## Yoma Daf 80a

###### Yoma 80a:1
[Yoma 80a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:1)

כׇּל הַשִּׁיעוּרִין כּוּלָּן בִּכְזַיִת, חוּץ מִטּוּמְאַת אוֹכָלִין, שֶׁשִּׁינָּה הַכָּתוּב בְּמַשְׁמָעָן, וְשִׁינּוּ חֲכָמִים בְּשִׁיעוּרָן. וּרְאָיָה לַדָּבָר — יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. מַאי שִׁינָּה הַכָּתוּב בְּמַשְׁמָעוֹ — מִ״לֹּא תְעוּנֶּה״, וּמַאי שִׁינּוּ חֲכָמִים בְּשִׁיעוּרֵיהּ — כְּכוֹתֶבֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**All the measures** in the Torah connected to eating are the volume of **an olive-bulk, except for** the amount of **food** that renders objects **impure, because the verse changed its expression** in this case, **and the Sages altered the measure** accordingly. **The proof of this,** that the Sages gave it a different measure because the verse used different language for it, is from **Yom Kippur.** Also in the case of Yom Kippur the Sages assigned a different measure because the verse used a different phrase. The Gemara asks: **How did the** Sages learn that the **verse changed its expression?** They learned **from:** “Any soul which **shall not be afflicted”** (Leviticus 23:29). The verse does not state: Any soul that shall eat, but rather: “Any soul which shall not be afflicted.” **How did the Sages change its measure?** One does not violate the prohibition unless he has eaten **the volume of a large date-bulk,** as opposed to the usual olive-bulk.


###### Yoma 80a:2
[Yoma 80a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:2)

וּמַאי רְאָיָה לַדָּבָר יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים? דְּאִי מֵהָתָם, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: אוֹרְחָא דִקְרָא הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what** does the *baraita* mean when it says: **A proof for this** is from **Yom Kippur?** Why is the verse pertaining to ritual impurity not sufficient to show that the Sages changed the measure based on the different words in the verse? The Gemara answers: **If** we learned it only from **there,** the case of impurity, **I would have said that that is the style of the verse,** and no *halakha* can be derived from it. Therefore, the verse pertaining to Yom Kippur teaches that whenever a verse deviates from the usual language, it implies a change in the *halakha* as well.


###### Yoma 80a:3
[Yoma 80a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:3)

טוּמְאַת אוֹכָלִין כְּבֵיצָה מְנָלַן? אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״מִכׇּל הָאוֹכֶל אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל״, אוֹכֶל הַבָּא מֵחֲמַת אוֹכֶל, וְאֵיזֶה — זֶה בֵּיצַת תַּרְנְגוֹלֶת. וְאֵימָא גְּדִי! מְחוּסָּר שְׁחִיטָה. וְאֵימָא בֶּן פְּקוּעָה! טָעוּן קְרִיעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara asks: **From where do we** derive that the measure for **impure foods** is **the volume of an egg-bulk? Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Elazar said that the verse states: “Of all food [*okhel*] which may be eaten [*ye’akhel*],** on which water comes shall be ritually impure” (Leviticus 11:34). The double usage of the root *akhal* teaches that the ritual impurity of food applies even to the amount which can be described as **food that comes on account of food,** i.e., food that comes from another food. **And which** food **is that? A chicken egg.** The Gemara asks: **And say** it is referring to **a kid,** which comes from a mother goat, and is therefore also food that comes from another food. The Gemara answers: **It lacks ritual slaughter.** The young goat is not yet food, since it is not edible until it has been slaughtered. The Gemara asks further: **And say** it is referring to **a *ben pekua*.** Since the slaughter of its mother made it fit to eat, the fetus itself need not be slaughtered, even if it survives and continues to live independently of its mother. The Gemara answers: The calf still **requires cutting,** since it cannot be eaten live, but it does not require ritual slaughter.


###### Yoma 80a:4
[Yoma 80a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:4)

וְאֵימָא בֵּיצַת בַּר יוֹכָנִי! תָּפַסְתָּ מְרוּבֶּה לֹא תָּפַסְתָּ, תָּפַסְתָּ מוּעָט תָּפַסְתָּ. וְאֵימָא בֵּיעֲתָא דְּצִיפַּורְתָּא דְּזוּטַר טוּבָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Even if we claim that the measure for impure foods is an egg-bulk, one could **say** it is referring to the giant **egg**-**bulk** of the bird called ***bar yokhani*.** The Gemara answers: **If you grasped many, you did not grasp anything; if you grasped few, you grasped something.** This means that in a case of doubt, take the smaller number, as it is included in the larger number. Therefore, the correct measure is the volume of a chicken egg. The Gemara questions this: If so, **say** it is referring to **a very small bird’s egg.** Consequently, no proof can be brought from the verse that the volume of a chicken egg is the measure for ritual impurity.


###### Yoma 80a:5
[Yoma 80a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:5)

רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ דִּידֵיהּ, אָמַר: ״מִכׇּל הָאוֹכֶל אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל״, אוֹכֶל שֶׁאַתָּה אוֹכְלוֹ בְּבַת אַחַת. וְשִׁיעֲרוּ חֲכָמִים: אֵין בֵּית הַבְּלִיעָה מַחֲזִיק יוֹתֵר מִבֵּיצַת תַּרְנְגוֹלֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Abbahu himself said:** The verse states: **“Of all food which may be eaten.”** This is referring to **food that you** can **eat at one time. The Sages estimated: The esophagus cannot hold more** than the volume of **a chicken’s egg,** and therefore this is the measure used for the ritual impurity of foods.


###### Yoma 80a:6
[Yoma 80a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:6)

אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: הָאוֹכֵל חֵלֶב בִּזְמַן הַזֶּה צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּכְתּוֹב לוֹ שִׁיעוּר, שֶׁמָּא יָבֹא בֵּית דִּין אַחֵר וְיַרְבֶּה בְּשִׁיעוּרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Incidental to the discussion on Torah measures, **Rabbi Elazar said: One who** unwittingly **eats** forbidden **fat** even **today must write down the** exact **measure** that he ate, **lest another court come** in the future **and increase the measure.**


###### Yoma 80a:7
[Yoma 80a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:7)

מַאי יַרְבֶּה בְּשִׁיעוּרִין? אִי נֵימָא דִּמְחַיְּיבִי קׇרְבָּן אַכַּזַּיִת קָטָן, וְהָתַנְיָא: ״אֲשֶׁר לֹא תֵעָשֶׂינָה בִּשְׁגָגָה וְאָשֵׁם״, הַשָּׁב מִידִיעָתוֹ — מֵבִיא קׇרְבָּן עַל שִׁגְגָתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What does** it mean to **increase the measure? If we say** that a future court **will obligate** him to bring **an offering** even for the **bulk** of **a small olive,** which is less than what is considered an olive-bulk today, he would not be liable to bring a guilt**-**offering. **Wasn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: It was said with regard to guilt-offerings: “And if any one of the common people sin through error, in doing any of the things which the Lord has commanded **not to be done, and be guilty”** (Leviticus 4:27)? This teaches that **one who repents due to his awareness,** i.e., one who repents following becoming aware that he performed a transgression, **brings an offering for his unwitting** transgression.


###### Yoma 80a:8
[Yoma 80a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:8)

לֹא שָׁב מִידִיעָתוֹ — אֵין מֵבִיא קׇרְבָּן עַל שִׁגְגָתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, **one who does not repent due to his awareness** that he sinned **does not bring an offering for his unwitting** action. Similarly, if one eats less than an olive-bulk, based on the current measures, he will not be obligated to bring a guilt-offering in the future if the measures change, even if the amount that he ate equals the volume of a revised olive-bulk. This is because the individual would not be bringing his offering because he became aware he had sinned, but because the Torah measures had been changed.


###### Yoma 80a:9
[Yoma 80a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:9)

אֶלָּא: דְּלָא מְחַיְּיבִי קׇרְבָּן עַד דְּאִיכָּא כְּזַיִת גָּדוֹל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** it should be explained as follows: It is possible that in the future a court **will not obligate** one to bring **an offering until he has** eaten the bulk **of a large olive,** which is more than today’s amount. One should write down how much he ate, since in the future a court might rule that the amount he ate is less than the size of an olive, and therefore he will not be obligated to bring an offering.


###### Yoma 80a:10
[Yoma 80a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:10)

וּלְמַאי דִּסְלֵיק אַדַּעְתִּין מֵעִיקָּרָא דִּמְחַיְּיבִי קׇרְבָּן אַכַּזַּיִת קָטָן, מַאי ״יַרְבֶּה בְּשִׁיעוּרִין״? שֶׁמָּא יַרְבֶּה בְּקׇרְבָּנוֹת מֵחֲמַת שִׁיעוּרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to its first suggestion: **According to what entered his mind initially,** that in the future a court might **obligate** him to bring **an offering** for the bulk of a **small olive, what** is the meaning of **increase the measure?** Rabbi Elazar should have said decrease the measure. The Gemara answers: The statement may have meant that **perhaps there will be an increase in offerings** that are brought **due to** the smaller **measure** for liability.


###### Yoma 80a:11
[Yoma 80a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:11)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: שִׁיעוּרִין וָעוֹנָשִׁין הֲלָכָה לְמֹשֶׁה מִסִּינַי. עוֹנָשִׁין מִכְתָּב כְּתִיבִי! אֶלָּא הָכִי קָאָמַר: (אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן:) שִׁיעוּרִים שֶׁל עוֹנָשִׁין — הֲלָכָה לְמֹשֶׁה מִסִּינַי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to this topic, **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Measures and punishments are *halakha*** transmitted **to Moses from Sinai.** The Gemara expresses surprise at this: **The punishments** for all transgressions **are written** explicitly in the Torah, and therefore are not part of an oral transmission from Moses. **Rather, this is** what was **said: Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Measures** that determine liability **for punishments are *halakha*** transmitted **to Moses from Sinai.**


###### Yoma 80a:12
[Yoma 80a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:12)

תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: שִׁיעוּרִין שֶׁל עוֹנָשִׁין הֲלָכָה לְמֹשֶׁה מִסִּינַי. אֲחֵרִים אוֹמְרִים: בֵּית דִּינוֹ שֶׁל יַעְבֵּץ תִּיקְּנוּם. וְהָכְתִיב: ״אֵלֶּה הַמִּצְוֹת״, שֶׁאֵין נָבִיא רַשַּׁאי לְחַדֵּשׁ דָּבָר מֵעַתָּה! אֶלָּא, שְׁכָחוּם וְחָזְרוּ וְיִסְּדוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **This was also taught** in a *baraita*: **Measures of punishments are *halakha*** transmitted **to Moses from Sinai. Others say:** These measures **were instituted by the court of Jabez.** The Gemara questions this: How can this be? **Isn’t it written: “These are the mitzvot which the Lord commanded Moses for the children of Israel at Mount Sinai”** (Leviticus 27:34). The word “these” underscores **that a prophet is not permitted to introduce** any new **element** related to the Torah and its mitzvot **from here on. Rather,** over the course of time, the people **forgot** the measures; subsequently the prophets **reestablished** the measures and taught them to the masses.


###### Yoma 80a:13
[Yoma 80a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:13)

הַשּׁוֹתֶה מְלֹא לוּגְמָיו. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא מְלֹא לוּגְמָיו מַמָּשׁ, אֶלָּא כׇּל שֶׁאִילּוּ יְסַלְּקֶנּוּ לְצַד אֶחָד וְיֵרָאֶה כִּמְלֹא לוּגְמָיו. וְהָא אֲנַן תְּנַן ״מְלֹא לוּגְמָיו״! אֵימָא: ״כִּמְלֹא לוּגְמָיו״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ We learned in the mishna that **one who drinks a cheekful** on Yom Kippur is liable. **Rabbi Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said: This does not** mean two **cheeks actually full. Rather,** the measure that determines liability is the volume of liquid **if one pushes** the drink **to one side** of his mouth, **and it appears as though his cheek were full.** The Gemara questions this: **Didn’t we learn** in the mishna: **A cheekful,** in the plural form, meaning two cheeks full? The Gemara answers: **Say: Like** two **cheeks full** in appearance. If viewed from only one side, one whose cheek is full appears as if his entire mouth is full.


###### Yoma 80a:14
[Yoma 80a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:14)

מֵיתִיבִי: כַּמָּה יִשְׁתֶּה וִיהֵא חַיָּיב? בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: רְבִיעִית, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: מְלֹא לוּגְמָיו. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: כִּמְלֹא לוּגְמָיו. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתֵירָא אוֹמֵר: כְּדֵי גְמִיעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** to this from a *baraita*: **How much** does one need to **drink** on Yom Kippur **to be liable? Beit Shammai say: A quarter-***log*, **and Beit Hillel say:** Two **cheeks full. Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Eliezer: Like** two **cheeks full** in appearance from the side, i.e. a single cheekful. **Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says:** The **amount** that one can **swallow** in one gulp. In this *baraita*, Beit Hillel’s opinion is that the measure for drinking on Yom Kippur is a cheekful. This implies that a cheekful means an actual cheekful.


###### Yoma 80a:15
[Yoma 80a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:15)

מִי עֲדִיפָא מִמַּתְנִיתִין דְּאוֹקֵימְנָא כְּדֵי שֶׁיֵּרָאֶה, הָכִי נָמֵי כְּדֵי שֶׁיֵּרָאֶה! אִי הָכִי, הַיְינוּ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר! אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ מְלֹא לוּגְמָיו דָּחוּק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara expresses surprise: **Is** the *baraita* **preferable to the mishna? Since it was established** that the measure in the mishna is **so that it appears** like a cheekful, **so too,** the *baraita* can be explained as meaning an amount **that looks like** two cheeks full. The Gemara questions further: **If so,** Beit Hillel require an amount that appears like two cheeks full; **this is** identical with the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer,** who says: Like two cheeks full. The Gemara answers: We could say that the practical difference **between them** is evident in the case of **a paltry cheekful,** which is not a complete mouthful but slightly less. According to Beit Hillel, one is not liable unless he drinks a full cheekful; but according to Rabbi Eliezer, one is liable even for a paltry mouthful.


###### Yoma 80a:16
[Yoma 80a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/80a:16)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב הוֹשַׁעְיָא: אִם כֵּן, הָוֵה לֵיהּ מִקּוּלֵּי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וּמֵחוּמְרֵי בֵּית הִלֵּל! אֲמַר לֵיהּ:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Hoshaya strongly objects to this** understanding: **If so,** if Beit Hillel’s measure is a single cheekful, then **this is** an instance of **Beit Shammai’s leniencies and Beit Hillel’s stringencies,** since the measure of a quarter-*log* is larger than a single cheekful. If so, why isn’t this debate listed in tractate *Eduyyot*, which lists all the cases where Beit Shammai are more lenient than Beit Hillel? **He said to him:**