1) TOSFOS DH Im Isa lid'Chizkiyah v'Chulei
úåñôåú ã"ä àí àéúà ìãçæ÷éä ëå'
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why this is only according to Chizkiyah.)
áçðí ð÷è àí àéúà ãäà àôé' øáé éåçðï îåãä äéëà ãàîø ìé÷ãùå àøáòéí îúåê ùîåðéí ëãàîøéðï ìòéì
(a) Implied question: There was no need to say "if [Chizkiyah's teaching] is true", for even R. Yochanan agrees when he said "40 of the 80 should become Kadosh", like we said above (78b)!
åùîà ããå÷à äéëà ãìà (îéëåéï ëãàîø ìå ìééúé çåìéï ìòæøä ãäåé öåøê ÷øáï åàéëà áéðééäå) [ö"ì îëåéï ìà îééúé çåìéï ìòæøä ãäåé öåøê ÷øáï àáì áãàîø àéëà áéðééäå àøáòéí ãåãàé äåå çåìéï - òåìú ùìîä]
(b) Answer: Perhaps this is only when he does not intend; he does not bring Chulin b'Azarah, for [all] are needs of the Korban, but when he said, they argue about the 40, for they are Vadai Chulin. ("He does not intend" is Stam. [According to R. Zeira,] Chizkiyah says that the other 40 are for Acharayus, which is a need of the Korban. When he said 40 will be Kadosh, the other 40 are Chulin, and one may not enter them.)
2) TOSFOS DH v'Likadshu Lehu Arba'im mi'Toch Shemonim (This starts a new Dibur according to Tzon Kodoshim)
úåñôåú ã"ä åìé÷ãùå ìäå àøáòéí îúåê ùîåðéí ]æä ãéáåø çãù ìôé äöàï ÷ãùéí]
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the Havah Amina why this is better than above.)
åàéãê äåå (ìéä) [ö"ì ìäå - éùø åèåá] ëîôøéù ìàçøéåú ãäëé àîø çæ÷éä ìòéì ãìàçøéåú ÷à îéëåéï åäìëê ìéëà ìîôøê ãîòééì çåìéï ìòæøä ëéåï ãìàçøéåú ÷à îéëåéï öåøê ÷øáï ðéðäå åùôéø ãîé àò''ô ùäï çåìéï
(a) Explanation: The other [40] are like one who separates [extra] for Acharayus, for so Chizkiyah said above (78b) that he intends for Acharayus. Therefore, we cannot ask that he enters Chulin b'Azarah. Since he intends for Achrayus, they are a need of the Korban, and it is fine, even though they are Chulin;
ëãúðéà áäìì äæ÷ï (ôñçéí ãó ñå:) îáéàä ëùäéà çåìéï ìòæøä åî÷ãéùä åñåîê òìéä åùåçèä
1. This is like a Beraisa teaches about Hillel ha'Zaken. He brought [his Olah] to the Azarah when it is Chulin, was Makdish it, did Semichah and slaughtered it.
àáì áäðê ãìòéì ãìéëà àìà çãà áäîä åãìîà úîåøä äéà åìà çæéà ììçí îòé÷øà çåìéï ìòæøä ÷à îòééì (åòì) [ðøàä ùö"ì òì] çðí (ôé' ëï) [ö"ì ëï ôé' - éã áðéîéï] á÷åðè'
2. However, in the other [suggestions] above, that there is only one animal, and perhaps it is Temurah and it is not proper for bread. From the beginning he enters Chulin b'Azarah without need. So Rashi [Kesav Yado] explained.
åàò''â ãìòéì áôø÷ äúëìú (ãó îç.) âáé ùçè ùðé ëáùéí òì (àøáòéí) [ö"ì àøáò - éã áðéîéï, àéæäå î÷åîï] çìåú çùáéðï ìäå çåìéï áòæøä
(b) Implied question: Above (48a), regarding one who slaughtered two lambs on four Chalos (Lechem ha'Panim), we consider them Chulin b'Azarah (even though he intends for Acharayus)!
äééðå îùåí ãôøé÷ ìäå áôðéí ãáçåõ ìà îöé ôøé÷ ìäå ãìà ìéôñìå áéåöà:
(c) Rejection: That is because he redeems them inside. He cannot redeem them outside, lest they be disqualified through Yotzei. (Here, Lachmei Todah may leave the Azarah.)
3) TOSFOS DH Dilma Im Shairo Eino Meshuyar
úåñôåú ã"ä ãìîà àí ùééøå àéðå îùåééø
(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that this conclusion is unlike it says in Temurah.)
