Previous daf

1)

(a) Rav Ashi and Ravina too, hold like Abaye. Rav Ashi establishes the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir (who requires three judges by Motzi-Shem-Ra) and the Rabbanan (who require twenty-three), when the witnesses warned the woman that she would receive Malkos.
What is then Rebbi Meir's reason?

(b) This conforms with the opinion of the Tana Kama in our Mishnah. The Rabbanan hold like Rebbi Yishmael.
What does *he* say?

(c) Since when does one receive Malkos for a La'av that is subject to Miysah?

(a) Ravina establishes the case when one of the witnesses is found to be a relative of the woman, or was disqualified from testifying for some other reason.
Why will that transform the case from Diynei Nefashos into Diynei Mamonos, according to Rebbi Meir?

(b) What do the Rabbanan then hold?

(c) This conforms with the Machlokes between Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi explaining Rebbi Akiva in the Mishnah in Makos.
What does Rebbi Akiva extrapolate from he Pasuk in Shoftim "al-Pi Shenayim Eidim *O Sheloshah Eidim* ... "?

(d) What 'Kal va'Chomer' does he learn from here?

(a) Rebbi Akiva then adds the above Halachah 'u'Mah Shenayim, Nimtza Echad Meihem Karov O Pasuk, Eidusan Beteilah, Af Sheloshah ... Eidusan Beteilah'. How does Rebbi Yossi qualify this ruling? To which category will it not apply?

(b) What is the S'vara behind Rebbi Yossi's distinction? Why should Diynei Nefashos be any different than Diynei Mamonos?

(c) Rebbi disagrees with Rebbi Yossi. He does not differentiate.
What qualification does he make regarding Rebbi Akiva's ruling, with which Rebbi Yossi disagrees?

(d) What is Rebbi's reason?

(e) How does Ravina now connect the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan in our Mishnah with the Machlokes Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi?

4)

(a) Another alternative is that Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan repeat the Machlokes between Rebbi Yossi and the Rabbanan.
What does Rebbi Yossi learn from the Pasuk in Shoftim "al-Pi Shenayim Eidim"?

(b) What do the Rabbanan say?

(c) So what is their Machlokes? What is the case?

(a) And a final alternative is that they argue over the same point as ben Zakai and the Rabbanan in the Mishnah in 'Hayu Bodkin', in connection with whether a discrepancy in 'Bedikos' is considered a discrepancy.
What are ...

1. ... Bedikos?
2. ... Chakiros?

(b) What is the significance of the Tana's statement 'Ma'aseh u'Badak ben Zakai be'Uktzei Te'einim'?

(a) What exactly did ben Zakai do?

(b) What should the witnesses have done had they not known the answer to such a question?

(c) What do the Rabbanan hold?

(d) How will this explain the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan?

(a) In a case where the husband brings witnesses who testify that his newly-wed wife committed adultery after the betrothal, and the father then brings witnesses who render them Eidim Zomemin, Rav Yosef rules that the first set of witnesses are sentenced to death, but are not obligated to pay. Considering that they attempted to make the woman lose her Kesuvah, why should they not also pay?

(b) And what does he rule in a case where the husband then brings witnesses who render the father's witnesses Zomemin?

(c) Why are *they* obligated to pay even though they too, are sentenced to death?

(d) Then why are the husband's witnesses not also obligated to pay the father the hundred Sela (of a Motzi-Shem-Ra) that they attempted to make him pay with their testimony?

(a) What does Abaye say in a case where Reuven claims that Levi raped him ...

1. ... against his will?
2. ... with his consent? What is his source for this?

(b) On what grounds does Rava disagree with this?

(a) What does Rava also say with regard to a case where he together with Shimon, witnesses Levi have relations with his wife?

(b) Why can we not infer the latter ruling from the former one?

Next daf