Previous daf

1)

(a) How does the Gemara attempt to prove that Rebbi Akiva, who holds of a Shelishi le'Tum'ah by Chulin, does not hold like Rebbi Yossi, (who holds of a Revi'i ba'Kodesh from a Kal va'Chomer)?

(b) On what basis does the Gemara query this proof?

(c) Rav Ashi nevertheless proves it from the Mishnah in Chagigah, which rules that a. a vessel combines all that is in it by Kodesh, but not by Terumah; and b. that a Revi'i is Pasul by Kodesh, but not by Terumah.
What does the first statement mean?

(d) Rav Ashi's proof is based on Rebbi Yochanan, who connects the above Mishnah to another Mishnah of Rebbi Akiva.
What does Rebbi Akiva say there (about a Tevul Yom), and what is the proof?

(a) Why does Rebbi Akiva not hold of Rebbi Yossi's Kal va'Chomer?

(b) How do we find a Revi'i be'Tum'ah d'Oraysa (according to Rebbi Akiva) by Kodesh?

(c) Rebbi Yossi learns a Revi'i ba'Kodesh from a Kal va'Chomer.
Is this d'Oraysa or mi'de'Rabbanan, and how do we know this?

(a) How does Rebbi Yossi (who holds that the fact that liquid can transmit Tum'ah is only mi'de'Rabbanan) find a case of a Shelishi le'Tum'ah d'Oraysa by Kodesh, and what does he do with the principle of 'Ein Tum'ah Oseh Keyotze Bo'?

(b) From where do Rebbi Yossi and his colleagues learn that food renders liquid Tamei (mi'd'Oraysa), seeing as they do not hold of 'Yitma Yitamei'?

(c) In view of the fact that Rebbi Yossi does not hold of 'Yitma Yitamei' (and liquid does not transmit Tum'ah) , how could Rebbi Yirmiyah (above, end of 15b) explain that Rebbi Yossi follows his own reasoning - that liquid transmits Tum'ah mi'd'Oraysa?

(a) How can frankincense and coal, which are not food, be subject to Tum'as Ochlin?

(b) The proof for Tziruf K'li lies in a Mishnah, which renders all the ingredients of a vessel (containing flour, incense, frankincense and coal), Tamei, should a Tevul-Yom touch one of them.
How do we know that that is because of Tziruf K'li, and not because each one transmits Tum'ah to the next one?

(c) What causes the Gemara to say that, according to Rebbi Yochanan, Tziruf K'li is only mi'de'Rabbanan?

(d) What does Rav Chanin learn from the Pasuk in Naso "Kaf Achas Asarah Zahav Melei'ah Ketores"?

(a) What is the difference between a Tamei needle that is found in the flesh of a Kodshim animal, and one that is found in its dung?

(b) What does Rebbi Akiva derive from the fact that this Mishnah in Iduyos renders the hands Tahor in both cases?

(c) Why did Rebbi Akiva use the expression 'Zochim'?

6)

(a) What is wrong with the suggestion that Tum'as Kelim mi'de'Rabbanan had not yet been decreed when this Mishnah was learnt?

(b) In that case, why did Rebbi Akiva not include Tum'as Kelim in his statement (see 5b)?

(c) Some say that Chazal did not decree Tum'ah on spittle that is found in Yerushalayim, others say that they did not decree Tum'ah on vessels that are found there. How does that present us with a problem from the Mishnah regarding the needle that was found in the flesh of a Kodshim animal?

(d) The Gemara gives two answers to this Kashya: Rav Yehudah quoting Rav, answers that the needle, which they recognised, was Tamei Mes.
What is the second answer?

(a) Why does an Amora need to inform us that Chazal did not decree Tum'ah on spittle that is found in Yerushalayim - when we have already learnt this in a Mishnah in Shekalim?

(b) One can ask a similar Kashya on the other opinion (that they did not decree Tum'ah on vessels that are found there).
Why can we not infer this from the Mishnah in Chagiga, which renders vessels found in Yerushalayim on the way down to the Mikveh, Tamei (suggesting that vessels found elsewhere are Tahor)?

(c) Then why does the Tana need to add that vessels found on the way up from the Mikvah are Tahor.
What can we infer from here, and what does it come to exclude?

(a) According to Rav, the needle that rendered the flesh of the Kodshim animal, Tamei, was Tamei Mes.
Why did the Gemara initially think that it should also be Metamei the person and the vessels?

(b) Why then, is this *not* the case?

(c) On what grounds does the Gemara query the inference that, in an equivalent case in a Reshus ha'Yachid, the person and the vessels would be Tamei?

(d) We answer this question with a principle of Rebbi Yochanan.
What does Rebbi Yochanan say?