REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Sanhedrin 33
(a) What does the Beraisa say about a judge who declared the innocent party,
guilty, and the guilty party, innocent ... '?
(b) How does Rav Yosef reconcile this ruling with our Mishnah, which states
'Diynei Mamonos Machzirin'?
(c) Rav Nachman then reconciles our Mishnah with the Beraisa 've'Im Hayah
Mumcheh le'Beis-Din Patur' (implying 'Ein Machzirin') by differentiating
between when there is someone who is greater than him in wisdom and years
and when there is not.
What does he mean by that?
(a) Rav Sheishes establishes our Mishnah by an error in a D'var Mishnah.
How does the first Beraisa then speak?
(b) How did our Mishnah speak, according to Rav Yosef and Rav Nachman?
(c) What is the basis for the difference between Ta'ah bi'Devar Mishnah and
Ta'ah be'Shikul ha'Da'as?
(a) Why did Ravina ask Rav Ashi (or Rav Hamnuna, Rav Sheishes) whether
'Ta'ah bi'Devar Mishnah' incorporates an error in a ruling of Rebbi Chiya
and Rebbi Oshaya? Why might we have thought otherwise?
(b) When (based on the fact that basically, in spite of Rebbi's greatness,
the status of the Beraisos is on a par with that of the Mishnayos) Rav Ashi
(or Rav Sheishes) answered in the affirmative, why did Ravina then find it
necessary to ask whether it also incorporated an error in Rav and Shmuel?
(c) And what did he retort when Ravina then asked his whether it
incorporated someone erring even in their (Ravina and Rav Ashi's) rulings?
(d) How does Rav Papa define 'Ta'ah be'Shikul ha'Da'as'?
(a) Why did Rebbi Tarfon feed a cow to the dogs?
(b) What subsequently caused him to bemoan the loss of his donkey? What did
Todos the doctor say in Rome about such a case?
(c) Rebbi Akiva pointed out that since he was a qualified Dayan and
therefore able to retract, he was Patur from paying. What should he rather
have asked him, according to Rav Hamnuna?
(d) How do we answer Rav Hamnuna's Kashya? Why did Rebbi Akiva ask the way
(a) What problem does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak have with Rav Hamnuna's
Kashya on Rebbi Tarfon?
(b) How do we answer this Kashya? Why ought the judge to be Patur despite
the fact that the cow had already been thrown to the dogs?
(a) Rav Chisda answers 'Ka'an she'Nasa ve'Nasan be'Yad ... '.
this answer the Kashya? Which Kashya is he coming to answer?
(b) How can 'Nasa ve'Nasan be'Yad' possibly apply to the case of 'Zikah es
ha'Chayav' (in the Beraisa)?
(c) How does this now create a problem with our Mishnah?
(d) What do we mean when we answer 'Chada Katani'?
(a) What problem does this create in the Seifa, in the equivalent case of
'Ein Machzirin le'Chovah'? What will be the case of 'Z'chus she'Hi Chovah'?
Ravina dispenses with the Kashyos on Rav Chisda by establishing 'Zikah es
ha'Chayav' (of the Beraisa) when the judge actually took a security from the
creditor and handed it to the debtor (otherwise, he would be able to
retract, like we initially thought).
(b) On what Halachic grounds do we reject the answer 'Chovseih de'Go'el
ha'Dam' (that the next of kin of the murdered man, who demands justice)
stands to lose?
(c) How do we also refute the current explanation on the basis of the Lashon
'Bein li'Zechus, Bein le'Chovah' in the Reisha?
How does he explain ...
Answers to questions
- ... 'Timei es ha'Tahor'?
- ... 'Tiher es ha'Tamei'?
(a) What does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Mishpatim ...
(b) And in connection with a Meisis (who talks someone into worshipping
idols), what does ...
- ... "ve'Naki Al Taharog"?
- ... "ve'Tzadik Al Taharog"?
(c) What She'eilah did Rebbi Zeira ask Rav Sheishes about Chayvei Galuyos
and Chayvei Malkos?
- ... Rav Shimi bar Ashi learn from the Pasuk in Re'ei "Lo Sachmol ve'Lo Sechaseh Alav"?
- ... Rav Kahana learn from the Pasuk there "Ki Harog Tahargenu"?
(d) And we resolve both She'eilos from a 'Gezeirah-Shavah'.
What do we
learn from ...
(e) How do we substantiate these D'rashos?
- ... "Rotze'ach" "Rotze'ach" (from Chayvei Miysos)?
- ... "Rasha" "Rasha" (from Diynei Nefashos)?
(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan qualifies the ruling in our
Mishnah, that we do not return a defendant to hear fresh evidence that he is
Under which circumstances will we bring him back after declaring
(b) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba asked Rebbi Yochanan about such a situation with
regard to a case of adultery.
Why might the above leniency not apply
(c) What makes murder cases less clear-cut than those of adultery?
(a) Rebbi Yochanan replied with the words 'a'de'Mokdach Yakid, Zil Kotz Kari
What does this mean?
(b) What did Rebbi Yochanan mean by that statement?
(c) What forces us to nevertheless presume that our Mishnah speaks in a case
of adultery too?
(d) And we establish the case by sodomy.
Why would the Tzedokim not agree
in such a case?
(a) Our Tana permits anyone to testify li'Zechus by Diynei Nefashos.
Answers to questions
do we initially think this comes to include?
(b) What does the Tana Kama in a Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Masei
"ve'Eid Echad Lo Ya'aneh be'Nefesh"?
(c) What does Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah say there?
(d) How does Rav Papa establish 'anyone' in our Mishnah to reconcile it with
the Rabbanan of Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah?