(a)Abaye, quoting the Bnei Yeshiva, sets out the order of the daily Avodos, according to Aba Shaul. The second arrangement of wood on the Mizbe'ach was for the Ketores. Where about on the Mizbe'ach was it placed?
(b)What exactly was its purpose? How often was it used?
(c)Which arrangement of wood ...
1. ... preceded it?
2. ... followed it?
(d)Bearing in mind that the Mizbe'ach ha'Zahav went hand in hand with the Menorah, which two Avodos had still to precede the Shechitah and the Zerikah of the Tamid?
1)
(a)The Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores (the second arrangement of wood on the Mizbe'ach), which was for the Ketores, was placed on the south-western corner, four Amos north of the Keren.
(b)They took coals from it twice a day - to place on the Mizbe'ach ha'Zahav for the Ketores.
(c)
1. The Ma'arachah Gedolah on which all the regular Korbanos were burnt, preceded the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores.
2. The Sidur Shnei Gizrei Etzim followed it.
(d)Clearing the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores and cleaning and preparing the Menorah still had to precede the Tamid.
2)
(a)The Zerikah of the blood of the Tamid was followed by the Hatavas Shtei Neros. Which other Avodah still preceded the bringing of the limbs on to the Mizbe'ach?
(b)This was followed by two kinds of flour. Which two kinds of flour?
(c)What was the last Avodah that still pertained to the Tamid shel Shachar?
2)
(a)After the Hatavas Shtei Neros came the Ketores (according to Aba Shaul), followed by the bringing of the limbs on to the Mizbe'ach.
(b)Then came the Minchah (that accompanied the Tamid) and the Chavitei Kohen Gadol.
(c)The last Avodah pertaining to the Tamid shel Shachar - was the bringing of the Nesachim which were poured into the small bowl next to the south-western Keren.
3)
(a)On Shabbos, they then brought the Korban Musaf. What were the last two Avodos?
(b)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Tzav "v'Hiktir Aleha Chelvei ha'Shelamim"? Which Korban is "Aleha" referring to?
3)
(a)The last two Avodos were 1. the placing of the two Bazichei Levonah on the Shulchan; 2. the bringing of the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim.
(b)We learn from the Pasuk "v'Hiktir Aleha Chelvei ha'Shelamim" - that all the Korbanos mast be brought after the Korban Tamid shel Shachar (to which "Aleha" refers), and not after the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim. In other words, the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim has to be the last Korban of the day.
4)
(a)"Hi ha'Olah al Mokdah al ha'Mizbe'ach Kol ha'Laylah" refers to the Ma'arachah Gedolah, and "v'Esh ha'Mizbe'ach Tukad Bo" to the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores. Why does the Ma'arachah Gedolah take precedence over the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores?
(b)For which logical reason might we have thought that the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores should take precedence over the Ma'arachah Gedolah?
(c)How do we counter that argument?
(d)What sequence do we learn from the Pasuk "u'Vi'er Aleha Etzim" ("Aleha", 've'Lo Al Chaverta')? Why is "Aleha" not required for itself?
4)
(a)The Ma'arachah Gedolah takes precedence over the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores - because its Kaparah is more common than that of the latter.
(b)We might have thought that the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores takes precedence over the Ma'arachah Gedolah - because its fire was taken inside the Heichal - whereas that of the Ma'arachah Gedolah was not.
(c)We counter that argument - by pointing out that if, for some reason, there was no fire on the second Ma'arachah, then they would take from the first.
(d)We learn from the Pasuk "u'Vi'er Aleha Etzim" - that one needs to arrange two pieces of wood on it, and not on another Ma'arachah (which must have already been lit) - i.e. the Ma'arachah shel Ketores. So we see that the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores precedes the Sidur Shnei Gizrei Etzim. "Aleha" is indeed needed for itself. However, the word "Aleha" appears twice.
5)
(a)The Torah writes "ba'Boker, ba'Boker" both with reference to the Sidur Shnei Gizrei Etzim and to the clearing of the ashes from the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores. So why does the former take precedence over the latter?
(b)What is the Sidur Shnei Gizrei Etzim Machshir?
(c)Then why should it precede the clearing of the ashes of the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores?
(d)Ravina answers (the initial Kashya) that having begun with the various Ma'arachos, it makes sense to finish with them before the next Avodah (clearing the ashes from the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores). How does Rav Ashi answer the latter Kashya?
5)
(a)The Sidur Shnei Gizrei Etzim and to the clearing of the ashes from the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores - because it is Machshir (it prepares ... for service) as opposed to clearing of the ashes, which is an Avodas Siluk (removal).
(b)The Sidur Shnei Gizrei Etzim is Machshir the Korban (since it goes on the Ma'arachah).
(c)It nevertheless precedes the clearing of the ashes of the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores - because a Machshir is a Machshir, whichever Mizbe'ach it is for.
(d)Rav Ashi answers the Kashya (using the same Sevara that we presented above in 4c.) - by pointing out that, if there was no fire on the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores, they would take from the Ma'arachah Gedolah (in which case, it was indeed a Machshir for the Ketores).
6)
(a)Abaye knew of no logical reason as to why clearing the ashes from the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores should precede the preparation of the five lamps. What reason does Rava (quoting a principle of Resh Lakish) give for it?
6)
(a)Abaye knew of no logical reason as to why clearing the ashes from the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores should precede the preparation of the five lamps. According to Rava, it wis because of Resh Lakish's principle 'Ein Ma'avirin Al ha'Mitzvos' (one does not bypass a Mitzvah). Here too, upon entering the Heichal, one would first come upon the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores (which, as we learned earlier, was drawn slightly towards the east), before the Menorah.
33b----------------------------------------33b
7)
(a)Where about were the Shulchan, the Menorah and the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores placed in the Heichal?
(b)Why was the Mizbe'ach not placed in line with the other two?
(c)What was the purpose of the two and a half Amos ...
1. ... between the Shulchan and the wall?
2. ... between the Menorah and the wall?
(d)Which Halachah in Hilchos Tefilin do we learn from Resh Lakish's principle (not to pass over Mitzvos)?
7)
(a)The Shulchan was placed in the middle of the Heichal on the north, two and a half Amos from the northern wall; the Menorah was exactly opposite it on the south side of the Heichal, also two and a half Amos from the southern wall. The Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores was in the middle, but drawn slightly towards the east.
(b)The Mizbe'ach was deliberately drawn out of line of the Shulchan and the Menorah, in keeping with the Pasuk in Terumah "Nochach ha'Shulchan" (with regard to the Menorah).
(c)The two and a half Amos ...
1. ... between the Shulchan and the wall served the purpose of allowing the two Kohanim who would place the two rows of Lechem ha'Panim every Shabbos to walk there abreast, before arranging them on the table simultaneously.
2. ... between the Menorah and the wall - was only in order to conform with the Shulchan.
(d)We learn from Resh Lakish's principle (not to pass over Mitzvos) - that the shel Yad must precede the shel Rosh (See also Tosfos DH 'Avurei Dar'a').
8)
(a)We learnt earlier that the Shnei Gizrei Etzim precedes Dishun Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi because of 'Machshir Adif'. Considering that the Torah writes twice "ba'Boker" by Hatavas Chamesh Neros, once by Dam ha'Tamid and twice by Hatavas Shtei Neros, how do we use one of the two "ba'Boker" written by the Shnei Gizrei Etzim ...
1. ... to determine that Hatavas Chamesh Neros precedes the Dam ha'Tamid?
2. ... to help determine that the Dam ha'Tamid precedes the Hatavas Shtei Neros?
(b)Rav Papa asks Abaye why we don't rather add the one "ba'Boker" to the Dishun Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi, to place it before the Dam ha'Tamid and the second "ba'Boker" to Dam ha'Tamid, to place it before the Hatavas Chamesh Neros (changing the order to Dishun Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi, Dam ha'Tamid, Hatavas Chamesh Neros and Hatavas Shtei Neros). What is the answer to this question?
(c)In fact, this answer is only valid according to Resh Lakish, but not according to Rebbi Yochanan, who derives this break from the double expression "ba'Boker ba'Boker". Why is the answer valid according to Resh Lakish? What reason does Resh Lakish give for breaking up the preparation of the Menorah into two?
(d)Why can we not move the Dishun Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi to after the Dam ha'Tamid, to place it between the two Hatavos?
8)
(a)We add one of the two "ba'Boker" written by the Shnei Gizrei Etzim ...
1. ... on to Hatavas Chamesh Neros giving it three "ba'Boker" as against the two of the Dam ha'Tamid (see 2.)?
2. ... to the Dam ha'Tamid (giving it two "ba'Boker" against the two of the Hatavas Shtei Neros), in which case, the Dam ha'Tamid takes precedence - because it is Mechaper.
(b)According to Rav Papa's Kashya, the order would be Dishun Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi, Dam ha'Tamid, Hatavas Chamesh Neros and Hatavas Shtei Neros. But that is not acceptable - because we need a break in between the Hatavas Chamesh Neros and Hatavas Shtei Neros.
(c)According to Resh Lakish, the reason for breaking up the preparation of the Menorah into two - is in order to cause excitement in the Azarah twice. This can be achieved even without performing another Avodah between them. But according to Rebbi Yochanan, who learns the break between them from the Pasuk "ba'Boker" ba'Boker" ('Chalkehu li'Shnei Bekarim'), Rav Papa's suggestion would be a problem.
(d)Neither is it possible to move the Dishun Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi to after the Dam ha'Tamid, and to place it in between the two Hatavos - because of 'Ein Ma'avirin al ha'Mitzvos' (in which case, the Dishun Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi must come before the Hatavos ha'Neros). (See also Maharsha on Rashi).
9)
(a)We based the previous set of Derashos on the fact that "ba'Boker ba'Boker" by the Shtei Gizrei Etzim is redundant. Why do we not use it to place the Shtei Gizrei Etzim before the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores?
9)
(a)We do not need "ba'Boker ba'Boker" by the Shtei Gizrei Etzim in order to place it before the Ma'arachah Sheni'ah shel Ketores - because we know that anyway, from "Aleha" 've'Lo Al Chavertah' (as we explained earlier, in 4d.).
10)
(a)Why does the Hatavos Chamesh Neros precede the Hatavas Shtei Neros, and not vice-versa?
(b)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Ki Sisa "b'Hetivo es ha'Neros Yaktirenah (written in connection with the Hatavas Shtei Neros)?
10)
(a)The Hatavos Chamesh Neros precede the Hatavas Shtei Neros, and not vice-versa - because having begun with the Hatavas Neros, it is logical to go ahead and prepare the majority of the lamps.
(b)We learn from the Pasuk in Ki Sisa "b'Hetivo es ha'Neros Yaktirenah - that at least two lamps must be left for the second Hatavah (otherwise, we would prepare first six lamps and leave only one for the second Hatavah).
11)
(a)Abaye in the name of Aba Shaul, places the Hatavas Shtei Neros before the Ketores, because of the Pasuk "b'Hetivo es ha'Neros Yaktirenah" (first the Neros and then the Ketores). From where does he know that the Ketores precedes the bringing of the limbs on to the Mizbe'ach?
(b)How does the Beraisa learn from "ha'Olah" (in Tzav) that bringing the limbs on to the Mizbe'ach precedes the Minchah?
(c)From where do we learn that the Minchah precedes the Chavitin, the Chavitin, the Nesech, and the Nesech, the Musaf?
11)
(a)According to Abaye in the name of Aba Shaul, the Ketores precedes the bringing up of the limbs on to the Mizbe'ach - because by the former, the Torah writes twice "ba'Boker", whereas by the bringing up of the limbs on to the Mizbe'ach, it only writes it once.
(b)The Beraisa learns from "ha'Olah" that bringing the limbs on to the Mizbe'ach precedes the Minchah - because "ha'Olah" teaches that the Tamid is brought up first (before any other Korban, and before the Minchah).
(c)The Minchah precedes the Chavitin - because the Torah writes in Emor "Olah u'Minchah" from which we learn that the Minchas ha'Tamid follows the Olah with nothing (such as the Minchas Chavitin) in between; the Chavitin precede the Nesech - because the Chavitin too, is a Minchah, and logically, one Minchah follows the other; And the Nesech precedes the Musaf - because the Torah writes (ibid) "Zevach u'Nesachim", to teach us that the Nesech follows the Zevach with no Korban in between.
