Question (Mishnah - R. Yosi): If slaughter and Zerikah [of Pesach] were done for a Shomeres Yom k'Neged Yom (see note 47 in Appendix) [after she immersed] on the day after she saw blood, and she saw blood later that day, she may not eat Pesach at night, but she is exempt from Pesach Sheni.

Question: What is the reason?

Suggestion: He holds that the Tzitz is Meratzeh [for Tum'as Zivah]!

Answer to both questions: No, he holds that she is not Teme'ah retroactively [so she was Tehorah at the time of Zerikah].

Question: He holds that she is Teme'ah retroactively!

(Beraisa - R. Yosi): If slaughter and Zerikah [of Pesach] were done for a Zav [who has seen two emissions, after he immersed] on the seventh [clean] day, and for a Shomeres Yom k'Neged Yom on her second day (the day after she saw blood), and each had a sighting later that day:

Even though they retroactively Metamei [to be an Av ha'Tum'ah] Mishkav and Moshav, they are exempt from Pesach Sheni.

Answer: The retroactive Tumah is mid'Rabanan (mid'Oraisa, they are Temei'im only from the time they see).

R. Oshiya also holds that the retroactive Tumah is mid'Rabanan.

(R. Oshaya): If a Zav had an emission on [what would have been] his seventh [clean] day, it is Soser (wipes out the days he counted, he must start counting seven clean days from the beginning);

(R. Yochanan): It is Soser only the seventh day itself!

Objection: This is illogical! If it nullifies the day, it should nullify the entire count; if not, the count should be complete!

Correction: Rather, R. Yochanan says that even the seventh day counts.

R. Oshaya: R. Yosi holds like you.

Question: But R. Yosi said that they retroactively Metamei Mishkav and Moshav!

Answer: We must say that the retroactive Tumah is mid'Rabanan.

Question: If so, Tum'as ha'Tehom does not apply to Zivah - if so, what do we exclude from '[Tum'as ha'Tehom is Meratzeh] only regarding Tum'as Mes' [in R. Chiya's Beraisa (80B)]?

Answer: We must answer like Rava [above] - it excludes Tum'as ha'Tehom of the Kohen.

Rejection (and answer to Objection 3:l:7, 80B): Really, it discusses Tum'ah of the owner regarding Pesach - the Tana holds that we do not slaughter and Zorek for one who is Tamei Sheretz.

Question: (R. Yosi holds that mid'Oraisa, the Tum'ah is not retroactive - this is because part (even a moment, at the beginning or end) of the second day before she saw counts like a full day of Shimur, so the next sighting starts a new Zivah.) According to R. Yosi, how can a woman become a full Zavah [so that three days of blood will be considered consecutive]?

Answer #1: She spurted blood continuously [from day one until day three].

Answer #2 She saw all of Bein ha'Shemashos on two consecutive days (this includes the last moment of day and the first moment of night, i.e. she saw on days two and three before even a moment of Shimur).

Question (Rav Yosef): Is Tum'as ha'Tehom permitted to a Kohen offering the Tamid? (If we learn that he was Nitma Tum'as ha'Tehom, may he offer it, even though there are Tahor Kohanim?)

If you will say that it is permitted to a Kohen offering Korbanos [Nazir or Pesach], perhaps it is a tradition only regarding Nazir and Pesach - or, perhaps we learn to the Tamid!

Answer #1 (Rabah): We learn from a Kal va'Chomer - Tum'as ha'Tehom is permitted even where known Tum'ah is not (Nazir or a Tamei individual regarding Pesach) - all the more so it is permitted where known Tum'ah is permitted (the Tamid, if there are no Tehorim to offer it)!

Objection: We may not learn from [a Kal va'Chomer from] a tradition from Sinai!

(Beraisa - R. Eliezer (to R. Akiva)): [The Tum'ah of] a bone the size of a barley seed is a tradition from Sinai - you cannot learn a Kal va'Chomer to a Revi'is of blood (that its Tum'ah is Soser Nezirus) from a tradition!

Answer #2 (Rava): We learn from a Gezerah Shavah "B'Mo'ado-B'Mo'ado" from Pesach.

Question: What is the source for Tum'as ha'Tehom [regarding Nazir and Pesach? This was asked before Rav Yosef's question - he already knew the conclusion, that it is a tradition.]

Answer #1 (R. Elazar): [Regarding Nazir it says] "V'Chi Yamus Mes Alav" - the Tum'ah was clear to him.

Question: This answers regarding Nazir - what is the source for Pesach?

Answer #2 (R. Yochanan): "V'Derech Rechokah Lachem" - [also Tum'ah must be] clear to you.

Answer #3 (Reish Lakish): Tum'ah must be like a Derech (road), i.e. exposed.

Refutation (of all of them - Beraisa): Tum'as ha'Tehom is one which was not known to anyone in the world.

R. Elazar says that if the Tum'ah was not clear to the one that became Tamei, it is Tum'as ha'Tehom;

R. Yochanan says that if the Tum'ah was not clear 'Lachem' [to at least two people], it is Tum'as ha'Tehom;

Reish Lakish says that any Tum'ah not clear to everyone [like a road] is Tum'as ha'Tehom!

Conclusion: Tum'as ha'Tehom is a tradition - the verses brought are mere Asmachtos.

Version #1 (Mar bar Rav Ashi): There is Ritzuy for Tum'as ha'Tehom only if he found out after Zerikah, but not if he found out beforehand.

Objection (Beraisa): One who finds a [previously unknown] corpse [underneath and] lying across the width of a path [on which he walked] is Tamei regarding Terumah, but Tahor regarding Pesach and Nezirus.

Tamei and Tahor refer to the future [even if he found out before Zerikah, Zerikah may be done]!

Version #2: Rather, Mar bar Rav Ashi taught that Ritzuy for Tum'as ha'Tehom is not only if he found out after Zerikah - rather, even if he found out beforehand it is Meratzeh.

(Beraisa): One who finds a corpse across the width of a path is Tamei regarding Terumah, but Tahor regarding Pesach and Nezirus.

This is only if there is no room to pass without touching, moving or towering above the Mes - if not, [this is Safek Tum'ah in Reshus ha'Rabim,] he is Tahor even regarding Terumah.

This is only if the Mes is intact - but if it was in pieces, he is Tahor - perhaps he passed between the pieces.

This is if it is not in a grave - a grave joins the pieces inside, it is as if the Mes is intact.

This is (Gra - the last two leniencies are) only if he walked [without a load], but if he carried a load or rode, he is Tamei - one who walks can avoid touching or towering above the Mes, but one who carries a load or rides cannot.

This is only regarding Tum'as ha'Tehom - but regarding a known Tum'ah he is Tamei;

Tum'as ha'Tehom is one which was not known to anyone in the world.

If the Mes was found covered in straw, dirt or pebbles, it is Tum'as ha'Tehom (no one can see it - perhaps a mound fell on the person, and no one ever knew);

If it was found in water, even in cracks between rocks, it is not Tum'as ha'Tehom, for one who looks can see it.

The law of Tum'as ha'Tehom only applies to [Tum'as] Mes.

(Mishnah): If the entire Pesach or most of it became Tamei, it is burned in front of the Mikdash using wood of (i.e. intended for) the Ma'arachah (fire on the Mizbe'ach. The wood is Hukdash on this condition, so there will not be Me'ilah);

Nosar [of a Tahor Pesach] or a Tamei minority of a Pesach is burned in the Chatzeros or on the roofs of the Benei Chaburah, using their own wood;

Stingy people burn it in front of the Mikdash in order to benefit from Etzei ha'Ma'arachah.

(Gemara) Question: What is the reason [to burn it in the Mikdash using Etzei ha'Ma'arachah when the majority became Tamei]?

Answer (R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina): This is to embarrass the Chaburah [for not being more careful.]

(Mishnah): A Tamei minority...

Contradiction (Mishnah): Similarly, if one left Yerushalayim and remembered that he is carrying Kodesh meat (it is now Pasul):

If he already passed Tzofim (from where one can see the Mikdash), he burns it where he is;

If not, he returns to burn it in front of the Mikdash from Etzei ha'Ma'arachah.