1)

(a)The Beraisa rules that someone whose throat hurts him - may not drink olive-oil on Shabbos (See Tosfos DH 'Lo Ye'ar'enu') ...

(b)The Chachamim forbade ingesting foods that are not normally eaten by healthy people on Shabbos lest one come to grind herbs to produce medicine.

(c)To alleviate the pain however, the Tana does allow him - to add a lot of olive-oil to Aave prnigron (which we just discussed) and to drink it as a beverage.

(d)We have now established the case concerning the ruling of Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel ... , who requires 'Borei P'ri ha'Eitz over olive-oil.

2)

(a)Despite the fact that the olive-oil is the major ingredient, we might otherwise have thought - that since he is only drinking the mixture as a cure, it does require any B'rachah at all.

(b)And the reason that one does is - because, at the end of the day, it does have a pleasant taste.

3)

(a)Over wheat-flour, Rav Yehudah requires the B'rachah 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah'. According to Rav Nachman - one recites 'Shehakol'.

(b)Rava queried Rav Nachman ('Don't argue with Rav Yehudah!') from the previous ruling of Shmuel and Rebbi Yochanan, in that - just as there, although the olive has changed its form, it retains its initial B'rachah, so too here.

(c)We reject the proof from there however in that - whereas there is nothing better than olive-oil to manufacture from the olives, here there is something better than flour to manufacture out of the wheat, and that is bread.

4)

(a)We query this theory too however, based on a statement of Rebbi Zeira ... Amar Shmuel, who rules that one recites - 'Shehakol' over a raw gourd and barley-flour,

(b)We initially extrapolate that over wheat-flour, one then recites - 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah'.

(c)We refute the proof however by suggesting - that one recites 'Shehakol' over wheat-flour too, and that Shmuel saw fit to mention specifically barley-flour - which we would otherwise have thought does not require a B'rachah at all.

(d)... even though salt and salt-water do - because it creates worms in the stomach.

5)

(a)And the reason that we nevertheless recite a B'rachah over barley-flour - is because (in spite of the hazard) one enjoys it.

(b)The B'rachah one recites over salt and salt-water is - 'Shehakol' ...

(c)... as we will learn in a Mishnah later in the Perek.

6)

(a)Shmuel and Rav Yehudah argue over the B'rachah one makes over 'Korei' - the newly-grown branch that of a date-palm that is initially soft and edible, but becomes hard (and turns into a Lulav) the following year.

(b)According to Rav Yehudah, one recites 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah'. Shmuel says - 'Shehakol'.

(c)Rav Yehudah argues that technically it is a Peira. Shmuel - counters that it is going to become hard.

(d)Shmuel prove from a radish, over which one recites 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah' even though it will eventually become hard - that something which is destined to become hard does not lose its B'rachah.

(e)We refute Shmuel's proof however - since whereas one plants the radish-seed in order to eat the radish, one does not not plant a date-palm in order to eat the branches.

7)

(a)We query the current refutation from a 'Tz'laf' - a caper-bush.

(b)The 'Parcha' - is the caper (the fruit of the Tz'laf).

(c)The Mishnah discusses 'kinds of Nitzpeh' - which is another name of Tz'laf.

(d)The Tana refer to 'kinds' of Nitzpeh - because it contains so many different kinds of edible parts.

8)

(a)The B'rachah the Mishnah require for ...

1. ... the leaves and the berries of the Tz'laf - is 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah'.

2. ... the Evyonos (the capers [synonymous with the Parcha]) and the Kafrisin (the peel that grows round the fruit) - 'Borei P'ri ha'Eitz.

(b)The problem is - that there too, one recites a B'rachah over the secondary parts of the tree?

(c)Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak explains - that, unlike the soft Lulav-branch, which one does ot have in mind to eat when planting it, a person who plants a caper-bush actually has in mind to eat all the various sections of the tree ...

(d)... since that will not detract one iota from the tree.

(e)In spite of Shmuel's support of Rav Yehudah, the Halachah is - like Shmuel (that the B'rachah over Korei is 'Shehakol).

9)

(a)Rav Yehudah Amar Rav declares Asur the Evyonos of a Tz'laf of Orlah in Chutz la'Aretz, but permits the Kafrisin.

(b)The problem with this is that the Mishnah regarding Tz'laf that we just quoted - considers the Kafrisin fruit, as well?

(c)We answer by establishing Rav Yehudah like Rebbi Akiva in Ma'asros. Rebbi Eliezer there rules that the berries, the capers and peels are subject to Ma'asros, whereas Rebbi Akiva colnfines the Din of Ma'asros to the Evyonos exclusively.

10)

(a)Had Rav Yehudah simply said 'Halachah ke'Rebbi Akiva' - we would have thought that it is like him in Eretz Yisrael too, whereas in reality ...

(b)... we have a principle that - 'Whoever is lenient in Eretz Yisrael, the Halachah is like him in Chutz la'Aretz, but not in Eretz Yisrael'.

(c)And the reason that he did not say 'Halachah ke'Rebbi Akiva be'Chutzah la'Aretz' is - we would have restricted the ruling to Ma'aser of fruit-trees, which are only de'Rabbanan, but with regard to Orlah, which is d'Oraysa, the Halachah is like the Chachamim even in Chutz la'Aretz.

11)

(a)Ravina found Mar bar Rav Ashi throwing away - the Evyonos and eating - the Kafrisin.

(b)Considering that he lived in Bavel, he held like - Rebbi Akiva.

(c)Ravina queried Mar bar Rav Ashi from a Beraisa, where Beis Shamai considers Tz'laf Kil'ayim be'Kerem. thereby classifying Tz'laf as - a vegetable.

(d)Beis Hillel rules - that it is not ...

(e)... because he considers Tz'laf a fruit.

12)

(a)Both Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel agree that Tz'laf is subject to Orlah.

(b)The problem with Beis Shamai is - that according to the latter ruling, Tz'laf is a fruit, whereas we just proved that they classify it as a vegetable.

(c)To resolve it - we establish that Beis Shamai has a Safek as to whether Tz'laf is a fruit or a vegetable.

(d)The Mishnah in Orlah rules that Safek Orlah in ...

1. ... Eretz Yisrael - is Asur.

2. ... Syria - is Mutar

3. ... Chutz la'Aretz - is Mutar ...

(e)... provided the Yisrael goes down to the Nochri's field and buys from him without seeing from which tree the Nochri picks it.

13)

(a)What Ravina now ask why Mar bar Rav Ashi - did not eat even the Evyonos of the Tz'laf - like Beis Shamai, who is even more lenient than Rebbi Akiva.

(b)We answer the Kashya - that although there is no problem to hold like Rebbi Akiva against Rebbi Eliezer, 'Beis Shamai in the place of Beis Hillel is not a Mishnah', in which case, it was Safek Orlah but Vaday.

14)

(a)We ask further that, based on the word "Es" (in the Pasuk in Kedoshim "va'Afraltem Orlaso es Piryo"), even according to Rebbi Akiva, the Kafrisin ought to be considered Orlah. "Es" implies - what is secondary to the fruit ...

(b)... from which we learn that Orlah applies even to a Shomer.

(c)Rava resolves the problem - by explaining that, despite "Es", Kafrisin do not have the Din of a Shomer - since they only guard the fruit as long as it attached to the tree, but not once it is detached.

15)

(a)Abaye queries Rava's answer from a Mishnah in Uktzin that discusses what does and what doesn't, combine with a pomegranate to make up a Shi'ur k'Beitzah - with regard to renderring it subject to Tum'as Ochlin.

(b)The Tana there rules that ...

1. ... the Pitma (the flower) at one end of a pomegranate - combines with the fruit, whereas ...

2. ... the Netz (the fluff) at the other end - does not.

(c)... indicating that the fluff is not considered fruit. Yet ...

(d)... the Mishnah says in Orlah that ...

1. ... the peel and the Netz of a pomegranate, as well as ...

2. ... the peels of nuts and their pits - are all subject to Orlah ...

(e)... in spite of the fact that the Netz falls off once the pomegranate is picked (posing a Kashya on Rava)?

16)

(a)Consequently, the criterion of the Shomer of a fruit is not connected to whether it is a Shomer after it has become detached, Rava redefines the criterion of what makes a Shomer a Shomer as being - that it must still be a Shomer when the fruit becomes fully ripe ...

(b)... which the Kafrisin of Tz'laf are not.

17)

(a)We query this answer of Rava too, from a statement of Rav Nachman regarding 'Masch'li' - a layer that grows round the dates (like the Kafrisin of Tz'laf).

(b)Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah declared that Masch'li are subject to Orlah - because it is a Shomer.

(c)... a Kashya on Rava - since it is only a Shomer when the dates are still small (but not when they are ripe).

18)

(a)We answer that Rav Nachman holds like Rebbi Yossi in connection with S'mader - fruit in its early stages.

(b)Rebbi Yossi says - that S'mader of Orlah is Asur.

(c)Rava on the other hand - holds like the Rabbanan, who maintain that fruit only adopts the Din of fruit when it reaches completion.

19)

(a)Rav Shimi from Neherda'a queries Rava from a Mishnah in Shevi'is, which discusses from which stage one is prohibited from cutting down fruit-trees in the Sh'mitah. Beis Chamai say 'mi'she'Yotzi'u' - from the time they produce the fruit (or the leaves [See Gilyon ha'Shas]).

(b)Beis Hillel agree with Beis Shamai regarding most fruit, but gives different stages for carob-trees, vines, and olive-trees. The stage for carob-trees is from the time that the fruit develops the shape of a chain (mi'she'Yashrishu'), for vines, mi'she'Yigre'u' and for olive-trees mi'she'Yanitz'u - from the time that it produces blossoms.

(c)Rav Asi equates mi'she'Yigre'u with Boser and Pul ha'Lavan (a white bean). Since it is obvious that grapes are not beans, he must mean - that the fruit has attained the size of a white bean.

(d)'Boser' means when the fruit has adopted its shape, whereas 'S'mader' means when the blossoms fall off.

20)

(a)Bearing in mind that the Tana gives the Tana considers Boser a fruit and not S'mader, the author of the Mishnah must be - the Chachamim of Rebbi Yossi.

(b)We now extrapolate from the Mishnah that - even though they argue with Rebbi Yossi with regard to dates, they concede that other fruits (including Tz'laf) are considered fruit even before the fruit reaches completion (a Kashya on Rava).

(c)Rava finally resolved the problem ( as to why Kafrisin of Tz'laf are not considered fruit even though they do protect the Evyonos - because it is only considered a Shomer if, once removed, the fruit dies.

(d)When they once removed the peel of ...

1. ... a pomegranate - the pomegranate died.

2. ... a Tzlaf - it survived without the peel.

(e)Based on the Gemara's conclusion with regard to the Kafrisin (the peel of theTz'laf), the B'rachah one recites over it is - 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah'.

21)

(a)According to Rav Sheishes, over peppers one recites 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah'. Rava maintains - that one does recite a B'rachah at all.

(b)Rava follows his reasoning elsewhere. He said that if someone eats peppers or ginger on Yom Kipur - is Patur.

(c)He refers to it as 'Kas Pilp'li ...') - because this is the correct word to use with regard to anything that one does not normally eat.

22)

(a)We query Rava however, from a Beraisa, in which Rebbi Meir asks that, in the Pasuk in Kedoshim (in connection with Orlah) " ... u'Neta'tem Kol Eitz Ma'achal va'Araltem Orlaso es Piryo", "Kol Eitz Ma'achal" - having written "va'Araltem Orlaso es Piryo", the words "Kol Eitz Ma'achal" appear superfluous?

(b)How does he therefore interprets "Kol Eitz Ma'achal" - with reference to a pepper-tree, which has the same taste as the fruit ...

(c)... and it is coming to teach us 0 that a pepper-tree is subject to Orlah.

(d)And he connects this with the Pasuk in Eikev "Eretz asher Lo be'Miskeinus Tochal bah Lechem, Lo Sechsar Kol bah" - by explaining the latter with regard to a pepper-tree, inasmuch as nothing is missing from Eretz Yisrael, even pepper-trees!

23)

(a)The Kashya on Rava is that - seeing as a pepper-tree is subject to Orlah, its fruit require\ the B'rachah of 'Borei P'ri ha'Eitz' (which is not what Rava just said).

(b)We reconcile Rava with the Beraisa - by establishing the latter by moist peppers, and Rava by dry ones.

(c)Rava ruled that someone who eats ginger on Yom Kipur - is Patur.

(d)When the Rabbanan (or Ravina) cited this ruling to Mereimar, the latter queried it from the case of crushed ginger with honey that came from India - where Rava ruled that ...

1. ... one they were permitted (Kashrus-wise) ...

2. ... and that they required the B'rachah 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah'.

(e)They answered - that the latter ruling refers to moist ginger, whereas the former one refers to dry ginger.

24)

(a)We now discuss the B'rachah that one recites over Chavitz Kidra - (a dish consisting of curdled milk, flour honey and oil) and Daysa (a dish of pounded grain).

(b)According to Rav Yehudah, one recites 'Shehakol'. Rav Kahana says - 'Borei Miynei Mezonos'.

(c)Rav Yehudah concedes that the B'rachah for plain Daysa is 'Borei Miynei Mezonos', and they argue over Daysa that resembles Chavitz Kidra - in that it contains honey.

(d)The basis of their Machlokes is - whether the main ingredient is the honey (Rav Yehudah) or the flour (Rav Kahana).

(e)Rav Yosef accepts the opinion of Rav Kahana, based on a ruling of Rav and Shmuel who rule - that over any food which contains one of the five species of grain - one recites 'Borei Miynei Mezonos'.

25)

(a)Rav and Shmuel also said that any food that comprises the five species of grain - requires 'Borei Miynei Mezonos'.

(b)Having issued ...

1. ... the latter ruling (regarding any food that comprises the five species ... ), they nevertheless saw fit to issue the former one (regarding any food that contains ... ) - to teach us that the five species require 'Borei Miynai Mezonos' even when they are mixed with other foods.

2. ... the former ruling, they nevertheless saw fit to issue the latter one, since we otherwise have thought that rice and millet (that are not mixed into another food) too, require 'Borei Miynei Mezonos'.