Question: "...Besar Kodesh bi'Chnaf Bigdo v'Noga bi'Chnafo El ha'Lechem v'El ha'Nazid v'El ha'Yayin v'El ha'Shemen v'El Kol Ma'achal ha'Yikdash va'Ya'anu ha'Kohanim va'Yomru Lo" (Chagai tested Kohanim about how many degrees of Tum'as Ochlim apply to Kodshim; they said that the last food is Tahor).

Rav said that the Kohanim erred (really, the last food becomes Tamei through the oil)!

Answer: This question is only against Rav - Rav's text [of the Mishnah of Yosi ben Yo'ezer] is Metaher [blood and water, the] 'liquids of Beis Mitbechai' (where Korbanos are rinsed);

He holds that Tum'ah applies to [wine and oil,] liquids of Beis Midbechai' (the Mizbe'ach).

(Rav): The Kohanim erred.

(Shmuel): They did not err.

Rav holds that they erred - Chagai asked whether or not a Revi'i is Tamei regarding Kodesh, and they said no;

Shmuel holds that they did not err - Chagai asked whether or not a Chamishi is Tamei regarding Kodesh, and they said no.

Question: We understand according to Rav - he asked about a Revi'i:

Version #1 (Rashi): A Sheretz touched bread (1), which then touched porridge (2), which then touched wine (3), which then touched oil or any food (4);

Version #2 (Tosfos): A Sheretz touched a garment (1), which touched bread or porridge (2), which then touched wine or oil (3), which then touched any food (4); (end of Version #2)

How does Shmuel derive that he asked about a Chamishi?

Answer: It does not say that Kenafo (Rashi - the Sheretz; Tosfos - the garment) touched the bread, rather, bi'Chnafo (something that touched Kenafo - therefore, the foods were one level more removed than Rav said).

Question: "Va'Yomer Chagai Im Yiga Temei Nefesh b'Chol Eleh ha'Yitma (if these foods will become Temei'im through a Tamei Mes (an Av ha'Tum'ah)) va'Ya'anu ha'Kohanim va'Yomru Yitma" - this is good according to Shmuel, also here the Kohanim answered correctly (a Revi'i of Kodesh is Tamei);

But according to Rav, both questions were about a Revi'i - why did they err about the Sheretz and not about a Tamei Mes?

Answer #1 (Rav Nachman): They were proficient in laws of Tum'as Mes, but not about laws of a Sheretz.

Answer #2 (Ravina): Above he asked about a Revi'i; here, he asked about a Shelishi. (Rashi - a Mes itself touched the bread, it became an 'Av' (to make a Rishon); Tosfos - the bread became a Rishon).

Question: "Va'Ya'an Chagai va'Yomer Ken ha'Am ha'Zeh...[v'Chen Kol Ma'ase Yedeihem va'Asher Yakrivu Shamir Tamei Hu" - we understand according to Rav, because they erred he said that their offerings are Temei'im;

But according to Shmuel, they answered correctly - why did he say this?!

Answer #1: This was said in astonishment - [since they are so proficient,] are all their offerings Temei'im?!

Objection: But it says "V'Chen" [connoting that this is really true]!

Answer #2 (Mar Zutra or Rav Ashi): Since their deeds were corrupt, the verse says that their offerings were Temei'im.

Rav's text [of the Mishnah of Yosi ben Yo'ezer] is Metaher 'liquids of Beis Mitbechai' (blood and water);

Levi's text says 'liquids of Beis Midbechai' (even wine and oil).

Question: We understand if Levi holds like Shmuel, who says that they do not Metamei other things, but they themselves can become Tamei - we can say that Chagai asked if each of these foods themselves touch a Rishon, if they become Nifsalim;

But if he holds like Rav, who says that even they themselves are Tehorim - how can he answer?

Answer: We must say that he holds like Shmuel.

Question: If Shmuel's text was 'Mitbechai', like Rav's, but other liquids of Beis Midbechai can Metamei, we understand that a Revi'i does not make a Chamishi, but a Shelishi makes a Revi'i;

But if his text was 'Midbechai', like Levi's, why did Chagai ask whether or not a Revi'i makes a Chamishi - since these liquids cannot Metamei, they cannot make even a Sheni or Shelishi!

Answer: We must say that he had the same text as Rav.

Support (for Levi - Beraisa #1): If blood, wine, oil, or water, i.e. a liquid of Beis Midbechai, became Tamei (Nifsal) inside [the Mikdash] and was taken outside, it is Tahor (cannot Metamei - we know from Chagai that it itself is Tamei);

If it became Tamei outside and was taken inside, it is Metamei (this will be explained).

Question: But R. Yehoshua ben Levi taught that liquids of Beis Midbechai are Tehorim only in their place!

Suggestion: This excludes if they became Tamei inside and were taken outside!

Answer: No, it excludes if they became Tamei outside and were taken inside.

Question: But he said [that they are Tehorim only] in their place [and now they are in their place]!

Answer: He means that they are Tehorim only if they became Temei'im in their place.

Support (for Rav - Beraisa #2): If blood or water, i.e. a liquid of Beis Mitbechai, became Tamei (i.e. touched Tum'ah), whether in a Keli or in the ground, it is Tahor;

R. Shimon says, if it became Tamei in a Keli it is Tamei (he holds that Tum'ah of liquids is mid'Oraisa - 16A); if it was in the ground, it is Tahor.

(Rav Papa): Even according to the opinion that Tum'ah of liquids is mid'Oraisa, there is a tradition from Moshe from Sinai to Metaher liquids of Beis Mitbechai.

Objection #1 (Rav Huna brei d'Rav Noson): But R. Elazar said that [mid'Oraisa,] liquids are not Tamei at all - we know this because Yosi ben R. Yo'ezer testified that Ayil Kamtza is permitted and that liquids of Beis Mitbechai are Tahor!

We may not learn from a tradition from Sinai [to other liquids! What is R. Elazar's proof - perhaps other liquids are Temei'im, and the tradition is Metaher liquids of Beis Mitbechai!]

Objection #2 (Ravina - Beraisa #3 - R. Yosi and R. Shimon): Kelim [that doubtfully became Temei'im through liquids] are Tehorim; food [that doubtfully became Tamei through liquids] is Tamei.

This shows that R. Shimon holds that Tum'ah of liquids is mid'Oraisa - yet in Beraisa #2 he is Metaher liquids in the ground;

If it is a tradition from Sinai, why do we distinguish liquids in the ground from liquids in Kelim?!

This is left difficult.

(Rav Papa): R. Shimon is Metaher water in the ground, but not blood;

He is Metaher water in the ground only if there is a Revi'is, for [mid'Oraisa] it is a valid Mikveh to immerse needles and forks [or other small Kelim, and it says "Mikve Mayim Yihyeh Tahor"] - but less than a Revi'is can become Tamei.

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): Liquids are Tamei in every respect.

Inference: This shows that he holds that liquids can Metamei Kelim mid'Oraisa.

Question (Mishnah): If a Keli has an outside and an inside, such as pillows, blankets and sacks, if the inside became Tamei, the outside is also Tamei; if the outside became Tamei, the inside is not Tamei;

R. Yehudah says, this is if it was Nitma by liquids - but if a Sheretz was Metamei it, either way both become Tamei.

If liquids can Metamei Kelim mid'Oraisa, why are they different than a Sheretz?!

Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah): R. Yehudah retracted [from saying that they are Tamei in every respect].

Answer #2 (Ravina): He did not retract - the Beraisa discusses a liquid Nitma by a Sheretz, the Mishnah discusses a liquid Nitma by hands [which is only mid'Rabanan].

Objection (Mishnah - R. Yehudah): This is if it was Nitma by liquids - but if a Sheretz was Metamei it, either way both become Tamei.

He should distinguish within liquids themselves - this [distinction between the inside and outside] applies to a liquid Nitma by hands - but if it was Nitma by a Sheretz, either way both become Tamei!

Conclusion: We must say that he retracted.

Question: Did he retract only regarding Kelim, but regarding food he holds like R. Yosi and R. Shimon [that liquids Metamei food mid'Oraisa] - or did he totally retract to hold like R. Meir?