1)

TOSFOS DH Zivchei Shalmei Tzibur Mina Lan

úåñôåú ã"ä æáçé ùìîé öáåø îðà ìï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explained above why we cannot learn from a Binyan Av.)

ìòéì (ãó ð. ã''ä ìà) ôéøùðå àîàé ìà àúé ááðéï àá

(a)

Reference: Above (50a DH Lo) I explained why we do not learn from a Binyan Av. (We cannot learn from Olah Chatas, and Asham, for they are Tadir (more frequent) than Kivsei Atzeres. Liability, we could ask that Kivsei Atzeres are called Shelamim, which do not require the north.)

2)

TOSFOS DH Mah Chatas b'Tzafon

úåñôåú ã"ä îä çèàú áöôåï ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we do not learn Matanos from the Hekesh.)

åìòðéï îúðåú ìéëà ìà÷ùåéé ìçèàú

(a)

Implied question: Why don't we equate it to Chatas regarding Matanos?

ëããøùéðï ìòéì ôø÷ ÷îà (ãó é:) àåúä ãîä ìîòìä åàéï àçøú ãîä ìîòìä

(b)

Answer: We expounded above (10a) "Osah" - [Chatas'] blood is put above, but no other blood is put above.

3)

TOSFOS DH Mah Olah b'Tzafon

úåñôåú ã"ä îä òåìä áöôåï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos asks how we learn that Shechitah in the north is Me'akev.)

åà''ú òéëåáà îðà ìï ãáòåìä ìà éãòéðï òéëåáà àìà î÷''å ãçèàú ëã÷àîø øá àãà áø àäáä ìòéì (ãó îç:) ùìà éäà èôì çîåø îï äòé÷ø

(a)

Implied question: What is the source that it is Me'akev? Regarding Olah we know Ikuv only from a Kal v'Chomer from Chatas, like Rav Ada bar Ahavah above (48b), that the Tafel should not be greater than the Ikar (what is primary);

åãáø äìîã á÷ì åçåîø àéðå çåæø åîìîã áäé÷ù (ìòéì ð:)

1.

Something learned from a Kal v'Chomer (Olah) cannot teach through a Hekesh (above, 50b! Really, there we proved that it can teach according to Rav Papa, but we could not resolve according to the opposing opinion - PF.)

àí ìà ðàîø ãñ''ì ëøá ôôà

(b)

Answer: Perhaps [this Tartzan] holds like Rav Papa.

4)

TOSFOS DH Ela Heikesha Kama l'Mai Asa

úåñôåú ã"ä àìà äé÷ùà ÷îà ìîàé àúà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we could not establish the Hekesh differently.)

ìà îöé ìîéîø ìòðéï àøáò îúðåú òì àøáò ÷øðåú ëãôøé'

(a)

Observation: We cannot say that [the Hekesh] teaches about four Matanos on the four Keranos, like I explained above (DH Mah Chatas, that we expounded that only Dam Chatas is put above).

åëé úéîà ìòðéï ôéñå÷ îúðåú ãðåúï åçåæø åðåúï ëã÷àîø øáé éùîòàì áòåìä ìòéì (ãó ðâ:)

(b)

Suggestion: Perhaps it teaches about separate Matanos, that he puts and returns and puts (he puts on each side by itself, and not two Matanos that are four), like R. Yishmael says about Olah (above, 53b)!

ëéåï ãàéú÷ù ðîé ìòåìä àéï ìðå ìùðåú îòåìä

(c)

Answer: Since [Eil Nazir] is equated also to Olah, we should not make it different than Olah [unless we are forced].

5)

TOSFOS DH Mah Chatas Einah Ne'echeles Ela l'Zichrei Kehunah

úåñôåú ã"ä îä çèàú àéðä ðàëìú àìà ìæëøé ëäåðä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos asks three questions about this Limud.)

úéîä ãì÷îï ô' ãí çèàú (ãó öæ:) åô' äúåãä (îðçåú ãó ôá:) ðô÷à ìï î÷øà àçøéðà

(a)

Question: Below (97b) and in Menachos (82b) we learn from a different verse!

