QUESTION: The Gemara proves from the Mishnah that if an Am ha'Aretz says that he designated part of the contents of the barrel as Kodesh (and is thus trusted to guard that Kodesh from becoming Tamei), he is also trusted with regard to the other items (such as Terumah and Chulin) in the barrel, even though they are not Kodesh.

RASHI (DH Migu) explains that we may assume that the Am ha'Aretz guards the Terumah while he guards the Kodesh because "it would be a disgrace to the Mizbe'ach to offer upon it Kodesh that is considered Tahor which was next to Terumah that is considered Tamei." For this reason, even the containers in which the Kodesh are stored are Tahor; it would be disgraceful for the Kodesh to be sitting in containers which are Tamei (DH bi'Metaher).

Why does Rashi say that the reason the Am ha'Aretz is trusted with regard to the other contents of the barrel (and the barrel itself) is that "it would be a disgrace to the Mizbe'ach"? The Gemara makes no mention of this reason of disgrace. Rather, the Gemara implies that the reason why the Am ha'Aretz is trusted for all of the contents of the barrel is that he guards everything in it because of the Kodesh it contains. Since ("Migu") he guards it properly to protect the Kodesh inside, he also guards the Terumah, and the barrel itself, from becoming Tamei. What is Rashi's source for saying that the reason why the Am ha'Aretz is believed is the disgrace to the Mizbe'ach?

ANSWER: The CHIDUSHIM U'VI'URIM (DH Alma) answers that the Gemara earlier applies the Mishnah's logic of "Migu" to a case in which a person examines a field (Beis ha'Pras) for bones (by blowing the soil or by checking if it was already trampled) in order to walk through the field without concern for becoming Tamei so that he may bring his Korban Pesach to the Beis ha'Mikdash. When a person examines the field in such a manner, the Chachamim suspend the decree of Tum'ah of a Beis ha'Pras so that he may offer his Korban Pesach. The Gemara proposes that once he examines the Beis ha'Pras and walks through it in order to bring his Korban Pesach, he may also eat Terumah even though he has walked through a Beis ha'Pras. Since ("Migu") the Beis ha'Pras has the status of a Tahor field for the purpose of bringing the Korban Pesach, it is also considered Tahor for the purpose of eating Terumah.

In the case of the Beis ha'Pras there is no logical connection between offering the Korban Pesach and the field's status of Tahor. Rather, the Chachamim merely suspended their decree of Tum'ah on the field out of necessity, even though there is no reason to assume that it is any more Tahor now than it was yesterday. If the reason why, in the case of the Mishnah, the barrels are considered Tahor is because the Am ha'Aretz guards the Kodesh inside them and thus it is assumed that he guards everything else inside them as well, that logic applies only when there are grounds to assume that he indeed guards the Kodesh and the Kodesh is Tahor. This logic does not apply in the case of the Beis ha'Pras, where there is no reason whatsoever to assume that the field is Tahor simply because someone wants to walk through it to bring a Korban Pesach.

From the fact that the Gemara does compare the case of the barrel of an Am ha'Aretz which contains Kodesh to the case of a person who walks through a Beis ha'Pras, Rashi infers that the reason why the Kodesh in the barrel is Tahor is not because the Am ha'Aretz is trusted. Rather, the Kodesh is considered Tahor out of necessity, so that the Am ha'Aretz "will not go and build a Bamah for himself" (22a). Accordingly, the only reason why the Terumah (inside the barrel along with the Kodesh) can be Tahor is because the Chachamim declared that it would be disgraceful for the Kodesh if the Kodesh would be Tahor while the Terumah next to it would be Tamei. Similarly, in the case of one who walks through a Beis ha'Pras to bring his Korban Pesach, it would be disgraceful for the Korban if the person would be permitted to bring the Korban Pesach through the field but would not be allowed to eat Terumah after he walks through the field.

QUESTION: The Mishnah states that an Am ha'Aretz is trusted with regard to the Taharah of barrels of wine and oil that are "Meduma" not only during the season of pressing but even seventy days before it. The Gemara asks whether these barrels of "Meduma" for which an Am ha'Aretz is trusted are "Meduma" of Terumah or "Meduma" of Kodesh. The Gemara says that the Mishnah cannot mean "Meduma" of Kodesh because there is no such thing as "Dimu'a" for Kodesh. The Gemara answers that the Mishnah refers to a case in which the Am ha'Aretz prepared his Tevel in order to separate Nesachim (Kodesh) from it, in which case he protects it from Tum'ah more carefully, just as he carefully protects actual Kodesh from becoming Tamei.

Apparently, the Gemara's question is that the term "Dimu'a" is never used for anything other than Terumah mixed with Chulin. It does not refer to Kodesh mixed with something, and therefore when the Mishnah uses the term it must refer to Terumah mixed with Chulin and not to Kodesh.

If this is the Gemara's question, then its answer is difficult to understand. The Gemara answers that the Am ha'Aretz designated part of the contents of the barrel to be offered as Nesachim, and thus the contents of the barrel are "Meduma" of Kodesh. If the term "Meduma" is never used for a mixture that contains Kodesh, why does the Gemara say that the Kodesh mixed in the barrel is called "Meduma"?

ANSWERS: The Rishonim present two ways to understand the Gemara's question and answer. Before those two ways are examined, it is necessary to point out that when the Mishnah says that the Am ha'Aretz is trusted with regard to the Taharah of "Meduma," it cannot mean that he is trusted for the Taharah of Kodesh or Terumah which became mixed with Chulin. In such a case, all of the contents of the barrel are Tamei: before the Kodesh or Terumah fell into the barrel, the Chulin was already Tamei, and thus guarding it from the time at which the Kodesh fell into the barrel is pointless. Accordingly, the word "Meduma" in the Mishnah cannot refer to ordinary "Meduma" (Terumah that fell into Chulin). For this reason, the Gemara initially assumes that the "Meduma" of the Mishnah must refer to produce in its original state that was just harvested and from which Terumah has not yet been separated (as Rashi explains in the Mishnah, beginning of 25a). Since Terumah must be separated from it, it is considered as though Terumah is mixed with it.

The Gemara rejects this explanation of "Meduma." It is known that an Am ha'Aretz does not protect Terumah from become Tamei seventy days before the pressing season, but only during the pressing season itself.

The Gemara answers that the Mishnah refers to Kodesh that is mixed with non-Kodesh, and not to Terumah that is mixed with Chulin.

The Gemara subsequently asks that Kodesh cannot be "Meduma." There are two ways to understand the Gemara's question:

(a) TOSFOS (whose words are inserted into the comments of Rashi in our texts) explains that if the Mishnah refers to Kodesh, then, as mentioned above, it cannot refer to Kodesh which became mixed with Chulin, because the Chulin in such a case is already Tamei. Rather, it must refer to Tevel from which Kodesh has not yet been separated. The Gemara asks that this cannot be the case, because there is no such thing as Tevel from which Kodesh must be separated! Produce in its original state contains no Kodesh. (There apparently is a printer's error in the words of Tosfos. The words "she'Yehei ha'*Tevel* Meduma b'Socho" should be "she'Yehei ha'*Kodesh* Meduma b'Socho.")

The Gemara answers this question by saying that the Am ha'Aretz intended to consecrate a portion of the produce of Tevel in the barrel and offer it as Nesachim. Accordingly, until he actually separates the Kodesh from the barrel, he guards the entire barrel from Tum'ah.

According to the Gemara's conclusion, the Mishnah's reference to "Meduma" is unrelated to Terumah. In fact, in the Mishnah's case the barrel may contain even produce from which Terumah was already separated. The Mishnah calls the contents of the barrel "Meduma" only because it is produce from which the Am ha'Aretz intends to separate Kodesh. Although the term "Meduma" is normally not used to refer to Kodesh mixed with Chulin (or any other mixture other than Terumah in Chulin), precedents for this usage of the term is found in TOSFOS in Zevachim (88a, DH Min) who writes that mixtures which contain Orlah and mixtures which contain Kil'ayim may also be called "Meduma." Tosfos there apparently understands the Gemara here in the same way as Tosfos here suggests, that the word "Meduma" does not refer exclusively to Terumah. (See TUREI EVEN 24b, DH Ne'emanin, and RASHASH there.)

(b) However, when RASHI (DH b'Metaher) explains the Gemara's answer (that the Am ha'Aretz planned to separate Kodesh from the barrel), he mentions that the contents of the barrel are "Chulin, Terumah, and Kodesh." Why does Rashi mention that the mixture contains Terumah? According to the previous explanation, the Gemara's answer is unrelated to Terumah; the Gemara searches for a case of Chulin and Kodesh mixed together, and not for a case of a mixture which contains Terumah.

The TOSFOS RID explains that Rashi apparently understands the question of the Gemara differently. According to Rashi, the Gemara asks why the Mishnah calls Kodesh mixed with Chulin "Meduma" when the term "Meduma" is used only to refer to a prohibited mixture of Terumah mixed with something else.

The Gemara answers that the contents of the barrel are a mixture of Chulin, Kodesh, and Terumah. The entire mixture is called "Meduma" because of the Terumah it contains. The Am ha'Aretz set aside his Tevel in order to separate Kodesh from it for use as Nesachim. It is called "Meduma" because it still contains Terumah which has not yet been separated from the Tevel. The Am ha'Aretz guards the entire mixture because it has produce of Kodesh designated in it.

Why, though, does the Mishnah mention "Meduma" and say that there is Terumah mixed with the Tevel, if the Terumah is not the reason for why the Am ha'Aretz guards the barrel from Tum'ah? He guards it because it contains Kodesh, and not because it contains Terumah. The answer is that the Am ha'Aretz is trusted only if he intended from the very start of its production to separate Kodesh from the produce (i.e. from the time the produce was harvested), as mentioned earlier. The Mishnah calls it "Meduma," or Tevel with Terumah still inside it, to show that it has been guarded from the beginning of its production.