1) TOSFOS DH Moraina d'Bei Nesi'ah
úåñôåú ã"ä îåøééðà ãáé ðùéàä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that he ruled for Rebbi's house.)
ùì áéú øáé åàôùø ùäéä áéîéå ãàôé' øáé îàéø ãðôèø ÷åãí øáé éäåãä ëãîåëç áôø÷ ùðé ã÷éãåùéï (ãó ðá:) äéä ÷ééí òãééï áäìåìà ãøáé ùîòåï áø øáé ëãîåëç áéøåùìîé ãáéöä
(a) Explanation: [He ruled] for Rebbi's house. Perhaps [R. Yehudah] was in Rebbi's days, for even R. Meir, who died before R. Yehudah, like is proven in Kidushin (52b), was still alive at the time of the wedding of Rebbi's son Shimon, like is proven in the Yerushalmi in Beitzah;
ãòáø ÷îé ôúçà åùîò ùäéå îèôçéï åàîø îçììéï àú äùáú
1. Citation (Yerushalmi): [R. Meir] passed by the doorway, and heard that they were clapping. He said "they are being Mechalel Shabbos!"
2. Note: Why did Tosfos say "perhaps"? He proves that R. Yehudah was alive in the days of Rebbi! Perhaps "the days of Rebbi" means when Rebbi was Nasi, after his father R. Shimon ben Gamliel died. It seems that R. Shimon ben Gamliel died before R. Meir, for in R. Shimon ben Gamliel's lifetime, he led the academy in which R. Meir learned (Horiyos 13b), and after R. Meir died, R. Yehudah ordered that Talmidei R. Meir not enter the Beis Midrash (Kidushin 52b). If the Nasi was there, he would decide such matters (Brachos 28a)!
åàó áéîé øá äéä ëãîùîò áôø÷ ÷îà ãòéøåáéï (ãó éâ:) ãàîø øá äàé ãîçããðà îçáøéà ãçîéúéä ìøáé îàéø îàçåøéä
3. R. Meir was even in the days of Rav, like it connotes in Eruvin (13b). Rav said "I am sharper than my colleagues, because I saw R. Meir from the back."
åéù âåøñéï ùí øáé îùåí òåáãà ãéøåùìîé
4. Rebuttal: Some texts there say "Rebbi" [in place of Rav], due to the episode in the Yerushalmi. (This suggests that R. Meir died before R. Shimon ben Gamliel, for Rebbi learned in a prominent place in the academy while his father was at the head (Bava Metzi'a 84b). If R. Meir was there, Rebbi would have seen his face! I find this text difficult, that Rebbi attributed his Chachmah to R. Meir, but he was reluctant to mention R. Meir's name in teachings (Horiyos 14a)! Also, Rebbi was pained that his colleague R. Elazar b'Ribi Shimon was sharper than himself (Bava Metzi'a 84b). Perhaps Rebbi said so before the episode there, after which R. Elazar b'Ribi Shimon proved his superiority, or he meant "I am sharper than most of my colleagues.")
2) TOSFOS DH Ho'il v'Yachol Likrosh v'La'amod Al k'Zayis
úåñôåú ã"ä äåàéì åéëåì ì÷øåù åìòîåã òì ëæéú
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses why we need verses to teach about Tum'ah of blood.)
îùîò ããí èîà îçîú ãçùéá ëáùø
(a) Inference: Blood is Tamei because it is considered like flesh.
åúéîä ãáîòéìä áôø÷ ÷ãùé îæáç (ãó éæ.) àîø îðéï ìãí ùøöéí ùäåà èîà ùðàîø åæä ìëí äèîà úéôå÷ ìé ãçùéá ëáùø
(b) Question: In Me'ilah (17a), it says 'what is the source that blood of Sheratzim is Tamei? It says "v'Zeh Lachem ha'Tamei."' I already know this, for it is considered like flesh!
åéù ìåîø ãàéöèøéê ÷øà ìøáåéé ãí öìåì ãîèîà áëòãùä ãñ''ã òã ùéäà áå ëãé ùéåëì ì÷øåù åìòîåã òì ëòãùä
(c) Answer: We can say that we need the verse to include clear blood, that k'Adashah (the volume of a lentil) of it is Metamei. One might have thought [that it is Tahor] until there is enough to solidify to k'Adashah (the Shi'ur of Tum'ah for flesh of Sheratzim).
åìäëé úðï ãí äùøõ åáùøå îöèøôéï ãùéòåøï ùåä àáì ãí ðáéìä åáùøä ìà ãàéï ùéòåøï ùåä
(d) Support: The Mishnah (17a) teaches "blood of a Sheretz and its flesh join, for their Shi'ur is the same, but blood of a Neveilah and its flesh do not join, for their Shi'urim are not the same."
åëï îåëç áéøåùìîé ãàîø ãí ðáéìä èîà
(e) Support: So it is proven in the Yerushalmi, which says that blood of a Neveilah is Tamei.
åäãúðï ãí äùøõ )åáùøå îöèøôéï) [ö"ì ëáùøå îèîà - öàï ÷ãùéí] åàéï ìðå ëéåöà áå
(f) Implied question: A Mishnah says that blood of a Sheretz is Metamei like its flesh, and there is nothing else like this!
[ö"ì ëùéòåø èåîàúå àáì ãîå îèîà - öàï ÷ãùéí]
(g) Answer: [Nothing else is like blood of a Sheretz, i.e. no other blood has] the same Shi'ur for Tum'ah, but [Dam Neveilah] is Metamei.
åà''ú åìîä ìé ÷øà áôø÷ áäîä äî÷ùä (çåìéï òá.) ìøáéòéú ãí îï äîú äøé éëåì ì÷øåù åìòîåã òì ëæéú
(h) Question: Why do we need a verse in Chulin (72a, to be Metamei) a Revi'is of blood of a Mes? It can congeal to a k'Zayis!
åéù ìåîø ãùàðé îú ãäåä îîòéèðï ãí îùåí ãâæòå îçìéó ëããøùéðï áøéù ãí äðãä (ðãä ðä.) îä òöí ùðáøà òîå åàéï âæòå îçìéó éöàå ùéðéí ùìà ðáøàå òîå éöàå ùòø åöôåøï ùàò''ô ùðáøàå òîå âæòï îçìéó
(i) Answer: A Mes is different, for we would have excluded blood, for it regenerates (the body produces more), like we expound in Nidah (55a) "just like a person is created (born) with a bone, and it does not regenerate (such matters are Metamei). This excludes teeth, which he was not created with them, and hair and nails, which even though he was created with them, they regenerate";
åôøéê åäøé áùø ãâæòå îçìéó åèîà åîùðé î÷åîå ðòùä öì÷ú
1. It asks that flesh regenerates, and it is Tamei! It answers that the place remains scarred.
åòåã ÷ùä áôø÷ ëì ùòä (ôñçéí ãó ëá.) ãìà îùðé à÷åùéà ããí ëùäåúøä ðáéìä äéà åçìáä åâéãä åãîä äåúøä ëãîùðé à÷åùéà ãçìá åâéã îùîò ãìà çùéá ëáùø
(j) Question: In Pesachim (22a), we do not answer the question from blood "when [benefit from] Neveilah was permitted, it and its Chelev and Gid [ha'Nasheh] and blood were permitted", like it answers the question from Chelev and Gid. This implies that [blood] is not considered like the flesh!
ìôéëê öøéê ìåîø ùéù ùåí øéáåé ãîøáéðï áéä ãí ðáéìåú åìáúø ãîøáä áéä îñúáø ìàå÷åîé øáåéà áøáéòéú ùéëåì ì÷øåù åìòîåã òì ëæéú
(k) Answer: Therefore we must say that there is some Ribuy to include Dam Neveilah. And after we include it, it is reasonable to establish the Ribuy for a Revi'is, since it can congeal to a k'Zayis.
3) TOSFOS DH Ein Misnadvin Log Shenayim v'Chamishah
úåñôåú ã"ä àéï îúðãáéï ìåâ ùðéí åçîùä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that this is only regarding a Nedavah.)
úéîä ëé äéëé ãàîøé' (ìòéì ãó ÷â.) âáé îðçåú ãàí àîø çöé òùøåï éáéà òùøåï ùìí òùøåï åîçöä éáéà ùðéí äëà ðîé ðéîà ëé àîø ìåâ àå ùðéí éáéà ùìùä ùäí ðñëé ëáù åëé àîø çîùä éáéà ùùä ùäí ðñëé ôø
(a) Question: Just like we said (above, 103a) about Menachos "if he said half an Isaron, he brings a full Isaron; an Isaron and a half, he brings two", also here we should say that if he said one or two Lugim, he brings three, which are the Nesachim of a lamb. If he said five, he should bring six, which are the Nesachim of a bull!
åùîà äëé ðîé äéëà ãàîø äøé òìé àáì äëà îééøé áðãáä ãéù ìåâ àçã àå ùðéí ìôðéå åàîø äøé àìå ìðñëéí
(b) Answer: Perhaps indeed this is true when he said "Harei Alai" (a Neder); here we discuss a Nedavah. There are one or two Lugim in front of him, and he said "these are for Nesachim."
åáâîøà âáé éù ÷áò ìðñëéí ôéøù á÷åðèøñ ëâåï ãàîø äøé òìé ëê åëê ìåâéï (ìîãä) [ö"ì ìà ã÷ - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã]
(c) Remark: In the Gemara regarding "Nesachim are fixed", Rashi explained that he said "it is Alai such and such (a number of) Lugim." He was not precise.
4) TOSFOS DH Shishah li'Nedavah
úåñôåú ã"ä ùùä ìðãáä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos mentions that later we discuss why there were six.)
áôø÷ áúøà (ãó ÷æ:) îééúé ìä ì÷îï åôìéâé àîåøàé ëðâã îé
(a) Reference: This is brought below (107b), and Amora'im argue about what [six] corresponds to.
5) TOSFOS DH Amar Abaye Im Timtzi Lomar
úåñôåú ã"ä àîø àáéé àí úîöà ìåîø ëå'
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why Abaye was unsure.)
îñô÷à ìéä ìàáéé îùåí ÷åùéà ãøá àùé
(a) Explanation: Abaye is unsure due to Rav Ashi's question. (Perhaps five is like that one or two, i.e. one cannot bring even part of it.)
6) TOSFOS DH Ad Asarah Peshita Li Achad Asar Miba'i Le
úåñôåú ã"ä òã òùøä ôùéèà ìé àçã òùø îéáòéà ìé
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why he did not ask about seven.)
åàí úàîø ùáòä ðîé úéáòé àé ìùðé (ëìéí) [ö"ì àéìéí - éùø åèåá] àéëåéï òã ãîîìà ìäå ìà ÷øáé àå ìàéì åëáù àéëåéï
(a) Question: Also seven he should ask about! If he intended for two rams, he may not bring it, until he completes (the amount for them, i.e. eight Lugim). Or, did he intend for a ram and a lamb?
åé''ì ãìà îéáòéà ìéä àìà áúøé îçã îéðà åçã îçã îéðà (àé àîø) [ö"ì îé àîøéðï - éùø åèåá] àå ìà àáì ôùéèà ãçã îçã îéðà åçã îçã îéðà àîøéðï:
(b) Answer: He asks only about two from one species and one from another species, do we say [that he intended for this], or no. However, obviously one from one species and one from another species, we say!
104b----------------------------------------104b
7) TOSFOS DH Mah Nishtanah she'Ne'emar Bah Nefesh
úåñôåú ã"ä îä ðùúðéú ùðàîø áä ðôù
(SUMMARY: Tosfos dispels a potential answer to this question.)
ãàé îùåí ãàéï áàä áùåúôåú
(a) Implied suggestion: Perhaps [it says Nefesh] to teach that partners may not bring it!
äåä ìéä ìîéëúá àéù àå ìùåï àçø ãîùîò éçéã ãå÷à
(b) Rejection: [If so,] it should have written "Ish" or another expression that connotes specifically an individual.
8) TOSFOS DH Chamishah Minei Tigun
úåñôåú ã"ä çîùä îéðé èéâåï
(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that only two of them were fried.)
ìà äéä îèâï îðçú ñåìú (îàôä) [ö"ì åîàôä - éùø åèåá] úðåø àìà îðçú îçáú åîøçùú ìçåãééäå
(a) Implied question: One did not fry Minchas Soles and Ma'afe Tanur, only Minchas Machavas and Marcheshes!
àìà ÷åøà èéâåï îä ùéù (áëåìå) [ðøàä ùö"ì áëåìï] ùîï:
(b) Answer: He calls [all] Tigun, because all have oil.
9) TOSFOS DH Harei Alai Minchah Yavi Eizo she'Yirtzeh
úåñôåú ã"ä äøé òìé îðçä éáéà àéæå ùéøöä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that he may not bring Minchas Nesachim.)
ôéøåù îçîùú îðçåú àáì áîðçú ðñëéí ìà àéëåéï
(a) Explanation: He may bring any of the five Menachos, but he did not intend for Minchas Nesachim.
àò''â ãîúðãá àãí îðçú ðñëéí áëì éåí
(b) Implied question: One may volunteer Minchas Nesachim every day! (Perhaps he intended for it!)
ãñúîà ãòúå àîðçåú äîôåøùåú åøâéìåú ìáà áôðé òöîï åìà áâìì æáç
(c) Answer: Stam he intends for Menachos that are explicitly written [regarding Nedavah] and normally come by themselves, and not due to a Zevach.
10) TOSFOS DH Minchah Min ha'Minchah
úåñôåú ã"ä îðçä îéï äîðçä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that he said one of these.)
ôéøåù àå àîø îéï äîðçä:
(a) Explanation: [He said Minchah,] or he said "Min ha'Minchah."