About this episode
Study Guide Rosh Hashanah 5 Today's daf is sponsored by Jennifer in honor of Paul Corwin. "Thank you for introducing me to the Daily Daf and for making every step of this life journey a joy. You yourself are a Tree of Life. Your heart is full of all the warmth of Shabbat and wherever you go you leave Mitzvahs behind. All blessings to you my dear friend." The Gemara continues the discussion from a braita regarding the five approaches regarding when one is obligated for delaying bringing a sacrifice. Those who derived from the verse "On the holiday of the matzot, on the holiday of Shavuot and on the holiday of Sukkot" an analogy from Pesach to Shavuot that one has seven days in which to bring the Chagiga sacrifice even on Shavuot, what do they derive from the reference to Sukkot in the verse? They make an analogy from Pesach to Sukkot that one needs to stay overnight in Jerusalem on the holiday. The ones who need the verse about the holidays to relate to delays in sacrifices, from where do they derive that on Shavuot one has seven says to bring the Chagiga sacrifice? They learn it from Rosh Chodesh. The Gemara refers back to the braita that mentioned all the types of sacrifices/promises in which the prohibition to delay is effective. In this braita, a Pesach sacrifice is mentioned. Why? Doesn't it need to be brought on Pesach – how can one offer it on a different holiday. One answer is that it got there by mistake. Another is to say that it is referring to one who designated an animal for Pesach but did not sacrifice it – in that case, it becomes a peace offering. Another braita is brought which takes the verse where delaying is mentioned – only in reference to a vow – and derives from it the other types of items that we saw previously. Two other laws are derived from this verse. One is: "he" and not his exchange. The Gemara tries to determine what is meant by exchange. Another is: "And in thee was sin." From there they derive that the sin is upon the person but the sacrifice is not disqualified. A question is raised against this as it seems to be derived from a different verse by the firstborn.