Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) THE BLOOD OF THE "KORBENOS PESACH"

(a) Question: The blood that spilled is mixed with a much greater quantity of Dam Tamtzis, it is Batul!
(b) Answer: R. Yehudah holds that Dam Tamtzis is also considered blood.

1. (Beraisa): Dam Tamtzis is forbidden by a Lav;
2. R. Yehudah says, it is forbidden by Kares.

(c) Question: But R. Elazar taught that R. Yehudah admits that Dam Tamtzis is not Mechaper!

1. "B'Nefesh Yechaper" - only Dam ha'Nefesh (that exudes when the animal is dying) is Mechaper.

(d) Answer: We know (from elsewhere) that R. Yehudah holds that blood does not Mevatel blood (because it is Min b'Mino).
(e) R. Yehudah: According to you, why do they plug up the Azarah (to keep the blood inside)?
(f) Chachamim: This shows the praise of Kohanim, they are up to their knees in blood.
(g) Question: The blood is a Chatzizah between the Kohen and the floor!
(h) Answer: It is wet, it is not a Chatzizah.

1. (Mishnah): The following are a Chatzizah if they are dry, not if they are wet - blood, ink, honey, and milk.

(i) Question: The Bigdei Kehunah will get dirty!

1. (Mishnah): If a Kohen served with dirty clothes, the Avodah is Pasul.
2. Suggestion: The Kohanim lift their garments.
3. Rejection: "Mido" - his garments must be like his Midah (size), they cannot be too long or short.

(j) Answer #1: Their clothes may be dirty when they take the limbs to the ramp, this is not Avodah.
(k) Rejection (Beraisa): "V'Hikriv ha'Kohen Es ha'Kol" - this is taking limbs to the ramp.
(l) Answer #2: Rather, their clothes may be dirty when they bring wood to the Ma'arachah (the pile on the Mizbe'ach), this is not Avodah.
(m) Question: The Kohanim who do Avodah must keep their garments clean - how can they do this?
(n) Answer: They stand on platforms (they are like the floor, they are not a Chatzizah).

(a) (Mishnah): If one slaughtered a Korban with intent to eat (or Lehaktir) something not normally eaten (or burned on the Mizbe'ach) Chutz li'Zmano or Chutz li'Mkomo, the Korban is Kosher;
(b) R. Eliezer says, it is Pasul (if he intended Chutz li'Zmano, it is Pigul).
(c) If he intended to eat (or burn) less than a k'Zayis of something normally eaten (or burned), it is Kosher;
(d) If he intended to eat half a k'Zayis and Lehaktir half a k'Zayis, it is Kosher, for eating and burning do not join.
(e) If one slaughtered a Korban with intent to eat a k'Zayis of any of the following, it is Kosher (for they are not normally eaten, or are not considered to be the Korban itself):

1. The skin, Rotev (sauce in which it was cooked), Kipah (spices and bits of meat that collect at the bottom of the pot), Alal (Rashi - a hard sinew in the neck; Tosfos - meat that comes off when flaying the animal), bones, sinews, horns and hooves.
2. Pigul, Nosar and Tamei do not apply to these.

(f) If one slaughtered a (female) Korban with intent to eat the fetus or fetal sac (Chutz...), it is Kosher (because some people eat it)
(g) If one did Melikah with intent to eat the eggs (Chutz...), it is Kosher;
(h) Pigul, Nosar and Tamei do not apply to eggs and milk.

(a) (Gemara - R. Elazar): If a Korban became Pigul, (the Lav and Kares for) Pigul applies to the fetus and fetal sac;

1. If one was Mefagel *in* (intended to eat (or Lehaktir, if it is something normally burned on the Mizbe'ach) Chutz li'Zmano) a fetus or fetal sac, the Korban does not become Pigul (because most people do not eat it).

(b) If one was Mefagel in Alal, Pigul applies to the bird's crop; if he was Mefagel in crop, Pigul does not apply to Alal.
(c) If one was Mefagel in the Eimurim (of Parim ha'Nisrafim, all the meat is burned), Pigul applies to the meat; if he was Mefagel in the meat, Pigul does not apply to the Eimurim.
(d) Support (Beraisa): (R. Shimon and Chachamim) both agree that if one was Mefagel in the meat of Parim ha'Nisrafim, this does not take effect (because the meat is not eaten).

