1)

(a)Bearing in mind that the Torah prescribes ...

1. ... breaking the "K'li Cheres, how can one make a hole in it before breaking it (since an earthenware pot with a hole is no longer a K'li)?

2. ... Kashering the copper pot, how can one make a hole in it before Kashering it (seeing as a copper pot with a hole can no longer be classified as a copper pot)?

(b)According to Resh Lakish, what does one do with the Kohen Gadol's Me'il which became Tamei after being taken out of the Azarah?

(c)Why is that?

1)

(a)Seeing as the Torah prescribes ...

1. ... breaking the "K'li Cheres - the hole that one makes in it before breaking it must be no more than the size of a tiny root (or enough to let in water from the outside, in which case it is still considered a K'li for olives), so as not to negate it from its status of K'li.

2. ... Kashering the copper pot - the hole that one makes in it before Kashering it must be re-sealed (by banging it with a sledge-hammer, in which case it regains its status as a K'li).

(b)According to Resh Lakish, if the Kohen Gadol's Me'il became Tamei after being taken out of the Azarah - it must be returned to the Azarah less than three by three Etzba'os at a time and washed ...

(c)... because the Torah forbids tearing the Me'il, in which case it can only be returned in small sections, each of which is not subject to Tum'ah on its own.

2)

(a)What does the Mishnah in Keilim say about soft cloths (that have not been woven, such as furs) and hard garments?

(b)Why is that?

(c)Then what Shi'ur determines their status?

2)

(a)The Mishnah in Keilim rules that soft cloths (that have not been woven, such as furs) and hard garments - are not subject to the Shi'ur of three by three Etzba'os ...

(b)... because they are unfit to wear, only to sit on.

(c)Consequently, the Shi'ur that determines their status is - three by three Tefachim.

3)

(a)On what basis do we place the Me'il in the category of a hard garment?

(b)How does Rav Ada bar Ahavah query Resh Lakish from there?

(c)How do we answer that?

3)

(a)We place the Me'il in the category of a hard garment - because each of its strands consisted of twelve strands (as we learned in Yoma), and was therefore extremely thick.

(b)Rav Ada bar Ahavah asks from there on Resh Lakish - who requires less than three Etzba'os of the Me'il at a time to be brought into the Azarah and washed: Why three Etzba'os?.

(c)To answer the Kashya - we explain that although a Beged of less than three by three Etzba'os on its own is not considered a Beged, three Etzba'os of a Beged of more than three by three Tefachim, is Chashuv in that it is part of the Beged.

4)

(a)What does Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah say about a garment that absorbs the blood of a Chatas and one that has the appearance of Tzara'as? What do they have in common?

(b)What is then the problem with washing the former in the Azarah (like Resh Lakish ruled [see Tosfos DH 've'Ha'])?

(c)Why can the Kohen not mix ...

1. ... all seven detergents together, in which case the urine will become Bateil?

2. ... mix it with one of the detergents (in its turn, over and above washing the garment with that detergent by itself)?

(d)We answer the Kashya based on another statement of Resh Lakish. What did Resh Lakish say they would mix with each of the ingredients?

4)

(a)Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah rules that a garment that absorbs the blood of a Chatas and one that has the appearance of Tzara'as - must be washed in seven specified detergents.

(b)The problem with washing the former in the Azarah is - the fact that one of those detergents is urine, which one is not permitted to bring into the Azarah.

(c)The Kohen cannot mix ...

1. ... all seven detergents together, in which case the urine will be Bateil (see Hagahos Maharsham) - because we have learned in the Mishnah in Nidah that one must wash the garment using each of the seven detergents individually, and in the right order.

2. ... the urine with one of the detergents (in its turn, over and above washing the garment with that detergent by itself) - because the Mishnah specifically states that one is obligated to rub the garment with each detergent independently three times.

(d)We answer the Kashya, based on another statement of Resh Lakish, that - each of the detergents must be applied together with fresh spit (which is actually one of the seven), in which the urine will become Bateil.

95b----------------------------------------95b

5)

(a)A Copper K'li Shareis in which a Chatas has been cooked requires Merikah and Shetifah. What is ...

1. ... Merikah?

2. ... Sh'tifah?

(b)What if ...

1. ... a boiling Chatas is thrown into it, but not actually cooked in it?

2. ... Kodshim Kalim are cooked in it?

(c)The Torah writes in Tzav "ve'Im bi'Cheli Cheres asher Tevushal bo, Yishaver". How do we learn from there that this extends to an earthenware vessel into which one merely poured Kodshim?

5)

(a)A Copper K'li Shareis in which a Chatas has been cooked requires ...

1. ... Merikah - Kashering in boiling water.

2. ... Sh'tifah - rinsing.

(b)The Din of Merikah u'Shetifah extends to a copper pot into which ...

1. ... a boiling Chatas has been thrown, but not cooked, and to one in which ...

2. ... boiling Kodshim Kalim have been thrown.

(c)The Torah writes in Tzav "ve'Im bi'Cheli Cheres asher Tevushal bo Yishaver". We learn that this extends to an earthenware vessel into which one merely poured Kodshim - from the juxtaposition of "bo" to "Yishaver" (since the Pasuk could otherwise have omitted the word "bo" altogether).

6)

(a)What does Rebbi Shimon say about a pot in which Kodshim Kalim have been cooked?

(b)Even Rebbi Shimon will agree however, that the vessels require Hag'alah. Why is that?

(c)Then what is the significance of exempting them from Merikah and Sh'tifah?

6)

(a)According to Rebbi Shimon - a pot in which Kodshim Kalim have been cooked - does not require 'Shetifah va'Hadachah'.

(b)Even Rebbi Shimon will agree however, that the vessels will require Hag'alah - because once they become Nosar, they will forbid whatever is subsequently cooked in them.

(c)The significance of exempting them from Merikah and Sh'tifah is that - the Hag'alah may be performed with diluted wine and even with wine on its own (whereas Merikah and Sh'tifah require pure water).

7)

(a)Rami bar Chama asked what the Din will be if one suspends the spit-rod with the Chatas, in the air of an earthenware oven without actually touching it. What exactly, is the She'eilah? Why might the oven not need to be broken?

(b)How did Rava try to resolve Rami bar Chama's She'eilah from our Mishnah 'Echad she'Bishel bo, ve'Echad she'Eirah le'Tocho Rose'ach'?

(c)How did Rami bar Chama refute that proof?

(d)What makes Beli'ah without Bishul worse than Bishul without Beli'ah?

7)

(a)Rami bar Chama asked what the Din will be if one suspended the spit-rod with the Chatas in the air of an earthenware oven without actually touching it. The She'eilah is whether the oven needs to be broken - seeing as even though there is Bishul, there is no Beli'ah (the oven does not actually absorb anything from the Chatas).

(b)Rava tried to resolve Rami bar Chama's She'eilah from our Mishnah 'Echad she'Bishel bo, ve'Echad she'Eirah le'Tocho Rose'ach' - from which we see that one of the two (Be'li'ah without Bishul), also renders the oven forbidden.

(c)To which Rami bar Chama retorted - that his She'eilah was whether Bishul renders Asur without Beli'ah (not vice-versa) ...

(d)... Beli'ah without Bishul is worse than Bishul without Beli'ah - because, since the Torah has taught us that earthenware never completely exudes Isur that it has absorbed, once the oven absorbs the Isur, the fact that the meat was not cooked in the oven will not save it from having to be broken.

8)

(a)So we try to resolve the She'eilah from Rav Nachman quoting Rabah bar Avuhah, who stated that the oven in the Azarah was made of metal. What does that prove?

(b)How do refute that? What did they used to bake in the oven that would entail Bishul and Beli'ah?

8)

(a)So we try to resolve the She'eilah from Rav Nachman, who quoting Rabah bar Avuhah, stated that the oven in the Azarah was made of metal - a proof that Bishul without Beli'ah must be forbidden. Otherwise, seeing as the Kohanim generally roasted the Chata'os on spit-rods, why did they not make the oven out of earthenware?

(b)And we answer that - the oven had to be made of metal anyway, because of the Sheyarei Menachos, which were subject to Bishul and Beli'ah.

9)

(a)What did Rabah bar Ahila'i rule in the case of the earthenware oven which they smeared with fat-tail, before frying bread in it?

(b)They queried Rabah bar Ahila'i from a Beraisa. What does the Tana say about ...

1. ... a dough that has been kneaded with milk? Why is that?

2. ... bread that is baked in an oven that has been smeared with fat?

(c)Why does this Beraisa pose a Kashya on Rabah bar Ahila'i.

(d)How do we deal with the Kashya?

9)

(a)In the case of the earthenware oven which they smeared with fat-tail, before frying bread in it, Rabah bar Ahila'i ruled - that it was permanently forbidden to eat any bread baked in that oven, even with salt, in case one came to eat it with milk, and an earthenware oven, in his opinion, cannot be Kashered, since it never fully exudes what it has absorbed.

(b)They queried Rabah bar Ahila'i from a Beraisa however, which forbids ...

1. ... a dough that has been kneaded with milk to be eaten, even with milk (in case one comes to eat it with meat).

2. ... any bread that is baked in an oven that has been smeared with fat, until one re-heats the oven ...

(c)... a Kashya on Rabah bar Ahila'i - who maintains that an earthenware oven cannot be Kashered.

(d)We are unable to answer the Kashya - and remain with a Teyuvta.

10)

(a)What does Rav say about earthenware pots on Pesach?

(b)How will he then establish the Beraisa that we just discussed, which permits an oven that has been re-heated?

(c)How might we resolve Rav with the Beraisa, even if the Tana is referring to an earthenware oven?

(d)Then why can one not place coals inside the pot and heat it up in the same way as the oven?

10)

(a)According to Rav, earthenware pots on Pesach - must be broken.

(b)And he establishes the Beraisa that we just discussed, permitting an oven that has been re-heated - by a metal oven.

(c)Alternatively, we might resolve Rav with the Beraisa even if the Tana is referring to an earthenware oven - by differentiating between an oven which is heated from the inside (producing a more intense heat, and which therefore exudes what it has absorbed), and a pot, which is heated from the outside.

(d)One cannot place coals inside the pot and heat it up in the same way as the oven - because we are afraid that, in order to prevent his pot from breaking, the owner will not heat it properly.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF