1)
(a)Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah Amar Rav also confines the Din of Asham Taluy to Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos. What third reason does he ascribe it to?
(b)To explain the ramification of the three opinions, we cite a case where there are two pieces to begin with and the Yisrael eats of them after a Nochri has eaten the first one. What will each opinion now hold? What will be the Din according to ...
1. ... Rabah (Mitzvos)?
2. ... Rebbi Zeira (Efshar le'Varer Isura)?
3. ... Rav Nachman (Ikva Isura)?
1)
(a)Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah Amar Rav, who also confines the Din of Asham Taluy to Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos, ascribes it to - the S'vara of Ikba Isura (the Isur is fixed).
(b)To explain the ramification of the three opinions, we cite a case where there are two pieces to begin with and the Yisrael eats of them after a Nochri has eaten the first one. According to ...
1. ... Rabah (Mitzvos) - he will be Patur, since at the time when he eats it there are no Mitzvos, and the same ruling will apply according to ...
2. ... Rebbi Zeira (Efshar le'Varer Isura) - seeing as at the time when he ate it, it was not possible to ascertain whether he sinned or not, whereas according to ...
3. ... Rav Nachman (Ikva Isura) - he will be Chayav, since its Isur was initially fixed.
2)
(a)When Rava queried Rav Nachman from the Beraisa of Coy and the Mishnah of Yibum, he established them like Rebbi Eliezer (as we explained above). What was his reaction when he asked him the same question from the Beraisa in Nidah?
(b)Why was he subsequently upset with himself for remaining silent? What should he have answered?
(c)And he was referring to a Beraisa where the Rabbanan exempt someone who Shechts an Asham Taluy ba'Chutz. What does Rebbi Meir say?
(d)What would have been the advantage of establishing the Mishnah like Rebbi Meir and not like Rebbi Eliezer?
2)
(a)When Rava queried Rav Nachman from the Beraisa of Coy and the Mishnah of Yibum, he established them like Rebbi Eliezer (as we explained above). When he asked him the same question from the Beraisa in Nidah - he remained silent.
(b)He was subsequently upset with himself for remaining silent - because he should have established the Mishnah like Rebbi Meir ...
(c)... with reference to a Beraisa where the Rabbanan exempt someone who Shechts an Asham Taluy ba'Chutz, where Rebbi Meir - declares him Chayav (see Rabeinu Gershom).
(d)The advantage of establishing the Mishnah like Rebbi Meir would have been to teach us that Rebbi Meir concurs with the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer.
3)
(a)What did Rav Nachman ... Amar Rav say about someone who eats a piece of fat which is Safek Shuman Safek Cheilev? With which Machlokes Tana'im is this connected?
(b)On what grounds do we query Rav's statement? What does Rebbi Eliezer in a Mishnah in Zevachim, say about someone who has not sinned, bringing an Asham Taluy?
(c)Rav Ashi therefore establishes Rav's statement according to Rebbi Eliezer citing Bava ben Buta. What does Bava ben Buta say (in the last Perek), in connection with bringing an Asham Taluy on Motza'ei Yom Kipur?
(d)What is Rav therefore coming to teach us?
3)
(a)Rav Nachman ... Amar Rav states that if someone eats a piece of fat that is Safek Shuman Safek Cheilev - whether or not he brings an Asham Taluy depends on the Machlokes between Rebbi Eliezer (Chayav) and the Chachamim (Patur).
(b)We query Rav's statement however, on the basis of Rebbi Eliezer in a Mishnah in Zevachim - who permits even someone who has not sinned, to donate a voluntary Asham Taluy.
(c)Rav Ashi therefore establishes Rav's statement according to Rebbi Eliezer citing Bava ben Buta in the last Perek - who forbids bringing an Asham Taluy on Motza'ei Yom Kipur, since there is not the slightest possibility of his being Chayav to bring one (as we will see there).
(d)Consequently - what Rav is coming to teach us is that Rebbi Eliezer according to Bava ben Buta will require at least Chatichah Achas in order to be Chayav an Asham Taluy.
4)
(a)A Beraisa discusses someone who eats Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos, where 'somebody else' ate the other one. What does the Tana rule in a case where the Yisrael ate the one piece first and ...
1. ... a Nochri ate the second piece afterwards?
2. ... a dog or a raven ate the second piece afterwards?
(b)In the reverse case, the Tana Kama exempts the Yisrael from an Asham Taluy. What does Rebbi say?
(c)What is the basis of their Machlokes?
4)
(a)A Beraisa discusses someone who eats Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos, where 'somebody else' ate the other one. In a case where the Yisrael ate the one piece first and ...
1. ... a Nochri ate the second piece afterwards - he requires an Asham Taluy, according to all opinions, and the same will apply in a case where ...
2. ... a dog or a raven ate the second piece afterwards.
(b)In the reverse case, the Tana Kama exempts the Yisrael from an Asham Taluy - whereas Rebbi obligates him.
(c)The basis of their Machlokes is - whether an Asham Taluy requires Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos (the Tana Kama) or not (Rebbi), as we discussed earlier.
5)
(a)If he himself ate the first piece be'Shogeg and the second one be'Meizid, the Mishnah obligates him to bring an Asham Taluy. What does the Tana mean by Shogeg and Meizid?
(b)Why, in the reverse case, does the Tana Kama exempt him?
(c)And why does Rebbi then say Chayav?
(d)If he ate them both be'Meizid, he is Patur. What does the Tana say in a case where he ate them both be'Shogeg?
5)
(a)If he himself ate the first piece be'Shogeg - (he was unaware that there was a piece that is Asur), and the second one be'Meizid - where he was aware of it), the Mishnah obligates him to bring an Asham Taluy.
(b)In the reverse case, the Tana Kama exempts him - because when he ate the second piece be'Shogeg, it was no longer Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos.
(c)Rebbi nevertheless rules that he is Chayav - because he does not require Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos (as we learned in the Reisha).
(d)If he eats them both be'Meizid he is Patur (from a Korban); be'Shogeg - the Tana requires him to bring one Asham Taluy for each piece.
6)
(a)What reason does the Tana give for the last ruling (see Shitah Mekubetzes 9)?
(b)Why can the author of the last ruling not be ...
1. ... Rebbi?
2. ... the Rabbanan?
(c)Like whom does Rav Ashi therefore establish the Beraisa?
(d)What does he stipulate when he brings it?
6)
(a)The reason the Tana gives for the last ruling (see Shitah Mekubetzes 9) is - because if we were to exempt him from an Asham, it would give the impression that we are fixing the first piece as Cheilev, when really it is a Safek.
(b)The author of the last ruling cannot be ...
1. ... Rebbi - because, according to whom, he would be Chayav to bring two Ashamos Taluy min ha'Din (seeing as he does not require Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos).
2. ... the Rabbanan - seeing as min ha'Din he is Patur from bringing a Korban for the second piece, how can the Chachamim obligate him to bring Chulin into the Azarah?
(c)Rav Ashi therefore establishes the Beraisa - like Rebbi Eliezer.
(d)When he brings it, he therefore stipulates - that if the first piece that he ate was Shuman, then this second Asham Taluy will atone for the second piece, and if not, then the Asham Taluy will be a Nedavah.
18b----------------------------------------18b
7)
(a)The Beraisa discusses someone who ate Safek Cheilev twice with a Yedi'ah in between and at the end. Rebbi obligates him to bring two Ashamos Taluy. Why is that?
(b)What do Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Elazar learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with Asham Taluy) "al Shig'gsaso asher Shagag"?
(c)What did Rebbi Zeira extrapolate from Rebbi's statement? What Chidush is Rebbi teaching us here?
(d)How does Rava reject Rebbi Zeira's proof? What then is Rebbi coming to teach us?
7)
(a)The Beraisa discusses someone who eats Safek Cheilev twice with a Yedi'ah in between and at the end. Rebbi obligates him to bring two Ashamos Taluy - just as he would have brought two Chata'os under the same circumstances.
(b)Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Elazar learn from the Pasuk (in connection with Asham Taluy) "al Shig'gsaso asher Shagag" that - sometimes one is Chayav one Asham Taluy for more than one Shogeg.
(c)Rebbi Zeira extrapolates from Rebbi's statement that - a Safek Yedi'ah divides by Chata'os (just like it divides Ashamos).
(d)Rava rejects Rebbi Zeira's proof however, on the grounds that perhaps what Rebbi means is that - just as a Vaday Yedi'ah in the middle would have obligated him to bring a second Chatas, so too, does a Safek Yedi'ah in the middle.
8)
(a)How does Abaye query Rava from the Beraisa that we discussed in the previous Perek 'K'lalo shel Davar, Kol she'Chalukin le'Chata'os ... '?
(b)Rava bar Chanan counters with a Kashya on Abaye from a case where someone eats Cheilev once before Yom Kipur and once after Yom Kipur in one He'elam. On what grounds does he maintain that, according to Abaye, he ought to be Chayav two Chata'os?
(c)What problem does he have with this? On what grounds should he not do so?
(d)What did Abaye answer him? Why does he readily concede that in this case, he only brings one Chatas?
8)
(a)Abaye queries Rava from the Beraisa that we discussed in the previous Perek 'K'lalo shel Davar, Kol she'Chalukin le'Chata'os ... ', which teaches us that - wherever one is not Chayav a Chatas, one is not Chayav an Asham Taluy (so how can one be Chayav an Asham Taluy with a Safek Yedi'ah, if one is not Chayav a Chatas for a Vaday Yedi'ah)?
(b)Rava bar Chanan counters with a Kashya on Abaye from a case where someone eats Cheilev once before Yom Kipur and once after Yom Kipur in one He'elam. He maintains that, according to Abaye, he ought to be Chayav two Chata'os - because Yom Kipur atones for those who are Chayav an Asham Taluy, in which case, they ought to have the Din of Safek Yedi'ah, to obligate two Chata'os (see also Tosfos DH 'Ela').
(c)The problem he has with this is that - the two Achilos took place in one He'elam, in which case one cannot be Chayav two Chata'os.
(d)In reply, Abaye condeded that, for sure without a Yedi'ah he will be Chayav only one Chatas - and when we say Yom Kipur atones for an Asham Taluy, that is only together with a Safek Yedi'ah (not on its own).
9)
(a)Rava refutes Abaye's latter statement, because the Mishnah in Shevu'os lists Hoda and Lo Hoda among the things that Yom Kipur atones for. What does he mean by that?
(b)According to the second Lashon, Rava bar Chanan asked Abaye whether according to him, based on the same premise as the first Lashon , if someone eats a k'Zayis Cheilev in the morning of Yom Kipur and a k'Zayis in the afternoon, he is be Chayav to bring two Chata'os. What did Abaye reply?
(c)Rava countered with a Beraisa (which discusses someone who is confronted with a Safek Aveirah at any time, even at dusk). How does the Beraisa conclude?
(d)What did he mean when he referred to Abaye as Tarda?
9)
(a)Rava refutes Abaye's latest statement because the Mishnah in Shevu'os lists Hoda and Lo Hoda among the things that Yom Kipur atones for, by which he means that - Yom Kipur atones whether there is a Yedi'ah or not.
(b)According to the second Lashon, Rava bar Chanan asked Abaye whether (based on the same premise as the first Lashon), according to him, if someone ate a k'Zayis Cheilev in the morning of Yom Kipur and a k'Zayis Cheilev in the afternoon, he would be Chayav to bring two Chata'os. To which he replied that - Yom Kipur does not atone all day, but only at the end of the day.
(c)Rava countered with a Beraisa (which discusses someone who is confronted with a Safek Aveirah at any time even at dusk), and concludes 'she'Kol ha'Yom Mechaper'.
(d)He referred to Abaye as 'Tarda' - meaning either a fool or a lazy person.
10)
(a)According to a second Lashon, Rava bar Chanan queried Abaye from the Mishnah in Yoma 'Achal ve'Shasah be'He'elam Achas, Eino Chayav Ela Chatas Achas'. How does this pose a Kashya on Abaye?
(b)To answer the Kashya, like whom does Abaye establish the Mishnah?
(c)We query this however, from the Seifa of the Mishnah, which exempts someone who drinks brine of fish-juice on Yom Kipur. What can we extrapolate from there regarding someone who drinks vinegar?
10)
(a)According to a second Lashon, Rava bar Chanan queried Abaye from the Mishnah in Yoma 'Achal ve'Shasah be'He'elam Achas Eino Chayav Ela Chatas Achas', a Kashya on Abaye - because there must have been a short break in between, sufficient time for there to have been a Safek Yedi'ah, which according to Abaye, is replaced by Yom Kipur.
(b)In answer to the Kashya - Abaye establishes the Mishnah like the Rabbanan (Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon), whereas Rebbi Zeira (whose opinion our Sugya is discussing) is speaking according to Rebbi.
(c)We query this however, from the Seifa of the Mishnah, which exempts someone who drinks brine of fish-juice on Yom Kipur - implying that if he drinks vinegar, he is Chayav.
11)
(a)On what grounds does the Tana Kama of a Beraisa exempt someone who drinks vinegar on Yom Kipur from a Chatas?
(b)What does Rebbi there say?
(c)Who must therefore be the author of the Seifa of the Mishnah in Yoma?
(d)How do we then refute the Kashya on Abaye that since the Seifa goes like Rebbi, the Reisha too must go like Rebbi?
11)
(a)The Tana Kama of a Beraisa exempts someone who drinks vinegar on Yom Kipur from a Chatas - because it does not quench one's thirst.
(b)Rebbi there holds that - he is Chayav ...
(c)... a proof that the author of the Seifa of the Mishnah in Yoma is Rebbi and not the Rabbanan.
(d)We refute the Kashya on Abaye that, since the Seifa goes like Rebbi, the Reisha must go like Rebbi too - by countering 'Seifa Rebbi, Reisha Rabbanan'.
12)
(a)Rava then queries Abaye from another Beraisa which discusses Me'ilah. What does the Tana say about someone who ...
1. ... eats, or benefits from, half a Perutah's worth of Hekdesh today and half tomorrow?
2. ... eats half a Perutah's worth of Hekdesh today and benefits half tomorrow?
3. ... eats half today and half three years later?
(b)How do we learn it from the Pasuk in Vayikra "Nefesh ki Sim'ol Ma'al Vechat'ah bi'Shegagah ... "?
(c)What problem does this now create for Abaye?
(d)Abaye gives two answers to this Kashya. One of them, that Yom Kipur atones for Isur, but not for Mamon (which must be paid up in order to achieve a Kaparah). What is the second answer?
12)
(a)Rava then queries Abaye from another Beraisa which discusses Me'ilah. The Tana rules that someone who ...
1. ... eats, or benefits from, half a Perutah's worth of Hekdesh today and half tomorrow - is Chayav, and the same applies to someone who ...
2. ... eats half a Perutah's worth of Hekdesh today and benefits half tomorrow and to someone who ...
3. ... eats half today and half three years later.
(b)We learn it from the double expression "Sim'ol Ma'al" (in the Pasuk in Vayikra "Nefesh ki Sim'ol Ma'al Vechat'ah bi'Shegagah ... ".
(c)The problem this now creates for Abaye is - why Yom Kipur does not divide between the two half-Shi'urim (like a Safek Yedi'ah) to exempt him from a Korban?
(d)Abaye gives two answers to this Kashya. One of them, that Yom Kipur atones for Isur, but not for Mamon (which must be paid up in order to achieve a Kaparah); the other that - Yom Kipur atones for a full Shi'ur, but not for half a Shi'ur.
13)
(a)Resh Lakish too, concurs with the opinion of Rebbi Zeira ('Ka'an Shanah Rebbi, Yedi'as Safek Mechalekes le'Chata'os'). What does Rebbi Yochanan say?
(b)How does Rebbi Yochanan then interpret Rebbi's statement 'ke'Shem she'Meivi Chatas al Kol Achas ve'Achas, Kach Meivi Asham Taluy ... '?
(c)What problem do we have with Rebbi's statement according to Resh Lakish (and Rebbi Zeira)? What ought Rebbi to have said?
(d)What will Resh Lakish answer to that?
13)
(a)Resh Lakish too, concurs with the opinion of Rebbi Zeira ('Ka'an Shanah Rebbi, Yedi'as Safek Mechalekes le'Chata'os'); whereas Rebbi Yochanan holds - 'Ein Yedi'as Safek Cholekes le'Chata'os' ...
(b)... and he interprets Rebbi's statement 'ke'Shem she'Meivi Chatas al Kol Achas ve'Achas, Kach Meivi Asham Taluy ... ' to mean that - just as one brings a second Chatas after a Yedi'as Vaday, so too, does one bring a separate Asham Taluy after a Yedi'as Safek (like Rava).
(c)The problem with Rebbi's statement according to Resh Lakish (and Rebbi Zeira) is that - it ought to have been reversed 'ke'Shem she'Meivi Asham Taluy ... ' (seeing as, in his opinion, he is learning Chatas from Asham, and not vice-versa) ...
(d)... a Kashya to which Resh Lakish has no answer.