Previous daf

1)

(a) According to the Mishnah in Shavu'os, the Korban Shevu'ah for Shevu'as ha'Eidus is restricted to someone who is fit to testify. According to Rav Papa, this comes to preclude a king.
What it come to preclude, according to Rav Acha bar Ya'akov?

(b) Is this min ha'Torah or mi'de'Rabbanan?

(c) If according to Resh Lakish, Shevu'as Bituy applies to less than a Shiur of Isur (because it is fit min'ha'Torah), then why does Shevu'as ha'Eidus not apply to a gambler, even though, he too, is Kasher min ha'Torah?

(a) The Beraisa explains that although Chazal said 'Asur' by all the Isurim on Yom Kipur, only three of them are actually Chayav Kares.
Which three?

(b) This Beraisa seems not to be perturbed by the fact that the Mishnah says 'Asur', even when there is a Chiyuv Kares.
How do we amend it to concur with the opening Kashya in the Sugya, which assumes that the Tana would not do this?

(c) Alternatively, 'Asur' pertains to the other cases.
Which other cases? From where do we learn that they are Asur?

(d) Is this really d'Oraysa?

(a) According to Rebbi Yochanan, for what logical reason is Chatzi Shiur forbidden?

(b) And why is Chatzi Shiur permitted (min ha'Torah) according to Resh Lakish?

(c) What reason do we initially give for someone who eats the Cheilev of a Coy not being Chayav Kares?

(a) There is no punishment for eating less than a Shiur.
What does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Tzav "Kol Cheilev"? What does Rebbi Yochanan prove from here?

(b) How does Resh Lakish, who maintains 'Chazti Shiur Mutar min ha'Torah', explain this Beraisa?

(c) How does Resh Lakish attempt to prove this from the Beraisa, which includes the Cheilev of a Coy (a species of deer which is a Safek Chayah, Safek Beheimah) in the prohibition of Cheilev, from "*Kol* Cheilev"?

(d) How will Rebbi Yochanan refute Resh Lakish's proof? How does he describe a Coy?

5)

(a) How do we prove that a Coy must be a breed on its own from a statement by Rav Idi bar Avin - with regard to the blood of a Coy?

(b) How do we know that there too, the reason is not because a Coy is a Safek, like Resh Lakish learns by the Beraisa of Cheilev?

(a) How do we know that "Te'anu es Nafshoseichem" does not mean that one should go and sit in the sun or in the cold?

(b) Then maybe it means that someone who is already in the sun or in the cold should remain there?

(a) In the second Beraisa, the Tana writes that affliction, like Melachah, speaks when it is forbidden elsewhere.
What does it mean, that Melachah is forbidden elsewhere?

(b) So we establish "Te'anu" by Pigul and Nosar, and "ve'Inisem es Nafshesiechem" (boh in Acharei-Mos) by Tevel.
Why do we need a second Pasuk for Tevel? Why can we not learn it from Pigul and Nosar?

(c) We ultimately include four more things from "ve'Inisem es Nafshoseichem".
What are they?

(a) The Beraisa however, concludes, by learning that Inuy refers to not eating from another source.
Why do we need another source? How might we otherwise interpret Inuy?

(b) What *is* the Beraisa's source that Inuy means to refrain from eating?

1. ... "Im Te'aneh es Benosai"(Vayeitzei) of Lavan to Ya'akov.
2. ... "Vayar es Anyeinu" (Sh'mos) of Egypt? What does the Inuy there refer to?

(a) Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi argue over what Inuy of the Man was. According to one of them, it was the fact that they could not see what they were eating.
What does that mean?

(b) What do we learn from here regarding ...

1. ... a blind man eating his food?
2. ... how to get the best out of a meal?

(c) How does the other opinion explain the Inuy of the Man?

(a) How does Resh Lakish explain the Pasuk in Koheles "Tov Mar'eh Einayim me'Halach Nafesh"?

(b) Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi also argue over the interpretation of the Pasuk in Mishlei "Ki Yiten be'Kos Eino, Yis'halech be'Meisharim".
Which two sins do they suggest (between them), that a person thinks is permitted, once he takes to drinking?