1)

TOSFOS DH ELA LA'AV REBBI YEHOSHUA HI VE'KATANI B'CHAMISHAH HA'ALAMOS CHAYAV CHAMISHAH CHATA'OS

' " ' '

(Summary: Tosfos explains why the Gemara does not bring the proof from the Reisha.)

.

(a)

Clarification: This implies that specifically Ha'alamos divide.

" " '' ' , ' ...

(b)

Implied Question: The Ri explains that the Gemara could just as well have cited the Reisha which states 'Five pieces from five dishes from the same Korban is Chayav only one Chatas' ...

' ...

1.

Implied Question (cont.): Seeing as the Mishnah compares 'dishes' to Korbanos ...

, .

(c)

Answer: Only since the She'eilah was not about 'dishes', it did not do so.

2)

TOSFOS DH AFILU TEIMA REBBI AKIVA HI

' " "

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies the authorship of 'Chamishah Zevachim be'He'elam Echad ... '.)

'' ' " ' .

(a)

Clarification: And the author of the Beraisa that rules that 'One is Chayav five Chata'os for five Korbanos in one He'elam' is not Rebbi Akiva but Rebbi Yehoshua.

3)

TOSFOS DH B'KATEF SHEL OLAH

' "

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies this.)

' .

(a)

Clarification: It has seven bones.

4)

TOSFOS DH B'CHAMISHAH MIYNEI KEDEIROS

' " '

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies the difference between 'five kinds of dishes' and 'five kinds of tastes'.

" ...

(a)

The Five Dishes: The Ri explains this as roasted, cooked, fried, pot-roasted and pickled ...

'' ' .

(b)

The Five Tastes: And 'five kinds of tastes' as 'pepper, ginger, calamus, cinnamon and cassia.

" .

(c)

A Different Opinion: Rashi however, learns the other way round.

16b----------------------------------------16b

5)

TOSFOS DH AMAR RABAH MISTAVRA ETC. U'PASHAT LEIH D'SHABASOS KI GUFIN DAMYAN ETC.

' " ', '

(Summary: Tosfos reconciles this with a statement that he made earlier.)

, ...

(a)

Question #1: This creates a contradiction in two statements of Rabah ...

" ' ...

1.

Question #1 (cont.): Since Rabah himself said earlier that, according to Rebbi Eliezer that someone who reaped twice, even on the same Shabbos, is Chayav two Chata'os ...

", ?

2.

Question #1 (concl.): In that case, why is it necessary to say that Shabasos are like Gufin?

, , " ?

(b)

Question #2: And similarly by Nidah, what is the significance of Gufin Muchlakin to him, seeing as Rebbi Eliezer is Mechayev on each and every Bi'ah?

", " " .

(c)

Answer: Rebbi Eliezer answered Rebbi Akiva according to Rebbi Akiva's opinion (not according to his own).

6)

TOSFOS DH DI'TENAN K'LAL GADOL ETC. ELA P'SHITA REBBI AKIVA HI U'SHEMA MINA YAMIM SHE'BEINTAYIM ETC.

' " ' " " '

(Summary: Tosfos explains why Rabah declines to learn like Abaye.)

", , ?

(a)

Question: Why is so obvious to him to be bring a proof for his opinion from there? Perhaps the P'shat is like Abaye?

", - , ' ...

(b)

Answer: Rabah holds that, since he asked the She'eilah concerning V'ladei Melachos - i.e. 'If someone performs many Melachos that are like one Melachah', he will also have asked on the case that follows it ...

, - , .

1.

Answer (cont.): Namely, that of 'Someone who, knowing that it is Shabbos, performed many Melachos' - which is equivalent to Zadon Shabbos ve'Shig'gas Melachos' - as to whether Shabbasos are like Gufin or not.

7)

TOSFOS DH RAV CHISDA AMAR ETC. U'PASHAT LEIH YAMIM SHE'BEINTAYIM HAVYAN YEDI'AH L'CHALEK ETC.

' " ' '

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies Rav Chisda's statement.)

, " ...

(a)

Clarification: Like the proof that he brings from Nidah but not from the Kal va'Chomer ...

" "...

1.

Question #1 (cont.): Since Rabah himself said earlier that, according to Rebbi Eliezer that someone who reaped twice, even on the same Shabbos, is Chayav two Chata'os ...

'.

2.

Clarification (concl.): But V'ladei Melachos ki'Melachos he said to him from tradition that one is Chayav on each one.

8)

TOSFOS DH AMAR RAV CHISDA MINA AMINA LAH D'SANYA HA'KOSEV ETC. U'MODEH RABAN GAMLIEL SHE'IM KASAV ETC. PATUR

' " ' " '

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies Rav Chisda's proof.)

, ...

(a)

Clarification: From this case alone - from the fact that he is Patur, one cannot prove that Shabasos are like Gufin ...

, , ' ... '

1.

Reason: Since the reason that he is Patur may well be because it is speaking in a case of Shig'gas Shabbos and Zadon Melachos, due to the fact that 'the days in between are a Yedi'ah to divide'.

' ' ' ...

(b)

Implied Question: Because even though Rabah Gamliel holds that 'A Yedi'ah of Chatzi Shi'ur is not considered a Yedi'ah' ...

...

(c)

Answer: Implying that a Yedi'ah like that divides ...

' ... '

1.

Reason: Since one can draw a distinction between a Yei'ah and 'the days in between' ...

.

(d)

Answer (cont.): And he concedes that by the days in between he concedes that they do not combine ...

.

(e)

Conclusion: That explains why he needs to bring another Beraisa to prove that Zadon Shabbos has a Chashivas for Shabbasos to be considered like Gufin more than Shig'gas Shabbos (According to the text of the Olas Shabbos; see also Shitah Mekubetzes 24)).

9)

TOSFOS DH V'TANYA ACHRITI ETC.

' " '

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies the proof.)

'' ...

(a)

Clarification: The Beraisa that says 'Patur' is speaking about Zadon Shabbos and Shig'gas Melachos ...

, ( ) " ' , .

1.

Clarification (cont.): Because since the Shabbasos by Zadon Shabbos and Shig'gas Melachos are like Gufin, it is akin to performing two half-Melachos which are not similar to one another in one He'elam, where one is completely Patur (See Shitah Mekubetzes 26).

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF