There is no obligation to withhold food from children on Yom Kipur.

A year or two before their coming of age we train them to fast part of the day.

Question: If we educate children two years prior, then need we even be told that we train them one year prior?!

Answer (R. Chisda): One year is for an ill child; two for a healthy one.

(R. Huna): Girls: Chinuch Sha'os begins at eight years old for a healthy child; nine for a weak one, while a 10 (healthy) and 11 (weak) complete the fast Mi'd'Rabanan (12 year olds complete the fast mid'Oraisa).

(R. Nachman): Boys: Chinuch Sha'os begins at nine (healthy) or 10 (weak); completing the fast Mi'd'Rabanan begins at 11 (healthy) or 12 (weak) (13 year olds complete the fast mid'Oraisa).

(R. Yochanan): Chinuch Sha'os begins at 10 (healthy) or 11 (weak) (there is no completion of the fast mi'de'Rabanan) and the 12 year old completes the fast mid'Oraisa.

Question: How will R. Yochanan explain the year or two before in the Mishnah!?

R. Huna and R. Nachman will explain that the Mishnah is speaking only by a weak child and both expressions (one year and two years) refer to the same time.

One year prior uses as its reference the weak child's obligation to complete the fast mi'de'Rabanan.

Two years prior is in reference to the child's Torah obligation for completing the fast.

However, R. Yochanan does not have Hashlamah de'Rabanan, hence these expressions cannot refer to the same date.

Answer: Do not use the term prior (Lifnei) in the Mishnah, which means, simply, a year or two before their age of majority.

A Beraisa states the date as R. Yochanan would teach it, that Chinuch (presumably Sha'os) begins a year or two before their Perek.

Question: How will R. Huna and R. Nachman explain that Beraisa?

Answer: The Chinuch in the Beraisa means Hashlamah!

Question: Since when would we refer to Hashlamah as Chinuch (the Beraisa teaches that Chinuch is to delay the child's meal by an hour)?

Answer: There are two types of Chinuch, Sha'os and Hashlamah.

A pregnant woman who develops a life-threatening craving for something she smells, is fed until she is calmed.

An ill person is fed, based on two medical opinions.

In the absence of medical experts, we rely on the patient, until he indicates that he has had enough.

The Beraisa teaches that if a woman develops a life- threatening craving for Kodshim or Davar Acher:

First we dip a spindle into the gravy of that forbidden food and let her suck it.

If that does not help, we give her the gravy itself.

If that does not help, we give her the forbidden food. It is permitted to feed it to her, because nothing stands before saving a life, except Avodah Zarah, Arayos, and Retzichah.

Question: What is the source for Avodah Zarah standing before saving a life?

Answer: From the obligation to love Hash-m with one's Soul (i.e. one's life).

Question: Whence the obligation to forfeit life and not violate Arayos and Retzichah?

Answer: From the fact that the Torah calls Arayos as akin to an act of murder (which we shall see shortly).

In Arayos as in Retzichah, it is permitted to save the victim at the expense of the life of the pursuer.

In Arayos, as we know by Retzichah, one must forfeit one's life in order to avoid violating the prohibition.

Question: How do we know to assume that a potential murderer himself must sacrifice his life?

Answer: It is logical, as in the incident brought before Rava.

The petitioner asked Rava if he is permitted to commit murder to save his own life.

Rava told him to allow himself to be killed, since he has no basis to assume his own life to be more precious (redder blood) than his neighbor's (and the permission to transgress in order to save a life does not apply here, since anyway someone is going to die).

The case of a woman who had such a craving was brought before Rebbi.

He told them to whisper in her ear that it is Yom Kipur and to see what happens.

They did so and her (the fetus') craving passed.

Rebbi used the Pasuk to refer to this fetus as destined for greatness.

That child grew to become R. Yochanan.

The opposite outcome occurred (the fetus did not relent) in the case brought before R. Chaninah and the child became a notorious price gouger.