Previous daf

1)

(a) Who needs to add a fifth (twenty-five percent of the amount) when redeeming Ma'aser Sheini?

(b) According to the Tana Kama of the Beraisa, a woman is obligated to add a fifth when redeeming Ma'aser Sheini (which we initially think belongs to her husband).
What does Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar in the name of Rebbi Meir say?

(c) Why can the Tana not be referring to when ...

1. ... both the Ma'aser and the money belong to her husband?
2. ... the Ma'aser belongs to her husband and the money is hers?

(d) So we try to establish the case when someone else gave her the money on the express condition that she redeems her husband's Ma'aser.
What is then the basis of their Machlokes?

(a) What problem does our interpretation of the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and the Chachamim in our Mishnah (regarding 'be'Kesef al-Yedei Atzmo') create on our interpretation of their current Machlokes?

(b) Abaye answers 'Eipuch'.
Why must this mean that we switch the opinions of the current Machlokes and not the previous one?

(a) Rava retains the Machlokes as it stands, and he establishes the Beraisa by Ma'aser that the woman inherited from her father. The basis of their Machlokes is equivalent to an old Machlokes of theirs regarding the status of Ma'aser Sheini.
Which Machlokes?

(b) How do we establish the Beraisa? Under which category does this property fall?

(c) How will we now explain the opinion of ...

1. ... Rebbi Meir?
2. ... the Rabbanan?

(a) What does the Tana of the Beraisa insert in the list of things that enable an Eved Cana'ani to go free, besides Shen ve'Ayin?

(b) From which category of principles of Rebbi Yishmael do we propose to learn the other twenty-four main limbs?

(c) Which two characteristics do they all share?

(d) What problem do we have with learning a 'Mah Matzinu' from two sources?

1. ... "Ayin", after having written "Shen"?
2. ... "Shen", after having written "Ayin"?

6)

(a) How do we counter the suggestion that "Ki Yakeh" and "Shen ve'Ayin" form a 'K'lal u'F'rat', in which case, we would not be able to include anything else?

(b) Which other condition is inherent in Shen ve'Ayin, that we try to incorporate in the second K'lal ("la'Chofshi Yeshalchenu")?

(c) What did we learn in a Beraisa which proves that this is not the case?

(d) Why does the Tana ignore the contention that only wounds which negate the use of the limb concerned send a slave to freedom? Why should that not be included in the 'K'lal u'F'rat u'Ch'lal'?

(a) What does another Beraisa say about a master who struck and wounded his slave's arm, which shriveled as a result, but which would later heal?

(b) If "la'Chofshi Yeshalchenu" is a Ribuy (rather than a P'rat), why should he not go free too?

(a) Rebbi Shimon maintains that a slave who goes free in this way requires a Get Shichrur.
Is he the only Tana to hold like that?

(b) What do Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Tarfon say?

(c) What compromise do the Machri'in Lifnei Chachamim make between Shen ve'Ayin and the other twenty-four limbs?

(d) What did they really mean when they referred to the twenty-four limbs as a 'K'nas Chachamim'?

(a) If the master struck the Eved on his ear and deafened him or on his eye and blinded him, he goes free.
What does the Tana of the Beraisa mean when he adds 'ke'Neged Eino ve'Eino Ro'eh, ke'Neged Ozno ve'Eino Shomei'a, Ein Eved Yotzei Bahem le'Cheirus'?

(b) What does ...

1. ... the Tana quoted by Rami bar Yechezkel say about a rooster which smashed a glass jar by crowing into it?
2. ... Rav Yosef quoting Bei Rav say about a horse that neighed or a donkey that brayed in the house and broke vessels?

(c) How did Rav Ashi answer Rav Sh'man, who asked from these two rulings on the previous Beraisa, which exempts someone who deafened or blinded a person by making a loud noise next to him?

(d) What does the Beraisa say about someone who causes his friend damage by giving him a shock?

(a) What does the Tana of a Beraisa say about a master who struck the eye or the tooth of his slave ...

1. ... and weakened their function?
2. ... which were already weak, blinding him or deafening him completely?

(b) Having taught ...

1. ... the former case, why did the Tana find it necessary to add the latter?
2. ... the latter case, why did the Tana find it necessary to add the former?

(a) What does ...

1. ... the Tana Kama of another Beraisa say about an Eved who asked his master who was a doctor, to paint his eye or to scrape his tooth, and he ended up by blinding him or by pulling out his tooth completely?
2. ... Raban Shimon ben Gamliel learn from the Pasuk "ve'Chi Yakeh Ish es Ein Avdo ... ve'Shichasah"?

(b) The Rabbanan Darshen "ve'Shichasah" like Rebbi Eliezer.
What does Rebbi Eliezer Darshen from "ve'Shichasah" (with regard to a Shifchah Cana'anis giving birth)?

(c) Why do the Rabbanan concede in this case that the Shifchah does not go free? In what basic way does it differ from the previous case?

(d) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel learns the two cases from "Shiches" "Shichasah" (giving us two D'rashos from the same word).
What do the Rabbanan say to that?

(a) On what basis does Rav Sheishes rule that if the master removed his slave's blind eye from its socket, he goes free?

(b) We prove this from a Mishnah in Temurah.
What does the Tana learn from the Pasuk in ...

1. ... Emor (in connection with Korbanos) "li'Retzonchem Tamim Zachar ba'Bakar ba'Kesavim u'va'Izim"?
2. ... Vayikra "ve'Im *min* ha'Of Korbano"?

(c) Rebbi Chiya bar Ashi Amar Rav permits an Eved whose master severed his extra finger.
How does Rav Huna qualify this ruling?

Next daf