Talmud Yerushalmi
Yerushalmi Terumot 11:2 ירושלמי תרומות י״א:ב׳
Part of: Chapter 11
Reading: Hebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlyHebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlySimple English onlyFaithful translation onlySide by side
משנה: דְּבַשׁ תְּמָרִים וְיֵין תַּפּוּחִין וְחוֹמֶץ סִיתְוָונִיּוֹת וּשְׁאָר כָּל מֵי פֵּירוֹת שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵיב קֶרֶן וְחוֹמֶשׁ. וְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם מַשְׁקֶה אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר לֹא מָנוּ חֲכָמִים שִׁבְעָה מַשְׁקִין כְּמוֹנֵי פַטָּמִין אֶלָּא אָמְרוּ שִׁבְעָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַמַּשְׁקִין טְהוֹרִין.
MISHNAH: Date honey, apple wine, vinegar from winter grapes24Late grapes that never became sweet enough to be eaten or used to make wine., and any other fruit juices from heave, Rebbi Eliezer subjects to [repayment of] value and fifth25If consumed by a non-Cohen in error, cf. Mishnah 6:1., but Rebbi Joshua frees [from payment]. Rebbi Eliezer declares them impure as drinks26“Impure” means (a) potentially impure if exposed to impurity and (b) able to prepare solid food for impurity; “pure” means not subject to impurity; cf. Demay, Chapter 2, Note 141. The seven fluids subject to impurity are enumerated in Mishnah Makhširin 6:4: Dew, water (including human body fluids), wine, olive oil, blood, milk, bees’ honey. These fluids are called “drinks”, following the verse Lev. 11:34.. Rebbi Joshua said, the Sages did not enumerate seven fluids as one counts raw materials for perfumes27Which the perfumer chooses according to his own wishes. but they said, seven fluids are impure, all other fluids are pure.
MISHNAH: Date honey, apple wine, vinegar from winter grapes24Late grapes that never became sweet enough to be eaten or used to make wine., and any other fruit juices from heave, Rebbi Eliezer subjects to [repayment of] value and fifth25If consumed by a non-Cohen in error, cf. Mishnah 6:1., but Rebbi Joshua frees [from payment]. Rebbi Eliezer declares them impure as drinks26“Impure” means (a) potentially impure if exposed to impurity and (b) able to prepare solid food for impurity; “pure” means not subject to impurity; cf. Demay, Chapter 2, Note 141. The seven fluids subject to impurity are enumerated in Mishnah Makhširin 6:4: Dew, water (including human body fluids), wine, olive oil, blood, milk, bees’ honey. These fluids are called “drinks”, following the verse Lev. 11:34.. Rebbi Joshua said, the Sages did not enumerate seven fluids as one counts raw materials for perfumes27Which the perfumer chooses according to his own wishes. but they said, seven fluids are impure, all other fluids are pure.
הלכה: הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מֵימַר מַה פְלִיגִין בְּחוֹמֶשׁ אֲבָל בְקֶרֶן אַף רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ מוֹדֵי. מַה פְלִיגִין לְשֶׁעָבַר הָא בַתְּחִילָּה אַף רִבִּי יוֹשׁוּעַ מוֹדֵה. וְתַנִּינָן דְּבַשׁ תְּמָרִים רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵיב בְּמַעְשְׂרוֹת וְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ פּוֹטֵר. כָּאן שֶׁזָּבוּ מִשֶּׁנִּטְבְּלוּ. וְכָאן שֶׁזָּבוּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִטְבְּלוּ.
