Parallel
פסחים 15:1
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
and what does FROM THEIR WORDS mean? From the words of R. Hanina, the Segan of the Priests? — Said Resh Lakish in Bar Kappara's name: our Mishnah treats of a principal uncleanness according to Scripture and a derivative uncleanness according to Scripture; and what does FROM THEIR WORDS mean? From the words of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua. Which [teaching of] R. Joshua? Shall we say, the following [teaching of] R. Joshua? For we learned: In the case of a cask of terumah wherein a doubt of uncleanness is born, — R. Eliezer said: If it is lying in an exposed place it must be laid in a hidden place, and if it was uncovered, it must be covered. R. Joshua said: If it is lying in a hidden place, one may lay it in an exposed place, and if it is covered it may be uncovered! How compare: there it is mere indirect action, whereas here it is [defiling] with [one's own] hands? — Rather it is this [ruling of] R. Joshua. For we learned: If a cask of [wine of clean] terumah in the upper part is broken, while [in] the lower part there is unclean hullin. R. Eliezer and R. Joshua agree that if a rebi'ith thereof can be saved in purity, one must save it. But if not, R. Eliezer ruled: Let it descend and be defiled, yet let him not defile it with [his own] hands: R. Joshua said: He may even defile it with his own hands. If so, [instead of] this [phrase] ‘FROM THEIR WORDS, he should state, ‘FROM his WORDS’? — This is what he means: From the controversy of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua we learn [etc.]’ — This may be proved too, because he states [further]: R. ELIEZER AND R. JOSHUA AGREE [etc.]. This proves it. And thus said R. Nahman in Rabbah b. Abbuha's name [too]: our Mishnah refers to a principal uncleanness according to Scripture and a derivative uncleanness according to Scripture, and what does FROM THEIR WORDS mean? From the words of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua. Raba raised an objection to R. Nahman: R. Jose said [to R. Meir]: The conclusion is not similar to the premise. For when our Masters testified, about what did they testify? If about flesh which was defiled through a derivative uncleanness, that we burn it together with flesh which was defiled through a principal uncleanness, [then] this is unclean and that is unclean! If about oil which was rendered unfit by a tebul yom, that it is lit in a lamp which was defiled by one unclean through the dead, one is unfit and the other is unclean. So we too admit in the case of terumah which was defiled through a derivative uncleanness, that we may burn it together with terumah which was defiled by a principal uncleanness. But how can we burn that which is in suspense together with that which is unclean? Perhaps Elijah will come and declare it [the former] clean! 15
—