1) TOSFOS DH Minchah she'Nikmetzah b'Heichal Kesherah she'Chen Matzinu...
úåñôåú ã"ä îðçä ùð÷îöä áäéëì ëùøä ùëï îöéðå...
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we do not say that the Tafel should not be greater than the Ikar.)
åàí úàîø àîàé ìà ÷àîø ëãé ùìà éäà èôì çîåø îï äòé÷ø ëãàîø áñîåê âáé ùìîéí ùùçèï áäéëì åâáé ëäðéí ðëðñéï áäéëì åàåëìéí ÷ãùé ÷ãùéí åùéøé îðçåú
(a) Question: Why didn't he say "lest the Tafel (secondary) be greater than the Ikar (what is primary)", like it said above about Shelamim slaughtered in the Heichal, and about [at a time of danger] Kohanim enter the Heichal and eat Kodshei Kodoshim and Shirayim of Menachos (below, 8b)?
é''ì ãäúí ëúéá (åé÷øà â) ôúç àäì îåòã (ùí å) áçöø àäì îåòã ùééê ìîéîø ùìà éäà èôì çîåø îï äòé÷ø ìôé ùúìä äëúåá áàäì îåòã
(b) Answer: There it is written "Pesach Ohel Mo'ed", so in Chatzer Ohel Mo'ed it is appropriate to say that Tafel should not be greater than the Ikar, because the Torah made it dependent on Ohel Mo'ed.
2) TOSFOS DH Maktir Alav Es ha'Bazichin
úåñôåú ã"ä î÷èéø òìéå àú äáæéëéï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos rejects Rashi's Perush.)
ôéøù á÷åðèøñ ãìà âîøéðï îîðçä
(a) Explanation (Rashi): We do not learn from a Minchah.
åìà äéä ìå ìôøù ëï ãì÷îï (ãó è:) ôøéê îéðä ìî''ã ùéøééí ùçñøå áéï ÷îéöä ìä÷èøä àéï î÷èéø ÷åîõ òìéäï åîùðé øáé )àìòæø( [ö"ì àìéòæø - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] äéà
(b) Objection #1: He should not have explained so, for below (9b, the Gemara) asks [from this Beraisa] against the opinion that if Shirayim became Chaser between Kemitzah and Haktarah, he does not burn the Kometz for them, and answers that [this Beraisa] is R. Eliezer. (If the Tana does not learn from Menachos, it is even like Chachamim!)
âí ùîåòä æå à' àôùø ìééùá
(c) Objection #2: Also this Sugya cannot be resolved [according to Rashi's Perush. We conclude that R. Elazar learns a Minchah from a Minchah, but he distinguishes Kometz of a Minchah from Levonah of Lechem ha'Panim.]
3) TOSFOS DH Mai Taima d'R. Yochanan
úåñôåú ã"ä îàé èòîà ãøáé éåçðï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why he did not answer differently.)
åà''ú ìéîà îùåí ãéìéó îãí
(a) Question: [Rav Acha] should say that [R. Yochanan] learns from blood!
åùîà ÷áìä äéä áéãå èòí æä
(b) Answer #1: Perhaps [Rav Acha] had a tradition for this reason.
àé ðîé ëãôøéùéú ìòéì ãìàôå÷é ãøáé éåçðï îôøù ø' àìòæø èòîà ãîúåê
(c) Answer #2: I explained above (7b DH v'Im) that R. Elazar explained the reason "Mitoch" to teach unlike R. Yochanan.
4) TOSFOS DH Rav k'R. Yochanan Sevira Lei (This is a new Dibur)
úåñôåú ã"ä øá ëøáé éåçðï ñ"ì (æä ãéáåø çãù)
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that they hold unlike R. Yosi.)
[åìéú ìéä ãøáé éåñé ãàîø] øàùåï øàùåï ÷ãåù (åìéú ìéä ãøáé éåñé)
(a) Explanation: He does not hold like R. Yosi, who says that every amount [that enters the Kli] is Kadosh.
5) TOSFOS DH ul'R. Chanina Isaron Lamah Nimshach l'Minchas Chotei (pertains to Amud B)
úåñôåú ã"ä åìøáé çðéðà òùøåï ìîä ðîùç ìîðçú çåèà (ùééê ìòîåã á)
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses which Kelim were Mekadesh according to R. Chanina.)
úéîä àëúé çöé òùøåï ìîä ðîùç ìøáé çðéðà ãì÷îï áô' ùúé îãåú (ãó ôæ.) îåëç ãðîùç ìîðçú çáéúéï åîðçú çáéúéï èòåðä ùîï åìáåðä
(a) Question: Still, why was the Chetzi Isaron anointed according to R. Chanina? Below (87a) it is proven that it was anointed for Minchas Chavitim, and Chavitim require oil and Levonah!
åé''ì îùåí ãîúçéìä äéå î÷ãùéï äîðçä ùì çáéúéï ááéñà òí äùîï åäéä âðàé áãáø ìäåöéà ìëìé çåì àçø ùðú÷ãùä åìëê ðîùç çöé òùøåï
(b) Answer: It is because initially they were Mekadesh the Minchah of Chavitim in a Bisa (Kli Shares) with oil, and it would be disgraceful to transfer it to a Chulin Kli after it was Mekudash. Therefore, the Chetzi Isaron was anointed.
åèòí æä àðå öøéëéï ðîé ìøáé éåçðï ãàîø ìòéì ãàéðä ÷ãåùä ìçöàéï ãàçø ùðú÷ãùä ùìéîä äéä âðàé ìäåöéàä îëìé ùøú ìëìé çåì
(c) Observation: We need this reason also according to R. Yochanan, who said above that it is not Kadosh l'Chatza'im. After the full amount was Mekudash, it would be disgraceful to transfer it from a Kli Shares to a Chulin Kli.
åöøéê ìåîø äùúà ìøáé çðéðà ùìà äéå îòøáéï ááéñà äîðçä òí äùîï àìà áúåê äáéñà òöîä äéä æä ìöã àçã åæä ìöã àçø
(d) Consequence: We must say that now, according to R. Chanina they did not mix the Minchah with the oil in a Bisa. Rather, in the Bisa itself this was on one side, and this on the other side;
ùàí äéä äëì îòåøá ìà äéå éëåìéï àçøé ëï ìçì÷ áçöé òùøåï îôðé ìåâ åîçöä ùîï ùäéà òåãó òì äçöé òùøåï
1. If everything was mixed, they could not divide in a half-Isaron due to the Log and a half of oil, which is in addition to the half Isaron.
(åìë''ò) [ö"ì åáìà"ä - ç÷ ðúï] ðîé ö''ì ëï ãáîúðéúéï ãùúé îãåú (ùí) îåëç ùäéå îçì÷éï äñåìú áçöé òùøåï åäùîï áîãä ùäéà îçæ÷ú ìåâ åîçöä
(e) Observation: Even without this, we must say so, for in the Mishnah below (87a) it is proven that they would divide the flour in a [Kli that holds] half an Isaron, and the oil in a measure that holds a Log and a half.
åàí úàîø ìø' îàéø ãàîø ì÷îï áô' ùúé îãåú (ùí) ãùðé òùøåðåú äéå áî÷ãù àçã âãåù åàçã îçå÷ (îëàï îòîåã á) åáîçå÷ äéå îåããéï ìçáéúé ë''â
(f) Question: According to R. Meir, who says below (87a) that there were two measures of an Isaron in the Mikdash - one [holds an Isaron when it is] Gadush (piled above the top of the Kli) and one [holds an Isaron when it is] Machuk (the excess above the top is leveled off), and in the Machuk they measured for Chavitei Kohen Gadol...
8b----------------------------------------8b
åòùøåï äîçå÷ (ìà) [ö"ì ìîä - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí] ðîùç ìøáé çðéðà ãàéï îðçä ÷ãåùä áìà ùîï
1. Why was the Machuk Isaron anointed according to R. Chanina, who holds that a Minchah does not become Kodesh without oil?
åé''ì ôï éáà ìèòåú áùåí ôòí åìîãåã áîçå÷ ìîðçú çåèà
(g) Answer: [It was anointed] lest they ever err and measure with the Machuk for Minchas Chotei (since no oil is added to it, it becomes Kodesh without oil).
àáì àéï ìúøõ ãø''î ñáø ëø' éåçðï ãàîø áô' ëì äîðçåú áàåú îöä (ì÷îï ãó ðæ:) (âîøéðï ãçééá òì ìéùúä - öàï ÷ãùéí îåç÷å) ãîãú éáù ìà ðú÷ãùå
(h) Implied suggestion: We could answer that R. Meir holds like R. Yochanan, who says below (57b) that the dry measures were not Mekudash!
(áô') [ö"ì ãáô' - öàï ÷ãùéí] ùúé îãåú (ì÷îï ãó ö.) îùîò ãñáø ø''î ãðú÷ãùå âáé äà ãúðï äúí ëì îãåú ùáî÷ãù äéå âãåùåú åîå÷é ìä ëø''î
(i) Rejection: Below (90a) it connotes that R. Meir holds that they were Mekudash, regarding the Mishnah there "all measures in the Mikdash were Gedushos", and we establish it like R. Meir;
(åàôé' òùøåï âãåù àôùø ãî÷ãù ãäà ãàîø ìòéì ùäçæéøï ìáéñà âãåùä åîéáòéà ìï ðîé áô' ùúé îãåú (ùí ôæ:) âáé ùåìçï àé î÷ãùé áâãåù àå ìà îùîò ãùàø ëìéí ìà î÷ãùé ääåà âãåù ìà öøéê àáì âãåù æä ùäåà îãúå ùì ëìé î÷ãù - öàï ÷ãùéí îåç÷å, ëé î÷åîå áãéáåø äáà) åæä àéï ìä÷ùåú ìøáé àìòæø ãàîø ìòéì îðçú çáéúéï ÷ãåùä ìçöàéï òùøåï îçå÷ ìø''î ìîä ðîùç
(j) Implied question: According to R. Elazar, who said above (7b) that Minchas Chavitim becomes Kodesh l'Chatza'im, according to R. Meir, why was the Isaron Machuk anointed? (The Chetzi Isaron can be Mekadesh the half put in it!)
ãáìàå èòîà ãôøéùéú ùìà éáà ìèòåú îöåä ì÷ãù ùìéîä
(k) Answer: [Even] without the reason I explained above, lest they err [and measure with the Machuk for Minchas Chotei], it is a Mitzvah to be Mekadesh the full Isaron [at once];
åìàå î÷øà ãîçöéúä ãääåà àå÷éîðà ìòéì ìäáéà (çáéúå) [ö"ì îáéúå - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] ùìí åìòëá îùåí ãçå÷ä ëúéáà áéä
1. Remark: We do not learn this from the verse "Machatzisah", for we establish it above (8a) to teach that he must bring the full amount from his house, and this is Me'akev because it says Chukah.
åà''ú ìø''ù ãàîø ì÷îï áô' ùúé îãåú (ãó ôæ:) ãîãä éúéøä äéúä ùí ùì ìåâ åîçöä ùáä äéä îåãã ìçáéúé ë''â ìåâ åîçöä ááå÷ø åìåâ åîçöä áòøá ìîä ðîùç ëéåï ãàéï ùîï ÷ãåù áôðé òöîå ìø' çðéðà
(l) Question: According to R. Shimon, who said above (87b) that there was an extra measure of a Log and a half, in which he measured [oil] for Chavitei Kohen Gadol, a Log and a half in the morning and a Log and a half in the afternoon, why was it anointed according to R. Chanina, who holds that oil does not become Kodesh by itself?
åé''ì ãúçéìä îðéçéï ùìùä ìåâéï ùîï òí äñìú ááéñà åëãôøéùéú ìòéì ùäéä âðàé ìäåöéà îëìé ùøú ìëìé çåì
(m) Answer: Initially they put three Lugim of oil with the flour in a Bisa (and were Mekadesh both of them), and like I explained above, that it would be disgraceful to transfer from a Kli Shares to a Chulin Kli.
6) TOSFOS DH Klei ha'Lach Mekadeshin Es ha'Lach u'Midos ha'Yavesh v'Chulei
úåñôåú ã"ä ëìé äìç î÷ãùéï àú äìç åîãåú äéáù ëå'
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why it mentions Kelim and Midos.)
îä ùã÷ã÷ äúðà ã÷øé ìùì ìç ëìé åìùì éáù îãåú
(a) Implied question: Why was the Tana meticulous to say "Kli" regarding measures for wet, and "Midos" regarding measures for dry?
îùåí ãáùì éáù äéå îã÷ã÷éï ìòùåú ëòðéï æä ùéäà âãåù úéìúà ëãøê ëì ùàø îãåú
(b) Answer: They were meticulous to make measures for dry so that the Godesh would be a third, like other (Chulin) Midos.
[ö"ì åàôé' òùøåï âãåù àôùø ãî÷ãù - öàï ÷ãùéí]
1. Even an Isaron Gadush, it is possible that [the Kli] is Mekadesh (even the Godesh above the top of the Kli).
[ö"ì ãäà ãàîø ìòéì ùäçæéøï ìáéñà âãåùä - öàï ÷ãùéí]
2. Implied Question #1: [Rav Amram] said above (7a) that they returned [a Kometz taken improperly] to a Bisa Gadushah (so the Kli will not be Mekadesh it)!
[ö"ì åîéáòéà ìï ðîé áô' ùúé îãåú (ùí ôæ:) âáé ùåìçï àé î÷ãùé áâãåù àå ìà îùîò ãùàø ëìéí ìà î÷ãùé - öàï ÷ãùéí]
3. Implied Question #2: We asked below (87b) about the Shulchan, whether or not it is Mekadesh what is Gadush. This implies that other Kelim are not Mekadesh!
[ö"ì ääåà âãåù ìà öøéê àáì (âãåù) [ö"ì âãåù - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] æä ùäåà îãúå ùì ëìé î÷ãù - öàï ÷ãùéí]
4. Answer: That Godesh is not needed, but this Godesh, which is [part of] the measure of the Kli, it is Mekadesh. (Chak Nasan - the Shulchan did not need the Godesh, and also the Bisa already had a full Godesh and contained its proper measure. Therefore, it is not Mekadesh an additional Kometz piled on top of it with difficulty.)
î''î âí òì ùì ìç ùí îãä òìéå ëã÷àîø ùîåàì ì''ù àìà îãåú àáì îæø÷åú î÷ãùéï åáùì ìç àééøé
(c) Observation: In any case, also measures for wet are called Midah, like Shmuel said "this was taught only about Midos, but buckets [for blood] are Mekadesh", and he discusses wet;
åáô' ùúé îãåú (ùí ôæ:) úðï æ' îãåú äéå áî÷ãù å÷à çùéá ãìç
1. And below (87b), a Mishnah teaches that there were seven Midos in the Mikdash, and it counts wet measures.
åáô' äîæáç î÷ãù (æáçéí ôç. åùí) ôéøù ä÷åðèøñ ãëîä ëìéí äéå îéåçãéí ììç ùàéðí îãåú ëâåï îæø÷åú å÷òøåú ìãí ìééï åìùîï
2. And below (88a), Rashi explained that several Kelim were special for wet that are not measures, such as buckets and bowls for blood, wine and oil;
àáì ìéáù ìà äéå îéåçãéï àìà ùúé îãåú ùì éáù ùäéå áî÷ãù òùøåï åçöé òùøåï
3. However, there were only two Kelim special for dry in the Mikdash, and they were dry measures - Isaron and Chetzi Isaron;
ãëìéí ùðåúðéï áå îðçä ëìé ìç äéå ùîæø÷åú å÷òøåú øàåééï ìëê
i. The Kelim in which they put a Minchah were [for] wet, for buckets and bowls are proper for this.
7) TOSFOS DH Aval Mizrakos Mekadeshin... she'Ne'emar Sheneihem Mele'im Soles
úåñôåú ã"ä àáì îæø÷åú î÷ãùéï [ëå'] ùðàîø ùðéäí îìàéí ñåìú
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses how we infer that Shmuel holds like Rav.)
ôéøù á÷åðèøñ (ããéé÷) ãàìîà îæø÷åú å÷òøåú ÷éãùå áìà ùîï
(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): This shows that buckets and bowls were Mekadesh without oil. (This shows that Shmuel holds like Rav.)
åæäå úéîä ãäëúéá áìåìä áùîï åîðà ìéä ãîðçä ÷ãåùä áìà ùîï
(b) Question: This is astounding! It is written "Belulah va'Shemen" - what is the source that a Minchah becomes Kadosh without oil? (Tzon Kodoshim - this is not Rav Acha's question. Tosfos asks what is the source to be Mekadesh without any oil in the Kli.)
åôéøù ø' ùîåàì ããéé÷ îãñáø (øéùà) [ö"ì ùîåàì - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí] ãîæø÷åú î÷ãùéï ùàéðå øàåé ìä ëîå îðçä äåàéì åøàåéä ìäú÷ãù áëìé àçø ãäééðå áéñà
(c) Explanation #2 (Rashbam): [The Gemara] infers that since Shmuel holds that since buckets are Mekadesh what is not proper for them, e.g. a Minchah, since it is proper to become Kodesh in another Kli, i.e. a Bisa...
àó îðçú ñìú îú÷ãùú áìà ùîï åìáåðä àò''ô ùàéðä øàåéä ìëìé )æä äåàéì åîú÷ãùú áëìé àçø) [ö"ì áîðçú æå äåàéì åîú÷ãùú áëìé áîðçú àçøú - éùø åèåá] ëâåï îðçú çåèà
1. Even a Minchah of flour becomes Kadosh without oil and Levonah, even though this Minchah is not proper for this Kli, since this Kli is Mekadesh another Minchah, e.g. Minchas Chotei. (I.e. the Gemara infers that just like Shmuel says that just like the proper Kli is Mekadesh, an improper Kli is Mekadesh, likewise just like a proper Minchah becomes Kadosh, also an improper Kli becomes Kadosh.)
åîìùåï äîùðä ã÷ã÷ ø' ùîåàì ã÷úðé ôø÷ äîæáç î÷ãù (æáçéí ôå.) ëùí ùäîæáç åäëáù î÷ãùéï àú äøàåé ìäí ëê ëìéí î÷ãùéí
(d) Explanation #2 (cont.): The Rashbam inferred from the wording of the Mishnah, for it teaches below (86a) "just like the Mizbe'ach and the ramp are Mekadesh what is proper for them, so Kelim are Mekadesh";
åîãìà ÷úðé (ëìé ùøú) [ö"ì ëê ëìéí - öàï ÷ãùéí] î÷ãùéï àú äøàåé ìäí ù''î ãî÷ãùéï àò''ô ùàéðå øàåé ìäí ëâåï îæø÷åú ùì ãí ùî÷ãùéï àú äîðçä
1. Since it did not teach "so Kelim are Mekadesh what is proper for them", this shows that they are Mekadesh even what is not proper for them, e.g. buckets for blood are Mekadesh a Minchah.
åòì çðí äåöøê øáé ùîåàì ìãéå÷ æä
(e) Objection: There was no need for the Rashbam make this inference! (Why should Kelim be greater than the Mizbe'ach, which is Mekadesh only what is proper for it? Rather, they are Mekadesh only what is proper for another Kli.)
åäà ãìà éìôé' îéðä îãåú
(f) Implied question: Why don't we learn from [the verse] Midos (that wet measures are Mekadesh dry, even though it is not proper for them)?
îùåí ãìà ðøàå îòåìí àìà æå ìîãéãú ìç åæå ìîãéãú éáù
(g) Answer: It is because they were never proper for this - these are only for measuring wet, and these are only for measuring dry. (Yashar v'Tov - they are not proper for other matters. Further, they were not used for anything other than measuring!)
åòåã éù ìôøù ããéé÷ äù''ñ îãàîø ùîåàì àáì îæø÷åú î÷ãùéï åìà ÷àîø î÷ãùéï (îðçåú åðñëéí) [ö"ì îðçú ðñëéí - éùø åèåá] ãëúéá áääåà ÷øà ù''î ãàôé' îðçú çåèà ÷àîø ãéìôéðï îìúà îîéìúà
(h) Explanation #3: The Gemara infers that since Shmuel said "but buckets are Mekadesh", and he did not say "they are Mekadesh Minchas Nesachim", which is written in that verse, this shows that he refers even to Minchas Chotei, for we learn a matter from another.
åîãî÷ãùéï îæø÷ å÷òøä îä ùàéï øàåé ìäí äåàéì åøàåé ìëì (àçã) [ö"ì àçø - öàï ÷ãùéí] ë''ù æä äëìé ùî÷ãù îä ùøàåé ìäéåú áúåëå
1. And since a bucket or bowl is Mekadesh what is not proper for them, since [the contents] are proper for another Kli, all the more so this Kli is Mekadesh what is proper to be in it. (Yashar v'Tov - in Explanation #3, the Torah revealed only about Minchas Nesachim and similar matters. Since Shmuel learned even Minchas Chotei, he must learn a matter from another.)
òåã éù ìôøù ããéé÷ îãéìéó ùîåàì ãåøåú îùòä îðùéàéí ë''ù ãéìôéðï îéìúà îîéìúà ëøá ãîðçä ÷ãåùä áìà ùîï ëîå ùîöéðå áîðçú çåèà
(i) Explanation #4: [The Gemara] infers that since Shmuel learns Doros (what applies to all generations) from Sha'ah (what applied only at the time of the Milu'im), from the Nesi'im, all the more so we learn a matter from another, like Rav, that a Minchah is Kadosh without oil, like we find regarding Minchas Chotei.
åàò''â ãîåëç ì÷îï áä÷åîõ øáä (ã' éè:) ãìà éìéó ùîåàì ãåøåú îùòä àìà îùåí ãúðà áéä ÷øà úøéñø æéîðé
(j) Implied question: It is proven below (19b) that Shmuel learns Doros from Sha'ah only because the Torah repeated [Korbanos ha'Nesi'im] 12 times! (How can we infer that we learn a matter from another, when no verse says to do so?)
î''î ëéåï ãéìéó ãåøåú îùòä áëì òðéï ùéìîãå äåà äãéï îéìúà îîéìúà:
(k) Answer: In any case, since he learns Doros from Sha'ah, for whatever reason, the same applies to a matter from another.