Mishnah 1
Hear the Mishnah

1)

(a)The Mishnah now discusses a dish for washing one's feet which holds between two Lugin and nine Kabin. How many Lugin are there in a Kav?

(b)On that day, says the Tana, they concluded that such a dish that cracked is nevertheless Tamei Medras. What does he mean by on that day?

(c)How did they arrive at that conclusion?

(d)Where would the dish have had to crack in order to lose its status as a vessel for washing one's feet?

(e)Then on what grounds does it remain subject to Tum'as Medras?

1)

(a)The Mishnah now discusses a dish for washing one's feet which holds between two Lugin and nine Kabin. There are four Lugin (each comprising six egg-volumes) in a Kav.

(b)On that day, says the Tana, they concluded that such a dish that cracked is nevertheless Tamei Medras. By on that day, he means - on the day R. Elazar ben Azaryah was appointed Nasi.

(c)They arrived at that conclusion - by taking a head-count and following the majority.

(d)In order to lose its status as a vessel for washing one's feet - the dish would have had to crack close to the base so that not sufficient water remained to wash one foot.

(e)It nevertheless remains subject to Tum'as Medras - because they tended to sit on it whilst washing their feet (see Tos. Yom-Tov & Tiferes Yisrael).

2)

(a)What does R. Akiva say about the cracked dish being Tamei Medras?

(b)Why is that?

(c)Like whom is the Halachah?

2)

(a)According to R. Akiva - the cracked dish is not subject to Tum'as Medras ...

(b)... because since it was made as a washing-dish, it has now become a washing-dish that can no longer be used (see Tiferes Yisrael).

(c)The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.

Mishnah 2
Hear the Mishnah

3)

(a)What did they say on that same day about all Korbanos that were Shechted she'Lo Lish'man?

(b)What does she'Lo Lishman mean?

(c)What are the two exceptions to the rule?

(d)What is the difference between those two Korbanos?

3)

(a)On that day they ruled that - all Korbanos that are Shechted she'Lo Lish'man are Kasher, even though the owner has not fulfilled his obligation.

(b)she'Lo Lishman means that - the Shochet had in mind a different Korban than the one that it actually was.

(c)The two exceptions to the rule are - Korban Pesach and Korban Chatas ...

(d)... the former, in its time (before or after Erev Pesach afternoon [see Tiferes Yisrael]), the latter, any time.

4)

(a)With regard to ...

1. ... the first half of the ruling, what is the significance of the fact that the Korbanos are Kasher (see Tiferes Yisrael)?

2. ... the second half of the ruling, how do we learn that the owner is not Yotzei his Neder from the fact that the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Motzei Sefasecha Tishmor ve'Aseisa, Ka'asher Nadarta la'Hashem Elokecha Nedavah" changes from Neder to Nedavah (refer to the Bartenura at the beginning of Zevachim)?

(b)To which branch of Korbanos does the second half of the above ruling not apply?

(c)We learn each of the two exceptions (Pesach and Chatas) from two respective Pesukim. What do we learn from the Pasuk in Emor "ve'Lo Yechal'lu es Kodshei B'nei Yisrael" (in connection with this ruling)?

(d)Why is the ruling in the Seifa confined to a Pesach in its time? What is the Din of a Pesach before or after its time?

4)

(a)With regard to ...

1. ... the first half of the ruling, the significance of the fact that the Korbanos are Kasher is - that the Kohen may proceed to perform the rest of the Avodah (Li'shemah [see Tiferes Yisrael]).

2. ... the second half of the ruling, we learn that the owner is not Yotzei his Neder from the fact that the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Motzei Sefasecha Tishmor ve'Aseisa, Ka'asher Nadarta la'Hashem Elokecha Nedavah" changes from Neder to Nedavah - since it implies that sometimes a Neder (a Korban that one undertook to bring) remains a Neder, whereas sometimes, it is brought as a Nedavah.

(b)The second half of the above ruling - does not apply - to Korb'nos Tzibur.

(c)We learn each of the two exceptions (Pesach and Chatas) from two respective Pesukim. From the Pasuk in Emor "ve'Lo Yechal'lu es Kodshei B'nei Yisrael", we learn - that if one Shechts a Chatas as Chulin, it remains Kasher (Kodshim Mechel'lin Kodshim, ve'Ein Chulin Mechal'lin Kodshim).

(d)The ruling in the Seifa is confined to a Pesach in its time - because a Pesach before or after its time becomes a Shelamim.

5)

(a)Which Korban does R. Eliezer add to the list of exceptions?

(b)R. Shimon ben Azai quoting the Sanhedrin (see Tiferes Yisrael), repeats the principle, but adds the word 'she'Kol ha'Zevachim ha'Ne'echalin ... '. What is the significance of that addition?

(c)What did the Chachamim say about it?

5)

(a)R. Eliezer adds to the list of exceptions - the Korban Asham.

(b)R. Shimon ben Azai quoting the Sanhedrin (see Tiferes Yisrael), repeats the principle, but adds the word 'she'Kol ha'Zevachim ha'Ne'echalin ... ' - which, by implication, includes the Korban Olah in the list of exceptions.

(c)The Chachamim however - disagree with him (in spite of the fact that he quoted the Sanhedrin).

Mishnah 3
Hear the Mishnah

6)

(a)On that same day, they discussed the status of Amon and Mo'av in the Sh'mitah. Which section of Amon and Mo'av were they referring to?

(b)Why can they not have been talking about the section of Amon and Mo'av that became permitted through Sichon and Og?

(c)What will be the Din in the latter case regarding Sh'mitah, assuming that the Olei Bavel did not capture the latter?

(d)R. Tarfon decreed Ma'aser Ani there (in the former [during the Sh'mitah year, see Tiferes Yisrael]). What did R. Elazar ben Azaryah say?

6)

(a)On that same day, they discussed the status of Amon and Mo'av in the Sh'mitah - with reference to the section which Yisrael did not capture via Sichon and Og.

(b)They cannot have been talking about the section of Amon and Mo'av that became permitted through Sichon and Og - because that is considered part of Eretz Yisrael ...

(c)... and Shevi'is will apply there even if the Olei Bavel did not capture it, as the Mishnah in Shevi'is explicitly teaches us.

(d)R. Tarfon decreed Ma'aser Ani there (in the former [during the Sh'mitah year, see Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Amon' & 'Ma'aser Sheini']). R. Elazar ben Azaryah decreed - Ma'aser Sheini.

7)

(a)On what grounds did R. Yishmael insist that R. Elazar ben Azaryah prove his opinion, and not R. Tarfon?

(b)Why did he refer to Ma'aser Sheini as a Chumra (see Tos. Yom-Tov)?

(c)What did R. Elazar ben Azaryah mean when he replied that it was R. Tarfon who had initiated a change, and not he? Which change was he referring to?

(d)How did R. Elazar ben Azaryah refer to both R. Yishmael and R. Tarfon?

7)

(a)R. Yishmael insisted that R. Elazar ben Azaryah, (and not R. Tarfon) prove his opinion - because he was the one who was being Machmir.

(b)He referred to Ma'aser Sheini as a Chumra - because it is Kadosh (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)When R. Elazar ben Azaryah replied that it was R. Tarfon who had initiated a change, and not he, he meant - that he (R. Elazar ben Azaryah), had merely followed the normal pattern of Ma'aser Sheini after the year of Ma'aser Ani, which R. Yishmael had not.

(d)R. Elazar ben Azaryah refered to both R. Yishmael and R. Tarfon as - his brother.

8)

(a)R. Tarfon responded by comparing Amon and Mo'av to Egypt (where Chazal initiated Ma'aser Ani in the Sh'mitah). How did R. Elazar ben Azaryah counter that?

(b)How did R. Yishmael justify his comparing Amon to Egypt (rather than to Bavel)?

(c)What did R. Elazar ben Azaryah reply to that (see Tiferes Yisrael)?

8)

(a)R. Tarfon responded by comparing Amon and Mo'av to Egypt (where Chazal initiated Ma'aser Ani in the Sh'mitah), which R. Elazar ben Azaryah countered - by comparing it to Bavel (where they initiated Ma'aser Sheini).

(b)R. Yishmael justified his comparison of Amon to Egypt (rather than to Bavel) - in that Amon and Mo'av like Egypt, are close to Eretz Yisrael, and initiating Ma'aser Ani in the Sh'mitah would give the poor something to rely on, should food become scarce, whereas Bavel is far away.

(c)To which R. Elazar ben Azaryah replied that - by initiating Ma'aser Ani rather than Ma'aser Sheini, they would cause the people in Eretz Yisrael to treat Ma'aser Sheini lightly (a monetary advantage for the poor, against a spiritual loss for the people in Eretz Yisrael [Tiferes Yisrael]).

9)

(a)R. Elazar ben Azaryah based his statement on the Pasuk in Malachi "ha'Yikba Adam Elokim ... ha'Ma'aser ve'ha'Terumah" (see Tos. Yom-Tov). What is the meaning of "ha'Yikba Adam Elokim"?

(b)Based on the first half of the Pasuk, what must "Ma'aser" (in the second half) mean?

(c)R. Yehoshua refuted R. Elazar ben Azaryah's Kashya on R. Yishmael, by basing the former's opinion on a different reason. What reason did he give?

(d)What did he mean by new and old?

(e)On what basis did he differentiate between the two? Why should one not learn a new Takanah from an old one?

9)

(a)R. Elazar ben Azaryah based his statement on the Pasuk in Malachi "ha'Yikba Adam Elokim - (Will a man steal from Hash-m) ... ha'Ma'aser ve'ha'Terumah?" (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

(b)Based on the first half of the Pasuk, "Ma'aser" (in the second half) must mean - Ma'aser Sheini.

(c)R. Yehoshua refuted R. Elazar's Kashya on R. Yishmael, by basing the former's opinion on a different reason, namely that - Amon & Mo'av, like Egypt, was a new decree, whereas Bavel was an old one.

(d)By new - he meant that it was initiated by the elders who lived after Ezra, and by old - that the Nevi'im before Churban Beis-Hamikdash already initiated it based on a prophecy ...

(e)... and one cannot learn a Takanas Chachamim from a prophecy.

10)

(a)What did the Chachamim of that period ultimately conclude? What did the Chachamim actually obligate in the Sh'mitah year in Amon and Mo'av, Ma'aser Ani or Ma'aser Sheini?

(b)What did R. Eliezer tell R. Yossi ben Durmaskis, when the latter came to visit him and asked him what Chidush had been said that day in the Beis-ha'Medrash? Where was R. Eliezer at the time?

(c)What was the latter's strange reaction to R. Eliezer's answer?

10)

(a)The Chachamim of that period ultimately concluded - that the Chachamim actually obligated Ma'aser Ani in Amon and Mo'av in the Sh'mitah (and not Ma'aser Sheini).

(b)When R. Yossi ben Durmaskis came to visit R. Eliezer (in Lud) and he asked him what Chidush had been said that day in the Beis-ha'Medrash - R. Eliezer replied by citing the above Halachah, at which ...

(c)... the former burst into tears from emotion (see Tiferes Yisrael).

11)

(a)What did R. Yossi ben Durmaskis mean when he quoted the Pasuk in Tehilim "Sod Hash-m li'Yere'av, u'Beriso le'Hodi'am"?

(b)What did he then instruct R. Eliezer to tell the Chachamim?

(c)And whose name did he cite in the chain of otherwise un-named Chachamim, from whom he actually heard this ruling?

(d)What can one comment on R. Yossi ben Durmaskis' statement (in connection with the fact that he cited it as Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai)?

11)

(a)When R. Yossi ben Durmaskis quoted the Pasuk in Tehilim "Sod Hash-m li'Yere'av, u'Beriso le'Hodi'am", he meant that - when the Chachamim arrived at their decision, they arrived at the truth by Divine inspiration.

(b)He then instructed R. Eliezer to tell the Chachamim - that they need not shed the slightest doubt on their decision, since traditionally, the fact that Amon & Mo'av take Ma'aser Ani in the Sh'mitah is a Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai.

(c)The name that he cited in the chain of otherwise un-named Chachamim, from whom he actually heard this ruling was - R. Yochanan ben Zakai (R. Eliezer's own Rebbe).

(d)One can comment on R. Yossi ben Durmaskis' statement that - it must be La'av Davka (not really the case), seeing as the ruling in question is only mi'de'Rabbanan, as we explained. In the Tosefta however, it appears that it is Davka.

Mishnah 4
Hear the Mishnah

12)

(a)On that same day, Yehudah Ger Amoni appeared before the assembly of Chachamim. What She'eilah did he ask them?

(b)What did Rabban Gamliel rule? Which Pasuk in Ki Seitzei did he quote him?

(c)On what grounds did R. Yehoshua disagree with Rabban Gamliel? What was his source?

(d)How did Sancheriv implement his strategy?

12)

(a)On that same day, Yehudah Ger Amoni appeared before the assembly of Chachamim - to find out whether he was eligible to marry into the Kahal (a Kasher Jewish woman) or not.

(b)Rabban Gamliel - disqualified him from coming into the Kahal, based on the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Lo Yavo Amoni u'Mo'avi bi'Kehal Hash-m" (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)R. Yehoshua disagreed with Rabban Gamliel however - based on a Pasuk in Yeshayah, which describes how Sancheriv used to move nations from place to place, so that no nation remained intact.

(d)He implemented his strategy - by moving them one town at a time.

13)

(a)How did Rabban Gamliel counter R. Yehoshua, based on the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "ve'Acharei-Chein Ashiv es Sh'vus b'nei Amon"?

(b)And what did R. Yehoshua say to that?

(c)What ruling did the Chachamim finally issue to Yehudah Ger Amoni?

(d)Based on R. Yehoshua's reasoning, on what grounds did they do that?

13)

(a)Rabban Gamliel countered R. Yehoshua, based on the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "ve'Acharei-Chein Ashiv es Sh'vus b'nei Amon" - a clear proof that they were destined to return, a prophecy that we can assume had been fulfilled.

(b)To which R. Yehoshua replied that - one cannot make such an assumption, any more than one can assume that Yisrael have already returned, following the promise that they will.

(c)The Chachamim finally - permitted Yehudah Ger Amoni to marry into the Kahal ...

(d)... based a. on R. Yehoshua's reasoning, and b. on the fact that the majority of nations are permitted, we assume that any prospective Ger has come from one of the majority (Kol de'Parish, me'Ruba Parush).

Mishnah 5
Hear the Mishnah

14)

(a)What does the Mishnah say about the Targum in Ezra & Daniel? What is meant by the Targum in Ezra & Daniel?

(b)How about Aramaic words that appear in other Sefarim, such as "ki'Dena Teimra L'hon" in Seifer Yirmiyah?

(c)What is the status of a Seifer (or part of a Seifer) that one translated from Targum into Lashon Ivris, or vice-versa? What does Lashon Ivris mean?

14)

(a)The Mishnah rules that the Targum in Ezra & Daniel - (the Arama'ic sections that appear regularly there) are Metamei the hands ...

(b)... and the same applies to Aramaic words that appear in other Sefarim, such as "ki'Dena Teimra L'hon" in Seifer Yirmiyah.

(c)A Seifer (or part of a Seifer) that one translated from Targum into Lashon Ivris (Lashon ha'Kodesh, see Tos. Yom-Tov), or vice-versa - is not.

15)

(a)A Seifer that is written in K'sav Ivri is not Metamei the hands. What is K'sav Ivri? Why is it called by that name?

(b)In the era of the Kings of Yisrael, our ancestors used this script in their secular dealings. How do we know this?

(c)Who used to use it even in their holy writings?

15)

(a)A Seifer that is written in K'sav Ivri - the script that was originally used on the other side of the River P'ras [Eiver means the other side]) is not Metamei the hands.

(b)We know that, in the era of the Kings of Yisrael, our ancestors used this script in their secular dealings - from coins that were excavated from that period.

(c)The Kutim (Samaritans) however - used it even in their holy writings.

16)

(a)Our Sefarim are written in K'sav Ashuris. What is the source of this script?

(b)Why is it called by that name?

(c)Which other two conditions are required for a Seifer to be Kasher?

16)

(a)Our Sefarim are written in K'sav Ashuris - which is the script that was used in the Luchos.

(b)It is called by that name - because it is the most praiseworthy (Me'ushar) of all scripts (see Tiferes Yisrael).

(c)The other two conditions that are required for a Seifer to be Kasher are - 1. that it is written on the skin of a Kasher animal (see Tos. Yom-To, Mishnah Achronah & other commentaries on the Mishnah) and 2. that it written with ink.

Mishnah 6
Hear the Mishnah

17)

(a)The Mishnah cites the Tzedokim, who complained about the Perushim (the Chachamim). Who were the Tzedokim? Why were they called by that name?

(b)Based on the ruling that Sefarim are Metamei the hands, what was their objection?

17)

(a)The Mishnah cites the Tzedokim - disciples of Tzadok and Baytus [some of them were called Baytusim] who denied Torah she'be'al Peh), who complained about the Perushim (the Chachamim).

(b)Based on the ruling that Sefarim are Metamei the hands, they objected - to the fact that the Chachamim did not extend the decree to the Sifrei Hamiram (the Sefarim written by the Minim [the heretics who swapped (Heimiru) the truth for falsehood]).

18)

(a)What complaint did Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai (anticipating the Tzedokim's response) add to their list (in connection with the bones of a donkey and of a Kohen Gadol)?

(b)How did the Tzedokim explain the latter phenomenon? What are Tarvados?

(c)How did Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai use their explanation, to counter their initial complaint?

(d)As a matter of fact, the Tzedokim's reasoning was incorrect, as was that of Raban Yochanan ben Zakai (see Tos. Yom-Tov), who only gave that reason to placate the Tzedokim. What is the real reason that they decreed Tum'ah on Sifrei Kodesh?

18)

(a)Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai (anticipating the Tzedokim's response) added to their list - the fact that the Chachamim did not declare Tamei the bones of a donkey, like they did those of a Kohen Gadol.

(b)The Tzedokim responded that - this distinction was based on love; to prevent a person from manufacturing Tarvados (spoons) from his father's bones (as a memento), something that he will not do with the bones of his donkey.

(c)Raban Yochanan ben Zakai retorted that - by the same token, the Chachamim decreed Tum'ah on Kisvei Kodesh (so that people should not manufacture with them mats to cover their animals, due to their great value, something ythat they will not do with the Sefarim of Minim, which are not valuable).

(d)As a matter of fact, the Tzedokim's reasoning was incorrect, and so was that of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai (see Tos. Yom-Tov DH 've'Harei Omrim' & 'she'Lo Ya'aseh'), who only gave that reason to placate the Tzedokim. The real reason that that they decreed Tum'ah on Sifrei Kodesh is - to prevent them from being eaten by mice (which occurred when they placed them next to Terumah).

Mishnah 7
Hear the Mishnah

19)

(a)The Tzedokim also objected to the Perushim's ruling (in Machshirin) rendering Nitzok Tahor. What does this mean? On what principle is it based?

(b)What did the Perushim counter (in connection with a stream of water that flowed from a grave-yard?

(c)What point were they making (see Tiferes Yisrael)?

(d)The latter ruling is in fact correct. What is its source?

19)

(a)The Tzedokim also objected to the Perushim's ruling (in Machshirin) rendering Nitzok Tahor - When one pours a liquid from a Tahor vessel into a Tamei one, the liquid that remains in the top vessel remains Tahor (because Nitzok Eino Chibur).

(b)The Perushim countered - by expressing their surprise at the Tzedokim, who declared Tahor a stream of water that flowed from a grave-yard ...

(c)... which, like Nitzok, also touches Tum'ah at one end, yet remains Tahor (Tiferes Yisrael).

(d)The latter ruling is in fact correct - based on the Pasuk in Shemini "Mikveh Mayim Yih'yeh Tahor".

20)

(a)The Tzedokim's next complaint concerned the difference between a person's Eved and Shifchah Cana'anim who damaged and his ox which damaged. What are their respective Halachos?

(b)What was the Tzedokim objection?

(c)And what did the Perushim answer to that?

(d)Is that the genuine answer?

20)

(a)The Tzedokim's next complaint concerned the difference between a person's Eved and Shifchah Cana'anim who damaged - for whom he is Patur from paying, and his ox which damaged - for which he is Chayav.

(b)The Tzedokim's objection was based on the fact that - whereas the owner is not obligated to teach his ox Mitzvos, he is obligated to teach his Eved Cana'ani, so if he is Chayav for the former, why is he Patur from the latter?

(c)To which the Perushim answered that, unlike the former - the latter have Da'as (the ability to reason). That being the case, if the owner was liable for their damages, whenever the owner angered them, they would take revenge by simply setting fire to a neighbor's haystack, forcing their master to pay.

(d)That is indeed the genuine answer (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

Mishnah 8
Hear the Mishnah

21)

(a)The final complaint was that of a Tzedoki Galili. Why was he called by that name?

(b)His complaint concerned the wording of a Get (see Tos. Yom-Tov). How did the name of ...

1. ... Nochri kings appear on it?

2. ... Moshe Rabeinu appear on it?

(c)What was now his objection?

21)

(a)The final complaint was that of a Tzedoki Galili. He was called by that name - because he lived in the Galil.

(b)His complaint concerned the wording of a Get (see Tos. Yom-Tov). The name of...

1. ... Nochri kings appeared in the date (year so-and-so of King so-and-so's reign).

2. ... Moshe Rabeinu appeared on it at the end, where one writes k'Das Moshe ve'Yisrael (like one does on a Sh'tar Kidushin).

(c)His objection was - how they could possibly write a Nochri king on the same page as Moshe Rabeinu (see Mishnah Achronah)?

22)

(a)What did the Perushim counter, in connection with the Pasuk in Sh'mos "Vayomer Paroh Mi Hash-m asher Eshma be'Kolo"?

(b)Why was that even worse (according to the Tzedokim's line of thought) than the wording of a Get?

(c)What did the Perushim prove from there (see Tos Yom-Tov)?

22)

(a)In reply, the Perushim - asked how the Tzedokim could possibly insert the Pasuk in Sh'mos "Vayomer Paroh 'Mi Hash-m asher Eshma be'Kolo" in their Sifrei Torah, seeing as, not only were they placing a Nochri king on the same page as Hash-m ...

(b)... but even worse - they gave it precedence by placing it first ...

(c)... a proof that placing an insignificant person on the same page as an important one in this way - is considered neither an insult to the latter nor an honor to the former (Tos. Yom-Tov).

23)

(a)What did Paroh subsequently announce, once he was smitten?

(b)Why does the Tana insert that here?

23)

(a)After Paroh had been smitten, he announced - "Hash-m ha'Tzadik ... ".

(b)The Tana inserts that here - on order to conclude the Masechta on a positive note (rather than on the negative one that preceded it).

Hadran alach 'Bo ba'Yom', ve'Nishl'am Maseches Yadayim