HALAKHAH: They want to say that they differ about the fifth but Rebbi Joshua agrees about the principal28Since the statement is formulated as tentative, if the farmer uses his own date honey from dates destined for the Cohen, he does not pay at all. But if a third person uses it, he has to pay its value as he would for any robbery (Maimonides and R. Abraham ben David, Terumot 11:2).. They differ after the fact29About the amount the transgressing layman has to pay., but before the fact Rebbi Joshua agrees30That date honey made from heave dates is forbidden to laymen.. But we have stated31Tosephta 9:8; only the statement of R. Eliezer and that of R. Nathan in the next paragraph.: “Rebbi Eliezer subjects date honey to tithes, but Rebbi Joshua frees it.” Here, when they obtained it after it became ṭevel, there before it became ṭevel32If the date honey was taken before the dates themselves became subject to heave and tithes as explained in the first chapter of Ma‘serot, R. Joshua holds that date honey itself cannot become subject to heave and tithes. But if the honey exuded from the dates after the dates were given as heave, R. Joshua agrees that it remains heave and is forbidden to laymen. The answer is thoroughly impractical since Mishnah Ma‘serot 1:2 states that dates become subject to tithes as soon as they contain moisture; it is difficult to see how honey could exude from dates harvested dry even if they were left to ripen in storage..
HALAKHAH: They want to say that they differ about the fifth but Rebbi Joshua agrees about the principal28Since the statement is formulated as tentative, if the farmer uses his own date honey from dates destined for the Cohen, he does not pay at all. But if a third person uses it, he has to pay its value as he would for any robbery (Maimonides and R. Abraham ben David, Terumot 11:2).. They differ after the fact29About the amount the transgressing layman has to pay., but before the fact Rebbi Joshua agrees30That date honey made from heave dates is forbidden to laymen.. But we have stated31Tosephta 9:8; only the statement of R. Eliezer and that of R. Nathan in the next paragraph.: “Rebbi Eliezer subjects date honey to tithes, but Rebbi Joshua frees it.” Here, when they obtained it after it became ṭevel, there before it became ṭevel32If the date honey was taken before the dates themselves became subject to heave and tithes as explained in the first chapter of Ma‘serot, R. Joshua holds that date honey itself cannot become subject to heave and tithes. But if the honey exuded from the dates after the dates were given as heave, R. Joshua agrees that it remains heave and is forbidden to laymen. The answer is thoroughly impractical since Mishnah Ma‘serot 1:2 states that dates become subject to tithes as soon as they contain moisture; it is difficult to see how honey could exude from dates harvested dry even if they were left to ripen in storage..
מוֹדֵי רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר שֶׁאִם עִישֵּׂר עַל הַתְּמָרִים אֲפִילוּ בְּאִיסְפָּמִיָּא דִּבְשָׁן מוּתָּר. מִילְתֵיהּ אָמְרָה שֶׁהוּא מְעַשֵּׂר מִן הַתְּמָרִים עַל הַדְּבָשׁ לְפִי תְּמָרִים. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵיב בְּמַעְשְׂרוֹת. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר לֹא שֶׁרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְחַיֵיב בְּמַעְשְׂרוֹת אֶלָּא שֶׁרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא יֹאכַל מִן הַתְּמָרִים עַד שֶׁיְּעַשֵּׂר עַל הַדְּבָשׁ. מִילְתֵיהּ אָמַר שֶׁהוּא מְעַשֵּׂר מִן הַתְּמָרִים עַל הַדְּבָשׁ לְפִי דְבָשׁ וּלְפִי תְּמָרִים.
Rebbi Eliezer agrees that if he tithed the dates, their honey is permitted even in Spain33If the dates were tithed when dry and the honey was produced later from exported dates, the honey remains permitted. {Since the text is not punctuated, it would be possible to read: If he tithed the dates even in Spain, their honey would be permitted. However, this interpretation is impossible since fruits of the Land cannot be tithed in Spain, not even in Apamea in Syria.}. This implies that he tithes dates including honey proportional to the dates. “Rebbi Eliezer subjects date honey to tithes.” We have stated31Tosephta 9:8; only the statement of R. Eliezer and that of R. Nathan in the next paragraph.: “Rebbi Nathan says, not that Rebbi Eliezer subjects it to tithes but Rebbi Eliezer says he should not eat from the tithes until he also tithed the honey.” This implies that he tithes dates including honey proportional34In volume. to honey and dates.
Rebbi Eliezer agrees that if he tithed the dates, their honey is permitted even in Spain33If the dates were tithed when dry and the honey was produced later from exported dates, the honey remains permitted. {Since the text is not punctuated, it would be possible to read: If he tithed the dates even in Spain, their honey would be permitted. However, this interpretation is impossible since fruits of the Land cannot be tithed in Spain, not even in Apamea in Syria.}. This implies that he tithes dates including honey proportional to the dates. “Rebbi Eliezer subjects date honey to tithes.” We have stated31Tosephta 9:8; only the statement of R. Eliezer and that of R. Nathan in the next paragraph.: “Rebbi Nathan says, not that Rebbi Eliezer subjects it to tithes but Rebbi Eliezer says he should not eat from the tithes until he also tithed the honey.” This implies that he tithes dates including honey proportional34In volume. to honey and dates.
רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם מַשְׁקֶה. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר לֹא שֶׁרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם מַשְׁקֶה עַל מַה נֶחְלְקוּ עַל שֶׁנָּפַל לְתוֹכוֹ מַשְׁקֶה. שֶׁרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם מַשְׁקֶה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים הוֹלְכִין אַחַר הָרוֹב.
“Rebbi Eliezer declares it35The Tosephta (9:8) makes it clear that only date honey is being discussed. impure as drink.” It was stated: “Rebbi Nathan said, Rebbi Eliezer does not declare it impure as drink; what did they disagree about? If some drink36In the Tosephta: “Water”. fell into it, then Rebbi Eliezer declares it impure as drink but the Sages say, it follows the majority37It is not a “drink” as long as there is more than 50% date honey..”
“Rebbi Eliezer declares it35The Tosephta (9:8) makes it clear that only date honey is being discussed. impure as drink.” It was stated: “Rebbi Nathan said, Rebbi Eliezer does not declare it impure as drink; what did they disagree about? If some drink36In the Tosephta: “Water”. fell into it, then Rebbi Eliezer declares it impure as drink but the Sages say, it follows the majority37It is not a “drink” as long as there is more than 50% date honey..”
עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי נָתָן רִבִּי מֵאִיר וְרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב וְרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר שְׁלָשְׁתָּן אָמְרוּ דָבָר אֶחָד. רִבִּי מֵאִיר דּוּ אָמַר אֵין מֵי פֵּירוֹת בְּטֵילִין לְעוֹלָם. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב דְּתַנֵּי רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר צִיר טָהוֹר שֶׁנָּפַל לְתוֹכוֹ מַיִם כָּל שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא. וְהָדֵין רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר דְּהָכָא.
In the opinion of Rebbi Nathan, Rebbi Meїr, Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob, and Rebbi Eliezer, all three said the same. Rebbi Meїr, for he says38It seems that this refers to the anonymous Mishnah Miqwa’ot 7:2, presumed to be R. Meїr’s teaching, which states that if a miqweh is short one half seah of the required 40 seah of water (cf. Chapter 4, Note 112, Chapter 19, Note 139), if one half of a seah of fruit juice fell in, the status of the miqweh is not changed. If the character of fruit juice could be disregarded (being less than 1 in 60 of the total amount), then the watered down fruit juice could make up the difference., “fruit juice never is disregarded.” Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob as we have stated39Mishnah Makhširin 6:3. Usually, fish sauce is impure since fish, coming out of the water, is always prepared for impurity (Demay, Chapter 2, Note 141.) If it is known that the fish sauce was extracted from pure fish by people strictly keeping the laws of purity, then the fish sauce is pure and, since it is not one of the “seven fluids” (Note 26), cannot become impure. But if any amount of water is added, it is prepared for impurity.: “Pure fish sauce into which fell the smallest amount of water is impure.” And Rebbi Eliezer here.
In the opinion of Rebbi Nathan, Rebbi Meїr, Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob, and Rebbi Eliezer, all three said the same. Rebbi Meїr, for he says38It seems that this refers to the anonymous Mishnah Miqwa’ot 7:2, presumed to be R. Meїr’s teaching, which states that if a miqweh is short one half seah of the required 40 seah of water (cf. Chapter 4, Note 112, Chapter 19, Note 139), if one half of a seah of fruit juice fell in, the status of the miqweh is not changed. If the character of fruit juice could be disregarded (being less than 1 in 60 of the total amount), then the watered down fruit juice could make up the difference., “fruit juice never is disregarded.” Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob as we have stated39Mishnah Makhširin 6:3. Usually, fish sauce is impure since fish, coming out of the water, is always prepared for impurity (Demay, Chapter 2, Note 141.) If it is known that the fish sauce was extracted from pure fish by people strictly keeping the laws of purity, then the fish sauce is pure and, since it is not one of the “seven fluids” (Note 26), cannot become impure. But if any amount of water is added, it is prepared for impurity.: “Pure fish sauce into which fell the smallest amount of water is impure.” And Rebbi Eliezer here.
טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר וְכָל מַשְׁקֶה. מַה טַעֲמָא דְּרַבָּנִין אֲשֶׁר יִשָּׁתֶה. מַה רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר כְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל דְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל דּוּ אָמַר כְּלָל וּפְרָט הַכֹּל בִּכְלָל. וְרוּבָּה מִדְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל דּוּ אָמַר אֲפִילוּ כְּלָל וּפְרָט וְחָזַר וְכָלַל הַכֹּל בִּכְלָל. רִבִּי פֶּרִיגוֹרִי דְקַיְסָרִין אָמַר רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֵּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אֶלָּא כָּךְ מֵשִׁיב רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר לַחֲכָמִים מַה דְאִית לְכוֹן אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל פְּרָט לְאוֹכֶל סָרוּחַ. כֵּן אִית לִי אֲשֶׁר יִשָּׁתֶה פְּרָט לְמַשְׁקֶה סָרוּחַ. אָמַר לוֹ לֹא דוֹמִין אוֹכְלִין לְמַשְׁקִין. לֹא אִם אָמְרָת בְּאוֹכְלִין שֶׁכֵּן אוֹכֶל סָרוּחַ מֵעִיקָּרוֹ טָָהוֹר. תֹּאמַר בְּמַשְׁקִין שֶׁכֵּן מַשְׁקֶה סָרוּחַ מֵעִיקָּרוֹ טָמֵא. דָּבָר אַחֵר לֹא אִם אָמְרָת בְּאוֹכְלִין שֶׁכֵּן אוֹכְלִין הַמְּיוּחָדִין לְאָדָם אֵין צְרִיכִין מַחֲשָׁבָה. תֹּאמַר בְּמַשְׁקִין שֶׁכֵּן מַשְׁקִין הַמְּיוּחָדִין לְאָדָם צְרִיכִין מַחֲשָׁבָה. וּמִפְּנֵי שֶׁצְּרִיכִין מַחֲשָׁבָה יְהֵא מַשְׁקֶה סָרוּחַ מֵעִיקָּרוֹ טָמֵא. הוֹאִיל והֵן צְרִיכִין מַחֲשָׁבָה יְהֵא מַשְׁקֶה סָרוּחַ מֵעִיקָּרוֹ טָהוֹר. דָּבָר אַחֵר אָמְרוּ לוֹ לֹא אִם אָמְרָת בְּאוֹכְלִין שֶׁכֵּן אוֹכְלֵי בְהֵמָה לְאָדָם אֵינָן בָּאִין בְּמַחֲשָׁבָה. תֹּאמַר בְּמַשְׁקִין שֶׁכֵּן מַשְׁקֶה בְהֵמָה לְאָדָם בָּאִין בְּמַחֲשָׁבָה. וְתַנֵּי כֵן כָּל מַשְׁקֶה מַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר אֲשֶׁר יִשָּׁתֶה פְּרָט לְמַשְׁקֶה סָרוּחַ דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר. אָמְרוּ לֹו אֵין מַשְקִין יוֹצְאִין לֹא יְדֵי עוֹפוֹת וְלֹא יְדֵי פָרָה.
