prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler of Kollel Iyun Hadaf
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
(a) Which tithes is one obligated to separate from crops or wine that one purchased from Kutim?
(b) Why does the Tana mention specifically Kutim (and not an Am ha'Aretz)?
(c) On what grounds does the Tana of this Mishnah in Demai permit the wine of Kutim in the first place? Did the Chachamim not issue a decree giving them the status of Nochrim in all respects?
(a) According to Rebbi Meir, how would someone who purchased a hundred Lugin of wine from the Kutim (shortly before Shabbos, or if he did not have any Tahor vessels into which to place the tithes) declare the Terumos and Ma'asros?
(b) What is Rebbi Meir's underlying principle?
(c) Rebbi Yehudah, Rebbi Yosi and Rebbi Shimon disagree; they forbid separating the Ma'asros in advance. What reason do we initially give for this?
(d) What problem does this create for Abaye, who established one Mishnah in Gitin like Rebbi Meir, and the other, like Rebbi Yehudah?
(a) To conform with Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah's opinions (with regard to using an animal for a Sukah), we invert Abaye's answer, to establish the Mishnah in Gitin which is concerned that the husband may have died, like Rebbi Meir, and the Mishnah which is not, like Rebbi Yehudah. Why then, is Rebbi Meir not worried that the flask may break?
(b) And if Rebbi Yehudah is not concerned that the Kohen may have died, then why does he not permit taking tithes from the wine that one bought from the Kutim, in advance?
(c) If, as we just explained, Rebbi Yehudah is not worried that the flask may break, then why does he use that as an argument in querying Rebbi Meir?
(d) And if he is not concerned about the Kohen dying, why does he require the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur to prepare another wife, in case his wife dies?
(a) We learned above, that Rebbi Meir disqualifies an animal from being used as a Mechitzah, because we are afraid that either it might die or it might run away. What is the problem with both of these reasons from the Mishnah in Eruvin, which precludes an animal from the Din of a Golel (the cover of a grave)?
(b) What is the basic reason for choosing to ask from the Mishnah in Eruvin rather than from the Beraisa, which we cited earlier, where we learnt exactly the same thing?
(c) What alternative reason do we give for that?
(a) Finally, Rav Acha bar Yakov explains that Rebbi Meir disqualifies an animal from serving as a Mechitzah mid'Oraisa, due to the fact that anything that only stands through air (and not under its own steam) is not called a Mechitzah (since air is an abstract entity). What is his alternative explanation?
(b) What is the difference between the two opinions?
(a) What does Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili learn from the Pasuk in Ki Setzei ...
1. ... "v'Kasav Lah Sefer Kerisus"?
2. ... "Sefer"?
(b) Why do the Rabanan disagree with Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili?
(c) How do they Darshen "Sefer Kerisus"?
(d) From "v'Kasav", the Rabanan learn that a woman can only be divorced through a Get, but not with money. Why would we have thought otherwise?
(a) Rebbi Yosi Hagelili learns from "Sefer Kerisus" what the Rabanan just learned from "v'Kasav". How does he do that?
(b) What do the Rabanan learn from "Sefer Kerisus"?
(c) What will be the Din if a man gives his wife a Get on the condition that she does not drink wine or go to her father's house ...
1. ... forever?
2. ... for thirty days?
(d) Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili learns that too, from the plural of "Kares/Kerisus". How do the Rabanan explain "Kares/Kerisus"?
(a) The Mishnah validates a Sukah whose walls consist of trees. How do we reconcile this with Rav Acha bar Yakov, who invalidates any wall that flaps around in a regular wind?
(b) What about the branches?
(c) What is the Chidush of this Mishnah? Why do we need a Mishnah to teach us that such a Sukah is Kasher?
(a) Is a tree eligible to serve as a Deyumad (by Pasei Bira'os)?
(b) The same condition applies to carrying under a large tree on Shabbos, whose wide-spread branches sag to within three Tefachim from the ground. Seeing as the Mechitzah is now man-made, why is it not considered 'Hukaf l'Dirah' (to permit carrying underneath it, even if it covers an area of more than a Beis Se'asayim (approx. 5,000 square Amos)?
(a) If, when Shabbos enters, a traveler finds himself beside a mound of earth ten Tefachim high (or a pit ten Tefachim deep), that covers an area which is more than four by four Amos but less than a Beis Se'asayim, how much of this area is he permitted to traverse?
(b) Then why does the Tana mention specifically more than four Amos?
(c) The third case mentioned in the Beraisa, is when a person finds himself in an area where the crops have been cut, and which is surrounded by standing corn. How do we query Rav Acha bar Yakov from here?
(d) How do we resolve the problem?