(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Moed Katan 5

MOED KATAN 5 - Dedicated by Gerald (Gedalia) Ziering in honor of Rabbi Elimelech Kohn, leader of the Daf Yomi shiur at Telshe Yeshiva Alumni of Riverdale, NY.


(a) Our Mishnah permits clearing out water-pits that became clogged -up with stones.
In which case does Rebbi Yochanan (explaining the Mishnah) permit even digging a pit from scratch?

(b) How do we ultimately explain the Beraisa ...

  1. ... 'Chotetin Boros, Sichin u'Me'aros shel Yachid, ve'Ein Tzarich Lomar shel Rabim'?
  2. ... 'Ein Chofrin Boros, Sichin u'Me'aros shel Rabim, ve'Ein Tzarich Lomar shel Yachid'?
(c) Clearing out the stones is permitted in certain cases even when digging the pit is forbidden.
To which of the two does the Tana of the Beraisa compare ...
  1. ... filling the already-dug pit with water?
  2. ... filling in the cracks and strengthening them with lime?
(a) What do we prove from our Mishnah, which says 'Osin Kol Tzorchei Rabim'?

(b) On what grounds do we refute the suggestion that 'Osin Kol Tzorchei Rabim' comes to include general communal needs such as the removal of thorns, road repairs and rectifying the Mikva'os, listed in the Beraisa?

(c) What does the Tana of the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk "ve'Hayah Alecha Damim"?

(a) What does Rebbi Shimon ben Pazi learn say about the Pasuk in Yechezkel "ve'Ra'ah Etzem Adam u'Banah Etzlo Tzi'un"?

(b) How did they know this Halachah before Yechezkel ha'Navi came upon the scene?

(c) Which other Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai did Yechezkel support with a Pasuk?

(d) Others learn Tzi'un Kevarim from the Pasuk in Tazri'a "ve'Tamei Tamei Yikra".
What do we learn from the second "Tamei"?

(a) Other Amora'im learn Tzi'un Kevarim from "ve'Lifnei Iver ... " (Kedoshim), "ve'Amar Solu Solu Panu Derech" or from "Harimu Michshol mi'Derech Ami" (Yeshayah); from "ve'Hoda'ta Lahem es ha'Derech Yeilchu Vah" (Yisro), ve'Hizartem es B'nei Yisrael mi'Tum'asam" (Metzora) or from "u'Sh'martem es Mishmarti" (Acharei-Mos). The final Derashah is from the Pasuk in Tehilim "ve'Sham Derech Ar'enu be'Yesha Elokim".
What else does Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi learn from this Pasuk?

(b) In what connection did Rebbi Yanai quote this Pasuk regarding an astute Talmid of his?

Answers to questions



(a) Why would they not mark a k'Zayis of flesh or a bone that was exactly the size of a barley that came from a corpse (in spite of the fact that it was Metamei be'Ohel)?

(b) Which individual section of a corpse, besides the spine, would be marked?

(c) A minority of large bones that made up the majority of the corpse's volume would be marked.
When would they also mark bones, even if they did not make up the majority of the volume of the corpse?

(a) When would they mark the location of the corpse (with lime) and when would they not mark it?

(b) Where exactly would they place the lime?

(c) Why would they not place it ...

  1. ... on the Tum'ah itself?
  2. ... far from the Tum'ah?
(a) Two of the three cases of Safek that would be marked were 'Sechachos and Pera'os'.
What are ...
  1. ... 'Sechachos'?
  2. ... 'Pera'os'?
(b) The third case of Safek is that of a Beis ha'P'ras.
How do we reconcile this with Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel, who permits blowing one's way through a Beis ha'P'ras in order to bring the Korban Pesach, and Ula, who is quoted as saying that a Beis ha'P'ras that was 'threshed' is Tahor (both of whom clearly hold that there is no Din of Tum'as Ohel by a Beis ha'P'ras)?

(c) How do we know that a field in which a grave is lost is called a Beis ha'P'ras?

(d) The third category of Beis ha'P'ras described in the Mishnah in Ohalos is 'a Sadeh Bochin'.
What was a 'Sadeh Bochin'? Why was it called by that name?

(a) What distinction does the Tana Kama of the Beraisa make between a marked field *with* trees and one *without* them?

(b) What does Rebbi Yehudah say?

(c) It appears from the Tana Kama that even a field in which a grave was dug also needs to be marked.
How do we reconcile this with the Sugya that we just learned, which assumes that it does *not*?

(d) How do we know that a grave was dug up? Perhaps the trees are on the inside (which *was* plowed) and the Tum'ah that was lost on the outside (which was *not*)?

(a) We then ask that perhaps the Tum'ah was on the inside (not between the trees) and the trees on the outside. We first answer that it speaks 'bi'Mesuvachin'.
What does 'bi'Mesuvachin' mean?

(b) What is the second answer?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,