Parallel
חולין 71:2
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
how much more so in the case of a man, who prevents the unclean matter that is in him from rendering him unclean, that he should protect the clean matter that is in him from becoming unclean! But perhaps that is so only in the case of an earthenware vessel, since it cannot render unclean by its outside; will you then say that it is so also in the case of a man who can convey uncleanness from the outside? — Are we dealing with the outside? No, on the contrary, we are dealing with the inside, and [with regard to the inside of] an earthenware vessel [the Jaw] is more strict, since it can convey uncleanness by its air-space. We have thus learnt the law regarding uncleanness swallowed from above, but whence do we know that it is so even when the uncleanness was swallowed’ from below? — From the following a fortiori argument. If in the upper part of the body where no decomposition [of food] takes place [the fact that it is swallowed] prevents [the unclean matter from conveying uncleanness], how much more so In the lower part where the actual decomposition takes place! But decomposition takes place below only if the food comes from above! — Even so, the fact that decomposition takes place below is a stronger point. We have now learnt the law regarding uncleanness swallowed by man, but whence do we know it with regard to uncleanness swallowed by an animal? — From the following a fortiori argument. If in the case of man, who is capable of conveying uncleanness whilst alive, the fact that it is swallowed prevents [the unclean matter from conveying uncleanness], how much more so is it in the case of animals, which are incapable of conveying uncleanness whilst alive, that the fact that it is swallowed prevents [the unclean matter within from conveying uncleanness]! But perhaps that is so only with regard to man since he must tarry a prescribed period in a house stricken with leprosy; will you then say that it is so also with regard to animals which need not tarry a prescribed period in a house stricken with leprosy? — In respect of what things, do you say, that an animal need not tarry the prescribed period in a house stricken with leprosy? It is [obviously] in respect of those things that are laden upon it. But for such things man too need not tarry within! For we have learnt: If a person entered a house stricken with leprosy carrying his clothes over his shoulders and his sandals and rings in his hands,he and they become unclean forthwith. If he was clothed in his garments, his sandals on his feet, and his rings on his fingers, he becomes unclean forthwith but they remain clean until he tarries there the length of time required for eating half a loaf of wheaten bread, but not barley bread, reclining and eating it with a condiment. Raba said: But we have learnt both these rules. We have learnt the rule concerning swallowed unclean matter, and we have learnt the rule concerning swallowed clean matter. Concerning swallowed unclean matter we have learnt the following Mishnah: If a person swallowed an unclean ring, he must immerse himself and thereafter may eat terumah; if he vomited it forth [after this immersion], it is still unclean and has rendered him unclean. And concerning swallowed clean matter we have learnt the following Mishnah: If a person swallowed a clean ring, entered a tent wherein lay a corpse, was sprinkled [with purification waters] the first time and the second time, immersed himself, and then vomited it forth, it remains as it was before! — Rabbah had in mind the case where a person swallowed two rings, one clean and the other unclean, [and he teaches that] the unclean ring will not render the clean ring unclean. 19
—