REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Yevamos 74
YEVAMOS 74 (6 Adar I) - dedicated by Harav Avi Feldman & family in memory of
his father, ha'Tzadik Rav Yisrael Azriel ben ha'Rav Chaim (Feldman) of
Milwaukee, on his Yahrzeit.
(a) The Beraisa writes that if strands that hold back the Mitzvah of Milah
remain, the respective owners are forbidden to eat Terumah, Pesach, Kodshim
Why can Ma'aser not mean Ma'aser Beheimah?
(b) In that case, why does the Tana need to insert Pesach? What would we
have thought had he only mentioned ...
(c) Then how else might we interpret Ma'aser, in order to avoid being forced
to resolve the She'eilah whether an Areil is forbidden to eat Ma'aser Sheini
or not? Who would then be the author of the Beraisa?
- ... Pesach?
- ... Kodshim?
(a) Why are an Onan and a T'vul Yom permitted to sprinkle the ashes of the
Parah Adumah, which, when all's said and done, is considered Kodshim?
(b) Which kind of T'vul Yom is not permitted to do so?
(a) Seeing as an Areil is forbidden to eat Terumah and permitted to sprinkle
the ashes of the Parah Adumah, what do we try to prove from the fact that
the Tana does not include Areil in his list?
(b) We reject this proof however, by establishing the Beraisa like Rebbi
What does Tana de'Bei Rebbi Akiva say?
(c) The Tana who argues with Rebbi Akiva is the Tana Kama of Rebbi Yosef
ha'Bavli. Rebbi Yosef ha'Bavli permits an Onan to burn the Parah, but
forbids a Mechusar Kipurim.
What does the Tana Kama say?
(d) How does this prove that he is the Tana who argues with Rebbi Akiva.
(a) Rebbi Yitzchak (like Rebbi Akiva) forbids an Areil to eat Ma'aser. He
learns this from a 'Gezeirah-Shavah'.
(b) Why must the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' be Mufnah? What Kashya could we otherwise
ask on it?
(a) The Torah writes "Al Tochlu *Mimenu* Na", because it belongs there, and
"ve'Lo Sosiru *Mimenu* ad Boker" for the 'Gezeirah-Shavah'. It might write
"ve'ha'Nosar *Mimenu* ad Boker ba'Eish Tisrofu", because it goes together
with the phrase which is coming as an Asei to rectify the La'av.
Alternatively, what might the phrase be coming to teach us?
(b) We need the Pasuk (by Ma'aser) "Lo Achalti *Mimenu* be'Tamei", because
it belongs there.
We need the Pasuk ...
1. ... "Lo Bi'arti *Mimenu* be'Tamei" for the D'rashah of Rebbi Avahu Amar
(c) How do we know that the latter D'rashah is speaking about *Tamei*
What does he learn from this Pasuk?
2. ... "ve'Lo Nasati Mimenu le'Meis" for the D'rashah of Resh Lakish Amar
What does he learn from this Pasuk?
(d) Why do we require this D'rashah anyway? Why would we have thought that
it is forbidden?
(a) We suggest that perhaps "le'Meis" means that he did not buy a coffin and
shrouds (rather than that he did not anoint with the actual oil) with the
money of Ma'aser.
Answers to questions
What would we then deduce from there with regard to a
(b) Rav Huna Brei de'Rav Yehoshua answers that "Mimenu" implies from the
Ma'aser itself and not from its proceeds.
What does Rav Ashi mean when he
answers "Lo Nasati" Dumya de"Lo Achalti"?
(c) In any event, it is only the "Mimenu" by *Pesach* that is Mufnah (and
not the one by *Ma'aser*). Those who learn that a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' that is
Mufnah on only one side can be overruled(see above 70b.) will learn the
concession of burning Tamei Terumah as fuel from Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar
How does he learn it from the Pasuk in Korach "va'Ani Hinei Nasati
Lecha es Mishmeres *Terumosai*"?
(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Emor "Ish Ish mi'Zera Aharon ...
ve'Hu Tzaru'a O Zav, ba'Kodshim Lo Yochal"? Which Kodshim does the Pasuk
(b) We suggest that perhaps the Torah is referring to Chazeh ve'Shok, which
female Kohanim are also permitted to eat.
What is 'Chazeh ve'Shok'?
(c) How do we know that that is not what the Torah is referring to here?
(d) But why is that any different than Terumah, which is forbidden to a
(a) What is the difference between a Zav who had *two* sightings and a Zav w
ho had *three* with regard to eating Terumah?
(b) What is the equivalent regarding a Metzora?
(c) The Mishnah in Nega'im differentiates between three levels of Tum'ah.
What do we learn from the Pasuk ...
- ... "Nefesh Asher Tiga Bo ... ve'Lo Yochal min ha'Kodshim Ki im Rachatz Besaro ba'Mayim" (Emor)?
- ... "u'Va ha'Shemesh ve'Taher ve'Achar Yochal min ha'Kodashim?" (Emor)
- ... "ve'Chiper Alehah ha'Kohen ve'Taheirah"? (Tazri'a)
(a) Terumah is more stringent than Ma'aser in four regards (M.Ch.P.Z. - the
same Chumros that it has over Kodshim, as we saw above on 73b.). The Chumros
of Ma'aser over Terumah are contained in the acronym Ha.D.As.Tu.B.
(b) Despite the fact that Ma'aser has more Chumros than Terumah, Terumah is
more stringent (in the above context) than Ma'aser, for one of two reasons.
One of them, because it is punishable by Misah. Rava maintains that even
without that, the Pasuk "ve'Lo Yochal min ha'Kodshim" could only be speaking
Why is that?
(a) What do we learn from the two Pesukim written in connection with a
Yoledes "ad Me'los Yemei Taharah" and "ve'Kiper Alehah ha'Kohen
(b) What would we otherwise have thought?
(c) We have already learned how Kodshim is more Chamur than Terumah.
does Rava infer from the word "ve'Taheirah" to prove that this latter Pasuk
can only be referring to Kodshim (and the former one therefore, to Terumah)?
(a) What does the Beraisa derive from the Pasuk (in Tazri'a) "Daber el B'nei
Yisrael ... *Ishah* ki Sazri'a ... "?
Answers to questions
(b) What is then the problem with the previous D'rashah?
(c) What do we prove from the Pasuk (in the same context) "be'Chol Kodesh Lo
(d) Then how do we reconcile the fact that, on the one hand, the Pasuk is
referring to a Giyores and a Shifchah Meshuchreres, and on the other, it
spaeks about eating Terumah?