Question: Rabeinu Elchanan asks from the Gemara in Bava Kama (Daf 110a) which states that 'He returned the money (of Gezel ha'Ger) to Yehoyariv and the Asham to Yeda'ayah' - so we see that they were in the second Beis-ha'Mikdash

Answer #1: This Beraisa was learned in the time of the first Beis-ha'Mikdash.

Answer #2: Alternatively, it does not refer Davka to Yehoyariv, but to the Mishmar that replaced them.

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that they did not subsequently return.

Question #1: How does Rashi know this? Seeing as ' Even if the Mishmar of Yehoyariv returned' implies that they could still have returned?

Question #2: Moreover asks Rabeinu Elchanan, many (of the original groups) did return, so how do we know that Yehoyariv did not?

Explanation #2: 'Rebbi' therefore explains that Yehoyariv may well have returned, and what the Gemara is asking here is - 'Was the Mishmeres of Yehoyariv in the second Beis ha'Mikdash?' ...

Explanation #2 (cont.): Because those twenty-four Mishmaros corresponded to the twenty-four Mishmaros that did not return, because they divided (the four Mishmaros that returned - See Birchas ha'Zevach) into twenty-four Mioshmaros, which served instead of them.

Question: There is a problem, according to what Tosfos wrote earlier (Daf 12b DH 'Hanach Sh'nei') that even after the tribes went into exile, they counted the Yovlos in order to sanctify the Sh'mitin ...

Question (cont.): In that case, in Galus Bavel too, before Ezra returned, they they were counting, so why did they begin counting afresh when after Ezra's return?

Answer: One cannot compare the cases - to be sure, as long as Yisrael (i.e. the tribe of Yehudah) was in their land, even when Yovel was not applicable, Sh'mitah applied with regard to plowing and planting, so they sanctified it

Answer (cont.): But when they were in Galus they did not sanctify the Sh'mitah at all.

Question: However, even in Galus they needed to sanctify the Sh'mitah - on account of the cancellation of debts that applies both in Eretz Yisrael and in Chutz la'Aretz ...

Question (cont.): And if this is correct, that Sh'mitah does not depend upon Yovel, even when Yisrael are in Galus, and not on their land at all, why should they not count Sh'mitin as if some of Yisrael were on their land?

Question (concl.): And even though not all its inhabitants are on it, they count Sh'mitah, even though they don't count Yovel (See Avodah Berurah) ...

Clarification: Which is the third of Adar, Ezra went up from Bavel (See Ner Mitzvah).

Clarification (cont.): And he went to Yerushalayim in the fifth month, traveling slowly from the month of Adar till the month of Av.

Question: From where does the Gemara know, asks Rabeinu Elchanan, that Kalev turned forty only in the second year - in which case when Yisrael crossed over the Yarden he would have been seventy-eight ...

Question (cont.): Perhaps the fortieth year began in the first year, so that when they sent the Spies he was forty-one and when they crossed the Yarden, he was seventy-nine ...

Question (concl.): And from where does the Gemara know that they conquered seven years and distributed seven years (See Avodah Berurah).

Answer: 'Rebbi' explains that the Pasuk does not come to be vague but to be precise ...

Answer: Because why would we need to know Kalev's age, if not to inform us that they conquered seven years and distributed seven years?

Implied Question: Here the Tana explains at the outset that 'Enough to cover Shabbos ... ' is just a Si'man, whereas in Perek ha'Techeiles (Menachos, Daf 49b & 50a) it says so only at the end ...

Implied Question (cont.): When it quotes Ravina, who asked Rav Ashi 'These six are really seven - seeing as there is the Sunday morning to contend with, assuming that "for Shabbos" is Davka?'

Explanation: What he means is this - If the two days of Rosh ha'Shanah fell on Thursday and Friday, then on Sunday they would examine the Tamid on Sunday - four days before the Shechitah on Thursday ...

Explanation: (cont.): And the Tamid for Friday, which is the second day Rosh ha'Shanah, they would examine on Monday - four days before its Shechitah; and likewise that of Shabbos they would exam ine onTuesday ...

Explanation: (concl.): And it is on this that Ravina asks that 'It really ought to be seven - seeing as there is the Tamid of Sunday, which also requires examination four days before its Shechitah, in which case how can there be less than seven?

Explanation #1: 'Rebbi' says that it is obvious (to the Gemara) that one is permitted to add indefinitely, and the question is up to how many is it considered a Hidur Mitzvah, and it is not necessary to search for more Kohanim ...

Explanation #1 (cont.): 'Rav Huna said up to a hundred and twenty', seeing as th Pasuk in Divrei ha'Yamim (2, 5) records how they searched for a hundred and twenty Kohanim to blow the trumpets and no more.

Explanation #2: Alternatively, it is obvious that adding indefinitely is not permitted, because if one does, the sounds will intermingle ...

Explanation #2 (cont.): 'Rav Huna said up that one may add up to a hundred and twenty' Kohanim, since we find in the Pasuk that they were not concerned with the mingling of sounds.

Question: Rabeinu Elchanan asks from where the Gemara knows that a Katan may enter the Azarah to sing whilst the Levi'im are standing on the Duchan (See Shitah Mekubetzes 14)?

Answer: The Ri answers that it learns it from a Ribuy of the Pasuk, which writes "Their sons and their brothers the Levi'im" (this phrase is written at the end of the following one), and "Yeshu'a, his sons and his brothers stood, Kadmi'el and his sons the sons of Yehudah, the sons of Chenadad" ...

Answer (cont.): Why does it add "their sons"? seeing as it mentions "his sons" by each one, rendering it superfluous?

Answer (concl.): It must therefore insert it, that it should be superfluous - and it implies Ketanim.

Implied Question: It could also have drawn another distinction between a Sadeh Achuzah and a Sadeh Mikneh ...

Implied Question (cont.): In that if one declares a Sadeh Achuzah Hekdesh and somebody else redeems it, it is divided up among the Kohanim in the Yovel, whereas a Sadeh Mikneh reverts to the owner when the Yovel arrives ...

Answer: Only it confines itself to differences that apply to where the owner redeems them.