Previous daf

1)

(a) Why do we have reason to doubt the ruling of Amasa ben Ish (alias Yisra ha'Yisre'eili) due to its timing?

(b) In that case, on what basis *did* they accept it?

(c) How did they answer Do'eg's Kashya 'that the women ought to have gone out to provide for the women'?

(d) We learn this from the Pasuk in Tehilim "Kol Kevudah bas Melech Penimah".
From which Pasuk in Chumash do others derive it?

(a) Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa, learns that Amoni and Mo'avi women are permitted to marry into the Kahal from "Amoni" 've'Lo Amonis', "Mo'avi" 've'Lo Mo'avis'.
Where does Rebbi Shimon derive it from?

(b) How does Rava explain the Pasuk in Tehilim "Pitachta le'Moseirai"? What did David mean when he said that?

(c) And to whom was he referring when he said there "Rabos Asisa Atah Hashem Elokai, Nifle'osecha u'Machshevosecha *Eileinu"*?

(d) And what did he mean when he said "Az Amarti, Hinei Basi, bi'Megilas Sefer Kasuv Alai"? What is the significance of "*Matzasi* David Avdi be'Shemen Kodshi Meshachtiv" (Tehilim) and "Sh'tei Benosecha *ha'Nimtza'os" (Vayeira - regarding the daughters of Lot)?

(a) Ula Amar Rebbi Yochanan says that the daughter of a Ger Amoni is permitted to marry a Kohen.
Whom do we think is the mother?

(b) This cannot go like Rebbi Yehudah, who holds 'bas Ger Zachar, ke'Bas Chalal Zachar'.
What is the problem with establishing it like Rebbi Yossi? What does Rebbi Yossi say?

(c) So we differentiate between an ordinary bas Ger and the daughter of a Ger Amoni, and we try to learn a potential Isur (for there to be a Chidush) from an Almanah le'Kohen Gadol and a Chalal.
Why could we not learn a bas Ger Amoni ...

1. ... from an Almanah le'Kohen Gadol?
2. ... from a Chalal?

(d) And why can we not even learn a bas Ger Amoni ve'Amonis from 'Tzad ha'Shaveh' from the two together?

(a) So how do we establish Ula Amar Rebbi Yochanan's statement? What kind of bas Ger Amoni is he referring to?

(b) This is substantiated by a statement of Ravin Amar Rebbi Yochanan. Which other case does he mention together with this one?

(c) Resh Lakish in fact, learns from Almanah le'Kohen Gadol, that their daughter is Pasul.
On what grounds does he learn it from there? In what way is it similar?

5)

(a) What did Rebbi Zakai mean when, commenting on the Pasuk "Ki im Besulah me'Amav Yikach Ishah" he said that this comes to include a Giyores Mechaneh?

(b) What did Rebbi Yochanan comment on that?

(c) Why can he not have meant an Amoni who married an Amonis (who are considered two nations, because the males are forbidden and the females, permitted?

(a) According to the second Lashon, Rebbi Yochanan explains 'mi'Sh'nei Amamin' to mean the daughter of two nations, one of which is itself two nations.
What did he mean by that?

(b) What is the difference between the two Leshonos?

(c) Rebbi Yochanan learns that the daughter of a second generation Mitzri who married a Yisre'eilis is permitted to marry a Kohen from a Mah ha'Tzad. Which Mah ha'Tzad?

(a) Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah cites Rebbi Zakai differently. According to his version, Rebbi Yochanan accepted the statement 'Ishah Amonis Kesheirah, B'nah me'Amoni Pasul, u'Bitah me'Amoni Kesheirah.'
Why is ...

1. ... 'Ishah Amonis Kesheirah'?
2. ... 'B'nah me'Amoni Pasul'?

(b) What problem does Rebbi Yochanan initially have with 'u'Bitah me'Amoni Kesheirah'?

(c) So how does he establish it?

(d) He rejects the Beraisa on the basis of the final statement 'ba'Meh Devarim Amurim ba'Amoni ve'Amonis she'Nisgayru; Aval Bitah me'Amoni, Pesulah'.
What is his objection to this?

(a) Rebbi Shimon permits a Mitzris and an Edomis from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from an Amonis, who is permitted immediately, even though the men are forbidden forever.
What Kashya do the Rabbanan ask on him from Arayos?

(b) Why is their proof from Arayos not acceptable? What Chumra does Arayos have over Mitzri and Edomi?

(c) So they ask from Mamzer.
Why is that proof also not acceptable?

(d) And what is the problem with learning from a 'Mah ha'Tzad' from both Arayos and a Mamzer, by both of whom the women are forbidden too?

(a) So the Rabbanan ask Rebbi Shimon from a Chalal of Chayvei Asei (instead of Mamzer).
What is the case? Which Tana holds that there is a Chalal from a Chayvei Asei?

(b) We bring a Chalal of Chayvei Asei to the 'Mah ha'Tzad' to answer the Kashya that one cannot learn from Arayos because they are Chayav Kareis. Why do we need to bring Arayos to the 'Mah ha'Tzad'? Why can we not learn from Chalal of Chayvei Asei alone?

(c) So what did Rebbi Shimon mean when he said 'Lo Ki, Halachah Ani Omer'?

(a) What further proof did Rebbi Shimon bring in a Beraisa from the Pasuk "*Banim* Asher Yivaldu"?

(b) What does Rebbi Yehudah learn from "Banim Asher *Yivaldu*" (according to Rashi's second explanation)?

(a) Bearing in mind that Rebbi Yehudah holds 'Kahal Geirim Ikri Kahal', what would have been the problem, had he agreed here with Rebbi Shimon?

(b) Why can we not answer that the Torah's case of Mitzri Sh'lishi speaks when a Mitzri Sheini married a bas Yisrael or a Giyores be'Isur?

(c) Then why does the Torah speak about a Mamzer, who came into the world be'Isur?

(d) And why does it then speak about a Machzir Gerushaso, who took his wife back, together with the leniency ("Hi To'eivah" 've'Ein Banehah To'eivin')?

Next daf