Nedarim 37

כל שכן דלא מעייל לספיקא

Abaye said to him: How have you explained [the Mishnah] 'A doubt in neziruth is ruled leniently' — as being R. Eliezer's view? Then consider the latter clause: Doubtful first-borns, whether of man<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If, e.g., a woman gave birth to twins, a male and a female, and it is not known the head of which appeared first (this being legally regarded as birth). If of the male, he is a firstborn; but if of the female, the male is not a first-born even if he subsequently issued first. ');">¹</span>

אמר ליה אביי במאי אוקימתא לספק נזירות להקל כרבי אליעזר אימא סיפא ספק בכורות אחד בכורי אדם ואחד בכורי בהמה בין טמאה בין טהורה המוציא מחבירו עליו הראייה

or beast,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If, e.g., two cows calved, one a male and one a female, one a firstling and one not; and it is not known whether the male is the firstling. Only male firstlings belong to the priest. ');">²</span>

ותני עלה ואסורים בגיזה ועבודה

whether clean or unclean — the claimant must furnish proof [that they are first-borns].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if the priest claims the firstling or redemption money for the first-born. ');">³</span>

אמר ליה אמאי קא מדמית קדושה הבאה מאליה לקדושה הבאה בידי אדם

And it was taught thereon: They may neither be sheared nor put to service!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Just as certain firstlings. (v. Deut. XV, 19). How then can this be the view of R. Eliezer, who holds that when in doubt the animal is not regarded as consecrated? ');">⁴</span>

אלא אי קשיא הא קשיא ספק משקין ליטמא טמא לטמא אחרים טהור דברי רבי מאיר וכן היה רבי אלעזר אומר כדבריו

— He replied: Why do you compare innate sanctity<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'sanctity that comes of itself', v. B.M. (Sonc. ed.) pp. 26ff. ');">⁵</span>

ומי סבירא ליה לרבי אלעזר ליטמא טמא

with man-made sanctity?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the former case a rigorous view is naturally taken. But when man consecrates, he has in mind only that which certainty comes within the terms of his consecration. ');">⁶</span>

והתניא רבי אלעזר אומר אין טומאה למשקין כל עיקר תדע שהרי העיד יוסי בן יועזר איש צרידה על איל קמצא דכן ועל משקין בית מטבחיא דכן

But if there is a difficulty, it is this: Doubtful fluids,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., if an unclean person, whose touch defiles liquids. put his hand into a vessel, and it is not known whether he actually touched the liquid there or not. ');">⁷</span>

הניחא לשמואל דאמר דכן מלטמא אחרים אבל טומאת עצמן יש בהן שפיר

in respect of becoming unclean [themselves], are unclean; in respect of defiling others, they are clean:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They do not defile them. ');">⁸</span>

אלא לרב דאמר דכן ממש מאי איכא למימר

this is R. Meir's view, and R. Eliezer agreed with him. But is it R. Eliezer's opinion that in respect of becoming unclean [themselves] they are unclean? But it was taught, R. Eliezer said: Liquids have no uncleanness at all [by Scriptural law]; the proof is that Jose b. Joezer of Zeredah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I Kings XI, 26. ');">⁹</span>

אלא הא רבי יהודה והא רבי שמעון

testified<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the historic occasion, when as a result of a dispute between R. Gamaliel and R. Joshua, the former was temporarily deposed from the Patriarchate, and R. Eliezer b. 'Azariah appointed in his stead. An examination was then made of scholars' traditions, which were investigated and declared valid or otherwise, v. 'Ed. (Sonc. ed.) Introduction, XI. ');">¹⁰</span>

דתניא הריני נזיר אם יש בכרי הזה מאה כור והלך ומצאו שנגנב או שאבד רבי יהודה מתיר ורבי שמעון אוסר

that the stag locust<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. Ayil, of doubtful meaning. ');">¹¹</span>

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. ');">¹²</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. ');">¹³</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? ');">¹⁴</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'. ');">¹⁵</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'. ');">¹⁶</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. ');">¹⁷</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,