Previous daf

1)

(a) The Mishnah in Taharos states 'ha'Nitzok, ve'ha'Ketapras u'Mashkeh Tofe'ach Eino Chibur' Lo le'Tum'ah ve'Lo le'Taharah'.
What is ...

1. ... 'Nitzok'?
2. ... 'Ketapras'?

(b) What does the Tana mean when he says ...

1. ... 'Eino Chibur le'Tum'ah'?
2. ... 'Eino Chibur le'Taharah?

3)

(a) What is the problem with two people who Toveled one after the other, in a Mikvah that contained exactly forty Sa'ah?

(b) According to the Tana Kama in Mikva'os, the second person remains Tamei. What does Rebbi Yehudah say? What is his reason?

(c) How does this Mishnah answer the Kashya that we just asked 'Ha Nami Tenina, Tofe'ach al-Menas Lehatfi'ach Chibur'? Who is the author of this Mishnah?

(d) But why can we not resolve our She'eilah from Rebbi Yehudah's ruling? Why will his reason there not apply to washing one's hands in halves?

(a) What do the following have in common: ha'Ba Rosho ve'Rubo be'Mayim She'uvim' and 'Tahor she'Naflu Al Rosho ve'Al Rubo Sheloshah Lugin Mayim She'uvin?

(b) In keeping with the previous Sugyos, what She'eilah does Rebbi Yirmiyah ask regarding these two cases?

(c) What special concession did Chazal allow a Ba'al Keri who is sick and who cannot go to Mikveh?

(d) Rav Papa asks the same She'eilah regarding a Ba'al Keri who Tovels half of his body, and pours nine Kabin of water over the rest.
What is the outcome of both She'eilos?

(a) We learned in our Mishnah that if one witness declares 'be'Fanai Nichtav' and the other one, 'be'Fanai Nechtam', the Get is Pasul.
How does Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah Amar Rebbi Yochanan qualify this? Under which circumstances will the Get be Kasher?

(b) What will the Din then be if they said nothing?

(c) Then why do they both need to be Sheluchim? Why will it not suffice that, when all's said and done, there are two witnesses available, even if only one of them is a Sheli'ach?

(d) In that case, how will we be forced to explain the Seifa of our Mishnah 'Shenayim Omrim be'Faneinu Nichtav , ve'Echad Omer be'Fanai Nechtam, Pasul ... '?

6) If, as we just explained, the Machlokes between Rebbi Yehudah and the Rabbanan is confined to where only one of the witnesses was a Sheli'ach, what is the basis of their Machlokes?

7)

(a) How does Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah Amar Rebbi Yochanan establish 'Echad Omer be'Fanai Nichtav ve'Echad Omer be'Fanai Nechtam, Pasul', according to the second Lashon?

(b) What can we extrapolate from this regarding two Sheluchim who bring a Get from overseas?

(c) Rav Asi asked Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah whether this means that the Seifa ('Shenayim Omrim be'Faneinu Nichtav ve'Echad Omer be'Fanai Nechtam, Pasul, ve'Rebbi Yehudah Machshir') speaks even when the two witnesses are both Sheluchim.
What did he reply?

(d) According to Rebbi Yochanan, how do we initially establish the basis of their Machlokes?

(a) Rava will certainly not be happy with this explanation, because it will mean that the Rabbanan do not hold of 'Ein Beki'in Lishmah' (like Rabah) and *he* will be following the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah.
How will *he* therefore establish the Machlokes?

(b) How will Rabah, who concurs with the second Lashon of Rebbi Yochanan, interpret the Machlokes? How can the Get be Kasher according to Rebbi Yehudah?

(a) According to both opinions, why does Rebbi Yehudah not argue in the Reisha (when one of the Sheluchim said 'be'Fanai Nichtav', and the other, be'Fanai Nechtam')?

(b) If the Beraisa 'Rebbi Yehudah Machshir be'Zu, ve'Lo ba'Acheres' does not come to preclude the Reisha (proving what we just said wrong), then what does it come to preclude?

(c) Why do we need a Beraisa to teach us this? Why is it not obvious?

(a) A statement made by Rav Yehudah corroborates the second Lashon of Rebbi Yochanan.
What did Rav Yehudah say?

(b) When Rabah bar bar Chanah was sick, and Rav Yehudah and the Rabanan went to visit him, they asked him whether two Sheluchim who brought a Get from overseas need to declare 'be'Fanai Nichtav ... '.
What did he reply? What reason did he give for this?

Next daf