(a)According to Rav Ashi, the source of the Machlokes Rabah and Rav Chisda (whether a Machsheves Areilim from the Shechitah to the Zerikah is effective or not) is the Pasuk in Vayikra "v'Nirtzah Lo Lechaper Alav" ('Alav v'Lo Al Chavero'). What Pesul are we talking about? Which basic concept (according to everybody) do we learn from this Derashah?
(b)What will be the Din by Shechato l'Mulim, li'Zerok ha'Dam la'Areilim Menuyim?
(c)How does Rabah learn from the the Pasuk in a. that such a Machshavah is Kasher?
(d)What does Rav Chisda say to that?
(a)According to Rav Ashi, the source of the Machlokes Rabah and Rav Chisda (whether a Machsheves Arelim from the Shechitah to the Zerikah is effective or not) is the Pasuk "v'Nirtzah Lo Lechaper Alav" - revolves around whether a Machshavah for someone who is not a Bar Kaparah like the owner, renders it Pasul or not. They argue by a Machshavah which is entirely she'Lo li'Menuyav who are also Arelim (and therefore not Bnei Kaparah) - even though there are Menuyim who are not Arelim. Rav Chisda renders the Korban, Pasul, because of the Machsheves she'Lo li'Menuyav), Rabah renders it Kasher.
(b)Even Rabah will agree that the same Machshavah for Arelim who are Menuyim (even from the Shechitah to the Zerikah), renders the Pesach, Pasul.
(c)Rabah learns from "v'Nirtzah Lo Lechaper Alav", 'Alav v'Lo Al Chavero' - 'Alav, Dumyah Didei, Mah Hu d'Bar Kaparah' ... .
(d)Rav Chisda holds that it renders the Korban Pasul, since - 'Ho'il' - the Arel could circumcise himself; this does indeed render him a Bar Kaparah.
(a)We just learnt that Rav Chisda holds of Ho'il, and Rabah does not. They both appear to have switched their opinions from the case of 'ha'Ofeh mi'Yom-Tov l'Chol' (quoted above on 46b). How do we reconcile ...
1. ... Rabah here with his opinion there, where he does hold of Ho'il?
2. ... Rav Chisda here with his opinion there, where he does not hold of Ho'il?
1. In the case of 'ha'Ofeh mi'Yom-Tov l'Chol', Rabah holds that one is not Chayav, because of Ho'il' (since guests might come) - even Lekula, because there is no act that still needs to be performed (it is not Mechusar Ma'seh); whereas in our case, where the Arel will have to have his Orlah removed, it is Mechusar Ma'seh, and Rabah will not hold 'Ho'il'.
2. As for Rav Chisda, he holds of 'Ho'il Lechumra (like in our case, even though it is Mechusar Ma'seh), but not by 'ha'Ofeh mi'Yom-Tov l'Chol', which is Lekula (even though it is not Mechusar Ma'seh).
(a)The Beraisa on the previous Amud, suggested 'Ho'il v'Orlah Poseles, v'Tum'ah Poseles. Mah Tum'ah, Lo Asah Miktzas Tum'ah k'Chol Tum'ah, Af Orlah' ... . What is the problem with establishing the Beraisa by Tum'as Gavri (when some of the owners are Tamei, as opposed to some of the limbs)
(b)The Seifa of the Beraisa reads 'Danin Davar she'Eino Noheg b'Chol ha'Zevachim (Orlah) mi'Davar she'Eino Noheg b'Chol ha'Zevachim (Tum'ah), v'Al Yochi'ach Zman' ... . What sort of Tum'ah is the Seifa talking about?
(c)Why do the Pesulim of Orlah and Tum'ah not apply to all Kodshim - only to Pesach?
(d)Is it not strange, for the Reisha to be talking about Tum'as Basar, and the Seifa about Tum'as ha'Guf? How does the Gemara initially answer this?
(a)If the Beraisa 'Ho'il v'Orlah Poseles, v'Tum'ah Poseles. Mah Tum'ah, Lo Asah Miktzas Tum'ah k'Chol Tum'ah, Af Orlah' ... refers to Tum'as Gavri (when some of the designees are Tamei), then why should Miktzas Orlah be any different? If one Shechted the Pesach on behalf of some Arelim and some Mulim, it is just as Kasher as Miktzas Tum'ah? So it must be talking about Tum'as Basar.
(b)The Seifa of the Beraisa 'Danin Davar she'Eino Noheg b'Chol ha'Zevachim (Orlah) mi'Davar she'Eino Noheg b'Chol ha'Zevachim (Tum'ah), v'Al Yochi'ach Zman' ... - must be speaking about Tum'as Gavri; because otherwise (if it was talking about Tum'as Basar, why should it not apply to other Korbanos)?
(c)The Pesulim of Orlah and Tum'ah do not apply to all Kodshim - because the owners of other Korbanos are not obligated to eat them, in which case they may send them through someone else; the owner of a Korban Pesach on the other hand, who is obligated to eat his Korban, may not eat it when he is Tamei, and sending his Korban through someone else will be ineffective.
(d)Indeed, the Reisha is speaking by Tum'as Basar and the Seifa by Tum'as Gavri; the Beraisa is asking from Tum'ah, irrespective which one.
(a)The Gemara gives an alternative answer to the previous question, according to Rebbi Yehoshua? What does Rebbi Yehoshua say, and what is the answer?
(b)Why is the Pesach different?
(c)The Seifa of the Seifa states 'Danin Davar she'Lo Hutar mi'Chelalo (Orlah), mi'Davar she'Lo Hutar mi'Chelalo, v'Al Tochi'ach Tum'ah, she'Harei Hutrah mi'Chelalah. How is ...
1. ... Tum'as Gavri Hutrah mi'Chelalah?
2. ... Tum'as ha'Guf Hutrah mi'Chelalah ?
(a)Alternatively, answers the Gemara, both the Reisha and the Seifa speak about Tum'as Basar. And there is one aspect of Tum'as Basar that applies to the Korban Pesach and not to other Kodshim: and that is if Nitma Basar, v'Cheilev Kayam, which (according to Rebbi Yehoshua) is Kasher by other Kodshim, but Pasul by the Pesach (vice-versa will be Kasher in both cases).
(b)The reason that the Pesach is Pasul in the previous case, is because, since the flesh of the Pesach became Tamei, it cannot be eaten, and we have already learnt many times that (unlike all other Korbanos) the prime purpose of the Pesach is to be eaten.
1. ... Tum'as Gavri is Hutrah mi'Chelalah - by the Korban Tzibur, which is brought if, for example. the majority of Kahanim are Tamei.
2. ... Tum'as Basar Hutrah mi'Chelalah - by the Korban Pesach, which is brought mainly to be eaten, so that, when the Torah permits a Tzibur a Pesach ha'Ba b'Tum'ah, it is permitting not only, the bringing of the Korban, but even its eating (which is the main objective of bringing it) even though the meat will inevitably become Tamei.
(a)A Pesach is only Kasher within its first year. If someone Shechts a Pesach which has passed its first birthday, it is Kasher. If however, one Shechted another animal as a Pesach - bi'Zmano, Rebbi Eliezer rules that it is Pasul. What does Rebbi Yehoshua say, and what is his reason?
(b)What would Rebbi Eliezer say if one were to Shecht the same animal she'Lo bi'Zmano as a Pesach? How is this a Kashya on Rav Chisda, who holds 'Ho'il' Lechumra?
(c)How does Rav Chisda answer the Kashya from the Pasuk in Bo "va'Amartem Zevach Pesach Hu"?
(a)Rebbi Yehoshua says that even if someone Shechts another animal as a Pesach bi'Zmano - it is Kasher, because of the principle 'Kol ha'Zevachim she'Nizbechu she'Lo Lisheman, Kesherim'. The fact that the former was Shechted bi'Zmano, only enhances the principle, since a Pesach bi'Zmano is Kasher as a Pesach (so we will learn it from a Kal va'Chomer from another Korban that was Shechted as a Pesach she'Lo bi'Zmano, which is not).
(b)If one were to Shecht the same animal she'Lo bi'Zmano, even Rebbi Eliezer would agree that it is Kasher. According to Rav Chisda, why does Rebbi Eliezer not apply here, the principle of 'Ho'il' (since it is Pasul bi'Zmano, it is also Pasuk she'Lo bi'Zmano)?
(c)Rav Chisda answers that Rebbi Eliezer learns the distinction between bi'Zmano and she'Lo bi'Zmano from a Pasuk - because the Torah writes in Bo "va'Amartem Zevach Pesach Hu" - 'Hu' b'Havayaso, Lo Hu Leshum Acheirim, v'Lo Acheirim Lishmo' (his reason for saying Pasul against the opinion of Rebbi Yehoshua). The Torah has however compared 'Hu Leshum Acheirim' and 'Acheirim Lishmo', from which we learn that just as the Pesach is only Pasul if it is Shechted as another Korban bi'Zmano, so too, is another Korban that is Shechted as a Pesach Pasul only bi'Zmano'.
(a)What is Sefer Yuchsin?
(b)Perhaps Rebbi Yochanan had some unkown reason for not wanting to teach it to Rav Simla'i. What reason did he present to Rav Simla'i for not doing so?
(c)Why did Rebbi Yochanan consider Rav Simla'i's request to learn Sefer Yuchsin in three months ridiculous?
(d)What was Beruri'ah's learning capacity?
(a)Sefer Yuchsin is a Sefer which contained all the oral Torah concerning the book of Tenach 'Divrei ha'Yamim'.
(b)Rebbi Yochanan told Rav Simla'i that he did not want to learn Sefer Yuchsin with him because one does not teach Sefer Yuchsin to anyone from Lud or from Neherda'a (possibly because they were not Meyuchsin), and certainly not Rav Simla'i, who was born in Lud and lived in Neherda'a.
(c)Rebbi Yochanan consider Rav Simla'i's request to learn Sefer Yuchsin in three months, ridiculous - because, if Beruryah, the wife of Rebbi Meir, daughter of Rebbi Chanina ben Teradyon, could not even complete it in three years, how could he possibly expect to finish it in three months?
(d)Beruriah was able to learn three hundred Sugyos from three hundred Rabbanim in one day.
(a)Before departing, Rav Simla'i asked Rebbi Yochanan why Lishmo v'she'Lo Lishmo is Pasul, whereas l'Ochlav v'she'Lo l'Ochlav is Kasher. He gave him four reasons. What are they?
(b)According to Rava, Rebbi Yochanan only gave Rav Simla'i three reasons. Why is that?
(a)Rebbi Yochanan told Rav Simla'i that Lishmo v'she'Lo Lishmo is Pasul, whereas l'Ochlav v'she'Lo l'Ochlav is Kasher - because 1. the former is a an intrinsic Pesul in the body of the Korban Pesach (whereas the latter is an external Pesul); 2. because it is permanent and cannot be canceled (whereas the former can: by giving it to Ochlav only); 3. because it is applicable by all four Avodos (whereas the latter is restricted to the Shechitah); 4. because it applies to a Korban Tzibur as well as to a Korban Yachid (whereas the latter is restricted to a Korban Yachid - since it is only applicable by the Korban Pesach).
(b)According to Rava, Rebbi Yochanan only gave Rav Simla'i three reasons - because reasons 1. and 2. are one and the same; it is permanent because it is an intrinsic Pesul.
(a)Sefer Yuchsin seems to have had some almost magical power. What happened after it was forgotten?
(b)How many camel-loads of Derashos did they carry, that were Darshened between "Atzal" and "Atzal"?
(c)What does 'between Atzal and Atzal' mean?
(a)From the time that Sefer Yuchsin was forgotten - the many explanations contained in it became forgotten, too, and the wisdom of the Chachamim decreased.
(b)Between "Atzal" and "Atzal" - they Darshened four hundred camel-loads of Derashos.
(c)'between Atzal and Atzal' means between two Pesukim, each containing the word "Atzal".