POINT BY POINT OUTLINE
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
1) WHEN HALF OF YISRAEL ARE TEHORIM (cont.)
(a) (Beraisa #1): If Yisrael was half Tehorim and half
Temei'im, Tehorim bring by themselves and Temei'im by
2) TIMES WHEN TEMEI'IM CANNOT BRING PESACH SHENI
(b) If there were more Temei'im than Tehorim, even one more,
they [may all] bring b'Tum'ah, for we do not divide a
(c) R. Eliezer ben Masya says, the Tzibur is not considered
Tamei on account of an individual - "Lo Suchal Lizbo'ach
Es ha'Posach b'Echad" (on account of one person).
(d) R. Shimon says, even if one Shevet is Tamei and the
others are Tehorim, Tehorim bring by themselves and
Temei'im by themselves.
1. Question: What is his reason?
(e) R. Yehudah says, if one Shevet is Tamei and the others
are Tehorim, Pesach is brought b'Tumah, for we do not
divide a Korban Tzibur
2. Answer: He holds that each Shevet is called a Kahal
1. He holds that each Shevet is called a Kehal; it is
as if Yisrael is half Tahor and half Tamei, and we
do not divide a Korban Tzibur, therefore all bring
(f) (Rav): If Yisrael was half Tehorim and half Temei'im, we
Metamei one person with a Sheretz [so Temei'im will be
the majority and everyone can bring Pesach together
(g) Question: We should leave it half-half - Rav holds that
in such a case Tehorim bring by themselves and Temei'im
(h) Answer #1: The case is, there was one more Tamei than
(i) Question: If so, we need not Metamei anyone - Temei'im
are already the majority, everyone can bring it together
(j) Answer: He holds like R. Eliezer ben Masya, who says that
the Tzibur is not considered Tamei on account of an
(k) Objection: The previous question returns - we should not
Metamei anyone; Tehorim will bring by themselves and
Temei'im by themselves!
(l) Answer #2: Rather, he holds that if there is a Tana who
holds like the first Tana, who does not allow everyone to
bring together b'Tum'ah when Yisrael is half-half, and
like R. Yehudah who holds that we do not divide a Korban
Tzibur, then we Metamei one of them with a Sheretz.
(m) (Ula): We send one of the Tehorim to Derech Rechokah.
(n) Question: Why doesn't he say to Metamei him with a
(o) Answer: he holds that we slaughter and Zorek for a Tamei
Sheretz [since he can eat at night, therefore he is
(p) Question: Why doesn't he say to Metamei him through a
(q) Answer: If so, he will not be able to bring Chagigah [of
the 15th, since he will be Tamei for seven days].
(r) Question: Since we send him away, he cannot bring Pesach!
(s) Answer: He can bring Pesach Sheni.
1. Question: Likewise, if we would Metamei him b'Mes,
he could bring Chagigah on the seventh day of
Pesach, for it will be the eighth day from his
(t) Objection (Rav Nachman): Ula's counsel is unreasonable -
who will agree to uproot his tent and go away?!
2. Answer: Ula holds that the last six days one may
bring Chagigah are compensation for the first day -
only one who could have brought it on the first day
may bring it later. (Sha'agas Aryeh (65) - we are
not concerned that for six days he will be unable to
fulfill Simchah by eating Shelamim, for mid'Oraisa
one can fulfill Simchah in other ways, e.g. meat and
(a) (Rav): If most of Yisrael were Zavim and the minority
were Tamei Mes, [even] those who were Tamei Mes do not
bring either Pesach:
1. They do not bring Pesach Rishon, for they are a
(b) Question (Shmuel): How do you fulfill "V'Ya'asu Venei
Yisrael Es ha'Posach b'Mo'ado"?
2. They do not bring Pesach Sheni, for it is brought
only when the Tzibur brings Pesach Rishon.
1. Counter-question (Rav): According to you, what
happens when all of Yisrael are Zavim?!
(c) Answer: Likewise, when most are Zavim and the minority is
Tamei Mes we cannot fulfill it!
2. Answer: You must agree that then we cannot fulfill
(d) (Rav Huna): If most were Tamei Mes and the minority were
Zavim, there is no compensation [on Pesach Sheni for the
Zavim [or anyone else] who did not bring] Pesach ha'Ba
(e) (Rav Ada bar Ahavah): There is compensation for Pesach
(f) Suggestion: Rav Ada holds that there is compensation
because he holds that Tum'ah Hutrah b'Tzibur (it is
considered as if Pesach was brought b'Taharah, therefore
there is compensation for other Temei'im); Rav Huna holds
that there is no compensation because he holds that
Tum'ah is Nidcheh b'Tzibur. (Tosfos - the Torah commands
a Tamei to bring Pesach Sheni only when "Ish Ish Ki
Yihyeh Tamei...", i.e. he is Tamei but the Tzibur is
(g) Rejection: No, all agree that Tum'ah is Nidcheh b'Tzibur
- Rav Huna holds that only [Pesach brought in] Taharah
detains people to Pesach Sheni, Rav Ada holds that even
Tum'ah detains people to Pesach Sheni.
(h) (Rav Mani bar Patish): If a third of Yisrael were Zavim,
a third were Tehorim, and a third were Tamei Mes, [even]
those who were Tamei Mes do not bring either Pesach:
3) WHEN THERE IS RITZUY FOR TUM'AH
1. They do not bring Pesach Rishon, for they are a
minority (the Zavim join with the Tehorim to
2. They do not bring Pesach Sheni, for the majority did
not bring Pesach Rishon, and a majority is not
detained to Pesach Sheni.
(a) (Mishnah): If blood of Pesach was thrown and then it
became known that it (Tosfos - the blood; Rashi - or
meat) was Tamei, the Tzitz is Meratzeh;
(b) It is not Meratzeh if the owner became Tamei (he must
bring Pesach Sheni);
1. It was taught that the Tzitz is Meratzeh Pesach and
Korbanos Nazir if the blood became Tamei, not if he
(c) If he became Tamei through Tum'as ha'Tehom, the Tzitz
is Meratzeh. (Rashi - this is a Tum'ah which at the time
the person became Tamei, perhaps no one ever knew that
there was Tum'ah there; Rambam - at the time, no one knew
(d) (Gemara) Inference: It is Meratzeh because he did not
find out until after Zerikah - but if he knew at the time
of Zerikah, it is not Meratzeh.
(e) Contradiction (Beraisa): The Tzitz is Meratzeh for blood,
meat and Chelev that became Tamei, whether [Zerikah was]
b'Shogeg or b'Mezid or b'Ones, for a Korban Yachid or a
(f) Resolution #1 (Ravina): The Beraisa discusses the Tum'ah
(the Tzitz is Meratzeh even if they became Tamei
b'Mezid), our Mishnah discusses the intent during Zerikah
(it is not Meratzeh for Mezid. Tosfos - mid'Oraisa,
whether it was Shogeg or Mezid, it is Meratzeh -
mid'Rabanan, it is not Meratzeh to allow eating the meat,
but he does not bring Pesach Sheni.)
(g) Resolution #2 (R. Shila): There is Ritzuy for Zerikah
whether it was Shogeg or Mezid; there is Ritzuy only if
the Tum'ah was b'Shogeg.
(h) Question (against R. Shila - Beraisa): ...Whether [Tum'ah
was] b'Shogeg or b'Mezid.
(i) Answer: No - it means that if the Tum'ah was b'Shogeg,
whether Zerikah was b'Shogeg or b'Mezid it is Meratzeh.
(j) Question: The Mishnah says that it is Meratzeh if he did
not find out until after Zerikah - but if he knew at the
time of Zerikah, it is not!
(k) Answer: Really, it is Meratzeh in either case - it
discusses finding out after Zerikah for parallel
structure with the Seifa, which teaches that if the owner
became Tamei it is not Meratzeh [even] if he did not find
out until after Zerikah.
(l) (Mishnah): If he became Tamei through Tum'as ha'Tehom...
(m) Question (Rami bar Chama): If a Kohen offering Korbanos
[Nazir or Pesach] was Nitma Tum'as ha'Tehom, are they
1. Perhaps the leniency only applies to the owner - or,
perhaps it is a law of Zevachim, it applies to the
Kohen and owner alike!
(n) Answer (Rava - R. Chiya's Beraisa): Tum'as ha'Tehom
applies only to Tum'as Mes.
1. Question: What does this come to exclude?
(o) Rejection (and Answer #2 to Question (1) - Rav Yosef):
Indeed, it discusses Tum'ah of the owner regarding Pesach
- however, it comes to exclude Tum'as ha'Tehom of Zivah
(retroactive Tum'ah on account of a later sighting - at
the time, no one knew about it), it is not Meratzeh.
2. Answer #1: It excludes Tum'as Sheretz.
3. Question: Whose Tum'ah does it discuss?
4. Answer #1A: It discusses Tum'ah of the owner.
5. It cannot discuss Nazir, for the only Tum'ah that
interrupts Nezirus [or invalidates the Korban] is
Tum'as Mes - "V'Chi Yamus Mes Alav"!
i. Rather, it must discuss Pesach.
6. Objection: This is according to the opinion that we
do not slaughter and Zorek for one who is Tamei
Sheretz - but according to the opinion that we do,
there is no Chidush of Tum'as ha'Tehom - even known
Tum'ah is Meratzeh!
7. Answer #1B: Rather, it discusses Tum'ah of the
Index to Outlines for Maseches Pesachim