## Pesachim Daf 18b

###### Pesachim 18b:1
[Pesachim 18b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:1)

וְלָאו מִקַּל וָחוֹמֶר קָאָתֵי: וּמָה מַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת כְּלִי — מְטַמְּאִין, מַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ — לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And doesn’t** the impurity of liquids that came into contact with a creeping animal **come from an *a fortiori*** inference: **Just as liquids that come to** a state of impurity **due to** contact with **a vessel,** which itself became impure due to contact with a creeping animal, **transmit impurity,** with regard to **liquids that come to** a state of impurity **due to** contact with **a creeping animal, all the more so** is it **not** clear that they transmit impurity to a vessel?


###### Pesachim 18b:2
[Pesachim 18b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:2)

דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Since the basic *halakha* of these liquids is derived by means of an *a fortiori* inference, no stringencies are added to it, in accordance with the principle: **It is sufficient [*dayyo*]** for the conclusion that **emerged from the** *a fortiori* **inference** to **be like the source of the inference.** In other words, a *halakha* derived by means of an *a fortiori* inference is no more stringent than the source from which it is derived. In this case, liquid that became impure through contact with a creeping animal transmits impurity to the same extent that liquid that became impure through contact with a vessel does.


###### Pesachim 18b:3
[Pesachim 18b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:3)

״יִטְמָא״ דְּרֵישָׁא הֵיכִי דָּרֵישׁ? ״מִכׇּל הָאֹכֶל אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל אֲשֶׁר יָבוֹא עָלָיו מַיִם יִטְמָא״, יִטְמָא — לְטַמֵּא אֶת הַמַּשְׁקִין. אַתָּה אוֹמֵר לְטַמֵּא אֶת הַמַּשְׁקִין, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לְטַמֵּא אֶת הַכְּלִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **How does** Rabbi Akiva **interpret** the term: **Shall be impure, in the first** portion of the verse: **“From all food which may be eaten, upon which water has come, shall be impure”** (Leviticus 11:34)? He interprets the term: **Shall be impure,** as: Shall render impure. Food **transmits ritual impurity to liquids.** Do **you say** that the term teaches that food **transmits impurity to liquids, or perhaps** the term teaches **only** that food **transmits impurity to a vessel?**


###### Pesachim 18b:4
[Pesachim 18b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:4)

אָמַרְתָּ קַל וָחוֹמֶר: וּמָה מַשְׁקֶה שֶׁמְּטַמֵּא אוֹכֶל — אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא כְּלִי, אוֹכֶל שֶׁאֵין מְטַמֵּא אוֹכֶל — אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁלֹּא יְטַמֵּא כְּלִי?! הָא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״יִטְמָא״ — לְטַמֵּא אֶת הַמַּשְׁקִין שֶׁהֵן עֲלוּלִין לְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **You** can **say an *a fortiori*** inference that negates this possibility: **Just as liquid, which transmits impurity to food, does not transmit impurity to a vessel,** with regard to **food, which does not transmit impurity to food, is it not right that it** should **not transmit impurity to a vessel?** If so, **how** then **do I establish** the meaning of the term: **Shall be impure,** which in this context indicates that food impurifies other items? This term indicates that food **transmits impurity to liquids, which are susceptible to contracting impurity.**


###### Pesachim 18b:5
[Pesachim 18b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:5)

מַאי אִירְיָא מַשְׁקִין מִשּׁוּם דַּעֲלוּלִין לְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה, תִּיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם דְּלֵיכָּא מִידֵּי אַחֲרִינָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Why did** Rabbi Akiva mention **specifically** that food impurifies **liquids due to** the fact that **they are susceptible to contracting impurity? Let him derive** this proof from the simple fact **that there is no other item** that food could render impure. As food does not transmit impurity to food, the only remaining alternative is that food impurifies liquids.


###### Pesachim 18b:6
[Pesachim 18b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:6)

הָכִי קָאָמַר: וְכִי תֵּימָא אוֹכֶל חָמוּר, דִּמְטַמֵּא מַשְׁקִין, נִיטַמְּיֵיהּ לִכְלִי. הַהוּא חוּמְרָא דְמַשְׁקִין הוּא, מִשּׁוּם דְּמַשְׁקִין עֲלוּלִין לְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **this is** what Rabbi Akiva **is saying: And lest you say** that the impurity of **food is severe,** as evidenced by the fact **that** it **transmits ritual impurity to liquids** despite the fact that liquids do not transfer impurity to other liquids, and therefore **let** food **transmit impurity to a vessel,** despite the fact that liquid does not transmit impurity to a vessel; therefore, the Gemara states **that** the fact that food transmits impurity to liquids **is** actually **a stringency** characteristic of **liquids,** not of food. The impurity of food is not more severe than that of liquids; rather, food transmits impurity to liquids **due to** the fact **that liquids** are **susceptible to contracting impurity.**


###### Pesachim 18b:7
[Pesachim 18b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:7)

וּמָה הִיא עֲלִילָתָן — שֶׁמְּקַבְּלִין טוּמְאָה שֶׁלֹּא בְּהֶכְשֵׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** in **what** manner **is their susceptibility** manifest? It is manifest in the fact **that they become ritually impure without** being first rendered **susceptible** to impurity. Foods can become impure only after first coming into contact with one of seven liquids. Liquids do not require any preparatory stage before becoming impure.


###### Pesachim 18b:8
[Pesachim 18b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:8)

״יִטְמָא״ — דְּאֵין עוֹשָׂה כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ, מֵהָכָא נָפְקָא? מֵהָתָם נָפְקָא: ״וְכִי יֻתַּן מַיִם עַל זֶרַע וְנָפַל מִנִּבְלָתָם עָלָיו טָמֵא הוּא״ — הוּא טָמֵא, וְאֵין עוֹשֶׂה טוּמְאָה כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ! חַד בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ, וְחַד בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת כְּלִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Is** the principle: **Shall be impure** teaches **that** ritual impurity **does not render a similar** item impure, e.g., that food does not transfer ritual impurity to other food, **derived from here?** It is **derived from there: “But if water is put upon the seed, and any of their carcass falls upon it, it is impure for you”** (Leviticus 11:38), from which it is inferred: **It is impure;** however, **it does not transmit impurity** to a **similar** item. Why is an additional source necessary to teach this same principle? The Gemara explains: Both verses are necessary, as **one** refers **to liquids that come to** a state of impurity **due to** contact with **a creeping animal,** while **one** verse refers **to liquids that come to** a state of impurity **due to** contact with an impure **vessel.**


###### Pesachim 18b:9
[Pesachim 18b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:9)

וּצְרִיכִי? דְּאִי אַשְׁמוֹעִינַן בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת כְּלִי — מִשּׁוּם דְּלָא חֲמִירִי. אֲבָל בְּמַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ — דַּחֲמִירִי, אֵימָא עוֹשֶׂה טוּמְאָה כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara adds: **And** both verses **are necessary,** as neither of the *halakhot* could have been derived from the other. **As, had** the verse **taught us** only the *halakha* **with regard to liquids that come** to a state of impurity **due to** contact with **a vessel,** one might have thought that liquids do not transfer impurity to similar items only **due to** the fact that **their** impurity is **not severe,** as it did not result from contact with a primary source of impurity; **however, with regard to liquids that come** to a state of impurity **due to** contact with **a creeping animal, which are** impure with a **severe** form of impurity that resulted from contact with a primary source of impurity, **say that** they **transmit impurity** to a **similar** item.


###### Pesachim 18b:10
[Pesachim 18b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:10)

וְלַשְׁמְעִינַן מַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת שֶׁרֶץ, וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן מַשְׁקִין הַבָּאִין מֵחֲמַת כְּלִי! מִילְּתָא דְּאָתְיָא בְּקַל וָחוֹמֶר טָרַח וְכָתֵב לַהּ קְרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And let** the verse **teach us** that liquids do not transmit impurity with regard to **liquids that come** to a state of impurity **due to** contact with **a creeping animal, and all the more so** will that be the case with regard to **liquids that come** to a state of impurity **due to** contact with **a vessel.** The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as at times with regard to **a matter that** could be **derived by** means of **an *a fortiori* inference, the verse** nevertheless **unnecessarily wrote it** explicitly.


###### Pesachim 18b:11
[Pesachim 18b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:11)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבִינָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: וְהָא אָמַר רָבָא: לָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי סָבַר כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravina said to Rav Ashi: But didn’t Rava say** that **Rabbi Yosei does not hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva** with regard to the third-degree ritual impurity status of non-sacred items? Contrary to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Yosei maintains that an item with second-degree ritual impurity does not confer third-degree impurity status upon non-sacred items by Torah law.


###### Pesachim 18b:12
[Pesachim 18b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:12)

וְלָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא סָבַר כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** similarly, **Rabbi Akiva does not hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei** with regard to the fourth-degree impurity of consecrated property. The relevance of these observations to the issue at hand is that if Rabbi Yosei maintains that the impurity of liquids is by Torah law, he evidently interprets the verse as: *Yetamme*, just as Rabbi Akiva does. However, in that case, he would also hold that second-degree ritual impurity confers upon another non-sacred item third-degree impurity status, as that *halakha* is also derived from the term: *Yetamme*.


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

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּשִׁיטַת רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא רַבּוֹ אֲמָרָהּ, וְלֵיהּ לָא סְבִירָא לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Ashi **said to him: Rabbi Yosei said** this *halakha* that liquids transmit impurity by Torah law **in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, his teacher;** however, **he himself does not hold** accordingly, as Rabbi Yosei is of the opinion that liquids do not transmit impurity to other items by Torah law.


###### Pesachim 18b:14
[Pesachim 18b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:14)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אָשֵׁי לְרַב כָּהֲנָא: בִּשְׁלָמָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי לָא סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, דְּתַנְיָא: אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: מִנַּיִין לָרְבִיעִי בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ שֶׁהוּא פָּסוּל?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi said to Rav Kahana** with regard to Rava’s statement: **Granted, Rabbi Yosei does not hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva, as it was taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yosei said: From where** is it derived with regard **to a consecrated** item with **fourth-**degree ritual impurity **that it is** only **disqualified** and does not transfer impurity to other objects?


###### Pesachim 18b:15
[Pesachim 18b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:15)

וְדִין הוּא: וּמָה מְחוּסַּר כִּפּוּרִים שֶׁמּוּתָּר בִּתְרוּמָה, פָּסוּל בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ. שְׁלִישִׁי שֶׁפָּסוּל בִּתְרוּמָה — אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה רְבִיעִי בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **And** this *halakha* **is a logical** *a fortiori* **inference: Just as one who lacks atonement,** e.g., a *zav* or leper who immersed at the conclusion of his period of impurity but has not yet brought an offering for his atonement, **who is permitted** to eat ***teruma*, disqualifies** a **consecrated** item if he comes into contact with it, with regard to **third-**degree ritual impurity, **which disqualifies *teruma*,** and in that way is more severe than one who lacks atonement, **is it not right that it** should **confer fourth-**degree ritual impurity status **upon a consecrated** item? The status of an item with third-degree ritual impurity should be no less severe than that of a person who lacks atonement.


###### Pesachim 18b:16
[Pesachim 18b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:16)

וְלָמַדְנוּ שְׁלִישִׁי בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ מִן הַתּוֹרָה, וּרְבִיעִי מִקַּל וָחוֹמֶר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes: **And we derived third-**degree impurity **with regard to consecrated** items **from the Torah, and fourth-**degree impurity of consecrated items **by** means of the above ***a fortiori* inference.** In light of the *dayyo* principle, one might have thought that this *a fortiori* inference cannot serve as the basis of the *halakha* that consecrated property can assume fourth-degree impurity status. Since the source of this inference is third-degree impurity status, the conclusion that emerges can be only that consecrated objects can assume third-degree impurity status, like *teruma* itself. The Gemara explains that the *dayyo* principle does not apply in this case. If the *a fortiori* inference is rendered moot as a result of applying that principle, the principle is not applied. Because the fact that consecrated objects can assume third-degree impurity status is derived from the verse, if that which emerges from the inference is that *halakha* itself, the *a fortiori* inference is moot. Therefore, the principle does not apply and the fact that consecrated objects can assume fourth-degree impurity status is derived from the inference.


###### Pesachim 18b:17
[Pesachim 18b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Pesachim/r/18b:17)

שְׁלִישִׁי מִן הַתּוֹרָה, דִּכְתִיב ״וְהַבָּשָׂר אֲשֶׁר יִגַּע

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates. The fact that consecrated objects can assume third-degree impurity status is derived **from the Torah, as it is written: “And the flesh that touches**