The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.40Lev. 11:34: “Any food that can be eaten, if water comes upon it it may become impure, and any drink that can be drunk can become impure in any vessel.” For the notion of preparation for impurity based on this and the nearby verses, cf. Note 26.
The argument ascribed here to the rabbis is difficult to understand and is not found in any of the parallel sources; it is not followed up and is superseded later by the documented opinion of the rabbis. The emphasis is only on the arguments of R. Eliezer, to show that R. Eliezer’s position in the Mishnah is not practice, even if R. Eliezer’s position in the Tosephta would be accepted because he is supported by R. Meїr and R. Eliezer ben Jacob. {Maimonides, Hilkhot Ṭum’at Okhlin 2:14, follows R. Eliezer; the interpretation here follows R. Abraham ben David ad loc.}
In Sifra Šemini Parašah 8(1), fruit juices are excluded since the verse speaks only of “water”. It is concluded that only drinks described by a single noun can be meant. Blood is included [loc.cit. 8(4)] since it is compared to water in Ps. 110:7. Fruit juices are excluded since they are called “fruit water”.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included41“A general statement followed by a particular one” is the heading of one of the 13 hermeneutical rules of R. Ismael, listed in the Introduction to Sifra. The detailed description of the rule, that a general statement followed by a particular one applies only to that particular one, is no longer connected with the name of R. Ismael; it represents the opinion of the Sages. For an application, cf. Kilaim Chapter 8, Note 20.
It is asserted here and in Nazir 6:2 that R. Ismael disagrees with the interpretation of the Sages and holds that the particular statement is only an illustration. The concurrence of both mss. here and the one available ms. in Nazir shows that the statement cannot be amended away and that in the Introduction to Sifra, only paragraphs 1 and 2 are attributable to R. Ismael.
In our case, “any drink” is taken as a general statement, “that can be drunk” as a particular one.? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included42This is a theoretical statement, not of relevance here, since the particular is not followed by a second general statement. However, it opens a window for a possible study of the development of the hermeneutical rules.. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea43He is mentioned only here. Greek παρήγορος “comforting”, a sobriquet for Menaḥem; cf. E. and H. Guggenheimer, Jewish Family Names and their Origins (Hoboken, NJ, 1992; Etymologisches Lexikon der jüdischen Familiennamen, München 1996), entry Perigord.: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food44Sifra Šemini Pereq 9(1). Since spoiled food is no longer food, it is not subject to the impurity of food., so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start45The expression is unclear since foodstuffs spoiled when coming into being never were food and, therefore, never subject to impurity of food., what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure46This argument refers to the quote from Sifra, Note 50, that water is subject to impurity as long as it is acceptable to animals and birds.? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about47Mishnah Uqeẓin 3:1: “All that is exclusively human food needs preparation [for impurity] but no thought.” Once prepared for impurity it automatically is ready to accept impurity. Tosephta Ṭevul Yom 1:5: “Foodstuffs [in certain aspects] have more restrictive rules than drinks, and drinks [in certain aspects] have more restrictive rules than foodstuffs. Food may have handles [the peduncles of apples, pears, etc. become impure with the fruit], they do not need thought to be food.” Any fluid other than water is a “drink” only if made for human consumption.? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure48Since nobody will want them as human drink.! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought49This refers to vetch which is human food only in times of famine and, according to R. Jehudah in Tosephta Uqeẓin 3:13, and the Sages in Mishnah Ḥallah 4:10, is treated as standard food if prepared as such. This means that vetch becomes human food only by a combination of intent and action, never by intent alone, in contrast to drinks., what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus50Sifra Šemini Parašah 8(4).: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.
The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.40Lev. 11:34: “Any food that can be eaten, if water comes upon it it may become impure, and any drink that can be drunk can become impure in any vessel.” For the notion of preparation for impurity based on this and the nearby verses, cf. Note 26.
The argument ascribed here to the rabbis is difficult to understand and is not found in any of the parallel sources; it is not followed up and is superseded later by the documented opinion of the rabbis. The emphasis is only on the arguments of R. Eliezer, to show that R. Eliezer’s position in the Mishnah is not practice, even if R. Eliezer’s position in the Tosephta would be accepted because he is supported by R. Meїr and R. Eliezer ben Jacob. {Maimonides, Hilkhot Ṭum’at Okhlin 2:14, follows R. Eliezer; the interpretation here follows R. Abraham ben David ad loc.}
In Sifra Šemini Parašah 8(1), fruit juices are excluded since the verse speaks only of “water”. It is concluded that only drinks described by a single noun can be meant. Blood is included [loc.cit. 8(4)] since it is compared to water in Ps. 110:7. Fruit juices are excluded since they are called “fruit water”.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included41“A general statement followed by a particular one” is the heading of one of the 13 hermeneutical rules of R. Ismael, listed in the Introduction to Sifra. The detailed description of the rule, that a general statement followed by a particular one applies only to that particular one, is no longer connected with the name of R. Ismael; it represents the opinion of the Sages. For an application, cf. Kilaim Chapter 8, Note 20.
It is asserted here and in Nazir 6:2 that R. Ismael disagrees with the interpretation of the Sages and holds that the particular statement is only an illustration. The concurrence of both mss. here and the one available ms. in Nazir shows that the statement cannot be amended away and that in the Introduction to Sifra, only paragraphs 1 and 2 are attributable to R. Ismael.
In our case, “any drink” is taken as a general statement, “that can be drunk” as a particular one.? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included42This is a theoretical statement, not of relevance here, since the particular is not followed by a second general statement. However, it opens a window for a possible study of the development of the hermeneutical rules.. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea43He is mentioned only here. Greek παρήγορος “comforting”, a sobriquet for Menaḥem; cf. E. and H. Guggenheimer, Jewish Family Names and their Origins (Hoboken, NJ, 1992; Etymologisches Lexikon der jüdischen Familiennamen, München 1996), entry Perigord.: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food44Sifra Šemini Pereq 9(1). Since spoiled food is no longer food, it is not subject to the impurity of food., so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start45The expression is unclear since foodstuffs spoiled when coming into being never were food and, therefore, never subject to impurity of food., what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure46This argument refers to the quote from Sifra, Note 50, that water is subject to impurity as long as it is acceptable to animals and birds.? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about47Mishnah Uqeẓin 3:1: “All that is exclusively human food needs preparation [for impurity] but no thought.” Once prepared for impurity it automatically is ready to accept impurity. Tosephta Ṭevul Yom 1:5: “Foodstuffs [in certain aspects] have more restrictive rules than drinks, and drinks [in certain aspects] have more restrictive rules than foodstuffs. Food may have handles [the peduncles of apples, pears, etc. become impure with the fruit], they do not need thought to be food.” Any fluid other than water is a “drink” only if made for human consumption.? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure48Since nobody will want them as human drink.! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought49This refers to vetch which is human food only in times of famine and, according to R. Jehudah in Tosephta Uqeẓin 3:13, and the Sages in Mishnah Ḥallah 4:10, is treated as standard food if prepared as such. This means that vetch becomes human food only by a combination of intent and action, never by intent alone, in contrast to drinks., what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus50Sifra Šemini Parašah 8(4).: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.
חֲבֵרַיָיא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר מוֹדֶה רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר לַחֲכָמִים בְּמַשְׁקֶה סָרוּחַ מֵעִיקָּרוֹ שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא. וְהָתַנִּינָן הַמּוֹהֵל הַיּוֹצֵא מֵהֶן רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מְטָהֵר וַחֲכָמִים מְטַמְּאִין. רִבִּי אִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר מוֹדֶה רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר לַחֲכָמִים בְּמֵי יַם הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁאֲפִילוּ הֵן סְרוּחִין הַתּוֹרָה קָרָא אוֹתָן מַיִם. וּלְמִקְוֵה הַמַּיִם קָרָא יַמִּים. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר זַבְדִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ מוֹדֵי רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר לַחֲכָמִים בְּמֵי תַּרְדִּין וּבְמֵי שְׂלָקוֹת שֶׁאֵינָן מַכְשִׁירִין.
The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Rebbi Eliezer agrees with the Sages that if a drink is stinking from the start it is impure. But did we not state51Mishnah Ṭahorot 9:3, speaking of the sap of olives which is not oil but fruit juice. Even though it does not smell badly, it is useless and we see that R. Eliezer declares useless fruit sap to be impure.
In the Mishnah, R. Simeon disagrees with the anonymous Tanna and holds that R. Eliezer declares olive sap pure. Since the Yerushalmi lacks this statement, it seems to reject the statements of R. Simeon and the colleagues.: “The fluid oozing out from them Rebbi Eliezer declares pure but the Sages impure”? Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Rebbi Eliezer agrees with the Sages about the waters of the ocean; even if they are stinking the Torah calls them water (Gen. 1:10): “The collection of water He called oceans.” Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Rebbi Eliezer agrees with the Sages that beet juice52תרד (Hebrew) and שׂלק (Arabic) are the same; cf. Kilaim Chapter 1, Note 64. does not prepare.
The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Rebbi Eliezer agrees with the Sages that if a drink is stinking from the start it is impure. But did we not state51Mishnah Ṭahorot 9:3, speaking of the sap of olives which is not oil but fruit juice. Even though it does not smell badly, it is useless and we see that R. Eliezer declares useless fruit sap to be impure.
In the Mishnah, R. Simeon disagrees with the anonymous Tanna and holds that R. Eliezer declares olive sap pure. Since the Yerushalmi lacks this statement, it seems to reject the statements of R. Simeon and the colleagues.: “The fluid oozing out from them Rebbi Eliezer declares pure but the Sages impure”? Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Rebbi Eliezer agrees with the Sages about the waters of the ocean; even if they are stinking the Torah calls them water (Gen. 1:10): “The collection of water He called oceans.” Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Rebbi Eliezer agrees with the Sages that beet juice52תרד (Hebrew) and שׂלק (Arabic) are the same; cf. Kilaim Chapter 1, Note 64. does not prepare.
רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי אִם יֹאמַר לָךְ אָדָם שְׁמוֹנָה מַשְׁקִין הֵן אֱמוֹר לֹו הֲרֵי טַל וּמַיִם מִין אֶחָד הֵן וּמָנוּ אוֹתָן חֲכָמִים שְׁנַיִם. אִילּוּ הֲוָה לָון חוֹרָן לֹא מְנוּנֵיהּ וְאִין הֲוָה חוֹרָן לֹא הֲוָה מְנוּנֵיהּ.
Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai: If somebody would say to you there are eight drinks53The seven drinks which prepare for impurity (Note 26) and fruit juice., tell him, are not dew and water the same? But they counted them as two! If we had another54Fruit juice, known to us from the controversy of R. Eliezer and the Sages., would they not have counted it? If another did exist55Unknown to us., would they not have counted it?
Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai: If somebody would say to you there are eight drinks53The seven drinks which prepare for impurity (Note 26) and fruit juice., tell him, are not dew and water the same? But they counted them as two! If we had another54Fruit juice, known to us from the controversy of R. Eliezer and the Sages., would they not have counted it? If another did exist55Unknown to us., would they not have counted it?