Pesachim 31

ספק משקין ליטמא טמא לטמא אחרים טהור דברי ר"מ וכן היה רבי אלעזר אומר כדבריו רבי יהודה אומר לכל טמא

Doubtful [cases of uncleanness with] fluids,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g. if an unclean person. whose touch defiles liquids, puts his hand into a vessel, and it is not known whether he actually touched the liquid there or not.');">¹</span> in respect of becoming unclean themselves, are unclean; in respect of defiling others,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., if unclean liquid fell near food and it is unknown whether it actually touched it or not.');">²</span>

רבי יוסי ור"ש אומרים לאוכלין טמאין לכלים טהורין

they are clean; this is R'Meir's view, and thus did R'Eleazar too rule as his words. R'Judah said: It is unclean in respect of everything.

וסבר רבי אלעזר משקין אית להו טומאה בעולם והתניא ר"א אומר אין טומאה למשקין כל עיקר תדע שהרי העיד יוסי בן יועזר איש צרידה על איל קומציא דכי ועל משקי בית מטבחיא דכן

R'Jose and R'Simeon maintain: In respect of eatables, they are unclean; in respect of utensils they are clean.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The general principle is this: when a doubt arises in a Scriptural law, we are stringent; in a Rabbinical law, we are lenient. Now liquid can become defiled by Scriptural law (Lev. XI, 34) , hence in doubt it is unclean. But there is a controversy as to whether it can defile other objects by Scriptural law. R. Meir holds that it cannot defile either food or utensils; R. Judah that it defiles both; while R. Jose and R. Simeon hold that it defiles food but not utensils.');">³</span> But does R'Eleazar hold that liquid is at all susceptible to uncleanness,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even in respect of itself.');">⁴</span>

הניחא לשמואל דאמר דכן מלטמא טומאת אחרים אבל טומאת עצמן יש להן שפיר אלא לרב דאמר דכן ממש מאי איכא למימר

surely it was taught: R'Eleazar said: Liquids have no uncleanness at all [by Scriptural law]; the proof is that Jose B'Jo'ezer of Zeredah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Cambridge Bible I Kings XI, 26.');">⁵</span> 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 deposed from the Patriarchate and R. Eliezer b. 'Azariah appointed in his stead. An examination was then made of scholars' traditions, and they were declared valid or otherwise; v. 'Ed., Sonc. ed., Introduction, xi.');">⁶</span>

אמר ר"נ בר יצחק אחדא

that the stag-locust<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. ayil, of doubtful meaning.');">⁷</span> is clean [fit for food], and that the fluids<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. blood and water.');">⁸</span>

והא כדבריו קאמר דנפישי ועוד והא וכן קתני קשיא

in the [Temple] slaughter-house are clean.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even by Rabbinical law. This postulates that the general uncleanness of liquids is Rabbinical only, and it was therefore not imposed in the Temple, so as not to defile the flesh of sacrifices. - The language of this Mishnah 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.');">⁹</span> Now, there is no difficulty according to Samuel's interpretation that they are clean [only] in so far that they cannot defile other [objects], but tha nevertheless they are unclean in themselves, then it is well; but according to Rab who maintained that they are literally clean,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even in respect of themselves.');">¹⁰</span>

גופא רב אמר דכן ממש ושמואל אמר דכן מלטמא טומאת אחרים אבל טומאת עצמן יש להן רב אמר דכן ממש קסבר טומאת משקין דרבנן וכי גזרו רבנן במשקין דעלמא ובמשקי בית מטבחיא לא גזור

what can be said? - Said R'Nahman B'Isaac: [He refers] to one [ruling only].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Eleazar agrees with R. Meir that it is clean in respect of other objects, but not that it is unclean in respect of itself.');">¹¹</span> But he states: as his words', implying that they are many; moreover, he teaches, 'and thus [etc.]'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both imply that he fully agrees with R. Meir');">¹²</span>

ושמואל אמר דכן מלטמא טומאת אחרים אבל טומאת עצמן יש להן קסבר טומאת משקין עצמן דאורייתא לטמא אחרים דרבנן וכי גזור רבנן במשקין דעלמא במשקי בית מטבחיא לא גזור וכי לא גזור רבנן לטמויי אחרים אבל טומאת עצמן יש להן

That is [indeed] a difficulty. The [above] text [states]: 'Rab said, They are literally clean: while Samuel maintained, They are clean [only] insofar that they cannot defile other [objects], but nevertheless they are unclean in themselves'.'

א"ל רב הונא בר חיננא לבריה כי עיילת לקמיה דרב פפא רמי ליה מי אמר שמואל דכן מלטמא טומאת אחרים אבל טומאת עצמן יש להן קרי כאן (ויקרא ז, יט) והבשר אשר יגע בכל טמא לא יאכל

Rab said: They are literally clean'. He holds that the uncleanness of liquids is Rabbinical, and when did the Rabbis decree thus?

אמר רב שישא ברי' דרב אידי מידי דהוה ארביעי בקדש מתקיף לה רב אשי רביעי בקדש לא איקרי טמא האי איקרי טמא קשיא

[only] in respect of liquids in general, but there was no decree in respect of the liquids of the slaughter-house.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. n. 5.');">¹³</span> 'While Samuel maintained, They are clean [only] in so far that they cannot defile other [objects], but nevertheless they are unclean in themselves'.

ת"ש (ויקרא יא, לד) וכל משקה אשר ישתה בכל כלי יטמא מאי יטמא הכשיר

He holds that the uncleanness of liquids themselves is Scriptural, [but] in respect of defiling others, Rabbinical; and when did the Rabbis decree? In respect of liquids in general, but in respect of the liquids of the slaughter-house there was no decree; again, when did the Rabbis refrain from decreeing [concerning the liquids of the slaughter-house]?

הכשיר מרישא דקרא שמעת ליה מכל האוכל אשר יאכל וגו' חד בתלושין וחד במחוברין

In respect to the defiling of other [objects], but they possess uncleanness in themselves.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the Rabbis could not free them from the uncleanness which they bear by Scriptural law.');">¹⁴</span> R'Huna B'Hanina said to his son: When you come before R'Papa, point out a contradiction to him: Did then Samuel say, 'They are clean in so far that they cannot defile other [objects], but nevertheless they are unclean in themselves', - read here, and the flesh that toucheth any unclean thing shall not be eaten?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VII, 19. Hence if the liquid is unclean, the sacrificial flesh which touches it may not be eaten.');">¹⁵</span>

וצריכי דאי אשמעינן בתלושין משום דאחשבינהו אבל מחוברין אימא לא

Said R'Shisha the son of R'Idi: Let it be compared to the fourth degree in the case of sacred [food].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e. , sacrifices. V. p. 62, n. 2. Thus there too it is unfit itself through defilement, yet cannot defile other flesh of sacrifices.');">¹⁶</span> To this R'Ashi demurred: A fourth degree in the case of sacred [food] is not designated unclean, [whereas] this is designated unclean? - This is a difficulty.

ואי תנא מחוברין משום דקיימי בדוכתייהו חשיבי אבל תלושין אימא לא צריכי

Come and hear: And all drink that may be drunk in any vessel shall be unclean?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev., XI, 34. This shows that liquids contract defilement.');">¹⁷</span> - What does 'it shall be unclean' mean?

ת"ש (ויקרא יא, לו) אך מעין ובור מקוה מים יהיה טהור מאי יהיה טהור מטומאתו

It makes [solid foodstuffs] fit [to become unclean].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For solids cannot be defiled unless moisture has previously been upon them. The words, 'it shall be unclean' thus refer to 'of all the food etc. 'with which the verse begins.');">¹⁸</span> [You say].'

ותלושין מי מכשירין והאמר ר' יוסי בר' חנינא משקי בית מטבחיא לא דיין שהן דכן אלא שאין מכשירין

It makes [solids] fit'; this you know from the beginning of the verse: All food which may be eaten [that on which water cometh, shall be unclean]? - one refers to detached [liquid], and the other to attached [liquid],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If rain falls upon produce it renders it susceptible to defilement only if the owner of the produce desired it to fall upon something. E.g., if he put out a basin so that the rain should wash it, and subsequently produce fell into the water, it is henceforth susceptible. We are informed here that whether the water is detached from the soil, i.e., whether the rain falls into something detached from the soil, e.g., a bath (as denoted by the words 'in any vessel') , or into something attached, i.e., forming part of the soil, e.g., a pit,and then eatables receive moisture from that rain, they are now ready to be defiled. In the latter case the produce is rendered susceptible only if it comes into contact with the water with the owner's rafv ihbgk desire; in the former, even against the owner's desire. V. Hul. ');">¹⁹</span> and both are necessary: for if we were informed of detached, that is because he [the owner of the eatables] assigned importance to them;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By the mere fact that he desired that the water should fall there or by pouring it into the vessel.');">²⁰</span>

תירגמא על דם דאמר ר' חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן מנין לדם קדשים שאינו מכשיר שנא' (דברים יב, טז) על הארץ תשפכנו כמים דם שנשפך כמים מכשיר

but as for attached, I would say that it is not so And if we were informed of attached, [that may be] because it [the liquid] stands in its place it has value; but as for detached, I would say that it is not so. Thus they are necessary. Come and hear: Nevertheless a fountain or a pit wherein is a gathering of water shall be clean?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XI, 36. This shows that only attached water is clean, but not detached.');">²¹</span> - What does 'shall be clean' mean? From his [or, its] uncleanness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The verse refers to one who is unclean, and states that if he takes a ritual bath (tebillah) in the water of a fountain or a pit he shall be clean, but not in the water of a bath (technically called 'drawn water') . But it does not refer to the cleanness of the water itself.');">²²</span> But can detached [liquid]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rashi: this difficulty refers to water, which can be attached too. But all other liquids are essentially detached.');">²³</span> make [eatables] fit [to become unclean]; surely R'Jose B'R'Hanina said: The liquids of the [Temple] slaughter-house, not enough that they are clean, but they cannot [even] make [eatables] fit [to become unclean]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This proves that the power of detached liquids in this respect is only Rabbinical; for if it were Scriptural, the Rabbis have no power to make an exception in this case.');">²⁴</span> Interpret this as referring to the blood,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But not the water.');">²⁵</span> for R'Hiyya B'Abin said in R'Johanan's name: How do we know that the blood of sacrifices does not make [anything] fit [to become defiled]? Because it is said, thou shalt pour it out [sc. the blood] upon the earth as water:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XII, 24.');">²⁶</span> blood which is poured out as water<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e. , the blood of non-sacrifices');">²⁷</span> makes fit;