[64a - 42 lines; 64b - 50 lines]
1)[line 17]ôøè åëìì ðòùä ëìì îåñéó òì äôøèPRAT U'CHLAL; NA'ASEH KLAL MOSIF AL HA'PRAT
(a)In the Introduction to the Sifra (the Halachic Midrash to Vayikra), Rebbi Yishmael, who is Doresh Klalei and Pratei (see below, entry #9), lists thirteen methods that Chazal use for extracting the Halachah from the verses of the Torah. One of them is Prat u'Chlal, [Na'aseh Klal Mosif Al ha'Prat].
(b)When a Prat (specification) is followed by a Klal (general term), then the Halachah of the verse is all-inclusive and applies to all of the cases of the general category.
2)[line 21]ëìì åôøè àéï áëìì àìà îä ùáôøèKLAL U'FRAT; EIN BA'KLAL ELA MAH SHEBA'PRAT
(a)In the Introduction to the Sifra (the Halachic Midrash to Vayikra), Rebbi Yishmael, who is Doresh Klalei and Pratei (see below, entry #9), lists thirteen methods that Chazal use for extracting the Halachah from the verses of the Torah. One of them is Klal u'Frat [Ein bi'Chlal Ela Mah shebi'Frat].
(b)When a Klal (general term) is followed by a Prat (specification), without teaching any new Halachos that pertain to that Prat, then the Halachah of the verse is limited and applies only to the Prat.
3)[line 24]åäà ìà ãîé ëììà áúøà ìëììà ÷îàV'HA LO DAMI KLALA VASRA LI'CHLALA KAMA- but the final Klal is not similar to the first Klal
4)[line 27]"àí äîöà úîöà...""IM HIMATZEI TIMATZEI..."- "If the theft be at all found [in his hand alive, whether it be an ox, or a donkey, or a sheep; he shall restore double.]" (Shemos 22:3)
64b----------------------------------------64b
5)[line 7]åäà ùðé ëììåú ãñîéëé àäããé ðéðäå?V'HA SHNEI CHELALOS DI'SEMICHEI A'HADADEI NINHU?- but they are two Klalos (general terms) that are next to each other?
6)[line 8]ëãàîøé áîòøáàKED'AMREI BMA'ARAVA- like they say in the west (i.e. Eretz Yisrael)
7)[line 8]ëì î÷åí ùàúä îåöà ùúé ëììåú äñîåëéí æä ìæäKOL MAKOM SHE'ATAH MOTZEH SHTEI KLALOS HA'SEMUCHIM ZEH LA'ZEH...- wherever you find two Klalos (general terms) written together followed by a Prat (a specific term), we interpret the Pasuk the same as a Klal u'Frat u'Chlal, as if the specification is written in between the two.
8a)[line 14]ãáø äîèìèìDAVAR HA'MITALTEL- a movable object
b)[line 14]åâåôå îîåïV'GUFO MAMON- and it has intrinsic monetary value
9)[line 18]øéáä åîéòè åøéáä äåàRIBAH U'MI'ET V'RIBAH HU (RIBUYEI U'MI'UTEI)
(a)In order to extract the Halachah from the verses of the Torah, many Tana'im interpret the verses on the basis of Klalim (generalizations) and Pratim (specifications). Others interpret the verses on the basis of Ribuyim (inclusions, i.e. qualifications that enlarge the scope of the law) and Mi'utim (exclusions).
(b)According to the approach that learns Klalei u'Fratei, when a Klal is followed by a Prat, which is followed in turn by another Klal, then everything belonging to the general category that is similar to the Prat is included. Anything that is not in the general category of the limiting Prat is not included. According to the approach that learns Ribuyei u'Mi'utei, the outcome mentioned previously (for Klal u'Frat u'Chlal) is already achieved when a Ribuy is followed only by a Mi'ut. When a Ribuy is followed by a Mi'ut and the Mi'ut is followed in turn by another Ribuy, then everything is included except for one item that is totally dissimilar to the limiting Mi'ut. (This means that the verse will include more instances than the first opinion assumed.)
10)[line 20]áîéí áîéí á' ôòîéíBA'MAYIM BA'MAYIM 2 PE'AMIM- it states the word "ba'Mayim" two times with regard to Kosher fish in the same verse: "mi'Kol Asher ba'Mayim" and "Kol Asher Lo Senapir v'Kaskeses ba'Mayim" (Vayikra 11:9)
11)[line 25]àçééä ì÷øï ëòéï ùâðáACHYEI LA'KEREN K'EIN SHE'GANAV- restore (lit. keep alive) the principle (the value of the animal) like it was at the time that it was stolen
12)[line 30]îåãä á÷ðñ åàçø ëê áàå òãéí ôèåøMODEH BI'KENAS V'ACHAR KACH BA'U EDIM, PATUR
Any payment that involves over-compensation for a monetary loss is considered a "Kenas" (penalty) rather than "Mamon" (compensation). In every case of Kenas, the liable party does not have to pay the Kenas if he admits to his guilt of his own accord. Only if witnesses testify to his guilt in court must he pay. If he admits to his guilt of his own accord, and later witnesses testify to his guilt in court, the Amora'im argue as to whether or not he must pay the Kenas (Bava Kama 74b-75a - he is exempted from payment, according to the lenient opinion, only if his admission took place under specific circumstances). Until one is obligated to pay a Kenas in court, he is fully exempt from payment and does not even have a moral obligation to pay it on his own accord (RASHBA to Bava Kama 74b, see also RAMBAN in Milchamos HaSh-m at the end of the third Perek of Kesuvos).
13)[line 43]ëì ôøùä ùðàîøä åðùðéú ìà ðùðéú àìà ìãáø ùðúçãù áäKOL PARSHAH SHE'NE'EMRAH V'NISHNEIS LO NISHNEIS ELA LA'DAVAR SHE'NISCHADESH BAH- any topic that is taught in the Torah and is repeated elsewhere in the Torah comes to teach a new Halachah with respect to that topic
14)[line 46]àîøú ìà ëê äéä!AMART, LO KACH HAYAH!- You must conclude that this is not the correct approach!
15)[last line]"[àí äîöà úîöà á]éãå""[IM HIMATZEI TIMATZEI B']YADO "- "[If the theft be at all found] in his hand [alive, whether it be an ox, or a donkey, or a sheep; he shall restore double.]" (Shemos 22:3)