סוטה ה׳Sotah 5

Mishnah

משנה: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ כָּךְ הַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וּבָאוּ וּבָאוּ. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה לַבַּעַל כָּךְ הִיא אֲסוּרָה לַבּוֹעֵל שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר נִטְמְאָה נִטְמְאָה דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ כָּךְ הָיָה דוֹרֵשׁ זְכַרְיָה בֶּן הַקַּצָּב. רִבִּי אוֹמֵר שְׁנֵי פְעָמִים הָאֲמוּרִים בַּפָּרָשָׁה אִם נִטְמָאָה נִטְמָאָה אֶחָד לַבַּעַל וְאֶחָד לַבּוֹעֵל.

MISHNAH: Just as the water checks her out so it checks him out, as it is said, “it will come, it will come”. Just as she is forbidden to the husband so she is forbidden to her paramour as it is said, “she was impure, she was impure,” the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Joshua said, that was the inference of Zachariah the butcher’s son. Rebbi said, the two times it said, “she became impure, she became impure,” once for the husband and once for the paramour.

Halakhah

הלכה: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ כול׳. אֲנָן תַּנִּינָן בָּאוּ בָּאוּ. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי וּבָאוּ וּבָאוּ. מָאן דָּמַר בָּאוּ בָּאוּ. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. וּמָאן דָּמַר וּבָאוּ וּבָאוּ. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. אֲנָן תַּנִּינָן נִטְמְאָה נִטְמְאָה. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי וְנִטְמָאָה וְנִטְמָאָה. מָאן דָּמַר נִטְמְאָה נִטְמְאָה. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. וּמָאן דָּמַר וְנִטְמְאָה וְנִטְמְאָה. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל.

HALAKHAH: “Just as the water checks her out,” etc. We stated “they came, they came”. Some Tannaïm stated “they will come, they will come”. He who said “they came, they came” is Rebbi Aqiba, he who said “they will come, they will come” is Rebbi Ismael. We stated “she became impure, she became impure”, some Tannaïm stated “and she became impure, and she became impure”. He who said “she became impure, she became impure” is Rebbi Aqiba, he who said “and she became impure, and she became impure” is Rebbi Ismael.

תַּנֵּי בוא ובה. וְכָתוּב כֵּן. כַּיי דָמַר רִבִּי אִמִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. גּוֹרְעִין לִדְרוֹשׁ מִתְּחִילָּתָהּ לְסוֹפָהּ. רִבִּי חֲנִינָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. וַאֲפִילוּ בְאֶמְצַע הַתֵּיבָה. וְיָצַקְתָּ עָלֶיהָ שֶׁמֶן. וְיָצַקְתָּ שֶׁמֶן מִנְחָה. לְרַבּוֹת אֶת כָּל הַמְנָחוֹת לִיצִיקָה.

It was stated, בוא ובה. Is that written? It follows what Rebbi Immi said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: For interpretation, one removes from its beginning to its end. Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah: Even a middle word. “You have to pour oil on.” You have to pour oil on a flour offering, to subject all flour offerings to pouring.

הַמְאָרְרִים. אָמַר רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא. מִינְיָין הַמְאָרְרִים. כְּנֶגֶד מָאתַיִם וְאַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁמוֹנָה אֵיבָרִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ. וּכְנֶגֶד מָאתַיִם אַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁמוֹנָה אֵיבָרִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ.

“The spell acting”. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, what is the count of “the spell acting”? It corresponds to the 248 parts of her body and the 248 parts of his body.

וְהָא תַנִּינָן. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ כָּךְ הַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה לַבַּעַל כָּךְ הִיא אֲסוּרָה לַבּוֹעֵל. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה לְאָחִיו שֶׁלַּבַּעַל כָּךְ הִיא אֲסוּרָה לְאָחִיו שֶׁלַּבּוֹעֵל. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ עַל כְּל בִּיאָה וּבִיאָה שֶׁהִיא מְקַבֶּלֶת אֶת בַּעֲלָהּ לְאַחַר הַבּוֹעֵל כָּךְ הֵן בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ. הִיא עַל יְדֵי שֶׁדַּרְכָּהּ לֵיאָסֵר בֵּין לוֹ בֵין לְאַחֵר הִיא נִבְדֶּקֶת. אֲבָל הוּא לִכְשֶׁיַּשְׁתֶּה הוּא נִבְדַּק. בָּדְקוּ אוֹתוֹ וְלֹא בָדְקוּ אוֹתָהּ. אֲנִי אוֹמֵר. הַזְּכוּת תָּלָה לָהּ. נִיחָא כְּמָאן דָּמַר. הַזְּכוּת תּוֹלָה וְאֵינָהּ נִיכֶּרֶת. בְּרַם כְּמָאן דָּמַר. הַזְּכוּת תּוֹלָה וְנִיכֶּרֶת. הֲרֵי לֹא הוּכְּרָה. אֶלָּא אֲנִי אוֹמֵר. מַיִם מְגוּלִּין שָׁתָת וְנִצְּבֵית. הָכֵין לָא הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מִיבְדְּקוּנַיהּ אֶלָּא כְדוֹן. אֶלָּא אֲנִי אוֹמֵר. עִם אֲחֵרוֹת נִסְתָּר. וְלֹא כֵן סַבְרִנָן מֵימַר. לִכְשֶׁיַּשְׁתֶּה הוּא נִבְדַּק. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיָה הוּא מֵזִיד וְהִיא שׁוֹגֶגֶת וּבָדְקוּ אוֹתוֹ וְלֹא בָדְקוּ אוֹתָהּ. אֲנִי אוֹמֵר. הַזְּכוּת תָּלָה לָהּ. נִיחָא כְּמָאן דָּמַר. הַזְּכוּת תּוֹלָה וְאֵינָהּ נִיכֶּרֶת. בְּרַם כְּמָאן דָּמַר. הַזְּכוּת תּוֹלָה וְנִיכֶּרֶת. הֲרֵי לֹא הוּכְּרָה. אֶלָּא אֲנִי אוֹמֵר. מַיִם מְגוּלִּין שָׁתָת וְנִצְּבֵית. הָכֵין לָא הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מִיבְדְּקוּנַיהּ אֶלָּא כְדוֹן. אֶלָּא אֲנִי אוֹמֵר. עִם אֲחֵרִים נִסְתְּרָה. מֵעַתָּה גֵירַשׁ יְהֵא מוּתָּר בָּהּ. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיָה הוּא שׁוֹגֵג וְהִיא מֵזִידָה. וּבָדְקוּ אוֹתָהּ וְלֹא בָדְקוּ אוֹתוֹ. הוּא מֵזִיד וְהִיא שׁוֹגֶגֶת. פְּשִׁיטָא שֶׁהִיא מוּתֶּרֶת לְבֵיתָהּ. גֵירַשׁ. מַהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא מוּתָּר בָּהּ. אֶיפְשַׁר לוֹמַר מֵזִיד בָּהּ. וְאַתְּ אָמַר הָכֵין. הוּא שׁוֹגֵג וְהִיא מֵזִידָה. פְּשִׁיטָא שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה לְבֵיתָהּ. גֵירַשׁ. מַהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא מוּתָּר בָּהּ. אֶיפְשַׁר לוֹמַר יוֹצֵאת מִתַּחַת יָדוֹ וְתֵאמַר הָכֵין. וּמְנַיִין שֶׁהַדָּבָר תָּלוּי בָהּ. שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר בָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. כְּתִיב וְאֶל אֵשֶׁת עֲמִיתְךָ לֹא יִתֵּן שְׁכָבְתְּךָ לְזָרַע לְטָמְאָה בָהּ. בָּהּ הַדָּבָר תָּלוּי. אִם הָיְתָה מֵזִידָה אֲסוּרָה. שׁוֹגֶגֶת מוּתֶּרֶת.

Did we not state: “Just as the water checks her out so it checks him out”? Just as she is forbidden to her husband, so she is forbidden to her paramour. Just as she is forbidden to her husband’s brother, so she is forbidden to her paramour’s brother. Just as the water checks her out for every single intercourse for which she receives her husband after [intercourse with] her paramour, so it checks him out. Since she in general becomes forbidden, whether by him or by another [man], she is checked out. But when he makes [her] drink, he is checked out. If it checked him out but not her, I would say that merit suspends for her. That is according to him who says that merit suspends and it is not recognizable. But following him who says that merit suspends and it is recognizable? Look, she was not recognized! But I could say that she drank uncovered water and it swelled. They should not have her checked out in this way but correctly! But I could say that he was in secret with other women. Did we not think to say, when he makes [her] drink, he is checked out? Explain it that he had criminal intent but she acted in error; then the water checked him out but not her. [ If the water checked her out but not him,] I would say that merit suspends for (her) [him]. That is according to him who says that merit suspends and it is not recognizable. But following him who says that merit suspends and it is recognizable? Look, she was not recognized! But I could say that she drank uncovered water and her belly swelled. They should not have her checked out in this way but correctly! But I could say that she was in secret with other men. Then if he divorced her, she would be permitted to him. Explain it that he acted in error but she had criminal intent; then the water checked her out but not him. If he had criminal intent but she acted in error, then it is obvious that she is permitted to her house. If he divorced her, would she be permitted to him? Is it possible to say that he had criminal intent and you say so? If he acted in error but she had criminal intent, it is obvious that she is forbidden to her house. If he divorced her, would she be permitted to him? Is it possible to say that she left because of him and you say so? From where do we know that all depends on her? Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Is is written: “Do not ejaculate semen into your neighbor’s wife to be impure through her.” It depends on her; if she had criminal intent, she is forbidden, acted in error she is permitted.

Mishnah

משנה: בּוֹ בַיּוֹם דָּרַשׁ רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה וְכָל כְּלִי חֶרֶשׂ אֲשֶׁר יִפֹּל מֵהֶם אֶל תּוֹכוֹ כֹּל אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכוֹ יִטְמָא. אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר טָמֵא אֶלָּא יִטְמָא לְטַמֵּא אֶת אֲחֵרִים לִימַּד עַל כִּכָּר הַשֵׁינִי שֶׁמְּטַמֵּא אֶת הַשְּׁלִישִׁי. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ מִי יְגַלֶּה עָפָר מֵעֵינֶיךָ רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי שֶׁהָיִתָה אוֹמֵר עָתִיד דּוֹר אַחֵר לְטַהֵר אֶת כִּכָּר הַשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ מִן הַתּוֹרָה שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא וַהֲלֹא עֲקִיבָה תַּלְמִידְךָ מֵבִיא לוֹ מִקְרָא מִן הַתּוֹרָה שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כֹּל אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכוֹ יִטְמָא.

MISHNAH: On the same day, Rebbi Aqiba explained: “Any clay vessel into which some of them would fall, all inside shall become impure.” It does not say “is impure” but “shall become impure”; this teaches about the secondarily impure loaf that it defiles the tertiary. Rebbi Joshua said, who would remove the dust from your eyes, Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai, since you were saying that a future generation would purify the tertiary loaf since there is nothing about it in the Torah, but behold, your student Aqiba supports it by a verse from the Torah, as it has been said, “everything inside shall become impure.”

Halakhah

הלכה: בּוֹ בַיּוֹם דָּרַשׁ רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה כול׳. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן אָמַר. רַב וּשְׁמוּאָל. חַד אָמַר. בֵּין בִּתְרוּמָה בֵין בְּחוּלִין אָמַר רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר. בִּתְרוּמָה אֲבָל לֹא בְחוּלִין. וְלָא יָדְעִין מָאן אָמַר דָּא וּמָאן אָמַר דָּא. מִן מַה דָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָה. אָמְרֵי לָהּ רַב בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חִיָיה רוֹבָא. הַשְּׁלִישִׁי בָא מַחְמַת הַשֶּׁרֶץ. הֲוֵי אוֹמֵר. הוּא דוּ אָמַר. בֵּין בִּתְרוּמָה בֵין בְּחוּלִין אָמַר רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. אוֹכֶל מַעֲשֵׂר שֶׁהוּכְשָׁר בְּמַשְׁקֶה וְנָגַע בּוֹ טְבוּל יוֹם אוֹ יָדַיִים מְסוֹאֲבוֹת. מַפְרִישִׁין מִמֶּנּוּ תְּרוּמַת מַעֲשֵׂר בְטָהֳרָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא שְׁלִישִׁי. וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי טָהוֹר בְּחוּלִין. פָּתַר לְהָקֵל הוּא. בְּיָדַיִם שֶׁהֵן מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן. וְהָא תַנִּינָן טְבוּל יוֹם. תִּיפְתָּר בִּטְבוּל יוֹם בֵּית הַפְּרָס. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. וַאֲפִילוּ תֵימַר. בִּטְבוּל יוֹם דְּבָר תּוֹרָה. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא דִּכְתִיב טָהוֹר טָמֵא. טָהוֹר לְחוּלִין מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם וְלִתְרוּמָה מִשֶּׁתֶּחְשָׁךְ. הָתִיב רִבִּי חַגַּיי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אוֹ נֵימַר. טָהוֹר בְּמַגַּע וְטָמֵא בָאֲכִילָה. אָמַר לֵיהּ. כֵּלִים אֲמוּרִים בַּפָרָשָׁה. אִית לָךְ מֵימַר גַּבֵּי כֵלִים טְהוֹרִים בְּמַגַּע וּטְמֵיאִים בָאֲכִילָה.

HALAKHAH: “On the same day, Rebbi Aqiba explained,” etc. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rav and Samuel. One said, Rebbi Aqiba referred to both heave and profane food, but the other referred to heave but not to profane food. But one does not know who said what. Since Rebbi Yose said in the name of Rebbi Jonah, they said, Rav in the name of the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya: The tertiary comes because of the reptile. This implies that he said that Rebbi Aqiba referred to both heave and profane food. A Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “If tithe food was prepared [for impurity] by a fluid and a ṭevul yom or unclean hands touched it, one may take from it the heave of the tithe in purity because it is tertiary, and the tertiary is pure for profane food.” He explains that it is a leniency about hands [whose impurity] is rabbinical. But did we not state: “A ṭevul yom”? Explain it by a ṭevul yom from [the impurity] of a broken field. Rebbi Zeïra said, you may even say a biblical tevul yom. There is a difference since it is written “pure, impure”. Pure for profane food during daytime and for heave when it gets dark. Rebbi Ḥaggai objected before Rebbi Yose: May we not say: Pure for touch and impure for eating? He answered him, vessels are mentioned in the paragraph! Can you say about vessels that they are pure for touch and impure for eating?

מַתְנִיתָא מְסַיְיעָא לְרַב. הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁבְּחוּלִין טָמֵא וּמְטַמֵּא וְהַשֵּׁינִי פוֹסֵל וְלֹא מְטַמֵּא וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי נֶאֱכַל בִּנְזִיד הַדֶּמַע. הָא לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ דֶמַע אָסוּר. וְאָסוּר דְּבַתְרָה. הָרִאשׁוֹן וְהַשֵּׁינִי שֶׁבַּתְּרוּמָה טְמֵאִין וּמְטַמְּאִין. וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי פוֹסֵל וְלֹא מְטַמֵּא. וְהָרְבִיעִי נֶאֱכַל בִּנְזִיד הַקּוֹדֶשׁ. אִין תֵּימַר. הָא לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ קוֹדֶשׁ אָסוּר. אַשְׁכָּחַת מֵימַר מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרַב. דָּמַר רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם רַב. שְׁלִישִׁי בָא מַחְמַת הַשֶּׁרֶץ וְהָרְבִיעִי מוּתָּר לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ קוֹדֶשׁ. שֶׁלֹּא אָמְרוּ רְבִיעִי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ אֶלָּא בְקָדְשֵׁי הַמִּקְדָּשׁ מְקוּדָּשִׁין. אָמַר רִבִּי חוּנָה. וְלֹא בִתְרוּמָה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. וּתְרוּמָה אָסוּר לַעֲשׂוֹתָהּ קוֹדֶשׁ שֶׁלֹּא לְהַמְצִיא בָהּ תְּקָלָה. וְאָמוּר דְּבַתְרָה. הָרִאשׁוֹן וְהַשֵּׁינִי וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁבַּקּוֹדֶשׁ טְמֵאִים וּמְטַמְּאִים. וְהָרְבִיעִי פְסִיל וְלֹא מְטַמֵּא. וְהַחֲמִישִּׁי נֶאֱכַל בִּנְזִיד הַקּוֹדֶשׁ. אִין תֵּימַר. הָא לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ קוֹדֶשׁ אָסוּר. וְכִי יֵשׁ חֲמִישִּׁי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. וְאַתְּ אָמַר לֵית כֵּן. וְהָכָא לֵית כֵּן.

A Mishnah supports Rav: “Profane food which is impure primarily is impure and defiles, secondarily it invalidates but does not defile, but the tertiary can be eaten in heave broth.” This implies that it is forbidden to turn it into heave. And it is said after that: “Heave which is impure primarily or secondarily is impure and defiles, tertiarily impure it invalidates but does not defile, but the fourth degree can be eaten in sacrificial broth.” If you say that it is forbidden to turn it into sacrificial food, you would find that Rav’s statements are contradictory since Rebbi Abba said in the name of Rav: The tertiary comes because of the reptile but the fourth degree can be turned into sacrificial food, because they spoke about fourth degree [of impurity] for sacrifices only for dedicated sacrifices of the Temple! Rebbi Ḥuna said, are we not talking about heave? But it is forbidden to turn heave into sacrificial food in order to avoid accidents! And it was said after that: “Sacrifices which are impure primarily, secondarily, or tertiarily are impure and defile, impurity in the fourth degree invalidates but does not defile, but the fifth degree can be eaten in sacrificial broth.” If you say, it is forbidden to turn it into sacrificial food, is there any impurity of the fifth degree in sacrifices? But you say there is not. So here also, there is not.

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הַשְּׁלִישִׁי בָא מַחְמַת הַשֶּׁרֶץ אָסוּר לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ תְרוּמָה. בָּעֵי קוֹמוֹי. אֲפִילוּ כְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הִילָא. וַאֲפִילוּ כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְלָמָּה. טְבוּל יוֹם פְּסִיל וְהַשֵּׁינִי פְסִיל. מַה טְבוּל יוֹם אֵינוֹ פוֹסֵל אֶת הַחוּלִין מִלַּעֲשׂוֹתָן תְּרוּמָה. אַף הַשֵׁנִי אֵינוֹ פוֹסֵל אֶת הַחוּלִין מִלַּעֲשׂוֹתָן תְּרוּמָה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. שְׁלִישִׁי בָא מַחְמַת שֶׁרֶץ אָסוּר לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ תְרוּמָה וּמוּתָּר לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ קוֹדֶשׁ. רִבִּי זְעִירָא בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יָסָא. מְטַמֵּא בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. וְאַתְּ אָמַר אָכֵן. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִשּׁוּם מַעֲלָה. אָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק. עִיקַּר טוּמְאָתוֹ בַקּוֹדֶשׁ מִשּׁוּם מַעֲלָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְלָמָּה הוּא מְטַמֵּא בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. מִשֵּׁם מַעֲלָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן. וַאֲפִילוּ כְרַבָּנִן דְּאִינוּן אָמְרִין. אֵין הַשְּׁלִישִׁי בְחוּלִין. וְלָמָּה הוּא אָסוּר. מְטַמֵּא בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. מִשֵּׁם מַעֲלָה. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְלֵית אֲנָן צְרִיכִין שְׁמָעִין לֵיהּ מִן בַּר נַשׁ רַב.

Rebbi Joḥanan said: The tertiary comes because of the reptile but it is (forbidden) [permitted] to turn it into heave. They asked before him: Even for Rebbi Aqiba? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Hila: Even following Rebbi Aqiba. And why? The ṭevul yom makes invalid, secondary impurity makes invalid. Just as the ṭevul yom does not invalidate profane food that it could not be turned into heave, so secondary impurity does not invalidate profane food that it could not be turned into heave. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The tertiary comes because of the reptile, and it is (forbidden) [permitted] to turn it into heave but (permitted) [forbidden] to turn it into sacrificial food. Rebbi Ze‘ira asked before Rebbi Yasa: It defiles sacrifices and you say so? He said to him, because of the distinction. Rebbi Samuel ben Rebbi Isaac said, the source of its impurity is the distinction. Rebbi Yose said, why does it defile sacrifices? Because of the distinction. Rebbi Yudan said, even for the rabbis who say that there is no tertiary in profane food, why is it forbidden? It defiles sacrifices because of the distinction. Rebbi Yose said to him, do we not need to hear this from a great personality?

תַּמָּן אָמְרִין. מִמָּה שֶׁקִּילֵּס רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶת רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה הָדָא אָמְרָה. הֲלָכָה כְיוֹצֵא בוֹ. רַבָּנִן דְּקַיְסָרִין אָמְרִין. לְמִדְרָשׁוֹ קִילְּסוֹ. אֲבָל לְמַעֲשֶׂה אֵין הֲלָכָה כְיוֹצֵא בוֹ. דָּמַר רִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי מַיְישָׁא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. לוֹקִין עַל הַשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁבְּמַעֲשׂה וַאֲפִילוּ כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. רִבִּי יוּדָן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אִילַי. וַאֲפִילוּ כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֵינָן לוֹקִין. לָמָּה. טְבוּל יוֹם פּוֹסֵל וְהַשֵּׁינִי פּוֹסֵל. מַה טְבוּל יוֹם אֵין לוֹ מַגַּע אֶצֶל הַחוּלִין. אַף הַשֵּׁינִי אֵין לוֹ מַגַּע אֶצֶל הַחוּלִין. אָמַר רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. כְּמִינְיָין הַחוּלִין כָּךְ מִינְיָין הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. וְאַתְיָיא כַּיי דָּמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה רִבִּי אִימִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. בָּכַל חוּלִין אֲנָן קַיָימִין. וְאָהֵן פִּירְקָא מַעֲשֵׂר אִינּוּן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וַאֲפִילוּ רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁבּוֹ אֵינוֹ מְחוּוָר. לֹא אוֹכַל אֵין כְּתִיב כָּאן אֶלָּא לֹא אָכַלְתִּי. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּא מָרִי. מִכֵּיוָן דִּכְתִיב כְּכָל מִצְוֹתֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתָנִי. כְּמִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְחוּוָר.

There, they say, because Rebbi Joshua praised Rebbi Aqiba, it implies that practice follows his argument. The rabbis of Caesarea say, he praised him for his ingenuity, but in fact practice does not follow his argument, since Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Maisha, in the name of Rebbi Eleazar said, one whips for tertiary [impurity] for tithes, even according to Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Yudan in the name of Rebbi Hilai: Even according to Rebbi Aqiba one does not whip. Why? The ṭevul yom makes invalid, secondary impurity makes invalid. Since the ṭevul yom has no touch for profane food, also secondary impurity has no touch for profane food. Rebbi Eleazar said, as the count for profane food so is the count of tithes. This corresponds to what Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Immi, said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: We deal with somebody who ate profane food, and that Chapter deals with tithe. Rebbi Yose said, even its primary [impurity] is not clear. Not “I will not eat” is written, but “I did not eat.” Rebbi Abba Mari said, since it is written “following all Your commandments which You commanded me,” is it as if it were not clear?

רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי מָנָא. מִפְּנֵי מַה אָמְרוּ. הַשֵּׁינִי שֶׁבַּחוּלִין מְטַמֵּא מַשְׁקֶה חוּלִין. מִפְּנֵי הַיָּדַיִם. [מַה הַיָּדַיִּם] שֶׁהֵן מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן מְטַמְּאוֹת מַשְׁקֶה חוּלִין. שֵׁינִי שֶׁהוּא מִדְּבַר תּוֹרָה לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן. אִי מַה הַיָּדַיִּם סְפֵיקָן לְטַמֵּא אֶת אֲחֵרִים טָמֵא. אַף הַמַּשְׁקִין סְפֵיקָן לְטַמֵּא אֶת אֲחֵרִים טָמֵא. הָתִיב רִבִּי חֲנִינָא לְרִבִּי מָנָא. הֲרֵי אוֹכֵל אוֹכְלִין טְמֵאִין וְשׁוֹתֶה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין סְפֵיקָן לְטַמֵּא אֶת אֲחֵרִים טָמֵא. וְהַמַּשְׁקִין הַיּוֹצְאִין מֵהֶן סְפֵיקָן לְטַמֵּא אֶת אֲחֵרִים טָמֵא. וְהָא שֵׁינִי שֶׁהוּא דְּבַר תּוֹרָה סְפֵיקוֹ לְטַמֵּא אֶת אֲחֵרִים טָהוֹר. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. וְלֹא בִתְרוּמָה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וַאֲפִילוּ תֵימַר. בִּתְרוּמָה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. מַה אִית לֵיהּ טָמֵא יִטְמָא דְּבַר תּוֹרָה. לֹא רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Mana: Why did they say that secondarily impure profane food defiles profane fluids? Because of the hands. Since hands, [whose impurity] is rabbinical, defile profane fluids, secondarily impure food, [whose impurity] is biblical, not so much more? Also, since hands, in a case of doubt whether they defiled, impart impurity, so also secondarily impure fluids, in a case of doubt whether they defiled, impart impurity. Rebbi Ḥanina objected before Rebbi Mana: Look, if somebody eats secondarily impure food and drinks secondarily impure fluids, in a case of doubt whether they defiled, they impart impurity. But secondarily impure foods by biblical standards, in a case of doubt whether they defiled, leave it pure! Rebbi Ḥanina said before Rebbi Mana: Do we not deal with heave? He said to him, even if you say that we deal with heave; is the one who argues “is impure”, “shall become impure” as word of the Torah not Rebbi Aqiba?

תַּמָּן אָמְרִין. שְׁתֵּי שְׁאֵילוֹת שָׁאֲלָן חַגַּי הַנָּבִיא. אַחַת הֵשִׁיבוּ אוֹתוֹ כָּרָאוּי וְאַחַת לֹא הֵשִׁיבוּ לֹוֹ כָרָאוּי. הֵן יִשָּׂא אִישׁ בְּשַׂר קוֹדֶשׁ בִּכְנַף בִּגְדוֹ. כְּנַף תְּחִילָּה. בְּשַׂר קוֹדֶשׁ שֵׁינִי. לֶחֶם וְנָזִיד שְׁלִישִׁי. וְיַיִן וְשֶׁמֶן וּמַאֲכָל רְבִיעִי. וְכִי יֵשׁ רְבִיעִי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. וַיַּעֲנוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֹא. לֹא הֵשִׁיבוּ אוֹתוֹ כָרָאוּי. שֶׁיֵּשׁ רְבִיעִי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. וַיֹּאמֶר חַגַּי אִם יִגַּע טְמֵא נֶפֶשׁ בְּכָל אֵלֶּה הַיִּטְמָא. אִם תִּהְיֶה כְּנַף טְמֵא נֶפֶשׁ וְנָגְעָה בְּכָל אֵלֶּה. הַיִּטְמָא. וַיַּעֲנוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים וַיֹּאמְרוּ יִטְמָא. הֵשִׁיבוּ אוֹתוֹ כָרָאוּי. דָּמַר רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. קוֹדֶם עַד שֶׁלּא גָזְרוּ רְבִיעִי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ שָׁאֲלָן. וְלָמָּה הוּא מְקַלְלָן. כְּאִינַּשׁ דְּבָעֵי עִילָּה עַל חַבְרֵיהּ. וּבֵיתָא מַה אִכְפַּת לָהּ. לֹא דוּ אָמַר וַאֲשֶׁר יַקְרִיבוּ שָׁם טָמֵא הוּא. כְּמַה דָמַר רִבִּי סִימוֹן בַּר זַבְדִּי. גּוּלְגּוֹלְתּוֹ שֶׁלָּאָרְנָן הַיְּבוּסִי מָצְאוּ תַּחַת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ.

There, they say: The prophet Haggai asked two questions; one they answered correctly and one incorrectly. “Assume a man carries holy meat in the corner of his garment.” The corner is of primary impurity, the holy meat of second degree, bread and soup of third degree, wine, oil, and food of the fourth. Does there exist a fourth degree of impurity for sanctified food? “The Cohanim answered, and said: No.” They did not answer correctly, since there is a fourth degree of impurity for sanctified food. “Ḥaggai said, if a person impure by the impurity of the dead would touch all of these, would they be impure?” If the corner would be impure by the impurity of the dead and touched these. Would it be impure? “The Cohanim answered and said, it would be impure.” They answered correctly. But Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He asked them before they decided about fourth degree [impurity] for sanctified food. Then why did he curse them? As a person who looks for a pretext against his neighbor. What difference does it make for the House? Is that not what he said: “What they are sacrificing there is impure”? That is what Rebbi Simon bar Zavdi said, they found the skull of Oman the Jebusite under the altar.

רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר כָּהֲנָא. בְּקִיאִין הָיוּ בְהֵיסֵיטּוֹת וְלֹא הָיוּ בְּקִיאִין בְּמַדָּפוֹת. הֵן יִשָּׂא אִישׁ בְּשַׂר קוֹדֶשׁ. שָׁאֲלָן. טְמֵא מֵת מְטַמֵּא בְהֵיסֵט. וַיַּעֲנוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֹא. הֵשִׁיבוּ אוֹתוֹ כָרָאוּי. שֶׁאֵין טְמֵא מֵת מְטַמֵּא בְהֵיסֵט. שָׁאֲלָן. טְמֵא מֵת עוֹשֶׂה מַדָּף. וַיַּעֲנוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים וַיֹּאמְרוּ יִטְמָא. לֹא הֵשִׁיבוּ אוֹתוֹ כָרָאוּי. שֶׁאֵין טְמֵא מֵת עוֹשֶׂה מַדָּף.

Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Cahana: They were expert in pushings but not expert in slight impurities. “Assume a man carries holy meat,” he asked them whether someone impure by the impurity of the dead imparts impurity by pushing. “The Cohanim answered, and said: No;” they answered him correctly. He asked them whether someone impure by the impurity of the dead imparts slight impurity. “The Cohanim answered and said: It will be impure.” They did not answer correctly, for the impurity of the dead does not impart slight impurity.

רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא רִבִּי פִינְחָס בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לֵוִי. עַל הַחֲמִישִּׁי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ שָׁאֲלָן. הֵן יִשָּׂא אִישׁ בְּשַׂר קוֹדֶשׁ בִּכְנַף בִּגְדוֹ. כְּנַף תְּחִילָּה. וּבְשַׂר קוֹדֶשׁ שֵׁינִי. לֶחֶם וְנָזִיד שְׁלִישִׁי. יַיִן וְשֶׁמֶן רְבִיעִי. וּמַאֲכָל חֲמִישִּׁי. שָׁאֲלָן. וְכִי יֵשׁ חֲמִישִּׁי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. וַיַּעֲנוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֹא. הֵשִׁיבוּ אוֹתוֹ כָרָאוּי. שֶׁאֵין חֲמִישִּׁי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. וְלָמָּה הוּא מְקַלְלָן כְּאִינַּשׁ דְּבָעֵי עִילָּה עַל חַבְרֵיהּ. וּבֵיתָא מַה אִיכְפַּה לֵיהּ. וַיֹּאמֶר וַאֲשֶׁר יַקְרִיבוּ שָׁם טָמֵא הוּא. כַּיי דָמַר רִבִּי סִימוֹן בַּר זְבִיד. גּוּלְגּוֹלְתּוֹ שֶׁלָּאָרְנָן הַיְּבוּסִי מָצְאוּ תַּחַת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ.

Rebbi Tanḥuma, Rebbi Phineas, in the name of Rebbi Levi: He asked them about the fifth degree of sanctified food. “Assume a man carries holy meat in the corner of his garment.” The corner is of primary impurity, the holy meat of second degree, bread and soup third, wine and oil fourth, and the food of the fifth degree. Does there exist fifth degree impurity for sanctified food? “The Cohanim answered, and said: No.” They did answer correctly, since there is no fifth degree impurity for sanctified food. Then why did he curse them? As a person who looks for a pretext against his neighbor. What difference does it make for the House? Is that not what Rebbi Simon bar Zavdi said, they found the skull of Ornan the Jebusite under the altar.

תַּנֵּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. מְנַיִין לָרְבִיעִי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ שֶׁהוּא פָסוּל. וְדִין הוּא. מַה אִם מְחוּסָּר כִּיפּוּרִים שֶׁאֵינוֹ פָסוּל בִּתְרוּמָה הֲרֵי הוּא פָסוּל בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. שְׁלִישִׁי שֶׁהוּא פָסוּל בִּתְרוּמָה אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּפְסוֹל בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ. הֲרֵי לָמַדְנוּ לִשְׁלִישִׁי מִן הַכָּתוּב. וְלִרְבִיעִי מִקַּל וְחוֹמֶר. הָתִיב רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הָאוֹכֶל הַבָּא מַחְמַת טְבוּל יוֹם יוֹכִיחַ. שֶׁהוּא פוֹסֵל בַּתְּרוּמָה וְאֵינוֹ פוֹסֵל בַקּוֹדֶשׁ. רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אַתְיָיא דְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי כְשִׁיטָּת רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה רַבּוֹ. כְּמָה דְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אָמַר. יִטְמָא יִטְמָא דְּבַר תּוֹרָה. כֵּן רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אָמַר. יִטְמָא יִטְמָא דְּבַר תּוֹרָה. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָה. לֵית רִבִּי יוֹסֵי צָרִיךְ לְהָדֵין קַל וָחוֹמֶר. קִרְיֵי דָרַשׁ רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְהַבָּשָׂר אֲשֶׁר יִגַּע. זֶה שֵׁינִי שֶׁנָּגַע בָּרִאשׁוֹן. בְּכָל טָמֵא. זֶה שְׁלִישִׁי שֶׁנָּגַע בַּשֵׁינִי. לֹא יֵאָכֵל. סוֹף טָמֵא לֹא יֵאָכֵל.

It was stated: “Rebbi Yose said, from where that the fourth degree is disabled in sanctified food? It is an argument. Since one who lacks expiation is not disabled for heave but disabled for sanctified food, it is only logical that third degree [impurity] which is disabled for heave should disable for sanctified food. That means, we learned third degree from a verse and fourth degree from an argument de minore ad majus.” Rebbi Joḥanan objected: Food that was touched by a ṭevul yom is a counterexample, because it is disabled in the case of heave but not disabled in the case of sanctified food. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Yose argues the method of his teacher Rebbi Aqiba. Just as Rebbi Aqiba says “it will be impure”, it makes impure by the words of the Torah, so Rebbi Yose says “it will be impure”, it makes impure by the words of the Torah. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: Rebbi Yose does not need that argument de minore ad majus. Rebbi Yose explains the verse: “Any meat which would touch”, that is second degree food because it touched primary impurity; “anything impure”, that is third degree food because it touched second degree impurity; “shall not be eaten”, the endstage of impurity cannot be eaten.

עַד כְּדוֹן בְּאוֹכְלִין שֶׁנִּיטְמוּ בְּאַוֵּיר כְּלִי חֶרֶשׂ שֶׁנִּיטְמָא בְשֶׁרֶץ. אוֹכְלִין עַצְמָן שֶׁנִּיטְמְאוּ בְשֶׁרֶץ מְנַיִין. וְדִין הוּא. מַה אִם הַכֵּלִים שֶׁאֵינָן מִטַּמְּאִין מֵאַוֵּיר כְּלֵי חֶרֶשׂ שֶׁנִּיטְמָא בְשֶׁרֶץ הֲרֵי הֵן מְטַמְּאִין כְּשֶׁרֶץ לְטַמֵּא אוֹכְלִין. [אֹכְלִין שֶׁהֵן מִטַּמְּאִין מֵאַוֵּיר כְּלֵי חֶרֶס שֶׁנִּיטְמָא בְשֶׁרֶץ אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁנִיטַמְּאִן כְּשֶׁרֶץ לְטַמֵּא אֹכְלִין.] עַד כְדוֹן כְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. כְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. וְהַבָּשָׂר אֲשֶׁר יִגַּע בְּכָל טָמֵא. וְזֶה רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁנָּגַע בְּכָל טָמֵא. לֹא יֵאָכֵל. לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַשֵּׁינִי. הַשְּׁלִישִׁי מְנַיִין. וְדִין הוּא. וּמַה אִם טְבוּל יוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ פָסוּל בְּחוּלִין הֲרֵי הוּא פוֹסֵל בַּתְּרוּמָה. שֵׁינִי שֶׁהוּא פוֹסֵל בְּחוּלִין אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּפְסוֹל בַּתְּרוּמָה. רְבִיעִי בַקּוֹדֵשׁ מְנַיִין. וְדִין הוּא. מַה אִם מְחוּסָּר כִּיפּוּרִים שֶׁאֵינוֹ פוֹסֵל בַּתְּרוּמָה הֲרֵי הוּא פוֹסֵל בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ. שְׁלִישִׁי שֶׁהוּא פוֹסֵל בַּתְּרוּמָה אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּפְסוֹל בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ. הָא לָמַדְנוּ לָרִאשׁוֹן וְלַשֵּׁינִי מִן הַכָּתוּב. וְלַשְּׁלִישִׁי מִן הַדִּין וְלָרְבִיעִי מִקַּל וְחוֹמֶר. דָּנין לוֹ דִין מִן הַדִּין. שֶׁיְּהֵא הַכֹּל מְשׁוּעְבָּד לַהֲלָכָה. שֶׁיְּהֵא הַשְּׁלִישִׁי פוֹסֵל בַּתְּרוּמָה וְהָרְבִיעִי בַקּוֹדֶשׁ.

So far about solid food that became impure in the air space of a clay vessel which had become impure by a reptile. What about solid food that became impure directly from a reptile? Is that not an argument? Since vessels, which cannot become impure in the air space of a clay vessel that became impure by a reptile, become impure by contact with a reptile to defile solid food, [is it not logical that solid food, which becomes impure in the air space of a clay vessel that became impure by a reptile, should become impure by contact with a reptile to defile solid food.] So far, following Rebbi Aqiba. Following Rebbi Ismael? Rebbi Ismael stated: “Any meat which would touch anything impure”, that is first degree food which touched any impurity, “shall not be eaten”, to add a second degree of impurity. The third degree from where? It is an argument. Since a ṭevul yom who is not disabled for profane food disables heave, it is only logical that a person secondarily impure, who disables profane food should disable heave. The fourth degree for sacrifices from where? It is an argument. Since one who lacks expiation who does not disable heave disables sanctified food, it is only logical that third degree [impurity] which disables heave should disable sanctified food. That means, we learned first and second degrees from a verse, the third from an argument and the fourth from an argument de minore ad majus. Can one pile argument on argument? Everything is subject to practice, i. e., that third degree disables heave and fourth degree disables sacrifices.