POINT BY POINT OUTLINE

POINT BY POINT OUTLINE

Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
daf@dafyomi.co.il http://www.dafyomi.co.il

Previous Daf YEVAMOS 73

Ask A
Question
1) STRINGENCIES OF "MA'ASER"

(a) Question: May an Arel eat Ma'aser (Sheni)?
1. Just like we learn from Ma'aser to Pesach that an Onen may not eat, we learn from Pesach to Ma'aser that an Arel may not eat!
2. Or, perhaps we can learn what is stringent (Pesach) from what is lenient (Ma'aser), but not vice-versa!
(b) Answer #1 (Rav Sheshes - Mishnah): The following apply to Terumah and Bikurim (the first fruits to ripen, one brings them to a Kohen in the Mikdash), but not to Ma'aser:
1. One is Chayav Misah b'Yedei Shamayim for eating them (b'Tum'ah), a Zar who ate them b'Shogeg must pay an extra fifth for them, they are forbidden to a Zar, they are the property of the Kohen;
2. They become Batel (nullified) if mixed with 100 times as much Chulin (regular food), one must wash his hands before touching them, and a Tevul Yom must wait until dark to eat them.
3. If an Arel were permitted to eat Ma'aser, the Mishnah should also say that an Arel may not eat Terumah and Bikurim, but he may eat Ma'aser!
(c) Rejection: Perhaps the Tana omitted teaching this. (Other answers to Question (a) are given on Daf 74.)
(d) Question: (Surely, the Tana would not omit only one case.) What else did he omit?
(e) Answer #1: He omitted a case in the Seifa:
1. (Seifa): The following apply to Ma'aser and Bikurim, but not to Terumah: one must bring them to Yerushalayim, one must recite Viduy over them, and they are forbidden to an Onen;
2. R. Shimon permits them to an Onen.
3. Bi'ur applies to them (there is a deadline, after which one must get rid of them);
4. R. Shimon exempts.
5. The Mishnah does not say that they may not be burned if they are Tamei, and that one is lashed for eating them if they are Tamei, which do not apply to Terumah!

73b----------------------------------------73b

6. This shows that the Tana omitted cases. (A second answer will be brought at the end of this Daf.)
(f) (Mishnah): Ma'aser and Bikurim are forbidden to an Onen; R. Shimon permits.
(g) Question: What is Chachamim's source to forbid?
(h) Answer: "In your city you may not eat Ma'aser... u'Serumas Yadecha";
1. We learned that "u'Serumas Yadecha" is Bikurim; the verse equates them to Ma'aser. Just like Ma'aser is forbidden to an Onen, also Bikurim.
2. R. Shimon explains that the Torah calls them Terumah to teach that just like Terumah is permitted to an Onen, also Bikurim.
(i) (Mishnah): They require Bi'ur; R. Shimon exempts.
1. Chachamim equate Bikurim to Ma'aser, and R. Shimon does not.

2) WHAT IS PERMITTED "B'TUM'AH"?

(a) Question: We said that one may not burn Tamei Ma'aser, and one is lashed for eating it. What is the source of this?
(b) Answer (Beraisa - R. Shimon): "I did not consume (Ma'aser) in Tum'ah" - whether I was Tamei and it was Tahor, or vice-versa;
1. Question (R. Shimon): (He must declare that he did not eat it b'Tum'ah.) Where does the Torah forbid this?
i. Question: "He will not eat from the Kodoshim..." forbids a Tamei to eat Ma'aser!
ii. Answer: R. Shimon asks where the Torah forbids eating Ma'aser when it is Tamei.
2. Answer (R. Shimon): It says "In your city you may not eat Ma'aser...", and "In your city you may eat them (blemished Korbanos that were redeemed), a Tahor and a Tamei together";
i. (Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): The Tahor and Tamei may eat in the same plate (even though the food becomes Tamei).
3. What is permitted (eating when the food is Tamei) there (Korbanos after redemption) is forbidden regarding Ma'aser.
(c) Question: We said that these do not apply to Terumah. What is the source of this?
(d) Answer (R. Avahu): We learn from "I did not eradicate it in Tum'ah". You may not burn Tamei Ma'aser, but you may burn Tamei Terumah oil.
(e) Suggestion: Perhaps you may not burn Tamei Ma'aser, but you may burn Tamei Kodesh oil!
(f) Rejection: A Kal va'Chomer refutes this:
1. Ma'aser is lenient, yet it may not be burned b'Tum'ah, all the more so Kodesh, which is stringent!
(g) Question: If so, the same applies to Terumah!
(h) Answer: "It" permits burning Tamei Terumah.
(i) Suggestion: Perhaps "it" permits burning Kodesh!
(j) Rejection: This is unreasonable, for Kodesh is stringent:
1. It can become Pigul (if it was offered with intent to eat it after the allotted time);
2. It becomes Nosar if not eaten in the allotted time;
3. It is brought in the Mikdash;
4. One transgresses Me'ilah for improper benefit from Kodesh;
5. A Tamei who eats it is Chayav Kares;
6. It is forbidden to an Onen.
(k) Question: We should not permit burning Tamei Terumah, since it has stringencies:
1. A Tamei who eats it is Chayav Misah (b'Yedei Shamayim);
2. If a Zar ate it b'Shogeg he pay for it and add a fifth;.
3. It cannot be redeemed;
4. It is forbidden to a Zar.
(l) Answer #1: There are more stringencies of Kodesh.
(m) Answer #2: (Even if there were equal numbers,) Kares is more severe (than Misah b'Yedei Shamayim).
(n) We said that one is lashed for eating Tamei Ma'aser or Bikurim, but not for Tamei Terumah.
(o) Question: This implies that he is not lashed, but it is forbidden. What is the source of this?
(p) Answer: "In your city you will eat it" - this (a redeemed Korban), not something else (Tamei Terumah);
1. A Lav derived from an Aseh is like an Aseh.
(q) Answer #2 (to question 1:f - Rav Ashi): The Tana also omitted cases in the Reisha!
1. He omitted that Terumah and Bikurim apply in other years (the third and sixth years of Shemitah) and have no redemption, which do not apply to Ma'aser (Sheni).