POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Makos 18
MAKOS 16-20 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications
for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
1) LASHES FOR EATING "KODSHIM" IN A FORBIDDEN WAY
(a) Answer #2: Rather, we expound a different verse -
"Va'Haveisem Shamah Oloseichem
1. Question: Why does the Torah list all of them again
- it could have said 'Lo Suchal l'Achlam'!
(b) (Rava): If a Zar eats Olah before Zerikah outside the
wall of Yerushalayim, according to R. Shimon he is lashed
2. Answer: They are repeated to forbid each by a Lav.
(Tosfos - indeed, if a Zar eats Olah before Zerikah
outside the wall, he is lashed five times; Rashi -
it suffices to learn lashes for eating before
Zerikah (or Bikurim before Kri'ah); lashes for
eating Kodshim outside are from "U'Vasar ba'Sadeh
Treifah Lo Socheilu" (below)).
(c) Question: He should also be lashed for "V'Zar Lo Yochal
Ki Kodesh Hem"!
(d) Answer: That only applies to Kodshim permitted to a
Kohen, Olah is forbidden even to Kohanim.
(e) Question: He should also be lashed for "U'Vasar ba'Sadeh
Treifah Lo Socheilu" - once meat leaves its (allowed)
border, it is forbidden!
(f) Answer: That only applies to meat permitted in its
boundary, Olah is forbidden everywhere.
(g) Question: He should also be lashed on account of R.
1. (R. Eliezer): "Lo Yochal Ki Kodesh Hem" - one is
lashed for eating any Pasul Kodshim.
2) WHAT IS "ME'AKEV" WHEN OFFERING "BIKURIM"?
2. Answer: This is only if it was permitted before it
became Pasul - here, it was always forbidden.
(h) Question: He should be lashed on account of R. Eliezer's
1. (Beraisa - R. Eliezer): Wherever it says 'Kalil
Tihyeh (it will be entirely burned)', there is a Lav
not to eat it.
(i) Answer: Rava only teaches about the lashes R. Shimon
expounded from "Lo Suchal Le'chol bi'Sh'arecha...".
(j) Version #1 (Rav Gidal): If a Kohen eats Chatas or Asham
before Zerikah, he is lashed.
(k) Question: What is the reason?
(l) Answer: "V'Achlu Osam Asher Kupar Bahem" - they may eat
only after Kaparah;
1. A Lav inferred from an Aseh is like a Lav, one is
lashed for it.
(m) Objection (Rava): "V'Chol Behemah Mafreses Parsah...Osah
Tochelu" - you may not eat other animals;
1. If one is lashed for a Lav inferred from an Ase, why
must it say "Es Zeh Lo Sochlu"?
(n) Version #2 (Rav Gidal): If a Zar eats Chatas or Asham
before Zerikah, he is exempt.
(o) Question: What is the reason?
(p) Answer: "V'Zar Lo Yochal Ki Kodesh Hem" only applies when
(the beginning of the verse) "V'Achlu Osam Asher Kupar
Bahem" applies, i.e. after Zerikah, when Kohanim may eat
(a) Version #1 (R. Elazar): Hanachah is Me'akev Bikurim,
Kri'ah is not Me'akev.
(b) Contradiction: But R. Elazar said, if Reuven separated
Bikurim before Sukos, and did not bring them before
Sukos, he must let them rot (for we do not do Kri'ah
(c) Answer: He cannot bring them after Sukos on account of R.
(d) Question: But R. Zeira taught, if a Minchah is small
enough that it could be kneaded, even it was not kneaded,
it is valid;
1. If it is too big (60 Esronim, there is not enough
oil or room in the vessel to knead it), it is
invalid because it was not kneaded (nor even
possible to knead it)! (Here also, since he cannot
do Kri'ah, this disqualifies them!)
(e) Version #2 - Rav Acha bar Yakov - (Rav Asi citing R.
Yochanan): Hanachah is Me'akev Bikurim, Kri'ah is not
(f) Contradiction - Question (Rav Asi): When are Bikurim
permitted to Kohanim?
1. Answer (R. Yochanan): Bikurim for which Kri'ah can
be done are permitted after Kri'ah, Bikurim for
which Kri'ah cannot be done are permitted after they
enter the Azarah.
(g) Resolution - part 1: He said that Kri'ah is Me'akev
according to R. Shimon, he said that it is not Me'akev
according to Chachamim.
2. This implies that Kri'ah is Me'akev, Hanachah is not
(h) Resolution - part 2: He said that Hanachah is Me'akev
according to R. Yehudah, he said that it is not Me'akev
according to Chachamim.
1. (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): "V'Hinachto" - this refers
to Tenufah (waving).
(i) Question: Who is the Tana that argues with R. Yehudah?
2. Question: Perhaps it really refers to Hanachah!
3. Rejection: "V'Hinicho" already teaches about
Hanachah, "V'Hinachto" must refer to Tenufah.
(j) Answer: It is R. Eliezer ben Yakov.
1. (Beraisa - R. Eliezer ben Yakov): "V'Lakach ha'Kohen
ha'Tene mi'Yadecha" - this teaches that Bikurim
2. Question: What is his reason?
3. Answer: He learns a Gezerah Shavah "Yad-Yad" between
Bikurim and Shelamim (regarding which it says "Yadav
i. Just as Bikurim require Tenufah by the Kohen,
ii. Just as Shelamim require Tenufah by the owner,
iii. Question: How do both do Tenufah (at the same
iv. Answer: The Kohen puts his hands under the
owner's, and they wave it together.