1)

(a)So Rava establishes the case of Shogeg be'Lo Miskaven (not be Avodah-Zarah, but) by other sins, specifically those that entail physical pleasure (such as eating Cheilev) - when someone eats Cheilev (non-Kasher fat), believing it to be Shuman (Kasher fat). Even though by Shabbos and by most other sins he would Patur from a Korban, by Cheilev and sins from which one derives peasure, one is Chayav, because of Shmuel's principle 'ha'Mis'asek ba'Chalavim va'Arayos Chayav' ('someone who is Mis'asek in the case of eating Cheilev or of Arayos, is Chayav a to bring a Korban'. This is because the Korban there comes to atone for the pleasure, not for the intention to perform the act (as it does by Shabbos).

(b)The equivalent case by Shabbos is - when someone means to cut something that is detached, and then discovers that it was attached - (Abaye and Rava's current bone of contention). The Beraisa then, which exempts from a Korban, proves Rava right.

(c)Abaye counters by establishing the case of other sins by someone who swallowed melted Cheilev (which is categorized as eating) believing it to be spittle (which is not). The equivalent case by Shabbos is someone who intends to pick up something that is detached, and then discovers that is was attached (but had he meant to cut the one, and mistakenly cut the other, he would indeed be Chayav, like Abaye).

2)

(a)If someone intends to throw an object two Amos, and he throws it four, Abaye rules that he is Chayav (since he intended to perform the basic act of throwing). According to Rava, he is Patur - because he neither forgot Shabbos nor the Melachah (the classical interpretation of Shogeg), but simply did not mean to do what he did, and he is therefore classified as 'Mis'asek' (like the previous case of cutting).

(b)We have already discussed Abaye and Rava's Machlokes regarding someone who intends to cut what is detached, but inadvertently cuts what is attached. In a third Machlokes, regarding someone who throws four Amos in a location which he believes to be a Reshus ha'Yachid, but it turns out to be a Reshus ha'Rabim, Rava again says that he is Patur.

1. Had Rava issued his ruling only in the case of cutting, we would have ascribed his exemption there to the fact that what he intended to do what a Meleches Heter, whereas in the case of throwing, which is basically a Meleches Isur, even Rava would agree that he is Chayav.

2. And had he added only the case where he meant to throw less than four Amos, we would have ascribed Rava's ruling there to the fact that his intention was to throw less than the Shiur, but in the third case, where he meant to throw a full four Amos, he would be Chayav, since the act that he meant to perform was one of Chiyuv. Consequently, Rava needs to state his Din in all three cases.

3)

(a)We have already quoted the Mishnah later: 'Avos Melachos, Arba'im Chaser Achas', and established the Chidush to be that even if someone transgressed all the Melachos (be'Shigegas Melachos) in one He'elam, he is Chayav thirty-nine Chata'os. According to Abaye, Zadon Shabbos, in the Mishnah of 'Avos Melachos Arba'im Chaser Achas', speaks when he knew about all the Melachos of Shabbos, but did not know their Shiurim; according to Rebbi Yochanan, it speaks when he knew about the Isur La'av, but not about the Chiyuv Kares. The problem with establishing the Mishnah according to Rava is - that according to him, in both of these cases the transgressor is Patur from a Korban.

(b)Assuming that Rava rules that 'Heizid be'Kareis ve'Shagag be'La'av' is Chayav' (like Rebbi Yochanan), that is how he will explain the Mishnah. If however, he holds 'Patur' (like Resh Lakish) - he will establish our Mishnah, when he was a Shogeg in every aspect of Shabbos - the La'av, the Kares and the Shiur, but he did know about Techumin ...

(c)... like Rebbi Akiva, who maintains that Techumin is d'Oraysa.

4)

(a)

1. The first group of eleven Melachos (from sowing to baking) were performed in order to obtain the dyes for the curtains (we shall see later why, in that case, the Tana mentions baking rather than cooking).

2. The second group of five Melachos (from shearing to spinning) were performed in order to obtain the wool for the curtains.

3. The third group of eight Melachos (from stretching the threads of the warp to tearing) were performed in the process of weaving the curtains.

4. The fourth group of seven Melachos (from trapping to cutting to size), were performed with the Tachash - in preparing its skin for use as the top cover of the Mishkan.

5)

(a)What tearing and erasing have in common is - that they are only considered Melachos if one's intention was to re-sew or to write in the place where the letters had been erased.

(b)Demolishing also belomgs to this group - because one is only Chayav if one demolishes in order to re-build, as we learnt above (31b).

Note: According to the Rosh (Si'man 6), untying too, belongs in this group of Melachos, and one will only be Chayav if one unties a knot with the intention of re-tying it.

(c)What placing threads in the loops, weaving, splitting threads, stitching, tearing, writing and erasing all have in common is - that they share the same Shiur of two (two loops, two threads and two letters).

(d)Makeh ba'Patish is - the final act of completing something (even though, in itself, it does not constitute any other Melachah). It is called 'Makeh ba'Patish', because upon completing their work, workers would bang their hammers on the anvil, to smoothen the base of the hammer, to be ready for use next time.

6)

(a)Despite the fact that one normally plows before sowing, our Tana put sowing first - because he is speaking about Eretz Yisrael, where, due to the hardness of the earth, it was customary to plow first, and it comes to teach us that even that preliminary plowing is considered a Melachah, and carries with it a Chiyuv Chatas.

(b)What Sowing, pruning, planting, re-planting an attached branch, and grafting all have in common is - that they are all incorporated in the Melachah of Zorei'a (although the latter two are included in planting too, since they are performed on trees, and not with seeds). Consequently, someone who performs all five Melachos in one Ha'alamah, will only be Chayav one Chatas.

(c)Pruning - is a Toldah of sowing.

(d)When Rebbi Ami says that planting, replanting a branch and grafting are also Chayav because of sowing, he means that they are also incorporated in sowing, so that, if someone performs them together with sowing, he will not be Chayav a second Chatas.

7)

(a)Someone who prunes and also needs the wood, is Chayav because of two Melachos - reaping and planting.

(b)Aspasta is Lucerne-grass, which produces three crops monthly. Consequently, someone who cuts Aspasta from the ground, has contravened two Melachos, reaping and planting.

(c)Someone who cuts a beet from its stalk, too, is Chayav because of two Melachos, because beets regrow very quickly.

8)

(a)Someone who plows, digs a hole and digs ditches in one Ha'alamah - is only Chayav one Chatas, since they are all included in the Melachah of Choresh.

(b)Someone who removes a mound of earth or fills in a hole ...

1. ... in the house - is Chayav because of Boneh.

2. ... in the field - is Chayav because of Choresh.

(c)One is only Chayav for digging a hole, if one needs the hole, but not if one only needs the earth.

(d)One is not Chayav for digging a hole if he needs only the earth, even according to Rebbi Yehudah (who holds that one is Chayav for a 'Melachah she'Einah Tzerichah le'Gufah') - because if he does not need the hole, then he is automatically spoiling the field, and the Chiyuv on Shabbos is for Tikun (improvement) and not for Kilkul (destruction).

9)

(a)Kotzer, Botzer, Goder, Mosek, and Orah are all words that mean harvesting or picking - Kotzer pertains to grain, Botzer to grapes, Goder to dates, Mosek to olives and Orah to figs.

(b)According to Rav Papa, someone who throws a clod of earth at a date-palm and knocks down some dates, is Chayav because of detaching and because of extracting - the dates from the bunches (See Tosfos DH 've'Achas'. - Extracting is a Toldah of Dash - threshing).

(c)Rav Ashi maintains that this is not the way that one usually detaches dates or extracts the dates. Consequently, in his opinion - he will not be Chayav at all.

(d)Rabah maintains that someone who gathers salt next to a salt-mine has transgressed the Melachah of Me'amer. Abaye howwever holds, the Melachah of Me'amer is confined to things that grow from the ground, but not to salt.

10)

(a)Dash, Menapetz and Menapet are one and the same Melachah.'Dash' means threshing; 'Menapetz' means beating the stalks of flax in order to separate the strands from the stalks; 'Menapet' means doing likewise to cotton.

(b)The reason that Menapetz (of flax) is a Toldah of Dash and not of Menapetz (of wool), is - because flax grows from the ground, whereas wool does not.