## Nazir Daf 53a

###### Nazir 53a:1
[Nazir 53a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53a:1)

וְהָא רָבָא הוּא דְּאָמַר: לֹא נִצְרְכָה אֶלָּא לְשִׁדְרָה וְגוּלְגּוֹלֶת שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת! בָּתַר דְּשַׁמְעַהּ מֵרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara expresses surprise at this argument: **But** wasn’t it **Rava** himself **who said:** This statement is **necessary only for** a whole **spine and skull that do not contain a quarter-***kav* **of bones?** This indicates that in his opinion a quarter-*kav* of bones from a spine does impart ritual impurity. The Gemara answers: **After he heard** the statement of the *tanna*, he understood **from Rabbi Akiva** that his dispute in the *baraita* (52a) concerns a spine and skull from two corpses, not a quarter-*kav* from a spine and skull. This interpretation led Rava to change his mind.


###### Nazir 53a:2
[Nazir 53a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53a:2)

תָּא שְׁמַע, שַׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר: עֶצֶם אֶחָד מִן שִׁדְרָה אוֹ מִן גּוּלְגּוֹלֶת! שָׁאנֵי שַׁמַּאי דְּמַחְמִיר טְפֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests: **Come** and **hear** a resolution from the following: **Shammai says** that **one bone from the spine or from the skull** imparts ritual impurity. Although the Rabbis dispute his ruling, it can be assumed that they do not have a vastly different opinion. Rather, they accept that a quarter-*kav* from a spine imparts impurity and renders a nazirite obligated to shave. The Gemara rejects this proof: **Shammai is different, as he is very stringent,** and therefore nothing at all can be inferred from his opinion with regard to that of the Rabbis.


###### Nazir 53a:3
[Nazir 53a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53a:3)

לִיפְשׁוֹט מִינַּהּ: טַעְמָא דְּשַׁמַּאי, דְּמַחְמִיר, הָא לְרַבָּנַן — עַד דְּאִיכָּא חֲצִי קַב עֲצָמוֹת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara counters: If in fact the Rabbis maintain an extremely different opinion from that of Shammai, **let us resolve** the problem **in** the opposite manner: **The reasoning** here is that **of Shammai, who is** particularly **stringent.** From this it may be inferred that, **according to** the opinion of **the Rabbis,** one is not rendered impure and a nazirite is not required to shave **unless there is a half-*kav* of bones** from the spine and skull.


###### Nazir 53a:4
[Nazir 53a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53a:4)

דִּילְמָא עַד כָּאן לָא פְּלִיגִי רַבָּנַן עֲלֵיהּ דְּשַׁמַּאי אֶלָּא בְּעֶצֶם אֶחָד, אֲבָל בְּרוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת — אֲפִילּוּ רַבָּנַן מוֹדוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this claim as well: **Perhaps** the argument is not that extreme after all, and **the Rabbis disagree with Shammai only with regard to** whether **one bone** from the spine or from the skull imparts impurity. **However, with regard to a quarter-***kav* **of bones, even the Rabbis** might **concede** that it renders people and items ritually impure, and a nazirite must shave for it.


###### Nazir 53a:5
[Nazir 53a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53a:5)

אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: זְקֵנִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, מִקְצָתָן הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: חֲצִי קַב עֲצָמוֹת וַחֲצִי לוֹג דָּם — לַכֹּל. רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת, וּרְבִיעִית דָּם — לֹא לַכֹּל. וּמִקְצָתָן הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: אַף רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת וּרְבִיעִית דָּם — לַכֹּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rabbi Eliezer said** that **some of the early Elders would say: A half-*kav* of bones and a half-*log* of blood** impart ritual impurity **in all** forms. Their impurity applies by Torah law, and therefore they impart impurity in a tent. But **a quarter-***kav* **of bones and a quarter-***log* **of blood,** they do **not** impart impurity **in all** forms, i.e., they do not impart impurity in a tent. **And some of** these Elders **would say** that **even a quarter-***kav* **of bones and a quarter-***log* **of blood** impart impurity **in all** forms. This was the dispute of earlier generations.


###### Nazir 53a:6
[Nazir 53a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53a:6)

בֵּית דִּין שֶׁלְּאַחֲרֵיהֶם אָמְרוּ: חֲצִי קַב עֲצָמוֹת וַחֲצִי לוֹג דָּם — לַכֹּל, רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת וּרְבִיעִית דָּם — לִתְרוּמָה וְקָדָשִׁים. אֲבָל לֹא לְנָזִיר וְעוֹשֵׂה פֶסַח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The **court that followed them said: A half-*kav* of bones and a half-*log* of blood** impart ritual impurity **in all** forms. **A quarter-***kav* **of bones and a quarter-***log* **of blood** impart impurity only **with regard to *teruma* and offerings,** i.e., the Sages decreed that they impart impurity in a tent to invalidate *teruma* and offerings **but not with regard to a nazirite.** A nazirite is not required to shave or bring offerings for impurity after contact with a quarter-*kav* of bones or a quarter-*log* of blood. **And** similarly, **one who performs** the ritual of **the Paschal offering** may proceed despite the fact that he came into contact with this amount of blood or bones, as the Sages did not apply this decree in cases where one’s impurity precludes the performance of a mitzva whose neglect is punishable by *karet*.


###### Nazir 53a:7
[Nazir 53a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53a:7)

מִכְּדִי אֵין הַכְרָעַת שְׁלִישִׁית מַכְרַעַת! אָמַר רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי, מִפִּי שְׁמוּעָה אָמְרוּ: מִפִּי חַגַּי זְכַרְיָה וּמַלְאָכִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks about the ruling of *halakha* in this case. **Now** consider, there is a principle that **the decision** of the **third** opinion is **not** considered **a decision.** A compromise ruling that seeks to resolve a dispute by including factors and cases that were not mentioned in the other two opinions is not considered decisive, so how could the later court make a distinction between a Paschal offering and other cases? **Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi said:** This ruling was not stated as a compromise. Rather, **they said** it **from tradition, from Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi,** the last of the prophets. This was not a new attempt to mediate between two earlier opinions but an ancient ruling in its own right.


###### Nazir 53a:8
[Nazir 53a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53a:8)

עַל אֵלּוּ הַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ. ״עַל אֵלּוּ״ דְּרֵישָׁא לְמַעוֹטֵי עֶצֶם כִּשְׂעוֹרָה, דְּעַל מַגָּעוֹ וְעַל מַשָּׂאוֹ — אִין, וְעַל אֲהִילוֹ — לָא. וְ״עַל אֵלּוּ״ דְּסֵיפָא — לְמַעוֹטֵי אֶבֶן הַסָּכוֹכִית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna taught that **for** all **these** aforementioned sources of ritual impurity **a nazirite shaves.** The Gemara explains that the phrase: **For these, in** the mishna’s **first clause,** serves **to exclude a bone that is a barley-grain**-**bulk. As for touching it and carrying it, yes,** a nazirite shaves, **but for his overlying** it, **no,** he does not shave. **And** the phrase: **For these, in the** mishna’s **latter clause,** serves **to exclude an overhanging [*hasekhukhit*] stone.** Although a stone that forms a cover over a corpse imparts impurity in a tent, a nazirite is nevertheless not obligated to shave due to this source of impurity.


###### Nazir 53a:9
[Nazir 53a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53a:9)

וַחֲצִי קַב עֲצָמוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ In its list of sources of impurity for which a nazirite must shave, the mishna taught: **And a half-*kav* of bones.**