Previous daf

1)

(a) How is it that a Mavoy with two learned men as great as Rabah and Abaye had neither a Shituf Mavu'os nor an Eruv Chatzeros?

(b) Why could Abaye not donate a loaf of his own on behalf of the other residents of the Mavoy?

(c) So why could he not simply designate one Revi'is in a barrel of vinegar?

(a) A corpse in the house render all the doorways (together with any vessels that are lying there) Tamei.
Will this apply to windows, too?

(b) Why are the vessels not Tamei anyway because of Ohel ha'Mes?

(c) Under which of two conditions (besides that of Machshavah) will the Tum'ah be confined to a specific doorway?

(a) If one had in mind *before* the man died, that, when he died, they would carry him out of a specific doorway then that doorway is Tamei, but not the others. According to Beis Shamai, Machshavah will not help *after* the man has died.
Why not?

(b) What will be the Din of vessels that were placed under one of the other doorways *after* the Machshavah?

(c) What do Beis Hillel say, and what is their reason?

(d) Like whom does Abaye (in 1c) hold?

(a) In another incident, the hot water from the B'ris Milah spilt. Rava ruled that they should ask the baby's mother.
What exactly did they ask her, and how would that solve the problem?

(b) Why was the mother not permitted to heat the water herself?

(c) Rav Mesharshaya queried Rava's ruling on the grounds that she was eating dates.
What did he mean by that?

(d) What did Rava answer him?

(a) In yet a third incident, the hot water for the baby's B'ris Milah spilt. How did Rava organize a Heter to move hot water from his Chatzer to the Chatzer where the baby was - even though the two Chatzeros had not made a joint Eruv?

(b) Why could he not leave the vessels in the men's section of the courtyard?

(c) How could Bitul Reshus help from one courtyard to another?

(a) Ravina asked Rava that since he did not hold like Shmuel, he could have carried the hot water from Chatzer to Chatzer without moving all his vessels to the women's section of the Chatzer.
How would that have been possible?

(b) Ravina's Kashya is based on the assumption that the two statements of Shmuel were interdependent.
How?

(c) Rava replied that, in *this* point, he followed the opinion of Shmuel. What then, is Shmuel's real reason for saying 'Ein Mevatlin ve'Chozrin u'Mevatlin'?

7)

(a) The Gemara suggests that Rav ('Mevatlin ve'Chozrin u'Mevatlin') is synonymous with the Rabbanan (in the Mishnah on 69b), who maintain that if one of the residents was Mevatel his Reshus in the Chatzer, the other residents are not permitted to carry from *his* Reshus into the courtyard, and Shmuel (Ein Mevatlin ve'Chozrin u'Mevatlin') like Rebbi Eliezer (26b) who permits it.
Why does the Gemara think that these these opinions are synonymous?

(b) The Gemara refutes this contention.
How could Rebbi Eliezer, in fact, agree with Rav?

(c) And how the Rabbanan agree with Shmuel?

(a) The Gemara then connects the Machlokes Rav and Shmuel with the Machlokes Tana'im - whether a resident who was Mevatel his Reshus forbids the other residents to carry if he subsequently carries out from his house into the Chatzer, even be'Shogeg (Rebbi Meir), or only be'Mezid, but not be'Shogeg (Rebbi Yehudah).
How would ...

1. ... Rebbi Meir hold like Rav?
2. ... Rebbi Yehudah hold like Shmuel?

(b) In fact, the Gemara concludes, both Tana'im hold that, in fact, the owner has relinquished ownership, like Shmuel.
What then, is the basis of their dispute?

(c) How could the other residents prevent the Mevatel from re-acquiring his rights in the Chatzer?