Pesachim 36
ולאו מקל וחומר קאתי ומה משקין הבאין מחמת כלי מטמאין משקין הבאין מחמת שרץ לא כל שכן
Are they not [rather] inferred a minori: if liquids which are unclean through a utensil defile, how much the more liquids which are unclean through a sherez! [Then] it is sufficient that that which is deduced by [this] argument shall be as its premise.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Not stricter. Scripture does not state that water defiled by a sherez, can contaminate something else, but it is merely deduced, as shown in the text.');"><sup>1</sup></span>
אמרת ק"ו ומה משקה שמטמא אוכל אינו מטמא כלי אוכל שאין מטמא אוכל אינו דין שלא יטמא כלי הא מה אני מקיים יטמא לטמא את המשקין שהן עלולין לקבל טומאה
You can answer, it follows, a minori: if a liquid, which defiles an eatable, cannot defile a utensil; then an eatable, which cannot defile an eatable, surely cannot defile a utensil! Hence how do I interpret.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'fulfil'.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
יטמא דאין עושה כיוצא בה מהכא נפקא מהתם נפקא (ויקרא יא, לח) וכי יותן מים על זרע ונפל מנבלתם עליו טמא הוא הוא טמא ואין עושה טומאה כיוצא בה חד במשקין הבאין מחמת שרץ וחד במשקין הבאין מחמת כלי
Deduce it from the fact that there is nothing else [left]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Everything else having been excluded.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
וצריכי דאי אשמועינן במשקין הבאין מחמת כלי משום דלא חמירי אבל במשקין הבאין מחמת שרץ דחמירי אימא עושה טומאה כיוצא בה
- This is what he means: And should you argue, an eatable is more stringent [than liquid], since it defiles liquids.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which a liquid cannot do.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ולשמעינן משקין הבאין מחמת שרץ וכ"ש משקין הבאין מחמת כלי מילתא דאתיא בקל וחומר טרח וכתב לה קרא
[and therefore] let it defile utensils [too]; [hence we are told that] that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The exposition of the verse to the effect that eatables defile liquid.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
אמר ליה רבי יוסי בשיטת ר"ע רבו אמרה וליה לא ס"ל
Because they contract uncleanness without being made fit.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For uncleanness, in contrast to eatables, which may become unclean only after moisture has fallen upon them.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
אמר ליה רב אשי לרב כהנא בשלמא ר' יוסי לא סבר לה כר"ע דתניא א"ר יוסי מניין לרביעי בקודש שהוא פסול
'[It] shall be unclean,' [teaching] that it cannot render something similar to itself [unclean]!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As Rabina, deduces from the verse itself.');"><sup>7</sup></span>
ולמדנו שלישי בקודש מן התורה ורביעי מקל וחומר
Surely it is deduced from elsewhere, [viz. ,] But if water be put upon the seed, and aught of their carcass fall thereon, it is unclean unto you:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XI. 38.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
שלישי מן התורה דכתיב (ויקרא ז, יט) והבשר אשר יגע
it is unclean, but it cannot create a similar uncleanness?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., it cannot make something like itself unclean, which is the actual reading supra 14a.');"><sup>9</sup></span> - One treats of liquids unclean<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'which come'.');"><sup>10</sup></span> through a sherez, and the other treats of liquids unclean through a utensil; and [both] are necessary. For if we were informed [this] of liquid which is unclean through a utensil, [I would say,] that is because it is not stringent; but in the case of liquid unclean through a shere which is stringent, I might argue that it creates uncleanness similar to its own. Then let us be told [this] about liquid defiled by a sherez, and how much the more liquid unclean through a utensil? - That which may be inferred a minori, Scripture takes the trouble of writing it [explicitly]. Rabina said to R'Ashi: But Raba said, R'Jose does not agree with R'Akiba, nor does R'Akiba agree with R'Jose?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Infra. Thus R. Jose holds that liquid can defile other liquid, and he must interpret Lev. XI, 33 accordingly. Now the eatable or liquid is a second (v. p. 81, n. 5) , and on this interpretation it makes a third: thus there is a 'third' in the case of hullin.');"><sup>11</sup></span> - Said he to him: R'Jose stated it in accordance with the opinion of R'Akiba his teacher, but he himself does not hold thus.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., the interpretation of yitma, 'it shall be unclean,' as yetamme, 'it shall defile'. Since R. Jose himself rejects this exegesis, there is nothing to teach that a second renders a third in the case of hullin.');"><sup>12</sup></span> R'Ashi said to R'Kahana: As for R'Jose not agreeing with R'Akiba, that is well, for it was taught: R'Jo said: How do we know that a fourth degree in the case of sacred food is unfit? Now this follows a minori: if he who lacks atonement,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., one who after performing tebillah (q.v. Glos) must bring an offering before he may partake of the flesh of sacrifices; viz., a zab and a zabah (v. Glos.) . a woman after confinement and a leper.');"><sup>13</sup></span> though permitted to partake of terumah, is unfit in respect of sacred food, then<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' These facts are learned in Yeb. ');"><sup>14</sup></span> a third, which is unfit in the case of terumah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if something unclean in the second degree touches terumah it renders it unfit, the terumah now being called a third; v. Sot. 29a.');"><sup>15</sup></span> is it not logical that it makes a fourth in sacred food! And we learn a third in the case of sacred food from Scripture, and a fourth a minori.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is added in order to answer the possible objection that what is deduced a minori cannot be more stringent than its premise, and since sacred food is thus deduced from terumah, it cannot go beyond a third, just as in the case of terumah. Hence it is pointed out that a third in the case of sacred food does not require an argument a minori, for that follows directly from Scripture; hence the deduction a minori must refer to a fourth, as otherwise it teaches nothing, and it is stated in B.K. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> 'A third from Scripture', for i is written, And the flesh that toucheth any unclean thing