ìòéì ôéøùúé [ö"ì äà - öàï ÷ãùéí] ã÷ùéà îúîåøä ôø÷ ëéöã îòøéîéï (ãó ëä.) ãîùîò ãäê äåà îñ÷ðà ãùîòúà ã÷ñáø øáé éåçðï àí ùééøå àéðå îùåééø:
(a) Explanation: Above (80a DH Mai) I explained what is difficult from Temurah (25a), for it connotes that this is the conclusion of our Sugya, that R. Yochanan holds that if he was Meshayer, it is not left over (and in Temurah he holds that it is left over).
4) TOSFOS DH ha'Torah Amrah Tov Asher Lo Tidor
úåñôåú ã"ä äúåøä àîøä èåá àùø ìà úãåø
(SUMMARY: Tosfos resolves this with sources that endorse vowing.)
åàôéìå øáé éäåãä ìà ÷àîø àìà ãàîø äøé æå àáì àîø äøé òìé ìà ëãàéúà áøéù çåìéï (ãó á.)
(a) Explanation: And even R. Yehudah said [that it is good to vow and fulfill] only when he said "this is [a Korban]", but not if he said "it is Alai", like it says in Chulin (2a).
åäà ãàîøéðï áôø÷ ùðé ðæéøéï (ðæéø ðè:) âáé îú àçã îäí éáéà àçø îï äùå÷ åéãåø ëðâãå
(b) Implied question: It says in Nazir (59b) regarding [if there a Safek which of two Nezirim became Tamei, and] one of them died, he brings another from the market and vows corresponding to him! (If it is improper, why do we encourage one to do so?)
úé÷åðé âáøà ùàðé
(c) Answer: Fixing a person (to enable the Safek Tamei Nazir to finish Nezirus) is different.
åäàéù îãéø áðå áðæéø (ùí ãó ëç:)
(d) Implied question: Why may a man impose Nezirus on his son? (This implies that it is proper to accept Nezirus!)
äééðå ðîé ëãé ìçðëå áîöåú:
(e) Answer: It is in order to train him in Mitzvos. (If it is improper, how is this training in Mitzvos? This is fine if Tosfos holds that Chinuch applies only to Mitzvos Aseh, like the Tosfos ha'Rid and Me'iri in Yevamos (114a); we are not concerned for the Lav of transgressing his vow (Sefas Emes Nazir 29a). However, Tosfos in Shabbos (121a DH Shma) and other Rishonim hold that Chinuch applies even to Lavim.)
81b----------------------------------------81b
5) TOSFOS DH Todah Min ha'Chulin v'Lachmah Min ha'Ma'aser...
úåñôåú ã"ä úåãä îï äçåìéï åìçîä îï äîòùø...
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why even the bread must be from Chulin.)
(ãäëé) [ö"ì ãëé - öàï ÷ãùéí] àîø äøé òìé úåãä îï äçåìéï ðúçééá äëì îï äçåìéï ãëì ãáø ùáçåáä àéðå áà àìà îï äçåìéï
(a) Explanation: Once he said "it is Alai to bring Todah from Chulin", he is obligated to bring everything from Chulin, for every obligation comes only from Chulin;
åëé äãø åàîø ìçîä îï äîòùø ìà îöé äãø áéä åàôéìå úåê ëãé ãéáåø
1. When he later said "its bread from Ma'aser", he cannot retract, and even Toch Kedei Dibur;
ãìà îáòéà ìáéú ùîàé ãàîøé áâî' âáé äøéðé ðæéø îï äâøåâøåú úôåñ ìùåï øàùåï
2. This is not only according to Beis Shamai, who say in the Gemara "I am a Nazir from Grogeros (dried figs)" that we follow his first words (he is a regular Nazir)...
àìà àôé' ìáéú äìì ãçùáéðï ìéä ðãø åôúçå òîå ìà ãîé ìäëà ãáòé ìîéäãø åìà îöé îéäãø ãàîéøä ìâáåä ëîñéøúå ìäãéåè
3. Rather, even according to Beis Hillel, who consider this a vow with its Pesach (a reason to consider it a mistake, and invalid), this is unlike here, that he wants to retract, and he cannot retract, for Amirah l'Gavoha ki'Mesiraso l'Hedyot (saying that one will give to Hekdesh takes effect like a Kinyan to a person);
åàîøéðï ðîé áôø÷ áúøà ãðãøéí (ãó ôæ.) åäìëúà úåê ëãé ãéáåø ëãéáåø ãîé çåõ îîâãó åòáåãú ëåëáéí åî÷ãù åîâøù
4. Also, we say in Nedarim (87a) that the Halachah is, Toch Kedei Dibur is like Dibur (one can retract or modify his words within the time to say three or four words), except for blasphemy, idolatry, Kidushin and divorce. (Likewise, one cannot retract from Hekdesh);
åâáé úîåøú òåìä åúîåøú ùìîéí îåëç áúîåøä ôø÷ ëéöã îòøéîéï (ãó ëä:) ãáðîìê àôéìå øáé éåñé îåãä ãàôé' úåê ëãé ãáåø äøé æå úîåøú òåìä (åùìîéí ðîé)
5. And regarding Temurah Olah u'Temuras Shelamim, it is proven in Temurah (25b) that regarding one who reconsidered, even R. Yosi agrees that even Toch Kedei Dibur, it is Temurah Olah (his retraction does not help).
6) TOSFOS DH Amai Kivan d'Amar Lachmah Min ha'Chulin...
úåñôåú ã"ä àîàé ëéåï ãàîø ìçîä îï äçåìéï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the question.)
úéîä äà ìà ùééê äëà ñåó îéìúà ð÷è ëãìòéì
(a) Question: (What was the Havah Amina that he must bring Todah from Chulin?) Here we cannot say that he said only the last words of his intent, like [we said] above (for he explicitly said that Todah will be from Ma'aser)!
åé''ì ã÷ùéà ìéä ãëé àîø äøé òìé ìçîé úåãä éáéà úåãä îï äîòùø ëîå äàåîø äøé òìé úåãä îï äîòùø åìçîä îï äçåìéï
(b) Answer: [The Makshan] found this difficult. When he said "Lachmei Todah is Alai", he should be able to bring Todah from Ma'aser, just like one who says "it is Alai to bring Todah from Ma'aser and its bread from Chulin"!
7) TOSFOS DH Taima d'Amar Todah Ha Lo Amar Todah Lo
úåñôåú ã"ä èòîà ãàîø úåãä äà ìà àîø úåãä ìà
(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions the question.)
úéîä îàé ÷ùéà ìéä àéï ä''ð ããåå÷à áàåîø äøé òìé úåãä áìà ìçí àáì àîø ìçí áìà úåãä ìà
(a) Question: What was the question? Indeed, it is only when he said "Todah is Alai" without [mentioning] bread, but if he said bread without Todah, no!
ãäà ìòéì ÷à îôøù ãñåó îéìúà ð÷è àáì àí ôéøù áäãéà ìçí áìà úåãä ìà
1. Source: Above it explains that he said only the last words of his intent, but if he explicitly specified bread without Todah, no!
8) TOSFOS DH Hi v'Lachmah Min ha'Ma'aser Yavi...
úåñôåú ã"ä (úåãä - öàï ÷ãùéí îåç÷å) äéà åìçîä îï äîòùø éáéà éáéà ìà ñâé ãìà îééúé
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that it is a Heter, but not a Chiyuv, to bring from Chulin.)
éù )ôé') [ö"ì ôéøåùé øù"é - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã] ùëúåá áäï åëé ìà ñâé ãìà îééúé ììçí îï äîòùø äà åãàé àí äáéà ìçí îï äçåìéï úáà òìéå áøëä
(a) Version #1: In some Perushim of Rashi it is written "must he bring bread from Ma'aser? Surely if he brought bread from Chulin, he should be blessed!"
åðøàä ùæä èòåú ñåôø ùàéï àãí éëåì ìééùá
(b) Rejection: This is a printing mistake. No one can resolve it. (Why does it mention bread, but not Todah?!)
åáîãåéé÷éí îöàúé åëé ìà ñâé ãìà îééúé úøåééäå îï äîòùø äà åãàé àí äáéà ùðéäí îï äçåìéï úáà òìéå áøëä
(c) Version #2: In precise [Seforim] I found "must he bring both from Ma'aser? Surely if he brought both of them from Chulin, he should be blessed!"
åëï ôéøù á÷åðè' áîúðé' åæä ìùåðå úåãä äéà åìçîä îï äîòùø éáéà ëîå ùðãø åáâîøà îôøù ãäàé éáéà ìàå çåáä äåà ãë''ù àí äáéà ùðéäí îï äçåìéï ãùôéø òáã àìà àí øöä ÷àîø:
(d) Support: So Rashi explained in our Mishnah. He wrote "a Todah, it and its bread from Ma'aser", he brings like he vowed. The Gemara explains that "he brings" is not an obligation. All the more so if he brought both from Chulin, he did fine! Rather, it means "if he wants [he may bring from Ma'aser]."