Talmud su Levitico 14:9
וְהָיָה֩ בַיּ֨וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֜י יְגַלַּ֣ח אֶת־כָּל־שְׂעָר֗וֹ אֶת־רֹאשׁ֤וֹ וְאֶת־זְקָנוֹ֙ וְאֵת֙ גַּבֹּ֣ת עֵינָ֔יו וְאֶת־כָּל־שְׂעָר֖וֹ יְגַלֵּ֑חַ וְכִבֶּ֣ס אֶת־בְּגָדָ֗יו וְרָחַ֧ץ אֶת־בְּשָׂר֛וֹ בַּמַּ֖יִם וְטָהֵֽר׃
E sarà il settimo giorno, che si raderà tutti i capelli dalla testa, dalla barba e dalle sopracciglia, anche tutti i capelli che si raderà; e si laverà i panni, laverà la carne nell'acqua e sarà pulito.
Jerusalem Talmud Kiddushin
Following Rebbi Ismael? Rebbi Ismael stated303Babli Soṭah 16b; Sifry Deut. #122.: At three places teaching circumvents Scripture and at another place the interpretation.The Torah said, “in a scroll”304This is a wrong quote, referring to Num. 6:23, the text of the incantations required in the rite of the wife suspected of infidelity. But that text has to be written on a scroll; cf. Soṭah 2:4, Notes 143-144. Here, it should say סֵפֶר "book", referring to the divorce document mentioned in Deut. 24:1 which can be written on anything not connected to the ground; Mishnah Giṭṭin 2:3. The quote is correct in the sources quoted in the preceding Note., but practice said on anything separated from the ground. The Torah said, “in dust”305Lev. 17:13. The blood of slaughtered wild animals or birds has to be covered “in dust”., but practice said in anything on which plants grow306Mishnah Ḥulin 6:6.. The Torah said, “with an awl”, but practice said, even a buck-thorn, even a thorn, even glass. And at one place the interpretation307R. Ismael’s own hermeneutical rules.: Rebbi Ismael stated: “It shall be on the seventh day that he shave all his hair308Lev. 14:9, speaking of the ritual purification of the healed sufferer from skin disease. All the quotes are from this verse.,” inclusion. “His head, his beard, and his eyebrows,” detail. Since it continues “and all his hair he shall shave,” it repeats inclusion. Inclusion, detail, and inclusion is judged only by what is similar to the detail309By the seventh hermeneutical rule one has to try to find an intensional definition of the properties common to the examples given as detail; these then are the properties referred to by the inclusions.. Since the detail is explained as place of bunching and exposed, it should refer only [hair growing] in bunches at exposed places. But practice is that he shaves to be like a gourd310Shaving completely every exposed hair; Mishnah Nega‘im 14:4. (Sifra Meṣora‘ Pereq 2 disagrees with the baraita here and the Mishnah and holds that the insistence on the shaving of all hair in both inclusions requires that any single one of the properties mentioned in the analysis of the detail, hair growing in bunches or visible, has to be shaved but nothing else. The Tanna of Sifra holds that practice follows interpretation closely.). “With an awl”, since an awl is made of metal, so anything made of metal311In Babylonian sources, Babli 21b, Mekhilta dR.Ismael Neziqin 2, Sifry Deut # 122, this is an argument of Rebbi, in Mekhilta dR.Šim‘on b.Jochai, of R. Yose ben Jehudah: Any metal implement which can be used for piercing is called “awl”. The most detailed analysis of the verse is in the Babli, 21b, (Midrash Haggadol Deut. 15:17) where the inclusion-exclusion methodology of R. Ismael is shown to lead to the admissibility of any metal piercing instrument and the addition-subtraction methodology of R. Aqiba to the inclusion of all mechanical and the exclusion of chemical means.. Rebbi Yose said, this is a large drill312In Sifry Deut # 122, Midrash Haggadol Deut. on Deut. 15:17: This is the large awl. The Yerushalmi text seems to be the original.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, that is the engraving-knife. “He shall bring him to the door.313Ex. 21:6; cf. Deut. 15:17.” I could think, even if it was lying flat. The verse says, “or to the door-post”. Since the door-post is upright, so also the door has to be upright314Babli 22b, Mekhilta dR.Ismael Neziqin 2, Mekhilta dR.Šim‘on b.Jochai p. 163.: a shame to him and to his family315They violated their obligation to support their relative when he could not fend for himself..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Jerusalem Talmud Nazir
MISHNAH: What is shaving in impurity? He was sprinkled on the third and seventh [days]187Since the only impurity which defiles the nazir is the impurity of the dead, he must have water with ashes from the Red Cow sprinkled on him on the 3rd and 7th days of his impurity (Num. 19)., shaves on the seventh, and brings his sacrifices on the eighth188As prescribed in Num. 6:9,10.. If he shaved on the eighth, he may bring his sacrifices189Two birds (Num. 6:10) and a sheep (Num. 6:12). on the same day, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Ṭarphon asked him, what is the difference between this one and the sufferer from skin disease190Mishnah Nega‘im 14:3 states that the person healed from skin disease can bring his sacrifices only after the sundown following his immersion in a miqweh. According to R. Aqiba [readings of Tosaphot, 44b s.v. א״ל; Maimonides (Commentary ad loc.; Meḥusere Kappara 4:2); see the readings in Sifra Meṣora‘ Pereq 2(7); another reading in the Commentary attributed to Rashi] this implies that he has to bring his sacrifices on the 9th if he shaved on the 8th.? He told him, the purification of this one is bound to his days188As prescribed in Num. 6:9,10., but the purification of the sufferer from skin disease is bound to his shaving191Lev. 14:9 prescribes the immersion of the sufferer from skin disease after his shaving but Num. 6:9 requires the impure nazir to shave “on the day of his purity”, i. e., after the second sprinkling and his immersion.. He cannot bring his sacrifices unless the sun had set for him192It is a general principle that immersion in water makes ritually pure only for profane places or food; for sancta only the following sundown brings purity, Lev. 22:7; cf. Soṭah 5:2, Note 42..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Jerusalem Talmud Megillah
If it spread while in quarantine246Lev. 13:13. If the entire skin of the patient is diseased, he is pure. Naturally while the disease is spreading he satisfies all conditions of severe purity, but since this requires a pronouncement by the Cohen, if there were no clear signs of impurity when he was put in quarantine and at the end of the quarantine the entire skin already was diseased, the Cohen who sees him only at the start and the end of his 7 days of quarantine has to declare him pure out of quarantine without ever pronouncing him absolutely impure., Rebbi Joḥanan said, he needs birds. Rebbi Eleazar said, he does not need birds. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, a baraita supports Rebbi Joḥanan: 247Sifra Mesora` Introduction 6–8.“From the sufferer from skin disease248Lev. 14:3. As introduction to the bird ceremony the Cohen has “to see that the skin disease was healed from the sufferer from skin disease.” Skin disease can be healed only from a sufferer from the disease; the final remark seems to be redundant. It is added to include also a sufferer who never was declared as such.; to include one on whom it spread on his entire person that he needs birds. Is that not a logical argument? If a person became pure and the signs of what made him impure are not on him shall need birds249The disappearance of his symptoms is the sign that he is healed, in contrast to the person who is pure but far from healed in that all his skin is infected., (should not) [is it not logical that]250The corrector’s changes are from the (Babylonian style) Sifra. one who became pure and the signs of what made him impure are on him [shall] need birds? [But] the one on whom it was stable for two weeks251Lev. 13:6. If the white spot does not grow within 14 days nor develop a white hair, the person has to be declared pure (after immersion) even though his problem skin is still visible. shall disprove it, since he became pure and the signs of what made him impure are on him, but he does not need birds. So do not wonder if one on whom it spread while in quarantine and the signs of what made him impure are on him does not need birds. The verse says, from the sufferer of skin disease to include one on whom it spread on his entire person that he needs birds.” If you would say that one becoming pure in quarantine does not need birds, should he not have objected that it would have been better to argue spreading against spreadings and not staying stable against spreadings252This is the proof that the Sifra supports the opinion of R. Joḥanan since following R. Eleazar instead of appealing to purity after a lengthy quarantine the Tanna should have mentioned the case of fast spreading skin disease which at the next inspection by the Cohen already has changed from a sign of impurity to one of purity and does not need birds.? Rebbi Ḥananiah the colleague of the rabbis: the baraita supports Rebbi Joḥanan since the Tanna answers his colleague, no. If you are saying about this one who never was up to be declared absolute, what can you say about the one who was to be declared absolute253The case of dispute between R. Joḥanan and R. Eleazar is not comparable to other cases of skin disease since the Cohen is not empowered to inspect during the quarantine; the patient never was in a state to be declared absolutely impure.? Because he was to be declared absolute, he needs birds. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, the closing statement254The second sentence of the Mishnah. supports Rebbi Eleazar. The one becoming pure in quarantine is not liable for torn clothing, and untended hair, and shaving, and birds. All of this is what we are considering here, about spreadings255This seems to refer to a statement similar to the wording of the Mishnah in the Babli: The only difference between one declared pure after quarantine and one declared pure after being absolutely impure is shaving and birds. Since this envisages a situation like the one discussed here, it explicitly supports the Babylonian R. Eleazar.. Rebbi Samuel bar Eudaimon said, all they are disagreeing is about bringing birds. But in the matter of bringing a sacrifice everybody agrees that he does not bring a sacrifice. It was stated thus: On the seventh he has to shave, on the eighth he shall bring256Lev. 14:9,10.; one who needs shaving brings a sacrifice, one who does not need shaving does not bring a sacrifice. Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina: All days on which the skin disease is on him he will be impure257Lev. 13:46., one whose impurity is caused by his skin disease. This excludes him whose (purity) [impurity]258Both the scribe’s and the corrector’s texts give the same meaning; the correction is unnecessary. depends on the count of his days259Since the Cohen cannot judge him during the intermediate days of his quarantine.. So far torn clothing and unkempt hair. From where shaving and birds260What is the biblical source of the statement of the Mishnah regarding these items?? Rebbi Eleazar the Southerner in the name of Rebbi Shammai: This shall be the doctrine of the sufferer from skin disease on the day261Lev. 14:2.. One who may become impure and pure on one day; this excludes one who cannot become impure and pure on one day262Since quarantine makes impure for a minimum of 7 days..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy