1)

(a)Rebbi Akiva asked Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Yehoshua a She'eilah in the butchery of Im'um - where they had gone to purchase an animal for the wedding feast of Rabban Gamliel's son.

(b)And he asked them whether someone who is intimate with his sister, his father's sister and his mother's sister in one He'elam - receives one set of Malkos or three.

(c)They cited him the Din of someone who is intimate with his five wives who are all Nidos - who receives five sets of Malkos.

(d)They cited him that case (although it was not what he asked them) - because they thought that in his case, one would then be Chayav five sets of Malkos from a Kal-va'Chomer.

2)

(a)Rebbi Akiva's She'eilah cannot be taken literally - because since, as it stands, they all bear different titles and they are five different bodies, the answer would have been obvious.

(b)So we interpret his She'eilah as pertaining to a case where a man has relations with his sister, who is also his father's sister and his mother's sister - which on the one hand comprises three different titles, but on the other, the three Isurim are contained in one body.

(c)We object to Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Yehoshua's answer from the case of the five wives who are Nidos - because we hold that the fact that they comprise five different bodies is more reason to be Chayav (thereby dispensing with their Kal-va'Chomer).

(d)We therefore learn from the Pasuk "Ervas Achoso Gilah" (which is otherwise redundant) that - in the current case (where they all share the title of Achos [see Shitah Mekubetzes 11]), one is Chayav for each title (since, when all's said and done, there is a slight difference between them).

(e)Rav Ada bar Ahavah establishes 'Achoso, she'Hi Achos Aviv, she'Hi Achos Imo' by a Rasha who is the son of a Rasha - where after a man has two daughters from his mother and a son from one of those daughters, the son has relations with his mother's sister, who is also both his own sister and his father's sister.

3)

(a)Rebbi Eliezer in a Beraisa, obligates someone who is intimate with any of the Arayos five times in one He'elam, to bring five Chata'os. The Chachamim rule that - he is Chayav to bring only one.

(b)The Chachamim concede to Rebbi Eliezer however, that if he is intimate with his five wives who are Nidos in one He'elam, he brings five Chata'os, which we initially ascribe to the fact - that he has caused them to bring five Chata'os between them.

(c)Rava rejects this reason on the basis of a Beraisa however - which rules in a case where a man has relations with five Arayos (either one with each one, or five with each) in one He'elam, whereas the women transgressed in five Ha'alamos that t- hey bring five Chata'os, whereas he brings only one (in spite of the fact that he caused them to bring five Chata'os).

(d)An alternative version of this Beraisa is that - he performed all five Bi'os with one Ervah in one He'elam, whereas she performed them in five Ha'alamos.

(e)Consequently, we conclude that the real reason for the Chachamim's conceding that the man who is intimate with his five wives who are Nidos, in one He'elam, is Chayav five Chata'os is - the fact that they are five bodies (as we have already learned).

4)

(a)We ask how many Chata'os someone is Chayav for reaping two ki'Gerogeros on Shabbos according to Rebbi Eliezer. In spite of his stringent ruling in the case of two Bi'os with one Ervah, he might concede here that he only brings one Chatas - because (as opposed to the case of two Bi'os) it is possible to reap the two ki'Gerogeros simultaneously.

(b)Rabah ascribes Rebbi Eliezer's ruling (by two Arayos) to the fact that he did two actions. Rav Yosef - to the fact that he could not have performed them simultaneously.

(c)Abaye queries Rabah from another Beraisa, where Rebbi Eliezer obligates someone who performs (on Shabbos) a Toldah together with its Av (in one He'elam), to two Chata'os, from which we can extrapolate that if he were to perform the same Av twice - he would be Patur ...

(d)... a Kashya on Rabah - who holds that by two reapings on Shabbos, he is Chayav two Chata'os.

5)

(a)Mar b'rei de'Ravana and Rav Nechumi bar Zecharya answer the Kashya by establishing the Beraisa by a trellis consisting of fig-branches over vines. Assuming that the fig-branches contain fruit but the vines do not ...

1. ... the Av comprises - cutting the fig-branches (for the figs).

2. ... the Toldah comprises pruning the vine, which he needs for fire-wood, which is described in Shabbos as 'Zomer ve'Tzarich le'Eitzim', which is listed as a Toldah of Kotzer.

(b)Even though he picked them simultaneously, Rebbi Eliezer obligates him to bring two Chata'os - since a. they have two different titles (Av and Toldah), and b. they are two different bodies (a fig-tree and a vine).

(c)And this solves the problem - inasmuch as the case where he will be Patur for transgressing an Av twice - is where he cut two G'rogros simultaneously, whereas Rabah rules that he is Chayav - in a case where he cut two G'rogros one after the other.

6)

(a)Rebbi Akiva also asked Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Yehoshua about the loose limb of an animal - which becomes Tamei because of Eiver min ha'Chai once it is completely detached.

(b)He now asked them - whether it is Tamei already from the time that most of it has been severed.

(c)They replied that - they had not heard about that, but that they had heard that the limb of a human being in the same circumstances is Tahor.

(d)And they derive Beheimah - which is not subject to Tum'ah in its lifetime, with a Kal va'Chomer, from Adam, which is.

7)

(a)When the lepers would approach the doctors on Erev Pesach - the latter would all but sever their loose limbs, leaving them attached by a hairsbreadth.

(b)The current process was necessary (not to render them Tahor, which they were anyway, but) - because it is not very nice to walk around on Yom-Tov with semi-detached limbs.

(c)The lepers would then finish the process without becoming Tamei - by hooking the loose end of the virtually-detached limb on to a thorn and moving away from it, without actually touching the limb as it became detached.

(d)This proves that - a limb does not become Eiver min ha'Chai until it is completely detached.

8)

(a)We query our Mishnah from a Mishnah in Machshirin - where the Tana rules that if someone is crushing leek (to extract the dew) or squeezing the rain out of his hair or clothes, the water that has already emerged is Huchshar le'Kabel Tum'ah, whereas the water that is still inside is not (see Tosfos DH 've'ha'Yotzei Mimenu')

(b)And the reason that Shmuel gives for his ruling that the leek itself is Huchshar Lekabel Tum'ah is - because as the dew leaves it, the two touch.

(c)The problem this creates with the Seifa of our Mishnah is that - by the same token, the leper ought to become Tamei, by virtue of the contact between his body and the limb as it as being detached.

(d)We solve the problem (based on a statement of Rav Yosef) - by establishing our Mishnah where the leper tugged with great force when pulling away from the thorn (as we will now see).

9)

(a)Rav Yosef himself is referring to a Beraisa, which discusses a Zav or a Tamei Meis who are walking in the rain, until their clothes become soaked. The Tana rules that the water which the Tamei squeezes ...

1. ... from the top of his clothes to the bottom - is Tahor and is not yet Muchshar Lekabel Tum'ah.

2. ... from the bottom of his clothes on to seeds - becomes Muchshar Lekabel Tum'ah.

(b)To explain why the water does not become Tamei when it leaves the garment of the Zav (or of the Tamei Meis), Rav Yosef establishes the Beraisa - where he removes the water from the garment with great force, so that it does not touch it as it pours out.

10)

(a)Our Mishnah cites a third She'eilah that Rebbi Akiva asked Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Yehoshua - whether someone who Shechts five Kodshim animals outside the Azarah in one He'elam is Chayav one Chatas or five.

(b)Based on the fact that someone who eats from a Kodshim animal cooked in five different dishes is Chayav five Asham Me'ilos, Rebbi Yehoshua replied that - Kal va'Chomer in our case, where there are five different animals (five bodies).

11)

(a)According to Rebbi Shimon, Rebbi Akiva did not ask about Shechutei Chutz - but about someone who eats Nosar from five Korbanos in one He'elam.

(b)Rebbi Yehoshua brought the same proof from Me'ilah as he did regarding the Tana Kama's version. Rebbi Akiva's response was that - if this was a Kabalah (a tradition), then he would accept it, but that if it was based on Rebbi Yehoshua's own logic, then he objected to it for three reasons.

(c)When he said that Me'ilah is different, because Asu bah ...

1. ... Ma'achil ke'Ochel, he meant that - it is unique, in that not only is the Zar who eats it Chayav (as long as it is still subject to Me'ilah), but so is the one who feeds it to a Zar (for taking it out of the domain of Hekdesh), and ...

2. ... Mehaneh ke'Neheneh - which is the equivalent of the previous case, only regarding Hekdesh that is not edible.

(d)We learn the third Chumra of Me'ilah over Nosar from the Pasuk in Vayikra "Nefesh ki Sim'ol Ma'al" - which teaches us that there is no time limit within which one must eat Kodshim in order to be Chayav Me'ilah, and even if one benefits half a Perutah's worth of Hekdesh today and the other half in three years time, he is nevertheless Chayav.

(e)Rebbi Shimon rejects the Tana Kama's version of Rebbi Akiva's She'eilah ('ha'Shochet Chamishah Zevachim ba'Chutz') - because in his opinion, one cannot learn Shochet (le'Chumra) from Ochel of Me'ilah, since the latter derives physical benefit (which the former does not), which we know is the source of other Chumros regarding Kodshim.

12)

(a)The Beraisa rules that in a case where someone w\eats, in one He'elam, five pieces of Nosar from one Korban cooked in five different dishes, he brings only one Chatas - and with regard to 'Lo Hoda' (where he did not know), he brings only one Asham Taluy.

(b)In the same case, but where he ate them in five Ha'alamos, the Tana rules that - he brings five Chata'os, and five Asham Taluys for 'Lo Hoda'.

(c)Whereas in the same case, where he eats the five pieces in one He'elam, but where they came from five different Korbanos, the Tana Kama rules that - he brings five Chata'os, and five Asham Taluys for 'Lo Hoda'.

(d)Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah holds that - he brings only one Chatas, and one Asham Taluy for 'Lo Hoda'.

13)

(a)The Beraisa states the principle that - whatever divides by Chata'os, also divides by Asham Taluy.

(b)And the Tana then goes on to say that somebody who ets in one He'elam five pieces of Korban before the Z'rikas ha'Dam - even in one He'elam, is obligated to bring five Chata'os.

(c)He does not mention the Din of Asham Taluy in this case - because he maintains that Me'ilah is not subject to an Asham Taluy.

(d)Consequently, the author of the Beraisa must be - Rebbi Yehoshua, since Rebbi Akiva holds that it is.

14)

(a)We try to prove from the Reisha, which obligates five Chata'os for eating Nosar cooked in five dishes in five Ha'alamos (but not in one He'elam) that - Rebbi Yehoshua retracted, conceding to Rebbi Akiva, that one cannot learn other Isurim from Me'ilah.

(b)But we refute this proof from the Seifa - which obligates someone who eats five pieces from five Korbanos to bring five Chata'os (a proof that he did not retract).

(c)To reconcile the contradictory rulings, we therefore suggest that - whether Rebbi Yehoshua retracted or not is a Machlokes Tana'im.

(d)We finally conclude that the Reisha is Rebbi Akiva (and the Seifa Rebbi Yehoshua, who did not accept Rebbi Akiva's objection), and the reason that by the case of Me'ilah (which is the continuation of the Reisha [which is Rebbi Akiva]), the Tana declines to mention Asham Taluy is - because the Tana holds like Rebbi Akiva in his query of Rebbi Yehoshua, but not regarding Asham Taluy by Asham Me'ilos.

15)

(a)To explain the five dishes, Shmuel cites a Beraisa, which lists Basar, Cheilev, So'les, Yayin and Shemen of an Olah - which combine to make up a k'Zayis, to render a person Chayav for Ha'ala'as Chutz.

(b)He refers specifically to an Olah - because by any other Korban, the Basar, which is eaten, will not combine.

(c)Chizkiyah establishes it by five different limbs; Resh Lakish, even by one limb, which incorporates five - with reference to the shoulder (and leg) incorporating the hoof, the calf, and the two sections of the thigh-bone (not counting the shoulder itself).

(d)Chizkiyah refers to five kinds of dishes - meaning each one cooked with a different additive (such as leek, cabbage pumpkin ... ), and Rebbi Yochanan, to five kinds of tastes - by which he means - prepared in five different ways (such as roasted, cooked, pickled ... ).