1. Inference: If he was Mefagel in the Eimurim, Pigul applies to the meat!

(e) Rejection: No, if he was Mefagel in the Eimurim, Pigul applies to the Eimurim.
(f) Support (for R. Elazar - Beraisa): Me'ilah applies to Parim and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim from the time they are Hukdeshu;

1. After slaughter, they have full Kedushas Mizbe'ach, they become Teme'im if touched by a Tevul Yom or Mechushar Kipurim, Linah disqualifies them.
2. Suggestion: Because Linah of the meat disqualifies the meat, similarly, intent to do Linah (i.e. Pigul) in the meat also disqualifies it!

(g) Rejection: No, the Beraisa discusses Linah of the Eimurim.
(h) Question (end of the Beraisa): Me'ilah applies to them even in Beis ha'Deshen, until the meat melts.

1. Since the end of the Beraisa discusses the meat, also the beginning!

(i) Rejection: No, the end discusses the meat, the beginning discusses the Eimurim.
(j) Question (Rabah - Beraisa): Improper intent in any of the following does not make a Korban Pigul, and they do not become forbidden on account of Pigul:

1. Wool on the head of a sheep, hair in a goat's beard, skin, Rotev, Kipah, Alal, crop, bones, sinews, horns, hooves, a fetus, a fetal sac, milk and eggs.
2. Intent in them does not make a Korban Pigul, one is not liable for them for Pigul, Nosar and Tamei.
3. One who offers from (any of) these outside the Mikdash is exempt.
4. Suggestion: The Beraisa teaches that intent for any of these does not make the Korban Pigul, if the Korban became Pigul (e.g. through intent in the meat), the prohibition of Pigul does not apply to them!

(k) Answer: No, it teaches that intent for any of them does not make the Korban Pigul, even the thing he intended for is not Pigul (but if he was Mefagel in the meat, the entire Korban is Pigul, including these things.)
(l) Question: The end of the Beraisa repeats, 'If one was Mefagel one of them, the Korban is not Pigul; they do not become Pigul';

1. Surely, this is to teach that even if the Korban is Pigul, Pigul does not apply to them!
2. Counter-question: Why does the Beraisa repeat 'One is not liable for them for Pigul, Nosar and Tamei'?
3. Answer: You must say, since that Tana had to teach that one is not liable for Nosar and Tamei, he also taught Pigul;

(m) Answer: Likewise, since that Tana had to teach that one is not liable for offering them outside the Mikdash, he repeated 'If one was Mefagel one of them, the Korban is not Pigul; they do not become Pigul.'
(n) Support (for R. Elazar - Rava - our Mishnah): If one was Mefagel in a fetus or fetal sac during slaughter, it is Kosher; if one was Mefagel in eggs during Melikah, it is Kosher;

1. Pigul, Nosar and Tamei do not apply to eggs and milk.
2. Inference: Pigul, Nosar and Tamei do apply to a fetus or fetal sac.

(a) (Mishnah): If a Ba'al Mum was brought up on the Mizbe'ach, we take it down;
(b) R. Akiva is Machshir (we offer it).
(c) (R. Chiya bar Aba): R. Akiva only allows this regarding Dukin (a film over the eye) (or other small blemishes), for a bird with this may be brought l'Chatchilah;

1. This is only if it became blemished after it was Hukdash (but if he was Makdish a Ba'al Mum, it is not Kodesh like a Korban).

(d) R. Akiva admits regarding a female that was Hukdash to be an Olah, for the disqualification preceded the Hekdesh.
(e) Question (R. Zeira - Beraisa): If one offered from these (among them, a fetus or fetal sac) outside the Mikdash, he is exempt.

1. Inference: (This is because they are not considered part of the mother -) if he offered (meat of) the mother outside the Mikdash, he would be liable! (We must say that the mother is an Olah, for one is liable only for something acceptable in the Mikdash.)
2. If R. Akiva is Machshir a female Hukdash to be an Olah, we could establish the Beraisa to be R. Akiva;

i. But if he is Posel it, like whom is the Beraisa?

(f) Answer #1: Rather, we infer, if he offered *the Eimurim* of the mother outside the Mikdash, he would be liable (we establish this regarding Korbanos that can be females, their Eimurim are offered in the Mikdash.)
(g) Rejection: But it says, if one offered (any part) *from these* outside the Mikdash, he is exempt - correspondingly, he is liable for (any part of) the mother!
(h) Answer #2: The Beraisa exempts for offering (even) the Eimurim of a fetus or fetal sac outside - we infer, if he offered the Eimurim of the mother outside the Mikdash, he would be liable