(a)The Mishnah discusses an oven standing in the doorway of a house, whose covered (see Tos. Yom-Tov & Eliyahu Rabah) Ayin juts out into the street, and over which a passing Aron ha'Meis is Ma'ahil. What is an Ayin?
(b)According to Beis Shamai, everything is Tamei. What does everything incorporate?
(c)What do Beis Hillel say?
(d)R. Akiva is the most lenient of all. What does he say? What is his reason?
1)
(a)The Mishnah discusses an oven standing in the doorway of a house, whose (see Tos. Yom-Tov & Eliyahu Rabah) Ayin - smoke vent juts out into the street, and over which a passing Aron ha'Meis is Ma'ahil (see Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Beis Shamai ... " & 'u'Beis Hillel ... ').
(b)According to Beis Shamai, everything - incorporating whatever is in the vent and what is in the room behind the oven, is Tamei.
(c)Beis Hillel - declares the former Tamei, but the latter, Tahor.
(d)R. Akiva declares Tahor - even what is in the vent (see Tos. Yom-Tov DH 've'He'ehilu ... ').
Mishnah 2
2)
(a)The Mishnah cites a similar triple Machlokes regarding a skylight between a house and an attic, which is covered by a pot with a crack. Beis Shamai rules that everything is Tamei. How wide must the crack be for this ruling to be effective?
(b)What do Beis Hillel say?
(c)On what grounds ought even the pot be Tahor, according to Beis Hillel, bearing in mind that it is made of earthenware?
(d)Then why do they declare it Tamei?
2)
(a)The Mishnah cites a similar triple Machlokes regarding a skylight between a house and an attic, which is covered by a pot with a crack. Beis Shamai rules that everything is Tamei - provided the crack is at least large enough to let in liquid (ke'Koneis Mashkin).
(b)According to Beis Hillel - the pot is Tamei, but the attic, Tahor.
(c)Bearing in mind that the pot is made of earthenware, even it ought to be Tahor, according to Beis Hillel - because in principle, they hold like R. Akiva ...
(d)... and they only declare it Tamei - due to a Chumra mi'de'Rabbanan.
3)
(a)R. Akiva declares even the pot Tahor. Why is that? How must the earthenware pot be lying, according to him
(b)Like whom is the Halachah in both of the above cases?
3)
(a)R. Akiva declares even the pot Tahor - because the Tana is speaking where the pot is placed with its base filling the gap (in which case it is not subject to Tum'ah, and therefore it does not transmit Tum'ah to the other side.
(b)The Halachah - is like Beis Hillel in both of the above cases.
Mishnah 3
4)
(a)What do Beis Hillel initially say in the above case, but where the earthenware pot is complete?
(b)According to Beis Shamai however, only food, drink and earthenware Keilim that are in the upper room remain Tahor. On what basis is this distinction drawn?
4)
(a)Initially, Beis Hillel (see Tos. Yom-Tov) rule in the above case, but where the earthenware pot is complete (see Tos. Yom-Tov) - that everything is Tahor.
(b)According to Beis Shamai however, only food, drink and earthenware Keilim that are in the upper room remain Tahor - because they are not subject to Tevilah, whereas other Keilim are (as we will explain shortly).
5)
(a)According to Beis Shamai, when Chazal declared Tahor food, drink and earthenware Keilim in the upper room, it was only for the Am ha'Aretz himself. Why did they then not declare other Keilim Tahor for him as well?
(b)Then why did they declare food, drink and earthenware Keilim Tahor?
(c)Why do we rule like Beis Shamai?
5)
(a)According to Beis Shamai, when Chazal declared Tahor food, drink and earthenware Keilim in the upper room, it was only for the Am ha'Aretz himself (see Tos. Yom-Tov). The reason that they did not declare other Keilim Tahor for him as well is - because then he might lend them to a Chaver, who will Tovel them and use them, without Haza'ah on the third and seventh days.
(b)They did however, declare Tahor food, drink and earthenware Keilim - because as we explained, they are not subject to Tevilah, in which case we are not afraid that the Chaver will borrow them from him.
(c)We rule like Beis Shamai - because ultimately, Beis Hillel conceded that Beis Shamai were right.
Mishnah 4
6)
(a)What does the Mishnah say about a wooden or metal jar full of Tahor liquid that is lying in the same attic?
(b)And what if he poured the liquid into another container?
(c)The Tana also discusses a woman who is kneading dough in the attic. What is the status of ...
1. ... the woman?
2. ... the dish?
3. ... the dough?
(d)On what condition will the dough too, become Tamei?
6)
(a)The Mishnah rules that if a wooden or metal jar full of Tahor liquid is lying in the same attic - the jar is Tamei for seven days, whereas the liquid remains Tahor.
(b)In the event however, that he pours the liquid into another container - it too becomes Tamei (See Mishnah Achronah).
(c)The Tana also discusses a woman who is kneading dough in the attic, in which case ...
1. ... the woman is Tamei for seven days, as is ...
2. ... the dish, whereas ...
3. ... the dough is Tahor.
(d)The dough too, will become Tamei however - should one move it into another K'li.
Mishnah 5
7)
(a)What if the jar is made of animal's dung, stone or earth?
(b)And what does the Tana say about a wooden or metal container that has been designated for Kodesh or for Chatas (the ashes of the Parah Adumah)? Is this the opinion of Beis Shamai too, or is it confined to Beis Hillel?
(c)Why is that?
(d)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Chukas "ve'Haysah la'Adas B'nei Yisrael le'Mishmeres"?
(e)What reason does the Tana give as to why everybody is believed regarding Chatas?
7)
(a)If the jar is made of animal's dung, stone or earth (which are all not subject to Tum'ah) - then they too, as well as the woman, remain Tahor.
(b)Both Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel also declare everything Tahor - in the case where the wooden or metal container has been designated for Kodesh or for Chatas (the ashes of the Parah Adumah) ...
(c)... because we believe the Am ha'Aretz with regard to them, when he says that they are Tahor. Otherwise we are afraid that all the Amei-ha'Aretz will go and build themselves Bamos and bring their own Korbanos.
(d)We learn from the Pasuk in Chukas "ve'Haysah la'Adas B'nei Yisrael le'Mishmeres" that - everybody is believed when it comes to Keilim that are designated for the Parah Adumah (see Tos. Yom-Tov).
(e)The Tana explains that everybody is believed regarding Chatas (see Tos. Yom-Tov & Tiferes Yisrael) - because the Keilim and the K'lei Cheres (see Tos. Yom-Tov) are Tahor.
8)
(a)The Mishnah concludes u'Matzilin im Defanos Ohalim. What does this mean?
(b)What does Defanos Ohalim come to preclude?
8)
(a)The Mishnah concludes u'Matzilin im Defanos Ohalim - the Keilim currently under discussion also prevent the Tum'ah from passing to the other side, when placed on top of walls (see Tos. Yom-Tov) ...
(b)... to preclude - pits whose walls do not protrude above the ground (as we will now explain).
Mishnah 6
9)
(a)To illustrate the previous ruling, the Mishnah presents the case of a pit or an enclosure in a house which is covered by a Chafishah and which is therefore Tahor. What is a Chafishah?
(b)Why is it not subject to Tum'ah?
(c)On what condition will the Chafishah not save the Keilim in the pit from Tum'ah?
(d)And what does the Tana say about a beehive which is covered by a Chafishah? What size beehive is he talking about?
9)
(a)To illustrate the previous ruling, the Mishnah presents the case of a pit or an enclosure in a house which is covered by a Chafishahn - a large basket used to pickle olives, and which is therefore Tahor.
(b)The Chafishah is not subject to Tum'ah - because it holds forty Sa'ah or more (see also Tos. Yom-Tov, end of Mishnah).
(c)The Chafishah will not save the Keilim in the pit from Tum'ah - if the latter does not have walls above ground level.
(d)And the Tana says - exactly the same about a beehive (that holds more than forty Sa'ah) which is covered by a Chafishah.
10)
(a)Besides a plank, what needs to cover a wall-less pit or a beehive with a hole, for their contents to be Tahor?
(b)Why is that?
(c)On what condition will even a K'li protect the contents of the pit or the beehive from Tum'ah?
(d)And what if the walls of the pit measure half a Tefach and so do the walls of the K'li?
10)
(a)Either a plank - or a kneading-dish without walls needs to cover a wall-less pit or a beehive with a hole for their contents to be Tahor ...
(b)... because it is specifically Keilim (receptacles) that do not prevent Tum'ah from passing into a wall-less pit or a beehive with a hole (see Tos. Yom-Tov).
(c)Even a K'li will protect the contents of the pit or the beeive from Tum'ah however - if it has walls of at least one Tefach (see Tos. Yom-Tov).
(d)If the walls of the pit or of the holed beehive measure half a Tefach and so do the walls of the K'li - they do not combine, and the contents of the pit or the beehive are Tamei (see Tos. Yom-Tov).
Mishnah 7
11)
(a)What does the Mishnah say about a Chafishah outside?
(b)What exactly does Kach Matzilin mi'ba'Chutz mean? On top of what is the Chafishah placed?
(c)On what grounds does the Tana draw a distinction between the outside wall of a house and that of a Chatzer or a garden in this regard?
11)
(a)The Mishnah rules that - a Chafishah outside (which we will explain shortly) saves from Tum'ah just like the Chafishah inside that we just discussed.
(b)Kach Matzilin mi'ba'Chutz means that - if the Chafishah is placed on posts outside a house in such a way that it is within a Tefach of one of the house's walls, and adjacent to it, it saves Keilim that are above it (see Tos. Yom-Tov) from Tum'ah.
(c)The Tana draws a distinction between the outside wall of a house and that of a Chatzer or a garden, in this regard - in that the latter does not serve as an Ohel, in which case the Chafishah will not prevent the Keilim inside it from becoming Tamei.
12)
(a)Finally, the Mishnah cites a Machlokes between R. Akiva and the Chachamim with regard to a pot, in a case where a beam is lying on two walls of a Chatzer. Where is the pot?
(b)What is the case?
(c)R. Akiva declares the Keilim in the pot Tahor. What do the Chachamim say?
12)
(a)Finally, the Mishnah cites a Machlokes between R. Akiva and the Chachamim with regard to a pot, in a case where a beam is lying on two walls of a Chatzer. The pot - is suspended from the beam.
(b)The case is - where there is a piece of Meis underneath the beam (see Tos. Yom-Tov) and there are Keilim inside the pot.
(c)R. Akiva declares the Keilim in the pot Tahor - the Chachamim declare them Tamei.
13)
(a)Assuming that, in the current case, the opening of the pot is lying flush against the beam, R. Akiva and the Chachamim agree that the Keilim in the pot (see Tos. Yom-Tov, end of Perek) are Tahor (see Tos. Yom-Tov). What will they then hold where the pot protrudes a Tefach from the beam?
(b)In which case are they then arguing?
(c)Like whom is the Halachah?
13)
(a)Assuming that, in the current case, the opening of the pot is lying flush against the beam, R. Akiva and the Chachamim agree that the Keilim in the pot (see Tos. Yom-Tov, end of Perek) are Tahor (see Tos. Yom-Tov), whereas Where the pot protrudes a Tefach from the beam - they both agree that they are Tamei, and ...
(b)... they are arguing in a case - where the pot protrudes from the beam, but less than a Tefach.
