Study Kiddushin folio 66B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
From where do I say my claim that one does not rely on a lone witness in matters of forbidden sex? As we learned in a baraita: R' Shimon said: An incident occurred with regard to a water reservoir of Diskim in Yavne, which had the presumptive status of being complete, i.e., they thought it containe
With regard to all immersions of ritual purification performed in the reservoir before it was measured, R' Tarfon would render them ritually pure, and R' Akiva would render them ritually impure. The two rabbis discussed the matter. R' Tarfon said: This mikveh retained the presumptive status of bein
R' Tarfon said in response: There is a parable that illustrates this. A priest was standing and sacrificing offerings on the altar, and it became known that he is the son of a divorced woman or the son of a ḥalutza. The halakha is that his earlier service before this discovery remains valid. R' Aki
R' Tarfon said: You compared the case of a mikveh found to be deficient to that of a blemished priest, whereas I compared it to the case of the son of a divorced woman or the son of a ḥalutza. Let us see to which case it is similar. If this case is similar to that of the son of a divorced woman or t
R' Akiva began to analyze the matter: The disqualification of a mikveh is by the testimony of an individual, as witnesses are not required to establish that a mikveh is deficient, and likewise the disqualification of a blemished priest with regard to performing the Temple service is by the testimon