Parallel
פסחים 17:1
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
Whereon Rab said: The priests erred? — Is this view [propounded] against any but Rab? Rab learned, ‘the liquids of the slaughter-house’; but the liquids of the altar can be defiled. [To turn to] the main text: ‘Rab said: The priests erred; but Samuel maintained, The priests did not err’. ‘Rab said, The priests erred’; he asked them about a fourth degree in respect of holy foodstuffs, and they answered him that it was clean. ‘But Samuel maintained, The priests did not err’; he asked them about a fifth degree in respect of holy foodstuffs, and they answered him, It is clean. As for Rab, it is well: hence four are written, ‘bread, pottage, wine, and oil’; but according to Samuel, whence does he know five? — Is it then written, ‘and his skirt touch [the bread]’? Surely it is written, and touch with [that] [by] his skirt, [meaning that it touched] that which was touched by his skirt. Come and hear: Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It shall be unclean. As for Samuel, it is well: since they did not err here, they did not err there [either]; but according to Rab, why did they err here yet did not err there? — Said R. Nahman in Rabbah b. Abbuha's name: They were well-versed in the uncleanness of a corpse, but not well-versed in the uncleanness of a sherez. Rabina said: There it was a fourth degree; here it was a third. Come and hear: Then answered Haggai and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith the Lord: and so is every work of their hands: and that which they offer there is unclean. As for Rab, it is well: hence ‘unclean’ is written. But according to Samuel, why was it unclean? — He indeed wondered. But it is written, and so is every work of their hands? — Said Mar Zutra, others state, R. Ashi: Because they perverted their actions the Writ stigmatizes them as though they offered up [sacrifices] in uncleanness. [To turn to] the main text: ‘Rab learned, The liquids of the slaughter-house; while Levi learned: The liquids of the altar’. Now according to Levi, it is well if he holds as Samuel, who said, They are clean [only] in so far that they cannot defile other [objects]. but nevertheless they are unclean in themselves: then it is possible where they all touched the first. But if he holds as Rab, who maintained [that] they are literally unclean, how is it conceivable? — You are compelled [to say that] he holds as Samuel. And according to Samuel, it is well if he holds as Rab who learned, ‘The liquids of the slaughter-house’, but the liquids of the altar can even defile others: [hence] it is only a fourth degree which cannot make a fifth, but a third can make a fourth. But if he holds as Levi who learned, ‘The liquids of the altar’, why particularly [ask about] a fourth, which cannot make a fifth; they cannot even make a second or a third? — You are compelled [to say that] he holds as Rab. It was taught in accordance with Rab; it was taught in accordance with Levi. It was taught in accordance with Rab: Blood, wine, oil and water, the liquids of the altar, which were defiled within and carried without, are clean. If they were defiled without and [then] brought within, they are unclean. But that is not so? for R. Joshua b. Levi said: ‘They did not rule that the liquids of the altar are clean save in their place’: is that not to exclude [the case where] they were defiled within and carried without! — No: it is to exclude [where] they were defiled without and [then] taken within. But he states, ‘in their place’? — This is what he states: They did not rule [that these liquids] are clean save when they were defiled in their place [sc. within]. It was taught as Rab: Blood and water, the liquids of the slaughter-house, which were defiled, whether in vessels or in the ground, are clean;
—