1)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that - whereas a Chatas Yachid she'Kiprah Ba'alehah has to die, a Chatas Tzibur she'Kiprah Ba'alehah does not.

(b)The case is - where the owner's lost Chatas is found after he has already brought its replacement.

(c)The source for this distinction is - Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai.

(d)According to Rebbi Yehudah - the Chatas Tzibur ... too must die.

2)

(a)Besides the above case, a Chatas whose owner died, one which has surpassed its age limit - V'lad Chatas and Temuras Chatas must die.

(b)The Din of Meisah does not apply to ...

1. ... a Chatas Tzibur she'Meisah Ba'alehah - because a Tzibur cannot die, as we will see shortly.

2. ... the V'lad of a Chatas Tzibur - because there is no such thing as a female Chatas Tzibur (as we have already learned).

3. ... the Temurah of a Chatas Tzibur - because a Korban Tzibur is not subject to Temurah (as we have already learned).

(c)Rebbi Shimon proves the opinion of the Tana Kama from here - because, he says, since three out of the other four rulings do not apply to a Chatas Tzibur, we can assume that the fourth and fifth cases (Chatas she'Kiprah Ba'alehah ve'she'Avrah Shenasah) do not apply to it either.

3)

(a)The Beraisa learns from the word ...

1. ... "Yavi" (in the Pasuk in Vayikra "Im Keves Yavi Korbano le'Chatas") that - if a lost Chatas is found after the owner has already designated a replacement, he has the option of bringing whichever one he wants as his Chatas.

2. ... "Yevi'e*nah" (in the Pasuk there "Nekeivah Temimah Yevi'enah") that - he is not permitted to bring both.

(b)In a Beraisa cited by Rav Hamnuna, Rebbi Yehudah holds that the second animal is subject to Tir'eh ad she'Tista'ev ... - he lets it graze in the meadow until it obtains a blemish, at which point he is allowed to redeem it).

(c)Rebbi Shimon says - Meisah.

4)

(a)Initially, in order to reconcile Rebbi Yehudah with our Mishnah, where he holds Tamus - we simply switch the opinions in the Beraisa (in which case, it is Rebbi Shimon who says Tir'eh and Rebbi Yehudah, Tamus).

(b)We reject this answer, since, in another Beraisa - Rebbi Shimon specifically includes Chatas she'Kipru Ba'alehah among the five Chata'os that have to die.

(c)So we reinstate the original version of the Machlokes, and we resolve the discrepancy in Rebbi Yehudah by drawing a distinction between Avudah be'Sha'as Hafrashah (but not at the time of the Kaparah) - where he holds Tir'eh, and Avudah be'Sha'as Kaparah - where he holds Tamus.

(d)Alternatively, Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah (Tamus) goes like Rebbi; whereas in the Beraisa, he goes like the Rabbanan - who say that a lost Chatas does not die unless it is found only after the Kaparah has taken place.

(e)Rebbi and the Rabbanan - argue over Avudah be'Sha'as Hafrashah (but Avudah be'Sha'as Kaparah, even the Rabbanan will concede that the Din is Meisah).

5)

(a)In a Beraisa, Rebbi Yossi discusses the Pasuk in Ezra, listing various Korbanos that the returnees brought after rebuilding the Beis-Hamikdash. The Tana refers to twelve goats, concluding "Tzefirei Chatas Sh'neim-Asar, ha'Kol Olah la'Hashem". The problem with this Pasuk is - how one can bring a Chatas as an Olah.

(b)Rava therefore explains that - the Pasuk is coming to teach us that, although Chata'os are generally eaten by the Kohanim, these Chata'os were completely burned, like Olos.

(c)And he quotes Rebbi Yossi, who explains that they brought these goats for the sin of Avodah-Zarah - which explains a. why they brought twelve bulls as Olos, and twelve goats as Chata'os (one for each tribe) and b. why they were not eaten.

(d)Rav Yehudah Amar Rav adds that - these Chata'os were to atone for the sin of Avodah-Zarah of which they had been guilty in the days of Tzidkiyah (prior to the Churban) ...

(e)... in which case we can assume that most of the original community of those who sinned had died by then.

6)

(a)We now try to draw a parralel between Chatas Tzibur she'Niskapru Ba'alehah, and Chatas Tzibur she'Meisu Ba'alehah inasmuch as - if the former is Meisah, so is the latter ...

(b)... and conversely, since here they brought the latter (a case of Chatas Tzibur she'Meisah, as we just proved), the former must be brought as well (a Kashya on Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah who holds Chatas Tzibur she'Niskapru Ba'alehah, Tamus.

(c)Rav Papa answers - with the principle Ein Tzibur Meisim (meaning that the Din of Chatas she'Meisah Ba'alehah does not apply to a Tzibur), whereas Chatas Tzibur she'Niskapru Ba'alehah, Tamus does.

7)

(a)We cannot learn the principle of Ein Tzibur Meisim from the Pasuk "Tachas Avosecha Yih'yu Banecha" - because that Pasuk applies to a Yachid no less than to a Tzibur.

(b)We therefore learn it from the fact that the Se'irei Regalim ve'Roshei Chadashim are purchased from the Terumas ha'Lishkah - irrespective of the fact that some of the donors have probably died by the time the Korban is brought.

(c)Alternatively, we circumvent the problem from Ein Tzibur Meisim altogether - by establishing that the Korbanos were brought on behalf of those who were still alive from the time of Tzidkiyahu.

(d)And we know that they were not in the minority - because the Pasuk describes how the trumpet-blowing and joy of those who had not seen the glory of the first Beis-Hamikdash was drowned out by those who had seen it and who now wept at the contrast.

8)

(a)We solve the problem that the Avodah-Zarah that they served was be'Meizid, for which a Korban does not atone - by ascribing it to a Hora'as Sha'ah (a special ruling for that time only) ...

(b)... which we prove from the twelve rams and the ninety-six lambs that they also brought, and which otherwise had no Halachic basis.

9)

(a)We learned in Sotah that when Yosef ben Yo'ezer and Yosef ben Yochanan Ish Yerushalayim died, the Eshkolos came to an end, Eshkolos being the acronym of Ish she'ha'Kol bo (Torah, Yir'as Chet and Gemilas Chasadim [symbolical of the three things on which the world stands] see also Shitah Mekubetzes 11).

(b)Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel said that all the Eshkolos who lived from Moshe's time until the time of Yosef ben Yo'ezer and Yosef ben Yochanan Ish Yerushalayim - studied Torah like Moshe Rabeinu.

(c)Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel himself said that during the mourning period of Moshe - three thousand Halachos were forgotten.

(d)We reconcile this with his previous statement (according to which the Eshkolos of that time should have retained everything that Moshe had taught) - in that the things that they retained, they had learned with the clarity of Moshe, but there were things it seems, that they did not learn properly and that they therefore forgot.

10)

(a)We then query Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel from a Beraisa which describes how after the death of Moshe, whenever there was a Machlokes, they went after the majority to declare Tahor or Tamei. The problem now is that - if they had learned like Moshe, how could there have been Machlokes at all?

(b)And we reconcile this with Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel's first ruling - in that what they knew, they were absolutely clear (Chochmah), and it was their power of reasoning (learning one thing from another [Binah]) that was not so strong.

11)

(a)The Beraisa describes the uniqueness of the Eshkolos - inasmuch as they were without Dofi, which we initially interpret as sin.

(b)We query this from a Beraisa however, in which the doctors advised that Chasid who was moaning from heart-ache - to suck goat's milk directly from a goat.

(c)So - he tied a goat to his bed-post and began doing what the doctors had prescribed.

(d)The Chachamim who came to visit him, subsequently retracted - because of ]the armed robber' whom he kept in his house (since sheep and goats used to graze in other people's fields, which is why Chazal issued a declaration forbidding keeping them in inhabited areas).

(e)They nevertheless arrived at the conclusion that - this was that Chasid's only sin.

12)

(a)Before he died, the Chasid himself issued a declaration - making the same statement about himself as the Chachamim had made.

(b)'That Chasid' always refers - either to Rebbi Yehudah ben Bava or to Rebbi Yehudah b'Rebbi Ila'i (the Chaver of Rebbi Meir) ...

(c)... who lived many years after the two Rebbi Yosef's - yet he was without sin.

13)

(a)We therefore reinterpret the Beraisa's statement ... mi'Ka'an va'Eilech Hayah bahen Dofi to mean that - the Machlokes of Semichah (concerning whether or not, one makes Semichah on one's Korban on Yom-Tov) first came into being.

(b)We mention particularly Semichah because it was the first official Machlokes (though once Machlokes began, the trend spread to other issues).

(c)Yosef ben Yo'ezer and Yosef ben Yochanan Ish Yerushalayim did indeed dispute Semichah - but that was at the end of their lives.