(Mishnah): There are three regions in Eretz Yisrael in regard to Sheviis. The land conquered by those who returned from Bavel (at the time of Ezra), meaning from the Land of Israel until Keziv - the produce may not be eaten (if it was unlawfully worked) and the land may not be worked. The land conquered by those who came from Mitzrayim (at the time of Yehoshua), meaning from Keziv until (even) the river and until Amanah may be eaten but may not be worked. From the river and from Amanah inwards, it may be eaten and worked.

(Gemara): (Proof that the laws of Sheviis only apply to Eretz Yisrael) The pasuk states (Devarim 12:1), "These are the laws and ordinances that you shall keep to perform in the Land'' - you are obligated only 'in the Land', but not outside.

But I could still say that not only are land related Mitzvos only an obligation in the Land, but even non land related Mitzvos should only be an obligation in the Land? So the pasuk states (Devarim 11:16-19), "Guard yourselves, lest your hearts be seduced...and Hash-m's fury will flare up in you (and you will quickly be lost from the Land)...And you shall set these words of Mine on your hearts etc.'' -even when you are in exile.

"And you shall set these words of Mine on your hearts and on your souls'' - to which Mitzvos is this referring? For example, Tefillin and Torah study (that are mentioned in the continuation of the pasuk). Just as Tefillin and Torah study are not land related and they apply even in Chutz LaAretz; so all Mitzvos that are not land related apply even in Chutz LaAretz.

Question: If so, they should be exempt when they are in exile, as the pasuk states (Nechemia 8:17), "And all the congregation of the returnees from the captivity made Succos and dwelt in the Succos, as they had not done so from the days of Yehoshua (written 'Yeshua') bin Nun''.

(The Gemara interjects): Why does the pasuk say Yeshua instead of Yehoshua?

Answer (R. Hillel son of R. Shmuel bar Nachman): The Torah diminished the honor of the Tzadik in his grave in deference to the Tzadik (Ezra) who lead the Jews in that generation.

(Baraisa resumes its proof): The Torah compares their coming in the time of Ezra with their coming to the Land at the time of Yehoshua - just as in the time of Yehoshua - just as at the time of Yehoshua, they had been exempt (from land related Mitzvos) and they became obligated; so to at the time of Ezra, they had been exempt (from land related Mitzvos) and they became obligated.

Question: On which level did they again become obligated (when they returned to the Land)?

Answer (R. Yosi bar Chanina): On a Torah level, as the pasuk states (Devarim 30:5), "And Hash-m your G-d will bring you to the Land that your fathers possessed and you shall possess it...'' - the Torah compares your possession (time of Ezra) to your fathers' possession (time of Yehoshua)- just as they were obligated by the Torah (in the land related Mitzvos), so too in the time of Ezra.

The Gemara continues to expound the same pasuk, "...and He will do good to you, and He will make you more numerous than your forefathers.'' - your fathers were exempt (until this point) and they became obligated (when they came to the Land) and so were you.

(But your strength in sanctifying the Land and becoming obligated was greater than theirs) - when your fathers came to the Land, they weren't under foreign rule, but you did this despite being under foreign (Persian) rule.

Your fathers only became obligated after 14 years - 7 years of conquering and 7 years of dividing, but you became obligated immediately upon returning the Land.

Your fathers only became obligated when they had acquired all of it, but your obligation applied to wherever you took, as soon as you took it.

(R. Elazar): (Disagreeing with R. Yosi bar Chanina) They voluntarily accepted the obligation of Maaseros (but it wasn't a Torah obligation).

What's his source? The pasuk states (Nechemia 10:1), "Yet, despite all this, we are making a pact and writing, and signed are our rulers, our Leviim and our Kohanim.'' (Later in the Perek, the pesukim state (Nechemia 10:33,36-38), "And we set upon ourselves the commandments to give...And to bring the first-fruits of our soil and the first of every fruit of every tree...And the firstborn of our sons and of our animals...and the firstborn of our cattle and our flocks...And the first of our dough and our heave offerings and the fruit of every tree, wine, and oil etc.''

Question: How does R. Elazar understand, "and the firstborn of our cattle and our flocks''? (The firstborn is a non-land related Mitzvah?!)

Answer: Once they accepted upon themselves Mitzvos in which they were not obligated (i.e. land related Mitzvos), the pasuk considers even those in which they were obligated as if they accepted them upon themselves.

Question: How does R. Yosi ben Chanina understand the pasuk, "Yet, despite all this...'' (that implies a voluntary acceptance)?

Answer: Since they accepted those Mitzvos happily, the pasuk considered it as if they accepted them voluntarily.

Question: How does R. Elazar understand, "(...and He will make you more numerous) than your forefathers'' (which implied that at the time of Ezra, there was a Torah obligation)?

Answer: He understands it to refer to the future redemption, as it was explained by R. Chelbo from Shimon bar Ba in the name of R. Yochanan - Your fathers inherited the land of seven nations (see Devarim 7:1 - the Chiti, Girgashi, Emori, Canaani, Prizi, Chivi and Yevusi) and you will inherit the land of 10 nations. The 3 extra are those (promised to Avraham in Bereishis 15:19) 'the Keni, the Kenizi and the Kadmoni'.

(R. Yehuda): They are the Arvaya, the Shamaya and the Navtaya.

(R. Shimon): They are Asia, Aspamya and Damesek

(R. Eliezer ben Yaakov): They are Asia, Kartigni and Turkey.

(Rebbi): They are Edom, Moav, Reshis Bnei Amon.

(According to R. Chelbo's understanding of the pasuk) "(...and He will make you more numerous) than your forefathers'' means - 'Even though your fathers were redeemed (from Mitzrayim) they were again enslaved. But as for you, once you will be redeemed, you will never again be enslaved.'

What is the source for this? (Yirmiyah 30:6), "Ask now and see whether a male gives birth'' - just as a male cannot give birth, so too, once you will be redeemed, you will never again be enslaved.

(Baraisa): If one walks from Acco to Keziv, everywhere to his right, which is to the east of the road is Tahor from the Rabbinic Tumah of Eretz HaAmim (lit. the land of the nations - meaning anywhere outside of Eretz Yisrael) and it is obligated in Maaseros and Sheviis, until he knows with certainty that a certain area of road has veered into Chutz LaAretz, making it exempt. And to his left, which is to the west of the road has the Tumah of Eretz HaAmim and it is exempt from Maaseros and Sheviis until he knows with certainty that it is obligated. This rule applies until he reaches Achziv.

R. Yishmael son of R. Yosi said in his father's name that it applies until Lavlev (which is further than Keziv).

Question: What's the status of Acco itself?

Answer (R. Acha bar Yaakov citing R. Imi): From two stories of Rebbi, we learn that Acco is part Eretz Yisrael and part Chutz LaAretz...

Story 1: Rebbi was once in Acco. He saw the people there eating 'clean bread' (made from wheat that was first soaked in water before it was ground). He said to them, "Why do you soak it? By doing so, you are causing it to be able to contract Tumah, which is forbidden in Eretz Yisrael!'' They replied, "A Rabbinical student once came here and ruled that 'Mei Beitzim' (lit. egg water) doesn't cause something to be able to contract Tumah. We therefore cook eggs in water and soak the wheat there.'' They understood that 'Mei Beitzim' was water in which eggs were cooked, but the student was actually referring to the liquid that flows from eggs. (This story shows that Acco is part of Eretz Yisrael, since Rebbi was particular about them causing Tumah to Chulin.)

(R. Yaakov bar Idi): At that time (when they saw that the student wasn't careful with his words and it caused a misunderstanding) they decreed that a student should not make Halachic rulings.

(R. Chiya citing Rav Huna): Even if a student rules correctly, his ruling is invalid.

Baraisa: If a student issues a ruling in front of his Rav, he incurs death on himself.

Baraisa (R. Eliezer): Nadav and Avihu only died because they issued a ruling in front of their Rav, Moshe.

A student once issued a ruling in front of his Rav, R. Eliezer. R. Eliezer told his (own) wife 'Ima Shalom' - This student certainly won't live until the end of the week.

He died before the end of the week. R. Eliezer's students said to him, "Rebbi, you are a prophet!'' He replied, "I'm not a prophet nor the son of a prophet! Rather, I have a tradition that any student that issues a ruling in front of his Rav incurs death upon himself.''

Baraisa: It is forbidden for a student to rule in front of his Rav, unless he is 12 Mil (around 12 km) away from him, like the length of the camp of Israel (in the desert).

What's the source (that it was 12 Mil)? The pasuk states (Bamidbar 33:49), "They camped along the Yarden (river) from Beis HaYeshimos to Avel Shittim'', which were 12 Mil apart.

This is like the story of when R. Tanchum bar Chiya was in Chefer. They asked him questions and he issued rulings. They asked him, "Didn't you teach us that it is forbidden for a student to issue a ruling in front of his Rav, unless he is 12 Mil away etc; and your Rav, R. Mana, is living in Tziporin?!'' He responded, "I didn't know that he was that close.'' From that time, he no longer issued rulings.

Story 2: Rebbi was once in Acco and he saw a person go out to a stony place that was the outer limit of those that returned from Bavel (at the time of Ezra). He said to him, "Aren't you the son of Ploni the Kohen (and it's prohibited for a Kohen to go to Chutz LaAretz)?'' The man replied, "My father followed his eyes and married a divorced women, and thereby made me a Chalal (who does not have the laws of Kehunah). (This story indicates that Rebbi viewed Acco as part of Chutz LaAretz.)