ME'ILAH 8 (25 Elul) – Dedicated in memory of Yechiel Avraham Avigdor ben Eliyahu Glaser z'l, by his brother Yisrael and family. May Avigdor's children merit to grow in Torah and Yiras Shamayim, and become sources of pride and Nachas to their father in Gan Eden.

1)

TOSFOS DH Ki Amar R. Akiva Mo'eles l'Yotzei l'Sarfah (cont.)

úåñôåú ã"ä ëé àîø øáé ò÷éáà îåòìú ìéåöà ìùøôä (äîùê)

àáì ìàëéìä ìà îøöä ëìåîø àáì ìòðéï ùéàëì ìà îäðéà æøé÷ä

(a)

Explanation #1 (cont.): However, it is not Meratzeh for eating. I.e. Zerikah does not help [to permit] that it will be eaten.

åìà ðøàä ãîä ìå ìäæëéø òéáåø öåøä ãìà àééøé áéä ø''ò äì''ì òã ëàï ìà ÷àîø ø''ò àìà ìà÷áåòé áîòéìä åìçéåáéä îùåí ôéâåì åðåúø åèîà

(b)

Rebuttal #1: This is difficult. Why should it mention Ibur Tzurah, which R. Akiva did not discuss? It should have said "R. Akiva said only to fix for Me'ilah, and to obligate for Pigul, Nosar and Tamei!"

åòåã ÷ùéà ãáôñçéí (ãó ôá.) îùîò ãìà îäðéà æøé÷ä ìäöøéê òéáåø öåøä (ãàîø) [ö"ì ãúðï] äúí ðèîà äôñç àå ùéöà éùøó îéã

(c)

Rebuttal #2: In Pesachim (82a) it connotes that Zerikah does not help to mandate Ibur Tzurah, for a Mishnah there teaches "if Pesach became Tamei or was Yotzei, it is burned immediately"!

åðøàä ìôøù ãä''ð ÷àîø [ö"ì äëà - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ëé ÷àîø øáé ò÷éáà æøé÷ä îåòìú ìéåöà ëìåîø ìòðéï ãáøéí äàîåøéí áîùðä ìà÷áåòé áôéâåì àáì îëì î÷åí ìùøéôä àæéì îéã (ãìà ôìéâ àîúðé') [ö"ì ãìàëéìä ìà îøöä - ùéèä î÷åáöú]

(d)

Explanation #2: It seems that this is what [R. Chanina] says here. R. Akiva said that Zerikah helps for Yotzei, i.e. for matters said in the Mishnah, [for Me'ilah and] to fix for Pigul, but in any case it is burned immediately, for it is not accepted to eat it.

2)

TOSFOS DH Chatas ha'Of

úåñôåú ã"ä çèàú äòåó

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that from here and onwards we discuss Kosher Kodshim.)

òã äùúà àééøé áãéï ôñåìé ÷ãùéí îúé éîòìå áäí åîëàï åàéìê àééøé áëùøéí

(a)

Remark: Until here [the first Perek] discuss the law of Pasul Kodshim, when Me'ilah applies to it them. From here and onwards it discusses Kesherim.

3)

TOSFOS DH Mo'alin Bahen mishe'Hukdeshu

úåñôåú ã"ä îåòìéï áäï îùäå÷ãùå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that this is from the time of verbal Hekdesh.)

ôéøåù ÷ãåùú ôä ãäééðå ëùä÷ãéùï

(a)

Explanation: [There is Me'ilah from when they were Hukdash,] i.e. verbal Kedushah, when he was Makdish them.

4)

TOSFOS DH Huchsheru Lipasel b'Tevul Yom uv'Mechusar Kipurim

úåñôåú ã"ä äåëùøä ìéôñì áèáåì éåí åáîçåñø ëôåøéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that they disqualify it through touching.)

ëìåîø ùàí ðâòå [áä èáåì éåí àå îçåñø ëôåøéí] ôñåì îìàëåì

(a)

Explanation: If a Tevul Yom or Mechusar Kipurim touched it, it is Pasul to forbid eating it.

5)

TOSFOS DH uv'Linah

úåñôåú ã"ä åáìéðä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that this can refer to Linah of blood or meat.)

áìéðú ãí áù÷éòú äçîä

(a)

Explanation #1: It becomes Pasul through Linah of blood at Shki'ah.

à''ð áìéðú áùø ìéåí åìéìä

(b)

Explanation #2: It becomes Pasul through Linah of the meat after one day and a night.

åàò''â ãáúø äëé ÷úðé äåæä ãîä ãîùîò ãäùúà ìà àééøé áäåæä

(c)

Implied question: Afterwards, it taught "if the blood was sprinkled." This connotes that now, we do not discuss when it was sprinkled;

åà''à áìéðú éåí åìéìä àìà ìàçø äæàä ùäøé ääæàä áéåí äîìé÷ä ãàì''ë àéôñì äãí áù÷éòú äçîä

1.

And Linah of one day and a night is possible only after Haza'ah, for Haza'ah is only the day of Melikah. If not, the blood was disqualified at Shki'ah.

î''î ð÷è âáé îìé÷ä ôñåì ãìéðú áùø ìôé ùîéã ùðîì÷ä îúçìú ìéðä ùì éåí åìéìä (åîùòú) [ãîùòú - ùéèä î÷åáöú] îìé÷ä îåðéï

(d)

Answer: In any case, it mentioned regarding Melikah the Pesul of Linah of meat, for immediately from the time of Melikah begins Linah of one day and a night, for we count from the time of Melikah. (Keren Orah asks why this matters, for in any case it ends at the end of the night! Rashash answers that if Haza'ah was exactly at Shki'ah, if we counted from the time of Haza'ah, we would give the night and the following day.)

6)

TOSFOS DH Huzah Damah Chayavin Aleha Mishum v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä äåæä ãîä çééáéï òìéä îùåí ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that some hold that this is not actual Haza'ah.)

ìî''ã ìòéì (ãó ä.) äéúø àëéìä ùðéðå ø''ì äåæä îîù ùðøàä ìàëéìä

(a)

Observation: According to the opinion above (5a) that we learned Heter Achilah, this means that actual Haza'ah was done, that it was proper to eat;

åìî''ã äéúø æøé÷ä ø''ì ùðøàä ìäæåú

1.

And according to the opinion [that we learned] Heter Zerikah, this means that it was proper to do Haza'ah;

åìî''ã äéúø ùçéèä ëé äéëé ãáòéðï ìòéì âáé [ö"ì áäîä ÷ãùé - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ÷ãùéí ãùééê áäï ÷áìä ùéäà øàåé ì÷áì ëãé (ìäæåú äëà ðîé) [ö"ì ìæøå÷ åìäæåú äëà ðîé âáé òåó] ãìà ùééê ÷áìä âáé çèàú äòåó áòéðï ùéäà øàåé ìäæåú

2.

And according to the opinion Heter Shechitah, just like above we require for an animal of Kodshei Kodoshim, to which Kabalah applies, that it is proper to receive in order to do Zerikah and Haza'ah (enough time remains in the day), also here for birds, that Kabalah does not apply to Chatas ha'Of, we require that it is proper to do Haza'ah.

7)

TOSFOS DH v'Ein Mo'alin Bah

úåñôåú ã"ä åàéï îåòìéï áä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos justifies the order of what the Mishnah taught.)

áãéï äéä ìå ìîéúðé (çèàú) [ö"ì òåìú - äøù"ù] äòåó òí ôøéí äðùøôéí ãúøåééäå (ìà - äøù"ù îåç÷å) ñì÷å ìâáåä ëåìäå

(a)

Implied question: [The Tana] should have taught Olas ha'Of together with Parim ha'Nisrafim, for both of them are totally offered to Hash-m!

àìà ùöøéê ìä÷ãéí çèàú äòåó ìòåìú äòåó ìôé ùäéà ÷åãîú

(b)

Answer: He needed to teach Chatas ha'Of before Olas ha'Of, for it has precedence (for Hakravah (Zevachim 10:4) and to be Makdish it (Tosefta Zevachim 10:4));

[åòåìú] äòåó ùåðä ÷åãí ìëì ä÷øáðåú ìôé ùéù áä ùééëåú ãîòéìä éåúø åàó îòåìú áäîä ãáòåìú áäîä àéï îåòìéï áòåøä ëé òåøä ìëäðéí (åáçèàú) [åáòåìú] äòåó îåòìéí àó áòåøä

1.

And he teaches Olas ha'Of before all [other] Korbanos, because Me'ilah applies to it more, even more than Olas Behemah, for Me'ilah does not apply to the skin of Olas Behemah, for its skin is given to Kohanim, and in Olas ha'Of Me'ilah applies even to its skin;

åàó (îùúöà) [ö"ì ìàçø ä÷èøä òã îùúöà - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ìáéú äãùï îåòìéï áä ëê ðøàä ìîåøé äøá øáéðå ôøõ ùé'

2.

And even after Haktarah, until [Olas ha'Of] goes to Beis ha'Deshen, Me'ilah applies to it. So it seems to my Rebbi, R. Peretz.

8)

TOSFOS DH Olas ha'Of Mo'alin Bah (from here pertains to the Mishnah on 9a)

úåñôåú ã"ä òåìú äòåó îåòìéï áä ëå' (îëàï ùééê ìîùðä áãó è.)

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that what he taught about Chatas applies also to Olah.)

ëîå ùôéø' âáé çèàú äòåó ëê äåà áòåìä

(a)

Explanation: Like I explained about Chatas ha'Of (regarding verbal Kedushah, Pesul through a Tevul Yom and Linah), so is Olah.

9)

TOSFOS DH Mitzah Damah

úåñôåú ã"ä îéöä ãîä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains what is Mitzuy and Haza'ah.)

ãâáé çèàú äòåó ð÷è äåæä îùåí ãáçèàú äòåó àéëà äæàä åîéöåé àáì áòåìä ìéëà àìà îéöåé ôéøåù ùñåçè äáùø (åäãí éåöà áãåç÷) [ö"ì áãåç÷ åäãí éåöà - ùéèä î÷åáöú] åîúîöä åäæàä äééðå ðåúæ äãí ìîøçå÷

(a)

Explanation: Regarding Chatas ha'Of it said that Haza'ah was done, for in Chatas ha'Of there is Haza'ah and Mitzuy, but in Olah there is only Mitzuy, i.e. he squeezes the meat with pressure and the blood is squeezed out. Haza'ah is that he sprinkles the blood on the Mizbe'ach from the neck.

10)

TOSFOS DH u'Mo'alin Bah Ad she'Tetzei l'Beis ha'Deshen

úåñôåú ã"ä åîåòìéï áä òã ùúöà ìáéú äãùï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why there is Me'ilah only until this time.)

ôé' àó ìàçø ùðùøôä ìôé ùòãééï öøéê ìäåöéà äãùï îçåõ ìîçðä àáì îëàï åàéìê äøé ðòùéú îöåúä åàéï îåòìéï áä

(a)

Explanation: [Me'ilah applies] even after it was burned, because still one must take the ashes outside the Machaneh. However, from here (taking the ashes outside) and onwards the Mitzvah was done, and Me'ilah does not apply.

11)

TOSFOS DH Parim ha'Nisrafim

úåñôåú ã"ä ôøéí äðùøôéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that three matters are included in this.)

ôø äòìí ãáø ùì öáåø åôø ëäï îùéç åôø éåí äëôåøéí åùòéøéí äðùøôéí ùòéø éåí äëôåøéí åùòéø òáåãú ëåëáéí

(a)

Explanation: This refers to Par Helam Davar of the Tzibur, Par Kohen Mashi'ach, and Par Yom Kipur. Se'irim ha'Nisrafim are the [inner] goat of Yom Kipur and Se'irei Avodah Zarah (for Helam Davar).

12)

TOSFOS DH Huchsheru Lipasel b'Tevul Yom

úåñôåú ã"ä äåëùøå ìéôñì áèáåì éåí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the consequence of becoming Pasul.)

úéîä ìîàé äéìëúà äåëùøå ìéôñì áèáåì éåí ëå'

(a)

Question: For what Halachah were they Huchshar to become Pasul through a Tevul Yom...?

ãàé ìàëéìä åäìà ôøéí äðùøôéí àéï áäí àëéìä ìëäðéí

1.

