1)

(a)When Nevuzeradan, the Babylonian general, exiled the Jews to Bavel, he made sure that the 'Kormim' and the 'Yogvim' remained in Eretz Yisrael. Who were the 'Kormim' and the 'Yogvim'? Why did he do that?

1)

(a)The Kormim were people who collected the balsam (spice) from Ein Gedi to Remasa, and the Yogvim were those who pressed the fish to obtain the Techeles (the dark blue dye for the one thread of Tzitzis). Nevuzeradan wanted the precious Techeles to dye the Emperor's clothes.

2)

(a)Why even during the week, may one not light with ...

1. ... Tevel Tamei?

2. ... white paraffin??

(b)What is 'Tzari'?

(c)Why might its classification provide us with an additional reason to disqualify it from being used for the Shabbos-lights?

2)

(a)Chazal forbade lighting the Shabbos-lights with ...

1. ... Tamei Tevel - because the Torah writes "Mishmeres Terumosai", to compare Terumah Temei'ah to Terumah Tehorah: just as the Heter to eat Terumah Tehorah applies only after it has been separated, so too, the Heter to burn Terumah Temei'ah applies only after it has been separated, but not to Tevel.

2. ... white paraffin - because (like balsam oil, which we discussed above) it jumps, and is dangerous to use.

(b)Tzari (balsam) - is the sap of a Kataf (balsam)-tree.

(c)Tzari might also be disqualified from being used for the Shabbos lights - because it is not a derivative of the tree, only from the bark, which, like tar, is not drawn up the wick.

3)

(a)Why does Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri strongly object to Rebbi Tarfon, who forbids all oils except for olive-oil to be used for the Shabbos-lights?

(b)Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri therefore, permits the use of all oils (except for those forbidden by the Rabbanan in our Mishnah), even fish-oil and tar! Why does he need to specifically mention these two?

(c)Sumchus says that all meat extracts are disqualified, but fish-oil is Kasher. Is that not what Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri says (see Tosfos DH 'Ika Beineihu')?

3)

(a)Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri objects to Rebbi Tarfon, who forbids all oil except for olive oil - because then, what would they do in towns where only other kinds of oil were available?

(b)Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri therefore, permits the use of all oils (except for those forbidden by the Rabbanan in our Mishnah), even fish-oil and tar! He need to specifically mention these two - because fish oil is similar to Cheilev and tar is an extract of pitch (both of which, we learnt above, are not Kasher for Shabbos-lights).

(c)Sumchus says that all meat extracts are disqualified, but fish-oil is Kasher. He argues with Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri (with whom he initially appears to agree) - as to whether the fish-oil requires a drop of ordinary oil to be added to it (like Rav B'runa Amar Rav) or not (i.e. that it is permitted even if it was not).

4)

(a)'Tanya: Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar Omer, Kol ha'Yotze min ha'Eitz, Ein Bo Mishum Shalosh al Shalosh, u'Mesachechin Bo'. What does Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar mean?

(b)What is the exception to this rule?

(c)Abaye maintains that Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar holds like Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael. What does he say? Why must Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar hold like him?

(d)Then why does Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar confine his statement to what comes from a tree? He should have incorporated everything except for wool and linen?

4)

(a)When Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar says 'Kol ha'Yotze min ha'Eitz, Ein Bo Mishum Shalosh Al Shalosh' - he means that materials such as hemp and cotton of three by three fingerbreadths, cannot become Tamei. And by 'Mesachechin Bo', he is saying that, since they cannot become Tamei, they are eligible for use as Sechach for one's Succah.

(b)Flax is the one exception to this rule - it is referred to as a tree, but is nevertheless subject to Tum'as Nega'im.

(c)Abaye maintains that Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar holds like Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, who states that - since the Torah uses the word "Beged", and then goes on to specify ' wool and linen', by Tum'as Nega'im, we can learn (with a Binyan Av), that by all the other cases of Tum'ah (Sheratzim, Mes and Shichvas Zera) and by Tzitzis - where the Torah uses the general term 'Beged', it also means clothes of wool or linen (exclusively). Now, unless Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar held like Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, from where would he know to exclude all other materials from Tum'ah?

(d)When Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar says 'Yotze min ha'Eitz' - he really means all materials that are not wool and linen.

26b----------------------------------------26b

5)

(a)According to Rava, Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar agrees with Rebbi Yishmael, that a garment of wool or linen of three by three finger-breadths is subject to Tum'ah. In which case does he disagree with him?

(b)When does Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael agree that Tum'ah applies even to clothes made of materials other than wool and linen?a

5)

(a)According to Rava, Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar agrees with Rebbi Yishmael, that a garment of wool or linen of three by three finger-breadths is subject to Tum'ah. But when he said 'Kol ha'Yotzei Min ha'Eitz, he meant specifically that, and not other materials, which can become Tamei - not like Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael.

(b)Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael agrees that all clothes (even not of wool and linen) of three by three Tefachim are subject to Tum'ah.

6)

(a)From where do we know that a woolen or linen garment even as small as three by three finger-breadths, is subject to Tum'as Nega'im?

(b)From where do we know that the extra 'Vav' comes to include garments of three by three finger-breadths, and not of three by three Tefachim (since we always learn the smallest possible Chidush from a Pasuk, not the biggest)?

(c)Why should the 'Kal va'Chomer' teach us three by three Tefachim, and not finger-breadths?

(d)Why can the extra 'Vav' not come to include garments of other materials which are three by three Tefachim, rather than wool and linen clothes of three by three finger-breadths?

6)

(a)We learn that a woolen and linen garment of even three by three finger-breadths is subject to Tum'as Nega'im, from the 'Vav' in "ve'ha'Beged".

(b)The extra 'Vav' cannot come to include garments of three by three Tefachim, since we know them already, from a Kal va'Chomer from the warp and the woof (which are subject to Tum'as Nega'im, so how much more so, clothes of three by three Tefachim!).

(c)The reason that the Kal va'Chomer is confined to garments of three by three Tefachim exclusively, and not garments of three by three finger-breadths, is because the former are fit for rich and poor people alike, whereas the latter are fit only for the poor, but not for the rich.

(d)The extra 'Vav' cannot come to include garments of other materials which are three by three Tefachim, rather than wool and linen clothes of three by three finger-breadths - because the Torah stresses "Beged Tzemer u'Fishtim", to preclude clothes of other materials (even if they are three by three Tefachim), so how can we include them from the 'Vav'?

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF