Yoma 80bיומא פ׳ ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Yoma 80b"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
80bפ׳ ב

כי אתשיל בעוג מלך הבשן אתשיל דהוו ליה בית שמאי לחומרא

When this question with regard to the measure of liquid was asked, it was not asked about an average-sized person, for whom a mouthful is smaller than a quarter-log. Rather, the question was asked even about Og, king of Bashan, in which case, it is Beit Shammai who are stringent, for Og’s cheekful is much more than a quarter-log.

מתקיף לה ר' זירא מ"ש אכילה דכל חד וחד בככותבת ומ"ש שתיה דכל חד וחד בדידיה א"ל אביי קים להו לרבנן בככותבת דבהכי מיתבא דעתיה בציר מהכי לא מיתבא בשתיה בדידיה מיתבא דעתיה בדחבריה לא מיתבא דעתיה

Rabbi Zeira strongly objects to this halakha with regard to the measure for liability for drinking: What is different with regard to eating, in that all people have the same measure, the volume of a large date; and what is different with regard to drinking, where each and every person is liable according to his own measure, i.e., every individual’s measure depends on the size of his own mouth? Abaye said to him: The Sages have an accepted tradition with regard to the volume of the large date, that eating this amount settles his mind, but less than this amount does not settle his mind. However, with regard to drinking, his mind is settled with the amount of his own cheekful, but his mind is not settled with the cheekful of his fellow who is smaller than him.

מתקיף לה רבי זירא וכל העולם כולו בככותבת ועוג מלך הבשן בככותבת א"ל אביי קים להו לרבנן דבהכי מיתבא דעתיה בציר מהכי לא מיתבא דעתיה מיהו כולי עלמא טובא ועוג מלך הבשן פורתא

Rabbi Zeira strongly objects to this for a different reason: Is everyone of average size satisfied with eating the volume of a large date, and even Og, king of Bashan, is also satisfied with the volume of a large date? If not, there should also be relative measures for eating. Abaye said to him: The Sages have an accepted tradition that this amount settles his mind, but less than this amount does not settle his mind. However, everyone of average size has his mind greatly settled, whereas Og, king of Bashan, has his mind only a little settled. But even so, this measure settles the mind of any person and relieves his affliction.

מתקיף לה רבי זירא בשר שמן בככותבת ולולבי גפנים בככותבת א"ל אביי קים להו לרבנן דבהכי מיתבא דעתיה בציר מהכי לא מיתבא דעתיה מיהו בשר שמן טובא לולבי גפנים פורתא

Rabbi Zeira strongly objects to this further: If it is on account of settling one’s mind, the following question can be raised: If one ate fatty meat, his mind would be settled with the volume of a large date, but if he ate edible grapevine shoots, would his mind similarly settled with the volume of a large date? Abaye said to him: The Sages have an accepted tradition that with this measure one’s mind is settled, but with less than measure his mind is not settled. However, with fatty meat, his mind is greatly settled; if one ate the same measure of grapevine shoots, his mind is only a little settled.

מתקיף לה רבא כזית בכדי אכילת פרס וכותבת בכדי אכילת פרס א"ל אביי קים להו לרבנן דבהכי מיתבא דעתיה בטפי מהכי לא מיתבא דעתיה

Rava strongly objects to this: For all prohibitions of eating, the measure that determines liability is the volume of an olive-bulk consumed within the time it takes to eat a half-loaf of bread. All forbidden food eaten within that period combines to the measure of an olive-bulk. However, one who eats an olive-bulk over a longer period is exempt. Yet, on Yom Kippur one who eats the volume of a large date, which is a larger measure, is culpable if this amount is eaten within the time it would take to eat a half-loaf of bread. This appears to be a leniency, since one must eat a larger measure in the same time period of time. Why is there not a longer period of time for liability on Yom Kippur, to reflect the larger measure? Abaye said to him: The Sages have an accepted tradition that one who eats within this duration of time, his mind is settled; but one who eats within a longer duration of time, his mind is not settled, and he remains in a state of affliction.

מתקיף לה רבא (בכותבת) בכדי אכילת פרס חצי פרס בכדי אכילת פרס א"ל רב פפא הנח לטומאת גוויה דלאו דאורייתא היא

Rava strongly objects to this: The measure for liability for eating on Yom Kippur is the volume of a large date consumed within the time it takes to eat a half-loaf of bread; but the measure for eating impure foods that render one ritually impure is half of a half-loaf, which is two egg-bulks, a much larger volume, and this must also be consumed within the time it takes to eat a half-loaf of bread Rav Pappa said to him: Do not raise a challenge from here. Leave aside ritual impurity of the body contracted through consuming impure foods because that is not by Torah law but by rabbinic law. The Sages were lenient in this matter. If one does not consume that amount of impure food within this time period, he is not rendered impure.

ומי אמר רב פפא הכי והכתיב (ויקרא יא, מג) ולא תטמאו בהם ונטמתם בם וא"ר פפא מכאן שטומאת גוויה דאורייתא מדרבנן וקרא אסמכתא בעלמא

The Gemara challenges this: But did Rav Pappa actually say that the rendering of ritual impurity of the body through the consumption of impure foods is by rabbinic law? But he appears to say the opposite in another statement: Isn’t it written: “You shall not make yourselves detestable with any creeping thing that creeps, neither shall you make yourselves impure with them, that you should be impure thereby” (Leviticus 11:43). And Rav Pappa said: From here, from the Torah’s usage of the word “impure” with regard to the prohibition of eating, we learn that ritual impurity of the body is by Torah law. The Gemara answers: Rav Pappa did not mean that the law is actually Torah law. The law is indeed rabbinic law, and the verse brought as proof is a mere support.

כל האוכלין א"ר פפא אכל אומצא ומילחא מצטרף ואע"ג דלאו אכילה היא כיון דאכלי אינשי מצטרפין אמר ריש לקיש ציר שעל גבי ירק מצטרף לככותבת ביוה"כ פשיטא מהו דתימא משקה הוא קמ"ל כל אכשורי אוכלא אוכלא הוא

§ We learned in the mishna: All types of foods combine to form a measure of liability with regard to eating on Yom Kippur. Rav Pappa said: If one ate meat and the salt that was on it, these combine to make the volume of a large date. Although consuming salt alone is not considered eating, since people do eat meat with salt together, they combine into one measure. Similarly, Reish Lakish said: Brine on a vegetable combines with the vegetable to make the volume of a large date with regard to the prohibition of eating on Yom Kippur. The Gemara expresses surprise at this: It is obvious. Why should the brine not combine with the vegetable, considering that it is itself food? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that brine is a beverage, and food and drinks do not combine, it teaches us that any item that prepares food for eating is considered a food.

אמר ריש לקיש האוכל אכילה גסה ביוה"כ פטור מ"ט (ויקרא כג, כט) אשר לא תעונה כתיב פרט למזיק

§ Reish Lakish said: One who eats in an excessive manner on Yom Kippur, to the degree that he forces himself to continue eating even when full is exempt, e.g., one who ate beyond being satiated on Yom Kippur eve and then ate something else as soon as the fast began. What is the reason for that? Because the Torah does not mention the prohibition of eating on Yom Kippur, but it was written “any soul which shall not be afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from his people” (Leviticus 23:29), excluding one who harms himself, e.g., one who does not enjoy his food at all.

א"ר ירמיה אמר ר"ל זר שאכל תרומה אכילה גסה משלם את הקרן ואינו משלם את החומש (ויקרא כב, יד) כי יאכל פרט למזיק אמר רבי ירמיה אמר רבי יוחנן זר

Similarly, Rabbi Yirmeya said that Reish Lakish said: A non-priest who ate teruma in an excessive manner pays the principal, that which he took, and does not pay the additional fifth, which one who illegally eats teruma pays to the priest as a penalty. This is because it states about one who eats teruma: “And if a man eat of the sacred thing in error, then he shall add a fifth to it, and give the priest the sacred thing” (Leviticus 22:14). The word “eat” excludes one who is not eating but harming himself. He does, however, pay the principal, since he caused a loss to the priest. The fifth is only paid by one who eats normally, not excessively. Similarly, Rabbi Yirmeya said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: A non-priest