1)

(a)We learn from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Koh Sevarchu" (in connection with Birkas Kohanim) and ...

1. ... "Koh Sevarchu" (in connection with Birkas Kohanim) and "Eleh Ya'amdu Le'*varech* Es ha'Am" that (besides the fact that the former must be said in Lashon ha'Kodesh) - it must also be recited standing.

2. ... "Va'yisa Aharon Es Yadav El ha'Am Va'yevarcheim" - that the Kohanim are obligated to raise their hands whilst reciting Birchas Kohanim (just like Aharon ha'Kohen did).

(b)Rebbi Yehudah maintains that the first 'Gezeirah-Shavah' is unnecessary - because he learns it from the word "Koh", which in his opinion, implies that it may not be changed (with regard to Lashon ha'Kodesh).

(c)Rebbi Nasan says the same about the second 'Gezeirah-Shavah'. He learns that the Kohanim are obligated to serve standing, from the Pasuk in Shoftim "La'amod Le'shareis".

(d)The latter then learns from the Pasuk in Ekev "Le'sharso u'Le'varech bi'Shemo" - that Birchas Kohanim too, must be recited standing.

2)

(a)Rebbi Yonasan queried the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Koh Sevarchu" and "Va'yisa Aharon Es Yadav El ha'Am Va'yevarchem", in that maybe that only pertains to the Kohen Gadol, on Rosh Chodesh and when he is performing the Avodas Tzibur. To which Rebbi Nasan replied from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Hu u'Vanav" - comparing a Kohen Hedyot to a Kohen Gadol (to answer his first Kashya).

2. ... "Kol ha'Yamim" - at all times (to answer his second one). Regarding the third Kashya, see Tosfos DH 'u'Chesiv').

(b)He needs to add 've'Iskish Berachah l'Sheirus' - because this Pasuk only mentions Sheirus ("La'amod l'Shares"), but not Birchas Kohanim.

(c)The Tana of yet another Beraisa learns from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Ve'samu Es Sh'mi" - that the Kohanim are obligated to mention the Name of Hash-m the way it is written whenever they Duchen.

2. ... "La'sum Es Sh'mo Sham" - that this is confined to Duchening in the Beis-Hamikdash, but not elsewhere.

3)

(a)Rebbi Yoshiyah finds this latter Derashah unnecessary, due to the Pasuk in Mishpatim "b'Chol ha'Makom Asher Azkir Es Sh'mi Avo Eilecha u'Veirachticha", which cannot be understood literally - because firstly, we learn from the Pasuk in Shemos "Zeh Sh'mi l'Olam, v'Zeh Zichri l'Dor Dor" that the Name of Hash-m cannot always be read the way it is written; and secondly, the Shechinah does not appear anywhere in the world.

(b)So Rebbi Yoshiyah inverts the Pasuk to read - "b'Chol ha'Makom Asher Avo Eilecha u'Veirachticha, (Sham) Azkir Es Sh'mi", meaning that in those places where Hash-m appears (i.e. in the Ohel Mo'ed in the desert, in the Mishkan or in the Beis ha'Mikdash), there the Kohanim are permitted to read Hash-m's Name the way it is written, but not anywhere else.

(c)In spite of the fact that the Torah writes "Koh Sevarchu Es Bnei Yisrael", the Tana of yet another Beraisa learns that Birchas Kohanim incorporates converts, women and Avadim Meshuchrarim - from the Pasuk "Amor La'Hem".

(d)And he learns that the ...

1. ... people who are being blessed are obligated to face the Kohanim as they are being blessed - from the same Pasuk "Amor la'Hem" (implying face to face, as one talks to a friend).

2. ... Kohanim must Duchen in a loud voice (so that everyone hears them) - from the same source "Amor La'Hem" (in the same way as one talks to a friend).

4)

(a)Amora'im too, make various Derashos from "Amor la'Hem". Abaye learns from " ... La'Hem" (in the plural) - that one only announces Kohanim when at least two Kohanim are Duchening.

(b)When Rav Chisda, commenting on "Amor La'Hem", says 'Amirah mi'she'La'Hem Tehei', he means - that the obligation of announcing the Kohanim can only be performed by Kohanim.

(c)Abaye's Derashah - is Halachah, Rav Chisda's is not Halachah.

5)

(a)Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi learns from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Ve'samu Es Sh'mi Al Bnei Yisrael ... " - that Hash-m yearns for Birchas Kohanim (since He attributes it to His needs [kiv'Yachol], more than to theirs).

2. ... "Va'avorchah Mevorchecha" - that a Kohen who Duchens will receive Hash-m's blessing (but not one who does not).

(b)Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi says that a Kohen who fails to go up to Duchen - transgresses three Mitzvos Aseh ("Koh Sevarchu", "Amor La'Hem" and "Ve'samu Es Sh'mi").

(c)Rav says that we even suspect him of being a ben Gerushah or a ben Chalutzah. We reconcile the two opinions - by establishing Rav by a Kohen who never goes up to Duchen (see also Tosfos DH 'Ha'), and Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, by one who does go up on occasions, and who cannot therefore be suspected of being Pasul.

6)

(a)Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi learns from the Pasuk in Shemini "Va'yisa Aharon Es Yadav El ha'Am Va'yevarcheim, Va'yeired me'Asos ha'Chatas v'ha'Olah v'ha'Shelamim" - that a Kohen is obligated to go up to Duchen before the conclusion of Birchas Avodah, and that failing that, he is not permitted to Duchen.

(b)We reconcile this with Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi, who went to Duchen after the conclusion of Birchas Avodah - by pointing out that they had a long walk to the Duchen, and it did not matter that they only arrived at the Duchen after the Shatz had concluded the Avodah, provided they began to move by then (and this answer is borne out by a Beraisa learned by Rebbi Oshaya).

(c)The problem with the Mishnah in Berachos 've'Im Hivtachto she'Nosei Es Kapav v'Chozer li'Tefilaso, Rashai' - is how a Shatz, who does not walk to the Duchen, can Duchen at all.

(d)We answer that a Kohen does need to actually walk to the Duchen, as long as he merely moves a fraction in preparation for Duchening (which the Shatz does) - corroborating the previous answer.

7)

(a)Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi learns from the Pasuk in Mishlei "Tov-Ayin Hu Yevorach (which he Darshens as if it were written "Hu Yevarech"), Ki Nasan mi'Lachmo la'Dal" - that the honor of Benching Mezuman (with a Kos shel Berachah) should be given to a person who is generous (and performs Mitzvos with his money). Elsewhere, this is explained to refer to the person who provided the meal.

(b)When he says that even birds recognize a miserly person - he is referring to people who place grain in their bird-traps to attract the birds. The birds will not be attracted to the grains in the miser's trap, because they recognize the owner for what he is, and will refuse to partake of his food.

(c)He learns from the Pasuk in Mishlei "Al Tilcham Es Lechem Ra Ayin" - that someone who accepts food from a miser transgresses a Lav.

(d)And Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak learns from the next words in the Pasuk "v'Al Tis'av l'Mat'amosav" - that he transgresses a second Lav.

8)

(a)When the previous Pasuk continues "Ki K'mo Sha'ar b'Nafsho ... " - it means either that he embitters the life of the miser by accepting his food, or that he causes him to assess how much he is eating of his and long for him to stop eating.

(b)The essence of the Pasuk in Shoftim (in connection with Eglah Arufah) "v'Anu v'Amru, Yadeinu Lo Shafchu Es ha'Dam ha'Zeh" is - (not to suggest that the Beis-Din were directly responsible for the death of the murdered man, but) that they did not behave in a miserly fashion by a. Allowing him to leave town without providing him with food for the journey, and b. by allowing him to leave unaccompanied.

9)

(a)Ada Amar Rav Samla'i rules that in a town whose inhabitants are all Kohanim - all of them Duchen.

(b)They bless the people who are working in the fields.

(c)When the Tana of the Beraisa disqualifies anyone standing behind the Kohanim from the Berachah - he is referring to those who are able to move to the correct position (facing the Kohanim), but fail to do so because they do not take Birchas Kohanim seriously; whereas Ada Amar Rav Samla'i is speaking about hired workers who are unable to come to Shul and are therefore not Ones.

(d)When the Beraisa rules 'Beis-ha'Keneses she'Kulah Kohanim, Miktzasan Olin, u'Miktzasan Onin Amen' - it is speaking when at least ten people (a significant number) refrain from going to the Duchen, to respond 'Amen' to those who do go up; whereas Ada Amar Rav Samla'i is speaking when less than ten people refrain from going up.

10)

(a)We quoted the Beraisa disqualifying the people who are standing behind the Kohanim from Birchas Kohanim. This does not pertain to a short person standing behind a tall one (even though he is not standing directly face to face with the Kohanim).

(b)We ask what the Din will be if a partition divides between the person and the Kohanim. The Bimah is definitely not considered an interruption.

(c)We resolve the She'eilah from a statement of Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi - who says that not even a metal barrier can divide between Yisrael and their Father in Heaven.

(d)Someone who is standing at the side of the Kohanim included in their Berachah - is included, provided he is standing slightly forward (of the Kohanim) and not slightly back.

11)

(a)We actually resolved the previous She'eilah from a Mishnah in Parah which states that if a Kohen intended to sprinkle the Mei Parah forwards, but it inadvertently splashed behind him (or vice-versa), hitting Tamei vessels that needed to be sprinkled - the vessels remain Tamei.

(b)We learn from the Pasuk in Chukas "v'Hizah ha'Tahor Al ha'Tamei" - that the 'Haza'ah' requires Kavanah (the intention to sprinkle on the specific vessels that were actually sprinkled).

(c)The Tana rules there - that if a Kohen intended to sprinkle the Mei Parah forwards, but it inadvertently hit vessels that were at the side which needed sprinkling, then provided they were slightly forward, they are included (because the Kohen had them in mind too, when he sprinkled the Mei Parah), but not if they were slightly further back.