Talmud sobre Tahorot 2:8

³¹From here on, a Geniza fragment is available; its readings are denoted by ג. For the quotations from a Tosephta, the Babli is denoted by ב, the Tosephta edited by Zuckermandel by תו. Huna bar Ḥiyya³²In the Babli, 4a, he is identified as Rav Huna. This is the only place in which his patronymic is given. said, the 24 hours which were quoted refer to sacrifices but not to pure food³³He denies the applicability of the Mishnah after the destruction of the Temple. Since the only sanctified food available after the destruction of the Temple was heave, the entire discussion becomes academic.. Rav Ḥisda objected, was it not stated³⁴Tosephta 1:9, Babli 9b.: “It happened with a girl in Aitlo³⁵The vocalization is not known; the Babylonian tradition is different; the place has not been identified. But in any case it is impossible to prepare sacrifices outside of Jerusalem since living animals cannot become impure and the material for flour, wine, and oil sacrifices was controlled by the Temple.
In Babli and Tosephta it is stated that the impurity in effect should have been retroactive, that the ruling as given fits only extraordinary circumstances. One may assume that the Yerushalmi refers to a similar text and that Rav Ḥisda the Babylonian’s question really refers to this, that under normal circumstances the impurity of a menstruating woman without regular period should act retroactively on food prepared in purity outside of Jerusalem. that she missed for three periods and then had a period. When the case came before the Sages, they said that her timing is exact.” Are there sacrifices in Aitlo? But it must be food prepared in the purity of sacrifices³⁶Profane food, eaten by people who insist that they adhere to strict standards of purity. While most of these, called “fellows”, observed the standards of heave (which recognizes three degrees of derivative impurity, cf. Introduction to Tractate Demay, p. 349; Demay 2:2, Note 137), some people adhered to standards of sacrifices which recognized four degrees (Mishnah Tahorot 2:5).! Is that not really profane food³⁷Mishnah Tahorot 2:8 decrees that profane food prepared according to the standards of sacrifices is still profane, admitting only two degrees of derivative impurity. A minority opinion admits three degrees, but certainly not four. This may be a polemic against followers of sects similar to that of Qumran, whose MMT text seems to prescribe the purity of sacrifices for all members of the group of the select few.? Explain it if it was prepared in the purity of purifying water³⁸The water to which ashes from the red cow were added and which purified from the impurity of the dead. This water had to be guarded even from touching sacrificial food, Mishnah Parah 10:6. The ashes were available in Palestine a long time after the destruction of the Temple, cf. Berakhot1:1, Note 3; it was not impossible for a priestly family to preserve the rules of this purifying process., since purifying water has more restrictive rules than sacrifices.

⁵⁵The origin of this paragraph is in Ḥagigah 2:5; a parallel discussion in Babli Ḥagigah 18b. The statement discussed is that tithe, in contrast to heave and First Fruits, may be eaten with unwashed hands. “Tithe” here always means Second Tithe since First Tithe whose heave of the tithe was separated is totally profane.“This applies to heave and First Fruits but not to tithe.” There⁵⁶Mishnah Ḥagigah 2:5., we have stated: “One washes his hands for profane, tithe, and heave; but for sacrifices one immerses⁵⁷One has to immerse his hands in 40 seah of water. “Washing” means that at least a quarter log (1/96 seah) of water flows over the hands..” There⁵⁸“There” is the Mishnah Bikkurim 2:1, “here” is Mishnah Ḥagigah 2:5., you say that tithe does not need washing and here you say, tithe needs washing! Those who say, tithe needs washing, the rabbis; he who says, tithe does not need washing, Rebbi Meїr. There⁵⁹Mishnah Parah 11:5., we have stated: “Anything needing immersion in water by rabbinic decree⁶⁰Any impurity not explicitly stated in the Pentateuch. makes sacrifices impure and heave unusable⁶¹Unwashed hands are always impure in the second degree by rabbinic decree (cf. Berakhot 8, Note 46). Profane food can only become impure in two degrees; the second cannot induce impurity in other profane food. Heave can become impure in three degrees; the third is called “unusable” since it cannot induce impurity in other food (except sacrifices which have