## Keritot Daf 13b

###### Keritot 13b:1
[Keritot 13b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:1)

וַחֲלֵב אִשָּׁה – מְטַמְּאִין טוּמְאַת מַשְׁקִין בִּרְבִיעִית. רוּקּוֹ, זוֹבוֹ, וּמֵימֵי רַגְלָיו – מְטַמְּאִין טוּמְאָה חֲמוּרָה, בְּכֹל שֶׁהוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**and the milk of a woman** who is a *zava* **transmit impurity of liquids where** there is **a quarter-***log*. The **saliva, gonorrhea-like discharge** of a *zav*, **and urine transmit severe impurity in any amount.**


###### Keritot 13b:2
[Keritot 13b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:2)

וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ מְקוֹם חָלָב מְעַיֵּין [הוּא], חָלָב נָמֵי נְטַמֵּא טוּמְאָה חֲמוּרָה בְּכֹל שֶׁהוּא, כְּזוֹבוֹ וְרוּקּוֹ! אֶלָּא שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: מְקוֹם חֲלֵב אִשָּׁה לָאו מַעְיָין הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you say** in accordance with the opinion of Rava that **the location** from which the **milk** emerges is considered **a spring,** then **milk also should transmit severe impurity in any amount, like the gonorrhea-like discharge** of a *zav* **and his saliva. Rather, conclude from it** that **the location** from which the **milk of a woman** emerges **is not** considered to be **a spring,** and the milk must be rendered susceptible to impurity in order to become impure or transmit impurity.


###### Keritot 13b:3
[Keritot 13b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:3)

אִי הָכִי, קַשְׁיָא הָא מַתְנִיתָא וְאָמַר רָבָא: ״מְטַמֵּא בֵּין לְרָצוֹן וּבֵין שֶׁלֹּא לְרָצוֹן״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **If so, this mishna** in *Makhshirin* cited earlier (13a), which **Rava said** supports his opinion, **is difficult,** as it states that a woman’s milk **renders** food susceptible to **impurity whether** it emerged **to** the **satisfaction** of the infant **or not to** his **satisfaction.** The mishna is difficult, as food is generally rendered susceptible to impurity only when the liquid comes into contact with it to the owner’s satisfaction.


###### Keritot 13b:4
[Keritot 13b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:4)

מִי סָבְרַתְּ ״שֶׁלֹּא לְרָצוֹן״ דְּאָמַר – דְּלָא נִיחָא לֵיהּ? לָא, מַאי ״שֶׁלֹּא לְרָצוֹן״ דְּאָמַר, דְּדַעְתֵּיהּ דְּתִינוֹק קָרִיבָא לְגַבֵּי חָלָב, אֲבָל אָמַר לָא נִיחָא לֵיהּ – טָהוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **Do you maintain** that the term: **Not to** their **satisfaction, that** the mishna **states,** means **that** the emergence of the milk **is not amenable to him? No;** rather, **what** is the meaning of the expression: **Not to** his **satisfaction, that** the mishna **states?** It means that the child did not indicate whether he desires the milk or not, but **as a child’s mind is close to milk,** i.e., he generally enjoys the milk, an explicit indication of interest or satisfaction is unnecessary in order for the milk to be susceptible to ritual impurity or to render other food items impure. **But** if **he says,** i.e., indicates, explictly that the milk is **not amenable to him,** then the milk is not susceptible to ritual impurity, and it remains **pure.**


###### Keritot 13b:5
[Keritot 13b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:5)

אָכַל אוֹכָלִין טְמֵאִין וְכוּ׳. לְמָה לִי שְׁהִיָּיה, דְּקָתָנֵי: וְשָׁהָה? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה, הָכִי קָתָנֵי: אָכַל אוֹכָלִין טְמֵאִין, וְשָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין, וְשָׁתָה רְבִיעִית יַיִן, וְשָׁהָה בַּאֲכִילָתָן וּבִשְׁתִיָּיתָן כְּדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס, וְנִכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ – חַיָּיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches that if one **ate** one quarter-loaf of **ritually impure foods** or drank a quarter-*log* of ritually impure liquids, or if one drank a quarter-*log* of wine, and he entered the Temple and remained there for the time it takes to eat a half-loaf of bread, he is liable. The Gemara objects: **Why do I** need him to **remain** in the Temple in order to be liable, such **that it teaches: And remained** there? **Rav Yehuda said** that **this** is what the mishna **is teaching:** In the case of one who **ate** a quarter-loaf of **ritually impure foods or drank** a quarter-*log* of **impure liquids, or drank a quarter-***log* **of wine, and remained** involved **in eating them or drinking them** for no more than the time it takes **to eat a half-loaf** of bread, **and** then **entered the Temple,** he is **liable.**


###### Keritot 13b:6
[Keritot 13b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:6)

רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר כּוּ׳. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״יַיִן וְשֵׁכָר אַל תֵּשְׁתְּ״ – יָכוֹל אֲפִילּוּ כֹּל שֶׁהוּא, אֲפִילּוּ מִגִּתּוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that **Rabbi Elazar says:** If one interrupted his drinking of the quarter-*log* of wine, or if he placed any amount of water into the wine, he is exempt. **The Sages taught** in a *baraita*: When the Torah instructs Aaron the High Priest: **“Drink no wine nor intoxicating drink,** you, nor your sons with you, when you go into the Tent of Meeting, that you shall not die” (Leviticus 10:9), one **might** have thought that this applies **even** if he drank **any amount,** and **even** if he drank wine **from its press,** i.e., wine that has not finished fermenting.


###### Keritot 13b:7
[Keritot 13b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:7)

תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְשֵׁכָר״ – אֵין אָסוּר אֶלָּא כְּדֵי לְשַׁכֵּר, וְכַמָּה כְּדֵי לְשַׁכֵּר? רְבִיעִית יַיִן בֶּן אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Therefore, **the verse states: “Nor intoxicating drink,”** indicating that **only** the consumption of a quantity of wine sufficient **to intoxicate** is **prohibited. And how much** wine is sufficient **to intoxicate?** It is a minimum of **a quarter-***log* of **wine** that is **forty days old,** which has already fermented.


###### Keritot 13b:8
[Keritot 13b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:8)

אִם כֵּן, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״יַיִן״? לוֹמַר לְךָ שֶׁמּוּזְהָרִין עָלָיו כֹּל שֶׁהוּא, וּמוּזְהָרִין עָלָיו מִגִּתּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If so, why** must **the verse state “wine,”** when the term “intoxicating drink” would have sufficed? It is **to tell you that** although one is not liable to receive death at the hand of Heaven for it, it is **prohibited** to drink **any amount of it,** even less than a quarter-*log*, and then enter the Temple; **and** similarly, it is **prohibited** to drink it **from its press** and then enter the Temple, and one who does so is liable to be flogged, as is the case with any other prohibition by Torah law.


###### Keritot 13b:9
[Keritot 13b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:9)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: ״יַיִן״ – אֵין לִי אֶלָּא יַיִן, שְׁאָר מְשַׁכְּרִין מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְשֵׁכָר״. אִם כֵּן, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״יַיִן״? עַל הַיַּיִן – בְּמִיתָה, וְעַל שְׁאָר מַשְׁקִין – בְּאַזְהָרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yehuda says:** From the word **“wine” I have** derived **only** that **wine** is forbidden; **from where** is it derived that **other intoxicating beverages** are forbidden as well? **The verse states: “Nor intoxicating drink.” If so, why** must **the verse state “wine”?** This comes to teach that **for** entering the Temple after drinking **wine** one is liable to receive the punishment of **death** at the hand of Heaven, **but for** entering after drinking **other** intoxicating **drinks,** one violates only a regular **prohibition.**


###### Keritot 13b:10
[Keritot 13b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:10)

רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: ״יַיִן אַל תֵּשְׁתְּ וְשֵׁכָר״ – אַל תִּשְׁתֵּהוּ כְּדֶרֶךְ שִׁכְרוּתוֹ, הָא אִם הִפְסִיק בּוֹ, אוֹ נָתַן לְתוֹכוֹ מַיִם כֹּל שֶׁהוּא – פָּטוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Elazar says** that the verse is interpreted to mean: **Wine you shall not drink, and intoxicating drink,** meaning that **you shall not drink it in the manner of its being intoxicating.** But **if one interrupted** his drinking, **or placed any amount of water into it** and drank it, he is **exempt.**


###### Keritot 13b:11
[Keritot 13b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:11)

בְּמַאי פְלִיגִי? תַּנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר: גָּמְרִינַן ״שֵׁכָר״ ״שֵׁכָר״ מִנָּזִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **With regard to what do they disagree? The first *tanna* holds: We learn** by verbal analogy that the term **“intoxicating drink”** is referring to wine, **from** the term **“intoxicating drink”** mentioned with regard to **a nazirite** in the verse: “He shall abstain from wine and intoxicating drink” (Numbers 6:3). There it is referring only to wine (see *Nazir* 4a).


###### Keritot 13b:12
[Keritot 13b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:12)

וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה לָא יָלֵיף ״שֵׁכָר״ ״שֵׁכָר״ מִנָּזִיר. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר סָבַר: מַאי ״שֵׁכָר״? מִידֵּי דְּהוּא מְשַׁכֵּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But Rabbi Yehuda does not derive** that the term **“intoxicating drink”** refers only to wine by the verbal analogy **from** the term **“intoxicating drink”** stated with regard to **a nazirite.** Consequently, he interprets the word as referring to an intoxicating drink that is not wine. **And Rabbi Elazar holds: What** is the meaning of the phrase: “Wine and **intoxicating drink”?** It is not referring to two separate items, but rather to wine **in the manner that it intoxicates.**


###### Keritot 13b:13
[Keritot 13b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:13)

כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּתַנְיָא: אָכַל דְּבֵילָה קְעִילִית, וְשָׁתָה דְּבַשׁ אוֹ חָלָב, וְנִכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ וְשִׁימֵּשׁ – לוֹקֶה, כְּמַאן? כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה בַּר אֲחוֹתַאי: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. וְקָרֵי רַב עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: ״טוּבְיָנָא דְּחַכִּימֵי״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **In accordance with whose** opinion **is that which is taught** in the following *baraita*: In the case of one who **ate** a sweet **dried fig from Ke’ila, or drank honey or milk,** all of which can have an intoxicating effect, **and** he **entered the Temple and performed** the Temple service, he is **flogged. In accordance with whose** opinion is this? It is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda,** who maintains that any item which intoxicates is included in the prohibition. **Rav Yehuda bar Aḥotai says:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, and Rav referred to Rabbi Elazar as the most gratified of the Sages,** as the *halakha* is in accordance with his opinion.


###### Keritot 13b:14
[Keritot 13b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:14)

רַב אַחָא דְּהוּצָל הֲוָה נִידְרָא עֲלַהּ דְּבֵיתְהוּ, אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב אָשֵׁי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִיל הָאִידָּנָא וְתָא לִמְחַר, דְּרַב לָא מוֹקֵי אָמוֹרָא עֲלֵיהּ מִיּוֹמָא טָבָא לְחַבְרֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם שִׁכְרוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that **Rav Aḥa** of the city **of Huzal had** taken **a vow** not to derive benefit **from his wife. He came before Rav Ashi** to request that he dissolve the vow. Rav Ashi **said to him: Go now and come** back **tomorrow,** as I have just drunk wine, and it is prohibited for me to issue a halakhic ruling, **as Rav** would **not place a disseminator before him** to communicate his lectures to the masses **from** the meal of one **Festival** day **until the other,** i.e., the next morning, **due to drunkenness.** Since it was customary to drink wine during Festival meals, Rav would not deliver public lectures on Festival days, as one who has consumed wine may not issue halakhic rulings.


###### Keritot 13b:15
[Keritot 13b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:15)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ, וְהָאָמַר רַב: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, וּמָר הוּא דְּקָא רָמֵי בֵּיהּ מַיָּא! אֲמַר לֵיהּ, הָא לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא בִּרְבִיעִית, הָא בְּיוֹתֵר מִכְּדֵי רְבִיעִית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Aḥa **said to him: But doesn’t Rav say:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar** that if one diluted the wine he drank with water and entered the Temple he is exempt; **and the Master is** one **who puts water into** his wine? Rav Ashi **said to him: That** is **not difficult; that** ruling of Rabbi Elazar applies in a case **where** one drank precisely **a quarter**-*log* of wine, whereas in **this** case I drank **more than a quarter**-*log* of wine. In such a case one does not maintain a clear mind even if he mixed in a small amount of water.


###### Keritot 13b:16
[Keritot 13b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:16)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וּלְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַקֹּדֶשׁ וּבֵין הַחוֹל״ – אֵלּוּ דָּמִין וַעֲרָכִין, חֲרָמִין וְהֶקְדֵּשׁוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ In the continuation of the passage in which the Torah prohibits a priest from entering the Temple after drinking wine, the verse states: “And that you may differentiate between the sacred and the common, and between the impure and the pure; and that you may instruct the children of Israel in all the statutes which the Lord has spoken to them by the hand of Moses” (Leviticus 10:10–11). **The Sages taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: **“And that you may differentiate between the sacred and the common.” These** terms are referring to the *halakhot* of **values and valuations, dedications and consecrations,** and the verse is teaching that it is prohibited to issue a ruling concerning these matters after drinking wine.


###### Keritot 13b:17
[Keritot 13b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:17)

״בֵּין הַטָּמֵא וּבֵין הַטָּהוֹר״ – אֵלּוּ טְמָאוֹת וּטְהָרוֹת. ״וּלְהוֹרוֹת״ – זוֹ הוֹרָאָה. ״אֵת כׇּל הַחוּקִּים״ – אֵלּוּ מִדְרָשׁוֹת. ״אֲשֶׁר דְּבַר ה׳״ – זוֹ הֲלָכָה. ״בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה״ – זֶה תַּלְמוּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**“Between the impure and the pure”; these** terms indicate that it is prohibited for one who drank wine to render decisions with regard to **ritually impure** items **and ritually pure** items. **“And that you may instruct”; this** is referring to **issuing a ruling** about what is permitted or prohibited. **“All the statutes”; this** is referring to the halakhic **expositions** of the Torah. **“Which the Lord has spoken”; this** is referring to ***halakha*** transmitted orally to Moses from Sinai. **“By the hand of Moses”; this** is referring to the **Talmud,** the deliberations on the Oral Law, from which halakhic conclusions are derived. It is prohibited to teach any of these subjects after drinking wine.


###### Keritot 13b:18
[Keritot 13b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:18)

יָכוֹל אַף הַמִּשְׁנָה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וּלְהוֹרוֹת״. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: יָכוֹל אַף תַּלְמוּד? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וּלְהוֹרוֹת״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
One **might** have thought that it is prohibited to teach **even Mishna** after drinking wine. Therefore, **the verse states: “And that you may instruct,”** indicating that the prohibition is limited to material that provides practical halakhic instruction, whereas one does not derive practical rulings from the Mishna. **Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says:** One **might** have thought that **even** teaching **Talmud** is prohibited. Therefore, **the verse states: “And that you may instruct,”** indicating that the prohibition is limited to issuing halakhic rulings, but it does not include teaching material such as Talmud, although halakhic conclusions may be derived from it.


###### Keritot 13b:19
[Keritot 13b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:19)

כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּתַנְיָא: יָצָא שֶׁרֶץ טָמֵא, וּצְפַרְדֵּעַ טָהוֹר, שֶׁשְּׁתוּיֵי יַיִן מוֹרִין בָּהֶן הוֹרָאָה. נֵימָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא, וְלָא רַבָּנַן? – אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבָּנַן, וְשָׁאנֵי הָכָא, דְּזִיל קְרִי בֵּי רַב הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **In accordance with whose** opinion **is that which is taught** in a *baraita*: The rulings that a carcass of **a creeping animal is ritually impure and** that a carcass of **a frog is pure** are **excluded** from this principle, **as those who have drunk wine may issue** a halakhic **ruling** about these matters. **Let us say** that this **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda,** who says it is permitted to teach Talmud, and these conclusions are obvious from the Talmud, **and** that it is **not** in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis.** The Gemara responds: **You** may **even say** that it is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis, and** that **this** case **is different, as** it **is** a topic that one could **go learn in a children’s school,** and teaching is not considered issuing a halakhic ruling.


###### Keritot 13b:20
[Keritot 13b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:20)

אָמַר רַב: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה. וְהָא רַב לָא מוֹקֵים אָמוֹרָא מִיּוֹמָא טָבָא לְחַבְרֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם שִׁכְרוּת! שָׁאנֵי רַב, דְּאוֹרִי מוֹרֵי. וְנֹיקֵם (דְּלָא) [וְלָא] לוֹרֵי! – כֹּל הֵיכָא דְּיָתֵיב רַב לָא סַגִּי לֵיהּ בְּלָא הוֹרָאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav says:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda,** that it is permitted to teach material from which *halakha* may be derived, but it is prohibited to issue halakhic rulings. The Gemara objects: **But Rav** himself would **not place a disseminator before him** to communicate his lectures to the masses **from** the meal of one **Festival** day **until the other,** i.e., the next morning, **due to drunkenness.** The Gemara explains: **Rav is different, as he would issue** halakhic **rulings** during his lectures. The Gemara further objects: **And let him place** a disseminator and deliver a lecture **but not issue** halakhic **rulings.** The Gemara explains: **Wherever Rav sits** and delivers a lecture, it is **not possible** for him to do so **without** issuing a halakhic **ruling.**


###### Keritot 13b:21
[Keritot 13b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:21)

**מַתְנִי׳** יֵשׁ אוֹכֵל אֲכִילָה אַחַת וְחַיָּיבִין עָלֶיהָ אַרְבָּעָה חַטָּאוֹת וְאָשָׁם אֶחָד: טָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל חֵלֶב, וְהָיָה נוֹתָר מִן הַמּוּקְדָּשִׁין, בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **There is** a case where one can perform **a single** act of **eating** an olive-bulk of food **and** be **liable** to bring **four sin offerings and one guilt offering for it.** How so? This *halakha* applies to one who is **ritually impure who ate** forbidden **fat, and it was left over from a consecrated** offering after the time allotted for its consumption **[*notar*], on Yom Kippur.** He is liable to bring sin offerings for eating forbidden fat and *notar*, for eating the meat of an offering while impure, and for eating on Yom Kippur. He is also liable to bring a guilt offering for misuse of consecrated property.


###### Keritot 13b:22
[Keritot 13b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/13b:22)

רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: אִם הָיָה שַׁבָּת וְהוֹצִיאוֹ – חַיָּיב. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אֵינוֹ מִן הַשֵּׁם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Meir says: If it was Shabbat and he carried it out** from a private domain to a public domain while eating it, he would be **liable** to bring an additional sin offering for performing prohibited labor on Shabbat. The Rabbis **said to him:** That liability **is not from the** same **type** of prohibition, as it is not due to the act of eating, and therefore, it should not be counted.