Jerusalem Talmud Sotah 3.6

משנה: נִטְמֵאת מִנְחָתָהּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא קָדְשָׁה בַכֶּלִי הֲרֵי הִיא כְּכָל הַמְּנָחוֹת וְתִיפָּדֶה. וְאִם מִשֶּׁקָּדְשָׁה בַכֶּלִי הֲרֵי הִיא כְּכָל הַמְּנָחוֹת וְתִישָּׂרֵף. וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁמִּנְחוֹתֵיהֶן נִשְׂרָפוֹת הָאוֹמֶרֶת טְמֵיאָה אֲנִי לָךְ וְשֶׁבָּאוּ לָהּ עֵדִים שֶׁהִיא טְמֵיאָה וְהָאוֹמֶרֶת אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה וְשֶׁבַּעֲלָהּ אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ וְשֶׁבַּעֲלָהּ בָּא עָלֶיהָ בַדֶּרֶךְ. וְכָל הַנְּשׂוּאוֹת לַכֹּהֲנִים מִנְחוֹתֵיהֶן נִשְׂרָפוֹת.

MISHNAH: If her flour offering became impure before it was sanctified in a Temple vessel, it is treated like all other flour offerings and should be redeemed. After it was sanctified in a Temple vessel, it is treated like all other flour offerings and should be burned. The flour offerings are burned in the following cases: One who says, I am impure for you, or that witnesses declared that she was impure; one who refuses to drink, or whose husband does not want to let her drink, or whose husband slept with her on the road. In addition, the flour offerings of women married to Cohanim are burned.

הלכה: נִטְמֵאת מִנְחָתָהּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא קָדְשָׁה בַכֶּלִי כול׳. תַּנֵּי. נִיטְמֵאת מִנְחָתָהּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא קָדְשָׁה בַכֶּלִי. הֲרֵי הִיא כְּכָל הַמְּנָחוֹת וְתִיפָּדֶה. מִשֶּׁקָּדְשָׁה בַכֶּלִי. הֲרֵי הִיא כְּכָל הַמְּנָחוֹת וְתִישָּׂרֵף.

HALAKHAH: “If her flour offering became impure before it was sanctified in a Temple vessel,” etc. It was stated: If her flour offering became impure before it was sanctified in a Temple vessel, it is treated like all other flour offerings and should be redeemed; after it was sanctified in a Temple vessel, it is treated like all other flour offerings and should be burned.

וְהָאוֹמֶרֶת. טְמֵיאָה אֲנִי. לֹא כְחַטָּאת שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְּעָלֵיהָ הִיא. וְחַטָּאת שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְּעָלֵיהָ יֵלְכוּ הַמָּעוֹת לְיַם הַמֶּלַח. דַּמְיָיא לְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אִם לְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אֲפִילוּ מִשֶּׁקָדְשָׁה בַכֶּלִי. אָמַר רִבִּי מַתַּנְיָיה. דַּמְיָא לְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי שֶׁנִּשְׁחַט. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. אִם מִשֶּׁנִּשְׁחַט נוֹדַע לוֹ. הַדָּם יִשָּׁפֵךְ וְהַבָּשָׂר יֵצֵא לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵיפָה.

“One who says, I am impure” Is it not like a purification offering whose owners died? And for a purification offering whose owners died, the money should be thrown into the Dead Sea. It is compared to a hung reparation offering. If it is compared to a hung reparation offering, even if it was sanctified in a Temple vessel! Rebbi Mattaniah said, it is compared to a hung reparation offering that was slaughtered, as we stated there: “If it became clear to him after it was slaughtered, the blood has to be poured out and the meat has to be taken out to the burning place.”

תַּנֵּי. נִיטְמֵאת מִנְחָתָהּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא קָרֵב הַקּוֹמֶץ. מֵתָה הִיא וּמֵת בַּעֲלָהּ. הַשְּׁיֵּרִיים אֲסוּרִין שֶׁעַל סָפֵק בָּאת מִתְּחִילָּתָהּ. כִּיפְּרָה סְפֵיקָהּ וְהָלְכָה לָהּ. בָּאוּ לָהּ עֵדִים שֶׁהִיא טְמֵיאָה. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ מִנְחָתָהּ אֲסוּרָה. מַהוּ בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ. בֵּין שֶׁקָּמַץ וּבֵין שֶׁלֹּא קָמַץ. בֵּין שֶׁהִקְטִיר וּבֵין שֶׁלֹּא הִקְטִיר. רִבִּי אִילָּא אָמִר. בֵּין שֶׁקָּמַץ וּבֵין שֶׁלֹּא קָמַץ בְּשֶלֹּא הִקְטִיר. אֲבָל אִם הִקְטִיר הַשְּׁיֵּרִיים מוּתָּרִין.

