Levítico 10:6 Referências do Talmudee: Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot, Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin & Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

Are sacrifices forbidden for the uncircumcised? One cannot deduce the answer from Passover since they are not subject to [the prohibition of] breaking a bone¹⁸No bone may be broken of the Passover sacrifice; Ex. 12:46. The bone marrow of other sacrificial animals is not forbidden. Therefore, no argument de minore ad majus is possible from Passover to other sacrifices., neither from heave since that would be inference after inference¹⁹In general, the rules of R. Ismael may be combined with one another; an exeption are the rules of sacrifices and sanctified matter. This is discussed in detail in the Babli, Zebaḥim Chapter 5, which has no parallel in the Yerushalmi. Even though the authorities quoted there are all Babylonian, the reference here shows that the basis of the arguments is a Yerushalmi tradition. It is stated in Babli, Zebaḥim 50a, that rules 2 and 3 in the scheme of R. Ismael cannot be used one after the other. Since the exclusion of the uncircumcised from heave was an application of rule 2 (Note 12), the result cannot be used as premiss for an argument of type 3. An attempt to formulate the rules in an extension of symbolic logic is in H. Guggenheimer, Über ein bemerkenswertes logisches System aus der Antike, Methodos 1951, 150–164.. At the end, you have to say “from it, from it²⁰An application of rule 2 (Note 12)..” Since “from it”²¹Ex. 12:9 (once), 10 (twice). The Babli must reject this argument since it deduces laws of Passover from all three instances of the word. which was said in the laws of Passover implies that the uncircumcised is disqualified, so “from it”²²Lev. 7:14. The verse is quoted in Mishnah Menaḥot 8:2. which was said in the laws of sacrifices must imply that the uncircumcised is disqualified. Are sacrifices forbidden for the mourner?²³There is no inference to be drawn from Lev. 10:6 since, after the death of Nadab and Abihu, Aaron and his sons were commanded not to mourn. “From it, from it.” Since “from it” which was said in the laws of tithe²⁴The Second Tithe, Deut. 26:14. states that the mourner is disqualified, so “from it” which was said in the laws of Passover²⁵This word indicates an oversight by editor or copyist since (1) from the laws of Passover nothing can be inferred for other sacrifices and (2) the mourner (whose relative died outside of Jerusalem so that he could not defile himself) is admitted to the Passover sacrifice. It most probably should read “sacrifices” (Note 22). must imply that the mourner is disqualified.

MISHNAH: The order of burning: One makes him sink into manure up to his knees²⁶To make the condemned lose partial consciousness from the methane gas coming from the manure., puts a stiff cloth into soft ones and winds them around his throat. One person draws in his direction, the other draws in his direction until he opens his mouth²⁷The two witnesses stand to either side of the condemned and choke him to force him to open his mouth. The coarse cloth is the one which chokes; the soft cloth is to shield the skin from injury. The entire procedure is modelled on the death of Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10:1–6) which is called “burning” (v. 6) but whose bodies were not injured externally (v. 5), and similarly the deaths of the 250 followers of Korah (Num. 16:35); Babli 52a.. Then one lights a wick²⁸Not really a wick but either liquid metal (Babli 52a) or burning oil. and throws it into his mouth that it enters his innards and chars his intestines. Rebbi Jehudah says, in that case, if he would die in their hands they would not have fulfilled the duty of burning²⁹By refusing to open his mouth, the condemned could force his executioners to choke him to death, which is considered the least painful kind of execution.; one opens his mouth forcefully with tongs, lights a wire and throws it into his mouth that it enters his innards and chars his intestines. Rebbi Eleazar ben Ṣadoq said, it happened that a Cohen’s daughter whored; they surrounded her with firewood and burned her. They told him, because the court at that time was incompetent³⁰Not incompetent but Sadducee (or in any case anti-Pharisee)..

HALAKHAH: “An unspecified nezirut is for thirty days,” etc. Bar Qappara said “ιʼεʼιʼεʼ” is thirty⁹³Num. 6:5: “Until the fulfillment of the days he shall be holy”. Since the verse mentions “the fulfillment of the days”, it must refer to a fixed number; but none is indicated. The number is found by interpreting “he shall be” יהיה in the Alexandrian numbering system using letters as numbers. Since י (ι) = 10, ה (ε) = 5, the sum is 2∙10+2∙5 = 30. (In the Babli, 5a and Sanhedrin 22b, this is attributed to Rav Mattanah; in Sifry Deut. 25 it is a gloss.). Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: Corresponding to the 29 times that in the Chapter about the nazir in the Torah is written “vow, nazir, to vow as nazir”⁹⁴In Chapter 6, 6 times in v. 21, 4 times in v. 2, 3 each in vv. 5,12,16, 2 each in vv. 13,19, and once in vv. 3,4,6,8,9,20. In the Babli, 5a, this passage is attributed to bar Pada.. Are they not 30⁹⁵If one counts the related word נֶזֶר in v. 7.? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, one has to be removed for its definition⁹⁶Before rules of the nazir can be explained, the notion of nazir has to be defined.. In the opinion of Bar Qappara, if he shaved on the 30th day, he did not fulfill his obligation. In the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan⁹⁷This should read: “R. Jonathan” since it refers to the statement of R. Samuel bar Nahman. (However, in the Babli, Sanhedrin 22b, R. Samuel bar Naḥman reports a similar statement in the name of R. Joḥanan.), if he shaved on the 30th day, he fulfilled his obligation⁹⁸Since the obligation is 29 days, the 30th day automatically is the day of celebration.. Some want to understand it from here: “To let his head’s hair grow wildly.⁹⁹Num. 6:5.” How much is a hair growth¹⁰⁰The scribe wrote first: “How much is wild hair?” This might be the better reading.? 30 days. Some want to understand it from here: “She shall cry for her father and her mother the days of a month¹⁰¹Deut. 21:13. The argument is based on the doctrine of uniqueness of lexemes, viz., that a word used in the Torah has one and only one meaning: A meaning established in one place can be transferred to any other. Cf. Berakhot 1:1, Note 70..” Since “days” mentioned there are 30, so also “days” mentioned here. Some want to understand it from here: ¹⁰²Num. 6:12.“The prior days shall fall, for his nezirut is impure.” The days which became permitted, which Moses and his court had permitted¹⁰³Moses had forbidden Aaron and his sons to let their hair grow in mourning for Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10:6), which otherwise they would have done for the customary period of 30 days (cf. Num. 20:29, Deut. 34:8)., and that is no less than 30 days. Some want to understand it from here: “Until the days are fulfilled⁹⁹Num. 6:5.”. How much are full days¹⁰⁴From one full moon to the next.? 30 days. Then if he shaved on the 30th day, he did not fulfill his obligation! Rebbi Isaac bar Eleazar said, “days” are written defectively יָמִם, with a letter י missing¹⁰⁵Therefore, there can be a day missing in the count, as there may be only 29 days from one full moon to the next..