1)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Kol ben Nechar La Yochal Bo" (in connection with the Korban Pesach) - 'Bo Hamaras Das Poseles, v'Ein Hamaras Das Poseles b'Ma'aser' (that a Mumar is permitted to eat Ma'aser Sheni).

2. ... "Kol Arel Lo Yochal Bo" - 'Bo Eino Ochel, Aval Ochel Hu b'Matzah u'Maror' (that an Arel is permitted to eat Matzah and Maror).

(b)In spite of having already taught us that ...

1. ... an Arel is forbidden to eat the Pesach, the Torah nevertheless needs to write "Kol ben Nechar ... " - because a ben Nechar is not physically repugnant, as is an Arel.

2. ... a Mumar (whose ways are estranged from Hash-m) is forbidden, it nevertheless needs to write "Kol Arel ... " - because, unlike a ben Nechar, an Arel's heart is with Hash-m.

(c)Rebbi Akiva derives the prohibition for an Arel to eat Terumah from "Ish Ish", and from the Pasuk "v'Chol Zar lo Yochal Kodesh", according to Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina, he extrapolates - that an Onen is permitted ('Zarus Amarti Lach, v'Lo Aninus').

2)

(a)The reason that he prefers to include Arel in the prohibition is based on the Siman 'Ma'asim Kerusim bi'Devar ha'Eved' (symbolizing Chumros that do not apply to Onen). 'Ma'asim' incorporate - a. it is lacking an act (Milah) and b. that the act involved is on the Arel's body.

(b)'Kerusim' signifies that he is Chayav Kares, 'bi'Devar', that it applied already before the Torah was given - and 'ha'Eved' that that the Milah of one's males and even of one's Avadim are crucial to the Korban Pesach.

(c)We query this however, in that Onen too has Chumros (that Arel does not [i.e. 'Yeshnah b'Chol Sha'ah, v'Noheges ba'Anashin v'Nashim, v'Ein b'Yado l'Saken Atzmo']).

1. 'Yeshnah b'Chol Sha'ah' means - that it can occur many times, and ...

2. ... 'Yesh b'Yado l'Saken Atzmo' (by Arel) - that it is possible to rectify.

(d)We refute the query - by pointing out that the Chumros of Arel exceed those of Onen.

(e)Rava explains the choice of Arel rather than Onen, from the Pasuk "Ish Ish" - indicating a Pesul that pertains only to a man and not to a woman (i.e. Arelus, and not Aninus).

3)

(a)We reject Rav Shemaya's suggestion that Rebbi Akiva learns from "Toshav v'Sachir" of Pesach that a circumcised Arab or Givoni (Gavnuni) is disqualified from eating it - because we know already from a Mishnah in Nedarim, that a circumcised Arab or Giv'oni is called an Arel and not a Mahul, in which case, we would not require a Pasuk to disqualify them.

(b)In fact, "Toshav v'Sachir" comes to preclude - a Ger who circumcised but did not Tovel, and a Katan who was born already circumcised.

(c)Rebbi Akiva disqualifies a Katan who is born Mahul from eating the Korban Pesach - because he still requires Hatafas Dam Bris (extracting some blood in place of the actual Milah).

4)

(a)Rebbi Eliezer uses "Toshav v'Sachir" for a 'Gezeirah-Shavah', because he disagrees with Rebbi Akiva in both issues. He holds that ...

1. ... the conversion of a Ger who had Bris Milah but who did not yet Tovel - is valid.

2. ... a Katan who is born Mahul - does not require Hatafas Dam Bris.

(b)And he learns that the Torah writes "Ish Ish" - not to teach us anything, but is simply employing human manner of speech.

5)

(a)Rav Chama bar Ukva asks whether one may anoint a Katan Arel with Terumah oil. A Katan Arel - is a baby during the first eight days who is not yet subject to the Mitzvah of Milah.

(b)Anointing with Terumah oil is prohibited, even though it is not eaten - because of the principle (that applies exclusively to Terumah and Yom Kippur) 'Sichah ki'Shesiyah' (anointing is like drinking).

6)

(a)To resolve the She'eilah, Rebbi Zeira cites a Beraisa. The Torah forbids Shechting the Pesach if one has uncircumcised sons (from the Pasuk "v'Az Yikrav la'Asoso"), and eating it one has uncircumcised Avadim (from "Az Yochal Bo"). The Beraisa learns from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Az" "Az" - that it is also forbidden to Shecht the Pesach if one had uncircumcised Avadim, and to eat it if one has uncircumcised sons.

(b)One would have uncircumcised Avadim at the time of eating but not at the time of Shechting - if one purchased them between the Shechitah and the time of eating.

(c)Rebbi Zeira tries to resolve Rav Chama bar Ukva's She'eilah (in 4a.) by similarly establishing the case by an uncircumcised son - when he was born between the Shechitah and the time of eating (a clear proof that even Arelus she'Lo bi'Zemanah is considered Arelus.

(d)Rava rejects this proof from the Pasuk itself - which writes "Himol Lo Kol Zachar, v'Az Yikrav la'Asoso", indicating that if he wanted to, he could circumcise his son, implying a son whose Milah has fallen due.

7)

(a)So Rava establishes the Beraisa by a case of Chaltzaso Chamah - a baby who had fever but whose fever died down.

(b)We must be speaking about a baby on the eighth day after its recovery for it not to be considered 'Arelus she'Lo bi'Zemanah'.

(c)He cannot be circumcised in the morning (before the time the Shechitah falls due) - because we are speaking when he recovered after mid-day, and Chaltzaso Chamah requires me'Es l'Es (a full seven days each consisting of twenty-four hours) before one is permitted to circumcise him.

(d)The day on which the baby is born does not require 'me'Es l'Es'.

(e)Rava will explain 'Yom Havra'aso k'Yom Hivaldo' (the day that he is cured is like the day that he is born) - with regard to waiting seven days before circumcising the baby whom was struck with a fever, but in fact, the day that he is cured is even more stringent than the day that he is born, inasmuch as it also requires 'me'Es l'Es' (which the day of birth does not).

8)

(a)According to Rav Papa, the Beraisa speaks about a baby whose eyes were hurting at the time of the Shechitas ha'Pesach. One is permitted to circumcise him - as soon as the pain dissipates.

(b)Rava establishes the case by a baby whose parents were in prison at the time of the Shechitah and were freed before the time of eating. 'Beis-Din' (incorporating every Jew) did not circumcise the baby - because as long as the parents are alive, the obligation rests exclusively with them (See Maharsha).

(c)They managed to Shecht the Korban Pesach - through a Shaliach.

(d)Rav Kahana Brei d'Rav Nechemyah establishes the case by a baby who was born a Tumtum and whose skin was torn open, revealing that he was a male only after the time of the Shechitah. Rav Sheravyah establishes it by a baby whose head emerged from the womb eight days earlier and whose body emerged only between the Shechitah of the Pesach and the time of eating. The problem with this is how the baby can survive for so many days without feeding - seeing as, the moment it is born, its navel (which is open until birth, and through which it is sustained via its mother) closes and its mouth opens.

9)

(a)We answer that this baby survived for eight days without eating - by means of the high fever that fed him.

(b)It must have been his mother's fever that sustained him (not his own, otherwise we would need to give him another seven days, as we explained earlier).

(c)Alternatively, we answer that it is possible for even a healthy baby to survive for such a long period without eating - if he cried when he was born (see Maharshal).

10)

(a)Given that Yisrael were Arelim when they crossed the Yarden, Rebbi Yochanan Amar Rebbi Ban'ah proves from the Pasuk in Yehoshua "v'ha'Am Alu min ha'Yarden b'Asor la'Chodesh ha'Rishon" - that they must have received Haza'ah (from the ashes of the Parah Adumah) on the tenth of Nisan, before the Milah, even though Yehoshua did not circumcise them until the following day ...

(b)... because they were still weak from the travails of the journey. It is also possible that each person arranged his own individual Haza'ah during the course of the forty years; either way, we see that an Arel can receive Haza'ah.

(c)We assume that Yisrael ...

1. ... were Tamei Mes at the time - because of the fifteen thousand men who died each year following the decree of the Meraglim.

2. ... did not receive the first Haza'ah from the ashes of the Parah Adumah on the eleventh of Nisan, after the Bris Milah - because then the second Haza'ah, which takes place four days after the first, would have had to be done on the fifteenth, too late to enable them to bring the Korban Pesach b'Taharah.

(d)We also know ...

1. ... that they brought the Pesach that year - because the Pasuk in Yehoshua testifies that they did.

2. ... that it was not a Pesach ha'Ba b'Tum'ah (seeing as most of the people were Tamei) - because the Beraisa specifically describes it as a Pesach ha'Ba b'Taharah.

11)

(a)Our Sugya cannot be referring to the Haza'ah that follows the Milah (because of the principle 'Kol ha'Poresh min ha'Arlah, k'Poresh min ha'Kever') - because Rebbi Yochanan has already taught us in Pesachim that that Haza'ah is confined to Nochrim who have converted, but does not extend to Jews who circumcise.

12)

(a)When the Pasuk writes ...

1. ... "ba'Eis ha'Hi Amar Hash-m el Yehoshua ... v'*Shuv* Mol es Bnei Yisrael ... " - it refers to the Peri'ah (the obligation to fold over the skin after the Milah (this implies that they already performed the Milah, and all that Yehoshua needed to do was the Peri'ah, whereas above we seemed to take for granted that it was the actual Milah which Yehoshua performed - see also Tosfos DH 'Mai Ta'ama').

2. ... "Shenis" - refers to the final stage of the actual Milah, which in turn, refers to the cutting of the strands which are crucial to the Mitzvah (as we learned above in Perek ha'Choletz li'Yevemto).

(b)Rabah bar Yitzchak infers from the fact that Yehoshua had to perform the Peri'ah on the whole of Yisrael - that Avraham Avinu was not commanded to perform the Peri'ah.

13)

(a)Perhaps the Bnei Yisrael did not circumcise their children in the desert because they were weak - or perhaps it was because the north-wind did not blow (in which case it is dangerous to circumcise).

(b)This is due to the fact that - as a result, the sun (a vital factor in the healing process of the baby [in those days]) did not shine.

14)

(a)Perhaps the north-wind did not blow because they were in Cherem (because of the Golden Calf - see also Tosfos 72a. DH 'Nizufin Hayu') - or perhaps it was because, if it had, it would have caused the Clouds of Glory to disperse.

(b)Rav Papa extrapolate from the above - that one should not perform the Milah on a cloudy day ...

(c)... nor on a day when the south-wind (the most powerful of all the winds) blows.

(d)Nowadays, we ignore the elements and perform the Milah anyway - relying on the Pasuk "Shomer Pesayim Hash-m" (Hash-m looks after the fools).