## Sotah Daf 29b

###### Sotah 29b:1
[Sotah 29b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:1)

מִטְּבוּל יוֹם דְּשֶׁרֶץ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**from one who immersed that day** who was never a primary source of impurity, as he was rendered impure only **through** contact with **a creeping animal,** and nevertheless he disqualifies *teruma* upon contact.


###### Sotah 29b:2
[Sotah 29b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:2)

מָה לִטְבוּל יוֹם דְּשֶׁרֶץ שֶׁכֵּן בְּמִינוֹ אַב הַטּוּמְאָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues to challenge the inference: **What** is unique **about** the impurity of **one who immersed that day** who was rendered impure **through** contact with **a creeping animal is that** this impurity can apply to either a person or a utensil, as people and utensils are capable of achieving purity through immersion, and **within its type** there can be **a primary source of impurity.** A loaf, however, is food, which can never be a primary source of impurity. It can only be rendered impure as a secondary source of impurity.


###### Sotah 29b:3
[Sotah 29b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:3)

כְּלִי חֶרֶשׂ יוֹכִיחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The *halakhot* of **an earthenware vessel can prove** that the fact that there are primary sources of impurity within its type is not a relevant factor. An earthenware vessel can never become a primary source of impurity, and nevertheless, if it is impure it disqualifies *teruma* upon contact.


###### Sotah 29b:4
[Sotah 29b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:4)

מָה לִכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ — שֶׁכֵּן מְטַמֵּא מֵאֲוִירוֹ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **What** is unique **about an earthenware vessel is that** unlike a loaf, it **can render** items **impure** or it can itself become impure **from its airspace.** An earthenware vessel is the only vessel that does not require direct contact with another item in order to contract or transfer impurity, but can effect or contract impurity through its airspace.


###### Sotah 29b:5
[Sotah 29b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:5)

טְבוּל יוֹם יוֹכִיחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **One who immersed that day can prove** that being able to render items impure through airspace is not a relevant factor. Such an item disqualifies *teruma*, but imparts impurity only through direct contact and not through its airspace.


###### Sotah 29b:6
[Sotah 29b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:6)

וְחוֹזֵר הַדִּין. לֹא רְאִי זֶה כִּרְאִי זֶה, וְלֹא רְאִי זֶה כִּרְאִי זֶה. הַצַּד הַשָּׁוֶה שֶׁבָּהֶן שֶׁמּוּתָּרִין בְּחוּלִּין, וּפוֹסְלִין בִּתְרוּמָה: כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן כִּכָּר שֵׁנִי שֶׁפּוֹסֵל בְּחוּלִּין — דְּפוֹסֵל בִּתְרוּמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the derivation has reverted** to its starting point. **The aspect of this** case **is not like the aspect of that** case **and the aspect of that** case **is not like the aspect of this** case, as each case has its own unique stringencies. However, **their common denominator is that non-sacred** food they come into contact with **is permitted,** i.e., is not rendered impure, **but they disqualify *teruma*.** Therefore, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai infers *a fortiori* that **all the more so, a loaf** that contracted **second-**degree impurity, **which is disqualified,** i.e., rendered impure, even if it is **non-sacred,** should also **disqualify *teruma*** with which it comes into contact. This was Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai’s logical *a fortiori* inference that led him to rule that a loaf of second-degree impurity status disqualifies *teruma*.


###### Sotah 29b:7
[Sotah 29b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:7)

וְדוֹר אַחֵר פָּרֵיךְ: מָה לְהַצַּד הַשָּׁוֶה שֶׁבָּהֶן — שֶׁכֵּן יֵשׁ בָּהֶן צַד חָמוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And another generation,** i.e., the later generation that Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai predicted would deem *teruma* that came into contact with second-degree impurity pure, would **refute** this inference as follows: **What** is unique **about their common denominator is that** both cases **have a stringent aspect** that does not exist in other impure items.


###### Sotah 29b:8
[Sotah 29b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:8)

וְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, צַד חָמוּר לָא פָּרֵיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai** maintained that *teruma* that came into contact with second-degree impurity is pure, as he **would not refute** an inference that is based on two sources due to the fact that both sources have **a stringent aspect,** since each source’s stringency is not shared by the other.


###### Sotah 29b:9
[Sotah 29b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:9)

תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: מִנַּיִן לִרְבִיעִי בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ שֶׁפָּסוּל?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **It is taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta*, *Ḥagiga* 3:18) that **Rabbi Yosei said: From where** is it derived with regard **to sacrificial** food with **fourth-**degree ritual impurity **that it is disqualified** although it is not capable of imparting impurity to other items?


###### Sotah 29b:10
[Sotah 29b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:10)

וְדִין הוּא: מָה מְחוּסַּר כִּיפּוּרִים, שֶׁמּוּתָּר בַּתְּרוּמָה — פָּסוּל בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ. שְׁלִישִׁי, שֶׁפָּסוּל בַּתְּרוּמָה — אֵינוֹ דִּין הוּא שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה רְבִיעִי בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It is** derived through **logical** inference: **Just as one who is lacking 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 partake **of *teruma*,** nevertheless **disqualifies sacrificial** food if he comes into contact with it, so too, with regard to an item of **third-**degree impurity status, **which disqualifies *teruma*** and is therefore more severe than one who is lacking atonement, **is it not logical that it should render sacrificial** food with which it comes into contact as having **fourth-**degree impurity?


###### Sotah 29b:11
[Sotah 29b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:11)

וְלָמַדְנוּ שְׁלִישִׁי לַקּוֹדֶשׁ מִן הַתּוֹרָה, וּרְבִיעִי מִקַּל וָחוֹמֶר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* concludes: **And we have** therefore **derived** that **third-**degree impurity applies **to sacrificial** food **from** an explicit verse in **the Torah, and** we have derived that **fourth-**degree impurity applies to sacrificial food **by** means of the above ***a fortiori*** inference.


###### Sotah 29b:12
[Sotah 29b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:12)

שְׁלִישִׁי לַקּוֹדֶשׁ מִן הַתּוֹרָה מְנָלַן — דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהַבָּשָׂר אֲשֶׁר יִגַּע בְּכׇל טָמֵא לֹא יֵאָכֵל״. מִי לָא עָסְקִינַן דִּנְגַע בְּשֵׁנִי — וְאָמַר רַחֲמָנָא ״לֹא יֵאָכֵל״. רְבִיעִי מִקַּל וָחוֹמֶר — כְּדַאֲמַרַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **From where in the Torah do we** derive that third-degree impurity applies **to sacrificial** food? The Gemara answers: **As it is written: “And the flesh that touches any impure thing shall not be eaten”** (Leviticus 7:19). **Are we not dealing** in the verse with meat **that touches** even an item of **second-**degree impurity? **And the Merciful One states** that it **“shall not be eaten,”** indicating that it assumes third-degree impurity. Therefore, **fourth-**degree impurity can be derived **by** means of the ***a fortiori*** inference of Rabbi Yosei, **as we stated** above.


###### Sotah 29b:13
[Sotah 29b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:13)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: טַעַם בְּרִיבִּי אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ מָה הוּא, שֶׁהֲרֵי תְּשׁוּבָתוֹ בְּצִדּוֹ: אוֹכֶל הַבָּא מֵחֲמַת טְבוּל יוֹם יוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁפָּסוּל בִּתְרוּמָה וְאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה רְבִיעִי בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** With regard to **the reasoning** behind **the Distinguished** Rabbi Yosei’s *a fortiori* inference, **I do not know what it is, as the response to his** inference **is** right **by its side: Food whose** impurity **came from** contact with **one who immersed that day can prove** that a degree of impurity that disqualifies *teruma* does not necessarily impart fourth-degree impurity to sacrificial food, **as** this food **disqualifies *teruma*** upon contact, **but it does not impart fourth-**degree impurity **upon sacrificial** food.


###### Sotah 29b:14
[Sotah 29b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:14)

דְּתַנְיָא, אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר: טְבוּל יוֹם תְּחִילָּה לַקּוֹדֶשׁ, לְטַמֵּא שְׁנַיִם, וְלִפְסוֹל אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta*, *Teharot* 1:4) that **Abba Shaul says:** With regard to **one who immersed that day,** until sunset he is treated as one who is impure with **first-**degree impurity **vis-à-vis sacrificial** food, in that he is able **to render two** items of sacrificial food **impure and to disqualify one** additional item. In other words, the first item of sacrificial food that he touches assumes the status of a second-degree impurity. A second item that comes into contact with the first one assumes third-degree impurity. A third item that comes into contact with the second assumes fourth-degree impurity and is therefore disqualified from being eaten, though it cannot impart impurity to other items.


###### Sotah 29b:15
[Sotah 29b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:15)

רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: מְטַמֵּא אֶחָד, וּפוֹסֵל אֶחָד. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁפּוֹסֵל אוֹכְלֵי תְרוּמָה וּמַשְׁקֵי תְרוּמָה — כָּךְ פּוֹסֵל אוֹכְלֵי קוֹדֶשׁ וּמַשְׁקֵי קוֹדֶשׁ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Meir says:** One who immersed that day is considered impure with second-degree impurity, even vis-à-vis sacrificial food, and as such **renders** only **one** item **impure and disqualifies one** additional item. **And the Rabbis say: Just as he** merely **disqualifies *teruma* foods and *teruma* liquids,** without transferring to them impurity that can then be transferred further, **so too, he** merely **disqualifies sacrificial foods and sacrificial liquids.** In other words, the impurity imparted by one who immersed that day can reach only third-degree impurity and not fourth-degree impurity, contrary to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei.


###### Sotah 29b:16
[Sotah 29b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:16)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב פָּפָּא: מִמַּאי דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי כְּרַבָּנַן סְבִירָא לֵיהּ? דִּילְמָא כְּאַבָּא שָׁאוּל סְבִירָא לֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר לְטַמֵּא שְׁנַיִם וְלִפְסוֹל אֶחָד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa objects to** Rabbi Yoḥanan’s argument: **From where** is the presumption derived **that Rabbi Yosei holds in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis? Perhaps he holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Abba Shaul, who says** that one who immersed that day is able **to render two** items of sacrificial food **impure, and to disqualify one** additional item.


###### Sotah 29b:17
[Sotah 29b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:17)

אִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ כְּאַבָּא שָׁאוּל סְבִירָא לֵיהּ, לַיְיתֵיהּ לִרְבִיעִי בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ מֵאוֹכֶל שֶׁבָּא מֵחֲמַת טְבוּל יוֹם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **If it enters your mind** that Rabbi Yosei **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Abba Shaul, he should have brought** proof **for** the existence of a **fourth** degree of ritual impurity **with regard to sacrificial** food **from** the case of **food whose** impurity **came from one who immersed that day,** as follows:


###### Sotah 29b:18
[Sotah 29b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/29b:18)

וּמָה אוֹכֶל הַבָּא מֵחֲמַת טְבוּל יוֹם, דִּטְבוּל יוֹם גּוּפֵיהּ מוּתָּר בְּחוּלִּין — אָמְרַתְּ עוֹשֶׂה רְבִיעִי בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ, אוֹכֶל

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Just as** with regard to **food whose** impurity **came from one who immersed that day, while the one who immersed that day is himself permitted to** consume **non-sacred** food, nevertheless **you say** that the food **imparts fourth-**degree impurity status **upon sacrificial** food, then with regard to **food**