POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous dafYoma 23
1) THE REVENGE OF THE TALMID CHACHAM
(a) A Talmid Chacham must take revenge and bear a grudge like a
2) PUTTING OUT FINGERS IN THE PAYIS
(b) Question: But what of the Torah prohibition?!
(c) Answer: That is speaking in money matters (as the examples
of Nekimah and Netirah indicate).
(d) Question: But the Beraisa speaks of letting go of vengeful
thoughts even in personal (non-financial) matters?!
(e) Answer: The Talmid Chacham is permitted to bear it (only) in
(f) Question: But Rava taught that it is praiseworthy to
overlook even such slights!?
(g) Answer: That speaks of his willingness to forgive when
(a) Question: If two fingers are permitted, then certainly one!?
3) TRAGEDY ON THE KEVESH
(b) Answer: One speaks of a healthy Kohen (only permitted to put
out one) and the other of an ill Kohen (does not have the
dexterity to put out one) as we learn in the Beraisa.
(c) We count the two fingers of the ill Kohen as one.
(d) Question: But the Beraisa implies that we count it as two
(while the one who puts out a thumb is not counted as two,
but is rather struck with a Pakia)?
(e) Answer: It means we count the ill Kohen as one, and we do
not count the thumb-user at all.
(f) Question: What is a Pakia?
(g) Answer [Rav]: Midra.
(h) Question: What is a Midra?
(i) Answer [R. Papa]: It is a whip with strands at the end.
(j) (Abaye) I used to think that Ben Bibai was in charge of
wicks (Pakia), but now I see that it means the whip.
(a) There was a tragic incident wherein a Kohen stabbed the
winner of a Kevesh-race.
(b) R. Tzadok brought the People to tears with his call
regarding the Eglah Arufah.
(c) The victim's father found his son still in his death throes:
1. He said that the son is their atonement.
(d) Question: Which incident came first (this or the Mishnah)?
2. He said that the knife could still be removed before
3. This teaches the relative importance of Tumah and
bloodshed in the eyes of the People (as in the Pasuk
regarding the time of Menasheh).
1. If it was this one, why didn't the Takanah follow?
(e) Answer: The murder came first, but was regarded as an
isolated incident; while the Mishnah triggered the Takanah.
2. If it was the Mishnah, then how did this one happen?
(f) Question: What Eglah Arufah did R. Tzadok refer to?
4) THE GARMENTS OF THE KOHEN
1. Among the ten qualities of Yerushalayim is that an
Eglah Arufah is not brought from there.
(g) Answer: He was speaking to elicit the People's tears.
2. Also, an Eglah Arufah refers to an unsolved murder, not
to this incident where the murderer is known?!
(h) Question: Had bloodshed become worthless or had Taharas
Keilim become precious?
(i) Answer: Given the reference to Menasheh, we may conclude
that bloodshed had lost significance.
(a) "Ufashat" indicates a change of garments as on Yom Kipur.
(b) In this case, a change to Chol garments.
(c) "Acherim" thus corrects this assumption, that the change is
into Kadosh garments.
(d) Question: Then how are they Acherim from the first set?
(e) Answer: They are shabbier than the first, but still Kadosh.
(f) Answer (R. Eliezer): Acherim refers to the person, teaching
that a Ba'al Mum may take out the Deshen (the Chachamim say
that a Ba'al Mum may not take out the Deshen).
(g) Regarding the first answer, we were taught in a Beraisa that
it is proper to change from the cooking to the serving
garments, to thus honor the Master.
(h) There is a Machlokes if the dispute between R. Eliezer and
Chachamim also applies to taking the Terumah (Resh Lakish)
or is restricted to taking the Deshen out (R. Yochanan).
(i) Question: What is the rationale of Resh Lakish?
(j) Answer: Terumas HaDeshen must not be an Avodah, since the
Torah speaks of its performance with *two* garments.
(k) Question: What will R. Yochanan do with this Pasuk?
(l) Answer: The two garments infer the presence of all four.
(m) Question: Why, then, are these two singled out?
(n) Answer: Mido teaches that it must be a correct fit;
Michnesei Bad teaches that they must be the first garments
(o) Question: Whence will Resh Lakish learn these Halachos?
(p) Answer: Mido (versus Ketones) teaches the first; Al Besaro
teaches the second.
(q) Question: Perhaps this Machlokes regarding the status of the
Terumas HaDeshen as an Avodah has a precedent between the
Tanaim (R. Yehudah and R. Dosa)?!
1. R. Yehudah holds that Yilbash teaches that the four
garments are required for Haramah.
(r) Answer: No, they may both hold that it *is* Avodah, but R.
Yehudah holds that we need a Pasuk to add the Mitznefes and
Avnet (to the two listed) while R. Dosa holds that we do not
need a Pasuk to add them.
2. R. Dosa holds that Yilbash the four garments of the
Kohen Gadol may be used by a Kohen Hedyot.
3. Question #1: But the Avnet of a Kohen Gadol differs
from that of a Kohen Hedyot?!
4. Question #2: How can garments be used for a lesser
5. Rather, Yilbash allows the use of worn (but not torn)
6. The dispute over whether the Bigdei Kohen Gadol may be
used by a Kohen Hedyot derives from Vihinicham Sham,
teaching that they must be placed in Genizah.
7. R. Dosa holds that they may be used by a Kohen Hedyot
and the Pasuk teaches that they may not be reused by
the Kohen Gadol on a subsequent Yom Kipur.
8. Would it not, then, appear that R. Yehudah holds that
Terumas HaDeshen *is* Avodah, and R. Dosa holds it is