1)

(a)Rebbi Ami, whose proof from Rav Yitzchak Amar Rebbi Yochanan (that when what grows becomes a majority, it is Mevatel the Ikar) we just refuted, makes a further attempt at resolving Yishmael Ish Kfar Yama's She'eilah from Rebbi Shimon in a Beraisa. According to Rebbi Shimon, the Chachamim did not give a Shi'ur (to become Batel) to Tevel, Ma'aser Sheni, Hekdesh and Chadash - because they all fall under the category of 'Davar she'Yesh Lo Matirin' (which declares Asur even a 'Kol she'Hu'); whereas they did give a Shi'ur to Terumah, Terumas Ma'aser, Chalah, Orlah and Kil'ei ha'Kerem, since they fall under the category of 'Davar she'Ein Lo Matirin' (which can become Batel).

(b)Davar she'Yesh Lo Matirin applies to ...

1. ... Tevel a Davar she'Yesh Lo Matirin - because one can cover it by separating Ma'asros from another source.

2. ... Ma'aser Sheni and Hekdesh - because they can be redeemed.

3. ... Chadash a Davar she'Yesh Lo Matirin - because the bringing of the Omer permits it.

(c)The Chumra of 'Davar she'Yesh Lo Matirin' - is confined to Min b'Mino (Min b'she'Eino Mino is Batel 'b'Nosen Ta'am' [which is generally one in sixty]).

(d)The Sugya in Avodah Zarah gives the reason for Tevel not becoming Batel as being - 'k'Hetero Kach Isuro' (meaning that just as Tevel becomes rectified by separating just one grain, so too does just one grain render what it falls into, forbidden.

2)

(a)With regard to Terumah, Terumas Ma'aser and Chalah, the fact that one can be Sho'el (have them rescinded through a Chacham) does not place them in the category of 'Davar she'Yesh Lo Matirin' - because there is no obligation to do so.

(b)The Shi'ur Bitul of Min b'Mino regarding ...

1. ... Terumah, Terumas Ma'aser and Chalah is - one in a hundred.

2. ... Orlah and Kil'ei ha'Kerem - one in two hundred.

(c)The Shi'ur Bitul of Min b'she'Eino Mino is - one in sixty (as we just explained).

3)

(a)The Mishnah in Shevi'is rules 'ha'Shevi'is Oseres Kol-Shehu b'Minah'. Apart from Shemitah fruit becoming mixed together with other fruit - the Mishnah is referring to a sixth-year onion which one re-planted in the Shemitah.

(b)Considering that Shevi'is is a 'Davar she'Ein Lo Matirin', Rebbi Shimon (who does not argue with the Rabanan there) establishes the Beraisa - by fruit which grew before the time ha'Bi'ur (which differs from fruit to fruit, and) which is a 'Davar she'Yesh Lo Matirin', seeing as one is permitted to eat it up until the time of Bi'ur.

(c)Fruit that grows after the time of Bi'ur, according to Rebbi Shimon, is 'Batel b'Nosen Ta'am'.

4)

(a)Rebbi Ami is trying to prove from the Beraisa of Rebbi Shimon - that what grows is not drawn after the Ikar, and is even Mevatel it.

(b)Rebbi Ami proves from Rebbi Shimon that what grows is not drawn after the Ikar from the fact that it is Mevatel it - because we take for granted that whatever is not Mevatel the Ikar becomes drawn after it.

(c)We reject this proof too however - by pointing out that he is speaking about the reverse case, about a sixth-year onion that was re-planted in the Shemitah, and here again, the growth is Mevatel the Ikar only l'Chumra, but strictly speaking, the growth is not Mevatel the Ikar.

(d)In spite of having used this Sevara to reject the previous proof, we nevertheless persist in citing this Beraisa - because, unlike the previous case, here we are dealing with two Chumros (firstly, that up until the Bi'ur, we treat any mixture like a 'Davar she'Yesh Lo Matirin' disallowing Bitul; secondly, the growth, which should not become Asur at all, is in fact, Asur. We might therefore have thought that we could not use the same Sevara here, because to such an extent, we would not go l'Chumra.

5)

(a)So Rebbi Ami tries to resolve the She'eilah from another Mishnah in Shevi'is. The Tana say there regarding sixth-year onions on which rain fell and which subsequently grew, that if their leaves were ...

1. ... bordering on black (a clear indication that they grew mainly in the Shemitah) - they are forbidden; whereas if they are ...

2. ... green - they are permitted (because they grew mainly in the sixth year, and not in the Shemitah).

(b)Rebbi Chananya ben Antignos gauges that the onions grew well in the Shemitah, and are therefore forbidden - by the fact that they can be detached by their leaves.

(c)About the reverse situation on Motza'ei Shevi'is - he says that they are permitted.

(d)In order to reject Rebbi Ami's proof from here too (that what grows is not Batel to the Ikar, and even renders it Batel) - we establish the Mishnah by onions that were pounded before being re-planted, which is why what subsequently grows is not drawn after them and is therefore Mevatel them.

6)

(a)The Tana Kama in a Beraisa says that someone who is weeding among Chasi'os with a Kuti, may eat from them casually, and is obligated to Ma'aser them. Chasi'os - incorporates all species whose seeds do not decompose before growing (such as the family of onions)

(b)We might have thought that they are forbidden - because they may have already reached the stage of Ma'aser before they were planted.

(c)The concession to eat them might be based on the fact that the obligation to Ma'aser them is only mid'Rabanan (so we are lenient when there is a Safek) - or it may be because, seeing as we rule 'Me'asran Vadai', it is clear that we do not consider the possibility that they may have already reached the stage of Ma'aser before they were planted.

7)

(a)In the same Beraisa, Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar rules - that even the produce of a Yisrael who is suspected of breaking the Shemitah is permitted on Motza'ei Shevi'is.

(b)Rebbi Ami finally resolves Yishmael Ish Kfar Yama's She'eilah from there - because Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar only permits it because what grows after Shemitah is Mevatel the Ikar.

(c)Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar cannot be speaking about ...

1. ... a species whose seeds decompose before growing - because the Tana specifically wrote 'Chasi'os' (whose seeds do not decompose).

2. ... someone who pounded the onions before planting them - because he refers to someone who is 'Chashud al ha'Shevi'is' (and it is only someone who observes Shevi'is who would bother to do that).

3. ... a case when the onions are mixed with other species - because he is speaking about someone who weeds, implying that he is particular about keeping them separate.

(d)To avoid Rebbi Yochanan ('Yaldah she'Savchah bi'Zekenah ... Asur') and Rebbi Yonasan ('Batzel she'Nat'o b'Kerem ... Asur') clashing with this Mishnah - Rebbi Yitzchak ascribes the reason for this Mishnah (based on the Pasuk in Behar "v'Shavsah ha'Aretz Shabbos la'Hashem") - that the root of the Isur of Shemitah-produce is the fact that it grew in the land, and seeing as the land was responsible for the Isur, it also causes it to become Batel. In other words, Shemitah is unique in this regard, and by other Isurim, the growth is not Mevatel the Ikar.

8)

(a)We just learned that the Isur of Shemitah is based in the land. The basis of the Isur of ...

1. ... Orlah - is the fact that the time has not yet expired.

2. ... Kil'ayim - the mixture of the species forbidden by the Torah.

(b)We have learned in a Beraisa 'Litra Ma'aser Tevel she'Zar'ah b'Karka v'Hishbichah, v'Harei Hu k'Eser Litrin, Chayeves b'Ma'aser' u'va'Shevi'is'. The ramifications of ...

1. ... 'Chayeves b'Ma'aser are - Ma'aser min ha'Ma'aser (whose obligation already came into effect before the Ma'aser was sown).

2. ... 'u'va'Shevi'is' are - that it must be got rid of before the time of Bi'ur.

3. ... the conclusion of this Beraisa 'v'Osah Litra Me'aser Alehah mi'Makom Acher Lefi Cheshbon' are - the Ma'aser min ha'Ma'aser must be separated from an external source, and not from within itself, because, seeing as what subsequently grew is Patur from Ma'aser, one would be separating from what is Patur to cover what is Chayav.

(c)If, as we initially believe, the obligation to Ma'aser is based in the land, our problem is - why is the growth not Mevatel the Ikar (like it is by Shevi'is)?

(d)In fact, we answer - the obligation to Ma'aser is, based not on the land, but in the 'Digun' (also known as 'Miru'ach' - flattening the pile of produce after winnowing).