Previous daf

1)

(a) We ask what the Din will be if the wife is the one to inform us that there is a war on. Perhaps she will be believed with a 'Migu' (because she could have said that there is peace (in keeping with our own contention). Why might 'Migu' not be applicable here?

(b) Why is it not obvious that our Mishnah ('Shalom ba'Olam, Ne'emenes') must be speaking when she testified that her husband died in battle (thereby informing us that there is a local war going on), because were she to claim that he died peacefully in his bed, she would be believed even in time of war?

(a) What does the Tana of the Beraisa say in a case where the woman testifies that ...

1. ... people set fire to the house or to the cave in which she and her husband were sitting, and that her husband died in the smoke-filled room and she escaped?
2. ... Nochrim or robbers fell upon them, killing her husband, and that she escaped?

(b) Seeing as, in both cases, it is only through the woman that we know about the (mini) war, why can we not resolve our She'eilah from ...

1. ... the first case (of the fire), in the negative?
2. ... the second case (of the robbers) in the positive?

(c) When a fire broke out during a wedding, a woman cried out 'See my husband, see my husband', and witnesses subsequently found a man who had burned to death and a severed hand. Rav Chiya bar Avin compared this to the case of the fire that we just discussed.
What did Rava say?

(d) How did Rav Chiya bar Avin account for the burned body and the severed hand?

1. ... be believed?
2. ... not be believed?

(a) What did Nechemyah Ish Beis D'li ask Rebbi Akiva when the latter went down to Neherda'a to declare a leap-year?

(b) What was his response to Rebbi Akiva's reply that that was indeed so?

(c) How did Rami bar Chama attempt to resolve our She'eilah (whether one witness is believed to testify that a man died in battle or not) from there?

(d) Rava rejected Rami bar Chama's proof however, on the grounds that Nechemyah Ish Beis D'li should then have said 'wherever there are robbers', rather than 'this country is teeming with robbers'.
Why then, did he mention them at all?

(a) What did Rebbi, based on the testimony of their two wives, rule in a Beraisa, when a ship on which two Talmidei-Chachamim was travelling, sank and they disappeared?

(b) How do we try to resolve our She'eilah from that Beraisa, which really speaks about *two* women testifying that their husbands *drowned*, and not about *one* witness testifying about someone being killed *in battle*?

(c) Why can there be no proof from there? What is wrong with the Beraisa as it stands?

(d) So we establish the Beraisa when the bodies were retrieved from the water and their wives, after seeing them immediately, then gave Rebbi Simanim (identifying signs).
Why do we need to say ...

1. ... that they gave Simanim (why not through recognition)?
2. ... that they saw the bodies *immediately* (see Tosfos DH 've'Chazinhu')?

6)

(a) What did Reuven counter when Shimon claimed that he had already returned his sesame-seeds?

(b) And what did Shimon reply to that?

(c) What was Rava's objection to Rav Chisda's comparison to the previous case of the two Talmidei-Chachamim (whose wives Rebbi permitted on the basis of the Simanim - on which he relied, and did not say that maybe these were other people who happened to have the same Simanim)?

(a) According to the Mishnah in Ma'aser-Sheini, if one finds a vessel, what can one assume it contains if on it, he finds the imprint of ...

1. ... a 'Kuf'?
2. ... a 'Mem'"
3. ... a 'Daled'?
4. ... a 'Tes'?
5. ... a 'Tav'?

(b) Why did they used to write these symbols?

(c) What does Mar Keshisha try to prove from this Mishnah (challenging Rava in the previous question)?

(a) To counter Mar Keshisha, Ravina asked Rav Ashi from Rebbi Yossi, who argues with the Tana Kama.
What does Rebbi Yossi say (in a case where one finds a box with the word Terumah written on it)?

(b) Why is that?

(c) Based on the obvious fact that, according to Rebbi Yossi, one does not assume boxes to have been emptied, and that they now contain other contents, Ravina vindicates Rava.
How does he explain the Machlokes between the Tana Kama and Rebbi Yossi?

(a) They sent a message that Yitzchak Resh Galusa bar Achsei de'Rav Bibi died on the way from Kurtava to Aspamya. According to Abaye, they had to suspect that maybe there was another person with the same name (and that his wife was forbidden to remarry).
What does Rava say?

(b) They found a Get in Neherda'a, on which the man had written that he, Andrulinai from Neherda'a had divorced his wife beside the city K'lunya. What did Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'a rule when Shmuel's father sent him a message asking him whether the woman, who presented the Get, was permitted to remarry with it?

(c) How did Rava refute Abaye's proof from there that we do contend with another person with the same name?

(d) So why did Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'a instruct them to search the whole of Naherda'a for another Andrulinai?

(a) What did Rabah bar Avuhah rule when Chavi bar Nanai and Nanai bar Chavi produced two bills of debt in their respective names in Mechuza?

(b) How does Rava prove his opinion from there?

(c) Abaye refutes Rava's proof on the grounds that there (where the creditor was claiming his own debt with his own document) was different, inasmuch as there was no reason to suspect anything.
Why does he not suspect that maybe ...

1. ... someone else with the same name lost the documents and that they found them?
2. ... someone else with the same name gave them the documents to safeguard on their behalf?
3. ... someone else with the same name handed them the documents and then retracted, thereby nullifying the transaction?

Next daf