Parallel
פסחים 33
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
If he deliberately transgressed in respect of a trespass-offering, [he is punished] by death? It is Rabbi. For it was taught: If he deliberately transgressed in respect of a trespass-offering, — Rabbi said: [He is punished] by death; while the Sages maintain: By a warning. What is Rabbi's reason? — Said R. Abbahu: He derives identity of law from the fact that ‘sin’ is written here and in the case of terumah: just as terumah involves death, so trespass involves death. And from that [it also follows]: just as terumah [involves punishment] for as much as an olive, so trespass [involves punishment] for as much as an olive. Now R. Papa demurred: How do you know that Rabbi holds as the Rabbis; perhaps he agrees with Abba Saul, who said: If it possesses the worth of a perutah, even if it does not contain as much as an olive? But surely it was R. Papa who said [that] Abba Saul requires both? Hence this proves that he retracted. Mar the son of Rabina said, This is what he means: No: if you say thus of other precepts — where the unintentional is not treated as intentional, for if he intended cutting what was detached but cut what is attached, he is not culpable; will you say [the same] in the case of trespass, where if he intended to warn himself with wool shearings of hullin but warmed himself with the wool shearings of a burnt-offering he is liable to a trespass-offering? R. Nahman b. Isaac said: He means this: If you say thus in the case of other precepts, that is because he who is not engaged therein is not declared culpable like he who is engaged therein, for if he intended picking up that which was detached but he plucked that which is attached [instead], he is not culpable; will you say [the same] of trespass, where if he stretched out his hand to take a vessel and [incidentally] anointed his hand with holy oil, he is liable for trespass? The Master said: ‘When is this said? When he separates terumah and it became leaven. But if he separates terumah of leaven on Passover, all agree that it is not holy.’ Whence do we know this? — Said R. Nahman b. Isaac, Scripture saith, [The firstfruits of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thy oil ...] shalt thou give to him: but not for its light. R. Huna son of R. Joshua objected: One must not separate terumah from unclean [produce] for clean; yet if he separates [thus] unwittingly, his terumah is valid. Yet why? Let us say, ‘for him, but not for his light’? — There is no difficulty: There it enjoyed a time of fitness, whereas here it did not enjoy a time of fitness. And how is it conceivable that it had no time of fitness? E.g. if it became leaven whilst attached [to the soil]. But if it became leaven when detached, would it indeed be holy? — Yes, he replied: ‘the sentence is by the decree of the watchers, and the matter by the word of the holy ones’; and thus do they rule in the academy in accordance with my view. When R. Huna the son of R. Joshua came,
—
he said, Scripture saith, The firstfruits [of thy corn etc.], [implying] that its residue is distinct [in that it becomes permitted] to the Israelite, [thus] this is excluded, since its residue is not [so] distinct. R. Ala b. R. ‘Awia sat before R. Joshua and he sat and said in R. Johanan's name: If grapes are defiled, one may tread them out less than an egg in quantity at a time, and their wine is fit for libations. This proves that he holds that the juice is indeed stored up; [consequently] when is it [the juice] defiled? When he expresses it; [but] when he expresses it, its standard quantity [for defiling] is absent. If so, [he can tread] as much as an egg too, for we learned: If a man unclean through a corpse squeezes out olives or grapes exactly as much as an egg in quantity, they are clean? — There it is [thus] if he did it; here it is in the first instance [when he must not tread as much as an egg] for fear lest he come to tread more than an egg. Said R. Hisda to him, Who needs you and R. Johanan your teacher: whither then has their uncleanness gone? This proves that he holds that the juice is indeed absorbed, and since the [solid] eatable is defiled, the juice too is defiled. And do you not hold that the juice is stored up? he replied. Surely we learned: If he who is unclean through a corpse squeezes out olives and grapes exactly as much as an egg in quantity, they are clean. Now it is well if you say that the liquid is stored up: for that reason it is clean. But if you say [that] it is absorbed, why is it clean? — Said he to him: We discuss here grapes which were not made fit; when [then] do they become fit? when he squeezes them; but when he squeezes them the standard quantity [for defilement] is diminished. For if you should not say thus, [them] when it was taught, ‘To what is this like? To terumah of mulberries and grapes which were defiled, which is not permitted to him either for eating or for burning.’ — but surely it may be eaten too, for if he wishes, he can tread them out less than an egg at a time? — Said Raba: It is a preventive measure, lest he come to a stumbling-block through them. Abaye said to him, Yet do we fear a stumbling-block? Surely it was taught: One may light [a fire] with bread or oil of terumah which was defiled! — The bread he casts among the wood, he replied, and the oil of terumah he pours into a repulsive vessel. [It was stated in] the text: ‘One may light [a fire] with bread or oil of terumah which was defiled’. Abaye said in Hezekiah's name, and Raba said, The School of R. Isaac b. Martha said in R. Huna's name: They learned this of bread only, but not of wheat, lest he come to a stumbling-block through it. But R. Johanan said: Even wheat. But why? Let us fear lest he come to a stumbling-block through it? — As R. Ashi said [elsewhere].
—