Study Sotah folio 30A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
whose third-degree impurity came from contact with an item of second-degree impurity, in which case the item with the second-degree impurity is itself forbidden, i.e. impure, even if it is non-sacred food, isn’t it logical to infer that it should be able to impart 4th-degree impurity upon sacrifici
And if you would say that the reason R' Yosei did not employ this a fortiori inference is because it can be refuted as follows: What is unique about one who immersed that day is that prior to his immersion he was a primary source of impurity, this cannot be, as R' Yosei brought proof for the existe
§ R' Asi said that Rav said, and some say Rabba ben Isi said that Rav said: R' Meir, and R' Yosei, and R' Yehoshua, and R' Elazar, and R' Eliezer all hold that an item of second-degree ritual impurity status cannot impart third-degree ritual impurity status to non-sacred items. Rav proceeds to prov
R' Meir is of this opinion, as we learned in a Mishnah (Para 11:5): Anything that requires immersion in water by rabbinic law renders sacrificial food impure upon contact, with second-degree impurity, and disqualifies teruma, meaning that it renders the teruma itself impure, but not to the extent t
It is evident that R' Yosei is of this opinion from that which we have stated above, that he derives that sacrificial food can contract 4th-degree impurity, because if he holds that non-sacred items can contract third-degree impurity, he should have derived through his a fortiori inference that ther