1)

TOSFOS DH Zerikah Minalan miv'Chiper Alav ha'Kohen me'Chataso

úåñôåú ã"ä æøé÷ä îðìï îåëôø òìéå äëäï îçèàúå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses how we expound similar verses regarding other Chata'os.)

äøáä éù úéîä ãäðé ÷øàé ãùçéèä å÷áìä åùçè àåúä ìçèàú åì÷ç äëäï ëúéáé áñúí çèàú ëâåï çèàú çìá áôøùú åé÷øà âáé ëùáä

(a)

Question: This is very astounding. These verses about Shechitah and Kabalah, i.e. "v'Shachat Osah l'Chatas" and "v'Lakach ha'Kohen", are written about a Stam Chatas, e.g. Chatas Chelev in Parshas Vayikra (4:33-34), regarding a female lamb;

åäàé ÷øà ãåëôø òìéå äëäï îçèàúå ëúéá áçèàú ãùîéòú ÷åì åáéèåé ùôúéí àáì áçèàú çìá ìà ëúéá îçèàúå àìà òì çèàúå ëúéá

1.

And this verse "v'Chiper Alav ha'Kohen me'Chataso" is written about the Chatas of Shevu'as ha'Edus (swearing that one does not know testimony) and Bituy Sefasayim (a Shevu'ah that one will or will not do an action). However, regarding Chatas Chelev it is not written me'Chataso, rather, Al Chataso!

åáúåøú ëäðéí áàåúä ôøùä òöîä ãçèàú çìá ãøéù î÷øà ãîçèàúå àò''â ãìà ëúéá áääéà ôøùúà åæäå úéîä ãùáé÷ ÷øà ãòì çèàúå ãëúéá áääéà ôøùúà

2.

And in Toras Kohanim, in the same Parshah itself of Chatas Chelev, it expounds from the verse "me'Chataso", even though it is not written in that Parshah! This is astounding that it abandoned the verse "Al Chataso" written in that Parshah!

åùîà îùåí ãòì çèàúå ìàçø ä÷èøú àéîåøéí äåà ãëúéá

(b)

Answer #1: Perhaps it is because Al Chataso is written after Haktaras Eimurim.

àáì úéîä ãì÷îï îùîò ãëì äðé ÷øàé ãäëà áçèàú çìá ëúéáé ã÷àîø àùëçðà çèàú çìá àáì çèàú ãùîéòú ÷åì åáéèåé ùôúéí îðà ìï

(c)

Question: Below, it connotes that all these verses are written about Chatas Chelev, for it says "we find Chatas Chelev, but what is the source for Chatas Shevu'as ha'Edus and Bituy Sefasayim?"!

åé''ì ãäëé ÷àîø ì÷îï àùëçðà çèàú çìá òëåáà ùçéèä å÷áìä áùðåé ÷ãù

(d)

Answer: Below, it says as follows. We find about Chatas Chelev that Shinuy Kodesh is Me'akev in Shechitah and Kabalah;

åùàø òáåãåú ðéìó ëãàîø ìòéì îä ùìîéí ìà çì÷ú áéï æáéçä ìùàø òáåãåú ìîöåä àó ëàï ìà úçìå÷ ìòëá å÷áìä ðîé ìà äåöøê ìëúåá àáì ùîéòú ÷åì îðà ìï

1.

We learn other Avodos like it says above (7b) - just like Shelamim, you do not distinguish between Shechitah and other Avodos l'Chatchilah, also here we do not distinguish to be Me'akev. Also Kabalah did not need to be written. However, what is the source for Shevu'as ha'Edus?

ãàò''â ãëúéá áéä åëôø òìéå îçèàúå åãøùéðï ìòéì ìùí çèàú äééðå ùðåé ÷ãù áæøé÷ä

i.

Implied question: (Why is this difficult?) It is written [about Shevu'as ha'Edus] "v'Chiper Alav [ha'Kohen] me'Chataso", and we expounded above l'Shem Chatas, i.e. Shinuy Kodesh regarding Zerikah!

åìà çì÷ú ìà ðéîà áæøé÷ä ìôé ùäéà òé÷ø ëôøä

ii.

Answer: We should not say "you did not distinguish" regarding Zerikah, since it is the primary Kaparah.

åùðåé áòìéí áçèàú çìá ðâîø îùîéòú ÷åì ãìéëà ôéøëà

2.

Answer (d) (cont.): Shinuy Ba'alim in Chatas Chelev we learn from Shevu'as ha'Edus, for there is no challenge. (The only source for Shinuy Ba'alim in Shevu'as ha'Edus is Zerikah! Tzon Kodoshim - regarding Shinuy Ba'alim, we say "you did not distinguish" even regarding Zerikah, and learn from it.)

åé''î ãîçèàúå ã÷àîø äééðå áùòéø ðùéà ãëúéá áéä ðîé îçèàúå å÷àé âí àçèàú çìá

(e)

Answer #2 (to Question (a)): Some say that "me'Chataso" discussed refers to Sa'ir Nasi, also about which it says me'Chataso, and it refers also to Chatas Chelev.

å÷ùä ãëúéá ìàçø ä÷èøú àéîåøéí ðøàä ìé áøå''ê.

(f)

Question: [We cannot learn from there, for] it is written after Haktaras Eimurim (which is not Me'akev)! So it seems to me, R. Baruch.

åòåã ð''ì ãìà äåä îöé ìîãøù îåëôø òì çèàúå àùø çèà ãëúéá áçèàú çìá îùåí ãäëé ÷àîø òì ôùòå àùø çèà åìà îééøé (äâää áâìéåï) áçèàú ÷øáðå åìà îùòéø ðùéà ãëúéá îçèàúå åðñìç ìå åäééðå îôùòå åçèàúå ùìå åðñìç ìå

(g)

Answer #3: He could not expound from "v'Chiper Al Chataso Asher Chata" written about Chatas Chelev, because it means "for his Pesha (Aveirah) that he sinned", and it does not refer to his Korban Chatas, and [likewise] not from Sa'ir Nasi, about which it says "me'Chataso v'Nislach Lo", i.e. from his Pesha and Chet, and he will be forgiven;

àáì áùîéòú ÷åì ìà ëúéá æä åìà æå àìà îçèàúå äééðå î÷øáðå. áøå''ê

1.

However, in Shevu'as ha'Edus it is not written this (Asher Chata) or that (v'Nislach Lo) rather, me'Chataso, i.e. from his Korban.

2)

TOSFOS DH u'Zerikah b'Shinuy Ba'alim Bein l'Mitzvah Bein Leakev

úåñôåú ã"ä åæøé÷ä áùðåé áòìéí áéï ìîöåä áéï ìòëá

(SUMMARY: Tosfos questions why we need another source for this.)

úéîä ãîäàé ÷øà åëôø òìéå äëäï îçèàúå ãøùéðï úøååééäå æøé÷ä áùðåé ÷ãù åùðåé áòìéí

(a)

Question: From this verse "v'Chiper Alav ha'Kohen me'Chataso" we expound both of them - Zerikah with Shinuy Kodesh, and Shinuy Ba'alim;

åàí ëï îçèàú çèàúå úéôå÷ ìéä ðîé òëåáà áùðåé ÷ãù ëîå áùðåé áòìéí ãàúøååééäå ÷àé

1.

If so, from Chatas Chataso (i.e. the Torah wrote did not write Chatas, rather, Chataso) we should learn also that Shinuy Kodesh is Me'akev, just like Shinuy Ba'alim, for it refers to both of them!

3)

TOSFOS DH v'Asah Es Chataso she'Yehu Kol Asiyosav l'Shem Chatas Ashkachna Shinuy Kodesh Shinuy Ba'alim Minalan Amar Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua Chatas Chataso

úåñôåú ã"ä åòùä àú çèàúå ùéäå ëì òùéåúéå ìùí çèàú àùëçðà ùðåé ÷ãù ùðåé áòìéí îð''ì àîø øá äåðà áøéä ãøá éäåùò çèàú çèàúå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos prefers a different text.)

ëê âéøñú ä÷åðèøñ åìâéøñà æå îå÷é áøéùà ìòëá áùðåé ÷ãù ÷åãí ùðòîéã ìîöåä áùðåé áòìéí áàí àéðå òðéï

(a)

Version #1: This is Rashi's text. According to this text, first we establish [the verse] to be Me'akev regarding Shinuy Kodesh, before we would establish for a Mitzvah regarding Shinuy Ba'alim, through Im Eino Inyan.

åàéðå îùîò ëï áëåìé ôéø÷à ìòéì âáé ùìîéí åôñç ã÷àîø àùëçðà ùðåé ÷ãù ùðåé áòìéí îðà ìï åîå÷é áøéùà áùðåé áòìéí áàí àéðå òðéï ÷åãí ùéòîéã ÷øà ìòëá

(b)

Objection: Our entire Perek connotes unlike this. Above, regarding Shelamim (4b) and Pesach (7b), it says "we find Shinuy Kodesh. What is the source for Shinuy Ba'alim?", and we establish the Reisha to teach about Shinuy Ba'alim through Im Eino Inyan, rather than establish the verse to teach that [Shinuy Kodesh] is Me'akev!

åîéäå é''ì ãùàðé äëà ãëáø àùëçðà ÷øà ìæøé÷ä áùðåé áòìéí

(c)

Answer: We can say that here is different, for we already found a verse for Zerikah with Shinuy Ba'alim.

åàéú ñôøéí ãâøñé àí àéðå òðéï ìùðåé ÷ãù ãðô÷à ìéä îäúí úðéäå òðéï ìùðåé áòìéí àùëçðà ìîöåä ìòëá îðà ìï àîø øá äåðà áøéä ãøá éäåùò çèàú çèàúå

(d)

Version #2: The text in some Seforim says 'Im Eino Inyan for Shinuy Kodesh, which we learn from there, use it to teach about Shinuy Ba'alim. This teaches a Mitzvah. What is the source that it is Me'akev? Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua said "Chatas- Chataso."'

åìâéøñà æå ìà öøéëéðï úå ì÷øà ãìòéì áæøé÷ä

(e)

Support #1: According to this text, we no longer need the verse above for Zerikah.

åðéçà ðîé äà ãâøñéðï ìòéì ëãàîø øá äåðà áøéä ãøá éäåùò çèàú çèàúå ãîùîò ãòé÷ø îéìúà ìà àúîø àääéà åäééðå îùåí ãìáñåó ìà ÷ééîà

(f)

Support #2: Now it is fine that above, the text says 'like Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua said - "Chatas- Chatas"', which connotes that his primary teaching was not said about that, i.e. because at the end it is not established (to teach about this).

4)

TOSFOS DH Minchasam v'Niskeihem ba'Laylah Minchasam v'Niskeihem Afilu l'Machar

úåñôåú ã"ä îðçúí åðñëéäí áìéìä îðçúí åðñëéäí àôé' ìîçø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that we do not expound from this verse.)

ìàå îäàé ÷øà [÷ãøéù]

(a)

Explanation: We do not expound from this verse. (Teshuvah Menachos 44b DH Minchasam (1) - Temurah 4b proves that really, we learn from "Devar Yom b'Yomo Milvad Shabsos Hash-m.")

5)

TOSFOS DH Hilkach Mitzvah mi'Shelamim v'Hanach Kera'i Le'akev

úåñôåú ã"ä äéìëê îöåä îùìîéí åäðê ÷øàé ìòëá

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses why all these Ikuvim were written.)

åà''ú ìîä ìé ìîëúá áëåìäå ìëúåá áçã (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí) åàéðê ëåìäå àúå îãëúéá æàú úåøú äçèàú úåøä àçú ìëì äçèàåú ëãì÷îï áùîòúà ãîáåâ

(a)

Question: Why must it write in all of them? It should write [a Drashah for Shinuy] in one, and we learn all of the others from "Zos Toras ha'Chatas" - there is one law for all Chata'os, like below (9b) in the Sugya of [Rav's teaching in the name of] Mavog!

åéù ìåîø ãáîñ÷ðà (îëàï îòîåã á) ìà ÷àé

(b)

Answer: In the conclusion, this [Drashah from "Zos Toras ha'Chatas"] does not last (we retract from it).

8b----------------------------------------8b

åàò''â ãáôø÷ ãí çèàú (ì÷îï ãó öá.) úðï úåøä àçú ìëì äçèàåú

(c)

Implied question: Below (92a), a Mishnah teaches "one Torah (law) for all Chata'os"!

äééðå áîéìúà ãëúéáà äúí àùø éæä îãîä òì äáâã

(d)

Answer: That is for the matter written there, "Asher Yazeh mi'Damah Al ha'Beged."

åîéäå àéëà ãàéú ìéä äê ñáøà ìø' ùîòåï áøéù îñëú îðçåú (ãó â:)

(e)

Disclaimer: However, some hold that R. Shimon holds like this (there is one law for all Chata'os even regarding Shinuy), in Menachos (3b).

åà''ú ìîä ìé ìîëúá áçèàú òëåáà áëì çìá òáåãåú ìëúåá áçãà åðéîà îä ùìîéí ìà çì÷ú ìîöåä àó çèàú ìà úçìå÷ ëã÷àîø ìòéì

(f)

Question: Why did the Torah need to write an Ikuv in all Avodos? It should write in one, and we should say "just like regarding Shelamim, you do not distinguish for a Mitzvah (Shinuy is forbidden), also regarding Chatas do not distinguish!", like it says above!

åé''ì ãëé äàé âååðà æîðéï ãèøç ìéä ÷øà åëúá

(g)

Answer #1: In such a case, sometimes the Torah toiled to write (explicitly what we could have expounded).

à''ð àúé ìãøùà àçøéðà

(h)

Answer #2: [The Ikuv in all Avodos] comes for another Drashah.

åà''ú îðà ìï áçèàú ðæéø òëåáà áùðåé áòìéí

(i)

Question: What is the source for a Ikuv of Shinuy Ba'alim regarding Chatas Nazir?

åéù ìåîø îçèàú çèàúå

(j)

Answer: We learn from Chatas- Chataso;

àò''â ãìòéì ìà ÷àé òé÷ø ôéøëà ñîéê àåúå îé âîéøé îäããé

1.

Even though above, this was not sustained, the primary challenge was "do we learn them from each other?!"

6)

TOSFOS DH Chatas d'Avodas Kochavim Asya mi'Chatas Chelev she'Chen Kares Kamosah

úåñôåú ã"ä çèàú ãòáåãú ëåëáéí àúéà îçèàú çìá ùëï ëøú ëîåúä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos proves that the text does not include Tum'as Mikdash.)

éù ñôøéí ùëúåá áäï çèàú ãòáåãú ëåëáéí åèåîàú î÷ãù å÷ãùéå

(a)

Alternative text: It says in some Seforim Chatas Avodah Zarah and Tum'as Mikdash v'Kodoshav.

åàéðå ðøàä ãàò''â ãëøú ëîåúä îëì î÷åí àéëà ìîéôøê îä ìçèàú çìá ùëï àéðä áàä áãìåú ëãôøëéðï ìòéì âáé çèàú îöåøò

(b)

Rebuttal: Even though [Tum'as Mikdash has] Kares like [Chelev], one can ask that Chatas Chelev is different, for it does not have Dalos (a cheaper Korban for poor people), like we ask above about Chatas Metzora.

7)

TOSFOS DH Shemi'as Kol

úåñôåú ã"ä ùîéòú ÷åì

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why we do not learn from Chataso.)

ãìà ëúéá ìçèàúå âáé òáåãä îðìï òëåáà àáì ëúéá ìçèàú òì ãáøéí àçøéí åàéï áëê ëìåí

(a)

Explanation: It does not say "l'Chataso" regarding the offering [of the Chatas for Shevu'as ha'Edus]. What is the source that it is Me'akev? However, it says l'Chatas regarding other matters, and this is no problem.

8)

TOSFOS DH Hachi Garsinan Hanach Kulhu Asyan b'Mah ha'Tzad

úåñôåú ã"ä (ä''â) äðê ëåìäå àúééï áîä äöã

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses why we are able to learn Chata'os from each other.)

ä÷ùä øáéðå úí îä ìäðê ùëï àéï áàéï áãìé ãìåú úàîø áäðê

(a)

Question (R. Tam): We cannot learn from these, for they do have Dalei Dalos (a Minchah for very poor people who cannot afford even birds). You cannot learn to these (which have)!

åúéøõ ëéåï ããìé ãìåú âåôéä ôñåìä ùìà ìùîä äééðå îðçú çåèà ãôñåìä ùìà ìùîä ëãúðï áøéù îðçåú (ãó á.) åîôé÷ ìï îãëúéá ëé çèàú äéà

(b)

Answer (R. Tam): Since Dalei Dalos itself is Pasul Lo Lishmah, i.e. Minchas Chotei, which is Pasul Lo Lishmah, like the Mishnah in Menachos (2a) teaches, that we learn from "Ki Chatas Hi"...

àéï ñáøà ùîä ùáàéï áãìé ãìåú éâøåí ìäí áòùéøåú ìäéåú ëùéøéï ùìà ìùîï ëéåï ùäãìé ãìåú òöîï ôñåì

1.

... It is unreasonable that the law of Dalei Dalos should cause that a rich person's Korban is Kosher Lo Lishmah, since Dalei Dalos itself is Pasul [Lo Lishmah].

å÷ùä à''ë ìòéì ãôøéê âáé îöåøò îä ìäðê ùëï àéðï áàéï áãìåú úàîø áîöåøò

(c)

Question: If so, above that it asked regarding Metzora "these do not have Dalos. Will you learn to Metzora?!"

îàé ÷åùéà åäìà ãìåú äééðå çèàú äòåó åçèàú äòåó ôñåìä ùìà ìùîä ëãúðï áôø÷ ÷ãùé ÷ãùéí (ì÷îï ãó ñã:) åîôé÷ ìéä áúåøú ëäðéí îçèàú äéà

1.

What was the question? Dalos is Chatas ha'Of. Chatas ha'Of Lo Lishmah is Pasul, like the Mishnah below (64b), and we derive it in Toras Kohanim from "Chatas Hi";

åëéåï ãôñåìä áãìåú äéàê éù ìä ìâøåí áòùéøåú äëùø ùìà ìùîä

2.

Since Dalos is Pasul [Lo Lishmah], how can it cause a rich person's Korban to be Kosher Lo Lishmah?!

åàí úàîø åäà áçèàú çìá ìîãä îùìîéí áäé÷ù ìîöåä åäéëé éìôé' ùàø çèàåú áîä äöã

(d)

Question: We learned Chatas Chelev from Shelamim through a Hekesh for a Mitzvah. How do we learn other Chata'os from a Tzad ha'Shavah?

äà áòéà äéà ì÷îï ôø÷ àéæäå î÷åîï (ãó ð.) àé ãáø äìîã áäé÷ù çåæø åîìîã ááðéï àá

1.

This is a question below (50a), whether the learned from a Hekesh can later teach through Binyan Av!

ìàå ôéøëà äéà ëìì ãëåìäå çèàåú ðîé éìôé' ìîöåä îùìîéí åìòëá äåà ãéìôéðï áùàø çèàåú îäðê ãëúéá òëåáà áâåôééäå

(e)

Answer: This is not a question at all, for also all Chata'os we learn l'Chatchilah from Shelamim, and we learn to be Me'akev from other Chata'os, from those in which an Ikuv was written.

åàí úàîø åçèàåú äöáåø ëâåï ùòéøé øàùé çãùéí åîåòãåú îðìï äà ìà àúå áîä äöã ãîä ìäðê ùëï ùðåé áòìéí ôåñì áäï îä ùàéï ëï á÷øáï öáåø

(f)

Question #1: Chata'os ha'Tzibur, such as goats of Rosh Chodesh and Mo'adim, what is their source? We cannot learn from the Tzad ha'Shavah, for Shinuy Ba'alim disqualifies [the sources, i.e. Chata'os Yachid], but not a Korban Tzibur!

ëãàîø ìòéì (ãó ã.) ãùðåé áòìéí ìéúà áöáåø ëáéçéã

1.

Source: It says above (4a) that Shinuy Ba'alim does not apply the Tzibur like to an individual.

àò''â ãìà ùééê ùðåé áòìéí áöáåø

2.

Implied question: Shinuy Ba'alim could not apply to the Tzibur (everyone is the owner)!

î''î ôéøëà èåáä äéà ëãàùëçï áô''÷ ã÷ãåùéï (ãó ä:) îä ìëñó ùëï ôåãéï áå ä÷ãùåú åîòùø ùðé úàîø áçåôä åëï ôø÷ äçåáì (á''÷ ãó ôç.) îä ìàùä ùàéðä áîéìä

3.

Answer: Even so, it is a proper question, like we find in Kidushin (5b) "you cannot learn from Kesef, for it redeems Hekdesh and Ma'aser Sheni, but Chupah cannot", and in Bava Kama (88a) "you cannot learn from a woman, for she has no Mitzvah of Bris Milah."

åòåã ÷ùä çèàåú ôðéîéåú ìøáé ùîòåï ãàîø ëì ùàéðå òì îæáç äçéöåï àéï áå îùåí ôéâåì àéëà ìîéôøê îä ìäðê ùëï ôéâåì ôåñì áäï úàîø áçèàåú äôðéîéåú

(g)

Question #2: Inner Chata'os, according to R. Shimon who says that anything that is not [offered] on the outer Mizbe'ach, Pigul does not apply to it, we can ask "Pigul applies to [outer Chata'os]. You cannot learn from them to inner Chata'os!"

åéù ìåîø ãáôø äòìí ãáø ùì öáåø ëúéá çèàú ä÷äì äéà åãøéù îéðä áú''ë ùôñåì ùìà ìùîå

(h)

Answer (to both questions): Regarding Par Helam Davar, it says "Chatas ha'Kahal Hi", and in Toras Kohanim we expound from this that Lo Lishmah, it is Pasul;

àí ëï àùëçï öáåø åâí ôðéîé ìòëá åìîöåä éìôéðï îùìîéí

1.

If so, we find that [Lishmah] is Me'akev regarding a [Chatas] Tzibur, and regarding an inner [Chatas]. We learn l'Chatchilah from Shelamim.

9)

TOSFOS DH Hagahah bi'She'ar Yemos ha'Shanah Lishmo Pasul

úåñôåú ã"ä äâä''ä áùàø éîåú äùðä ìùîå ôñåì

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that this is when it can still be offered.)

äééðå ÷åãí äôñç ãáòé ò÷éøä àå ëâåï ãðãçå áòìéí ìôñç ùðé

(a)

Explanation: This refers to before Pesach, for it requires Akirah (to make it a different Korban). Or, the owners were detained to Pesach Sheni;

àáì àç''ë ìà ãôñç áùàø éîåú äùðä ùìîéí åùìîéí ìùí ôñç ÷ùçéè ëãàîø áô' úîéã ðùçè (ôñçéí ãó ñã.) åáô' ùðé ãçåìéï (ãó ì.)

1.

However, afterwards, no (it is Kosher), for Pesach during the rest of the year is Shelamim, and he slaughters Shelamim l'Shem Pesach, like it says in Pesachim (64a) and in Chulin (30a).

åîéäå àéëà ìî''ã áñåó àìå ãáøéí (ôñçéí ãó òâ:) ãáòé ò÷éøä

2.

Remark: However, there is an opinion in Pesachim (73b) that obligates Akirah (even when it can no longer be offered for Pesach).

10)

TOSFOS DH Lishmo Pasul

úåñôåú ã"ä ìùîå ôñåì

(SUMMARY: Tosfos supports Rashi's Hagahah.)

ëúåá á÷åðèøñ ãìà çæå ìîéìúéä (äâäú ùéèä î÷åáöú) åøáéðå ù''é äâéä ëãàîø áôñçéí (ãó ñà.) ùçèå ÷åãí çöåú ôñåì ùðàîø áéï äòøáéí

(a)

Explanation: Rashi wrote that it is not proper for its matter (to be offered for Pesach). Rashi changed the text to be like it says in Pesachim (61a) "if they slaughtered it before midday it is Pasul, for it says Bein ha'Arbayim."

åëîä ôòîéí ùðä äëúåá á÷áéòåú æîðå áàøáòä òùø áéï äòøáéí

(b)

Support #1: Several times the Torah fixed the time to be on the 14th Bein ha'Arbayim [so it is Me'akev].

åñåâéà ãäù''ñ ðîé îùîò ì÷îï áâîøà äôñç ùùçèå ùçøéú ãîáéï äòøáéí ðôé÷

(c)

Support #2: The Gemara connotes like this below (11b) regarding Pesach slaughtered in the morning, that "Bein ha'Arbayim" excludes this.

åàéï ìåîø ãðôé÷ îããøùéðï äëà ìæáç ùìîéí ùöøéê ùéò÷øðå ìæáç ùìîéí

(d)

Implied suggestion: Perhaps we exclude this from what we expound here "l'Zevach Shelamim" - he must uproot it to be a Shelamim! (This shows that it is Pasul for Pesach.)

ããéìîà äðé îéìé ìîöåä àáì ìòëá ìà

(e)

Rejection: Perhaps that is only l'Chatchilah, but it is not Me'akev.

11)

TOSFOS DH v'Im Min ha'Tzon Korbano

úåñôåú ã"ä åàí îï äöàï ÷øáðå

(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that we expound something extra.)

ôé' á÷åðèøñ ìàå ÷øà éúéøà ãøéù àìà îîùîòåú ã÷øà îùîò ìéä äëé

(a)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): We do not expound an extra verse. Rather, the verse connotes like this.

åæäå úéîä ãàé ìà îééúé ÷øà éúéøà îðà ìéä ìàå÷åîé áôñç

(b)

Question: This is astounding. If we do not bring an extra verse, what is the source to establish it to discuss Pesach?

åðøàä ãîééúåøà ãøéù ãìà äåä öøéê ìîëúá ìæáç äùìîéí ãàùìîéí ÷àé

(c)

Explanation #2: We expound an extra verse. There was no need to write "l'Zevach Shelamim", for [the verse] was discussing Shelamim!

[åòé''ì] ãáñîåê ãøéù ëùá ìøáåú ôñç ìàìéä åôéøù øáéðå ù''é ãîéåúø ãîãëúéá áúø äëé áùìîéí åàí òæ (äâäú äøù"ù) ÷øáðå îëìì ãòã äùúà àééøé áëùá

(d)

Explanation #3: Below (9a) we expound "Kesev" to include Pesach for the law of the tail. Rashi explained that it is extra, for since after this it says regarding Shelamim "v'Im Ez Korbano", which implies that until now, we discussed a lamb;

åä''ð é''ì îãëúéá ìòéì àí îï äá÷ø ÷øáðå îëìì ãäëà áöàï îééøé àí ëï äöàï îéåúø äåà ìîåúø ôñç. áøåê

1.

Also here, we can say that since it says above "Im Min ha'Bakar Korbano", this implies that here we discuss Tzon (goats and sheep). If so, "ha'Tzon" is extra, to teach about Mosar Pesach. This is from R. Baruch.

12)

TOSFOS DH Iy Havah Kasuv l'Zevach Shelamim kid'Amrat

úåñôåú ã"ä àé äåä ëúá ìæáç äùìîéí ëã÷àîøú

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that this is not precise.)

äåä ìéä ìîéîø àé äåä ëúá ìæáç ëã÷àîøú ãùìîéí ìà öøéê ëìì

(a)

Observation: It should have said 'had it written [only] "l'Zevach", it would be like you said', for there was no need at all to write Shelamim.

13)

TOSFOS DH Ela l'Zevach Ribuya Hu

úåñôåú ã"ä àìà ìæáç øáåéà äåà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that this connotes a Ribuy to the Gemara.)

îùîò ìéä ìâîøà ùäåà øáåéà ëãàîø (á''÷ ãó ñâ.) áëì ëììà ëì øáåéà ãîùîò ìéä ìçì÷ áéï ëì ìáëì

(a)

Explanation: The Gemara understands that it is a Ribuy, like it says (Bava Kama 63a) "b'Chol is a Klal. Kol is a Ribuy." It understands that we distinguish between Kol and b'Chol;

äéìëê ìà ãøùéðï ìéä áëììà åôøèà àìà áøéáä åîéòè åá÷åðèøñ äàøéê áôéøåùå:

1.

Therefore, we do not expound through Klal u'Ferat, rather, through Ribuy u'Mi'ut.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF