1)

(a)The Mishnah discusses a vessel that is eligible for Tum'as Medras, incorporating - whatever is designated for Mishkav (lying on), Moshav (sitting on) and Merkav (riding on).

(b)The Tana rules that it is Madaf for (Mei) Chatas - if someone who is Tahor for Chatas moves or carries it (Heset), he renders it Tamei for Chatas ...

(c)... and certainly if he actually touches it (Tiferes Yisrael).

(d)He refers to this Tum'ah as Madaf - because (based on the Pasuk in Bechukosai 'Kol Aleh Nidaf', the noise of a shaking leaf [which is relatively something monor]) it is merely a Chumra de'Rabbanan.

2)

(a)In the above ruling - the Mishnah draws no distinction whatsoever, between vessels that are Tamei and those that are completely Tahor (even for Terumah).

(b)If it is not a vessel, but a person, whom the Tahor person moves or touches - then the person becomes Tamei for Chatas.

(c)The principle that governs the current rulings is that - whatever is Tahor even for Terumah (but not for Chatas) has the Din of a Zav as far as Mei Chatas is concerned.

3)

(a)According to R. Eliezer, the current Chumra is confined to vessels that are eligible for Tum'as Medras, but if it is merely eligible for Tum'as Meis, it is not a Madaf (see Tos. Yom-Tov). The definition of something that is eligible for Tum'as Meis is - a regular K'li that is fit for use.

(b)R. Yehoshua rules that - it has the same Din as a vessel that is subject to Tum'as Medras.

(c)They are arguing specifically about - being Metamei be'Heset (but not be'Maga [see previous Tos. Yom-Tov]).

(d)The Chachamim - rule like R. Yehoshua regarding a Tamei vessel, but like R. Eliezer regarding one that is Tahor.

4)

(a)The Tana now discusses a Madaf that is Elyono shel Zav - which is the top blanket of a series of blankets that cover a Zav.

(b)Min ha'Torah - Elyono shel Zav is not Metamei (only the blanket that actually touches him).

(c)And the Chachamim decreed Tum'ah on it - because of the sheets on which the Zav are lying, which are all Metamei Mishkav ...

(d)... even if there are ten.

5)

(a)The Mishnah declares - Tamei ...

1. ... both someone who is Tahor for Chatas who touches a Madaf, and ...

2. ... a jar that one intends to use for Mei Chatas ...

(b)... due to Chumra de'Chatas.

6)

(a)The Tana declares - Tamei someone who touches Tahor food or drink with his hands, but - Tahor if he touches it with his feet.

(b)He compares Tahor food and drink with regard to Chatas to Tamei food and drink, which render the hands Tamei (mi'de'Rabbanan) ...

(c)... only more so - seeing as (unlike the latter case), the body becomes Tamei too.

7)

(a)Even if he only moved the food or drink with his hands without actually touching it, R. Yehoshua declares him Tamei - since he decrees Heset because of touching.

(b)If he did the same thing with his body however - he remains Tahor (Tiferes Yisrael).

(c)According to the Chachamim - either way, Heset is Tahor.

8)

(a)A Kallal shel Chatas - (an earthenware jug [see also Tos. Yom-Tov]) that touches a Sheretz remains Tahor.

(b)We find it mentioned in the Torah - in Parshas Chayei Sarah (in connection with Rifkah and Eliezer), where Unklus translates "ve'Kadah al Shichmah" as 've'*Kulsah* al Katfah'.

(c)It remains Tahor - because earthenware vessels cannot become Tamei from the outside.

9)

(a)R. Eliezer declares it Tahor even if one places it on top of the Sheretz. The Chachamim - declare it Tamei ...

(b)... because the Torah specifically states " ... and he shall place it outside the camp *in a Tahor place"*.

(c)R. Eliezer disagrees - due to the fact that the vessel that contains the ashes is Tahor.

(d)The Halachah is - like the Chachamim.

10)

(a)R. Yossi and the Chachamim argue along similar lines, but where one places the Kallal shel Chatas on top of Tamei food or drink (see Tos. Yom-Tov) or on top of Kisvei Kodesh. If it touched any of the three - both Tana'im declare it Tahor.

(b)If one places the Kallal shel Chatas on top of one of them - it becomes Tamei, according to the Chachamim.

(c)In the earlier case, where one placed it on top of the Sheretz - R. Yossi declares it Tamei (like the Chachamim of R. Eliezer).

(d)He declare it Tahor, however, if one placed it on top of ...

1. ... Tamei food or drink - because they are only a V'lad ha'Tum'ah, and not an Av, and he issues the same ruling with regard to ...

2. ... Kisvei Kodesh - because they are only Metamei Yadayim mi'de'Rabbanan.

11)

(a)The Mishnah declares someone who is Tahor for Chatas who touches an oven that is Tahor for Kodesh ...

1. ... with his hands - Tamei.

2. ... with his feet - Tahor.

(b)The reason for ...

1. ... the former ruling is - because even someone who is Tahor for Kodshim is Tamei for Chatas, until he Tovels specifically for Chatas.

2. ... the distinction - because, like in the case of food and drink (in Mishnah 2), the Chachamim confined their decree to someone who touched with his hands.

12)

(a)If a person is standing on top of an oven holding either a jar containing Mei Chatas or a pole with a Kallal shel Chatas attached to either end, all of which are extended to outside the oven, R. Akiva declares them Tahor - because the water and the ashes are not actually resting on the oven.

(b)The Chachamim declare him Tamei - because, since the person is holding them, it is as if they are resting on the oven, too.

(c)The Halachah is - like the Chachamim.

13)

(a)R. Akiva and the Chachamim also argue in the reverse case, where the same person is standing next to the oven holding the same jar or pole, which he then passes over the oven, where ...

1. ... R. Akiva declares it Tamei, and ...

2. ... the Chachamim, Tahor.

(b)The basis of their Machlokes is - whether we apply Kelutah K'mi she'Hunchah Dami (something that passes across an area is considered as if it is resting there [Rebbi Akiva]) or not (the Chachamim [see Tos. Yom-Tov]).

(c)Both Tana'im rule however, that if a person stands on top of an oven holding ...

1. ... an empty jar that is Tahor for Mei Chatas or ...

2. ... water that has been designated for Mei Chatas - it remains Tahor ...

(d)... because the prohibition of placing Mei Chatas on a Tamei place is confined to the ashes and to water which has already been mixed with the ashes.

14)

(a)The Mishnah rules that if a jar of Chatas touches a jar containing ...

1. ... Mei Chatas - the latter becomes Tamei.

2. ... Kodesh or Terumah - the latter remains Tahor.

(b)The reason for ...

1. ... the latter ruling is based on the principle that - a vessel can only receive Tum'ah via an Av ha'Tum'ah, and the jar containing Chatas is only a Rishon.

2. ... the former ruling is - because the one exception to the principle is Mei Chatas, which can receive Tum'ah from a V'lad (mi'de'Rabbanan).

(c)If he is carrying the jar containing the Mei Chatas in one hand and the jar containing Kodesh or Terumah in the other - then both (see Tos. Yom-Tov) become Tamei ...

(d)... the former - because the carrier became Tamei for Chatas (via his hands) by touching a Terumah vessel, and the latter, because he became Tamei by carrying Mei Chatas.

15)

(a)In the previous case, but where the person is holding both jars by means of a piece of paper, the Tana - they both remain Tahor ...

(b)... because he is not touching the Kodesh or the Terumah jar with his hands (and even though the Mei Chatas renders him Tamei by carrying it, it cannot render the Terumah Tamei).

(c)However, if he is holding the Chatas jar by means of a piece of paper and the other jar in his hands, they are both Tamei - because a. Terumah is Tamei regarding Chatas, and b. Mei Chatas receives Tum'ah via a V'lad (as we explained earlier).

16)

(a)In the reverse case, where he is holding the Kodesh or Terumah jar by means of a piece of paper and the Chatas jar in his hands, the Tana Kama - declares both jars Tahor ...

(b)... because he is not touching the Kodesh or the Terumah jar with his hands (and even though the Mei Chatas renders him Tamei by carrying it, it cannot render itself Tamei).

(c)R. Yehoshua however, declares the Mei Chatas Tamei - following his own ruling in the Tosefta, that a Tahor for Chatas who moves a key that is Tahor for Terumah, becomes Tamei, in case he forgets and moves something that is Tamei ...

(d)... and the same ruling will apply in the earlier case, where the person is holding both jars by means of a piece of paper (see also Tos. Yom-Tov).

(e)The Halachah is - like the Chachamim.

17)

(a)Finally, in a case where someone touches both of the above jars whilst they are lying on the ground, the Chatas jar is Tamei, whereas that of Kodesh or Terumah is Tahor. The ...

1. ... Chatas jar is Tamei - because the person became Tamei for Chatas when touching the jar of Kodesh or Terumah.

2. ... Kodesh or the Terumah jar is Tahor - since he did not touch the Mei Chatas (only the jar).

(b)According to the Chachamim, the same will apply in the event that he moves them. R. Yehoshua holds - that a Tahor for Chatas who moves a key that is Tahor for Terumah ...

(c)... becomes Tamei (as we explained earlier).