POINT BY POINT OUTLINE
Prepared by Rabbi Yisrael Shaw of Kollel Iyun Hadaf
daf@dafyomi.co.il http://www.dafyomi.co.il
|
CHAGIGAH 22 (11 Iyar) - dedicated by the Feldman family in memory of their mother, ha'Rabbanit Sara Dvosya bas Rav Mordechai (of Milwaukee), on the day of her Yahrzeit.
|
1) THE FIRST STRINGENCY OF "KODESH" OVER "TERUMAH": IMMERSING UTENSILS INSIDE OF OTHER UTENSILS (cont.)
(a) (Rava): Since the fifth stringency is because of
Chatzitzah, it must be that the first one is for another
reason.
1. Rather, the first one is a Gezeirah in order to
prevent one from immersing small utensils (needles
and weaving-forks) in a vessel whose mouth is
smaller than the reed inserted into the mouth of a
leather canteen.
i. (Mikva'os 6:7) A reed, whose hollow is a
diameter of two fingers, is the minimum size
necessary for the passage of water to be
considered linked to, and part of, the Mikvah.
2. Rava holds like R. Nachman who said in the name of
Rabah bar Avuha: There are eleven stringencies in
our Mishnah (since the first and the fifth are
indeed different cases).
(b) Question: What is the difference between R. Ila's reason
and Rava's reason?
(c) Answer: Immersing utensils inside of a Sal or Gargusani
(a very wide-mouthed basket) is the difference.
1. Rava permits it (since there is no fear that the
mouth of the outer vessel will be too small).
2. R. Ila prohibits it (since there is still a problem
of the inner utensil weighing down upon the outer
utensil, being a Chatzitzah.
(d) This Machlokes between Rava and R. Ila is actually a
Machlokes between Tana'im, as recorded in a Beraisa.
1. The Tana Kama holds like Rava.
2. Aba Shaul holds like R. Ila.
(e) Question: If this is the reason (R. Ila or Rava) not to
immerse utensils inside of utensils for Kodesh, then the
same should apply for Terumah and it should be
prohibited!
(f) Answer: The Mishnah is speaking to Chaverim (who follow
the laws of Tum'ah and Taharah), who will be careful when
immersing a utensil within another utensil for Terumah,
and will do it correctly.
1. Even though an Am ha'Aretz might see the Chaver
immersing a utensil within another utensil and he
will go and do it incorrectly, we do not care,
because we do not accept Terumah from an Am
ha'Aretz.
2. Kodesh, though, we must accept from an Am ha'Aretz,
because if we do not, it will cause enmity.
i. Therefore, a Chaver may not immerse a utensil
within another utensil for Kodesh, because an
Am ha'Aretz might see and do the same (but do
it incorrectly), and the Kodesh will be Tamei.
3. We find in a Beraisa that it is R. Yosi who is
concerned for causing enmity.
(g) Question: How can we permit immersing this way for
Terumah -- perhaps a Chaver will borrow the utensil from
an Am ha'Aretz (and it will be Tamei)!
1. A Mishnah (Kelim 10:1) (in which Beis Shamai and
Beis Hillel argue whether an earthenware vessel of
an Am ha'Aretz is able to stop Tum'ah from spreading
from one room to another) shows that Chaverim indeed
borrow utensils from Amei ha'Aretz!
22b----------------------------------------22b
(h) Answer: When a Chaver borrows a utensil from an Am
ha'Aretz, he immerses it again (in case the Am ha'Aretz
had immersed it inside another utensil).
1. Question: But a Beraisa says that an Am ha'Aretz is
trusted when he says he immersed properly (for
Tum'as Mes)!
2. Answer #1 (Abaye): That is only for Tevilah of his
body, but not for Tevilah of a utensil.
i. This refers to the Tevilah at the end of his
seven day Taharah period (when he had Haza'ah
in front of us on both the third and seventh
days).
ii. Since we were stringent upon him at the
beginning (requiring that he wait three days in
front of us before doing Haza'ah, and not
trusting him that he counted three days
already), we were lenient at the end (believing
him when he said he did Tevilah).
3. Answer #2 (Rava): He is believed for Tevilah of a
utensil, but only when he says he never immersed a
utensil within another utensil.
i. But if he says that he has immersed a utensil
within another utensil, we do not trust that
his Tevilah was valid.
2) THE SECOND STRINGENCY OF "KODESH" OVER "TERUMAH": SEPARATE PARTS OF THE UTENSIL BECOME "TAMEI" FOR "TERUMAH", BUT NOT FOR "KODESH"
(a) A utensil (used for Terumah) which became Tamei
(mid'Rabanan) on the outside, is only Tamei on the
outside.
1. The utensil's thick upper edge and handle remain
Tahor.
2. If it became Tamei on the inside, though, the entire
utensil becomes Tamei.
(b) What is the "Beis ha'Tzevitah?"
1. (Shmuel): The place one holds to stretch it out.
2. (R. Yochanan): The place on the utensil for dipping.
(c) (R. Bivi): Utensils used for Kodesh become Tamei
completely, no matter which part of the utensil was
touched by Tum'ah; the same applies to utensils used for
Chulin which was prepared with Taharah of Kodesh.
1. This is consistent with the statement of Rabah bar
Avuha.
2. Rabah bar Avuha said that the first six stringencies
in the Mishnah apply both to Kodesh and to Chulin
that was prepared with Taharah of Kodesh.
Next Daf
Index to Outlines for Maseches Chagigah |
