1)
(a)We learned in our Mishnah 'va'Chachamim Omrim, Maga T'reifah Shechutah', implying that a T'reifah Shechutah is Metamei. How does Shmuel's father reconcile this with the fact that it is not?
(b)How did Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa, according to Rava (or Kadi)'s amendment, counter the Rabbanan ...
1. ... who declared Tahor a limb (that the fetus sticks out) due to the Shechitah of its mother?
2. ... when they replied that from the Shechitah of a T'reifah we can learn that sometimes a Shechitah disposes of the Tum'ah, without permitting the animal to be eaten?
(c)And how do the Rabbanan counter Rebbi Meir from the opening Mishnah in the Perek 'Chotech min ha'Ubar she'be'Me'eha'?
(d)All this is based on Rava's amendment of the Beraisa. What proof do we have that Rava's text is correct?
1)
(a)We learned in our Mishnah 'va'Chachamim Omrim, Maga T'reifah Shechutah', implying that a T'reifah Shechutah is Metamei. Shmuel's father reconciles this with the fact that it is not - by establishing our Mishmah specifically by a Kodshim animal.
(b)Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa, according to Rava (or Kadi)'s amendment, counters the Rabbanan ...
1. ... who declare Tahor a limb (that the fetus stuck out) due to the Shechitah of its mother - by suggesting that if that were so, then it should aalso be permitted to eat.
2. ... when they replied that from the Shechitah of a T'reifah we can learn that sometimes Shechitah dispenses with the Tum'ah, without permitting the animal to be eaten - by restricting that to the limb of the Ubar (which is not part of the animal itself), but not to the limb of a T'reifah.
(c)On the other hand, the Rabbanan counter Rebbi Meir from the opening Mishnah in the Perek 'Chotech min ha'Ubar she'be'Me'eha' - where we see that, a foreign body is actually better than the animal itself.
(d)All this is based on Rava's amendment of the Beraisa, which we know to be correct - because another Beraisa corroborates it word for word.
2)
(a)What does Resh Lakish mean when he states that just as Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan argue over Ubrin, so too, do they argue over Evarin?
(b)What does Rebbi Yochanan say?
(c)How does Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina explain Rebbi Yochanan? What makes Evarin worse than Ubrin, according to the Rabbanan?
2)
(a)When Resh Lakish states that, just as Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan argue over Ubrin, so too, do they argue over Evarin, he means that - they also argue over whether the Shechitah of an animal renders a loose limb (Eiver ha'Meduldal) Tahor or not, just as they argue over the limb of an Ubar.
(b)According to Rebbi Yochanan - even the Rabbanan will agree that the Shechitah of the animal renders any loose limbs Neveilah (because Shechitah Osah Nipul [the Shechitah completes the act of severing the limb]).
(c)Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina ascribes this to the fact that - the limb of an Ubar can revert to its original Heter (in the event that it withdraws the limb, as Rebbi Yochanan explained earlier), whereas a loose limb cannot.
3)
(a)We query the current version of the Machlokes between Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish however, from the Beraisa that we cited earlier, where Rebbi Meir said 'Lo, Im Tiharah Shechitas T'reifah osah ve'es ha'Eiver ha'Meduldal bah, Davar she'Gufah ... '. How will Resh Lakish explain the Beraisa (seeing as, according to him, Rebbi Meir does not permit either the Ubar or the Eiver ha'Meduldal)?
(b)What is the problem with this, according to Rebbi Yochanan?
(c)We therefore re-word the Machlokes. We cite Resh Lakish like we did before, but how do we now cite Rebbi Yochanan?
(d)What reason does Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina now give to explain why Rebbi Meir is more lenient by Eiver than he is by Ubar?
3)
(a)We query the current version of the Machlokes between Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish however, from the Beraisa that we cited earlier. Rebbi Meir said there 'Lo, Im Tiharah Shechitas T'reifah osah ve'es ha'Eiver ha'Meduldal bah, Davar she'Gufah ... '. According to Resh Lakish, Rebbi Meir said this to the Chachamim, according to their way of thinking (even though Rebbi Meir himself does not permit either the Ubar or the Eiver ha'Meduldal).
(b)The problem with this, according to Rebbi Yochanan is - what did Rebbi Meir mean when he said 'Im Tiharah Shechitas T'reifah ... ve'es ha'Eiver ha'Meduldal bah', seeing as neither Rebbi Meir nor the Rabbanan declare the Eiver ha'Meduldal, Tahor?
(c)We therefore re-word the Machlokes. We cite Resh Lakish like we did before, whereas according to Rebbi Yochanan - even Rebbi Meir will agree that the Shechitah of the animal renders the Eiver ha'Meduldal, Tahor (because Ein Shechitah Osah Nipol).
(d)Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina explains that Rebbi Meir is more lenient by Eiver than he is by Ubar - because the Eiver is part of its body whereas the Ubar is not (a S'vara which earlier on, he himself attributed to the Rabbanan).
73b----------------------------------------73b
4)
(a)Everyone agrees, says Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef Amar Rebbi Yochanan, that Misah Osah Nipul ve'Ein Shechitah Osah Nipul. Why can he not be referring to the case of Ubar?
(b)What does he mean when he says Misah Osah Nipul?
(c)What are the ramifications of this statement?
(d)What point is Rebbi Yochanan now making?
4)
(a)When Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef Amar Rebbi Yochanan says that everyone agrees that Misah Osah Nipul ve'Ein Shechitah Osah Nipul, he cannot be referring to the case of Ubar - since that is the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir (Osah Nipul) and the Rabbanan (Ein Osah Nipul).
(b)When he says Misah Osah Nipul, he means that - the Shechitah completes the cut, as we explained, in which case the limb is not considered a Neveilah, but Eiver min ha'Chai.
(c)The ramifications of this statement are that - a k'Zayis of flesh from the limb is not Metamei (which it would be if it was considered a Neveilah), only the entire limb.
(d)The point Rebbi Yochanan is now making is that - on the one hand, Rebbi Meir, who argues with the Rabbanan regarding the Shechitah of an Ubar, concedes that the Shechitah of the mother does not render the Eiver Nipol; whilst on the other hand, the Rabbanan, who argue with Rebbi Meir regarding the Shechitah of the Ubar, concede that Misah Osah Nipul.
5)
(a)Rebbi Meir learns in a Mishnah in the ninth Perek (in connection with an animal with a loose limb and loose flesh) that, should the animal die, the flesh requires Hechsher Lekabel Tum'ah. What does he say about the loose limb?
(b)If the Tana held Ein Misah Osah Nipul, what would be the Din regarding ...
1. ... Hechsher?
2. ... Tum'ah? Under what heading would it fall?
(c)Who argues with Rebbi Meir in this point?
5)
(a)Rebbi Meir learns in a Mishnah in the ninth Perek (in connection with an animal with a loose limb and loose flesh) that, should the animal die, the flesh requires Hechsher Lekabel Tum'ah. And he adds that the loose limb - is Metamei because of Eiver min ha'Chai and not because of Eiver min ha'Neveilah (a proof that he holds Misah Osah Nipul).
(b)If the Tana held Ein Misah Osah Nipul, it would ...
1. ... not require Hechsher, because ...
2. ... it would fall under the heading of Neveilah.
(c)Nobody argues with Rebbi Meir in this point.
6)
(a)In another Mishnah there, Rebbi Meir says (regarding the same animal) 'Nishch'tah Beheimah, Huchsh'ru be'Damehah'. What does that prove?
(b)On what grounds does Rebbi Shimon disagree?
(c)What is now the Kashya on Rebbi Yochanan from both of the above Mishnahs?
(d)How do we establish Huchsh'ru' to answer the second Kashya?
6)
(a)In another Mishnah there, Rebbi Meir says (regarding the same animal) 'Nishchetah Beheimah, Huchsh'ru be'Damehah' - a proof that Ein Shechitah Osah Nipul, since it adopts the same Tum'ah as the mother (Tum'as Ochlin), and not Eiver min ha'Chai.
(b)Rebbi Shimon disagrees - only because in his opinion, an animal cannot be Machshir its own Eiver.
(c)The Kashya on Rebbi Yochanan from both of the above Mishnahs is that - seeing as both Misah Osah Nipul and Ein Shechitah Osah Nipul turn out to be Mishnahs, his dual statement appears superfluous.
(d)To answer the second Kashya, we establish Huchsh'ru with regard to - Basar from the animal itself.
7)
(a)How do we reconcile the previous answer with the fact that Huchsh'ru is written in the plural?
(b)Why does the Tana find it necessary to mention Basar that comes off the Eiver ha'Meduldal? Why might we otherwise have thought that it does not require Hechsher, even though Basar from the Shechted animal does?
7)
(a)And we reconcile this answer with the fact that Huchsh'ru is written in the plural - by establishing it with regard to Basar both from the animal and from the Eiver.
(b)The Tana finds it necessary to mention Basar that comes off the Eiver ha'Meduldal, to refute the supposition that it does not require Hechsher, even though Basar from the Shechted animal does - because when it was still attached to the Eiver min ha'Chai, it stood to be Metamei a stringent Tum'ah (Adam and Keilim, and not just food) together with the Eiver.
8)
(a)Why did Rav Yosef advocate following the opinion of Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef in Rebbi Yochanan?
(b)Why did he find it necessary to say this? What was he coming to preclude?
(c)The Beraisa forbids an Eiver ha'Meduldal and Basar ha'Meduldalin of a Beheimah, Chayah or Of that one subsequently Shechted, based on the Pasuk in Mishpatim "u'Basar ba'Sadeh T'reifah Lo Sochelu". What does Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan comment on that?
8)
(a)Rav Yosef advocated following the opinion of Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef in Rebbi Yochanan - because Rabah bar bar Chanah quoted Rebbi Yochanan that way too.
(b)He found it necessary to say this - to preclude the initial statement of Rebbi Yochanan, where he maintained that even the Rabbanan hold Shechitah Osah Nipul.
(c)The Beraisa forbids an Eiver ha'Meduldal and Basar ha'Meduldal of a Beheimah, Chayah or Of that one subsequently Shechted, based on the Pasuk in Mishpatim "u'Basar ba'Sadeh T'reifah Lo Sochelu". Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan comments on that, that - the Beraisa is merely an Asmachta, because the Isur is really mi'de'Rabbanan.