ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler of Kollel Iyun Hadaf
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
(a) Rebbi Elazar Amar Oshaya rules that if a rich Tamei Mikdash became poor after designating birds for his Korban - he cannot now bring them as his Korban, because of the principle 'Ho'il ve'Nidcheh Yidacheh' (once something is rejected, it cannot be reinstated).
(b) Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Yehoshua learns from Rebbi Elazar's ruling - that a. Ba'alei-Chayim Nidachin, b. Dichuy Me'ikara Havi Dichuy, and c. Kedushas Damim Madcheh' (as we learned on the previous Daf, according to Rebbi Yochanan).
(c) We query Rebbi Elazar however, from a Beraisa, which rules that if ...
1. ... somebody designated a female lamb as a Korban Pesach - 'Tir'eh ad she'Tista'ev ve'Timacher, ve'Yavi be'Damehah Pesach'.
2. ... that female lamb subsequently gave birth to a male V'lad - the same applies to the V'lad as to its mother. It cannot be brought directly as a Korban Pesach, seeing as it came from a rejected Kedushah.
(d) Rebbi Shimon says - that it can be brought directly as a Korban Pesach.
(a) We can extrapolate from Rebbi Shimon - that he holds 'Ein Ba'alei Chayim Nidachin'.
(b) And we refute Rav Ukva bar Chama's proof from Rebbi Shimon that 'Ba'alei Chayim Einan Nidachin' (a Kashya on Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Oshaya) - by establishing the latter like the Rabbanan.
(c) We cite a Beraisa which discusses a case where one of the two goats on Yom Kipur dies. Assuming that it was the Sa'ir la'Azazel that died, Rebbi Shimon rules there - that one brings a second goat as a Sa'ir la'Azazel, and brings the first one as the Sa'ir la'Hashem (without a new Hagralah).
(d) Besides 'Ein Ba'alei Chayim Nidachin', Rebbi Shimon also holds - 'Hagralah Einah Me'akeves'.
(a) Rav Shimi bar Ashi cites two Pesukim "ve'Lakchah Sh'tei Sorim" (in Tazri'a), and "ve'Asah ha'Kohen Osam ... " (in Acharei-Mos) from which Rav Chisda learns - that 'Kinin' (the pair of birds that comprise most Korb'nos Of) are nominated (which one is the Chatas, and which one, the Olah) either by the owner, when he initially sets them aside, or by the Kohen when he proceeds to offer them up.
(b) The ramifications of Rav Chisda's ruling are - that should the owner nominate them some time in between, his nomination is invalid.
(c) We query Rav Chisda however, from a Beraisa discussing the two goats on Yom Kipur, which learns from the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos "ve'Asahu Chatas" - that it is the Goral (the lots) that determine the status of the two goats, and not 'Keri'as Shem' (nomination).
(d) We would otherwise have thought that Keri'as Shem would suffice - from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from 'Kinin', where Goral is not effective, yet Keri'as Shem is.
(a) The current D'rashah creates a problem with Rav Chisda - based on the S'vara that 'Shem Dumya de'Goral', meaning that just as Goral precludes 'Lekichas Ba'alim' and 'Asiyas Kohen', so too, does 'Keri'as Shem'.
(b) We therefore amend our understanding of 'Shem', changing it - to the 'Keri'as Shem' that takes place together with 'Lekichas Ba'alim' and 'Asiyas Kohen' (not independently, as we thought until now).
(c) We query Rav Chisda again from another Beraisa, which discusses a Tamei Mikdash Ani who designated money for his Korban Of. In the event that he becomes rich after nominating money for the Chatas and for the Olah - he uses the money of the Chatas for his Korban Chatas Beheimah, to which he adds money from his own pocket.
(d) The money of the Olas ha'Of goes - to 'Nedavah' (towards the purchase of Olos Kayitz Mizbe'ach). He cannot add it to the Chatas money - since he already designated it as an Olah.
(e) We try to prove from there - that Keri'as Shem determines the status of Kinin (a Kashya on Rav Chisda).
(a) Rav Sheishes however, counters that, based on the statement of Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Oshaya - that a Tamei Mikdash Ashir, who brings the Korban of an Ani (which is the case in the Beraisa), is not Yotzei (as he is in the Beraisa).
(b) So, to satisfy ...
1. ... Rebbi Elazar, he amends the Beraisa to read (not 've'Amar [after becoming rich] Eilu le'Chatasi ... '. but) 'she'K'var Amar' (before he became rich).
2. ... to satisfy Rav Chisda - in exactly the same way, but with reference to the time when he initially set aside the money.
(c) Rebbi Chaga Amar Rebbi Yashiyah however, disagrees with Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Oshaya. He holds - that a Tamei Mikdash Ashir who brings the Korban of an Ani is Yotzei.
(d) According to him, to answer the Kashya on Rav Chisda, we will amend the Beraisa to - 've'Lakach ve'Amar', where he actually took the money and nominated it after he became rich.
(a) We query Rebbi Chaga Amar Rebbi Yashiyah from a Beraisa, which rules that if a Metzora ...
1. ... Ani brings the Korban of an Ashir - he has fulfilled his obligation but a Metzora ...
2. ... Ashir who brings the Korban of an Ani - has not.
(b) Rebbi Chaga answers that Metzora is different - because the Torah writes there "Zos Toras ha'Metzora", and "Zos" comes to preclude (a Metzora Ashir who brings the Korban of an Ani).
(c) Nevertheless, a Metzora Ani who brings the Korban of a Metzora Ashir is Yotzei - because the word "Toras", comes to include it.
(d) And the Beraisa that we cite in support of Rebbi Chagai's answer, learns from the word "Hu", in the Pasuk "ve'Im Dal Hu ve'Ein Yado Maseges" - that the D'rashah from "Zos" is confined to Metzora, and does not extend to a Tamei Mikdash Ashir who brings the Korban of an Ani.
(a) When Rebbi Shimon in our Mishnah says that lambs always come before goats, he means - that in most cases in the Torah, "min ha'Kevasim" precedes "min ha'Izim".
(b) He nevertheless learns from the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with the Chatas Yachid) "ve'Im Keves Yavi ... " - that the two are really of equal importance (seeing as in this particular instance, the Torah first wrote "ve'Heivi Korbano Se'iras Izim").
(c) Similarly, the Tana observes - that although the Torah usually places "Tor" (a pigeon) before "ben Yonah" (a young dove), from the Pasuk ...
1. ... in Tazri'a (in connection with a Korban Yoledes) "Yonah O Tor le'Chatas", we can learn that the two are equal in the Torah's eyes.
2. ... in Kedoshim "Ish Imo ve'Aviv Tira'u" - that the same is true with regard to honoring one's parents, since, even though in most cases, the Torah places "Av" before "Eim", here it reverses the order..
(d) Nevertheless ...
1. ... Kibud Av take precedence over Kibud Eim (should the two clash) - because one's mother is obligated to honor one's father (her husband, no less than her son). And for the same reason ...
2. ... Kavod ha'Rav takes precedence over Kibud Av (although there, the Torah always places 'Kavod Rav' first).
(a) The Beraisa lists four occasions on which the Azarah cried out (for better or for worse). It cried out for Chofni and Pinchas - sons of Eli ha'Kohen (Gadol) to be removed from the Azarah - for desecrating the Heichal (by making the Yoldos wait before sacrificing their Kinin).
(b) The second cry was for Yochanan ben Nadvai Talmid of Pinka'i (Pinchas) to enter and fill his stomach with Kodshei Shamayim. The Tana relates how he used to eat four hundred Sa'ah of small birds (which were Chata'os ha'Of) just for dessert alone - to avoid their becoming Nosar (in which case they would have to be burned).
(c) The third of the Azarah's cries was for the gates to open, to allow Yishmael ben Fi'abi to enter - to come and serve as Kohen Gadol.
(a) Whereas the fourth cry was for the gates to open and drive Yisachar Ish K'far Barka'i out - because he despised Kodshei Shamayim in order to honor himself.
(b) The dispute between Yanai Hamelech and Queen Alexandra Shalomis (also known as Sh'lomtzi'on ha'Malkah) was - as to which is more tasty, lamb (the king) or kid (the queen).
(c) They specifically asked him - because, in his capacity as Kohen Gadol (who was constantly bringing Korbanos), they assumed him to be the greatest expert in that field.
(d) He replied - that lamb must be tastier, because it (and not a kid-goat), was the Torah's choice for the Korban Tamid.
(a) His mistake in presenting his reply - was that he answered with an arrogant and mocking wave of the hand.
(b) The King ordered his right hand to be cut off - but he bribed the officer in charge to cut off his left hand instead. Upon hearing that, the king ordered his right hand to be cut off, too.
(c) Rav Yosef commented - 'Blessed be Hash-m who gave Yisachar Ish Barka'i his desert (or who punished him) in this world (rather than in the World to Come)'.
(a) Rav Ashi comments that Yisachar Ish Barka'i ought to have known better - because we learned in our Mishnah that there is no difference between a lamb and a kid-goat.
(b) According to Ravina, he did not even know Chumash - because the Torah writes in Vayikra (in connection with the Korban Shelamim) "Im Kesev" ... "Im Eiz", to indicate that the two are equal (thought it is not then clear why our Mishnah did not cite that Pasuk).
(c) Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Chanina states that Talmidei-Chachamim increase peace in the world - as the Pasuk writes "'ve'Chol Banayich Limudei Hash-m, ve'Rav Shalom Banayich" (Do not read "Banayich" [your children] but 'Bonayich' [your builders, with reference to the Talmidei-Chachamim]).
Hadran Alach 'ha'Meivi Asham' u'Selika Lah Maseches Kerisus