KERISUS 21 - This Daf has been dedicated l'Iluy Nishmas Rochel Rivkah bas Mattisyahu HaCohen, by her son-in-law, Ari Rosenstein of Ramat Beit Shemesh in honor of her Yahrzeit, on 11 Elul.

1)

TOSFOS DH DAM CHALALIM P'RAT L'DAM KILU'ACH ETC.

' " '

(Summary: Tosfos discusses two contradictory explanations in Rashi, one here and one in Chulin, and elaborates.)

" ' ' - , , ...

(a)

Explanation #1: Rashi explains 'Dam Chalalim' - that it already became a Chalal, in other words that it had died preciously and that is why it is Machshir ...

, .

1.

Explanation #1 (cont.): To preclude Dam Kilu'ach (blood that is flowing), which only now is becoming a Chalal.

" ( .)- ' ' , , , .

(b)

Explanation #2: But Rashi did not explain it like this in Perek ha'Shochet (Chulin Daf 36a), where he said 'to preclude Dam Kilu'ach' - meaning that blood with which it is becoming a Chalal, is Machshir, to preclude Dam Kilu'ach, which flows before it becomes a Chalal (See Chok Nasan & Shitah Mekubetzes 22).

, ...

(c)

Question: In our Sugya it implies that Dam Kilu'ach is the blood that flows as the Soul is leaving the body?

...

(d)

Clarification: It also implies in our Sugya that the Hechsher by Adam is not equivalent to Beheimah ...

, ...

1.

Clarification (cont.): Because by Adam the blood after Yetzi'as Neshamah is Machshir, but not the blood that emerges with Yetzi'as Neshamah ...

...

2.

Clarification (cont.): Whereas by Behemah the blood after Yetzi'as Neshamah is not Machshir ...

( :) ' , ... '

(e)

Source: As the Gemara says in Peachim (Daf 16b) 'Leave aside Dam ha'Tamtzis (the last blood oozing from the vein) which, even by Chulin is not Machshir, normis the blood of the dead animal or that of i wounded one'.

, " ".

(f)

Clarification (concl.): Only the blood of Shechitah, which we learn from "Tishpechenu ka'Mayim".

2)

TOSFOS DH KIBEL DAMO BI'SHENEI KOSOS

' "

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies the case.)

, .

(a)

Clarification: The first cup contains Dam Kilu'ach, and and the second cup, blood from after the Kilu'ach.

3)

TOSFOS DH CHAYAV SH'TEI CHATA'OS (See Chok Nasan)

' "

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies the ruling.)

.

(a)

Clarification: In the event that he ate it in two Ha'alamos.

22b----------------------------------------22b

4)

TOSFOS DH IM AD SHE'LO NIMLEKAH HODA ETC. TE'ASENAH VADAY

' " '

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies the ruling and explains why specifically before the Melikah.)

.

(a)

Clarification: And it is eaten like other Chata'os.

, ? ? ...

(b)

Question: Why specifically before the Melikah? Why can the Kohanim not eat it even if it became known only after the Melikah? ...

...

(c)

Refuted Answer #1: If it is because it was not known during the Melikah ...

( .) ' ' , , .

1.

Refutation: The Gemara said above in the first Peerek (Daf 7a) - 'Rebbi Yossi concedes by a Mechaser Kaparah that, since he is only bringing his Korban in order to be permitted to eat Kodshim, he does not require a Yedi'ah initially.

- ' ' ...

(d)

Refuted Answer #2: And if it is a decree - perhaps people will say that a Chatas ha'Of that comes on a Safek is eaten ...

' ( :) ' , ... '...

1.

Refutation: That is fine according to Rebbi Yochanan, who will say later on in Perek ha'Meivi (Daf 26b) that 'If he gets to know that she gave birth for sure only after the Melikah, it is Asur, due to a decree ... ' ...

, , - , ?

2.

Refutation (cont.): But according to Rav who says there that even if he gets to know only after the Melikah, seeing as he knew before the Haza'ah, he is allowed to eat it - why does the Mishnah not say (even) after the Melikah?

, ...

(e)

Answer: , The same does in fact, apply after the Melikah ...

, .

1.

Answer (cont.): , And the Tana is only coming to preclude after the Haza'ah, because then a Chatas ha'Of , since then people will definitely say that Chatas ha'Of thatr comes on a Safek is eaten (See Shitah Mekubetzes 33).

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF