7) click for question
(a) Our Mishnah discusses a case where someone became Tamei in the Azarah and was aware of this. In order to be Chayav a Korban Oleh ve'Yored, he would then have to forget - either that he was Tamei, or that he was in the Beis-Hamikdash, or both.
(b) There are also three possibilities regarding the time he remains in the Azarah that will render him Chayav. One is if he prostrates himself there before leaving - the second, if he remains there for the time it would have taken him to do so; and the third, if he exited the Azarah taking any route other than the shortest.
(c) He will not however, be Chayav - if he leaves the Azarah by the shortest route, but taking longer to reach the exit than the time it would take him to prostrate himself.
8) click for question
(a) This leniency is based on - the Mitzvas Asei (in Naso) "vi'Yeshalchu min ha'Machaneh ... ve'Chol Tamei la'Nafesh".
(b) Under similar circumstances, one would be Chayav Kareis regarding an Asei by Nidah (which will be cited in the Sugya) - if, in the middle of a Bi'ah, his wife informs him that she has become a Nidah, and he exits immediately ...
(c) ... because of the pleasure one derives from the actual exiting.
(d) What one must therefore do is - to wait for the Milah to go limp, and then to exit.
9) click for question
(a) Rebbi ...
1. ... Eliezer learns from the juxtaposition of "O be'Nivlas Sheretz ... ve'Ne'elam Mimenu" - that one is only Chayav for He'elam Sheretz (Tum'ah), but not for He'elam Mikdash (or Kodesh).
2. ... Akiva learns from the Pasuk "ve'Ne'elam Mimenu ve'hu Tamei" - that one is only Chayav for He'elam Tum'ah, but not for He'elam Mikdash (or Kodesh [like Rebbi Eliezer learned from the previous juxtaposition, and the Sugya will discuss the ramifications of their Machlokes shortly]).
(b) Rebbi Yishmael learns from "ve'Ne'elam" "ve'Ne'elam" - that he is Chayav a Korban Oleh ve'Yored even for He'elam Mikdash and Kodesh as well.
10) click for question
(a) The problem Rav Papa has with the Lashon of our Mishnah 'Yedi'os ha'Tum'ah Shetayim she'Hein Arba' is - that there are actually six cases all in all (since each case of Mikdash and Kodesh, besides the Yedi'ah of Tum'ah, requires Techilas Yedi'ah and Sof Yedi'ah).
(b) Initially, he expected the Tana to say 'Shetayim she'Hein Sheish', and not 'Shetayim she'Hein Shemonah' (in spite of the fact that He'elam Tum'ah by both Tum'as Mikdash Tum'as and Kodesh also requires Yedi'ah bi'Techilah and Yedi'ah be'Sof) - because Yedi'as ha'Tum'ah is exactly the same by Kodesh as by Mikdash, so the two are counted as one.
(c) Rav Papa himself concludes that in fact, there are eight cases, like Abaye initially retorted, and the Tana states 'four' (according to ...
1. ... the first Lashon) - because he is only concerned with the second Yedi'ah, which actually creates the Chiyuv Korban.
2. ... the second Lashon) - because he is only concerned with the first Yedi'ah, which is peculiar to Korban Oleh ve'Yored (whereas the second is common to all Korbanos).
11) click for question
(a) Rav Papa asks whether a person who forgot Hilchos Tum'ah will be obligated to bring a Korban Oleh ve'Yored. The case cannot be where he touched a dead lizard, but thought that it is a frog that is Tamei and not a lizard - because that is an explicit Pasuk, and every child knows the real facts. Consequently, it is not considered a Ha'alamah.
(b) Rav Papa is referring to a case where the sinner knew exactly that he had touched a piece of Sheretz, and that that piece measured a 'k'Adashah' (a lentil), only he thought that the Shi'ur Tum'ah of a Sheretz is larger than a 'k'Adashah'.
(c) The She'eilah is that even though he did not know the Shi'ur Tum'ah, he might nevertheless be Chayav to bring a Korban - because he knew that a Sheretz is Metamei.
(d) The outcome of the She'eilah is -'Teiku' (Tishbi Yetaretz Kushyos ve'Ibayos').
12) click for question
(a) Rebbi Yirmiyah asks whether - it is considered He'elam Mikdash in a case where a ben Bavel arrives in Eretz Yisrael and, in a state of Tum'ah, he enters the Beis-Hamikdash without being aware that that is where he is.
(b) Rebbi Yirmiyah cannot have asked this She'eilah according to ...
1. ... Rebbi Akiva (even though he requires Yedi'ah bi'Techilah) - because he does not incorporate He'elam Mikdash in the Din of Korban Oleh ve'Yored (as we just learned in our Mishnah).
2. ... Rebbi Yishmael (even though he incorporates He'elam Mikdash in the Din of Korban Oleh ve'Yored) - because he does not require a Yedi'ah bi'Techilah (as we will learn later in the Masechta).
(c) In fact, Rebbi Yirmiyah asks his She'eilah - according to Rebbi (who both incorporates He'elam Mikdash in the Din of Korban Oleh ve'Yored and requires a Yedi'ah bi'Techilah).
(d) The two sides of the She'eilah (which, like the previous one, remains unanswered) are - whether, in spite of the fact that he knew about Tum'as Mikdash, it is not even called 'Yedi'as Beis Rabo' in the case of Tum'ah (where he once knew what a Sheretz was and that touching it will render him Tamei, but forgot) - since in our case, he never knew that where he was standing was the location of the Beis-Hamikdash (and that a Tamei person standing where he was would be Chayav).
Index to Review Questions and Answers for Maseches Shevuos