REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Zevachim 66
ZEVACHIM 66-68 - Dedicated to the leaders and participants in the Dafyomi
shiurim at the Young Israel of New Rochelle, by Andy & Nancy Neff
***** Perek Chatas ha'Of *****
(a) What does our Mishnah say about a Chatas ha'Of that the Kohen brings ...
(b) What does the Tana mean by 'ke'Ma'aseh ...
- ... below the Chut ha'Sikra 'ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Olah' or ke'Ma'aseh Olah le'Shem Olah'?
- ... above the Chut ha'Sikra, even 'ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Chatas'?
- ... Chatas'?
- ... Olah?
(a) What does the Tana say about an Olas ha'Of that the Kohen brings ...
(b) And what does he say about an Olas ha'Of that the Kohen brings below the
- ... above the Chut ha'Sikra 'ke'Ma'aseh Olah le'Shem Chatas'?
- ... above the Chut ha'Sikra 'ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Olah', or 'ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Chatas'?
(a) The Tana concludes 've'Chulan Ein Metam'in Begadim be'Beis ha'Beliyah'.
Answers to questions
What is the significance of this type of Tum'ah?
(b) What is he then coming to teach us?
(c) What does the Tana add to this ruling?
(d) The only exception to this is 'Chatas ha'Of she'As'ah Le'matah le'Shem
Why is that?
(a) Initially, we establish the Reisha of the Mishnah 'Chatas ha'Of
she'As'ah le'Matah' in the case of 'Ma'aseh Olah le'Shem Chatas', by Melikah
(when the Kohen cut both Simanim).
How do we deal with the problem that
our Mishnah, which rules that it is Pasul, will then not go like Rebbi
Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon?
(b) What alternative do we present to explain 'Ma'aseh Olah'?
(c) What advantage do we gain by doing so?
(a) Why can the change in the Seifa 'As'ah Lema'alah ke'Ma'aseh Kulan,
Pesulah' (incorporating Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Chatas'), not refer to the
Kohen's having performed the Melikah above the Chut ha'Sikra?
(b) Then what is it referring to?
(c) On what grounds do we refute the proof that seeing as the change in the
Seifa refers to the Haza'ah, so too, does the change in the Reisha?
(a) In the Seifa, we learned 'Olas ha'Of she'Asah Lema'alah ke'Ma'aseh
Chatas le'Shem Olah, Pesulah'. What might 'Ma'aseh Chatas' refer to, besides
the Melikah of only one Si'man?
(b) We object to the latter interpretation, because then the Seifa
(ve'Chulan ... 'u'Mo'alin Bah') would not go like Rebbi Yehoshua. What
does Rebbi Yehoshua say (in the following Mishnah)?
(a) Rebbi Eliezer ('Mo'alin Bah') and Rebbi Yehoshua ('Ein Mo'alin Bah') in
the following Mishnah, actually argue over 'Olas ha'Of she'Asah Lematah
ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem Chatas'.
Why must 'ke'Ma'asesh Chatas' refer to
the Melikah (i.e. only one Siman) and not to the Mitzuy (i.e. which the
(b) We just established the Seifa ('Olas ha'Of ... Lematah ke'Ma'aseh
Chatas') by Melikah.
How did we establish a. the Reisha ('Chatas ha'Of ...
Lema'alah le'Shem Olah') and b. the Metzi'asa ('Olas ha'Of ... Lema'alah
(c) And how do we deal with this seemingly strange phenomenon?
(a) In the case 'Olas ha'Of she'Asah le'Matah ke'Ma'aseh Chatas le'Shem
Chatas', why does Rebbi Eliezer hold 'Mo'alin Bah'?
(b) He attempts to prove his opinion from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Chatas.
Which 'Kal va'Chomer'?
(c) How does Rebbi Yehoshua refute this proof? Why can one not prove a
'Chatas le'Shem Olah' from an 'Olah le'Shem Chatas'?
(a) How does Rebbi Eliezer then try to prove his point from Kodshei Kodshim
that were Shechted in the south?
Answers to questions
(b) On what grounds does Rebbi Yehoshua refute this proof too?