1) TOSFOS DH Talmud Lomar v'Arach Aleha ha'Olah (cont.)
úåñôåú ã"ä úìîåã ìåîø åòøê òìéä äòåìä (äîùê)
ìëê ðøàä ãîãøáðï îéôñéì àôéìå ä÷èéø åòùä äëì åìà äòîéãå ãáøéäí äéëà ãìà àôùø
(a) Conclusion: Therefore, it seems that mid'Rabanan it is forbidden even if he was Maktir and did everything. Chachamim did not enforce their words where it is not possible (to fulfill them and also fulfill Pesach).
2) TOSFOS DH Eis d'Garsei (pertains to the previous Daf)
úåñôåú ã"ä àéú ãâøñé (ùééê ìãó îè:)
(SUMMARY: Tosfos brings two texts.)
äà àéëà öôøà ãúìúà áùáúà åçìå ùðé éîéí èåáéí ùì ø''ä àçø äùáú åôøéê åìéèòîéê úîðéà äåå ãäàéëà ãôðéà ãîòìé ùáúà
(a) Version #1: [Some texts says "there is Tuesday morning, and the two days of Rosh Hashanah occurred after Shabbos", and it asks "veli'Taimech (this is difficult also for you, for) there are eight! There is [the lamb for the Tamid] of Friday afternoon!"
åëñáåø äéä ùáàîöò äéåí äéä îãáø
(b) Explanation: [The Makshan] thought that we discuss [even] in the middle of the day.
åàéú ãâøñé äà àéëà öôøà ãçã áùáúà åîåðä äá' éîéí èåáéí ìôðé äùáú åáúø äëé ðâøåñ ãôðéà ãîòìé éåîà èáà
(c) Version #2: Other texts say "there is Sunday morning", and he counts the two days of Yom Tov before Shabbos", and afterwards the text says "[there is the lamb for the Tamid] of the afternoon of Erev Yom Tov!"
3) TOSFOS DH mi'Kol Makom Zayin Havu
úåñôåú ã"ä îëì î÷åí æ' äåå
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we did not ask about Sunday afternoon.)
ãáùìîà [áéï äòøáéí] ãøàùåï àò''ô ùöøéê áé÷åø ã' éîéí éèøç åéîöà îáå÷øéï ùäîá÷øéï äéå îá÷øéï àåúï ëãé ìîåëøï
(a) Explanation: Granted, [the Tamid for] the afternoon of Sunday, even though it must be checked four days [before offering it], he can toil and find checked animals. Checkers used to check them in order to sell them;
àáì áöôøà ìà éëåì áìéìä ìèøåç åìá÷ù (îá÷øéï) [ðøàä ùö"ì îáå÷øéï]
1. However, [for the Tamid of] the morning, at night he cannot toil and find checked animals.
4) TOSFOS DH Deika Nami deka'Tani Kedei l'Shabbos
úåñôåú ã"ä ãé÷à ðîé ã÷úðé ëãé ìùáú
(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that above, a Tana was not meticulous about this.)
àó ò''â ãìòéì (ãó ìè.) úðéà ëãé ùéëøåê åéùðä åéùìù
(a) Implied question: Above (39a), a Beraisa taught [that a Chulya must be] Kedei (in order) to wrap [a thread around the others], and a second and third time! (There he must do so. It is not a mere Siman!)
ìéëà ìîéèòé äúí
(b) Answer: There, one cannot err.
5) TOSFOS DH she'Ein Mechanchin
úåñôåú ã"ä ùàéï îçðëéï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos rejects Rashi's Perush.)
ôéøù á÷åðèøñ ãèòîéä ãø''ù ÷àîø åî''î ôøéê ùôéø çéðåê îàï ãëø ùîéä îòåìú äúîéã
(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): This explains R. Shimon's reason. Even so, [the Gemara] properly asked "who mentioned Chinuch?" regarding Olas Tamid (since R. Shimon discusses only Ketores).
åìà éúëï çãà ëéåï ãääåà äåä èòîà àéãê ð÷è àééãé
(b) Rebuttal #1: This cannot be! Firstly, since [Chinuch] is the reason [for Ketores, it is not difficult why] it mentioned the other [Olas Tamid] for parallel structure with it.
åúå ãáçñåøé îéçñøà îùîò ãîäãø àãøáðï (åúå) àìîà ãøáðï îåãå áçéðåê
(c) Rebuttal #2: "The Mishnah is abbreviated" connotes that we seek to explain Rabanan. This implies that Rabanan agree about Chinuch!
åúå îðìï ãùìí äåä
(d) Rebuttal #3: What is the source that it is offered complete? (Chinuch does not explain this! Yashar v'Tov - "Chinuch of Mizbach ha'Olah is only with a morning Tamid" refers to "if they did not offer a lamb in the morning, they do not offer in the afternoon." The Mishnah is abbreviated (and Chachamim say that either way, we do not offer in the afternoon). If so, "we are Mechanech [only...]" is according to Rabanan. If so, presumably, they agree about Ketores. If so, there is no source that the full amount is offered, like R. Shimon says.)
6) TOSFOS DH ba'Meh Devarim Amurim she'Lo Nischanech
úåñôåú ã"ä áîä ã''à ùìà ðúçðê
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains how this answers the question.)
åàäà ÷àé ùàéï îçðëéï ãîúðé'
(a) Explanation: "For we are not Mechanech..." in our Mishnah refers to this. (It gives the reason for what the full Mishnah taught "what is the case? It is when there was not Chinuch...")
7) TOSFOS DH Aval Nischanech Yakrivu (This starts a new Dibur according to the Shitah Mekubetzes Kesav Yad and Tzon Kodoshim)
úåñôåú ã"ä [ö"ì àáì ðúçðê é÷øéáå - æä ãéáåø çãù ìôé äùéèä î÷åáöú åäöàï ÷ãùéí]
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why the Temidim are unlike the Ketores.)
ëáù àçã ãå÷à åìà ùðéí îãìà ÷úðé åá' äéå ÷øéáéí ìø''ù
(a) Explanation: We offer specifically one lamb, and not two, since it did not teach "they would offer two according to R. Shimon."
àò''â ãâáé ÷èåøú ÷øá ëåìä
(b) Implied question: The entire amount of Ketores is offered!
ìà ãîé ëìì ãäúí çãà îéìúà äéà
(c) Answer: There is different, for it is one matter.
8) TOSFOS DH d'Lo Shechicha u'Me'atra
úåñôåú ã"ä ãìà ùëéçà åîòúøà
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that the first reason is primary.)
òé÷ø äèòí îùåí ãìà ùëéçà ãáô''á ãéåîà (ãó ëå.) îåëç î÷øà ãëúéá åëìéì òì îæáçê áøê ä' çéìå ãòåìä ðîé îòúøà
(a) Explanation: The primary reason because it is not common, for in Yoma (26a) it is proven from a verse, for it says "v'Kalil Al Mizbachecha Barech Hash-m Cheilo", that also Olah makes rich (those who offer it).
9) TOSFOS DH Yachol Yehei Yachid Misnadev u'Mevi
úåñôåú ã"ä éëåì éäà éçéã îúðãá åîáéà
(SUMMARY: Tosfos resolves this with the Gemara in Me'ilah.)
åäà ãàîøéðï áîòéìä ôø÷ çèàú äòåó (ãó è:) äðäðä îáùø ÷ãùé ÷ãùéí ÷åãí æøé÷ä åëå' éáéà ÷èåøú ùëåìä ìîæáç
(a) Implied question: We say in Me'ilah (9b) that one who benefits from meat of Kodshei Kodoshim before Zerikah... [Levi says that] he must bring Ketores, which is totally for the Mizbe'ach]!
äééðå ìîåñøä ìöáåø:
(b) Answer: That is to give it to the Tzibur. (He does not offer it for Nedavah.)
50b----------------------------------------50b
10) TOSFOS DH Talmud Lomar v'Chulei k'Chol Asher Tzivisicha Ya'asu
úåñôåú ã"ä úìîåã ìåîø [ëå'] ëëì àùø öåéúéê éòùå
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we need a second verse forbidding Ketores Nedavah.)
úéîä ìîä ìé ÷øà ãìà úòìå òìéå ÷èøú æøä åúéôå÷ ìéä îäëà
(a) Question: Why do we need the verse "Lo Sa'alu Alav Ketores Zarah"? I already know from here!
åàåîø øáé ãä''à ãöáåø äåà ãîô÷ãé ùìà éùðå àáì éçéã ëòéï öáåø îáéà
(b) Answer #1 (Tosfos' Rebbi): One might have thought that the Tzibur is commanded not to deviate, but an individual may bring like the Tzibur [on the inner Mizbe'ach].
åúéîä ãà''ë ìà úòìå áìùåï øáéí ìîä ìé ãîéðéä ãøùéðï ìòéì öáåø åéçéã î÷èøú æøä
1. Question: If so, why does it say "Lo Sa'alu" in a plural expression? From it we expound above (50a) a Tzibur and an individual from "Ketores Zarah"?
åé''ì [ãäåé àîéðà öáåø ùøé ìâáé ÷èøú ðãáä òì îæáç äôðéîé åäåé] ùôéø áëìì ëàùø öåéúéê ëéåï ãîééúå çåáä (àå - ç÷ ðúï îåç÷å) îééúå ðãáä
2. Answer: One might have thought that a Tzibur is permitted a Nedavah of Ketores on the inner Mizbe'ach, and this is included in ka'Asher Tzivisicha. Since they bring [Ketores] for Chovah, they can bring it for Nedavah.
åðøàä ãìà îäãø àìà à÷èøú ñîéí ãùééê ìîæáç ä÷èøú áääéà ôøùúà àáì àîàé ãìà ëúéá ÷åãí ìà îäãø [åä''à ãòì îæáç äçéöåï îáéà]
(c) Answer #2: It seems that this refers only to Ketores of the ingredients [that the Torah specified], which pertains to Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores in that Parshah, but it does not refer to what was not written, and one might have thought that one may bring on the outer Mizbe'ach (Tzon Kodoshim. Keren Orah [and Yashar v'Tov] delete the bracketed words, and explain that one might have thought that an individual or Tzibur may bring on the inner Mizbe'ach.)
11) TOSFOS DH u'Mechetzah Avad
úåñôåú ã"ä åîçöä àáã
(SUMMARY: Tosfos resolves this according to R. Elazar above.)
÷ùéà ìø' àìòæø ãàîø (ìòéì ãó ç.) ÷ãåù ìçöàéï åîçöéúä ãàîø ÷øà îçöä îùìí (ìäáàä) äåà åà''ë àîàé àáã ãäà àëúé ìà àé÷ãéù ÷ãåùú äâåó åà''ë áø ôãéåï äåà
(a) Question: According to R. Elazar, who said above (8a) that it becomes Kadosh half at a time, and "Machatzisah" that the Torah said is half of a full [Shi'ur] regarding bringing (he must bring a full Isaron from his house), why is it lost? It did not yet get Kedushas ha'Guf. If so, it can be redeemed!
åàò''â ãîùîò áîñëú ù÷ìéí (ãó ã.) àáåãéï îìé÷øá
1. Suggestion: It connotes in Shekalim (4a) that it is lost from being offered. (Indeed, it can be redeemed!)
î''î îä áéï æä ìñåìú àçø ëéåï ãðôãä
2. Rejection: In any case, why is this different than other flour, since it was redeemed? (Why should we say that it cannot be offered?)
îéäå [ö"ì ëéåï ùäôãéåï äåìê ìàéáåã - éùø åèåá] îù''ä ÷øé ìéä àáã
(b) Answer: However, since the Pidyon is lost (one must cast it to the Dead Sea), it says that it is lost. (One does not gain through redemption.)
12) TOSFOS DH Afilu Pigul Ta'un Ibur Tzurah
úåñôåú ã"ä àôé' ôéâåì èòåï òéáåø öåøä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains his source.)
ãéìéó òåï òåï îðåúø àó ìòðéï äà îãäúí àéëà [òéáåø] öåøä äëà ä''ð ëããøùéðï ôø÷ ÷îà (ãôñçéí ãó â.) åáôø÷ àéæäå î÷åîï (æáçéí ãó ðå:) áéåí àúä ùåøôå åàé àúä ùåøôå áìéìä
(a) Explanation: He learns [a Gezeirah Shavah] "Avon-Avon" from Nosar even regarding this. Since there, there is Ibur Tzurah, also here (before it is burned), like we expounded in Pesachim (3a) and in Zevachim (56b) "you burn during the day, and you do not burn at night." (Even what may not be eaten at night, we do not burn until morning.)
13) TOSFOS DH Ta'aseh Afilu b'Shabbos Ta'aseh Afilu b'Tum'ah
úåñôåú ã"ä úòùä àôéìå áùáú úòùä àôéìå áèåîàä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we can learn both from one word.)
äà ãîô÷éðï äëà îçã ÷øà ùáú åèåîàä (äééðå îùåí ãâìé øçîðà âáé) [ö"ì åâáé - öàï ÷ãùéí] ôñç ããøùéðï îáîåòãå àôéìå áùáú åàéöèøéê ÷øà àçøéðà âáé èåîàä àéù ðãçä åàéï öáåø ðãçéï
(a) Implied question: Why do we learn Shabbos and Tum'ah from one verse, and regarding Pesach, we expound from "b'Mo'ado" even on Shabbos, and we need another verse for Tum'ah - "Ish" (an individual) is detained (to Pesach Sheni), but a Tzibur is not detained?
åðøàä ãäé îéðééäå îô÷ú ãù÷åìéï äí åìà ãîå ìôñç:
(b) Answer: [For Chavitim] there is no reason to learn one (Shabbos or Tum'ah) more than the other. They are equal [so we learn both of them]. They are unlike Pesach. (There, "b'Mo'ado" connotes when it is offered, and we can expound "Ish" to teach about Tum'ah.)