1)

TOSFOS DH YACHOL SHE'ANI MARBEH AFILU MINCHAH

' " '

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies the statement.)

'' .

(a)

Clarification: The Ri explains that this is the MInchas Nesachim which is entirely burned on the Mizbeach.

2)

TOSFOS DH TALMUD LOMAR KACHEM KA'GER

' " "

(Summary: Tosfos presents an alternative answer.)

' , ''!'

(a)

Alternative Answer: The Gemara could answer like it explained above 'Now that the Pasuk includes a bird, how much more so an Olas Beheimah!'

3)

TOSFOS DH DI'CHESIV KI MULIM HAYU KAL HA'AM

' "

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies the answer and elaborates.)

.

(a)

Clarification: Since they performed B'ris Milah when they left Egypt.

" ...

(b)

Implied Question: And although those who were circumcised from the time of Avraham did not do so when they left Egypt ...

" , .

(c)

Answer: Nevertheless, initially, when they performed the Milah, they did so in order to enter the covenant of Hash-m and to separate from the other nations, even though they Toveled only now.

4)

TOSFOS DH VAYISHLACH ES NA'AREI B'NEI YISRAEL VA'YA'ALU OLOS

' "

(Summary: Tosfos reconciles this with the Sugya in Zevachim.)

" ( ) - []...

(a)

Implied Question: Even though there is a Machlokes there in Perek Paras Chatas (Zevachim, 115) - where one opinion holds that they brought an Olas Re'iyah, the other, that it was an Olas Tamid ...

", .

(b)

Answer: They brought many Olos.

5)

TOSFOS DH GER TOSHAV OSEH MELACHAH

' "

(Summary: Tosfos disagrees with Rashi's definition of Ger Toshav.)

" ( :) " " ,' ' -' ' ... ...

(a)

Question: From here one can ask on Rashi who explains in Perek ha'Choletz (Yevamos, Daf 48b), where the Gemara explains "Veyinafesh ben Amasecha ve'ha'Ger" - 'Zeh Ger Toshav' - that he undertook not to worship idols ... and Chilul Shabbos is akin to idolatry.

' ?'

1.

Question (cont.): Whereas here the Gemara sttes that he does work on Shabbos?

" , . ()

(b)

Answer: The explanation therefore is that the Gemara there is speaking about not doing Melachah on behalf of his master, but for himself, it is permitted.

" .

(c)

Inference: From here the Ri Paskened that one is permitted to allow a Nochri to work on Shabbos in the house of a Yisrael, on behalf of himself (See Mayim Kedoshim).

9b----------------------------------------9b

6)

TOSFOS DH V'HI SHIFCHAH L'CHALEK AL KOL SHIFCHAH V'SHIFCHAH

' "

(Summary: Tosfos queries the need for a Pasuk from two sources.)

, " ...

(a)

Question: Here we require a Pasuk to divide even different entities ...

( :) " " " , , " ...

1.

Source #1: Whereas the Gemara there in Perek Oso ve'es B'no (Chulin, Daf 82b) implies that, since they are separate entities, it is obvious if one Shechted the animal and then its babies, one is Chayav (two sets of Malkos), even though there is no Pasuk ...

( .) ' .'

2.

Source #2: And similarly later, in Perek Amru lo (Daf 17a), When the Gemara says 'Shabbasos are like separate entities'.

7)

TOSFOS DH TORAH ACHAS LI'METZORA'IM HARBEH

' "

(Summary: Tosfos cites the Toras Kohanim, which Darhens the Pasuk differently than the Gemara.)

" " ,' ...

(a)

Toras Kohanim: The Toras Kohanim learns it from the Pasuk "ve'Chavsah Achas" - 'to teach us that one brings one lamb for many plagues' ...

" " ' ' ...

(b)

Toras Kohanim (cont.): Whereas from "ve'Zos Tih'yeh Toras" it Darshens 'One law for all Metzora'in' ...

.

1.

Reason: Seeing as the Torah distinguishes their Tum'os and their time-periods.

8)

TOSFOS DH MAPALAS TE'OMIM ITZRICHA LEIH

' "

(Summary: Tosfos explains the Chidush and queries the Mishnah.)

" .

(a)

Clarification: We would otherwise have thought that regarding 'Mapalas Te'omim', Rebbi Yehudah concedes to the Rabanan.

, " ' - , ' ...

(b)

Question: In that case, who would be the author of 'Mapalas Te'omim' - If it was the Rabanan, it would be obvious, and if was Rebbi Yehudah, he agrees with the Rabanan?

".

1.

Conclusion: Tzarich Iyun (One needs to search for an answer).

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF