1)

(a)What problem did the Emperor of Rome have with Techi'as ha'Meisim? Why did he consider it impossible (see Agados Maharsha)?

(b)How did his own daughter get her father to answer the question himself (based on two hypothetical potters)?

(c)What did she say when he replied that the former was certainly the greater, since anyone can make pots out of clay, but who can make them out of water?

(d)How did Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael solve the Emperor's problem, based on a 'Kal va'Chomer' from glass vessels?

1)

(a)The problem the Emperor of Rome had with Techi'as ha'Meisim was - that it is impossible to create someone out of earth, which is what a dead person reverts to after death (see Agados Maharsha).

(b)His own daughter got her father to answer the question himself - by asking him which potter would be greater, if one made pots out of water, and the other, out of clay.

(c)When he replied that the former was certainly the greater, for anyone can make pots out of clay, but who can make them out of water?, - she pointed out that if that was so, why can G-d, who creates babies out of 'water', not recreate them out of clay?

(d)Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael solve the Emperor's problem with a 'Kal va'Chomer' - if glass vessels which break can be reconstructed with the breath of man, how much more so can a human-being be reconstructed with the breath of Hash-m.

2)

(a)When a heretic posed the same question to Rebbi Ami, he cited im a parable of servants of a king, who once built him large palaces where there was no water and no earth, which subsequently fell. How did the parable continue?

(b)How did he prove Techi'as ha'Meisim from there?

(c)What practical proof did Rebbi Ami bring from a species of squirrel?

(d)How did he dismiss the argument that this is a slow process, that might take a week or two (whereas Techi'as ha'Meisim will take only a moment)? Where do we find immediate bulk creation that resembles Techi'as ha'Meisim?

2)

(a)When a heretic posed the same question to Rebbi Ami, he cited im a parable of servants of a king, who once built him large palaces where there was no water and no earth, which subsequently fell - In reply to the kings request to rebuild them, but in a location where there was water and earth, they claimed that they were unable to do so, the king became angry with them, because if they could build palaces where there was no water or earth, then they could certainly build them where there was!

(b)Likewise, if Hash-m was able to create Adam out of a small abstract drop (or the world out of nothing), then He could certainly re-create him out of his remains (earth).

(c)Rebbi Ami brought a practical proof for this from a species of squirrel - which is created from earth, and he invited skeptics to go down to the valley and see for themselves, squirrels that were in the process of being created, and were as yet, still half-squirrel and half- earth.

(d)He dismissed the argument that that is a slow process that might take a week or two to become finalized, whereas Techi'as ha'Meisim will take only a moment - by inviting them to climb a mountain and see how at one stage, there is only one Chilazon (a type of worm [or fish] that rises from the sea once every seventy years, and from which one extracts the blue dye for Techeiles), yet the moment the rain falls, the mountainside is full of Chilzonos.

3)

(a)What argument did a heretic cite to disprove the institution of Techi'as ha'Meisim (though in fact, he doubted Hash-m's ability to perform it)?

(b)What did Gevihah ben P'sisa (a hunchback who was particularly smart) retort?

(c)Why did the latter speak to him aggressively, using the words 'Woe to you wicked ones, who claim that the dead do not come back to life'?

(d)And how did he respond when the heretic, angry at being called a 'Rasha', threatened to beat the hunchback out of him?

3)

(a)The argument that a heretic cite to disprove the institution of Techi'as ha'Meisim (though in fact, he doubted Hash-m's ability to perform it) was - that if those who are alive, die, then what sense does it make to bring those who have already died back to life.

(b)Gevihah ben P'sisa (a hunchback who was particularly smart) retorted - that quite to the contrary, if Hash-m can create people for the first time, then why should he not be able to re-create them.

(c)The latter spoke to him aggressively, using the words 'Woe to you wicked ones, who claim that the dead do not come back to life' - because that was the expression that the heretic had used in addressing him.

(d)When the heretic, angry at being called a 'Rasha', threatened to beat the hunchback out of him - he assured him that if he could do that, he would indeed be a great doctor.

4)

(a)On the twenty-fourth of Nisan, the 'Dimusnai' were eliminated. Who were the Dimusnai?

(b)What argument did Gevihah ben Pesisa present to the Sanhedrin together with his request to act as Yisrael's spokesman?

(c)What was the name of the judge that set up the international court?

(d)After Gevihah ben Pesisa obtained permission, what did he ask each nation before giving his answer?

4)

(a)On the twenty-fourth of Nisan, the 'Dimusnai' were eliminated. The Dimusnai were - various nations who wanted to take parts of Yehudah and Yerushalayim (as we shall now see).

(b)Together with his request to act as Yisrael's spokesman, he pointed out to the Sanhedrin - that if he lost the argument, they could always soften the blow by claiming that the victors had defeated a Hedyot (and it was therefore no big deal); whereas should he win, they would extol the greatness of Torah.

(c)The name of the judge that set up the international court was none other than - Alexander (the Great) Mokdon.

(d)After Gevihah ben Pesisa obtained permission, before giving his answer, he asked each nation - on which legal work they based their claim. When they answered that they based it on the Torah, he countered that he too, would base his answer on the Torah, as we shall now see.

5)

(a)With what argument did he vanquish ...

1. ... the Africans (descendants of the Cana'anim [see Agados Maharsha]) who claimed that Eretz Cana'an belonged to them?

2. ... the Egyptians, who claimed that Yisrael had never returned the numerous vessels (and clothes) that they had 'borrowed' from them before leaving Egypt?

(b)What year did that year happen to be?

(c)Alexander Mokdon allowed both the Africans and the Egyptians three days to prepare their replies. What happened then?

(d)What claim did the B'nei Yishmael and the B'nei Keturah present to Alexander Mokdon?

5)

(a)He vanquished ...

1. ... the Africans (descendants of the Cana'anim [see Agados Maharsha]) who claimed that Eretz Cana'an belonged to them - by reminding them that Cana'an had been cursed by No'ach in that he would be a slave to Shem and Yafes, and that whatever a slave owned belonged to his master.

2. ... the Egyptians, who claimed that Yisrael had never returned the numerous vessels (and clothes) that they had 'borrowed' from them before leaving Egypt - by countering that if they (the Egyptians) paid the six-hundred thousand people who worked as slaves for four hundred and thirty years, they would gladly return the things they had borrowed.

(b)That year happened to be - the Sh'mitah year (see Agados Maharsha).

(c)Alexander Mokdon allowed both the Africans and the Egyptians three days to prepare their replies. In the end - not only did they not return to court, but they also abandoned the fields and vineyards that they had taken over in Eretz Yisrael (which Yisrael had left Hefker, because it was the Shmitah year) and fled.

(d)The claim that the B'nei Yishmael and the B'nei Keturah presented to Alexander Mokdon - was that they were joint heirs with Yitzchak, and that part of Eretz Yisrael therefore belonged to them.

6)

(a)Based on which Pasuk in Chayei-Sarah, did Gevihah ben Pesisa refute the claim of the B'nei Yishmael and the B'nei Keturah, too? What does 'Av she'Nasan Agin le'Banav mean?

(b)What gift did Avraham give to the B'nei Keturah and possibly to Yishmael (see Agados Maharsha)?

(c)On what grounds did Antoninus, King of Rome, suggest that both the body and the soul might avoid being punished in Gehinom?

(d)What did Rebbi reply? What parable did he give of a king who had an orchard containing luscious figs?

6)

(a)Gevihah ben Pesisa refuted the claim of the B'nei Yishmael and the b'nei Keturah, too, on the basis of the Pasuk in Chayei-Sarah, where the Pasuk writes - "Vayiten Avraham es Kol Asher lo le'Yitzchak. ve'Livnei ha'Pilagshim Asher le'Avraham Nasan Avraham Matanos". Clearly then, Avraham appointed Yitzchak as his heir, after sending away Yishmael and the B'nei Keturah with specific gifts (known as 'Agin').

(b)The gift Avraham gave to the B'nei Keturah and possibly to Yishmael (see Agados Maharsha) was - the name of Tum'ah (black magic and access to demons).

(c)Antoninus suggested that both the body and the Soul might avoid being punished in Gehinom - seeing as the body without the Soul lies still without moving, and the Soul without the body flies through the air like a bird (without sinning).

(d)Rebbi replied with the parable of a king who had a fig-orchard which produced the most luscious fruit - and in charge of which he appointed two guards, one of them lame and the other one blind. One day the king discovered that someone had eaten all the fruit. When the two guards pleaded innocent (seeing as the one was unable to walk, whilst the other could not see), the king placed the lame guard onto the back of the blind one and lashed them both together. And that is how Hash-m will punish Resha'im in Gehinom, He wll cast the Soul back into the body, just as they were when they sinned.

91b----------------------------------------91b

7)

(a)What was Rebbi's initial reaction to Anoninus' question as to why the sun rises in the east and sets in the west?

(b)So how did Antoninus re-phrase the question?

(c)What did Rebbi mean when he replied with the Pasuk in Tehilim "u'Tzeva ha'Shamayim L'cha Mishtachavim"?

(d)And what did he reply when Antoninus asked him further why it does not then stop in the middle of the sky and retreat (as is customary before kings)?

7)

(a)Rebbi's initial reaction to Antoninus' question as to why the sun rises in the east and sets in the west was - that he would have asked the same question had the reverse been the case (in which case it was based on mere curiosity, and not on wisdom).

(b)So Antoninus re-phrased his question to read - why, having risen in the east, the sun sets in the west. Why does it not make the full circle to set in the same spot where it rose? (see Agados Maharsha)

(c)When Rebbi replied with the Pasuk "u'Tzeva ha'Shamayim Lecha Mishtachavim" - he meant that the sun's movement is an act of bowing before the Shechinah, which is in the west, and which is therefore where it sets.

(d)And when Antoninus asked him further why it does not then stop in the middle of the sky and retreat (as is customary before kings) - he replied that doing so would result in sudden darkness (in the west), causing confusion among workers and travelers (it is not clear why he did not reply simply that it would result in half the world to be in a constant state of day, and the other half, in a constant state of night).

8)

(a)What objection did Antoninus raise when, in reply to his question, Rebbi stated ...

1. ... that the Neshamah enters the body only with the formation of the baby's body?

2. ... that the Yeitzer-ha'Ra joins a person already when he is formed?

(b)What did Rebbi subsequently prove from the Pasuk ...

1. ... in Iyov "u'Fekudascha Shamrah Ruchi"?

2. ... in Bereishis "la'Pesach Chatas Rovetz"? What does "Chatas" mean?

(c)What did Rebbi comment after each of the two episodes, even having substantiated Antoninus' opinion?

8)

(a)Antoninus' objected, when in reply to his question, Rebbi stated ...

1. ... that the Neshamah enters the body only with the formation of the baby's body (forty days after conception) - on the grounds that a (saltless) drop could not possibly last forty days (until it is formed [see Agados Maharsha]) without turning putrid, and more than a piece of unsalted meat, which cannot last even three days without going bad.

2. ... that the Yeitzer-ha'Ra joins the person from the moment he is formed - that if that were so, it would kick its way out of its mother's womb.

(b)Rebbi subsequently proved from the Pasuk ...

1. ... in Iyov "u'Fekudascha Shamrah Ruchi" - that Hash-m places the Neshamah inside the person already when the angel brings the drop before Him to determine its future.

2. ... in Bereishis "la'Pesach Chatas Rovetz" - that the Yeitzer-ha'Ra joins a person only from the time of birth, substantiating both of Antoninus' statements.

(c)After each of the two episodes, before even having substantiated Antoninus' opinion, Rebbi commented -that Antoninus had taught him that.

9)

(a)What is the problem with the two P'sukim (both in connection with Techi'as ha'Meisim), one in Yirmiyah "Bam Iver u'Pise'ach" and the other, in Yeshayah "Az Yedaleg ke'Ayal Pise'ach, ve'Taron L'shon Ileim"?

(b)How does Resh Lakish resolve the apparent discrepancy?

(c)And how does Ula resolve the apparent discrepancy between the two Pesukim in Yeshayah (in connection with Techi'as ha'Meisim) "Bila ha'Ma'ves la'Netzach u'Machah Hash-m Dim'ah me'Al Kol Panim" and "Ki ha'Na'ar ben Me'ah Shanah Yamus ... "?

(d)What does the latter Pasuk mean?

(e)We just explained that Nochrim will continue to die after Techi'as ha'Meisim (albeit at a ripe old age), and we query the very presence of Nochrim in Olam ha'Ba (which is reserved for Yisrael exclusively). What is the answer?

9)

(a)The problem with the two P'sukim (both in connection with Techi'as ha'Meisim), one in Yirmiyah "Bam Iver u'Pise'ach" and the other, in Yeshayah "Az Yedaleg ke'Ayal Pise'ach, ve'Taron L'shon Ileim" is - that whereas the first Pasuk maintains that people will arise with their blemishes, the second Pasuk indicates that they will get up fully cured.

(b)To resolve the discrepancy, Resh Lakish explains - that initially, everybody will rise with whatever blemish they had, and that subsequently, they will be cured.

(c)Ula resolves the apparent discrepancy between the two Pesukim in Yeshayah (in connection with Techi'as ha'Meisim) "Bila ha'Ma'ves la'Netzach u'Machah Hash-m Dim'ah me'Al Kol Panim" and "Ki ha'Na'ar ben Me'ah Shanah Yamus ... " - by establishing the former by Yisrael, and the latter, by Nochrim.

(d)The latter Pasuk means - that when someone dies at the age of a hundred, they will say that he died young.

(e)We just explained that the Nochrim will continue to die after Techi'as ha'Meisim (albeit at a ripe old age). In answer to the question what Nochrim will be doing in Olam ha'Ba (which is reserved for Yisrael exclusively) we explains - that some Nochrim will be needed to look after our sheep and lands, and those are the ones the Pasuk is referring to.

10)

(a)How does Rav Chisda resolve the apparent discrepancy between the Pesukim in Yeshayah "ve'Chafrah ha'Levanah u'Voshah ha'Chamah, Ki Malach Hash-m Tzevakos" and "ve'Hayah Or ha'Levanah ke'Or ha'Chamah, ve'Or ha'Chamah Yih'yeh Shiv'asayim ke'Or Shiv'as ha'Yamim"?

(b)And how will we resolve the discrepancy according to Shmuel, who confines any difference between nowadays and the days of Mashi'ach to our freedom from the yoke of the nations exclusively?

(c)How does Rava resolve the apparent discrepancy between the Pesukim in Ha'azinu "Ani Amis va'Achayeh" (implying with the blemishes with which he died) and "Machatzti va'Ani Erpa"?

(d)On what basis does the Tana of the Beraisa conclude that "Ani Amis va'Achayeh" pertains to the same person (a further proof for Techi'as ha'Meisim)?

10)

(a)To resolve the apparent discrepancy between the Pesukim in Yeshayah "ve'Chafrah ha'Levanah u'Voshah ha'Chamah, Ki Malach Hash-m Tzevakos" and "ve'Hayah Or ha'Levanah ke'Or ha'Chamah, ve'Or ha'Chamah Yih'yeh Shiv'asayim ke'Or Shiv'as ha'Yamim" - Rav Chisda establishes the former after Techi'as ha'Meisim (where the light of the sun and moon will fade before the light of the Tzadikim), and the latter, in the time of Mashi'ach, prior to Techi'as ha'Meisim.

(b)According to Shmuel however, who confines any difference between nowadays and the days of Mashi'ach to our freedom from the yoke of the nations exclusively - we establish the former Pasuk in the camp of the Tzadikim (where the sun and moon will continue to shine with increased strength), and the latter, in the camp of the Shechinah (where their light will be dwarfed by its Shechinah).

(c)Rava resolves the apparent discrepancy between the Pesukim "Ani Amis va'Achayeh" (implying with the blemishes with which he died) and "Machatzti va'Ani Erpa" - by establishing the former Pasuk at the moment of revival, and the latter, at a later stage, when everyone will be cured of all ailments (as we learned earlier).

(d)The Tana of the Beraisa concludes that "Ani Amis va'Achayeh" pertains to the same person (a further proof for Techi'as ha'Meisim) - from the Hekesh (in the same Pasuk) to "Machatzti ve'Ani Erpa", which obviously pertains to the same person.

11)

(a)What does Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... in Beshalach "Az Yashir Moshe ... " and from the Pasuk in Yehoshua "Az Yivneh Yehoshua Mizbe'ach la'Hashem"?

2. ... in Melachim "Az Yivneh Sh'lomoh Bamah li'Chemosh Shikutz Mo'av ... "?

(b)Besides a further proof for Techi'as ha'Meisim min ha'Torah, what does Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi learn from the word " Yehalelucha" (in the Pasuk in Tehilim "Ashrei Yoshvei Veisecha, Od Yehalelucha Selah")? What should the Navi otherwise have said?

(c)And what does Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan learn from the Pasuk in Yeshayah "Kol Tzofayich Nas'u Kol, Yachdav *Yeraneinu*"? What should the Navi otherwise have said?

(d)What else does he extrapolate from the Pasuk?

11)

(a)Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa proves from the Pasuk ...

1. ... in Beshalach "Az Yashir Moshe ... " and from the Pasuk "Az Yivneh Yehoshua Mizbe'ach la'Hashem" - that 'Techi'as ha'Meisim is min ha'Torah (because otherwise, the Torah should have written 'Shar' and 'Banah' respectively.

2. ... in Melachim "Az Yivneh Sh'lomoh Bamah li'Chemosh Shikutz Mo'av ... " - that although it was Sh'lomoh's wives who built these altars, the Torah reckons as if Sh'lomoh himself would have built them (for marrying such women in the first place, or at least for not stopping them from sinning).

(b)Besides a further proof for Techi'as ha'Meisim min ha'Torah, Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi learns from the word " Yehalelucha" (in the Pasuk in Tehilim "Ashrei Yoshvei Veisecha, Od Yehalelucha Selah") - that anyone who sings praises to Hash-m in this world, it is as if he had sung them in Olam ha'Ba.

(c)And Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan learns from the Pasuk in "Kol Tzofayich Nas'u Kol, Yachdav *Yeraneinu*" (instead of 'Rin'nu') - another proof for Techi'as ha'Meisim min ha'Torah.

(d)He also extrapolates from the Pasuk - that all the prophets will sing Shirah together to Hash-m in Olam ha'Ba.

12)

(a)What does Rav Yehudah Amar Rav learn from the word " Morashah" (in the Pasuk in ve'Zos ha'Berachah "Torah Tzivah Lanu Moshe Morashah Kehilas Ya'akov")?

(b)How does he connect Torah to Morashah?

(c)In the Pesukim "u'le'Om mi'le'Om Ye'ematz" (Toldos, in connection with Ya'akov and Eisav), and "Mah Ekov Lo Kaboh Keil" (Balak, in connection with Bil'am's B'rachos), what do the words "Om" and "Kaboh" (respectively) mean?

(d)Given that, based on a Pasuk in Tehilim, "Bar" means Torah, how does Rav Chana bar Bizna Amar Rebbi Shimon Chasida now interpret the Pasuk in Mishlei "Mone'a Bar Yikvuhu le'Om"?

12)

(a)Rav Yehudah Amar Rav learns from the word " Morashah" (in the Pasuk in ve'Zos ha'Berachah "Torah Tzivah Lanu Moshe Morashah Kehilas Ya'akov") - that if someone withholds Torah from a Talmid it is as if he had withheld from him his father's inheritance ...

(b)... because Torah has been Yisrael's inheritance since the six days of the Creation.

(c)In the Pesukim "u'le'Om mi'le'Om Ye'ematz" (Toldos, in connection with Ya'akov and Eisav), and "Mah Ekov Lo Kaboh Keil" (Balak, in connection with Bil'am's B'rachos), the words "Om" and "Kaboh" mean - 'a fetus' and 'curse' (respectively).

(d)Given that, based on a Pasuk in Tehilim, "Bar" means Torah, Rav Chana bar Bizna Amar Rebbi Shimon Chasida now interprets the Pasuk "Mone'a Bar Yikvuhu le'Om" to mean - that if someone withholds Torah from a Talmid, even the unborn fetuses will curse him (see Agados Maharsha).

13)

(a)Based on the Pasuk in Melachim "*va'Yikov* Chor be'Dalto" (in connection with the collecting boxes in the Beis-Hamikdash), what punishment does Ula bar Yishmael ascribe to someone who fails to impart Torah to a Talmid?

(b)Abaye adds 'Like an Uchla de'Katzri'. What is an 'Uchla de'Katzri'?

(c)Someone who does learn with a Talmid on the other hand, will receive B'rachos like 'the Mashbir' (the sustainer), as the Pasuk writes there in Mishlei "u'B'rachah le'Rosh Mashbir". To whom does this refer? Who is described by the Torah as 'Mashbir'?

13)

(a)Based on the Pasuk in Melachim "*va'Yikov* Chor be'Dalto" (in connection with the collecting boxes in the Beis-Hamikdash), Ula bar Yishmael ascribes to someone who fails to impart Torah to a Talmid the punishment - of being holed like a sieve.

(b)Abaye adds 'Like an Uchla de'Katzri' - which is a vessel used by laundry-men to sprinkle water on the clothes.

(c)Someone who does learn with a Talmid on the other hand, will receive B'rachos like 'the Mashbir' (the sustainer), as the Pasuk writes there in Mishlei "u'B'rachah le'Rosh Mashbir" - a title which the Torah, in Mikeitz conferred upon Yosef ("ve'Yosef ... Hu ha'Mashbir").

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES ON THIS DAF