מַשִּׁיקוֹ בְּמַיִם, מִשֶּׁהֶחֱמִיץ – אֵין מַשִּׁיקוֹ בְּמַיִם. אֲמַר רָבָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁתִּמְּדוֹ בְּמַיִם טְהוֹרִים וְנִטְמְאוּ, אֲבָל טְמֵאִים מֵעִיקָּרָא – לָא.

one brings the temed into contact with water of a ritual bath temed in a ritual bath, thereby purifying the temed . Once it ferments, he does not bring it into contact with water, as that is effective only in purifying water and not in purifying other liquids. Rava said: The Sages taught this only with regard to a case where one prepared temed with ritually pure water and it later became impure, but if the water was impure from the outset, the contact with the ritual bath would not purify it.

אֲזַל רַב גְּבִיהָה מִבֵּי כָּתִיל אֲמָרָהּ לִשְׁמַעֲתָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב אַשִׁי: מַאי שְׁנָא טְמֵאִין מֵעִיקָּרָא דְּלָא – דְּאָמְרִינַן: אַיְידֵי דְּמַיָּא יַקִּירֵי שָׁכְנִי תַּתָּאֵי, וּפֵירָא קָפֵי מִלְּעֵיל, וְלָא קָא סָלְקָא לְהוּ הַשָּׁקָה לְמַיָּא; אִי הָכִי, טְהוֹרִים וּלְבַסּוֹף נִטְמְאוּ נַמִי!

Rav Geviha from Bei Katil went and stated this halakha before Rav Ashi and asked: What is different in the case of water that is impure from the outset such that bringing the temed into contact with the ritual bath would not purify it, as we say: Since the water is heavy it settles at the bottom of the vessel, and the fruit, the grape residue, floats above, and therefore, contact with the water of the ritual bath would not be effective for the water of the temed ? If so, the same would apply in the case of water that was ritually pure and ultimately became impure as temed also.

אֶלָּא מְבַלְבְּלִי, הָכָא נַמִי מְבַלְבְּלִי!

Rather, the reason contact is effective in the case of ritually pure water that later became impure as temed is that the water and the residue are intermingled. Here too, in the case of water that was impure from the outset, the water and the residue are intermingled, and contact with the water of a ritual bath would be effective.

מתני׳ כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֶכֶר אֵין קְנָס, וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ קְנָס אֵין מֶכֶר.

Any situation where there is sale of one’s daughter as a Hebrew maidservant, i.e., when she is a minor, there is no fine of fifty sela paid to her father if she is raped or seduced, as that fine is paid to her father only when she is a young woman. And any situation where there is a fine paid to the father there is no sale.

גמ׳ אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: זוֹ דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר, אֲבָל חֲכָמִים אָמְרוּ: יֵשׁ קְנָס בִּמְקוֹם מֶכֶר. דְּתַנְיָא: קְטַנָּה מִבַּת יוֹם אֶחָד עַד שֶׁתָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת – יֵשׁ לָהּ מֶכֶר וְאֵין לָהּ קְנָס, מִשֶּׁתָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת עַד שֶׁתִּיבַּגֵּר – יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וְאֵין לָהּ מֶכֶר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר; שֶׁהָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֶכֶר אֵין קְנָס, וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ קְנָס אֵין מֶכֶר.

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: This is the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Rabbis said: There is the possibility of payment of a fine in a situation where there is sale, as it is taught in a baraita : A minor girl from the age of one day old until she reaches puberty and grows two pubic hairs is subject to sale, but is not entitled to receive payment of a fine. Once she reaches puberty and grows two pubic hairs, from that point until she matures into a grown woman she is entitled to receive payment of a fine, but is not subject to sale. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir, as Rabbi Meir would state a principle: Any situation where there is a sale, there is no fine; and any situation where there is a fine, there is no sale.

וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: קְטַנָּה מִבַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד עַד שֶׁתִּיבַּגֵּר – יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס.

And the Rabbis say: A minor girl from the age of three years and one day until she matures into a grown woman is entitled to receive payment of a fine.

קְנָס אִין, מֶכֶר לָא? אֵימָא: אַף קְנָס בִּמְקוֹם מֶכֶר.

The Gemara asks: Is that to say that yes, she is entitled to payment of a fine, but she is not subject to sale? Isn’t her father permitted to sell her during most of that period? The Gemara answers: Say that the Rabbis said: She is also entitled to receive payment of a fine during that period in a situation where she is subject to sale.

מתני׳ כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֵיאוּן אֵין חֲלִיצָה, וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ חֲלִיצָה אֵין מֵיאוּן.

Any situation where there is the right of refusal for a minor girl married by her mother or brothers, enabling her to opt out of the marriage, there is no ḥalitza , as a minor girl whose husband died without children cannot perform ḥalitza . And any situation where there is ḥalitza , once she has reached majority, there is no right of refusal.

גמ׳ אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: זוֹ דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר, אֲבָל חֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: יֵשׁ מֵיאוּן בִּמְקוֹם חֲלִיצָה. דְּתַנְיָא: עַד מָתַי הַבַּת מְמָאֶנֶת? עַד שֶׁתָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: עַד שֶׁיִּרְבֶּה הַשָּׁחוֹר עַל הַלָּבָן.

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: This is the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Rabbis say: There is the right of refusal in a situation where there is ḥalitza , as it is taught in a baraita : Until when may a girl refuse? She may do so as long as she is a minor, until she grows two pubic hairs, which are signs of puberty rendering her a young woman; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: She may refuse until the black hairs in the pubic area appear to cover an area greater than the white skin of the area uncovered by hair. At that stage, she is already eligible to perform the rite of ḥalitza . That is the opinion of the Rabbis.

מתני׳ כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ תְּקִיעָה – אֵין הַבְדָּלָה, וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ הַבְדָּלָה – אֵין תְּקִיעָה;

Any situation where there is a shofar blast sounded on the eve of Shabbat or a Festival to stop the people from performing labor and to demarcate between the sacred and the profane, there is no havdala recited at the conclusion of the Shabbat or Festival in prayer and over a cup of wine. And any situation where there is havdala recited, there is no shofar blast sounded.

יוֹם טוֹב שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת – תּוֹקְעִין וְלֹא מַבְדִּילִין, בְּמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת – מַבְדִּילִין וְלֹא תּוֹקְעִין.

How so? On a Festival that occurs on Shabbat eve, one sounds the shofar and one does not recite havdala , as that is recited only when the transition is from a sacred day to a profane day or from a day of greater sanctity to a day of lesser sanctity. The sanctity of Shabbat is greater than the sanctity of the Festival, and therefore havdala is not recited in this case. On a Festival that occurs at the conclusion of Shabbat, one recites havdala , but one does not sound the shofar.

כֵּיצַד מַבְדִּילִין? ״הַמַּבְדִּיל בֵּין קוֹדֶשׁ לְקוֹדֶשׁ״. רַבִּי דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר: ״בֵּין קוֹדֶשׁ חָמוּר לְקוֹדֶשׁ הַקַּל״.

How does one recite havdala in that case; i.e., what is the formula of the blessing? It concludes: Who distinguishes between sacred and sacred, as opposed to the standard blessing at the conclusion of Shabbat: Who distinguishes between sacred and profane. Rabbi Dosa says that the formula is: Who distinguishes between greater sanctity and lesser sanctity.

גמ׳ הֵיכִי תּוֹקֵעַ? אֲמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: תּוֹקֵעַ וּמֵרִיעַ מִתּוֹךְ תְּקִיעָה, וְרַב אַסִי אֲמַר: תּוֹקֵעַ וּמֵרִיעַ בִּנְשִׁימָה אַחַת. אַתְקֵין רַב אַסִי בְּהוּצָל כִּשְׁמַעֲתֵיהּ.

The Gemara asks: How does one sound a tekia on a Festival that occurs on Shabbat eve, when the difference between the sanctity of the preceding day and the sanctity of the coming day is not as pronounced as it is on a standard Shabbat eve? Rav Yehuda said: One sounds a tekia , i.e., a long continuous shofar blast, and sounds a terua , i.e., a staccato series of shofar blasts, from the midst of the tekia . And Rav Asi said: One does not sound a continuous blast; rather, he sounds a tekia and then sounds a terua in one breath. Rav Asi instituted the practice in the city of Huzal in accordance with his halakha .

מֵיתִיבֵי: יוֹם טוֹב שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת – תּוֹקְעִין וְלֹא מְרִיעִין; מַאי לָאו לֹא מְרִיעִין כְּלָל? לָא, רַב יְהוּדָה מְתָרֵץ לְטַעְמֵיהּ, וְרַב אַסִי מְתָרֵץ לְטַעְמֵיהּ; רַב יְהוּדָה מְתָרֵץ לְטַעְמֵיהּ – לֹא מְרִיעִין בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ, אֶלָּא מִתּוֹךְ תְּקִיעָה; וְרַב אַסִי מְתָרֵץ לְטַעְמֵיהּ – לֹא מְרִיעִין בִּשְׁתֵּי נְשִׁימוֹת, אֶלָּא בִּנְשִׁימָה אַחַת.

The Gemara raises an objection to the statements of Rav Yehuda and Rav Asi from a baraita : On a Festival that occurs on Shabbat eve, one sounds a tekia but does not sound a terua . What, is it not that one does not sound a terua at all? The Gemara answers: No, rather, Rav Yehuda explains the baraita according to his line of reasoning and Rav Asi explains the baraita according to his line of reasoning. Rav Yehuda explains the baraita according to his line of reasoning: One does not sound a distinct terua ; rather, he sounds the terua that emerges from the midst of the tekia . And Rav Asi explains the baraita according to his line of reasoning: One does not sound the tekia and the terua in two breaths; rather, he sounds them in one breath.

״וּבְמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת״ כו׳. הֵיכָא אָמַר לָהּ? אֲמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: בַּחֲתִימָתָהּ. וְכֵן אֲמַר רַב נַחְמָן: בַּחֲתִימָתָהּ.

§ The mishna states that on a Festival that occurs at the conclusion of Shabbat one recites havdala , and that the Sages disagreed as to the formula of that blessing. The Gemara asks: Where does one recite the formula in question? Rav Yehuda said: He recites the formula at the conclusion of the blessing. But in the body of the blessing one recites the same formula as in every conclusion of Shabbat: Who distinguishes between sacred and profane, between light and darkness, etc. And likewise, Rav Naḥman said: He recites the formula at the conclusion of the blessing.

וְרַב שֵׁשֶׁת בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִידִי אֲמַר: אַף בִּפְתִיחָתָהּ. וְלֵית הִלְכְתָא כְּוָותֵיהּ.

And Rav Sheshet, son of Rav Idi, said: One recites that formula even at the beginning, in the body of the blessing, instead of the formula: Who distinguishes between sacred and profane. The Gemara comments: And the halakha is not in accordance with his opinion.

״רַבִּי דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר: ׳בֵּין קֹדֶשׁ חָמוּר לְקֹדֶשׁ הַקַּל׳״. וְלֵית הִלְכְתָא כְּוָותֵיהּ.

The mishna teaches: Rabbi Dosa says that the formula is: Who distinguishes between greater sanctity and lesser sanctity. The Gemara comments: And the halakha is not in accordance with his opinion.

אֲמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: יוֹם טוֹב שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּאֶמְצַע שַׁבָּת, אוֹמֵר: ״הַמַּבְדִּיל בֵּין קֹדֶשׁ לְחוֹל וּבֵין אוֹר לְחֹשֶׁךְ וּבֵין יִשְׂרָאֵל לַגּוֹיִם וּבֵין יוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי לְשֵׁשֶׁת יְמֵי הַמַּעֲשֶׂה״, מַאי טַעְמָא? סֵדֶר הַבְדָּלוֹת הוּא מוֹנֶה. הדרן עלך הכל שוחטין

Rabbi Zeira said: At the conclusion of a Festival that occurs in the middle of the week, one recites: Who distinguishes between sacred and profane, and between light and darkness, and between Israel and the nations, and between the seventh day and the six days of labor, even though it is not Shabbat. What is the reason for that practice? He is enumerating the series of distinctions that the Sages instituted and not specifically the distinction unique to that particular day.