REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf
Makos 15
|
MAKOS 11-15 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications
for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
|
1)
(a) What is a 'La'av she'Kadmo Asei'?
(b) Even assuming that a 'La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei' is Patur from Malkos, what
does Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan say about a 'La'av she'Kadmo
Asei'?
(c) What did Rabah say, when Rebbi Yochanan denied having said it?
(d) If the Pasuk to which Rabah referred to was "vi'Yeshalchu min
ha'Machaneh ... ve'Lo Yetam'u es Machaneihem", which Mishnah did he refer
to?
2)
(a) Rebbi Yochanan nevertheless denied having said it, because of a Beraisa.
What did the Tana say there in the case of O'nes she'Giresh, if the O'nes
was ...
- ... a Yisrael?
- ... a Kohen?
(b) What problem did Rebbi Yochanan have with this Beraisa?
3)
(a) Ula answers Rebbi Yochanan's Kashya, by pointing out that the Torah did
not need to write "ve'Lo Siheyeh le'Ishah" by O'nes, because we could learn
it from Motzi-Shem-Ra.
How would we learn it from there?
(b) How would this solve the problem?
(c) But how could we apply the Asei after the La'av by O'nes from the Pasuk
of Motzi-Shem-Ra, which applies before the La'av?
(d) What Pircha do we ask on the 'Kal va'Chomer' of O'nes from
Motzi-Shem-Ra'?
4)
(a) We then reverse the Limud, suggesting that the Torah could have learned
the Asei by Motzi-Shem-Ra (who has a Din of Lokeh u'Meshalem) from O'nes
(who has not), and that we should now learn it 'Im Eino Inyan', as an Asei
by O'nes, only after having transgressed, to exempt him from Malkos.
How
do we refute this suggestion?
(b) So we try to apply "ve'Lo Siheyeh le'Ishah" written by Motzi-Shem-Ra, to
O'nes after having transgressed (to turn it into a 'La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei')
because it is superfluous in its own context.
Why is that?
(c) On what grounds do we refute this suggestion as well? What then might
the Pasuk by Motzi-Shem-Ra be coming to teach us?
(d) How do we refute even the suggestion that we might then learn the P'tur
from Malkos by O'nes from Motzi-Shem-Ra with a 'Kal va'Chomer' or with a
'Mah Matzinu'?
5)
(a) How does Rava finally solve our problem by Darshening the Pasuk "Lo
Yuchal le'Shalchah *Kol Yamav*"?
(b) What does Ravin Amar Rebbi Yochanan say about that?
(c) Rav Papa asked Rava how Rebbi Yochanan can possibly ascribe Malkos to a
case of 'La'av she'Kadmo Asei', which is not like the standard La'av of
Chasimah.
What was Rava's reply?
(d) But do we not exempt a 'La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei' for that very reason?
Answers to questions
15b---------------------------------------15b
6)
(a) Even a 'La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei' is subject to Malkos, either in a case
of 'Bitlo ve'Lo Bitlo' or in a case of 'Kiymo ve'Lo Kiymo'.
What is the
definition of ...
- ... 'Bitlo ve'Lo Bitlo'
- ... 'Kiymo ve'Lo Kiymo'?
(b) What is the problem with Rava's D'rashah 'Kol Yamav be'Amod ve'Hachzer',
if we say 'Kiymo ve'Lo Kiymo'?
(c) How do we solve the problem?
7)
(a) What is the problem with the Beraisa quoted by the Beraisa expert 'Kol
Mitzvos Lo Sa'aseh she'Yesh Bah Asei, Kiyem Asei she'Bah Patur, Bitel Asei
she'Bah, Chayav'?
(b) How does ...
- ... Rebbi Yochanan amend the text?
- ... Resh Lakish amend it?
(c) What is the basis of their Machlokes?
(d) Why can one not simply warn the transgressor before he negates the Asei
(in which case it will be a 'Hasra'as Vadai')?
8)
(a) As a matter of fact, Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish follow their own
opinions in an independant Machlokes.
What do they both agree, in a case
where someone swears that he will eat a loaf of bread on the same day, and
fails to do so by the time nightfall arrives?
(b) Rebbi Yochanan attributes this ruling to the fact that it is a 'La'av
she'Ein Bo Ma'aseh'.
What does Resh Lakish say?
(c) According to which Tana are they arguing?
Answers to questions
Next daf
|