On what grounds does Rebbi Yochanan object to that explanation?
(c)
So how does he interpret the Pasuk?
1)
(a)
In the Pasuk in Yeshayah "Lachen Hirchivah She'ol Nafshah, u'Pa'arah Pihah li'Veli Chok", Resh Lakish interpet ...
1.
... "Lachen Hirchivah She'ol Nafshah, u'Pa'arah Pihah ... " to mean - that for committing just one sin, a person will have to go to Gehinom (see Agados Maharsha).
2.
... " li'Veli Chok" to mean - that he will also have to go to Gehinom 'for failing to keep one Mitzvah'.
(b)
Rebbi Yochanan objects to that explanation - on the grounds that Hash-m does not want to judge K'lal Yisrael so harshly (and that consequently, if there is a way to learn the Pasuk in a way that is less severe, then one should adopt it).
(c)
He therefore interprets the Pasuk to mean - that even if one only observes just one Mitzvah, he will not go to Gehinom (see Maharitz Chayos).
2)
(a)
Based on the fact that the off-spring of Arpachshad (one of five sons of Shem), from whom Avraham descended, comprised a third of the world (Yad R'mah), how does Resh Lakish explain the Pasuk in Zechari'ah, which states that, in the days of Mashi'ach, only one third of the sons of the people of the world will remain?
(b)
Based on the same objection as in the previous case, how does Rebbi Yochanan explain the Pasuk?
(c)
What exactly does this imply? Who exactly will then survive, assuming Yisrael comprise ...
1.
... less than a third of the world?
2.
... more than a third of the world?
(d)
According to Rashi's second interpretation, Resh Lakish explains 'Shelishis' to mean a third of Yisrael, who is the third of Arpachshad, who is the third of Shem. What does Rebbi Yochanan say?
2)
(a)
Based on the fact that the off-spring of Arpachshad (one of five sons of Shem), from whom Avraham descended, comprised a third of the world (Yad R'mah), Resh Lakish explains that the Pasuk which states that, in the days of Mashi'ach, only one third of the sons of the people of the world will remain - refers to one third of the descendants of Arpachshad. Seeing as Yisrael are more numerous than the other nations, this implies that part of Yisrael will not even be included in that third.
(b)
Based on the same objection as in the previous case, Rebbi Yochanan explains the Pasuk to mean - that a third of all the descendants of No'ach will survive.
(c)
This implies, assuming Yisrael comprise ...
1.
... less than a third of the world - that they will all survive together with the Geirim and the Chasidei Umos ha'Olam (who will make up the third).
2.
... more than a third of the world - that inevitably, some of them will die too, but less than according to Resh Lakish.
(d)
According to Rashi's second interpretation, Resh Lakish explains 'Shelishis' to mean a third of Yisrael, who is the third of Arpachshad, who is the third son of Shem; whereas according to Rebbi Yochanan - it is a third of the descendants of No'ach (not Shem), incorporating all the descendants of Arpachshad, the third son of Shem, who was the third son of No'ach. This means that the whole of Yisrael will survive.
3)
(a)
In similar fashion, Resh Lakish interprets the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "Ki Anochi Ba'alti Bachem Velakachti Eschem Echad me'Ir, u'Shenayim mi'Mishpachah" literally (that one per city, to per family, will survive). How does Rebbi Yochanan interpret it
(b)
What objection did Rav raise, when his Talmid Rav Kahan explained the Pasuk in Yirmiyah like Resh Lakish?
(c)
On what occasion did he once quote the Pasuk "ve'Lo Simatzei be'Eretz ha'Chayim" to Rav Kahana? What did he imply with that?
(d)
What did he reply when Rav Kahana asked him why he was cursing him?
3)
(a)
In similar fashion, Resh Lakish interprets the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "Ki Anochi Ba'alti Bachem Velakachti Eschem Echad me'Ir, u'Shenayim mi'Mishpachah" literally (that one per city, to per family, will survive); whereas according to Rebbi Yochanan, the Pasuk means - that one Tzadik in a town will save the town, and two Tzadikim in a family will save the family.
(b)
When Rav's Talmid Rav Kahana explained the Pasuk in Yirmiyah like Resh Lakish - Rav raised the same objection as Rebbi Yochanan did).
(c)
He quoted the Pasuk "ve'Lo Simatzei be'Eretz ha'Chayim" to Rav Kahana - when he once saw him washing his hair when he ought to have been learning Torah.
(d)
When Rav Kahana asked him why he was cursing him, he replied - that he was merely quoting a Pasuk.
4)
(a)
How many of the six hundred thousand between the ages of twenty and sixty who left Egypt, entered Eretz Yisrael?
(b)
Based on this fact, what does Rebbi Sima'i in a Beraisa, extrapolate from the comparison between leaving Egypt and arriving in Eretz Yisrael (contained in the Pasuk in Va'eira "And I took you for Me as a nation, and I will bring you to the land")?
(c)
What happened to the remaining hundred and eighty thousand million Jews.
(d)
What does Rava comment on this, based on the Pasuk in Hoshe'a "ve'Ansah Shamah ki'Yemei Ne'urehah u'che'Yom Alosah me'Eretz Mitzrayim"?
4)
(a)
Of the six hundred thousand Jews between the ages of twenty and sixty who left Egypt - only two entered Eretz Yisrael (Yehoshua and Kalev).
(b)
Based on this fact, Rebbi Sima'i in a Beraisa, extrapolates from the comparison between leaving Egypt and arriving in Eretz Yisrael (contained in the Pasuk in Va'eira "And I took you for Me as a nation, and I will bring you to the land") - that for every two of B'nei Yisrael that left Egypt, six hundred thousand did not leave (see also Ya'avatz).
(c)
The remaining hundred and eighty thousand million B'nei Yisrael died during the plague of darkness, so that the Egyptians would not be aware of their death.
(d)
Based on the Pasuk in Hoshe'a "ve'Ansah Shamah ki'Yemei Ne'urehah u'che'Yom Alosah me'Eretz Mitzrayim", Rava comments - that in the days of Mashi'ach, the same proportion will leave Galus.
5)
(a)
Which three atrocities did an elderly Egyptian once show Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Yossi (presumably in an ancient script, Agados Maharsha) in Alexandria, that his ancestors did to the Tana's?
(b)
What do these have to do with Moshe Rabeinu's punishment?
(c)
Which punishment?
5)
(a)
An elderly Egyptian once showed Elazar b'Rebbi Yossi (presumably in an ancient script, Agados Maharsha) in Alexandria - that some of the B'nei Yisrael his ancestors drowned in the sea, some they killed by the sword and others they squashed in the buildings.
(b)
And it was concerning those atrocities (see Agados Maharsha) that Moshe asked Hash-m why He had intensified the slavery after appointing him a Shali'ach to go before Paroh and take Yisrael out of Egypt, for which he was subsequently punished.
(c)
We are referring - to the Divine decree that Moshe would witness what Hash-m was about to do Paroh (the Ten Plagues), but not what He would do to the thirty-one kings of Cana'an.
6)
(a)
Who was Hash-m referring to when He complained about those who were gone, and were no longer to be found?
(b)
What doubts might one have expected coming from ...
1.
... Avraham?
2.
... Yitzchak?
3.
... Ya'akov?
(c)
In which other area did Moshe query Hash-m (though on an earlier occasion), which the Avos did not?
(d)
What was Hash-m's response to Moshe's current comment?
6)
(a)
When Hash-m complained about those who were gone, and were no longer to be found, He was referring to - the Avos.
(b)
The doubts one might have expected coming from ...
1.
... Avraham are - why he had to pay so much money for a burial ground for Sarah, when Hash-m had already instructed him to acquire the land by walking its length and breadth of it.
2.
... Yitzchak are - why, having promised that he would bless him in the land, he had to fight with shepherds for the wells that his own shepherds had dug.
3.
... Ya'akov are - why he had to pay a hundred Kesitah for a plot of land in Sh'chem, when Hash-m had already told him that the land on which he was lying would belong to him and his children.
(c)
Similarly, Hash-m complained - how (on an earlier occasion) Moshe queried Hash-m about His Holy Name, whereas the Avos did not.
(d)
Hash-m response to Moshe's current comment was - "Now you will see what I will do to Par'oh", implying that he would not what Hash-m would later do to the thirty-one kings of Cana'an.
7)
(a)
According to Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel, Moshe prostrated himself (as a mark of thanks) when he stood on Har Sinai, after the Chet ha'Eigel, and perceived the Midah of "Erech Apayim" (denoting temporary forgiveness, and a chance to make good). What do the Rabbanan say?
(b)
Which opinion has the support of a Beraisa?
(c)
The Tana records the dialogue that took place between Hash-m and Moshe when Moshe ascended Har Sinai and found Him writing "Erech Apayim". What did Hash-m retort when Moshe suggested ...
1.
... 'Erech Apayim la'Tzadikim'?
2.
... that the Resha'im deserve to perish?
(d)
And what did Moshe retort, when after Yisrael sinned by the Golden Calf, and Moshe was Davening on their behalf, Hash-m reminded him how he himself had specifically asked for 'Erech Apayim la'Tzadikim'?
(e)
Which Pasuk in Ki Sisa did Moshe subsequently cite?
7)
(a)
According to Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel, Moshe prostrated himself (as a mark of thanks) when he stood on Har Sinai, after the Chet ha'Eigel, and perceived the Midah of "Erech Apayim" (denoting temporary forgiveness, and a chance to make good). According to the Rabbanan however, he prostrated himself in prayer - when he saw the Midah of Emes (which denoted that Yisrael deserved to be killed).
(b)
The opinion that has the support of a Beraisa - is that of Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel, as we shall now see.
(c)
The Tana records the dialogue that took place between Hash-m and Moshe when Moshe ascended Har Sinai and found Him writing "Erech Apayim". When Moshe suggested ...
... that the Resha'im deserve to perish - Hash-m retorted that one day he would retract from that statement.
(d)
And when, after Yisrael sinned by the Golden Calf, and Moshe was Davening on their behalf, Hash-m reminded him how he himself had specifically asked for 'Erech Apayim la'Tzadikim', Moshe retorted - that Hash-m had answered 'Af li'Resha'im.
(e)
Moshe subsequently cited the Pasuk - "ve'Atah Yigdal Na Ko'ach Hash-m (and apply 'Erech Apayim' even though they were Resha'im) Ka'asher Dibarta Leimor".
111b----------------------------------------111b
8)
(a)
What was Rebbi Chaga doing when he heard a child, who quoted the Pasuk in Tehilim "Tefilah le'Moshe" immediately after that of "Edosecha Ne'emnu Me'od ... Hash-m le'Orech Yamim"?
(b)
What did he extrapolate from there?
8)
(a)
When Rebbi Chaga heard a child, who quoted the Pasuk in Tehilim "Tefilah le'Moshe" immediately after that of "Edosecha Ne'emnu Me'od ... Hash-m le'Orech Yamim", he was - climbing up a ladder in the house of Rabah bar Shiloh.
(b)
He extrapolated from there - that Moshe must have perceived the Midah of 'Erech Apayim'.
9)
(a)
Based on the Pasuk in Yeshayah "ba'Yom ha'Hu Yih'yeh Hash-m Tzevakos la'Ateres Tzvi ... ", what does Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Chanina say will happen to those who 'do the will of Hash-m and hope for His Glory (salvation)'?
(b)
And what does he learn from the words there "li'She'ar Amo"?
(c)
If "u'le'Ru'ach Mishpat" refers to those who overcome their Yetzer-ha'Ra and do Teshuvah on their sins, what does the Navi mean when he adds ...
1.
... "u'le'Yoshev al ha'Mishpat"?
2.
... "ve'li'Gevurah"?
3.
... "Meshivei Milchamah"?
4.
... "Sha'arah"?
(d)
What did Hash-m answer the Midas ha'Din, when it asked what it was that caused those who are precluded from attaining these levels?
(e)
Their end is hinted in the words final words in the Pasuk "Paku Peliliyah". Based on the Pasuk in Mishpatim "ve'Nasan bi'Felilim" and on the Pasuk in Shmuel (said by Avigayil to David) "ve'Lo Sih'yeh Zos l'cha le'Fukah"), what does "Paku Peliliyah" mean?
9)
(a)
Based on the Pasuk in Yeshayah "ba'Yom ha'Hu Yih'yeh Hash-m Tzevakos la'Ateres Tzvi ... ", Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Chanina says - that Hash-m will become a crown on the head of each Tzadik who 'did the will of Hash-m and hoped for His Glory (salvation)'.
(b)
He learns from the words there "li'She'ar Amo" - that in order to be eligible for such a reward, the Tzadik must also be humble.
(c)
"u'le'Ru'ach Mishpat" refers to those who overcome their Yeitzer-ha'Ra and do Teshuvah on their sins, when the Navi adds ...
1.
... "u'le'Yoshev al ha'Mishpat", he means - they must also judge with absolute accuracy.
2.
... "ve'li'Gevurah" - that they overcome their Yeitzer-ha'Ra, not just by desisting from sinning, but by performing a Mitzvah in its place.
3.
... "Meshivei Milchamah" - who know how to do battle in the 'war of Torah'.
4.
... "Sha'arah" - that they arrive early each morning in the Beis-Hamedrash, and remain till late at night.
(d)
When the Midas ha'Din asked Hash-m what it was that caused those who are precluded from attaining these levels, He answered - 'drinking wine' (i.e. that they are absorbed in the pleasures of this world).
(e)
Based on the Pasuk in Mishpatim "ve'Nasan bi'Felilim" and on the Pasuk in Shmuel (said by Avigayil to David) "ve'Lo Sih'yeh Zos l'cha le'Fukah"), what does "Paku Peliliyah" means - that they will be judged in Gehinom.
10)
(a)
What does our Mishnah extrapolate from the Pasuk in Re'ei (in connection with the Ir ha'Nidachas) "Yatz'u Anashim b'nei Beliya'al mi'Kirbecha ... "?
(b)
What specifications (besides the fact that they must be residents of the town and members of that tribe) must the Madichin (those who talk the residents into sinning) meet, for the town to become an Ir ha'Nidachas?
(c)
What happens to a town where only a minority were talked into worshipping Avodah-Zarah or if the Madichin were non-residents?
(d)
What are the ramifications of this Halachah?
10)
(a)
Our Mishnah extrapolates from the Pasuk (in connection with the Ir ha'Nidachas) "Yatz'u Anashim b'nei Beliya'al mi'Kirbecha" - that the residents of an Ir ha'Nidachas will not receive a portion in Olam ha'Ba (see Tif'eres Yisrael).
(b)
Besides the fact that the Madichin (those who talk the residents into sinning) must be residents of the town and members of that tribe) - they must also be men (not women and not children) for the town to become an Ir ha'Nidachas.
(c)
A town where only a minority were talked into worshipping Avodah-Zarah or if the Madichin were non-residents - has the Din of individuals.
(d)
The ramifications of this Halachah are - that each person receives Sekilah, and that their property is not destroyed.
11)
(a)
What is the Din of an Ir ha'Nidachas with regard to witnesses and warning?
(b)
for how long must a passing caravan have been in town to be considered inhabitants of an Ir ha'Nidachas?
(c)
On what condition will they then save the town if they did not serve Avodah-Zarah?
(d)
Seeing as they would also cause the town's money to be destroyed, should they have served Avodah-Zarah, and turned the minority who did sin into the majority, why does the Tana present specifically the case where they save the town?
11)
(a)
To be considered an Ir ha'Nidachas - each person requires two witnesses and warning.
(b)
A passing caravan will be considered inhabitants of an Ir ha'Hi - provided it has been in town at least thirty days.
(c)
They will then save the town from becoming an Ir ha'Nidachas - if by virtue of the fact that they did not serve Avodah-Zarah, they turned the minority who did not serve into a majority.
(d)
Despite the fact that they would also cause the town's money to be destroyed, should they have served Avodah-Zarah, and turned the minority who did sin into the majority, the Tana nevertheless presents specifically the case where they save the town - because bearing in mind that they are basically strangers in the community, they are unlikely to be easily talked into serving Avodah-Zarah together with the other residents, and the case where they come to save the town will therefore be more common.
12)
(a)
What do we learn from the word "Kol" (in the Pasuk there "Hacharem Osah ve'es Kol Asher bah")?
(b)
Which property belonging to the Tzadikim does not need to be burned?
(c)
How are the animals in an Ir ha'Nidachas killed?
(d)
The Pasuk continues "ve'es Kol Shelalah Tikbotz el Toch Rechovah". What does one do if the town ...
1.
... has no town-square?
2.
... square is situated outside the town?
12)
(a)
We learn from the word "Kol" (in the Pasuk there "Hacharem Osah ve'es Kol Asher bah") - that even the property of the Tzadikim has to be burned ...
(b)
... though this is confined to property that is actually in the town at the time.
(c)
The animals in an Ir ha'Nidachas are killed - by the sword (like their owners).
(d)
The Pasuk continues "ve'es Kol Shelalah Tikbotz el Toch Rechovah". If the town ...
1.
... has no town-square - then one has to make one.
2.
... square is situated outside the town - then it has to be moved to inside.
13)
(a)
Our Mishnah also learns "Shelalah", 've'Lo Sh'lal Shamayim'. What are the ramifications of this ruling with regard to ...
1.
... Hekdesh?
2.
... Terumah?
3.
... Ma'aser Sheini and Sefarim"? Why can Ma'aser Sheini not be burned (seeing as it can normally be eaten even by Yisre'elim)?
(b)
What does Rebbi Shimon learn from "Kalil la'Hashem Elokecha"?
(c)
Rebbi Yossi Hagelili interprets "Vehaysah Teil Olam" literally. Rebbi Akiva disagrees. What does Rebbi Akiva learn from "Lo Sibaneh Od"?
13)
(a)
Our Mishnah also learns "Shelalah", 've'Lo Sh'lal Shamayim'. The ramifications of this ruling with regard to ...
1.
... Hekdesh are - that it must be redeemed.
2.
... Terumah are - that it must be left to go bad.
3.
... Ma'aser Sheini and Sefarim" are - that they must be placed in Genizah. Ma'aser Sheini cannot be burned (even though it can normally be eaten even by Yisre'elim, because the Torah calls it 'Kodesh').
(b)
Rebbi Shimon learns from "Kalil la'Hashem Elokecha" - that if one carries out the Din against the Ir ha'Nidachas, it is considered as if one has brought Hash-m a burnt-offering.
(c)
Rebbi Yossi Hagelili interprets "Vehaysah Teil Olam" literally. Rebbi Akiva disagrees because of the Pasuk "Lo Sibaneh Od" - from which he extrapolates "that although it may not be rebuilt into a residential area, it may be turned into gardens and orchards.
According to Rebbi Yochanan, it is possible for one city to have been divided among two tribes. What does Resh Lakish say?
(c)
How does Rebbi Yochanan prove his opinion from our Mishnah 'ad she'Yehei Madichehah me'Osah Ir u'me'Oso Sheivet'?
(d)
How does Resh Lakish refute Rebbi Yochanan's proof?
14)
(a)
The Beraisa learns from the word ...
1.
... "Yatz'u" - that if the Madichin did not entice the residents of the Ir ha'Nidachas directly, only through a Shali'ach - the town does not have the Din of an Ir ha'Nidachas.
2.
... "Anashim" (besides 've'Lo Nashim, ve'Lo Ketanim') - that there must be at least two Madichim.
3.
... "b'nei Beliya'al" - that the Madichim are people who have thrown off the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven from on themselves.
4.
... "mi'Kirbecha" - that a town that is close to the border cannot become an Ir ha'Nidachas.
5.
... "Yoshvei Iram" - that the Madichim must be residents of that town (as we learned in the Mishnah).
6.
... "Leimor" - that each person who served Avodah-Zarah must have had witnesses and warning (as we learned in our Mishnah).
(b)
According to Rebbi Yochanan, it is possible for one city to have been divided among two tribes. Resh Lakish holds - that if a city fell between the borders of two tribes, then it belongs to the one with a majority of residents who reside there.
(c)
Rebbi Yochanan proves his opinion from our Mishnah 'ad she'Yehei Madichehah me'Osah Ir u'me'Oso Sheivet' - which means that even if the Madichin are from that town, it only becomes an Ir ha'Nidachas if they are also from the same tribe (insinuating that a town can be divided among two tribes).
(d)
Resh Lakish refutes Rebbi Yochanan's proof - by establishing the Mishnah where one of the Madichin inherited a field in that town or received it as a gift, even though he does reside there.
15)
(a)
What do we assume the Pasuk in Yehoshua means when it describes how two of the tribes gave nine towns of refuge? On whom does this pose a Kashya?
(b)
On what grounds to we query the answer that one of the tribes provide five, and the other, four?
(c)
What does the Lashon 'Kashya' imply?
15)
(a)
We assume that when the Pasuk in Yehoshua describes how two of the tribes gave nine towns of refuge - the Navi means that each gave four and a half towns (a Kashya on Resh Lakish).
(b)
We query the answer that one of the tribes provided five, and the other, four - on the grounds that the Pasuk should have then said so.
(c)
The Lashon 'Kashya' implies - that although it is difficult (to reconcile the Lashon ha'Pasuk, in our case), it is not considered an absolute disproof.
16)
(a)
We ask what the Din will be if the residents of the Ir ha'Nidachas talked themselves into serving Avodah-Zarah. How do we try to resolve the She'eilah from our Mishnah, which precludes a town whose Madichin are women or children from the Din of Ir ha'Nidachas?
(b)
On what grounds do we refute this proof?
(c)
What does the word 'G'ridi' ('Hanach Basar Nafshaihu Gridi') mean? What language is it?
(d)
What is the meaning of the Lashon Ivri word ...
1.
... 'Goreid'?
2.
... 'Gorer'?
16)
(a)
We ask what the Din will be if the residents of the Ir ha'Nidachas talked themselves into serving Avodah-Zarah. And we try to resolve the She'eilah from our Mishnah, which precludes a town whose Madichin are women or children from the Din of Ir ha'Nidachas - on the assumption that self-Hadachah should be no better than Hadachah through women or children (seeing as it does not fall under the category of "Vayadichu" any more than they do).
(b)
But we refute this proof however - on the basis of a 'S'vara', that whereas a person does not take the Hadachah of a women or of a Katan seriously, he does take seriously his own Hadachah ('Hanach Basar Nafshaihu G'ridi').
(c)
The word 'Gridi' - is an Arama'ic word meaning 'drawn after' (like the word 'G'reida', which means 'alone', a person who is drawn away from society).
