1) WHEN WE START COUNTING THE “OMER” (cont.)

(a) (Continuation of Beraisa #2 – R. Yehudah ben Beseira): It says “Tispar Lach” – the count depends on Beis Din;
1. It cannot be the day after Shabbos, for everyone knows that himself, without Beis Din.
2. (This is unlike R. Yehudah ben Beseira in Beraisa #1. Some delete ‘ben Beseira’ from the text (this teaching is of R. Yehudah), others say that there were two Tana’im named R. Yehudah ben Beseira.)
(b) R. Yosi says, “Mi’Macharas ha’Shabbos” – the day after Yom Tov;
1. Suggestion: Perhaps it means after Shabbos Bereishis, i.e. Shabbos of Pesach!
2. Rejection: It only says “Shabbos”, it does not specify – this could be any Shabbos of the year!
(c) Another proof – it says “Shabbos” at the end and at the beginning – just like the end is a Regel, and Shabbos is next to the start of the Regel, also the beginning.
(d) Contradiction (R. Shimon ben Elazar): It says “Sheshes Yomim Tochal Matzos”, and it says “Shiv’as Yomim Matzos Tochelu”!
(e) Resolution: Matzah that may not be eaten for seven days (i.e. Chadash, which is forbidden until the Omer is brought) may be eaten for six days (this teaches that the Omer is brought on the second day of Pesach.)
(f) Suggestion: “Mi’Yom Havi’achem Tisperu” – perhaps we reap and bring the Omer, and we may start counting any time afterwards!
(g) Rejection: “Mi’Yom Havi’achem” (you must start that day.)
(h) Suggestion: Perhaps “Mi’Yom Havi’achem” teaches that we reap, count and bring the Omer during the day!
(i) Rejection: “Sheva Shabasos Temimos Tihyenah” – the weeks must be Temimos (complete), so we must start counting at night.
(j) Suggestion: Perhaps we reap, bring and count at night!
(k) Rejection: “Mi’*Yom* Havi’achem”.
(l) Question: How do we fulfill both verses?
(m) Answer: We reap and count at night, we bring during the day.
(n) (Rava): One can challenge every Tana, except for the last two Tana’im of each Beraisa:
1. We challenge R. Yochanan ben Zakai – the verses he learns from are needed for Abaye’s teaching.
i. (Abaye): It is a Mitzvah to count the days, and a Mitzvah to count the weeks.
2. We challenge R. Eliezer and R. Yehoshua – granted, they prove that “Shabbos” refers to Yom Tov, but perhaps it refers to the last day of Pesach!
3. We cannot challenge R. Yishmael or R. Yehudah ben Beseira (in Beraisa #1.)
4. We challenge R. Yosi b’Rebbi Yehudah – perhaps the Torah says that we count 50 days for seven full weeks, excluding the days from Pesach until the first Motzei Shabbos after Pesach!
5. We challenge R. Yehudah (ben Beseira) (in Beraisa #2) – perhaps we count from the last day of Pesach!
6. R. Yosi realized that his first proof could be challenged (it is R. Eliezer’s proof), so he brought a second proof.
(o) (Abaye): It is a Mitzvah to count the days, and a Mitzvah to count the weeks.
(p) Rabanan of Rav Ashi’s academy counted the days and the weeks.
(q) Ameimar counted the days but not the weeks;
1. He holds that there is no Mitzvah today, only a remembrance to the Mitzvah when the Mikdash stands, it suffices to count the days.
2) PREPARING THE “OMER”
(a) (Mishnah – R. Meir): They reaped the Omer and put it in boxes; they brought it to the Azarah and singed it over fire, in order to fulfill the Mitzvah of Kali (roasted);
(b) Chachamim say, they beat it with reeds and cabbage stalks (they are soft), in order not to mash it; it is put into an Aviv (a copper vessel) with holes, it is roasted inside.
(c) It was spread out in the Azarah to be exposed to the wind to dry out. It was put in a bean grinder, it was sifted through 13 sifters, an Isaron was extracted;
(d) The remainder was redeemed – it is exempt from Ma’aser, but Chalah must be separated (if one makes a dough from it);
(e) R. Akiva says, Chalah and Ma’aser must be taken.
(f) (Gemara – Beraisa – R. Meir): “Aviv” – this is the first harvest;
(g) “Kaluy ba’Esh” – Yisrael singe it in fire; in order to fulfill the Mitzvah of Kali;
(h) Chachamim say, if it was singed in fire it would not be called Kali – Kali is something roasted in Kalil (a copper vessel);
66b—————————————66b

1. There was a pipe used by sellers of parched grain; it had many holes, like a sifter, to allow heat of the fire to enter everywhere.
(i) Question: “Aviv Kaluy…Geres” – is it Kaluy (parched) when it is still Aviv (before it is ground), or when it is Geres (flour)?
(j) Answer: “Ba’Esh” separates between Kaluy and Geres, teaching that Kaluy refers to Aviv.
(k) “Karmel” – it is Rach (soft – we transpose the letters of ‘Kar’ to spell ‘Rach’) and Mal (it can be beaten by hand).
(l) Support: Similarly, other verses are expounded as acronyms:
1. “V’Ish Ba…Lechem Bikurim Lechem Se’orim v’Charmel *B’TZiKLONo* Va’Yomer Ten la’Am v’Yochelu” – *B*a v’Ya*TZ*a*K* *L*anu *v*’Achalnu v’*N*aveh Havah (he came and poured for us, and we ate; it was nice);
2. “*N*i*SALS*a*H* ba’Ahavim” – *N*isa v’Ni*T*en v’N*AL*eh v’Ni*S*mach v’Nis*CH*atei ba’Ahavim” – an adultress entices, let us talk, we will rejoice and stroll in love.
3. “Kenaf Renanim *N*e’*EL*a*S*a*H*” – *N*osei *OL*eh v’Ni*SCH*atei – the Bar Yuchni (a large bird) goes up and gently lays its egg down into its nest.
4. “Ki *Y*a*R*a*T* ha’Derech l’Negdi” – *Y*ar’asah, *R*a’asah, Na*T*sah (Bilam’s donkey feared, saw and turned.)
5. (Tana d’vei R. Yishmael): “Charmel” – Kar Malei (like a full pillow, e.g. stuffed with feathers.)
3) “MIRU’ACH” OF “HEKDESH”
(a) (Mishnah – R. Akiva): Chalah and Ma’aser must be taken.
(b) (Rav Kahana): R. Akiva says that (in general) Miru’ach (final processing) of Hekdesh does not exempt from Ma’aser.
(c) Question (Rav Sheshes – Beraisa) Question: What was done with the rest of the three Sa’im reaped (after an Isaron for the Omer was extracted?)
1. Answer: It was redeemed, anyone could eat it; it is exempt from Ma’aser, Chalah must be separated;
2. R. Akiva says, Chalah and Ma’aser must be taken.
3. Chachamim: This is like a normal case of grain redeemed from Hekdesh, it is exempt from Ma’aser, Chalah must be separated.
i. Summation of question: If Chachamim tried to bring a proof against R. Akiva from a normal case, surely R. Akiva agrees that Miru’ach of Hekdesh exempts!
(d) Answer: Chachamim thought that he agrees, he answered that he argues with this also.
(e) Question (Rav Kahana bar Tachlifa – Beraisa – R. Akiva): Chalah and Ma’aser must be taken, because Hekdesh only buys (with Shekalim of Terumas ha’Lishkah) what is needed (the rest was never Hekdesh!) (Rav Kahana is refuted.):
(f) (R. Yochanan): (Really, R. Akiva holds that Miru’ach of Hekdesh exempts – in the Mishnah) he is Mechayev because Hekdesh buys only what is needed.
(g) (Rava): Surely, Miru’ach of Hekdesh exempts;
1. Even R. Akiva is Mechayev only because Hekdesh buys only what is needed, he agrees that what was truly Hekdesh (at the time of Miru’ach) is exempt.
(h) (Rava): Tana’im argue about Miru’ach of a Nochri:
1. (Mishnah – R. Meir and R. Yehudah): We may Torem produce of a Yisrael (make it Terumah) on (i.e. to exempt) produce of a Yisrael, we may Torem produce of Nochrim or Kusim (questionable converts, they are considered like Nochrim) on that of Nochrim or Kusim, we may Torem anyone’s produce on anyone else’s.
2. R. Yosi and R. Shimon say, we may Torem from Yisrael on Yisrael, from Nochri on Kusi or vice-versa, but we may not Torem from Yisrael on Nochri or Kusi or vice-versa.