From the Pasuk ...

... in Tehilim "Arba'im Shanah Akut be'Dor" Rebbi Eliezer learns that - the era of Mashi'ach will last for forty years (despite the fact that it clearly refers to the generation of the Desert [seeing as the Pasuk uses the word "Akut" in the future]).

... in Yeshayah "ve'Hayah ba'Yom ha'Hu ve'Nishkachas Tzur Shiv'im Shanah ki'Yemei Melech Echad" Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah learns that - the era of Mashi'ach will last for seventy years (since "Melech Echad" implies 'Melech Meyuchad', a special king [Mashi'ach]).

... in Tehilim "Yira'ucha im Shemesh ve'Lifnei Yare'ach Dor Dorim" Rebbi learns that - it will last for three generations (since "Dor Dorim" implies three generations, and "Shemesh" and "Yare'ach" respectively, refer to Mashi'ach and Malchus Beis David).

We already cited Rebbi Hillel, in whose opinion Yisrael experienced Mashi'ach in the time of Chizkiyah Hamelech, and will not experience it again. Rav Yosef refutes Rebbi Hillel's statement from a Pasuk in Zecharyah "Gili Me'od bas Tziyon ... Hinei Malkech Yavo lach, Tzadik ve'Nosha hu, Ani ve'Rochev al ha'Chamor ... " a problem for Rebbi Hillel - since Zecharyah (who refers here to the era of Mashi'ach) prophesied in the time of the second Beis-Hamikdash, whilst Chizkiyah lived in the time of the first.

To be sure, Zecharyah ben Yehoyada lived in the time of the first Beis-Hamikdash - but the Seifer 'Zecharyah' to which Rav is referring, was written by Zecharyah ben Berechyah.

Bearing in mind the Pasuk in Tehilim "Samchenu ki'Yemos Inisanu", Rebbi Eliezer (in another Beraisa) learns from the Pasuk "va'Ye'ancha va'Yar'ivecha" that - just as the period of "va'Ye'ancha" (namely, that of the Manna) lasted forty years, so too, will that of Mashi'ach (which will be one of true Simchah).

Whereas ...

... Rebbi Dosa learns from the Pasuk in Lech-L'cha "va'Avadum ve'Inu osam Arba Me'os Shanah" that - just as Galus Mitzrayim lasted four hundred years, so too, will the era of Mashi'ach.

... Rebbi learns from the Pasuk in Yeshayah "Ki Yom Nakam be'Libi u'Shenas Ge'ulai Ba'ah" that - the era of Mashi'ach will last three hundred and sixty-five years ...

... a year for each day, as the Lashon of the Pasuk indicates.

Another text reads three hundred and sixty-five (not years, but) thousand years - because, as the Pasuk writes in Tehilim "Ki Elef Shanim be'Einecha ke'Yom" (from which we learn that a thousand years in the eyes of Hash-m is like one day of ours).

In the above Pasuk in Yeshayah "Ki Yom Nakam be'Libi", Rebbi Yochanan explains 'le'Libi Gilisi, le'Evarai Lo Gilisi'(Hash-m [Ke'vayachol] did not even reveal the date of Mashi'ach to His Limbs). Resh Lakish says - 'le'Libi Gilisi, le'Mal'achei ha'Shareis Lo Gilisi' (though the difference is unclear).

According to ...

... the Beraisa cited by Rebbi Avimi b'rei de'Rebbi Avahu, based on the Pasuk in Yeshayah "u'Mesos Chasan al Kalah, Yasis alayich Elokayich", the era of Mashi'ach will last - seven thousand years (Hash-m's equivalent of the seven days of Sheva B'rachos).

... Shmuel, based on the Pasuk "ki'Yemei ha'Shamayim al ha'Aretz", the era of Mashi'ach will last - as many years as the world will have already existed from the Creation until his arrival.

... Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, based on the Pasuk in Yeshayah "Ki Mei No'ach Zos Li asher Nishba'ti", it will last as many years as the world will have already existed from the time of the Great Flood until his arrival.

Based on the Pasuk in Yeshayah "Ayin Lo Ra'asah Elokim Zulasecha Ya'aseh li'Mechakeh lo", Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan states that all the rewards contained in the prophesies pertain ...

... to the era of Mashi'ach. As for Olam ha'Ba, nobody has ever seen it and nobody can possibly describe it.

... to Ba'alei-Teshuvah, but not to Tzadikim, whose reward (even in the era of Mashi'ach) is beyond description.

Besides Ba'alei-Teshuvah, the Pasuk also refers to - people who marry off their daughters to Talmidei-Chachamim and who do business or benefit Talmidei-Chachamim.

Shmuel disagrees with Rebbi Chiya bar Aba's first statement. According to him - the era of Mashi'ach will differ from the preceding one only inasmuch as Yisrael will no longer be subservient to the nations (but not in any other way).

Whereas Rebbi Avahu disagrees with Rebbi Chiya bar Aba's second statement. In his opinion - Tzadikim do not reach the level of Ba'alei-Teshuvah. Note, that the Ba'alei-Teshuvah referred to here obviously speaks about Ba'alei-Teshuvah who attain the level of the Tzadikim and who are now on a par with them in righteousness.

He learns this from the Pasuk in Yeshayah "Shalom Shalom la'Rachok ve'la'Karov ... " - where the Pasuk gives precedence to those who came from far (Ba'alei-Teshuvah) to the Tzadikim (who were always close).

Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan interprets "la'Rachok ve'la'Karov" to mean - those were always far from sin (Tzadikim) and those were close to it (Ba'alei-Teshuvah).

According to Rebbi Yehoshua be Levi, "Ayin Lo Ra'asah Elokim Zulasecha" pertains to the wine that was put away at the time of the Creation (Yayin ha'Meshumar). Resh Lakish interprets it as - Eden.

We reconcile this with the fact that Adam ha'Rishon lived in Gan Eden (up to the time that he was banished) - by differentiating between Eden itself and Gan Eden (which is where Adam lived).

And we know that 'Gan' and 'Eden' are not one and the same - because the Pasuk writes in Bereishis "ve'Nahar Yotzei me'Eden Lehashkos es ha'Gan".

The Beraisa offers three possible interpretations of the Pasuk in Sh'lach-L'cha "Ki D'var Hash-m Bazah". Besides someone who says that the Torah is not of Divine origin or an Apikores - it might also mean someone who interprets Torah in his own way, without adhering to the traditional interpretation.

According to the 'Davar Acher'...

... "ve'es Mitzvaso Heifer" refers to - someone who annuls the B'ris Milah.

... "Hikares Tikares" - means in this world and in Olam ha'Ba, respectively.

Rebbi Eliezer Hamuda'i says with regard to most of the above (he does specifically incorporate 'an Apikores' in his list) that - even though he has accumulated Torah and good deeds, he loses his portion in Olam ha'Ba.

He places 'Ha'Mechalel es ha'Kodshim' and 'ha'Mevazeh es ha'Mo'ados' (which he adds to the list) in the category of - "D'var Hash-m Bazah".

'ha'Mevazeh es ha'Mo'ados' entails - relegating Chol ha'Mo'ed to an ordinary weekday (by wearing weekday clothes, and eating regular food).

And he also incorporates - someone who embarrasses his fellow-Jew in his list.

Another Beraisa states that someone who concedes that the entire Torah was written by Hash-m with the exception of only one Pasuk, that was said by Moshe Rabeinu - also falls under the category of "Ki D'var Hash-m Bazah" ...

... and this extends even if he maintains that - just one Dikduk (a missing word or an extra one), one 'Kal va'Chomer' (see Marg'lis ha'Yam) or one 'Gezeirah-Shavah' was not handed down traditionally.

According to Rebbi Meir, anyone who learns Torah but does not teach it, is termed ''D'var Hash-m Bazah". When Rebbi Nasan says 'Kol Mi she'Eino Mashgi'ach al ha'Mishnah', he refers to - someone who does not consider the Mishnayos vital to the understanding of the Pasuk.

Rebbi Yishmael interprets the Pasuk with reference to someone who worships Avodah-Zarah; Rebbi Naha'ra'i - to someone who is able to study Torah, but doesn't.

The source of Rebbi Yishmael's interpretation of "Ki D'var Hash-m Bazah" (someone who serves Avodah-Zarah) is - the words "D'var Hash-m", implying the words that Hash-m spoke personally to Yisrael ("Anochi" and "Lo Yih'yeh l'cha"), as opposed to the other eight commandments, which Yisrael received through Moshe Rabeinu.

Rebbi Yehoshua ...

... ben Korchah describes someone who learns Torah without revising it as - sowing without reaping (meaning that he derives no results from his learning).

... (ben Chananyah) describes someone who learns Torah and forgets it - to a woman who has a baby and the baby dies.

When Rebbi Akiva says 'Zemer be'Chol Yom, Zemer be'Chol Yom', he means that - like a song that one sings, even though one knows it well, so too, should one revise one's learning, even if one already understands it.

Rav Yitzchak bar Avudimi learns this from the Pasuk in Mishlei ...

... "Nefesh Amal Amlah lo" meaning that - if someone toils in Torah in this world, he will know it like a song in Olam ha'Ba. Alternatively, if one toils in one place, Torah works on his behalf, to help him understand it in another place.

... "Ki Ikaf alav Pihu" - 'because he 'bent his mouth over it', which means that he applied himself diligently).

After learning from Iyov that man is born to work hard ("Ki Adam le'Adam Yulad"), Rebbi Elazar interprets the above-mentioned Pasuk "Ki Ikaf alav Pihu" - with reference to the work that one performs with one's mouth ...

... which he knows refers to Torah-study from the Pasuk in Yehoshua - "Lo Yamush Sefer-ha'Torah ha'Zeh mi'Picha ... ".

When Rava said 'Kulhu Gufi de'Ruft'ki Ninhu,Tuveih le'de'Zachi de'Havi de'Ruft'ki d'Oraysa', he meant that - all people are created to work hard, but that those who work hard in Torah are particularly praiseworthy.

'de'Raft'ki' (and not 'de'Ruft'ki') might also mean - a large purse or pocket for one's money. Likewise, the human body is a large purse which is meant to contain things (preferably Torah).

Resh Lakish interprets the Pasuk in Mishlei "ve'No'ef Ishah Chasar Leiv" - with reference to someone who learns Torah only on occasions, which the Pasuk is comparing to a man who has no wife, who sleeps sometimes with this woman, and sometimes with that one.

This is contained in the Pasuk there "Ki Na'im ki Sishmerem be'Vitn'cha, Yikonu Yachdav al S'fasecha" which teaches us that - one can only retain what one has learned only if one has everything at one's fingertips.

According to the Beraisa, "ve'ha'Nefesh asher Ta'aseh be'Yad Ramah ... ki D'var Hash-m Bazah" refers to King Menasheh, who queried Moshe Rabeinu, when he asked why he found it necessary to write "va'Achos Lotan Timna ... ", "ve'Timna Haysah Pilegesh" and "va'Yeilech Reuven bi'Yemei K'tzir Chitim ... " in the Torah, since these P'sukim appear to have no significance.

The Tana adds that also the Pasuk in Tehilim "Teishev be'Achicha Tedaber be'Ven Imcha Titn Dofi" refers to Menasheh. When Yeshayah ha'Navi referred to Menashe's sin ...

... as "Chavlei ha'Shav" - he meant that he gained nothing from it (like a Mumar Lehach'is, who sins to spite Hash-m, and not because he benefits from the sin).

... "ve'cha'Avos ha'Agalah" - he meant to hint at the ways of the Yeitzer-ha'Ra, who is at first, compared to the strands of a cobweb, but later turns into the ropes of a wagon (meaning that he first traps us into sinning in a small way, before going on to trap us into sinning big.

The significance of the Pasuk ...

... "va'Achos Lotan Timna. ve'Timna Haysah Pilegesh" is - that Timna was so keen to marry into the family of Avraham and Yitzchak, because they were G-d-fearing, that she went to each of the Avos in turn, asking them to convert her and marry her, and it was only after they refused that she went and became the concubine of Elifaz ben Eisav, because, she said, 'It is better to be a slave in this family, than free in any other one!'

... "va'Yeilech Reuven bi'Yemei K'tzir Chitim ... " is - to teach us how careful Tzadikim are not to take what is stolen. That is why the Torah records that Reuven took only flowers (which people tended to declare Hefker), and not wheat, which was already ripe, and which would therefore have constituted theft.

We learn of Timna's status from the Pesukim "va'Achos Lotan Timna" and "Aluf Lotan" ("Aluf Timna" that follows is not the same Timna as the one under discussion) - from the fact that she was the sister of a prince (because "Aluf" is a Malchusa be'Lo Taga' [meaning a king without a crown]), so presumably her father was a king too.

Amalek was born specifically to her - to punish the Avos for not accepting her into their family.

According to Rav, the Duda'im that Reuven brought his mother were 'Yavruchi', according to Rebbi Yonasan, 'S'vimki'. Levi translates them as 'Sigli' - which means 'jasmin' (see also Agados Maharsha).

Amora'im argue over the achievement of someone who studies Torah li'Sh'mah, based on Pesukim in Yeshayah. Based on the Pasuk ...

... "Ya'aseh Shalom li, Shalom Ya'aseh li" Rebbi Alexandri explains that - he makes peace between the celestial Hosts and those on earth.

" ... li'Neto'a Shamayim ve'Liysod Aretz" - Rav explains that - it is as if he had built one palace in Heaven and one on earth.

... "u've'Tzeil Yadi Kisisicha", Rebbi Yochanan says that - he protects the whole world.

... "ve'Leimor le'Tzi'on Ami Atah", Levi maintains that - he actually brings the Redemption closer.

Resh Lakish learns from the Pasuk in Lech-L'cha (in connection with Avraham and Sarah) "ve'es ha'Nefesh asher Asu be'Charan" that - if someone learns Torah with his fellow-Jew's son, it is as if he had made him.

Rebbi Yochanan learns from the Pasuk in Ki Savo "u'Shemartem es Divrei ha'B'ris ha'Zos ... " that - it is as if he had authored the Divrei Torah that he taught him.

Rava learns from the conclusion of that Pasuk " ... va'Asisem Osam" (which he reads as 'Atem' [without a 'Vav'] that - it is as if he had made himself.

Rebbi Avahu learns from the Pasuk in Beshalach (in connection with hitting the rock for its water) "u'Mat'cha asher Hikisa Bo es ha'Ye'or Tikach be'Yadecha" that - the Torah reckons someone who coerces his fellow-Jew to perform a Mitzvah, as if he had done the Mitzvah himself ...

... since it was not actually Moshe, but Aharon, who had struck the River Nile, yet it is attributed to Moshe, because he had 'instructed Aharon into doing it.

According to Rav and Rebbi Chanina, an Apikores (among those cited in our Mishnah who do not receive a portion in Olam ha'Ba) is someone who insults a Talmid-Chacham. Rebbi Yochanan and Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi define it as - someone who insults his friend in the presence of a Talmid-Chacham.

We try to prove Rebbi Yochanan and Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi right from the case of Megaleh Panim ba'Torah, which they will interpret as someone who insults a Talmid-Chacham (like Rav and Rebbi Chanina interpret 'Apikores'). But how will Rav and Rebbi Chanina interpret - Megaleh Panim ba'Torah?

In fact, Rav and Rebbi Chanina will define 'Megaleh Panim ba'Torah' as - someone who misinterprets Torah (like King Menashe, whom we quoted earlier).

In the second Lashon, the above pairs argue in the Seifa (over the definition of 'Megaleh Panim ba'Torah'). The problem according to Rav and Rebbi Chanina (who define it as someone who insults a Talmid-Chacham) from Apikores is - exactly the same as the problem we had with their interpretation of Apikores from 'Megaleh Panim ba'Torah' (only in the reverse); namely, how they will then define Apikores?

Rav Yosef initially interprets Apikores according to them as - someone who claims that the Rabbanan do not benefit us in any way. They only learn for themselves (providing us with no tangible benefits).

Abaye rejects this interpretation however, because this would fall under the category of 'Megaleh Panim ba'Torah' - as we learned in Yirmiyah "Were it not for My covenant (of Torah), I would not have placed the statutes of the Heaven ... ". From which we can learn that the whole of mankind (including all their material benefits) continues to exist only on the merit of Torah and those who study it.

Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak proves the usefulness of Talmidei-Chachamim (Tzadikim) - from the Pasuk in Vayeira (in connection with the destruction of S'dom) "And I will forgive the entire place for their sake" (of the fifty Tzadikim - that No'ach had mentioned).

So we conclude that, according to Rav and Rebbi Chanina, an Apikores is someone who is learning with his Rebbe, and when they come upon something that they have learned before, he declares 'That's what we said over there', instead of 'That's what the Rebbe said'. Rava finally interprets 'Apikores' as someone who says 'What use are the Rabanan to us? They have never permitted us to eat a raven, nor have they even forbidden a pigeon (All they do is interpret the written Torah)!'.

When the bei Binyamin brought Rava animals for inspection that turned out to be ...

... Tereifah, he would comment - 'See, I forbade you a pigeon!' (since initially, it seemed to be Mutar like a pigeon)

... Kasher, he would comment - 'See, I permitted you a raven!' (since initially, it seemed to be Asur like a ravn).