(R. Yonah citing R. Yosi Geliliya citing R. Yosi bar Chaninah): We do not ask Halachah in front of the bier of a Mes.

Question: R. Yochanan asked R. Yanai in front of the bier of R. Shmuel ben Yotzadak, if one was Makdish his Olah to Bedek ha'Bayis [does it get Kedushas Bedek ha'Bayis?], and he answered him!

Answer: We can say that he was [four Amos] distanced, or the eulogies had finished.

Question: R. Yirmeyah asked R. Ze'ira in front of the bier of R. Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak and he answered him!

Answer: We can say that he was distanced, he would answer him. When he was close, he would not answer him.

Those who carry [the Mes] on the shoulder are forbidden to wear sandals, lest one of their sandals snap, and he will [stop to fix it, and] lose the Mitzvah.

R. Ze'ira slipped in the field. They wanted to straighten him, and they found him [intentionally] lying [on the field, not due to weakness]. They said to him, why is this? He told them, because [I was thinking] to where we are going - "veha'Chai Yiten El Libo." (This Perush is based on MATANOS KEHUNAH (Koheles Rabah 7:9), MASHBI'ACH (here and Brachos 3:1), and HA'ARUCH (Shara 2).)

One who finds a Mes Mitzvah, he takes care of it and buries it in its place.

When is this? It is if he found it outside the Techum, but if he found it inside the Techum, he brings it to the cemetery and buries it.

(R. Akiva): So was my first service in front of Chachamim. Once, I was walking on the road, and I found a Mes Mitzvah. I took care of [and carried] it four Mil (about four kilometers) until I brought it to the cemetery, and buried it;

When I came to R. Eliezer and to R. Yehoshua, I told them the matter. They told me "for every step you took, it is as if you spilled blood!" (TOSFOS Kesuvos 17a says that he was liable for not burying it in its place, or because he was Batel from serving Chachamim, which is greater than learning. YEFE MAR'EH - moving it from its place is so severe, for the Mes has Menuchah only where it died.)

R. Akiva: At a time that I intended to merit [a Mitzvah], I was liable. At a time that I did not intend to merit, how much the more so! At that time, I did not budge from serving Chachamim.

R. Akiva: One who does not serve Chachamim [will stumble in matters for which one] is Chayav Misah (YEFE MAR'EH).

A found corpse acquires its place (to be buried there), even in a field full of saffron (it is very valuable), for Yehoshua made this a condition for Yisrael's inheritance of the land.

When is this? It is if he found it outside the Techum, but if he found it on the road, he buries it to the right of the road or the left of the road.

If there is an unplowed field [on one side] and a plowed field [on the other side], he buries it in the unplowed field (this causes less loss). If there is a plowed field and a seeded field [on the two sides], he buries it in the plowed field.

If there is a vineyard and a seeded field, he buries it in the seeded field.

If there is a vineyard and an orchard - some teach that he buries it in the vineyard, and some teach that he buries it in the orchard.

The one who says that he buries it in the vineyard, but not it in the orchard, this is due to Tum'as Ohel (one who walks under a tree that towers over the grave, he will become Tamei);

The one who says that he buries it in the orchard, but not it in the vineyard, due to Hechsher of harvested grapes. (The owner is pleased with the juice that exudes from them, so they are Huchshar, and they become Tamei due to the grave.)

If one did oppositely (buries it in the wrong place), R. Imi citing Reish Lakish said that he transgresses due to "Lo Setamei Es Admascha."

If both of them were unplowed, or both of them were plowed, he buries it in whichever side he wants.

If a Kohen and a Levi [encounter a Mes Mitzvah], the Levi becomes Tamei. If a Levi and a Yisrael [encounter it], the Yisrael becomes Tamei.

Question: Is a Levi not the same as a Yisrael [regarding Tum'ah?! Neither is forbidden!]

Answer (R. Avin): This was taught at a time when Leviyim sat on the Duchan (and sang in the Mikdash. If he becomes Tamei, he will lose the Mitzvah.)

Chachamim agree to R. Eliezer that if a Tamei Kohen Gadol and a Tahor Nazir [found a Mes Mitzvah], the Kohen Gadol is Mitamei, and the Nazir is not Mitamei. And R. Eliezer agrees to Chachamim that if a Tahor Kohen Gadol and a Tamei Nazir [found a Mes Mitzvah], the Nazir is Mitamei, and the Kohen Gadol is not Mitamei.

Question: Exert yourself [and you will find the answer! Why do Chachamim say that the Nazir should be Mitamei, for his Kedushah is not permanent?] If his father was Mekadesh him from the womb [to be a Nazir, and when he reached the age of Nedarim, he accepted to be a Nazir Olam, also his Kedushah is permanent]!

Answer: This (Kedushas Kohen) is mid'Oraisa. This (a father imposes Nezirus on his son) is not mid'Oraisa.

(Rav Huna citing Rav Yosef): R. Eliezer holds like Beis Shamai. Beis Shamai say that Tadir and Mekudash - Mekudash has precedence (therefore in Kidush, we bless Mekadesh ha'Shabbos before Borei Peri ha'Gefen). So R. Eliezer says, that Tadir and Mekudash - Mekudash (a Nazir, who brings a Korban for Tum'ah) has precedence.

If a Nazir for 30 days and a Nazir for 100 days [found a Mes Mitzvah], the Nazir for 30 days is Mitamei. If a Nazir for 100 days and a Nazir Olam [found a Mes Mitzvah], the Nazir for 100 days is Mitamei.

If there were a Nazir Olam and a Nazir Neziros (he accepted many Neziriyos, and cannot finish them in his lifetime) - some teach that the Nazir Olam is Mitamei, and some teach that the Nazir Neziros is Mitamei;

The one who says that the Nazir Olam is Mitamei, but not the Nazir Neziros, this is because he brings many Korbanos (every 30 days). The one who says that the Nazir Neziros is Mitamei, but not the Nazir Olam, this is because his shaving is greater (he shaves only once a year. We explained this like PNEI MOSHE.)

Question: If one did oppositely (the one with precedence was Mitamei, what is the law)?

Answer: This is like R. Imi said in the name of Reish Lakish said [one who buried in the wrong place] transgresses "Lo Setamei Es Admascha", and so here (he transgresses the Lav of Tum'ah, for he should not have been Metamei).