1)

(a)The problem with the Beraisa which rules like Beis Hillel with regard to the correct order of the B'rachos over wine and Kidush - is why such a ruling is necessary, seeing as we already know from the Bas-Kol (the Heavenly Voice, that the Halachah is always like Beis Hillel.

(b)One answer is that the Beraisa preceded the Bas-Kol; the other one - that the Beraisa follows the opinion of Rebbi Yehoshua, who does not abide by the Bas-Kol (because he declared 'Lo ba'Shamayim Hi'! [See Tosfos]).

2)

(a)We query Beis Shamai (who gives precedence to Kidush over wine) from a Beraisa, which discusses the order of B'rachos regarding a person who arrives home from Shul on Motza'ei Shabbos ('Yayin, Ma'or, Besamim, Havdalah'). If he does not have any spare wine for Kos shel B'rachah after eating, he uses the one Kos that he has for Birchas ha'Mazon, and recites Havdalah afterwards on the same cup of wine.

(b)The problem now is - that here the Tana gives wine precedence over Havdalah, whereas in our Mishnah, Beis Shamai gives precedence to Kidush over wine.

(c)The juxtaposition of the two B'rachos Ner and Besamim teaches us that the author of the Beraisa is Beis Shamai.

(d)And who is the who presents the Machlokes Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel in this regard?

(e)According to Rebbi Yehudah - Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel both agree that Mazon precedes Havdalah.

3)

(a)We suggest that the author of the Beraisa is Beis Shamai according to Rebbi Meir (who is the author of their Machlokes in our Mishnah and) who said - that Ner precedes Besamim.

(b)We refute this suggestion however, based on the positioning in our Mishnah of Mazon - before Havdalah.

(c)To resolve the discrepancy, we draw a distinction between bringing Shabbos in - (as soon as possible) and accompanying Shabbos out (as late as possible) ...

(d)... in order to avoid creating the impression that Shabbos isa burden (of which we wish to rid ourselves as soon as possible).

4)

(a)We now query Beis Shamai from a Beraisa whihold ch states that if wine arrived only at the end of the meal, one recites a B'rachah over it and then Benches. Assuming that 'recites a B'rachah over it' means that he then drank it, we now ask on Beis Shamai - that here he seems to hold that one does Birchas ha'Mazon does not require a Kos shel B'rachah, whereas in the Mishnah he holds that it does?

(b)We object to the answer that ...

1. ... after reciting the B'rachah he Benched with it, and drank it only afterwards - from a statement of Mar who ruled that the Mevarech is obligated to drink from the Kos.

2. ... he drank from it and Benched over the rest of the Kos - from the statement of Mar 'Ta'amo Pogmo' (if one tastes the wine in the Kos, it becomes disqualifies from being used as a 'Kos shel B'rachah').

3. ... he drank from the wine that he poured into his hands - inasmuch (assuming that the Kos holds exactly a Revi'is), he will nevertheless have detracted from the Shi'ur Kos.

4. ... the cup initially contained a little more than the Shi'ur - since the Tana specifically says that it speaks where there is only one Kos (implying one Shi'ur).

(c)We refute the final objection however - by establishing the case where there was one full Kos containing slightly more than one Sh'iur but not sufficient for two.

(d)We reinstate the Kashya however, by citing a Beraisa learned by Rebbi Chiya, which quoting Beis Shamai, rules in the current case, where one recites a B'rachah over the wine and then Benches, that one actually drinks the wine immediately.

(e)We finally resolve the discrepancy in Beis Shamai - by turning it into a Machlokes Tana'im as to what Beis Shamai holds.

5)

(a)According to Beis Shamai in our Mishnah, one first washes one's hands and then pours out the Kos. They are referring to - wine that arrived at the table before they began the meal ...

(b)... which they want to drink before commencing the meal.

(c)The reason the Beraisa gives for Beis Shamai's ruling is - because they are afraid that if one were to pour out the wine first - perhaps one's Tamei hands will touch the back of the Kos and render the wine at the back of the Kos Tamei, which in turn, wiill render the Kos Tamei.

(d)They are not afraid that his hands will render the Kos Tamei anyway- because hands are Sheniyos le'Tum'ah, and a Sheini does not make a Sh'lishi in Chulin.

6)

(a)According to Beis Hillel, one first pours out the wine. They are afraid that if one were to wash one hands first - then the Kos will perhaps render Tamei the water that remains on his hands, which in turn will render Tamei the hands themselves.

(b)They are not afraid that the Kos will render his hands Tamei anyway - since a K'li cannot be Metamei a person directly.

(c)To explain why the Kos is not Metamei the wine that it contains, based on a Mishnah in Keilim, we establish the case - where the back of the Kos is Tamei but not the inside.

(d)Liquids are generally - a Sheini le'Tu'ah.

7)

(a)The Mishnah there says that if the outside of a receptacle becomes Tamei via Tamei liquids, then ...

1. ... the inside ...

2. ... its rim and its various handles - remain Tahor.

(b)Whereas if the Tamei liquid rendered the inside Tamei - the entire K'li is Tamei.

8)

(a)Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel argue over whether one is permitted to use a K'li whose back became Tamei via liquid (Beis Hillel) or not (Beis Shamai), due to a decree - in case drops of wine splash on to the back of the Kos.

(b)Beis Hillel do not hold of the decree (which explains why they are afraid of the Kos being Metamei the liquid on his hands) - since drops are not common.

9)

(a)Following their previous reason, Beis Hillel in our Mishnah add a second reason 'Teikef li'Netilas Yadayim, Se'udah' - meaning that one should eat immediately after washing one's hands ...

(b)... and what they are actually saying to Beis Shamai is - that, even if it would be forbidden to use a Kos whose back is Tamei, as Beis Shamai maintain, one would need to pour out the Kos first, in order to wash as close to the meal as possible.

10)

(a)According to Beis Shamai in our Mishnah, one wipes one's hands on the designated cloth which one then places on the table. They are afraid that, if one were to place it on the cushion on which one is leaning - the cushion will render the cloth Tamei, and the cloth in turn, will be Metamei one's hands.

(b)They are not afraid that the cushion will be Metamei ...

1. ... the cloth - since one K'li cannot be Metamei another.

2. ... the person himself - because a K'li cannot be Metamei a person.

(c)According to Beis Hillel, after drying one's hands, one places the cloth on the cushion. They are afraid that if one were to place it on the table - the table will be Metamei the water on the cloth, which will then be Metamei the food.

(d)To explain why the table does not render the food Tamei we establish the status of the table - as a Sheini le'Tum'ah, which cannot make a Shelishi by Chulin.

11)

(a)The basis of the Machlokes between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel is - whether one is permitted to use a table that is a Sheini le'Tum'ah (Beis Hillel) or not (Beis Shamai).

(b)Beis Shamai's reason is - a decree on account of Kohanim who eat T'rumah.

(c)Beis Hillel disagree with the decree - because Kohanim are careful, and no decree is necessary.

12)

(a)The second reason Beis Hillel in our Mishnah add to explain why we are more concerned about the food becoming Tamei than the hands is - because 'Ein Netilas Yadayim le'Chulin min ha'Torah'.

(b)What are they actually saying to Beis Shamai is - even if you will ask why should we be more concerned about the food than about the hands, it is nevertheless preferable to be, due the the principle 'Ein Netilas Yadayim ... ' (in other words, min ha'Torah, hands cannot becoming Tamei, food can).

13)

(a)According to Beis Shamai in our Mishnah, one first sweeps and then washes Mayim Acharonim requires that one sweeps before washing Mayim Acharonim, because - if one were to wash first, one would be liable to pour some of the Tamei water on the pieces of bread, rendering them inedible.

(b)Beis Hillel is not worried about that, because, they say - the Shamash will remove the pieces of bread that are larger than a k'Zayis, and we are not concerned about pieces of bread that are smaller than a k'Zayis.

(c)We learn from Beis Hillel - that one may destroy crumbs that are smaller than a K'zayis.

(d)The basis of their Machlokes is - whether one is permitted to make use of a Talmid-Chacham as a Shamash (who knows that one has to remove 'crumbs' that are larger than a k'Zayis before Mayim Acharonim [Beis Hillel]) or not (Beis Shamai).

14)

(a)Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina Amar Rav Huna - rules like Beis Hillel in all the cases in the Perek except for the current one.

(b)Rebbi Oshaya agrees with Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina's ruling on the one hand, yet he Paskens like Beis Hillel in the entire Perek, including this case - by switching the opinions of Beis Hillel and Beis Shamai.

15)

(a)According to Beis Shamai in our Mishnah, the order of priorities is 'Ner, Mazon, Besamim, Havdalah'. The order of priorities according to Beis Hillel is - 'Ner, Besamim, Mazon, Havdalah'.

(b)Rav Huna bar Yehudah, a guest of Rava, was surprised when he saw his host - recite the B'rachah over Besamim before Ner (like neither opinion in our Mishnah?).

(c)In reply, Rava pointed out that our Mishnah follows the opinion of Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa. Rebbi Meir's disputant there is - Rebbi Yehudah.

16)

(a)Rebbi Yehudah in the Beraisa states - that both Tana'im agree that the first B'rachah is 'Mazon' and the last, 'Havdalah'.

(b)And their dispute concerns 'Ner' and 'Besamim', which is the order according to ...

1. ... Beis Shamai, whereas ...

2. ... according to Beis Hillel - it is 'Besamim' and 'Ner'.

(c)Rebbi Yochanan commented on this double Machlokes - that the people have the Minhag to do like Beis Hillel, according to Rebbi Yehudah.

17)

(a)According to Beis Shamai in our Mishnah, the correct wording for the B'rachah over fire is 'she'Bara Ma'or ha'Eish'. Beis Hillel say - 'Borei Me'orei ha'Eish'.

(b)Both opinions agree that 'Bara' implies the past - because the B'rachah of Ner during Havdalah commemorates Adam \ha'Rishon's discovery of man-made fire ...

(c)... on Motza'ei Shabbos.

(d)Rabah explains the Machlokes - as to whether'Borei' can refer to the past (Beis Hillel) or not (Beis Shamai).

(e)According to Beis Shamai, one cannot say 'Borei Me'orei ha'Eish' - since it refers to the ongoing present, and light has already ben created.

18)

(a)Rav Yosef queries Rabah from the Pesukim "Yotzer Or u'Vorei Choshech", "Yotzer Harim u'Borei Ru'ach" and "Borei Shamayim ve'Noteihem" - all of which prove that 'Borei' can refer to the ongoing present too.

(b)Rav Yosef therefore concludes that they do not argue over "Bara" and "Borei" both of which can refer to the past (See Tosfos DH 'be'Bara'). And their Machlokes is confined to - whether we say 'Ma'or' (Beis Shamai) or 'Me'orei' (Beis Hillel).

(c)How does he explain the source of their Machlokes?

19)

(a)We ask why the Ner belonging to an Akum is not eligible to be used for Havdalah. Why does the Besamim of a Nochri not present a problem?

(b)Rav Yehudah Amar Rav establishes the Mishnah a group of Nochrim who have gathered to party. How does that answer the Kashya?

(c)What is the problem with this answer from the Seifa?

(d)How does Rebbi Chanina from Sura answer that Kashya?