Which tannaitic opinion is reflected in the mishna in Zavim quoted by the gemara which listed that one who eats food that is a rishon/first degree or a sheni/second degree would disqualify teruma, but the teruma itself would not be able to pass on impurities (it would make the teruma a shlishi/third degree). Why does one who eats these impurites disqualify teruma? The gemara proceeds to go through the list of the other ordinances related to impurities and explain why the rabbis instituted each ordinance. The gemara then questions the fact that the students of Shamai and Hillel decreed that if one’s hands touch food, it disqualifies teruma – wasn’t this instituted by Shamai and Hillel themselves? After answering this question, the gemara then suggests that King Solomon decreed this – how can that be explained?
This week’s learning is sponsored by Audrey Mondrow in memory of Irving “Poppy” Mauskopf, Yechezkel ben Rachel and Avraham. “A man that exemplified complete emuna. He greeted everyone with a smile. We were all very privileged to have him in our lives. May his neshama have an aliya.”
This week’s learning is sponsored by Caroline Bollag l’ilui nishmat Pinchas ben Menashe Peyser.
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Today’s daily daf tools:
This week’s learning is sponsored by Audrey Mondrow in memory of Irving “Poppy” Mauskopf, Yechezkel ben Rachel and Avraham. “A man that exemplified complete emuna. He greeted everyone with a smile. We were all very privileged to have him in our lives. May his neshama have an aliya.”
This week’s learning is sponsored by Caroline Bollag l’ilui nishmat Pinchas ben Menashe Peyser.
Shabbat 14
לָא מְטַמּוּ? אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה, רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ הִיא. דִּתְנַן: רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הָאוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל רִאשׁוֹן — רִאשׁוֹן. וְאוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל שֵׁנִי — שֵׁנִי. אוֹכֶל שְׁלִישִׁי — שְׁלִישִׁי. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: הָאוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל רִאשׁוֹן וְאוֹכֶל שֵׁנִי — שֵׁנִי. שְׁלִישִׁי — שֵׁנִי לַקּוֹדֶשׁ, וְאֵין שֵׁנִי לַתְּרוּמָה בְּחוּלִּין שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ עַל טׇהֳרַת תְּרוּמָה.
do not render it impure; in other words, they do not render the teruma capable of transmitting impurity to other items? Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: It is the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua. As we learned in a mishna: Rabbi Eliezer says: One who eats food with first degree ritual impurity status assumes first degree ritual impurity status, and anything with first degree ritual impurity status renders teruma impure. And one who eats food with second degree ritual impurity status assumes second degree ritual impurity status. One who eats food with third degree ritual impurity status assumes third degree ritual impurity status. Rabbi Yehoshua says: One who eats food with first degree ritual impurity status and one who eats food with second degree ritual impurity status assume second degree ritual impurity status. One with second degree ritual impurity status who comes into contact with teruma disqualifies it and does not render it impure. One who eats food with third degree ritual impurity status assumes second degree ritual impurity status vis-à-vis consecrated items, and he does not assume second degree ritual impurity status vis-à-vis teruma. Eating an item with third degree ritual impurity status is only feasible in the case of non-sacred items, as eating impure teruma is prohibited. It is only possible in the case of non-sacred food items that were prepared as if their level of purity were on the level of the purity of teruma.
אוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל רִאשׁוֹן וְאוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל שֵׁנִי — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? דְּזִימְנִין דְּאָכֵיל אוֹכָלִין טְמֵאִין, וְשָׁקֵיל מַשְׁקִין דִּתְרוּמָה, וְשָׁדֵי לְפוּמֵּיהּ וּפָסֵיל לְהוּ.
With regard to the decree itself, the Gemara asks: One who eats food with first degree ritual impurity status and one who eats food with second degree ritual impurity status; what is the reason the Sages decreed impurity upon him, rendering him impure? The Gemara answers: Because at times one eats impure food, and takes liquids of teruma, and casts them into his mouth and disqualifies the liquids, as the impure food comes into contact with the liquid in his mouth and disqualifies it. To prevent this, the Sages decreed that one who eats impure food becomes impure and must refrain from touching teruma at all.
שׁוֹתֶה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? דְּזִימְנִין דְּשָׁתֵי מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין, וְשָׁקֵיל אוֹכָלִין דִּתְרוּמָה וְשָׁדֵי לְפוּמֵּיהּ וּפָסֵיל לְהוּ. הַיְינוּ הָךְ? מַהוּ דְתֵימָא: הָא שְׁכִיחִי, וְהָא לָא שְׁכִיחִי — קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.
Similarly, the Gemara asks: One who drinks impure liquids; what is the reason the Sages decreed impurity upon him? The Gemara answers: Because at times one drinks impure liquids, and takes teruma foods, and casts them in his mouth, and disqualifies them. The Gemara asks: This decree is the same as that decree as they were issued for one reason. Why did the mishna list them separately and consider them two different decrees? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that this, people who eat impure food, is common; as it is common for one eating to drink. Consequently, one who eats impure food is likely to drink teruma liquid. And, however, that, one drinking impure liquids who would put food in his mouth while drinking is uncommon. As a result, it is conceivable to say that the Sages did not issue a decree in an uncommon case. Therefore, the mishna teaches us that even in that instance the Sages decreed impurity.
וְהַבָּא רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בְּמַיִם שְׁאוּבִין — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? אָמַר רַב בִּיבִי אָמַר רַב אַסִּי: שֶׁבַּתְּחִלָּה הָיוּ טוֹבְלִין בְּמֵי מְעָרוֹת מְכוּנָּסִין וּסְרוּחִין, וְהָיוּ נוֹתְנִין עֲלֵיהֶן מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין. הִתְחִילוּ וַעֲשָׂאוּם קֶבַע — גָּזְרוּ עֲלֵיהֶם טוּמְאָה.
Among the eighteen decrees that the Sages issued on that day, we also learned: And one whose head and most of his body come into drawn water is impure by rabbinic decree. The Gemara asks: What is the reason the Sages decreed impurity upon him? Rav Beivai said that Rav Asi said: The reason for this is that originally they would immerse to become purified in cave water that was collected, still, and foul. Although this water purified them, due to its stench, the people immersing themselves would pour on themselves drawn water in order to clean themselves. Once they began this custom and transformed it into an established part of the ritual, the Sages issued a decree on the drawn water, rendering it impure, to prevent them from washing with it after immersion.
מַאי קֶבַע? — אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: לֹא אֵלּוּ מְטַהֲרִין, אֶלָּא אֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ מְטַהֲרִין. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: מַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ, הָא קָא טָבְלִי בְּהָנָךְ? אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: לֹא אֵלּוּ מְטַהֲרִין, אֶלָּא אֵלּוּ מְטַהֲרִין.
The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of this, that they transformed it into an established part of the ritual? Abaye said that they would say: The cave water is not what purifies; rather this, the cave water, and that, the drawn water, together purify. Rava said to him: What difference does it make if they say that? Ultimately, aren’t they immersing in the cave water? As long as they immersed themselves properly, it matters not if they misunderstand the reason. Rather, Rava said: The problem is that eventually they would say: This, the cave water, is not what purifies; rather, that, the drawn water, purifies. Therefore, the Sages issued a decree prohibiting the use of drawn water after purification.
וְטָהוֹר שֶׁנָּפְלוּ עַל רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה לוּגִּין מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? — דְּאִי לָא הָא, לָא קָיְימָא הָא.
And the Sages decreed impurity upon a ritually pure person that three log of drawn water fell on his head and most of his body. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that the Sages decreed impurity upon him? The reason for the decree is that if it were not for this decree that a ritually pure person, who does not require immersion, becomes impure when drawn water falls on him, then that, the first decree, would not stand. People would not distinguish between a person who was pure from the start and one who was just purified upon emerging from immersion.
וְסֵפֶר — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? — אָמַר רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא: שֶׁבִּתְחִלָּה הָיוּ מַצְנִיעִין (אֶת) אוֹכָלִין דִּתְרוּמָה אֵצֶל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה, וַאֲמַרוּ: הַאי קֹדֶשׁ וְהַאי קֹדֶשׁ. כֵּיוָן דְּקָחָזוּ דְּקָאָתוּ לִידֵי פְסֵידָא, גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה.
The Gemara explains the next case in the mishna: And a Torah scroll; what is the reason the Sages decreed impurity upon it? Rav Mesharshiya said: Since at first, ignorant priests would conceal teruma foods alongside the Torah scroll, and they said in explaining that method of storage: This is sacred and that is sacred, and it is appropriate that they be stored together. Since the Sages saw that they were coming to ruin, as the mice who were attracted to the teruma foods would also gnaw at the Torah scrolls, the Sages decreed impurity upon it. Once they issued the decree of impurity on the Torah scroll, the priests no longer placed teruma near it.
וְהַיָּדַיִם — מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַיָּדַיִם עַסְקָנִיּוֹת הֵן. תָּנָא, אַף יָדַיִם הַבָּאוֹת מֵחֲמַת סֵפֶר פּוֹסְלוֹת אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה. מִשּׁוּם דְּרַבִּי פַּרְנָךְ — דְּאָמַר רַבִּי פַּרְנָךְ אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הָאוֹחֵז סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה עָרוֹם, נִקְבָּר עָרוֹם. עָרוֹם סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: עָרוֹם בְּלֹא מִצְוֹת. בְּלֹא מִצְוֹת סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא אֵימָא: עָרוֹם בְּלֹא אוֹתָהּ מִצְוָה.
The Gemara explains the next case in the mishna: And the hands; the reason that the Sages decreed impurity upon them is because hands are busy. A person’s hands tend to touch dirty or impure objects. Since one does not always pay attention to what his hands touch, and it is inappropriate for holy food to be touched by dirty hands, the Sages decreed impurity. It was taught in a baraita: Even hands that come to be impure due to contact with a Torah scroll disqualify the teruma. The reason for this decree is because of the statement of Rabbi Parnakh, as Rabbi Parnakh said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One who holds a Torah scroll in a manner that the scroll is exposed without a covering; his punishment is that he is buried naked. The Gemara wonders: Does it enter your mind to say that he will actually be buried naked? Why should he suffer such ignominy for this sin? Rather, Rabbi Zeira said: He is buried naked, i.e., without mitzvot. And the Gemara wonders further: Does it enter your mind to say that he should be buried naked in the sense of without mitzvot? Will he be stripped of all his merit due to that sin? Rather, say he is buried naked, i.e., without that mitzva. If he touches an uncovered Torah scroll, even for the purpose of performing a mitzva, he is not credited with that mitzva because he performed it inappropriately.
הֵי גְּזוּר בְּרֵישָׁא? אִילֵימָא הָא גְּזוּר בְּרֵישָׁא,
The Gemara asks: Which of these decrees did the Sages issue first? If you say that they issued this decree, impurity of hands in general, first,
כֵּיוָן דְּהָךְ גְּזוּר בְּרֵישָׁא, הָא תּוּ לְמָה לִי? אֶלָּא הָךְ גְּזוּר בְּרֵישָׁא, וַהֲדַר גְּזוּר בְּכוּלְּהוּ יָדַיִם.
once they decreed that first, why do I need that decree of impurity on hands that touch a sacred scroll as well? Once the Sages decreed impurity on hands in general, there is no longer a necessity to decree impurity on hands that touched a Torah scroll, as hands are impure in any case. Rather, certainly the Sages decreed impurity on this, hands that touched a Torah scroll, first. And then they decreed impurity on all hands.
וּטְבוּל יוֹם — טְבוּל יוֹם דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא הוּא, דִּכְתִיב: ״וּבָא הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְטָהֵר״! סְמִי מִכָּאן טְבוּל יוֹם.
Among the decrees listed in the mishna, there is the decree that contact with one who immersed himself during the day disqualifies teruma. The Gemara asks: One who immersed himself during the day transmits impurity by Torah law, as it is written: “One who touches it remains impure until evening. He should not eat of the consecrated items and he must wash his flesh with water. And the sun sets and it is purified. Afterward, he may eat from the teruma, for it is his bread” (Leviticus 22:6–7). Consequently, until sunset he is prohibited by Torah law from touching consecrated items, and the same is true for teruma. The Gemara answers: Delete from here, from the list of decrees in the mishna, one who immersed himself during the day.
וְהָאוֹכָלִין שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ בְּמַשְׁקִין — בְּמַשְׁקִין דְּמַאי? אִילֵימָא בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ — דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא נִינְהוּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְכׇל מַשְׁקֶה אֲשֶׁר יִשָּׁתֶה״. אֶלָּא בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת יָדַיִם, וּגְזֵירָה מִשּׁוּם מַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ.
And among the decrees that were listed, there is also the decree concerning the impurity of the foods that became impure through contact with liquids. The Gemara asks: With liquids that became impure due to contact with what source of impurity? If you say that the mishna is referring to liquids that come to be impure due to contact with a creeping animal, they are impure by Torah law, as it is written with regard to the impurity of creeping animals: “And every liquid that is drunk in any vessel, will be impure” (Leviticus 11:34). Rather, the mishna is referring to liquids that come to be impure due to contact with impure hands. The Sages issued this decree due to liquids that come to be impure through contact with a creeping animal.
וְהַכֵּלִים שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ בְּמַשְׁקִין — כֵּלִים דְּאִיטַּמְּאוּ בְּמַשְׁקִין דְּמַאי? אִילֵימָא בְּמַשְׁקִין דְּזָב — דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא נִינְהוּ! דִּכְתִיב: ״וְכִי יָרוֹק הַזָּב בַּטָּהוֹר״ — מַה שֶּׁבְּיַד טָהוֹר טִמֵּאתִי לָךְ. אֶלָּא בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ, וּגְזֵירָה מִשּׁוּם מַשְׁקִין דְּזָב.
And among the decrees that were listed, there is also the decree concerning the vessels that became impure through contact with liquids. The Gemara asks: Vessels that became impure due to contact with liquids that became impure due to contact with what source of impurity? If you say that they become impure due to contact with liquids secreted by a zav, e.g., spittle, urine, etc., they are impure by Torah law, as it is written: “And if a zav spits on a pure person and he should wash his clothes and wash in water and he is impure until the evening” (Leviticus 15:8). The Sages interpreted homiletically: Whatever is in the hand of the pure person I made impure for you. Not only did the person who came into contact with the liquids of the zav become impure, but the objects in his hand did as well. Rather, here it is referring to liquids that come to be impure due to contact with a creeping animal, which by Torah law do not transmit impurity to vessels. And the Sages issued a decree with regard to those liquids due to their similarity to the liquids of a zav.
וְיָדַיִם תַּלְמִידֵי שַׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל גְּזוּר? שַׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל גְּזוּר! דְּתַנְיָא: יוֹסֵי בֶּן יוֹעֶזֶר אִישׁ צְרֵידָה וְיוֹסֵי בֶּן יוֹחָנָן אִישׁ יְרוּשָׁלַיִם גְּזַרוּ טוּמְאָה עַל אֶרֶץ הָעַמִּים וְעַל כְּלֵי זְכוּכִית. שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח תִּיקֵּן כְּתוּבָּה לָאִשָּׁה, וְגָזַר טוּמְאָה עַל כְּלֵי מַתָּכוֹת. שַׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל גָּזְרוּ טוּמְאָה עַל הַיָּדַיִם!
Among the list of items in the mishna with regard to which the disciples of Shammai and Hillel instituted decrees, were the hands of any person who did not purify himself for the sake of purity of teruma. If he came into contact with teruma, the Sages decreed it impure. The Gemara asks: And with regard to hands, was it the disciples of Shammai and Hillel who issued the decree of impurity? Shammai and Hillel themselves issued the decree. As it was taught in a baraita: Yosei ben Yo’ezer of Tzereida and Yosei ben Yoḥanan of Jerusalem decreed impurity on the land of the nations, that the land outside Eretz Yisrael transmits impurity; and they decreed impurity on glass vessels, even though glass is not listed in the Torah among the vessels that can become impure. Shimon ben Shataḥ instituted the formula of a woman’s marriage contract and also decreed special impurity on metal vessels. Shammai and Hillel decreed impurity on the hands.
וְכִי תֵּימָא שַׁמַּאי וְסִיעָתוֹ וְהִלֵּל וְסִיעָתוֹ, וְהָאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: שְׁמֹנָה עָשָׂר דָּבָר גָּזְרוּ, וּבִשְׁמֹנָה עָשָׂר נֶחְלְקוּ. וְאִילּוּ הִלֵּל וְשַׁמַּאי לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה מְקוֹמוֹת, דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא: בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה מְקוֹמוֹת נֶחְלְקוּ וְתוּ לָא. וְכִי תֵימָא: אֲתוֹ אִינְהוּ גְּזוּר לִתְלוֹת, וַאֲתוֹ תַּלְמִידַיְיהוּ וּגְזַרוּ לִשְׂרוֹף. וְהָאָמַר אִילְפָא: יָדַיִם תְּחִלַּת גְּזֵירָתָן לִשְׂרֵיפָה! אֶלָּא אֲתוֹ אִינְהוּ גְּזוּר וְלָא קַבִּלוּ מִינַּיְיהוּ, וַאֲתוֹ תַּלְמִידַיְיהוּ גְּזַרוּ וְקַבִּלוּ מִינַּיְיהוּ.
And if you say that the baraita is referring to Shammai and his faction and Hillel and his faction, didn’t Rav Yehuda say that Shmuel said: With regard to eighteen matters they issued decrees that day, and with regard to those eighteen matters they disagreed prior to that? The eighteen disputes were only between the disciples of Shammai and Hillel, whereas Hillel and Shammai themselves argued only in three places. Clearly, they were neither party to the disputes nor the decrees. As Rav Huna said: Shammai and Hillel disagreed in only three places and no more. And if you say that Hillel and Shammai came and decreed that teruma that came into contact with hands would be in abeyance, and their students came and decreed to burn teruma that came into contact with hands, then the following difficulty arises. Didn’t Ilfa, one of the Sages, say: With regard to hands, from the beginning their decree was that teruma that comes into contact with them is to be burned? According to Ilfa, there is no uncertainty. Teruma that came into contact with definite impurity is burned. Teruma that is in abeyance may not be destroyed. One must wait until it becomes definitely impure or decomposes on its own. Rather, the explanation is that they came and issued a decree and the people did not accept the decree from them, and their disciples came and issued a decree and they accepted it from them.
וְאַכַּתִּי, שְׁלֹמֹה גְּזַר! דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁתִּיקֵּן שְׁלֹמֹה עֵירוּבִין וּנְטִילַת יָדַיִם, יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה: ״בְּנִי אִם חָכַם לִבֶּךָ יִשְׂמַח לִבִּי גַם אָנִי״, ״חֲכַם בְּנִי וְשַׂמַּח לִבִּי וְאָשִׁיבָה חוֹרְפִי דָבָר״! — אֲתָא
The Gemara asks further: Still, the matter is not clear, as the decree of hands was issued by King Solomon. As Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: At the time that Solomon instituted the ordinances of eiruv and of washing hands to purify them from their impurity, a Divine Voice emerged and said in his praise: “My son, if your heart is wise my heart will be glad, even mine” (Proverbs 23:15), and so too: “My son, be wise and make my heart glad, that I may respond to those who taunt me” (Proverbs 27: 11). The Gemara responds: Came
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I started learning when my brother sent me the news clip of the celebration of the last Daf Yomi cycle. I was so floored to see so many women celebrating that I wanted to be a part of it. It has been an enriching experience studying a text in a language I don’t speak, using background knowledge that I don’t have. It is stretching my learning in unexpected ways, bringing me joy and satisfaction.
Warwick, Rhode Island, United States
In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!
Pittsburgh, United States
It’s hard to believe it has been over two years. Daf yomi has changed my life in so many ways and has been sustaining during this global sea change. Each day means learning something new, digging a little deeper, adding another lens, seeing worlds with new eyes. Daf has also fostered new friendships and deepened childhood connections, as long time friends have unexpectedly become havruta.
Northwest Washington, United States
I decided to give daf yomi a try when I heard about the siyum hashas in 2020. Once the pandemic hit, the daily commitment gave my days some much-needed structure. There have been times when I’ve felt like quitting- especially when encountering very technical details in the text. But then I tell myself, “Look how much you’ve done. You can’t stop now!” So I keep going & my Koren bookshelf grows…
Huntington, United States
I began learning the daf in January 2022. I initially “flew under the radar,” sharing my journey with my husband and a few close friends. I was apprehensive – who, me? Gemara? Now, 2 years in, I feel changed. The rigor of a daily commitment frames my days. The intellectual engagement enhances my knowledge. And the virtual community of learners has become a new family, weaving a glorious tapestry.
Far Rockaway, United States
Bronx, United States
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Haifa, Israel
When the new cycle began, I thought, If not now, when? I’d just turned 72. I feel like a tourist on a tour bus passing astonishing scenery each day. Rabbanit Michelle is my beloved tour guide. When the cycle ends, I’ll be 80. I pray that I’ll have strength and mind to continue the journey to glimpse a little more. My grandchildren think having a daf-learning savta is cool!
Jerusalem, Israel
After reading the book, “ If All The Seas Were Ink “ by Ileana Kurshan I started studying Talmud. I searched and studied with several teachers until I found Michelle Farber. I have been studying with her for two years. I look forward every day to learn from her.
Virginia, United States
I had dreamed of doing daf yomi since I had my first serious Talmud class 18 years ago at Pardes with Rahel Berkovitz, and then a couple of summers with Leah Rosenthal. There is no way I would be able to do it without another wonderful teacher, Michelle, and the Hadran organization. I wake up and am excited to start each day with the next daf.
Irvine, United States
It has been a pleasure keeping pace with this wonderful and scholarly group of women.
Beit Shemesh, Israel
I began my journey with Rabbanit Michelle more than five years ago. My friend came up with a great idea for about 15 of us to learn the daf and one of us would summarize weekly what we learned.
It was fun but after 2-3 months people began to leave. I have continued. Since the cycle began Again I have joined the Teaneck women.. I find it most rewarding in so many ways. Thank you
New Jersey, United States
My curiosity was peaked after seeing posts about the end of the last cycle. I am always looking for opportunities to increase my Jewish literacy & I am someone that is drawn to habit and consistency. Dinnertime includes a “Guess what I learned on the daf” segment for my husband and 18 year old twins. I also love the feelings of connection with my colleagues who are also learning.
Tampa, United States
I have joined the community of daf yomi learners at the start of this cycle. I have studied in different ways – by reading the page, translating the page, attending a local shiur and listening to Rabbanit Farber’s podcasts, depending on circumstances and where I was at the time. The reactions have been positive throughout – with no exception!
Guildford, United Kingdom
I started my Daf Yomi journey at the beginning of the COVID19 pandemic.
Los Angeles, United States
Tel Aviv, Israel
New York, United States
I started learning at the beginning of the cycle after a friend persuaded me that it would be right up my alley. I was lucky enough to learn at Rabbanit Michelle’s house before it started on zoom and it was quickly part of my daily routine. I find it so important to see for myself where halachot were derived, where stories were told and to get more insight into how the Rabbis interacted.
Ra’anana, Israel
Los Angeles, United States
I never thought I’d be able to do Daf Yomi till I saw the video of Hadran’s Siyum HaShas. Now, 2 years later, I’m about to participate in Siyum Seder Mo’ed with my Hadran community. It has been an incredible privilege to learn with Rabbanit Michelle and to get to know so many caring, talented and knowledgeable women. I look forward with great anticipation and excitement to learning Seder Nashim.
Karmiel, Israel
Shabbat 14
לָא מְטַמּוּ? אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה, רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ הִיא. דִּתְנַן: רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הָאוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל רִאשׁוֹן — רִאשׁוֹן. וְאוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל שֵׁנִי — שֵׁנִי. אוֹכֶל שְׁלִישִׁי — שְׁלִישִׁי. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: הָאוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל רִאשׁוֹן וְאוֹכֶל שֵׁנִי — שֵׁנִי. שְׁלִישִׁי — שֵׁנִי לַקּוֹדֶשׁ, וְאֵין שֵׁנִי לַתְּרוּמָה בְּחוּלִּין שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ עַל טׇהֳרַת תְּרוּמָה.
do not render it impure; in other words, they do not render the teruma capable of transmitting impurity to other items? Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: It is the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua. As we learned in a mishna: Rabbi Eliezer says: One who eats food with first degree ritual impurity status assumes first degree ritual impurity status, and anything with first degree ritual impurity status renders teruma impure. And one who eats food with second degree ritual impurity status assumes second degree ritual impurity status. One who eats food with third degree ritual impurity status assumes third degree ritual impurity status. Rabbi Yehoshua says: One who eats food with first degree ritual impurity status and one who eats food with second degree ritual impurity status assume second degree ritual impurity status. One with second degree ritual impurity status who comes into contact with teruma disqualifies it and does not render it impure. One who eats food with third degree ritual impurity status assumes second degree ritual impurity status vis-à-vis consecrated items, and he does not assume second degree ritual impurity status vis-à-vis teruma. Eating an item with third degree ritual impurity status is only feasible in the case of non-sacred items, as eating impure teruma is prohibited. It is only possible in the case of non-sacred food items that were prepared as if their level of purity were on the level of the purity of teruma.
אוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל רִאשׁוֹן וְאוֹכֵל אוֹכֶל שֵׁנִי — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? דְּזִימְנִין דְּאָכֵיל אוֹכָלִין טְמֵאִין, וְשָׁקֵיל מַשְׁקִין דִּתְרוּמָה, וְשָׁדֵי לְפוּמֵּיהּ וּפָסֵיל לְהוּ.
With regard to the decree itself, the Gemara asks: One who eats food with first degree ritual impurity status and one who eats food with second degree ritual impurity status; what is the reason the Sages decreed impurity upon him, rendering him impure? The Gemara answers: Because at times one eats impure food, and takes liquids of teruma, and casts them into his mouth and disqualifies the liquids, as the impure food comes into contact with the liquid in his mouth and disqualifies it. To prevent this, the Sages decreed that one who eats impure food becomes impure and must refrain from touching teruma at all.
שׁוֹתֶה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? דְּזִימְנִין דְּשָׁתֵי מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין, וְשָׁקֵיל אוֹכָלִין דִּתְרוּמָה וְשָׁדֵי לְפוּמֵּיהּ וּפָסֵיל לְהוּ. הַיְינוּ הָךְ? מַהוּ דְתֵימָא: הָא שְׁכִיחִי, וְהָא לָא שְׁכִיחִי — קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.
Similarly, the Gemara asks: One who drinks impure liquids; what is the reason the Sages decreed impurity upon him? The Gemara answers: Because at times one drinks impure liquids, and takes teruma foods, and casts them in his mouth, and disqualifies them. The Gemara asks: This decree is the same as that decree as they were issued for one reason. Why did the mishna list them separately and consider them two different decrees? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that this, people who eat impure food, is common; as it is common for one eating to drink. Consequently, one who eats impure food is likely to drink teruma liquid. And, however, that, one drinking impure liquids who would put food in his mouth while drinking is uncommon. As a result, it is conceivable to say that the Sages did not issue a decree in an uncommon case. Therefore, the mishna teaches us that even in that instance the Sages decreed impurity.
וְהַבָּא רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בְּמַיִם שְׁאוּבִין — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? אָמַר רַב בִּיבִי אָמַר רַב אַסִּי: שֶׁבַּתְּחִלָּה הָיוּ טוֹבְלִין בְּמֵי מְעָרוֹת מְכוּנָּסִין וּסְרוּחִין, וְהָיוּ נוֹתְנִין עֲלֵיהֶן מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין. הִתְחִילוּ וַעֲשָׂאוּם קֶבַע — גָּזְרוּ עֲלֵיהֶם טוּמְאָה.
Among the eighteen decrees that the Sages issued on that day, we also learned: And one whose head and most of his body come into drawn water is impure by rabbinic decree. The Gemara asks: What is the reason the Sages decreed impurity upon him? Rav Beivai said that Rav Asi said: The reason for this is that originally they would immerse to become purified in cave water that was collected, still, and foul. Although this water purified them, due to its stench, the people immersing themselves would pour on themselves drawn water in order to clean themselves. Once they began this custom and transformed it into an established part of the ritual, the Sages issued a decree on the drawn water, rendering it impure, to prevent them from washing with it after immersion.
מַאי קֶבַע? — אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: לֹא אֵלּוּ מְטַהֲרִין, אֶלָּא אֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ מְטַהֲרִין. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: מַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ, הָא קָא טָבְלִי בְּהָנָךְ? אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: לֹא אֵלּוּ מְטַהֲרִין, אֶלָּא אֵלּוּ מְטַהֲרִין.
The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of this, that they transformed it into an established part of the ritual? Abaye said that they would say: The cave water is not what purifies; rather this, the cave water, and that, the drawn water, together purify. Rava said to him: What difference does it make if they say that? Ultimately, aren’t they immersing in the cave water? As long as they immersed themselves properly, it matters not if they misunderstand the reason. Rather, Rava said: The problem is that eventually they would say: This, the cave water, is not what purifies; rather, that, the drawn water, purifies. Therefore, the Sages issued a decree prohibiting the use of drawn water after purification.
וְטָהוֹר שֶׁנָּפְלוּ עַל רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה לוּגִּין מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? — דְּאִי לָא הָא, לָא קָיְימָא הָא.
And the Sages decreed impurity upon a ritually pure person that three log of drawn water fell on his head and most of his body. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that the Sages decreed impurity upon him? The reason for the decree is that if it were not for this decree that a ritually pure person, who does not require immersion, becomes impure when drawn water falls on him, then that, the first decree, would not stand. People would not distinguish between a person who was pure from the start and one who was just purified upon emerging from immersion.
וְסֵפֶר — מַאי טַעְמָא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה? — אָמַר רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא: שֶׁבִּתְחִלָּה הָיוּ מַצְנִיעִין (אֶת) אוֹכָלִין דִּתְרוּמָה אֵצֶל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה, וַאֲמַרוּ: הַאי קֹדֶשׁ וְהַאי קֹדֶשׁ. כֵּיוָן דְּקָחָזוּ דְּקָאָתוּ לִידֵי פְסֵידָא, גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן טוּמְאָה.
The Gemara explains the next case in the mishna: And a Torah scroll; what is the reason the Sages decreed impurity upon it? Rav Mesharshiya said: Since at first, ignorant priests would conceal teruma foods alongside the Torah scroll, and they said in explaining that method of storage: This is sacred and that is sacred, and it is appropriate that they be stored together. Since the Sages saw that they were coming to ruin, as the mice who were attracted to the teruma foods would also gnaw at the Torah scrolls, the Sages decreed impurity upon it. Once they issued the decree of impurity on the Torah scroll, the priests no longer placed teruma near it.
וְהַיָּדַיִם — מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַיָּדַיִם עַסְקָנִיּוֹת הֵן. תָּנָא, אַף יָדַיִם הַבָּאוֹת מֵחֲמַת סֵפֶר פּוֹסְלוֹת אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה. מִשּׁוּם דְּרַבִּי פַּרְנָךְ — דְּאָמַר רַבִּי פַּרְנָךְ אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הָאוֹחֵז סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה עָרוֹם, נִקְבָּר עָרוֹם. עָרוֹם סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: עָרוֹם בְּלֹא מִצְוֹת. בְּלֹא מִצְוֹת סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ? אֶלָּא אֵימָא: עָרוֹם בְּלֹא אוֹתָהּ מִצְוָה.
The Gemara explains the next case in the mishna: And the hands; the reason that the Sages decreed impurity upon them is because hands are busy. A person’s hands tend to touch dirty or impure objects. Since one does not always pay attention to what his hands touch, and it is inappropriate for holy food to be touched by dirty hands, the Sages decreed impurity. It was taught in a baraita: Even hands that come to be impure due to contact with a Torah scroll disqualify the teruma. The reason for this decree is because of the statement of Rabbi Parnakh, as Rabbi Parnakh said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One who holds a Torah scroll in a manner that the scroll is exposed without a covering; his punishment is that he is buried naked. The Gemara wonders: Does it enter your mind to say that he will actually be buried naked? Why should he suffer such ignominy for this sin? Rather, Rabbi Zeira said: He is buried naked, i.e., without mitzvot. And the Gemara wonders further: Does it enter your mind to say that he should be buried naked in the sense of without mitzvot? Will he be stripped of all his merit due to that sin? Rather, say he is buried naked, i.e., without that mitzva. If he touches an uncovered Torah scroll, even for the purpose of performing a mitzva, he is not credited with that mitzva because he performed it inappropriately.
הֵי גְּזוּר בְּרֵישָׁא? אִילֵימָא הָא גְּזוּר בְּרֵישָׁא,
The Gemara asks: Which of these decrees did the Sages issue first? If you say that they issued this decree, impurity of hands in general, first,
כֵּיוָן דְּהָךְ גְּזוּר בְּרֵישָׁא, הָא תּוּ לְמָה לִי? אֶלָּא הָךְ גְּזוּר בְּרֵישָׁא, וַהֲדַר גְּזוּר בְּכוּלְּהוּ יָדַיִם.
once they decreed that first, why do I need that decree of impurity on hands that touch a sacred scroll as well? Once the Sages decreed impurity on hands in general, there is no longer a necessity to decree impurity on hands that touched a Torah scroll, as hands are impure in any case. Rather, certainly the Sages decreed impurity on this, hands that touched a Torah scroll, first. And then they decreed impurity on all hands.
וּטְבוּל יוֹם — טְבוּל יוֹם דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא הוּא, דִּכְתִיב: ״וּבָא הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְטָהֵר״! סְמִי מִכָּאן טְבוּל יוֹם.
Among the decrees listed in the mishna, there is the decree that contact with one who immersed himself during the day disqualifies teruma. The Gemara asks: One who immersed himself during the day transmits impurity by Torah law, as it is written: “One who touches it remains impure until evening. He should not eat of the consecrated items and he must wash his flesh with water. And the sun sets and it is purified. Afterward, he may eat from the teruma, for it is his bread” (Leviticus 22:6–7). Consequently, until sunset he is prohibited by Torah law from touching consecrated items, and the same is true for teruma. The Gemara answers: Delete from here, from the list of decrees in the mishna, one who immersed himself during the day.
וְהָאוֹכָלִין שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ בְּמַשְׁקִין — בְּמַשְׁקִין דְּמַאי? אִילֵימָא בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ — דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא נִינְהוּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְכׇל מַשְׁקֶה אֲשֶׁר יִשָּׁתֶה״. אֶלָּא בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת יָדַיִם, וּגְזֵירָה מִשּׁוּם מַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ.
And among the decrees that were listed, there is also the decree concerning the impurity of the foods that became impure through contact with liquids. The Gemara asks: With liquids that became impure due to contact with what source of impurity? If you say that the mishna is referring to liquids that come to be impure due to contact with a creeping animal, they are impure by Torah law, as it is written with regard to the impurity of creeping animals: “And every liquid that is drunk in any vessel, will be impure” (Leviticus 11:34). Rather, the mishna is referring to liquids that come to be impure due to contact with impure hands. The Sages issued this decree due to liquids that come to be impure through contact with a creeping animal.
וְהַכֵּלִים שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ בְּמַשְׁקִין — כֵּלִים דְּאִיטַּמְּאוּ בְּמַשְׁקִין דְּמַאי? אִילֵימָא בְּמַשְׁקִין דְּזָב — דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא נִינְהוּ! דִּכְתִיב: ״וְכִי יָרוֹק הַזָּב בַּטָּהוֹר״ — מַה שֶּׁבְּיַד טָהוֹר טִמֵּאתִי לָךְ. אֶלָּא בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ, וּגְזֵירָה מִשּׁוּם מַשְׁקִין דְּזָב.
And among the decrees that were listed, there is also the decree concerning the vessels that became impure through contact with liquids. The Gemara asks: Vessels that became impure due to contact with liquids that became impure due to contact with what source of impurity? If you say that they become impure due to contact with liquids secreted by a zav, e.g., spittle, urine, etc., they are impure by Torah law, as it is written: “And if a zav spits on a pure person and he should wash his clothes and wash in water and he is impure until the evening” (Leviticus 15:8). The Sages interpreted homiletically: Whatever is in the hand of the pure person I made impure for you. Not only did the person who came into contact with the liquids of the zav become impure, but the objects in his hand did as well. Rather, here it is referring to liquids that come to be impure due to contact with a creeping animal, which by Torah law do not transmit impurity to vessels. And the Sages issued a decree with regard to those liquids due to their similarity to the liquids of a zav.
וְיָדַיִם תַּלְמִידֵי שַׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל גְּזוּר? שַׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל גְּזוּר! דְּתַנְיָא: יוֹסֵי בֶּן יוֹעֶזֶר אִישׁ צְרֵידָה וְיוֹסֵי בֶּן יוֹחָנָן אִישׁ יְרוּשָׁלַיִם גְּזַרוּ טוּמְאָה עַל אֶרֶץ הָעַמִּים וְעַל כְּלֵי זְכוּכִית. שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח תִּיקֵּן כְּתוּבָּה לָאִשָּׁה, וְגָזַר טוּמְאָה עַל כְּלֵי מַתָּכוֹת. שַׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל גָּזְרוּ טוּמְאָה עַל הַיָּדַיִם!
Among the list of items in the mishna with regard to which the disciples of Shammai and Hillel instituted decrees, were the hands of any person who did not purify himself for the sake of purity of teruma. If he came into contact with teruma, the Sages decreed it impure. The Gemara asks: And with regard to hands, was it the disciples of Shammai and Hillel who issued the decree of impurity? Shammai and Hillel themselves issued the decree. As it was taught in a baraita: Yosei ben Yo’ezer of Tzereida and Yosei ben Yoḥanan of Jerusalem decreed impurity on the land of the nations, that the land outside Eretz Yisrael transmits impurity; and they decreed impurity on glass vessels, even though glass is not listed in the Torah among the vessels that can become impure. Shimon ben Shataḥ instituted the formula of a woman’s marriage contract and also decreed special impurity on metal vessels. Shammai and Hillel decreed impurity on the hands.
וְכִי תֵּימָא שַׁמַּאי וְסִיעָתוֹ וְהִלֵּל וְסִיעָתוֹ, וְהָאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: שְׁמֹנָה עָשָׂר דָּבָר גָּזְרוּ, וּבִשְׁמֹנָה עָשָׂר נֶחְלְקוּ. וְאִילּוּ הִלֵּל וְשַׁמַּאי לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה מְקוֹמוֹת, דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא: בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה מְקוֹמוֹת נֶחְלְקוּ וְתוּ לָא. וְכִי תֵימָא: אֲתוֹ אִינְהוּ גְּזוּר לִתְלוֹת, וַאֲתוֹ תַּלְמִידַיְיהוּ וּגְזַרוּ לִשְׂרוֹף. וְהָאָמַר אִילְפָא: יָדַיִם תְּחִלַּת גְּזֵירָתָן לִשְׂרֵיפָה! אֶלָּא אֲתוֹ אִינְהוּ גְּזוּר וְלָא קַבִּלוּ מִינַּיְיהוּ, וַאֲתוֹ תַּלְמִידַיְיהוּ גְּזַרוּ וְקַבִּלוּ מִינַּיְיהוּ.
And if you say that the baraita is referring to Shammai and his faction and Hillel and his faction, didn’t Rav Yehuda say that Shmuel said: With regard to eighteen matters they issued decrees that day, and with regard to those eighteen matters they disagreed prior to that? The eighteen disputes were only between the disciples of Shammai and Hillel, whereas Hillel and Shammai themselves argued only in three places. Clearly, they were neither party to the disputes nor the decrees. As Rav Huna said: Shammai and Hillel disagreed in only three places and no more. And if you say that Hillel and Shammai came and decreed that teruma that came into contact with hands would be in abeyance, and their students came and decreed to burn teruma that came into contact with hands, then the following difficulty arises. Didn’t Ilfa, one of the Sages, say: With regard to hands, from the beginning their decree was that teruma that comes into contact with them is to be burned? According to Ilfa, there is no uncertainty. Teruma that came into contact with definite impurity is burned. Teruma that is in abeyance may not be destroyed. One must wait until it becomes definitely impure or decomposes on its own. Rather, the explanation is that they came and issued a decree and the people did not accept the decree from them, and their disciples came and issued a decree and they accepted it from them.
וְאַכַּתִּי, שְׁלֹמֹה גְּזַר! דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁתִּיקֵּן שְׁלֹמֹה עֵירוּבִין וּנְטִילַת יָדַיִם, יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה: ״בְּנִי אִם חָכַם לִבֶּךָ יִשְׂמַח לִבִּי גַם אָנִי״, ״חֲכַם בְּנִי וְשַׂמַּח לִבִּי וְאָשִׁיבָה חוֹרְפִי דָבָר״! — אֲתָא
The Gemara asks further: Still, the matter is not clear, as the decree of hands was issued by King Solomon. As Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: At the time that Solomon instituted the ordinances of eiruv and of washing hands to purify them from their impurity, a Divine Voice emerged and said in his praise: “My son, if your heart is wise my heart will be glad, even mine” (Proverbs 23:15), and so too: “My son, be wise and make my heart glad, that I may respond to those who taunt me” (Proverbs 27: 11). The Gemara responds: Came
