1)

(a)The Torah writes in ki Sissa "al B'sar Adam Lo Yisach, u've'Maskunto Lo Sa'asu Kamohu". How many K'risus does the Pasuk mention in connection with these two La'avin?

(b)What does Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Hoshaya say about this with regard to Chata'os?

(c)What problem does this create with Kareis de'Achoso, from which we learned Achoso she'Hi Achos Aviv va'Achos Imo?

(d)Why is this no problem according to Rebbi Yitzchak?

2)

(a)We conclude that, based on Ein Onshin min ha'Din, we need the Pasuk to teach us Achoso she'Hi Bas Aviv u'Bas Imo. But did we not learn that from the second "Achoso", whereas we are currently querying the first "Achoso"?

(b)What does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak set out to prove from the order of the three K'risos in our Mishnah 'ha'Mefatem es ha'Shemen, ha'Mefatem es ha'Ketores ve'ha'Sach be'Shemen ha'Mishchah'?

(c)On what grounds do we reject the suggestion that the Tana placed them in that order merely to juxtapose both cases of Mefatem, but not to teach us anything?

(d)What have we now proved?

3)

(a)What problem do we have with the fact that our Mishnah lists on the one hand, 'ha'Ishah ha'Mevi'ah ha'Beheimah alehah', and on the other, 'ha'Ba al ha'Zachur ve'al ha'Beheimah'?

(b)Why can we not prove that the Tana must be speaking about a man, from Milah?

(c)To resolve the problem, Rebbi Yochanan amends the Mishnah to read 'ha'Ba al ha'Zachur ve'Heivi Zachur alav' (instead of 've'Ishah ha'Mevi'ah ha'Beheimah alehah'), and the author of our Mishnah is Rebbi Yishmael. Why is that?

(d)How is it possible to interpret our Mishnah by a woman, when virtually all the cases are presented in the masculine?

4)

(a)Which Tana holds in the Seifa that Megadef is Chayav a Korban?

(b)How does that pose a Kashya on the previous statement?

(c)Nor can we establish Rebbi Akiva like Rebbi Yishmael regarding ha'Ba al ha'Zachur ve'ha'Meivi Zachur alav (in the Reisha), due to a statement by Rebbi Avahu. Which statement?

5)

(a)How does Rebbi Avahu extrapolate his previous statement from Rebbi Yishmael and Rebbi Akiva's sources?

(b)If Rebbi Yishmael learns Ba al ha'Zachur from "ve'es Zachar Lo Sishkav ... ", from where does he learn Meivi Zachur alav?

(c)And from where does Rebbi Akiva learn Meivi Zachur alav?

6)

(a)If we cannot establish the Reisha like Rebbi Akiva, as we just explained, then how do we finally reconcile the Seifa (regarding Megadef) with the Reisha?

(b)What do we mean when we ask, if that is so, why the Tana does not also insert ha'Ba al ha'Beheimah ve'ha'Meivi Beheimah alav?

(c)What does Abaye reply to that?

(d)Why do we require a Pasuk for the Nishkav (Meivi Zachur Alav), any more than a woman, who is Chayav in all cases of Arayos, just like the man (because of the Pasuk (in Kedoshim) "ha'Nefashos ha'Osos")?

7)

(a)Rebbi Elazar in the name of Rav leaves our Mishnah 've'ha'Ishah ha'Mevi'ah Beheimah alehah' intact. How does he then resolve our original problem, that this will detract from the number of Chata'os)?

(b)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Korach "Torah Achas Yih'yeh Lachem la'Oseh bi'Shegagah. ve'ha'Nefesh asher Ta'aseh be'Yad Ramah"?

8)

(a)How does Rebbi Yochanan explain the fact that our Mishnah lists Shabbos as one Chatas, when it really incorporates thirty-nine (making a total of seventy-eight)?

(b)And he cites the Beraisa which, commenting on the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with a Korban Chatas) "me'Achas me'Heinah", Darshens (from the extra 'Mem' in "me'Achas") "Heinah" she'Hi Achas' (which is only counted as one). What does the Tana mean when he Darshens "Achas" she'Hi Heinah" (from the extra 'Mem' in "me'Heinah")?

(c)If, in the latter case, the sinner forgot all the Melachos, in which regard did he know that it was Shabbos?

(d)Why did the Tana choose to present Shabbos in the form of Shig'gas Shabbos ve'Zadon Melachos, and not Zadon Shabbos ve'Shig'gas Melachos (counting it as thirty-nine Chata'os)?

9)

(a)What do we mean when we add that alternatively, it is more logical to establish our Mishnah by Shig'gas Shabbos and Zadon Melachos than the other way round, because it is fixed (Pesika leih)? What would be the problem if the Mishnah was talking about Zadon Shabbos ve'Shig'gas Melachos (counting it as thirty-nine Chata'os)?

(b)What other reason is there to explain why the Tana prefers to establish Shabbos by Shig'gas Shabbos ve'Zadon Melachos?

(c)How many Chata'os would one be Chayav in a case of Shig'gas Avodos ve'Zadon Avodah-Zarah?

10)

(a)Why can Shig'gas Avodas-Kochavim not be speaking where the sinner prostrated himself ...

1. ... in a Beis Avodah-Zarah, thinking that he was in a Shul?

2. ... before a statue that was not made to be worshipped?

(b)We therefore establish the case where he prostrated himself to an image out of love or fear of a person, according to Abaye. What does Rava say?

(c)So how will Rava establish the case of Shig'gas Avodas-Kochavim?

(d)Then what did he mean when he asked Rav Nachman what the Din will be if he forgot that both Avodah-Zarah and the Avodos are Asur?

3b----------------------------------------3b

11)

(a)Rav Papa establishes Shig'gas Avodas-Kochavim by a child who was captured among the Nochrim. How does that fit into the category of Shig'gas Avodas-Kochavim ve'Zadon Avodos?

(b)And how will the alternative case of the grown-up who erred in the Pasuk in Yisro "Lo Sa'asun Iti Elohei Chesef ve'Elohei Zahav" fit into that category? What was his mistake?

(c)Rav Acha b'rei de'Rav Ika in the name of Rav Bibi bar Abaye explains that the Tana only mentions the name Shabbos and the name Avodah-Zarah. What does he mean by that?

(d)How does he prove this from the Mishnah's insertion of 'Ishah u'Bitah'? Which case/s does the Tana omit ...

1. ... which is not written?

2. ... even though they are written?

12)

(a)Rav Acha b'rei de'Rav Ika actually queries Rav Bibi bar Abaye's previous statement from a Kashya that he himself asked on a ruling regarding Ma'aleh Evrei P'nim and Ma'aleh Evrei Chutz. What is the difference between them?

(b)What ruling do both cases share?

(c)What problem does Rav Acha b'rei de'Rav Ika have with Rav Bibi bar Abaye, who asked that if that is so, the thirty-six K'risus in our Mishnah ought to be listed as thirty-seven?

(d)How do we answer the Kashya? What is the basic difference between Shabbos and Avodah-Zarah on the one hand, and Shechutei Chutz on the other, that justifies Rav Bibi bar Abaye's query in spite of his previous statement?

13)

(a)Rebbi Yirmiyah asked Rebbi Zeira what the Din will be regarding a case where the Torah states one La'av and two K'risos. Which two cases was he referring to?

(b)On what grounds did Rebbi Zeira refute the She'eilah?

(c)What does the Pasuk in Re'ei "Hishamer l'cha Pen Ta'aleh Olosecha be'Chol Makom ... " teach us?

(d)What do we then learn from ...

1. ... the Gezeirah-Shavah of 'Hava'ah' "ve'el Pesach Ohel Mo'ed Lo Hevi'o") 'Hava'ah' ("ve'el Pesach Ohel Mo'ed Lo Yevi'enu")?

2. ... the Pasuk "Sham Ta'aleh ve'Sham Ta'aseh Olosecha"?

14)

(a)Rebbi Zeira therefore switched the She'eilah to a case of Ov ve'Yid'oni. What is then the She'eilah?

(b)And he cited a Machlokes Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish in this point. To what does Rebbi Yochanan ascribe the listing of both Ov and Yid'oni among the Niskalin in Sanhedrin, whereas our Mishnah only mentions Ba'al Ov?

(c)On what grounds does our Mishnah choose to mention Ba'al Ov rather than Yid'oni?

(d)What reason does Resh Lakish ascribe to our Mishnah's omission of Yid'oni?

15)

(a)What reason does Rav Papa give for Resh Lakish declining to learn like Rebbi Yochanan?

(b)Bearing in mind that the author of K'risos is Rebbi Akiva (who does not require an act, as we will see), on what basis does Resh Lakish require an act?

(c)A Ba'al Ov then, does constitute an act. What exactly is ...

1. ... Ov?

2. ... Yid'oni?

16)

(a)The Beraisa lists the four key Avodos of Avodah-Zarah (including Hishtachavayah), describing them as Avodos she'Yesh bahen Ma'aseh. Resh Lakish establishes this like Rebbi Akiva, according to whom a Ma'aseh Kol-D'hu will suffice. What does Rebbi Yochanan say?

(b)Assuming that we equate the act of banging one's arms (by Ba'al Ov) with bending one's body (by Hishtachavayah), according to whom does Resh Lakish consider banging one's arms an act?

(c)How will Resh Lakish then explain the Chachamim in our Mishnah, who specifically preclude Megadef from the K'risos, but not Ba'al Ov?

(d)And why did they pick specifically Megadef?

17)

(a)Ula interprets Ba'al Ov as sacrificing to a Sheid (a demon). What problem does Rabah have with this?

(b)So how does he qualify Ula's interpretation?

(c)Abaye queries this on the grounds that this is synonymous with Chover Chaver. What is the punishment for Chover Chaver?

(d)What did Rabah reply to Abaye's Kashya?

18)

(a)How does the Beraisa define a regular Chover Chaver? What are its three categories?

(b)Under which circumstances does Abaye permit gathering hornets and scorpions to one place using witchcraft?

(c)According to Rebbi Yochanan in the Rabbanan, who considers bending one's body an act, why do the latter not also consider bending one's lips an act with regard to Megadef (which constitutes cursing Hash-m)?

(d)On what grounds then, do we preclude Eidim Zomemin (by whom the Torah writes "al-Pi ... ") from Chatas, because it is not considered an act? Why do we not say there as well 'Akimas Sefasav havi Ma'aseh'?

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF