Previous daf

1) Both the Rabbanan and Rebbi Shimon derive their respective opinions from Sotah. The Rabbanan learn from Sotah that a Safek Tum'ah has the Din of Vaday.

(a) How is that inherent in the Dinim of Sotah?

(b) Why, according to the Rabbanan, is a Safek Tum'ah (in the case of Mikveh) Asur even in a Reshus ha'Rabim? Why do they not learn from Sotah, who is Asur only if she transgressed in a Reshus ha'Yachid?

(c) When do the Rabbanan apply the principle 'Safek Tum'ah bi'Reshus ha'Rabim, Tahor'?

(a) But why is that? Surely, we should learn from a Sotah, who is considered Vaday, that Safek Tum'ah has a Din of Vaday, in which case there should be no distinction drawn between Reshus ha'Yachid and Reshus ha'Rabim?

(b) Why then, does Rebbi Shimon say (by Mikveh) that a Safek Tum'ah is not Vaday Tamei?

(a) What does this mean, and why does Hillel disagree?

(b) How about a woman who sees blood when she is asleep, and how about a Shotah?

(c) If Shamai refers to normal women and not to Shotos, then why does he say *Kol* ha'Nashim?

(d) Is it possible to reconcile our Mishnah, which is Metamei a bloodstain on a woman's clothes, with Shamai, who says that, if the blood would have emerged from the woman's body, then she would have been aware of it?

(a) What does Hillel say to that?

(b) What is a Moch, and why does Abaye maintain that Shamai must agree by a woman who uses a Moch, that she is indeed Temei'ah retroactively?

(c) What does Rava say to that?

(d) When does Rava concede that Shamai agrees by a woman who uses a Moch, and why?

(a) What is the difference between the first reason in Shamai (Chezkas Taharah), and the two subsequent ones?

(b) What is the difference between the second reason (a woman is aware) and the third (the blood would have emerged earlier)?

6) If Shamai's reason is because the blood should have emerged earlier, then why does he agree, that if someone took from one side of a box of Taharos, and they later found a dead Sheretz on the other side - the Taharos are Tamei retroactively?

7) Rava finally explains that Shamai is lenient by a Nidah, because of Bitul Piryah ve'Rivyah'.

(a) What does he mean?

(b) How can we reconcile both Beraisos?

(c) Why does Hillel not like Shamai's argument of 'Bitul Piryah ve'Rivyah'?

(d) How does Shamai parry Hillel's argument?

The Gemara rejects the initial answer - that Chizkiyah (and Rebbi Yochanan, who argue in this point) are speaking about a box which has no rim.

(a) Why does the Gemara reject that answer, and what is the Gemara's first conclusive answer?

(b) The Gemara quotes a Beraisa which rules that, if a Sheretz was found in the tenth bucketful of water, the first nine bucketsful are Tahor. Resh Lakish, quoting Rebbi Yanai, established that the Beraisa was speaking when the bucket had no rim. Otherwise, the water in the first nine bucketsful would be Tamei.

(c) Does this mean that Chizkiyah does not agree with Rebbi Yanai's explanation? (two answers)

(d) What is now the Machlokes between Rebbi Yochanan and Chizkiyah?