Previous daf

1)

(a) We know from numerous sources that a woman who has unnatural relations with a man is Chayav.
According to Rav Nachman bar Rav Chisda, the same will apply if she brings an animal on herself unnaturally.
What does he say about a man performing unnatural bestiality with an animal?

(b) What is the basis for this distinction?

(c) On what grounds does Rav Papa object to this? What does he say?

(d) Both opinions however, are proved wrong by a Beraisa.
What does the Beraisa say?

(a) Ravina asked Rava what the Din will be with regard to 'ha'Me'areh be'Zachur'.
What does 'ha'Me'areh be'Zachur' mean?

(b) What did Rava answer him? Why did he not even consider this a She'eilah?

(c) What did Ravina then go on to ask him?

(a) Rava replied that we learn it 'Im Eino Inyan' from the Ha'ara'ah that is written in connection with Achos Aviv va'Achos Imo.
Why is that Ha'ara'ah superfluous? From where else would we learn Ha'ara'ah by Achos Aviv ve'Imo?

(b) We ask why the Torah then presents the source for Ha'ara'ah by bestiality by Achos Aviv va'Achos Imo.
Why should it not do so? What source should it have chosen?

(c) How do we answer this Kashya?

(a) What did Rav Sheishes mean when he replied 'K'vastan' to Rav Achdevui bar Ami's She'eilah whether a person is Chayav for performing Ha'ara'ah on himself?

(b) How did Rav Ashi explain the possibility of Rav Achdevui bar Ami's She'eilah actually taking place?

(c) Why is this subject to another Machlokes?

(d) So what does Rav Ashi conclude, according to the opinion of those who say 'ha'Meshamesh Meis ba'Arayos Chayav'?

(a) They asked Rav Sheishes whether the animal with which a Nochri committed bestiality is put to death.
On what grounds might it not be?

(b) Rav Sheishes answered them from a Beraisa.
What does the Beraisa say in connection with trees of an Asheirah?

(c) By the same token, we ask, if a Nochri prostrates himself before an animal, it too, ought to be forbidden.
What is the problem with that? From where do we know that it is not?

(d) We counter this by suggesting that should indeed be forbidden even if a Yisrael did it, just like it is if he raped it.
If so, how would we explain the fact that the Torah needs to forbid it as a Korban?

(a) How does Abaye explain the difference between the original two cases?
Why does a Yisrael who rapes the animal forbid it, but not a Nochri?

(b) This explanation assumes that Abaye totally disagrees with Rav Sheishes (with regard to an animal that was raped by a Nochri).
How might we partially reconcile his opinion with that of Rav Sheishes?

(c) In which point will he still argue with him (besides the fact that he requires both Takalah and Kalon, whereas Rav Sheishes does not)?

(d) Why does Abaye not learn the Din of an animal that was worshipped from an Asheirah that was worshipped?

(a) Rava learns like Rav Sheishes, who forbids an animal even where there is no Kalon.
How does he then explain the distinction between an animal that is worshipped and one that is raped?

(b) Then why the Torah forbid an Asheirah?

(c) We attempt to finally resolve Rav Sheishes' She'eilah from the Seifa of our Mishnah, which ascribes the animal being forbidden, to Kalon (in addition to Takalah).
What do we try and extrapolate from there?

(d) How do we refute this proof? If the Reisha is not speaking where there is Takalah and Kalon, then what is it speaking about?

8)

(a) What is the standard case of Kalon without Takalah?

(b) What She'eilah did Rav Hamnuna ask in this regard?

(a) Rav Yosef attempts to resolve Rav Hamnuna's She'eilah from a Beraisa.
What does the Tana ...

1. ... say about a three-year old girl regarding her Kidushin, her Yavam acquiring her, and someone else subsequently committing adultery with her?
2. ... mean when he says 'u'Metam'ah es Bo'alah le'Tamei Mishkav Tachton ke'Elyon'? Does this imply that, before the age of three, she is not Metamei be'Nidah?

(b) Then what *does* he mean?

(c) What is the difference between the top sheet of a Zav and the sheets underneath him?

(a) With regard to the Tana's earlier statement, can a girl ...

1. ... of three become betrothed with Bi'ah under her own auspices?
2. ... who is under three become betrothed with Kesef and Sh'tar?

(b) The Beraisa rules that if the girl who is over three marries a Kohen, she is permitted to eat Terumah.
Would she be able to eat Terumah if her father was Mekadesh her to a Kohen with Kidushei Kesef or Sh'tar?

(c) If one of the Pesulim (e.g. a Nasin or a Mamzer) rapes her, he disqualifies her from eating Terumah. What does Rav Yosef extrapolate from the Tana's next statement 've'Im Ba Alehah *Echad mi'Kol ha'Arayos* ha'Amuros ba'Torah, Mumsin al-Yadah, ve'Hi Peturah'?

(d) How do we refute the proof from there that Kalon without Takalah is sufficient to warrant the animal's death?

(a) Another Beraisa rules that a boy of over nine acquires his Yavam.
What does the Tana say about ...

1. ... giving her a Get? Why is that?
2. ... a case where he is Bo'el a Nidah? What would be the Din he was under nine?

(b) What will be the Din if he ...

1. ... is a Pasul Yisrael who has relations with a bas Kohen?
2. ... is a Kohen who betroths a bas Yisrael with Bi'ah?
3. ... commits bestiality in front of only one witness?
4. ... commits bestiality in front of two witnesses?

(c) Here too, we try and extrapolate from the Tana's next statement 've'Im Ba Al *Achas mi'Kol ha'Arayos* ha'Amuros ba'Torah, Mumsin al-Yado' (incorporating animals), that Kalon without Takalah, will suffice to warrant the animal's death.
How do we refute this proof?

(a) How do we attempt to resolve our She'eilah from the Seifa of our Mishnah, which ascribes the animal being forbidden, to Kalon (in addition to Takalah).
What do we try and extrapolate from there?

(b) How do we refute that proof?

Next daf