(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Nidah 51


(a) In the Beraisa of 'Gozel she'Nafal le'Gas', on what basis does Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri render the Kasher fledgling Tamei, even without Machshavah?
The Rabbanan reject his Kal va'Chomer because 'Im Amarta be'Tum'ah Chamurah, she'Kein Einah Yoredes Le'Kach, Tomar be'Tum'ah Kalah, she'Kein Yoredes Le'Kach' - Initially, the Gemara explains 'Yoredes le'Kach' to mean that it does not pass on Tum'ah to something like itself (Adam to Adam).
(b) How does the Gemara then explain the words of the Rabbanan, and why can this interpretation not be correct?
2) The Gemara ultimately explains it to mean that Tum'ah Chamurah does not require a Hechsher, whereas a Tum'ah Kala does.
(a) What does this mean?

(b) How do we then explain the Mishnah in Shekalim, which includes among the specialties of Nivlas Of Tahor, that it does not require Hechsher (even for Tum'ah Kala)?

(c) How does Rava dismiss the entire contention that the Tum'ah Kala of a Nivlas Of Tahor needs any kind of Hechsher at all, from a Beraisa, which learns that it does, from "Al Kol Zera Zeru'a Asher Yizarei'a"?

(d) Then how does Rava resolve our problem? How does he explain the Rabbanan's answer to Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri?

(a) What does Rava say about crops that were originally sown for seeds, but the owner then (whilst they were still attached to the ground) decided use as food - according to Rebbi Yochanan?

(b) How does he prove this from the Mishnah in Ma'asros: 'ha'Si'ah, ve'ha'Eizov ve'ha'Kurnis she'be'Chatzer, Im Hayu Nishmarin, Chayavin'?

(c) How does Rav Ashi refute Rava's proof, and what is the Chidush, according to him?

(d) What does Rav Ashi ask on Rava from our Mishnah 'Kol she'Chayavin be'Ma'asros, Metam'in Tum'as Ochlin'?

(e) How does Rava answer this, and how does he prove it from the Seifa 'Kol she'Chayav be'Reishis ha'Gez, Chayav be'Matanos??

4) Ravina refutes the proof by establishing the Mishnah according to Rebbi Shimon.
(a) What does Rebbi Shimon say?
The Gemara ultimately proves Rava's contention that we go by the species, and not just by the article, from a discrepancy between our Mishnah, which writes that 'Kol she'Chayav be'Pei'ah, Chayav be'Ma'asros', and the Beraisa 'ha'Mafkir es Karmo, ve'Hishkim ba'Boker u'Batzro, Chayav be'Peret u've'Olelos, u've'Shikchah u've'Pei'ah, u'Patur min ha'Ma'aser'.
(b) How is Rava vindicated from there?
Answers to questions



(a) How does the Gemara deduce that aniseed is Metamei Tum'as Ochlin from the Mishnah in Pei'ah, which writes that the Chachamim concede to Rebbi Akiva that if someone sows aniseed or mustard-seeds in a few places he gives Ma'aser from each one separately?
The Gemara asks on this from Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri, who disagrees with Rebbi Akiva (who holds that spices can be bought with Ma'aser Sheini money, although they are not Metamei Tum'as Ochlin). In *his* opinion, since spices cannot be purchased with Ma'aser Sheini money, they are not Metamei Tum'as Ochlin either - and aniseed is a spice?
(b) How does the Gemara resolve this difficulty by establishing the first Beraisa by 'Sheves ha'Asuyah le'Chamach' - What is 'Sheves ha'Asuyah le'Chamach'?

(c) Is S'tam aniseed intended for taste or as a dip, and how do we know this from the inference from the Mishnah in Uktzin: 'ha'Sheves mi'she'Nasnah Ta'am, Ein Bah Mishum Terumah, ve'Ein Mitam'ah Tum'as Ochlin'?

(a) What is subject to Matanos, but not to Reishis ha'Gez?

(b) What is subject to Shevi'is but not to Biy'ur, and why?

(a) According to the Gemara's first contention, why does the Pasuk need to write "Senapir"?

(b) Why indeed, should the Torah *not* write "Senapir"?

(c) Why does the first answer fall away?

(d) Why *does* the Torah write "Senapir"?

8) The Mishnah writes that there are certain things over which one recites a Berachah beforehand but not afterwards.
The Gemara rejects vegetables and water as being those things, because we find some Amora'im who did make a Nach-Berachah ('Borei Nefashos') over them.
(a) Why does the Gemara also reject the possibility that the Mishnah refers to Mitzvos?

(b) How does the Gemara finally learn our Mishnah?

(c) What is the reason for this?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,