Previous daf

1)

(a) What does our Mishnah say about Shimon who sees Reuven Shecht a bird and not perform Kisuy ha'Dam?

(b) And what does the Tana say about a case where the wind ...

1. ... uncovered blood on which Kisuy ha'Dam was already performed?
2. ... covered the blood before the Shochet had a chance to perform the Mitzvah?

(c) In the same context, what does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos ...

1. ... "Ve'shafach ... Ve'chisah"?
2. ... "Va'omar li'Venei Yisrael", with which the Parshah begins?

(a) What does another Beraisa learn from "Ve'shafach ... Ve'chisah"? What principle does this teach us?

(b) What did Raban Gamliel in a Beraisa, rule with regard to a case where Reuven Shechted a bird, and Shimon preempted him, covering the blood before Reuven had a chance to do so?

(c) We ask whether the fine was to pay for the 'stolen' Miztvah or the 'stolen' B'rachah.
What are the ramifications of the She'eilah?

(a) And we resolve the She'eilah from an incident that occurred with Rebbi.
What did a certain Tzedoki try to prove from the Pasuk in Amos "Ki Hinei Yotzer Harim u'Vorei Ru'ach"?

(b) What did Rebbi answer him, based on the end of the Pasuk "Hashem Tzevakos Sh'mo"?

(c) How did the Tzedoki react to that?

(d) Why did Rebbi fast three fasts?

(a) As Rebbi was about to break his fast, there was a knock at his door.
What did he think? Why did he cite the Pasuk in Tehilim "Va'yitnu be'Varusi Rosh"?

(b) Who in fact, was at the front door? What good news did he bring Rebbi?

(c) After accepting Rebbi's invitation to join him for his meal, what did the second Tzedoki choose, when Rebbi presented him with the choice of Bensching over a Kos shel B'rachah or money? How much did he offer him?

(d) What did a Heavenly Voice proclaim?

(e) What did Rebbi Yitzchak testify about that Tzedoki's family?

(a) What is the Din regarding someone who finds an object that he has already returned to the owner before? What does "Hasheiv" (in Ki Seitzei) imply?

(b) Rav Acha b'rei de'Rava asked Rav Ashi why this should differ from the Din in our Mishnah, which exempts a person who has performed Kisuy ha'Dam once from performing it a second time, should the wind uncover it.
What did the latter reply?

(a) How does Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan qualify the Din in our Mishnah 'Kisahu ha'Ru'ach, Chayav Lechasos'? Under which circumstances is he Chayav?

(b) Why do we not apply here the principle of 'Dichuy' ('Once Patur, always Patur')?

(c) In which area of Halachah does 'Dichuy' apply?

(d) What is the difference between Rebbi Yochanan's ruling and the case in the Beraisa 'ha'Shochet ve'Nivla Dam be'Karka, Chayav Lechasos' (even though the blood was not subsequently uncovered)?

7)

(a) What does our Mishnah say about the Dam Shechitah of a bird that became mixed up with water? Under which circumstances does one remain Chayav to cover it?

(b) And what does the Tana say about blood which became mixed up with red wine or with the blood of a Beheimah or of a Chayah (which is not Dam ha'Nefesh)?

(c) What does Rebbi Yehudah say about the latter cases?

(a) And what does the Tana finally say about blood that ...

1. ... squirts on to the ground beyond the hole that one prepared for the Dam Shechitah?
2. ... sticks to the knife?

(b) How does Rebbi Yehudah qualify these final rulings?

(a) We learned the identical Mishnah in Zevachim with regard to the blood of Kodshim that became mixed up with water, wine or blood of a Beheimah or of a Chayah.
What distinction did Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan draw there between whether it was the water that fell into the blood or the blood into the water? What does he rule in the latter case?

(b) Rav Papa explains that this distinction will not apply to our Mishnah.
Why not? What will our Mishnah hold even in a case where the blood fell into the water?

(a) What is Rav Yehudah Amar Rav referring to when he says that 'it' atones, is Machshir Lekabel Tum'ah and requires covering?

(b) We conclude that although 'Mechaprin' and 'Chayavin be'Kisuy' are already mentioned specifically in their respective Mishnayos (as we just explained), Machshirin is not.
What problem do we have with ...

1. ... this?
2. ... the suggestion that Rav is referring to a case where one mixed the blood with rain-water?

(a) So how do we answer the Kashya?

(b) Rebbi Asi from Naharbil establishes the case by 'Tzalelta de'Dama'.
What is that? How does it answer the Kashya?

(c) Rebbi Yirmiyah establishes the case with regard to the Chiyuv Kareis (for drinking blood, but not water)? How much real blood would the mixture need to contain for that?

(a) We learned in a Beraisa that all the liquids that emerge from a Meis are Tahor except for one.
Which one?

(b) What does the Tana say about every appearance of red that emerges from him?

(c) We query the initial statement of the Beraisa from a Mishnah in T'vul-Yom, where the Tana compares all liquids that emerge from a T'vul-Yom to liquids that touch it.
What will be the Din in both instances?

(d) What does the Mishnah say about the liquids that emerge from all other Teme'in, both minor and major?

(a) How do we initially interpret 'minor' and 'major'?

(b) What problem does that create with the previous Beraisa?

(c) To solve the problem, how do we re-interpret 'minor' and 'major'?

(d) Why did Chazal decree Tum'ah on the liquids of a Zav but not on those of a Meis?

Next daf