(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


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 be'Tum'ah.
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.
What does 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 ...

  1. ... Rebbi Avahu require a special D'rashah for Rebbi Shimon?
  2. ... 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?
(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'.
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?

(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"?

Answers to questions



(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 forgot later.
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 ...

  1. ... in Kedoshim "Le'ma'an Tamei es Mikdashi"?
  2. ... in Acharei-Mos "u'Shemartem es Mishmarti Levilti Asos me'Chukos ha'To'evos ... ve'Lo Sitam'u Bahem"?
  3. ... in Masei "ve'Lo Setamei es ha'Aretz"?
(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"?
(a) How does Rebbi Shimon query the need for Rebbi Yehudah's D'rashah?

(b) What does he learn from ...

  1. ... the Pasuk "ve'Chiper al ha'Kodesh mi'Tum'os ... "?
  2. ... the Hekesh "u'mi'Pish'eihem le'Chol Chatosam"?
  3. ... "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?

(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?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,