Previous daf

1)

(a) According to Rebbi Eliezer, a man may wear armor in the street, because armor for a man is a Tachshit, not a burden.

(b) The Chachamim maintain that, on the contrary, armor is a symbol of disgrace for a man. This is evident from the Pasuk in Yeshayah, which describes how, in the days of Mashi'ach, weapons will become obsolete, and how they will all be broken up to transform them into plowing implements. RebbiEliezer however, does not accept this argumant. The reason that weapons will become obsolete in the days of Mashi'ach, he argues, is only because then, there will be no use for them; today, as long as they are still needed, they are a Tachshit. 'Sheraga be'Tihara' means that weapons will become obsolete in the days of Mashi'ach, like a lamp is obsolete during the day, when the sun is shining.

(c) Shmuel says that the only difference between the world today and the days of Mashi'ach, is our subservience to the nations, which will disappear then. Everything else, including the wearing of weapons, will continue as it was. (The discarding of weapons referred to by Yeshayah, according to Shmuel, pertains not to the days of Mashi'ach, but to the period of Olam ha'Ba which will follow it).

(d) According to Rebbi Chiya bar Aba, all the words of the prophets - including those of Yeshayah concerning the abolishing of weapons - pertained to the days of Mashi'ach. But Olam ha'Ba is beyond the scope and vision of the prophets.

(a) In the second Lashon, Rebbi Eliezer replied to the Chachamim that weapons will not cease to be worn in the days of Mashi'ach (only in the time of Olam ha'Ba) - like the opinion of Shmuel.

(b) The Pasuk "Chagor Chargecha al Yarech Gibor" etc., implies that weapons are a Tachshit (something praiseworthy) for a man, and not a disgrace - like the Chachamim suggest.

(c) The Chachamim however, establish this Pasuk by Divrei Torah - that a Talmid-Chacham should clarify what he learns and revise it constantly, so that, when he is called upon to account for his deeds, he will have all the proofs needed to vindicate himself. In principle, Rebbi Eliezer agrees with this Derashah, but he also insists on learning the Pasuk literally, because of the principle 'Ein Mikra Yotze Mi'Yedei Peshuto' (The plain interpretation of a Pasuk must be retained).

(d) Rav Kahana said that he was eighteen years old when he finished Shas, yet he did not know that 'Ein Mikra Yotze mi'Yedei Peshuto'. So we see that a Jew must learn everything - even if he does not understand it so well - and then revise it at a deeper level, when he will be able to pick up many things of which he was unaware the first time round - even principles.

(a) 'Shenei Talmidin ha'Mechadedin Zeh laZeh ba'Halachah' means two Talmidei-Chachamim who ask each other questions and give answers, not in order to try and catch each other out, but in order to increase their understanding of the Sugya.

(b) Hashem will grant them success in their quest, and what's more, they will rise to greatness - provided that is, that they learn li'Shemah, and that they do not become conceited.

(c) According to Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, they will be Zocheh to long life in the World to Come, as well as wealth and honor, all of are given with the right hand (to someone who learns li'Shemah.

(d) Someone who learns Torah she'lo li'Shemah, will merit wealth and honor.

(e) 'bi'Yeminah' might also refer to those who study Torah with much effort, to clarify everything that they learn; whereas 'bi'Semolah' referds to those who learn casually, without much effort and care.

(a)

1. "Nidberu" is from the word "Yadber (Amim Tachteinu" - in Tehilim), meaning to place under our jurisdiction (a connotation of 'humbleness' - in our Sugya, 'gently'). It refers to two people who learn together gently, sweetly, with the intention of learning from one another. And it could also mean 'to lead', because they lead each other to the correct Halachah.
2. From "u'le'Choshvei Shemo" refers to someone who intended to perform a Mitzvah, but was prevented from doing so - it is nevertheless considered as if he had performed it.

(b) We learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Shomer Mitzvah Lo Yeida *Davar* Ra"- that if someone performs a Mitzvah properly, he will not be given any bad news.
2. ... " ba'Asher Diber Melech Shilton u'Mi Yomar Lecha mah Ta'aseh? ... Shomer Mitzvah" etc. - that someone who performs a Mitzvah properly has the power to cancel Hashem's harsh decrees.

(c) From the Pasuk ...

1. ... "ha'Yosheves ba'Ganim Chaverim Makshivim, le'Kolecha Hashmi'ini" teaches us that when two Talmidei-Chachamim listen carefully to each other when they learn Torah, Hashem grants them their requests;
2. ... "Berach Dodi, u'Demei" etc, that if they do *not* do so, they will cause the Shechinah to depart from Klal Yisrael.

(d) "ve'Diglu Alai Ahavah" teaches us that when two Talmidim who, because they have no Rav from whom to learn, join forces and study together, to arrive at a better understanding of the subject-matter, Hashem loves them.

(a) Lending is a greater Mitzvah than giving Tzedakafm because it spares the recipient from embarassment.

(b) It is a greater Mitzvah still, to give someone in need money to enter into a business venture, the profits of which are shared with the owner.

(c) A Talmid-Chachamim who takes revenge like a snake is prefferable to a pious, unlearned Jew, because one can learn a lot from his Torah. On the other hand, one should keep well away from the latter, who, due to his ignorance, will make mistakes from which one is bound to learn.

6)

(a)

1. ... 'Lamas' is the Greek word for a dog. Consequently, "Lamas me'Re'eihu Chesed" means, that someone who keeps a vicious dog in his house, withholds Chesed from other Jews. Why is that?
Because the poor will be too afraid to come to his door.
2. ... And what's more, he also ride himself of the fear of G-d, since the Pasuk continues "ve'Yir'as Shakai Ta'azov".

(b) That man tried to pacify the pregnant woman who came to bake in his house, by informing her that the dog which was barking at her, had had his fangs removed, and that she therefore had nothing to fear.

(c) 'Too late!' she told him. 'The baby has already moved, and died - from the fright'.

8)

(a) Kevalin are Temei'in, and it is forbidden to go out with them on Shabbos.

(b) How can Biris be a bracelet, when a Biris is Tahor, and we already know that a bracelet is Tamei?

(c) A Biris, which is only worn on one leg, is there to serve a garment (to hold up a sock) - which explains why it is Tahor, as we learnt earlier in the Masechta. It is of no ornamental value, since it is only worn on one leg, which is somewhat degrading. Consequently, a woman will not take it off to show her friends, which in turn, explains why she is permitted to go out with it in the street.
Kevalim, on the other hand, besides serving as garters to hold up her socks, are also of ornamental value, which explains why they are Tamei. It is also possible to remove them without revealing her legs. In that case, we suspect that she may remove them to show her friends, which is why Chazal forbade her to go out with them on Shabbos. (If, according to Rashi, a woman is permitted to go out with a Biris, because she will not take it off - since that would mean revealing her legs - then it is not clear why Kevalim are forbidden. All this, applies to this stage, when the Gemara thinks that the only difference between a Biris and Kevalim is, that, whereas the one is worn on *one* leg, the other is worn on *two* - Tosfos).

(a) According to Rav Huna, (in whose opinion both a Biris and Kevalim are worn on two legs) the difference between them is the chain that joins the Kevalim, but not the Biris.

(b) The Biris is nothing more than a pair of garters, but the chain on the Kevalim is considered a K'li Ma'aseh - making it subject to Tum'ah, like a bell.

(c) This is because it served the function of forcing the women who wore them (members of a specific family in Yerushalayim, who used to take long steps, which would cause them to lose their virginity early) to take shorter steps, thereby preserving their virginity. And because of their ornamental function, she was forbidden to go out with it on Shabbos, as we explained earlier.

(a) 'Kodesh la'Hashem' was engraved on the Tzitz. However, this was not all written in one straight line: the word 'Kodesh' together with the 'Lamed', were written at the beginning of the line, and the Name of 'Hashem' was written above it - at the end of the line.
According to Rebbi Eliezer b'Rebbi Yossi, who claims to have seen the Tzitz in Rome, the words 'Kodesh la'Hashem' were written in one line.

(b) We can hardly learn from the Tzitz any Din concerning weaving, since the Tzitz was not woven - it was made of gold!

(c) We *do* however, learn from the Tzitz that an ornament, however small, is Tamei.

(a) Fom "O Beged" we learn that whatever is woven, however small it may be, is Tamei.

(b) And from "Kol K'li Ma'aseh" we learn that a small article half of which is woven and the other half ornament (but not woven), is Tamei.

(c) We learn Tum'as Sheretz from Tum'as Mes in this regard - by means of a Gezeirah Shavah "K'li" "K'li".