1)

TOSFOS DH Hachi Garsinan Aval Sof Chatas v'Olah

úåñôåú ã"ä ä''â àáì ñåó çèàú åòåìä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses whether this is even for the first Matanah of Olah.)

áîúðä ùðéä ùì òåìä îééøé ùäéà á÷øï îòøáéú ãøåîéú ãæä î÷åí ùéøéí ùì çèàú

(a)

Explanation: We discuss the second Matanah of Olah, which is in the southwest corner. This is the place of Shirayim of Chatas.

àáì áîúðä øàùåðä ùì òåìä éùôê ìàîä ìøáðï ãàéï æä î÷åí ùéøéí ããí òåìä á÷øï îæøçéú öôåðéú åùéøéí á÷øï îòøáéú ãøåîéú

(b)

Opinion #1: However, if the first Matanah of Olah [became mixed], it is spilled to the Amah according to Rabanan, for this is not the place of Shirayim [of Chatas], for [the first Matanah of] Dam Olah is in the northeast corner, and Shirayim are in the southwest corner.

îéäå é''ì ëéåï ãéñåã ãøåîé àéðå îï äôñå÷ àìà îèòîà ãáòé' áñîåê ìå (ìòéì ãó ðâ.) ãåîéà ãùéøéí ôðéîééí à''ë àéï ÷ôéãà àí éúðí áîæøçéú öôåðéú ìäëùéø ãí úçìú òåìä

(c)

Rebuttal: (We need not say so.) We can say that since the southern Yesod is not from a verse, rather, from the reason "we require what is nearby", similar to inner Shirayim, if so it is not a problem if we put them in the northeast corner in order to be Machshir the initial blood of Olah.

åëï îåëéç ÷öú áñîåê âáé ðúï ìîòìä åìà ðîìê éçæåø åéúï ìîèä åáòé ìàåëåçé ãî÷åí òåìä î÷åí ùéøéí åîùîò ùìà ðúï òãééï ëìì îúðåú òåìä (áìáãï)

(d)

Support (of Rebuttal): It is somewhat proven like this below (81b), regarding one who put above and did not consult. He puts again below. [The Makshan] wants to prove that the place of Olah is the place of Shirayim. It connotes that he did not yet put at all Matanos Olah.

à''ð éôðä ãøê ùîàì åéúï úçìä á÷øï îòøáéú ãøåîéú ùäåà î÷åí ùéøéí åéúï ùéøéí áùúé ÷øðåú:

(e)

Opinion #2: Alternatively, he turns to the left and puts first in the southwest corner, which is the place of Shirayim, and he puts Shirayim in two corners.

2)

TOSFOS DH Hachi Garsinan Mai Ka Mashma Lan

úåñôåú ã"ä ä''â îàé ÷î''ì

(SUMMARY: Tosfos justifies the question.)

úéîä èåáà ÷à îùîò ìï ãé÷øáå ìîø ëãàéú ìéä á' îúðåú ùäï ã' åìîø îúï àçã àò''â ãòáø òì áì úâøò àå áì úåñéó

(a)

Question: This teaches a lot! [If Olah became mixed with Bechor], it is offered according to this [Tana] like he holds, two Matanos that are four, and according to this opinion, one Matanah, even though he transgresses Bal Tigra or Bal Tosif!

åùîà é''ì ëéåï ãéäéá ìùí îéí ìéëà áì úåñéó åâí ìà îùåí áì úâøò ëéåï ãùá åàì úòùä åîú÷ï ÷øáðå åáìà ÷øà ðîé. áøå''ê

(b)

Answer: Since he puts for the sake of water, there is no Bal Tosif, and also not Bal Tigra, since he is passive and fixes his Korban, and also without a verse [we know this]. This is from R. Baruch.

3)

TOSFOS DH Tanai Hi Ika d'Nafka Lah mi'Hacha v'Ika d'Nafka Lah mi'Hacha

úåñôåú ã"ä úðàé äéà àéëà ãðô÷à ìä îäëà åàéëà ãðô÷à ìä îäëà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos resolves this with the Gemara in Menachos.)

úéîä ìîä ãåç÷ ìåîø úðàé äéà ãáä÷åîõ øáä (îðçåú ëá:) ôøéê åàéîà òã ãàéëà îéï åîéðå åòåìéï ÷ùéà

(a)

Question #1: Why does he give a difficult answer that Tana'im argue about this? In Menachos (22b), it asks "say [that there is no Bitul] only when they are Min b'Mino, and Olim! This is left difficult;

ìéîà ÷øà ÷ãù äí àéöèøéê ãàí àéðå òðéï ìîéï åîéðå åòåìéï úðäå ìòðéï ìòåìéï ìçåã àôéìå äåé ùìà îéðå

1.

He should say that the verse "Kodesh Hem" is needed. Im Eino Inyan (if it is not needed) for Min b'Mino and Olim, use it for Olim alone, even b'Eino Mino!

åòåã ÷ùä ãäëà àìéáà ãø' éåçðï ÷ééîà åäúí ÷àîø øáé éåçðï ìääéà ãøùä ãåì÷ç îãí äôø

(b)

Question #2: Here we hold according to R. Yochanan, and there R. Yochanan [learned this from] the Drashah "v'Lakach mi'Dam ha'Par"!

åò''÷ ðéîà ãàéöèøéê îùåí ãñ''ã ùéùôê ìàîä ëãé ùìà éòáåø òì áì úåñéó åòì áì úâøò

(c)

Question #3: We should say that we need it, for one might have thought that it is poured to the Amah, lest he transgress Bal Tosif or Bal Tigra!

åò''÷ ãîàé ùðà ùðúòøáå ìîèä áìîòìä ãîåãä ø' éäåùò ãéùôê åàéï îùðéí æä ìäëùéø æä

(d)

Question #4: Why is it different when Nisnim below were mixed with Nisnim above? R. Yehoshua agrees that they are poured [to the Amah], and we do not deviate in this [Korban] to be Machshir this;

åîúï àçú áîúï ã' îùðéí åòåáø òì áì úâøò

1.

When blood that needs one Matanah [became mixed] with blood that needs four Matanos, [he holds that] we deviate, and transgress Bal Tigra!

åëé úéîà îùåí ãîúï à' áîúï ã' àé àîøú éùôê àéï ùééê ìùìí úçúéäí ëâåï áëåø åîòùø ùðôñì àáì òåìä åçèàú ùðôñì ãàôùø ìùìí úçúéäí éùôê

2.

Suggestion: It is because blood of one Matanah [mixed] with blood of four Matanos, if you will say that it is poured to the Amah, one cannot pay (bring another Korban to compensate) for them, e.g. Bechor or Ma'aser that became Pasul. (Any animal brought to compensate, if it was not a firstborn, and it was not the 10th to leave the pen, it cannot become Bechor or Ma'aser.) However, if Olah or Chatas became Pasul, he can pay in place of them!

i.

Note: Acharonim ask that Pesach has one Matanah, and one can pay in place of it. They also ask why inability to pay changes the Torah law. In any case this animal is lost!

òåìú ðãáä îàé àéëà ìîéîø

3.

Rejection: How can you answer for Olas Nedavah?! (There is no Achrayus. If he brings another Nedavah, it is not payment or compensation.)

åîéäå é''ì ãìà ãîé ãðéúðéí ìîòìä áðéúðéí ìîèä àéï ìå ìôñåì áéãéí ãí òåìä ìäëùéø ãí çèàú

(e)

Answer: We can say that Nisnim above [mixed] with Nisnim below is different. We should not overtly disqualify Dam Olah in order to be Machshir Dam Chatas;

àáì äëà ùàéðå ôåñìå áéãéí àìà òåîã áî÷åîå ùá åàì úòùä ùàðé

1.

However, here that he does not overtly disqualify it, rather, he [puts one Matanah, and] stands in his place passively [and does not give more.

åîéäå ìø''à ÷ùä ãîùðä ìéúï á' îúðåú åáëåø àéðå àìà (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) îúðä àçú åòåáø îùåí áì úåñéó

(f)

Question: However, this is difficult for R. Eliezer, [who says that] he deviates to put two Matanos [that are four], and Bechor should have only one Matanah, and he transgresses Bal Tosif;

åáðéúðéï (îëàï îòîåã á) ìîòìä áìîèä ìà îëùéø ìîòìä àìà ò''é øåàéï ìùí îéí

1.

And regarding Nisnim above [mixed with Nisnim] below, he is Machshir above only because we view it as if it were water!

81b----------------------------------------81b

åîéäå äà ðîé çã èòîà äåà ãîùåí ãàéú ìéä ìùí îéí äåà ãìà òáø îùåí áì úåñéó

(g)

Answer: Also this is the same reason. Because he holds that [one may put] l'Shem water, he does not transgress Bal Tosif!

åòåã ëùòåáø òì áì úåñéó àéðå îùðä áãí ìôñåì àáì áðéúðéï ìîòìä åìîèä åðéúðéï áçåõ áðéúðéï áôðéí ëåìäå îùðä áãí ìôñåì

1.

Also, when he transgresses Bal Tosif, he does not deviate with blood to disqualify. However, regarding Nisnim above and below, and Nisnim outside [mixed with] Nisnim inside, in all of them he deviates with the blood to disqualify.

4)

TOSFOS DH Minayin Afilu Nis'arev b'Asham v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä îðéï àôé' ðúòøá áàùí ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos asks why the other Tana'im need only one verse.)

úéîä ëé äéëé ãìäàé úðà àéöèøéê ÷øà ìúåãä ìòåìä åìàùí

(a)

Question: Just like according to this Tana we need the verse for Todah, Olah and Asham (and we need another Drashah to teach about Bechor, Ma'aser and Pesach)...

åìîàï ãðô÷à ìéä ðîé îåì÷ç îãí äôø åîãí äùòéø ãòåìéï àéï îáèìéï ãìîà ä''î ôø åùòéø ùùåéï ìâîøé áîúðåúéäï îúï àçã áîúï ã' îðéï àå òåìä áðàëìéï

1.

Also according to the opinion that learns from v'Lakach mi'Dam ha'Par umi'Dam ha'Sa'ir that Olim are not Mevatel each other, perhaps this is only for the bull and goat, which have exactly the same Matanos. What is the source for Nisnim one Matanah [mixed] with Nisnim four Matanos, or Olah with Korbanos that are eaten?

åëï ìîàï ãðô÷à ìéä î÷åãù äí îðà ìéä ðúòøá áãí òåìä ãìîà á÷ãùéí äðàëìéï îééøé

2.

And similarly according to the one who learns from Kodesh Hem, what is his source for [other Korbanos] that became mixed with Olah? Perhaps it discusses [only] Korbanos that are eaten!

5)

TOSFOS DH v'Ein Temuraso Kereivah

úåñôåú ã"ä åàéï úîåøúå ÷øéáä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions the Gemara in Temurah from here.)

úéîä ëéåï ãúðàé äéà àîàé äãø áéä áô''÷ ãúîåøä (ãó ä:)

(a)

Question: Since Tana'im argue about this, why did [the Gemara] retract in Temurah (5b? Initially, it said that Rava expounds "Hem" to forbid offering Temuros Bechor and Ma'aser. It said that Abaye learns this from "la'Shem Hu");

ã÷àîø åøáà àéï ä''ð àìà äí ìîä ìé ëå'

1.

It said that indeed, Rava [also learns from "... la'Shem Hu."] Rather, what does he learns from "Hem"? [It teaches that if blood mixed with Dam Bechor or Ma'aser...]

6)

TOSFOS DH Ha Ukimna b'Ruva Elyonim

úåñôåú ã"ä äà àå÷éîðà áøåáà òìéåðéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses whether we can infer that Mekom Olah Mekom Shirayim.)

ôé' á÷åðèøñ åäàé ãéäéá ìîèä ìùí ùéøé çèàú äåà ã÷éäéá àáì òåìä ìà îúëùøà ãäà éäéá ìîòìä ùéòåø úçúåðéí åòåã

(a)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): He puts below for the sake of Shirei Chatas, but this is not Machshir Olah, for he puts above more than the amount of lower blood. (Perhaps all the Dam Olah was put above.)

à''ð îå÷îú ìä áúòøåáú çèàú åòåìä ìà ùîòú îéðä (ìà) î÷åí òåìä î÷åí ùéøéí ãëéåï ãòåìä ìà îúëùøà ìà æøé÷ ìäå áî÷åí òåìä àìà áàöèáàåú

(b)

Explanation #2: Even if you establish it to discuss a mixture of Chatas and Olah, you may not derive that the place of Olah is the place of Shirayim, for since it is not Machshir Olah, he does not throw in the place of Olah (against the northeast and southwest edges), rather, [he pours] on the top of the Yesod;

å÷ùä ãìøáðï ãàîøé éù áéìä åäåéà ìä òåìä ëùøä åéù ãí òåìä ùðùàø ìîèä åøàåé ìæøé÷ä

(c)

Question: According to Rabanan, who say that Ein Bilah, and it is a Kosher Olah, and Dam Olah remains below and it is proper for Zerikah (we learn that the place of Olah is the place of Shirayim! Shitah Mekubetzes answers that the Sugya above holds that the place of Olah is the place of Shirayim. Our Sugya argues; also according to Chachamim, he is Yotzei this and this, i.e. initial Chatas and its Shirayim.)

7)

TOSFOS DH Nasan b'Chutz la'Aretz v'Acher Kach Nasan Bifnim Kosher

úåñôåú ã"ä ðúï áçåõ åàçø ëê ðúï áôðéí ëùø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that he intends that the wrong blood be l'Shem water.)

åëâåï ãéäéá ãîéí äôðéîéí áçåõ ìùí îéí ãàé ìàå äëé äéàê çåæø åðåúï áôðéí åäìà ëáø ðúëôø ìùîåàì ìôé îä ùôéøùúé ìòéì áô' ùðé (ëå: ã''ä àîø) ãîæáç çéöåï ìãîéí äôðéîééí ëî÷åîï ãîé

(a)

Explanation: The case is, he put inner blood outside l'Shem water. If not, how could he return to put inside? He already atoned according to Shmuel, based on what I explained above (26b) that the outer Mizbe'ach is considered like the place of inner blood!

åáëé äàé âååðà îééøé ñéôà áôðéí åðúï áçåõ ùäëðéñ ãîéí äçéöåðéí ìùí îéí

1.

The Seifa discusses such a case, that he put [blood of the mixture] inside, and the outside. He entered the outer blood l'Shem water.

å÷''÷ àîàé ôñåì ëùîëðéñ ìùí îéí ãìëôø ëúéá:

(b)

Question: Why is it Pasul when he enters it l'Shem water? It is written "Lechaper"!

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF