Rebbi is refuted.

(Rabah bar Shila): A case occurred, and Chachamim attributed a Shilya to a baby born 10 days earlier.

We attribute a Shilya to a baby only if the baby came out before it.

(Rabah bar bar Chanah): A case occurred, and Chachamim attributed a Shilya to a baby born 23 days earlier.

Rav Yosef: You told us 24!

(Rav Acha brei d'Rav Avira): A case occurred in which a baby was born 33 days after its twin.

Rav Yosef: You told us 34!

Question: We understand according to the opinion that the ninth month (of a viable baby born in the ninth month) need not be complete. (The first baby was born after seven full months, and its twin was born about four days into the ninth month);

However, according to the opinion that the ninth month must be complete, how can this happen? (It cannot be that both babies were born in the seventh month; if one was born in (i.e. at the end of) the ninth month, the other was born in the eighth, it is surely a Nefel!)

Answer: We must switch the episodes, and say that a baby was born 23 days after its twin (both in the seventh month) and that Chachamim attributed a Shilya to a baby born 33 days earlier.

(R. Avin bar Rav Ada): Once, a baby was born three months after its twin. The twins are in this Beis Medrash. They are Yehudah and Chizkiyah, the sons of R. Chiya.

Question: (They could not have been conceived at the same time.) However, it was taught that a pregnant woman cannot become pregnant with a second fetus!

Answer (Abaye): Indeed, they were conceived at the same time. One of them was born at the beginning of the seventh month, and the other was born at the end of the ninth month.

(Mishnah): If a Shilya is in a house, the house is Tamei...

(Beraisa - R. Meir): If a Shilya is in a house, the house is Tamei;

This is not because a Shilya is a child, rather, because there is always a child with it.

R. Yosi, R. Yehudah and R. Shimon are Metaher the house.

Rabanan (R. Yosi,... ): Don't you agree that if the Shilya was taken in a basket to another house, the latter house is Tahor?

R. Meir: Yes, because moving it causes it to dissolve.

Rabanan: It was already dissolved in the first house!

R. Meir: Moving it dissolves it more.

(Rav Hamnuna): R. Shimon holds that Tum'ah mixed with (a larger quantity of) another species is Batel.

Question (Rav Papa): Is this also the reason for R. Yosi and R. Yehudah?

Rav Hamnuna and Rav Bivi laughed. Of course it is!

Rav Papa: One should ask such questions from his Rebbi (even if he will be laughed at. Perhaps he will learn something from the answer);

"Im Navalta v'Hisnasei v'Im Zamosa Yad l'Feh." (One who disgraces himself for the sake of learning will be elevated. One who does not ask will not be able to answer).

R. Shimon holds similarly elsewhere;

(Beraisa): (A Tarvad (spoonful, what one can contain in his hands) of Rekev (the decayed flesh of a Mes) is Tamei like a Mes.) If a small amount of earth fell into it, it is Tamei;

R. Shimon says, it is Tahor.

Question: What is R. Shimon's reason?

Answer #1 (Rabanan): Surely, there is a grain of Rekev is between two grains of earth. It is Batel (and less than a Tarvad of Rekev remains).

Rejection (Rabah): Surely, a grain of earth is between two grains of Rekev. It is Batel to the Rekev, there is more than a spoonful!(Ramban - it is more likely that the minority is Batel is the majority!)

Answer #2 (Rabah): R. Shimon holds that Rekev at the end (after it mixed with something else) is like its initial formation (if anything else corroded with a Mes to form Rekev, it is not considered Rekev);

(Beraisa): If a Mes was buried naked in a marble coffin or on a stone floor, its Rekev is Tamei;

If a Mes was buried clothed, or in a wooden coffin or on a brick floor, its Rekev is Tahor. (The clothes, wood or bricks decayed with the Mes.)

Rekev applies only if it was a natural death, but not if he was murdered. (Then it is not a full Mes. It lacks some of the blood.)

(Beraisa): If a small amount of earth fell into a Tarvad of Rekev, it is Tamei;

R. Shimon says, it is Tahor.

If a spoonful of Rekev was scattered in a house, it is Tamei;

R. Shimon says, it is Tahor.

We must teach the argument in both cases;

Had we taught only when earth fell in, one might have thought that only there Chachamim are Metamei, for all the Rekev is together, but they admit if it was scattered, for it is not all under one (part of the) Ohel;

Had we taught only when it was scattered, one might have thought that only there R. Shimon is Metaher, for it is not all under one (part of the) Ohel; but he admits if it is together and earth fell in.

(Beraisa): More than a Tarvad of Rekev Beis ha'Kevaros (Rashi - from a cemetery. Alternatively, it is from a Mes buried in clothing. Tosfos - it is pure Rekev in which bits of plaster fell) is Tamei;

R. Shimon says, it is Tahor.

Question: What is Chachamim's reason?

Answer: Surely, it contains a Tarvad of proper Rekev.

Question: If R. Shimon is Metaher a mixture of Rekev because its end is like its beginning, why is he Metaher a Shilya?

Answer (R. Yochanan): He is Metaher because it is Batel in a majority (of Dam Leidah).

R. Yochanan taught similarly elsewhere;

(R. Yochanan): R. Shimon (regarding Shilya) and R. Eliezer ben Yakov agree with each other.

(Beraisa - R. Eliezer ben Yakov): If a cake of dried blood fell from the womb of a large animal (which did not give birth before), we bury the cake, and its next calf is not a Bechor.

(Beraisa - R. Chiya): The cake does not have Tum'ah Maga (touching) or Masa (moving).

Question: If it is not Tamei, it is not considered a Nevelah. (It has no Kedushas Bechor.) Why must it be buried?

Answer: This is to publicize that the next calf is not a Bechor.

Inference: If the next calf is not a Bechor, the cake must be a proper child.

Question: If so, why did R. Chiya say that the cake does not have Tum'ah Maga or Masa?

Answer (R. Yochanan): It is Tahor because it is Batel in a majority (of blood).

(R. Ami citing R. Yochanan): R. Shimon agrees that (if a woman miscarried a Shilya) she is a Yoledes.

(An elder): R. Yochanan learns from "Ishah Ki Sazri'a" -- even if she only gave birth to something (that liquefied, and is) like what she was Mazri'ah (her seed), she is a Yoledes.

(Reish Lakish): If a Shefir was cut up in the water it was washed in (alternatively, in blood and natal secretions), since it lost its form, it is Tahor, like a Mes that lost its form.