1)

(a)For Shabbos Sukos, they would fill a golden barrel that had not been sanctified as a Kli Shareis ... . Ze'iri explains that, in the opinion of this Tana, 'Ein Shi'ur la'Mayim', and 'Klei Shareis Mekadshin she'Lo mi'Da'as'. The significance of ...

1. ... 'Ein Shi'ur la'Mayim' is that - however much water one would pour into the jar for Nisuch ha'Mayim, it would be fit for the Mitzvah, and would therefore become sanctified in the Kli Shareis. Consequently, it was imperative to use a jar that had not been sanctified.

2. ... 'Klei Shareis Mekadshin she'Lo mi'Da'as' is that - even if one were to pour the water into the jar without the specific intention of sanctifying it, it would nevertheless become sanctified. For this reason too, it was imperative to use a jar that had not been sanctified.

(b)They were not permitted to use a Klei Shareis to draw the water for Nisuch ha'Mayim, according to ...

1. ... Chizkiyah, who (agrees that 'Ein Shi'ur la'Mayim', but) maintains that our Tana may even hold 'Ein Klei Shares Mekadshin Ela mi'Da'as', due to a decree - because people might say that the water was drawn in order to sanctify it (and they will subsequently think that Linah does not disqualify the Nesachim).

2. ... Rebbi Yanai quoting Rebbi Zeira, who maintains that, in addition, our Tana might hold both 'Ein Klei Shares Mekadshin Ela mi'Da'as' and 'Yesh Shi'ur la'Mayim' - because people might say that the water was drawn for the Kohanim to wash their hands and feet. So when they see the water remaining in the jar overnight and then being used the next morning for Nisuch ha'Mayim, they will think that the Pesul of Linah does not apply to the Nesachim.

(c)Although a Kohen Hedyot would wash from the Kiyor - the Kohen Gadol would make Kidush Yadayim v'Raglayim from a golden jar, which had to be sanctified.

2)

(a)If one leaves wine in an uncovered strainer, the Tana Kama forbids it to be drunk (in case the snake venom seeps through the strainer - even if the lower vessel is covered). Rebbi Nechemyah says - that as long as the lower vessel is covered, the water is permitted (because the venom floats, and does not seep through the strainer).

(b)The author of our Mishnah, which does not permit water that was left uncovered to be poured through a strainer, could nevertheless be Rebbi Nechemyah, who agrees that - it should not be brought on the Mizbe'ach anyway, as shall now see.

(c)We learn from the Pasuk in Mal'achi "Hakriveihu Na l'Fechasecha" - that whatever one would not offer to a human king, one should not offer to Hash-m either.

(d)Based on this Pasuk - Rebbi Nechemyah will agree that, even though this water is fit for people to drink, one would not however serve it to a king.

3)

(a)When the Mishnah writes that the flute is taken either five or six days, it is referring to the flute of Simchas Beis ha'Sho'eivah.

(b)Five - when Shabbos falls in the middle of Sukos, six, when it falls on the first day.

4)

(a)Rav Yehudah and Rav Eina argue over whether to call the water-drawing ceremony 'Simchas Beis ha'Sho'eivah' or 'Simchas Beis ha'Chashuvah'. Mar Zutra commented - that in fact, both names are justified.

(b)The name ...

1. ... 'Simchas Beis ha'Sho'eivah' - is based on the Pasuk in Yeshayah "u'She'avtem Mayim b'Sason mi'Ma'ynei ha'Yeshu'ah".

2. ... 'Simchas Beis ha'Chashuvah' is so called - because it is an important Mitzvah, already prepared by Hash-m since the days of the creation, when he created the Shitin (according to this opinion).

5)

(a)According to Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah, the 'flute' overrode Shabbos. the Chachamim say - that it does not even override Yom-Tov.

(b)Rav Yosef maintains that, in reality, they both agree that the flute of the Simchas Beis ha'Sho'eivah does not override Shabbos or Yom-Tov, and their Machlokes ...

1. ... concerns the flute that was played when the wine of the Nesachim was poured on the Mizbe'ach each morning and evening. (Note: Actually, the flute was not played daily - only twelve times a year - but many other instruments (incorporated in the word 'flute') were.

2. ... is based on whether 'Ikar Shirah bi'Cheli' (the chief Mitzvah of Shir is playing the instruments [Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah]) or 'Ikar Shirah b'Peh' (the chief Mitzvah is the actual singing (Rebbi).

6)

(a)Rav Yosef bases his explanation on another Beraisa which discusses a different aspect of the Klei Shareis - Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah permits it.

(b)According to him, the basis of the Machlokes is whether to learn the Dinim of Klei Shareis from the flute of Moshe or not. The flute of Moshe was - a bamboo flute that remained from the time of Moshe.

(c)He equates the basis of their Machlokes with that of the previous Machlokes - whether 'Ikar Shirah bi'Cheli' (Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah), in which case, we will learn all the Klei Shareis from the flute of Moshe, or 'Ikar Shirah b'Peh (Rebbi), and we cannot learn the one from the other (since, in his opinion, the instruments were not Klei Shareis).

(d)They did in fact, attempt to overlay it with gold - but it sounded more beautiful without it, so they removed the gold and left it as it was.

7)

(a)We refute Rav Yosef's explanation however, in that even if ...

1. ... Rebbi will agree that 'Ikar Shirah bi'Cheli', he may well not learn the Din of Klei Shareis from the flute of Moshe to permit Klei Shareis of wood - because we cannot learn 'the possible' (to make other vessels out of metal) from 'the impossible' (to make the flutes out of metal - since it spoils the sound, as we just learned).

2. ... Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah will hold 'Ikar Shirah b'Peh', and even if we cannot learn what is possible from what is not, he will permit wooden Klei Shareis from the Pasuk in Terumah "v'Asisa Menoras Zahav Tahor Mikshah Te'aseh ha'Menorah" - which, in his opinion, constitutes a 'Ribuy' ("v'Asisa Menoras") 'Miy'ut' ("Zahav Tahor"), and 'Ribuy' ("Mikshah Te'aseh ha'Menorah")

(b)The last Ribuy actually includes everything, whereas the Miyut excludes one thing only (earthenware vessels) from the 'Miyut' ...

(c)... namely, earthenware vessels.

8)

(a)Rebbi disagrees with Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah in that he learns a 'Klal u'Ferat u'Chelal'.

(b)The 'Klal u'Ferat' alone would teach us 'Ein bi'Chelal Ela Mah he'bi'Ferat' (i.e. only what the Prat says). Comes the second 'Klal, and includes whatever is similar to the Prat ...

(c)... metal (but excluding wood).