Explanation: This implies that one cannot do so in the middle of his Tefilah (unlike the previous opinions in the Gemara).

Implied Question: The custom now regarding fasts on Monday and Thursday is that people say lengthy Pesukim of mercy and Selichos during the Berachah of Selach Lanu. (Isn't this unlike this opinion?)

Answer: It is possible to answer that the public is different.

Proof: This is similar to the Gemara in Berachos (34a) that says that a person should not ask for his needs in the first three or last three Berachos of Shemoneh Esrei. However, today we have a custom to make an addition called "Krovetz" in the first three Berachos in public. It must be that doing so in public is different.

Explanation: It does not appear to him that the word "Makrin" implies one horn anymore than the word "Makrin" (with an extra Yud). [See Maharam at length regarding the intent of Tosfos here.]

Opinion#1: Rashi explains in his first opinion that this barley was for making beer.

Question: This is difficult, as in all of the Gemara we do not find that they made beer from barley, but rather from dates or hops.

Opinion#2: It therefore appears that the correct explanation is Rashi's second explanation (that they used to plant barley seeds in troughs of earth etc., see Rashi DH "Asinti"). Rashi also cites both of these explanations in Kesuvos (8a, DH "mi'Chi").

Explanation: Rabeinu Shemayah says that in Greek this means, "Held twice." "Kart" means held, and Sim means two.

Explanation(cont.): He explains that this means a second holding. This makes the Gemara later that says "Kartasim and the day that Rome grabbed the throne" understandable. This means the second holding (second time Rome grabbed the throne), and the day that Rome first grabbed the throne (see Rashash).

Text: We do not have the text, "Let them write it."

Text(cont.): This is because they did not write down laws (at that time).

Question: We say in Kesuvos (30a) that when the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed, even though they stopped administering the four deaths, the law that people would receive four deaths did not stop (as Hash-m administered these deaths). Whoever was liable to receive stoning etc. Why does this Gemara say this happened when the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed? Didn't this stop forty years before the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed, as they stopped judging capital cases?

Answer#1: Even though they generally stopped trying these cases, when they saw a need to try such a case they would go back to their chamber and judge the case there.

Answer#2: My teacher, Rabeinu Menachem, told us in the name of Rebbi Yehonasan that "when the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed" is referring to the statement, "the law of four deaths continued." This is what it means. Even though the four deaths by Beis Din completely stopped, their law did not stop. Certainly in the forty years before the destruction, when they technically could have killed people, there was judgement by the law of Heaven. (The Milo ha'Ro'im explains that one might think that after the destruction Hash-m would not punish in this fashion. The Gemara therefore explains that He continued to do so, and he certainly continued to do so forty years before the destruction, when Beis Din could have still done so if they so chose.)

Question: Isn't Yerushalayim also called a "place" regarding eating Kodshim and Ma'aser Sheini? The Torah says, "In the place that Hash-m will choose!" (How do we know that "place" here refers to the Beis Hamikdash and not Yerushalayim?)

Answer: It is possible to answer that regarding laws of capital punishment, a "place" refers to the Lishkas ha'Gazis that was half on holy ground (the Beis Hamikdash) and half on regular ground. The reason for this is because we require that the Sanhedrin be close to the Shechinah.

Answer (cont.): We also say later (52a) that whoever appoints an unworthy judge is as if he is planting an Asheirah tree next to the altar. This is apparent from the fact that the Pasuk, "Judges and policemen (from Beis Din)" is next to the Pasuk, "Do not plant an Asheirah...next to the altar of Hash-m."

Answer (cont.): This is why they went into exile and sat in the store. Despite the fact that the store itself was on Har Ha'Bayis, it was still not as close to the Shechinah as was the Lishkas ha'Gazis.

Question: How do we know that this (proximity to the Shechinah) is a prerequisite regarding other punishments of death than a Zaken Mamrei? The only time this is stated is regarding a Zaken Mamrei!

Answer: It is possible that we derive that as long as the Great Sanhedrin is in its place next to the altar, there is a law that you should appoint judges in all of your cities to judge capital cases. If they go away, there are no more capital cases. [See also Tosfos in Shabbos, (15a DH "Ela") and Tosfos in Sanhedrin (14b, DH "Melamed").]