Explanation: This means that Reishis ha'Gez only applies to sheep, not goats. This is despite the fact that goats are also called sheep, as the Pasuk states, "Go to the sheep and take from there two young goats."

Implied Question: This is despite the fact that we do not derive Torah laws from Pesukim from Nevi'im. (How, then, can we make this derivation?)

Answer: This is merely revealing that this is regarding sheep shearings. It is not a new teaching.

Observation: There is a slight implication that this is a Gezeirah Shaveh, as the Gemara asks later "What do we derive from Giza-Giza?" Even so, it would not be teaching anything new.

Question: How can we derive from Bechor that Reishis ha'Gez even applies to oxen? It explicitly says "sheep!"

Answer: I would think that "sheep" is not limited to sheep, just as "do not shear the firstborn of your sheep" is not limited to sheep (but rather any kosher animal).

Explanation: Two Pesukim are need because it is more normal to rip out the produce with the root than without it.

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that this is because it is like a person who damages Matanos or eats them. Just as such a person is exempt from replacing them, so too is someone who steals them.

Question: If so, what is the reason that Rav Chisda (130b) has to teach us this lesson (that one who damages or eats Matanos is exempt)? It is the reason of our Mishnah!

Explanation #2: In the earlier commentaries of Rashi written in his handwriting he explained that this refers to a time before he sheared five sheep which causes one to be obligated to color the shorn wool. He did not become obligated until he colored it. However, Rashi erased this explanation.

Answer: It appears that Rav Chisda was teaching that we should not explain the Mishnah as did Rashi in his earlier writings. Rather, one is exempt from paying for Matnos Kehunah that he damaged because he acquired them through making a Shinuy (i.e. change in the object).

Explanation: The Mishnah states that one who gives abundantly gives one fortieth of his produce as Terumah.

Explanation (cont.): The Gemara did not want to say that Shmuel is teaching that one sixtieth is given by a stingy person, as there is no reason for Shmuel to state what is already clearly stated by the Mishnah in Terumos (4:3).

Observation: The Yerushalmi in Peah asks, why isn't Terumah on this list of things, as Shmuel states that one kernel of wheat causes an entire crop to be exempt?

Observation (cont.): The Yerushalmi answers that Terumah does have a limit in that one cannot give all of his produce as Terumah. This is as the Mishnah (see Terumos 4:5) states that if someone makes all of his grain Terumah and all of his dough Chalah, he has done nothing.

Observation (cont.): The Yerushalmi asks that a person also cannot make his entire field into Pe'ah, yet it is on this list of things that have no set amount!

Observation (cont.): The Yerushalmi answers that Pe'ah can be all of a field when he is liable. This means that once a person starts harvesting a field, he can make all of his field Pe'ah opposite what he already harvested. However, once one is obligated to take Terumah from produce, meaning after it has been gathered, he cannot make all of his produce Terumah.

Observation (cont.): The Yerushalmi asks, why aren't the ashes of the Parah Adumah, earth of the Sotah, and spittle of the Yevamah included in this list?

Observation (cont.): The Yerushalmi answers that the Mishnah only includes things that if one does more of them it is more of a Mitzvah, even though he only must do a little bit of them (as opposed to these things where there is no Mitzvah to do more than the minimal amount).