Previous daf

1)

(a) Assuming that the Tana of our Mishnah 'ha'Mevakeres ha'Maksheh Leiled Mechatech Eiver Eiver ... ' speaks about cutting the Bechor into limbs and feeding them all to the dogs, on whom does the Mishnah pose a Kashya?

(b) How will Rav Huna therefore establish our Mishnah?

(c) What problem do we have with this from the Seifa 'Yatza Rubo, Yikaver'?

(d) So how will Rav Huna explain the Seifa?

(a) Rava asks whether we go after the Rov with regard to Evarim, to consider the Bechor born or not. We suggest that he is speaking about a case where the majority of the animal that emerged includes the minority of a limb (the majority of which remained inside the mother).
What will the She'eilah then be?

(b) On what grounds do we reject this suggestion?

(c) Then what *is* the She'eilah? What is the case?

(d) How can it be permitted to cut off part of a Bechor and feed it the dogs? Why is it not considered making a blemish on Kodshim?

(a) We try to resolve Rava's She'eilah from our Mishnah 'Yatza Rubo, Harei Zeh Yikaver'.
Why can we not accept this statement literally?

(b) Why can the Chidush not be that 'Mechatech u'Meni'ach Na'aseh ke'Mi she'Yatzta Rubo' (like we explained above according to Rav Huna)?

(c) We therefore suggest that the Tana is speaking in Rava's case, and he is coming to teach us that we consider the minority of the limb that remained inside, born, resolving Rava's She'eilah.
On what grounds do we reject this suggestion? What might the Tana alternatively be coming to teach us?

(a) Rava asks whether, if the Bechor emerged from the womb, but after the midwife wrapped him in a creeper from a date-palm (or in a shawl [Rashi does not seem to have this case in his text]).
What is Rava's She'eilah? Why should he not be considered a Bechor?

(b) He then asks what the Din will be if it is wrapped in his placenta.
On what grounds do we find it necessary to establish this case by the placenta of another baby, and not its own?

(c) Why does Rava find it necessary to ask this She'eilah? What must he then assume in the previous one?

(d) He then asks whether, if a woman (the owner of the animal) holds the baby to assist in its birth, it is considered a Chatzitzah.
Why might it not be?

(e) We establish all the She'eilos when the Bechor emerged from the womb backwards.
Why is that?

(a) Rava then asks what the Din will be if, whilst it is still inside its mother's womb, a weasel swallowed it, and extracted it from the womb.
On what grounds do we reject the She'eilah the way it stands?

(b) So how do we establish it?

(c) And finally, he asks what the Din will be if someone holds the mother's womb next to the womb of another animal, and the fetus moves from one to the other.
What is the She'eilah there?

(d) What is the outcome of Rava's She'eilos?

(a) Rav Acha asks whether the Bechor has a Din Bechor, if the walls of the womb stretched and it was born without touching them.
What are the two sides of the She'eilah?

(b) What does Mar bar Rav Ashi mean when he asks whether a Bechor becomes Kadosh if it is born from its mother's womb which is torn out (which obviously cannot be taken literally)?

(a) Rebbi Yirmiyah asked Rebbi Zeira what the Din with regard to 'Nigmemu Koslei Beis ha'Rechem'.
What is the She'eilah assuming that 'Nigmemu means that the inner ...

1. ... part of the thickness of the walls of the womb has been removed?
2. ... section of the womb has been removed?

(b) What was Rebbi Zeira's reaction to Rebbi Yirmiyah's She'eilah?

(c) Rebbi Zeira asked two She'eilos.
One, regarding where the major section of the womb was still intact, and that is where the baby was born. What is the other She'eilah?

(d) What did Rebbi Zeira conclude?

8)

(a) What does our Mishnah say about a shepherd who places his hand inside the stomach of a Kasher animal and touches the dead Ubar lying inside it?

(b) The Tana Kama extends this Din to a Tamei animal.
What does Rebbi Yossi Hagelili say?

(c) The Tana Kama learns his ruling from a 'Kal va'Chomer'.
Which 'Kal va'Chomer?

(d) On which principle might his ruling also be based?

(a) We learned a Pasuk in Shemini "ve'Chi Yamus min ha'Beheimah Asher Hi Lachem le'Ochlah".
If "Asher Hi Lachem le'Ochlah" refers to Kasher animals, what does "ve'Chi Yamus min ha'Beheimah" refer to?

(b) What does the Tana Kama learn from this Hekesh?

(c) To explain Rebbi Yossi Hagelili, what does Rebbi Yitzchak learn from the Pasuk there "ve'Chol Holech al Kapav be'Chol Chayah ha'Holeches ... "?

(d) In that case, why according to Rebbi Yossi Hagelili is a dead ...

1. ... Kalut in the stomach of a cow not Metamei?
2. ... cow in the stomach of a camel Metamei (seeing as is not Mehalchei Kapav) Metamei?
3. ... Kalut (which is also "Holech al Kapav) in the stomach of a Kelutah not Metamei?

(e) How do we know that the latter case is not Metamei?

(a) How does Rav Achdevu'i bar Ami query all this from a dead Chazir in the stomach of a Chazirta?

(b) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak therefore learns Rebbi Yossi Hagelili's ruling from the Pasuk in Vayikra "Nefesh ki Siga be'Chol Tamei O be'Nivlas Chayah Teme'ah O be'Nivlas Beheimah Teme'ah O be'Nivlas Sheretz Tamei".
What problem do we have with the words "Beheimah Teme'ah"?

(c) What does he therefore learn from there, according to Rebbi Yossi Hagelili?

(d) Seeing as we now learn this from Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, why do we need Rebbi Yitzchak's D'rashah ("ve'Chol Holech al Kapav")?

(a) What did Rebbi Yonasan comment to ben Azai? Of the Neveilos of the four animals, Beheimah Tehorah and Teme'ah, Chayah Tehorah and Teme'ah, which one has no specific Pasuk to teach us that its Neveilah is Metamei?

(b) On what grounds did he refute ben Azai's reply, when he quoted the Pasuk in Shemini "Kol Holech al Kapav, be'Chol ha'Chayah ha'Holeches ... ha'Noge'a be'Nivlasah, Yitma"?

(c) What did Rebbi Yonasan reply, when ben Azai asked him what Rebbi Yishmael said in this regard?

(d) What else did Rebbi Yonasan cite Rebbi Yishmael as saying?

(e) What did ben Azai then lament about himself?

Next daf