Siman - Chagigah Daf 23
- הנושא את המדרס נושא את התרומה אבל לא את הקודש
The third case in the Mishnah on Daf 20b stated: הנושא את המדרס נושא את התרומה אבל לא את הקודש – One who is carrying a midras, an article that supported the weight of a zav, zavah or a niddah, may also carry terumah, but not kodesh. The Gemara asks why he may not carry the kodesh, and answers that it is on account of a certain incident, as Rav Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel, that there was once an incident with someone transporting a barrel of kodesh from place to place, ונפסקה רצועה של סנדלו ונטלה והניחה על פי חבית ונפלה לאויר החבית – and the strap of his sandal broke off and he took it and placed it on a barrel, and it fell into the airspace of the barrel, and then the kodesh in the barrel became tamei. At that time, they said: נושא את התרומה אבל לא את הקדש. When the Gemara suggests that a similar decree should apply to terumah, it answers that the Mishnah is Rebbe Chananyah ben Akavya, who holds that whenever the Chachomim made a decree, they did it only for the same circumstances as the original incident.
- כלים הנגמרים בטהרה צריכין טבילה לקודש אבל לא לתרומה
The Mishnah’s sixth case stated: כלים הנגמרים בטהרה צריכין טבילה לקודש אבל לא לתרומה – Keilim that were completed in a state of taharah, require tevilah for use with kodesh but not for use with terumah. The Gemara seeks to clarify who made the keilim, for if a chaver made them, then they would not require tevilah, for he would be careful that they should not become tamei. And if an am ha’aretz made them, the Mishnah would have not have referred to them as “keilim that were made in a state of taharah,” since the am ha’aretz might have been tamei. Rabbah bar Shila said in the name of Rav Masnah, who said in the name of Shmuel, that the Mishnah is referring to a case where a chaver made them, ומשום צינורא דעם הארץ – and it is because of a concern that they became tamei from the spittle of an am ha’aretz. The Gemara asks when did the spittle fall on the kli? If it fell before the kli was completed, the kli does not have the din of a kli that can be mekabel tumah. It could not have fallen after the kli was completed, for the chaver would have been careful to not let that happen. The Gemara answers that the situation that we are worried about is where the spittle fell on the kli before it was completed, and it remained moist after the kli was completed.
- הכלי מצרף מה שבתוכו לקדש אבל לא לתרומה
The Mishnah’s seventh case stated: הכלי מצרף מה שבתוכו לקדש אבל לא לתרומה – A kli combines what is in it with regard to kodesh, but not with regard to terumah. Rebbe Chanin said that this is learned from the passuk, "כף אחת עשרה זהב מלאה קטרת" – One gold ladle of ten shekels , filled with ketores. הכתוב עשאו לכל מה שבכף אחת – The passuk made everything that is in the ladle like one entity. Rav Kahana challenged if this rule was a d’Oraysa, based on a Mishnah where Rebbe Akiva ruled that if a tevul yom touched part of the fine flour of kodesh, ketores, levonah, or coals, then all of it is tamei, and it was deduced that this was only a d’Rabbanon din. Reish Lakish answered in the name of Bar Kapparah, that Rabbi Akiva might agree that mid’Oraysa, a kli combines its kodesh contents into one entity, in a situation where the contents require a kli, like in the case of the ketores, but it does not combine when the item does not require a kli, such as in the case of the שירי מנחה – the remainders of a minchah. And the Rabbis decreed that even an item that does not require a kli, כלי מצרפו – the kli does combine it. The Gemara addresses why Rebbe Akiva included ketores and levonah in his list since they do require a kli.
