Previous daf

1)

(a) We learn from the episode in Beis-Sha'an - that it is wrong to scorn a Talmid-Chacham who says something that appears startling.

(b) The meaning of ...

1. ... 'Ein Mazichin Oso', based on the Pasuk "ve'Lo Yizach ha'Choshen me'al ha'Eifod" is - that one may not force him to retract (move him away from his statement).
2. ... 'Ein Maznichin Oso', based on the Pasuk "ki Lo Yiznach Le'olam Hashem" is - that one does not make him reject what he said.

(c) 'Ein Mazchichim Oso' means - that one may also not brand him as being conceited on account of it.

(d) The Beraisa in Sotah records that an increase in 'Zechuchei ha'Leiv' - resulted in an increase in Machlokos among the Talmidei-Chachamim.

(a) The Pasuk relates - that Menasheh did not manage to capture Beis-Sha'an, Ta'anach and their villages.

(b) The problem Rebbi Yehudah b'rei de'Shimon ben Pazi raises from here with Rebbi Meir and Rebbi is - that Beis-Sha'an is clearly part of Eretz Yisrael, so how could they exempt it from Ma'asros?

(c) To answer this Kashya, we cite Rebbi Shimon ben Elyakim ... Amar Rebbi Elazar ben Shamua, who stated - that there are many cities that the Olei Mitzrayim captured (took control over), but not the Olei Bavel.

(d) The Olei Bavel deliberately refrained from capturing them - so that the poor should have a source of sustenance during the Sh'mitah.

(a) When Rebbi observed that Rebbi Meir only ate a vegetable *leaf* in Beis Sha'an, he meant to ask - how Rebbi could permit Beis-Sha'an on the basis of that testimony, seeing as a vegetable leaf has the Din of Arai (casual eating), which does not need to be Ma'asered.

(b) Rebbi Zeira replied - that in fact, he ate from a bunch of vegetables (the formation of which, renders vegetables subject to Ma'asros, as we learned in the Mishnah in Ma'asros).

(c) Rebbi knew that Rebbi Meir had not ...

1. ... simply forgotten to Ma'aser the vegetables -because, as our Sugya stresses, Hashem guards Tzadikim against eating forbidden foods.
2. ... Ma'asered them from a different batch that he had at home - since we do not suspect Tzadikim of Ma'asering 'she'Lo min ha'Mukaf '(taking Ma'aser not in the presence of the produce on behalf of which they are Ma'asering.
3. ... looked at one side and separated Ma'aser in his mind, before eating from the other side - because of the caliber of the testifier, who would not have testified had there been the slightest doubt that this was not the case.

(a) Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir - was on his way to perform the Mitzvah of Pidyon Shevuyim (redeeming captives), when he arrived at the River Gana'i. (b)

1. When he discovered that there was no crossing - he asked the river to split, to allow him to cross.
2. When the river refused on the grounds that whereas *it* was certainly fulfilling the wish of its Creator, *he* was only a Safek whether he would succeed or not (see Tosfos DH 'Amar Leih') - he retorted that if it refused to split, he would decree that no more water would ever flow into it again.

(c) When the River made its claim, it was referring to the Pasuk in Koheles "Kol ha'Nechalim Holchim el ha'Yam".

(d) Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir ordered the river to split also for ...

1. ... his traveling companion - who was also performing a Mitzvah, inasmuch as he was carrying wheat for Matzos shel Mitzvah.
2. ... the Arab merchant who had joined them - so that people should comment on how badly one treats those who accompany a Yisrael.

(a) Rav Yosef considered Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir greater than Moshe and the six hundred thousand members of K'lal Yisrael - for whom the sea only split once, whereas for him it split three times.

(b) He amended his statement from 'greater than' to 'as great as' - when he was asked to prove that the river split three times and not just once (remaining split until all three had crossed).

6)

(a) When Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir' donkey refused to eat the barley ...

1. ... that the innkeeper fed it, he tried sifting it.
2. ... even after he had sifted the barley - he cleaned it of stones and waste, using his hands.

(b) 'Chavtinhu' must mean 'sifted' and not 'threshed' - because if it had not been threshed, it would not yet be subject to Terumos and Ma'asros.

(c) Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir suggested (with justification, as it turned out) - that perhaps the barley was not Ma'asered.

(d) He referred to the donkey as 'this poor fellow' - because, he claimed, here it was on its way to 'carry out the will of its Creator, and here was the innkeeper feeding it Tevel!

(a) We query the donkey's Chumra, based on the Mishnah in D'mai, which rules that grain of D'mai that one purchases for seeding or for feeding one's animal, flour for tanning hides, or oil for fuel or to anoint vessels - does not need to be Ma'asered.

(b) Vaday Tevel under these circumstances, would be Chayav Ma'asros mi'de'Rabbanan, only they did not extend the decree to D'mai.

(c) We reconcile the donkey of Rebbi ben Ya'ir with the Mishnah in D'mai through Rebbi Yochanan - who qualifies the Mishnah, confining it to where one purchased the grain initially as animal fodder, but not when the owner initially purchased it for human consumption, and then decided to use it to feed his animals (as was the case with the innkeeper of Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir).

(d) And we support Rebbi Yochanan with a Beraisa, which rules that someone who buys grain to eat, but then decides to use it to feed ...

1. ... his own animals, or ...
2. ... somebody else's - is first obligated to Ma'aser it.

(a) Rebbi's face shone with pleasure, when Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir initially accepted his invitation to eat by him - because the latter was known not to accept invitations.

(b) After referring to Yisrael as 'Kedoshim', Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir ascribed his reluctance to accept invitations to two categories of people - a. to those who really want to invite guests but who do not have the means to do so (and whose invitations Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir did want to accept), and b. to those who do have the means, but who do not really want to have guests.

(c) And it is in connection with the latter that the Pasuk in Mishlei warns - not to partake of the bread that the miser offers you, for he invites you reluctantly; he extends an invitation, but the invitation is not sincere.

(d) Rebbi, he claimed, was different - in that he both had the means and his invitation was sincere.

(a) Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir promised - to accept Rebbi's invitation upon his return. He was unable to fulfill his request immediately, he explained - because he was on his way to perform a Mitzvah.

(b) Upon his return, he exclaimed that the Angel of Death was lurking in Rebbi's house - when, 'by chance', he entered his estate through one of many doorways, where he came across white mules (whose bite is incurable) in Rebbi's possession.

(c) When he saw them - he declared that he could not possibly eat by someone who keeps the Mal'ach ha'Maves in his house.

(d) Neither was he satisfied when Rebbi offered to ...

1. ... sell the mules - because then he would transgress the La'av of 'Lifnei Iver ...'.
2. ... declare them Hefker (and send them into the forests) - because that would result in a lot of damage.
3. ... cut off the soles of their feet (which would not have been 'bal Tashchis', since they could still have been used for threshing).
4. ... kill them - because that would mean contravening the La'av of 'bal Tashchis'.

(a) When Rebbi began to plead with him to relent - a mountain suddenly sprung up between them.

(b) Rebbi - burst into tears and exclaimed that if that is how Hashem protects the interests of Tzadikim during their lifetime, how much more so after their deaths.

(c) His statement was based on another statement made by Rebbi Chama bar Chanina, who declared - that Tzadikim are greater after their death than they are in their lifetime.

(d) This statement was based in turn, on an incident that occurred with Elisha after his death - when the corpse of a Rasha, who was hastily thrown into his grave, arose and walked away (so as not to denigrate Elisha with his presence). And this was a greater miracle than the child of the Shunamis whom he revived in his lifetime, which he achieved only after considerable effort on his part.

(a) Rav Papa asked Abaye how Rebbi Chama bar Chanina knew that this incident was not merely the result of Eliyahu's promise - that Elisha would achieve double of what he himself achieved (i.e. that he would revive two dead people against the one that Eliyahu had revived).

(b) This would negate Rebbi Chama bar Chanina's proof - since the miracle would then be the fulfillment of the Pasuk in Iyov "Ve'sigzar Omer Ve'yakum Lach" (that Hashem fulfills the requests of Tzadikim) rather than due to the merit of Elisha.

(c) Abaye answered - that if that was the case, the Rasha should have remained alive, and not walked a short distance and dropped dead (as the Pasuk records).

(d) Eliyahu's promise came true, says Rebbi Yochanan - when he cured the Tzara'as of Na'aman, general of the Syrian army (and, as the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha (in connection with Miriam) indicates, Tzara'as is akin to death).

(a) According to Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, does the Pasuk refers to white mules as "Yeimim" - because they cast fear into the hearts of those who come across them.

(b) Rebbi Chanina was a doctor. When he declared that nobody had ever consulted him regarding a kick from a white mule and lived, he meant, not the person, but the wound ('Ve'chaysah', and not 'Ve'chayah').

(c) To reconcile this with the fact that there were cases of people wounded by the bite of white mules who recovered - we explain 'white mule' to mean a black mule with white feet.

(a) A witch was trying to remove earth from where Rebbi Chanina was standing without his noticing - in order to cast a spell on him that would kill him.

(b) But Rebbi Chanina told her - that she was wasting her time, because the Torah writes "Ein Od mi'Levado" (i.e. it is impossible to cause somebody's death unless it has been decreed in Heaven).

(c) Rebbi Yochanan explained the word "Cheshafim" - to be the acronym of 'Makchishin Pamalya shel Ma'alah' (meaning that witchcraft defies the Divine decree).

(d) We reconcile this with Rebbi Chanina's previous statement - by establishing the latter with regard to most people, and the former, to Tzadikim of the caliber of Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir.

(a) Rebbi Chanina also says - (based on the Pasuk in Tehilim "me'Hashem Mitz'adei Gaver, ve'Adam Mah Yavin Darko") that if someone knocks his finger - then it must have been decreed in Heaven.

(b) Rebbi Elazar stated that the blood that flows from a finger that one knocked - atones like the blood of an Olah.

(c) Rava adds three conditions to that. One, that it pertains specifically to the right thumb - which one tends to knock with more force.

(d) Secondly, it pertains to the second knock on the same spot (before the first one has healed). And thirdly - it is confined to a person who is going to perform a Mitzvah.

Next daf