(a)Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim testified that the Kohanim in the Beis Hamikdash would burn Kodshim meat that became Tamei through an Av ha'Tum'ah, together with meat that became Tamei through a Vlad ha'Tum'ah, despite the fact that, by so doing, they were increasing its level of Tum'ah. What exactly, did they do, and why was this permitted?
(b)What are the two differences between a Tamei Mes and a Tamei Sheretz, with regard to transmitting Tum'ah to others?
(c)According to Rebbi Akiva's testimony, in what did the Kohanim used to burn oil that became Tamei through a Tevul-Yom?
(d)What is a Tevul-Yom, what degree of Tum'ah is he, and what increase in Tum'ah would have occured, according to Rebbi Akiva?
(a)The Kohanim would burn Kodshim meat that had touched a Rishon l'Tum'ah and was now a Sheni, together with Kodshim meat that was a Rishon (the Gemara will amend this later).
(b)A Tamei Mes (someone who touches a corpse) is an Av ha'Tum'ah, who transmits Tum'ah even to people and vessels, whereas a Tamei Sheretz is only a Rishon, who can transmit Tum'ah only to food. It also renders them an Av like itself, whereas a Tamei Sheretz renders food that touches him, a Sheni.
(c)According to Rebbi Akiva's testimony, the Kohanim used to burn oil that became Tamei through a Tevul-Yom, in a lamp that had touched a Tamei Mes and was itself an Av ha'Tum'ah.
(d)A Tevul-Yom is a Tamei person who Toveled that day, and (assuming he was a Kohen) was waiting for night-fall before being permitted to eat Terumah. Until nightfall, he remains a Sheni l'Tum'ah. By burning the Shelishi oil in a lamp that was a Rishon, they would raise its level of Tum'ah from a Shelishi to a Sheni.
(a)What did Rebbi Meir derive (seemingly from either Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim or from Rebbi Akiva - though we do not yet know from which one), with regard to burning Terumah Tehorah on Pesach?
(b)Rebbi Yosi disagrees. According to him, both Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua agree that burning Terumah Tehorah and Terumah Temei'ah together is forbidden. What then, is their Machlokes?
(a)Rebbi Meir derived from one of the opinions in our Mishnah - that one may burn Terumah-Chametz that is Tahor (which must anyway be burned on Erev Pesach) together with Terumah Temei'ah, even though they render it Tamei in the process.
(b)The dispute between Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua concerns, not whether one may burn Terumah Tehorah together with Terumah Temei'ah (which is forbidden), but whether one may burn it together with Terumah Teluyah.
(a)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Shemini "v'Chi Yiten Mayim Al Zera, v'Nafal mi'Nivlasam Alav, Tamei Hu" (with regard to food transmitting Tum'ah)?
(b)According to Abaye, this Pasuk refers to Chulin only, but not to Terumah or Kodshim (where food can render other food Tamei). What does ...
1. ... Rav Ada bar Ahavah quoting Rava, say?
2. ... Ravina quoting Rava, say, and what is his reason?
(c)What is the problem with our Mishnah - according to Ravina quoting Rava?
(a)We learn from the Pasuk "v'Chi Yiten Mayim Al Zera, v'Nafal mi'Nivlasam Alav, Tamei Hu" - that if the carcass of a Sheretz falls on seeds which were Muchshar Lakabel Tum'ah, the seeds become Tamei, but they cannot transmit Tum'ah to other seeds (meaning any other food) like themselves.
(b)According to ...
1. ... Rav Ada bar Ahavah quoting Rava - the Pasuk refers to Terumah as well, but not to Kodshim.
2. ... Ravina quoting Rava - it refers to Kodshim as well, since the Torah gives no indication that it is restricted to Chulin alone, or to Chulin and Terumah exclusively.
(c)The problem with our Mishnah, according to Ravina quoting Rava is - since food does not transmit Tum'ah to food, how did the flesh of Kodshim become Tamei through its contact with a Vlad ha'Tum'ah?
(a)To answer the previous question, the Gemara tries to establish our Mishnah when the flesh was wet, and it was through the liquid that it became Tamei. What is wrong with that contention?
(b)How then, does the Gemara resolve the problem?
(a)If, as we just suggested, the flesh became Tamei through the water on the flesh of the Vlad - then why does the Tana say ' ... Im ha'Basar she'Nitma bi'Vlad ha'Tum'ah', and not im ha'Basar u'Mashkin... ?
(b)The Gemara therefore explains that, even though food does not transmit Tum'ah to other food mid'Oraysa, it does, mid'Rabanan (and our Mishnah is speaking about Kodshim that became Tamei mid'Rabananthrough contact with a Vlad.
(a)According to Rebbi Akiva, burning oil which became Tamei through a Tevul-Yom (making it a Shelishi) in a lamp that became Tamei through a Tamei Mes (making it a Rishon), would turn a Shelishi into a Sheni. But is this not precisely what Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim permitted? So what does the Tana mean when he says 'Hosif Rebbi Akiva'?
(b)From where do we know that any metal that touches a dead person, or a Tamei Mes, attains the same degree of Tum'ah as that what it touched?
(a)We initially thought that Rebbi Akiva was speaking about an earthenware lamp that touched a Tamei Mes (making it a Rishon) - in fact, he is speaking about a metal one (which becomes an Av). Consequently, by burning oil that is a Shelishi in it, one is transforming a Shelishi into a Rishon, one level higher than according to Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim.
(b)We know that any metal that touches a dead person, or a Tamei Mes, attains the same degree of Tum'ah as that what it touched - from the Pasuk in Chukas "ba'Chalal Cherev", from which Chazal derive 'Cherev, Harei Hu k'Chalal'.
(a)Terumah oil that touched a Tevul Yom becomes Pasul, and not Tamei. What is the difference between Pasul and Tamei?
(b)How might we have been able to use this fact to answer the above question?
(c)What prompted Rav Yehudah to answer the Kashya by establishing the Mishnah by a metal lamp rather then by an earthenware lamp, and answering it as in 5a?
(a)'Pasul' refers to the lowest degree of Tum'ah (by Terumah, a Shelishi), which does not transmit Tum'ah further. 'Tamei' refers to any degree above that, which does.
(b)We might have used this fact to answer our Kashya - by establishing Rebbi Akiva in our Mishnah even by an earthenware lamp: because whereas Rebbi Chanina permits increasing the level of Kodshim meat from a Shelishi l'Tum'ah (which is Tamei - since there is a Revi'i by Kodshim), Rebbi Akiva goes further to permit even the burning of a Shelishi by Terumah oil (which is only Pasul) in a lamp which is a Rishon - raising its level from a Pasul Shelishi to a Sheni, which is Tamei.
(c)Rav Yehudah preferred to establish the Mishnah by a metal lamp, and to give the former answer - because otherwise, why did Rebbi Akiva refer to a lamp which was Tamei Mes, why not to one which was Tamei Sheretz, unless it is because he is referring to a metal lamp, which became an Av ha'Tum'ah, because of 'Cherev, Harei Hu k'Chalal'.
(a)Rava learns that, according to Rebbi Akiva, Tum'as Mashkin (to transmit Tum'ah) must be d'Oraysa. True, the oil that touched a Tevul Yom, is Pasul anyway. But how do we know that the Tum'ah that is being added to the oil in the lamp, is not just mid'Rabanan?
(b)What caused the Rabanan to be strict with regard to liquids, to say that anything which renders Terumah, Pasul, makes liquids a Rishon, even when it itself, is only a Rishon, a Sheni or even a Shelishi?
(c)What is the sole exception to this rule?
(a)Rebbi Akiva cannot be talking about adding Tum'ah mid'Rabanan by burning the oil in the lamp that touched a Tamei Mes - since mid'Rabanan, all liquids become a Rishon l'Tum'ah anyway. So he must be talking about adding Tum'ah d'Oraysa.
(b)The reason that the Rabanan were strict with regard to liquids, to say that anything which renders Terumah Pasul, makes liquids a Rishon - is because liquid is prone to immediate Tum'ah, since it does not require a Hechsher Lekabel Tum'ah (which solid food does).
(c)The sole exception to this rule - is liquid that become Tamei through touching a Tevul-Yom. It becomes a Shelishi (where this is appropriate), and not a Rishon, since a Tevul-Yom is Metamei mi'd'Oraysa, and what is d'Oraysa does not require strengthening.
(a)Rebbi Meir says 'and from their words we can learn that one may burn Terumah Tehorah together with Terumah Temei'ah on Pesach'. Why can he not be referring to Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim in our Mishnah?
(b)And why can he not be referring to Rebbi Akiva?
(c)The Gemara then suggests that perhaps Rebbi Meir is referring to Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim (in our Mishnah), and that he is speaking about burning flesh which became Tamei through an Av ha'Tum'ah d'Oraysa together with flesh that became Tamei through a Vlad (Vlad) d'Rabanan. What does this mean?
(a)When Rebbi Meir says 'and from their words we can learn that one may burn Terumah Tehorah together with Terumah Temei'ah on Pesach', he cannot be referring to Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim - because Rebbi Chanina referred to the burning of Tamei together with Tamei, whereas he is now permitting burning Tahor (Terumah Tehorah in the sixth hour) together with Tamei.
(b)Nor can he referring to Rebbi Akiva - since Rebbi Akiva permitted the burning of Pasul together with Tamei, whilst he now comes to permit burning Tahor together with Tamei.
(c)Perhaps Rebbi Meir is referring to Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim after all, and he is speaking about burning meat which became Tamei through an Av ha'Tum'ah d'Oraysa together with meat that became Tamei through a a Vlad (Vlad) d'Rabanan (i.e. by touching a vessel that became Tamei through contact with a Tamei liquid). And Rebbi Meir comparing an Isur d'Rabanan (Terumah Chametz in the sixth hour) to Tum'ah d'Rabanan, now derives from Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim, that one may turn an Isur mid'Rabanan, into Tum'ah d'Oraysa.