ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Horayos 9
HORAYOS 9-10 - One week of study material has been dedicated by Mrs. Rita
Grunberger of Queens, N.Y., in loving memory of her husband, Reb Yitzchok
Yakov ben Eliyahu Grunberger. Irving Grunberger helped many people quietly
in an unassuming manner and is dearly missed by all who knew him. His
Yahrzeit is 10 Sivan.
(a) Ravina asked Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak what the Din will be (vis-a-vis a
Korban Oleh ve'Yored), according to Rebbi Yirmiyah and Rebbi Yossi Hagelili,
in the case of a king who is stricken with Tzara'as. Generally, a king who
is stricken with Tzara'as - is forced to abdicate his throne (as we shall
see on the next Daf).
(b) 'Miftar Patur' means that he is only Patur as long as he is king, but
becomes Chayav once his status changes; 'Midcha Dachi' means - that since he
was Patur at the time that he contracted Tzara'as, he is not just Patur but
(c) When Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak replied 'Dilach O De'Gaza', he meant -
that seeing as the Korban is purchased with the money belonging to the Nasi,
he remains Patur, seeing as, losing his throne does not mean that he also
loses his wealth (and the reason that the king is not subject to a Korban
Oleh ve'Yored is due to his wealth, as we explained earlier).
(a) According to Rebbi Akiva, a Kohen Gadol is Patur from a Korban Oleh
ve'Yored. He learns it from the Pasuk "Zeh Korban Aharon u'Vanav" -
implying that the only Korban that a Kohen Gadol is obligated to bring is
his daily Korban Chavitin, to preclude a Korban Oleh ve'Yored).
(b) We try to refute this proof however, by suggesting that the Torah only
precludes him from bringing the Minchah that a very poor man brings - since
after all, like the Chavitei Kohen Gadol, it comprised a tenth of an Eifah
of fine flour (but not from that of Dalus [the bird Korban] and of Ashirus
[the animal Korban]).
(c) We counter this suggestion by quoting the Pasuk "Ve'chiper Alav ha'Kohen
al Chataso Asher Chata me'Achas me'Eileh" - from which we learn that whoever
is Patur from one is Patur from the other,
(a) We have a problem with this however, from Rebbi Akiva in our Mishnah,
where he ruled that, whereas a Nasi is ...
1. ... Chayav a Korban by Bituy Sefasayim and Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav, he
(b) Bearing in mind that the Pasuk there writes (in connection with the
Nasi) "Ve'hayah Ki Ye'esham le'Achas me'Eileh", the problem is - why he did
not Darshen there (by Nasi) that whoever is Patur from one of them is Patur
from all three (like he Darshened by Kohen Gadol).
2. ... Patur by Shemi'as Kol.
(c) Initially - we differentiate between "me'Achas" (which he does Darshen
in this way) and ''le'Achas" (which he does not).
(d) We conclude that in the latter Pasuk, Rebbi Akiva explains "le'Achas" to
mean that even if only one of the three applies, then the king is Chayav to
bring that one. He would in fact, have Darshened "me'Achas me'Eileh" in
exactly the same way, if it had been written by Dal or Ashir. However,
because it is written by Dalei Dalus (in which it is similar to the Minchas
Chavitin, as we explained ealier, and in conjunction with the initial
D'rashah by Minchas Chavitin ["Zeh Korban Aharon u'Vanav"]).
(a) In the case of pure Shogeg, our Mishnah recaps that ...
1. ... by other Mitzvos, a Yachid brings a Kisbah or Se'irah, and the Nasi,
a Sa'ir. The Kohen Gadol and the Beis-Din bring - a Par.
(b) Everyone agrees that Beis-Din are Patur from a Korban Oleh ve'Yored, and
that a Yachid, a Nasi and a Kohen Gadol are Chayav for two of the three
cases. Rebbi Shimon exempts the Kohen Gadol - from Tum'as Mikdash
2. ... by Avodah-Zarah, a Yachid, a Nasi and a Kohen Gadol bring a Se'irah.
Beis-Din bring - a Par for an Olah, and a Sa'ir for a Chatas.
3. ... a Yachid and a Nasi are subject to an Asham Taluy - whereas a Kohen
Gadol and Beis-Din are Patur.
4. ... Beis-Din is Patur from an Asham Vaday - whereas a Yachid, a Nasi and
a Kohen Gadol are all Chayav.
(c) ... and a Nasi from Shemi'as Kol (like Rebbi Akiva).
(d) According to the Tana Kama, those who are Chayav all bring a Korban Oleh
ve'Yored. Rebbi Eilezer however - obligates a Nasi to bring a Sa'ir.
(a) Rebbi Shimon, in a Beraisa, presents 'K'lalim'. He equates a Nasi with a
Yachid as regards an Asham Taluy. He equates a Nasi with a Yachid regarding
an Asham Vaday. What does he say about a Kohen Gadol and Beis-Din?
(b) He exempts Beis-Din from Korban Oleh ve'Yored, and he obligates both a
Nasi and a Kohen Gadol to bring it, though he exempts a Nasi from Shemi'as
Kol and a Kohen Gadol from Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav - implying that a the
latter is Chayav for Shemi'as Kol and Bituy Sefasayim.
(c) Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Yehoshua reconciles this with the Seifa, where
Rebbi Shimon equates a Kohen Gadol with the Beis-Din, who are Patur from all
three cases of Korban Oleh ve'Yored - by establishing the latter by Dalei
Dalus, and the former, by Dalus.
(d) Rebbi Shimon, we conclude, agrees with Rebbi Akiva in one point, and
argues with him in another. In fact, he ...
1. ... agrees with what he says - that a Kohen Gadol is Patur from the
Minchah of Dalei Dalus.
2. ... argues with him - when he exempts him from the Korban of a Dal (and
of an Ashir) as well (as we just explained a little earlier).
(a) Chizkiyah learns from the Pasuk "Ve'nichresah ha'Nefesh ha'Hi mi'Toch
ha'Kahal" - that according to Rebbi Shimon in our Mishnah, a Kohen Gadol is
Patur from a Korban for Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav), since he does not share
the Korban of the Kahal on Yom Kipur).
(b) In that case we ask, by the same token, a Nasi should be Patur from a
Korban too (seeing as he does not share the Korban of the Kahal throughout
the year). We reply (bearing in mind that this Pasuk occurs in the Parshah
of Yom Kipur) - that since he does share the Kahal's Korban on Yom Kipur, he
is not precluded like a Kohen Gadol is.
(c) This leaves us however, with the Kashya, that Kohanim, who do not share
in the Kahal's Korban on Yom Kipur either, should also be Patur from the
Korban of Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav. We reject the suggestion that Kohanim
are at least equal to the rest of the Kahal regarding other Mitzvos
throughout the year - because a Kohen Gadol is, too (yet he is precluded).
(d) Rava finally amends Chizkiyah's Limud to read - that a Kohen Gadol is
exempt from Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav because he is exempt from the Chet of
the individuals of the Kahal (by S'tam Shigegas Ma'aseh [not on Yom Kipur,
but) the whole year round (which neither a Nasi nor Kohanim Hedyotos are).
(a) Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah, obligates a Nasi to bring a Sa'ir for a
Korban Oleh ve'Yored. Rebbi Yochanan restricts this ruling to Tum'as Mikdash
ve'Kodashav - which is Chayav Kareis be'Meizid, like cases of Chatas Kavu'a
be'Shogeg (but not to Shemi'as Kol and Shevu'as Bituy - which are not).
(b) Rav Papa proves this from the fact that Rebbi Eliezer confines his
ruling to a Nasi, because, if not for Rebbi Yochanan - he ought to have
included a Kohen Gadol by Shemi'as Kol and Bituy Sefasayim.
(c) The reason that he does not at least include a Kohen Gadol by Tum'as
Mikdash ve'Kodashav is - because he holds like Rebbi Shimon, who exempts a
Kohen Gadol from a Korban by Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav.
(a) Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Yehoshua queried Rav Papa. Perhaps he asked, Rebbi
Eliezer refers to all three cases of Korban Oleh ve'Yored (i.e. that a Kohen
Gadol brings a Par), because he holds like Rebbi Akiva, who says - that a
Kohen Gadol is Patur from a Korban Olah Oleh ve'Yored.
(b) To which Rav Papa replied that in any event, Rebbi Akiva did not exempt
the Kohen Gadol from a Par - in which case, had Rebbi Eliezer concurred with
his opinion, he should have added that to the Sa'ir of a Nasi.
(c) We conclude 've'Su Lo Midi' - from which it is clear that Rav Huna b'rei
de'Rav Yehoshua accepted his answer.
(a) Rebbi Yochanan states - that Rebbi Eliezer concedes that a Nasi is Patur
from an Asham Taluy (even though it is Chayav Kareis by Meizid just like a
***** Hadran Alach Horeh Kohen Mashi'ach *****
(b) A Beraisa expert cited a Beraisa in front of Rav Sheishes (regarding a
Nasi) 'Asham Taluy Ba al Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav' - because he is Chayav
Kareis by Meizid, like a fixed Chatas.
(c) The author of this Beraisa must be - Rebbi Eliezer, who applies this
S'vara to obligate a Nasi by Korban Oleh ve'Yored.
(d) The problem with this Beraisa is - that it does not conform with the
previous statement of Rebbi Yochanan (in which case, the Beraisa has no
***** Perek Kohen Mashi'ach *****
(a) Our Mishnah rules - that a Kohen Gadol who sins and is removed from
office, or a king who sins and abdicates - needs to bring a Par and a Sa'ir
(b) A Kohen Gadol who is removed from office and then sins still brings a
Par, says the Tana. A Nasi in the same circumstances however - has the Din
of a Hedyot (in which case he brings a Kisbah or Se'irah).