1)

TOSFOS DH Achshav Bein b'Chamin Bein b'Tzonen

úåñôåú ã"ä òëùéå áéï áçîéï áéï áöåðï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the inference.)

ãîæåâ ìé ìéùðà ãéúåøà äåà ãáîæéâä ùì çîéï äéå òñå÷éï åáà ìåîø åìøáåú àôéìå öåðï

(a)

Explanation: "Mix for me" are extra words, for they were engaged in mixing with hot water. It comes to say and include even cold water.

2)

TOSFOS DH Michdi Israbu Kol ha'Kodoshim l'Inyan Merikah u'Shtifah

úåñôåú ã"ä îëãé àéúøáå ëì ä÷ãùéí ìòðéï îøé÷ä åùèéôä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions this.)

úéîä ãìîà ø''ò ñáø ìä ëî''ã ì÷îï (ãó öå:) ÷ãùé ÷ãùéí èòåðéï îøé÷ä åùèéôä åìà ÷ãùéí ÷ìéí åàúé çèàú ìøáåú ÷ãùéí ÷ìéí

(a)

Question: Perhaps R. Akiva holds like the opinion below (96b) that Kodshei Kodoshim require Merikah and Shtifah (scouring and rinsing), but Kodshim Kalim do not. "Chatas" comes to include Kodshim Kalim!

3)

TOSFOS DH Talmud Lomar Kol Chatas

úåñôåú ã"ä ú''ì ëì çèàú

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that elsewhere, Tana'im argue about such Drashos.)

ö''ò áøéù àìå òåáøéï (ôñçéí îâ:) ãôìéâé áãøùä ãëì åááëåøåú (ãó ìã. (äâää áâìéåï))

(a)

Question: This requires investigation in Pesachim (43b), in which [Tana'im] argue about [whether we] expound Kol, and in Bechoros (34a).

4)

TOSFOS DH Ein Li Ela Chatas Nekevah Chatas Zachar Minayin

úåñôåú ã"ä àéï ìé àìà çèàú ð÷áä çèàú æëø îðéï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions the inclusions.)

úéîä ëéåï ãëáø øéáä çèàú öáåø àéúøáé ìé' çèàú æëø ãàéï ð÷áä áöáåø

(a)

Question: Since [the Torah] already included Chatas Tzibur, a male Chatas was included, for the Tzibur never brings a female!

åàé äåä âøñé' àéôëà ðéçà

(b)

Answer: If the text would say oppositely, it would be fine. (First we include a male Chatas, e.g. of a Nasi, and afterwards Chatas Tzibur.)

úéîä ìøáé éåñé äâìéìé ãðô÷à ìéä îäï ìà äåáà úé÷ùé ìéä ãàéï ìé àìà çèàú öéáåø æëø ëâåï ùòéø ãø''ç çèàú éçéã åð÷áä îðéï

(c)

Question: According to R. Yosi ha'Gelili, who learns from "Hen Lo Huva", we should ask that this teaches only a Chatas Tzibur, which is a male, like the goat of Rosh Chodesh (that the verse discusses). What is his source for Chatas Yachid, and a female?

5)

TOSFOS DH u'Tehei Machshavah Poseles bi'Fnim mi'Kal v'Chomer

úåñôåú ã"ä åúäà îçùáä ôåñìú áôðéí î÷''å

(SUMMARY: Tosfos challenges the Kal v'Chomer.)

úéîä îä ìçåõ ùëï ôñì áå ùàø ÷ãùéí úàîø áôðéí ùìà ôñì áå àìà çèàú

(a)

Question #1: We cannot learn from Chutz, for it disqualifies other Kodshim. Will you say about inside, which disqualifies only Chatas?!

åòåã îä ìçåõ ùëï ôñì áå áùø úàîø áôðéí ùìà ôñì áå àìà ãí

(b)

Question #2: You cannot learn from Chutz, for it disqualifies meat. Will you say about inside, which disqualifies only blood?!

åòåã îä ìçåõ ùëï ðôñì áëì òðéï ãí äéåöà úàîø áôðéí ãàéï ðôñì àìà ìëôø:

(c)

Question #3: You cannot learn from Chutz, for it disqualifies in every case. Will you say about inside, which disqualifies only with intent to atone?!

82b----------------------------------------82b

6)

TOSFOS DH Mekom Meshulash

úåñôåú ã"ä î÷åí îùåìù

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explained this above.)

ôéøùúé ìòéì áñåó ô' ùðé (ãó ëè. ã''ä ìî÷åí)

(a)

Reference: I explained this above (29a DH l'Makom. He brought six explanations, and questioned all of them.)

7)

TOSFOS DH v'Lo Tehei Machshavah Poseles b'Chutz mi'Kal v'Chomer

úåñôåú ã"ä åìà úäà îçùáä ôåñìú áçåõ î÷''å

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions the Havah Amina that intent should disqualify.)

úéîä ëéåï ãìà éãò ãøùä ãùìéùé æä çåõ ìæîðå åôéâåì æä çåõ ìî÷åîå áìàå ÷''å ðîé ìà úäà îçùáä ôåñìú

(a)

Question #1: Since he did not know the Drashah "Shelishi" - this is Chutz li'Zmano, and "Pigul" - this is Chutz li'Mkomo, even without the Kal v'Chomer, intent should not disqualify!

åà''ú ìà úäà éöéàú çåõ ôåñìú áìà ìëôø ÷''å îáôðéí ùìà ôñì àú äîùåéø åâí çèàú ãå÷à î÷''å

(b)

Question #2: Going outside should not disqualify without intent to atone, from a Kal v'Chomer from inside, which does not disqualify the remainder! Also, it should disqualify only Chatas, from a Kal v'Chomer!

åé''ì ëéåï ãðô÷à ìï î÷øà ãáùø ðôñì äåà äãéï ëì ãîéí

(c)

Answer (to Question #2): Since we learn from a verse that meat is disqualified, the same applies to all blood.

8)

TOSFOS DH Damah v'Lo Besarah

úåñôåú ã"ä ãîä åìà áùøä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions the need for this exclusion.)

ìòéì (ãó éà. (äâäú öàï ÷ãùéí)) ãøùéðï ãîä ùì æå åìà ãîä ùì àçøú

(a)

Observation: Above (11a) we expounded "the blood of this, and not the blood of another."

å÷''÷ ì''ì ìîòåèé áùøä äà ìëôø ëúéá

(b)

Question: Why do we need to exclude its meat? It is written "Lechaper"!

9)

TOSFOS DH Kivan she'Yatza Besar Chutz li'Mechitzaso Ne'esar

úåñôåú ã"ä ëéåï ùéöà áùø çåõ ìîçéöúå ðàñø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the sources for blood that left.)

ôé' á÷åðèøñ åãí äéåöà î÷''å îáùø àúé

(a)

Explanation (Rashi): We learn that blood that leaves [is disqualified] from a Kal v'Chomer from meat;

åòåã ðô÷à ìï îäï ìà äåáà àú ãîä åâå' àîø ùîà äëðñúí àú ãîä ìôðéí àîøå äï ìà äåáà àú ãîä àì ä÷ãù ùîà çåõ ìîçéöúä éöúä àîøå ìå ôðéîä äéúä äëé ãøùéðï ìéä ì÷îï áôø÷ èáåì éåí (ãó ÷à.)

1.

We learn also from "Hen Lo Huva." Moshe asked [Aharon and his sons why Chatas Rosh Chodesh was burned] - perhaps you entered the blood inside? They said "Hen Lo Huva Damah El ha'Kodesh." He said "perhaps it left its Mechitzah (Chatzer ha'Mishkan)?" They said that it was "Penimah" (inside). So we expound below (101a).

åìà ã÷ ãì÷îï ãøéù îá÷ãù äéúä

(b)

Rebuttal: He was not precise. Below, we expound that it was "ba'Kodesh".

åö''ò áô' ëéöã öåìéï (ôñçéí ôá.) ããøéù ìòðéï áùø äéåöà

(c)

Question #1: This requires investigation. In Pesachim (82a), it expounds [Hen Lo Huva] regarding meat that left! (Tzon Kodoshim - however, it concludes unlike this.)

åòåã áôø÷ áäîä äî÷ùä (çåìéï ñç.) ãàéëà úðà ãìà ãøéù äúí åáùø áùãä ìòðéï éåöà

(d)

Question #2: In Chulin (68a) there is a Tana who does not expound there "v'Vasar ba'Sadeh" regarding Yotzei!

10)

TOSFOS DH Lo Nitzrecha Ela l'Derech Meshupash

úåñôåú ã"ä ìà ðöøëà àìà ìãøê îùåôù

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses what is Derech Meshupash.)

ôéøù á÷åðèøñ ëâåï ãøê (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) ââéï åòìéåú áéú ÷ãùé ä÷ãùéí áìåìéï

(a)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): E.g. [Derech Meshupash] is going through roofs and Aliyos (upper stories) above the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim through windows.

å÷ùä ãáä÷åîõ øáä (îðçåú ãó ëæ:) ãøùé øáðï àì ä÷ãù áìà éáà àáì îáéú ìôøëú åàì ôðé äëôøú áìà éîåú

(b)

Question: In Menachos (27b) Rabanan expound that to enter "El ha'Kodesh" is forbidden due to "Lo Yavo", but for "mi'Beis la'Paroches" and "El Pnei ha'Kapres" it says [that he will not go, and] "Lo Yamus";

åôøéê ìëúåá àì ä÷ãù åîáéú ìôøëú åìà áòé àì ôðé äëôøú åîùðé ìîòåèé ãøê îùåôù

1.

It asks that the Torah should write "El ha'Kodesh" and "mi'Beis la'Paroches" and it would not need "El Pnei ha'Kapres", and answers that it excludes Derech Meshupash;

åäùúà ì''ì ÷øà úéôå÷ ìéä ãøê ââéï îãëúéá åàì éáà ãîùîò ãøê áéàä ëãîîòèéðï áôø÷ á' ãùáåòåú (ãó éæ:) èîà ùðëðñ ãøê ââéï ìäéëì

2.

Why do we need a verse? We should know already [to exclude] through roofs, for it is written "v'Al Yavo", which connotes Derech Bi'ah (the normal way to enter), like we exclude in Shevuos (17b) a Tamei who entered through roofs to the Heichal!

åðøàä ìôøù ãáùáåòåú îééøé ëùôéçú àú äú÷øä àáì áîðçåú àééøé (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) ëùðëðñ ãøê ìåì ùäéä áòìééú áéú ÷ãùé ÷ãùéí

(c)

Answer #1: In Shevuos it discusses when he made a hole in the roof, but in Menachos it discusses when he entered through a window in the Aliyah above the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim;

ùáå äéå îùìùìéí àú äàåîðéí áúéáåú ããøê áéàä äåà ãìëê ðòùä

1.

Through it, they used to lower workers in boxes. This is Derech Bi'ah, for it was made for this.

à''ð ëîå ùôéøù á÷åðèøñ áîðçåú (ùí) (ùçúê) [ö"ì çúø - øù"é ùí] äçåîä ìôðé åìôðéí åòùä ôúç áãøåí àå áöôåï åðëðñ åìà ðëðñ áôúç ùáîæøç ùéäà (äâää áîäãåøú òåæ åäãø) ôðéå ìîòøá

(d)

Answer #2 (Rashi in Menachos 27b): He dug underneath the wall of the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim and made an opening in the south or north, and entered. He did not enter through the opening in the east, so that he would face west.

åòåã ôé' á÷åðèøñ äúí à''ð ðëðñ áôúç îæøç åöãã áàìëñåï åäåìê (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) áöããéï ìà îéçééá ãàì ôðé áòéðï ùéäå ôðéå (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú áîðçåú) àì ôðéí îæøçééí ùì ëôåøú

(e)

Answer #3 (Rashi in Menachos): He enters through the opening in the east, and turns and goes on the diagonal on the sides. He is not liable, for [to be liable] we require "El Pnei", that he faces the east side of the Kapores.

åòåã éù ìôøù ãøê îùåôù ëâåï ãøê ìåì ùäéä àçåøé áéú äëôåøú ëãàîø áñåó àéæäå î÷åîï (ìòéì ãó ðä:) ùðéí ìôø áø

(f)

Explanation #2: E.g. Derech Meshupash is through a window in back of Beis ha'Kapores", like it says above (55b) "Shnayim (Leviyim guard) l'Parbar" (outside a window that enables one to see into the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim from the back).

åä÷ùä ä''ø éò÷á ãàåøìéð''ù ì''ì ÷øà ìîòåèé áä÷åîõ øáä ãøê îùåôù úéôå÷ ìé îãëúéá åàì éáà ëããéé÷éðï äëà åäà äáàä ëúéáà áé'

(g)

Question (Ri of Orlins): Why do we need a verse in Menachos to exclude Derech Meshupash? I should know since it says "v'Al Yavo", like we deduce here, for Hava'ah (bringing in) is written!

åéù ìçì÷ áéï äáàú äãí ìáéàú âåó äàãí:

(h)

Answer: We can distinguish between bringing in blood, and a person entering.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF