(a)Rava quotes Rav Nachman as saying that all the Amos are Amos of six Tefachim. Does this mean that there is no difference, according to him, between the Amah of a Succah and a Mavoy and that of Kil'ayim?

(b)'Kol Amos she'Amru Chachamim be'Amah bas Shishah, u'Vilevad she'Lo Yehu Mechuvanos'. This Beraisa appears to go exactly like Rava. How does Abaye attempt to explain it?

(c)Why is this answer not acceptable?

(d)How does Abaye eventually reconcile his own opinion with this Beraisa?


(a)No! Rava is not saying that the Amos of a Succah, a Mavoy and of Kil'ayim are the same. According to him, the Amos of a Succah and a Mavoy consist of six tight Tefachim, and that of Kil'ayim, of six loose Tefachim - both Lechumra (like Abaye).

(b)Abaye tries to establish the Beraisa: 'Kol Amos she'Amru Chachamim be'Amah bas Shishah, u'Vilevad she'Lo Yehu Mechuvanos' - by Amos of Kil'ayim exclusively.

(c)This answer however, is unacceptable - because Raban Shimon ben Gamliel goes on to say 'Kol Amos she'Amru Chachamim be'Kil'ayim, be'Amah bas Shishah, u'Vilevad she'Lo Yihyu Metzumtamos'; from which we can deduce that the Tana Kama is speaking about all Amos (i.e. those of Succah and Mavoy, too).

(d)Abaye answers - that seeing as Raban Shimon ben Gamliel voices his opinion, he follows the opinion of Raban Shimon ben Gamliel.


(a)According to Rava, why does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel say 'Kol Amos she'Amru, be'Kil'ayim bas Shishah'? Is it not to exclude the Amah of a Succah and a Mavoy?

(b)'Cheik ha'Mizbe'ach' refers to the Yesod. How does Rashi finally explain the Pasuk in Yechezkel "ve'Eleh Midos ha'Mizbe'ach be'Amos, Amah, Amah ve'Tefach, ve'Cheik ha'Amah"?

(c)Which part of the Yesod was a small Amah of five Tefachim, the height or the width?


(a)According to Rava, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel's main Chidush - is that the Amah of Kil'ayim should not be measured tightly, and the reason that he adds 'be'Amah bas Shishah' - is not to exclude the Amos of Succah and Mavoy, but to exclude the Amah of the Yesod of the Mizbe'ach, and that of the Sovev (the base and the ledge around which the Kohanim could walk, respectively), which consisted of five Tefachim, rather than six.

(b)"ve'Eleh Midos ha'Mizbe'ach be'Amos, Amah, Amah ve'Tefach, ve'Cheik ha'Amah", according to Rashi's final explanation, means that, even though all the measurements of the Mizbe'ach consist of one Amah (of five Tefachim) plus a Tefach, the Amah of the Yesod will consist of just an Amah.

(c)It was the height of the Yesod that was a small Amah; the width was a regular Amah.


(a)The four Keranos (which were one Amah by one Amah) were also measured by the small Amah of five Tefachim. Does this refer to the height or to the width?

(b)If the Keranos measured one Amah by one Amah, why does the Pasuk describe them as being a Zeres?


(a)Both the Amah width and the Amah height of the four Keranos - consisted of small (five-Tefachim) Amos.

(b)A Zeres is half an Amah. Consequently, when the Pasuk gives the width of the Keranos as being a Zeres - it is referring to the measurement of the Keranos from the middle, one Zeres in each direction.


(a)Which other K'li Kodesh was measured by the smaller size Amah?


(a)Also the Amah square of the Mizbe'ach ha'Zahav (the small incense-Altar) consisted of a small Amah of five Tefachim.


(a)According to Rebbi Chanan, the entire Pasuk (of "Eretz Chitah u'Se'orah" etc.) comes to teach us the various Shi'urim:

1. "Eretz Chitah" - regarding someone who enters a house which is stricken with Tzara'as;

2. "Se'orah" - regarding the Din of a bone of a corpse;

3. "Gefen" - regarding a Nazir;

4. "Te'einah" - regarding carrying on Shabbos;

5. "Rimon" - regarding Tum'as Kelim;

6. "Eretz Zeis-Shemen" - regarding most things. Which things?

7. "u'Devash" - regarding Yom Kippur. What do all of these mean?

(b)In that case, how can Rav rule that Shi'urin are Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai?



1. If someone enters a house which has Tzara'as, holding clothes or rings in his hands, he and the clothes become Tamei immediately. Not so the clothes and the ornaments that he is wearing - they only become Tamei if he waits in the house the amount of time it would take to eat an Achilas Peras (four egg-volumes) of wheat-bread with condiments, whilst he is leaning (each of these details diminishes the time of eating).

2. The bone of a corpse is Metamei - by touching and by carrying (but not by Ohel) if it is the size of a barley.

3. The Shi'ur of the pits and the skin of grapes that a Nazir needs to eat in order to be Chayav (Malkus) - is a Revi'is (of a Lug = one and a half egg-volumes) of wine (which is thicker than water, and therefore has more surface tension than water.

4. The Shi'ur for carrying on Shabbos as regards food is that of a 'ki'Gerogeres' (a dried fig).

5. Wooden vessels which break, no longer receive Tum'ah. People still tend to use a vessel with a hole up to the size of a pomegranate, for which reason it will still receive Tum'ah. Once it is the size of a pomegranate however, the owner throws it away, and it no longer receives Tum'ah. (These Dinim are confined to the vessels of private people, not to vessels that are sold in shops, where they tend to discard all broken vessels, however small the hole).

6. The Shi'ur of most things is a k'Zayis. The list includes Cheilev, blood, Nosar and Pigul.

7. The Shi'ur for which one is Chayav Kares on Yom Kippur is that of a Koseves (a date).

(b)In fact, the Shi'urim are 'Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai', but the Rabbanan found support for them in this Pasuk (not that we actually learn the Shi'urim from there).



(a)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Metzora ...

1. ... "ve'Rachatz es Kol Besaro"?

2. ... "ba'Mayim"?

3. ... "ve'Rachatz es Kol *Besaro"?

4. ... "es Kol Besaro"?

(b)What is the Din by one, two or three hairs that have knotted?

(c)In which regard did Rav say that Chatzitzin are Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai'?

(d)In which cases did the Rabbanan decree?

(e)Why did the Rabbanan not also decree on Mi'uto she'Eino Makpid because of Mi'uto ha'Makpid or because of Rubo she'Eino Makpid?


(a)We learn from ...

1. ... "ve'Rachatz es Kol Besaro" - that nothing may interrupt between the water and the skin (known as a Chatzitzah) when one Tovels.

2. ... "ba'Mayim" - that one must Tovel in a collection of water (a Mikveh), though not necessarily in spring water.

3. ... "ve'Rachatz es Kol Besaro" - that there must be sufficient water in the Mikveh for an average person to Tovel (one Amah by one Amah by three Amos = forty Sa'ah).

4. ... "es Kol Besaro" - that knotted hair is also a Chatzitzah (as will be explained immediately).

(b)Rabah bar Rav Huna said - that one knotted hair is a Chatzitzah, three is not, whereas two was a Safek by him.

(c)When Rav said that Chatzitzin are 'Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai' - he was referring to Rav Yitzchak, who said (with referrence to hair - see Tosfos Dh 'Devar Torah') 'Devar Torah (i.e. ' Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai') Rubo u'Makpid Alav, Chotzetz, ve'she'Eino Makpid Alav, Eino Chotzetz'.

(d)The Rabbanan decreed - by Rubo she'Eino Makpid and by Mi'uto ha'Makpid.

(e)The Rabbanan did not decree on Mi'uto she'Eino Makpid because of Mi'uto ha'Makpid or because of Rubo she'Eino Makpid - because that would be a Gezeirah li'Gezeirah, which the Rabbanan do not usually do?


(a)How do we learn from the Aron that the height of a Mechitzah is ten Tefachim?

(b)Then how can Rav say that Mechitzin is Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai (according to Rebbi Yehudah)?

(c)According to Rebbi Meir, in whose opinion even the Amos of the holy vessels consisted of six Tefachim, the Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai was said with regard to 'Gud, Levud and Dofen Akumah'. What do these mean?


(a)Chazal have said that Hash-m did not descend lower than ten Tefachim, from which we see that above ten Tefachim is considered a different Reshus. Now the Aron, from whose lid Hash-m spoke to Moshe, was nine Tefachim high, which, together with the one Tefach of the lid, makes ten Tefachim. So we see that ten Tefachim constitutes a Mechitzah.

(b)Rav says that Mechitzin is Halachah etc. - according to the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah, in whose opinion the Amos of the Aron (and of all the holy vessels) were Amos of five Tefachim, and not of six (which means that the Aron was not ten Tefachim tall, but eight and a half). Consequently, Mechutzin can indeed be 'Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai'.

(c)According to Rebbi Meir (who learns Mechitzin from the Aron), the Halachah by Mechitzin was said by 'Gud', 'Levud' and 'Dofen Akumah': 'Gud' means that we sometimes stretch a wall upwards ('Gud Acheis Mechitzasah') or downwards ('Gud Asek Mechitzasah') - as if it reached the ceiling or the floor, even though, in reality, it does not; 'Levud' means that whenever there is a space of less than three Tefachim, we extend the wall to the end as if it was filled in; 'Dofen Akumah', which is confined strictly to the Dinim of Succah, means that we permit Pasul Sechach between the Sechach and the wall of the Succah as if the wall of the Succah was bent (which is no reason to invalidate the Succah).


(a)When our Mishnah requires that one reduces the twenty Amos plus between the Koreh at the entrance to the Mavoy and the ground, how does one go about doing this?

(b)According to Rav Yosef, one piles up one Tefach of earth (along the length of the Mavoy - corresponding to the width of the Koreh) across the entire width of the Mavoy. What does Abaye hold?

(c)How does the Gemara initially attempt to explain their Machlokes?

(d)The Gemara concludes that both Rav Yosef and Abaye agree that underneath the beam is considered inside the Mavoy. What then, does Abaye require four Tefachim (first answer - refer to the following question)?


(a)In the case of a Koreh which is higher than twenty Amos, one could of course, simply lower the Koreh. However, it would probably be easier to raise the level of the ground, by piling up earth across the width of the Mavoy (which is the option discussed by the Gemara).

(b)According to Abaye, one would need to fill in earth for four Tefachim along the Mavoy.

(c)The Gemara initially explains that Rav Yosef permits carrying under the Koreh (because it is the outer edge of the Koreh which is considered to be extended to the ground). Consequently, one Tefach (the Tefach underneath the Koreh) will suffice; whereas Abaye forbids it (because, according to him , it is the inner edge that is considered to be extended) That is why four Tefachim (a significant measurement) is required.

(d)Abaye (in the first alternative answer) requires four Tefachim - because, according to him, a Koreh does not serve as a Heker, but as a Mechitzah. In fact, he too agrees that it is the outer edge that is 'extended'. However, a Mechitzah must serve a Reshus of at least four Tefachim, which is why he requires piling up the earth for a length of four Tefachim.


(a)The Gemara gives two alternative answers to explain Abaye - one: that Abaye also agrees that the beam serves as a Heker; but that, according to him, a Heker must be seen from a distance, and not just from underneath. What is the second alternative?


(a)According to the Gemara's final interpretation of Abaye - Abaye agrees with Rav Yosef that a Koreh serves as a Heker, and that even a Heker from underneath ought to suffice. However, he decrees that one Tefach is not sufficient, because people might tread down the earth to a point where the Koreh will once again be more than twenty Amos high. And since one Tefach is not enough, he requires four Tefachim, which is considered a significant measurement in other places.