1)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that a Mohel who circumcised on Shabbos the baby that he was supposed to circumcise on Sunday, instead of the baby that he was supposed to circumcise on Shabbos - is Chayav a Chatas.

(b)Rebbi Eliezer rules Chayav even in a case where the baby that he circumcised on Shabbos was supposed to have been circumcised on Friday. Rebbi Yehoshua rules - that he is Patur.

(c)Rav Huna learns our Mishnah as it stands. According to him, Rebbi Eliezer learn from Avodah-Zarah (from the Pasuk in Shelach-Lecha "Torah Achas Yihye Lachem, La'Oseh bi'Shegagah") - that whoever transgresses be'Shogeg a La'av which carries a sentence of Kares (be'Meizid) is Chayav a Chatas.

(d)Rebbi Yehoshua disagrees - on the grounds that whereas there, he did not perform a Mitzvah, here he did (seeing as the Friday baby was subject to Milah).

2)

(a)'Rav Yehudah learns (in the Reisha) Patur' - because according to him, the Reisha speaks when the Mohel circumcised a Friday baby instead of the Shabbos (and not the Sunday one), and R. Eliezer agrees with Rebbi Yehoshua's reason as cited by Rav Huna.

(b)He establishes their Machlokes - by the Sunday baby that the Mohel circumcised on Shabbos ...

(c)... and Rebbi Yehoshua rules Patur - because unlike Avodah-Zarah, the Mohel found himself obligated to circumcise, and was therefore busy with performing a Mitzvah.

3)

(a)According to Rebbi Chiya citing Rebbi Meir, even Rebbi Yehoshua agrees that a Mohel who circumcised a Friday baby on Shabbos is Chayav and they argue over the case of a Sunday baby.

(b)The problem with this however, is - that having ruled Chayav even where the Mohel performed a Mitzvah, how can Rebbi Yehoshua then rule Patur where he didn't?

(c)To solve the problem - de'Bei Rebbi Yanai establishes Rebbi Chiya's first ruling where, when he had inadvertently circumcised the Shabbos baby on Friday ...

(d)... and the reason that Rebbi Yehoshua rules Patur in the second ruling is - because there is a baby to circumcise, in which case Milah is destined to override Shabbos, whereas in the Reisha it is not.

4)

(a)Our Mishnah discusses all the possible days on which a healthy baby can be circumcised. He is circumcised, not on the eighth day, but on ...

1. ... the ninth - if he was born Bein-ha'Shemashos (during dusk, in which case he cannot be circumcised on the eighth day, in case it is really the seventh).

2. ... the tenth - if he was born during Bein ha'Shamashos on Friday evening (in which case he cannot be circumcised on the ninth day - because that will be Shabbos, and the Mitzvah of Milah does not override any Bris that does not take place on the eighth day).

3. ... the eleventh - if the tenth day is Yom-Tov (that falls on Sunday).

4. ... the twelfth - if the tenth and the eleventh days are Rosh Hashanah (that falls on Sunday and Monday).

(b)One circumcises a baby that has recovered from an illness - as soon as he has recovered.

(c)Shmuel rules - that one gives a baby that recovered from a fever seven days to recover before circumcising him.

5)

(a)We ask whether we need a 'me'Es le'Es' or not. What we mean is whether Shmuel requires a full seven days, or whether the baby can be circumcised any time on the eighth day.

(b)We try to resolve the She'eilah from the Beraisa learned by Luda 'Yom Havra'aso ke'Yom Hivaldo' - implying that just as the day of the baby's birth counts as the first day even though it does not constitute twenty-four hours, so too does the day that he recovers from a fever.

(c)We reject this proof however - by explaining the Tana to mean that just as the day when the baby is born we add seven days (to circumcise him on the eighth), so too, do we add seven days to the day that he recovers from his fever, but this does not mean that we do not require a me'Es le'Es, as is the case there.

6)

(a)Our Mishnah defines the remaining strands which render the Milah invalid as - those which cover the crown (i.e. the thick part) of the Milah.

(b)They affect a Kohen in particular -in that he is not permitted to eat Terumah as long as some of those strands remain intact.

(c)If the baby is a fat one, and some of the flesh above the Orlah folded over, giving the appearance of covering the Gid at that spot, then one is obligated to remove it because of 'Mar'is ha'Ayin'.

(d)The Tana rules that a Mohel who performs the Milah without performing the Peri'ah (folding back the skin over the Atarah after the actual circumcision has been completed) - is as if he had not performed the Milah.

7)

(a)When to explain the 'Tzitzin ha'Me'akvin es ha'Milah' in our Mishnah, Rebbi Yirmiyah bar Aba ... Amar Rav says 'Basar ha'Chofeh es Rov Govah ha'Atarah' he means - that not only the majority of the circumference of the skin of the Orlah needs to be removed, but so does the majority of the thickness of the Orlah at any one point.

(b)According to Shmuel, who says 'Kol Zeman she'Miskasheh ve'Nir'eh Mahul, Eino Tzarich Lamul' - it is only if the baby definitely appears to be circumcised when his limb is stiff that the Mohel does not need to circumcise him; but if it looks doubtful, then he requires a second circumcision. Whereas according to Raban Shimon ben Gamliel in the Beraisa, who says 'Kol Zeman she'Miskasheh ve'Eino Nir'eh Mahul, Tzarich Lamulo' - it is only if the baby definitely looks uncircumcised, that he needs to be circumcised again, but not if it looks doubtful.

8)

(a)The B'rachah recited by ...

1. ... the Mohel is - 'Baruch ... Al ha'Milah'.

2. ... the father of the baby - is 'Baruch ... Lehachniso bi'Veriso shel Avraham Avinu'.

(b)After the two B'rachos, the participants say - 'ke'Shem she'Hichnasteihu la'B'ris, Kein Tachniseihu le'Torah, le'Chupah u'le'Ma'asim Tovim' (our text reads - 'ke'Shem she'Nichnas ... Ken Yikanes ... ').

(c)

1. Yitzchak Avinu is referred to as 'Yedid' - because the Torah writes about him (by the Akeidah) "Asher Ahavta - es Yitzchak" (see also Tosfos DH 'Yedid').

2. 'mi'Beten' - means that he was sanctified for this Mitzvah even before he was born, when Hash-m said to Avraham: "Aval Sarah Isht'cha ... Vahakimosi es Brisi Ito".

(d)'Tzaveh le'Hatzil Yedidus She'ereinu mi'Shachas ... ' (contained in the B'rachah following the Milah) is a prayer to save the circumcised baby from ever entering Gehinom (and this is based on the Medrash which describes how Avraham Avinu sits outside the gates of Gehinom, and prevents anyone who has been circumcised, from entering).

9)

(a)Were it not for the blood of Milah (the symbol of self-sacrifice), Hash-m would not have created the world.

(b)When circumcising Geirim and Avadim, the Mohel recites the B'rachah 'Baruch ... Al ha'Milah'(just as he does for anybody else).

(c)The Mevarech always concludes the Berachah with 'Baruch ... Kores ha'Bris'.

10)

(a)After 'Asher Kideshanu be'Mitvosav ve'Tzivanu' the Mevarech continues by the Milah of ...

1. ... a Ger - 'Lamul es ha'Geirim u'Lehatif Meihem Dam Bris'.

2. ... an Eved Cana'ani - 'Lamul es ha'Avadim u'Lehatif Meihem Dam Bris'.

(b)In both cases, he adds that were it not for the blood of Milah, heaven and earth would not be able to exist, which we learn from the Pasuk - "Im Lo B'risi, Yomam va'Laylah Chukos Shamayim va'Aretz Lo Samti".

(c)And he concludes - 'Baruch ... Koreis ha'Bris' (as we explained earlier).

11)

(a)Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah permits setting up a strainer on Yom-Tov, but on Shabbos - he only permits pouring the wine into it provided it is already set up, because setting up a strainer involves making an Ohel.

(b)The Chachamim - forbid setting up a strainer on Yom-Tov. They permit however, placing into one that has already been set up on Yom-Tov - but not on Shabbos.

12)

(a)The problem with Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah (who permits setting-up a strainer on Yom-Tov) is based on the Mishnah in 'Kol ha'Kelim', where he permits putting a window-stopper (such as a sky-light in a roof) in place only if it is both tied and hanging.

(b)Rabah bar bar Chanah explains the basis of the Machlokes between Rebbi Eliezer and the Chachamim (who permit replacing the window-stopper outright) in 'Kol ha'Kelim' as - whether one is permitted to add to a temporary Ohel on Yom-Tov and Shabbos (the Chachamim) or not (Rebbi Eliezer).

(c)The problem is how Rebbi Eliezer can then permit setting up a strainer Lechatchilah on Yom-Tov?

13)

(a)And we answer by establishing Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah like R. Yehudah - who permits Machshirei Ochel Nefesh (as we learned in 'Kol ha'Kelim').

(b)Rebbi Yehudah however - does qualify this concession, confining it to a Melachah which could not have been performed the day before (because it either something broke on Yom-Tov and needs to be repaired, or the food would have deteriorated by the time Yom-Tov arrived).

(c)In spite of this, Rebbi Eliezer permits setting-up a strainer (even though this could have been done before Yom-Tov) - because he not only holds like Rebbi Yehudah, he goes one step further than him, to permit Machshirei all Ochel Nefesh, even if they could have been performed the day before.

14)

(a)Rav Yosef stated someone who sets up a strainer on Shabbos - is Chayav Chatas

(b)When Abaye asked him whether someone who hangs a cup on a peg will also be Chayav, he meant - that it is inappropriate to use the term 'Chayav Chatas', seeing as constructing a temporary Ohel is not really building, and is only Asur mi'de'Rabbanan.

(c)Abaye therefore holds - that one transgresses an Isur de'Rabbanan of Uvdin de'Chol (a weekday occupation) ...

(d)... which will not extend to hanging a cup on a peg (since that in no way resembles a Melachah).