(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

Zevachim 50

ZEVACHIM 47-50 - Dedicated to the leaders and participants in the Dafyomi shiurim at the Young Israel of New Rochelle, by Andy & Nancy Neff


(a) What does Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael say about 'Davar ha'Lamed be'Hekesh, Chozer u'Melamed be'Binyan Av'?

(b) What do we extrapolate from there with regard to 'Davar ha'Lamed be'Hekesh, Chozer u'Melamed be'Kal-va'Chomer'?

(c) How does Rebbi Yirmiyah attempt to resolve the She'eilah, based on the same sources as those used by Rebbi Yochanan to prove that 'Davar ha'Lamed be'Hekesh, Eino Chozer u'Melamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah'?

(d) We counter that, in that case, we could certainly learn Tzafon by Asham directly from Olah. If we don't, it must be because of a Pircha on the latter Limud, and by the same token, there is a Pircha on the former one, too).
Why indeed can we not learn Tzafon by Asham ...

  1. ... directly from Olah?
  2. ... from a Binyan Av from Chatas?
2) We now have three Pesukim which teach us Tzafon by Kodshei Kodshim.
Why can we not learn ...
  1. ... Olah from Chatas and Asham?
  2. ... Chatas from Olah and Asham?
  3. ... Chatas from Olah and Asham?
(a) We now ask about 'Davar ha'Lamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah', Chozer u'Melamed be'Hekesh'. Rav Papa quotes the Pasuk in Tzav "ve'Zos Toras Zevach ha'Shelamim, Im al Todah Yakrivenu".
What do we learn there ...
  1. ... regarding a Korban Todah from Shelamim?
  2. ... from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Sham" "Sham" from Ma'aser Sheini?
(b) On what grounds does ...
  1. ... Rav Zutra b'rei de'Rav Mari refute the proof from there that 'Davar ha'Lamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah', Chozer u'Melamed be'Hekesh'?
  2. ... Ravina reject Rav Zutra's refutation? What is the basis of their Machlokes?
(a) So 'Davar ha'Lamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah, Chozer u'Melamed be'Hekesh' remains unresolved. Rami bar Chama cites a Beraisa to try and resolve the She'eilah whether ' ... Chozer u'Melamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah' or ' ... Ein Chozer u'Malemed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah'.
Besides ten Chametz loaves, how many kinds of Matzah loaves would accompany the Todah?

(b) What do we learn from "So'les Murbeches?

(c) What do we learn from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah ...

  1. ..."Chalos" "Chalos" from Murbeches?
  2. ... "Matzos" "Matzos"?
(d) Assuming that the second Limud is from Chalos, what did Rami bar Chama extrapolate from this?

(e) How did Ravina refute that? If the second Limud is not from Chalos, then from where is it?

(a) So Rava learns it from another source. What does the Beraisa, discussing the Par Kohen Mashi'ach, learn from ...
  1. ... the Pasuk in Vayikra "ve'Kirbo u'Firsho ... Ve'hotzi"?
  2. ... the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Rosho al Kera'av" "Rosho al Kera'av" from Olas Tzon?
(b) And what does "ve'Kirbo u'Pirsho" (which is written in the same Pasuk as "ve'es Or ha'Par ve'es Besaro") come to teach us?

(c) And what does Rebbi, in another Beraisa, learn from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Or u'Basar u'Peresh" (by Par ve'Sa'ir shel Yom ha'Kipurim) from "Or u'Basar u'Peresh"?

(d) What has Rava proved from here?

Answers to questions



(a) How do we attempt to resolve the She'eilah whether 'Davar ha'Lamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah Chozer u'Melamed be'Kal-va'Chomer' or not, from 'Davar ha'Lamed be'Hekesh, Chozer u'Melamed be'Kal-va'Chomer'?

(b) Why will this only work according to Rav Papa?

(c) How do we finally resolve the She'eilah from a 'Kal-va'Chomer' from 'Davar ha'Lamed be'Hekesh Chozer u'Melamed be'Kal-va'Chomer'?

(d) We ask whether 'Davar ha'Lamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah Chozer u'Melamed be'Binyan Av' or not.
What do we answer?

(a) We ask whether 'Davar ha'Lamed be'Kal-va'Chomer, Chozer u'Melamed be'Hekesh' or not, and we remain with 'Teiku'. We resolve it however, according to Rav Papa from 'Davar ha'Lamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah she'Eino Lameid min ha'Hekesh', like Rebbi Yochanan?

(b) How do we resolve the She'eilah whether 'Davar ha'Lamed be'Kal-va'Chomer, Chozer u'Melamed ...

  1. ... bi'Gezeirah-Shavah', from a 'Kal-va'Chomer' from 'Ge'zeirah-Shavah she'Melamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah'?
  2. ... be'Kal va'Chomer' with a 'Kal-va'Chomer' from 'Gezeirah-Shavah she'Melamed bi'Gezeirah-Shavah'?
(a) What do we mean when we refer to the previous case as a 'Kal-va'Chomer ben Kal-va'Chomer'?

(b) And what do we mean when we query that on the grounds that it is not a 'ben Kal-va'Chomer', but a 'ben b'no shel 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(c) So we learn it instead from a 'Hekesh she'Melamed be'Kal-va'Chomer'.
How do we learn it from there?

(d) How does this solve our problem? Why is this not also a 'ben b'no shel 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(a) We now discuss whether a 'Davar ha'Lamed be'Kal-va'Chomer, Chozer u'Melamed be'Binyan-Av'.
What sort of Tum'ah does Nivlas Of Tahor Metamei cause?

(b) What does Rebbi Meir in the Beraisa cited by Rebbi Yirmiyah, say about a bird that turns out to be T'reifah after the Kohen performed Melikah? (c) What does Rebbi Yehudah say ...

  1. ... in that case?
  2. ... in the case of a Chulin bird that one Shechted and which then turned out to be a Treifah?
(a) What 'Kal-va'Chomer' does Rebbi Meir Darshen in connection with a Nivlas Of Tahor from a Nivlas Beheimah Tehorah that turned out to be T'reifah after it was Shechted?

(b) And how does he learn the Melikah of Of Kodshim from there?

(c) What does Rebbi Yossi say?

(d) What are we trying to prove from this Beraisa?

(a) We refute this proof however, on the grounds that Rebbi Meir really derives his ruling from a 'Hekesh'.
Which 'Hekesh'?

(b) And even if he learns it from a 'Binyan-Av', we do not have an absolute proof that 'Davar ha'Lamed be'Kal-va'Chomer, Chozer u'Melamed be'Binyan-Av' (bearing in mind that his source is Shechitah of Chulin).
Why not?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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