R' Yehudah ben Bava testified [concerning] five things: [The first:] that we [the court] cause [certain] minors to refuse to continue the marriage. And [he testified] that we allow a woman to re-marry based on one witness. And [he testified] that a rooster was [once] stoned in Jerusalem for killing a person. And [he testified] that forty-day-old wine was poured as a libation on the Altar. And [he testified] about the morning tamid that it may be offered until four hours [of the day].

R' Yehoshua and R' Nechunya ben Elinasan, the leader of Kfar HaBavli, testified concerning a limb of a corpse, that it is tamei. For R' Eliezer says: They did not say [this] except regard-ing a limb from a living [person]. They said to [R' Eliezer]: Is it not a kal vachomer? If even [regard-ing] a living [person], who is [inherently] tahor, a limb that becomes detached from him is tamei, [then regarding] a corpse, which is [inherently] tamei, is it not logical that a limb that becomes detached from it should be tamei? [R' Eliezer] said to them: They did not say that a limb transmits tumah except regarding a limb that was severed from a living person. Alternatively, the tumah [emanating] from the living is [in a sense] greater than the tumah [emanating] from the dead. For a living [zav] renders tamei a couch or a seat [that is] underneath him to contaminate a person [who touches the couch or seat] and to contaminate [his] clothes; and [the zav also renders tamei] that which is above him [and rests on him with] a light tumah, to contaminate foods and beverages [only]; where-as a corpse does not contaminate [in this manner].

[Regarding] an olive's volume [or more] of flesh that becomes detached from a limb [that had been severed] from a living [person], R' Eliezer declares [it] tamei, whereas R' Yehoshua and R' Nechunya declare [it] tahor. [Regarding] a bone [fragment] the size of a barleycorn [or greater] that becomes detached from a limb [that had been severed] from a living [person], R' Nechunya declares [it] tamei, whereas R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua declare [it] tahor. They said to R' Eliezer: [On] what [basis] did you see [fit] to declare tamei an olive's volume of flesh that becomes de-tached from the [severed] limb of a living [person]? He replied: We find [that] the [severed] limb of a living [person] is like a complete corpse. [It follows that] just as [re-garding] a corpse, [the law is that] an olive's volume of flesh that becomes detached from it is tamei, so too, [regarding] the [severed] limb of a living [person], an olive's volume of flesh that becomes detached from it should be tamei. They said to [R' Eliezer]: No! If you declared tamei an olive's volume of flesh that becomes detached from a corpse, [this is logical,] since you [also] declared tamei a bone [fragment] the size of a barleycorn that becomes detached from it. Can you [likewise] declare tamei an olive's volume of flesh that becomes detached from the [severed] limb of a living [person], when you [yourself] declared tahor a bone [fragment] the size of a barleycorn that becomes detached from it? They said to R' Nechunya: [On] what [basis] did you see [fit] to declare tamei a bone [fragment] the size of a barleycorn that becomes detached from the [severed] limb of a living [person]? He replied: We find [that] the [severed] limb of a living [person] is like a complete corpse. [It follows that] just as [re-garding] a corpse, [the law is that] a bone [fragment] the size of a barleycorn that becomes detached from it is tamei, so too, [regarding] the [severed] limb of a living [person], a bone [fragment] the size of a barleycorn that becomes detached from it should be tamei. They said to him: No! If you declared tamei a bone [fragment] the size of a barleycorn that becomes de-tached from a corpse, [this is logical,] since you [also] declared tamei an olive's volume of flesh that becomes detached from it. Can you [like-wise] declare tamei a bone [fragment] the size of a barleycorn that becomes detached from the [severed] limb of a living [per-son], when you [yourself] declared tahor an olive's volume of flesh that becomes detached from it? They said to R' Eliezer: [On] what [basis] did you see [fit] to divide your opinion? Either declare both of them tamei, or declare both of them tahor! [Rabbi Eliezer] said to them: The tumah of the flesh is greater than the tumah of the bones. For the [tumah of] flesh ap-plies in [the case of] neveilos and in [the case of] sheratzim, which is not so in regard to the bones. Alternatively, a limb that is “properly” covered with flesh transmits tumah through contact, through carrying, and via a roof. [When some of] the flesh is missing [from a limb] it is [still] tamei. [But if any part of] the bone is missing [from the limb], it is tahor. They said to R' Nechunya: [On] what [basis] did you see [fit] to divide your opinion? Either declare both of them tamei, or declare both of them tahor! [R' Nechunya] said to them: The tumah of the bones is greater than the tumah of the flesh. For [a piece of] flesh that becomes detached from a living [person] is tahor, whereas a limb that becomes detached from [a living person] and is in its complete form is tamei. Alternatively, an olive's volume of flesh transmits tumah through contact, through carrying and via a roof, and [similar-ly], the majority of the bones [in the skeleton] transmit tumah through contact, through carrying and via a roof. [Now, if] the flesh is missing [the requisite volume], it is [completely] tahor. [But if part of] the majority of the bones [in the skeleton] is missing, [the law is that] even though [the remainder] is tahor [in the respect that it is precluded] from transmitting tumah via a roof, it [still] transmits tumah through contact and through carrying. Alternatively, when all the flesh of a corpse is less than an olive's volume in measure, it is tahor. [But with respect to] the majority of the structure and the numeric majority [of the bones] of a corpse, even though they do not measure a quarter-kav, they are tamei. They said to R' Yehoshua: [On] what [basis] did you see [fit] to rule both of them tahor? [R' Yehoshua] said to them: No! If you said regarding a corpse, since [a corpse] is subject to “a majority,” “a quar-ter-[kav]” and “corpse-dust.” Shall you say [the same] regarding [a limb severed from] a living [person], which is not subject to “a majority,” “a quarter-[kav]” and “corpse-dust”?

R' Yehoshua and R' Tzadok testified regarding a firstborn-donkey redemption [sheep] that died, that the Kohen has no [claim] at all upon [the owner]. For R' Eliezer says: [The owner] is responsible for [the redemption sheep], just as [for] the five selaim of a son. But the Sages say: [The owner] is not responsible for [the redemption sheep]. Rather, it is like the redemption [mon-ey] of maaser sheni.

R' Tzadok testified concerning the brine of nonkosher grasshoppers that it is tahor, because the earlier Mishnah [had stated]: “Nonkosher grasshoppers that were pickled together with kosher grasshoppers do not render their brine forbidden.”

R' Tzadok testified concerning where [the] flowing [waters] are greater than the trickling [waters], that they are valid. There was an incident in Biras HaPilya, and the incident was brought before the Sages and they ruled [the mingled wa-ter] fit.

R' Tzadok testified concerning flowing [spring water] that one channeled with a walnut leaf, that they are fit. There was an in-cident in Ahalya, and the incident was brought be-fore the [Court in the] Chamber of Hewn Stone and they ruled [the water] fit.

R' Yehoshua and R' Yakim, leader of Hadar, testified regarding a jug of cha-tas ashes that one placed upon a sheretz, that [the ashes] are tamei; for R' Eliezer rules [the ashes] tahor. R' Papyas testified regarding one who declared two terms of nezirus, that if he shaved for the first [nezirus] on day thir-ty, then he shaves for the second [nezirus] on day sixty. But if he shaved on day sixty-minus-one, he has discharged his obliga-tion, because day thirty is reckoned for him in the count.

R' Yehoshua and R' Papyas testified concerning the offspring of a shelamim that one should offer it as a shelamim, for R' Eliezer says that the offspring of a shelamim is not offered as a shelamim, and the Sages say: it is offered. R' Papyas said: I testify that we had a cow [that was a] shelamim sacrifice and we ate it on Pesach and we ate its offspring as a shelamim on the Festival.

They testified about the boards of professional bakers (on which loaves of bread are shaped) that they are [susceptible to be-coming] tamei, for R' Eliezer rules [them] tahor. They testified about an oven that someone cut into sections and put sand between one section and the other, that it is [susceptible to becoming] tamei, because R' Eliezer rules [it] tahor. They testified that we may intercalate [a month into] the year during the entire Adar, because [the Sages] used to say: until Purim. They testified that we may intercalate [a month into] the year conditionally; and a story happened with Rabban Gamliel that he went to obtain authorization from the governor in Syria and was delayed in coming [back], and they intercalated [a month into] the year with the stipulation that Rabban Gamliel would approve it, and upon his returning, he declared: “I ap-prove,” and it turned out that it became a leap year.