Pesachim 15a (טו.) — the Talmud in English

And what

“from their words

we learned,” as Rabbi Meir says? —

From the words of Rabbi Ḥanina, Deputy High Priest,

who taught that the same law applies to ḥametz teruma during the sixth hour.

For although, according to Torah law, the teruma is still fit to be eaten, it is permitted to render it impure by means of the impure teruma. For food does not render other food impure; this applies only by rabbinic decree. And in any event, from the sixth hour onward it is forbidden by rabbinic decree.

Reish Lakish said in the name of bar Kappara:

That is not the interpretation of our Mishna.

Rather,

the Mishna

is dealing with meat that became impure

through a Torah-level primary source of impurity, together with meat that became impure

through

a Torah-level offspring of impurity.

In principle, one cannot prove from the words of Rabbi Ḥanina and Rabbi Akiva that pure ḥametz teruma may be rendered impure.

And

what

“from their words

we learned,” as Rabbi Meir says? — This does not refer to the first clause of the Mishna. Rather,

from the words of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua

in another place we learned this.

We raised a difficulty concerning it:

Which

Rabbi Eliezer and

Rabbi Yehoshua

are the ones from whom Rabbi Meir learned this with regard to ḥametz?

If you say that it is this Rabbi Yehoshua, as we learned: A barrel of teruma that developed a doubt concerning its impurity

[for example, an impure person entered the place, and it is uncertain whether he touched it or did not touch it] —

Rabbi Eliezer says: If it was lying in an exposed place

[a place open to all],

he should place it in a concealed place. And if it was uncovered, he should cover it!

For even if it is not fit to be eaten but only to be used for kindling, one is still obligated to protect it so that it does not contract definite impurity.

The reason is that it is written: “the safeguarding of My teruma,” but we read it as “My terumot,” in the plural. Rabbi Eliezer holds that the reading determines the interpretation. Two terumot are implied: one pure and one suspended [of uncertain impurity]. Both require protection from impurity.

Rabbi Yehoshua says:

It is not only unnecessary to increase the protection afforded it; it is even permitted to lessen that protection.

If it was lying in a

concealed place, he should place it in an exposed place. And if it was covered, he should uncover it!

For Rabbi Yehoshua holds that the written form determines the interpretation. “The safeguarding of My teruma” is written in the singular, implying one teruma, namely, the pure one alone. But suspended teruma does not require protection.

Infer from this that according to Rabbi Yehoshua, any teruma that is destined only to be used for kindling does not require protection. Rabbi Meir learned from his words that the same law applies to ḥametz teruma during the sixth hour on the eve of Pesaḥ. Since it is obligated to be removed, it is permitted to render it impure.

And we reject this:

Are

the two cases comparable?

For

there,

Rabbi Yehoshua did not permit one to render the suspended teruma impure directly. Rather, he permitted placing it in an exposed place, so that it would become impure on its own.

It is merely an indirect cause

of impurity.

But

here,

Rabbi Meir permitted even burning the pure teruma together with the impure teruma, although by doing so he renders it impure

directly.

This cannot be learned from that case.

And we conclude:

Rather, this

is what bar Kappara meant when he said that we learned this from the words of

Rabbi Yehoshua:

It is from the following

that we learned:

A barrel

of wine

of pure teruma

that

broke in the upper winepress

[the place where grapes are trodden],

and

in the

lower

[the pit located beneath the winepress] there are

impure non-sacred produce,

and the barrel broke, so that the pure teruma wine is about to fall into the impure non-sacred produce and become impure through it, thereby also prohibiting the wine already in the pit, in accordance with the law of impure teruma that becomes mixed with non-sacred produce, in which the entire mixture becomes prohibited:

Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua agree that if

he

can save from it

[from the teruma barrel]

a quarter-log

of wine

in purity—

he should save it!

For if he has time to bring a pure vessel and save at least a quarter-log of wine in purity, he is obligated to make the effort to bring it and save the pure teruma wine, and he may not receive the wine in an impure vessel.

And this is so even though in the meantime he will lose both the rest of the wine in the barrel and the wine in the pit. For in the meantime the remaining wine will fall into the impure non-sacred produce and become mixed with it, thereby prohibiting even that produce from being eaten. [As in a mixture of non-sacred produce and teruma: If the teruma is pure, the entire mixture is prohibited to non-kohanim; and if it is impure, the mixture is prohibited even to kohanim. For a kohen who eats impure teruma violates a positive commandment. Here too, the teruma wine will become impure through the non-sacred produce, and its status will be that of impure teruma mixed with non-sacred produce, all of which is prohibited even to kohanim].

Nevertheless, if he can save a quarter-log of wine in purity, he should do so, even at the cost of losing the impure non-sacred produce.

But if not,

if he cannot save even a quarter-log of the wine except by searching for a pure vessel, by which time all the wine will fall into the non-sacred produce and become impure through it, causing him to lose the wine in the pit as well—

Rabbi Eliezer says: Let

the entire pure teruma fall into the pit

and become impure

on its own,

and

only

he may not render it impure directly.

Although he will thereby lose the non-sacred produce, he may not render the teruma impure directly.

And Rabbi Yehoshua says: He may even

render it

impure directly.

There is no violation of the mitzva of “the safeguarding of My teruma,” since in any event it is destined to become impure through the non-sacred produce.

It follows that Rabbi Yehoshua permitted rendering impure directly any teruma that is destined to be lost. Rabbi Meir learned from his words that the same law applies to pure teruma on the eve of Pesaḥ after the time of the prohibition.

And we raise a difficulty:

If so,

what is the meaning of

“from these words

we learned,” which is expressed in the plural?

But only Rabbi Yehoshua holds this way, whereas Rabbi Eliezer disagrees with him. If so,

“from his words

we learned”—

he should have said

this to Rabbi Meir!?

And we answer:

This is what

Rabbi Meir

said: From the dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua we learned

that it is permitted to burn pure teruma together with impure teruma. For the halakha follows Rabbi Yehoshua against Rabbi Eliezer with regard to matters of purity, and according to his position it is permitted to do so.

And we prove this:

This too is precise

in our Mishna.

For

it

teaches

in Rabbi Yosei’s reply to Rabbi Meir:

Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua agree

that one burns this separately and that separately.

It follows that Rabbi Meir learned his ruling from the words of Rabbi Yehoshua.

And we conclude:

This proves it!

And so

also

Rav Naḥman said in the name of Rabbah bar Avuha:

Rabbi Ḥanina, Deputy High Priest, whose case in the

Mishna

concerns the burning of meat that became impure

through a Torah-level primary source of impurity, together with meat that became impure through

an

offspring of Torah-level impurity.

Rabbi Meir did not learn his ruling from his words.

Rather,

what

“from their words

we learned,” as Rabbi Meir says? —

From the words of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua,

who disagreed concerning a barrel of teruma that broke.

Rava raised an objection to Rav Naḥman

from the following beraita:

Rabbi Yosei said

to Rabbi Meir:

The case under discussion is not analogous to the proof.

When our Sages testified

[Rabbi Ḥanina, Deputy High Priest, and Rabbi Akiva],

what did they testify about?

If

it was like the testimony of Rabbi Ḥanina, did he not testify

about the meat

of sacrificial offerings

that became impure through an offspring of impurity, which is burned together with meat that became impure through a primary source of impurity?

For

the meat

this

was in any event

impure

with third-degree impurity, it is permitted to render it impure again through the first meat,

and

although as a result this meat becomes

impure

with second-degree impurity.

And

if

it was like the testimony of Rabbi Akiva, did he not testify

about the oil

of teruma

that became disqualified through a tevul yom, which is lit in a lamp that became impure through one rendered impure by a corpse?

For

since the oil

this

was in any event

disqualified,

it is permitted to light it in the impure lamp,

and

even though the oil now becomes

impure,

rendering others impure.

And

Rabbi Yosei argued to Rabbi Meir:

We too agree

that this is the law

with regard to teruma that became impure through an offspring of

an offspring of

impurity,

and became third-degree impure,

that it is burned together with teruma that became impure through a primary source of impurity,

even though it thereby becomes second-degree impure and renders others impure, since it was already disqualified.

But

pure teruma, although it is in any event destined to be burned, may not be rendered impure on the eve of Pesaḥ. And not only pure teruma, but even suspended teruma [of uncertain impurity] may not be burned together with impure teruma. For

how can we burn

the teruma

that is suspended

with

the impure one?

It may in fact be pure.

And perhaps Elijah will come

and resolve its uncertainty

and declare it pure! And below [20b] he raises a difficulty: In our Mishna, Rabbi Yosei said that according to Rabbi Yehoshua it is permitted to burn the impure teruma together with the suspended teruma.

And below, on 20b, the Gemara raises the difficulty that in our Mishna Rabbi Yosei said that according to Rabbi Yehoshua it is permitted to burn the impure teruma together with the suspended teruma.