Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) THE STATUS OF CHULIN PREPARED WITH THE TAHARAH OF KODESH

(a) (Tana Kama of Beraisa) Chulin prepared with Taharah of Kodesh is treated like Chulin (with no special Dinim).
(b) (R. Elazar b. R. Tzadok) It is treated like Terumah.
(c) (Tana of our Mishnah) It is treated like Kodesh.

1. The Mishnah states that "the clothing of Yochanan b. Gudgeda -- who ate Chulin with the Taharah of Kodesh all his life -- was considered a Madres for Chatas."
2. This implies that it was a Madres only for Chatas, but not for Kodesh.
3. This teaches that Chulin preparead with the Taharah of Kodesh is treated like Kodesh.

(a) (R. Yochanan b. Elazar) One who dropped his handkerchief and asked someone else to pick it up and return it to him -- the handkerchief is Tamei.

1. The person who picked it up did not bother to guard it from Tum'ah, because he assumed the owner was Tamei.

(b) (R. Yonasan b. Amram) If one inadvertently donned his Shabbos clothes thinking that they were his weekday clothes, the clothes are Tamei.
(c) (R. Elazar b. Tzadok) It once happened that the clothes of two women got mixed up at the bathhouse, and each donned the other's clothing, and R. Akiva declared both sets of clothing to be Tamei.
(d) Question: These three cases imply that one who guards an item (from Tum'ah) thinking that it was another item (or while it was in someone else's hands), it is not considered guarded from Tum'ah!

1. But two Beraisos say that it *is* considered guarded as long as he had in mind to guard it!?

(e) Answer: It is not a question on two of the three cases mentioned.

1. It is not a question on the case of R. Elazar b. Tzadok.

(i) In that case, each woman assumes that the other woman is an Am ha'Aretz (who is not careful about Tum'ah).
(ii) Hence, she took her mind off of guarding the other woman's clothing from Tum'ah.

2. It is not a question on the case of R. Yonasan b. Amram.

(i) A person guards his Shabbos clothes from Tum'ah with more diligence.
(ii) Hence, when he guards them only with the diligence given to weekday clothes, it is considered a Hesech ha'Da'as from guarding his Shabbos clothes.

(e) Question: It is a difficulty, though, on R. Yonasan b. Elazar!

1. Even though the person who picked it up did not guard it from Tum'ah, the owner should have guarded it while it was in his friend's hands!
2. Why, then, is it Tamei?

(f) Answer: There is a Chazakah that one does not guard an item from Tum'ah that is in the hands of someone else.

3) MISHNAH: ELEVEN WAYS IN WHICH KODESH IS MORE STRINGENT THAN TERUMAH

(a) Kodesh is more stringent than Terumah in eleven different ways, as listed.

1. We may immerse utensils inside of other utensils in a Mikvah for Terumah, but not for Kodesh.
2. Separate parts of the utensil become Tamei for Terumah, but not for Kodesh.
3. One may carry Terumah while carrying a Madres, but one may not carry Kodesh.
4. The clothing of those who eat Terumah are a Madres for Kodesh.
5. When immersing garments for Kodesh, one must first untie them and dry them, but for Terumah one may immerse them while they are knotted (and/or wet).
6. Utensils that were completed with Taharah still need Tevilah for Kodesh, but not for Terumah.
7. A utensil joins all of its contents together for Kodesh, but not for Terumah.
8. Tum'ah of Kodesh extends to a fourth level, while that of Terumah extends only to a third level.
9. For Terumah, if one hand became Tamei, the other remains Tahor, while for Kodesh, one must immerse both hands, because one hand is Metamei the other for Kodesh but not for Terumah.
10. One may eat Terumah foods that are dry, with hands that are Tamei, but not Kodesh foods.