1)

COOKING THE SHELAMIM (Yerushalmi Perek 6 Halachah 9 Daf 31a)

[ãó ìà òîåã à] îúðé' äéä îáùì àú äùìîéí àå ùåì÷ï åëäï ðåèì àú äæøåò áùìä îï äàéì åçìú îöä àçú îï äñì åø÷é÷ îöä àçã åðúï òì ëôé äðæéø åîðéôï åàçø ëê äåúø äðæéø ìùúåú áééï åìéèîà ìîúéí

(a)

(Mishnah): He is Mevashel or Sholek (cooks or overcooks) the Shelamim. The Kohen takes the cooked foreleg of the ram, a Matzah loaf from the basket, and a wafer, and puts them on the hand of the Nazir and waves them. Afterwards, the Nazir may drink wine and become Tamei Mes;

øáé ùîòåï àåîø ëéåï ùðæø÷ òìéå àçã îï äãîéí äåúø äðæéø ìùúåú áééï åìäéèîà ìîúéí:

(b)

R. Shimon says, after Zerikah (throwing the blood on the Mizbe'ach) of one of the Korbanos, he may drink wine and become Tamei Mes.

âî' îúðéúà àîøä äùìå÷ ÷øåé îáåùì ãúðéðï äéä îáùì äùìîéí àå ùåì÷ï

(c)

(Gemara): Our Mishnah teaches that Shaluk is called Mevushal, for it says 'he is Mevashel or Sholek the Shelamim' (and the Torah said "ha'Zero'a Beshelah").

å÷øééä àîøä ùäöìé ÷øåé îáåùì ãëúéá [ãáøé äéîéí á ìä éâ] åéáùìå àú äôñç áàù

(d)

Question: A verse teaches that roasted is called Mevushal - "va'Yvashlu ha'Pesach ba'Esh" (and Pesach must be roasted)...

1.

Note: The Gemara interrupts before the question is finished.

àéï úéîø ùìà ëäìëä

2.

Interjection - Suggestion: Perhaps they [truly cooked it in water], improperly!

ø' éåðä áåöøééä àîø ëîùôè

3.

Rejection (R. Yonah Botzriyah): [The verse concludes] "ka'Mishpat" (like the Halachah).

åîúðéúà àîøä ùäùìå÷ ÷øåé îáåùì åäà úðéðï äðåãø îï äîáåùì îåúø áöìé åáùìå÷

(e)

Summation of question: And our Mishnah teaches that Shaluk is called Mevushal, and a Mishnah says that one who vows [not to eat] Mevushal is permitted Tzeli (roasted food) and Shaluk!

àîø ø' éåçðï äìëå áðãøéí àçø ìùåï áðé àãí

(f)

Answer (R. Yochanan): Vows depends on the way people speak.

àîø ø' éàùéä äìëå áðãøéí àçø ìùåï úåøä

(g)

(R. Yoshiyah): Vows depends on the language of the Torah.

îä ðôé÷ îáéðéäåï

(h)

Question: (They argue about one who vows from Mevushal. R. Yoshiyah forbids him to eat Tzeli. - OHR YAKOV) What [other] difference is between them?

àîø ÷åðí ééï ùàéðé èåòí áçâ òì ãòúéä ãø' éåçðï àñåø áéåí èåá äàçøåï òì ãòúéä ãøáé éàùéä îåúø

(i)

Answer: If one said Konam (is forbidden like a Korban) wine that I will taste during the Chag (Sukos)' - according to R. Yochanan, he is forbidden on the last day of Yom Tov (the way people speak, also it is called Chag). According to R. Yoshiyah, he is permitted (the Torah does not call Shemini Atzeres part of Chag ha'Sukos).

àåó ø' àåùòéà îåãä ùäåà àñåø ìà àîø ø' éàùéä àìà ìçåîøéï

(j)

Rejection: Even R. Yoshiyah agrees that he is forbidden. R. Yoshiyah said [that vows depends on the language of the Torah] only to be stringent.

ø' çééä áø áà àîø ø' éåçðï àëì (çìéèà) [ö"ì çìèéï - ÷øáï äòãä] åàîø ìà èòîéú îæåï áäãéï éåîà

(k)

(R. Chiya bar Bari): R. Yochanan ate Peros Ginosar, and said 'I did not taste Mazon today.'

åäúðï äðåãø îï äîæåï îåúø áîéí åáîìç

(l)

Question (Mishnah): One who vows [not to eat] Mazon is permitted [only] water and salt. (Even though R. Yochanan did not vow, surely he spoke like normal people, and he himself said that vows depends on the way people speak. - PF)

ôúø ìä ëø' éàùéä ãàîø äéìëå áðãøéí àçø ìùåï äúåøä

(m)

Answer: [The Mishnah] is like R. Yoshiyah, who says that vows depend on the language of the Torah.

îðééï ùëì äãáøéí ÷øåééï îæåï

(n)

Question: What is the source that all [foods] are called Mazon?

àîø øáé àçà áø òåìà [áøàùéú îä ëâ] åòùø àúåðåú ðåùàåú áø åìçí åîæåï åâåîø îä úìîåã ìåîø åîæåï

(o)

Answer (R. Acha bar Ula) Question: "V'Eser Asonos Nos'os Bar va'Lechem u'Mazon..." - why does it say u'Mazon?

àìà îéëï ùëì äãáøéí ÷øåééï îæåï

1.

Answer: This teaches that all [foods] are called Mazon. (YEFE MAR'EH - among foods that are not grain, there is no reason to call one 'Mazon' more than another.)

ëúéá [áîãáø å éè] åì÷ç äëäï àú äæøåò áùìä îï äàéì àé áùìä éëåì áôðé òöîä

(p)

Suggestion: It says "v'Lakach ha'Kohen Es ha'Zero'a Beshelah Min ha'Ayil" - perhaps "Beshelah" means that it is [cooked] by itself!

úìîåã ìåîø îï äàéì

(q)

Rejection: It says "Min ha'Ayil."

äà ëéöã çåúëä òã ùäåà îðéç áä ëùòåøä åìà ä÷åãù áåìò îï äçåì åìà äçåì áåìò îï ä÷åãù

(r)

How does he do? He cuts the Zero'a (before salting it) until he leaves about the size of a barley seed connected [to the ram]. The Kodesh (Zero'a, which is permitted only to Kohanim) does not absorb from the Chol (the rest of the ram; even though it is Kodshim, compared to the Zero'a it is Chulin), and the Chol does not absorb from the Kodesh. (It does not absorb during cooking, for there is a Shi'ur for Bitul - OHR SOMAYACH Hilchos Ma'achalos Asuros 6:11).

2)

THE SHI'UR OF BITUL FOR ISURIM (Yerushalmi Perek 6 Halachah 9 Daf 31a)

çéìôéé ùàì ìø' éåçðï åìøùá"ì èáì îäå (ùéåñø) [ö"ì ùéàñåø - ÷øáï äòãä] áéåúø îîàúéí

(a)

Question (Chilfai, to R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish): Do seasonings forbid [the food] more than 200 times [their own volume? Even though 'Tevel' is spelled with a Tes, it is as if it is with a Tov.]

àîø ìéä àéï èáì áéåúø îîàúéí

(b)

Answer (R. Yochanan): Seasonings do not [forbid] more than 200.

1.

Note: It seems that he asked R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish together, and only one of them answered. Presumably, it was R. Yochanan, who was greater. Alternatively, the text should say 'Amru Lei.'

åäà úðéðï ëì äîçîõ åäîèáì (åäîãîò) [ðøàä ùö"ì îãîò]

(c)

Question (Mishnah): Anything that ferments or seasons, is Medame'a [regarding Terumah, and regarding Orlah or Kil'ai ha'Kerem, it forbids].

1.

Note: 'Medame'a' connotes a mixture of Terumah and Chulin. Our text 'veha'Medame'a' is difficult, for the Gemara will prove that the Mishnah discusses any amount. Medame'a forbids only up to 100! Below, the text says 'Medame'a' (without 'veha'), like the Rambam's text of the Mishnah (Orlah 2:4). The Mishnah means 'anything that ferments or seasons - it is Medame'a regarding Terumah (forbids to Zarim, if the fermenting agent or seasoning is Terumah), and regarding [a fermenting agent or seasoning of] Orlah or Kil'ai ha'Kerem, it forbids.

àéï úéîø åìîàä åìîàúéí

2.

Suggestion: [It means that] it forbids up to 100 (regarding Terumah) and 200 (regarding Orlah and Kil'ai ha'Kerem).

àôéìå ìà çéîõ àôéìå ìà èéáì

3.

Rejection: Even if it did not ferment, and even if it did not season, it forbids up to 100 and 200!

àìà áòðáéí [ãó ìà òîåã á] àðï ÷ééîéï

(d)

Answer: Rather, [Chilfai's question and the answer] discusses grapes (which do not have such a potent taste. The Mishnah teaches that potent seasonings forbid more than 200.)

ø' éåñé áùí ø' éåçðï áùìà öéîé÷å àáì àí öéîé÷å éù èáì áéåúø îîàúéí

(e)

Limitation (R. Yosi citing R. Yochanan): This is when [the grapes] did not become raisins, but if they became raisins, their seasoning is [potent, and forbids] more than 200.

ø' çééä áùí øáé éåçðï áùìà áéùìå àáì àí áéùìå éù èáì áéåúø îîàúéí

(f)

Limitation (R. Chiyah citing R. Yochanan): This is when [the grapes] did not ripen, but if they ripened, their seasoning is [potent, and forbids] more than 200.

øáé éñà åøáé éäåùò áï ìåé áùí áø ôãééä ëì ðåúðé èòîéí àçã îîàä

(g)

(R. Yosah and R. Yehoshua ben Levi citing Bar Padyei): All Nosenei Ta'am (matters that give taste, forbid only if they are at least) one part in 100 [of the mixture].

øáé çééä áùí øáé äåùòéä áï ìåé áùí áø ôãééä ëì ðåúðé èòîéí àçã îùùéí

(h)

(R. Chiyah [bar Aba] citing R. Yehoshua ben Levi citing Bar Padyei): All Nosenei Ta'am [forbid only if they are at least] one part in 60.

àîø øáé ùîåàì áø øá éöç÷ ìøáé çééä áø àáà äà øáé éñà ôìéâ òìê åäà îúðéúà ôìéâà òì úøéëåï ëì äîçîõ (îèáì) [ðøàä ùö"ì åäîèáì] îãîò [ö"ì áúøåîä åáòøìä åáëìàé äëøí àñåø - ÷øáï äòãä]

(i)

Question (R. Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak, to R. Chiya bar Aba): R. Yosah argues with you, and a Mishnah argues with both of you! Anything that ferments or seasons, it is Medame'a regarding Terumah, and regarding Orlah or Kil'ai ha'Kerem, it forbids;

àéï úéîø ìîàä îîàúéí àôé' ìà çéîõ àôé' ìà èéáì àìà áéåúø àðï ÷ééîéï

1.

If you will say that it forbids up to 100 and 200, even if it did not ferment, and even if it did not season, [it forbids 100 and 200]! Rather, it forbids even more!

àîø øáé éøîéä úéôúø áùø ááùø

(j)

Answer (R. Yirmeyah): [Bar Padyei] discusses [a mixture of forbidden] meat with meat. (However, seasonings can forbid more than 60 or 100.)

àîø øáé éåñé äåà áùø ááùø äåà ùàø ëì äàéñåøéï

(k)

(R. Yosi): Meat with meat and all other Isurim are the same. (If they are not made to give taste, they forbid until 60 or 100.)

øáé àáäå áùí øáé éåçðï (åìàéñåø îùòøéï àåúå ëéìå áöì ëéìå ÷ôìåè) [ö"ì ëì äàñåøéï îùòøéï àåúï ëàìå äï áöì å÷ôìåè - ÷øáï äòãä]

(l)

(R. Avahu citing R. Yochanan): All Isurim [that fell into Heter Min b'Mino, we are stringent, and] we estimate as if an onion or leek [the size of the Isur fell into the Heter. If it would give taste, the mixture is forbidden.]

îàé ëãåï àäï àîø ðåúðé èòîéí àçã îîàä åàäï àîø ðåúðé èòîéí àçã îùùéí

(m)

Question: Why [do they argue] - some say that Nosenei Ta'am [forbid only up to] one part in 100, and some say that Nosenei Ta'am [forbid only up to] one part in 60?

åùðéäï ìîéãéï îàéì ðæéø îàï ãàîø ðåúðé èòîéí àçã îîàä àú òåùä àú äæøåò àçã îîàä ìàéì åîàï ãàîø ðåúðé èòîéí àçã îùùéí àú òåùä àú äæøåò àçã îùùéí ìàéì

(n)

Answer: Both of them learn from Eil Nazir. The one who says that Nosenei Ta'am [forbid up to] one part in 100, you consider the Zero'a one part in 100 of the ram. (This is the source. Yisraelim may eat the ram, for the Zero'a was too small to give taste to it.) The one who says that Nosenei Ta'am [forbid up to] one part in 60, you consider the Zero'a one part in 60 of the ram;

îàï ãàîø ðåúðé èòîéí àçã îîàä àú îåöéà àú (äæøåò äòöîåú) [ö"ì äòöîåú îï äæøåò - ÷øáï äòãä] åîàï ãàîø ðåúðé èòîéí àçã îùùéí àéï àú îåöéà àú (äæøåò îï äòöîåú) [ö"ì äòöîåú îï äæøåò - ÷øáï äòãä]

1.

The one who says that Nosenei Ta'am one part in 100, you remove the bones from the Zero'a (for they do not give taste; the meat of the Zero'a is one part in 100 of the ram). The one who says that Nosenei Ta'am [forbid up to] one part in 60, you do not remove the bones from the Zero'a.

åëùí ùàú îåöéà àú äòöîåú îï äæøåò ëê àú îåöéà îï äàéì

2.

Question: [According to the first opinion,] just like you remove the bones from the Zero'a (for they do not give taste, for the same reason) you should remove the bones from the ram [and calculate based on only the meat]!

ìéú éëéì ãúðé àéï èéðåôú ùì úøåîä îöèøôú òí äúøåîä ìàñåø àú äçåìéï àáì èéðåôú ùì çåìéï îöèøôú òí äçåìéï ìäòìåú àú äúøåîä

3.

Answer: You cannot say so, for the waste of Terumah (e.g. bran) does not join to with Terumah to forbid Chulin, but the waste of Chulin joins with Chulin to be Mevatel Terumah.

øá áéáé áòé èéðåôú ùì úøåîä îäå ùúöèøó òí äçåìéï ìäòìåú àú äúøåîä

(o)

Question (Rav Bivi): Does waste of Terumah join with Chulin to be Mevatel Terumah?

îï îä ãàîø øá äåðà ÷ìéôéï àéñåø îöèøôéï ìäúéø äãà àîøä èéðåôú ùì úøåîä îöèøôú òí äçåìéï ìäòìåú àú äúøåîä

(p)

Answer: Since Rav Huna said that peels of Isur join to permit, this shows that the waste of Terumah joins with Chulin to be Mevatel Terumah.

úðé ø' çæ÷éä ëì îä ùàñøúé ìê áî÷åí àçø äúøúé ìê ëàï

(q)

(R. Chizkiyah - Beraisa): All that I forbade to you elsewhere, I permitted to you here;

ìôé ùáëì î÷åí îàä àñåø îàä åòåã îåúø åëà àôéìå îàä îåúø

1.

Everywhere [else], 100 [times as much mixture as Isur] is forbidden, and more than 100 is permitted. Here, even 100 is permitted.

øá àîø úðåôä îòëáú áðæéø

(r)

(Rav): Tenufah is Me'akev a Nazir [from drinking wine].

åäúðé úåøú äðæéø áéï ùéù ìå (ëðôéí áéï ùàéï ìå ëðôéí) [ö"ì ëôéí áéï ùàéï ìå ëôéí - ÷øáï äòãä]

(s)

Question (Beraisa): "Toras ha'Nazir" - whether he has palms or does not have palms.

ãàîø øá áðæéø ùéù ìå

(t)

Answer: Rav discusses a Nazir with [palms, but if he has no palms, Tenufah is not Me'akev].

åúðé ëï äøàåé ìúðåôä úðåôä îòëáú áå ùàéï øàåé ìúðåôä àéï úðåôä îòëáú áå

(u)

Support (Beraisa): If one is proper to do Tenufah, Tenufah is Me'akev. If one is not proper to do Tenufah, Tenufah is not Me'akev.

ùîåàì àîø [ãó ìá òîåã à] ùéòø îòëáú áðæéø ëúðåôåú åëáäåðåú ùì îöåøò

(v)

(Shmuel): Hair is Me'akev [Korbanos] Nazir like Tenufos and Behonos (the right thumb and toe) of a Metzora (are Me'akev his Taharah. This is even according to Rabanan, who say that Tiglachas is not Me'akev.)

åäúðé úåøú äîöåøò áéï ùéù ìå áäåðåú áéï ùàéï ìå áäåðåú

(w)

Question (Beraisa): "Toras ha'Metzora" - whether he has Behonos or has no Behonos (he can become Tahor).

ôúø ìä ëøáé àìéòæø ãàîø ðåúï òì î÷åîï:

(x)

Answer: [Shmuel] explains that like R. Eliezer, who says that he puts [Dam ha'Asham] on the place [where the thumb and toe would connect to the hand and foot. There is no substitute for the hair of a Nazir. We explained this like RIDVAZ.]

1.

Note: I understand the source to say that hair is Me'akev the Shelamim, for he must be proper to put his hair under the pot. The RIDVAZ (he elaborated below in TOSFOS HA'RID 6:11) connotes that it is Me'akev all the Korbanos. Perhaps a Hekesh equates them for this. Shmuel did not give a Shi'ur of how much hair is needed. Why was this not brought above (Halachah 5), in the discussion of whether shaving cancels? This requires investigation. (PF)

3)

ONE WHO SHAVED ON A PASUL KORBAN (Yerushalmi Perek 6 Halachah 10 Daf 32a)

îúðé' âéìç òì æáç åðîöà ôñåì úâìçúå ôñåìä åæáçéå ìà òìå ìå

(a)

(Mishnah): If a Nazir shaved on a Korban (i.e. after its Shechitah), and it was found to be Pasul, his shaving is invalid, and he was not Yotzei with his other Korbanos (he must bring them again);

âéìç òì äçèàú ùìà ìùîä åàçø ëê äáéà ÷øáðåúéå ìùîä úâìçúå ôñåìä åæáçéå ìà òìå ìå

(b)

If he shaved on the Chatas [that was slaughtered] Lo Lishmah (with improper intent, which disqualifies it) and later he brought the other Korbanos Lishmah, his shaving is invalid and he was not Yotzei the other Korbanos;

âéìç òì äòåìä åòì äùìîéí ùìà ìùîï åàçø ëê äáéà ÷øáðåúéå ìùîï úâìçúå ôñåìä åæáçéå ìà òìå ìå

(c)

If he shaved on the Olah or Shelamim Lo Lishmah, and he later brought the other Korbanos Lishmah, his shaving is invalid and he was not Yotzei the other Korbanos;

ø' ùîòåï àåîø àåúå äæáç ìà òìä ìå åùàø ëì äæáçéí òìå ìå

(d)

R. Shimon says, he was not Yotzei that Korban [offered Lo Lishmah], but he was Yotzei the other Korbanos.

åàí âéìç òì ùìùúï åðîöà àçã îäï ëùø úâìçúå ëùøä åéáéà ùàø äæáçéí:

(e)

If he shaved on all the Korbanos, and one was found to be valid, his shaving is valid, and he must bring [replacements for] the other Korbanos [that were Pasul].

âî' òìú ìå åìúâìçúå àéï úéîø ìà òìú ìå åìúâìçúå àôéìå æáçéå ìà òìå ìå

(f)

(Gemara): [R. Shimon holds that] he was Yotzei [the other Korbanos] and his shaving. If you will say that his shaving was invalid, also his [other] Korbanos would not count for him.

øáé éåçðï áòé îäå òì ùìîé çâéâä ìâìç ëøáé ùîòåï

(g)

Question (R. Yochanan): May he shave on a Shelamim of Chagigah (i.e. Nedavah, not for Nezirus), according to R. Shimon?

åìà îúðéúà äéà ø' ùîòåï àåîø àåúå äæáç ìà òìä ìå åùàø ëì äæáçéï òìå ìå åàôéìå ùçèï ìà ëùìîé ðãáä äï

(h)

Answer: Do we not learn from our Mishnah? R. Shimon says, he was not Yotzei that Korban [offered Lo Lishmah], but he was Yotzei the other Korbanos, and even though he slaughtered [the Olah or Shelamim on which he shaved Lo Lishmah - regarding a Shelamim,] is it not like a Nedavah of Shelamim?!

äãà àîøä ùäåà îâìç òì ùìîé ðãáä ëøáé ùîòåï

1.

This shows that one may shave on a Nedavah of Shelamim according to R. Shimon.

øáé éåñé áø àáåï àîø øá àãà áø (àçà) [ö"ì àäáä - ÷øáï äòãä] åøáé éåçðï øá àãà áø (àçåä öøéëà ìéä åøáé éåçðï ôùéèà) [ö"ì àäáä ôùéèà ìéä åø"é öøéëä - ÷øáï äòãä] ìéä:

(i)

(R. Yakov bar Avun): Rav Ada bar Ahavah and R. Yochanan [differed about this] - according to Rav Ada bar Ahavah, surely [R. Shimon permits shaving on a Nedavah of Shelamim, like we proved]. R. Yochanan was unsure.