It cannot be for eating, for Kohanim do not eat from Parim ha'Nisrafim!

åàé ìéôñì ìä÷øéá àéîåøéäí ÷àîø

2.

Suggestion: It is to disqualify the Eimurim from Hakravah.

îëì î÷åí âáé ôø åùòéø ùì éåí äëôåøéí ìéëà ìîéîø äëé ùäøé îùì öáåø äí åáàéí áèåîàä

3.

Rejection: Regarding the bull and goat of Yom Kipur, one cannot say so, for they are of the Tzibur, and they [can] come b'Tum'ah, for Tum'ah is permitted to the Tzibur (for Korbanos with a fixed time)!

åéù ìåîø ìòðéï ìùåøôå ááéú äãùï ùùåøôéï áå àú äôñåìéï ÷àîø

(b)

Answer: It is to be burned in Beis ha'Deshen where we burn Pesulim;

ùäéä ìäí ìôñåìéï áéú äãùï ìòöîï ëãàîøéðï ôø÷ èáåì éåí (æáçéí ãó ÷ã:) (âáé) â' áéú äãùðéí äéå ùí

1.

Pesulim had their own Beis ha'Deshen, like we say in Zevachim (104b) that there were three Batei Deshen there.

13)

TOSFOS DH Huzah Daman

úåñôåú ã"ä äåæä ãîï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the Haza'os of its blood.)

ôéøåù òì äôøåëú åòì îæáç äæäá ëãàîøéðï ôø÷ àéæäå î÷åîï (ùí ãó îæ.) åîåòìéï áäí òã ùéåúê äáùø àáì îùðéúê äáùø àéï îåòìéï ùäøé ðòùéú îöåúå

(a)

Explanation: [The blood was sprinkled] towards the Paroches and on the gold Mizbe'ach, like we say in Zevachim (47a), and Me'ilah applies to it until the meat melts. However, from when the meat melts Me'ilah does not apply, for its Mitzvah was done.

14)

TOSFOS DH Ein Mo'alin b'Oros Aval Mo'alin b'Basar

úåñôåú ã"ä àéï îåòìéï áòåøåú àáì îåòìéï ááùø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why there is Me'ilah in the meat.)

ãîùàçø ùæø÷ ãîä æëä äîæáç ááùø åäåä ìéä ÷ãùé ä' [ö"ì åäëäðéí áòåøåú åðô÷é ìäå îëìì ÷ãùé ä' - öàï ÷ãùéí]

(a)

Explanation: After Zerikas Dam [Olah] the Mizbe'ach acquired the meat, and it is Kodshei Hash-m, and the Kohanim [acquired] the skins, and they cease to be Kodshei Hash-m.

15)

TOSFOS DH veha'Kohanim b'Oros (this is all one Dibur according to Tzon Kodoshim)

úåñôåú ã"ä åäëäðéí áòåøåú (äëì ãéáåø àçã ìôé öàï ÷ãùéí)

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why these depend on each other.)

ëãàîøéðï (æáçéí ãó ÷â.) ëì ùìà æëä äîæáç ááùø ìà æëå äëäðéí áòåø

(a)

Source: This is like we say (Zevachim 103a) that whenever the Mizbe'ach did not acquire the meat, the Kohanim did not acquire the skin.

16)

TOSFOS DH Aval Mo'alin b'Basar Ad she'Tetzei l'Beis ha'Deshen

úåñôåú ã"ä àáì îåòìéï ááùø òã ùúöà ìáéú äãùï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos distinguishes Olah from Parim and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim.)

ãàëúé ìà ðòùéú îöåúå ùöøéê ìäåöéàä ìáéú äãùï

(a)

Explanation: The Mitzvah was still not done, for one must take it out to Beis ha'Deshen.

àáì âáé ôøéí åùòéøéí äðùøôéí àéï áäï äåöàä ìáéú äãùï ùùí äí ðùøôéï äéìëê àéï îåòìéï áäï îùäåúê äáùø

(b)

Distinction: Regarding Parim and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim there is no taking it out to Beis ha'Deshen, for they are burned there. Therefore, Me'ilah does not apply to it from when the meat melts.

17)

TOSFOS DH Karmu Paneha b'Tanur Huchsheru Lipasel b'Tevul Yom...

úåñôåú ã"ä ÷øîå ôðéä áúðåø äåëùøå ìéôñì áèáåì éåí åáîçåñø ëôåøéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses whether or not the text can mention Linah.)

îùåí ãúðåø î÷ãù äìçí á÷øéîú ôðéí

(a)

Explanation: This is because the oven is Mekadesh the bread through forming a crust on the faces.

åé''ñ ùàéï âåøñéï åáìéðä ãäà úðï ôø÷ ùúé äìçí (îðçåú ãó ÷:) [ö"ì ùúé äìçí - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ðàôåú îáòøá åàéï ãåçåú ìà ùáú åìà éåí èåá

(b)

Alternative text: Some texts do not say "and through Linah", for a Mishnah in Menachos (100b) teaches that Shtei ha'Lechem are baked during the day (before Yom Tov) and they are not Docheh Shabbos or Yom Tov;

åàé ìéðä ôñìä áäå àí ëï ëùðàôä îáòøá äøé äí ôñåìéí ìîçø áìéðä

1.

If Linah disqualified them, if so, when they are baked on Erev Shavu'os, they would be Pasul the next day due to Linah!

åàåø''é (ãâøñ ùôéø ãîã÷úðé ÷øîå) [ö"ì ãâøñéðï ìäé ùôéø ãîã÷úðé ÷øîå ôðéä - ùéèä î÷åáöú] áúðåø äåëùøå ìéôñì ëå' àìîà àéú ìéä úðåø î÷ãù ìçí åàí ëï ò''ë ìéðä ôñìä åàí ëï àôééúå ãìçí ãåçä äùáú

(c)

Rebuttal (Ri): The text can properly say ["and through Linah"]. Since it taught "when its faces formed a crust in the oven, it is Huchshar to become Pasul..." this teaches that he holds that the oven is Mekadesh bread. If so, you are forced to say that Linah disqualifies. If so, baking the bread is Docheh Shabbos;

ãäëé ãéé÷ áôø÷ øáé éùîòàì (îðçåú ãó òá:) áñåôå åîùðä ãôø÷ ùúé äìçí (ùí ãó öä:) àéú ìéä ãúðåø àéï î÷ãù åìäëé ÷àîø ãàéï àôééúå ãåçä éåí èåá [ö"ì åàéðå ðôñì ìà áèáåì éåí åìà áîçåñø ëôåøéí ëéåï ãúðåø àéðå î÷ãù - ùéèä î÷åáöú]

1.

The Gemara infers like this in Menachos (72b), and a Mishnah in Menachos (95b) holds that the oven is not Mekadesh. Therefore it says that baking it is not Docheh Yom Tov, and it is not disqualified through a Tevul Yom or Mechusar Kipurim, since the oven is not Mekadesh.

åàí úàîø (ëéåï ãàéú ìéä ìúðà ãîúðé' úðåø î÷ãù ìîä ìé ÷øîå ôðéä ëðéñúå áúðåø ìé÷ãùéä ãäà ëìé ùøú î÷ãù) [ö"ì ìîä ìé ëðéñä ìúðåø ëìì ãäà îù÷ãùå äåëùøå ìéôñì ãäà çåìéï ùðòùå òì èäøú ä÷åãù ë÷ãù ãîå - ç÷ ðúï]

(d)

Question: Why do I [care about] entering it in the oven at all? From when it was Hukdash, it was Huchshar to become Pasul, for Chulin made Al Taharas ha'Kodesh are like Kodesh!

åéù ìåîø ãîùåí èáåì éåí ð÷èéä ã÷ñáø çåìéï ùðòùå òì èäøú ä÷åãù ìàå ë÷ãù ãîå (çåìéï ãó ìä:)

(e)

Answer: He mentioned so due to a Tevul Yom. He holds that Chulin made Al Taharas ha'Kodesh are not like Kodesh (Chulin 35b).

[ö"ì åà"ú ëéåï ãàéú ìéä ìúðà ãîúðé' úðåø î÷ãù ìîä ìé ÷øîå ôðéä ëðéñúå áúðåø ìé÷ãùéä ãäà ëìé ùøú î÷ãù - ç÷ ðúï]

(f)

Question: Since the Tana of our Mishnah holds that the oven is Mekadesh, why do we need that the faces formed a crust? Entering it in the oven should be Mekadesh it, for a Kli Shares is Mekadesh (what one puts inside it)!

(åäà) [ö"ì åé"ì ãäà - ç÷ ðúï] ãëìé ùøú î÷ãù äééðå ãå÷à ëùðòùä ëì äøàåé ìéòùåú áå åäééðå ëùð÷øí

(g)

Answer: A Kli Shares is Mekadesh, i.e. only when everything proper to do was done in it, i.e. when it formed a crust.

18)

TOSFOS DH Lishchot Aleihen ha'Zevach

úåñôåú ã"ä ìùçåè òìéäï äæáç

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why it depends on the faces forming a crust.)

ëìåîø ëéåï ã÷øîå ôðéä îéã éù ìäí úåøú ìçí (òìéäí) ìùçåè àú äæáç òìéäí

(a)

Explanation: Once the faces formed a crust, immediately it has the law of bread to slaughter the Zevach on it;

àáì ìà ÷øîå ìà ãâáé ùçéèú äæáç ëúéá ìçí åàéï ÷øåé ìçí àìà àí ëï ÷øí äìçí

1.

However, if they did not form a crust, no, for regarding the Zevach it is written "[Al] Lechem", and it is not called Lechem unless it formed a crust.

19)

TOSFOS DH Nizrak Daman Shel Kevasim Chayavin Aleihen v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä ðæø÷ ãîï ùì ëáùéí çééáéï òìéäï ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that we discuss liability for the bread.)

ôéøåù òìéäï òì (äëáùéí) [ö"ì äìçí - ÷øï àåøä, äøù"ù]

(a)

Explanation: "Aleihen" (for them) means for the bread.

20)

TOSFOS DH v'Ein Mo'alin Bahen

úåñôåú ã"ä åàéï îåòìéï áäï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that there is not even an Isur.)

åàí úàîø îòéìä äåà ãìéúà äà àéñåøà àéëà åäà îîåðà ãëäï äåà ëãîñé÷ ìòéì áñô''÷ (ãó æ:)

(a)

Question: "There no Me'ilah" connotes that there is an Isur. (Why is this?) It is the Kohen's property, like we concluded above (7b)!

(åëé úéîà) [ö"ì åàéï ìåîø - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ëã÷àîø ìòéì ìà ðöøëà àìà ìøáé ò÷éáà ëå'

1.

Implied suggestion: We can say like it says above, that it is needed only according to R. Akiva (it was Yotzei, and Zerikah takes effect on Yotzei for Me'ilah, Pigul, Nosar and Tamei, but not to permit eating it).

ãäà àôéìå ìøáé ò÷éáà àéðï îåòìéï ìùúé äìçí ëéåï ãàéðå âåó äëáùéí

2.

Rejection: Even according to R. Akiva, Me'ilah does not apply to Shtei ha'Lechem, since it is not the body of the lambs!

åéù ìåîø ãð÷è åàéï îåòìéï àâá äðé ãìòéì åëï ö''ì áìçí äôðéí

(b)

Answer: It mentioned "Me'ilah does not apply to it" Agav (for parallel structure with) those above. And so we must say so about Lechem ha'Panim.

21)

TOSFOS DH Karvu ha'Bazichn Chayavin Aleihen Mishum Pigul v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä ÷øáå äáæéëéí çééáéï òìéäí îùåí ôéâåì ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains how this parallels Hakravah of a Kometz.)

äáæéëéí äøé äí îúéøéí äìçí äñéìå÷ ùì áæéëéí ëîå ä÷îéöä åääéìåê ìîæáç ëîå äéìåê ì÷åîõ åî÷èéøéí äáæéëéí ëîå ùî÷èéøéï ä÷åîõ

(a)

Explanation: The spoons [of Levonah] permit the Lechem [ha'Panim]. Removal of the spoons is like Kemitzah, and Holachah to the Mizbe'ach is like Holachah of the Kometz, and we are Maktir [the Levonah in] the spoons like we are Maktir the Kometz.

22)

TOSFOS DH Ein Mo'alin b'Shirayim

úåñôåú ã"ä àéï îåòìéï áùéøéí

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

ãäà àéú áäå äéúø ìëäðéí

(a)

Explanation: This is because they have a Heter to Kohanim.

23)

TOSFOS DH ha'Kometz veha'Levonah

úåñôåú ã"ä ä÷åîõ åäìáåðä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explained this in Zevachim.)

ôéøùúé áàøéëåú áæáçéí (áôø÷ ùðé ãó ë) [ö"ì ãó îä: ã"ä àáì]

(a)

Reference: I explained this at length in Zevachim (45b DH Aval. According to R. Shimon, who holds that Ein Isur Chal Al Isur, for something with Me'ilah, other Isurim take effect on it only for one who became Bar Mitzvah afterwards.)

24)

TOSFOS DH Kidshu b'Chli Huchshar Lipasel v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä ÷ãùå áëìé äåëùø ìéôñì ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that it mentioned Kidush in a Kli Agav the others.)

ìà ð÷è ÷ãùå áëìé îùåí ÷åîõ

(a)

Implied suggestion: It mentioned Kidush in a Kli due to the Kometz.

ãîòé÷øà ðîé ÷åãí ùðúï ä÷åîõ áëìé (÷ãùå åäåëùø) [ö"ì ì÷ãùå äåëùø - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] ìéôñì áèáåì éåí (î÷åãí) [ö"ì îù÷ãùå - öàï ÷ãùéí] áëìé øàùåï òí äîðçä ëåìä ÷åãí ù÷îõ

(b)

Rejection: Also initially, before he put the Kometz in a Kli to be Mekadesh it, it was Huchshar to become Pasul through a Tevul Yom from when he was Mekadesh it in the first Kli with the entire Minchah, before he did Kemitzah!

ëãúðï ì÷îï (ãó è.) äîðçåú îåòìéï áäï îùäå÷ãùå ÷ãùå áëìé äåëùøå ìéôñì áèáåì éåí

1.

Source (Mishnah - 9a): Me'ilah applies to Menachos from when they were Hukdash. From when they were Mekudash in a Kli, they are Huchshar to become Pasul through a Tevul Yom.

àìà àâá (äðê) [ö"ì àéðê - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ãð÷è ÷ãùå áëìé ð÷è ìéä

(c)

Explanation: Rather, Agav (due to) the others, for which it mentions that he was Mekadesh it in a Kli, it mentioned this [also here].

25)

TOSFOS DH u'Pigul Ein Bahen

úåñôåú ã"ä åôéâåì àéï áäï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos gives consequences of whether or not the Nesachim came with a Zevach.)

ãëåìí àéï ìäï îúéøéï åëì ãáø ùàéï ìäï îúéøéï àéï çééáéï òìéå îùåí ôéâåì

(a)

Explanation: All of them do not have Matirim, and anything without Matirim, one is not liable for it for Pigul.

åîðçú ðñëéí àé îééøé ááàä áôðé òöîä ëãàîøéðï äúí (æáçéí ãó îã.) îáéà àãí æáçå äéåí åîëàï òã òùøä éîéí ðñëéí àúéà ëëåìé òìîà ãàéï ìä îúéøéï

1.

And Minchas Nesachim, if it discusses when it comes by itself, like we say there (Zevachim 44a) that one may bring his Zevach today, and the Nesachim in the next 10 days, it is like everyone, for it has no Matirim;

åàé ááàä òí äæáç ôìåâúà ãøáé îàéø åøáðï áñåó ô' áéú ùîàé (æáçéí ãó îâ.) ø' îàéø ñáø ôéâì åøáðï ñáøé ìà ôéâì åàúéà îúðé' ëøáðï

2.

And if it comes with a Zevach, R. Meir and Rabanan argue about this in Zevachim (43a). R. Meir holds that he was Mefagel, and Rabanan hold that he was not Mefagel, and our Mishnah is like Rabanan.

åáìéðä ã÷úðé àé îééøé ááà îï äæáç ø''ì ù÷éòú äçîä ãáúîåøä çùéá ìäå ãáø ùãøëå ìé÷øá áéåí

(b)

Possibility #1: It taught Linah. If it discusses [Nesachim] that come with a Zevach, [Linah] refers to Shki'ah, for in Temurah it considers them something normally offered during the day.

åàé ááàä áôðé òöîä îåëç áúîåøä áô' éù á÷øáðåú (ãó éã:) ã÷øéáä àôéìå áìéìä åòîåã äùçø ôñìúå åàí ëï ðöèøê ìôøù ìéðä òîåã äùçø

(c)

Possibility #2: And if [the Nesachim] come by themselves, it is proven in Temurah (14b) that it is offered even at night, and dawn disqualifies it. If so, we must explain that Linah is dawn.

26)

TOSFOS DH Aval Le'itmuyei Lo

úåñôåú ã"ä àáì ìàéèîåéé ìà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that this is to enable it to be Metamei others.)

(åìôé) [ôéøåù] ùäèáåì éåí àéðå òåùä (àåúä - ùéèä î÷åáöú îåç÷å) èåîàä ìèîà àçøéí îúðé' øáðï äéà:

(a)

Explanation: A Tevul Yom does not make Tum'ah to be Metamei others. [We infer that] our Mishnah is Rabanan.

8b----------------------------------------8b

27)

TOSFOS DH Techilah l'Kodesh

úåñôåú ã"ä úçìä ì÷ãù

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that what it touches, that becomes a Sheni.)

åàí ðâò áàåëì ÷ãù òåùä àåúå ùðé åùðé ùìéùé åùìéùé øáéòé

(a)

Explanation: If [a Tevul Yom] touched a Kodesh food, he made it a Sheni, and a Sheni makes a Shelishi, and a Shelishi makes a Revi'i.

28)

TOSFOS DH Metamei Es ha'Kodesh

úåñôåú ã"ä îèîà àú ä÷ãù

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that the Kodesh disqualifies another food of Kodesh.)

ìòùåú òåã àçø åôåñì äúøåîä ùìà (úòùä) [ö"ì éôñåì - ùéèä î÷åáöú] åúø

(a)

Explanation: [He is Metamei it] to make another [food of Kodesh forbidden to eat], and he is Posel Terumah so it does not disqualify another [food of Terumah].

29)

TOSFOS DH v'Chachamim Omerim v'Chulei Kach Hu Posel v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä åçëîéí àåîøéí [ëå'] ëê äåà ôåñì ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that this is even for liquids of Kodesh.)

ã÷à ñáøé ãèáåì éåí àéðå ø÷ ôåñì (áùåí) [ö"ì áëì - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ãáø åàó áîù÷ä ÷ãù åëååúééäå îå÷é îúðéúéï

(a)

Explanation: They hold that a Tevul Yom is merely Posel anything, and even a liquid of Kodesh. We establish our Mishnah like them.

30)

TOSFOS DH l'Aba Sha'ul Maileh Asu b'Kodshim v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä ìàáà ùàåì îòìä òùå á÷ãùéí ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that elsewhere it connotes that this is mid'Oraisa.)

åà''ú äëà îùîò ãèáåì éåí îãøáðï äåà ëã÷àîø ùåéðäå øáðï ìèáåì éåí åëå' åáñåèä ôø÷ ëùí (ãó ëè:) éìéó øáéòé á÷ãù î÷''å îîçåñø ëôåøéí

(a)

Question: Here it connotes that a Tevul Yom is mid'Rabanan, like it says "Rabanan made a Tevul Yom...", and in Sotah (29b, R. Yosi) learns a Revi'i in Kodesh from a Kal v'Chomer from Mechusar Kipurim;

åîä îçåñø ëôåøéí ùàéï ôñåì áúøåîä ôåñì á÷åãù ùìéùé ùôñåì áúøåîä àéðå ãéï ùéòùä øáéòé á÷ãù

1.

A Mechusar Kipurim does not disqualify Terumah, but he disqualifies Kodesh. A Shelishi disqualifies Terumah. All the more so he should make a Revi'i in Kodesh!

åôøéê àåëì äáà îçîú èáåì éåí éåëéç åîùðé ãéìîà ñáø ìä ëàáà ùàåì åîàé ÷àîø äà ãàáà ùàåì ãøáðï äåà

2.

The Gemara asks that a food that a Tevul Yom touched refutes this. (It is Pasul for Terumah, but it does not make a Revi'i in Kodesh!) It answers that perhaps [R. Yosi] holds like Aba Sha'ul, How can it say so? Aba Sha'ul's teaching is mid'Rabanan!

åö''ì ãøáéòé á÷ãù ãøáðï äåà

(b)

Answer #1: We must say that a Revi'is in Kodesh is mid'Rabanan.

åëï ôé' øù''é áôø÷ ÷îà ãôñçéí (ãó éè.) ãìà (çùéá) [îùëçú] ìéä øáéòé á÷ãù ìî''ã àéï àåëì îèîà àåëì àìà îãøáðï äåà

(c)

Support: So Rashi explained in Pesachim (19a), that we do not find a Revi'is in Kodesh according to the opinion that a food is Metamei a food only mid'Rabanan.

îéäå ø''ú ôé' ãîùëçú ìéä ò''é òöéí (åøáéòé) [ö"ì åìáåðä øáéòé - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí] á÷ãù ãàåøééúà (åàáà ùàåì ä''÷ ìéä) äéëé ÷àîø ãéìîà ñáø ìä ëàáà ùàåì åäà ãàáà ùàåì îãøáðï äåà

(d)

Rebuttal: R. Tam explained that we find a Revi'i in Kodesh mid'Oraisa through wood and Levonah. [The Gemara there] means as follows. Perhaps [R. Yosi] holds like Aba Sha'ul, and Aba Sha'ul's teaching is mid'Rabanan!

åé''ì ãñåâéà ãñåèä (ãó ëè:) ìéú ìéä äà ãøáà àìà àéú ìéä ãèáåì éåí îï äúåøä åëãáòà äù''ñ äëà ìåîø ãîúðé' øáðï äéà

(e)

Answer #2: The Sugya in Sotah (29b) argues with Rava. Rather, it holds that a Tevul Yom [makes a Sheni/ Shelishi according to Aba Sha'ul/ R. Meir] mid'Oraisa, like the Gemara wanted to say here that our Mishnah is Rabanan.

31)

TOSFOS DH Amar R. Chanina l'Yotze'in v'R. Akiva Hi

úåñôåú ã"ä àîø øáé çðéðà ìéåöàéï åø''ò äéà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos resolves this with the Gemara in Zevachim.)

úéîä ä''ã àé ãéöà ìöã äøàù à''ë (äì''ì) [ö"ì äà - ç÷ ðúï] îåãä ø''ò ëãàéúà ìòéì

(a)

Question: What is the case? If [the bird] left on the side of the head, R. Akiva agrees, like it says above (7a, that he agrees when the blood left)!

åàé ãéöà ìöã øâìéå î''î äà àîøéðï ôø÷ ùðé ãæáçéí (ãó ëä:) äéà áôðéí åøâìéä îáçåõ [ö"ì ÷áì - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí] åàç''ë çúê ôñåìä ìôé ùùîðåðéú ùì àáø ùéöà çåõ îúòøá òí äãí åðîöà ùî÷øéá ôñåì éåöà ò''â äîæáç

1.

If it left on the side of the legs, we say in Zevachim (25b, about a Zevach) that it is inside and its legs are outside, if he did Kabalah and then cut [off what is outside], it is Pasul, because fat of the limb that left mixes with the blood, and he offers the Pesul of Yotzei on the Mizbe'ach.

é''ì ãîééøé ùëì äãí ðàñó áöåàø åàç''ë éöà äøâì ãäùúà ìéëà ìîéçù ìùîðåðéú ùëì îä ùòúéã ìòìåú áöåàø îï äàéáøéí ëáø òìä

(b)

Answer #1: We discuss when all the blood gathered in the neck, and afterwards the leg left. Now there is no concern for fat, for whatever will later rise to the neck from the limbs, already rose.

à''ð ëâåï (ùéöà) [ö"ì ùìà éöà] ëåìå åçúê îä ùéöà òí äòöí ùàéï æä ôñåì áòåôåú àìà à''ë îçåñø àáø åàç''ë îì÷ä

(c)

Answer #2: It did not leave entirely, and he cut what left with the bone - this is not Pasul in birds, unless it is lacking a limb - and afterwards he did Melikah.

åäøá øáéðå øçáéä ôéøù ãäëé ôé' áæáçéí (ãó ëå.) (÷àîø) ÷áì åàç''ë çúê ôñåìä ìôé ùæåø÷ àú äùîðåðéú [ö"ì ìëúçéìä - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ùðôñì áéåöà ò''â äîæáç

(d)

Answer #3 (R. Rechavyah): In Zevachim (26a) it means that if he did Kabalah and then cut, it is Pasul, because he throws on the Mizbe'ach l'Chatchilah fat of what was disqualified through Yotzei;

àáì àí ëáø æø÷ ëì äãí ëùø ùäøé ÷ééí îöåú æøé÷ä îï äãí àò''ô ùëáø òìä ùîðåðéú äéåöà ùðúòøá òí äãí åæø÷å òì äîæáç

1.

However, if he already threw all the blood it is Kosher, for he fulfilled the Mitzvah of Zerikah from the blood, even though the fat that left already rose and mixed with the blood and he threw it on the Mizbe'ach.

åäëà ðîé úðï äåæä ãîùîò äåæä ëáø äéìëê çèàú äòåó ëùøä ã÷ééí áä îöåú äæàä îï äãí àò''ô ùòí äãí ðúòøá äùîðåðéú

(e)

Support: Also the Mishnah teaches "if he did Haza'ah", which connotes already. Therefore, Chatas ha'Of is Kosher, for he fulfilled the Mitzvah of Haza'ah from the blood, even though fat was mixed with the blood.

32)

TOSFOS DH v'Tani Rav Huzah Damah

úåñôåú ã"ä åúðé øá äåæä ãîä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why this implies that Mitzuy is not Me'akev.)

ãîéã ùäåæä ãí çèàú äòåó ðòùéú îöåúå ÷øéðï [áéä] (ëå')

(a)

Explanation: Immediately that he did Haza'ah of Dam Chatas ha'Of, we call this that its Mitzvah was done (so there is no Me'ilah).

33)

TOSFOS DH Bishlama l'Rav Ada bar Ahavah Hainu di'Chsiv...

úåñôåú ã"ä áùìîà ìøá àãà áø àäáä äééðå ãëúéá åäðùàø áãí éîöä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why this supports Rav Ada.)

àò''â ãðùàø çèàú äéà ëìåîø àò''â ãàéï ãí àìà îä ùðùàø îï ääæàä òãééï äéà çèàú åúìåéä äæééúä áîéöåé ùäåà îòëá

(a)

Explanation: Even though [blood] remains, it is a Chatas. I.e. even though the only blood is what remains from Haza'ah, still it is a Chatas (its Mitzvah was not finished), and its Haza'ah depends on Mitzuy, which is Me'akev.

34)

TOSFOS DH kid'Tanya d'Vei R. Yishmael she'Im Nish'ar

úåñôåú ã"ä ëãúðéà ãáé øáé éùîòàì ùàí ðùàø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains how this is like Rav Huna.)

ôé' àí ðùàø éîöä åàí ìàå ìà éîöä åìéëà òéëåáà

(a)

Explanation: If remains [blood], he squeezes. If not, he does not squeeze, and it is not Me'akev.

35)

TOSFOS DH u'Mai Chatas Hi a'Reisha

úåñôåú ã"ä åîàé çèàú äéà àøéùà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that Reisha is what is written before "veha'Nish'ar".)

ëìåîø ìà ÷àé çèàú äéà àîéöåé àìà ÷àé àøéùà ã÷øà ãäééðå äæàä åùàø òðééðé îìé÷ä ùëúåáéí ÷åãí åäðùàø

(a)

Explanation: "Chatas Hi" does not refer to Mitzuy. Rather, it refers to the beginning of the verse, i.e. Haza'ah and other matters of Melikah written before "veha'Nish'ar".

36)

TOSFOS DH Ela me'Atah Gabei Minchah... (pertains to the coming Daf)

úåñôåú ã"ä àìà îòúä âáé îðçä ãëúéá åäðåúøú ä''ð ùàí ðéúåúø (ùééê ìãó äáà)

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the question.)

ëìåîø âáé îðçä ãëúéá åäðåúøú îï äîðçä éàëìå àäøï åáðéå ä''ð ùàí ðéúåúø éàëìå åàí ìà ðéúåúøå äùéøééí áéï ÷îéöä ìä÷èøä àéï áëê ëìåí

(a)

Explanation: Regarding Minchah, that it is written "veha'Noseres Min ha'Minchah Yochlu Aharon u'Vanav", likewise, if there is left, they will eat, and if no Shirayim remain between Kemitzah and Haktarah, this is not a problem?!

åë''ú ä''ð åäà úðéà îñìúä åëå'

1.

And if you will say that indeed, this is so, a Beraisa teaches "mi'Saltah..." (if any of the flour is missing, it is Pasul).

îùîò äëà ãôùéèà ìéä ìäù''ñ ùéøééí ùçñøå áéï ÷îéöä ìä÷èøä ôñåì

(b)

Inference: Here it connotes that it is obvious to the Gemara that if Shirayim became lacking between Kemitzah and Haktarah, it is Pasul;

å÷ùéà ãô''÷ ãîðçåú (ãó è.) ôìéâé øáé éåçðï åø''ì å÷ñáø çã îéðééäå ãî÷èéø ÷åîõ òìéä

(c)

Question: In Menachos (9a) R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish argue. One of them holds that he burns the Kometz [for the remainder]!

åé''ì ãðäé ãî÷èéø ÷åîõ òìéä î''î îåãä ùàåúï äùéøééí àñåøéï áàëéìä ëãîùîò ìéùðà ãåäðåúøú îï äîðçä éàëìå åëå' ãëé ìà ðéúåúø (ëìåí) [ëìåîø] ùçñøå (äùéøééí ìà àëìå) [ö"ì îï äùéøééí ìà éàëìå - öàï ÷ãùéí] ëäðéí

(d)

Answer: Granted, he burns the Kometz for it. In any case, he agrees that one may not eat the Shirayim, like the words connote "veha'Noseres Min ha'Minchah Yochlu...", and when did not remain, i.e. the Shirayim are lacking, Kohanim will not eat.

37)

TOSFOS DH v'Ha Tanya mi'Saltah v'Chulei (pertains to the coming Daf)

úåñôåú ã"ä åäà úðéà îñìúä ëå' (ùééê ìãó äáà)

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the question from this verse.)

åà''ú î''î ìéùðé ãùàðé äëà ãâìé ÷øà îñìúä åîùîðä

(a)

Question: In any case, he should answer that here is different, for the Torah revealed "mi'Saltah umi'Shamnah"! (Shitah Mekubetzes - what we said that "Chatas Hi" refers to the Reisha is a poor answer.)

åé''ì ãàéú ìï ìàçùåáé ÷øà ãçèàú äéà ëîå îñìúä åîùîðä

(b)

Answer #1: We should consider the verse "Chatas Hi", like "mi'Saltah umi'Shamnah" (so a Chatas should be like a Minchah).

åòåã ðøàä ìîåøé øáé ëéåï ãçæéðï ãåäðåúøú îùîò ãöøéê ùéäà ðéúåúø ëîå ëï àéú ìï ìîéîø ãåäðùàø øåöä ìåîø ùöøéê ùéäà ðùàø ãàéï ìçì÷ áéðéäï ëé äìùåï ùåä

(c)

Answer #2 (Tosfos' Rebbi): Since we find that "veha'Noseres" connotes that something must remain, similarly we should say that veha'Nish'ar means that something must remain.

åà''ú îàé äàé ãîééúé äàé ÷øà ãîñìúä åîùîðä àéáòé ìéä ìàéúåéé ÷øà ãîï äîðçä ããøùéðï ôøè ìîðçä ùçñøä

(d)

Question: Why does it bring here the verse "mi'Saltah umi'Shamnah"? It should bring the verse "Min ha'Minchah", which we expound to exclude a Minchah that is lacking;

åáô''÷ ãîðçåú (ãó è:) îöøéê ìúøåééäå çã ìîðçä ùçñøä ÷åãí ÷îéöä åçã ìùéøééí ùçñøå áéï ÷îéöä ìä÷èøä

1.

And in Menachos (9b) we require both verses, one for a Minchah that became lacking before Kemitzah, and one for Shirayim that became lacking between Kemitzah and Haktarah;

åîùîò äúí ãîîï äîðçä ðô÷à ìï ùéøééí ùçñøå åà''ë àéáòé ìéä ìàéúåéé îï äîðçä ãäà äëà îééøé áëé äàé âååðà

2.

And it connotes there that from "Min ha'Minchah" we learn Shirayim that became lacking. If so, it should have brought Min ha'Minchah, for we discuss such a case here!

åé''ì ãìà ã÷ äù''ñ ëåìé äàé ìàéúåéé îï äîðçä åçãà îúøé ð÷è åëîå åòåã äåà

(e)

Answer #1: The Gemara was not so precise to bring "Min ha'Minchah." It brought one of the two verses. It is as if it says "and also [it says...]"

åòåã ðøàä ìîåøé ùéçéä ãàé ìà äàé ÷øà îñìúä åîùîðä ãðô÷à ìï îéðéä îðçä ùçñøä ÷åãí ÷îéöä ìà äåä ãøùéðï îîï äîðçä ìùéøééí ùçñøå áéï ÷îéöä ìä÷èøä

(f)

Answer #2 (Tosfos' Rebbi): If not for this verse "mi'Saltah umi'Shamnah", from which we learn a Minchah that became lacking before Kemitzah, we would not expound "Min ha'Minchah" for Shirayim that became lacking between Kemitzah and Haktarah;

àìà áúø ãëúéá îñìúä ãîùîò ãáòéðï áùòú ÷îéöä ùúäà äîðçä ùìéîä àæ ãøùéðï îï äîðçä ìùéøééí [ö"ì ùçñøå ëå' - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ãîùîò îï äîðçä ùäéúä ëáø ëìåîø ùäéúä ùìéîä áùòú ÷îéöä

1.

Rather, after it is written "mi'Saltah", which connotes that we require at the time of Kemitzah that the Minchah is complete, then we expound "Min ha'Minchah" for Shirayim that became lacking, for it connotes "from the Minchah that already was", i.e. it was complete at the time of Kemitzah;

åìëê îééúé ÷øà ãîñìúä àó ìùéøééí ùçñøå áéï ÷îéöä ìä÷èøä

2.

Therefore, it brings the verse "mi'Saltah" even for Shirayim that became Chaser between Kemitzah and Haktarah.

åîùðé äúí ëúéá (åäðåúø) [ö"ì åäðåúøú - äøù"ù] ÷øà éúéøà äåà ãäà åãàé ãàéëà ùéøééí ùäøé ëúéá å÷îõ îìà ÷åîöå åä÷èéø àéðä (ëì äîðçä ÷ééîà) [ö"ì ÷àé àëì äîðçä - öàï ÷ãùéí] ø÷ ä÷åîõ ùäåà î÷èéø

(g)

Answer #2 (cont.): It answers that there it is written "veha'Noseres", an extra verse, for surely there are Shirayim, for it says "v'Kamatz Melo Kumtzo v'Hiktir." It does not refer to the entire Minchah, only to the Kometz, which he is Maktir;

åà''ë ã÷øà éúéøà äåà ìéú ìï ìîéîø ùàí ðéúåúø

1.

And if so, that it is an extra verse, we should not say that [it means] if remained. (Rather, there must be a remainder);

äëà ëúéá åäðùàø åìà îééúø ãöøéê ìåîø (ùéù ùéøééí áãí åìà äéæä) [ö"ì ùàí éù ùéøééí áãí ùìà éæä - ùéèä î÷åáöú] îëåìå åìà àúà ìåîø ãäæééú çèàú úìåé áîéöåé ëìåîø ùéäà îéöåé îòëá:

2.

Here it is written "and what remains", and it is not extra, for it needs to say that if there are remnants of blood [after Haza'ah], he does not sprinkle all of it. It does not come to say that Haza'ah of Chatas depends on Mitzuy, i.e. that Mitzuy is Me'akev.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF