1)
(a)Rami bar Chama claims that the Machlokes between Rabah and Rav Chisda whether we say Ho'il or not, is not a new one. How does he connect the Machlokes between Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah (who permits baking the Matzos before declaring Chalah) and Rebbi Yehoshua, who does not, to Rabah and Rav Chisda respectively?
(b)On what grounds does the Gemara refute that connection, because perhaps ...
1. ... Rebbi Eliezer will agree with Rav Chisda, that 'Ho'il' does not apply to someone who bakes from Yom-Tov to weekday?
2. ... Rebbi Yehoshua will agree with Rabah, that it does?
(c)Rebbi Yirmeyahu was pleased to accept Rami bar Chama's explanation of the Machlokes between Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua for want of a better one. Why did he not want to explain that Rebbi Eliezer holds 'Tovas Hana'ah Mamon' and Rebbi Yehoshua holds 'Einah Mamon'?
1)
(a)Rami bar Chama explains that Rabah, who says 'Ho'il' (since guests might come etc.), follows the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer, whom we have already explained, permits baking the Matzos before declaring Chalah, because he holds 'Ho'il' (since he could take Chalah from each dough separately); whereas Rav Chisda, who does not say 'Ho'il', holds like Rebbi Yehoshua, who does not hold of 'Ho'il' either.
(b)The Gemara refutes that connection, because perhaps ...
1. ... Rebbi Eliezer will agree with Rav Chisda, that 'Ho'il' does not apply to someone who bakes from Yom-Tov to weekday - because (unlike in his case, where, the moment the owner places the doughs into the oven, 'Ho'il' already applies to him practically) in Rav Chisda's case, practically speaking, 'Ho'il' does not apply immediately, since he has yet to invite the guests.
2. ... Rebbi Yehoshua will agree with Rabah, that 'Ho'il' does apply - because (unlike in his case, where it is unusual to separate a small piece from each Chalah - in which case, one of the doughs is definitely forbidden both to him and to guests) in Rabah's case, the dish that he cooked is at least fit for guests (who are common).
(c)Rebbi Yirmeyahu did not want to explain Rebbi Eliezer because of 'Tovas Hana'ah Mamon' and Rebbi Yehoshua, 'Einah Mamon' - because even if we were to do so, and Rebbi Eliezer were to hold 'Tovas Hana'ah Mamon, this would not remove the Isur of "Lo Sa'aseh Kol Melachah" through a forbidden act. It is better to establish the Machlokes by 'Ho'il', in which case, one will only be transgressing Bal Yera'eh and Bal Yimatzei, which does not require an act, but comes by itself.
2)
(a)Rebbi Zeira did not accept Rami bar Chama's explanation due to Rebbi Yehoshua, who asked Rebbi Eliezer 'li'Devarecha, Harei Hu Over Mishum "Lo Sa'aseh Kol Melachah". What does he prove from there?
(b)Rebbi Yirmeyahu replied to that from the Beraisa, where Rebbi Eliezer responded 've'li'Devarecha, Harei Hu Over Mishum Bal Yera'eh u'Bal Yimatzei'? What was he answering him?
(c)From where do we know that Rebbi Eliezer must hold 'Tovas Hana'ah Mamon' (despite the Gemara's statement to the contrary - at the beginning of 46b)?
2)
(a)Rebbi Zeira did not accept Rami bar Chama's explanation - due to Rebbi Yehoshua, who asked Rebbi Eliezer 'li'Devarecha, Harei Hu Over Mishum "Lo Sa'aseh Kol Melachah". According to Rabah, why did Rebbi Eliezer not reply that he holds of 'Ho'il' and that there is therefore no Melachah?
(b)Rebbi Yirmeyahu answers from the Beraisa, where Rebbi Eliezer asked Rebbi Yehoshua 've'li'Devarecha, Harei Hu Over Mishum Bal Yera'eh u'Bal Yimatzei'?, and, although Rebbi Yehoshua did not answer him there and then, he does answer him in our Mishnah, where he says 'Lo Zehu Chametz she'Muzharin Alav'; so why can we not assume that Rebbi Eliezer too, answered Rebbi Yehoshua elsewhere?
(c)Since Rebbi Eliezer said to Rebbi Yehoshua in the Beraisa 'li'Devarecha, Harei Hu Over Mishum Bal Yera'eh u'Bal Yimatzei', he must hold 'Tovas Hana'ah Mamon' - otherwise (bearing in mind what Rashi wrote earlier DH 'Aval Hacha' - that 'Ho'il' cannot place the dough in his Reshus), there is no reason why he should transgress 'Bal Yera'eh u'Val Yimatzei'. When the Gemara made the statement to the contrary, it was not yet aware of this Beraisa.
3)
(a)Rebbi Yishmael Bno shel Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah gives the maximum Shi'ur of a dough that may be kneaded, as two Kabin of wheat and three of barley (a Kav = 24 egg-volumes). What does Rebbi Nasan say quoting Rebbi Eliezer, and why does he do that?
(b)How de we account for the fact that Rebbi Yishmael himself gave the Shi'ur as three Kabin of wheat and four of barley?
(c)How do we see from the above that wheat deteriorates more than barley, and what difference does it make?
3)
(a)Rebbi Nasan quoting Rebbi Eliezer - says the opposite: namely, that the maximum Shi'ur of dough that may be kneaded, is three Kabin of wheat and two of barley, because he holds that barley becomes Chametz quicker than wheat.
(b)When Rebbi Yishmael himself gave the Shi'ur as three Kabin of wheat and four of barley - he was referring to poor quality grain, where three Kabin of wheat is equivalent to two of good quality grain, and four Kabin of barley, to three.
(c)We see from here that whereas barley loses only a quarter of its volume when it deteriorates, barley loses a third.
4)
(a)Rav gives a smaller minimum Shi'ur for kneading dough for Matzah. What is it?
(b)What other ramification does that Shi'ur have?
(c)But how does he reconcile that with the Mishnah in Chalah 'Chameshes Reva'im Kemach (ve'Od) Chayavin b'Chalah'?
4)
(a)Rav gives the minimum Shi'ur for kneading dough for Matzah as a Melugni'an Kav.
(b)The above Shi'ur is also the Shi'ur from which Chalah must be taken.
(c)The 'Chameshes Reva'im Kemach' given by the Mishnah in Chalah as the Shi'ur Chalah is synonymous with the Melugni'an Kav (Both are the equivalent of five Lugin (of Tzipori).
48b----------------------------------------48b
5)
(a)Rav Yosef gives a smaller Shi'ur still. What is it?
(b)What does he do with Abaye's Kashya that, by doing so, they relieve themselves of the obligation to separate Chalah?
(c)The Halachah is like Rebbi Eliezer. Is it like him only by the large Babylonian loaves which tend to stick together in the oven, or even by smaller loaves, which do not?
5)
(a)According to Rav Yosef, one may not knead more than three Lugin on Pesach.
(b)Abaye's Kashya that by doing so, one relieves oneself of the obligation to separate Chalah - is easily answered, because we hold like Rebbi Eliezer, who says that the basket combines the loaves to make up the Shi'ur Chalah - even after they have been baked.
(c)The basket combines the loaves, according to Rebbi Eliezer, irrespective of whether they stick together in the oven, or not.
6)
(a)What She'eilah does the Gemara ask with regard to a flat vessel which has no rim?
(b)How does the Gemara resolve the She'eilah?
(c)According to Rebbi Eliezer, the basket combines the loaves for Chalah. What does Rebbi Yehoshua say?
(d)What does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel hold with regard to Kikros shel Bavel - which stick together whilst baking in the oven?
6)
(a)The Gemara asks whether the vessel combines only when it has a rim and all the loaves are it is the inside of the basket that combines it, and a flat vessel which has no rim does not have an inside, or whether it is the air of the basket (that is above its floor) which combines, in which case it will combine even when there is no rim.
(b)The Gemara does not resolve the She'eilah, but remains with a 'Teiku'.
(c)Rebbi Yehoshua holds that also the oven combines the loaves to make up a Shi'ur Chalah (See Hagahos ha'Gra).
(d)Raban Shimon ben Gamliel holds that Kikros shel Bavel - which, due to their thickness, tend to stick together in the oven whilst they are being baked, are combined by the oven, but not loaves that do not.
7)
(a)Raban Gamliel permits three women to knead their respective doughs simultaneously, even though they are all sharing one oven. What do the Chachamim hold?
(b)What does Rebbi Akiva say about the women, the ovens and the wood? Whom is he coming to support?
(c)'Zeh ha'K'lal, Tafach, Tiltosh b'Tzonan'. What does this mean?
7)
(a)According to the Chachamim, the three women may not begin kneading simultaneously, since this will inevitably cause a waiting period, which, in turn, will lead to the doughs becoming Chametz. So what they must do is stagger their work: one of them kneads first; then, when she starts preparing the dough, the second one begins to knead; and when she starts preparing the dough, the third one starts kneading.
(b)Rebbi Akiva, in support of the Chachamim, points out that not all women work diligently, not all wood burns well, and not all ovens are that well heated (in which case, Raban Gamliel is really asking for trouble by permitting all the women to begin kneading simultaneously).
(c)In any event, the moment the woman perceives that the dough is about to rise, she should prevent this from happening by dipping her hands in cold water and smearing the threatening dough.
8)
(a)Rebbi Yehudah holds 'S'iur Yisaref, v'ha'Ochlo Patur. Siduk Yisaref, v'ha'Ochlo Chayav Kares'. What is Si'ur, and what is Siduk?
(b)According to the Chachamim of the Mishnah (Rebbi Meir), both of these fall under the category of Siduk. Then what is Si'ur, according to them? What is the Halachic difference between Si'ur and Siduk?
(c)The Chachamim of the Beraisa is Rebbi Yehudah. How do we then explain the words following their statement 'Zeh v'Zeh, Chayav Kares'? Doesn't Rebbi Yehudah hold that one is not Chayav Kares for Si'ur?
(d)Why does Rebbi Meir disagree with Rebbi Yehudah regarding his Si'ur?
8)
(a)According to Rebbi Yehudah, Si'ur - is when cracks first appear in the dough (rendering it Chametz Nukshah).
(b)According to the Chachamim, both of these fall under the category of Siduk and are real Chametz. Si'ur - is when the dough turns pale.
(c)'Zeh v'Zeh, Chayav Kares' - is actually Rebbi Meir's comment on Rebbi Yehudah's statement (which differentiates between 'ke'Karnei Chagavim' and 'Nisarvu Sedakav'); Rebbi Meir considers them both proper Chametz.
(d)Rebbi Meir disagrees with Rebbi Yehudah because, he maintains, a crack on top of the dough signifies many cracks below the surface.