The Tana Kama of our Mishnah requires the boy to eat a Tartimar of meat and half a Log of Italian wine in order to become a ben Sorer u'Moreh. According to Rebbi Yossi - he must eat a Manah of meat and drink a Log of wine.

The significance of specifically Italian wine is - the that it is highly addictive, which ordinary wine is not (and the underlying reason behind the Chiyuv of a ben Sorer u'Moreh is the fact that he will find it difficult to mend his ways due to the addiction to the meat and the wine).

The Tana rules - that a boy who eats these amounts ...

... by a Se'udas Mitzvah, by Ibur ha'Chodesh, or Ma'aser Sheini in Yerushalayim - is Patur.

... of Neveilos, Tereifos, Shekatzim u'Remasim' - is Patur, too.

When the Tana mentions 'Ma'aser Sheini', he means that - the boy steals Ma'aser-Sheini money from his parents, which he takes to Yerushalayim, where he buys meat and wine (since Ma'aser Sheini per se does not pertain to animals).

And if he eats and drinks other exotic foods and liqueurs besides wine - he does not become a ben Sorer u'Moreh.

The Mishnah extrapolates from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Zolel ve'Sov'ei" that - he eats meat and drinks wine in a gluttonous manner.

The Pasuk in Mishlei - "Al T'hi be'Sov'ei Yayin, be'Zolelei Basar lamo" hints at the same thing even more explicitly.

It is not clear what a Tartimar (of meat mentioned by the Tana Kama) is. Rebbi Zeira however learns it from Rebbi Yossi's opinion - because just as the Shi'ur of wine he gives is double the amount of that prescribed by the Tana Kama, so presumably, is the Shi'ur of meat. Consequently, since Rebbi Yossi gives the latter as a Manah, the Tartimar of the Tana Kama must be half a Manah.

Rav Chanan bar Muldah quoting Rav Huna requires the boy to purchase the meat and wine at a cheap price, and he extrapolates this from the Pasuk "Zolel ve'Sov'ei" - because "Zolel" is a derivative of 'Zol', which means 'cheap'.

The underlying reason for this is - because he is more likely to become addicted to the food if it is cheap).

In order to be Chayav, Rav Huna requires the ben Sorer u'Moreh to eat the meat raw and drink the wine - undiluted.

Rabah and Rav Yosef exempt him from Misah if he eats the meat raw and drinks the wine undiluted (because eating food in that manner is not addictive).

To reconcile the two opinions, Ravina explains Rav Huna to mean that - the meat should not be completely cooked (only half-roasted on coals, the way robbers eat it, and the wine not properly diluted (in the way that most people drink it).

Consequently, Rav Huna's reason regarding ...

... the meat is - because, since he steals it from his parents, he will be afraid to eat it in a leisurely manner in case he gets caught, and even if he does so once, he will not do it regularly).

... the wine is - because one does not become addicted to drinking undiluted wine or wine that is over-diluted.

Rabah and Rav Yosef say that if a ben Sorer u'Moreh eats salted meat and drinks wine straight from the vat - he is Patur, because eating and drinking in this way is not addictive either.

The Mishnah in Ta'anis forbids eating two cooked dishes, meat or wine at the Se'udah ha'Mafsekes on Erev Tish'ah be'Av - but it excludes salted meat and wine from the vat from the latter prohibitions.

When Rebbi Chanina b'Rebbi Yossi gives the Shimon'ur ...

... of salted meat, as 'Kol Z'man she'hu ki'Shelamim', he means that - for the two days and the night in between that one is permitted to eat Shelamim, it is not called salted (because the meat's natural juice continues to neutralize the salt).

... of wine from the vat as 'Kol Z'man she'Hu Toseis', he means that - as long as the wine 'bites the throat' because of its sharpness, it is called 'Toseis' (a time-period of three days). The source for this ruling is a Beraisa which precludes Yayin Toseis from the prohibition of drinking uncovered wine for fear that a snake drank from it.

The Shi'ur by a ben Sorer u'Moreh might be different than the Din of Erev Tish'ah be'Av - because whereas the latter is based on Simchah, the former is a question of addiction, which consequently is gauged differently.

We therefore give the Shi'ur, regarding a ben Sorer u'Moreh, for ...

... salted meat - as one day only, meaning that once the first day has passed, it is no longer addictive, and a ben Sorer u'Moreh is not Chayav.

... wine from the vat - as up to forty days, up to which time the ben Sorer u'Moreh is not Chayav.

Rav Chanan learns from the Pasuk in Mishlei "T'nu Sheichar la'Oved ve'Yayin le'Marei Nefesh" that - wine was created a. to pay the Resha'im in this world, in order to drive them out of the next. b. to comfort mourners.

Wine causes the Resha'im's faces to turn red (from pleasure) in this world (since the Pasuk there writes "Al Teire Yayin ki Yisadam"); in the World to Come - they will turn white from embarrassment.

Rava Darshens the Pasuk "Al Teire Yayin Ki Yisadam" - as a warning not to pursue the pleasures of wine, because in the end, it will turn into blood (meaning that it will cause one's death).

Rav Kahana reconciles the word 'Tirosh' (wine), which is written without a 'Vav' ('Tirash') but pronounced 'Tirosh' as if it had one - by ascribing to wine two powers 'Zachah, Na'aseh Rosh ([meaning a leader] corresponding to the way it is pronounced), Lo Zachah, Na'aseh Rash' ([meaning poor] corresponding to the way it is written).

Similarly, Rava explains the Pasuk "ve'Yayin Yesamach L'vav Enosh" - to mean either "Yeshamemehu" (a Lashon of destruction and desolation, the way it is written [with a 'Shin']) or "Yesamach", the way it is pronounced.

Rava ascribed his own wisdom - to wine and spices.

Rav Amram b'rei de'Rebbi Shimon bar Aba quoting Rebbi Chanina cites the Pasuk in Mishlei "Who will experience Oy va'Voy, strife, pain, senseless wounds, and red eyes?". To which the Pasuk answers - "those who stay back for more wine".

The Pasuk concludes "la'Ba'im la'Chekor mi'M'soch" - with reference to people who search for where they can find superior spiced wines.

According to Rav Dimi in the name of the b'nei Ma'arva, this is one way of explaining the Pasuk. It is also possible to explain it backwards, in which case "Oy va'Voy and pain" refers to mourners ...

... "strife and senseless wounds", to - wicked people who are constantly picking fights with others.

.. "red eyes" - to those who are well-off and comfortable; they are the ones who can afford to look for superior spiced wines.

Ubar Galila'a commented on the Pesukim in No'ach "va'Yechal No'ach Ish Adamah, va'Yita Karem va'Yesht min ha'Yayin va'Yishkar, va'Yisgal be'Soch Ohalo ... va'Yeida es asher Asah lo B'no ha'Katan" - on the thirteen 'Vay's (words which begin with 'Vav' 'Yud', which begin with No'ach planting a vineyard, and culminate with his own denigration at the hand of his son), which teaches us the harm that excessive wine-drinking can do.

Rav and Shmuel argue over what Cham did to his father. One says - that he castrated him; the other, that he raped him.

The proof that he ...

... castrated him lies in the fact that - No'ach cursed his fourth son Cana'an, in return for Cham's having prevented him from having a fourth son.

... raped him is based on a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "va'Yar" - "va'Yar osah Sh'chem ben Chamor" (in connection with the rape of Dinah).

We have already explained why No'ach cursed Cana'an, Cham's fourth son, according to the opinion that Cham castrated him. According to the opinion that he raped him, he did so - because he agrees that he castrated him too.

According to Rav Ukva (or Rebbi Zakai), No'ach's mistake in planting a vineyard of all things - was in not taking his cue from Adam ha'Rishon, who brought death on himself and on the whole of the world by drinking wine.

This conforms to Rebbi Meir, who holds in a Beraisa that the tree from which Adam ate was a vine. The basis for Rebbi Meir's opinion is - precisely what we have been saying; that nothing causes as much wailing as wine.

The basis for Rebbi Yehudah's opinion that it was wheat lies in the fact that - a baby learns to call his mother and father directly when he begins to eat wheat-bread (suggesting that the Tree of Knowledge was wheat).

Rebbi Nechemyah learns that it was a fig-tree - because since, that is the tree whose leaves they took to fashion themselves belts to cover their nakedness, we can assume that it was also the tree that caused them to sin.

Similarly, we find Hash-m repairing, using the very tools with which he struck - with regard to the Beis-Hamikdash, which He destroyed with fire, and which He will rebuild with fire (like we say in 'Nacheim' on Tish'ah be'Av). May it come about soon.

In the Pasuk in Mishlei "Lemu'el Melech, Masa asher Yisrehu Imo", ''Lemuel Melech" means - 'The deeds and wisdom of Shlomoh ha'Melech were dedicated to the Shechinah' ("Lemu'el" being the acronym of 'Lamo Keil' [for the sake of Hash-m]).

Rebbi Yochanan in the name of Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai discussing the Pesukim there, explains that the entire Pasuk was said by Shlomoh ha'Melech's mother (Bas-Sheva). By ...

... 'Mah B'ri' she meant that - everyone knows that Shlomoh's father feared Hash-m. So if Shlomoh will indulge in wine and becomes obsessed with the pleasures of life, they will say that he took after her.

... 'u'Mah bar Bitni' that - all of David's other wives were no longer intimate with him once they became pregnant (until they gave birth). Not so she, who in the knowledge that intimacy is healthy for the baby during the last three months of pregnancy, forced her way into her husband's presence (to make him aware of her).

... 'u'Mah bar Nidri' that - whereas all the other wives of David prayed for a son who would be fit to reign, she made a Neder that if she had a son, she would bring him up to be a great Talmid-Chacham and who would be fit to be a Navi.

She ordered him to avoid behaving like other kings - who would drink to the point of drunkenness (who would satiate themselves with the pleasures of life).

"u'le'Roznim Eli Sheichar" means either that it is not befitting for someone to whom all the secrets in the world are revealed, to become drunk or that - it is not befitting for someone who is visited by all the kings (who came to pay him homage and to ask for his advice) to be in a state of drunken stupor.

Rebbi Yitzchak explains that Shlomoh later admitted that his mother was right. When he said there ...

... "Ki Ba'ar Anochi me'Ish", he meant that - if No'ach (who was called 'Ish Tzadik'), who did not drink as much as he did, suffered from the wine that he drank, how much more so would he suffer (if he didn't stop).

... "ve'Lo Binas Adam li" - he was making the same analogy between himself and Adam ha'Rishon, who also drank less than he did (and look what happened to him)!

Rebbi Avahu requires a ben Sorer to eat and drink with - a group of empty-headed people, before he becomes Chayav.

We query him from our Mishnah, which exempts him if he eats in a Chaburas Mitzvah - implying that any group that is not a Chaburas Mitzvah renders the ben Sorer u'Moreh Chayav, irrespective of the caliber of people they are?

And we answer - by establishing our Mishnah by a group of empty-headed people, and it is coming to teach us that the ben Sorer u'Moreh is nevertheless Patur, since it is a Chaburas Mitzvah.

We learned in a Beraisa that they would only eat bread and legumes at the Seudah of Ibur ha'Chodesh. Nevertheless, our Mishnah needs to preclude a ben Sorer u'Moreh who eats at such a Se'udah - to exempt him even where he brings his own meat and wine with him.

The least number of participants who would join in the Se'udah of Ibur Chodesh - whose purpose was to spread the fact that Rosh Chodesh fell on the thirty-first day of the previous month (and not on the thirtieth) is - ten.

The Se'udah took place - on the night following the thirtieth.

We resolve the apparent discrepancy between two Beraisos, one of which requires them to ascend for the Se'udah in the evening (following the thirtieth of the month), the other, in the morning, by citing Rebbi Chiya bar Aba, who would instruct the participants of the Se'udas Ibur Chodesh - to arrive before nightfall, and to leave only after day-break (so that people would see them both coming and going, and realize that Rosh Chodesh fell on the thirty-first).

besides the fact that there was no Kidush ha'Chodesh when Rosh Chodesh fell on the thirty-first, the Sugya of Ibur Chodesh cannot be referring to Kidush ha'Chodesh - because Kidush ha'Chodesh only requires three people, and not ten.

Rava rules that a ben Sorer u'Moreh who eats fowl - is Patur.

And he establishes our Mishnah, which exempts him if he ate 'Shekatzim and Remasim', suggesting that if he would have eaten Kasher creatures of that type of meat (locusts), he would be Chayav is speaking - where he ate a little less than a Tartimar of animal meat, which he needs to complement with the meat under discussion.

Having already learned in the Reisha 'Achal ba'Chaburas Mitzvah' on the one hand, and 'Tereifos, Shekatzim and Remasim' on the other, the Tana adds ...

... 'Achal D'var she'hu Mitzvah' - to include Tanchumei Aveilim (even though the Se'udah there is no more than a Takanas Chachamim). We would then interpret the Reisha - to mean Kohanim eating Kodshim or even Yisre'elim eating the Korban Pesach.

... 'u'D'var Aveirah' - to include eating on a Ta'anis Tzibur (which is also only an Isur de'Rabbanan).

The ben Sorer u'Moreh is Patur for eating a D'var Aveirah - because the Torah writes "Einenu Shome'a be'Koleinu", from which we can extrapolate "be'Koleinu", 've'Lo be'Kolo shel Makom'(he obeys Hash-m but not his parents).

In spite of having already learned in the Reisha that a ben Sorer u'Moereh is only Chayav for eating meat and drinking wine, the Tana finds it necessary to add ...

... 'Achal Kol Ma'achal ve'Lo Achal Basar' - to preclude also a fig from Ke'ilah and ...

... 'Shasah Kol Mashkeh ve'Lo Shasah Yayin' - to preclude honey and milk (all of which which inebriate).

The Tana nevertheless needs to preclude them. Otherwise, we might have thought that the ben Sorer u'Moreh is Chayav - in view of the Beraisa which renders Chayav someone who partakes of them and enters the Beis-Hamikdash (as if he had drunk wine).

The Beraisa supports this ruling with the same Pasuk in Mishlei that our Mishnah quoted regarding a ben Sorer u'Moreh ("Al T'hi be'Sovevei Yayin ve'Zolelei Basar"), but adds another Pasuk in Mishlei, which begins "Ki Sovei ve'Zolel Yivaresh", which means that - someone who indulges excessively in the pleasures of life, will become poor in learning (he will not remember what he has learned).

The Tana explain the continuation of the Pasuk "u'Kera'im Talbish Numa" to mean that - his laziness (sleepiness) will cause him to become poor in learning, as we explained.

Rebbi Zeira interprets the word "Numa" literally - to mean that if someone sleeps ('Numi' in Arama'ic) in the Beis-ha'Medrash - his learning will become torn and fragmented (he will only remember bits and pieces of what he has learned).