Previous daf

1)

(a) What does Rebbi Yanai learn from the Pasuk in Ki Savo "Bi'arti ha'Kodesh min ha'Bayis"?

(b) And what does Rebbi Yochanan learn from the Pasuk (ibid.) "Ve'achlu bi'She'arecha ve'Save'u"?

(c) What does Rebbi Yochanan learn from "Bi'arti ha'Kodesh min ha'Bayis"?

(d) And what does Rebbi Yanai learn from "Ve'achlu bi'She'arecha ve'Save'u"?

(a) Rebbi Chanina Chuza'a cites the above-mentioned Beraisa "ke'Nafshecha", 'ke'Nafsho shel Ba'al ha'Bayis', exempting the laborer from having to Ma'aser what he eats.
What does he infer from the Beraisa with regard to a purchaser?

(b) What does Rebbi Chanina Chuza'a attempt to prove here that poses a Kashya on both Rebbi Yanai and Rebbi Yochanan? How can Rebbi Chanina Chuza'a equate Mekach with G'mar Melachah?

(c) How does Rav Papa establish the Beraisa, to answer the Kashya according to ...

1. ... Rebbi Yochanan?
2. ... Rebbi Yanai?

(d) The Kashya then arises, that in that case, why is the owner Patur from Ma'asros, seeing as at the time of G'mar Melachah (when the fruit is picked), it is inside the Chatzer or the house?
How do we answer it?

(a) We query the need for a Pasuk to preclude a laborer from the Din of a purchaser, on the grounds that it should not be necessary.
Why not?

(b) To what does the Beraisa attribute the fact that the shops of Beis Hino were destroyed three years before Yerushalayim?

(c) What do Chazal learn from the Pasuk in Re'ei ...

1. ... "Aser Te'aser ... Ve'achalta"?
2. ... "Tevu'as Zar'acha"?

(a) Why did the Tana then learn from "ke'Nafshecha", that a laborer is Patur from Ma'asros (seeing as even Mekach is)?

(b) What does the Tana really learn from "ke'Nafshecha"?

5)

(a) The Mishnah in Ma'asros gives the stage for squash and pumpkins as 'mi'she'Yipaksu'.
How does Rav Asi interpret this?

(b) On the assumption that the Tana is speaking in the field, Rav Asi asks from this Mishnah on Rebbi Yanai and Rebbi Yochanan (who require the fruit to have entered the house or the Chatzer respectively.
Why does Rav Asi decline to establish the Mishnah in the Chatzer or the house?

(c) How do we therefore establish the Mishnah (to counter Rav Asi's Kashya)?
How will we then explain the Lashon 'mi'she'Yipaksu'?

(a) The Beraisa gives the G'mar Melachah as 'Hachnasasan'.
Assuming that this means in the field, Mar Zutra B'rei de'Rav Nachman asks from here on Rebbi Yanai and Rebbi Yochanan.
How does Mar Zutra interpret the word 'Hachnasasan'?

(b) How do we counter his Kashya?

(c) What are the ramifications of these interpretations? Regarding which Halachah is the Beraisa speaking?

(a) Alternatively, Rebbi Yanai differentiates between two different kinds of fruits.
When is Hachnasasan *le'Sadeh* Kove'a, and when *Bayis*?

(b) The Sugya in Pesachim assumes that the crops that a deceased Chaver left behind were never Tevel, because maybe he did like Rebbi Oshaya.
What does Rebbi Oshaya permit a person to do?

(c) Like which of the two interpretations of Rebbi Yanai does that Sugya hold?

(a) We have discussed Adam bi'Mechubar.
Which Pasuk teaches us that a Shor may eat be'Talush?

(b) How do we try to learn Adam be'Talush from a 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(c) What Pircha do we ask on this 'Kal va'Chomer'? What leniency does Beheimah enjoy over Adam?

(d) We have already cited the D'rashah from "ke'Nafshecha", which precludes a laborer from being subject to the La'av of Chasimah.
How would we otherwise have learned from a 'Kal va'Chomer' that he is included?

(a) So we learn Adam be'Talush from the fact that the Torah writes "Kamah" twice.
How do we do that?

(b) Rebbi Ami dispenses with the need for this D'rashah.
How does he extrapolate Adam be'Talush from the Pasuk "Ki Savo be'Kerem Re'echa"?

(a) We attempt to learn Beheimah by Mechubar from Adam, using the same 'Kal va'Chomer' (though in reverse) as we used earlier to try and learn Adam be'Talush from Beheimah.
What Pircha do we ask on this? What leniency does Adam enjoy over Beheimah?

(b) We suggest that perhaps one ought to be Chayav to sustain a Beheimah from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Adam.
Which 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(c) How do we counter this suggestion? From which Pasuk do we learn that the obligation of sustaining an animal does not extend to animals?

(a) What do we finally learn Beheimah bi'Mechubar from the fact that the Torah writes "Re'echa" twice by Adam by Mechubar?

(b) Ravina dispenses with the need for this D'rashah. He learns it from "Lo Sachsom Shor be'Disho"? What ought the Torah to have written?

(c) So what dual D'rashah does he learn from "Lo Sachsom Shor ... "?

(d) How does he know that the Torah did not write "Shor" to preclude other animals from the concession of eating?

Next daf