It was stated: If her offering became impure before the fistful was sacrificed; if she died or her husband died, the rest is forbidden because it was brought from the start to resolve a doubt. Her doubt was atoned for and went away. If there came witnesses declaring that she was impure, in any case her offering is forbidden. What means “in any case”? Whether the fistful was taken or not, whether it was sacrificed or not. Rebbi Hila said, whether the fistful was taken or not as long as it was not sacrificed, but if it was sacrificed the rest is permitted.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. מִנְחַת חוֹטֵא שֶׁלַּכֹּהֲנִים נִקְמֶצֶת. וְהַקּוֹמֶץ קָרֵב לְעַצְמוֹ וְהַשְּׁיֵרִיים קְרֵיבִין לְעַצְמָן. וּשְׁנֵיהֶן מִקְרָא אֶחָד דּוֹרְשִׁין. וְהָיְתָה לַכֹּהֵן כַּמִּנְחָה. רַבָּנִין אָמְרִין. הֲרֵי הִיא כְמִנְחַת נִדְבָתוֹ. מַה מִנְחַת נִדְבָתוֹ קְרֵיבָה בְבָלוּל. אַף זוֹ קְרֵיבָה בְבָלוּל. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. הֲרֵי עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה שֶׁלַּכֹּהֵן כַּעֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה שֶׁלַּיִּשְׂרָאֵל. מַה עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה שֶׁלַּיִּשְׂרָאֵל נִקְמֶצֶת אַף זוֹ נִקְמֶצֶת. אִי מַה זוֹ נֶאֱכֶלֶת אַף זוֹ נֶאֱכֶלֶת. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְכָל מִנְחַת כֹּהֵן כָּלִיל תִהְיֶה לֹא תֵאָכֵל. אִילֵּין שְׁיֵרִיים מִשֵּׁם מַה הֵן בָּאִין. מִשֵּׁם קוֹמֶץ מִשֵּׁם שְׁיֵרִיים. אִין תֵּימַר. מְשׁוּם קוֹמֶץ. אֵינוֹ נוֹתְנָן בַּלַּיְלָה וְאֵינוֹ נוֹתְנָן לְאַחַר מִיתָה וְאֵינוֹ מְחַשֵּׁב לָהֶן. וְאִין תֵּימַר. מִשּׁוּם שְׁיֵרִיים. נוֹתְנָן בַּלַּיְלָה וְנוֹתְנָן לָאַחַר מִיתָה. מַהוּ שֶׁיְּחַשֵׁב לָהֶם. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר. הַקּוֹמֶץ קָרֵב לְעַצְמוֹ וְהַשְּׁיֵרִיים מִתְפַּזְּרִין עַל גַּבֵּי הַדֶּשֶׁן. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בָּעֵי. מַה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּדֶשֶׁן שֶׁלְּמַעֲלָן. כְּבַר אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. אֶלָּא אִם אֵינוֹ עִנְיָין לְדֶשֶׁן שֶׁלְּמַעֲלָן תְּנֵיהוּ עִנְיָין לְדֶשֶׁן שֶׁלְּמַטָּן. הָדָא אָמְרָה. נוֹתְנָם בַּלַּיְלָה וְנוֹתְנָן לְאַחַר מִיתָה וּמְחַשֵׁב לָהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. אֵינוֹ מְחַשֵׁב לָהֶן. שֶׁלֹּא הוּכְשְׁרוּ לֹא לָאֲכִילַת אָדָם וְלֹא לָאֲכִילַת מִזְבֵּחַ. רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל בָּעֵי. הַךְ רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֵּירִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּשִׁיטַּת אָבִיו אוֹ בְשִׁיטַּת חֲכָמִים. אִין בְּשִׁיטַּת אָבִיו. יִקָּרֵב לְמַעֲלָן. אִין בְּשִׁיטַּת חֲכָמִים. לֹא יִקְמוֹץ. בְּשִׁיטַּת אָבִיו הוּא. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. הֲרֵי עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה שֶׁלַּכֹּהֵן כַּעֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה שֶׁלַּיִּשְׂרָאֵל. מַה עֲשִׂירִית הָאֵיפָה שֶׁלַּיִּשְׂרָאֵל נִקְמֶצֶת אַף זוֹ נִקְמֶצֶת. אִי מַה זוֹ נֶאֱכֶלֶת אַף זוֹ נֶאֱכֶלֶת. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְכָל מִנְחַת כֹּהֵן כָּלִיל תִהְיֶה לֹא תֵאָכֵל. וּתְהֵא כָלִיל. וְלֹא תֵאָכֵל הִיקְשִׁתֵיהּ. לֹא הִקְשִׁתֵיהּ לְכָלִיל תָּקְטָר.

We have stated there: “Rebbi Simeon says, a fistful is taken from the sinner’s flour offering of a Cohen. The fistful is sacrificed separately and the rest is sacrificed separately.” Both of them explained the same verse: “It shall be the Cohen’s as a flour offering.” The rabbis say, it is like his voluntary flour offering. Since his voluntary flour offering is brought entire, that one also is brought entire. Rebbi Simeon says, the tenth of an epha of a Cohen is like the tenth of an epha of an Israel. Since a fistful is taken from the tenth of an epha of an Israel, so a fistful is taken from the tenth of an epha of a Cohen. Maybe, since this one is eaten, the other is also eaten? The verse says, “Any flour offering of a Cohen shall be totally burned; it shall not be eaten.” The rest, under which category is it brought, under the rules of a fistful or under the rules of remainders? If you want to say, under the rules of a fistful, one cannot bring them during the night, one cannot bring them after death, and he is forbidden to think about them. If you want to say, under the rules of a remainder, one can bring them during the night, one can bring them after death. Is he forbidden to think about them? Let us hear from the following: Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon says, the fistful is sacrificed separately and the rest dispersed over the ashes. Rebbi Joḥanan asked, where are we holding? If the upper ashes, Rebbi Simeon already said it. If it cannot refer to the upper ashes, let it refer to the lower ashes. That means, one can bring them during the night, one can bring them after death, and he can think about them. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, he is forbidden to think about them since they are not qualified as food either for humans or for the altar. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal asked: Does Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon follow the rules of his father or the rules of the rabbis? According to the rules of his father, it should be brought on top [of the altar]. According to the rules of the rabbis, why should he take a fistful? He follows his father’s rules. Rebbi Simeon says, the tenth of an epha of a Cohen is like the tenth of an epha of an Israel. Since a fistful is taken from the tenth of an epha of an Israel, so a fistful is taken from the tenth of an epha of a Cohen. Maybe, since this one is eaten, the other is also eaten? The verse says, “Any flour offering of a Cohen shall be totally burned; it shall not be eaten.” Then it should be burned totally! You bound it to “it shall not be eaten”; you did not bind it to “it has to be sacrificed in its entirety.”

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. רָאָה רִבִּי דַעֲתּוֹ שֶׁלְרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֵּירִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן וְשָׁנָה כְיוֹצֵא בוֹ. רִבִּי בָא בַּר כֹּהֵן בָּעֵי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְלָמָּה לִי כְרִבִּי לְעָזָר בֵּירִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. אֲפִילוּ כְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אָבִיו. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אִיכּוּל בְּרֹאשׁ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. וְאֵין שְׂרֵיפָה בְרֹאשׁ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. הָתִיב רִבִּי חֲנִינָה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. וְהָא תַנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה וּפְלִיג. לִיקָּרֵב כָּלִיל אֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה מִפְּנֵי שׁוּתָפוּתָהּ שֶׁלָּאִשָּׁה. לְהֵיאָכֵל אֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה מִפְּנֵי שׁוּתָפוּתוֹ שֶׁל אִישׁ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. רִבִּי רָאָה דַעְתּוֹ שֶׁלְרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֵּירִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. וְרִבִּי חִיָיה רוֹבָה רָאָה דַעְתּוֹ שֶׁלְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אָבִיו.

Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi accepted the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon and taught accordingly. Rebbi Abba bar Cohen asked before Rebbi Yose: Why Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Even following his father, Rebbi Simeon! He said to him, “eating” is on the altar, “burning” is not on the altar. Rebbi Ḥanina objected before Rebbi Mana: Did not Rebbi Ḥiyya disagree: “It cannot be burned completely because of the wife’s part; it cannot be eaten because of the husband’s part.” He said to him, Rebbi accepted the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon, the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya accepted the opinion of the latter’s father Rebbi Simeon.