וְאִם־תַּחְתֶּיהָ֩ תַעֲמֹ֨ד הַבַּהֶ֜רֶת לֹא־פָשְׂתָ֤ה בָעוֹר֙ וְהִ֣וא כֵהָ֔ה שְׂאֵ֥ת הַמִּכְוָ֖ה הִ֑וא וְטִֽהֲרוֹ֙ הַכֹּהֵ֔ן כִּֽי־צָרֶ֥בֶת הַמִּכְוָ֖ה הִֽוא׃ (פ)
만일 색점이 여전하여 피부에 퍼지지 아니하고 빛이 엷으면 화상으로 부은 것이니 제사장은 그를 정하다 할 것은 이는 화상의 흔적임이니라
Sifra
3) (Vayikra 13:24) "a burn by fire": I might think that only a "rebellious" (i.e., unhealed) burn were intended. It is, therefore, written "and the healthy flesh of the burn." (If the latter alone were written,) I might think that it must form a scab; it is, therefore, written "a burn by fire." How is this to be reconciled? It healed and did not heal (i.e., it formed a peel and not a scab) And thus is it written below (Vayikra 13:28) "it is the peel of the burn" — until it forms a membrane, like a garlic peel.