POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous dafYoma 57
YOMA 57 - David Warm of Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, has dedicated the
Daf in memory of his dear late mother and father, Devorah bas Dovid & Arieh
Leib ben Zvi.
1) THE SHECHINAH AND TUMAH
(a) We are taught that even when we are Tamei the Shechinah is
2) VECHEN YA'ASEH
(b) The blasphemer challenged R. Chanina by calling us Tamei
(based on the Pasuk indicating that such will be the case in
(c) R. Chanina responded that the Shechinah is with us even so.
(a) The Beraisa uses this Pasuk as a Hekesh (to connect Par-Sair
and Heichal-Kodesh HaKodoshim).
3) HAZA'AH IN THE HEICHAL
(b) Question: Can something which is, itself, derived from a
Hekesh (Par from Sair) in turn teach a Hekesh (Heichal from
(c) Answer: This is not called a Hekesh (but rather Heimenu
(d) Question: But what according to the opinion that considers
Heimenu as a Hekesh?
(e) Answer: The "place" is learned from one another (such that
each Hekesh deals with its own issues and no Lamed is being
(f) Alternate Answer: The Limudim can both be learned as one
(Chutz from Penim).
(a) R. Elazar b. R. Yosi reported seeing drops of Dam (from the
Sair on Yom Kipur) on the Paroches in Rome, contrary to the
Tana Kama who teaches that the Haza'ah is *not* on the
4) IF THE BLOOD OF THE PAR AND SAIR BECAME MIXED
(b) Question: Perhaps those drops were from other Korbanos (e.g.
the Par He'elem Davar)?
(c) Answer: R. Elazar saw the (eight) drops in line.
(d) The Beraisa teaches the same sequence regarding the other
1. R. Elazar reported seeing *those* drops (and while
those are not done on the Paroches, it is not Me'akev
is some drops fall on it).
2. Question: Perhaps those were from Yom Kipur?
3. Answer: He saw they were not in line.
(a) If they became mixed before the Haza'ah Bifnim:
1. (Rava) He does one set of Haza'os and it counts for
(b) If they became mixed after the Par LeMa'alah:
2. R. Yirmiyah sharply put down Rava's suggestion.
i. Rava ends up with the Sair LeMa'alah being
sprinkled before the Par LeMatah, which is Pasul.
ii. Rather, he must sprinkle one sent for Par and
another set for Sair.
1. R. Papa suggested to do one Haza'ah LeMatah for both
and then a Sair LeMa'alah.
2. Rava told R. Papa that the insult leveled by R.
Yirmiyah would apply doubly to this suggestion which
repeated the earlier error.
5) SHIRAYIM OR DECHUYAH
3. Rather, he must sprinkle for Par LeMatah and then offer
a full set for Sair.
(c) If the cups of the Par and Sair became confused:
1. He sprinkles two sets from each cup.
(d) If only some of each of the Damim became mixed:
1. It seems obvious that he would use the non-mixed Dam!
2. The question is whether the mixed Dam would be
considered Shirayim (and placed on the Yesod) or it is
Dechuyah (and spilt into the Amah).
3. (R. Papa) It is clearly Dechuyah.
i. Even the opinion (R. Elazar b. R. Shimon, below)
which maintains that one cup makes the others
Shirayim would say so only if the contents of the
cups could be, but were not, sprinkled.
4. (R. Huna b. R. Yehoshua) It is clearly Shirayim.
ii. Here, however, they *could not* be sprinkled and
would be Dechuyah.
i. Even the opinion (Tana Kama, below) which
maintains that one cup makes the other Dechuyah
would say so only when nothing was offered from
ii. In our case, parts of each cup *were* sprinkled.
(a) The Machlokes (referred to above) is reported in the Beraisa
which deals with a Chatas whose Dam was collected in four
(b) If the Matanos were offered partially from each cup:
1. (Tana Kama) The remaining Dam in each cup is Shirayim.
2. If, however, the Matanos were offered from only one
cup, then the Dam in the remaining cups is Dechuyah.
3. (R. Elazar b. R. Shimon) This second case would still
make the rest Shirayim.
4. Question: How will R. Elazar learn the limitation of
VeEs Damo (even partial Dam) Yishpoch?
5. Answer: It will preclude the Shirayim remaining in the