Talmud Nazir (E)

(18) Contradicting ‘Ulla b. Hanina's teaching.
(19) Which would imply that the comparison was exact.
(20) Viz., whole bodies.
(21) And the body crumbled into corpse-dust, together with the limb which decayed during his lifetime.
(22) Does the law of corpse-dust apply or not?
(23) Thus Raba's question is answered in the affirmative.
(24) And the question remains.
(25) One lacking a limb.
(26) Does he receive stripes for eating it or not? — V. Mak. 13a.
(27) That the creature eaten must be the size of an ant.
(28) That what is eaten must be a separate creature.
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 52a
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 52a
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 52a
R. Judah of Diskarta
1
 replied: Judge from the following. [It has been taught: From the verse,
Whosoever doth touch] them [. . . shall be unclean],
2
 it might be thought that this is [only if he
touches] whole [reptiles], and so Scripture says, [And upon whatsoever any] of them [. . . doth fall].
3
From ‘of them’ [alone] it might be thought that part of them [defiles], and so Scripture says ‘them’.
How are [the texts to be] reconciled? [He is not unclean] unless he touches a part of one equivalent
to a whole one and the Sages estimated this to be the size of a lentil, since the sand-lizard
4
 at its first
formation
5
 is of the size of a lentil. Hence it follows that tradition specifies [a certain] size.
6
 R.
Shemaya demurred: The reason that we require a [particular] size, so that if it is not the size of a
lentil it does not defile, is because there is no life in it,
7
 but when there is life in it, [it may be that] no
[minimum size is required].
8
 It is this question that is being put to you.
9
 
    THE BACKBONE AND THE SKULL: The question was propounded: Does the Mishnah say the
backbone and the skull,
10
 or does it say perhaps the backbone or the skull?
11
 — Raba replied: Come
and hear: A backbone that has been stripped of most of its ribs
12
 is clean,
13
 but if it is in the grave,
even though it is broken in pieces or separated [into parts], it is unclean,
14
 because of the grave.
15
Now the reason [that the backbone is clean] is that it has been stripped, but if it were not stripped,it
would be unclean,
16
 and so may we [not] infer from this that the correct reading is, either the
backbone or the skull? — Does it say, ‘But if etc.’?
17
 What we are told is that when [the backbone
is] stripped, it is clean;
18
 but the other case
19
 still remains doubtful.
 
    Come and hear: R. Judah says: Six things were declared unclean by R. Akiba and clean by the
Sages, and R. Akiba retracted his opinion. It is related that a basket full of [human] bones was taken
into the Synagogue of the Tarsians
20
 and placed in the open air.
21
 Then Theodos, the Physician,
together with all the physicians, entered, and said that there was not the backbone of a single corpse
there.
22
 The reason [that it was declared clean] is that there was not a backbone from a single
[corpse], but had there been either a backbone or a skull from a single [corpse],
23
 a nazirite would
have been required to poll because of it, whence it follows that we read in our Mishnah, either the
backbone or the skull? The case was put strongly. Not only was there not the backbone and skull of a
single corpse, but there was not even the backbone of a single corpse or the skull of a single corpse.
 
    Judge
24
 from the enumeration [of the six things]: And what are the six things that R. Akiba
declared unclean and the Sages clean? A limb set up
25
 from two corpses, a limb set up [from bones
sever ed] from two living men, and a half-kab of bones taken from two corpses, a quarter [log] of
blood taken from two [corpses], a barleycorn's bulk of bone broken into two parts, the backbone and
the skull.
26
____________________
(1) V. supra p. 126, n. 6.
(2) Lev. XI, 31. Referring to dead reptiles.

---

(3) Ibid. 32. ‘of’ meaning even ‘part of’.
(4) One of the reptiles which defile; v. Ibid. 30.
(5) But if less, it does not defile.
(6) For the sand-lizard is the size of a lentil when whole.
(7) As in the case of the dead sand-lizard.
(8) But only that the creature should be alive.
(9) And R. Judah of Diskarta has not answered this.
(10) That both must be in the room for the nazirite to poll.
(11) And he must poll if only one is there.
(12) Cf. the Tosef. where the reading is probably, ‘vertebrae’.
(13) I.e., it does not defile through ‘overshadowing’.
(14) And defiles if ‘overshadowed’.
(15) Which joins the pieces together. Tosef. Oh.II, 3.
(16) Though the backbone alone is mentioned in the Tosefta.
(17) Adopting reading of Asheri.
(18) Perhaps even when the skull is there too.
(19) Stripped and the skull removed.
(20)  Other renderings are, ‘weavers’, ‘bronzeworkers’; v. Aruch and A.S. 27b. [We find a synagogue of Tarsians in
Jerusalem, Tiberias and Lydda. According to Krauss, Synagogale Altertumer, p. 201, they are identical with the
synagogues of Alexandrians, who had brought over with them, to Palestine, the industry in Tarsian carpets — an
industry which flourished greatly in Egypt; v. also TA. II, 625.]
(21) I.e., under an opening in the roof to prevent it conveying uncleanness by ‘overshadowing’.
(22) And so it could not convey defilement by ‘overshadowing’. Tosef. Oh. IV, 2.
(23) And a nazirite had ‘overshadowed’ it.
(24) Lit., ‘come and hear’.
(25) I.e., made by taking one bone from one corpse and another bone from a second corpse.
(26) This enumeration appears to be a digest of Oh. II, 6 and 7, or Tosef. ‘Ed. I, 6; but is not quite identical with either.
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 52b
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 52b
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 52b
Now if you assume that either the backbone or the skull [alone is unclean] there would [surely] be
seven things there? — When [the number six] was mentioned,
1
 it referred to all those things where
the majority differed from him, but excluded [the case of] a barley-corn's bulk of bone, since it is an
individual who differed from him,
2
 for we have learnt: If a barley-corn's bulk of bone is divided into
two, R. Akiba declares it unclean and R. Johanan b. Nuri clean.
3
 
    Alternatively, [the number six] referred to members coming from a corpse, but it did not refer to
[the case of] a member [severed] from a living being.
4
 
    Alternatively, [the number six] referred to all those [cases] where a nazirite must poll because of
‘overshadowing’ them, but excludes [the case of] a barley corn's bulk of bone,
5
 since he need not.
 
    Alternatively, [the number six] referred to all those [cases] from which he retracted, but excludes
[the case of] a quarter [log] of blood, from which he did not retract. For Rabbi said to Bar Kappara,
‘Do not include [the case of] a quarter [-log] of blood amongst the retractions,for R. Akiba had that
as a [traditional]
6
 teaching, and furthermore the verse, Neither shall he go in to any dead body,
7
supports him. — R. Simeon says: All his life he declared [a quarter-log of blood from two corpses]
unclean, whether he retracted after his death, I do not know.
8
 — A Tanna taught that [R. Simeon's]
teeth grew black because of his fasts.
9
 Come and hear: It has been taught: Beth Shammai say that a
quarter [-kab] of bones, be they any of the bones, whether from two [limbs] or from three,
10
 [is
sufficient to cause defilement by overshadowing]. And Beth Hillel say, a quarter [-kab of bones]
from a [single] corpse [is required], [and these bones must be derived] from [those bones which

---