Previous Daf

PESACHIM 60

Ask A Question

1) DOES THE MISHNAH DISCUSS ONE OR TWO AVODOS?

(a) (Gemara - Rav Papa) Question: Does the Mishnah discuss different intents in one Avodah, or in different Avodos?

1. If it discusses different intents in one Avodah, it is like R. Yosi, who says that we are concerned even for a person's final words;

i. It is unlike R. Meir, who says that we follow [only] his initial words (if he intended Lishmah and then Lo Lishmah, it is fully Lishmah)!

2. If it discusses different intents in two Avodos, it is even like R. Meir;

i. R. Meir says that we follow [only] his initial words regarding one Avodah - he agrees that intents in two Avodos are Posel.

3. Question: Which case of two intents does Rav Papa discuss?

i. If he intended Lo Lishmah and then Lishmah, whether this was in one or two Avodos, R. Meir and R. Yosi agree that the first intent was already Posel!
ii. R. Yosi holds that we are concerned [for his first words, and] even for his final words.

4. Answer: He intended Lishmah and then Lo Lishmah.

(b) Answer #1 (Mishnah): If Pesach was slaughtered Lo Lishmah, and also Kabalah, Holachah and Zerikah were Lo Lishmah [it is Pasul].

1. Question: What is the case?

i. If this is simply like it says, why must all four Avodos be Lo Lishmah - it is Pasul from the first Avodah!

2. Answer: It means, it was slaughtered Lo Lishmah; alternatively, it was slaughtered Lishmah, and Kabalah, Holachah and Zerikah were Lo Lishmah; or slaughter, Kabalah and Holachah were Lishmah, and Zerikah was Lo Lishmah - i.e. intent in two Avodos.

(c) Objection (Seifa - really, this is the middle clause): Lishmah and then Lo Lishmah [is also Pasul].

1. Question: What is the case?

i. If it is in two Avodos, this is just like the Reisha!

2. Answer #1: It is in one Avodah; the Mishnah is R. Yosi, who is concerned even for his final words!

(d) Answer (and Answer #2 to Question c:1): No, the Seifa also discusses intent in two Avodos:

1. The Reisha discusses when each intent is for the Avodah he is currently doing; the Seifa discusses intent in an Avodah for a subsequent Avodah, e.g. he slaughters Lishmah, with intent to do Zerikah Lo Lishmah.
2. It teaches that intent from one Avodah to another takes effect.
3. Version #1 (Rashi): [Elsewhere] Rav Papa was unsure [also] about this.

(e) Version #2 (Tosfos) Conclusion: This is why Rav Papa asked about the Mishnah (it can be explained either way)! (end of Version #2)
(f) Answer #2 (the actual Seifa): If he intended Lo Lishmah and then Lishmah, it is Pasul.

1. Question: What is the case?

i. If it is in two Avodos, even Lishmah and then Lo Lishmah is Pasul, it need not teach about Lo Lishmah and then Lishmah (the first Avodah was Posel)!

2. Answer #1: It is in one Avodah.
3. Suggestion: Just like the Seifa discusses one Avodah, also the Reisha (middle clause, of Lishmah and Lo Lishmah; the Mishnah is R. Yosi)!

(g) Rejection (and Answer #2 to Question e:1): No, the Seifa also discusses intent in two Avodos;

1. Indeed, it is not a Chidush - it was taught along with the case of Lishmah and then Lo Lishmah.

(h) Answer #3 (the coming Mishnah): If Pesach was slaughtered for people who cannot eat it (they are sick or old; or, if they are forbidden to eat it, e.g.), were not Menuyim on it (did not own a share), Arelim (uncircumcised; see note in Appendix) or Temei'im, it is Pasul.

1. Clearly, this discusses one Avodah - since the Seifa discusses one Avodah, also the Reisha (our Mishnah)!

(i) Rejection: This is not necessarily so - the Seifa discusses one Avodah, but the Reisha could discuss one or two Avodos!
(j) Answer #4 (the coming Mishnah): If Pesach was slaughtered for people who can eat it and people who cannot, it is Kosher.

1. Question: What is the case?
2. Answer #1: It discusses two Avodos - it is Kosher because he intended for people who cannot eat it during Zerikah, and intent for who will eat it does not affect Zerikah.
3. Rejection: If so, we would infer that such intents in one Avodah in which intent for who will eat takes effect, e.g. slaughter, is Posel;

i. But the Halachah is that intent for some people who can eat and some who cannot is not Posel!

4. Answer #2: Rather, it discusses one Avodah - since the Seifa discusses one Avodah, also the Reisha (our Mishnah)!

(k) Rejection: This is not necessarily so - the Seifa discusses one Avodah, but the Reisha could discuss one or two Avodos!

(a) Question: (If Pesach was slaughtered any day other than Erev Pesach Lo Lishmah, i.e. l'Shem Shelamim, it is Kosher; if it was Lishmah, it is Pasul.) If Pesach was slaughtered any other day of the year Lishmah and Lo Lishmah, what is the law?

1. Perhaps the intent Lo Lishmah uproots the intent Lishmah, so it is Kosher;
2. Or, perhaps it does not?

(b) Answer #1 (Rav Dimi): Pesach is Kosher Lishmah in its proper time, and Kosher Lo Lishmah any other time;

1. Just like Lishmah in its time does not uproot Lo Lishmah (if it was slaughtered with both intents it is Pasul), Lo Lishmah in its time does not uproot Lishmah, therefore it is Pasul.

(c) Rejection (R. Yirmeyah): No - Lo Lishmah is not uprooted, for it [is more prevalent, it] applies to all Korbanos [one does not fulfill his obligation if the Avodah was Lo Lishmah - sometimes this even disqualifies the Korban];

1. But Lishmah can be uprooted, for it is Pasul only regarding Pesach [outside its time].

(d) Question: What was the conclusion?
(e) Answer (Rava): If Pesach was slaughtered any other day Lishmah and Lo Lishmah, it is Kosher, for Stam (without specifying) it is [destined to be slaughtered in its time] Lishmah, nevertheless slaughter Lo Lishmah is Kosher;

1. This shows that Lo Lishmah uproots its normal Lishmah status - likewise, when it is slaughtered Lishmah and Lo Lishmah, the Lo Lishmah uproots the Lishmah!

(f) Question (Rav Ada bar Ahavah): Perhaps we distinguish when he explicitly said that he slaughters Lishmah to when he did not!

1. Slaughter for Ochlav (people who may eat it) and Lo l'Ochlav (for people who may not eat it) is Kosher, even though slaughter Lo l'Ochlav is Pasul;
2. Question: Stam it is l'Ochlav - even Lo l'Ochlav should be like l'Ochlav and Lo l'Ochlav!
3. Answer: This shows that explicitly saying the intent is unlike Stam.

(g) Answer (Rava): These are very different!

1. As long as one does not specify Lo Lishmah in slaughter, Stam it is Lishmah;
2. We cannot say that Stam it is for Ochlav - perhaps its owners will be Menuyim on another Korban, and others will be Menuyim on this!

i. (Mishnah): One may be Manuy on a Korban or retract from Minuy until it is slaughtered.

(h) Question: If Pesach was slaughtered any other day b'Shinuy Ba'alim (with intent for people other than its owners), what is the law?

1. Is Shinuy Ba'alim like intent for another Korban (Lo Lishmah), and it is Kosher, or not?

(i) Answer #1 (Rav Papa): Shinuy Ba'alim is Posel in its time, just like Lo Lishmah - just like Lo Lishmah is Posel in its time and is Machshir at other times, also Shinuy Ba'alim!