## Nazir Daf 53b

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

חֲצִי קַב עֲצָמוֹת — אִין, רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת — לָא. הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִילֵּימָא דְּאִית בְּהוֹן עֲצָמוֹת כִּשְׂעוֹרָה — תִּיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם עֶצֶם כִּשְׂעוֹרָה! אֶלָּא דְּאַקְמַח אַקְמוֹחֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes this ruling of the mishna: **A half-*kav* of bones, yes,** a nazirite must shave if he contracts impurity from them; **a quarter-***kav* **of bones, no,** he does not. **What are the circumstances? If we say that they contain bones** that are **a barley-grain**-**bulk, let** the *tanna* of the mishna **derive** the *halakha* that it imparts ritual impurity **due to** the fact that it is **a bone that is a barley-grain**-**bulk. Rather,** the mishna is referring to a situation **where it has been made like flour.** In that case, a half-***kav*** of bones render people and items impure in a tent, although they do not include a bone the volume of a barley-grain-bulk.


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

עַל אֵבֶר מִן הַמֵּת וְעַל אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי שֶׁיֵּשׁ עֲלֵיהֶן בָּשָׂר כָּרָאוּי. אֵין עֲלֵיהֶן בָּשָׂר כָּרָאוּי, מַאי? רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֵין הַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ עֲלֵיהֶן. רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: הַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ עֲלֵיהֶן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna taught that a nazirite shaves **for a limb** severed **from a corpse and for a limb** severed **from a living** person, **upon** either of **which there is a fitting** quantity of **flesh.** The Gemara asks: If **there is not a fitting** quantity of **flesh upon them, what** is the *halakha*? **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The nazirite does not shave for them. Reish Lakish said: The nazirite does shave for them.**


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

רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֵין הַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ עֲלֵיהֶן, דְּהָא קָתָנֵי בְּרֵישָׁא: עַל אֵבֶר מִן הַמֵּת וְעַל אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי וְכוּ׳ שֶׁיֵּשׁ עֲלֵיהֶן כְּזַיִת בָּשָׂר — אִין, אֲבָל אֵין עֲלֵיהֶם — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains their respective opinions. **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The nazirite does not shave for them, as** the *tanna* **teaches in the first clause** of the mishna in the list of sources of ritual impurity for which a nazirite must shave: **For a limb** severed **from a corpse and for a limb** severed **from a living** person that contains a fitting quantity of flesh. One can infer from this: **Those upon which there is an olive-bulk of flesh, yes,** he must shave for them, **but** if **there is not** that amount of flesh **upon them, no,** a nazirite need not shave due to them.


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

וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אוֹמֵר: מְגַלֵּחַ. מִדְּלָא קָתָנֵי בְּסֵיפָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says** that **he shaves,** employing the following reasoning: **From** the fact that the mishna **does not teach** the following **in the latter clause,** i.e., the subsequent mishna (54a), in the list of sources of impurity for which a nazirite need not shave: A limb that does not contain a fitting quantity of flesh, one can infer that a nazirite is obligated to shave for a limb of that type.


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

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר לָךְ: כׇּל הֵיכָא דְּמַשְׁמַע מִכְּלָלָא, לָא קָתָנֵי בְּסֵיפָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan** could have **said to you,** in response to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish’s argument: The fact that the mishna omits this case from the list is not proof, as the *tanna* **does not teach in the latter clause anything that can be understood by inference** from the earlier mishna.


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

וְהָא חֲצִי קַב עֲצָמוֹת, דְּמַשְׁמַע חֲצִי קַב עֲצָמוֹת — אִין, רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת — לָא, וְקָתָנֵי בְּסֵיפָא רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty against this claim of Rabbi Yoḥanan: **But** the first clause of the mishna lists the case of **a half-*kav* of bones,** which **indicates: A half-*kav* of bones, yes,** a nazirite must shave for that; **a quarter-***kav* **of bones, no,** he is not obligated to shave for that. **And** yet the *tanna* **teaches in the latter clause** that a nazirite does not shave for **a quarter-***kav* **of bones.** This shows that the next mishna does not rely on the rulings of this mishna. Rather, it lists all the items for which a nazirite need not shave.


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

הָתָם אִי לָאו רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: אֲפִילּוּ עַל מַגָּעוֹ וְעַל מַשָּׂאוֹ לָא, לְהָכִי אִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיתְנֵי רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת, דְּעַל אֲהִילָן הוּא דְּאֵין הַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument: **There, had** the *tanna* **not** taught **a quarter-***kav* **of bones, I would say** that he need **not** shave **even for touching it or carrying it. For this** reason it **was necessary** for the mishna **to teach** the case of **a quarter-***kav* **of bones,** to indicate that **it is** only **for their** ritual impurity contracted in **a tent** that **a nazirite does not shave.**


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

וְהָא חֲצִי לוֹג דָּם, דְּשָׁמְעַתְּ מִינַּהּ חֲצִי לוֹג דָּם — אִין, רְבִיעִית דָּם — לָא, וְקָתָנֵי בְּסֵיפָא רְבִיעִית דָּם! הָתָם, לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: רְבִיעִית דָּם הַבָּא מִשְּׁנֵי מֵתִים מְטַמֵּא בְּאֹהֶל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a further difficulty: **But** the mishna lists **a half-*log* of blood** among those sources of impurity for which a nazirite must shave, **from which you** can **learn** that for **a half-*log* of blood, yes,** he shaves; for **a quarter-***log* **of blood, no,** he does not shave. **And** yet **the latter clause** of the mishna **teaches** that he need not shave for **a quarter-***log* **of blood.** The Gemara answers: It is also necessary to state this *halakha* unambiguously **there, to exclude** the opinion **of Rabbi Akiva, as Rabbi Akiva said: A quarter-***log* **of blood that comes from two corpses renders** people and items **impure in a tent,** whereas the mishna simply states: A quarter-*log*, which indicates that all of the blood comes from a single corpse.


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

הַאי אֵבֶר מִן הַמֵּת, הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִי דְּאִית בֵּיהּ עֶצֶם כִּשְׂעוֹרָה, מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן? וְאִי דְּלֵית בֵּיהּ עֶצֶם כִּשְׂעוֹרָה, מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ? אָמַר לָךְ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: לְעוֹלָם דְּלֵית בֵּיהּ עֶצֶם כִּשְׂעוֹרָה, וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי רַחֲמָנָא רַבְּיֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes the dispute between Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish: **What are the circumstances** of **this limb** severed **from a corpse** that is not covered by sufficient flesh? **If it contains a bone that is a barley-grain**-**bulk, what is Rabbi Yoḥanan’s reason** for maintaining that a nazirite does not have to shave for this ritual impurity? A bone of this size imparts impurity even if there is no flesh upon it. **And if it does not contain a bone that is a barley-grain**-**bulk, what is Reish Lakish’s reason** for saying that a nazirite must shave due to this bone? The Gemara explains that **Reish Lakish** could have **said to you: Actually** we are dealing with a limb **that does not contain a bone that is a barley-grain**-**bulk, and even so the Merciful One includes it** as a source of ritual impurity.


###### Nazir 53b:10
[Nazir 53b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53b:10)

דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יִגַּע עַל פְּנֵי הַשָּׂדֶה בַּחֲלַל חֶרֶב אוֹ בְמֵת״, ״עַל פְּנֵי הַשָּׂדֶה״ — זֶה הַמַּאֲהִיל עַל פְּנֵי הַמֵּת, ״בַּחֲלַל״ — זֶה אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי וְיֵשׁ לוֹ לְהַעֲלוֹת אֲרוּכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This is **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **“And whoever in the open field touches one who is slain by the sword, or one who dies on his own,** or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days” (Numbers 19:16). This verse is expounded by the Sages as follows: **“In the open field”; this** is referring to the *halakha* of **one who overlies a corpse,** even without touching it. **“One who is slain”; this** is referring to **a limb** slain, i.e., severed, **from a living** person, **that contains** enough flesh **for** the limb **to heal.**


###### Nazir 53b:11
[Nazir 53b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/53b:11)

״חֶרֶב״ הֲרֵי זֶה כְּחָלָל, ״אוֹ בְּמֵת״ — זֶה אֵבֶר הַנֶחְלָל מִן הַמֵּת, ״אוֹ בְּעֶצֶם אָדָם״ — זֶה רוֹבַע עֲצָמוֹת, ״אוֹ בְּקֶבֶר״ — זֶה קֶבֶר סָתוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages further derive from the phrase “one who is slain by the sword” that the legal status of a metal **sword** in terms of its degree of ritual impurity **is like** that of **one who is slain,** i.e., a metal implement, e.g., a sword, that was rendered impure through contact with a corpse is impure to the same degree of severity as a corpse itself. **“Or one who dies on his own”; this is a limb that was slain,** i.e., severed, **from a corpse** and is covered with enough flesh that it would heal if he were alive. **“Or a bone of a man”; this is a quarter-***kav* **of bones. “Or a grave”; this is a sealed grave,** which imparts impurity when there is less than a handbreadth between the corpse and its cover.