(a)What does the Mishnah say about someone who is not sure whether what he ate was ...
1. ... Cheilev or Shuman?
2. ... a k'Zayis of Cheilev or less than a k'Zayis?
(b)What exactly, is the case?
(c)Why, if there is only one piece, is he Patur?
(d)Why does the Tana then insert the case of 'Cheilev ve'Shuman lefanav?
(e)What will be the Din if, at the time that he ate it he knew that one of the pieces was Cheilev and he ate it nonetheless?
1)
(a)The Mishnah rules that someone who is not sure whether what he ate was ...
1. ... Cheilev or Shuman, or whether it was ...
2. ... a k'Zayis of Cheilev or less than a k'Zayis - must bring an Asham Taluy
(b)The case is - where two pieces, one Cheilev and the other, Shuman, are lying in front of him and he thinks that they are both Shuman (See Tosfos Yom Tov).
(c)If there is only one piece, he is Patur - since there is not definitely a piece of Isur there ('Lo Ikba Isura').
(d)The Tana then inserts the case of 'Cheilev ve'Shuman lefanav - to explain the Reisha,
(e)If, when he eats it he knows that one of the pieces is Cheilev and he ate it nonetheless - he is considered a Meizid and is Patur from a Korban.
2)
(a)What does the Tana say about a similar case where a man ...
1. ... is in the house with his wife and his sister, and he has relations with one of them but does not know which one?
2. ... a man performed a Melachah, and is not sure whether he performed it on Shabbos or on a weekday?
(b)What exactly is the former case?
2)
(a)The Tana issues the same ruling in a similar case where a man ...
1. ... is in the house with his wife and his sister, and he has relations with one of them but does not know with which one and in a case where ...
2. ... he performs a Melachah, and is not sure whether he performed it on Shabbos or on a weekday.
(b)The former case is - where he thinks that the woman with whom he is intimate is his wife (See also Tosfos Yom Tov DH 'va'Afilu').
Mishnah 2
3)
(a)What does the Mishnah say about someone who transgresses two Asham Taluys ...
1. ... in one He'elam?
2. ... in two Ha'alamos (where he had a Yedi'ah in between)?
(b)In a case where someone transgresses one of two Chayvei Kareis (Cheilev or Nosar, his wife who is a Nidah or his sister) that are in front of him, or if he transgresses either Shabbos or Yom Kipur (during the bein-ha'Shemashos in between them), on what grounds does Rebbi Eliezer obligate him to bring a Chatas?
(c)What does Rebbi Yehoshua say, based on the word "bah" (in the Pasuk in Vayikra ("asher Chata bah")?
(d)What does Rebbi Eliezer learn from the word "bah"?
3)
(a)The Mishnah rules that someone who transgresses two Asham Taluys ...
1. ... in one He'elam - is Chayav to bring only one (similar to the Din of two Chayvei Chatas in one He'elam).
2. ... in two Ha'alamos (where he had a Yedi'ah in between) - must bring two.
(b)In a case where someone transgresses one of two Chayvei Kareis (Cheilev or Nosar, his wife who is a Nidah or his sister) that are in front of him, or if he transgresses either Shabbos or Yom Kipur (during the bein-ha'Shemashos in between them), Rebbi Eliezer obligates him to bring a Chatas- seeing as Mah Nafshach, he transgressed an Isur that is subject to a Chatas (See Tosfos Yom Tov).
(c)Based on the word "bah" (in the Pasuk in Vayikra ("asher Chata bah") - implying that he must know exactly what his sin was, Rebbi Yehoshua exempts him from a Chatas.
(d)Rebbi Eliezer learns from the word "bah" - that 'Mis'asek on Shabbos is Patur.
4)
(a)With reference to the Melachah of cutting off something that is attached, what is the case of Mis'asek?
(b)Based on which other principle/Pasuk is Mis'asek Patur?
(c)Why can the P'tur of Mis'asek not pertain to Chalavim and Arayos?
4)
(a)With reference to the Melachah of cutting off something that is attached, the case is - where one intended to cut something that he thought is detached (which is permitted [See Tosfos Yom Tov]) and then discovered that it was attached (Tiferes Yisrael).
(b)Mis'asek is Patur, based on the principle/Pasuk - 'Meleches Machsheves' (See Tosfos Yom Tov).
(c)The P'tur of Mis'asek cannot pertain to Chalavim and Arayos - where he is Chayav on account of the Hana'ah that he derives from the sin.
5)
(a)What does Rebbi Yossi say about someone who transgresses either Shabbos or Yom Kipur during the bein-ha'Shemashos in between them and who doesn't know which one he transgressed?
(b)Why is that?
(c)Then what is the case of Safek Shabbos, Safek bein-ha'Shemashos, where he holds 'Chayav Chatas'?
(d)Which other case of Melachah on Shabbos or Yom Kipur does Rebbi Yossi mention?
(e)Like whom is the Halachah?
5)
(a)Rebbi Yossi states that Rebbi Eliezer does not argue with Rebbi Yehoshua in a case where someone transgresses either Shabbos or Yom Kipur during the bein-ha'Shemashos in between them and who doesn't know which one he transgressed ...
(b)... due to the possibility that he performed half of the Melachah on the one and half, on the other, in which case he is Patur anyway.
(c)... and the case of Safek Shabbos, Safek bein-ha'Shemashos, where he holds 'Chayav Chatas' - is where he transgresses in the middle of one of the two days, but he cannot recall which one.
(d)The other case of Melachah on Shabbos or Yom Kipur that Rebbi Yossi mentions is - where he performs a Melachah on one of the two and is not sure which Melachah he performed.
(e)The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.
6)
(a)What does Rebbi Yehudah say about an Asham Taluy in the cases over which Rebbi Yehoshua exempts from a Chatas?
(b)How does he learn it from the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with Asham Taluy) "ki Secheta ve'Lo Yada"?
(c)Like whom is the Halachah?
6)
(a)Rebbi Yehudah rules that, in the cases over which Rebbi Yehoshua exempts from a Chatas - he is also Patur from an Asham Taluy ...
(b)... based on the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with Asham Taluy) "ki Secheta ve'Lo Yada" - which implies that one is only obligated to bring an Asham Taluy if he does not know for sure that he sinned.
(c)The Halachah is 'like the Tana Kama.
Mishnah 3
7)
(a)According to Rebbi Shimon Shezuri and Rebbi Shimon, Rebbi Yehoshua in the previous Mishnah concedes that in a case of two sins with the same name, the sinner is Chayav, and he argues in a case where the two sins have different names. What is an example of a case of two sins with ...
1. ... the same name?
2. ... different names?
(b)Why does Rebbi Yehoshua then concede that the sinner is Chayav in the former case?
(c)What did Rebbi Yehudah say (even where he intended to pick ...
1. ... figs and he picked grapes?
2. ... black figs and he picked white ones?
(d)How does the Gemara explain both cases?
(e)Then why is he Patur according to Rebbi Yehoshua?
7)
(a)According to Rebbi Shimon Shezuri and Rebbi Shimon, Rebbi Yehoshua in the previous Mishnah concedes that in a case of two sins with the same name, the sinner is Chayav, and he argues in a case where the two sins with different names. An example of a case of two sins with ...
1. ... the same name is - where he is not sure with which of two women who are both Nidos he had relations.
2. ... different names is - where he is not sure whether he reaped on Shabbos or whether he ground ...
(b)... and Rebbi Yehoshua concedes that the sinner is Chayav in the former case - because he knows exactly which sin he transgressed (See Tosfos Yom Tov).
(c)Rebbi Yehudah says that even where he intended to pick ...
1. ... figs and he picked grapes or ...
2. ... black figs and he picked white ones - Rebbi Yehoshua exempts him from a Chatas.
(d)The Gemara explains both cases - where he actually meant to perform both actions, but in the reverse order ...
(e)... and the reason that he is Patur according to Rebbi Yehoshua is - because when he performed each action, he did not do what he intended to do.
8)
(a)What did Rebbi Shimon comment on Rebbi Yehudah's previous explanation?
(b)How does the Mishnah go on to explain the Limud from "asher Chata bah" according to Rebbi Shimon?
(c)Like whom is the Halachah regarding the Machlokes ...
1. ... Rebbi Yehoshua and Rebbi Eliezer?
2. ... Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon?
8)
(a)Rebbi Shimon commented on Rebbi Yehudah's previous explanation that - he would be most surprised if Rebbi Yehoshua would exempt the sinner in such a case!
(b)The Mishnah goes on to explain the Limud from "asher Chata bah" according to Rebbi Shimon - by a plain case of Mis'asek (where he did not intend to pick the fig at all, as we learned in the previous Mishnah).
(c)The Halachah regarding the Machlokes ...
1. ... Rebbi Yehoshua and Rebbi Eliezer is - like Rebbi Yehoshua ...
2. ... according to the explanation of Rebbi Yehudah.
