THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question about the Daf
SOTAH 26,27,29,30 - These Dafim have been dedicated by Mrs. Estanne
Abraham-Fauer in honor of the first Yahrzeit (18 Teves 5761) of her father,
Reb Mordechai ben Eliezer Zvi (Weiner). May the merit of supporting and
advancing the study of the Talmud be l'Iluy Nishmaso.
1) "SHELISHI" FOR TERUMAH AND "REVI'I" FOR KODESH: MID'ORAISA OR MID'RABANAN
OPINIONS: The Gemara derives the Halachos of Shelishi for Terumah and Revi'i
for Kodesh from either a Kal v'Chomer or from a Mah ha'Tzad. (See Chart.)
Are these sources true Limudim that teach a Halachah d'Oraisa, or are they
only supports for Halachos that are mid'Rabanan?
2) THE STATUS OF A "MECHUSAR KIPURIM" WITH REGARD TO KODESH
(a) RASHI in our Sugya implies that the Halachos of Shelishi for Terumah and
Revi'i for Kodesh are both mid'Oraisa, and that the Kal v'Chomer of our
Gemara is a full-fledged Kal v'Chomer. Even though both Kal v'Chomers that
the Gemara suggests (to teach Shelishi and Revi'i) seem to be refutable
through the argument of "Dayo," nevertheless, our Gemara holds -- like Rashi
writes -- that when a Kal v'Chomer will be rendered completely useless if
the rule of "Dayo" is applied, then we do not apply "Dayo" and the Kal
v'Chomer remains in effect. (The problem of "Dayo" of the Kal v'Chomer that
teaches Shelishi for Terumah is that the Chumra of a Sheni is that it
*itself* is Tamei for Chulin, but not that it is Metamei other items. Hence,
we should not be able to learn from there that a Sheni could make another
item Pasul in the case of Terumah. The problem of "Dayo" of the Kal v'Chomer
that teaches Revi'i for Kodesh is that one who is Mechusar Kipurim is only
*Asur* to *eat* Terumah, but he does not make Terumah that he touches Pasul,
and therefore we should not be able to learn from there that a Shelishi
makes Terumah become Pasul.)
This is also the opinion of TOSFOS in many places (Pesachim 19a, DH Lo;
Chulin 35a, DH Ein Lecha; Chagigah 21b, DH Basraisa (2)).
(b) However, RASHI in Pesachim (19a, DH Amar Lei) argues that Revi'i for
Kodesh is only *mid'Rabanan*. He proves this by pointing out that Rebbi
Yosi -- who is the one who makes the Kal v'Chomer -- himself holds that a
solid food cannot be Mekabel Tum'ah from either a liquid or a solid food,
but only from a Kli. A Kli can never be less than a Rishon l'Tum'ah, and
thus the food that touches the Kli would become a Sheni, and the liquid that
touches that food would become a Shelishi, after which nothing else would
become Tamei, mid'Oraisa. Rebbi Yosi must be discussing the Tum'ah
*d'Rabanan* of food or drink that touches another food, and thus the whole
point of his Kal v'Chomer is to teach a Halachah d'Rabanan and to teach
where it is possible to have a Revi'i l'Tum'ah.
Rashi cites proof for this from the Gemara in Chagigah (20b) which says
clearly that the Chumra of Kodesh (that a Revi'i will make Kodesh become
Pasul, while only a Shelishi will make Terumah become Pasul) is only a
Ma'aleh d'Rabanan that has no source in any d'Oraisa law. (See Tosfos in
Pesachim who cites a different Girsa of the Gemara in Chagigah, and who
attempts to reconcile the Gemara in Chagigah with his opinion that Revi'i
for Kodesh is d'Oraisa, even according to Rashi's Girsa.)
(c) RASHI in Chulin (35a) seems to have a third opinion. Rashi explains that
even the status of Shelishi for Terumah is also only mid'Rabanan, and food
that touches a Tevul Yom is also Pasul (as a Shelishi) only mid'Rabanan.
According to Rashi, all of the Kal v'Chomers in our Sugya are not true Kal
v'Chomers (perhaps because of the problem of "Dayo"), and they are only
teaching Halachos mid'Rabanan.
This is the opinion of Rashi later in Chulin (128a, DH Mehader) as well (see
Gilyon ha'Shas and Rashash there). This also seems to be the opinion of
Rashi's second explanation in Chagigah (24a, DH Eino Din).
How could Rashi say that a Tevul Yom does not make Terumah become Pasul
mid'Oraisa? The Gemara in Yevamos cites two sources from the Torah to teach
that a Tevul Yom may not touch Terumah. One of the sources is that which
Rashi cites in our Sugya (beginning of 29b), that the Torah clearly refers
to a *Kli* which is a Tevul Yom, which remains Tamei until the evening with
regard to Terumah. A Kli obviously cannot eat Terumah, and thus the verse
must be teaching that a Kli cannot *touch* Terumah.
How does Rashi in Chulin explain that verse? Apparently, Rashi learns that
just like it is prohibited for a person who is a Tevul Yom to *eat* Terumah,
it is prohibited for a person or a Kli that is a Tevul Yom to *touch*
Terumah. But if he does touch it, b'Di'eved the Terumah does not become
Pasul. That is, the Gemara in Yevamos is teaching only that it is prohibited
for a Tevul Yom to touch Terumah, but not that the Terumah becomes Pasul
(this is implicit in the words of Rashi in Yevamos).
The Acharonim cite a source for Rashi's opinion in Chulin from the Girsa of
the Gemara of some Rishonim in Pesachim (35a; see Rabeinu Nisim Ga'on in
Berachos 35b, and Tosfos in Menachos 21a, DH Yatzu), that after a person
performs Tevilah when he is still a Tevul Yom, he is actually Tahor, and the
Torah merely made a special level of purity, a Ma'aleh, that prohibits him
from eating Kodshim.
OPINIONS: Rebbi Yosi proves from a Kal v'Chomer that a Revi'i level of
Tum'ah will make Kodesh become Pasul. His Kal v'Chomer is from the Halachah
of one who is Mechusar Kipurim, who is "Pasul b'Kodesh" even though he is
Mutar b'Terumah. If a Mechusar Kipurim is Mutar b'Terumah but yet is Pasul
b'Kodesh, then certainly a Shelishi -- which makes Terumah Pasul -- should
make Kodesh a Revi'i (see Chart, footnote 7). When referring to a Mechusar
Kipurim's status with regard to Kodesh, Rebbi Yosi says that a Mechusar
Kipurim is "Pasul" for Kodesh. Does Rebbi Yosi mean that a Mechusar Kipurim
is merely prohibited from eating Kodesh, or is he also able to make Kodesh
Pasul by touching it?
(a) The RASHASH in Chagigah (beginning of 21a) asserts that a Mechusar
Kipurim is not only prohibited mid'Oraisa from eating Kodesh, but he is even
able to be Posel Kodesh, mid'Oraisa, by touching it. He proves this from the
Gemara in Yevamos (74b), in which Rava infers from the verse (Vayikra 12:7)
that teaches that the Mechusar Kipurim becomes Tahor after bringing his
Korban, that until that time the person is Tamei. Rava concludes, therefore,
that the Halachah that meat of Kodesh that touches something Tamei may not
be eaten applies to meat of Kodesh that touches a Mechuasr Kipurim before
the person brings his Korban (see Rashi there, DH Kari).
(b) However, the wording of our Gemara clearly implies that a Mechusar
Kipurim is not Posel Kodshim mid'Oraisa, but that he is only *Pasul* to eat
Kodshim mid'Oraisa. Although it is true that he *is Posel* Kodshim (Tevul
Yom 2:4) -- that is only mid'Rabanan. The RASHASH (Chagigah 24a) cites the
Tosefta in Chagigah (3:7), which is the source for Rebbi Yosi's kal
v'Chomer, and the Yerushalmi in Chagigah (3:4), which both say that the Kal
v'Chomer is from the Halachah that a Mechusar Kipurim is *Posel* Kodesh.
Nevertheless, the Girsa of our Gemara, the Gemara in Chagigah (24a), and the
Gemara in Pesachim (18b) is that a Mechusar Kipurim is *Pasul* (not Posel)
for Kodesh. This is also clear from the Gemara in Pesachim (35a, according
to our Girsa; see previous Insight) which tells us that a Mechusar Kipurim
is Asur b'Kodshim mid'Oraisa only because of a Ma'aleh, but *not* because he
In fact, the TOSFOS HA'ROSH questions why our Gemara says that a Mechusar
Kipurim is only Pasul from eating Kodesh and is not Posel. Why should he not
be Posel Kodesh as well because of the logic of the Rashash (that the Torah
implies that he is Tamei and any Kodesh that a Tamei touches becomes Pasul)?
The Tosfos ha'Rosh answers that the Torah does not actually refer to a
Mechusar Kipurim as "Tamei." Rather, it says merely that after he brings his
Korban, he "becomes Tahor." Only something that is explicitly called "Tamei"
can be Posel items of Kodesh.
How, though, are we to understand the Gemara in Yevamos which the Rashash
cites as proof that a Mechusar Kipurim can be Posel Kodesh?
The Gemara there is expressing the opinion of Rava, who argues with Abaye
about this point. Apparently, our Gemara and the Gemara in Pesachim (35a)
side with Abaye, who says that Kodesh that is touched by a Mechusar Kipurim
does not become Pasul mid'Oraisa. (Rava will adopt the Girsa of the Rashash
in the statement of Rebbi Yosi, that Mechusar Kipurim is *Posel* items of