Вайикра 21:1 Ссылки в Талмуде: Jerusalem Talmud Nazir, Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot, Jerusalem Talmud Demai & Jerusalem Talmud Horayot

HALAKHAH: “The High Priest and the nazir,” etc. It is written: “He shall not go close to a dead body.³Lev. 21:11, speaking of the High Priest. A parallel argument in the Babli, 47b.” Where do we hold? If to forbid non-relatives, is he not also under the rules of a simple priest⁴A common priest is forbidden to defile himself for any dead person other than close relatives, Lev. 21:1–3.? If it cannot refer to non-relatives, refer it to relatives. It is written: “Not to go close to a dead body,” and you say so? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Gamda said, from here repeated prohibitions in the Torah⁵In his opinion, the High Priest who defiles himself for a corpse violates two identical prohibitions.. But it is to permit the corpse of obligation⁶This follows the rule that “an exclusion on top of an exclusion means an inclusion.” Since in general a Cohen is forbidden to defile himself for the dead, the repetition of the prohibition for the High Priest indicates an obligation to defile himself in some cases. Since father and mother, for whom defilement is commanded to the common priest, are forbidden to the High Priest, the corpse for whom the High Priest (and by implication, any priest) has to defile himself is a non-relative, the corpse of obligation.. Some understand it from the following: “⁷Lev. 21:4. The man shall not defile himself, in the midst of his people” he may not defile himself⁸If other Jews are present who may bury the dead, he may not defile himself. By implication, if he is alone, he must defile himself.. But he defiles himself for a corpse of obligation. Some understand it from the following: “⁷Lev. 21:4. To profane himself.” He may not defile himself to profane himself; he defiles himself for a corpse of obligation.

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.

It is stated⁷⁶This baraita is in similar form in other Yerushalmi sources, Nazir 7:1, Śemaḥot IV:25,26, Tosephta Moëd qaṭan 1:12, Avodah zarah 1:8, and in materially different Babylonian tradition in Babli Avodah zarah 13a, Erubin 47a.: A Cohen may defile himself by leaving the Land⁷⁷It is not clear which verse of the Torah declares all land outside the Land of Israel ritually unclean but the fact that it is so, is obvious from Amos 7:17. (The Babli takes the impurity of the “land of Gentiles” to be rabbinic, but this refers to the time when no ashes of a red heifer were available anymore and every Cohen was impure from the start, whereas the Yerushalmi baraita might refer to earlier times, cf. Chapter 1, Note 3.) The prohibition for the Cohen to defile himself willingly derives from Lev. 21:1–15. for civil and criminal suits, for the consecration of the New Moon and intercalation of a year⁷⁸In the absence of a computed calendar, the last two activities may be exercised outside the Land of Israel only if political circumstances make the consecration in Israel impossible. (The statements up to this point are missing in the Babli parallels; see the preceding Note.), to save a field from a Gentile, and he even may leave and lodge a complaint about it⁷⁹“To lodge a complaint” about real estate usually means to claim ownership against a squatter, in particular if there are no written documents for either party., to study Torah and to marry a wife. Rebbi Judah says, if he has a place to study⁸⁰Any place to study in the Land of Israel., he should not defile himself. Rebbi Yose says, even if he has a place to study, he may defile himself, since a man may not have the luck to learn from every teacher. They said about Joseph the Cohen⁸¹Joseph (called Issi) ben Yehudah (or Aqabiah) from Huẓal in Babylonia who immigrated to Israel and was a student of Rebbis Eleazar ben Shamua and Yose ben Ḥalaphta. He is a Tanna of the last generation and known as the “last of the pious”. If such a holy man leaves Israel to follow his secondary teacher, the practice of leaving the Land for study purposes is well established. that he defiled himself and followed his teacher to Sidon⁸²Note the Talmudic vocalization Ṣīdān, in contrast to Biblical Ṣīdōn, close to modern Arabic Ṣaidā.. In truth⁸³As a rule, any tannaïtic statement label אבל “in truth”, represents established practice. The permission for a priest to leave the Land for marriage is only for an arranged marriage, not for a search for a possible bride., they said a priest should not go abroad unless one promised him a wife.