כל הטעון ביאת מים מדברי סופרים מטמא את הקדש ופוסל את התרומה ומותר בחולין ובמעשר דברי ר"מ
With regard to anything that by rabbinic law requires entry into water, i.e., either immersion or ritual washing of the hands, although it is pure by Torah law, it is accorded second-degree impurity. Therefore, such an item renders sacrificial food impure, meaning that the sacrificial food becomes impure and transmits impurity to other sacrificial food, and disqualifies teruma, meaning that it renders the teruma itself impure, but not to the extent that the teruma can render other teruma impure. And it is permitted for non-sacred food and for second-tithe produce to come in contact with such an item, and no impurity is thereby transmitted. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir.
וחכמים אוסרים במעשר
And the Rabbis prohibit items that require entry into water from coming in contact with second-tithe produce, as they hold that the produce is thereby rendered impure. According to the Rabbis, the status of second-tithe produce is more stringent than that of non-sacred food, and second-tithe produce assumes third-degree impurity upon contact with an item of second-degree impurity, which is in accordance with the opinion of the mishna.
מתקיף לה רב שימי בר אשי ממאי דלמא עד כאן לא פליגי רבנן עליה דרבי מאיר אלא באכילת מעשר אבל בנגיעה דמעשר ואכילה דחולין לא פליגי
Rav Shimi bar Ashi objects to this interpretation of that mishna. From where is it clear that it is contact that the Rabbis prohibit? Perhaps the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi Meir only with regard to a person with second-degree impurity partaking of second-tithe produce. But with regard to contact of an individual with second-degree impurity with second-tithe produce or his eating non-sacred food, they do not disagree.
והא נגיעה היא מדקתני נאכלין בידים מסואבות מי לא עסקינן דקא ספי ליה חבריה
And this case in the mishna is a case involving contact with the flesh of the slaughtered animal, from the fact that it teaches: They may be eaten with ritually impure hands, in the passive form, and not: One may eat them with impure hands. Are we not dealing with a case where another with impure hands fed him, but the one eating it was ritually pure and did not touch it? Therefore, the case in the mishna here, which indicates that it is forbidden for one with impure hands to touch the flesh if it has come in contact with the blood, cannot be referring to an animal purchased in Jerusalem with second-tithe money. The reason is that in that case, the Rabbis concede that contact with second-tithe produce, even produce rendered susceptible to ritual impurity by the blood, is permitted for one whose hands are impure with second-degree ritual impurity.
אלא אמר רב פפא הכא בידים תחלות עסקינן ורבי שמעון בן אלעזר היא דתניא אין ידים תחלות לחולין רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר משום רבי מאיר ידים תחלות לחולין ושניות לתרומה
Rather Rav Pappa said: Here, in the mishna, we are dealing with hands that are impure with first-degree ritual impurity, which render even non-sacred food impure. And the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, as it is taught in a baraita: In those cases where hands have first-degree impurity, it is not that they render non-sacred food impure; rather, it means that they impart to teruma and sacrificial food second-degree impurity rather than third-degree impurity. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says in the name of Rabbi Meir: In those cases where hands have first-degree impurity, it means that they render non-sacred food impure. And in those cases where hands have second-degree impurity it means that they invalidate teruma and impart to it third-degree impurity.
תחלות לחולין אין לתרומה לא הכי קאמר תחלות אף לחולין שניות לתרומה אין לחולין לא
The Gemara asks: Did Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar say that in those cases where hands have first-degree impurity, with regard to non-sacred food, yes, they render it impure, but with regard to teruma, hands do not render it impure? The Gemara answers: This is what Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar is saying: In those cases where hands have first-degree impurity, it means that they render even non-sacred food impure, and all the more so they render teruma impure. But in those cases where hands have second-degree impurity, it means that with regard to teruma, yes, the hands invalidate teruma and impart third-degree impurity, but with regard to non-sacred food, hands do not render it impure.
ומי איכא ידים תחלות אין דתניא הכניס ידיו לבית המנוגע ידיו תחלות דברי רבי עקיבא וחכמים אומרים ידיו שניות
The Gemara asks: And are there cases where hands assume first-degree impurity? The Gemara answers: Yes, as it is taught in a mishna (Yadayim 3:1): If one inserts his hands into a leprous house (see Leviticus 14:33–53) his hands assume first-degree impurity as though his entire body entered the house; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. And the Rabbis say: His hands assume second-degree impurity.
דכולי עלמא ביאה במקצת לא שמה ביאה והכא בגזירה ידיו אטו גופו קא מיפלגי
The Gemara elaborates: Everyone agrees that in principle, partial entry into a leprous house is not characterized as entry in terms of rendering one who enters impure. Therefore, one who inserted his hands into the house is not impure by Torah law. And here, it is with regard to a rabbinic decree that renders his hands impure that they disagree: The Sages issued a decree that if one inserted his hands into a leprous house, his hands are impure due to the impurity by Torah law that one assumes when he enters the house with his entire body. The objective of the decree is to prevent him from entering the leprous house.
מר סבר ידיו כגופו שוינהו רבנן ומר סבר ידים כידים דעלמא שוינהו רבנן
One Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that when the Sages issued the decree they determined that the status of his hands inserted into the house is like the status of his body that enters the house, first-degree impurity. And one Sage, the Rabbis, holds that the Sages rendered the status of hands inserted into the house like the status of hands in general, with regard to which they issued a decree of second-degree impurity, even if they had been washed.
ולוקמה כרבי עקיבא דאמר ידיו תחלות הויין דלמא כי קאמר רבי עקיבא הני מילי בתרומה וקדשים דחמירי אבל לחולין שניות הויין
The Gemara asks: And why did Rav Pappa interpret the mishna in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar? Let Rav Pappa interpret the mishna in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, who says: If one inserts his hands into a leprous house, his hands assume first-degree impurity. The Gemara answers: Perhaps when Rabbi Akiva says that one’s hands assume first-degree impurity, that statement applies only in cases of teruma and sacrificial food, which are stringent. But with regard to non-sacred food, perhaps hands are impure only with second-degree impurity.
וליהויין נמי שניות דהא שמעינן ליה לר"ע דאמר שני עושה שלישי בחולין
The Gemara objects: And let hands also be impure only with second-degree impurity and the mishna could still be in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. As we heard that Rabbi Akiva says: An item of second-degree impurity imparts third-degree impurity to non-sacred items.
דתנן בו ביום דרש רבי עקיבא (ויקרא יא, לג) וכל כלי חרש וגו' יטמא טמא לא נאמר אלא יטמא לטמא אחרים לימד על ככר שני שהוא עושה שלישי בחולין
As we learned in a mishna (Sota 27b): On that day, when Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya was appointed Nasi in Yavne, Rabbi Akiva taught: “And every earthenware vessel into which any of them falls, whatever is in it shall be impure, and you shall break it” (Leviticus 11:33). With regard to the item rendered impure in the vessel, it is not stated: It is impure [tameh]; rather, the term “it shall be impure [yitma]” is stated, indicating that the item has the capacity to transmit impurity to other items. This verse teaches about a loaf with second-degree impurity that had been rendered impure in the airspace of an earthenware vessel in which there was a creeping animal, that through contact it renders non-sacred food impure with third-degree ritual impurity.
דלמא הני מילי בטומאה דאורייתא אבל בדרבנן לא
The Gemara explains: Perhaps this statement, that non-sacred food becomes impure with third-degree ritual impurity, applies only with regard to impurity by Torah law, e.g., a creeping animal; but with regard to impurity by rabbinic law, e.g., impurity of hands, that is not the halakha.
אמר ר"א א"ר הושעיא הכא בחולין שנעשו על טהרת הקדש עסקינן ודלא כרבי יהושע דתניא רבי אליעזר אומר האוכל אוכל ראשון ראשון שני שני שלישי שלישי
Rabbi Elazar said that Rabbi Hoshaya said a third explanation of the mishna: Here we are dealing with a case of non-sacred food items that were prepared on the level of purity of sacrificial food. And the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, as it is taught in a mishna (Teharot 2:2): Rabbi Eliezer says: One who eats food with first-degree ritual impurity assumes first-degree impurity. One who eats food with second-degree ritual impurity assumes second-degree impurity. One who eats food with third-degree impurity assumes third-degree impurity.
רבי יהושע אומר האוכל אוכל ראשון ושני שני שלישי שני לקדש ואין שני לתרומה
The mishna continues: Rabbi Yehoshua says: One who eats food with first-degree or second-degree impurity assumes second-degree impurity. One with second-degree impurity who comes into contact with teruma disqualifies it, but does not render it impure. One who eats food with third-degree impurity assumes second-degree impurity vis-à-vis sacrificial food, i.e., his contact with sacrificial food renders it impure with the capacity to transmit impurity to other sacrificial food, but does not assume second-degree impurity vis-à-vis teruma, and his contact with teruma does not disqualify it.
בחולין שנעשו על טהרת תרומה
Eating an item that has third-degree impurity is feasible only in the case of non-sacred food, as partaking of impure teruma or sacrificial food is prohibited. Generic non-sacred food cannot contract third-degree impurity at all. Therefore, the case of one who eats food that has third-degree impurity is referring specifically to non-sacred food items that were prepared on the level of purity of teruma.
על טהרת תרומה אין על טהרת הקדש לא קסבר חולין שנעשו על טהרת הקדש לית בהו שלישי
The Gemara infers from Rabbi Yehoshua’s statement that if one prepares items as if their level of purity were on the level of purity of teruma, then yes, they have the status like teruma, but if one prepares items as if their level of purity were on the level of purity of sacrificial food, they do not have the status like sacrificial food, and such items would not contract third-degree impurity. This indicates that Rabbi Yehoshua holds that non-sacred food items that were prepared on the level of purity of sacrificial food do not assume third-degree impurity.
The Gemara objects: Let us interpret the mishna