Previous daf

1)

(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan restricts the opening ruling in our Mishnah to where the water fell into the blood, but not vice-versa.
What does he mean?

(b) What is the reason for this?

(c) Rav Papa adds that this is not the case regarding Kisuy ha'Dam.
What does he mean?

(d) Why is that?

(a) What does Resh Lakish say about someone who mixes a k'Zayis of Pigul with a k'Zayis of Nosar and a k'Zayis of Tamei and eats them together?

(b) Why is that?

(c) Besides the Chidush of Hasra'as Safek, we learn from here that Isurin are Mevatel one another.
What might we otherwise have thought?

(d) What third thing do we learn from here with regard to 'Nosen Ta'am'?

(a) Is rice subject to Chalah?

(b) What does the Beraisa say about a dough that is made of wheat and rice with regard to Chalah, even assuming that the latter is in the majority?

(c) If 'Nosen Ta'am' is only mi'de'Rabbanan, on what basis is such a dough Chayav Chalah?

(a) What does the Seifa of the Beraisa add that repudiates our previous answer?

(b) We therefore conclude 'Ela Miyn be'she'Eino Miyno be'Ta'ama'.
How do we then establish the case of Resh Lakish to explain why we go there after the Rov?

5)

(a) Having just concluded 'Miyn be'she'Eino be'Ta'ama, Miyn be'Miyno be'Ruba', on what grounds do we query the second half of the statement? How do we think we ought to apply 'Ro'in' there?

(b) And we base this Kashya on the opening case of 'Ro'in' in our Mishnah. How do we initially interpret 'Nis'areiv be'Yayin, Ro'in Oso keI'lu Hu Mayim'? What exactly, are we referring to?

(c) What does this prove?

(d) We try to answer that *'Ro'in'* refers to the blood (and not to the wine).
How will that dispose of the Kashya? What is the Tana then coming to teach us?

(a) We query this latter explanation however, from the Lashon of the Beraisa.
If 'Ro'in refers to the blood, what ought the Tana to have said?

(b) We also ask from Rebbi Yehudah.
What does Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa, say about Toveling a bucket containing white wine or milk? Under which circumstances does he permit it, based on Ro'in?

(c) What does this prove?

(d) How do we then answer the basic Kashya, based on that very same Beraisa? According to which Tana then, do we rule 'Miyn be'Miyno be'Rubo' (ignoring the principle of 'Ro'in')?

(a) Another Beraisa rules that if one Tovels a bucket full of spit, the Tevilah is not valid, whereas if it is full of urine, we view it as if it was water.
What is the reason for ...

1. ... the first ruling? What is the significance of the bucket 'full of spit'?
2. ... the second ruling? What would the Halachah otherwise be?

(b) What does the Tana rule in a similar case where the bucket is full of Mei Chatas?

(c) Seeing as Mei Chatas is also a kind of water, why is the Tana more stringent in this case, than in the previous one?

(a) Why do we establish the author of the Beraisa as Rebbi Yehudah?

(b) What problem do we then have with the Seifa?

(a) Abaye answers with another Beraisa.
What does Rebbi Yehudah say there about 'Dam Mevatel Dam', 'Rok Mevatel Rok' and 'Mei Raglayim Mevatlin Mei Raglayim'? What common ruling pertains to all three?

(b) What is the significance of the second ...

1. ... 'Dam'?
2. ... 'Rok' and 'Mei Raglayim'?

(c) In whose name does Rebbi Yehudah quote this ruling?

(d) What does Abaye learn from there with regard to 'Ro'in'?

(a) Rava disagrees with Abaye. According to him, Rebbi Yehudah agrees with Raban Gamliel, and he establishes the Beraisa by a bucket that is Tamei on the outside, but Tahor on the inside.
How is this possible?

(b) How will that answer the Kashya.
If Rebbi Yehudah generally holds 'Ro'in', why will he decline to apply it in this case?

(c) If the Tevilah of the inside of the barrel is a mere Chumra, then why did the Rabbanan even necessitate a Rov?

Next daf