Taharos, Chapter 4, Mishnah 11. Our chapter has been assembling a catalogue of sfeikos, doubtful cases in the laws of tumah and taharah. An earlier list gathered the doubts that are ruled tamei; the list we are now in the middle of gathers the doubts that are ruled tahor. This Mishnah supplies three more entries for that list, and we will work through all three.
Safek Yadayim
"Safek yadayim litma, u'litamei, v'litaher, tahor." The first case concerns hands. The Chachamim decreed that a person's hands carry the status of sheniyos, second-degree tumah, on a rabbinic level. The reasoning is that hands are never still. They are constantly reaching and handling, and a person who is not deliberately guarding them has no real record of where they have been or what they have come into contact with. On that basis the Rabbis assigned them tumah.
The Mishnah lists three forms the doubt can take. "Litma": we know the hands are tamei, and the question is whether they in fact conveyed that tumah to something else. "U'litamei": we know the hands were tahor, and the question is whether they contracted tumah. "V'litaher": the question is whether the washing that was meant to purify them actually accomplished its purpose. In all three, the ruling is tahor. The entire tumah of hands rests on a rabbinic decree to begin with, and a doubt within a d'rabbanan is decided leniently.
Safek Reshus Harabim
"Safek reshus harabim, tahor." A doubt about tumah that comes up in the public domain is resolved in favor of taharah. We have already met this rule in passing; perakim five and six take it as their central subject, and that is where we will study it properly.
It is worth noting already that the very basis of this leniency is a dispute among the Tannaim, recorded in the Tosefta to Taharos, chapter six, halachah ten. Is the source of the rule connected to the Korban Pesach, or does it stem from the simple reality that in a public thoroughfare we have no practical way of establishing what happened and who touched what? We will take that up in its place.
Safek Divrei Sofrim
"Safek divrei sofrim, tahor." The third item on the list is a doubt in something whose standing is that of divrei sofrim. What divrei sofrim actually means is itself a subject of debate: some hold it is d'oraisa, some d'rabbanan, and some place it in between, tending toward one side or the other. We need not settle that here. Our Mishnah is interested in the practical halachah, and it goes on to illustrate with cases in which tumah takes hold by force of divrei sofrim.
- "Achal ochlin t'mei'im": one who ate tamei foods becomes tamei mi'divrei sofrim.
- "Shasah mashkin t'mei'im": one who drank tamei liquids becomes tamei mi'divrei sofrim.
- "Ba rosho v'rubo b'mayim she'uvin": one who entered with his head and the greater part of his body into drawn water. Unlike the water of a mikveh, which gathers naturally, mayim she'uvin are waters that were transported by human hands.
- "O shenaflu al rosho v'rubo shloshah lugin mayim she'uvin": or that he did not immerse at all, but three lugin of such drawn water fell upon his head and the greater part of his body.
Now let a doubt arise in any of these. Perhaps three lugin fell on him and perhaps it was only two and a half. Perhaps the cup he drank from held the tamei liquid and perhaps it held the tahor one. In all four of these cases, and in any others of the same category, "sfeiko tahor," the doubt is resolved leniently.
The Exception, and an Exception to the Exception
"Chutz min davar shehu av hatumah v'hu mi'divrei sofrim." The Mishnah carves out one category from this leniency: a thing that is an av hatumah, a primary source of tumah, the highest tier of tumah, and whose status as such derives from divrei sofrim. The Bartenura's example is dam tevusah, mixed blood. When a doubt of that sort arises, and it arises in the private domain, we rule sfeiko tamei.
The Bartenura appends a further limitation. One case slips out from under even this stringency: safek Beis HaPeras. A Beis HaPeras is a field that has been plowed, in which there is uncertainty as to whether a grave was ever there. Once the plow has passed through, the location of any bones is untraceable, and bones themselves transmit tumah, so the field carries a built-in doubt. Now imagine someone who is not sure whether he set foot in that Beis HaPeras at all. His uncertainty is about a place that is itself uncertain, one doubt resting on top of another, a sfeik sfeika. Here the halachah is tahor.
Those are the three entries our Mishnah contributes to the list of sfeikos that are ruled tahor.