Question: The Aruch (Erech 'Amen') citing Rabeinu Nisim, queries this from the Gemara at the beginning of 'Sheloshah she'Achlu' (B'rachos, Daf 47a) which prohibits answering an 'Amen Yesomah' ...

Question (cont.): And here, where they did not hear the B'rachah, and it is only via the waving of the cloths that they knew to answer 'Amen', they would have been answering an Amen Yesomah?

Answer #1: And he answers in the name of the Rabbanan of Eretz Yisrael that 'Amen Yesomah' refers to someone who is Chayav a B'rachah, and when he answers 'Amen' he wants to fulfill his obligation - he needs to hear the B'rachah and then to answer 'Amen', in which case it will not be an Amen Yesomah.

Answer #1 (cont.): Whereas when they answered 'Amen' to the waving of the cloths that was with regard to Keri'as ha'Torah and not Tefilah or something that the Chazan was being Motzi the Tzibur.

Support: And that is also how the Yerushalmi in this Perek (at the end of Halachah 1) explains - 'There was a wooden platform in the middle on which the Gabai stood ...

Support (cont.): And when someone was called up to Lein, the appointee would wave the cloths and they would answer 'Amen' on every B'rachah.

Proof #1: And the Yerushalmi in B'rachos (at the end of 'Eilu Devarim') says - in reply to the question 'What is an Amen Yesomah?' - 'Someone who is Chayav to recite a B'rachah and does not know on what he is answering'.

Proof #2: Rav Kohen Tzedek Ga'on rules that 'The Tzibur is obligated to remain silent and to hear each and every B'rachah that the Chazan makes, and then to answer 'Amen' after he has completed the B'rachah'.

Answer #2: Another answer is that they kept track of the order of the B'rachos, which follow one another in a fixed order.

Clarification: As the Pasuk writes "u'che'Patish Yefotzetz Sela".

Question #1: The Pasuk implies that the hammer is the metal that fragments the rock?

Question #2: And the same Kashya applies to the Gemara in Perek Echad Dinei Mamonos (Sanhedrin, Daf 34a & 34b), which states that 'Just as iron breaks up (Mischalek) into many sparks, so too, does one Pasuk incorporate many explanations'? ...

Question #3: And to the Gemara in Perek Amar Rebbi Akiva (Shabbos, Daf 88b & 89a) - 'Just as this hammer breaks up into many sparks, so too, did every command that emerged from the Mouth of Hakadosh-Baruch-Hu divided into seventy languages'?

Refuted Answer: Rabeinu Shmuel however, changed th text of the Gemara in Sanhedrin from 'Mischalek' to 'Mechalek'.

Refutation #1: This correction is not in order however, because, in that case, why mention the hammer at all? It ought to have simply said 'Mah Sela Mischalek ... '?

Refutation #2: Moreover, the current Sugya implies that it is the iron that fragments?

Answer (Change of Tex): In our Sugya, some commentaries have the text 'Im Barzel Hu, Mefa'afe'a' (it melts) - since fire tends to melt metal; 've'Im Sela Hu, Mispotzetz', as the Pasuk writes "u'che'Patish Yefotzetz Sela".

Reinstating Original Text: Rabeinu Tam however, establishes the text that appears in the Sefarim ...

Explanation: And he explains "u'ke'Patish Yefotzetz Sela" to mean that the rock fragments the rock ...

Proof: In keeping with the story cited in the Medrash (Eichah, on the Pasuk "Zaku Nezirim") - of 'A person who acquired a Sanpirinun (stone), and when he placed it on an anvil to test it and struck it with a mallet, the anvil split and the Sanpirinun remained intact.

Proof (cont.): And that what the Pasuk writes "u'che'Patish Yefotzetz Sela" - The rock fragments the hammer, since the Sanpirinun is a sapphire stone (a form of rock).

Implied Question: Even though the Pasuk does not write "the rock fragments it ...

Answer: There are many Pesukim that are written in this manner (for example) "Avanim Shachaku Mayim (Stones are worn away by water [Iyov, 14]) - "Shachaku osan Mayim".

Question: In our Sugya the Gemara compares the hammer to the Yeitzer ha'Ra, whilst in the Sugyos in Sanhedrin and in Shabbos it compares it to words of Torah?

Answer: Perhaps this is a classical example of one word which came out (of Hash-m's Mouth) with many meanings.

Question: On Rabeinu Tam - since at the beginning of Maseches Ta'anis (Daf 4a) the Gemara states 'Any Talmid-Chacham who is not as tough as iron is not a genuine Talmid-Chacham, as the Pasuk writes "ke'Patish Yefotzetz Sela" ...

Question (cont.): So we see that it is the hammer that is hard, and that it fragments the rock?

Clarification: That one indulges in marital relations in the day and in the night ...

Source: Since the Gemara in Cheilek (Sanhedrin, Daf 107a) cites the same statement in connection with the incident with David, who declared "Test me and try me out!", and the Pasuk immediately afterwards writes "Towards evening, David arose from his bed" ...

Source (cont.): And Rav Yehudah Amar Rav explains that 'He turned his night-bed into a day-bed, completely forgetting Rebbi Yochanan's statement 'A man has a small limb ... '.