Chagigah 21a — the Talmud in English

k.

The onen,

whose dead relative died for him on that day, and although he did not become impure through his dead relative, he is forbidden by Torah law to eat consecrated things because of his mourning, and even at night he is forbidden by rabbinic law [Meiri]—

and one lacking atonement

[impure persons who immersed and whose sun set, and who must bring offerings for their atonement, such as a male zav, a female zava, and a woman who gave birth], and who are forbidden to eat consecrated things until they bring their atonement—

these—an onen after his mourning and one lacking atonement after he brought his atonement—

require immersion for

the eating of

Kodesh.

Since until now they had been forbidden, the Sages required them to immerse for Kodesh, lest they diverted their attention from guarding their purity.

But they did not

require them to immerse

for

the eating of

Teruma.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: “They immerse vessels inside vessels for Teruma, but not for Kodesh”:

And we raised a difficulty concerning it:

With regard to Kodesh, what is the reason that they do not

immerse one vessel inside another?

Rabbi Ila said: Because its weight

[its heaviness]

of the vessel

the inner

constitutes an interruption.

For with regard to Kodesh they were stringent to be concerned lest the weight of the inner vessel press it against the bottom of the outer vessel and prevent the water from entering between the two vessels, and the immersion was therefore not effective for the inner vessel [and not for the outer vessel either, if it too was impure].

And we challenge this:

But since the latter clause

[the fifth level in our Mishna] has as its reason

an intervening substance,

it follows that the reason of the

first clause is not an intervening substance. For if you say that the reason of both is an intervening substance, and the Mishna taught us that with regard to Kodesh anything resembling an intervening substance disqualifies, whereas with regard to Teruma it does not disqualify, the Mishna need not repeat and teach this; it would have sufficed to teach it once.

it follows that the reason for the first clause is not an obstruction. For if you say that the reason for both is an obstruction, and that the Mishna teaches us that with regard to sacrificial food anything resembling an obstruction disqualifies the immersion, whereas with regard to teruma it does not disqualify it, there would be no need for the Mishna to repeat this, and it would be enough to teach it once.

For it teaches in the latter clause: “The measure of Kodesh is not like

the measure of Teruma in the interruption of its immersions

the measure of Teruma.

With regard to Kodesh: he loosens, dries, immerses, and afterward ties.

And with regard to Teruma: he ties, and afterward immerses.

And we answer: In truth, the reason of the

first clause and the latter clause is an intervening substance

.

And it is necessary

for our Mishna to teach us the laws of interruption in both instances, since one interruption cannot be inferred from the other.

For if it had taught us

only

the first clause,

that with regard to Kodesh one does not immerse one vessel inside another,

I might have said: this is

the reason that with regard to Kodesh they do not

immerse one vessel inside another:

because there is the weight of the vessel,

in it. There is weight in the inner vessel pressing it against the outer vessel, and therefore there is reason to be stringent and be concerned about an interruption.

But the latter clause, where there is no

there

weight of a vessel,

but only a knot,

I might say that with regard to Kodesh it too does not constitute

the knot

an interruption. Therefore, the Mishna taught the level that even a knot constitutes an interruption in immersion for Kodesh.

And if it had taught us

And if it had taught us

only

the latter clause,

that the knot constitutes an interruption for Kodesh,

I might have said: this is the reason that with regard to Kodesh they do not

immerse a garment that has a knot

because ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact page location")

the knot is very tightly fastened

[the knot is tight], and it is close to constituting an interruption.