1)

MUST ONE WASH HIS HANDS FOR MA'ASER? (Yerushalmi Bikurim Perek 2 Halachah 1 Daf 6a)

[ ] '' .

(a)

(Mishnah): These apply to Terumah and Bikurim, but not to Ma'aser.

.

(b)

(Mishnah): We wash the hands for Chulin, Ma'aser and Terumah, and immerse them for Kodshim.

.

(c)

Question: There (our Mishnah) you say that Netilas Yadayim is not needed for Ma'aser, and here (that Mishnah in Chagigah) you say that Ma'aser requires Netilas Yadayim! (This Sugya was copied from Chagigah 2:5. This is why 'here' refers to the Mishnah in Chagigah, and 'there' refers to our Mishnah in Bikurim.)

:

(d)

Answer #1: [In Chagigah] we say that Netilas Yadayim is needed for Ma'aser, like Rabanan. [In Bikurim] we say that Ma'aser does not require washing, according to R. Meir;

.

1.

(Mishnah): Anyone who must immerse mid'Rabanan, he is Metamei Kodesh (makes it a Shelishi, so it can disqualify other Kodesh) and disqualifies Terumah, and he is permitted Chulin and Ma'aser. R. Meir says so. Chachamim forbid Ma'aser.

' .

(e)

Rejection: Did [the one who answered this] not hear that R. Shmuel said in the name of R. Ze'irah, what does it mean "Chachamim forbid Ma'aser''? His body is disqualified from eating Ma'aser (but he may touch it)!

(f)

Question: How can we answer [the contradiction about Ma'aser]?

.

(g)

Answer #2: [In Chagigah] we say that washing is needed for Ma'aser, when he wants to eat. [In Bikurim] we say that Ma'aser does not require washing, when he wants to touch.

['' - ]

(h)

Objection: The Mishnah taught Terumah [with Ma'aser]. Is not one who wants to eat [the same as] one who wants to touch! (Surely both must wash for Terumah!)

.

(i)

Answer #3: [In Chagigah, we say that even to touch Ma'aser one must] wash due to Serach [lest people touch Terumah without washing. In Bikurim, we teach that according to letter of the law, one need not wash for it, for Stam hands are not Metamei it.

[ ( )] ( ) ['' - ] .

(j)

Objection: [In Chagigah, Chulin was taught with Ma'aser. Is there [a decree of] washing for [touching] Chulin due to Serach?! (Surely there is not! We explained this based on SHA'AREI TORAS ERETZ YISRAEL.)

.

(k)

Answer: [In Chagigah we discuss] Chulin made Al Taharas (with all the stringencies as if it were) ha'Kodesh.

.

(l)

Question: Are Chulin made Al Taharas ha'Kodesh not like Chulin?!

.

(m)

Answer: We can answer like R. Shimon ben Elazar or like R. Lazar bei R. Tzadok;

.

1.

[The Mishnah in Chagigah can hold that Chulin made Al Taharas ha'Kodesh are like Chulin, and] it is like R. Shimon ben Elazar. A Beraisa taught, R. Shimon ben Elazar citing R. Meir said that hands are a Rishon for Chulin and a Sheni for Terumah.

2.

Or, it can be like R. Lazar bei R. Tzadok;

:

i.

(Mishnah): Chulin made Al Gav ha'Kodesh are like Chulin. R. Elazar bei R. Tzadok says, they are like Terumah; [an Av ha'Tum'ah is] Metamei two (the first such food it touches becomes a Rishon, the second is a Sheni) and disqualify one (the third is a Shelishi; it does not make a Revi'i).