1)

TOSFOS DH Oh Dilma Basar Behemah Azlinan

úåñôåú ã"ä àå ãìîà áúø áäîä àæìéðï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that the animal must be mostly outside.)

úéîä àí äáäîä áôðéí ôùéèà ãâáøé èäåøéí ëãîåëç ëåìä ùîòúéï

(a)

Question: If the animal is inside, obviously the people are Tehorim, like is proven from the entire Sugya!

åéù ìåîø ãä''÷ áúø áäîä ãå÷à àæìéðï áúø øåáà àáì áâáøé ìà

(b)

Answer: It means as follows. Do we follow the majority only regarding the animal, but not regarding people?

2)

TOSFOS DH Oh Dilma Kivan d'Hadur Hadur

úåñôåú ã"ä àå ãìîà ëéåï ãäãåø äãåø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that we discuss whether it is Metamei after it was returned.)

ôé' á÷åðèøñ ãîáòéà ìéä ìòðéï èåîàú áâãéí ùì àìå ùäåöéàå

(a)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): He asks about Tum'as Begadim of these who took it out.

å÷ùä àèå îçéöåú òæøä (î÷åí) (ö"ì î÷åä - âìéåï) èäøä ãëéåï ùðèîàå îé éèäøí

(b)

Objection: Are the walls of the Azarah a Mikveh to be Metaher?! Once [the people and their Begadim] became Tamei, who will be Metaher them?!

åðøàä ìôøù ãîáòéà ìéä ìòðéï äðåâò áôðéí ããìîà ëéåï ãéöàå áçåõ àò''â ãçæøå äðåâò áôðéí èîà

(c)

Explanation #2: He asks about one who touches inside. Perhaps once they went outside, even though they returned, one who touches [them] inside is Tamei.

åîñé÷ ãîéáòéà ìéä (ëéåï) (ö"ì ëâåï - âìéåï áùí öàï ÷ãùéí) ãð÷èé áá÷åìñé åîééøé áòåîã áçåõ åàåçæ áî÷ìåú ìäåöéàí ìàçø (ùéçæøå) (ö"ì ùçæøå - âìéåï áùí öàï ÷ãùéí) ëãôéøù á÷åðèøñ. äâ''ä

1.

We conclude that he asks about when they carry it on poles. We discuss when he stands outside and holds the poles to take them out after they returned, like Rashi explained. This is a comment.

3)

TOSFOS DH Parim ha'Nisrafim

úåñôåú ã"ä ôøéí äðùøôéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the question about when they returned.)

ùéöàå äôøéí åäàðùéí åçæøå äôøéí åâáøé îäå ôùéèà äàðùéí åâí áâãéí ùäéå òìéäí èîàéí åáçæøúï ìà ðèäøå

(a)

Explanation: The bulls and people left, and the bulls and people returned. What is the law? Obviously, the people and the garments that were on them are Tamei, and when they returned they did not become Tahor!

àìà àí àðùéí àçøéí ðëðñå áòæøä åéúòñ÷å áäåöàúï àå äøàùåðéí ìáùå áâãéí àçøéí îé äåå èîàéí áòñ÷ æä ÷åãí ùéöàå çåõ ìòæøä

1.

Rather, [we ask about] if other people entered the Azarah and engaged in taking them out, or the first people wore other garments. Are they Tamei through this activity before they leave the Azarah?

ëéåï ùéöàå äôøéí ëáø çùåá ëàéìå îåöéàéí àåúí îôúç òæøä åìçåõ

2.

Since the bulls already left, it is considered as if they take them out of the opening of the Azarah and outside [even before they leave now]?

å÷àîø (îé) (ö"ì àé - âìéåï áùí öàï ÷ãùéí) úìé îéìúà áäåöàú äôø ìáãå àò''ô ùìà éöàå äàðùéí à''ë âáé ñåáìéï àåúï áîåèåú ëéåï ùéöà äôø åìëê ðèîàå äøàùåðéí àí ëï âí ãâåàé ðèîàå

(b)

Explanation (cont.): [The Gemara] says that if the matter depends only on taking out the bull, even though the people did not leave, if so, when they carry it on poles, once the bull left, and therefore the first ones are Tamei, if so also the ones inside became Tamei;

åúñáøà ùéäà úìåé áéöéàú äôø ìáãå åäà áòéðï åàçø éáà àì äîçðä

1.

[It challenges] is this reasonable, that it depends only on the bull leaving? We require "afterwards he will enter the Machaneh"!

àìà ôùéèà (ãáòéà) (ö"ì ãáòéðï - âìéåï áùí öàï ÷ãùéí) âí ùéöàå äàðùéí òí äôøéí åìëê ãâåàé ìà îèîàé

2.

Rather, obviously we require also that the people leave with the bulls. Therefore, those inside are not Metamei (their garments);

åâí ááòéà ãéìê àðùéí àçøéí ùîòåìí ìà éöàå ôùéèà ãèäåøéï àå âáøé ÷ãîàé àí ìáùå áâãéí àçøéí

3.

Also in your question, about other people who never left, obviously they are Tehorim, or the initial people, if they wore different garments!

àìà øáé àìòæø äëé áòé ãð÷èé áá÷åìñé ùäôøéí éöàå åçæøå [ö"ì åáàå] àðùéí àçøéí åòîãå çåõ ìòæøä åîåöéàéï äôøéí ùáúåê äòæøä áî÷ìåú

(c)

Conclusion: Rather, R. Elazar asks as follows. They held it on poles. The bulls left and returned, and other people came and stood outside the Azarah and take out the bulls in the Azarah with poles;

îé àîøéðï ëéåï ùäôøéí ëáø éöàå åäàðùéí òåîãéí áçåõ çùåá ëàéìå îåöéàéï àåúï îôúç òæøä åìçåõ åèîàéï

1.

Do we say that since the bulls already left, and the people stand outside, it is considered as if they take them outside the opening of the Azarah, and they are Tamei;

àå çùåá ëàéìå ìà éöàå äôøéí îòåìí ìçåõ åèäåøéí

2.

Or, is it considered as if the bulls never left, and they are Tahor?

àáì àí ðëðñå áôðéí âáøé çãùéí àå äøàùåðéí ááâãéí çãùéí ëéåï ùîòåìí àìå ìà éöàå ôùéèà ãèäåøéí àò''ô ùéöàå ëáø äôøéí

i.

However, if new people entered inside, or the initial people in new clothes, since these never left, obviously they are Tehorim, even though the bulls already left.

(îä ùáôðéí àéðå) (ö"ì åîä ùôéøùúé ãîéáòéà ìéä ìòðéï äðåâò - âìéåï áùí öàï ÷ãùéí) áôðéí àéðå îáåàø åæä òé÷ø. áøåê ã''ê

(d)

Remark: What I explained (above, Explanation #2 in DH Oh Dilma Kivan) that he asked about one who touches inside is not clear. This is primary. This is from R. Baruch.

4)

TOSFOS DH Mechusar Yetzi'ah k'Mechusar Ma'aseh Dami Oh Lo

úåñôåú ã"ä îçåñø éöéàä ëîçåñø îòùä ãîé àå ìà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos defends the Havah Amina that they are Metamei.)

åà''ú àé îèîàå áôðéí àí ëï éèîàå àú äàéîåøéí

(a)

Question: If they are Metamei inside, if so they are Metamei the Eimurim! (How can we be Maktir the Eimurim?)

åéù ìåîø ãîçåñø çúéëä ôùéèà ãäåé ëîçåñø îòùä

(b)

Answer: Something that needs to be cut, obviously it is like Mechusar Ma'aseh (so the Par is not Metamei them before they are removed);

åìà úèîàå áùòú ôøéùúï ãîééøé áðéúæéï (áòì) (ö"ì áëì - âìéåï áùí öàï ÷ãùéí) ëøçå

1.

And they do not become Tamei at the time they separate [from the Par], for we discuss when they are cut off with all his strength. (In such a case, they do not receive Tum'ah from their source - Kerisus 15b, Tosfos Chulin 72a-b.)

105b----------------------------------------105b

åáéøåùìîé âøñéðï áñåó ôø÷ ùðé ùòéøéí øáé àìéòæø ùàì ôøéí äðùøôéï åùòéøéí äðùøôéí îäå ùéèîàå áâãéí (ö"ì àåëìéï - ÷øï àåøä, ÷ãùé ãåã) áìà äëùø åáìà èåîàä îôðé ùñåôï ìèîàåú èåîàä çîåøä

(c)

Citation (Yerushalmi): R. Eliezer asked, Parim ha'Nisrafim and Se'irim ha'Nisrafim, are they Metamei food without Hechsher and without Tum'ah, because in the end they will have severe Tum'ah?

äùéá øáé ùîåàì ÷ôåã÷éà îòúä éèîàå àéîåøéí àìà ëùôøùå åàôéìå úéîà ãìà ôéøùå ëäãà àéï îé çèàú îèîàéï ãáø ìçæåø åìèîàåú îîðå

1.

Citation (cont.): R. Shmuel Kapudkiya answered if so, they would be Metamei the Eimurim! Rather, [he asked about] when (i.e. after the Eimurim) separated. And even if you will say that that they did not separate, Mei Chatas are not Metamei something to return and become Tamei from it. (Similarly, the bull is Metamei others, but it does not become Tamei.)

5)

TOSFOS DH u'Metamei Tum'as Ochlin bik'Beitzah

úåñôåú ã"ä åîèîà èåîàú àåëìéï áëáéöä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses how we know that it is in his hand.)

ôé' á÷åðèøñ îã÷úðé öøéëä îçùáä åàéï öøéëä äëùø àìîà áãð÷éè ìéä áéãéä òñ÷éðï ãàé îçúà ààøòà àîàé àéðä öøéëä äëùø

(a)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): Since [the Mishnah] taught that it needs intent, and it does not need Hechsher, this shows that we discuss when he is holding it in his hand. If it were on the ground, why would it not need Hechsher?!

åàé ãð÷éè ìéä áôåîéä àîàé öøéëä îçùáä àéï ìê îçùáä âãåìä îæå

1.

And if he is holding it in his mouth, why would it need intent? There is no greater intent than this!

å÷úðé ëáéöä àéï ëæéú ìà

2.

And [the Mishnah] taught a k'Beitzah yes (it is Metamei), but a k'Zayis no.

å÷ùä ëéåï ãéù áå ëáéöä àò''â ãîçéú ààøòà îèîà áìà äëùø îùåí ãñåôå ìèîà èåîàä çîåøä

(b)

Question: Since there is a k'Beitzah, even if it is on the ground, it is Metamei without Hechsher, for in the end it will have severe Tum'ah!

åìà ãîé ìîçåñø éöéàä ãáôðéí àéï øàåé ëìì ìèîà åîùåí äëé ìà îáòéà ìéä ìøáðï áëáéöä ãð÷éè áéãéä

1.

This is unlike what is Mechusar Yetzi'ah inside. It is not proper at all to be Metamei. This is why [R. Aba bar Mamal] did not ask according to Rabanan when he holds k'Beitzah in his hand (for obviously it is Metamei)!

åðøàä ìôøù ãäééðå èòîà ãîùîò ìéä ãîééøé áð÷éè áéãéä îùåí ãàæ àéëà çéãåù ìàùîåòéðï ãáòé ëáéöä åìà çùéá ëð÷éè áôåîéä

(c)

Explanation #2: It seems that the reason why it connotes to him that we discuss when he is holding it in his hand is because then there is a Chidush, to teach that k'Beitzah is required. It is not considered that he holds it in his mouth;

àáì áîçéú ààøòà ôùéèà ãáòé ëáéöä

1.

However, when it is on the ground, obviously k'Beitzah is required.

åôé' ä÷åðèøñ éù ìéùá ëîå ùôéøùúé ìòéì )áäâää - öàï ÷ãùéí îåç÷å) åëï òé÷ø

(d)

Answer (to Question (b)): We can resolve Rashi like I explained above (105a DH Mechusar), that what was not cut is like Mechusar Ma'aseh. If also, also on the ground we can consider it to be Mechusar Ma'aseh.) This is primary.

6)

TOSFOS DH umid'Seifa R. Meir Reisha Nami R. Meir

úåñôåú ã"ä åîãñéôà ø''î øéùà ðîé ø''î

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out another way we could have rejected this.)

äåä îöé ìîéîø åìéèòîéê äà ÷úðé îöéòúà äàåëì àáø îï äçé îîðä ñåôâ àú äàøáòéí åäééðå ãìà ëøáé îàéø ã÷ñáø àéðå ðåäâ àìà áèäåøä (ö"ì ááäîä èäåøä - âìéåï, öàï ÷ãùéí) áôø÷ âéã äðùä (çåìéï ãó ÷á:) (ëãôøéùéú ìòéì)

(a)

Observation: He could have said ul'Taimech (this is difficult also for you), that the middle clause taught "one who eats Ever Min ha'Chai from it receives 40 lashes." This is unlike R. Meir, who holds that [Ever Min ha'Chai] applies only to Tahor animals, in Chulin (102b).

1.

Note: The Dibur ha'Maschil shows that Tosfos had the text of Shitah Mekubetzes.

7)

TOSFOS DH Chiburei Ochlin Al Yedei Mashkin

úåñôåú ã"ä çéáåøé àåëìéï ò''é îù÷éï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos gives two explanations of how liquid joins them.)

ôé' á÷åðè' çöé æéú ðáìä îëàï åçöé æéú ðáìä îëàï åîù÷ä èåôç áàîöò åðåâò áùðéäï îçáøï ìèîà àåëìéï åîù÷éï äðåâòéï áàçã îï äçöàéï äàìå

(a)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): A half-k'Zayis of Neveilah is here, and a half-k'Zayis of Neveilah is here, and a liquid Tofe'ach (it can wet something else) is in the middle and touches both of them. It joins them to be Metamei food and drink that touch one of these halves.

åàéï çéáåø ìèåîàä çîåøä ìèîà àãí åëìéí åèòîà ìà éãòðà

1.

It is not a connection for severe Tum'ah, to be Metamei people or Kelim. I do not know the reason.

åëòðéï æä ôéøù áä÷åîõ øáä (îðçåú ãó ëã.) âáé öéøåó ëìé åçéáåø îéí îäå

(b)

Remark: He explained similarly in Menachos (24a) regarding "Tziruf of a Kli a connection of water - what is the law?"

ãôéøù äúí á÷åðèøñ ëìåîø çöé òùøåï ùðèîà áöéøåó ëìé îäå ùîèîà àçø áçéáåø îéí ëâåï àí éù ùúé çöàé òùøåï áëìé åàéï ðåâòéï åçöé òùøåï éù çåõ ìëìé )äùðé - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã, öàï ÷ãùéí îç÷åäå)

1.

Rashi explained there, i.e. half an Isaron became Tamei through Tziruf Kli. Can it be Metamei another through connection of water, e.g. if there are two half-Esronim in a Kli and they do not touch each other, and a half-Isaron outside the Kli...

åçéáåø îéí ëâåï ðéöå÷ àå öéðåø îçáø àú ùì çåõ ìëìé åàú ùáúåê äëìé åðâò èåîàä ìæä ùáëìé ùàéï ðåâò áîéí åðèîà çáéøå îùåí öéøåó ëìé îäå ùéèîà æä àú ùì çåõ áçéáåø îéí

2.

And water, i.e. a flow or pipe, connects what is outside the Kli and [one] inside the Kli, and Tum'ah touched the one in the Kli that does not touch the water, and the other one [in the Kli] became Tamei due to Tziruf Kli. Is it Metamei the one outside due to connection of water?

åãáø úéîä äåà ìåîø ùîù÷éï îçáøéï àåëìéï ì÷áì èåîàä åìèîà àçøéí ãàôéìå òåø àéï îöøôå ëãàéúà áäòåø åäøåèá (çåìéï ãó ÷éæ:)

(c)

Question #1: This is astounding, to say that liquid connects foods to receive Tum'ah or be Metamei others. Even skin does not join [meat attached to it], like it says in Chulin (117b)!

åòåã ùôéøù ùîçáøéï (ö"ì ùîúçáøéï - âîøà òåæ åäãø) ò''é ðéöå÷ åäìà àôé' ìîéí òöîï ÷é''ì ãàéï ðéöå÷ çéáåø ìèåîàä

(d)

Question #2: Also, he explained that they are connected through a flow. Even water itself, we hold that a flow is not a connection for Tum'ah!

å÷öú äéä ðøàä ìôøù ãîééøé áùðéîåçå ò''é äîéí åðãá÷å éçã

(e)

Explanation #2: It seems that we discuss when they dissolved through water and stuck together.

åîéäå ëòéï ôéøåù ä÷åðèøñ éù îùðä àçú áîñëú èäøåú (ô''ç î''ç)

(f)

Support (for Explanation #1): There is a Mishnah like Rashi's Perush, in Taharos (8:8);

òøéáä ùäéà ÷èôøñ åðéöå÷ (ö"ì åäáö÷ - öàï ÷ãùéí) îìîòìï åîù÷ä èåôç îìîèï åâ' çúéëåú ëáéöä àéðï îöèøôåú åá' îöèøôåú

1.

If a trough is inclined and a dough is above and a liquid Tofe'ach (there is enough to wet what touches it) is below and three pieces k'Beitzah (in all), they do not join. Two pieces join;

åø' éåñé àåîø àó ùúéí àéðï îöèøôåú àìà à''ë øåööåú îù÷ä åàí äéä îù÷ä òåîã àôé' ëòéï äçøãì îöèøó

2.

R. Yosi says, even two pieces join only if liquid is pressed between them. If liquid stands [not on an incline], even [tiny pieces like seeds of] mustard join.

åáúåñôúà úðéà àúøåâ ùðôøõ åúçáå áëåù àå á÷éñí àéðå çéáåø ùàéï çéáåøé àãí çéáåø

3.

The Tosefta (Uktzin 1:4) teaches that if an Esrog was split and a spindle or chip was inserted (to connect the parts), connection through man is not considered connection;

òéñä ùðéìåùä áîé ôéøåú èäåøä ùàéï ìê ãáø ùäåà îçáø àú äàåëìéï àìà ùáòä îù÷éï

i.

If a dough was kneaded with fruit juice, it is Tahor, for only the seven liquids connect food.

åãáø úéîä äåà àí àéï ìéùú [ö" îé - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã] ôéøåú îåòìú ìçáø àú ä÷îç

(g)

Question: This is astounding if kneading with fruit juice does not help to connect the flour! (Tzon Kodoshim asks that R. Akiva says so in Tevul Yom 3:4.)

åùîà ìùä ìàå ãå÷à àìà àåøçà ãîéìúà ð÷è (ãáø ùàãí) ((ö"ì ãëùàãí - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã) ìù áîé ôéøåú ôòîéí ùîé ôéøåú îçáøéí ùðé çöàé æéúéí ùì òéñä áîù÷éí äáàéí îæä ìæä

(h)

Answer: Perhaps "kneaded" is not precise. [The Tosefta] discusses a common case, that when a person kneads with fruit juice, sometimes the fruit juice connects two half-Zeisim of dough through liquid that comes from one to the other.

8)

TOSFOS DH Mah Kan Chutz l'Shalosh Machanos b'Yom ha'Kipurim...

úåñôåú ã"ä îä ëàï çåõ ìùìù îçðåú áéåí äëéôåøéí àó ìäìï áôøä àãåîä ëï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why it is not a problem of learning Lamed mi'Lamed.)

úéîä äà áôø éåä''ë ìà éãòé' ùìù îçðåú àìà îäé÷ùà ãìôø æä ôø éåí äëéôåøéí áôø÷ á''ù (ìòéì ãó ìè.) ëãôéøù á÷åðè' åîñô÷éðï àé ãáø äìîã áäé÷ù çåæø åîìîã áâ''ù àå ìà

(a)

Question: We know three Machanos for Par Yom Kipur only from a Hekesh "l'Par" - this is Par Yom Kipur, above (39a), like Rashi explained, and we are unsure whether something learned from a Hekesh returns to teach through a Gezeirah Shavah! (We should resolve from here that we can!)

åàôé' úéîöé ìåîø ãàúà îøéáåé ãçèàú [ö"ì çèàú - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã] ãáñåó äúòøåáú (ìòéì ôâ.)

1.

Implied suggestion: Perhaps we learn [Par Yom Kipur] from an inclusion of "Chatas-Chatas", above (83a).

ääåà ðîé äé÷ùà äåà

2.

Rejection: Also that is a Hekesh!

åùîà â''ù äåà

(b)

Answer #1: Perhaps that is a Gezeirah Shavah. (We know that something learned from a Gezeirah Shavah can return to teach through a Gezeirah Shavah.)

åéù (ö"ì åòåã éù - öàï ÷ãùéí) ìôøù ãôøä ÷ãùé áã÷ äáéú äéà

(c)

Answer #2: Parah [Adumah] is Kodshei Bedek ha'Bayis. (This is like the opinion that it depends on the Lamed (the second matter we want to learn); only when it is Kodshei Mizbe'ach, we do not learn it from another Lamed. For this, Parah is like Chulin.)

åäùúà ðîé àúé ùôéø ãéìéó áâ''ù îæøçä ùì éøåùìéí àò''â ãùøéôú ôøä éìôà îäæàúä ì÷îï áôø÷ áúøà (ãó ÷éâ.):

(d)

Support: Now it is fine that [R. Eliezer] learns east of Yerushalayim [for Par Yom Kipur] from a Gezeirah Shavah, even though we learn burning Parah from its Haza'os below (113a. Since only one matter is Kodshei Mizbe'ach, all agree that we learn Lamed from Lamed - Shitah Mekubetzes 51a:1.)

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF