*28.6 Makkos Daf 19 A (12 lines Up)*We learned a _beraisa_ (28.4) regarding the permissibility of eating _maaser sheini_ in Yerushalayim after the _churban._ In 28.6 it was explained that since the _zerikah_ of a _bechor_ requires a _mizbeach,_ we learn a _hekesh_ that eating the _bechor_ also requires a _mizbeach_*Summary**Challenge:* If we hold _*“Kedusha rishona kidsha l’asid lavo”*_ that Yerushalayim maintains its _kedusha_ even after the _churban,_ then Bechor *would* be permissible nowadays _[we can build a mizbeach and bring it as a korban]._If we hold *_“Kedusha rishona kidsha l’shaata''_* that Yerushalayim lost its kedusha after the _churban,_ then the permissibility of _Bechor_ *is the same question* as _maaser sheini!_*Ravina:* We hold that *Yerushalayim lost its _kedusha._* But there is no question that the bechor is forbidden, because we’re discussing a specific case of *a _bechor_ which had _zerikah_ before the _churban._* Since the _zerikah_ was with a _mizbeach_ we learn by means of a _hekesh_ that it must also be eaten with a _mizbeach_ [which is no longer possible]._(Our question is; may we eat maaser sheini in Yerushalayim nowadays when there is no mizbeach? But maaser sheini doesn’t need a mizbeach. We thus compare it to a case of a bechor which doesn’t need a mizbeach either - because any avodah was already done before the churban. Since that bechor is forbidden, we learn that maaser is also forbidden)._ See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate

*28.5 Makkos Daf 19 A (Middle)*Rav Sheishes said that only Placing is required in order to permit Bikkurim. A source for this was found in a _beraisa_ forbidding the consumption of _maaser sheini_ in Yerushalayim after the _churban._ It could not deduced logically from Bechor (which is a _korban_ ), nor from Bikkurim (which requires Placing); it was deduced from a _hekesh_ in a _possuk._ Since the beraisa only mentions that Bikkurim requires Placing and not Reading, it seems that only Placing is required.*Summary**Rav Ashi:* Even according to the opinion that Reading is not “required”, *it is certainly part of the Bikkurim procedure.* Why was Reading not mentioned?*Rav Ashi: Since a ger who brings _bikkurim_ cannot read* a _parsha_ that discusses “our fathers”, Reading was not mentioned. *This _beraisa_ is thus not a proof to Rav Sheishes.**Challenge:* Why is the *“Tzad Hashaveh”* method not employed by this _beraisa? (When you can refute two sources for a law in different ways, you combine the two, and deduce from both together),_*Resolution:* Both sources share *a common denominator that is absent* in the case of _maaser sheini._ See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate

*28.4 Makkos Daf 19 A (6 lines Dn)**Summary**Rav Sheishes: Placing the bikkurim* in the _beis hamikdash_ permits it for the _kohen’s_ consumption, *not reading the _parsha._*This follows this Tanna:Beraisa: Rabbi Yosi repeated three things from three sages. The first;*Rabbi Yishmael: Maaser Sheini does not become permissible nowadays in Yerushalayim.*A Bechor needs to be brought to a specific place [the beis hamikdash] just like maaser sheini [needs to be brought to yerushalayim]. A bechor cannot be brought nowadays.But perhaps the reason for that is since *a _bechor_ needs to be brought as a _korban?_**Bikkurim is not brought as a _korban_* and it still cannot be brought nowadays?*Bikkurim requires Placing* [perhaps _maaser sheini_ which does not, can still be brought nowadays].The _possuk_ compares _maaser sheini_ to _bechor,_ this teaches that *_maaser sheini_ is compared to _bechor_ and cannot be brought nowadays.*It seems from this _beraisa_ that *only placing is necessary, not reading.* If reading were necessary the _beraisa_ would have said _“Bikkurim_ requires placing and reading”. This is then *the source of Rav Sheishes.* See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate

*28.3 Makkos Daf 18 B (4 lines Up)**Today’s learning sponsored* by*Mr. & Mrs. Dovid Dukelsky*As an Iluy Neshomo for *Shifra Bas Yeshayahu A"H**Sponsor a day's learning* (thousands of minutes!) for only $50 *click here*https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTURabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov: _“V’lakach hakohen haTene miyadecha”_ refers to _tenufah._*Summary**Question: What is Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov’s reasoning* for selecting this _possuk_ as the source for _tenufah?_*Answer: Since the word Yad is mentioned here.* Regarding _tenufah_ of _shelamim_ we also find the word yad.Yad regarding _bikkurim_ refers to the Yisroel’s hand and Yad regarding _shelamim_ refers to the kohen’s hand. This teaches that in both cases the _tenufah_ must be done by the hand of both, the Kohen and Yisroel. This is possible in practice when the kohen places his hands under the yisroel’s hands and guides him in the _tenufah._*Rava bar Ada quoting Rav Yitzchok:* When does _bikkurim_ become prohibited to a _zar?_ When it comes into the _azarah_ _[Regarding when it becomes permitted for the kohen see 26.3, 28.1, 28.4]._This follows this Tanna:*Beraisa: Rabbi Eliezer:* Bikkurim that was placed at the doorway to the _azarah_ and it is partly inside and *partly outside; what’s outside* is considered _chullin_ and what’s inside is _kodesh._ See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate

*28.2 Makkos Daf 18 B (15 lines before spreads)*Rabbi Elazar quoting Rabbi Hoshaya: Placing the _bikkurim_ in the _beis hamikdash_ permits it for the kohen’s consumption, not reading the _parsha._*Summary**Rabbi Acha bar Yaakov* repeated the statement of “Rabbi Elazar quoting Rabbi Hoshaya” but he credited it to *“Rabbi Asi quoting Rabbi Yochanan”**Rabbi Acha bar Yaakov: Challenge:* This contradicts another statement by Rabbi Yochanan.*Rabbi Asi to Rabbi Yochanan:* When may _bikkurim_ be eaten by _kohanim?_*Rabbi Yochanan:* If it was separated before Sukkos, *from the reading.* After Sukkos; *from when it was placed* in the _beis hamikdash._Above he said, Reading is not what permits the _bikkurim,_ and yet here he says that it is. Above he said that Placing is what permits the _bikkurim,_ and yet here he says that it is not?*Resolution:* When Rabbi Yochanan says that it depends on the Reading, he is expounding *according to Rabbi Shimon* (26.3). When he says it does not depend on the Reading *he is following the Rabbanan* (26.3).When he says it does not depend on the Placing he is expounding *according to Rabbi Yehuda* _(in the following beraisa)._ When he says that it depends on the Placing, *he is following the Rabbanan.**Beraisa: Rabbi Yehuda: _“V’hinachto”_ refers to _tenufah,_* there is another possuk that states _“v’hinicho”_ which refers to Placing. _[If there were two pessukim that mentioned Placing, it would be a necessary part of the Bikkurim process.]_*Question: Who are the Rabbanan* who argue against this?*Answer: Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov:**Beraisa: Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov: _“V’lakach hakohen”_ refers to _tenufah_* _[not v’hinachto, thus it refers to Placing, and we have two pessukim that require Placing]._ See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate

*28.1 Makkos Daf 18 B (24 lines Dn)**Summary*_In 26.3 we learned a difference of opinion regarding what permits the kohen to eat bikkurim, reading the parsha or placing it in the beis hamikdash._*Rabbi Elazar quoting Rabbi Hoshaya: Placing the _bikkurim_* in the _beis hamikdash_ permits it for the kohen’s consumption, *not reading the _parsha._*_[The parsha of bikkurim which mentions “simcha” can only be read until Sukkos.]_*Challenge: Rabbi Elazar quoting Rabbi Hoshaya:* “If one separated _bikkurim_ but neglected to bring it until after Sukkos, *it cannot be eaten.”*It seems that the *reading of the parsha is a requirement,* and since in this case it cannot be read, it cannot be eaten.*Resolution:* Up until Sukkos, when it is *possible* to read the parsha, the _bikkurim_ may be eaten without reading. But after Sukkos *when it cannot be read, it cannot be eaten.**In keeping with Rabbi Zeira’s principle.**Rabbi Zeira:* Any mincha that is *capable* of being mixed, need not be mixed. *But if it cannot be mixed, it is not kosher.* See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate

*27.6 Makkos Daf 18 B (7 lines Dn)*Today’s learning sponsored by*_Sunday Kollel Darkei Avigdor_*Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $50 *click here:*https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU*Summary**Rav Gidal amar Rav: A _kohen_ who eats of _chatas_ and _asham_ before _zerikah,_ gets _malkos._*This is based on the _possuk “V’ochlu osam asher kupar bahem”_ - one may only eat from a _korban_ after the _kapparah_ was affected by means of _zerikah._ *A _lav_ that is inferred from an _eseh_ is considered a _lav._**Challenge: Rava:* If an inferred lav suffices, *why is there a _lav_ specifying the forbidden animals?**Resolution:* We must amend the statement by Rav Gidal amar Rav.*Rav Gidal amar Rav: A _zar_* who eats of _chatas_ and _asham_ before _zerikah,_ *is _pattur._*This is based on the _possuk “V’ochlu osam asher kupar bahem,_ *_v’zar lo yochal”_* - A _kohen_ may eat from a _korban_ after the _kapparah_ was affected by means of _zerikah_ but a _zar_ may not.The _lav_ addressing the _zar_ only applies to a _korban_ that a _kohen_ can eat, but *the _lav_ does not apply before _zerikah._* See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate

*27.5 Makkos Daf 18 A (2 lines Up)*Today’s learning sponsored by*Pinny Tzinner* and *Yanky Borger* in honor of *Reb Yoel Lax*Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $50 *click here:*https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTURava: If a non-kohen ate from an olah before zerikah, outside of Yerushalayim, he would be liable for five sets of malkos according to Rabbi Shimon [For all the lavin previously derived by Rabbi Shimon; 1, Eating outside Yerushalayim, 2, eating outside the azarah, 3, eating an olah, 4, by a non-kohen, 5, before zerikah].*Summary**Challenge: But there is another _lav_* as quoted by Rabbi Eliezer:*Beraisa: Rabbi Eliezer:* _“Kodesh should not be eaten”;_ This is a _lav_ against eating _kodesh_ that became _possul._ _[An olah that eaves the azarah becomes possul]._*Resolution:* That _possuk_ refers to *_kodesh_ that was fit to be eaten before it became _possul,_* but it cannot be applied to _olah._*Challenge: But there is another _lav_* quoted by Rabbi Eliezer.*Beraisa: Rabbi Eliezer:* _“Kalil sihiyeh lo sei’achel”;_ This is a *_lav_ against eating of an _olah._**Resolution: Indeed, Rava would quote this _possuk_* for a sixth _lav,_ Rava was referring to the _lavin_ taught by Rabbi Shimon [Maharam]. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate

*27.4 Makkos Daf 18 A (5 lines Dn)*Today’s learning sponsored by*Yerachmiel and Shoshana Weiss* in honor of *Binyomin’s Bar Mitzvah*Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $50 *click here:*https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTURava: If a non-kohen ate from an _olah_ before _zerikah,_ outside of Yerushalayim, he would be liable for five sets of _malkos_ according to Rabbi Shimon [For all the _lavin_ previously derived by Rabbi Shimon; 1, Eating outside Yerushalayim, 2, eating outside the _azarah,_ 3, eating an olah, 4, by a non-kohen, 5, before _zerikah]._*Summary**Challenge: But there is another _lav;_* “A _zar_ should not eat _kodesh”._*Resolution:* That _possuk_ refers to *_kodesh_ that is being eaten by _kohanim,_* but it cannot be applied to _olah._*Challenge: But there is another _lav;_* _“basar basadeh treifah lo socheilu” (this lav is not necessary for treifah, and the word basadeh is superfluous)_ which means that *meat “outside of its proper place* _(basadeh)”_ should not be eaten.*Resolution:* That _lav_ refers to *meat that may be eaten inside its proper place,* but it cannot be applied to _olah._ See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate

*27.3 Makkos Daf 17 B (4 lines Up)**Today’s learning sponsored*In honor of *Rav Shaul Yechezkel Schwartz Shlita* for his selfless dedication to the klalSponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $50 *click here:*https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTURabbi Shimon derived certain lavin from a _possuk_ based on logical arguments. Since _lavin_ cannot be established by logic, we understand that he derived ‘prohibitions’ not actual _‘lavin’._*Summary**Challenge: Rabbi Shimon is referring to a _lav._**Rava:* If a non-kohen ate from an olah before _zerikah,_ outside of Yerushalayim, he would be liable for *five sets of _malkos_ according to Rabbi Shimon* [For all the _lavin_ previously derived by Rabbi Shimon; 1, Eating outside Yerushalayim, 2, eating outside the _azarah,_ 3, eating an _olah,_ 4, by a non-kohen, 5, before _zerikah]._*Resolution:* Rava does not mean five _lavin,_ *he actually means five prohibitions.**Challenge:* The mishna states *“These are liable for _malkos”_* [and two of Rabbi Shimon’s _lavin_ are mentioned, it seems they’re bona fide _lavin]._*Resolution:* The _lavin_ are not derived by logic but by the *superfluity of the verse.*Earlier in Devarim 12, all of these admonishments are detailed; in our _possuk_ they’re repeated as prohibitions. But the _possuk_ could have said “You may not eat them in your gates”. *From the _possuk’s_ repetition of all the details we learn a _lav_ on each detail.* See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate