Rujukan Talmud untuk Imamat 21:3: Jerusalem Talmud Nazir & Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot

Rebbi Yasa stated before Rebbi Joḥanan: Just as one defiles himself for a corpse of obligation, so one defiles himself for a limb of a corpse of obligation¹⁵This contradicts the preceding statement.. Rebbi Joḥanan answered him: Is that so? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira: Explain it if he returns¹⁶If a Cohen was burying a corpse of obligation and later found another limb of the same corpse, he may bury the limb since he already is impure and the prohibition of Lev. 21:1 refers only to him becoming impure, not to what he does once he is impure. In the Babli, 43b, this is a tannaïtic statement ascribed to R. Jehudah.. It was stated: Rebbi Yose said, nobody has to defile himself for a limb from his living father, but one has to defile himself for bone the size of a barley corn from his father. Rebbi Jehudah says, just as one has to defile himself for bone the size of a barley corn from his father, so one has to defile himself for a limb from his living father¹⁷Śemaḥot 4:27. In the Babylonian sources, Babli 43b, Sifra Emor Introduction 13, R. Jehudah represents the opinion ascribed here to R. Yose, while R. Yose denies that a Cohen defiles himself for a piece of his father’s bone. The reason given is Lev. 21:3 (speaking of the Cohen’s unmarried sister): “For her he has to defile himself,” interpreted as “for her body, but not for her body parts.”. ¹⁸Sifra Emor Introduction 14. Śemaḥot 4:28 (יוסף פסקס), Yalqut Qohelet 976 (יוסף הכהן). It is clear from the story that one speaks of a priestly family.“It happened that Yose ben Paxas developed a growth¹⁹Greek νομή “cancerous growth”. on his foot. When the surgeon came to remove it, he told him to inform him when only a hair’s breadth was left²⁰Connecting the growth to his body.. He²¹The surgeon. cut until only a hair’s breadth was left, and informed him. He²²Yose ben Paxas. addressed his son Onias and told him, Onias my son, up to now you had to care for me, but leave now since nobody has to defile himself for a limb from his living father²³Since the growth, once separated from his body, is impure in the impurity of the dead (Mishnah Ahilut 2:1).. When this came before the Sages, they said, about him it was said: “It happens that a just man is lost in his merit²⁴Eccl. 7:15. The implication is that practice follows R. Yose.;” the just is lost and his merit accompanies him.

A sister injured by a piece of wood, Rebbi Meїr and Rebbi Simeon say, he shall not defile himself for her, but the Sages say, he must defile himself for her⁸²This refers to the rules Lev. 21:1–4, that a Cohen may not defile himself by the impurity of the dead except for his close relative. His sister is included in the list as long as she belongs to his clan, i. e., as long as she is not married. The language of v. 3 is involved: “And for his virgin sister who is close to him, who never had been a man’s, for her he must defile himself”, inviting a close analysis of the meaning of the conditions attached.
In the Babli, 60a, this is only R. Simeon’s opinion.. Rebbi Meїr and Rebbi Simeon follow well what they have stated, but the argument of Sages seems inverted. There⁸³It is not clear what the reference is. It could be Deut. 22:23, “If there was a virgin girl …” The statement of the rabbis referred to is not otherwise recorded., they say “a girl”, not an adult, “a virgin”, not one injured by a piece of wood; and here, they say so? Rebbi Hila said, every interpretation follows its context. There⁸⁴Lev. 21:3. The argument is quoted in the Babli, 60a., “and for his virgin sister”, that excludes the raped and the seduced one. Or maybe I should exclude the one injured by a piece of wood? The verse says, “who had not been a man’s.” Who became [deflowered] through the action of a man, not one who became it through something else. “The close one”, to include the betrothed one⁸⁵In the Babli, 60a/b, the divorced sister is included.. “To him”, to include the adult. The argument of Sages seems inverted. There⁸⁶In the interpretation of Lev. 21:3 in Sifra Emor 0(4); the Cohen may not defile himself by the impurity of the dead, “except for his flesh close to him, for his mother and his father, his son and his daughter, and his brother.”, they say “the close one”, to exclude the betrothed one⁸⁷“His flesh close to him” is his wife after the marriage, not his betrothed., “to him”, to exclude the divorcee⁸⁸The Cohen is not permitted to defile himself for a wife forbidden to him.. And here, they say so⁸⁹His betrothed sister is included, his own betrothed is excluded. (Instead of ארוסתו, ms. A has the synonym כלתו.)? Rebbi Hila said, every interpretation follows its context. “His sister” is always inside [the family] until she leaves; his betrothed is always outside until she enters.