REVACH L'DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
daf@dafyomi.co.il http://www.dafyomi.co.il
& Revach l'Neshamah - http://www.revach.net
|
|
SUMMARY
1. If one said, "This animal shall be a Temuras Olah, Temuras Shelamim," according to Rebbi Meir it is a Temuras Olah. According to Rebbi Yosi, it is both a Temuras Olah and a Temuras Shelamim.
2. If one first said that an animal shall be a Temuras Olah, and then he changed his mind and said that it shall be a Temuras Shelamim, everyone agrees that it is a Temuras Olah.
3. If one said, "It shall be a Temuras Olah *and* a Temuras Shelamim," according to Rabah bar bar Chanah, Rebbi Meir agrees that it is both an Olah and a Shelamim. Rav Dimi maintains that even in that case, Rebbi Meir maintains that it is only a Temuras Olah.
4. If he said, "It shall be half a Temuras Olah and half a Temuras Shelamim," according to Abaye, Rebbi Meir agrees that it is both a Temuras Olah and a Temuras Shelamim. Rava disagrees.
5. If the Kohen brings a Minchah with intent to eat an olive's size from the Minchah the next day and an olive's size outside the Azarah, it is Pigul according to Rebbi Yehudah.
6. If a Kohen brings a Korban with intent to eat an olive's size from the Korban both after the allotted time and outside the allotted place, everyone agrees that the Korban is Pasul but not Pigul.
|
A BIT MORE
1. A person placed an animal of Chulin next to an Olah and a Shelamim and said, "This animal shall be a Temurah for the Olah, a Temurah for the Shelamim." According to Rebbi Meir, it is a Temuras Olah. According to Rebbi Yosi, it is sold and the proceeds are used to purchase both an Olah and a Shelamim.
2. Since he originally wanted it to be only a Temuras Olah, he cannot change his mind. It is a Temuras Olah even according to Rebbi Yosi.
3. Rabah bar bar Chanah maintains that Rebbi Meir agrees with Rebbi Yosi that the first Lashon is not the primary Lashon. He maintains that if one said, "Temuras Olah, Temuras Shelamim," his original intention was to make it a Temuras Olah, but subsequently he changed his mind. Therefore, it is an Olah and not a Shelamim. However, if he said, "Temuras Olah *and* Temuras Shelamim," it is clear that he wants it to be both. Therefore, it is both an Olah and a Shelamim. Rav maintains that Rebbi Meir says that the first Lashon is the primary Lashon. Therefore, even if one said, "Temuras Olah *and* Temuras Shelamim," it is a Temuras Olah and not a Temuras Shelamim.
4. According to Abaye, since it is clear that he wants it to be both a Temuras Olah and a Temuras Shelamim, even according to Rebbi Meir it is both a Temuras Olah and a Temuras Shelamim. According to Rava, although he wants it to be both a Temuras Olah and a Temuras Shelamim, since he said Temuras Olah first, half of the animal attains the sanctity of an Olah, and the Kedushas Olah then spreads to the entire body of the animal, and the Temuras Shelamim cannot take effect.
5. According to Rava, it is Pigul even if both Machshavos of the Kohen occurred during the Kemitzah, because Rebbi Yehudah maintains that the first Lashon is primary even when the two Machshavos occur at the same time. According to Abaye, it is Pigul only if the first Machshavah occurred during the Haktarah of the Kometz and the second Machshavah during the Haktarah of the Levonah, because Rebbi Yehudah rules that when the two Machshavos occur at the same time, both Machshavos are primary.
6. Rebbi Yehudah maintains that the first Lashon is primary. However, in this case, since both Machshavos involved the same olive's size of the Korban, both Leshonos are primary and the Korban is not Pigul.
|
Next Daf
Index to Revach for Maseches Zevachim
|
