## Shevuot Daf 6a

###### Shevuot 6a:1
[Shevuot 6a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/6a:1)

הַאי מַאי? בִּשְׁלָמָא בְּלָא סִיד הֵיכָל, קְרוּם בֵּיצָה לָא קַשְׁיָא – דְּאַף עַל גַּב דִּקְרוּם בֵּיצָה מִתַּתַּאי דִּשְׂאֵת, רַחֲמָנָא אָמַר ״וְלַשְׂאֵת וְלַסַּפַּחַת״ – סַפַּחַת טְפֵילָה לַשְּׂאֵת, אַף עַל גַּב דְּמִנַּחֲתָא מִינַּיהּ טוּבָא. אֶלָּא סִיד הֵיכָל – קַשְׁיָא, אֶלָּא מְחַוַּורְתָּא מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **What is this** comparison? **Granted,** it would all be well **were it not for** the difficulty with regard to a mark the color of the **lime** plaster **of the Sanctuary** walls, as the difficulty raised with regard to **an egg membrane–**colored mark is **not difficult. As even though** the shade of **an egg membrane** is two stages **below** that **of a *se’et*, the Merciful One states: “And for a *se’et* and for a *sappaḥat*”** (Leviticus 14:56), which indicates that **a *sappaḥat* is secondary to a *se’et*** and can combine with it **even though** a *sappaḥat* **is** of **a much lower** degree of brightness **than it.** Rabbi Akiva holds that both of the additional shades not explicitly mentioned in the Torah are derived from the word: *Sappaḥat*, and so both of them can combine with a *se’et*. **But** the difficulty raised with regard to a mark the color of the **lime** plaster **of the Sanctuary** walls is indeed **difficult. Rather, it is clear** that **the mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva.**


###### Shevuot 6a:2
[Shevuot 6a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/6a:2)

וְהֵיכָא שָׁמְעִינַן לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא זוֹ לְמַעְלָה מִזּוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara elaborates on Rabbi Akiva’s opinion: **And where have we learned** that **according to Rabbi Akiva** the different shades should be ordered **this** one **above that** one, i.e., according to their degrees of brightness, and only two adjacent shades can combine together?


###### Shevuot 6a:3
[Shevuot 6a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/6a:3)

אִילֵּימָא מֵהָא – דְּתַנְיָא: אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, שָׁאַל יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מֵרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: מִפְּנֵי מָה אָמְרוּ מַרְאוֹת נְגָעִים שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהֵן אַרְבָּעָה? אָמַר לוֹ: וְאִם לָאו, מָה יֹאמְרוּ? יֹאמְרוּ מִקְּרוּם בֵּיצָה וּלְמַעְלָה טָמֵא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If we say** we learned it **from that which is taught** in the following *baraita*, it is difficult. The *baraita* teaches: **Rabbi Yosei said** that **Yehoshua, son of Rabbi Akiva, asked of Rabbi Akiva: For what** reason **did** the Sages **say** that the different **shades of** leprous **marks are two** types **that are four,** and proceed to specify their names? Rabbi Akiva **said to him: But if not** that, **what** else **could they say?** Rabbi Yehoshua answered him: **Let them say** that any mark of a degree of brightness **from** that of **an egg membrane and above is ritually impure.**


###### Shevuot 6a:4
[Shevuot 6a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/6a:4)

אָמַר לוֹ: לוֹמַר שֶׁמִּצְטָרְפִים זֶה עִם זֶה. אָמַר לוֹ, וְיֹאמְרוּ: ״מִקְּרוּם בֵּיצָה וּלְמַעְלָה טָמֵא, וּמִצְטָרְפִין זֶה עִם זֶה״! אָמַר לוֹ: לוֹמַר לָךְ, כׇּל כֹּהֵן שֶׁאֵינוֹ בָּקִי בָּהֶן וּבִשְׁמוֹתֵיהֶן, אֵינוֹ רוֹאֶה אֶת הַנְּגָעִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Akiva **said to him:** They specified the four different shades in order **to say that they combine with each other** in that order, i.e., each one with its adjacent shade. Rabbi Yehoshua **said to him:** If so, **let them** simply **say:** Any mark of a degree of brightness **from** that of an **egg membrane and above is ritually impure, and they combine with each other.** Rabbi Akiva **said to him:** They specified their names in order **to tell you: Any priest who is not an expert in** distinguishing between **them and** in identifying **their names is not** authorized to **inspect the** leprous **marks** and make a decision regarding them.


###### Shevuot 6a:5
[Shevuot 6a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/6a:5)

וְאִילּוּ ״מִסִּיד הֵיכָל וּלְמַעְלָה״ – לָא קָאָמַר;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the difficulty: Rabbi Yehoshua suggested that according to Rabbi Akiva’s opinion it should be sufficient to say that any mark of a degree of brightness from that of an egg membrane and upward is impure, **but he did not say** that it would also be necessary to add: And any mark of a degree of brightness **from** that of the **lime** plaster **of the Sanctuary** walls **and above** is impure. If Rabbi Akiva agrees to the categorization of the mishna, then it would be necessary to state separately each category of marks, in a dual formulation, in order to indicate that only shades that are categorized together can combine.


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

מִדְּלָא אֲמַר לֵיהּ, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ דִּשְׁמִיעַ לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא דְּאָמַר: כּוּלְּהוּ לְבַהֲדֵי שְׂאֵת מִצְטָרְפִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Conclude from** the fact **that he did not say** this **to** Rabbi Akiva **that** Rabbi Yehoshua **heard of Rabbi Akiva that he says: All** the different shades **combine with a *se’et*.** Accordingly, both a snow-white *baheret* and a lime-colored mark will each combine with a *se’et*, as they are adjacent to it when listed in order of their degrees of brightness. An egg membrane–colored mark will also combine with a *se’et*, as it is derived from the word: *Sappaḥat*, and the Torah indicates that a *sappaḥat* is secondary to a *se’et*.


###### Shevuot 6a:7
[Shevuot 6a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/6a:7)

וְדִלְמָא ״שְׂאֵת וְתוֹלַדְתָּהּ״, ״בַּהֶרֶת וְתוֹלַדְתָּהּ״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **But perhaps** Rabbi Akiva does hold that the only combinations possible are ***a se’et* and its secondary** mark, i.e., an egg membrane–colored mark; and **a *baheret* and its secondary** mark, i.e., a lime-colored mark. And perhaps Rabbi Yehoshua in fact proposed that the Sages should use a dual formulation, but the *baraita* cites only the first half of his suggestion.


###### Shevuot 6a:8
[Shevuot 6a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/6a:8)

אֶלָּא מִדְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא – דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: מָשָׁל דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא לְמָה הַדָּבָר דּוֹמֶה? לְאַרְבָּעָה כּוֹסוֹת שֶׁל חָלָב, אֶחָד נָפְלוּ לְתוֹכוֹ שְׁתֵּי טִיפִּין שֶׁל דָּם, וְאֶחָד נָפְלוּ לְתוֹכוֹ אַרְבַּע טִיפִּין שֶׁל דָּם, וְאֶחָד נָפְלוּ לְתוֹכוֹ שְׁמוֹנֶה, וְאֶחָד נָפְלוּ לְתוֹכוֹ שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה טִיפִּין – וְאָמְרִי לַהּ: שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה טִיפִּין – שֶׁכּוּלָּן מַרְאוֹת לוֹבֶן הֵן, אֶלָּא שֶׁזֶּה לְמַעְלָה מִזֶּה וְזֶה לְמַעְלָה מִזֶּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** Rabbi Akiva’s opinion can be inferred **from that** which **Rabbi Ḥanina** says, **as Rabbi Ḥanina says:** The following is **an analogy** to illustrate the opinion **of Rabbi Akiva: To what is this matter comparable?** It is comparable **to four cups of milk,** and **two drops of blood fell into one** of them, **and four drops of blood fell into** another **one** of them, **and eight** drops of blood **fell into** another **one, and twelve drops** of blood **fell into** the last **one. And some say** that **sixteen drops** fell into the last cup. This is a suitable analogy, **as** the milk in **all of** the cups still **has** a similar **shade of white, but** the cups can be ordered according to their degrees of brightness, **as this** one is **above this** one, **and that** one is **above that** one. Rabbi Ḥanina’s analogy would appear to portray Rabbi Akiva’s opinion in the same way it was cited earlier.


###### Shevuot 6a:9
[Shevuot 6a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/6a:9)

אֵימוֹר דְּשָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא – בְּפָתוּךְ; בְּחָלוּק מִי שָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this. The Torah states that a “reddish-white affliction” (Leviticus 13:42), not just a flawless white one, renders a person ritually impure. Therefore, the Gemara suggests: **Say that you heard Rabbi Akiva** express this opinion **with regard to** combining different shades of a mark that is **mixed [*befatukh*]** with red, which is the case most similar to the analogy offered by Rabbi Ḥanina, but **with regard to** different shades of **flawless** white, **have you heard** Rabbi Akiva express this opinion?


###### Shevuot 6a:10
[Shevuot 6a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/6a:10)

וְכִי תֵּימָא כִּי הֵיכִי דְּשָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ בְּפָתוּךְ, הָכִי שָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ בְּחָלוּק; וּבְפָתוּךְ גּוּפֵיהּ מִי שָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ? וְהָתַנְיָא, רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: אֲדַמְדַּם שֶׁבָּזֶה וְשֶׁבָּזֶה כְּיַיִן הַמָּזוּג בְּמַיִם; אֶלָּא שֶׁל בַּהֶרֶת עַזָּה כַּשֶּׁלֶג, וְשֶׁל סִיד דֵּיהָה הֵימֶנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say** that **just as you heard** Rabbi Akiva express this opinion **with regard to** a mark that is **mixed** with red, **so too,** by logical extension, **you have** effectively **heard** Rabbi Akiva express this opinion **with regard to** different shades of **flawless** white, as what possible reason is there to differentiate between them, this is difficult. **And** this suggestion is problematic, as **in the case of a mixed** reddish-white mark **itself, did you** ever **hear him** express this opinion? **But isn’t it taught** otherwise in a mishna (*Nega’im* 1:2): With regard to the various shades of white that are mixed with red, **Rabbi Akiva says** the **reddish** variation **of this** one, i.e., of a *baheret*, **and of that** one, i.e., of a lime-colored mark, **are like wine diluted in water, except** for the following distinction: That the reddish variation **of a *baheret* is** still an **intense** white, **like snow,** albeit with a somewhat pinkish hue, **but** the reddish variation **of lime is darker than it.**