Talmud Nazir (E)

(12) Defiling man by contact or carrying.
(13) V. Bek. 23b. A Jew may not eat the flesh of an animal which dies of itself, but may give it to a stranger; v. Deut.
XIV, 21.
(14) Defiling food only but not man.
(15) After which it ceases to defile.
(16) For corpse-dregs are unfit to be eaten by a human being.
(17) For corpse-dregs are fit to be eaten by a dog.
(18) When it becomes corpse-dregs.
(19) It is assumed that though the sun turns the fat into corpse-dregs, it is still fit to be eaten by a dog.
(20) And unfit for a dog. Hence it becomes clean.
(21) I.e.,it does not convey defilement from the unclean to the clean vessel.
(22) Aliter; The honey of Zifim; (cf. Josh. XV, 24). V.Sot. 48b.
(23) So the Aruch.
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 50b
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 50b
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 50b
Beth Shammai say: Also one of a porridge of grist or beans, because [at the end of its flow] it springs
back.
1
 
    Rammi b. Hama asked: is there [transference of defilement through] a jet in the case of
foodstuffs,
2
 or does [transference of defilement through] a jet not apply to foodstuffs? Do we say
[that the principle applies to thick honey and batter] because they contain liquor,
3
 whereas
[foodstuffs] contain no liquor,
4
 or is it perhaps because they are compact masses
5
 and [foodstuffs]
are also compact masses?
6
 — Raba replied: Come and hear: A whole piece of fat
7
 from a corpse, if
melted, remains unclean, but if it was in pieces
8
 and they were melted, it remains clean.
9
 Now if you
assume [that the principle of transference of defilement through] a jet does not apply to foodstuffs,
[then even if it be] whole and then melted it should become clean!
10
 — R. Zera commented: I and
Mar, son of Rabina, interpreted [the above teaching as follows]: It refers to where at the time of
melting, the column of fire ascended to the mouth of the vessel
11
 and [the fat] coagulated whilst it
was all together.
12
 
    Rabina said to R. Ashi: Come and hear [the following]: Beth Shammai say: Also one of a porridge
of grist or of beans, because [at the end of its flow] it springs back!
13
 — What does this prove? In the
other cases
14
 it may be the fact that they are compact masses [which causes defilement] though here
it is because of the liquor.
15
 
    OR A LADLEFUL OF CORPSE-MOULD: And what is its size? — Hezekiah said: The palm of
the hand full. R. Johanan said: The hollow of the hand
16
 full.
 
    It has been taught: The [measure of the] ladleful of corpsemould mentioned is,from the bottom of
the fingers upwards.
17
 So R. Meir. The Sages say [it means] the hollow of the hand full.
18
 Now R.
Johanan at least agrees with the Rabbis; but with whom does Hezekiah agree, neither with R. Meir,
nor with the Rabbis? — I will tell you. The palm of the hand full and from the joints of the fingers
upwards is the same measure.
19
 R. Shimi b. Adda said to R. Papa: How is it known that ‘from the
joints of the fingers and upwards’ means towards the tips? Perhaps it means lower down the hand
20
when [the measure] is the palm of the hand full?
21
 This was not solved.
22
____________________
(1)  Being thick liquids, they have such elasticity that when he ceases to pour out the liquid, the lower end of the jet,
which has touched the unclean vessel, springs back into the upper vessel. M. Maksh. V. 9.
(2) Viz, if he melted some solid food, e.g.,fat, and poured it from a clean to an unclean vessel.
(3) And it is the presence of the liquor which causes the jet to shrink backwards.
(4) Whence they would not transfer defilement from the lower end of the jet to the upper end.

---

(5) And so transfer defilement; in the same way as any solid becomes wholly unclean even if part of it is defiled.
(6) And transfer defilement.
(7) Of an olive's bulk.
(8) Each smaller than an olive. When smaller than an olive, unclean flesh loses its defiling property.
(9) Though now solidified to one piece larger than an olive's bulk. Tosaf. Oh. IV, 3.
(10) Whilst being melted, the fat would move from side to side of the vessel and so there would be less than an olive's
bulk of the fat in one spot, if the jet of liquid fat be not counted as joined together.
(11) And the vessel was at rest when heated so that the fat was heated all together.
(12)  Without moving from its original position, so Rashi. Tosaf. and Asheri give the following reading: ‘It refers to
where at the time of melting a column [of fat] rose and sublimed at the mouth of the vessel’. In either case there is no
flow.
(13)  It is now assumed that the Rabbis disagree with Beth Shammai only as regards grist and beans, but accept his
criterion of springing back. This occurs in the presence of a liquid only.
(14) I.e., thick honey and batter.
(15) And the Rabbis disagree as to the criterion. Beth Shammai say it is liquor and the Rabbis, perhaps, the fact that it is
a compact mass.
(16) Formed by bending the fingers to touch the wrist.
(17) I.e., presumably towards the tips of the fingers.
(18) Tosef. Oh. II, 2.
(19) And he agrees with R. Meir.
(20) Upwards in the direction of the shoulder.
(21) And there is no difficulty for Hezekiah.
(22) These words occur in the printed texts, but are omitted by Tosaf. and others.
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 51a
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 51a
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 51a
    Our Rabbis taught: What type of corpse produces corpsemould [that can defile]? A corpse buried
naked in a marble sarcophagus or on a stone floor is a corpse which produces corpse-mould. If it is
buried in its shroud, or in a wooden coffin, or on a brick floor, it is a corpse which does not produce
corpse-mould [that can defile].
1
 
    ‘Ulla said: Corpse-mould [to defile] must come from flesh and sinew and bone. Raba raised [the
following] objection to ‘Ulla. [It has been taught:] Corpse-mould derived from flesh is clean. This
implies that if it be from bones it is unclean, even though there be no flesh present? — Say rather as
follows: Corpse-mould derived from flesh is clean, unless there be bone in the flesh. But there are no
sinews!?
2
 — It is impossible that there should be flesh and bones without sinews.
 
    Rab Samuel
3
 b. Abba said that R. Johanan said: Two corpses buried together act as gilgelin
4
 to
each other. R. Nathan [son of R. Oshaia]
5
 raised the following objection. [It has been taught that
corpse-mould] derived from two corpses is unclean? — Said Raba, [we suppose that] each was
buried separately and decayed and together’ formed a ladleful of corpse-mould.
6
 
    Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said that R. Johanan said: If a man cut [the corpse's] hair and buried it with
it, it acts as gilgelin [and the resultant mould does not defile].
 
    We have learnt elsewhere: Every part of a corpse is unclean except the teeth, the hair and the
nails; but whilst still attached [to the corpse], they are all unclean.
7
 Hezekiah propounded: What is
the law in the case of hair long enough to be polled,
8
 and nails long enough to be pared?
9
 Do we say
that anything which is fit to be cut is as though already cut,
10
 or perhaps they are after all still
attached?
11
 — But cannot the question be resolved from [the dictum of] Rabbah b. Bar Hanah?
12
The reason [that the hair acts as gilgelin] is because he cut it, but if he does not cut it, it does not?
13
He [Rabbah b. Bar Hanah] might have meant this: If he cut it, it acts as gilgelin; but if he did not cut

---