Study Pesachim folio 20B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
תלמוד לומר: ״כל אשר בתוכו יטמא״, וסמיך ליה: ״מכל האכל״. אוכל מטמא מאויר כלי חרס, ואין כל הכלים מטמאין מאויר כלי חרס.
Therefore, the verse states with regard to creeping animals: “And every earthenware vessel into which any of them falls, whatever is in it should be impure, and you should break it” (Leviticus 11:33). And juxtaposed to it is the verse: “From all food in it which may be eaten, upon which water comes, should be impure” (Leviticus 11:34). This indicates that food is rendered impure by the airspace of an earthenware vessel, but not all vessels are rendered impure by the airspace of an earthenware vessel. This baraita proves that the earthenware vessel itself is not considered to be filled with carcasses of creeping animals, and therefore it does not render everything inside it impure with 1st-degree impurity. Were the earthenware vessel indeed considered as if it were filled with impurity, vessels inside it would also assume 1st-degree ritual impurity.
רב חסדא רמי פיסחא אפיסחא ומשני: מי אמר רבי יהושע שתיהן כאחת?
Rav Ḥisda raised a contradiction between one statement with regard to Passover and another statement with regard to Passover, and he resolved this contradiction himself. The Talmud elaborates: Did R' Yehoshua actually say that both of them may be burned as one, teruma whose purity is uncertain, and definitely impure teruma, on Passover eve?
ורמינהו, אמר רבי יוסי: אין הנדון דומה לראיה, כשהעידו רבותינו — על מה העידו? אם על הבשר שנטמא בולד הטומאה ששורפין אותו עם הבשר שנטמא באב הטומאה — זה טמא וזה טמא.
And he raised a contradiction from the Tosefta, as R' Yosei said: The inferred conclusion of burning pure and impure leaven together is not similar to the case from which you cited proof. When R' Meir said that the rabbis, R' Ḥanina the deputy High Priest and R' Akiva, testified, about what did they testify? If you assert that R' Meir said with regard to meat that became ritually impure through contact with a secondary source of impurity, that one may burn it together with meat that became impure through contact with a primary source of impurity, that is a case where both this meat is impure and that meat is impure, albeit not at the same level of impurity.