(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Yoma 17


OPINIONS: The Mishnah in Tamid states that the Lishkas ha'Tela'im was in the *northwest*, while the Mishnah in Midos puts it in the *southwest* of the Beis ha'Moked. Rav Ada brei d'Rav Yitzchak resolves this apparent contradiction by stating that the Lishkas ha'Tela'im was "Aktzuyei Mekatzya." Because of this, when approached from the south, the Lishkas ha'Tela'im appeared to be in the northwest, but when approached from the north, it appeared to be in the southwest. What does "Aktzuyei Mekatzya" mean?
(a) RASHI and the RA'AVAD (in Tamid) and ROSH (in Midos) explain that the Lishkas ha'Tela'im was "elongated." Since it occupied almost the entire western side of the Beis ha'Mokad, if one looked from the north, there appeared to be more of it to the south, and vice versa.

The VILNA GAON (Tamid 3:3) suggests that there was an important reason for extending the Lishkas ha'Tela'im. The southern part of the Beis ha'Moked (i.e. the side closer to the Azarah) was Chol, according to the Mishnah (Midos 1:6; see Rashi 15b DH Shetayim), while the northern half was Kodesh. If the entrance to the Lishkas ha'Tela'im would have been in the south, since it was entered from an area of Kodesh the entire Lishkah would have been Kodesh. But the excrement deposited by the sheep is disrespectful to an area that is Kodesh. Therefore, they extended the Lishkah to the north, where its entrance led to non-Kodesh area (i.e. the northern side of the Beis ha'Mokad), making the Lishkah, too, Chol.

(b) Rabeinu Chananel (in his first explanation) and the Aruch, citing Rav Moshe ha'Darshan, suggest that "Aktzuyei Maktzei" means that the Lishkas ha'Tela'im was "set away" from the corner of the Bei ha'Mokad, almost in the center of the western side of the Beis ha'Moked (but a bit closer to the south, as the Gemara concludes). Therefore, when one looked in from the north, since it was still a distance away it looked as though it was in the southwest corner, and vice versa.

(c) The BA'AL HA'ME'OR (in our Sugya) appears to have learned that the Lishkas ha'Tela'im was indeed in the southwest corner of the Beis ha'Mokad, but the southern wall of the Lishkas ha'Tela'im was not the southern wall of the Beis ha'Mokad. Rather, its southern wall began at the corner, and protruded north into the Beis ha'Moked at an angle as it projected towards the east (see mini-diagram below; north is up). Therefore, coming from the south it seemed as though the Lishkas ha'Tela'im's main area was more towards the north and v.v.


(c) The RAMBAM (Perush ha'Mishnayos, Midos 1:6) suggests what seems to be an original answer to the Gemara's question. He explains that Lishkas ha'Tela'im was in the southwestern corner of the *Beis ha'Moked*, which was at the same time the northwest of the *Azarah*. That is, the Mishnah in Midos which puts the Lishkas ha'Tela'im on the northwest is not referring to a side of Beis ha'Mokad, but of the Azarah. Although this explanation is brilliant and resolves the contradiction, nevertheless the Gemara itself seems to suggest other explanations! (In fact, RIVA, in Tosfos 17b DH v'Ha, asks why the Gemara did *not* offer this seemingly simple answer.)

Rabeinu Chananel in our Sugya makes the same suggestion as the Rambam, and although there appears to be some words missing in our texts of his commentary, it seems that he means to say one of two things: 1. Either he learned that this is the intention of "Aktzuyei Mekatzya" -- the Lishkah was "set into a corner" from two different perspectives. (See Chazon Ish, Orach Chayim 126:16) 2. The Rambam and Rabeinu Chananel may have learned that when the Gemara continues "u'Mistabra...," it is *rejecting* the answer of Aktzuyei Mekatzya, and insisting that the Lishkas ha'Tela'im was indeed entirely in the southeast of the Beis ha'Mokad. Since the Gemara does not explain explicitly how to resolve this with the Mishnah in Tamid, that Rambam gives his suggestion for what the Gemara must have meant.


Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,