1) TOSFOS DH v'Chen ha'Shole'ach Korbanos... Kohen Menif Al Yado (cont.)
úåñôåú ã"ä åëï äùåìç ÷øáðåúéå... ëäï îðéó òì éãå (äîùê)
åé''ì ãáôø÷ ëì äôñåìéï (æáçéí ãó ìâ.) îñ÷éðï ãúéëó ìñîéëä ùçéèä ãàåøééúà
(a) Answer: In Zevachim (33a) we conclude that Tekef l'Semichah Shechitah is mid'Oraisa.
2) TOSFOS DH Mesafka Lehu
úåñôåú ã"ä îñô÷à ìäå
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the Safek.)
àé òì ùí ëìééï ð÷øàå îçáú åîøçùú (ùáîøçùú) [ö"ì åáîøçùú - öàï ÷ãùéí] áòé ìàéúåééä åðôé÷
(a) Explanation #1: [He is unsure] if they are called Machavas and Marcheshes due to the Kelim, and he must bring it in a Marcheshes, and he is Yotzei;
àå òì ùí îòùéäï òì ùí øçéùä (øçéùú äìá àå øçéùú ùôúéí - öàï ÷ãùéí îåç÷å) åëéåï ãìà éãòéðï ìäé ðúëåéï àé àøçåùé äìá àå àøçéùú ùôúéí éäà îåðç òã ùéáà àìéäå ëê ôéøù á÷åðèøñ
1. Or, it is called so due to what is made in them, based on Rechishah. Since we do not know for which he intended, whether for thoughts of the heart or moving of the lips, he leaves it until Eliyahu will come. So Rashi [Kesav Yad] explained.
åòì çðí ð÷è ìôéøåùå àé òì ùí ëìééï ð÷øàå ãàôé' ôùéèà ìéä ìùí îòùéäï àéëà ìñôå÷é àé àøçåùé äìá ðúëåéï åîáéà áîøçùú àé àøçåùé äôä åîáéà áîçáú
(b) Objection: According to his Perush, there was no need to explain "perhaps they are called so due to the Kelim." Even if he knew that it is based on what is made in them, there is a doubt, if he intended for thoughts of the heart, so he brings in a Marcheshes, or for moving of the lips, so he brings in a Machavas!
ìôéëê ðøàä ãð÷è òì ùí ëìééï ìîéîø ãîñô÷à ìï àé ëìé ðãø àå ìîðçä ðúëåéï
(c) Explanation #2: He mentioned "perhaps they are called so due to the Kelim" to teach that we are unsure if he vowed a Kli, or a Minchah.
åà''ú åàîàé éäà îåðç éáéà îøçùú åîðçú îøçùú îñô÷ ëãàùëçï ì÷îï (ãó ÷æ.) ôéøùúé åàéðé éåãò îä ôéøùúé ùéù ìå ìäáéà ëì äñô÷åú ìôèåø òöîå îðãø
(d) Question: Why is it left [until Eliyahu comes]? He should bring a Marcheshes (the Kli), and a Minchas Marcheshes, like we find below "I specified and I do not know what I specified" - he brings everything he has a Safek about it to exempt himself from his vow!
åé''ì ãîééøé ëâåï ãàîø îòåú äììå àå ñåìú æä ìîøçùú
(e) Answer: The case is, e.g. he said "these coins or this Soles is for Marcheshes."
åîéäå ÷ùä ãìú÷ï îòåú äììå éáéà îòåú ùì çåìéï åé÷ðä îøçùú åéàîø ãàí ëìé ðãø éäà äëìé ÷ðåé áäï
(f) Question: To fix these coins, he should bring Chulin coins and buy a Marcheshes, and say that if he vowed a Kli, the Kli is acquired with [the Hekdesh coins]!
åéù ìåîø ëâåï ùäôøéù îòåú åä÷ãéùï ìîøçùú ëîå ùéãøùå çëîú äìùåï
(g) Answer: The case is, e.g. he separated coins and he was Makdish them for Marcheshes, like [Chachamim] will expound according to the Chachmah of the expression. (Why doesn't the above solution apply? Chak Nasan, Chemdas Daniel and Olas Shlomo say that here, he is not obligated to find a solution until Chachamim resolve the meaning. Yad Binyamin says that his coins did not get Kedushah.)
3) TOSFOS DH Oh Al Shem Ma'aseihen
úåñôåú ã"ä àå òì ùí îòùéäï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that this is unlike Rav Ashi.)
åìéú ìäå ìáéú ùîàé äà ãàîø øá àùé áøéù îëéìúéï (ãó â:) îçáú ìùí îøçùú áîðà ÷à îçùá åîçùáä áîðà ìà ôñìä
(a) Explanation: Beis Shamai argue with what Rav Ashi said above (3b, that if one intended) about [Minchas] Machavas l'Shem Marcheshes, he intended for the Kli, and intent for the Kli does not disqualify.
4) TOSFOS DH u'Kesheros a'Beis Pagi
úåñôåú ã"ä åëùøåú àáéú ôàâé
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the inference that the oven is Mekadesh.)
ôéøù á÷åðèø' àìîà ãàéï úðåø î÷ãù îãëùøåú àáéú ôàâé åàéï ðôñìåú áéåöà
(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): This shows that the oven is not Mekadesh, since they are Kosher in Beis Pagi, and they are not disqualified through Yotzei.
åàéï ðøàä ìôøù ëï ëãôé' áô''÷ (ìòéì è. ã''ä ø''ì)
(b) Rejection: This is wrong, like I explained above (9a DH Reish Lakish. Kidush through the oven does not cause that they are disqualified through Yotzei. Rather, it is repulsive to take it outside after it became Mekudash.)
åéù ìúîåä îàé ÷à îãîéà àôééú ùúé äìçí åìçí äôðéí ìàôééú îðçú îàôä úðåø äà àîø áñåó äúëìú (ìòéì ðà.) àîø øáà òì îçáú îìîã ùèòåðéï ëìé åàé àôé ìä îàúîåì àéôñìä ìä áìéðä
(c) Question: What is the comparison of baking Shtei ha'Lechem and Lechem ha'Panim to baking Minchas Ma'afe Tanur? Above (51a), Rava said that "Al Machavas" teaches that [Minchas Chavitim] needs a Kli, and if he baked it from yesterday, it is disqualified through Linah;
åä''ð îàôä úðåø ëúéá îìîãê ùèòåï ëìé åìéîà ãúðåø ùì îðçåú î÷ãù àáì ùì ùúé äìçí åìçí äôðéí ìà î÷ãù
1. Likewise, it is written Ma'afe Tanur, to teach that it needs a Kli, and he should say that the oven of Menachos is Mekadesh, but [the oven] of Shtei ha'Lechem and Lechem ha'Panim is not Mekadesh!
åé''ì ãáô' ãí çèàú (æáçéí öä:) îåëç ãìà äåä áî÷ãù àìà àçã úðåø ùì îúëú ùäéä ìùúé äìçí åìçí äôðéí åìîðçåú
(d) Answer: In Zevachim (95b) it is proven that there was only one metal oven in the Mikdash. It was for Shtei ha'Lechem and Lechem ha'Panim and Menachos;
åìà ãîé ìääéà ãúëìú ãâáé îðçåú ìà àîø øçîðà òùä áîçáú òùä áúðåø òùä áîøçùú
1. It is unlike the case above (51a), for regarding Menachos, the Torah did not say "make in a Machavas. Make in an oven. Make in a Marcheshes";
àáì áçáéúéï àîø øçîðà òì îçáú áùîï úòùä (åé÷øà á):
2. However, the Torah said about Chavitim "Al Machavas ba'Shemen Te'aseh."
63b----------------------------------------63b
5) TOSFOS DH R. Yishmael. V'Chachamim Omerim Echad Shabbos...
úåñôåú ã"ä øáé éùîòàì. [åçëîéí àåîøéí] àçã ùáú...
(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that first it teaches what all agree to.)
ùáú ãîåãä øáé éùîòàì îæëéø áøéùà
(a) Observation: First it mentions Shabbos, about which R. Yishmael agrees.
