The Elliot B Sit edition, an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, has dedicated Masechet Beitzah anonymously for the complete recovery of Meir ben Esther. We recite: "May it be Your will, O Lord, to heal him, among all the sick of Your people Israel. Amen." Additionally, Masechet Beitzah has been dedicated for the elevation of the soul of Sarah bat Mazal. We pray: "May the spirit of the Lord rest upon her in the Garden of Eden. Amen." We bless our anonymous sponsor that, with God's help, he should be granted long life, health, wealth, and honor, and may he merit in the near future to raise a family and continue his good works for the community. Amen.
Today's daf has been dedicated by our dear friends Mr. Nissim and Elias Bassan from Panama, may God protect them, in memory of their dear mother Sarah bat Malka. May her soul rest in the Garden of Eden. We begin today's daf on Yud Tet Amud Rishon, on the second line. The sages taught in a braita: A vessel that became tamei from before Yom Tov, one is not allowed to immerse it bein hashemashot. The reason is that bein hashemashot is a time of uncertainty, being both day and night. Therefore, on the night side, it is Yom Tov, and one is prohibited from immersing a vessel on Yom Tov because it appears as if one is repairing it, which is forbidden.
Just as it is prohibited to immerse it on Yom Tov, it is also prohibited to immerse it bein hashemashot. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri states that even during the week, one should not immerse a vessel that became tamei bein hashemashot. His reasoning is that even after immersing it, the vessel cannot be used until ha'erev shemesh, the sunset. Thus, if a person is immersing the vessel at night, it indicates urgency, and he may use it immediately, which is problematic.
Now, the first Tana does not require ha'erev shemesh. The Tana Kama does not state that one needs ha'erev shemesh, but it implies that during the week, one could immerse it bein hashemashot. What about the law of ha'erev shemesh? Rava states that he found the sages of the Yeshiva of Rav sitting and discussing the disagreement. The disagreement is based on whether one can infer a person's intention from their actions. For example, if a person is holding a keli that became tamei and is running bein hashemashot to immerse it, one must discern his intention.
What is the case? If he is running with the vessel in his hand to immerse it, one must consider if he knows he needs ha'erev shemesh and is rushing to immerse it before sunset. The first Rabbi states that the Tana Kama would conclude that this person knows the law of bein hashemashot and is trying to immerse it before nightfall to ensure its immediate use. However, the other opinion posits that he is running because of work, not because of the immersion, and thus he may use it that night, which is a concern.
This is the crux of the disagreement regarding inferring intention from action. Rava then clarifies that the disagreement is not about discerning intention from actions. Rather, it concerns a case where a vessel became tamei from a sheretz that is less than the size of a adasha. The question posed to the rabbis is whether it is tamei or not. One opinion holds that if he does not know the law regarding a keli that became tamei from less than a sheretz, he is likely also unaware of the law of bein hashemashot. Therefore, he should be stopped from immersing it during the week.
The other opinion argues that while the person may not know the adasha law, he is aware of the ha'erev shemesh law, which is explicitly mentioned in the Torah. Hence, the Tana Kama asserts that one does not need to stop a person during the week from immersing a vessel because he is likely familiar with the laws of bein hashemashot and ha'erev shemesh.
The Gemara continues with the discussion about immersing from one purpose to another. The Mishnah states that one can immerse from one purpose to another, and the Gemara will explain this. The sages taught: What does it mean to immerse from one purpose to another? For example, if a person wishes to use a vessel that became tamei for olives, he can immerse it for that purpose. If he later decides to use it for grapes, the vessel is still tahor, and he can use it without needing a specific intention when immersing it. However, if he wants to re-immerse it for the new intention, that is allowed on Yom Tov because the initial immersion was not necessary.
Now consider the case of immersing from one group to another. If a person was part of a group to eat the Korban Pesach and then became tamei, he can immerse himself or his vessels to eat with a different group. The Gemara states that he can immerse on Yom Tov because he is already tahor. The immersion is merely a precaution, and therefore it is permitted.
The Mishnah then presents the views of Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel regarding offerings on Yom Tov. Beit Shammai states that one may bring a korban shelamim but may not perform semicha, pressing hands upon the animal, as it is considered using an animal, which is forbidden. Beit Hillel argues that one may bring both korban shelamim and olot and may perform semicha on Yom Tov.
The Gemara clarifies the disagreement. Ulla states that the disagreement pertains to shalmei chagiga, where all agree one may bring the offering, but the question is whether one may perform semicha. Beit Shammai prohibits it, while Beit Hillel permits it. The Gemara proceeds to analyze the reasoning behind these opinions.
Rabbi Shimon states that the Torah indicates that one must bring offerings during the holidays, and the discussion centers on whether nedarim and nedavot can be brought on Yom Tov. The Gemara concludes that all agree that nedarim and nedavot cannot be brought on Yom Tov because they do not have a set time. Thus, the discussion continues regarding the implications of these laws on the observance of Yom Tov.
In summary, the Gemara has explored the intricacies of the laws surrounding immersion, intention, and offerings on Yom Tov, revealing the depth of halachic discourse and the careful consideration of each opinion. This examination not only highlights the legal distinctions but also emphasizes the importance of understanding the underlying intentions behind actions in the realm of Jewish law.