åà''ú ëéåï ãàéú÷ù ìçèàú àí ëï éôñìå ùìà ìùîä ëçèàú

(b)

Question: Since [Eil Nazir] is equated to Chatas, it should be Pasul Lo Lishmah, like Chatas!

åìøáðï ããøùé áô''÷ (ìòéì ãó é:) àåúä ðéçà àáì ìø' àìéòæø ÷ùä

(c)

Partial answer: According to Rabanan, who expound (above 10a) "Osah" (only Chatas), this is fine. However, it is difficult for R. Eliezer (who disagrees there, for he disqualifies Asham Lo Lishmah)!

åöøéê ìã÷ã÷ áô' äúëìú (îðçåú ãó îç:) ãâîø ùìîé çåáä îùìîé ðãáä åìà î÷ùéðï ìçèàú

(d)

Question: This requires investigation in Menachos (48b). We learn Shalmei Chovah from Shalmei Nedavah, and we do not equate to Chatas!

6)

TOSFOS DH she'Im Gilach Al Achas mi'Sheloshtan Yatza

úåñôåú ã"ä ùàí âìç òì àçú îùìùúï éöà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos asks why the Hekesh does not teach another law.)

úéîä ãöøéê ÷øà áðæéø ãîùìç (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí) ùòøå úçú äãåø ùì çèàú úéôå÷ ìé îäê äé÷ùà:

(a)

Question: We need a verse in Nazir (45b) that he sends his hair under the pot [in which they cook] the Chatas. I should already know from this Hekesh!

55b----------------------------------------55b

7)

TOSFOS DH Shelamim she'Shachtan Kodem Pesichas ha'Heichal

úåñôåú ã"ä ùìîéí ùùçèï ÷åãí ôúéçú ääéëì

(SUMMARY: Tosfos brings where this is explained.)

îôåøù áô''÷ ãòéøåáéï (ãó á.) åáô' äúëìú (îðçåú ãó îè:)

(a)

Reference: This is explained in Eruvin (2a) and Menachos (49b).

8)

TOSFOS DH Hu Atzmo Ein Na'aseh Ela k'Pesach Pasu'ach

úåñôåú ã"ä äåà òöîå àéï ðòùä àìà ëôúç ôúåç

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that it is needed only for the time of Shechitah.)

ùäåéìåï îùîùú (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) òùåé ìöðéòåú áòìîà ùìà éñúëìå áäéëì áùòú ùçéèä

(a)

Explanation: The curtain is for mere Tzeni'us, lest people look into the Heichal at the time of Shechitah;

ãàé îùåí ìàçø ùçéèä äøé éëåìéï ìñâåø äãìúåú

1.

Whereas after Shechitah, they can close the doors. (No curtain is needed.)

9)

TOSFOS DH Govhah Mai

úåñôåú ã"ä âåáää îàé

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions that it interrupts.)

úéîä àé âåáää çùéá äôñ÷ à''ë ëðâã äîæáç éôñì ùîôñé÷

(a)

Question: If height is considered an interruption, opposite the Mizbe'ach (i.e. the Mizbe'ach is between the Shochet and Pesach ha'Heichal) should be Pasul, for it interrupts! (We know that the entire Azarah is Kosher for Kodshim Kalim.)

åàéï ìåîø îùåí ãøåàä ôúç îìîòìä ìîæáç

1.

Suggestion: Because he can see the opening above the Mizbe'ach [it is not an interruption].

ãäà ñì÷à ãòúê äùúà ãâåáää ùîðä îôñé÷ ãìéëà ìîéîø îùåí ãâåáää ùîðä äéä ñåúí ëì äôúç ãäà ñáåø ùäéä äôúç âåáä òùøéí àîä ëãôøéê áñîåê åö''ò

2.

Rejection: Now we are thinking that a height of eight interrupts. We cannot say that a height of eight blocks the entire opening, for we are thinking that the opening was 20 [Amos] tall, like it asks below! This requires investigation.

åäà ãàîøéðï áéåîà (äâäú öàï ÷ãùéí) ô''÷ (ãó èæ:) âáé ëäï äùåøó ôøä ùäéä ëåúì îæøçé ðîåê ùéåëì ìøàåú ôúç àäì îåòã å÷àîø äúí ããøê ôìâà àîúà òéìàä äéä éëåì ìøàåú

(b)

Question: It says in Yoma (16b) about the Kohen who burns Parah Adumah that the eastern wall was low, so he could see Pesach Ohel Mo'ed, and it says there that he saw through the top half-Amah (of the opening. This should resolve the question here!)

åùîà äééðå ãå÷à äæàä ùäéúä îòåîã àáì ùçéèä äéúä îéåùá

(c)

Answer: Perhaps only for Haza'ah [height does not interrupt], for it was done while stolen, but Shechitah was done sitting. (Ayeles ha'Shachar asks what is the source that Shechitah must be done sitting. Seemingly Tosfos means that it may be done sitting. We disqualify sitting only for Avodos from Kabalah and onwards, which require Kehunah (14b). Only kings from Beis David may sit in the Azarah! Presumably, Tosfos holds like Riva (in Tosfos Yoma 25a DH Ein), who says that anyone may sit if needed for Avodah.)

åàëúé úé÷ùé îëðâã äîæáç àîàé ëùø ìùçåè ëãàîø ëì äòæøä ëåìä ëùøä ìùçéèä

(d)

Remark: It is still difficult opposite the Mizbe'ach. Why is Shechitah Kosher there, like it says that the entire Azarah is Kosher for Shechitah [of Kodshim Kalim]!

10)

TOSFOS DH Shnei Pishpeshin Havu b'Beis ha'Chalifos

úåñôåú ã"ä ùðé ôùôùéï äéå ááéú äçìéôåú

(SUMMARY: Tosfos distinguishes these from the Pishpesh mentioned in Gitin.)

áîñëú îãåú (ãó ìä:) àîøéðï (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) ãàåìí òåãó òìéå çîù òùøä àîä îï äöôåï åçîù òùøä àîä îï äãøåí

(a)

Background: In Midos (35b) we say that the Ulam extended past [the Heichal] 15 Amos in the north and 15 Amos in the south;

åäåà äéä ð÷øà áéú äçìéôåú åäéå ìå ùðé ôùôùéï ìäëùéø àú ëì äòæøä ãàåúå çöø òã ëåúì îòøáé ÷øåé òæøä

1.

It was called Beis ha'Chalifos. It had two Pishpeshim (small openings) to be Machshir the entire Azarah. The Chatzer until the western wall is called the Azarah.

åìà ëîå ùôé' á÷åðèøñ ùäëì ÷øåé áéú äçìéôåú òã ëåúì îòøáé

(b)

Remark: This is unlike Rashi explained that everything was called Beis ha'Chalifos until the western wall.

åáôø÷ äðéæ÷éï (âéèéï ðã:) âáé ëäï âãåì áéåä''ë ã÷àîø ãçæéðéä áôùôù

(c)

Citation: In Gitin (54b), regarding the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kipur (if it was possible for witnesses to know that he was Mefagel while doing the Avodah alone in the Heichal), it says that they could see him through a Pishpesh.

åôé' á÷åðèøñ ãùðé ôùôùéï äéå ááéú (äâää áâìéåï, åáùéèä î÷åáöú) äçìéôåú

(d)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): There were two small openings in Beis ha'Chalifos.

åúéîä âãåì ôéøåùå ããøê ôùôùéï ìà äéä éëåì ìøàåú áäéëì (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) ëìì

(e)

Rebuttal: This is astounding! He could not see into the Heichal at all through [those] Pishpeshim!

åôé' øáéðå øéá''à ãçæéðé' ãøê ôùôù ùéòùå ôùôùéï ìøàåú àí ôéâì åàí ìàå

(f)

Explanation #2 (Rabbeinu Riva): They could see him through Pishpeshim, i.e. they would make Pishpeshim to see whether or not he was Mefagel.

åâí æä ÷ùä ãìòéì ôø÷ ëì äôñåìéï (ãó ìâ.) ôøéê åðéòáéã ôùôù åîùðé (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) äëì áëúá îéã ä' òìé äùëéì

(g)

Question: Also this is difficult, for above (33a) the Gemara said "we should make a Pishpesh", and answers "ha'Kol bi'Chsav mi'Yad Hash-m Alai Hiskil" (the entire structure of the Mikdash was given through prophecy. We may not change anything!)

åîôøù ä''ø éò÷á îàåøìéð''ù ãääåà ôùôù äééðå ãøê äìåì ùàçåøé áéú äëôøú ùéøàä îùí (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) áéú ÷ãù ä÷ãùéí åáäéëì éëåì ìøàåú ãøê ôúç äâãåì ìàåìí

(h)

Explanation #3 (Ri of Orlins): That Pishpesh was through the Lul (a window) in back of Beis ha'Kapores (in back of the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim). One could see from there [into] Kodesh ha'Kodoshim, and in the Heichal one could see through the great opening to the Ulam.

11)

TOSFOS DH Shenayim l'Par Bar

úåñôåú ã"ä ùðéí ìôø áø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the Heter to slaughter in back of the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim.)

âáé ùåîøéï îééúé ìäàé ÷øà áô''÷ ãúîéã (ãó ëæ.)

(a)

Explanation: This verse is brought regarding Shomerim in Tamid (27a).

úéîä ìé àçåøé äëôøú äéàê éëåì ìùçåè äà àéðå éëåì ìøàåú ùí ôúç àäì îåòã ãøê çìåï ãìôø áø ãäà àéëà ùðé ôøëåú áéï äéëì åáéï ÷ãùé ä÷ãùéí

(b)

Question: How can one slaughter in back of ha'Kapores? He cannot see Pesach Ohel Mo'ed through the window of Par Bar, for there are two Parochos (curtains) between the Heichal and Kodesh ha'Kodoshim!

åáôøëú ìà äéä ùåí ôúç àìà àçú ôøåôä îï äãøåí åàçú îï äöôåï

1.

There was no opening in the Paroches. Rather, one was partially lifted (to enable the Kohen Gadol to pass through) on the south, and one was [partially lifted] on the north (Yoma 52b)!

åéù ìåîø ãäìåì ÷øé ôúç åøåàä áå ÷ãù ä÷ãùéí (äâää áîäãåøú òåæ åäãø) ãìà âøò îàäì îåòã

(c)

Answer: The Lul is called a Pesach, and one can see Kodesh ha'Kodoshim through it. It is no worse than Ohel Mo'ed;

ëîå àçåøé áéú äçìéôåú ùäéå ôùôùéï å÷øåééï ôúç åò''é ëï ëùø ìùçåè òã ëåúì îòøáé ìôé ùøåàä áäï äàåìí ù÷øåé àäì îåòã ìîàï ãàî' ÷ãåùú äéëì åàåìí çãà îéìúà

1.

This is like in back of Beis ha'Chalifos, that there were Pishpeshim, and they are called Pesach, and through this Shechitah is Kosher until the western wall, for one can see the Ulam, which is called Ohel Mo'ed, according to the opinion that the Kedushah of the Heichal and Ulam are the same.

äâä"ä (äâää áâìéåï) åìà ð''ì ãáùìîà ùðé ôùôùéï ãáéú äçìéôåú äåå ùðé ôúçéí ÷èðéí åîùîùéï ëðéñä åéöéàä åîé÷øå ôúç àáì ôø (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) áø çìåï ÷èï åìà ôúç î÷øé

(d)

Comment - Rebuttal: Granted, the two Pishpeshim of Beis ha'Chalifos were small openings, and they serve for entrance and exit, and they are called Pesach. However, Par Bar was a small window, and it is not called Pesach.

åáñåó äúòøåáåú (ì÷îï ôá:) ÷øé ìéä ãøê îùåôù åìà îé÷øé áéàä ãøê ùí

1.

Below (82b), it is called a crooked way. It is not called Bi'ah (normal entrance) through there;

åàé äåä ð÷á áôúçå ùì äéëì ìà äéä éëåì ìùçåè àí äéä äôúç ðòåì òì ñîê àåúå ð÷á ÷èï. áøå''ê:

2.

If there were a small hole in Pesach ha'Heichal, one could not slaughter if the opening was locked, relying on that small hole. This [comment] is from R. Baruch.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF