Meilah 17b — the Talmud in English

They said:

“Let Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai go, for he is experienced”

[accustomed]

in miracles .

They said:

“And who will go after him,”

who will accompany him?

Rabbi Eliezer bar Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yosei did not want his son Rabbi Eliezer to accompany Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, because he argued that he was irascible and feared that he might punish him—that is, that he might take offense at him over something, and his offense would harm his son. Therefore,

Rabbi Yosei said to them

to the Sages of Israel:

“And if Father Halafta were alive

[Rabbi Yosei was the son of Rabbi Halafta]

could you

indeed

say to him, ‘Give your son over to be killed’?”

That is, just as my father would not have agreed to send me and endanger himself, so my son will not go with you.

Rabbi Shimon did not understand his concern, and thought that Rabbi Yosei was afraid for his son because of fear of the government or because of the danger of the roads . Therefore,

Rabbi Shimon said to them: “If Yochai, Father, were alive,”

indeed

“could you say to him, ‘Give your son over to be killed’?”

That is, just as I am prepared to enter a place of danger in order to annul evil decrees against the Jews, so Rabbi Eliezer should endanger himself, and Rabbi Yosei is not permitted to oppose this.

Rabbi Yosei said to them: “I will go” ,

I will go myself, and I will not send my son, because

perhaps Rabbi Shimon will punish him; that is what

I fear

my fear is that perhaps Rabbi Shimon will punish him, because he is young and quick to answer [as indeed occurred].

He accepted this upon himself,

Rabbi Shimon made a vow to him

not to punish him,

that he would not punish him!

And the Gemara continues to relate:

Even so, he punished him!

When

Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yosei

were walking on the road, this question was asked before them: From where do we know that the blood of a creeping creature is impure? He twisted his mouth,

he hurried to answer ,

Rabbi Eliezer bar Rabbi Yosei, and said:

The Torah said,

“And this shall be impure for you,”

as explained.

Rabbi Shimon took offense.

And Rabbi Shimon said to him: “From the twisting of your lips,

from the speed of your answer,

it is evident that you are a Torah scholar! Let the son not return to his father” !

And it is stated in the Jerusalem Talmud that his taking offense caused harm, and Rabbi Eliezer bar Rabbi Yosei was seized by diphtheria [a type of throat illness]. And when Rabbi Shimon remembered his condition [his promise] to return him to his father, he retracted, prayed for him, and he was healed .

that Rabbi Shimon’s taking offense harmed Rabbi Eliezer bar Rabbi Yosei, who was stricken with askara [a type of throat disease]. When Rabbi Shimon remembered his condition [his promise] to return him to his father, he changed his mind, prayed for him, and he was healed .

A demon went out to meet them ,

one demon whose name was

Ben Temalyon,

and he appeared like a small infant, and was accustomed to jest among women and with them.

He said

to them, Ben Temalyon said: Do you

wish

that I

come with you,

and through me the miracle will occur?

Rabbi Shimon was distressed that the miracle would come through a demon.

Rabbi Shimon wept and said: “What,

even if

the maidservant of Father’s household,

the maidservant of the household of Abraham our father

, had an angel happen upon her three times ,

at the time of her distress, as it is said [Genesis 16] three times, “And an angel of the Lord said to her,” teaching that for each and every statement a different angel was sent to her,

and I,

I am not worthy that an angel should happen upon me even

once,

and the miracle will be performed through a demon? And again he said:

“Let the miracle come from wherever,”

the main thing is that the miracle should come!

He went ahead,

Ben Temalyon went before them,

and

entered

into the body of the emperor’s daughter,

into the body of the daughter of the Roman emperor. And she became insane, and cried out and said continually, “Bring me Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi Yochai” .

When they arrived there ,

when Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Eliezer arrived at the emperor’s palace,

they said to him

to Ben

Temalyon, “Ben Temalyon, come out! Ben Temalyon, come out!” And they said this quietly and in a whisper, so that the members of the royal household would not notice and would think that Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Eliezer had accomplished this through their prayer.

They said this quietly and in a whisper, so that the members of the royal household would not notice and would think that Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Eliezer had accomplished this through their prayers.

And when they called him,

when they said this to him,

he went out and departed,

he came out of the daughter of the king and went away. And before he left, Ben Temalyon said to the members of the royal household: Know that the king’s daughter will be healed; when I leave, I will break every glass vessel in the house. And indeed he did so upon his departure !

They said to them

the members of the royal household said to Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Eliezer: As a reward for healing the king’s daughter,

if

you request

whatever you have to ask for,

whatever you desire,

enter the king’s treasury,

and enter the king’s treasury

and take whatever you have ,

whatever you wish!

Enter,

they entered the king’s treasury,

they found that letter,

the document in which the royal decree against the Jews was written, that they should not circumcise their sons, that they should not observe Shabbat, and that they should have intercourse with menstruant women,

they took it,

they took it

and tore it.

And the decree was annulled .

And the Gemara concludes that from this story it is understood what Rabbi Eliezer ben Rabbi Yosei said in tractate Yoma [57a].

And this is what Rabbi Eliezer bar Rabbi Yosei said,

in his debate with the Sages concerning the place of the sprinkling of the blood on the Day of Atonement:

“I saw it,

the curtain,

in Rome,

which had been taken to Rome when they plundered the Temple and its vessels,

and there were several drops of blood upon it!”

And he saw it on this occasion, when he was permitted to enter the king’s treasury.

Mishna:

The Mishna continues with the law of combining prohibitions. [The Mishna and Gemara are explained according to the attribution to Rashi and Rabbeinu Ovadiah].

Piggul and notar do not combine with one another ,

because they are two names 649 ,

of disqualification. And this will be explained in the Gemara.

A creeping creature and an animal carcass, and likewise an animal carcass and the flesh of a corpse, do not combine with one another to impart impurity, even according to the lesser of them,

that is, an animal carcass is less stringent than a creeping creature, for it imparts impurity only in the measure of an olive, whereas a creeping creature imparts impurity even in the measure of a lentil. And less than the measure of a lentil of a creeping creature does not combine to complete the measure of an olive of an animal carcass. And all the more so, less than the measure of an olive of an animal carcass does not combine to complete the measure of a creeping creature.

Likewise, an animal carcass is less stringent than the flesh of a corpse, for a corpse imparts seven-day impurity, whereas an animal carcass imparts only one-day impurity. And less than the measure of an olive of a corpse does not combine to complete the measure of an animal carcass. And all the more so, less than the measure of an olive of an animal carcass does not combine to complete the measure of a corpse.

Gemara:

We learned in our Mishna: Piggul and notar do not combine with one another.

The Gemara discusses with regard to which prohibition they do not combine.

Rav Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel: They taught

in our Mishna that they do not combine

only with regard to the impurity of the hands,

if one touched half an olive-measure of piggul and half an olive-measure of notar, they do not combine to render the hands impure,

We learned in tractate Pesachim [120b] that the Sages decreed impurity of the hands upon one who touches piggul and notar. For piggul, because of “suspicion of the priesthood,” that is, priests suspected of making the offering piggul in order to cause the owners loss, and saying that they did so unintentionally. Therefore, they decreed that one who touches an egg-measure or an olive-measure of the flesh of piggul renders his hands impure, and must immerse his hands before touching sacred things. And since they decreed impurity, they will not make it piggul, because immersing the hands is troublesome . And concerning notar they decreed it because of “the laziness of the priesthood,” that is, lazy priests, and likewise lazy Israelites, who are lax in eating sacred things and leave them over. And since they decreed impurity of the hands, they will hurry in eating them.

And the reason that they do not combine is because

it is rabbinic,

that is, since even in a complete measure it is only a rabbinic decree, as explained, and if we combine them, it would be a decree upon a decree. And the Sages did not decree a decree upon a decree ;

But with regard to eating, they do combine.

One who eats most of an olive-measure of piggul, and notar completes it to an olive-measure, is flogged on account of piggul. And likewise, most of an olive-measure of notar, and piggul completes it, he is flogged on account of notar .

For it was taught,

as we learned in a beraita:

Rabbi Eliezer says:

The Torah said in the section of the inauguration offerings [Exodus 29, verse 34 ], “If any of the flesh of the inauguration offering or of the bread remains until the morning, you shall burn the remainder in fire , it shall not be eaten, for it is holy,”

and what the Torah wrote, “for it is holy,” is superfluous for purposes of exposition. And we expound:

The words “because it is sacred” are superfluous and are therefore expounded:

Anything in the sacred realm that is disqualified,

such as piggul, notar, and blood that was spilled,

the verse comes to impose a prohibition against eating it.

That is, all sacred offerings that were disqualified are forbidden in eating. Therefore, notar and piggul combine.

Mishna:

The Mishna discusses the combination of foods [edibles] with regard to impurity and for other laws. And it will be explained according to the commentary of Rabbeinu Ovadiah of Bertinoro.

The food

[food item]

that became impure through a primary source of impurity,

and became a first-degree derivative,

and the food

that became impure through a derivative of impurity,

and became a second-degree derivative,

combine with one another,

to the measure of an egg,

to impart impurity according to the lesser

among them.

And the Mishna continues in tractate Tohorot [chapter 1, mishna 8]: “How so? Half an egg’s measure of first-degree food and half an egg’s measure of second-degree food that they mixed with one another—second-degree.” That is, this combined measure of an egg, its status is that of second-degree impurity, and if it touched teruma, it disqualifies it, according to the law of a second-degree impurity that disqualifies teruma. And this is “according to the less severe of them,” for it conveys impurity in the manner in which a second-degree impurity conveys impurity. But they do not combine “according to the more severe of them,” for this combined measure of an egg does not become an egg’s measure of “first-degree” impurity, and therefore it does not convey impurity to non-sacred foods through contact, making them second-degree. And the reason that they combine will be explained in the Gemara. And all foods combine with one another to disqualify the body [the person who eats it]

with a measure of

half a pras.

A person who eats impure foods in the measure of “half a pras,”

is disqualified from eating teruma and disqualifies teruma through his contact with it, until he immerses.

