1)

(a)What problem do we have with the Tana's first ruling, declaring B'nos Kutim Nidos from birth?

(b)how did Rava b'rei de'Rav Acha bar Rav Huna Amar Rav Sheishes solve it?

(c)Who must then be the author of our Mishnah? Which Tana goes after the minority?

1)

(a)The problem with the Tana's first ruling, declaring B'nos Kutim Nidos from birth is - how this differs from B'nos Yisrael, who are also Tamei if they see (and if they don't, then B'nos Kutim should not be Tamei either.)

(b)Rava b'rei de'Rav Acha bar Rav Huna Amar Rav Sheishes explained that - the Tana is speaking S'tam, and he goes after the minority of babies who do have sightings (see Tosfos ha'Rosh).

(c)And the author of our Mishnah must then be - Rebbi Meir, who goes after the minority.

2)

(a)On what grounds do the Rabbanan in a Beraisa, agree with Rebbi Meir that a Katan is Patur from Chalitzah "?

(b)What reason does Rebbi Meir give for exempting a Katan and Ketanah from Yibum as well?

(c)What objection do the Rabbanan raise to that?

(d)How do we refute the Kashya that Rebbi Meir only follows a Miy'ut (minority) that is common, but not one that is not, such as a Ketanah having a sighting?

(e)The source for this answer lies in independent statements by Rebbi Yossi, Rebbi and Rav Yosef (with reference to babies in Ein Bul, Beis She'arim and Pumbedisa, respectively). What did each of them say?

2)

(a)The Rabbanan agree with Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa, that a Katan is Patur from Chalitzah - since the Torah in Ki Seitzei writes (in connection with Chalitzah) "Ish".

(b)Rebbi Meir also exempts a Katan and Ketanah from Yibum - in case the Yavam turns out to be a Saris (a eunuch), or the Yevamah, an Aylonis (who cannot have children), both of whom are Patur from Yibum, in which case their intimacy will be subject to Kareis).

(c)The Rabbanan object to that - because the majority of Ketanim are not Serisim or Aylonos.

(d)We refute the Kashya that Rebbi Meir only follows a Miy'ut (minority) that is common, but not one that is not, such as a Ketanah having a sighting - by pointing out that it is indeed common for Ketanos to have sightings.

(e)The source for this answer lies in independent statements by Rebbi Yossi, Rebbi and Rav Yosef (with reference to babies in Ein Bul, Beis She'arim and Pumbedisa, respectively) - each of whom referred to a case where a newborn baby Toveled even before her mother.

3)

(a)What problem do we have with Rav Yosef's statement (though those of Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi pose no problem)?

(b)The problem is based on a statement of Shmuel. What did Shmuel say about T'rumas Chutz la'Aretz? Which kind of Tum'ah applies there?

(c)Under which circumstances is it applicable?

3)

(a)The problem with Rav Yosef's statement (though those of Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi pose no problem) is - why a baby in Bavel would need to Tovel ...

(b)... seeing as Shmuel rules that - Tum'as Chutz la'Aretz only applies to an internal Tum'ah (such as Keri or Zav) ...

(c)... and is further restricted to eating, but does not apply to touching (and one assumes that a newborn baby was not going to be fed Terumah).

4)

(a)Mar Zutra answers with a Beraisa, based on the Pasuk in Emor "ve'Lo Yechal'lu es Kodshei B'nei Yisrael asher Yarimu la'Hashem". What does the Tana learn from there?

(b)What problem do we have with the Tana learning drinking and anointing from the above Pasuk?

(c)To answer the Kashya, how do we amend the statement?

(d)How does the Tana alternatively learn it from the Pasuk in Tehilim "va'Tavo ke'Mayim be'Kirbi, u'che'Shemen be'Atzmosai"?

4)

(a)Mar Zutra answers with a Beraisa, based on the Pasuk in Emor (in connection with the prohibition of a Tamei Kohen eating Terumah) "ve'Lo Yechalelu es Kodshei B'nei Yisrael asher Yarimu la'Hashem" from which the Tana learns that - both anointing and drinking are included in the prohibition of eating (and these are things that are certainly applicable to a newborn baby).

(b)The problem with the Tana learning anointing and drinking from that above Pasuk is that - we already have a principle that drinking is included in eating in such matters (in which case we do not require another Pasuk).

(c)We answer by amending the statement to - 'Lerabos es ha'Sach ke'Shoseh' (to include anointing like drinking).

(d)Alternatively, the Tana learns it from the Pasuk in Tehilim "va'Tavo ke'Mayim be'Kirbi, u'che'Shemen be'Atzmosai" - comparing anointing oneself with oil to drinking water.

5)

(a)What problem do we have with Rav Sheishes' initial answer (establishing our Mishnah concerning B'nos Kutim, like Rebbi Meir, who goes after the minority)?

(b)How do we solve the problem, based on the extra 'Vav' (in the word "ve'Ishah", in the Pasuk in Metzora (in connection with Nidus) "ve'Ishah ki Sih'yeh Zavah")?

(c)We query the D'rashah of 'Tinokes bas Yom Echad' from another Beraisa, based on the Pasuk there "ve'Ishah asher Yishkav Ish osah ... ". Based on the extra 'Vav', what age girl does the Tana incorporate in the Din of Bo'el Nidah?

(d)Rava answers that one of them is really a Halachah le'Mosheh mi'Sinai (and not a Limud from the extra 'Vav'). On what grounds do we conclude that the Din of Bo'el Nidah is the one that is Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai and not that of Tinokes bas Yom Echad le'Nidah?

5)

(a)The problem with Rav Sheishes' initial answer (establishing our Mishnah concerning B'nos Kutim like Rebbi Meir, who goes after the minority) is - why this should be restricted to B'nos Kutim, and not extend to B'nos Yisre'elim.

(b)We solve the problem, based on the extra 'Vav' (in the word "ve'Ishah", in the Pasuk in Metzora (in connection with Nidus) "ve'Ishah ki Sih'yeh Zavah") from which we learn that - a newborn baby is included in the Din of Nidus, a D'rashah with which the Kutim did not agree.

(c)We query the D'rashah of 'Tinokes bas Yom Echad' from another Beraisa, based on the Pasuk there "ve'Ishah asher Yishkav Ish osah ... ". There too, based on the extra 'Vav' in ve'Ishah, the Tana incorporates in the Din of Bo'el Nidah a little girl - but only from the age of three.

(d)Rava answers that one of them is really a Halachah le'Mosheh mi'Sinai (and not a Limud from the extra 'Vav'). We conclude that the Din of Bo'el Nidah is the one that is Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai (and not that of 'Tinokes bas Yom Echad le'Nidah') - since there is nothing in the Pasuk to indicate that it is talking about a girl from the age of three.

6)

(a)If the Din of Bo'el Nidah is Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai, why did the Tana quote the Pasuk of "ve'Ishah"?

(b)What do we really learn from the 'Vav' of "ve'Ishah"?

6)

(a)Even though the Din of Bo'el Nidah is Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai, the Tana quotes "ve'Ishah" - in the form of an Asmachta (in support of the Rabbinical ruling).

(b)And what we really learn from the 'Vav' of "ve'Ishah" is - to preclude a man who sees red (blood) from the Din of Zivus.

32b----------------------------------------32b

7)

(a)And what do we learn from the extra 'Hey' in the Pasuk (ibid. [in connection with a Zavah]) "ve'Ishah ki Yazuv Zov Damah ... "?

(b)Why does the Tana mention specifically ten days, as opposed to three or one?

(c)Why do we need two D'rashos? Why can we not learn the Din of Ketanah by Zavah from Nidah?

(d)Why, once we know the Din of Zavah, will we automatically know the Din of Zivus?

7)

(a)From the extra 'Hey' in the Pasuk (in connection with a Zavah]) "ve'Ishah ki Yazuv Zov Damah ... ", we learn that - a baby of ten days is subject to Zivus.

(b)The Tana mentions specifically ten days, as opposed to three or one - because there can be no Zivus before the seven days of Nidus and three days of sightings.

(c)We cannot learn the Din of Ketanah by Zavah from Nidah - because a Nidah is immediately Tamei for seven days, whereas a Zavah is initially Tamei for only one day.

(d)Once we know the Din of Zavah however, we will automatically know the Din of Zivus - because every Zavah must have first been a Nidah (as we just explained).

8)

(a)The Pasuk "ve'Ishah" by Zavah comes to preclude a man who sees 'red', from Tum'ah. Why do we need two Pesukim for this, one by Zavah and one by Nidah?

(b)What does Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa learn from the extra "Ish", in the Pasuk in Metzora "Ish Ish ki Yih'yeh Zav mi'Besaro"?

(c)And what does Rebbi Yishmael b'no shel Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah learn from the Pasuk there ...

1. ... "la'Zachar"?

2. ... "ve'la'Nekeivah"?

(d)Then what does he learn from "Ish Ish"?

8)

(a)The Pasuk "ve'Ishah" by Zavah comes to preclude a man who sees 'red', from Tum'ah. We need two Pesukim for this, one by Zavah - to preclude a man from Tumah if he has a sighting of red Zera, and one by Nidah - to preclude him from Tum'ah if he has a sighting of blood.

(b)Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa learns from the extra "Ish" (in the Pasuk "Ish Ish ki Yih'yeh Zav mi'Besaro") that - a Zachar too, is subject to Tum'as Zivus from the day he is born ('ve'Chein le'Inyan Zecharim').

(c)Rebbi Yishmael b'no shel Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah learns from the Pasuk there ...

1. ... "la'Zachar" that - he is subject to Zivus irrespective of whether he is a Gadol or a Katan.

2. ... "ve'la'Nekeivah" that - she is subject to Nidus and Zivus irrespective of whether she is a Gedolah or a Ketanah.

(d)He learns nothing from "Ish Ish" - because of the principle Dibrah Torah ki'Leshon b'nei Adam.

9)

(a)What does another Beraisa learn from the extra 'Vav' in the Pasuk - "ve'Ish ki Seitzei mimenu Shichvas-Zera"?

(b)How do we reconcile this with the above, which includes a child of one day in the Din of Zav?

(c)Which Din is Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai?

9)

(a)Another Beraisa learns from the extra 'Vav' in the Pasuk "ve'Ish ki Seitzei mimenu Shichvas-Zera" that - a child of nine is subject to Tum'as Keri.

(b)We reconcile this with the above, which includes a child of one day in the Din of Zav - by again learning the one from the Pasuk, and the other, from Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai.

(c)The Din including a Katan of nine in the Din of Keri must be Halachah ... ' - since (as we learned in connection with the Din of Zivus of a Nekeivah), there is nothing to indicate that the Pasuk is speaking about a boy of nine.

10)

(a)What do we then learn from the Pasuk "ve'Ish ki Seitzei ... "?

(b)Why do we need two Pesukim (to include both a Zachar and a Nekeivah of one day in the Din of Zivus)? Why can we not learn ...

1. ... Nekeivah from Zachar?

2. ... Zachar from Nekeivah?

10)

(a)And from the Pasuk "ve'Ish ki Seitzei ... " - we learn that a woman who sees Zera is Tahor (see Tosfos ha'Rosh).

(b)We need two Pesukim (to include both a Zachar and a Nekeivah of one day in the Din Zivus). We cannot learn ...

1. ... Nekeivah from Zachar - since a Zachar becomes Tamei even after three sightings in one day (which a Nekeivah does not).

2. ... Zachar from Nekeivah - because a Nekeivah is Tamei Zivus even be'Oneis, whereas a Zachar is not.

11)

(a)We learned in our Mishnah that Kutim are Metamei Mishkav Tachton ke'Elyon. Why can this not mean that if he is lying on ten sheets, he renders the bottom one Tamei like the top one?

(b)What it must therefore mean is that the bottom sheet of a Bo'el Nidah (which we suspect him of being) is Tamei like the top sheet of a Zav. What is the Din of ...

1. ... the bottom sheet of a Zav?

2. ... the top sheet of a Zav (and the bottom sheet of a Bo'el Nidah and of a Kuti)?

11)

(a)We learned in our Mishnah that Kutim are Metamei Mishkav Tachton ke'Elyon. This cannot mean that if he is lying on ten sheets, he renders the bottom one Tamei like the top one - because that is obvious, since Tum'as Mishkav is based on the fact that one lies on it (and has nothing to do with touching).

(b)What it must therefore mean is that the bottom sheet of a Bo'el Nidah (Tachton shel Bo'el Nidah [which we suspect him of being]) is Tamei like the top sheet of a Zav (Elyon shel Zav). The ...

1. ... bottom sheet of a Zav - is Metamei Adam (and the clothes he is wearing), whereas the ...

2. ... top sheet of a Zav (and the bottom sheet of a Bo'el Nidah and of a Kuti) - is Metamei food and drink, but not Adam.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF