1)

TOSFOS DH Sha'ar Nikanor

úåñôåú ã"ä ùòø ðé÷ðåø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses why he may go only until Sha'ar Nikanor.)

ùäéà òæøú ðùéí åòã ùí îçðä ìåééä ëãàîø áôñçéí áôø÷ ëéöã öåìéï (ãó ôä:) ùòø ðé÷ðåø ìà ðú÷ãù [á÷ãåùú] îçðä ùëéðä åéù ìå ãéï îçðä ìåééä

(a)

Explanation: This is Ezras Nashim. Until there is Machaneh Levi, like it says in Pesachim (85b) that Sha'ar Nikanor was not given Kedushas Machaneh Shechinah. It has the law of Machaneh Levi;

åòì ëøçê äà [ãëúéá åáà] ìôðé ä' ùòø ðé÷ðåø äåà [ãàéï ìåîø] ìôðé ä' áòæøä îîù ùäøé îçåñø ëôøä äåà

1.

You are forced to say that "u'Va Lifnei Hash-m" refers to Sha'ar Nikanor. You cannot say that it literally refers to the Azarah, for he is Mechusar Kaparah;

[åàîøéðï] áñîåê òåã èåîàúå áå ìøáåú îçåñøé ëôåøéí ùçééá ëøú àí ðëðñ ìîçðä ùëéðä.

2.

We say below that "Od Tum'aso Bo" includes a Mechusar Kipurim. He is Chayav Kares if he enters Machaneh Shechinah.

2)

TOSFOS DH Michdi Sha'ar Nikanor v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä îëãé ùòø ðé÷ðåø ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the question from Nazir Tamei.)

åëé äéëé ãäúí ìà úåëì ìã÷ã÷ îëìì ãòã éåí [äùîéðé] àñåø ìéëðñ ãäà ìéúà ëãîôøù åàæéì

(a)

Explanation: Just like there (Nazir Tamei), you cannot infer that until day eight, he may not enter, for this is not true, like we proceed to explain...

àìà äà åãàé ëé ð÷éè ÷øà åáéåí äùîéðé éáéà ìäåãéò ìðå æîï äáàú ÷øáðåú åìà áà ìàåñøå ìéëðñ ùí ÷åãí ìëï

1.

Rather, surely the verse said "uva'Yom ha'Shmini Yavi" to inform us when he brings Korbanos. It does not come to forbid him to enter there beforehand;

åâáé æá ðîé àëúé îðà ìéä ìúðà ãàñåø ìéëðñ

2.

Also regarding a Zav, what is the Tana's source to forbid entering?

åäà ãìéëà ìîéîø ôúç àäì îåòã ø"ì (äâäú áøëú øàù) ôúç ääéëì

(b)

Implied question: Why can't we say that "Pesach Ohel Mo'ed" means Pesach ha'Heichal!

ëãàùëçï âáé ùìîéí åùçèå ôúç àäì îåòã åãøùéðï áæáçéí (ãó ðä:) [ùéäéå] ãìúåú ääéëì ôúåçéï

1.

Source: We find regarding Shelamim "u'Shchato Pesach Ohel Mo'ed", and we expound in Zevachim (55b) that the doors of the Heichal must be open [when it is slaughtered];

åìòåìí àéîà ìê ãåãàé èáåì éåí ãîú àñåø ìéëðñ ùí ãäåà îçðä ùëéðä

2.

And really, I can say that surely, a Tevul Yom of Mes may not enter there, for it is Machaneh Shechinah!

åé"ì ãìäà ìà àéöèøéê ìîòè (äâäú îäø"á øðùáåøâ) ãäà ëúéá èîà éäéä ìøáåú èáåì éåí ãðô÷à ìï áñîåê ãëì èáåì éåí àñåø ìéëðñ áîçðä ùëéðä

(c)

Answer: We need not exclude this, for it says "Tamei Yihyeh", to include a Tevul Yom. We derive below that every Tevul Yom may not enter Machaneh Shechinah;

àìà åãàé áà äëúåá ìåîø æîï äáàú ÷øáðåú áùîéðé åìà ÷åãí ìä åìà ìàåñøå ìéëðñ ä"ð ðéîà äëé.

1.

Rather, surely the verse comes to teach that the time to bring Korbanos is day eight, and not before, and not to forbid entering. Also here (regarding Zav) we can say so.

3)

TOSFOS DH v'Iy b'Machaneh Levi Kai

úåñôåú ã"ä åàé [áîçðä ìåééä ÷àé]

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why this is relevant.)

ëìåîø ãàæ (äâäú áøëú øàù) îåúø ìéëðñ áîçðä ìåééä

(a)

Explanation: I.e. [if Pesach Ohel Mo'ed refers to Machaneh Levi,] then (the Nazir Tamei, on day eight) may enter Machaneh Levi.

4)

TOSFOS DH v'Iy (part 2)

úåñôåú ã"ä åàé (çì÷ á)

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains what is difficult if it is Machaneh Levi.)

àîàé ìé÷øé ìéä àäì îåòã

(a)

Citation of Gemara: Why is it called Ohel Mo'ed?

ùäøé áîçðä ìåééä äëúåá îãáø ò"ë áîçðä ùëéðä äåà æä ùàñåø ìéëðñ ë"æ ùäåà îçåñø ëôåøéí

(b)

Explanation: The verse discusses Machaneh Levi! Rather, you are forced to say that it is Machaneh Shechinah, which he may not enter as long as he is Mechusar Kipurim;

åàîàé ÷øé ìéä ôúç àäì îåòã ãîùîò úåê äòæøä ìôðé ääéëì ëîå åùçèå ôúç àäì îåòã äëúåá áùìîéí ùðùçèå úåê äòæøä

1.

Also, why is it called Pesach Ohel Mo'ed, which connotes in the Azarah, in front of the Heichal, just like "u'Shchato Pesach Ohel Mo'ed" written regarding Shelamim, which is slaughtered in the Azarah?

5)

TOSFOS DH v'Iy (part 3)

úåñôåú ã"ä åàé (çì÷ â)

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the source to forbid Mechusar Kipurim in Machaneh Shechinah and Machaneh Levi.)

ìîéîøà îä àäì îåòã îçåñø ëôåøéí ìà òééì

(a)

Citation of Gemara: This teaches that just like a Mechusar Kipurim may not enter the Ohel Mo'ed...

àó ìîçðä ìåééä ðîé îçåñø ëôøä ìà òééì

(b)

Explanation: Also Machaneh Levi, a Mechusar Kipurim may not enter.

åàäì îåòã îðìï ãëúéá èîà éäéä ìøáåú èáåì éåí òåã èåîàúå áå ìøáåú îçåñø ëôøä (äâäú áøëú øàù) ùàñåø ìéëðñ áîçðä ùëéðä

1.

And what was the source that he may not enter the Ohel Mo'ed? (This was obvious to the Tana.) "Tamei Yihyeh" includes a Tevul Yom. "Od Tum'aso Bo" includes a Mechusar Kipurim. He may not enter Machaneh Shechinah. (Orach Mishur and Keren Orah say that the following is a comment added later to Tosfos; many words are missing.)

äâ"ä úéîä äøé çåæø àáéé åîùðé ëãáøé çáéøéå ãøá ðúï îîä ùäéå [àåîøéí îñáøú ìáí] àìîà ÷ñáø èáåì éåí ãæá ëæá (äâäú àåøç îéùåø)

(c)

Comment - Question: This is astounding. Abaye returns and answers like the words of Rav Noson's colleagues, what they said from their own reasoning "this shows that Tevul Yom of Zav is like a Zav"; (This is like our text. In the text of most Rishonim, Abaye said that he is not like a Zav.)

åîä ùìà ôéøùå àéê äéä îåëéç äúðà (äâäú àåøç îéùåø) ãèáåì éåí ëæá

1.

[Abaye asked only] that Rav Noson's colleagues did not explain how the Tana proved that Tevul Yom of Zav is like a Zav.

(àñåø) ãæá àñåø ìéëðñ àì ôúç àäì îåòã åðæéø éëåì ìéëðñ áîçðä ùëéðä

2.

[They hold that he proved it from "ba'Yom ha'Shemini"; which connotes that without ha'Arev Shemesh, a Tevul Yom of] Zav may not enter to Pesach Ohel Mo'ed. [If so, we should say the same about a Nazir. Why do we say that] a Nazir can enter Machaneh Shechinah? (Keren Orah - therefore, Abaye explained their words. It is a proper proof that a Zav is forbidden in Machaneh Levi, for the verse discusses Machaneh Levi, and it connotes that without ha'Arev Shemesh he may not enter. It is called Ohel Mo'ed to teach that he may not enter);

ùäøé ìàå îçåñø ëôåøéí äåà ãìà î÷øé îçåñø ëôåøéí àìà ìîé ùèåîàä éåöàä îâåôå.

3.

[However, regarding a Nazir, it discusses Machaneh Shechinah. Even though he must bring a Korban,] he is not Mechusar Kipurim. Mechusar Kipurim applies only to one from whose body Tum'ah comes out.

45b----------------------------------------45b

6)

TOSFOS DH R. Yoshiyah Omer Eino Tzarich...

úåñôåú ã"ä øáé éàùéä àåîø àéðå öøéê...

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions why this is better than the first Tana's reasoning.)

ëé äåìê ìòáåã òáåãä åàéðå ëì ëê ãøê áæéåï

(a)

Explanation: [Even one who ascends the Mizbe'ach], he goes to do Avodah, and it is not in such a disgraceful way [if he would ascend steps].

å÷ùä ãîàé àéðå öøéê ìîãøù îñáøà àìà î÷"å

(b)

Question: Why does he say "this is not needed" to expound from reasoning, rather, [we expound] from a Kal va'Chomer? (Reasoning is no worse than a Kal va'Chomer!)

åáñéôøé àéï äâéøñà ø' éàùéä àåîø àìà ëì æä îãáøé ú"÷

(c)

Observation: In the Sifri, the text does not say "R. Yoshiyah says," Rather, all this is from the first Tana's words.

åäëé àéúà äúí àå àéðå àìà ôúç àäì îåòã îîù àîøú à"ë ãøê áæéåï

1.

Citation (Sifri): Or perhaps literally [he shaves at] Pesach Ohel Mo'ed! If so, this is disgraceful.

àå àéðå àìà îîù ëìåîø ãàéï ìäåöéà îñáøà äôñå÷ îîùîòå

i.

Explanation: "Or perhaps literally" means that we should not explain the verse unlike its connotation due to [mere] reasoning!

äøé äåà àåîø ìà úòìä ÷"å ìãáø áæéåï.

2.

Citation (cont.): It says "do not ascend [the Mizbe'ach on steps]." All the more so, a matter of disgrace is forbidden.

i.

Note: According to the Sifri's text, Question (b) is not difficult. Without the Kal va'Chomer, the Tana himself was unsure whether he may rely on his reasoning.

7)

TOSFOS DH Lo Hayah Meshale'ach Tachas ha'Dud

úåñôåú ã"ä ìà äéä îùìç úçú äãåã

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that he must shave in Yerushalayim.)

ðøàä ãîëì î÷åí ôùéèà ìéä ìúðà ãàäðé ôùèà ã÷øà ãîùîò ãáéøåùìéí äåà îâìç ãàí (ëï äåà áãôåñ åðöéä) äéä îâìç áâáåìéï ìà äéä îùìç (äâäú îäø"á øðùáåøâ) úçú äãåã

(a)

Assertion: It seems that it is obvious to the Tana that the simple meaning of the verse helps. It connotes that he shaves in Yerushalayim, for if he shaved in the Gevulin (outside Yerushalayim), he would not send his hair under the pot;

ãëúéá á÷øà åâìç äðæéø ôúç àäì îåòã åì÷ç àú ùòø øàù ðæøå åðúï òì äàù àùø úçú æáç äùìîéí åàéëà úðà ããøéù áâî' éöà æä ùîçåñø ì÷éçä äáàä åðúéðä

1.

It says in the verse "v'Gilach ha'Nazir Pesach Ohel Mo'ed v'Lakach Es Se'ar Rosh Nizro v'Nasan Al ha'Esh Asher Tachas Zevach ha'Shelamim", and there is a Tana who expounds in the Gemara "this excludes this one [who literally shaves in the Azarah], who needs to take, bring and put [his hair under where they cook the Shelamim]." (It is obvious to him that they do not cook it in the Azarah);

åä"ð îçåñø äáàú ùòøå îçåõ ìéøåùìéí ìúúí úçú ãåã äùìîéí áéøåùìéí.

2.

Also here, his hair must be brought from outside Yerushalayim to put it under the pot of the Shelamim in Yerushalayim!

8)

TOSFOS DH R. Meir Omer ha'Kol Meshalchin Tachas ha'Dud

úåñôåú ã"ä øáé îàéø àåîø [äëì îùìçéï úçú äãåã]

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions R. Meir's source for the exception.)

áéï ðæéø èäåø áîãéðä åáéï ðæéø èîà [áî÷ãù], çåõ îï äèîà ùáîãéðä

(a)

Explanation: [All send the hair under the pot], whether a Nazir Tahor [even] in the Medinah (outside the Mikdash), or a Nazir Tamei in the Mikdash, except for a Tamei in the Medinah.

áâî' àîøéðï îôðé ùùòøå ð÷áø åëï ùìäé úîåøä (ãó ìã.)

1.

The Gemara explains that this is because the hair [of a Nazir Tamei who shaved in the Medinah] must be buried, and so it says in Temurah (34a).

àáì ÷ùä îðìï ãð÷áø åö"ò.

(b)

Question: What is the Tana's source that it must be buried?