Point By Point Summary Of TosfosDaf Series

1.

1) TOSFOS DH SHE'AIN

+

1) TOSFOS DH SHE'AIN

תוספות ד"ה שאין

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains when the Mishnah in Sanhedrin must and must not discuss more than an amount of judges.)

ואם תאמר דבפ"ק דסנהדרין (דף ב.) לא חשיב אלא ע"א

(a) Question: In Sanhedrin (2a), the Mishnah only says that seventy-one judges are required. (It does not list these other requirements. Why?)

וי"ל דהתם לא חשיב אלא מילי דסנהדרין

(b) Answer: The Mishnah there only discusses the amounts of judges (required for all of the topics in the Mishnah).

ותדע דתנן נמי התם אין מוציאין למלחמת הרשות אלא בב"ד של ע"א ולא תני מלך ויועץ ואורים ותומים אע"ג דבעינן להו כדמסיק התם בגמרא (דף טז.) מקרא

(c) Proof: This is evident from the statement of the Mishnah in Sanhedrin (20b) that we do not go out to wage a Milchamas ha'Reshus without a Beis Din of seventy-one judges. The Mishnah does not say a king, adviser, and Urim v'Tumim are required even though they indeed are, as the Gemara concludes there (16a) by deducing so from a Pasuk. (Here, too, it is just mentioning an amount of judges.)

ואם תאמר הדתנן התם אין דנין לא את השבט כו' ומוקי לה עולא בגמ' (שם) בבאין על עסקי נחלות כתחלתו מה תחלתו בע"א כו' אי מה תחלתו בקלפי ואורים ותומים וכל ישראל וכו' ומאי קושיא אה"נ דניבעי אורים ותומים וכל ישראל והא דלא חשיב להו התם במתני' (דף ב.) משום דלא איירי אלא במילי דסנהדרין

(d) Question: The Mishnah states there that we do not judge a tribe etc. Ula explains in the Gemara there (16a) that the case is when they are complaining about their portion of inheritance in Eretz Yisrael. Just as the original division of Eretz Yisrael was done with a lottery, Urim v'Tumim, and all of Bnei Yisrae, so too etc. What is Ula's question? Perhaps we indeed require the Urim v'Tumim and all of Bnei Yisrael! Perhaps the Mishnah merely omits this fact because it is only discussing an amount of judges (not everything needed for the case, as we have explained above).

ויש לומר מדכייל להו בהדי נביא השקר וכהן גדול משמע ליה דלא בעינן אלא ע"א דומיא דידהו

(e) Answer: It is possible that being that the Mishnah includes this case with cases such as judging a false prophet and a Kohen Gadol (who sins), the implication is that only seventy-one judges are required like these other cases.

מאי אמרת דשבק למיתני אורים ותומים משום דלא איירי אלא במילי דסנהדרין אם כן ליתנינהו באפי נפשייהו דלא אתו למיטעי לשוינהו כנביא השקר

1. Will you say that the Mishnah did not say anything about the Urim v'Tumim because it is only saying an amount of judges? If so, it should be stated on its own, in order that people should not mistakenly think that it has the exact same law as judging a false prophet (and that the Urim v'Tumim is not necessary in this case).

2.

2) TOSFOS DH V'CHEIN

+

2) TOSFOS DH V'CHEIN

תוספות ד"ה וכן

(SUMMARY: Tosfos asks more questions about having seventy-one judges.)

פירש בקונטרס ובימי משה דהוא מלך ונביא ואחיו כהן גדול ואורים ותומים

(a) Explanation: Rashi explains that in the time of Moshe Rabeinu, he had the law of being a king and a prophet, his brother was a Kohen Gadol, and he had the Urim v'Tumim.

ותימה אם כן בפ"ק דסנהדרין (דף טז:) בהעמדת סנהדרין לשבטים דילפינן ממשה דבמקום ע"א הוה קאי ליבעי נמי מלך ונביא

(b) Question #1: If so, in Sanhedrin (16b) when the Gemara discusses making a Sanhedrin (of seventy-one) for the tribes, derived from the fact that Moshe is in place of seventy-one judges, we should also require a king and prophet!

ועוד אע"ג דאהרן היה בבנין משכן וכי נשאלו באורים ותומים לעשות משכן הלא קודם שנתכהן אהרן על ידי המלואים נעשה המשכן

(c) Question #2: Additionally, even though Aharon was involved in the building of the Mishkan, did they ask the Urim v'Tumim whether or not they should build the Mishkan? The Mishkan was commanded to be made before Aharon became the Kohen during the days of the inauguration of the Mishkan!

וקושיא ראשונה יש לתרץ דהכא מרבינן טפי משום דכתיב וכן תעשו דמשמע דאתא לרבויי כל הנך

(d) Answer: We can answer the first question by saying that we include more regarding the building of the Mishkan than regarding a Beis Din for the tribes because the Pasuk says, "And so you should do," implying that it includes all of these things (Urim v'Tumim etc.).

וא"ת כלים נמי ניבעו ע"א וכי תימא הכתוב תלאן בשירות דאין צריך אלא שירות הא בסמוך משמע דאי לאו אותם הוה אמינא דבעי משיחה ועבודה ואם כן השתא דכתב אותם למעוטי משיחה ע"א מיהא לא נימעוט

(e) Question: Vessels should also require seventy-one judges! If you will say that the Pasuk states that all they need is to be used for service and they automatically become holy, the Gemara later implies that without the Pasuk, "Osam" I would think that they require both anointing and service. (This does not have to do with including or excluding seventy-one judges.) If so, the Pasuk only excludes anointing. However, seventy-one judges should still be necessary!

וי"ל דאתא אותם לגלויי דוכן תעשו לא קאי אכלים ולא בעינן בהן לדורות דומיא דמשה

(f) Answer: It is possible to answer that "Osam" reveals that "And so they should do" is not referring to vessels, and we therefore do not require in the future that vessels used in the service of the Beis Hamikdash should be made holy like those of the Mishkan.

3.

3) TOSFOS DH MASIV

+

4.

4) TOSFOS DH L'DOROS

+

5.

5) TOSFOS DH LI'LAMEDCHA

+

6.

6) TOSFOS DH AIN

+

6) TOSFOS DH AIN

תוספות ד"ה אין

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains how this can be a requirement if there is not yet an Azarah.)

תימה למאן דאמר בפ"ב [דזבחים] (דף קיג. ושם) דאין מנחה בבמה היאך מתקדשת בשלמא בימי עזרא איכא למימר דסבר כמ"ד קדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה וקידשה לעתיד לבא ועזרא זכר בעלמא הוא דעבד אבל בימי שלמה ויהושע קשיא

(a) Question: This is difficult. According to the opinion in Zevachim (113a) that there is no Minchah brought on a Bamah, how can the Azarah become holy? It is understandable that this opinion understands that Ezra held like the opinion that the original holiness is present forever. Therefore, Ezra only made a rememberance (when he helped rebuild and sanctify the Beis Hamikdash). However, in the days of Shelomo and Yehoshua, this is difficult. (How did they sanctify the Azarah without being able to bring a Minchah?)

וכ"ת דקדשה במנחת העומר והא בסוכות היה הקידוש בימי שלמה כדאמר במועד קטן (דף ט.) וכדמוכחי קראי

1. If you will say that they sanctified it through the Minchas ha'Omer (brought on Pesach), this cannot be, as Shelomo sanctified the Beis Hamikdash during Sukos. This is clearly stated in Moed Katan (9a) and is apparent from the Pesukim!

ויש לומר כיון שהכל בא בבת אחת הקידוש ועשיית מנחה לא חשבינן מנחה בבמה ובקמיצה ובהקטרה היתה מקומה מתקדש וכל העבודה היתה מחנכתה ומתקדש מקומה

(b) Answer #1: It is possible to answer that being that everything happens at once, the sanctification and bringing of the Korban Minchah, it is not considered that the Minchah is brought on a Bamah. When the Kemitzah and burning are done, the place where it is done becomes holy. All of this service would inaugurate the Azarah and make the place holy.

א"נ כיון דלא אפשר לא צריך והא דקאמר הכא דאין מתקדשת היינו היכא דאפשר כגון שבאין להוסיף על העזרה

(c) Answer #2: Alternatively, being that it is not possible, it is not necessary. Our Mishnah only says that it is not holy without this in a case where it is possible to do this, meaning in a case where one is coming to add to the already existing Azarah.

7.

7) TOSFOS DH V'YOTZEI

+

8.

8) TOSFOS DH B'SHECHITAS

+

9.

9) TOSFOS DH AIN BINYAN

+

10.

10) TOSFOS DH AD KI

+

11.

11) TOSFOS DH ASSUR

+

12.

12) TOSFOS DH AMATU L'HACHI

+

12) TOSFOS DH AMATU L'HACHI

תוספות ד"ה אמטו להכי

(SUMMARY: Rashi and Tosfos argue whether the animals walked inside or outside the walls of the Azarah.)

לעיל פירש בקונטרס ואעמידה שתי תודות גדולות אצל החומה מבחוץ

(a) Opinion #1: Earlier (15a), Rashi explained that the Pasuk, "And I will place two large Todos" is talking about placing them outside [near] the wall.

וקשיא אם כן פנימית אמאי נאכלת והא נפסלה ביוצא דלא מצינו שיהא קדוש חוץ לחומה ובפרק בתרא דמכות (דף יט:) נמי אמר במעשר שני טהור שפודין אותו בפסיעה אחת חוץ לחומה

(b) Question: This is difficult. If so, why is the inner Todah eaten? It should be invalid because it is outside the wall, as we have never found a Korban that is holy outside the walls of the Beis Hamikdash! In Makos (19b), the Gemara also discusses Ma'aser Sheini that is pure, and is redeemed one step outside of the wall (once it is in Yerushalayim, it cannot be redeemed).

ונראה דבפנים היו מהלכין

(c) Opinion #2: It appears that they would go inside the walls.

ואע"ג דקרי פנימה להך דלהדי חומה ולפי זה היא יותר חיצונה שהיא כלפי חוץ לעיר

(d) Implied Question: This is despite the fact that the animal close to the wall was called the inner Todah, while it was actually closer to being outside towards the city. (How, then, can this be called the inner Todah?)

מכל מקום קרי לה פנימה לפי שיש דבר אצלה

(e) Answer: Even so it was called the inner Todah, as there was something else next to it (and the wall was on the other side).

והדתנן בפ' כיצד צולין (פסחים פה: ושם) החלונות ועובי החומה כלפנים

(f) Implied Question: The Mishnah says in Pesachim (85b) that the windows and the thickness of the walls are considered like the inside. (According to Tosfos that the animals walked inside, and the windows and walls were already holy, how did this create a new holy area? According to Rashi that they walked outside the walls this is clearly not difficult, as they walked where they established the new holiness.)

אע"פ שהלכו מבפנים היה מתקדש כל מה שהיה בלבם לקדש דלא אפשר לילך בענין אחר

(g) Answer #1: Even though they walked inside, whatever area they wanted to become holy became holy, as it is not possible to have the animals walk outside (as they would become unfit to be brought as Korbanos according to Tosfos).

ועוד דמסקינן התם דוקא בשוה לקרקע ולשם היה אפשר להלך

(h) Answer #2: Additionally, the Gemara concludes there that only the area that was on ground level (of the Beis Hamikdash) was holy. It was therefore possible for the animals to make areas that were not on the same level holy. (The Gemara in Pesachim (86a) discusses roofs of underground chambers that were not on the same ground level as the Azarah, and were therefore not holy despite the fact that they were within the confines of the Azarah.)

13.

13) TOSFOS DH D'KADSHAH

+