POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous dafPesachim 77
1) MISHNA: KODSHIM B'TUMAH [bottom of 46b]
(a) Five Korbanos are offered B'tumah, but not eaten.
2) GEMARA: TUMAH HUDCHAH B'TZIBUR - INTRODUCTION
(b) The Korban Pesach is brought B'tumah and is eaten.
(a) Question: What does the number (5) in the Mishna come
3) TUMAH HUDCHAH O HUTRAH B'TZIBUR
(b) Answer: Korbanos Chagigah might have been considered.
1. These Korbanos are of a "public" nature.
(c) Question: List the Seirim of the festivals!
2. There is a set time for these Korbanos.
3. They do not, however, override Shabbos.
4. As such, they do not override Tumah, either.
(d) Answer: They are included in the Zivchei Shalmei
Tzibbur (see Rashi).
(e) Question: Then we need not have listed the Seirim of
Rosh Chodesh either!
(f) Answer [77a]: Rosh Chodesh is not called Moed, and
could have been mistakenly excluded.
1. We are taught that Rosh Chodesh is called "Moed."
(g) Question: Are all the cases of the Mishna derived from
2. This is based on the teaching of Abaye regarding
the "Moed" for destruction.
(h) Answer: Indeed, the word Moed (to permit Tumah) may be
found by all the festival Korbanos.
(i) Question: Why do we need a separate reference to Moed
by *each* of the festivals?
(j) Answer: Each festival has unique qualities which, alone
or in combination, would override Shabbos and Tumah,
but would not yield the others.
1. Tamid is constant and entirely burnt (unlike the
2. Pesach carries Kares (unlike Tamid).
3. Tamid plus Pesach both have a stringent side
(unlike the other communal Korbanos) hence the
need for the Pasuk.
4. The Pasuk could refer only to Korbanos which bring
atonement (and not Omer and Shtei HaLechem).
5. The Omer and Shtei HaLechem are important in that
they come to permit (unlike the others).
(a) Tumah in community is [presumably] overridden, not
4) R. YEHOSHUA ON TUMAH B'TZIBUR #1
1. R. Yehudah is the only Tana who holds that Tumah
(b) The Tzitz [presumably] does not address edible parts of
the Korban since R. Eliezer is the only Tanna who holds
that the Tzitz addresses edibles while R. Yosi holds
that it does not.
2. Their Machlokes regarding the Tzitz establishes R.
Yehudah's position as Hutrah and R. Shimon's as
1. Question: Is the Mishna (which permits the Omer
and Shtei HaLechem) then not like R. Yehoshua?
(b) Question: How will R. Eliezer use Habasar V'hadam?
2. R. Yehoshua holds (based on "V'asisa Olasecha
Habasar V'hadam") that if either the blood or meat
become unfit then the other is unfit.
3. R. Eliezer holds (based on "V'dam Z'vachecha
Yishafech") that if there is no meat there can
still be blood.
(c) Answer: It teaches that both blood and meat are thrown
(there is a gap in front of the Mizbeach).
(d) Question: How will R. Yehoshua use V'dam Zivachecha
(e) Answer: That Pasuk is right next to "eat the meat!"
(f) Question: Why (acc. to R. Yehoshua) do we need two
5) R. YEHOSHUA ON TUMAH B'TZIBUR #2
(g) Answer: One for Olah and one for Shlamim, each having
its unique qualities.
1. Olah is entirely burnt (unlike Shlamim).
(h) Question: How will R. Eliezer deal with "eat the meat?"
2. Shlamim is "eaten" two ways (unlike Olah).
(i) Answer: It teaches that the meat cannot be eaten if the
blood is not sprinkled.
(j) Question: Then the *whole* Pasuk is used for that
purpose (and there is no Pasuk for blood without meat)?
(k) Answer: The order of the Pasuk is reversed in mid-verse
for the extra teaching.
(l) Question: And R. Yehoshua?
(m) Answer: The Halachah that meat cannot be eaten before
the blood is sprinkled is a Kal V'Chomer.
1. Emurim, if absent, are dispensable, yet when they
are present they are indispensable.
(n) Question: And R. Eliezer?
2. Blood, if absent, is indispensable, all the more
so when present.
(o) Answer: The Torah even writes that which could be
(p) Question: And R. Yehoshua?
(q) Answer: Wherever we can apply logic, we do so.
(a) Question: Is our Mishna not like R. Yehoshua?
1. We need both, the blood and the meat.
(b) Answer: The Tzitz addresses that which goes up (onto
2. The Tzitz does not address the edibles.
3. How can the edible Korbanos be brought B'tumah?
1. Question: What about the Omer and Shtei HaLechem
(nothing goes up)?
2. Answer: The requirement of both the blood and the
meat is only by sacrifices, not by meal-offerings.
3. Question: But we find that R. Yehoshua invalidates
4. Answer: That teaching is *according* to R.
Yehoshua, and *not according* to R. Yehoshua (this
Tana carries R. Yehoshua's view further to meal
5. Question #1: Who is this, more stringent, Tana?
6. Question #2: We find in a Bereisa (wherein R. Yosi
states his concurrence with the opinions of R.
Eliezer and R. Yehoshua in respect to both
sacrifices and meal-offerings) that R. Yehoshua
*did* hold his view even by meal-offerings!
7. Indeed, R. Yehoshua holds that the Tzitz *does*
8. Question: Then why did we say above "according to
R. Yehoshua - Pasul?"
9. Answer: That refers to that which was lost or
10. Question: The according to whom does the Tana
teach "if it became Tamei?"
11. Answer: According to R. Eliezer.
12. Question: That is obvious?!
(i) R. Eliezer permits when the ingredients are
13. Answer: It must be according to R. Yehoshua.
(ii) Is it news that he permits when they are
14. Question #1: But he taught that it is "Pesula?"
15. Question #2: But he taught that if both the meat
and the Cheilev were Tamei, there is no Zerika?
(i) This implies that R. Yehoshua holds that the
Tzitz does not address that which "goes up."
16. Answer: This Mishnah does, indeed, follow R.
Yehoshua, here it is "L'chatchilah," there,
(ii) Neither does it address edibles.
17. Question: Where do we see that R. Yehoshua makes
such a distinction?
18. Answer: In the Bereisa, "...if he did the Zerika,
it is effective."
19. Question #1: "Pesula" means even b'Di'eved.
20. Question #2: "Five things are brought B'Tumah"
21. Answer: Here it is b'Yachid, here it is b'Tzibur.