Previous daf

1)

(a) Our Mishnah states that if a Saris made Bi'ah with his Yevamah, he invalidates her.
What can we infer from there?

(b) Is this a Kashya on Rav Hamnuna, who says that a Shomeres Yavam who committed adultery with another man, becomes a Zonah and is Pasul to marry a Kohen?

(c) The author of our Mishnah, which says that an Aylonis becomes Pasul to marry a Kohen only if one of the brothers performs Bi'ah with her, cannot be Rebbi Yehudah.
Why is that? What does Rebbi Yehudah say?

(a) Our Mishnah states that a S'ris Chamah Kohen who marries a bas Yisrael may feed her Terumah.
What will be the din by a S'ris Adam?

(b) What do Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi Shimon say about an Androginos Kohen who marries a bas Yisrael?

(c) And what does Rebbi Yehudah say about a Tumtum who tears open and discovers that he is a male? May he perform Chalitzah?

(d) The Tana Kama permits an Androginus to marry but not to be married. What does Rebbi Eliezer say?

(a) What Chidush is the Tana teaching us when he permits the wife of a Kohen who is a S'ris Chamah to eat Terumah? Why would we have thought that she may not?

(b) According to Resh Lakish, Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi Shimon permit the wife of an Androginus to eat Terumah but not Chazeh ve'Shok.
Why does this statement make no sense?

(c) If, as we suggest, he is referring to Terumah nowadays, which is only mi'de'Rabbanan, then why did he not differentiate between Terumah nowadays and Terumah in the time of the Beis Hamikdash (rather than Terumah and Chazeh ve'Shok)?

(d) What does Rebbi Yochanan say?

(a) Resh Lakish cites a Beraisa which reads 'Igul be'Igulim, Oleh'.
What are the two possible interpretations of this Beraisa?

(b) What is the proof from the fact that Terumah nowadays must be de'Rabbanan (in spite of the fact that the Terumah of figs is only mi'de'Rabbanan anyway)?

(c) Rebbi Yochanan disagrees. He cites a Beraisa which reads 'Chatichah ba'Chatichos, Olah'.
What does this mean?

(d) In which point do Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish disagree?

5) Orlah and K'lai ha'Kerem normally become Batel in two hundred.
Then why does Rebbi Meir, in the Mishnah in Orlah, say that bundles of Tilsan (fenugreek - a kind of legume) of K'lai ha'Kerem are not Bateil in two hundred?

6)

(a) According to the Chachamim, the only six 'fruits' that do not become Batel are nuts from Perech (possibly coconuts), pomegranates from Baden, sealed barrels of wine, young mangold (a type of beet) -shoots, the cabbage of Eretz Yisrael (which used to be as large as a tree) and a Greek gourd. Which food does Rebbi Akiva add to the list?

(b) To which of these will the Isur of ...

1. ... Orlah apply, but not K'lai ha'Kerem?
2. ... K'lai ha'Kerem apply, but not Orlah?

(c) Rebbi Meir learns 'Kol she'Darko Limanos'.
How does Rebbi Yochanan interpret this?

(d) What does Resh Lakish say?

(a) According to Rebbi Yochanan, the Tana of the Beraisa holds that even Chatichah ba'Chatichos is Bateil too. What other example does the Tana of the Beraisa add to that of pieces of Chatas?

(b) Rebbi Yehudah disagrees.
Why is that (see also Tosfos DH 'Rebbi Yehudah')?

(c) If the piece of Chatas, or of Lechem ha'Panim that fell into the hundred pieces of Chulin was also Tahor, even the Tana Kama would agree that it would not become Bateil.
Why is that (according to Rebbi Yochanan)?

(d) Then why does the cake of figs of Terumah become Bateil in the cakes of Chulin figs in the Reisha (even though they can all be sold to a Kohen - with little loss to the owner)?

(a) How will Resh Lakish, who learned above that Kol she'Darko Limamos does not become Bateil, explain this Beraisa, which holds that it does?

(b) Then why does Rebbi Yehudah disagree?

(c) In that case, why, in the Seifa, does the Tana move to when the piece of Chatas is Tahor? Why did he not rather tell us that if it did not melt, then it does not become Bateil, even when it is Tamei?

Next daf