[34a - 46 lines; 34b - 32 lines]
1)[line 4]לולLUL- a shaft; in this case, a stairwell
2a)[line 4]הביתBAYIS- the ground floor apartment of a house
b)[line 4]לעלייהALIYAH- an attic or loft, i.e. the second story apartment of a house
3)[line 7]אינדרונאINDERONA- (O.F. chambre) a room
4)[line 8]באביBAVEI- gates, doors
5)[line 9]דרגיל בחדD'RAGIL B'CHAD- [in a case where all four doors were used at one time or another, but now only] one is used regularly (RASHI). (According to Rav Papa, we must assume that Rav Huna dealt with a case where either the ground floor apartment or the loft apartment had two doors to the stairwell, and only one was used regularly - see RASHASH, SHITAH MEKUBETZES #3)
6)[line 10]פיתחא דאקרנאPISCHA D'AKRANA- an entryway at the corner of a room
7)[line 12]עדי פצימיADEI PETZIMEI- behold, its doorposts, i.e. the ends of the walls are its doorposts (even though this entranceway does not have a proper doorframe)
8)[line 13]איקלעIKLA- chanced upon, happened to come to
9)[line 14]פצים אחדPATZIM ECHAD- one doorpost [in an entranceway at the corner of a room] (RASHI)
10)[line 15]כר''מK'REBBI MEIR- like the opinion of Rebbi Meir (who rules that a room with one doorpost requires a Mezuzah, as is brought in the following Sugya)
11)[line 19]דרך ביאתך מן הימיןDERECH BI'ASCHA MIN HA'YAMIN- the ordinary way that you come, [starting] from the right
12a)[line 20]דכי עקר איניש כרעיהD'CHI AKAR INISH KAR'EI- for when a person moves his foot
b)[line 20]דימינא עקרD'YAMINA AKAR [B'REISHA]- he moves his right foot first
13)[line 22]"ויקח יהוידע הכהן ארון אחד ויקב חר בדלתו, ויתן אתו אצל המזבח מימין בבוא איש בית ה', ונתנו שמה הכהנים, שמרי הסף, את כל הכסף המובא בית ה'""VA'YIKACH YEHOYADA HA'KOHEN ARON ECHAD VA'YIKOV CHOR B'DALTO, VA'YITEN OSO ETZEL HA'MIZBE'ACH MI'YAMIN BE'VO ISH BEIS HASH-M, V'NASNU SHAMAH HA'KOHANIM, SHOMREI HA'SAF, ES KOL HA'KESEF HA'MUVA BEIS HASH-M" - "And Yehoyada the Kohen took a chest and he bored a hole in its door, and he placed it beside the Mizbe'ach on the right-hand side as a man enters the House of HaSh-m, and the Kohanim, the guards of the inner-gate, were to place there all the money that was brought to the House of HaSh-m." (Melachim II 12:10) (The Collection Boxes)
(a)King Yeho'ash, whom the Navi describes as a righteous king, at least as long as Yehoyada the Kohen Gadol was alive to guide him, failed to remove the Bamos (on which they sacrificed to HaSh-m).
(b)One of the first things he did was to enact that when the people bring their annual half-Shekel, as well as other monetary donations to Bedek ha'Bayis, including Erchin, they would give the money directly to their friends, the Kohanim of the Mishmar (group) that was serving that week. The Kohanim in turn, were permitted to keep the money, in exchange for undertaking to keep the Beis ha'Mikdash in good repair out of their own funds.
(c)In the twenty-third year of his forty-year reign, however, he discovered that the Kohanim had pocketed the money and failed to provide the necessary repairs to the House of HaSh-m. He immediately called Yehoyada and the other Kohanim and asked them about it. When they failed to reply, he reinstated the previous custom, whereby everyone had to give their dues and their gifts for Bedek ha'Bayis directly to Bedek ha'Bayis, rather than to the Kohanim. In fact, the verse relates that the Kohanim preferred the new arrangement - not to take the money and not to take responsibility for keeping the Beis ha'Mikdash in good repair.
(d)That was when Yehoyada the Kohen Gadol introduced the novel idea of a collection-box into which all money for Bedek ha'Bayis would be placed.
14)[line 30]ואין ריבוי אחר ריבוי אלא למעטEIN RIBUY ACHAR RIBUY ELA L'MA'ET - one extension of the law that occurs in the Torah after an identical extension of the law limits the scope of the law [rather than extending it]
(a)This rule of Biblical interpretation interprets the occurrence of two Ribuyim (inclusive words) regarding an identical point as limiting the Halachah they describe, rather than extending it to include more items or to apply in more cases. That is, even though a single Ribuy extends the Halachah to additional items or cases to which one would have thought that the Halachah does not apply, a double Ribuy teaches not to extend the Halachah but rather to interpret it in a limited sense.
(b)The logical derivation for this rule is as follows: If we already know to apply the Halachah under discussion to a particular item (or case), it would not be necessary for the Torah to again teach that the Halachah applies even to that item. It is therefore evident from the second Ribuy that the first one was not meant to include that item. Likewise, the second Ribuy cannot have been written to include that item, for the Torah could have taught to include that item by writing only the first Ribuy. It must therefore be concluded that the double Ribuy means to teach that we should not learn to include the item in the Halachah under discussion. (This rule is closely related to the rule of "Shenei Chesuvim ha'Ba'im k'Echad Ein Melamdim" - see Background to Zevachim 24:1 and to the converse rule of "Ein Mi'ut Achar Mi'ut Ela l'Rabos - see Yoma 43a and Background to Shevuos 7:8.)
(c)In all cases of Ribuy Achar Ribuy, the obvious question is why did the Torah write even a single Ribuy? Let the Torah write neither Ribuy and we would know by ourselves not to include the item, since there is no Ribuy to include it! (Obviously the item would not be included without a Ribuy, since we originally found it necessary to interpret the first Ribuy as including that item.) TOSFOS (to Yoma 60a DH Trei) asks a similar question (with regard to Mi'ut Achar Mi'ut) and answers that perhaps we would have included that item (or excluded it, in the case of Mi'ut Achar Mi'ut) without the first Ribuy, through a Binyan Av (see Background to Menachos 93:32) or a Kal va'Chomer (see Background to Avodah Zarah 46:22). The first Ribuy was not really necessary, but we would have justified the Ribuy as "Milsa d'Asya b'Kal va'Chomer Tarach v'Chasav Lah Kra" - "the Torah troubles itself to write out explicitly that which can be learned from a Kal va'Chomer" (see Kidushin 4a, Chulin 118b). The second Ribuy teaches not only to ignore the first Ribuy, but also to ignore the Binyan Av or Kal va'Chomer as well.
(d)In other instances (such as the one recorded in our Sugya) it is more obvious why a double Ribuy is necessary. The second Ribuy does not entirely negate the first, but rather it limits the first Ribuy (or it limits itself) to a narrower interpretation.
15)[line 31]למזוזה אחתLI'MEZUZAH ACHAS- [the verse excludes the need] for one [of the two] doorpost[s]
16)[line 34]להלןL'HALAN- there (Devarim 24:1)
17)[line 36]להלןL'HALAN- there (Devarim 27:8)
18)[line 38]וכמו שנאמרU'CHEMO SHE'NE'EMAR- and as it states... (that Mezuzos and Gitin must be written with ink - RASHI)
19)[line 38]"ויאמר להם ברוך, 'מפיו יקרא אלי את כל הדברים האלה, ואני כתב על הספר בדיו'.""VA'YOMER LAHEM BARUCH, 'MI'PIV YIKAREI ELAI ES KOL HA'DEVARIM, VA'ANI KOSEV ES KOL HA'DEVARIM BI'DEYO'." - "And Baruch said to them: From his (Yirmeyahu's) mouth he read out to me all the words, and I wrote everything in ink'." (Yirmeyahu 36:18)
20)[line 41]כתיבה תמהKESIVAH TAMAH- a perfect writing, with no part of any letter missing
21a)[line 42]ליכתבא אאבנאLICHTEVA A'AVNA- we could chisel the words of a Mezuzah into a stone
b)[line 43]וליקבעה אסיפאV'LIKBE'AH A'SIPA- and set it (that stone) into the doorway
22)[line 1]לטטפת לטטפת לטוטפתL'TOTAFOS L'TOTAFOS L'TOTAFOS- the three times that the word "l'Totafos" is mentioned in the Torah (Shemos 13:16, Devarim 6:8, and Devarim 11:18)
23a)[line 2]טט בכתפי שתיםTAT B'CHASPI SHETAYIM- "Tat" in a Caspian dialect is two
b)[line 3]פת באפריקי שתיםPAS B'AFRIKI SHETAYIM- "Pas" in an African dialect is two
24)[line 7]על ד' עורותAL ARBA'AH OROS- on four pieces of parchment
25)[line 7]בעור אחדB'OR ECHAD- in one piece of leather (which is the piece of leather from which the four compartments for the parchments are made)
26a)[line 10]חוטCHUT- a string. There are two explanations for the use of this string: (a) after the four parchments of the Tefilah Shel Rosh are written and folded, they are tied with a string of hair from the tail of cattle; (b) as the Tefilah Shel Rosh is sewn with a string of sinew, the string is passed in between each of the four compartments that hold the parchments (SHITAH MEKUBETZES #4)
b)[line 10]משיחהMESHICHAH- (O.F. linoel) linen thread, string
27)[line 11]אין חריצן ניכרEIN CHARITZAN NIKAR- if the crease between each of the four compartments that hold the parchments is not noticeable (for example, if one were to use only one large compartment with dividing pieces inside)
28)[line 14]לדבקL'DABEK- to glue [the parchments together]
29)[line 18]ר' יהודה ברביREBBI YEHUDAH B'REBBI- Rebbi Yehudah, the great Talmid Chacham (RASHI)
30)[line 19]שטולה עורSHE'TOLEH OR- that he covers with leather
31)[line 20]מודה היינו פלוגתייהוMODEH?! HAINU PELUGTAIHU!- he agrees? This is exactly their point of contention! (i.e. whether the four parchments inside of a Tefilah Shel Yad must be attached or not; in this case they are clearly detached)
32a)[line 26]בעתיקתאB'ATIKTA- (lit. with an old one) that has already been used as a Tefilah Shel Rosh
b)[line 26]בחדתתאB'CHADETASA- (lit. with a new one) that has never been used as a Tefilah Shel Rosh
33)[line 26]הזמנה מילתא היאHAZMANAH MILSA HI
There is a disagreement as to whether designating an object for a purpose of Kedushah renders it unfit for secular use. Abaye (Berachos 23b, Megilah 26b) is of the opinion that Hazmanah is enough. Others rule that an action must be performed on the object before it is unfit for secular use.
34)[line 27]דאתני עלייהו מעיקראD'ASNI ALAIHU ME'IKARA- he made the Tefilah Shel Rosh with the specific intention that if need be, he may change it into a Tefilah Shel Yad
35)[line 27]כיצד סדרןKEITZAD SIDRAN?- What is the correct order of the placement into the compartments of the Tefilah Shel Rosh, of the four Parshiyos written on the parchments of the Tefilin: "Kadesh Li" (Shemos 13:1-10), "v'Hayah Ki Yevi'acha" (Shemos 13:11-16), "Shema" (Devarim 6:4-9), "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" (Devarim 11:13-21)?
36)[line 28]קדש לי והי' כי יביאך מימיןKADESH LI V'HAYAH KI YEVI'ACHA MI'YAMIN- (a) the Parshiyos of "Kadesh Li" and "v'Hayah Ki Yevi'acha" are on the right half of the Tefilah Shel Rosh (RASHI); (b) the Parshah of "Kadesh Li" is in the rightmost compartment and the Parshah of "v'Hayah Ki Yevi'acha" is next to it (to the left of it) (TOSFOS, citing RABEINU TAM)
37)[line 28]שמע והי' אם שמוע משמאלSHEMA V'HAYAH IM SHAMO'A MI'SEMOL- (a) the Parshiyos of "Shema" and "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" are on the left half of the Tefilah Shel Rosh (with "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" in the leftmost compartment) (RASHI); (b) the Parshah of "Shema" is in the leftmost compartment and the Parshah of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" is next to it (to the right of it) (TOSFOS, citing RABEINU TAM)
38)[line 31]והקורא קורא כסדרןVEHA'KOREI KOREI K'SIDRAN- (a) and the "reader" [i.e. when someone is facing a person wearing the Tefilah Shel Rosh, he] "reads" them (i.e. they are arranged from right to left) according to the order in which they were written in the Torah (see above, entry #33) (RASHI); (b) and when Abaye answered the question of the Gemara, he meant that the words "Kan mi'Yemino Shel Korei" apply to the first Beraisa mentioned in the Gemara (line 28) and not to the second one ("Tanya Ipcha"). That is, ha'Korei Korei k'Sidran Shel Beraisa Rishonah. (The words "Kan mi'Yemino Shel Meni'ach" apply to the "Tanya Ipcha.") As such, when someone is facing a person wearing the Tefilah Shel Rosh, he sees that the Parshah of "Kadesh Li" is in the rightmost compartment and the Parshah of "v'Hayah Ki Yevi'acha" is next to it (to the left of it), and that the Parshah of "Shema" is in the leftmost compartment and the Parshah of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" is next to it (to the right of it) (TOSFOS, citing RABEINU TAM, according to the SHITAH MEKUBETZES # 21).
39)[last line]החליף פרשיותיהHICHLIF PARSHIYOSEHA- he interchanged [the order in which] the sections [of the Torah written on the parchments were placed in the compartments]