1) TOSFOS DH Af l'Divreichem Chetzi Log v'Log Lo Ya'aseh...

úåñôåú ã"ä àó ìãáøéëí çöé ìåâ [åìåâ] ìà éòùä...

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains how R. Meir and R. Yehudah would answer this.)

åøáðï ñáøé ãìà ãîé (ëîãä) [ö"ì ãîãä - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã, öàï ÷ãùéí] ùì ìåâ åîçöä ìà öøéëä àìà ìçáéúéï àáì çöé ìåâ öøéê ìîéìé èåáà ìñåèä åìúåãä åìîðåøä

(a) Explanation: Rabanan hold that this is different, for the measure of a Log and a half was needed only for Chavitim, but a half-Log is needed for many things - for Sotah, for Todah and for the Menorah.

2) TOSFOS DH Birutzei Midos Niskadshu

úåñôåú ã"ä áéøåöé îãåú ðú÷ãùå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos shows that R. Chiya bar Yosef below could hold like this.)

ìîàï ãàîø ìà ðú÷ãùå ðéçà äà ãàîø ì÷îï (ãó ö.) îåúø ðñëéí ì÷éõ îæáç åîôøù )øáéðå çééí áø ø' éåñé) [ö"ì ø' çééà áø éåñó - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã, - öàï ÷ãùéí] áéøåöé îãåú

(a) Observation: According to the opinion that they were not Mekudash [mid'Oraisa - Mishneh l'Melech], it is fine what it says below (90a) that Mosar Nesachim is for Kitz ha'Mizbe'ach, and R. Chiya bar Yosef explains that [Mosar Nesachim] is Birutzei Midos;

ãéù ìäï ôãéåï åìå÷çéï îîåúø ðñëéí ëáùéí ìòåìä åî÷éöéï àåúå

1. [It is fine,] for they can be redeemed, and we buy from Mosar Nesachim lambs for Olos, and we offer them for Kitz ha'Mizbe'ach.

àáì ìîàï ãàîø ðú÷ãùå ÷ùéà äà àéï ìäí ôãéåï

(b) Question: However, according to the opinion that [mid'Oraisa, Birutzei Midos] Niskadshu, this is difficult. They cannot be redeemed!

åéù ìåîø ãîééøé áðñëé öáåø åìá áéú ãéï îúðä òìéäï ëãîô' áéøåùìîé ãù÷ìéí

(c) Answer: [R. Chiya bar Yosef] discusses [Mosar of] Nesachim of the Tzibur. Lev Beis Din stipulates about them, like the Yerushalmi in Shekalim explains.

åîéäå àí ìðå îéôñìé áìéðä ëãàîøéðï ì÷îï ãìòðéï äëé ìà îúðå

(d) Limitation: However, if they were left overnight, they are disqualified through Linah, like we say below (in a Beraisa, 90b) for they do not stipulate about this.

åîãîéôñìé áìéðä ðîé éù ìã÷ã÷ ã÷ñáø áéøåöé îãåú ðú÷ãùå

(e) Inference: Also since they are disqualified through Linah, we can infer that [the Tana] holds that Birutzei Midos were Niskadshu [mid'Oraisa].

åàí úàîø åðâæåø ùîà éàîøå îåöéàéï îëìé ùøú ìçåì ëãâæøéðï äúí ìø' éåñé (áìç áãðò÷ø) [ö"ì áîéãú äìç ãðò÷ø - öàï ÷ãùéí] åìòéì áô' äúåãä (ãó òè:)

(f) Question: We should decree lest people say that what was in a Kli Shares can go out to Chulin, like we decree there according to R. Yosi there (90a) about a wet measure, for it is Ne'ekar (what was in the Kli later goes above the surface), and above (79b)!

åéù ìåîø ãäëà ìà âæøéðï (ãàîøéðï ìðôùééäå) [ö"ì ãàîøé áôùééäå - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã) áéøåöéï ìà ðú÷ãùå

(g) Answer: Here we do not decree, for [people who see that it is Chulin] will say to themselves that Birutzim were not Niskadshu.

3) TOSFOS DH u'Man d'Amar mil'Ma'alah l'Matah ka'Savar Mele'im she'Lo Yechsar v'Lo Yosir

úåñôåú ã"ä åîàï ãàîø îìîòìä ìîèä ÷ñáø îìàéí ùìà éçñø åìà éåúéø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses what they argue about.)

äìëê éòùä äéï îöåîöí åîîðå éëåéï ùàø äîãåú

(a) Explanation #1: Therefore, he makes an exact Hin, and from it gauges the other measures;

åîàï ãàîø øáéòéú áøéùà åîøáéòéú éòùä ùàø äîãåú òã äéï åàé àôùø ìòåìí ùìà éäå ùúé îãåú ÷èðåú ëùîããå ìúåê àçú âãåìä ùìà éäå éúéøåú òìéä îôðé äàåôéà äâãåìä ëùîòøéï ùðé ëìéí áúåê ëìé àçã

1. The one who said a Revi'is first, and from a Revi'is he makes the other Midos until a Hin, and it is impossible that two small measures, when they are measured into one big measure, will not exceed it, due to the great foam when two Kelim are poured into one Kli;

àáì ëùîåãã áäéï àú çöé ääéï ùåôê îï ääéï ìçöé ääéï áðçú àéï ëàï àåôéà ëê îåâä áôéøåùé øù''é

2. However, when one measures with a Hin [to make] a half-Hin, he pours gently from the Hin to the half-Hin, and there is no foam. So was corrected in Rashi's Perush.

åòåã éù ìôøù ãäééðå èòîà ãîàï ãàîø îìîòìä ìîèä äåé ñéîï ãëîå ùäåìê åîçñø åàéðå äåìê åîåñéó ëê ìà éåúéø ãàôé' ðú÷ãùå áéøåöéï äééðå ãéòáã àáì ìëúçéìä ìà éåúéø

(b) Explanation #2: The reason for the one who says from above to below, it is a sign, that just like he decreases and does not increase, so one may not put extra. Even if Birutzim were Niskadshu, this is b'Di'eved, but l'Chatchilah one may not add;

åîàï ãàîø îìîèä ìîòìä äåé ñéîï ãëîå ùäåìê åîåñéó ëê éëåì ìäåúéø äáéøåöéï

1. And the one who says from below to above, it is a sign, that just like he increases, so one may make extra Birutzim.

4) TOSFOS DH Sheva Medidos

úåñôåú ã"ä ùáò îãéãåú

(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that he holds that there were four wet measures.)

(ôéøåù) [ö"ì ôé' á÷åðèøñ - éùø åèåá] ìúåê ëìé àçã ãùðúåú äéå áäéï åëï ôé' áîúðéúéï ãìà äéúä ùí àìà äéï

(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): [There are seven measurements] inside one Kli, for there were notches in the Hin. And so he explained in our Mishnah, that there was only a Hin.

å÷ùéà ãáúåñô' (ô''é) úðéà àîø ø''à [á''ø öãå÷] ã' îãåú ùì ìç äéå áî÷ãù

(b) Question #1: In the Tosefta (10:1), R. Eliezer b'R. Tzadok teaches that there were four wet measures in the Mikdash!

åáîúðéúéï ðîé ìà ÷úðé ùðúåú àìà ìôø åàéì åëáù

(c) Question #2 (and Explanation #2): Also our Mishnah taught only notches for a bull, ram and lamb! (Rather, R. Eliezer b'R. Tzadok agrees that there were also wet measures for a Revi'is, Chetzi Log and Log.)

5) TOSFOS DH Revi'is Mayim li'Metzora

úåñôåú ã"ä øáéòéú îéí ìîöåøò

(SUMMARY: Tosfos resolves this with the Mishnah in Nega'im.)

úéîä ãáô' áúøà ãðâòéí úðï ëéöã îèäøéï àú äîöåøò äéä îáéà ôééìé ùì çøñ çãùä åðåúï ìúåëä çöé ìåâ îéí

(a) Question: In Nega'im (14:1), a Mishnah teaches "how are we Metaher a Metzora? He brings a new Cheres flask and puts in it half a Log of water"!

åäâéä äøá øáéðå éäåãä áï äøá øáéðå éåí èåá øáéòéú îéí ëãúðï äëà

(b) Answer #1: Rabbeinu Yehudah ben ha'Rav Rabbeinu Yom Tov corrected the text there to say a Revi'is of water, like our Mishnah here.

åøá øáéðå éåí èåá áø éöç÷ îôøù ãúðàé äéà ëãàùëçï (âáé ñåèä) [ö"ì áñåèä - éùø åèåá] áô' äéä îáéà (ãó èæ: åùí) ùìùä öøéëéï ùéøàå òôø ñåèä åàôø ôøä åøå÷ éáîä îùåí ø' éùîòàì àîøå àó ãí öôåø

(c) Answer #2 (Rav Rabbeinu Yom Tov bar Yitzchak): Tana'im argue about this, like we find in Sotah (16b). Three matters need to be seen - earth of Sotah and ashes of Parah Adumah (on the water on which they are put), and spit of a Yevamah. They said in the name of R. Yishmael, also blood of a bird (for Taharas Metzora);

åîôøù èòîà ãø' éùîòàì îùåí ãëúé' åèáì àåúí áãí äöôåø äùçåèä åáîéí äáà îéí ùãí äöôåø ðéëø áäï åëîä äï øáéòéú

1. It explains R. Yishmael's reason, because it says "v'Taval Osam b'Dam ha'Tzipor ha'Shechutah uva'Mayim" - bring [an amount of] water so that the blood of the bird will be recognized in it. How much is this? It is a Revi'is;

åîñúáøà ãøáðï ãìà çééùé áòå çöé ìåâ ëãúðï äúí âáé ñåèä åðåúï ìúåëå çöé ìåâ îéí îï äëéåø øáé éäåãä àåîø øáéòéú

2. Presumably, Chachamim who are not concerned [that the blood be recognized in the water] require a half-Log, like it teaches there (15b) regarding Sotah, that he puts [in the Kli] a half Log of water from the Kiyor. R. Yehudah says, he puts a Revi'is;

åàùëçï äúí ìòéì áâî' ãéìôé' ñåèä ëìé ëìé îîöåøò îùîò ùéù ìäùååúí

3. We find there above in the Gemara that we learn Sotah from [a Gezeirah Shavah] "Kli-Kli" from Metzora. This implies that we should equate them!

å÷ùä ìôéøåù æä (ìçùåá âáé ãúðï äëà áîúðé') [ö"ì ãäëà áîúðé' çùéá - öàï ÷ãùéí] øáéòéú îéí ìîöåøò åçöé ìåâ ìñåèä

(d) Question #1: Here in our Mishnah, it lists a Revi'is of water for a Metzora, and half a Log for a Sotah! (We do not equate them.)

åòåã áðæéø áô' ùìùä îéðéï (ãó ìç.) ÷à çùéá âáé òùø (øáéòéú) [ö"ì øáéòéåú - éùø åèåá] [øáéòéú] îéí ìîöåøò åôøéê ãìà çùéá øáéòéú îéí ìñåèä åîùðé ãáôìåâúà ìà ÷îééøé àìîà ãîöåøò ìàå ôìåâúà äéà

(e) Question #2: In Nazir (38a) it lists among 10 Reviyos (matters for which the Shi'ur is a Revi'is) a Revi'is of water for a Metzora. [The Gemara] asks that it should list a Revi'is of water for a Sotah, and answers that we do not list matters about which there is an argument. This shows that there is no argument about Metzora!

åùîà àó ãôìåâúà äéà ìà çùéá ìä ìôìåâúà åãåå÷à áñåèä ôìéâé ëã÷àîø áîúðé' ãø' éäåãä ëùí ùîîòè áëúá ëê îîòè áîéí (ãìà äéä ðéëø áçöé ìåâ - èäøú ä÷åãù îåç÷å)

(f) Answer: Perhaps even though there is an argument, he does not consider it an argument. They argue about only about Sotah, like it says in the Mishnah that R. Yehudah, just like he diminishes what must be written, he diminishes the water;

àáì áîöåøò àò''â ãìëåìé òìîà äåé áøáéòéú ôìéâé äëé ãîø áòé àãîåîéú ãí âîåø [ö"ì ãìà äéä ðéëø áçöé ìåâ - èäøú ä÷åãù]

1. However, regarding Metzora, even though all agree that [the minimum Shi'ur] is a Revi'is, they argue as follows. One requires absolute redness of blood, and it would not be recognized [properly] in half a Log;

åîø ìà çééù àìà àôé' ðúáèì áîéí åìéëà àìà çæåúà áòìîà ùéù áå ÷öú àãîåîéú:

2. And one opinion is not concerned. Rather, even if it is Batel in the water, and there is a mere appearance, that there is a little redness [this suffices].

88b----------------------------------------88b

6) TOSFOS DH Iy l'Sotah Chulin Hu

úåñôåú ã"ä àé ìñåèä çåìéï äåà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that this is said in astonishment.)

áúîéä åëé çåìéï äåå äîéí ùéäà öøéê ì÷ãùï åäà îéí ÷ãåùéí ëúéá (áîãáø ä) åàîøéðï áñôøé àéï ÷ãåùéí àìà ùðú÷ãùå áëéåø àìîà ëáø ÷ãùå ìäå

(a) Explanation: This is said in astonishment. Is the water Chulin, that one must be Mekadesh it?! It says "Mayim Kedoshim", and we say in the Sifri "Kedoshim" means that they were Niskadshu in the Kiyor. This shows that they already became Kadosh.

åà''ú åäà ôøéùéú áô''÷ (ìòéì ç.) ãàçø ùðú÷ãùå áëìé ùøú ìà îùéîéðï ìäå áëìé çåì îùåí ãîéâðéà îéìúà

(b) Question: I explained above (8a) that after they were Niskadshu in a Kli Shares, we do not put them in a Chulin Kli, for it is disgraceful!

åé''ì ãäðé îéìé áãáø ä÷øá ìîæáç

(c) Answer: That refers to something offered on the Mizbe'ach.

7) TOSFOS DH Ner Yisrael Kach Hayah

úåñôåú ã"ä ðø éùøàì ëê äéä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that also elsewhere Rebbi called him so.)

ëàï åáô' ùðé ãòøëéï (ãó é.) ÷øé ìéä ðø éùøàì âáé îòùä åòùä øáé úùòä çñéøéï åðøàä çåãù áæîðå

(a) Observation: Here and in Erchin (10a), he called [his son Shimon] "Ner Yisrael" regarding an episode in which [in one year] Rebbi made nine months Chaser (only 29 days), and the moon was seen in its time.

åîôøù äøá øáéðå çééí îùåí ãàééøé áîéãé ãàåøä ëâåï äëà áðøåú åäúí áìáðä

(b) Explanation (Rabbeinu Chaim): [He called him so] because he discusses matters of light - here he discusses the Neros, and there, the moon.

8) TOSFOS DH Ner Shel Mikdash Shel Perakim Havah

úåñôåú ã"ä ðø ùì î÷ãù ùì ôø÷éí äåä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that the Sugya in Shabbos is like this opinion.)

åìà ùì çåìéåú ùéåëì ìñì÷ä

(a) Explanation: It was not of rings that he could remove it. (He could only bend it.)

åäà ãàîøéðï áôø÷ áîä îãìé÷éï (ùáú ãó ëá.) åäà äëà ëéåï ã÷áéòé ðøåú ìà ñâé ãìà îù÷ì åàãìå÷é

(b) Implied question: We say in Shabbos (22a) "here, since the Neros are fixed [in the Menorah], he can light only through an intermediary!" (This implies that all agree to this.)

äééðå ëî''ã ùì ôø÷éí

(c) Answer: That is like the opinion that it was of Perakim.

9) TOSFOS DH mi'Chlal d'Iy Ba'i Le'azuzei Matzi Meziz Lah

úåñôåú ã"ä îëìì ãàé áòé ìàåæåæé îöé îæéæ ìä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we assume that he cannot move it.)

åëé úéîà àéï äëé ðîé ãùì çåìéåú äéä

(a) Implied question: Perhaps indeed [he could move it], for it was of rings!

à''ë èåá äéä ùéñì÷ ìâîøé ëãé ùé÷ðç éôä:

(b) Answer: If so, it would be better to totally remove it, in order to clean it well.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES ON THIS DAF