(a)Rebbi Yehoshua in our Mishnah connects the removal of the Din Me'ilah by Kodshei Kodshim to whatever has a Sha'as Heter le'Kohanim. Bar Kapara instructed bar Pada to look into the meaning of Sha'as Heter la'Kohanim. What was the relationship between bar Kapara and bar Pada?
(b)What are the three possible interpretations of Sha'as Heter la'Kohanim?
(c)If Heter Shechitah refers simply to after the Shechitah has been performed, what is the meaning of ...
1. ... Heter Zerikah?
2. ... Heter Achilah?
(d)Chizkiyah interprets it as Heter Shechitah. What does Rebbi Yochanan say?
1)
(a)Rebbi Yehoshua in our Mishnah connects the removal of the Din Me'ilah by Kodshei Kodshim to whatever has a Sha'as Heter le'Kohanim. Bar Kapara instructed bar Pada - (his sister's son) to look into the meaning of Sha'as Heter la'Kohanim.
(b)The three possible interpretations of Sha'as Heter la'Kohanim are - Heter Shechitah, Heter Zerikah and Heter Achilah.
(c)Heter Shechitah refers to after the Shechitah has been performed ...
1. ... Heter Zerikah - to after the Kabalas ha'Dam, and ...
2. ... Heter Achilah - to after the Z'rikas Dam.
(d)Chizkiyah interprets it as Heter Shechitah. Rebbi Yochanan, as - Heter Achilah.
2)
(a)Rebbi Zeira cites our Mishnah, which, with reference to Sha'as Heter le'Kohanim, refers to Lanah, Nitme'ah ... . How does he interpret Lanah? Why does this seem to refute the opinions of both Chizkiyah and Rebbi Yochanan?
(b)How do we counter Rebbi Zeira's premise? Whose opinion does our Mishnah then support?
(c)We cite the Seifa, which (describing she'Lo Haysah lah Sha'as Heter le'Kohanim) refers to she'Nishchatu Chutz li'Zemano ... ve'she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku es Damah. How do we interpret ve'she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku es Damah? Why can it not mean that both were performed bi'Pesul?
(d)What does this prove?
2)
(a)Rebbi Zeira cites our Mishnah, which (describing Sha'as Heter le'Kohanim) refers to Lanah, Nitme'ah ... . He interprets Lanah as - Lan Damah (with reference to after the Shechitah but before the Zerikah) - which is equivalent to Heter Zerikah, a Kashya on both Chizkiyah and Rebbi Yochanan.
(b)We counter Rebbi Zeira's assumption however - by establishing Lanah as referring to Lan Basar - which refers to after the Zerikah, which is equivalent to Heter Achilah (like Rebbi Yochanan).
(c)We cite the Seifa, which (describing she'Lo Haysah lah Sha'as Heter le'Kohanim) refers to she'Nishchatu Chutz li'Zemano ... ve'she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku es Damah, and we interpret ve'she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku es Damah to mean ve'she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku Kesheirim es Damah - since it would be unnecessary for Pesulim to perform both).
(d)This proves that - Heter Zerikah Shaninu (like Rebbi Zeira).
3)
(a)What will be the Din, according to the current interpretation of our Mishnah, if the Kohanim perform the Kabalah be'Kashrus and the Zerikah be'Paslus?
(b)Rav Yosef however, queries this premise from a Mishnah in Zevachim, which discusses a Pasul Chatas, whose blood does not require Kibus Begadim. What is Kibus Begadim?
(c)It makes no difference whether the Chatas previously had a Sha'as ha'Kosher (it had been Kasher at one stage, such as Lanah, Nitme'ah or Yatz'ah), or not. Besides she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku es Daman, which other two examples of Lo Haysah lah Sha'as ha'Kosher does the Mishnah present?
(d)Assuming that the Tana means she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku Pesulim es Daman, what is the problem with the inference Kibluhu Kesheirim ve'Zarku Pesulim, Damah Ta'un Kibus Begadim? What do we learn from the Pasuk in Tzav (in connection with Kibus Begadim) "... asher Yazeh mi'Damah"?
3)
(a)According to the current interpretation of our Mishnah, if the Kohanim perform the Kabalah be'Kashrus and the Zerikah be'Paslus - Me'ilah will no longer apply, since the Tana holds Heter Zerikah (which already took place) and not Heter Achilah.
(b)Rav Yosef however, queries this assumption from a Mishnah in Zevachim, which discusses a Pasul Chatas, whose blood does not require Kibus Begadim - (washing a garment in the Azarah) in the event that the blood of a Pasul Chatas fell on it).
(c)It makes no difference whether the Chatas previously had a Sha'as ha'Kosher (it was Kasher at one stage, such as Lanah, Nitme'ah or Yatz'ah), or not. Besides she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku es Daman, the Mishnah presents as examples of 'Lo Haysah lah Sha'as ha'Kosher - Chutz li'Zemanah and Chutz li'Mekomah.
(d)Assuming that the Tana means she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku Pesulim es Daman, the problem with the inference Kibluhu Kesheirim ve'Zarku Pesulim, Damah Ta'un Kibus Begadim is that - this would mean that the blood fell on the garment after the Zerikah, whereas the Pasuk in Tzav (in connection with Kibus Begadim) " ... asher Yazeh mi'Damah" teaches us that it only requires washing if the garment absorbed the blood before or during the Zerikah (but not afterwards).
4)
(a)So what do we conclude?
(b)How will this then reflect on she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku es Daman in our Mishnah?
(c)If even Kibluhu Kesheirim has a Din of Mo'alin, why does the Tana mention Kiblu at all?
(d)How does Rav Asi prove that Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku must be Davka?
4)
(a)We therefore conclude that - Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku is La'av Davka, and that Ein Damah Ta'un Kibus Begadim even if Kiblu Kesheirim ve'Zarku Kesheirim.
(b)By the same token therefore, she'Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku es Daman in our Mishnah - is La'av Davka, and Mo'alin bah will apply even if Kiblu Kesheirim ve'Zarku Pesulim, because the Tana requires Heter Achilah, like Rebbi Yochanan.
(c)And the reason that the Tana mentions Kiblu at all is - because having mentioned 'Nishchat Chutz li'Zemano ve'Chutz li'Mekomo, he also sees fit to mention Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku'.
(d)Rav Asi proves that Kiblu Pesulim ve'Zarku must be Davka (like Rebbi Zeira), because if it was La'av Davka, then why would we need two Mishnahs to present the concept of La'av Davka with regard to Kiblu Pesulim.
5b----------------------------------------5b
5)
(a)The Mishnah in Zevachim on the other hand, is La'av Davka, as we explained, yet the Tana mentions ... Kiblu Pesulim to teach us that Pesulim render the remaining blood Shirayim. What is the case?
(b)What do we mean by that?
(c)What, besides the fact that the second cupful of blood is poured out on to the Y'sod, are the ramifications of the blood being termed Shirayim?
(d)How will we reconcile Rav Asi with the Mishnah in Zevachim, which implies that if a Pasul receives the blood with a Machshavah of Pigul, any remaining blood from the neck of the Korban is Kasher for Zerikah?
5)
(a)The Mishnah in Zevachim on the other hand, is La'av Davka, as we explained, yet the Tana mentions ... Kiblu Pesulim to teach us that Pesulim render the remaining blood Shirayim - if after they received half the blood and sprinkled it, Kesheirim completed the Avodah on the second half.
(b)What we mean is that - instead of being sprinkled on the Mizbe'ach, the second cupful of blood has to be poured out on to the Y'sod (of the Mizbe'ach) and ...
(c)... that a garment on which blood from the second bowl spilled between the first Z'rikas ha'Dam and the second one, does not require washing.
(d)And when the Mishnah in Zevachim implies that if a Pasul receives the blood with a Machsheves Pigul, any remaining blood from the neck of the Korban is Kasher for Zerikah - that is only because the Kohen had a Machsheves Pigul, whereas the current Mishnah referred to by Rav Asi is speaking where he received it with a Machshavah Kesheirah (which has the same Din as a Kasher who receives the blood with a Machsheves Pigul).
6)
(a)We query Rav Asi however, from a statement of Rebbi Yochanan. What did Rebbi Yochanan reply when Resh Lakish asked him whether Pesulim render the remaining blood Shirayim or not? Which two cases did he list?
(b)What reason did he give for that?
(c)What can we extrapolate from his wording (that poses a Kashya on Rav Asi)?
(d)We reject this inference however, by restricting Rebbi Yochanan's statement to cases that do not atone for the Tzibur (and that is where Chutz li'Zemano and Chutz li'Mekomo are the only two cases that make Shirayim). What do we mean by that?
(e)What makes these two Pesulim different than other Pesulim belonging to that category?
6)
(a)We query Rav Asi however, from Rebbi Yochanan, who, in reply to Resh Lakish's She'eilah whether Pesulim render the remaining blood Shirayim or not - stated that nothing makes Shirayim except for Machsheves Chutz li'Zemano and Chutz li'Mekomo ...
(b)Ho'il u'Meratzin le'Pigulan ...
(c)... implying that all other Pesulim do not render the remaining blood Shirayim (a Kashya on Rav Asi).
(d)We reject this inference however, by restricting Rebbi Yochanan's statement to cases that do not atone for the Tzibur (and that is where Chutz li'Zemano and Chutz li'Mekomo are the only two cases that make Shirayim) by which we mean that - of the category of Pesulim that never have a Heter be'Tzibur, only they make the remaining blood Shirayim ...
(e)... because they are unique, inasmuch as they are effective in creating Pigul (as Rebbi Yochanan mentioned in his statement).
7)
(a)In that case, which P'sul was Rav Asi referring to when he said 'P'sul Oseh Shirayim'?
(b)What sets the P'sul of Tum'ah apart from the Pesulim referred to by Rebbi Yochanan?
7)
(a)And when Rav Asi said 'P'sul Oseh Shirayim' - he was referring specifically to the P'sul of Tum'ah ...
(b)... which is different than the Pesulim referred to by Rebbi Yochanan - inasmuch as, based on the principle Tum'ah Hutrah be'Tzibur, it has the unique distinction of possessing a Heter by Tzibur (which places it on a par with Pigul with its Heter of Ho'il u'Meratzin le'Pigulan).
8)
(a)We again query Rav Asi from another Beraisa 'ha'Pigul Le'olam Mo'alin bo'. What level of Kodshim is the Tana talking about?
(b)We initially establish the Beraisa before Zerikah. What is then the case?
(c)Why is the Me'ilah not removed?
(d)What can we extrapolate from there with regard to a Kabalas Dam Kasher? What does this prove?
8)
(a)We again query Rav Asi from another Beraisa 'ha'Pigul Le'olam Mo'alin bo' - with reference to Kodshei Kodshim.
(b)We initially establish the Beraisa before Zerikah - where the Korban was Shechted with a Machsheves Pigul ...
(c)... and the reason that the Me'ilah is not removed is - because, since the Kabalah of Pigul is not considered a Kabalah, we cannot apply the principle Kol ha'Omed Lizarek ke'Zaruk Dami.
(d)We can extrapolate from there that - a Kabalas Dam Kasher would remove the Din Me'ilah, because of Kol ha'Omed ... , a proof that Heter Zerikah Shaninu (like Rebbi Zeira).
9)
(a)We counter this however, by establishing the Beraisa by after the Zerikah. What can we now extrapolate from there with regard to a Z'rikas Dam Kasher?
(b)What does that prove?
(c)And the Tana inserts the word 'Le'olam' to teach us the ruling of Rav Gidal Amar Rav. What does Rav Gidal Amar Rav say?
9)
(a)We counter this however, by establishing the Beraisa by after the Zerikah, and we can now extrapolate that - a Z'rikas Dam Kasher would remove the Me'ilah ...
(b)... a proof that Heter Achilah Shaninu (like Rebbi Yochanan).
(c)And the Tana inserts the word 'Le'olam' to teach us the ruling of Rav Gidal Amar Rav that - Z'rikas Pigul does not remove the Din of Me'ilah (as we learned above).
