1) TOSFOS DH ha'Listiyon
úåñôåú ã"ä äìéñèéåï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that the grapes were sweetened in the sun while attached.)
ééï òðáéí ùðúîú÷å áùîù ëãîåëç áâî' ãîå÷é ìä áçåìéà ãùîùà
(a) Explanation: This is wine of grapes sweetened in the sun, like is proven in the Gemara. We establish it to be [from grapes] stricken by the sun.
åîéäå ìà ëîå ùôé' á÷åðè' ùúåìéï äòðáéí ìùîù
(b) Remark: It is not like Rashi explained, that they suspend the grapes for the sun [to dry them].
ãäà áôø÷ äîåëø ôéøåú (á''á öæ:) ÷úðé ááøééúà ééï äìéñèéåï åùì öîå÷éï
(c) Rejection: In Bava Basra (97b), a Beraisa teaches Yayin ha'Listiyon and raisin wine (they are different)!
àìà áîçåáø áòåãï áâôï ðîú÷å áùîù
(d) Conclusion: Rather, while they are attached on the vine they are sweetened in the sun.
2) TOSFOS DH Matok
úåñôåú ã"ä îúå÷
(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that it is naturally sweet.)
ìùåï àçø ôé' á÷åðèøñ úéøåù ùìà òáøå òìéå àøáòéí éåí
(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): This is wine less than 40 days [from when the grapes were stomped].
åìà éúëï ãäà äëà ÷úðé åàí äáéà ôñåì åáôø÷ äîåëø (âí æä ùí.) úðé øáé çééà ééï îâéúå ìà éáéà åàí äáéà ëùø
(b) Rebuttal: Here it teaches that if he brought [sweet wine] it is Pasul, and in Bava Basra (97b) R. Chiya taught that if one may not bring grape juice, and if he brought, it is Kosher!
åðøàä ëìùåï àçø ùôé' îúå÷ äééðå îàìéå åìà îçîú äùîù
(c) Explanation #2: The other version in Rashi is correct. It is [sweet] due to itself, and not due to the sun.
3) TOSFOS DH Keroch v'Tani
úåñôåú ã"ä ëøåê åúðé
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that Ravina is Machshir both.)
ìäëùéø ÷àîø ëãîåëç ñåâéà ãäîåëø ôéøåú (â''æ ùí.) ãäìéñèéåï ëùø
(a) Explanation: He says so to be Machshir [both], like is proven in Bava Basra (97b) that ha'Listiyon is Kosher [b'Di'eved].
åàò''â ãàéöèøéê ìéä ìúðà ìîéúðé äìéñèéåï åîúå÷
(b) Implied question: The Tana needs to teach ha'Listiyon and sweet (they are different. If so, perhaps sweet is Pasul b'Di'eved!)
ìà îùîò ìéä ìøáéðà ìçì÷ áéï æä ìæä
(c) Answer: Ravina holds that it is unreasonable to distinguish between them.
4) TOSFOS DH k'Shem sheha'Dibur Yafeh li'Vesamim v'Chulei
úåñôåú ã"ä ëùí ùäãéáåø éôä ìáùîéí ëå'
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why elsewhere this was taught oppositely.)
áôø÷ ÷îà ãëøéúåú (ãó å:) ÷àîø øáé éåçðï àéôëà âáé ÷èåøú ãúðé' ëùäåà ùåç÷ àåîø äéèá äã÷ å÷àîø îñééò ìéä ìøáé éåçðï ãàîø ëùí ùäãéáåø øò ìééï ëê ãéáåø éôä ìáùîéí
(a) Implied question: In Kerisus (6b), R. Yochanan said oppositely about Ketores. The Beraisa says that when he grinds it, he says "very finely", and it says that this supports R. Yochanan, who said that just like speech is bad for wine, so speech is good for spices!
îùåí ãëé ÷àîø øáé éåçðï áðñëéí ÷àîø ìäå ëé äéëé ã÷éí ìï á÷èåøú ùäãéáåø éôä ìáùîéí ëê äãéáåø øò ìééï
(b) Answer: When R. Yochanan discussed Nesachim, he said that just like we hold about Ketores that speech is good for spices, so speech is bad for wine;
åëé ÷àé á÷èåøú ÷àîø ìäå ëé äéëé ã÷éí ìï áðñëéí ùäãéáåø øò ìééï ëê äãéáåø éôä ìáùîéí
1. And when he discussed Ketores, he told them that just like we know about Nesachim that speech is bad for wine, so speech is good for spices.
5) TOSFOS DH she'Govhan Rechavim Garsinan
úåñôåú ã"ä ùâåáäï øçáéí âøñéðï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos supports our text.)
åìà ùâåáäï ëøçáï ëãàùëçï (øåçáå) [ö"ì ãàøåçáï - éùø åèåá] îééúé ÷øà ãëúéá ëø ðøçá
(a) Assertion: The text does not say "that their height is like their width." [Our text] is like we find that we bring a verse for their width, for it is written "Kar Nirchav."
åááøàùéú øáä àîø ãëáùéí ùì úîéã ãäéå ëì ëê âáåäéí ùàåëìéí òì âáé àøæéí åëùäéå îøëéáéï àåúï òì äâîìéí øâìé äëáùéí ðâøøéï ìàøõ:
1. In Bereishis Rabah it says that lambs of the Tamid were so tall that they eat on cedar trees, and when they are carried on camels, the legs of the lambs drag on the ground. (Yashar v'Tov - we cannot say that they were as wide as this!)
6) TOSFOS DH Shtei Midos. Achas Gadosh v'Achas Machuk
úåñôåú ã"ä ùúé îãåú. àçã âãåù åàçã îçå÷
(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions Rashi's Perush.)
úéîä âãåì ãø''î ãøéù ìä î÷øà ãëúéá òùøåï òùøåï ìëáù äàçã åá÷åðèøñ ôé' ãø''î ñ''ì âîøà ãùúé òùøåðåú áöáåø
(a) Question: R. Meir expounds this from a verse that says "Isaron Isaron la'Keves ha'Echad", and Rashi explained that R. Meir holds that there is a tradition of two Esronim [measures] of the Tzibur!
7) TOSFOS DH Gadosh she'Bo Hayah Moded l'Chol ha'Menachos
úåñôåú ã"ä âãåù ùáå äéä îåãã ìëì äîðçåú
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why they did not do oppositely.)
àéôëà ìà øöå ìòùåú ìîãåã áâãåù ìçáéúé ë''â
(a) Implied question: Why didn't they do oppositely, to measure for Chavitei Kohen Gadol with the Gadosh [Isaron measure]?
ùìà éùôåê äñìú ìàøõ ëùçåöäå:
(b) Answer: This was lest the flour spill to the ground when he takes half.
87b----------------------------------------87b
8) TOSFOS DH Moded u'Rminhu Chavitei Kohen Gadol v'Chulei
úåñôåú ã"ä îåãã åøîéðäå çáéúé ëäï âãåì ëå'
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why he did not ask from the Beraisa brought above.)
îäà ã÷àîø ø''î åîçå÷ ùáå îåãã ìçáéúé ë''â
(a) Implied question: Why didn't he ask from what R. Meir taught "with the Machuk he measured for Chavitei Kohen Gadol"?
ìà áòé ìà÷ùåéé ãñì÷à ãòúê ùôòîéí îåãã áæä åôòîéí áæä
(b) Answer: He did not want to ask from that, for he thought that sometimes he measured from this (the Machuk Isaron), and sometimes from this (half Isaron).
9) TOSFOS DH ba'Meh Mechalkah l'Chalos
úåñôåú ã"ä áîä îçì÷ä ìçìåú
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses how he divided it into 12 Chalos.)
ôéøù á÷åðèøñ ùîçì÷ä ìòéñä
(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): He divides it when it is dough.
åà''à ìåîø ëê ãäà àîøéðï ì÷îï (ãó ôç:) ãøáéòéú ðîùçä ùáå äéä îåãã ìçáéúé ë''â øáéòéú ùîï ìëì çìä åçìä å÷åãí ìéùä öøéê ìáìåì ëùäåà ñìú
(b) Rebuttal (and Explanation #2): One cannot say so, for below (88b) it says that the Revi'is was anointed. With it, we measure a Revi'is of oil for Chavitei Kohen Gadol for each Chalah. Blilah (mixing the Minchah with oil) must be before kneading, when it is flour! (Rather, he divides the flour. Yashar v'Tov - above (74b), Rashi said that after kneading, he puts oil for Blilah.)
åîëì î÷åí ìà àôùø ìòùåú áå èåøèðé ãîù÷åìú åîàæðéí ñéîï ÷ììä áñìú ëîå áòéñä
(c) Observation: And in any case [even if we divide the flour, we must say that it is divided by hand, for] we cannot use a scale, for this is a sign of a curse regarding flour, just like regarding a dough.
åîãä ÷èðä ëì ëê ùì à' îùðéí òùø áòùøåï ìà øöå ìú÷ï
(d) Implied question: Why didn't they enact to make a small measure of one part in 12 of an Isaron [for the flour for each Chalah]?
åàôùø ã÷èðä ëì ëê âí äéà àéðä ñéîï áøëä
(e) Answer: Perhaps such a small [measure], also it is not a sign of Brachah.
10) TOSFOS DH Mahu she'Yekadesh Kamatzim b'Godesh Shelo
úåñôåú ã"ä îäå ùé÷ãù ÷îöéí áâåãù ùìå
(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that this refers to a Kometz of a Minchah.)
ôé' á÷åðè' ùðé ÷åîöé ìáåðä áìà áæéëéï
(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): This refers to two Kamatzim of Levonah without the spoons.
å÷ùéà ãäåä ìéä ìîéîø ìáåðä áäãéà
(b) Question #1: [If so, Rami bar Chama] should have said Levonah explicitly!
åòåã ëéåï ãòí ùåìçï ðîé áòé áæéëéï ëãëúéá ëôåúéå åúðéà ì÷îï áôø÷ ùúé äìçí (ãó öæ.) ëôåúéå àìå äáæéëéï äéàê úéñ÷ àãòúéï ìîéîø ãñâé áìà áæéëéï
(c) Question #2: Since also with the Shulchan we require spoons, like it says "Kaposav", and a Beraisa below (97a) teaches Kaposav - these are Bazichin, how could one think to say that it suffices without Bazichin?
åðøàä ìôøù ãîééøé á÷åîõ ùì îðçä ëãàîøé' áô''÷ (ìòéì ç.) ãîðç' ù÷îöä áäéëì ëùøä
(d) Explanation #2: We discuss the Kometz of a Minchah, like we said above (8a) that if Kemitzah of a Minchah was taken in the Heichal, it is Kosher.
åîéäå äà ãîñé÷ àéðå î÷ãù ìé÷øá àáì î÷ãù ìéôñì ìôé' ä÷åðèøñ ðéçà ãî÷ãù ìéôñì áèáåì éåí åáìéðä
(e) Question (against Explanation #2): However, the conclusion "it is not Mekadesh to be offered, but it is Mekadesh to become Pasul" is fine for Rashi. It is Mekadesh to become Pasul through a Tevul Yom or Linah;
ãàé ìàå ùåìçï ìà îéôñìé ãòãééï ìà ðú÷ãùä áëìé ùøú ëéåï ãìà ðúðåä ááæéëéï
1. If not for the Shulchan, it would not become Pasul, for it still was not Mekudash in a Kli Shares, since they did not put it in Bazichin.
àáì ìîàé ãôøéùéú [ö"ì ÷ùä - öàï ÷ãùéí] äà îé÷îé äëé ëáø ðú÷ãùä ëåìä îðçä áëìé ùøú åîéôñìà áèáåì éåí åáìéðä
2. However, according to what I explained it is difficult, for before this, it was already put in a Kli Shares, and it is disqualified through a Tevul Yom or Linah!
åéù ìôøù ëé ääåà ãô''÷ (ùí å:) âáé æø ù÷îõ ãî÷ãùéï ìéôñì ìòðéï ãìà îäðé úå çæøä îàçø ùðú÷ãù ä÷åîõ òì äùåìçï
(f) Answer: We can say like above (6b) regarding a Zar who did Kemitzah. He is Mekadesh to become Pasul so that returning [the Kometz to the Shirayim] does not help. [Similarly here it does not help,] since the Kometz became Kadosh via the Shulchan.
11) TOSFOS DH Shenasos Hayu b'Hin
úåñôåú ã"ä ùðúåú äéå áäéï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos clarifies what Rav Kahana taught about this.)
áô' äîåëø àú äñôéðä (á''á ãó ôå:) àîøé' ëãàîø øá ëäðà ùðúåú äéå áäéï ä''ð ùðúåú äéå áîãåú åôéøù ùí øáéðå ùîåàì ãîéìúà ãøá ëäðà áô' ùúé îãåú
(a) Citation: In Bava Basra (86b) we say "like Rav Kahana said, there were notches in the Hin. Also here, there were notches in the Midos." The Rashbam explained that Rav Kahana's teaching is in [our] Perek "Shtei Midos."
åàéðä ëàï àìà îùðä ùìéîä ùðéðå
(b) Rebuttal: It is not here. Rather, an explicit Mishnah teaches [so]!
àáì áîñëú ùáú ôø÷ äîåöéà ééï (ãó ô:) âáé àðãéôé îôøù øá ëäðà ùðúåú ëãúðï ùðúåú äéå áäéï
(c) Explanation: Rather, In Shabbos (80b), regarding Andifi (R. Nechemyah says that the Shi'ur for Hotza'ah of plaster is for Andifi), Rav Kahana explains that these are notches, like the Mishnah teaches "there were notches in the Hin."
åäùúà äëé ÷àîøéðï äúí ëãàîø øá ëäðà òì úéøåõ àçø ùðúåú äéå áäéï äëà ðîé ðúøõ ùðúåú äéå áîãåú:
1. Now, [in Bava Basra] we say "like Rav Kahana said about another answer, there were notches in the Hin. Also here, there were notches in the Midos." (Rav Kahana's Chidush was that also Chulin Midos had notches.)