Today's Daf Yomi
March 22, 2021 | ืืณ ืื ืืกื ืชืฉืคืดื
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 monthโs learning is sponsored by Shlomo and Amalia Klapper in honor of the birth of Chiyenna Yochana, named after her great-great-grandmother, Chiyenna Kossovsky.
-
This month's learning is sponsored by Elaine Hochberg in honor of her husband, Arie Hochberg, who continues to journey through Daf Yomi with her. โAnd with thanks to Rabbanit Farber and Hadran who have made our learning possible.โ
Pesachim 121 – Siyum Masechet Pesachim
Today’s siyum is sponsored by Lynn Horwitz for the 6th yartzeit of ืจืื ืืื ืื ื ืืช ืืฉืจืื ืืขืงื ืืืื ืจืืืืย which will be on the first night of Pesach, Leil HaSeder. “It seems fitting to sponsor this siyum in Rachelโs memory as it was Rachel who inspired me to start daf yomi.ย 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”.ย 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 Farberโs podcast. While Rachelโs 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.ย ืชื ืฆืื And by Allison and Akiva Shapiro in honor of their daughter Meiraโs 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 (ืืฃ ืืืื ืื ืฉืื - ืขืืจืืช): Play in new window | Download
ืื ืชื ื ืืคืืืื ืืื ืชื ื ืื ืืชืจ
The Gemara explains that there is no dispute between Rav Huna and Rav แธคisda 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.
ืืื ืืชื ื ืืคืืืื ืืฉืื ืืฉืื ืืืื ื ืืื ืืชื ื ืื ืืชืจ ืืฉืื ืขืฆืื ืืืื ื
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.
ืื ืืืจ ืืืืช ืืื ืืืจ ืืืืฆื ืืื ืืืืจ ืืืืช ืืืืกืืจื ืืืื ืืืืจ ืืืืฆื ืืืืืืชื:
It was stated above that Rav Huna and Rav แธคisda 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.
ืืชื ืืณ ืืืจื ืืจืืช ืืคืกื ืคืืจ ืืช ืฉื ืืื ืืืจื ืืช ืฉื ืืื ืื ืคืืจ ืืช ืฉื ืคืกื ืืืจื ืจืื ืืฉืืขืื ืจืื ืขืงืืื ืืืืจ ืื ืื ืคืืืจืช ืื ืืื ืื ืคืืืจืช ืื:
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.
ืืืณ ืืฉืชืืฆื ืืืืจ ืืืืจื ืจืื ืืฉืืขืื ืืจืืงื ืืืื ืฉืคืืื ืืื ืฉืคืืื ืืืื ืืจืืงื
GEMARA: The Gemara explains the opinions of the tannaโim 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.
ืืืืจื ืจืื ืขืงืืื ืื ืฉืคืืื ืืืื ืืจืืงื ืืื ืืจืืงื ืืืื ืฉืคืืื:
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.
ืจืื ืฉืืืื ืืืงืืข ืืคืืืื ืืื ืืขื ืืื ืื ืคืฉืืื ืขื ืคืืืื ืืื ืืฉืจ ืงืืฉื ื ืืืฆืืชืื ืืฆืื ื ืขื ืคืืืื ืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืืจืื ืฉืืืืื ื ืืงืืืื ื ืืืืืขื ื ืืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื
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 [sheheแธฅeyanu], sustained us, and brought us to this time, does the priest recite this blessing, or does the father of the son recite it?
ืืื ืืืจื ืืงืืื ืื ืื ืืืืื ืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืืงื ืขืืื ืืฆืื ืื ืืื ืืืืื ืืชื ืฉืืื ืืื ืืืจืฉื ืืืจื ืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืฉืชืื ืืืืืชื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืฉืชืื:
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 sheheแธฅiyanu is generally recited by the one who receives the benefit. Or, perhaps the father of the son recites sheheแธฅeyanu, 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 sheheแธฅeyanu. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that the father of the son recites two blessings.
ืืืจื ืขืื ืขืจืื ืคืกืืื ืืกืืืงื ืื ืืกืืช ืคืกืืื
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 monthโs learning is sponsored by Shlomo and Amalia Klapper in honor of the birth of Chiyenna Yochana, named after her great-great-grandmother, Chiyenna Kossovsky.
-
This month's learning is sponsored by Elaine Hochberg in honor of her husband, Arie Hochberg, who continues to journey through Daf Yomi with her. โAnd with thanks to Rabbanit Farber and Hadran who have made our learning possible.โ
Subscribe to Hadran's Daf Yomi
Want to explore more about the Daf?
See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners
Pesachim 121 – Siyum Masechet Pesachim
The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria
ืื ืชื ื ืืคืืืื ืืื ืชื ื ืื ืืชืจ
The Gemara explains that there is no dispute between Rav Huna and Rav แธคisda 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.
ืืื ืืชื ื ืืคืืืื ืืฉืื ืืฉืื ืืืื ื ืืื ืืชื ื ืื ืืชืจ ืืฉืื ืขืฆืื ืืืื ื
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.
ืื ืืืจ ืืืืช ืืื ืืืจ ืืืืฆื ืืื ืืืืจ ืืืืช ืืืืกืืจื ืืืื ืืืืจ ืืืืฆื ืืืืืืชื:
It was stated above that Rav Huna and Rav แธคisda 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.
ืืชื ืืณ ืืืจื ืืจืืช ืืคืกื ืคืืจ ืืช ืฉื ืืื ืืืจื ืืช ืฉื ืืื ืื ืคืืจ ืืช ืฉื ืคืกื ืืืจื ืจืื ืืฉืืขืื ืจืื ืขืงืืื ืืืืจ ืื ืื ืคืืืจืช ืื ืืื ืื ืคืืืจืช ืื:
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.
ืืืณ ืืฉืชืืฆื ืืืืจ ืืืืจื ืจืื ืืฉืืขืื ืืจืืงื ืืืื ืฉืคืืื ืืื ืฉืคืืื ืืืื ืืจืืงื
GEMARA: The Gemara explains the opinions of the tannaโim 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.
ืืืืจื ืจืื ืขืงืืื ืื ืฉืคืืื ืืืื ืืจืืงื ืืื ืืจืืงื ืืืื ืฉืคืืื:
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.
ืจืื ืฉืืืื ืืืงืืข ืืคืืืื ืืื ืืขื ืืื ืื ืคืฉืืื ืขื ืคืืืื ืืื ืืฉืจ ืงืืฉื ื ืืืฆืืชืื ืืฆืื ื ืขื ืคืืืื ืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืืจืื ืฉืืืืื ื ืืงืืืื ื ืืืืืขื ื ืืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื
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 [sheheแธฅeyanu], sustained us, and brought us to this time, does the priest recite this blessing, or does the father of the son recite it?
ืืื ืืืจื ืืงืืื ืื ืื ืืืืื ืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืืงื ืขืืื ืืฆืื ืื ืืื ืืืืื ืืชื ืฉืืื ืืื ืืืจืฉื ืืืจื ืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืฉืชืื ืืืืืชื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืฉืชืื:
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 sheheแธฅiyanu is generally recited by the one who receives the benefit. Or, perhaps the father of the son recites sheheแธฅeyanu, 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 sheheแธฅeyanu. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that the father of the son recites two blessings.
ืืืจื ืขืื ืขืจืื ืคืกืืื ืืกืืืงื ืื ืืกืืช ืคืกืืื