four degrees.) but is permitted for profane food and tithe. But the Sages forbid for tithe⁶²Second Tithe cannot be eaten with unwashed hands..” Is that not explained by what Rebbi Samuel says in the name of Rebbi Zeïra, what means the Sages forbid for tithe? His body is disqualified from eating tithe. What is that? May you say tithe needs washing, if he wants to eat; may you say tithe does not need washing, if he wants to touch? No, wanting to touch is the same as wanting to eat⁶³Nobody can expect a food handler not to eat.. So it must be washing as discipline⁶⁴Washing one’s hands for profane food (in the Babli restricted to eating bread) is to teach people the discipline needed to handle heave (sources cf. Note 55).. But we have stated: “heave”! Is there washing as discipline for heave⁶⁵For heave, washing is a biblical requirement. If heave is mentioned in a Mishnah, it cannot be dealing with washing because of rabbinic discipline.? But it is about profane food prepared by the rules of sacrifices⁶⁶This was practiced, e. g., by the Qumran sect who ate all their food under the strict rules of impurities applicable to sacrifices. Usually, strict Pharisees prepared their food under the rules of heave.. Is profane food prepared by the rules of sacrifices not profane? Explain it either⁶⁷This use of אי is a Babylonism not usually found in the Yerushalmi. following Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar or following Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ẓadog. Either following Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar as it was stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says in the name of Rebbi Meїr: Hands are [impure] in the first degree for profane food, in the second for heave⁶⁸They will transfer impurity to any food but that food cannot induce other impurity.. Or following Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ẓadog as it was stated there⁶⁹Mishnah Ṭahorot 2:8.: “Profane food prepared by the rules of sacrifices is profane. Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ẓadog says it is like heave, it may be impure in two degrees and invalidates a third.”

Do the House of Shammai hold that “hands” are for profane food⁹⁷Given the explanation of the House of Hillel, they seem to presuppose that the secondary impurity of hands has a Biblical root. This is incredible.? Explain it either following Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar or following Rebbi Eleazar, son of Rebbi Ẓadoq. Following Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar as it has been stated⁹⁸Tosephta Tahorot 1:6 in the reading of Rabbenu Simson of Sens. In the printed editions and the Vienna manuscript, the reading is “hands are of primary impurity for sacrifices.” That reading is rejected by R. David Pardo in his commentary on the Tosephta. The statement is quoted several times in the Yerushalmi and also in Babli Ḥulin 33b. The interpretation here is that profane food can become impure only from the source of impurity or primary impurity. Hence, unwashed hands must be of primary impurity in order to influence profane food. In contrast, terumah becomes unusable if it was in contact with secondary impurity; hence, primary impurity causes the same result for profane food as secondary impurity for terumah. This seems to be the opinion of Maimonides (הלכוֹת אבוֹת הטוּמאה יא׃טו), who often is influenced by the Yerushalmi, also in Ḥulin; it is incompatible with Rashi’s interpretation of the text in Ḥulin. There it is stated that hands can become primarily impure only if held into the windows of a house afflicted with leprosy. That would not make a good reason for the House of Shammai.: “Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said in the name of Rebbi Meïr, hands are primarily impure for profane food and secondarily for terumah.” Or following Rebbi Eleazar, son of Rebbi Ẓadoq, as we have stated there⁹⁹Mishnah Ṭahorot 2:8, quoted in Babli Ḥagigah 20a, Ḥulin 35b. Profane food can receive only primary impurity. Terumah can receive both primary and secondary impurity; the third stage is called “unusable” since it cannot be eaten, but it does not transmit the impurity further. Sacrifices become impure also in a tertiary way; only the fourth stage is “unusable.”: “Profane food that was prepared under the rules of purity of sacrifices is still profane food. Rebbi Eleazar, the son of Rebbi Ẓadoq said, it is like terumah becoming impure in two stages and unusable in a third.”

There, we have stated¹⁶⁹Mishnah Bikkurim2:1. The corrector added the text presupposed by the scribe.: [“For heave and First Fruits one incurs the penalty of death¹⁷⁰Eating them in impurity is a deadly sin. or a fine of a fifth¹⁷¹If misappropriated, the restitution must be at least 125%.; they are forbidden to lay persons, are property of the Cohen¹⁷²They might be traded from one Cohen to another and a Cohen may use them as gifts to marry a wife since, even if she was a lay person before, she becomes a member of the Cohen’s family by marriage and may eat heave and First Fruits., may be lifted by one in 100¹⁷³If heave or First Fruits were mixed with profane food and are now no longer recognizable, if they constitute less than 1% of the mixture, 1% may be lifted and designated heave or First Fruits and the remainder freed for lay use., need washing of the hands and sundown.] This applies to heave and First Fruits but not to tithe.” There, you are saying tithe does not need washing, but here, you are saying that tithe needs washing. When you are saying that tithe needs washing, following the rabbis; but when you are saying that tithe does not need washing, following Rebbi Meïr. As we have stated there¹⁷⁴Mishnah Parah 11:5. Babli 18b., “anything which requires immersion by the words of the Sopherim¹⁷⁵Part of the original institutions of Judaism formulated by Ezra and his successors. makes sancta impure and disqualifies heave but is permitted for profane food and tithe, the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages forbid for tithe¹⁷⁶Since tithe becomes impure by touch of hands or things impure in the second degree and unwashed hands always are impure in the second degree..” He did not understand that Rebbi Samuel said in the name of Rebbi Ze`ira: What means, “but the Sages forbid for tithe”? His body became disqualified from consuming tithe¹⁷⁷But not touching.. How it that? If you are saying, tithe needs washing, [for one who intends to eat. If you are saying, tithe does not need washing,] if he intends to touch¹⁷⁸The better text probably is obtained by deleting the corrector’s addition: “If you are saying, tithe needs washing, if he intends to touch? But does not one who wants to eat also want to touch?”. But does not one who wants to eat also want to touch? Only because of [handwashing as discipline. But did we not state “heave”? For heave is there] handwashing as discipline¹⁷⁹Again it is better to delete the corrector’s addition. The washing of hands is “discipline of heave”.? Therefore about profane food prepared in the purity of sancta. But is profane food prepared in the purity of sancta not profane food¹⁸⁰Food prepared to the standards of sancta is not a sanctum unless dedicated, which in the absence of a Temple is impossible. Therefore it remains profane and its status cannot be changed by touching with hands which are impure in the second degree.? Explain either following Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar or Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ṣadoq. Either following Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar, as it was stated, Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says in the name of Rebbi Meïr, hands are first degree impure for profane food and second degree impure for heave¹⁶⁴Touching with unwashed hands always disqualifies. Babli Ḥulin 33b; differently Tosephta Taharot 1:6.. Or Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ṣadoq, as we have stated there¹⁸¹Mishnah Taharot 2:8.: “profane food prepared in the purity of sancta is profane food. Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ṣadoq says, it is like heave, to be impure in two stages and disqualified in the third¹⁶²This is a discussion of impurity imparted by unwashed hands. The basic observation is that an impure person or object which touches anything susceptible to impurity imparts impurity of one degree lower. (However, the majority opinion is that fluids do not touch but merge, and therefore transmit impurity of the same degree as the acting material.) There are three stages of biblical impurity, “grandfather of impurity”, a corpse or a house in which there is a corpse, “original impurity”, anything touched by a corpse or (with a few exceptions) found in a house containing a corpse, and any other impurity described in the Torah, and “impurity in the first degree”, biblically imparted by contact with original impurity or rabbinically by contact with any impure fluid. The other stages are rabbinical; persons or food impure in stage n by touch impart impurity of stage n+1. The technical term is “impure” for anything able to impart impurity and “disqualified” for matters unusable because of impurity but not imparting impurity to others. Profane food may be impure in stage 1, it becomes disqualified (cannot be dedicated for any sacred use) in stage 2. Heave and Second Tithe (sacra not connected with the Temple) are impure in stages 1,2 and disqualified in stage 3. Temple sacra are impure in stages 1,2,3 and disqualified in stage 4..”