Parallel
חגיגה 18:2
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
MISHNAH. THE HANDS HAVE TO BE RINSED FOR [EATING] UNCONSECRATED [FOOD], AND [SECOND] TITHE, AND FOR TERUMAH [HEAVE-OFFERING]; BUT FOR HALLOWED THINGS [THE HANDS] HAVE TO BE IMMERSED. IN REGARD TO THE [WATER OF] PURIFICATION, IF ONE'S HANDS BECAME DEFILED, ONE'S [WHOLE] BODY IS DEEMED DEFILED. IF ONE BATHED FOR UNCONSECRATED [FOOD], AND INTENDED TO BE RENDERED FIT SOLELY FOR UNCONSECRATED [FOOD], ONE IS PROHIBITED FROM [PARTAKING OF SECOND] TITHE. IF ONE BATHED FOR [SECOND] TITHE, AND INTENDED TO BE RENDERED FIT SOLELY FOR [SECOND] TITHE, ONE IS PROHIBITED FROM [PARTAKING OF] TERUMAH. IF ONE BATHED FOR TERUMAH, AND INTENDED TO BE RENDERED FIT SOLELY FOR TERUMAH, ONE IS PROHIBITED FROM [PARTAKING OF] HALLOWED THINGS. IF ONE BATHED FOR HALLOWED THINGS, AND INTENDED TO BE RENDERED FIT SOLELY FOR HALLOWED THINGS ONE IS PROHIBITED FROM [TOUCHING THE WATERS OF] PURIFICATION. IF ONE BATHED FOR SOMETHING POSSESSING A STRICTER [DEGREE OF SANCTITY], ONE IS PERMITTED [TO HAVE CONTACT WITH] SOMETHING POSSESSING A LIGHTER [DEGREE OF SANCTITY]. IF ONE BATHED BUT WITHOUT SPECIAL INTENTION, IT IS AS THOUGH ONE HAD NOT BATHED. THE GARMENTS OF AN AM HA-AREZ POSSESS MIDRAS -UNCLEANNESS FOR PHARISEES; THE GARMENTS OF PHARISEES POSSESS MIDRAS-UNCLEANNESS FOR THOSE WHO EAT TERUMAH; THE GARMENTS OF THOSE WHO EAT TERUMAH POSSESS MIDRAS-UNCLEANNESS FOR [THOSE WHO EAT] HALLOWED THINGS; THE GARMENTS OF [THOSE it yet does not render the person fit to eat food possessing any degree of sanctity. Similarly, in the cases that follow, intention for one degree of sanctity does not enable one to partake of food having a higher degree of sanctity. WHO EAT] HALLOWED THINGS POSSESS MIDRAS — UNCLEANNESS FOR [THOSE WHO OCCUPY THEMSELVES WITH THE WATERS OF] PURIFICATION. JOSE B. JO'EZER WAS THE MOST PIOUS IN THE PRIESTHOOD, YET HIS APRON WAS [CONSIDERED TO POSSESS] MIDRAS-UNCLEANNESS FOR [THOSE WHO ATE] HALLOWED THINGS. JOHANAN B. GUDGADA USED ALL HIS LIFE TO EAT [UNCONSECRATED FOOD] IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PURITY REQUIRED FOR HALLOWED THINGS, YET HIS APRON WAS [CONSIDERED TO POSSESS] MIDRAS-UNCLEANNESS FOR [THOSE WHO OCCUPIED THEMSELVES WITH THE WATER OF] PURIFICATION. GEMARA. Do unconsecrated food and [Second] Tithe then require rinsing of the hands? Now we can show this to conflict with [the following Mishnah]: For terumah and first fruits one may incur the penalty of death, or [a fine of] an [added] fifth, and they are prohibited to non-priests and they are the property of the priest, and are neutralized in one hundred and one [parts], and require rinsing of the hands, and sunset; these [rules] apply to terumah and first fruits but not to [Second] Tithe. How much less then to unconsecrated food. Thus there is a contradiction in regard to [Second] Tithe and a contradiction also in regard to unconsecrated food! Granted that in regard to [Second] Tithe [it can be shown that] there is no contradiction: the one [Mishnah] is according to R. Meir and the other is according to the Rabbis. For we have learnt: Whosoever requires immersion by enactment of the Scribes defiles hallowed things and invalidates terumah, but is permitted [to eat] unconsecrated food and [Second] Tithe — this is the view of R. Meir; but the Sages prohibit in the case of [Second] Tithe. In regard to unconsecrated food, however, there is a contradiction! — There is no contradiction: the one case refers to eating [unconsecrated food] and the other to touching [it]. To this R. Shimi b. Ashi demurred: The Rabbis differ from R. Meir only in regard to the eating of [Second] Tithe, but in regard to the touching of [Second] Tithe and the eating of unconsecrated food they do not differ! — Both [Mishnahs], therefore, must refer to eating; but there is no contradiction: the one refers to the eating of bread, the other refers to the eating of fruit. For R. Nahman said: Whosoever rinses his hands for fruit belongs to the haughty of spirit. Our Rabbis taught: He who raises his hands, if he did so with intention, his hands are [levitically] clean; but if he did so without intention, his hands are unclean. Similarly one who bathes his hands, if he did so with intention, his hands are clean, but if he did so without intention his hands are unclean. — But behold it is taught: Whether he did it with intention or without intention, his hands are clean! — R. Nahman answered: There is no contradiction: the one [statement] refers to unconsecrated food,
—