And so all foods combine to the measure of food for two meals for an eruv. One who wishes to walk on Shabbat more than two thousand cubits makes a boundary eruv, that is, he places there food for two meals

“half a

pras,” becomes disqualified from eating teruma and invalidates teruma through his contact with it, until he immerses himself. And likewise all foods combine to form an amount

in the place where he wishes his eruv to acquire for him, and he walks from this place an additional two thousand cubits.

And so all foods combine to the measure of an egg’s measure to convey food impurity. For food does not convey impurity with less than an egg’s measure. As it is stated [Leviticus 11]: “From all the food that may be eaten,” which implies: food that is eaten at one time. And the Sages estimated that the house of swallowing [the throat in which the food is swallowed] does not hold more than a hen’s egg. And so all foods combine to the measure of a dried fig for carrying on Shabbat. One who carries foods on Shabbat from one domain to another is not liable for less than a dried fig’s measure.

that is, he places there enough food for two meals

in the place where he wishes his eruv to acquire residence for him, and from that place he may travel an additional two thousand cubits.

And likewise all foods combine to form an amount of an egg in order to convey food impurity. Food cannot convey impurity when it is less than an egg’s measure. As it is stated [Leviticus 11]: “From any food that may be eaten,” which indicates: food that can be eaten all at once. The Sages estimated that the throat—the passage through which food is swallowed—cannot hold more than the volume of a chicken’s egg. And

And

so all foods combine to the measure

of a kakot [date]

on Yom Kippur.

The measure for all prohibitions of eating, in order to become liable for them, is an olive’s measure. But with regard to becoming liable for karet and lashes when deliberate, and a sin-offering when inadvertent, for eating on Yom Kippur, the measure is that of a kakot, and it is slightly less than an egg’s measure, approximately two olive-measures .

Because the Torah changed its wording and did not write “you shall not eat,” as with the other Torah prohibitions, but rather “you shall afflict your souls,” and this implies that the Torah was concerned only with the cessation of the affliction. And the Sages estimated that with the measure of a kakot a person who eats it is satisfied, while with less than this measure he is not satisfied.

[a date fruit]

The Mishna continues with the law of combining liquids.

All liquids combine to disqualify the body [the person who drinks them],

with a measure of

a quarter-log.

As explained concerning one who eats impure foods, so one who drinks impure liquids in the measure of a quarter-log is disqualified from eating teruma and disqualifies teruma through his contact with it, until he immerses.

And

so all liquids combine to the measure of filling both cheeks on Yom Kippur.

One who drinks on Yom Kippur is not liable for less than the measure of “filling both cheeks.” This means that he places liquids in his mouth, moves them to one side, and they are visible. And this measure is for each person according to the size of his mouthful, while for an average person it is less than a quarter-log.

And

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: Food that became impure through a primary source of impurity and food that became impure through a derivative of impurity combine with one another to convey impurity according to the less severe of the two.

The Gemara cites a beraita, and its reason that they combine is explained in it.

It was taught: Rabbi Shimon says: What is the reason

that a first derivative and a second derivative combine? Because

it is possible for a second-degree impurity to make a first-degree impurity .

We learned in the Mishna: Food that became impure through contact with a primary source of impurity, and food that became impure through contact with a secondary source of impurity, combine with one another to convey impurity according to the less severe of the two.

The Gemara cites a beraita, a tannaitic source not included in the Mishna, in which the reason why they combine is explained.

Before the Gemara explains, it is puzzled by the wording of the beraita:

And does the second-degree impurity make

the one who touches it first-degree impurity?!

That is impossible!

For it does not make it even second-degree impurity, but only third-degree impurity!?

the object that touches it

first-degree impurity?”

That is impossible!

It does not even make it second-degree impurity; it makes it only third-degree impurity!?

And we answer:

Rava said: This is what it is saying: What caused the second-degree impurity

to come to a state of impurity—was it

not the first-degree impurity?

And since its impurity came through the force of the first-degree impurity, therefore the first-degree impurity is not inferior to it, and combines with it. But the second-degree impurity does not have the “force” to combine with the first-degree impurity.

Rav Ashi said,

in accordance with the words of Rava, but with a change of wording: A first-degree and a second-degree impurity, with regard to a third-degree impurity, are members of “one hut,” they are members of one house. That is, the second-degree impurity comes through the force of the first-degree impurity, and therefore the first-degree impurity combines with it.

Rava said: This is what it means: What caused second-degree impurity

to come to a state of impurity—was it

not the first-degree impurity?

Since its impurity comes through the power of first-degree impurity, the first-degree impurity is therefore no less potent than it, and combines with it. Second-degree impurity, however, does not have the “power” to combine with first-degree impurity.

Rav Ashi said,

in accordance with Rava’s explanation, but with a change in wording:

“First-degree and second-degree impurity, with regard to third-degree impurity, are members of one ‘chamber’;”

they are members of the same house. That is, second-degree impurity comes through the power of first-degree impurity, and therefore first-degree impurity combines with it.