Previous daf

1)

(a) If a convert who was sharing a series of rooms in a barn in a courtyard with a Jew, dies, as long as nobody else takes possession of his section, it is obvious that the Jew is permitted to carry in the courtyard. What does the Beraisa mean when it says 'Mes Ger Mi'b'od Yom, Af Al Gav she'Hichzik Yisrael Acher bi'Nechasav, Oser'?
How does Rav Nachman interpret 'Oser'?

(b) Rebbi Yochanan establishes the author of the two previous Beraisos (from which we asked on Rav Nachman) to be Beis Shamai.
What do Beis Shamai say?

(a) What is difficult with the statement in the Beraisa (with regard to a Yisrael and a convert who shared a barn in a courtyard, and the convert died) 'mi'b'Od Yom, Af Al Pi she'Hichzik Yisrael Acher bi'Nechasav, Oser'?

(b) How does Rav Papa amend the Beraisa and explain it? Why will we not apply the principle 'Kol she'Mutar le'Miktzas Shabbos' ... ?

(c) According to Beis Hillel, Bitul Reshus helps even on Shabbos. Ula tries to compare this to the case of 'K'lach Eitzel Yafos'. What is the case of 'K'lach Eitzel Yafos', and what is the attempted comparison to Beis Hillel?

(d) The Gemara however, rejects this comparison outright.
What then, is the basis of the Machlokes between Beis Hillel and Beis Shamai (regarding whether Bitul Reshus helps on Shabbos or not)?

(a) If Reuven is a partner in both of his neighbors - Shimon and Levi's wine businesses, the three neighbors do not require an Eruv. This is not the case if one of his neighbors owns a wine business, and the other, an oil business. According to Rav, the difference lies in how many vessels are being used.
What does this mean?

(b) What proof does Rava bring for this?

(c) On what grounds does Abaye reject Rava's proof?

(a) 'Rebbi Shimon Omer, Echad Zeh ve'Echad Zeh, Einan Tzerichin Eruv'. This appears to be highly illogical, since the two commodities are not fit to combine.
How does Rabah explain Rebbi Shimon? What is his source?

(b) Are Shimon and Levi (the two outer neighbors) permitted to carry from one to the other?

(c) What do the Rabbanan now hold, and what is their reasoning?

(d) How do we explain Rebbi Shimon's words 'Ein Tzerichin le'Arev'? To whom does this pertain?

5)

(a) Rav Yosef interprets our Mishnah by one Mavoy (like we did originally). According to him, Rebbi Shimon follows the opinion of Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri, and the Rabbanan that of the Rabbanan, in their Machlokes regarding oil floating on wine.
What is the Machlokes there?

(b) How will we now explain Rebbi Shimon's opinion?

(a) Rebbi Elazar ben Tadai holds that even if Shimon and Levi are both wine-merchants, they require an Eruv.
If, as Rabah explains, both poured their wine into the barrel, the Rabbanan concede that no Eruv is needed, then what are they arguing about, and what is the basis of their Machlokes?

(b) What is the technical difference between Eruv Chatzeros and Shituf Mavu'os, and how is this based on the difference in their functions?

(c) How does Rav Yosef (who disagrees with Rabah), on the basis of that distinction, explain the Machlokes between Rebbi Shimon ben Tada'i and the Rabbanan?

(d) How does Rav Yosef prove his interpretation of Rebbi Shimon ben Tada'i from Rav, who is quoted as ruling both like Rebbi Meir and like Rebbi Shimon ben Tada'i? What does Rebbi Meir say?

(a) Abaye queries Rav Yosef's proof on the grounds that Rav would then need to issue the same ruling twice.
Which of the two rulings would be superfluous, and why is that?

(b) Why *does* Rav need to issue his second ruling 'Halachah ke'Ven Tada'i'? And why does he need to issue two rulings at all? Why did he not just rule like Rebbi Meir?

(a) Rebbi Meir holds that Eruv Chatzeros is confined to bread, whereas Shituf Mavu'os should be made with wine.
May one use bread for a Shituf Mavu'os?

(b) According to some, Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan argue only when wine is used for either the Eruv or the Shituf, but they agree that, if bread is used, one Eruv will suffice for both the Mavoy and the Chatzer. Others say that even the Rabbanan agree that, when wine is used, two Eruvin are needed, and they only argue by bread.
What is then Rebbi Meir's reason for requiring a separate Eruv for each?

(a) What is the Kashya on the Rabbanan from the words (of the Rabbanan in our Mishnah) 'O Me'arvin, O Mishtatfin'? How does the Gemara initially understand this?

(b) How does Rav Gidal quoting Rav interpret that phrase?

(c) Some say 'Halachah ke'Rebbi Meir', others, 'Minhag ke'Rebbi Meir', and yet others 'Nahagu ke'Rebbi Meir'.
What is the difference between these three Leshonos?