ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Chulin 25
(a) Rav Ada bar Ahavah asked that K'lei Cheres should become Tamei by
touching (even from the outside) from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from other Keilim -
which are Mekabel Tum'ah from the outside, even though they are not Mekabel
Tum'ah from the inside, 'Kal va'Chomer' K'lei Cheres, which are.
(b) We learn from the Pasuk (in connection with other Keilim) "ve'Chol Asher
Yipol *Alav*" - that they are Mekabel Tum'ah by touching, irrespective of
whether it is from the inside or from the outside.
(c) We counter the current Kashya from the Pasuk there "ve'Chol K'li
Pasu'ach Asher Ein Tzamid Pasil Alav Tamei Hu", from which (given that it is
speaking about a K'li Cheres) we extrapolate - that if its lid is firmly
shut, a K'li Cheres is not Mekabel Tum'ah.
(a) We extrapolate from "Tocho" (in connection with a K'li Cheres) - that it
is only the air-space of a *K'li Cheres* that renders the K'li Tamei, but
not that of other vessels.
(b) Even though we used "Tocho" for the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' of Rebbi Yonasan
ben Avtulmus ('Tocho Letamei ve'Tocho Litamei') - we can learn the previous
D'rashah, since the Torah writes four "Tocho's" ...
(c) ... two D'rashos from each of the two "Tochos" ('Toch' and 'Tocho').
(a) We have just explained two of the "Tochos". Given that we need one
"Tocho" itself, we learn from the fourth one - "Tocho", 've'Lo Toch Tocho'
(b) ... meaning that if there is a K'li containing food inside a K'li Cheres
which also contains a Sheretz, whose top protrudes above the top of the
outer one, the food remains Tahor.
(a) We conclude 'va'Afilu K'li Shetef Matzil'. A 'K'li Shetef' is - any
vessel other than an earthenware one.
(b) We might have thought that a K'li Shetef does not prevent the food that
it contains from becoming Tamei - because generally, anything that is
subject to Tum'ah does not prevent Tum'ah from passing through it.
(c) And the Pasuk is coming to teach us that this case is different - in
that a vessel cannot receive Tum'ah from another vessel, which explains why
the vessel itself does not become Tamei and why it protects the food inside
it (see Tosfos DH 'va'Afilu').
(a) Finally, we ask why K'lei Shetef become Tamei from the outside. We would
have thought that they do not - 'Kal va'Chomer' from K'lei Cheres, which are
not, even though they are subject to Tum'ah from the inside (which K'lei
Shetef are not).
(b) We answer - by quoting the Pasuk "ve'Chol K'li Pasu'ach ... Tamei
*Hu*" - from which we extrapolate that it is only earthenware vessels that
are subject to the distinction between a lid tightly shut and a lid that
isn't; but other vessels, can become Tamei even if they have a lid that is
(a) The Beraisa establishes our Mishnah 'Tahor bi'Chelei Eitz, Tamei
bi'Chelei Matchos' - to mean that Peshutei K'lei Eitz (flat wooden vessels)
are Tahor, but not Peshutei K'lei Matchos.
(b) The source for ...
1. ... the ruling the regarding 'Peshutei K'lei Eitz' - is the Torah's
comparison of wooden vessels to a sack (in Parshas Shemini).
(c) The Beraisa establishes 'Tahor bi'Chelei Matchos, Tamei bi'Chelei Eitz'
by Gulmei Keilim - which is the shape of vessels that have yet to be
2. ... the Tum'ah of K'lei Matchos - is in a Pasuk in Matos (in connection
with the vessels that they brought back from the battle against Midyan),
"Ach K'lei Chesef u'Chelei Zahav ... ".
(a) The Beraisa rules that ...
1. ... a wooden vessel that still requires smoothening with a horsetail
plant, ornamental pins to be added, round grooves to be pressed into it, or
sand papering using the skin of a tunny-fish - is considered 'Gulmei K'lei
Eitz' and is subject to Tum'ah, and so is ...
(b) The one exception which the Tana lists that is Tahor, is a wooden vessel
that requires scratching out a hollow to be used as a receptacle. The
problem with this is - that it is obvious, seeing as the vessel still falls
under the category of 'Peshutei K'lei Eitz'.
2. ... a wooden vessel that still requires a base, a rim or a handle - is.
(c) We answer 'de'Chak Kepiza be'Kaba' - which means that he had in fact
carved out a hollow that holds three Lugin (turning it into a receptacle),
only the vessel is incomplete because it was his intention to add another
Lug, to make it four.
(a) The Beraisa lists four similar Gulmei K'lei Matchos as it did regarding
Gulmei K'li Eitz, but adds a metal vessel that needs to be flattened with a
hammer. If 'La'shuf' means to smoothen metal vessels with a lamina,
'Legarer' means - to scratch gold and silver ones.
(b) The Tana exchanges 'Lekarkov' (to press round grooves into it) for
'Lekarker' - which means to engrave.
(c) These five Gulmei K'lei Matchos are Tahor. The Tana rules that a metal
vessel that still requires ...
1. ... a base, a rim or a handle - is Tahor too.
2. ... a lid - is Tamei.
(a) The reason for the previous ruling is - because since the lid is a
separate piece, the vessel is considered complete without it.
(b) Rebbi Yochanan ascribes the Tana's general leniency regarding Gulmei
K'lei Matchos to the fact that metal vessels were made for Kavod (i.e. they
were considered a luxury item, as was the case in those days). Consequently,
until they were completely finished, they did not serve their purpose. Rav
Nachman attributes the leniency by metal vessels to their high price, and
until they are complete, they will not fetch the price that one expects them
(c) The ramifications of their Machlokes are - with regard to bone vessels,
which are valuable but not made for Kavod.
(d) Rav Nachman follows his reasoning elsewhere - where he says - that bone
vessels have the same Din as metal ones.
(a) Rebbi Yishmael b'no shel Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah learns from the
Pasuk "ve'Chol *Ma'aseh Izim* Tischat'u" - that vessels made from the horns
and the hooves of goats are subject to Tum'ah.
(b) From "ve'Chol" - he includes vessels made from the horns and hooves of
(c) And the Pasuk only mentions "Izim" - to preclude vessels made from birds
(e.g. from the claws of a vulture from the realm of Tum'ah).
(a) Our Mishnah discusses which almonds are Chayav and which are Patur -
(b) The Beraisa establishes our Mishnah 'ha'Chayav bi'Shekeidim ha'Marim
Patur bi'Mesukim' by small almonds (that are not fully-grown), and the Seifa
'ha'Chayav bi'Shekeidim ha'Mesukim Patur be'Marim' - by big ones (that are).
(c) The Tana's reason by sweet almonds is because people tend to wait until
they are ripe before picking them, and by bitter one - because they make a
point of eating them before they become ripe and too bitter to eat.
(d) According to Rebbi Yishmael b'Rebbi Yossi in the name of his father,
small almonds are always Patur from Ma'asros. Others say that big ones are
(e) According to the latter opinion - fully-grown bitter almonds are
potentially edible, because when heated on the fire they become sweet.
(a) Our Mishnah discusses Temed - grape-pits onto which one pours water, and
which turns into wine once the mixture ferments.
(b) The Tana rules that until Temed ferments, it cannot be purchased with
money of Ma'aser Sheini (in connection with which the Torah mentions wine),
and by the same token - it will invalidate a Mikveh which does not yet
contain (the Shi'ur Mikveh of) forty Sa'ah, into which it falls ...
(c) ... because it is still considered water, and three Lugin of drawn water
(Mayim She'uvin) invalidate a Mikveh (if it is added before the Mikvah
contains forty Sa'ah).
(d) Once the Temed has fermented, the Tana rules - it has a Din of wine in
both of the above regards. It can be purchased with Ma'aser Sheini money,
and a mere three Lugin of it cannot invalidate a Mikvah.
(e) The connection between the previous Mishnahs on the one hand, and the
current and ensuing ones on the other is - that the former are discussing
the contrast between two independent Halachos, and the latter, the contrast
between two halves of the same Mitzvah.
(a) When giving one's half-Shekel, everyone had to give a Kalbon - the
little bit extra that everyone had to pay Hekdesh when giving his annual
half-Shekel, to compensate Hekdesh on the losses it sustained in the process
of exchanging the different denominational coins that people gave to the
(b) If two brothers who had divided their father's inheritance and then
formed a partnership, gave a full Shekel between them - they had to pay
(c) If however, they had not yet divided the inheritance (known as Tefusas
ha'Bayis [alias 'the pool']) - they only needed to give *one* Kalbon between
them (just as the father would have done had he given on their behalf).
(d) As far as Ma'aser Beheimah is concerned says the Tana, this distinction
works in the reverse - in the former case (where they entered into a regular
partnership), they would be Patur from Ma'aser Beheimah (just as all
partners are); whereas in the latter case, (where they are sharing the
property bi'Tefusas ha'Bayis) they are Chayav.
(a) The Tana Kama in a Beraisa rules that someone who makes Temed, and finds
exactly as much juice as the water that he added, is Patur from Ma'asros.
Rebbi Yehudah rules - that he is Chayav.
(b) We initially think that our Mishnah goes like neither Tana - because the
Tana'im make no mention of the Temed fermenting, in which case it seems, the
Tana Kama declares it water even if it has fermented, whereas Rebbi Yehudah
declares it wine even if it has not.
(c) Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah answers that the Tana'im are arguing
over Temed that fermented - in which case, the author of our Mishnah will be
(d) Rav Nachman prefers not to establish the Machlokes by Temed that did not
ferment, in order to establish our Mishnah like the Rabbanan - because he
maintains that in such a case, since they are speaking when he only found as
much juice as the water that was added, Rebbi Yehudah would not consider it
to be wine.
1. ... that did not ferment - is considered water even according to Rebbi
2. ... that ferment, but where contains more juice than the water that one
added - is considered wine, even according to the Chachamim.