Talmud sobre Números 19:18

“If he is bothered by it it separates” for immersion; so if he is not bothered it does not separate for immersion⁴¹Since for cleansing from impurity the verse requires that one immerse “all his flesh” in water, any dirt on the skin prevents the water to touch the skin and invalidates the immersion. The Mishnah restricts that to unwanted dirt; wanted adhesions separate only in the volume of an olive. Dry dough which acts as glue becomes part of the trough.. The same is true for immersion and for sprinkling⁴⁷For the ritual of cleansing from the impurity of the dead, sprinkling with water containing ashes of the Red Cow (Num. 19). If the water only is sprinkled on dirt which would invalidate immersion, the implement is purified.. It⁴⁸The dough in the volume of an olive sticking to the trough, as described in the Mishnah. is not a connection for impurity, from the following: “if he desires its existence it is like the baking trough,” otherwise it is not really⁴⁹S. Liebermann points to Yoma 6:4 (Note 83), where גּוּפוֹ “its body” is used as opposite of מַמָּשׁ “really it”. like the trough. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, so did Rebbi formulate: Dirt under the chair⁵⁰Used as glue. is connection for impurity, but no connection for sprinkling⁵¹The two statements are not quite parallel. Immersion requires that the object to be purified be completely immersed; “connection” then means that if the glue is wetted, the wood below also is purified. In sprinkling, only drops are used; if a drop falls on the glue, the object is not purified.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Simeon bar Cahana: An atrophied limb, an atrophied nail⁵²Inoperative but still connected to the body., the ballast of a pumpkin and its hollow⁵³A hollowed-out pumpkin used as a bottle. Since it is lighter than water, it cannot be immersed and filled with water without a ballast, usually a stone. While it is not part of the pumpkin, it is an intrinsic part of the bottle, as much as its hollow. All these are included in “connection for impurity, but no connection for sprinkling.”. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, also down which he plucked⁵⁴Downy facial hair. If a woman insists on removing it it acquires the status of unwanted dirt described in the Mishnah, being an obstacle to immersion and no receptor of sprinkling drops. is connection for impurity but no connection for sprinkling. What is the difference between impurity and sprinkling? Rebbi La said, about sprinkling it is written, he shall sprinkle on the tent and on all vessels⁵⁵Num. 19:18.. But here, for you⁵⁶Many occurrences in the rules of impurity in Lev. 11: Babli Ḥulin 118a, a discussion of people having different needs at different times in Šabbat 48b., all you have use for.

HALAKHAH: “But for overhanging branches, or protuberances,” etc. What is the status of the undistributed middle¹⁵⁰Mishnah 2 spells out for which biblical impurities the nazir has to shave; the implication is that for anything less he does not have to shave. Mishnah 3 has a list of rabbinic impurities for which the nazir does not have to shave; the implication is that for anything more he has to shave. We are left without instructions for cases which fall in between.? Rebbi Joḥanan said, the undistributed middle is judged leniently¹⁵¹Anything not covered by Mishnah 2 is not biblical; the nazir is prevented from shaving.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the undistributed middle is judged restrictively¹⁵²Anything not exempted by Mishnah 3 requires shaving and a new start. The Babli, 53b, reports the same opinions, limited to the case taken here as illustration.. What is the undistributed middle? That is a limb from a corpse or a limb from a living body which is not sufficiently⁶²“Sufficient flesh” is enough left on a limb connected to a living body that it could heal. covered by flesh¹⁵³Mishnah Ahilut 1:8 spells out that such a limb induces impurity by touch or carrying but not in a tent.. Rebbi Yose asked¹⁵⁴He questions R. Simeon ben Laqish’s position.: From where [do we infer that] a bone [induces impurity in the size of] a barley grain? Not from that verse, “or a person’s bone¹⁵⁵Num. 19:16. In v. 18, only “bone” is mentioned but not “human”. This is interpreted in Sifry Num. #127,129 to cover bones coming from both living or dead persons; cf. Babli 54a, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Num. 19:16,18.”? Here you require a barley grain, there you do not require a barley grain¹⁵⁶For a bare bone, everybody agrees that a barley grain represents the minimum size which induces impurity. According to R. Simeon ben Laqish, a bone fragment with some flesh is not subject to a legal minimum.! Rebbi Samuel bar Eudaimon stated: “A slain one”, anything from a slain person¹⁵⁷Without a minimum; Sifry Num. #127., that is a limb from a corpse or a limb from a living body which is not sufficiently covered by flesh.

“Nor immerses,” for it is written, he sprinkles, he immerses⁹³Num. 19:18.. Since sprinkling is during daytime, also immersion is during daytime. From where that sprinkling is during daytime? For it is written⁹⁴Num. 19:19., the pure one sprinkles on the impure one on the third day. ⁹⁵From here on this paragraph and the next are from Šabbat2, Notes 63–71. This paragraph is connected with the Mishnah here since it states only that immersion of males has to be during daytime. The next paragraph has no connection, it simply is copied from Šabbat. All who require immersion immerse themselves normally during daytime except for the woman after her period and one who gave birth who only immerses herself during the night⁹⁶Babli Šabbat121a, Pesaḥim90b, Yoma6a, 87a.. A woman after her period whose time has passed⁹⁷After the first evening she could have immersed herself after her period; cf. Niddah4:1 Note 3. Babli Niddah67b. immerses herself either during the day or during the night. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba preached this to the people of Tyre⁹⁸As practice to be followed., a woman after her period whose time has passed immerses herself either during the day or during the night. There⁹⁹In Babylonia, where the statement was attributed to R. Joḥanan; Niddah67b. There, the reason is given “because of the discipline of her daughter”, that she should learn the rules clearly. they say, even one whose time has passed not, because of her mother-in-law and her daughter-in-law. They saw a woman of the family of our rabbis¹⁰⁰The household of R. Jehudah Nesia. The deviation of Galilean from Babylonian practice is confirmed. immersing herself normally during daytime. We shall say that her time had passed.