Previous daf

1)

(a) What did Rava reply when he was asked the above She'eilah (concerning the Aliyos on Rosh Chodesh) by Ula bar Rav?

(b) How were the Anshei Ma'amados faced with the same problem?

(c) According to Rav, they solved the problem by employing 'Doleg'; according to Shmuel, 'Posek'.
What is the meaning of ...

1. ... 'Doleg'?
2. ... 'Posek'?

(d) Why does ...

1. ... Rav not agree with the concept of Posek?
2. ... Shmuel not agree with the concept of Doleg?

(a) How does Shmuel reconcile his opinion with Rebbi Chanina, who was reluctant to permit Rebbi Chanina the Rebbe to break up Pesukim except for his young disciples, who were unable to learn whole Pesukim?

(b) With regard to the Anshei Ma'amados, the Tana Kama of the Beraisa in Ta'anis permits the second Aliyah in a Parshah of five, to Lein one Pasuk into the next Parshah.
What does Yesh Omrim (Rebbi Nasan) say?

(c) According to Rav, why does Rebbi Nasan not permit 'Doleg' in this case?

(d) Why is there no Kashya also on Shmuel ('Let Rebbi Nasan permit 'Posek')?

(a) In which case is the Tana Kama of Yesh Omrim more lenient, in the case of reading less than three Pesukim at the beginning of the Parshah or in that of stopping less than three Pesukim from the end?

(b) Based on that and on the fact that Yesh Omrim disagrees with him in that case, what is the problem with Rebbi Tanchum Amar Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, who after ruling like the Yesh Omrim, goes on to say that just as it is forbidden to read less than three Pesukim at the beginning of the Parshah so to, is it forbidden to stop less than three Pesukim from the end?

(c) What is the answer? Why might Yesh Omrim nevertheless have had good reason to be more *lenient* with regard to stopping less than three Pesukim *from the end*.

(d) In that case, why are Chachamim more lenient with regard to stopping less than three Pesukim *from the beginning*?

5)

(a) Considering that we do not Daven Musaf on a Ta'anis Tzibur, why do we think that four people may nevertheless be called up?

(b) Why is there no proof (that one calls up *three* people) from the fact that when our Mishnah lists the occasions on which four are called up, it only lists Rosh Chodesh and Chol ha'Mo'ed (implying that on a Ta'anis Tzibur one calls up only three)?

(c) How do we try to resolve our She'eilah from the fact that when Rav arrived in Bavel on a Ta'anis Tzibur, he was called up and although he recited a Berachah before reading, he did not recite one afterwards?

(d) On what do we base the suggestion that Rav was called up in place of a Kohen?

(a) On what grounds do we then contend that, even if Rav Huna was called up in place of a Kohen, this was not possible in the case of Rav?

(b) How do we finally accept the previous suggestion (that Rav was called in place of a Kohen) as the final answer, in spite of the fact that Rav paid deference to Shmuel.

(c) How do we try to prove that Rav must have been called up in place of a Kohen (and not for Sh'lishi, as we first presumed).

(d) On what grounds do we refute this proof? How was it possible for Rav to have been called for Sh'lishi (or Revi'i) in spite of the objection that he should not have then recited a Berachah beforehand either?

7)

(a) Based on a Beraisa, we finally rule that on a Ta'anis Tzibur, only three people are called up.
What is the reason for this ruling?

(b) On Rosh Chodesh we call up four people.
Why is there no Bitul Melachah then? Since when is work forbidden on Rosh Chodesh?

(c) Why is Rosh Chodesh a semi-Yom-Tov specifically for women?

(d) What proof do we have from the Haftarah of 'Machar Chodesh' that Rosh Chodesh is not considered a day of work?

(a) How does Rav Ashi try to prove from 'Zeh ha'K'lal, Kol Yom she'Yesh Bo Musaf ve'Eino Yom-Tov Korin Arba'ah' in our Mishnah, that the Tana of our Mishnah disagrees with the above-mentioned Beraisa (with regard to calling up three people on a Ta'anis Tzibur)?

(b) We reject Rav Ashi's contention (that, according to the Tana of our Mishnah, one calls up *four* people on Tish'ah-be'Av), on the grounds that this concurs neither with the Tana Kama nor with Rebbi Yossi of another Beraisa. According to Rebbi Yossi, on Tish'ah-be'Av one always calls up three people, and the third one is the Maftir.
What does the Tana Kama say?

(c) If 'Zeh ha'Kl'al ... ' does not come to include a Ta'anis Tzibur (like Rav Ashi maintains), then what *does* it come to include? Why is it mentioned at all?

(a) Which principle governs the number of Aliyos on each of the days mentioned in our Mishnah?

(b) So why do we call up ...

1. ... four people on Rosh Chodesh and on Chol ha'Mo'ed?
2. ... five on Yom-Tov?
3. ... six on Yom Kipur?
4. ... seven on Shabbos?

(a) When Rav arrived in Bavel, everyone else prostrated themselves (for Tachanun), but Rav did not. The initial reason we give (for Rav not prostrating himself) is based on a Pasuk in Behar.
What does the Pasuk say?

(b) How come that the other people *did* prostrate themselves? Why did Rav not move across to another part of the Shul?

(c) Alternatively, the entire floor may have comprised stone. Nevertheless, the other people tended to bow down (perhaps in the way that we do) and it was only Rav who had the Minhag to prostrate himself (which is forbidden on a stone floor).
In that case, why did Rav not change his Minhag and bow down like everybody else?

(d) Finally, we establish the case even by an earth floor, and Rav did not prostrate himself because of a statement of Rebbi Elazar.
What did Rebbi Elazar say?

(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Melachim ...

1. ... "va'Tikod Bas-Sheva Apayim Aretz"?
2. ... "mi'Ch'ro'a al Birkav"?

(b) We learn from Ya'akov's words to Yosef that Hishtachavayah means to prostrate oneself flat on the ground.
What did Ya'akov say to him?

(c) What happened when Levi demonstrated Kidah in front of Rebbi?

(d) How do we reconcile this with Rebbi Elazar, who attributed Levi's lameness to the fact that he accused Hashem of not helping Yisrael in their hour of need?

Next daf