|(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
(a) Our Mishnah rules that a Chatas ha'Of which the Kohen brings ...2)1. ... below the Chut ha'Sikra 'ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Olah' or ke'Ma'aseh Olah le'Shem Olah' - is Pasul.(b) When the Tana says 'ke'Ma'aseh ...
(a) The Tana rules that an Olas ha'Of that the Kohen brings ...3)1. ... above the Chut ha'Sikra 'ke'Ma'aseh Olah le'Shem Chatas' - is Kasher, only the owner has not fulfilled his duty.(b) And he rules - that an Olas ha'Of that the Kohen brings below the Chut ha'Sikra - is Pasul whatever the circumstances.
(a) The Tana concludes 've'Chulan Ein Metam'in Begadim be'Beis ha'Beliyah' - a Tum'ah that renders Tamei whoever eats it (even though he did not otherwise touch it), which is the only Tum'ah that pertains to the Neveilah of a Tahor bird.
(a) Initially, we establish the Reisha of the Mishnah 'Chatas ha'Of she'As'ah le'Matah' in the case of 'Ma'aseh Olah le'Shem Chatas', by Melikah (when the Kohen cut both Simanim). And the problem that our Mishnah, which rules that it is Pasul, will then not go like Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon - is not really a problem, since we have already established the previous Mishnah not like him (so it is feasible to establish this Mishnah not like him as well).5)
(a) The change in the Seifa 'As'ah Lema'alah ke'Ma'aseh Kulan, Pesulah' (incorporating Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Chatas'), cannot refer to the Kohen's having performed the Melikah above the Chut ha'Sikra - because we already learned that the Melikah may be performed anywhere on the Mizbe'ach.6)
(a) In the Seifa, we learned 'Olas ha'Of she'Asah Lema'alah ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Olah, Pesulah'. Besides the Melikah of only one Si'man, 'Ma'aseh Chatas' might refer to - the omission of Mitzuy.7)
(a) Rebbi Eliezer ('Mo'alin Bah') and Rebbi Yehoshua ('Ein Mo'alin Bah') in the following Mishnah, actually argue over 'Olas ha'Of she'Asah Lematah ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Chatas'. 'ke'Ma'asesh Chatas' refers to the Melikah (i.e. only one Siman) and not to the Mitzuy (i.e. which the Kohen omitted) - because Rebbi Yehoshua's reason (that cutting one Si'man Le'matah turns the bird into a Chatas, as we will later conclude), is simply not applicable to a case where the Kohen cut two Simanim before omitting the Mitzuy.8)
(a) We already cited the Machlokes between Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua regarding 'Olas ha'Of she'Asah le'Matah ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Chatas'. Rebbi Eliezer holds 'Mo'alin Bah' - since the Heter Achilah that would have remove the Me'ilah by a Kasher Chatas, does not apply in this case.9)
(a) Rebbi Eliezer then tries to prove his point from Kodshei Kodshim that were Shechted in the south (as Shelamim), whose Basar is also not normally subject to Me'ilah, yet someone who derives Hana'ah in this case is Mo'el.Next daf