Previous daf

1)

(a) Rava resolves Rami bar Chama's She'eilah (whether we go after the Ikar Korban or the current Heter) from Nosar and Pigul in our Mishnah.
How does he resolve it (from Nosar)?

(b) On what grounds do we erase the Kashya from Pigul?

(a) Rav Huna bar Nasan answers Rava's Kashya. He explains that our Mishnah is referring to Nosar of an *Olah* (which does not become permitted after the Shechitah).
On what grounds does Rava query his answer?

(b) Rav Huna bar Nasan explained to Rav why the Tana mentions Nosar of Olah, and not just ki'B'sar Olah.
What did he say?

(c) What other reason might we have given to explain why the Tana mentions Nosar of Olah?

(a) The Tana of a Beraisa gives four examples of the Isar that the Torah forbids. Three of them when the Noder says 'Hareini she'Lo Ochal Basar ... ke'Yom she'Meis Bo Aviv, ke'Yom she'Meis Bo Rabo, ke'Yom she'Neherag Bo Gedalyah ben Achikam'.
What is the fourth example?

(b) What does Shmuel mean when he explains 've'Hu she'Nadur be'Oso ha'Yom'?

(c) Then which Halachah is the Tana teaching us?

(d) How do we attempt to resolve Rami bar Chama's She'eilah from Shmuel's explanation?

(a) How do we re-word Shmuel's statement in order to repudiate this proof?

(b) In that case, why is it not obvious that the Neder is valid? Which of the four cases might we not have known if not for the Beraisa?

(c) Why might we not even have known any of the four cases? Why are they not similar to Korban, which is the standard Davar ha'Nadur?

5)

(a) We have already referred to the Mishnah in the second Perek 'ke'Chalas Aharon u'chi'Terumaso Mutar'.
What do we initially infer from the term 'T'rumas *Aharon*' (with regard to T'rumas Lachmei Todah)? What is T'rumas Lachmei Todah?

(b) How could we then resolve Rami bar Chama's She'eilah from there?
Why do we presume that T'rumas Lachmei Todah speaks *after* the Zerikas Damim of the Todah, and not beforehand?

(a) We reject that inference in favor of 'Eima ki'Terumas ha'Lishkah Asur'. What is 'T'rumas ha'Lishkah'?

(b) This explanation presumes that if someone is Matfis 'ki'Terumas Lachmei Todah', his Neder will not be valid (because we go after the current Heter). We ask why the Tana then says 've'chi'Terumaso' and not 'ki'Terumas Lachmei Todah'.
Why would the latter be a bigger Chidush?

(c) How do we initially answer this Kashya?

(d) What alternative explanation do we give as to why the Tana omits T'rumas Lachmei Todah?

(a) What does 'de'Afreshinhu be'Lishaihu' mean?

(b) We could have given another variation of the same answer.
What is it? So why did we prefer to present the current version?

(c) How many Lachmei Todah did they normally bake?

(d) What does Rav Tuvi bar Kisna Amar Shmuel say about Lachmei Todah that were baked as four Chalos? Why specifically four?

(a) What is the problem with taking the Terumah in the form of ...

1. ... one of the four loaves?
2. ... a piece of each of the four loaves?

(b) Then how *did* they separate the Terumah from the four loaves?

(c) The Chalos Todah comprised one kind of Chametz-loaf and three, of Chametz.
What did the three Matzah-loaves consist of?

(a) We learned in a Beraisa 'Harei Alai ki'Bechor, Rebbi Ya'akov Oser, ve'Rebbi Yossi Matir'.
What sort of person must the Noder be?

(b) According to our initial contention, what would be the Din if someone said 'Harei Zeh ki'Bechor ...

1. ... Lifnei Zerikas Damim'?
2. ... Le'achar Zerikas Damim'?

(c) Had he said (even after the Zerikas Damim) 'Harei Alai ki'Bechor' (S'tam), the Neder would also have been valid according to all opinions. How do we know that?

(d) So why did we prefer to ask 'I Lifnei Zerikas Damim, Mai Ta'ama de'Ma'an de'Shari', rather than to ask the same Kashya from 'I de'Amar 'Harei Alai ki'Bechor (S'tam)'?

(a) Then over which case are Rebbi Ya'akov and Rebbi Yossi arguing?

(b) What will we then have proved with this Beraisa?

Next daf