1) TOSFOS DH V'Chiper Es Mikdash ha'Kodesh Zeh Lifnai v'Lifnim Ohel Mo'ed...
úåñôåú ã"ä åëôø àú î÷ãù ä÷åãù æä ìôðé åìôðéí àäì îåòã...
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that the goat atoned for Tum'ah in these places.)
áô''÷ ãùáåòåú (ãó éâ:) ôéøù á÷åðèøñ ãîééøé áèîà ùùéîù ìôðé åìôðéí àå áäéëì àå áîæáç
(a) Explanation (Rashi in Shevuos 13b): This discusses a Tamei who served in the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim, or in the Heichal, or on the Mizbe'ach.
åúéîä ãìà àùëçï ãîëôø ùòéø äðòùä áôðéí àîùîù áèåîàä åëàï ôéøù á÷åðèøñ ãîééøé áèîà ùðëðñ ìôðé åìôðéí àå ðâò áîæáç
(b) Question: We do not find that the inner goat atones for Tum'ah, and here Rashi explained that we discuss a Tamei who entered inside or touched the Mizbe'ach!
å÷ùä ãàîàé áòé ÷øà äëà àëì çã åçã äà áô''á ãùáåòåú (ãó èæ:) ðô÷à ëøú áëåìäå îçã ÷øà îãëúéá îùëï åî÷ãù àí àéðå òðéï ìèåîàä ùáçåõ úðäå òðéï ìèåîàä ùáôðéí
(c) Question: Why do we need a verse here each one? In Shevuos (16b) we learn that there is Kares for all of them from one verse, since it says "Mishkan" and "Mikdash". If it is not needed for Tum'ah outside, use it to teach about Tum'ah inside!
åùîà îàçø ãðô÷à ìï äëà áëåìäå ãîúëôøéï ìà îéáòé ìòðéï ëøú àìà çã ÷øà
(d) Answer: Perhaps after we learn here that all of them get Kaparah [through the goat], we require for Kares only one verse. (Yashar v'Tov - since all need Kaparah, this shows that all are as severe as the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim.)
åòåã ÷ùä äà ãúðéà áô''÷ ãùáåòåú (ãó æ:) åëôø òì ä÷åãù îèåîàåú áðé éùøàì ùéù ìé áòðéï äæä ìäáéà ùìù èåîàåú èåîàú òáåãú ëåëáéí åâéìåé òøéåú åùôéëåú ãîéí å÷àîø øáé ùîòåï îî÷åîå äåà îåëøç
(e) Question: A Beraisa in Shevuos (7b) teaches "v'Chiper Al ha'Kodesh mi'Tum'os Bnei Yisrael" - perhaps I should include three [Aveiros] that are called Tum'os - idolatry, Arayos and murder, and R. Shimon said, it is proven from its place [unlike this];
äåä ìéä ìîéîø îäëà ãòì ëøçê áèåîàú ä÷åãù äëúåá îãáø
1. He should have said [that it is proven] from here. You are forced to say that it refers to Tum'ah of Kodesh!
åòåã ãáñåó äåöéàå ìå (éåîà ñà.) îééúé ìä àîúðé' áðùôê äãí éáéà àçø åéçæåø åéæä úçìä áôðéí åëï áäéëì åëï áîæáç äæäá
(f) Question: Also, in Yoma (61a, this Drashah) is brought regarding the Mishnah of "if the blood spilled, he brings another [animal] and returns and sprinkles first in the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim, and similarly in the Heichal, and similarly on the gold Mizbe'ach";
îùîò áäãéà ãìòðéï äæàåú ãøéù ãîæä òì áéï äáãéí åòì äôøåëú åòì îæáç äæäá åùéøé äãí òì éñåã îæáç äçéöåï
1. This explicitly connotes that he expounds about Haza'os. He sprinkles between the staves of the Aron, on (towards) the Paroches and on the gold Mizbe'ach, and Shirayim on the Yesod of the outer Mizbe'ach;
å÷øé ìéä ìîæáç äçéöåï òæøåú ìôé ùäéä áòæøä ãàéëà òæøú ëäðéí åòæøú éùøàì ã÷ãåùúí ùåä ìéçùá îçðä ùëéðä [ö"ì áôø÷ á' ãùáåòåú (ãó èæ.) - áàøåú äîéí]
2. The outer Mizbe'ach is called "Azaros" because it was in the Azarah, that there are there Ezras Kohanim and Ezras Yisrael. Their Kedushah is equal to be considered Machaneh Shechinah in Shevuos (16a).
åàò''â ãëåìäå äæàåú ëáø ëúéáé åàôéìå òéëåáà ãøùéðï îåëìä (áôø÷ á' ãùáåòåú (ãó èæ) - áàøåú äîéí îåç÷å) àí ëéìä ëéôø åàí ìà ëéìä ìà ëéôø
(g) Implied question: All of the Haza'os are already written, and we even expound that they are Me'akev, since it says "v'Chilah" - if he finished [the Haza'os], he was Mechaper. If he did not finish, he was not Mechaper!
àéöèøéê äàé ÷øà ãìà úéîà äðé îéìé àäøï ìäëé ëúá øçîðà åëôø äëäï àùø éîùç àåúå åàùø éîìà ëããøùéðï áúåøú ëäðéí åëúéá áúøéä åëôø àú î÷ãù ä÷åãù
(h) Answer: We need this verse, lest we say that this is only Aharon. Therefore, the Torah wrote v'Chiper ha'Kohen Asher Yimshach Oso va'Asher Yemalei" (to include future Kohanim Gedolim), like we expound in Toras Kohanim, and it says afterwards "v'Chiper Es Mikdash ha'Kodesh."
2) TOSFOS DH Hushvu Kulan l'Kaparah Achas she'Miskaprin b'Se'ir ha'Mishtale'ach
úåñôåú ã"ä äåùåå ëåìï ìëôøä àçú ùîúëôøéï áùòéø äîùúìç
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses Kaparah of the inner goat.)
àáì áùòéø äðòùä áôðéí ìà äåùåå ãàéï ëäðéí îúëôøéí ëããøùéðï áô''÷ ãùáåòåú (ãó éâ:) ãëúéá àùø ìòí
(a) Distinction: However, they are not the same regarding the inner goat. Kohanim do not get Kaparah [through it], like we expound in Shevuos (13b), for it says "Asher la'Am."
åàí úàîø åìåéí áîä îúëôøéí àé áùòéø äðòùä áôðéí àùø ìòí ëúéá åàéëà ìîàï ãàîø áôø÷ äæøåò (çåìéï ÷ìà:) ìåéí ìà àé÷øå òí
(b) Question: How do Leviyim get Kaparah? If it is through the inner goat, [this cannot be, for] it says "Asher la'Am", and there is an opinion in Chulin (131b) that Leviyim are not called "Am"!
åàé áôøå ùì àäøï áéúå ëúéá ãäééðå ëäðéí
1. And if it is through Aharon's bull, [this cannot be, for] it says "Beiso", i.e. Kohanim!
åéù ìåîø ãîúëôøéï áùòéø äðòùä áôðéí îàçø ãëúéá éëôø àìå äìåéí ãàùîåòéðï ÷øà ãîúëôøéï
(c) Answer: They get Kaparah through the inner goat, since it is written "Yechaper" - these are the Leviyim. The verse teaches that they get Kaparah.
3) TOSFOS DH v'Ein Se'irei Avodas Kochavim Te'unin Semichah
úåñôåú ã"ä åàéï ùòéøé òáåãú ëåëáéí èòåðéï ñîéëä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the need for the verse, and why we do not learn oppositely.)
åàéöèøéê ÷øà ìîòåèé ãìà úéìó îôø äòìí ãáø ùì öáåø ãæä öáåø åäàé öáåø
(a) Explanation #1: We need the verse to exclude, lest we learn from Par Helam Davar of the Tzibur, for this is of the Tzibur and this is of the Tzibur.
àé ðîé îùåí ãø' ùîòåï îøáé ìäå áñîåê îãëúéá (åé÷øà ã) åñîê éãå òì øàù äùòéø åø' éäåãä îå÷é ìä ìøáåú ùòéø ðçùåï
(b) Explanation #2: It is because R. Shimon includes them from "v'Samach Yado Al Rosh ha'Sa'ir", and R. Yehudah establishes it to include Se'ir Nachshon.
åàéôëà ìà îñúáøà ìéä ìîéîø ãîäçé îîòè ùòéø ðçùåï åîäùòéø éøáä ùòéøé òáåãú ëåëáéí
(c) Implied question: Why didn't he want to say oppositely, that we exclude Se'ir Nachshon from ha'Chai, and "ha'Sa'ir" includes Se'irei Avodas Kochavim?
îùåí ãîäùòéø ãëúé' âáé ðùéà àéú ìï ìøáåéé èôé ðîé ùòéø ðùéà ëîå ùòéø ãðçùåï
(d) Answer #1: Because "ha'Sa'ir" is written regarding a Nasi, it is more reasonable to include the goat of a Nasi, like Se'ir Nachshon.
åìé ðøàä ãìäëé ìéëà ìîéîø çé ìîòè [ùòéø] ðçùåï îùåí ãàé àîøú áùìîà ìøáåú ùôéø
(e) Answer #2: It seems to me we cannot say that ha'Chai excludes Se'ir Nachshon, for granted, if you will say that it includes, it is fine;
àìà àé àîøú ìîòè ìùúå÷ ÷øà îéðéä ãùòä îãåøåú ìà éìôéðï ëãàîø ô' ëì äîðçåú áàåú îöä (ìòéì ãó ðè.) âáé îðçú ùîéðé ììáåðä:
1. However, if you will say that it excludes, the verse should not have mentioned this, and we do not learn Sha'ah (what applied only once) from Doros (what applies to all generations), like it says above (59a) regarding the Minchah of the eighth day [of Chanukas ha'Mishkan] for Levonah.
92b----------------------------------------92b
4) TOSFOS DH Ha l'R. Shimon Semichah b'Ba'alim Ba'inan
úåñôåú ã"ä äà ìøáé ùîòåï ñîéëä ááòìéí áòéðï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses who is considered the owner.)
åàäøï ìàå áòìéí äåà
(a) Explanation: Aharon (the Kohen Gadol) is not the owner.
ãàé îùåí ùîúëôø òí ëì éùøàì
(b) Implied question: [He should be considered the owner, for] he gets Kaparah through it with all of Yisrael!
äà àîø ø' ùîòåï áîñëú äåøéåú (ãó ä.) ôø åùòéø ìëì ùáè
(c) Answer: R. Shimon said in Horiyos (5a) that each Shevet brings a bull and goat. (Surely he does not get Kaparah through Korbanos for other Shevatim.)
åäà ãçùéáé æ÷ðéí áòìéí àò''ô ùéù ôø åùòéø ìáéú ãéï áôðé òöîï
(d) Implied question: The [Sanhedrin] are considered the owners [of all of them], even though there is a bull and goat for Beis Din by themselves!
ëéåï ãòì éãéäï ðòùä äçèà ÷øé ìäå áòìéí
(e) Answer: Since the sin was done through them, they are called owners.
5) TOSFOS DH Girsa b'Alma
úåñôåú ã"ä âéøñà áòìîà
(SUMMARY: Tosfos brings two opinions about what this refers to.)
ì''à ôéøù á÷åðèøñ ëìåîø ãøáé éäåãä ìéú ìéä äìëä ìîùä îñéðé áùúé ñîéëåú àìà áâéøñà áòìîà ð÷è ìäå åéìéó ìäå î÷øàé
(a) Version #1 (Rashi): I.e. R. Yehudah does not have a tradition from Sinai for two Semichos [b'Tzibur], rather, he said so for a mere Girsa (text that helps to remember the Halachah), and [really] he learns them from verses.
å÷ùä ãáôø÷ ëì äîðçåú áàåú îöä (ìòéì ñá:) ôøéê åéäå æáçé ùìîé öáåø èòåðéï ñîéëä î÷''å åîùðé âîéøé ùúé ñîéëåú áöáåø
(b) Question: Above (62b) it asks that Zivchei Shalmei Tzibur should require Semichah based on a Kal v'Chomer, and it says that we have a tradition from Sinai [that there are only] two Semichos b'Tzibur!
åé''ì ãäúí îééøé ìø' ùîòåï ãàéú ìéä âîøà ëãàîø ðîé áñîåê ìøáéðà åøáé éäåãä äåä îîòè æáçé ùìîé öáåø îäôø
(c) Answer: There it discusses according to R. Shimon, who has a tradition, like it says below according to Ravina. R. Yehudah would exclude Zivchei Shalmei Tzibur from "ha'Par".
òåã ôéøù ìùåï àçø âéøñà áòìîà ÷øàé àñîëúà áòìîà ìàå÷îé âéøñà ìñéîðà
(d) Version #2 (Rashi): It is mere Girsa, i.e. the verses are a mere Asmachta, to establish a text for a Siman (to remember the Halachah).
6) TOSFOS DH Ika Lemifrach
úåñôåú ã"ä àéëà ìîéôøê
(SUMMARY: Tosfos asks why we do not learn from the Hekesh of all Korbanos.)
úéîä ðéìó îä÷éùà ãëì ä÷øáðåú ëããøùéðï (æáçéí ãó æ:) áéåí öååúå æä áëåø îòùø åôñç
(a) Question: We should learn from the Hekesh of all Korbanos, like we expound (Zevachim 7b) 'b'Yom Tzavoso" - this is Bechor, Ma'aser and Pesach.
7) TOSFOS DH she'Chen Te'unin Nesachim u'Tenufas Chazah v'Shok
úåñôåú ã"ä ùëï èòåðéï ðñëéí åúðåôú çæä åùå÷
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we cannot learn from a Tzad ha'Shavah.)
åëé úéîà çèàú åàùí éåëéçå
(a) Question: Chatas and Asham should be Yochi'ach (prove that the law does not depend on this)!
îä ìëåìäå ãîúï ãîéí îøåáä ìîæáç úàîø áäðé ãáîúðä àçú:
(b) Answer: You cannot learn from all of them, which have many Matanos of Dam (four, or two that are four), to these (Bechor, Ma'aser and Pesach), which have one Matanah.