Previous daf

1)

(a) Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Nasan queries Rav Papa, who just established the Machlokes between Rebbi Yehudah ('Sheneihem Yeitz'u le'Beis ha'Sereifah') and the Rabbanan ('ha'Tamei be'Tum'aso') by whether 'Tzitz Meratzeh al Achilos' or not.
What does Rebbi Yehudah, in a Beraisa, say in a case where one of the Bazichin became Tamei?

(b) What do the Rabbanan say?

(c) Why can the Machlokes there not be whether 'Tzitz Meratzeh' or not?

(d) How does this pose a Kashya on Rav Papa?

(a) Furthermore, Rav Ashi asks on Rav Papa from another Beraisa.
What does Rebbi Yehudah there say about a case where one tribe is Tamei during the bringing of the Korban Pesach?

(b) What do the Rabbanan say?

(c) On what basis does Rebbi Yehudah permit the entire Tzibur to bring the Pesach be'Tum'ah, despite the fact that the majority of tribes are Tahor?

(a) Ravina asks on Rav Papa from our Mishnah, where Rebbi Yehudah rules that if one of the Sh'tei ha'Lechem or of the rows of Lechem ha'Panim become Tamei, both are taken to the Beis ha'Sereifah.
What reason does he give for that?

(b) What can we now learn from both our Mishnah and the Beraisa (cited by Ravina and Rav Ashi respectively)?

(c) So what reason does Rebbi Yochanan ascribe to Rebbi Yehudah's rulings?

(a) Our Mishnah rules that the Todah is Mefagel its Lechem.
How about vice-versa?

(b) What time-limit does the Torah give for eating a Todah?

(c) What will the Din then be, if someone Shechts his Todah with the intention of eating ...

1. ... it the next day?
2. ... its loaves the next day?

(d) What does the Tana then say about being Mefagel ...

1. ... the Kevasim (that accompany the Sh'tei ha'Lechem)?
2. ... the Sh'tei ha'Lechem?

(a) What does Rav Kahana learn from the Pasuk in Tzav "Ve'hikriv al Zevach ha'Todah, Chalos"?

(b) What should the Torah otherwise have written?

(c) Then why does our Mishnah exempt the Todah from Pigul, if one was Mefagel the loaves?

(d) What Kashya does this pose on the Seifa of our Mishnah 'ha'Kevasim Mefaglin es ha'Lechem'?

(a) So what reason do we finally give to explain why both 'ha'Todah Mefageles es ha'Lechem' and 'ha'Kevasim Mefaglin es ha'Lechem' and not vice-versa?

(b) Having taught us both sides of the Halachah by Todah, why did the Tana then find it necessary to repeat it with regard to the Sh'tei ha'Lechem? Why might we otherwise have thought that the Din in the Seifa ('ve'ha'Lechem Eino Mefagel es ha'Todah') will not apply to the Kevasim and the Sh'tei ha'Lechem?

(a) Rebbi Elazar asked Rav what the Din will be if someone Shechted a Todah with the intention of eating half a k'Zayis of the Korban and half of the Lechem.
Why could he not have been asking him about the Minchah becoming Pigul?

(b) Then what was his She'eilah?

(c) Rav replied that the Lechem is indeed Pigul. We query this however, with a 'Kal-va'Chomer'.
Which 'Kal-va'Chomer'?

(a) We query the 'Kal-va'Chomer' however, from a Beraisa, which discusses a case where Reuven sowed seeds in Shimon's vineyard in which the grapes were already recognizable (S'mader).
What did the Chachmim of that time rule?
Why is that?

(b) What is the significance of the fact that the grapes were S'mader?

(c) What is the Kashya on Rav from there? What 'Kal-va'Chomer could we have Darshened there?

9)

(a) We refute the 'Kal-va'Chomer' in the case of Kil'ayim however, based on the fact that seeds in a vineyard are only Asur mi'de'Rabbanan. In fact, Kanvus (hemp) and Lof (a kind of legume) alone constitute an Isur d'Oraysa in a vineyard.
Why is that?

(b) Now that the Kil'ayim is only mi'de'Rabbanan, why did the Chachamim there forbid only the seeds and not the vines?

(c) Others learned Rebbi Elazar's She'eilah to Rav (not with regard to someone who Shechted the Todah in order to be Mefagel the Lechem, but) with regard to another (albeit similar) case.
Which case?

(d) The rest of the Sugya is identical to the initial one.
Why, according to the second Lashon, did Rebbi Elazar not deign to ask what the Din will be in the case of 'ha'Shochet es ha'Todah Lefagel es ha'Lechem'?

(a) Rebbi Aba Zuti presents a different version of Rebbi Elazar's She'eilah. According to him, Rebbi Elazar asked Rav what the Din will be if someone Shechts one of the Kivsei Atzeres in order to eat a 'k'Zayis me'Chaveiro' the next day.
What are the two possible meanings of 'me'Chaveiro'?

(b) What are then the ramifications of the She'eilah?

(c) Rav tried to resolve the She'eilah from a Mishnah later, which cites the exact case of Rebbi Elazar's She'eilah, concluding 'Sheneihem Kesheirim'. What does this prove?

(d) How did Rebbi Elazar refute Rav's proof?

(a) From which stage will a Machshavah on a Zevach be Mefagel the Nesachim, according to Rebbi Meir?

(b) What does he say about the Nesachim being Mefagel the Zevach?

(c) What is therefore the difference between someone who Shechts a Zevach with the intention of eating it the next day, and one who does so with the intention of bringing the Nesachim the next day?

(d) What does Rebbi Meir mean when he says 'Mefagel es ha'Nesachim'.
What would one have to do in order to be Chayav Kareis?

(a) On what grounds does Rebbi Meir, in a Beraisa, consider Nesachim subject to Pigul?

(b) How does he counter the Rabbanan's argument that it is possible to bring the Nesachim as much as ten days after the Korban?

(c) According to Rava, how will Rebbi Meir counter the Rabbanan's argument that one can change the Nesachim from one Korban to another?

(a) On what grounds does Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa, include the Log of oil of a Metzora in the Din of Pigul? What Matir does it have?

(b) What did Rebbi Meir reply when the Chachamim queried him from the fact ...

1. ... that it is possible to bring the Nesachim as much as ten days after the Korban?
2. ... that it is possible to change the Log of oil to the Asham of another Metzora?

Next daf