ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafBerachos 22
(a) Torah must be studied like it was given at Har Sinai 'be'Eimah
u've'Yir'ah, be'Reses u've'Zi'ah'.
Other Tum'os, even Zivus and Nidus, to not clash with this concept. Tum'as
Keri, which comes through a deliberate act of light-headedness, does.
(b) Rebbi Yonasan ben Yosef permits a Ba'al Keri even to elaborate on the
Mishnayos, as long as he does not learn Gemara.
And Rebbi Nasan ben Avishalom even allows learn him to learn Gemara, too.
provided he does not pronounce the names of Hashem contained there.
(c) Others quote Rebbi Yochanan ha'Sandelar as saying that a Ba'al Keri
should not enter the Beis-Hamedrash at all.
(d) Although Rebbi Yehudah permitted a Ba'al Keri to learn Hilchos Derech
Eretz, he personally chose to be Machmir.
(a) Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseira told the disciple to open his mouth and speak
up (to Lein slowly), since they have already rescinded the decree requiring
Ba'alei Keri to Tovel.
Rebbi Ila'i says that the Mitzvah of 'Reishis ha'Gez' applies only in Eretz
Yisrael. Rebbi Yashiyah holds that one is only Chayav for sowing a mixture
of seeds, if one sows grape-seeds together with wheat and barley seeds
(b) Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseira specifically said that they have already
rescinded the Takanah of obligating Ba'alei Keri to Tovel for Torah,
possibly because the Takanah of Ezra was never really accepted (See Rambam,
Hilchos Keri'as Shema 4:8).
(c) According to others, Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseira said 'Batlu li'Netilusa'
- meaning that they rescinded the obligation to look for water for washing
before Tefilah, like Rav Chisda (above 15a).
(a) Nachum Ish Gamzu and Rebbi Akiva whispered the concession of using nine
Kabin of water, instead of Toveling in a Kasher Mikveh (or in a river
(b) Some say that Ben Azai passed the information on to his disciples in a
regular voice. It was an important concession, due to the Bitul Torah
caused by having to look for a Kasher Mikveh. Others say that he too,
passed on the information in a whisper because he too, did not like the
concession, inasmuch as it encouraged the Talmidei-Chachamim to spend too
much time with their wives - like chickens.
(c) The Geder Gadol is demonstrated in a story, in which a man accosted an
unmarried woman, who retorted 'Empty man! Do you have forty Sa'ah of water
in which to Tovel? And he desisted. Clearly, the need to Tovel in forty
Sa'ah (and not nine Kabin) prevented many people from sinning
(a) Tevilah requires immersing in forty Sa'ah of gathered water. Tish'ah
Kabin is performed by pouring nine Kabin (one and a half Sa'ah) of water
(which can be drawn) over one's head and body.
(b) Some argued against the concession of Tish'ah Kabin on the grounds that
it was too cold, because, they maintained, one could always heat the water
in the Mikveh. Not everyone agrees with that however. According to some
opinions, it is forbidden to Tovel in heated water.
(a) The barrel contained nine Kabin of water, and was used for the
Talmidei-Chachamim to Tovel before Keri'as ha'Torah (It is unclear as to
why Rashi writes specifically Keri'as ha'Torah and not before Davening?)
(b) Talmidei Chachamim, presumably because of their long hours of incessant
Torah-study, were weak and were generally considered to be sick.
(c) Rav Dimi maintained that Rav Nachman's barrel ought to be broken
because, they said, the concession of Tish'ah Kabin was restricted to
Ba'alei Keri who saw Keri involuntarily, but not those who emitted Keri
deliberately (incorporating Tashmish). That being the case, the barrel
would only be used infrequently, and may as well be broken.
Ravin, on the other hand, held that the concession of nine Kabin was
specifically for the benefit of those who emitted Keri deliberately.
Someone who saw involuntarily, did not even require Tish'ah Kabin.
(a) According to one opinion, the Amora'im gave a Choleh who saw Keri
deliberately, the same Din as a healthy person who saw deliberately (forty
Sa'ah), and a Choleh who saw involuntarily the same Din as a healthy one
who saw involuntarily (nine Kabin).
And according to the other opinion, they compared a Choleh who saw
deliberately to a healthy person who saw involuntarily (nine Sa'ah),
whereas one who saw involuntarily, they did not obligate to Tovel at all.
(b) Rava objects to Abaye's explanation, because Ezra, he proves, did not
institute nine Kabin at all, only Tevilah.
(c) Rava therefore learns that Ezra only instituted forty Sa'ah for a
healthy person who saw Keri deliberately; it was the Rabbanan of a few
generations later, who added nine Kabin for a healthy person who saw Keri
involuntarily. Regarding the Machlokes Amora'im by a sick person, Rava
learns as before.
(d) Rava rules that a Choli ha'Margil requires forty Sa'ah, and a Choli
le'Onso is permitted to learn without Tevilah.
(a) One opinion holds that Rebbi Yehudah requires forty Sa'ah on the
ground, but not in a vessel, whereas the other opinion holds that Rebbi
Yehudah requires forty Sa'ah, even inside a vessel.
(b) Those in whose opinion Rebbi Yehudah forbids even forty Sa'ah inside a
vessel, will explain 'In any case' to mean that the forty Sa'ah is Kasher,
even if the water is drawn.
(c) Rava bar Shmuel objected to Rav Papa Bensching (on account of the nine
Kabinthat had fallen on him) because nine Kabin was only valid for
*learning*, but not *teaching* - and Bensching Mezuman, where the person
who is Bensching is Motzi others, has the Din of teaching.
Therefore he thought that he, who had actually Toveled in a Mikveh, should
(d) In the end, it was Rav Huna Brei de'Rav Yehoshua, who had not been
Tamei in the first place, who prevailed.
(a) Rav Chama Toveled on Erev Pesach (even though, inorder to learn, he
would have relied on nine Kabin), because he intended to be Motzi the
participants of the Seider (as was customary in those days), and, as we
have already learnt, teaching others, requires a proper Tevilah (Perhaps
the reason for this is because the Pasuk, which serves as an Asmachta for
Takanas Ezra, writes "ve'Hoda'atam Levanecha" etc., which implies
(b) By saying that the Halachah is not like him, the Gemara means, either
to be strict, and to say that teaching too, requires forty Sa'ah; or to be
lenient, to dismiss the entire need to Tovel for Divrei Torah nowadays,
since Takanas Ezra has already been rescinded.
(a) If a Ba'al Keri remembers in the middle of the Amidah, that he is a
Ba'al Keri, he should say a shortened form of each Berachah.
(b) According to the Mishnah, if a Ba'al Keri Tovels close to sunrise, he
should quickly come up and get dressed, in order to conclude the Shema with
the rising of the sun. If this is not possible, then he should kick up some
earth with his feet, cover his body with the murky water, and recite the
(b) One may not use smelly water or water in which one has soaked flax, to
(c) 'Ad she'Yatil le'Tochan Mayim' refers to a pot containing urine, and
teaches that one may not recite the Shema in front of it, until one has
added water (we shall see in the Gemara how much water needs to be added.
(a) If a Ba'al Korei remembers in the middle of Leining, that is a Ba'al
Keri, he must quickly finish the Keriy'ah.
(b) Rebbi Permits a Ba'al Keri to Lein no more than three Pesukim.
(c) If someone sees excrement in front of him whilst he is Davening the
Amidah, he must move; if possible, to go four Amos in front of it. If this
is not feasible, then he should at least move four Amos to the side.
(d) Someone who Davens and finds excrement in a place where he should have
expected to find it, will not be Yotze, insists Rava , because of the Pasuk
in Mishlei "Zevach Resha'im To'eivah"!
Consequently, his Tefilah is an abomination, and he has not fulfilled the
Mitzvah of Tefilah (Whether he should Daven again or not, see Tosfos d.h.
'Af Al Pi').
(a) Rav Chisda and Rav Hamnuna argue over whether a person who was dripping
urine during the Amidah must start the Amidah again, or whether he must
just resume from where he left off.
(b) Rav Chisda and Rav Hamnuna do not differentiate between whether he
waited long enough to finish the Amidah (from beginning to end) or not.
They both agree there that he must begin the Amidah again. Their argument
therefore, must be in a case when he did not delay that long. The basis of
their Machlokes is, whether a man who begins to Daven with an urge to
urinate is called unfit to Daven (in which case his first Tefilah was
unfit, and he must begin again), or whether we say that, although he
should not have Davened, he was not, up to the time that the urine actually
began dripping, considered unfit, so there is no need to repeat the Amidah.