Implied Question: When the Gemara in Perek Keitzad Mevorchin (Daf 38:) says that wine satisfies and makes a person happy ...

Answer: It explains there that 'A lot of wine brings on an appetite, a little satisfies'.

Explanation #1: La'v Davka, he was merely careful not to eat.

Explanation #2: Alternatively, he actually undertook to fast, to ensure that he would remember and take care not to eat.

Halachah: The firstborn have a Minhag to fast on Erev Pesach, as we learned in a Beraisa in Maseches Sofrim (Perek 21, Halachah 3) 'One does not fast during the month of Nisan, other than the firstborn on erev Pesach.

Implied Question: Even though nowadays there is no Pesach?

Answer: Nevertheless, the prohibition that existed then was never nullified.

Implied Question: And even though Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseira only permitted (the Korban Pesach in the morning) Bedi'eved, but Lechatchilah, it is forbidden on account of the Pasuk "Don't Shecht on Chametz" - 'Do not Shecht the Pesach whilst you still have Chametz', which means until six hours - and we do find a Tana who disagrees with him?

Answer: Nevertheless, since Bedi'eved, it is Kasher, he (Rav Sheishes) maintains that one should be stringent not to eat from the morning.

Clarification: Since one already mentioned the redemption before the Se'udah.

Implied Question: Even though Matzah too, requires leaning, And we don't say 'Mai de'Havah Havah'?

Answer #1: Matzah is different since, it is the major part of the Se'udah, more than wine.

Answer #2: Moreover, with regard to wine, one has already leaned during the first two cups.

Answer #3: Furthermore, it is written in the Torah as a commemoration of freedom 'Since the dough of our fathers did not manage to rise until they were redeemed' (See Mishnah, 116:)

Implied Question: And even though it is 'Lechem Oni' ...

Answer: One should nevertheless eat it by in a manner that conveys freedom.

Halachah: And the obligation to lean when eating Matzah is confined the B'rachah of ' ... al Achilas Matzah' and the Afikoman.

Halachah: And all four cups require leaning whilst one is drinking them.

She'eilah #1: One needs to examine what the Halachah is if one forgot to lean, whether one needs to drink the cup again (and to lean).

She'eilah #2: Likewise, if one forgets to lean whilst drinking the third cup, if one needs to drink it again whilst leaning, despite the ruling that 'between the third and fourth cups, one should not drink'.

Clarification: Facing upwards.

Clarification: And not like those who explain 'Facing downwards', as this is not the way that one eats.

Support: And so it is implied in 'ha'Mocher es ha'Sefinah' (Bava Basra, Daf 74.) - 'They slept 'Ifr'kid', and a rider was able to pass under their (bent) legs, holding a spear in his hands'.

Suggestion: It appears that it is also not necessary to lean in the presence of one's father who is also his Rebbe, since why should he be any worse that another Rebbe?

Refutation: Generally, however, a father teaches his son Torah, as we learned in the Gemara in Kidushin (Daf 31.) - that 'A son is afraid of his father more than of his mother, because he teaches him Torah'. Yet the Gemara says that 'In the presence of his father, he is obligated to lean'?

Clarification: If not for this reason, they would no not be Chayav ...

Reason: Since women are Patur from Mitzvos Asei that are time-bound.

Implied Question: And even though the four cups are mi'de'Rabbanan ...

Answer: The Chachamim instituted them as if they were d'Oraysa.

Clarification: The Rashbam explains that Yisrael were redeemed on account of them (the women), and the same applies to the Megilah (through Esther) and Chanukah (through Yehudis).

Question #1: The word 'Af (also)' however, implies that they were not the main reason for the miracle.

Question #2: Moreover, the wording in the Yerushalmi is 'Because also they were included in that "Safek' - implying in the danger of " ... to wipe out, to kill and to destroy".

Implied Question: And when the Gemara says that women are Patur from Succah, even thought there too, they were included in the miracle of " ... because in Succos I settled the B'nei Yisrael"?

Answer: That is by an Asei d'Oraysa ...

Conclusion: Whereas the four cups, which are de'Rabbanan, the Chachamim instituted them for women too, since they were included in the miracle.

Clarification: This implies that Lechatchilah, it needs to be diluted.

Precedence: And likewise, the Gemara in Sheloshah she'Achlu (50:) says 'Everyone agrees that one cannot recite a B'rachah over the Kos shel B'rachah until one adds water'?

Question: The Gemara in the same Perek there (Daf 51.) lists one of the ten things that is required of the Kos shel B'rachah as 'Chai'?

Answer #1: Rashi establishes 'Chai' there to mean that one places it into the cup of Birchas ha'Mazon undiluted, to preclude the idea of diluting it in one cup and pouring it into another one before proceeding with Birchas ha'Mazon.

Answer #2: Rabeinu Tam explains that 'Chai' there only partially diluted ...

Support: As the Gemara states in 'ben Sorefr u'Moreh' (Sanhedrin, Daf 70.), which requires a ben Sorer u'Moreh to drink wine 'Chai', and which the Gemara explains to mean partially diluted.

Implied Question: And when the Gemara in 'ha'Motzi Yayin (Shabbos, Daf 76:) says that 'Diluting it properly' that is mentioned there means to dilute it until one reaches the Shi'ur of a Revi'is ...

Answer: That is referring to when one arrives at Birchas ha'Aretz.

Answer (cont.): Which, according to Rabeinu Tam, means that one then adds water; not like Rashi who explains that one adds wine.

Support: And this is also how the Aruch explains it.

Answer #3: The B'nei Narvuna however, explains that 'Chai' (in the last mentioned case) refers to the cup, meaning that it must be whole, and not broken.

Support: Like we say in the last Perek of Makos (Daf 16.) 'If one crushes nine ants, and of which is 'Chai' (i.e. whole, seeing as even a dead ant is considered a Beryah) ...

Support: Like the Gemara says at the end of 'Gid ha'Nasheh' (Chulin, Daf 102:) in connection with (the Shi'ur of) a Tamei bird 'whether in its lifetime or after its death, it is a Kolsh'hu.

Precedent: And in Bava Kama too, the Gemara says 'Its breakin up is considered its death'.

Proof: This explanation makes good sense, since all ten things (listed there) now pertain to the Kos (and not to the wine)!

Halachah: And it would seem that the need to dilute the wine was confined to the wines of those times, which were strong; but by our wines, this is not necessary.

Explanation #1: The explanation is like that of the Rashbam - that they drank them consecutively ...

Explanation #2: And not like that of Rashi - that he poured all four cups into one Kos ...

Refutation: Because 'Shas'an' (he drunk them) implies many cups.

Clarification: This means the Mitzvah of Simchas Yom-Tov.

Clarification (concl.): Since we would otherwise have thought that, seeing as the Chachamim instituted four cups of wine, one cannot be Yotzei the Mitzvah of Simchas Yom-Tov, without being Yotzei that of the four Kosos.

Clarification: The explanation of the Rashbam that old wine is better is the correct one ...

Proof: Like the Gemara says in Megilah (Daf 16:) "And to his father he sent like this" - 'Old wine from which old men derive benefit'.

Proof (cont.): And the Gemara in Bava Basra (Daf 91:) also says 'All old things are good!'

Implied Question: And the reason that the Tana mentions the less obvious item first ...

Reference to Answer: Tosfos explained above in 'Keitzad Tzolin' (Daf 85.).

Clarification: This is equivalent to 'ki'Melo Lugmav, as Tosfos explained earlier (107a DH 'Im' [See Tosfos there]).

Halachah: Lechatchilah however, one needs to drink a Revi'is.

Text #1: Some texts read 'What is 'K'dei Mezigas Kos Yafeh' - for each one.

Explaining the Question #1: According to that, the questioner thought that the 'Mezigas Kos Yafeh' mentioned by Shmuel referred to all four cups - a quarter of a Revi'is (of diluted wine) per cup.

Explaining the Question #1 (cont.): Whereas the Beraisa, which requires a quarter of a Revi'is of undiluted wine between the four cups, a quarter of a Revi'is for each cup.

Explaining the Question #1 (cont.): And when the Tana added 'or diluted', he did not mean that a Revi'is of diluted wine will suffice, but that one may drink the wine diluted.

Conclusion: In any event, the Beraisa is speaking about wine that is undiluted, and that one Revi'is will suffice for all four cups.

Question #1: How could the questioner possibly think that a Mezigas Kos Yafeh will suffice for all four cups, seeing as one of those cups is the Kos shel B'rachah, which is a 'Kos Yafeh'?

Question #2: And the Rashbam asks further that the Beraisa is speaking S'tam?

Text #2: Therefore the other text, which reads 'Both of them are the same Shi'ur' is preferable.

Text #2 (cont.): Now too, the Beraisa is speaking where one needs a Revi'is after it has been diluted.

Explaining the Question: The Gemara thought at first that one needs a Revi'is ha'Log of undiluted wine for each person and that 'Mazug' refers to the drinking and not to the Revi'is mentioned in the Beraisa.

Explaining the Answer: But following the answer, it does indeed refer to the Revi'is.

Conclusion: And this Sugya follows the opinion of Rav Nachman and Rava at the beginning of 'ha'Motzi Yayin' (Shabbos, 76:), who hold that 'The Kos shel B'rachah requires a quarter of a Revi'is of undiluted wine, so that, when diluted, it stands at a Revi'is ha'Log'.

Conclusion (cont.): And the Mishnah there gives the Shi'ur for carrying out wine as 'Mezigas Kos Yafeh, which is a quarter of a Revi'is, which will stand at a Revi'is, once it has been diluted, like the Shi'ur of all beverages ...

Proof: As we learned there in the Seifa 'And the Shi'ur of all other beverages is a Revi'is'.

Question #1: Because Abaye queries them there, firstly, since from the Mishnah, which states that 'Wine is diluted with two parts water (and not three)?

Question #2: And secondly, 'How can water combine when it is still in the jug'?

Abaye's Explanation: It seems that according to Abaye, the Shi'ur for carrying out wine on Shabbos is a full Revi'is.

Proof: And so it is implied in the Sugya there, where Abaye stated 'Until now Rebbi Nasan only said here that a k'Zayis requires a Revi'is ... ' (Rashi's explanation there does not appear correct) ...

Proof (concl.): And he (therefore) holds that the Kos shel B'rachah requires a Revi'is of wine, irrespective of whether it is undiluted or diluted.

Discrepancy: The Gemara here cites this Pasuk to illustrate the importance of red wine ...

Discrepancy (cont.): Whereas in 'ha'Mocher Peiros' (Bava Basra, Daf 97a), the Rashbam explains that it cites it to its detriment?

Reference to Answer: It is explained there (See Hagahos ve'Tziyunim).