1)

(a)When Rebbi Meir says 'Terumah l'Kohen, u'Ma'aser Rishon l'Levi', he might be coming to teach us that Ma'aser is given specifically to a Levi - to preclude the opinion of Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah, who maintains that it may be given to a Kohen, too.

(b)We might learn that, according to Rebbi Meir, not only does one give Ma'aser to a Levi, but also that only a Levi may eat it from ...

1. ... the Lashon of Rebbi Elazar (ben Azaryah - see Tosfos) 'Matiro l'Kohen' - implying a Heter Achilah, in which case, Rebbi Meir, who argues with him, must also be speaking about a Heter Achilah (and not just about who to give it to).

2. ... his own words - in that, just as 'Terumah l'Kohen refers to eating it, so too, does Ma'aser Rishon l'Levi.

(c)'Rebbi Elazar's statement 'Matiro l'Kohen' is strange - since it implies that there is someone who forbids a Kohen to eat Ma'aser, which of course, is not true, since he is a Levi too.

(d)So we emend it to read - 'Nosno af l'Kohen'.

2)

(a)Rebbi Meir learns from the Pasuk in ...

1. ... Korach "Ki es Ma'aser Bnei Yisrael Asher Yarimu la'Hashem Terumah" - that just as Terumah is forbidden to Zarim, so too, is Ma'aser.

2. ... Emor "u'Mesu Bo Ki Yechaleluhu" - that a Zar is not Chayav Misah for eating it b'Mezid ("Bo" [bi'Terumah] 've'Lo b'Ma'aser').

3. ... Emor "v'Yasaf Chamishiso Alav" - that, if he eats it b'Shogeg, he does not need to pay the extra fifth that one does by Terumah ("Alav" 'v'Lo al Ma'aser').

(b)Rav Acha Brei d'Rabah quotes these Derashos 'mi'Shemei di'Gemara' - meaning that he did not invent them, but that he heard them from his Rebbe, who heard them from his Rebbe ... all the way back to Rebbi Meir himself.

3)

(a)According to the Rabanan, Torah compares Ma'aser to Terumah (in the Pasuk in Korach) - to teach us that Tevel of Ma'aser Rishon is forbidden just like Tevel of Terumah.

(b)One is not Chayav Misah - for eating Ma'aser Rishon, Sheni or Ani.

(c)Rebbi Yosi in a Beraisa learns from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Lo Suchal l'Echol bi'She'arecha ... " (by Ma'aser Sheni) and "v'Achlu bi'She'arecha v'Save'u" (by Ma'aser Ani in the third year) - that, just as the latter Pasuk is clearly speaking about Ma'aser Ani, so too, is the former. Taken out of context of the rest of the Pasuk, the Torah is therefore coming to introduce a Lav for eating Tevel of Ma'aser Ani.

(d)We need the Hekesh of Ma'aser to Terumah - to teach us that someone who eats Tevel of Ma'aser (Rishon or of) Ma'aser Ani is Chayav Misah (see Tosfos Yeshanim DH 'I').

(e)In a second Lashon, we answer that the Rabanan need to learn that Tevel of Ma'aser Rishon is forbidden just like Tevel of Terumah from the Hekesh of Ma'aser to Terumah, in spite of the Derashah of Rebbi Yosi - in order to teach us that it is also subject to Chiyuv Misah (as we explained in the first Lashon).

4)

(a)The problem with the Seifa of our Mishnah 'bas Levi Me'ureses l'Kohen u'Bas Kohen l'Levi, Lo Tochal Lo bi'Terumah v'Lo b'Ma'aser', despite having established our Mishnah like Rebbi Meir is - how Zarus will apply there.

(b)To answer the Kashya, we establish the Mishnah with regard to giving her Shali'ach permission to take Terumah from her husband's crops. The Tana learns from the Pasuk "va'Achaltem Oso b'Chol Makom Atem u'Vateichem" - that a bas Yisrael who is married to a Levi (but not if she is just betrothed to him), is permitted to appoint her own Shali'ach to separate Terumas Ma'aser on behalf of her husband.

(c)The Pasuk cannot coming to permit the wife of a bas Levi to eat Ma'aser - because if marriage permits the wife of a Kohen to eat Terumah, then it will certainly permit the wife of a Levi to eat Ma'aser (which is less stringent than Terumah).

5)

(a)According to Mar brei d'Ravina, the Seifa comes to forbid a bas Levi to receive Ma'aser (and a bas Kohen to receive Terumah) without her husband in attendance. Some Amora'im (in Perek Nos'in al ha'Anusah) ascribe the prohibition of giving Terumah to a woman who comes on her own to the granary - to the Isur of Yichud (which one is likely to transgress under these circumstances), a reason that conforms with Mar brei d'Ravina's explanation.

(b)According to others, it is - because her husband may divorce her, and we are afraid that the owners, unaware that she is now divorced, may continue to give her Ma'aser, even though she has now become a Zarah.

(c)We counter 'ul'Ta'amech, Gerushah bas Kohen Mi Lo Achlah bi'Terumah' - with reference to the Mishnah there 'Ishah Ein Cholkin Lah Terumah al ha'Goren', which some opinions ascribe to the fear that she might claim after she is divorced.

(d)The problem is - on what grounds is a divorcee who is a bas Kohen, not permitted to eat Terumah?

6)

(a)So we finally forbid both a bas Kohen to receive Terumah and a bas Levi to receive Ma'aser, in the granary - on account of a bas Yisrael who was married to a Levi or a Kohen, but who is now divorced.

(b)Even though we are not talking about eating, but about receiving a portion, the Tana mentions that they are 'betrothed' (despite the fact that the same prohibition will apply even if they are married) - only because of the Reisha, where it is specifically a bas Yisrael who is betrothed to a Kohen, who is forbidden to eat Terumah.

7)

(a)According to Rebbi Akiva in a Beraisa, Terumah is given to a Kohen, and Ma'aser Rishon, to a Levi. Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah says - that Ma'aser may be given to a Kohen, too.

(b)Rebbi Akiva's source is the Pasuk in Korach "v'el ha'Leviyim Tedaber ... ". Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah, we explain, concurs with the statement of Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi - who says that in twenty-four places in Tanach, the Kohanim are referred to as Leviyim, and this is one of them.

(c)Rebbi Akiva agrees with Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi's statement in principle, only in his opinion, this Pasuk cannot be one of those twenty-four places - because the Torah also writes there "va'Achaltem Oso b'Chol Makom", and whereas a Levi may eat Ma'aser anywhere (even in a Beis ha'Kevaros), a Kohen may not.

(d)Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah will explain "b'Chol Makom" to mean - that Ma'aser is not confined to the walls of Yerushalayim, but can be eaten anywhere, and that it may be eaten by someone who is Tamei (the second part of the Derashah is unclear, since it has nothing to do with "b'Chol Makom").

8)

(a)Rebbi Akiva moved the entrance to that garden from which Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah used to take Ma'aser Rishon - so that the sole access to it was via a Beis ha'Kevaros (and Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah was a Kohen).

(b)He did that - to prevent Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah from collecting Ma'aser Rishon, to which he considered him ineligible.

9)

(a)The Mishnah in Sotah states that Yochanan Kohen Gadol nullified the Mitzvah of Viduy Ma'aser - because the text " ... v'Gam Nesativ la'Levi ... " was no longer correct, seeing as he himself had instituted that one may also give it to the Kohanim.

(b)Rebbi Yonasan and the elders argue over the reason for Chazal punishing the Leviyim. According to one of them, it was because most of the Leviyim did not return to Eretz Yisrael with Ezra; whilst according to the other - it was so that the Kohanim should have something to fall back on when they were Tamei.

(c)We reject this version of their Machlokes - because there is no justification to penalize the Leviyim purely in order to benefit the Kohanim.

10)

(a)In fact, everyone agrees that the punishment was due because they failed to return from Bavel. What they argue over is to whom Ma'aser Rishon is given; whether it is exclusively to the poor, or whether the Kohanim are also considered poor during the time that they are Tamei.

(b)Even assuming that the Kohanim during their days of Tum'ah are also considered poor, Rebbi Akiva nevertheless moved the entrance of that garden to face a grave-yard - because Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah was a wealthy man, and even if other Kohanim may be considered poor when they are Tamei, he was certainly not (Agados Maharsha).

(c)We know that most of the Leviyim did not go back with Ezra - because it is a specific Pasuk in Ezra (see Tosfos DH 'u'mi'Bnei').

(d)The change that took place in the judicial system of Eretz Yisrael as a result of most of the Leviyim remaining in Bavel - was the fact that whereas previously, they used to appoint police officers from the Leviyim, they now began appointing them from among the Yisraelim.

11)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that a bas Yisrael who marries a Kohen ...

1. ... who dies leaving behind a child - may eat Terumah.Ma'aser Rishon, and the same will apply if she ...

2. ... first, and then, after his death, a Levi, who dies, leaving behind a son - is permitted to eat Ma'aser.

(b)If ...

1. ... the Levi dies too, in the event that both husbands leave behind a child - she is permitted to eat Ma'aser.

2. ... she then marries a Yisrael - she may eat only Chulin, as will be the Din if ...

3. ... the Yisrael dies, leaving behind a child.

(c)The same woman will now be permitted to eat ...

1. ... Ma'aser - in the event that the child from the Yisrael dies.

2. ... Terumah - in the event that the child from the Levi dies as well..

12)

(a)Exactly the same situation exists with regard to a bas Kohen who marries a Yisrael and a Levi, but in the reverse. If a bas Kohen marries a Yisrael, who dies leaving her with a son, and she then marries a Levi, who also dies leaving her with a son...

1. ...she is permitted to eat Ma'aser...

2. ...but not Terumah.

(b)Should she then marry a Kohen, who dies, leaving her with a son - she may eat Terumah.

(c)If all three sons then die - she may return to her father's house and eat Terumah.

(d)The source for the latter ruling is the Pasuk in Emor "v'Shavah el Beis Avihah ki'Ne'urehah".