Mishnah for Yevamot 163:3

טהורות בטהורות עדיף ליה

According to Resh Lakish,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who explained the Baraitha under discussion to refer to a crushed piece. ');">⁷</span> wherein lies the difference between the first clause and the final clause?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In either case the piece is Pentateuchally forbidden. As neutralization takes place in the case of the first clause owing to the insignificant value of the piece. neutralization should also take place, for the same reason, in the case of the final clause! According to R. Johanan, the reason for the difference between the two clauses has been explained supra p. 553, n. 6. ');">⁸</span> — R. Shisha the son of R. Idi replied: The first clause deals with uncleanness that was due to liquids,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the crushed mixture was contained, for instance. in a vessel that had been in contact with unclean liquids. ');">⁹</span>

Explore mishnah for Yevamot 163:3. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.