We came, we were inspired and now we need to take action. As Reb Scheiner said. It's not simply about learning the daf, its instilling within ourselves ahavas hatorah. One who has an ahavah for Torah doesn't need to pursue tayvos olam hazeh, he is too busy with olam habah. He won't waste his time with idle things, after all he has a lover: the Torah. So if you feel the urge come spend your time delving in the amkus of Torah rather than lehavdil the depths of depravity. My goal is to post a question or several a day on the daily daf and the oilam can post answers. Remember aiyen ponim l'torah so there can be more than one answer to a question.

ברכות דף ב

1. מאימתי - Why does Torah Shbaal Peh start with a "mem"?

2. In response to the questions תנא היכא קאי דקתני מאימתי ותו מאי שנא דתני בערבית ברישא לתני דשחרית ברישא the gemara gives two answers. Rashi says the second answer ואי בעית אימא יליף מברייתו של עולם is only responsding to the gemaras second question. Is there a way to learn that in fact the gemara is answering both questions?

3. The Gemara explains that the reason why the mishna used the time indicator for Zman Krias Shema as משעה שהכהנים נכנסים לאכול בתרומתן to teach us an additional din that Kohanim that became tomai can eat terumah from evening and they don't have to wait until they bring a korban והא קמשמע לן דכפרה לא מעכבא The gemara brings a proof to this from the possuk of ובא השמש וטהר If you look at that possuk however it is talking about tumah that doesn't require a korban. והנגע, בכל-טמא-נפש, או איש, אשר-תצא ממנו שכבת-זרע. ה או-איש אשר יגע, בכל-שרץ אשר יטמא-לו; או באדם אשר יטמא-לו, לכל טמאתו. ו נפש אשר תגע-בו, וטמאה עד-הערב; ולא יאכל מן-הקדשים, כי אם-רחץ בשרו במים. ז ובא השמש, וטהר; ואחר יאכל מן-הקדשים, כי לחמו הוא?

Since tomorrow is Shabbos posting today for tomorrow's daf.

ברכות דף ג

1. אוי לבנים שבעונותיהם החרבתי את ביתי ושרפתי את היכלי The Gemara uses the term destruction with respect to ביתי and burning with respect to the heichal. The possuk מלכים ב פרק כה
when describing the churban suggests that the "bayis" was burned וישרף את-בית-ה Moreover, the gemara in Taanis דף כט,א uses the term destruction with respect to the heichal תניא כשחרב טורנוסרופוס הרשע את ההיכל (although it also uses the term burning earlier with respect to the heichal "שרובו של היכל בו נשרף " and destruction with respect to the bayis "כשחרב בית המקדש"). What is the difference between the "bayis" and the "heichal" and which was burned and which destroyed?

2. The gemara says אמר רבי אמי אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי אין אומרין בפני המת אלא דבריו של מת אמר רבי אבא בר כהנא לא אמרן אלא בדברי תורה אבל מילי דעלמא לית לן בה. Rashi based on a possuk in Mishlei explains the reason that Divrei Torah is ossur שהכל חייבין לספר בהן והמת דומם והוה ליה לועג לרש חרף עושהו But the gemara on :ס"א in Niddah says ור' יוחנן לטעמיה דא"ר יוחנן מאי דכתיב במתים חפשי כיון שמת אדם נעשה חפשי מן המצות so what does rashi mean when he says שהכל חייבין לספר בהן ?

פותחין בכבוד אכסניא - הרב יו איי ג'יי שליט"א, תשואות חן על יוזמת וביצוע מפעל גדול וקדוש זה, תתברך מנותן התורה ויישר כחך וחילך לאורייתא

ברכות דף ב

on daf beis amud bais, the gemara says that in Eretz Yisrael (Maarava) they did not hear what Rav Shila said about the diyuk of tahar vs. veyit-har and they questioned the meaning of "uba hashemesh vetahar", whether it means the sun coming up or going down.

the reason they were satisfied that it refers to the sun going down was because the wording of a beraisa is clearly indicative that the correct meaning is that the sun goes down.

how can we interpret a posuk based on a beraisa? isn't that like putting the cart before the horse?

ZemirosShabbos wrote on 03 Aug 2012 17:45:

Interpreting a Possuk based on a Chazal, is analogous to to putting a car's engine in the hood up front, not putting a horse in front of the cart....

ur-a-jew wrote on 03 Aug 2012 14:30:


1. I was thinking that perhaps Torah ShBaal Peh starts with a mem to combine with the bays of breishas in order to allude to the possuk ודברת בם. The Torah is telling us you should speak בם that is Torah Sbksav and Torah Shbaal Peh

2. The שפתי חכמים explains al pi drush that the tanna learned from ברייתו של עולם that just like the Torah starts with breishas shomyim v'oretz even though it didn't explain the creation of aish and mayim from which the shomayim was created so too the tanna starts with מאימתי even though he never explained from where we know the chiyuv to say krias shema.

ur-a-jew wrote on 05 Aug 2012 14:23:


Nice! But you're not the first one, see Here.

ראה במדבר רבה פרשת נשא פרשה יג סימן טו

צא וחשוב כ"ד ספרים של תורה שבכתב ושמונים מן משנה שמתחלת במ"ם מאימתי קורין את שמע וכו' ומסיימת במ"ם (תהלים כט) ה' יברך את עמו בשלום מ"ם ארבעים ומ"ם ארבעים הרי שמונים הרי ק"ד שעולים מניינם של תורה שבכתב ותורה שבעל פה, ד"א שראשי ש"ס משנה חשבון ראשי אותיות הן עולים שמונים צא וחשוב, מ' מן מאימתי של סדר זרעים, י' מן יציאות השבת של סדר מועד, ח' מן חמש עשרה נשים מן סדר נשים א' מן ארבעה אבות נזיקין מן סדר ישועות, כ' מן כל הזבחים מן סדר קדשים, א' מן אבות הטומאות מן סדר טהרות הרי שמונים מיכן שעולים תורה שבכתב ותורה שבעל פה למנין ק"ד ונתנה לכ"ו דורות שהיו מאדם ועד משה שניתנה תורה על ידו הרי ק"ל לכך היה משקל הקערה ק"ל

read the rest of the Midrash there as well.

ראה עוד תענית ח, א דריש לקיש היה מסדר מתניתין ארבעים זימני כנגד ארבעים יום שניתנה בהן התורה

btw I would like to applaud you for starting this thread, great idea!
[even though i'm not "doing the daf"]

ברכות דף ד

1. רב אשי אמר בפלגא אורתא דתליסר נגהי ארבסר הוי קאי והכי קאמר משה לישראל


Two questions if one looks at the possuk שמות יא ד Rashi says that Moshe was addressing Pharoah not klal yisroel. Moreover, the seder hapossukim suggests that this statement was said prior to Rosh Chodesh Nissan?

ur-a-jew wrote on 03 Aug 2012 15:55:


While this question is indeed a good one, קשיא בית אבית, קשיא היכל אהיכל. I would like to point out something here (in the "the censored text" section), where it seems that the girsaot here aren't all that clear to begin with.

The simple difference between the "bayis" and the "heichal" is; The Bayit refers to the Beit HaMikdash as a whole, including the Azarot, while the Heichal refers to the building housing the Kodesh and Kodesh HaKadashim only.

ברכות דף ה

1. The Gemara brings down a memra from Rebbi Yitzchok that one who says Krias Shema Al Hamittah mazikin jump away from him.
ואמר רבי יצחק כל הקורא קריאת שמע על מטתו מזיקין בדילין הימנו שנאמר ובני רשף יגביהו עוף ואין עוף אלא תורה שנאמר התעיף עיניך בו ואיננו ואין רשף אלא מזיקין שנאמר מזי רעב ולחומי רשף וקטב מרירי
It would seem from the possuk the gemara darshans that any Torah accomplishes this, why does Rebbi Yitzchok limit his statement to Krias Shem
Al Hamittah. The question would seem to be even stronger when considering that the gemara earlier stated that a talmud chochom does not
have to say Krias Shema Al Hamittah precisely because he has Torah שרגיל במשנתו לחזור על גרסתו תמיד (Rashi)?

TehillimZugger wrote on 05 Aug 2012 14:54:


1. Even the censored version of אוי לי שהחרבתי את ביתי ושרפתי את היכלי והגליתים לבין אומות העולם
uses the same phraseolgy with respect to the heichal and the bayis.

2. I don't thing that the "heichal" includes the kodesh hakodshim, see for example here. In light of that perhaps when the gemara uses the phrase "ביתי " it refers to the Kodesh Hakodshim which is sometimes referred to as בית קודש הקדשים this still does not answer the contradiction (although I'm wondering whether we could answer that one is referring to miikdash rishon and the other mikdash sheini, since the possuk in Melachim is describing bayis rishon, whereas טורנוסרופוס was in bayis sheini).

The Bayis Rishon Sheini thing has potential.

Unrelated but it's on TornosRuphus:

Some of you may have noticed that I'm learning Avodah Zarah, the gemorah on daph 20a [referenced by Reb MT [url=http://www.guardyoureyes.org/forum/index.php?topic=5273.msg139138#msg139138]here[/url]] says that one is prohibited from giving "chen" to Aku"m, in other words one should not glorify Aku"m. the gemorah then relates that Rabbi Akiva once saw the wife of TornosRuphus, he spit, laughed and cried. He spit because she came from a blemished droplet, laughed because he saw that eventually he will marry her, and cried for her beauty* that will eventually waste away in the earth [We are men of nature we are made from the earth, at the end of my eighty I'll return to the dirt[sup]Matisyahu[/sup]].

The gemorah in Nedarim 50b [right on top] mentions this woman, and Rashi explains:
A nobleman whose name was Ruphus who would constantly pester Rabi Akiva through words of Torah, Rabi Akiva would always defeat him though and each time the nobleman would be shamed. He came [home] and told his wife, she said I'll butter him up and seduce him, because she was extremely beautiful. So she came to him and uncovered her legs. Rabi Akiva spit, laughed and cried. So she said to him, why did you do these things? He replied, I spit because you come from a blemished droplet, and I cried because your beauty will eventually waste away in the earth. He wouldn't tell her why he laughed, until she persisted and he admitted that he sees that she will marry him eventually. She asked him, is it still possible for me to become a mensch [although I doubt she used that term]? He said yes. She went and converted; after her husband died she married Rabi Akiva and brought him great riches.
Tosafos says almost the same thing, however according to Tosafos, she didn't "come to him and uncover her legs" but "got dressed up and went before Rabi Akiva" [this is an important difference, because as mentioned, Reb MT references the second part of this Gemorah in Avodah Zarah, where the Gemorah asks, how was Rabi Akiva permitted to look at her? And the gemorah answers that he caught a glimpse when he turned a corner. Accordingly, coming "before him" would be more accurate than "going to him"]. Another difference in Tosafos, that he didn't break down and admit why he was laughing, which lets us understand how come she was permitted to convert [whereas according to Rashi she "went" and converted, Rabi Akiva wouldn't do it for her]. Another difference "She left [we can take this to mean, she left her husband], converted, and brought him a lot of money and was married to him". The gemorah in Kiddushin daph 7a says that while usually the husband has to pay the wife and that constitutes the marriage "Kiddushin", if the husband is greatly respected then the wife can pay him, and that constitutes the marriage, according to Tosafos, perhaps that's what the money was all about.

And finally, the Gemorah in Nedarim 50a relates that Rabi Akiva, right after his marriage [while he was still a bigger Am HaAretz than any one of us here at GYE] lived in great poverty and promised his wife that if only he had the money, he would get her a "Jerusalem of Gold"!
The gemorah in Shabbos 59a-b relates that Rabi Akiva actually ended up getting a "Jerusalem of Gold" for his wife. The sefer Shivim Temarim [end of siman 42] asks that according to halacha, Rabi Akiva was not obligated to fulfill the "promise" that a dreaming Am HaAretz had made years before, taking into account that only special women wore "Cities of Gold" [see Shabbos], and they were an impoverished couple with no money, status, or anything, the promise was so absurd at the time, that it was not at all binding, if so, why did Rabi Akiva come through and get the "Jerusalem of Gold" for his wife?

According to the next page in Nedarim, that Rabi Akiva married another woman [and note that Rashi says she waited for HER husband to die, not for Rabi Akiva's wife], and she brought him lots of cash, we can understand that Rachel, the first wife, may have felt that Rabi Akiva will now ignore her and spend all his time with the new pretty, rich wife. To show that he still loved her, he used some of his newfound cash, and got her a gift, that is still famous today!





___________________
* It is interesting to note, that at the end of Makkos, upon seeing the destruction of the temple [see, it IS related] the sages cried while Reb Akiva laughed. When asked about it he replied that he laughed because he foresaw the eventual Nechama.
Upon learning this Gemara though, we may ask, if he was capable of oth, laughing and crying, why didn't he at least first cry for the churban and then laugh for the nechama.

We can answer in two ways. A. the ecstasy of the geulah was so real to him, that it seemed a total waste to cry for the churban when the nechama is so close at hand, and so exciting! B. Like Reb Dov said over here, the churban is really not a problem when taken into context that it's paving the way for geulah [see also what I wrote [url=http://www.guardyoureyes.org/forum/index.php?topic=4337.msg142878#msg142878]here[/url]].

daf ה
the gemara brings the passuk of רגזו ואל תחטאו
and learns from it that one should fight his yetzer and if that doesnt help he should be osek batorah and if that doesnt help he should think about yom hamisa.
how does this work out with the gemarah kiddushin borosi yetzer harah borosi torah tavlin
how is there a step after learning if learning is the tavlin for the yetzer harah why should something else work and why didnt learning help?