1)

(a)If, in addition to specifying her Neder, the woman actually linked it to her Chovah, but cannot remember what she specified, how many Olos is she obligated to bring initially?

(b)In a case where she only brought two Kinin, including three Olos, assuming that all the birds that she brought consisted of the same species, how many birds will she still need to bring?

(c)Why will it not suffice to bring one bird corresponding to the Chovah, and one Kan consisting of the species that she did not being earlier?

(d)And how many birds will she still need to bring, assuming that the Chovah and the Neder consisted of different species (and that, like in the earlier case, she does not know which of the species was brought last)?

(e)What happens to the second bird (the one that the Kohen actually brought already) that she brings to correspond to her Chovah?

1)

(a)If, in addition to specifying her Neder, the woman actually linked it to her Chovah, but cannot remember what she specified - she needs to bring five Olos, one for her Chovah, and four for her Neder, two pigeons and two young doves.

(b)In a case where she only brought two Kinin, including three Olos, assuming that all the birds that she brought consisted of the same species, she will still need to bring - five Olos, one corresponding to her Chovah, the other four, in the way that we just explained.

(c)It will not suffice to bring one bird corresponding to the Chovah, and one Kan consisting of the species that she did not being earlier - since we are still speaking in a case where the Kohen brought two of the birds above the Chut and two, below it, in which case, one of the Olos is Pasul, and the two Olos that he brought above the Chut are of no value, seeing as she undertook to bring the three together.

(d)Assuming that the Chovah and the Neder consisted of different species (and that, like in the earlier case, she does not know which of the species was brought last) - she will still need to bring six birds, since she doesn't know which species was brought first, in which case she has to bring both a pigeon and a young dove together with the four birds that she brings for her Neder.

(e)The second bird (the one that the Kohen actually brought already) that she brings to correspond to her Chovah - she brings as an Olas Nedavah.

2)

(a)The Mishnah then discusses what the Halachah will be if the woman gave the birds to the Kohen, but doesn't remember what she gave him, neither does she know what the Kohen did with them. What are the three possibilities with regard to ...

1. ... what she gave him?

2. ... what the Kohen did with them?

(b)The Tana Kama obligates her to bring four birds for her Neder, two for her Chovah and one for her Chatas. Why does she have to bring ...

1. ... four birds for her Neder?

2. ... two birds for her Olas Chovah?

3. ... only one bird for her Chatas? Why should she not bring another Chatas to match the Olah, in case it was the other species that he brought?

(c)Then why does ben Azai obligate her to bring two Chata'os?

(d)What happens to the Chata'os? Why is that?

2)

(a)Finally, the Mishnah discusses what the Halachah will be if the woman gave the birds to the Kohen, but doesn't remember what she gave him, neither does she know what the Kohen did with them. The three possibilities with regard to ...

1. ... what she gave him are - either two Kinin of pigeons, two Kinin of young doves or one Kan of each.

2. ... what the Kohen did with them are - whether he brought all the birds above the Chut ha'Sikra, all of them below it or half above the Chut and half below it.

(b)The Tana obligates her to bring four birds for her Neder, two for her Chovah and one for her Chatas. She needs to bring ...

1. ... four birds for her Neder - two of each species, in case the Kohen brought all the birds below the Chut ha'Sikra, and she has not yet even begun to fulfill her Neder.

2. ... two birds for her Olas Chovah - because, according to the Tana Kama, the Olah (of the Chovah) must follow the Chatas, even if it is brought last. And even if the Kohen brought all the birds below the Chut ha'Sikra (or half below and half above), she doesn't know which species he brought for the Chatas.

3. ... only one bird for her Chatas - because she may bring whichever species she chooses for her Chovah. Neither does she need to bring another Chatas to match the Olah, in case it was the other species that he brought, because it is the Chatas which determines the Olah, and not vice-versa (as we just explained).

(c)ben Azai obligates her to bring two Chata'os - because he holds that everything goes after the first bird. Consequently, seeing as the Kohen may have brought the first Kan above the Chut ha'Sikra (or even half above and half below), and she doesn't know which species that was, she is obligated to bring one of each.

(d)The Chata'os are not eaten by the Kohanim (as the Chatas ha'Of usually is) - but is burned, because, seeing as the Chatas may well have been brought in the first batch, it is only a Safek Chiyuv, and may not be eaten.

3)

(a)Rebbi Yehoshua declared 'Zehu she'Amru ke'she'Hu Chai, Kolo Echad, u'che'she'Hu Meis, Kolo Shiv'ah'. What did he mean in the context of the above Mishnah?

(b)To what else was he referring?

(c)If its two horns are used to make trumpets and its two calves to make flutes, what do they do with its ...

1. ... skin?

2. ... intestines?

(d)Having proved that the author of Kinin is Rebbi Yehoshua, how will Rav Ada bar Ahavah now explain why, in the Mishnah there that we cited above, the Mefurashin are not Kasher in the case of Chetzyan Lema'alah ve'Chetzyan Lematah?

3)

(a)Rebbi Yehoshua declared 'Zehu she'Amru ke'she'Hu Chai, Kolo Echad, u'che'she'Hu Meis, Kolo Shiv'ah'. With reference to the last case in the above Mishnah, he meant that - even though initially, the woman was Chayav to bring only four birds for her Neder, and two for her Chovah, now that she already brought four birds, she becomes Chayav to bring another eight (according to ben Azai).

(b)He was also referring - to a ram, which only has one voice whilst it is alive, but seven voices after its death.

(c)Its two horns are used to make trumpets and its two calves, flutes; its ...

1. ... skin is used - to make a drum, and its ...

2. ... intestines - to make harp-strings.

(d)In spite of having proved that the author of Kinin is Rebbi Yehoshua, Rav Ada bar Ahavah will now explain that in the Mishnah there that we cited above, the Mefurashin are not Kasher in the case of Chetzyan Lema'alah ve'Chetzyan Lematah - because although the Melikah of an Olah turns it into a Chatas with regard to removing the Isur Me'ilah, this does not mean that the Korban becomes a Kasher Chatas, since an Olah cannot suddenly become a Chatas simply by changing the Avodah.

4)

(a)The Mishnah states that all Pesulin with which the Kohen performed Melikah, remain Pasul. What does he say about being Metamei the person who eats them?

(b)Why is that?

(c)And what does he say in this regard, in a case where the Kohen ...

1. ... performed Melikah with his left hand or in the night?

2. ... Shechted Chulin birds in the Azarah or performed Melikah on Kodshim birds outside the Azarah?

(d)And what does he say about a Kohen who performed Melikah with a knife or even with his fingernail, but on Chulin or on Kodshim outside the Azarah?

4)

(a)The Mishnah states that all Pesulin with which the Kohen performed Melikah, remain Pasul. The Melikah however - does remove the Din Tum'ah (that pertains to whoever eats them) ...

(b)... since he is talking about Pesulim ba'Kodesh, by which we rule Im Alu, Lo Yerdu.

(c)And the same applies, he says, in a case where the Kohen ...

1. ... performed Melikah with his left hand or in the night, or where he ...

2. ... Shechted Chulin birds in the Azarah or performed Melikah on Kodshim birds outside the Azarah.

(d)But where a Kohen performed Melikah with a knife or even with his fingernail, but on Chulin or on Kodshim outside the Azarah - the Tana rules Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah.

5)

(a)Why does the Tana include Melikah with younger pigeons and older doves in the list of the things that are not Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah?

(b)What is considered too young in a pigeon, and too old in a dove?

(c)In which list does he count a bird whose wing has dried up, whose eye is blinded or whose leg has been cut off?

(d)How will we reconcile this with the principle Ein Tamus ve'Zachrus be'Of?

5)

(a)The Tana includes Melikah with younger pigeons and older doves in the list of the things that are not Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah - because, seeing as they are not eligible to be brought as a Korban, and therefore do not fall in the category of 'Pesulo ba'Kodesh', they fall under the category of Im Alu, Yerdu.

(b)A pigeon whose plumage has not yet began to turn gold, is considered too young to be brought as a Korban, whereas when some of the plumage around the neck of a dove begins to turn gold, it is considered too old.

(c)He counts a bird whose wing has dried up, whose eye is blinded or whose leg has been cut off - in the list of those which are not Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah ...

(d)... because, unlike a bird with a regular blemish) they are Pasul, due to the principle "Hakriveihu Na le'Pechasecha" (anything that one would not give a king, one should not offer to Hash-m either (whereas the Dinim of regular Mumin do not pertain to birds).

6)

(a)The Tana concludes with the principle Kol she'Pesulo ba'Kodesh Eino Metamei (Begadim) be'Beis ha'Beli'ah, ve'Chol she'Eino ba'Kodesh ... . What is the criterion for Pesulo ba'Kodesh?

(b)What is the significance of the word Begadim (which appears in the Sugya later on the Amud)?

6)

(a)The Tana concludes with the principle Kol she'Pesulo ba'Kodesh Eino Metamei (Begadim) be'Beis ha'Beli'ah, ve'Chol she'Eino ba'Kodesh ... . The criterion for Pesulo ba'Kodesh is that - it entered the Azarah in a state of kashrus, and became Pasul only afterwards (see also Tosfos DH 'Amar').

(b)The significance of the word Begadim (which appears in the Sugya later on the Amud) is that - the person who eats the Nivlas Of Tamei does not only render himself Tamei, but also the clothes that he is wearing.

68b----------------------------------------68b

7)

(a)What is Rav coming to teach us when he rules that S'mol and Laylah (with regard to Melikas Of) are Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah, but that Zar and Sakin are not?

(b)We just learned that the Melikah of a Zar is Pasul. How about an Onan, an Areil and other Pesulim?

(c)Seeing as Melikah with the left hand or in the night is Pasul, on what grounds is the Tum'ah removed by ...

1. ... Melikas S'mol?

2. ... Melikas Laylah?

(d)Why does Melikas Zar not also remove the Tum'ah, seeing as a Zar is Kasher to Shecht?

7)

(a)When Rav rules that S'mol and Laylah (with regard to Melikas Of) are Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah, but that Zar and Sakin are not - he is coming to teach us the Din of a Zar, since the others are already mentioned in our Mishnah.

(b)Besides the Melikah of a Zar - the Melikah of an Onan, an Areil and all other Pesulim, is Pasul, too.

(c)Despite the fact that Melikah with the left hand or in the night is Pasul, the Tum'ah is removed by ...

1. ... Melikas S'mol - because it is Kasher Lechatchilah with regard to the Kaf and the Machtah on Yom ha'Kipurim.

2. ... Melikas Laylah - because it is Kasher Lechatchilah with regard to the burning of the Evarim and the Pedarim.

(d)Melikas Zar however, does not remove the Tum'ah, despite the fact that he is Kasher to Shecht Lechatchilah - since Shechitah is not considered an Avodah (presumably, this also answers the same Kashya that one could ask on Melikas Sakin).

8)

(a)When Rebbi Zeira disqualified a Zar from Shechting the Parah Adumah, what source did Rav give for this?

(b)What do we try to prove from there?

(c)We try to counter the answer that Parah is different in that it is Kodshei Bedek ha'Bayis with a Kal va'Chomer. Which Kal va'Chomer?

(d)What does Rav Shisha b'rei de'Rav Idi prove from Mar'os Nega'im?

8)

(a)When Rebbi Zeira disqualified a Zar from Shechting the Parah Adumah, Rav cited the source as - "Elazar" (ha'Kohen) and "Chukah" (which always comes Le'akev).

(b)We try to prove from there that - Shechitah must be an Avodah.

(c)We try to counter the answer that Parah is different in that it is Kodshei Bedek ha'Bayis with a Kal va'Chomer - because if Kodshei Bedek ha'Bayis requires Kehunah, then how much more so Kodshei Mizbe'ach.

(d)Rav Shisha b'rei de'Rav Idi proves from Mar'os Nega'im however that - Kehunah is not necessarily connected with Avodah (but can also be an independent requirement), in which case the Kal-va'Chomer to include Kodshei Mizbe'ach falls away.

9)

(a)What is the Din of a Zar vis-a-vis Melikah of Olos ha'Ofos by a Bamah?

(b)Then why does Rav not place Melikas Zar on a par with S'mol and Laylah, since it is Kasher by a Bamah?

(c)From where does the Beraisa learn that a Korban that is Yotzei (that left its boundaries) Im Alah, Lo Yeired?

(d)How will Rav explain this, in light of what he just said?

9)

(a)A Zar - is permitted to perform the Melikah of Olos ha'Ofos by a Bamah.

(b)Nevertheless, Rav does not place Melikas Zar on a par with S'mol and Laylah (since it is Kasher by a Bamah) - because he holds that one cannot learn Mikdash from Bamah (which is considered like Chol compared to Mikdash).

(c)The Beraisa learns that a Korban that is Yotzei (that left its boundaries) Im Alah, Lo Yeired - from Bamah, where Yotzei is permitted Lechatchilah.

(d)In light of what Rav just said, he will explain that - the Beraisa's real source is "Zos Toras ha'Olah" (from which we learn that Kol she'Pesulo ba'Kodesh, Im Alah Lo Yeired [incorporating Yotzei]), and that the Limud from Bamah is merely an Asmachta.

10)

(a)Rebbi Yochanan disagrees with Rav. What does he say about Melikas Zar?

(b)From where does he learn it?

(c)What do we try to prove from the Reisha of our Mishnah "Kol ha'Pesulin she'Malku Melikasan Pesulah, ve'Eino Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah'?

(d)How do we ...

1. ... try to refute Rav's answer, that the Tana comes to include S'mol and Laylah?

2. ... dismiss that argument?

10)

(a)Rebbi Yochanan holds that - Melikas Zar is not Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah.

(b)And he learns it from - Bamah.

(c)We try to prove from the Reisha of our Mishnah "Kol ha'Pesulin she'Malku Melikasan Pesulah, ve'Eino Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah' - that this includes Melikas Zar, a proof for Rebbi Yochanan.

(d)We try to refute Rav's answer, that the Tana comes to include S'mol and Laylah ...

1. ... by pointing out that the Tana mentions them explicitly.

2. ... dismiss that argument however - by citing the principle Tani ve'Hadar Mefaresh' (the Beraisa first states the principle and then explains it).

11)

(a)We query Rav again from the Seifa of the Mishnah Zeh ha'Kelal, Kol she'Hayah Pesulo ba'Kodesh, Metamei Begadim a'Beis ha'Beli'ah ... . How do we counter this with a Kashya on Rebbi Yochanan from the Seifa de'Seifa?

(b)And we conclude that the Reisha de'Seifa comes to include Shechitas Kodshim bi'Fenim. What does the Seifa de'Seifa then come to include?

(c)We learned a Beraisa in support of Rebbi Yochanan. What does the Tana say about ...

1. ... a Zar or a Pasul who perform Melikah?

2. ... a Korban ha'Of that is Pigul, Nosar or Tamei?

11)

(a)We query Rav again from the Seifa 'Zeh ha'Kelal Kol she'Hayah Pesulo ba'Kodesh, Metamei Begadim a'Beis ha'Beli'ah ... '. But we counter this by asking what the Seifa de'Seifa ('Lo Hayah Pesulo ba'Kodesh, Metamei ... ') then comes to include according to Rebbi Yochanan?

(b)And we conclude that the Reisha de'Seifa comes to include Shechitas Kodshim bi'Fenim, and the Seifa de'Seifa - Melikas Chulin ba'Chutz.

(c)We learned a Beraisa in support of Rebbi Yochanan, where the Tana rules that ...

1. ... if a Zar or a Pasul performs Melikah - it is not Metamei be'Beis ha'Beli'ah, and neither is ...

2. ... a Korban ha'Of that is Pigul, Nosar or Tamei'.

12)

(a)What did Rebbi Yitzchak hear about Kemitzas Zar and Melikas Zar?

(b)What did Chizkiyah say to that?

(c)What objection do we raise to the suggestion that ...

1. ... the Melikah of a Zar is Metamei, because it is Kasher by a Bamah?

2. ... the Kemitzah of a Zar is not Metamei, because a Minchah cannot be brought on a Bamah?

12)

(a)Rebbi Yitzchak heard regarding Kemitzas Zar and Melikas Zar that - the Din by one of them is Im Alah, Teired, and by the other, Im Alah, Lo Teired, but he could not recall which was which.

(b)Chizkiyah said that logically - Kemitzah, Teired, and Melikah, Lo Teired.

(c)We object to the suggestion that ...

1. ... the Melikah of a Zar is Metamei, because it is Kasher by a Bamah - because then so is Kemitzah.

2. ... the Kemitzah of a Zar is not Metamei, because a Minchah is never brought on a Bamah - because neither is a bird.

13)

(a)The current comparison is based on a statement of Rav Sheishes. What did Rav Sheishes say in connection with a Minchah and a bird-offering being brought on a Bamah?

(b)How does he learn it from the Pasuk in Mishpatim (in connection with Har Sinai) "Vayizb'chu Zevachim Shelamim"?

(c)What does that have to do with the Din of a Bamah?

13)

(a)The current comparison is based on a statement of Rav Sheishes that - according to those who hold that a Minchah cannot be brought on a Bamah, neither can a bird-offering; whereas according to those who say that it can, so can a bird.

(b)And he learns it from the Pasuk in Mishpatim, which rules (in connection with the Korbanos that they brought at the foot of Har Sinai) "Vayizb'chu Zevachim Shelamim", from which Chazal learn - "Zevachim", 'but not bird-offerings, "Zevachim", but not Menachos ...

(c)... and the foot of Har Sinai had the Din of a Bamah.

14)

(a)So what is Rebbi Yitzchak's reason? Why can we not learn the Kemitzah of a Zar in the Beis-Hamikdash from Bamah?

14)

(a)Rebbi Yitzchak's reason for not learning the Kemitzah of a Zar in the Beis-Hamikdash from Bamah is - because a Bamah does not require a K'li Shareis (which may well be the reason why a Zar is permitted to bring it), whereas the Beis-Hamikdash does.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF