1)

(a)Rebbi Yochanan disagrees with the previous explanation (of Rebbi Yitzchak and Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak). He maintains that Raban Gamliel and his Beis Din rescinded the Takanah of Beis Hillel and Beis Shamai min ha'Torah (from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Shabbos" "Shabbos" from Shabbos Bereishis - that, just like by Shabbos Bereishis, only the day itself is forbidden, so too by Shemitah, will only the Shemitah year itself be forbidden, but not the period prior to it and after it [See Tosfos DH 'Mah Lehalan']).

(b)His explanation is unacceptable however - because a 'Gezeirah Shavah' cannot uproot Tosefes Shemitah, irrespective of whether it is learned from a Pasuk or from a Halachah.

(c)Rav Ashi therefore amends Rebbi Yochanan's explanation. He explains that in fact, Raban Gamliel and his Beis-Din hold like Rebbi Yishmael, that the Derashah of "b'Charish uv'Katzir Tishbos" pertains to Shabbos and not to forbid Tosefes Shemitah. Consequently - we can revert to the explanation that we gave earlier; namely, that it was indeed Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel who decreed Tosefes Shemitah [from Pesach and from Shavu'os] but that, when they issued the decree, they stipulated that a later Beis-Din would be able to rescind it)

2)

(a)The Tana of our Mishnah forbids using Mei Kilon (water in a pit) to water a Beis ha'Shelachin because of the excessive trouble involved. According to Rebbi Yochanan, he decrees rainwater (that is flowing and does not involve excessive trouble) in case one will then go on to use Mei Kilon. Rav Ashi explains - that it is because rain-water itself, before the pits become full (or after the rain stops - Rabeinu Chanan'el), needs to be drawn and is therefore considered Mei Kilon.

(b)Their Machlokes is based on a statement of Rebbi Zeira, who quoting ... Shmuel, says that one is permitted to water one's field on Chol ha'Mo'ed from rivers that draw their water from pools - and who does not issue a decree forbidding it because the water in the pools may run out, and obtaining a new source of water (on Chol ha'Mo'ed) will involve excessive trouble (Tircha Yesera).

(c)Rebbi Zeira's statement concurs with Rav Ashi, who only forbids rainwater because it is considered Mei Kilon, but not on account of Mei Kilon (but not of that of Rebbi Yochanan, who decrees one because of the other).

(d)Rebbi Yirmeyahu asked Rebbi Zeira (who permitted watering one's field in Bavel from pools of water), why the pools of Bavel should be any different than Mei Kilon, which might dry up and are therefore forbidden. He replied - that the pools of Bavel do not tend to dry up.

3)

(a)The Tana of the Beraisa permits using the water from pools on Chol ha'Mo'ed, provided a stream flows between them - because, should the pools dry up, one can always take to using the water from the stream to water one's fields without excessive trouble.

(b)Rav Papa adds the requirement that one must be able to water most of the field from that stream simultaneously (for obvious reasons). Rav Ashi maintains that this is not necessary - because, seeing as that stream is so conveniently located, people will nevertheless water their fields from it (even if it takes two or three days instead of one) rather than search for other sources of water.

(c)One may water a Sadeh Beis ha'Shelachin from a pool of water (even when there is no stream flowing from it) - if the water is dripping into the pool from another pool (which is situated above it), but only as long as the water is actually dripping.

(d)In addition, Abaye adds - that the original fountain (which feeds the upper Beis ha'Shelachin) has not dried up.

4)

(a)Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya forbids carrying water from a lower field to a higher one - because of the trouble that this entails.

(b)Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon is even more stringent - forbidding even the transportation of water from a lower area in a field to a higher one in the same field.

5)

(a)The Beraisa permits watering vegetables on Chol ha'Mo'ed - as long as one intends to pick them and eat them on Chol ha'Mo'ed, but not if it is to enhance their growth for after the Chag.

(b)Rabah Tosfa'ah asked Ravina to place a certain man in Cherem one Chol ha'Mo'ed - because he was watering vegetables on Chol'ha'Mo'ed.

(c)He queried Ravina's proof from the Beraisa in that, based on a Mishnah in Pe'ah - he interpreted 'Madlin Yerakos' as removing the excess vegetables (though the Mishnah is talking about vines of Pe'ah or Olelos) to improve the growth of the remaining ones.

(d)In that Mishnah, Rebbi Yehudah permits removing the excess vines (that stint the growth of the vineyard) even from the sections that belong to the poor. Rebbi Meir - forbids it.

6)

(a)Ravina proved that in the realm of Shemitah, 'Madlin' means to water - from another Beraisa (in connection with Shemitah) which specifically states 'Madlin Mayim li'Yerakos Kedei Le'Achlan'.

(b)When Rabah Tosfa'ah heard Rabah Tosfa'ah's proof - he conceded 'I Tanya, Tanya' ('If it is a Beraisa, then I have nothing more to say').

7)

(a)Rav Yehudah translates Ugiyos for the vines (which our Mishnah forbids digging on Chol ha'Mo'ed) as 'Banchi' - (circular ditches surrounding the vines).

(b)We reconcile this with Rav Yehudah himself, who permitted the people of Tzisa'i to dig 'Banchi' for their vineyards on Chol-ha'Mo'ed - by confining his ruling to the re-digging of old ones that became stopped up (which does not involve excessive work), but does not apply to digging new ones.

8)

(a)Rebbi Zeira and Rebbi Aba bar Mamal argue over Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah's reason for forbidding digging the course of a stream in the Shemitah year. One of them says because it resembles digging in one's field - the other one, because throwing the dug earth onto the stream's banks looks as if one is creating a new source for seeding.

(b)We suggest that the difference between them will be in a case where the water flows along the bed as he digs, since that hardly resembles normal digging. We reject this suggestion however - on the grounds that even the first opinion will have to admit that it looks as if he is creating a new source of seeding and is therefore forbidden.

(c)So we give the difference as being a case where the digger throws the earth beyond the stream's banks, in which case, it no longer looks as if he is preparing them for sowing. This opinion does not nevertheless forbid it, because it resembles digging - because he maintains that seeing as people who dig normally leave the earth where it is, it does resemble digging.

9)

(a)The Tana Kama in a Mishnah in Shevi'is rules 'Oseh Adam es Zivlo Otzer' - meaning that one is permitted to pile up all one's manure in one's field.

(b)But Rebbi Meir forbids it (because it conveys the impression that he is manuring his field), unless he places it in a ditch three Tefachim deep or on a mound three Tefachim high. He concedes however, that it is permitted even if there is no ditch or mound - if some manure was placed there already before the Shemitah.

(c)Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah is the most strict of all - he agrees with Rebbi Meir's stringency, but not with his concession.

10)

(a)Ameimar ascribes Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah's ruling forbidding the digging of a source of a stream to the fact that it resembles digging in a field. But didn't we just learn - that Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah himself agrees with Rebbi Meir, who permits digging a ditch of three Tefachim in which to place his manure?

(b)Rebbi Zeira and Rebbi Aba bar Mamal give two reasons as to why the latter case (the Mishnah in Shevi'is) is different. One says because it speaks when he already dug the ditch beforehand - the other one says that the fact that he later fills the ditch with manure demonstrates that he is not digging it in order to cultivate the field, and is therefore permitted.

11)

(a)Rebbi Aba explains 'u'Mesaknin es ha'Mekulkeles' (in our Mishnah) to mean that if five Tefachim of a stream that was one Amah deep became stopped up - one is permitted to re-dig the stream to its previous depth of six Tefachim. It is obvious that this will be forbidden if the stream had an original depth of ...

1. ... three Tefachim, and two and half Tefachim became stopped up - because three Tefachim is too shallow to be of much use (rendering the Tircha unnecessary).

2. ... twelve Tefachim, of which ten Tefachim became stopped up - because, even though the proportion is the same as five Tefachim to six, this is more depth than one needs (rendering it too, an unnecessary Tircha).

(b)Rebbi Aba asks whether it is permitted in the case of a stream that was originally seven Tefachim deep, five of which became stopped up? It might be ...

1. ... permitted - because he is digging five Tefachim, exactly the same as in the original case permitted by our Mishnah.

2. ... forbidden - because one of those five Tefachim is unnecessary, rendering it a Tircha Yeseirah.

(c)Abaye permitted the removal of branches from the river bed on Chol ha'Mo'ed; Rebbi Yirmeyahu permitted clearing the source of a river that became stopped-up, and Rav Ashi permitted clearing away a large pile of rubble that had formed in the middle of a river. The common reason for all these concessions is - Tzorchei Rabim (communal needs), which is permitted on Chol ha'Mo'ed, even if it involves excessive trouble, even if it is done in public and even if it could have been done beforehand (see Rosh, Siman 6).