Previous daf

1)

(a) What does Rebbi Yishmael, in a Beraisa, learn from the Pasuk in Chukas (in connection with Tum'as Meis) "ve'Chol Asher Yiga *al-P'nei ha'Sadeh*"?
What does this come to preclude?

(b) According to Rebbi Akiva on the other hand, which two things does it come to include?

(c) From where does Rebbi Yishmael learn that Golel ve'Dofek are Metamei?

(a) What does Rav Hoshaya learn from the Pasuk "ha'Noge'a be'Meis be'Nefesh Adam", according to Rebbi Akiva?

(b) What does Rebbi Yishmael learn from there? How does he interpret "be'Nefesh Adam"?

(c) Rebbi Akiva disagrees with that because of what he says in another Beraisa.
What does he learn from the Pasuk "ve'Al Kol Nafshos Meis Lo Yavo"?

(d) How does that explain why he disagrees with Rebbi Yishmael regarding the Pasuk "ha'Noge'a be'Meis be'Nefesh Adam"?

3)

(a) What does our Mishnah say in a case where the fetus of an animal that was experiencing difficulties in giving birth, stuck out its foot, which the Shochet severed before Shechting its mother?
What is the status of the Ubar?

(b) If he severed it only after the Shechitah of the mother, Rebbi Meir considers the mother 'Maga Neveilah'.
Why is that?

(a) On what grounds do the Chachamim consider it only Maga Tereifah?

(b) What are the ramifications of 'Maga Tereifah'?

(c) And they learn this from the Shechitah of a Tereifah, which renders the animal Tahor.
On what grounds does Rebbi Meir disagree with them?

(a) From where does the Tana suggest to learn that the Shechitah of a Tereifah ought not to render it Tahor?

(b) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Shemini "Kol ha'Noge'a Bahem Yitma"?
What does this come to include?

(c) What objection do we raise to the Tana's suggestion that one cannot learn a Tereifah from a Beheimah Teme'ah, because, unlike the latter, it did not have a 'Sha'as ha'Kosher' (a time that it was permitted)?

(a) What distinction does the Tana finally draw between Beheimah Teme'ah and Tereifah regarding Tum'ah?

(b) And what will be the status of an eighth-month baby that has been Shechted?

(a) On what grounds do we query the Tana's ruling, rendering the Ubar, Tamei due to its contact with the severed foot whilst they were still joined? Why do we suggest that it ought nevertheless to remain Tahor?

(b) And we suggest that Rebbi Meir follows his own reasoning in the Mishnah in Keilim, where he discusses a garment of three by three Tefachim that is Tamei Medras.
What is the significance of the Shi'ur of three by three Tefachim?

(c) Rebbi Meir rules there that if the garment is torn in two, each half remains Tamei.
Why is that?

(a) What does Rebbi Yossi say? What reason does *he* give for the garment remaining Tamei?

(b) What are we trying to prove from Rebbi Yossi?

(c) We refute this however, by citing a statement by Ula.
What does Ula say about a piece of garment the size of three by three finger-breadths that is torn off from a large garment that was Tamei Medras? Why is that?

(d) How will this now help us re-establish our Mishnah?

(a) According to Ravina, the Kashya from Tum'as Beis ha'Setarim is not valid for a different reason.
What distinction does he draw between a garment that is Tamei Medras, and the foot of an Ubar, in this regard?

(b) We suggest that the S'vara of 'Kol ha'Omed ... ' is confined to the opinion of Rebbi Meir in a Mishnah in Mikva'os.
What does Rebbi Meir say there about Toveling a pot with an excessively long handle?

(c) How do we reconcile Ravina with the Rabanan there, who require the entire vessel to be Toveled?

(d) According to Ravina, who considers the foot of the Ubar to be severed, why does our Mishnah need to write 'Chatchah'?

Next daf