ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafPesachim 62
(a) According to Rav Ashi, the source of the Machlokes Rabah and Rav Chisda
(whether a Machsheves Areilim from the Shechitah to the Zerikah is effective
or not) is the Pasuk "ve'Nirtzah Lo Lechaper Alav" - revolves around whether
a Machshavah for someone who is not a Bar Kaparah like the owner, renders it
Pasul or not. They argue by a Machshavah which is entirely she'Lo
li'Menuyav who are also Areilim (and therefore not B'nei Kaparah) - even
though there are Menuyim who are not Areilim. Rav Chisda renders the Korban,
Pasul, because of the Machsheves she'Lo li'Menuyav), Rabah renders it
(b) Even Rabah will agree that the same Machshavah for Areilim who *are*
Menuyim (even from the Shechitah to the Zerikah), renders the Pesach, Pasul.
(c) Rabah learns from "ve'Nirtzah Lo Lechaper Alav", 'Alav ve'Lo Al Chavero'
- 'Alav, Dumyah Didei, Mah Hu de'Bar Kaparah' ... .
(d) Rav Chisda holds that it renders the Korban Pasul, since - 'Ho'il' - the
Areil could circumcise himself; this does indeed render him a Bar Kaparah.
1. In the case of 'ha'Ofeh mi'Yom-Tov le'Chol', Rabah holds that one is not
Chayav, because of Ho'il' (since guests might come) - even Lekula, because
there is no act that still needs to be performed (it is not Mechusar
Ma'seh); whereas in our case, where the Areil will have to have his Orlah
removed, it is Mechusar Ma'seh, and Rabah will not hold 'Ho'il'.
2. As for Rav Chisda, he holds of 'Ho'il Lechumra (like in our case, even
though it is Mechusar Ma'seh), but not by 'ha'Ofeh mi'Yom-Tov le'Chol',
which is Lekula (even though it is not Mechusar Ma'seh).
(a) If the Beraisa 'Ho'il ve'Orlah Poseles, ve'Tum'ah Poseles. Mah Tum'ah,
Lo Asah Miktzas Tum'ah ke'Chol Tum'ah, Af Orlah' ... refers to Tum'as Gavri
(when some of the designees are Tamei), then why should Miktzas Orlah be any
different? If one Shechted the Pesach on behalf of some Areilim and some
Mulim, it is just as Kasher as Miktzas Tum'ah? So it must be talking about
(b) The Seifa of the Beraisa 'Danin Davar she'Eino Noheg be'Chol ha'Zevachim
(Orlah) mi'Davar she'Eino Noheg be'Chol ha'Zevachim (Tum'ah), ve'Al
Yochi'ach Z'man' ... - must be speaking about Tum'as Gavri; because
otherwise (if it was talking about Tum'as Basar, why should it not apply to
(c) The Pesulim of Orlah and Tum'ah do not apply to all Kodshim - because
the owners of other Korbanos are not obligated to eat them, in which case
they may send them through someone else; the owner of a Korban Pesach on the
other hand, who *is* obligated to eat his Korban, may not eat it when he is
Tamei, and sending his Korban through someone else will be ineffective.
(d) Indeed, the Reisha is speaking by Tum'as Basar and the Seifa by Tum'as
Gavri; the Beraisa is asking from Tum'ah, irrespective which one.
(a) Alternatively, answers the Gemara, both the Reisha and the Seifa speak
about Tum'as Basar. And there is one aspect of Tum'as Basar that applies to
the Korban Pesach and not to other Kodshim: and that is if Nitma Basar,
ve'Cheilev Kayam, which (according to Rebbi Yehoshua) is Kasher by other
Kodshim, but Pasul by the Pesach (vice-versa will be Kasher in both cases).
(b) The reason that the Pesach is Pasul in the previous case, is because,
since the flesh of the Pesach became Tamei, it cannot be eaten, and we have
already learnt many times that (unlike all other Korbanos) the prime purpose
of the Pesach is to be eaten.
1. ... Tum'as Gavri is Hutrah mi'Chelalah - by the Korban Tzibur, which is
brought if, for example. the majority of Kahanim are Tamei.
2. ... Tum'as Basar Hutrah mi'Chelalah - by the Korban Pesach, which is
brought mainly to be eaten, so that, when the Torah permits a Tzibur a
Pesach ha'Ba be'Tum'ah, it is permitting not only, the bringing of the
Korban, but even its eating (which is the main objective of bringing it)
even though the meat will inevitably become Tamei.
(a) Rebbi Yehoshua says that even if someone Shechts another animal as a
Pesach *bi'Zemano* - it is Kasher, because of the principle 'Kol ha'Zevachim
she'Nizbechu she'Lo Lisheman, Kesherim'. The fact that the former was
Shechted bi'Zemano, only enhances the principle, since a Pesach bi'Zemano
*is Kasher* as a Pesach (so we will learn it from a Kal va'Chomer from
another Korban that was Shechted as a Pesach she'Lo bi'Zemano, which is
(b) If one were to Shecht the same animal she'Lo bi'Zemano, even Rebbi
Eliezer would agree that it is Kasher. According to Rav Chisda, why does
Rebbi Eliezer not apply here, the principle of 'Ho'il' (since it is Pasul
bi'Zemano, it is also Pasuk she'Lo bi'Zemano)?
(c) Rav Chisda answers that Rebbi Eliezer learns the distinction between
bi'Zemano and she'Lo bi'Zemano from a Pasuk - because the Torah writes in Bo
"va'Amartem Zevach Pesach *Hu*" - 'Hu' be'Havayaso, Lo Hu Leshum Acheirim,
ve'Lo Acheirim Lishemo' (his reason for saying Pasul against the opinion of
Rebbi Yehoshua). The Torah has however compared 'Hu Leshum Acheirim' and
'Acheirim Lishemo', from which we learn that just as the Pesach is *only*
Pasul if it is Shechted as another Korban *bi'Zemano*, so too, is another
Korban that is Shechted as a Pesach Pasul only bi'Zemano'.
(a) Sefer Yuchsin is a Sefer which contained all the oral Torah concerning
the book of Tenach 'Divrei ha'Yamim'.
(b) Rebbi Yochanan told Rav Simla'i that he did not want to learn Sefer
Yuchsin with him because one does not teach Sefer Yuchsin to anyone from Lud
or from Neherda'a (possibly because they were not Meyuchsin), and certainly
not Rav Simla'i, who was born in Lud and lived in Neherda'a.
(c) Rebbi Yochanan consider Rav Simla'i's request to learn Sefer Yuchsin in
three months, ridiculous - because, if Beruryah, the wife of Rebbi Meir,
daughter of Rebbi Chanina ben Teradyon, could not even complete it in three
*years*, how could he possibly expect to finish it in three *months*?
(d) Beruriah was able to learn three hundred Sugyos from three hundred
Rabbanim in one day.
(a) Rebbi Yochanan told Rav Simla'i that Lishemo ve'she'Lo Lishemo is Pasul,
whereas le'Ochlav ve'she'Lo le'Ochlav is Kasher - because 1. the former is
a an intrinsic Pesul in the body of the Korban Pesach (whereas the latter is
an external Pesul); 2. because it is permanent and cannot be canceled
(whereas the former can: by giving it to Ochlav only); 3. because it is
applicable by all four Avodos (whereas the latter is restricted to the
Shechitah); 4. because it applies to a Korban Tzibur as well as to a Korban
Yachid (whereas the latter is restricted to a Korban Yachid - since it is
only applicable by the Korban Pesach).
(b) According to Rava, Rebbi Yochanan only gave Rav Simla'i three reasons -
because reasons 1. and 2. are one and the same; it is permanent because it
is an intrinsic Pesul.
(a) From the time that Sefer Yuchsin was forgotten - the many explanations
contained in it became forgotten, too, and the wisdom of the Chachamim
(b) Between "Atzel" and "Atzel" - they Darshened four hundred camel-loads
(c) 'between Atzel and Atzel' means between two Pesukim, each containing
the word "Atzel".