[19a - 24 lines; 19b - 40 lines]
1)[line 1]מי לא עסקינן דנגע בשני?MI LO ASKINAN D'NAGA B'SHENI?- According to those who maintain that the verse refers specifically to levels of Tum'ah down to and including a Sheni l'Tum'ah, the words "b'Chol Tamei" must include even a Sheni. According to Rebbi Akiva, the Torah refers to a Shelishi l'Tum'ah as well. According to his view, this exegesis would therefore teach us about a Revi'i l'Tum'ah.
2)[line 5]דלא לישתמיט תנא וליתני...D'LO LISHTAMIT TANA V'LISNI...- If Rebbi Akiva agrees with this Derashah, some Tana in a Mishnah or Beraisa should have made mention of the opinion of Rebbi Akiva who maintains that Terumah can become a Revi'i l'Tum'ah and Kodshim a Chamishi l'Tum'ah mid'Oraisa.
3)[line 8]דק ואשכחDAK V'ASHKACH- examined the Mishnayos and found [the following Mishnah which clearly states that Rebbi Akiva does not agree with the Derashah]. Rebbi Akiva does not agree with the Kal va'Chomer in Sotah (29a) which determines that Terumah can become a Shelishi l'Tum'ah; he derives this fact from the Kal va'Chomer mentioned by Rebbi Yosi in the Beraisa (18b - see RASHI here).
4)[line 9]מצרףMETZAREF (TUM'AH: TZIRUF KLI)
(a)There are a number of ways for food to become Tamei. One of these ways is for the food to come into contact with a source of Tum'ah.
(b)When more than one food item of Kodshim are grouped together in a vessel - even if they are not touching each other - they will all become Tamei if any of them comes into contact with a source of Tum'ah. This is because the Kli unites them and causes them to be viewed as if they are one item (RAMBAM Hilchos Avos ha'Tum'ah 12:7).
5)[line 14]והלבונהLEVONAH- frankincense (a handful of which was placed on top of a Minchah (meal-offering), and later offered on the Mizbe'ach. See below, Background to 20:3.)
6)[line 17]אלמא קסבר צירוף דרבנןALMA KASAVAR TZIRUF D'RABANAN- The Gemara now goes off on a tangent; the fact that Rebbi Yochanan quotes the testimony of Rebbi Akiva as his source for this Halachah implies that he must be of the opinion that it is a Rabbinical enactment.
7)[line 20]תנן התם על מחט שנמצאת בבשרTENAN HASAM, AL MACHAT SHE'NIMTZES B'VASAR- At this point, the Gemara begins an in-depth discussion of a Mishnah in Eduyos. This Mishnah deals with a needle found in the flesh of a Korban and is not directly related to our Maseches; however, this Mishnah is cited together in Eduyos with our Mishnah (14b) as being from the testimony of Rebbi Chanina Segan ha'Kohanim. In addition, both testimonies involve intricate laws of Tum'ah and Taharah. For these reasons, the Gemara discusses the second testimony of Rebbi Chanina Segan ha'Kohanim here in detail.
8)[line 22]בפרשPERESH- excrement (found in the entrails of the slaughtered animal)
9)[last line]שאין טומאת ידים במקדשSHE'EIN TUM'AS YADAYIM B'MIKDASH- The Rabanan decreed that when a person touches a Rishon l'Tum'ah, his hands become a Sheni l'Tum'ah. This is referred to here as "Tum'as Yadayim." The Rabanan did not apply this edict in the Beis ha'Mikdash. (TOSFOS DH she'Ein)
19b----------------------------------------19b
10)[line 1]ונימא שאין טומאת ידים וכלים במקדשV'NEIMA SHE'EIN TUM'AS YADAYIM V'CHELIM BA'MIKDASH- At this point the Gemara understands that the meat containing the needle is wet with one of the seven liquids which are Machshir it l'Kabel Tum'ah. The needle should make the liquids a Rishon l'Tum'ah, thereby enabling them to be Metamei utensils (especially since Rebbi Akiva is mentioned in this Mishnah, and he is of the opinion that liquids are able to make utensils Tamei mid'Oraisa; TOSFOS DH v'Neima).
11)[line 3]ידים קודם גזירת כלים נשנוYADAYIM KODEM GEZEIRAS KELIM NISHNU- [when Rebbi Akiva made his statement regarding] Yadayim, the Rabanan had not yet decreed that vessels should become Tamei in such a scenario [even in locations outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash]
12)[line 7]דאפילו בחולין נמי לא מטמאD'AFILU B'CHULIN NAMI, LO METAMEI- that is, the Mishnah is referring to a case in which there is no liquid on the meat that could have been affected by the needle.
13)[line 12]לא גזרו על ספק הרוקין שבירושליםLO GAZRU AL SAFEK HA'RUKIN B'YERUSHALAYIM- The Chachamim did not decree that spit of undetermined origin found in [the streets of] Yerushalayim must be considered Tamei. Spit found in areas other than Yerushalayim, however, must be considered Tamei. One reason why Yerushalayim is different is that since Kodshim must be eaten in Yerushalayim, people living there who are Tamei are careful not to do that which could cause others to become Tamei.
14)[line 15]מחט טמא מתMACHAT TEMEI MES- A needle, since it is metal, receives the identical Tum'ah as the Temei Mes due to Cherev Harei Hu k'Chalal (see below, entry #19) and becomes an Av ha'Tum'ah.
15)[line 16]שהיתה פרה חסומה ובאה...SHE'HAYESAH PARAH CHASUMAH U'VA'AH...- the cow was muzzled from before it came into Yerushalayim (and the needle must therefore have been swallowed outside of Yerushalayim, where there is a Rabbinical decree in effect declaring any Kli of undetermined origin to be Tamei)
16)[line 22]שוק העליוןSHUK HA'ELYON- the upper market (which Tamei people would specifically populate in order not to inadvertently be Metamei those who were Tahor)
17)[line 22]דאיתחזק זבD'ISCHAZEK ZAV- that a Zav had been seen passing by the place where the spit was found
18)[line 24]דרך ירידהDERECH YERIDAH- the way down (there were separate paths to the Mikvah - one that led to the Mikvah, and one that led back)
19)[line 26]אלאELA...- this is the answer of the Gemara; we needed to be taught that the implication of the Reisha is specific, and not that of the Seifa.
20)[line 20]גזייתאGAZYASA- narrow passageways [which open into both the path going down to the Beis ha'Tevilah as well as the path leading up]. One using the Mikvah may have gone through these passageways on his way up or down. Since these vessels were certainly Tamei at one point, one may not assume that they made it to the Beis ha'Tevilah. Any other Kli of undetermined origin, however, which was not necessarily ever Tamei, may be presumed Tahor.
21)[line 30]חרב הרי הוא כחללCHEREV HAREI HU K'CHALAL
(a)A metal utensil which comes into contact with a dead body gains the same level of Tum'ah as the dead body - that of an Avi Avos ha'Tum'ah. Similarly, if a metal utensil comes into contact with an Av ha'Tum'ah which has received its Tum'ah from a Mes, it has the status an Av ha'Tum'ah. (A Rishon or Sheni l'Tum'ah cannot make utensils Tamei.) This is derived from the description in the Torah of a dead body as a "Chalal Cherev" - "A body [who died by the] sword." From this wording we learn that a sword - i.e., a metal utensil - is similar to the dead body itself in terms of Tum'ah.
(b)According to some Rishonim, this law applies to non-metal utensils (other than earthenware ones) as well; see Insights to Pesachim 14:2.
22)[line 31]זאת אומרת עזרה רשות הרבים היאZOS OMERES, AZARAH RESHUS HA'RABIM HI- The Gemara now explains that the person and knife did not definitely come into contact with the needle. Rather, a doubt arose as to whether or not they touched the needle.
23)[line 33]וכל ספק טומאה ברשות הרבים ספיקו טהורKOL SAFEK TUM'AH BI'RESHUS HA'RABIM, SEFEKO TAHOR (SAFEK TUM'AH BI'RESHUS HA'YACHID / BI'RESHUS HA'RABIM)
(a)When there is a doubt as to whether an object is Tahor or Tamei, its status depends upon its location. If the object is in a Reshus ha'Rabim, the object may be considered Tahor. If it is in a private domain, it must be considered Tamei.
(b)This is learned from the law regarding a woman suspected of being unfaithful to her husband. If two people witness the unfaithfulness of a Sotah, she is judged to be Teme'ah and therefore may not remain married to her husband. Similarly, when there are two people present when a doubt arises regarding the Tum'ah/Taharah status of a person or object, he or it is judged to be Tamei. Such a case is referred to as a Reshus ha'Yachid l'Tum'ah. If more than two people are in the area wherein the doubt arose, it is a Reshus ha'Rabim l'Tum'ah. In such a case, the person or object is judged to be Tahor.
24)[line 36]דבר שאין בו דעת לישאל... ספיקו טהורDAVAR SHE'EIN BO DA'AS LI'SHA'EL... SEFEIKO TAHOR
(a)When there is a doubt as to whether an object is Tahor or Tamei, when it is in a private domain it must be considered Tamei. (See previous entry.)
(b)This Halachah applies only when either that which is the source of the Tum'ah or that which may have received the Tum'ah is a Ben Da'as (i.e. has intelligence). If a doubt arises as to whether or not a Tamei object came into contact with a Tahor object with no human involvement, then even in a Reshus ha'Yachid one may consider the object to still be Tahor. This is because this case is not comparable to the case of a Sotah, in which Bnei Da'as were involved (see previous entry).
(c)Our Sugya concludes that when a doubt arises as to whether or not a person brought together two objects, one Tamei and the other Tahor, then this is considered a question involving a Yesh Bo Da'as li'Sha'el and the previously Tahor object must be considered Tamei if the doubt arose in a Reshus ha'Yachid.