Previous daf

1)

(a) What does the Beraisa rule in the case 'Dinar Zahav Zahuv Yesh Li be'Yadcha; Ein Lach be'Yadi Ela Dinar Kesef'.
Why is that?

(b) What do we try to extrapolate from the Lashon 'Dinar Zahav Zahuv'? What would this prove?

(c) How will this reflect back on to our Mishnah 'Sh'tei Kesef Yesh Lecha be'Yadi; Ein Lecha be'Yadi Ela P'rutah, Patur'?

(d) How does Rav Ashi reject this proof? How does he interpret 'Dinar Zahav Zahuv' in the Beraisa?

(a) What does the Beraisa cited by Rebbi Chiya rule in the case 'Sela Li be'Yadcha; Ein Lecha be'Yadi Ela Sela Chaser ...

1. ... Sh'tei Kesef'?
2. ... Chaser Ma'ah'?

(b) What is the reason for this distinction?

(c) What is the significance of this Beraisa? Why did Rebbi Chiya cite it?

(a) How does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak Amar Shmuel qualify the Din of Ta'anas Sh'tei Kesef regarding Shevu'ah? In which case will it not apply?

(b) This is based on a Beraisa which in turn, comments on the D'rashah from the Pasuk in Shoftim "Lo Yakum Eid Echad be'Ish le'Chol Avon u'le'Chol Chatas".
Which D'rashah?

(c) What does the Beraisa comment on that D'rashah?

(a) How did Rebbi Yitzchak respond when Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel taught 'Ta'ano Chitin u'Se'orin, ve'Hodeh Lo be'Achas Meihen Chayav'?

(b) What did he add that caused us to ask whether Resh Lakish disagreed with Rebbi Yochanan?

(c) What do we mean when we say that Resh Lakish used to wait? What is the significance of this statement?

(d) What alternative do we give to explain why Rebbi Yitzchak did not know whether Resh Lakish argued with Rebbi Yochanan or not?

(a) How do we try to prove Shmuel right from our Mishnah, where the Tana Kama and Raban Gamliel argue over whether 'Ta'ano Chitin ve'Hodeh Lo bi'Se'orin' is Patur (Tana Kama) or Chayav (Raban Gamliel)?

(b) How do we refute this proof? If they also argue over 'Ta'ano Chitin u'Se'orin ... ', then why does the Tana present their Machlokes by 'Ta'ano Chitin' alone?

(c) The Seifa of our Mishnah refers to a case of 'Ta'ano Keilim ve'Karka'os; Hodeh be'Keilim ve'Karka'os ... Patur'.
What do we try to extrapolate from the fact that the Tana presents a case of 'Keilim ve'Karka'os'? What would that prove?

(d) How do we refute that proof too? If even 'Keilim ve'Keilim' is Patur, why does the Tana present the case of 'Keilim ve'Karka'?

(a) This Chidush is known as 'Zokekin'.
What does that mean?

(b) Seeing as the Mishnah in Kidushin already taught the Din of Zokekin, why does it need to repeat it here?

7)

(a) According to Rebbi Chiya bar Aba, Rebbi Yochanan holds 'Ta'ano Chitin u'Se'orin, ve'Hodeh Lo be'Achas Meihen, Patur'.
How do we reconcile this with Rebbi Yitzchak, who commented 'Yeyasher, ve'Chein Amar Rebbi Yochanan, when Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel ruled Chayav?

(b) After citing the same two sources from our Mishnah as Kashyos on Rebbi Chiya bar Aba as we just attempted to bring as proofs for Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel and arriving at the same conclusions, Rebbi Aba bar Mamal queries Rebbi Chiya bar Aba from a Beraisa.
What does the Seifa of the Beraisa say regarding 'Ta'ano Shor ve'Seh, ve'Hodeh Lo be'Achas Meihen'?

(c) On what grounds does Rebbi Chiya bar Mamal reject the answer that the author of the Beraisa is Raban Gamliel, who holds 'Ta'ano Chitin ve'Hodeh Lo bi'Se'orin, Chayav'?

(d) So Rebbi Chiya bar Aba established the Beraisa like Admon in our Mishnah.
What does Admon say?

(e) How do we know that this is a genuine answer and not a 'Dochek' (a pushed answer)?

(a) What does Rav Anan Amar Rebbi Yochanan say about a case where Shimon admits that he owes Reuven ...

1. ... barley, after the latter claimed from him wheat, and before he had a chance to add that he owed him barley too?
2. ... one needle, when Reuven claimed from him two (bearing in mind that needles are not worth two Kesef)?

(b) What proof does he bring from the Pasuk "Kesef O Keilim"? What could the Torah otherwise have written?

(c) Rav Papa ruled 'Ta'ano Keilim u'Perutah, ve'Hodeh be'Keilim ve'Kafar bi'Perutah, Patur; Hodeh bi'Perutah ve'Kafar be'Keilim, Chayav'. One of the rulings follows the opinion of Rav, and the other, of Shmuel.
Which is which?

(a) Rav Nachman comments on our Mishnah 'Manah Li be'Yadcha; Ein Lach be'Yadi, Patur', 'u'Mashbi'in Oso Shevu'as Heses'.
What is a 'Shevu'as Heses'? What does 'Heses' mean?

(b) On what Chazakah is Rav Nachman's ruling based?

(c) Why do we not rather apply the Chazakah 'Ein Adam Me'iz Chovo bi'Fenei Ba'al Chovo' ('A debtor does not have the Chutzpah to deny the creditor's claim')?

(a) Rav Idi bar Avin Amar Rav Chisda rules 'ha'Kofer be'Milveh Kasher le'Eidus'.
What does he rule in the case of 'Kofer be'Pikadon' (where witnesses testify that they saw the article by him)? Why the difference?

(b) Why do we not then apply the principle 'Chashud a'Mamona, Chashud a'Shevu'asa'?

1. ... the first opinion say regarding a Shevu'as Heses in the Seifa?
2. ... Rav Chaviva say regarding a Shevu'as Heses in the Reisha?

Next daf