(Mishnah - R. Yosi): A case occurred in which a girl went to the spring and was raped. R. Yochanan ben Nuri ruled that if most men of the city have proper lineage, she may marry a Kohen.

(Gemara - Rav Yehudah citing Rav): The episode happened by the spring of Tzipori. (Even though most of the traffic are Nochrim, we follow the majority of the city, who are Kesherim.)

(R. Yirmeyah and R. Chama bar Ukva, both citing R. Chaninah citing R. Yanai): R. Yehoshua agrees about one who was raped (she is believed, for she did not lose her Chezkas Kashrus).

Support (R. Chizkiyah citing R. Yochanan): R. Yehoshua agrees about one who was raped.

(R. Chiya bar Ashi citing Rav): The Halachah follows R. Yosi, who said in the name of R. Yochanan ben Nuri.

Question (R. Ze'ira, to R. Yosi): How do we rule in practice?

Answer (R. Yosi): We rule like R. Yosi, who said in the name of R. Yochanan ben Nuri.

(R. Ila citing R. Yanai): He had Bi'ah [with her] in the city of Tziporin. (We are thinking that this is like Kavu'a, so we do not follow the majority. At the end of the Sugya, we retract from this.)

(Rava citing R. Yanai): If they saw him separate from Tziporin (the city) and have Bi'ah, the Chazakah is that a Pasul there (from the city) had Bi'ah.

Question: [If they saw him separate from] a Reshus ha'Rabim, what is the law? (Is this like when he separated from a house?)

Answer #1 (R. Yirmeyah bar Va): R. Yosi says [that we follow] the majority.

Source (for R. Yirmeyah): R. Chiyah, citing R. Yochanan, said that a Mavuy that is all Nochrim, and one Yisrael lives in it, and a house in it caved in, we excavate it [even on Shabbos] due to the Yisrael. A Reshus ha'Rabim, we follow the majority. (This shows that we distinguish a Reshus ha'Rabim from a house.)

Consequence: What R. Ba (Rava) said in the name of R. Yanai, that if they saw him separate from Tziporin and have Bi'ah, the Chazakah is that a Pasul there had Bi'ah - according to R. Yirmeyah, this is when they saw him separate from the houses [but not from Reshus ha'Rabim].

Question: According to R. Yosi, it is even [if he separated] from Reshus ha'Rabim, for if Tziporin was locked (the Bo'el could not have comes from elsewhere), R. Yosi says that [she is disqualified] unless one can prove [that the Bo'el was Kosher. It is not enough to prove that he came from Reshus ha'Rabim];

And here, [R. Yirmeyah said that] R. Yosi says [that we follow] the majority! (This is answered only later.)

Source (for R. Yosi): R. Ze'ira citing R. Yosi citing R. Yochanan said that if one's box [of grain] became switched [with someone else's] at the grinder, if it was established that an Am ha'Aretz grinded there that day, he is concerned [lest it is the Am ha'Aretz' grain, and he must tithe it like Demai]. If not, he is not concerned. (Also here, if a Pasul separated from Tziporin, we should be concerned, whether he separated from the houses or from Reshus ha'Rabim.)

Question: What is the difference between this and a Sirki (market of Yishmaeli merchants)?

Was it not taught that a Sirkis who is supplied one day from Isur, that day proves about all days (one may never buy from him? Also here, we should be concerned even if an Am ha'Aretz was not established that day, or even if we do not know that someone separated from Tziporin and was Bo'el!)

Answer: A Sirki - is it possible that he is not supplied?! (Surely he is supplied, and perhaps it was from Isur!) And here, I say that it was not established that an Am ha'Aretz grinded there that day - should, he be concerned?!

Note: And even if an Am ha'Aretz grinded there that day, perhaps it was not switched with his grain! And even if it was, perhaps he tithed! (PF)

And here, I say that the Pasul came only to draw water that day [and not to have Bi'ah]. Should I be concerned?!

(R. Ila citing R. Yanai): He had Bi'ah [with her] in the city of Tziporin.

(R. Ba (i.e. Rava) citing R. Yanai): [Even] if they saw him separate from Tziporin (the city) and have Bi'ah, the Chazakah is that a Pasul there (from the city) had Bi'ah.

Question: For what is found, we follow the majority! (A Mishnah teaches so about meat found in a city in which most stores sell Kosher meat. This is not considered Kavu'a!)

Answer: Due to this difficulty, [we must say that they do not consider this like Kavu'a. Rather,] Rabanan compare this to Sheratzim (i.e. Safek Tum'ah in Reshus ha'Yachid);

(Beraisa): If there were nine frogs and one Sheretz in Reshus ha'Yachid, and one touched one of them, and he does not know which he touched, the Safek is Tamei.

If it separated to Reshus ha'Rabim and he touched, the Safek is Tahor. If it returned to Reshus ha'Yachid and he touched, the Safek is Tamei. (This is why R. Yirmeyah is stringent only if he separated from the houses.)

(Rav Chisda): All valiant [Chachamim] did not find [an answer to this! Rav Chisda's question is after the following remark.]

(Rav Imi): Blessed is He who chose Chachamim and their words!

Question: Rather, than comparing it to Reshus ha'Yachid, compare it to Reshus ha'Rabim!

(Beraisa): If there were nine Sheratzim and one frog in Reshus ha'Rabim, and one touched one of them, and he does not know which he touched, the Safek is Tahor. If it separated to Reshus ha'Yachid and he touched, the Safek is Tamei;

If it returned to Reshus ha'Rabim and he touched, the Safek is Tahor.

(Rav Chisda): All valiant [Chachamim] did not find [an answer to this]!

Answer (Rav Imi): Blessed is He who chose Chachamim and their words! (They consider the spring like Reshus ha'Yachid.)

Question: Is the spring of Tziporin not Reshus ha'Rabim?!

Answer (R. Yosi): Since both of them can be secluded, it is like Reshus ha'Yachid. (This also resolves the contradiction above in R. Yosi. Regarding Bi'ah, he is stringent even from a Reshus ha'Rabim for this reason. Above, R. Yirmeyah bar Va said that R. Yosi follows the majority for other matters, e.g. a house in a Mavuy that caved in, for it is not Kavu'a. We explained this entire Sugya like MEICHAL HA'MAYIM.)

A case occurred in which a baby girl was found cast in the wasteheap. The case came in front of R. Yishmael bei Rebbi Yosi. He said, her status is like an Isah. (PNEI MOSHE)

Assumption (R. Yirmeyah): He means that [she is like] a Kosher Isah. Does R. Yishmael bei Rebbi Yosi argue with his father?! (In our Mishnah, R. Yosi follows the majority of the city.)

Rebuttal (R. Yosi, the Amora): You can even say that an Isah is Pasul, and R. Yishmael bei Rebbi Yosi does not argue with his father;

Question: Why [can this be like R. Yosi]?

Answer: [Even] Kosher people have Zenus (so we follow the majority, but only) Pesulim cast (abandon babies in the wasteheap).