## Chagigah Daf 22b

###### Chagigah 22b:1
[Chagigah 22b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:1)

לְעַצְמוֹ טִהַרְנוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**we declared** them **pure for** the *am ha’aretz* **himself,** not for *ḥaverim*, since *ḥaverim* in any event do not consider anything touched by an *am ha’aretz* to be pure. A *ḥaver* would therefore never relate to the food of an *am ha’aretz* as pure, and he would not use the earthenware vessels of an *am ha’aretz* for preparation of pure food, since an earthenware vessel cannot be purified through immersion. However, he might borrow a metal vessel, for instance, and purify it through immersion before using it for pure food.


###### Chagigah 22b:2
[Chagigah 22b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:2)

אֲבָל נְטַהֵר אֶת הַכְּלִי, שֶׁטׇּהֳרָתוֹ לְךָ וָלוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** how **can we purify a vessel** of metal and other materials, **whose purity** would be relevant both **for you and for him?** A *ḥaver* may one day borrow a metal vessel from the *am ha’aretz*, and not realize that it was once inside an earthenware vessel in the same room as a corpse and as a result requires extensive purification from corpse contamination through the ashes of the red heifer, rather than mere immersion. Therefore, the *am ha’aretz* is informed that his vessels of metal and other materials have contracted impurity from the corpse, and must undergo the extensive purification process, and after this is done these vessels will now be fit for use of the *ḥaver* after mere immersion.


###### Chagigah 22b:3
[Chagigah 22b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:3)

תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: בּוֹשַׁנִי מִדִּבְרֵיכֶם, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי! אֶפְשָׁר אִשָּׁה לָשָׁה בַּעֲרֵיבָה — אִשָּׁה וַעֲרֵיבָה טְמֵאִין שִׁבְעָה, וּבָצֵק טָהוֹר? לוֹגִין מָלֵא מַשְׁקִין — לוֹגִין טָמֵא טוּמְאַת שִׁבְעָה, וּמַשְׁקִין טְהוֹרִין?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It is taught** in a *baraita* with regard to this debate between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel: **Rabbi Yehoshua said: I am ashamed of your words, Beit Shammai,** for they are illogical. Is it **possible** that there should be a corpse on the first floor, with an earthenware vessel blocking the opening to the second story, and **a woman** is standing upstairs **kneading** dough **in a** metal **bowl,** and the **woman and the bowl are impure** for **seven** days owing to the impurity of the corpse, **while** the **dough** inside the trough **is pure?** For that would be the result according to Beit Shammai, who distinguishes between food and earthenware vessels on the one hand and metal vessels on the other. Similarly: Is it possible that there is **a** metal **pitcher [*login*] full of liquid** in the second story, and the **pitcher** should be **impure with impurity of seven** days, **while the liquids** remain **pure?**


###### Chagigah 22b:4
[Chagigah 22b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:4)

נִטְפַּל לוֹ תַּלְמִיד אֶחָד מִתַּלְמִידֵי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי, אָמַר לוֹ: אוֹמַר לְךָ טַעְמָן שֶׁל בֵּית שַׁמַּאי. אָמַר לוֹ: אֱמוֹר. אָמַר לוֹ: כְּלִי טָמֵא — חוֹצֵץ אוֹ אֵינוֹ חוֹצֵץ? אָמַר לוֹ: אֵינוֹ חוֹצֵץ. כְּלִי שֶׁל עַם הָאָרֶץ — טָמֵא אוֹ טָהוֹר? אָמַר לוֹ: טָמֵא. וְאִם אַתָּה אוֹמֵר לוֹ ״טָמֵא״, כְּלוּם מַשְׁגִּיחַ עָלֶיךָ? וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא שֶׁאִם אַתָּה אוֹמֵר לוֹ ״טָמֵא״, אוֹמֵר לְךָ: ״שֶׁלִּי טָהוֹר וְשֶׁלְּךָ טָמֵא״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
After Rabbi Yehoshua posed this question, **one student from among the students of Beit Shammai approached him** and **said to him: I will tell you Beit Shammai’s reasoning. He said to him: Speak. He said to him: Does an impure vessel serve as a barrier** to corpse contamination **or does it not serve as a barrier?** Rabbi Yehoshua **said to him: It does not serve as a barrier.** The student asked further: And **is a vessel of an *am ha’aretz* pure or impure? He said to him: Impure.** The student responded: **And if you tell him** that his vessel **is impure, will he pay attention to you at all?** Clearly he will not. **What is more, if you say to him** that it is **impure, he will say to you:** On the contrary, **my** vessel **is pure and yours is impure.**


###### Chagigah 22b:5
[Chagigah 22b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:5)

וְזֶהוּ טַעְמָן שֶׁל בֵּית שַׁמַּאי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And that is Beit Shammai’s reasoning:** Food, drink, and earthenware vessels inside a sealed earthenware vessel remain pure, as, since they belong to an *am ha’aretz*, a *ḥaver* will not eat the food or borrow the earthenware vessel. Vessels of metal or similar materials may one day be borrowed by a *ḥaver*, however, and therefore Beit Shammai declared these to be impure.


###### Chagigah 22b:6
[Chagigah 22b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:6)

מִיָּד הָלַךְ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְנִשְׁתַּטַּח עַל קִבְרֵי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי, אָמַר: נַעֲנֵיתִי לָכֶם עַצְמוֹת בֵּית שַׁמַּאי! וּמָה סְתוּמוֹת שֶׁלָּכֶם כָּךְ, מְפוֹרָשׁוֹת — עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה. אָמְרוּ: כׇּל יָמָיו הוּשְׁחֲרוּ שִׁינָּיו מִפְּנֵי תַּעֲנִיּוֹתָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Once he heard the logic behind Beit Shammai’s opinion, **Rabbi Yehoshua immediately went and prostrated himself on the graves of Beit Shammai,** i.e., the students and proponents of Shammai, and **said: I humble myself before you, bones of Beit Shammai. If such** clarity and wisdom is **found in your** rulings that you stated and left **unexplained, all the more so** must this be the case **in your** rulings when they were stated and **explained.** People **said** of Rabbi Yehoshua: **Throughout his days his teeth darkened because of** all **his fasts** that he undertook to atone for having spoken inappropriately of Beit Shammai.


###### Chagigah 22b:7
[Chagigah 22b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:7)

קָתָנֵי מִיהַת ״לְךָ וָלוֹ״, אַלְמָא שָׁאֲלִינַן מִינַּיְיהוּ! כִּי שָׁיְילִינַן מִינַּיְיהוּ מַטְבְּלִינַן לְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to its main point. **In any event,** this mishna **teaches** that the status of the vessels of an *am ha’aretz* is relevant both **for you and for him. Apparently,** then, **we** *ḥaverim* **may borrow** vessels **from** *amei ha’aretz*. The question therefore arises: Why are the Sages not concerned that *amei ha’aretz* may immerse vessels inside of other vessels in an inappropriate way, so that they will remain unpurified when borrowed by a *ḥaver*? The Gemara answers: **For when we** *ḥaverim* **borrow** vessels **from them we immerse them** before using them. It is therefore inconsequential to us if their vessels were not immersed properly beforehand.


###### Chagigah 22b:8
[Chagigah 22b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:8)

אִי הָכִי, נַיהְדְּרוּ לְהוּ בֵּית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי: כִּי שָׁאֲלִינַן מִינַּיְיהוּ מַטְבְּלִינַן לְהוּ! טְמֵא מֵת בָּעֵי הַזָּאָה שְׁלִישִׁי וּשְׁבִיעִי, וּמָנָא לְשִׁבְעָה יוֹמֵי לָא מוֹשְׁלִי אִינָשֵׁי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so, let Beit Hillel respond to Beit Shammai.** They can respond as follows: **When we borrow** vessels **from them we immerse them,** and that is why we rule that vessels of metal or similar materials are pure. The Gemara explains: That dispute is referring to the impurity of a corpse. **And that which becomes impure by** proximity to **a corpse requires sprinkling** of the red heifer’s ashes on the **third and seventh** days of its purification, **and people do not** generally **lend vessels for seven days.** The solution the *ḥaver* implements of immersing vessels that he borrows from an *am ha’aretz* is effective only for other impurities, but not for the impurity imparted by a corpse.


###### Chagigah 22b:9
[Chagigah 22b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:9)

וְאַטְּבִילָה לָא מְהֵימְנִי? וְהָתַנְיָא: נֶאֱמָנִין עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ עַל טׇהֳרַת טְבִילַת טְמֵא מֵת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara poses a question with regard to the *halakha* that a *ḥaver* must immerse vessels that he borrows from an *am ha’aretz*: **But** is it so that *amei ha’aretz* **are not trusted with regard to immersion? Isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: ***Amei ha’aretz* are trusted with regard to the purification** process **of immersion of that which has become impure by** contact with **a corpse?** In addition to being sprinkled with purification water on the third and seventh days, a person or article that has been in contact with a corpse must also undergo immersion on the seventh day. An *am ha’aretz* is believed when he says that he has performed this immersion.


###### Chagigah 22b:10
[Chagigah 22b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:10)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא בְּגוּפוֹ, הָא בְּכֵלָיו. רָבָא אָמַר: אִידֵּי וְאִידֵּי בְּכֵלָיו, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דְּאָמַר ״מֵעוֹלָם לֹא הִטְבַּלְתִּי כְּלִי בְּתוֹךְ כְּלִי״, וְהָא דְּאָמַר ״הִטְבַּלְתִּי, אֲבָל לֹא הִטְבַּלְתִּי בִּכְלִי שֶׁאֵין בְּפִיו כִּשְׁפוֹפֶרֶת הַנּוֹד״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara presents two answers for this question. **Abaye said** one answer: This is **not difficult. This** *baraita*, which teaches that an *am ha’aretz* is trusted, is referring **to** the immersion of **his body,** whereas **this** teaching of the Gemara that *amei ha’aretz* are not trusted concerning immersion deals **with his vessels. Rava said** a different answer: Both **this and that,** both the *baraita* and the Gemara’s teaching, refer **to** the **vessels** of an *am ha’aretz*, **and it is** nevertheless **not difficult. This** *baraita*, which teaches that an *am ha’aretz* is trusted, is referring to an *am ha’aretz* **who said: I never immersed one vessel inside another,** which is a statement that we accept. **And this** teaching of the Gemara that *amei ha’aretz* are not trusted deals with one **who said: I have immersed** vessels inside of other vessels, **but I did not immerse with a vessel whose mouth does not have** the width of **the tube of a wineskin.** It is with regard to such details that an *am ha’aretz* cannot be trusted.


###### Chagigah 22b:11
[Chagigah 22b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:11)

וְהָתַנְיָא: נֶאֱמָן עַם הָאָרֶץ לוֹמַר פֵּירוֹת לֹא הוּכְשְׁרוּ, אֲבָל אֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן לוֹמַר פֵּירוֹת הוּכְשְׁרוּ אֲבָל לֹא נִטְמְאוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And so it was taught** in a *baraita* to this effect: **An *am ha’aretz* is trusted to say** that **produce has not been made susceptible** to impurity, i.e., that it has never come into contact with water, **but he is not trusted to say** that the **produce has been made susceptible** to impurity **but has not** actually **become impure.** This *baraita* shows that *amei ha’aretz* are trusted concerning basic facts, but not concerning matters that require detailed knowledge and scrupulous care.


###### Chagigah 22b:12
[Chagigah 22b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:12)

וְאַגּוּפוֹ מִי מְהֵימַן? וְהָתַנְיָא: חָבֵר שֶׁבָּא לְהַזּוֹת — מַזִּין עָלָיו מִיָּד, עַם הָאָרֶץ שֶׁבָּא לְהַזּוֹת — אֵין מַזִּין עָלָיו עַד שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְּפָנֵינוּ שְׁלִישִׁי וּשְׁבִיעִי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara poses a question with regard to Abaye’s opinion: **And is** an *am ha’aretz* really **trusted** concerning **his body,** when he claims to have immersed? **Isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: Concerning **a *ḥaver* who comes** before those in charge of sprinkling water of purification **to be sprinkled** with that water, and claims that the requisite three days have passed since his contamination by a corpse, **they may sprinkle upon him immediately. But** concerning **an *am ha’aretz* who comes** before them and claims that three days have passed, **they may not sprinkle upon him until he performs** and counts **in our presence** the **third** day **and** the **seventh** day? This shows that an *am ha’aretz* is not trusted concerning the purity of his own body.


###### Chagigah 22b:13
[Chagigah 22b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:13)

אֶלָּא אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: מִתּוֹךְ חוֹמֶר שֶׁהֶחְמַרְתָּ עָלָיו בִּתְחִילָּתוֹ, הֵקַלְתָּ עָלָיו בְּסוֹפוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Abaye said,** modifying his previous explanation: **Because of the stringency that you applied to** the *am ha’aretz* **in his beginning,** i.e., at the beginning of the purification process, by not allowing him to purify himself without first ensuring that he has not been in contact with a corpse for three days, **you** may **be lenient with him in his end,** in that he is trusted regarding having immersed at the end of the seven days, removing the impurity contracted through contact with a corpse.


###### Chagigah 22b:14
[Chagigah 22b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:14)

אֲחוֹרַיִם וָתוֹךְ. מַאי אֲחוֹרַיִם וָתוֹךְ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: The *halakhot* of **the back** of a vessel **and** its **inside** apply to vessels used for *teruma*, but not for sacrificial food. The Gemara asks: **What is** the meaning of: **The back and** its **inside?**


###### Chagigah 22b:15
[Chagigah 22b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:15)

כְּדִתְנַן: כְּלִי שֶׁנִּטְמָא אֲחוֹרָיו בְּמַשְׁקִין — אֲחוֹרָיו טְמֵאִין, תּוֹכוֹ, אוֹגְנוֹ, אׇזְנוֹ, וְיָדָיו — טְהוֹרִין. נִטְמָא תּוֹכוֹ — כּוּלּוֹ טָמֵא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains. **As we learned** in a mishna (*Keilim* 25:6): **A vessel whose back** part, as opposed to its inside, **was defiled by** contact with impure **liquid. Its back is impure,** while its other parts, such as **its inside, its rim, its ear-shaped handles, and its** straight **handles are pure.** By Torah law, foods and liquids cannot impart ritual impurity to a vessel at all, but by rabbinic law liquids can. In order to clarify that it is only a rabbinic decree, they instituted that the impurity thereby imparted, if the liquid touched the outside of the vessel, should affect only the part touched by the liquid, but not its inside or the other parts of its outside. However, if **its inside was defiled,** even by impurity only according to rabbinic law, **it is all impure.** This *halakha* applies only to *teruma*, but regarding offerings, the defilement of any part of the vessel renders it all impure.


###### Chagigah 22b:16
[Chagigah 22b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:16)

וּבֵית הַצְּבִיטָה וְכוּ׳. מַאי בֵּית הַצְּבִיטָה? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מָקוֹם שֶׁצּוֹבְטוֹ, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וַיִּצְבׇּט לָהּ קָלִי״. רַבִּי אַסִּי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מָקוֹם שֶׁנְּקִיֵּי הַדַּעַת צוֹבְעִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And its place for gripping.** The Gemara asks: **What is** the meaning of: **Place for gripping [*beit hatzevita*]? Rav Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said:** It is the **place** where **he** grips the vessel in order to **pass [*tzovet*]** it, a kind of indentation used for grasping the vessel. **And similarly it states: “And he pinched [*vayitzbat*] some parched corn for her”** (Ruth 2:14), which means that he gave her a little of the corn. Therefore, the term is referring to a place on the vessel used to grasp it. **Rabbi Asi** said that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** It is the **place that fastidious people** use for **dipping.** A small receptacle for spices and the like would be attached to the sides of vessels for dipping one’s food.


###### Chagigah 22b:17
[Chagigah 22b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:17)

תָּנֵי רַב בִּיבִי קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן: כׇּל הַכֵּלִים אֵין לָהֶם אֲחוֹרַיִם וָתוֹךְ, אֶחָד קׇדְשֵׁי הַמִּקְדָּשׁ וְאֶחָד קׇדְשֵׁי הַגְּבוּל. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: קׇדְשֵׁי הַגְּבוּל מַאי נִינְהוּ — תְּרוּמָה, וְהָתְנַן: אֲחוֹרַיִם וָתוֹךְ וּבֵית הַצְּבִיטָה לִתְרוּמָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Beivai taught** the following *baraita* **before Rav Naḥman: No vessels have** this difference between **the back and inside, whether** they are vessels used for **consecrated** foods **of the Temple or** those used for **consecrated** foods **of outlying areas,** i.e., outside the Temple. In these cases, if one of the parts of the vessel was defiled with impure liquids the entire vessel becomes impure. Rav Naḥman **said to him: What are these consecrated** foods **of outlying areas** mentioned in the *baraita*? This term is usually applied to ***teruma*,** but if so the *baraita* contradicts the mishna. For **didn’t we learn** in the mishna: The *halakhot* of **the back** of a vessel **and** its **inside and its place for gripping** apply **to** vessels used for ***teruma*?**


###### Chagigah 22b:18
[Chagigah 22b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:18)

דִּלְמָא לְחוּלִּין שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ עַל טׇהֳרַת הַקּוֹדֶשׁ קָאָמְרַתְּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Naḥman continued: **Perhaps** when you said the consecrated foods of outlying areas you were not referring to *teruma*, but rather **you are speaking of non-sacred** food **prepared according to the** standards of **purity of sacrificial** food, and you called them consecrated foods of outlying areas because this level of purity can be observed outside the Temple as well.


###### Chagigah 22b:19
[Chagigah 22b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:19)

אַדְכַּרְתַּן מִילְּתָא דְּאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת שָׁנוּ כָּאן; שֵׁשׁ רִאשׁוֹנוֹת — בֵּין לַקּוֹדֶשׁ, בֵּין לְחוּלִּין שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ עַל טׇהֳרַת הַקּוֹדֶשׁ, אַחֲרוֹנוֹת — לַקּוֹדֶשׁ, אֲבָל לֹא לְחוּלִּין שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ עַל טׇהֳרַת הַקּוֹדֶשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In the course of this discussion Rav Naḥman said to Rav Beivai: **You have** now **reminded me** of something that **Rabba bar Avuh said** concerning this issue: **They taught eleven stringencies** of sacrificial food **here** in the mishna. The **first six** apply **both to sacrificial** food **and to non-sacred** food **prepared according to the** standards of **purity of sacrificial** food, whereas **the last** five **apply** only **to sacrificial** food**s but not to non-sacred** food **prepared according to the** standards of **purity of sacrificial** food. Rabba bar Avuh’s statement therefore corroborates the interpretation of the *baraita* as dealing with non-sacred food prepared according to the standards of purity of sacrificial foods.


###### Chagigah 22b:20
[Chagigah 22b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chagigah/r/22b:20)

הַנּוֹשֵׂא אֶת הַמִּדְרָס — נוֹשֵׂא אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה, אֲבָל לֹא אֶת הַקּוֹדֶשׁ. קוֹדֶשׁ, מַאי טַעְמָא לָא? מִשּׁוּם מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָיָה. דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאֶחָד שֶׁהָיָה מַעֲבִיר חָבִית שֶׁל יֵין קוֹדֶשׁ מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **One who carries an object trodden** by a *zav* may **carry *teruma*** at the same time, if he is careful that neither he nor the impure object come into contact with the *teruma*, **but** this may **not** be done with **sacrificial** food. The Gemara asks: Concerning **sacrificial** food, **what is the reason** that he may **not** carry it? As long as contact with the food is prevented, why should he not carry sacrificial food as well? The Gemara answers: This enactment was made **due to an incident that occurred. As Rav Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said:** There was once **an incident involving someone who was transferring a barrel of sacrificial wine from one place to another,**