Question (Beraisa): "Rovetz (crouching)" - not an animal that always crouches, nor an animal standing under its load;

"Tachas Masa'o" refers to a load that it can stand under. Also, this excludes an unloaded animal (that must be loaded again).

If pain to animals is mid'Oraisa, he should be obligated even if it always crouches or is standing!

Answer: The Tana is R. Yosi ha'Glili, who says that pain to animals is mid'Rabanan.

Support: The Beraisa says that "Tachas Masa'o" refers to a load that it can stand under. We know that R. Yosi ha'Glili expounds this way!

Question: The Beraisa cannot be R. Yosi ha'Glili!

(Seifa): "Tachas Masa'o" excludes an unloaded animal.

Question: What does this mean?

It cannot mean that there is no Mitzvah to load an unloaded animal. It says "Hakim Takim"!

Answer: Rather, there is no Mitzvah to load it for free, only for pay. This is like Chachamim!

Answer: Really, the Tana is R. Yosi. Regarding loading, he agrees with Chachamim.

(Beraisa) Suggestion: Perhaps "Ki Sir'eh" means when you will see, even from afar!

Rejection: "Ki Sifga (when you will encounter)."

Suggestion: Perhaps "Ki Sifga" means literally, when you will encounter (come close (Levush), i.e. within four Amos (Chidushei R. Yehonasan))!

Rejection: It says "Ki Sir'eh."

We fulfill both verses through seeing that is like encountering. Chachamim estimated, when it is one Ris (seven and a half Ris equals one Mil) away.

(Beraisa): He walks with it for four Mil.

(Rabah bar bar Chanah): This is for pay.

(Mishnah): Reuven's own Aveidah takes precedence over that of his father or Rebbi;

His Rebbi's Aveidah takes precedence over his father's.

This is because his father brought him to this world, but his Rebbi, who taught him Chachmah, brings him to life in the world to come;

If his father is a Chacham, his father's takes precedence.

If his father and Rebbi were carrying burdens, he helps his Rebbi unload, and then his father.

If his father and Rebbi were imprisoned, first he redeems his Rebbi, and then his father;

If his father is a Chacham, he redeems his father first.

(Gemara) Question: What is the source (that his own Aveidah takes precedence)?

Answer (Rav Yehudah): "Lo Yihyeh Becha Evyon" - do not make yourself poor (by abandoning your own Aveidah).

(Rav Yehudah): Anyone who is zealous to give precedence to his own Aveidah (he never goes beyond the letter of the law) will ultimately become poor.

(Mishnah): If his father and Rebbi were carrying burdens, he helps his Rebbi unload, and then his father.

(Beraisa - R. Meir): The Mishnah discusses his Rebbi who taught to him Chachmah (the reasons behind the Mishnayos and how to resolve difficulties), not the Rebbi who taught to him written Torah or the text of the Mishnayos;

R. Yehudah says, it is whomever he learned most of his Chachmah from;

R. Yosi says, even if he explained only one Mishnah to him, he is considered his Rebbi.

Rava: This is like Rav Sechorah, who explained to us 'Zuhama Listron' (a ladle to push aside the froth).

A Chacham explained to Shmuel one part of a Mishnah about opening the Mikdash.. Shmuel tore his clothing (like one does for his Rebbi) when the Chacham died.

(Ula): Chachamim in Bavel rise for each other and tear clothing over each other;

Regarding an Aveidah, they give precedence (over their fathers) only to their primary Rebbi.

Question (Rav Chisda): If the Rebbi needs a Talmid (to hear what the Talmid learned from others), what is the law?

Rav Huna: I don't need you. You need me!

They were upset with each other, and did not see each other for 40 years. Rav Chisda fasted 40 days for having pained his Rebbi. Rav Huna fasted 40 days for having suspected that Rav Chisda asked about himself.

(R. Yitzchak bar Yosef citing R. Yochanan): The Halachah follows R. Yehudah.

(Rav Acha bar Rav Huna): The Halachah follows R. Yosi.

Question: Did R. Yochanan really rule like R. Yehudah? R. Yochanan taught that the Halachah follows an anonymous Mishnah!

(Mishnah): ...His Rebbi that taught him Chachmah... (this is like R. Meir)!

Answer: It means 'that taught him most of his Chachmah.' It is like R. Yehudah.

(Beraisa): Learning oral Torah is good, but it is not best.

Learning Mishnah is good, and one is rewarded for it;

Learning Gemara is the greatest;

One should run to learn Mishnah more than Gemara.

Question: If Gemara is greatest, why should one run to learn Mishnah more than Gemara?!

Answer (R. Yochanan): In Rebbi's day, they taught that Gemara is greatest. Everyone abandoned Mishnah and engaged only in Gemara;

There was danger lest the Mishnah be forgotten. Therefore, Rebbi taught that learning Mishnah takes precedence.

Question: What was the source to say that Gemara is greatest?

Answer (R. Yehudah): "Haged l'Ami Pish'am (tell to My nation their transgression)" refers to Chachamim. Their Shegagos (mistaken rulings due to not understanding the reasons behind the Mishnayos) are considered like Mezid sins;

"Ul'Veis Yakov Chatosam" refers to ignoramuses. Their Mezid sins are considered Shogeg.

(Mishnah - R. Yehudah): Be careful in your learning. One is punished for an oversight in learning as for a Mezid sin.

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): "Ha'Charedim El Devaro (those diligent to His word)" are Chachamim. "Acheichem" are people who learn only oral Torah. "Sone'eichem" are people who only learn Mishnah (they are unqualified to decide Halachah, but do so anyway). Menadeichem" are ignoramuses (who shun Chachamim like Nidos).

"V'Nireh v'Simchaschem" - we will all rejoice.

"V'Hem Yevoshu" - Nochrim will be embarrassed, but Yisrael will rejoice.

(Mishnah): If Reuven deposited with Shimon (a Shomer Chinam) an animal or Kelim, and they were stolen or lost, Shimon could swear (that he was not negligent) and be exempt. If he paid and did not want to swear, and the thief was found, the thief pays Kefel (double, or four or five if a Kosher Behemah was slaughtered or sold) to Shimon;

If Shimon swore and did not want to pay, payments of Kefel, four or five go to Reuven.

(Gemara) Question: Why must the Mishnah list both an animal and Kelim?

Answer: It must teach both cases.

Had it taught only about an animal, one might have thought that only regarding an animal Reuven allows Shimon to acquire the (deposit, in order that he will acquire the) Kefel, for guarding an animal is a burden, but if he guarded Kelim, Reuven gets it;

Had it taught only about Kelim, one might have thought that Reuven allows Shimon to acquire, because the fine is only Kefel, it is never more, but the payment for an animal can be four or five, and he would not allow Shimon to acquire.

The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

Question (Rami bar Chama): A man cannot transfer ownership of something that is not yet in the world (i.e. Kefel)!

Even according to the opinion that a man can transfer ownership of something not yet in the world, that is only in cases such as fruits that will grow on a date tree, for they normally come. Here, who says that the deposit will be stolen?

And even if it is stolen, who says that the thief will be found? And even if he is found, perhaps he will admit, and not pay the fine!