1) BRINGING THE KORBAN TAMID AT MIDDAY
QUESTION: Rava says that mid'Oraisa, the afternoon Korban Tamid may be brought from the time that the sun begins to turn towards the west.
RASHI (DH Ela Amar Rava) explains that the Tamid may be brought during "the last six hours of the day." However, Rashi immediately afterwards writes that the Tamid may be brought "from six and a half hours onward," when the shadows lean towards the east and are not directly under the person. This means the last five and a half hours of the day. Rashi clearly seems to contradict himself.
The GILYON HA'SHAS points out that Rashi later (93b) writes explicitly that the Tamid may be brought from exactly midday (Chatzos) and onward. Rashi there quotes the Gemara in Yoma (28b) as the source. The Gemara in Yoma says that if not for the fact that the walls of the Azarah are sloped, the Korban would be brought earlier, but since the walls are sloped and it is not possible to see their shadows until a half-hour after midday (six and a half hours into the day), the Korban is brought only from that time onward.
ANSWER: The TZELACH answers that perhaps Rashi's intention is to explain the Gemara here in accordance with the Gemara in Yoma, which Rashi quotes later (and which Tosfos here also quotes, in DH Mukminan). Rashi means that mid'Oraisa the Korban Tamid may be brought from six hours and onward. However, since one must wait for shade to appear towards the east, the Rabanan instituted that the Kohen wait until six and a half hours into the day before he brings the Korban Tamid.
What does Rashi mean when he says that a person's shadow does not appear until six and a half hours? The Gemara in Yoma says that there is shade at six hours, and that it is only the sloped walls that do not have shadows until six and a half hours.
It could be that Rashi understands that a person is like a sloped wall, since he is narrow on top and broad on bottom. Accordingly, when one uses the shade of a person as the sign for midday, he does not see the shadow until six and a half hours. Only a straight wall has shade beneath it at exactly six hours.
58b----------------------------------------58b
2) THE SOURCE FOR OFFERING THE "KORBAN TAMID" BEFORE THE "KORBAN MUSAF"
QUESTION: The Gemara quotes a Beraisa which teaches the source for the Halachah that the Korban Tamid must be the first Korban brought each day. The verse states, "ha'Olah" -- "the Olah" (Vayikra 6:2), which implies that this Korban (the Olas Tamid) must be the first Korban brought each day, and no other Korban should be brought before this Olah.
TOSFOS (DH ha'Olah) asks that the Mishnah in Zevachim (89a) derives this Halachah from a different source. The Mishnah there teaches that the source for the Halachah that the Korban Tamid must be brought before the Korban Musaf is the verse, "Milvad Olas ha'Boker Asher l'Olas ha'Tamid" -- "Besides the burnt offering in the morning that is for the continual burnt offering, you shall offer these" (Bamidbar 28:23).
Why do the Beraisa here and the Mishnah in Zevachim give different sources for this Halachah?
ANSWERS:
(a) TOSFOS answers that both verses are necessary. The verse mentioned in the Mishnah in Zevachim ("Milvad Olas ha'Boker") teaches that the Korban Musaf is not offered before the Korban Tamid. The verse mentioned in the Beraisa here ("ha'Olah") teaches that Nedarim and Nedavos are not offered before the Korban Tamid. Without the verse of "ha'Olah," we might have thought that Nedarim and Nedavos differ from the Korban Musaf and they may be offered before the Korban Tamid, because they are brought very frequently. On the other hand, without the verse of "Milvad Olas ha'Boker," we might have thought that the Korban Musaf may be offered before the Korban Tamid, because it is a Korban Tzibur, a communal offering. Therefore, both verses are necessary.
(b) In his second answer, Tosfos explains that the two verses refer to two separate laws. The verse cited by the Mishnah in Zevachim refers to the slaughter of the Korban, and it teaches that the Korban Tamid should be slaughtered first. The verse cited by the Beraisa here refers to the burning of the Korban, and it teaches only that the Korban Tamid must be burned first, but not that it must be slaughtered first.
(c) Tosfos in Zevachim (89a, DH Kol ha'Tadir) quotes RABEINU CHAIM who says that the verse of "ha'Olah" teaches more than the verse of "Milvad Olas ha'Boker." The verse of "Milvad Olas ha'Boker" teaches that the Korban Tamid, which is offered every day, must be offered before the Korban Musaf, which is not offered every day (and, similarly, before all other Korbanos which are not offered every day). How, though, do we know that an offering such as the Minchas Chavitin of the Kohen Gadol -- which is offered every day -- may not be offered before the Korban Tamid? For this the Beraisa here quotes the verse of "ha'Olah," which teaches that the Tamid comes before all Korbanos, even before other daily offerings (see also Tosfos to Bava Kama 111a, DH Talmud Lomar).
(d) The KEREN ORAH in Zevachim suggests another answer. The verse in the Mishnah there teaches that the Korban Tamid is always brought before the Korban Musaf. However, we might have thought that this rule applies only to the Korban Musaf. If other Korbanos are present and ready to be offered before the Korban Tamid is ready to be slaughtered, then perhaps they should be offered first. This would be similar to the rule taught in the following Mishnah in Zevachim. The Mishnah there teaches that if a person has two Korbanos in front of him to offer, he should offer first the one that is more Kadosh. The Beraisa here derives from "ha'Olah" that the Tamid must be the first Korban of the day, even if it is not ready to be offered and other Korbanos are waiting.
According to this explanation, the Korban Tamid always must be brought first, even when it will cause a delay in bringing other Korbanos (for example, when a sheep is not readily available to be brought as the Korban Tamid). However, the SEFAS EMES says that if a sheep cannot be found at all, then it is possible that the verse of "ha'Olah" does not apply, and other Korbanos may be offered even though the Korban Tamid has not yet been offered. The logic for this seems to be that the verse can be understood as saying that only when the Tamid will be brought that day, may no other Korban be brought before it, but when the Korban Tamid will not be brought that day, other Korbanos may be brought.
The Gemara in Erchin (11b) supports the suggestion of the Sefas Emes. The Gemara there relates that at the time that the first Beis ha'Mikdash was destroyed, the Kohanim were saying Shirah. The Gemara asks, over what Korban were they saying Shirah? They could not have been saying Shirah over the Korban Tamid, because from the seventeenth day of Tamuz of that year no sheep were allowed into the Beis ha'Mikdash to be offered as the Korban Tamid. The Gemara concludes that they were saying Shirah over a different animal that was being offered as an Olas Nedavah (and not a sheep, which is required for the Tamid). The Gemara there supports the Sefas Emes, because it demonstrates that the Kohanim brought other Korbanos even though they did not bring the Korban Tamid. (The Gemara in Erchin poses a strong question on the view of the OR HA'CHAYIM (Vayikra 6:2), who maintains that no Korban may be offered before the Korban Tamid, even when the Beis ha'Mikdash is surrounded by enemies and there is no animal to offer as the Korban Tamid.) (See also Insights to Zevachim 89:1.)
(When an animal other than the Tamid was slaughtered before the Tamid was offered, Tosfos here and in Zevachim says that the animal is not disqualified. Tosfos in Menachos (49b, DH Talmud) says that the Korban is Pasul mid'Rabanan.) (Y. MONTROSE)