Resources for Chagigah daf 19

1.     The גמרא says that for חולין one does not need any כוונה לטבילה. See the תשובות הרשב"א in חלק ג' סימן רנ"ה חלק ז' סימן י"ט who paskens based on our גמרא that you can ask a נכרי to be טובל your כלים for you! This would be very helpful for caterers who sometimes have hundreds of pieces of silverware to be טובל. However, it is not so simple. While our גמרא does not bring any opposing views as to whether one needs כוונה לטבילה for חולין, the גמרא in חולין דף ל"א brings that ר' יוחנן holds that one does need כוונה לטבילה for חולין. The גמרא’s discussion there is about a נדה who was forced to be טובל, and ר' יוחנן says she is not permissible to her husband without כוונה לטבילה. Nonethless, see the שולחן ערוך in יו"ד סימן ק"ך סעיף ט"ו who paskens that טבילה by a נכרי works for טבילת כלים. See the ב"ח there who disagrees and says that the only reason the רשב"א was lenient with טבילת כלים was because he holds that a נדה who was טובל without כוונה works, but we (Ashkenazim) pasken in הלכות נדה that a נדה does need כוונה לטבילה, so לדידן it should not work by טבילת כלים either. However, see the ש"ך there in ס"ק כ"ח who says that everyone can agree that טבילה without כוונה works for טבילת כלים since טבילת כלים isn’t really going from טומאה לטהרה in the classic sense and doesn’t affect items put in the כלי while it still טמא.

2.     The גמרא brings the משנה of גל שנתלש ובו ארבעים סאה. There is a fundamental question regarding this משנה: there are two main differences between a מקוה and a מעין- a מקוה must have forty סאה but a מעין is מטהר בכל שהוא. Also, a מקוה must be stationary but a מעין can be moving. See the רשב"א in the תורת הבית תורת הבית, בית ז' שער ז as well as the תוספות יו"ט on that משנה in מקוואת who both point out that our משנה is ממה נפשך difficult: a detached wave is moving, so if the wave works to be מטהר the person, it must considered a מעין. If so, why does the משנה have to say it had forty סאה? Any amount is sufficient to be מטהר (as long as it covers the item that you are being מטהר)? From here we would seem to have a proof to the שיטת הרא"ש that while a מעין doesn’t need forty סאה for טהרת כלים, it does need forty סאה for טבילת אדם. See the ב"ח in יו"ד סימן ר"א ס"ק י"א who says that a wave from an ocean is different than a regular מעין. For example, a זב needs a מעין to be טהור yet according to some he cannot be טובל in an ocean. The reason is that even though an ocean is מטהר בזוחלין like a מעין, it isn’t called "מים חיים" to be מטהר a זב. Similarly, it is not מטהר with less than forty סאה. See the ש"ך in יו"ד סימן ר"א ס"ק כ who disagrees and says that the issue here is not that it’s an ocean but rather that the wave was detached from the ocean. He says that once it is detached it can still be מטהר בזוחלין but needs forty סאה. See the חידושי הגר"ח על הרמב"ם in מקוואת פּרק ט, הל' ו. ד"ה והנה במקוואות , who understands the ש"ך as follows: there are two דינים in a מעין- there is the status of מעין itself and the waters of the מעין. When something has the status of a מעין, it can be מטהר with less than 40 סאה. Separately, waters that come from a מעין can be מטהר בזוחלין. Therefore, when מעין water becomes detached from the מעין itself, it can be מטהר בזוחלין but needs forty סאה.

3.     The גמרא brings the ברייתא that one cannot be מטהר בכיפּין. See the מרדכי in שבת פּרק ד' סימן של"ב who brings a רבינו שמחה who first suggested that one could be טובל in snow but then changed his mind for two reasons: one is that one cannot get snow on every part of the person at the same time. Second, it is considered being מטהר בכיפּין. The בית יוסף in סימן ר"א ד"ה כתב המרדכי doesn’t understand this since the top of the snow is still attached to the ground, so why would it be considered כיפּין? It should just be like a deep pool. See the קהילות יעקב in מקוואות סימן ד אות ה who explains רבינו שמחה as follows: if you touch one piece of snow, you are not מטמא all the other snow nearby, whereas by water you are. The reason is that water is considered one unit whereas snow is tons of different units. Consequently, the upper part of the snow may be considered כיפּין.

Rabbi Millman's Marei Mekomos Halacha

Rabbi Azriel Katz - Meforshim Overview

Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld - Shakla Vetarya

New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters

Rabbi Mordechai Papoff - English Topics