1) TOSFOS DH veha'Ma'ah
úåñôåú ã"ä åäîòä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that this is a Hechra.)
÷åìáåï ùëì éçéã îáéà îçöéú äù÷ì áäëøò áàãø
(a) Explanation: This is the Kolbon, that every individual brings Machatzis ha'Shekel in Adar with a Hechra (a small addition, so the pan holding the silver given will outweigh and raise the other pan of the scale holding the half-Shekel);
åàí ðúðå áéï ùðéäí ù÷ì ùìí ðåúðéï ÷åìáåï à' îòä ÷èðä îôðé äëøò ùòëùéå ìà ðúðå ùðéäí àìà äëøò àçã åàéìå äáéàå ëîùôèå äéä ùí ùúé äëøòåú ìôéëê ðåúðéï ÷åìáåï àçã ëê ôéøù á÷åðè'
1. If two people gave a Shekel for both of them, they give one Kolbon, a small coin due to Hechra. Now, both of them give [together] only one Hechra. If they brought properly (each by himself), there would be two Hachra'os. Therefore, they give one Kolbon. So Rashi explained. (Yashar v'Tov - R. Meir argues, and obligates two Kolbonos.)
å÷ùéà ãàí äëøò òåìä éåúø îîòä äéàê éåöàéï áäëøò àçã áîòä åäìà çééáéï ùúé äëøòåú (åàí æä ùéòåø äëøò ìîä ãç÷ á÷åðèøñ ìôøù ëï ìôéëê ðøàä ãáëì äëøòåú îééøé - éùø åèåá îåç÷å îëàï åîáéàå ìîèä) åôìåâúà äéà áúåñô' ãù÷ìéí
(b) Question: If a Hechra (for both together) is more than a Ma'ah, how are they Yotzei with one Hechra with a Ma'ah? They are obligated two Hachra'os! [The amount] is an argument in the Tosefta in Shekalim (1:5);
ãúðéà ëîä äåà ðåúï ÷åìáåï îòä ëñó àçã îë''ã ëñó ìñìò åçëîéí àåîøéí çöé îòä ùì àøáò àéñøåú
1. Citation (Tosefta): How much does he give? [He gives] a Kolbon, one Ma'ah of silver, one part in 24 of a silver Sela. Chachamim say, he gives a half Ma'ah of four Isarim.
[ö"ì åàí æä ùéòåø äëøò ìîä ãç÷ á÷åðèøñ ìôøù ëï - éùø åèåá]
2. And if [a Ma'ah] is the Shi'ur of a Hechra, what forced Rashi to explain so (that we discuss two who gave a Shekel)?
[ö"ì ìôéëê ðøàä ãáëì äëøòåú îééøé (å÷åìáåðåú àìå îä äéå òåùéï îäï ðåôìéï ìù÷ìéí ãáøé ø''î ø' àìòæø àåîø ìðãáä) - éùø åèåá]
(c) Explanation #2: It seems that we discuss all Hachra'os (even one who gave a half-Shekel, according to R. Meir).
2) TOSFOS DH u'Shmuel Mai Taima Lo Amar k'R. Oshaya
úåñôåú ã"ä åùîåàì îàé èòîà ìà àîø ëøáé àåùòéà
(SUMMARY: Tosfos asks why R. Oshaya did not say like Shmuel.)
åäåà äãéï ëì äðé àîåøàé ãìòéì
(a) Explanation: Likewise [this is why] all the Amora'im above [did not say like R. Oshaya].
åøáé àåùòéà îàé èòîà ìà àîø ëùîåàì
(b) Implied question: Why didn't R. Oshaya say like Shmuel?
ãáùìîà àîåøàé ãìòéì ñáøé ãîåúø îðçä ìàå ìðãáä àæìé àìà ìøáé àåùòéà ãçùéá îåúø îðçú çåèà ëì ùëï îåúø òùéøéú äàéôä
1. Granted, the Amora'im above hold that Mosar Minchah does not go to Nedavah. However, R. Oshaya, who lists Mosar Minchas Chotei, all the more so Mosar Asiris ha'Eifah!
3) TOSFOS DH Hi Keruyah Chatas
úåñôåú ã"ä äéà ÷øåéä çèàú
(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that we learn another law from this.)
áôø÷ ÷îà (ìòéì ã.) ãøùéðï ìä åúøúé ùîòú îéðä
(a) Observation: We expound this above (4a). We learn two laws from this. (Also, Minchas Chotei Lo Lishmah is Pasul, like Chatas.)
4) TOSFOS DH umid'Einah Keruyah Chatas Yirkevu
úåñôåú ã"ä åîãàéðä ÷øåéä çèàú éø÷áå
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we do not say so about Minchah.)
ìà ãîé ìîåúø îðçä ãìà úéø÷á åàéðä ÷øåéä çèàú
(a) Implied question: Why is this unlike Mosar Minchah? It does not rot, and it is not called Chatas!
åòùéøéú äàéôä ãåå÷à ã÷øåéä çèàú áéçæ÷àì (îã) àúà äàé ÷øà ìàôå÷é ãàéï îåúø ÷øåéä çèàú åúéø÷á:
1. Only Asiris ha'Eifah is called Chatas, in Yechezkel (44:27). This verse comes to exclude that its Mosar is not called Chatas, and it rots.
108b----------------------------------------108b
5) TOSFOS DH l'Fi she'Ein Bilah
úåñôåú ã"ä ìôé ùàéï áéìä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why this is a problem.)
ùöøéê ìäáéà ùðé îðçåú òîäï áá' ëìéí åàéï éëåì ìòøáï éçã áëìé àçã äìëê ìà îéçæé ëé ääåà ãðãøå
(a) Explanation: He must bring two Menachos with them in two Kelim, and he cannot mix them together in one Kli. Therefore, it does not look like what he vowed.
åîï äãí ìà çééùéðï àí ðúòøá åìëì äôçåú àí ðúòøá ñåìúï éëåì ìòøá ìëúçéìä ëãàîøï ìòéì âáé ééï:
(b) Distinction: We are not concerned about the blood, if it becomes mixed (even though Kabalah is in two Kelim. And even if you will say that one may not mix the blood), at least if the flour became mixed, l'Chatchilah one may mix [the blood], like we said above (89b) about wine.