1)

(a)To which Isurim might Rebbi Avahu Amar Rebbi Yochanan be referring when he states 'Kol Revi'iyos she'ba'Torah Ein Heter Mitztaref le'Isur'?

(b)He concludes 'Chutz me'Revi'is she'be'Nazir'. In which point does he disagree with Rebbi Avahu Amar Rebbi Yochanan, who said the same thing with regard to all Isurim in the Torah?

1)

(a)When Rebbi Avahu Amar Rebbi Yochanan states 'Kol Revi'iyos she'ba'Torah Ein Heter Mitztaref le'Isur' - he might be referring to Revi'is of wine of Orlah or of K'lai ha'Kerem.

(b)When he concludes 'Chutz me'Revi'is she'be'Nazir' - he disagrees with Rebbi Avahu Amar Rebbi Yochanan, who said the same thing with regard to all Isurim in the Torah, inasmuch as Rebbi Yochanan includes even the solids of a Nazir (such as grape-pits and skins) in the Isur which half a Shiur of Heter will supplement, whereas Rebbi Elazar restricts it to wine.

2)

(a)Rebbi Elazar lists ten 'Revi'iyos'. How does Rav Kahana categorize them?

(b)The Si'man for the five red ones is 'Nazir, ve'Oseh Pesach, she'Horu, ba'Mikdash, u'Meisu'. 'Nazir' refers to a Revi'is wine for which a Nazir is Chayav. Is this unanimous?

(c)What is meant by the Si'man of ...

1. ... 've'Oseh Pesach'?

2. ... 'she'Horu'?

3. ... 'ba'Mikdash'?

(d)The last of the five refers to one Revi'is of blood that drained from two dead people. How do we extrapolate this from the Pasuk in Emor "ve'Al Kol Nafshos Meis Lo Yavo"?

2)

(a)Rebbi Elazar lists ten 'Revi'iyos' - which Rav Kahana categorizes as five red liquids and five white ones.

(b)The Si'man for the five red ones is 'Nazir, ve'Oseh Pesach, she'Horu, ba'Mikdash, u'Meisu'. 'Nazir' refers to a Revi'is wine for which a Nazir is Chayav - the opinion of the Tana Kama of our Mishnah (whereas according to Rebbi Akiva, the Shiur is a k'Zayis).

(c)What is meant by ...

1. ... 've'Oseh Pesach' is - the four cups of wine at the Seder, each of which needs to hold a Revi'is.

2. ... 'she'Horu' is - that someone who has drunk a Revi'is of wine, is forbidden to issue Halachic rulings.

3. ... 'ba'Mikdash' is - that someone who has drunk a Revi'is of wine is forbidden to enter the Beis-Hamikdash.

(d)The last of the five refers to one Revi'is of blood that drained from two dead people. We extrapolate this from the Pasuk "ve'Al Kol Nafshos Meis Lo Yavo" - from the fact that "Nafshos" is in the plural and "Meis" in the singular.

3)

(a)And the Si'man for the white ones is 'Chalas, Nazir, u'Metzora, she'Nifselu, be'Shabbos'. The first of these is 'Revi'is Shemen le'Chalah', referring to the three kinds of Chalos of a Todah: regular Chalos, bread scalded in boiling water and wafers. How many loaves were there of each kind?

(b)How was the half-Log of oil divided among the three kinds of loaves?

(c)'Nazir' refers to the Revi'is Shemen le'Nazir'. How many kinds of loaves did the Nazir have to bring?

(d)How much oil was used for each kind of loaf?

3)

(a)And the Si'man for the white ones is 'Chalas, Nazir, u'Metzora, she'Nifselu, be'Shabbos'. The first of these is 'Revi'is Shemen le'Chalah', referring to the three kinds of Chalos of a Todah, regular Chalos, bread scalded in boiling water and wafers - each of which there were ten.

(b)The half-Log of oil was divided among the three kinds of loaves - a quarter Log for the wafers and the Chalos, and a quarter for the loaves scalded in boiling water.

(c)'Nazir' refers to the Revi'is Shemen le'Nazir' - who had to bring two kinds of loaves, Chalos and wafers.

(d)A Revi'is ha'Log was used for each kind of loaf.

4)

(a)What is meant by the Si'man of ...

1. ... 'u'Metzora'?

2. ... 'she'Nifselu'?

3. ... 'be'Shabbos'?

4)

(a)What is meant by the Si'man of ...

1. ... 'u'Metzora' is - the quarter of a Log of water in which they initially Shechted one of his two birds, before dipping the cedar wood, the hyssop, the red thread and the remaining live bird into it. A quarter of a Log is the maximum in which the blood of the Shechted bird would still be visible.

2. ... 'she'Nifselu' is - that someone who drinks a Revi'is of Tamei liquid is forbidden to eat T'rumah and renders T'rumah Pasul if he touches it.

3. ... 'be'Shabbos' is - that someone who carries on Shabbos a Revi'is of any liquid (other than those already listed in the Mishnah in Shabbos), as well as putrid water, is Chayav.

5)

(a)What does the Mishnah in Yadayim 'me'Revi'is Notlin le'Yadayim le'Echad va'Afilu li'Shenayim' mean?

(b)Why did Rebbi Elazar not include it in his list?

(c)Then why did he include 'Nazir' ('Revi'is Yayin le'Nazir'), even though Rebbi Akiva disagrees.

(d)For the same reason, he does not include the Mishnah in Sotah, where, according to Rebbi Yehudah, the Kohen placed a Revi'is of water into an earthenware cup for the Sotah to drink, and the Mishnah in B'rachos, where Rebbi Zakai requires a Revi'is of water in a chamber-pot in order to Daven. What does the Tana Kama say ...

1. ... in the Mishnah in Sotah?

2. ... in the Mishnah in B'rachos?

5)

(a)The Mishnah in Yadayim 'me'Revi'is Notlin la'Yadayim le'Echad va'Afilu li'Shenayim' means - that the Shiur for one or two people who wash their hands before eating bread, is a Revi'is.

(b)Rebbi Elazar does not include it in his list - because it is not unanimous (according to others, a Revi'is will suffice for one person, but not for two).

(c)He nevertheless included 'Nazir' ('Revi'is Yayin le'Nazir'), even though Rebbi Akiva disagrees - because for some reason, he was only particular not to include cases that are subject to Machlokes in the list of white liquids, but not in that of red ones.

(d)For the same reason, he does not include the Mishnah in Sotah, where, according to Rebbi Yehudah, the Kohen placed a Revi'is of water into an earthenware cup for the Sotah to drink, and the Mishnah in B'rachos, where Rebbi Zakai requires a Revi'is of water in a chamber-pot in order to Daven. The Tana Kama ...

1. ... in the Mishnah in Sotah gives the Shiur - as half a Log.

2. ... in the Mishnah in B'rachos - as even a 'Kol she'Hu'.

6)

(a)What is the case of Mikveh which Rebbi Elazar appears to have omitted?

(b)Why did he omit it?

(c)Why did he omit the Din of a fountain comprising a Revi'is of water, which is fit to Tovel small objects?

(d)Was a person initially permitted to Tovel in a fountain that contains less than forty Sa'ah?

6)

(a)The case of Mikveh that Rebbi Elazar appears to have omitted is - the Toveling of needles (and other small objects), which may be performed in a Revi'is of water.

(b)He omitted it - because Chazal subsequently forbade it (in favor of a Mikveh of forty Sa'ah).

(c)He omitted the Din of a fountain comprising a Revi'is of water which is fit to Tovel small objects - because in fact, even a 'Kol she'Hu will suffice.

(d)A person was never permitted to Tovel in a fountain containing less than forty Sa'ah.

38b----------------------------------------38b

7)

(a)The Tana Kama of our Mishnah states 've'Eino Chayav ad she'Yochal min ha'Anavim k'Zayis'. We initially establish this statement like Rebbi Akiva (whose opinion is mentioned later). What will be the Shiur by liquids according to him?

(b)And what will the Rabbanan say?

(c)How does one measure ...

1. ... a k'Zayis of liquid?

2. ... a Revi'is of solid?

(d)On what grounds do we reject the contention that the Tana Kama holds like Rebbi Akiva?

7)

(a)The Tana Kama of our Mishnah states 've'Eino Chayav ad she'Yochal min ha'Anavim k'Zayis'. We initially establish this statement like Rebbi Akiva (whose opinion is mentioned later). The Shiur by liquids according to him - will be a k'Zayis, too.

(b)The Rabbanan will say - that the Shiur for both solids and liquids is a Revi'is.

(c)One measures ...

1. ... a k'Zayis of liquid - by filling a cup with liquid and dropping an Aguri'-olive into it (the liquid that is displaced is a k'Zayis) Tosfos.

2. ... a Revi'is of solid - by dropping the equivalent of what one ate into a cup full of liquid. If the liquid that has been displaced is equal to a Revi'is, then one knows that he ate a Revi'is.

(d)We reject the contention that the Tana Kama holds like Rebbi Akiva on many scores. One of them is - the fact that we never find the Tana citing the Mishnah Achoranah before the Mishnah Rishonah.

8)

(a)How do we finally establish the Tana Kama's statement 've'Eino Chayav ad she'Yochal min ha'Anavim k'Zayis'? Like whom does he hold?

(b)In which case do Rebbi Akiva and the Rabbanan then argue?

(c)What does Rebbi Akiva learn from the Pasuk "va'Anavim Lachim vi'Yeveishim Lo Yocheil"? How does he learn it from there?

8)

(a)We finally establish the Tana Kama's statement 've'Eino Chayav ad she'Yochal min ha'Anavim k'Zayis' - unanimously (because even the Rabbanan concede that the Shiur of food by a Nazir is a k'Zayis).

(b)Rebbi Akiva and the Rabbanan only argue - whether, with regard to Nazir, liquids have the same Shiur as solids or not.

(c)Rebbi Akiva learns from the Pasuk "va'Anavim Lachim vi'Yeveishim Lo Yochal" - that liquids have the same Shiur as solids. This he derives from the 'Vav' of "va'Anavim", which connects this Pasuk to the preceding one "ve'Chol Mishras Anavim Lo Yishteh" (referring to wine).

9)

(a)The Torah writes "va'Anavim Lachim vi'Yeveishim Lo Yocheil". What are "Anavim Yeveishim"?

(b)The Torah could have written just "va'Anavim Lo Yocheil". What do we learn from the excessive Lashon?

(c)We extend this to all Isurei Nazir, including fresh wine and grapes. What is the Chidush? Why is this any different than grapes and raisins?

(d)But surely this too is explicit in the Pasuk "mi'Yayin ve'Sheichar Yazir (which Unklus translates as 'fresh and old wine') ... va'Anavim ... Li Yocheil"? So why does the Tana find it necessary to include it?

9)

(a)The Torah writes "va'Anavim Lachim vi'Yeveishim Lo Yocheil". "Anavim Yeveishim" are - raisins.

(b)The Torah could have written just "va'Anavim Lo Yocheil". We learn from the excessive Lashon - that if a Nazir eats a k'Zayis of grapes and a k'Zayis of raisins immediately after receiving one warning, he receives two sets of Malkos.

(c)We extend this to all Isurei Nazir, including fresh wine and grapes - which (unlike grapes and raisins) have different names but the same taste.

(d)The Tana finds it necessary to include this, despite the fact that it appears to be explicit in the Pasuk "mi'Yayin ve'Sheichar Yazir (which Unklus translates as 'fresh and old wine') ... va'Anavim ... Li Yocheil" - because the fresh wine mentioned in the Pasuk could be referring to wine that is more than three days old, which no longer tastes like grapes (creating the necessity to mention that he is Chayav two Malkos, even if the two foods have the same taste).

10)

(a)According to Abaye, a Nazir who ate either grape-pits or grape-skins receives two sets of Malkos; one for "me'Chartzanim (or ve'ad Zag) Lo Yocheil". What is the other one?

(b)How many sets of Malkos will he then receive for eating grape-skins and grape-pits?

(c)What does Rava say?

10)

(a)According to Abaye, a Nazir who ate either grape-pits or grape-skins receives two sets of Malkos; one for "me'Chartzanim (or ve'ad Zag) Lo Yocheil" - the other one, "mi'Kol Asher Ye'aseh mi'Gefen ha'Yayin".

(b)For eating grape-skins and grape-pits - he will then receive three sets.

(c)According to Rava - there is no Malkos for "mi'Kol Asher Ye'aseh mi'Gefen ha'Yayin", because it is a 'La'av she'bi'Chelalus' (one La'av that incorporates a number of things).

11)

(a)According to Abaye, how many sets of Malkos will someone receive for eating a k'Zayis of grapes, of raisins, of pits, of skin and of fresh grape-juice all within one warning?

(b)In that case, why does the Tana of the Beraisa state 'five'?

(c)We then search for at least one additional omission. Why can we not consider old wine and vinegar, which the Tana omitted, as that additional omission?

(d)Which La'av does the Tana omit according to Abaye?

11)

(a)According to Abaye, someone who eats a k'Zayis of grapes, of raisins, of pits, of skin and of fresh grape-juice all within one warning - will receive six sets of Malkos (five for "Lo Yocheil" and one for "mi'Kol Asher Ye'aseh").

(b)The Tana of the Beraisa states 'five' - only because he omits it from his list (not because it does not belong there).

(c)We then search for at least one additional omission. We cannot consider old wine and vinegar, which the Tana omitted, as that additional omission since, as far as 'Shiyur' is concerned, we are searching for the omission of additional La'avin for eating the same prohibited food (not with more kinds of food that could be added to the list) Tosfos.

(d)The La'av omitted by the Tana according to Abaye is - that of "Lo Yachel Devaro".

12)

(a)We then conclude that this is not really an omission at all, seeing as we are only concerned with La'avin that are peculiar to Nezirus, whilst "Bal Yacheil" pertains to other Nedarim as well. Why is it necessary to make this point in order to ask on Abaye?

(b)Ravina mi'Parzika asked Rav Ashi from Bein ha'Beinayim, which the Tana omits. On whom is he asking?

(c)If Bein ha'Beinayim means small grapes (like Rabeinu Tam maintains), the Kashya is clear, seeing as the Tana does indeed omit these sort of grapes from his list (though it is then unclear how this differs from old wine and vinegar which, as we explained earlier, is not considered a Shiyur anyway). But if it pertains to the flesh between the skin and the pits (which is included in 'Anavim'), what is the Kashya?

12)

(a)We conclude that this is not really an omission at all, seeing as we are only concerned with La'avin that are peculiar to Nezirus, whilst "Bal Yachel" pertains to other Nedarim as well. We do not make this point in order to ask on Abaye - but because otherwise there will be a Kashya on Rava, since the Tana never omits only one thing from his list.

(b)Ravina mi'Parzika asked Rav Ashi from the omission of Bein ha'Beinayim - on Abaye, assuming he concurs with Rava, and does not consider "Lo Yachel" as a Shiyur (Tosfos).

(c)If Bein ha'Beinayim means small grapes, the Kashya is clear, seeing as the Tana does indeed omit these sort of grapes from his list (though it is then unclear how this differs from old wine and vinegar which, as we explained earlier, is not considered a Shiyur anyway). If it pertains to the flesh between the skin and the pits (which is included in 'Anavim') - he is asking from the fact that the way the flesh is picked from the grape is unusual, and requires a special Pasuk ("ve'Ad") to obligate the Nazir. And it is that La'av which the Tana omits.

13)

(a)On account of the previous Kashya (from 'Bein ha'Beinayim'), we amend the text of the Beraisa ('Lokeh Chamesh'). How does the Beraisa now read?

(b)Then on what basis did Rav Papa read it as 'Lokeh Chamesh' when querying Abaye?

(c)What is the meaning of ...

1. ... 'Purtzanin'?

2. ... 'Itzurin'?

(d)Then like whom does Unklus translate "me'Chartzanim ve'Ad Zag" 'mi'Purtzanin ve'Ad Itzurin' hold?

13)

(a)On account of the previous Kashya (from 'Bein ha'Beinayim'), we amend the text of the Beraisa ('Lokeh Chamesh') - to read 'Lokeh' (which could well mean five sets of Malkos, and not six (as we originally thought).

(b)Rav Papa read it as 'Lokeh Chamesh' when querying Abaye - because, not realizing that Abaye had a Kabalah (tradition) that one receives Malkos for a La'av she'bi'Chelalus, he wanted to see whether he would not retract.

(c)

1. 'Purtzanin' - means pits.

2. 'Itzurin' - means skins (from the Aramaic word which means to squeeze [something that one cannot do with the pits]) Tosfos.

(d)In that case, Unklus, who translates "me'Chartzanim ve'Ad Zag" 'mi'Purtzanin ve'Ad Itzurin' - holds like the opinion of Rebbi Yossi in our Mishnah.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF