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


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Yoma 27

YOMA 27, 28, 29 (16 Shevat), 30 - have been dedicated by Gitle Bekelnitzky for the 38th Yahrzeit of Leah bas Mordechai Dovid and Chasya (Bikelnitzky), mother of her late husband, Simcha Bekelnitzky.


(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk ..
  1. ... "ve'Ata u'Vanecha Itach Tishmeru es Kehunaschem" (Korach)?
  2. ... "ve'Shachat es Ben ha'Bakar Lifnei Hashem, ve'Hikrivu B'nei Aharon ha'Kohanim"(Vayikra)? Which Avodah does "ve'Hikrivu" refer to?
(b) How does Abaye now attempt to re-learn Chizkiyah's Derashah (quoted at the foot of 26b.) from the Pasuk "ve'Nasnu B'nei Aharon ha'Kohen Eish Al ha'Mizbe'ach?

(c) How do we refute this explanation too?

(a) We have already explained why the Torah needs to write "ve'Nasnu B'nei Aharon *ha'Kohen* Eish al ha'Mizbe'ach". "ve'Hikriv ha'Kohen es ha'Kol" refers to *carrying the limbs* on to the Mizbe'ach. Why is it not necessary to write that for its own sake?

(b) Then why *does* the Torah write it? What does it come to exclude?

(c) Does the arranging of the two blocks of wood require Kehunah?

(a) What do we learn from "ve'Hiktir *ha'Kohen* es ha'Kol ha'Mizbeichah"?

(b) What do we learn from the Torah's use of the plural in the Pasuk "ve'Archu" "B'nei Aharon" "ha'Kohanim"?

(c) What is the problem with this Derashah from its source?

(d) How do we resolve this difficulty from the continuation of the Pasuk "al ha'Eitzim Asher al ha'Eish Asher Al ha'Mizbe'ach"?

Answers to questions



(a) To which Mitzvah does the phrase in Parshas Tzav "ve'ha'Eish al ha'Mizbe'ach Tukad Bo" refer?

(b) Does every Korban require the arranging of the pile of wood on the Mizbe'ach?

(c) Then why does it mention it here in Parshas Vayikra, by the bull of the Olas Nedavah?

(a) Rebbi Asi quoting Rebbi Yochanan, declares that a Zar who arranges the wood on the Mizbe'ach is Chayav.
What is he Chayav?

(b) What *is* he permitted to do?

(c) What objection does Rebbi Zeira raise to Rebbi Yochanan's first statement?

(d) Why can we not answer that we have a precedent from the following Avodah, which is kasher by night yet a Zar is invalidated from performing it:

  1. The Avodah the burning of the limbs and the fat-pieces?
  2. The Terumas ha'Deshen? How do we learn this from another statement of Rebbi Yochanan?
6) So we amend Rebbi Yochanan's statement to a different (day) Avodah.
Which Avodah?


(a) Rava asked that if arranging the two blocks of wood (the Sidur Sh'ei Gizrei Eiztim) was an Avodah, then why did it not require a Payas.
Which Beraisa did he forget?

(b) If only *day*-Avodos required a Payis, then why did a Payis determine who should perform ...

  1. ... the burning of the limbs and fat-pieces?
  2. ... the Terumas ha'Deshen?
(c) If only those Avodos which render a Zar Chayav Misah require a Payis, how do we then account for the fact that the Shechitah requires one, too?
(a) In the next Mishnah, the Tana describes how the Memuneh would ask the Kohanim to go and see whether it was light in the east.
Why was this necessary?

(b) If the Sidur Sh'nei Gizrei Eitzim on the Mizbe'ach was considered a *day*- Avodah, then why did he tell them to go and see whether the time of *Shechitah* of the Tamid had arrived, and not the time of the Sidur Sh'nei Gizrei Eitzim (which preceded the Tamid)?

(a) In the second Lashon, Rebbi Zeira asked Rebbi Yochanan (who declared a Zar who arranged the Ma'arachah to be Chayav Misah), why he should be Chayav, seeing as it is followed by another Avodah.
Which Avodah?

(b) Why does Rashi delete the Kashya from the carrying of the limbs and the fat-pieces, and from the Terumas ha'Deshen, both of which are the beginning of other Avodos, and yet a Zar is Chayav for performing them?

Answers to questions
Next daf

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