Previous daf

1)

(a) Rebbi Yehoshua holds that someone who eats a Rishon, becomes a Sheni (according to Rebbi Eliezer, he becomes a Rishon).

(b) Someone who is a Rishon is Tamei, to make Terumah that he touches a Sheni (which can still make other Terumah a Shelishi). Whereas someone who is a Sheni (by Chulin) is Pasul, but does not transmit Tum'ah any further.

(c) According to Rebbi Yehoshua, someone who eats a Shelishi, becomes a Sheni, to make Kodesh a Shelishi.

(d) The Mishnah must be speaking about Chulin she'Na'asu Al Taharas Terumah. If it were speaking about ordinary Chulin, how could it be a Shelishi (since the lowest degree of Tum'ah by Chulin is a Sheni).

(a) According to Rebbi Yehoshua, someone who eats a Shelishi becomes a Sheni for Kodesh because, since Chulin which was guarded Al Taharas Terumah, is not considered guarded for Kodesh. We suspect that the Shelishi is really a Rishon as far as Kodesh is concerned, and the person who ate it becomes a Sheni.

(b) The reason for the decree that someone who eats food which is a Rishon or a Sheni becomes a Sheni is because sometimes a person who is eating Tamei food, puts some beverage of Terumah in his mouth, thereby rendering it Pasul; and the reason for the decree that if he drinks a Tamei beverage is the opposite: because whilst he is drinking a Tamei beverage, he may put Terumah food in his mouth and make it Pasul.

(c) Although the two decrees appear to be one and the same, Chazal nevertheless saw fit to issue the second decree independently, since, although it is common to drink whilst eating, it is not common to eat whilst drinking.

(d) Chazal were merely taking their cue from the Torah, which warns the Kohanim (with the words in Bamidbar - "es Mishmeres Terumosai"), to guard their Terumah from becoming Tamei.

(a) Initially, they used to Tovel in Mikva'os in caves, where the water was repugnant. After the Tevilah therefore, it became cstomary to pour over themselves three Lugin of drawn water, in order to rinse off the smelly water of the Mikveh. Eventually, it reached the stage when people were saying that it is not the Mikveh water which purifies but the drawn water. So they decreed that someone who follows his immersion in the Mikveh with bathing in drawn water, becomes Tamei.

(b) "Ach Ma'ayan u'Bor Mikveh Mayim" teaches us that only a natural collection of water is Kasher for Tevilah, but not drawn water.

(c) They only decreed that three Lugin of water that fell on a person renders him Tamei, because of its similarity to the previous decree. Because if one would be Tahor in the *latter* case, people would not understand why he should be Tamei in the *former*.

(a) The reason for the decree ...

1. ... that Sifrei Kodesh should be Metamei Terumah, is because of the custom of the Kohanim to put their Terumah away next to Sefarim. The former, they claimed, is holy just like the latter. Their reasoning however, backfired, when the mice, which were attracted by the Terumah, also began chewing the Sefarim. This prompted the Chazal to decree Tum'ah on the Sefarim - to encourage the Kohanim to discontinue placing their Terumah next to them.
2. ... of Tum'ah on hands, is because hands tend to touch everything. Sometimes one touches the dirty parts of the body, and then the Terumah, making the Terumah disgusting to eat.

(b) If the reason for Tum'as Yadayim was because of Tum'ah, then we ought to suspect that perhaps he touched an Av ha'Tum'ah, and is a Rishon (not just a Sheni)? Secondly, why are only *the hands* Metamei Terumah? If his hands touched Tum'ah, then his whole body should be Tamei, and Terumah should become Tamei if it touched any part of the body, not just the hands? And thirdly, it would not suffice just to wash one's hands to remove the Tuma'h, but to immerse one's entire body in a Mikveh.

(c) As a result of the decree on hands, we are obligated to wash our hands before eating bread.

(a) Rebbi Parnach meant that someone who holds the parchment of the Sefer-Torah with his bare hands, will lose the reward of whichever Mitzvah he is currently performing (see Tosfos d.h. 'be'Lo').

(b) It is obvious that the decree that hands become Tamei through touching a Sefer, came before the decree that S'tam hands are Tamei, because, after the latter, the former decree would be superfluous.

6)

(a) A Tevul Yom is indeed Tamei d'Oraysa, and must be erased from the list of the eighteen decrees.

(b) Liquid that became Tamei through touching *a Sheretz*, is Metamei min ha'Torah, and would hardly be included in the eighteen Rabbinical decrees!

(c) The liquid (which made the food Tamei) must therefore be speaking about liquid that became Tamei through contact with S'tam Yadayim (or any of the Tum'os which render Terumah Pasul), which they decreed on account of liquid which became Tamei through a Sheretz.

(d) Chazal, who decreed Tum'ah on liquid, and not on food, took their cue from the Torah, which renders liquid fit to receive Tum'ah immediately, whereas food cannot receive Tum'ah , before it has had contact with a liquid.

(a) The liquids of a Zav are Tamei d'Oraysa, and do not need to be included in the eighteen decrees mi'de'Rabbanan.

(b) The liquid that we are talking about (which renders vessels Tamei) must be referring to liquid which received Tum'ah through a Sheretz (although it is Tamei d'Oraysa, it cannot transmit Tum'ah to vessels - mi'd'Oraysa - since, min ha'Torah, vessels can receive Tum'ah only through an Av ha'Tum'ah).

(a) Yossi ben Yoezer and Yossi ben Yochanan decreed Tum'ah on the lands of the gentiles because of the unmarked graves there - and non-Jewish corpses are Metamei through touching and carrying, according to Rebbi Shimon, and also be'Ohel, according to the Rabbanan.

(b) Shimon ben Shetach decreed that all a person's property should be considered collateral for his wife's Kesubah, and that he was not permitted to simply sat aside money for her Kesubah. He issued this decree in order to discourage a person from making a hasty divorce, and telling his wife to take her money and go.

(c) Shamai and Hillel themselves argued only three times.

(a) In fact, Hillel and Shamai did attempt to decree Tum'as Yadayim, but the decree was not accepted until their Talmidim issued it, years later.

(b) We cannot say that, when Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel argued, Shamai and Hillel were also present, each one siding with his Talmidim, because this is not one of the three places where Shamai and Hillel argued.

(c) Nor can we say that Shamai and Hillel decreed a Safek Tum'ah on hands (which means that the Terumah is not burnt), and their Talmidim came and decreed a Vaday Tum'ah. Why not?
Because Ilfa said that the initial decree of hands was that of Vaday Tum'ah, in which case, the Terumah had to be burnt, already from the decree's inception.

(a) Shlomoh Hamelech decreed Eiruvei Chatzeiros and Netilas Yadayim.

(b) Shlomoh's decree was confined to Kodshim, and Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel added the decree on Terumah (a general decree on all S'tam Yadayim - even those of non-Kohanim).