åáñô''÷ ãñåëä (ãó ë.) ãôìéâé øáé àìéòæø åøáðï áîçöìú. åàîø øáà áâãåìä ãëåìé òìîà ìà ôìéâé ãñúîà ìñéëåê ëé ôìéâé á÷èðä
(b) Citation: In Sukah (20a), R. Eliezer and Rabanan argue about a mat, and Rava said that they do not argue about a big mat. Stam, all agree that it is for Sechach (so it is not Mekabel Tum'ah, and it is Kosher for Sechach). They argue about a small one;
åî÷ùé àáéé àé äëé àçú âãåìä åàçú ÷èðä àçú ÷èðä åàçú âãåìä îáòé ìéä
1. Abaye challenged - if so, why does it say "the same applies whether it is big or small? It should say "whether it is small or big!" (I.e. what they agree about should be last.)
àéï âéøñà æå ðëåðä åàéôëà âøñéðï ëãîåëç äëà ãääåà ãîåãå øáðï îáòé ìéä ìîéúðé áøéùà
(c) Rejection: This text is wrong. The text says oppositely, like is proven here, that the case that Rabanan agree about should be taught first. (The Seifa (64a) teaches first Shabbos, which they argue about! Chak Nasan and Rashash say that since the Reisha taught Shabbos first, also the Seifa did.)
åëï ääéà ãúðï áôø÷ áúøà ãøàù äùðä. (ãó ëè:) àçú éáðä åàçú ëì î÷åí ùéù áå á''ã
(d) Support: Also the Mishnah in Rosh Hashanah (29b, teaches first what all agree to) - the same applies to Yavneh and every place where there is Beis Din (we blow the Shofar on Rosh Hashanah even when it is Shabbos).
6) TOSFOS DH Mafshit Es ha'Pesach Ad ha'Chazeh
úåñôåú ã"ä îôùéè àú äôñç òã äçæä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses why elsewhere the law is different.)
ãøê øâìéå îúçéì åäåìê åîôùéè òã äçæä ìéèåì àéîåøéå
(a) Explanation: He starts from the legs and flays until the chest, to take the Eimurim.
åìà ãîé ìääéà ãúðéà ááëåøåú áôø÷ ëì ôñåìé äîå÷ãùéï (ãó ìâ.) åáúîåøä ôø÷ åìã çèàú (ãó ëã.) àéï îøâéìéï áéåí èåá åàéï îøâéìéï ááëåø
(b) Implied question: Why is this unlike the Beraisa in Bechoros (33a) and in Temurah (24a), that we do not flay from the legs on Yom Tov, and we do not flay a Bechor from the legs?
ãäúí áîôùéèå ìòùåú ðåã ùìí åöøéê ìäåöéà øâìéå (îöåàøå) [ö"ì ãøê öåàøå - öàï ÷ãùéí]
(c) Answer: There, he flays to make a full flask, and he needs to remove the legs via the neck.
åìàå ãåå÷à ð÷è äëà ôñç ãáëì (÷øáï) [ö"ì çèàú - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] öéáåø ùì ùáú äåä îöé ìàùîåòéðï
(d) Implied question: Here he mentioned Pesach. The law is not only for Pesach. He could have taught about any Chatas Tzibur of Shabbos! (Tosfos Shabbos Sof 116b says that all permit to totally flay Temidim and Musafim. This refers to Olos, which are totally burned on the Mizbe'ach on Shabbos. Chatas, which is eaten, is like Pesach.)
åð÷è ôñç ìøáåúà àó òì ôé ùéù ôñçéí îøåáéí åðøàéï îåèìéï ëðáéìä
(e) Answer #1: He mentioned Pesach for a Chidush. Even though there are many Korbanos Pesach, and they look like they are discarded like a Neveilah [R. Yishmael allows flaying only until the chest].
àé ðîé îùåí øáåúà ãøáðï ãàôéìå ìöåøê éçéã äúéøå
(f) Answer #2: It is a Chidush according to Rabanan. Even for the need of an individual they permitted [flaying all of it].
àé ðîé ãåå÷à áôñç ùøå øáðï ãçùå ùìà éú÷ì÷ì äáùø îùåí ãòé÷øå ìàëéìä:
(g) Answer #3: Rabanan permit only for Pesach, lest the meat get ruined, for [Pesach] is primarily to be eaten.