[27a - 37 lines; 27b - 42 lines]
*********************GIRSA SECTION*********************
We recommend using the textual changes suggested by the Bach, the Tzon Kodashim, the Vilna Ga'on and the marginal notes of the Vilna Shas. This section is devoted to any other important corrections that Acharonim have pointed out in the Gemara, Rashi and Tosfos.
[1] Gemara 27a [line 20]:
Hagahos ha'Gra #2
The Gra speculates what the "Lishna Acharina" ìéùðà àçøéðà is, according to Rashi's partial quote. Now, however, we have the commentary of Rabeinu Gershom, in which the Lishna Acharina ìéùðà àçøéðà is quoted in its entirety. This version fits Rashi's words much more clearly. See also Chart #6 for a summary of the different Leshonos.
[2] Rashi 27a DH Yado a'Kodesh ã"ä éãå à÷åãù:
The words "Idach d'Chulin" àéãê ãçåìéï
should be "v'Idach d'Chulin" åàéãê ãçåìéï
[3] Rashi DH Gavra Lo Ischazek ã"ä âáøà ìà àéúçæ÷:
We have mentioned above (Girsa #1) that it is very difficult to understand Rashi without seeing the full wording of the Lishna Acharina ìéùðà àçøéðà as it is quoted by Rabeinu Gershom. There are also a number of printing errors in Rashi, as follows:
1.The words "Keivan d'Ba'a l'Meimar" ëéåï ãáòà ìîéîø
should be "v'Im Timtzi Lomar Hacha Keivan d'Ba'a l'Meimar" åàí úîöé ìåîø äëà ëéåï ãáòà ìîéîø
2.The words "Al Sheteihen Heni'ach Yado u'Sheteihen Temurah" òì ùúéäï äðéç éãå åùúéäï úîåøä
should be "Al Sheteihen Heni'ach Yado, Sheteihen Temurah" òì ùúéäï äðéç éãå ùúéäï úîåøä
3.The words "aha'Hi Ba'alas Mum" àääéà áòìú îåí
should be "ha'Hi Ba'alas Mum" ääéà áòìú îåí
4.The words "Al ha'Hi d'Ba'alas Mum" òì ääéà ãáòìú îåí
should be corrected as suggested by Shitah Mekubetzes #20
5.The words "d'Cheivan del'Achulei Hava Ba'i" ãëéåï ãìàçåìé äåä áòé
should be "v'Cheivan del'Achulei Hava Ba'i" åëéåï ãìàçåìé äåä áòé
6.The words "Ha d'Nakat Kol ha'Hi d'Ba'alas Mum" äà ãð÷è ëì ääéà ãáòìú îåí
should be corrected as suggested by Shitah Mekubetzes #21
7.The words "d'Af Al Gav d'Anach Yadei" ãàó òì âá ãàðç éãéä
should be "Af Al Gav d'Anach Yadei" àó òì âá ãàðç éãéä
[4] Gemara 27b [line 8]:
Should be corrected as suggested by Shitah Mekubetzes #2; this is also the Girsa of Rashi
*******************************************************
1)[line 5]àîø øáà àôéìå á÷ãùé îæáçAMAR RAVA, AFILU B'KODSHEI MIZBE'ACH- Rava said that even with regard to Kodshei Mizbe'ach, the word "Tachas" can refer to Chilul. According to Rabeinu Gershom, Rava is arguing with Abaye's contention that "Tachas" connotes both Hatfasah and Chilul. Rava maintains that "Tachas" means only Chilul, and it can never be used to make a Temurah. Rava understands that the Mishnah is saying that "Tachas" can be used for Chilul of a Ba'al Mum (the words of the Reisha, when he says "Tachas Zu," are also referring to the Seifa, "If it was a Ba'al Mum"). Rav Ashi, whose words follow Rava's, is apparently agreeing with Abaye and disputing Rava's statement. (According to this explanation, Rava's interpretation of the Mishnah is very forced.)
(a) (According to the text of our Gemara, Rava's words are "b'Kodshei Mizbe'ach Mashkachas Lah," as opposed to Rabeinu Gershom's text, "b'Kodshei Mizbe'ach Havah." According to our text, it could be that Rava is not arguing with Abaye, but is simply making an added observation. Rav Ashi and Abaye (in his next statement in the Gemara that follows) disagree with Rava and maintain that we interpret a person's usage of the word "Tachas" based on the positioning of his hands.)
2)[line 35]ààåðàäA'ONA'AH / BITUL MEKACH
If a person makes a profit of one sixth of the total value on an item that he sells, without the purchaser's knowledge, the transaction is valid, but the seller must return the profit to the purchaser. If the profit is less than one sixth, nothing is returned. If the profit is more than one sixth, the sale is invalid even if the profit is returned.
27b----------------------------------------27b
3)[line 8]ìéîà áãùîåàì ÷à îéôìâéLEIMA BED'SHMUEL KA MIPALGI- say that they are arguing with regard to the law of Shmuel, who says that if Hekdesh of any value is redeemed onto something worth a Perutah, it takes effect. (According to Rashi's Girsa (as it appears in Hagahos ha'Gra #1 and #2), this statement applies only to Rebbi Yirmeyah's opinion. The Gemara is suggesting that according to Rebbi Yirmeyah, the argument between Rebbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish revolves around Shmuel's law. According to Rebbi Yonah, however, Rebbi Yochanan certainly argues with Shmuel's law.) See Chart #7.
4)[line 20]ùîåé áúøéSHAMUY B'TREI- it was appraised by two (that is, its value was first appraised by two experts, and, later, three or more experts appraised it to be worth more)
5)[line 24]áúø ãòåú àæìéðïBASAR DE'OS AZLINAN- we follow the majority opinion
6)[line 35]àéï àãí îåöéà ãáøéå ìáèìäEIN ADAM MOTZI DEVARAV L'VATALAH
Rebbi Meir is of the opinion that a person does not utter words for no purpose. Therefore, when a person's statement seems to be nonsensical, we "read into" his words a more plausible explanation.
7)[line 38]ãìà çæééï, ìà áòééï îåîàD'LO CHAZYAN, LO BE'AYAN MUMA- [with regard to a Tamei animal or a Ba'al Mum,] since they are not fit to be offered as Korbanos, we do not require that they have a Mum (and they may be sold immediately). In contrast, if one was Makdish a female for an Asham or Olah, it may not be sold without a Mum, since females are fit to be offered as other types of Korbanos. (The Lishna Acharina which Rashi quotes substitutes the words "Kadesh Gufa" for these words. According to both versions, the conclusion is the same. The only difference is that the version that appears in our text quotes a statement of Rebbi Shimon in which he discusses Asham, while the Lishna Acharina quotes a statement of Rebbi Shimon in which he discusses Olah.)