REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Shevuos 7
SHEVUOS 6-10 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
(a) What do we try to learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with
the Korban Oleh ve'Yored) "le'Chol Tum'aso Asher Yitma *Bah*"?
(b) What do we mean when we suggest that maybe the Miy'ut comes to preclude
Mikdash ve'Kodashav? What does it want to preclude them from?
(c) Rava turns to a Beraisa to settle the issue.
To whom does he refer as
'Doleh Mayim mi'Boros Amukim'?
(d) Having stated in the Parshah of Korban Oleh ve'Yored "O be'Nivlas Chayah
Temei'ah", on what basis does Rebbi consider the phrase "O be'Nivlas Beheima
h Temei'ah" superfluous?
(a) What does Rebbi learn from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Beheimah Temei'ah"
"Nefesh Ki Siga ... O bi'Veheimah Temei'ah" (in Tzav [in connection with
someone who then eats Kodshim])?
(b) What do we then learn from the Hekesh "be'Chol Kodesh Lo Siga ve'el
ha'Mikdash Lo Savo"?
(c) What do we ask on this from the Pasuk "be'Chol Kodesh Lo Siga"? What
does this Pasuk come to include?
(d) How do we counter the suggestion that it is more logical to include
Mikdash from the Hekesh and to preclude Terumah from "Bah", because Mikdash,
like Kareis, is subject to Kareis?
(a) So Rava tries to learn Mikdash (as opposed to Terumah) from the three
Kerisos that are written in connection with someone who eats Shelamim
What does Rava mean when he says 'Achas li'Chelal (in Parshas
Emor) ve'Achas li'P'rat (in Parshas Tzav)?
(b) What is it then coming to teach us?
(c) Why do we not rather treat it as a regular K'lal u'P'rat, in which case
we would rule 'Ein bi'Ch'lal Ela Mah she'bi'P'rat'?
(a) What does Rava learn from the third Kareis (also in Tzav)?
(b) We refute Rava's explanation however, in face of Rebbi Avahu.
Rebbi Avahu learn from the third Kareis?
(c) And according to Rebbi Shimon, Rebbi Avahu concludes, we need the third
Kareis to include a Chata'os Penimi'os (such as the Par ve'Sa'ir of Yom
Kipur) in the Din of Kareis for eating them be'Tum'ah.
Why does ...
(d) So the Neherda'i in the name of Rava try to learn the Din of Tum'as
Mikdash from one of the three extra 'Tum'os' that are mentioned together
with the three above-mentioned 'Kerisos'.
- ... Rebbi Avahu require a special D'rashah for Rebbi Shimon?
- ... Rebbi Shimon require a special D'rashah for Chatas Penimis? Why would he have otherwise held that a Chatas Penimis is not subject to Kareis?
On what grounds do we refute
this suggestion too?
(a) Rava finally learns Tum'as Mikdash from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Tum'aso"
(in connection with Korban Oleh ve'Yored) "Tum'aso" (in Parshas Chukas).
In which connection is this latter Pasuk written?
Answers to questions
(b) We ask why the Torah now needs to write "Bah". Why can "Bah" not come to
preclude Terumah from a Korban Oleh ve'Yored?
(c) What problem do we have with the answer (that it comes to include
'Nivlas Of Tahor')?
(d) Based on the Pasuk "O Ki Yiga", what do we answer? Why is 'Nivlas Of
Tahor automatically precluded from "O Ki Yiga"?
(a) We learned in our Mishnah that the Sa'ir ha'Penimi atoned for Tum'as
Mikdash ve'Kodashav of which one was aware at the time that one sinned, but
For which three sins does the Beraisa suggest it might have
come to atone? Why is that?
(b) To which sin is the Torah referring when it writes ...
(c) What does Rebbi Yehudah in the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk (in
Acharei-Mos, in connection with the Sa'ir Penimi) "mi'Tum'os B'nei Yisrael"?
- ... in Kedoshim "Le'ma'an Tamei es Mikdashi"?
- ... in Acharei-Mos "u'Shemartem es Mishmarti Levilti Asos me'Chukos ha'To'evos ... ve'Lo Sitam'u Bahem"?
- ... in Masei "ve'Lo Setamei es ha'Aretz"?
(a) How does Rebbi Shimon query the need for Rebbi Yehudah's D'rashah?
(b) What does he learn from ...
- ... the Pasuk "ve'Chiper al ha'Kodesh mi'Tum'os ... "?
- ... the Hekesh "u'mi'Pish'eihem le'Chol Chatosam"?
- ... "le'Chol Chatosam"? What does this preclude?
(a) What is the problem with the Tana's passing suggestion that the Sa'ir
Penimi comes to atone for the three cardinal sins?
Answers to questions
(b) How do we answer this Kashya? To which two possible cases might the
Beraisa be referring?
(c) What second answer do we give that applies to Shefichus Damim, and not
to the others?