1)

TOSFOS DH Kodshei Kodoshim

úåñôåú ã"ä ÷ãùé ÷ãùéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why the Mishnah discusses Kodshei Kodoshim.)

ëâåï çèàú åàùí åùìîé öáåø ùéù áäï îòéìä òã ùéäà áäï ùòú äéúø ìëäðéí ãäééðå ìàçø æøé÷ä ãòã ùòú æøé÷ä îé÷øå ÷ãùé ä' åáàéîåøéí àó ìàçø æøé÷ä

(a)

Explanation: E.g. Chatas, Asham and Shalmei Tzibur which have Me'ilah before there is Sha'as Heter to Kohanim, i.e. after Zerikah. Until Zerikah they are called Kodshei Hash-m, and [there is Me'ilah in] their Eimurim even after Zerikah;

àáì á÷ãùéí ÷ìéí àéï áäï îòéìä òã ìàçø æøé÷ä ùàæ äåáøø çì÷ âáåä åàæ éù îòéìä áàéîåøéäï:

1.

However, Kodshim Kalim have no Me'ilah until after Zerikah. Then, the portion of Hash-m is clarified, and then there is Me'ilah in their Eimurim.

2)

TOSFOS DH she'Shachtan b'Darom

úåñôåú ã"ä ùùçèï áãøåí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses where Kabalah was.)

åãéðï ìéùçè áöôåï ëãàé' áô' àéæäå î÷åîï (æáçéí ãó îæ.) îåòìéï áäï áâîøà îôøù îàé (øáåúà) [ö"ì ÷î"ì - ùéèä î÷åáöú]

(a)

Explanation: Their law is to be slaughtered in the north, like it says in Zevachim (47a). The Gemara will explain what "Me'ilah applies to them" teaches.

åà''ú äàé ùùçèï áãøåí äéëé ãîé

(b)

Question: What is the case of Shechitah in the south?

àé ã÷áì áöôåï äà ìîä ìé úðéðà áñîåê áñéôà

1.

If he received the blood in the north, why is this needed? It is taught below in the Seifa!

åàé ã÷áì áãøåí àí ëï áøéùà äåé ìéä ìîéúðé ùùçèå áãøåí å÷áì áöôåï åëï ùçèå áöôåï å÷áì áãøåí ãìà äåé øáåúà ëì ëê ëîå ùùçèå áãøåí å÷áì áãøåí

2.

If he received the blood in the south, if so it should have taught before this "they were slaughtered in the south and Kabalah was in the north, and similarly they were slaughtered in the north and Kabalah was in the south", which is less of a Chidush [that Me'ilah applies] than when they were slaughtered in the south and Kabalah was in the south!

ãñãø îùðúéðå ëê äåà ùùåðä àåúå ùéù áå çéãåù éåúø áñéôà ëãòáéã áâî' öøéëåúà

3.

The order of our Mishnah is to teach the bigger Chidush in the Seifa, like the Gemara makes a Tzerichusa (explains why we need each clause);

åìôé æä ùùåðä çéãåù æä áøéùà à''ë úðé æå åàéï öøéê ìåîø æå åäãø úðé ìà æå àó æå åàéï æå ùéèú úðàéí

i.

According to this, that it teaches this Chidush in the Reisha (when both Shechitah and Kabalah were in the south), if so, it taught this, and there is no need to say this (that Me'ilah applies when Shechitah or Kabalah was in the south, and the other was in the north), and later teaches (regarding Shechitah or Zerikah at night) not only this, rather, even this! The Tana'im did not do so!

[ö"ì åé"ì - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí] ãëåìì áøéùà ùéðåé î÷åí ããøåí åäãø îôøù ëéöã ÷úðé ëìåîø ëéöã äåé ùéðåé î÷åí ããøåí ùàîøå ëâåï ùùçèï áãøåí å÷áì áöôåï ëå' àáì ùçèï áãøåí å÷áì áãøåí áäà ìà îééøé îúðé'

(c)

Answer: He includes in the Reisha Shinuy Makom of the south, and later explains how this is. I.e. how is Shinuy Makom of the south that was said? E.g. he slaughtered in the south and Kabalah was in the north [or vice-versa]. However, Shechitah in the south and Kabalah in the south, our Mishnah did not discuss this.

åðøàä ìôåí øéäèà ãáëé ä''â ìéú áäå îòéìä îãìà îôøù ìäå áîúðéúéï åéù èòí áãáø îùåí ãùéðä áäå ë''ë

(d)

Assertion: It seems that in such a case Me'ilah does not apply, since our Mishnah did not explain this. We can give a reason, because he deviated so much.

îéäå ðøàä ìîäø''ø ôøõ ùé' ãàéï æå ñáøà ãäà áâî' îôøù èòîà ãîúðéúéï ãîåòìéï áäï àò''â ãùéðä åòùä áôñåì îùåí ãäåà øàåé ì÷ãùéí ÷ìéí åà''ë îä ìé çã ôñåì îä ìé úøé ôñåìé

(e)

Objection (R. Peretz): This is unreasonable, for the Gemara explains the reason for our Mishnah that Me'ilah applies, even though he deviated and did it in a Pasul way, because [the south] is proper for Kodshim Kalim. If so, what is the difference between one Pesul and two Pesulim?!

ìëï ð''ì ãäåà äãéï áùçè å÷áì áãøåí ãîåòìéï

(f)

Conclusion: Therefore, it seems to me that the same applies when Shechitah and Kabalah were in the south. Me'ilah applies.

åäà ãìà úðé áîúðéúéï àò''â ãäåà øáåúà èôé

(g)

Implied question: Why was it not taught in our Mishnah? It is a bigger Chidush!

ëê ãøê îùðä åìôé ùùåðä ëì àçã áôðé òöîå ìà çù ìùðåúí áéçã

(h)

Answer: This is the way of the Mishnah. Because it taught each [deviation] by itself, it was not concerned to teach them together.

ëãàùëçï áô' äáà òì éáîúå (éáîåú ãó ðâ:) ã÷úðé äáà òì éáîúå áéï áùåââ áéï áîæéã ëå' åáâîøà úðé àôéìå ùðéäí

1.

Source: We find this in Yevamos (53b). It teaches "one who had Bi'ah with his Yevamah, whether Shogeg or Mezid [... whether he was Shogeg, Mezid or Anus (forced) and she was not, or vice-versa], and in the Gemara it teaches even if both of them [were Shogegim, Mezidim or Anusim];

åáîùðä ùééøéä àò''â ãäåé øáåúà èôé îùåí ãîñúîà ëéåï ãùîòú çãà ìøéòåúà ä''ä áúøúé:

2.

The Mishnah omitted it, even though it is a bigger Chidush, for presumably, since you learned [that he acquired] when there was one Rei'usa (reason to say that he should not acquire), the same applies when there are two.

3)

TOSFOS DH Shachtan b'Darom v'Kibel Daman b'Tzafon...

úåñôåú ã"ä ùçèï áãøåí å÷áì ãîï áöôåï ùçèï áöôåï å÷áì ãîï áãøåí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that the bigger Chidush is taught last.)

áâî' îôøù [äà] ãúðï ÷áì áãøåí ìøáåúà ãàò''â ãùéðä á÷áìä ãòé÷ø òáåãä äéà î''î îåòìéï

(a)

Reference: The Gemara explains that it taught that Kabalas Dam was in the south for a bigger Chidush. Even though he deviated in Kabalah, which is a primary Avodah (it requires Kehunah), even so, Me'ilah applies.

ùçè áéåí åæø÷ áìéìä ùçè áìéìä åæø÷ áéåí ëê äâéøñà áøåá äñôøéí

(b)

Version #1: If he slaughtered during the day and Zerikah was at night, or slaughtered at night and Zerikah was during the day - this is the text in most Seforim.

åðøàä ìø''é ùäåà ùéáåù ãàéú ìéä ìîéúðé àåúå ùäåà çéãåù éåúø áñéôà ëîå âáé ãøåí

(c)

Rebuttal (Ri): This is wrong. It should teach the bigger Chidush at the end, like regarding the south!

àìà âøñéðï àéôëà ùçè áìéìä åæø÷ áéåí ùçè áéåí åæø÷ áìéìä ãæøé÷ä òé÷ø òáåãä

(d)

Version #2: Rather, the text says oppositely. He slaughtered at night and Zerikah was during the day, or slaughtered during the day and Zerikah was at night, for Zerikah is the primary Avodah;

åäåéà çéãåù éåúø ëùùéðä áæøé÷ä ãàéëà îòéìä

1.

The bigger Chidush is when he deviated in Zerikah, that there is Me'ilah. Therefore, it omitted Kabalah regarding night, and mentioned Zerikah.

åìäëé ùáé÷ ÷áìä âáé ìéìä åð÷è æøé÷ä îùåí ãàé àôùø ìöîöí ùúäà ùçéèä îîù áñåó äìéìä åä÷áìä îéã áéåí ã÷áìä åùçéèä úëåôåú æå ìæå:

2.

The reason it omitted Kabalah regarding night and mentioned Zerikah, is because it is impossible to be so exact that Shechitah is at the very end of the night and Kabalah is immediately during the day, for Kabalah and Shechitah are adjacent (one may not delay in between).

4)

TOSFOS DH Kol she'Hayah Lah Sha'as Heter l'Kohanim

úåñôåú ã"ä ëì ùäéä ìä ùòú äéúø ìëäðéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why this uproots Me'ilah.)

ùðòùéú (áæøé÷ä) [ö"ì äæøé÷ä áäëùø - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí] àéï îåòìéï ãìà ÷øéðà áäå ÷ãùé ä'

(a)

Explanation: [Whatever had a Heter to Kohanim, i.e.] Zerikah was Kosher, Me'ilah does not apply to it, for it is not called Kodshei Hash-m.

5)

TOSFOS DH Peshita Mishum d'Shactan b'Darom Afkinun mi'Yedei Me'ilah

úåñôåú ã"ä ôùéèà îùåí ãùçèï áãøåí àô÷éðåï îéãé îòéìä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos answers why it is no Chidush that Zerikah does not uproot Me'ilah.)

åà''ú ìéùðé ãäà ÷î''ì ãæøé÷ä ìà îäðéà áäå ìàôå÷é îéãé îòéìä

(a)

Question: He should answer that the Chidush is that Zerikah does not help to uproot Me'ilah from them!

é''ì ãäà ôùéèà äåà ëéåï ùäæøé÷ä áôñåì ãìà îäðéà åìà îéãé

(b)

Answer #1: This is obvious. Since Zerikah was Pasul, it does not help at all.

åòåã é''ì ãìôé îä ùôéøù îåøé ðéçà ùôéø åì÷îéä àôøù áòæøú äùí

(c)

Answer #2: According to what my Rebbi explained, this is fine. I will explain below (Sof DH Chutz).

6)

TOSFOS DH Kodshim she'Mesu Yatz'u mi'Yedei Me'ilah v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä ÷ãùéí ùîúå éöàå îéãé îòéìä ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why there is no Me'ilah.)

ãëéåï ùäåìëéï ìàéáåã ìà àé÷øå ÷ãùé ä'

(a)

Explanation: Since they are wasted (nothing goes on the Mizbe'ach), they are not called Kodshei Hash-m.

7)

TOSFOS DH Chutz li'Zmano v'Chutz li'Mkomo l'Mai Chazu

úåñôåú ã"ä çåõ ìæîðå åçåõ ìî÷åîå ìîàé çæå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions this text, but defends it.)

ëìåîø äåä ìéä ìîéîø ãäåé ëîàï ãçð÷éðäå ãìà çæå ìîéãé

(a)

Explanation: He should have said that it is as if he choked them, for they are not proper for anything.

å÷ùä ãîàé ôøéê äùúà [ëì äðé ãúðé áîúðéúéï] ëéåï ãàéëà î''ã àí òìå ìà éøãå ìà àîøéðï ëîàï ãçð÷éðåï

(b)

Question: What was the question? All those taught in our Mishnah, since there is an opinion that Im Alah Lo Yered, we do not say that it is as if he choked them;

ëì ùëï ãðéçà èôé (îëàï îòîåã á) çåõ ìæîðå åçåõ ìî÷åîå ãìà ðéîà ëîàï ãçð÷éðäå ãäà ìëåìé òìîà àí òìå ìà éøãå ëãôøéùéú ì÷îï

1.

All the more so, Chutz li'Zmano and Chutz li'Mkomo are better, that we do not say that it is as if he choked them, for all agree that Im Alah Lo Yered, like I explained below (in the next Dibur)!

2b----------------------------------------2b

ìëï ð''ì ãâøñéðï çåõ [ö"ì ìæîðå åçåõ - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí] ìî÷åîå ìîä ìé ëìåîø ôùéèà ãìà äåé ëîàï ãçð÷éðäå îèòîà ãòìå ìà éøãå ëãôøéùéú ãòãéó îëåìäå

(c)

Answer #1: Therefore, it seems to me that the text says "why do we need Chutz li'Zmano and Chutz li'Mkomo?" I.e. obviously it not is as if he choked them, due to the reason Im Alah Lo Yered, like I explained, that it is better than all of [the others of our Mishnah];

åîùðé äåàéì åîøöä ìôéâåìå ëìåîø äà ÷î''ì ãæøé÷ä ìà îô÷ò îéãé îòéìä ãñã''à ãàò''â ãôñåìä î''î îøöä ì÷áåò ôéâåì åìçééá ëøú (åàò''â) ãáòéðï áôéâåì ëäøöàú ëùø

1.

[The Gemara] answers "since it is Meratzeh for Pigul." I.e. Zerikah does not uproot from Me'ilah. One might have thought that even though it is Pasul, in any case it is Meratzeh to fix for Pigul and obligate Kares, for to make Pigul we require like what is Meratzeh Kosher (all the Avodah was Kosher, except for intents Chutz li'Zmano).

åà''ë úåòéì ðîé ìäåöéàä îéãé îòéìä ÷î''ì

2.

If so, it should help also to uproot from Me'ilah! [The Mishnah] teaches that this is not so.

åðøàä ãåç÷ ìôøù ùìà äéä éåãò äî÷ùä äàîú ùáà (ìåîø) [ö"ì ìàùîåòéðï - öàï ÷ãùéí] ãæøé÷ä ìà îô÷ò îéãé îòéìä (åäà ôé' ìòéì ãòì ëøçéä) [ö"ì ëãôéøùúé ìòéì ãò"ë äåà îåëç - öàï ÷ãùéí] îîéìúéä ãøé éäåùò

(d)

Objection: It is difficult to explain that the Makshan did not know the truth, that it comes to teach that Zerikah does not uproot from Me'ilah, like I explained above, for you are forced to say that it is proven from R. Yehoshua's words (since there was no Heter to Kohanim)!

ìëï ðøàä ìîåøé äëé ãâøñ ùôéø ìîàé çæå ëìåîø åãàé éãòðà ãøáåúà (îùåí æøé÷ä) [ö"ì ãçåõ ìæîðå åçåõ ìî÷åîå ìåîø ùäæøé÷ä ìà îô÷ò îéãé îòéìä - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ò''ë ëãôøéùéú

(e)

Answer #2 (to Question (b) - Tosfos' Rebbi): The text properly says "what are Chutz li'Zmano and Chutz li'Mkomo proper for?" I.e. surely he knew that it is a bigger Chidush of Chutz li'Zmano and Chutz li'Mkomo, to say that Zerikah does not uproot from Me'ilah. You are forced to say like I explained (for all agree that Im Alah Lo Yered);

îéäå îä çéãåù éù ëéåï ùàéï ùåí (øàåéåú) [ö"ì äéúø - öàï ÷ãùéí] áæøé÷ä îäéëé úéúé ãîô÷ò îéãé îòéìä

1.

However, what is the Chidush? There is no Heter through Zerikah. Why should I think that it uproots Me'ilah?!

åîùðé äåàéì åîøöä ìôéâåìå åìäëé ñì÷à ãòúê ãæøé÷ä îô÷ò îéãé îòéìä ÷î''ì ãìà:

2.

It answers "since it is Meratzeh for Pigul." Therefore, one might have thought that Zerikah uproots Me'ilah. [The Mishnah] teaches that this is not so.

8)

TOSFOS DH Alu Mahu she'Yerdu

úåñôåú ã"ä òìå îäå ùéøãå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos proves that he asks about Shechitah or Kabalah in the south.)

ò''ë ÷àé àãøåí ãàçåõ ìæîðå åçåõ ìî÷åîå ìà ÷àé ãäà îùîò ôø÷ äîæáç î÷ãù (æáçéí ãó ôã.) ãìë''ò ìà éøãå

(a)

Explanation: You are forced to say that he refers to Darom. He does not refer to Chutz li'Zmano and Chutz li'Mkomo, for it connotes in Zevachim (84a) that all agree that Lo Yered;

åâí ìà ÷àé àìéìä ãôìåâúà äéà áäãéà áéï øáé éäåãä åø' ùîòåï

1.

Also, he does not refer to [Shechitah or Kabalah] at night, for R. Yehudah and R. Shimon explicitly argue about this.

9)

TOSFOS DH Aliva d'R. Yehudah Kuli Alma Lo Pligi d'Im Alu Yerdu

úåñôåú ã"ä àìéáà ãø' éäåãä ëåìé òìîà ìà ôìéâé ãàí òìå éøãå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why all agree according to R. Yehudah.)

ãäùúà âáé ðùçè áìéìä ãìà ùçè áãøåí ÷àîø éøãå ëì ùëï äéëà ãùçè áãøåí ãùéðä î÷åîå ãéøãå

(a)

Explanation: Now, regarding [a Korban] slaughtered at night, that he did not slaughter in the south, [R. Yehudah] says Yered - all the more so when he slaughtered in the south, that he changed its place, Yered!

ëé ôìéâé àìéáà ãø''ù ãàîø âáé ðùçè áìéìä ìà úøã øá éåñó ëø''ù (ãàñø) ãîãîä ùéðåé î÷åí ìùéðåé æîðå

1.

They argue according to R. Shimon, who says about Shechitah at night Lo Yered. Rav Yosef holds like R. Shimon, who compares changing the place to changing the time.

10)

TOSFOS DH v'Rabah Amar Lecha...

úåñôåú ã"ä åøáä àîø ìê òã ëàï ìà ÷àîø ø''ù àìà áðéúðéï ìîòìä ùðúðï ìîèä ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses why he needed to discuss this case.)

úéîä àîàé ùá÷ áìéìä åðùôê ãîä åéöàä ãîä ãôìéâé áäå øáé éäåãä åø''ù åð÷è ðéúðéï ìîòìä ùðúðï ìîèä ãàó øáé éäåãä îåãä ãìà éøãå

(a)

Question: Why did he abandon [Shechitah or Kabalah] at night, the blood spilled, and the blood left [the Azarah], which R. Yehudah and R. Shimon argue about, and he discussed Nisnim (blood that must be put) above that was put below? Even R. Yehudah agrees that Lo Yered!

åôéøù äø''é ãîééøé äëà (áòåó ùòåìúå) [ö"ì áòåìú äòåó ùãéðä] ìîòìä åòùàä ìîèä

(b)

Answer (Ri): Here we discuss Olas ha'Of. Its law is to be done above, and it was done below;

(åäëà) [ö"ì åáäà - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ìà îåãä øáé éäåãä îùåí ãäåé ëôñåì [ö"ì ãøåí - ùéèä î÷åáöú] äéìëê éøãå

1.

Regarding this, R. Yehudah does not agree, for it is like the Pesul of the south. Therefore, Yered.

ãìà ãîé ðéúðéï ìîòìä ùðúðï ìîèä ã÷àîø áæáçéí (ãó ôã.) ãìà ôìéâ øáé éäåãä

(c)

Implied question: Why is this unlike Nisnim above that were put below? It says in Zevachim (84a) that R. Yehudah does not argue!

ãäúí îééøé ááäîä ùäéúä ìä äëùø áùçéèä åá÷áìä àáì áòåìú äòåó ùîì÷ä ìîèä ãìà äéä ùåí äëùø ôìéâ øé éäåãä ëîå áðùçè áìéìä åðùôê ãîä

(d)

Answer #1: There it discusses an animal. It had Sha'as ha'Kosher through Shechitah and Kabalah. However, if Melikah of Olas ha'Of was below, it did not have any Hechsher;

åòì æä îçì÷ øáä ãò''ë ìà ÷àîø ø''ù ìà éøãå âáé æáçéí àìà îùåí ãìà ùéðä áäï àìà áîæáç òöîå åìòåìí æáéçúï å÷áìúï áöôåï ëìåîø ëì îöåúä åëì òðééðéä

1.

Rabah argues about this, for we find that R. Shimon said Lo Yered only regarding Zevachim, that he deviated in them only on the Mizbe'ach itself, and really, their Shechitah and Kabalah was in the north, i.e. the entire Mitzvah and the entire matter. (R. Y.M. Feinstein - places fixed on the Mizbe'ach, e.g. for Melikah and Matanos Dam, are laws of the Mizbe'ach, and not of Avodas ha'Korban. Deviation in them is not like deviation in the Korban itself);

àáì áùçè áãøåí îåãä ø''ù ãëîàï ãçð÷éä ãîé åäåé ëîå ùçåèé çåõ ëéåï ùîùðä î÷åí ùçéèä åáùåçè çåõ ìë''ò àí òìå éøãå

i.

However, what was slaughtered in the south, R. Shimon agrees that it is as if he choked it. It is like Shechutei Chutz, since he changed the place of Shechitah. Regarding Shechutei Chutz, all agree that Im Alah Yered.

îéäå ÷ùä ìîåøé øáéðå ä''ø ôøõ îäà ãîåúéá øá éåñó ì÷îï ìøáä çãà îâå çãà ëå' ôé' ãçæéðï âáé îìé÷ä ãëùùéðä áä àí òìä ìà éøã åä''ä âáé ùéðåé [ö"ì ãøåí - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ááäîä åàéúåúá øáä

(e)

Question (R. Peretz): Below (3a), Rav Yosef challenged one [Mishnah] amidst another. I.e. we find regarding Melikah that when he deviated in it, Im Alah Lo Yered, and the same applies to Shinuy of the south in an animal, and Rabah was refuted;

åìôéøåù ø''é àîàé àéúåúá îùéðåé î÷åí ãîìé÷ä åäà àéäå îçì÷ äëà ùôéø áéï ùéðåé ãòåó (ìâåó äîæáç) [ö"ì áâåó äîæáç ìùéðåé - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ãáäîä îöôåï ìãøåí

1.

According to the Ri, why was he refuted from Shinuy Makom of Melikah? [Rabah] properly distinguishes between Shinuy of a bird on the Mizbe'ach, and Shinuy in an animal from north to south!

ìëï ð''ì ëãîùîò áôùåè ãîééøé ááäîä

(f)

Answer #2: Therefore, it seems like the simple meaning, that we discuss an animal.

åàò''â ãîåãä áéä ø' éäåãä

1.

Implied question: R. Yehudah agrees about [an animal]!

îëì î÷åí îééúé ìä )ìãåîéà ìùéðåé( [ö"ì ìãîéåï ãùéðåé - ùéèä î÷åáöú] î÷åí ãäåé ëé ùéðåé ããøåí åìñéîðà áòìîà ð÷è

2.

Answer: Even so, we bring it for the comparison, that Shinuy Makom is like Shinuy of the south. It is a mere Siman.

åëì æä ãåç÷

(g)

Rebuttal: This is a poor answer.

ìëï ðøàä ìîåøé øáéðå ä''ø ôøõ ãäåöøê øáä ìäáéà äà îéìúà ãðéúðéï ìîòìä ùðúðï ìîèä

(h)

Answer #3 (R. Peretz): Rabah needed to bring this matter of Nisnim above that were put below (and explain why it is unlike Shechitah in the south);

ãàé ìà àééúé àìà ðùçèä áìéìä áäà åãàé àéëà ìôìåâé ùôéø ãäúí ùéðåé æîï åäëà ùéðåé î÷åí åìà ãîå ëìì àäããé åòãééï äéä ÷ùä ìå ìøáä îðéúðéï ìîòìä ùðúðï ìîèä

1.

Had he brought only what was slaughtered at night, about this surely one can distinguish properly. There is Shinuy in time, and here is Shinuy in place. They are not like each other at all! The Mishnah of Nisnim above that were put below would still be difficult for Rabah.

åë''ú îä òðéï ùéðåé æøé÷ä ìùéðåé ùçéèä ãâáé ãøåí ãäà áäà ãðéúðéï ìîòìä ùðúðï ìîèä àó ø''é îåãä îùåí ãäåé ôñåì áæøé÷ä àáì äëà âáé ãøåí äåé ôñåì áùçéèä

(i)

Question: What is the relevance of Shinuy Zerikah to Shinuy Shechitah of the south? Regarding Nisnim above that were put below, even R. Yehudah agrees, for it is a Pesul of Zerikah, but here, regarding the south, it is a Pesul of Shechitah!

äà ìàå îéìúà ãìø''ù îäðé ôñåì áùçéèä ëîå áæøé÷ä ìø' éäåãä ãäà áðùçè áìéìä ãà''ø éäåãä éøãå ÷àîø ø''ù ìà éøãå

(j)

Answer: This is wrong. According to R. Shimon, a Pesul of Shechitah helps [to say Lo Yered] like a Pesul of Zerikah according to R. Yehudah, for when it was slaughtered at night, that R. Yehudah says Yered, R. Shimon says Lo Yered;

åà''ë îäùúà éù ìðå ìãîåú ùçè áãøåí ìø''ù ìðéúðéï ìîòìä ùðúðï ìîèä åà''ë úé÷ùé ìøáä ìëê äåöøê ìçì÷ áéï ðéúðéï ìîòìä (ìðéúðéï ìîèä áéï) [ö"ì ùðúðï ìîèä åáéï - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ùçè áãøåí

1.

If so, now we can compare Shechitah in the south according to R. Shimon to Nisnim above that were put below. If so, it is difficult for Rabah! Therefore, he needed to distinguish between Nisnim above that were put below and Shechitah in the south;

àáì áéï ðùçè áìéìä ìùçè áãøåí ìà äåöøê ìçì÷ ãàåúå çéìå÷ ôùåè äåà åéãåò ìëì ãäúí ùéðåé æîï åäëà ùéðåé î÷åí

2.

However, he did not need to distinguish between Shechitah at night and Shechitah in the south, for the distinction is obvious and known to all. There is Shinuy of time, and here is Shinuy of place.

11)

TOSFOS DH Ela l'Rabah Kashya

úåñôåú ã"ä àìà ìøáä ÷ùéà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why it is difficult for him.)

ãàîø ëîàï ãçð÷éä ãîé åà''ë äåä ìéä ëé ÷ãùéí ùîúå

(a)

Explanation: He said that it is as if he choked them. If so, they are like Kodshim that died!

12)

TOSFOS DH u'Mai Ika Bein d'Oraisa lid'Rabanan

úåñôåú ã"ä åîàé àéëà áéï ãàåøééúà ìãøáðï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we did not say that Korban is a difference.)

äåä îöé ìîéîø ãîãøáðï ìà îééúé àùí îòéìä

(a)

Implied question: [The Gemara] could have said that for [Me'ilah] mid'Rabanan, one does not bring Asham Me'ilah!

(åòãéôà) [ö"ì àìà òãéôà - ùéèä î÷åáöú] îéðéä ÷à îùðé ãàôéìå çåîù ìéëà åëù [ãìà îééúé] àùí ãäåä çåìéï áòæøä

(b)

Answer: It gave a better answer. There is not even a Chomesh, and all the more so he does not bring Asham Me'ilah, for it would be Chulin b'Azarah!

13)

TOSFOS DH u'Mi Ika Me'ilah mid'Rabanan

úåñôåú ã"ä åîé àéëà îòéìä îãøáðï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why this was astounding.)

úéîä îàé ÷à îúîä àéï àéëà èåáà ëâåï âáé ãí ãúðï ì÷îï (ãó éà.) éöà ìðçì ÷ãøåï îåòìéï áå ëå' åøåöä ìåîø îãøáðï

(a)

Question: Why was [the Makshan] astounded? There are many [cases of Me'ilah mid'Rabanan], e.g. regarding blood. A Mishnah below (11a) teaches that when [blood] went out to Nachal Kidron, Me'ilah applies to it, and [the Gemara] wants to say that it is mid'Rabanan!

åëï âáé àôø çèàú (áøéù) [áñåó] äúëìú (îðçåú ãó ðá.)

1.

Also regarding ashes of Parah Adumah, in Menachos (52a, we say that there is Me'ilah mid'Rabanan)!

åé''ì ãùàðé äúí ãìà áãéìé îéðééäå äéìëê éù ìäï ìú÷ï îòéìä

(b)

Answer: There is different, for people do not refrain from them. Therefore, [Chachamim] should enact Me'ilah;

àáì äëà âáé ÷ãùéí ùùçèï áãøåí áãéìé îéðééäå åòì æä îúîä àéëà îòéìä áëä''â

1.

However, here, regarding Kodshim slaughtered in the south, people refrain from them. About this the Gemara is astounded "is there Me'ilah in such a case?!"

åîùðé àéï ëãàîø òåìà åàó á÷ãùéí ùîúå ãáãéìé éù îòéìä îãøáðï:

2.

It answers yes, like Ula taught. Even for Kodshim that died, which people refrain from, there is Me'ilah mid'Rabanan.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF