(a)What did Rav Ada bar Masna reply, when his wife asked what their children would eat when he went to Yeshivah to learn Torah?
(b)What is extraordinary about the Pasuk in va'Eschanan "u'Meshalem le'Son'av el Panav le'Ha'avido"?
(c)Which two points emerge from the final phrase in va'Eschanan "... Asher Anochi Metzavecha Hayom La'asosam"?
(d)What is the dual meaning of "Erech Apayim" (Ki Sisa)?
(a)When Rav Ada bar Masna's wife asked what their children would eat when he went to Yeshiva to learn Torah - he replied that there were plenty of wild vegetables available. Alternatively, that there were moist canes which, if cut when they were soft, could be ground and made into bread.
(b)"u'Meshalem le'Son'av el Panav le'Ha'avido" is extraordinary - inasmuch as it suggests that the Resha'im are a burden that Hash-m carries and wants to get rid of (See Agados Maharsha).
(c)"Hayom La'asosam" - Chazal expound - 'today (in this world) is the time to perform Mitzvos, and not tomorrow (in the World to Come)', where there will be no more opportunity to do so; and also 'today to perform them, and tomorrow to receive the reward (because there is no basic remuneration for Mitzvos in this world).
(d)"Erech Apayim" - (in the plural) means that Hash-m is slow to smile at the Tzadikim (who receive the reward for their good deeds only in the World to Come), and slow to become angry with the Resha'im (who receive their punishment only in the World to Come); both of His 'faces' (Kevayachol) are slow to materialize.
(a)Rebbi Yehudah limits the area of Pasei Bira'os to a Beis Sasayim. Considering that the Pasim themselves total two Amos on each side, what She'eilah does the Gemara ask with regard to Rebbi Yehudah's restriction?
(b)Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar in a Beraisa permits Roshah ve'Rubah shel Parah more than a Beis Sasayim. How does the Gemara attempt to resolve its She'eilah from there?
(c)How does the Gemara refute this proof, and how does it finally explain the Machlokes between Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar and Rebbi Yehudah?
(d)What distinction does Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar draw between the maximum size of a pen, a wood-store etc., and that of guarding-huts in the fields?
(a)The Gemara's She'eilah is whether the Beis Sasayim (up to which Rebbi Yehudah permits the Pasei Bira'os) includes the two Amos of the Pasin (because if it would not, the person would not learn from his Beis Sasayim plus two Amos to carry in an area of more than a Beis Sasayim which is not Hukaf le'Dirah), or whether it is exclusive of the Pasin (because he will only compares other areas to the actual pit area, ignoring the Pasin - in which case, he will not come to carry in a space of more than a Beis Sasayim).
(b)Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar permits a pit of a Beis Sasayim, and does not include the Pasin - suggesting that Rebbi Yehudah, who appears as a third opinion in this Beraisa, requires the pit, including the Pasin, to be no more than a Beis Sasayim (otherwise, in which point does he argue with Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar).
(c)The Gemara however, refutes this proof - perhaps Rebbi Yehudah agrees that the Beis Sasayim does not include the Pasin, and their dispute concerns the shape of the Beis Sasayim; according to Rebbi Yehudah, it does not need to be square (and is Kasher even if it fifty Amos by a hundred - like the Chatzer of the Mishkan); whereas according to Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar, the Beis Sasayim is Kasher only if it square.
(d)Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar draws a distinction between a pen, a wood-store etc., whose air is designated for use as part of a dwelling - and in which it is therefore permitted to carry even if it is five or ten Kurin (far in excess of a Beis Sa'ah), and the guarding-huts in the fields, which are used to serve the field (instead of vice-versa), and which will therefore not permit carrying in an area of more than a Beis Sasayim.
(a)Rebbi Yochanan and Rebbi Elazar both stressed the power of Mechitzos that emerges from the Chachamim of our Mishnah, who permit Pasei Bira'os even if the street passes straight through it (though Rebbi Yehudah does not). What is the problem with this from another statement of Rebbi Yochanan's regarding Yerushalayim?
(b)How does the Gemara resolve the two statements of Rebbi Yochanan?
(c)In another Beraisa, Rebbi Yehudah permits someone with two houses, one on either side of the street, to put up two Lechayayim or two Koros and carry there, whereas the Rabbanan forbid this. How do we reconcile both Rebbi Yehudah and the Rabbanan with their opinions in our Mishnah, where they appear to have switched views?
(a)Since Rebbi Yochanan and Rebbi Elazar both stressed the power of Mechitzos that emerges from the Chachamim of our Mishnah, who permit Pasei Bira'os even if the street passes straight through it - it appears that this is their opinion. Then how can Rebbi Yochanan say elsewhere, that if the doors of Yerushalayim were not closed at night-time, it would be considered a Reshus ha'Rabim (in spite of the wall that surrounded it), and one would be Chayav for carrying four Amos in it?
(b)The Gemara resolves this apparent contradiction - by explaining that, although Rebbi Yochanan stressed the power of Mechitzos (like the Chachamim) in fact, he follows the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah, who rules that when the public pass in between the Pasei Bira'os, they negate the Mechitzos, and it remains a Reshus ha'Rabim.
(c)In our Mishnah, which speaks about the Pasei Bira'os, the Mechitzos are not real ones, but Halachic ones - and it is there that Rebbi Yehudah holds that the public negate them; whereas, in the Beraisa, which speaks about two proper Mechitzos at the side of the street, Rebbi Yehudah will agree that the public cannot negate them. The Rabbanan, on the other hand, hold that the public cannot negate the Mechitzos of Pasei Bira'os - because at least there are four walls (albeit Halachic ones); whereas in the Beraisa, where there are only two, the public passing through will negate them.
(a)Rebbi Yochanan made the radical statement that one is not Chayav for carrying anywhere in Eretz Yisrael. Taking his statement literally, what reason does the Gemara give for this?
(b)Given the geography of Bavel, what obvious problem faces us?
(c)As a matter of fact, one should even be permitted to carry anywhere in the world, according to this logic. Why is that?
(d)The Gemara concludes that Rebbi Yochanan is referring to carrying on the slopes of Eretz Yisrael. Why does he not consider the slopes of Eretz Yisrael a Reshus ha'Rabim?
(a)Rebbi Yochanan ruled that one is not Chayav for carrying in Eretz Yisrael - because of the steep mountain range in the north (Sulma de'Tzur), and the wadi (Machsana de'Geder) in the south. - Presumably, the Gemara takes for granted the Mediterranean Sea in the west, and the two Seas and the Jordan River in the east.
(b)In that case, queries the Gemara - why may one not carry in Bavel too, which is also surrounded by the rivers P'ras and Diglas?
(c)And if it comes to that, carrying anywhere in the world should be permitted, since all of the land is surrounded by the oceans!
(d)The slopes of Eretz Yisrael are not considered a Reshus ha'Rabim - since they are not similar to the camp of Yisrael in the desert, which was flat.
(a)Why does Rachbah consider it obvious that, according to the Rabbanan, a mound of earth which rises ten Tefachim within the space of four Amos, and which the public use, is considered a Reshus ha'Yachid?
(b)What is his She'eilah according to Rebbi Yehudah?
(c)What did Rava answer him?
(d)Will this apply even to the slopes of Beis Meron? What are the slopes of Meron?
(a)Rachbah maintains that, according to the Rabbanan, a mound of earth which rises ten Tefachim within the space of four Amos, and which the public use, will be considered a Reshus ha'Yachid - due to a Kal va'Chomer: if, in their opinion, the public cannot negate four walls when it is easy for them to pass through (as it is in our Mishnah), then how much more so will that be the case, when it is only with difficulty that they can use it - like it is here.
(b)The She'eilah, according to Rebbi Yehudah - is whether his ruling (that the public negate the Mechitzos) is confined to our Mishnah (where it is easy for the public to pass through), but will not apply in our case (where the mound rises four Amos in the space of ten Tefachim), since it is only with difficulty that they are able to use it; or whether it will apply there, too.
(c)Rava answers like the second side of the She'eilah (that,according to Rebbi Yehudah, even in the case of a mound that rises ten Tefachim within the space of four Amos - the public will negate the Mechitzos and it has the Din of a Reshus ha'Rabim); and even if, due to the steep angle of the incline, the ascent requires ropes to hold on to.
(d)This applies even to the slopes of Beis Meron - which were so narrow, that it was impossible for two people to climb them side by side.
(a)A Chatzer to which the public has access (via its gates or via a breach in the walls) is considered a Reshus ha'Rabim regarding Tum'ah, but a Reshus ha'Yachid regarding Shabbos. What makes the Gemara think that the author of this Beraisa is Rebbi Yehudah, and what problem does it then have with the previous Sugya?
(b)What does the Gemara solve the problem?
(a)If the public cannot negate the Mechitzos of Pasei Bira'os, even though it is easy for them to pass through, then how much more so will they not negate the Mechitzos of a Chatzer, to which one has access only via narrow gates or a breach in the walls (making it relatively difficult to pass through) - Consequently, the author of the Beraisa, which needs to state that such a Chatzer is a Reshus ha'Yachid regarding Shabbos, would appear to be Rebbi Yehudah, contradicting Rava's ruling in 5c.
(b)The Gemara answers - that really the author of the Beraisa is the Rabbanan, and the Chidush lies not in the fact that the Chatzer is a Reshus ha'Yachid for Shabbos, but that it is a Reshus ha'Rabim for Tum'ah.
(a)The Beraisa considers the steep paths of Beis Gilgul to be a Reshus ha'Yachid. How does one gauge whether a gradient is a Reshus ha'Yachid or a Reshus ha'Rabim?
(b)How does Rava, who rules that one is Chayav for carrying on a steep slope, explain this Beraisa?
(a)If a gradient is so steep that one's slave is unable to run up it carrying a Sa'ah of wheat in front of an officer - then it has the Din of a Reshus ha'Yachid; if he can, it has the Din of a Reshus ha'Rabim.
(b)Rava certainly holds that the public negate the Mechitzos, even by a steep slope. However, that applies to anywhere else in the world, but not to Eretz Yisrael (like Rebbi Yochanan): in Eretz Yisrael, when Yehoshua (who loved his people), distributed the land, he did it in such a way that all the easily negotiable areas he gave to the public, whilst those pieces that were uncomfortable for them to use, he distributed to individuals. Consequently, the steep inclines in Eretz Yisrael (such as the paths of Beis Gilgul, of which the Beraisa is speaking), are considered a Reshus ha'Yachid.
(a)Why does Rebbi Akiva require a wall of ten Tefachim by a private water-pit? Why are Pasei Bira'os not sufficient, like they are by a public water-pit?
(b)Then why does he permit a private well?
(c)Rebbi Yehudah ben Bava is more strict than Rebbi Akiva. What does he hold?
(d)What is required to permit drawing water and drinking it in an area not permitted by Pasei Bira'os?
(a)Rebbi Akiva is concerned that by a private water-*pit*, maybe the water will dry up, and, because there is no-one to remind him (unlike by a public pit, where the public will remind each other), the owner will forget, and carry his bucket there.
(b)A well is less likely to dry up, so Rebbi Akiva does not differentiate between a public well and a private one.
(c)Rebbi Yehudah ben Bava - restricts the Heter of Pasei Bira'os to a public well only - not to a private one, and nor to any sort of pit.
(d)Any area not permitted by Pasei Bira'os - requires regular Mechitzos.