REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chagigah 22
(a) What is the difference between Rava, who gives the reason for the
prohibition of Toveling one vessel inside another by Kodesh as a decree -
because one may come to Tovel in a vessel with a narrow mouth, and Rebbi
Ila, who ascribes it to Chatzitah?
(b) What is a Gargusni?
(c) What does Rava say about someone who ...
- ... filled a basket or a Gargusni with vessels and Toveled them?
- ... divided a Mikveh with a basket or a Gargusni?
(a) Why is someone who Tovels in a Mikveh which is divided by a basket or a
Gargusni not Tahor?
(b) Why is the Tevilah nevertheless valid, if he Tovels pins and needles of
Hekdesh in a vessel whose mouth is less than a 'ki'Shefoferes ha'Nod' which
itself requires Tevilah?
(c) The Mishnah in Mikva'os states 'Keilim she'Mil'an Keilim ve'Hitbilan,
Harei Eilu Tehorin'. The Tana is referring to Terumah (though it is not
clear why Rashi says this, since according to the run of the Sugya, it seems
to be talking about Kodesh), and the vessels are Tahor even if the mouth of
the outer vessel was less than a ki'Shefoferes ha'Nod'.
What does the Tana
mean when he continue 've'Im Lo Taval Mayim ha'Me'uravim, ad she'Yihyu
Me'uravin ki'Shefoferes ha'Nod'?
(a) 'Sal ve'Gargusni she'Mil'an Keilim ve'Hitbilan Bein le'Kodesh Bein
li'Terumah, Tehorin'. This is the opinion of the Tana Kama of the Beraisa
(with whom Rava conforms). Rebbi Ilya holds like Aba Shaul.
What does Aba
(b) Seeing as Aba Shaul's reason is because of Chatzitzah, why is it
permitted to Tovel one vessel inside another for Terumah?
(c) In that case, why does Aba Shaul forbid Toveling one vessel inside the
other by Kodesh?
(d) Why does 'Eivah' not apply by Terumah?
(a) The Tana who holds of 'Eivah' is Rebbi Yossi.
What does Rebbi Yossi
say about accepting wine for the Nesachim and oil for the Menachos all the
(b) What does Rav Papa say about accepting testimony from Amei ha'Aretz
(c) We learned earlier that it is permitted to Tovel one vessel inside
another by Terumah, since one does not accept Terumah from an Am ha'Aretz.
What does 've'Nichush li'She'eilah?' mean?
(a) Beis Hillel maintain that sealed earthenware vessels save anything from
Tum'ah. This Halachah incorporates two possible cases. It might be speaking
about an earthenware vessel in a room in which a dead person is lying.
What is the alternative case?
Answers to questions
(b) What do Beis Shamai say?
(c) Beis Shamai declare food and earthenware vessels Tahor, but nothing
Why is that?
(a) Why did Rebbi Yehoshua consider Beis Shamai's opinion to be a farce?
(b) How did he compare it to a case of a Tamei woman kneading dough in a
dish, and to a jug which is Tamei Meis that is full of liquid?
(c) He changed his tune however, when a Talmid of Beis Shamai presented him
with Beis Shamai's reason.
What is Beis Shamai's reason? Why is the food
(d) What would the Am ha'Aretz probably tell you if you informed him that it
(a) How did Rebbi Yehoshua react to that Talmid's explanation?
(b) What happened to his teeth? Why was that?
(c) What do we learn from Beis Shamai's response 'she'Taharaso Lecha ve'Lo'?
(d) So why do we permit vessels that were Toveled inside other vessels? Why
are we not worried that an Am ha'Aretz will subsequently Tovel his vessels
inside a vessel with a mouth that is less than the Shiur of 'ki'Shefoferes
ha'Nod' and a Chaver will borrow it from him?
(a) If we assume that the borrower Tovels the vessel, then why did Beis
Hillel not counter Beis Shamai in the same way (by declaring *all* vessels
inside the earthenware Tamei vessels should be Tahor, since the borrower
will Tovel them anyway)?
(b) Abaye reconciles the fact that we do not believe Amei ha'Aretz regarding
Tevilah, with the Beraisa 'Ne'emanim Amei ha'Aretz al Taharas Tevilas Tamei
Meis' by differentiating between Tevilas Gufo and Tevilas Keilim.
the din is each case? Which one is believed and which one is not?
(c) Rava establishes both Beraisos by Tevilas Keilim.
How does he then
reconcile them? When is one believed even by Tevilas Keilim and when is one
(d) What precedent do we have for this from a Beraisa regarding Amei
ha'Aretz with regard to fruit that is Muchshar le'Kabeil Tum'ah?
(a) If a Chaver claims that it is the third day since his Tum'ah, he is
What happens to an Am ha'Aretz?
(b) How do we reconcile what we said earlier (that an Am ha'Aretz is
believed on Tevilas Gufo), with this Beraisa, from which we see that he is
not even believed when he says that today is his third day?
(a) In light of what we learned in our Mishnah (regarding 'Achorayim,
ve'Toch u'Beis ha'Tzevitah'), what will be the Din of a vessel which besides
the inside and the bottom, also has a lip, or a handle, if ...
Answers to questions
1. ... the back became Tamei through a Tum'ah de'Rabbanan? Do the other
sections require Tevilah?
(b) We explained in our Mishnah that 'Beis ha'Tzevitah' means the handle,
conforming with Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel's translation of the word.
2. ... the inside became Tamei?
does Rebbi Asi Amar Rebbi Yochanan interpret 'Beis ha'Tzevitah'?
(c) According to a Beraisa quoted by Rav Bibi, there is no difference
between one part of the vessel and another, neither as regards Kodshei
Hamikdash nor as regards Kodshei ha'G'vul.
What would Kodshei ha'G'vul
(d) This cannot be however, seeing as our Mishnah explicitly does
differentiate between the parts of the vessel with regard to Terumah.
how does Rav Nachman interpret Kodshei ha'G'vul? What did his Rebbe Rabah
bar Avuhah say that will now corroborate Rav Bibi's Beraisa?