Hutar (totally permitted to partially enter the Azarah, this is the only way to do the Mitzvah - therefore, Bi'ah b'Miktzas of a Tevul Yom is also permitted);

1. Tum'as Mes is only Dechuyah (overridden to allow Korban Pesach - we have no source to override other Tum'os)!

(g) (Rava): We should say just the contrary!

1. A Metzora is Hutar, but we have no source to permit partially entry of a Tevul Yom;
2. The Torah was Docheh Tum'as Mes to allow Korban Pesach - likewise, it is Docheh another Tum'ah (Zivah)!

(h) Inference: Abaye and Rava both hold that Tum'ah is Nidcheh b'Tzibur.