Question #1: Why does the Mishnah in Perek Chelek (which lists those who will not receive a portion in Olam ha'Ba, and the same question pertains to ...

Question #2: The Gemara in the last Perek of Kesuvos (Daf 111a), which precludes those who die in Chutz La'Aretz from coming back to life?

Question #3: And also to the text there that precludes Amei ha'Aretz from coming back to life unless they give benefit to Talmidei-Chachamim?

Question #4: And to people who lend on interest, about whom the Medrash says that they will not come back to life? Tosfos Ri.

Clarification: This refers to the clear blood, from which the heart drinks. It only weighs twenty-five silver pieces which is equivalent to a quarter of a Log.

Question: Tosfos' Rebbe asks why the Gemara does use the same Lashon here as it uses at the beginning of Makos (Daf 2a). 'How do the witnesses become Zomemin'? What the Mishnah ought to have asked is 'How do the witnesses not become Zomemin'?

Question (cont.): Here too, is ought to have asked 'How does he warn her?' What it ought to have said is 'How does he not warn her?'

Question (cont.): Moreover, there the Gemara gives a clear answer, whereas here, even according to the answer given by the Gemara, it should have said 'How does he not warn her'?

Answer: The reason the Gemara does not ask that here is because it could answer that 'Do not speak ... ' in the Reisha, really means 'Do not seclude yourself', which is a proper Kinuy, in which case the Lashon 'How does he warn her?' is justified, and the Kashya that remains is the discrepancy between the Reisha and the Seifa.

Explanation #1: And this is how to explain the Gemara: 'So we see that ...

Source: Seeing as the Tana said 'Keitzad Mekanei', which is a more refined way of speaking ...

Precedent: As we learned in the Mishnah in the first Perekof Kesuvos (Daf, 13a) 'They saw her speaking - and the Gemara explains that 'Dibur' really means 'S'tirah' ...

Explanation #1 (cont.): One can therefore ask from the Seifa, which states that 'If she did speak, she is still permitted to her husband'. Now if 'Dibur' really means S'tirah, why is she permitted?

Conclusion: Consequently, 'Dibur' must be meant literally.

Explanation #2 (Yerushalmi): The Yerushalmi implies that the answer is that Dibur in the Reisha means S'tirah (only it uses a more refined Lashon).

Explanation #2 (cont.): This is what the Yerushalmi says: 'Does this mean that he warns her not to speak to the man, and that if she secluded herself with him, she is Patur'?

Explanation #2: 'It is coming to teach us that even if she spoke with him, as she was not secluded with him, she remains permitted to her husband.

Explanation #2 (concl.): (Alternatively), the Mishnah is using a refined expression - with reference to the Reisha, whereas the Seifa can only mean literally Dibur.

Refuted Question: One cannot query this from Perek ha'Ishah she'Naflu lah Nechasim (Kesuvos, Daf 81a) in the Sugya of Shomeres Yavam, where the Gemara asks that we need to conform with the stipulation 'When you marry someone else (Acher), you will receive what is written in the Sh'tar'?

Refuted Question (cont.): To which Rav Ashi answers that the Yavam is like Acher?

Refutation: Because regarding T'nai Beis-Din, the Gemara considers a brother like Acher, but not with regard to Acher of the Pasuk.

Proof #1: And this is also implied in Perek Ein Makdishin (Erchin, Daf 25b) where we learned in connection with the Pasuk "If he sold the field to Acher" - "to someone else", 'and not to his son'.

Proof #1 (cont.): Or perhaps we will extrapolate "to someone else", 'and not to his brother'? When the Pasuk says "Ish", brother is included. Consequently, when the Torah says "to someone else", it must mean "to someone else", 'and not his son'.

Proof #1 (cont.): Implying that, had the Torah not written "Ish", a brother would not fall under the category of 'Acher'.

Proof #2: And so the Gemara says in the first Perek of Kidushin (Daf 13b) 'The Torah says "Lest he dies in battle and another man will marry her".

Proof #2 (cont.): Rav Shisha b'rei de'Rav Idi asked - 'Perhaps "Acher" means the Yavam'? To which the Gemara answers that Yavam is not called Acher.

Question #1: From Perek ha'Omer (Kidushin, Daf 67b), where the Gemara learns from here that Kidushin does not take effect on relatives. Perhaps the Pasuk is needed specifically for Yavam, as the Gemara says in our Sugya; so how do we know relatives?

Question #2: Furthermore, in our Sugya, we preclude Yavam, even though the Torah writes "Ish Acher", whereas in Erchin, we include Yavam from the word "Ish", and preclude one's son from "Acher"?

Refuted Answer: And if you will try to answer that the Gemara in Perek ha'Omer (Ibid.) precludes relatives from "Ish", and Yavam from "Acher".

Refutation: At the end of the day, what will you Darshen from "ve'Ish acher Yikachenah"?

Refuted Question: In case you will ask that this Pasuk is speaking about a Vaday Sotah - via witnesses, which we learn via a Gezeirah-Shavah "Davar" "Davar" from Mamon, at the end of Maseches Gitin (Daf 90a) ...

Refuted Question (cont.): And a Vaday Sotah does not require Chalitzah, since the Torah inserts the word "Tum'ah" like by Arayos, as the Gemara says in the first Perek of Yevamos.

Refutation: The answer is that, seeing as we learn Vaday Sotah from "Tum'ah" which is written by her, the Torah only needs to write "le'Acher" for a woman who goes out on account of S'tirah.

Question: Tosfos' Rebbe, quoting the Rivam, asks - that a Vaday Sotah, an Aylonis, where the husband was aware of it and the wife of a Saris all require a Get from their husbands if he is alive, yet they are Patur from the Yavam without Chalitzah?

Answer (Part #1): Vaday Sotah is not comparable to our case, because since the Torah writes Tum'ah, she is like a complete Ervah, who is subject to a Gezeiras ha'Kasuv that exempts her.

Answer (Part #2): And as for the wife of a Saris or an Aylonis whose husband is alive, is permitted to him, yet the Pasuk, quoted in the first Perek of Yevamos, exempts her from Yibum completely.

Answer (Part #2 [cont.]): A Safek Sotah, on the other hand, is only precluded with regard to being forbidden to her husband, and the Pasuk now teaches us that, seeing as he (the Yavam) comes on account of his brother's marriage, he stands in the place of the husband, forbidding him to perform Yibum with her ...

Answer (Part #2 [concl.]): But she still requires Chalitzah.

Enhancing Gemara's Kashya: Rabeinu Chananel adding meaning to the Kashya, explains - that the Torah writes "asher Lo Yivneh", implying 'to build, and not to demolish'.