Beitzah 19a — the Talmud in English

Alternatively, if you wish, say

our Mishna is in accordance with

the Rabbis

who permit both immersion and pouring on Shabbat, but prohibit everything on Shabbat.

And the entire Mishna—

is on Shabbat.

The Sages taught: A vessel that became impure on the eve of a Festival—

one may not immerse it during twilight.

Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: Even on a weekday one may not immerse it

during twilight

because it requires

also

“the setting of the sun

after its immersion. And if he immersed it, he must protest against him.

And we raise an objection:

A

for

does the first tanna not require the setting of the sun

after immersing the vessel, and how can one immerse it during twilight on a weekday?

Rava said

to resolve it:

I found the Sages of the school of Rav sitting and saying:

They disagree

over “his intention is recognizable from his actions”

the first tanna and Rabbi Shimon Shezuri.

And what are the circumstances?—

For example, he is holding the vessel in his hand and is hurrying

and hastening to run

and going

close to

twilight in order to immerse it.

One Master holds: This fact that he is hurrying and going—

he certainly knows that the setting of the sun is required,

and if, when he immerses it, he sees that he will not have “the setting of the sun,” he will wait until the following day.

And therefore he permitted it on a weekday and prohibited it on a Festival, because perhaps he will exert himself for nothing on the Festival.

And one Master holds: It is because of

the performance of

his labor that he is hurrying.

And if we permit him to immerse it, there is concern that he will use it without the setting of the sun.

And I said to them: With regard to “his intention is recognizable from his actions”—

everyone agrees

that they say so.

When they disagree—

for example, another vessel became impure for him

with an impure creature

of

a measure that is

less than an lentil,

which does not impart impurity.

And he came before the Sages to inquire:

whether

with less than a lentil—

did it become impure or not?

One Master holds: From this

that an impure creature does not impart impurity with less than a lentil

he did not learn,

he does not know—

this

law of

the setting of the sun, as well, he did not learn.

And one Master holds: Only this

alone

is what he did not learn,

because the impurity of an impure creature of less than a lentil, which does not impart impurity, is not explicitly stated in Scripture.

But

this, the setting of the sun,

which is explicitly stated in Scripture,

he did learn.

We learned in the Mishna:

And one may immerse from one status to another.

The Sages taught: How

does one immerse

from one status to another?

One who wishes to make

his

winepress

of wine with a special purity for it, to immerse his jug again after he had already immersed it to purify it for pressing oil—this is an additional purification

“on account of his jug”,

and he is permitted to do it on a Festival, since this is not a repair, for his first immersion has already availed him.

And

likewise, if he wishes to make an additional purification by immersion for

his jug

for making oil, after he had already immersed it once for the sake of wine, this is

“on account of his winepress”—

he may do it.

How is it from one group to another?

He was eating in this group

and immersed his vessels to become pure for eating with them,

and he wishes to eat in another group—

the authority is in his hand

to immerse his vessels again as a special purification for this group.

Mishna:

Beit Shammai say: One brings peace-offerings

on a Festival, since they contain human consumption.

But,

one may not place his hands upon them,

since placing of the hands is with all his strength, and it emerges that he leans upon the animal; and the Sages prohibited leaning upon an animal on Shabbat and on a Festival, since it is as though he uses it, and using an animal is prohibited by rabbinic decree.

But not

does he bring

burnt-offerings,

since they do not contain consumption.

And Beit Hillel say: One brings

also

peace-offerings and

also

burnt-offerings,

from the exposition of the verse that will be explained in the Gemara,

and

even

one may place his hands upon them

for the reason that will be explained in the Gemara.

Gemara:

Ulla said:

Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel did not disagree concerning the bringing of the Festival peace-offerings on a Festival, that they are sacrificed, since they are the obligation of the day; and likewise they did not disagree concerning vows and freewill offerings, that they are not sacrificed, since they are not the obligations of the day.

And all the

dispute

between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel is only

concerning the Festival peace-offerings—

to place one’s hands,

and concerning

the burnt-offering of appearance—

to be sacrificed.

Ulla now explains their dispute concerning the sacrifice of a burnt-offering:

For Beit Shammai hold: [Leviticus 23]

“And you shall celebrate it as a festival to the Lord”

is written.

And they expound from “and you shall celebrate it” that only a

Festival-offering—

yes,

that alone

is sacrificed, but

the burnt-offering of appearance—

no,

it is not sacrificed.

And Beit Hillel hold

that one should expound from

“to the Lord”—

everything that is

a thing that is

to the Lord,

even burnt-offerings, is sacrificed.

But vows and freewill offerings—

all agree that they are not sacrificed on a Festival.

And so Rabbi Adda bar Ahava said: Vows and freewill offerings—

are not sacrificed on a Festival.

An objection was raised

against Ulla and Rabbi Adda from what we learned in a beraita:

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel did not disagree concerning a burnt-offering that is not of the Festival—

that it is not sacrificed on a Festival.

And concerning peace-offerings that are of the Festival—

that they are sacrificed on a Festival.

With regard to what did they disagree—

concerning a burnt-offering that is of the Festival, and concerning peace-offerings that are not of the Festival

[which are not Festival peace-offerings].

For Beit Shammai say: He may not bring

a burnt-offering of the Festival, nor peace-offerings that are not of the Festival.

And Beit Hillel say: He may bring

them.

And we answer:

Explain

the wording of the beraita,

and say it as follows:

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel did not disagree concerning burnt-offerings and peace-offerings that are not of the Festival—

that they are not sacrificed on a Festival.

And

they did not disagree

concerning peace-offerings that are of the Festival—

that they are sacrificed on a Festival.

With regard to what did they disagree—

concerning a burnt-offering that is of the Festival.

For Beit Shammai say: He may not bring, and Beit Hillel say: He may bring.

Rav Yosef said

to offer another resolution:

But

have you removed the tannaitic opinions from the world!?

Have you taken [removed] the other tannaitic opinions from the world!? That is to say, is it impossible to establish the matter as a dispute among tannaitic opinions!?

Rather, the dispute

is a tannaitic dispute,

for tannaim disagreed concerning the matter. There are tannaim who hold like Ulla, and there are those who hold like Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar.

For it was taught: Peace-offerings that come on account of the Festival, on the Festival—

Beit Shammai say: He places his hands upon them on the eve of the Festival, and slaughters them on the Festival.

And Beit Hillel say: He places his hands upon them on the Festival,