Question (R. Yirmeyah, to R. Ze'ira): If one reaped a half-Grogeres on this Shabbos amidst Zadon Shabbos and Shigegas Melachos, and a half-Grogeres on [another] Shabbos amidst Shigegas Shabbos and Zadon Melachos, do they join?

Answer (R. Ze'ira): Is it possible to say that Shabbosos divide (he is liable for each Shabbos), and Shabbosos join?! (Surely they do not join!)

Question (R. Yirmeyah): Plates divide and plates join! (If one ate two k'Zeisim of Chelev in one Helam, i.e. one was roasted and one was cooked, he brings two Chata'os. If he ate a half-k'Zayis of one kind in each of two plates, they join!)

Answer (R. Ze'ira): I do not know why plates [divide and join]!

Question: Doesn't a Beraisa teach this? If one wrote one letter on this Shabbos and one on the coming Shabbos, R. Eliezer obligates a Chatas and R. Yehoshua exempts.

Answer (R. Azaryah, to R. Mana): We can say that [the Beraisa] discusses Zadon [Shabbos and Shigegas Melachos. R. Yirmeyah asked about a half-Shi'ur amidst Zadon Shabbos and Shigegas Melachos, and a half-Shi'ur amidst Shigegas Shabbos and Zadon Melachos.]

Question (R. Mana): All the more so [they should not join]! Mezid does not divide [to obligate additional Korbanos], and it does not join [to Shogeg to obligate a Korban]. Shogeg, which divides, all the more so it does not join! (PNEI MOSHE)

Answer (R. Chananyah): [R. Yirmeyah] did not say (ask) so. Rather, if one reaped a half-Grogeres on Shabbos amidst Zadon Shabbos and Shigegas Melachos, and a half-Grogeres in the afternoon (i.e. the same Shabbos) amidst Shigegas Shabbos and Zadon Melachos, do the Shegagos in each of them join?

(R. Mana): Even though R. Yosah did not say (ask) like this, he said (asked) similarly;

Question (R. Yosah): If one ate a half-k'Zayis knowing it is Kodesh, but forgetting Tum'ah (that he is Tamei), and a half-k'Zayis amidst Helam Kodesh and Yedi'as Tum'ah, do they join?

Question: Granted, Shabbosos divide (when he was Shogeg about Shabbos), for there are weekdays in between (surely there was Yedi'ah of Shabbos before the next Shabbos). Regarding Nidah, what do you have [to divide]?

Answer (Reish Lakish): We can say that [R. Eliezer learns from] a Nidah who had an interruption of Taharah in between.

(R. Eliezer bei R. Shimon): [R. Akiva] asked about one who had five Bi'os with one Nidah in one Helam. What is the law? Is he is liable one for all of them, or is he liable one for each one?

[R. Eliezer] said that he is liable for each one.

Question: If one reaped and reaped again in one Helam, is he not liable only once for all of them?!

(R. Acha citing R. Chanina): So R. Mana asked - didn't R. Shmuel say in the name of R. Avahu citing R. Yosi ben Chaninah "this entire Halachah (the first Mishnah of our Perek) is like R. Eliezer, but Rabanan say that he is liable only once.'' Also here he should be liable only once!

Answer (R. Yosi): It is like R. Acha said in the name of R. Chanina - Rabanan do not hold like this.

(Rabanan of Kisarin citing R. Nisa): This entire Halachah (our Mishnah) is like R. Eliezer. Any Halachah derived from it is all like R. Eliezer [but Rabanan disagree].

(Mishnah): There are 39 Melachos (they will be explained in this and coming Perakim) - seeding, plowing, reaping, making piles, threshing, winnowing, Borer (selecting), grinding, sifting, kneading, baking;

Shearing wool, laundering, Menapetz (banging wool to crush and remove impurities; alternatively, separating clumps into fibers; alternatively, brushing and combing it), dying, spinning, Meisach (arranging the warp (lengthwise) threads on a loom), making two Batei Nirin (passing two warp threads through holes in a frame that lifts and lowers warp threads on a loom), weaving two threads, Potze'a two [warp] threads (cutting off excess if they are frayed; alternatively, cutting them off the loom), tying, untying, sewing two stitches, tearing in order to sew two stitches;

Hunting a deer, slaughtering, flaying, salting (the hide), tanning the hide, Memachek (scraping the skin), and cutting [it into strips];

Writing two letters, erasing in order to write two letters, building, destroying, extinguishing, burning, Makeh b'Patish (finishing a Kli), and Hotza'ah from Reshus to Reshus. These are 39 Melachos.

(Gemara) Question: [Our Mishnah says that] there are 39 Melachos. What is the source for [39] Avos Melachos from the Torah?

Answer #1 (R. Yonason ben Elazar): We learn from the 39 occurrences of the word 'Melachah' [or Meleches or Melachto] in the Torah. (There are 61 in all, but 22 are excluded, e.g. where it says "Meleches Avodah'' - Rashba 49b, from R. Chananel.)

Question (to R. Acha): When it says the plural Melachos, does it count like two?

Remark (R. Shein): R. Acha looked through the entire Torah and did not find this written. (The question is irrelevant.)

Question: Is "va'Yavo ha'Baysah La'asos Melachto'' among them? (Some say that Yosef went to do his work, and some say that it is a euphemism, he wanted to be with Eshes Potifar.)

Question: Is "va'Ychal Elokim ba'Yom ha'Shevi'i Melachto Asher Asah'' among them? (Perhaps we do not count Melachah of Shamayim.)

(Beraisa - R. Shimon ben Yochai): "Sheshes Yamim Tochal Matzos uva'Yom ha'Shevi'i Atzeres la'Shem Elokecha Lo Sa'aseh Melachah'' comes to complete 39 Melachos written in the Torah.

Answer #2 (R. Yosi bei R. Bun citing R. Shmuel bar Nachmani): They correspond to the 39 times written about [building] the Mishkan "Melachah'' and "Avodah''.

(R. Yosi ben Chanina): It is not written "Zeh ha'Davar'', rather, "Elu ha'Devarim.'' Davar [connotes one], Devarim [connotes two] - this is a source for Avos and Toldos.

Answer #3 (R. Chanina or Tziporin citing R. Avahu): [The Gematriya of] Aleph is one, Lamed is 30, and Hei is five. [We would add] one for Davar, and [had it written Devarim,] two for Devarim, [and now that it wrote ha'Devarim, we add] three for ha'Devarim - ALEI TAMAR.) This is the source for 39 Melachos written in the Torah.

(Rabanan of Kisarin): Nothing is lacking from there (we can expound all 39 from Eleh). Aleph is one, Lamed is 30, and Hei is eight. Rabanan do not refrain from expounding "Hei'' like "Ches.''

Note: How did they know to expound it like Ches, and not like Hei, and there will be 36? Perhaps they investigated the Melachos used for the Mishkan, and it would be difficult to combine some together in order to limit the count to 36.

R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish deliberated in this Perek for three and a half years, and derived 39 Toldos from every [Av Melachah];

When they found [an Av Melachah] to connect [the Toldah to it], they connected it. When they did not, they connected it to (considered it a Toldah of) Makeh b'Patish.

R. Chiyah Ruba's sons deliberated in this Perek for six months, and derived six matters from every [Av].

R. Chiyah Ruba's sons hold like their father;

(R. Chiya): One who reaps, reaps grapes, reaps olives, reaps dates, detaches [other fruits], or picks figs, all of them are [Avos] due to reaping. (They are all the same Melachah, just they are done on different matters. We explained this like OHR SOMAYACH, Hilchos Shabbos 7:4.)

(R. Sirud): Yehudah bar Rebbi deliberated in Machshirin for six months. At the end, a Talmid of R. Simai came and asked him [a question in Machshirin], and he did not answer. [The Talmid] said "it is evident that he did not pass the entrance to Torah'' (i.e. six months is too little to even begin understanding Machshirin., This is due to the difficulty of Machshirin, and not due to a shortcoming in Yehudah, so it is not Leshon ha'Ra. I think that this is the intent of HA'GAON RAV C. KANIEVSKY, SHLITA.)

(Mishnah): There are 39 Avos Melachos.

Why must it teach this? If he did all of them in one Helam, he is liable for each one.

(R. Zakai, in front of R. Yochanan): If one slaughtered, burned, and poured libations in one Helam, he is liable for each one. (The Torah explicitly forbade bowing, to obligate for each Avodah);

Rebuttal (R. Yochanan): Babylonian! You crossed three rivers [to come to Eretz Yisrael to learn], and you stumbled! He is liable only once.

Before [R. Yochanan] broke [R. Zakai's teaching], there is "Achas'' (liability for each one), but there is no] "Henah'' (one liability for all of them). After he broke it, there is "Henah'', but there is no "Achas''. PNEI MEIR - this is not relevant here at all. It was relevant in Halachah 1, which discusses how to expound "v'Asah me'Achas me'Henah.'' Since our Sugya copied R. Zakai's question and R. Yochanan's answer, it copied also this.)