1)REDEEMING MA'ASER SHENI THAT ENTERED YERUSHALAYIM
(a)Question (Beraisa - R. Yosi): If one had a Tevel fig, and he said 'the Terumah is at the stem. Ma'aser Rishon is in the north (i.e. the northernmost tenth of the fig). Ma'aser Sheni is in the south (in a year of Ma'aser Sheni, and he was in Yerushalayim - if it was a year of Ma'aser Oni, he designated Ma'aser Oni in the south, even if he was outside Yerushalayim)' and he ate it:
1.If he is a Kohen, he is lashed once (the Ma'aser Rishon is Tevel, for Terumas Ma'aser was not separated from it);
2.If he is a Zar, he is lashed twice (for the Ma'aser Rishon and for Terumah). Had he eaten it without tithing it, he would have been liable only once (for Tevel).
3.Inference: (In a year of Ma'aser Sheni,) this is only if he was in Yerushalayim. If not, he is lashed for Ma'aser Sheni outside Yerushalayim, even though it was never inside!
(b)Answer #1: The case is, he brought it inside and took it out again.
1.Question: If so, what is the Chidush?
2.Answer: The case is, he brought it in and took it out when it was still Tevel. R. Yosi holds that tithes that were not separated are considered as if they were separated (it is as if the Ma'aser entered).
3.Question (Mishnah- R. Shimon ben Yehudah citing R. Yosi): Beis Hillel and Beis Shamai agree that if Peros entered and left Yerushalayim before final processing (there was no obligation to tithe it yet), it may be redeemed;
i.They argue about Peros that entered Yerushalayim after final processing. Beis Shamai obligate eating it in Yerushalayim, and Beis Hillel permit redeeming it.
ii.Summation of question: If it is as if as Ma'aser was separated, why do Beis Hillel permit redeeming it after it entered Yerushalayim?
4.Answer: Rava taught that mid'Oraisa, Ma'aser may be eaten only within the walls. Mid'Rabanan, once Ma'aser enters the walls, it cannot be redeemed;
i.Chachamim decreed only about actual Ma'aser (to forbid redeeming it after it entered the walls). They did not decree about (Ma'aser that will be separated from) Tevel that entered.
(c)Answer #2 (Ravina): The case is, he was inside, holding the Ma'aser outside on a stick. The Tana resolves Rav Papa's question (it is as if the Ma'aser entered Yerushalayim).
2)REMOVING ONE'S HAIR
(a)(Mishnah): One is lashed for the following:
1.Making a Korchah (uprooting hair and making a bald patch) in his head, Hakafas ha'Rosh (rounding the corners of the head, i.e. cutting the sideburns), shaving Pe'as ha'Zakan (a corner of the beard), or scratching (and wounding) oneself out of grief over a Mes;
i.If he made one scratch for five Mesim, or five scratches for one Mes, he is lashed five times.
2.He is liable twice for the sideburns (if he cuts both), once for each. He is lashed for each of the five corners of the beard, two on each side and one below (Rivan (printed in the Gemara in place of Rashi) - one under each sideburn, one at the bottom of each jaw, and the chin. Other Rishonim argue about their location);
3.R. Eliezer says, if he cut them at once (Ramah, cited by Ritva - at the same moment; alternatively, if he was warned only once and did not stop in between), he is liable only once.
4.He is liable only if he shaved (the beard (Rosh, Tosfos in other Masechtos; Rambam - or the sideburns) with a razor;
5.R. Eliezer says, he is liable even if he cut them with a planing tool (Rashi (Shabbos); Rambam - or tweezers).
(b)(Gemara - Beraisa) Suggestion: Perhaps one is liable only once for "Lo Yikrechu" for four or five bald patches!
(c)Rejection: "Korchah" obligates for every one.
(d)Question: What do we learn from "b'Rosham"?
(e)Answer - Suggestion: Since it says "... v'Lo Sasimu Korchah Bein Einiechem", perhaps one is liable only between the eyes!
1.Rejection: "B'Rosham" obligates for all parts of the head.
(f)Question: "Lo Yikrechu Korchah b'Rosham" is written regarding Kohanim. The Torah gave them extra Mitzvos. What is the source for Yisraelim?
(g)Answer: We learn from a Gezerah Shavah "Korchah-Korchah."
(h)Question: What is the case of four or five Karachos?
1.If he did one after the other and he was warned before each one, obviously he is lashed for every one!
(i)Answer #1: Rather, he was warned only once.
(j)Objection: If so, he is liable only once!
1.(Mishnah): If a Nazir drank wine all day, he gets only 40 lashes. If he was warned repeatedly, he gets 40 lashes for each warning he transgressed.
(k)Answer #2: Rather, he put Nasa (a potion that makes hair fall out and prevents it from growing back) on his fingers and applied it to different parts of his head at the same time;
1.The warning applies to each application.
3)THE SIZE OF A KORCHAH
(a)Question: What is the size of a Korchah to be liable?
(b)Answer #1 (Rav Huna): It is big enough to make the scalp visible.
(c)Answer #2 (R. Yochanan): It is the area of a bean.
(d)Tana'im argue as Rav Huna and R. Yochanan do.
1.(Beraisa): The size of a Korchah to be liable is big enough to make the scalp visible;
2.Others say, it is the area of a bean.
(e)(Rav Yehudah bar Chaviva): There is a third Tana, who says that one is liable for two hairs;.
1.Some say that the third Tana obligates for the area of a lentil.
(f)(Beraisa): One who shaves the length of a scissors blade on Shabbos is liable.
(g)Question: How long is this?
(h)Answer (Rav Yehudah): It is two hairs (i.e. twice the distance between adjacent hair follicles in an average person).
(i)Question (Beraisa): The length to be liable for regarding Korchah is two hairs (implying that this is different from the length of a scissors blade)!
(j)Answer: It means that the length to be liable for regarding Korchah is also two hairs.
(k)Support (Beraisa): One who shaves the length of a scissors blade on Shabbos is liable. This is two hairs;
1.R. Eliezer says, he is liable for one hair.
2.Chachamim admit that one is liable for removing a single white hair among black ones (because this is important to him);
3.Men may not do so even on a weekday - "v'Lo Yilbash Gever Simlas Ishah" (do not adorn yourself like a woman. Rambam - he is lashed even for one hair; Ra'avad - it is forbidden only if he removes enough to make a recognizable difference; Ritva - our Tana holds that this is forbidden only mid'Rabanan due to "Simlas Ishah").
4)PE'AS HA'ROSH AND PE'AS HA'ZAKAN
(a)(Mishnah): If he rounds Pe'as ha'Rosh...
(b)(Beraisa): Pe'as ha'Rosh is the end of the head. (From the jaws and below is not called Rosh, rather, the beard.)
(c)Question: What does it mean to round the end of the head?
(d)Answer: He cuts the sideburn even with the hairlines on the forehead and in back of the ears.
(e)(A reciter of Beraisos): The one who cuts and the one being trimmed are both lashed.
(f)Objection (Rav Chisda): Why is the one being trimmed lashed? He did not do anything!
1.Your teaching is like R. Yehudah, who says that one is lashed for a Lav she'Ein Bo Ma'aseh (but the Halachah does not follow him)!
(g)Answer #1 (Rava): It is even like Chachamim. It teaches that one who cuts his own Pe'os is lashed twice (for each).
(h)Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): It is even like Chachamim. The case is, he moves his head to help the one cutting. This is an action.
(i)(Mishnah): If he shaves Pe'as ha'Zakan...
(j)(Beraisa): Pe'as ha'Zakan is the end of the beard, i.e. Shiboles ha'Zakan (Rivan - the five places where it sticks out. Most Meforshim holds that this refers only to the chin. The Rosh explains that R. Chananel holds that it is the Adam's apple, but the Beis Yosef and Gra refute this.)
(a)(Mishnah): If he made one scratch (due to five Mesim)...
(b)(Beraisa) Suggestion: Perhaps "v'Seret" applies even if he scratches because his house burned down or his ship sank!
(c)Rejection: "La'Nefesh" teaches that he is liable (some explain - transgresses) only due to a Mes.
(d)Question: What is the source that if he made five scratches due to a Mes, he is lashed five times?
(e)Answer: "V'Seret" obligates for each one.
(f)R. Yosi: What is the source that if he made one scratch due to five Mesim, he is lashed five times?
(g)Answer: "La'Nefesh" obligates for each Mes.
(h)Question: We used this to exempt one who scratches due to monetary loss!
(i)Answer: R. Yosi holds that Seritah and Gedidah are the same (both apply whether he used his hand or an instrument). It says "Lo Sisgodedu... la'Mes", so "la'Nefesh" is extra to obligate for each Mes.