1)

(a)How do we learn from the Pasuk in Mishpatim "B'chor Banecha Titein Li. Kein Ta'aseh le'Shorcha le'Tzonecha" that animals bought or received as a gift are exempt from Ma'aser Behemah?

(b)But that Pasuk refers to B'chor Beheimah and not to Ma'aser?

(c)Why can the Pasuk not be referring to ...

1. ... a Chatas and Asham?

2. ... an Olah and Shelamim?

3. ... an Olas Re'iyah?

1)

(a)We learn that animals bought or received as a gift are exempt from Ma'aser Behemah from the Pasuk in Mishpatim "B'chor Banecha Titein Li. Kein Ta'aseh le'Shorcha le'Tzonecha" - in that, just as B'chor Adam cannot have been purchased or received as a gift, neither can Ma'aser Beheimah.

(b)Although that Pasuk is written with regard to B'chor Beheimah (and not Ma'aser), nevertheless, the Halachah cannot pertain to B'chor - since the Torah writes "Kein Ta'aseh", and a B'chor is not subject to any Ma'aseh for it to become a B'chor.

(c)The Pasuk cannot be referring to ...

1. ... a Chatas and Asham - since having learnt this Din from B'chor Adam, it must be similar to a B'chor Adam, which is not given because of a sin.

2. ... an Olah and Shelamim - since they too, are not similar to B'chor Adam which, unlike them, is obligatory and not as a Neder or Nedavah.

3. ... an Olas Re'iyah - which unlike a B'chor Adam is restricted to a particular time of the year.

2)

(a)What does Rebbi Asi Amar Rebbi Yochanan say about someone who purchases ten unborn fetuses which are subsequently born?

(b)What source does Rava cite for this ruling, to reconcile it with the previous Halachah?

(c)What did Rebbi Elazar answer to the same question?

(d)How did he arrive at that answer?

2)

(a)Rebbi Asi Amar Rebbi Yochanan rules that if someone purchases ten unborn fetuses - he is obligated to Ma'aser them, in spite of the fact that they were purchased.

(b)To reconcile Rebbi Asi with the previous Halachah, Rava cites the source for his ruling as the word "Ta'aseh", which indicates that it is only at the time when they are fit to have Ma'aser taken from them, that they purchased animals are exempt from Ma'aser, to exclude the likes of fetuses, which are not.

(c)What did Rebbi Elazar - gave the same answer to the same question ...

(d)... which he arrived at in a dream (which he found to be a good answer).

3)

(a)Rebbi Shimon ben Elyakim asked Rebbi Elazar a Kashya on Rebbi Asi from a Beraisa. What does the Beraisa say about somebody who purchases an animal before it is eight days old with regard to Ma'aser Beheimah?

(b)Why does this pose a Kashya on Rebbi Asi?

(c)Initially, we answer that this Beraisa is not authentic. Alternatively, it goes like Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah. What does Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah sayabout an animal that is less than eight days old?

(d)From where does he learn it?

3)

(a)Rebbi Shimon ben Elyakim asked Rebbi Elazar a Kashya on Rebbi Asi from a Beraisa, which rules that somebody who purchases an animal before it is eight days old - is exempt from Ma'aser ...

(b)... a Kashya on Rebbi Asi - according to whom he ought to be Chayav.

(c)Initially, we answer that this Beraisa is not authentic. Alternatively, it goes like Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah, who says - that a Mechusar Z'man must go into the pen to be Ma'asered ...

(d)... just like a B'chor which is Kadosh even before eight days.

4)

(a)In the Beraisa cited by a Beraisa expert in front of Rav, what is the sole case of an animal given as an Esnan Zonah that goes into the pen to be Ma'asered?

(b)What would the owner do, if the tenth animal turned out to the Esnan Zonah?

(c)The questioner asked why it is not Patur because it has been purchased. What did he forget?

(d)Why is the prostitute herself not Chayav to Ma'aser it?

4)

(a)In the Beraisa cited by a Beraisa expert in front of Rav, the sole case of an animal given as an Esnan Zonah that goes into the pen to be Ma'asered is - where the man purchased it back from the Zonah.

(b)If the tenth animal turned out to the Esnan Zonah - the owner would set it free in the meadow until it obtains a blemish ... ('Yir'eh ad she'Yista'ev')

(c)The questioner who asked why it is not Patur because it has been purchased, forgot - about Rebbi Asi Amar Rebbi Yochanan, according to who if the purchased animal is a fetus, it is Chayav Ma'aser, and that is how the Beraisa must be speaking.

(d)The prostitute is not obligated to Ma'aser the animal herself because when the Torah forbids an Esnan, it is speaking specifically about a Zonah Nochris.

56b----------------------------------------56b

5)

(a)What do we extrapolate from the fact that we do not establish the case by a Zonah Yisre'elis (with regard to an Esnan which is still a fetus, as we explained earlier)?

(b)This is based on a statement of Abaye. What did Abaye say about...

1. ... the Esnan of a Zonah Nochris and the baby that is born from her relationship with a Kohen?

2. ... the Esnan of a Yisre'elis and the baby that is born from her relationship with a Kohen?

(c)How do we learn the two Dinim of Esnan from a Gezeirah-Shavah "To'eivah" "To'eivah" from Arayos?

(d)Which of the current Dinim do we learn from the word "Zar'o" (in the Pasuk in Emor, in connection with the Kohanim, "ve'Lo Yechalel Zar'o be'Amav")?

5)

(a)We extrapolate from the fact that we do not establish the case by a Zonah Yisre'elis (with regard to an Esnan which is still a fetus, as we explained earlier) - that the Din of Esnan Zonah does not pertain to a Zonah Yisre'elis.

(b)This is based on a statement of Abaye, who said that ...

1. ... the Esnan of a Zonah Nochris is forbidden and that the baby born from her relationship with a Kohen is not a Chalal.

2. ... the Esnan of a Yisre'elis is permitted, and the baby that is born from her relationship with a Kohen is a Chalal.

(c)We learn the two Dinim of Esnan from a Gezeirah-Shavah "To'eivah" "To'eivah" from Arayos - that the Din of Esnan is confined to where there is Chiyuv Kareis (as is the case by Arayos).

(d)We learn from the word "Zar'o" (in the Pasuk in Emor, in connection with the Kohanim, "ve'Lo Yechalel Zar'o be'Amav") - that the baby is only a Chalal if it his considered his Zera, which it is not if the mother is a Nochris.

6)

(a)The Mishnah discusses brothers who are partnership with regard to Kalbon and Ma'aser Beheimah. What is 'Kalbon'?

(b)What does 'Chayav Kalbon' mean in this context?

(c)What principle does the Tana present regarding the corollary between Kalbon and Ma'aser Beheimah in our case?

(d)What is the criterion that creates a P'tur from ...

1. ... Ma'aser Beheimah?

2. ... Kalbon?

(e)When does the Mishnah now hold that they are ...

1. ... Chayav Kalbon and Patur from Ma'aser Beheimah?

2. ... Chayav Ma'aser Beheimah and Patur from Kalbon?

6)

(a)The Mishnah discusses brothers who are partnership with regard to Kalbon and Ma'aser Beheimah. Kalbon is the little extra that everyone has to pay Bedek ha'Bayis over and above the half-Shekel (as a sort of handling or exchange fee).

(b)'Chayav Kalbon' in this context mean - that if two brothers give a full Shekel between them, they have to add on two Kalbonos.

(c)Presenting the corollary between Kalbon and Ma'aser Beheimah in our case, the Tana states - that whenever they are Chayav the one, they are Patur from the other.

(d)The criterion that creates a P'tur from ...

1. ... Ma'aser Beheimah is - being partners.

2. ... Kalbon is - that they are sharing their father's inheritance.

(e)The Mishnah now hold that they are ...

1. ... Chayav Kalbon and Patur from Ma'aser Beheimah - once they have divided the property and entered into partnership.

2. ... Chayav Ma'aser Beheimah and Patur from Kalbon - before that stage.

7)

(a)What do we learn (in connection with Ma'aser Beheimah) from the word ...

1. ... "lach" (in the Pasuk in Korach "Kol Peter Rechem Yih'yeh lach")?

2. ... " Yih'yeh "?

(b)What problem do we have with that?

(c)To solve the problem, we quote the Pasuk in Re'ei "u'Vekoros Bekarchem ve'Tzonchem". How that that answer the Kashya?

7)

(a)We learn from the word ...

1. ... "lach" (in the Pasuk in Korach "Kol Peter Rechem Yih'yeh lach" - that partners are Patur from Ma'aser Beheimah)

2. ... " Yih'yeh " - that as long as the animals are still in the kitty, they are Chayav.

(b)The problem with that is - that the Pasuk is talking about Bechorah, and not Ma'aser Beheimah.

(c)To solve the problem, we quote the Pasuk in Re'ei "u'Vekoros Bekarchem ve'Tzonchem" - from which we learn that partners are Chayav Bechorah, in which case the current Pasuk 'Im Eino Inyan' must refer to Ma'aser Beheimah.

8)

(a)Rebbi Yirmiyah discusses the various possible computations as to when the brothers are Chayav or Patur with regard to Kalbon and Ma'aser Sheini (two of which we already discussed in the Mishnah). On what conditions are they Chayav ...

1. ... both?

2. ... neither?

(b)All four cases are obvious, except for the last one. Why is that? What might we otherwise have thought?

8)

(a)Rebbi Yirmiyah discusses the various possible computations as to when the brothers are Chayav or Patur with regard to Kalbon and Ma'aser Sheini (two of which we already discussed in the Mishnah). They are Chayav ...

1. ... both - if they divided up the money but not the animals.

2. ... neither - if they divided up the animals but not the money.

(b)All four cases are obvious, except for the last one, where we might otherwise have thought - that since they divided up the animals, indicating that they want to split up, it is as if they have divided the money too (in which case they ought to be Chayav Kalbon).

9)

(a)Rebbi Anan establishes the case where the brothers are Patur from Ma'aser Beheimah by kids against goats. What does he say there where they each took half the kids or half the goats?

(b)Why is that?

(c)What does Rav Nachman say?

(d)What is the basis of their Machlokes?

9)

(a)Rebbi Anan establishes the case where the brothers are Patur from Ma'aser Beheimah by kids against goats. But where they each took half the kids or half the goats - he rules that they are Chayav ...

(b)... since each one obviously received what was his.

(c)Rav Nachman says - that they are Patur there too.

(d)The basis of their Machlokes is - whether we hold 'Yesh B'reirah' (Rebbi Anan( or 'Ein Bereirah' (Rav Nachman).

10)

(a)Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Yochanan have a similar Machlokes. Rebbi Elazar establishes that they are Patur only if they divided ten against nine. What exactly is the case?

(b)What does he say if they divide nine against nine or ten against ten?

(c)What does Rebbi Yochanan say?

(d)What is the basis of their Machlokes?

(e)Rebbi Yochanan follows his own reasoning regarding brothers who divided their father's property. What did Rebbi Asi citing him say there?

10)

(a)Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Yochanan have a similar Machlokes. Rebbi Elazar establishes that they are Patur only if they divided ten - small lambs (say) against nine large ones.

(b)If they divide nine against nine or ten against ten, he maintains - that they are Chayav Ma'aser (lust like Rebbi Anan).

(c)Rebbi Yochanan maintains that either way they are Patur.

(d)The basis of their Machlokes is - whether we say 'Yesh B'reirah' (Rebbi Elazar) or 'Ein B'reirah' (Rebbi Yochanan)

(e)Rebbi Yochanan follows his own reasoning regarding brothers who divided their father's property. Rebbi Asi citing him said there - that 'Brothers have the Din of purchasers and must therefore return everything to the kitty when the Yovel arrives'.

11)

(a)Why does Rebbi Yochanan see fit to teach us 'Ein B'reirah in both of the current cases? What would we have thought had he confined his ruling to ...

1. ... by Ma'aser Beheimah ("B'chor Banecha Titein li. Kein Ta'aseh le'Shorcha ... ")?

2. ... by Sadeh?

(b)What does 'I Nami Lechatchilah' mean?

11)

(a)Rebbi Yochanan sees fit to teach us 'Ein B'reirah in both of the current cases. Had he confined his ruling to ...

1. ... Ma'aser Beheimah ("B'chor Banecha Titein li. Kein Ta'aseh le'Shorcha ... "), we would have thought that - this is because just as 'B'chor Banecha' is clearly defined, so too, B'chor Beheimah, whereas by Sadeh, the Torah only requires Mecher to go back in the Yovel, but not Yerushah and Matanah.

2. ... by Sadeh, we would have thought that - that is le'Chumra, but not by Ma'aser Beheimah, where it means going le'Kula (to exempt the owner from Ma'aser Beheimah.

(b)'I Nami Lechatchilah' means - that Alternatively, we would have confined going back in the Yovel is confined to fields, which must go back to their original owners, but not to Ma'aser, where that concept does not exist.

12)

(a)We query those who hold 'Yesh B'reirah' from a Beraisa. What does the Tana say in a case where one partner took ten lambs, and the other, nine and a dog?

(b)Why are the former forbidden?

(c)To answer the Kashya, how does Rav Ashi establish the Beraisa?

12)

(a)We query those who hold 'Yesh B'reirah' from a Beraisa, which rules, in a case where one partner took ten lambs, and the other, nine and a dog - that all the lambs 'against' the dog are forbidden, and those together with it are permitted.

(b)The former are forbidden - because we don't know which lamb corresponds to the dog (otherwise, it alone would be forbidden).

(c)To answer the Kashya, Rav Ashi establishes the Beraisa - where the two sets of animals are not worth the equivalent amounts, so that each of the ten lambs are worth less than the dog. In such a case, the excess value of the dog extends to all the remaining nine lambs.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF