Previous daf

1)

(a) Our Mishnah describes Miysas Sereifah.
Where would they place ...

1. ... the person who was to be 'burned'? Why did they do that?
2. ... the hard cloth that they wound round the sentenced man's neck?

(b) Why did they need two cloths? Why would one of them not suffice?

(c) After forcing his mouth open, how did they 'burn' him?

(d) What exactly caused the condemned man's death?

(a) According to Rebbi Yehudah, they forced his mouth open using a pair of tongs.
Why does he object to the Tana Kama's method?

(b) According to Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Tzadok, burning had to be performed in the literal sense.
How does he attempt to prove this from an actual case that took place with a Bas Kohen who had committed adultery? How did Beis-Din put her to death?

(c) On what grounds do the Chachamim refute his proof?

(a) We learn the method of burning from a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Sereifah" "Sereifah" from Adas Korach.
How do we learn it from there?

(b) Rebbi Elazar learns the same 'Gezeirah-Shavah', but from a different source.
Which source?

(c) The first opinion uses Korach as its source, based on the Pasuk "ve'es Machtos ha'Chata'im ha'Eileh *be'Nafshosam*".
How does Rebbi Elazar intercept the word "be'Nafshosam"?

(d) He bases this on Resh Lakish's interpretation of the Pasuk in Tehilim "be'Chanfei La'agei Ma'og Charak Alav Shimeimo".
What caused the Angel of Gehinom to sharpen his teeth, following the episode with Korach, according to Resh Lakish?

(a) Rebbi Elazar's source is the Pasuk in Shemini "va'Yamusu Lifnei Hashem", which he interprets to mean that they died the same sort of death as Miysas Beis-Din.
How does the first opinion explain the Pasuk? How did they die?

(b) All this is based on a statement of Aba Yossi ben Dustai.
How does Aba Yossi describe Nadav and Avihu's death?

(c) How does the first opinion explain the Pasuk "va'Tochal Osam" (implying that part of them remained intact, like Rebbi Elazar)?

(d) We query the above 'Gezeirah-Shavah' however, as there is a third case where the word "Sereifah" is used, but where the burning is meant literally, and from which we might learn the Din of Sereifah.
What is it?

(a) We nevertheless prefer to learn from the Adas Korach or from the B'nei Aharon, because they have in common with the punishment of Sereifah 'Adam, Chotei, Neshamah, Pigul', which Parim ha'Nisrafin do not.
What does 'Neshamah' mean?

(b) We try to counter this by citing 'Machshir, le'Doros', which Parim ha'Nisrafin share in common with the punishment of Sereifah, but which the above two do not. 'Machshir' means that they, like the Sereifah of our Sugya, are a Mitzvah.
What does 'le'Doros' mean?

(c) In any event, seeing as Parim ha'Nisrafin has certain plus-factors that the other two do not, why do we not learn from it that Sereifah must be taken literally?

(a) We explain that the opinion which learns Sereifah from Adas Korach, declines to learn it from Nadav and Avihu, because their bodies were completely burned.
So why not learn from them that this is the way Sereifah should be performed?

(b) How can a side Pasuk, which is written in a different context, negate a 'Gezeirah-Shavah'

(c) Now that we have the S'vara (Pasuk) of Rav Nachman, why do we still need the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' of "Sereifah" "Sereifah"? Why can we not learn from *it* that burning entails the inside, as we explained?

(d) How would we fulfill the requirement of "ve'Ahavta le'Re'acha Kamocha" even if Sereifah was taken literally?

(a) What did Nadav once say to Avihu as they were walking behind Moshe and Aharon?

(b) What did Hashem answer them?

(c) What adage did Rav Papa quote in this connection?

8)

(a) If an Am ha'Aretz initially perceives a Talmid-Chacham as a golden water-jug, how does he perceive him once the Talmid-Chacham ...

1. ... has talked to him?
2. ... has benefited from him?

(b) What are the hidden ramifications of this final distinction?

(c) What does this have to do with the previous Sugya?

(a) What did Rav Chama bar Tuvya do with Imr'sa bas Tali ha'Kohen when she committed adultery?

(b) Besides having erred in Rav Masna, who establishes our Mishnah by a strip of lead, he was guilty of another error based on a Beraisa.
What does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Shoftim "u'Va'sa el ha'Kohanim ve'el ha'Shofet Asher Yih'yeh ba'Yamim ha'Heim"?

(c) To dispense with the first error, why can we not answer that Rav Chama did not hold like Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Tzadok?

(a) What did Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Tzadok in the Beraisa remember having seen when he was a child riding on his father's shoulders?

(b) What did the Chachamim reply to that?

(c) How do we reconcile this with our Mishnah, where they ascribed his testimony to a Beis-Din of Tzedokim?

(d) How do we know that the episode in our Mishnah occurred after the one in the Beraisa?

(a) According to the Tana Kama, how was Miysas Sayaf carried out?

(b) Rebbi Yehudah considers this a disgusting death.
What does he advocate?

(c) The Chachamim considered that no less disgusting.
What did Rebbi Yehudah answer to that?

(d) And how do the Chachamim counter that?

(e) How do they prove their point from a Beraisa? Which Minhag does the Beraisa cite that would be forbidden because of "u've'Chukoseihem Lo Seleichu" were it not for a Pasuk that supports it?

(a) The Mishnah in 'ha'Nisrafin' lists a murderer and the inhabitants of Ir ha'Nidachas as those who receive Sayaf.
How do we know that the Anshei Ir ha'Nidachas receive Sayaf?

(b) The Torah writes in Mishpatim (in connection with someone who killed an Eved) "Nakom Yinakem".
How do we know that this refers to death by the sword?

(c) We reject the suggestion that Sayaf is performed by piercing the condemned man in the stomach or in his throat, on the basis of the Pasuk "l'Fi Charev".
What does this prove?

(d) How do we know that Sayaf does not constitute making him a Gistera? What is a Gistera?

(a) From where do we initially learn that someone who kills a fellow Yisrael receives Sayaf (seeing as the above-mentioned Pasuk pertains to an Eved)?

(b) What does the Beraisa Darshen from the Pasuk in Shoftim (by Eglah Arufah) "ve'Atah Te'va'er ha'Dam ha'Naki mi'Kirbecha"?

(c) In view of the above Kal-va'Chomer, why is this D'rashah necessary?

(d) Now that we need the D'rashah, how do we know that Sayaf is not performed with a hatchet from the back of the neck (like an Eglah Arufah)?

(a) How is Miysas Chenek performed?

(b) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Kedoshim ...

1. ... "*ve'Ish* Asher Yin'af ... "?
2. ... "Asher Yin'af es Eishes *Ish*"?
3. ... "Asher Yin'af es Eishes *Re'eihu*"?
4. ... "Mos Yumas"?

(c) Rebbi Yashiyah ascribes this latter ruling to the fact that for lack of a clear directive, one may only give him the most lenient death.
What does Rebbi Yonasan say?

(d) Rebbi Explains Rebbi Yonasan's opinion. From where does he extrapolate that S'tam Miysah bi'Yedei Adam means Chenek?

(e) How does Rebbi know that Miysah she'Ein Bah Roshem pertains to Chenek and not Sereifah, which also leaves no wound?

Next daf