Implied question: Why doesn't [the Mishnah] count Shovet (evening the warp threads) and Medakdek (hitting the woof so it will not be too taut? They were in the Mishkan!)

Answer: They are totally included in Meisach and weaving [respectively]. (On 75b, it says that they are included in them. Tosfos adds that they are totally included.)

Implied question: Why doesn't [the Mishnah] count Menapetz (bang flax out of the stalk)? In the Mishkan, they were Menapetz flax to make curtains and other things!

Answer: This is because it is precisely Dash, just [Dash] applies to grain, and Menapetz applies to flax.

Distinction: Zoreh (winnowing), Borer (selecting) and Meraked (sifting) are three [separate] matters.

Question: Still, we should count crushing ingredients [for dyes], which was in the Mishkan. Even though an Oni eats his bread without crushing, regarding ingredients, it is an important Melachah!

Answer (Ri): "He eats his bread" is not precise. Rather, likewise an Oni dyes with ingredients without crushing.

Question: Also sifting should not be taught, for an Oni eats his bread made from a dough with the coarse bran, like it says below (76b)!

Answer: Most Aniyim do not eat without sifting. However, regarding Chalah, the Gemara says [there] that the bran joins [towards the Shi'ur], for it is called "mi'Lechem ha'Aretz", since some Aniyim eat with the bran.

Remark: R. Tam explained differently. The Ri did not accept his Perush.

Explanation: Also R. Chananel explained [like this text], that Bereirah applies to a food amidst another food. He selects the one that he does not want to eat from the food that he wants to eat;

The one that he does not want to eat is considered Pesoles with respect to the one that he wants to eat.

Support: The Yerushalmi connotes like this. The text [there] says "one who selects foods from foods - Chizkiyah said...

Explanation: [He selects and leaves] for the needs of others.

Note: Also Tosfos ha'Rosh says so, but his DH is Borer u'Meni'ach l'Bo b'Yom. He explains how Ula distinguishes this from Borer v'Ochel l'Bo b'Yom. Perhaps this is also Tosfos' intent. Shabbos Shel Mi explains that Tosfos distinguishes Borer u'Meni'ach from Borer v'Ochel in the Beraisa itself, for we do not yet distinguish immediately from later in the day.

Explanation: The one who answered held that [Bereirah of] less than a Shi'ur is the way of eating.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): Similarly, [Rav Hamnuna] could have asked that the Beraisa did not teach a sifter or sieve.

Question #1 (Ri): What was Rav Hamnuna's answer? Also according to him, we can ask "the Beraisa does not mention food from amidst Pesoles!"

Question #2: Below, Rashi explained "a Beraisa says that he is liable", i.e. the Beraisa here. The Gemara answers that it discusses with a sifter or sieve. How can it answer so? The Beraisa does not mention a sifter or sieve!

Explanation #2 (Ri): He asks only from a funnel or plate. He means as follows. Did the Beraisa teach a funnel or plate?! Since it comes to explain laws of Bereirah, that by hand is permitted, and with a sifter or sieve one is Chayav Chatas, it should not have omitted teaching that with a funnel or plate he is exempt, but it is forbidden.

Note: Rav Yosef said that the Beraisa teaches that Bereirah by hand is permitted; with Kelim not special for Bereirah, he is exempt, but it is forbidden; and with Kelim special for Bereirah, he is liable. Rav Hamnuna asks that if so, the Beraisa should have explicitly taught the middle law, i.e. he is exempt, but it is forbidden! (The Beraisa says "he may not select", but did not say that he is exempt. These words could be part of the Seifa, in which he is liable!) Rav Hamnuna does not ask that the Beraisa did not mention the Kelim, i.e. a funnel or plate, or a sifter or sieve. The way he explains, the Beraisa does not teach a case that is forbidden, but he is exempt.

Inference: Ochel from Pesoles is not the way of Bereirah.

Question: Below (138a), we say that the way of Bereirah is Ochel from Pesoles!

Answer: There we discuss when there is more Pesoles than Ochel. Ochel from Pesoles is the way of Bereirah, for there we discuss a strainer.

Question (Rashba): A Mishnah (Beitzah 14b) teaches that one who selects legumes on Yom Tov, Beis Shamai say, he selects Ochel and eats. Beis Hillel say, he selects normally;

The Gemara says, what is the case? It is when there is more Ochel than Pesoles, but when there is more Pesoles than Ochel, all agree that he takes the Ochel and leaves the Pesoles;

If when there is more Pesoles than Ochel, taking the Ochel from the Pesoles is the way of Bereirah, why do Beis Shamai permit? They forbid Bereirah in the normal way! This requires investigation there.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): This is the Beraisa above.

Objection #1 (Ri): Based on how we establish it to discuss a sifter or sieve, this connotes that only for [later] in the day is forbidden, but for immediately, even in a sifter or sieve is permitted;

In Beitzah (14b) it connotes that a sifter or sieve is forbidden in every case, for in the Mishnah, Beis Hillel say that he selects normally with a funnel or plate, but not with a sifter or sieve. They do not distinguish between for immediately and for [later] in the day!

Objection #2: It seems that according to Ula above, Bereirah for [later] in the day is like for immediately according to Abaye. If so, Ula permits with a sifter or sieve even for [later] in the day;

The Mishnah in (Beitzah 14b) forbids at least for [later] in the day (if not for immediately)!

Answer (Ri): The Beraisa above discusses Bereirah by hand. Here that we establish [the Beraisa] with a sifter or sieve, it is a different Beraisa, and even for immediately he is Chayav Chatas.

Support: R. Chananel connotes like this. He explained that there are three laws of Bereirah for immediate use - by hand it is permitted l'Chatchilah, with a funnel or plate he is exempt, but it is forbidden, and with a sifter or sieve he is Chayav Chatas.

Explanation: I (Rav Dimi) do not know if the reason why [Rav Bivi] did not select them before bringing them in front of them [is because he forbids Ochel mi'Toch Pesoles].

Suggestion: Perhaps he is unsure if the reason [Rav Bivi] did not select them at the time he placed them in front of them [is because he forbids Ochel mi'Toch Pesoles]!

Rejection: If so, why did he say "or, perhaps he forbids Ochel mi'Toch Pesoles"? All permit Ochel mi'Toch Pesoles for immediately!

Explanation: [An Isur of] grinding applies only to beets, but it is permitted for other foods.

Explanation: One might have thought that there is no cooking at all. [Rav Acha] teaches that this is not so. Granted, he intends to harden it. However, there is cooking, for it softens, and then it hardens, and he is liable.

Suggestion: Perhaps he teaches that we do not say that he intends to harden it!

Rejection: In Avodah Zarah (38a), [Ravina] said about a Nochri who cast pegs in an oven [in order to dry them, and he ignited the oven], if a Yisrael previously put gourds in [the oven, to get cooked], this is fine. (It is not called Bishul Akum, i.e. food that Nochrim cooked);

[The Gemara] asks that this is obvious, and answers that one might have thought that the Nochri intended to cook the peg. [Ravina] teaches that this is not so. He intended to harden it. (Regarding Bishul Akum, this is not considered intent to cook.)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): He is not liable for Boneh, for building does not apply to Kelim.

Rebuttal: Only regarding one who reassembled a bed or candelabra of rings we say that there is no building in Kelim, but when he totally makes the entire Kli, he is liable for Boneh!

We say below (102b) that if one drives a peg into the handle of a hoe (so the blade will not fall off), he is liable for building (according to Rav. Perhaps Tosfos did not mention that Shmuel obligates for Makeh b'Patish, for we follow Rav against Shmuel in Isurim.)

Question: This requires investigation why it is not difficult from blowing (i.e. creating) glass Kelim (75b. It says that one who does so is liable for Makeh b'Patish. Sefas Emes suggests that Boneh applies only to combining separate items, e.g. boards of the Mishkan.)

Explanation: Below (111b), Rashi explained that they tie and untie. Sometimes they tie nets, and sometimes they untie them.