Parallel
פסחים 16
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
Doubtful [cases of uncleanness with] fluids, in respect of becoming unclean themselves, are unclean; in respect of defiling others, 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. R. Jose and R. Simeon maintain: In respect of eatables, they are unclean; in respect of utensils they are clean. But does R. Eleazar hold that liquid is at all susceptible to uncleanness, 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 testified that the stag-locust is clean [fit for food], and that the fluids in the [Temple] slaughter-house are clean. 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 that nevertheless they are unclean in themselves, then it is well; but according to Rab who maintained that they are literally clean, what can be said? — Said R. Nahman b. Isaac: [He refers] to one [ruling only]. But he states: as his words’, implying that they are many; moreover, he teaches, ‘and thus [etc.]’? 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’. ‘Rab said: They are literally clean’. He holds that the uncleanness of liquids is Rabbinical, and when did the Rabbis decree thus? [only] in respect of liquids in general, but there was no decree in respect of the liquids of the slaughter-house. ‘While Samuel maintained, They are clean [only] in so far that they cannot defile other [objects], but nevertheless they are unclean in themselves’. 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]? In respect to the defiling of other [objects], but they possess uncleanness in themselves. 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? Said R. Shisha the son of R. Idi: Let it be compared to the fourth degree in the case of sacred [food]. 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. Come and hear: And all drink that may be drunk in any vessel shall be unclean? — What does ‘it shall be unclean’ mean? It makes [solid foodstuffs] fit [to become unclean]. [You say]. ‘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], and both are necessary: for if we were informed of detached, that is because he [the owner of the eatables] assigned importance to them; 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? — What does ‘shall be clean’ mean? From his [or, its] uncleanness. But can detached [liquid] 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]? Interpret this as referring to the blood, 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: blood which is poured out as water makes fit;
—
blood which is not poured out as water does not make fit. To this R. Samuel b. Ammi demurred: Behold the last-drained blood, which is poured out like water, yet it does not make fit? — Said R. Zera to him, Leave the last-drained blood alone, which does not make fit even in the case of hullin. R. Samuel b. Ammi received it [the reason] from him, because the Divine Law saith, Only be sure that thou eat not the blood; for the blood is the life: blood wherewith life goes out is called blood; blood with which life does not go out is not called blood. Come and hear: If blood became unclean and he [the priest] sprinkled it unwittingly, it [the sacrifice] is accepted; if deliberately, it is not accepted? — It was Rabbinically [unclean], this not being in accordance with R. Jose b. Jo'ezer of Zeredah. Come and hear: For what does the headplate propitiate? For the blood, flesh, and the fat which were defiled, whether in ignorance or deliberately, accidentally or intentionally, whether in the case of an individual or of the community. [It was defiled] by Rabbinical law [only], this not being in accordance with Jose b. Jo'ezer of Zeredah. Come and hear: And Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy thing: now what iniquity does he bear? If the iniquity of piggul, surely it is already said, it shall not be accepted? If the iniquity of nothar, after the first violent rush, The life and vitality pass out with the first blood, not with the last. surely it is already said, neither shall it be imputed [unto him that offereth it]? Hence he bears nought but the iniquity of defilement, which is inoperative in opposition to its general rule, in the case of a community. Does that not mean the defilement of the blood? — Said R. Papa: No: the defilement of the handfuls. Come and hear: If one bear unclean [kodesh] flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be defiled? And the priests answered and said, No.19
—