***** Perek Nigmar ha'Din *****
9) click for question
(a) Our Mishnah learns from the Pasuk in Emor "Hotzei es ha'Mekalel" - that the Beis-ha'Sekilah must be outside Beis-Din far from the Beis-Din.
(b) A man stands outside Beis-Din holding a bundle of cloths and another man in the distance sitting astride a horse - just within view of the former.
(c) In the event that one of the judges or even a Talmid claims that he has something to say in defense of the accused - the one waves the bundle of cloths, and the other then rides post-haste after the guilty man and brings him back to Beis-Din for reassessment.
(d) The guilty man himself is permitted to return to court with a point to raise in his own favor - even four or five times, provided he has something of substance to say (as we have already explained).
10) click for question
(a) Our Mishnah implies that the Beis-ha'Sekilah is situated just outside Beis-Din. The Beraisa however, explains that it must be outside the three camps, which in Yerushalayim comprise - Machaneh Shechinah (the Ezras Yisrael, within the Sha'ar Nikanor), Machaneh Leviyah (the five hundred Amos by five hundred Amos that comprised the Har ha'Bayis), and Machaneh Yisrael (from there until the walls of Yerushalayim).
(b) The equivalent to this with regard to towns other than Yerushalayim, which did not comprise three camps is - outside the city-walls.
(c) In view of this Beraisa, we establish our Mishnah - where the Beis-Din, have moved outside the city-walls.
(d) The reason for distancing the Beis-ha'Sekilah from the town might be so as not to convey the impression that Beis-Din was a murderous institution. Alternatively, it might be - to give the accused more time to arrive there, leaving themselves more time to save him.
11) click for question
(a) The Beraisa learns from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "mi'Chutz la'Machaneh" (in the above Pasuk in Emor) "mi'Chutz la'Machaneh" (Vayikra, in connection with the Parim ha'Nisrafin) - that the Mekalel in the Desert was taken outside all three camps before being stoned.
(b) 'Parim ha'Nisrafin' incorporates the Par Kohen Mashi'ach and the Par He'elam Davar shel Tzibur.
12) click for question
(a) When the Torah writes (in Vayikra in connection with the Par He'elam Davar shel Tzibur) "ve'Saraf Oso Ka'asher Saraf es ha'Par ha'Rishon (of the Kohen Mashi'ach)" - that the Par ha'Eidah must be sent out of one camp (the Machaneh Shechinah).
(b) Now that the Torah writes there (in connection with the Par Kohen Mashi'ach) "ve'Hotzi es Kol ha'Par el mi'Chutz la'Machaneh", we learn from the previous Pasuk - that Parim ha'Nisrafin must be sent, not just from Machaneh Shechinah, but from Machaneh Leviyah, too.
(c) And bearing in mind the Pasuk there "al Shefech ha'Deshen Yisaref" (written there in connection with the Par Kohen ha'Mashi'ach), we learn from the Pasuk in Tzav (written in connection with the Terumas ha'Deshen from the Mizbe'ach) "el mi'Chutz la'Machaneh" - that Parim ha'Nisrafin must be sent out of Machaneh Yisrael, too.
(d) To be Chayav for 'Shechutei Chutz' - one need only Shecht Kodshim outside the Ezras Yisrael in the Machaneh Leviyah.
13) click for question
(a) We list four reasons to explain why it is preferable to learn the taking out of the Mekalel from the taking out of the Parim ha'Nisrafin (three camps) rather than from Shechutei-Chutz (one camp).
(b) The four reasons are a. & b. The fact that the Torah writes "Hotzei" and "el mi'Chutz la'Machaneh" by both (but not by Shechutei Chutz) ...
1. c. Machshir, meaning - that they are both performing the Mitzvah (unlike Shechutei Chutz, which is a sinful act, and ...
2. ... d. Mechaper, meaning - that they both atone for a sin (unlike Shechutei Chutz, which is itself a sin).
14) click for question
(a) As against the above however, we list four points in which Mekalel is similar to Shechutei Chutz (and not to Parim ha'Nisrafin): a. Both refer to a person (and not to an animal); b. Both sinned (unlike Parim ha'Nisrafin) ...
1. ... c. Neshamah, meaning - either that both of them entail killing (unlike Parim ha'Nisrafin, which entails burning an animal that is already dead), or that in both cases, the person dies (since Shechutei Chutz is subject to Kareis), and ...
2. ... d. Pigul, meaning - that in neither case does one contravene the laws of Pigul (Shechting Kodshim out of context), whereas Parim ha'Nisrafin can lead to Pigul, should the Shochet have in mind to burn the limbs outside too.
(b) The first reason given as to why we learn the Mekalel from Parim ha'Nisrafin rather than from Shechutei Chutz is - that we give priority to learning 'Machshir from Machshir', because it is the most significant of all the above eight comparisons.
15) click for question
(a) Rav Papa learns all three camps by the Mekalel (and by every Beis ha'Sekilah) from the Pesukim in Emor. The Pasuk "Hotzei es ha'Mekalel" must be speaking about sending out of the Machaneh Leviyah (and not from the Machaneh Shechinah, as we learned until now) - because Moshe, who was speaking, was standing in the Machaneh Leviyah.
(b) And Rav Papa then explains the Pasuk "va'Yotzi'u es ha'Mekalel el mi'Chutz la'Machaneh" - to add the Machaneh Yisrael.
(c) This latter Pasuk is not in fact, needed to teach us that they carried Out Hashem's command to the letter - because we already know that from the Pasuk "u'Venei Yisrael Asu Ka'asher Tzivah Hash-m es Moshe".
Index to Review Questions and Answers for Maseches Sanhedrin