Previous daf

1)

(a) Rebbi Yochanan permits two sons to bring the Korban that their father left when he died, but not to declare another animal a Temurah (an exchange) on it.
Why not?

(b) From where do we learn that Shutfin cannot make a Temurah?

(c) How does this seem to contradict his pervious statement (regarding a father who dies, leaving two sons and a Minchah)?

(d) What do we mean when we reply 'Sha'ani Hasam, de'Amar K'ra "Im Hamer Yamir", 'Le'rabos es ha'Yoresh'? How does this resolve the discrepancy?

(a) What did Rebbi Ya'akov from Nehar Pakud ask, based on the Pasuk (also in Bechukosai, in connection with Ma'aser Sheini) "ve'Im Ga'ol Yig'al"?

(b) What do we answer?

(c) What did Rebbi Avahu Amar Rebbi Yochanan say in a case where Reuven designated an animal to fulfil Shimon's Neder? Who ...

1. ... adds a fifth (should he come to redeem it)?
2. ... is able to make a Temurah?

(d) In the same vein, in a case where Reuven separates Terumah on behalf of Shimon, what does Rebbi Yochanan say about the Tovas Hana'ah (the right to choose the Kohen)? Who possesses that right?

(a) What does that prove with regard to the corrollory of the ownership of a Korban and the ability to make a Temurah on it?

(b) What did it prompt Rav Asi to ask Rav Ashi on our previous conclusion?

(c) Rav Ashi answered 'mi'Kiv'a Lo Mechapra, mi'Kufya Mechapra.
What did he mean by that?

(a) We learned above that if Kodshim are Shechted she'Lo Lisheman, they are nevertheless Kasher, but the owner remains obligated to bring the Korban again.
What do we mean when we ask whether 'Kipru O Lo Kipru'?

(b) What are the ramifications of the She'eilah?

(c) What prompts Rav Shisha b'rei de'Rav Idi to say 'Mistavra de'Lo Kipru'?

(d) On the other hand, one might ask, if it does not atone, what is the point of bringing the first one?
How does Rav Ashi explain why Rav Shisha b'rei de'Rav Idi opted to ask the way he did?

(a) What will be the Din if someone sins again after designating his Chatas for a previous sin? Will the Chatas cover his second sin too?

(b) We ask whether the same will apply to an Olah with regard to Mitzvos Asei that he transgressed after having designated an Olah.
Why might the Din differ there from a Chatas? Why might the Olah cover his latter sins too?

(c) We try to resolve the She'eilah with the following Beraisa.
What problem does the Tana have with the Pasuk in Vayikra "Ve'samach ... Ve'nirtzah Lo Lechaper Alav"?

(d) The Tana therefore explains that in a case where one failed to peform the Semichah 'Ma'aleh Alav ha'Kasuv Ke'ilu Lo Kiper, ve'Kiper'.
What do we suggest that he means by that, that resolves our She'eilah?

(a) Rava points out that as long as the animal has not been Shechted, the Mitzvah to perform Semichah still remains.
How does that serve to reject the proof? Why can we no longer resolve any She'eilah pertaining to an Asei after the designation?

(b) What does Rav Huna bar Yehudah mean when he explains the Tana to mean 'Kiper Gavra, Lo Kiper Kamei Shemaya'?

7)

(a) What does Rebbi Akiva in the Mishnah in Nega'im, comment regarding the Pasuk in Metzora "ve'ha'Nosar Asher al Kaf ha'Kohen ... Le'chaper Alav Lifnei Hashem"?

(b) And what does Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri mean when he says ' ... u'Ma'alin Alav Ke'ilu Lo Kiper'?

(c) How do we know that he does not mean to obligate the Metzora to bring another Korban?

(d) On what grounds do we refute this proof of Rav Huna bar Yehudah? What else might Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri mean?

(a) Rebbi Shimon learned in a Beraisa that the lambs of Shavu'os come to atone for Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav (where the sinner had no knowledge of his sin, as we learned in Shevu'os).
Why is this statement unacceptable?

(b) So how do we amend it?

(c) How many goats did they bring on Shavu'os?

(d) Seeing as the first goat atoned for Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav, what was the point of the second?

(a) In what connection does the Tana state here that the Torah takes pity on the money of K'lal Yisrael?

(b) The Tana refers to Tum'as Mikdash as an Asei de'le'Achar Hafrashah. Why does he call it an Asei?

(c) How do we initially explain the statement (mentioned earlier) 'Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav that one perpetrated between the times that one brought the two goats' (for which the second goat atones)?

(d) What would this then prove?

(a) How do we establish the Beraisa, to refute the proof?

(b) What would the Din then be if they designated both goats at the same time?

(c) What problem do we have with this explanation?

(a) Rav Papa therefore establishes the case even where they designated the two animals at one and the same time, and he explains the Beraisa on the basis of a statement of Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel (in connection with Temidin that remained after the first of Nisan).
What is the significance of the first of Nisan in this regard?

(b) What would we therefore expect to happen to such Temidin?

(c) What does Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel therefore mean when he said 'Sakin Moshchasan le'Mah she'Hein'? What actually happens to them, according to him?

(d) How does Rav Papa adapt Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel's principle to our case?

Next daf