(c)Nashim and Avadim cannot combine because of P'ritzus (immodesty), neither can they combine with men to form a Mezuman - because, in the second B'rachah, women are not able to insert B'ris, and Avadim, Eretz.
(d)Whereas, based on a statement of Rav Nachman, 'ha'Kol Mitztarfin le'Zimun' comes to include - a Katan who knows to whom he is Bensching.
2)
(a)Rebbi Yehudah in Zavin learns from the extra "Ish" in the Pasuk in Shemini "Ish Ish ki Yih'yeh Zav mi'Besaro" that a one day old baby is subject to Zivus. What does Rebbi Yishmael B'no shel Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah say to that? What does he learn from the Pasuk there "ve'ha'Zav es Zovo, la'Zachar ve'la'Nekeivah"?
(b)Then why does the Torah write "Ish Ish"?
2)
(a)Rebbi Yehudah in Zavin learns from the extra "Ish" in the Pasuk "Ish Ish ki Yih'yeh Zav mi'Besaro" that a one day old baby is already subject to Tum'as Zivus. Rebbi Yishmael B'no shel Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah argues that - this is not necesssary, since we already know it from the Pasuk "ve'ha'Zav es Zovo, la'Zachar ve'la'Nekeivah" (incorporating a Zachar or a Nekeivah of any age).
(b)And the Torah writes "Ish Ish" - because of Dibrah Torah ki'Leshon B'nei Adam (the Torah sometimes uses the vernacular of the people to whom it is addressed).
3)
(a)'ha'Kol Metam'in be'Tamei Meis' comes to include a Katan. Based on the Pasuk in Chukas (in connection with the ashes of the Parah Adumah) "Ish asher Yitma ve'Lo Yischata", why would we have thought otherwise?
(b)What do we then learn from the Pasuk there ...
1. ... "ve'Al ha'Nefashos asher Hayu Sham"?
2. ... "Ish"?
(c)If, based on the word "Adam" (in the Pasuk in Tazri'a "Adam ki Yih'yeh be'Or Besaro" [in connection with Tzara'as]) the Mishnah in Nega'im includes a Katan, what does the Tana learn from the Pasuk there ...
1. ... "ve'ha'Tzaru'a"?
2. ... "Ish Tzaru'a"? In which connection does the Pasuk preclude her?
3)
(a)'ha'Kol Metam'in be'Tamei Meis' comes to include a Katan. Based on the Pasuk in Chukas (in connection with the ashes of the Parah Adumah) "Ish asher Yitma ve'Lo Yischata", we would otherwise have thought that - only a grown-up is subject to Zivus.
(b)We therefore learn from the Pasuk there ...
1. ... "ve'Al ha'Nefashos (plural) asher Hayu Sham" that - Tum'as Zivus applies to a Katan too.
2. ... "Ish" that - he is not Chayzv Kareis.
(c)Based on the word "Adam" (in the Pasuk in Tazri'a "Adam ki Yih'yeh be'Or Besaro" [in connection with Tzara'as]) the Mishnah in Nega'im incorporates a Katan in Tum'as Tzara'as, and from the Pasuk there ...
1. ... "ve'ha'Tzaru'a" - it incorporates a woman too ...
2. ... from "Ish Tzaru'a" - it precludes her from the Din of 'P'ri'ah and P'rimah' (letting her hair grow long and renting her garments) to which a male Tamei Muchlat is subject.
4)
(a)What does the Mishnah in Nega'im 'ha'Kol Kesheirim Lir'os es ha'Nega'im' comes to include?
(b)Under which condition is he eligible to declare the Metzora Tahor or Tamei?
(c)How does Ravina reconcile this with Mar, who disqualifies any Kohen not conversant with the Dinim of Tzara'as and with the names of the various plagues from seeing Nega'im?
4)
(a)The Mishnah in Nega'im ('ha'Kol Kesheirim Lir'os es ha'Nega'im') comes to include - a Kohen who is not conversant with the Dinim of Tzara'as ...
(b)... who is eligible to declare the Metzora Tahor or Tamei - provided he is instructed to do so by a Talmid-Chacham who examined the Metzora first.
(c)Ravina reconciles this with Mar, who disqualifies any Kohen not conversant with the Dinim of Tzara'as from seeing Nega'im - by establishing that by a Kohen who does not understand the ruling even when it is told to him.
5)
(a)What is the meaning of the Mishnah in Parah 'ha'Kol Kesheirin Lekadesh'?
(b)According to Rebbi Yehudah, it comes to include a Katan. Whom does he then preclude there from Kidush?
(c)Whereas according to the Tana Kama, it comes to include a woman. Whom does he then preclude from Kidush?
5)
(a)The Mishnah in Parah 'ha'Kol Kesheirin Lekadesh' means that - any Kohen is eligible to mix the ashes of the Parah Adumah together with the water.
(b)According to Rebbi Yehudah, it comes to include a Katan, but not - a woman and an Androginus.
(c)Whereas according to the Tana Kama, it comes to include a woman - but not a Chashu.
6)
(a)In connection with the ruling in the Mishnah in Parah 'ha'Kol Kesheirin Lehazos (the ashes of the Parah Adumah)', we cite Rebbi Elazar. Whose Haza'ah does he validate?
(b)Two Mishnahs in Chulin state 'ha'Kol Shochtin', one to include a Kuti. What does the other come to include?
(c)What does the Mishnah in Kesuvos 'ha'Kol Ma'alin le'Eretz Yisrael' ...
1. ... come to include?
2. ... come to include according to those texts that specifically cite Avadim ?
(d)And what does the Mishnah there 've'Ein ha'Kol Motzi'in' include?
6)
(a)In connection with the ruling in the Mishnah in Parah 'ha'Kol Kesherin Lehazos (the ashes of the Parah Adumah)', we cite Rebbi Elazar - who validates the Haza'ah of an Areil (someone who is not circumcised).
(b)Two Mishnahs in Chulin state 'ha'Kol Shochtin', one to include a Kuti, the other - a Yisrael Mumar.
(c)In the Mishnah in Kesuvos 'ha'Kol Ma'alin le'Eretz Yisrael', the Tana ...
1. ... comes to include - Avadim ...
2. ... whereas according to those texts that specifically cite Avadim, it comes to include - moving there where it is from a good area to an inferior one.
(d)And the Mishnah there 've'Ein ha'Kol Motzi'in' comes to include - an Eved who ran away from his master in Chutz la'Aretz to Eretz Yisrael.
3b----------------------------------------3b
7)
(a)'ha'Kol Chayavin be'Succah' come to include Kohanim, Levi'im and Yisre'elim. What is the Chidush?
(b)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Emor "ba'Succos Teishvu ... ", that would have led us to learn otherwise?
(c)Then why are they Chayav?
(d)In which way is this comparable to travelers?
7)
(a)'ha'Kol Chayavin ba'Succah' comes to include Kohanim, Levi'im and Yisre'elim - to preclude the supposition that Kohanim are Patur because they are unable to fulfill the Mitzvah properly ...
(b)... since we learn from the Pasuk "ba'Succos Teishvu ... ", "Teishvu", 'ke'Ein Taduru' (the Mitzvah of living in the Succah with one's wife just as one lives the whole year round in one's house), something which the Kohanim are unable to do due to their obligation to perform the Avodah.
(c)Yet we conclude that they are Chayav - because during those periods that they are not on duty, they can fulfill the Mitzvah of "Teishvu", 'ke'Ein Taduru'.
(d)This is comparable to travelers - who are also Patur from Succah by day (as long as they are on the road), but Chayav by night (at the inn where they break their journey).
8)
(a)Why does the Beraisa need to teach us that Kohanim are included in the Mitzvah of ...
1. ... Tziztis?
2. ... Tefilin? Which Tefilin is the Tana talking about?
(b)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Tzav (in connection with Bigdei Kehunah) "Yilbash al Besaro"?
(c)Why can the Kohen not wear the Tefilin on top of his shirt-sleeve?
(d)Seeing as he is Patur from Tefilin shel Yad, why is he nevertheless Chayav to wear Tefilin shel Rosh?
(e)In that case, why is the Kohen not also Patur from Tefilin shel Rosh in order not to interrupt between the Mitznefes (the hat/turban) and his head.
8)
(a)The Beraisa needs to teach us that Kohanim are included in the Mitzvah of ...
1. ... Tziztis - because the Torah compares it to the Mitzvah of Kil'ayim, from which they are Patur (in the form of the Avnet (the belt), which comprises wool and linen).
2. ... the Tefilin shel Rosh - which he is Chayav to wear - even though he is unable to wear the Tefilin shel Yad.
(b)We learn from the Pasuk "Yilbash al Besaro" that - the Bigdei Kehunah must be worn next to the body, and that nothing may interrupt between the two.
(c)The Kohen cannot wear the Tefilin on top of his shirt-sleeve - because the Torah writes "ve'Hayah l'cha le'Os al Yadcha", obligating the Tefilin to be worn underneath the sleeve "l'cha le'Os", 've'Lo la'Acherim le'Os'.
(d)Even though he is Patur from Tefilin shel Yad, he is nevertheless Chayav Tefilin shel Rosh - because they are effectively two separate Mitzvos (see Tosfos DH 'shel Yad').
(e)Nevertheless is not also Patur from Tefilin shel Rosh (in order not to interrupt between the Mitznefes [the hat/turban] and his head) - because there is room on his head between the turban and his forehead to lay Tefilin.
9)
(a)The Beraisa incorporates Kohanim, Levi'im and Yisre'elim in the Mitzvah of Teki'as Shofar. How does the Pasuk in Pinchas "Yom Teru'ah Yih'yeh lachem" initially lead us to believe that Kohanim should be Patur?
(b)The source for this is the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha "u'Seka'atem ba'Chatzotzros". How do we therefore refute the current suggestion?
(c)We therefore conclude that Kohanim might be Patur from Teki'as Shofar on account of the Mishnah in Rosh Hashanah, equating the Mitzvah of Rosh Hashanah with that of Yovel, from which Kohanim are Patur. From which aspect of Yovel are Kohanim precluded?
(d)On what grounds do we therefore refute that suggestion, too?
9)
(a)The Beraisa incorporates Kohanim, Levi'im and Yisre'elim in the Mitzvah of Teki'as Shofar. The Pasuk in Pinchas "Yom Teru'ah Yih'yeh lachem" initially leads us to believe that Kohanim should be Patur - because it implies that it applies exclusively to those who are only Chayav to blow Shofar one day a year, to preclude Kohanim, who blow in the Beis-Hamikdash on Shabbos, Rosh-Chodesh and Yom-Tov too.
(b)The source for this is the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha "u'Seka'atem ba'Chatzotzros" - which in fact, has nothing to do with Shofar (which they blow only mi'de'Rabbanan).
(c)We therefore conclude that Kohanim might be Patur from Teki'as Shofar on account of the Mishnah in Rosh Hashanah, equating the Mitzvah of Rosh Hashanah with that of Yovel, from which Kohanim are Patur - with regard to property that they sell (which, unlike a Yisrael, they can do even in the Yovel, and what's more, which they may redeem at any time, even within the first two years).
(d)We refute that suggestion too however, on the grounds that - they are still subject to the Din of Hashmatas Kesafim (the cancellation of debts) and Shilu'ach Avadim (the releasing of Jewish servants) that take place in the Yovel. Therefore, they should be Chayav Shofar, too.
