Question: In Ta'anis (26b), we say that at the time of Shacharis and Musaf when people are not usually drunk, we do not make this decree. During Minchah and Neilah, which are during times when people do (drink alcoholic beverages and can) become drunk, we do have this suspicion. This implies that Minchah time is a time when people commonly become drunk!

Answer: The Gemara in Ta'anis (ibid.) regarding Duchaning (the blessing given by the Kohanim) is different, as there even if one has drunk one Revi'is of wine he is unfit to Duchan. (In other words, being drunk there actually means it was common during that time of day to drinking a Revi'is of wine.)

Observation: The Gemara does not bother to answer the first question.

Opinion: This teaches us that one must wear a belt before he prays.

Explanation: The Machzor Vitri explains that the reason for putting on a belt is in order that his heart should not see his private parts.

Explanation (cont.): Therefore, this law specifically refers to their times when they did not wear pants. This is why they needed to wear a belt when they prayed. However, since we wear a belt on our pants, we do not have to wear a special belt for prayer.

Opinion: We see from our Gemara that one should not pray barefoot unless it is the ninth of Av or Yom Kippur (when we are not allowed to wear leather shoes).

Observation: This implies that it is better to judge a case than to learn Torah.

Implied Question: The Gemara in Moed Katan (17a) states regarding a person who was stung by a wasp and died that when they brought him to the cave of the pious ones to be buried, the cave did not accept him. They brought him to cave of judges, and he was accepted (implying those who learn Torah are greater than judges).

Answer: The Gemara (ibid.) is referring to judges who were not expert judges, as they sometimes took bribes. (See the Chidushei Chasam Sofer who explains that Tosfos does not literally mean they took bribes, as this would make them evildoers.)

Explanation: This is as opposed to a case where the judgment is twisted.

Question: This is difficult, as in the end of Nedarim (17a) the text states, "Ravina asked, if someone prepared an area to be a bathroom or bathhouse, what is the law?" This indicates that he is also asking his question regarding a bathhouse.

Answer #1: Some indeed erase the question regarding a bathhouse from that Gemara due to our Gemara.

Answer #2: However, it is possible to uphold the text (ibid.). Our Gemara means as follows: It must be that just as we cannot extrapolate an answer regarding a bathroom, we cannot extrapolate an answer regarding a bathhouse. The Gemara answers that a bathroom is different, as it is very dirty. This is why Ravina did not answer his question regarding a bathroom. However, regarding a bathhouse, after Ravina asked the question he answered it leniently.

Answer #3: Alternatively, when the Gemara (ibid.) asks about someone who prepared an area to be a bathhouse, it is not a quote from Ravina but rather it is a statement of the Gemara that there is no difference. We find similar added comments or questions by the Gemara in other places.

Question: This is difficult, as "Shalom" also translates into that He makes peace for him!

Answer: Gideon called the altar "Shalom" because Hash-m makes peace for the entire world, otherwise he would not have said "peace." If he did not mean to call Hash-m "Shalom" in this fashion, but rather meant when he said, "Hash-m Shalom" that Hash-m makes peace for him personally, he should have said, "Hash-m is his peace."

Explanation: This is specifically referring to a present that is given to him by someone because of their close relationship, as the recipient is not embarrassed to receive it. However, if someone gives charity in a way that the recipient is embarrassed, the Pasuk says regarding him, "One who gives in secret covers anger" (and the present should be given in secret, without informing the recipient).

Explanation: The Matanos are permitted to non-Kohanim, as explained by Rashi.

Proof: This is also apparent from the Gemara in Chulin (132a).

Implied Question: The Gemara in Kesuvos (25a) says that dividing these Matanos shows one has a status of being a Kohen. (How can this be if he does not have to be a Kohen to eat Matanos?)

Answer: This is only if he brings witnesses that he received the Matanos because he was a Kohen.

Implied Question: This is despite the fact that it had already been decreed that they would serve the Egyptians, as the Pasuk states, "And they will cause them to work and afflict them." (How, then, can Rav attribute this to Yaakov's actions?)

Answer: Perhaps it would not have been decreed that they should be afflicted so much were it not for this, as the four hundred years started thirty years before Yitzchak was born (see Maharshal who changes this text of Tosfos, and Maharsha who defends it).

Explanation: This is as Rashi proves that Avraham was forty eight when Sedom was built, and it was peaceful there for twenty six years. This implies that Avraham was seventy three when he killed the kings.

Implied Question: The Seder Olam implies that he was seventy five when he killed the kings, as he says that he was seventy during the Bris Bein ha'Besarim. This is as the Pasuk states, "And it was at the end of thirty years etc." He then returned to Charan and stayed there for five years, as the Pasuk states, "And Avraham was five years and seventy years old when he left Charan etc."

Implied Question (cont.): The year that he left Charan was a year of famine. He left Egypt, and stayed there for three months. He then went to Eilonei Mamrei. This was during they year that he killed the kings. According to this account, Sedom would only have been peaceful for twenty four years. (How can we reconcile these opinions?)

Answer: It must be that it was peaceful two years earlier (before they started serving Kedar'laomer).