Previous daf

1)

(a) What does Rebbi Yehudah learn with regard to Tum'as Ohel from a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Ohel" "Ohel" from Mishkan?

(b) The Rabbanan who argue with Rebbi Yehudah, maintain 'Ohel Ohel Ribah'. What does this mean?

(a) What is 'Kever ha'Tehom'?

(b) What did they achieve by building courtyards in Yerushalayim on top of rocks? What was underneath them?

(c) Why did they bring pregnant women there? What happened to the babies that were born there?

(d) They considered it necessary to be so strict with all issues connected with the Parah Adumah, because of a certain leniency which they practiced, in order to prove the Tzedokim wrong.
What was it?

(a) Which kind of vessels were used in preparing the Parah Adumah?

(b) Which Chumra did they practice with regard to the Kohen who was designated to burn it?

(a) According to the Tana Kama of the Mishnah, how did the children ride to the spring of the Shilo'ach to draw the water for the Parah Adumah?

(b) Rebbi Yossi permits them to fill their stone jars from the backs of the bulls.
Why should they not dismount and enter the water?

(c) Why does the Tana Kama insist that they dismount?

(a) What does Rebbi Yehudah say about riding on the doors? What problem does that create with his own principle quoted at the beginning of the Amud?

(b) Rav Dimi quoting Rebbi Elazar, differentiates between an Ohel of a Tefach and one of a 'Me'lo Egrof'.
What exactly is he saying? What is a 'Me'lo Egrof'?

(c) But Rebbi Yehudah himself said earlier that the children rode on bulls with wide backs and *not on doors*.
What is now the problem with what Rav Dimi just said to explain Rebbi Yehudah? How do we currently understand Rebbi Yehudah's statement 'not on doors'?

(d) Abaye re-interprets 'not on doors' to mean that it was not necessary for them to ride on doors (but that they could if they so wished). Rava presents an original reason as to why they deliberately avoided riding on doors (and he has a Beraisa to back him up).
What is it?

6)

(a) Why is there a problem with Rebbi Elazar, who maintains that Rebbi Yehudah concedes by a Me'lo Egrof, that a natural Ohel becomes important and is considered an Ohel, from Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah, who permitted sleeping under a bed in the Sukah?

(b) We answer that a bed is not considered an Ohel for a different reason.
What is it?

(c) In answer to the Kashya that, in that case, the backs of bulls too, are created to sit on top of them (and not as an Ohel to protect what is underneath them), Abaye answers that the shepherds tended to protect themselves from the sun and the rain by lyiing underneath the bulls' stomachs (in which case, they *were* meant to protect what was underneath them).
How do we counter this from a bed?

(d) How does Rava answer the previous Kashya from the Pasuk in Iyov "Or u'Basar Talbisheini, u've'Atzamos ve'Gidin *Tesochecheini*"?

(a) The contradiction in Rebbi Yehudah currently under discussion assumes that Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah does not consider a bed (e.g. a temporary Ohel) to be an Ohel. According to the way we originally explained Rebbi Yehudah, points out the Gemara, there is no Kashya to begin with.
Why is that

(b) Rebbi Shimon too, requires a permanent structure as a Sukah (as we saw above on Daf 7b.); yet he forbids sleeping under a bed in the Sukah.
Why is that?

9)

(a) According to the Tana Kama of our Mishnah, a Sukah that is supported by a bed is Kasher.
What does Rebbi Yehudah say?

(b) Rebbi Zeira and Rebbi Aba argue over Rebbi Yehudah's reason. One of them explains that it is because it is not fixed.
What does this mean?

(c) What does the other one say?

(d) What is the difference between the two explanations?