1)

(a)Rebbi Eliezer in a Beraisa, explains the words "ve'es Avoseichem" (in the Pasuk in Shmuel [in connection with Shmuel's rebuke of the people]) "ve'Atah, Hisyatzvu ve'Ishaftah echem Lifnei Hash-m es Kol Tzidkos Hash-m asher Asah Itchem ve'es Avoseichem") to mean that - even the Avos would be unable to stand up to the Tochachah of Hash-m.

(b)Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah and the Rabbanan argue over the Pasuk in Tehilim "Zeh Dor Dorshav Mevakshei Ya'akov Selah". According to one of them, the generation follows its leaders. According to the other - the leaders follow the generation.

(c)We refute the suggestion that this is referring to their level of righteousness, because of Tzidkiyahu in his time and Yehokim in his. Rebbi Yochanan in the name of Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai says ...

1. ... based on the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "Bereishis Mamlechus Yehoyakim ben Yoshiyahu Melech Yisrael", that - Hash-m wanted to revert the world to null and void because of the wicked Yehoyakim, but when he saw his generation (who were more righteous than him), His anger abated.

2. ... that - He wanted to revert the world to null and void because of Tzidkiyahu's generation (who were wicked), but when He saw Tzidkiyah (who was a Tzadik), His anger abated.

(d)Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah and the Rabbanan are therefore arguing over - whether the soft-heartedness or hard-heartedness nature of the people follows that of the king, or vice-versa.

2)

(a)When our Mishnah says 'Heseg Yad be'Noder', it means that if a man declares 'Erech shel Ashir Zeh Alai', and he himself is poor (or vice-versa) - we assess him according to his status, not according to that of the Ne'erach.

(b)A young man of nineteen who declares ...

1. ... on a man who is over sixty 'Erko shel P'loni Alai' - pays the Erech of a man of sixty.

2. ... on a girl 'Erkah shel P'lonis Alai' - pays the Erech of the girl.

3. ... 'Erki (or Erech shel P'loni) Alai', and he (or the Ne'erach) turns twenty before he has paid - he pays the Erech of someone under twenty (like the Ne'erach was at the time of the declaration).

(c)In the equivalent case, where a rich man declares 'Korbano shel Metzora Ani Zeh Alai', (or vice-versa) - he brings whichever Korban the Metzora would be Chayav to bring.

(d)Bearing in mind that by Heseg Yad we go after the status of the Ma'arich (since the Ne'erach is not Chayav anything), Rebbi presents a case of Heseg Yad where the Ma'arich is assessed according to the Ne'erach - there where Reuven, who is rich, declares 'Erki Alai', and Shimon, who is poor, says 'Mah she'Amar Zeh, Alai'.

3)

(a)If a poor man declares 'Dami Alai' - he remains obligated to pay Hekdesh his assessed value until he has paid in full.

(b)Our Mishnah says 'Heseg Yad be'Noder' (and not 'be'Ma'arich') - because it is copying the Lashon of the Pasuk " ... asher Tasig Yad ha'Noder" though it really refers to someone who is Ma'arich).

(c)And the Tana continues 've'ha'Shanim be'Nidar' instead of 'be'Ne'erach' - in order to balance Heseg Yad be'Noder, with which it began.

(d)We learn from the Pasuk " ... asher Tasig Yad ha'Noder" that - by Heseg Yad, we go after the Noder.

4)

(a)The problem with ...

1. ... the ruling 'Aval be'Korbanos Eino Kein ... ' (implying that a Madir Ashir who undertakes to bring the Korban of a Metzora Ani, brings the Korban of a Metzora Ani) is that - he is not poor, and the Torah specifically writes "ve'Im Dal Hu" implying that the concession of a Korban Oleh ve'Yored is confined to the Metzora (and does not extend to the Madir).

2. ... Rebbi Yitzchak's answer, establishing our Mishnah by where the Madir is an Ani too (based on the same Pasuk) is - how we know that Heseg Yad applies to the Madir at all; maybe the Torah only has pity on the Ma'arich?

(b)Rav Ada bar Ahavah however, learns from the Pasuk there "ve'Ein Yado Maseges" that - (in spite of "Hu") the Madir is included in the Din of Oleh ve'Yored.

(c)This implies that a Madir Ashir who undertakes to bring the Korban of a Metzora Ani must bring a Korban Ashir, creating a problem with our Mishnah 'Aval be'Korbanos Eino Kein' - seeing as in fact, by Korbanos, we go after the Noder just like by Heseg Yad.

5)

(a)We answer that 'be'Korbanos Eino Kein' is indeed not referring to the case of a Metzora Ani and - but to a Madir Ani who undertakes to bring the Korban of a Metzora Ashir (in which case we go after the Mudar and not after the Madir, like we do by Heseg Yad, as we just explained).

(b)We might otherwise have thought that he brings the Korban of an Ani - taking our cue from Heseg Yad.

(c)And we learn that he does not from the Pasuk - "Im Dal Hu" (and the Metzora is not poor).

6)

(a)This latter D'rashah is not necessary according to Rebbi in our Mishnah ('Ashir she'Amar Erki Alai, ve'Shama Ani ... ') - because he anyway goes after the Metzora, and not after the Noder.

(b)We answer that - according to Rebbi, we need the Pasuk to obligate the case of a Metzora Ani and a Madir Ashir to bring the Korban Ashir, even though Rebbi normally goes after the Metzora.

(c)Granted, we just dismissed this D'rashah as unnecessary - but that was according to the Rabbanan, who go after the Noder anyway.

7)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that a Ma'arich who was rich at the time of the declaration, but who became poor before paying (or vice-versa) - must pay the Erech of a rich man (not Heseg Yad).

(b)Rebbi Yehudah holds that 'Ani ve'He'eshir ve'He'eni' - too, must pay the Erech of an Ashir.

(c)The Tana continues 'Aval be'Korbanos Eino Kein'. By the Korbanos of a Metzora - we go after the obligation of the Metzora (as we learned in the previous Mishnah).

(d)When Rebbi says that (sometimes) Erchin has the same Din as Korbanos, he is referring to - the case of a Metzora Ashir who declares 'Erki Alai', and a poor man who overhears his Neder, undertakes to pay the same Erech as the rich Metzora, and he is Chayav to pay that sum ...

(e)... because, as opposed to a regular case, where the Ne'erach is not obligated to pay anything, in this case, he is.

8)

(a)The Mishnah rules that, in a case where, after the Kohen assesses a Ma'arich Ani, his father dies leavings him a fortune or whose ships arrive from overseas laden with treasures - he retains the Din of an Ani, and Hekdesh benefits nothing from the Ma'arich's newfound wealth (as we will explain in the Sugya).

(b)We learn from " ... asher Tasig Yad ha'Noder" that Ani ve'He'eshir pays the Erech of an Ashir, and from "al-Pi asher Tasig Yad ha'Noder" that - Ashir ve'He'eni does too.

(c)Whereas Rebbi Yehudah extrapolates from the Pasuk "ve'Im Mach He me'Erkecha" that - Heseg Yad only applies to someone who is poor from beginning to end (but if he is rich in the middle, he must pay the full Erech).

(d)We query this from the Pasuk (in connection with the Korban Oleh ve'Yored of a Metzora) "ve'Im Dal Hu" - which we do not Darshen in this manner, according to any of the Tana'im whom we are about to cite.

9)

(a)The last Kashya is based on a Mishnah in Nega'im, where Rebbi Shimon goes after the Chatas (Beheimah, by a Metzora Ashir, and Chatas ha'Of by a Metzora Ani), which means that - whatever his status at the time that he brings the Chatas determines his status for the other Korbanos too.

(b)According to Rebbi Yehudah there, it all depends on the Asham, whereas according to Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov in a Beraisa - it depends on the two live birds (one of which is sprinkled, whilst the other is sent away alive).

10)

(a)To explain why we do not Darshen "Hu" like we did by Erchin, we establish the Din by Metzora as a Gezeiras ha'Kasuv ("Asher Tasig Yado be'Taharaso"), only the Tana'im argue over how to interpret the Pasuk. Rebbi Shimon (Chatas) learns his ruling - from the fact that the Pasuk writes "Vechiper alav ha'Kohen" immediately prior to the Pasuk of the Metzora Ani.

(b)According to Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov, the criterion lies in the Pasuk "Asher Tasig Yado be'Taharaso", which Rebbi Yehudah interprets as Machshir, and which therefore pertains to the Asham, which is Machshir him - to enter the Mikdash and to eat Kodshim (when they place the blood of the Asham on his thumb, his big toe and on the middle joint of his ear) .

(c)Whereas according to Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov, "be'Yom Taharaso" refers to what causes him to become Tahor - the two live birds ...

(d)... and he is Tahor - to shave off his hair.

(e)And we Darshen "ve'Im Dal Hu" - like Rebbi and the Rabbanan respectively, as we explained earlier on the Amud.

11)

(a)We query the above explanation ('ad she'Yehei be'Makuso mi'Techilaso ve'ad Sofo') from Eidus, where the Torah also writes in Vayikra "ve'Hu Eid", yet Rebbi Yehudah does not Darshen there mi'Techilah ve'ad Sof. The Beraisa disqualifies Reuven from testifying for Shimon if he became his son-in-law, or if he became blind, a deaf-mute or senile after witnessing the event in question. The Tana rules that - in those cases where his wife died, or he regained his sight, his speech and hearing and his sanity before being called to testify - his testimony is valid.

(b)And he concludes with the rule that - whenever the beginning and the end of the testimony is be'Kashrus, the testimony is valid.

(c)We answer that this is because the Torah writes there "O Ra'ah" and "Im Lo Yagid" - establishing the criteria for testimony as the validity of the witnesses at the time of seeing the event and of acually testifying.

(d)And the Torah writes "ve'Hu" to teach us the Din taught by another Beraisa, where the Tana rules that - in a case where someone makes a group of potential witnesses swear that ...

1. ... if they know of the testimony in hand, they will come and testify for him - they are Patur, because he did not specify anyone in particular.

2. ... whoever knows of the testimony should come and swear they - are Chayav, because what he said is tantamount to specifying.