Opinion: We see from our Gemara that a document that does not have the years from the creation of the world, not even the thousands or hundreds of years, is valid. This is as long as he wrote the last two digits of the years.

Opinion (cont.): This is because in those days they would write the date based on the Greek kingdom, and the scribe must have omitted mentioning this fact. If it would clearly say in the document, "based on the years of the Greek kingdom," the Gemara would not have asked that perhaps these years are from the time Bnei Yisrael came out of Egypt etc.

Opinion (cont.): Even so, we would not say that it must be from a different accounting of years (dating it later), and therefore he cannot collect with this document until the time on the document arrives being that in the exile the years of Greece were usually used. Accordingly, even if he skipped the exact number of years from creation now that we count based on the years of creation, there is no reason to worry.

Opinion (cont.): If he skipped the thousands of years there is also no reason to worry, as the Gemara says later, "Leave the first thousand, and take the last thousand." (In other words, there was clearly not an amount of thousands in the document in question, and the Gemara asked that we should say the thousands of years are different.)

Text: Some Sefarim have the text, "Leave the large amount, and take (i.e. analyze) the small amount."

Observation: Rabeinu Tam wrote a document with the last two (or three, see Rosh #7 and Pilpula Charifta) digits, and skipped the thousands of years, and the fact that it was from the creation of the world.

Opinion#1: Rashi explains that their language is a collection of various words from other languages of other nations.

Question: This is difficult. The sons of Yishmael, Keturah, and the nations of Amon and Moav who were after the Dor ha'Flagah (the generation that made the Tower of Babylon) also must have gotten their language from other nations!

Opinion#2: The Ri therefore explains that "writing (and language)" refers to an important language used by kings, similar to "Greek knowledge" (a language used by important people that involved signs and hints).

Opinion#2 (cont.): This is as the Gemara says in Megilah (10b), "And I have cut off from Babylon a name and a remnant." "A name" refers to a language. What does this Gemara mean? They used to talk in Aramaic, and still do! (How was their language "cut off?") Rather, it means that they do not have an important royal language.

Opinion#3: It is also possible that this is based on the statement of the Bereishis Rabah that during the Dor ha'Flagah the ocean rose up and flooded many families from the seventy nations. The surviving nations were replenished from Yishmael and Keturah. It is therefore possible that each nation assumed one of the languages that had been destroyed as its language. However, Rome learned their language from a different nation (other than the original seventy nations).

Observation: The Gemara at this point could have brought the entire Beraisa that is quoted later, but instead quotes a small part of it.

Implied Question: The Gemara quotes someone who answered this contradiction by saying, "one is referring to his coronation, one is referring to his sons's coronation." (How could the Gemara have entertained that this would answer the question, when the Beraisa it just quoted from clearly negates this as an answer?)

Answer#1: The one who answered the question did not know the Beraisa as it is brought in its entirety later, but rather answered the question based on the part of the Beraisa quoted by the questioner.

Answer#2: It is also possible to say that this is certainly another Beraisa.

Implied Question: The Gemara could not have asked this question from our Mishnah. (Why not?)

Answer: The Mishnah implies that it is talking about two different people, as it uses the lengthy terminology, "The Genusya day of kings and the birthday." However, the Beraisa says, "The Genusya day and the birthday." This implies that it is referring to the same person.

Question#1: Rashi's opinion is difficult. Why did Rebbi originally tell Antoninus to kill his daughter?

Question#2: A further difficulty (with Rashi's explanation) is that Rebbi himself retracted this opinion on his own!

Opinion: It therefore appears that the explanation of Rabeinu Chananel and the Aruch is correct. They say that Antoninus sent a type of grass called a Gargira indicating that his daughter was Gira, meaning an adultress. This is as we find that the Targum Yerushalmi translates the Pasuk, "ha'Noef v'ha'Noa'fess" -- "the adulterer and the adulteress" as "Geira v'Geirasa."

Opinion (cont.): Rebbi sent Antoninus "Kusbarta" -- "oleander," as if to say, "Kasa" -- "cover" her embarrassment, and rebuke her privately. Antoninus did not understand Rebbi's message, and he thought that Rebbi meant that he should kill his daughter. He therefore sent him the "Karsi" -- leek" as if to say, "Do you want me to cut off (i.e. kill) my child?" Rebbi sent him back lettuce, as if to say that he meant "Chasa" -- "lettuce" which also can mean "have mercy" on her. In other words, Rebbi meant to indicate through this message that his original message was to cover up what happened, and rebuke her privately.

Question: Killing is one of the Seven Noahide Laws! (How could Antoninus have done this?) Even a Jew is not allowed to kill a gentile, as the Beraisa states (26a) that one is not allowed to kill a gentile and shepherd of small animals, although he does not have to save them.

Answer#1: Antoninus was scared that Roman officers would find out about this, and this would lead to his execution. We say, "If someone is coming to kill you, get up early to kill him (first)."

Answer#2: It is also possible that he would pick the guards who were heretics and Mosrim (people who handed over Jews to the government). While whether or not a gentile is a heretic is irrelevant when it comes to accepting their Korbanos, this does affect the law regarding killing them.

Proof: This is as the Gemara says in Chulin (13b), "Now that they would kill Jews (who are heretics), they would certainly kill idolaters (who were heretics)!"

Text: Rabeinu Elchanan says that we do not have the text, "if so." If he said this, Rebbi Chanina should have understood that the guard was dead. If he was sleeping, why would it show special power to be able to wake up the guard?

Observation: The Medrash says that milk can make one impure, and milk can make one pure. When Rebbi was born, there was a decree that boys should not be given a Bris Milah. Rebbi's father and mother gave him a Bris Milah anyway. The Caesar sent for Rebbi and his mother. Rebbi's mother quickly switched (Rebbi) with Antoninus, and she nursed Antoninus before she brought him to the Caesar. The Caesar saw the baby did not have a Bris, and let her go home. The officer who informed on them said, "I saw that this baby received a Bris Milah! It must be that Hash-m does miracles for them constantly!" They then proceeded to repeal the decree.

Observation (cont.): The Yerushalmi also states that Antoninus ended up learning Torah, converting, and giving himself a Bris Milah.

Text: We do not have the text, "Her officers, and not all of her officers," as the Pasuk says, "her kings, and all of her princes."

Opinion: The Ri states that "Nasi" in this context means the elder who is discussed in Josephus. The Romans pledged not to have a king, due to a king who forcibly took possession of a woman. They would therefore appoint an elder who would have three hundred advisers. However, after many years a person forced himself into being their ruler. His mother had died when she had given birth to him, and her stomach was split open and they found the baby alive. He ruled over them, and was called Caesar in Roman, which means split apart in Hebrew. All Roman kings thereafter were called "Caesar" based on his name.

Question: Didn't the Gemara earlier say that Antoninus was excluded, and that he received a portion in Olam Haba even without having a Bris Milah?

Answer: He also ended up having a Bris Milah. We have the text in the Yerushalmi in Megilah (ch.1) that Antoninus asked Rebbi, "Will you feed me from the Leviathan in the next world?" Rebbi said, "Yes." Antoninus asked, "You will not let me eat from the Korban Pesach, but you will let me eat from the Leviathan?!" Rebbi answered, "What should I do for you? The Pasuk says, "And anyone who is not circumcised cannot eat it." Once Antoninus heard this, he went and circumcised himself. This is why they said Antoninus converted.