1)

(a)We query Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak's previous statement however (that, according to Rebbi Yehudah, S'tam juice of berries and pomegranates is Asur), from a Mishnah in Machshirin, where the Tana Kama rules that a woman's milk is Machshir whether it emerges intentionally or not. 'Tamei' there means - Machshir.

(b)The Tana's reason for this ruling is - because a woman's milk is always called a beverage (see Rashi and Tosfos DH 'le'Razton').

(c)Animals' milk on the other hand, is only Machshir - if it emerged with the owner's intention, because otherwise it is not called a beverage.

(d)Based on a 'Kal va'Chomer' from the milk of a woman - which is designated for Ketanim exclusively, Rebbi Akiva gives the milk of an animal - which is drunk by Gedolim too, the same Din as that of a woman.

2)

(a)The Rabbanan refute Rebbi Akiva's Kal va'Chomer - by pointing out that the blood that emerges from a woman's wound is Machshir, whereas that of an animal is not.

(b)And they learn this from the Pasuk "ve'Dam Chalalim Yishteh", to which we compare Dam Mageftah - based on the principle 'What difference does it make whether the blood comes from a person who is completely dead or only half dead (i.e. wounded)'?

(c)Nevertheless, Rebbi Akiva is more stringent by milk than by blood - because if someone milks an animal in order to cure it, the milk is Tamei, whereas if he lets blood in order to cure it, it is Tahor ...

(d)... and since milking for a cure is Tamei, he holds, so is milk that emerges S'tam.

3)

(a)The Rabbanan counter Rebbi Akiva by citing a Halachah that the juice of grapes and olives that emerge le'Ratzon - is subject to Tum'ah; she'Lo le'Ratzon - is not.

(b)Initially, we interpret ...

1. ... 'le'Ratzon to mean - with the owner's knowledge.

2. ... 'she'Lo le'Ratzon' to mean - S'tam.

(c)And if the juice of grapes and olives (which everybody squeezes for their juice) that emerge S'tam - is not subject to Tum'ah, how much more so that of berries and pomegranates (which only some people do [a Kashya on Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak]).

(d)We resolve this problem, even without changing 'le'Ratzon' to mean S'tam and 'she'Lo le'Ratzon', against his express wishes, by answering - that the juice of baskets of olives and grapes escapes through the holes, in which case, the owner declares them Hefker; whereas that of berries and pomegranates in other vessel - does not, and many owners will therefore use it as a liquid (even S'tam).

4)

(a)We have proved that Rebbi Yehudah concedes to the Rabbanan that the juice that emerges from olives and grapes is forbidden. We now try to prove from the Beraisa, which permits squeezing plums, quinces and sorb-apples - that the Rabbanan concede to Rebbi Yehudah that the juice of other fruits (other than that of berries and pomegranates) is permitted.

(b)The problem with this Beraisa, even if the author was Rebbi Yehudah would be - that even if Rebbi permits the juice that emerges by itself, since when does he permit squeezing the fruit for its juice.

(c)We conclude however - that this is precisely what enables us to prove our point, since if Rebbi Yehudah goes so far as to permit squeezing the juice of fruit, because it is not considered juice at all, then there is no reason why the Rabbanan should hold differently.

5)

(a)The Tana forbids squeezing pomegranates, because they used to squeeze pomegranates in the house of Menashya bar Menachem (during the week). The problem with ...

1. ... Rav Nachman, who rules like Menashya ben Menachem is - that like Menashya ben Menachem was not a Tana, that an Amora should deign to rule liked him.

2. ... explaining this to mean that the Halachah is like the Tana who forbids squeezing pomegranates, since that is what they did in his house is - why we should issue a ruling on the basis of one individual.

(b)We try to compare Rav Nachman to Rebbi Eliezer in a Beraisa, who considers thistles in a vineyard to be Kil'ayim. The Chachamim - do not, since most people do not tend to retain thistles (not in a vineyard nor anywhere else).

(c)Rebbi Chanina ascribes Rebbi Eliezer's ruling - to the fact that the Arabians rend to retain thistles on behalf of their camels (just as Rav Nachman cited the family of Menashya bar Menachem).

(d)We refute this proof however - on the grounds that one cannot compare Beis Menashya bar Menachem (who was a mere individual) to the Arabians (who were an entire nation) in this regard ...

(e)... because to them the principle 'Batlah Da'ato Etzel Kol Adam' will not apply (like it does to an individual).

6)

(a)So we compare Rav Nachman's ruling to one by Rav Chisda, who said - that if someone who squeezed beets into a Mikveh and altered its appearance, it becomes Pasul (even though beet juice is not considered a beverage).

(b)We reconcile this ruling with other Mishnayos, which give the Shi'ur of Pasul liquid that render a Mikveh Pasul as three Lugin - by confining the latter ruling to drawn water (which is otherwise Kasher).

(c)And the reason that it invalidates the Mikveh is - because it becomes a beverage by virtue of the owner's having been Machshiv it.

(d)And it is for the same reason - that Rav Nachman rules like the Tana of Bei Menashya ben Menachem.

(e)Rav Papa disagrees. According to him, beet juice invalidates a Mikveh, even though it is not considered a beverage - on account of the principle that whatever is not eligible to form a Mikveh Lechatchilah, invalidates it should it fall into it.

7)

(a)The Mishnah in Mikva'os invalidates a Mikveh into which wine, vinegar or Mochel falls - provided it causes the Mikveh to changs color.

(b)'Mochel' is - a watery juice (the first of three) which begins to emerges soon after the olives have been placed in the vat to heat.

(c)Abaye establishes the Mishnah like Rebbi Ya'akov - who considers Mochel a beverage.

(d)He finds it necessary to do so - because in his opinion, only a beverage can render a Mikveh, Pasul.

(e)Nevertheless the Mochel that emerges at the beginning is Tahor - because the owner does not intend to retain it.

8)

(a)Rebbi Shimon defines Mochel - as not being a beverage.

(b)Nevertheless, the Mochel that emerges from the Ikul Beis ha'Bad (the third stage round about the time that it is squeezed) Tamei - because a few drops of oil are bound to come out together with the Mochel.

(c)And they argue - by the second stage, after the olives have begun to get hot from the pressing of the batch one against another.

(d)Rava establishes the Mishnah in Mikva'os even like Rebbi Shimon (who does not consider Mochel a beverage) - on the basis of the principle that whatever is not eligible to form a Mikveh Lechatchilah, will invalidate it should it fall into it (like Rav Papa a little earlier.

9)

(a)Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel ...

1. ... permits squeezing a bunch of grapes - into a dish containing food, but ...

2. ... forbids - doing so into an empty one.

(b)The basis for the distinction between squeezing into food and squeezing into liquid is - that the former is considered separating food from food (which is permitted in this case), the latter, as liquid from food.

(c)Rav Yehudah forbids squeezing into an empty dish - because, even though one does not generally drink from a dish, there is nothing to show that he wants to add it to food, so we will assume that he may want it as a drink.

(d)Rav Chisda extrapolates from Rav Yehudah - that one is permitted to milk a goat into a dish containing food, but not into an empty one.

(e)The principle that forms the basis of these rulings is - that liquid that is squeezed on to food is considered food.

10)

(a)Rami bar Chama queries Rav Yehudah from a Mishnah in Taharos, which rules - that the milk that a Zav milks from a goat is Tamei.

(b)The problem this creates for Rav Yehudah is - that the Tana does differentiate between whether the goat was milked into an empty pail or into a dish containing food, and that in the latter case how did the milk become Muchshar ... ?

(c)We reconcile Rav Yehudah with the Mishnah by citing Rebbi Yochanan who says (in a somewhat different context) - that the first drop of milk is considered a liquid in any event, since it is needed to wet the nipple (thereby facilitating the remaining milk to flow easily). And it is that drop that renders the rest of the milk Muchshar ... as it emerges.

11)

(a)Ravina queries Rav Yehudah from another Mishnah in Taharos, where the Tana rules ...

1. ... that if a Tamei Meis who squeezed out exactly a k'Beitzah of olives and grapes (without touching the juice that emerges) - the juice is Tahor.

2. ... (by inference) that if, under the same circumstances, there was a little more than a k'Beitzah - the juice would be Tamei.

(b)The Tana mentions Tamei Meis to preclude - a Zav, who would render even the juice from one grape Tamei, by means of Heset (carrying).

(c)The reason that, in the former case, the liquid does not become Tamei via the fruit that was touched by the Zav is - because once the first drop of juice has emerged, the fruit has been reduced to less than a k'Beitzah, and although less than a k'Beitzah of food is subject to Tum'ah, it cannot be Metamei anything else.

(d)The problem that this creates with Rav Yehudah is - based on the premise that the Tana is talking about juice that is being squeezed into a dish containing food (like we though in the previous case).

(e)Ravina himself solves it however - by establishing the Mishnah where he is squeezing the juice into an empty bowl.