Reference for Nedarim 37:12
ורמי דרבי יהודה אדרבי יהודה מי אמר רבי יהודה לא מעייל איניש נפשיה לספיקא ורמינהי רבי יהודה אומר סתם תרומה ביהודה אסורה ובגליל מותרת שאין אנשי הגליל מכירין את תרומת הלשכה טעמא דאין מכירין
is clean [i.e., fit for food], and that the fluids<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The flow of blood and water. ');"><sup>12</sup></span> in the [temple] slaughter-house are clean?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even by Rabbinical law. Since the general uncleanliness of liquids is rabbinical only, it was not imposed upon liquids in the temple slaughter house, so as not to defile the flesh of sacrifices. The language of this testimony is Aramaic, whereas all other laws in the Mishnah are couched in Hebrew. Weiss, Dor, I, 105, sees in this a proof of its extreme antiquity; v. A.Z. (Sonc. ed.) pp. 181ff for further notes. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> Now, there is no difficulty according to Samuel's interpretation that they are clean [only] insofar that they cannot defile other liquids, but that nevertheless they are unclean in themselves; but according to Rab, who maintained that they are literally clean [even in respect of themselves], what can be said?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It may appear that this difficulty arises in any case. But if the Mishnah, 'an uncertain vow of neziruth', is not R. Eliezer's ruling, it can be answered that though the entire law of the uncleanness of liquids is rabbinical only, he is nevertheless stringent in a case of doubt. But if the Mishnah agrees with R. Eliezer, so that though neziruth and vows in general are Biblically binding, he is lenient in case of doubt, how can he treat liquids strictly, when the law is merely rabbinical? ');"><sup>14</sup></span> But [answer thus]: One [the Mishnah in Toharoth] teaches R. Judah's view; the other [our Mishnah] gives R. Simeon's. For it was taught: [If one says,] 'Behold! I will be a <i>nazir</i>,' if this stack contains a hundred <i>kor</i>,'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A measure of capacity: 36.44 litres in dry measure; 364.4 litres in liquid measure. J.E. 'Weights and Measures'. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> and he goes and finds it stolen or destroyed: R. Judah ruled that he is not a <i>nazir</i>: R. Simeon, that he is.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'R. Judah permits. R. Simeon forbids'. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> Now, R. Judah is self-contradictory. Did he say that one does not place himself in a doubtful position?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he meant to be a nazir only if it certainly contained that measure. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> Then a contradiction is shewn: R. JUDAH SAID: AN UNSPECIFIED REFERENCE TO <i>TERUMAH</i> IN [JUDEA IS BINDING, BUT NOT IN GALILEE, BECAUSE THE GALILEANS ARE UNFAMILIAR WITH THE <i>TERUMAH</i> OF THE TEMPLE-CHAMBER. Thus the reason is that they are unfamiliar,