REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Shevuos 5
(a) In the Beraisa that we cited earlier (which discusses the
Machlokes between Rebbi Akiva and Rebbi in connection
with He'elam Tum'ah), Rebbi said ''ve'Ne'elam",
How did Rava initially explain
this inference? What should the Torah otherwise have
(b) What did Abaye ask on Rava from the Pasuk in ...
(c) So how does Abaye explain Rebbi's interpretation of
- ... Naso (in connection with a Sotah) "ve'Ne'elam me'Einei Iyshah"?
- ... Iyov (in connection with Torah) "ve'Ne'elmah me'Einei Kol Chai u'me'Of ha'Shamayim Nistarah"?
(d) Rav Papa asked Abaye from our Mishnah 'Ein Bah Yedi'ah
bi'Techilah ve'Yesh Bah Yedi'ah be'Sof'. How is it
possible, he asked him, for a person never to have had
any inkling about Tum'ah? What did Abaye answer?
(a) Initially, we attribute the fact that the Mishnah in
Shabbos refers to 'Yetzi'os Shabbos Shetayim she'Hein
Arba bi'Fenim, u'Shetayim she'Hein Arba ba'Chutz' (whilst
our Mishnah only refers to one set of 'Shetayim she'Hein
Arba') to the fact that the major Sugya of Shabbos
belongs in Maseches Shabbos, so the Tana goes into more
What is the problem with this
(b) Why can we not answer that some of the Yetzi'os are
Chayav and some are Patur (Aval Asur [mi'de'Rabbanan],
which would conform with the Tana in Shabbos)?
(c) What objection do we raise to Rav Papa's answer (to
resolve the main problem), that (following the same
reasoning) our Mishnah only deals with the Avos (but not
with the Toldos)?
(d) How does Rav Ashi explain our answer (that two cases
pertain to Hotza'ah, and two to Hachnasah) despite the
fact that the Tana specifically mentions 'Yetzi'os'?
(a) How does Rav Ashi prove his point from the Mishnah in
K'lal Gadol 'ha'Motzi me'Reshus li'Reshus'? How do we
know that the Tana is not referring exclusively to
Answers to questions
(b) What justification does the Tana have for doing this?
(c) How does Ravina prove Rav Ashi's answer from the Mishnah
in Shabbos (based on the fact that the Tana there begins
with the words 'Yetzi'os ha'Shabbos ... '?
(d) Rava resolves the original problem by explaining that
What does he mean by that?
(a) The Mishnah in Nega'im lists the four sightings of
If Baheres and Se'eis are the two Avos, what
does 'Sapachas' mean?
(b) If 'Baheres' is white like snow and 'Se'eis' like white
wool, what is the Toldah of ...
(c) Why does the Tana in Nega'im not give the Toldah of
Se'eis as white like wool, which is close to it (see
Rashi 6a DH 've'Ilu')?
- ... Baheres?
- ... Se'eis?
(a) What is the significance of the name 'Se'eis'?
(b) How do they rank in their order of whiteness?
(c) Why do we not rather describe the Toldah of Baheres as
white like lamb's wool, and Se'eis as white like the lime
of the Heichal?
(d) What it the significance of the Av and its Toldah? What
is the difference for example, between the corollary of a
Baheres and a mark that is like the lime of the Heichal,
and that of a Baheres and a mark that is like the white
of an egg?
(a) Rava remarks that the author of 'Mar'os Ne'ga'im' cannot
be Rebbi Akiva, who says 'Zu Lema'alah mi'Zu'.
Answers to questions
does this mean?
(b) Why would this create a problem with an appearance that
is like the lime of the Heichal?
(c) Why would the same problem not apply to a mark that
resembles the membrane of an egg (which is the Toldah of
Se'eis, but is separated from it by two levels of