Previous daf

1)

(a) The Tana Kama of our Mishnah requires the boy to eat a Tartimar of meat and half a Log of Italian wine in order to become a ben Sorer u'Moreh. According to Rebbi Yossi - he must eat a Manah of meat and drink a Log of wine.

(b) The significance of Italian wine is - that the underlying reason behind the Chiyuv of a ben Sorer u'Moreh is the fact that he becomes easily addicted to the meat and wine, which is not the case by ordinary wine.

(c) The Mishnah rules - that a boy who eats these amounts ...

1. ... by a Se'udas Mitzvah, by Ibur ha'Chodesh, or Ma'aser Sheini in Yerushalayim - is Patur.
2. ... of Neveilos, Tereifos, Shekatzim u'Remasim' - is Patur, too.

(d) He is also Patur if he eats Ma'aser-Sheini. This mean - that he steals Ma'aser-Sheini money from his parents, with which he buys meat and wine and eats, in Yerushalayim.

(a) "Zolel ve'Sov'ei" implies - that he eats meat and drinks wine in a gluttonous manner.

(b) The Pasuk in Mishlei - "Al Tehi be'Sov'ei Yayin, be'Zolelei Basar Lamo" hints at the same thing even more explicitly.

(c) It is not clear what a Tartimar is. Rebbi Zeira learns it from Rebbi Yossi's opinion - because just as the Shiur of wine he gives is double the amount of that prescribed by the Tana Kama, so presumably, is the Shiur of meat. Consequently, since Rebbi Yossi gives the latter as a Manah, the Tartimar of the Tana Kama must be half a Manah.

(d) Rav Chanan bar Muldah requires the boy to purchase the meat and wine at a cheap price, and he extrapolates this from the Pasuk "Zolel ve'Sov'ei" - because "Zolel" is from the root 'Zol' meaning 'cheap'.

(e) The underlying reason for this is - because he is unlikely to become addicted to the food if it is expensive).

(a) In order to be Chayav, Rav Huna requires the ben Sorer u'Moreh - to eat the meat raw, and drink the wine undiluted.

(b) Rabah and Rav Yosef exempt him from Miysah if he eats the meat raw and drinks the wine undiluted (because eating food like that does not lead to addiction).

(c) To reconcile the two opinions, Ravina explains Rav Huna - to mean that the meat should not be completely cooked (only half-roasted on coals, the way robbers eat it, and the wine not properly diluted (in the way that most people drink it)

(d) Rav Huna's reason is - because since he steals the meat from his parents, he will be afraid to eat it in a liesurely manner in case he gets caught, and even if he does so once, he will not do it regularly). And asfor the wine, one does not become addicted to drinking undiluted wine or wine that is over-diluted.

(a) Rabah and Rav Yosef say that if a ben Sorer u'Moreh eats salted meat and drinks wine straight from the vat - he is Patur, because eating and drinking in this way does not addict.

(b) The Beraisa rules that even though one may not eat two cooked dishes, meat or wine at the Se'udah ha'Mefsekes on Erev Tish'ah-be'Av - salted meat and wine fom the vat are not included in the prohibition.

(c) When Rebbi Chanina b'Rebbi Yossi gives the Shiur ...

1. ... of salted meat, as 'Kol Z'man she'Hu ki'Shelamim', he means - that for the two days and the night in between that one is permitted to eat Shelamim, it is not called salted (because the meat's natural juice continues to meutralize the salt).
2. ... of wine from the vat as 'Kol Z'man she'Hu Toses', he means that as long as the wine 'bites the throat' because of its sharpness, it is called 'Toses' (constituting three days). Note, that Yayin Toses is also not subject to Giluy (wine that is left open, which is forbiddden for fear that a snake drank from it).

(d) The Shiur by a ben Sorer u'Moreh might be different than the Din of Erev Tish'ah be'Av - because whereas the latter is based on Simchah, the former is a question of addiction, which consequently has a different guage.

(e) We therefor give the shiur for ...

1. ... salted meat - as one day only, meaning that once the first day has passed, it is no longer addictive, and a ben Sorer u'Moreh is not Chayav.
2. ... wine from the vat - as up to forty days.

(a) Rav Chanan learns from the Pasuk "T'nu Sheichar la'Oved ve'Yayin le'Marei Nefesh" - that wine was created a. to pay the Resha'im in this world, in order to drive them out of the next. b. to comfort mourners.

(b) Wine causes the Resha'im's faces to turn red (from pleasure) in this world (since the Pasuk there writes "Al Teireh Yayin ki Yisadam"); in the World to Come - they will turn white from embarrassment.

(c) Rava Darshens the Paasuk "Al Teire Yayin Ki Yisadam" - as a warning not to pursue the pleasures of wine, because in the end, it will turn into blood (meaning that it will cause one's death).

(a) Rav Kahana reconciles the word 'Tirosh' (wine), which is written without a 'Vav', which spells ('Tirash') but pronounced as if it had one ('Tiyrosh') - by ascribing to wine two powers 'Zachah Na'aseh Rosh ([meaning a leader] corresponding to the way it is pronounced), Lo Zachah, Na'aseh Rash' ([meaning poor] corresponding to the way it is written).

(b) Similarly, Rava explains the Pasuk "ve'Yayin Yesamach Levav Enosh" - to mean either "Yeshamemehu" (a Lashon of destruction and desolation, the way it is written [a 'Shin', it seems, is more substancial than a 'Sin']) or "Yesamach", the way it is pronounced.

(c) Rava ascribed his wisdom - to wine and spices.

(d) Rav Amram B'rei de'Rebbi Shimon bar Aba Amar Rebbi Chanina explains the Pasuk in Mishlei. The ones who will experience "Oy va'Voy, strife, pain, senseless wounds, and red eyes" are - those who stay back for more wine.

(e) "la'Ba'im la'Chekor mi'Mesach" - refers to people who search for where they can find superior spiced wines.

(a) According to Rav Dimi in the name of the B'nei Ma'arva, this is one way of explaining the Pasuk. It is also possible to explain it backwards. If "Oy va'Voy and pain" refers to mourners ...

1. ... "strife and senseless wounds" refers to - wicked people who are constantly picking fights with others.
2. .. "red eyes" - refers to those who are well-off and comfortable; they are the ones who can afford to look for superior spiced wines.

(b) Ubar Galila'a commented on the Pesukim in No'ach "va'Yechal No'ach Ish Adamah, va'Yita Karem va'Yesht min ha'Yayin va'Yishkar, va'Yisgal be'Soch Ohalo ... va'Yeida es Asher Asah Lo B'no ha'Katan" - on the thirteen 'Vay's (words which begin with 'Vav' 'Yud', which with begin with No'ach planting a vineyard, and culminate with his own denigration at the hand of his son.

(c) Rav and Shmuel argue over what Cham did to his father. One says he castrated him, the other, that he raped him.

(d) The proof that he ...

1. ... castrated him lies in the fact - that No'ach cursed his fourth son Cana'an, in return for Cham's having prevented him from having a fourth son.
2. ... raped him stems from a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "va'Yar" -"va'Yar Osah Sh'chem ben Chamor" (in connection with the rape of Dinah).

(e) We have already explained why No'ach cursed Cana'an, Cham's fourth son, according to the opinion which holds that Cham castrated him. According to the opinion that he raped him, he did so - because in fact, he agrees that he castrated him (besides raping him).

(a) According to Rav Ukva (or Rebbi Zakai), No'ach's mistake in planting a vineyard of all things - was in not taking his cue from Adam ha'Rishon, who brought death on himself and on the whole of the world through drinking wine.

(b) This conforms with Rebbi Meir, who holds in a Beraisa that the tree from which Adam ate was a vine. The basis for Rebbi Meir's opinion is - precisely what we have been saying; that nothing causes as much wailing as wine.

(c) The basis for Rebbi Yehudah's opinion, that it was wheat is - the fact that a baby learns to call his mother and father directly when he begins to eat wheat-bread (suggesting that the Eitz ha'Da'as was wheat. (d) According to Rebbi Nechemyah - it was a fig-tree, because that is the tree whose leaves they took to fashion themselves belts to cover their nakedness. So presumably, that is the tree that caused them to sin.

(e) We find Hashem repairing, using the very tools with which he struck - with regard to the Beis-Hamikdash, which He destroyed with fire, and which He will rebuild with fire (like we say in 'Nacheim' on Tish'ah be'Av). May it come about soon.

9)

(a) We now discuss the series of Pesukim in Mishlei. "Lemu'el Melech, Masa Asher Yisrehu Imo". ''Lemuel Melech" means - 'The deeds and wisdom of the Shlomoh ha'Melech were dedicated to the Shechinah' ("Lemu'el'' = 'Lamo Keil').

(b) Rebbi Yochanan in the name of Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai explain these Pesukim. This is his explanation ...

1. ... "Mah B'ri" - Everyone knows that Shlomoh's father feared Hashem. So if Shlomoh indulges in wine and becomes obssessed with the pleasures of life, they will say that he took after his mother (Bas-Sheva).
2. ... "u'Mah bar Bitni" - All of David's other wives were no longer intimate with him once they became pregnant (until they gave birth). Not so Bas-Sheva, who in the knowledge that intimacy is healthy for the baby during the last three months of pregnancy, forced her way into her husband's presence (to make him aware of her).
3. ... "u'Mah bar Nidri" - Whereas all David's other wives prayed for a son who would be fit to reign, Bas-Sheva prayed for a son who would be a great Talmid-Chacham and who would be fit to be a Navi.

(c) She ordered him to avoid behaving like other kings - who would drink to he point of drunkenness (i.e. who would satiate themselves with the pleasures of life).

(d) "u'le'Roznim Eli Sheichar" might mean that it is not befitting for someone to whom all the secrets in the world are revealed, to become drunk. Alternatively, it might mean - that it is not befitting for someone who is visited by all the kings (who came to pay him homage and to ask for his advice) to be in a state of drunken stupor.

(e) Rebbi Yitzchak explains that Shlomoh later admitted that his mother was right. When he said there ...

1. ... "Ki Ba'ar Anochi me'Ish", he meant - that if No'ach (who was called 'Ish Tzadik'), who did not drink as much as he did, suffered from the wine that he drank, how much more so would he suffer (if he didn't stop).
2. ... "ve'Lo Binas Adam Li" - he was making the same analogy between himself and Adam ha'Rishon, who also drank less than he did (and look what happened to him).

(a) Rebbi Avahu requires a ben Sorer to eat and drink with - a group of empty-headed people, before he becomes Chayav.

(b) We query him from our Mishnah, which exempts him if he eats in a Chaburas Mitzvah - implying that any group that is not a Chaburas Mitzvah renders the ben Sorer u'Moreh Chayav, irrespective of the caliber of people he eats with.

(c) We answer this - by establishing our Mishnah by a group of empty-headed people, which is coming to teach us that the ben Sorer u'Moreh is nevertheless Patur, since it is a Chaburas Mitzvah.

(d) We learned in a Beraisa that they would only eat bread and legumes at the Seudah of Ibur ha'Chodesh. Nevertheless, our Mishnah needs to preclude a ben Sorer u'Moreh who eats at such a Se'udah - to exempt him even when he brings his own meat and wine with him.

(a) The least number of participants who would join in the Se'udah of Ibur Chodesh - whose purpose was to spread the fact that Rosh Chodesh fell on the thirty-first day of the previous month (and not on the thirtieth) is - ten.

(b) The Se'udah if Ibur ha'Chodesh took place - on the night following the thirtieth.

(c) We resolve the apparent discrepancy between two Beraisos, one of which requires them to ascend for the Se'udah in the evening (following the thirtieth of the month), the other, in the morning, by citing Rebbi Chiya bar Aba, who would instruct the participants of the Se'udas Ibur Chodesh - to arrive before nightfall, and to leave only after day-break (so that people would see them coming and see them going, and realize that Rosh Chodesh fell on the thirty-first).

(d) The Sugya of Ibur Chodesh cannot be referring to Kidush ha'Chodesh - because a. Kidush ha'Chodesh did not take place when Rosh Chodesh took place on the thirty-first, and b. because Kidush ha'Chodesh only requires three people, and not ten.

(a) Rava rules - that a ben Sorer u'Moreh who ate fowl is Patur.

(b) And he establishes our Mishnah, which exempts him if he ate 'Shekatzim and Remasim', suggesting that if he would have eaten Kasher creatures of that type of meat (i.e. locusts), he would be Chayav is speaking - when he ate a little less than a Tartimar of animal meat, which he needs to complement with the meat under discussion.

(c) Having already learned in the Reisha 'Achal ba'Chaburas Mitzvah' on the one hand, and 'Tereifos, Shekatzim and Remasim' on the other, the Tana adds ...

1. ... 'Achal D'var she'Hu Mitzvah' - to include Tanchumeu Aveilim (even though the Se'udah there is no more than a Takanas Chachamim). We would then interpret the Reisha - to mean Kohanim eating Kodshim or even Yisre'elim eating the Korban Pesach.
2. ... 'u'D'var Aveirah' - to include eating on a Ta'anis Tzibur (which is also only an Isur de'Rabbanan).

(d) The ben Sorer u'Moreh is Patur for eating a D'var Aveirah - because the Torah writes "Einenu Shome'a be'Koleinu", from which we extrapolate "be'Koleinu", 've'Lo be'Kolo shel Makom'.

(a) In spite of having already learned in the Reisha that a ben Sorer u'Moereh is only Chayav for eating meat and drinking wine, the Tana finds it necessary to add ...

1. ... 'Achal Kol Ma'achal ve'Lo Achal Basar' - to preclude also a fig from Ke'ilah (which inebriates).
2. ... 'Shasah Kol Mashkeh ve'Lo Shasah Yayin' - to preclude honey and milk.

(b) The Tana nevertheless needs to preclude them. Otherwise, we might have thought that the ben Sorer u'Moreh is Chayav - in view of the Beraisa which obligates someone who partakes of them and enters the Beis-Hamikdash (as if he had drunk wine).

(c) The Beraisa repeats the Pesukim that our Mishnah quoted regarding "Zolel ve'Sovei", adding the Pasuk in Mishlei which begins "Ki Sovei ve'Zolel Yivaresh", which means - that someone who benefits excessively, will become poor in learning (he will not remember what he has learned).

(d) Rebbi Zeira Darshens from the continuation of the Pasuk "u'Kera'im Talbish Numa" - that if someone sleeps ('Numi' in Arama'ic) in the Beis-ha'Medrash - his learning will become torn and fragmented (i.e. he will only remember bits and pieces of his learning).