Today's Daf Yomi
March 22, 2021 | 讟壮 讘谞讬住谉 转砖驻状讗
Masechet Pesachim is sponsored by Sivya Twersky in honor of her daughter, Shoshana Baker, her grandson's upcoming Bar Mitzvah ,and in memory of her father, Harav Pesach Zachariah Halevi ben Reuven and Leah Z'late Z'L. He lived Torah and emunah by example to congregational and biological families. His yahrzeit falls within this masechet.
-
This month's learning聽is sponsored by Leah Goldford in loving memory of聽her grandmothers, Tzipporah bat Yechezkiel, Rivka Yoda Bat聽Dovide Tzvi, Bracha Bayla bat Beryl, her father-in-law, Chaim Gershon ben Tzvi Aryeh, her mother, Devorah Rivkah bat Tuvia Hacohen, her cousins, Avrum Baer ben Mordechai, and Sharon bat Yaakov.
Pesachim 121 – Siyum Masechet Pesachim
Today’s siyum is sponsored by Lynn Horwitz for the 6th yartzeit of 专讞诇 讬讜谞讬谞讛 讘转 讬砖专讗诇 讬注拽讘 讜诇讗讛 专讬讬讝诇聽 which will be on the first night of Pesach, Leil HaSeder. “It seems fitting to sponsor this siyum in Rachel鈥檚 memory as it was Rachel who inspired me to start daf yomi.聽 When Rachel decided to go to Frisch for high school, to help her catch up to the boys who would be in her honors Talmud shiur, we arranged her to have a Sunday morning Talmud “boot camp”.聽 The Rebbi insisted that a parent attend as well so I joined her and together we learned basic gemara vocabulary and how to parse a sugya. While Rachel used these skills to hold her own in shiur, in an attempt to keep up with her growing knowledge of Torah, I began daf yomi, a cycle I completed with the help of Rabbanit Michelle Farber鈥檚 podcast. While Rachel鈥檚 years on this earth were short, her intense embrace of family, friend, nature and learning made a strong impression on and continues to inspire all who knew her.聽 转谞爪讘讛 And by Allison and Akiva Shapiro in honor of their daughter Meira鈥檚 completion of Masechet Pesachim and dedication to daf yomi. And by Avigail Gordon in honor of her daughters. “Tzipora, whose love of learning and dedication to daf yomi inspired me to start this journey in the first place, and Adira, my Pesach baby, who got a headstart in her Talmud learning as she grew inside me. May your lives always be full of Torah learning and commitment, and may you continue to know and learn from and with inspirational female scholars like those in the Hadran community. It is my great honor to learn with them, and with you.”
Why did the rabbis determine that meat that was pigul and notar, that was left beyond the time that was permitted to eat the meat, were to make hands that touched them impure? What were they trying to prevent? And what proportion is the requisite amount that is needed to transfer impurity. There was be a blessing for eating the meat of the Paschal sacrifice and for the chagiga sacrifice. Does a blessing on one of them exempt the other? And if so, which one? Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva disagree. What is the basis for the controversy? In the redemption of the firstborn son, pidyon haben, the father blesses the blessing on the redemption. Who blesses the blessing shehechiyanu – the priest who benefits because he receives money or the father who benefits from the observance of the mitzvah? It is ruled that the father of the son blesses that blessing also.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast (讚祝 讬讜诪讬 诇谞砖讬诐 - 注讘专讬转): Play in new window | Download
讞讚 转谞讬 讗驻讬讙讜诇 讜讞讚 转谞讬 讗谞讜转专
The Gemara explains that there is no dispute between Rav Huna and Rav 岣sda concerning the reason for the prohibition. One of these two Sages teaches his explanation with regard to the case of piggul, mentioned in the mishna; and the other one teaches it with regard to notar.
诪讗谉 讚转谞讬 讗驻讬讙讜诇 诪砖讜诐 讞砖讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 诪讗谉 讚转谞讬 讗谞讜转专 诪砖讜诐 注爪诇讬 讻讛讜谞讛
The Gemara elaborates: The one who teaches it with regard to piggul maintains that the reason is due to suspected priests. As a result of enmity, a priest might cause the offerings to become piggul. To dissuade priests from doing so, the Sages instituted that one who touches piggul is rendered ritually impure, which ensures that the offending priest also suffers from his actions. He who teaches this explanation with regard to notar claims that the reason is due to lazy priests, to prevent sloth among the priests. The Sages decreed that notar causes ritual impurity, to ensure that the priests ate the sacrificial meat within the allotted time.
讞讚 讗诪专 讻讝讬转 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讻讘讬爪讛 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻讝讬转 讻讗讬住讜专讜 讜诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻讘讬爪讛 讻讟讜诪讗转讜:
It was stated above that Rav Huna and Rav 岣sda disagree with regard to the size of the meat that confers ritual impurity. One of them said that an olive-bulk of meat contracts ritual impurity, and one of them said that only an egg-bulk contracts ritual impurity. The Gemara explains the reasoning behind this debate. The one who said that an olive-bulk contracts ritual impurity maintains that the ritual impurity of notar and piggul is similar to its prohibition. Since notar and piggul are prohibited when they are an olive-bulk, the same applies to their ritual impurity. And the one who said that sacrificial meat becomes ritually impure when it is an egg-bulk maintains that it is similar to its ritual impurity. In other words, just as the minimum size of ritual impurity for other types of meat is an egg-bulk, the same applies to piggul and notar.
诪转谞讬壮 讘讬专讱 讘专讻转 讛驻住讞 驻讟专 讗转 砖诇 讝讘讞 讘讬专讱 讗转 砖诇 讝讘讞 诇讗 驻讟专 讗转 砖诇 驻住讞 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讝讜 驻讜讟专转 讝讜 讜诇讗 讝讜 驻讜讟专转 讝讜:
MISHNA: If one recited the blessing over the Paschal lamb, which is: Who sanctified us with His mitzvot and commanded us to eat the Paschal lamb, he has also exempted himself from reciting a blessing over the Festival offering. The blessing for the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth of Nisan is: Who sanctified us with His mitzvot and commanded us to eat the offering. However, if he recited the blessing over the Festival offering, he has not exempted himself from reciting a blessing over the Paschal lamb. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: This blessing does not exempt one from reciting a blessing over this one, and that blessing does not exempt that one, as there is a separate blessing for each offering.
讙诪壮 讻砖转诪爪讗 诇讜诪专 诇讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讝专讬拽讛 讘讻诇诇 砖驻讬讻讛 讜诇讗 砖驻讬讻讛 讘讻诇诇 讝专讬拽讛
GEMARA: The Gemara explains the opinions of the tanna鈥檌m in the mishna. When you analyze the matter you will find that according to the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, sprinkling of the blood on the altar is included in the more general category of pouring. In other words, the blessing over the Paschal lamb, whose blood is poured, includes the Festival peace-offering, whose blood is sprinkled, as sprinkling is included within the general category of pouring. But conversely, pouring is not included in sprinkling. Consequently, when one recites the blessing over the Festival peace-offering, he has not exempted himself from reciting a blessing over the Paschal lamb.
诇讚讘专讬 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 诇讗 砖驻讬讻讛 讘讻诇诇 讝专讬拽讛 讜诇讗 讝专讬拽讛 讘讻诇诇 砖驻讬讻讛:
By contrast, according to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, these are two separate mitzvot: Pouring is not included in sprinkling, and sprinkling is not included in pouring. Therefore, Rabbi Akiva maintains that each offering requires its own blessing.
专讘讬 砖诪诇讗讬 讗讬拽诇注 诇驻讚讬讜谉 讛讘谉 讘注讜 诪讬谞讬讛 驻砖讬讟讗 注诇 驻讚讬讜谉 讛讘谉 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 注诇 驻讚讬讜谉 讛讘谉 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱 讘专讜讱 砖讛讞讬讬谞讜 讜拽讬讬诪谞讜 讜讛讙讬注谞讜 诇讝诪谉 讛讝讛 讻讛谉 诪讘专讱 讗讜 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱
The Gemara discusses another case concerning the order of the blessings: Rabbi Simlai attended a redemption of the firstborn son. The celebrants raised a dilemma before him with regard to the blessings. First they noted that it is obvious that the blessing over the redemption of a firstborn son, which is: Who sanctified us with His mitzvot and commanded us over the redemption of the firstborn son, is certainly recited by the father of the son, as he is the one obligated to redeem his son. However, with regard to the second blessing: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has given us life [shehe岣yanu], sustained us, and brought us to this time, does the priest recite this blessing, or does the father of the son recite it?
讻讛谉 诪讘专讱 讚拽诪讟讬 讛谞讗讛 诇讬讚讬讛 讗讜 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱 讚拽讗 注讘讬讚 诪爪讜讛 诇讗 讛讜讛 讘讬讚讬讛 讗转讗 砖讗讬诇 讘讬讛 诪讚专砖讗 讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱 砖转讬诐 讜讛诇讻转讗 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱 砖转讬诐:
The Gemara explains the two sides of the dilemma. It can be suggested that the priest recites the blessing, as he benefits from the five sela he receives when the boy is redeemed. The blessing of shehe岣yanu is generally recited by the one who receives the benefit. Or, perhaps the father of the son recites shehe岣yanu, as he is the one who performs the mitzva. Rabbi Simlai did not have an answer readily available, and he went to ask this question in the study hall. The scholars said to him that the father of the son recites the two blessings: Over the redemption of the son and shehe岣yanu. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that the father of the son recites two blessings.
讛讚专谉 注诇讱 注专讘讬 驻住讞讬诐 讜住诇讬拽讗 诇讛 诪住讻转 驻住讞讬诐
Masechet Pesachim is sponsored by Sivya Twersky in honor of her daughter, Shoshana Baker, her grandson's upcoming Bar Mitzvah ,and in memory of her father, Harav Pesach Zachariah Halevi ben Reuven and Leah Z'late Z'L. He lived Torah and emunah by example to congregational and biological families. His yahrzeit falls within this masechet.
-
This month's learning聽is sponsored by Leah Goldford in loving memory of聽her grandmothers, Tzipporah bat Yechezkiel, Rivka Yoda Bat聽Dovide Tzvi, Bracha Bayla bat Beryl, her father-in-law, Chaim Gershon ben Tzvi Aryeh, her mother, Devorah Rivkah bat Tuvia Hacohen, her cousins, Avrum Baer ben Mordechai, and Sharon bat Yaakov.
Subscribe to Hadran's Daf Yomi
Want to explore more about the Daf?
See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners
Cultivating Creativity at the Seder with Shira Hecht-Koller
Pesachim 121 – Siyum Masechet Pesachim
The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria
讞讚 转谞讬 讗驻讬讙讜诇 讜讞讚 转谞讬 讗谞讜转专
The Gemara explains that there is no dispute between Rav Huna and Rav 岣sda concerning the reason for the prohibition. One of these two Sages teaches his explanation with regard to the case of piggul, mentioned in the mishna; and the other one teaches it with regard to notar.
诪讗谉 讚转谞讬 讗驻讬讙讜诇 诪砖讜诐 讞砖讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 诪讗谉 讚转谞讬 讗谞讜转专 诪砖讜诐 注爪诇讬 讻讛讜谞讛
The Gemara elaborates: The one who teaches it with regard to piggul maintains that the reason is due to suspected priests. As a result of enmity, a priest might cause the offerings to become piggul. To dissuade priests from doing so, the Sages instituted that one who touches piggul is rendered ritually impure, which ensures that the offending priest also suffers from his actions. He who teaches this explanation with regard to notar claims that the reason is due to lazy priests, to prevent sloth among the priests. The Sages decreed that notar causes ritual impurity, to ensure that the priests ate the sacrificial meat within the allotted time.
讞讚 讗诪专 讻讝讬转 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讻讘讬爪讛 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻讝讬转 讻讗讬住讜专讜 讜诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻讘讬爪讛 讻讟讜诪讗转讜:
It was stated above that Rav Huna and Rav 岣sda disagree with regard to the size of the meat that confers ritual impurity. One of them said that an olive-bulk of meat contracts ritual impurity, and one of them said that only an egg-bulk contracts ritual impurity. The Gemara explains the reasoning behind this debate. The one who said that an olive-bulk contracts ritual impurity maintains that the ritual impurity of notar and piggul is similar to its prohibition. Since notar and piggul are prohibited when they are an olive-bulk, the same applies to their ritual impurity. And the one who said that sacrificial meat becomes ritually impure when it is an egg-bulk maintains that it is similar to its ritual impurity. In other words, just as the minimum size of ritual impurity for other types of meat is an egg-bulk, the same applies to piggul and notar.
诪转谞讬壮 讘讬专讱 讘专讻转 讛驻住讞 驻讟专 讗转 砖诇 讝讘讞 讘讬专讱 讗转 砖诇 讝讘讞 诇讗 驻讟专 讗转 砖诇 驻住讞 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讝讜 驻讜讟专转 讝讜 讜诇讗 讝讜 驻讜讟专转 讝讜:
MISHNA: If one recited the blessing over the Paschal lamb, which is: Who sanctified us with His mitzvot and commanded us to eat the Paschal lamb, he has also exempted himself from reciting a blessing over the Festival offering. The blessing for the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth of Nisan is: Who sanctified us with His mitzvot and commanded us to eat the offering. However, if he recited the blessing over the Festival offering, he has not exempted himself from reciting a blessing over the Paschal lamb. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: This blessing does not exempt one from reciting a blessing over this one, and that blessing does not exempt that one, as there is a separate blessing for each offering.
讙诪壮 讻砖转诪爪讗 诇讜诪专 诇讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讝专讬拽讛 讘讻诇诇 砖驻讬讻讛 讜诇讗 砖驻讬讻讛 讘讻诇诇 讝专讬拽讛
GEMARA: The Gemara explains the opinions of the tanna鈥檌m in the mishna. When you analyze the matter you will find that according to the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, sprinkling of the blood on the altar is included in the more general category of pouring. In other words, the blessing over the Paschal lamb, whose blood is poured, includes the Festival peace-offering, whose blood is sprinkled, as sprinkling is included within the general category of pouring. But conversely, pouring is not included in sprinkling. Consequently, when one recites the blessing over the Festival peace-offering, he has not exempted himself from reciting a blessing over the Paschal lamb.
诇讚讘专讬 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 诇讗 砖驻讬讻讛 讘讻诇诇 讝专讬拽讛 讜诇讗 讝专讬拽讛 讘讻诇诇 砖驻讬讻讛:
By contrast, according to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, these are two separate mitzvot: Pouring is not included in sprinkling, and sprinkling is not included in pouring. Therefore, Rabbi Akiva maintains that each offering requires its own blessing.
专讘讬 砖诪诇讗讬 讗讬拽诇注 诇驻讚讬讜谉 讛讘谉 讘注讜 诪讬谞讬讛 驻砖讬讟讗 注诇 驻讚讬讜谉 讛讘谉 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 注诇 驻讚讬讜谉 讛讘谉 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱 讘专讜讱 砖讛讞讬讬谞讜 讜拽讬讬诪谞讜 讜讛讙讬注谞讜 诇讝诪谉 讛讝讛 讻讛谉 诪讘专讱 讗讜 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱
The Gemara discusses another case concerning the order of the blessings: Rabbi Simlai attended a redemption of the firstborn son. The celebrants raised a dilemma before him with regard to the blessings. First they noted that it is obvious that the blessing over the redemption of a firstborn son, which is: Who sanctified us with His mitzvot and commanded us over the redemption of the firstborn son, is certainly recited by the father of the son, as he is the one obligated to redeem his son. However, with regard to the second blessing: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has given us life [shehe岣yanu], sustained us, and brought us to this time, does the priest recite this blessing, or does the father of the son recite it?
讻讛谉 诪讘专讱 讚拽诪讟讬 讛谞讗讛 诇讬讚讬讛 讗讜 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱 讚拽讗 注讘讬讚 诪爪讜讛 诇讗 讛讜讛 讘讬讚讬讛 讗转讗 砖讗讬诇 讘讬讛 诪讚专砖讗 讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱 砖转讬诐 讜讛诇讻转讗 讗讘讬 讛讘谉 诪讘专讱 砖转讬诐:
The Gemara explains the two sides of the dilemma. It can be suggested that the priest recites the blessing, as he benefits from the five sela he receives when the boy is redeemed. The blessing of shehe岣yanu is generally recited by the one who receives the benefit. Or, perhaps the father of the son recites shehe岣yanu, as he is the one who performs the mitzva. Rabbi Simlai did not have an answer readily available, and he went to ask this question in the study hall. The scholars said to him that the father of the son recites the two blessings: Over the redemption of the son and shehe岣yanu. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that the father of the son recites two blessings.
讛讚专谉 注诇讱 注专讘讬 驻住讞讬诐 讜住诇讬拽讗 诇讛 诪住讻转 驻住讞讬诐
