Previous daf

1)

(a) What does Ula learn from the Pasuk in Kedoshim "ve'Ish Asher Yikach es Achoso ve'Ra'ah es Ervasah"? What is the problem with the Pasuk the way it stands?

(b) Since when does Kares (in which context this Pasuk is written) require a warning?

(c) de'Bei Chizkiyah learns the obligation to warn from the Pasuk in Mishpatim "ve'Chi Yazid Ish al Re'eihu Le'horgo be'Ormah".
How does he learn it from there?

(d) And de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael learns it from the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha "ha'Motz'im Osos Mekoshesh Eitzim" (written in the present tense). How does Tana de'Bei Rebbi learn it from the Pasuk in Ki-Seitzei "al-D'var Asher Inah es Eishes Re'eihu"?

(a) The Tana needed to find a source for warning in the case of murder (de'Bei Chizkiyah), even though we already have one in the case of incest with a sister, because we cannot learn warning (which is a leniency) with regard to death by the sword, from a case of Malkos (which is more lenient). But why do we then need the Pasuk by the Mekoshesh (de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael)?

(b) Seeing as the punishment of Chilul Shabbos is Sekilah, why does the Torah then add another source for warning by Na'arah Me'urasah (Tana de'Bei Rebbi [who also receives Sekilah]), according to ...

1. ... Rebbi Shimon (whom we quoted earlier)?
2. ... the Rabbanan?

(c) What does Rava (or Chizkiyah) learn from the Pasuk in Shoftim (in connection with the witnesses warning) "Yumas ha'Meis"?

(a) On what ground does Rav Chanan exempt the witnesses of a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah from the death-penalty, should they claim that she committed adultery, in the event that they subsequently become Zomemin?

(b) What problem do we initially have with this?

(c) If, as we suggest, he is speaking when the witnesses did not warn the woman, then how can she be sentenced to death anyway? What does Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah say?

(d) What is Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah's reasoning?

(e) We still query Rav Chanan however, on the grounds that according to him, the woman ought not to be Chayav Miysah either.
Why not?

(a) So how do we conclude according to Rav Chanan? What is the Din of the witnesses and of the woman in the above case according to Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah?

(b) In which case then, according to Rav Chanan, could an Ishah Chaverah then become subject to the death-penalty, in the opinion of Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah?

(c) Why can the witnesses not now claim that they came to forbid her on the *adulterer* (with the same ramifications as our original Kashya)?

(d) Why did Rav Chanan mention specifically a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah? Is it because the Din would be any different in the case of a married woman?

(a) What distinction does Rav Chisda draw between a discrepancy regarding the murder weapon and a discrepancy regarding the color clothes that the murderer is wearing? What is the reason for this distinction?

(b) How will Rav Chisda then establish the Beraisa which considers a discrepancy ...

1. ... the color clothes the murderer was wearing no less than "Eino Nachon" than a a discrepancy in the murder weapon?
2. ... which color shoes the murderer was wearing?

(c) And how does Rami bar Chama initially explain our Mishnah, where ben Zakai questioned the witnesses with regard to the fig-stalks on the fig-tree, according to Rav Chisda?

(d) We reject Rami bar Chama's initial answer, from the Lashon of the Beraisa 'Tachas Te'einah Hargo'.
So what is Rami bar Chama's second explanation of our Mishnah?

(a) A second Beraisa cites ben Zakai as having asked the witnesses "Te'einah Zu ... Te'einim Shechoros, Te'einim Levanos'.
How does this Beraisa disprove Rami bar Chama's second interpretation of our Mishnah?

(b) Rav Yosef finally reconciles Rav Chisda's ruling with our Mishnah by establishing ben Zakai as a minority opinion.
How does he explain ben Zakai's opinion?

(c) How long did Raban Yochanan ben Zakai live? How was his life divided into three?

(d) What does the Beraisa say about the Chanus? What was the 'Chanus'?

(a) Based on what we just learned, why do we initially reject the suggestion that ben Zakai is synonymous with Raban Yochanan ben Zakai?

(b) We learn from the Pasuk in Shoftim "ve'Kamta ve'Alisa" that the Sanhedrin ha'Gedolah were only fully effective as long as they sat in the Beis-Hamikdash.
What are the ramifications of this ruling? Does it affect Diynei K'nasos?

(c) What leads us ...

1. ... to believe that this ben Zakai is not Raban Yochanan ben Zakai the Nasi?
2. ... to conclude that they must be one and the same?

(d) Why does our Mishnah then refer to him as ben Zakai, and the Beraisa, as Raban Yochanan ben Zakai?

8)

(a) What do we mean when we ask on our Mishnah (with regard to the Bedikos) 'Afilu Shenayim Omrim Eini Yode'a', 'Mai Afilu'?

(b) Rav Sheishes therefore amends the Tana's statement and links it to the Chakiros in the Reisha, and the Tana is speaking when there are three witnesses.
How does the statement now read?

(c) What does he mean when he establishes our Mishnah like Rebbi Akiva? On what basis does Rebbi Akiva disqualify all three witnesses, when only one of them says 'Eini Yode'a'?

(d) In fact, this is the specific opinion of Rebbi Shimon, only Rebbi Akiva, who learns something else from the comparison between three witnesses and two, agrees with Rebbi Shimon.
That being the case, why does Rav Sheishes establish our Mishnah like Rebbi Akiva rather than like Rebbi Shimon?

(a) Rava argues with Rav Sheishes on the grounds that the Tana says 'Eidusan Kayemes' and not 'Eidusan Beteilah'.
How does he then explain the Mishnah?

(b) Who will then be the author of our Mishnah?

(a) By whom had Rav Kahana and Rav Safra been learning Sanhedrin, when Rami bar Chama met them?

(b) Rami bar Chama asked them that, seeing as Bedikos and Chakiros are both min ha'Torah, why is the testimony disqualified should one of the witnesses say 'Eini Yode'a' by one of the Chakiros, but not by the Bedikos.
What did they reply?

(c) Rami bar Chama commented that although Rav Kahana and Rav Safra claimed to have learned only P'shat, they were conversant with the deeper reasons too.
How did they respond to that?

(a) We learned in our Mishnah that a discrepancy of one day at the beginning of the month is acceptable, since we assume one of them to have been unaware of the fact that the previous month had been pronounced a full month.
What time limit does Rebbi Acha bar Chanina Amar Rebbi Asi Amar Rebbi Yochanan give to allow for this error?

(b) How does Rava attempt to prove this from the Mishnah itself which does not allow a discrepancy of two days? What reason does Rava ascribe to this?

(c) On what grounds do we refute Rava's proof? If it is not due Rebbi Yochanan's principle that we cannot accept a discrepancy of two days, then to what might we attribute it? What does 'T'rei Shipuri' mean?

(a) And what did Rebbi Acha bar Chanina Amar Rebbi Asi Amar Rebbi Yochanan say about the final time to say 'Kidush Levanah'?

(b) Rebbi Ya'akov bar Idi Amar Rav Yehudah explains this to mean until seven days.
What do the Neherda'i say?

(c) In fact, we conclude, both opinions hold like Rebbi Yochanan, only Rav Yehudah holds 'Ki Yisra', whereas the Neherda'i hold 'Ki Nafya'.
What is the meaning of ...

1. ... 'Ki Yisra'?
2. ... 'Ki Nafya'?

Next daf