Mishnah 1
Hear the Mishnah

1)

(a)What is a Pidyon Petter Chamor?

(b)What did R. Yehoshua and R. Tzadok testify with regard to a Pidyon Petter Chamor that died?

(c)To what do they compare it?

1)

(a)A Pidyon Pe'ter Chamor - is he lamb with which one redeemed one's firstborn donkey.

(b)R. Yehoshua and R. Tzadok testified that if a Pidyon Pe'ter Chamor died - the Kohanim have no claim against the owner ...

(c)... like the lost money of Pidyon Ma'aser Sheini, which the owner is not obligated to replace.

2)

(a)What did R. Eliezer say about it?

(b)How did he learn it from the Pasuk in Ki Sissa "u'Petter Chamor Tifdeh be'Seh ... ve'Chol B'chor Banecha Tifdeh"?

(c)How did the Chachamim counter this, based on the Pasuk in Korach "Ach Padoh Tifdeh es B'chor ha'Adam, ve'es B'chor ha'Beheimah ha'Teme'ah Sifdeh"?

2)

(a)R. Eliezer - disagrees ...

(b)... based on the Pasuk in Ki Sissa "u'Pe'ter Chamor Tifdeh be'Seh ... ve'Chol B'chor Banecha Tifdeh" - comparing a Pe'ter Chamor to the five Sela'im of a B'chor Adam, which one is obligated to give to the Kohen, even if the baby dies.

(c)The Chachamim counter this, based on the Pasuk in Korach "Ach Padoh Tifdeh es B'chor ha'Adam, ve'es B'chor ha'Beheimah ha'Teme'ah Sifdeh" - implying that the Hekesh is confined to the actual Pidyon, but to nothing else.

Mishnah 2
Hear the Mishnah

3)

(a)What did R. Tzadok testify about the brine of Tamei locusts?

(b)What did the Mishnah Rishonah originally say about it?

(c)On what are these leniencies based?

3)

(a)R. Tzadok testified - that the brine of Tamei locusts is permitted.

(b)The Mishnah Rishonah originally - permitted it only if the Tamei locusts were pickled together with Tahor ones.

(c)These leniencies are based - on the fact that locusts have no blood, and their juice is therefore no more than moist.

Mishnah 3
Hear the Mishnah

4)

(a)What is ...

1. ... 'Zochlin'? Why is it called by that name?

2. ... 'Notfin'?

(b)What is the difference between them regarding ...

1. ... Shi'ur?

2. ... the way they are Metaher?

3. ... their being used for Mei Chatas and Tevilas Zavin?

(c)What did R. Tzadok testify with regard to the one that falls into the other?

(d)What happened in this regard in Biras ha'Pilyah, when such a case came before the Chachamim?

4)

(a)

1. 'Zochlin' is - the water of a flowing river (like the Pasuk in Ha'azinu (in connection which crawling snakes) "ke'Chamas Zochalei Afar".

2. 'Notfin' is - rain water (which drips into it).

(b)The difference between them regarding ...

1. ... the Shi'ur is - that the former is Metaher even with a Kolshehu, whereas the latter requires forty Sa'ah.

2. ... the way they are Metaher is - that whereas the former is Metaher even as it flows, the latter must be contained (in the form of a Mikvah).

3. ... their being used for Mei Chatas and Tevilas Zavin is - that the former is eligible, the latter is not.

(c)R. Tzadok testifed - that if a minority of Notfin falls into a majority of Zochlin, the latter remains Kasher.

(d)When this happened in Biras ha'Pilyah, and the case came before the Chachamim - they corroborated the ruling of R. Tzadok.

Mishnah 4
Hear the Mishnah

5)

(a)What happens to Zochlin that flow along a pipe?

(b)What did R. Tzadok testify regarding Zochlin that flowed through a large wall-nut leaf (see Tiferes Yisrael)?

(c)What happened in this regard in Ahalyah, when such a case came before the Sanhedrin in Lishkas ha'Gazis?

5)

(a)When Zochlin flow along a pipe - they become disqualified.

(b)R. Tzadok testified regarding Zochlin that flowed through a large wall-nut leaf (see Tiferes Yisrael) - the water remained Kasher.

(c)When this happened in Ahalyah, and the case came before the Sanhedrin in Lishkas ha'Gazis - they too, corroborated the ruling of R. Tzadok.

Mishnah 5
Hear the Mishnah

6)

(a)Based on Targum Unklus' translation 've'Kulasah al Shichmah', what is 'Kalal shel Chatas'?

(b)On which Pasuk (in Chayei Sarah) does Unklus say that?

(c)Why, if a Kalal shel Chatas is lying on top of a Sheretz, does it not become Tamei?

(d)Then why did R. Yehoshua and R. Yakim Ish Hadar testify that the ashes inside it do? On which Pasuk in Chukas is this ruling based?

6)

(a)Based on Targum Unklus' translation 've'Kulasah al Shichmah' - 'Kalal shel Chatas' is the earthenware vessel in which the ashes of the Parah Adumah have been placed.

(b)Unklus says that on the Pasuk in Chayei Sarah (in connection with Rivkah "ve'Chadah al Shichmah".

(c)If a Kalal shel Chatas is lying on top of a Sheretz, it does not become Tamei - because an earthenware vessels is not subject to Tum'ah from the outside.

(d)And the reason that R. Yehoshua and R. Yakim Ish Hadar testified that the ashes inside it do is (based on the Pasuk in Chukas "ve'Hini'ach mi'Chutz la'Machaneh be'Makon Tahor" (and this is not a 'Makom Tahor').

7)

(a)On what grounds did R. Eliezer disagree with them?

(b)Like whom is the Halachah?

7)

(a)R. Eliezer disagreed with them - on the grounds that the ashes are lying inside the earthenware vessel, which is Tahor.

(b)The Halachah - is like R. Yehoshua and R. Yakim Ish Hadar.

8)

(a)R. Papyas testified about a Nazir who undertook two sets of Nezirus and who shaved for the first Nezirus on the thirtieth day. Why ought he to have shaved on the thirty-first?

(b)Then why Bedi'eved, is he Yotzei if he shaved on the thirtieth?

(c)When ought the Nazir to now shave for the second Nezirus?

(d)On what grounds did R. Papyas testify that if he shaved on the fifth-ninth day, he is Yotzei?

8)

(a)R. Papyas testified about a Nazir who undertook two sets of Nezirus and who shaved for the first Nezirus on the thirtieth day. He ought to have shaved on the thirty-first - in order to complete the thirty-day Nezirus period.

(b)He is nevertheless Yotzei Bedi'eved, if he shaved on the thirtieth - due to the principle 'Miktzas ha'Yom ke'Kulo'.

(c)By the same token, the Nazir ought now to shave for the second Nezirus - on the sixtieth day.

(d)On what grounds did R. Papyas testify that if he shaved on the fifty-ninth day, he is Yotzei - due to the fact that, having shaved on the twenty-ninth day, the thirtieth day serves as both the last day of the first set of Nezirus and the first day of the second.

Mishnah 6
Hear the Mishnah

9)

(a)What did R. Yehoshua and R. Papyas testify with regard to the baby of a Shelamim?

(b)R. Eliezer disagrees. What does he say should be done with it?

(c)Why is that?

(d)The Chachamim say 'Yikrav'. In which point do they disagree with the Tana Kama (see Tiferes Yisrael)?

9)

(a)R. Yehoshua and R. Papyas testified - that the baby of a Shelamim is brought as a Shelamim.

(b)R. Eliezer disagrees. According to him - it must be placed in a narrow enclosure and left to die ...

(c)... out of concern that the owner will otherwise delay bringing the Shelamim until the baby is born and go on to grow herds of cows.

(d)The Chachamim say 'Yikrav' - that the owner may bring the baby as any Korban be pleases (even if it is not a Shelamim [Tiferes Yisrael]).

10)

(a)What did R. Papyas testify with regard to the baby of a Shelamim that they ate on Pesach? When did the eat it?

(b)Why must 'Chag' in this instance refer to Shavu'us and not to Succos (to which 'Chag' generally refers)?

10)

(a)R. Papyas testified that they a Shelamim on Pesach - and its baby as a Shalamim on Shavu'os.

(b)'Chag' in this instance must refer to Shavu'us and not to Succos (to which 'Chag' generally refers) - because if one delays bringing a Korban beyond the next Yom-ov, one transgresses the Mitzvah of "u'Vasa Shamah, ve'Heiveisem Shamah" (even though the La'av 'Bal Te'acher' only takes effect after three Yamim-Tovim).

Mishnah 7
Hear the Mishnah

11)

(a)The same pair of Tana'im testified on 'Aruchos shel Nachtomin' - What are 'Aruchos shel Nachtomin ' (spelt with an 'Alef')?

(b)Why might we have thought that they are Tahor?

(c)On what basis did they testify that they are Tamei?

(d)Why did R. Eliezer then declare them Tahor?

11)

(a)The same pair of Tana'im testified on 'Aruchos shel Nachtomin' - kneading-boards (since there is no difference between 'Aruchos' spelt with an 'Alef' and 'Aruchos' spelt with an 'Ayin').

(b)We might have thought that they are Tahor - since they are 'Peshutei K'lei Eitz' (flat wooden receptacles, which the Torah does not consider Tamei).

(c)Nevertheless, they testified that they are Tamei - mid'Rabanan.

(d)R. Eliezer declared them Tahor - since in his opinion, they are not considered Kelim.

12)

(a)And the same pair testified with regard to an oven that has been cut into segments. Which way was it cut?

(b)On what two conditions did they argue with R. Eliezer over its status?

(c)On what grounds did ...

1. ... they declare the oven Tamei?

2. ... R. Eliezer declare it Tahor??

(d)Like whom is the Halachah?

12)

(a)And the same pair testified with regard to an oven that has been cut into segments - across its width (so that the segments are lying one on top of the other).

(b)They argued with R. Eliezer over the oven's status, on condition - that a. sand has been placed between the segments (see Tiferes Yisrael), and b. the outside has been cemented.

(c)They ...

1. ... declared it Tamei was - because of the cement, whereas ...

2. ... R. Eliezer declared it Tahor - because of the sand (see Tiferes Yisrael).

(d)The Halachah - is like the Chachamim.

13)

(a)The Chachamim permitted declaring a leap-year up to Purim, but no later (see Tosfos Yom-Tov). What did R. Yehoshua and R. Papyas testify regarding this matter?

(b)Why does this not incorporate the thirtieth of Adar, even if Adar was a full month?

13)

(a)The Chachamim permitted declaring a leap-year up to Purim, but no later (see Tosfos Yom-Tov). R. Yehoshua and R. Papyas testified - that it is permitted up until the end of Adar ...

(b)... the twenty-ninth, not the thirtieth, which is eligible to become Nisan (as we learned in Pesachim).

14)

(a)And what did they finally testify about declaring a leap year on condition?

(b)What condition did the Beis-Din once make in regard, when Raban Gamliel was away?

(c)Where did Raban Gamliel go? What was he doing there?

(d)What happened when he returned?

14)

(a)And they finally testified - that Beis-Din may declare a leap-year on condition.

(b)When Raban Gamliel was once away - they declared a leap year on condition he agreed with their ruling upon his return.

(c)Raban Gamliel - actually went to Syria (see Tiferes Yisrael) to discuss communal matters with the Roman governor, and he had been delayed.

(d)When he returned - he agreed with the Beis-Din's ruling and the year was indeed a leap year.

Mishnah 8
Hear the Mishnah

15)

(a)Menachem ben Signai testified on the addition of the caldron in which a. olives, b. dyes are cooked. What exactly is this referring to?

(b)On what grounds did he testify that the former is Tamei?

(c)How did he learn that from the Pasuk in Shemini (in connection with earthenware ovens) "u'Teme'im Yih'yu Lachem"?

(d)Then why did he declare the latter rim Tahor?

(e)What did the Chachamim say about these two rulings?

15)

(a)Menachem ben Signai testified on 'the addition of the caldron in which a. olives, b. dyes are cooked' - (i.e. the rim which is added to the top of the caldron to extend its height.

(b)He testified that the former is Tamei - because the olive-cookers tend to use it for cooking more olives.

(c)He learned that from the Pasuk in Shemini (in connection with earthenware ovens) "u'Teme'im Yih'yu Lachem" - which implies that whichever part of a vessel is needed is subject to Tum'ah together with the rest of the vessel.

(d)And he declared the latter rim Tahor - because the dyers, afraid that it will spoil their dyes, decline to use it (see Tosfos Yom-Tov; also Rambam on the Mishnah & Tiferes Yisrael).

(e)The Chachamim - reversed these two rulings.

Mishnah 9
Hear the Mishnah

16)

(a)What did R. Nechunya ben Gudg'da testify about a deaf-mute girl whose father married her off?

(b)Why might we have thought otherwise?

(c)Then why did he nevertheless rule that she can?

16)

(a)R. Nechunya ben Gudg'da (see Tosfos Yom-Tov) testified that a deaf-mute girl whose father married her off - can be divorced with a Get ...

(b)... in spite of the fact that she is a full-fledged Eishes Ish, and that she does not have Da'as.

(c)He nevertheless ruled that she can - because a man can divorce his wife against her will (in which case she does not need Da'as).

17)

(a)What did R. Nechunya ben Gudg'da also testify about a Ketanah bas Yisrael who is married to a Kohen?

(b)Why might we have thought that this is forbidden?

17)

(a)R. Nechunya ben Gudg'da also testified that a Ketanah bas Yisrael who is married to a Kohen - is permitted to eat Terumah de'Rabanan.

(b)We might otherwise have thought that this is forbidden - on account of Terumah d'Oraysa.

18)

(a)What is a 'Marish'?

(b)What did R. Nechunya ben Gudg'da testify about a thief who built a Marish that he stole into his mansion and then does Teshuvah?

(c)Why is that?

18)

(a)A 'Marish' is - a large beam.

(b)R. Nechunya ben Gudg'da testified that if a thief who built a Marish that he stole into his mansion and then does Teshuvah - he pays for the owner its value, and is not required to demolish his mansion in order to return it (see Tosfos Yom-Tov) ...

(c)... because if he was, he would be discouraged from doing Teshuvah.

19)

(a)And what did the same Tana finally testify about a stolen Chatas that is not publicly known to have been stolen?

(b)The reason that he gave was 'Mipnei Tikun Mizbe'ach'. What does that mean?

19)

(a)The same Tana finally testified that a stolen Chatas that is not publicly known to have been stolen - atones (without the need to bring a second one) ...

(b)... 'Mipnei Tikun Mizbe'ach' - (so that the Kohanim should not feel dejected at having eaten Chulin that were Shechted in the Azarah, and stop bringing Korbanos).

Hadran Alach 'He'id Rebbi Yehoshua'

D.A.F. TALMUD RESOURCES
FOR MASECHES EDUYOS