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 66
YOMA 59-88 have been dedicated to the memory of the late Dr. Simcha
Bekelnitzky (Simcha Gedalya ben Shraga Feibush) of Queens N.Y. by his wife
and daughters. Well known in the community for his Chesed and Tzedakah, he
will long be remembered.
1) USING A LOST-AND-FOUND SEIR FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR (cont'd)
(a) The as-yet-unanswered Question: Why may the Seir not be used
for the following year, rather than pastured or let to die?
2) THE VIDUI
(b) Answer (Rava): We may not re-use the Seir the Seir owing to
a Gezeirah of Takalah (as taught in the Beraisa).
1. Answer: Fear that the owner will be Makriv the animals
at the improper time.
(c) The Gezeirah over Takalah is, apparently, a Machlokes in the
2. Question: The same should apply to all Korbanos (none
should be put out to pasture)!?
3. Answer: The Takalah is the concern over accidentally
deriving benefit from them.
4. Question: Again, that should not only apply to the Par
and Seir of Yom Kippur!?
5. Answer: Our concern is that he will offer them
improperly, which only applies to animals which, by
themselves, *are* able to be offered, but for the
1. One Beraisa allows an animal designated as a Korban
Pesach to be brought for Pesach Sheni on the following
year, while one Beraisa forbids its subsequent use.
(d) Question: But the Beraisos add that the same Din will apply
to money designated for a Korban Pesach (which does not have
an age limit)?
2. No, the Beraisos argue over how to calculate the year
(like Rebbi and Rabanan) and hence if it is possible to
use this animal next Pesach.
(e) Answer: They must, indeed, be arguing about Takalah.
(a) His Vidui did not include the transgressions of the Kohanim.
3) THE DESIGNATED USHER FOR THE SEIR
(b) Question: According to which Tana are the Kohanim omitted?
(c) Answer (R. Yirmiyah): It is not R. Yehudah who taught (61b)
that all, including Kohanim, gain Kaparah through the Seir
(d) Alternate Answer (Abaye): It could even be R. Yehudah, and
the Kohanim are certainly part of "Your Nation, Yisrael!"
(a) The Beraisa derives from Ish and Iti some of the details of
1. Ish - he may be a Zar
4) HOTZA'AH ON YOM KIPUR
2. Iti - he must have been previously designated.
(b) Question: Why might we have invalidated a Zar?
3. Iti - even when Yom Kipur falls on Shabbos.
4. Iti - even if Tamei.
(c) Answer: It is an aspect of Kaparah.
(d) Question: What activity on Shabbos does Iti permit?
(e) Answer: That if the Seir is ill the usher may carry it in
(f) Question: According to whom is this Din?
(g) Answer: It is not like R. Noson who holds that carrying a
living being is not an Isur Torah (as it 'carries itself').
(h) Alternate Answer: It could even be the opinion of R. Noson,
but being *sick* may take it out of consideration as
(a) (Rafram) The Beraisa just cited seems to imply that it is
permitted to carry on Yom Kipur, as we need to be taught
that it is permitted to carry if Yom Kipur falls on Shabbos.
5) TUMAH IS PERMITTED BY THE SEIR HAMISHTALEACH
(a) Question: How is Tumah relevant to the Seir HaMishtaleach?
6) R. ELIEZER'S APPROACH TO THE QUESTIONS
(b) Answer (R. Sheshes): If the designated usher becomes Tamei,
he enters the Azarah to usher out the Seir.
(a) R. Eliezer was asked if the Seir, if ill, could be carried.
7) THE EIGEL
(b) He avoided the question by asserting that the Seir was
healthy and strong.
(c) He was further asked the Din if the usher becomes ill, might
he send it with someone else, and he avoided this question,
(d) They further asked him for the Din if he pushed the animal
off the cliff and it did not die, and, again, he avoided the
question by asserting that it surely died.
1. The Chachamim answered the above three questions.
(e) R. Eliezer was asked if a certain person would merit Olam
Haba and he redirected their question onto a different
2. He may carry it; he may send a substitute; and, he must
go down and kill it.
(f) He was asked if it is permitted for the Shepherd to save the
sheep from the lion (see Rishonim) and he responded that
they might ask if it is permitted to save the Shepherd.
(g) The asked if it is proper to save the shepherd and he
responded that perhaps they meant the sheep.
(h) They asked if a Mamzer inherits, and he responded regarding
the Mamzer and Yibum.
(i) They asked about an unpainted spot (for the Churban) in a
Mamzer's house and he responded regarding painting the grave
marking of a Mamzer.
(j) R. Eliezer did these things because he did not wish to say
anything that he had not heard from his Rebbi.
(k) A wise woman asked him why different members of Klal Yisrael
received different death penalties for the Eigel, and R.
Eliezer redirected her wisdom to the loom.
1. Rav and Levi disputed the answer to this question:
2. One opinion was that it varied on the degree of
involvement in the transgression (active worship,
embracing, private pleasure).
3. One opinion was that it varied on the level of warning
given (warning plus witnesses, witnesses alone, or
(a) (R. Yehudah) The tribe of Levi did not worship the Eigel
8) THE ACCOSTING BABYLONIANS
(b) Question: Ravina recited the above teaching and the sons of
R. Papa b. Aba asked how there could have been parents,
children and siblings of Bnei Levi who worshiped?
(c) Answer: They were all non-Leviim.
1. Father- his maternal grandfather.
2. Brother- the son of his mother.
3. Sons- his grandchildren from his daughter.
(a) They were not actually Babylonians, but were actually
(b) The term Babylonian was used derogatorily owing to the Jews'
hatred of that People.
(c) This was comforting to R. Yosi in the supporting Beraisa.