- כל המשלים למי מקוה משלים למי כיור לרביעית אינו משלים
Reish Lakish said: כל המשלים למי מקוה – any substance which can complete the requisite water of a mikveh (forty סאה), משלים למי כיור – can complete the requisite water for the kiyor, לרביעית אינו משלים – but cannot complete a revi’is for נטילת ידים. This cannot refer to טיט הנדוק – liquid mud, because if it is thin enough for a cow to drink, it is even valid for נטילת ידים, and if not, it is invalid even for a mikveh. It cannot refer to יבחושין אדומין – red midges which generate from water, because they can be immersed in by themselves (and not just complete a mikveh)!? Therefore, Rav Pappa concludes that Reish Lakish referred to נתן סאה ונטל סאה – where one put a se’ah of liquid (other than water) into a full mikveh and then removed a se’ah from the mikveh. Although the mikveh now contains less than forty סאה of water, the other liquid was בטל to the valid mikveh, which remains valid after some of its water was removed. Rebbe Yochanan said this can be repeated עד רובו – up until (but not including) most of it consists of the other liquids. This process can be used for מי כיור as well, but not for נטילת ידים.
- Machlokes if מי כיור must be מים חיים
Reish Lakish said: מי מקוה כשירים למי כיור – mikveh waters are valid to be used as kiyor waters. This implies that the כיור does not require מים חיים – natural [spring] water, to which the Gemara objects from a Baraisa: the passuk says that parts of the korban are washed "במים" – with water, which excludes wine, but includes "שאר מים" – “other water” (i.e., which is not מים חיים), and adds that it is a kal vachomer that מי כיור may be used. This indicates that מי כיור is מים חיים, which is why it is certainly valid for washing the korban parts!? The Gemara suggests that its advantage is that it was sanctified, but objects that this is actually a disadvantage, because another Baraisa states that "מים" requires waters שאין להם שם לווי – which do not have an accompanying name, thus excluding the כיור’s water, which are called "מי כיור". Rather, the first Baraisa meant to allow water fit for the כיור for washing korban parts, with its advantage being that it is מים חיים. The Gemara concludes that Rebbe Yishmael requires מים חיים for the כיור, but the Chochomim do not.
- זקני דרום: a טמא מת is מרצה for a קרבן יחיד
The זקני דרום said that the Mishnah which invalidates avodah performed by a tamei only applies to someone tamei from a שרץ, but regarding a טמא מת – someone contaminated by a corpse, מתוך שמרצה בציבור – since he makes communal [korbanos] acceptable through his avodah, מרצה נמי ביחיד – he also makes private [korbanos] acceptable. Although a קרבן יחיד is forbidden for any טמא to bring (even a טמא מת), the ציץ of the Kohen Gadol validates it בדיעבד. The זקני דרום hold מכפרין כמתכפרין – those who generate atonement (Kohanim) are [compared] to those who receive atonement (owners). Just as a קרבן צבור is only permitted to bring for owners who are טמא מת, but not those who are טמא שרץ, so too Kohanim who are טמא מת can bring a קרבן צבור, but not those who are טמא שרץ. Finally, the reason why they hold a קרבן צבור cannot be brought for owners who are טמא שרץ, is because they hold: שוחטין וזורקין על טמא שרץ – we may shecht and throw the blood [of a pesach] for an individual owner who is a טמא שרץ. Since the korbanos of טמא שרץ owners can be brought for them, they would not be deferred to פסח שני, and therefore, a majority of such owners do not allow for their korban to be brought in a state of tumah. Reish Lakish objected forcefully to the זקני דרום’s opinion, as the Gemara proceeds to present.