1)

(a)Rava maintains that there are - three and a third Dinrim in one Torah's Sela.

(b)He proves it based on Unklus' translation of the Pasuk in Ki Sissa, which writes, in connection with the Shekel ha'Kodesh "Esrim Geirah ha'Shekel" - which Unk'lus translates as twenty Ma'ah.

(c)He then cites a Beraisa which states - that one Dinar comprises six Ma'ah ...

(d)... a proof that three and a third Dinrim equal twenty Ma'ah, or one Sela.

2)

(a)We query Rava however, from another Beraisa, which queries the Toras Kohanim, where the Tana gives the redeeming price for each Chomer of barley-seeds of forty-nine Sela'im and forty nine Pundiyonin eight Sela and forty nine Pundiyon - which is the equivalent of fifty Sela'im and one Pundiyonim.

(b)The problem with the Toras Kohanim is that - in reality, there are forty eight Pundiyonin in a Sela, in which case the Tana ought to have said forty-nine Sela'im and forty-eight Pundiyonin, which is the equivalent ot fifty Sela'im. So what is the significance of the extra Pundiyon?

(c)To which the Beraisa answers - that Chazal added one Pundiyon for each section of field in which one can sow a Chomer of barley seeds, as an exchanging fee.

(d)The Kashya on Rav is that, based on the Gemara in Kidushin, which states that there are six Ma'ah in a Dinar and two Pundiyon in each Ma'ah, it transpires that - since we said above that forty eight Pundiyon make up one Sela, and we also know that twelve Pundyon make one Dinar, there must be four Dinrim in a Sela, and not three and a third, as Rava said.

(e)To reconcile Rava with the Beraisa, we establish the latter - after they raised the value of the Sela by a sixth, whereas Rava is speaking about the original value of the Sela, before it was raised.

3)

(a)In connection with what we just explained, we learn from ...

1. ... the word "Yih'yeh" (in the Pasuk in Bechukosai "Esrim Geirah Yih'yeh ha'Shekel") - that Beis-Din may add to the value of the Shekel.

2. ... the word "Hu" (in the Pasuk in Korach "Esrim Geirah Hu") - that one is not permitted to devalue it.

(b)When, assuming each Shekel to be worth three and a third Zuz, as Rava taught above, Rav Ashi sent Rav Acha, the son of Ravina (who was a Kohen), seventeen Dinrim for Pidyon ha'Ben, he asked for a third of a Zuz change.

(c)But Rav Acha informed him - that, since they had recently raised the value of the Shekel to four Zuzim, it was Rav Ashi who now owed him a further three Shekalim, and not the other way round.

4)

(a)'Kesef'...

1. ... in the Torah refers to a Sela ...

2. ... in Nevi'im, to Litrin (another name for a Manah - twenty five Sela), and ...

3. ... in Kesuvim, it refers to Kintrin (the equivalent of one hundred Shekel)

(b)The one exception to the current rules is the four hundred Shekel that Avraham paid for the Me'oras ha'Machpeilah, which he paid in Kintrin ...

(c)... which we learn from the fact that Efron asked for coins that were "Over la'Socher", and since there are such places where they refer to their Shekalim as 'Kintrin', that is what Avraham gave to Efron.

5)

(a)Rebbi Oshaya initially thinks that the Chachamim ...

1. ... wanted to hide all the silver and gold in the world, because it was mixed with the silver and gold that was plundered from the Beis-ha'Mikdash, and was therefore Hekdesh. To use it therefore, would have constituted Me'ilah (misappropriation of Hekdesh).

2. ... then decided otherwise - based on the Pasuk in Yechezkel "u'Va'u Paritzim ve'Chileluhu", which suggests that when Hekdesh money is subjected to abuse, is goes out to Chulin.

(b)We refute that contention however - because the money of Hekdesh did not constitute the majority of the money in the world.

(c) The Gemara therefore concludes - that it must have been the Dinrim of the eras of the Emperors Hadrian and Turian, most of which came from the plunder of the Beis-ha'Mikdash, that they wanted to hide.

6)

(a)Rav Yehudah in the name of Rav Asi initially categorizes ...

1. ... the Torah's "Shekel" as - a Sela Tzuri (i.e. four Dinrim).

2. ... the Torah's "Kesef" as - Kesef Tzuri (i.e. a Sela)

3. ... 'Kesef' of the Rabanan as Kesef mi'Dinah (one eighth of an equivalent Tzuri coin).

(b)We query Rav Yehudah from the Mishnah in Shevu'os, which states 'ha'Ta'anah Sh'tei Kesef' - in connection with a Shomer Chinam who received money or vessels and from whom the owner is now claiming and over which he must swear (in answer to the owner's claim which he partially denies).

(c)'Sh'tei Kesef' is - two Ma'ah (a third of a Dinar) ...

(d)... a Kashya on Rav Yehudah, who maintains that 'Kesef' in the Torah is always a Dinar.

7)

(a)We answer by quoting the Pasuk in question "Kesef O Keilim". When we say 'Mah Keilim Sh'nayim, Af Kesef Shenayim', we mean - that just as 'Keilim' implies two, and even if they are not valuable, so too does 'Kesef' mean two coins that are not valuable.

(b)This answer the Kashya - inasmuch as we have reduced the coins to Isrim, which are not valuable, from Dinrim, which are.

(c)Incidentally, we learn from the Hekesh of Keilim to Kesef - that, just as Kesef has some intrinsic value, so too, must the Keilim.

8)

(a)The Gemara then queries Rav Yehudah from the Mishnah in Ma'aser Sheini and from Shmuel, with regard to Hekdesh. The Mishnah discusses how much of a sum of P'rutos of Ma'aser Sheini one is allowed to change to take to Yerushalayim. Shmuel rules that a Manah's worth of Hekdesh that one redeemed with something to the value of a P'rutah - is duly redeemed.

(b)The Pasuk writes in ...

1. ... Re'ei "Vetzarta ha'Kesef be'Yad'cha" in connection with - Ma'aser Sheini.

2. ... Bechukosai "Venasan ha'Kesef ve'Kam lo" (though these are not the exact words that the Torah uses) - in connection with redeeming a field of Hekdesh ...

(c)... creating a problem with Rav Yehudah Amar Rav Asi - who maintains that wherever the Torah writes "Kesef", one must use a silver Shekel (and not copper P'rutos).

(d)We answer the Kashya ...

1. ... from the Mishnah in Ma'aser Sheini - by attributing the ruling to fact that the Torah writes "Kesef" there twice (to include payment of any demonination).

2. ... from Shmuel - by citing the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Kodesh" "Kodesh" from Ma'aser.

9)

(a)Once again, we query Rav Yehudah Amar Rav Asi from the Mishnah in Kidushin, where Beis Shamai give the minimum amount of Kidushei Ishah as a Dinar or the value of a Dinar. According to Beis Hillel - it is a P'rutah.

(b)We learn Kidushei Kesef from the words "Ein Kasef" (in the Pasuk in Mishpatim ([n connection with an Amah Ivriyah]) - "Veyatz'ah Chinam Ein Kasef") - by Darshening 'Ein Kasef le'Adon Zeh (the Amah'ha'Ivriyah's master) Aval Yesh Kesef le'Adon Acher' (her husband).

(c)The problem once again, is - that, if, as Rav claims, Kesef means a silver Dinar, how can Beis Hillel permit a P'rutah?

(d)We ...

1. ... initially try to reconcile Rav Yehudah with the Mishnah in Kidushin - by establishing him like Beis Shamai.

2. ... finally amend reconcile him with Beis Hillel his statement however - by confining his statement to "Kesef" that is fixed (such as the fifty Shekalim of Oneis and Mefateh and the thirty Shekalim of Eved) , which is Kesef Tzuri in d'Oraysas.

10)

(a)The problem we still have with the first half of Rav Yehudah's amended statement is - that it is already contained in our Mishnah, with regard to the five Sela'im of Pidyon ha'Ben.

(b)To answer the Kashya - we establish the Chidush in the second half of his statement ('and Kesef Medinah in de'Rabbanans').

(c)Consequently, the Sela that the Mishnah in Bava Kama obligates someone who strikes his friend across the ear (or who blows a Shofar in his ear) to pay - means a Sela Medinah (hald a Zuz) ...

(d)... and not four Zuzim.

11)

(a)Chanan 'Bisha' - (the wicked) once struck his friend across the ear (or blew Shofar in his ear).

(b)Rav Huna ruled - that he Chayav to pay him half a Zuz (as we just learned).

(c)But he only had on him a poor-quality Zuz which was unependable. So he repeated the performance and paid him the entire Zuz.