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


by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Yoma 49

YOMA 49-50 (6 & 7 Adar) were dedicated by Harav Avi Feldman & family in memory of his father, the Tzadik Harav Yisrael Azriel ben Harav Chaim (Feldman) of Milwaukee (Yahrzeit: 6 Adar)


(a) Question: But the Beraisa specifically teaches that Holachah (together with Kabalah and Zerikah) with the left hand is Pesulah!?
(b) Answer: Teyuvta.
(c) Question: But we know that R. Sheshes was aware of this Beraisa, as he cited this very Beraisa as a question on R. Chisda!?
(d) Answer: He asked R. Chisda from this Beraisa after it had been pointed out to him by the questioners.
(e) Question: But R. Chisda supported himself from a Pasuk (that Holachah is Kesheirah BeZar)!?
(f) Answer: The Zar only served to hold the blood, not to carry it at all.
(g) Question (R. Papa): Would it be permitted for one Kohen to do the Chafinah and place it into the hands of the Kohen Gadol (are both VeLakach and BeHeivi required, or is a Chafnayim-full enough)?
(h) Answer: Teiku.
(a) Question (R. Yehoshua b. Levi): If the Kohen Gadol dies after placing the flour into the Kaf, may his replacement use his Chafinah?
1. (R. Chanina) See the questions of the earlier ones!
2. Question: But it seems that R. Chanina was older than R. Yehoshua b. Levi (since the latter turned to the former who permitted drinking Shachalayim on Shabbos)!?
i. Drinking should be clearly permitted (as we learned from the Mishnah)?!
ii. Rather, he permitted pounding it and drinking it.
(1) Question: If we are speaking of danger, then this is not news; if not, then how could it be permitted?
(2) Answer: It was a situation of danger, but he was asking for medical advice.
(3) Question: Why ask this of R. Chanina?
(4) Answer: He was an expert, as indicated by his claim regarding the fatality rate of an injury from a mule.
i) Question: But there are survivors!?
ii) Answer: He was speaking of the live wound.
iii) Question: But we see those injuries heal!?
iv) Answer: He was referring to a red mule with white hooves whose injury does not heal.
3. Answer: We see from R. Yehoshua's use of the title Rebbi that R. Chanina must have been his senior (and R. Chanina meant to point out that the later scholars asked like the earlier ones).
4. Question: But we find that R. Chanina was *not* in doubt regarding the use of the Chafinah.
i. He taught that the replacement Kohen must slaughter a new Par as the Pasuk implies "BePar VeLo BeDamo Shel Par."
ii. He also taught that the Chafinah done before the Shechitah is meaningless (thus clearly implying that the replacement Kohen may not use the dead Kohen's Chafinah).
5. Answer: We must explain R. Chanina's comment regarding R. Yehoshua's question as making two points:
i. R. Yehoshua's question implies that he holds (not like me, R. Chanina) "even with the Dam Par."
ii. His question also echoes those (earlier) who argue with me.
(b) Answer (R. Papa relating to R. Yehoshua's original query): It depends on whether the Kohen Gadol must make a second Chafinah inside.
1. If he does, then reusing the previous Kohen's Chafinah should be fine.
2. If not, then it is a good question!
(c) (R. Huna) The opposite is the case since then it is *surely* lacking a Chafinah since his hands are not identical (and the question of reusing the Chafinah is only if there is *not* a second Chafinah)!
(d) We see from our Mishnah (VeKach Hi Midasah) that there is a second Chafinah.
(e) Not necessarily (the phrase in the Mishnah may only permit making a Midah or require an exact measure).

(f) We see, then, from a Beraisa which details the procedure (and its difficulty!) of the second Chafinah that, indeed, there is are two.
(a) Question: May the replacement Kohen use the Dam Par of the first (based on how to interpret Par)?
(b) Answer: R. Chanina holds *not* with its Dam; Resh Lakish holds *even with* its Dam; R. Ami holds *not* and R. Yitzhok Nafcha holds *even with*.
(c) Question (R. Ami of R. Yitzhok Nafcha): If you were correct, then the appointees to a Korban Pesach should be able to withdraw until Zerikah (not Shechitah as in the Mishnah)?!
(d) Answer: Korban Pesach is different (based on the Pasuk).
(e) Question (on the *even with* position): If you were correct, then the Mishnah should allow Pidyon even with a slaughtered Seh (yet the Mishnah restricts this along with other marginal sheep, e.g. Tereifah, Kilayim, etc.)?!
(f) Answer: Pidyon is different (it is linked to Pesach).
(g) Question: Then the link should extend to all details of the Pesach applying to Pidyon Peter Chamor!?
(h) Answer: The repetition of Tifdeh gives more options by Pidyon.
(i) Question: Then the options should include those things which the cited Mishnah had just restricted!?
(j) Answer: If we would be *that* inclusive, then the link of Seh would lose its function.
Next daf


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